1. Company LOGO www.company.com Conceptual Design Review Akshay Ashok, Nithin Kolencherry, Steve Skare, Michael McPeake, Muhammad Azmi, Richard Wang, Mintae Kim, Dodiet Wiraatmaja, Nixon Lange

2. Company LOGO www.company.com Outline Mission and Market Concept of Operations Selected Aircraft Concept Aircraft Design Mission A/C sizing & Carpet Plots Aircraft Description Aerodynamic Design details Sonic Boom Performance Propulsion Structures Weights and Balance Stability and Control Cost Summary/Conclusion

3. Company LOGO www.company.com Opportunity Description Create a supersonic transport aircraft that meets the following characteristics: Mach 1.6-1.8 Cruise Speed 4000 nm Design range 35-70 Passengers (Mixed Class) 3 Pax-mi/lb Fuel Efficiency Takeoff Field Length < 10000 ft

4. Company LOGO www.company.com Mission A cost-effective, advanced, high-speed commercial air transport that connects major worldwide hubs Key Design Goals: Supersonic flights over land (Overpressure < 0.3psf) IOC in 2020 Manufacturing capabilities exist 60 passengers 4000nm ground range

5. Company LOGO www.company.com Customer Priorities Customer needs and System Benefits – Speed Supersonic travel – Safety Compliance with FAA/ICAO regulations Acceptable boom signature – Global Connectivity Connect major worldwide hubs – Affordability Competitive Pricing

6. Company LOGO www.company.com Customers Primary Customer: Airlines – Singapore Airlines Ranked No. 1 in the world, Significant presence in Asia. – United Arab Emirates Strategically located in one of our hubs. A well known luxury airlines. – Delta Airlines Top US Airline, the only one that covers all 50 states. Strong presence in Asia and Europe. Private Customers – A variant of our aircraft will be designed to suit specific customer needs. http://airtravel.about.com/od/basedinnorthamerica/tp/top10na.htm http://travel.msn.co.nz/article.aspx?id=378404

7. Company LOGO www.company.com Markets of Interest Three regions of focus – Trans-Atlantic – Trans-continental – Inter-Asia

8. Company LOGO www.company.com Worldwide Hubs

9. Company LOGO www.company.com Range Diagram Los Angeles (LAX) Copyright © 1996-2009, Karl L. Swartz. All rights reserved. All trademarks mentioned herein belong to their respective owners.

10. Company LOGO www.company.com Range Diagram New York (JFK) Copyright © 1996-2009, Karl L. Swartz. All rights reserved. All trademarks mentioned herein belong to their respective owners.

11. Company LOGO www.company.com Range Diagram London (LHR) Copyright © 1996-2009, Karl L. Swartz. All rights reserved. All trademarks mentioned herein belong to their respective owners.

12. Company LOGO www.company.com Range Diagram Dubai (DXB) Copyright © 1996-2009, Karl L. Swartz. All rights reserved. All trademarks mentioned herein belong to their respective owners.

13. Company LOGO www.company.com Range Diagram Beijing (PEK) Copyright © 1996-2009, Karl L. Swartz. All rights reserved. All trademarks mentioned herein belong to their respective owners.

14. Company LOGO www.company.com Concept Selection Concept 1 Concept 2Concept 3

15. Company LOGO www.company.com 2nd run AFT ARROW WING CONCEPTHYBRID CONCEPT 1HYBRID CONCEPT 2HYBRID CONCEPT 3 D A T U M SONIC BOOM--- SUBSONIC NOISEs+s CONTROL SURFACES-ss TURN AROUND TIMEs++ AIRPORT COMPATIBLE++- SAFETYs+- EASE OF MANUFACTURE-s- EMPTY WEIGHT++s COST--- +251 -425 s322 Pugh’s Matrix : 2 nd Run

16. Company LOGO www.company.com

17. Company LOGO www.company.com Aircraft Walk-Around

18. Company LOGO www.company.com Blunt Nose Top-mounted Canards Dihedral Low Wing Aerodynamically Contoured Skin Elevons Flaps

19. Company LOGO www.company.com Arrow-wing Design Rear mounted Engines Area-ruled fuselage for minimum wave drag Vertical Stabilizer and Rudder Inboard Mounted Main Landing Gear

