Sample Project 2009

Istanbul Technical University
Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Aeronautical Engineering Department
Principles of Aircraft Design

UCK451E
Project Report
Conceptual Design of a Two Seat General Aviation

Aircraft
Instructor : Prof. Mehmet Şerif Kavsaoğlu

Course Assistant : Uğur Özdemir
Date : 19/01/2009
Prepared by : GROUP 18
Merve MELEK 110040027 mrv_melek@yahoo.com
Seyit Türkmen KOÇ 110040131 trkmnko@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
General aviation covers a huge range of activities, both commercial and non-
commercial, including private, flight training, police aircraft, air-ambulance, air charter and
etc. General aviation aircrafts generally use piston propeller engine especially single piston
propeller engine. This more traditional class of aircrafts includes nearly all aircraft from
Wright Brothers up through World War II. Today, piston engines are used almost exclusively
on light, general aviation aircraft.
In this project conceptual design of a two seat, piston propeller general aviation
aircraft will be performed. It is expected that aircraft will fly around 130 knots at 8000ft and
to a range of 500 nautical miles. Design study will be performed both by taking design
account in and comparing to competitor data, and with considering historical values. Design
method is mainly based on textbook on Raymer [1].
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page Number

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Purpose 1
1.2. Requirements And Mission Profile 1
1.3. Description of The Report 2
CHAPTER 2 COMPETITOR STUDY 3

2.1. Introduction 3
2.2. Competitor Study 3
2.3. Summary Of Results 10
2.4. Conclusion 11
CHAPTER 3 FIRST GUESS SIZING 12

3.1. Introduction 12
3.2. Design Requirements&Mission Profile 12
3.3. Conceptual Sketching&Initial Sizing 13
3.4. Calculations 14
3.5. Trade Studies 18
3.6. Summary of Results 26
3.7. Conclusion 27
CHAPTER 4 AIRFOIL and GEOMETRY SELECTION 28

4.2. Wing Airfoil Selection 28
4.3. Wing Geometry 31
4.4.Selection of Tail Airfoil 35
4.5. Tail Geometry 38
4.6. Non Dimensional Drawings 40
4.7. Summary Of Results 41
4.8. Conclusion 42
CHAPTER 5 THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO and WING LOADING 43

5.2. Selection of Horsepower to Weight Ratio 43
5.3. Selection of Wing Loading 48
5.4. Analysis and Calculations 55
5.5. Summary Results 67
I
5.6. Conclusion 68
CHAPTER 6 INITIAL SIZING 69
6.2. Rubber Engine Sizing 70
6.3. Engine Selection 75
6.4. Fixed Engine Sizing 76
6.5. Geometry Sizing 80
6.6. Summary Results 85
6.7. Conclusion 86
CHAPTER 7 CONFIGURATION LAYOUT and INTERIOR DESIGN 87

7.2. Wing and Tail Surfaces 87
7.3. Fuselage and Interior Design 95
7.4. Fuel Tanks Location 98
7.5. Drawings of Top, Front and Side views of the Aircraft 99
7.7. Conclusion 102
CHAPTER 8 PROPULSION and FUEL SYSTEM INTEGRATION 103

8.2. Propulsion Selection 103
8.3. Selected Engine Properties 104
8.4. Propeller-Engine Integration 105
8.5. Fuel System 109
8.7. Conclusion 113
CHAPTER 9 LANDING GEAR and SUBSYSTEMS 114

9.2. Landing Gear Arrangement 114
9.3. Tire Sizing 115
9.4. Shock Absorber 121
9.5. Castoring Wheel Geometry 125
9.6. Gear Retraction Geometry 126
9.7. Subsystems 127
9.8 Summary of Results 129
9.9 Conclusion 131
CHAPTER 10 AERODYNAMICS 132
II
10.2. Estimation of Lift 132
10.3. Estimation of Parasite Drag 137
10.4. Calculations 138
10.5. Estimation of Drag Due Lift 142
10.5. Plots 143
10.7. Conclusion 147
CHAPTER 11 DECRIPTION OF JANE FORMAT 148
CHAPTER 12 CONCLUSION 149
REFERENCES 150
APPENDIX A HISTOGRAMS FROM COMEPTITOR DATA 151

APPENDIX B AIRFOIL DATA 155
III
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Single piston propeller nose mounted aircrafts are more traditional which are generally
preferred for general aviation or training. These types of aircrafts configuration are important
because they are cheap and have lower fuel consumption according to turboprop for the same
hp. For many years, peoples have flied with general aviation aircrafts, so there are many
different choices for this type if someone wants to buy. By considering this situation, it is
important to design aircraft which has lower cost, lower fuel consumption and better
performance. Thus, it can be found a place in the market.
In this project, conceptual design of a two seat, single piston propeller engine aircraft
will be performed in order to provide the requirements and mission profile below.
1.1. PURPOSE
The project aircraft will be designed for training about 500nm.
1.2. REQUIREMENTS AND MISSION PROFILE
For a two seat, training aircraft with following objectives are given below. The
following requirements are fixed after the Initial Sizing (Chapter 6);
Range : 500 nm = 3040000ft
Vcruise : 130 knots = 219, 44 ft/s
hcruise : 2440m = 8000ft
Wcrew : 100kg = 220, 26lb
Wpayload : 100kg = 220, 26lb
Mission Profile:
Figure 1.1 Mission profile
1
1.3. DESCRIPTION OF THE REPORT
The design is performed mostly by using the textbook, AIRCRAFT DESIGN: A

CONCEPTUAL APPROACH, Raymer D.P, AIAA Education Series, Washington, 1992.
Books that are used stated in REFERENCES part of the project at the end. The detailed
drawings of the design aircraft with all necessary dimensions are given in Appendices and
should be referred in any calculation.
2
CHAPTER 2
COMPETITOR STUDY
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this chapter is to show how the competitor study must be executed
according to the required aircraft design. To design an aircraft we need some specifications of
the similar aircrafts. Therefore; first, these specifications are searched and gathered. Then, we
analysis these aircraft’s characteristics in order to design own aircraft.
2.2. COMPETITOR STUDY
After we find the characteristics of the aircrafts, we make a table to compete them. This
table includes the competitor study for single piston propeller engine, one or two seat and
general aviation or trainer aircrafts. The information about existing aircrafts that match our
category is tabulated below:
3
2.2.1. COMPETITOR AIRCRAFT SPECIFICATIONS
1 2 3
Piper PA-28-180
AIRCRAFT Cessna-140 Cessna-152 Cherokee
COUNTRY USA USA USA - Florida
ACCOMMODATION(CREW) 2 2 4
PAYLOAD WEIGHT,Wp(kg) 255 242,71 430
EMPTY WEIGHT,We(kg) 403 504.394 558
FUEL WEIGHT,Wf(kg) 83,34 88,75 189
MAX. TAKE OFF WEIGHT,Wo(kg) 658 757 1090,9
1× Continental C85- 1*Lycoming O-235
POWERPLANT 12 K2C 1× Lycoming O-320-E2A
POWER(h.p.) 85 110 180
WING SPAN(m) 10,25 10,068 9
WING AREA(m2) 15,1 14,864 14,86
WING ASPECT RATIO 6,96 6,82 5,59
WETTED ASPECT RATIO 1,78 1,75 1,43
WING TAPER RATIO 1 1 0,9248
SWEEP ANGLE(I.e.) 0 0 0
SWEEP ANGLE(c/4) 0 0 1,48 
WING THICKNESS RATIO(root) 12% 12% 15%
WING THICKNESS RATIO(tip) 12% 12% 15%
AIRFOIL(root) NACA 2412 NACA 2412 NACA 652-415
AIRFOIL(tip) NACA 2412 NACA 0012 NACA 652-415
FLAPS Fowler Fowler slotted (10,25,40 degree)
CRUISING SPEED(knots) 94 100-110 124
STALLING SPEED,FLAPS UP(knots) 39 48 50
STALLING SPEED,FLAPS
DOWN(knots) 46 43 47
MAX. WING LOADING,W/S(lb/ft2) 8,68 10 15
MAX.POWER LOADING(h.p. /lb) 0,058 0,0625 0,0752
SERVICE CEILING(m) 4700 4267.13 4998,72
TAKE OFF DISTANCE(m) 154 224.024 219,456
LANDING DISTANCE(m) 70 135,634 182,88
RANGE(nautical mile) 395 690 510
MAX. RATE OF CLIMB(ft/min) 680 715 750
Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications
4
4 5 6
Aeronca 11AC Boeing/Stearman
AIRCRAFT Chief (PT_13) Pitts S-2 C
COUNTRY USA USA USA
PAYLOAD WEIGHT,Wp(kg) 238,1 200 213,3
EMPTY WEIGHT,We(kg) 354,12 878 520
FUEL WEIGHT,Wf(kg) 56,9 174,25 106,25
MAX. TAKE OFF WEIGHT,Wo(kg) 567 1232 771
Lycoming AEIO-
POWERPLANT Continental A65-8 Lycoming R-680-5 540
POWER(h.p.) 65 220 260
WING SPAN(m) 11 9,8 6,1
WING AREA(m2) 16,3 27,6 11,8
WING TAPER RATIO 1 1 1
SWEEP ANGLE(I.e.) 0 0 7
SWEEP ANGLE(c/4) 0 0 7
WING THICKNESS RATIO(root) 12% 13% 15%
WING THICKNESS RATIO(tip) 12% 13% 12%
AIRFOIL(root) NACA 4412 NACA 2213 NACA 63A015
AIRFOIL(tip) NACA 4412 NACA 2213 NACA0012
FLAPS Cowl No flap double slotted
CRUISING SPEED(knots) 72 106 150,33
STALLING SPEED,FLAPS UP(knots) 30,41 48 56
MAX. WING LOADING,W/S(lb/ft2) 7,1 9,15 13,3
SERVICE CEILING(m) 3291,9 3415 6400
TAKE OFF DISTANCE(m) 177,7 182,88 169
LANDING DISTANCE(m) 268,224 91,44 - 152,4 229
Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications (continued)
5
7 8 9
Diamond DA 20
AIRCRAFT Yakovlev Yak-52 Zenith CH601 XL Katana
COUNTRY Russia Canada Canada
PAYLOAD WEIGHT,Wp(kg) 290 282 271
EMPTY WEIGHT,We(kg) 1015 318 529
FUEL WEIGHT,Wf(kg) 125 81,25 83,7
1× Vedeneyev M- 1× Jabiru 3300 flat-6 1× Continental IO-
POWERPLANT 14P engine 240-B
POWER(h.p.) 360 110 125
WING SPAN(m) 9,3 8,23 10,87
WING AREA(m2) 15 12,3 11,61
WING TAPER RATIO 0,542 0,875 0,695
SWEEP ANGLE(I.e.) 4,8  0 1
SWEEP ANGLE(c/4) 0 0 0,5 
WING THICKNESS RATIO(root) 14,50% 15%
WING THICKNESS RATIO(tip) 9,30% 15%
AIRFOIL(root) Clark YH Riblett GA-35-A-415 Wortmann FX 63-137
AIRFOIL(tip) Clark YH Riblett GA-35-A-415 Wortmann FX 63-137
FLAPS Split Plain Slotted
CRUISING SPEED(knots) 128 120 138
STALLING SPEED,FLAPS UP(knots) 60 44,32 42
DOWN(knots) 54-57 or 46-49 38,23 34
SERVICE CEILING(m) 4000 4875 min 4000
TAKE OFF DISTANCE(m) 170 152 390
LANDING DISTANCE(m) 300 152 201,5
6
10 11 12
Aviat Husky A-1B- AMD Alarus
AIRCRAFT 200 CH2000 De Havilland Chipmunk
COUNTRY United states USA-Georgia Canada
PAYLOAD WEIGHT,Wp(kg) 172 275,58 310
FUEL WEIGHT,Wf (lt) 137 108 68,2
Lycoming IO-360- Lycoming 0-235- 1× de Havilland Gipsy
POWERPLANT A1D6 N2C Major
POWER(h.p.) 350 116 145
WING SPAN(m) 10,82 8,73 10,47
WING AREA(m2) 17 12,73 16
WETTED ASPECT RSTIO 1,77 1,54 1,76
WING TAPER RATIO 1 0,89 0.53
SWEEP ANGLE(I.e.) 0 1 1
SWEEP ANGLE(c/4) 0 0 0
WING THICKNESS RATIO(root) 11, 72% 18% 15%
WING THICKNESS RATIO(tip) 11, 72% 18% 11, 61%
AIRFOIL(root) Modified Clark Y NACA 640-18 NACA 1415
AIRFOIL(tip) Modified Clark Y NACA 640-18 USA 35B
conventional &
FLAPS manual Split Slotted (beaver ın)
SERVICE CEILING(m) 6096 5200
TAKE OFF DISTANCE(m) 80 499,872 160
LANDING DISTANCE(m) 121 554,736
7
13 14 15
Piper PA-38
AIRCRAFT Ikarus C 42 Tomahawk Sukhoi Su 31
COUNTRY Germany USA Russia
PAYLOAD WEIGHT,Wp(kg) 183 200 100
FUEL WEIGHT,Wf(kg) 50 102,5 288,8
1× Avco Lycoming O- 1* VOKBM M-
POWERPLANT 1× Rotax 912s 235 14PF
POWER(h.p.) 100 112 360
WING SPAN(m) 9,45 10,36 7,8
WING AREA(m2) 12,5 11,6 11,8
WING TAPER RATIO 1 1 0,46
SWEEP ANGLE(I.e.) 0 0 5,2 
SWEEP ANGLE(c/4) 0 0 0
WING THICKNESS RATIO(root) 12% 18%
WING THICKNESS RATIO(tip) 12% 18%
AIRFOIL(root) NACA 2412 NASA GA(W)-1 Symmetrical
AIRFOIL(tip) NACA 2412 NASA GA(W)-1 Symmetrical
FLAPS Plain Plain No flap
DOWN(knots) 32 46
SERVICE CEILING(m) 3658 4000 4000
TAKE OFF DISTANCE(m) 80 250 110
LANDING DISTANCE(m) 150 215,5 300
RANGE(nautical mile) 450 384 156,6
8
When we make a competitor table, we need lots of information about the aircrafts
characteristics. Some of these characteristics were found Jane’s All of the World and the other
sites. Besides, the wing flap types are searched. It can be seen in the table that the competitor
aircrafts has different types of flap such as plain or simple, fowler, slotted and split flap.
According to this information, we formed the table which is shown above. Some
characteristics of aircrafts such as taper ratio, sweep angle were measured from the aircrafts
pictures. Also, while we were calculating the wetted aspect ratio, we used the Sref/ Swet = 3,
9. This ratio was taken from a graph for Sref / Swet in the Raymer. These all of information
will be used in the next part of the study to compare the value of the desired aircraft.
2.2.2 GRAPHS FOR COMPETITOR OF AIRCRAFTS
It is made a table for 15 trainer and general aviation aircrafts specifications which can
be found. According to this table, some specifications for competitor study are plotted below:
Graph 2.1 We/Wo – Wo (kg)
According to this graph, empty weight-takeoff weight ratio changes between the 500-
1300kg. The intensity is seen approximately 700-800kg.
9
Graph 2.2 Wf/Wo – Wo (kg)
In this graph, fuel weight-takeoff weight ratio changes nearly between 400-1400kg.
However, the most intensity region can be said the approximately 700-800kg.
Histograms of competitor aircrafts are replaced in Appendix A.
2.3. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The results of this competitor study are listed as a table below:
Range 200-600nm
Vcruise 100-140knot
Wo 750-1000kg
Wp 200-300kg
Take off distance 100-200m
Landing distance 100-200
W/S 10-15 lb/sq ft
h.p./W 0,05-0,075
According to this table we can choose the characteristics of aircraft which we will
design. Our aircraft will be single engine piston propeller, two seat, general aviation or trainer
10
aircraft. We use this competitor study to create our won aircraft. Therefore, the competitor
study and the plotted data of 15 aircrafts are very important for us during the designation.
2.4. CONCLUSION
During competitor study, we have been interested in 15 aircrafts that matches our
design category. Then, we analyzed these aircrafts and we did tables and graphs to see and
compete better these characteristics of the aircrafts. The results of plotted diagrams give us
much useful introductory information about our design process.
11
CHAPTER 3
FIRST GUESS SIZING
3.1. INTRODUCTION
First guess sizing is an important stage to create an aircraft. In this chapter, the aim is
doing an introduction to the design process. That is to say, this study offers quick method of
estimating takeoff weight, empty weight and fuel weight from a conceptual sketch. In this
direction; first, a conceptual sketch is constituted. Then, with the design requirements which
are given below, it is started to make calculations to estimate takeoff weight.
3.2. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS & MISSION PROFILE
For a two seat, training aircraft with following objectives are given below:
Range : 500 nm = 3040000ft
Wcrew : 100kg = 220, 26lb
Wpayload : 100kg = 220, 26lb
2 3
5
6
1
Figure 3.1 Mission Segments
0–1: Takeoff
1–2: Climb
2–3: 500 nm Cruise at 2440m at Vcruise=130 knots
12
3–4: Descent
4–5: 30 min. Loiter
5–6: Landing
3.3. CONCEPTUAL SKETCHING & INITIAL SIZING
13
According to aircrafts which are competed, the aspect ratio is selected as 7.
AR=7
The wetted area ratios, Swet / Sref is chosen 3, 8 from Figure 3.5 [1]. Then, the wetted
AR
aspect ratio is calculated according to this formula: ARwetted = Swet / Sref
After that, from Figure 3.6[1], max. L/D ratio can be found: (L/D) max = 12, 5
For cruise (L/D) = (L/D) max and for loiter (L/D) = 0,866 (L/D) max.
3.4. CALCULATIONS
3.4.1. Takeoff Weight Calculation
Take of weight can be estimated by using formula that given below:
Wo = Wcrew + Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty

(3.1) [1]
Wcrew and Wpayload are given at the mission requirements. According to it;
• Wcrew = 100kg = 220,26lb
• Wpayload = 100kg = 220,26lb
Then, Wfuel and Wempty are written as a function of Wo. Thus; the formula becomes:
Wcrew + W payload
W0 =
W W
1− ( f ) − ( e ) (3.2) [1]
W0 W0
 We 
  : Empty Weight Fraction
 Wo 
 Wf 
  : Fuel Weight Fraction
 Wo 
3.4.2. Empty Weight Estimation

The empty weight fraction (We/W0) can be estimated from the historical data as shown
in Table 3.1[1]. The empty weight fraction (We/W0) is:
We
= AW0c K vs (3.3) [1]
W0
14
According to the Table 3.1., for fixed wing and single engine, the coefficients A, C
and Kvs are determined as the below:
A = 2, 36
W
C = -0, 18 =e
=
AW c
0 K vs 2, 05W0−0.18
W0
Kvs = 1
3.2.4.3. Fuel Fraction Estimation

3.4.3.1. Mission Segment Weight Fractions
The ratios of W1/W0, W2/W1, W4/W3, W6 /W5 can be estimated from the table of
historical mission segment weight fractions.
Take off and warm up W1/W0 0,97

Climb W2/W1 0,985
Descent W4/W3 1
Landing W6/W5 0,995
Table 3.1 Historical mission segment weight fractions [1]
To determine the W3/W2 (for cruise) and W5/W4 (for loiter), it should be some
calculations. These are shown below.
1-CRUISE
For estimate the cruise segment weight fractions W3/W2, the Brequet’s range equation
[1]
is used:
W3  − RC 
V L  Wi−1  = exp 
R= n   W2  V( L / D )  (3.4) [1]
C D  Wi 
R Range (feet)
C Specific Fuel Consumption(1/s)
V Velocity(ft/s)
L/D Lift to drag ratio
Table 3.2
To find the value of C, it is used the formula [1] is shown below:
C bhp V
C= (3.5) [1]
550ηp
15
Propeller specific fuel consumption Cbhp = 0, 4 lb/hr/bhp and propeller efficiency p =
0.8 are taken from Table 3.4[1] for cruise conditions. Also, the cruise speed Vcruise = 130 knot =
219.44ft /s is given in mission profile. According to these values;
C = 0,000110828 1/s
For the aspect ratio which is selected for two seat, trainer aircraft, L/D is determined
as 12, 5 from Figure 3.6 [1].
During cruise conditions,
(L/D)max = L/D = 12,5
By using the equation (3.4) [1], the cruise segment fraction is calculated as:
W3/W2 = 0,884415519
2-LOITER
For estimate loiter segment weight fractions W5/W4, the endurance equation [1] must
be considered:
W  W5  − EC 
1 L = exp  
E= n i −1   W4  ( L / D) 
(3.6) [1]
C D  Wi 
E is the endurance time during loiter. This value is given in the mission profile as the
30 minute = 1800 s.
Also, for loiter conditions, Cbhp = 0, 5 lb/hr/bhp and propeller efficiency p = 0.7 are
taken from Table 3.4 [1].
During loiter conditions,
(L/D)loiter =0,866(L/D)max = 10,825
It should be known Vloiter, to calculate specific fuel consumption.
ρ cruise
Vloiter = 0.76Vcruise (3.7) [1]
ρ loiter
- loiter = 1,048 kg/m3 (@ 5246ft = 1600m)

- cruise = 0,963 kg/m3 (@ 8000ft = 2440m) [2]
From these data;
Vloiter = 159,8681 ft/s
16
Then, specific fuel consumption, C is determined as the below:
C = 0,000115345 1/s
Therefore, by using the equation (2.6), the loiter weight fraction is calculated as:
W5/W4 = 0,981002997
After the calculating all of weight fractions, the total weigh fraction W6/W0 is required to find
W6 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6
=
W0 W0 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
(3.8) [1]
From this formula the total weight fraction;
W6 / W0 = (0.97) (0.985) (0, 888603528) (1) (0.981002997) (0.995) = 0.778693
W6/W0 = 0,824817
Then, the fuel weight fraction is calculated from the formula is given below.
Wf W6
= 1.06(1 − ) (3.9) [1]
W0 W0
According to this, fuel weight fraction: Wf / W0 = 0,185694

From take-off weight calculation equation which is given (2.2);
Wcrew + W payload
W0 =
W W
1− ( f ) − ( e )
W0 W0
• Wcrew and Wpayload values are given at the design requirements as 100kg = 220, 26lb.
• Wf / W0 = 0,185694
• We / W0 = 2,36W0−0.18
To find the value of W0, it must to do iteration. For doing this, the iterative equation is got as
given:
220, 26 + 220, 26
W0 =
1 − 0.185694 − 2, 36W0 −0.18
After ordering this equation, the formula becomes:
440, 52
W0 =
0,814306 − 2, 36W0 −0.18
17
W0 = 540,976 + 2, 8982 W0 0, 82
Then; the iterative process was done to calculate W0. Thus; some solution was found. These
are given below:
W0 (Guess) (lb) W0 (Calculated) (lb)

2000 2016,59
2017 2026,6
2030 2036,3
2038 2040,67
2040,67 2041,881858
Table 32.3 Calculation of Wo
Wo = 2041,881858lb = 927kg
In conclusion, the results are estimated:
W0 (lb) 2041,88
We (lb) 1222,19
Wf (lb) 379,165
Table 3.4 All weights
3.5. TRADE STUDIES

3.5.1. Cruising Speed Trade Off
3.5.1.1. Trade Off for Vcruise = 120 knots = 202, 56 ft/s

For trade study, first cruise speed was changed as 120 knots = 202, 56 ft/s. Therefore,
some data must be calculated again for new cruise speed. Here are the variable specifications:
C = 0,000102303 1/s (For cruise)
W3
is the same.
W2
0, 963 ft
=Vloiter =
(0.76)(202, 56) 147, 5706
1, 048 s
C = 0,000106472 1/s (For loiter)
18
W5
= 0,982451404
W4
New total weight fraction and fuel fraction:
W6/W0 = 0,8326035 and Wf / W0 = 0,184403
Then; using the new data, the iterative process was done again to calculate W0. The
solutions are found:

2000 2013,4
2015 2021,5
2022 2029,3
2030 2033,16
2033,16 2033,744675
Table 3.5
W0 (lb) 2033,74
We (lb) 1218,19
Wf (lb) 375,028
Table 3.6
Wo = 2033,744675lb = 923,32kg
3.5.1.2. Trade Off for Vcruise = 140 knots = 236, 32 ft/s

In this part, there are some change for Vcruise = 140 knots = 236.32 ft/s. Therefore, some
datas must be calculated again for new cruise speed. Here are the variable specifications:
C = 0,000119354 1/s (For cruise)
W3
is the same.
W2
0, 963 ft
=Vloiter =
(0.76)(236, 32) 172,1657
1, 048 s
C = 0,000124218 1/s (For loiter)
W5
= 0,979556726
W4
19
New total weight fraction and fuel fraction:
W6/W0 = 0,823601 and Wf / W0 = 0,186983

