INTRODUCTION

In today’s world there are different types of aircrafts with the latest technology. Every year there is a great
competition for making an aircraft capable of carrying a large no:of passengers in the aircraft. So, in this
report we intend to implant the differentiation among the aircrafts having a sitting capacity of 60-70
passengers. This report gives the different aspects of specifications like wing configuration, weigh
specification, power plant specification and performance specification.

In 2007 Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and the National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) were
planning to jointly design and develop a 70-seater civil regional aircraft. NAL had held discussions with
Pratt and Whitney (Canada) and General Electric (U.S.) for an engine. The NAL-designed RTA-70 is meant
to ply short-haul routes and compete with planes of French- Italian aircraft maker Avions de Transport

R
Régional (ATR), a leading exporter of turbo-prop aircraft to the Indian sub-continent.

VE
In 2008, the Indian government through the Ministries of Defence and Civil Aviation have approved the
plan and have asked HAL to prepare a roadmap for the project. It will not be an indigenous venture as the
government is planning to enter into a memorandum of understanding with major names in the industry
like Embraer, Bombardier
O
Aerospace or United Aircraft Corporation. The aircraft was expected to fly in six to seven years.
R
In 2010 at the India Aviation exhibition held in Hyderabad, a proposed cabin was on display and more
G

details on the specifications of the aircraft have been revealed.

On 23 December 2010, it was announced that the Indian government had asked NAL to consider the use
AN

of turbofan engines on the RTA-70. According to an NAL official, the use of a jet engine was seen as "a
stepping stone to the high end" by the government
R

Airplanes come in many different shapes and sizes depending on the mission of the aircraft, but all
KA

modern airplanes have certain components in common. An aircraft design is a separate discipline of
aeronautical engineering. It is very different from the analytical aspect such as aerodynamics, structures,
control and propulsion.

Actually the design is an iterative process as shown in the design wheel. Requirements are set by the prior
design trade studies. Concepts are developed to meet the requirements. Design analysis frequently point
towards the new concepts and technologies which can initiate a new design effort. However, once a
particular design under progress, all these activities are equally important in producing a good aircraft
concept.

Page | 1
 AIRCRAFT DESIGN
CYCLE

R
VE
O
R
G
AN

Figure 1

Aircraft design is a separate discipline of aeronautical engineering- different from the analytical disciplines
R

such as aerodynamics, structures, controls and propulsion. An aircraft designer needs to be well
versed in these and many such analyses. A good aircraft designs seems to miraculously glide through
KA

subsequent evaluations by specialists without major changes being required.

Design is not just the actual layout, but also the analytical processes used to determine what should be
designed and how the design should be modified to better meet the requirements. Sometimes a design
will begin as an innovative idea rather than as a response to a given requirements.
THE DESIGN WHEEL

Figure 2

Those involved in design can never quite agree as to just where the design process begins. The designer

R
thinks it starts with a new airplane concept. The sizing specialist knows that nothing can begin until an
initial estimate of the weight is made. The customer, civilian or military feels that the design with

VE
requirements. All concept over above is mean to be correct.

Actually, design is an iterative effort, as shown in “Design Wheel”. Concepts are developed to
O
meet requirements. Design analysis frequently points toward new concepts and technologies, which can
initiate a whole new design effort.
R

CYCLES OF DESIGN PROCESS:

G
AN
R
KA

Figure 3

Aircraft design can be broken into three major phases,

1.Conceptual design
2.Preliminary design
3.Detail design
Page | 3
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:
Conceptual design is a very fluid process. New ideas and problems emerge as a design is
investigated in ever increasing detail. Each time the latest design is analyzed and sized, it must be
redrawn to reflect the new gross weight, fuel weight, wing size, engine size, and other changes.

Conceptual design will usually begin with either a specific set of design requirements established by
the prospective customer or a company -generated guess as to what future customers need. Design
requirements include aircraft range and payload, take-off and landing distances, and maneuverability and
speed requirements.

The actual design effort usually begins with conceptual sketch. A good conceptual sketch will include the
approximate wing and tail geometries, the fuselage shape, and the internal locations of the major
components such as the engine, cockpit, payload/passenger compartment, landing gear and fuel tanks.

PRELIMINARY DESIGN:

R
VE
It can be said to begin when the major changes are over. The big questions such as whether
to use a canard or an aft tail have been resolved. At some point late in preliminary design, even minor
changes are stopped when a decision is made to freeze the configuration. During this design the specialists
O
in areas such as structures, landing gear, and control systems will design and analyze their portion of
R
the aircraft. Testing is initiated in areas such as aerodynamics, propulsion, structures, and stability and
control.
G

A key activity during this type of design is “LOFTING’. Lofting is the mathematical modeling of the
outside skin of the aircraft with sufficient accuracy to insure proper fit between its different parts,
AN

even if they are designed by different designers and possibly fabricated in different locations. The
ultimate objective during this design is to ready the company for the detail stage, also called “FULL-SCALE
DEVELOPMENT”.
R

DETAIL DESIGN:
KA

Assuming a favorable decision for entering full-scale development, the detail design phase begins
in which the actual pieces to be fabricated are designed. For example, during conceptual and preliminary
design the wing box will be designed and analyzed as a whole. During detail design, that whole will be
broken down into individual ribs, spars, and skins, each of which must be separately designed and
analyzed.

Another important part of detail design is called production design. Specialists determine how the
airplane will be fabricated, starting with smallest and simplest subassemblies and building upto the final
assembly process. Production designers frequently wish to modify the design for ease of manufacture;
that can have a major impact on performance or weight. Compromises are inevitable, but the design must
still meet the original requirements.
During detail design, the testing effort intensifies. Actual structure of the aircraft is fabricated and tested. Control laws
for the flight control system are tested on an “iron-bird” simulator, a detailed working model of the actuators and flight
control surfaces. Flight simulators are developed and flown by both company and customer test pilots. Detail design
ends with fabrication of the aircraft. Frequently the fabrication begins on part of the aircraft before the entire detail-
design effort is completed.

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Page | 5
DATA COLLECTION AND REQUIREMENTS

In this section we present the design specifications of various aircrafts which comes under the same
category as of our project.

The data has been organized in tabular form and graphs have been made to depict the
required value for our project.

The various aircrafts taken into considerations are:

1. XAC Y-7 100

2. IPTN N-250-100
3. ATR-72-200
4. ATR-72-500

R
5. ILYUSHIN II-114
6. SAAB 2000

VE
7. ANTONOV AN-140
8. De Havilland Dash 8 Q300 O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
Page | 7
KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
Page | 9
KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
Page | 11
KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
Page | 13
Graphs showing the chosen values..