20. Company LOGO www.company.com Major Design Parameters Design ParameterValueUnits Aircraft MTOW308000lbs Fuel weight fraction0.567 Empty weight fraction0.433 Wing area3092.369ft 2 Wing loading99.6psf T sl /W 0 0.5 Aspect Ratio2.2 Strake Sweep70⁰ Aircraft length200ft Outboard wing sweep36⁰ thickness to chord (mean chord)10% root chord85ft Taper ratio0.12 # of Engines4

21. Company LOGO www.company.com Design Mission 10 3 2 4 6 10 7 9 8 Taxi & takeoff 5 Climb (10000 ft) Second Segment Climb At best rate of climb Steady Cruise 4000nm Loiter (25 min. max) Attempt to Land Divert 200 nm Loiter (25 min. max) Land Climb No range descent credit Altitude restriction for traffic 4000 nm Ground Range 500 nm – 100kt Headwinds 200nm IFR Reserves Design Range: 4500 nm

22. Company LOGO www.company.com SIZING METHOD

23. Company LOGO www.company.com

24. Company LOGO www.company.com Aircraft Geometry Strake sweep, a/c length, wing leading edge position all remained constant Per each iteration – Solved for the second sweep angle given AR – Solved for the wing area and updated geometry – Dynamically changed the canard and vertical tail area – Calculated area distribution of a/c

25. Company LOGO www.company.com Aircraft geometry in Matlab

26. Company LOGO www.company.com Fixed Design Parameters Strake sweep angle : 70 degrees Mean t/c = 10% Length of a/c = 200ft Starting locations of: – Wing – Engine Nacelle – Vertical Tail – Canard

27. Company LOGO www.company.com Mission Segments Important Mission Segments are discretized: – Climb and Cruise – Compute drag and fuel used for each discrete segment For climb: – Assume linear acceleration and climb profile – Full throttle For Cruise: – Assume constant altitude cruise – Partial Throttle

28. Company LOGO www.company.com Component Weights Used component weight equations from Raymer – Averaged military and commercial eqs Derived a correction factor according to the Concorde Applied corrected equations to our aircraft

29. Company LOGO www.company.com Drag Prediction Subsonic Drag prediction: Mach<0.8 – Parasite Drag: Schlicting Formula – Skin Friction Form factor(K) to account for fineness ratio and wing geometry effects Interference factor(Q) accounts for aerodynamic interference between components – Induced Drag: Calculate Cl based on a/c weight Assume Oswald efficiency factor e= 0.8 K = 1/e – Miscellaneous Drag: Assumed 3% of parasite drag To account for antennas fixtures, lights, leakages and protuberances

30. Company LOGO www.company.com Drag Prediction Supersonic Drag Prediction: Mach>1.2 – Used same equations as subsonic regime, but flow is 2D, therefore: Form factor = 1 Interference factor = 1 – Wave Drag: Compute the equivalent body of revolution from the geometric model Generate axis normal cross-sectional area distribution (A)

31. Company LOGO www.company.com Drag Prediction Transonic Drag Prediction: 0.8<Mach<1.2 – Approach from Raymer Chapter 12 – Rough estimate for parasite drag using graphical method Interpolate Cd 0 at specific control locations between M=0.8 and 1.2

32. Company LOGO www.company.com Started by using NK321 as a Model Gathered tabulated performance parameters from Raymer Created 6 th order polynomials for modeling performance curves Scaled the performance values to satisfy the a/c thrust requirement Core Engine Modeling

33. Company LOGO www.company.com Engine Assumptions At supersonic cruise engine produces 40% of required thrust At subsonic cruise engine produces 80% of required thrust Remainder of thrust is produced from nozzle and inlet – Based on Concorde engine performance – Accounted for larger diameter engine for better subsonic performance

34. Company LOGO www.company.com Overpressure Calculation Two prediction methodologies – Carlson’s simplified method N-wave peak model Calculate overpressure based on effective CS area distribution – Seebass’ Plateau wave signature model Utilizes basic aircraft parameters

