Preliminary sizing correlations for the

rear-end of transport aircraft

Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona
Departamento de Aeronaves y VehÍculos Espaciales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study of which this work is only the first part, is the development of conceptual design tools to perform an optimized
design of the rear fuselage and tail surfaces. The development of a new and extensive database of transport aircraft and an analysis of certain
general, rear fuselage and horizontal stabilizer parameters of the aircraft are presented in this paper.
Design/methodology/approach – In addition to the development of a comprehensive high accurate database, linear and non-linear correlations
between different parameters of the aircraft have been established. Data were analyzed using comparison criteria between aircraft database based
on the mission, the number of engines installed or arrangement of the tail surfaces.
Findings – It has been possible to obtain very relevant, linear and non-linear correlations for critical design parameters to optimize the design of
the rear fuselage and horizontal tail.
Research limitations/implications – In the case of the tail cone, the data have not yielded significant correlations. On the other hand, there are
some regressions that do not work well in some cases and for which it would be good to further expand the database.
Practical implications – Results obtained greatly improve the existing methods for conceptual design, which usually pay no attention to the rear
part of the aircraft. Besides, these new procedures are adapted to different categories of aircraft, allowing greater optimization of the designs.
Originality/value – The novel contribution of this work is focused on the development of a new high-fidelity database and includes many more
aircraft than any other work previously released. Also, new correlations, linear and non-linear, additional parameters not considered in previous
studies, and differentiated by category of aircraft studies are provided.
Keywords Aircraft conceptual design, Correlation analysis, Rear fuselage, Tailplanes
Paper type Research paper

Nomenclature MTOW ⫽ maximum take-off weight (ton)

R ⫽ range (NM)
Symbols R2 ⫽ correlation coefficient
ARH ⫽ horizontal tail aspect ratio (ARH ⫽ bH 2
/SH) RFlength ⫽ rear fuselage length (m)
bw ⫽ wing span (m) Sw ⫽ wing area (m2)
bH ⫽ horizontal tail span (m) SH ⫽ horizontal tail area (m2)
CD0H ⫽ horizontal tail parasite drag coefficient SH/Sw ⫽ non-dimensional horizontal tail area
CL ⫽ aircraft lift coefficient TSA ⫽ tail strike angle (°)
CLH ⫽ horizontal tail lift coefficient V ⫽ aircraft speed (m/s)
CMac ⫽ aircraft pitching moment coefficient VH ⫽ air speed at horizontal tail (m/s)
crH ⫽ horizontal tail root chord (m) VeH ⫽ horizontal tail volume coefficient (VeH ⫽
cRw ⫽ wing root chord (m) lHSH/SwMACw)
ctH ⫽ horizontal tail tip chord (m) Vol ⫽ global volume parameter (Vol ⫽ LfusHfusbw)
DH ⫽ horizontal tail drag (N) (m3)
DindH ⫽ horizontal tail induced drag (N) W ⫽ aircraft weight (N)
DHi ⫽ horizontal tail induced drag parameter (DHi ⫽ wfus ⫽ fuselage width (m)
bHMTOW/ARHVeHMACw) (ton) xac ⫽ aerodynamic center position (m)
Hfus ⫽ fuselage height (m) xcg ⫽ aircraft center of gravity position (m)
Lfus ⫽ fuselage length (m) ␩H ⫽ dynamic pressure horizontal tail to wing ratio
lH ⫽ horizontal tail moment arm (m) (␩H ⫽ VH 2
/V2)
MACw ⫽ mean aerodynamic wing chord (m) ⌳0.25H ⫽ horizontal tail sweep at quarter chord (°)
␭H ⫽ horizontal tail taper ratio (␭H ⫽ ctH/crH )

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1748-8842.htm
This work has been supported by Airbus Operations Rear-End RADAR
project and the Spanish Centre for Industrial Technological Development
(CDTI – Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness) and Airbus
Operations co-funded project CURvED.
Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
88/1 (2016) 24 –32 Received 15 April 2014
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1748-8842] Revised 28 July 2014
[DOI 10.1108/AEAT-04-2014-0051] Accepted 8 September 2014

