Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cruise Performance
Cruise Performance
Cruise Performance
X-body axis
T
Aerodynamic Lift
V
Thrust
X-wind axis Aerodynamic
Drag Horizontal
Weight
Aerodynamic lift and drag (L and D) depend on the angle of attack. In a simplified manner,
equations (2.1) and (2.2) can be understood as follows:
Angle of attack is adjusted to provide the required total lift.
Thrust is adjusted to provide the required acceleration and/or climb angle.
The required lift, climb angle and acceleration depend on the class of manoeuvre that the
aircraft has to perform: level cruise, climb, horizontal acceleration, steady turn, etc.
In the most of the cases, the thrust axis forms a little angle with respect to the wind axis.
That is, the angle (+T) is small enough to assume cos(+T) 1 and sin(+T) 0, letting
to simplify (2.1) and (2.2) to the following form:
T D W sin
mV (2.3)
m V L W cos (2.4)
Figure 2-2
For a cambered wing (figure 2-4), the minimum drag (CDmin) occurs at some positive lift
(CLmd). The drag polar has also a parabolic shape, but there is a vertical offset as given by
the equation (2.9):
CD CD min KCL CLmd
2
(2.9)
1 1
L/D max
CL
CL
L/D max
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
CD CD
Figure 2-3 Figure 2-4
Drag polar, uncambered wing Drag polar, cambered wing
For wings of moderate camber the offset CLmd is usually small; this implies that CD0 is
approximately equal to CDmin and equation (2.7) may be used. But even in the general
case, the equation (2.7) may be valid. It is usually found that, in a practical region of CL,
the straight line approximation of CD vs CL2 is acceptable. For instance, the figure 2-5
shows a case with CDmin = 0.025, CLmd = 0.2 and K = 0.045, comparing:
Several exact points calculated with equation (2.9).
The straight line approximation by equation (2.7), obtained with the double condition to
match the drag polar and the slope CD CL2 at the point of maximum L/D, which is in
practice a CLopt adjustment method.
CD vs CL2
3
2.5
2
Eq. (2.9)
CL2
0.5
0
0 0.04 0.08 0.12
CD
Figure 2-5: Simplified drag polar
In the previous example, the obtained values are CD0=0.020 and K=0.033. Note that the
approximation provides CD0 and K values to be applied in equation (2.7) that are lower
than those CDmin and K in equation (2.9).
The figure 2-6 shows the comparison of the lift to drag ratio L/D as a function of C L,
calculated with both equations. In this example, the difference in L/D is less than 7% in
the range of CL between 0.5CLopt and 2CLopt.
L/D vs CL
25
20
15 Eq. (2.9)
L/D
Aprox. (2.7)
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5
CL
Figure 2-6: Simplified Lift to Drag ratio
Therefore, in the use of the equation (2.7) as a simplified polar, the coefficients are
adjusted to represent the drag polar in the region of CL that is of interest for the analysis of
cruise or climb performance. In this scenario, the empirical zero-lift drag coefficient CD0
must be seen as a fictitious quantity, probably lower than the actual CD at CL=0.
The use of the simpler equation (2.7) instead of (2.9) let us to obtain easier analytical
results, without a significant loss of generality. The mathematical results of the next
sections are based on equation (2.7), providing a simplified but useful first approximation.
Nevertheless, it is feasible to get more refined results applying the same methods to the
equation (2.9).
The induced drag coefficient K is mainly related to the geometric and aerodynamic
characteristics of the wing. In the theoretical case of a 3-dimensional wing with an elliptical
lift distribution, the induced drag coefficient depends on the aspect ratio (A = b/c = b2/S,
being S the wing area, b the wing span and c the mean geometric chord) as follows:
CL2 1
Elliptical lift distribution: CDi KCL2 K (2.10)
A A
In practice, the deviation from the ideal elliptical distribution is like a reduction of the aspect
ratio. This effect is usually represented by the Oswald efficiency factor (e) as:
1
K (2.11)
Ae
Typical values of the Oswald efficiency factor are between 0.65 and 0.85 in subsonic flight,
It accounts not only for the non-elliptical form of the lift distribution, but also for the induced
drag due to fuselage, tailplanes, nacelles and interference effects.
For practical purposes, the drag coefficient CD is frequently expressed in counts, being
1 count = 104 = 0.0001 of CD.
