Module 2 Preliminary Aircraft Specifications

PHILIPPINE STATE COLLEGE OF AERONAUTICS
INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Learning Module No. 02: Preliminary Aircraft Specifications
LEARNING
MODULE NO. 02:
Preliminary Aircraft
Specifications
AE 416 – AIRCRAFT DESIGN I
Prepared by:
AERO FACULTY
1|P age
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TIME
TOPIC PAGE
ALLOTMENT
Sizing from a Conceptual Sketch 4 70 minutes

Airfoil Geometry and Selection 16 70 minutes
Thrust to Weight Ratio and Wing Loading 46 70 minutes
Selection of Thrust to Weight Ratio and Wing Loading 69 30 minutes
TIME
ACTIVITY PAGE
ALLOTMENT
Laboratory Report No. 3 70 140 minutes

HONESTY CLAUSE
As an institution of higher learning, students are expected to display highest degree

of honesty and professionalism in their class work, requirements, and activities; thus,
in no case that cheating—or any form of it, may it be plagiarism, copying other
students' works, and fabrication of materials—shall be tolerated. The college
assumes as a simple and minimal preferred of habits in academic matters that
students be truthful and that they publish for deposit solely the merchandise of their
personal efforts.
2|P age
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Course Learning Outcomes [CLO]
CLO 2: Conduct preliminary estimates using

Module Learning Outcomes [MLO]
historical data and/or statistical equations to
conduct estimations of different aircraft MLO 5: Perform analysis for initial design Topic Learning Outcomes [TLO]
parameters and performance. estimations.
CLO 8: Display professional commitment to MLO 6: Perform selection of wing and tail
ethical practice in complying the academic geometry for the conceptual aircraft. TLO 3: Apply theoretical knowledge in
requirements such as technical reports and aerodynamics by establishing preliminary
other module activities. MLO 7: Establish conceptual aircraft aircraft specifications
CLO 9: Express leadership, good performance requirements for initial
design purposes. TLO 4: Execute initial design analysis
communication, sense of responsibility and
teamwork in accomplishing all given
procedures for estimation of preliminary
collaborative tasks. aircraft specifications.
CLO 10: Acknowledge the importance of TLO 5: Perform computations for selection
airplane design in the interest aviation industry of vital preliminary aircraft parameters
and its contribution to national development. which serve as a foundation of the
conceptual aircraft design.
3|P age
I. SIZING FROM A CONCEPTUAL SKETCH

A. TAKEOFF WEIGHT DETERMINATION
The design takeoff gross weight is the total weight of the aircraft as it begins
the mission for which it was designed. This is different from the maximum
takeoff weight. On the other hand, many military aircraft can be overloaded
beyond the design weight at the expense of reduced maneuverability. Unless
specifically mentioned, takeoff gross weight (W0) is assumed to be the design
weight.
The design takeoff gross weight can be broken into different components
such as crew weight, payload (or passenger weight), fuel weight and the
remaining (or “empty”) weight. The weight of structure, engines, landing
gear, fixed equipment, avionics, and anything else not considered as part of
the crew, payload or fuel weight is the aircraft empty weight. Takeoff weight
is given by the formula:
𝑊0 = 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 + 𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 + 𝑊𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝑊𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 (𝑒𝑞. 2.1)
From Eq. (2.1) the crew and payload weights are both known since they are
initially specified in the design requirements of the aircraft. The remaining
unknowns are the fuel and the empty weight. However, they are both
dependent on the total aircraft weight and thus requires an iterative process
for aircraft sizing.
Simplifying the calculation, both fuel and empty weights can be expressed as
𝑊𝑓 𝑊
fractions of the total takeoff weight, i.e., and 𝑊𝑒 . Thus Eq. (2.1) becomes:
𝑊0 0
𝑊𝑓 𝑊𝑒
𝑊0 = 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 + 𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 + ( ) 𝑊0 + ( ) 𝑊0 (𝑒𝑞. 2.2)
𝑊0 𝑊0
Solving Eq. (2.2) for 𝑊𝑂 gives:

(𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 + 𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 )
𝑊0 = (𝑒𝑞. 2.3)
𝑊𝑓 𝑊
1 − (𝑊 ) − (𝑊𝑒 )
0 0
𝑊𝑓 𝑊
From Eq. (2.3) 𝑊0 can be determined if both 𝑊 and 𝑊𝑒 can be estimated.
0 0
Estimation of these weight fractions will be discussed in the subsequent
chapters.
B. EMPTY WEIGHT ESTIMATION

The empty weight fraction can be estimated statistically from the historical
trends shown in the figure below. Empty weigh fractions vary from about 0.3-
4|P age
0.7 and diminish with increasing total aircraft weight. From the figure below,
it can be inferred that the type of aircraft also has a strong effect with the
empty weight fraction. An example is the flying boats which have the highest
empty weight fractions and long-range military aircrafts having the lowest.
This is because the flying boats need to carry extra weight for what amounts
to a boat hull. In addition to this, notice that different types of aircrafts
exhibit different gradients to the trend lines of empty weight fraction versus
takeoff weight.
The table shown below presents a statistical curve-fit equations for the
trends shown in the figure above. Note that these are all exponential
equations based upon takeoff gross weight. The exponents are small negative
numbers, which indicates that the empty weight fractions decrease with
increasing takeoff weight as shown in the trendlines provided by the figure
above. The differences in exponents for different types of aircraft reflect the
different slopes to the trend lines and imply that some types of aircraft are
more sensitive in sizing than others. A variable sweep wing for example is
generally heavier than a fixed wing because of the included weight of
sweeping mechanism of the wing and is also accounted for at this initial stage
of design by multiplying the empty weight fraction as determined from the
equations in the table provided below by about 1.04.
5|P age
Advanced composite materials are replacing aluminum in a number of new

designs, however, there have not yet been enough composite aircraft flown
to develop statistical equations. Based on a number of design studies, the
empty-weight fraction for other types of aircraft can be estimated at this
stage by multiplying the statistical empty weight fraction by 0.95.
C. FUEL FRACTION ESTIMATION

In general, only a part of the aircrafts fuel supply is available for performing a
“mission” requirement and is commonly referred to as mission fuel. The rest
of the fuel includes reserve fuel as required by civil or military design
specifications and “trapped fuel” which is the fuel that cannot be pumped
out of the tanks.
The required amount of mission fuel depends upon the mission to be flown,
the aerodynamics of the aircraft, and the engine’s fuel consumption. The
aircraft weight during the mission affects the drag, so the fuel used is
basically a function of the aircraft weight. As a first approximation, the fuel
used can be considered to be proportional to the aircraft weight, so the fuel
𝑊𝑓
fraction 𝑊 is approximately independent of aircraft weight. Fuel fraction can
0
be estimated based on the mission to be flown using approximations of the
fuel consumption and aerodynamics of the aircraft.
i. MISSION PROFILES
Mission profiles describe the segments of operation the aircraft is
designed to operate in. For example, many transport and general
aviation designs, use the Simple Cruise mission where the aircraft is
6|P age
sized to provide some required cruise range. As a consideration to

safety, it would be wise to carry extra fuel for instances where the
destination airport is closed or unavailable due to existing weather
conditions, so a loiter of typically 20-30 minutes is added.
Alternatively additional range may also be included, representing the
distance to the nearest airport or some fixed number of minutes of
flight at cruise speed where the FAA requires 30 minutes of additional
cruise fuel for general aviation aircraft.
Other missions are more complex like the typical Air Superiority
mission which includes a cruise out, a combat consisting of either a
certain number of turns or a certain number of minutes at maximum
power, weapons drop, a cruise back and a loiter. The weapons drop
refers to firing of guns and missiles and is often left out of sizing
analysis to ensure that the aircraft has enough fuel to return safely if
the weapons aren’t used. Note that the second cruise segment is
identical to the first, indicating that the aircraft must return to its base
at the end of the mission.
The low-level strike mission includes dash segments that must be

flown at just a few hundred feet off the ground to improve the
survivability of the aircraft as it engages its target. However, at the
expense of aerodynamic efficiency expressed as the lift to drag ratio
(L/D), the lift to drag ratio is greatly reduced during low-level, high-
speed flight as well as the engine efficiency where the aircraft may
burn almost as much fuel during the low-level dash segment as it
burns in the much-longer cruise segment.
7|P age
The strategic bombing mission introduces another complexity in the

mission where after the initial cruise, a refueling segment occurs
(indicated by R) where the aircraft meets a tanker aircraft and
receives some quantity of fuel in the air. This enables bomber aircrafts
to achiever far more range at the expense of overall operating cost to
operate a fleet of tanker aircrafts dedicated to support bombers. In
addition to this, note that the bomber mission also operates at low
level to improve survivability as opposed to previous bombers which
operates at higher altitudes all throughout the mission. Another
important thing to know is that the return cruise range is far shorter
than the initial cruise range because of the extreme range required.
Should the aircraft be sized to return to its original base, it would
probably weigh several million pounds. It is instead assumed that
strategic bombers will land on friendly bases in allied countries for
refueling after completing their mission.
ii. MISSION SEGMENT WEIGHT FRACTIONS

For analysis of the various mission segment weight fractions, they
should be numbered for each segment or legs with zero denoting the
start of the mission. Mission leg “one” is usually engine warm up and
takeoff for first order sizing estimation. The remaining legs are
sequentially numbered. A typical example is the simple cruise mission,
the legs could be numbered:
1. Warm up and takeoff
2. Climb
3. Cruise
4. Loiter
5. Land
In the same manner, the aircraft weight at each part of the mission
could also be numbered here the beginning weight is the takeoff
gross weight (𝑊0 ), the weight at the end of the first mission segment
(warm up and takeoff) would be (𝑊1 ), weight at the end of the climb
segment (𝑊2 ), weight after cruise segment (𝑊3 ), weight after loiter
(𝑊4 ), and weight at the end of landing (𝑊5 ) which is also the end of
the total mission. It is important to know that after each mission
segment, the aircraft loses weight by burning fuel and that our simple
sizing method doesn’t permit missions involving a payload drop. The
aircraft weight at the end of a mission segment is then divided by its
weight at the beginning of that segment and is now called the
“mission segment weight fraction” which will be the basis for
estimating the required fuel fraction for initial sizing.
8|P age
For any mission segment “i,” the mission segment weight fraction can
be expressed as (𝑊𝑖 /𝑊𝑖−1 ) and if these weight fractions can be
estimated for all of the mission legs can be multiplied together to find
the ratio of the aircraft weight at the end of the total mission (𝑊𝑥 )
divided by the initial weight (𝑊0 ). This ratio, (𝑊𝑥 /𝑊0 ), can now be
used to calculate the total fuel fraction required.
For our simplified initial sizing, the types of mission legs will be limited
to warm up and takeoff, climb, cruise, loiter and land. As previously
mentioned, mission legs involving combat, payload drop and refuel
are not permitted in this simplified sizing method. Meanwhile,
historically, warmup and takeoff, and landing weight fractions are
given as average values for reasonable initial sizing method.
Note that in the simple sizing method, we ignore descent with the
assumption that cruise ends with a descent and that the distance
traveled during descent is part of the cruise range.
Cruise segment mission weight fractions can be found using the

Breguet range equation given as:
𝑉𝐿 𝑊𝑖−1
𝑅= ln ( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.4)
𝐶𝐷 𝑊𝑖
or
𝑊𝑖−1 𝑅𝐶
−
= 𝑒 𝑉(𝐿/𝐷) (𝑒𝑞. 2.5)
𝑊𝑖
Where:
R = Range
C = Specific fuel consumption
V = Velocity
L/D = Lift to drag ratio
9|P age
Loiter weight fractions are found from the endurance equation:

𝐿/𝐷 𝑊𝑖−1
𝐸= ln ( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.6)
𝐶 𝑊𝑖
or
𝑊𝑖−1 𝐸𝐶
−
=𝑒 𝐿/𝐷 (𝑒𝑞. 2.7)
𝑊𝑖
Where:
E = endurance or loiter time
NOTE: Use consistent units! Also note that C and L/D vary with speed
and altitude. Furthermore, C varies with throttle setting, and L/D
varies with aircraft weight.
iii. SPECIFIC FUEL CONSUMPTION