24
 Preliminary sizing correlations Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32

␳ ⫽ air density (kg/m3) (reduced strength, weight reduction, etc.), but not from a
⌽ ⫽ efficiency factor of the aircraft’s polar global point of view, due to the complexity. Moreover, as
initial design specifications significantly affect the solution
Introduction obtained, it would be more appropriate to talk about the
advantages and disadvantages of each configuration and
Despite the economic downturn of recent years and the
thereby decide which one is more suited to aircraft design.
current crisis, passenger traffic is expected to grow at an
Having in mind all these considerations, it seems that there is
annual rate of 4.7 per cent (EUROCONTROL, 2010;
room for improvement in this field.
AIRBUS, 2012), (Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 2013),
Taking into account the previously mentioned objective of
clearly above the global economic growth, and cargo traffic
improving the performance of future transport aircraft by
will expand even faster. It should be noted that this predicted
improving their rear fuselage and tail stabilizers, a conceptual
traffic growth varies depending on the geographic area, and
and preliminary design-level research is discussed here. To
the Asia-Pacific region is expected to be the most active area,
perform this, as has been done since the work of Roskam
focusing on emerging economies, such as India and China. To
(1686) and which is still the case (Ibrahim, 2004; Ibrahim and
allow this development, the performances of transport aircraft
Mohnot, 2006; Vouvakos et al., 2010; Kallinderis et al., 2009),
have been improved very significantly over the past decades,
the first activity carried out is a compilation of data on all
particularly due to technological developments in key areas,
possible commercial aircraft. In all, 100 commercial transport
such as aerodynamics, propulsion, noise and emissions
aircraft have been investigated to fill a database in which the
reduction, structures, avionics, materials, etc. (Anderson,
information is classified. On the other hand, a study has been
2002; Martinez-Val and Perez, 2009). For example, the range
developed on what parameters are relevant and interesting in the
parameter, the best example of the cruise performance of a
design of a rear fuselage and stabilizers. These parameters have
commercial transport aircraft, has almost doubled since the
been investigated in detail for all the aircraft included in the
beginning of the era of jet engines (Martinez-Val et al., 2008).
database.
Paradoxically, these significant advances have taken place
The optimization of aircraft designs using conceptual and
over 50 years of transport jets without the overall aircraft
preliminary design tools based on statistical data correlations
configuration having been altered, which is characterized by a
of existing aircraft is not a new activity. Many authors, in
slender fuselage and a high aspect ratio wing and stabilizing
addition to those mentioned above, have developed
surfaces attached to the tail cone (Anderson, 2002). Two
methodologies based on correlations of aircraft parameters
possibilities for integrating the engines have shown a perfect fit
(Torenbeek, 1996; Roskam, 2013; Raymer, 2012; Jenkinson
to this configuration: podded-engines under the wings or
et al., 1999; Nicolai and Carichner, 2010). The emphasis of
attached to the rear fuselage. The conservative approach
this work lies, first, in the amount of updated transport aircraft
regarding the massive selection of this configuration has been
data and, second, in the specificity of the research, as the
balanced through an ongoing effort, as already indicated,
analyzed parameters and data present a high level of novelty.
which has led to continued progress in all actions and figures
The results obtained from the analysis of the main
of merit related to the economic aspects (Martinez-Val and
characteristics of the aircraft listed in the database as well as
Perez, 2009; Martinez-Val et al., 2008).
the main data and figures of merit for the rear fuselage and the
In the past, there have been numerous studies to improve
horizontal stabilizer are presented in this paper. It is expected
the performance of the tail surfaces (Abbas et al., 2005;
to be able to present the results for the vertical stabilizer in
Viswanath, 1996; Lucas et al., 2011; Cazals and Sagne, 2010).
future work. The overall objective of the study is to draw
Research has been growing in two directions: a detailed
conclusions on how each selected parameter analyzed affects
investigation of the flow field around the tail cone and
the configuration of each rear-end and the tail surfaces. This
stabilizers (Lucas et al., 2011) or studies to find new
activity aims to identify the most optimized designs for the rear
configurations to obtain better efficiencies mainly through a
part of the aircraft that are included in the database and infer
reduction in the contribution to aerodynamic drag (Lucas
an ideal tail design, which correspond with certain of each of
et al., 2011; Cazals and Sagne, 2010). The above scenario
the proposed parameters. Of course, the determination of the
combined with growing markets, environmental restrictions and
ideal empennage comes restricted by the design mission of the
technological developments will witness the production of nearly
aircraft, that is, its initial design specifications.
30,000 new aircraft from regional to very high capacity in the
The present paper is organized into three main sections. In
next 20 years (Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 2013; AIRBUS,
the first one, the database created is described according to
2012). In these circumstances, the key question is: what should
chosen design parameters, which include general data,
be the design specifications for such airplanes? To confront the
rear-end geometry and horizontal tailplane characteristics.
problem, one possible answer is to achieve significant
The second section comprises the detailed statistical analysis
improvements in the aerodynamic efficiency of the aircraft
of the selected parameters, showing all the best correlations
configurations and to optimize the vertical and horizontal
(both linear and novel non-linear). Finally, the last section is
stabilizers and tail cone of the current aircraft, a strategy that has
devoted to the conclusions drawn from the study.
not yet been put into practice since, designers having focused
primarily on improving the performance of the wing.
Database description and main parameters
Although there have been numerous developments in the
design of the tail cone and stabilizing surfaces, an absolute selection
optimum has not yet been reached because studies are The database consists of 100 aircraft, as previously indicated.
attempting to optimize designs from a concrete viewpoint The aircraft have been organized, first, according to the