0.8
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
CD
In this example, between Mach 0.70 and 0.80 there is a significant increase in the drag
and at a critical Mach of approximately 0.85 a rapid rise is experienced in both the zero-lift
drag and the induced drag. The drag rise is caused by shock waves that induce boundary
layer separation.
The aerodynamic design for high subsonic aircrafts tries to achieve low compressibility
drag and a high drag critical Mach number. For initial design calculations, it is usual to
assume CD due to compressibility in the order of 5 counts (0.0005) for long range cruise
conditions and in the order of 20 counts (0.0020) for high speed cruise conditions.
Next figure 2-8 shows an example of evolution of CDmin, CLmd and K with Mach.
0.035 0.7
0.030 0.6
0.025 0.5
CDmin
K, CLmd
CDmin
0.020 0.4
0.015 0.3
K
0.010 0.2
0.005 0.1
CLmd
0.000 0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Mach
Figure 2-8: Subsonic evolution of CDmin, CLmd and K with Mach (example)
Lift
Thrust Drag
Weight
Equations (2.12) and (2.13) imply that the thrust to weight ratio (T/W) in level flight must be
the inverse of the aerodynamic efficiency (L/D) as derived in (2.14). Therefore the
condition for minimum thrust at a given weight is also the condition for maximum L/D.
T D CD
(2.14)
W L CL
Power required is force times velocity, which in steady level flight equals the drag times
the speed. The power required to weight ratio is:
P DV C
V D (2.15)
W L CL
So the condition for minimum power required at a given weight occurs at minimum (DV)/L
or maximum (L/D)/V. It is achieved at a speed lower than the speed of maximum L/D, as
shown in figure 2-10.
Max (L/D)/V
Min. Min.
Power Thrust
V
Figure 2-10: Conditions for minimum thrust and minimum power
T C D C D0
KCL (2.16)
W CL CL
At a given weight, to find the condition at which thrust is minimum and L/D is maximum,
the derivative with respect to CL is set to zero. The results are:
CD0
CL min T CLopt (2.17)
K
1/ 2 1/ 4
2W 2W K
Vmin T (2.18)
SCL min T S D0
C
If the optimal lift coefficient is substituted back into equation (2.7) the drag coefficient is
twice the zero-lift drag coefficient:
C D0
CD min T CD0 K 2CD0 (2.19)
K
Dmin T CD min T 2CD0
2 KCD0 (2.20)
W CL min T CD0 K 1/ 2
L L 1
(2.21)
D min T D max 2 KCD0
The optimal lift coefficient for minimum drag and thrust is reached by achieving the optimal
dynamic pressure. This can be obtained by varying either speed or altitude:
At a given altitude, equation (2.18) indicates that VminT decreases during the cruise
because of the reduction of weight due to the fuel burned.
On the other hand, maintaining true airspeed and minimum thrust during the cruise
would require to decrease the density () at the same rate as W. It means to gain
altitude during the cruise, following a cruise-climb flight path (figure 2-11).
Cruise-climb
Climb Descent
P C
V D
2 W C D0
SCL CL
KCL
2W
CD0 CL3 / 2 KC1L/ 2 (2.22)
W CL S
At a given weight and altitude, the condition at which power required is minimum can be
obtained setting the derivative with respect to CL to zero. The results are:
3CD0
CL min P (2.23)
K
1/ 2 1/ 4
2W 2W K
Vmin P (2.24)
SCL min P S 3CD0
3CD0
CD min P CD0 K 4CD0 (2.25)
K
Dmin P CD min P 4CD0 4
KCD0 (2.26)
W CL min P 3CD0 K 1/ 2
3
At a given weight and altitude, comparing the equations (2.23) to (2.26) with the equations
(2.17) to (2.21) it is seen that:
Vmin P Vmin T 31/ 4 . The velocity for minimum power required is approximately 0.76
times the velocity for minimum thrust.
CLminP is 1.73 times CLminT.
The drag coefficient for minimum power required (CDminP = 4CD0) is twice the drag
coefficient for minimum thrust (CDminT = 2CD0); however the actual drag for minimum
power required is less than twice the drag for minimum thrust, since the aircraft flies at
a slower speed. In fact:
Dmin P Dmin T 2 3 1.155
L Dmin P L Dmax
1 1.155 0.866 ; the aerodynamic efficiency when flying
at minimum power is 87% of maximum L/D.