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 7000

6000

5000
Max.Fuel(kgf)

4000

3000 Series1

2000

1000

R
0 200 400 600 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

VE
O
R
8000
G

7000
AN

6000
R

5000
Max. pay load(kgf)

KA

4000
Series1
3000

2000

1000

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max. Cruise Speed(kmph)

Page | 15
 30000

25000

20000
Max.To Weight(Kgf)

15000
Series1

10000

5000

R
0

VE
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
O
R
G

30000
AN

25000
R

20000
Max.Landing Weight(Kgf)

KA

15000
Series1

10000

5000

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
 6

4
Ailerons(m2)

3
Series1
2

R
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

VE
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
O
R
G
AN

4
R

3.95
KA

3.9

3.85
Propeller Dia.(m)

3.8

3.75
Series1
3.7

3.65

3.6

3.55
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

Page | 17
 30

25

20
Overall Length(m)

15
Series1

10

R
0

VE
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
O
R
G
AN

10

9
R

8
KA

7
Overall Height(m)

5
Series1
4

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
 3.5

3
Fuselage Max.Width(m)

2.5

1.5 Series1

0.5

R
0

VE
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
O
R
G
AN

3.5

3
R
KA

2.5
Fuselage Max.Depth(m)

1.5 Series1

0.5

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

Page | 19
 1400

1200

1000
Landing run(m)

800

600 Series1

400

200

R
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

VE
Cruise Speed(Kmph)

O
R
G

2500
AN

2000
R

1500
Range(km)

KA

1000 Series1

500

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Cruise Speed(kmph)
 450

400

350

300
W/S

250

200
Series1
150

100

50

R
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

VE
O
R
G

9
AN

7
R

6
KA
Wheel Track(m)

4 Series1

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

Page | 21
 12

10

8
Wheel Base(m)

6
Series1

R
2

VE
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
O 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
R
G
AN

18000

16000
R

14000
Operating empty weight(kgh)

KA

12000

10000

8000 Series1
6000

4000

2000

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
 35

30

25
Wing Span(m)

20

15 Series1

10

R
VE
5

0
O
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
R
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
G
AN

100
R

90
KA

80

70
Wings gross Area(m2)

60

50

40 Series1

30

20

10

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

Page | 23
 35

30

25
Aspect Ratio

20

15 Series1

10

R
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

VE
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

O
R
G

0.7
AN

0.6
R

0.5
KA
Taper Ratio(Wing)

0.4

0.3 Series1

0.2

0.1

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)
 8000

7000

6000

5000
Max.pay load(kgf)

4000
Series1
3000

2000

R
1000

VE
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(m)
O
R
G

25000
AN

20000
R
Max.Zero fuel weight(kgf)

KA

15000

Series1
10000

5000

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(m)

Page | 25
 450

400

350
Max.Wing loading(kg/m2)

300

250

200 Series1

150

100

50

R
0

VE
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise speed(m)
O
R
7
G

6
AN

5
Max.power loading(kgf/kw)

4
KA

3 Series1

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise speed(m)
 10000

9000

8000

7000
Service Ceiling(m)

6000

5000
Series1
4000

3000

2000

R
1000

VE
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise speed(m)
O
R
G

300
AN

250
R

200
KA
Main Wheel Size(m)

150
Series1

100

50

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise Speed(m)

Page | 27
 160

140

120
Nose Wheel Size(m)

100

80
Series1
60

40

R
20

VE
0
0 100 200 300 400 O500 600 700 800
Max.Cruise speed(m)
R
G
AN
R
KA
 1 . Initial design specifications
1.1 Introduction

In this section, we present an application of the preliminary design procedure. A

60 seater airplane cruising at M = 0.45, at 4.5 km altitude and having a gross still
air range (GSAR) of 2000 km is considered. The presentation is divided into eight
sections
• Data collection
• Preliminary weight estimation

R
• Optimization of wing loading and thrust loading

VE
• Wing design
• Fuselage design, preliminary design of tail surface and preliminary layout
• CG calculation
O
• Control surface design
R
• Performance estimation and presentation of results
G
AN

1.1 Design Philosophy

R

In this report the aim is to design a 60 seater aircraft for regional transportation purpose. The
infrastructural growth, in road and the rail transportation is not in the pace with the
KA

country’s GDP growth. The only alternative is air transportation. A sector of upper middle class
people would prefer to commute at fast between cities. For this sector of people the airfare
which is near first class AC train is comfortable. So the aircraft should be efficient to reduce the
per passenger cost, should able to operate in small airports and should be reasonably
fast. Considering all the facts in the present design projects we are concentrating on the
aircrafts with turboprops.

Page | 29
The requirements are as mentioned bellow

1. Gross Still Air Range = 2000 km

2. No. of Passenger = 60
3. Flight Cruise speed = 500 km/h
4. Service ceiling = 9000 m
5. Takeoff Distance = 900 m
6. Landing Distance = 900 m

Certification requirements

R
VE
All commercial aircrafts must satisfy the airworthy requirements to fly in various
countries. Typically each country has its own aviation authority to qualify.
O
India - DGCA (Director General of Civil Aviation)
R
UK - CAA (Civil Aviation Authority)
G

USA - FAA (Federal Aviation Authority)

Russia- CIS
AN

In all the regulation the following aspects should be covered, the severity may
R

vary.
KA

1. Flight :- This includes performance like stall, take off, climb, cruise,
descent, landing, response to gust etc. Also included are requirements of
stability, controllability and maneuverability.
2. Structural :- Flight loads, ground loads, emergency landing condition,
fatigue evaluation, damage tolerant design and failsafe designs.
3. Power plant :- Fire protection, auxiliary power unit, air intake/exhaust, fuel
system, cooling
4. Others :- Material quality regulations, bird strike, Propeller blade
dismantling and hitting the fuselage etc.
All these regulation and test are meant for the at most safety of the passengers. Apart
from above said qualifications the environment concerns like emission and noise
pollution needs to be met.

1.2 Preliminary Design

To begin with data is collected for the existing commercial aircrafts available in
service. The following preliminary configurations are taken.

R
VE
Power plant - To meet the short range, medium speed, short take off and
landing requirements it is preferred to choose turboprops.
O
Wing Mounting - The wing is mounted on the top of the fuselage. This
R
configuration is best for the turboprops. The engine can be mounted on the
G

bottom surface of the wing. This configuration is highly efficient because bottom
surface of the wing generates small amount of lift as compared to the top.
AN

Anything on the top surface of the wing reduces lift considerably.