25
 Preliminary sizing correlations Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32

nationality of the manufacturer and subsequently, by
manufacturer. The parameters included are mainly geometric,
although some others have been considered to provide an
overview of the mission of the aircraft, that is, MTOW,
number of passengers, range [. . .].
Once the parameters have been selected, it is necessary to
obtain their values. Establishing a definition for each
parameter is an essential task, because it is the only possibility
of developing a consistent database for building correlations.
Some of the parameters are basic, so it was possible to find
them in the open literature (i.e. HTP span, MTOW, etc.).
Others were estimated by means of a computer-aided tool
developed by Airbus that allows measuring directly in the
three view drawings of the aircraft. In spite of this, some of the
geometric parameters of the horizontal stabilizer and rear
fuselage have not been determined for all the aircraft
belonging to the same family, as the values are the same in
most cases and distort the correlations that are intended to be
built. It should be noted that it has not been possible to
determine all the parameters for every aircraft because there is
not enough information in the open literature. All the
parameters were compiled in a worksheet to allow processing.
The parameters obtained from the database have been
divided into groups for easier comprehension. The groups
considered are: general, rear fuselage and horizontal tail. The
parameters related to performances, that is, range, and
maximum take-off weight, are included in the first group. This
group also encompasses general geometric parameters which
are not related directly to the tail cone or the empennage, that
magnitude (RFlength) that includes the tail cone and the
attachments of the horizontal and vertical stabilizers. Another
parameter included in this group is the tail strike angle (TSA).
This is the maximum pitch angle that the aircraft can reach
with the main landing gear on the runway while there is a point
in the tail cone in contact with the ground.
Horizontal tail parameters
The dimensional parameters considered are the following:
surface area (SH), moment arm (lH), span (bH), root chord
(crH), tip chord (ctH) and 1/4 of chord line sweep angle (⌳0.25H).
The dimensionless parameters taken into account are:
aspect ratio (ARH), taper ratio (␭H), non-dimensional
horizontal tail area (SH/Sw) and volume coefficient (VeH),
which is defined as equation (2):
lHSH
VeH ⫽ (2)
SwMACw
Finally, there is another relevant parameter included in the
analysis which has been derived from the expression of the
horizontal tail drag [equation (5)]. To obtain this parameter,
the part of the horizontal tail drag dependent on the lift
coefficient, equation (3), has been conveniently combined
with the balance moment equation, equation (4), resulting in
the following final expression:
DH ⫽
1 2
2 冉
␳V SH␩H CD0H ⫹
1
C2
␲ARH⌽ LH 冊 (3)

is, wing area or fuselage length. The other group includes the
parameters which are related to the rear fuselage and xcg ⫺ xac
CL ⫹ CMac ⫺ VeH␩HCLH ⫽ 0 (4)
horizontal stabilizer. MACw

General parameters
The Maximum take-off weight (MTOW) is one of the most
important design parameters of an aircraft, because it is not
DindH ⫽
1 2
2
␳V SH
1 1 1
␲ARH⌽ VeH
2 ␩
H
CL 冉
xcg ⫺ xac
MACw
⫹ CMac 冊2
(5)

only related to the performances but also to systems, structure,

Substituting SH by bH2/ARH and using the vertical forces
payload, etc. So considering MTOW for building the
equilibrium equation for replacing the lift coefficient, equation
correlations is inevitable.
(6) is obtained:
Another important parameter is the wing area (Sw). It is

冉 冊
related to weight, drag and performances, and is used for
1 2 1 bH2 2W xcg ⫺ xac 2
obtaining dimensionless parameters related to tail surfaces, DindH ⫽ ␳V ⫹ CMac (6)
2 ␲␩H⌽ ARH VeH ␳V Sw MACw
2 2 2
that is, horizontal tail volume coefficient. Besides, wing span
(bw) and wing mean aerodynamic chord (MACw) are
magnitudes used for the same purpose as the wing area. As first approximation, the aerodynamic moment coefficient
Fuselage length (Lfus), height (Hfus) and width (wfus) define of the aircraft is neglected from equation (6), because the
the main dimensions of the fuselage itself. From fuselage other term in the parenthesis has been considered as
length, fuselage height and wing span, it is possible to infer a dominant, and it is a parameter which is difficult to obtain for
parameter which represents the global external geometry. It is all aircraft. Moreover, the maximum take-off weight has been
called global volume (Vol) and is calculated as equation (1): taken as the representative design weight of the aircraft. So,
extracting MTOW and MACw from the parenthesis, equation
Vol ⫽ bwHfusLfus (1) (7) is obtained.

