C H A P T E R

1
The Aircraft Design Process

O U T L I N E

1.1 Introduction 1 1.4 How to Design a New Aircraft 15

1.1.1 The Contents of This Chapter 2 1.4.1 Conceptual Design Algorithm for a General
1.1.2 Why Do We Need an Aircraft Design Aviation Aircraft 16
Process? 2 1.4.2 Implementation of the Conceptual Design
Algorithm 18
1.2 General Process of Aircraft Design
and Development 2 1.5 Elements of Project Engineering 18
1.2.1 Common Descriptions of the Design 1.5.1 Project Plan 18
Process 2 1.5.2 Team Leadership 19
1.2.2 Fundamental Phases of the Aircraft 1.5.3 Task Management and the Task Matrix 20
Design Process 4 1.5.4 Gantt Diagrams 20
1.2.3 Concepts of Importance to the Aircraft 1.5.5 PERT Charts 20
Design Process 6 1.5.6 Fishbone Diagram for Preliminary
1.2.4 Development Timeline for Typical Airplane Design 20
GA Aircraft 9 1.5.7 Documentation Standards and Drawing
Organizing 22
1.3 Introduction to Aviation Regulations and
1.5.8 Quality Function Deployment and
Certification 10
a House of Quality 23
1.3.1 Aviation Regulations That Apply to
GA Aircraft 10 1.6 Presenting the Design Project 27
1.3.2 Important Regulatory Concepts 14
References 32

1.1 INTRODUCTION Airplane design can be daunting even for veteran

designers. Serious design projects demand multiple disci-
This book focuses on the conceptual and preliminary plines to join in perfect harmony to fashion a product that
design of General Aviation (GA) aircraft. The Federal best suits an intended mission. The modern aircraft is
Aviation Administration (FAA), which regulates aircraft subjected to many constraints demanded by concerns
in the United States, defines GA aircraft as one that is nei- for safety, cost, maintainability, performance, and mar-
ther for commercial nor for military operations [1]. This ketability, to name a few. The torrent of requirements
definition classifies great many aircraft as GA, ranging calls for an effective process that systematically guaran-
from sailplanes and lighter-than-air vehicles to jet aircraft tees a balance between these constraints. This chapter
and even civilian supersonic aircraft (an emerging trend presents elements of this process and introduces many
in contemporary business jet development). While GA topics for aspiring and professional designers alike. In
includes many kinds of aircraft, commercial and military this capacity, a thorough design algorithm is presented,
aircraft are discussed as well in the book, for there is helpful to anyone tackling a new design project. Addi-
much to be learned. The designer of GA aircraft should tionally, important regulatory concepts and a few handy
be well rounded in all types of aircraft, a point that will project management tools to help with the development
be made repeatedly. of the new aircraft are discussed.

General Aviation Aircraft Design 1 Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818465-3.00001-X
2 1. The Aircraft Design Process

The author is often asked what it takes to become an as dictated by prospective customers or perceived cus-
aircraft designer. The answer is not simple and requires tomer needs. The cost of developing new aircraft requires
conceptual design to be separated from detail design. In the design to be conducted in an organized fashion. No
the opinion of this author, an effective conceptual designer matter the type of aircraft or the reason for its design, sev-
possesses a wide-scope knowledge of aircraft as a collec- eral specific tasks must be completed before it can be built
tion of systems. It requires knowledge of not only aerody- and flown. The order of these tasks is called the design
namics, systems, structures, powerplant, electrics, and process.
stability and control, but also regulations, certification, Aircraft manufacturers only fund projects for which
management, manufacturing, maintenance, and even probability of success is considered high. The design pro-
marketing and financing. One does not have to be an cess helps by systematically evaluating critical aspects of
expert in any of these fields but must know enough to the aircraft, allowing weaknesses to be identified and
make sound decisions. Ideally, some of these fields eliminated. During the conceptual design phase, this is
should be bolstered by industry experience—an effective done using mathematical procedures. Later, however,
conceptual designer must understand the consequences this involves specific testing of aerodynamic and struc-
of a specific design direction, for this may dictate the suc- tural configuration, materials, avionics, control system
cess of the project. Sutter [2], pp. 76–79, gives a good layout, and many more.
example of this regarding the design of the wing and The order of the tasks comprising the design process
engine configuration of the Boeing 737. In contrast, an may vary depending on the manufacturer involved. Usu-
effective detail designer possesses a deep, but narrow- ally, there is an overlap of tasks. For instance, the fuselage
scope, knowledge of the system being designed. The design may already be in progress before the sizing of the
detail designer should be considered an expert within wing or stabilizing surfaces is completed. Additionally,
that scope. While this book caters primarily to the concep- the sophistication of the process is affected by the size
tual aircraft designer, the detail designer, too, can find and maturity of the company in which it takes place.
useful information in here. Regardless, certain and identical steps must be completed
in all of them; weight must be estimated, lifting surfaces
1.1.1 The Contents of This Chapter and fuselage must be sized, performance must be
assessed, and so forth.
• Section 1.2 presents a general description of the aircraft
design process, its fundamentals, and a typical
timeline for the development and certification of
General Aviation aircraft. 1.2 GENERAL PROCESS OF AIRCRAFT
• Section 1.3 presents topics important to regulatory and DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
certification of GA aircraft. Among those are recent
changes made to 14 CFR Part 23, under which GA This section presents a general description of the air-
aircraft are certified. plane design process. Often, the process begins with
• Section 1.4 presents a specific algorithm intended to the publication of a formal Request for Proposal (RFP),
guide the aircraft designer through the conceptual a release of a list of requirements, or similar documents.
design process. If you are unsure of “what to do next,” It may be considered completed once the delivery of a cer-
refer to it. It is based on actual industry experience and tified product begins, although another perspective
not academic “cookbook” approaches. would say once its development ceases. Many process-
• Section 1.5 presents the responsibility of a team leader related topics of importance are also presented in this sec-
and an assortment of project management tools. Many tion. These are generalizations that also apply to other
beginning project leaders are often at a loss as to how to classes of aircraft.
manage a project. If this is your predicament, you need
to study these tools. Project management revolves 1.2.1 Common Descriptions of the Design
around knowing what to do and when to do it. Process
• Section 1.6 presents helpful approaches to describing (1) Elementary Outline of the Design Process
engineering ideas using graphics ranging from three-
view drawings to composite photo images. These are A general description of the aircraft design process is
extremely helpful when trying to “sell” an idea. provided in several aircraft design textbooks intended
for university students of aerospace engineering. Under-
standing this process is of great importance for design
1.1.2 Why Do We Need an Aircraft Design
team leaders. An elementary, top-level depiction is pre-
Process?
sented in Figure 1-1. While the diagram correctly
New aircraft are designed for a variety of reasons. describes the chronological order of steps required to
Most are designed to fulfill a specific role or a mission build the Proof-of-Concept (POC) aircraft, it omits the
 1.2 General Process of Aircraft Design and Development 3
as the “frozen” configuration is adequate to meet the
requirements. The Go-ahead Approval is the date at which
upper management gives the green light for the design
team to proceed with the selected configuration and
develop an actual prototype. It marks the readiness of
the organization to fund the project. The term Type Certif-
icate is described in Section 1.3.2, Important Regulatory
Concepts.
Torenbeek’s depiction also shows that detail design
begins during the preliminary design phase and that
manufacturing tends to overlap preceding phases. The
manufacturing phase includes the design and construc-
tion of production tooling, establishment of vendor rela-
tions, and other preparatory tasks.

(3) Typical Design Process for General Aviation Aircraft

FIGURE 1-1 An elementary outline of the aircraft design process. Figure 1-3 presents the design process based on the
author’s experience. It parallels Torenbeek’s depiction
overlap between phases. In a real industry environment, in many ways, but accounts for iteration cycles often
there is not a set date at which conceptual design ends required during this period. It differs in its focus on the
and preliminary design begins. Instead, there is a sub- fabrication of a Proof-of-Concept (POC) aircraft. It also
stantial overlap between the phases, which permits a reflects the fact that issues arise during preliminary
more cost-effective use of the workforce. design that require the OML of the configuration to be
modified, in particular if the design is unorthodox. Such
(2) Design Process Per Torenbeek
an issue might be a higher engine weight than expected,
In his classic text, Torenbeek [3], pp. 499 discusses the requiring it to be moved to a new location to maintain the
process in detail and presents a depiction reproduced in original empty weight CG position. This, in turn, calls for
Figure 1-2. It demonstrates the process realistically by a reshaping of the engine cowling or nacelle, and other
showing overlapping activities as well as several impor- modifications. Such changes are handled by numbering
tant milestones. Configuration Freeze is a set date after each version of the OML, as if it were the final version,
which no changes to the external geometry, called the out- because, eventually, the one with the highest number is
side mold line (OML), are allowed. This holds even if a bet- “frozen.” This allows the design team to proceed with
ter geometric shape is discovered. It marks the date for work on structures and other internal features of the air-
the aerodynamics group to cease geometric optimization, craft, rather than waiting for the configuration freeze.

FIGURE 1-2 Aircraft design process per Torenbeek. Reproduced from E. Torenbeek, Synthesis of Subsonic Aircraft Design, 3rd ed.,
Delft University Press, 1986.
4 1. The Aircraft Design Process

FIGURE 1-3 Aircraft design process for a typical GA aircraft.

1.2.2 Fundamental Phases of the Aircraft • Mission (the purpose of the • Ease of manufacturing (how will
Design Process design). it be produced).
• Technology (avionics, • Maintainability (tools, labor, and
(1) Requirements Phase materials, engines, control methods required to maintain
system). the aircraft).
This is the initial phase, during which the required • Aesthetics (the importance • Initial cost estimation.
mission, capability, and regulatory constraints are formu- of “good looks”). • Evaluation of marketability.
lated. Requirements are akin to a wish list. They express • Requirements for occupant
the capabilities the new design must deliver, such as comfort (pressurization,
galleys, lavatories).
how fast, how far, how high, how many occupants, what • Ergonomics (pilot and
payload, and so on. The requirements may be as simple passenger ergonomics).
as a few lines of desired capabilities (e.g. range, cruising
speed, and payload) or a complex document with thou- Deliverables: Initial loft and a Conceptual Design
sands of pages, stipulating environmental impact, oper- Evaluation Report, which allows management to make a
ating costs, maintainability, hardware, avionics, and well-reasoned call about whether to proceed to the
ergonomics, just to name a few. It is the responsibility preliminary design phase.
of the design lead to ensure the airplane has a fair chance
of meeting the requirements, and this is demonstrated (3) Preliminary Design Phase
during the next phase, the Conceptual Design Phase.
Interestingly, the definition of this phrase is unclear.
(2) Conceptual Design Phase For instance, Raymer states “Preliminary design can be said
to begin when the major changes are over” [4], pp. 15.
This constitutes the initial sizing of the aircraft, estima- In contrast, Torenbeek considers this its end, stating:
tion of cost, performance, stability, and evaluation of reg- “A characteristic of this phase is that modifications are made
ulatory compliance issues, to name a few. It absorbs just continuously until a decision can be taken to ‘freeze’ the con-
enough engineering to provide management with a reli- figuration, and this marks the end of the preliminary design
able assessment of desired performance, desired aes- phase” [3], p. 4. Nicolai states that various fine-tuning
thetics, and basic understanding of the scope of the takes place and that many large decisions are made
development effort, including marketability, labor during this phase1 [5], p. 25. To this author, the prelimi-
requirements, and expected costs. Typically, the follow- nary design phase simply refers to design work con-
ing characteristics are defined during this phase: ducted on the POC and any nonconforming prototype
intended for initial flight testing, evaluation, and demon-
• Type of aircraft (piston, • Special aerodynamic features
turboprop, turbojet/fan, (flaps/slats, wing sweep, etc.). stration. It confirms the viability of the idea, exposes
fixed wing, rotorcraft). • Certification basis (LSA, Part 23, potential problems, and offers opportunities to evaluate
Part 25, Military). possible solutions. Thus, significant changes are actually

