SAWE Report - Cal Poly San Luis Obispo

More documents

Recommendations

Info

gravity is influenced by only the fixed weight of the aircraft and again the aircraft remains at a 5% unstable static margin during landing. This plot indicates that the center of gravity monitor works together with the control system in order to minimize trim drag while at the same time maintaining the aircraft’s controllability. 59
10 Stability and Control To initially size the horizontal tail, tail volume coefficients from historical aircraft were analyzed. This was done in an attempt to determine the rough size of the horizontal and vertical tail surfaces prior to addressing stability and control issues. The tail volume coefficients are unitless parameters defined by geometric values relating the size of the empennage surface to the aircraft. The horizontal and vertical tail volume coefficients are defined in the following equations. V H = SHTL c S W HT W V V = SVT L b S W VT W Because the demands for most supersonic cruising aircraft are considered similar to a certain extent, the historical values of tail volume coefficients are used to back out the planform areas for the horizontal and vertical surfaces. Similar aircraft and their tail volume coefficients are presented in Table 10.I. AIRCRAFT Table 10.I - Historical Aircraft Tail Volume Coefficients TAIL VOLUME COEFFICIENTS V H V V Boeing SST (2707-300) 0.36 0.049 Concorde n/a 0.080 GD F-111A 1.28 0.064 Rockwell B1B 0.80 0.039 TU-22M 1.11 0.087 TU-144 n/a 0.081 AVERAGE 0.58 0.067 Using the average tail volume coefficient for these similar aircraft yielded a horizontal stabilizer area of 386 ft 2 . This is rather large and may be attributed to the fact that these vehicles require large robustness in CG travel without the use of a flight control augmentation system (CAS). Likewise, the vertical tail would require 196 ft 2 of area. This number is driven slightly larger due to the fact that some of the larger historical tail volumes are inflated because these aircraft’s verticals are mounted on booms which extend aft. These booms allow for greater moment arms and make the vertical more effective. The effects of horizontal tail area on longitudinal static stability were looked at in an attempt to determine what the driving factors for horizontal tail area are. A Roskam class II method was 60
Page 1 and 2:
SAWE Paper No. 3232 Category No. 10
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Abstract_________
Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures Figure 1.1 - Design
Page 7 and 8:
Figure 13.4 - Rectilinear Vision Pl
Page 9 and 10:
Nomenclature AIAA American Institut
Page 11 and 12:
α Angle of Attack, degrees, rad.
Page 13 and 14:
Table 1.II - Summary of Design Requ
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 1.3 - F-15 Strike Eagle F-11
Page 17 and 18:
Table 1.III - Comparison of the F-1
Page 19 and 20: Many of the equations buried in the
Page 21 and 22: 3 Configuration The current configu
Page 23 and 24: Another problem arises from the 20
Page 25 and 26: • Span = 54.7 ft • m.a.c. = 32
Page 27 and 28: 4 Stealth Considerations As mention
Page 29 and 30: Table 4.I - Common Ground Radars Ra
Page 31 and 32: 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 1 GH
Page 33 and 34: 5 Aerodynamics The major aerodynami
Page 35 and 36: 1 GHz. 40º LE Sweep 10 GHz. 40º L
Page 37 and 38: 5.3 Wing Thickness The effect of wi
Page 39 and 40: 5.4 Airfoil The NACA 65A-003 airfoi
Page 41 and 42: 1 Section Lift Coefficient 0.9 0.8
Page 43 and 44: 90 80 Wing Cross Sectional Area (ft
Page 45 and 46: 6 Propulsion In developing the prop
Page 47 and 48: Table 6.II - RFP Dimensions Compare
Page 49 and 50: 38 Figure 6.1 - VAATE Goals
Page 51 and 52: TSFC 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.
Page 53 and 54: Deflection Angle Analysis for Mach
Page 55 and 56: Figure 6.8 - Cost Association with
Page 57 and 58: The inlet has a boundary layer dive
Page 59 and 60: 7 Materials and Structure The overa
Page 61 and 62: Vertical Attachment Points Horizont
Page 63 and 64: 8 Landing Gear Landing Gear design
Page 65 and 66: steel. This means that more braking
Page 67 and 68: Table 9.II - Final Component Weight
Page 69: throughout the 5-hour mission. Usin
Page 73 and 74: difference in neutral point and cen
Page 75 and 76: 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 2
Page 77 and 78: The Vendetta configuration utilizes
Page 79 and 80: -0.6 -0.4 UNSTABLE NEUTRAL -0.2 Lif
Page 81 and 82: Validation of an aircraft design su
Page 83 and 84: consumption. The main aspects of th
Page 85 and 86: In addition to the performance requ
Page 87 and 88: 70,000 Altitude (ft) 60,000 50,000
Page 89 and 90: 11.4 Mission Requirements By comple
Page 91 and 92: Table 11.VIII - Landing Flight Prof
Page 93 and 94: 11.7 Alternate Missions In addition
Page 95 and 96: 12 Payload Weapon internal layout d
Page 97 and 98: 13 Cockpit Cockpit Design began wit
Page 99 and 100: that could be used in landing and t
Page 101 and 102: 14 Systems The systems of the Vende
Page 103 and 104: 14.3 Fuel System Initial fuel syste
Page 105 and 106: 15 Manufacturing Several manufactur
Page 107 and 108: 16 Cost Analysis The final and perh
Page 109 and 110: Appendix Threats Chart Common Surfa
Page 111 and 112: Wing Break Point Fuel Aft Fuselage
Page 113 and 114: The Vendetta Design Team Chris Atki
Page 115 and 116: References 1. “Ejection Systems,
Page 117: 35. www.dfrc.nasa.gov/PAO/PAIS/HTML
show all

SAWE Report - Cal Poly San Luis Obispo

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?