CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION MISSION REQUIREMENTS LOAD FACTORS

INTERCEPT INSTANTANEOUS TURN RATE SUSTAINED TURN RATE CLIMB HIGH ANGLE OF ATTACK

GUST LOAD FACTOR V-n DIAGRAM WING LOAD DISTRIBUTION

SPANWISE LIFT DISTRIBUTION SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAM BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM

FUSELAGE LOAD DISTRIBUTION

FUSELAGE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS

SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAM BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM

STATIC MARGIN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND MATERIAL ANALYSIS-THEORY

CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION The design of an aircraft draws an number of basic areas of aerospace engineering. The areas like aerodynamics, propulsion, structure,and control invloves parameters that govern the size,shape, weight, performance of an aircraft. Although we generally try to seek optimums in all these aspects, with an aircraft, this is practically impossible to achieve. The reason is that in many cases, optimising one characteristic degrades another. The starting point in any aircarft is to clearly identify its purpose. Henceforth the aircraft design project laboratory deals and gives a practical approach to the design of an aircraft. Under this we have to design a heavy weight cargo aircraft.

MISSION SPECIFICATINS MISSION: High altitude, long range,cargo aircraft. ENGINE: Four turbo fan engines MAXIMUM SPEED: 0.9 Mach RANGE: 5500 Km STRUCUTRAL FACTOR: 0.8 PAY LOAD: 23000Kg ALTITUDE: 8500m CREW: 2 MEMBERS

RESULTS FROM AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT - 1 Cruise Velocity, V =236.111m/s Density of air at 35000ft, =0.49575Kg/m3 Wing loading at cruise, W/S =490.676Kg/m2 Minimum drag coefficient, CDO=0.01 Aspect Ratio=5.33 Instantaneous turn rate, =0.2 rad/sec Thrust to weight ratio =0.205

LOAD FACTORS It is defined as the ratio of lift to the weight, n=L/W. In level flight, the lift produced by the wings equals to the weight, so that n=1. However, during manoeuvres such as climb to altitude, acceleration to high speed, sustained or instantaneous turn rate associated with the combat, significantly larger load factors may occur. Since they set

the limit on the internal structure, it is very important that the maximum load factors be determined.

INTERCEPT

Dynamic pressure, q= (v2)/2 =13818.65N K=1/(eA) =0.055599

For an intercept flight phase, the load factor can be calculated using the following relation, n=(q/(W/S)) (CDO/K)0.5 =3.2278

INSTANTANEOUS TURN RATE: With instantaneous turn rate, the load factor was given by

n=((V/g)^2+1))0.5 =4.99

SUSTAINED TURN RATE A sustained turn rate is one in which the speed and altitude are same so that thrust will be equals to drag. An expression for finding out the load factor during sustained turn rate is shown below. n=[(qAe/(W/S))[(T/W)-(qCDO/(W/S))]](1/2) =3.3759

CLIMB In climb the load factor is assumed to be one.

TAKE OFF TRANSITION

The transition phase of take off is a climb at constant radius. Analysis determined that the load factor is constant and equal to n=1.15 HIGH ANGLE OF ATTACK For high angle of attack the load factor is found by the relation below n=qCL/(W/S) =4.164

DIVE CONDITION The velocity at dive condition is related to the cruise as follows Vdive=1.5Vcruise =360 m/s

V-n DIAGRAM Taking few velocities and finding its corresponding load factors the V-n diagram is drawn
V 30 60 90 120 143 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360

n n

0.19 0.78 1.75 .012 4.4 -.2 -1 -1.8 -1.8 -1.8

4.4 -1.8

4.4 -1.8

4.4 -1.8

4.4 -1.8

4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 -1.32 -0.87 -0.42 0

GUST LOADS Gust loads are unsteady aerodynamics loads that are produced by aerodynamic turbulence. The effect of turbulent gust is to produce a short time change in the effective angle of attack. This change can either be positive or negative, thereby producing an increase or decrease in the wing lift and change in the load factor. LEVEL FLIGHT At 8500m altitude, the gust velocity u for level flight is given as 25 C=8.52 =(2w/s)(gcCL) Substituting the values in the above equation =55.15 K=0.88 /(5.3+ )=0.8