2000 2019,7
2020 2031,7
2032 2038,9
2040 2045,9
2046 2049,73
2049,73 2049,921731
Table 3.7
Wo = 2049,921731lb = 930,66kg
W0 (kg) 2049,92
We (kg) 1226,13
Wf (kg) 383,3
Table 3.8
Here, there are the graphs of trade off for cruise speed:
Vcruise-We Graph
1227
y = 0,2352x + 1170,6
1226 R2 = 1
1225
1224
1223
We(kg)
Vcruise-We
1222
Doğrusal (Vcruise-We)
1221
1220
1219
1218
1217
200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240
Vcruise(knot)
20
Figure 3.2 Cruise Velocity Trade wrt We
In this graph, it can be seen that the cruise speed changes with the empty weight
linearly. While cruise speed is increasing, the empty weight is increasing, too. However, just
only for this graph, the change is linearly. For another graph, it couldn’t be linear.
Vcruise-Wf Graph
384 y = 0,245x + 325,4

2
383 R =1
382
381
Wf(kg)
380
379 Vcruis e-W f
378 G raph
377 ğ l
376
375
374
200 210 220 230 240
Vcruise(ft/s)
Figure 3.3 Cruise Velocity Trade wrt Wf
In this graph, it can be seen that the cruise speed changes with the fuel weight linearly.
While cruise speed is increasing, the fuel weight is increasing, too like the empty weight.
Again, this linear change is only for this graph.
21
Vcruise-Wo Graph
2052
y = 0,4792x + 1936,7
2050
R2 = 1
2048
2046
Wo (kg)
2044
Vcruise_Wo Graph
2042
Doğrusal (Vcruise_Wo Graph)
2040
2038
2036
2034
2032
200 210 220 230 240
Vcruise(ft/s)
Figure 3.4 Cruise Velocity Trade wrt Wo
In this graph, it can be seen that the cruise speed changes with the takeoff weight
linearly only for this graph. While cruise speed is increasing, the takeoff weight is increasing,
too like empty and fuel weight. The results are obtained for takeoff weight between the 900 –
1000kg as seen in the graph.
* Cruise speed trade of graphs shows that the change of weight (Wo, We, Wf) with cruise
speed is not seriously. Therefore, the selected value for cruise speed, 130 knots seems to be
suitable for the design.
3.5.1. Range Trade Off
3.5.1.1. Trade Off for Range = 400 nm = 2432000 ft

In this part, only cruise weight fraction changes. This changing affects the total weight
fraction and fuel weight fraction.
W3
= 0,906410825
W2
Thus, new total weight fraction and fuel weight fraction are obtained as the below:
W6/W0 = 0,84533 and Wf / W0 = 0,16395
22

2000 1964,125
1960 1942,95
1940 1930,42
1918 1915,97
1914 1912,6
1912,6 1912,152341
Table 3.9
Wo = 1912,152341lb = 868,117kg
W0 (lb) 1912,15
We (lb) 1158,14
Wf (lb) 313,497
Table 3.10
3.5.1.1. Trade Off for Range = 600 nm = 3648000ft

Same calculations are done for the trade off range = 3648000ft. According to these
calculations, some data are changed:
W3
= 0,862953959
W2
Thus, new total weight fraction and fuel weight fraction are obtained as the below:
W6/W0 = 0,804802 and Wf / W0 = 0,20691

2000 2070,52
2071 2114,2
2115 2141,1
2142 2157,63
2167 2177,77
2178 2181,52
2182 2183,24
2183,24 2183,754761
Table 3.11
23
Wo = 2183,754761lb = 991,425kg
W0 (lb) 2183,75
We (lb) 1291,4
Wf (lb) 451,841
Table 2.12
Here, there are the graphs of trade off for range:
Range-Wo Graph
2200 y = 0,0002x + 1366,9

R2 = 0,9993
2150
2100
Wo (kg)
2050
Range-Wo Graph
Doğrusal (Range-Wo Graph)
2000
1950
1900
1850
0 500000 1E+06 2E+06 2E+06 3E+06 3E+06 4E+06 4E+06
Range (feet)
Figure 3.5 Range Trade wrt We
In this graph, it can be seen that the curve of empty weight variation with the range is
a linear variation. While range is increasing from 400 nm (2432000ft) to 600 nm (3648000ft),
the empty weight is increasing linearly just only for this study.
24
Range-Wf Graph
500
y = 0,0001x + 35,642
450
R2 = 0,9991
400
350
300
Wf (kg)
Range-Wf Graph
250
Doğrusal (Range-Wf Graph)
200
150
100
50
0
0 500000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Range(feet)
Figure 3.6 Range Trade wrt Wf
In this graph, it can be seen that the curve of fuel weight - range shows a linear
variation. While range is increasing, the fuel weight is increasing linearly for this study.
25
Range-We Graph
1300
y = 0,0001x + 890,76
R2 = 0,9995
1280
1260
1240
We (kg)
Range-We Graph
1220
Doğrusal (Range-We Graph)
1200
1180
1160
1140
0 500000 1E+06 2E+06 2E+06 3E+06 3E+06 4E+06 4E+06
Range (feet)
Figure 3.7 Range Trade wrt Wo
In this graph, it can be seen that the curve of takeoff weight variation with the range is
a linear variation. While range is increasing, the takeoff weight is increasing linearly for this
study.
* On the contrary cruise speed; the results as to range vary much.
3.6. SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS
Briefly, it is aimed to summarize the studies in this chapter; first, it is chosen an aspect
ratio and L/D ratio for designation of a conceptual sketch. According to these data, some
weight fraction are calculated and done estimation of takeoff weight, empty weight and fuel
weight. The results of these weights are found nearly the specifications of the aircrafts which
were searched in competitor study. According to it, the takeoff weight is determined as 927kg
(approximately 2041lb).
The takeoff weight (W0), empty weight (We) and fuel weight (Wf) of the designed aircraft are
estimated from the calculations as follows:
W0 (lb) 2041,88
We (lb) 1222,19
Wf (lb) 379,165
26
Table 3.13
After the estimation of these weights, trade studies are done for cruise speed and
range. According to the trade study, the variations of We, Wo and Wf is calculated and plotted
in trade off parts.
3.7. CONCLUSION
First guess study has an important role to enter the design process. In order to start this
study, first, a conceptual sketch is formed according to selected some characteristics such as
aspect ratio. Then, n the direct of the given mission profile data, weight fractions for the
mission profile was calculated. Thus, the wanted specifications (takeoff weight, empty weight
and fuel weight) are estimated. The results are found agreeable, when we compare the trainer
or general aviation aircrafts.
In trade study, it can be observed how the variation of takeoff weight and the other
weights as to cruise speed and range is. While the weight changing is not very much for cruise
speed, it has a serious change for range.
27
CHAPTER 4
AIRFOIL AND GEOMETRY SELECTION
4.1. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this chapter is to select the appropriate airfoil and the geometries of
wing and tail. Airfoil determines cruise and stall speeds, so choosing airfoil type has very
important role on aircraft performance. In this study wing geometry; aspect ratio, wing
sweep, taper ratio, twist, wing incidence, dihedral, wing vertical location and wing tips, wing
and tail airfoils were selected. Finally, airfoil geometries were plotted and non-dimensional
sketches of the reference wing and tail platforms were drawn showing the mean aerodynamic
chord, the quarter chord point and the quarter chord line.
4.2. WING AIRFOIL SELECTION
Airfoil selection is the most important part of the aircraft design process because the
Airfoil has a major effect on aerodynamic efficiency during all phases of flight. For example,
cruise speed, takeoff and landing distances and stall speed are affected by the airfoil.
Therefore, an airfoil with suitable flight characteristics must be chosen out of hundreds of
available sections when designing a plane.
The purpose in the airfoil selection is to obtain the lowest drag at low angles of attack
while obtaining a high CLmax. According to this, airfoil varies as to lots of characteristics such
as Reynolds number, design Mach number, design lift coefficient, stall characteristics,
thickness ratio etc. Most important data are Reynolds number and design Mach number. Each
airfoil is designed for a certain Reynolds number. Before deciding to an airfoil, it is calculated
the Reynolds number according to the given cruise conditions. Then, the design Mach number
is found and searched for the thickness ratio from Fig. 4.14 [1].
To calculate Reynolds number, it is determined a mean aerodynamic chord from the
competitor aircrafts:
28
Aircraft C(root) C(tip) Taper Ratio c
Cessna 140 1,47317 1,47317 1 1,47317
Cessna 152 1,47636 1,47636 1 1,47636
Cherokee 1,71562 1,5866 0,9248 1,65195
Aeronca 1,48182 1,48182 1 1,48182
Stearman 2,81633 2,81633 1 2,81633
Pitts 1,93443 1,93443 1 1,93443
Yak-52 2,09196 1,13384 0,542 1,66033
Zenith 1,59417 1,3949 0,875 1,49675
Diamond 1,25918 0,87513 0,695 1,07868
Aviat 1,57117 1,57116 1 1,57116
Alarus 1,54306 1,37332 0,89 1,45984
Chipmunk 1,99762 1,05874 0,53 1,57624
Ikarus 1,32275 1,32275 1 1,32275
Tomahawk 1,11969 1,11969 1 1,11969
Su-31 2,07236 0,95328 0,46 1,5818
Table 4.1 Competitor study data
It can be seen the root and tip chord, taper ratio and mean aerodynamic chord ( c ) in
the table above. These values are calculated some formulas using Excel. These calculations
are made in order to obtain average of mean aerodynamic chord. Thus, it can be found mean
aerodynamic chord using for our airplane.
c = 1,580087m
After mean aerodynamic chord is calculated, the Reynolds number is found at a given
cruise conditions.
Cruise conditions (@2440 m):
ρcruise = 0,963 kg/m3

μcruise = 0,000017124 kg/ms
Vcruise = 130 knots = 66, 82 m/s
acruise = 330,74 m/s
ρ× V × c
=
Re ≅ 6 ∗106
µ
According to the given cruise conditions, our Reynolds number are calculated
approximately 6000000.
Mdesign = V / a = 0,2
29
From this formula, our design Mach number is calculated as 0, 2.
[1]
The thickness ratio for this design Mach number is found between 12% - 15% . In
the table which is given below, there are some airfoils varies thickness from 12 to 15.
Greater t/c tends to increase Clmax up to a point. In order to it, greater t/c increases fuel
volume. Because of these reasons, we would like to make the t/c as large as possible to reduce
wing weight. Therefore, the airfoils which have 15 % thickness are thought to prefer. The
airfoils are chosen NACA airfoils because they are more available than others.
NACA
Profile NACA 4412 NACA 23012 652415 NACA 2412 NACA 2415 NACA 23015
Re 600X104 600X104 600X104 570X104 600X104 600X104
Roughness - - - - - -
Clmax
behavior D B D D D D
Clmax 1,63 1,75 1,6 1,68 1,59 1,7
ao -3,9 -1,2 -2,8 -2 -1,9 -1,2
dCl/dα 0,11 0,105 0,113 0,104 0,107 0,103
Design Cl 0,5 0,19 0,3 0,41 0,21 0,09
CD min 0,0062 0,0061 0,0041 0,0061 0,0063 0,0062
Cma -0,094 -0,013 -0,062 -0,051 -0,049 -0,005
xa / c 0,246 0,241 0,266 0,243 0,246 0,239
ya / c -0,051 0,035 -0,065 -0,004 -0,013 -0,043
ρ0 1,1 1,1 0,669 1,1 1,1 1,1
f/c 0,018 0,018 0,022 0,02 0,02 0,018
xf / c 0,15 0,15 0,5 0,4 0,4 0,15
t/c 0,12 0,12 0,15 0,12 0,15 0,15
xt / c 0,3 0,3 0,41 0,3 0,3 0,3
[3]
Table 4.2 Airfoils for wing
According to the Table3.2, NACA 23015 is selected because of fact that moment
coefficient of NACA 23015 is the smallest. It can be seen in the Table 3.2 cm = - 0.005. Also,
it is 5-digit airfoil, so it is chosen between the other profiles. The advantage of the 5-digit
airfoil using is that it has higher maximum lift coefficient. Another thing about 5-digit NACA
profile, due to their high maximum lift coefficient, they have good stall characteristics.
NACA 23015 airfoils’ stall behavior is classified as “D” [Figure 3.1.]. It can be seen the curve
of maximum lift coefficient is not sharp.
Our competitor aircrafts generally have 4-digit airfoil. However, we don’t want to
select a 4-digit airfoil because of its low maximum lift coefficient and high moment
coefficient. Beside, we don’t select a 6-digit airfoil owing to the fact that it is laminar airfoils.
30
Figure 4.1 Behaviour of Clmax
Figure 4.2 NACA 23015 airfoil
For NACA 23015 airfoil, according to the some given Reynolds numbers C l-α , C d-
α, Cm-α graphs and C d-C l curves are indicated in Appendix B.
4.3. WING GEOMETRY
4.3.1. Aspect Ratio

The aspect ratio of a wing is defined as the square of the span divided by the wing
area. It is a measure of how long and slender a wing is from tip to tip. Aspect ratio and
planform are powerful indicators of the general performance of a wing, although the aspect
31
ratio as such is only a secondary indicator. The wingspan is the crucial component of the
performance for a rectangular wing; this reduces to the ratio of the wings span to the chord
length. High aspect ratio wings have long spans while low aspect ratio wings have either short
spans or thick chords.
While high aspect wings create less induced drag, they have greater parasite drag.
Also, higher aspect ratio wing have heavier wing than low aspect ratio wing.
An important effect of changing aspect ratio is a change in stalling angle. For
aerodynamic efficiency, higher aspect ratio is better, but it is worse for stall. Low aspect ratio
wing reaches stall later than higher aspect ratio wing.
From the competitor study, the average aspect ratio is calculated as 6, 6. Beside, it can
be seen the from Table 4.1[1] equivalent aspect ratio is 7, 6 for the general aviation - single
engine. According to these values, aspect ratio of our design is selected as 7. These are shown
in the table is given below.
Competitor Study : 6,6
Table 4.1 : 7,6
Our aspect ratio : 7
Table 4.3
4.3.2. Wing Sweep
Wing sweep is important for the pitch-up characteristics of the plane. There are two
sweep angles; one is leading edge sweep angle (ΛL.E.) which is important for transonic and
supersonic speeds; the other is quarter-chord line sweep angle (Λc/4) which is important for
subsonic speeds. It is better for stability. A swept wing has a natural dihedral effect. To
prevent excessive stability, generally sweep and dihedral are not used together. Wing sweep
increases the structural weight both because of the increased tip loading and because of the
increased structural span.
The selected aircraft is subsonic, there is nearly 4 degree quarter-chord line sweep
angle (Λc/4) and it has a sweep from leading edge. To determine leading edge sweep angle, it
is calculated the wing span average of competitor studies aircrafts. The wing span is found as
9. And the mean aerodynamic chord c has found as nearly 1, 58m. Than, the leading edge
wing sweep is calculated from the wing geometry (the angle of between the span and leading
edge). According to these calculations, the leading edge wing sweep angle is found as 8, 6.
(ΛL.E.) = 8, 6
(Λc/ 4) = 4 
32
4.3.3. Taper Ratio
Taper ratio is the ratio of the length of the chord at the wing tip the length of the chord
at the wing root. Taper affects the distribution of lift along the span of the wing. To obtain
nearly elliptical wing, wings are tapered because the lift distribution on the tapered wing
approaches to elliptical lift distribution. Thus, the induced drag on the wing is low effective.
Also, lower taper ratios lead to lower wing weight.
To give a taper to the wing is better than the rectangular wing which is no taper (Taper
ratio = 1). Rectangular wing is the basic wing shape. Because of low cost and easy building,
many single-engine planes use rectangular wings. In this type of wings, chord doesn’t vary
from root to tip, so there isn’t any approach to elliptical wing. Thus, lift at the wing tips is
higher. However, lift at the tapered wing tips has essentially zero.
[1]
For most low swept wings, taper ratio generally is between 0, 4 – 0, 5 . Therefore, in our
design taper ratio is selected as 0, 4.
 = 0, 4
4.3.4. Twist
Wing twist is used to prevent tip stall and to revise the lift distribution to approximate
an ellipse. Typically, wings are twisted between zero and five degrees. However, we can not
use any twist in our design to do a simple design. Twist makes the design complex.
4.3.5. Wing Incidence

Angle of incidence at which the wing or horizontal tail of an airplane is installed on
the fuselage, measured relative to the axis of the fuselage. Wing incidence minimizes drag
especially during cruise.
If the wing is untwisted, the incidence is simply the angle between the fuselage axis
and the wing’s airfoil chord lines. Usually, to obtain maximum L/D at cruise condition for
general aviation aircraft have an incidence of about 2 degree.
Angle of Wing Incidence = 2 
4.3.6. Dihedral
Wing dihedral is the angle of the wing with respect to the horizontal when seen from
the front. Dihedral tends to roll the aircraft level whenever it is banked. That is to say, a
dihedral on the wing helps to stabilize the airplane for minor rolling motions from side to side.
Also, dihedral works to stabilize the plane, there is a minor loss in the lift of the wing. The
33
dihedral angle is selected from Table 4.2, as 0 degrees for the subsonic swept angle, mid wing
aircraft.
For easily production, it is chosen no dihedral angle because the wing is not
monolithic. The wing is formed from two parts.
Dihedral Angle = 0 deg
4.3.7. Wing Vertical Location

Aircraft operation conditions determine the wing vertical location with respect to the
fuselage. For small aircraft, the high wing arrangement can block the pilot's visibility in a turn
and in a climb. If the fuselage is roughly circular and fairings are not used, the mid-wing
arrangement provides the lowest drag. High and low wing arrangements must use fairings to
attain acceptable interferences drag with a circular fuselage. The mid wing offers some of the
ground clearance benefits of the high wing. Also, mid wing has better maneuver capability
than high and low wing. It can be seen the mid wing airplane in the figure which is given
below:
Figure 4.3 Mid wing [1]
4.3.8. Wing Tips
Wing tip shape has two effects upon subsonic aerodynamics performance. The tip
shape affects the aircraft wetted area. A far more important effect is the influence the tip
shape has upon the lateral spacing of the tip vortices. This is largely determined by the ease
with which the higher pressure air on the bottom of the wing can escape around the tip to the
top of the wing. It is selected in the design sharp edge wing tips because a tip with a sharp
edge reduces the induced drag.
34
Figure 4.4 Wing tips [1]
4.4. SELECTION OF TAIL AIRFOIL

4.4.1. Tail Arrangement
For most aircraft designs, the conventional tail will usually provide adequate stability
and control at the lightest weight and also 70% or more of the aircraft in service use
conventional type. Although T-tail is effective because of not being in the wake of wing, it is
heavier than the conventional type. Therefore, conventional tail is selected for tail
arrangement from Figure 4.30 Aft Tail Variations table [1].
Figure 4.5 Conventional tail
First mission of the tails is not provides to lift. Most of lift is generated by wings. It
can be said that tails are little wings. Tails’ priority function is provides for trim, stability and
control. Therefore, it is important to become the stall speed of tail later than the wing but it
isn’t the most crucial parameter for design because tail doesn’t produce more lift, it is only a
fraction of its lift potential. Thus, it is considered another specification of tails. These are
35
pitch moment and wing incidence. To provide balance of the moment, horizontal tail has
negatively incidence angle of about 2-3 degree and thus, the balance the wing pitching
moment is stabilized by negative incidence of horizontal tail. According to it, wing incidence
angle of tail is chosen as - 2 degree.
To select the tail airfoil, it is needed some specifications. For instance, the thickness
ratio of tails is usually similar to the wing thickness ratio, according to the historical data.
Therefore, it is selected in this study both of horizontal and vertical tail thickness ratio is the
same of the wing thickness ratio as 15 %.
Vertical and horizontal tail airfoils are not the same. It is selected in this design that
vertical and horizontal tail airfoils are different. To prevent unbalanced yawing moment, most
aircraft use symmetric airfoil for vertical airfoil because any lift obtaining from vertical tail is
not needed. In this case, it isn’t required any camber of tails airfoil. For four digit and five
digit NACA airfoils, it couldn’t any necessary information about same thickness ratio.
Although 6-digit airfoils are laminar, it can be selected a six digit airfoil NACA 652015. This
airfoil is selected because it is symmetric and its drag coefficient is lower than other NACA
symmetric airfoils.
Profile NACA 652415 NACA 642015 NACA 652015

Re 600X104 600X104 600X104
Roughness - - -
Clmax
behavior D D D
Clmax 1,6 1,45 1,41
ao -2, 8 0 0
dCl/dα 0,113 1,112 1,111
Design Cl 0,3 0 0
CD min 0,0041 0,0048 0,0042
Cma -0, 062 0 0
t/c 0,15 0,15 0,15
Table 4.4 Airfoils for vertical tail [3]
36
Figure 4.6 NACA 652015 Airfoil
For NACA 652015 airfoil, according to the some given Reynolds numbers C l-α, C d-
α, Cm-α graphs and C d-C l curves are indicated in Appendix B
An airplane must be in balance longitudinally in order to fly. This means that the net
affect of all. Because the horizontal the forces acting on the airplane produces no overall
pitching moment about the centre of gravity. The horizontal tail provides a balancing force to
maintain equilibrium for different speeds and center of gravity positions tail is located some
distance from the center of gravity, even the small amount of lift it produces can generate a
large pitching moment at the centre of gravity. Generally, four-digit NACA profile is used for
horizontal tail. In the table which is given below, there are three NACA profile have same
thickness ratio with the wing. Ix digit airfoil is not chosen because of laminar effects.
Horizontal tail’s mission is not lift, it provides control. Thus symmetric profile is more
suitable for horizontal tail. Because of these reason, it can be selected NACA 0015 for the
horizontal tail.
NACA
Profile NACA 4415 NACA 0015 652415
Re 600X104 861X104 600X104
Roughness - - -
Clmax
behavior D A D
Clmax 1,56 1, 66 1,6
ao -4, 2 -0, 9 -2,8
dCl/dα 0,106 0,97 0,113
Design Cl 0,4 0,3 0,3
CD min 0,065 0,0064 0,0041
Cma -0, 095 0 -0, 062
xa / c 0,241 0,238 0,266
ya / c -0, 04 -0,4 -0, 065
ρ0 1,1 1,1 0,669
f/c 0,4 0 0,22
xf / c 0,4 - 0,5
t/c 0,15 0,15 0,15
xt / c 0,3 0,3 0,41
Table 4.5 Airfoils for horizontal tail [3]
37
For NACA 0015 airfoil, according to the some given Reynolds numbers C l-α, C d-α,
Cm-α graphs and C d-C l curves are indicated in Appendix B.
4.5. TAIL GEOMETRY

4.5.1 Aspect Ratio
For the selected horizontal and vertical tail, it is selected from Table 3 Tail aspect
[1]
ratio and taper ratio . In this table, the aspect ratio for horizontal tail changes between 3-5
and for vertical tail changes between 1, 3-2. According to this table, the aspect ratio of
horizontal tail is chosen 5 and for vertical tail is chosen 1, 5 because preferring large control
surfaces are better.
4.5.2. Taper Ratio
In the same table, it can be seen the taper ratio for horizontal and vertical tail. As to
this table, taper ratio for horizontal tail is selected as 0, 6 and vertical tails taper ratio is
selected as 0, 5.
4.5.3. Sweep Angle
Leading edge sweep angle of horizontal tail is generally wanted to be 5 degree more
than the wing sweep to make the tails stall after than the wing. Since the sweep angle of wing
is 8, 6, the tail sweep angle is considered nearly 5 degree more than it. Thus, tail sweep angle
is found 13, 6.
4.5.4. Tail Vertical Location
Spin recovery is the important situation for the aircraft because of resulting stall.
Vertical tail has a big role in spin recovery. An aircraft in a spin, one wing tends to stall more
38
deeply than the other. The wing that stalls first will fall, increasing its angle of attack and
become deep the stall. During these circumstances, the other wing will rise, decreasing its
angle of attack, and the aircraft will yaw towards to more deeply-stalled wing. The difference
in lift between the two wings the aircraft to roll and the difference in drag causes the aircraft
the yaw. The yaw axis is perpendicular to the wings and lies in the plane of the aircraft
centerline. A yaw motion is a side to side movement of the nose of the aircraft. This yawing
moment is prevented by using rudder which is hinged at the aft of the vertical stabilizer.
Because of this, vertical tail is important for spin recovery. Also, tail geometry for spin
recovery, location of the horizontal tail and rudder, is essential parameter.
In this study, the tail is chosen whose horizontal tail is at the forward with respect to
the vertical tail and also, horizontal tail vertical location is chosen high. In the figure, shown
below, the selected location of horizontal tail is given above for spin recovery. The “uncover”
parts of the rudder provide to increase rudder control.
Figure 4.8Tail geometry for spin recovery [1]

