See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318142340

Method to Calculate Aircraft Climb and Cruise Trajectory using an Aero-

Propulsive Model

Conference Paper · June 2017

DOI: 10.2514/6.2017-3550

CITATIONS READS
5 5,677

2 authors:

Georges Ghazi Ruxandra Mihaela Botez

École de Technologie Supérieure École de Technologie Supérieure
31 PUBLICATIONS   167 CITATIONS    501 PUBLICATIONS   4,009 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

NEW METHODOLOGIES FOR CALCULATION OF FLIGHT PARAMETERS ON REDUCED SCALE WINGS MODELS IN WIND TUNNEL View project

Research View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ruxandra Mihaela Botez on 14 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Method to Calculate Aircraft Climb and Cruise Trajectory
using an Aero-Propulsive Model

Georges Ghazi1, Andréa Mennequin2 and Ruxandra M. Botez3

University of Quebec, École de Technologie Supérieure,
Laboratory of Applied Research in Active Controls, Avionics and AeroServoElasticity LARCASE,
Montreal Quebec, H3C-1K3

A vital part of the Flight Management System (FMS) is an aircraft mathematical model
for gaining information about the efficiency of an optimal trajectory. This paper presents a
methodology and several algorithms to compute the vertical trajectory of a commercial
aircraft using an Aero-Propulsive Database (APDB). The trajectory considered in this study
is composed of climb, acceleration and cruise segments. The methodology was applied to the
business aircraft Cessna Citation X. Given a flight plan expressed in terms of waypoints, the
algorithms provide an estimation of the distance traveled, Top of Climb (TOC) localization,
flight time and fuel burned. These parameters are essential in the estimation of the flight
cost. To evaluate the quality of the complete trajectory prediction algorithm, its outputs
were compared to trajectories obtained with a professional Cessna Citation X Level D
Aircraft Research Flight Simulator (RAFS). The results shown in this paper clearly indicates
that the proposed algorithm is capable of predicting the aircraft trajectory and performance
with less than 1% of error.

Nomenclature
AF = acceleration factor
CI = cost index, Kg/hr
Cost = operational flight cost, Kg
FT = flight time, hr
FB = fuel burned, Kg
g = acceleration of gravity, m/s2
GS = ground speed, m/s
h = altitude, m or ft
M = flight Mach number
m = mass of the aircraft, Kg
L,D = lift and drag force, N
V = true airspeed, m/s
T = thrust force, N
SFC = specific fuel consumption parameter, Kg/s/N
wf = fuel burn rate, Kg/s
= wind gradient, kts/ft

Greek Notation
γ = flight path angle, deg
Δ = increment step or variation
ΔISA = temperature deviation from standard day, K

1
Ph.D. Student, LARCASE, 1100 Notre Dame West, Montreal, QC, H3C-1K3, Canada.
2
Undergraduate Student, LARCASE, 1100 Notre Dame West, Montreal, QC, H3C-1K3, Canada.
3
Full Professor, AIAA Associate Fellow, Canada Research Chair Holder Level 1 in Aircraft Modeling and
Simulation, Head of the LARCASE, ETS, 1100 Notre Dame West, Montreal, QC, H3C-1K3, Canada.
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 I. Introduction

