National Aeronautics and Space Administration

1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Fundamental Aeronautics Program Subsonic Rotary Wing Project Civil Tiltrotor Fleet in the NextGen Airspace Larry A. YoungNASA Ames Research Center 2011 Technical Conference March 15-17, 2011Cleveland, OH 1 www.nasa.gov

2. Rotorcraft in the NextGen Airspace • Demonstrate analytically that rotorcraft can be successfully integrated into NextGen airspace • Identify unique NextGen technologies and concepts of operations that might be required to maximize safe, efficient, environmental responsive, and economic employment of rotorcraft in the NextGen airspace • Demonstrate with modern, accepted analysis/simulation tools that rotorcraft can be a potential solution to airport/airspace congestion • Provide insights into rotorcraft-specific technology advances that will be required

3. Making Sure Rotorcraft Requirements are Factored into NextGen Tech & CONOPS • Primary emphasis of NextGen implementation is, not unexpectedly, on subsonic fixed-wing jet aircraft • It is vitally important to ensure that rotorcraft requirements are adequately factored into NextGen technologies and concepts of operation • Without proper attention to rotorcraft-specific technology and operational questions and issues the full potentiality of future rotorcraft systems might not be realized CTR in NextGen - 5

4. Optimal Synthesis Inc. Main Objective of “Modeling High-Speed Civil Tiltrotor Transports in the Next Generation Airspace” Study … to conduct a systems study that addresses the issues associated with deploying a fleet of CTRs by exploring the trades among procedures, CTR capabilities, and overall NextGen performance

5. Not One, but a Family of Vehicles Being Studied • CTR airspace simulations will be based on a fleet of 10-, 30-, 90-, and 120-PAX vehicles • 10- and 30-PAX vehicle design heritage based, in part, on BA-609 and V-22 • 90- and 120-PAX vehicles are clean-sheet conceptual designs based on Bell Helicopter technology projections for IOP’s of 2020. • Additionally, both VTOL and STOL takeoff and landing profiles have been incorporated in pilot-in-the-loop and airspace simulations • Bell PRESTO sizing analysis used for vehicles CTR in NextGen - 8

6. ICDS CL BL 0.0 6 deg forward sweep BL 275.00 BL 275.00 457.00 dia FS 417.000 FS 119.536 FS 859.164 Mast CL WL 152.36 16 deg WL 35.00 95.0 dia 739.628 30-Pax CTR Conceptual Design

7. 95.0 34 x 72 Aft Entry Door 88.0 21.0 21.0 2.0 21.0 21.0 70.0 Cabin Height 34 x 72 Fwd Entry Door This seat only on aft row at aft bhd 21.50 Floor Lavatory 72.0 Floor 91.50 cockpit 352.0 cabin length 30-Pax CTR Cont.

8. BL 0.0 6 deg fwd sweep BL 590.40 850.10 Dia FS 988.12 FS 421.09 WL 269.37 WL 64.0 156.0 FS 1763.73 120-PAX CTR Conceptual Design

9. 149.0 34 x 72 Aft Entry Door 20.0 aisle 34 x 72 Service Door 21.0 seats 90 in plus cabin 20 x 38 Emergency Exit (2) 34 x 72 Fwd Entry Door 36 in floor 21 width x 32 pitch seats Lavatory Stowage Aft Pressure Bhd Lavatory Fwd Galley Closet First Class 28 width x 38 pitch seats Aft Galley 74.0 cockpit 941.0 cabin floor 120-Pax CTR Cont.

10. Summary of Year 1 Effort 10-, 30-, 90- and 120-pax CTRs designed by Bell Convert to BADA Modeling Format Verified performance with Bell’s data Scaled 10-, 30-, 120-pax BADA models to generate 90-pax CTR BADA Format Data Verified performance with Bell’s 90-pax CTR design Integrate BADA data into ACES for CTR NAS Performance analysis

11. Summary of Year 1 Effort (Cont’d) Pilot-in-the-Loop Simulation using Miami International Bell’s BA 609 simulator for 10-pax CTR Bell’s Partial Task Simulator for 30-pax CTR Developed CTR flight profiles in conversion mode → BADA fuel burn in conversion mode Developed procedures to select VTOL & STOL sites • - Interference with existing fixed-wing traffic was to be avoided • - Upwind approach, landing, and departures are preferred • Approaches and departures parallel to existing fixed-wing traffic • patterns are preferred • - Buildings/structures in close vicinity to landing zone are to be avoided • Low flight over neighborhoods, highways, taxiways, and runways are • to be avoided