Specific fuel consumption (SFC or C) is the rate of fuel consumption
divided by the resulting thrust. For jet engines, C, is usually measured
𝑙𝑏
in pounds of fuel per hour per pound of thrust (ℎ𝑟) / 𝑙𝑏 𝑜𝑟 1/ℎ𝑟. The
figure below shows specific fuel consumption trends using Mach
number versus equivalent jet SFC.
Propeller engine SFC is normally given as 𝐶𝑏ℎ𝑝 which is the pounds of

fuel per hour to produce one horsepower at the propeller shaft (or
10 | P a g e
one brake horsepower, 1 bhp = 550 ft-lb/s). A propeller thrust SFC

equivalent to jet engine SFC can now be calculated. Since the engine
produces thrust via the propeller, which has an efficiency 𝜂𝑝 defined
as the thrust horsepower output per horsepower input given in the
equation below.
𝑇𝑉
𝜂𝑝 = (𝑒𝑞. 2.8)
550
Where:
V = velocity in feet per second
The equivalent thrust SFC for a propeller driven aircraft is then given
as:
𝑊𝑓 /𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 1 𝑉
𝐶= = 𝐶𝑏ℎ𝑝 ∗ = 𝐶𝑏ℎ𝑝 (𝑒𝑞. 2.9)
𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑇 550𝜂𝑝
On the other hand, the figure below shows typical values of 𝐶𝑏ℎ𝑝 and
𝜂𝑝 for propeller powered aircraft which can be used for rough initial
sizing.
iv. L/D ESTIMATION

The remaining unknown in the range and loiter equations is the lift to
drag ratio which is a measure of the design’s overall aerodynamic
efficiency. The lift to drag ratio is highly dependent upon the
configuration arrangement. At subsonic speeds, the lift to drag ratio is
most directly affected by two aspects of design which is the wing span
and wetted area. In cases of level flight, the lift must equal the aircraft
weight and thus lift to drag ratio is solely dependent upon drag. In
11 | P a g e
addition to this, drag at subsonic speeds are mainly induced drag

(drag due to lift) which is a function of the wing span, and parasite
drag (zero-lift drag) which is a drag related to the form or profile of
the body. The parasite drag is primarily skin-friction drag and is
directly proportional to the total surface area of the aircraft exposed
to the air (hence the term wetted area).
From previous knowledge in aerodynamics, aspect ratio of the wing

has been used as a primary indicator of wing efficiency. Aspect ratio is
defined as the ratio of the square of the wing span and the wing
reference area. For a simple rectangular wing, the aspect ratio is
simply the ratio of the span to the chord. Typical values of aspect ratio
range from under one for re-entry lifting bodies to over thirty for
sailplanes and other typical values range between three and eight. For
the initial design purposes, aspect ratio can be selected from
historical data.
Aspect ratio can be used to estimate the subsonic L/D ratio; however,
parasite drag is not only a function of just the wing area as expressed
by the definition of aspect ratio, but also of the aircrafts total wetted
area as discussed above.
To illustrate this example, consider the two aircrafts shown below

with the same mission of strategic bombing. The B-47 features a
conventional approach in its design with an aspect ratio of over 9. In
return, it is not surprising that it attains a L/D of over 17. On the other
hand, the AVRO Vulcan has an aspect ratio of only 3, and by
comparison it attains almost the same L/D ratio. The explanation for
this outcome lies in the actual drivers of L/D ratio discussed above.
With both of the aircrafts having the same wing span and about the
same wetted areas, both have about the same L/D ratio. The aspect
ratio of the B-47 is not higher because of the greater wing span but
because of a smaller wing area. However, this reduced wing area is
offset by the wetted area of the fuselage and tails. As we can see from
the ratios of wetted area to wing reference area 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 / 𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 , the
AVRO design has a total wetted area of less than 3 times the wing
area and the B-47 has a wetted area of 8 times the wing area. This
wetted area ratio can be used along with aspect ratio as a more
reliable estimate of L/D. Wetted area ratio is clearly dependent on the
actual configuration layout. As stated above, a new parameter the
“wetted aspect ratio” is defined as the ratio of the wing span squared
12 | P a g e
to the total aircraft wetted area which is similar to the aspect ratio
but instead it considers the total wetted area.
The figure below shows the ratio of 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 / 𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 for each known
aircraft designs.
13 | P a g e
The figure below plots the maximum L/D for a number of aircraft
versus the wetted aspect ratio where clear trend lines for jet,
propeller powered, and fixed-gear propeller powered aircraft are
indicated. Note that the wetted aspect ratio can be expressed as the
wing geometric aspect ratio divided by the wetted area ratio.
𝑏2 𝐴𝑅
𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = = (𝑒𝑞. 2.10)
𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑
( 𝑆 )
𝑟𝑒𝑓
It should be clear that the designer has no control over the L/D ratio.
The designer picks the aspect ratio and determines the configuration
arrangement which in turn determines the wetted area ratio.
However, the designer must strike a compromise between the desire
for a high L/D ratio and the conflicting desire for low weight.
The statistical equation provided above for estimating the empty

weight fraction are based on normal designs. If the aspect ratio
selected is much higher than that of other aircraft in its class, the
14 | P a g e
empty weight fraction would be higher than estimated by these

simple statistical equations. L/D can now be estimated from a
conceptual sketch where the designer arranges the major
components of the aircraft. From the sketch, the wetted area ratio
may be estimated using the figure above for wetted area ratio and an
eye-ball estimate may be done and the wetted aspect ratio may now
be calculated and used to estimate the maximum L/D using the trend
lines provided above.
Note that the L/D can usually be estimated without a sketch by an

experienced designer. The wetted aspect ratio method is provided
primarily for students but it can be useful for quickly evaluating novel
concepts. Also, drag varies with altitude and velocity where there is a
velocity which maximizes L/D for any altitude there is. To maximize
cruise or loiter efficiency the aircraft should fly at approximately the
velocity for maximum L/D as shown below for a jet and propeller
powered aircraft. For initial sizing, these percentage can be multiplied
to the estimated L/D to determine the L/D for cruise and loiter.
v. FUEL FRACTION ESTIMATION

Using the historical values, tables presented and the equations for
cruise and loiter segments, the mission segment weight fractions can
now be estimated by multiplying each weight fractions together. The
𝑊
outcome will be the total mission weight fraction (𝑊𝑥 ). This simplified
0
method does not allow mission segment involving payload drops, all
weight lost during the mission must be due to fuel usage. The mission
𝑊
fuel fraction must therefore be equal to (1 − 𝑊𝑥 ). Assuming a typical
0
6% allowance for reserved and trapped fuel, the total fuel fraction can
be estimated by:
𝑊𝑓 𝑊𝑥
= 1.06 (1 − ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.11)
𝑊0 𝑊0
vi. TAKEOFF WEIGHT CALCULATION

Using the fuel fraction found with Eq. (2.11) and the statistical empty
weight equation selected from the tables presented, the takeoff gross
weight can be found iteratively using Eq. (2.3). This can be done by
15 | P a g e
guessing a takeoff gross weight, calculating the statistical empty-

weight fraction and then calculating the takeoff gross weight. If the
results don’t match the guess value, a value between the two is used
as the next guess. This will usually converge in just a few iterations.
The first order sizing process is diagrammed in the figure below.
II. AIRFOIL GEOMETRY AND SELECTION

A. AIRFOIL SELECTION
The airfoil, in many respects, is the heart of the airplane. The airfoil affects
the cruise speed, takeoff and landing distances, stall speed, handling qualities
and overall aerodynamic efficiency during all phases of flight.
i. AIRFOIL GEOMETRY
Chord – straight line from the leading edge to the trailing edge
Camber – refers to the curvature characteristic of most airfoils
Mean Camber Line – the line equidistant from the upper and lower
surfaces
Total airfoil camber – defined as the maximum distance of the mean
camber line from the chord line, expressed as a percent of chord
In the earlier days, most airfoils had flat bottoms and it was common
to refer to the upper surface shape as the “camber”. Later, as airfoils
with curved bottoms came into usage, they were known as “double-
16 | P a g e
cambered” airfoils. Also, an airfoil with a concave lower surface was

known as an “under-cambered” airfoil.
The thickness distribution of the airfoil is the distance from the upper
surface to the lower surface, measured perpendicular to the mean
camber line and is a function of the distance from the leading edge.
The airfoil “thickness ratio” (t/c) refers to the maximum thickness of
the airfoil divided by its chord. Proper scaling of the airfoil can be
done to change either the drag due to profile or airfoil lift
characteristics.
ii. AIRFOIL LIFT AND DRAG

Airfoil generates lift by changing the velocity of air passing over and
under itself which is usually done by change in angle of attack and/or
camber. Bernoulli’s equation shows that higher velocities produce
lower pressures and in turn the upper airfoil surface tends to be
pulled upward by lower than ambient pressures while the lower
surface of the airfoil tends to be pushed upward by higher than
ambient temperatures. These pressure difference of the airfoil
generate the net lifting force.
Note that an airfoil in two-dimensional flow does not experience any

drag due to the creation of lift. The pressure forces produced in the
generation of lift are at right angles to the oncoming air. All two-
dimensional airfoil drag is produced by skin friction and pressure
17 | P a g e
effects resulting from flow separation and shocks. It is only in three-

dimensional flow that drag due to lift is produced.
Lift force on an airfoil is perpendicular to the flight direction while the

drag force is parallel to the flight direction. The pitching moment is
usually negative when measured about the aerodynamic center,
implying a nose down moment. Note that two-dimensional airfoil
characteristics are denoted by lowercase subscripts where as the
three-dimensional wing characteristics are denoted by upper case
subscripts.
The aerodynamic center is a point on the airfoil where the pitching

moment remains constant for any angle of attack. The aerodynamic
center is not the same as the airfoil’s center of pressure (or lift). In
fact, the center of pressure is usually behind the aerodynamic center
and its location varies with angle of attack for most airfoils.
It is important to remember that airfoil characteristics are strongly

affected by the Reynold’s number at which they are operating. It is
the Reynold’s number that influences whether the flow will be
laminar or turbulent, and whether flow separation will occur. A typical
aircraft wing operates at a Reynold’s number of about ten million.
iii. AIRFOIL DESIGN

In the past, designer would select an airfoil (or airfoils) from a catalog
of existing airfoil profiles. This selection would consider factors such
as the airfoil drag during cruise, stall and pitching moment
characteristics, thickness available for structure and fuel, and the ease
of manufacture. With today’s computational airfoil design capabilities,
it is becoming common for the airfoil shapes for a wing to be custom
designed and is usually based upon inverse computational solutions
for desired pressure distributions on the airfoil. Today, different
methods of reducing flow separation near the trailing edge have been
employed.
Another consideration in modern airfoil design is the desire to

maintain laminar flow over the greatest possible part of the airfoil.
Laminar flow airfoils combined with smooth fabrications can produce
a wing with laminar flow over about 50-70% of the wing. Critical
Mach number should also be given attention in airfoil design since
differences in profiles affects the Mach number which produces local
supersonic flow along the airfoil. The local supersonic flow creates a
18 | P a g e
large increase in drag along with a reduction in lift and a change in

pitching moment. A supercritical airfoil is designed to minimize these
effects and modern computational methods allow design of airfoils in
which the upper surface shock is minimized or even eliminated by
spreading the lift in the chordwise direction which reduces upper
surface velocity for a required total lift and therefore increasing the
critical Mach number.
iv. DESIGN LIFT COEFFICIENT

