AI AA-84-2 163

On the Aerodynamic Optimization

of Mini-RPV and Small GA Aircraft
F. R. Goldschmied, Monroeville, PA

AlAA 2nd Applied Aerodynamics Conference

August 21-23, 1984/Seattle, Washington

For permission to copy or republish, contact the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
1633 Broadway, New York, NY 10019
 ON THE AERODYNAMIC OPTIMIZATION OF MINI-RPV AND SMALL GA AIRCRAFl
Foblo R. Goldschmied"
Monruevi 1 le, PA 15146
Abstract Wing drag, l b
FW
v
A b r i e f study has been c a r r i e d o u t on the adap- H, J e t t o t a l - h e a d @ Sta. 5, l b l f t '
t a t i o n of an optimized system comprising an axisym-
m e t r i c body, s u c t i o n boundary-layer c o n t r o l and AH,, Total-head r i s e o f fan between S t a .
s t e r n j e t - p r o p u l sion, which was developed o r i g i - 2 and 5, l b / f t 2
n a l l y f o r l i g h t e r - t h a n - a i r a p p l i c a t i o n , t o mini-RPV Wing l i f t , 7b
and small GA a i r c r a f t by t h e a d d i t i o n o f dynamic
wina l i f t . For mini-RPV. c o n s i d e r a t i o n has been n Fan soeed,
, RPM
given t o fuselage diameters o f 20 and 34" w i t h a Free-stream s t a t i c pressure, l b / f t 2
gross weight range from 125 t o 300 l b a t the speeds
o f 100 and 150 Kn. The p r e d i c t e d powers ranged
P5 S t a t i c base pressure @ S t a . 5, l b l f t '
from 2.35 t o 16.20 HP.

For the GA a i r c r a f t , c o n s i d e r a t i o n has been given

t o fuselage diameters o f 45 and 60" w i t h a gross
qo = w,2 Free-stream dynamic pressure, l b / f t 2

weight range from 1400 t o 3400 l b a t t h e speed of 4 Fan s u c t i o n flow, f t ' l s e c

200 MPH. The p r e d i c t e d powers ranged from 60.6 T Thrust of fusel agelboundary-l ayer
t o 132.5 HP.
c o n t r o l / j e t system, l b
Nomencl a t ure ut = nd,n Fan t i p speed, f t / s e c

A Wing area, ft2 UO

Free-stream v e l o c i t y , f t / s e c
AR Aspect r a t i o
J e t v e l o c i t y @ Sta. 5, f t / s e c
B Wing span, f t
V Fuselage volume, f t 3
C Wing chord, f t
NO Gross weight, l b
Wing drag c o e f f i c i e n t
E l - wouo
HP550 Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index
AH,
CH,, = -
4"
5
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e c o e f f i c i e n t 'IF Fan t o t a l e f f i c i e n c y
V Kinematic v i s c o s i t y o f a i r , f t 2 / s e c
P Mass d e n s i t y o f a i r , l b s e c 2 / f t 4

$ = n A Fan f l o w parameter
H, - Po 5 diut
CHT, = - Jet total-head c o e f f i c i e n t
q0
L
CL = q Wing l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t

P, - P Introduction
CP5 = - S t a t i c base pressure c o e f f i c i e n t The concept o f the optimum aerodynamic i n t e g r a -
q0 @ Sta. 5
t i o n of body p r e s s u r e - d i s t r i b u t i o n ( w i t h concomitant
Fan s u c t i o n f l o w c o e f f i c i e n t shape), s l o t - s u c t i o n boundary-layer c o n t r o l and
s t e r n j e t - p r o p u l s i o n was presented i n 1967'; a wind-
tunnel v e r i f i c a t i o n w i t h a s e l f - p r o p e l l e d t e s t model
was presented i n 1982,' showing 50% power r e d u c t i o n
CTw = -
IW
Thrust c o e f f i c i e n t f o r wing as compared t o t h e best streamlined body w i t h s t e r n
qovo'66 wake-propeller. An optimized LTA system was d e r i v e d
from t h e above data' and i t was a l s o shown t h a t j e t -
p r o p u l s i o n o f a subsonic body w i t h f r e e t r a n s i t i o n
CTo =
TO
___ Total t h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t was achieved w i t h j e t total-head equal t o f r e e -
qovo.66 stream's.' It can be noted t h a t , f o r t h e same mass
flow, a conventional free-stream j e t p r o p u l s o r would
Diameter of stern j e t and o f have a j e t t o t a l - h e a d c o e f f i c i e n t CHT, = 4 o r , f o r
d, t h e same diameter, a c o e f f i c i e n t CHT, = 2, as shown
fan, f t
i n Ref. 5, on t h e b a s i s of the b e s t conventional
D Diameter o f fuselage, f t streamlined body of equal volume.

The o p t i m i z a t i o n of streamlined bodies by shape

.-/ *Consulting Engineer; Associate F e l l o w A I A A .

@Copyright 1984 by Fabio R. Goldschmied, P.E.

o n l y was presented i n 1974;6 f o r a l l - t u r b u l e n t
boundary-layers, l i t t l e drag g a i n could be obtained
by o p t i m i z i n g t h e shape. T h i s extensive program
Released Io A l A A Io publish in a l l lorms.
 . .:.. . :.:.
proved c o n c l u s i v e l y t h a t boundary-layer c o n t r o l /j . . .
:::.
8
and p r o p u l s i o n had t o be i n t e g r a t e d w i t h t h e body
shape i f s u b s t a n t i a l power gain had t o be achieved.

The o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s paper i s t o i n v e s t i g a t e
h e a v i e r - t h a n - a i r a p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s optimized
system, i . e . t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n of
a l i f t i n g wing onto t h e fuselagefboundary-layer
c o n t r o l f j e t p r o p u l s i o n system. The e v a l u a t i o n w i l l
be c a r r i e d o u t on t h e b a s i s o f an aerodynamic e f f i -
c i e n c y index 6 = W,U,/HP f o r two classes o f a i r -
c r a f t , i.e. mini-RPV @ 100 and 150 Kn and small
GA (General A v i a t i o n ) 2-seat and 4-seat a i r c r a f t
0 200 MPH.
Qtimizeo Body/Boundary-Layer C o n t r o l /
Jet-Propblsion System: *Tunnel Te-ss_t

The wind-tunnel t e s t program o f t h e 20" diameter

s e l f - p r o p e l l e d model was c a r r i e d o u t i n 1981 i n
t h e 8x10 low-speed wind tunnel o f t h e David T a y l o r
Naval Ship R&D Center; t h e t e s t program was q u i t e
extensive as i t comprised o v e r 800 t e s t p o i n t s
organized i n 86 t e s t runs. The t e s t r e s u l t s a r e
presented i n Refs. 2, 3 and 4. The b a s i c t e s t
model w i t h open j e t (Conf. 00) i s shown i n F i
1 (starboard photo) and i n F i g . 2 ( s t e r n photoy:
I n F i g . 1 t h e 12" chord s t r u t can be p l a i n l y seen
as l a r g e as a wing would be; i t s i n t e r f e r e n c e Fig. 2 Stern photo o f wind-tunnel t e s t model
e f f e c t i s a l r e a d y accounted f o r i n a l l t h e t e s t (Conf. 00)
results. F i o u r e 2 shows c l e a r l y t h e t h r e e r a d i a l
rakes i n t h e j e t nozzle t o measure t h e f l o w and
t h e j e t total-head.

