Scott Hayden, Team Lead – Chief Engineer, Performance & Structures Specialist Dana Pugh – Trade Studies and Propulsion Specialist Dany Fahmy – 3-D designer,

Scott Hayden, Team Lead – Chief Engineer, Performance & Structures Specialist

Dana Pugh – Trade Studies and Propulsion Specialist

Dany Fahmy – 3-D designer, Aerodynamicist

Court Groves – Stability and Control Specialist

Morphing Aircraft Design

MAE 155B, Aerospace Engineering Design II

University of California, San DiegoJacobs School of Engineering

June 7, 2004Charles Chase, Lockheed MartinDr. James Lang, Project Advisor

Goals, Schedule and Project Cost Design Drivers

Initial Morphing Aircraft Concepts Delta Wing Jive Straight Jacket

Final Design Concept Straight Jacket Method of Morphing

System Design Configuration Aerodynamics Propulsion Stability and Control Materials and Structures Performance Trade Studies Cost Estimates

Conclusions References and Acknowledgments

Morphing Aircraft Project Outline

Goals, Schedule and Project Cost

Project Description

Design a Strike Aircraft with morphing capabilities Maximize the Strike Mission performance. Ingress and Egress demand supersonic cruising at Mach 2 Carry a 2,000 pound internal weapons payload

Three morphing variations to maximize flight performance and Minimize project costs:

“Swing" wing concept Fan wing concept Switchblade wing concept

Trade studies varying T/W, W/S, and Aspect Ratio up to 20%

Perform preliminary design analysis on final aircraft choice

Climb from Sea Level to Best Cruise Altitude ( ≥ 55,000 feet )

Ingress for 1,200 nautical miles at Mach 2.0 and BCA

“Strike Patrol” for 4 hours at subsonic velocity ( ≥ 55,000 feet )

Return to base at Mach 2.0 and BCA

Carry Reserve fuel for additional 20 minute loiter

Descend to Sea Level and Land

SUBsonic Configuration: Make TEN sustained 360° turns at M=0.7 Withstand a 3g sustained load ( ≥ 55,000 feet )

SUPERsonic Configuration: Make ONE sustained 180° turn at M=2.0

Mission Requirements

Design Drivers

Supercruise at Mach 2

Aerodynamics Wave Drag Area-Ruling

Stability and Control Yaw and Pitch Stability are critical

Propulsion Utilize only military thrust to reach and maintain cruise velocity of Mach

2

Design Drivers (cont…)

Subsonic to Supersonic and vice versa

Maximize performance for BOTH supersonic cruise and subsonic loiter

Feasibly morph between optimal operating configurations

Recognize this HUGE change Aerodynamics Stability and Control Systems Optimize!

0 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8

9 10

Mission Phase Breakdown

0 – 1 Take-off and accelerate

1 – 2 Climb from sea level to BCA and M = 2.0

2 – 3 Ingress at M = 2.0 and BCA for 1200nm

3 – 4 “Strike Patrol” for 4 hours at subsonic speed for maximum

endurance and optimum altitude (at or above 55,000 ft)

4 – 5 Combat allowance

5 – 6 Climb and acceleration allowance (to BCA and M = 2.0)

6 – 7 Egress at M = 2.0 and BCA for 1200nm

7 – 8 Descend

8 – 9 Reserves: Fuel for 20 minutes at optimum speed and

altitude for maximum endurance

9 - 10 Landing

Strike Mission ProfileSubso

nic

Subso

nic

Subsonic

Supersonic Supersonic

Spring BreakMilestones

Final Schedule

Final Presentation

Preliminary Design

Switchblade concept

Fan concept

Swing wing design

Trade Studies

Conceptual Design

Objectives and Success Criteria

June 7th

10987654321

Weeks During Spring Quarter 2004 (March 22 – June 7)

Project Costs

Engineering (4 engineers, $92/hour, 12 hours/week, 11 weeks): $48,576

Travel to Lockheed Martin Sponsor (food/gas): $95

Miscellaneous Design Tools: $150

Total - Pay up!