For early conceptual designs, designers must frequently rely upon
existing airfoils and one should be selected in such a way that it is the
closest to having the desired characteristics. The design lift coefficient
at which the airfoil has the best lift to drag ratio should be a first
consideration in initial airfoil selection. This is the point on the drag
polar that is tangent to a line from the origin and closest to the
vertical axis. In fact, for subsonic flights, the aircraft should be
designed so that it flies the design mission at or near the design lift
coefficient to maximize the aerodynamic efficiency.
As a first approximation, it can be assumed that wing lift coefficient C L

is equal to the airfoil lift coefficient C l. In level flight, the lift must
equal the weight, so the required design lift coefficient can be found
as follows.
𝑊 = 𝐿 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐿 ≅ 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝑙 (𝑒𝑞. 2.12)
1 𝑊
𝐶𝐿 ≅ 𝐶𝑙 = ( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.13)
𝑞 𝑆
It is important to note that dynamic pressure (q) is a function of
velocity and altitude. By assuming a wing loading, the design lift
coefficient can be calculated for the velocity and altitude of the design
mission. Also, the wing loading of the actual wing decreases during
the mission as fuel is burned and thus to stay at the design lift
coefficient, the dynamic pressure must be steadily reduced during the
mission by either slowing down (which is undesirable) or climbing to a
higher altitude (referred to as cruise-climb) followed by an aircraft
trying to maximize range.
In actual practice, a design lift coefficient usually will be based upon

past experience, and for most types of aircraft typically will be around
0.5. In fact, the initial selection of the airfoil is often simply based
upon prior experience or copied from some successful design.
v. STALL CHARACTERISTICS
19 | P a g e
Stall characteristics play an important role in airfoil selection. In fact,

some airfoil profiles exhibit gradual reduction in lift during a stall,
while others show a violent loss of lift, accompanied by rapid changes
in pitching moment. The three profiles of concern are fat, thin, and
very thin airfoil profiles. Typically, fat airfoils stalls from the trailing
edge where the turbulent boundary layer increases with increase of
angle of attack. Usually at 10 degrees the boundary layer begins to
separate starting at the trailing edge and moving forward as the angle
of attack is further increased. Thus, the loss of lift is gradual along
with small number of changes in pitching moment. Meanwhile, thin
airfoils stall from the leading edge, just like moderate thickness
airfoils, the flow separates near the nose at a very small angle of
attack but immediately reattaches itself so that little effect is felt. At
some higher values of angle of attack, the flow fails to reattach which
immediately stalls the entire airfoil causing abrupt change in lift and
pitching moment. Lastly, very thin airfoils exhibit another form of
stall, which is similar to the flow of thin airfoils in a way that flow
separates from the nose and small angle of attack and reattaches
almost immediately. However, this bubble continues to stretch
towards the trailing edge as the angle of attack is increased. At angles
of attach where the bubble stretches all the way to the trailing edge,
the airfoil reaches its maximum lift and beyond that stall occurs. The
loss of lift is smooth but large changes in pitching moment is
experienced. These airfoils pitching moments are illustrated in the
figure below.
20 | P a g e
A compromise to this is twisting of the wing in a way that the tip

airfoil has reduced angle of attack compared to the root (washout)
which causes the wing root to stall first. This produce gradual stall
even for a wing with a poorly stalling airfoil and the turbulent wake
generated will vibrate the horizontal tail, notifying the pilot that a stall
is imminent.
In a similar fashion, the designer may elect to use different airfoils at

the root and tip where the tip airfoil may be so selected to have high
stall characteristics than the wing root. This ensures good flow over
the ailerons for roll control at an angle of attack where the root is
stalled. If such methods are employed, the designer must consider
intermediate airfoils by interpolation which will have section
characteristics between the two and can also be estimated by
interpolation. However, this does not work for modern supercritical
or laminar flow airfoils and estimation should be done
computationally.
Stall characteristics for thinner airfoils can be improved with various

leading-edge devices and active methods (such as blowing or suction).
Remember that wing stall is directly related to airfoil stall only for
high aspect ratio unswept wings. For lower aspect ratio or highly
swept wings, the 3-D effects dominate stall characteristics and airfoil
stall characteristics can be essentially ignored in airfoil selection.
Likewise, pitching moment must also be considered in airfoil
selection. Some supercritical airfoils use what is called rear-loading to
increase lift without increasing the region of supersonic flow which
produces an excelled L/D, but can cause large pitching moment. For a
stable tailless or flying wing aircraft, the pitching moment must be
near zero.
vi. AIRFOIL THICKNESS RATIO

Airfoil thickness ratio has a direct effect on drag, maximum lift, stall
characteristics, and structural weight. The effect of thickness in
airfoils was described in aerodynamics where the increasing thickness
increases the drag due to increased separation. Likewise, the effect of
thickness ratio on Critical Mach number is emphasized at speeds
which creates local supersonic flow over the wing which can be
increased by using supercritical airfoils to reduce drag or to permit a
thicker airfoil at the same drag level. The thickness ratio affects the
maximum lift and stall characteristics primarily by its effect on the
21 | P a g e
nose shape. For a wing of fairly high aspect ratio and moderate
sweep, a larger nose radius provides a higher stall angle and a greater
maximum lift coefficient. The opposite is true for low aspect ratio,
swept wings such as a delta wing where a sharper leading edge
provides greater maximum lift due to the formation of vortices just
behind the leading edge. The leading-edge vortices act to delay wing
stall.
Thickness also affects structural weight where the statistical

equations for wing weight show that the wing structural weight varies
approximately inversely with the square root of the thickness ratio.
Halving the thickness ratio will increase wing weight by about 41%
where the wing weight is typically about 15% of the total empty
weight which gives an increase in empty weight of about 6% which
when applied to sizing equations can have a major impact.
For initial selection of thickness ratio, the historical trend shown

below can be used. Note that supercritical airfoils would tend to be
about 10% thicker, (i.e., conventional airfoil thickness ratio times 1.1)
than the historical trend shown below. Frequently, thickness is varied
from root to tip and due to fuselage effects, the root airfoil of a
subsonic aircraft can be as much as 20-60% thicker than the tip airfoil
without greatly affecting the drag. This is very beneficial, resulting in a
structural weight reduction as well as more volume for fuel and
landing gear. This thicker root airfoil should extend to no more than
about 30% of the span.
22 | P a g e
23 | P a g e
While an understanding of the factors important to airfoil selection is

important, an aircraft designer should not spend too much time trying
to pick exactly the “right” airfoil in early conceptual design. For early
conceptual layout, the selected airfoil is important mostly for
24 | P a g e
determining the thickness available for structure, landing gear and

fuel.
B. WING GEOMETRY
Wing reference geometry is started out as a trapezoidal wing. The figure
below shows the key geometric parameters of the reference wing.
Note that the reference wing is fictitious and extends through the fuselage to
the aircraft centerline. Therefore, the wing reference area includes area
which sticks into the fuselage and that the root airfoil is the airfoil in the
aircraft centerline and not where the actual wing connects to the fuselage.
Also, there are two key sweep angles as shown in the figure above where the
leading-edge sweep angle is an angle of concern for supersonic flight (to
25 | P a g e
reduce drag) and the quarter chord line sweep is the sweep most related to
subsonic flight. It is important not to confuse with these two sweep angles.
Airfoil pitching moment data in subsonic flow is generally provided about the
quarter chord point where the airfoil pitching moment is essentially constant
with changing angle of attack (i.e., aerodynamic center). Such a point is also
defined for the complete trapezoidal wing and is based on the concept of
mean aerodynamic chord which is the chord “c” of an airfoil located at some
distance “Ȳ” from the centerline.
The aerodynamic center is approximately the same percent location of the

mean aerodynamic chord as that of the airfoil alone and in subsonic flow,
that is at the quarter chord point on the mean aerodynamic chord.
Meanwhile, for supersonic flow the aerodynamic center moves back to about
40% of the mean aerodynamic chord.
Note that the designer uses the mean aerodynamic chord and the resulting
aerodynamic center point to position the wing properly. The wing reference
area S, can be determined only after the takeoff gross weight is determined.
The shape of the reference wing is determined by its aspect ratio, taper ratio
and sweep.
26 | P a g e
i. ASPECT RATIO
The aspect ratio was first investigated in detail by the Wright Brothers
who were using wind tunnels they constructed. They found that a
long and skinny wing (high aspect ratio) has less drag for a given lift as
compared to a short, fat wing (low aspect ratio) which is due to the
three-dimensional effects.
Knowing the definition of how lift is formed, the air on a wing would
like to escape from the bottom of the wing (high pressure) to the
upper surface (low pressure). This is not possible for two-dimensional
flow and for a real three-dimensional wing, the air can escape around
the wing tip. The air escaping around the wing tip lowers the pressure
difference between the upper and lower surfaces which reduces the
lift near the tip. In addition to this, the air flow around the tip flows in
a circular path when seen from the front which in effect essentially
pushes down on the wing which reduces the effective angle of attack
of the wing airfoils. This circular, or “vortex” flow pattern continues
downstream behind the wing.
In general, a wing with a high aspect ratio has tips farther apart than
an equal area wing with a low aspect ratio. Therefore, the amount of
the wing affected by the tip vortex is less for a high aspect ratio wing
than a low aspect ratio wing. Note that it is the actual wing span
which determines the drag due to lift. However, area is usually held
constant and when that is the case, the wing span varies as the square
root of the aspect ratio. As was shown previously, the maximum
subsonic L/D of an aircraft increases approximately by the square root
of an increase in aspect ratio when wing area and wetted area ratio
are held constant. On the other hand, the wing weight also increases
with increasing aspect ratio by about the same factor.
Another effect of aspect ratio is the change in stalling angle which

essentially increases with reduced effective angle of attack at the tips
of a low aspect ratio wing. Thus, increasing the stalling angle as
compared to a higher aspect ratio wing. This is one reason why tails
are usually lower in aspect ratio in order to delay tail stall until well
after the wing stalls to ensure adequate control of the aircraft.
27 | P a g e
Conversely, a canard can be made to stall before the wing by

employing a higher aspect ratio surface to prevent the pilot from
stalling the wing. For initial wing layout the values and equations
provided in the table below can be used. These were determined
through statistical analysis of a number of aircraft. Jet aircraft
evidence a strong trend of aspect ratio decreasing with increasing
Mach number evidence due to drag due to lift becoming relatively
less important at higher speeds. Therefore, designs of high-speed
aircraft thus use lower-aspect ratio wings to save weight. The table
uses an equivalent wing area that includes the canard area in defining
the aspect ratio of an aircraft with lifting canard. To determine the
actual wing aspect ratio, it is necessary to divide the lifting area
between the wing and the canard which usually generates 10-25% of
the total lifting area. Thus, the wing aspect ratio becomes statistically
determined aspect ratio divided by 0.9-0.75.
28 | P a g e
ii. WING SWEEP

Wing sweep is used primarily to reduce the adverse effects of
transonic and supersonic flow. Theoretically, shock formation on a
swept wing is determined not by the actual velocity of the air passing
over the wing but rather by the air velocity perpendicular to the
leading edge of the wing. This was first applied by the Germans which
allowed increase in the Critical Mach number by sweeping the wing.
At supersonic speeds, the loss of lift associated with supersonic flow

can be reduced by sweeping the wing leading edge aft of the Mach
cone angle (arcsin (1/M)). The figure below shows a historical trend
line for wing leading edge sweep versus Mach number. Note that
wing sweep is measured in reference with a line perpendicular to the
flight direction and the Mach angle is defined with respect to the
flight direction. Thus, the other line labelled below is the required
sweep to place the wing exactly on the Mach cone. In addition to this,
the difference between the two lines results from two reasons. First,
in the high-speed range, it becomes structurally impractical to sweep
the wing past the Mach cone. In the speed range above Mach 2.5, it is
necessary to use sharp or nearly sharp airfoils. Selecting the wing
sweep equal to the Mach cone angle would indicate zero sweep for
speeds at or below Mach 1.0. However, the case for transonic speed
regime is a higher critical Mach number which requires subsonic flow
velocity over the wing and thus, a swept wing.
The exact wing sweep depends on the desired critical Mach number,
thickness ratio, taper ratio and other factors. For initial wing layout,
the trend line is reasonable.
29 | P a g e
Sweeping of the wing aft or forward has no theoretical difference but

mostly due to structural considerations. Also, sweeping each wing in
different directions is also possible as for the case of an oblique wing.
Wing sweep also improves stability since it has a natural dihedral
effect and frequently, it is necessary to use zero or negative dihedral
on a swept wing to avoid excessive stability.
The wing sweep and aspect ratio together have a strong effect on
pitch up characteristics of the wing which is an undesirable tendency
of some aircraft. The figure below describes boundaries for pitch up
avoidance for combinations of wing quarter chord sweep angle and
aspect ratio.
iii. TAPER RATIO

