DOCSLIB.ORG

16.885 Aircraft Systems Engineering Cost Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
16.885 Aircraft Systems Engineering Cost Analysis 16.885 Aircraft Systems Engineering Cost Analysis Karen Willcox MIT Aerospace Computational Design Laboratory AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY Outline • Lifecycle cost • Operating cost • Development cost • Manufacturing cost • Revenue • Valuation techniques AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Lifecycle Cost Lifecycle : Design - Manufacture - Operation - Disposal Lifecycle cost : Total cost of program over lifecycle 85% of Total LCC is locked in by the end of preliminary design. AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Lifecycle Cost 100 95% 85% 80 65% 60 40 Disposal Operation and support Impact on LCC (%) 20 design Detailed design Manufacturing and acquisition Preliminary design, system integration Conceptual 0 Time (From Roskam, Figure 2.3) AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Operating Cost ¾ Airplane Related Operating Cost SROC (AROC) 10% CROC ¾ Passenger Related Operating Cost 2% (PROC) PROC Cargo Related Operating Cost ¾ 18% AROC (CROC) 70% ¾ Systems Related Operating Cost (SROC) AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Airplane Related Operating Costs CAPITAL COSTS: CASH AIRPLANE RELATED Financing OPERATING COSTS: Insurance Capital Crew Depreciation Fuel Costs CAROC Maintenance 40% 60% Landing Ground Handling GPE Depreciation GPE Maintenance Control & Communications CAROC is only 60% - ownership costs are significant! AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 CAROC Breakdown per Trip Other Control & Comm 3% Ground Fuel is roughly 20% of Handling 9% 60% of 70% of Total 7% Operating Cost Landing Crew i.e. 8% 6% 40% Maintenance 15% Fuel 20% typical data for a large commercial jet AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Non-Recurring Cost Cost incurred one time only: Engineering - airframe design/analysis - configuration control - systems engineering Engineering Tooling - design of tools and fixtures - fabrication of tools and fixtures Other Tooling - development support - flight testing Other AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Recurring Cost Cost incurred per unit: Labor - fabrication - assembly - integration Labor Material to manufacture -raw material - purchased outside production - purchased equipment Production support Material -QA - production tooling support - engineering support Support AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Learning Curve As more units are made, the recurring cost per unit decreases. This is the learning curve effect. e.g. Fabrication is done more quickly, less material is wasted. n Y x Y 0 x Yx = number of hours to produce unit x n = log b/log 2 b = learning curve factor (~80-100%) AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Learning Curve 1 0.8 Every time production 0.6 doubles, cost is reduced 0.4 b=0.9 0.55 by a factor Cost of unit unit of Cost of 0.9 0.2 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 Unit number Typical LC slopes: Fab 90%, Assembly 75%, Material 98% AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Elements of a Cost Model Engineering Data Build Schedule & Performance 120 lanes lanes 80 40 0 Number of p of Number 2000 2010 2020 2030 Year Recurring Cost Component Breakdown Plane Wing Fuselage COST Winglet Skin Ribs MODEL RC/lb NRC/lb Weight Subparts/lb Non-Recurring Learning Curve NRC Distribution Cost 1 2 0.8 0.4 1 Cost of unit 0 NRC ($B) 0 10 2030 4050 Unit number 0 2003 2007 2011 2015 Year AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Typical Cost Modeling 1. Take empirical data from past programs. 2. Perform regression to get variation with selected parameters, e.g. cost vs. weight. 3. Apply “judgment factors” for your case. e.g. configuration factors, complexity factors, composite factors. There is widespread belief that aircraft manufacturers do not know what it actually costs to turn out their current products. AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Cost Modeling • Aircraft is broken down into modules – Inner wing, outer wing, … – Modules are classified by type • Wing, Empennage, Fuselage, … • Cost per pound specified for each module type – Calibrated from existing cost models – Modified by other factors • Learning effects • Commonality effects • Assembly & Integration: a separate “module” • 2 cost categories: development & manufacturing Production run: a collection of modules AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Cost Modeling Plane Centerbody Wing Landing Propulsion Systems Payloads Final Gear Assembly At this level, the degree of detail can Winglet Outer Inner … range from e.g. “wing” Wing Wing to “rivet”. Identifier Weight Area RC per Subparts NRC per NRC time pound per pound pound distribution Labor Material & Support Tooling Engineering Other Equipment AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Development Cost Data Baseline QA Baseline Dev. Labs Baseline QA QA Baseline Dev. Dev. Labs Labs Baseline Tool Tool Fab. Fab Baseline ToolFab.Tool Fab. Baseline Tool Tool Design Design Baseline M.E. M.E. Baseline Engr. Engr.. Baseline Tool Design Baseline M.E. Baseline