50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition AIAA 2012-1039

09 - 12 January 2012, Nashville, Tennessee

Design of a Fire-Fighting Unmanned Air Vehicle

Elizabeth Subramaniam1 and Nishit Joseph1
School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering,
RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia

Asher Rose1
School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering,
RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia
and
Cees Bil2
School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering,
RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Australia’s environmental conditions make it one of the most fire-prone countries in the world,
and a large percentage of the population resides or works in high-risk areas, creating an on-going
need for better fire-fighting capabilities. An undergraduate design project was based on a request
from the Country Fire Authority (CFA) to create an unmanned water-bombing system for aerial
fire suppression. This paper provides a summary of the resulting design, the Praesidium
unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system. The proposed UAV configuration is a ducted co-axial
rotor with a lifting body and forward thrust unit, which uses a bucket system to deliver water,
retardant or foam payloads. This configuration offers vertical takeoff and landing capabilities
regarded as essential to make use of the natural water resources available in Australia, and to
enable operation in difficult terrains. The system utilizes a fleet of three semi-autonomous aircraft
to enable tactical drops. Cameras and sensors will provide real-time situational awareness to the
operators, who control the fleet from a mobile ground control station located at a safe distance
from the fire.

I. Introduction

T HE Country Fire Authority (CFA) helps to prevent and respond to fire and emergency situations in Victoria, as
well as assisting other Australian states and emergency service organisations. With Australia being a country that
is very susceptible to fire and has a large percentage of the population residing or working in high-risk areas, the
need for better fire-fighting capabilities is always prevalent. Aircraft play a critical role in suppressing wildfires due to
their mobility, ability to reach fires quicker than ground crew, and ability to apply retardants or foam1,2. This makes the
deployment time of aerial fire-fighting equipment highly important to fire suppression3,4. Aerial fire fighting has been
used by the CFA since the 1970‟s5.
The main aircraft used in aerial fire-fighting can be classified as multi-engine tankers, helicopters, and small fixed
wing aircraft. The large tankers are best suited for large fires and retardant application, whilst the helicopters and small
fixed wing options provide economic fire suppression1. Large aircraft may be inefficient and expensive if not capable
of controlled water or retardant release, due to overkill and the time taken to land and refill before making a drop on
another area4. Small fixed wing aircraft provide the benefit of lower operating costs than large tankers and their ability
to take off from small runway strips. Many small-fixed wing aircraft used for fire-fighting are current or converted
agricultural aircraft, making this platform widely available and well stationed. Dedicated fire-fighting helicopters may
have internal water tanks, but often helicopters from other purposes are employed and use detachable buckets. The
ability of helicopters to hover refill means that the platform can deliver water and suppressant at the lowest cost if
sufficient filling points are available close to the fire3. In addition to water bombers, the CFA also employs aircraft for
infra-red line scanning of fires5.
Using unmanned aircraft for fire suppression could provide the benefits of protecting human operators from fire
environments, allowing simple controller changeover to avoid pilot fatigue, allowing UAVs to operate in dangerous

1
Undergraduate Student, RMIT University, PO Box 71, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia, Student Member
2
A/Professor, RMIT University, PO Box 71, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia, c.bil@rmit.edu.au, Associate Fellow
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright © 2012 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
 environments otherwise inaccessible to manned aircraft, and increased disposability of aircraft 6. Furthermore, UAVs
can be autonomously programmed, and may be of smaller and cheaper designs due to the lack of crew.
Currently, the CFA‟s aerial fire-fighting fleet consists of manned aircraft, fixed wing and helicopters. As part of an
evaluation of the potential use of UAVs for fire suppression, the CFA has put forward a Request for Proposal (RFP)
for a water-bombing UAV (see Appendix). This paper provides a summary of the unmanned aerial system (UAS)
design proposed by a team of undergraduate aerospace engineering students at RMIT University as part of the capstone
design project. The design requirements are outlined, and the proposed design is presented, with the key design choices
explained.

II. Design Requirements

The aircraft, in accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) obtained from the Country Fire Authority (CFA)
(Appendix), was required to meet several performance and mission specifications. These have been sub-categorised
into primary and secondary requirements in order to determine their importance.

A. Primary Requirements
Amongst the primary requirements, the RFP stated that a drop rate of 40,000 litres per hour was required to be
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

supplied by the unmanned aircraft system (UAS). This must be achieved with a water source located a minimum of
2km from the drop-zone and may, if necessary, only be achieved at peak operations. The system, in order to be
effective, must transport a payload of water, foam, or retardant as required by each individual mission, with minimum
conversions required to change the payload type.
The aircraft must also be capable of operating from rough fields, dirt strips and/or paddocks. This is to reflect the
ruggedness of the design, and the environment in which it will be operating. In these situations it must have a
maximum take-off distance of 600m.
A standard mission for the unmanned aircraft (UAV) is to include a loiter time of 1 hour. As such, the aircraft must
be designed in order to achieve such endurance on top of the time required for the aircraft‟s base mission profile;
dropping 40,000 litres per hour with a water source 2km away. The entire system must be highly mobile in order to
operate in the rugged environment in which it will be required, and have a short turn-around time. This ensures the
aircraft spends a maximum amount of time in airborne operations.
Finally, and critically for unmanned aircraft, all crashworthiness regulations must be met in terms of
communication loss and the aircraft‟s flight path.

