1. 1 Tom Zettel Mike Bociaga Jon Olsten Jamie Rosin Hayne Kim Brandon Washington Marques Fulford

2. 2 Outline  Mission Statement  Market/Customers  Competitors  Mission Scenarios  System Design Requirements  Summary  Next Steps

3. 3 Mission Statement  To create an innovative and cost effective commercial aircraft capable of take-off and landing in extremely short distances, making it available to a larger number of runways, in order to open up more airports, primarily to relieve the continuous growing congestion of large hubs.

4. 4 “Next-Generation DC-3”  An aircraft that is going to see very large scale production to fill a popular and profitable niche in the market  One that is going to revolutionize air travel

5. 5  Economic growth yielding traffic growth.  Domestic fleet average seat size growth is dramatic. Market Outlook

6. 6  17,650 new single aisle airplanes will be delivered over the next will be delivered over the next 20 years. 20 years.  This will make up 48% of the total airplanes in service in 2026. airplanes in service in 2026.  By the year of 2058, 61,604 single aisle airplane will be in service. aisle airplane will be in service. Market Outlook

7. 7 Primary Customer: Airlines  Currently, over 20% of all flights from O’Hare, LaGuardia, & Newark are Delayed – Bureau of Transportation Statistics source: U.S. Department of Transportation - Federal Aviation Administration source: U.S. Department of Transportation - Federal Aviation Administration  Customer Needs –Carry out short, mid-range missions –Reduced flight delays –Low cost  Proposed missions include flights from Gary Chicago to Dallas Love Field, …693 nmi from Gary Chicago to Dallas Love Field, …693 nmi

8. 8 Customer Benefits  “Flight delays cost the U.S. economy $15 billion a year” Mary E. Peters, United States Transportation Secretary, January 22 nd, 2008 Mary E. Peters, United States Transportation Secretary, January 22 nd, 2008  Maximize profits – Maximize Total Revenue  Reduce flight delays through direct flights to secondary airports  More flight services and availabilities increase the revenue for airlines. –Reduce Costs  Operation cost –Less idle time saves aircraft fuel burn. aircraft fuel burn.

9. 9 Competitors  Types of Transportation –Automobiles –Airplanes –Trains –Personal aircraft/ Skycars  Airplane Manufactures –Range 1500-2000 nmi –150-170 passenger capacity –Single isle

10. 10 Airplane Manufacturers  Aircraft within our size and range requirements –single aisle planes  Competition includes –N generation Boeing 737NG family and its replacement, the 737RS (Y1) – the Airbus A320 series and its replacement (NSR) –Embraer’s E-Jets (spec. E-190 and E-195) –the N+1 generation C110 and C130 CSeries jets from Bombardier (Canadair)

11. 11 Airplane Manufacturers  ARrival looked at aircraft within our size and range requirements (e.g. single aisle planes)  Competition includes the N generation Boeing 737NG family, the Airbus A320 series, Embraer’s E-Jets (spec. E-190 and E-195), and the N+1 generation C110 and C130 CSeries jets from Bombardier (Canadair)

12. 12 Other Competitors  Personal Air Vehicles –The Skycar –Family Commuters

13. 13  Too Expensive –Portugal estimates that the high speed rail line "connecting Lisbon with Madrid and with Porto, due to be operational by 2013, is estimated to cost around 7.2 billion Euros”, according to Forbes. Compare the costs to the new international airport near Lisbon, estimated at 3 billion Euros, and you can see why people are questioning the need. –http://goeurope.about.com/b/2005/12/09/the-cost-of-high-speed-rail.htm Why High-Speed Trains are Not a Competitor

14. 14 Mission Scenarios  Relieve over congested airport hubs –Land at secondary airports  Near and around major hubs  Cutting travel time for passengers –Half-runway landings and takeoffs  Double number of takeoffs and landings on one runway

15. 15 Most Congested Airports  Chicago O’Hare  Newark International  New York LaGuardia Airport Late Flights Average Departure Delays Average Taxi-Out Average Scheduled Departure to Take-off Cancelled Flights Percent Flights Late O’Hare7,093 55.14 min 21.79 min 76.93 min 48522.17% Newark3,137 69.87 min 32.69 min 102.56 min 32024.35% LaGuardia2,218 59.40 min 32.92 min 92.33 min 41521.15% *Data taken from www.bts.gov

16. 16 Representative City-Pairs  Chicago, IL to Dallas, TX –Approx 697 nmi  Newark, NJ to Charlotte, NC –Approx 460 nmi  New York, NY to Miami, FL –Approx 935 nmi

