Aircraft sizing is the process of determining the take-off gross weight and fuel weight

required for an aircraft concept to perform its design mission.

Sizing was introduced as a quick method based upon minimal information about the
design. A more refined method capable of dealing with most types of aircraft-sizing
problems is needed:

An aircraft can be sized using some existing engine or a new design engine:

• The existing engine: fixed in size and thrust. “fixed-engine”

• The new design engine can be built in any size and thrust required. It can be streched
during the sizing process. “rubber engine”

Rubber-engine sizing is used during the early stages of an aircraft development program
that is sufficiently important to warrant the development of an all-new engine. This is
generally the case for a major military fighter or bomber program.

The designer will use a rubber engine in the early stages of design, and tell the engine
company what characteristics the new engine should have. When the engine company
finalizes the design, it becomes fixed in size and thrust.
Developing a new jet engine costs several billion dollars. Developing and certifying a new
piston engine is also very expensive.

Most aircraft projects do not rate development of a new engine, selection the best from
the existing engines is more convenient. But the study must begin with rubber-engine
design to determine what characteristics to look for in the selection of an existing engine.

The rubber-engine sizing approach allows the designer to size the aircraft to meet both
performance and range goals, by solving for take-off gross weight while holding the T/W
ratio required to meet the performance objectives.

W   T   T / W  cnst

This is not possible for fixed-engine aircraft sizing. When a fixed sized engine is used, either
the mission range or the performance of the aircraft must become a fallout parameter.
dh T T 
Sample: Climb flight:  R / C is certain   
dt W  W certain

If the calculation of the take-off gross weight required for the desired range indicates that
the weight is much higher
 R / C  or range 
Rubber Engine Sizing
Review of Sizing

In the first stage of the design (L / D), (Wi / Wi-1) and (Wx / W0) was obtained.

We
 AW0C Kvs
W0 Wcrew  Wpaylod
 W0 
Wf  W  W  W 
 1.061  x  1   f    e 
W0  W0   W0   W0 

• Not include sudden weight change.

• In many cases, cannot be used for
fixed-engine sizing.

Refined Sizing Equation

For missions with a payload drop or other sudden weight change

W0  Wcrew  Wfixed payload  Wdropped payload  Wfuel  Wempty

We
? W0
Wpayload W0
Empty Weight Fraction

(We / W0) estimation:

Including major design variables. A, (T/W), (hp/W), (W/S), Vmax

We
W0

 a  bW0c1 Ac2 (T / W0 )c3 (W0 / S )c4 M max
c5
Kvs 
Aircraft Type a b c1 c2 c3 c4 c5

Jet Trainer 0 4.28 -0.10 0.10 0.20 -0.24 0.11

Jet Fighter -0.02 2.16 -0.10 0.20 0.04 -0.10 0.08

Military Cargo/ 0.07 1.71 -0.10 0.10 0.06 -0.10 0.05

Bomber
Jet Transport 0.32 0.66 -0.13 0.30 0.06 -0.05 0.05
Kvs : variable sweep constant 1.04 if variable sweep 1.00 if variable sweep
Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006
We
 a  bW0c1 Ac2 (hp / W0 )c3 (W0 / S )c4 Vmax
c5

W0
(knots)

Aircraft Type a b c1 c2 c3 c4 c5

Unpowered Sailplane 0 0.76 -0.05 0.14 0 -0.30 0.06

Powered Sailplane 0 1.21 -0.04 0.14 0.19 -0.20 0.05

Metal/Wood Homebuilt 0 0.71 -0.10 0.05 0.10 -0.05 0.17

Composite Homebuilt 0 0.69 -0.10 0.05 0.10 -0.05 0.17

Single Engine -0.25 1.18 -0.20 0.08 0.05 -0.05 0.27

Twin Engine -0.90 1.36 -0.10 0.08 0.05 -0.05 0.20

Agricultural 0 1.67 -0.14 0.07 0.10 -0.10 0.11

Twin Turboprop 0.37 0.09 -0.06 0.08 0.08 -0.05 0.30

Flying Boat 0 0.42 -0.01 0.05 0.05 -0.12 0.18

Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006

Fuel Weight
Weight at the end of mission The only weight loss during the mission
was due to fuel usage:
Wx Take-off weight
Wx
W0 W fuel  1 
W0
Wf This cannot be assumed if the mission
includes a weight drop.