12. 4.5 Airplane Mode Conversion Mode Conversion Mode Level off at Top of Climb Top of Descent (TOC) (TOD) cruising altitude Perform Continuous Perform Continuous FAF FAF Descent Approach Descent Approach Prior to intersect GS Prior to intersect GS 6 6 6 5 5 5 (CDA) (CDA) 10 10 - - passenger passenger Cruise Continue climbing Airplane Mode 90 knots/75 90 knots/75 ˚ Nacelle for 3 for 3 ˚ glide slope in Airplane Mode to 250 KCAS to 250 KCAS 70 knots/80 70 knots/80 ˚ Nacelle for 6 6 ˚ glide slope ˚ ˚ 50 knots/85 50 knots/85 Nacelle for 9 glide slope Complete Complete 7 30 30 - - passenger passenger conversion conversion Level off @ 1500 ft 90 knots/75 90 knots/75 ˚ Nacelle for 3 ˚ glide slope to Airplane Mode Arrival Fix Departure Fix Departure Fix In Airplane Mode 200 KCAS 70 knots/82 70 knots/82 ˚ Nacelle for 6 ˚ glide slope Landing Landing @600 ft/200 knots @600 ft/200 knots Missed Missed Begin converting to Begin converting to 50 knots/88 50 knots/88 ˚ Nacelle for 9 ˚ glide slope @10,000 ft Spot Spot @10,000 ft @10,000 ft Airplane mode and Helo Helo Mode Mode 4 4 4 @200ft Decision Altitude 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 climb at 1100 fpm climb at 1100 fpm Convert to 90˚ Nacelle VTOL Takeoff VTOL Takeoff @ 20 knots ˚ 90 Nacelle Nacelle Convert to Convert to 3 3 3 @400 ft @400 ft or or or or 60 ˚ Nacelle decision decision 11 11 11 STOL mode STOL mode STOL Takeoff STOL Takeoff decelerate decelerate Height Height Convert to 90˚ Nacelle ˚ 75 at 35 knots at 35 knots to 110 knots to 110 knots Warm Warm - - up up @ 35 knots 1 1 1 2 2 2 12 12 10K- 1500 feet 12 600-10K feet 10K – 10K feet Summary of Year 1 Effort (Cont’d) • Major Outcomes from the PITL • Identified/reaffirmed required flight control & display augmentation • Generated data to check BADA modeling & Fuel Burn Post Processor • Developed baseline takeoff and approach and landing profiles

13. Summary of Year 2 Effort • CTR fleet airspace simulations • Initial CTR fleet fuel-burn/carbon emissions estimates • Initial CTR terminal area noise predictions using INM NAS Analysis Test Matrix

14. CTR Fleet Introduction Airspace Simulations ACES Fix-Based Conventional Routings Mixed-Equipage Conventional Routings Conventional Fixed-Wing Fleet Baseline: Influence of NextGen

15. Assumptions for NextGen Performance Analysis • CTR Fleet Operates in Under-500 Mile Markets • CTR Capacity Substituted for Conventional Capacity on a Seat-for-Seat Basis • ACES Delay Metric—OPSNET 45 Airports • VTOL Vertiport Capacity per Hour: • 12 Departures • 12 Arrivals • 20 Total Operations

16. Assumptions for NextGen Performance Analysis CTR Substitution on a Seat-for-Seat Basis

17. Vertiport Capacity & Locations With Multiple Vertiports Locations With Multiple Vertiports

18. NAS Analysis Test Matrix & High-Level Results

19. Baseline Delays

20. CTR30, 90 & 120 Mixed Regional Networks

21. Delays for a Mixed Fleet of CTR 30, 90, 120 Note: Test Point 3.4

22. Average Delay Reduction (NAS-wide) from CTR substitution

23. CTR Fleet Noise and Emissions • Original intent was to use the currently in-development FAA/Volpe AEDT noise and emissions tool for the CTR fleet study • This did not prove feasible during the required period of performance for the study • Instead, first-order carbon emission estimates were made on the basis of fuel-burn predictions • And, further, INM (Integrated Noise Model) was used to make CTR terminal noise estimates for EWR airport (as being ideally representative)

24. Preliminary Investigation of CTR Fleet Fuel-Burn

25. Preliminary Noise Analysis for the CTR Fleet SEL noise contours of 45 in-bound and 45 out-bound flights at EWR using INM (Test Point 3.4: a mixed CTR30, CTR90, and CTR120 fleet) 25

26. Preliminary Noise Analysis for the CTR Fleet (Cont’d) DNL noise contours of 1491 in-/out-bound flights at EWR using INM Area under 60 dB contour is 14 square-miles, which is comparable to NASA NVI NRA study of 19 square-miles with the same number of a mix fleet with conventional, CESTOL, and LCTR flights at EWR

27. Year 3 Effort (Currently Underway) -- CTR Public Service/Disaster Relief Modeling • Public service missions are a singular and key aspect of rotorcraft; CTR will be no different • During Year 3 effort, specialized simulation tools will be used to assess utility of CTR fleet for disaster relief missions • Prototypical scenario to consider is a hurricane relief effort • One possibility to consider in analysis is a CRAF-like (Civil Reserve Air Fleet) CTR civilian fleet response to disaster scenario

28. Concluding Remarks • Recent airspace simulation results support earlier assessments of the potentiality of civil tiltrotor aircraft, in commercial transport roles, to significantly reduce NAS-wide airport delay • Though the introduction of advanced aircraft technologies narrows the anticipated gap between civil tiltrotor aircraft and new generation conventional fixed-wing transport aircraft in terms of fuel burn and noise emissions, considerable work remains

29. Questions? 29