Engr. non-dimensional labor hours non-dimensional time Boeing data for large commercial jet AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Development Cost Model • Cashflow profiles based on beta curve: t c (t ) Kt D 1(1 t )E 1 • Typical development time ~6 years • Learning effects captured – span, cost 0.06 Support 0.05 Tool Fab 0.04 Tool Design ME 0.02 Engineering (from Markish) normalized cost 0.01 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19normalized 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 time 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Development Cost Model Payloads 8% Wing 20% Systems 17% Empennage 9% Installed Engines 8% Landing Gear 1% Fuselage 37% Representative non-recurring cost breakdown by parts for large commercial jet (from Markish). AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Development Cost Data For your reference: $/lb assembled from public domain weight and total cost estimates plus representative NRC breakdown by aircraft part (see Markish). Tool Engineering ME Design Tool Fab Support Totals 40.0% 10.0% 10.5% 34.8% 4.7% 100.0% Wing $7,093 $1,773 $1,862 $6,171 $833 $17,731 Empennage $20,862 $5,216 $5,476 $18,150 $2,451 $52,156 Fuselage $12,837 $3,209 $3,370 $11,169 $1,508 $32,093 Landing Gear $999 $250 $262 $869 $117 $2,499 Installed Engines $3,477 $869 $913 $3,025 $408 $8,691 Systems $13,723 $3,431 $3,602 $11,939 $1,612 $34,307 Payloads $4,305 $1,076 $1,130 $3,746 $506 $10,763 AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Manufacturing Cost Model • Aircraft built Æ modules required • Modules database – Records quantities, marginal costs – Apply learning curve effect by module, not by aircraft Labor Materials Support 85% 95% 95% time AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Manufacturing Cost Model Final Assembly 6% Wing Payloads 27% 11% Systems 6% Installed Engines 9% Empennage Landing Gear 10% 3% Fuselage 28% Representative recurring cost breakdown by parts for large commercial jet (from Markish). AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Manufacturing Cost Data For your reference: $/lb values assembled from public domain weight and total cost estimates plus representative RC breakdown by aircraft part (see Markish). Labor Materials Other Total Wing $609 $204 $88 $900 Empennage $1,614 $484 $233 $2,331 Fuselage $679 $190 $98 $967 Landing Gear $107 $98 $16 $221 Installed Engines $248 $91 $36 $374 Systems $315 $91 $46 $452 Payloads $405 $100 $59 $564 Final Assembly $58 $4 $3 $65 AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 NASA Cost Models Online cost models available at http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/airframe.html e.g. Airframe Cost Model - simple model for estimating the development and production costs of aircraft airframes - based on military jet data - correlation with empty weight, max. speed, number of flight test vehicles, and production quantity AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Revenue Model Revenue model must predict market price and demand quantity. 180 90 160 80 140 767-200ER 70 A300 767-300ER 120 A310 777-200 60 A330 777-300 100 50 A340 747-400 747 80 MD-11 40 A300 767 60 30 A330 777 price ($M) 20 40 A340 deliveries MD-11 10 20 0 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1985 1990 1995 2000 year year Historical wide body data from Markish. No correlation found between price and quantity. AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Aircraft Pricing Cost-Based Pricing Market-Based Pricing Performance Cost + Profit = Price Operating Cost Market Competition Value Passenger Appeal Personal aircraft Commercial transport Business jets? Military aircraft Source: Schaufele AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Commercial Aircraft Pricing • Total Airplane Related Operating Costs are fairly CAROC constant. • Aircraft price must balance CAROC. PRICE Total AROC COST/WEIGHT (Capital costs) TRADE-OFF AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Business Jet Empirical Data Figure A7 in Roskam: -1 AMP1989 = log {0.6570 + 1.4133 log WTO} AMP1989 is predicted airplane market price in 1989 dollars Take-off weight: 10,000 lb < WTO < 60,000 lb BUT Gulfstream GIV and 737 BJ versions do not fit the linear trend. AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Commercial Jet Empirical Data Figure A9 in Roskam: -1 AMP1989 = log {3.3191+ 0.8043 log WTO} AMP1989 is predicted airplane market price in 1989 dollars Take-off weight: 60,000 lb < WTO < 1,000,000 lb AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Military Aircraft Empirical Data Figure A10 in Roskam: -1 AMP1989 = log {2.3341+ 1.0586 log WTO} AMP1989 is predicted airplane market price in 1989 dollars Take-off weight: 2,500 lb < WTO < 1,000,000 lb AEROSPACE COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY 9/19/2004 16.885 Revenue Model: Price • Assumption: market price based on 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Remote Pilot – Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Study Guide