1
To paraphrase the text in the reference.
 1.2 General Process of Aircraft Design and Development 5
considered (and sometimes implemented) on the proto- assurance protocols, is being prepared at the same time.
type, regardless of whether it was already “frozen.” Some Some of the tasks that are accomplished are listed below:
of the specific tasks that are accomplished during this
phase are: • Detail design revisions • Aeroelastic testing (Ground
(structures, systems, Vibration Testing).
avionics, etc.). • Mechanical testing.
• Detailed geometry • Evaluation of special • Application of selected • Avionics testing.
development. aerodynamic features. technologies. • Maintenance procedures and
• Layout of major • Evaluation of certifiability. • Tooling design and refinement of maintainability.
load paths. • Evaluation of mission capability.
fabrication.
• Detailed component • Refinement of producibility. • Fabrication and assembly.
weight estimation. • Maintainability (including • Structural testing.
• Details of mission are accessibility to implement repairs)
polished. is defined.
• Detailed pre-maiden • Preliminary production cost The culmination of this phase is Maiden Flight of the
performance evaluation. estimation. POC. This is followed by the development flight testing
• Detailed pre-maiden as discussed below.
stability and control
analysis. (6) Development Program Phase
A development program follows a successful comple-
Deliverables: A drawing package and a Preliminary Design
tion of the preliminary design. The development of this
Evaluation Report that helps with the decision to go-ahead
phase usually begins long before the Maiden Flight and
with the fabrication of the POC aircraft.
is usually handled by flight test engineers, flight test
(4) Detail Design pilots, and certification management.
This refers to any design effort that involves the detail • Establish Aircraft Operating • Group roles must be trained
design of the airframe and system integration (e.g. air- Limitations (AOL). prior to flight—not on the job.
frame design and engine installation). Detail design really • Establish Pilot’s Operating • Establish emergency procedures.
needs to be considered from two perspectives: (1) During Handbook (POH). • Establish group responsibilities.
• Prepare Master Flight Test • Revision of AOL, POH,
prototyping, when it refers to the design of the airframe Schedule (MFTS). and MFTS.
and systems associated with the prototype aircraft. • Envelope Expansion • Flight Readiness Review.
(2) During development of manufacturing, where it refers Schedule (or “Matrix”).
to the design of airframe and systems associated with • Test Equipment
production aircraft. Some of such design work is referred Acquisition.
• Flight Support Crew
to as sustaining engineering. Of course, it is more compli- Training.
cated than that, and a limited description of the work that
takes place is listed below.
The conclusion of this phase is a certifiable aircraft. This
means the organization understands the risks and scope of
• Detail design work (structures, • Structural detail
systems, avionics, etc.). design. the required certification effort and should be convinced
• Study of technologies (vendors, • Mechanical detail design. the certification program can be successfully completed.
company cooperation, etc.). • Avionics and electronics
• Subcontractor and vendor detail design. (7) Postdevelopment Programs
negotiations. • Ergonomics detail design.
A lot of work remains, even though the development
• Prototype: Design of limited (one- • Mockup fabrication.
time use) tooling (fixtures and jigs). • Iron-bird fabrication program comes to a successful end. A viable aircraft
• Production: Design of multiuse (for systems testing). design continues in development when customers begin
tooling. • Maintenance procedures its operation and discover features that would benefit the
planning. design. Then, there is the advancement of avionics. New
• Material and equipment
equipment must be installed, and this must be
logistics.
engineered. A broad scope of various postdevelopment
programs is listed below.
Deliverables: Final OML and internal structure for the
POC or production aircraft. • Development flight test/structural/systems/avionics
program.
(5) Proof-of-Concept Aircraft and Testing
• Certification flight test/structural/systems/avionics
The construction of the POC begins during the detail program.
design phase. This is a very involved process for estab- • Aircraft is awarded a Type Certificate.
lished companies that intend to produce the design, as • Production process design.
the production process, with all its paperwork and quality • Production tooling design and fabrication.
6 1. The Aircraft Design Process

• Delivery of produced aircraft. sensitive to off-design flight conditions than the competi-
• Eventual reception of Production Certificate. tion, and this could be spun into a marketing advantage.

(3) Handling Requirements (Stability and Control)

1.2.3 Concepts of Importance to the Aircraft How important is the handling of the aircraft? Does it
Design Process feature a manual control system, making stick forces and
responsiveness imperative? Or does it use hydraulic or
(1) Definition of the Mission
electric control system, so stick forces can be adjusted
The mission of the new aircraft must be clearly to acceptable levels? Has the design team considered
defined. How fast, far, and high shall it fly? Is it a cruiser? responses to spoiler and flap deployment or changes in
If so, at what cruising speed and altitude will it be oper- thrust?
ated? Is it a cargo transport aircraft? How much payload The Lockheed SA-3 Viking, an antisubmarine warfare
must it carry? Is it a fighter? What energy state or loitering aircraft, features a high wing with two powerful pylon-
capabilities are required? A clearly defined mission is mounted turbofans. The aircraft experiences command-
important because the airplane will be sized to meet that ing pitch changes with thrust, requiring a Stability
mission: It will be most efficient when performing that Augmentation System (SAS) to suppress. It was not
mission. Clarity of this nature also has an unexpected originally designed into the prototype, implying it was
redeeming power for the designer: It is common during a fix. The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress uses spoilers for
aircraft development that changes to capabilities are sug- banking. When banking hard, the spoiler on the down-
gested by outside agencies. Despite being well meant, moving wing is deployed, reducing lift on the outboard
some suggestions can be detrimental. A clearly defined portion. This, in turn, moves the center of lift forward,
mission allows the designer to turn down disadvanta- causing a nose pitch-up tendency, to which the pilot must
geous suggestions on the basis they compromise the pri- respond by pushing the yoke forward (to bring the nose
mary mission. back down). Handling issues of this nature must be antic-
ipated, and their severity assessed.
(2) Performance Requirements and Sensitivity
(4) Ease of Manufacturing
Performance requirements must be a clearly defined
subpart of the mission. Target take-off distance, time to Ease of manufacture profoundly impacts the engineer-
cruise altitude, cruise range, and even environmental ing of the product and its cost to the customer. While it is
noise must be specified. It is also important to understand less expensive to manufacture a straight constant-chord
how deviations from the design conditions affect the per- wing than a tapered one, it is less efficient aerodynami-
formance. This is referred to as performance sensitivity. cally. Which is more important? The designer should jus-
How does high altitude and high temperature impact tify on the merits why a particular geometry or raw
the take-off distance? How about an upward slope of a material is required. It is simple to select composites for
runway? How will a routine operation of the airplane a new aircraft design on the grounds this makes it easier
above or below design cruise altitude affect range and to manufacture compound surfaces. But are they really
endurance? Rather than regarding this as a nuisance, needed? For some aircraft, the answer is a resounding
the designer should turn it into a strength by making peo- yes, but for others, the answer is simply no.
ple in management and marketing aware of the deficien- As an example, consider the De Havilland of Canada
cies. And who knows? Perhaps the new aircraft is less DHC-2 Beaver (see Figure 1-4). Manufacturing this

FIGURE 1-4 The De Havilland of Canada DHC-2 Beaver. Photo by Phil Rademacher.
 1.2 General Process of Aircraft Design and Development 7
otherwise sturdy airplane from composites is a question- weight that is 5% to 10% higher than the projected gross
able proposition: It would simply make it more expen- weight.
sive. First, it is hard to justify manufacturing an
aerodynamically inefficient frustum-style fuselage2 and (7) Maintainability and Accessibility
constant-chord wing featuring a nonlaminar flow airfoil Maintainability is the ease by which an airplane can
with composites. Composites are primarily justifiable be kept airworthy by the operator. It refers to how easy
for compound laminar flow surfaces. They require expen- it is to access critical components. The design team
sive molds to be built and maintained, and should the air- should spend an effort guaranteeing that inspecting
craft be produced in large numbers, these must be and replacing critical components are easy. Such an
manufactured as well; each may only last for perhaps effort is easy to spin into marketing advantage. Compli-
30 to 50 units. cated manufacturing processes can result in an aircraft
The interested reader is encouraged to jump to that is both hard and costly to maintain. One of the
Section 2.2, The Estimation of Project Development Costs, advantages of aluminum is how relatively easy it is to
for further information about manufacturing costs. For repair. Composites on the other hand can be hard to
instance, see Example 2.3, which compares development maintain. Maintainability also extends to the economics
cost for a composite and aluminum aircraft. Cost analysis of repairing: Are expensive tools required? Accessibility
methods, such as the widely used DAPCA-IV, predict extends to the ergonomics of repairing: Will the
work hours for the development of composite aircraft mechanic have to contort like a pretzel to replace the
to be two times greater than that of comparable alumi- part? Will it take 10 h of labor to access a component that
num aircraft. They also predict tooling hours to double will take 5 min to replace? It cannot be emphasized
and manufacturing hours to be 25% greater than for alu- enough that novice engineers should consult with Air-
minum aircraft. Thus, composite aircraft are more expen- frame and Powerplant (A&P) mechanics and try to
sive to manufacture despite reduction in part count. understand their perspective. Many valuable lessons
There are numerous other complexities to contend with, can be learned from people who perform fabrication,
some of which are presented in Section 5.2.6, Composite assembly, and maintenance.
Materials. Composites offer great properties. However,
just because they are right for one application does not (8) Aesthetics (Looks)
mean they are appropriate for another.
Looks may seem a secondary concern, but it should
not be under-estimated. While beauty is in the eye of
(5) Certifiability the beholder, it is a fact of business that aircraft that have
Will the aircraft be certified? If the answer is yes, then a certain look appeal to a larger population of potential
the designer must explore all stipulations this is likely to buyers. This may improve sales, even if their perfor-
inflict. If no, the designer still bears a moral obligation to mance is less than that of the competition. The so-called
ensure the airplane is safe to operate. Since noncertified Joint Strike Fighter program is a great example of such
airplanes are destined to be small, this can be accom- appeal. Its purpose was to introduce an aircraft for the
plished by designing it to prevailing certification stan- US armed forces that simultaneously replaced the F-16,
dards, for instance, 14 CFR Part 23 or LSA standards A-10, F/A-18, and AV-8B tactical fighter aircraft. Three
such as ASTM F2245 [6]. Certification is a government versions of the aircraft were planned, and to keep down
quality stamp. It tells the customer the airplane conforms development, production, and operating costs, a com-
to strict safety standards. mon shape was proposed for which 80% of parts were
interchangeable. There were two participants in the con-
(6) Features and Upgradability (Growth) tract bid: Lockheed-Martin and Boeing. Lockheed’s entry
was the X-35 and Boeing’s the X-32 (see Figure 1-5). Both
The weight of most civilian and military aircraft
aircraft were thought to be worthy candidates, but on
increases with time. It is not a question of if, but when
October 26, 2001, Lockheed was announced as the win-
and by how much. Requests for added capabilities and
ner. The reason cited by the Department of Defense,
systems raise the weight and often require major changes
according to The Federation of American Scientists, an
such as a more powerful engine, and even wing enlarge-
independent, nonpartisan think tank, was:
ment. Additionally, it is often discovered during proto-
typing that the selected material and production The Lockheed Martin X-35 was chosen over the competing Boe-
methodology leads to a heavier aircraft than initially ing X-32 primarily because of Lockheed’s lift-fan STOVL design,
thought. The careful designer sizes the aircraft for a which proved superior to the Boeing vectored-thrust approach [7].