Fig. 3 P o r t photo o f wind-tunnel t e s t model w i t h

Fig. 1 Starboard photo o f wind-tunnel t e s t model
(Conf. 00)
The a x i a l force ( d r a g o r t h r u s t ) measurements
were based b o t h on t h e wake's momentum balance,
as i n d i c a t e d b y a wake rake, and on t h e f o r c e
e x e r t e d on t h e s t r u t , as i n d i c a t e d by t h e wind-
tunnel balance which was supporting t h e s t r u t .
A t t h e h i g h e r t h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t s , above CT =
0.010, t h e r e was i n a l l cases e x c e l l e n t agreement
between t h e two types of a x i a l f o r c e measurements,
as shown i n Figs. 7, 8 and 9; t h e r e f o r e t h e t h r u s t
data cannot be d i s p u t e d i n any way.
The model was a l s o t e s t e d w i t h a t a i l b o o m i n
t h e j e t nozzle (Conf. 01) as shown i n F i g . 3.
t a i l b o o m (Conf. 01)
The l a y o u t o f t h e t e s t model's aftbody w i t h t h e
s u c t i o n s l o t , f a n i n s t a l l a t i o n and j e t nozzle i s
shown i n F i g . 4 . While t h e fan should have been
a t S t a t i o n 5, t h e arrangement shown had t o be ac-
cepted f o r p r a c t i c a l reasons. The fan mass-flow
weighted mean pressure r i s e i s computed between
S t a t i o n s 2 and 5, w i t h t h e flow being measured a t
S t a t i o n 5; t h e f a n a i r power i s determined by t h e
product of f l o w and pressure r i s e .
Figure 5 presents a photo o f t h e a x i a l f a n
i n s t a l l a t i o n i n t h e forebody of t h e wind-tunnel t e s t
model: t h e fan discharae i s i n t h e l e f t foresround,
w h i l e t h e f a n i n t a k e i s i n d i c a t e d by t h e Founded
edge i n s i d e t h e forebody. ._.

2
 L&&-
R =ssx106 I... iMSz

1
1.0 0 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 12 1.4 1.6-.1.8
.. 2.0 2.2
L.-L

Dimanrianler~h i d l 0iildnce. XI0

L . . .2.4
U . 2.6 2.8 1.0

Fig. 6 Experimental s t a t i c - p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n
on t e s t model @ 6" angle o f a t t a c k

System A n a l y s i s

A procedure has been developed f o r t h e a d d i t i o n

Fig. 4 Aftbody l a y o u t with s u c t i o n - s l o t , fan
i n s t a l l a t i o n and j e t nozzle (Conf. 00)
of wings t o t h e body and f o r t h e computation o f t h e
a d d i t i o n a l t h r u s t acquired from the j e t t o counter-
a c t t h e w i n o ' s draa. The w i n o ' s l i f t l d r a a r a t i o s
have been coGputed i r o m c l a s s i c a l NACA data;' better
r e s u l t s could be obtained w i t h modern a i r f o i l s such
as the Liebeck, t h e NASA GA(W)-l and -2, e t c . The
fan performance has been based on t h e t e s t e d NASA
a x i a l r o t o r / s t a t o r stage 516; t h e s t a g e ' s design
and experimental performance i s given i n Ref. 8.

The experimental wind-tunnel t e s t data of Ref.

2 have been r e p l o t t e d i n the complete t h r u s t range
and a r e shown i n Figs. 7, 8 , 9 , 11, 12 and 13. The
f a n s e l e c t i o n p l o t i s given i n F i g . 10, w i t h t h e
516 performance curves r e l a t i n g pressure, f l o w and
efficiency.

The computational procedure comprising 15 steps

i s given below:

1. S e l e c t t h e max. c r u i s e speed U, and the

corresponding dynamic pressure qo; determine o r
estimate the gross weight Wo.

2. Select fuselage diameter t o y i e l d adequate

cabin space and/or equipment volume.

3. Assume l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t CL o f wing @ max.

c r u i s i n g speed. Compute t h e wing l o a d i n g qoCL and
t h e wing area A = Wo/qoCL. A l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t CL
= 0.40 i s selected f o r the mini-RPV and CL : 0.30
i s selected f o r t h e GA a i r c r a f t .

4. Compute the wing chord and span, assuming

a wing a s p e c t - r a t i o AR = 10 and constant chord:

Fig. 5 Photo o f f a n i n s t a l l a t i o n i n wind-tunnel c =Q B = 1oc

t e s t model
The t y p i c a l stepwise s t a t i c pressure d i s t r i b u t i o n A c t u a l l y the wing may have a t a p e r r a t i o and t h e
on the body i s shown i n F i g . 6 a t 0' and 6' angle computed chord value i s the niean chord.
of a t t a c k . The stepwise d i s t r i b u t i o n i s used ( w i t h
s u i t a b l e boundary-layer c o n t r o l ) t o avoid t h e l a r g e 5. Compute t h e wing l i f t / d r a g r a t i o a t t h e
growth o f t h e boundary-layer momentum-thickness selected CL p o i n t , using one o f the f o l l o w i n g two
which n o n n a l l v occurs i n t h e adverse Dressure experimental equations from Ref. 7 ( F i g . 18, p . 21)
g r a d i e n t area "and t o achieve v e r y low e x t e r n a l wake f o r wings of aspect r a t i o AR = 10:
drags, a s shown i n Refs. 1 and 2.
a. Cg=O.0068+0.0343 Cf (NACA 23018 A i r f o i l )
While i n Refs. 2, 3 and 4 the wind-tunnel t e s t
data were p l o t t e d o n l y up t o CT = 0.020, since the b. Cg=0.0045+0.0383 Cf (NACA 653-418 A i r f o i l )
main focus was on the e q u i l i b r i u m p o i n t (CT = O ) ,
i n t h i s paper a l l the a v a i l a b l e t e s t data a r e p l o t - A parametric wing design study should be made, i n
ted, f o r both f r e e t r a n s i t i o n on the body and f o r the manner of Koegler,' b u t i t i s beyond the scope
.....:.... t r a n s i t i o n t r i p p e d a t 10% l e n g t h . o f t h i s b r i e f paper.