35. Company LOGO www.company.com CARPET PLOTS

36. Company LOGO www.company.com Carpet Plot Characterizes SUPERSONIX aircraft sizing and identifies design drivers – Builds on results from detailed sizing exercise – Approximate method, suitable for the current level of detail Objective of optimization – Minimize W 0 Constraints – Landing and Takeoff ground roll @ JFK < 8000ft takeoff, < 2800ft landing – Boom overpressure < 0.3 psf – Subsonic 2-g maneuver: P S >0 – 1-g Supersonic cruise: P S >0

37. Company LOGO www.company.com Carpet Plot Variables of iteration – Have the most impact on aircraft weight Wing-loading Thrust-weight ratio Aspect ratio – Constraint diagram provides a starting point Wing-loading: [85 – 115] psf Thrust-weight: [0.3 – 0.6] Aspect ratio: [1.8 - 2.3]

38. Company LOGO www.company.com

39. Company LOGO www.company.com Carpet plot

40. Company LOGO www.company.com AIRCRAFT DESCRIPTION

41. Company LOGO www.company.com Dimensioned three-view to scale

42. Company LOGO www.company.com

43. Company LOGO www.company.com Cabin Layout First Class Coach Class Exits Emergency Exits & Crew Seating Cockpit Galleys and Restrooms

44. Company LOGO www.company.com Cabin Layout Aircraft Cabin: 83 Ft 10 Ft 6.5 ft

45. Company LOGO www.company.com Cabin Layout First ClassCoach Class Seat Pitch: 40”Seat Pitch: 36” Seat Width: 28”Seat Width: 20” Aisle Width: 28”Aisle Width:20” Aisle Height: 6’6” No overhead binsOverhead bins 6’6” 3’6” Cabin is enclosed in a cylinder of a 10 foot diameter This helps with pressurization of cabin, and aircraft geometry shaping with light structure

46. Company LOGO www.company.com AERODYNAMIC DESIGN & SONIC BOOM ANALYSIS

47. Company LOGO www.company.com Airfoil Selection - Database of existing supersonic aircraft airfoils used to make initial selection AircraftWing Root airfoilWing Tip airfoil Rockwell D481 B-1 Lancer NA69-190-2NA69-190-2 ? General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark NACA 64-210.68NACA 64-209.80 Northrop F-5 Tiger NACA 65A004.8 Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon NACA 64A204 McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle NACA 64A006.6NACA 64A203 McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornet NACA 65A005 modNACA 65A003.5 mod Grumman G-303 F-14 Tomcat NACA 64A209.65 modNACA 64A208.91 mod Lockheed 246 F-104 Biconvex 3.36% McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II NACA 0006.4-64 modNACA 0003-64 mod Convair 4 B-58 Hustler NACA 0003.46NACA 0004.08 Convair 8-24 F-106A Delta Dart NACA 0004-65 mod Republic F-105 Thunderchief NACA 65A005.5NACA 65A003.7 Lockheed/Boeing 645 F-22 Raptor NACA 64A?05.92NACA 64A?04.29 http://www.ae.uiuc.edu/m-selig/ads/aircraft.html#conventional

48. Company LOGO www.company.com NACA 64-A-410 X-foil Analysis Constraints used were C Lmax required by aircraft during take-off and landing. Stall angle of attack = 12⁰ Tail and canards will use symmetric airfoils

49. Company LOGO www.company.com Correction for Aspect Ratio Conversion of 2-D airfoil to 3-D wing. C lα = 0.1 per degree C Lα = 0.05 per degree Clean C Lmax = 0.8373 Calculate required C Lmax Subsonic Take off and Landing M-0.16 Clmax Req = 1.017

50. Company LOGO www.company.com High Lift devices C Lmax increment using high lift devices -Use of slotted fowler Flaps-trailing edge of wing -Extending flap – C L -Effect of wing strake Image courtesy: Aircraft Design: A conceptual approach, 4 th edition, Raymer

51. Company LOGO www.company.com High Lift Devices Flap Sizing -Required C Lmax -Take-off vs. Landing C Lmax Flap Dimensions -40 ft span -2 ft from the wing root - flapped area = 2032.66 sq.ft PLOT WITH CLMAX FOR TAKE OFF AND LANDNG Take off ΔC Lmax = 60%-80% Landing ΔC Lmax