4.5.5. Twist and Dihedral
There is no twist and dihedral angle for horizontal and vertical tail. These parameters
are not very important for this aircraft. It isn’t used any twist because of cost. And tails are
control surfaces. Therefore, it isn’t requiring any thing to provide stability.
39
4.6. NONDIMENSIONAL DRAWINGS
Nondimensional drawing of Wing
Ctip=0,4
Y=0,91
Croot=1
c = 0, 74
Nondimensional drawing of Horizontal Tail

Ctip=0,6
Y=0,89
Croot=1
c = 0, 79
40
Nondimensional drawing of Vertical Tail
Croot=1
Ctip=0,5
c = 0, 77
Characteristics WING HORIZONTALTAIL VERTICAL TAIL

Airfoil NACA 23015 NACA 2415 NACA 652-015
Aspect Ratio 7 5 1,5
Wing Sweep(l.e.) 8,6° 13,6° 41,6°
Wing Sweep(c/4) 4° 6,76° 40°
Taper ratio ( λ ) 0,4 0,6 0,5
Twist untwist untwist untwist
Dihedral 0° - -
Incidence 2° -2° -
Wing Tip Sharp Sharp -
Wing Vertical
Location Mid High -
Table 4.6 Characteristics of wing and tails
41
4.8. CONCLUSION
In this study, firstly airfoils are selected which satisfies the required characteristics of
the wing in terms of lift coefficient, thickness ratio, etc. After that the initial decisions on
aspect ratio, sweep, taper ratio, twist, incidence, dihedral, wing vertical location and tips are
determined. During all selections, aircraft’s improved performances are considered. Actually,
it is important to point out that, the competitor study was played an important role in the
determination of these parameters. However, these are only initial estimations and likely to be
revised in the following chapters in order to achieve an optimal design.
42
CHAPTER 5
THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO AND WING LOADING
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Horsepower-to-weight ratio (hp/W) and wing loading (W/S) properties of an aircraft

plays an important role for the performance of the propeller aircraft. By using the hp/W and
W/S values, it can be estimated the other performance parameters. Therefore, correctly
estimation of these values is very essential for performance calculations. It is defined the
hp/W as the T/W (thrust to weight ratio) for propeller aircraft. By using a formula, T/W can
be converted to hp/w.
In this study, hp/w and W/S is selected by considering the competitors average,
historical value and the calculations for the aircraft performance. Then, according to obtained
value, the final selection for hp/W and wing loading is done. Also, other performance
properties of the aircraft will be evaluated from the selected hp/W and W/S. To make this
estimations, it is used the given performance requirements.
The performance requirements are given below:
- Stall Speed( Vstall ) : 50 knots @ sea level, standard day, flaps down full down
- Stall Speed( Vstall ) : 60 knots @ 5000ft hot day flaps full down (landing)
- Take off Field Length (FAR 23): 600m (seal level, standard day)
- Landing Field Length (FAR 23): 600m (sea level, standard day)
- Cruising Speed: 130 knots (with 75% power engine and reversible @ 8000ft
Altitude)
5.2. SELECTION OF HORSEPOWER-TO-WEIGHT RATIO
5.2.1. Competitor Study
Hp/W is inverse of power loading of the aircrafts which exist in competitor study is
given below as a table.
43
AIRCRAFT Hp/W(hp/lb)
Cessna–140 0,058
Cessna–152 0,0625
Piper PA–28–180 Cherokee 0,0752
Aeronca 11AC Chief 0,052
Boeing/ Stearman Model 75(PT_13) 0,081
Pitts S–2 C 0,152
Yakovlev Yak–52 0,127
Zenith CH601 XL 0,085
Diamond DA 20 Katana 0,0756
Aviat HUSKY 0,1
AMD Alarus CH2000 0,0685
De Havilland Chipmunk 0,072
Ikarus C 42 0,1
Piper PA–38 Tomahawk 0,067
SU–31 0,134
Average 0,08732
Table 5.1 HP/W
It can be seen an average HP/W value of the competitor aircrafts is approximately 0,087.
hp
= 0.087
W
5.2.2. Statistical Estimation
For general aviation-single engine, piston propeller aircrafts, power-to-weight ratio is
0.07 as to Table 5.2 [1] historical average values for power-to-weight ratio.
hp
= 0.07
W
There is another approach for first estimate horsepower-to-weight ratio. According to
this approach, it is considered that the HP/W is related to maximum speed. To apply this
process, it can be benefited from Table 5.4[1] for general aviation-single engine aircrafts. To
determine the power-to-ratio is used the formula [1] given below:
44
P
= aVmax c
W0
(5.1)
Vmax is given in the performance requirements as 130 knots = 219, 44 ft/s. Also,
according to the Table 5.4:
a = 0, 025
C = 0, 22
Thus;
P
= 0,=
025(219, 44)0,22 0, 0818
W0
5.2.3. Thrust Matching
Another method to estimate horsepower-to-weight ratio is “thrust matching”. Thrust

matching is used to make a better initial of the required T/W for aircraft designed primarily,
for efficiency during cruise. This refers to the comparison of the selected engine’s thrust
available during cruise to the estimated aircraft drag.
During level flight, when the thrust must equal the drag and weight must equal the lift.
Therefore, it can be written;
T  1
  = (5.2)[1]
 W cruise ( L / D )cruise
To get the equivalent take-off T/W, the required cruise T/W must be regulated because
maximum take-off thrust at sea level much than the cruise thrust at altitude. To do this
estimation is used the equation (5.3):
T  T   Wcruise   Ttakeoff 
=  (5.3)[1]
   
 W takeoff  W cruise  Wtakeoff   T 
  cruise 
For a propeller aircraft, the required takeoff P/W can be found by solving in Eq. (5.4)
[1]
at cruise conditions and adjusting weight and power back to takeoff conditions.
 hp   V   1   Wcruise   hptakeoff 
  =  cruise  ∗   ∗   ∗   (5.4)[1]
 W takeoff  550.η p   ( L / D)cruise   Wtakeoff   hpcruise 
45
 hp   Vcruise   1 
=    ∗  
 W cruise  550.η p   ( L / D)cruise 
In order to find (hp/W) for take-off, it should be known some parameters’ value and
L L
approaches. It is known for propeller, η p ≅ 0,8 and   = 
 D cruise  D  max
L
To estimate   , it is used the formula which indicates the relation between lift and drag
 D  max
coefficients.
CL = CD0 π eAR (5.5)[1]
The value of parasite drag coefficients generally varies between 0, 02 and 0, 03 for
single engine-general aviation aircrafts. In this study, parasite drag coefficient CDo is selected
as 0, 024. Because it is important the performance of aircraft for this project, CDo value is
chosen for smaller drag. The better choice may be the most little value 0, 02, but this is very
high cost for this aircraft. Therefore, it is not selected.
* CDo = 0.024 (for single engine light aircrafts no strut) [4]

* e (Oswald efficiency) = 0.8
* AR = 7 (It is determined at previous chapter)
According to these values, CL is calculated as the below:
CL =0, 649
D = qSCD and CD = 2CDo, so D = 2qSCD0
CD =0, 048
L L CL 0, 649
 = = = = 13,52
D cruise D max CD 0, 048
It is known from Table (3.2) [1];

 Wcruise   Wc lim b 
  = 0.97 and   = 0.985
 Wc lim b   Wtakeoff 
46
Thus;
Wcruise  Wcruise Wc lim b 

= ×  =0.97 × 0.985 =0.956
Wtakeoff  Wc lim b Wtakeoff 
For a piston-powered, propeller-driven aircraft, the power available varies with the
density of the air provided to the intake manifold. Therefore, piston-powered aircraft typically
[1]
cruise at about % 75 of take-off power . And also, in the performance requirement, it is
given the cruise speed is with 75% power at 8000ft altitude.
 h. p.takeoff  1
 =  = 1.33
 h. p.cruise  0.75
Vcruise is given 130 knots = 219.44 ft/s in the performance requirements.
After all needed parameters were calculated, it can be found (hp/W)take-off :
h. p.   219, 44   1 
=  = ( 0.956 ) (1.33) 0, 0469
W takeoff  550 × 0,8   13,52 

It is found by thrust matching;

hp
= 0, 0469
W
5.2.4. Final Selection

In order to find hp/W, some different methods were considered. Here, these
results are given as a table:
Method Result for hp/W

Competitor Study 0,087
Statistical Estimation 1 0,07
Statistical Estimation 2 0,0818
Thrust Matching 0,0469
Table 5.2
The final selection of the horsepower-to-weight ratio was made according to these
different values. It can be seen that the thrust matching results are very low according to the
other results such as competitors’ aircrafts and historical value. Therefore, thrust matching
value of hp/W is not considered. If the thrust matching value is selected, it would be made
very large wing to provide the lift. During selecting the hp/W, to consider the reducing fuel
47
consumption is important because W0 becomes lower while reducing fuel consumption.
Finally; the hp/W is chosen 0, 085.
hp
= 0, 085
W
5.3. SELECTION OF WING LOADING
5.3.1. Competitor Study
Wing loading (W/S) of the aircrafts which exist in competitor study is given below as
a table.
AIRCRAFT W/S (lb/ft^2)

Cessna-140 8,68
Cessna-152 10
Piper PA-28-180 Cherokee 15
Aeronca 11AC Chief 7,1
Boeing/ Stearman Model 75(PT_13) 9,15
Pitts S-2C 13,3
Yakovlev Yak-52 17,61
Zenith CH601 XL 9,85
Diamond DA 20 Katana 13,2
Aviat HUSKY 10,9
AMD Alarus CH2000 12,3
De Havilland Chipmunk 11,709
Ikarus C 42 7,6
Piper PA-38 Tomahawk 13,39
SU-31 1,55
Average 10,75593333
Table 5.2 Wing Loading
5.3.2. Statistical Estimation
From Table 5.5[1], for a single engine aircraft, wing loading is 17 lb/ft2.
W  W  W
  =  = 17lb / ft 2
 S aircraft  S takeoff S
48
5.3.3. Stall Speed
[1]
From the formula which is given Equation (5.6) , to calculate wing loading, it is
found some unknowns. One of the most parameter all of them is stall speed. Airplanes can be
equipped with devices to prevent or postpone a stall or to make it less (or in some cases more)
severe, or to make recovery easier. Therefore, stall speed is a major provider to safety flying.
Stall speed is directly related with the lift coefficient. After the aircrafts enter stall state, lift of
aircrafts is decrease suddenly. There is a lift coefficient at stall speed which is the maximum
lift coefficient of the aircraft.
5.3.3. a. Stall Speed for 50 knots at sea level, standard day, flaps full down
In this part, Vstall = 50 knots @ sea level, standard day for flaps full down and landing
conditions. Also, at sea level, standard day conditions the air density is 0, 00238 slug/ ft3.
1
W= L = qstall S CL max = ρ V2 stall S CL max (5.6a) [1]
2
W 1
= ρ V2 stall CL max (5.6b) [1]
S 2
To determine wing loading, there is still an unknown, maximum lift coefficient, is the
more difficult to estimate than other parameters. This value can vary from about 1.2 to 1.5 for
a plain wing with no flaps to as much as 5.0 for a wing with large flaps affected by prop wash.
It is directly related to use of flaps. When some flaps conditions or no-flap, maximum lift
coefficient is changing. To determine this change, it is benefited from Figure 5.3[1]. This
figure shows maximum lift coefficient values for different flap types. The aircrafts in the
competitor study, there is generally aircrafts which have no-flap, fowler flap and single slotted
flap.
Firstly, it is found the Clmax of airfoil towards to the quarter chord line sweep angle.
The (Λc/4) is designed as 4 degree. In respect of this sweep angle, the maximum lift coefficient
is chosen 1, 7. However, this value of maximum lift coefficient is for airfoil. To find the
maximum lift coefficient for wing there is an assumption: (CLmax) wing = 0.9(Clmax)airfoil.
According to this information, the (CLmax) wing = 1, 53 is calculated. Than, this value of the
maximum lift coefficient of the wing is shifted to the graph which is given at Figure (5.3) [1].
It is searched for the maximum lift coefficient of wing with flaps because flap reduces the
49
stall speed by increasing the camber of the wing thereby increasing the maximum lift
coefficient. For different flap configurations the Clmax values are given below:
* Clmax for no flap : 1, 53

* Clmax for fowler flap : 2, 52
* Clmax for single-slotted flap: 2, 15
* Clmax for plain flap : 1, 8
From the formula (5.6b) [1], for Vstall = 50 knots = 88, 4 ft/s and  = 0, 00238 slug/ft3.
According to this information, the wing loading W/S is calculated for the flap types:
* For no flap : W/S = 12, 97lb /ft2
* For fowler flap : W/S = 18, 23 lb/ft2
* For single-slotted flap: W/S = 21, 36 lb/ft2
W/S = 16,74 lb/ft2

* For plain flap :
5.3.3. b. Stall Speed for 60 knots at 5000ft, hot, flaps full down
In this part, the stall speed Vstall = 60 knots at 5000ft altitude, hot day for flaps full
down and landing conditions. Also, @5000ft hot day conditions the air density is 0, 00189
slug/ ft3.
If the same considerations and assumptions are made for this stall speed, the maximum
lift coefficient of the wing for no-flap, plain, fowler and slotted flap remain the same. The
different parameter is air density and stall speed for this part. Because of this, by using the
same formula which is given Equation (5.6b) the wing loading can be calculated.
Vstall = 60 knots = 101, 28 ft/s
 = 0, 002043 slug/ft3
* For no flap : W/S = 16,03 lb/ft2
50
* For fowler flap : W/S = 26,41 lb/ft2
W/S = 22,53 lb/ft2

* For single-slotted flap:
* For plain flap : W/S = 18,86 lb/ft2
5.3.4. Takeoff Distance
Takeoff is the phase of flight in which an aircraft goes through a transition from
moving along the ground (taxiing) to flying in the air. A number of different values are
referred to as “takeoff distance”. The most noticeable definition of takeoff distance or
“balance field length (BFL)”, is the distance that pilot can stop the aircraft safely if a
problem occurs at one of the engines or to continue takeoff on the remaining engines at
decision speed. Balance field length is sometimes called the “FAR 23 takeoff field length”.
However, Far 23 doesn’t require meeting balance field length. There are some parameters
which affect the takeoff distance such as wing loading and thrust-to-weight ratio. This relation
can be seen in Equation (5.7). The following equation gives the maximum allowable wing
loading for the given takeoff distance of a propeller aircraft.
W hp
= (TOP )σ CLTAKEOFF ( ) (5.7)[1]
S W
In the performance requirements, take of field length is given 600m = 1968, 5ft
for sea level, standard day. Then, take off parameter (TOP) is found for the take off distance
1968, 5ft from Figure (5.4) [1].
• TOP (ground roll) = 210
• TOP (over 50ft) = 280
For ground roll line and over 50ft line, the take of parameter TOP is different from each other.
[1]
Also, the Figure (5.4) doesn’t give an accurate value for TOP, because of this TOP is
chosen between these two values as 250.
TOP = 250
•  = 1 ( for sea level)
In the formula, the lift coefficient is not maximum lift coefficient. Here, it is the
takeoff lift coefficient, is definition of stall speed. Lift off speed is generally 1, 1 times of stall
51
speed. With another saying, maximum lift coefficient for take of is not same value for the
maximum lift coefficient. CLmax is valid for landing configuration (flaps full down) and CLmax
for takeoff is nearly 80% of CLmax value.
CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX
From these values, the wing loading for different flap types is calculated.
* For no flap : CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX = 0,80 ×1,53 = 1, 224
W
= (250)(1)(1,
= 224)(0, 085) 26, 01 lb / ft2
S
* For fowler flap: CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX = 0,80 × 2,52 = 2, 016
W
= (250)(1)(2,
= 016)(0, 085) 42,84 lb / ft2
S
* For single-slotted flap: CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX = 0,80 × 2,15 = 1, 72
W
= (250)(1)(1,
= 72)(0, 085) 36,55 lb / ft2
S
* For plain flap : CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX = 0,80 ×1,8 = 1, 44
W
= (250)(1)(1,
= 44)(0, 085) 30,6 lb / ft2
S
5.3.5. Landing Distance
Landing distances consist basically of two segments: the air run from a height of 50ft
to the surface accompanied by a slight deceleration and flare which is defined as “FAR 23
landing field length”, and the ground deceleration from the touchdown speed to a stop as
shown in the figure below. Landing distance is largely determined by wing loading. Wing
loading affects the approach speed, which must be certain multiple of stall speed. This is
1,15*Vstall for the general aviation aircraft. Therefore, for better approximation of the landing
distance this can be used to estimate the maximum landing wing loading.
52
 W   1 
Slanding = 80   + Sa (5.8)[1]
 S   σ ⋅ CL 
max
In this formula, the first term represents to ground roll to absorb the kinetic energy at
touchdown speed. The constant term, Sa, represents to obstacle-clearance distance.
First of all, it is computed the competitors’ average landing distance 600m = 1968, 5ft.
Also;
•  = 1 ( for sea level)
• Sa = 600ft /for general aviation-type power-off approach)
• CLmax = 1,53 (for no flap)
• CLmax = 2,52 (for fowler flap)
• CLmax = 2,15 (for single-slotted flap)
• CLmax = 1,8 (for plain flap)
W  1  W
=
* For no flap : 1968,5 80    + 600 = 26,17 lb/ft2
S   1×1,53  S
W  1  W
= 43,11 lb/ft2
=
* For fowler flap: 1968,5 80     + 600
 S   1× 2,52  S
W  1 
=
* For single-slotted flap: 1968,5 80    + 600
W
= 36, 78 lb/ft2
S   1× 2,15  S
W  1 
=
* For plain flap: 1968,5 80    + 600 W
S   1×1,8  = 30, 79 lb/ft2
S
5.3.6. Wing Loading for Cruise
To optimize cruise range, wing loading should be selected to provide a high L/D at the
cruise conditions. This range gives the best range for cruise. A propeller aircraft, which loses
thrust efficiency as speed goes up, gets the maximum range when flying at the speed for best
L/D. To maximize range, parasite drag equals to induce drag. For maximum propeller range;
W 1
= qC
= L ρcruise ⋅Vcruise
2
π . A.e.CD0
S 2
CL was found as 0, 649.
53
For 8000ft altitude cruise conditions, the performance requirements are given:
 = 0, 001869 slug/ft3
Vcruise = 219, 44 ft/s
W 1 W 
(0.001869)(219, 44) 2 π × 7 × 0.8 × 0.02   = 29, 2 Lb/ft2
S 2  S cruise
This wing loading value is made for cruise conditions. It must be adjusted to sea level
conditions (takeoff conditions); it must be multiplied by weight fraction.
−1
W  W   W1 W2  −1
  =    ⋅ = 29, 2.(0.97 × 0.985)
 Takeoff  cruise  0 1 
S S W W
W 
  = 30,57 Ib / ft 2
 S takeoff
5.3.7. Final Selection of Wing Loading
After all methods for wing loading estimation are made, it is required to make a final
selection of wing loading. The results of the all methods are shown as a table which is given
below. For takeoff and landing estimation, it is selected single-slotted flap values for wing
loading.
Method W/S for plain flap

Competitor Study 10,76
Statically Estimation 17
Stall Speed 1(50kt) 16,74
Stall Speed 2(60kt) 18,86
Takeoff Distance 30, 6
Landing Distance 30,79
Cruise Speed 30,57
Table 5.3 Final selection of wing loading
It can be seen the results of the method different fro each other. From the wing
loadings estimated above, the lowest value is selected to ensure that the wing is large enough
for all flight conditions. As a lowest value, stall speed for standard day gives better solution
for wing loading compare to the other method. It can be seen from the Table 5.3. wing
loading becomes higher by using the flap.
54
The estimations are made for three types of flap, the plain flap is chosen. The plain
flap is simply a section of the trailing edge that is hinged to bend down. Because of simple
mechanism and lower cost of plain flap, it is selected between the other flap types.
Also, the calculated values of wing loading for stall speed especially for 50 knots, at
sea level, standard day conditions are better for both competitors and historical values. It is
higher than competitors and approximately equals to historical value. According to these
results, 17 lb/ft2 is chosen for wing loading estimation.
W
= 17lb / ft 2
S
5.4. ANALYSIS AND CALCULATIONS
The purpose of this part is to make an estimation of some performance parameters

such as stall speed, takeoff and landing distance for different conditions by using the
determined horsepower-to-weight ratio and wing loading.
5.4.1. Stall Speed for Landing Configuration

The landing conditions are considered for the stall speed to calculate in this part. These
landing conditions are that the landing becomes at sea level, standard day and flaps full down.
Because of that it is decided to use the plain flap in the design, the maximum lift
coefficient of the plain flap for landing configuration is taken. It is (CLmax)landing =1,8
According to this maximum lift coefficient value, the stall speed for landing configuration is
determined by using the equation (5.6b):
W  W 
W/S = ½ ρ V2stall CLmax and   =  =17
 S landing  S takeoff
Also, for standard day, at sea level, the air density is  = 0, 00238 slug/ft3.
2(W / S ) 2 × (17)
=Vstall = = 89, =
08 ft / s 52, 77 knots
ρ ⋅ CLmax 0.00238 ×1,8
55
5.4.2. Stall Speed for Takeoff Configuration
To estimate the stall speed for takeoff configuration, it is assumed for sea level,
standard day and takeoff configurations. Flaps contribute to takeoff stall speed because of
they are used about half the maximum angle configuration. Therefore, an aircraft uses the
80% CLmax at the take off conditions ( CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX ). Again, the calculation of Ctakeoff
is made for the plain flap. By using the same formula;
2(W / S ) 2 × (17)
=
Vstall = = 99, =
6 ft / s 59knots
ρ ⋅ CLmax 0.00238 × 1.44
5.4.3. Stall Speed for Cruise Configuration

To calculate the cruise configuration of stall speed, the assumptions are for sea level,
standard day and no flap deflection. Because of flap off configuration, maximum lift
coefficient is taken from Figure 5.3 for no flap curve. It is shown above as (CLmax) cruise=1, 53.
W  W   W1 W2 
  =   × = 17 × (0.97 × 0.985) =
16, 24lb / ft 2
 S cruise  S takeoff  W0 W1 
2(W / S ) 2 × (16, 24)

=Vstall = = 94, =
44 ft / s 55,95knots
ρ ⋅ CLmax 0.00238 ×1.53
5.4.4. Stall Speed for 5000ft, Hot Day, Landing Configuration

In this part, it is wanted to estimate the stall speed for 5000ft altitude, hot day and
landing configuration. For 5000ft altitude, the density is ρ5000 =0, 00189 slug /ft3. Also, it is
known the maximum lift coefficient for landing from the above calculations. For plain flap,
(CLmax) landing = 1, 8. While the same calculations are made for this stall speed;
W  W 
  =  = 17
56
2(W / S ) 2 × (17)
=Vstall = = 99,97 =ft / s 59, 22knots
ρ ⋅ CLmax 0.00189 ×1,8
5.4.5. Takeoff Ground Roll

For takeoff ground roll, the assumptions are for standard day, sea level. To determine
ground roll distance, it is benefited from Figure 5.4[1] for the takeoff parameter (TOP) which
is computed according to the takeoff lift coefficient CL TO and sea level density ratio σ=1. For
plain flap, CLTAKEOFF = 0,80CL MAX = 1, 44
(W / S ) 17
=TOP = = 138,89lb / ft 2
σ ⋅ CLTO⋅ (hp / W ) 1× (1, 44) × 0, 085
From Figure 5.4[1] for propeller aircraft, grounds roll distance which is the intersection
with TOP and grounds roll line, is found. Thus; ground roll is estimated as nearly 1000ft .for
138, 89 lb/ft2 TOP.
Takeoff Ground Roll = 1000ft = 304, 8m

5.4.6. Takeoff Field Length
It is made some assumptions for the takeoff ground roll. Only one thing is different
than ground roll which takeoff field length is for 50ft obstacle. TOP for takeoff field length is
the same with ground roll because the terms in the TOP equation are not change. For the same
takeoff parameter, TOP =138, 89 lb/ft2, takeoff field length is found from the Figure 5.4[1],
over 50ft line. According to it, takeoff field length is found as nearly 1300ft.
Takeoff Field Length = 1300ft = 396, 24m
5.4.7. Landing Ground Roll

The calculation of landing ground roll is made for sea level, standard day
configuration.
σ=1
W  W 
(CLmax)landing =1,8   =  =17 lb/ft
2
57
 W   1 
Slanding = 80   + Sa
 S   σ ⋅ CL 
max
W  1   1 
Landing Ground Roll = 80     = 80 ×17 ×   = 755,56 ft = 230,3m
S   σ ⋅ CLmax   1 × 1,8 