The relation between Cpower and C is easily derived by means of the propeller efficiency p,
which is defined as the ratio of thrust power output to power input:
TV
p (2.29)
PD
pPD TV
T or PD (2.30)
V p
In this way, the equivalent SFC for a propeller engine is:
dW / dt Cpower PD V
C Cpower (2.31)
T T p
For cruise optimization purposes, some simplified models of SFC are frequently assumed
at constant altitude:
For subsonic jet aircrafts, C is considered approximately independent of the speed.
For propeller aircrafts, Cpower is approximately independent of the speed, so equivalent
C is approximately proportional to the speed.
C C
V V
More real variations of SFC with Mach and altitude are illustrated in next figures 2-13 and
2-14, based on general trends and expressions provided by Howe [2R6]:
For turboprop engines, as illustrated in figure 2-13, there is some slight fall of Cpower
with Mach, and small altitude effect.
For turbofan engines, the bypass ratio R has an important effect. Figure 2-14 shows
typical curves of SFC versus Mach and altitude, for a pure turbojet (R=0), a low bypass
turbofan (R=2) and a high bypass turbofan (R=10).
Typical Turboprop SFC per power (all altitudes) Typical Turboprop SFC per thrust
3 0.8 S/L
20000 ft
40000 ft
Cpower (N/h/kW)
0.6
2
C (1/h)
0.4
1
0.2
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Mach Mach
0.6 0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Mach Mach
Figure 2-14: Typical Turbojet and Turbofan SFC, after Howe [2R6]
In general, for jet aircrafts the SFC increases slightly with Mach instead of being constant,
while for propeller aircrafts Cpower decreases slightly with Mach instead of being constant.
At a given altitude, it is possible to adopt a common formulation of SFC per unit of thrust,
valid for both jet and propeller aircraft, in the way indicated by the equation (2.32), where:
Cref is the SFC at a reference speed Vref.
kC is an empirical constant that depends on Cref, Vref and n.
V
n
C Cref k C V n
Vref
(2.32)
C
k C ref
n
Vref
For jet aircraft, the exponent n is in the vicinity of 0, being n 0. Particularly, the simplified
model that was shown in figure 2-12 has n = 0 and kC = C.
For propeller aircraft, the exponent n is in the vicinity of 1, with n 1. Particularly, the
simplified model that was shown in figure 2-12 has n = 1 and kC = Cpower / p.
In general, the model represented by equation (2.32) is usable with exponents 0 n 1;
being the jet case close to the lower limit and the propeller case close to the upper limit.
t2 W2 V
R Vdt dW (2.34)
t1 W1 dW dt
The specific endurance or instantaneous endurance is the derivative of the time flown
with respect to the weight of fuel burned. It can be expressed in terms of the specific fuel
consumption and the required thrust using the inverse of equation (2.27) and can be
related to the aerodynamic efficiency using the equation (2.14) (note that dE/dW < 0):
dE 1 1 1 L 1
(2.35a)
dW dW / dt CT CD W
dE 1 L 1
(2.35b)
dW C D W
The specific range or instantaneous range is the derivative of the distance travelled with
respect to the weight of fuel burned (note that dR/dW < 0):
dR V V V L 1
(2.36a)
dW dW / dt CT CD W
dR V L 1
(2.36b)
dW C D W
The variables involved in the equations (2.35) and (2.36) are the aerodynamic efficiency
L/D, the flight speed V and the specific fuel consumption C. If we assume that they are
approximately constant, the endurance and the range can be integrated as follows:
W2 1 L dW 1 L W1
E W 1
CD W
ln
C D W2
(2.37)
W2 V L dW V L W1
R W 1
CD W
ln
C D W2
(2.38)
Usually, the expressions (2.37) and (2.38) are not valid for the complete flight, but can be
applied with little loss of accuracy by breaking the cruise into several shorter mission
segments and using the appropriate L/D values as aircraft weight drops. Then W 1 and W 2
denote respectively the weights at the beginning and the end of each segment.
V L
The equation (2.38) is known as the Breguet range equation and the product is
C D
named the range parameter (PR), being a measure of the cruising performance.
Using the generic SFC model C k C V n provided by the equation (2.32), it is seen that, at
a given weight and altitude:
With n=0 (which is approximately representative of jet aircrafts):
o The maximum specific endurance |dE/dW| is reached at maximum L/D; it is
coincident with the condition of minimum thrust.
o The maximum specific range |dR/dW| is reached at maximum VL/D or
minimum D/(LV) and is achieved at a speed greater than the speed of
minimum thrust.