2
A frustum style fuselage is a tapered structure that does not feature compound surfaces. It is discussed in Chapter 12, The Anatomy of the Fuselage.
8 1. The Aircraft Design Process

FIGURE 1-5 Which aircraft looks better to you; the Boeing X-32 or the Lockheed X-35? Left photo by Jake Turnquist; Right photo by Phil Rademacher.

Apparently, in hover, the X-32’s engine exhaust would or aerial survey aircraft as well. But a strange looking
return to the intake, reducing its thrust. However, soon beast it is, at least to this author.
thereafter, rumors began that the real reason was the looks
(9) Lean Engineering and Lean Manufacturing
of the two proposals, a claim denied by James Roche, the
then secretary of the Air Force [8]. Rumor held that mili- The concepts lean engineering and lean manufacturing
tary pilots did not like the looks of the Boeing proposal. refer to design and production practices whose target is
The two aircraft in Figure 1-5 allow the reader to opine to minimize waste and unnecessary production steps.
on whether the looks of an airplane are of importance. For instance, consider the production of a hypothetical
Another case in point is the Transavia PL-12 wooden kitchen chair. Assume that pride has the manu-
Airtruk, shown in Figure 1-6. It was originally developed facturer attach a gold-plated metal plaque to the lower
in New Zealand as the Bennett Airtruck (later Waitomo surface of the seat that reads: “World’s finest kitchen
Airtruk). It is a single-engine agricultural sesquiplane chairs, since 1889.” Assume it takes five steps to attach
of all-metal construction. Among many unusual features the plaque and labor is required to order it from an out-
is a cockpit mounted on top of the engine (for good for- side vendor, transporting it to the manufacturer, keep it
ward visibility), twin tail-booms that are only connected in stock, and so on. Strictly speaking, the purpose of a
at the wing to allow a fertilizer truck to back up and refill chair is to allow someone to sit on it and, then, said plaque
the airplane’s hopper, and the sesquiplane configuration is not visible. It can be argued the plaque is vain and as
generates four wingtip vortices that help better spread such brings no added value to the customer. In fact, it
fertilizer. It is a capable aircraft, with a 2000 lb. (900 kg) only brings up the cost of production; it certainly does
fertilizer capacity and can be used as a cargo, ambulance, not improve the seating experience. The plaque is

FIGURE 1-6 The Transavia PL-12 Airtruk agricultural aircraft. Photo by Geoff Goodall - via Ed Coates collection.
 1.2 General Process of Aircraft Design and Development 9
therefore wasteful and from the standpoint of a lean pro- are common in the aviation industry, as the modern air-
duction should be eliminated from the process. plane is a compromise of several disciplines. To better
Lean manufacturing refines the production process to understand how IPTs work, consider the development
minimize waste, increasing the profitability of a business. of a pressurization system for an aircraft. An example
The scope of lean manufacturing is large and covers IPT could consist of the following members:
topics such as optimizing the layout of templates for cut-
ting fabric to minimize waste material, to minimizing the (1) A structural analyst, who determines pressurization
inventory of a stock room by ordering components just stresses in the airframe and suggests airframe
before they must be installed (so called just-in-time philos- modifications if necessary.
ophy). The result is a production that is far less costly to (2) A performance analyst, who evaluates the benefits of
the customer and Mother Earth. the higher cruise altitude and airspeed the
The philosophy behind lean manufacturing is usually pressurization will permit.
attributed to the car manufacturer Toyota, which is (3) A powerplant expert, who solves engine-side
renowned for adhering to it in its production processes. problems, such as those associated with bleed air,
Thus, it is also known as Toyotism. An important aspect heat exchangers, and liaison duties between the
of Toyotism is the identification of the Seven Wastes engine and airframe manufacturers.
[9]; an approach attributed to Toyota’s chief engineer (4) An interior expert, who evaluates the impact of the
Taiichi Ohno: (1) Overproduction, caused by the pressurization system on the interior decoration, such
manufacturing of products before they are needed; as those that stem from the requirement of sealing
(2) waiting, caused by parts that do not move smoothly and condensation.
in the production flow; (3) transporting, as in moving a (5) An electrical expert, who assesses the electrical work
product in between processes; (4) unnecessary processing, required to allow the pilot to operate the
when expensive, high-precision methods are used where pressurization system.
simpler methods suffice; (5) unnecessary inventory, which (6) A systems expert, who works on the pressurization
is the accumulation of vendor parts in stockrooms; system ducting layout, interface issues with heat
(6) excessive or unnecessary motion, caused when the lack exchangers, cabin pressure relief valves, cabin
of ergonomics on the production floor increases produc- sealing, and so on.
tion time; and (7) production defects, which are inflicted on Such a group would meet, perhaps once a week, to dis-
the production floor and are costly due to the inspection cuss issues and come up with resolutions, often with the
and storage requirements. The above barely scratches the inclusion of representatives of the manufacturers of the
surface of lean manufacturing but is intended to whet the various systems.
reader’s appetite.
(10) Integrated Product Teams (IPT) 1.2.4 Development Timeline for Typical GA
Aircraft
An integrated product team is a group of people with a
wide range of skills who are responsible for the develop- A flowchart showing a typical development timeline
ment of a product or some feature. The formations of IPTs for GA aircraft is shown in Figure 1-7. The timeline lasts

FIGURE 1-7 Typical development timeline for GA aircraft.

10 1. The Aircraft Design Process

for 7 years and shows the approximate events comprising confusion with the so-called “Federal Acquisitions Regu-
the entire development from the initial idea to reception lations.” Instead, they are referred to as Title 14 of the
of a type certificate. This timeline could be compressed Code of Federal Regulations, or simply 14 CFR. This is noted
with sound funding. Note that while the timeline when citing regulations, e.g., 14 CFR Part 23.
assumes the construction of two nonconforming proto- In Europe, the regulations are called Certification Spec-
types, this depends on the project. Expect 2 prototypes ifications (CS) [11]. These superseded the Joint Aviation
for LSA, and 4–6 for commuter class aircraft. Noncon- Regulations (JAR) in 2003. The CS are enforced by the
forming prototypes are used for initial testing of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). That year, EASA
proof-of-concept aircraft and are usually built rapidly to replaced the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA), which had
save money. However, since they do not comply with been formed in 1970. International harmonization of cer-
(or conform to) airworthiness standards, they receive tification standards is on-going and allows compliance
an airworthiness certificate in the so-called Experimental demonstrated in one country to be accepted in
category. Once the conforming prototypes (the ones that another. A prime example of this is 14 CFR Part 23 and
do conform to the production aircraft) are fabricated and the corresponding European CS-23 standards.
used for certification flight and systems testing, the non- Adherence to the airworthiness regulations is enforced
conforming ones can come in handy as demonstration by the government of a country in which an aircraft is
vehicles for marketing purposes. manufactured. An aircraft built in one country but certi-
fied in another must comply with airworthiness regula-
tions in the latter country. Manufacturers and operators
1.3 INTRODUCTION TO AVIATION of aircraft that fail to comply with these standards are
REGULATIONS AND CERTIFICATION subject to severe penalties (typically financial). From a
certain point of view, regulations can be considered a col-
This section introduces aviation regulations and air- lection of standards. A standard stipulates a specific merit
craft certification—specifically for GA aircraft. Aircraft that must be met.
are of substantial weight and can cause significant damage
to property and death in event of a crash. A risk reduction 1.3.1 Aviation Regulations That Apply
is achieved, in part, by regulating their use, a task for
to GA Aircraft
which the FAA is responsible (in the United States). The
regulatory scope includes design, manufacturing, mainte- As stated at the beginning of this chapter, the FAA
nance, and operation of aircraft and requires manufac- defines General Aviation as aircraft other than airliners
turers to comply with various airworthiness regulations. and military aircraft [1]. In the United States (US), GA air-
Depending on the class of aircraft, once compliance is craft must comply with a set of regulations contained
shown, the applicant is awarded a certificate of the kind under title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. For
(and in the order) shown in Figure 1-8. The certification instance, typical small GA aircraft are certified under
process itself is complex and beyond the scope this book. 14 CFR Part 23, whereas business jets (which are also con-
More information is provided in reference [10]. sidered GA) are certified under 14 CFR Part 25 (like com-
In the United States, aircraft are certified to regulations mercial jetliners). This breakdown is illustrated in
called the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR). Enacted in Figure 1-9 (note that lighter-than-air vehicles are
1965, they superseded the Civil Aviation Regulations omitted).
(CAR). Today, thousands of aircraft operate that were Regulations are either prescriptive or performance based.
certified to the CAR. The government agency that The advantage of the former is that it specifies what is
enforces these regulations is the Federal Aviation Adminis- required to meet a standard (e.g., “use a safety factor of
tration (FAA). It superseded the Civil Aeronautics Admin- 1.5 no matter what”). This reduces the level of sophistica-
istration (CAA) in 1958. FAA order 1320.46C prohibits tion required by a manufacturer to show compliance. In
FAA employees from using the acronym “FAR,” to avoid contrast, performance based allows flexibility that

FIGURE 1-8 Classification of certificates related to aircraft development and manufacturing (per 49 US Code § 44,704).
 1.3 Introduction to Aviation Regulations and Certification 11

FIGURE 1-9 Classification of aircraft and associated regulations.

accommodates nonstandard design solutions. However, Rulemaking). The change introduced performance based
greater analytical sophistication is required (e.g., “my rather than prescriptive certification. Additionally, the
envelope protection will never allow the aircraft to reach use of consensus standards, such as those issued by the
limit loads, so why bother with a safety factor of 1.5.”). American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM),
Table 1-1 lists a few regulations for selected classes of was introduced. Applicants (individuals or organizations)
aircraft. Two frequently mentioned classes involving GA can also propose their own means of compliance (subject
aircraft are 14 CFR Part 23 and LSA. Part 23 aircraft are to FAA approval). However, it remains possible to certify
awarded a Type Certificate (TC), while LSA receive a Spe- per preamendment 64 standards. On March 14th, 2016,
cial Airworthiness Certificate (S-AC). More information the FAA published the NPRM, entitled “Revision of Air-
about the certification of aircraft is provided in Ref. [12]. worthiness Standards for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and
On August 31, 2017, the FAA adopted a significant Commuter Category Airplanes.” In it, the FAA stated that
modification of 14 CFR Part 23 by releasing its 64th it “…proposes to amend its airworthiness standards for normal,
amendment. The change is recognized by many as the utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes by remov-
“New Part 23” or “Part 23 NPRM” (Notice of Proposed ing current prescriptive design requirements and replacing

TABLE 1-1 Certification basis for several classes of aircraft.