If the mission includes a weight drop, it is necassary to calculate the weight of the fuel burned
during every mission:

Wi  Wi  x
 Wf i  1   Wf m  Wf i
Wi 1  Wi 1  1

for each segment total mission fuel without reserve and trapped fuel.

The reserve fuel allowance is usually 5%, and accounts for  x 

an engine with poorer-than-normal fuel consumption. W f  1.06 W f i 
An additional allowance of 1% for trapped fuel istypical.  1 
Mission Segment Wieght Fractions

Engine Start, Taxi, and Takeoff

W1
Engine start, taxi, and take-off weight fraction:  0.97  0.99
W0

Climb and Accelerate

Climbing and accelerating to cruise altitude Wi

 1.0065  0.0325M Subsonic
weight fraction: Wi 1
(Mach number “M” starting at Mach 0.1) Wi
 0.991  0.007M  0.01M 2
Wi 1
Supersonic

For an acceleration beginning at other Mach 0.1, the calculated weight fraction should be
divided by the weight fraction calculated for the beginning Mach number.

For an example, accelaration from Mach 0.1 – 0.8 requires a weight fraction of about 0.9805,
whereas acceleration from Mach 0.1 – 2.0 reqires a weight fraction of 0.937. To accelerate
from Mach 0.8 – 2.0 would require a weight fraction of (0.937/0.9805), or 0.9556.
Cruise
 RC
Wi
Breguet range equation: e V ( L / D) for jet aircraft
Wi 1
 RC power  RCbhp
Wi  p ( L / D) 550 p ( L / D )
e e ( fps unit )
Wi 1
for propeller aircraft

R: range L/D: lift to drag ratio

C: specific fuel consumption p : propeller efficiency
V: velocity

L 1
During cruise and loiter: L W  
D qcD0 W 1

W / S S qAe
W/S : actual wing loading, not the take-off wing loading
Loiter

 EC
Wi
for jet aircraft e L/ D E: endurance time
Wi 1
  EVCpower    EVCbhp 
   
Wi   p ( L / D )   550 p ( L / D ) 
for propeller aircraft e e ( fps unit )
Wi 1
Combat/Known Time Fuel Burn

The combat mission leg is normally specified as either a time duration (“d”) at maximum
power (typically d = 3 min), or as a certain number of combat turns at maximum power at
some altitude and Mach number.

The weight of the fuel burned is equal to the Wi

product of thrust, specific fuel consumption, and  1  C(T / W )(d )
duration of the combat, so the mission segment Wi 1
weight fraction:
(T/W : at combat weight and
thrust, not at take-off conditions)
If the combat is defined by some number of turns, the d  2x
duration of combat (d) must be calculated. The time to  2Vx
complete “x” turns is the total number of radians to d
turn divided by the turn rate: g (n 2  1)1/ 2 g n2 1
 
V
The load factor “n” for a sustained combat turn is found
by assuming that the thrust angle is approximately
aligned with the flight direction:
T D
L L D  T  L 
n   n    
W DW  W  D 
Constraints of maximum structural load n  nmax
factor and maximum available lift:
qcLmax
qcL n
L  nW  n  W /S
W /S

L 1 L 1
   (The changes to “e” at
D qc W 1 D qcD0 n(W / S ) combat conditions can
D0
  be considered.)
W / S S qAe n(W / S ) qAe
 Descent for Landing Landing and Taxi Back
Wi Wi
Historical estimation:  0.990  0.995  0.992  0.997
Wi 1 Wi 1

Summary of RefinedSizing Method

Design objectives
Includes more Wing geometry selection Sizing
sophisticated Sketch or
initial layout and “e” estmate mission
analytical
techniques T/W and W/S
according to Swet / Sref
first-order and cD 0
Wi / Wi-1
method.
for each mission segment
Engine SFC’s
Includes W0 guess
weight drops. We / W0
Iterate for
equation Wf
solution
Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006 for each mission segment

W0 calculated
“Design objectives” and “sizing mission”

“wing geometry”
Estimation of “e”

“A conceptual sketch” or “initial layout”

“wetted area ratio”

Estimation of “cD 0”

