U6AEA26 - AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT-I

FIRE-FIGHTER AIRCRAFT
A PROJECT REPORT
Submitted by
SWATI MUNDA [Reg.No.-12UEAE0049]
RANDHAWA SINGH JAT [Reg.No.-12UEAE0038]
SHIVA VIGNESH [Reg.No.-12UEAE0047]
SHUBHAM BHALLA [Reg.No.-12UEAE0045]

In partial fulfillment for the award of the degree

Of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

VEL TECH DR.RR & DR.SR TECHNICAL

UNIVERSITY,
CHENNAI 600062

APRIL 2015

1
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project report AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT I (FIRE-

FIGHTER AIRCRAFT) is the
Bonafide work of

SWATI MUNDA [Reg.No.-12UEAE0049]

RANDHAWA SINGH JAT [Reg.No.-12UEAE0038]
SHIVA VIGNESH [Reg.No.-12UEAE0047]
SHUBHAM BHALLA [Reg.No.-12UEAE0045]

Who carried out the project work under my Supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE
N.Murugan R.Jaganraj
Head of Department Assistant Professor,
Dept. of Aeronautical Engineering Dept. of Aeronautical Engineering
VelTech Dr. RR & Dr. SR Technical VelTech Dr. RR & Dr. SR Technical
University University

2
 CERTIFICATE OF EVALUATION

UNIVERSITY: Veltech Dr. RR & Dr. SR Technical University

BRANCH: AERONAUTICAL
YEAR: 2014-2015

SEMESTER: VI
TITLE: FIRE-FIGHTER AIRCRAFT

SWATI MUNDA [12UEAE0049] VTU3040

RANDHAWA SINGH JAT [12UEAE0038] VTU3615
SHIVA VIGNESH [12UEAE0047] VTU3077
SHUBHAM BHALLA [12UEAE0045] VTU3618

PLACE:

This report was submitted during the viva voce held on

Internal Examiner External Examiner

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all I would like to express my deepest gratitude to VEL TECH Dr. RR & Dr. SR
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY for giving me this tremendous opportunity.
I would like to express gratitude to Founder- President Prof Dr. R. Rangarajan B.E
(Elec.), B.E (Mech.) M.S (Auto), D.Sc. for giving me the opportunity to be the part
of this Institution.
I would like to acknowledge Founder- Vice President Dr. Sagunthala Rangarajan
(MBBS) for her support.
I would further like to express my gratitude to Chairperson and Managing Trustee
Dr. Rangarajan Mahalakshmi K. B.E (IE) M.B.A (UK) Ph.D.
I would also like to express my deepest thanks to Vice President Mr. K.V.D Kishore
Kumar.
I would like to express my deepest thanks to our Chancellor Dr. R.P.Bajpai Ph.D.
(IIT) D.Sc. (Hokkaido, Japan) FIETE.
I would further like to thank our Vice- Chancellor Dr. BeelaSatynarayana B.E
(Mech.), M.E (MD), M.E (IE) M. Tech (CSE), Ph.D. (IIT Delhi)
I would like to express my gratitude to our Registrar Dr. E. Kannan M.E, Ph.D.,
PGDSM (Hons.)
I would like to thank Dr. P Mathiyalagan Ph.D. Dean School of Mechanical for his
constant support.
I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to Mr. N MURUGAN Head of the
Department (Mechanical Department) for his valuable suggestions.
Finally I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Mr. Jagan Raj Asst. Professor
for helping me throughout the project and sharing his valuable knowledge.

4
CONTENT

5
 ABSTRACT
The aim of this project is to design and conceptualize a amphibious firefighter to
carry water capacity of 8500kg with range of 1300km,with maximum speed of
540 kmph at an maximum altitude of 6000m. In large forest fires over wide
areas, aerial fire fighting with water dumping from helicopters and aircrafts has
been widely employed in the world, but water dropped from helicopters is not
always sufficient to control large fires, since the limited quantity of water that can
be carried aloft is a critical issue and also, the duration of aerial fire fighting is
necessarily limited to daytime operations. On the other hand, aircrafts can drop
large amounts of water. A seaplane is a powered fixed-wing aircraft capable
of taking off and landing (alighting) on water.This project includes the weight
estimation,performance and design parameters of a amphibious aircraft.Various
aircraft have been used over the years for firefighter. As per the latest state of
forests report of the Forest Survey of India the actual forest cover of India is
19.27% of the geographic area, corresponding to 63.3 million ha. Only 38 million
ha of forests are well stocked (crown density above 40%). This resource has to
meet the demand of a population of 950 million people and around 450 million
cattle. As such, country has to meet the needs of 16% of the world's population
from 1% of the world forest resources. The same forest has also to cater for the
19% of the world cattle population.