B. Secondary Requirements
These requirements, while deemed to be important, were not seen as mission critical and, as such, were of secondary
consideration. It was stated that, should the aircraft be capable of transporting a payload of 4,000 litres or more, the
option should be given to be able to drop that payload in multiple passes, rather than all at once. In order to maximise
the transportability of the system, the UAV should have a ferry range of at least 500 nautical miles. This is the range of
the aircraft without the added weight of the payload.
Secondary support requirements state that the distance between the aircraft and the base station should be
maximised in order to exploit the full operational range of the aircraft. Also, the UAV is to require as little
maintenance as possible and be of a rugged design, with the base station requiring no more than one highly skilled
operator. Finally, an aircraft capable of water scooping is desirable, but not required.

III. Proposed Design

The proposed design comprises a fleet of three semi-autonomous ducted co-axial rotor aircraft, controlled by a
mobile Ground Control Station (GCS). Figure 1 displays the proposed configuration. Key parameter of the design is
shown in Table 1. Important features of the configuration are its Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) capability,
the ducted co-axial rotor system, body design, external payload, Forward Thrust Unit (FTU) and vector thrusting. Also
significant to the system performance is the choice to utilize a fleet of aircraft, and the integrated avionics system
architecture.

A. VTOL Choice
The principle mission of the aircraft is to fight forest
fires. In order to perform this mission, the aircraft must be
able to pick up either retardant material or water; typically
achieved through pump refilling, scooping, or hovering
above a source to pick up water. An analysis of the
Figure 1. Praesidium UAV design. Australian environment, in which the aircraft is to be
2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 designed to operate, revealed the available water sources as being unsuited to fixed wing aircraft; many water sources
are too narrow and discontinuous to allow for water scooping, or are small dams and lakes only accessible through
hover filling7,8. Additionally, a literature review revealed the dominance of rotary wing aircraft used in aerial fire-
fighting in Australia9. As such, an aircraft with vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) capabilities was determined to be
most valuable. Additionally, the requirement of the aircraft to be of rugged design and have short take-off and landing
capabilities, and the added maneuverability achieved through the use of a VTOL platform reinforced this decision.

B. Ducted Co-axial Compounded Rotor

The choice of having VTOL as the main feature to pick up water or fire retardant leads to a rotorcraft
configuration. Overcoming the induced torque of the standard helicopter configuration was considered to be a key
consideration to improve the efficiency of the design. A number of rotorcraft configuration were considered in the
design such as tandem, co-axial, intermeshing, tilt, compound rotor configurations, etc. The limits of the
configuration‟s dimensions i.e. the rotor diameter and the capacity of the payload required to successfully meet the
RFP meant that the co-axial compounded configuration is the most attractive option. The benefits of the co-axial
include high thrust to weight ratio, lower power loss from tail rotor, increased stability, controllability as well as
maneuverability. The compounded configuration offered the possibility of a simple rotor without leading to decreased
mechanical complexity increasing reliability10.
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

To further improve the UAV‟s operation efficiency at hover and low speeds, (typical of its operation) a ducted
configuration was selected. Ducted rotors offer an increase in rotor efficiency by minimizing tip losses. The duct also
had the added benefit of providing an enclosed housing of the blade offering a safer design for ground operation.

C. Body Design
The main design intent of the configuration‟s body was to improve the aerodynamic efficiency of configuration
during forward flight. The preliminary calculation indicated that benefit of relieving the rotor of lift translated to
significant saving in fuel consumption. Using the performance equation given by Leishman and compensating for the
power required for forward flight 10. A decrease of about 4% of the blade loading for a given payload weight and range,
would result in a 14% saving in fuel for low flight speeds with more significant saving realized at higher speeds.
To enable an efficient design a blended configuration is employed in the UAV. The main features include the front
nose region, the rear wings and the wing lets. The nose region was designed to minimize drag and provide lift while
the rear wings were included to improve the overall L/D ratio of the configuration. The main purpose of the winglets
was to enable directional control while also housing the rear landing gears.

D. External Payload
It is common for fire-fighting aircraft to have either a belly tank, or an
external system such as a bucket in order to transport the required payload.
In order to simplify the design, reduce costs, and increase the aircraft‟s
flexibility it was decided that an external payload system would be used.
This leads to the aircraft having the ability to transport multiple types of
payload and reduces the UAV‟s overall size.
The most commonly used bucket for helicopter fire-fighting is the Bambi
Bucket4, with model 2226S chosen as the most suitable, with a 1000L
payload capacity. This bucket has an empty weight of 63kg, gross weight of
1,100kg and a height of 1.10m. It is collapsible, light weight and releases its
payload through an electronically controlled valve. The bucket is designed to
be dipped into the water in order to be filled, requires a water depth of only Figure 2. Praesidium collecting
1.52m and takes 3-5 seconds to refill11. A power fill system can be attached water using 2226S Bambi Bucket.
which reduces the required water depth to only 45cm11.

