Elena Turrado and Rodrigo Martinez-Val ETSI Aeronáuticos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, SPAIN ICRAT 2004 IMPACT OF FUTURE GENERATION AIRCRAFT

Elena Turrado and Rodrigo Martinez-Val

ETSI Aeronáuticos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, SPAIN

ICRAT 2004IMPACT OF FUTURE GENERATION AIRCRAFT IN AIRPORT OPERATIVITY

AND AIRSPACE CAPACITY

November 2004

Index• Introduction• Solutions• Supersonic Aircraft• Flying Wing• NLA• A380 a detailed example of NLA• Costs• Conclusions

IMPACT OF FUTURE GENERATION AIRCRAFT IN AIRPORT OPERATIVITY AND AIRSPACE CAPACITY

Introduction

What’s the problem?

Slot -constraints Airports & Airspace constraints

Growth will cause the airports to adapt

5 % per year growth in traffic air means 50% more passengers in 2012.

To cope with growth, the choice is:

• Adaptation to bigger aircraft

• New runways and terminals.

• Additional airports.

• More extensive use of air space


Solutions

• MORE EXTENSIVE USE OF AIR SPACE (FL 400)

Supersonic / high subsonic aircraft

Flying Wings

• ADAPTATION TO BIGGER AIRCRAFT

New Large Aircraft (NLA)

Flying Wings

• Sonic Cruiser: It was expected to be introduced into service in 2008 (Project finished in 2002)

- Mach 0.95 -0.98

- 100-300 passengers.

- 9000 NM Range

• High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT): It was expected to be introduced into service sometime between the years 2005 and 2015.

- Mach 2.0 to 2.5

- 250-300 passengers.

- 9260 km Range

Advantages : - Reduce Airspace Congestion (FL 400)

- Reduce time route (20% less)

Disadvantages: - Increase in fuel consumption (+ 30 -40 %)

- Increase in Business class charges ( +15% )


Supersonic / High Subsonic Aircraft

• OPERATIONAL CAPACITYThe large wing span (up to 99,6 m) exceed the maximum requirement (80 m) by the airport authorities. So, it involve significant modifications to accommodate the size and weight.

LARGE CAPACITY & HIGH FLIGHT LEVEL


EUROPEANLARGE CAPACITY

FLYING WINGB-747 A380

Track (m) 13,89 11 12,4Wheel base (m) 30,1 – 35,9 25,6 31,7

FLYING WING (Boeing) Boeing 747-400

Wingspan 289 feet (88.1 meters) 211 feet (64.3 meters)

Height 40.9 feet (12.5 meters) 63 feet (19.2 meters)

Length 160.8 feet (49 meters) 232 feet (70.7 meters)

EnginesThree high-bypass-ratio jetengines.

Four turbofan engines

Passenger Capacity 800Up to 624(high density config.)

Range7,000 miles(11,265 km)

7,200 miles(11,587 km)

Cruising Speed486 knots(560 mph / 900 kph)

490 knots(563 mph / 908 kph)

Flying Wings : Characteristics

• GROUND HANDLING- A reduction of height on ground level make difficult the movement of vehicles needed to supply the aircraft. - Passenger boarding/deboarding, with an optimum timearound, involve a minimum of three bridges at the same level.

• EMERGENCY EXITS

At least five type A doors (1,067 m x 1,829 m) are necessary at both sites of the aircraft (leading edge and rear aircraft).


Flying Wings : Ground Operation

Airport Compatibility (maximum span 80m)

ADVANTAGES (vs. B777-200 /A330-200)

• Reduced Take-off and landing field length.• Less fuel burnt per passenger-kilometre (15% more efficient).• 10-20 percent more efficient as a transport vehicle in terms of global transport productivity.

DISADVANTAGES

• Uncommon wing architecture => manufacturing and maintenance problems.• Uncommon cabin arrangement => negatively perceived by passengers.• Increased passenger and cargo flight loads for increased distance to airplane axis.


C-FlyWing A330-200 B777-200VARIABLEWheel Track 14,0 m 12,4 m 12,7 mFloor height 3 m 5 m 5 mFIELD LENGTHTake-off (MTOW) 1860 m 2530 m 2530 mLanding (MLW) 1320 m 1722 m 1570 mPERFORMANCES (300 pax)Range 10230 km 8900 km 9730 kmFuel efficiency 19,8 g/pax..km 21,5 g/pax..km 23,5 g/pax..kmTransport productivity(PLxR)/(MTOWxRG)

0,0749 0,0661 0,0652

Flying Wings : Advantages & Disadvantages

Source FAA (1989)

Source ICAO (1999)

Airport reference Code ICAO/FAA


Aerodromecode number

Reference fieldlength(m)

Aerodrome codeletter

Wingspan (m)Outer main gear-wheel span (m)

1 <800 A b < 15 < 4.52 800 = 1200 B 15 = b < 24 4.5 = d < 63 1200 = 1800 C 24 = b < 36 6 = d < 9

D 36 = b < 52E 52 = b < 65

9 = d <144

=1800F 65 = b < 80 14 = d < 16

Aircraft ApproachCategory

Aircraft ApproachSpeed (Kn)

Airplane DesignGroup

Aircraft Wingspanfeet (m)