17. 17 Chicago, IL to Dallas, TX  Using secondary airports  Gary Chicago –Runway 7,003 ft –42 mi from Chicago O’Hare  Dallas Love Field –Runways 8,800 ft and 7,752 ft –21 mi from Dallas International  Airport distance 693 nmi

18. 18 Initial Mission Scenario  Will have additional fuel in case of any necessity to loiter or land at alternate airport Take off Gary Chicago Climb Cruise Landing Descent Land Dallas Love Field

19. 19 New York, NY to Miami, FL  LaGuardia to Miami International  Non-interfering spiral descent and landing on half-runway at each airport  Airport distance 935 nmi

20. 20 Take-Off LaGuardia Climb Cruise Landing Descent Loiter Land Miami International Initial Mission Scenario  Want extra loitering time in case of traffic on runways

21. 21 Charlotte, NC to Newark, NJ  Take off from Charlotte with half-runway takeoff  Land at secondary airport in Newark –Essex County Airport (CDW)  20 mi from Newark International  Takeoff from Essesx –Without refueling  Non-interfering spiral descent and landing on half-runway at Charlotte  Airport distance 460 nmi

22. 22 Initial Mission Scenario  Round trip without refueling Take off Charlotte Climb Land Essex County Take off Essex County Land Charlotte Cruise

23. 23 Aircraft Payload/Passenger Capacity  Passenger capacity and payload still under discussion –Based on sizing –Approximating 150 passengers  Weight limits on shorter runways –3,000-5,000ft average limit 30,000 lbs

24. 24 Significant Wants  STOL/ESTOL capability  Ability to operate in secondary airports  Reasonable cruise Mach number  Mid-size passenger, payload capacity  Cost effective

25. 25 Mission Requirements DescriptorTargetThreshold Takeoff Runway LengthLTE2500ft3000ft Landing Runway LengthLTE2500ft3000ft Height to Passenger Door Sill at OWELTE5ft9 Height to Baggage Door Sill at OWELTE4ft6 Typical Cruise Mach NumberGTE0.80 0.76 Range w/ Max PayloadGTE2000nmi1500nmi Max Take-Off WeightLTE lb Max Passengers (single class)GTE170pax150pax Operating Cost ($US 2007)LTE0.08$/seat-mile0.12$/seat-mile

26. 26 New Technologies  Advanced materials such as CFRP which give a projected weight reduction of about 15% over N generation competitors from Airbus and Boeing and 13% over Embraer’s E-Jets*  Advances in propulsion such as the geared turbofan (GTF) and the Unducted Fan (UDF) for fuel efficiency and noise reduction  High lift through blown flaps, potential use of thrust vectoring  Benchmarking with the EasyJet “EcoJet” concept for “Green” technologies *Based off of Boeing 787 weight savings vs. its competitors

27. 27 New Technologies - CFRP Assuming the 787’s CFRP construction becomes the industry standard, ARrival applied the weight saving factor of the 787’s design over its peers to current generation Boeing and Airbus single aisle jets.

28. 28 Benchmarking  Based off of ARrival’s projected requirements and the data from our main competitors, ARrival found the competitors that closely matched our aircraft’s preliminary specifications  Weight savings data from Boeing 787 family over the 767 family, 777 family, and Airbus A330 family used to project weight savings of a CFRP single-aisle plane vs. the 737NG, A320 family, and the larger Embraer E-Jets  Bombardier CSeries aircraft match our projected range requirements however, data for this type is sketchy as it is an N+1 generation aircraft still in planning

29. 29 Benchmarking with N Gen and N+1 Gen Competing A/C AircraftW0 [lb]We/W0paxR [nmi] Boeing 737-6001240000.661103050 Boeing 737-7001330000.631263260 Boeing 737-8001555000.581622940 Boeing 737-9001640000.571772745 Airbus A3181499000.581073200 Airbus A3191665000.541243700 Airbus A3201698000.551503000 Airbus A3212061000.521853050 Embraer 1901053590.571062300 Embraer 1951075640.581182100 Canadair C110-STD118800N/A1101800 Canadair C130-STD129300N/A1301800

30. 30 Summary  System requirements driven by customer wants and market outlook  Use new technologies to meet system requirements  Mission is to create an aircraft that will relieve traffic and congestion at major hubs

31. 31 Next Steps  Finalize major design requirements  Plan out specific phases of missions  Size aircraft  Design aircraft interior layout  Determine the use of advanced technologies