Landing Ground Roll = 755, 56ft = 230, 3m
5.4.8. Landing Field Length

The landing field length is estimated for sea level, standard day conditions.
 W   1 
Slanding = 80   + Sa = S= L.G.R + S a
 S   σ ⋅ CL 
landing
max
Landing ground length is found above as 755, 56 ft. Thus; landing field length is
calculated by added LGR to Sa.
Slanding (Landing Field Length) = 755, 56 + 600 = 1355, 56ft = 413, 18 m
5.4.9. The Altitude for Best Range

The assumption for the altitude estimation is cruise speed which is the speed for the
best range is 130 knots = 219, 44ft/s.
W  W  W  W W 
  =  =  × 1 × 2  =17 × (0.97 × 0.985) =16, 24 lb/ft2
 S bestrange  S cruise  S takeoff  W0 W1 
It is calculated the wing loading for the best range conditions 16, 24 lb/ft2. Now, it is
known both the wing loading and speed for best range conditions. According to the best range
speed equation (5.9) [1], it can be calculated the altitude through the air density.
2W 1
Vb.r = (5.9) [1]
ρ×S CDoπ eAR
2 ×17 1
219, 44 =  = 0, 001087 slug/ft3
ρ 0, 024 × π × 0,8 × 7
By using the linear interpolation method, the altitude for  = 0, 001087 slug/ft3 is
determined from (Table B.1-1) [1]. Thus;
58
h = 24447, 43ft = 7451, 6m
5.4.10. The Mach number

In this part, the Mach number is found for the calculated altitude and best range speed
130 knots.
From (Table B.1-2) [1], by using the linear interpolation for h = 7451, 6 ≅ 7, 5km the
temperature T = 242, 71 K. To determine the Mach number, first the speed of sound must be
calculated.
a= γ RT = 1, 4 × 287 × 242, 71 = 312, 28m / s = 607, 548 knots

Then, the Mach number for the best range;
V 130
=
Mb.r. = br = 0, 214
a 607,548
5.4. 11. Maximum value of L/D

For maximum L/D condition the lift coefficient is calculated by using the equation
[1]
(5.10) . This lift coefficient is for minimum drag or thrust in level flight. In level flight
thrust equals to the drag.
CL, min thrust or drag = CD0 π eAR (5.10) [1]
Thus; CL, min thrust or drag = 0, 02 × π × 0,8 × 7 = 0, 649

For the level flight equilibrium;
L = W = qSCL (5.11) [1]
[1] [1]
When Eq. (5.10) is substituted into Eq. (5.11) , it is obtained lift for minimum
thrust or drag conditions.
L = W = qS CD0 π eAR = qS (0, 649)
At any given weight, the aircraft can be flown at the optimal lift coefficient for
minimum drag by varying velocity or altitude.
To calculate maximum L/D value, also, it can be needed the estimation of the drag for
minimum thrust or drag. For level flight, drag equals to thrust.
CL 2
T = D = qS (CD0 + ) (5.12) [1]
π eAR
59
[1]
By using the assumption for lift coefficient which is given in Eq. (5.10) , the
(5.12) [1] formula is formed:

( ) =
2
CD0 π eAR
D min thrust or drag = qS CD0 +  qS (CD0 + CD0 )= 2CD0 qS (5.13) [1]
π eAR
 
According to this formula; D min thrust or drag = 2(0, 02) qS = 0, 048.qS
After the calculations of the lift and drag for minimum thrust or drag conditions which
gives the maximum value of the L/D, it is estimated (L/D) max.
Lmin thrustordrag (0, 649)qS
(L/D) max = = = 13,52
Dmin thrustordrag (0, 048)qS
(L/D) max = 13, 52
5.4. 12-13. Hpcruise / hptakeoff value
L L W   W W 
 =  =  13, 52  cruise  = 1   2  =0,97 × 0,985 =0,956
 D cruise D  max  Wtakeoff   W0   W1 
T  1 1
 =  = = 0, 074
 W cruise ( L / D )cruise 13,52
[1]
When the Equation (5.4) is rearranged, it is obtained the formula for
 hpcruise 
  which is given below:
 hptakeoff 
 Vcruise   1   Wcruise   219, 44   1 

 hpcruise   550 ×η p   ( L / D)cruise   Wtakeoff   550 × 0,8   13,52  (
  ⋅  ⋅  . . 0,956 )
=  = = 0, 415
 hptakeoff   hp  0, 085
 
 W takeoff
 hp cruise 
  = 0.415
 hptakeoff 
5.4. 14. Loiter Speed for Best Endurance at Sea Level
Best endurance speed is the same loiter speed.
60
2 (W / S )loiter 1
For a propeller aircraft; =
Vb.e V= (5.14) [1]
loiter
ρ SL 3CDoπ eAR
To calculate the loiter speed; it should be known the wing loading for loiter.
Therefore, loiter wing loading is found by multiplying the weight fractions to takeoff wing
loading. For loiter, the wing loading weight fraction is assumed initial of loiter.
W  W   W4 W3 W2 W1 
  =    =×
17 (1× 0.8886 × 0.985 × 0.97) =
14, 43lb / ft 2
 S  Loiter  S takeoff W 3 W 2 W 1 W 0 
If the found wing loading puts in to the Equation (5. 14)[1], loiter speed for best
endurance at sea level determines like the below:
2 1
Vb.e =Vloiter = ×14, 43 × =103, 75 ft / s = 61,5knots
0.00238 3 × 0.024 × π × 0,8 × 7
Vb.e = 103, 75 ft/s = 61, 5 knots
5.4. 15. Instantaneous Turn Rate at Cruising Speed and Altitude
The calculations for instantaneous turn rate are made at cruising speed and altitude.
According to this condition, cruse speed Vcruise = 130 knots = 219, 44 ft/s and the altitude for
cruise is hcruise = 8000ft.
The turn rate is a function of load factor “n”. Because of this; firstly, it is determined
the load factor at cruise conditions. The load factor formula is given below:
L qSCL qCL (5. 15) [1]

=
n = =
W W (W / S )cruise
Instantaneous turn rate estimation is made for the maximum lift coefficient for no flap
condition. According to this information, the maximum lift coefficient for no flap condition is
found as 1, 53 above estimations.
CL max =1.53
ρ8000ft=0, 001869slug/ft3
61
W  W  W W 
  =  × 1 ⋅ 2  =17 × (0.97 × 0.985) =16, 24
 S cruise  S takeoff  W0 W1 
After all values of terms in the equation are determined, the load factor is calculated
from Equation (5. 11) [1].
1 1
qCL max ρ 2
Vcruise
. CL max × 0.001869 × (219, 44) 2 (1.53)
=n = 2 = 2 = 4, 24
(W / S )cruise (W / S )cruise 16, 24
Then, the instantaneous turn rate is estimated by using the turn rate formula which
is given below as Equation (5. 16) [1].
RadialAcceleration • g n2 − 1
TurnRate = ; ψ= (5. 16) [1]
Velocity Vcruise
* g = gravitational acceleration is 32, 2 ft/s2.
32, 2 4, 24 2 − 1
=ψ = 0.605rad / s = 34, 658  /s
219, 44
ψ = 0, 605 rad/s = 34, 658  /s
5.4.16. Climb Gradient and Rate of Climb at the Beginning of the Climb
Climb gradient, “G”, is the ratio between vertical and horizontal distance traveled. The
calculations of the climb gradient and rate of climb at the beginning of climb are made for sea
level and V = 1,2Vstall conditions. Climb gradient description;
D T
G = (T-D) / W or = −G
W W
To find the climb gradient, first of all, it can be determined the D/W and T/W terms.
D/W can be expressed as in Eq. (5. 17) [1]:
D qSCD0 + qS (CL / π Ae) qCDo W 1

2
= = + (5. 17) [1]

W W W / S S qπ Ae
In order to solve this equation, it is needed to find the wing loading for climb
conditions.
62
W  W   Wclimb 
  =  ×   =
17 × (0.97) =
16, 49
 S climb  S takeoff  Wtakeoff 
Also, Vclimb is equal to 1, 2 times Vstall. Thus; Vclimb = 1, 2. (99, 6 ft/s) = 119, 52 ft/s.
And the dynamic pressure is;
1 1
q= ρV 2 = × 0, 00238 × (119,52) 2 =
16,999 ≅ 17 psf
2 2
1
D 2
ρV 2CDo W 1 17 × (0, 024) 1
= + = + 16, 49 × = 0, 0798
W W /S S qπ Ae 16, 49 17 × π × 7 × 0,8
After D/W ratio is found, to estimate the climb gradient “G”, it is needed to calculate
the thrust to weight ratio for climb conditions:
T T   550η p   h. p   550 × 0.8 

=   =   =    × 0.085
= 0.313
W  W takeoff  Vc lim b   W   119,52 
Climb gradient;
T D
G= − = 0, 313 – 0, 0798 G = 0, 2332
W W
Climb gradient is a description for the ratio between the vertical and horizontal speeds.
Horizontal speed Vx defines the climb velocity and the vertical velocity refers to rate of climb.
Vy
G= Vy = G. Vx = G. Vclimb = (0, 2332).119, 52ft/s = 27, 875 ft/s
Vx
Rate of climb = 27, 87 ft/s
5.4.17. Climb Gradient and Rate of Climb at the End of the Climb
For this part, it is made the same calculations; however at different flight conditions.
The assumptions are that it becomes at cruising altitude and cruising speed.
hcruise = 8000ft
Vcruise = 219, 44 ft/s
cruise = 0, 001869 slug/ft3
63
W  W  W   Wcruise 
  =   ×  climb
W  ×  =17 × (0.97) × (0,985) =
16, 24
 S climb  S takeoff  takeoff   Wclimb 
1 1
q= ρV 2 = × 0, 001869 × (219, 44) 2 =
44,999 ≅ 45 psi
2 2
1
D 2
ρV 2CDo W 1 45 × (0, 024) 1
= + = + 16, 24 × = 0, 0865
W W /S S qπ Ae 16, 24 45 × π × 7 × 0,8
After D/W ratio is found, to estimate the climb gradient “G”, it is needed to calculate
the thrust to weight ratio for climb conditions:
T T   550η p   h. p   550 × 0.8 

=   =   =  × 0.085
= 0.17
W  W takeoff  Vcruise   W   219, 44 
Climb gradient;
T D
G= − = 0, 17 – 0, 0865 G = 0, 0835
W W
Rate of climb estimation:
Vy
G= Vy = G. Vx = G. Vclimb = (0, 0835). (219, 44) ft/s = 18, 65 ft/s
Vx
Rate of climb = 18, 65 ft/s
5.4.17. Maximum Ceiling
The maximum ceiling altitude is the altitude at which the aircraft will fly with design
lift coefficient. From this assumption, some calculations are done for maximum ceiling value.
First, it is calculated design CL and q form by using the following equations.
W = L = q design ×S × CL design

(W/S)cruise = q design × CL design
W  W  W 
=
    ×  climb 
 S climb  S takeoff  Wtakeoff 
64
It is known the values of terms in order to compute the dynamic pressure for design
from performance requirements:
Vcruise = 130 knots = 219, 44ft/s (at 75% power at 8000ft)
cruise = 0, 001869 slug/ft3

According to this value, it can be dynamic pressure;
1 1
q= ρ designVdesign 2 = × 0, 001869 × (219, 44) 2 =
44,999 ≅ 45
2 2
2
T  T   CDo 
 −G ±  −G −4 
W  W  W   π A Re 
  = (5. 18) [1]
 S cruise 2
qπ A Re
By using equation (5. 18) [1], with G = 0, the equation becomes;
T   CDo   T
2
T 
2
 T   0.024 
 ±   −4   ±   −4 
W  W   W   qπ A Re   W   W   45 × π × 7 × 0.8 
=  =
 S cruise 2 2
qπ A Re 45 × π × 7 × 0.8
W 
  = 16, 24 ;
 S cruise
2
T  T 
  ±   − 0.0001213 =
0.041
W  W 
After solving this equation, it is calculated (T/W) value for ceiling.
T 
  = 0.022
 W ceiling
T  550η p h. p.  WT .O ρ h
 = ×  × ×
W cruise Vh ,cruise W T .O Wcruise ρo
65
ρ hpmax, cruise 2 × qdesign
= and Vh ,cruise =
ρ 0 hpmax,takeoff ρ
550 × 0,8 1 ρh
=
0, 022 × 0, 075 × ×
2 × qdesign 0,97 × 0,985 0, 00238
ρh
In the above formula, there are two air density for ceiling altitude “h”. The value of ρh
is:
ρh = 0, 000591 slug/ft3
According to this air density value, from Table (B.1-1)[1] the maximum ceiling altitude
is estimated:
hmax, ceiling =39128, 5ft=11926, 4m
66
Horsepower To Weight Ratio (hp/W)takeoff 0, 085
Wing Loading (W/S)takeoff 17 lb/ft2
Clmax (Plain Flaps) 1,8
Vstall (sea level, standard day, landing conf.) 52,77 knots
Vstall (sea level, standard day, takeoff conf.) 59 knots
Vstall (sea level, standard day, cruise) 55,95 knots
Vstall (5000ft, hot day, landing conf.) 59,22 knots
Take off Ground Roll (sea level, standard 1000ft(304, 8)

day)
Take off field length (seal level, standard 1300ft(396, 24m)
day)
Landing Ground Roll (seal level ,standard 755,56ft(230,3m)
day)
Landing Field Length (seal level ,standard 1355,56ft(413,18m)
day)
Altitude (for best range) 24447, 43ft(7451, 6m)
Mbest range (sea level) 0, 214
(L/D)max 13, 52
hpcruise/hptakeoff 0,415
Vbest endurance (loiter) (sea level) 61, 5 knots
Instantaneous Turn Rate (cruising altitude) 34,658 deg/s
Climb Gradient (G) (Beginning of Climb) 0, 2332
Rate of climb (Vy) (Beginning of Climb) 27, 87 ft/s
Climb Gradient (G) (End of Climb) 0,0835
Rate of climb (Vy) (End of Climb) 18, 65 ft/s
Maximum Ceiling 39128, 5ft(11926, 4m)
67
5.6. CONCLUSION
In this study, the final selection of wing loading and horsepower-to-weight ratio were
performed by using various methods by considering some approaches. Wing loading is
chosen according to the plain flap, stall speed conditions because of the using flap increases
the wing loading. If the wing loading is higher, the wing area would be smaller. Also, plain
flap is selected because the simple design and low cost. Also, while making a decision for
hp/W value, it is considered the competitors average, historical dates and the calculations.
According to these obtained value; it is selected the suitable hp/W for the design.
After performing the selection of horsepower-to-weight ratio and wing loading, many
performance criterions are determined and reported under performance analysis section for
various conditions.
68
CHAPTER 6
INITIAL SIZING
6.1. INTRODUCTION
Purpose of this chapter is to make a sizing study on aircraft. Aircraft’s takeoff gross
weight and fuel weight will be calculated in sizing study. The first guess sizing which has
been done previously was limited to fairly simple, at this stage we have more information
about the aircraft so a better analysis can be done.
An aircraft can be sized using some existing engine or a new design engine. The
existing engine is fixed in size and thrust, and referred as a “fixed engine”. The new design
engine can be built in any size and for any thrust required, and it is called a “rubber engine”.
We will start by doing a rubber engine sizing; after requirements are met we will continue
with a fixed engine sizing. Finally geometric sizing will be done for fuselage, wings and
control surfaces
6.1.1. Design Requirements

The requirements for the design project aircraft are given below:
Range : 500 nm =3040000 ft

Wcrew : 100kg (1 pilot) = 220, 26lb
Wpayload : 100kg (1 passengers) = 220, 26lb
The design mission is:
2 3
5
6
1
0–1: Takeoff
1–2: Climb
2–3: 500 nm Cruise at 2440m at Vcruise=130 knots
3–4: Descent
4–5: 30 min. Loiter
5–6: Landing
69
6.2. RUBBER-ENGINE SIZING
In first guess sizing study, it is determined the takeoff weight by making iteration from
the equation which is shown.
Wcrew + W payload
W0 = (6.1) [1]
W  W 
1−  e  −  f 
 W0   W0 
Both payload and crew weight are given in the design requirements. The unknowns in
the formula are fuel weight and empty weight. To calculate the takeoff weight, it must be
firstly estimation of fuel and empty weight fractions. It can be seen the fuel weight and empty
weight are dependent on the total takeoff weight, so they are defined the fractions of total
weight. However, this approach is made for first guess size study. For initial sizing study, this
equation is not valid. The equation of takeoff weight is refined for this chapter as seen below:
 We 
Wo = Wcrew + Wpayload + Wfuel +   ⋅ Wo (6.2) [1]
 Wo 
Here, empty weight is again expressed as an empty weight fraction (We/W0).W0, but
the fuel weight is determined directly.
6.2.1. Empty Weight Estimation
From the Table 6.2[1], empty weight fraction can be estimated statically for the general
aviation-single engine aircrafts. It can be easily seen the empty weight fraction is related to
the takeoff gross weight, aspect ratio, horsepower to weight ratio, wing loading and maximum
cruise speed. The aspect ratio was determined as 7 at the airfoil selection part. Also,
horsepower-to-weight ratio and wing loading was calculated as 0, 075 and 17 lb/ft2 in the
previous chapter “Horsepower to Weight Ratio and Wing Loading”. And the maximum cruise
speed is given n the design requirements as 130 knots. According to these data, it can be
[1]
written empty weight fraction from the formula (6.3) by using the terms which are given
Table 6.2 [1]:
C3
 h. p.   Wo 
C4
We
= a + bWoC1 AR C 2  C5
   Vmax (6.3) [1]
W0  Wo   S 
We
−0, 25 + 1.18W0−0.20 (7)0.08 (0.075)0.05 (17) −0.05 (130)0.27
=
W0
70
We
−0, 25 + 3,913W0−0.20
=
W0
6.2.2. Fuel Fraction Estimation
The fuel weight fraction estimation depends on the mission profile of the selected
aircraft. To find the total fuel weight fraction, it should be calculated at all mission segments’
fuel weight fractions. The calculations in this part are similar to the first guess sizing
calculations. After that the all fuel weight fractions are found, the total fuel weight fraction is
calculated by multiplying all of them.
6.2.2.1. Engine Start, Taxi and Take off

[1]
The engine start, taxi and takeoff weight fraction is estimated historically . This
value can be selected between 0, 97 – 0, 99.A reasonable estimate is chosen as;
W1
= 0,98
W0
6.2.2.2. Climb and Accelerate

The climb weight fraction of piston-propeller aircraft can be estimated from the Table
2.1[1] of historical mission segment weight fractions like the fist guess sizing study.
W2
= 0,985
W1
6.2.2.3. Cruise
For estimate the cruise segment weight fractions W3/W2, the Brequet’s Range
Equation [1] is used:
W3  − RC 
V L  Wi−1  = exp 
R= n   W2  V( L / D )  (6.4) [1]
C D  Wi 
L 1
= (6.5) [1]
D qCD0 W  1
+ 
W   S cruise qπ eA
 
 S cruise
71
To calculate (L/D);
Range = 500nm = 3040000ft
hcruise = 2440m = 8000ft
 = 0, 001869 slug/ft3 (for 8000ft)
Cbhp = 0, 4lb/hr/hp = 0, 0001111 lb/s/hp (for cruise)
p = 0.8
Vcruise = 130knots = 219, 44ft/s
CD0 = 0, 024 (in the previous chapter is selected)
From these data, firstly it should be calculated wing loading for cruise:
W  W  W W
  =  × 1 × 2 =17 × 0.98 × 0.985 =16, 41lb / ft 2
 S cruise  S TO W0 W1
Then, dynamic pressure for cruise altitude:
1 1
q =ρcruise ⋅ Vcruise
2
=× 0.001869 × (219, 44) 2 ≅ 45lb / ft 2
2 2
According to above values, it can be computed the (L/D) from equation (6.5) [1]:
L 1
= = 11,56
D 45 × 0, 024 + 16, 41× 1
16, 41 45 × π × 0,8 × 7
After the determination of L/D, it is calculated weight fraction for cruise by using the (6.4) [1].
W3  −(3040000)(0.0001111) 
= =
exp   0.936
W2  550 × (0.8) × (11,56) 
W3
= 0,936
W2
6.2.2.4. Descent
[1]
The descent weight fraction is estimated historically . This value can be selected
between 0, 99 – 0, 995.A reasonable estimate is chosen as;
W4
= 0,995
W3
72
6.2.2.4. Loiter
[1]
To calculate loiter weight fraction, it is used Brequet’s Endurance Equation for
propeller aircraft:
W5  − EVCbhp 
= exp 
W4  550η ( L / D)  (6.6) [1]
 p 
Before the estimation of weight fraction for loiter, it should be found the (L/D) for
loiter. To calculate (L/D) loiter:
E = 30 min = 1800s
Cbhp = 0, 5lb/hr/hp = 0, 0001389 lb/s/hp
loiter = 1, 048 kg/m3 (for 1600m, from first guess sizing study)
cruise = 0, 963 kg/m3
ρcruise
Vloiter = 0, 76Vcruise = 159, 868 ft/s
ρloiter
qloiter = 26 lb/ft2
Wing loading for loiter:
W  W  W W W W
  =  × 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 =17 × 0.98 × 0.985 × 0,936 × 0,995 =15, 28lb / ft 2
 S loiter  S TO W0 W1 W2 W3
L 1
= = 13, 47
D 26 × 0, 024 + 15, 28 × 1
15, 28 26 × π × 0,8 × 7
After the determination of L/D, it is calculated weight fraction for cruise by using the (6.6) [1].
W5  −(1800)(159,868)(0.0001389) 
= =
exp   0.993
W4  550 × (0.8) × (13, 47) 
W5
= 0,993
W4
6.2.2.4. Landing and Taxi Back

The weight fraction for landing and tax back is taken from again from historical data.
Historical data change between 0, 992 – 0, 997.In this project, it is selected as 0, 997.
W6
= 0,997
W5
73
To obtain total weight fractions, all of these mission segment weight fractions are
multiplied together. Therefore;
W6 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6
= =0.98 × 0.985 × 0.936 × 0.995 × 0.993 × 0.997 =0,89
W0 W0 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
Total fuel includes, 100% mission fuel + 5% reserve fuel + 1% trapped fuel.
According to these proportions total fuel weight fraction is estimated as shown:
Wf W6
= 1.06(1 − ) (6.7)
[1]
W0 W0
Wf Wf
= 1.06(1 − 0,89) = 0,1166 = 0,1166
W0 W0
6.2.3. Takeoff Weight Calculation
From take-off weight calculation equation which is given (6.1) [1];
Wcrew + W payload
W0 =
W W
1− ( f ) − ( e )
W0 W0
• Wcrew and Wpayload values are given at the design requirements as 100kg = 220, 26lb.
• Wf / W0 = 0,1166
• We / W0 = -0, 25 + 3,913W0-0,20
To find the value of W0, it must to do iteration. For doing this, the iterative equation is got
as given:
220, 26 + 220, 26
W0 =
1 − 0.1166 − (−0, 25 + 3, 913W0 −0.20 )
After ordering this equation, the formula becomes:
440, 52
W0 =
1,1334 − 3, 913W0 −0.20
W = 388, 67 + 3, 4524 W0, 8
Then; the iterative process was done to calculate W0. Thus; some solution was found.
These are given below:
74
1600 1651, 71
1684, 26 1704, 65
1717, 38 1725, 31
1735, 22 1736, 406
1737 1738, 3506
Table 6.1
Wo = 1738, 3506lb = 789, 21kg
Wf = 202, 69lb = 92, 02kg
We = 1095, 14lb = 497, 2kg
6.3. ENGINE SELECTION
After calculating the take off gross weight, required engine horsepower can be found
simply by using the horsepower to weight ratio (h.p. /W0) which has been calculated
previously and the calculated take off gross weight (W0).
The horsepower-to-weight ratio was 0, 075. Firstly, all calculations are made for this
hp/W0 value. However, as a result of this value, the range was found as 923nm. This range
was very higher than the design requirements 500nm. To correct it, it is changed the hp/W0
value as 0, 085. Thus, the range value is nearly the design requirements. Beside, with
increasing the horsepower-to-weight ratio not only takeoff weight decreases, but also
performance better as to old value of hp/W0.
 hp 
  = 0, 085
 W0 
 hp 
Required power is =   . W0 = (0, 085). (1738, 3506lb) = 147, 76 hp
 W0 
According to the design requirements, the aircraft has one piston propeller engine.
This engine must be provide the required power is determined as 147, 76 hp. After searching
Jane’s and web pages of engine companies, it is decided to select an appropriate engine which
provides 150 hp powers. This value is nearly same with required power 147, 76hp.
The selected engine is used generally light general aviation and trainer aircrafts.
75
Figure 6.1Lycoming O-320 E2A [5]
MANUFACTURER LYCOMING ENGINE (Pennsylvania)