    F FAA-G-8082-22 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Remote Pilot – Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Study Guide August 2016 Flight Standards Service Washington, DC 20591 This page intentionally left blank. Preface The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has published the Remote Pilot – Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) Study Guide to communicate the knowledge areas you need to study to prepare to take the Remote Pilot Certificate with an sUAS rating airman knowledge test. This Remote Pilot – Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Study Guide is available for download from faa.gov. Please send comments regarding this document to [email protected]. Remote Pilot – Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Study Guide i This page intentionally left blank. Remote Pilot – Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Study Guide ii Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Obtaining Assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) .............................................. 1 FAA Reference Material ...................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Applicable Regulations .......................................................................................... 3 Chapter 2: Airspace Classification, Operating Requirements, and Flight Restrictions .............. 5 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Easy Access Rules for Auxiliary Power Units (CS-APU)
    APU - CS Easy Access Rules for Auxiliary Power Units (CS-APU) EASA eRules: aviation rules for the 21st century Rules and regulations are the core of the European Union civil aviation system. The aim of the EASA eRules project is to make them accessible in an efficient and reliable way to stakeholders. EASA eRules will be a comprehensive, single system for the drafting, sharing and storing of rules. It will be the single source for all aviation safety rules applicable to European airspace users. It will offer easy (online) access to all rules and regulations as well as new and innovative applications such as rulemaking process automation, stakeholder consultation, cross-referencing, and comparison with ICAO and third countries’ standards. To achieve these ambitious objectives, the EASA eRules project is structured in ten modules to cover all aviation rules and innovative functionalities. The EASA eRules system is developed and implemented in close cooperation with Member States and aviation industry to ensure that all its capabilities are relevant and effective. Published February 20181 1 The published date represents the date when the consolidated version of the document was generated. Powered by EASA eRules Page 2 of 37| Feb 2018 Easy Access Rules for Auxiliary Power Units Disclaimer (CS-APU) DISCLAIMER This version is issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in order to provide its stakeholders with an updated and easy-to-read publication. It has been prepared by putting together the certification specifications with the related acceptable means of compliance. However, this is not an official publication and EASA accepts no liability for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent in the use of this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrating Air Systems in Aircraft Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Ali Tfaily Department of Mechanical Engineering Mcgil
    Integrating Air Systems in Aircraft Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Ali Tfaily Department of Mechanical Engineering McGill University, Montreal August 2018 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Engineering ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my supervisor, Prof. Michael Kokkolaras, for his support and guidance throughout my time as his student. I am honored to have worked along a supervisor that always helped me in my work and even my personal life. I am grateful to members of Bombardier’s Advanced Product Development department for their insights on aircraft design and optimization. Special acknowledgment is given to the Thermodynamics department at Bombardier Product Development Engineering, namely Sebastien Beaulac, Hongzhi Wang, Jean-Francois Reis, and Emmanuel Germaine, who provided expertise that greatly assisted this research. I would also like to thank Jean Brousseau for sharing his knowledge on air systems design. I am very grateful to John Ferneley, Susan Liscouët-Hanke, Pat Piperni, and Fassi Kafyeke who were supportive of my career goals and provided me the means to pursue these goals. Finally, I am grateful to my friends and family for their constant support and encouragement throughout the ups and downs of my studies. ABSTRACT The strong interactions between aircraft and air systems necessitate the integration of the latter to multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) considerations of the former. This research presents such a methodology considering environmental control and ice protection systems. These systems consume pressurized bleed air from the aircraft’s engines to perform their respective functions. We first describe the models used to predict the behavior of these systems and then propose different approaches to their integration into an existing aircraft MDO environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Engineering Approach in Aircraft Design Education; Techniques and Challenges