A IR transport has become the major contributor to global economic, providing the most rapid worldwide
transportation network1, 2. This rapid expansion of air traffic and the concern for environmental consciousness
has greatly encouraged academia and the aerospace industry to improve the overall efficiency of airline operations 3-
6
. According to several studies, most of aircraft do not fly at their optimal trajectory in terms of altitude and speed7-9.
In this context, optimizing the vertical flight profile could be a promising solution to both improve the management
of the air traffic and the reduction of environmental emissions10-13.
Nowadays, performance prediction and flight trajectory optimization are the fundamental capabilities of the
Flight Management System (FMS). This electronic device was introduced to civil aircraft in 1982 as a specialized
airborne computer in order to help crew members to realize several in-flight tasks such as navigation, trajectory
prediction, aircraft performance computations and guidance 14. In addition to reduce the pilot’s workload, the FMS
can also provide the crew with some optimization advisories in order to minimize fuel and time costs15, 16. The
optimal trajectory computed by the FMS is not only relies on the results of the optimization method, but also depend
on the aircraft mathematical model used to predict the aircraft performance. It is therefore important and essential to
establish an authentic aircraft model for gaining information about the efficiency of different aircraft procedures 17, 18.
There are several ways to model an aircraft18-20. The most common one is to integrate a set of nonlinear
equations, also called equations of motion21. Notable examples of computer programs that use such equations are the
Boeing’s aircraft performance software (INFLT/REPORT) and the Airbus’s Performance Engineer Program (PEP).
Designed for flight planning, these programs can be used to generate climb, cruise and descent trajectories.
Although they give accurate trajectory estimates, they are unfortunately not adapted for FMS applications. Indeed,
as mentioned by Suchkov et al.22, the main problem is the dimensions of the database required to calculate aero-
propulsive forces and engine fuel flow to figure out all the flight parameters.
Another alternative to model aircraft performance is to use the Base of the Aircraft Data (BADA) developed by
the European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) 23-25. BADA is a database of ASCII files
including performance characteristic for 318 aircrafts. These characteristics include mainly aerodynamic and engine
coefficients needed to represent the aircraft behavior within its normal operational flight envelope. This limitation of
the aircraft flight envelope reduces considerably the potential of the FMS in achieving optimal trajectories.
The aim of this paper is to present a new methodology to compute the vertical trajectory of the Cessna Citation
X using an Aero-Propulsive Database (APDB). The APDB used in this study to estimate the aero-propulsive force
of the Cessna Citation X was developed in previous study by Ghazi et al.26-28. To evaluate the quality of the
trajectory prediction algorithm, its outputs were compared to trajectories obtained with a professional Cessna
Citation X Level D Aircraft Research Flight Simulator (see Fig. 1) designed and manufactured by CAE Inc.
According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA, AC 120-40B), the level D is the highest certification level
for the flight dynamics modeling.

Figure 1. Cessna Citation X Level D Flight Simulator

This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 briefly presents the different flight phases comprised in a
conventional flight, as well as the set of equations used to model the aircraft. Section 3 deals with the trajectory
prediction algorithms and their implementations. In section 4, simulation results and the validation of the
methodology are presented. Finally, the paper ends with conclusions and remarks.
2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 II. Conventional Flight and Aircraft Mathematical Model

A. The Conventional Flight and Flight Cost

1. The Conventional Flight
As illustrated in Fig. 1, the flight to be considered in this paper is a standard commercial flight composed of two
main phases of flight: climb and cruise. This restriction was considered because most of the fuel consumed during a
flight is burned during the climb and cruise phases. Thus, optimizing the flight trajectory of an aircraft is mainly to
optimize the climb and cruise sections.

Figure 2. Conventional vertical flight profile for a commercial aircraft

The climb phase – The climb phase typically starts after the take-off and is in general composed of several
segments. The first climb segment is performed at constant Indicated Airspeed (IAS). However, because of speed
restrictions applied in the airspace, aircrafts are not allowed to fly above 250KIAS below 10,000 ft. For this reason,
the first climb IAS segment is usually completed with an acceleration phase in order to climb at a desired IAS that is
greater than 250KIAS. After the acceleration, a second climb IAS segment is performed. While the IAS is kept
constant, the True Airspeed (TAS) increases as the altitude gained. The increase in TAS is also reflected in a rising
Mach number. Therefore, the aircraft will continue to climb at constant IAS until the altitude where the Mach
number matches the desired cruise Mach number. As this point, the pilot/FMS has to change the climb reference to
constant Mach, and will continue to climb in Mach until the Top of Climb (TOC). The altitude at which the
transition IAS to Mach takes place is called the crossover altitude. For most commercial aircraft, this altitude is
typically near 27,000 ft depending on the IAS/Mach profile selected.
The cruise phase – The cruise phase corresponds to the longest section of the flight; it begins at the Top of
Climb (TOC) and ends at the Top of Descent (TOD). Unlike the climb phase, the cruise is very simple as it is
mainly composed of straight-level segments at constant Mach number. Finally, step climbs (local change of
altitudes) can be performed in order to reduce the aircraft fuel consumption. The transition between two altitudes
(before and after the step climb) is treated as a climb at constant Mach number.