Landing gear - The aircraft has a retractable tricycle landing gear

R
KA

Wing and Empennage - The conventional tapered wing configuration will be

used. The T-tail configuration is good from aerodynamic point of view and
conventional tail configuration is good from structural point of view. The tail plane
surfaces are kept well out of the airflow behind the wing, giving smoother flow,
more predictable design characteristics, and better pitch control. This is
especially important for planes operating at low speed, where clean airflow is
required for control.

The effective distance between wing and tailplane can be increased without a
significant increase in the weight of the aircraft. The distance between the two planes

Page | 31
gives the "leverage" by which the tailplane can control the aircraft's pitch attitude -
with a greater distance, smaller, lighter tailplanes and elevators can be used.

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 The tail surfaces are mounted well out of the way of the rear fuselage, permitting this
site to be used for the aircraft's engines. This is why the T-tail arrangement is also
commonly found on airliners with rear-mounted engines.

The horizontal stabilizer is kept farther away from the ground, which helps reduce
damage to it by objects on the ground when taking off or landing.

1.2.1 Preliminary Weight Estimate

R
For the given number of passenger the pay load estimation is done as follows

VE
1. One crew member for every 30 passengers. Total of 2-crew member for
60 passengers. O
2. Flight pilot and co-pilot
R
3. As per the practiced standards 102 kg per passenger( 80 kg passenger
weight and 22 Kg check in luggage)
G
AN

Thus the total payload becomes 64 x 102 = 6528 Kg

This 102 kg is considered after referring to similar airplanes.
R

A database is prepared referring to various aircrafts similar to the aircraft under

design and is presented in Table.1. In this report we will be referring to this table very
KA

often. The design will follow ATR-72 aircraft.

Referring to Table.1 we can consider

WTo = 22000 Kg and

WGross=22200 Kg

Calculation

S = W/(W/S) W/S =344 kg/m2 from data collection.

S = 22000/344 ≈ 64 m2
Page | 33
b = √(AxS) b=27.71 ≈ 28 m

The Root chord Cr =

Taper ratio λ = 0.4 (Ref. from the data table for Aircrafts) Cr

= 3.26 m

Ct = λ X Cr =1.31 m

Referring to Table.1 we can consider

R
Sv / S =0.21 and Sh / S = 0.25

VE
Sv = 0.21 x 64 = 13.44 m2 O
Sh = 0.25 x 64 = 16.0 m2
R
To find the aspect ratio of the vertical tail and horizontal tail
G

Referring to Table 4.3 of Ref (Raymer Ref.2). for taper ratio and aspect ratio.
AN

Horizontal tail Vertical

tail
Ah λh Av λv
R

Fighter 3 -4 0.2 – 0.4 0.6 – 1.4 0.2 – 0.4

KA

Sail plane 6-10 0.3 – 0.5 1.5 – 2.0 0.4 – 0.6

Others 3-5 0.3 – 0.6 1.3 – 2.0 0.3 – 0.6
T-tail - - 0..7 – 1.2 0.6 – 1.0

Aspect ratio Av = 1.5 Taper ratio λv = 0.0.35

Ah = 5.5 λh = 0.5
 bv = 4.5 m

bh = 9.4 m

Crv =

Crv = 4.42 m

Ctv = λvCrv = 1.55 m

R
Crh = 2.27m

VE
Cth = λhCrh = 1.13m
O
R
Control Surfaces:
G

A number of aircrafts and their 3-view drawings are studied and the following
AN

parameters are chosen.

S_flap / S = 0.2
R
KA

b_flap / b = 0.4

S_ele / S_ht = 0.33

S_rud / S_vt = 0.32

Therefore the following parameters are calculated:

S_ele = 5.28 m2

S_rud = 4.30 m2

b_flap = 11.2 m

Page | 35
Fuselage:

Length: Referring to ATR-72-200 aircraft whose capacity is 66 passengers and the

length is 27.17.

The overall length of the aircraft is taken as 27 m (our Aircraft capacity is of 64)

lf =27 m

Diameter:

Referring to ATR-72-200, the width of the fuselage is taken as 2.6 m. df

R
VE
=2.6 m and height of 1.9 m

Overall height:
O
Based on the dimensions of different aircrafts the overall height is taken as 7.7 m
R
G

Engine Location:

Engines will be mounted on the bottom surface of the wing. The upper surface
AN

contributes more for generation of lift. So clean upper surface is an advantage.

R

Landing gear:
KA

Tricycle retracting type landing gear will be located on the belly of the fuselage.

Main wheel size 863x250 mm

Nose Wheel size 450x190 mm

Wheel Track (m) 4.1 m

Wheel Base (m) 10.77 m

Power Plant:

2 Pratt and Witney 123D Each rated 1604 kW (According to the table.1) and
referring to company website.
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R

Page | 37
 Fig 1.1Antonov- AN-140

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Fig 1.2 XAC Y-7 100

 R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R

Fig 1.3 ATR 72-500

KA

Page | 39
 R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Fig 1.4 Proposed Aircraft under design

 2. Revised weight estimation
In the previous section ,an initial estimate for the aircraft parameters has been done
.The weight estimate is being revised using refined estimates of fuel weight and empty
eight. The fuel fractions for various phases are worked out in the following steps .The fuel
fractions for warm up, take off ,climb and landing are taken from Raymer Ref.2(4),chapter 3 .

FUEL FRACTION ESTIMATION

The fuel weight depends on the mission profile and the fuel required as reserve. The mission

R
profile for a civil turbo prop transport aircraft involves

VE
Take off O
Climb
R
Cruise
Loiter before landing
G

Descent and landing

AN

2.1.1 Warm up and Take off

R
KA

The value for this stage is taken by following the standards given in Raymer Ref.2(4)
,chapter 3

W1
= 0.97
W0

W 0 is the weight at take-off and W 1 is the weight at the end of the take-off phase.

2.1.2 Climb
The weight ratio for this stage is chosen by following the standards given in Raymer

Page | 41
 Ref.2(4), chapter 3.
W2
= 0.985
W1

R
VE
O
R
G

2.1.3 Cruise
AN

Derivation for Range:-

R
KA

The weight ratio for the cruise phase of flight is calculated using the following
Breguet equation

Where,
BSFC = 3 N/kW-hr = 0.5 lb/BHP-hr
Gross still air range = 2000 km. Hence

GSAR 2000
Cruise safe air range = = = 1333.33 km
1.5 1.5
From figure 3.5 of Raymer Ref.2 (4), the Swet Sref value is 5.2.