The forests of the country are therefore, under tremendous pressure. Forest fires
are a major cause of degradation of India's forests. While statistical data on fire loss
are weak, it is estimated that the proportion of forest areas prone to forest fires
annually ranges from 33% in some states to over 90% in other. About 90% of the
forest fires in India are created by humans. Thus India is in huge need of firefighters
to protect its flora as the flora of India is one of the richest of the world .

6
INTRODUCTION
Aerial firefighting is the use of aircraft and other aerial resources to
combat wildfires. The types of aircraft used for fire-fighting include fixed-wing
aircraft and helicopters. Smokejumpers and Rappel are also classified as aerial
firefighters, Delivered to the fire by parachute from a variety of fixed-wing
aircraft, rappelling from helicopters. Chemicals used to fight fires may include
water, water enhancers (Such foams and gels) and specially formulated fire
retardants.

Amphibious aircraft: Aircraft which can be takeoff from land and water is known
as amphibian aircraft. The retracted wheels in the amphibious aircraft make them
as an amphibian. Amphibian aircrafts are widely used in remote areas where lakes
were more plentiful than airports. Today the conventional wheeled
undercarriage is replaced by the hull fuselage design. The hull fuselage design
makes the aircraft floating on the water. On the other hand the conciliation to
allow the aircraft to fly both in land and water is resulted in added weight and
complexity in the shape. The amphibian aircraft must have a cruise speed lower
than the normal conventional land based aircraft. Amphibious planes provide an
opportunity to operate in two ways. They are,

Land based flight operations

Water based flight operations

7
 Float planes: These are a specific type of seaplanes that have the aspect of
floats. Floats are mounted as a replacement for wheels. Nowadays the
modern aircraft allow the aircraft to operate in the field of both lands as
well as in water. French built the first float plane in 1910. During the
worldwar1 and worldwar2 the float planes are most commonly employed
in various relevance of bombing runs and air sea rescue. Float planes are
used in the remote areas where landing on strips is not accessible but
landing on water is accessed.
Flying boats: It is different from float plane on several aspects. Flying boats
have the water tight fuselage in which they act as a tight hull of a boat.
They often provide features of undersized floats attached near the wings to
stabilize the aircraft on the water. During the age of 1900s the flying boats
achieve their popularities. To a great extent similar to float boats. During
the worldwar1 and worldwar2 the flying boats are most commonly
employed in various relevance of bombing runs and air sea rescue. It serves
as a cargo and passenger transport transversely the Atlantic. Now- a days
flying boats are employed for the fire-fighting of forest fires. Since flying
boats hold a heavier payload. Most flying boats are water tankers. Float
planes become amphibious by adding the wheels attached to the floats
.flying boats become amphibious by adding retractable wheels. By this way
the aircraft can be used both on land as well as in water. Many airplanes
are served for special purposes appliances. It can be applicable to various
roles in rural areas and multifunctional usages.

8
Grumman Corporation

They introduced a light utility amphibious aircrafts like

Goose
Widgeon
Mallard

Figure 2: Goose Grumman widgeon Figure 3: The goose aircraft

types.

Figure 4: Goose mallard

9
These aircrafts are widely used for civilian purposes. When the time period
increases the need for the purpose of amphibian aircraft is also increased for the
military of United States. The military of United States was in the need of various
services such as anti sub marine patrol, rescue of sea - air services.

Canadair cl-215: The cl-215 is famous for having many nicknames in different
countries. For example, they are called as Canadairs in Croatia, Greece, France,
Serbia and Italy, whereas they are called as ducks in western Canada. They are
also called as scoopers by many other aircraft operators. Super turboprop
versions of these aircraft are called super scoopers, having increased
performance. This aircraft fills its tanks by gliding over water bodies like lakes and
rivers or ponds. The water is sometimes mixed with additives, for direct attack of
wildfires and structure protection. With water sources close to fires, cl-215s have
delivered 75-125 loads of water in a single day in support of fire-fighting efforts.
The aircraft can fill its tank of liquid capacity 1400 us gallon in ten seconds at a
speed of 75-80 knots/hour. In addition to its primary role as a water bomber, the
cl-215 is capable of several configurations such as maritime patrol and search and
rescue and thus can be called as a multitalented aircraft.

Figure 5: Canadair cl-215

10
Bombardier 415: The 415 started its maiden flight on the sixth of December 1993,
and the first delivery was on November 1994. Orders from many countries soon
followed. Because of its key performance as a water bomber and as fire
suppressant, it quickly gained the name super scooper from its predecessor. It
was awarded the prestigious batefuegos de oro (gold fire extinguisher) in
recognition of its abilities in the dangerous but necessary tasks of fire-fighting, the
award citation in part read "this is the most efficient tool for the aerial combat of
forest fires, key to the organization of firefighting in a large number of countries.
The continuous improvements to meet the needs of forest firefighting have made
these aircraft the aerial means most in demand over more than 30 years. The
aircraft requires 1340 m of flyable area to descend from 15 m altitude, scoop
6,137 liters of water during a 12-second 410 m-long run on the water, then climb
back to 15 m altitude. According to the bombardier website, the 415 takes "12
seconds, travelling at 130 km/h (70 knots) and 410 meter (1,350 feet), to scoop
up a 6,137-litre (1,621-us-gallon) water load... The advanced bombardier 415
aircraft scoops water from sites that are only two meter (6.5 feet) deep and 90
meter (300 feet) wide. When the water site is too small for a full pick-up, the
bombardier 415 takes a partial load and returns to the fire. The bombardier 415
amphibian doesnt need a straight scooping path. Since the aircraft is still in
"flying" mode while scooping, pilots can easily maneuvers around river bends or
visible obstacles in the water."

