DOCSLIB.ORG

University of Southampton Research Repository Eprints Soton

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University of Southampton Research Repository Eprints Soton University of Southampton Research Repository ePrints Soton Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given e.g. AUTHOR (year of submission) "Full thesis title", University of Southampton, name of the University School or Department, PhD Thesis, pagination http://eprints.soton.ac.uk Faculty of Engineering and the Environment Computational Engineering and Design Research Group Cost Optimization Tools for Advanced Gas Turbine Technologies by Stephan Langmaak Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Engineering Academic Supervisors: Prof. James Scanlan, Dr Andr´asS´obester Industrial Supervisors: Dr Stephen Wiseall (y), Martin Rhodes August 2015 University of Southampton Abstract Faculty of Engineering and the Environment Computational Engineering and Design Research Group Doctor of Engineering Cost Optimization Tools for Advanced Gas Turbine Technologies by Stephan Langmaak This thesis presents two studies that illustrate how cost modelling can be integrated into the various design process stages, ranging from strategic gas turbine and airframe system design to preliminary and detailed component design and production planning. The first study investigates which cruise speed the next generation of short-haul aircraft with 150 seats should fly at and whether a conventional two- or three-shaft turbofan, a geared turbofan, a turboprop or an open rotor should be employed in order to make the aircraft's direct operating cost robust to uncertain fuel and carbon (CO2) prices in the Year 2030, taking the aircraft productivity, the passenger value of time and the modal shift into account. To answer this question, an optimization loop was set up in MATLAB consisting of nine modules covering gas turbine and airframe design and performance, flight and aircraft fleet simulation, operating cost and optimization. If the passenger value of time is included, the most robust aircraft design is powered by geared turbofan engines and cruises at Mach 0.80. If the value of time is ignored, however, then a turboprop aircraft flying at Mach 0.70 is the optimum solution. This demonstrates that the most fuel-efficient option, the open rotor, is not automatically the most cost-efficient solution because of the relatively high engine and airframe costs. The second study shows how a factory cost model can be combined with a paramet- ric component production time model, to not only calculate costs at the manufacturing operation level for production planning, but also the total unit costs of future integrally bladed disc (blisk) designs for component trade-off studies. As future process times can only be estimated and the correlation between operation times and blisk design parame- ters, including the number of blades, the disc diameter and other design variables, is never perfect, all operation times have uncertainty distributions. These are cascaded through the model to generate a probability distribution of the unit cost. i ii Contents 1 Cost Optimization1 1.1 Background....................................1 1.1.1 Costing within the Aerospace Industry.................1 1.1.2 Design Optimization...........................2 1.2 Research Motivation...............................3 1.2.1 System Study...............................4 1.2.2 Component Study............................7 1.3 System Costing..................................8 1.3.1 Fuel and Carbon Prices.........................8 1.3.2 Multi-Disciplinary Optimization.................... 12 1.4 Component Costing............................... 22 1.4.1 Activity-Based Costing......................... 22 1.4.2 Parametric Costing............................ 24 2 Advanced Gas Turbine Technology 27 2.1 Gas Turbine and Airframe System Options.................. 27 2.1.1 System Option 1: Two-Shaft Turbofan................. 28 2.1.2 System Option 2: Three-Shaft Turbofan................ 29 2.1.3 System Option 3: Geared Turbofan.................. 31 2.1.4 System Option 4: Turboprop...................... 32 2.1.5 System Option 5: Open Rotor..................... 33 2.2 Gas Turbine Component Options........................ 36 2.2.1 Blisks................................... 36 iii 3 System Study 41 3.1 Methodology and Assumptions......................... 41 3.1.1 Module 1: Engine Design........................ 43 3.1.2 Module 2: Airframe Design....................... 51 3.1.3 Module 3: Engine Performance..................... 55 3.1.4 Module 4: Airframe Performance.................... 56 3.1.5 Module 5: Performance Requirement.................. 57 3.1.6 Module 6: Flight Simulation...................... 64 3.1.7 Module 7: Aircraft Fleet Simulation.................. 73 3.1.8 Module 8: Direct Operating Cost.................... 75 3.1.9 Module 9: Optimizer........................... 81 3.2 Results and Discussion.............................. 83 3.2.1 Optimum Design............................. 83 3.2.2 Mission Performance........................... 89 3.2.3 Optimum Cruise Speed......................... 100 3.2.4 Verification................................ 107 4 Component Study 111 4.1 Factory Cost Model............................... 111 4.1.1 Model Schematics............................ 111 4.2 Scalable Blisk Cost Model............................ 