diff --git "a/file780.txt" "b/file780.txt" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/file780.txt" @@ -0,0 +1,3650 @@ + + + + +The NASA STI program operates under the auspices of the Agency Chief Information Officer.It collects, organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates NASA's STI.The NASA STI program provides access to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports Server, thus providing one of the largest collections of aeronautical and space science STI in the world.Results are published in both non-NASA channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which includes the following report types: TECHNICAL PUBLICATION.Reports of completed research or a major significant phase of research that present the results of NASA Programs and include extensive data or theoretical analysis.Includes compilations of significant scientific and technical data and information deemed to be of continuing reference value.NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal professional papers but has less stringent limitations on manuscript length and extent of graphic presentations. +TECHNICALMEMORANDUM.Scientific and technical findings that are preliminary or of specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, working papers, and bibliographies that contain minimal annotation.Does +Project SummaryThe purpose of this project is to create performance data for twelve Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) aircraft that can be used by many aviation models.The performance data are presented in two formats: the Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) format specified by EUROCONTROL, and the Multi Aircraft Control System (MACS) format specified by NASA.During the execution of the project, simulations were conducted using the Kinematic Trajectory Generator (KTG) for the BADA files, and the MACS software for the MACS files.Simulation output from KTG and MACS were examined and validated by the UAS manufacturers.Nine of the twelve UAS aircraft were validated using this process, although some discrepancies were found in the trajectory generators and are documented in this report.Three of the twelve UAS aircraft-two rotorcraft and one hybrid UAS-require different trajectory generators and will need to be validated at some future point.In addition to the twelve BADA and MACS formatted performance files, the project also conducted simulations using the communication, navigation and surveillance (CNS) capabilities of the UAS aircraft.CNS equipage files provided by the UAS manufacturers were used to configure and conduct the experiments using the Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES) with KTG.Finally, operational requirements and limitations of all twelve UAS aircraft are documented by the project.As UAS aircraft have some unique operating requirements-for example, some aircraft can be launched by a catapult while others cannot fly when the wind speed exceeds thirty knots-documentation of these limitations allows researchers to determine whether the weather conditions and availability of infrastructure limit or prohibit the conduct of UAS missions.The value to the aviation community of the work generated by this project is enormous.UAS aircraft perform very differently than piloted aircraft.UAS aircraft have vastly different cruise speeds, operating range, altitude ceilings, and departure and approach speeds than equivalent piloted aircraft such that finding a match between piloted aircraft performance and a UAS aircraft is impractical.Because the BADA and MACS files created by the project are specific to UAS aircraft, aviation researchers can use these UAS performance files to correctly experiment with UAS aircraft in the National Airspace System using virtually any standard aviation simulation tool. +List of Figures +List of Tables +IntroductionThe purpose of this project was to create performance data for twelve Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) aircraft in two formats usable by standard aviation models: the Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) that has been specified by EUROCONTROL [1], and the Multi Aircraft Control System (MACS) that has been specified by NASA [2].In addition, simulations were conducted to evaluate the communication, navigation and surveillance (CNS) capabilities of the UAS aircraft using the Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES).This report presents the industry data acquired for twelve UAS aircraft, the BADA and MACS files that were produced for these aircraft and tests to verify the data files.The twelve UAS aircraft are Shadow B, Global Hawk, Orbiter, Aerosonde, Predator A, Predator B, Gray Eagle, Predator C, Hunter, Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL.The tests were able to identify and correct errors in the BADA data.Data for the twelve aircraft analyzed in this project were provided by AAI and General Atomics (GA).A summary of modeling, production and verification of the BADA and MACS files for these aircraft is shown in Table 1.Results from ACES simulations to evaluate CNS capabilities of the aircraft are also presented in this report.Manufacturer data for eight aircraft were provided by AAI: Shadow B (RQ7B), Aerosonde, Orbiter, Cargo UAS, NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL, Hunter UAS (MQ-9B), Global Hawk (RQ4A) and Fire Scout.Important specifications and basic attributes of these aircraft are shown in Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8 andTable 9. +Industry Data PresentationIndustry data for only Shadow B are presented here as a sample and for brevity (Table 14).The data for all twelve UAS aircraft are presented in Appendix A. +BADA File PresentationResearch and development activities in the Air Traffic Management (ATM) and the Air Traffic Control (ATC) systems require accurate information on aircraft performance, expressed via an Aircraft Performance Model (APM).While the primary role of APMs is to provide aircraft performance data to ATM/ATC simulation tools, APMs should also be capable of computing the geometric, kinematic and kinetic aspects of an aircraft in flight.Furthermore, these performance models should also be applicable in all phases of flight and be available for a wide set of aircraft.1 Currently, APMs do not exist for UAS, and the task of developing them is complicated due to the significant heterogeneity in UAS configuration and operation.In this project, APMs were developed for 12 UAS aircraft and expressed in two formats: the Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) and the Multi-Aircraft Control System (MACS).The resulting UAS APMs, the assumptions used in their generation, and the limitations identified along the way are described in the remainder of this report.BADA is an APM developed and maintained by EUROCONTROL [1].BADA provides a set of ASCII files containing performance and operating procedure coefficients for approximately 300 different aircraft in all phases of flight.The coefficients include those used to calculate thrust, drag and fuel flow and those used to specify nominal cruise, climb and descent speeds.BADA is based on a kinetic approach to aircraft performance modeling, which models aircraft forces.The intended use of BADA is trajectory simulation and prediction in ATM research and development and strategic planning in ground ATM operations.Currently, several air traffic modeling and simulation tools such as ACES, FACET etc., use BADA for trajectory simulation.Four Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) files were generated for each UAS aircraft, consisting of stall speeds during different phases of flight, ascent and descent rates, fuel flow rate, empty and fuel masses, and aircraft speeds at different altitudes during the flight.These four files are:  Operational Performance File (.OPF): contains performance parameters for a specific aircraft type including drag and thrust coefficients  Airlines Procedures File (.APF): contains speed procedure parameters for a specific aircraft type  Performance Table File (.PTF): contains summary performance tables of true airspeed, climb/descent rate and fuel consumption at various flight levels for a specific aircraft type  Descent file (.DCT): contains descent rate and fuel consumption rate during descent.This file represents data in the .PTF file in a different format.For each aircraft, the .APF, .OPF and .PTF files were compiled by the Purdue team, whereas the .DCT file was compiled by IAI using the data in the .PTF file.The four BADA files for Shadow B are shown in Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4.It should be noted that only those columns in the .DCT file that are relevant to simulating the flight using the Kinematic Trajectory Generator (KTG) were compiled.KTG is a flight trajectory simulation tool developed at IAI [3], which was used to simulate the UAS flights and validate the BADA files.Therefore, the .DCT file contains less data than the version provided by the EUROCONTROL.Only the BADA files for Shadow B (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4), and their corrected versions and the reasons for the corrections later on in this report, are presented here.The files for all the UAS aircraft (including Shadow B) were provided to NASA on a DVD, along with the option to download them from an ftp site: ftp://ftp.i-a-i.com.While it is safe to assume that the fuel flow equations and the climb/descent procedures provided in BADA can be used for large UAS, the lightweight aircraft may not perform as intended if modeled using the same formulas.Once the modeling is completed, simulation tools utilize the tables and parameters in the .PTF and .OPF files for each aircraft to describe its trimmed motion or transition at any specified altitudes. +Challenges with BADA File Format for UAS: Deficiencies and LimitationsBADA is primarily used for manned aircraft and its capability to model rotorcrafts, hybrids or electric aircraft is currently unknown.Current BADA format does not have provisions for simulating rotorcraft and electric engines (both frequently used in the UAS family).Performance characteristics and/or aircraft component types that are missing in BADA, but important for understanding the UAS-NAS integration, can be classified as deficiencies in BADA.These deficiencies are of the following types:  Aircraft type, class and size (e.g., rotorcraft are currently not considered in BADA)  Propulsion type (e.g., BADA currently handles only jets, turboprops and pistons; electric engines are not considered)Performance characteristics that are poorly modeled in BADA (fidelity too low to be used in existing simulations) can be classified as limitations of BADA:  Stall speed buffers that are too limiting  Climb/descent schedules that are often ill-suited for many UAS +DeficienciesAircraft type, class and size: BADA was primarily developed for manned, fixed-wing aircraft, and does not have provisions to include rotorcraft or hybrid aircraft.Additionally, BADA specifies wake categories based on aircraft weight: Small (up to 12,500 lb.), Medium (12,500 to 41,000 lb.), Large (41,000 to 255,000 lb.) and Heavy (more than 255,000 lb.).However, it does not include very-small/light aircraft such as Orbiter or Aerosonde.Consequently, BADA coefficients and procedures are not well-defined for such very-light aircraft.Considering these restrictions, some of the UAS aircraft could not be properly represented in BADA until modifications (revisions to the format) were in place: Rotorcraft: NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL and Fire Scout  Hybrid: Cargo UAS  Very Light Aircraft: Aerosonde and OrbiterThe following BADA fields, in particular, are difficult, or even impossible, to determine for the three aforementioned aircraft types: a) stall speeds, b) cruise, climb and descent speeds, c) rate of climb/descent coefficients, d) thrust coefficients, and e) ground movements. +Propulsion type:In its current format, BADA can accommodate three engine types: Jet, Turboprop or Piston.This prevents the representation of UAS that use electric motors, such as the Orbiter.Introduction of electric engine format into BADA requires changes to the .APF and .PTF files in BADA, particularly the fuel flow of the aircraft, in addition to the performance coefficients in the .OPF file. +LimitationsStall Speed Buffer: As described earlier, aircraft speeds in the .PTF file are currently set to accommodate transport aircraft, these buffer values need to be modified for realistic UAS representation.More specifically, current true airspeed values in the .PTF file have to be at least 1.3 times (1.2 in some cases) the stall speeds at different phases of flight.While this is justified in the case of transport aircraft for reasons of passenger comfort, implementing this in UASs alters their performance.The relationship between stall speeds and speeds in the .PTF file are shown in Table 30.Currently these rules are strictly followed while developing the BADA files for the aircraft in our list since most simulation software have a hard constraint on these conditions before flying an aircraft.Discrepancies resulting from this rule directly affect the performance of certain aircraft. +Ill-suited climb/descent schedules:In BADA, standard airline procedures are defined using speed profiles in different phases of flight.Procedures similar to that need to be defined in order to calculate rate of climb/descent, fuel flow etc., at different flight levels.In the case of commercial jet aircraft, BADA provides methods to calculate speed profiles at different flight levels, as exemplified in Figure 5, where, C Vmin refers to the stall speed buffer (Table 30) and Vd CL represents standard airline climb speed increments as shown in Figure 6.These procedures are also defined in BADA for manned aircraft with turboprops and piston engines (not shown here).Similarly, standard descent procedures are also defined for manned aircraft (not shown here).However, these definitions were not used in the development of BADA files for the UAS aircraft.Climb/descent speeds, rate and fuel flow are directly taken from the output of sizing tools (FLOPS, JSBSim, etc.) with the stall speed buffers being the only added constraint.Also, simulation software such as KTG and FACET do not hard-code these definitions.Considering the vast heterogeneity in design, such standard procedures may be hard to define for UAS aircraft. +MACS File PresentationThe Multi Aircraft Control System (MACS) is a comprehensive research platform used in the Airspace Operations Laboratory (AOL) at NASA Ames Research Center [2].It was developed to increase the overall realism and flexibility of controller-and pilot-in-the loop air traffic simulations [4].There are three functional classes of aerodynamic models in MACS with varying levels of fidelity, viz. the motion predictor class, the 4-DOF model and the 6-DOF model.These aero models use aircraft performance database files as parameters for the models.Currently, 434 aircraft files exist within the MACS database.Addition of new aircraft types for simulation in MACS requires adding database entries for those new aircraft.While MACS allows for simple mappings of aircraft and engines to those already in the database, an entirely new database entry was created for each UAS studied.This is due to the vast differences in size, weight, and flight envelope between UAS and aircraft already in the MACS database.The addition of a new aircraft in the MACS database is accomplished by essentially filling out the aircraft_specific_model_data.datfile.This master file (Figure 8) contains all top level information regarding an aircraft and has provisions to map the required drag model and engine model of the aircraft.Mach numbers for an aircraft.Further, where applicable, it also specifies changes to these coefficients for other flight parameters such as settings of flaps, landing gear and speed brakes. Flight