Therefore the change in velocity of the aircraft is given as u=uk u=20 The incremental load factor,n= uVCL/(2W/S) On substituting the values in the above equation, n=0.693 HIGH ANGLE OF ATTACK u=38 Applying similar formulas used for level flight, u=30.4 n=1.58 DIVE CONDITION u'=12.5 Applying similar formulas used for level flight, u=10 n=.52 WING LOAD DISTRIBUTION The loads on the wing are made up of aerodynamic lift,drag forces, as well as concentrated or distributed weight of wing mounted engines,stored fuels, weapons,structural elements,etc.

SPAN WISE LIFT DISTRIBUTION As a result of the finite aspect ratio of the wing, the lift distributions vary along the span from the maximum lift at the root, to a minimum lift at the tip. The span wise lift distribution should be proportional to the wing planform. It can be readily calculated by vortex panel method. By assuming the wing as elliptic,then the analytic span wise lift distribution is given by LE(Y) = Where, LE(Y) Is the total lift generated by the wing with the elliptical planform. Y is the span wise coordinate of the wing with y=0 to y=+ or (b/2)

Span (b) =31.8m Semi span(b/2)=15.9m Aspect ratio=5.33 Surface area, S=343.3332075m Lift (L)=2245042.98KN By assuming the wing as trapezoidal, then the analytic span wise lift distribution is given by LT(y) =] Where,

LT(y) distribution

is

the

trapezoidal

wing

planform

lift

=tapper ratio=Ct/Cr=0.4

BY SCHRENK APPROXIMATION: LBAR=[LE(y)+LT(y)]/2 A flap enhances the lift over the span wise extent where they are placed. The lift force is assumed to be uniform in the region of the flaps. L(flap)=224504.298KN Concentrated and distributed wing weights have also been calculated by using the corresponding formulas and the spreed sheet is generated which is shown below. The shear force and bending moment are calculated by dividing the semi span of the wing into 20 equal parts. The shear force and bending moment are calculated by considering the wing without flap, and for flap alone, for structural weight, and for each and every point load, it has been calculated and the total shear force and bending moment are calculated and the corresponding shear force and bending moment diagram is plotted.

WING LOAD SUMMARY

` LOAD TYPE L(UNFLAP) L(FLAP) FUEL ENGINE STRUTURE MAGNITUDE Y/ (b/2)_START 2245042.98 0 224504.298 0 56179 0 5850.2076 0.1 1561.875 0 Y/(b/2)_END 1 0.4 0.4 0.1 1

LOAD SPANWISE DISTRIBUTION: 2y/b L(y)e 0 38996.9 6 1.8325 0.05 38948.1 8 3.665 0.1 38801.4 9 5.4975 .15 38555.7 y(m) 0 L(y) t 43754.4 9 42441.8 6 41129.2 2 39816.5 L V(lift) 41375.73 636346. 3 40696.02 594970. 6 39965.35 554274. 5 39186.17 514310. M(lift) 1083175 9 9665654 8573571 7559661

5 7.33 0.2 38209.0 6 9.1625 0.25 37758.0 6 10.995 0.3 37200.7 3 12.827 0.35 36530.3 5 9 14.66 0.40 35741.6

9 38503.9 5 37191.3 2 35878.6 8 34566.0 5 33253.1 1 16.492 0.45 34825.4 31940.7 5 8 18.325 0.50 33772.3 30628.1 6 4 20.157 0.55 32568.8 29131.5 5 8 21.99 0.60 31197.5 28002.8 7 7 23.822 0.65 29635.0 26690.2 5 6 4 25.655 0.70 27849.0 25377.6 6 27.487 0.75 25794.0 24064.9 5 6 7 29.32 0.80 23398.1 22752.3 8 3 31.152 0.85 20542.9 21439.7 5 2 32.985 0.90 16998.3 20127.0 8 7 34.817 0.95 12176.8 18814.4 5 3 36.65 1.0 0 17501.8