Design Project Cost Estimates

Initial Morphing Aircraft Concepts

Conceptual Design Approach

Individually design three different morphing aircraft Each satisfying the mission requirements Highlight design drivers – Supercruise at M=2, Morph to optimize

performance

Develop method to compare each individual design Fair Systematic Same set of assumptions and design restrictions

Use subjective and objective comparisons to downsize to a final design

Measures of Merit Weight! Pugh Chart

Conceptual Design Approach (cont…)

Subsonic Wing ParametersAspect Ratio

Leading Edge SweepTaper RatioSwet/Sref

Supersonic Wing ParametersAspect Ratio

Leading Edge SweepTaper RatioSwet/Sref

T/Wtakeoff(initial guess)

Now Back trackwith W/Stakeoff

W/Si

takeoff

landing

manuever

Gives Max.Demanded Wing

Loading

CommonAssumptions:

MmaxAltitudeTSFCCD0K

L/Di

WeightFractions

Calculate SubsonicLoiter Velocity

Size Wings

Refine W/S, T/Wi andAssumptions to

maximize performace

Reiterate!

Delta Wing

SupersonicSubsonic

Delta Wing

TOGW: 90000lbs. Wf=46967lbs We=41287lbs

Subsonic / supersonic aspect ratio: 8 / 2.91

Cdosubsonic / supersonic: .0105 / .01575

Span subsonic / supersonic: 164.75 / 52.16ft

L/D loiter / supercruise: 16.778 / 7.906

W/S loiter / supercruise: 27.38 / 89.29

T/W loiter / supercruise: 0.385 / 0.377

JiveSupersonic Subsoni

c

Inlets

Pivot Points

2 Engines

1 1 VerticVertical Tailal Tail

Rotates Inside Fuselage

Swings in from a pivot point

The swing motion follows a designed track within the fuselage

From subsonic configuration to supersonic configuration, only about 70% of the wing swings in

Latches into supersonic configuration with clamps creating a smaller aspect ratio

Jive - How it Morphs

JiveWeight SummaryTOGW (lb) 180000

We (lb) 81362

Wf uel (lb) 99360

W/Stakeof f (lb) 47.3

T/Wtakeof f (lb) 0.235

We/W0 0.452

Wf /W0 0.55

Vehicle CharacteristicsSubsonicWingspan (ft) 154.8Aspect Ratio 6.3Cdo (M=0.70) 0.015K (M=0.70) 0.080(L/D)max subsonic 14.1

SupersonicWingspan (ft) 50.1Aspect Ratio 2.4Cdo (M=2.0) 0.023K (M=2.0) 0.377(L/D)max supersonic 7.8

Jive – Weight & Characteristics

Straight Jacket

High Aspect Ratio Subsonic Wings Maximize L/D for loiter

Low Aspect Ratio Supersonic Wings Reduce Drag Maximize Range Increase Maneuverability

Combine wings to simplify Morph Reduce mechanical/electrical/control costs and complications Utilize long slender subsonic wings to shape slender body Achieve something never seen before

Aim of Design

Straight Jacket - Subsonic

Straight Jacket - Supersonic

Straight Jacket – Method of Morphing

Comparison

Delta Wing Straight Jacket JivePossibility ++ + +

Probability + O +

Risk OAerodynamics (super) ++ ++ OAerodynamics (sub) + +

Morphing Capabilities O + +

Aesthetic Appeal O + OOverall O + +

Team INFERNO Pugh Chart

POOR MODERATELY POORO NEUTRAL+ GOOD

++ EXCELLENT

LEGEND

ComparisonMeasures of Merit

Every aircraft meets project requirements TOGW

Straight Jacket Jive Delta WingWeight Summary

TOGW (lb) 66,918 180,000 90,000

We (lb) 37,114 81,362 41,288

Wfuel (lb) 27,804 99,360 46,967

W/Stakeoff (lb) 62.80 47.30 26.53

T/Wtakeoff (lb) 0.4 0.235 0.5

We/W0 0.55 0.452 0.459

Wf/W0 0.42 0.55 0.52

Subsonic Straight Jacket Jive Delta WingWingspan (ft) 138.49 154.85 164.75Aspect Ratio 18 6.30 8Cdo (M=0.80) 0.012 0.015 0.011K (M=0.80) 0.03 0.080 0.080(L/D)max subsonic 25.87 14.100 16.778

SupersonicWingspan (ft) 43.282 50.112 52.162Aspect Ratio 6 2.400 2.91Cdo (M=2.0) 0.018 0.023 0.0158K (M=2.0) 0.41 0.377 0.2032(L/D)max supersonic 12.14 7.798 7.906