3
 6. Compute the drag o f t h e wing:

WO
Fw = cL/cD
since t h e wing l i f t must equal t h e gross weight
W,. Compute the t h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t :

r e q u i r e d t o generate t h e t h r u s t t o counterbalance
t h e wing drag. Add 10% t o the wing t h r u s t c o e f f i -
c i e n t f o r wing/fuselage i n t e r f e r e n c e drag, although
the model was t e s t e d i n t h e wind-tunnel w i t h a
s t r u t l a r g e enough t o be a wing; a l s o add another
t h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t increment o f 0.003 f o r t h e
empennage and t a i l b o m s .

CT, = CTw f 0.10 CTw f 0.003

L

I n the wind-tunnel t e s t s o f Ref. 2, an empennage a

adequate t o y i e l d n e u t r a l s t a t i c s t a b i l i t y t o t h e
body up t o 8' had an incremental power c o e f f i c i e n t
._
L
U
o f o n l y 0.0020. c
rn
Y

0.02k
7. Obtain t h e value o f t h e f a n a i r power coef-
f ic i e n t :
M I 0 1 *

from t h e experimental p l o t C H P ~ Jvs CT a s presented

i n Fig. 7, corresponding t o the above CT, f o r the
f r e e t r a n s i t i o n o r f o r t h e t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n case, 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.M
as warranted by t h e Reynolds number and b y opera-
t i o n a l considerations. Thrust Coefficient CT =Tk,Vo'66

8. Obtain the value o f the f a n f l o w c o e f f i -

cient: Fig. 7 Fan a i r power c o e f f i c i e n t CHP25 vs T h r u s t
c o e f f i c i e n t CT

from t h e experimental p l o t CQs vs CT as presented

i n Fig. 8, corresponding t o the above CT, f o r the
f r e e t r a n s i t i o n o r f o r the t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n case,
as warranted by the Reynolds number and by opera-
t i o n a l considerations.
cq, x U 0 V Q . 6 6 .
Compute t h e f a n f l o w 4 = I ..* I I I

9. Obtain the value o f t h e fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e

coefficient : 0.03- Transition

An
CHli = 2
qo
from t h e experimental p l o t C H ~ Svs CT as presented
i n F i g . 9, corresponding t o the above CT, f o r t h e
f r e e t r a n s i t i o n o r f o r the t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n case,
as warranted bv the Revnolds number and bv ooera-
t i o n a l consid&ations. Compute the fan i r e b e
~

r i s e AH,,= CH,, x q.,

10. The s e l e c t i o n o f the best a x i a l r o t o r / s t a t o r

stage f o r the j o b r e q u i r e s t h e computation o f t h e 15
f a n system r e s i s t a n c e c o e f f i c i e n t O'/$ i n the O N
domain :
--2
LY 5 Fig. 8 Fan f l o w c o e f f i c i e n t CQ5 vs Thrust
a"@ = 3557
c o e f f i c i e n t CT 4

4
 p 1.00 ,* i I I I I
NASA Axial

Transition

0.4 -

Thrust Coefficient CT = T/qoVa6

Fig. 9 Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e c o e f f i c i e n t CH2s vs 0’3 -Fan System Resistance

Thrust c o e f f i c i e n t CT

The denomination of $ i s t h e f a n f l o w parameter: 0. 2 -

Y
@=$-
7 d:ut 0.1 -
The denomination of + i s the fan total-pressure
parameter: I I I I
0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fan Flw Parameter 0

The f a n diameter corresponds t o t h e j e t diameter

d, ; u t = n d S n i s t h e fan t i p speed and P i s t h e
a i r mass d e n s i t y . Figure 10 presents t h e $4 p l o t
w i t h two fan system r e s i s t a n c e curves, r e p r e s e n t i n g
t h e max. and min. encountered i n t h i s study, and
w i t h t h e experimental performance curves $4and
$ - n ~of t h e selected NASA a x i a l r o t o r / s t a t o r stage
518;’ i t can be seen t h a t a f a i r l y good match i s
achieved, i . e . t h e fan w i l l operate between 88.3
and 90.6% e f f i c i e n c y . Fan aerodynamic s e l e c t i o n
procedures a r e discussed thoroughly i n Section 6
o f Ref. 10.
11. The fan speed i s computed:
n = - c- q 5 ‘a 130.13 RPS
$ VO.33
The value of t h e fan flow parameter +
i s determined
i n Fig. 10 from t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e fan system
r e s i s t a n c e curve w i t h t h e NASA 518 performance
curve. The range of $ i s from 0.485 t o 0.508.
S i m i l a r l y , t h e f a n e f f i c i e n c y n~ i s determined i n
F i g . 10 from t h e NASA 51B e f f i c i e n c y curve a t t h e
above 0 l o c a t i o n .
The f a n diameter i s assumed t o correspond t o t h e
s t e r n j e t diameter: ds = 0.1625D.
Fig. 10 Fan pressure parameter +
and t o t a l
e f f i c i e n c y QF vs fan f l o w parameter $
13. The j e t t o t a l - h e a d c o e f f i c i e n t
Hs- Po
CHT, = __
qo
i s determined from t h e p l o t of Fig. 11 and t h e j e t
v e l o c i t y r a t i o Us/U, i s determined from t h e p l o t
o f Fig. 12 f o r t h e f r e e t r a n s i t i o n o r t h e t r i p p e d
t r a n s i t i o n cases, as warranted by Reynolds number
and opera t ional con s i dera t i on s.
14. The j e t s t a t i c base pressure c o e f f i c i e n t CP,
i s determined from t h e p l o t of Fig. 13. I t can be
seen t h a t t h e s t a t i c base pressure c o e f f i c i e n t range
i s v e r y high; CPs w i l l be over 0.8 f o r t h e t h r u s t
c o e f f i c i e n t range of t h i s study. A s a reference,
Ref. 11 shows t h a t t h e ’ base pressure c o e f f i c i e n t
o f conventional b o a t t a i l / j e t a f t e r b o d i e s i s i n t h e
0.10 t o 0.15 range.
15. The f i n a l step i s t h e computation o f t h e
aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index:

12. The fan shaft power can be computed now from

t h e C H P 2 5 value of Step 7 and t h e above e f f i c i e n c y
determination f o r an a v a i l a b l e fan design:
The index expresses t h e power r e q u i r e d t o f l y t h e
a i r c r a f t ’ s gross weight a t t h e max. c r u i s e speed;
t h e r e f o r e , i t i s a good i n d i c a t i o n of t h e e f f i -
c i e n c y of t h e aerodynamic design when comparing
two a i r c r a f t a t t h e same speed.