Class Regulations Comments

General Aviation 14 CFR Part 23 (USA) On August 31st, 2017, the FAA adopted a modified version of 14 CFR Part 23,
CS-23 (Europe) commonly referred to as the “New Part 23.”
Commercial Aviation 14 CFR Part 25 (USA)
CS-25 (Europe)
Sailplanes 14 CFR 21.17(b) (USA) 14 CFR 21.17(b) allows the FAA to tailor the certification on a need-to-basis to
CS-22 (Europe) sailplanes. Then, by referring to AC 21.17-2A, the FAA accepts the former JAR-22 as a
certification basis, which have now been superseded by CS-22.

Airships 14 CFR 21.17(b) (USA) 14 CFR 21.17(b) allows the FAA to tailor the certification on a need-to-basis to airships.
CS-30 and CS-31HA

Nonconventional Aircraft 14 CFR 21.17(b) (USA) 14 CFR 21.17(b) allows the FAA to tailor the certification on a need-to-basis to
CS-22 (Europe) nonconventional aircraft.
Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) Consensus (USA) See discussion below regarding LSA acceptance in the US.
CS-LSA (Europe)
12 1. The Aircraft Design Process

FIGURE 1-10 A brief timeline depiction of the rulemaking change.

them with performance-based airworthiness standards [13].” an undesirable direction. It may force the designers to
This rulemaking change is significant and constitutes feature large and complex high-lift system where a
one reason for the release of the second edition of this simpler system would suffice. The issuance of such
book. A timeline of events preceding the adoption of the exemptions requires extra cost and documentation for
modified standards is shown in Figure 1-10. A corre- the manufacturer and the FAA. Thus, it constitutes an
sponding Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA 2016– impediment to the certification process.
2005) was published by EASA on June 23rd, 2016 [14]. In contrast, performance-based standards are intended
In the words of the FAA, not only are the (older) air- to conform the certification of an airplane to its actual
worthiness standards of 14 CFR Part 23 based on dated capabilities. A case in point is the “new” paragraph
design technology from the 1950s and 1960s, they are also §23.2110, Stall speed, which states.
prescriptive [13]. This means they prescribe the require-
ments with which the product must comply. An example §23.2110 Stall speed
of such prescription is paragraph §23.49 (c), which regu- The applicant must determine the airplane stall speed
lated stalling speed, stating that or the minimum steady flight speed for each flight config-
uration used in normal operations, including takeoff,
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, VSO climb, cruise, descent, approach, and landing. The stall
and VS1 at maximum weight must not exceed 61 knots speed or minimum steady flight speed determination must
for— account for the most adverse conditions for each flight con-
figuration with power set at—
(1) Single-engine airplanes; and
(2) Multiengine airplanes of 6000 pounds or less (a) Idle or zero thrust for propulsion systems that are used
maximum weight that cannot meet the minimum rate primarily for thrust; and
of climb specified in § 23.67(a) (1) with the critical (b) A nominal thrust for propulsion systems that are used
engine inoperative. for thrust, flight control, and/or high-lift systems.

Without going into too much detail, the paragraph There is no prescribed minimum stalling speed.
prescribes that single-engine aircraft must have a stalling Instead, a stalling speed appropriate to the size of the air-
speed of no more than 61 KCAS in the landing configu- craft is selected. It is to be expected that the stalling speed
ration (VS0). It dictates so without ever justifying why of larger and faster aircraft will be higher than those
the stalling speed must be 61 KCAS and not some other which are smaller and slower. However, what differs is
speed. For one, why should a large single-engine aircraft the demonstration of compliance for a large versus small
such as the Pilatus PC-12 be required to stall at 61 knots aircraft, for both must demonstrate safe operation. This is
or less, like a small Cessna 152? The former typically harder to show for higher stalling speed (higher kinetic
cruises around 270 + KTAS [15] and is operated by energy dissipated in case of emergency is but one aspect
skilled pilots; the latter cruises at 100 + KTAS and is of the certification). The FAA (and industry) hopes that
operated by student pilots. It is in this capacity that pre- this will reduce the cost and time required to certify
scriptive regulations can potentially drive a design in new aircraft and encourage applicants to bring new
 1.3 Introduction to Aviation Regulations and Certification 13
and innovative technology to the market, without Cessna 172 class aircraft would be certified as a Level 2,
compromising safety. Time will tell. Low-Performance, Nonaerobatic aircraft, while an Eclipse
Another aspect of Part 23 NPRM is the classification of 550 would be certified as a Level 3, High-Performance, Non-
aircraft. The “old” and “new” versions can be compared aerobatic aircraft.
in Tables 1-2 and 1-3, respectively. Before August 31st, Guidance for the new 14 CFR Part 23 can be found on
2018, GA aircraft were certified under 14 CFR §23.3, Air- the FAA website (www.faa.gov) under FAA Home >
plane Categories, under four categories: Normal, Utility, Aircraft > Aircraft Certification > Design Approvals
Aerobatic, and Commuter. These categories were subjected (retrieved in 2018). The webpage presents a document
to the restrictions listed in Table 1-2. Except for the Com- listing Means-of-Compliance (MOC) [17]. This listing
muter category, an aircraft may be certified in more than presents numerous ASTM standards, the primary of
one category provided the requirements of each are met. which is ASTM 3264–18. Note that the applicant must
In contrast, in Part 23 NPRM, the classification is now pay upward of $60 (in 2018) for each ASTM standard.
accomplished per Table 1-3. All aircraft are now certified The certification of Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) differs in
under a normal category but are separated in subcategories important ways from aircraft certified under 14 CFR Parts
using Certification Levels (1 through 4) and Performance 23 and 25. As stated earlier, LSA receives an S-AC, not a
Levels (low and high). Additional requirements must be TC. Second, LSA must meet the definition 14 CFR Part
complied with if the new aircraft is aerobatic. Thus, a §1.1 (General definitions) and §21.190 (Issue of a special

TABLE 1-2 Restrictions for aircraft classes certified under the “Old” 14 CFR Part 23.
Restriction Commuter Normal Utility Aerobatic

Number of pilots 1–2 1 1 1

Max number of occupants 19 9 9 9
Max T-O weight 19,000 lbf 12,500 lbf 12,500 lbf 12,500 lbf
Aerobatics allowed? No No Limited Yes
Nonaerobatic operations permitted Normal flying Normal flying Normal flying N/A
Stalls (no whip stalls) Stalls (no whip stalls) Stalls (no whip stalls)
Steep turns (ϕ < 60°) Lazy eights Lazy eights
Chandelles Chandelles
Steep turns (ϕ < 60°) Steep turns (ϕ < 90°)
Spins (if approved)
Max maneuvering g-loading, n+ 24000
2:1 + < n +
3:8 4.4 6.0
W + 10000
Min maneuvering g-loading, n 0.4n+ < n
 1.52 1.76 3.0

W ¼ Maximum T-O weight. Maneuvering loads are based on 14 CFR §23.337.

A whip stall occurs when an airplane is pitched to a near vertical attitude, after which it falls on its nose such that the wing is subjected to AOA close to 90°. This can
demand a dangerous recovery procedure [16].

TABLE 1-3 Restrictions for aircraft classes certified under the “New” 14 CFR Part 23.
Aircraft certification level
1 2 3 4

Max seating capacity 0–1 2–6 7–9 10–19

Aircraft performance level

Low High

Max normal operating and max operating airspeeds VNO and VMO
250 KCAS VNO or VMO > 250 KCAS
Max operating Mach number MMO
0.6 MMO > 0.6

Aerobatic capability?

Certify for aerobatics (if YES, then also consider limitations of Subpart G) YES NO
14 1. The Aircraft Design Process

airworthiness certificate for a light-sport category aircraft). (4) Maintenance Requirements

Eligibility requires a manufacturer’s Statement of Compli-
The use of an aircraft subjects it to wear and tear that
ance (SOC) (per §1.190(b)(1)(iii)), the details of which are
eventually calls for repairs. Such repairs can be of a pre-
listed in §21.190(c). Note that there are important differ-
ventive type (e.g. replacement of a component expected
ences between certifying manufactured LSA and those
to fail within a given period of time) or the restorative type
assembled from kits (see Chapter 9 of reference [12]).
(e.g. an addition of a doubler to improve the integrity of a
The system is a form of “self-regulation” and reduces
structure beginning to show signs of fatigue). The manu-
FAA oversight. The LSA industry recognizes that respon-
facturer is required to specify frequency and rigor of pre-
sible compliance is the only way to avoid more burden-
ventive maintenance in a maintenance program. It
some regulations. According to FAA officials in 2012,
instructs when such tasks must be accomplished. If the
this system has been mostly problem free, excluding one
owner or operator of the aircraft does not comply with
instance [18]. The matrix of ASTM standards accepted by
this satisfactorily, the aircraft may lose its AC and is then
the FAA can be obtained from the FAA online website
said to be “grounded.”
[19] for LSA and [17] for 14 CFR Part 23 for aircraft.
(5) Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA)
Parts manufacturer approval authorizes a manufacturer
1.3.2 Important Regulatory Concepts to produce and sell replacement or modification parts for
(1) Advisory Circular (AC) a given aircraft. Thus, the manufacturer can produce air-
worthy parts even if it is not the original manufacturer.
An advisory circular is a means for the FAA to share
information with the aviation community regarding spe- (6) Service Bulletin (SB)
cific regulations and recommended operational practices. In due course of time, the manufacturer inevitably learns
This information is sometimes detailed enough to be pre- new things about the operation of its aircraft. This experi-
sented in the form of a textbook (e.g., AC36-3H— ence results from dealing with customers as well as the
Estimated Airplane Noise Levels in A-Weighted Deci- manufacturer’s sustaining engineering effort. It usually
bels) or as simple as a few pages (e.g., AC 11–2A—Notice improves the aircraft and its operation and is of great value
of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System). A com- to other operators. Such experience is shared by publishing
plete list of ACs is provided on the FAA website [20]. service bulletins (SB). Although the recommendations in an
SB are most often discretionary (optional), they will some-
(2) Airworthiness times relay information required to comply with an AD.