MODEL O-320 E2A
Type Four cylinder air-cooled horizontal opposed engine
Propeller Drive Two blade fixed pitch McCauley propeller
Max Diameter 74in = 1879, 6mm
Weight, Dry 244lb
Power (at T-O) 150 hp
Max Continuous 160
Max Cruise Rating 140
Specific Fuel Consumption (at T-O) 0, 42 lb/h/lb
Core RPM 2700 rpm
Compression Ratio 07:01

Aluminum-alloy casting and a fully machined
Combustion Chamber combustion chamber
Table 6.2 Engine Specifications [5-6]
6.4. FIXED-ENGINE SIZING
Fixed-engine sizing procedure is similar to the rubber engine sizing with several
exceptions. These exceptions result from the fact that either the mission range or the
performance must be considered a fallout parameter, and allowed to vary as the aircraft is
sized.
It is selected an engine’s power output is higher than the required engine power, so
aircraft’s takeoff gross weight will change:
N × hpeach (6. 8) [1]
W0 =
hp / W0
76
“N” points out the number of engine. Here, it is had one engine; therefore, N equals to
“one”.
1×150
=
W0 = 1764, 705lb W0 = 1764, 705lb = 801, 176kg
0.085
With the takeoff weight known, the range capability can be determined from equation
[1]
(6.1) using a modified iteration technique. The known takeoff weight is repeatedly used as
the “guess” W0, and the range for one or more cruise legs is varied until the calculated W0
equals the unknown W0. In this method, during calculate the takeoff weight; it is considered
the range is variable by keeping the horsepower-to-weight ratio constant.
In order to find total weight fraction, it should be determined the weight fractions of
all missions. Weight fractions remain same except cruise and loiter mission segments. The
weight fractions for takeoff, climb and accelerate, descent and landing are defined above:
W1 W4
= 0.98 = 0.995
W0 W3
W2 W6
= 0.985 = 0.997
W1 W5
Now, it is calculated the weight fractions for cruise and loiter which they change if
range is variable.
* The estimation of weight fraction for cruise;

The specific fuel consumption (SFC) is 0, 42 lb/hp/lb = 0, 0001167 lb/s/lb for
selected engine. By using the equation (6. 4) [1];
W3  R × 0, 0001167 
=
exp  − =λ
W2  550 × 0.8 ×11,56 
* The estimation of weight fraction for loiter;

The specific fuel consumption (SFC) is 0, 50 lb/hr/lb = 0, 0001389 .By using the
equation (6. 6) [1];
W5  (1800)(159,868)(0, 0001389) 
=
exp  − =ϕ
W4  (550)(0.8)( L / D ) loiter 
During iteration process, cruise and loiter weight fractions are called as  and  for
easiness.
77
We have to recalculate (L/D)loiter because wing loading at loiter had changed due to
change at cruise weight fraction
W W W W W W
 =  × 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 =17 × 0.98 × 0.985 × (λ ) × 0.995 =(16,328λ )lb / ft 2
S loiter S TO W0 W1 W2 W3
L 1 λ
=
D loiter 26 × 0, 024 1 0, 0357λ 2 + 0, 038
+ 16,328λ ×
16,328λ 26 × π × 0,8 × 7
Then, this expression substitutes into weight fraction equation for loiter:
W5  0, 0908(0, 0357λ 2 + 0, 038)   −0, 00345 − 0, 00324λ 2 

ϕ= =
exp  −  =
exp  
W4  λ   λ 
Then, total mission weight fraction is;
W6 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6
= = 0.98 × 0.985 × (λ ) × 0.995 × (ϕ ) × 0.997 = 0.9576λϕ
W0 W0 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
After determination of mission weight fraction, it is calculated the fuel weight

fraction:
Wf W6
= 1.06(1 − ) = 1.06(1 − 0,9576λϕ ) = 1, 06 − 1.015λϕ
W0 W0
[1]
These are put into the takeoff weight equation given (6.1) ; it is obtained the new
takeoff weight equation:
220, 26 + 220, 26
W0 =
1 − (1, 06 − 1, 015λϕ ) − ( −0, 25 + 3, 913W0 −0.20 )
440,52
W0 =
0,19 + 1.015λϕ − 3,913W0 −0.20
It should be do the iteration process to find the new range. During this iteration
process, we need follow the some considerations. According to this iteration process, first it is
guessed a range value. For this guessed range value, it is found the variable “”. After that, it
78
is calculated the “” from value of . Then, it is calculated the takeoff weight from weight
equation. At the last, it is done the iteration until the calculated W0 equals the unknown W0.
Wo Guessed Wo Calculated
Range (nm)  
(lb) (lb)
500 0, 9326 0, 9933 1764 , 705 1759, 98
510 0, 9313 0, 9933 1764 , 705 1761, 63
520 0, 93 0, 99329 1764 , 705 1763, 66
525 0, 9294 0, 99329 1764 , 705 1764, 66
Table 6.3 Range Calculation
As it can be seen in the table, the new range for fixed-engine sizing study is found as:
R = 525nm = 3192000ft
The new weight fractions are as follows:
W1/W0 0, 98
W2/W1 0, 985
W3/W2 0, 9294
W4/W3 0, 995
W5/W4 0, 99329
W6/W5 0, 997
W6/W0 0, 884
Wf/W0 0, 12296
Table 6.4 Weight Fractions
For W0 = 1764, 705lb;

Wf = 216, 988lb
We = 1107, 197lb
After the calculations as to range, it is found the range value for fixed-engine sizing
study. If some range requirement must be satisfied, then performance must be the secondary
parameter. The takeoff weight will be set by fuel requirements, and the fixed-sized engine
may not necessarily provide the thrust-to-weight ratio desired for performance considerations.
79
6.5. GEOMETRY SIZING
Since the takeoff gross weight is known, the fuselage, wing and tails can be sized.
Most of these sizing procedures based on historical approaches given in Ref [1].
6.5.1. Fuselage
The fuselage size is determined by real-world constraints. The fuselage length can be
found from Table 6.3[1] by using the statistical equation L = aW0C . According to this formula,
fuselage length is related to the takeoff gross weight. The value of a and C are taken from the
table. For general aviation-single engine aircraft, a = 4, 37 and C = 0, 23. Thus, the fuselage
length can be calculated by using the takeoff gross weight W0 = 1764, 705lb
Fuselage Length = (4, 37).(1764, 705)0, 23 = 24, 4ft =7, 437m
Fuselage diameter can be found from the fuselage fineness ratio (FFR) which is
basically;
FuselageLength
FFR= (6. 9) [1]
FuselageMaximumDiameter
For subsonic aircraft, fuselage fineness ratio changes from 3 to 8. Subsonic drag is
minimized by a fineness ratio of about 3. However, fuselage fineness ratio is 3, may not
provide enough tail moment arm, so tail boom can be added, with a smooth fairing from the
front part of fuselage. This creates the streamlined “tadpole” shape characteristic of several
newer small airplanes. According to all of them, the FFR is selected;
FFR = 5
Maximum diameter of fuselage is: Length / FFR = 7, 437/5

Dmax = 1, 4874m
6.5.2. Wing
The actual wing area can be calculated simply as the takeoff weight divided by the
takeoff wing loading. But this wing area is the reference area of the theoretical, trapezoidal
wing and includes the area extending into the aircraft centreline. Both values are found above
and in previous study. Therefore;
80
W0 1764, 705
=
S wing = = 103,806 ft 2 = 9, 644m2
(W / S )0 17
The aspect ratio has been chosen as 7 before. The span of the wing can be found now:
bwing = AR × S wing = 26,96 ft = 8, 217m
We can find the root and tip chords by using the geometric equations below:
Taper ratio (λ) has been chosen as 0.4 before;
Croot = 2S / b(1+λ) =5, 5ft= 1, 677m
Ctip = λ Croot =0, 6708m
6.5.3. Tail Sizing
Previously, for the estimation of tail size it is used historical approaches. Here, it is
considered the tail size would be in some way the wing size because the primarily purpose of
a tail is to counter the moments produced by the wing. To estimate tail size is more difficult
because of importance of both area and tail moment arms. The effectiveness of a tail in
generating the necessary moment about the center of gravity is proportional to the lift
produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm.
First, it is required a method for initial estimation of tail size which is called “tail
volume coefficient”. It is shown below the tail volume coefficient both vertical and horizontal
tails.
LVT SVT
cVT = (6.10) [1]
bw S w
LHT S HT
cHT = (6.11) [1]
c w Sw
For a vertical tail, the wing yawing moments which must be countered are most
directly related to the wing span (bw). This leads to the “vertical tail volume coefficient” as
can be seen Eq. (6.10) [1]. For a horizontal tail, the pitching moments which must be countered
are most directly related to the wing mean aerodynamic chord ( Cw ). This leads to the
“horizontal tail volume coefficient” as shown by Eq. (6.11) [1].
81
Mean aerodynamic chord of the wing is:
Cw =2/3 Croot (1+λ+λ2)/ (1+λ) = 1, 246m = 4, 088ft
From Table 6.4[1], for a general aviation - single engine aircraft, vertical tail volume
coefficient cVT is determined as 0.04. The tail arm is taken about 60% for an aircraft with a
front-mounted propeller engine.
LVT = 0.6L = (0.6) (7, 437m) =4, 4622m = 14, 64ft
After estimation of the vertical tail length, it is calculated the area of vertical tail. The
value of win span and wing area are found above. Also, vertical tail volume coefficient is
determined from Table (6. 4) [1]. According to these values, it can be found the area of vertical
tail by using the Eq. (6.10) [1] as given the below:
SVT = (26, 96) (103, 806) (0, 04)/ (14, 64) = 7, 65ft2
SVT = 7, 65ft2= 0, 71m2
To calculate the span and chord of tails, it is required aspect ratios of tails. The aspect
ratio values for horizontal tail are determined 5, and for vertical tail 1, 5m2.
Wing span for vertical tail;
bVT = AVT SVT = 1.5 × 0, 71 = 1, 032m
Mean chord length for vertical tail:

cVT = 1, 032/1.5 = 0, 688m
Also, the same estimations and calculations are made for the horizontal tail. From
Table 6.4[1], for a general aviation - single engine aircraft, horizontal tail volume coefficient
cHT is determined as 0, 7. The tail arm is taken again about 60% of the fuselage length.
LVT = 0.6L = (0.6) (7, 437m) =4, 4622m = 14, 64ft
After estimation of the horizontal tail length, it is calculated the area of horizontal tail
by using the Eq. (6.10) [1] as given the below:
SHT = (4, 088) (103, 806) (0, 7)/ (14, 64) = 20, 29ft2
SHT = 20, 29ft2 = 1, 885m2
Wing span for horizontal tail;

bHT = AHT S HT =5 ×1,885 =
3, 07 m
Mean chord length for horizontal tail:

cHT = 3, 07/5 = 0, 614m
82
6.5.4. Control Surface Sizing
The primary control surfaces are the ailerons (roll), elevator (pitch) and rudder (yaw).
Final sizing of these surfaces is based upon dynamic analysis of control effectiveness,
including structural bending and control system effects.
- Aileron;
Ailerons are typically about 15-25% of the wing chord. In this project, this ratio is
chosen as 20%. According to this value, it is estimated the aileron span over wing span ratio
[1]
from Fig (6.3) which can be seen below. This historical guideline shows that the aileron
span over wing span ratio is between the ratios of 40-50% for 0, 20 aileron chord over wing
chord. From that, it is selected as 45%.
Figure 6.3 Aileron Guidelines [1]
For ca / cw = 0.20 and ba / bw = 0.45;

cw = 1, 246m  caileron = ca = 1, 246 × 0, 20 = 0, 2492m
bw = 8, 217m  baileron = ba = 8, 217 × 0, 45 = 3, 697m
- Flaps;
Flaps are typically about 15-25% of the wing chord, too. If it is performed the same
procedure for the flaps, it is chosen flap chord length to be %24 of wing chord length for plain
flap. Also, flap span over wing span ratio is taken as 40%.
83
For cf / cw = 0.24 and bf / bw = 0.40;
cw = 1, 246m  cflap = cf = 1, 246 × 0, 24 = 0, 299m
bw = 8, 217m  bflap = bf = 8, 217 × 0, 40 = 3, 287m
- Rudder and Elevators;;

Rudders and elevators are typically about 25-50% of the tail chord. Elevators and
rudders generally begin at the side of the fuselage and extend to the tip of the tail or to about
90% of the tail span. According to this information, Rudder chord length over vertical tail
chord length was chosen %35. Also, elevator chord length over horizontal tail chord length
was chosen %40.
For cr / cVT = 0, 40 and br / bVT = 0.90;
cVT = 0, 688m  crudder = cr = 0, 688× 0, 40 = 0, 2752m
bVT = 1, 032m  brudder = br = 1, 032 × 0, 90 = 0, 9288m
For ce / cHT = 0.40 and be / bHT = 1;

cHT = 0, 614m  celevator = ce = 0, 614× 0, 40 = 0, 2456m
bHT = 3, 07m  belevator = be = 3, 07 × 1 = 3, 07m
6.6. SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS
RUBBER ENGINE SIZING

W1/W0 (Takeoff) 0.98
W2/W1 (Climb) 0.985
W3/W2 (Cruise) 0.936
W4/W3 (Descent) 0.995
W5/W4 (Loiter) 0.993
W6/W5 (Landing) 0.997
W0 1738, 3506lb
We 1095, 14lb
Wf 202, 6916lb
Required Horsepower 147, 76 hp
Table 6.5 Summary of Rubber Engine Sizing
84
FIXED ENGINE SIZING
Selected Engine Lycoming O-235 E2A
Horsepower 150 hp
W1/W0 (Takeoff) 0.98
W2/W1 (Climb) 0.985
W3/W2 (Cruise) 0.9294
W4/W3 (Descent) 0.995
W5/W4 (Loiter) 0.99329
W6/W5 (Landing) 0.997
W0 1764, 705lb
We 1107, 197lb
Wf 216, 988lb
Range 525nm
Table 6.6 Summary of Fixed Engine Sizing
GEOMETRY SIZING
Fuselage L = 7, 437m Dmax= 1, 4874m
Wing Sw= 9, 644m2 bw = 8, 217m
Croot = 1, 677 m Ctip = 0, 6708m
Taper ratio = 0.4 Aspect ratio = 7
Horizontal tail SHT = 1, 885m2 bHT = 3, 07m
cHT = 0, 614m Aspect ratio = 5
Vertical tail SVT = 0, 71m2 bVT = 1, 032m
cVT= 0, 688m Aspect ratio = 1, 5
Ailerons ca / cW = 0, 20 ba / bW = 0, 45
ca = 0, 2492m ba = 3, 697m
Elevators ce/cHT=0, 40 be/bHT= 1.0
ce = 0, 2456m be = 3, 07m
Rudder cr/cVT=0, 40 br/bVT= 0, 9
cr = 0, 2752m br = 0, 9288m
Flaps (plain) cf/cw=0, 24 bf/bw=0, 4
cf = 0, 299m bf = 3, 287m
Table 6.7 Summary of Geometry Sizing
85
6.7. CONCLUSION
In this part, the aim was to do calculations for initial sizing of general aviation-single
engine aircraft. In this sense, firstly, rubber engine sizing is performed and aircraft takeoff
weight is calculated. Then, the required power is found by using the horsepower-to-weight
ratio. Previously, the hp/W value was determined as 0, 075, but here it is decided to change
because of range calculation. According to 0, 075 hp/ lb, the range is found very higher than
design requirements. This means that the aircraft empty weight increases unnecessarily. The
higher range does not provide better performance. Therefore, the new hp/W value is estimated
as 0, 085. Thus, the range is found nearly design requirements. From hp/W ratio, an engine
which can support this power was selected. From that engine, a fixed engine sizing study was
done and new takeoff gross weight and new range value was calculated for this engine.
Finally, geometry sizing of aircraft is done. All areas and lengths for main parts of aircraft
like fuselage wings and tails were calculated. Same calculations were done for control
surfaces.
86
CHAPTER 7
CONFIGURATION LAYOUT AND INTERIOR DESIGN
7.1. INTRODUCTION
The configuration layout and interior design is very important part of the design. In
this part includes all drawings of the aircraft such as wing, tail, control surfaces and whole
aircraft. Drawing means of the product of the aircraft. All of the calculations or analytical
tasks are very important, too. Drawing comes after these calculations of the aircraft. While the
analytical tasks are vitally important, the designer must remember that these tasks serve only
to influence the drawing, for it is the drawing alone that ultimately will be used to fabricate
the aircraft.
The purpose of this study is to make necessary calculations for determining the aircraft
configuration layout and draw the external geometry and interior design includes cockpit of
the aircraft.
7.2. WING AND TAIL SURFACES
From the previous studies, we can tabulate a table including the parameters for wing
and tail surfaces in order to make the necessary calculations. This table is shown below.
HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Characteristics WING
TAIL TAIL
AR (Aspect Ratio) 7 5 1,5
Λc/4 4° 6, 76° 40°
Taper ratio ( λ ) 0,4 0, 6 0, 5
Twist - - -
Area (S) (m2) 9, 644 1, 885 0, 71
Table 7.1 General specifications of wing and tails
The following equations will be used to make the calculations for wing, horizontal and
vertical tails.
Span; b = AS (1) [1]
2S
Root chord; Croot = (2) [1]
b(1 + λ )
Tip chord; Ctip = λCroot (3) [1]
87
2 1 + λ + λ2
Mean aerodynamic chord (M.A.C); C = Croot (4) [1]
3 1+ λ
b 1 + 2λ
Location of M.A.C; Y= (5) [1]
6 1+ λ
After the calculations of these terms, initial sizing study is done. In this part, some
dimensions are found such as span, chords, main aerodynamic chord and location of M.A.C.
• Span:
Wing ⇒ b = 8, 217m
Horizontal Tail ⇒ b = 3, 07m
Vertical Tail ⇒ b = 1, 032m
• Chords:
Wing ⇒ Croot = 1, 677m; Ctip = 0.6708m

Horizontal Tail ⇒ Croot 0, 614m;
Ctip = λCroot =0, 6 × 0, 614 =
0,3684m
2S 2 × 0, 71
Vertical Tail ⇒
= Croot = = 0,917
b(1 + λ ) 1, 032 × (1 + 0,5)
λCroot
Ctip = =
0,5 × 0,917 = 0, 458
• Mean Aerodynamic Chord (Ĉ):
Croot (1 + λ + λ 2 ) / (1 + λ )
2
=c
3
Wing ⇒ Ĉ = 1, 246m
Horizontal tail ⇒ Ĉ = 0, 501m
Vertical Tail ⇒ Ĉ = 0, 713m
• Location of M.A.C (Ŷ):
b 1 + 2λ 8, 217  1 + 0,8 
Wing ⇒Y =× = × =1, 761m =
5, 778 ft
6 1+ λ 6  1 + 0, 4 
b 1 + 2λ 3, 07  1 + 1, 2 
⇒Y =× = × =
0, 703m =
6  1 + 0, 6 
Horizontal Tail 2,306 ft
6 1+ λ
2b 1 + 2λ 2 ×1, 032  1 + 1 
Vertical Tail ⇒ Y =× = × =0, 4586m =
1,505 ft
6 1+ λ 6  1 + 0,5 
88
The results are tabulated below;
Geometry b (m) Croot (m) Ctip (m) Ĉ (m) Ŷ (m)

Wing 8, 217 1, 677 0, 6708 1, 246 1, 761
Horizontal Tail 3, 07 0, 614 0, 3684 0, 501 0, 703
Vertical Tail 1, 032 0, 917 0, 458 0, 713 0, 4586
Table 7.2 Main dimensions of the wing and tails
According to these parameters, we can draw the top view of the wing and tail surfaces.
0.614
0.704
0.501
1.535
0.368
Figure – 7.1 Top view of the horizontal tail
89
0.458
0.713
1.032
0.917
Figure 7.2 Side view of the vertical tail
0.67
1.761
1.246
4.109
1.677
Figure 7.3 Top view of the wing
90
When the wing is designed, it is considered that the length of the entering part to
fuselage as nearly 0, 30m. This part exists at the location of the maximum fuselage diameter.
However, the aileron and flap lengths sums are approximately 3, 4m. After flap, there is 0,
42m to the fuselage. In order to not close the flap to fuselage, it is selected the distance
between the flap and fuselage on wing is 0, 30m.
Flaps, ailerons, elevator and rudder dimensions are determined in previous study
“Initial Sizing”.
Flaps: Flaps are placed on the wing which is 40% of the span and 24% of the chord.
cf / cw = 0, 24; bf / bw = 0, 40
cw = 1, 246m and cf = 0, 24 × 1, 246 = 0, 299m
bw = 8, 217m and bf = 0, 40 × 8, 217 = 3, 2868m ( For each wing = 1, 6434m )
Ailerons: Ailerons are placed on the wing which is 45% of the span and 20% of the chord.
ca / cw = 0, 25; ba / bw = 0, 45
cw = 1, 246m and ca = 0, 20 × 1, 246 = 0, 2492m
bw = 8, 217m and ba = 0, 45 × 8, 217 = 3, 697m ( For each wing = 1, 84 m )
Elevator: Elevators are placed on the horizontal tail which is 100% of the span and 40% of
the chord.
ce / cw = 0, 40; be / bw = 1
ce = 0, 40 × 0, 614 = 0, 2456m
be = 0, 100 × 3, 07 = 3, 07m ( For each horizontal tail = 1, 535m )
Rudder: Rudder is placed on the vertical tail which is 90% of the span and 35% of the chord.
cr/cVT=0, 35; br / bw = 0, 90
cr = 0, 40 × 0, 688 = 0, 2752m
br = 0, 90 × 1, 032= 0, 9288m
91
1.8485
1.643
Figure 7.5 The sketch of the wing with flap and aileron
0.2456
153.5
Figure 7.6 The sketch of the horizontal tail with elevator
92
0.9288
0.2752
Figure 7.7 The sketch of the vertical tail with rudder
As explained in previous studies, NACA 23015 airfoil is used for the wing, both at the
root and tip. NACA 652015 airfoil is used for the vertical tail and NACA 0015 airfoil is used
for the horizontal tail, both at the root and tip. The wing has constant camber and thickness;
hence there is no need to show any auxiliary control lines. For horizontal and vertical tail
there is no camber. Wing has 2 degree and horizontal tail has -2 degree incidence angle.
Also, there is no twist distribution for wing and tails.
The plotting of the airfoils for wing and tails are shown below:
Figure 7.8 NACA 23015 profile
93
Figure 7.9 NACA 0015 profile
Location of Center of Gravity Point:
For a stable aircraft, the wing should be initially located such that the aircraft center of
gravity is at about 30% of the mean aerodynamic chord. When the effects of the fuselage and
tail are considered, the center of gravity would be about 25% of the total subsonic
aerodynamic center of the aircraft [1].
The mean aerodynamic chord of wing is 1, 246m. According to above information, the
location cg point is 0, 3115m. The desired location of the cg point is shown in Figure 7.9
below.
94
Figure 7.11 The location of center of gravity point for wing
7.3. FUSELAGE AND INTERIOR DESIGN
7.3.1 Fuselage
From previous study, fuselage length and maximum diameter have been found as;
L = 24, 4ft = 7, 437m and Dmax = 1, 4874m
7.3.2. Cockpit Design
For cockpit design there are four important points to be considered:
 The pilots and other crew members can reach all the controls comfortably.
 The pilots and other crew members must be able to see all flight essential instruments
without undue effort.
 Communication by voice and by touch must be possible without undue effort.
 Visibility from cockpit must adhere to certain minimum requirements.
Cockpit will be designed for two crew members, pilot and co-pilot. For two crew member
[1]
including configurations, 100inch (2.54m) cockpit length can be considered. Pilots are
95
located by observing requirements for pilot visibility and for pilot ability to reach important
control and instruments. It is also considered a smooth exterior, 20º unobstructed vision
angle above the horizontal axis considering the pilot’s eye and 15º vision over the nose from
the front windshield. Besides, Lc (length between the pilot’s eye and the windshield) value is
generally between the 0, 5 and 0, 6m. According to this interval, Lc is considered about 0.5m.
Cockpit width is considered as 1,08m. For cockpit seats, economy class ones are chosen and
seat width is considered as 0, 45m table 9.1[1]. Also, there is 0, 2m space between the seats.
0.2
0.45 0.45
1.08
SEAT SEAT
FLOOR
0.40
Figure 7.12 Front view of cockpit
7.3.3. Wetted Area Determination
Aircraft wetted area, is the total exposed surface area, and it must be calculated for drag
estimation. In order to find the wetted area first the exposed area must be found, referring to
section 7.10[1], it is mentioned that the exposed area is found by dividing the reference wing
area by the cosine of the dihedral angle. After the exposed area is found the wetted area is
found by using equation 7.11[1] for t/c > 0, 05. All of thickness ratios are t/c = 0, 15 for this
project. Therefore;
* Wing Wetted Area
Sexposed = Sreference / cos (dihedral) = 9, 644 / cos (0°) (dihedral angle = 0°) = 9, 644m2
96
Because of no dihedral, exposed area is determined only by considering that the wings
reference area minus the part of the wing covered by the fuselage. Thus;
Sexposed = 8, 87m2
Swet = Sexposed [1.977+0, 52(t/c)] = 8, 87 [1.977+0, 52(0, 15)]
Swet, wing = 18, 23m2
* Horizontal Tail Wetted Area
Sexposed = Sreference / cos (dihedral) = 1, 885 / cos (0°) (dihedral angle = 0°) = 1, 885
Sexposed = 1, 73m2
Swet = Sexposed [1.977+0, 52(t/c)] = 1, 73 [1.977+0, 52(0, 15)]
Swet, horizontal tail=3, 56m2
* Vertical Tail Wetted Area
Sexposed = Sreference / cos (dihedral) = 0, 71 / cos (0°) (dihedral angle = 0°) = 0, 71
Sexposed = 0, 65m2
Swet = Sexposed [1.977+0, 52(t/c)] = 0, 65 [1.977+0, 52(0, 15)]
Swet, vertical tail = 1, 33m2
* Fuselage
For the fuselage the wetted area was found by using equation 7.12 [1]. By using Catia,
for Fig. 12 the top area (Atop) of the fuselage is found to be 8, 05m2 and the side area
(Aside) is 7, 226m2. Therefore,
 Atop + Aside 
S wet ≅ 3, 4  
 2 
Swet, fuselage = 25, 969m2
Total Wetted Area
Swet, total = 18, 22 + 3, 56 + 1, 33 + 25, 969
Swet, total = 49, 08m2
97
Aircraft Internal Volume
Aircraft internal volume is determined by using equation 7.13 [1]. The top area and side
area are found above. These data are put into the equation, it is calculated the internal volume.
The calculation is given below:
 Atop × Aside 
Vol ≅ 3, 4  
 4L 
Vol = 6, 648m3
7.4. FUEL TANKS LOCATION
For the aircrafts of competitor study, the fuel tanks are usually being in the wings as a
wing tanks. Therefore, it is considered the fuel tanks in each wing.
The power-plant for this project; one 150 hp Lycoming O-320 E2A four cylinder air-
cooled horizontal opposed engine driving a two blade fixed pitch McCauley propeller. Fuel
contained in two integral wing tanks.
Figure 7.13 Fuel tanks location in wings
98
7.5. DRAWINGS OF THE TOP, FRONT AND SIDE VİEWS OF THE AIRCRAFT
Figure 7.14 Top view of the aircraft
Figure 7.15 Front view of the aircraft
99
Figure 7.16 Side view of the aircraft
Wetted Area Determination

