ORI( Tnalpage'l$ Pooe Oualn' 292 Proceedings of the NA3A/USRA Advanced Design Program 6Th Summer Conference
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
t P,/o 291 PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF A SUPERSONIC SHORT-TAKEOFF AND VERTICAL-LANDING (STOVL) FIGHTER MRCRAFT UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS, LAWRENCE N 91-18165 A preliminary design study of a supersonic short-takeoff and vcrticaHanding (STOVL) fighter is presented. Three configurations (a lift + lift/cruise concept, a hybrid fan-vectored thrust concept, and a rnLxed-flow-vectored thrust concept) were initially investigated with one configuration .selected for further design analysis. The selected configuration (the lift + lift/cruise concept) was successfully integrated to accommodate the powered-lift short takeoff and vertical landing requirements as well a,s the demanding supersonic cruise and point performance requirements. A supersonic fighter aircraft with a short takeoff and vertical landing capabilit T using the lift + lift/cruise engine concept seems a viable option for the next generation fighter. NOMENCIATImE PHASE I AIRCRAFT STUDY BAi Battlefield Air Interdiction Mission Prof'des and Specification CA Counter Air e.g. Center of Gravity, The mission profiles for the Phase I study (Figs. I and 2) FS Fuselage Station show the design defensive counter air superiority mission and HFVT Hybrid Fan-Vectored Thrust the fallout battlefield air interdiction mis,sion. The mis.sion LIFT I.ift + IJft/Crui_ specification (Table l ) shows the armament carried for each MFVT Mixed-Flow-Vectored Thrust mission and the point performance requirements. n.m Nautical Mile STOVL Short Takeoff, Vertical Landing 8 INTRODUCTION 5 6 7 9 I0 The sur_ivability of long, hard-surface runways at Air Force Main Operating Bases is fundamental to the current operations • I . 2 3_ -- 151) NM_50 NMi [50 NMb_---_IS0 NM_ of the Air Force Tactical Air Command. Without the use of these runways, the effectiveness of the Tactical Air Command is stwerely degraded (1). One possible _)lution to this runway denial situation is to include a short takeoff and vertical landing capability in a supersonic fighter/attack vehicle. An aircraft with this capability is envisioned ms the next multirole fighter to replace the F-16 in the 2000-2010 time period (2). Design teams at the University of Kansas, through the sponsorship of the NASA/USRA Advanced Design Program, Fig. 1. Counter Air Migsion Profile have completed a conceptual design study of a supersonic STOVL aircraft. Phase I of the study began with a brief his- torical survey of powered-lift vehicles followed by a technology 5 1o assessment of the latest supersonic STOVL engine cycles under consideration by industry and government in the U.S. and U.K. A survey of operational fighter/attack aircraft and the mt_leru battlefield scenario was completed to develop, respectively, the _-----300 NM_-_'J100 NMI II00 NM_-'_ 300 NM_ performance requirements and mission profiles for the study( _4 ).Three aircraft were considered for initial investiga- tions(S-7}.They employed the following engine cycles: a [HGIHE SYAflr/IYAIllI-O_ _ 7. W_APONS DIIOP OIALF LOAD/ lift + lift/cruise cycle, a hybrid fan-vectored thrust cycle, and rA_V 8. _5_1 I,V SrO 9. CtlJtB TO £1?'JISE IH ALTIfUO_ a mixed-flow-vectored thrust cycle. Phase II of the study CLIIIJJ rO EllUlSE Ot_7 AL _lrt/FIE tO, B_I/A CRUISE m consisted of comparing the three configurations of Phase I and BCIIL_ CBUIS_ our I t. |0 JHHUtE LOIFEI1 - f.o00 Yr selecting one configuration for further design analysis. This 02_1] Otlf Iz. ON_ |¢IIIUfE IIOVEI_ paper (1)briefly presents the results tff the Phase I aircraft 13. £AHO WITIt _$ IHrEnNAL ¥(JEL study; (2) discusses the considerations for the selection of and modifications made for the Phase II aircraft; and (3)presents the design analysis performed on the Phase II aircraft. Fig. 2. Battlefield Air Interdiction Mission Profile ORI( tNALPAGE'l$ Pooe OUALn' 292 Proceedings of the NA3A/USRA Advanced Design Program 6th Summer Conference Table 1. Mission Specifications Crew: One Pilot (225 lb) Armament.. One internal M61A1 Vulc_an cannon and 400 rounds of 20 mm ammo Erllply Wcl|ht - II.?Jl ibl eaytoad: Counter Air O_eraal Len_a = 5N 33 fl _ Two ASRAAMs (stored internally) and Overtll Width 335O fl two AMRAAMs (stored internally) O_¢ralt He_ghl = I350 fl • Battlefield Air Interdiction Wzng Area : 322 f_ v Ti5 Aeea 43 fP Six Mk 82 Bombs (externally stored), or H Taft An:a 50 fP Six AGM-6S Mavericks (externally stored ) Four AGM-88A HARMs (externally stored) Performance: Performance Oxax_teristic Va/ue Time to Climb 40K in 2 rain 1 g Specific Excess Energy (ZA) 30K Math 0.9 SO0 ft/sec (2B) IOK Mach 0.9 IO00 ftfsec Sustained Turn Rate IL_ L_ tim (3A) Mach 0.8/15K ft ! 