Therefore the corresponding wetted Aspect ratio is

Aspect ratio/( Swet Sref ) = 12/5.2=2.3

Corresponding to this value of wetted aspect ratio, ( L

D )max is taken as 17
from figure 3.6 of Raymer Ref.2(4). This corresponds to the average value for Civil Turbo
prop aircrafts.
As prescribed by Raymer Ref.2(4) ,chapter 3

R
VE
( L D )cruise = ( L D )max
O
To account for allowances due to head wind during cruise and provision for diversion to
R
another airport, we proceed as follows.
G

Head wind is taken as 15 m/s. The time to cover the cruise safe range of 1333.33 km at cruise
AN

velocity of 500km/hr is
R

1333.3
Time = = 2.67 hrs
KA

500

Therefore with a head wind of 15m/s or 54km/hr, the additional distance that has to
be accounted for
Additional distance = 54 x 2.67 = 144 km

The allowance for diversion to another airport is taken as 300 km. From the information
available the air distance between nearest airport is about 300 km. The corresponding map
is given in this report.

The total distance during cruise, R = 1333.3 + 144 + 300 = 1777.3 =1780(approx).
Page | 43
Substituting the above values in the Breguet equation, we get

2.1.4 Loiter

R
VE
Derivation for endurance:-
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
Therefore the from chapter 1.
weight ratio for
Loiter phase of
flight is
calculated using
the following
expression

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

W1
=3374 N/ m 2
S

W3 , η = 0.7
= 3374 x 0.985 x 0.897 =2982 N/ m 2 p

We design for a loiter time of 30 min, so endurance E = 0.5 hrs

Page | 45
Therefore we get
W4
= 0.9878
W3

2.1.5 Landing
Following the standards specified by Raymer Ref.2(4), chapter 3, we take this ratio as

W5

R
= 0.995
W4

VE
Therefore , O
R
W5
= 0.995 x 0.9878 x 0.897 x 0.985 x 0.97 = 0.8423
Wo
G

Allowing a reserve fuel of 6%, we obtain the fuel fraction as

AN

Wf W5
= ς = 1.06(1 ) = 0.1671
Wo
R

-
Wo
KA

2.2 Empty Weight Fraction

To determine the empty weight ratio, we follow the method in Raymer Ref.2(4),

chapter 3, which gives a relation between We and W o as follows.

Wo
 We − 0.05
= 0.92 W o (eq 1)
Wo

Hence,

Wpayload 6528
W0 = = (eq 2)
1 − Wf Wo − We Wo 1 − 0.1671 − We Wo
From chapter 1 ,Wpayload =(102x64)=6528 kgf

R
We solve this equation by iteration

VE
Table 2 : Iterative procedure for W o
Wo(guess) We Wo (from eq 1) O W o (from eq 2)

22200 0.5577 23728.6

R
23728.6 0.5559 23566.7
23566.7 0.5562 23500
G

23500 0.5562 23500

AN

Hence, the gross weight W o is obtained as

R

Wo = 23500 Kg
KA

We Wf Wpay
The critical weight ratios are:- = 0.5562 , = 0.1671 , = 0.2778
Wg Wo Wo

Page | 47
 R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Fig 2.1 This picture shows major airports in India.

 R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Fig 2.2 This picture shows Air network between major airports in
India.

Page | 49
KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
 TRe q *V 15553*138.9
THP = = = 2160.3Kw
1000 1000

η p = 0.8

THP 2160.3
BHP = = = 2700Kw
0.8 0.8

BHP per engine

BHP 2700
BHP = = = 1350Kw =1822 hp per engine
2 2

The power required per engine is 1350kW

R
VE
O
Engine selection
R
G

P req= BHP per engine=1350 kW

AN

From Pratt and Whitney engine data base

R

Model Max SHP TO RPM Max continuous power

KA

PW 120 1491 kW 1212 1268 kW

PW 121A 1640 kW 1212 1417 kW
PW 123D 1604 kW 1212 1454 kW ◄
PW 127F 2051 kW 1212 1864 kW

Considering the power requirement, PW123D engine is selected.

Page | 51
Propeller selection

N = 1212 RPM information from website for PW123D engine

n= 1212/60 = 20.2 RPS

3 3
ρ =0.77 kg/m = 0.001508 slug/ft

R
=455.6(0.001508/(1002100*20.22))1/5

VE
=2.36
O
For a four bladed propeller with Cs =2.36
R
G

J for ηmax = 1.64

AN

J=V/nd
R

Propeller dia D=V/n J = 455.6/20.2*1.64

KA

= 13.75 ft = 4.2 m

Referring to the similar airplanes data,

The propeller diameter is chosen as 3.9 m.
 R
VE
O
R
G

Fig 3.1 Drag polar compared with Fokker-50

AN
R
KA

Page | 53
4.0 WING DESIGN

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
4.1 Introduction
The weight and the wing loading of the airplane have been obtained in sections 2 and 3.
The details are as below
Weight = 23500 Kg = 230535 N

Wing loading = 3600 N/m2

Wing area is obtained as 64.04 m2
The wing design involves choosing the following parameters.
1. Airfoil selection
2. Aspect ratio
3. Sweep

R
4. Taper ratio

VE
5. Twist
6. Incidence
O
7. Dihedral
R
8. Vertical location
G
AN

4.2 Airfoil selection

The airfoil shape influences Many aerodynamic parameters. I has an influence
R

on stalling speed, fuel consumption during cruise, turning performance and weight of the
KA

airplane.
After referring to the existing similar airplanes, NACA 653618 is chosen. For
NACA 653618

Details:
Design lift co-efficient 0.6
Thickness ratio 18 percent

4.3 Aspect ratio

The aspect ratio affects CL, Cdi and wing weight.
Page | 55
At present stage of design, we chose aspect ratio A = 12 based on the data
collection. (Table 1).

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
4.4 Sweep
Referring to Raymer Ref.2,
Generally for low subsonic speed, sweep will be taken as zero. Based
on the data of similar airplanes, sweep = 0 deg.

4.5 Taper ratio

Based on the data collected, taper ratio selected as 0.4.

4.6 Twist

R
Based on the data of similar airplanes, twist = 0 deg.

4.7 Wing incidence

VE
O
The wing incidence angle is the angle between wing reference chord and fuselage
R
reference line. Wing incidence angle is chosen to minimize drag at some operating
G

conditions, usually at cruise.

The wing incidence angle is the angle between wing reference chord and fuselage reference
AN

line. Wing incidence angle is chosen to minimize drag at some operating conditions, usually
at cruise.
W
3600 = 0.48466
R

C Lopt = S =
qcr 0.5 * 0.77 *138.9 2
KA

CLopt = 0.48466 = C Lcruise

CLcruise = CLα ( iw − α oL )
t/c = 18 From Raymer Ref.2
Λ =0

β 2
= 0.8319
Page | 57
Λ =0

Clα Slope of the aerofoil NACA 653618

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 Clα =6.07 per radian

R
VE
O
CLα= 5.62 per radian = 0.098 per deg
R
G

CLcruise = CLα ( iw − α oL )
AN

α oL = 4.1 for NACA 653618 aerofoil.

iw = 0.04125 rad
R

iw = 2.360
KA

Based on the data collected, the wing incidence angle is chosen as iw= 2o

4.8 Vertical location of wing.

The vertical location of wing for the designed airplane has been chosen to be a High
wing configuration which is typical of similar airplanes.