Vehicle Characteristics

Final Design Concept

and the winner is…

STRAIGHT JACKET

Straight Jacket

Straight Jacket

Straight Jacket

Subsonic 3-View

Vertical Tails

Payload

Engines

Wing Structure

Inlets

Nose Gear

Main Gear

Fuel Tanks

ElectricalSystem

Tailpipe

Engine & OilCooling

InstrumentsEngine Controls

Anti-iceGear

Avionics

Sub Configuration

Supersonic 3-View

Method of MorphingConcept:

Wing design incorporating single subsonic and supersonic wing into ONE structure

Takeoff and climb to BCA in subsonic formation

Morph to Supersonic formation for Mach 2 ingress

Accelerate in subsonic formation to M=0.7 Cervos/mechanisms “pop” wings down Large gears simultaneously rotate wings forward Mach 0.7 Mach 1

Use advanced controls systems Utilize seamless elevons and ailerons on BOTH wings Create lift and stability

Cervos/mechanisms bring wings back into fuselage and secure into place

And away we go… accelerate to M=2

Method of Morphing

Cross Section of Fuselage in Supersonic Formation

Reach Strike destination and slow to Mach 1

Cervos/mechanisms “pop” down wings Slowly draw subsonic wings from forward fuselage

Allow aerodynamic forces to deploy wings Only apply resistive force with gears

Method of Morphing

Front view of Straight Jacket in Subsonic Formation

Reduce lift and drag on forked wings Use seamless elevons and ailerons to minimize lift drag Advanced feedback control systems Allow drag forces to pull back wings

Natural Aerodynamic forces will slow aircraft from M=1 to M=0.7

Wings rotate out

Cervos/mechanisms bring wings back into fuselage and secure into place

Survey and drop payload if necessary… Morph back and RTB

Method of MorphingTop View of Wing Planform

Bottom View of Wing Planform

Back View of Wing Planform

Master Morph Control Gear

Simultaneously controlled wing gears

Subsonic Wings

Supersonic Wing

Large Steel / Titanium Strut

Re-lubricating Bearings

Titanium Circular Shafts

Bottom Shaft Brace

Method of Morphing

Use tooth to stabilize hidden wings Bring wings up and down Controlled by same servos and mechanisms, simultaneously Used to catch wings bring brought in Helps guide back into fuselage pocket

Hidden Wing Support – The Tooth

Tooth

Method of Morphing

New Belly material (IN RED)

“Smart” material - Polymer that forms to wings and tooth when collapsed

Stiffens and reduces surface area when wings are out Able to take Mach 2 airload from skin friction drag

Drag Reduction Technology

System Design

Aerodynamic CharacteristicsSubsonic Supersonic

Aspect Ratio 14 6

Airfoil NACA 4412 NACA 64-206

t/c .12 .06

Wing Span 168.46 59.78

Wing Area 2027.09 595.54

Sweep 8 28

Cl max 1.4 .0091

(L/D)max 24.56 10.75

Cdo .012 .036

Oswald efficiency 0.66 0.87

Swet/Sref 4 10

Taper Ratio 0.35 0.25

Aerodynamics

TOGW = 83,939 Lbs

We = 49,063 Lbs

Wf = 34,876 Lbs

Wf/W = 0.43

W/Sto = 39.49 Lb/ft2

T/Wto = 0.4

Fuel burn by mission segment (lb)  

1) take off / acceleration 802.5

2) Climb 5005.2

3) Ingress 7275.1

4) Strike Patrol 8050.4

5) Combat allowance 1043.8

6) Accel/Climb Allowance 2990.0

7) Egress 6783.6

8) Descend 241.5

9) Reserves 567.1

10) Land 142.5

Weight Summary – Strike Mission

Cdo vs Mach Number

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Mach Number

Cd

o Series1

CDO vs Mach Number

K vs Mach Number

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Mach Number

K Series1

K vs Mach Number

Pressure drag due to shockformation

It is greater than all the otherdrag together

D/q(wave) = 4.5*pi()*(A/L)^2

L=longitudinal dimension

A= max cross-sectional area

To minimize the wave drag, wetried to minimize the cross

sectionalarea and maximize the

longitudinaldimension and this is how we

cameup with the fuselage shape.