Swet,wings 19, 82m2
Swet,horizontal tail 3, 87m2
Swet, vertical tail 1, 46m2
Swet, fuselage 25, 969m2
Swet,total 51, 12m2
Atop 8, 05m2
Aside 7, 226m2
Volume 6, 648m3
Table 7.3 Wetted Area Determinations
100
HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Characteristics WING
TAIL TAIL
AR (Aspect Ratio) 7 5 1,5
Λc/4 4° 6, 76° 40°
Taper ratio ( λ ) 0,4 0, 6 0, 5
Twist - - -
Dihedral 0° - -
Incidence 2° - 2° -
Wing Tip Sharp Sharp -
Wing Vertical
Mid High -
Location
Table 7.4 General specifications of wing and tails
GEOMETRY SIZING
Fuselage L = 7, 437m Dmax= 1, 4874m
Wing Sw= 9, 644m2 bw = 8, 217m
Croot = 1, 677m Ctip = 0, 6708m
Taper ratio = 0.4 Aspect ratio = 7
Horizontal tail SHT = 1, 885m2 bHT = 3, 07m
CHT(mean) = 0, 501m Aspect ratio = 5
Vertical tail SVT = 0, 71m2 bVT = 1, 032m
CVT(mean) = 0, 713m Aspect ratio = 1, 5
Ailerons ca / cW = 0, 25 ba / bW = 0, 45
ca = 0, 2492m ba = 3, 697m
Elevators (for horizontal tai) ce/cC=0, 40 be/bHT= 1, 0
ce = 0, 2456m be = 3, 07m
Rudder (for vertical tail) cr/cVT=0, 35 br/bVT= 0, 90
cr = 0, 2752m br = 0, 9288m
Flaps (plain) cf/cw=0, 24 bf/bw=0, 40
cf = 0, 299m bf = 3, 2868m
Location of cg 0, 3115m
Table 7.5 Geometry sizing
101
7.7. CONCLUSION
In this chapter, it is done the configuration layout and interior design for the aircraft.
To be formed whole aircraft, geometry sizing is made. For geometry sizing, it is determined
some dimensions of the aircraft such as wing and tails chords, locations of center of gravity of
the aircraft etc. Almost all of the geometric parameters were shown on technical drawings of
wing and tail surfaces. Then, fuselage and interior design or cockpit design are done basically.
The drawings are not complex and difficult; on the contrary, all of them are made simply.
During the drawings, it is considered to reach the best possible configuration for the aircraft.
After that, wetted area and aircraft internal volume are determined which is important in drag
calculations. Finally, it is contemplated the fuel tanks exist in the wings.
102
CHAPTER 8
PROPULSION AND FUEL SYSTEM INTEGRATION
8.1. INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, it is intended to analyze the propulsion system for desired aircraft. It is
wanted to select the most suitable propulsion system. Also, it will be determined the propeller
sizing and tried to select the propeller for the aircraft according to the found specifications.
Then, the propulsion system and propeller will be installed to the aircraft. Eventually, the fuel
system will be analyzed and the fuel tank will be defined.
8.2. PROPULSION SYSTEM SELECTION
There are many options for aircraft propulsion. These propulsion system options are
shown in the Figure 8.1 [1]. According to this figure, the most suitable one should be selected
for desired aircraft at given conditions. All aircraft engines operate by compressing outside
air, mixing it with fuel, burning the mixture, and extracting energy from the resulting high-
pressure hot gases. However, the engine types have some advantages and disadvantages with
respect to each other and their specific properties determine the application areas of each
engine. Therefore, here, it is discussed which engine is selected and why selected because the
propulsion system selection is important for the aircraft. Firstly, when it is considered the
Figure 8.2[1], it can be seen easily that aircraft design Mach number determines the engine
type. For lowest Mach number (for the project, M is found nearly 0, 2), the best engines are
both piston-prop and turboprop. The engine choice is reduced from ten to two. It is preferred
the piston-propeller engine instead of turboprop. Piston-props generally are cheaper than the
turboprops. Also, piston-props use lowest fuel consumption. However, turboprops use more
fuel for the same horsepower. Although producing a lot of noise and vibration, it is selected
the piston-prop engine for the design project because still the piston-props are the best choice
for the lighter aircrafts.
103
Figure 8.1 Propulsion system options [1]
Figure 8.2 Propulsion system speed limits [1]
8.3. SELECTED ENGINE PROPERTIES
The engine has been chosen as Textron Lycoming O -320 E2A for the aircrafts in
previous study. The selected engine is still the same. The detailed properties of this engine
which was taken from Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft and Wikipedia are tabulated below:
104
MANUFACTURER LYCOMING ENGINE (Pennsylvania)
MODEL O-320 E2A
Four cylinder air-cooled horizontal
Type opposed engine
Two blade fixed pitch McCauley
Propeller Drive propeller
Max Diameter 74in = 1879, 6mm
Bore 130mm (5, 118in)
Weight, Dry 244lb (110, 7kg)
Height 22,99in = 0, 58m = 1, 92ft
Width 32,24in = 0,81m = 2,69ft
Length 29, 56in = 0,75m = 2,46ft
Cylinders (stroke) 98, 4mm
Cylinders (capacity) 5200cc
Power (at T-O) 150 hp
Max Continuous 160
Max Cruise Rating 140
Specific Fuel Consumption (at T-O) 0, 42 lb/h/lb
Core RPM 2700 rpm
Compression Ratio 07:01
Aluminum-alloy casting and a fully
Combustion Chamber machined combustion chamber
Table 8.1 Engine Specifications [6, 7]
8.4. PROPELLER – ENGINE INTEGRATION
In this part, the propeller and engine dimensions are determined. Then, propeller
location and engine installations are defined. Also, required inlets and exhausts are
determined.
8.4.1. Propeller Sizing
The actual details of the propeller design such as the blade shape and twist are not
required to lay out a propeller-engine aircraft. Instead of, it should be determined the propeller
diameter, engine dimensions and inlet, exhausts. In propeller sizing part, it is found the
propeller diameter for two conditions which are tip speed and hp. Propeller diameter is
function of hp. Also, tip speed is related to the length of the propeller blade. It should be kept
105
[1]
below sonic speed . According to these; the smallest one is chosen for the propeller
[1]
diameter. Generally, larger propeller diameter, the more efficient the propeller will be .
However, if the propeller is larger, it is increased the drag and weight. Therefore, it is selected
the two blade.
 Propeller diameter estimation for tip speed:
(Vtip) static = πnd / 60 (ft/s) (8.1) [1]
n = rotational rate (rpm)

d = diameter
 π nd 
2
(=
Vtip )
helical 
 60 
 + V forward
2
(8.2)[1]
To calculate the helical speed, first it should be found the forward speed which is
related to the cruise speed. The cruise speed for design requirements is 130 knots = 219,
44ft/s. Also, other cruise condition is the altitude of the cruise. The cruise altitude has been
given as 8000ft in the previous study.
1/2 ρcruise Vcruise = 1/2 ρSL VSL2
ρcruise = 0.001869 slug/ft3 (@ 8000ft)

ρSL = 0.00238 slug/ft3
It is determined the forward speed which is the same sea level speed by using the
above equation:
VSL = VForward = 194, 5 ft/s
The metal is thought as a propeller material. At sea level the helical tip speed of a
metal propeller for low noise should not exceed 700ft / s.
From (8.2) [1], it is determined the required propeller diameter. For n = 2700rpm;
 π .2700.d 
2
=  + (194,5 )
2
700 
 60 
By solving this equation, the propeller diameter is found as 1, 45m.

d = 4, 756ft = 1, 45m
106
 Propeller diameter estimation for HP(for two blade):
d =1,83 4 Hp =1,83 × 4 150 =6, 4 ft =1,95m
d = 6, 4ft = 1, 95m
From these two metal blades propeller diameters, the smaller one is selected because
of the tip speed limitation. Therefore; the propeller has two blades and diameter is;
d = 4, 756ft = 1, 45m
Now, it is required to decide that the propeller has fixed or variable pitch. A variable-
pitch propeller can be used to improve thrust. Therefore, variable pitch makes positive effects
for different cruise speeds, but in this design the variable pitch is unnecessary because of the
constant cruise speed. Thus, it is decided to use for the aircraft a fixed pitch propeller is
called a cruise prop or climb prop. Also, the selected engine Lycoming O-320 E2A uses the
two blades fixed pitch McCauley propeller. This information is considered in the decisions,
too.
Spinner exists on the most of the aircrafts. The shape of spinner is generally cone or
bullet. And spinner mission is pushing the air out to where the propeller is more efficient.
Ideally, the spinner should cover the propeller out to about 25% of the radius [1]
Rspinner = 0.25Rpropeller = (0, 25) (1, 45/2) Rspinner = 0, 18125m = 0, 055ft
To sum up, the specifications of the propeller are: two metal blades, fixed pitch
propeller with spinner.
8.4.2. Propeller Location
The propeller locations matrix is shown in the figure below. According to it, it can be
seen there is different location for the propeller. For example, the propeller can be settled on
the fuselage, wing, tail or front, behind, top etc. For this project, it is decided the tractor
location. Tractor engine location offers a fuselage mounted engine configuration. Tractor
location is the standard for most of the history of aviation. The heavy engine is in the front for
the tractor location. This causes the shorter fore body, and allowing smaller tail area and
improved stability. Also, whether water or air cooled, front placement offers the most
efficient position for cooling for tractor location. Because of these causes, for this general
aviation aircraft, the conventional tractor engine location is selected.
107
Figure 8.3 Propeller locations [1]
8.4.3. Engine – Size Estimation
In this part, it is made engine-size study and the results are compared with the real
engine size (Lycoming O-320 E2A) which has been selected before. To product of an engine,
it is considered four different type propeller powerplant. One of them is the horizontally-
opposed piston engine. The selected engine (Lycoming O-320) is an opposed engine, too.
Opposed piston engine sees most use today.
The estimation of the engine size is found by using Table 10.4[1], for a piston-prop
engine. The calculations are given below:
X= a (bhp) b (8.3) [1]
• Weight: X=W= (5, 47)(150)0, 780 = 272, 48lb

• Length: X=L= (3, 86)(150)0, 424 = 32, 3in = 0, 82m = 2, 7ft
• Diameter: X=D= 23in = 1, 92ft = 0, 58m
By comparing the estimated engine values and real engine values;
Estimated Value Real Value (from table 8.1)

Weight, kg 272, 48lb = 123, 71kg 244lb = 110, 7kg
Length, m 32, 3in = 2, 7ft = 0, 82m 29, 56in = 2,46ft = 0,75m
Diameter, m 23in = 0.58m 22, 99in = 0, 58m
Table 8.2 Comparing of estimated values and real values
108
It can be seen that the obtained values for engine are very close to the selected real
engine. Even, the diameters of both are the same. The estimated values of the engine length
and weight are a little much than the selected engine.
8.4.4. Piston Engine Installation
There are special installation requirements for the piston engines. These installation
requirements have many effects on the configuration layout. For this design, tractor engine
location is selected. Therefore, the engine exists on the front part of the fuselage. Thus, the
cooling-air intake is located directly in front of the engine cylinders. By baffles which are flat
sheets of metal, the air diverted over top of the engine to engine compartment. There are two
types of the air-cooling: down-draft and up-draft. Down-draft cooling is selected for this
aircraft because up-draft cooling can heat up the cabin by dumping the hot air in front of the
windscreen. Also, windscreen can be covered by the engine oil leak. And, exists air is into a
high pressure region for down-draft cooling. Because of these factors, down-draft cooling is
chosen although it has a poor place for the exit air.
Figure 8.4 Tractor locations [1]
Figure 8.5 Down-draft cooling [1]
8.5. FUEL SYSTEM
An aircraft fuel system includes the fuel tanks, fuel lines, fuel pumps, vents and fuel-
management controls.
There are three types of fuel tanks: discrete, bladder, integral. Discrete tanks are
normally used only for small general aviation and homebuilt aircrafts. Bladder tanks are made
109
by stuffing a shaped rubber bag into a cavity in the structure. Rubber bag of the bladder tank
is thick, so 10% of the available fuel volume is lost. And, bladder tank is used for self-sealing.
Integral tanks are areas inside the aircraft structure that have been sealed to allow fuel storage.
Integral tanks are part of the aircrafts structure; therefore, they cannot be removed for service
or control. The most commonly used and efficient fuel tank for the competitor aircrafts are the
integral tanks. Therefore, integral fuel tank configuration will be used for the design of the
aircraft. The wings are used for the fuel tanks. Required fuel tank volume was determined by
the mission fuel. Mission fuel weight is;
Wf = 216, 988lb = 98, 5kg
Total fuel weight will be stored in both each sides of the wings. Each wing includes
two different fuel tanks because of the landing gear location. If only one tank would be in the
wing, there was no location for the landing gear. For each side of the wing, the mission fuel
weight is the half of the total weight:
Mf1=Mf2 =Wf / 2 = (216, 988)/2 = 108, 5lb = 49, 3kg
To find the capacity of the fuel tanks, the areas are separated on airfoils A1 and A2, by
distance H, the following formula is used;
Ai = 0.9(0.5c) (t/c) (c) (8.4) [1]
According to the formula, in total it is used the half of the airfoil chord length for fuel.
(From 0.15c to 0.65c, other parts are for flaps, ailerons, actuators etc.). Also, for each tank,
the cross sectional area loss due to airfoil curvature is taken as 10% of the rectangular area
shown.
By defining two fuel tanks for each side of the wing;
• Volume of the tank from airfoil (A1) to airfoil (A2), which is H1 distance apart, is;
H1
V1 = ( A1 + A1 A2 + A2 ) (8.5)[1]
3
When fuel tank volume is calculated for tank, the thickness ratio is 15% due to the
wing airfoil. Each wing has one fuel tank. It should not divide each tank into two separate
parts because the landing gear is considered on the fuselage. Therefore, it is not require
making a room for the landing gear.
110
Fuel tank:
The chord length at the tip of the wing (fuel tank end section) is 0, 335m. And, the
chord length of the fuel tank beginning section is 0, 754m. From equation (8.4) [1];
A1 = 0, 9 (0, 1675) (0, 15) (0, 335) = 0, 0076m2
A2 = 0, 9 (0, 377) (0, 15) (0, 754) = 0, 0384m2
H1 (perpendicular distance between A1 and A2) = 3, 7m
3, 7
V1 =× (0, 0076 + (0, 0076) × (0, 0384) + 0, 0384) =
0, 078 m3
3
The total volume of the fuel tanks; Vtotal =2Vwing= 0, 156m3
The density of the fuel is taken as 785 kg/m3, also assuming that 15% volume for wing
tanks is lost due to structural elements inside the tank, and the weight is;
MTotal = (0, 85) (785) (0, 156) = 104, 1kg
This obtained value is really good value for this design. The required mission fuel
weight is 98, 5kg. However, for integral tanks, there is foam in the wing to prevent fire and
leak. This foam covers 2.5% of the volume. Also, 2.5% of the fuel is absorbed by the foam.
When these losses are considered, remaining fuel is nearly the same the mission fuel.
111
0,754m
3,7m
0,335m
Figure 8.4 Fuel tank in the wing
PROPELLER
Diameter 1, 45m
Spinner radius 0, 18125m
Blade number 2
Type fixed - pitch
Location tractor
ENGINE
Weight 123, 71kg
Length 0, 82m
Diameter 0, 58m
Installation down-draft
FUEL SYSTEM
Type integral
Volume 0, 156m3
Table 8.2
112
8.7. CONCLUSION
In this study, propulsion system and fuel integration trainings are done. The propeller
designations and location are determined. Also, engine and fuel system are defined. Engine
dimensions and installation are made. And, the selections and decisions for the fuel system
are discussed. In order to do this, wing fuel tank volume is calculated by considering the
technical drawings. Thus, it is checked the wing fuel tank is sufficient. Finally, the estimated
engine dimensions are compared with the actual values such as the aircrafts in the competitor
study.
113
CHAPTER 9
LANDING GEAR AND SUBSYSTEMS
9.1. INTRODUCTION
In aviation, the landing gear is the structure that supports an aircraft on the ground and
allows it to taxi. Landing gear usually includes wheels. The design of the landing gear is one
of the more fundamental aspects of aircraft design. The design and integration process
encompasses numerous engineering disciplines, e.g., structures, weights, runway design and
economics. Landing gear must not cause any trouble for the structure of aircraft and it must
provide a safe landing. In this chapter, it will be discussed that the design and installation of
landing gear and other subsystems
9.2. LANDING GEAR ARRANGEMENT
Since many years, various arrangements have been used for wheels and structures to
connect them to the airplane. For example, tail dragger, single main, bicycle, tricycle or multi-
bogey. Single main landing gear is especially for sail planes due to its simplicity. Another
type is multi-bogey which is for heavy aircraft. This type is not considered because desired
aircraft is lighter. Now, the most popular landing gear arrangements are the tricycle landing
gear arrangement. The tricycle arrangement has one gear strut in front, called the nose wheel,
and two or more main gear struts slightly aft of the center of gravity. This type of landing gear
makes the aircraft easier to handle on the ground and it also makes landings much safer. The
main advantage of this layout is that it eliminates the ground loop problem of the tail dragger.
Also, although tail dragger is conventional type and has less drag and weight, it is unstable on
the ground because the center of gravity locates behind of the wheel. However, tricycle
landing gear arrangement is instead a stable design because of the location of the main gear
with respect to the center of gravity. It also improves forward visibility and permits a flat
cabin design. Because of these causes, in this design project, the tricycle landing gear
arrangements with one main unit (strut), two wheels on each side and one wheel on the
forward (steer able) is selected. Tricycle arrangement is shown in figure [1] below:
114
Figure 9.1 Tricycle landing gear arrangements [1]
9. 3. TIRE SIZING
The tires are sized by considering the aircraft weight. It should be carried the weight of
the aircraft. Generally main wheels carry the most of the aircraft total weight about 90%.
Although the nose wheel carries only about 10% of the static load, it is exposed to higher
dynamic loadings at landing. Static load on landing gear are shown in the Figure 9.2[1]:
Figure 9.2 Wheel load geometry [1]
Calculation of the static loads and dynamic load are indicated by the following
equations:
Na
(Max Static Load) main= W ⋅ (9.1)[1]
B
Mf
(Max Static Load) nose= W ⋅ (9.2)[1]
B
M
(Min Static Load) nose= W ⋅ a (9.3)[1]
B
115
10 ⋅ H ⋅ W
(Dynamic Breaking Load) nose = (9.4)[1]
g⋅B
By using the above equations, it is calculated the static loads on the tires and dynamic
load on the nose tires under a 10ft2/s braking deceleration. Na, Nf, Ma, Mf, H and B are
dimensions for gear landing geometry are shown in Fig. 9.2[1]. These static and dynamic loads
are divided by the total number of main or nose tires to get the load per tire “WW (weight on
wheel)” which is used for tire selections.
From the historical data, it is known:
Mf – Ma = 0.2 c ( c is the mean aerodynamic chord)
Mf = 0.15 B Ma = 0.08 B
B = wheel base
H = Ground and cg distance
Mf = the distance between main wheel and forward cg point
Ma = the distance between main wheel and aft cg point
Also, the mean aerodynamic chord (M.A.C) was found in early studies as 1,246m = 4,
088ft.
Mf – Ma = 0.15B – 0.08B = (0.2)(4, 088)
Thus; B = 11, 68ft = 3, 56m
H is chosen as 2, 20m = 7, 22ft, by considering the center of gravity is on the

centerline of the fuselage. This value is a normal value for this type of aircraft because the
average of height overall for the competitor aircrafts is determined as 2, 38m.
8-15% of the aircraft’s weight should be carried by the nose wheel for most-aft and
most-forward cg points. For this aircraft, the weight was found as 1764, 205lb = 800, 1kg
before. Now, the static and dynamic loads are determined as given below. It can be seen that
it is assumed nearly 92% of the weight for main maximum static load. Also, for nose, the
maximum static load is 15% and the minimum static load is 8% of the aircraft’s weight.
Na
(Max Static Load) main =W ⋅ =
0.92W ⇒ Na= 0.92(11, 68) Na = 10, 75ft = 3, 28m
B
Mf
(Max Static Load) nose =W⋅ =0.15W ⇒ Mf = 0.15(11, 68) Mf = 1, 752ft = 0, 53m
B
116
Ma
=
(Min Static Load) nose W= 0.08W ⇒ Ma= 0.08(11, 68) Ma = 0, 93ft = 0, 285m
B
Nf + Mf = B ⇒ Nf = B – Mf = 11, 68 – 1, 752 Nf = 9, 928ft = 3, 026m
The values of the dimensions for gear landing geometry are shown in Fig. 8.3:
Figure 9.3 Wheel load geometry with dimensions
To add %25 additional load to gears for later growth of the design process is very
common. The aircraft the off gross weight was found as 1764, 705lb. If it is wanted to make a
recalculation the loads for this 25% additional load to gears:
N a 1, 25 1, 25
(Max Static Load) main = W = 1764, 705 × (0,92) × = 1014, 7lb
B 2 2
Mf
(Max Static Load) nose = W 1,=
25 1764, 705 × (0,15) ×1,=
25 330, 8lb
B
Ma
(Min Static Load) nose = W 1,=
25 1764, 705 × (0, 08) ×1,=
25 176, 47lb
B
10 HW 10(7, 22)(1764, 705)