52. Company LOGO www.company.com Drag buildup calculated using drag code Lower supersonic skin friction due to predominant 2-d flow Wave drag accounts for 72% of supersonic drag Effect of blunt nose profile to minimize boom overpressure Drag Buildup

53. Company LOGO www.company.com Drag Polars Drag Polars were plotted for 3 different cases – Supersonic Cruise (M=1.8, Altitude=60000ft) – Subsonic Flight (V=250kts, Altitude=10000ft) – Landing (M=0.4-0.16, Altitude=10000-0ft)

54. Company LOGO www.company.com Drag Polars

55. Company LOGO www.company.com L/D vs. C L

56. Company LOGO www.company.com Sonic Boom Features – Blunt nose – Dihedral angle – Smooth Area distribution, fuselage geometry – Low AR, high sweep for shock mitigation Assumption Supersonic flights over land (Overpressure < 0.3psf)

57. Company LOGO www.company.com Results Calibrated the Carlson method prediction for the SSBD (F-5) and had a correction factor of 1.09 Time signature Δt = 0.03 s MethodOverpressure (lb/sq. ft) Carlson0.28 Seebass0.71

58. Company LOGO www.company.com Method used to calculated Sonic Boom Carlson simplified sonic boom (NASA tp 1122 1978) 1. Determined the Shape Factor Generate axis normal cross-sectional area distribution Equivalent area due to lift – from span distribution Combined effective area 2. Calculate effect of atmosphere on propagation (effective M, h altitude ) 3. Calculate bow shock and shock duration

59. Company LOGO www.company.com Effective area distribution

60. Company LOGO www.company.com STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS

61. Company LOGO www.company.com Loading on Aircraft Lift = weight = 308000 lb

62. Company LOGO www.company.com Load Path 5 spars in each wing – Carry bending in wings Wing box carry through – Standard for high speed transport – Provides minimum weight Semi-monocoque skin structure – Help to resist load in aircraft Stringers around fuselage – Bonded to composite skin – Carry fuselage load – Prevent bending Spars Wing boxes Stringers

63. Company LOGO www.company.com Engine Mounted onto the spars Ease of maintenance Optimum span loading effect – Help in lift Safety – Away from cabin Engines

64. Company LOGO www.company.com Landing gear Main landing gear between 4 th and 5 th spars – Safety factor of 3 – 120 ft from nose – Max load carry at landing = 952290 lb – Max load carry at taxi = 833488 lb Nose landing gear Safety factor of 3 – 55 ft from nose – Max load carry at taxi = 90552 lb 10% of aircraft W 0 Main Landing Gears

65. Company LOGO www.company.com Material Selection 70% will be composite Skin – CFRP (Graphite + Epoxy) Service temperature up to 180°C 98 lb/ft 3 – Lighter – Higher fracture toughness and yield strength Nose, Leading and Trailing edges – CFRP (Graphite + Polyimide) Service temperature up to 300°C – Creep problem 100 lb/ft 3 Lighter than titanium Spars, ribs and stringers – CFRP (Carbon + Epoxy) Lighter Higher fracture toughness and yield strength Landing Gear – AF-1410 High corrosion and fatigue resistance Excellent fracture toughness A lot cheaper than titanium

66. Company LOGO www.company.com Weight saving about 20-30% of MTOW – Not too much due to mechanical fasteners Titanium – May be higher if combine with polyimide epoxy adhesive FM 1000

67. Company LOGO www.company.com ENGINE DESIGN

68. Company LOGO www.company.com Inlet Description 4 types of basic inlets available 2-D ramp inlet best For our aircraft Variable ramps – Provides capability to fly supersonic and subsonic Supersonic inlet improvement – Heat source addition Raymers Fig 10.9 ‘Variable inlet geometry

69. Company LOGO www.company.com Engine Description Turbofan with afterburner Around 38,500 lbs of Thrust/Engine BPR= 1.627 Fan ratio= 4.3 Weight= 3000 lbs/engine Area = 41 ft 2 Diameter= 7.2 ft Length = 33 ft

70. Company LOGO www.company.com Nozzle Description Types of nozzles Converging-Diverging Variable Area Raymers Fig 10.23 ‘Types of nozzles’

71. Company LOGO www.company.com Power Available VS Altitude Take 32 g 22 g maneuver Take off Cruise

72. Company LOGO www.company.com PERFORMANCE

73. Company LOGO www.company.com V-n, Gust diagram V-n diagram used for structural load at different operating conditions Raymer’s Gust of 12.5, 25, 38 ft/s at altitude above 50,000 ft.