parameters file: This file specifies the flight path in terms of origin and destination airports along with their location and altitudes, the waypoints, different operational speeds (climb, cruise, descent, approach and landing in knots of indicated air speed), cruise altitude, communication and navigational equipage, and flight-specific operational procedures (e.g., self-separation).The aircraft model data file for each UAS aircraft was produced by Purdue, whereas the flight parameters file was compiled by IAI by utilizing the data from the .OPF and .PTF BADA files.It should be noted that the 'AIRFRAME DRAG MODEL' file and 'ENGINE THRUST MODEL' file in Figure 8 are external files that are called to the motion class while executing a particular aircraft.If a particular UAS aircraft is similar to an existing aircraft in MACS, a simple mapping will accomplish this process (Table 15), but for other aircraft new drag model and thrust model have to be created.The three MACS files for Predator B are shown in Figure 8, Figure 9 and Figure 10, respectively.The MACS files for the twelve UAS aircraft were provided to NASA on a DVD, along with the option to download them from an ftp site: ftp://ftp.i-a-i.com.Since this project involves representing UAS data in two formats (BADA and MACS), there is a reasonable need for consistency between a MACS file and a BADA file for the same aircraft.Accordingly, a convention was developed such that a majority of the entries in a MACS file were mapped to specific entries in a BADA .OPF or .APF file as shown in Figure 7.The various attributes that distinguish UAS from traditional fixed-wing manned aircraft also imply difficulties in populating the aircraft_specific_model_data.datfile since some fields are either not applicable or are not available as a result of the UAS configuration. +Challenges with MACS File Format for UASThe various attributes that distinguish UAS from traditional fixed-wing manned aircraft also imply difficulties in populating the aircraft_specific_model_data.datfile since some fields are either not applicable or are not available as a result of the UAS configuration. +Lack of Airframe Drag ModelFor majority of the twelve UAS aircraft studied in this project, detailed airframe drag data was not available due to the propriety nature of the information.Efforts were made to substitute or map drag data from similarly sized aircraft to mitigate this problem.However, this was not possible for all twelve UAS aircraft due to vast differences in size between the smaller UAS and existing aircraft in the MACS database.Consequently, these UAS aircraft were not simulated in MACS: Orbiter, Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL. +No Support for Electric Engines and RotorcraftIn the case of the Orbiter UAS, which is a battery powered fixed-wing aircraft; it was difficult to generate a MACS profile simply because the format only supports jets, turboprops or props.Furthermore, an attempt was made to match a similar engine based on output, but this was unsuccessful since the size of the Orbiter UAS (and its power plant) is much smaller than anything available in the database currently.Similarly, rotorcraft and hybrid engines are also not fully represented in MACS currently.More details regarding the MACS modeling of these aircraft are discussed in later sections. +MethodologyThe flowchart shown in Figure 11 shows the various steps involved in generating BADA and MACS aircraft performance models (APMs) for a UAS.The process includes validation via test in ATM/ATC simulation software, specifically trajectory generators used in ACES and MACS.The first step in the analysis involves collection of required UAS data to estimate its weights and performance.Data for UAS being studied in this project are collected from their respective manufacturers.Next, an aircraft sizing algorithm (FLOPS, DATCOM-JSBSim, etc.) uses the data to estimate weights, aircraft climb, cruise, descent performance, etc.A MATLAB-based tool was developed to generate BADA and MACS files using outputs from the sizing algorithms.In the last step, the complete APM files are examined via use in ACES/MACS for purposes of validation. +Flight Optimization System (FLOPS)The Flight Optimization System (FLOPS) is a multidisciplinary system of programs for conceptual and preliminary design and evaluation of advanced aircraft concepts.It consists of nine primary modules out of which the first five are used in this project: 1) weights, 2) aerodynamics, 3) engine cycle analysis, 4) propulsion data scaling and interpolation, 5) mission performance, 6) takeoff and landing, 7) noise footprint, 8) cost analysis, and 9) program control.The weights module uses statistical/empirical and analytical equations to predict the weight of each item in a group weight statement. +The aerodynamics module uses a modified version of the Empirical Drag EstimationTechnique (EDET) program to provide drag polars for performance calculations.Modifications include smoothing of the drag polars, more accurate Reynolds number calculations, and the inclusion of other techniques for skin friction calculations.Alternatively, drag polars can also be input, but so far we have been using the FLOPS calculated values until we get it in the same ballpark as the manufacturer provided values.FLOPS engine cycle analysis module provides the capability to internally generate an engine deck consisting of thrust and fuel flow data at a variety of Mach-altitude conditions.Engine cycle definition decks are provided for turbojets, turboprops, mixed flow turbofans, separate flow turbofans, and turbine bypass engines.Piston engine and propeller performance data can also be generated.Since very detailed engine decks were not available from manufactures due to security reasons, FLOPS' internal decks were used, while information such as baseline engine thrust, fuel flow, etc. were obtained from the manufacturer.The propulsion data scaling and interpolation module uses an engine deck that has been input or one that has been generated by the engine cycle analysis module, fills in any missing data, and uses linear or nonlinear scaling laws to scale the engine data to the desired thrust.It then provides any propulsion data requested by the mission performance module or the takeoff and landing module.The mission performance module uses the calculated weights, aerodynamics, and propulsion system data to calculate performance.Based on energy considerations, optimum climb profiles may be flown to start of cruise conditions.The cruise segments may be flown at the optimum altitude and/or Mach number for maximum range or endurance or to minimize NOx emissions, at the long range cruise Mach number, or at a constant lift coefficient.Descent may be flown at the optimum lift-drag ratio.FLOPS engine thrust output is validated by comparing the results to the manufacturer-provided thrust data.If the values differ by more than , the FLOPS engine cycle module is re-run by altering coefficients within the module (such as overall pressure ratio, bypass ratio for turbofans, and turbine entry temperature) until the difference is less than .In this project, the program is used in such a way that an optimal weight of the aircraft is estimated for a given range or endurance, thrust (engine parameters), geometric features etc. FLOPS results are then compared to manufacturer provided data.Cruise, climb and descent phases of flight where scheduled according to the following procedures after consulting with the manufacturers, a) Cruise: fixed Mach number at input maximum altitude or cruise ceiling, b) Climb: minimum fuel-to-distance profile, and c) Descent: descent at optimum lift-drag ratio.FLOPS can handle only fixed-wing aircraft of the following engine types: Jet, Turboprop and Piston.FLOPS is primarily designed for modeling manned aircraft and hence, it has limitations in modeling very light aircraft such as the Aerosonde and Shadow B. In this project, the following seven aircraft are modeled using FLOPS: Shadow B, Global Hawk, Predator A, Predator B, Gray Eagle, Avenger and Hunter UAS. +Constructing BADA models of UAS from Public Data/ Photos employing 3D Modeling, JSBSim, and DATCOMIn this analysis, publically available data and photographs of UAS are converted into detailed models.These models are used to measure the static performance of the UAS in order to create BADA models.This approach is appropriate for UAS when not enough data is available to characterize the aircraft performance for BADA.The following aircraft in the UAS set are modeled using the JSBSim/DATCOM integrated model: Aerosonde, Orbiter and Cargo UAS. +DATCOM Aerodynamics ModelIn 1976, the McDonnell Douglas Corporation was commissioned to convert the USAF Stability and Control DATCOM to an automated program.Implementation of the Digital DATCOM was completed in 1978.Since that time, it has undergone various updates and is still widely used in industry and academia today [5].The Digital DATCOM has several limitations.It assumes the fuselage is a body of revolution, so external fuel tanks and other large protrusions from the fuselage cannot be accounted for.There is also no method for a twin vertical tail, so this must be approximated as a single vertical tail.In addition, there is no method to compute the effect of rudder control so this must be estimated.The underlying methods of the DATCOM are based on charts and equations used in aircraft design.This technique of aerodynamics modeling is faster than a computational fluid dynamics based approach, but is also less accurate.Previously, our lab has conducted wind tunnel testing of a small UAS in order to validate the Digital DATCOM for application to this domain.The Digital DATCOM reads a data file describing the aircraft geometry.It then produces tables for the predicted aerodynamics.The lift, drag, and side force coefficients are available in the user manual.The DATCOM output is in the stability frame (rotated from the aircraft body frame by the angle of attack). +Propulsion ModelsUAS propulsion systems are modeled using existing methods within the JSBSim library [6].JSBSim provides models for piston, turbine, and turboprop engines and electric motors.The turbine engine produces its own thrust; however, the turboprop and electric motor must use a propeller to convert the engine power to thrust. +MethodologyThe main inputs required for analyzing each aircraft are the mass properties, propulsion characteristics, flight control, and aerodynamic properties.Several programs are used to provide inputs for JSBSim simulation.The aircraft visual model is generated by Blender [7], the aerodynamic properties are generated from DATCOM, and the engine and propeller files are generated from the Aeromatic website [8].Some other input data includes moments of inertia, which were calculated given the aircraft's configuration data and aerodynamic type, and stability-related characteristics, such as center of gravity and aerodynamic center, which were estimated from the blender model.The interactions between the different elements of this process are shown in +Gathering Publically Available Data/ PhotographsInformation on UAV performance specifications, dimensions, propulsion systems, aerodynamics, and mass properties can be found on the internet.Often this information is published as marketing information.Also, various photographs can be obtained on the internet.In addition to the general shape of the aircraft, these photographs provide information on the position of the control surfaces, landing gear, etc. that is typically not published. +7.2.2.2Constructing 3D Models in Blender Due to the sensitive nature of UAS dimension information; all of the dimensions of the aircraft required for input into the DATCOM aerodynamics program are not publicly available.To obtain reasonable estimates of this information, 3D models were constructed in the Blender 3D modeling program.If orthographic drawings are available, these drawings are employed to construct the 3D model as shown in Figure 13.The shape of the aircraft is modified until it agrees with all of the orthographic projection views provided. +Figure 13. Orthographic projection/picture based modelingWhen an orthographic projection drawing is not available, pictures can be utilized.The disadvantage to this method is that it is difficult to correctly account for the perspective distortions.If enough pictures are taken of the same aircraft, it is possible for some algorithms to recover the orthographic projection of the image; however, this approach was not utilized in this analysis.An example of employing a picture to aid in 3D modeling is shown in Figure 14. +7.2.2.3Measuring 3D Model to Create DATCOM Input File Once a 3D model has been created in blender it can be easily used to measure quantities required for the DATCOM aerodynamics input file.For instance, the wing section of the Cargo UAS is being measured (Figure 15). +Test Aircraft in Manual Flight SimulationThe FlightGear flight simulator is used to test the accuracy of each aircraft system [9].FlightGear takes the main JSBSim file for each aircraft as input (Figure 16).The JSBSim file includes file paths for the visual model of each aircraft from the AC extension file from Blender, the aerodynamic flight characteristics from DATCOM, engine and propeller information, flight control details, and ground reaction details.Each path contributes to the entire function of the model in the flight simulator and is then tested for each of the following:  The aircraft is observed on the runway to test accuracy of ground reactions. The simulation is initialized with the aircraft in free fall to test the aircraft glide characteristics.If necessary, stability augmentation systems are added at this stage to make manual flight easier. When applicable, the aircraft are tested for smooth and controlled takeoff. Control surfaces are checked for proper function. +JSBSim Trimming and Performance Table GenerationOnce the flight testing is completed, the model is trimmed at various conditions using the JSBSim trim program to generate the performance table.For each flight altitude, aircraft's weights are varied by three different fuel levels, low level, nominal level, and hi level.In the original BADA performance table, the corresponding aircraft's true airspeed for each flight level is based on the aircraft's flight procedure.However, such information is not available for most of the UAVs.True airspeed is instead chosen within the operational speed range provided by the manufacturers.Inputs of flight level and true airspeed are then fed into JSBSim as well as aircraft's weight.For cruise flight, flight path angle is set to zero and then JSBSim provides the fuel flow rate.However for climb and descent flights, simulation is conducted with increments of the flight path angle.The maximum flight path angle that ensures the aircraft's trim is then used in the following equation to calculate the rate of climb. +Modeling of Electric UAS Aircraft: OrbiterThe fundamental idea here is that fuel, fuel consumption, and fuel capacity of any sort can be decomposed into raw energy units (kW-h, BTU, etc.) as a middle ground.Using dimensional analysis, the energy content of an electrical battery is converted into kW-h and that capacity is then normalized by the energy content of a specified fossil fuel.The end result is a volume of fossil fuel (in liters) that contains the same amount of energy as the original electrical battery as shown in Eq. ( 1), where, B v is the published battery voltage (in volts), C v is the published battery capacity (in A-h), and E q is the energy content of the fossil fuel (in KW-h/L).1000 q v v eq E C B C  (1)However, this solution is not complete without a way to represent the rate of energy consumption.As with the energy capacity problem, the electric engine power consumption is converted to raw energy units (J/s, BTU/s, etc.), which is often specified by the manufacturer.This energy consumption rate is normalized by the specific energy content of a fossil fuel (J/kg) such that the flow rate is in terms of weight.The result of the conversion is a weight-based fuel flow value (in kg/min) that represents the same amount of energy flow as the electrical systems onboard the aircraft.This is shown in Eq. ( 2), where P v is rated electric engine power (in KW), E q is again the energy content of the fossil fuel (in (KW-h)/L), and ρ is the density of the fossil fuel.q v q v E P E P f 60 10 6 . 