(T/W) and (W/S) initial values are selected The iteration for take-off gross weight (W0)
begins with an initial guess as to W0, and
Mission segment weight fractions are then the aircraft weight is calculated
determined with engine data. throughout the mission.
  x 
For each mission leg, the aircraft weight will be reduced by W f  1.06   W f i 
either the weight of fuel burned or the payload weight dropped.  1 

W0  Wcrew  W fixed payload

Also the total fuel burned is summed throughout the mission.
 Wdropped payload  W fuel
Wempty
 W0
W0

Along with a statistical empty weight fraction estimation for W0

Fixed-Engine Sizing

The sizing procedure for the fixed-size engine is similar to the rubber-engine sizing:

The mission range or the performance must be considered a secondary parameter, and
allowed to vary as the aircraft is sized.

If the range is allowed to vary, the sizing problem is very simple. The required T/W is
determined to provide all required performance capabilities, using the known characteristics
of the selected engine. Then:
NTper engine
W0  N: number of engines
(T / W )
With the take-off weight known, the range capability can be determined using a modified
iteration technique:
Wempty
W0  Wcrew  W fixed payload  Wdropped payload  W fuel  W0
W0

The known take-off weight is repeatedly used as the “guess” W0, and the range for one or
more cruise legs is varied until the calculated W0 equals the known W0.

This technique can also be used to vary mission parameters other than range.
If some range requirement must be satisfied, then performance must be the secondary
parameter. The take-off gross weight will be set by fuel requirements and the fixed-size
engine may not necessarily provide the T/W ratio desired for performance considerations.

In this case the take-off gross weight can be solved by iteration, as for the rubber-engine
case, with one major exception:
Wempty
W0  Wcrew  W fixed payload  Wdropped payload  W fuel  W0
W0

The T/W ratio is now permitted to vary during the sizing iterations.

Wi
 1  C(T / W )(d ) can not be used for determining a weight fraction for combat
Wi 1 mission legs as it assumes a known T/W.
Instead, the fuel burned during combat by a fixed-size engine is treated as a weight drop. For
a given engine, the fuel burned during a combat leg:
Wf  CTd

The weight of fuel calculated is treated as a weight drop in the iterations. Once the take-off
gross weight is determined, the resulting T/W ratio must be used to determine the actual
aircraft performance for the requirements evaluated before. If the requirements are not
met, then either your aircraft design is not very good or the requirements are too tough!
Geometry Sizing
Fuselage
Fuselage Many methods exist to
Once the take-off gross can be sized.
Wing initially estimate the
weight has been estimated
Tails required fuselage size.

For certain types of aircraft, the fuselage size

is determined strictly by “real-world Aircraft Type a (lb) a (kg) c
constarints”. For example, a large passenger Unpowered Sailplane 0.86 0.383 0.48
aircraft devotes most of its length to the Powered Sailplane 0.71 0.316 0.48
passenger compartment. Once the number of Metal/Wood Homebuilt 3.68 1.350 0.23
passengers is known and the number of seats
Composite Homebuilt 3.50 1.280 0.23
across is selected, the fuselage length and
Single Engine 4.37 1.600 0.23
diameter are essentially determined.
Twin Engine 0.86 0.366 0.42

For initial guidance during fuselage layout and Agricultural 4.04 1.480 0.23
tail sizing, statistical equations can be used: Twin Turboprop 0.37 0.169 0.51
Flying Boat 1.05 0.439 0.40
Fuselage Length  aW 0
c
Jet Trainer 0.79 0.333 0.41
(ft or m) Jet Fighter 0.93 0.389 0.39
These are based solely upon take-off gross Military Cargo/Bomber 0.23 0.104 0.50
weight, and give remarkably good correlations Jet Transport 0.67 0.287 0.43
to most existing aircraft. Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006
Fuselage fineness ratio is the ratio between the fuselage length and its maximum diameter. If
the fuselage cross section is not a circle, an equivalent diameter is calculated from the cross-
sectional area.

for a fixed internal volume

the subsonic drag minimization: Length/ diameter 3 Most aircarft fall

between these
the supersonic drag minimization: Length/ diameter 14 values.

A fineness ratio of 3.0 may not provide enough tail moment arm, so a tail boom can be
added, with a smooth fairing from the front part of the fuselage. This creates the streamlined
“tadpole” shape characteristic of many sailplanes and several newer small airplanes.

