Cruise Range in Formation Flight
Abstract
A new set of analytical range equations (a modification of the traditional Bréguet range equation) suitable for formation flight at transonic flight speeds under realistic operating conditions (constant Mach number and altitude) is derived. Formations of two aircraft of the same type are analyzed to determine the effects of 1) weight differences between the aircraft, 2) altitude, and 3) the formation flight range on the potential fuel benefits and the associated optimum Mach number. In the case of a weight difference, the lightest aircraft should lead the formation to realize the largest fuel benefits. Overall, fuel savings of 6 to 12% for the total formation can be realized at the expense of a reduction in cruise Mach number from 0.85 to 0.80. The fuel benefit is much less (2 to 8%) when the formation is flown at the original design cruise Mach number. In terms of fuel benefits and Mach number, it is beneficial to fly in formation at higher altitudes. Formation flight step climb procedures are possible, but the additional fuel savings are minimal compared to a constant-altitude formation flight.
References
[1] , “Aircraft Route Optimization for Formation Flight,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 51, No. 2, 2014, pp. 490–501. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C032154
[2] , “The Use of Aircraft Wakes to Achieve Power Reductions in Formation Flight,” Proceedings of the Fluid Dynamics Panel Symposium, AGARD, 1996, pp. 1777–1794.
[3] , “Flight Test Results of Close Formation Flight for Fuel Savings,” AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2002-4490, 2002.
[4] , “F/A-18 Aircraft Performance Benefits Measured During the Autonomous Formation Flight Project,” AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2002-4491, 2002.
[5] , “An Initial Flight Investigation of Formation Flight for Drag Reduction on the C-17 Aircraft,” AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2012-4802, 2012.
[6] , “Summary of Flight Testing and Results for the Formation Flight for Aerodynamic Benefit Program,” AIAA SciTech 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2014-1457, 2014.
[7] , “Surfing Aircraft Vortices for Energy,” Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2015, pp. 31–39. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1548512913500734
[8] , “Aerodynamic Performance of Extended Formation Flight,” 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, AIAA Paper 2010-1240, 2010.
[9] , “Formation Flight—Fine-Tuning of Theoretical Performance Prediction,” 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2013-0961, 2013.
[10] , “The Effects on Formation-Flight Aerodynamics Due to Wake Rollup,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 45, No. 4, 2008, pp. 1167–1173.
[11] , “Extended Formation Flight at Transonic Speeds,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 51, No. 5, 2014, pp. 1501–1510. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C032385
[12] , “Analytic Approach to Optimal Routing for Commercial Formation Flight,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 38, No. 10, Oct. 2015. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.G000806
[13] , “Advanced Aircraft Design: Conceptual Design, Analysis and Optimization of Subsonic Civil Airplanes,”
Aerospace Series , Wiley, West Sussex, England, U.K., 2013, pp. 96–97.[14] , “Cruise Performance and Range Prediction Reconsidered,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 33, Nos. 5–6, 1997, pp. 285–321.
[15] , “Simplified Thrust and Fuel Consumption Models for Modern Two-Shaft Turbofan Engines,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 45, No. 4, 2008, pp. 1450–1456.
[16] , “Flight Performance of Aircraft,” AIAA, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 237–256.
[17] , “Flight Test Techniques Used to Evaluate Performance Benefits During Formation Flight, ” NASA TP-2002-210730, 2002.
[18] , “Design, Performance and Modeling Considerations for Close Formation Flight,” AIAA 23rd Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, AIAA Paper 1998-4343, 1998.