2 38356.51 475124 6617187 37474.98 436767. 5 36539.71 399293. 5 35548.22 362752. 8 34497.36 327204. 6 33383.09 292707. 3 32200.25 259324. 2 30942.2 227123. 9 29600.22 196181. 2 7 28162.68 166581. 5 26613.5 138418. 8 24929.52 111805. 3 23075.26 86875.8 20991.32 63800.5 5 18562.72 42809.2 3 15495.61 24246.5 1 8750.898 0 5746523 4946146 4214443 3549698 2950096 2413710 1938498 152293 1162790 857529.8 603877.3 398994.1 239794.2 122879.7 44431.73 0

636346.3

L(flap) 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 63634.6 3 0 0 0 0 0

V(flap) M(flap) W-fuel 572711. 5247471 7 6242.11 509077 4197977 6242.11 445442.4 3265093 6242.11 381807.8 2448820 6242.11 318173.2 1749157 6242.11 254538.5 1166105 6242.11 190903.9 699662.8 6242.11 127269.3 349831.4 6242.11 63634.63 116610.5 6242.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

V-fuel -56179

M-fuel -514740

-49936.9 -411792 -43694.8 -320283 -37452.7 -240212 -31210.6 -171580 -24968.4 -114387 -18726.3 -68632 -12484.2 -34316 -6242.11 -11438.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

W-VMWstruct sruct struct engi ne -30.44 0 447.46 7708.9

VMTot V Tot M engin engin e e 114073 1544957 11700. 10720 1 6

8 8 4 5 0 104199 1335918 29.526 417.02 6888.9 11700. 85763. 3 6 8 8 9 4 9 943935 1144973 28.613 387.50 6124.7 5850. 11700. 64322. .3 3 6 1 9 2 4 9 0 -42882852456 9719972 27.700 358.88 5414.6 5850.2 .2 4 8 9 0 755905 8157846 26.787 331.18 4757.0 5850.2 32161. .2 2 7 3 5 -304.4 0 660183 6772649 25.874 4150.1 5850.2 21441. 3 0 565341 5562856 24.960 278.52 3592.3 5850. 5850.2 10720. .4 64 8 6 2 2 5 0 24.047 253.56 3081.9 6 5 2 0 23.134 229.51 2617.2 4 8 6 0 22.221 206.38 2196.6 2 3 7 0 21.308 184.16 1818.4 2 7 0 20.394 162.85 1480.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 477284 4526876 .4 384367 3652253 .6 292500 2947889 .9 259140 2411891 226961 1937017 .1

8 4 9 0 19.481 142.45 1182.5 6 9 6 0 18.568 122.97 921.50 4 8 7 0 17.655 104.40 696.15 2 9 1 0 16.742 86.754 504.82 1 0 15.828 70.012 345.84 8 4 0 14.915 54.183 217.54 6 2 7 0 14.002 39.267 118.25 4 6 6 0 13.089 25.265 46.298 2 2 5 0 0 0 12.176

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

196039 1521111 .3 166458 1161869 .5 138314 856833.7 .4 111718 603372.5 .6 86805. 398648.4 70 63746. 239576.6 36 42769. 122761.4 97 24221. 44385.43 25 0 0

TOTV

TOTM

FUSELAGE LOAD DISTRIBUTION The fuselage can be considered to be supported at the center of the lift of the main wing. The loads on fuselage structure are then due to the shear force and bending moment about that point. The loads come from a variety of components for eg.the weights of payload, fuel, wing structure, tail structure, engines, fuselage structure, and tail control lift force. Fig illustrates a typical load distribution. Note that the coordinate along the fuselage is denoted as x and the fuselage is L.