E. Forward Thrust Unit

In order to achieve forward flight a propulsive unit was required. For simplicity, weight and cost considerations an
electric motor is to be employed. This, like the main lifting fan, is to be ducted for efficiency and safety reasons. An
added benefit of using an electric motor is that, in the event of a main engine failure, the backup batteries will continue
to power the forward thrust unit for 2.3 minutes, improving the crash worthiness of the aircraft by allowing the body to
continue to produce lift, and augmenting the autorotation capabilities of the aircraft.

F. Vector Thrusting
In order for the aircraft to be stable during flight, and particularly hover, thrust vectoring is to be employed through
the addition of control vanes beneath the main rotor. These will be placed in such a way so that, even when deflected,
3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 there is sufficient undisrupted airflow to enable the aircraft to continue hovering. Thrust vectoring will be used to
counter any gusting produced in the unpredictable bushfire micro-climate, and also for low speed maneuvering. The
control vanes will be independently controlled, enabling the aircraft to move in any direction.

Table 1. Praesidium Major Design Parameters.

Parameter Value
Maximum Take-Off Weight 2720kg
Operational Empty Weight 1370kg
External Payload (Bambi Bucket 2226S) 1000L capacity (63kg empty weight)
Blade Radius 2.95m
Number of blades 8
Wing span 13m
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Mission velocity @ standard fuel with payload 31.3m/s

Climb velocity (at sea level and MTOW) 6m/s
Engine model 1 x PT6C-67C
Maximum continuous power @ sea level 815kW
Operating power 80.00%
Net power required (1500m altitude, 35°C) 650kW
Maximum allowable fuel 350kg
Ferry velocity 31.3 m/s
Ferry range 520 nm (963km)
Maximum endurance time (without payload) 9hrs
Maximum endurance time (with MTOW) 3.5hrs
Ceiling height 2134m (7000ft)
Operational flight altitude 914m (3000ft)
Standard water release height (mission dependent) 30.5m (100ft)
LOS communication range to GCS 110km

G. Fleet
The drop patterns and tactics used in aerial fire suppression highlight the need for multiple drops, which can be
achieved through controlled release systems or multiple aircraft. The shapes of the drops imply that the use of multiple
aircraft may achieve better drops without gaps in the drop lines12. Further to this, the use of multiple aircraft may
enable the drops to be made quicker, and to better fit the shape required12. The UAS proposed consists of a fleet of
three aircraft. The primary reasons were to enable strategic capability, such as swarming behavior, and to allow for
smaller aircraft sizes for storage, safety, and mission flexibility.

H. Integrated Avionics System Architecture

In order to make the system semi-autonomous, particular avionic systems are required. The navigation system will
consist of a GPS/INS integrated system, electro optical system, flight control system, and terrain and collision
avoidance. This system will allow programmed maneuvers and automatic flight based on waypoints. Communications
will be done through a signal relaying system with a parabolic dish antenna for direct link operational range of 110km,
and satellites will be engaged for ferry and communication back- up. Real-time computation of the center of gravity,
health and usage monitoring, and subsystem management will be performed autonomously. The GCS will be a 4x4
vehicle, requiring one highly trained operator, and another operator. The UAV will contain automatic programs for
ease of operation, and risk mitigation. The cameras and sensors will also provide real-time situational awareness for
operators, fire-fighting crew, and data records for further study.
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 IV. Configuration Characteristics
A. Aerodynamics
The unique configuration demanded a more accurate means of estimating the aerodynamic characteristics of the
configuration are considered. In order to achieve this, Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) was employed to study the
configuration and determine the key parameters such as lift, drag and location of center of pressure of the
configurations (Figure 3). The study was aimed at improving the aerodynamic performance of the blended body hence
the effect of the rotors was not considered.
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Figure 3. Pressure distribution and flow field analysis.

Key approximation used was the flow was assumed to be completely laminar. Turbulence models were not
employed due the increased uncertainty associated with such models. A laminar solution was determined to be
sufficient to permit the study of key design features of the proposed configuration.
The main focus of the study was to optimize the design of the nose region and rear wing sections to give a high
L/D ratio. The first round of studies focused on the rear wings and body shape that resulted in small modifications to
the plan form curvature and a more pronounced wing as seen in figure 4. This change saw an improvement of the L/D
ratio by 55%. Further improvements, in particular in the design of the nose and leading edge improved the L/D to a
final value of 3.8.
Quantity Config Config Config
Initial Design Final Design
1 2 3
Cl (duct area) 0.102 0.586 0.713
Cd (duct area) 0.081 0.299 0.185
L/D 1.264 1.957 3.842
CP % UAV length 77.07% 90.5% 89.82%
Blade design of the UAV was obtained using
blade element momentum theory10 . The aim of the
blade design was to enable a take-off at MTOW
under the extreme atmospheric conditions specified
in the RFP with 1.15g acceleration to meet
regulation requirements.
A numerical method of BEMT was
implemented in FORTRAN that varied the solidity
and the twist for a given root angle. The blade was
selected such that it had the highest power loading
while meeting the design aim.
Figure 4. Aerodynamic Shape Optimisation.
B. Structural Considerations
Due to the unconventional design of the aircraft, an unconventional structural frame is used to obtain the required
structural integrity.