114 4.2.1 Blisk Design Variability......................... 115 4.2.2 Model Structure............................. 115 4.2.3 Regression Analysis........................... 118 4.2.4 Uncertainty................................ 119 4.3 Results and Discussion.............................. 123 4.3.1 Unit Cost Prediction........................... 123 4.3.2 Blisk Design Space............................ 126 5 Conclusion and Recommendations 129 5.1 System Study................................... 129 5.1.1 Contribution and Limitations...................... 129 5.1.2 Future Work............................... 130 iv 5.2 Component Study................................ 132 5.2.1 Factory Cost Model........................... 132 5.2.2 Scalable Blisk Cost Model........................ 133 A Design Optimization Data 135 B Performance Diagrams 147 C Cruise Speed Optimization Data 155 D Cost Diagrams 167 v vi List of Figures 1.1 Design Phases within the Product Life-Cycle.................3 1.2 Correlation Between Oil Price and Direct Operating Cost from 1971 to 20099 1.3 Direct Operating Cost Elements from 1971 to 2009.............. 10 1.4 Total Flight Journey Time Vs. Direct Distance................ 17 1.5 Aircraft, High-Speed Train and Car Market Share Vs. Direct Distance... 18 1.6 Aircraft Market Share Vs. Average Door-to-Door Speed........... 19 1.7 Impact of Cruise Speed on Aircraft Market Share............... 19 1.8 Single-Aisle Aircraft Flight Distance Distribution............... 20 1.9 Effect of Cruise Speed on 150-Seater RPK................... 21 1.10 Conventional Vs. Activity-Based Costing.................... 23 2.1 Two-Shaft Turbofan Aircraft (Cruise Speed: Mach 0.78)........... 29 2.2 Three-Shaft Turbofan Aircraft (Cruise Speed: Mach 0.78).......... 30 2.3 Geared Turbofan Aircraft (Cruise Speed: Mach 0.78)............. 31 2.4 Turboprop Aircraft (Cruise Speed: Mach 0.70)................ 33 2.5 Open Rotor Aircraft (Cruise Speed: Mach 0.70)................ 35 2.6 Open Rotor Aircraft (Cruise Speed: Mach 0.76)................ 36 2.7 Blisk Weight Saving............................... 37 2.8 Axial-Flow Gas Turbine Compressor with LFW, MFS and ECM Blisks... 37 2.9 Linear Friction Welding............................. 38 3.1 System Design Methodology........................... 42 3.2 Engine Design Framework............................ 44 3.3 Blade, Disc and Drum Schematic........................ 50 3.4 Airframe Design Framework........................... 52 3.5 Engine Performance Framework......................... 55 vii 3.6 Airframe Performance Framework....................... 56 3.7 Takeoff Field Length Simulation Framework.................. 60 3.8 Balanced Field Length Simulation Framework................. 61 3.9 Climb Requirement Simulation Framework.................. 62 3.10 Cruise Requirement Simulation Framework.................. 63 3.11 Landing Requirement Simulation Framework................. 64 3.12 Flight Profile................................... 65 3.13 Flight Taxi Simulation Framework....................... 67 3.14 Flight Landing Simulation Framework..................... 68 3.15 Flight Deceleration Simulation Framework................... 69 3.16 Flight Descent Simulation Framework..................... 70 3.17 Flight Cruise Simulation Framework...................... 70 3.18 Flight Ascent Simulation Framework...................... 71 3.19 Flight Acceleration Simulation Framework................... 71 3.20 Flight Takeoff Simulation Framework...................... 72 3.21 Aircraft Fleet Simulation Framework...................... 74 3.22 Fleet Size, Annual Flight Cycles and Flight Hours Vs. Cruise Speed.... 74 3.23 Direct Operating Cost Elements.......................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Robust Gas Turbine and Airframe System Design in Light of Uncertain
    Robust Gas Turbine and Airframe System Design in Light of Uncertain Fuel and CO2 Prices Stephan Langmaak1, James Scanlan2, and András Sóbester3 University of Southampton, Southampton, SO16 7QF, United Kingdom This paper presents a study that numerically investigated which cruise speed the next generation of short-haul aircraft with 150 seats should y at and whether a con- ventional two- or three-shaft turbofan, a geared turbofan, a turboprop, or an open rotor should be employed in order to make the aircraft's direct operating cost robust to uncertain fuel and carbon (CO2) prices in the Year 2030, taking the aircraft pro- ductivity, the passenger value of time, and the modal shift into account. To answer this question, an optimization loop was set up in MATLAB consisting of nine modules covering gas turbine and airframe design and performance, ight and aircraft eet sim- ulation, operating cost, and optimization. If the passenger value of time is included, the most robust aircraft design is powered by geared turbofan engines and cruises at Mach 0.80. If the value of time is ignored, however, then a turboprop aircraft ying at Mach 0.70 is the optimum solution. This demonstrates that the most fuel-ecient option, the open rotor, is not automatically the most cost-ecient solution because of the relatively high engine and airframe costs. 1 Research Engineer, Computational Engineering and Design 2 Professor of Aerospace Design, Computational Engineering and Design, AIAA member 3 Associate Professor in Aircraft Engineering, Computational Engineering and Design, AIAA member 1 I. Introduction A. Background IT takes around 5 years to develop a gas turbine engine, which then usually remains in pro- duction for more than two decades [1, 2].