Wave Drag – Area Ruling

Engine Type: F119- PW- 100 (F-22) Scale Factor: 1.39

Includes 16.7% improvement -10% installation Engine sized up from 35,000 lb of Thrust to 43,750 lb Max Thrust

Number of Engines: 2

Engine Characteristics:

Engine Characteristics for 1 of 2 engines

Front Face Area (ft 2̂) 7.347

Diameter (ft) 3.059

Length (ft) 10.761

Weight (lb) 3051.29

Propulsion

Propulsion – F119

2 Engine Performance Thrust

Sea-Level Static Max Thrust (lbs) 43750

Supercruise (M=2) Thrust @ BCA (lbs) 5051

Inlet and Duct Design

Variable Inlet Design

Inlet Location

Duct Location and Inlet Location

Inlet

Inlet in front of the Leading edge

Nozzle

Ejector design cools the afterburner and nozzle

The converging-diverging design allows easier transitions between subsonic and supersonic

Nozzle Length ~ 2.5 feet

Afterburner & Nozzle ~ 6.3 feet

Nozzle Design Alternative

A component of the F119

Vectoring flaps are the most common vectoring-nozzle type

Need to do Trade Studies of cost and surface sizing to see if beneficial

2D Thrust Vectoring

Propulsion – Capture Area

Capture Area Versus Supercruise Mach Numbers for BCA

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Mach Number

Acap

ture

(ft

)

TSFC VS. M and Altitude for Military Thrust for F119

TSFC for Miltary Power Versus Mach Number and Altitude

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Mach Number

TS

FC

(1/

hr)

0 ft

5k ft

10k ft

15k ft

20k ft

25k ft

30k ft

35k ft

> 35k ft

Trade Studies

Total Weight Versus Aspect Ratio for Supersonic and Subsonic Configurations

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

0 5 10 15 20 25

Aspect Ratio

Wo (

lbs)

AR(sub) = 15

AR(sub) = 16

AR(sub) = 17

AR(sub) = 18

AR(sub) = 19

AR(sub) = 20

AR (sup) = 2

AR (sup) = 3

AR (sup) = 4

AR (sup) = 5

AR (sup) = 6

AR (sup) = 7

AR (sup) = 8

Total Weight Versus Altitude*Assume Ingress/Egress and Strike Patrol Preform at the Same Altitude

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

54000 56000 58000 60000 62000 64000 66000

Altitude (feet)

Wo

(lb

s)

Ingress/Egress

Strike Patrol

Trade Studies

~57000 feet for BCA

Trade Studies

Total Weight Versus Take Off Thrust-to-Weight Ratio for Varying Ingress Wing Loading

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

T/Wtakeoff

Wo

(lb

s)

W/Singress=70

W/Singress=80

W/Singress=90

W/Singress=100

W/Singress=110

W/Singress=120

W/Singress=130

W/Singress=140

W/Singress=150

Stability and Control

The Basics 4 control surfaces Elevons, Ailerons, RudderAilerons – 2 configurations

Subsonic & Supersonic Elevons – Only on subsonic

configuration Designed for increased stability at

loiter speed Rudder – Vertical twin tails

rudders sized to allow for stability at M=2+

Leading edge flaps Used to alter camber and

decrease lift during morphing phase

Stability and Control

Subsonic Supersonic

Stability and Control

Advanced controls Fluidic thrust vectoring

Increased maneuverability and performance at high supersonic Advantages Disadvantages

Fly by wire controls Automatic cg maintenance

Using sensors and fuel pumps

Stability and Control Maintenance of center of gravity

Phases: 1. subsonic cg 2. supersonic cg 3. subsonic post-payload drop 4. supersonic cg post-payload drop

Travel of center of gravity

81.281.3

81.481.581.6

81.781.881.9

82

82.182.2

1 2 3 4

Morphing Phase (1=subsonic; 2=supersonic; 3=subsonic post payload drop; 4=supersonic post

payload drop)

loca

tio

n o

f cg

fro

m n

ose

of

airc

raft

Series1

Stability and Control

Detailed Weight analysis Wing weight: 15527.02 lbs

Subsonic wing: 10431.51 lbs Supersonic wing: 5994.72 lbs

Fuselage weight: 8983.85 lbs

Installed engine weight: 8404.29 lbs

Vertical tail weight: 7686.02

Fuel system weight (empty): 2026.31

Payload: 2000 lbs

Avionics weight: 1332.66 lbs

Final component build up weight (empty): 50553.1 lbs With fuel: 85356.9 lbs

Landing Gear Main Landing Gear

Max static load: 81866.38 lbs Extended length: 60 in.