2. Flight Cost Definition

From an airline's point of view, the cost of a flight can be defined as a compromise between the cost related to the
fuel consumption and other costs that are proportional to the flight time. A common way to express the flight cost,
according to several references in the literature29, 30, is given in Eq. (1),

(1)

where is the fuel burned, is the total duration of the flight and is the Cost Index. The is a constant
parameter used by the airline in order to quantify the compromise between minimizing the fuel consumption and
minimizing the travel time. A typical value (according to Liden31) for a Boeing 747 is around 200, and for a Boeing
757, around 50. Basically, increasing the CI will give priority to a shorter flight time without considering the amount
of fuel burned, while decreasing the CI will give priority to the fuel consumption without considering the flight time.

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
B. Aircraft and Engine Mathematical Models
The mathematical model used in this study to model the aircraft’s behavior is described by a set of equations, also
called equations of motion21. However, because of the limited processing power of the FMS, slight simplifications
had to be taken into account. These are:
 The aircraft is modeled as a point mass,
 The aircraft forces components are strictly confined in a fixed vertical plane,
 The aircraft motion is symmetric so that the lateral force and wind component are not considered.
 The rate of flight path angle ( ) is small and can be neglected compared to the others accelerations,
 The engine thrust vector in assumed to point in the direction of the aircraft velocity.
Thus, the pertinent equations of motion for the problem are defined in its general form as:

(2)

(3)

(4)

where is the aircraft mass, is the altitude, is the true airspeed (TAS), is the flight path angle, is the thrust
force, is the lift force, is the drag force, is the acceleration of gravity, and is the average horizontal wind
component as a function of the altitude.
As the aircraft flies along its flight path, fuel is burned by the engines, which reduces the mass of the aircraft.
The variation of the mass has a direct consequence on the performance of the aircraft, and must therefore take into
account in the overall aircraft performance model. The fuel burn, , can be estimated as,

(5)

where is the engine fuel burn rate and is the elapsed time. The fuel burn rate is determined by the specific
fuel consumption coefficient ( and thrust force using the following equation,

(6)

Finally, all the information needed to perform the calculations and solve the set of equations (2)-(6) is contained
in an Aero-Propulsive Database (APDB). By definition, an APDB is a simplified numerical model of the aircraft
divided in several sub-databases (one sub-database for each flight phase). Table 1 describes the inputs and outputs of
the different sub-database that composed the APDB used in this paper.

Table 1. Aero-Propulsive Model Database

Flight Phase Inputs Outputs
Climb at constant o Altitude [ft] o Thrust [N]
IAS o IAS [knots] o Excess Thrust (T-D) [N]
o Gross Weight [Kg] o Specific Fuel Consumption
o ISA temperature deviation [°C] Coefficient [Kg/s/N]
Climb at constant o Altitude [ft] o Thrust [N]
Mach o Mach number o Excess Thrust (T-D) [N]
o Gross Weight [Kg] o Specific Fuel Consumption
o ISA temperature deviation [°C] Coefficient[Kg/s/N]

Cruise at constant o Altitude [ft] o Fuel flow [Kg/s]

Mach/IAS o Mach number
o Gross Weight [Kg]
o ISA temperature deviation [°C]

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 It is important to mention that each sub-database in Table 1 is defined in discrete form and only certain
parameters are referenced in the APDB. For example, the altitude may give in steps of 1,000 ft, gross weight in steps
of 500 Kg and so on. For the cases when the values required to be introduced in the inputs are not exactly the ones
available in the APDB, linear interpolations between the outputs of the available data are performed.