=
(Dynamic Braking Load) nose= 1, 25 = (1, 25) 423, 47lb
gB (32, 2)(11, 68)
The statistical tire sizing can be determined from Table 11.1[1] for general aviation
aircrafts:
117
Ww is the weight carried by tire. It is the maximum static load for whole wheels.
• Diameter: D = AWWB
A = 1, 51
B = 0, 349 Dmain = 16, 91in. = 0, 4295m
WW = 1014, 7lb
• Width: w = AWWB
A = 0, 7150
B = 0, 312 wmain = 6, 2in. = 0, 1575m
WW = 1014, 7lb
Nose tires can be assumed to be about 80% the size of the main tires.
Dnose = 0.8Dmain = (0.8) (0, 4295) Dnose = 0, 3436m = 12in
wnose = 0.8 wmain = (0.8) (0, 1575) wnose = 0, 126m = 4, 96in
In landing, brakes absorb kinetic energy from aircraft. The brake kinetic energy
absorption requirements must during landing at the design landing weight. For this design,
landing weight is 100% of the takeoff weight (Wlanding = 1764, 705lb). Brake conditions are
important for the estimation of the rim diameter. It is assumed that brakes are applied when
aircraft has stall speed. Thus, by assuming that the brakes are applied when the aircraft goes
to stall speed, it can be ignored that the energy loses because of aerodynamic drag and thrust
reversing. Stall speed was found in previous study for landing configuration as 89, 07ft/s.
2
1 WVstall 1
KEbraking = (9.5)[1]
2 g 2
1 1764, 705 × (89, 07) 2

KEbraking = × =
108697 ft ⋅ lbf
4 32, 2
The wheel diameter is related to the kinetic energy per braked wheel. By using Figure
[1]
9.4 , for general aviation, the wheel diameter can be found as nearly 7in. = 0, 178m.
118
Figure 9.4 Wheel diameters for breaking [1]
Table 9.1 Tire data [1]

[1]
By using the Table 9.1 , it is done the more suitable selection of tire. According to
this table, it can be seen the Type III tire data supplies all conditions for the gear loads and
dimensions. For desired aircraft, it is chosen the 7.00-8 size categories for main tires.
119
The total dynamic braking load for nose should be divided by 1, 3 to find total
dynamic nose wheel load.
Total dynamic nose wheel load = (423, 47) / 1.3 = 325, 75lb
According to this value; the Type III, 5.00-4 tire is selected for nose wheel. The
properties of these tires are tabulated below:
Max Max Rolling Wheel Inflation
Max
Tire Width Diameter Radius Diameter Pressure
Load (lb)
(in) (in) (in) (in) (psi)
Main
2400 7.30 20.85 8.3 8 46
7.00-8
Nose
1200 5.05 13.25 5.2 4 55
5.00-4
Table 9.2 Selected tire properties
After the selection of main and nose tires, the pressure checks for them must be
performed. To do this, it is calculated foot print area Ad for tires by using the given formula:
d 
= Ap 2,3 wd  − Rr  (9.6)[1]
2 
The terms in this formula: w is tire width, d is tire diameter, and Rr is rolling radius.
Also, weight carried by tire is found by inflation pressure times contact area (foot print area).
These parameters are taken like in the table such as new diameter is 20, 85m for main tires
and 13, 25m for nose tires. Then, pressure is found and compared with the value given in the
table above.
Ww = PAP (9.7)[1]
• Main tires;
d   20,85 
=
Ap 2,3 wd  − =
Rr  2,3 7,30 × 20,85  − 8,3
=  60, 3in
2
 2   2 
P = Ww/Ap = 1014, 7 / 60, 3 = 16, 82psi < 46psi
P = 16, 82psi is lower than the inflation pressure of main tires which is given in the
Figure 9.4[1] as 46psi. Also, the determined pressure value is compared with the value which
is given in the Table 11.3[1] for major civil airfield. According to this table, the inflation
120
pressure should not be passed the 120psi. For desired aircraft, it is found the inflation pressure
is 16, 82psi. Therefore, the pressure check is ok.
• Nose tire;
d   13, 25 
=
Ap 2,3 wd  − =
Rr  2,3 5, 05 × 13, 25  − 5,=
2  26, 81in2
2   2 
P = Ww/Ap = 423, 47 / 26, 81 = 15, 8psi < 55psi
It can be said the same thing for the nose tire. The inflation pressure of nose tire is
lower than the value of given in the table which is 55psi. Also, this value is smaller than the
120psi explained above for the main tires.
9.4. SHOCK ABSORBER
Shock absorbers are an important part of aircraft landing gear. The landing gear must
absorb the occurring shock during the bad landing and smooth out the ride when taxiing. A
shock absorber is named “damper” in technical use because it is a mechanical device designed
to smooth out or damp shock impulse, and dissipate kinetic energy.
There are many different types gear shock absorber. One of them is the solid spring
gear arrangement. Solid spring gear is used in much general aviation. In this design, it is
decided to use the solid-spring gear for shock absorber. This type is very simple and
economic although slightly heavier than other types of gear.
Figure 9.5 Solid-Spring gear/shock arrangements [1]
9.4.1. Stroke Determination
The stroke is directly related to the some parameters such as the vertical velocity of
aircraft at touchdown, shock absorber material and amount of wing stall after touchdown.
The vertical velocity at touchdown is established in various specifications for different types
of aircrafts. Most aircrafts require 10ft/s vertical velocity capability. To determine the stroke it
is used the following equation:
121
2
Vvertical η
=S − T ST (9.8)[1]
2 gη N gear η
where, (from table 11.4[1])
η(Shock-absorber efficiency) = 0, 62 (steel coil spring)
ηT (tire efficiency) = 0, 47
N gear (gear load factor) = 3 (from table 11.5[1] for general aviation)
Vvertical = 10 ft/s = 120 in/s
For tires, it is assumed that the tires deflect only to its rolling radius; the stroke for
tires (ST) is calculated as given below:
d 
S=
T  − Rr 
2 
For main tires: ST = (d/2-Rr) = (20, 85/2 – 8, 3) = 2, 125in = 0, 177ft
For nose tire: ST = (d/2-Rr) = (13, 25/2 – 5, 2) = 1, 425in = 1, 119ft
2
Vvertical η 102 0, 47
Main tires: S= − T ST = − × 0,177= 0, 70 ft= 8, 4in.
2 gη N gear η 2 × 32, 2 × 0, 62 × 3 0, 62
Smain = 8, 4in. = 0, 7ft = 0, 21m
2
Vvertical η 102 0, 47
Nose tire: S= − T S= − ×1,119
= 0, 745 ft= 8,93in.
2 gη N gear η 2 × 32, 2 × 0, 62 × 3 0, 62
T
Snose = 8, 93in = 0, 745ft = 0, 226m
The calculated value for stroke supply that the minimum condition which is said that a
stroke of 8in, is usually considered a minimum, and at least 10-12in is desirable for most
aircraft. The stroke value for both tires are higher than 8in. This is good result. Also, nose
wheel stroke is generally either equal or slightly larger than main tires. This situation provides
a smooth ride while taxiing. The estimated nose stroke value is 8, 93in > 8, 4in (main tires).
This result is good, too.
9.4.2. Solid-Spring Gear Sizing
The deflection geometry for a solid-spring gear leg is shown in the Figure 9.6.
122
Figure 9.6 Solid spring gear deflection [1]
The purpose of this part is to calculate the length of the gear leg. To do this, it should
be make some calculations. First of all, in the previous part, the stroke was found. Stroke is
the vertical component of the deflection of the gear leg. The gear leg is considered as a
constant-cross-section bending beam using the average values of beam width (w) and
thickness (t). Therefore; by assuming the gear leg and height, it can be tried to estimate the
most suitable w and t for desired gear leg.
After some researches about the competitors and other trainer aircrafts, it is decided to
take the height of the gear is 27, 5in = 0, 7m and  is 40deg. From these values, it can be
found the gear length:
l= H / cos= 27, 5/cos (40) = 36in = 0, 91m
l (length of gear leg) = 0, 91m
Figure 9.7 Reference dimensions for landing gear under no load condition [8]
123
By using these all of the values, it can be estimated the gear leg width and thickness.
To estimate the w and t, it will be calculated the moment of inertia. Here, there are some
calculations for it.
Because of there are two gear legs, the force of each leg is defined as given below:
WN gear 1764, 705 × 3

Fs = , thus; =Fs = 2646,31 lb (9.9) [1]
2 2
The component of the load on the gear that is perpendicular the gear leg is;
F = Fs (sin) (9.10) [1]
F = 2646, 31. (sin40) = 1700lb
The deflection which is perpendicular to the gear leg is related to the stroke. This
relation can be shown as following:
S = y.sin () (9.11) [1]
The gear leg is assumed a constant-cross-section bending beam. Thus, it is calculated
the deflection “y” from the structural bending-beam equation:
FI 3
y= (9.12) [1]
3EI
If the Eqs. (9.9 – 9.11) are put into the deflection “y” equation (9.12), it is obtained the
stroke “S” of a solid-spring gear leg:
I3
S = Fs ( sin 2 θ ) (9.13) [1]
3EI
• E = Elasticity modulus (~ 30 million psi for steel)
• I = beam’s moment of inertia
For a rectangular-cross-section gear leg, the moment of inertia is;
wt 3
I= (9.14) [1]
12
To determine the moment of inertia it is used the Eqs. 9.13;

I3
S = Fs ( sin 2 θ ) = 8, 4in
3EI
( 36 )
3
l3
= s(
I F= θ ) 3ES (2646,31)(sin 2 40) 3 ×=
2
sin 0, 0675in 4
30 ×10 × 8, 4
6
124
If the moment of inertia is I = 0, 0675in4, it can be assumed width and thickness of
gear leg:
wt 3
I= = 0, 0675in4 wt3 = 0, 81 in4
12
Now, the suitable w and t are estimated according to the above results. Thus, if t is
assumed as 0, 6in, the width becomes 3, 75in. It is thought that these values are suitable for
desired aircraft. Now, all dimensions for the gear and gear leg are shown below:
Height = 27, 5in Length = 36in
w = 3, 75in t = 0, 6in
Also, it is required to calculate the length of the nose tire. It is known the mean tire
diameter and the height.
D = 20, 85in = 0, 53m
H = 0, 7m
If it is added to height of main gear the main gear radius, it is found the distance from
the ground. Then, when it is subtracted the nose gear radius, it can be calculated the height of
the nose gear. The length of the nose gear is equal to the height. Therefore;
l(nose) = 0, 795m = 31, 3in
9.5. CASTORING WHEEL GEOMETRY

It is important especially for ground steering that the tire wheels and nose wheels must
be capable of being castored. Castoring wheel adds static and dynamic loads to the system
and can cause stability problems like wheel shimmy. Wheel shimmy should be prevented.
Therefore, rake angle and trail are used to prevent it.
125
For most tricycle-geared aircraft, a steering linkage is connected to rudder pedals or a
separate steering wheel, providing positive control of the turning angle. A key objective in the
design of a steerable nose wheel is to reduce the required control forces while retaining
dynamic stability. The desired for this project is the landing gear arrangement is tricycle.
Because of this, it is considered providing positive control of a turning angle.
Also, because of that the aircraft is a small aircraft, a rake angle is estimated as 15
and trail is about 20% of tire radius [1].
Castoring wheel geometry and dimensions are shown in figure:
Figure 9.6Castoring wheel geometry
9.6. GEAR – RETRACTION GEOMETRY
Landing gear including struts, wheels, and brakes are the major part of the
undercarriage. It can be fixed or retractable. Retracting the landing gear helps reduce drag. An
aircraft landing gear is movable between a retracted position and an extended position. There
are many different options for main-landing gear retracted positions. For instance, location of
the gear may be in the fuselage, in the wing, in the wing-fuselage junctions or in the nacelle.
However, in this project, there is no nacelle. If gears are in the fuselage or wing-fuselage
junction is better for aerodynamics, but bad for structure because it tends to chop up the
structure. Location of the gears plays important role in aerodynamics of aircraft. In this
project, the aircraft retract the gear into the fuselage. Landing gear consists of the wheels that
stick out below the fuselage so that the airplane can roll down the runway during landing and
takeoff. It is selected the fuselage retraction system because, it is important that the gear leg is
minimum length. If it would be used the wing or wing-fuselage retraction system, it is
required the height of the landing gear is higher than 27, 5in. This means increasing of the
gear leg. Therefore, it is decided to the fuselage retraction system for this aircraft.
126
Four bar linkage configuration is selected for main landings gear. This four bar linkage
mechanism is valid for most landing gear. This mechanism makes the gear simple and
lightweight because the loads pass through the rigid members and simple pivots.
Also, forward retracting four bar linkage type is selected for nose landing gear.
This type of retraction system is more preferable because even under hydraulic failures, air
loads will be able to pull the gear down. As a result, Main gear retraction is into the fuselage
fairings and the nose gear folds forward into the fuselage.
9.7. SUBSYSTEMS
Hydraulic, electrical, pneumatic and auxiliary/emergency power systems are basic
subsystems of the aircrafts. Also, avionics can be considered a subsystem. For this project, it
is tried to do initial design/conceptual design layout of an aircraft. In this point, subsystems do
not have a major impact. It should be only considered that an efficient place for these
subsystems’ installation. Thus, there will be meet no problem in later design steps. In this
part, the subsystems are defined shortly as given below:
9.7.1. Hydraulics
Aircraft Hydraulics is a means of transmitting energy or power from one place to
another efficiently. Some systems operated by hydraulics are flight controls such as flaps
ailerons, etc., landing gear, speed brakes, fixed-wing and rotary-wing folding
mechanisms, auxiliary systems, and wheel brakes. Therefore, hydraulic systems are important
for the aircraft. It can be seen in the below a simplified hydraulic system.
Figure 9.7 Simplified hydraulic systems [1]
127
9.7.2. Electrical System
The primary function of an aircraft electrical system is to generate, regulate and

distribute electrical power throughout the aircraft. An aircraft electrical system provides
electrical power to the avionics, hydraulics, environmental control, lighting and other
subsystems. The electrical system consists of batteries, generators, transformer-rectifiers,
electrical controls, circuit breakers and cables.
9.7.3. Pneumatic System

Pneumatic systems, commonly known as vacuum or pressure systems, power the
heading and attitude indicators in most general aviation (GA) aircraft, and in some aircraft,
also power the autopilot and de-ice systems. For pilots who regularly fly at night or in
instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) these systems are essential. The pneumatic
systems use engine as a compressed air resource.
9.7.4. Auxiliary/Emergency Power

If there would be a problem at the hydraulic systems of aircraft, flight will be
uncontrollable. To prevent the uncontrollable flight, emergency power becomes active. There
are three different emergency systems: ram air turbine (RAT), monopropellant emergency
power unit (EPU), and jet-fuel APU (Auxiliary power unit). An emergency power unit (EPU)
is a device for energy production in case of failure of the primary systems. An APU is much
like an EPU but is designed and installed to allow continuous operation. Also, APU provides
energy for air conditioning, lighting and engine starting.
9.7.5. Avionics
Avionics means “aviation electronics”. The cockpit of an aircraft is a major location
for avionic equipment, including control, monitoring, communication, navigation, weather,
radar, and anti-collision systems. For initial layout, it is necessary to provide sufficient
volume in the avionics section. Also, the nose of the aircraft should be designed to hold the
radar.
On the average, avionics has a density of about 30-45 lb/ft3. It can be estimated the
required avionics weight by using the Table 11.6[1], for general aviation-single engine aircraft.
According to this table, the required avionic weight divided by the empty weight is between 0,
01 and 0, 03. For this project, this proportion is taken as 0, 02. It is known the empty weight
Wempty = 1107, 197lb from previous chapter. Thus;
128
Wavionics
= 0, 02
Wempty
Wavionics =
0, 02 × (1107,197) =
22,14lb ≅ 10kg
Gear Type Tricycle retractable

Gear Main Nose
Specifications One strut, one wheel One strut, one wheel
Tires Type III Type III
Speed (mph) 120 120
Max load (lb) 2400 1200
Inflation pressure (psi) 46 55
Max width (in.) 7, 30 5, 05
Max diameter (in.) 20, 85 13, 25
Rolling radius (in.) 8, 3 5, 2
Wheel diameter (in.) 8 4
Number of plies 6 6
Shock Absorber Solid-Spring Gear/Shock Arrangement
Gear stroke (in.) 8, 4 8, 93
Length(in.) 36in 31, 3in
Fuselage
forward retracting four-bar
Gear Retraction Geometry rearward retracting four
linkage
bar linkage
Figure 9.8 Location of main landing gears (Bottom view)
129
40
1.93
Figure 9.9 Orientation of main and nose landing gears (front view)
Figure 9.10 Orientation of main and nose landing gears (side view)
130
9.9. CONCLUSION
It is purposed in this study, to make the better design for the landing gear dimensions
and loads and select the some specifications such as tire sizing because it is important that the
aircraft has stable landing. The landing gear should be carrying the aircraft carefully. By these
considerations, it is made the calculations of the landing gear for a good design. To do this,
some assumptions are made by comparing the competitor’s aircrafts. Also, to reduce drag it is
decided to the aircraft retracts the landing gear into the fuselage.
After performing the landing gear, the subsystems of aircraft and their main functions
are can be explained shortly. The subsystems are not examined much, as they don’t affect the
initial layout of the aircraft much except for the space they require.
131
CHAPTER 10
AERODYNAMICS
10.1. INTRODUCTION
The previous studies have presented methods for design layout of a credible aircraft
configuration. Initial sizing, wing geometry, engine installation, tail geometry, fuselage
internal arrangement, and numerous other topics have been discussed. In this chapter, the
aerodynamic properties of the aircraft to be designed are discussed and examined.
( )
Therefore, the lift curve slope CLα , maximum lift CLmax (
) with and without high lift
devices for cruise, landing and takeoff conditions, angle of attack for maximum lift (α ), CL max
parasite ( C ) and induced drags ( C ) are estimated below. C − α and C − C curves are
D0 Di L L D
plotted according to the estimated values for cruise, takeoff and landing configurations.
The calculations done in this chapter are performed for the following configurations,
Takeoff / Landing : clean (no flaps) at M = 0.2

Takeoff / Landing : flapped at M = 0.2
10.2. ESTIMATION OF LIFT

In this section, it is estimated the lift curve slope, maximum lift and angles of both for
clean and with high devices at the takeoff and landing configurations. These conditions are
analyzed for M = 0, 2.
10.2.1 Lift Curve Slope
Lift curve slope ( CLα ) can be found from the following relation for a swept wing with
M<1 condition.
2π ⋅ AR  Sexp osed 
CLα =   ( F ) (10.1)[1]
AR β  tan Λ max,t
2 2 2
  S ref 
2+ 4+ 1 + 
η2  β2 
CLα
where, β2= 1-M2 and η= (airfoil efficiency) (10.2)[1]
2π / β
• Λmax, t : the sweep of the wing at the chord location where the airfoil is the
132
thickest (xt/c). In this project, the wing profile was selected NACA23015. For NACA 23015,
maximum thickness is 0, 3. This value is nearly the same quarter chord point. Therefore,
maximum thickness sweep angle is assumed the same with ΛC/4 = 4 = 0, 698rad.
• η : Airfoil efficiency is approximated as 0, 95.
• AR : 7
• F : is the fuselage lift factor which accounts for the fact that the fuselage creates
some lift due to the “spill over” of lift from the wing and is found by using equation (for D =
1, 4874m and b =8, 217m)
2 2
 d  1, 4874 
F= 1, 07 1 +  = 1, 07 1 + = 1, 49 (10.3)[1]
 b  8, 217 
• Sexposed : is the wings reference area minus the part of the wing covered by the
fuselage, from the previous chapters;
Sreference = 9, 644m2
Sexposed = 8, 87m2 (from previous drawings)
Swet = 18, 22m2
These values are put into the CLα equation; CLα is calculated for M = 0, 2 as given
below:
β2 = (1- M2) = (1 - 0.22) = 0, 96

By using equation (10.1);
2π × 7  8,87 
CLα =  9, 644  (1, 49 )
2
7 (0,96)  tan 4 

2 0

2+ 4+ 2 1 + 
0,95  0,96 
CLα = 6, 346 rad-1 = 0, 11 deg-1
10.2.2. Maximum Lift (Clean)

The maximum lift coefficient of the wing is generally related to the wing area. This
strongly affects the aircraft takeoff weight to perform the design mission. For high aspect
ratio wings with sweep, maximum lift is related with the following equation;
CL max = 0.9Cl max cos Λ0.25c (10.4) [1]
• Cl max = 1, 7
• CL max = 1, 53 (from previous study, for NACA 23015)
CL max = 0.9Cl max cos Λ0.25c = 0.9(1, 7).cos (4) = 1, 53.cos (4)
133
CL max (clean) = 1, 526
Another way to calculate the CL max is the high Mach number approach. Therefore, for
high Mach number:
ΛL.E. = 8, 6
C 
=CL max Cl max  L max  + ∆CL max (10.5) [1]
 Cl max 
∆CL max = 0  CL max = 1, 513
According to these CL max values are nearly the same with the CL max value for NACA
23015 (1, 53). However, CL max, clean is closer to actual value than the value for high Mach
number. Because of it, CL max is taken as 1, 526.
The angle of attack for maximum lift is states as;
CL max
α=
C + α oL + ∆α CL max (10.6)[1]
L max
CLα
Here, α oL represents the airfoil zero lift angle and ∆α CL max represents the angle of
attack increment. For wing airfoil NACA 23015, it is known from previous chapters that;
Cl max = 1, 7 ; αoL = -1, 2º
• ∆ α CL should be determined to calculate the α CL . To find ∆ α CL , firstly, it is

max max max
required to estimate the by using ∆y (the leading edge sharpness parameter). ∆y for
common airfoils are given in the Table 12.1[1]. According to this table, For NACA 5
digit airfoils, ∆y = 26(t/c).
∆y = 26(t/c) = 26(0.15) = 3.9
Also, it is needed to know the leading edge sweep angle. The leading edge sweep
angle was found in previous chpater as ΛL.E.= 8, 6º
From Figure 12.10[1], for ∆y = 3.9 and ΛL.E.= 8, 6º; the angle of attack increment is
nearly 2.
2ο
∆α CL max =
Maximum lift angle (clean) ;
Maximum lift angle of attack can be found by using equation (10.6). It is found
2ο . αoL = -1, 2º and lift curve slope CLα = 0, 11 deg-1:
as ∆α CL max =
CL max 1,526
α=
C + α oL + ∆α=
CL max + 2 14, 67ο
+ (−1, 2)= αCL max = 14, 67°
L max
CLα 0,11
134
10.2.3. Maximum Lift with High Lift Devices
It was decided to use plain flap for desired design. Plain flap rotates on a simple hinge.
Also, it has typically a flap chord “Cf” of 30% of the airfoil chord. The plain flap increases lift
by increasing the camber. Maximum lift occurs around 40-45 degrees of deflection.
It can be seen a figure below. This figure illustrates the effects the high-lift devices
have upon the lift curve of the wing. From this figure, plain flap moves the angle of zero-lift
to the left and increases the maximum lift. The slope of the lift curve remains unchanged, and
the angle of stall is somewhat reduced.
Figure 10.1 Effects of high lift devices [1]
Increase in maximum lift and change in the zero lift angles equations are given:
S flapped
∆CL max =0.9∆Cl max cos Λ H . L. (10.7)[1]
S ref
S flapped
∆ (α oL )airfoil
∆α oL = cos Λ H .L. (10.8)[1]
S ref
For plain flap, the CL max value was found before as 1, 8. This value CL max = 1, 8 is
valid for landing configuration. Also, the information to determine the CL max and ∆α oL are
given below:
• ∆Cl max = 0, 9 for plain flaps (from Table 12.2[1])
• ΛH.L. is the sweep angle at the hinge line of the high-lift surface. ΛH.L. is assumed as
nearly -2 because this value’s effect is the same during the calculations.
(CosΛH.L. ≅ 1).
• Sflapped can be estimated from previous drawings as Sflapped = 4m2, Sreference = 9, 644m2
135
At the take off setting:
For take off flap settings, lift increments of about 70% of ∆CL max value should be
used. Besides, the change in zero lift angles for flaps in 2-D case is approximately -10 deg at
the take off setting (half flap). (∆α0L) airfoil= -10º
From equation (10.7);
4
∆CL max = 0, 7 × 0,9 × 0,9 cos(−2) = 0, 235
9, 644
At the take off setting;
CL max = CL max) clean + ∆CL max = 1, 526 + 0, 235 = 1, 761
CL max = 1, 761
Also, by using equation (10.8);

4
∆α oL =−10 cos(−2) =−4,15ο
9, 644
At the take off setting the zero lift angle of attack is;
αoL = αoL) clean + ∆αoL = -1, 2 – 4, 15 = -5, 35°
αoL = -5, 35°