Nose Landing Gear Min static load: 490.52 lbs Max static load: 10,659.19 lbs Dynamic breaking load: 2461.49 Extended length: 72 in.

Kinetic Energy absorbed by breaking: 6.85x10^6 ft-lbs

Vertical Kinetic Energy absorbed by deflecting shock and tire: 223,995.6 ft-lbs

Materials and Structures

Aircraft Skin @ Mach 0.55, 55,000 ft ~10 °F @ Mach 2.2, 55,000 ft ~250 ° F Titanium Alloy or other specialized material

Airframe Brazed steel honeycomb? Titanium / Magnesium (risky) Aluminum structure with heat-protective tiles

Wing and wing spars Titanium / Advanced Composites

The Tooth – Tucked Wing Stabilizer Al

Other Stainless steel heat shield over the engine Steel Engine Mounts

Key Materials for the Straight Jacket

Aerodynamic Heating Drivers

Materials and Structures

Belly Skin New Age material “Smart” Materials Micro Piezoelectric actuators Must change and sustain aerodynamic drag load

Elevons and Ailerons Seamless “smart” material

Key Materials for the Straight Jacket

Aerodynamic Heating Drivers

Materials and Structures

Airframe Wing Spars

Spar caps Wing Attachment Fittings

Use steel to provide high strength and fatigue resistance Belly Skin Circular Wing Rotation Shaft

Titanium Other

Engine mounts Morphing mechanisms steel, titanium, Al where applicable

Stress, Stiffness and Strength Drivers

Materials and StructuresLimit Loads

Limit Loads +4 to -2 UAV Factor of Safety - 1.25

Sources Takeoff Acceleration to Mach 2 Wing loading in Subsonic “Strike Patrol”

Other Airloads Inertia Loads Landing Takeoff Powerplant

Typical Vn Diagram

Materials and StructuresSubsonic Wing Air Loads on Lifting

SurfacesSpanwise Loading Total Vertical Load

Also airloads due to control deflection Need additional steel stringers at 20% span

Root Shearing Force 89,394 lb Bending Moment 3.2*10^6 ft-lb

(For maximum G Loading)

Materials and StructuresSupersonic Wing Air Loads on Lifting

SurfacesSpanwise Loading Total Vertical Load

Root Shearing Force 122,720 lb Bending Moment 1.5*10^6 ft-lb

(For maximum G Loading)

Materials and StructuresSpanwise Distribution of Drag Loads

Subsonic Wing Supersonic Wing

Approximation Constant 95% avg drag load from root 80% span 120% avg drag load from 80% to wingtip

Subsonic Root Shear 5,912 lb Supersonic Root Shear16,372 lb

Bending Moment 2.2*10^5 ft-lb Bending Moment 2.6*10^5 ft-lb

Subsonic Wing Supersonic WingSubsonic Wing Supersonic Wing

Materials and Structures

Torsional Load found from Wind Tunnel Tests Use airfoil moment coefficient summed from root to tip

Consider also Inertial Loads Powerplant Loads Landing Gear Loads

Materials and Structures

Use Shear Loads and Bending Moments Calculate Mass moments of inertia Use these to size I-Beam spar caps Size spar caps to absorb majority of bending force Size cross-sectional area of web to absorb shear

Mass Moment of Inertia

Performance

Total Mission Duration 6 hours 56 minutes

Egress and Ingress at M=2

Strike Patrol - Subsonic Velocity for Maximum Endurance (55,000 ft)

Reserves - Subsonic Velocity for Maximum Endurance (Sea Level)

5,685 ft Takeoff distance Ground roll, Transition, and Climb over a 50 ft barrier Thrust capabilities and high L/D enable short TO distance

6,421 ft Landing distance Approach (clearance of 50 ft barrier), Flare, and Ground Roll

Desire Ps=0 contours to envelop those of an opponent

Performance

Sustained Load Factor (Ps = 0)