Airworthiness refers to activities required to support (7) Special Airworthiness Certificate (S-AC)
the safe operation of aircraft. The term comprises a com- A special airworthiness certificate can be issued for air-
plex set of actions that include the establishment of rules planes that, for some reason, must be operated in a spe-
to enforce best engineering and maintenance practices, cialized fashion (e.g., ferry flying, agricultural use,
description of the legal and physical state of the aircraft, experimental, marketing, etc.). This precludes it from
and provides evidence the aircraft meets design specifica- being used for commercial transportation of people or
tions and the applicable certification criteria. Airworthi- freight. LSA aircraft also receive an S-AC. It is issued in
ness is a field of specialization too involved to permit accordance with 14 CFR 21.175 in the following sub-
appropriate presentation in this book. classes: primary, restricted, limited, light-sport, provi-
sional, special flight permits, and experimental. Of
(3) Airworthiness Directives (AD)
these, the prototypes of new aircraft designs typically
Sometimes the operation of a specific aircraft develops receive an experimental permit while they are being flight
unanticipated issues that may compromise its safety. This tested or used for market surveys.
requires the manufacturer to notify the aviation authori- Once the manufacturer is nearing the end of the cer-
ties. The authorities will issue an Airworthiness Directive tification process, the authorities may allow early deliv-
(AD) to the manufacturer and to all operators worldwide. ery of the aircraft by issuing provisional permits. This
The AD is a document that stipulates redesign effort or helps the manufacturer begin to recover the extreme
maintenance actions to prevent the issue from developing development costs. The provisional permit subjects the
into a catastrophic event. Compliance with the AD is operation of the aircraft to limitations that are lifted once
required or the airworthiness certificate (AC, see Bullet the manufacturer finally receives the TC. An example of
(8)) for the specific aircraft may be cancelled. ADs for dif- this is a GA airplane designed for an airframe lifetime of,
ferent aircraft types can be viewed on the FAA website [21]. say, 12,000 h.3 Since fatigue testing is one of the last

3
General Aviation aircraft often specify airframe lifetime in terms or flight hours rather than cycles because they are operated in a much less rigorous
environment than commercial aircraft.
 1.4 How to Design a New Aircraft 15
compliances to be demonstrated, it is possible the air- battery manufacturer who wants to produce a battery
craft would receive a provisional S-AC with a 2000-h air- for use in a specific aircraft. The TSO tells the manufac-
frame limitation. Since GA aircraft usually operate some turer the capability of the battery (e.g. amp-hours,
200 to 300 flight hours per year, the 2000-h limitation temperature tolerance, etc.). The TSOA tells the manufac-
will not affect the operator for several years, allowing turer that, in the eyes of the FAA, the product is qualified
the manufacturer to complete the certification while and can now be produced.
being able to deliver aircraft. Once the 12,000-h lifetime
(12) Type Certificate (TC)
is demonstrated, the 2000-h limitation on already deliv-
ered aircraft is lifted. Once the manufacturer of a civilian aircraft, engine, or
propeller has demonstrated its product meets or exceeds
(8) Standard Airworthiness Certificate (AC)
the airworthiness standards, it is awarded a Type Certifi-
Once the type certificate (TC) has been approved, each cate. This is done by publishing a Type Certificate Data
unit of the now mass-produced aircraft will receive a stan- Sheet (TCDS). The TCDS lists important information
dard airworthiness certificate. This is only issued once each about operating limitations, applicable regulations, and
aircraft has been demonstrated to conform to the TC and other restrictions. This means the aircraft is now “offi-
has been assembled in accordance with industry practice; cially defined” by the TC. TCDS for all civilian aircraft
is ready for safe operation; and has been registered (given is available online on the FAA website [22].
a tail number). Each aircraft produced is tracked using While obtaining the TC is very costly for the manufac-
serial numbers. The AC allows the aircraft to be operated, turer, it helps market the product. It can be stated with a
provided its maintenance is performed in accordance high level of certainty that a product without a TC (i.e.
with regulations. “experimental”) is unlikely to sell in the same quantity
or at the same price it would with a TC. The TC is a qual-
(9) Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ity stamp: It makes the product “trustworthy.” The rea-
Many operators of airplanes request new features to be son why a TC is so costly is that it requires the product
offered. An example of a common change is when a pis- to undergo strenuous demonstration of safe operation,
ton propeller is replaced with a turboprop. Another quality of material, and construction. Additionally, the
example is to convert an airplane to transport patients, TC serves as a basis for producing the aircraft.
something for which it was unlikely originally designed.
Such changes require the approval of the aviation author-
ities. Once it is demonstrated that the change does not 1.4 HOW TO DESIGN A NEW AIRCRAFT
compromise the continued airworthiness of the aircraft,
a supplemental type certificate is issued. The STC lists what This section presents a step-by-step method intended
changes were made to the aircraft, details how it affects to help the novice designer begin the conceptual design
the TC, specifies new or revised operational limitations, of an aircraft and bring it to the preliminary phase. The
and stipulates the affected serial numbers (effectivity). conceptual design phase formally transforms the initial
specifications into an external geometry and assesses its
(10) Technical Standard Order (TSO)
capabilities. Reliable analysis methods are required dur-
A technical standard order is a minimum performance ing this phase, as it is an opportunity to design as many
standard to which materials, parts, processes, and appli- problems out of the airplane as possible.
ances used in civil aircraft are subjected. Effectively, a Another word for algorithm is process; it is a list of
TSO is a letter to the manufacturer of a given product stat- tasks arranged in a logical order. The design algorithm
ing that in order to get the product TSOd, specific perfor- presented is an enhanced version of that attributed to
mance requirements must be met and a list of engineering Frank Barnwell (1880–1938, 57), a prolific designer of
documentations (drawings, specifications, diagrams, many aircraft, including the Bristol F2B fighter [23]. It
etc.) must be submitted. The TSO is an official certificate is a process of iteration, so the selected analysis methods
that confirms the part is safe for use in a specific aircraft— must be conducive to iteration as well. During the design
it is airworthy. This puts the manufacturer at a significant phase, discoveries are made that call for repeated calcu-
advantage over another one whose product is not TSOd. lations. For instance, if it is discovered that the wingspan
It is also essential for pilots to know that the equipment must be increased, it will not just affect the wing geome-
they are using is airworthy. try, but weight, drag, and performance, to name a few.
Thus, all parameters that depend on wingspan, explicitly
(11) Technical Standard Order Authorization (TSOA)
or implicitly, must be updated, from the most elementary
A technical standard order authorization is a document to the most complex.
that authorizes the manufacturer to produce parts and The modern spreadsheet is ideal for this analysis
components in accordance with a TSO. An example is a approach. This book provides the designer with methods
16 1. The Aircraft Design Process

to simplify the implementation of the design process bring the design into the preliminary design phase.
using spreadsheet analysis. As an example, many graphs Where appropriate, the reader is directed toward a sec-
in the book have no other data available besides the tion in this book that provides the needed analysis
graphs themselves. These have been painstakingly digi- method. The algorithm treats the design process as a com-
tized for the reader. Additionally, many methods are pre- puter program: First, several initialization tasks are per-
sented using computer codes written in Visual Basic for formed, followed by a set of iterative tasks.
Applications (VBA), native to Microsoft Excel. Note that sketching the airplane is not suggested until
Step 10. While this may appear strange to some, the rea-
son is simple: Not enough information exists for an effec-
1.4.1 Conceptual Design Algorithm for
tive sketch until Step 10. Of course, this does not mean a
a General Aviation Aircraft sketch cannot be or should not be drawn before that—just
The design algorithm is presented in Table 1-4 and that an accurate depiction of the airplane is not possible.
illustrated in Figure 1-11. It covers the complete concep- For one, the wing and tail geometry are determined in
tual design process and presents several tasks that help Steps 8 and 9, so an earlier sketch is unlikely to represent

TABLE 1-4 Conceptual design algorithm for a GA aircraft.

Step Task Section

1 Understand requirements, mission definition, and the implications of the regulations to which the airplane will be certified. –
2 Study aircraft that fall into the same class as the one to be designed. These may present you with great design ideas and –
solutions. They can also show you what to steer away from—which is priceless!

• Qualitatively evaluate what configuration layout may best suit the mission.
• Decide on a propulsion methodology (propeller, turbofan, others?).
3 If the target weight and maximum level airspeed are known, estimate the development and manufacturing costs for a 2.2
projected 5-year production run. If the target weight is not known, perform this task once it is known (see STEP 6 or 12). 2.3
Evaluate how many units must be produced to break-even and the required retail prices. Evaluate operational costs and
labor force as well. How do these compare to the competition?
4 Create a Constraint Diagram based on the requirements of STEP 1 (target performance). 3.2
5 Select critical performance parameters (T/W or BHP/W and W/S) from the Constraint Diagram. Once T/W and W/S are 3.2
known, the next step is to estimate the gross weight so that wing area and required engine thrust (or power) can be extracted.
6 Estimate initial empty and gross weight using W-ratios with historical relations and conduct a thorough mission analysis. 6.2
7 Using the results from the Constraint Diagram of STEP 4 and the initial gross weight of STEP 6 estimate the initial wing area 3.2
and thrust required. This calls for a guess for an expected CLmax. Thrust will reveal what sort of an engine is required for the
airplane. Keep in mind the requirements for stall speeds (e.g. LSA limit is 45 KCAS, “old” 14 CFR Part 23 is 61 KCAS, etc.) to
ensure the selected W/S and T/W (or BHP/W) will allow the design to simultaneously meet all performance requirements
and stall speeds.
8 Estimate initial tail surface area and special position using VHT and VVT methodology. 11.4
9 Propose a wing layout that suits the mission by establishing initial AR, TR, airfoils, planform shape, dihedral, washout, etc. 8
Note that many of these parameters are likely to change in the next iteration. For the airfoil selection, use a method like the 9
one shown in Section 8.3.9, Decision Matrix for Airfoil Selection.
10 If not already done, sketch several initial configurations and methodically evaluate their pros and cons. Select a candidate 4
configuration.
11 Based on the selected propulsion methodology (see STEP 2), select the engine type and layout (number of, types, properties 7
of, location of) to be evaluated.

12 Using the candidate configuration, estimate empty, gross, and fuel weight using the appropriate combination of Statistical, 6.3
Direct, and/or Known Weights methods. 6.4
6.5
13 Determine the empty weight CG, develop a CG loading cloud, gross weight CG, movement due to fuel burn, and inertia 6.6
properties (Ixx, Iyy, …).
14 Determine a candidate CG envelope based on results from STEP 13. Expect this to change once STEP 16 will be completed. 6.7
15 Layout fuselage (space claims, occupant location, baggage, cargo) using a method similar to that of Section 12.3, Sizing the 12.3
Fuselage.
 1.4 How to Design a New Aircraft 17
TABLE 1-4 Conceptual design algorithm for a GA aircraft—cont’d
Step Task Section

16 Perform a detailed static and dynamic stability analysis of the candidate configuration. Various
17 Modify the tail surface geometry in accordance with the results from the static and dynamic stability analysis of STEP 13. 11
Note that dynamic stability modes should be converging, and the geometry will likely have to be “morphed” to eliminate 24
any diverging dynamic modes. 25
18 Evaluate the following layout design modifications as needed based on the above analyses: Various

• Structural load paths (wing, HT, VT, fuselage, etc.)

• Control system layout (manual, hydraulic, fly-by-wire/light)
• Flight control layout (geometry, aerodynamic balancing, trim tabs)
• High lift systems and layout (flap types, LE devices)
• Landing gear layout (tricycle, taildragger, fixed, retractable, etc.)