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace Engine Data
    AEROSPACE ENGINE DATA Data for some concrete aerospace engines and their craft ................................................................................. 1 Data on rocket-engine types and comparison with large turbofans ................................................................... 1 Data on some large airliner engines ................................................................................................................... 2 Data on other aircraft engines and manufacturers .......................................................................................... 3 In this Appendix common to Aircraft propulsion and Space propulsion, data for thrust, weight, and specific fuel consumption, are presented for some different types of engines (Table 1), with some values of specific impulse and exit speed (Table 2), a plot of Mach number and specific impulse characteristic of different engine types (Fig. 1), and detailed characteristics of some modern turbofan engines, used in large airplanes (Table 3). DATA FOR SOME CONCRETE AEROSPACE ENGINES AND THEIR CRAFT Table 1. Thrust to weight ratio (F/W), for engines and their crafts, at take-off*, specific fuel consumption (TSFC), and initial and final mass of craft (intermediate values appear in [kN] when forces, and in tonnes [t] when masses). Engine Engine TSFC Whole craft Whole craft Whole craft mass, type thrust/weight (g/s)/kN type thrust/weight mini/mfin Trent 900 350/63=5.5 15.5 A380 4×350/5600=0.25 560/330=1.8 cruise 90/63=1.4 cruise 4×90/5000=0.1 CFM56-5A 110/23=4.8 16
    [Show full text]
  • Rolls-Royce / Itp Regulation
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG Competition Case M.8242 - ROLLS-ROYCE / ITP Only the English text is available and authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Art 6(2) Date: 19/04/2017 In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32017M8242 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 19.04.2017 C(2017) 2613 final In the published version of this decision, some information has been omitted pursuant to Article PUBLIC VERSION 17(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 concerning non-disclosure of business secrets and other confidential information. The omissions are shown thus […]. Where possible the information omitted has been replaced by ranges of figures or a general description. To the notifying party: Subject: Case M.8242 – Rolls-Royce / ITP Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation No 139/20041 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area2 Dear Sir or Madam, (1) On 24 February 2017, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which the undertaking Rolls-Royce Holdings plc ("Rolls-Royce", United Kingdom) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Industria de Turbo Propulsores SA ("ITP", Spain) by way of a purchase of shares (the "Transaction").3 Rolls-Royce is designated hereinafter as the "Notifying Party", and Rolls-Royce and ITP are together referred to as the "Parties". 1 OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Livre 1.Indb
    European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company EADS N.V. Registration Document 2010 European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company EADS N.V. (the “Company” or “EADS” and together with its subsidiaries, the “Group”) is a Dutch company, which is listed in France, Germany and Spain. The applicable regulations with respect to public information and protection of investors, as well as the commitments made by the Company to securities and market authorities, are described in this registration document (the “Registration Document”). In addition to historical information, this Registration Document includes forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are generally identified by the use of forward-looking words, such as “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “plan”, “project”, “predict”, “will”, “should”, “may” or other variations of such terms, or by discussion of strategy. These statements relate to EADS’ future prospects, developments and business strategies and are based on analyses or forecasts of future results and estimates of amounts not yet determinable. These forward-looking statements represent the view of EADS only as of the dates they are made, and EADS disclaims any obligation to update forward-looking statements, except as may be otherwise required by law. The forward-looking statements in this Registration Document involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause EADS’ actual future results, performance and achievements to differ materially from those forecasted or suggested herein. These include changes in general economic and business conditions, as well as the factors described in “Risk Factors” below. This Registration Document was prepared in accordance with Annex 1 of EC Regulation 809/2004, filed in English with, and approved by, the Autoriteit Financiële Markten (the “AFM”) on 19 April 2011 in its capacity as competent authority under the Wet op het financieel toezicht (as amended) pursuant to Directive 2003/71/EC.