Figure 6: Bombardier 415

11
Beriev be-12: During development of the beriev be-200 unique fire-fighting
equipment was tested using a specially modified be-12p, coded '12 yellow'. After
installation of the fire-fighting system, the aircraft was registered ra-00046 and
given the designation be-12p-200. This modified be-12 was used to develop both
the fire-fighting system and methods of operation for the be-200, the Russian navy
had 55 aircraft in service, according to figures released in 1993. By 2005 this had
reduced to twelve, and by 2008 there were only 9 aircraft still in service.

Figure 7: Beriev be-12p-200

12
Seaplanes: Seaplanes are aircraft designed to take off and land on the surface of
the water. Aircraft of this type fall into two distinctly different categories. Various
categories of flying boats float planes, and outriggers are placed inside a generic
term called seaplanes. The essential difference between different types of
seaplanes is in the fuselage itself.

1. One category consists of conventional land planes that are mounted on

floats, sometimes called pontoons, in place of a conventional landing gear
with wheels. The float plane type has a main float attached to the fuselage
by struts and an outrigger float under each wing. The term "twin float
aircraft" is used to distinguish aircraft having a float located to each side of a
centerline aligned in a forward to aft alignment of the aircraft where the
respective floats provide a substantial proportion at least of flotation for the
aircraft and do not act merely as stabilizer. This then is to distinguish such
aircraft from seaplanes which may have stabilizer floats depending from a
respective wing.
2. The other category consists of a basically different type of aircraft in which
the lower part of the fuselage is shaped somewhat like a boat and which, at
rest and low speed, floats on the surface just as a boat does - hence the term
"flying boat." the flying boat is basically a seaplane with a boat hull fuselage.

13
 Comparison of various amphibious aircraft configuration
Aircraft BOMBARDIER GRUMMAN S-2 AIR-TRACTOR Lockheed BERIEV
415 TRACKER AT-802
C-130H Be-12P-200

Payload 6,400lb (2,900kg) 10,014.31lb 6838.8lb 45,000lb 13245lb(6000kg)

Empty load 28,400lb 18,315lb 6505lb (2,951kg) 75,800lb 56291.39lb

(12,880kg)

Fuel load 10,250lb 4,339.537lb 5656.2lb 72,000lb 11037.52lb

(4,650 kg)

Total Load 45,050lb 32,668.81lb 16000lb 1,55,000lb 80573.52lb

(20,407.65kg) (36499.8kg)

Wing span (b) 28.6m 22.12m 18.06m 40.4m 29.84m

Height 8.9m 5.33 M 5.33m 11.6m 9.1

Fuselage length 19.82m 13.26M 10.95m 29.8m 26.51m

Airfoil type NACA 4417 NACA 63A415 NACA 4415 NACA 64A318 NACA 23010

Location of wing High wing HIGH WING HIGH WING HIGH WING HIGH WING

Wing area (S) 100m2 45.06m2 37.25m2 162.1m2 99m2

14
 Bombardier 415 S-2 AIR Lockheed BERIEV
TRACKER TRACTOR
C-130H Be-12P-200
AT-802

W/S 450.5lb/m2 725lb/m2 429.5lb/m2 956.79lb/m2 813.87lb/m2

Range 2443km 2170 km 2963 km 3800 KM 1500km (with

5000kg payload)

3600 (max fuel

rev.)

Endurance 12hrs 9hrs 10hrs 13hrs 8.3hrs

Max. Speed 359 km/h 450 km/h 370 km/h 592 Km/h 473 km/h

Max. Altitude 4500m 6700 m 7620m 10060 M 8000m

R/C 8.1 m/s 8.9 m/s 4.3 m/s 9.3 M/S 9.5m/s

Take-off Distance 815m 783 m 945m 1093 M 1200 m

Landing distance 675 m 525m 724m 780m 975m

15
Preliminary sizing of airplanes
The purpose of the part 1 is to present a rapid method for the preliminary sizing
of an airplane to a given mission specification. It is defined as the process which
will be resulted I n the numerical definition of the following airplane design
parameters

Gross takeoff weight, WTO

Empty weight, WE
Mission fuel weight, WFE
Take off power, P TO
Wing area, S
Wing aspect ratio, A
Maximum required lift coefficient (clean), CL MAX
Maximum required lift coefficient for takeoff, CL MAX TO
Maximum required lift coefficient for landing, CL MAX L/G

16
 [A] Preliminary weight estimation
Following are the weight which constitute to total weight of an aircraft.