Finally, from the standpoint of aircraft performance, only one

parameter has been considered: range (R). This range
DindH ⬵
1 2 1
2
␳V
bH2MTOW2 2
冉
(x ⫺ xac)
␲␩H⌽ ARH2VeH2MACw2 ␳V2Sw cg 冊 2
(7)

corresponds to the manufacturer’s design payload.

The parameter is called DHi and has the expression indicated
Rear fuselage parameters in equation (8):
The rear fuselage is usually considered as the part of the
fuselage comprised between the end of cylindrical section and bHMTOW
DHi ⫽ (8)
the physical end of the fuselage. So its length is a relevant ARHVeHMACw

26
 Preliminary sizing correlations Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32

Correlations and dependency analysis
Having defined all the parameters, several linear and
non-linear relationships have been established between these
preliminary design parameters. These correlations as well as
mean values will be presented along this section. Obviously,
the selected correlations have been only those with a very good
correlation coefficient, always with R2 higher than 0.8, except
in those cases in which it is relevant to show disperse
correlations to obtain some conclusions. The database used to
carry out this study includes, as was previously explained,
many different aircraft. Hence, it is necessary to classify these
aircraft into several groups for drawing relevant conclusions.
The criteria used for establishing the classification are the
following: flight segment, tail configuration and number of
engines.
The flight segment criterion groups the aircraft depending
on their range. Four flight segments have been considered:
regional, single aisle, medium range and long range. The
intervals associated with each segment are indicated in
Table I.
In relation to the tail configuration classification, the most
common tail arrangements in commercial aviation have been
considered. These are conventional tail and T-tail. The only
difference between them is the vertical position of the
horizontal surface: low and attached to the tail cone, for
conventional tail, and at the tip of the vertical stabilizer for
T-tail.
Finally, the classification according to the number of
engines is interesting because it affects the general aircraft
arrangement. Furthermore, the number of engines can be
closely related to the position of them in some cases, that is,
the three-engine configuration is restricted to one engine to be
positioned on the symmetry plane.
General parameters
One of the most important parameters in conceptual aircraft
design is the wing loading. It is related not only to the majority
of the performances (cruise, take-off, landing), but also to
relevant flight qualities, such as stall speed and the response to
vertical gusts. It is defined as the ratio between the weight of
the aircraft and the wing area. Therefore, a correlation
between Sw and MTOW has been built. From the standpoint
of the tail configuration (Figure 1), it is evident that all the
groups have a very good correlation coefficient. In spite of
some authors building this correlation through non-linear
equations, known as square cube law (Torenbeek, 1996), the
approximations considered are linear because they are slightly
better. The behaviors are quite similar for both tail
configurations, although the T-tail aircraft wing loading is
slightly lower than for the conventional tail aircraft, as the
slope of the regression equation is higher for the T-tail series.
Figure 1 Wing area vs maximum take-off weight according to tail
configuration
This effect may be translated into a worse vertical gust
response and controllability in cross-wind during landing and
an increased wing area for the same MTOW.
If aircraft in the database are classified according to the
flight segment, then the results are different (Figure 2). In this
case, the regression coefficients are not so good for all the
groups. However, in this case, the square cube law is better
than the linear correlation for medium range and single aisle
aircraft. It is possible to see that the exponent corresponding
to medium range is around 0.78 and for the single aisle series
is around 0.64. This is consistent with some authors
(Torenbeek, 1996), who indicate that these differences are
caused by the power plant. Medium range series shows the
same behavior than turbojet aircraft, as well as single aisle
airplanes behave like turboprop aircraft.
When classifying the aircraft according to the number of
engines (Figure 3), the linear regressions obtained have a good
correlation coefficient. Again, in this classification, the square
cube law for four-engined and three-engined aircraft can be
taken into account. It is possible to detect the differences in
the exponent of the equations. It is noted that three-engined
airplanes behave as turboprop aircraft (Torenbeek, 1996).
Another conclusion is that for the same wing area, installing an
engine in the symmetry plane of the aircraft results in
an increased maximum take-off weight compared to having an
even number of engines.
The global volume parameter has been analyzed compared
to the maximum take-off weight. This correlation represents
the relation between the geometry and the weight, considering
Figure 2 Wing area vs maximum take-off weight according to the
flight segment

Table I Flight segment classification

Flight segment Range
Regional R ⬍ 2,000 NM
Single aisle 2,000 NM ⬍ R ⬍ 3,500 NM
Medium range 3,500 NM ⬍ R ⬍ 6,000 NM
Long range R ⬎ 6,000 NM