5°/see (3B) Math 0.9/3OK ft 9°/see (3C) Math 1.2/30K ft 8°/sec Fig. 3. Lift + Lift Cruise Configuration Three View (3D) Mach 0.9/15K ft 6.5g ( 3E )Mach 1.6/30K ft 4.5 g Acceleration 70 sec (4A) 30K ft Mach 0.9 to Math 1.6 "lakeoff _rekg_l ]J,140 Ibl II. (4B) Math 0.5 to Mach 1.4 8Osec Empty W_ight 20.871 lbl Fuel We_lhl 10,754 lbt t (4C) iOK ft Mach 0.3 to Math 0.9 22 sec landing Distance Over,a] Widm 33¸O0 ft = Without Chute 2200 fi OveraB Helghl = I_ 3O ft I ° Wing Axea 322 _ i Gmundrt,_n: Takeoff- 300 fi, Vertical "Landing V Tad Area 62 fP _ I- Ce._flcaffon: Mi|itat 3. H Tail Area 62 fd | Lift + Ufl/Cruise Configuration Description The LIFT configuration consists of a conventional wing and fltselage with a canard and strake. Figure 3 shows a three-view I I I I I ) I I ' I drawing of the LIFT configtwation. The mid-fuselage-mounted wing, using full-span leading and trailing edge surfaces to provide for high lift and lateral control, incorporates a strake allowing for delayed wing stall at high angles of attack. The Fig. 4. Hybrid Fan-Vectored Thrust Configuration Three View empennage consists of an all-moving canard and a single vertical fin using a two-surface rudder to enhance redundant T against battle damage. Considerations for the liaselage layout included internal packing of the counter air mission weapons below) acts at approximately one-third of the engine length. and lift engine, as well as ,shaping for reduced wave drag. The resulting hover balance lends itself to the engine being The engine cycle of the LIFT co0figuration consists of a 28:1 driven forward to the middle of the aircraft, thus the twin thrust-to-weight lift engine just aft of the cockpit and a boom configuration. The forward swept wing and inverted conventionally located lift/cruise engine. The lift/crui_ engine vertical tail are aimed to achieve structural synergism. The employs a single ventral nozzle that opens aft of the last turbine wing rear main spar is sTnergistic with the main engine mount stage. The afterburner flame holders double as turning vanes and the inverted vertical tail acts a,s an efficient structural tie for the flow. Flow turning is also enhanced by a main nozzle between the booms. capable of choking down its exit area. A three-axis reaction The HFVT engine c'ycle consists of a mixed augmented control ,system is required for hover and transition control. An turbofan driving a remote front fan through a shaft. The front auxiliary inlet on the upper surface of the fuselage is opened fan is connected to the rest of the engine by an interduct. At to reduce hot gas reingestion and foreign-object damage. the forward end of the interduct is a diverter valve to allow two modes of operation for the engine: ( 1) Parallel--the front Hybrid Fan-Vectored Thrust Configuration Description fan flow is diverted to a plenum and fed to two unaugmented, fully vectoring front nozzles. The core air is fed by a ventral The HFVF configuration consists of a twin boom, high auxiliary inlet behind the cockpit. (2),%eries--the auxiliary forward swept wing, and an aft s_'cpt inverted vertical tail. inlet and front nozzles are shut off and the front fan air passes Figure 4 shows a three-view drawing of the HF_q" configu- through the valve to the rest of the engine for maximum ration. The combined vertical thrust of the two forward posts power. The parallel mode is used for the powered lift and single aft post of the HFVT engine cycle (described requirements and subsonic cruise wbere the higher bypass University of Kansas 293 ratio may improve the specific fuel consumption. The series The LIFT configuration was 14001b lighter than the MFVT mode is for point performance and supersonic flight where the and 2400 lb lighter than the HFVT The added cost of the lift front nozzles are faired in by a retractable ramp to minimize engine negated its lighter weight as the cost of the three drag. A two-axis reaction control system is required as the configuratiorts was similar. front nozzles differentially vector to provide lateral control. The more conventional internal packaging of the LIFT configuration compared to the other concepts allowed it a Mixed-How-Vectored Thrust Configuration Description favorable area rule distribution. The HFVT configtwation area distribution suffered due to the large loss of cross-sectional The MFVT configuration consists of a high aft swept wing, area in the I_)om region. The large transfer ducts required by twin vertical tails, and all moving horizontal stabilators. the MFVT cycle increased the mid and ",fit fu_qage width Figure 5 shows a three-view of the MFVT configuration. The resulting in a large gap in cross-sectional area between the large flow transfer ducts required for the MFVT engine cycle canopy and mid fu_lage.