3 60000 6      (2)This dimensional analysis method, while convenient and simple, is not without its drawbacks.Weight is an important measure in aircraft mission performance analysis and this method does not account for the reality that a battery does not change in weight when it is being charged or drained.As a result, simulations that implement this solution can result in the aircraft losing more weight than possible due to "fuel" consumption. +Rotorcraft Modeling and Analysis: RPATRotorcraft performance was estimated using Rotorcraft Performance Analysis Tool, RPAT, developed at Cornell.This Microsoft Excel based performance analysis tool is capable of calculating hover performance, maximum gross weight, parasite and profile drag, and forward flight power consumption for given rotorcraft input parameters.At Purdue, the RPAT basic program went through serious modification to output the entire .PTF table for rotorcrafts, which includes the flight speed, fuel flow rates for different phases of flight, climb and descent rates for three different weight settings.The modified RPAT consists of several modules viz.Aircraft Specifications, Hover Performance, Parasite Drag Estimate, Profile Drag Estimate, Forward Flight Power Analysis, Forward Flight Summary and the BADA format .PTF table.As mentioned before, BADA equations are not suitable for rotorcrafts.The calculation follows preliminary design process and performance analysis based on rotorcraft energy equations [10].Results from the modified version of the RPAT were compared to the existing full scale helicopter performance data for verification.The flight profile assumes that the rotorcrafts climb at the best rate of climb and cruise at the best range speed.The descent profile is adjusted to match the performance characteristics given by the manufacturer.In the Aircraft Specifications module, the basic sizes of components and performance parameters are estimated using statistical/empirical equations based on 7 initial inputs: aircraft gross weight, range, maximum forward flight speed, number of blades in rotors, number of engines and specific fuel consumption [11].The estimated values are only used when specific data are not available.In the Hover Performance module, with complete aircraft specifications from aircraft specifications, 'out of ground effect' rotorcraft hover performance is calculated.In the modified RPAT, rotorcrafts are assumed to be 'out of ground'.The essence of hover performance calculation is to analyze distribution of required power to main rotor and tail rotor using iterations.For hover performance, power available at varying altitude is also calculated.From Parasite Drag Estimation and Profile Drag Estimation, power required correspond the drag components for varying altitude and varying forward flight speed are estimated.Parasite drag is estimated using Eq. 3, where D p is the parasite drag, f is equivalent flat plate area, V is forward velocity and is dynamic pressure.The flat plate area of the aircraft can be obtained by drag build up; however, since data was available, given flat plate area were used in both aircraft calculations.2 * V f q f D p    (3)Using parasite drag, atmospheric condition and flight velocity, parasite power can be calculated for the forward flight as given in Eq. 4, where hp p is the parasite power in Horse Power units.1100 550 * 3 V f V D hp p p    (4)Profile power caused by both main rotor and tail rotor is given by Eq. 5, where hp pro is the profile power in Horse Power units, C d is profile drag coefficient, Ω is angular velocity of rotor blades, A b is area of rotor blades, R is rotor radius and μ is rotor tip speed ratio.( ) ( )(5)Rotor disk angle of attack (α) is also calculated using the parasite drag as given in Eq. 6, where GW is gross weight of the aircraft.          p D GW 1 sin  (6)Rotor disk angle of attack calculation assumes that angle of attack is positive for forward flight.The estimated rotor disk angle of attack is then used in forward flight for induced velocity calculation.In the Forward Flight Power Analysis module, previously calculated power components are added to the induced power estimated.With the assumption that rotors are ideal, induced drag is calculated using the same equation used for a fixed wing aircraft (Eq.7), where T is thrust, A is disk area and ρ is the density of fossil fuel or air.(7) Using induced drag calculations, induced power is estimated using Eq. 8, where hp ind is induced power in Horse Power units.(8) By combining estimated power components, power required for forward flight is calculated using Eq. 9, where hp access is the access power.Access power was assumed to be zero for aircraft used in this project.(9) Power required is a function of forward flight velocity and thus can be represented in a graph known as the power curve, shown in Figure 17. +Figure 17. Sample power curveThe power required and available power data are produced for entire range of flight altitudes and for three different weight settings.Using the power required and power available data, cruise, climb and descent performance data are calculated for .PTF.When generating a .PTF table, the rotorcrafts are assumed to be flying at the most efficient flight profile: best rate of climb, maximum range speed at cruise and maximum glide range speed at descent.This results in a flight profile very similar to fixed wing aircrafts, where the rotorcraft does not perform any vertical flight, which is highly unlikely.First, the cruise performances are calculated using best range forward velocity setting.Best range forward velocity will maximize the UAS mission range.Speed is calculated assuming there are no head or tail wind and the engine models are turbine engines.The maximum range speed for cruise is determined at the speed where a line through origin is tangent to the power curve.For climb performance analysis, Eq. 10 is used to calculate the extra power required to climb.When the difference between the power available and power required from the power curve is maximum, the flight profile during climb corresponds to the best rate of climb.Unlike fixed wing aircraft, forward flight speed during best rate of climb is much different from that of cruise or descent for rotorcraft.Furthermore, the differences between the rate of climb for low, nominal and high mass configurations are large, because rotors are the source of both lift and thrust for rotorcrafts.Descent velocity is found at speeds for maximum glide range speed.This velocity is found by determining a point on the power curve where through the origin is tangent to the required power curve, similar to cruise speed.Fuel flow rates during descent are estimated by adjusting the throttle to match the manufacturer determined rate of descent.Using partial power of level flight setting, Eq. 10 is used to calculate the negative climb.In this project, the following aircraft are modeled using RPAT: Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL.This section documents the sizing of the aircraft chosen for analyses, comparison of the sizing results with data provided by aircraft manufacturers, analysis of BADA and MACS files and the deficiencies or limitations associated with BADA and MACS in representing the aircraft.A summary of the manufacturer prescribed engines and the engine decks actually used in this project is provided in Table 16.High resolution data for the actual engines were not available due to security reasons and therefore, either an alternative deck was used to mirror the actual engine or an engine type within the modeling tool is used to duplicate the original.Mismatches between engines lead to several discrepancies, which are described in detail in the following subsections.If an internal engine cycle is used, FLOPS uses linear or non-linear scaling laws to scale the engine data to the desired thrust.If the maximum thrust at cruise for a particular vehicle is provided by its manufacturer, for example, this value is input to FLOPS before the execution of the program.The desired thrust values are sometimes not achieved due to conflicts in the FLOPS optimization regimes.Since priority is given to sizing the vehicle to the exact weights and configurations, the engine thrust values are sometimes compromised.An exact match between thrust values from data and FLOPS can lead to discrepancies in weights, configurations etc., and vice versa.Mismatches between engine thrust values for a number of aircraft are listed in the subsequent sections.In some cases the transport weight equation coefficients within FLOPS were altered by trial and error until the weights, configuration and engine thrust match the manufacturer data to provide a reasonable vehicle performance output.If a desired thrust value is not provided by the manufacturer, FLOPS chooses a default starting point for sizing, based on the type of the engine in use.Similar procedures were followed in the other sizing tools as well. +Shadow BShadow B is a small-scale, fixed wing aircraft equipped with a piston engine.Data for Shadow B were provided by its manufacturer, AAI.FLOPS was used to model the Shadow B as closely as possible.FLOPS generated the drag polars, fuel flow rates and climb rates for different phases of flight based on primary input data for Shadow B. The MATLAB-based BADA tool developed at Purdue was used to translate FLOPS output to the required BADA files in the format mandated by EUROCONTROL.The current FLOPS model predicts a maximum take-off gross weight of 593 lb., which is higher than the actual Shadow B gross weight of 467 lb., a difference of approximately 20%.Additionally, FLOPS specifies a cruise Mach number of 0.225 while the actual value is 0.197.Table 17 provides a summary of FLOPS sizing results compared to industry (AAI) data.This model, therefore, is not a perfect representation of Shadow B. However, by using FLOPS' General Aviation module and with the help of correlation factors, it is possible to model an aircraft in the same weight category as that of Shadow B. While matching the exact performance values requires further refinement, the present model appears to be a reasonable basis for this refinement.The .PTF file for Shadow B was shown in Figure 4. Shadow B is equipped with a UEL 741AR74-1102 piston engine.Since all or most of the engine performance details were provided, the .PTF file predicted reasonable values for speed, climb/descent rates and fuel flow. +Summary of BADA Deficiencies and LimitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: None.Though the BADA climb/descent schedules were not expected to suite an aircraft as small as the Shadow B, the cruise, climb and descent speeds, fuel flow and climb rates matched manufacturer provided data with reasonable accuracy. +Summary of MACS Deficiencies and LimitationsMACS files were generated directly from the BADA outputs.In addition to filling out the aircraft_specific_model_data.datfile, existing drag models and engine thrust models were mapped.The MACS drag model and engine thrust model used for Shadow B are C172 and O-320-H2AD, respectively.The completed aircraft_specific_model_data.datfile for Shadow B is shown in Figure 18. +Global HawkGlobal Hawk is a medium scale, fixed-wing aircraft equipped with a Rolls-Royce turbofan engine.The aircraft cruises at 31000 ft., with a maximum altitude of 65000 ft., and weighs approximately 26700 lb.The BADA model of Global Hawk was developed using data provided by AAI (collected from Northrop Grumman).The FLOPS model of the Global Hawk is generated by using the built-in Transport Aircraft weight equations, engine deck, and aerodynamic data of FLOPS.The size and propulsion system (e.g.jet) of the Global Hawk aircraft make FLOPS a reasonable choice as a sizing tool.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 18.For reasonable estimations of the weights and performance of this aircraft using FLOPS, modifications to the FLOPS built-in weight equations were made as would be appropriate for modeling an unmanned aircraft; weight multipliers for furnishings, passenger compartment, and other amenities were set to zero.Avionics and electrical systems weights were increased to reflect the likelihood of the additional instrumentation carried by the Global Hawk to perform its surveillance mission and to be remotely piloted.Additionally, structural weight equation multipliers were calibrated so as to result in an empty weight that closes matches the published Global Hawk empty weight.FLOPS generated the drag polars, fuel flow rates and climb rates for different phases of flight based on primary input data for Global Hawk.These values are used in the BADA model to generate BADA specific coefficients, which are then used to generate performance characteristics found in the .PTF.Due to their resemblance in design to traditional manned aircraft, generating BADA files for Shadow B and Global Hawk is not complicated.Again, most of the performance characteristics available in the .PTF file matches with the manufacturer provided data with reasonable accuracy. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: None +MACSMACS master files were developed by mapping the BADA files.A new drag model was created for Global Hawk and was mapped as an external file.The following MACS engine thrust model was used for Global Hawk: PW_JT8D-07. +OrbiterThe Orbiter is a small UAS only capable of launch by a slingshot system.Notable features of the aircraft include an aft fuselage propeller electric engine, large swept wings with winglets, and no tail.The engine is an HB2815-2000 electric engine with a two-blade propeller.The empty weight of the aircraft is 12 lb.and the gross weight is 16 lb.The fuselage is 42 in.in length and the wingspan is 86.6 in.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 19.The images used in constructing 3D models of Orbiter, and the model generated therefrom, are shown in Figure 19 and Figure 20, respectively.The DATCOM-JSBSim flight modeling tool was used to model Orbiter, from which the BADA files are developed.Orbiter is equipped with an electric engine which posed challenges in accurate calculating fuel flow rates.JSBSim cannot produce fuel flow rate of an electric engine in terms of kilogram per minute.In fact, an electric engine uses batteries as a power source and therefore weight does not change over time.To resolve this matter, fuel flow rate was considered as the current usage rate.Since JSBSim provides throttle usage for each trim state, it was converted into current usage rate in terms of ampere per min.These current usage rates were then converted into equivalent fuel usage in order to represent the aircraft in BADA. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: Engine type missing.Orbiter is an electric engine and therefore, no fuel flow rates could be provided as mandated by BADA.This calls for a provision for electric engines in the BADA format.BADA limitations: BADA model is currently not defined for electric engines and therefore, the Orbiter BADA files were generated directly from the modeling software, ignoring BADA equations. +MACSThe Orbiter MACS model is not completely developed as MACS is not equipped to handle electric air aircraft.Converting the Orbiter current usage rates to fuel usage rates is not sufficient to complete a MACS engine thrust model.A MACS engine thrust model requires the engine pressure ratio, corrected fuel flow rates etc., to represent a gas engine in its entirety.This calls for a provision to add electric engine capabilities into the motion predictor class of MACS.In addition to the engine thrust file, the drag model of the aircraft is also not available to the level of detail that MACS mandates.Therefore, these fields are left empty in the MACS master file.All fields that are not related to the engine model or drag model are completed using available data from the manufacturers and BADA output files. +AerosondeThe Aerosonde is a small UAV designed for collecting weather data.It is powered by a small piston engine.Notable features of the aircraft include an inverted V-tail at the end of a twin boom.It is also a pusher prop with the engine located behind the wing.The aircraft has an empty weight of 48.9 lb.It has a wingspan of 11 ft.