Design Issues Related to Vehicle Control

from the Virginia Tech Aircraft Design Information Sources pages

Kehrer, W.T., "Flight Control and Configuration Design Considerations for Highly Maneuverable Aircraft," AGARD CP-262, May 1979.

Mangold, P., "Integration of Handling Quality Aspects into the Aerodynamic Design of Modern Unstable Fighters," Flying Qualities, AGARD-CP-508, Oct. 1990.

• Issues relating instabilities in longitudinal and lateral-directional controls and flying qualities are discussed.

Mangold, P. and Wedekind, G., "Integration of Aerodynamic, Performance, Stability and Control Requirements into the Design Process of Modern Fighter Aircraft Configurations," AGARD LS 153.

Stephen Mark Swanson, "A Computer Module to Calculate the Horizontal Control Surface Size of a Conceptual Aircraft Design," MS Thesis, Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, January 1990.

• This thesis describes a module for ACSYNT. It includes a discussion of the determination of the center of gravity position and the considerations required to determine a size of an aft tail or canard. Thrust vectoring considerations for landing are also included.

McKay, K. and Walker, M. "A Review of High Angle of Attack Requirements for Combat Aircraft," Flying Qualities, AGARD CP-508, Oct. 1990.

• The paper examines qualitatively the implications of designing for high angle of attack on aircraft design configuration.

Mangold, Peter, "Transformation of Flightmechanical Design Requirements for Modern Fighters into Aerodynamic Characteristics," AGARD CP-147, Nov. 1991.

Joseph R. Boland, David R. Riley and Kevin D. Citurs, "Aircraft Control Requirements and Achievable Dynamics Prediction," AIAA Paper 93-3648, Aug. 1993.

• This paper is very close to Wayne Durham's control allocation work.

James M. Simon, William B. Blake and Dieter Multhopp, "Control Concepts for a Vertical Tailless Fighter," AIAA Paper 93-4000, Aug. 1993.

• This paper includes a lot of aerodynamic data on control effectiveness, and a discussion of the control requirements associated with the typical requirement for a vertical tail.

Canard-Tail Comparisons

Fellers, W., Bowman, W., and Wooler, P., "Tail Configuration for Highly Maneuverable Combat Aircraft," AGARD CP-319, Combat Aircraft Maneuverability, Oct. 1981.

• A comparison in maneuverability for three tail configurations, aft tail, tailless (with and without thrust vectoring) and canard configuration is presented. This is one of the first papers to discuss nose down pitching moment requirements at high angle-of-attack as a primary design criterion.

Wedekind, G., "Tail Versus Canard Configuration: An Aerodynamic Comparison with Regard to the Suitability for Future Tactical Combat Aircraft," ICAS-82-1.2.2, 1982.

Nicholas, W.U., Naville, G.L., Hoffschwelle, Huffman, J.K., and Covell, P.F., "An Evaluation of the Relative Merits of Wing-Canard, Wing-Tail, and Tailles Arrangements for Advanced Fighter Applications," ICAS-84-2.7.3, 1984.

Landfield, J.P., and Rajkovic, D., "Canard/Tail Comparison for an Advanced Variable- Sweep-Wing Fighter,"Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 23, No. 6, June 1986, pp. 449-454 (also AIAA Paper 84-2401).

• This paper provides an excellent survey of the control power issues arising in the design process, and the interplay between relaxed static stability and various control effecter possibilities. It also references most of the other design studies comparing aft tail and canard design.

return to the table of contents ?

direct comments and suggestions to W.H. Mason, mason@apollo.aoe.vt.edu