High Wing configuration:

Advantages:

Page | 59
 i) Allows placing fuselage closer to ground, thus allowing loading and unloading
without special ground handling equipment.
ii)Jet engines & propeller have sufficient ground clearance without excessive landing gear
length leading to lower landing gear weight.

iii) For low speed airplanes, weight saving can be effected by strut braced wing.
iv)For short take off and landing (STOL) airplanes with high wing configuration have
following specific advantages. (a) Large wing flaps can be used (b) Engines are away
from the ground and hence ingestion of debris rising from unprepared runways is avoided
(c) Prevents floating of wing due to ground effect which may occur for low wing
configuration.

R
4.9 Dihedral

VE
Based on the data of similar airplanes, dihedral is chosen as 3 deg.
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 Parameters XAC-Y7 ATR-42 ATR-72 IPTN-N250-100 IL 114 SAAB 2000 An140

1 Aspect ratio 11.7 11.1 12 12.1 11 11

2 Wing Area (m2) 75.26 54.5 61 65 81.9 55.74

3 W (Kgf) 21800 18600 21500 24800 23500 22800 19150

R
4 W/S (Kg/m2) 289.7 341.3 352.5 381.5 286.9 409

VE
5 Wing location High Mounted High Mounted High Mounted Low Wing Low Wing High

O
6 Aerofoil NACA 43 Series MS 0317 (MS0313)

R
7 t/c 18 % (At root) 17% (At root) 16%

G
8 Sweep 0 0

9 Taper Ratio 0.313 0.548 0.618 0.518 0.524

AN
10 Twist (Degree) 3
Wing incident
11 3 (At root) 2 (At root) 2 (At root) 2 2 (At root)
(i) Deg
R
12 Dihedral Angle 2.5 deg 2.5 deg 3 7 6
KA

Fowler Flaps Single

Double slotted Double slotted Double slotted Double
13 High Lift device Single and Slotted
flaps flaps fowler flaps Slotted Flaps
double slotted Flaps

Table: 4.1 Comparison of different parameters of similar aircrafts

Page | 61
5.Fuselage And Tail Sizing

Fuselage sizing

lf = aWoC

For a twin turbo prop (From Raymer Ref.2 book)

a= 0.169
C=0.51
We have Wo= 23500 Kg

R
Therefore lf = (0.169)*(23500)0.51 =28.65 m

Therefore the length of the fuselage is 28.65 m.

VE
O
R
Length of Nose
G

=0.03 therefore lnose= 0.86m

lcockpit = 2.5 m . It is standard for a 2 pilot cockpit.

AN

Cabin Length:
R

Economic classs. No. of passengers = 48 (12 rows)

KA

Business class. No. of passengers = 12 (3 rows)

Parameter Economy class Business class

Seat pitch (inches) 32 38
Seat width (inches) 22 28
Aisle width (inches) 22 56
Seat abreast 4 2
No. of aisle 1 1
Max height (m) 2.2 2.2
Class No. of seats No. of rows Seat pitch Cabin length (m)
Economy 52 13 32 10.56
Business 8 4 38 3.86

Cabin diameter
df(internal) = (22*4 +22*1)*2.54/100 = 2.8
m t = (110)(0.02) +1”
= 3.2 inch
= 0.0813 m

External diameter of the fuselage = 2.8+0.0813*2 = 2.96 m

R
Rear fuselage

VE
= 0.25

= 0.25* 28.65 = 7.1625 m

O
R
Total fuselage length (m)
G

Nose length = 0.86

Cockpit = 2.5
AN

Passenger seating = 14.42

Rear fuselage = 7.162
R

Toilets, and other = 1.3

KA

Total length = 28.5

Cargo door = 1.3

Tail sizing
1. Aspect ratio
Aspect ratio of horizontal wing Ah = 5.5
Aspect ratio of vertical tail Av = 1.5

2. Area ratio
Sh/S = 0.25 Sv/S= 0.21

Sh= 16 m2 Sv= 13.44 m2

Page | 63
3. Span

bh= 9.4 m
bv= 4.5 m
Crh= 2.27 m
Cth=1.13m
Crv= 3.73 m
Ctv=2.24 m

R
4. Engine location

VE
The type of Engine mounting and it’s location play a major role in deciding the overall
drag coefficient of the airplane. A conventional wing mounted engine is chosen
O as
it facilitates periodic maintenance in an industry where an
R
attached to the lower side of the wing using pylons to reduce drag. The other reason for
G

choosing a wing mounted engine is the fuel is stored in the wings itself, thereby
reducing the length of the fuel line. From the data collection of similar airplanes, the
AN

engineFrom referring to the data of similar airplanes the engines are located at 33.4 % of
wing semi-span.
R
KA

5. Landing gear
Hydraulically retractable tricycle type, nose unit retract forward, main units
inward into fuselage and large under fuselage fairing.
Minimum turning radius on ground is 17.08m

Wheel base 12 m
Track 4.10 m
 R
VE
O
Cargo Door Business class Economy class Passenger door

R
G
Fig 5.1 Cabin Layout

AN
(The design of ATR-72 aircraft is considered for Cabin layout.)
R
KA

Page | 65
6. Estimation of component weights and CG
location
Aircraft weight is a common factor which links different design activities (aerodynamics,
structures, propulsion, layout, airworthiness,environmental, economic and operational
aspects).To this end, at each stage of the design, a check is made on the expected total mass
of the completed aircraft. A separate design organization(weights department)is employed
to assess and control weight. In the preliminary design stage, estimates have to made from
historical statistical data of all the component parts of the aircraft from similar airplanes. As

R
parts are manufactured and the aircraft prototype reaches completion it is possible to check

VE
the accuracy of the estimates by weighing each component and where necessary instigate
weight reduction programmes. O
6.1 Aircraft mass statement
R
G

The weight of the entire airplane can be sub-divided into empty weight and useful
load. The empty weight can be further subdivided into-
AN

• Structures group
• Propulsion group
R

• Equipment group
KA

DCPR(Defense Contractor Planning Report) weight is taken as the weight obtained

after deducting weights of wheels, brakes, tires, engines, starters, batteries, equipments,
avionics etc from the empty weight. DCPR weight is important for cost estimation, and can
be viewed as the weight of the parts of the airplane that the manufacturer makes as
opposed those of items bought and installed.