With n=1 (which is approximately representative of propeller aircrafts):
o The maximum specific endurance |dE/dW| is reached at maximum (L/D)/V or
minimum (DV)/L; it is coincident with the condition of minimum power.
o The maximum specific range |dR/dW| is reached at maximum L/D; it is
coincident with the condition of minimum thrust.
So in first approach, with the above very simplified models of SFC, the four conditions of
minimum thrust, minimum power, maximum specific endurance and maximum specific
range collapse in:
- 3 conditions of steady level flight for jet aircrafts with n=0.
- 2 conditions of steady level flight for propeller aircrafts with n=1.
L /D DV L D L D
Max. = Min. Max. = Min. Max. V = Min.
V L D L D LV
General
Min. Power Min. Thrust
(Jet & Prop)
Jet aircraft with n=0
Max. |dE/dW| Max. |dR/dW|
C constant
Prop aircraft with n=1
Max. |dE/dW| Max. |dR/dW|
Cpower constant
Next figures 2-15(a) and (b) illustrate the position of these points along the curves of L/D
and D/L versus speed, in non-dimensional form. Graphically it is interesting to note that:
The condition of minimum power or maximum (L/D)/V is at the point where a line from
the origin is tangent to the L/D curve. Conversely, the slope of the D/L curve at this
point is the opposite of the slope of a straight line from the origin.
The condition of maximum V(L/D) is at the point where a line from the origin is tangent
to the D/L curve. Conversely, the slope of the L/D curve at this point is the opposite of
the slope of a straight line from the origin.
L/D versus V D/L versus V
2
Min T
1 Min P Max VL/D
(L/D) / (L/D)max
(D/L) / (D/L)min
n=0 ME n=1
ME n=0 ME n=0 MR
n=1 n=1 MR n=0 n=1 MR
ME MR 1 Min P Max VL/D
0.5 Min T
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
V / V_minT V / V_minT
Figure 2-15(a): L/D & optimal conditions Figure 2-15(b): D/L & optimal conditions
Up to now we have not introduced any particular assumption about the drag polar. In the
next sections we will obtain particular results for the drag polar represented by the
simplified parabolic equation (2.7), in combination with the SFC model of (2.32).
0.95
0.2
0.9 Jet
0.1
n=0
0.85
1 1.08 1.16 1.24 1.32
VbestR / VminT
Figure 2-16
PE
1 L
1 CL
1 S
n/2
CL 1n / 2
(2.45)
C D k C V CD0 KCL k C 2W
n 2
CD0 KCL2
At a given weight and altitude, the conditions for best loiter are calculated setting the
derivative of the endurance parameter with respect to CL to zero. The results are:
CD0 2n
CLbestE (2.46)
K 2n
1/ 2 1/ 4
2W 2W K 2 n
VbestE (2.47)
SCLbestR S D0
C 2 n
CD0 2 n 4
CDbestE CD0 K CD0 (2.48)
K 2n 2n
L 1 (2 n) (2 n)
(2.49)
D bestE 4 KCD0
Referring L/D to the maximum aerodynamic efficiency from equation (2.21), we have:
L (2 n) (2 n) L
(2.50)
D bestE 2 D max
Next figure 2-17 shows the best-endurance-to-minimum-thrust ratios of aerodynamic
efficiency and airspeed. Note that:
For n = 0, best endurance and minimum thrust conditions are the same one.
For n = 1, (L/D) ratio is 0.866 and airspeed ratio is 0.76.
0.95
0.8
0.9
0.9
n=1
Propeller
0.85
0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1
VbestE / VminT
Figure 2-17
30000
Altitude (ft)
20000
10000
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
TAS (kts)
V L 1 2W CL
PR (2.52)
C D C S CD0 KCL2
If we suppose that C is constant with altitude, it is clear from (2.52) that flying at higher
altitudes improves the range. The range parameter seems to grow indefinitely with altitude.
However this is false, because we have to take into account the compressibility effects and
the available thrust.
The longest range conditions are the optimum combination of altitude and airspeed where
the maximum range parameter is reached. Finding it requires sweeping in altitude and, as
altitude increases, it requires:
To check for compressibility effects that can change CD0 and K.
To check if there is sufficient thrust to fly at the predicted altitude.
Usually, the drag of a subsonic jet aircraft increases very rapidly at speeds beyond MDR
(Mach of drag rise). In general, past a critical altitude (which is determined by M bestR=MDR)
the best range conditions are attained while flying at constant Mach = M DR, at the altitude
maximizing the range parameter. This is quite complex and is assessed in section 2.4.4.