    [Show full text]
  • Ahead of Its Time 75 Years of MTU History
    Annual Report 2008 Ahead of its time 75 years of MTU history. 100 years of aviation expertise. WorldReginfo - a6a23212-0bdc-4ce2-9f68-998dbc575eab Order backlog by segments (without consolidation) in € million Revenues by segments (without consolidation) in € million OEM MRO OEM MRO 2004 3,236.0 2,125.0 2004 1,375.6 575.9 2005 3,433.8 3,703.6 2005 1,434.8 766.9 2006 3,218.4 3,804.4 2006 1,483.1 954.7 2007 3,216.8 5,139.6 2007 1,599.5 1,004.7 2008 3,884.5 5,361.2 2008 1,642.9 1,113.0 EBITDA adjusted by segments (without consolidation) in € million Net profit in € million OEM MRO 2004 131.3 42.7 2004 0.2 2005 162.4 77.8 2005 32.8 2006 217.7 103.4 2006 89.1 2007 305.7 87.9 2007 154.1 2008 330.3 78.9 2008 179.7 WorldReginfo - a6a23212-0bdc-4ce2-9f68-998dbc575eab Selected consolidated financial information and key figures at a glance Change in € million (unless otherwise specified) 2008 - 2007 2008 2007 2006 Revenues and earnings Revenues 148.4 5.8 % 2,724.3 2,575.9 2,416.2 thereof: commercial and military engine business (OEM) 43.4 2.7 % 1,642.9 1,599.5 1,483.1 thereof: commercial maintenance business (MRO) 108.3 10.8 % 1,113.0 1,004.7 954.7 Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) 15.6 4.0 % 408.5 392.9 335.6 Earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) 5.0 2.1 % 248.3 243.3 183.8 Net profit 25.6 16.6 % 179.7 154.1 89.1 Earnings (adjusted) Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA adjusted) 12.8 3.3 % 405.7 392.9 318.2 Earnings before interest and tax (EBIT adjusted) 18.4 5.9 % 331.0 312.6
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 UNIVERSAL REGISTRATION DOCUMENT Including the Annual Financial Report CONTENTS
    2019 UNIVERSAL REGISTRATION DOCUMENT Including the Annual Financial Report CONTENTS EXTRACT FROM THE INTEGRATED REPORT 2 5 NON-FINANCIAL SAFRAN AT A GLANCE 3 PERFORMANCE 241 EDITORIAL 4 5.1 Organization and management of non‑financial performance 242 GROUP PROFILE 6 5.2 Key non‑financial risks 246 ECOSYSTEM 12 5.3 Business ethics, export and customs controls 251 STRATEGY AND BUSINESS MODEL 18 5.4 Responsible purchasing 256 5.5 Climate and environment 258 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 40 5.6 Health and safety 265 PERFORMANCE AND VALUE CREATION 46 5.7 Human resources 268 5.8 Social dialogue 275 5.9 Social impact 276 5.10 Methodological note and ITP report 278 5.11 Cross‑reference table for the Non‑financial Information Statement 284 PRESENTATION 1 OF THE GROUP 49 6 1.1 Safran overview 50 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 287 1.2 Group businesses 54 6.1 Safran’s corporate governance structure 288 1.3 Competitive position 74 6.2 Membership structure of the Board Research and development 74 1.4 of Directors 291 1.5 Industrial investments 81 6.3 Operating procedures and work of Sites and production plants 83 1.6 the Board of Directors and the Board Safran performance and quality policy 84 1.7 Committees 324 6.4 Application of the AFEP‑MEDEF Corporate Governance Code 334 6.5 Directors’ interests in the Company’s share capital 334 2 REVIEW OF OPERATIONS IN 2019 6.6 Compensation policy and compensation AND OUTLOOK FOR 2020 87 packages for corporate officers 335 6.7 Cross‑reference table for the corporate 2.1 Comments on the Group’s performance governance report prepared
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Integrated Report Contents Safran at a Glance 2020 Key Figures