19 Modify the design for benign stall characteristics (via washout, airfoils, slats, flaps). 9
10
20 Perform a detailed drag analysis of the candidate configuration. Design for minimum drag by polishing the geometry for 16
elimination of flow separation areas, including the addition of wing fairings.
21 Perform a detailed performance analysis (T-O, climb, cruise, range, descent, and landing). Perform sensitivity analyses of 17–23
T-O, climb, cruise, range, and landing. Create a payload-versus-range plot.
22 Optimize and refine where possible. Various
23 Perform a regulatory evaluation and answer the following questions: 14 CFR Part
23
(1) Will the candidate configuration meet the applicable aviation regulations?
(2) Does it meet all requirements of STEP 1?
(3) Does it satisfy the mission of STEP 1?
If the answer to any of the three questions is NO, then go back to STEP 10 and modify the candidate configuration. If all can
be answered with a YES, then continue to the next step.
24 Freeze OML. Do this by the release of an electronic solid model of the vehicle that is document controlled. N/A

25 Create a V-n Diagram. 17.4

26 Detailed load analysis. –
27 Move into the Preliminary Design Phase. –

FIGURE 1-11 The aircraft design algorithm shown as a flow chart. AC stands for aircraft, VLM for Vortex-Lattice Method, S&C for Stability and
Control, NP for Neutral Point and CG for Center of Gravity.
18 1. The Aircraft Design Process

those with any precision. For this reason, and in the as a VBA function, using appropriate arguments.
humble view of this author, an earlier sketch is a bit like For instance, such a function could be called CD(Href,
a shot in the dark. That said, adhering to this algorithm is Vtas, df, ldg), where Href is the reference altitude
not the law of the land. It merely represents how this (e.g., 25,000 ft), Vtas is the true airspeed in knots, df is
author does things. The reader can bend the algorithm the deflection of the flaps, and ldg the status of the land-
to his or her own style. What works best for the reader ing gear for an aircraft with retractable landing gear. It is
is of greater importance. essential in teamwork that all members use the same lift,
As stated earlier, the algorithm is conveniently imple- drag, and thrust models. Specific members can be tasked
mented in a spreadsheet. It is important to meticulously with developing these for the team. The use of such
prepare it such that when any parameter changes, all in-house functions reduces the risk of members “acciden-
dependent parameters are automatically updated. Do tally” using incorrect values, thus reducing chances of
not leave this to the last minute; do it correctly from “late development surprises.”
the start. This saves time. Where possible, enter formulas An example of an implementation in a real spreadsheet
rather than numbers in the cells in the spreadsheet. Two is shown in Figure 1-13. Note that two easily identifiable
common mistakes made by engineering students work- colors have been chosen for cells to indicate where the user
ing on spreadsheets are (1) hardcoding numbers rather shall enter information and where a formula has been
than formulas and (2) wait to the end of a semester to entered. This reduces the risk of the user accidentally
make the spreadsheets conducive to iteration. By then deleting important formulas and helps make the spread-
it is too late. sheet appear better organized and more professional.

1.4.2 Implementation of the Conceptual 1.5 ELEMENTS OF PROJECT

Design Algorithm ENGINEERING
The design algorithm is conveniently implemented
using a 3-dimensional spreadsheet software. Such a This section introduces a few tools at the disposal of
spreadsheet allows multiple worksheets. It assigns one the project engineer. This is not a complete listing; there
worksheet (called the “General” worksheet) as an informa- is a multitude of ways to conduct business. Readers inter-
tion hub, while all remaining worksheets are organized in ested in deeper understanding of each topic are directed
the hierarchy shown in Figure 1-12. All parameters that toward a host of available texts on project engineering.
affect multiple worksheets are entered in the “General Experienced project engineers may not find anything
Tab”. This ensures that changing multiuse parameters helpful in this section, but that is okay. This section is
(e.g. wingspan) is automatically reflected in all codepen- not intended for them, but the novice engineer who is
dent analyses in the other worksheets. A spreadsheet that not sure where to begin or how to proceed.
requires the user to visit all affected worksheets to change
the wingspan is poorly designed. It invites mistakes.
1.5.1 Project Plan
The power of the spreadsheet is further enhanced
by writing VBA functions. For instance, it is highly The successful development of a new aircraft requires
recommended that the drag model (CD) be developed a project plan. A project plan is a chronological listing of

FIGURE 1-12 Organizational hierarchy for a spreadsheet (see text for explanation).
 1.5 Elements of Project Engineering 19

FIGURE 1-13 Organizational hierarchy implemented in an actual spreadsheet (see text for explanation).

tasks to be executed and an associated time-stamp. The working relationships, to name a few. The project engi-
trick is to devise a balanced plan. A plan with little detail neer serves as a liaison between management of the com-
is useless. Too complex a plan is ineffective because it pany and the engineering workforce. Some of these are
requires a considerable effort to create and maintain. A duties the project engineer never even heard mentioned
balanced plan resides somewhere between the two while a student.
extremes. Six important skills are often attributed to good
A project plan can be developed by (1) defining mile- project managers: communication, organization, team
stones that stretch from the start of the project to its com- building, leadership, coping, and technological skills.
pletion, (2) by assigning dates to the milestones, and A communication skill is the ability to listen to people
(3) by assigning tasks that must be completed before each and being able to persuade them to act in a manner that
milestone. Sometimes it helps to create a project plan by favors the goals of the project. An organizational skill is the
first defining the initial and final milestones (e.g. “start ability to plan, set goals, and analyze difficult situations.
design” and “first flight”) and then place intermediary Team building involves being able to empathize and relate
milestones between those (e.g. “design freeze” and “wind to people’s personal issues. It leads to team loyalty and
tunnel testing”). motivates it to succeed. Leadership is setting a good exam-
ple and exercise professionalism. It is the display of
enthusiasm and positive outlook, and it results in an
1.5.2 Team Leadership
effective delegation of tasks. A good leader sees the
Serious engineering projects need an effective leader “big picture” and can communicate it to the team
who ensures the necessary tasks are executed in a proper members. A coping skill involves flexibility, patience, per-
order. Ordinarily, this position suits an experienced engi- sistence, and openness to suggestions from others. It
neer, who is titled as the project engineer or project manager. makes the leader resolute and able to adjust to changing
This individual must understand the “big picture.” In conditions. A technological skill involves the use of prior
short, the project engineer delegates tasks to the design experience, knowledge of the project, and the exercise
team. She (or he) also deals with multiple other tasks, of good judgment. Additional characteristics of a good
such as scheduling, communication, hiring, conflict reso- leader are integrity (strong morals), truthfulness (speak
lution, coordination, and interaction between groups of facts not subjective truths), and responsibility (do not
specialists, vendor negotiations, and development of blame others for own mistakes).
20 1. The Aircraft Design Process

1.5.3 Task Management and the Task Matrix arranging a series of events (tasks) and their duration
in a network that represents the lifetime of the project.
To better manage the project, it helps to create a list of This allows the critical path schedule, which is the longest
tasks to be completed. Figure 1-14 illustrates how a con- duration a project is expected to last, to be determined.
ceptual aircraft design project can be broken down into a The method was developed in the late 1950s for the US
2-dimensional task matrix. For some, it offers greater clar- Navy’s Special Projects Office for the Polaris Fleet Missile
ity than the Gantt chart to be discussed next. However, it Program as project Program Evaluation and Review Task
lacks the date-stamp. The matrix consists of a horizontal (PERT) [25]. This name stuck, although the term Task
list of subprojects (Preliminaries—Cost—Weight—etc.), was replaced with Technique. PERT is related to an older
further broken down into vertical columns of tasks. Note method called Critical Path Method (CPM) but has
that the numbers above each column refer to the chapters superseded it.
in this book providing the required information. Each PERT breaks the project into a network of nodes that
task can be given a designation number to help keep track are connected with lines (arrows). The lines represent
of its progress. Thus, the tasks under the subproject the length the tasks (or set of tasks) are expected to take.
“Weight Modeling” could be enumerated as W1—Weight The nodes represent a break between separate tasks. The
of Rival AC, W2—Initial Weight, and so on. Adding new arrangement forms a network of activities and allows for
tasks to the matrix and removing unnecessary ones is a depiction of multiple tasks in progress at any time.
easy. Each task is assigned a starting and completion date Ordinarily, PERT uses three estimates for the time it takes
and engineer(s) to which it is assigned. This not only to complete a task (e.g., 14 days most likely, 21 days pes-
helps the project engineer comprehend the project status simistic, 10 days optimistic). Then, the shortest and lon-
and its individual subprojects but also allows it to be used gest duration of the project is assessed by tracing the
as a basis for a Gantt diagram and PERT chart. Note that path from the initial to the final task. The reader is encour-
the shaded region at the bottom implies the target infor- aged to further investigate the numerous pros and cons of
mation (or knowledge) gained at the completion of each the method as presented in the literature.
subproject. Thus, the subproject “Drag Modeling” yields
a Drag Model, the subproject “Thrust Modeling” yields a
Thrust Model, and so on. The Task Matrix can be
expanded to include additional subprojects, e.g., 1.5.6 Fishbone Diagram for Preliminary
“Mechanical Systems,” “Electric System,” “Avionics,” Airplane Design
“Flight Testing,” and “Regulatory Compliance Review,”
The Fishbone Diagram, more formally known as an Ishi-
to name a few. These are omitted from Figure 1-14 in
kawa Diagram or a Cause-and-Effect Diagram, is named
interest of space.
after Kaoru Ishikawa (1915–1989), a Japanese quality con-
trol statistician. At its core, the diagram focuses on effects
1.5.4 Gantt Diagrams and their causes. The “causes” are drawn enclosed in a
box around a horizontal arrow. Then, arrows pointing
A Gantt diagram depicts the chronological flow of a toward the “effect” (or consequence), are marked along
project. It is named after its inventor, Henry Gantt the horizontal arrow. The resulting graph is reminiscent
(1861–1919) [24]. The diagram breaks the project down of a fish skeleton, which explains its nickname.
into individual major tasks and associated subtasks, each While the diagram is intended for root-cause analysis, it
with a start and an end date. Ordinarily, a multitude of is also helpful to illustrate top-level (or big-picture) status
other information is associated with these tasks, such as of a design project (see Figure 1-17). In this application,
human resources and equipment (see the horizontal bars the horizontal arrow is a timeline. It starts at the initiation
in Figure 1-15). Important project completion dates, of the project and terminates at its completion. It can rep-
called milestones, are displayed as well. Software, such resent the entire development program or subprojects.
as Microsoft Project, allows the generation of Gantt dia- The “causes” can be thought of as major tasks that are
grams to be completed more effectively. broken down into subtasks, which are listed along the
arrow pointing at the timeline. The arrows point to a
milestone or a representative time location on the time-
1.5.5 PERT Charts line, as shown in the figure. The advantage of this dia-
A PERT chart displays the sequence of events that gram is that it helps the project manager to
constitute a project as a network of nodes and arrows (1) demonstrate the status of the project to upper manage-
(see Figure 1-16). It offers the project manager several ment, (2) to anticipate when to ramp up for specific sub-
tools to help manage the project, including an estimate projects, and (3) to understand the “big-picture” of the
of duration and resource planning. It does so by project.
FIGURE 1-14 A Task Matrix breakdown of a conceptual design project into bite-sized tasks. The numbers above each column refer to chapters in this book that will help you complete
said tasks.
22 1. The Aircraft Design Process

FIGURE 1-15 A Gantt diagram, showing a hypothetical conceptual design of a simple aircraft.

FIGURE 1-16 A simplified PERT chart with example task durations.