A historically derived fuselage fineness ratio can be used, along with the length estimate, to
develop the initial fuselage layout. However, “real world constraints” such as payload
envelope must take priority. For most design efforts the realities of packaging the internal
components will establish the fuselage length and diameter.
Wing
The actual wing size: The reference area of the
theoretical, trapezoidal wing,
and icludes the area
W extending into the aircraft
S centerline.
W /S

Tail Volume Coefficient

For the initial layout, a historical approach is used for the estimation of tail size. The
effectiveness of a tail in generating a moment about the center of gravity is proportional to
the force produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm.

The primary purpose of a tail is to counter the moments produced by the wing. Thus, it would
be expected that the tail size would be in some way related to the wing size. In fact, there is a
directly proportional relationship between the two, as can be determined by examining the
moment equaitons. Therefore, the Stail / Swing should show some consistent relationship for
different aircraft, if the effects of tail moment arm could be accounted for.

The force due to tail lift is proportional to the tail area. Thus, the tail effectiveness is
proportional to the Stail x (moment arm)  volume, which leads to the “tail volume
coefficient” method for initial estimation of tail size.
For a vertical tail, the wing yawing
moments which must be countered are
most directly related to the wing span bw.
This leads to the “vertical tail volume
coefficient”.
LVT SVT
cVT 
bw S w
SVT = vertical tail area
cVT = vertical tail volume coefficient
bw = wingspan
Sw = wing area
LVT = distance from wing to VT
SHT = horizontal tail area
cHT = horizontal tail volume coef.
cw = wing mean chord
LHT = distance from wing to HT
For a horizontal tail or canard, the
pitching moments which must be
countered are most directly related to
the wing mean chord (cw). This leads to
the “horizontal tail volume coefficient”.
S HT LHT
cHT 
cw Sw
LHT
The horizontal tail area is
commonly measured to the
aircraft centerline, while a canard’s
area is commonly considered to
include only the exposed area.
LVT
If twin vertical tails are used, the
vertical tail area is the sum of two.
 Aircraft Type CHT CVT
Sailplane 0.50 0.02
Homebuilt 0.50 0.04
cVT bw Sw
Single Engine GA 0.70 0.04 SVT 
Twin Engine GA 0.80 0.07 LVT
Agricultural 0.50 0.04
Twin Turboprop 0.90 0.08
must be estimated
cHT cw Sw
Flying Boat 0.70 0.06 S HT 
Jet Trainer 0.70 0.06 LHT
Jet Fighter 0.40 0.07
Military Cargo/Bomber 1.00 0.08 At this stage, this can be estimated by a percent of the
Jet Transport 1.00 0.09 fuselage length.

Aircraft Type Tail arm

Front-mounted propeller engine 60% of the fuselage length
Engines on the wing 50 - 55% of the fuselage length
Aft-mounted engines 45 – 50% of the fuselage length
A sailplane 65% of the fuselage length
Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006
Aircraft Type The volume coefficient can be reduced by
All moving tail 10 - 15%
The volume coefficient can be reduced by Type
T-tail 5% (due to endplate) Vertical
5% Horizontal
H-tail 5% Horizontal
Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006

CHT for an aircraft with a control-type canard is  0.1.

For canard aircraft moment arm can be taken as 30 – 50% of the fuselage length.
For a lifting canard aircraft, the volume coefficient method isn’t applicable.

An area split must be selected by the designer. The required total wing area is then allocated
accordingly. Typically, the area split allocates about 25% to the canard and 75% to the wing.
A 50 -50 split produces a tandem-wing aircraft.

For an airplane with a computerized “active” flight control system, the statistically estimated
tail areas may be reduced by 10% provided that trim, engine-out, and nose wheel lift-off
requirements can be met.
Control-Surface Sizing

The primary control surfaces are the ailerons (roll), elevator (pitch) and rudder (yaw).

Final sizing of these surfaces is based upon dynamic analysis of control effectiveness,
including structural bending and control-system effects.

For initial design:

In span, the ailerons typically extend from
about 50% to about 90% of the span.