Figure 5. Structural Design and Analysis.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 In order to determine the loads applied to the aircraft, computational fluid dynamic (CFD) analysis was used to
determine the aerodynamic loading at each section of the fuselage. Then, the maximum thrust required from the main
rotor and FTU, the maximum payload, engine and avionics weights, as well as the landing loads were applied to the
structure in order to acquire a conservative result. The structure was designed around a central octagonal section that
would form the structural support around the main hub. Chord-wise ribs were used to achieve the required airfoil
lifting body shape, with spars supporting the wings. Throughout the process, the structure was first over-designed in
order to be ultra-conservative. Following this, finite element (FE) analyses were run in order to determine the areas of
high and low stress; material was then either removed or added in order to reduce the overall weight of the structure.

C. Control
In order for the aircraft to remain balanced during hover and cruise, it is necessary to understand the static loads
applied to the aircraft. Analysis was done for four flight scenarios; hover with and without the payload, and cruise with
and without the payload. What was determined was that the forward thrust unit is sufficiently powerful to balance the
aircraft during hover without the payload however, should the payload be present it would need to be placed 1.6m
forward of the aircraft‟s centre of gravity. This would, of course, change if a more powerful electric motor were to be
used. During cruise without the payload the forward thrust unit should be vectored 17.7 deg. downward from the
horizontal. This angle should be reduced to 12.0 deg. should the payload be present. Once again the forward thrust unit
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

is overpowered for such operations for safety reasons.

D. Performance
The performance of the configuration was built upon the knowledge gained from the overall aerodynamics, blade
design and engine information. The performance of the configuration depends strongly on the density of air, hence
ambient conditions are important. The selected conditions were that of the RFP for take-off that 5000ft altitude with an
ambient temperature of 25oC (5000ft ISA + 20oC). The performance at sea level and 3000ft at ISA conditions was also
studied since the configuration was designed to spend a significant portion of the operation time in those conditions.
The velocity-power curves of the configuration for the three free stream condition and at various payload weights is
shown in figure 6.

5000ft(SI+20˚C) Sea Level (SI)

3000ft (SI)
1000
900
800
Total Power [kW]

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
Forward Velocity [m/s] Forward Velocity [m/s] Forward Velocity [m/s]

Figure 6. Cruise power required/available for various operating conditions.

Under the worst case conditions corresponding to low air density the power required at MTOW just meet the
continuous maximum power available and any initial will require the use of the take-off thrust that is available for a
5min operation period. However, once some forward speed is gained the power required is well below the power
available under the given. At normal ISA operating condition the power required is well below the power available for
operations.

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 5000 ft (SI + 20oC) Sea Level (SI) 3000 ft (SI)
900

800
Total Power [kW]

700

600

500

400

300
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Climb Velocity [m/s] Climb Velocity Climb Velocity

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Take off Power (10min) Maximum Continues Power MTOW

Full Fuel+50%Payload Full Fuel

Figure 7. Climb power required/available for various operating conditions.

The climb velocity and total power required is shown in figure 7. The most critical condition is again the condition
corresponding to the low density atmospheric conditions. The maximum speed for Praesidium was limited by the
power of FTU and was depended on the free stream conditions. The range versus fuel is shown in figure 8. The graphs
also include the maximum velocity possible at the given flight condition. The plots show the range achieved for
operational empty weight plus the indicated fuel burn except one condition at maximum speed at MTOW. For all
OEW+ maximum fuel, the range exceeds the RFP requitements of 500nm. For MTOW with maximum fuel the range
achieved is above 200nm depending on the flight conditions.

600 9
8
500
7
400 6
Endurance [h]
Range [nm]

5
300
4
200 3
2
100
1
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Fuel [kg] Fuel [kg]

Figure 8. Range and endurance versus fuel load.

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 The endurance was estimated for various velocities starting from 0 m/s (hover) to maximum forward speed
possible at the given free ambient conditions. Each forward velocity is plotted for OEW including indicated fuel burn
and MTOW. The plot is shown in figure 8. The plot indicate that the loiter requirements as determined by the RFP is
exceeded. For conditions where the payload is not included, the endurance was significantly higher for all considered
condition. The high endurance capability will allow Praesidium to meet a wide variety of missions including
reconnaissance, border patrol, fire scouting, etc. making it a more versatile configuration.

E. Operations
In order to complete swarming strategies when fire-fighting, i.e. multiple strategic drops in various drop patterns,
the UAV system proposed consists of a fleet of three UAVs and a mobile GCS. The small size and VTOL capability of
the UAVs means that they can be easily located in small hangars, away from airstrips and airport congestion. Each
UAV will have a Bambi Bucket manually connected by ground crew. The UAV will take off and travel to a nearby
water source, according to waypoint inputs and instruction received from the GCS. It refills by lowering the bucket
into the water source and collects up to 1000L of water. A ballast system enables the bucket to tip when it touches the
water surface for dip-filling, and the Bambi Bucket can fill in 3 - 5 seconds as it is lifted from the water. In the event
that natural water sources are unavailable, dip-tanks may be utilised. Each UAV will fly at 30 m/s (108 km/h) when
carrying a water payload. Electronic control systems enable the water to be released from a valve at the bottom of the
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