It has become normal practice in aircraft design to list the various components of
aircraft mass in a standard format.

The components are grouped in convenient subsections as shown below.

 6.1.1 Structures Group
1. Wing(including control surfaces)
2. Tail(horizontal and vertical including controls)
3. Body(or fuselage)
4. Nacelles
5. Landing gear (main and nose units)
6. Surface controls

6.1.2 Propulsion Group

R
1. Engine(s)(dry weight)

VE
2. Accessory gearbox and drives
3. Induction system O
4. Exhaust system
5. Oil system and cooler
R
6. Fuel system
G

7. Engine controls
8. Starting system
AN

9. Thrust reversers
R

6.1.3 Fixed equipment group

KA

1. Auxiliary power unit

2. Flight control systems (sometimes included in structural group)
3. Instruments and navigation equipment
4. Hydraulic systems
5. Electrical systems
6. Avionics systems
7. Furnishing
8. Air conditioning and anti-icing
9. Oxygen system
10. Miscellaneous (e.g. fire protection and safety systems)
Page | 67
 6.2 weights of various components
After making the classification between various groups and listing the
components in each group, we next proceed to determine the weights of these
components. In the preliminary design stages it is not possible to know the size of
individual aircraft components in great detail but it is possible to use prediction
methods that progressively become more accurate as the aircraft geometry is
developed. Most aircraft design textbooks contain a set of equations empirically
derived based on existing aircraft. For the present design, we choose to follow
equations prescribed in Appendix 8.1 of [5]. Using these equations, the weights of
various individual components are calculated.

R
6.3 C.G Location and C.G Travel
VE
O
6.3.1 Wing Location on Fuselage
R
The wing longitudinal location is decided based on the consideration the C.G of the
G

entire airplane with full payload and fuel is around the quarter chord of the m.a.c. We
tabulate the weights and the corresponding C.G locations of various components and then
AN

apply moment equilibrium about the nose of the airplane in order to solve for Xl.e (the
distance of leading edge of root chord of the wing from the nose).In tabulating the results,
R

we assume that the C.G locations of wing, horizontal tail and vertical tail are at 40% of the
KA

respective m.a.c. The fuselage C.G is taken to be at 40% of it’s length. The engine C.G
location was taken to be at 50% of it’s length. All other components were taken to have a
net C.G location at 40% of the fuselage length. The tabulated values are given below. The
nose wheel was placed referring to ATR-72 aircraft, main landing gear position was
determined based on load distribution.
• Using data for equivalent trapezoidal wing in section 4, the location of wing c.g. is at 5.34
m behind the leading edge of the root chord. The quarter chord of m.a.c is at
4.76 m behind the leading edge of root chord.
• Noting that the tail arm is 14.85 m and that the c.g of tail is 15 % behind the a.c., the
distance of horizontal tail c.g. from leading edge of root chord of wing is 20.05 m. In a
similar way, c.g. of vertical tail is at 19.56 m behind leading edge of the root chord of
wing
 Components Wt (Kgf) CG (m) Wt*CG (Kgf*m) % Wt
Wing 2678.34 12.92 34613.15 11.40
Fuselage 3290.00 11.40 37506.00 14.00
HT 432.00 25.72 11112.92 1.84
VT 362.88 25.07 9097.90 1.54
Engine 1170.00 11.91 13930.68 4.98
Fixed Equipment 3995.00 11.40 45543.00 17.00
Nose Wheel 167.00 1.74 290.41 0.71
Main Landing Gear 949.93 13.74 13051.09 4.04
Pay Load 6528.00 12.36 80686.08 27.78

R
Fuel 3926.85 12.56 49319.70 16.71

VE
295150.93

Table 6.1 Weights and CG location

O
R
By applying moment equilibrium about the nose of the airplane, we obtain
G

location of wing leading edge at the root to be 11.74 m from the nose of the airplane.
The C.G of the airplane lies at 12.56 m from the nose.
AN

6.4 C.G Travel for Critical Cases

R
KA

6.4.1 Full Payload and No Fuel

For the case of full payload and no fuel, the fuel contribution to the weight is
not present. However, since we have assumed that the c.g of the fuel to be at the
quarter chord of the m.a.c of the wing (where the c.g of the entire airplane has been
positioned) there will be no c.g shift in this case.
Hence, the C.G shift is
0%.

6.4.2 No Payload and No Fuel

Page | 69
For this case, the fuel as well as the payload contribution are not present. Since the
c.g of payload is not at the c.g of the entire airplane, the c.g is bound to shift by a
certain amount in this case. Calculations showed that, the C.G shift is 4%.

6.4.3 No Payload and Full fuel

For this case, since there is no payload, the c.g is bound to shift. On performing
calculations, we obtain the new c.g location. The shift in CG is about 3.13 %

6.5 Summary

R
VE
• Wing location(leading edge of root of trapezoidal wing) – 11.74 m
• c.g location with Full payload and full fuel - 12.56 m
O
• c.g travel for No Payload and No Fuel – 4.0%
• c.g travel for No Payload and full Fuel – 3.13%
R
G
AN
R
KA
7 Control Surfaces

7.1 Stability and Controllability

The ability of a vehicle to maintain its equilibrium is termed stability and the influence which the pilot
or control system can exert on the equilibrium is termed its controllability. The basic requirement for
static longitudinal stability of any airplane is a negative slope of the curve of the pitching moment
coefficient, Cmcg, versus lift coefficient, CL. Dynamic stability requires that the vehicle be not
only statically stable, but also that the motions following a disturbance from equilibrium be such as
to restore the equilibrium. Even though the vehicle might be statically stable, it is possible that the
oscillations following a disturbance might increase in magnitude with each oscillation, thereby

R
making it impossible to restore the equilibrium.

7.2 Static Longitudinal Stability and Control

VE
O
R
7.2.1 Specifications
G

• The horizontal tail must be large enough to insure that the static longitudinal
AN

stability criterion, dCmcg/dCL will be negative for all anticipated center of gravity
positions.
R

• An elevator should be provided so that the pilot will be able to trim the airplane(maintain
KA

Cm = 0) at all anticipated values of CL.

• The tail should be large enough and its elevator powerful enough to enable the pilot rotate
the airplane during the take-off run to the required angle of attack. This condition is
termed as the Nose wheel Lift-off condition.

7.2.2 Aft Center of gravity limit

For the “stick free” case and for small angles of attack ,the following expression for the aft
center of gravity limit in terms of the tail-size parameter, V we have the following equation.
The value of xc.g from above equation is termed the “stick-free neutral point”, since it is the
c.g location at which the static stability is neutral.