LOAD SUMMARY(FUSELAGE) LOAD TYPE PAYLOAD STRUCTU RE TAIL STRUCTU RE MAGNITU DE -150000 -6247 6817.7 X/L_STA X/L_E R N 0.1 0.6 0 1 0.8 1 X/L_RESU LT 0.35 0.5 0.9 M SUM TAIL LIFT -35543.080.9 0.9 0.9 M@C_LI FT -37500 -624.7 6135.93 31988.7 7 31988.7 7

FUSELAGE LOAD DISTRIBUTION

X/L 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .95 1.00 W-PL 0 0 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 -13636.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V-PL 0 0 -13636.4 -27272.7 -40909.1 -54545.4 -68181.8 -81818.2 -95454.5 -109091 -122727 -136364 -150000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M-PL -3109499 -3109499 -3109499 -3062386 -2968158 -2826817 -2638363 -2402795 -2120113 -1790318 -1414309 -989386 -518250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W-STRUCT -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 -297.48 V-STRUCT -0.08 297.4 594.88 892.36 1189.84 1487.32 1784.8 2082.28 2379.79 2677.24 2974.72 3272.2 3569.68 -2379.84 -2082.36 -1784.88 -1487.4 -1189.92 -892.44 -594.96 -297.48 M-STRUCT 44191.52 44191.8 43164.28 41108.97 38025.87 33914.97 28776.28 22609.8 15415.52 7193.448 -2056.42 -12334.1 -23639.5 -35972.8 -27750.4 -20555.9 -14389.1 -9250.14 -5138.97 -2055.59 0

W-tail V-tail M-tail L-tail V1tail

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1374.34 -1374.34 -1374.34 -1374.34 -1374.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -6871.7 -6871.7 -6871.7 -6871.7 -5497.36 -4123.02 -2748.68 -1374.34 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -142450 -118709 -94966.9 -71225.2 -47483.4 -28490.1 -14245 -4748.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -106629 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -106629 -106629 -106629 -106629 -106629 0 0

M1tail
-2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -2210424 -1842020 -1473616 -1105212 -736808 -368404 0 0

Vtotal
-0.08 297.4 -13041.5 -26380.4 -39719.2 -53051.4 -66397 -79735.9 -93074.8 -106414 -119753 -133091 -146430 -9251.54 -8956.58 -8359.1 -8656.58 -6687.28 -5015.46 -3343.64 -1671.82

Mtotal
-5418182 -5418182 -5419209 -5374151 -5283007 -5145777 -4962461 -4733059 -4457572 -4135999 -3768339 -3354594 -2894764 -2388847 -1988479 -1589139 -1190826 -793542 -402033 -16300.6 -4748.34

V-TOTAL(DIAGRAM)

M-TOTAL(DIAGRAM)

CENTRE OF CALCULATION

GRAVITY

AND

STATIC

MARGIN

The centre of gravity is computed by summing the moment about the leading point of the fuselage and dividing by sum of the forces. CENTRE OF GRAVITY=22.803m (FROM THE NOSE OF THE FUSELAGE) STATIC MARGIN: A simplified measure of the pitching stability that can be used for locating some of the heavier components of the fuselage is called static margin. If the static margin is positive then the aircraft is statically stable.

SM= (xnp-xcg)/cWhere, xnp is the location of centre of lift xcg is the centre of gravity position c- is the mean aerodynamic chord By substituting SM=0.0316(stable) the above values we get

SELECTING OF AN AEROFOIL: In the new airplane design weight must important to the selection of airfoil; because the airplanes most important part aerofoil section. Selection of an airfoil depends on following:

High lift Low drag Maximum speeds High rate of climbs Ceiling

By using the formula CL=W/(S*q) we can find the CL values at takeoff and landing. We have to select an aerofoil that has the range of CL values within the drag bucket.

CL START =0.0513 CL END =0.0506 NACA 2408 has drag bucket within this range. CDO =0.01

Structural analysis Tensile loading In the semi-monocoque design, the sheet metal covering is designed to with stand the tensile loads. With the fuselage, supported at the center of lift for a positive load factor, the tensile loads are on the top surface. For a negative load factor, they would be on the bottom surface. In most case, the positive load factor is the larger of the two.