bucket. To meet the 40,000L/hr drop rate, each UAV can make 14 successive return trips to water sources 2km away
from the fire site, which achieves a 42,000L/hr drop rate.
When the mission is completed, the controller can input the landing coordinates. To prevent damage to the bucket
control head, the bucket should be released close to the ground, or the UAV should be made to enable the bucket to
gently touch the ground and then back-up. The UAVs have semi-autonomous capabilities, such that the operator will
need to put in coordinates. The UAVs will relay images and data to the GCS to assist the operator in making decisions.
The UAVs will be aware of each other‟s flight plans, and will have collision avoidance systems for other objects.
In the event of damage or failure of a system, there is also a redundancy control unit, automatic programming
system for landing, and the option of releasing the water payload or bucket. The fleets and ground control stations
should be distributed logistically across states, with consideration of fire prone regions, population densities, important
public installations, and the availability of existing fire-fighting resources. For the state of Victoria, it is recommended
that a fleet of 3 UAVs and corresponding GCS is designated to cover up to two fire districts. This strategic placement
is to enable the UAVs to be close to fire areas for rapid deployment and targeting, whilst maintaining direct
communication links with the Ground Control Station for maximum reliability of the system. The strategic locations of
Melbourne, Bairnsdale, Bright, Swan Hill, and Hamilton, would enable Victoria‟s most fire prone region; The Great
Divide; and other areas to be well protected with respect to existing fire assets. To highlight the typical missions for
which this fire-fighting UAV is proposed, two scenarios are shown for a fire emergency in the State of Victoria.
Scenario 1: Macedon Regional Park
This mission example involves a Praesidium fleet based in a Melbourne hangar, required to complete aerial fire-
fighting at Macedon Regional Park, Macedon. The fleet will be fitted with the Bambi Buckets at their Melbourne
hangar sight. If based at Essendon Airport they will take up to 30 minutes to reach the fire site, this includes time for
dispatch. However, this time can be reduced if the UAVs are located in local hangar spaces since no runway is
required, or if already in position for take-off from Essendon Airport. Essendon Airport is less than 45.0 km as the
crow flies from the Macedon Regional Park, so the GCS remains in range for direct LOS communication throughout
the mission. However, the GCS may choose to move to the fire site to facilitate communication with other on site fire-
fighting resources. Once at the site, Mount Macedon has numerous local water sources that the UAVs can make use of.
These include several reservoirs within 2-3km of the park perimeter, as shown in figure 9. The UAVs are given inputs
from the GCS, who have map data and correspondence with the CFA about the local water sources, and other
operations. The UAVs can perform swarming behaviour for the water refills and targeting, dropping one after the other
along a fire line. The UAV real-time images and data readings are fed back to the GCS and CFA to provide
information for strategy planning.
If the situation involves spot fires, one of the UAVs can easily be diverted to suppress individual fires. This UAV
can use a different water source to the two swarming UAVs to avoid crowding of water sources, and negate the need to
coordinate refilling time with the other UAVs. Within one hour of arriving on site, the UAVs will each be able to make
14 successive drops of 1,000L, achieving a 42,000L/hr drop rate. This allows for one minute per flight section; hover
water re-fill, 2km flight to fire, coordinating strategic drop, and 2km return flight to water source. This is a
conservative assumption to account for planning by the GCS operator. The times for refill and strategic drops may be
reduced if the GCS is using multiple highly skilled operators, and so a higher water drop rate is achievable. After four
hours of peak operation, the UAVs will be low on fuel, and can refuel at Sunbury Airfield, which is 15.7 km from
Macedon Regional Park, before returning to the fire site if required, or returning to base.
8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Figure 9. Operations scenario 1: Macedon Regional Park.
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Scenario 2: Mount Buller

A large fire is occurring at Alpine National Park (Mt. Buller). The first responders are the Mansfield CFA, who is
in charge of evacuation and logistics. A UAV fleet of 3 and GCS is based at Essendon Airport. The UAV fleet is
tasked to Mt. Buller. The fleet are deployed with empty bucket and tether attachments, and travel from Essendon
Airport to fill up initially at Lake Eildon. At a flight speed of 31.3m/s, allowing for bucket attachment and takeoff it
will take approximately 1.5hrs to travel 115.3km (62.3nm) to Lake Eildon. The GCS departs from the Essendon
Airport base simultaneously on route towards Mt. Buller. The GCS should maintain its direct link communication at all
times with the UAVs due to the driving route and flight times. However, if the mountainous terrain interferes, satellite
communication will be activated.
During transit, the GCS operator will contact the CFA to locate local water sources within 10km of the fire for
hover refill. If due to weather conditions and fire, local water sources are unavailable within this radius, the Mansfield
CFA will be able to provide portable dip tanks. The fleet then travels 40.2km (21.7nm) in approximately 30 minutes to
the fire site at Mt. Buller and makes the first round of water-drops. Real-time updates to UAV ground station on
current weather conditions and fire behaviour are made. The fleet refill at the local water sites, or the CFA provided
tanks within 5km from the fire site, and complete up to 7 additional water drops. The UAVs can then travel 30.4km to
Mansfield airport to refuel, after which the UAV‟s can return to complete more water bombing, or return to the
Melbourne base if the fire is well contained, i.e. easily extinguishable by ground crew.