    Paper ID #11232 Systems Engineering Approach in Aircraft Design Education; Techniques and Challenges Prof. Mohammad Sadraey, Daniel Webster College Mohammad H. Sadraey is an Associate Professor in the Engineering School at the Daniel Webster Col- lege, Nashua, New Hampshire, USA. Dr. Sadraey’s main research interests are in aircraft design tech- niques, and design and automatic control of unmanned aircraft. He received his MSc. in Aerospace Engineering in 1995 from RMIT, Melbourne, Australia, and his Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Kansas, Kansas, USA. Dr. Sadraey is a senior member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), and a member of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). Prof. Nicholas Bertozzi, Daniel Webster College Nick Bertozzi is a Professor of Engineering at Daniel Webster College (DWC) and Dean of the School of Engineering and Computer Science (SECS). His major interest over the past 18 years has been the concurrent engineering design process, an interest that was fanned into flame by attending an NSF faculty development workshop in 1996 led by Ron Barr and Davor Juricic. Nick has a particular interest in help- ing engineering students develop good communications skills and has made this a SECS priority. Over the past ten years he and other engineering and humanities faculty colleagues have mentored a number of undergraduate student teams who have co-authored and presented papers and posters at Engineering Design Graphics Division (EDGD) and other ASEE, CDIO (www.cdio.org), and American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) meetings as well. Nick was delighted to serve as the EDGD pro- gram chair for the 2008 ASEE Summer Conference and as program co-chair with Kathy Holliday-Darr for the 68th EDGD Midyear meeting at WPI in October 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Incorporates Many Significant Technological Enhancements Derived from Predecessor Development Programs
    AIAA AVIATION Forum 10.2514/6.2018-3368 June 25-29, 2018, Atlanta, Georgia 2018 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference F-35 Air Vehicle Technology Overview Chris Wiegand,1 Bruce A. Bullick,2 Jeffrey A. Catt,3 Jeffrey W. Hamstra,4 Greg P. Walker,5 and Steve Wurth6 Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, TX, 76109, United States of America The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II incorporates many significant technological enhancements derived from predecessor development programs. The X-35 concept demonstrator program incorporated some that were deemed critical to establish the technical credibility and readiness to enter the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program. Key among them were the elements of the F-35B short takeoff and vertical landing propulsion system using the revolutionary shaft-driven LiftFan® system. However, due to X- 35 schedule constraints and technical risks, the incorporation of some technologies was deferred to the SDD program. This paper provides insight into several of the key air vehicle and propulsion systems technologies selected for incorporation into the F-35. It describes the transition from several highly successful technology development projects to their incorporation into the production aircraft. I. Introduction HE F-35 Lightning II is a true 5th Generation trivariant, multiservice air system. It provides outstanding fighter T class aerodynamic performance, supersonic speed, all-aspect stealth with weapons, and highly integrated and networked avionics. The F-35 aircraft
    [Show full text]
  • Ac 120-67 3/18/97
    Advisory u.s. Department ofTransportation Federal Aviation Circular Ad.nnlstratlon Subject: CRITERIA FOR OPERATIONAL Date: 3/18/97 AC No: 120-67 APPROVAL OF AUTO FLIGHT Initiated By: AFS-400 Change: GUIDANCE SYSTEMS 1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) states an acceptable means, but not the only means, for obtaining operational approval of the initial engagement or use of an Auto Flight Guidance System (AFGS) under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, section 121.579(d); part 125, section 125.329(e); and part 135, section 135.93(e) for the takeoff and initial climb phase of flight. 2. APPLICABILITY. The criteria contained in this AC are applicable to operators using commercial turbojet and turboprop aircraft holding Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operating authority issued under SPAR 38-2 and 14 CFR parts 119, 121, 125, and 135. The FAA may approve the AFGS operation for the operators under these parts, where necessary, by amending the applicant's operations specifications (OPSPECS). 3. BACKGROUND. The purpose of this AC is to take advantage of technological improvements in the operational capabilities of autopilot systems, particularly at lower altitudes. This AC complements a rule change that would allow the use of an autopilot, certificated and operationally approved by the FAA, at altitudes less than 500 feet above ground level in the vertical plane and in accordance with sections 121.189 and 135.367, in the lateral plane. 4. DEFINITIONS. a. Airplane Flight Manual (AFM). A document (under 14 CFR part 25, section 25.1581) which is used to obtain an FAA type certificate.