1.5.7 Documentation Standards and Drawing

The project manager should establish document stan-
Organizing
dards early. This should include a numbering system
Document standards refer to rules controlling how doc- for drawings, bill-of-materials, reports, and design notes.
uments are to be formatted and stored. This ranges from The documents required to design an aircraft grow expo-
the selection of font styles and layout for reports, to the nentially in scope and quantity with time. Storing the
way technical drawings are labeled and numbered. resulting deluge of data using a simple and effective
 1.5 Elements of Project Engineering 23

FIGURE 1-17 A typical Fishbone Diagram adapted to the design process. Completed tasks have been stricken through, and color coding can be
used to further illustrate project progress.

document numbering system pays off quickly in time want to pay a lot of money for maintenance” can be trans-
saved when searching and referencing this work. As an lated to “reliability.” This, in turn, can be measured in
example, poor organization of documents can easily terms of how frequently parts fail and require repairs. It
translate into a 30-min search for a specific part or assem- is inevitable that some of these requirements conflict with
bly drawing when conducting stress analysis—5 min each other, in addition to depending on each other. For
wasted here, and 10 min there quickly become a drag instance, the weight of an aircraft will have a great impact
on productivity. on its rate of climb, but none on its reliability.
An example of a simple and practical drawing tree is Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a method
shown in Figure 1-18. The same approach can be intended to help in this capacity by taking various cus-
extended to any document involving the conceptual tomer wishes into account. This is accomplished using
and preliminary design. For instance, regular Design a multifaceted selection matrix to help evaluate the
Notes (which contain design calculations) can be given impact of various customer wishes on areas such as engi-
prefixed sequential numbers. Thus, design notes involv- neering development. This shows the designer which
ing structural analysis could be called “DN-S-053-A,” customer-wishes to focus on. It was developed by the Jap-
where S refers to Structures, 053 is the 53rd such docu- anese specialists Dr. Yoji Akao and Shigero Mizuno. It is
ment, and A is a revision letter. The design notes can widely used in many industries. One of the method’s
incorporate similar denotation standards for Aerody- best-known tools is the so-called House of Quality (HQ)
namics (A), Power plant (P), Mechanical systems (M), (aka Quality Functional Deployment Matrix), a specialized
and so forth. Regardless, caution must be exercised in matrix, resembling a sketch of a house, designed to con-
breakdown as there are extremes here, as in so many vert customer requirements into a numeric score that
other areas of the development. helps defining areas for the designer to focus on. The pri-
mary drawback is that it can take considerable effort to
develop, and it suffers from being highly dependent on
1.5.8 Quality Function Deployment and the perspectives of the design team members.
a House of Quality
Preparing a House of Quality
Sophisticated products must simultaneously satisfy
many requirements, including customer and engineering The HQ consists of several matrixes that focus on differ-
requirements. To improve the likelihood the product will ent facets of the product development (see Figure 1-19).
satisfy the needs of the customer, it may be necessary to The impact of desired (or customer) requirements on
survey what it is they know (or think) they need. Unfor- the technical requirements and their interrelation is iden-
tunately, survey responses can often be vague and, thus, it tified, helping the designer understand which require-
is necessary to convert them to statements that allow them ments are of greater importance than others and how
to be measured. For instance, a statement like “I don’t this complicates the development of the product. The
24 1. The Aircraft Design Process

FIGURE 1-18 Example of a practical drawing numbering system.

FIGURE 1-20 Customer requirements matrix.

industry does not necessarily apply directly to the avia-

FIGURE 1-19 A basic House of Quality.
tion industry.

Step 1: Customer Requirements

preparation of an HQ is best explained through an exam-
ple. Below, a simplified version of the HQ, tackling the Assume that customer surveys have been collected for
development of a small GA airplane, is presented. The the design of a simple aircraft and the desired require-
reader is reminded that the HQ can be implemented in ments are fast, efficient, reliable, spacious, and inexpensive
several ways—and a form that suits, say, the textile (see Figure 1-20). An actual HQ would certainly have
 1.5 Elements of Project Engineering 25
more than five requirements, but, again, this demonstra- good) and this is indicated using the arrowhead that
tion will be kept simple. points up. “Production cost,” on the other hand, has neg-
The survey has requested that potential customers rate ative effects on it, so the arrow points down.
the requirements using values between 1 (something con- The other challenges have been identified in a similar
sidered unimportant) and 5 (something very important). manner, except the first one (SIZE OF AIRCRAFT). It is
This is placed in a matrix shown in Figure 1-20. Here, let not clear whether a larger or a smaller version of the air-
us assume the requirement FAST received an average rat- craft is beneficial to the customer, so it is left without an
ing of 3.0 (moderately important), EFFICIENT a rating of arrow. Naturally, this may change if the team decides this
5.0 (very important), etc. Then, the ratings are added and is important; all parts of the HQ are decided by the design
the sum (18.5) is entered as shown. The column to the team and its consensus may differ from what is being
right shows the percentages of the ratings. For instance, shown here.
the percentage associated with the requirement “fast’ is Next consider the roof itself, shown as the diagonal
100  3.0/18.5 ¼ 16.2%. lines in Figure 1-21. It is used to indicate positive and neg-
ative relationships between the challenges. These are typ-
Step 2: Technical Requirements ically denoted with symbols (e.g., + for positive and—for
The next step requires the designing team to list several negative), but here the following letters are used:
engineering challenges that relate to the customer
NN—Means there is a strong negative relationship
requirements. For instance, the requirement for “effi-
between the two engineering challenges.
ciency” calls for special attention to the lift and drag char-
N—Means there is a negative relationship.
acteristics of the aircraft. These have been listed in
P—Means there is a positive relationship.
Figure 1-21 with some other engineering challenges, such
PP—Means there is a strong positive relationship
as “size of aircraft,” “drag,” “weight,” and so on. These
between the two engineering challenges.
will be revisited in STEP 4.
The term relationship in this context refers to how one
Step 3: Roof challenge affects another. Consider the columns contain-
The roof (see Figure 1-21) is used to indicate interrelation- ing SIZE OF AIRCRAFT and DRAG. It can be argued that
ships between the various engineering challenges. It must there is a strong negative relationship between the SIZE
be kept in mind the roof sits on top of the technical OF AIRCRAFT and DRAG (large aircraft ¼ high drag).
requirements matrix and the diagonals enclose the col- This is indicated by entering NN at the intersection of
umns of engineering challenges. This arrangement must their diagonals. Similarly, there is a positive relation
be kept in mind for the following discussion. between SIZE OF AIRCRAFT and LIFT, indicated by
The roof consists of two parts: the roof itself and, for the P at the intersection. Some might argue there should
lack of a better term, the fascia. The fascia is used to indi- be a strong positive relationship; however, if the size
cate whether the challenge listed below (e.g., “drag or refers to the volume of the fuselage rather than the wings,
“weight”) has a favorable effect on the product. Thus, then the relationship is arguably only positive. This
more “power” has a favorable effect (more power is shows how the buildup of these relationships is highly
subject to interpretation, requiring the design team to
reach a consensus. Once complete, the example letter
combinations are entered as shown in Figure 1-21.

Step 4: Interrelationship matrix

The next step is to try to place weight on the engineering
challenges as they relate to the customer requirements.
This is accomplished using the interrelationship matrix
(see Figure 1-22). The design team must come up with
a scale that can be used to indicate the severity of such
associations. It is not uncommon to use a scale such as
the one shown below:

9—Means the customer requirement has great

influence.
3—Means the customer requirement has moderate
influence.
1—Means the customer requirement has weak
FIGURE 1-21 Technical requirements matrix. influence.
26 1. The Aircraft Design Process

Step 5: Targets
The target matrix (see Figure 1-23) represents the results of
a cross-multiplication and summation that is used to deter-
mine where to place the most effort during the develop-
ment of the product. The operation takes place as follows.
Consider the percentage column of the customer
requirements matrix (16.2%, 27.0%, etc.) and the first
column of the technical requirements column (SIZE OF
AIRCRAFT, 9, 1, 1, etc.). These are multiplied and
summed as follows:
0:162  9 + 0:270  1 + 0:243  1 + 0:216  9 + 0:108  3
¼ 4:24
The remaining columns are multiplied in this fashion,
always using the percentage column, yielding 4.86,
3.24, 2.43, and so on.
The next step is to convert the results into percentages.
First, add all the results (4.24 + 4.86 + …) to get 24.73. Sec-
FIGURE 1-22 The interrelationship matrix. ond, for the first column, the percentage of the total is
100  4.24/24.73 ¼ 17.2%, 100  4.86/24.73 ¼ 19.7% for
the second one, and so forth. These numbers are the
This is employed as follows: Consider the customer most important part of the HQ, as the highest one indi-
requirement FAST (see Figure 1-20). It will have a strong cates where most of the development effort should be
influence on the engineering challenge DRAG. Thus, spent. The results and the entire House of Quality can
enter 9 in the intersection cell. However, LIFT will be less be seen in Figure 1-24. We conclude that, in this case,
affected by FAST; enter 3 in the intersection cell. Simi- the PRODUCTION COST and DRAG are the two areas
larly, the customer requirement RELIABLE will not have that should receive the greatest attention.
any effect on the WEIGHT, and so on.
Step 6: Comparison matrix
For clarity, omit entering numbers in cells where no
influence exists. Some people prefer to enter special sym- It is often helpful to create a matrix to compare an existing
bols in such cells, but in this author’s view, it only adds an company product to that of the competition. This helps to
extra layer of confusion. Note that these numbers will be identify shortcomings in the company products and to
used as multipliers in the next step. improve those. A comparison matrix is shown in

FIGURE 1-23 The target matrix.

 1.6 Presenting the Design Project 27

FIGURE 1-24 The completed house of quality.

Figure 1-24, where they have been “graded” in light of the machinery, and vehicles, must be communicated clearly
customer requirements, allowing differences to be and effectively. While the topic of geometric dimension-
highlighted. Thus, while the customer requirement FAST ing and tolerancing (GDT) and industry standards in
has a score of 3.0, it is possible the design team values it a technical drafting is beyond the scope of this book, saying
tad lower, or at 2.5. However, the team may also opine a few words about the presentation of images is not. The
that competitor aircraft 1 and 2 appear to emphasize it practicing engineer will participate in many meetings and
even less. Such a conclusion should be based on hard design reviews, where often many experts in various
numbers, such as drag coefficients or cruising speed, fields gather and try to constructively criticize a new
and not subjective opinions. design. The process is often both exhausting and hum-
The purpose of this section was to introduce the reader bling but is invaluable as a character-builder. Being able
to the HQ as a tool to help with the development of a new to describe the functionality of one’s design is priceless,
product (or the redesign of an existing one). The inter- and no tool is better for that purpose than a figure, an
ested reader is directed toward the multitude of online image, or a schematic. Three-dimensional depictions
resources that add greater depth to this topic. are particularly effective. The modern aircraft designer
benefits from computer-aided design (CAD) tools such
as solid modelers (Solidworks, CATIA, and others),
1.6 PRESENTING THE DESIGN PROJECT which allow complex 3D geometry to be depicted with
a photo-realistic quality. Highly specialized software,
A picture is worth a thousand words. This adage is for instance, finite element analysis (FEA) and computa-
particularly true in the world of engineering, where tional fluid dynamics (CFD) programs, allow the engi-
detailed information about complicated mechanisms, neer to describe the pros and cons of very complicated
28 1. The Aircraft Design Process