Figure 2-19 shows this optimization in sketch.
Figure 2-19
Cruise-climb
The second option results in a flight path known as the cruise-climb. The range parameter
PR = (V/C)(L/D) is nearly constant, except for small variations of kC with altitude in equation
(2.32), and the range can be integrated as in equation (2.38). This is recalled in (2.53),
being Cave the average specific fuel consumption in case of slight variations with altitude:
W2 V L dW V L W1
R ln (2.53)
W1 CD W Cave D W2
Stair-step
However, the cruise-climb profiles are not normally permitted by the air traffic control that
wants to keep all aircraft at a constant altitude and speed. Nevertheless, on a long flight,
air traffic control may permit a stair-step path in which the aircraft climbs to a more
optimal altitude several times during the cruise.
Cruise-
Stair-step cruise
Descent
Climb
Figure 2-20
Flying at constant speed and altitude can be integrated in the range equation substituting
W by L and expressing CD as a function of CL:
L2 V dL V CL 2 dCL
R (2.54)
L1 C D C CL1 CD0 KCL2
And this integral is easily solved as follows:
C
V 1 CL 2 dCL V 1 CD 0 K
L2
R C K
arctg
CL
C CD 0 L1
1 CL2
C CD 0 K CD 0 CL1
CD 0
V 1 CL1
arctg CL 2
arctg C / K
(2.55)
C KCD0 CD0 / K D0
Cruise at constant C
V1 L V2
Climb decreasing airspeed Descent
Figure 2-21
In the particular case of a propeller aircraft in which Cpower and p are independent of the
speed, the term V C p Cpower can be extracted from the integral of R, obtaining:
p L W1
R ln (2.56)
Cpower D W2
In the particular case of a jet aircraft in which C is independent of speed, V can be
substituted as a function of the square root of the weight, yielding:
R
1 L W2
C D W1
2W dW 2 2 CL
SCL W
C S CD
W1 W2 (2.57a)
In general, if C = kCVn with n1, we can apply the same method of speed substitution as a
function of the weight, producing the following result (note that equation (2.57a) is just a
particular case of (2.57b) with n=0):
(1 n ) / 2
R
2
(1 n) k C
2
CL(1 n) / 2
W1(1 n) / 2 W2(1 n) / 2 (2.57b)
S CD
General
The previous results are only analytical approaches to very particular cases of aircraft
aerodynamic and SFC models and flight paths.
In general, the Breguet range equation (2.38) can be applied with little loss of accuracy by
breaking the cruise legs into several shorter mission segments and taking average values
of the range parameter (V/C)(L/D).
r T / T0
r 1
being p / p 0 (2.60)
r 5.2561 /
0
C k CMm (2.61)
With respect to the exponent m in equation (2.61), other simple interpretation is:
With a dependency C TASn in the troposphere, at constant Mach the SFC would
change like an n/2 n/(2(r1)). Being r = 5.2561, the exponent n/(2(r1)) would be
within 0 and 0.08 for n between 0 and 0.7 respectively.
With a dependency C TASn in the stratosphere, at constant Mach the SFC would
be constant, since the sound speed is constant at the stratosphere. So m = 0.
Nevertheless, the model C Mnm is more generally applicable and accurate than
the simple model C TASn; so the above estimations must be understood only as a
checking of the order of magnitude of the exponent m.
Introducing the standard atmosphere definitions from (2.60) in the equations (2.58), (2.59)
and (2.61) we attain:
2W
V2 r 1
(2.62)
0 SCL
V M RT0 Ma 0 (2.63)
C k CMm(r 1) (2.64)
The fraction V/C that appears in the range parameter can be expressed as a function of :
V Ma 0 [1 / 2 m(r 1)]
(2.65)
C k CM
Combining (2.62) and (2.63) it is possible to obtain a relation between and CL that does
not depend on V:
1/ r
1 2W
2 2
(2.66)
CL 0 SM a 0
Linking (2.66) with (2.65) we get the fraction V/C as a function of CL:
1 2m(r 1)
V Ma 0 1 2W 2r
(2.67)
C k CM CL 0 SM2a 02
Ma 0 (r 1)(1 2m) r CL
[1 (1 2m(r 1)) / 2r ]
V L 1 2W 2r
(2.68)
C D k CM 0 S CD
At given weight and Mach, the optimization of the range parameter only depends on the
last term of equation (2.68). To simplify, we will denote:
1 2m(r 1) 0.9049 if m 0
s 1 (2.69)
2r 0.9697 if m 0.08
This leads to the optimization of the following function of the lift coefficient:
CLs
f (C L ) (2.70)
CD0 KCL2
The maximum of this function is reached at CLbRMT as given by equation (2.71), where the
subscript bRMT indicates that it is the value of CL that produces the best range at fixed
Mach in the troposphere:
s CD0 s 2r 1 2m(r 1)
CLbRMT CLopt CLopt (2.71)
2s K 2s 2r 1 2m(r 1)
Drag coefficient and aerodynamic efficiency are given by:
2 4r
CD CD0 KCLbRMT
2
CD0 CD0 (2.72)
2s 2r 1 2m(r 1)
Above results are valid while they are inside the limits of the troposphere: 1 0.22336.