The tensile force acting on the fuselage skin is due to the moment at XCL. The tensile stress is then, T = Where, R is the half-height of the fuselage at XCL and I is the bending moment of inertia.

In the case of a circular cross section fuselage at XCL and I is the bending moment of inertia. In the case of circular cross-section fuselage, R is the radius of fuselage; I is I= Where=R-t; and t is the thickness of the sheet metal skin. I Therfore, from the Eq. T= The stress in the skin must be less than the ultimate tensile stress for the material divide by the design load factor, or T From this, using the Eq., the minimum skin thickness is tMIN= In many cases, a more desirable cross-section shape for the fuselage is elliptical in order to give a higher ceiling height. For an elliptic cross-section fuselage, where the major axis is the vertical height of the fuselage the bending moment of inertia about the minor axis(due to MXCL)) is I= Where,

A is the major axis radius, b is the minor axis radius, and c=A-t and D=B-t, where again t is the fuselage skin thickness.

For(t<<R), I=

In this case, the minimum skin thickness is, tMIN= In either case of circular or elliptic cross-section fuselage, Eq.provides values for the minimum skin thickness needed to withstand the tensile load produced by the maximum bending moment. The required thickness depends on the material, property; Values for the materials typically used are presented in the next section.

COMPRESSIVE LOADING In the semi-monocoque design, the longerons are designed to withstand the compressive loads with the fuselage, supported at the centre lift for a positive load factor; the compressive loads are on the lower side. For a negative load factor they are on the upper side. Again in most cases positive load factor is larger of the two and dictates the structural design. Structural failure under compression for the longerons usually occurs due to buckling. This will set the structural design limit the criterion for buckling comes from the Euler column formula, given as FE=

Where, F is the critical column load to produce buckling , L is the unsupported length, and C is a factor that depends on how the column is fixed ends. Fpr pinned ends, C=1, whereas C=4 for fixed ends. The longerons are often supported by comparatively flexible ribs or bulk

heads are rigid enough to provide restraint to the longerons, a value of C=1.5 can be used. Using Eq. the critical stress is e= Where the radius of gyration is given as, =

With I being the bending moment of inertia and A being the cross-sectional area of the column. In order to prevent a structural failure in the longerons, the compressive stress must be less than the buckling stress divided by the design load factor, namely.

The next step is then to determine the actual compressive stress in the longerons. This requires the setting of the configurations of longerons around the fuselage. An example arrangement of longerons around a circular cross-section fuselage of radius, R is shown in the fig. these consists of series of circular cross- section of elements that are equally spaced

in symmetric pattern about the vertical centerline of the fuselage. The annular distance between longerons is 90/n, where N is the no of longerons in a 90 arc-segment or the fuselage. In the example drawing in fig, the annular distance is 22.5, corresponding to N=4. The longerons in the lower halfplane of the fuselage are under compression due to the bending moment, m for a positive load factor. For the design the maximum stress is where corresponds to the largest vertical distance of a longerons from the centre of bending, which for this shape, is horizontal centre line of fuselage. By definition the bending moment of inertia is, I=

For discrete longerons of equal cross-section area, A1

I=A1 (y) For the general arrangement shown in the fig for N=4 and using the symmetry. I=4 A1R[ Also, ymax=Rcos(90/N), so that the minimum stress in a longeron is

In order the longerons not buckle due to this stress,

Substituting for from Eq. after evaluating the cosine terms and grouping the pre defined terms on the right hand side, we obtain

Where, I is the bending moment of inertia for the longeron cross-section shape. Eqn. illustrates some of the design decisions that need to be made with regards to longerons. Ultimately, the maximum un supported length, L needs to be decided. It depends on the material used for the longerons through, IL. The cross-section should be one that has a large bending moment of inertia. Typical shapes are either hollow circular or rectangular tubes, or open S-shape beams. The material should be one that has a large strength-toweight ratio. Examples of these will be given in the section. The final value of L will become the spacing between bulkheads in the fuselage. If the spacing

of bulkheads were determined due to other design decisions, that value of L would be used, and the crosssection properties of the longerons that were needed to prevent buckling would then be determined.

MATERIAL SELAECTIONS The criterion commonly used in the selections of structural materials for aircraft is that they have a minimum weight. Achieving this generally requires a synergy between the structural design and the material selections. Other factors that can also enter into the selaection pf materials are resistance to corrosion, fatigue behavior, creep characteristics, and machining and fabrication ability. The two types of loading that were analyzed with regards to the fuselage were pure tension and pure compression. In addition, the main wing spar will experience pure bending. Expressions that relate applied loads, F in these cases, to the induced stresses are tensile, compressive, and bending stresses respectively.

The weight of a structural member can be expressed in terms of density and volume. Therefore substituting for the

areas in the stress Eqn and solving for the respective weights,

For the same applied load Eqs. Allow comparisons to be made between the weights of material with different ultimate stress limits. For Eg. For tensile loading

For compressive loading,

For bending,

Table shows the values of weights ratio from equations for the different materials using as a references the properties of aluminium alloy 2024-T3. The rows of the table are listed in the order highest to lowest ultimate stress

Analyzing the material in the table on the basis of minimizing weight for bending and compressive buckling, the lowest density materials three are better than the aluminium alloys. For tensile loading, the selection, there is not a significant difference between the materials listed. Therefore for structures such as the fuselages kin, which are designed on the basis of tensile loading the selection of the material can be made to include other aspects such as corrosion resistant, finish, cost, etc. for structural elements that are designed to resist buckling and bending, it would appear that a magnesium alloy would be preferable. However, again

other considerations may be important, such as that magnesium has a greater tendency to corrode compared to an aluminium alloy. Although stain less steel has the highest ultimate stress and modulus of elasticity, in all aspects of loading, it has significant weight penalty. However in applications were the elements are exposed to high temperatures or were corrosion is a high concern, stainless steel may be the material of choice. Fiber reinforced plastics consists of high strength fiber that are bonded together with resigns and built up in layers to form an integral structure. Early examples consists of glass fibers bonded with polymer resins. Currently, high modulus fibers such as boron, silicon carbide, graphite and beryllium are used along with new resins such as cycloaliphatic epoxies and polymeric resins. Through the use of composite materials such as these, the total weight of an aircraft can be reduced by more than 35%.

Another means of reducing the structure weight is through the use do honey comb sandwich elements. In this case, a thick light-weight core of honey comb material is bonded between two thin facing layers of high tensile strength material. In such an arrangement, the bending moment is,

Where is the stress in the facing layers, with thickness, and is the thickness of the core material with, this is a particularly good method pf construction for the vertical and horizontal stabilizers because the internal volume is not needed for fuel storage. A minimum-weight analysis of such sandwich structures shown that with regards to bending moment, the minimum weight is obtained when the weight of the facing layers is same as that of the core material. When the minimum-weight sandwich structure is compared to a solid beam element made from the same materials the facing material to resist the same bending moment, the weight of the solid beam is,

To see the impact of the weight savings, if the facing material is 2024-T3 aluminium alloy from and the density of the honey comb material is approximately 10times less than the weight fraction is WsandwichWsolid=0.37

In this case, the honey comb is sandwich structure is only 37% of the weight of the equivalent solid structure. When it is noted that this is smaller than any one of the other materials subjected to materials in the

table, the great benefit it has towards achieving lightweight structures is clearly evident.

CONCLUSION New aircraft and innovative models are the outcome of experimental designs, which are put to many trails. These models may be successful when put on paper but might not yield the same result when tried out practically. Still there are many more areas in our aircraft left unexplored, such as instruments and control systems, radar systems, etc. These make calculations much complicated which be laborious. Also there might arise many debatable topics in our designs and hidden loose strings. There are many assumption involved in our design and data borrowed from history. We have also acquired satisfactory results which exceeds our requirements and expectations, thus making our aircraft a competitive one among others in skies.

REFERENCES:

Design of aircraft- Thomas C. Corke All the worlds aircraft- Janes

Theory of wing sections- Abbott