Wing taper ratio, 𝜆, is the ratio between the tip and root chord of a
wing. Most wings of low sweep have a taper ratio of about 0.4-0.5
and most swept wings have a taper ratio of about 0.2-0.3. Tapering
the wing affects the lift distribution along the span of the wing. As
proven by Prandtl wing theory, induced drag is minimized when the
lift is distributed in an elliptical fashion which for an untwisted and
unswept wing results in an elliptical wing planform. However,
30 | P a g e
elliptical wing planform is difficult and expensive to build. In terms of

ease in manufacture, an untapered rectangular wing is preferrable
however, excessive tip chords load up the wing tip generating more
lift in than which is ideal resulting in about 7% more drag than an
elliptical wing with the same aspect ratio.
When a rectangular wing is tapered, the tip chords become shorter,

reducing the undesired effects of a rectangular wing which results in a
drag due to lift less than 1% higher ideal elliptical wing if the taper
ratio is set at 0.45. Wing swept aft tends to load the tips creating
more lift in the tips, and to return to the ideal elliptical distribution it
is necessary to increase the amount of taper (or reduce the taper
ratio). The figure below shows the results of NACA wind tunnel tests
to determine the taper ratio required to approximate the elliptical lift
distribution for a swept untwisted wing and can be used for first
approximations of desired taper ratio. It should be noted that taper
ratios much lower than 0.2 should be avoided for all but delta wings
as a very low aspect ratio wing promotes tip stall.
31 | P a g e
iv. TWIST
Wing twist is used to prevent tip stall and to revise the lift distribution
to approximate an ellipse. Typically, wings are twisted between zero
and five degrees. Geometric twist is the actual change in airfoil angle
of incidence and is usually measured from the root airfoil. Washing
out the wing means that the tip is at a negative angle as compared to
the root airfoil. If a wing is said to have a linear twist, this means that
the twist angle changes proportionally to the distance from the root
airfoil.
Aerodynamic twist is the angle between zero lift angle of an airfoil

and the zero-lift angle of the root airfoil. This applies for different
airfoil sections in the span of the wing. If same airfoil sections are
used, then the aerodynamic twist is the same as the geometric twist.
On the other hand, a wing with no geometric twist can have an
aerodynamic twist. The total wing aerodynamic twist equals the wing
geometric twist plus the root airfoil zero lift angle minus the tip airfoil
zero lift angle. Any attempt to optimize the lift distribution by twisting
the wing will be valid only at one lift coefficient. This means that at
other lift coefficient, the wing will perform worse the more twist is
introduced to the wing and it is for this reason that large amount of
twist above 5 degrees should be avoided. For initial design purposes
historical data should be used but typical values of twist (3 degrees)
provide adequate stall characteristics.
32 | P a g e
v. WING INCIDENCE
Wing incidence angle is the pitch angle of the wing with respect to the
fuselage. If the wing is not twisted, the incidence is simply the angle
between the fuselage and airfoil chord lines. On the other hand, if the
wing is twisted, the incidence is defined with respect to some
arbitrarily chosen spanwise location of the wing (usually the root of
the exposed wing where it intersects the fuselage).
Incidence is usually used to minimize drag at some operating

conditions, usually cruise. The incidence angle is chosen such that
when the wing is at correct angle of attack for the selected design
condition, the fuselage is at the angle of attack for minimum drag. For
most initial design work for general aviation and homebuilt aircraft 2
degrees of incidence is typical, 1 degree for transport aircraft and
approximately zero for military aircraft.
vi. DIHEDRAL
Dihedral angle of the wing is measured with respect to the horizontal
as seen from the front view of the aircraft. Dihedral tends to roll the
aircraft level whenever it is banked which is frequently and incorrectly
explained as the result of greater projected area for the wing that is
lowered. In reality, the rolling moment is caused by a sideslip
introduced by the bank angle. The aircraft slides toward the lowered
wing, which increases its angle of attack and the resulting moment is
approximately proportional to the dihedral angle.
Wing sweep also produces a rolling moment due to sideslip, caused

by the change in relative sweep of the left and right wings. For an aft
swept wing, the rolling moment produced is negative and
proportional to the sine of twice the sweep angle creating an effective
dihedral that adds to any actual geometric dihedral. For a forward
swept wing, the sweep angle produces a negative dihedral effect,
requiring an increased geometric dihedral in order to retain natural
directional stability.
In addition, position of the wing on the fuselage has an influence on

the effective dihedral with the greatest effect provided by a high wing
which is frequently and incorrectly explained as a pendulum effect.
Actually, the fuselage in sideslip pushes the air over and under itself. If
the wing is high-mounted, the air being pushed over the top of the
fuselage pushes up on the forward wing, providing an increased
dihedral effect. The reverse is true for a low mounted wing. Excessive
33 | P a g e
dihedral effect produces Dutch roll and to counter this tendency,

increase vertical tail area must be done which increases weight and
drag. The table below shows initial estimates of dihedral.
vii. WING VERTICAL LOCATION

Wing vertical location with respect to the fuselage is generally set by
operating conditions required for the aircraft. An example would be
high speed commercial transport aircraft with low wing design and
military transport aircraft with similar mission profiles are all of high
wing designs.
The major benefit of a high wing is that fuselage can be closer to the
ground which is essential for military transports which loads and
unloads different types of cargo without ground handling gears that
are common to transport categories in airports. In fact, these aircraft
place the floor of the cargo compartment about 4-5 feet of the
ground similar to height of cargo area of most trucks. Also, jet engines
or propellers can have decent amount of ground clearance without
requiring excessive landing gear length without the risk of the wing tip
striking the ground as well when in a nose high rolled attitude. Thus,
landing gear weight is generally reduced. For low-speed aircraft,
external struts can be used to greatly lower wing weight, however it
adds substantially to the drag but since roughly 2/3 of the lift is
contributed by the upper surface of the wing, it follows that less drag
impact will be seen if the struts disturb airflow on the lower surface of
the wing. Another structural benefit is that the fuselage is clear of the
wing box making better use of the fuselage volume as compared to
when the wing is low or middle mounted. However, it increases drag
due to increase in frontal area. For a STOL aircraft design, high wing
allows room for very large wing flaps to generate high lift coefficient.
The height of the wing with respect to the ground also tends to
prevent floating where the ground effect increases lift as it
approaches the ground risking overshooting of the runway. Since
most STOL aircraft are designed to operate in unimproved fields, high
wing places engines and propellers away from flying rocks and debris.
34 | P a g e
Disadvantages of high wing arrangement are commonly associated

with fuselage weight increase to support the landing gear loads. The
fuselage is usually flattened at the bottom to provide the desired
cargo floor height above the ground which is heavier than the circular
fuselage. Also, if the fuselage is circular in the top portion, fairings
should be utilized in the junction. For small aircrafts, high-wing
arrangements can block the pilot’s visibility in a turn obscuring the
direction where the aircraft is turning and as well as during climb.
If the fuselage is circular and fairings are not used, the mid-wing
arrangement provides the lowest drag as compared to the high and
low wing which use fairings to attain acceptable interference drag.
Mid-wing configuration offers some ground clearance and benefits of
the high wing. Mid-wing is also probably superior for aerobatic
maneuverability. However structural carry through problems presents
a major problem with the mid-wing to accommodate the wing carry
through box.
The major advantage of a low wing configuration comes in landing
gear stowage which eliminates external blister usually used with high
wing configurations. To provide adequate engine and propeller
clearance, the fuselage must be placed farther off the ground than for
a high wing aircraft. While adding to the landing gear weight, it also
provides greater fuselage ground clearance which reduces aft-
fuselage upsweep angle needed for required takeoff angle of attack
and lesser drag contributions.
Large transports have fuselage diameter on the order of 20 feet which

allow uninterrupted passenger compartment above the wing carry
through box. Also, if the center wing panel of a low wing aircraft lacks
dihedral, a one-piece flap passing under the fuselage can be used
which reduce the complexity and risk of asymmetric lift caused by
failure of flaps to extend. A continuous flap will produce more lift and
drag than a broken flap with equal area. Several disadvantages have
been mentioned already including ground clearance, and necessary
equipment for loading and unloading. Frequently, dihedral angle for a
low wing aircraft is not set by aerodynamics but by the angle required
to avoid striking the wing tip on the ground during a bad landing as
well as clearances needed for the engines and propellers. Also, to
minimize landing gear length, positioning the engine above the plane
of the wing increases interference effects between the wing and
propeller resulting in increased fuel consumption during cruise.
35 | P a g e
viii. WING TIPS

Wing-tip shape has two effects upon subsonic aerodynamic
performance. The tip shape affects the aircraft wetted area, but only
to a small extent. A far more important effect is the influence of the
tip shape upon the lateral spacing of tip vortices which is determined
by the ease with which the higher-pressure air can escape around the
tip to the top of the wing.
A smoothly rounded tip permits the air to flow around the tip. A tip
with a sharp edge makes it more difficult, thus reducing induced drag.
In fact, most of the new low drag wing tips use some form of sharp
edge. The most widely used low drag wing tip is the Hoerner wing tip
which has a sharp edge and an undercut which is canted
approximately 30 degrees to the horizontal. Drooped and upswept
wing tips are similar to the Hoerner except that the tip is curved
upwards or downwards to increase the effective span without
increasing the actual span.
Sweeping the tip also affects drag. The tip vortex tends to be located
approximately at the trailing edge of the wing tip so an aft swept wing
tip tends to have lower drag. However, it increases the wing torsional
loads. A cut-off forward swept wing tip is sometimes used for
supersonic aircraft where the tip is cutoff at an angle equal to the
supersonic Mach cone angle because the area of the wing within the
shock cone formed at the wing tip will contribute little to the lift. Also,
this tip shape reduces torsional loads on the wing.
The end plate effect is a way to reduce induced drag, however it is

seen rarely in application. The wetted area of the endplate creates
drag, effective span increase of about 80% of the actual span and can
be useful when span is limited. An advanced version of the endplate
can offer lower drag than an equal increase in area of the wing span.
36 | P a g e
The winglet gets and additional drag reduction by using the energy
available in the tip vortex.
C. BIPLANE WING
With thicker airfoils now in use, the biplane arrangement is mainly reserved
for recreational purposes. However, it should be considered whenever low
structural weight is more important to the design than aerodynamic
efficiency or when low speed is required without complicated high lift devices
or excessive wing span.
A biplane should theoretically produce exactly half the induced drag of a

monoplane with equal span. Unfortunately, mutual interference effects
prevent the full benefit from being attained. Good design can yield on the
order of 30% reduction in drag due to lift for a biplane when compared to a
monoplane of equal span. However, if the total wing area is held constant to
provide the same wing loading for biplane and monoplane, and the wing
span for each aircraft is the same, then the aspect ratio of the wings of the
biplane must each be double the aspect ratio of the monoplane. For a typical
monoplane with aspect ratio of seven, a biplane would need each wing to
have an aspect ratio of 14 to maintain the same total wing and wetted area
while approximately attaining 30% reduction in induced drag. Also, if the
wing area and span of a biplane and monoplane are identical, the chord
length for a biplane should be half as long as the monoplane but due to the
effect of Reynolds number in airfoil drag, additional penalty will be incurred
for the biplane.
It is important to know key terms associated with a biplane construction. Gap

is defined as the vertical distance between two wings of the biplane. Span
ratio is the ratio between the shorter and the longer wing. Stagger is the
longitudinal offset of two wings relative to each other which can be positive
or negative as discussed in the previous module. Decalage is the relative
angle of incidence between two wings of a biplane.
Much of the discussions for initial selection of wing geometry can be applied
to biplane wings. Most biplanes have wing aspect ratios comparable to
monoplanes of similar class (six to eight). Note that the mean aerodynamic
chord of a biplane can be found as the weighted average of the mean chords
of the two wings, weighted by the relative areas of the wings. The biplane
aerodynamic center is approximately 23% of the M.A.C. rather than 25% for a
monoplane due to wing interference effects.
D. TAIL GEOMETRY AND ARRANGEMENT
37 | P a g e
i. TAIL FUNCTIONS
Tails acts like little wings but performs only at a fraction of its lift
potential. The tail provides for trim, stability, and control. Trim refers
to the generation of a lift force which acts through some tail moment
arm from the center of gravity that balances some other moment
produced by the aircraft. For a horizontal tail, trim primarily refers to
balancing of the moment created by the wing. The typical incidence
angle of a horizontal tail is about 2-3 degrees to balance pitching
moment generated by the wing and is usually adjustable through a
range of about 3 degrees up and down. Vertical tail trim force is not
normally required because the aircraft is usually left-right symmetric
and does not create any unbalanced yawing moment. However, for a
single engine propeller, slip stream produces yawing moment which
requires offsetting of the vertical tail several degrees from the center
line. The tails are key element of stability. While it is possible to
design a stable aircraft without tails, such designs are penalized in
some other area such as compromised airfoil shape, excessive wing
area or sweep, or narrow center of gravity range.
Another function of the tail is control. The tail must be sized to
provide adequate control power at all critical conditions. For
horizontal tails or canard, critical conditions include nose wheel liftoff,
low speed flight with flaps down and transonic maneuvering. For
vertical tail, critical conditions include engine out flight at low speeds,
maximum roll rate and spin recovery.
Note that control power depends upon the size and type of the
movable surface.
ii. TAIL ARRANGEMENT
38 | P a g e
The figure above illustrates variations of aft tail. Most aircraft designs,
the conventional tail will usually provide adequate stability and
control at the lightest weight. The T-tail configuration is also widely
used, while inherently heavier than the conventional tail for support,
because it provides compensating advantages in many cases. Due to
endplate effect, T-tail allows a smaller vertical tail, clears the
horizontal tail of the wing wake and propeller wash which increases
efficiency and reducing its size, and reduces buffeting tendencies
which reduces structure fatigue and pilot fatigue. Mounting of engine
pods in the vertical tail is also a benefit for some transport category
aircraft. Aesthetics is also a consideration.
Cruciform tail is a compromise between conventional and T-tail

designs. This tail design clears the horizontal tail to avoid proximity to
a jet exhaust or to expose lower part of the rudder to undisturbed air
during high angle of attack conditions and spins. While this can be
done with a T-tail, this arrangement will impose less weight penalty
but will not provide tail area reduction due to endplate effects.
H-tail is used primarily to position vertical tails in undisturbed air