    2020 INTEGRATED REPORT CONTENTS SAFRAN AT A GLANCE 2020 KEY FIGURES SAFRAN AT A GLANCE €1,073 million FREE CASH FLOW P. 01 rd Global aerospace group, excluding * RISK 3 airframers €2,792 million EDITORIAL MANAGEMENT NET DEBT P. 02 P. 40 REVENUE(1) CORPORATE down 33.0% (down 32.5% €449 million GROUP €16,498 million CAPEX PROFILE GOVERNANCE on organic basis) on 2019 P. 04 P. 42 RECURRING OPERATING INCOME(1) €1,213 million €1,686 million down 55.9% (down 58.6% TOTAL R&D ECOSYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND VALUE on organic basis) on 2019 (including customer-funded R&D) P. 10 CREATION (1) P. 50 PROFIT €844 million (Group share) 78,892 STRATEGY down 68.3% on 2019 EMPLOYEES AND BUSINESS (at December 31, 2020) MODEL P. 18 Long-term credit rating: BBB+ (with stable outlook) Our activities AEROSPACE AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT PROPULSION EQUIPMENT/ INTERIORS DEFENSE/ AEROSYSTEMS BREAKDOWN OF REVENUE(1) BY SEGMENT €7,633 million €6,893 million €1,922 million BREAKDOWN OF RECURRING OPERATING INCOME(1) BY SEGMENT €1,192 million €687 million €(174) million BREAKDOWN OF RECURRING OPERATING MARGIN(1) BY SEGMENT 15.6% 10.0% (9.1)% * Classification criteria: revenue - Source: Safran. (1) Adjusted data. See section 2.1.1 of the 2020 Universal Registration Document for a reconciliation of the consolidated income statement with the adjusted income statement and a breakdown of the adjustment. 1 I SAFRAN 2020 INTEGRATED REPORT EDITORIAL EDITORIAL Message from the Chairman of the Board of Directors IN 2021, SAFRAN WILL ROSS McINNES and the Chief Executive Officer CONTINUE TO DRAW OLIVIER ANDRIÈS STRENGTH FROM ITS The total mobilization of all teams enabled Safran to tackle the crisis in 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Switch Catalog
    SWITCH CATALOG SAFRAN IS A LEADING INTERNATIONAL HIGH-TECHNOLOGY GROUP and Tier-1 supplier of systems and equipment for aerospace, defense and security. Operating worldwide, Safran has 66,300 employees and generated sales of 14.7 billion euros in 2013. Through our global presence Safran not only enhances competitiveness, but also builds industrial and commercial relations with the world’s leading prime contractors and operators, while providing fast, local service to customers around the world. Working alone or in partnership, Safran holdsworld or European leadership positions in its core markets. LEADERSHIP POSITIONS IN EACH OF OUR CORE BUSINESSES AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT AEROSPACE PROPULSION Landing and braking systems: Safran designs, produces and supports landing gear, wheels, carbon brakes and Aircraft engines: Carrying on the CFM56 tradition, Safran related systems for civil and military xed and rotarywing and GE, through CFM International, a 50/50 joint company aircraft. These systems are used on many dierent aircraft, between Snecma (Safran) and GE, have launched the new including the Airbus A320, A350 XWB, A380 and A400M, LEAP engine, which will power the Airbus A320neo, Boeing the Boeing NextGeneration 737, 737 MAX, 767, 777 and 737 MAX and Comac C919. Safran oers the SaM146 787 Dreamliner, the Rafale, Euroghter Typhoon, F18, etc. engine for regional jets, through PowerJet, a 50/50 joint Engine systems and equipment: Safran is the sole company between Snecma (Safran) and NPO Saturn, and is nacelle systems integrator for the Airbus A380. Working developing the Silvercrest® for business jets. In the military alone or in partnership with GE, Safran is developing sector, Safran makes the M88 engine for the Rafale ghter nacelles for LEAP engines (Airbus A320neo and Comac and the TP400 turboprop for the Airbus A400M military C919) and for the Silvercrest® and GE Passport business transport, through the Europrop International GmbH jet engines.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Effectively Deploy Defect Prevention Methods in the Aero Engine Supply Chain