74. Company LOGO www.company.com Range Diagram Breguet Range Equation Depended on – Velocity – Specific Fuel Consumption – L/D at supersonic cruise – Wi/Wf at beginning of cruise

75. Company LOGO www.company.com Compliance Matrix

76. Company LOGO www.company.com WEIGHT AND BALANCE

77. Company LOGO www.company.com Component Weight Prediction Model of component weight relating to external geometry must be formulated. Raymer’s Fighter and Transport weight were summed and averaged for model prediction Empty weight prediction was compared to Concorde. Correction factor is equal to 1.07

78. Company LOGO www.company.com Prediction Evaluation Correction factor of 1.07. Check for Trendline Summation of overall empty weight, cargo, and fuel weight have a 0.4% overall error

79. Company LOGO www.company.com

80. Company LOGO www.company.com Center of Gravity Calculation

81. Company LOGO www.company.com Center of Gravity (Continued) 5 fuel tanks were used in prediction of C.G. Location of tanks were taken from Concorde. Fuel fraction of the weight and capacity were calculated to ensure that there is enough room.

82. Company LOGO www.company.com STABILITY AND CONTROL

83. Company LOGO www.company.com Static Longitudinal Stability Neutral Point (X np ) – Subsonic = 25.4% MAC / 131 ft – Supersonic = 40.4% MAC / 139 ft Static Margin: – MTOW/Subsonic : 25.6% MAC – Start of Cruise: 31.2% MAC – Landing: 28.0% MAC

84. Company LOGO www.company.com Control Surfaces Elevons – Combination of Elevators and Ailerons (Pitch and Roll Control) – Typically used for delta wing or tailless aircraft – Size – 310 ft 2 (total on both sides) – Comparison: Concorde – 345 ft 2

85. Company LOGO www.company.com Lateral Stability

86. Company LOGO www.company.com Control Surfaces Rudder – Area = 140 ft 2 – Deflection Limited to ±10° Possibly higher for slower speeds (approach/landing) – Meets the 3 conditions? Lateral Trim – One Engine Out 35 Knot Crosswind Landing Historical Trends (Concorde ~112 ft 2 )

87. Company LOGO www.company.com COST

88. Company LOGO www.company.com Cost Analysis Development and Manufacturing costs estimated from Modified RAND DAPCA IV Cost Model (pg 568-575) $30 Billion for 100 aircraft (in 2020 $) – Cost per aircraft is $300 million – Cost of one Concorde for 2009 $ is $253 million For 100% profit – 200 aircrafts to be sold – Or $600 million per aircraft for 100 aircrafts

89. Company LOGO www.company.com Viability for the airlines Purchase price of $300 million. Depreciation value per plane after 15 years: $270 million – Residual value for 15 year use is 10% – $30 million per year

90. Company LOGO www.company.com Typical aircraft economic mission Direct Operating Costs (projected) – $0.20 per seat-mile (2009 US Dollars) for a trip from JFK airport to Heathrow Airport Indirect Operating Cost – Landing Fees JFK - $1650 Heathrow - $860(2009 US Dollars) – IOC (assuming 1/3 of DOC) $0.07 per seat-mile (2009 US Dollars) for a trip from JFK to Heathrow

91. Company LOGO www.company.com SUMMARY

92. Company LOGO www.company.com Compliance Matrix

93. Company LOGO www.company.com Is this concept worth future development work? Plausible endeavor – There is a potent market – Technological advancements to meet engineering requirements by 2020 – FAA removing overland supersonic flight restriction – Will become financially viable transport by 2020

94. Company LOGO www.company.com Next Steps Fine tune aerodynamic analysis – Boom prediction – Airfoil analysis Engine Performance analysis – Engine deck – Engine component design Structural analysis – Panel buckling

95. Company LOGO www.company.com Company LOGO www.company.com Thank You