during high angle of attack conditions or to position the rudders in the
propeller wash on a multiengine aircraft to enhance engine out
control. This configuration is usually heavier but its endplate effect
allows reduction in area of horizontal tail.
V-tail is used to reduce wetted area where tail forces are derived from
the vertical and horizontal projections of the force exerted upon the V
surfaces. For some horizontal and tail area, the required V surface
area would be found from the Pythagorean theorem and tail dihedral
from arctangent of ratio of required vertical and horizontal areas.
However, to obtain satisfactory stability and control, the V surfaces
must be upsized to about the same total area as would be required
for separate tails surfaces. The reduced interference drag comes at
the cost of complexity in control actuation in moving the surfaces.
Another disadvantage is the adverse roll-yaw coupling which can be
avoided by using inverted V-tail. Inverted V-tail also reduce spiraling
tendencies; however, ground clearance is a common issue.
Y-tail is similar to the V-tail except that the dihedral angle is reduced
and a third surface is mounted below the V surfaces which contains
the rudder while the V surfaces provides pitch control. This
arrangement avoids the complexity of ruddervators while reducing
39 | P a g e
interference drag when compared to conventional tail. An inverted Y-

tail is used to keep horizontal surfaces out of the wing wake at high
angles of attack.
Twin tails can position the rudders away from the aircraft centerline
which may be blanketed by the wing or forward fuselage at high angle
of attack. Also, this configuration can be used to reduce height
required by a single tail although they are usually heavier but are
often more effective.
Boom mounted tails have been used to allow pusher propellers, or

allow location of a heavy jet engine near the center of gravity. Though
typically heavier, it can be desirable in some applications. Boom
mounted tails can also have mid-mounted horizontal tail or high
horizontal tail.
The ring tail attempts to provide all tail contributions via an airfoil
sectioned ring which attach to the aft fuselage, usually doubling as
propeller shroud. However, this configuration is proven inadequate in
application.
Horizontal tail with respect to the wing is critical to the stall

characteristics of the aircraft. If the tail enters the wing wake during
stall, control will be lost and pitch up may be encountered. Several T-
tailed aircraft encountered deep stall from which the aircraft could
become unrecoverable. Provisions to prevent this condition is done
using stick pushers and other warning systems informing the pilot of
imminent stall. The figure below shows acceptable horizontal tail
locations.
40 | P a g e
Other possible tail arrangements are depicted by the figure below

with the use of canards but due to the difficulty of providing difficulty
have fell out of favor. Early canard applications required well trained
pilots with quick reflexes. Canards fall under two classes: control
canard and lifting canard. Control canard is primarily used as for
control as an aft tail function. X-29 employs this type of canard and
has experienced instability in pitch but is actually neutral in stability
with the canard off. This means that the canard usually operates at
nearly zero angle of attack, thus carrying little of the aircraft’s weight
which can be accomplished using sophisticated flight control systems.
In other similar aircrafts, control canard is used to control the angle of
attack of the wing and to balance out the pitching moment produced
by deflection of wing flaps.
On the other hand, lifting canard uses both wing and canard to
provide lift under normal flight conditions. This requires a well
forward center of gravity and the canard will usually have higher
aspect ratio and camber than a control canard to reduce the canard’s
drag due to lift. The lifting canard arrangement it theoretically more
efficient because of the lift that must be produced by the wing which
permits smaller wing and reduces total drag due to lift. Disadvantages
include locating the wing aft on the aircraft than would be the case
with an aft tail which increases pitching moment caused by the use of
wing flaps. Pitching moment must be balanced during slow flight and
canards cannot use wing flaps, instead an increase in wing area is
employed to accommodate more powerful flaps may be used.
Another drawback is the canard is much closer to the center of gravity
which reduces trim and control effectiveness requiring a larger
surface producing more trim drag when operating at fairly large
deflections or at an extremely forward center of gravity condition. A
benefit from employing canards is the avoidance of pitch up which is
desirable for pitch up avoidance.
41 | P a g e
Tandem wing is an extension of the lifting canard where each wing

produces equal lift which gives the benefit of induced drag reduction
to a theoretical value of 50%. However, the aft wing tends to be in the
wake of the first wing which reduces the theoretical value of 50%
because the aft wing should now be set at a higher angle of attack.
Attaining stability with a tandem wing is done by moving the center of
gravity forward of the location for an even weight split which prevents
the aft wing from attaining its full lift capacity. This necessitates
separation of each wing both horizontally and vertically.
Three surface aircraft theoretically offers minimum trim drag where

the canard or aft tail will change the aircraft total lift distribution
which increases total induced drag when generating lift for trim
purposes. Ideally, since the canard and aft tail acts in opposite
direction, they can cancel each other’s effect on the total lift
distribution. However, it is only a theoretical far field effect and may
not be fully realized in actual designs. A disadvantage of this
arrangement is additional weight, complexity and interference drag
associated with the extra surfaces.
Back-porch or aft-strake is a horizontal control surface that is

incorporated into a faired extension of the wing or fuselage which can
serve as a pitch up prevention mechanism or primary pitch control in
some cases. Tailless configuration offers the lowest weight and drag
of any tail configuration if it can be made to work. For a stable
42 | P a g e
aircraft, the wing of a tailless configuration must be reflexed or

twisted to provide natural stability which reduces wing efficiency. For
an unstable aircraft with a computerized flight control system, this
need not be done since they can be designed to be self-trimming
which can be difficult to accomplish because of the sensitivity to the
center of gravity location. The vertical tail can also be eliminated for
reduced weight and drag; however, a flying wing design is the most
difficult to stabilize both manually and by computer since they need
to rely on wing control surfaces for control unless provisions for
vectored thrust is established. Rudder control is provided by wing tip
mounted drag devices.
Some fully tailless designs utilized drooped outer wing panels for
stability and control enhancement which acts somewhat like an
inverted V-tail and provide the desirable proverse roll-yaw coupling
with rudder deflection. Winglets or endplates mounted on the wing
tips can be used in place of vertical tails which could ideally provide
the required vertical tail surface for free since the effective increase in
wing aspect ratio may more than compensate for the wetted area of
the tail.
iii. TAIL ARRANGEMENT FOR SPIN RECOVERY

The vertical tail plays a key role in spin recovery. An aircraft in spin is
essentially falling vertically and rotating about a vertical axis with the
wing fully stalled. The aircraft is also typically at a large sideslip angle,
and to recover from the spin, requires that the wing be out of stall
(reduce angle of attack). However, rotation must first be stopped and
the sideslip angle reduced or the aircraft will immediately enter
another spin. This requires adequate rudder control even at high
angles of attack seen in the spin. The figure below shows the effect of
tail arrangement on rudder control at high angles of attack. At high
angles of attack the horizontal tail is stalled which produces turbulent
wake extending upward at approximately a 45-degree angle.
43 | P a g e
The picture shown above shows examples of horizontal tail

positioning where the first picture (from the left) shows a fully
blanketed rudder not ideal for spin recovery. The second and third
picture shows positioning of the tail forward and aft which leaves an
unblanketed portion of the rudder which is ideal. As a rule of thumb,
at least a third of the rudder should be out of the wake. The next two
examples show positioning of the horizontal tail upward and an
unblanketed rudder is achieved, however pitch up characteristics
should be taken into account. The last example shows application of
dorsal and ventral fin where the former improves tail effectiveness at
high angle of sideslip by creating vortices that attaches to the vertical
tail which tends to prevent high angles of sideslip as seen in spins and
augments rudder control in the spin. The latter has the extra
advantage of being where it cannot be blanketed by the wing wake
which are also used to avoid lateral instability in high-speed flight.
iv. TAIL GEOMETRY

The surface areas required for all types of tails are directly
proportional to the aircraft’s wing area, so the tail areas cannot be
selected until the initial estimate of aircraft takeoff gross weight has
been made. Geometric parameters for tail can be selected such as the
aspect ratio and taper ratio which show little variation over a wide
range of aircraft types.
44 | P a g e
Note that the T-tail aircraft have lower vertical tail aspect ratios to
reduce weight impact of the horizontal tail location on top of the
vertical tail. Also, some general aviation aircraft use untapered
horizontal tail to reduce manufacturing costs.
Leading edge sweep of the horizontal tail is usually set to about 5

degrees more than the wing sweep to delay tail stall ensuring that the
wing stalls first. Increased sweep also provides higher critical Mach
number to avoid loss of elevator effectiveness due to shock
formation. For low-speed aircraft, horizontal tail sweep is frequently
set to provide a straight hinge line for the elevator, which usually has
the left and right sides connected to reduce flutter tendencies.
Vertical tail sweep varies between about 35 and 55 degrees. For a

low-speed aircraft, there is little reason for sweeping the vertical tail
beyond about 20 degrees. However, for a high-speed aircraft, vertical
tail sweep is used to ensure that tail’s critical Mach number is higher
than the wing.
The exact planform of the tail surfaces is actually not very critical in
the early stages of the design process. For conceptual design, it is
usually acceptable to simply draw tail surfaces that “look right” based
upon experience and similar designs.
Tail thickness ratio is usually similar to the wing thickness ratio as

determined by the historical guidelines provided in the wing geometry
section. A high-speed aircraft, the horizontal tail is frequently about
10% thinner than the wing to ensure that the tail has a higher critical
Mach number. Note that lifting canards or tandem wing should be
designed using the guidelines and procedures given for initial wing
design, instead of the tail design guidelines described above.
45 | P a g e
III. THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO AND WING LOADING

Thrust to weight ratio (T/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 analytical design activities conducted after
an initial design layout. However, it is necessary that a credible estimate of the
wing loading and thrust to weight ratio be made before any initial design layout
is begun. Otherwise, the optimized aircraft may be so unlike the as drawn aircraft
that the design must be completely redone.
An example is the wing loading, where if the value used is very low (implying a
large wing), the designer will have no trouble finding room for the landing gear
and fuel tanks. If later optimization indicates the need for a much higher wing
loading, the resulting smaller wing may no longer be able to accommodate the
landing gear and fuel tanks.
Wing loading and thrust to weight ratio are interconnected for a number of
performance calculations, such as takeoff distance, which is a frequently a critical
design driver. A requirement for short takeoff can be met with low W/S and low
T/W because even if the engine is small, it will need to accelerate slowly,
therefore, it needs to reach only a moderate speed to lift off the ground. The
opposite is true for the takeoff distance, a high W/S (small wing) and a high T/W
will need to reach a high speed to lift off but a large engine can rapidly accelerate
the aircraft to that speed.
Due to this interconnection, it is frequently difficult to use historical data to

independently select initial values for wing loading and thrust to weight ratio.
Instead, the designer must guess at one of the parameters and use that guess to
calculate the other parameter from critical design requirements. In many cases,
the critical requirement for wing loading will be the stall speed during the
approach for landing. Approach stall speed is independent of engine size, so the
wing loading can be estimated based upon stall speed alone. The estimated wing
loading can then be used to calculate the T/W required to attain other
performance drivers such as the single engine rate of climb. For less obvious
cases, the designer must guess one parameter, calculate the other parameter to
meet various performance requirements, then recheck the first parameter.
A. THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO

i. DEFINITIONS
T/W directly affect aircraft performance. An aircraft with higher T/W
will accelerate more quickly, climb more rapidly, reach a higher
maximum speed and sustain higher turn rates. On the other hand,
46 | P a g e
larger engines will be consuming more fuel driving the takeoff gross
weight up to perform the design mission.
T/W is not a constant due to the changes in aircraft weight during

flight as fuel is burned. In addition, the engine’s thrust varies with
altitude and velocity (as does the horsepower and propeller efficiency
𝜂𝑝 ). When designers talk about an aircraft’s T/W, they generally refer
to the T/W during sea level static conditions, standard day conditions
at design takeoff weight and maximum throttle setting. Another T/W
concerns about combat conditions. Calculating T/W at a partial power
setting is possible, say during an approach to landing where the
throttle setting is near idle. The operating T/W at that point in the
mission is probably less than 0.05.
Note that confusion with the takeoff T/W with T/W at other
conditions should be avoided. If a required T/W is calculated at some
other condition, it must be adjusted back to takeoff conditions for use
in selecting the number and size of the engines.
ii. POWER LOADING AND HORSEPOWER TO WEIGHT RATIO

The term thrust to weight is associated with jet engine aircraft. For
propeller powered aircraft, the equivalent term has classically been
the power loading expressed as the weight of the aircraft divided by
its horsepower (W/hp).
Power loading has an opposite connotation from T/W because a high-

power loading indicates a smaller engine. Power loadings typically
range from 10-15 from most aircraft. An aerobatic may have a power
loading of about 6. A few aircraft have been built with power loadings
as low as three or four. A propeller powered aircraft produces thrust
via the propeller, which has an efficiency 𝜂𝑝 defined as the thrust
output per horsepower provided by the engine. The T/W for a
propeller powered aircraft can be expressed as follows:
𝑇 550 𝜂𝑝 ℎ𝑝
=( )( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.14)
𝑊 𝑉 𝑊
Note that hp/W (horsepower to weight ratio) is included in Eq. (2.14)

which is simply the inverse of the power loading (W/hp). To avoid
confusion, this book refers to the horsepower to weight ratio rather
than the classical power loading and the reader should remember
that the power loading can be determined simply by getting the
reciprocal of the hp/W ratio.
47 | P a g e
iii. STATISTICAL ESTIMATION OF T/W