Gross takeoff weight, WTO

Empty weight, WE
Mission fuel weight, WFE

The following are the step involve in estimating the value of WTO, WE and WF:

Payload

Guess take-off weight

Mission fuel weight

Calculate WOEtent value then WEtent then WE

Follow the above step till WE tent and WE become same

17
Step1: The Payload and the range mainly decide the gross weight of aircraft.
(a) Max payload: Estimated water payload (W water): 8500 kg
Estimated passenger load (W pass): (4X50) = 200 kg
(b)Max Range: = (Forest distance x 2) + (airbase distance x 2) + ((distance from
water body x 2) x (number of loiter)) + (total distance covered in water during
loiter) + (safe distance)
= 106x2 + 150x2 + 50x2x10 + 500 + 500
= 2512 m

Step2: Now from the data collection we use to guess the gross weight of aircraft
by comparing the payload and range of different aircraft from our estimated
payload and range and get the average gross weight and also include extra weight.
So our guess gross weight = 30000 kg

18
Stage 3: (a) Mission profile

1. Engine start and warm up

2. Taxi

3. Take off

4. Climb to Cruise altitude

5. Cruise

6. Loiter

7. Descent

8. Scoop water

9. Climb out

10. Cruise in

11. Descend

12. Landing

13. Taxi shut down.

19
FORMULA- 1) WTO = (W OE + WPL +WF)

2) WOE = W E + W TFO + W CREW

3) WE = W ME + W FEQ

4) WOE tent = W TO guess - W F W PL

5) WE tent = WOE tent - WTFO Wcrew

6) WF = W F used + W F res

Step3 (b) Mission Fuel fraction

The fuel fraction for each phase is defined as the ratio of end weight to begin
weight.
Phase 1: Engine start Begin weight is WTO.
End weight is W1
Then the fuel fraction for this phase can be found from part 1 of Roskam W1/ WTO
= 0.992
Phase 2; Taxi Begin weight is W1.
End weight is W2
Then the fuel fraction for this phase can be found from part 1 of Roskam W2/ W1 =
0.990
Phase 3: Take off Begin weight is W2
End weight is W3
Then the fuel fraction for this phase can be found from part 1 of Roskam W3/ W2 =
0.996
Phase 4: Climb to Cruise altitude and Begin weight is W3.
End weight is W4
Then the fuel fraction for this phase can be found from part 1 of Roskam W4/ W3 =
0.985

20
Phase 5: Cruise Begin weight is W4.
End weight is W5
W5/ W4 = 0.789
Phase 6: Loiter Begin wt = W5.
End wt = W6.
Then the fuel fraction can be found as, W6/ W5 = 0.611
Phase 7: Descent Begin wt = W6.
End wt = W7.
W7/ W6 =0.990.
Phase 8: Scoop water Begin wt = W7.
End wt = W8.
Then the fuel fraction for this phase is found to be W8/W7 = 0.89
Phase 9: climb out Begin wt = W8.
End wt = W9.
Then the fuel fraction for this phase is found to be W9/W8 = 0.89
Phase 10: Cruise in Begin wt = W9.
End wt = W10.
Then the fuel fraction for this phase is found to be W10/W9 = 0.79
Phase 11: Descend Begin wt = W10.
End wt = W11.
Then the fuel fraction for this phase is found to be W11/W10 = 0.91
Phase 12: Landing Begin wt = W11.
End wt = W12.
Then the fuel fraction for this phase is found to be W12/W11 = 0.99
13. Taxi shut down. Begin wt = W12.

21
 End wt = W13.
Then the fuel fraction for this phase is found to be W13/W12 = 0.99
It is now possible to calculate the mission fuel fraction.
M ff, (from the equation 2.13 of part 1 of Roskam)
M ff,
=0.992*0.99*0.996*0.985*0.665*0.62*0.99*0.78*0.985*0.665*0.99*0.99*0.99
= 0.195
Mf used = (1-- 0.195) WTO
= 0.805 WTO
Reserve 25% of fuel
Wf = 0.805 WTO x 0.25
= 0.2 WTO
WOE TENT (Roskam, 2005) = WTO GUESS 0.2WTO 3855.5
WOE TENT = 30000-0.2*30000-3855.5
= 20144.5 kg
WE TENT = 8256-0.005x145000-350
= 196445 kg
WF = 0.2wTO
= 6000 kg
Allowable empty weight from Roskam table no. 2.13
CONCLUSION

To summarize the overall weights after iteration

WTO = 28000kg =61810.15lbs
WE = 18544.5 kg
WF = 5600kg

22
 [B] Selection of Main parameter
Following are the Main parameter: 1. Wing loading (W/S)

2. Thrust loading (T/W)

A requirement for short take-off can be met by using a large wing (low W/S) with
a relatively low T/W. On the other hand, the same take-off distance could be met
with a high W/S along with a higher T/W

Wing loading affects stalling speed, climb rate, take-off and landing distances,
minimum fuel required for range and turn performance.

