Vendetta Final Proposal Part 1 (3.4 MB) - Cal Poly

More documents

Recommendations

Info

performance requirements on the aircraft is not well defined. Because of this, the initial design point was also chosen inthe center of the design domain in order to allow for aircraft growth. However, more accurate analytical techniques haveallowed the current design point to move closer to the minimum wing loadings and thrust-to-weight ratios. The initialsize and weight estimates are shown in Table 2.IV along with the current values for comparision.1.0Thrust to Weight Ratio0.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.2Current DesignPointRange > 3500 nm2-g P s > 0 fpsInitial DesignPointLanding< 8000 ftInstant Turn Rate > 8°/sec1-g P s > 200 fps1-g P s > 0 fps0.1Takeoff < 8000 ft406080100 120 140Wing Loading, (psf)160180200Figure 2.2 - Constraint PlotTable 2.IV - Initial and Current SizingInitial Design Point Current Design PointTOGW 108,400 lb 125,051 lbW e 51,600 lb 56,797 lbW f 47,600 lb 58,974 lbW f /W 0.43 0.47T/W 0.54 0.48W/S 100 lb/ft 2 83.3 lb/ft 2T SL 58,000 60,000 lbS ref 1,084 ft 2 1,500 ft 27
3 ConfigurationThe current configuration of the aircraft is the result of several major iterations. The first iterations wereindividual designs developed by each of the six team members at the beginning of the project. Four of the individualdesigns were considered for the configuration the Vendetta.The Nergal (Figure 3.1) and the Jackhammer (Figure 3.2) were both tailless aircraft utilizing thrust vectoring forstability in the yaw axis. Each aircraft utilized Pratt and Whitney F119 engines found in the F-22. The Nergal was farsmaller than the Jackhammer due to its single engine and fuel volume usage. Both aircraft incorporated rotary weaponslaunchers capable of carrying every weapon mentioned by the RFP in a single weapons bay. The cockpit layout wasside-by-side to minimize the redundant cockpit displays and maximize crew communication.The Interdictor (Figure 3.3) and Big Paulie (Figure 3.4) were both based on the RFP engines. The Interdictorused straight inlet ducts with an inlet screen similar to what is used on the F-117. Big Paulie attempted to make use ofthe axisymetric translating center body inlets of the RFP engine in a stealth design by using a prismatic translating inletspike to better control radar energy.Both aircraft were deemed impractical due to the large cross-sectional areasproduced by the excessive size of the RFP engines. The cockpit arrangement of these aircraft was side-by-side similar tothe Nergal and Jackhammer.Analysis performed during this early work clearly showed that the engine provided by the RFP was far too largefor the thrust it provided. The two aircraft designed for the F119 were both smaller and more space efficient. Thisnarrowed the design options to the Nergal and Jackhammer. Both of these aircraft were tailless and it was determinedthat the weight and drag benefits associated with the lack of a vertical tail would be outweighed by the costs associatedwith the thrust vectoring system. It was also determined that the aircraft were too unstable laterally to be controlled byan inexpensive, low bandwidth, thrust vectoring system. It was decided to begin with a new design incorporating thestrong points of each aircraft.The first iteration of the aircraft is shown in Figure 3.5; it is a large aircraft that has many design flaws. The firstFigure 3.1 - Nergal Figure 3.2 - Jackhammer Figure 3.3 - Interdictor Figure 3.4 - Big Paulie8
Page 6 and 7: Figure 11.1 - 1-g Military Specific
Page 8 and 9: Nomenclature6DOF Six Degrees of Fre
Page 10: 1 IntroductionThe American Institut
Page 13 and 14: Table 1.III - Comparison of the F-1
Page 15: The weight fraction method provides
Page 19 and 20: • Span = 53 ft• m.a.c. = 32 ft
Page 21 and 22: VendettaChris DroneyNate SchnaibleK
Page 23 and 24: low signature axisymmetric advanced
Page 25 and 26: 0° Lookup77°50403020100-10-20-30-
Page 27 and 28: 5.2 Wing SweepThe next wing paramet
Page 29 and 30: 5.3 Wing ThicknessThe effect of win
Page 31 and 32: 0.10.050-0.05-0.1-0.150 0.1 0.2 0.3
Page 33 and 34: 5.6 DragDrag was divided into four
Page 35 and 36: 6 PropulsionIn developing the propu
Page 37 and 38: Turbine Engine Technology (IHPTET)
Page 39 and 40: 35,00030,000Sea Level 1.5K 5K10K20K
Page 41 and 42: 0.990.980.97Pressure Recovery0.960.
Page 43 and 44: oundary layer diverter for high spe
Page 45 and 46: 7 Structural Layout & Material Sele
Page 47 and 48: Vertical AttachmentPointsHorizontal
Page 49: 8 Landing GearLanding Gear design f

Vendetta Final Proposal Part 1 (3.4 MB) - Cal Poly

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?