5
 M i n i -RPV

Mini-RPV aerodynamic design has n o t achieved y e t

an adequate degree of e f f i c i e n c y f o r t h e m i s s i o n
speed and endurance requirements. Considering t y p i -
c a l c u r r e n t v e h i c l e s such as t h e A i r Force/Boeing
Pave Tiger, t h e Atmy/Lockheed Aquila, t h e I s r a e l W
A i r c r a f t i n d u s t r i e s Scout, t h e Tadiran M a s t i f f MK3

fi
and t h e Developmental Sciences Sky Eye, i t i s found
t h a t t h e gross weight ranges from 220 t o 380 l b ,

1
L& 9,- '\FreeTransiiion
and
Coni. Wake
t h e maximum c r u i s i n g speed ranges from 8 5 t o 100
Kn and t h e engine powers range from 22 t o 30 HP.
The aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index ranges from 2.5
t o 3.5.
Transition
Tripped B 58% 0
The wind-tunnel t e s t model,2"'4 w i t h i t s dia-
meter D = 20.0 i n . and 100 Kn speed, may be c l a s s i -
I I I I I f i e d a s a f u l l - s c a l e mini-RPV; Table 1 presents i t s
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 performance d a t a f o r 125, 150 and 175 l b gross
0.66 weights w i t h a s u i t a b l e wing (CL = 0.40) and empen-
Thrust Ccefficient CT = T/q 0V nage.

F i g . 11 J e t t o t a l - h e a d c o e f f i c i e n t CHT, vS
T h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t CT Table 1 20" Diameter ( V = 6 . 2 ft3)Mini-RPV
P 100 Kn (qo = 34.1 PSF)
(Free T r a n s i t i o n )

Gross Weight W, lb 125 I t 150 l b 175 l b

1.8 I I I I
1 Wing l o a d i n g qoCL @ CL= 0.4 13.6 13.6 13.6
PSF
Wing area A = Wo/qoCL, ft2 9.19 11.03 12.86
Wing chord, C ft 0.958 1.050 1.134
Wing span, B ft 9.58 10.50 11.34
L i f t / d r a g r a t i o of wing, 37.6 37.6 37.6
CL/CD @ CL = 0.40
CL
Drag of wing, Fw = W o / ~ 3.32 3.99 4.65
V

0. 2
01
c I I I
01 lo
I
-IJ Thrust coeff. f o r wing
Total t h r u s t coeff.
CTw
CTa
0.0285
0.034E
0.0348
0.0412
1.0406
1.0476
0 0.01 0.02 0. m 0. M 0.05
Fan a i r power coeff. CHP, 0.060 0.0685 1.0755
Thrust Ccefficient CT = TPoVo'66
Fan f l o w c o e f f . CQ, 0.0237 0.0252 1.0264
F i g . 1 2 J e t v e l o c i t y - r a t i o U,/U, vs Thrust Fan f l o w 9 CFS 13.50 14.35 15.03
c o e f f i c i e n t CT Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 2.54 2.80 3.05
coeff. CHzs
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 86.36 95.20 103.70
AH2 i PSF

1.4, I I I I
Fan system-resi stance 0.785 0.805 0.811
I coeff. @2/*

Fan speed, n RPM 33,964 35,756 37,311

Fan diameter, d, in. 3.25 3.25 3.25
Fan e f f i c i e n c y , '?F % 89.75 90.50 90.75
Fan shaft power HP 2.35 2.78 3.12
Jet total-head coeff. CHT5 2.66 2.90 3.16
Jet velocity r a t i o U,/Uo 1.35 1.42 1.51
I I I I I J e t s t a t i c base 1.04 1.10 1.10
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.M 0.05 pressure c o e f f . cp5
Thrust Ccefliclent C l =T/qoVo'M Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y F. 16.34 17.20 18.22
index
F i g . 1 3 J e t s t a t i c base pressure c o e f f i c i e n t CP, vs ~ __
T h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t CT

6
 With f r e e t r a n s i t i o n t h e f a n s h a f t powers a r e
3 HP and l e s s a t t h e 100 Kn speed; t h e aerodynamic
e f f i c i e n c y index i s o v e r 16. The engine may be
an a v a i l a b l e Fox Twin, y i e l d i n g 3 HP @ 14,500 RPM
and weighing 3 l b w i t h mount and m u f f l e r . Table
2 presents t h e performance data o f t h e same 20 i n .
4 fuselage a t 150 Kn speed w i t h f r e e t r a n s i t i o n ,
w h i l e Table 2a presents t h e corresponding data w i t h
t r a n s i t i o n t r i p p e d @ 10% l e n g t h on t h e fuselage,
f o r gross weights of 150, 175 and 200 l b . It i s
found t h a t t h e fan s h a f t powers a r e l e s s than 7
HP w i t h f r e e t r a n s i t i o n and l e s s than 8 HP w i t h
t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n ; t h e corresponding aerodynamic
e f f i c i e n c y index values a r e over 13 and 10, respec-
tively.
As a d i r e c t comparison w i t h a c u r r e n t mini-RPV
design, t h e fuselage diameter was increased t o 34
i n . t o match b o t h t h e l a t e r a l dimension and t h e
l e n g t h of t h e A i r Force/Boeing Pave T i g e r ' s fuse-
lage; Table 3 presents t h e performance data @ 100
Kn w i t h free t r a n s i t i o n w h i l e Table 3a presents
t h e corresponding data w i t h t r a n s i t i o n t r i p p e d @
10% length, f o r gross weights o f 225, 250 and 275
1b.
Table 2 20" Diameter ( V = 6.2 ft') Mini-RPV
With f r e e t r a n s i t i o n t h e fan shaft powers a r e
l e s s than 6 HP w h i l e w i t h t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n t h e
powers a r e l e s s than 20 HP; t h i s may be compared
w i t h t h e 28 HP enaine o f t h e 250 l b Pave T i a e r .
The aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index values a r e over
14 and 11, r e s p e c t i v e l y .
F i n a l l y , Table 4 presents t h e performance data
of t h e 34 i n . diameter fuselage a t 150 Kn w i t h
gross weights of 250, 275 and 300 l b and w i t h
t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n . It can be noted t h a t t h i s case
w i t h 300 l b represents a s u b s t a n t i a l performance
improvement over t h e Pave T i g e r , i n b o t h speed (50%
gain) and weight (20% gain); t h e f a n s h a f t power
i s 16 HP and t h e aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index i s
8.75. I t can be noted t h a t , w i t h t r i p p e d t r a n s i -
t i o n , t h e r e i s no l a m i n a r f l o w r i s k and t h a t t h e
t u r b u l e n t power c o e f f i c i e n t s should a c t u a l l y be
lower because t h e Reynolds number i s h i g h e r by t h e
f a c t o r 1.7 x 1.5 = 2.55.
A schematic l a y o u t of t h e proposed mini-RPV con-
f i g u r a t i o n i s shown i n Fig. 14; t h e pylon/wing
arrangement was proposed b y Larrabee" f o r g l i d e r s
so as t o maximize t h e w i n g ' s l i f t . I t can be noted
t h a t t h e pylon/fuselage i n t e r f e r e n c e e f f e c t was
a l r e a d y simulated i n t h e wind-tunnel t e s t s by t h e