Figure 10. Operations scenario 2: Mount Buller.

The key benefit of employing an unmanned system is to enable dangerous missions to be completed without
endangering crew. Hence, safety is a core aspect of this UAV system design, and this has also affected key design
choices. This section provides an overview of the safety aspects of the design, including risk mitigation strategies
(Table 2). The ducted design creates safety for ground handling crew since the rotor blades are encased. In the event of
an emergency or uncontrolled landing, the duct also reduces the possible damages caused by the rotor blades.
As per helicopter design requirements, this UAV is designed for auto-rotation in the event of engine failure. Auto-
rotation will allow the rotor blades to freely spin, and generate a small amount of lift from the air going up through the
duct, enabling a controlled emergency land. Compared to conventional helicopter, this lifting body and wing design,
combined with the FTU, also improve the outcomes of the height-velocity flight envelope. This is because the design
allows for some glide performance and forward velocity separate to the main rotors, and thus a more controlled
9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 emergency landing in the event of engine failure. The design also employs multiple control surfaces, i.e. elevons,
rudder, thrust vectoring, and swivelling FTU. This provides multiple options for improving the stability of the design,
and to help compensate for possible control surface issues.
The avionics system is designed with multiple redundancies to meet regulations, and add security to the design.
The UAV will be programmed to either return to base or return to the last known position with a signal, in the case of a
loss of signal during a mission. This means that the UAV can operate beyond LOS. The avionics subsystems have
inbuilt redundancies and failsafe features for robustness and safety. There will be two computers running in parallel at
the heart of the integrated avionics for added redundancy as discussed in the earlier sections. There is an electrical load
management system employed for ensuring the safe distribution of electrical power and the protection of the hardware.
The UAV will also employ a backup battery, which will supply a 90 W constant power load for at least 15 minutes.
The backup battery is useful in case of a malfunction of the UAVs main power supply.
Further, it was decided that the main avionics bay should be located separately to the engine in order to prevent
heating and vibration impacts on the avionics from the engine. Avionics installation mounts which absorb vibrations
have also been used.

Table 2. Safety and Risk Mitigation Strategies.

Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Risk Description Mitigation Strategy

Engine stall/Loss of thrust
Intensive vibration
Loss of surface controls
(individual, including actuator or
electronic failure)
Loss of GPS signal
Loss of communication link
Disrupted battery charging from
alternator system
Back-up battery low
Adverse weather conditions
Electronics failure due
overheating
Water/moisture risks
- FTU remaining flight time of at least 2.3 minutes from battery provides forward velocity to
enable more controlled aircraft direction for land.
- Auto-rotation, lifting body, and wing design will result in a more controlled glide than
conventional helicopter for a reduced ground impact velocity.
- UAV emergency land activated by manual pilot.
o Release of the water payload should be triggered.
o Quick location of suitable landing site required.
- Rigid structure and counter rotation of the blades should reduce vibrations.
- The avionics installation mounts are designed to absorb vibration.
- Depending on which surface control has been lost certain measures will be taken. Have multiple
control surfaces that can account for other losses, however this results in reduced reaction time.
o E.g. Control vanes on main duct affect pitch and roll, which could compensate for loss of
elevons or rudder and vice versa.
o E.g. FTU swivel could compensate for pitch control if elevons lost, and vice versa.
- Avionics system will be programmed to:
o Use the inertial sensors, altitude sensors, and airspeed sensors for navigation.
- Manual pilot will take over, using camera image as guide to land safely and terminate the
mission.
- Takeover by autopilot or vice versa.
- Avionics is programmed to:
o Return to base, or
o Return to last known position with signal,
o Relay signal to other UAVs back to GCS, and
o Initiate satellite communication.
- Mission terminated to go back to base safely.
- The backup battery will immediately takeover supplying enough battery to the avionics and
other systems for approximately 15 minutes allowing a safe landing.
- Mission terminated to go back to base safely.
- UAV powered from main battery-alternator system.
- Designed to fly hot and high due to nature of primary mission, i.e. fire-fighting. Multiple
control surfaces to maintain stability in adverse conditions.
- Check with local authorities, such as CFA and CASA to determine if it is suitable to fly.
to - If ventilation and heat exchange fails, and avionics bay temperature is reaching the maximum
operating temperatures of the electronics, a safe landing will be triggered.
- Avionics and aircraft are sealed.

Damaged landing gear
Foreign object ingestion to main
rotors
Rotor blade damage/release
- Fixed non-retractable rear landing gear, and re-tractable front landing gear.
- Due to VTOL and FTU swivel, can still land softly and adjust longitudinal weight balance
towards front or rear landing gear, so landing is still safe and controlled, with some possible
structural damage on land.
- Rigid blade design with high solidity should be capable of withstanding impact damage.
- Reinforced duct structure to protect fuel system.
- Engine is well protected at nose of aircraft.
- If significant, terminate mission and land via manual pilot.

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 V. Design Summary and Conclusion

In response to a Request for Proposal for an unmanned system, issued by the Country Fire Authority (CFA) in the state
of Victoria in Australia, to assist in fire fighting operations across the state, a student design presents the Praesidium
UAV. This is a ducted-fan UAV system that is designed to make use of the many water dams, small lakes and other
bodies of water located around the state.