In some aircraft, the ailerons extend all

The required aileron area the way out to the wing tips. This extra
10% provides little control effectiveness
due to vortex flow at the wingtips, but
can provide a location for an aileron mass
balance.

Wing flaps occupy the part of the wing

span inboard of the ailerons. If a large
Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, 2006 “maximum lift coefficient” is required, the
flap span should be as large as possible:

The use of spoilers rather than ailerons..

Spoilers are deflected upward into the slipstream to reduce the wing’s lift. Deploying the
spoiler on one wing will cause a large rolling moment.

Spoilers are commonly used on jet transports to augment roll control at low speed, and can
also be used to reduce lift and add drag during the landing roll-out. However, because
spoilers have very nonlinear response characteristics, they are difficult to implement for roll
control when using a manual flight control system.

High-speed aircraft can experience a phenomenon known as “aileron reversal” in which the
air loads placed upon a deflected aileron are so great that the wing itself is twisted. At some
speed, the wing may twist so much that the rolling moment produced by the twist will exceed
the rolling moment produced by the aileron, causing the aircraft to roll the wrong way.
To avoid this, many transport jets use an auxiliary, inboard aileron for high-speed roll control.
Spoilers can also be used for this purpose. Several military fighters rely upon “rolling tails”
(horizontal tails capable of being deflected nonsymmetrically) to achieve the same result.
Elevators and rudders generally begin at the side of the fuselage and extend to the tip of
the tail or to about 90% of the tail span. High-speed aircraft sometimes use rudders of large
chord which only extend to about 50% of the span. This avoids a rudder effectiveness
problem similar to aileron reversal.
Control surfaces are usually tapered in chord by the same ratio as the wing or tail surface so
that the control surface maintains a constant percent chord. This allows spars to be straight-
tapered rather than curved. Ailerons and flaps are typically about 15 – 25% of the wing chord.
Rudders and elevators are typically about 25 – 50% of the tail chord.

Control-surface “flutter,” a rapid oscillation of the surface

caused by the air loads, can tear off the control surface or wing or tail
even the whole wing.

Flutter tendencies are minimized by using mass balancing

and aerodynamic balancing: refers to the addition of weight
forward of the control-surface hingeline to counterbalance
the weight of the control surface aft of the hingeline. This
greatly reduces flutter tendencies. To minimize the weight
penalty, the balance weight should be located as far forward
as possible. Some aircraft mount the balance weight on a
boom flush to the wing tip. Others bury the mass balance
within the wing, mounted on a boom attached to the control
surface.

An aerodynamic balance is a portion of the control surface in

front of the hinge line. This lessens the control force required
to deflect the surface, and helps to reduce flutter tendencies.
The aerodynamic balance can be

a notched part of the control surface, an overhung portion of the control surface,
(or a combination of the two)
hingeline
rudder or elevator

hingeline rudder or
elevator

tail tail

Notched or horn Overhung aerodynamic

aerodynamic balance balance

The notched balance is not suitable

for ailerons or for any surface in
high-speed flight. The hinge axis
should be no farther aft than about
20% of the average chord of the
control surface.
A first approximation of the desired hingeline of a balanced control surface:

Break the control surface into spanwise strips. For a movable surface trailing a fixed surface,
assume the center of pressure is at 0.33 of the movable chord length. For a movable surface
in the free stream, assume that the center of pressure is at 0.20 of the chord length. Add up
the centers of pressure, weighted by the areas, to find an overall center of pressure and make
sure that the hingeline is well ahead of it. (But, don’t thrust the result, use more sophisticated
analysis method as soon as possible.)

The horizontal tail for a manually controlled aircraft is almost always configured such that the
elevator will have a hinge line perpendicular to the aircraft centerline. This permits
connecting the left-hand and right-hand elevator surfaces with a torque tube, which reduces
elevator flutter tendencies.

Some aircraft have no separate elevator. Instead, the entire horizontal tail is mounted on a
spindle to provide variable tail incidence. This provides outstanding “elevator” effectiveness
bur is somewhat heavy. Some general-aviation aircraft use such an all-moving tail, but it is
most common for supersonic aircraft, where it can be used to trim the rearward shift in
aerodynamic center that occurs at supersonic speeds.

A few aircraft such as the F-23, SR-71 and North American F-107 have used all-moving vertical
tails to increase control authority.