III. Trajectory Prediction Algorithm

The fundamental basis for the trajectory prediction algorithm is the numerical integration of the aircraft performance
equations (2) to (6) including variable weight, speed and altitude. However, because of the limited processing unit of
the FMS, the aircraft performance equations may be simplified and accommodated to types of maneuver (i.e.
unrestricted climb, acceleration and level flight).
This section aims to present several workable step-by-step processes for calculating the aircraft performance in
terms of flight time, distance traveled, and fuel consumption for each maneuver.

A. Unrestricted Climb Segment at Specified IAS/MACH

By considering that the aircraft is climbing at constant speed (IAS or Mach), Eq. (2) can be further simplified by
applying a couple of modifications. First, the term in Eq. (2) is rewritten using the following chain rule,

(7)

Then, dividing Eq (2) by , substituting the term from Eq. (7) in Eq. (2), and rearranging the terms such that
the left-hand side only consists of the flight path angle results in the following alternative form of Eq. (2),

(8)

In Eq. (8), the term is the acceleration factor which represents the fact that the airplane isn’t climbing at constant
true airspeed (TAS). The equations for the acceleration factor, depending on the climb speed strategy (IAS or
Mach), are given as follows32:
• for a climb constant indicated airspeed:

(9)

• for a climb at constant Mach number:

(10)

where and are the standard and non-standard temperatures respectively, and is the
temperature deviation.
Finally, the complete simplified aircraft model in climb can be summarized by the following set of equations,

(11.a)

(11.b)

(11.c)

where is the aircraft ground speed.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Since aircraft performances in Table 1 are given in discrete values, the aircraft altitude is divided into sub-
segments from the initial altitude to the target altitude as shown in the following figure,

Figure 3. Aircraft discrete trajectory in climb at specified IAS/MACH

where is the discrete position index, is the aircraft altitude, is the horizontal distance. The altitude
step is arbitrary. However, the smaller the step, the more accurate the computed trajectory. In this
study, a step of ft was considered as a compromise between accuracy and time computation.
To start the calculation process, it is assumed that the following parameters are known and provided by the user:
 Climb speed strategy (constant IAS or constant Mach number),
 Initial aircraft state (i.e. weight, altitude and IAS or Mach number),
 Environment conditions (i.e. wind gradient and temperature deviation from standard day).
The step integration process used for calculating the aircraft trajectory can be developed as follows:

Algorithm 1: Unrestricted Climb Segment at Specified IAS/MACH

Step 0: Initialize the discrete index position, , set the aircraft initial conditions (altitude , weight
, and speed), set the distance traveled , elapsed time and fuel burned to zero.

Step 1: Using the environment model, compute the temperature deviation ( ) and the wind
gradient at the current altitude .

Step 2: Based on the speed strategy, compute the aircraft true airspeed (TAS) and determine the
acceleration factor ( ) from Eq. (9) and (10).

Step 3: Using the APDB in Table 1, interpolate the Thrust ( ), the excess thrust ( ) and the
for the current altitude, aircraft weight, speed and temperature deviation.

Step 4: Determine the flight path angle. If the wind component is assumed to be zero (i.e = 0), then
the sinus of the flight path angle is simply determined from Eq. (11.a). Otherwise, the flight path angle is
calculated by solving the Eq. (11.a) with a suitable numerical technique.

Step 5: Knowing the flight path angle, compute the rate of climb and the ground speed from Eqs.
(11.b) and (11.c), and the delta time .

Step 6: Knowing the step time, update the time, distance traveled, fuel burned and the aircraft mass
using an Euler integration method:

Step 7: Update the altitude and the discrete index , and go back to the Step 1.
Repeat this process of step integration up to the desired altitude .