    [Show full text]
  • FROM the GROUNDUP September 2004 CAPABILITIES BROCHURE
    Vought Aircraft Industries, Inc. www.voughtaircraft.com INTEGRATED AEROSTRUCTURES FROM THE GROUNDUP September 2004 CAPABILITIES BROCHURE Airbus A330/A340 In 1988, we became the Boeing 747 We’ve built panels for the main first major U.S. structural assemblies supplier to fuselage, doors and the empennage section for more Airbus with the award of wing components for than 1,350 Boeing 747 aircraft since the program the A330/A340 long-range aircraft. Deliveries began in 1968. began in 1990, exceeding the 500 shipset mark in 2002. 2 PROVEN Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Our company has delivered more than 2,200 We were one of three team members on the empennage sections to Lockheed Martin B-2 program, with responsibility for more since becoming a supplier on the C-130 structure than any other team member. program in the 1950s. Through our heritage companies, we have been a premier supplier to the aerospace industry for nearly nine decades. Vought is a proven leader in providing aerostructures of superior quality to our customers. We’ve helped shape many major aircraft programs over the years – from small business jets to jumbo airplanes, and tactical fighters to cargo aircraft. From the ground up, Vought creates quality structures that help our customers take flight. 3 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III Robotic Tack Cell Machine We have consistently driven down the price of the Our new robotic tack cell transforms a six-step C-17 components we build through continuous process into a single operation. The six-axis producibility improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS COURSE FILE III B. Tech II Semester
    ERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING MRCET (UGC Autonomous) – – AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS COURSE FILE III B. Tech II Semester (2017-2018) Prepared By Ms. L Sushma, Assoc. Prof Department of Aeronautical Engineering MALLA REDDY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY (Autonomous Institution – UGC, Govt. of India) Affiliated to JNTU, Hyderabad, Approved by AICTE - Accredited by NBA & NAAC – A Grade - ISO 9001:2015 Certified) Maisammaguda, Dhulapally (Post Via. Kompally), Secunderabad – 500100, Telangana State, India. III– II B. Tech Aircraft Systems By L SUSHMA I AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING MRCET (UGC Autonomous) – – MRCET VISION ฀ To become a model institution in the fields of Engineering, Technology and Management. ฀ To have a perfect synchronization of the ideologies of MRCET with challenging demands of International Pioneering Organizations. MRCET MISSION To establish a pedestal for the integral innovation, team spirit, originality and competence in the students, expose them to face the global challenges and become pioneers of Indian vision of modern society. MRCET QUALITY POLICY. ฀ To pursue continual improvement of teaching learning process of Undergraduate and Post Graduate programs in Engineering & Management vigorously. ฀ To provide state of art infrastructure and expertise to impart the quality education. III– II B. Tech Aircraft Systems By L SUSHMA II AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING MRCET (UGC Autonomous) – – PROGRAM OUTCOMES (PO’s) Engineering Graduates will be able to: 1. Engineering knowledge: Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals,
    [Show full text]
  • Inlet and Nozzle Technology for 21St Century Fighter Aircraft
    THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS 345 E 47th SL, New York, N.Y. 10017 96-GT-244 The Society shall not be responsible for statements or opinions advanced in papers or discussion at meetings of the Society or of its Divisions or Sections, or printed in its publications. Ditetcion Is printed only if the paper is published in an ASME Journal. Authorization to photocopy • material for internal or personal use under circumstance not falling within the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act is granted by ASME to libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Rearming Service provided that the base fee of $0.30 per page is paid directly to the CCC, 27 Congress Street, Salem MA 01970. Requests for special pennistion or bulk mproduzlion shoukt be ad- dressed to the ASME Technical Publishing Department. Copyright 0 1996 by ASME All Rights Reserved Printed In U.S.A. Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT1996/78736/V002T02A006/2406937/v002t02a006-96-gt-244.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 INLET AND NOZZLE TECHNOLOGY FOR 21ST CENTURY FIGHTER AIRCRAFT Marvin C. Gridley 111111111111,111111 111111 Steven H. Walker Wright Laboratory IMJFIMA Bldg 450 2645 Fifth Street Suite 7 Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7913 USA ABSTRACT more flexible, to perform a variety of missions to counter changing The focus of propulsion integration technology in the 21st threats. century will be economy. USAF inlet and nozzle technology goals Specifically, two propulsion integration technologies that offer translate into 50% weight reduction and 25% acquisition cost the potential for lower cost and more survivable aircraft systems while reduction metrics for new aircraft system.