Sustained Load Factor at Max Thrust (Ps = 0)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4

Mach Number

Alt

titu

de

(1

03 )

n=1

n=3

n=5

n=7

n=9

q Limit

VstallLimit

1-g Specific Excess Power at Max Thrust (Ps)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4

Mach Number

Alt

itu

de

(1

03 )

Ps=0

Ps=100

Ps=300

Ps=500

q Limit

VstallLimit

Specific Excess Power at Max Thrust with n=1

Want Ps Maximized at each energy height to minimize climb time

PerformanceLines of Constant Energy overlaid onto lines of constant Ps (n=1)

1-g Specific Excess Power at Max Thrust (Ps)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2

Mach Number

Alt

itu

de

(1

03)

5k

10k

15k

20k

25k

30k

35k

40k

45k

50k

55k

60k

65k

70k

75k

80k

85k

90k

95k

100k

105k

Ps=0

Ps=100

Ps=300

Ps=500

q Limit

Vstall Limit

Turn Rate and Corner Speed at Max Thrust (Altitude = 55,000 ft)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Velocity (ft/s)

Tu

rn R

ate

(d

eg

/s)

n=1.5

n=2

n=3

n=3.89

n=4

n=5

R = 500 ft

R = 750 ft

R = 1000 ft

R = 1250 ft

R = 1500 ft

R = 1750 ft

R = 2000 ft

R = 2250 ft

qinf Limit

Vstall Limit

Ps = 0

Turn Rate and Corner Speed at Max Thrust (Altitude = Sea Level)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 150 300 450 600 750 900 1050 1200

Velocity (ft/s)

Tu

rn R

ate

(deg

/s)

n=1.5

n=2

n=3

n=3.89

n=5

n=6

n=7

R =500 ft

R = 750 ft

R = 1000 ft

R = 1250 ft

R = 1500 ft

R = 3000 ft

R = 4000 ft

R = 5000 ft

qinf Limit

Vstall Limit

Ps = 0

PerformanceDog House Plots

Performance

Performance Requirements and Review

Required Actual UnitSupercruise RequirementMach Number in Military Thrust at 55,000 ft 2 2

Subsonic ConfigurationSustain Load Factor - Maximum Thrust

M = 0.7 / Alt = 55,000 ft 3 3.89 g's

Instaneous Turn RateM = 0.7 / Alt = 55,000 ft 7.48 deg/ sM = 0.5735 / Alt = 55,000 ft 6.95 deg/ s

M = 0.7 / Alt = SL 29.4 deg/ s

Subsonic Velocity for best endurance at 55,000 ft - 555 ft/ sMach Number 0.5735

Total Mission Duration 6:55 hr:min

Takeoff Distance 8000 5,685 ft

Landing Distance 8000 6,421 ft

Conclusions

Cost

100 aircraft total purchase

RTD&E: $9,469,990,078

Flyaway: $1,882,680,488

Other costs: $1,135,329,434

Total acquisition: $1.2488x1010

Unit flyaway cost: $113,526,705.70

Future Work Needed

WING STABILTY IN MORPH!!

CG Maintenance system

Creation of “Belly” material

Wind tunnel testing

Thrust Vectoring

CFD Analysis

Area ruling and minimization of wave drag

Nozzle placement – Trade studies

FEM

Subsystems / Mechanizations

Lessons Learned

Interdependence and communication

Personal responsibility to get the work done

Work for a real life sponsored project

Break the rules of standardization

References and Acknowledgements

References

Raymer, Daniel P. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual ApproachAmerican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., 1999

Beer, Ferdinand P., DeWolf T. John, and E. Russell Johnston, Jr.Mechanics of MaterialsMcGraw-Hill, 2002.

US Military Aircraft. Federation of American Scientists.

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/

Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption, NASA Glenn Research Centerhttp://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/sfc.html

F-22 Raptor F119-PW-100 Engine, Globalsecurity.orghttp://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-f119.htm

First we’d like to thank the Academy…

Dr. James LangProject Advisor

Charles Chase Lockheed Martin Sponsor

John MeissnerMAE 155 Teaching Assistant

Dr. Vistasp M. KarbhariUCSD Professor of Structural Engineering

Tom ChalfantUCSD MAE Machine Shop Manager

And all of the pilots and jets that fly over UCSD … everyday. Thank You.