7 @ 150 Kn (qo = 77.3 PSF)

(Free T r a n s i t i o n )

Wing l o a d i n g qoCL @ C ~ = o . 4
~

~
175 l b
30.8
__
~
203 l b
30.8
strut. The wing span i s 162 i n . and t h e useful
fuselage l e n g t h i s 83 in., w h i l e t h e o v e r a l l fuse-
l a g e l e n g t h i s 127 i n . The empennage i s supported
by a s i n g l e boom.

S m a l l General A v i a t i o n A i r c r a f t

Wing area A = Wo/qoCL, f t 2 Small GA a i r c r a f t cornwise another cateoorv. ..

4.87 5.68 6.49 ~

t o which t h i s system a n a l y s i s may be a p p l i e d w i t h

Wing chord, C =t 0.697 0.753 0.805 interesting results.
Wing span, B 6.97 7.53 8.05
V L i f t / d r a g r a t i o o f w' 37.6 37.6 37.6
CL/CO @ CL = 0.40 Table 2a 20" Diameter ( V = 6.2 f t 3 )Mini-RPV
@ 150 Kn (qo = 77.3 PSF)
CL ( T r a n s i t i o n Tripped @ 10% Length)
Drag of wing, Fw = W0/% 3.99 4.65 5.32
__ ~ -
Gross Weight Wo lb 150 11 175 I t 200 l b
Thrust c o e f f . f o r wing CTw 0.015: 0.0179 0.0205
Total t h r u s t coeff. CT, 0.0191 0.0226 0.0255 T o t a l t h r u s t coeff. CT, 0.019c 0.022 0.0255
Fan a i r power c o e f f . CHP,, 0.039! 0.0432 0.0471 Fan a i r power c o e f f . CHPZS 0.050 0.054: 0.0587
Fan f l o w c o e f f . CQ, 0.020; 0.0210 0.0216 Fan f l o w c o e f f . CQ, 0.022; 0.0227 0.0234
Fan flow Q CFS 17.20 17.89 18.40 Fan f l o w Q CFS 18.9 19.3 19.9
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 1.94 2.05 2.16 Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 2.24 2.35 2.48
coeff. CH2 5 coeff. CH,
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 150.0 158.8 166.9 Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 173.1 181.6 191.7
AH,, PSF AH* 5 PSF
Fan system-resi stance 0.746 0.763 0.766 Fan system-resi stance 0.781 0.778 0.783
coeff. '$2/ $ coeff. '$2/$
Fan speed, n RPM 44,071 45,412 46,617 Fan speed, n RPM 49,034 49,835 50,140
Fan diameter, d S in. 3.25 3.25 3.25 Fan diameter, d5 in. 3.25 3.25 3.25
Fan e f f i c i e n c y , 'iF % 89.0 89.6 89.7 Fan e f f i c i e n c y , ' i ~ % 88.3 89.9 90.2
Fan s h a f t power HP 5.29 5.74 6.26 Fan s h a f t power HP 6.75 7.19 7.75
J e t t o t a l - h e a d coeff. CHTs 2.06 2.20 2.30 J e t total-head c o e f f . CHTS 2.28 2.40 2.50
Jet velocity r a t i o U,/Uo 1.16 1.20 1.25 Jet velocity r a t i o U,/Uo 1.28 1.32 1.36
J e t s t a t i c base cp5 0.86 0.89 0.93 J e t s t a t i c base cp5 0.98 1.02 1.06
pressure c o e f f . pressure coeff.
Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y E 13.00 14.00 14.69 Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y E 10.40 11.19 11.84
4 index index
__

7
 Table 3 34" D i a k t e r ( V = 30.5 ft3)Mini-RPV Table 4 34" Diameter ( V = 30.5 ft') Mini-RPV
@ 100 Kn (so = 34.1 PSF) @ 150 Kn (so = 77.3 PSF)
(Free T r a n s i t i o n ) ( T r a n s i t i o n Tripped @ 10% Length)
- __ -
Gross Weight Wo lb 225 l b !50 I t 175 l b Gross Weight Wo lb 250 l b 275 l b I00 l b
~ ~ ~
__
Wing l o a d i n g qoCL @ C ~ = 0 . 4 13.6 13.6 13.6 Wing l o a d i n g qoCL @ C~'0.4 30.8 30.8 30.8
PSF PSF W
Wing area A = Wo/qoCL, f t Z 16.5 18.4 20.2 Wing area A = Wo/qoCL, f t Z 9.74
Wing chord, C ft 1.284 1.356 1.421 Wing chord, C ft 0.986
Wing span, B ft 12.84 13.56 14.21 Wing span, B ft 9.86
L i f t / d r a g r a t i o of wing, 37.6 37.6 37.6 L i f t / d r a g r a t i o o f wing, 37.6
CL/CO @ CL = 0.40 CL/CD @ CL = 0.40