Page | 71
7.2.3 Forward center of Gravity Limit
The forward c.g. limit is not generally dependent on maintaining stability. As the c.g
is moved forward ,the stability contribution xc.g −xa.c of the wing becomes more and
more negative ,thereby increasing the static stability. In order to keep the airplane in
equilibrium as the c.g is moved forward, the elevator must be capable of trimming out the
resulting negative pitching moment. The pitching moment will be the greatest when the
airplane is at CLmax when the airplane is landing and ground effects decrease the
downwash at the tail.

aw=5.62 /radian = 0.098 /degree

R
from the value obtained in section 4 on wing design.

VE
From Raymer Ref.2 Fig 16.4, M=0.5 O
Cmα = -0.7 / radian
R
Therefore,
G

Referring to Nelson book

AN

We get Cmα = -0.68 / radian for Navion

Cmα = -0.78 / radian for STOL
R

Therefore the Cmα = -0.7 / radian in appropriate.

KA

Cmα (fuse) =0.223 for Navion.

For Jet planes

Therefore for turboprop aircraft can be considered.

 = 0.52 from Perkins and Hage

Horizontal Tail
Aspect Ratio : 5.5

Landing Mach number= 0.17

β2 =1 - M2 = 0.971, A=5.5
From Equation in section 4,

R
aw Land =4.354/ radian = 0.076 /deg

VE
-0.125=0.06+0.06-(0.076/0.098) X V X 1 X (1-0.2979) X (1-(-0.0066/-0.0114)X0.52) V =
O
0.6438
R
G

V= therefore
AN

The value is closer to the value from similar aircrafts.

R

We can take
KA

Therefore Sht= 12.81 m2

Vertical Tail
Aspect ratio= 1.5

From Equation in section 4,

at Land =2.064 / radian = 0.036/deg

Cnβ desirable =0.08 / radian = 0.0014 /deg

Page | 73
Cnβ (fuselage) = =0.0025

-0.0014=0+0.0025-0.036 V V
= 0.102

V= therefore

The value is closer to the value from similar aircrafts. We

R
can take

VE
Therefore Svt= 13.4 m2 O
R
G
AN
R
KA
8. Performance Estimation

The details regarding overall dimensions, engine details, weights, geometric

parameters of wing, fuselage, horizontal tail, vertical tail, vertical tail and other
details like CLmax in various conditions and maximum load factor are given in section
8.2 - 8.10. The details of flight condition for estimation of drag polar are as follows

Altitude : 4500 m = 14760 ft

R
Mach number : 0.45

Kinematic Viscosity : 2.12355 ×10−5 m2/s

Density : 0.777 kg/m3

VE
O
Speed of Sound : 322.6 m/s
R
Flight Speed : 138.9 m/s
Weight of the Airplane : 23500 kgf
G
AN
R
KA

Page | 75
 Wing Loading Calculations
The power-to-weight ratio (P/W) and the wing loading (W/S) are the two most
important parameters affecting aircraft performance. Optimization of these
parameters forms a major part of the design activities conducted after initial weight
estimation. For example, if the wing loading used for the initial layout is low, then the area
would be large and there would be enough space for the landing gear and fuel tanks.
However it results in a heavier wing.
Wing loading and thrust-to-weight ratio are interconnected for a number of critical
performance items, such as take-off distance, maximum speed etc. These are often the
design drivers. A requirement for short takeoff can be met by using a large wing (low W/S)

R
with a relatively low P/W. On the other hand, the same takeoff distance could be met with

VE
a high W/S along with a higher P/W.
In this section, we use different criteria and optimize the wing loading and thrust
O
loading. Wing loading affects stalling speed, climb rate, takeoff and landing distances,
R
minimum fuel required and turn performance.
G

Similarly, a higher thrust loading would result in more cost which is undesirable.
However it would also lead to enhanced climb performance. Hence a trade-off is needed
AN

while choosing W/S and P/W. Optimization of W/S and P/W based on various
considerations is carried out in the following subsections.
R
KA

1. Landing Distance Consideration

SLand = 1200 m

Initially landing distance was considered as 900m. But it is found that for all similar
aircrafts the landing distance is around 1200 m . so it is decided to consider
landing distance as 1200m

S Land ( feet)
Va =
0.3

(1200)(3.28)
Va =
0.3
V a = 114.54 K nots V a = 5 9 .0 4 m / s
Stall Speed , Vs = Va/1.3 = 59.04/1.3

Vs = 45.4 m/s

1
Now (W/S)Land = ρ 0σ Vs2CL max
2

1
(1.225) * (45.4) 2 * 2.7
2

(W/S)Land = 3408.64 N/m2

W Land/W TO = 0.97

R
VE
(W/S) TO = 3514.065 N/m2

With 10% Variation in Vs

O
R
2761.0 N/m2 < (W/S)Land < 4124.46 N/m2
G
AN
R

2. Maximum Speed Consideration

KA

Vmax = 1.1 Vcr Vcr = 500 Kmph

Vmax = 1.1*500

Vmax = 550 Km/h = 152.8 m/s

C D = C D0 + KC L2

1
K=
π Ae

S wet
C D 0 = C fe
S ref

Page | 77
 A 12
= = 2.3
S wet 5.2
S ref

1 1 1
= + + 0.05
e ewing e fuge

1 1 1
= + + 0.05
e 0.84 0.1

e = 0 .7 4 6

1
K=
π *12 * 0.746

R
K = 0.03555

VE
O
R
G
AN

CD 0 = 1
2
4K L D ( )
R

Max
KA

1
CD 0 = 2
4 * 0.03555 (17 )

C D 0 = 0.02433

C D = C D0 + KC L2

C D = 0.02433 + 0.03555C L 2
This is the Drag polar for the aircraft under design

CD 0 S wet
= C fe *
S ref
0.02433 = C fe * 5.2

C fe = 0.004679

F1 = 0.004679 *1.87 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.21)

F1 = 0.01277

CD 0 − F1
F2 =
W
S

0.02433 − 0.01277
F2 =
3440

R
F2 = 3.36046E − 6

VE
K
F3 =
q2 O
0.03555
F3 =
R
2
( 12 * 0.77 *152.8 ) 2
G

F3 = 4.39972 E − 10
AN

F1
Popt =
F3
R
KA

0.01277
Popt =
4.39972 E − 10

2
Popt = 5387.449 N / m

tv max = 0.07282
Considering +5% of tvmax (0.076461)

Page | 79
3573.65 N/m2 < W/S < 8121.815 N/m2

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 2W
CL =
ρ SV 2

2 * 5387.446
CL =
0.77 *152.82

C L = 0.59934

C D = 0.02433 + 0.03555*0.59934 2

C D = 0.03709986

WCD
T=
CL

R
23500 * 9.81* 0.03709986
T=

VE
0.59934

T = 14 270 .3 9 N O
TV
R
PRe q =
1000
G

14270.39 *152.8
PRe q =
1000
AN

PR e q = 2180.515 Kw (Total power)