Engine Exhaust Engine Air Intake

PT6-A Engine Control Vanes
Fuel Tank
Top Set of Blades
Bottom Set of Blades

Elevons Ventilation Outlet

Main Spar
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Integral
Skin

Nose Landing
Gear Avionics FTU Blades

Main Rib
Antennas
Navigation Lights FTU
Rotating Gears

Integral
Rudder Skin
Main Landing
Gear

Figure 11. Praesidium X10 and its components.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 The Praesidium UAV, which is Latin for „Protection‟, is a ducted co-axial vehicle designed for VTOL operations,
as well as conventional forward flight. The central hub contains two counter-rotating sets of 4 fixed blades (θw = -
16.95°), which provide the aircraft‟s principal source of lift. The system is powered by a Pratt & Whitney Canada
PT6C-67C turbo-shaft engine. The ducted feature improves the efficiency of the rotors by minimising tip loss effects,
and additionally improves the safety of the design. The nose, body, and wing have been designed to supplement the lift
from the main duct during forward flight, thereby maximizing range and endurance. The forward thrust unit provides
the impulse required to propel the aircraft forward. It is operated via an electric generator system that gains power
through an alternator system connected to the engine. To ensure high stability and control, multiple control systems are
incorporated into the design. There is thrust vectoring to control hover, elevons for pitch and roll, rudders for yaw, and
FTU swivel feature for pitch. The design utilises a long-line external payload connected via winch system at three
connection points.
The avionics and ground control system enables semi-autonomous functionality of the UAV, whereby the system
has automatic programs and flight based on waypoints and drop zone goals. Swarm technology is employed to ensure
positive mission based interaction between each craft in the UAV system, enabling them to both work in tandem and
work independently to complete an overall mission objective. The GCS is a portable road vehicle. The avionics array
is designed towards real time communication capability and heavy data transfer via multiple uplink downlink systems,
such as direct „line of site‟ radio communication, use of the Australian emergency services communication network
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

based on wireless Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) and secondary satellite redundancy if land communication
fails.
The design was based on RFP requirements, Australian environmental conditions, fire-fighting strategy, and CFD
and FE analysis, with a focus on providing a highly capable system that offers innovation in aerial fire-fighting
services. Crew in the mobile GCS can control a fleet of three UAVs with 1000L payload Bambi buckets. The UAS is
able to perform rapid hover refills, swarming behavior, and meet or surpass the required drop rate of 40,000L/hr. The
unmanned factor could be of high benefit to the CFA and other emergency services due to the protection of personnel,
ability to enter more difficult environments, disposability, and semi-autonomous capability.
The Praesidium is a revolutionary design that came into conception through careful examination of the key
requirements of the request for proposal, detailed knowledge about Australian environmental conditions, and a focus
on providing a highly capable system that offers innovation in aerial fire-fighting services within Australia. The VTOL
design was viewed as a necessity for fighting Australian wildfires as it offers the benefit of rapid refilling and precision
water bombing at low altitudes under extremely dynamic conditions. The aircraft will travel into untouched and barren
landscape that is not accessible to any other mobile unit and fight fires in conditions that would normally jeopardise the
safety of human life. The Praesidium UAV's mission is to facilitate safe fire-reconnaissance and water-bombing
operations within suburban and rural areas to protect the lives and property of Australian citizens against one of our
nation's greatest natural threats. This charge is to be undertaken with minimum risk to CFA and emergency service
personnel, while providing the most technologically advanced fire-fighting UAV platform ever designed to combat the
horrors of the Australian forest wildfire. Utilising such advances as an internally ducted lifting fan to provide VTOL
capability and major lift source, and off-the-shelf fire-fighting technology, the Praesidium is purpose built for the
harsh environment and rugged terrain.
Along with this new fire-fighting platform, a new strategy will be employed to fight fires with an unforgiving
tenacity. Instead of one aircraft, a single platform will comprise of three semi-autonomous air vehicles employing
advances in swarm logic behaviour, rapid deployment and real time situational awareness for the field commander, the
UAV fleet will conduct its missions with singular purpose and precision.
The fleet of three aircraft, offered at a competitive cost, will provide the CFA a versatile and strategic system
capable of acquiring and relaying important data about the environment, fire behaviour and ground water sources,
ultimately ensuring that any fire management task force has the most up to date information. Designed to conduct
performance based sorties the Praesidium UAV may also double as a Surveillance, Weather Telemetry and Search and
Rescue platform in the off season to add to the robust nature of the design.
The design of the vehicle involved much more than can be covered in detail in this paper. Further information on
the design philosophy, design process, team management, costings, as well as detailed technical information is
available in the design report13.