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 20.The images used in constructing 3D models of Aerosonde, and the model generated therefrom, are shown in Figure 21 and Figure 22, respectively.The DATCOM-JSBSim flight modeling tool was used to model Aerosonde, from which the BADA files are developed.While running JSBSim, the trim condition was not achieved with the engine model provided by the manufacturer.This may be caused by the lack of propulsion or aerodynamic data.To achieve trim, more powerful engine was used in DATCOM and JSBSim.The excessive thrust input resulted in larger maximum flight path angles and eventually larger rates of climb.More accurate propulsion and aerodynamic information will be able to improve the rate of climb accuracy. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: Ill-suited climb/descent schedules overshoot the speed limits of the aircraft in climb and descent, suggesting modifications that may have to be made in BADA to account for procedures pre-defined by the aircraft manufacturers. +MACSMACS performance files were generated by mapping the BADA files.MACS drag model and engine thrust model were custom made for Aerosonde as the MACS database does not have drag models or thrust models capable of representing an aircraft as light as the Aerosonde. +Predator APredator A is a small-scale, fixed-wing aircraft equipped with a Rotax914 four cylinder piston engine.The aircraft cruises at an altitude of 16000 ft., with maximum altitude at 31000 ft. and weighs approximately 2250 lb.The BADA model of Predator A was developed using data provided by General Atomics (GA).FLOPS piston engine deck was generated using engine data provided by the manufacturer.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 21.FLOPS generated values for the drag polar, speed schedules, and climb rates and fuel flow were used in the MATLAB-based BADA model to generate BADA specific coefficients.These coefficients are further used to generate the .PTF file for Predator A.The BADA .PTF file generated for Predator A was found to have several discrepancies in comparison to the manufacturer provided data.The cruise, climb and descent TAS were overpredicted by at least 20% in the .PTF, while the fuel flow rates and climb rates were overpredicted by more than 200% in certain cases.A combination of several problems can be attributed to these discrepancies, such as lack of higher granularity engine thrust data, incompatibilities of BADA climb equations with the aircraft, etc.Additionally, pre-defined procedures set by the manufacturer may alter the performance of the aircraft which may perform differently in different flight profiles.For example, Predator A always descends at a CAS of 75 kts while the FLOPS-BADA combination assumes descent at optimum lift-drag ratio.Modifications along these lines and further investigation into the problem are being conducted at Purdue in order to produce better results. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: Ill-suited climb/descent schedules overshoot the speed limits of the aircraft in climb and descent, suggesting modifications that may have to be made in BADA to account for procedures pre-defined by the aircraft manufacturers +MACSMACS performance files were generated by mapping the BADA files.The following MACS drag model and engine thrust model were used respectively for Predator A: C172 and O-320-H2AD. +Predator BPredator B is a medium-scale, fixed-wing aircraft equipped with a Honeywell TPE331-10YGD turboprop engine.The aircraft cruises at an altitude of 31000 ft., with maximum altitude also at 31000 ft. and weighs approximately 10500 lb.The BADA model of Predator B was developed using data provided by GA.FLOPS model of the Predator B is generated by using the built-in Transport Aircraft weight equations, engine deck, and aerodynamic data of FLOPS.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 22.FLOPS generated values for the drag polar, speed schedules, climb rates and fuel flow are used in the MATLAB-based BADA model to generate BADA specific coefficients.These coefficients are further used to generate the .PTF file for Predator B.During BADA production it was identified that the cruise, climb and descent TAS of Predator B were over-predicted by the BADA model due to the stall speed buffer condition employed in BADA.Simulation tools compatible with BADA also apply this limit, making it a hard constraint on the aircraft.Additional discrepancies, if any, are currently being investigated by the manufacturers. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: Stall speed buffer constraints in BADA overshoot the speed of Predator B in cruise, climb and descent.Manufacturer reported cruise speed at 31000 ft. is 160 kts while BADA constraint sets the speed at 209 kts.Further limitations can be identified only after complete validation of the aircraft. +Predator C (Avenger)Avenger is a medium-scale, fixed-wing aircraft equipped with a Pratt and Whitney 545B, high bypass ratio, turbofan engine.The aircraft cruises at an altitude of 40000 ft., with maximum altitude also at 40000 ft. and weighs approximately 15800 lb.The BADA model of Avenger was developed using data provided by GA.FLOPS model of the Avenger is generated by using the built-in Transport Aircraft weight equations, engine deck, and aerodynamic data of FLOPS.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 24.FLOPS generated values for the drag polar, speed schedules, climb rates and fuel flow are used in the MATLAB-based BADA model to generate BADA specific coefficients.These coefficients are further used to generate the .PTF file for Avenger.The BADA .PTF file generated for Avenger was found to have several discrepancies in comparison to the manufacturer provided data.The cruise, climb and descent TAS were overpredicted by at least 13% in the .PTF, while the fuel flow rates and climb rates were overpredicted by more than 200% in certain cases.GA reports decreasing fuel flow rates with altitude whereas the BADA model predicts the opposite trend.A combination of several problems can be attributed to these discrepancies, such as, lack of higher granularity engine thrust data, incompatibility of BADA equations with the aircraft etc.Additionally, pre-defined procedures set by the manufacturer may alter the performance of the aircraft which may perform differently in different flight profiles.For example, Avenger always descends at a CAS of 150 kts, while the FLOPS-BADA combination assumes descent at optimum lift-drag ratio.Modifications along these lines and further investigation into the problem are being conducted at Purdue in order to produce better results. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: Ill-suited climb/descent schedules overshoot the speed limits of the aircraft in climb and descent, suggesting modifications that may have to be made in BADA to account for procedures pre-defined by the aircraft manufacturers. +MACSMACS performance files were generated by mapping the BADA files.The following MACS drag model and engine thrust model were used respectively for Avenger: AVEN(created externally and added into the database) and PW_JT8D-07. +Hunter UASHunter UAS is a small-scale, fixed-wing aircraft equipped with two APL heavy fuel engines.The aircraft cruises at an altitude of 18000 ft., with maximum altitude also at 18000 ft. and weighs approximately 1950 lb.The BADA model of Hunter UAS was developed using data provided by AAI.FLOPS piston engine deck was generated using engine data provided by the manufacturer.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 25.FLOPS generated values for the drag polar, speed schedule, climb rates and fuel flow are used in the MATLAB-based BADA model to generate BADA specific coefficients.These coefficients are further used to generate the .PTF file for Gray Eagle. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: None +MACSMACS performance files were generated by mapping the BADA files.The following MACS drag model and engine thrust model were used respectively for Hunter UAS: C172 and O-320-H2AD. +Cargo UASThe Cargo UAS aircraft is a medium sized hybrid UAS with a single piston engine at the rear of the fuselage, a rectangular wing planform, and a unique triangular bent tail design.The engine is a UEL 741AR74-1102 piston engine.The empty weight of Cargo UAS is 333 lb. and the gross weight is 467 lb.The fuselage length is 63.1 inches and the wing span is 19.8 feet.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 26.The images used in constructing 3D models of Cargo UAS, and the model generated therefrom, are shown in Figure 23 and Figure 24, respectively.The DATCOM-JSBSim flight modeling tool was used to model Cargo UAS, from which the BADA files are developed.Cargo UAS is a hybrid aircraft that uses its rotor for vertical takeoff and landing while it switches to propeller for climb, cruise, and descent segment.It was assumed that only propeller was used for .PTF generation, even for climb and descent close to sea level.Any lift or drag developed by the rotor blades and shaft were neglected in the model and simulation. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: Aircraft type missing.Cargo UAS is a hybrid air aircraft and therefore, no stall speeds exist during take-off or landing.Additional modes, such as hover, may have to be introduced.BADA limitations: BADA model is currently defined only for fixed-wing aircraft.The Cargo UAS BADA files were generated directly using the modeling software, ignoring equations provided by BADA. +MACSThe Cargo UAS MACS model is not completely developed as MACS is not equipped to handle hybrid air aircraft.Engine thrust file and the drag model of this hybrid air aircraft is not available to the detail that MACS mandates.Therefore, these fields are left empty in the MACS master file.All fields that are not related to the engine model or drag model are completed using available data from the manufacturers and BADA output files. +Fire ScoutFire Scout is a small-scale rotorcraft with a Rolls-Royce 250 C20W turboshaft engine.The empty weight of Fire Scout is 1457 lb. and the gross weight is 3150 lb.The fuselage length is 23.95 feet and the main rotor diameter is 27.5 feet.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 27.The .PTF of Fire Scout closely matches the maximum altitude, cruise speed, and rates of climb/descent provided by the manufacturer.Amongst the two rotorcrafts-Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350)-Fire Scout is perhaps analyzed better by RPAT, mainly due to the larger size of the aircraft and also due to the availability of adequate aircraft specifications from the manufacturer. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: Aircraft type missing.Since rotorcrafts neither have stall speeds nor drag polars as in the same context as fixed wing aircrafts, some of the blocks in the OPF are not completed.Also, main characteristics of rotorcrafts such as vertical takeoff, land, and hover capabilities cannot be encapsulated in the BADA format.BADA limitations: BADA model is currently not defined for rotorcrafts and therefore, the Fire Scout BADA files were generated directly from the modeling software, ignoring BADA equations. +MACSThe Fire Scout MACS model is not completely developed as MACS is not equipped to handle rotorcrafts.Engine thrust file is not available to the detail that MACS mandates and a drag model cannot be conceived in the same manner as that of aircraft.Therefore, these fields are left empty in the MACS master file.All fields that are not related to the engine model or drag model are completed using available data from the manufacturers and BADA output files. +NEO S-300 Mk II VTOLNEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350) is a small-scale rotorcraft with a JETA1 powered single turbine engine.The empty weight of S350 is 187.4 lb. and the gross weight is 330.7 lb.The fuselage length is 10.33 feet and the main rotor diameter is 11.5 feet.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 28.The .PTF file of S350 has several mismatches in comparison with the maximum altitude, cruise speed, and rates of climb/descent provided by the manufacturer.The RPAT estimates of fuel flow values for S350 resulted in similar values across different altitudes.This is because the size of S350 is at the lower end of the rotorcraft spectrum. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: Vehicle type missing.Since rotorcrafts neither have stall speeds nor drag polars as in the same context as fixed wing aircrafts, some of the blocks in the OPF are not completed.Also, main characteristics of rotorcrafts such as vertical takeoff, land, and hover capabilities cannot be encapsulated in the BADA format.BADA limitations: BADA model is currently not defined for rotorcrafts and therefore, the BADA files for S350 were generated directly from the modeling software, ignoring BADA equations. +MACSThe S350 MACS model is not completely developed as MACS is not equipped to handle rotorcrafts.Engine thrust file is not available to the detail that MACS mandates and a drag model cannot be conceived in the same manner as that of aircraft.Therefore, these fields are left empty in the MACS master file.All fields that are not related to the engine model or drag model are completed using available data from the manufacturers and BADA output files. +BADA File ValidationAs mentioned earlier, UAS aircraft were simulated using KTG with the BADA files providing the necessary input.The purpose of these simulations was twofold:  Understand the flight characteristics of the UAS aircraft and identify any anomalies  Submit simulation results to the manufacturers of the UAS and thereby validate the BADA files +Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using KTG +Issues and ResolutionImportant features of Shadow B's flight simulation using KTG are shown in Table 29.Anomalies were observed in the simulation results.For example, the graphs in Figure 25 depict variations in the true airspeed (TAS) of Shadow B with altitude, divided into two phases of the flight: from takeoff at KIAD to cruise altitude, and from cruise altitude to landing at KJFK.TAS increased from 56 kts to about 67 kts during takeoff within a very short altitude, and later to about 71 kts during the climb (identified by the long red-oval).Also, TAS decreased from about 79 kts to 76 kts for a very small change in altitude during descent (identified by the short redoval). +Figure 25. True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for RQ7B for flight from KIAD to KJFK +Reason for AnomaliesThe anomalies in Figure 25 were found to be caused by errors in compiling BADA files by the Purdue team.BADA user manual dictates that the flight speed at a given altitude described in the .PTF file should be higher than the stall speeds indicated in the .OPF file by a factor of 1.2 for takeoff and 1.3 for all other segments of the flight-these factors were probably established by airlines to augment safety at flight speeds approaching the stall limits.The different types of stall speeds specified in the .OPF file and the altitudes when they are taken into consideration by KTG are shown in Table 30.The BADA files used in compiling the results in Figure 25 did not correctly take this into consideration and the resulting speed-altitude data in the .PTF file were in conflict with the factors of safety described earlier.The Purdue team was notified of this violation and the BADA files were corrected.The BADA files in Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4 are the corrected versions.However, these criteria affected the way some of the UAS aircraft were modeled, which will be mentioned in later sections of this report. +Simulation results using corrected BADA filesShadow B was simulated using the corrected BADA files (Figure 26, Figure 27, Figure 28 and Figure 29), with the main features of the flight shown in Table 31.The cruise TAS increased to 99 kts (as compared to that in Table 29), which the Purdue team explained as being a result of the factors of safety imposing a higher effective stall speed and causing the aircraft to fly 32.The variation of TAS with altitude is shown in Figure 33.The sharp increase in TAS during climb (red oval in Figure 33) was due to the fact that the airspeed at the corresponding altitude was in conflict with the factor of safety described earlier.For example, the .PTF file for Global Hawk indicates TAS as 124 kts at 2000 ft.