27
 Preliminary sizing correlations Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32

Figure 3 Wing area vs maximum take-off weight according to the Figure 5 Global volume vs maximum take-off weight according to
number of engines flight segment

lines. The two-engined series presents the largest slope and

the whole aircraft. When classifying the aircraft depending on the three-engined series, the lowest. This fact may indicate
the tail configuration, it is possible to detect that conventional that the three-engined aircraft have the heaviest configuration
tail aircraft have a better regression coefficient than T-tail for the same volume, and the two-engined aircraft develop the
ones. In spite of that, the two correlations have high R2. In lightest configuration.
principle, linear correlations have been considered because of
their inherent simplicity. But, in the case of conventional tail,
Rear fuselage
the correlation coefficient improves considerably when taking
Focusing now on the rear end of the aircraft, the ratio of the
into account the non-linear regression, so this is included in
rear fuselage length to the fuselage height is analyzed. This
the graph. All the equations and coefficients are shown in
ratio represents the slenderness of the rear fuselage. The
Figure 4.
averages and deviations of this value according to the different
However, the results obtained for flight segment
classifications are presented in Table II. The differences
classification are not so satisfactory (Figure 5). On the one
between the groups are not significant. In fact, the values are
hand, regional and single aisle aircraft exhibit high correlation
in the 3.3-3.65 interval.
coefficients, but, on the other hand, medium range and long
The averages and the deviations of the ratio rear fuselage
range aircraft show more dispersion. This effect could be
length – fuselage length, which represents the relative length of
justified taking into account the increasing use of composite
the rear fuselage – are presented in Table II. In this case, the
materials in modern aircraft, thus allowing lighter products
differences between the groups are more relevant than in the
than older designs for a similar external geometry. Besides, the
previous parameter. According to the flight segment, long
non-linear regressions do not improve the R2 as in the previous
range aircraft exhibit a 3 per cent lower ratio, approximately,
case. So it is possible to conclude that reducing the design
than the other three groups. Furthermore, the two-engined
range of the aircraft improves the relation between the
aircraft ratio is 4 per cent lower than for four-engined aircraft.
geometry and the weight.
Then, it is possible to conclude that long range aircraft with
From the standpoint of the number of installed engines, all
two installed engines have a lower relative length for the rear
the series (two, three and four engines) have quite good linear
fuselage compared to the other layouts.
behavior (Figure 6). The results of this classification are also
The last parameter investigated related to the rear fuselage
interesting due to the high quality of the regression coefficients
is the tail strike angle. Table II also collects the averages and
and the diverse behavior of the three series. The main
the deviations of this magnitude. The differences in the values
difference relies on the value of the slope of the regression
are not significant. So it is possible to indicate a typical value

Figure 4 Global volume vs maximum take-off weight according to

Figure 6 Global volume vs maximum take-off weight according to
tail configuration
the number of engines

28
 Preliminary sizing correlations Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32

Table II Averages and deviation of different parameters Figure 8 Horizontal tailplane area vs wing area according to flight
Criteria RFlength/Hfus RFlength/Lfus TSA 共 兲
0 segment

Tail
Conventional 3.44-0.397 0.369-0.049 11.59-2.411
T-tail 3.36-0.379 0.351-0.074 11.52-3.102

Flight segment
Regional 3.42-0.381 0.371-0.081 11.36-2.980
Single aisle 3.52-0.183 0.367-0.041 10.72-2.093
Medium range 3.40-0.405 0.368-0.055 12.64-2.503
Long range 3.50-0.503 0.347-0.049 11.31-1.596

Number of engines
2 3.38-0.358 0.360-0.068 11.29-2.594
3 3.40-0.465 0.381-0.051 12.54-1.833
4 3.64-0.412 0.394-0.031 12.20-2.724
Note: The first value in each cell is the average and the other is the
deviation
for this parameter, which is between 10-12°, for all the aircraft
in the database.
Horizontal tailplane
The first two parameters to be compared are the horizontal tail
area and the wing area. If the aircraft are classified according
to their tail configuration, then the approximations are
different, depending on the series (Figure 7). The
conventional series has a lower linear correlation coefficient
than the T-tail. For this reason, a non-linear correlation for
the conventional series is tested. This approximation slightly
improves the R2, but it continues to be worse than for the
T-tail. Nevertheless, both series present good correlations
with R2 greater than 0.89.
If the classification criterion is the flight segment, then the
linear correlation coefficients obtained for all series are worse
than the previous ones except for long range aircraft
(Figure 8). Regional aircraft have an acceptable linear
correlation, but the non-linear one is slightly better. The single
aisle series has the worst value for R2 of all the series of this
classification. Medium range aircraft have a bad linear
correlation (R2 lower than 0.7). It is possible to improve this
by using a non-linear approximation but the correlation
coefficient continues being low (R2 ⫽ 0.75). On the other
hand, the long range series have a very good correlation
coefficient, higher than 0.95. It seems that the aircraft groups
with the largest and smallest range (long range and regional),
especially long range, have a better relation between the
horizontal tailplane area and the wing area than the aircraft
considered as “medium” range (medium range and single
aisle).
Finally, the most relevant classification for the relation
between these parameters is according to the number of
installed engines (Figure 9). All the series have high linear
regression coefficients. In addition, the two- and four-engine
equations are similar to each other. A three-engine
approximation has a larger slope, which means that the
average ratio between the horizontal tailplane area and
the wing area is higher than for two- or four-engined aircraft.
The reason is that the aircraft with an uneven (three) number
of engines necessarily have to install one engine at the rear
end. So, the center of gravity is situated further back and more
tail area is necessary to carry out longitudinal maneuvers. The
approximation for three-engined aircraft can be improved if a
non-linear regression is considered.
Moreover, when considering the parameter DHi associated
with the horizontal tailplane induced drag in terms of MTOW,
the results are quite impressive. If the aircraft in the database
are classified in terms of the tail configuration, then the
behavior of the regression curves is very good (Figure 10). In
the case of a conventional tail, the best approximation is the
non-linear, as well as T-tail aircraft, which have a parabolic
correlation with an R2 close to 1.

Figure 7 Horizontal tailplane area vs wing area according to the Figure 9 Horizontal tailplane area vs wing area according to the
tail configuration number of engines

29
 Preliminary sizing correlations Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32

Figure 10 DHi parameter vs maximum take-off weight according to Figure 12 DHi parameter vs maximum take-off weight according to
the tail configuration the number of engines

then the four-engined ones and the highest is for the

Likewise, if the classification according to the flight segment is two-engined aircraft. It should be pointed out that the aspect
considered, then the curves used to approximate the points are ratio for the medium range aircraft is quite lower than for the
different depending on the group (Figure 11). For regional other three flight segments.
aircraft, the best approximation is non-linear. For single aisle When analyzing the taper ratio according to the tail
and long range aircraft, the approximation is a parabola. configuration, T-tailed aircrafts have the horizontal stabilizer
Finally, medium range is correlated through a linear with a higher taper ratio than conventional airplanes.
correlation. Comparing the values of R2, the medium range Attending to the flight segment, the general extracted rule is:
series presents the worst values, their being lower than 0.8. the higher the range, the lower the taper ratio. From the
The other three regression coefficients are acceptable, standpoint of the number of engines classification,
especially the long range one which is close to 1. three-engined aircraft are very different to two- or
The correlation coefficients obtained in the analysis in terms four-engined aircraft. This group has a lower taper ratio. It is
of the number of engines are all higher than 0.95 (Figure 12). caused by the fact of installing an engine inside the vertical
The equations used are straight lines, which are the simplest tailplane, so it is necessary to reduce the weight of the
ones. Nevertheless, the slopes of the approximations are very horizontal stabilizer. This is consistent with the aspect ratio,
different, which means that the parameter DHi has a very which is lower for these aircraft too.
different behavior depending on the number of engines On the other hand, the quotient of elevator area to
installed on the aircraft. Considering MTOW as a constant horizontal tailplane area is studied. T-tail aircraft present a
(larger than 200 ton), the three-engined configuration has the higher ratio than conventional ones. The behavior with the
highest horizontal tailplane induced drag coefficient, and the range is the same as the taper ratio; namely, the higher the
two-engined aircraft the lowest. range, the lower the quotient. Attending to the number of
On the other hand, there are some parameters which have engines, the lowest ratio corresponds to the three-engined
been studied through their averages and deviations, for aircraft. The average for four-engined aircraft is slightly higher
simplicity and clarity, instead of using curve-fitting. These than the previous one. The two-engined group presents the
parameters are ARH, ␭H and Selev/SH. Table III depicts the highest elevator area ratio.
results of this analysis. Focusing on the aspect ratio, the most
relevant classification is the one based on the number of Table III Averages and deviations of horizontal tailplane parameters
engines. The values change significantly depending on the
Criteria ARH ␭H Selev/SH
group. Three-engined aircraft show the lowest aspect ratio,
Tail
Conventional 4.49-0.641 0.384-0.082 0.247-0.037
Figure 11 DHi parameter vs maximum take-off weight according to T-tail 4.56-0.594 0.457-0.129 0.341-0.045
the flight segment
Flight segment
Regional 4.72-0.485 0.471-0.160 0.331-0.053
Single aisle 4.59-0.608 0.388-0.085 0.286-0.054
Medium range 4.02-0.586 0.398-0.119 0.239-0.051
Long range 4.60-0.694 0.348-0.055 0.237-0.013

Number of engines
2 4.68-0.477 0.424-0.132 0.303-0.056
3 3.67-0.293 0.355-0.022 0.221-0.035
4 4.07-0.848 0.418-0.133 0.246-0.061
Note: The first value in each cell is the average and the other is the
deviation

30
 Preliminary sizing correlations
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona
Finally, it is interesting to note that the horizontal tailplane of
the three-engined aircraft is severely constricted by the fact of
having one engine installed in the vertical tail. For this reason,
its design is quite different from that of the other aircraft, and
the relevant parameters exhibit a differentiated statistical
behavior. This complexity justifies the low number of aircraft
which have presented this configuration throughout history
and, particularly, the low number of three-engined aircraft
included in the database.
An example case
After presenting the main correlations established between
parameters of the database, in this section, an example of
sizing of a horizontal tail using a procedure based on these
results is collected. To compare the accuracy of the sizing
performed, the airplane selected for the exercise is going to be
a current existing commercial transport one not included in
the database. This aircraft is the Boeing B737 MAX 8.
The process starts by establishing, as input, the MTOW
(82.19 ton), the number of passengers (175), the design range
for the selected payload (3,660 NM), the fuselage length (39.6
m) and the height of the fuselage (4.01 m). From these data,
the steps in the design process are now presented. At every
step, the value obtained and the percentage of error made
related to the actual value of the parameter obtained from the
open literature are computed as follows:
1 Entering Figure 4 (conventional series) with MTOW,
Vol ⫽ 6, 044m3 (6 per cent) parameter is determined.
2 By means of the Vol previous value, the wing span is
obtained from the definition of the parameter [equation
(1)]. A value of bw ⫽ 38m (6 per cent) is obtained.
3 The wing area is obtained from Figure 1 (conventional
series) using MTOW. The value obtained for Sw is 145 m2
(8.9 per cent).
4 Starting with MTOW, it is possible to estimate the wing
root chord through a well-established correlation between
these two parameters obtained from the open literature
(Kallinderis et al., 2009), yielding a result of cRw ⫽
6.47m (9.8 per cent).
5 Through geometric relationship between the wing area,
the wing span, the wing root chord and the wing mean
aerodynamic chord (assuming that the wing planform is
trapezoidal), it is possible to estimate a value for the
MACw of 4.43 m (1.6 per cent).
6 Based on the value of the previous output and by means of
the correlation of Figure 9 (two engines), the value of the
planform area of the horizontal stabilizer SH ⫽ 36.3m2 (8.3
per cent) is obtained.
7 For the moment arm of the HTP, LH, it has been
necessary to use a correlation not presented in this work
due to space limitations, but obtained with the same
database, relating this parameter to the length of the
fuselage. The equation for the linear correlation, whose
coefficient R2 is 0.952, is the following equation (9):
LH ⫽ 0.4408Lfus ⫹ 0.7337 (9)
The estimated value of the parameter has been LH ⫽
18.2m (2.9 per cent).
8 Now, it is possible to calculate, according to the
definition, the horizontal tailplane volume coefficient,
31
Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32
which turns out to have a value of VeH ⫽ 1.027 (0.8 per
cent).
9 To obtain the horizontal stabilizer aspect ratio and its
span, the DHi parameter and Figure 11 (medium range)
are used. Thus, a value of DHi ⫽ 43.55ton (2.3 per cent) is
obtained. With the definitions of DHi and the HTP aspect
ratio is finally possible to estimate the values of bH and
ARH, giving bH ⫽ 15m (3.4 per cent) and ARH ⫽ 6.23 (1.3
per cent).
In view of the process followed and the error committed over
conventional reference design, it can be said that the method
presented is very acceptable in terms of accuracy and
calculation time. Subsequent work should try to generate a
broader approach to include more general parameters of the
airplane, as well as the conceptual design of other elements of
the rear fuselage (VTP and rear end).
Conclusions
A new database of commercial transport aircraft, including
about 100 aircraft data of all scopes (regional, short, medium
and long range) has been developed. The database is very
detailed, especially from the point of view of geometric
parameters, as it could make use of a very powerful graphical
computational tool (Airbus proprietary) for obtaining
geometrical data with high accuracy from three view drawings
of aircraft. The purpose of the database is to focus on
analyzing trends that follow certain geometrical parameters
affecting the rear fuselage and horizontal tail, as first steps to
try to optimize future designs of the rear part of commercial
transport aircraft in a conventional configuration arrangement
to make them more efficient.
In addition to analyzing the parameters of the tail area, very
interesting correlations for some general parameters of the
aircraft have also been obtained, which, if not offering novelty
as do the above, have the tremendous interest of the large
number of aircraft analyzed as well as their differentiated
analysis based on the design scope, the number of engines
installed and the configuration of the tail surfaces of the
aircraft.
The correlations shown are only a very small part of the
study actually conducted. Although having considered only
those regressions with correlation coefficients greater than 0.9,
correlations with lower values have also been shown when it
was interesting to compare the effects of the tail configuration,