    [Show full text]
  • EASA Safety Information Bulletin
    EASA SIB No: 2009 - 12 EASA Safety Information Bulletin SIB No.: 2009 - 12 Issued: 30 April 2009 Subject: Erroneous Low Range Radio Altimeter (LRRA) indications on Boeing 737 aircraft Ref. Publications: Boeing Flight Operations Technical Bulletin 737-09-2 Description: An erroneous Low Range Radio Altimeter (LRRA) indication has been identified in connection with a recent 737-800 accident and there are reports of further incidents attributed to the same cause. Two LRRA systems provide height above ground data to Boeing 737 aircraft systems which include the displays, autothrottle (A/T), autopilots and configuration/ground proximity warning. Data from the left LRRA are used on some Boeing 737 aircraft for the autothrottle logic, regardless of the autopilot selected. When the autothrottle logic senses that the airplane is in landing flare, the thrust levers are retarded to the idle stop. If one LRRA provides erroneous altitude readings, the associated flight deck effects may typically include: • Inappropriate Flight Mode Annunciation (FMA) indication of autothrottle RETARD mode during approach phase with the airplane above 27 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). There will also be corresponding thrust lever movement towards the idle stop. The FMA will continue to indicate RETARD after the thrust levers have reached the idle stop rather than change to ARM. • Large differences between displayed radio altitude. • Inability to engage both autopilots in dual channel approach (APP) mode. • Unexpected removal of the Flight Director Command Bars during approach on the pilot’s side with the erroneous radio altimeter display. • Unexpected Configuration Warnings after takeoff, during approach, or during go-around. This is information only.
    [Show full text]
  • Airframe & Aircraft Components By
    Airframe & Aircraft Components (According to the Syllabus Prescribed by Director General of Civil Aviation, Govt. of India) FIRST EDITION AIRFRAME & AIRCRAFT COMPONENTS Prepared by L.N.V.M. Society Group of Institutes * School of Aeronautics ( Approved by Director General of Civil Aviation, Govt. of India) * School of Engineering & Technology ( Approved by Director General of Civil Aviation, Govt. of India) Compiled by Sheo Singh Published By L.N.V.M. Society Group of Institutes H-974, Palam Extn., Part-1, Sec-7, Dwarka, New Delhi-77 Published By L.N.V.M. Society Group of Institutes, Palam Extn., Part-1, Sec.-7, Dwarka, New Delhi - 77 First Edition 2007 All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publishers. Type Setting Sushma Cover Designed by Abdul Aziz Printed at Graphic Syndicate, Naraina, New Delhi. Dedicated To Shri Laxmi Narain Verma [ Who Lived An Honest Life ] Preface This book is intended as an introductory text on “Airframe and Aircraft Components” which is an essential part of General Engineering and Maintenance Practices of DGCA license examination, BAMEL, Paper-II. It is intended that this book will provide basic information on principle, fundamentals and technical procedures in the subject matter areas relating to the “Airframe and Aircraft Components”. The written text is supplemented with large number of suitable diagrams for reinforcing the key aspects. I acknowledge with thanks the contribution of the faculty and staff of L.N.V.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Technology Roadmap to 2050 | IATA
    Aircraft Technology Roadmap to 2050 NOTICE DISCLAIMER. The information contained in this publication is subject to constant review in the light of changing government requirements and regulations. No subscriber or other reader should act on the basis of any such information without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without taking appropriate professional advice. Although every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, the International Air Transport Association shall not be held responsible for any loss or damage caused by errors, omissions, misprints or misinterpretation of the contents hereof. Furthermore, the International Air Transport Association expressly disclaims any and all liability to any person or entity, whether a purchaser of this publication or not, in respect of anything done or omitted, and the consequences of anything done or omitted, by any such person or entity in reliance on the contents of this publication. © International Air Transport Association. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, recast, reformatted or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written permission from: Senior Vice President Member & External Relations International Air Transport Association 33, Route de l’Aéroport 1215 Geneva 15 Airport Switzerland Table of Contents Table of Contents ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]