Maximum lift angle of attack can be found by using equation (10.5) according
2ο , and lift curve slope CLα = 0.0929deg-1:
to ∆α CL max =
1, 761
α C= + 2 12, 66ο
+ (−5,35) =
L max
0,11
αCL max = 12, 66°
At the landing setting:
The change in zero lift angles for flaps in 2-D case is approximately -15 deg at the
landing setting (full flap).
(∆α0L) airfoil= -15º
From equation (10.7);
4
∆CL max= 0,9 × 0,9 × 1= 0,336 ∆CL max =
0,336
9, 644
At the landing settings;
CL max = CL max) clean + ∆CL max = 1, 526+0, 336
136
CL max = 1, 862
Also, by using equation (10.8);
4
∆α oL =−15 cos(−2) =−6, 22ο
9, 644
At the landing setting the zero lift angle of attack is;

αoL = αoL) clean + ∆αoL = -1, 2 – 6, 22 = -7, 42°
αoL = -7, 42 °
And again by using equation (10.5), it is determined the maximum lift angle of attack;
1,862
α C= + 2 11,51ο
+ (−7, 42)=
L max
0,11
αCL max = 11, 51°
10.3. ESTIMATION OF PARASITE (ZERO-LIFT) DRAG
The following two methods are used for determination of the parasite drag such as
equivalent skin friction method and component buildup method.
10.3.1. Equivalent Skin-Friction Method
For subsonic aircrafts parasite drag consists of skin friction drag and separation drag.
We can estimate the skin friction drag by using the formula:
S 
CD = C fe  wet  (10.9)[1]
0 S
 ref 
* C fe = 0.0045 (From Table 12.3[1] for light aircraft-single engine)

* Swet,total = 19, 82m2
* Sref = 9, 644m2
 19,82 
= =
CD 0.0055  9, 644  0, 0113  CD = 0, 0113
0
  0
10.3.2. Component Buildup Method
Component buildup method estimates the subsonic parasite drag of each component of
the aircraft using a calculated flat-plate skin-friction drag coefficient (Cf) and a component
“form factor” (FF) that estimates the pressure drag due to viscous separation. Then the
interference effects on the component drag are estimated as a factor “Q” and the total
[1]
component drag is determined as the product of the wetted area, Cf, FF, Q . Total drag on
each component is determined by following equation:
137
∑ ( C fc ( FF )c Qc Swetc ) + C
=
CD )
0 subsonic Sref
Dmisc + CD
L&D
(10.10)[1]
Where flat-plate skin-friction coefficient ( C f ) for turbulent, subsonic flow and skin
friction coefficient for turbulent flow is given by:
0, 455
Cf = (10.11)[1]
(log10 R) 2.58
(1 + 0.144 M 2 )0.65
and skin roughness “R” for subsonic flow is,
( k)
1.053
=R R=
cutoff 38.21 l (10.12)[1]
“l” is the characteristic length of the component. For fuselage, it is the total length
(l=L) and for wing or tail, it is the mean aerodynamic chord.
“k” is the skin roughness value and for smooth paint, it is 0, 634x10-5m from Table
12.4[1].
After the calculations of the skin roughness and skin friction coefficient, it can be find
the total drag on each component by determination of the FF and estimation of the Q.
10.4. CALCULATIONS
10.4.1. Takeoff and Landing (Clean at M = 0.2)
The following table shows the calculated R and Cf values for each component.
L (m) R Cf
Wing 1, 246 14254437 0,00283
Fuselage 7, 437 94000000 0,00214
Vertical
0, 688 7665803 0,00312
Tail
Horizontal
0, 614 6800148 0,0032
Tail
Table 10.1 R and Cf values
Component form factors and interference factors:
 Fuselage
 60 f 
FF =1 + 3 +  (10.13)[1]
 f 400 
138
l 7, 437
f= = = 5 (10.14)[1]
d 1, 4874
 60 f   60 5 
FF =+
1 +  =+
1 3 + =1,5
 f 3
400   5 400 
Fuselage interference factor is negligible; Q =1
 Wing
 0.6  t  t 
4
FF =
1 +   + 100    1.34 M (CosΛ m )  (10.15)[1
0.18 0.28
 ( x / c ) m  
c   
c
(x/c) m=0, 3 (t/c) m=0.15 and Λm=4º for NACA 23015 airfoil;
 0, 6 4
1 + 0,3 ( 0,15 ) + 100 ( 0,15 )  1,34(0, 2) (Cos 4 )  =
FF = 0.18 o 0.28
1,35
 
For a mid-wing, the interference factor will be negligible so the Q =1
 Vertical Tail
(x/c) m=0, 3 (t/c) m=0, 015 and Λm=40º for NACA 0015
 0, 6 4
1 + 0,3 ( 0,15 ) + 100 ( 0,15 )  1,34(0, 2) (Cos 40 )  =
FF = 0.18 o 0.28
1, 27
 
Vertical tail interference factor is assumed as Q =1, 05 for conventional tail.
 Horizontal Tail
(x/c)m=0, 3 (t/c)m=0, 15 and Λm=6, 76º for NACA 66-009 laminar airfoil.
 0, 6 4
1 + 0,3 ( 0,15 ) + 100 ( 0,15 )  1,34(0, 2) (Cos 6, 76 )  =
FF = 0.18 o 0.28
1,35
 
Horizontal tail interference factor is taken as Q =1, 04
The following table shows the component drags and total component drag by using
Eqn. (10.10):
139
Mach = 0.2 Cf Swet (m2) FF Q Component CD0
Wing 0,00283 19,82 1,35 1 0,00785
Fuselage 0,00214 25,969 1,5 1 0,00864
Vertical Tail 0,00312 1,46 1,27 1,05 0,000629
Horizontal Tail 0,0032 3,87 1,35 1,04 0,001802
Total Component Drag Coefficient 0,018921
Table 10.2 Component drags for M=0, 2
• Miscellaneous Drags
 Due to Upsweep
D
= 3.83u 2.5 Amax (10.17)[1]
qupsweep
Amax is the maximum cross-sectional area of the fuselage;
d2
Amax= = π(3.48)2= 1, 72m2
4
u is the upsweep angle of the fuselage centerline. From drawings,
u = 12, 68º =0, 22rad
D/q = 3, 83(0, 22)2.5(1, 72) = 0, 15m2
CD0 )upsweep
=
D / q 0,15
= = 0, 01555
Sref 9, 644
(10.18)[1]
 Due to Canopy
For light aircraft windshields has smoothly far into the fuselage and D/q = 0, 07
(Windshield Frontal Area) is suggested:
D/q = 0, 07 (0, 86) = 0, 0602m2
CD )=
0 canopy
D / q 0, 0602
=
S ref
= 0, 00624
9, 644
There is no base drag for desired aircraft. Because of this, there is no base of drag.
CD= CD0
misc
) upsweep
+ CD0 ) canopy
)
+ CD0 = 0, 0113 + 0, 00624=
base
+ 0 0, 01754
140
• Leakage and Protuberance Drag
The effect of leakage & protuberance on CD0 is changing between 5 and 10% of total
parasite drag for propeller aircraft. In this design it is assumed as 6%.
CD =0, 06 (0, 018921+0, 01754) = 0, 00219

L&P
Then, total parasite drag at M = 0.2 for clean configuration is:
CD )
0 total
= CD )
0 component
+ CD )
0 misc
+ CD )
0 L& P
= 0, 018921 + 0, 01754 + 0, 00219 = 0, 038
CD )
0 total
= 0, 038
10.4.3. Takeoff and Landing (With High Lift Devices at M = 0.2)
The flap contribution to the parasite drag is caused by the separated flow above the flap.
 For takeoff:
δFlap =30º is taken for takeoff. (bflap/bwing is determined as 0, 40 before)

b
∆CD = 0.0023 flap δ flap (10.19)[1]
0 flap bwing
∆CD = 0, 0023 × 0, 4 × 30o =0, 0276
0 flap
CD ) takeoff = CD ) clean +∆ CD ) flap =0, 038+0, 0276

0 0 0
CD )=
0 takeoff , flap
CD )
0 clean
+ ∆ C=
D
0 )
0, 0656
flap
 For landing:
δFlap=60º is taken for landing.
∆CD = 0.0023 × 0.4 × 60=

o
0, 0552
0 flap
CD ) landing = CD ) clean +∆ CD ) flap =0, 038 +0, 0552

0 0 0
CD ) = CD
0 landing , flap )
0 clean
+ ∆ C=
D0 )
0, 0932
flap
141
10.5. ESTIMATION OF DRAG DUE TO LIFT (INDUCED DRAG)
The drag polar of the NACA 23015 airfoil given in Chapter 4 has shown that the wing
has approximately a moderate camber and CD and CD of the wing are very close to each
0 min
other, so the following relation between lift and drag coefficient can be used.
=
C D CD + KCL 2 (10.20)[1]
0
K is the “drag-due-to-lift factor” and defined as,
1
K= (10.21)[1]
π ARe
For leading edge sweep angle is smaller than 30º, Oswald efficiency factor “e” can be
calculated from the straight-wing aircraft relation;
e =−
1, 78(1 0, 045 AR 0.68 ) − 0, 64 (10.22) [1]
e =−
1, 78(1 0, 045(7)0.68 ) − 0, 64 = 0, 839
Then,
1
=K = 0, 0542
π × 7 × 0,839
So, CD =KCL2 = 0, 0542 CL2

i
CD = 0,0542 CL 2
i
When ground effect is considered, Keffective must be determined.
1.5
h
33  
K effective
= b (10.23)[1]
1.5
K h
1 + 33  
b
It is known that; b = 8, 217m and h = 2, 20m. By using the eq. (10.23);
  2, 20 
1.5

 33  
  8, 217  
=K effective 0,=
0542 0, 0444
  2, 20  
1.5
 1 + 33   
  8, 217  
142
10.6. CL - α AND CL - CD CURVES
CL - α and CL - CD curves will be plotted for the configurations below:
• Clean at M = 0.2 Configuration
=
CD 0, 038 + 0, 0542CL 2
• Takeoff at M = 0.2 Configuration
=
CD 0, 0656 + 0, 0542CL 2
• Landing at M = 0.2 Configuration
=
CD 0, 0932 + 0, 0542CL 2
• Takeoff at M = 0.2 With Ground Effect Configuration
=
CD 0, 0656 + 0, 0444CL 2
Curves are plotted below:
CL – α Curves
Figure 10.2 CL– α graph for clean configuration
143
Figure 10.3 CL – α graph for takeoff-flapped configuration
Figure 10.4 CL– α graph for landing-flapped configuration
144
CL – CD Curves
Cl-Cd Graph (clean configuration at M=0.2)
0,18
0,16 0,15995 0,15995
0,14
0,12
0,1
Cd
0,0922 0,0922
0,08
0,06
0,05155 0,05155
0,04 0,038
0,02
0
-1,5 -1 -0,5 0 0,5 1 1,5
Cl
Figure 10.5 Cl – Cd graph for clean configuration
Cl-Cd Graph (takeoff flapped configuration)
0,2
0,18755 0,18755
0,18
0,16
0,14
0,12 0,1198 0,1198
Cd
0,1
0,08 0,07915 0,07915
0,06 0,0656
0,04
0,02
0
-1,5 -1 -0,5 0 0,5 1 1,5
Cl
Figure 10.6 Cl – Cd graph for takeoff flapped configuration
145
Cl-Cd Graph (Landing Flapped Configuration)
0,25
0,21515 0,21515
0,2
0,15 0,1474 0,1474

Cd
0,1 0,10675 0,10675

0,0932
0,05
0
-1,5 -1 -0,5 0 0,5 1 1,5
Cl
Figure 10.7 Cl – Cd graph for landing flapped configuration
Cl-Cd Graph (Takeoff Flapped Configuration with

Ground Effect)
0,18
0,16 0,1655 0,1655
0,14
0,12
0,11 0,11
0,1
Cd
0,08 0,0767 0,0767

0,06 0,0656
0,04
0,02
0
-1,5 -1 -0,5 0 0,5 1 1,5
Cl
Figure 10.8 Cl – Cd graph for takeoff flapped configuration with geound effect
146
Results are tabulated below:
Takeoff Flapped Landing Flapped

Clean at M = 0.2
at M = 0.2 at M = 0.2
Clα (1/deg) 0,0929 0,11 0,11
CLmax 1,526 1,761 1,862
CL - α αL=0 (deg) -1,2 -5,35 -7,42
αClmax (deg) 14,67 12,66 11,51
ΔαClmax (deg) 2 2 2
Table 10.3 Lift calculations
Takeoff Flapped at Landing Flapped at

Clean at M = 0.2
M = 0.2 M = 0.2
CL - CD CD 0,038+0,0542CL2 0,0656+0,0542CL2 0,0932+0,0542CL2

Table 10.4 Drag calculations
10.8. CONCLUSION
Various aerodynamic properties of the aircraft have been calculated in this chapter.
Two configuration has considered for this purpose namely clean at M=0.2 and flapped at
M=0.2 for takeoff/landing. Table 10.3 shows that maximum lift increase and Table 10.4
shows that parasite drag increase considerably with the use of flaps which is expected for
both takeoff and landing. Also, drag analysis is done based upon different types of drag is
estimated at the final.
Although the 2-D airfoil characteristics and 3-D wing characteristics are different,
recalling from Chapter 4, CL can be taken as Cl. Therefore, the wing CL - α and CL - CD
curves are seemed to be good when compared to the NACA 23015 airfoil though this
comparison is a very rough estimate.
147
CHAPTER 11
DESCRIPTION IN JANE’S FORMAT
:
MarTı MT- 1505 McCauley propeller. Fuel tanks are integrated on
wings.
ACCOMMODATIONS: Two seat for crew.
SYSTEMS: Hydraulic Systems, APU, Electrical

System, Pneumatic System.
DIMENSIONS EXTERNAL:
Wing span 8.217m (26.96ft)
Wing chord: at root 1.677m (5.5ft)
at tip 0.6708m(2.2ft)
Wing aspect ratio 7
Horizontal tail span 3.07m (10.07ft)
Horizontal tail chord 0.501m (1.64ft)
Horizontal tail aspect ratio 5
Length overall 7.437m (24.4ft)
Fuselage width 1.487m (4.88ft)
Vertical tail span 1.032m (3.385ft)
Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics (ITU) Vertical tail aspect ratio 1.5
Wheel base 3.56m (11.86ft)
TYPE: Two seat training aircraft. Height overall 2.2m (7.22ft)
DESIGN FEATURES: Tapered, 8.6 leading edge DIMENSIONS INTERNAL:

sweep, mid-mounted, from root to tip the same Cockpit: Length 1.6m (5.25ft)
airfoil NACA 23015; no twist and dihedral, also 2
wing incidence. Section of NACA 0015 is at vertical AREAS:
tail and NACA 652-015 at horizontal tail. Tails have Wings, gross 9.644m2 (104.35 sq ft)
2
no twist and dihedral. Horizontal tail 1.885m (20.29sq ft)
Vertical tail 0.71m2 (7,64sq ft)
FLYING CONTROLS: Ailerons, elevators and
rudder statically and dynamically balanced, with WEIGHTS AND LOADING:
mechanical actuation. Electrohydraulically actuated Weight empty 497.32kg (1095.14lb)
plain flaps. Plain aileron on the wing. plain type Max fuel 92kg (202.69lb)
rudder and elevator; all are sealed. Max T-O 789.2kg (1738.350lb)
Wing loading 17 lb/sq ft
STRUCTURE: Fuselage frame with aluminum Hp/W 0.085
alloys, and wing and tail carbon composites.
PERFORMANCE:
LANDING GEAR: Hydraulically retractable tricycle
type. Solid-spring gear arrangement for main Max. Cruising Speed 136.5 knots
wheels and steerable nose-wheel. Main gear; Stalling Speed 52.77 knots
fuselage rearward retracting four bar linkage. Nose Max. R/C (knots) 40.43 knots
gear; forward retracting four-bar linkage. Tires used Range with max. Payload 525 nm
in the main gear 7.00-8 (46 psi), in the nose gear Max. Ceiling 12206.4m (40047.3ft)
5.00-4 (55 psi). Takeoff distance (sls) 335.28m (1100ft)
Landing distance (sls) 230.3m (755.56ft)
POWER PLANT: One 150 hp Textron Lycoming O- L/D) max 14.75
Loiter speed (at 5000m) 64.36 knots
320 2A four cylinder air-cooled horizontal
opposed engine, driving a two blade fixed pitch
148
CHAPTER 12
CONCLUSION
Conceptual design of the two seat general aviation aircraft provided insight four us
between final layout of the aircraft and mission requirements. Aircraft was designed to meet
mission requirements, and it is seen that after final layout it satisfies almost all of them.
However, range is found as 525nm, this value is a bit higher than the requirements value
500nm. This result is not very important because the difference is not very high, and aircraft
can meet the design requirement.
The visual appearance of the aircraft is similar to this type aircraft, but most of the
lighter aircrafts have low or high wing. In this project, mid-wing design was selected for
desired aircraft because it was wanted to design an aerobatic aircraft by considering the cost.
Also, the landing gear arrangement is not oleo, although oleo is common type today. It was
decided to use solid spring landing gear arrangement. This type is both simple and economic.
Except wing location and landing gear arrangement, this new design is similar to its
competitors with the general appearance.
The project gives sufficient and reasonable results that can be proceed by a
preliminary design based on this study.
About the course, it can be said that this project and lecture gave us skills and chance
to use and gain knowledge on engineering and real problems one can face during design.
149
REFERENCES
[1] Raymer D. P., “Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach”, AIAA Education Series, 1992
[2] NACA Report 824
[3] Riegels F. W., “Airfoil Sections”, 1961
[4] Acar H., Flight Mechanics Lecture Notes
[5] www.lycomig.com
[6] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycoming_O-320
[7] Jane’s all of the World’s Aircraft
[8] Grove Aircraft Landing System Inc, Part Catalog 110
150
APPENDIX A
HISTOGRAM OF EXISTING COMPETITOR AIRCRAFTS
# of Aircraft
5 SU-31 AVIAT
4 TOMAHAWK DIAMOND
3 CESSNA140 STEARMAN CHEROKEE
2 CHIPMUNK IKARUS YAK-52
1 AERONCA ALARUS CESSNA152 ZENITH PITTS
60 80 100 120 140 160 Vcruise(knot)
Table A.1 # of Aircraft – Vcruise (knot)
# Of
Aircraft
CESSNA
YAK-52 ZENITH
140
AERONC CHIPMUN TOMAHAW

ALARUS DIAMOND
A K K
CHEROKE CESSNA RANGE

SU-31 MAN PITTS IKARUS
E 152 (m)
10
0 0 200 300 400 500 600 700
Table A.2 # of Aircraft – Range (m)
151
# of Aircraft
CHIPMUNK
AVIAT
6
DIAMOND
5
PITTS
4
CESSNA140 ALARUS STEARMAN
3
ZENITH TOMAHAWK SU-31
2
IKARUS AERONCA CESSNA152 CHEROKEE YAK-52
1
250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Wo (kg)
Table A.3 # of Aircraft – Wo (kg)
# of
Aircraft
6
CESSNA152 YAK-52
5
AERONCA ALARUS
4
PITTS ZENITH
3
IKARUS STEARMAN DIAMNOND
2
SU-31 AVIAT TOMAHAWK CESSNA140 CHIPMUNK CHEROKEE
1
Wpl
100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 (kg)
Table A.4 # of Aircraft – Wpl (kg)
152
# of Aircraft
8 STEARMAN
7 AERONCA
6 YAK-52
5 PITTS
4 CHIPMUNK
3 CESSNA140 TOMAHAWK
2 IKARUS ZENITH CESSNA152
1 AVIAT SU-31 CHEROKEE DIAMOND ALARUS
0 100 200 300 400 500 T.O.D.(m)
Table A.5 # of Aircraft – Take off Distance (m)
#of Aircraft
Chipmunk
7
Aviat
6
5 Ikarus
Zenith Aeronca
4
Stearman Pitts
3
Cherokee Tomahawk Su 31
2
Cessna-140 Cessna-152 Diamond Yak-52 Alarus
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 L.D. (m)
Table A.6 # of Aircraft – Landing Distance (m)
153
# of Aircraft
Tomahawk
7
Pitts
6
Zenith Diamond
5
Stearman Alarus
4
Cessna-140 Chipmunk
3
Ikarus Aviat Yak-52
2
Su 31 Aeronca Cessna-152 Cherokee
1
0 5 10 15 20 W/S (lb/ft^2)
Table A.7# of Aircraft – Wing Loading (lb/ft2)
# of Aircraft
Chipmunk
6
Alarus
5
Tomahawk Zenith
4
Cessna-152 Stearman
3
Cessna-140 Diamond Aviat Su 31
2
Aeronca Cherokee Ikarus Yak-52 Pitts
1
0,05 0,075 0,1 0,125 0,15 0,175 Hp/W (hp/lb)
Table A.8 # of Aircraft – Power Loading (hp /lb)
154
APPENDIX B
AIRFOIL DATA
Figure B.1 Wing Airfoil (NACA 23015) characteristics [2]
155
Figure B.2 Horizontal Tail Airfoil (NACA 652-015) characteristics [2]
156
Figure B.3 Horizontal Tail Airfoil (NACA 652-015) characteristics [2]
157
Figure B.4 Vertical Tail Airfoil (NACA 0015) characteristics [2]
158
159

Sample Project 2009

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sample Project 2009

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Istanbul Technical University

Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Principles of Aircraft Design

Conceptual Design of a Two Seat General Aviation

Instructor : Prof. Mehmet Şerif Kavsaoğlu

Title Page Number

CHAPTER 2 COMPETITOR STUDY 3

CHAPTER 3 FIRST GUESS SIZING 12

CHAPTER 4 AIRFOIL and GEOMETRY SELECTION 28

CHAPTER 5 THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO and WING LOADING 43

CHAPTER 7 CONFIGURATION LAYOUT and INTERIOR DESIGN 87

CHAPTER 8 PROPULSION and FUEL SYSTEM INTEGRATION 103

CHAPTER 9 LANDING GEAR and SUBSYSTEMS 114

CHAPTER 10 AERODYNAMICS 132

CHAPTER 11 DECRIPTION OF JANE FORMAT 148

CHAPTER 12 CONCLUSION 149

APPENDIX A HISTOGRAMS FROM COMEPTITOR DATA 151

The project aircraft will be designed for training about 500nm.

1.2. REQUIREMENTS AND MISSION PROFILE

Figure 1.1 Mission profile

The design is performed mostly by using the textbook, AIRCRAFT DESIGN: A

2.2. COMPETITOR STUDY

Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications

Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications (continued)

Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications (continued)

Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications (continued)

Table 2.1 Competitor Aircrafts’ Specifications (continued)

2.2.2 GRAPHS FOR COMPETITOR OF AIRCRAFTS

Graph 2.1 We/Wo – Wo (kg)

Histograms of competitor aircrafts are replaced in Appendix A.

2.3. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

The results of this competitor study are listed as a table below:

3.2. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS & MISSION PROFILE

3.3. CONCEPTUAL SKETCHING & INITIAL SIZING

Wo = Wcrew + Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty

3.4.2. Empty Weight Estimation

3.2.4.3. Fuel Fraction Estimation

Take off and warm up W1/W0 0,97

Table 3.1 Historical mission segment weight fractions [1]

It should be known Vloiter, to calculate specific fuel consumption.

- loiter = 1,048 kg/m3 (@ 5246ft = 1600m)

According to this, fuel weight fraction: Wf / W0 = 0,185694

After ordering this equation, the formula becomes:

W0 (Guess) (lb) W0 (Calculated) (lb)

In conclusion, the results are estimated:

3.5. TRADE STUDIES

3.5.1.1. Trade Off for Vcruise = 120 knots = 202, 56 ft/s

C = 0,000106472 1/s (For loiter)

New total weight fraction and fuel fraction:

W6/W0 = 0,8326035 and Wf / W0 = 0,184403

W0 (Guess) (lb) W0 (Calculated) (lb)

3.5.1.2. Trade Off for Vcruise = 140 knots = 236, 32 ft/s

C = 0,000124218 1/s (For loiter)

W6/W0 = 0,823601 and Wf / W0 = 0,186983

W0 (Guess) (lb) W0 (Calculated) (lb)

384 y = 0,245x + 325,4

Figure 3.3 Cruise Velocity Trade wrt Wf

Figure 3.4 Cruise Velocity Trade wrt Wo

3.5.1. Range Trade Off

3.5.1.1. Trade Off for Range = 400 nm = 2432000 ft

W6/W0 = 0,84533 and Wf / W0 = 0,16395

W0 (Guess) (lb) W0 (Calculated) (lb)

3.5.1.1. Trade Off for Range = 600 nm = 3648000ft