structural concepts and 3D flow fields, and even add a sophistication in their geometric engines. Besides allow-
fourth dimension by performing time-dependent ana- ing photorealistic renderings of complex 3-dimensional
lyses. It cannot be overemphasized to the entry-level geometry, some even offer limited FEA and CFD capabil-
engineer to get up to speed on this technology. It not only ities. They provide perfect mathematical definitions of
helps with communication, but also develops a strong 3- complicated compound surfaces and allow curvature
and 4-dimensional insight into engineering problems. perfect OML to be created using NURBS surfaces. Images
from such programs can be quite persuasive and informa-
(1) Three-View Drawings tive. Figure 1-26 shows an image of a twin-engine
The three-view drawing is a fundamental presentation regional jet design from one such package, superimposed
tool the engineer should never omit. Airplane types are on a background image taken at some 18,000 ft. The
commonly displayed using three-view drawings, show- resulting image can be of great help in engineering and
ing their top-, side-, and frontal views. Such drawings marketing meetings.
are an essential part of the complete submittal proposal
package for any aircraft. Although such presentation (3) Images Using Finite Element Modelers
images date back to the beginning of aviation, they are The modern structural analysis often includes sophis-
vital for any design proposal. Figure 1-25 shows a typical ticated Finite Element Analyzers, capable of producing
such drawing, with the added modern flare in the form of compelling images. While such images should be used
a 3D perspective rendering. with care (as their compelling nature tricks many into
thinking they always represent reality, which may be far
(2) Images Using Solid Modelers
off the mark), they can give even a novice an excellent
The modern solid modeler software (CAD) has revolu- understanding of load paths as well as where stress con-
tionized aircraft design. Long gone are the large sloped centrations reside. While such images are usually avail-
drafting tables and the special architectural pens that able only after detailed design work has begun, images
deliver uniform line thicknesses and other tools of the from previous design exercises can sometimes be helpful
past. These began to disappear in the late 1980s and early in making a point about possible structural concepts.
1990s. Today, drafters equipped with personal com- Figure 1-27 shows stress concentrations in a forward
puters or workstations, model complicated parts and shear-web of the wing attachment/spar carry-through
assemblies in virtual space. At the time of writing, pro- structure of a small General Aviation aircraft, subject to
grams such as Solidworks, and CATIA are common an asymmetric ultimate load. The elongated diamonds
packages for this purpose and pack an enormous in the center of the spar carry-through are corrugations

FIGURE 1-25 A nonstandard three-view drawing, made using modern solid modeling software.
 1.6 Presenting the Design Project 29

FIGURE 1-26 A solid model of a modern regional jet superimposed on a photographic background, showing the capability of modern Computer
Aided Design software.

FIGURE 1-27 An image of a stress field in the spar carry-through of a small General Aviation aircraft due to asymmetric wing loads, generated
by a popular Finite Element analysis software.

intended to stiffen the shear-web, but these cause high trusting them blindly—but they may not necessarily
stress concentrations on their own. show what happens in real flow. This is not to say they
never resemble reality, only that they do not always.
(4) Images Using Computational Fluid Dynamics
Software (5) Cutaway Drawings
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a vibrant field Few visual representations are as capable of illustrat-
within the science of Fluid Mechanics. Spurred by a need ing the complexity of an airplane as the cutaway draw-
to predict and investigate aerodynamic flow around 3- ing. Such images are normally extremely detailed and
dimensional bodies, this computational technology has require a great depth of knowledge of the internal struc-
become the stalwart of the modern aerodynamics group. ture of an airplane to prepare correctly. A case in point is
Similar advice as above should be given to the entry-level Figure 1-29, which shows a cutaway of a business jet
aircraft designer. The images generated by the modern designed by a student design team in the author’s aircraft
CFD packages are often mindboggling in their sophistica- design class. Slated to be certified to 14 CFR Part 25
tion (Figure 1-28). It is therefore easy to be lulled into (Commercial Aviation) rather than 14 CFR Part 23
30 1. The Aircraft Design Process

FIGURE 1-28 Streamlines and “oil flow” plots speak volumes about the nature of airflow around this SR22, showing the strength of Navier-
Stokes CFD software. Copyright 2021 Cirrus Aircraft or its Affiliates. All Rights Reserved. Image reproduced with the permission of Cirrus.

(General Aviation) the figure depicts details about the assignment, one effectively becomes an expert on that topic.
structure, systems, aerodynamic features, and accommo- Weeks of grueling work on such a project blurs the judg-
dation that is impossible to express in words. ment for what needs to be included in the engineering
report. The expertise, surprisingly, skews one’s perspec-
(6) Engineering Reports
tive; complex concepts become so trivial in the mind of
The work of the engineer is primarily of the “mental” the engineer that their definitions and other related details
kind; it involves the process of thinking. This poses an get omitted from the documentation. Then, several months
interesting challenge for anyone hiring an engineer— or even a few years later, one has become an expert on a dif-
how can this intangible product be captured so it does ferent topic. The previous work is a distant memory,
not have to be recreated continually? The answer is the securely archived in the digital vaults of the organization.
engineering report and engineering drawing. At that moment, something happens that warrants a review
An engineering report is a document that describes the of that work. This is when one realizes how many important
details of a specific idea. Engineering reports encompass concepts were omitted and these, now, call for extra effort
a large scope of activities. It can be a mathematical deri- and time for reacquaintance. Additionally, detail and care-
vation of some formula, listing of test setup, analysis of ful documentation is priceless when you have to defend
test results, a justification for a way to fabricate a given your work in a legal deposition. It is what US companies
product, evaluation of manufacturing cost, or geometric use every day to defend themselves against accusations
optimization, just to name a few. Regardless of its pur- of negligence, saving billions of dollars.
pose, the report must always be written with complete-
(7) Engineering Drawings
ness and detail on the forefront. Such technical reports
are how a company retains the thinking of the engineer, The modern engineering drawing has become a very
so it does not have to be “re-thought” next time around— sophisticated method of relaying information about the
it turns the intangible into something physical. geometry of parts and assemblies. The details of what
The organization and format of reports varies greatly. It is called an “industry standard drawing” will not be dis-
is not practical to present any given method here on how to cussed here, other than mentioning that such drawings
write a report. However, what all reports share is that they must explain tolerance stack-ups and feature a bill of
should be objective, concise, and detailed. A common mis- materials and parts to be dimensioned. Today, engineer-
take made by rookie engineers is to ignore documenting ing drawings are exclusively created using computers by
what “appears trivial.” The author is certainly guilty of a specialized and important member of the engineering
making such mistakes. While working on a specific team—the drafter. A competent drafter knows the
FIGURE 1-29 A cutaway of the Atmos 750, a business jet designed by the author’s aircraft design students. It reveals details about the structure, systems, aerodynamic features, and
accommodation, to name a few. Cutaway by Xinyu Yang.
32 1. The Aircraft Design Process

ins-and-outs of the drafting standards and ensures these [10] Anonymous, The FAA and Industry Guide to Product Certification,
do not become a burden to the engineer. third ed., Prepared by Aerospace Industries Association (AIA),
Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA), General Aviation Manufac-
The engineering drawings are typically of two kinds: a turers Association (GAMA), and the FAA, May 2017.
part drawing and an assembly drawing. The part drawing [11] Anonymous, Certification Specifications (CSs), EASA, http://www.
shows the dimensions of individual parts (a bracket, an easa.europa.eu/agency-measures/certification-specifications.php
extrusion, a tube, a bent aluminum sheet, etc.), while [Accessed 06/14/2018].
the assembly drawing shows how these are to be attached [12] Anonymous, FAA ORDER 8130.2J: Airworthiness Certification of
Aircraft, FAA, 2017.
in relation to each other. A kit plane may require 100 to [13] Anonymous, Federal Register, FAA, 14 March 2016. http://
200 drawings, a GA aircraft may require 10,000, and a federalregister.gov/a/2016-05493. (Accessed 1 June 2018).
fighter or a commercial jetliner 50,000 to over 100,000 [14] Anonymous, Notice of Proposed Amendment 2016-05, EASA, 2016.
drawings—according to Sutter [2], the original Boeing [15] Anonymous, Pilatus Aircraft, 12 July 2017. https://www.
747 required 75,000 drawings. For this reason, a logical pilatus-aircraft.com/en/customer-support/publications#pc-12/
flightmanuals. (Accessed 9 June 2018).
numbering system that allows parts and assemblies to [16] Anonymous, Weight-Shift Control Aircraft Flying Handbook, FAA-H-
be quickly located is strongly recommended. 8083-5, FAA, 2008.
[17] Anonymous, FAA Accepted Means of Compliance for Part 23 Air-
planes (Amendment 23-64), 2018. https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/
References air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/small_airplanes_regs/
media/part_23_moc.pdf. (Accessed 5 October 2018).
[1] Anonymous, FAA, December 12, 2003. http://faa.custhelp.com/
[18] Anonymous, Zodiac CH 601 XL Airplane, Special Review Team
app/answers/detail/a_id/154/kw/%22general%20aviation%
Report, FAA, January 2010.
22/session/L3RpbWUvMTMzNTgwOTk4MS9zaWQvSkxqTW9
[19] Anonymous, FAA Accepted ASTM Consensus Standards - LSA, 3
ZV2s%3D. (Accessed 1 June 2018).
October 2017. http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/
[2] J. Sutter, 747 – Creating the World’s First Jumbo Jet and Other Adven-
media/StandardsChart.pdf. (Accessed 14 June 2018).
tures from a Life in Aviation, Smithsonian Books, New York, 2006.
[20] Anonymous, n.d. Advisory Circulars. https://www.faa.gov/
[3] E. Torenbeek, Synthesis of Subsonic Aircraft Design, third ed., Delft
regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/ [Accessed 10/25/2018].
University Press, 1986.
[21] Webpage for Airworthiness Directives. http://rgl.faa.gov/
[4] D. Raymer, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, fifth ed., AIAA
Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/Frameset?
Education Series, 2012.
OpenPage. (Accessed 24 August 2019).
[5] L. Nicolai, G. Carichner, Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design,
[22] Anonymous n.d., Type Certificate Data Sheets (Make Model), FAA,
Vol. 1, AIAA Education Series, 2010.
[Online]. Available: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_
[6] Anonymous, Standard Specification for Design and Performance of a
Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet
Light Sport Airplane, ASTM F2245-18, ASTM, 2018.
[Accessed 06/14/2018].
[7] R. Sherman, M.X. Hardiman, Federation of American Scientists, 2
[23] J.D. Anderson, The Grand Designers: The Evolution of the Airplane in
November 2016. https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-35.htm.
the 20th Century, Cambridge University Press, 2018, https://doi.
(Accessed 1 June 2018).
org/10.1017/9780511977565.
[8] E.C. Aldridge, Briefing on the Joint Strike Fighter Contract Announce-
[24] J.M. Nicholas, H. Steyn, Project Management for Engineering, Busi-
ment, US Department of Defence, 26 October 2001. http://archive.
ness and Technology, fifth ed., Routledge, 2017.
defense.gov/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID¼2186.
[25] D.G. Malcolm, J.H. Roseboom, C.E. Clark, W. Fazar, Application
(Accessed 1 June 2018).
of a Technique for Research and Development Program Evaluation, Oper.
[9] D. McBride, The 7 Wastes in Manufacturing, EMS Consulting
Res. 7 (5) (1959) 646–669.
Group, 29 August 2003. http://www.emsstrategies.com/
dm090203article2.html. (Accessed 1 June 2018).