    How to Effectively Deploy Defect Prevention Methods in the Aero Engine Supply Chain October 9th 2019, Toulouse An AESQ Supplier Forum Event AESQ – Aerospace Engine Supplier Quality Strategy Group This document slide does not contain ITAR or EAR technical data. The content of this presentation slide is proprietary and Copyright © SAE International. Further use or distribution is not permitted without permission from SAE confidential information of the AESQ. It is not permitted to be distributed to any third party without the written consent of the AESQ. Ian Riggs Olivier Castets Global Quality Executive Quality Manager Component & Accessories Rolls-Royce Civil Aerospace Safran Aircraft Engines Chairman - AESQ AESQ – Aerospace Engine Supplier Quality Strategy Group This document slide does not contain ITAR or EAR technical data. The content of this presentation slide is proprietary and confidential information of the AESQ. It is not permitted to be distributed to any third party without the written consent of the AESQ. Agenda Safran 08:00 Case Welcome & Voice Studies Overview & Introductions of the Maxime Heinisch Overview Olivier Objectives Ian Olivier Customer Barbara Lisa BREAK Barrie Riggs Castets Balmat Safety Negroe Claveloux Hicklin Process FMEA Measurement Systems Process Control Problem Solving (8D) GROUP Welcome Ian Martin LUNCH Back Olivier FACC PHOTO Pete E Teti PW Kalisz Riggs Schäffner Mechachrome 12:00 12:45 Castets Meggitt Human Let’s Talk Closing Deployment Remarks Factors A380 FAL 17:00 Catherine Ludovic BREAK Erika Helen Ian Barbara Tour Information CLOSE & Catarina-Graca Chevet Grimm Djäknegren Riggs Negroe DEPART AESQ – Aerospace Engine Supplier Quality Strategy Group This document slide does not contain ITAR or EAR technical data.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Combat Aircraft (1945 – 2010)
    I MODERN COMBAT AIRCRAFT (1945 – 2010) Modern Combat Aircraft (1945-2010) is a brief overview of the most famous military aircraft developed by the end of World War II until now. Fixed-wing airplanes and helicopters are presented by the role fulfilled, by the nation of origin (manufacturer), and year of first flight. For each aircraft is available a photo, a brief introduction, and information about its development, design and operational life. The work is made using English Wikipedia, but also other Web sites. FIGHTER-MULTIROLE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES No. Aircraft 1° fly Pg. No. Aircraft 1° fly Pg. Lockheed General Dynamics 001 1944 3 011 1964 27 P-80 Shooting Star F-111 Aardvark Republic Grumman 002 1946 5 012 1970 29 F-84 Thunderjet F-14 Tomcat North American Northrop 003 1947 7 013 1972 33 F-86 Sabre F-5E/F Tiger II North American McDonnell Douglas 004 1953 9 014 1972 35 F-100 Super Sabre F-15 Eagle Convair General Dynamics 005 1953 11 015 1974 39 F-102 Delta Dagger F-16 Fighting Falcon Lockheed McDonnell Douglas 006 1954 13 016 1978 43 F-104 Starfighter F/A-18 Hornet Republic Boeing 007 1955 17 017 1995 45 F-105 Thunderchief F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Vought Lockheed Martin 008 1955 19 018 1997 47 F-8 Crusader F-22 Raptor Convair Lockheed Martin 009 1956 21 019 2006 51 F-106 Delta Dart F-35 Lightning II McDonnell Douglas 010 1958 23 F-4 Phantom II SOVIET UNION SOVIET UNION No.