The tables provided below shows typical values for T/W and hp/W for
different classes of aircraft along with reciprocal values of hp/W for
propeller powered aircraft. NOTE that these values are all at
maximum power settings at sea level and static conditions (zero
velocity).
Note that current generation of dog fighters approaches a T/W of 1.0

implying that the thrust is nearly equal to the weight. At combat
conditions, when some fuel has been burned off, T/W of these
aircrafts exceeds 1 and are capable of accelerating while going
straight up. The jet dogfighter T/W values are with afterburning
engines whereas the other jets typically do not have afterburning.
Thrust to weight ratio is closely related to maximum speed, and later
in the design process calculations for drag at the design maximum
speed will be used with other criteria to establish the required T/W.
For now, the tables below provide the curve fit equations based upon
maximum Mach number or velocity for different classes of aircraft.
These can be used as a first estimate for T/W or hp/W and should be
considered valid only within the normal range of maximum speeds for
each aircraft class.
48 | P a g e
iv. THRUST MATCHING

For aircraft designed primarily for efficiency during cruise, a better
initial estimate of the required T/W can be obtained by thrust
matching. This refers to the comparison of the selected engine’s
thrust available during cruise to the estimated aircraft drag.
In level unaccelerated flight, the thrust must equal the drag and the
lift must equal the weight. Thus, T/W must be equal to the inverse of
L/D:
𝑇 1
( ) = (𝑒𝑞. 2.15)
𝑊 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 ( 𝐿 )
𝐷 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒
Recall that the L/D estimation previously would suffice for Eq. (2.15)
where we can refer to the table for cruise L/D for a jet or propeller
powered aircraft. Note that this method assumes that the aircraft is
cruising at approximately the optimum altitude for the as-yet known
wing loading. The method would be invalid if the aircraft were forced
by the mission requirements to cruise at some other altitude such as
sea level. When the wing loading is selected, the L/D at the actual
cruise conditions should be calculated and used to recheck the initial
estimate for T/W.
49 | P a g e
Note that the T/W ratio for Eq. (2.15) is at cruise conditions and not
takeoff. The aircraft will have burned part of its fuel on the preceding
mission segments of flight and will continue to burn more as the
cruise progress. Also, thrust of the selected engine will be different at
cruise than at sea level, static conditions. These factors should be
considered to arrive at the required takeoff T/W, used to size the
engine.
The highest weight during cruise occurs at the beginning of the cruise
segment. The weight of the aircraft at the beginning of the cruise is
the takeoff weight less the fuel burned during takeoff and climb to
cruise altitude. From the tables presented in the mission weight
fraction estimation, typical values for these mission legs are 0.970 and
0.985 or 0.956 when multiplied together. A typical aircraft will
therefore have a weight at the beginning of cruise of about 0.956
times the takeoff weight. This value is used below to adjust the cruise
T/W back to takeoff conditions.
Thrust during cruise is different from the takeoff value. Jet aircraft are
normally designed to cruise at approximately the altitude at which the
selected engine has the best (lowest) specific fuel consumption,
typically around 30,000-40,000 feet. While SFC is improved, thrust
decreases. Also, engine is sized using thrust setting that produces the
best SFC which is around 70%-100% of the maximum continuous,
non-after burning thrust. The cruise thrust at altitude is therefore less
than the maximum takeoff thrust at sea level and the required cruise
T/W must be adjusted to obtain the equivalent takeoff T/W. Typically,
a subsonic, high bypass ratio turbofan for a transport aircraft will have
a cruise thrust of 20-25% of the takeoff thrust, while a low bypass
afterburning turbofan or turbojet will have a cruise thrust of 40%-70%
of the takeoff maximum value ash shown below.
50 | P a g e
For a piston powered, propeller driven aircraft, the power available

varies with the density of the air provided to the intake manifold. If
the engine is not supercharged, then the power falls off with
increasing altitude according to the density ratio. For example, a non-
supercharged engine at 10,000 ft will have about 73% of its sea level
power. To prevent reduction in performance, a supercharger is used
to maintain the manifold pressure at essentially sea-level density up
to the compression limit of the supercharger. Piston powered aircraft
typically cruise at about 75% of takeoff power.
For a turbine powered, propeller driven (turboprop) aircraft, the

horsepower available increases somewhat with increasing speed but
the thrust drops off anyway due to the velocity on the propeller.
Turboprop has an additional, residual thrust contribution from the
turbine exhaust and it is customary to convert this thrust to its
equivalent horsepower and add it to the actual horsepower, creating
the equivalent shaft horsepower (eshp). For a turboprop engine
installation, the cruise eshp is about 60-80% of the takeoff value.
51 | P a g e
The takeoff T/W required for cruise matching can now be

approximated using the equation provided below. Where the thrust
ratio between takeoff and cruise conditions should be obtained from
actual engine data if possible.
𝑇 𝑇 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑇𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓
( ) =( ) ( )( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.16)
𝑊 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝑊 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑊𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝑇𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒
For a propeller powered aircraft, the required takeoff hp/W ratio can
be found using the equation below where 𝜂𝑝 = 0.8 typically.
ℎ𝑝
( )
𝑊 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓
1 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 ℎ𝑝𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓
=( ) ( )( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.17)
𝐿/𝐷 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑊𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓 ℎ𝑝𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒
After an initial layout has been completed, actual aerodynamic
calculations are made to compare the drag during cruise with the
thrust available. There are many other criteria which can set the
thrust to weight ratio such as climb rate, takeoff distance and turning
performance. These other criteria also involve the wing loading and
are described in the next section.
First pass estimate of T/W or hp/W should be selected as the higher

of either the statistical values or values obtained from cruise
52 | P a g e
matching. After the selected of wing loading in the next section, the
selected T/W should be rechecked against all requirements.
B. WING LOADING
Wing loading is the weight of the aircraft divided by the area of the reference
wing. The term wing loading normally refers to the takeoff wing loading but
can also refer to combat and other flight conditions. Wing loading affects stall
speed, climb rate, takeoff and landing distances and turn performance. The
wing loading determines the design lift coefficient and impacts drag through
its effect upon wetted area and wing span.
Wing loading has a strong effect upon sized aircraft takeoff gross weight. If
the wing loading is reduced, the wing is larger. This may improve
performance but additional drag and empty weight due to the larger wing
will increase takeoff gross weight to perform the mission. The leverage effect
of the sizing equation will require a more than proportional weight increase
when factors such as drag and empty weight are increased.
The figure above shows typical takeoff wing loading for each class of aircraft.
The methods presented here accounts for wing loading at different
performance conditions and to ensure that adequate lift is provided in all
flight conditions, the lowest estimated wing loading should be selected.
However, if an unreasonably low wing loading value is driven by only one of
these performance conditions, the designer should consider another way to
meet that condition such as the case for stall speed requirements where it
may be better to equip the aircraft with high lift flap system. If the takeoff
distance or rate of climb require a very low wing loading, perhaps the thrust
to weight ratio should be increased.
i. STALL SPEED
53 | P a g e
The stall speed of an aircraft is directly determined by the wing

loading and the maximum lift coefficient. Stall speed is a major
contributor to flying safety with a substantial number of fatal
accidents each year due to “failure to maintain flying speed.” Also, the
approach speed which is the most important factor in landing
distance and also contributes to post touchdown accidents is defined
by the stall speed.
Civil and military design specifications establish maximum allowable

stall speeds for various classes of aircraft where in some cases, stall
speed is explicitly stated. FAR 23 certified aircraft (under 12,500 lbs.
TOGW) must stall no more than 61 knots, unless they are multi engine
aircrafts and meet certain climb requirements. While not stated in
any design specifications, a stall speed of about 50 knots would be
considered the upper limit for a civilian trainer or other aircraft to be
operated by low-time pilots.
The approach speed is required to be at least 1.3 times the stall speed
for civil applications and at least 1.2 o 1.15 (carrier based) times for
military applications. Meanwhile, approach speed may be explicitly
stated in the design requirements or will be selected based upon prior
similar aircraft where the stall speed can be found by dividing 1.3, 1.2
or 1.15.
The equation below states that lift is equal to weight in level flight and
that at stall speed the aircraft is at maximum lift coefficient.
1 2
𝑊 = 𝐿 = 𝑞𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑆𝐶𝐿 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝜌𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑆𝐶𝐿 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑒𝑞. 2.18)
2
𝑊 1 2
= 𝜌𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝐶𝐿 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑒𝑞. 2.19)
𝑆 2
Where:
𝜌 = typically, sea level standard density or sometimes 5000 feet
altitude or hot day value of 0.00189 slugs per cubic feet
The remaining unknown, maximum lift coefficient can be very difficult
to estimate. Values from about 1.2 to 1.5 for a plain wing with no
flaps to as much as 5.0 for a wing with large flaps immersed in
propwash or jet wash. Maximum lift coefficient for an aircraft
designed for short takeoff and landing applications will be about 3.0.
For a regular transport aircraft with flaps and slats, the maximum lift
coefficient is about 2.4. Other aircraft with flaps on the inner part of
the wing will reach a lift coefficient of about 1.6-2.0.
54 | P a g e
Note that maximum lift coefficient depends upon wing geometry,

airfoil shape, flap geometry and span, leading edge slot or slat
geometry, Reynolds number, surface texture, and interference from
other parts of the aircraft such as the fuselage, nacelle or pylons. The
trim forces generated by horizontal tail will increase or reduce the
maximum lift depending on the direction of the trim force. If propeller
wash or jet wash impinges upon the wing or the flaps, it will also have
a major influence upon maximum lift during power on conditions. For
a better initial estimate of maximum lift, it is necessary to resort to
test results and historical data as provided in the figure below which
shows maximum lift trends versus sweep angle for several classes of
aircraft. Remember the maximum lift using takeoff flap setting will
typically be about 80% of these landing maximum values.
ii. TAKEOFF DISTANCE

A number of different values are referred to as the takeoff distance
where the ground roll is the actual distance traveled before the
wheels leave the ground. The lift of speed for a normal takeoff is
about 1.1 times the stall speed. VLO = 1.1Vstall.
The obstacle clearance distance is the distance required from brake

release until the aircraft has reached some specified altitude which is
55 | P a g e
usually 50 feet for military or small civil aircraft and 35 feet for
commercial aircraft.
Balanced field length is the length of the field required for safety in
the event of an engine failure in a multiengine aircraft. When the
aircraft has just began ground roll, the pilot would have no trouble
stopping it safely if one engine were to fail. The balance field length is
the length required to takeoff and clear the specified obstacle when
one engine fails at exactly the decision speed. Decision speed is the
speed at which the distance to stop after an engine failure exactly
equals the distance to continue the takeoff on the remaining engines.
Note that use or reverse thrust is not permitted for calculation of
balanced field length.
Both wing loading and thrust to weight ratio contribute to the takeoff
distance and the equations below assume that the thrust to weight
ratio has been selected to be used in determining the required wing
loading to attain some required takeoff distance. However, it can also
be solved for T/W if wing loading is known.
Other factors contributing to the takeoff distance are the aircraft’s

aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance. The rolling resistance is
determined by the type of runway surface, type, number inflation
pressure and arrangement of the tires.
For initial estimation of required wing loading, a statistical approach

for estimation of takeoff distance can be used. The figure below
permits estimation of takeoff ground roll, takeoff distance to clear a
50 feet obstacle and FAR balanced field length over a 35 feet obstacle.
For military multiengine aircraft, the balance field length over a 50
feet obstacle is approximately 5% greater than the FAR (35 feet)
balanced field value. Note that twin engine aircraft has a greater FAR
balanced field length than a three or four engine aircraft.
The takeoff parameter (TOP) is the takeoff wing loading divided by

the product of the density ratio, takeoff lift coefficient and takeoff
thrust to weight ratio. The density ratio is the ratio of air density in
the takeoff altitude divided by sea level value of density.
The takeoff lift coefficient is the actual lift coefficient at takeoff, not
the maximum lift coefficient at takeoff conditions as used for stall
calculation. The aircraft take off about 1.1 times the stall speed so the
56 | P a g e
takeoff lift coefficient is the maximum takeoff lift coefficient divided

by 1.21. However, keep in mind that takeoff and landing lift
coefficient may also be limited by tail down angle permitted by the
landing gear (typically 15 degrees).
To determine the required wing loading to meet a given takeoff

distance requirement, the takeoff parameter obtained from the figure
above is used in the following expressions that gives the maximum
allowable wing loading for the given takeoff distance.
𝑊 ℎ𝑝
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑟 𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑: = (𝑇𝑂𝑃)(𝜌)(𝐶𝐿 𝑇𝑂 )( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.20)
𝑆 𝑊
𝑊 𝑇
𝐽𝑒𝑡 𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑: = (𝑇𝑂𝑃)(𝜌)(𝐶𝐿 𝑇𝑂 )( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.21)
𝑆 𝑊
iii. CATAPULT TAKEOFF

Most naval aircraft must be capable of operation from an aircraft
carrier. For takeoff from a carrier, a catapult accelerates the aircraft
to flying speed in a very short distance. Catapults are steam operated
and can produce a maximum force on the aircraft launch depending
on the steam pressure used. Therefore, a light aircraft can be
accelerated to a higher speed by the catapult than a heavy one. The
57 | P a g e
figure below shows the velocities attainable as a function of aircraft

weight for three catapults in use by the U.S. Navy, note that a rough
guess of takeoff weight is required.
For catapult takeoff, the airspeed as the aircraft leaves the catapult
must exceed the stall speed by 10%. Airspeed is the sum of the
catapult end speed (Vend) and the wind over deck of the carrier (Vwod).
For aircraft launch operations the carrier will be turned into the wind
which will produce wind over deck on the order of 20-40 kts.
However, the design specification for a navy aircraft frequently
requires launch capabilities with zero wind over deck or even a
negative value to enable aircraft launch while at anchor. Once the
speed is known, the maximum wing loading is defined by:
𝑊 1 (𝐶𝐿 𝑚𝑎𝑥 )
𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓
( ) = 𝜌(𝑉𝑒𝑛𝑑 + 𝑉𝑤𝑜𝑑 )2 (𝑒𝑞. 2.22)
𝑆 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 2 1.21
iv. LANDING DISTANCE

There are a number of different values referred to as the landing
distance. Landing ground roll is the actual distance the aircraft travels
from the time the wheels first touch to the time the aircraft comes to
a complete stop.
58 | P a g e
FAR 23 landing field length includes clearing a 50 feet obstacle while

the aircraft is still at approach speed and on the approach glidepath
(normally 3 degrees). After crossing the obstacle, the pilot slows the
aircraft to the touchdown speed of typically 1.15 times the stall
speed. The obstacle clearance distance roughly doubles the ground
roll distance alone.
FAR 25 landing field length includes 50 feet obstacle clearance at

approach speed, and also add an arbitrary two thirds to the total
distance to allow a safety margin. The landing distance definition for
military aircraft is normally specified in a request for proposals but
typically resembles the FAR 23 definition.
Landing distance is largely determined by wing loading. Wing loading

affects the approach speed, which must be a certain multiple of stall
speed (1.3 for civil aircraft, 1.2 for military aircraft). Approach speed
determines the touchdown speed, which in turn defines the kinetic
energy which must be dissipated to bring the aircraft to a halt. The
kinetic energy, and hence stopping distance varies as the square of
the touchdown speed. In fact, a reasonable first guess of the total
landing distance in feet including an obstacle clearance is
approximately 0.3 times the square of the approach speed in knots.
This is approximately true for FAR 23 military aircraft without thrust
reversers and FAR 25 aircraft with thrust reversers.
The equation below provides a better approximation of the landing

distance which can be used to estimate the maximum landing wing
loading. The first term represents the ground roll to absorb the kinetic
energy at touch down speed while the term Sa represent the obstacle
clearance distance.
𝑊 1
𝑆𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 80 ( ) ( ) + 𝑆𝑎 (𝑒𝑞. 2.23)
𝑆 𝜌𝐶𝐿 𝑚𝑎𝑥
Where:
Sa = 1000 (airliner type, 3 degrees glideslope)
Sa = 600 (general aviation type power off approach)
Sa = 450 (STOL, 7 degrees glideslope)
For aircraft with thrust reversers or reversible pitch propellers, the

first term of Eq. (2.23) should be multiplied by 0.66. For FAR 25
commercial aircraft, the total landing distance must be multiplied by
59 | P a g e
1.67 to provide the required safety margin. Note that the landing
wing loading must be converted to takeoff conditions by dividing the
ratio of landing weight to takeoff weight. This ratio is usually not
based upon the calculated end of mission weight but instead based
upon some arbitrary landing weight as specified in the design
requirements.
For most propeller powered aircraft and jet trainers, the aircraft must
meet its landing requirement at or near the design takeoff weight so
the ratio is about 1.0. For most jet aircraft, the landing is typically
calculated at a weight of about 0.85 times the takeoff weight. Military
design requirements will frequently specify full payload and some
percent of fuel remaining (usually 50%) for the landing.
v. ARRESTED LANDING
Aircraft which land on navy aircraft carriers are stopped by a cable
and brake arrangement called the arresting gear. One of several
cables strung across the flight deck is caught by a hook attached to
the rear of the aircraft. The cable is attached at both ends to drum
mechanisms which exert a drag upon the cable as it is pulled by the
aircraft, thus stopping it in a very short distance.
For carrier-based aircraft, the approach speed (1.15 times the stall
speed) is the same as the touchdown speed. Carrier pilots do not flare
and slow down for landing. Instead, they are taught to fly the aircraft
right into the deck, relying upon the arresting gear to make the
landing. By using this technique, the aircraft has enough speed to go
around if the cables are missed. The landing weight limits for three
standard arresting gears are depicted in the figure below. This figure
can be used to determine the allowable approach speed based upon a
first guess of the landing weight. The approach speed divided by 1.15
defines the stall speed which can then be used to estimate the wing
loading.
60 | P a g e
vi. WING LOADING FOR CRUISE

For cruising, two aerodynamic coefficients are necessary. C Do is the
zero lift drag coefficient has the following typical values:
Type CDo
Jet Aircraft 0.015
Clean, Propeller Aircraft 0.02
Dirty, Fixed-Gear Propeller
0.03
Aircraft
The Oswald’s efficiency factor e is a measure of drag due to lift

efficiency and has the following typical values:
Type e
Fighter 0.6
Other aircraft 0.8
To maximize range during cruise, the wing loading should be selected

to provide a high L/D at cruise conditions. A propeller aircraft loses
thrust efficiency as speed goes up, gets maximum range when flying
at speed best for L/D, while a jet aircraft maximizes range at
somewhat higher speed where the L/D is slightly reduced. The speed
for best L/D can be shown to result in the parasite drag, equaling the
induced drag. Therefore, to maximize range for a propeller aircraft, it
should fly such that:
𝐶𝐿2
𝑞𝑠𝐶𝐷𝑜 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷𝑖 = 𝑞𝑆 (𝑒𝑞. 2.24)
𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
61 | P a g e
During cruise, the lift must equal the weight so the lift coefficient
equals the wing loading divided by dynamic pressure but from Eq.
(2.24) CL equals the square root of the product of 𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)𝐶𝐷𝑜
𝑊
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 (𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝): = 𝑞√𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)𝐶𝐷𝑜 (𝑒𝑞. 2.25)
𝑆
As discussed previously, the wing loading decreases during cruise due

to the fuel burned, thus a reduction in dynamic pressure is necessary.
However, reducing speed is not really desirable so a cruise climb is
performed to lower the density.
A jet aircraft flying a cruise climb will obtain maximum range by flying
at a wing loading such that the parasite drag is three times the
induced drag which yields the following formula:
𝑊 𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅 )𝐶𝐷𝑜
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 (𝐽𝑒𝑡): = 𝑞√ (𝑒𝑞. 2.26)
𝑆 3
Frequently cruise climb is not allowed by the ATC to be performed by

the pilot as they wanted, therefore the pilots ask permission to climb
several times forming the “stair step climb schedule” and allow the
thrust setting to be maintained at the setting which minimizes fuel
consumption.
vii. WING LOADING FOR LOITER ENDURANCE

Most aircraft will have some loiter requirement during the mission,
typically 20 minutes of loiter before landing. Unless the requirement
for loiter is a substantial fraction of the total mission duration, it is
better to optimize the wing loading for cruise.
For an aircraft which must be optimized for loiter, the wing loading
should be selected to provide a high L/D. For jet aircraft, the best
loiter occurs at maximum L/D should be used. For propeller aircraft,
loiter is optimized when the induced drag is three times the parasite
drag which also provides the wing loading for minimum power
required.
𝑊
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝐿𝑜𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝐽𝑒𝑡): = 𝑞√𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅 )𝐶𝐷𝑜 (𝑒𝑞. 2.27)
𝑆
𝑊
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝐿𝑜𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝): = 𝑞√3𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)𝐶𝐷𝑜 (𝑒𝑞. 2.28)
𝑆
62 | P a g e
The equations provided above assumes that loiter velocity and

altitude are known. If the loiter altitude is not specified, it should be
selected for best specific fuel consumption at loiter power setting.
Typically, this is 30,000-40,000 feet for a jet and the limit altitude for
the turbocharger for a piston powered aircraft. For a non-
turbocharged engine, the best loiter occurs at sea level.
Usually, loiter velocity is not specified and the designer should

determine the best loiter velocity and select the wing loading
accordingly. This requires cross plotting of wing loading with the
resulting L/D and specific fuel consumption for various velocities and
altitudes. Such a procedure is too complex for initial design purposes.
For initial design purposes, it can be assumed that the best loiter
velocity will be about 150-200 knots for turboprops and jets, and
about 80-120 knots for piston propeller aircrafts. If altitude is not
specified, the altitude for best fuel consumption should be selected.
The wing loading estimated by the equations provided above is the

average during the loiter. This must be converted to takeoff
conditions by dividing the loiter wing loading by the ratio of the
average loiter weight to the takeoff weight. In the absence of better
information, this ratio can be assumed to be about 0.85. Note that the
equations provided above are to be used for designing an aircraft
optimized solely for loiter. For most aircraft, wing loading will be
selected for best cruise and the loiter capabilities will be a fallout.
viii. INSTANTANEOUS TURN

An aircraft designed for dog fighting must have the capability of high
turn rate which is an indicator of the outcome of dogfights given that
the aircraft and pilots are evenly matched. A typical turn rate
superiority of 2 degrees per second is considered significant. Two
types of turn rates are of concern which is the sustained and
instantaneous turn. Sustained turn rate is the turn rate at which the
thrust of the aircraft is just sufficient to maintain velocity and altitude
in the turn. For a sustained turn, the thrust must equal the drag. If the
aircraft turns at a quicker rate, the drag becomes greater than the
available thrust, thus the aircraft will be losing altitude or slowing
down. The instantaneous turn rate is defined as the highest turn rate
possible, ignoring the fact of altitude and speed losses.
63 | P a g e
The load factor or g-loading during a turn is the acceleration due to lift
expressed as a multiple of standard acceleration due to gravity. The
load factor, n, is equal to the lift divided by the aircraft’s weight.
For a level, unaccelerated flight, the load factor of one (1) is implied.
For a level turn, the wing must provide 1-g lift in the vertical direction
to hold up the aircraft, so the remaining g’s available to turn the
aircraft in the horizontal direction are equal to the square root of the
squared of n minus 1. Thus, the radial acceleration in a level turn is g
times the square root of n2-1.
The turn rate is equal to the radial acceleration divided by the

velocity. For a level turn this results in the equations provided below
which provides the turn rate in radians per second. A multiplier of
57.3 must be multiplied to obtain the turn rate in degrees per second.
𝑔√𝑛2 − 1
𝜓= (𝑒𝑞. 2.29)
𝑉
𝑞𝐶𝐿
𝑛= (𝑒𝑞. 2.30)
𝑊/𝑆
Instantaneous turn rate is limited only by the usable maximum lift and
the velocity at which the maximum lift exceeds the load-carrying
capability of the wing structure. Typical values of maximum load
factor for fighter aircraft are 7.33 g but newer fighters are designed to
have 8 g or 9 g which should be met at some specified combat weight.
Corner speed is the speed at which maximum lift available exactly

equals the allowable load factor and provides the maximum turn rate
for an aircraft at that altitude. Achieving corner speed as quickly as
possible is desired to provide the best turn rate which is typically
about 300-350 KIAS regardless of altitude. The load factor can be
solved with a specified turn rate if required:
𝜓𝑉 2
𝑛 = √( ) + 1 (𝑒𝑞. 2.31)
𝑔
If the value of load factor is greater than the ultimate load factor
specified in the design requirements, somebody has made a mistake.
The required wing loading can be solved using:
64 | P a g e
𝑊 𝑞𝐶𝐿 𝑚𝑎𝑥
= (𝑒𝑞. 2.32)
𝑆 𝑛
The only unknown is the maximum lift coefficient at combat

conditions which is different from the maximum lift coefficient for
landing. Also, the use of full flaps is not usually possible and Mach
number effect reduces maximum lift at higher speeds. In addition to
this, maximum useable lift will be limited by buffeting or
controllability considerations.
For initial design purposes, combat maximum lift coefficient is 0.6-0.8

for fighter aircraft with simple trailing edge flap, and 1.0-1.5 for
fighter with complex system for leading and trailing edge flaps. The
resulting wing loading must be divided by the ratio of combat weight
to takeoff weight to obtain the required takeoff loading. Usually, the
combat weight is specified as the aircraft design takeoff weight with
any external fuel tanks dropped and 50% of the internal fuel gone.
This is approximately 0.85 times the takeoff weight for most fighters.
The resulting wing loading is the maximum which will allow the
required instantaneous turn.
ix. SUSTAINED TURN