(Figure 34), which was less than 1.3 times the cruise stall speed of 107.82 kts from the .OPF file (Table 30 and Figure 35).Since KTG attempts to follow the speed profiles described in the BADA files, TAS increased rapidly in a very short period of time and during a small change in altitude at the beginning of the climb phase.Plan-view of the flight path is shown in Figure 36 and plots describing other aspects of the flight are shown in Figure 37. Cargo UAS (CUAS), Fire Scout (MQ8B) and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350) are rotorcraft or a hybrid of rotorcraft and conventional aircraft.Therefore, they were not simulated using KTG, and the results from simulating and validating their flight profiles using these files are not presented here.On the other hand, the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center (FAA Tech Center) has been developing models to analyze and simulate rotorcraft.Consequently, they were approached to provide technical support in validating the BADA files for the four aforementioned aircraft.However, the timeline of this project was too short to take advantage of the Tech Center's expertise.A collaborative effort between NASA and the FAA Tech Center to develop adequate models for rotorcraft is strongly recommended to fill this gap in knowledge. +Summary of UAS Simulations in KTGResults of UAS flight simulations using KTG are summarized in Table 40.Included in here are four main features of each flight to briefly distinguish the different aircraft: origin and destination airports, target cruise altitude and speed.Also indicated are whether the aircraft reached the target cruise altitude and speed in the simulation, and whether BADA files for each aircraft were validated by its manufacturer.As mentioned earlier, simulation results for each UAS flight were submitted to the corresponding aircraft manufacturer for validation.It should be noted that rotorcraft cannot be simulated in KTG.Hence, the BADA files of Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL were not validated by this approach.As mentioned earlier, the Tech Center was approached to assist in validating BADA files for these aircraft, but the process was not complete within the timeline of this project.Recommendations are made in the latter sections of this report on options to validate these files. +MACS File ValidationMACS files for the twelve UAS aircraft were validated by comparing the simulation results from MACS with those from KTG.The premise to this was that the validation of BADA files by the UAS manufacturer indirectly validated the KTG results. +Issues and ResolutionMACS was developed to simulate manned aircraft.Consequently, there were some issues to be resolved to modify the software and simulate UAS aircraft. +Issue 1: Speed vs. Altitude Constraints in MACSDuring the simulation of Shadow B via MACS the aircraft could not reach its cruise altitude of 8000 ft.Investigation of MACS' software code indicated that an aircraft should have a minimum speed of 100 KCAS when flying between 3500 ft. and 10500 ft. to reach the cruise altitude.Since Shadow B's speed of 80 KCAS at 8000 ft. was less than this minimum speed, it had no vertical speed beyond the altitude of 3500 ft.causing it to not reach cruise altitude.The following modifications were made to MACS' code to address this issue: MACS file modified: commonObjects/PerfDescr.java +Issue 3: Simulation of Rotorcraft and Electric AircraftNo provision was found to configure and simulate rotorcraft flights in MACS.Further, the aircraft model data files for UAS rotorcraft and electric aircraft could not be developed due to the absence of relevant data fields in the files.Consequently, the files for Orbiter (electric aircraft), Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL were incomplete, and hence were not simulated in MACS.No immediate solution was found to address this issue. +Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACSImportant features of Shadow B's flight simulation using MACS are shown in Table 41.Unlike KTG, aircraft weight at takeoff and landing are not recorded in MACS and indicated as such.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Shadow B. The plots in Figure 59 show the variation in true airspeed (TAS) of shadow B with altitude.The plot on the left hand side is from takeoff to cruise altitude and that on the right is from cruise to landing.It is not known what caused the rapid increase in speed during the climb phase, and the jaggedness and the associated increases in speed beyond the cruise speed in the right hand plot.The spikes in airspeed in Figure 60 are a different representation of the jaggedness in Figure 59, and hence could not be explained.Since it is not yet known as to how MACS interprets the files for UAS aircraft, no hypothesis was formed to explain the simulation results.44.It should be noted that, unlike Shadow B and Global Hawk, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed.The slow speed of Predator A is a possible reason.However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure 61 were not compiled for Predator A. Other simulation results are shown in Figure 64.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure 64b) is not known.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Predator A. 45.It should be noted that, unlike Shadow B and Global Hawk, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed.While Predator B flies faster than Predator A, it is slower compared to Global Hawk, and this is a possible reason for the unsuccessful simulation.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Predator B (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure 61 46.It should be noted that, similar to Predator B, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed, possibly due to its slow speed compared to Global Hawk.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Gray Eagle (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure 61 were not compiled for Gray Eagle.Other simulation results are shown in Figure 66.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure 66b) is not known.47.It should be noted that, similar to Predator B, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed, possibly due to its slow speed compared to Global Hawk.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Predator C (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure 61 were not compiled for Gray Eagle.Other simulation results are shown in Figure 67.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure 67b) is not known.48.It should be noted that, similar to Predator A, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed, possibly due to its slow speed compared to Global Hawk.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Hunter (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure 61 were not compiled for Hunter.Other simulation results are shown in Figure 68.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure 68b) is not known.As mentioned earlier, the MACS files for Orbiter (ORBM), Cargo UAS (CUAS), Fire Scout (MQ8B) and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350) did not truthfully represent the aircraft because: 1) Orbiter is an electric aircraft and cannot be correctly represented within the schema of MACS, and 2) the other three aircraft are either rotorcraft or a hybrid of rotorcraft and conventional aircraft, which cannot be represented in MACS.Therefore, these aircraft were not simulated in MACS and the results from simulating and validating their MACS files are not presented here. +Summary of UAS Simulations in MACSResults of UAS flight simulations using KTG are summarized in Table 49.Included in here are four main features of each flight to briefly distinguish the different aircraft: origin and destination airports, target cruise altitude, and cruise speed reached.Also indicated is the cruise altitude reached by the aircraft in simulation.As mentioned earlier, MACS simulation results for each UAS flight were compared to the corresponding results from KTG for validation, the premise being that the KTG results were validated by the UAS manufacturer.It should be noted that electric aircraft and rotorcraft cannot be simulated in MACS.Hence, the MCAS BADA files of Orbiter (electric aircraft), Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL were not validated by this approach.The FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center (FAA Tech Center) was contacted for assistance in validating MACS files for these aircraft.However, the process could not be completed during the current project's contract period.However, the issues and difficulties identified in developing these MACS files are discussed in the latter sections of this report, along with recommendations for validating the files. +ACES Simulations for CNS CapabilitiesAs user selectable options in ACES, several Communication system, Navigation system and Surveillance system models are available for use in airspace simulations for experimentation to determine the implications of these real world systems on aircraft operations and airspace concepts.For UAS aircraft, many of these same systems are integrated (or are being considered for integration and use) onboard these unmanned aircraft in varied capacity by the UAS community and are, or may become, integral components of the UAS systems as the future of UAS architectures to enable their use in the NAS progresses.For the UAS in the NAS, Modeling and Simulation effort, twelve UAS aircraft models have been introduced into ACES and have been tested for the ability to configure their systems to use the ACES CNS models.This summary report describes the process for adding these UAS into the latest version of ACES with CNS models, and outlines the steps taken to configure ACES to fly these aircraft with the CNS models.Results of the simulations performed are provided in summary table and comments on the p, improvement. +UAS Aircraft/BADA Data Installation and Preparation for CNS Simulations +Installation of UAS Aircraft Models into ACES and KTGPrior to testing the UAS aircraft with ACES CNS models, databases in ACES and KTG were configured for nine UAS aircraft.This configuration process is explained in detail in Appendix B. +Develop Flight Data SetsSince this was a first-use experience with the UAS aircraft, new Flight Data Sets (FDSs) were defined that were both appropriate to the UAS aircraft characteristics, and also were adequate to exercise the capabilities of the CNS models, especially for communications.The process for defining the FDSs for the simulations used the following information and guidelines:  Speed and cruise altitudes were identified for use in the FDSs from the aircraft .PTF BADA files. Flight route distances were selected (with some experimentation) based on UAS size, weight and aircraft speed characteristics. FDS Flight routes were derived from existing FDSs.The routes used were variations on routes used to represent UAS operations for Homeland Security applications within ZAU Sector in previous UAS work, and were tailored for route length appropriate to the class of UAS that would use the FDS. The FDSs that were created flew UAS flights for gate-to-gate operations between Towered airports to allow for full execution of all communication messages that are part of our communications message sets.(see Note 1)  Airline names used on the FDSs were created to be appropriate to the UAS vendor to help identify the type of UAS flown in a simulation.Aircraft names that were used mapped directly to the designators for the UASs that had been defined in the BADA and ACES database files (i.e.RQ4A, RQ7B, etc…)  FDSs were defined for a single UAS flight each.Note 1: The current architecture defined in ACES has yet to be tailored for UAS operations.Use of UAS flights gate-to-gate is strictly the default scenario for any aircraft, and is planned to be modified for UAS operations.Note 2: Information regarding origin/destination airports, route distances, altitude and speed defined in these FDSs is indicated in the simulation summary chart -Table 50.Summary of results for from ACES simulations to test CNS capabilities of UAS aircraft Testing: Each FDS was tested in independent simulations to verify its applicability prior to applying the CNS equipage.In several instances, initial FDSs were discovered to be defective for the purpose of this testing, because the airports/flight routes that were chosen were all located within the same TRACON where the KTG would alter the flight path to a route that would not allow for the flight duration and airspace transitions that were desired to enable applicability of the full communications message set application for CNS capability modeling.Once this situation was understood, two of the initial FDSs were rebuilt to use separated airports. +Develop CNS Plugin Configuration FilesThe CNS Plugin in ACES allows the user to define the systems that comprise the compliment CNS avionics that are operational in a simulation.The implementation for use of these systems is managed by defining aircraft CNS equipage configuration files for whichever Communication (Comm.),Navigation (Nav.) or Surveillance (Surv.)system the user wishes to have functioning onboard an aircraft during an ACES system.Next, ACES collects and stores those data for analysis and evaluation in an output database.To date, six CNS models are available: +Test ResultsResults from the simulations were very positive, with all of the Comm.and Surv.model simulations completing as expected and generating correct output data.The exception to this was for the use of the Nav.GPS system models, where the simulations would run and indicate a successful completion, but no navigation data was stored, indicating that the Nav.GPS model had not been applied for the flight.Investigating this further it was found that this was also the case for the VOR/DME Nav.model and for simulations that used a standard aircraft with the same results indicating that it had nothing to do with the UAS model.On final investigation, a simulation with the same standard aircraft was run using the MPAST trajectory generator, and the Nav.GPS model performed as expected.The problem has been identified to Intelligent Automation and a fix to correct the KTG interoperability with the Navigation models has been defined but was not able to be implemented for the completion of this testing. +Problems Encountered and Precautions for use of CNS models with UAS Comm.model simulations: FDSs that define flights departing from and arriving at airports located within the same TRACON airspace appear to have their flight path altered to what appears to be a shorter route.This needs to be investigated further to determine just what does happen to the flight path, but this would be problematic for UAS simulations especially for smaller UAS where flight routes are typically of shorter duration and distance. Comm., Nav. or Surv.model simulations: There was one instance where in an airline name was used that did not correlate with an AOC that ACES uses in its AOC XRef file.In this case, communications was set up to use VDL2, however the simulation ran with the Comm.model defaulting to Voice VHF.This is a known problem with the ACES models use, but the remedy to this problem is simply that the user makes sure that all airlines defined in the FDS are common airline names that have an associated AOC.For our further UAS CNS modeling work, we are considering implementing an UAS AOC, where we would use and add as needed, UAS manufacturer airline designators and associated them to this AOC to ensure proper equipage of UAS aircraft, especially for larger simulations. +ConclusionsThe purpose of this project was to provide performance data for twelve UAS aircraft, in formats usable by standard aviation models: BADA and MACS.BADA files for fixed-wing UAS aircraft were developed by modifying a NASA-developed aircraft sizing software called FLOPS.Separate aircraft models were developed to size rotorcraft, hybrid aircraft and electric aircraft.However, the fidelity of the output from these models is limited by the fact that the aircraft data from the UAS manufacturers were not complete and accurate due to proprietary restrictions.Simulations were conducted using KTG for the BADA files, and the MACS software for MACS files.Simulation output from KTG were examined and validated by the UAS manufacturers.However, simulations were not conducted for two rotorcraft and one hybrid aircraft, due to limitations on KTG.Hence, their BADA files were not validated.Similarly, these aircraft cannot be simulated in MACS, and hence, their MACS files were not validated.Furthermore, a number of difficulties and challenges were encountered in simulating the other UAS aircraft in MACS, either due to the lack of format support to represent UAS aircraft data as MACS files or due to limitations on MACS software.Therefore, MACS files of all twelve aircraft were not validated.Recommendations were made to resolve these issues to successfully represent all twelve UAS aircraft in BADA and MACS format.The FAA Tech Center was approached to assist in validating the BADA and MACS files for rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft.However, the effort needed was beyond the scope and timeline of this project and is included as one of the recommendations to extend the scope and benefits of this project.The project also involved simulations to simulate the communication, navigation and surveillance (CNS) capabilities of UAS aircraft.CNS equipage files provided by the UAS manufacturers were used to configure and conduct the simulations in the Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES).KTG was the trajectory generator employed in these simulations.The communication and surveillance simulations were successful, whereas the navigation simulations require some modifications to ACES and KTG.This project was focused on producing and validating only BADA and MACS data files for UAS aircraft.However, it is speculated that the challenges encountered in this process and the recommendations to be discussed in the following sections are applicable to almost all other data formats.Therefore, efforts to address these issues will be beneficial to the entire aviation community.13 Recommendations for Future Work +Recommendations to Modify BADA Format for UAS SimulationsAs described earlier, the EUROCONTROL developed the format of BADA files primarily for manned-aircraft.Consequently, many areas and topics were identified that either require modification or new definitions to accommodate UAS aircraft design and operations (Section 4).This section presents some of the important areas in BADA format to be modified for successful simulation of UAS aircraft. +Design-based modificationsSince the current BADA format does not have specific provisions, UAS aircraft have to be represented using the templates of existing manned-aircraft.However, this restricts the number of UAS aircraft that can be represented in the BADA format.In particular, there are no provisions to represent very light aircraft (e.g., Shadow B and Aerosonde), rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft (e.g., Cargo UAS and Hunter), and electric engines (e.g., Orbiter).Furthermore, there are no airline operations for UAS aircraft to compile the .APF BADA file.Since a wide variety of UAS aircraft are being currently developed and operated, the need to update BADA format is not only critical to conducting large-scale simulations of NAS, but also time-sensitive if the FAA has to meet the Congressional mandate of creating necessary framework to operate UAS aircraft in the NAS [12]. +Operations-based changesCurrent BADA format imposes certain restrictions on aircraft operations (e.g., stall speed criteria).These restrictions were formulated based on passenger safety and comfort for manned-aircraft.However, UAS aircraft operate outside the envelope of passenger flights, and hence, should not be subjected to these restrictions.Furthermore, there are no provisions to faithfully represent the flight profiles of UAS rotorcraft and hybrid UAS aircraft in BADA.During discussions with the FAA Tech Center, their experts have voiced similar concerns regarding the current format of BADA in modeling rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft, and expressed interest in future efforts to update the format [13]. +Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS SimulationsThe challenges and difficulties were encountered in developing MACS files were described in Section 5. Though these initially appear to be different from those encountered for BADA, there are many commonalties between them.For example, 1) both MACS and BADA were not able to represent and simulate rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft, and 2) data and operational rules for existing manned-aircraft were used to model fixed-wing UAS aircraft, leading to similar discrepancies between simulation output and expected aircraft performance.This section presents some of the important areas in MACS to be modified for successful simulation of UAS aircraft. +Aircraft DataFor majority of the twelve UAS aircraft studied in this project, detailed airframe drag data was not available due to the propriety nature of the information.Consequently, data from similarly sized manned-aircraft were substituted for or mapped to UAS aircraft, resulting in many discrepancies between simulation output and expected aircraft performance.Furthermore, electric aircraft, rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft cannot be represented and simulated in MACS (e.g., Orbiter, Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL).The FAA Tech Center was approached to assist in the validation of MACS files for the rotorcraft, but this was beyond the scope and timeline of this project. +Modifications to MACS SoftwareMACS software was found to be consuming large computer memory to simulate slow flying UAS aircraft such as Shadow B. Furthermore, modifications were made to force the software into simulating the cruise segments of flight, which were not successful.Some of these issues might have been resolved by NASA experts but they were not readily available during the period of this project. +Validation of BADA and MACS Files for Rotorcraft and Hybrid AircraftAs mentioned earlier, KTG was used to simulate UAS aircraft based on BADA files, the results from which were validated by the aircraft manufacturers.However, since, KTG cannot simulate rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft, the BADA files for Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL were not validated.Similarly, since MACS cannot simulate these aircraft, the corresponding input files were also not validated.As mentioned earlier, a joint research effort between NASA and the FAA Tech Center to developing rotorcraft models is strongly needed and recommended to leverage the expertise of the two agencies in filling this gap in knowledge. +Other Recommendations Kinematic Trajectory Generator (KTG)KTG has been extensively verified and validated for simulations involving manned aircraft.However, key areas were identified that require modifications to simulate UAS aircraft in KTG. Different types of data are used as input to simulation an aircraft in KTG.These involve the four BADA files described earlier and a file defining the aircraft's control parameters (Appendix B).Therefore, the accuracy of simulation results from KTG is dependent on the accuracy of BADA files and the control parameters file.However, all UAS aircraft simulations presented in this report were conducted using default setting for aircraft control parameters, due to lack of appropriate data.Effort required to compute specific control parameters for each UAS aircraft was beyond the scope of this project, and can be a valuable extension to improve the fidelity of the simulations. The present framework of KTG does not support the simulation of rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft due to lack of appropriate BADA and aircraft control parameters files.Modifications to BADA format based on aforementioned recommendations should be able to address this issue. Another important element currently not available in KTG is the ability to estimate an aircraft's engine thrust, which is essential to simulating rotorcraft and hybrid aircraft. +Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES)ACES was used to conduct simulations to evaluate the CNS capabilities, requirements and limitations of UAS aircraft operations.However, similar to KTG, ACES is currently best suited to simulate manned-aircraft, requiring changes to ACES' configuration to conduct these simulations (Appendix B).While these changes addressed a number of difficulties in simulating UAS aircraft, many more remain:  Very small UAS aircraft such as Aerosonde and Orbiter were also simulated using the separation rules for small aircraft category, which may lead to larger separation distances than otherwise necessary.On the other hand, separation criteria for such very small aircraft are non-existent, making this a very important operational issue that needs to be addressed immediately for successful real-world operations of such UAS aircraft. UAS aircraft can have a short range (less than 40 nmi.) due to limitations on actual aircraft range (small fuel tank) or the range of its ground control station imposing line-ofsight restrictions.However, current airspace definitions in ACES did not allow the simulation of such aircraft. +Fleet-level Simulations of UAS AircraftUAS aircraft were simulated in this project only to validate aircraft data (BADA, MACS and CNS equipage), limiting their scope.However, large-scale simulations involving fleets of UAS aircraft in multiple operational regimes are required to thoroughly understand their impact on current-day and future operations in the NAS.Further, such simulations also provide insights into challenges associated with HITL processes such piloting, controlling and managing the UAS traffic.This file contains the flight control parameters for each aircraft type.Due to lack of accurate data for UAS aircraft, the default values specified for existing conventional aircraft were used.For example, to simulate Global Hawk's flight, its control parameters were added to this file in seven separate lines, where "RQ4A" was the aircraft code used to identify Global Hawk.The entries indicated as <> are only shown for clarity and should not be included in the file: <> RQ4A,500,2.25,0,0,0.004,0,0.32,0,0.08,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0<> RQ4A,1000,2.25,0,0,0.004,0,0.32,0,0.08,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0<> RQ4A,2000,2.25,0,0,0.004,0,0.32,0,0.08,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0<> RQ4A,5000,0.225,0,0,0.0004,0,0.032,0,0.008,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0<> RQ4A,10000,0.0225,0,0,0.0004,0,0.032,0,0.008,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0<> RQ4A,20000,0.0225,0,0,0.0004,0,0.032,0,0.008,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0<> RQ4A,30000,0.0225,0,0,0.0004,0,0.032,0,0.008,0.000002,0,0.0000081,0.024,0,-0.00000015,0,0 +Configuration of "MPAS_SYNONYM.LST," "SYNONYM_ALL.LST" and"SYNONYM_ACES_KTG.OLD" These files specify the names of the BADA files to be used for a particular aircraft.For example, to add Global Hawk, use "blank space" to separate entries in each file.Do not use "tabs" for "space."Following the template for the entries of existing aircraft in each file is strongly advised to avoid any errors or misinterpretation of the files by KTG. +Configuration of ACES DatabaseThe UAS aircraft should be added to the table "aircraft_characteristics_ds" in the ACES file "aces_model_input_nodal_model.sql".This file is shown here only as an example.The analyst should use the appropriate ACES database file being used in her/his simulations.This table specifies the aircraft's speed (KCAS) during different phases of flight. +Location of table: Build\modules\acesutilities\data\databaseFigure 1 .1Figure 1.The .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................17Figure 2. The .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI...................................18 Figure 3.The .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................19 Figure 4.The .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................20 Figure 5. BADA climb schedules for commercial Jet aircraft .....................................................22 Figure 6.BADA standard airline climb increments for commercial Jet aircraft ...........................22 Figure 7. Convention for MACS-BADA mapping .......................................................................24 Figure 8. Aircraft model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue................................25 Figure 9. Airframe drag model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue......................26 Figure 10.Snapshot of flight parameters file for Predator B. Speeds are indicated air speeds in knots.File produced by IAI........................................................................................................27 Figure 11.APM generation and validation flowchart .................................................................28 Figure 12.Flowchart representing the BADA generation process using the DATCOM/JSBSim/Flight Sim tool .............................................................................................30 Figure 13.Orthographic projection/picture based modeling ......................................................31 Figure 14.Difficulties of non-orthographic projection picture based modeling ...........................31 Figure 15.Blender 3D Modeling of Cargo UAS .........................................................................32 Figure 16.FlightGear Simulation Testing of Cargo UAS ...........................................................33 Figure 17.Sample power curve ................................................................................................36 Figure 18.Aircraft model data MACS file for Shadow B ............................................................39 Figure 19.Orbiter images used for 3D construction ..................................................................41 Figure 20.Orbiter DATCOM Input Visualization ........................................................................42 Figure 21.Aerosonde images used for 3D model construction .................................................43 Figure 22.Aerosonde DATCOM Input Visualization ..................................................................43 Figure 23.Schematics of Cargo UAS from AAI .........................................................................49 Figure 24.Cargo UAS DATCOM Input Visualization .................................................................49 Figure 25.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for RQ7B for flight from KIAD to KJFK ...................52 Figure 26.Corrected .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue.................53 Figure 27.Corrected .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI.......................53 Figure 28.Corrected .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue................54 Figure 29.Corrected .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue.................55 Figure 30.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files .................................................................................................................56 Figure 31.Plan-view of Shadow B flight path from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files ..56 Figure 32.Details of Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files ...............57 Figure 33.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO ..........58 Figure 34.The .PTF file for Global Hawk (RQ4A).File was compiled by Purdue......................59 Figure 35.The .OPF file for Global Hawk (RQ4A).File was compiled by Purdue......................60 Figure 36.Plan-view of Global Hawk flight path from KMSP to KMCO ......................................61 Figure 37. Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO ................................................................................................................61 Figure 38.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM .....................62 Figure 39.Plan-view of Orbiter flight path from KATL to KBHM ................................................62 Figure 40.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM..........................................................................................................................63 Figure 41.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Aerosonde flight from KATL to KBHM ..............64 Figure 42.Plan-view of Aerosonde flight path from KATL to KBHM ..........................................64 Figure 43.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Aerosonde flight from KATL to KBHM..................................................................................................................65 +Figure 1.The .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................17Figure 2. The .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI...................................18 Figure 3.The .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................19 Figure 4.The .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................20 Figure 5. BADA climb schedules for commercial Jet aircraft .....................................................22 Figure 6.BADA standard airline climb increments for commercial Jet aircraft ...........................22 Figure 7. Convention for MACS-BADA mapping .......................................................................24 Figure 8. Aircraft model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue................................25 Figure 9. Airframe drag model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue......................26 Figure 10.Snapshot of flight parameters file for Predator B. Speeds are indicated air speeds in knots.File produced by IAI........................................................................................................27 Figure 11.APM generation and validation flowchart .................................................................28 Figure 12.Flowchart representing the BADA generation process using the DATCOM/JSBSim/Flight Sim tool .............................................................................................30 Figure 13.Orthographic projection/picture based modeling ......................................................31 Figure 14.Difficulties of non-orthographic projection picture based modeling ...........................31 Figure 15.Blender 3D Modeling of Cargo UAS .........................................................................32 Figure 16.FlightGear Simulation Testing of Cargo UAS ...........................................................33 Figure 17.Sample power curve ................................................................................................36 Figure 18.Aircraft model data MACS file for Shadow B ............................................................39 Figure 19.Orbiter images used for 3D construction ..................................................................41 Figure 20.Orbiter DATCOM Input Visualization ........................................................................42 Figure 21.Aerosonde images used for 3D model construction .................................................43 Figure 22.Aerosonde DATCOM Input Visualization ..................................................................43 Figure 23.Schematics of Cargo UAS from AAI .........................................................................49 Figure 24.Cargo UAS DATCOM Input Visualization .................................................................49 Figure 25.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for RQ7B for flight from KIAD to KJFK ...................52 Figure 26.Corrected .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue.................53 Figure 27.Corrected .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI.......................53 Figure 28.Corrected .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue................54 Figure 29.Corrected .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue.................55 Figure 30.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files .................................................................................................................56 Figure 31.Plan-view of Shadow B flight path from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files ..56 Figure 32.Details of Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files ...............57 Figure 33.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO ..........58 Figure 34.The .PTF file for Global Hawk (RQ4A).File was compiled by Purdue......................59 Figure 35.The .OPF file for Global Hawk (RQ4A).File was compiled by Purdue......................60 Figure 36.Plan-view of Global Hawk flight path from KMSP to KMCO ......................................61 Figure 37. Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO ................................................................................................................61 Figure 38.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM .....................62 Figure 39.Plan-view of Orbiter flight path from KATL to KBHM ................................................62 Figure 40.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM..........................................................................................................................63 Figure 41.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Aerosonde flight from KATL to KBHM ..............64 Figure 42.Plan-view of Aerosonde flight path from KATL to KBHM ..........................................64 Figure 43.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Aerosonde flight from KATL to KBHM..................................................................................................................65 +Figure 2 .2Figure 1.The .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................17Figure 2. The .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI...................................18 Figure 3.The .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................19 Figure 4.The .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue............................20 Figure 5. BADA climb schedules for commercial Jet aircraft .....................................................22 Figure 6.BADA standard airline climb increments for commercial Jet aircraft ...........................22 Figure 7. Convention for MACS-BADA mapping .......................................................................24 Figure 8. Aircraft model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue................................25 Figure 9. Airframe drag model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue......................26 Figure 10.Snapshot of flight parameters file for Predator B. Speeds are indicated air speeds in knots.File produced by IAI........................................................................................................27 Figure 11.APM generation and validation flowchart .................................................................28 Figure 12.Flowchart representing the BADA generation process using the DATCOM/JSBSim/Flight Sim tool .............................................................................................30 Figure 13.Orthographic projection/picture based modeling ......................................................31 Figure 14.Difficulties of non-orthographic projection picture based modeling ...........................31 Figure 15.Blender 3D Modeling of Cargo UAS .........................................................................32 Figure 16.FlightGear Simulation Testing of Cargo UAS ...........................................................33 Figure 17.Sample power curve ................................................................................................36 Figure 18.Aircraft model data MACS file for Shadow B ............................................................39 Figure 19.Orbiter images used for 3D construction ..................................................................41 Figure 20.Orbiter DATCOM Input Visualization ........................................................................42 Figure 21.Aerosonde images used for 3D model construction .................................................43 Figure 22.Aerosonde DATCOM Input Visualization ..................................................................43 Figure 23.Schematics of Cargo UAS from AAI .........................................................................49 Figure 24.Cargo UAS DATCOM Input Visualization .................................................................49 Figure 25.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for RQ7B for flight from KIAD to KJFK ...................52 Figure 26.Corrected .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue.................53 Figure 27.Corrected .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI.......................53 Figure 28.Corrected .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue................54 Figure 29.Corrected .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue.................55 Figure 30.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files .................................................................................................................56 Figure 31.Plan-view of Shadow B flight path from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files ..56 Figure 32.Details of Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files ...............57 Figure 33.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO ..........58 Figure 34.The .PTF file for Global Hawk (RQ4A).File was compiled by Purdue......................59 Figure 35.The .OPF file for Global Hawk (RQ4A).File was compiled by Purdue......................60 Figure 36.Plan-view of Global Hawk flight path from KMSP to KMCO ......................................61 Figure 37. Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO ................................................................................................................61 Figure 38.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM .....................62 Figure 39.Plan-view of Orbiter flight path from KATL to KBHM ................................................62 Figure 40.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM..........................................................................................................................63 Figure 41.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Aerosonde flight from KATL to KBHM ..............64 Figure 42.Plan-view of Aerosonde flight path from KATL to KBHM ..........................................64 Figure 43.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Aerosonde flight from KATL to KBHM..................................................................................................................65 +) in TRACON airspace by aircraft weight and engine type ......................................................................................................................................... 130 Table 66.Different speed settings of Global Hawk for inclusion in ACES aircraft database.Speeds are Calibrated Airspeed in knots (KCAS)................................................................... 131 +Figure 1 .1Figure 1.The .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue. +Figure 2 .2Figure 2. The .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI. +Figure 3 .3Figure 3.The .OPF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue. +Figure 4 .4Figure 4.The .PTF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue. +Figure 5 .Figure 6 .56Figure 5. BADA climb schedules for commercial Jet aircraft +Three files were produced to simulate UAS flight in the Multi-aircraft Control System (MACS):  Aircraft model data file: This file contains an aircraft's description and performance parameters such as the engine type and number of engines, limits on the different operational weights and speeds, and drag model. Airframe drag model data file: This file specifies the lift and drag coefficients, at different +Figure 7 .7Figure 7. Convention for MACS-BADA mapping +Figure 8 .8Figure 8. Aircraft model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue. +Figure 9 .9Figure 9. Airframe drag model data file for Predator B. File produced by Purdue. +Figure 10 .10Figure 10.Snapshot of flight parameters file for Predator B. Speeds are indicated air speeds in knots.File produced by IAI. +Figure 1111Figure 11.APM generation and validation flowchart +Figure 12 .12Figure 12. +Figure 12 .12Figure 12.Flowchart representing the BADA generation process using the DATCOM/JSBSim/Flight Sim tool +Figure 14 .14Figure 14.Difficulties of non-orthographic projection picture based modeling +Figure 15 .15Figure 15.Blender 3D Modeling of Cargo UAS +Figure 16 .16Figure 16.FlightGear Simulation Testing of Cargo UAS +22 +Figure 18 .18Figure 18.Aircraft model data MACS file for Shadow B +2 8.8 ft. 2 Figure 19 .2219Figure 19.Orbiter images used for 3D construction +Figure 21 .21Figure 21.Aerosonde images used for 3D model construction +Figure 23 .23Figure 23.Schematics of Cargo UAS from AAI +Altitude from MSL (ft.) Airspeed vs. Altitude (cruise to landing) faster.Airspeed vs. altitude graphs compiled from simulation results with corrected BADA files are shown in Figure 30.Plan-view of the flight path is shown in Figure 31.Graphs describing other aspects of the flight are shown in Figure32.It should be noted that Shadow B's cruise altitude and ceiling were assumed to be equal (18000 ft.MSL) in developing the BADA files.However, commercial aircraft usually cruise at a lower altitude than their ceiling. +Figure 26 .26Figure 26.Corrected .APF file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by Purdue. +Figure 27 .27Figure 27.Corrected .DCT file for Shadow B (RQ7B).File was compiled by IAI. +Figure 30 .Figure 32 . 9 . 2303292Figure 30.