R

To convert it to sea level static thrust

KA

PRe q 2180.515
= = 3634.19Kw
0.6 0.6

3634.19
Power per engine is = 1817.1 kw
2

P 3634.19
= = 0.01576
W 23500 *9.81

Page | 81
3. (R/C)Max Consideration
3C D 0
( CL ) min P =
K

3 * 0.02433
( C L ) min P =
0.03555

( CL )min P = 1.432886

2W S
Vmin P =
ρ ( CL )min P

R
2 * 3440
Vmin P =

VE
1.225 *1.432886

Vmin P = 62.61m / s
O
1
R
q = *1.225 * 62.612
2
G

q = 2401.01
AN

K
F3 =
q2
R

0.03555
F3 =
KA

2401.012

F3 = 6.16668E − 9

F1
Popt =
F3

0.01277
Popt =
6.16668E − 9

Popt = 1439.03N / m2

Since the value is not appropriate, it is not considered

4. Based on the Range consideration (R)
Vcr =500 Kmph = 138.9 m/s

1
q = * 0.77 *138.92
2

q = 7427.886

K
F3 =
q2

R
0.03555
F3 =
7427.8862

VE
F3 = 6.4433E − 10
O
F1
Popt =
R
F3
G

0.01277
Popt =
6.4433E − 10
AN

Popt = 4451.86N / m2
R
KA

2997.12 N/m2 < W/S < 6612.69 N/m2

Page | 83
Summary of above considerations.
Popt (N/m2) Wing loading N/m2) power loading

S land consideration 3514 2761- 4125

Vmax consideration 5387.4 3573.6- 8121.8 0.01576

Range consideration 4452 2998- 6613

R/C consideration

Take off consideration 0.08112

R
VE
The wing loading is chosen as 3600 N/m2 O
R
G
AN
R
KA
 R
VE
O
R
ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS

G
Fig. 9.1 to 9.6 shows the engine characteristics at different altitude during different flight conditions.

AN
R
KA

Page | 85
 KA
R
AN
G
Fig 9.1
R
O
VE
R
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
Page | 87
 KA
R
AN
G
Fig 9.3
R
O
VE
R
 KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
Page | 89
KA
R
AN
G
R
O
VE
R
 R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Fig 9.6

Page | 91
9 features of the designed aircraft
9.1 Three View Drawing
The 3-view drawing of the airplane designed is given in figure

9.2 Overall Dimensions

Length : 34.32
Wing Span : 27.72 m
Wheel base : 12.0 m
Wheel track : 4.1 m

R
VE
9.3 Engine details
Pratt and Whitney PW 123D Engine
O
Maximum SHP TO 1604 kW
R
Maximum continuous power 1454 kW
G

8.4 Weights
AN

Gross Weight : 23500 kgf

Empty Weight : 13045 kgf
R

Fuel Weight : 3927 kgf

KA

Payload : 6528 kgf

9.5 Wing Geometry

Planform Shape : Tapered wing with no sweep
Span : 27.72 m

Area : 64.04 m2
Airfoil : NACA - 653618, t/c = 18%, Clopt = 0.6
Root Chord : 3.3 m
Tip Chord : 1.32 m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 2.451 m
Quarter chord Sweep : 0 deg
Dihedral : 3 deg
Twist : 0 deg

Incidence : 2 deg
Taper Ratio : 0. 4 (Equivalent Trapezoidal wing)
Aspect Ratio : 12

9.6 Fuselage Geometry

Length : 28.5 m
Maximum Diameter : 2.96 m

R
9.7 Horizontal Tail Geometry

VE
Span : 9.4 m
Area : 12.81 m2
O
Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 1.74 m
R
Root Chord : 1.81 m
G

Tip chord : 0.91 m

Taper Ratio : 0.5
AN

Aspect Ratio : 5.5

R

9.8 Vertical Tail Geometry

KA

Span : 4.5 m
Area : 13.44 m2
Root Chord : 4.26 m
Tip chord : 1.7 m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 2.15 m
Quarter Chord Sweep : 0 deg
Taper Ratio : 0.4
Aspect Ratio : 1.5

Page | 93
9.9 Other details
CLmax without flap : 1.5
CLmax with landing flaps : 2.7

9.10 Crew and Payload

Flight crew : 2 (pilot and co-pilot)

Cabin crew : 2
Passenger seating : 52 economy and 08 business class

R
VE
9.11 Performance
The detailed performance estimation is given in section 9. The highlights are as
O
follows.
R
• The performance is worked for a gross weight of 23500 kgf and wing
G

loading of 3600 N/m2 except for landing where the landing weight is taken
as 85% of take-off weight.
AN

• Maximum Mach No. at 10000 ft Mmax = 0.45

R
KA
 R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Fig 8.1 Three view drawing of Aircraft under design

Page | 95
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
References:
1) Dr. E G Tulapurkara, A. Venkattraman, V. Ganesh, “ An Example of Airplane

Preliminary Design Procedure- Jet Transport, AE TR 2007-4, April 2007

2) Raymer .D.P. Aircraft design a conceptual approach.

AIAA’ educational series, 2006

3) Tulapurkara.E.G Lecture Notes on Aircraft Design, Department

R
of Aerospace Engineering I.I.T Madras, 2008

VE
4) Roskam J. Methods of estimating drag polars of subsonic airplanes
O
Roskam Aviation & Engineering Corporation, Ottawa, Kansas,1983
R
5) Jenkinson L.R., Simpkin P. and Rhodes D.
G

Civil Jet Aircraft Design, Arnold, 1999

AN

6) Wood K.D. Aerospace vehicle design, Volume 1, Johnson

publishing company, Boulder, Colorado, 1966

R

7) Perkins C.D. & Hage A.E. Airplane performance stability & control,
KA

McGraw Hill, 1963

8) Abbot I.H. and Doenhoff A.E. Theory of wing sections,

Dover publications, 1959

9) Roskam J. Aircraft design,

Roskam Aviation & Engineering Corporation, Ottawa, Kansas, 1990

10) Kroo, Ilan & Shevel, Richard - Aircraft Design, Synthesis and Analysis

11) Lloyd R. Jenkinson, James F. Marchman III

Aircraft Design Projects For Engineering Students

12) BRUHN- Airplane Design

INTERNET REFERENCES

1. www.wikipedia.org

2. www.cessena.com

3. www.diamondaircraft.com

4. www.airliners.net

5. www.boeing.com

6. www.google.com

7. www.scribd.org

R
VE
O
R
G
AN
R
KA

Page | 97