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Appendix: Request for Proposal - Fire Fighting UAV

Overview
The Country Fire Authority (CFA) is one of the world‟s largest emergency service organisations, with over 66,000
full- and part-time employees and volunteers. The CFA‟s remit is to protect lives and property in the state of Victoria
from bushfires, and to assist other like organizations in neighboring states and territories when needed. More details
about the Authority, its organisation, function and history may be found at FireWire, the CFA website located at
http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/. The CFA makes use of a variety of fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft which are used for
surveillance and mapping, communications and water-bombing – the latter mission including the delivery of foam and
chemical retardant as well as water. All are, of course, manned, but the Authority has decided to evaluate the use of
unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) in the water-bomber role.
The specification given below sets out the CFA‟s needs in terms of the use of such vehicles. It should be noted that,
in order to allow potential suppliers as much design flexibility as possible, many of the requirements are intended as
system requirements, which may or may not involve the use of more than one UAV (and associated ground equipment)
at a time in a co-ordinated operation.
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

Specification
1. Mission/Payload

• Drop rate – i.e., the rate at which the payload is delivered on one or more targets – 40,000 litres/hour at
peak operational rate with a minimum distance from loading point to target of 2 km.
• Payload may be any one of water, foam or retardant as needed; no or an absolute minimum of conversion
should be necessary to change from one to another. The option to select one in flight, e.g., to convert
water into foam, is considered desirable.
• Payload should be able to be released in multiple passes if full load of a single vehicle 4,000 litres.
• Ferry range 500 nautical miles OR vehicle(s) must be readily transportable by other means, which must
have off-road capability.
• Air vehicle must be able to operate from rough fields, e.g., a dirt strip, with a maximum length of 600 m.
Take-off run (brakes release to 50 ft height) 500 m from a strip at an altitude of 1500 m AMSL on an
ISA + 35 oC day.
• Standard sortie to include loiter time of 1 hour.

2. Support Requirements

• Highly mobile: all vehicles, ground and air, must have rough field capability. Base station must be able
to move at 10 minutes‟ notice or less; UAV must be able to loiter unattended while base moves (this can
be considered as part of the loiter requirement mentioned above).
• Distance from base station to fire (targets) should be maximised.
• Rugged, with minimum maintenance requirements when deployed
• As far as possible, independent of fixed base requirements; ground equipment other than base station
should not require highly-trained operators
• Ability to scoop water desirable but not mandatory

3. Crashworthiness

• Secure communications links are considered vital; the vehicle(s) must remain in contact with the base
station at all times, regardless of location, weather and situation with respect of the fire(s).
• Flight Termination System required in case of comms link loss; return-to-base system preferred soft
landing recovery system acceptable.
• Must not start fire if it crashes. Fuel, electronics, etc., must be protected from impact damage.

4. General

• Navigation package to include GPS system; other avionics and sensors to be as considered desirable,
but system architecture should be such as to allow easy removal and customisation for specific
missions. Such system changes will take place at a fixed base, not in the field, though equipment

13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 required for an avionics change should be portable so as to allow changes to be done from a temporary
base.
• Design to satisfy Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) UAV Design Standards
5. Costs

• Acquisition cost not to exceed AUS$2 million for a system capable of meeting the above requirements.
• Operating and maintenance costs to be no more than that of existing aircraft used in this role.
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

14
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the additional team members: Robert Buettner, Salvador Gomez, Yeun
Ting Kwok, Abdulghani Mohamed, Thanh Trieu Nguyen, and Nicholas Olorenshaw. We also extend thanks to
RMIT Associate Professors Tom Steiner and Lachlan Thompson, and to Dr. Peter Hoffmann of Engineers Australia,
for their consultation.

References

1
American Helicopter Services & Aerial Firefighting Association, “Tutorial: Aerial Firefighting,” [Online], 2005,
http://www.ahsafa.org/tutorial.html.
2
Dynamic Aviation, “Leading the Way in Firefighting,” Dynamic Aviation , 2011.
3
Fogarty, L., Slijepcevic, A., and Imrie, I., “Comparison of the Cost-Effectiveness of Some Aircraft Used for Fire Suppres-
sion - Part 2,” Department of Conservation , 1998, Thames: New Zealand Research Institute.
4
Slaughter, S., “Firestorm: Fighting Wildfires from the Air,” Abacus Publishing , 2007.
Downloaded by PRINCETON UNIVERSITY on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2012-1039

5
Country Fire Authority, “Aircraft,” [Online], 2011, http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/about/equip/aircraft.htm.
6
Austin, R., Unmanned Aircraft Systems: UAVs Design Development and Deployment , John Wiley, Virginia, 2010.
7
Country Fire Association South Australia, “Aircraft Selection,” [Online], 2011,
http://www.cfs.sa.gov.au/site/about us/aerial firefighting/aircraft selection.jsp.
8
The Great Eastern Ranges, “Catchments and Water,” [Online], 2009,
http://www.greateasternranges.org.au/nature-people/catchments-and-water/catchmnts-and-water.
9
National Aerial Firefighting Centre, “Frequently Asked Questions,” [Online], December 2011,
http://www.nafc.org.au/portal/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=2&tabid=3.
10
Leishman, J., Principles of helicopter aerodynamics , Cambridge aerospace series, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
11
SEI Industries, Bambi Bucket Operations Manual , Canada, 2010, Version E.
12
Hubbard, S., “Aircraft Strategy & Tactics,” [Online], 2008, http://www.sonnet.com/usr/wildfire/.
13
Subramaniam, E., Joseph, N., et al. “Design of a UAV for Aerial Fire Fighting”, RMIT University, 2011.

15
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics