Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:09:36.317Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Low speed control of a second generation supersonic transport aircraft using integrated thrust vectoring

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

A. J. Steer
A. J. Steer*
Affiliation:
Modelling, Control and Simulation Science Group, Flight Management and Control Department, DERA, Bedford, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Various control options, using both conventional and novel control motivators, may be available to the designer of a second-generation supersonic commercial transport (SCT) aircraft. A number of tradeoff studies using conventional control surfaces have already been addressed and, more specifically, the low-speed performance benefits deriving from a second pitch control surface quantified. However, a combination of limited rudder control power together with the continuing need to improve overall aircraft performance through reduced fin and control surface sizing has resulted in this assessment of alternative methods of control power generation. Specifically, using the foreplane asymmetrically to generate yawing moments for directional control and deflecting the engine exhaust nozzles for thrust vector control (TVC) about all three rotational axes. At low-speed the effectiveness of TVC will be enhanced due to the high engine thrust required by an SST to overcome the large lift-induced drag generated at approach angles of attack where, conversely aerodynamic control power will be at a minimum due to low dynamic pressure.

This paper begins with a statement of the technical background to the work together with an overview of TVC and its current applications. This is followed by a description of the aerodynamic mathematical model, thrust vector control implementation and the accompanying flight control system. A comparison of aerodynamic and thrust vector control at low speed is then made using established manoeuvres about all three rotational axes. Aircraft speed, take-off performance and the effect of fin area reduction are also addressed. Finally, the major results are summarised and conclusions drawn on a selection of control options and the associated implementation issues. It should be noted that issues relating to high speed and supersonic cruise are not specifically addressed nor are the implications of engine failure conditions.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 104 , Issue 1035 , May 2000 , pp. 237 - 245
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2000 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Steer, A. J., Reed, A. D. S., Preliminary studies into the low speed control requirements for the European Supersonic Commercial Transport, DERA/AS/FDS/CR97091/1, Mar 97.Google Scholar
2. Steer, A. J., Further studies into the European Supersonic Commercial transport low speed control requirements, DERA/AS/FMC/CR97390/1.0,Sep97.Google Scholar
3. Steer, A. J., A piloted simulation study of longitudinally unstable ESCT configurations following failure of the primary FCS, DERA/AS/FMC/CR980128/1.0,Mar98.Google Scholar
4. Steer, A. J., An evaluation of the lateral/directional control power requirements for ESCT, DERA/AS/FMC/CR980518/1.0, Dec 98.Google Scholar
5. Fink, D., New SU-35 boasts greater agility, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 6 Dec 93.Google Scholar
6. Kandebo, S., F119 demonstrates quick response, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 24 Jul, 95.Google Scholar
7. Kandebo, S., Jast design benefits from main engine thrust vectoring, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 12 Feb, 96Google Scholar
8. Dornheim, M., X-31, F-16 MATV, FIA-18 HARV explore diverse missions. Aviation Week and Space Technology, 18 Apr 94.Google Scholar
9. Scott, W., X-31 ‘kill’ ratios exceed predictions, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 8 Aug 94.Google Scholar
10. Proctor, P., Thrust vector control eyed for transports, Aviation week & space technology, Aug 95.Google Scholar
11. Gal-or, B., Civilising military thrust vectoring flight control. Aerospace America, Apr 96.Google Scholar
12. Anon, Vectoring Nozzle Study CONCEPT DOWN-SELECTION AND EVALUATION, Rolls-Royce pic, Filton, Bristol, Contract No FSIA/328,Jun95.Google Scholar
13. Muir, E. A. M., The application of Robust Inverse Dynamics Estimation to the control of a thrust vectoring fighter aircraft, DERA/AS/FMC/TR97170/1.0, Dec 97.Google Scholar
14. Smith, P. R., Burnell, J J, Non-linear Dynamic Inversion (NDI): A top down approach to control law design, DRA/FDS/CR94081/1, Mar 94.Google Scholar
15. Smith, P. R., A simplified approach to Non-linear Dynamic Inversion based flight control, DRA/FDS/CR96140/1.0, Mar 96.Google Scholar
16. Smith, P. R., A theoretical analysis of the simplified Non-linear Dynamic Inversion approach to flight control, DERA/AS/FDS/CR97109/1.0,Mar97.Google Scholar
17. Steer, A. J., Implementation and evaluation of direct allocation control methods applied to a flying wing aircraft configuration, DERA/AS/FMC/TR980094/1.0, Mar 98.Google Scholar
18. Anon, Department of Defence Interface Standard - Flying Qualities of Piloted Aircraft, MIL-STD-1797A, Jan 90.Google Scholar