AAE 451 TEAM CONCEPT SELECTION TEAM 4 Jared

AAE 451 TEAM CONCEPT SELECTION TEAM 4 Jared Hutter, Andrew Faust, Matt Bagg, Tony Bradford, Arun Padmanabhan, Gerald Lo, Kelvin Seah September 23, 2003

OVERVIEW OF DESIGN Isometric View, Not to Scale

MODULAR DESIGN n Many possible layout configurations. n Ease of maintenance, repair and upgrades. n Damaged pod can be replaced while aircraft is still air-worthy. n Dummy pod may be used in initial test flights.

STRUCTURE n n n High wing – stability; minimize FOD. Engines and avionics pod attached directly to the wing ¨ Lower surface and towards the front ¨ Stability issue ¨ Prof. Andrisani’s Arrow Rule Unobstructed view for camera in avionics pod. “Plug-n-Play” concept, allows movement of CG depending on future requirements. Tail-dragger design ¨ Steering may pose a potential problem.

PROPULSION n Twin engine Located symmetrically on either side of the avionics pod under the wing ¨ Incorporated into the tail boom structure. ¨ n n Weight savings from smaller engine mounts. Shorter propeller blades. Vibration is away from the avionics pod. Disadvantages: Synchronization ¨ Maintenance (twice the issues) ¨ Failure (twice as possible) ¨

PAYLOAD n Individual pod. ¨ Removable, replaceable. ¨ Flexibility in meeting future requirements. ¨ No need for a fuselage. n Mounted under wing on centerline, in front. ¨ Unobstructed view for camera. ¨ Not affected by engine vibrations. ¨ Allows LOS for Wi-Fi antenna. ¨ Air-data boom is in the free-stream. ¨ Easy integration of the air-data boom.

PROFILE VIEW 2. 7 ft 15 ft

TOP VIEW Wing Span: 18. 7 ft Aspect Ratio: 7 24. 0” 14. 0” 3. 5 ft 8. 0” 1 ft 2. 7 ft 15 ft

FRONT VIEW 18. 7 ft 3. 5 ft

ENGINE LAYOUT 8” 6” to tail boom engine fuel

AVIONICS POD LAYOUT 10” Avionics Equipment 20” Width = 14” MP 2000

CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS DESIGN SPACE PREL IMIN ARY

QUESTIONS?