Following are the steps involve in the choice of optimum wing loading and thrust
loading

1. Landing distance consideration

2. (R/C)max consideration
3. Absolute ceiling consideration
4. Choice of optimum wing loading
5. Consideration of wing weight (Ww)
6. Final choice of W/S
7. Thrust requirements
I. Requirement for Vmax
II. Requirements for (R/C)max
III. Take-off thrust requirements
8. Engine choice

The Maximum lift coefficient depends upon the wing geometry, airfoil shape, flap
span and geometry, leading edge slot or slat geometry, Reynolds number, surface
texture and interference from other parts of the airplane such as the fuselage,
nacelles or pylons.

23
Landing distance consideration: The stalling speed Vs is estimated in the following
manner.

(a) Sland is prescribed as

(b)Va = , Sland should be in feet, The approach speed (Va) in knots
0.3
(c)Va = 1.3 VS, where Vs is stall velocity.

(d)W/S based on landing considerations = where w/s is in N/m2

Range of (CLMAX)Landing for flying boats is 1.8 to 3.4.

The W L/WTO for firefighter is in range of 0.79 - 0.95. Under FAR 23 rules the
Specification requires that Sland = 649.8336 m = 2132 ft

Va = 84.30 kts = 43.3639 m/s

Vs = 33.356 m/s

Density at sea level = 1.225 kg/m3

Wing loading during landing is = 1499.37 N/m2

CLMAX_LANDING
(N/m2)

1.8 1226.66

2.0 1362.96

2.2 1499.25

2.4 1635.55

2.6 1771.85

24
TAKE OFF DISTANCE SIZING

From above table we conclude that WL/WTO = 0.79- 0.95 (LAND)

WL/WTO= 0.98- 1.0 (WATER)

25
WING LOADING AT TAKE-OFF IN LAND

.79 0.82 0.85 0.88 0.91 0.94

W/S)L W/S)TO W/S)TO W/S)TO W/S)TO W/S)TO W/S)TO

1226.66 1552.73 1495.92 1443.12 1393.93 1347.97 1304.95

1362.96 1725.26 1662.14 1603.48 1548.81 1497.75 1449.95

1499.25 1897.78 1828.35 1763.82 1703.69 1647.52 1594.94

1635.55 2070.31 1994.57 1924.17 1858.57 1797.30 1739.94

1771.85 2242.84 2160.79 2084.52 2013.46 1947.08 1884.94

WING LOADING AT TAKE-OFF IN WATER

.98 0.99 1.0

W/S)L W/S)TO W/S)TO W/S)TO

1226.66 1251.69 1239.05 1226.66

1362.96 1390.77 1376.72 1362.96

1499.25 1529.84 1514.39 1763.82

1635.55 1668.92 1652.07 1924.17

1771.85 1808.01 1789.74 2084.52

26
CRUSE CONSERDERATION

We consider that our aircraft max altitude is to be 6000 m. Corresponding to this

altitude density is 0.66kg/m3 , CLmax =1.2 1.8, At this altitude in max velocity is
Vmax= 540 kmph

For crusing we have to use the following formula

=

CL max W
S
1.2 36.154

1.4 42.9098

1.6 49.19

1.8 55.28

27
(R/C)max consideration

The climb Rate component. From Equation 3.12 from the Roskam Part 1 of
airplane design yields; FROM THE GRAPH WE CAN CALCULATE THE f and Swet

W TO = 61810.15 lbs

S wet = 68 x 10 ft

28
From 3.22 d, fig 21 b of Roskam Part 1 of airplane design yields
F = 34 ft
Vso = 22.66 (W/S)

(W/S) V so RC RCP

Psf fps Kts Fpm hp/lbs

20 101.38 60.29 98 0.00300

30 124.16 73.86 148 0.00448

40 143.37 85.29 197 0.00596

50 160.30 95.41 246 0.00745

29
Final wing loading

Average w/s for

1. Landing consideration = 1204.854 N/m2

2. Take-off consideration = 1739.35 N/m2
3. Cruse consideration = 45.889 N/m2
Comparing the w/s of different consideration an appropriate w/s is taken as
1739.35 N/m2

Thrust requirement
After selecting the W/S for the aircraft, the thrust needed for various design
requirement is obtained. These requirements decide the choice of engine.
1. Requirement for Vmax:
1
= ( +F2+F3p) qmax

Chosen value of p i.e. 1739.35 N/m2 is substituted in the above eqt
t= 13781.25((.009124/1739.35)+1.632*10-6+(3.84*10-10*1739.35))
t=0.104
T/W=0.104/0.18=0.57
T=0.57*28000*9.81=158.704KN
2. Requirements for (R/C)max
The following equation is used
t = {(R /C)/V}+( 1/2)* (V2/P) (F1 + F2 p + F 3p2)
Substituting appropriate values, yields : t r/c=0.14
TR/C=38.455KN
Tmax=158.7KN
Twin engine configuration of 79.35KN/per engine