Sustained turn rate is usually expressed in terms of maximum load
factor at some flight condition that the aircraft can sustain without
slowing or losing altitude. An example is the ability for sustaining 4- or
5-g at 0.9 Mach number at 30,000 feet is frequently specified. The
equations below are used to relate turn rate to load factor where if
the speed is to be maintained, the thrust must equal the drag and the
lift must equal the weight times the load factor.
𝑇
( )
𝑛= 𝑊 (𝑒𝑞. 2.33)
𝐿
(𝐷 )
Sustained turn load factor is maximized by maximizing the T/W and

the L/D ratio. The highest L/D occurs when the induced drag equals
the parasite drag. During a turn, the lift equals the weight times the
load factor, n. Thus, the lift coefficient equals the wing loading times n
divided by the dynamic pressure. The equation below gives the wing
loading that maximizes the sustained turn rate at a given flight
condition. Note that if the load factor is one, the resulting equation is
65 | P a g e
the same as for the maximum range equation presented above which
is the wing loading for best L/D ratio in level flight. In short, the
equation estimates the wing loading that maximizes the turn rate
regardless of thrust available which will frequently give ridiculously
low values of wing loading that will provide the required sustained
turn rate at only a fraction of the available thrust.
𝑊 𝑞
= √𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)𝐶𝐷 𝑜 (𝑒𝑞. 2.34)
𝑆 𝑛
The wing loading to exactly attain a required sustained load factor, n,

using all of the available thrust can be determined by equating the
thrust and drag, and using the fact that since lift equals weight times
n, the lift coefficient during a maneuver equals the wing loading times
n, divided by the dynamic pressure. From T = D:
𝐶𝐿2
𝑇 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷 𝑜 + 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷 𝑖 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷 𝑜 + 𝑞𝑆 ( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.35)
𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
𝐶𝐿2 𝑛2 𝑊 2
𝑇 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷 𝑜 + 𝑞𝑆 ( ) = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷 𝑜 + ( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.36)
𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅) 𝑞𝑆𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅 )
𝑇 𝑞𝐶𝐷 𝑜 𝑊 𝑛2
= + ( ) (𝑒𝑞. 2.37)
𝑊 𝑊/𝑆 𝑆 𝑞𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
Solving for W/S to yield the wing loading that exactly attains a
required sustained load factor n. After W/S is selected, Eq. (2.37) can
be used to recheck the T/W.
𝑇 2 4𝑛2 𝐶𝐷 𝑜
√(
(𝑇/𝑊) ± 𝑊 ) − ( ( ))
𝑊 𝜋𝑒 𝐴𝑅
= (𝑒𝑞. 2.38)
𝑆 2𝑛2
𝑞𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
The thrust to weight ratio for this calculation is at combat conditions,

so the takeoff T/W must be adjusted to combat conditions by dividing
by the ratio between combat and takeoff weight and multiplying by
the ratio between combat and takeoff thrust. If the term with the
square root in Eq. (2.38) becomes negative, there is no solution which
implies that at a given load factor, the following must be satisfied
regardless of the wing loading:
66 | P a g e
𝑇 𝐶𝐷 𝑜
≥ 2𝑛√ (𝑒𝑞. 2.39)
𝑊 𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
Note that it is very important to realize in these calculations that the

efficiency factor e, is itself a function of the lift coefficient at which
the aircraft is operating. This is due to the separation effects at higher
lift coefficients that increase drag above the parabolic drag polar
values. At high angles of attack the e value may be reduced by 30% or
more. Unfortunately, the equations provided for turning flight are
very sensitive to the e value. If these equations yield W/S values far
from historical values, the e value is probably unrealistic and
calculated W/S values should be ignored.
x. CLIMB AND GLIDE

The specifications for rate of climb for various combinations of factors
such as engine-out, landing gear position and flap settings and while
the details may vary, method for selecting wing loading to satisfy such
requirements is the same.
Rate of climb is a vertical velocity, typically expressed in feet per

minute. The climb gradient G, is the ratio between the vertical and
horizontal distance traveled. At normal climb angles, the climb
gradient equals the power excess divided by the thrust expressed as:
𝐺 = (𝑇 − 𝐷)/𝑊 (𝑒𝑞. 2.40)

Or
𝐷 𝑇
= −𝐺 (𝑒𝑞. 2.41)
𝑊 𝑊
D/W can also be expressed below as:
𝐶𝐿2
𝐷 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷 𝑜 + 𝑞𝑆 ( ) 𝑞𝐶𝐷 𝑜 𝑊 1
𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
= = + (𝑒𝑞. 2.42)
𝑊 𝑊 𝑊/𝑆 𝑆 𝑞𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅 )
Equating Eq. (2.41) and (2.42) and solving for wing loading gives the
equation expressed below:
67 | P a g e
2 4𝐶𝐷 𝑜
𝑇 𝑇
[( ) − 𝐺] ± √( − 𝐺) − ( )
𝑇 𝑊 𝑊 𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
= (𝑒𝑞. 2.43)
𝑊 2
𝑞𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅)
The similarity of Eq. (2.43) and (2.38) is for a load factor of 1 only. Like
before, T/W must be ratioed to the flight conditions and weight under
consideration. The resulting W/S must then be ratioed to a takeoff
weight value. Likewise, the term within the square root cannot go
below zero, so the following must be true regardless of the wing
loading.
𝑇 𝐶𝐷 𝑜
≥ 𝐺 + 2√ (𝑒𝑞. 2.44)
𝑊 𝜋𝑒(𝐴𝑅 )
The equation above states that no matter how clean your design is,
the T/W ratio should be greater than the desired climb gradient.
Another implication is that a very clean aircraft that cruises at high
speed despite very low T/W will probably climb poorly.
For takeoff flap settings, CDo will increase by about 0.02, and e will
decrease by about 5%. For landing flap settings, CDo will increase by
about 0.07 and e will decrease by about 10% relative to the no flap
value. Retractable landing gear in the down position will increase CDo
by about 0.02.
For cases of engine out, the thrust lost due to a dead engine can be
accounted in the T/W. An example for a three-engine aircraft with
one engine out, will have 2/3 of the original T/W. To attain some glide
angle specification, setting T/W to zero and using negative value of G
(denoting sink rate), wing loading can be determined if a particular
sink rate is desired. Note that G is the sink rate divided by the forward
velocity.
xi. MAXIMUM CEILIING

Eq. (2.43) can be used to calculate wing loading to attain some
maximum ceiling, given the T/W at those conditions. Climb gradient
can be set to zero to represent level flight at the desired altitude.
Frequently a small residual climb capability such as 100 feet per
minute is required at maximum ceiling which can be included in the
same equation by first solving for the climb gradient G.
68 | P a g e
For a high-altitude aircraft such as an atmospheric research or

reconnaissance plane, the low dynamic pressure available may
determine the minimum possible wing loading. Eq. (2.25) can be used.
This may suggest a wing loading so low as to be impractical and
should be compared with the wing loading required to fly at a given
lift coefficient as shown below:
𝑊
= 𝑞𝐶𝐿 (𝑒𝑞. 2.45)
𝑆
For efficiency during high altitude cruise, the lift coefficient should be
near the airfoil design lift coefficient. For a typical airfoil, this is about
0.5 and for a high-altitude aircraft, new high lift airfoils with design lift
coefficients of 1.0-1.4 can be used.
C. SELECTION OF THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO AND WING LOADING

An initial estimate of the thrust to weight (or horsepower to weight) ratio
was previously made and conditions for selection was established for initial
design considerations.
For the wing loadings estimated above, the lowest value should be selected
to ensure that the wing is large enough for all flight conditions. Note that all
wing loadings should be converted to takeoff conditions.
A low wing loading will always increase aircraft weight and cost and if it is
driven only by one of the design requirements, a change in design
assumptions may allow for selection of a higher wing loading. Note that wing
loadings calculated by Eq. (2.25-2.28) and Eq. (2.25 and 2.34) are
aerodynamic optimizations for only a portion of the mission and if their
values give lower than those given in the table for wing loading, they may be
ignored.
When the best compromise for wing loading has been selected, the T/W ratio
should be rechecked to ensure that all requirements are still met. The
equations provided in the last section which use T/W should be recalculated
with the selected W/S and T/W. Only then can the initial sizing be initiated.
69 | P a g e
LABORATORY REPORT NO. 3 – PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

Instructions for the laboratory reports will be given by the instructor and be submitted in
the platform agreed upon by the class.
LABORATORY REPORT NO. 4 – WING AND TAIL SELECTION GEOMETRY

LABORATORY REPORT NO. 5 – POWER LOADING SELECTION

70 | P a g e

Module 2 Preliminary Aircraft Specifications

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Module 2 Preliminary Aircraft Specifications

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHILIPPINE STATE COLLEGE OF AERONAUTICS

INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

AE 416 – AIRCRAFT DESIGN I

Sizing from a Conceptual Sketch 4 70 minutes

Laboratory Report No. 3 70 140 minutes

As an institution of higher learning, students are expected to display highest degree

Course Learning Outcomes [CLO]

CLO 2: Conduct preliminary estimates using

I. SIZING FROM A CONCEPTUAL SKETCH

𝑊0 = 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 + 𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 + 𝑊𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝑊𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 (𝑒𝑞. 2.1)

Solving Eq. (2.2) for 𝑊𝑂 gives:

B. EMPTY WEIGHT ESTIMATION

Advanced composite materials are replacing aluminum in a number of new

C. FUEL FRACTION ESTIMATION

sized to provide some required cruise range. As a consideration to

The low-level strike mission includes dash segments that must be

The strategic bombing mission introduces another complexity in the

ii. MISSION SEGMENT WEIGHT FRACTIONS

Cruise segment mission weight fractions can be found using the

Loiter weight fractions are found from the endurance equation:

iii. SPECIFIC FUEL CONSUMPTION

Propeller engine SFC is normally given as 𝐶𝑏ℎ𝑝 which is the pounds of

one brake horsepower, 1 bhp = 550 ft-lb/s). A propeller thrust SFC

iv. L/D ESTIMATION

addition to this, drag at subsonic speeds are mainly induced drag

From previous knowledge in aerodynamics, aspect ratio of the wing

To illustrate this example, consider the two aircrafts shown below

The statistical equation provided above for estimating the empty

empty weight fraction would be higher than estimated by these

Note that the L/D can usually be estimated without a sketch by an

v. FUEL FRACTION ESTIMATION

vi. TAKEOFF WEIGHT CALCULATION

guessing a takeoff gross weight, calculating the statistical empty-

II. AIRFOIL GEOMETRY AND SELECTION

cambered” airfoils. Also, an airfoil with a concave lower surface was

ii. AIRFOIL LIFT AND DRAG

Note that an airfoil in two-dimensional flow does not experience any

effects resulting from flow separation and shocks. It is only in three-

Lift force on an airfoil is perpendicular to the flight direction while the

The aerodynamic center is a point on the airfoil where the pitching

It is important to remember that airfoil characteristics are strongly

iii. AIRFOIL DESIGN

Another consideration in modern airfoil design is the desire to

large increase in drag along with a reduction in lift and a change in

iv. DESIGN LIFT COEFFICIENT

As a first approximation, it can be assumed that wing lift coefficient C L

In actual practice, a design lift coefficient usually will be based upon

Stall characteristics play an important role in airfoil selection. In fact,

A compromise to this is twisting of the wing in a way that the tip

In a similar fashion, the designer may elect to use different airfoils at

Stall characteristics for thinner airfoils can be improved with various

vi. AIRFOIL THICKNESS RATIO

Thickness also affects structural weight where the statistical

For initial selection of thickness ratio, the historical trend shown

While an understanding of the factors important to airfoil selection is

determining the thickness available for structure, landing gear and

The aerodynamic center is approximately the same percent location of the

Another effect of aspect ratio is the change in stalling angle which

Conversely, a canard can be made to stall before the wing by

ii. WING SWEEP

At supersonic speeds, the loss of lift associated with supersonic flow

Sweeping of the wing aft or forward has no theoretical difference but

iii. TAPER RATIO

elliptical wing planform is difficult and expensive to build. In terms of