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
B. Acceleration Segment
As mentioned in Section II.A, the climb speed after 10,000 ft is usually higher than 250 KIAS. The FMS can
therefore command the autopilot to perform an acceleration from the actual speed (IAS1) to the desired speed (IAS2).
The logic of acceleration may differ from an aircraft to another. For the Cessna Citation X, the control law for the
acceleration is based on a constant rate of true airspeed. Thus, the aircraft will accelerate at constant dV/dt ≈ 2.62
ft/s2 (1.56 kts/s) until the aircraft reach the desired indicated airspeed.
The equation typically used to compute the average flight path angle for a fixed dV/dt during the acceleration
phase is defined by:

(12)

The step integration process used for calculating the aircraft trajectory during the acceleration phase is almost
similar to that of the climb. However, unlike the climb, the altitude variation required to perform the acceleration is
unknown. Thus, the acceleration segments are typically integrated based on a fixed time step ( = 2 seconds).
The step integration process used for calculating the aircraft trajectory can be developed as follows:

Algorithm 2: Speed Change Segment

Step 0: Initialize the discrete index position, , set the aircraft initial conditions (weight , and
speed), set the altitude equal to the altitude at which the acceleration starts, set the distance traveled
, elapsed time and fuel burn to zero. Set the indicated airspeed to IAS1.

Step 1: Based on the current indicated airspeed (IAS), compute the aircraft true airspeed (TAS).

Step 2: Using the environment model, compute the temperature deviation ( ) and the wind
gradient at the current altitude .

Step 3: Using the APDB in climb, interpolate the Thrust ( ), the excess thrust ( ) and the
for the current altitude, aircraft weight, speed and temperature deviation.

Step 4: Determine the flight path angle. If the wind component is assumed to be zero (i.e =0), then
the sinus of the flight path angle is simply determined from Eq. (12). Otherwise, the flight path angle is
calculated by solving the Eq. (12) with a suitable numerical technique.

Step 5: Knowing the flight path angle, compute the rate of climb and the ground speed from Eqs.
(11.b) and (11.c), and the delta altitude .

Step 6: Knowing the step altitude and step time, update the altitude, distance traveled, and fuel burned
using an Euler integration method, and update the aircraft mass:

Step 7: Update the TAS such as and compute the corresponding indicated
airspeed (IAS).

Step 8: Update the discrete index , and go back to the Step 2. Repeat this process of step
integration up to the desired indicated airspeed IAS2.

C. Level Flight Segment

The cruise is a special case of the Eq. (2) as the flight path angle and the aircraft acceleration are by definition zero.
Moreover, the true airspeed (or Mach number) is derived from the pilot-selected cruise speed, and the total distance
between the TOC and the TOD is pre-computed by the FMS. As mentioned in Section II-A, step climbs can be

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
performed during the cruise in order to improve the fuel economy. In this case, the cruise must be divided into
several level segments according to the number of step climbs defined by the pilot/FMS.
To compute the aircraft performance along a given level segment, the distance between the beginning and the
end of the level segment is also divided into sub-segments as shown in the following figure,

Figure 4. Aircraft Discrete Trajectory in Climb at Specified IAS/MACH

where (e.g. 25 nautical miles) is an arbitrary step distance. Like for the climb, the smaller the step, the more
accurate the computed trajectory. Finally, the Algorithm 3 is applied to each level segment.

Algorithm 3: Level Segment

Step 0: Initialize the discrete index position, , set the aircraft initial conditions (weight , cruise
altitude , and speed), set the distance traveled elapsed time and fuel burn to zero.

Step 1: Based on the cruise speed IAS/Mach, compute the aircraft true airspeed (TAS).

Step 2: Using the environment model, compute the temperature deviation ( ) and the wind
gradient at the cruise altitude .

Step 3: Knowing the TAS, compute the ground speed and determine the time require to traveled
the step distance :

Step 4: Using the APDB in cruise, interpolate the fuel flow for the current altitude, aircraft weight,
speed and temperature deviation.

Step 5: Updated the distance traveled, fuel burned and the aircraft mass:

Step 8: Update the discrete index , and go back to the Step 2. Repeat this process of step
integration until .

IV. Results
To validate the methodology presented in the previous section and to ensure that the prediction algorithms robustly
represent the aircraft performance over normal operation conditions, a series of 14 flight tests were performed using
the Cessna Citation X level D flight simulator for different aircraft take-off weights, cruise altitudes and climb/cruise
speeds strategies. Each flight test was conducted using the Flight Management System (FMS) by following every
time the same route from Montreal - Pierre Elliot Trudeau airport (CYUL) to Washington - Ronald Reagan airport

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
(KDCA). As a standard flight plan, the different waypoints in Table 2 were manually entered in the FMS, and the
autopilot was configured in VNAV and LNAV modes in order to follow the instructions provided by the guidance
function of the FMS.

Table 2. Waypoints list from Montreal (CYUL) to Washington (KDCA)

Nb. Waypoint ID Latitude [deg] Longitude [deg]
1 CYUL N45°27.80 W73°45.90
2 | KAPAD N45°26.29 W73°38.69
3 | MAXAR N45°16.77 W73°43.02
4 | HUMUS N45°04.49 W74°04.49
5 | SLK N44°23.07 W74°12.27
6 | RKA N42°27.48 W75°14.35
7 | LVZ N41°16.37 W75°41.37
8 KDCA N38°51.13 W77°02.26

For each flight test, the distance traveled, the fuel burned and the total flight time were estimated based on the
aircraft flight parameters collected with the flight simulator. In parallel, the same flight tests were evaluated using
the APDB (see Table 1) and the different algorithms developed in the previous section.
To illustrate how each flight test was compared and validated, an example of a successful case is given in Fig. 5,
where the “experimental” represents the flight simulator, and the “numerical” is the prediction obtained with ours
algorithms.

Montreal

TOC

TOD

Washington

Figure 5. Example of a flight trajectory comparison between CYUL and KDCA

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Figures 6 to 8 show the differences in fuel burned, flight time and flight cost (for CI = 50) between the level D
Cessna Citation X flight simulator (Exp.) and the algorithm developed in this study (Num.).

650,00 1,00

Absolute Error [%]

600,00
Fluel Burned [Kg]

0,80
550,00
0,60
500,00
0,40
450,00
400,00 0,20
350,00 0,00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Num. 435,9 503,8 434,6 433,6 501,1 508,4 538,9 498,2 539,1 531,6 530,8 562,8 603,7 562,6
Exp. 436,1 501,8 434,4 434,1 500,3 510,3 543,6 501,4 541,0 535,2 535,6 562,3 608,7 560,5
Err. 0,04 0,40 0,05 0,12 0,17 0,38 0,88 0,63 0,36 0,67 0,90 0,09 0,83 0,37

Figure 6. Fuel burned comparison results

28,00 0,70
27,90

Absolute Error [%]

0,60
Flight Time [min]

27,80 0,50
27,70
0,40
27,60
0,30
27,50
27,40 0,20
27,30 0,10
27,20 0,00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Num. 27,82 27,77 27,76 27,78 27,82 27,84 27,78 27,95 27,75 27,71 27,73 27,65 27,64 27,56
Exp. 27,77 27,68 27,68 27,68 27,72 27,75 27,70 27,78 27,68 27,63 27,60 27,58 27,55 27,52
Err. 0,19 0,31 0,26 0,34 0,37 0,32 0,28 0,58 0,25 0,28 0,45 0,23 0,31 0,14

Figure 7. Flight time comparison results

21,00 0,35

Absolute Error [%]

Flight Cost [x100 Kg]

20,00 0,30
19,00 0,25
0,20
18,00
0,15
17,00 0,10
16,00 0,05
15,00 0,00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Num. 18,27 18,92 18,22 18,23 18,92 19,00 19,28 18,96 19,27 19,17 19,17 19,45 19,85 19,40
Exp. 18,24 18,86 18,19 18,18 18,86 18,98 19,29 18,91 19,25 19,17 19,16 19,42 19,86 19,36
Err. 0,14 0,33 0,21 0,23 0,32 0,13 0,04 0,27 0,08 0,02 0,08 0,19 0,04 0,21

Figure 8. Flight cost comparison results (CI = 50)

As it can be observed, for all flight tests, the prediction error for each parameter is always less than 1%. This
suggests that the trajectory prediction algorithm developed in this paper, as well as the APDB used to model the

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
aircraft performance, can predict with a very good level of accuracy the aircraft performance along a given flight
trajectory.

V. Conclusion
In this paper, a method to calculate the trajectory of an aircraft in terms of flight time, distance traveled, and fuel
burned using an Aero-Propulsive Database (APDB) was developed. A simplified mathematical model of the aircraft
for the climb and cruise phases was presented, and several estimation algorithms were developed to estimate the
aircraft flight parameters for three types of maneuver (i.e. unrestricted climb, acceleration and level flight). To
validate the proposed methodology, a total of 14 flight tests were performed and compared with a professional
Cessna Citation X level D flight simulator designed and manufactured by CAE Inc., where the level D corresponds
to the highest certification level for the flight dynamics modeling. The relevant parameters to be compared were the
fuel burned, total flight time and associated flight cost.
Results showed that the proposed methodology gave an excellent estimation of the aircraft performance with a
maximum absolute error less than 1% for each flight parameter. Thus, it has been concluded the trajectory prediction
algorithm and the APDB created in this paper were experimentally validated.
In order to improve the results and the methodology presented in this paper, future studies will focus on the
development of algorithms and APDBs to estimate the aircraft performance during the descent phase. This update
will improve the accuracy of the current algorithm, and will allow a complete flight analysis.

Acknowledgments
This work was performed at the Laboratory of Applied Research in Active Controls, Avionics and
AeroServoElasticity research (LARCASE). The Aircraft Research Flight Simulator was obtained by Dr Ruxandra
Botez, Full Professor, thanks to the research grants that were approved by the Canadian Foundation of Innovation
(CFI) and Ministère du Développement Économique, de l'Innovation et de l'Exportation (MDEIE) and the
contribution of CAE Inc. Thanks are dues to CAE Inc. team, and to Mr. Oscar Carranza Moyao for their support in
the development of the Aircraft Research Flight Simulator at the LARCASE laboratory. Thanks are also dues to Mrs
Odette Lacasse at ETS for her support. Thanks are also due to the CMC Electronics-Esterline team, more
specifically to Mr Reza Neshat for his interest in this subject.

References
1
Perovic, J. "The economic benefits of aviation and performance in the travel & tourism competitiveness index," The Travel
& Tourism Competitiveness Report 2013 Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013.
2
Steele, P. "Aviation: Benefits beyond borders," ATAG Presentation to ICAO Destination Green Vol. 15, 2013.
3
Kousoulidou, M., and Lonza, L. "Biofuels in aviation: Fuel demand and CO 2 emissions evolution in Europe toward 2030,"
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment Vol. 46, 2016, pp. 166-181.
4
Ruby, M., and Botez, R. M. "Trajectory Optimization for vertical navigation using the Harmony Search algorithm," IFAC-
PapersOnLine Vol. 49, No. 17, 2016, pp. 11-16.
5
Gabor, O. Ş., Simon, A., Koreanschi, A., and Botez, R. M. "Improving the UAS-S4 Éhecal airfoil high angles-of-attack
performance characteristics using a morphing wing approach," Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G:
Journal of Aerospace Engineering Vol. 230, No. 1, 2016, pp. 118-131.
6
Gabor, O. S., Koreanschi, A., and Botez, R. M. "Low-speed aerodynamic characteristics improvement of ATR 42 airfoil
using a morphing wing approach," IECON 2012-38th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society. IEEE, 2012,
pp. 5451-5456.
7
Jensen, L., Hansman, R. J., Venuti, J., and Reynolds, T. "Commercial airline altitude optimization strategies for reduced
cruise fuel consumption," 14th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. 2014, p. 3006.
8
Jensen, L., Hansman, R. J., Venuti, J. C., and Reynolds, T. "Commercial airline speed optimization strategies for reduced
cruise fuel consumption," 2013 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. 2013, p. 4289.
9
Turgut, E. T., Cavcar, M., Usanmaz, O., Canarslanlar, A. O., Dogeroglu, T., Armutlu, K., and Yay, O. D. "Fuel flow
analysis for the cruise phase of commercial aircraft on domestic routes," Aerospace Science and Technology Vol. 37, 2014, pp. 1-
9.
10
Murrieta Mendoza, A., and Botez, R. "Vertical navigation trajectory optimization algorithm for a commercial aircraft,"
AIAA/3AF Aircraft Noise and Emissions Reduction Symposium. 2014, p. 3019.
11
Patron, R. S. F., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Vertical profile optimization for the Flight Management System CMA-9000
using the golden section search method," IECON 2012-38th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society. IEEE,
2012, pp. 5482-5488.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 12
Patron, R. F., Oyono Owono, A. C., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Speed and altitude optimization on the FMS CMA-9000
for the Sukhoi Superjet 100 using genetic algorithms," 2013 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. 2013,
p. 4257.
13
Murrieta Mendoza, A., Beuze, B., Ternisien, L., and Botez, R. M. "Branch & Bound-Based Algorithm for Aircraft VNAV
Profile Reference Trajectory Optimization," 15th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. 2015, p.
2280.
14
Collinson, R. P. Introduction to avionics systems: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
15
Liden, S. P. "Flight management system providing minimum total cost." Google Patents, 1988.
16
Gagné, J., Murrieta, A., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "New method for aircraft fuel saving using Flight Management
System and its validation on the L-1011 aircraft," 2013 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. 2013, p.
4290.
17
Sibin, Z., Guixian, L., and Junwei, H. "Research and modelling on performance database of flight management system,"
Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics (CAR), 2010 2nd International Asia Conference on. Vol. 1, IEEE, 2010, pp.
295-298.
18
Murrieta-Mendoza, A., and Botez, R. M. "Methodology for vertical-navigation flight-trajectory cost calculation using a
performance database," Journal of Aerospace Information Systems Vol. 12, No. 8, 2015, pp. 519-532.
19
Nelson, R. C. Flight stability and automatic control: WCB/McGraw Hill New York, 1998.
20
Marshall, R. T., and Schweikhard, W. G. "Modelling of airplane performance from flight-test results and validation with an
F-104G airplane." NASA Flight Research Center, Washington, DC, 1973.
21
Cook, M. V. Flight dynamics principles: a linear systems approach to aircraft stability and control: Butterworth-
Heinemann, 2012.
22
Swierstra, S., Eurocontrol, H., Nuic, A., Center, E. E., and Brétigny-sur-Orge, F. "AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE
MODELING FOR AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS."
23
Nuic, A., Poinsot, C., Iagaru, M.-G., Gallo, E., Navarro, F. A., and Querejeta, C. "Advanced aircraft performance modeling
for ATM: enhancements to the BADA model," 24th Digital Avionics System Conference. AIAA/IEEE Washington, DC, 2005.
24
Nuic, A., Poles, D., and Mouillet, V. "BADA: An advanced aircraft performance model for present and future ATM
systems," International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing Vol. 24, No. 10, 2010, pp. 850-866.
25
Nuic, A. "User manual for the Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) revision 3.10," Atmosphere Vol. 2010, 2010, p. 001.
26
Ghazi, G., Tudor, M., and Botez, R. "Identification of a Cessna Citation X aero-propulsive model in climb regime from
flight tests," International Conference on Air Transport INAIR. 2015.
27
Ghazi, G., Botez, R. M., and Tudor, M. "Performance database creation for cessna citation x aircraft in climb regime using
an aero-propulsive model developed from flight tests," AHS Sustainability, 2015.
28
Ghazi, G., Botez, R., and Achigui, J. M. "Cessna citation X engine model identification from flight tests," SAE
International Journal of Aerospace Vol. 8, No. 2015-01-2390, 2015, pp. 203-213.
29
Dancila, B., Botez, R., and Labour, D. "Altitude optimization algorithm for cruise, constant speed and level flight
segments," AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference. 2012, p. 4772.
30
Murrieta-Mendoza, A., and Botez, R. "Method to calculate aircraft VNAV trajectory cost using a performance database,"
ASME 2014 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2014,
pp. V001T01A053-V001T01A053.
31
Liden, S. "Optimum cruise profiles in the presence of winds," Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 1992. Proceedings.,
IEEE/AIAA 11th. IEEE, 1992, pp. 254-261.
32
Blake, W. "Jet transport performance methods," Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 2009.

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

View publication stats