the range or the number of engines on the quality of the
correlation. The analysis performed also takes into account
linear and non-linear correlations that may be incorporated
into conceptual design tools.
Examples of some of the robust correlations that can
improve decisions at the conceptual design level of are
Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW) and wing area (Sw),
Global volume (Vol) and Maximum Take-off Weight
(MTOW), Horizontal tailplane area (SH) and wing area (Sw)
and Horizontal tailplane induced drag (DindH) and Maximum
Take-off Weight (MTOW).
To assess the quality and usefulness of the database and
correlations explained in this work, an example case of a
current transport airplane design has been performed,
comparing the accuracy of the estimated design and the real
 Preliminary sizing correlations
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado and Alejandro Sanchez-Carmona
airplane data. The selected airplane has been the B737 MAX
8, for which it has possible to obtain several general
parameters as well as the main HTP geometric data with a
mean error below 4.6 per cent, and with impressive
estimations of values, such as the HTP volume coefficient with
an error of 0.8 per cent.
The novel contributions of this work, in addition to the size
of the database managed and its accuracy, have been to find a
new parameter for the horizontal stabilizer and obtain key
geometric parameters for optimizing the rear fuselage and tail
cone of the aircraft. Neither element is taken into account at
the level of conceptual design, but they have great
responsibilities in the performances of the aircraft, with severe
repercussions in terms of aerodynamic drag and weight. In
future work, it is expected to complete the present research by
adding a detailed investigation of the key parameters of the
vertical stabilizer, trying to develop a key analysis for the
optimization design of the entire rear area of future transport
aircraft.
References
Abbas, A., Días, J. and Cabello, J. (2005), “REMFI:
rear-fuselage and empennage flow investigation”, Proc.
Council of European Aerospace Societies/Thematic
Network on Key Aerodynamic Technologis
(CEAS-KATnet) Conference, Bremen.
AIRBUS (2012), Global Market Forecast, AIRBUS, Blagnac
Cedex.
Anderson, J.D. (2002), The Airplane: a History of its
Technology, AIAA, Reston, Virigina.
Boeing Commercial Airplanes (2013), Current Market Outlook
2013-2032, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, WA.
Cazals, O. and Sagne, J.G. de la. (2010), “Airplane with flat
rear fuselage said queue-de-morue empennage”, U.S.
Patent. 2010/0133377 A1.
EUROCONTROL (2010), Long-Term Forecast: Flight
Movements 2010-2030, Eurocontrol, Brussels.
Ibrahim, K. (2004), “Selecting principal parameters of
baseline design configuration for twin turboprop transport
aircraft”, AIAA 2004-5069, Providence, RI.
Ibrahim, K. and Mohnot, A. (2006), Selecting Principal
Parameters of Baseline Design Configuration for Light General
Aviation Aircraft, AIAA 2006-3316, San Francisco, CA,
pp. 1-11.
Jenkinson, L., Simpkin, P. and Rhodes, D. (1999), Civil Jet
Aircraft Design, Elsiever, Elsiever L.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
32
Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Volume 88 · Number 1 · 2016 · 24 –32
Kallinderis, Y., Vouvakos, X. and Menounou, P. (2009),
“Linear correlations of principal parameters for the
preliminary design of twin civil jet aircraft”, Aircraft
Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 81 No. 6,
pp. 508-515.
Lucas, S. De, Velazquez, A., Vega, J.M. and Methodology, A.
(2011), “An optimization method for an aircraft rear-end
conceptual design based on surrogate models”, Proceedings
of the World Congress of Engineering, London, Vol. 3.
Martinez-Val, R. and Perez, E. (2009), “Aeronautics and
astronautics: recent progress and future trends”, Proceedings
of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal
of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol. 223 No. 12,
pp. 2767-2820.
Martinez-Val, R., Palacin, J.F. and Perez, E. (2008), “The
evolution of jet airliners explained through the range
equation”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, Vol. 222
No. 6, pp. 915-919.
Nicolai, L.M. and Carichner, G.E. (2010), “Fundamentals of
aircraft and airship design”, in Schetz, J.A. (Ed.), Aircraft
Design, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Blacksburg, VA, AIAA Educa, Vol. 1.
Raymer, D.P. (2012), Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach,
AIAA Education Series, Sylmar, CA.
Roskam, J. (1986), “Rapid Sizing method for airplanes”,
Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 554-560.
Roskam, J. (2013), Airplane design, part II: preliminary
configuration design and integration of the propulsion system,
DARcorporation, Lawrence, KS.
Torenbeek, E. (1996), Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane Design,
Delft University Press, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht.
Viswanath, P. (1996), “Flow management techniques for base
and after body drag reduction”, Progress in Aerospace
Sciences, Vol. 32 Nos 2/3, pp. 79-129.
Vouvakos, X., Kallinderis, Y. and Menounou, P. (2010),
“Preliminary design correlations for twin civil turboprops
and comparison with jet aircraft”, Aircraft Engineering and
Aerospace Technology, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 126-133.
Corresponding author
Cristina Cuerno-Rejado can be contacted at: cristina.
cuerno@upm.es