Drag of wing, Fw = CL 5.98 6.65 7.31 CL 7.98

Drag o f wing, Fw = W o / r l b 6.65 7.31
0
Thrust c o e f f . f o r wing CTw 1.0180 1.0201 'LO221 Thrust c o e f f . f o r wing CTw 0.0089 0.0098 1.0106
Total t h r u s t coeff. CT, 1.0228 1.0251 1.0273 Total t h r u s t coeff. CT, 0.0128 0.0138 1.0146
Fan a i r power coeff. CHP,, 1.0436 1.046f 8.0495 Fan a i r power c o e f f . CHP,, 0.0390 0.0405 1.0416
Fan f l o w coeff. C Q 5 1.0210 1.021f '.0220 Fan f l o w c o e f f . CQs 0.0198 0.0202 1.0205
Fan f l o w Q CFS 34.95 35.94 36.60 Fan f l o w Q CFS 48.8 49.8 50.5
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 2.05 2.14 2.23 Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 1.92 1.98 2.02
coeff. CHss coeff. CH25
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 69.9 72.9 76.0 Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 148.4 153.0 156.3
AH,__
Fan system-resi stance
PSF
0.763 D.773 3.770
AH*,
Fan system-resi stance
PSF
0.724 0.731 0.738
coeff. coeff. m2/*
Fan speed, n
Fan diameter, d
$2/*
RPM
in.
:7,916
5.525
8,354
5.525
8.619
5.525
Fan speed, n
Fan diameter, d
RPM
in.
25,862
5.525
' 26,276
5.525
5,557
5.525
Fan e f f i c i e n c y , n~ % 89.10 89.40 39.60 Fan e f f i c i e n c y , QF % 88.4 88.6 88.8
Fan s h a f t power HP 4.98 5.29 5.65 Fan s h a f t power HP 15.00 15.70 16.20
J e t t o t a l - h e a d c o e f f . CHT5 2.20 2.30 2.38 J e t total-head c o e f f . CHTs 1.90 1.96 2.00
Jet velocity r a t i o U,/Uo 1.20 1.24 1.26 Jet velocity r a t i o U& 1.15 1.16 1.18
J e t s t a t i c base CPS 0.90 0.92 0.95 J e t s t a t i c base CP 5 0.87 0.89 0.90
pressure c o e f f . pressure c o e f f .
Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y E 14.0 14.6 15.1 Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y E 7.72 8.19 8.75 W
index index
__

Table 3a 34" Diameter ( V = 30.5 ft') Mini-RPV Table 5 l i s t s t h e p e r t i n e n t parameters of t h r e e

P 100 Kn (qo = 34.1 PSF) c u r r e n t 2-seat personal GA a i r c r a f t by Beech,
( T r a n s i t i o n Tripped @ 10% Length) Cessna and Piper; t h e gross weight i s n e a r l y t h e
~
same (1670 t o 1675 l b ) and so i s t h e speed (121
Gross Weight Wo lb 275 l b t o 127 MPH) and t h e engine power (108 t o 115 HP).
~ The aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index i s i n t h e v i c i n i t y
T o t a l t h r u s t coeff. CTO 0.0273 o f 5.0.
Fan a i r power coeff. CHP,, 0.0612
The fuselage diameter i s selected a t 45 i n . so
Fan flow c o e f f . CQ, 0.0237 as t o accommodate two tandem seats; t h e cabin
Fan f l o w Q CFS 39.43 arrangement l a y o u t i s shown i n Fig. 15. I t has
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 2.54 been observed t h a t minimum cabin h e i g h t i s 42 i n .
coeff. CH,, and t h e minimum seat spacing dimension i s 36 i n .
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 86.6
AH25 PSF The speed has been selected t o be 200 MPH
i n s t e a d of 125 MPH because i t represents present
Fan system-resistance 0.785 GA speed f o r small personal a i r c r a f t . Table 6 pre-
coeff. m2/+ sents t h e performance data f o r gross weights of
Fan speed, n RPM 20,018 1400, 1675 and 1800 l b w i t h t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n .
Fan diameter, d5 in. 5.525 I t can be seen t h a t t h e fan s h a f t power i s l e s s
Fan e f f i c i e n c y , n~ % 89.8 than 72 HP and t h e aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index
i s over 12.0. T h i s performance y i e l d s a 60% speed
Fan s h a f t power HP 6.90 improvement, a 33% power gain and a 7.5% gross
J e t total-head coeff. CHT, 2.56 weight enhancement. l h e schematic l a y o u t o f t h i s
Jet velocity r a t i o U,/Uo 1.38 2-seat GA c o n f i g u r a t i o n i s shown i n Fig. 16, w i t h

J e t s t a t i c base
pressure coeff.
Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y
index
-
CP 5 1.08 a mid-wing arrangement w i t h 0.45 t a p e r r a t i o and
277 i n . o v e r a l l span. The useful fuselage l e n g t h
i s 110 i n . w h i l e t h e o v e r a l l fuselage l e n g t h i s
E 12.26
130 i n . The empennage i s supported b y a t w i n boom
and i t comorises t w i n rudders.

8
 L >

I
48" I

4-Seat Cabin Arrangement - 60" Oia. Fuselage

- 110" L

6.7'
n 2-Seat Cabin Arrangement - 45" Dia. Fuselage

F i g . 1 5 Cabin arrangement l a y o u t f o r GA a i r c r a f t

U Table 6 45" Diameter ( V = 70.6 f t 3 )E4 A i r c r a f t

@ 200 MPH (qo = 104 PSF)
( T r a n s i t i o n Tripped @ 10%Length)
-- -
Gross Weight Wo lb
- 800 1b
1400 1b 675 1 I -
__
Wing l o a d i n g qoCL @ C ~ = 0 . 3 31.2 31.2 31.2
PSF
Wing area A = Wo/qoCL, f t 2 44.8 53.7 57.7
F i g . 14 Schematic l a y o u t of mini-RPY c o n f i g u r a t i o n Mean wing chord, C ft 2.11 2.31 2.40
Wing span, B ft 21.1 23.1 24.0
Table 5 2-Seat E4 A i r c r a f t @ 120 MPH L i f t / d r a g r a t i o of wing, 38.3 38.3 38.3
CL/CO @ CL i 0.30
(qo = 37.0 PSF)
___
I
CL
Drag o f wing, Fw = Wo/rlb 36.5 47.0
43.7
Beech Cessna Piper 0
77 152 PA-38-112 Thrust coeff. f o r wing CTw 0.0206 1.024; 1.0265
,kipper i e r o b a t Tomahawk 2
__ Total t h r u s t coeff. CTo 0.0256 1.030: 1.0321
Empty weight W lb 1,103 Fan a i r power c o e f f . CHP,, 0.0588 1.0651 1.0685
Gross weight Wo Ib 1,675 Fan f l o w coeff. CQ, 0.0234 1.0241 1.0248
Wing span B ft 30.0 Fan f l o w Q CFS 117.1 122.1 124.1
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 2.45 2.66 2.74
Wing area A ft' 130 124.7
coef f . C"* 5
Wing l o a d i n g W/A PSF 12.88 Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 254.8 276.6 284.9
Length 2. ft 24.0 24.1 23.1 AH,, PSF
Fan system-resistance 0.793 0.794 0.796
Engine power
Max. c r u i s e
speed
Wing l i f t
Uo
HP