    [Show full text]
  • Rolls-Royce Plc Annual Report and Audited Financial Statements for the Year Ended 31 December 2020
    COMPANY NUMBER 01003142 ROLLS-ROYCE PLC ANNUAL REPORT AND AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2020 Contents Rolls-Royce plc Annual Report 2020 CONTENTS Company Information 1 Strategic Report Group at a glance 2 Chief Executive’s review 4 Purpose, vision and strategy 6 Business model 9 Business environment 11 Key performance indicators 13 Financial review 15 Business review 23 Principal risks 31 Section 172 statement 36 Directors’ Report Directors 38 Directors’ indemnities 38 Dividends 38 Corporate governance 38 Employment of disabled persons 39 Employee engagement 39 Stakeholder engagement 40 Financial instruments and risk management 41 Post balance sheet events 41 Related party transactions 41 Political donations 41 Branches 41 Greenhouse gas emissions 42 Disclosures in the Strategic Report 43 Management report 43 Going concern statement 43 Responsibility statements 46 Financial Statements Consolidated Financial Statements 48 Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements 55 Company Financial Statements 119 Notes to the Company Financial Statements 121 Subsidiaries, Joint Ventures and Associates 149 Independent Auditor’s Report 156 Other Financial Information 168 Glossary 170 Company Information Rolls-Royce plc Annual Report 2020 COMPANY INFORMATION Registered office Kings Place 90 York Way London N1 9FX Independent Auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Chartered Accountants and Statutory Auditors 1 Embankment Place London WC2N 6RH 1 Strategic Report Rolls-Royce plc Annual Report 2020 STRATEGIC REPORT The Directors present their Strategic Report on the Rolls-Royce plc Group (the Group), together with the audited financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2020. Group at a glance Pioneers of Power Rolls-Royce pioneers cutting-edge technologies that deliver clean, safe and competitive solutions to meet our planet’s vital power needs.
    [Show full text]
  • MTU Annual Report 2010 and Also Permanently Available to Shareholders on the MTU Website At
    A n n u A l report 2010 CE o n T n T S MAGAZI n e 2 0 1 0 United by excellence » Magazine insert at page 4 FcAI n A n I l report 2010 To our shareholders 6 Corporate Governance 18 Group management report 46 Consolidated Financial Statements 104 Additional information 220 » Detailed table of contents: page 3 SCTEDE l E C o n S o l i D ATED F i n A n C i A l i n F o r M AT i o n A n D k E y F i G U r E S Selected consolidated financial information and key figures at a glance in € million (unless otherwise specified) Change 2010-2009 2010 2009 Revenues and earnings r evenues 96.6 3.7 % 2,707.4 2,610.8 attributable to the commercial engine business1) 123.9 11.8 % 1,177.6 1,053.7 attributable to the military engine business1) -46.1 -8.7 % 485.9 532.0 attributable to the commercial maintenance business1) 16.4 1.6 % 1,074.0 1,057.6 Gross profit 64.3 14.0 % 522.9 458.6 Earnings before interest and tax (EBiT) 21.1 8.5 % 268.0 246.9 Earnings after tax 1.2 0.9 % 142.2 141.0 Earnings (adjusted) Earnings before interest and tax (EBiT adjusted) 19.0 6.5 % 311.3 292.3 EBiT margin (adjusted) 11.5 11.2 Balance sheet Total assets 277.0 8.8 % 3,426.1 3,149.1 Equity 88.6 12.1 % 819.3 730.7 Equity ratio in % 23.9 23.2 net financial debt -86.2 -60.5 % 56.2 142.4 Cash flow Cash flow from operating activities -1.4 -0.6 % 251.3 252.7 Cash flow from investing activities -40.7 -30.7 % -173.2 -132.5 Free cash flow 24.6 20.5 % 144.8 120.2 Cash flow from financing activities -21.7 -31.5 % -90.6 -68.9 Number of employees at year-end Commercial and military engine business (oEM) 80 1.6 % 4,965 4,885 Commercial maintenance business (MRO) 162 5.8 % 2,942 2,780 Share data Earnings per share in € Undiluted earnings per share 0.02 0.7 % 2.91 2.89 Diluted earnings per share 0.03 1.1 % 2.83 2.80 Dividend per share in €2) 0.17 18.3 % 1.10 0.93 Dividend yield in % 2.2 2.4 Total dividend2) 8.1 17.8 % 53.6 45.5 outstanding common stock at Dec.
    [Show full text]