A <91 I 0 b 49 (15)B 91 = 121 II 49 (15) b 79 (24)C 121 = 141 III 79 (24) b 118 (36)D 141 = 166 IV 118 (36) b 171 (52)E

= 166VVI

171 (52) b 214 (65)214 (65) b 262 (80)

NLA : Characteristics


Table : Aircraft Design Group V and VI Comparison

NLA : Airport Design Impact (1/4)

DesignCharacteristics

Aircraft DesignGroup V

Aircraft DesignGroup VI

% Incremental andReduction in Safety Margin

Length -- -- NoneWidth 150 ft 200 ft 33%Shoulder Width 35 ft 40 ft 14%Blast Pad Length 200 ft 200 ft NoneBlast Pad Width 220 ft 280 ft 27%Runway SafetyArea Length

1000 ft 1000 ft None

Runway SafetyArea Width

500 ft 500 ft None

Runway ObjectFree Area Length

1000 ft 1000 ft None

Runway

Runway ObjectFree Area Width

800 ft 800 ft None

Bridges andCulverts

Taxiing WeightsUp to 877,000pounds

Up to1,400,000pounds

60%


Table : Aircraft Design Group V and VI Comparison (cont.)


DesignCharacteristics

Aircraft DesignGroup V

Aircraft DesignGroup VI

% Incremental andReduction in Safety Margin

Width 75 ft 100 ft 33%Shoulder Width 35 ft 40 ft 14%Taxiway EdgeSafety Margin

15 ft 20 ft 33%

Safety AreaWidth

214 ft 262 ft 22%

Airfield TaxiwayObject Free Area& Safety Margin

320 ft 386 ft21%54% Safety Reduction

Taxiway

TerminalTaxilane ObjectFree Area &Safety Margin


Holdline 280 ft 280 ft NoneParallel Runways -- -- NoneRunway/ ParallelTaxiway

400 ft 600 ft 50%

Parallel Runways& Safety Margin


Separations

Parallel Taxilanes& Safety Margin

245 ftNLA DesignWingspanequals 262 ft

298 ft22%Wingtip Collision

• AIRSIDE:

- Pavements : Increase in weight -> increase in tyres

- Safety: Fire protection (CAT.10- ICAO/ F ó G - FAA).

Emergency Procedures (increase of 30% in passengers.)

Deicing facilities and operations (increase in equipment and staff)

Object free areas o protection areas of Navigation Aids.

- Operations: Wake vortex effects

• AIRSIDE / LANDSIDE:Gate requirements, Apron separation clearances, Compatible passenger loading bridges and Ground servicing (Spaces, 30% more equipment, capabilities).



• LANDSIDE :

More facilities in terminal (check-in desks, security and passport control, Departure lounges, baggage lobbies), parking.

• ENVIRONMENT

- Airport Noise: Below Stage 3 noise levels.

- Air quality (emissions): Higher efficiency jet engines.

- Water runoff.




A380 a detailed example of a NLA






Costs


• ANALYSIS CARRIED OUT:

In base on surveys realised by ACI to American airports of USA (20 answers).

Airports which currently operate B747

• AVERAGE COST PER AIRPORT

Total average : 200 millions € (aprox. 8000 Mill SKK*)

Concepts: 80% Airside, 15% Terminal and 5% Operational facilities

NOTE: Staff and maintenance costs no included. * 1 € ~ 40 SKK


Cost (1/2)

• MAXIMUM JUSTIFIED: 100 Mill. $ (83 millions € ~ 3320 Mill SKK)

• SOLUTION: INCREASE IN CHARGES

Aeronautical tariffs for landing, parking and the use of terminals could rise by up to 25%.

Airports Operators point of view(50% of movements currently made by B747s are in the future made by A380s)


Cost (2/2)


Conclusions

• AIR TRAFFIC CONGESTION

- The large aircraft is a good solution to air traffic congestion in airports.

- Large capacity Flying-wing is a double solution to airspace congestion.

• CHANGES IN AIRPORT INSTALLATIONS

- Most future generation aircraft will be design group VI (FAA) and Type F (ICAO) aircraft

- Possible requirements of operational waivers, restrictions or prohibitions from operating them.


Conclusions (1/3)

• FINANCIAL ASPECT


Conclusions (2/3)

Large Aircraft reduce seat-km costs.

And at slot-constrained airports, NLA provides growth capacity.

Airport Operator should evaluate the cost of adecuate airport infrastructures (in average 200 mill. € per Airport) and the possibly necessary subsidies or changes in tariffs politicy.

4 B747 -> 3 A380 equal earnings per passenger

1 B747 -> 1 A380 revenue from charges

AIRLINES

AIRPORTS

• SAFETY

NLA reduces separation clearances => Supplemental safety items :

Ground looking camera systems,

wingtip collision indicators,

or reduced speed limits….etc.


Conclusions (3/3)

• MARKET ANALYSIS

Airport Operators => Market opportunityMarket opportunity open like Hub Airport operating with NLA.

Thanks for your attention.

Any Questions?

Documents

Elena Turrado and Rodrigo Martinez-Val ETSI Aeronáuticos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, SPAIN ICRAT 2004 IMPACT OF FUTURE GENERATION AIRCRAFT