30
 [C] ENGINE SELECTION

Pratt & Whitney PW1000G

General characteristics

Type: Turboprop
[22]
Length: 150 inches (3,800 mm)
Diameter: 56.081.0 inches (1,4222,057 mm)

Components

Compressor: Axial flow,1-stage geared fan, 2-3 stage LP, 8 stage HP

Combustors: Annular combustion chamber
Turbine: Axial, 2-stage HP, 3-stage LP

Performance

Maximum thrust: 15,00035,000 lbf (67156 kN)

31
 [D] WING DESIGN
The principle beyond this section is to design the aircraft wing layout. The
stall speed is higher in high wing configuration. The field length required for
landing and takeoff is long. The maximum lift to drag ratio will be high. The
aircraft riding quality in turbulence is good. The weight of the wing is low. The
interference drag is poor in the high wing configuration. The visibility of the
passenger looks good. The landing gear is located on the fuselage under carriage.
The main applicability of the amphibious operation of loading and unloading is
quicker and easier in the configuration.

The wing sweep of the aircraft wing is taken as zero. So the lift to curve
slope will be high. The pitch altitude variation is higher in the near to ground
levels. The drag ratio of compressibility will be high with the wing weight lower.
Strutted wing comprise a benefit of with reference to 30% of wing weight more
than the other wings.The weight and the wing loading of the airplane we find as
579915 N and 5195 N/m2. These give wing area as 111.63 m2. The wing design
involves choosing the following parameters.The wing design involves choosing the
following parameters.

1. Airfoil selection
2. Aspect ratio
3. Sweep
4. Taper ratio
5. Twist
6. Incidence
7. Dihedral
8. Vertical location

32
W/S=1739.35 N/m2

AR=9.1

B=37.87m

S=157m2

Cr=2S/b(1+ lambda)

=2*157/(37.87*1.24)

=6.6m

Ct=6.6*0.24

=1.6m

C^=4.6m

Airfoil Selection

The airfoil shape influences CLmax , CDmin, CLopt , Cmac and stall pattern.
These in turn influence stalling speed, fuel consumption during cruise, turning
performance and weight of the airplane.
For high subsonic airplanes, the drag divergence Mach number(MD) is
an important consideration. It may be recalled that (MD) is the Mach
number at which the increase in the drag coefficient is 0.002 above the value
at low subsonic Mach numbers. A supercritical airfoil is specially designed to
increase MD. NASA has carried out tests on several supercritical airfoils and
recommends the use of NASA-SC(2) series airfoil with appropriate thickness
ratio and camber.

33
Design lift coefficient

The CLopt of an airfoil is the lift coefficient at which the drag coefficient is
minimum. For passanger airplanes, the airfoil is chosen in such a way that CLopt
Equals Lcruise C .
Using the value of (W/S) = 1739.35 Nm-2
and q corresponding 11 km altitude, gives :
CLcruise = 0.425
CLopt is taken as 0.4 for choosing airfoil thickness ratio and wing sweep.

34
Summary of matching results
Examine the matching requirements of figure,
The twin engine propeller driven airplane is now characterised by the following
design parameter;
Takeoff weight; 28000 kg
Empty weight(WE) = 18544.5 kg
Fuel weight (WF) = 5600kg
Maximum lift coefficient
CL MAX = 1.90
CL MAX TO = 2.2
CL MAX L = 3.4
Aspect ratio =9.1
Take off wing loading = 1739.35 N/m2

35
AIRFOIL SELECTION:-
Based on CLmax and thickness to chord ratio,NRELs S814 airfoil is selected
CLmax=0.425

Max thickness 24.2% at 24.6% chord.

Max camber 2.6% at 77.6% chord
BILGE KEEL
The bilge keel is attached on the both sides of the fuselage. The length of the keel
is 11.5ft and the breadth is 0.07ft. The aircraft rolling can be stopped with the
help of Bilge keel. Large wings are most often providing a short field length. The
high standards of coefficient of lift are obtained with the assist of flap.

36
DESIGN OF FUSELAGE

The fuselage layout is designed with the help of the following elements such as,
Crews of the amphibious aircraft, Fuel level which is used for flight operation,
Avionics systems and Beaching facilities. While designing the loads such as,

Empennage loads
Pressure loads
Landing gear loads
Loads induced by propulsion installation

The figure shown below shows the fuselage geometric parameters are
selected for the new design.

Figure 18.A: Size of Fuselage

37
D f stands for diameter of fuselage, D f = 3.2m

L f, stands for length of the fuselage, L f = 22.8m

Ha, stands for height of aircraft, Ha =10.5m

L fc, stands for length of the fuselage cone, L f = 10.47m

fc, stands for fuselage cone angle, f c =9.8

COCKPIT visibility

The cockpit layout can be made with the vicinity pattern of pilot eye vector is
about- 18 and +19 from the central axis.

Figure 22: shows the cockpit layout of amphibious aircraft

The radial eye vector of cockpit section in amphibious aircraft is taken as +

19 and -18. The aircraft is designed with the modern advanced glass cockpit
with stick controls. The front section of the fuselage is designed with the usual
amphibious aircraft configuration. This type of configuration provides a good
visibility to the pilots and suitable for low drag optimisations. Fly by wire system is
used for various computer control system.

38
DESIGNING OF FUSELAGE

The main purpose of the fuselage is to attach the other parts of the aircraft.
The main parts of the aircraft such as wing and the T-tail of the aircraft are
attached together. The length and the perimeter are reduced as much as possible
to provide a well estimated drag profile of the aircraft. The fineness ratio of the
fuselage {d / l} is taken as 0.14, since diameter is taken as 3.2 m and length is
taken as 22.8. The co efficient drag is found to be 0.1569.

The fineness ratio of geometric limitations of the amphibious aircraft are

suggested as follows,

For fuselage section,

F = LF / D F

= 22.8/3.2

=7.12

The fuselage section consists of sitting arrangement,

For cone section

FC = L FC / D F

= 10.14/3.2

= 3.16

For the two crew members in the cockpit the estimated length of the cockpit is
taken as 2.8metre.

39
Empennage Design

Introduction

The design of a tail plane is done based on many requirements related to its
functions. It provides balance in steady flight. The function of a fixed and movable
tail surfaces are to make sure a balance in the steady flight by applying a force at
a given distance from centre of gravity and also to ensure that this balance is
stable and to produce forces for controlling the aircraft.

Some of the possible configurations for the empennage design are shown
in the figure below. For a conventional aircraft, Raymer (2006) recommends the
use of conventional arrangement as this configuration provides adequate stability
and control at the lightest weight. There were other configurations also
considered and they were the T-tail, the cruciform, the V-tail and the H-tail. T-tail
has many advantages and one of these helps reducing the fatigue for both
structure and the pilot. It will provide a better rudder authority at high angle of
attack and stalls so as to prevent a spin. Because the vertical tail must carry the
horizontal tail and therefore the vertical tail should be strengthened. And the H-
tail is heavier than the conventional configuration. So they were not chosen.
Cruciform is a combined configuration of conventional and T-tail. But still
cruciform tail doesnt provide a tail area reduction because of the end plate effect

40
and the cruciform is not stable as the conventional configuration. So it was not
chosen. A T-tail configuration was selected for the fire fighting aircraft.

Figure 27: Empennage configuration (Raymer 2006)

7.2. Empennage sizing

It is considered to be an iterative process of design of the tail plane. One should

make an initial choice of certain parameters such as aspect ratio, taper ratio,
thickness ratio, airfoil shape etc. It is always difficult to choose the type of
aerodynamic balance, type of control system and whether the stabilizer is fixed or
adjustable. (Torenbeek 1982)

Horizontal stabilizer means the component of the empennage that lies in the
horizontal plane. To calculate the area of the horizontal stabilizer a statistical
method was used. The statistical approach involves a tail volume coefficient and
Raymer gives the data for the parameters used. This is an amphibious aircraft and
the volume coefficient is determined to be 0.7. The horizontal area was calculated
as follows:
41
 SHT = cHTCwSw LHT

Where, cHT is the volume coefficient

Cw is the wing mean chord

Sw is the wing area

L is the moment arm.

The moment arm is defined as the distance from the tail quarter chord to
the wing quarter chord. The moment arm should be found out to calculate the tail
size. This is approximated by a percent of the total fuselage length. For an aircraft
with the engines mounted on the wings, the tail moment arm is about 50-55% of
the fuselage length. Here we take 52% of the fuselage length (Raymer 2006).
Horizontal tail area is calculated as follows:

SHT = (0.70 x 4.6 x 157) 42.65= 11.85 m2

The vertical stabilizer is the component of empennage that lies on the

vertical plane. When compared with horizontal tail plane, it is considered that the
design of vertical tail plane is more complicated. It is connected behind the wing
and fuselage combination, so it difficult to calculate the lateral directional
aerodynamic characteristics. It is also meets the oncoming air at an angle of side
slip (Torenbeek 1982). Some of the criteria are taken are, after the engine failure
or deflection of the rudder, the tail plane should not stall as the result of an
oscillation and also multiengine aircrafts must be on steady flight of the critical

42
engine fails. And it is also important that the aircraft possess positive directional
and lateral stability.

It is calculated in the same way. The tail volume coefficient is determined to

be 0.053. The tail moment arm is the same taken to find the horizontal area. The
vertical area is calculated as follows:

SVT = cVTbwSw LVT

Where, bw is the wing span

SVT = (0.053 x 37.87x 157) 42.65 =75.62 m2

43
Landing Gear Design

Introduction

The design and placement of the landing gear are established by the unique
features related with each aircraft, i.e., geometry, load, and mission
requirements. Known the weight and cg range of the aircraft, appropriate
configurations are specified and checked to establish how clearly they match the
airframe structure, flotation, and operational provisions. The principal features,
e.g., the number and size of tires and wheels, brakes, and shock absorption
mechanism, are selected in compliance with federal standards.

Landing gear is placed to get good ground stability and controllability. A

good landing gear position should provide better handling characteristics and
should not allow over-balancing during takeoff or landing. The main functions of
landing gears are, it absorbs landing shocks and taxiing shocks, it helps in ground
manoeuvring, taxi, landing roll, takeoff roll and steering. It also provide brake
capability and helps airplane towing. And also it protects the ground surface.
Landing gear must absorb landing and taxi loads and also it must transmit these
loads to the airframe.

While designing the landing gear, three loads must be considered. They are
vertical loads, longitudinal loads and lateral loads. Vertical loads depend on the
touchdown rates. Design touchdown rate for a FAR 25 aircraft is 12 fps. To absorb

44
shocks, associated with any touchdown rates, most landing gear consists of two
elements. They are tires and shock absorbers. Other than vertical landing gear
load there is also longitudinal and lateral loads. Some of the landing gear
elements resist these loads and they are called drag- brace and the side brace
(Raymer 2007).

Landing Gear arrangement

Landing gear arrangements are shown in Figure below. The common landing gear
arrangements for high-wing designs are the tail-dragger and tricycle
arrangements (Raymer 2006).

Figure 34: Landing gear arrangements (Raymer 2006)

45
 Because of the inherent instability on the ground, bicycle and single main
landing gear arrangements are less preferable. The aft wheel is so far away from
the c.g. for a bicycle aircraft that makes the aircraft to take off and land in a flat
attitude. Outrigger wheels are required on the extremes of the aircraft, and it
makes difficult when the aircraft has high wing configuration (Raymer 2006). The
outrigger wheels would need to be long to reach from the wing to the ground.
The weight of these outrigger wheels would be significant, and the storage of
these wheels is difficult. The quadricycle arrangement has a significant increase in
weight when compared it with the tricycle and tail-dragger arrangements. And it
also needs a flat takeoff and landing attitude. The stability is increased due to the
wheel locations and also the loads on each wheel are reduced due to the added
wheel (Raymer 2009). The quadricycle arrangement is not considered because of
the width required in storing the landing gear in the fuselage when the landing
gear is retracted. The fuselage width is not sufficient to house all four landing
gear. For high wing aircraft both the tricycle and the tail-dragger arrangements
are used. The tricycle gear arrangement gives good steering and ground stability
characteristics. A flat cabin floor allows for good visibility take-off and during
approach as well as the ability to store and load cargo. The advantages of flat
storage and loading of cargo are not applicable to the fire-fighting application.
The tail-dragger allows an increased angle of attack at take-off and landing
(Torenbeek 1982). So this decreases the take-off and landing distances for the
aircraft when compared to a tricycle gear. Tail-dragger gears are typically smaller,
are thus lighter, and require less storage space in the fuselage and it provides
more propeller clearance, less drag, and it also allows the wing to generate more
lift (Raymer 2006). Tail-dragger arrangements are unstable during turning

46
manoeuvres on the ground, because the centre-of-gravity is being located behind
the main landing gear. This significant decrease in stability was considered
prohibitive to this design. But for a tricycle landing gear the c.g. is located ahead
of the main landing gear and this makes the aircraft stable on the ground and it
can be landed at a good crab angle. It improves forward visibility.

So a tricycle arrangement was chosen for this aircraft due to its good
stability and steering, as well as good visibility.

47
.

48
CONCLUSION:-
Finally the design process for amphibious fire fighter aircraft has completed.
The Layout and design of the amphibious is complete. Class I weight and balance
analysis has been conducted. Performance and design parameters has been
conducted and it has been determined that the amphibious fire fighter aircraft is a
stable aircraft. The drag polar and lift-to-drag ratio analysis determined that
resizing of the aircraft is not necessary. The dimensions of the amphibious aircraft
have been determined and our aircraft is ready to continue with the next stage of
the design process.

49
 References
1. Aircraft performance and design , John D. Anderson, Jr. University of
Maryland
2. Aircraft design A conceptual approach, Daniel P. Raymer president
Conceptual Research Cooperation, Sylmar California
3. An example of airplane preliminary design procedure Jet Transport, E.
G. Tulapurkara, A. Venkattraman, V. Ganesh
4. Aircraft Design A Systems Engineering Approach, Mohammad H. Sadraey,
Deniel Webster College, New Hampshire, USA
5. Design of Aircraft, Thomas C. Corke, University of
6. Notre Dame
NPTEL Airplane Design(Aerodynamic), professor E.G. Tulapurkara.

50