MPH
115

121 122 1 127

coeff.
Fan speed, n
Fan diameter, d5
Fan e f f i c i e n c y , ' 1 ~
mn
'
RPM
in.
%
25,777
7.31
90.1
!6,82!
7.31
90.2
17,211
7.31
90.3
CL 0.341 0.272 0.322
coeff. Fan s h a f t power HP 60.6 68.6 71.6
Aerodynamic J e t t o t a l - h e a d c o e f f . CHTs 2.5 2.66 2.74
efficiency E 4.70 5.04 5.05 Jet velocity r a t i o U,/Uo 1.37 1.41 1.44
index
J e t s t a t i c base cp5 0.92 1.10 1.11
pressure c o e f f .
Note: The above data were d e r i v e d from A v i a t i o n Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y E 12.1 13.0 13.3
Week & Space Technology, March 12, 1984, p. 144. index

9
 Table 7 l i s t s th'e p e r t i n e n t parameters o f f i v e Table 7 4-Seat 6R A i r c r a f t @ 200 MPH
c u r r e n t 4-seat GA a i r c r a f t b y Maule, Mooney, Piper, (so = 104 PSF)
Cessna and Beech, w i t h speed from 196 t o 201 MPH,
gross weights from 2500 t o 3400 l b and engine
powers from 200 t o 285 HP. The aerodynamic e f f i -
c i e n c y index ranges from 6.5 t o 7.9.

The cabin dimensions f o r f o u r seats a r e t y p i -

c a l l y 43 i n . width, 48 i n . h e i g h t and 92 i n .
l e n g t h ; a fuselage diameter o f 60 i n . has been __
selected and t h e cabin l a y o u t arrangement i s shown 2125
i n F i g . 15. 3400
Table 8 presents the performance data f o r gross 33.5
weights of 2500, 2900 and 3400 l b a t 200 MPH w i t h 181.0
t r i p p e d t r a n s i t i o n . I t i s seen t h a t f o r the lowest
weight t h e f a n s h a f t power i s 110, f o r a gain o f 18.8
47%; f o r the middle weight t h e f a n power i s 120
HP, f o r a gain o f 40%, w h i l e f o r t h e top weight Length ft 24.4 24.7 27.3 28.6 26.7
t h e f a n power i s 132 HP, f o r a gain o f 53%.
Engine power HP 210.0 200.0 200.0 235.0 285.0
M a x ' cruise U, MPH
speed 196.0 201.0 198.0 199.0 198.0

r - r f l ;
1
2-Seat GA Aircraft
Schematic Layout

Confiouration
Wing l i f t
coeff.
Aerodynamic
efficiency
CL

E
0.157 0.148

6.49 7.47
0.167 0.172 0.184

7.90 7.22 6.50

1675 6 Gross Weight index

68 HP (Tripped Trans. I

~ __ ~

Gross Weight W, lb
__ 500 1t
-
!900 1b 1400 1b
-
Wing l o a d i n g qoCL @ C ~ = 0 . 3 31.2 31.2 31.2
PSF
Wing area A = Wo/qoCL, f t 2 80. 1 92.9 108.9 U
Mean wing chord, C ft 2.83 3.04 3.30
Wing span, 8 ft 28.3 30.4 33.0
L i f t / d r a g r a t i o o f wing, 38.3 38.3 38.3
CL/CO @ CL = 0.30

Drag of wing, Fw = Wo/-lb CL 65.2 75.7 88.7

CD
Thrust c o e f f . f o r wing CTw 1.02Oi 0.0240 3.0281
Total t h r u s t c o e f f . CTO 1.025i 0.0794 5.0339
Fan a i r power c o e f f . CHP,, 1.059( 0.0644 5.0712
Fan f l o w c o e f f . CQ, 1.023! 0.0242 3.0252
Fan flow Q CFS 209.4 215.6 224.5
Fan p r e s s u r e - r i se 2.48 2.64 2.82
coeff. CH.. L D

Fan p r e s s u r e - r i s e 257.9 274.5 293.2

AH"./ < PSF
Fan system-resistance 0.790 0.787 0.800
coeff. $%4
Fan speed, n RPM 19,42; 19,96C 20,744
Fan diameter, d, in. 9.75 9.75 9.75
Fan e f f i c i e n c y , 'IF % 90.0 90.2 90.4
Fan shaft power HP 110.3 120.1 132.5
J e t total-head c o e f f . CHT5 2.50 2.64 2.81
Jet velocity r a t i o U5/Uo 1.37 1.41 1.46
J e t s t a t i c base cp, 1.06 1.09 1.12
pressure c o e f f .
Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y E 12.08 12.88 13.68
F i g . 16 Schematic l a y o u t o f 2-seat GA a i r c r a f t index
configuration ~
e