If not, equations (2.71) to (2.74) must be disregarded and the maximum range parameter
in the troposphere is reached just at the tropopause. In that case the global maximum will
be in the stratosphere.
Where TP indicates the temperature ratio at the tropopause (TP = 0.7519), which remains
constant at the stratosphere.
By equation (2.61), the specific fuel consumption varies like m. On the other hand, the
variation of is linked to the variation of CL by equation (2.58), which can be rewritten as:
2W 1
(2.76)
0M2a02TPS CL
Therefore the range parameter can be expressed as:
m
V L Ma 0 TP 0M2a02TPS C1Lm
(2.77)
CD k CM 2W C
D
At given weight and Mach, the optimization of the range parameter only depends on the
last term of equation (2.77). This leads to optimize the following function:
C1L m
f ( CL ) (2.78)
CD0 KCL2
The maximum of this function is reached at CLbRMS as given by equation (2.79), where the
subscript bRMS indicates that it is the value of CL that produces the best range at fixed
Mach in the stratosphere:
1 m CD0 1 m
CLbRMS CLopt (2.79)
1 m K 1 m
Drag coefficient and aerodynamic efficiency are given by:
2
CD CD0 KCLbRMS
2
CD0 (2.80)
1 m
L CLbRMS 1 m2 1 L
1 m2 (2.81)
D CD 2 CD0K D max
Again, these results are very close to the condition of maximum aerodynamic efficiency:
CLbRMS / CLopt V / VminT (L/D)/(L/D)max
If m=0 1 1 1
If m=0.08 1.083 0.961 0.9936
The density ratio of this optimized altitude is obtained by substitution of (2.79) into (2.76),
yielding (2.82). The results are valid in the stratosphere, with 0.29707.
2W K 1 m
(2.82)
0M2a02TPS CD0 1 m
Global optimization
Depending on the combination of aircraft parameters, Mach limitation and flight envelope,
a number of different situations can appear; for instance:
The maximum operational altitude of the aircraft is below the optimal altitude at the
troposphere given by equation (2.74). In that case the best range condition is at the
maximum operational altitude.
The global maximum is in the troposphere, given by (2.71) with (2.74) in bounds.
There is no local maximum in the troposphere since equation (2.74) is out of bounds.
The global maximum in the stratosphere, given either by equation (2.79) or by the
maximum operational altitude, if it is not possible to reach the optimum C L.
There is a local maximum at the troposphere, given by equation (2.71) with (2.74) in
bounds, and other local maximum at stratosphere given by equation (2.79). The global
maximum is determined by comparison of the respective values of range parameter.
2.5 Bibliography
References for chapter 2:
2R1. D. P. Raymer.
Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach.
AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Education Series.
1st edition 1989 5th edition 2012.
2R2. E. Torenbeek.
Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane Design.
Delft University Press & Kluwer Academic Publishers.
1982.
2R3. L. M. Nicolai, G. E. Garichner.
Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design.
Volume I Aircraft Design.
AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Education Series.
1st edition 1975 Last edition 2010.
2R4. S. A. Brandt, R. J. Stiles, J. J. Bertin, R. Whitford.
Introduction to Aeronautics: A Design Perspective.
AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Education Series.
1st edition 1997 2nd edition 2004.
2R5. L. R. Jenkinson, P. Simpkin, D. Rhodes.
Civil Jet Aircraft Design.
AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Education Series.
1999.
2R6. D. Howe.
Aircraft Conceptual Design Synthesis.
Professional Engineering Publishing.
2000.
2R7. A. K. Kundu.
Aircraft Design.
Cambridge University Press.
2010.
2R8. M. Asselin.
An Introduction to Aircraft Performance.
AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Education Series.
1997.