10
 The aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index i s over 12.0.
The schematic l a y o u t o f t h e 4-seat GA c o n f i g u r a t i o n
i s shown i n F i g . 17; a high-wing arrangement was
selected w i t h a span o f 360 i n . and a 0.45 t a p e r
r a t i o . The useful f u s e l a g e l e n g t h i s 147 i n . w h i l e
the o v e r a l l fuselaoe l e n o t h i s 174 i n . The emDen-
nage i s supported -by t w i n booms and i t comprises
t w i n rudders.
Conclusions
I t has been shown t h a t t h e simole a d d i t i o n o f
a conventional NACA wing t o t h e t e s t e d optimized
system comprising axisymmetric body, boundary-layer
c o n t r o l and s t e r n j e t p r o p u l s i o n y i e l d s a p r e d i c t e d
a i r c r a f t perfonnance which i s s u p e r i o r t o c u r r e n t
mini-RPV and small GA a i r c r a f t l e v e l s .
Schematic Layout
4-Seat GA Aircraft
Configuration
2903 Ib Gross Weight
2% MPH Speed
120 HP (Tripped Trans.
A 250 l b gross weight mini-RPV could be f l o w n
a t 100 Kn w i t h 7.0 HP; a 2-seat 1675 l b GA aircraft
could be f l o w n a t 200 MPH w i t h 69 HP, and a 4-seat
2900 l b GA a i r c r a f t could be f l o w n a t 200 MPH w i t h
120 HP.
The general t r e n d of t h e aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y
index E a g a i n s t t h e t h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t CT i s shown
i n F i g . 18 f o r b o t h f r e e t r a n s i t i o n and t r a n s i t i o n
t r i p p e d a t 10% l e n g t h ; i t can be seen t h a t t h e
t h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t should be k e p t above a value
of 0.025 i n o r d e r t o achieve aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y
index values above 12. 0. T h i s can be done b y
a d j u s t i n g t h e gross weight Wo a g a i n s t t h e f u s e l a g e
volume V and t h e speed Uo.
B e t t e r r e s u l t s can be expected if t h e l i f t
system should be i n t e g r a t e d , i . e . if t h e fuselage
s u c t i o n a i r mass f l o w should be d i r e c t e d l a t e r a l l y
i n t o t h e wings t o supply j e t f l a p s o r c i r c u l a t i o n -
control w a l l - j e t s . The l i m i t a t i o n then would be
t h e a l l o w a b l e wing l o a d i n g and t h e w i n g ' s induced
drag, a s t h e l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y
increased by t h e j e t - f l a p o r by t h e c i r c u l a t i o n -
control.
The a i r mass f l o w would serve t h r e e purposes:
)
( a ) fuselage boundary-layer c o n t r o l , ( b ) wing l i f t
enhancement, and ( c ) p r o p u l s i o n . A l s o t h e suc-
t i o n ' s momentum d r a g i s minimized since o n l y t h e
i n n e r boundary-layer f l o w i s drawn i n t o t h e s l o t
a t Sta. 1 ( F i g . 5); i t i s estimated t h a t a 33%
d r a g saving i s achieved, as compared t o free-stream
f l o w intake, a t the p o i n t o f equilibrium f o r the
body alone. The n e x t step o f t h i s program i s ex-
pected t o be t h e wind-tunnel t e s t o f t h e 20 i n .
diameter model i n t h e arrangement of F i g . 14; t h e
wing p y l o n would be i n s t a l l e d e x a c t l y as t h e
present s t r u t . A second step would be t h e i n v e s t i -
g a t i o n o f t h e optimum f i n e n e s s r a t i o ; t h e 2.72
fineness r a t i o was s e l e c t e d o r i g i n a l l y f o r LTA
application. A preliminary theoretical parametric
study i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e optimum should be n e a r
6 and t h a t f u r t h e r power r e d u c t i o n can be expected.

181 Free Transition

and
a
T
16 - Transition Tripped
Q 58% \,**--o- _/--
-
C 14 - # .ox-

Ea /'
- # s t Transition
.$< 12 ,*' Tripped B 10%
E=-lO-
"3
.-5 uII
gi
0
8
6-
-
I'
,2';:LMPH 7- 2-Seat
GAB 123 MPH
- I// Mini-RPV
2 -,' @1WKn 7
I
01 I I I I
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
174" I Thrust Coefficient CT = T/qoVo'66

F i g . 17 Schematic l a y o u t o f 4-seat GA a i r c r a f t Fig. 18 Aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y index E vs

configuration T h r u s t c o e f f i c i e n t CT

11
 References

1. F. R. Goldschmied, " I n t e g r a t e d H u l l Design,

Boundary-Layer Control and Propulsion of Sub-
merged Bodies," A I A A Journal o f Hydronautics,
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-11 ( J u l y 1967).

2. F. R. Goldschmied.
~~ -- " I n t e o r a t e d H u l l Oesion.
~~~ ~ ~~,
Boundary-Layer Control and Propulsion of Sub-
merged Bodies: Wind-Tunnel Verification,"
A I A A Paper 82-1204, AIAA/SAE/ASME 18th J o i n t
Propulsion Conference, Clevela nd, OH (June
1982).
3. F. R. Goldschmied, "Wind-Tunnel Demonstration
o f an Optimized LTA System w i t h 65% Power
Reduction and N e u t r a l S t a t i c S t a b i l i t y , " A I A A
Paper 83-1981, A I A A Lighter-Than-Air Systems
Conference, Anaheim, CA ( J u l y 1983).

4. F. R. Goldschmied, "Jet-Propulsion o f Subsonic

Bodies w i t h J e t Total-Head Equal t o Free-
Stream's,'' A I A A Paper 83-1790, A I A A Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, Danvers, MA ( J u l y
1983).
5. F. R. Goldschmied, "Aerodynamic I n t e g r a t i o n
o f Ax isymme t ri c Body Pressure- D i s t r ib u t ion ,
Slot-Suction Boundary-Layer Control and Stern
Jet-Propulsion, I1 - Propulsion Evaluation,"
A I A A Journal o f A i r c r a f t ( t o be published).

6. J . S. Parsons, R. E. Goodson and F. R. Gold-

schmied, "Shaping o f A x i s m e t r i c Bodies f o r
Minimum Drag i n Incompressible Flow," A I A A
Journal of Hydronautics, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp.
100-107 ( J u l y 1974).
7. I. H. Abbott, A. E. von Doenhoff and L . S.
S t i v e r s , Jr., "Sumnary of A i r f o i l Data," NACA
Report 824 (1945).

8. G. Kovich and R. J. Steinke, "Performance of

Low-Pressure-Ratio Low-Tip-Speed Fan Stage
w i t h Blade T i p S o l i d i t y o f 0.65," NASA TMX-
3341 (February 1976).
9. J . A. Koegler, Jr., "A Parametric Wing Design
Study f o r a Modern Laminar Flow Wing," NASA
TM 80154 (December 1979).

10. C. 0. Wood and F. R. Goldschmied, "Design and

S p e c i f i c a t i o n Guidelines f o r Large Draft Fan:.
and Systems," E l e c t r i c Power Research i n s t i -
t u t e Report EPRI CS-3431 (January 1984).

11. D. E. Reubush and J . F. Runckel, "Effect 0:

Fineness R a t i o on B o a t t a i l Drag o f C i r c u l a r -
A r c Afterbodies Having Closure R a t i o s of 0.50
with t Exhaust a t Mach Numbers up t o 1.30,"
I 3 S A ThJ-7192 (May 1973).

12. E. E. Larrabee, "Preservation of Wing Leading-

Edge Suction a t t h e Plane o f ! F e t r y as a
F a c t o r i n Wing-Fuselage Design, Proceedings
of the NASA-Industry-University General A v i a -
t i o n Drag Reductic? Workshop, J. Roskam, Ed.,
U n i v e r s i t y of Kansas ( J u l y 1975), pp. 107-119.

12