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Shadow B flight from KIAD to KJFK using corrected BADA files +Figure 33 .Figure 34 .3334Figure 33.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Global Hawk flight from KMSP to KMCO +Figure 36 .Figure 37 . 9 . 3363793Figure 36.Plan-view of Global Hawk flight path from KMSP to KMCO +Figure 38 .Figure 41 .Figure 43 .384143Figure 38.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Orbiter flight from KATL to KBHM +Figure 44 .Figure 46 .4446Figure 44.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Predator A flight from KATL to KJFK +Figure 47 .Figure 49 .4749Figure 47.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Predator B flight from KMSP to KMCO +Figure 50 .Figure 52 .5052Figure 50.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Gray Eagle flight from KATL to KJFK +Figure 53 .Figure 55 .5355Figure 53.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Predator C flight from KMSP to KMCO +Figure 56 .Figure 58 .5658Figure 56.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Hunter flight from KATL to KJFK +Figure 59 .Figure 60 .5960Figure 59.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Shadow B flight simulation using MACS from KMSP to KMCO +Figure 61 .Figure 63 .6163Figure 61.True airspeed (TAS) vs. altitude for Global Hawk flight simulation using MACS from KMSP to KMCO +Figure 64 .64Figure 64.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Predator A flight simulation using MACS 10.6 Simulation of Predator B (MQ-9) using MACS Important features of Predator B's flight simulation using MACS are shown in Table45.It should be noted that, unlike Shadow B and Global Hawk, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed.While Predator B flies faster than Predator A, it is slower compared to Global Hawk, and this is a possible reason for the unsuccessful simulation.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Predator B (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure61were not compiled for Predator B. Other simulation results are shown in Figure65.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure65b) is not known. +were not compiled for Predator B. Other simulation results are shown in Figure 65.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure 65b) is not known. +Figure 65 .65Figure 65.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Predator B flight simulation using MACS 10.7 Simulation of Gray Eagle (MQ1C) using MACS Important features of Gray Eagle's flight simulation using MACS are shown in Table46.It should be noted that, similar to Predator B, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed, possibly due to its slow speed compared to Global Hawk.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Gray Eagle (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure61were not compiled for Gray Eagle.Other simulation results are shown in Figure66.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure66b) is not known. +Figure 66 .66Figure 66.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Gray Eagle flight simulation using MACS 10.8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS Important features of Predator C's flight simulation using MACS are shown in Table47.It should be noted that, similar to Predator B, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed, possibly due to its slow speed compared to Global Hawk.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Predator C (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure61were not compiled for Gray Eagle.Other simulation results are shown in Figure67.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure67b) is not known. +a.Figure 67 .67Figure 67.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Predator C flight simulation using MACS 10.9 Simulation of Hunter (MQ5B) using MACS Important features of Hunter's flight simulation using MACS are shown in Table48.It should be noted that, similar to Predator A, the flight did not reach cruise altitude and speed, possibly due to its slow speed compared to Global Hawk.The flight was simulated from KBNA to KATL to prevent MACS from exceeding its memory usage limits and thereby successfully complete the simulation due to the slow speed of Hunter (relative to Global Hawk).However, as mentioned earlier, it is not known as to why MACS cannot simulate a slow flying aircraft.Consequently, simulation results similar to Figure61were not compiled for Hunter.Other simulation results are shown in Figure68.Similar to Shadow B and Global Hawk, the reason for the sharp fluctuations in speed (Figure68b) is not known. +a.Figure 68 .68Figure 68.Variation in altitude and airspeed (TAS) with time and distance for Hunter flight simulation using MACS +Figure 69 .69Figure 69.Different speeds for Global Hawk (RQ4A) in the BADA file "RQ4A__.PTF".The file shown here is a section of the complete file. +Figure 70 .70Figure 70.Different stall speeds for Global Hawk (RQ4A) in the BADA file "RQ4A__.OPF".The file shown here is a section of the complete file. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Table 1 .1Project Summary .........................................................................................................10 +Table 2 .2Specifications and basic attributes of Shadow B (RQ7B) ............................................11 +Table 3 .3Specifications and basic attributes of Global Hawk (RQ4A) .........................................11 +Table 4 .4Specifications and basic attributes of Aerosonde ........................................................11 +Table 5 .5Specifications and basic attributes of Orbiter ...............................................................12 +Table 6 .6Specifications and basic attributes of Cargo UAS ........................................................12 +Table 7 .7Specifications and basic attributes of NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL .....................................12 +Table 8 .8Specifications and basic attributes of Hunter UAS (MQ5B) .........................................12 +Table 9 .9Specifications and basic attributes of Fire Scout .........................................................12 +Table 10 .10Specifications and basic attributes of Predator A .......................................................13 +Table 11 .11Specifications and basic attributes of Predator B .......................................................13 +Table 12 .12Specifications and basic attributes of Gray Eagle ......................................................13 +Table 13 .13Specifications and basic attributes of DHS Avenger/Predator C ................................14 +Table 14 .14Industry data for Shadow B (RQ7B).Provided by AAI...............................................14 +Table 15 .15Airframe drag model substitutions for UAS aircraft.MACS files for Orbiter, Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL were not simulated.............................................24 +Table 16 .16Summary of the actual engines used and the engine decks used in the project to model BADA and MACS for UAS aircraft ..................................................................................37 Table 17.FLOPS sizing results for Shadow B ...........................................................................38Table 18. FLOPS sizing results for Global Hawk .......................................................................40 Table 19.DATCOM-JSBSim sizing results for Orbiter ...............................................................41 Table 20.DATCOM-JSBSim sizing results for Aerosonde ........................................................43 Table 21.FLOPS sizing results for Predator A ..........................................................................44 Table 22.FLOPS sizing results for Predator B ..........................................................................45 Table 23.FLOPS sizing results for Gray Eagle .........................................................................46 Table 24.FLOPS sizing results for Predator C ..........................................................................47 Table 25.FLOPS sizing results for Hunter UAS ........................................................................48 Table 26.DATCOM-JSBSim sizing results for Cargo UAS .......................................................48 Table 27.RPAT sizing results for Fire Scout .............................................................................50 Table 28.RPAT sizing results for NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL ........................................................50 Table 29.Features of Shadow B flight simulation using KTG ....................................................51 Table 30.Stall speeds and corresponding altitude constraints employed by KTG.Stall speeds are Calibrated Airspeeds (CAS) in knots ...................................................................................52 Table 31.Features of Shadow B flight using corrected BADA files............................................55 Table 32.Results of Global Hawk flight simulation using KTG ..................................................57 Table 33.Features of Orbiter flight simulation using KTG .........................................................62 Table 34.Features of Aerosonde flight simulation using KTG ...................................................63 Table 35.Features of Predator A flight simulation using KTG ...................................................65 Table 36.Features of Predator B flight simulation using KTG ...................................................67 Table 37. Features of Gray Eagle flight simulation using KTG ..................................................69 Table 38.Features of Predator C flight simulation using KTG ...................................................71 Table 39.Features of Hunter flight simulation using KTG .........................................................73 Table 40.Summary of nine UAS flights using KTG.Only origin, destination, cruise altitude and cruise speed are included here.Validation of BADA files implies the aircraft reached target cruise altitude in simulation.......................................................................................................76 Table 41.Features of Shadow B flight simulation using MACS .................................................78 Table 42.Features of Global Hawk flight simulation using MACS .............................................80 Table 43.Features of Aerosonde flight simulation using MACS ................................................80 Table 44.Features of Predator A flight simulation using MACS ................................................81 +Table 45 .45Features of Predator B flight simulation using MACS ................................................82 Table 46.Features of Predator A flight simulation using MACS ................................................83 Table 47.Features of Predator C flight simulation using MACS ................................................84 Table 48.Features of Hunter flight simulation using MACS.......................................................85 Table 49.Summary of nine UAS flight simulations in MACS.Only origin, destination, cruise altitude and cruise speed are included here..............................................................................87 Note 2: Information regarding origin/destination airports, route distances, altitude and speed defined in these FDSs is indicated in the simulation summary chart -Table 50.Summary of results for from ACES simulations to test CNS capabilities of UAS aircraft ...............................88 Table 51.Summary of results for from ACES simulations to test CNS capabilities of UAS aircraft .................................................................................................................................................90 Table 52.Industry data for Shadow B (RQ7B).Provided by AAI...............................................96 Table 53.Industry data for Global Hawk (RQ4A).Provided by AAI...........................................98 Table 54.Industry data for Orbiter.Provided by AAI............................................................... 100 Table 55.Industry data for Aerosonde.Provided by AAI......................................................... 103 Table 56.Industry data for Predator A. Provided by General Atomics..................................... 105 Table 57.Industry data for Predator B. Provided by General Atomics..................................... 108 Table 58.Industry data for Gray Eagle.Provided by General Atomics.................................... 112 Table 59.Industry data for Predator C. Provided by AAI......................................................... 115 Table 60.Industry data for Cargo UAS.Provided by AAI........................................................ 117 Table 61.Industry data for Cargo UAS.Provided by AAI........................................................ 120 Table 62.Industry data for Fire Scout.Provided by AAI.......................................................... 123 Table 63.Industry data for NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL.Provided by AAI..................................... 125 Table 64.Flight crossing altitudes in TRACON airspace by aircraft weight and engine type ... 130 Table 65.Flight Calibrated Airspeed (CAS +Table 1 . Project Summary UAS Aircraft Code in BADA and MACS Files Manuf acturer Industry Data Acquired BADA Delivered BADA Verified MACS Delivered MACS Verified1Shadow BRQ7BAAIYesYesYes*YesYesGlobal HawkRQ4AAAIYesYesYesYesYesOrbiterORBMAAIYesYesYes†YesNo †AerosondeMK47AAIYesYesYes*YesNo †Predator AMQ1BGAYesYesYes*YesFail ‡Predator BMQ-9GAYesYesYesYesFail ‡Gray EagleMQ1CGAYesYesYes*YesFail ‡Predator CAVENGAYesYesYes*YesFail ‡Hunter UASMQ5BAAIYesYesYesYesFail ‡Cargo UASCUASAAIYesYesNo #YesFail ‡Fire ScoutMQ8BAAIYesYesNo #YesNo ##NEO S-300 Mk II VTOLS350AAIYesYesNo #YesNo ##* Aircraft performance altered by BADA stall speed constraints † Aircraft engine profile issues-electric aircraft ‡ Failed to reach designated cruise altitude # Cannot simulate rotorcraft in KTG ## Cannot simulate rotorcraft in MACS +2 Specifications and Basic Attributes of UAS Aircraft 2.1 Eight Aircraft from AAI +Table 2 . Specifications and basic attributes of Shadow B (RQ7B)2Length (ft.)11.2Wingspan (ft.)14.0Max. gross weight (lb.)375Range (nmi.)685 for air aircraft; 27 for controlEndurance (hr.)9Max. altitude (ft.)15000Communication capabilitiesPrimary & secondary datalink, TDMANavigation modesAuto-launch, auto-pilot (altitude, airspeed & heading), fly-to-location, auto-land, flight termination (parachute)SurveillanceATC transponderExample civilian applicationsSurveillance: fuel pipelines, power lines, ports & harbors, and law enforcement +Table 3 . Specifications and basic attributes of Global Hawk (RQ4A)3Length (ft.)44.4Wingspan (ft.)116.2Max. gross weight (lb.)26700Range (nmi.)12000Endurance (hr.)35Max. altitude (ft.)65000Communication capabilitiesKu SATCOM datalink, CDL line-of-sight, UHF SATCOM/LOS, and ATC voiceSurveillanceSynthetic aperture radar, EO NIIRS 6.0, IR NIIRS 5.0Example civilian applicationsAtmospheric research, forest fire monitoring and support, and natural hazard monitoring +Table 4 . Specifications and basic attributes of Aerosonde4Length (ft.)6.9Wingspan (ft.)11.8Max. gross weight (lb.)30Range (nmi.)608Endurance (hr.)10Max. altitude (ft.)15000Communication capabilitiesPrimary & secondary + independent imagery datalinkNavigation modesCloudcap avionics suiteSurveillanceMode 3 IFF transponderExample civilian applications Land survey, ice monitoring, and climate change support +Table 5 . Specifications and basic attributes of Orbiter5Length (ft.)3.2Wingspan (ft.)7.2Max. gross weight (lb.)14.3Range (nmi.)27Endurance (hr.)2-3Max. altitude (ft.)18000Communication capabilitiesOne data uplink and one data downlink channelNavigation modesUMAS avionics for flight control, stabilization, mission control, and payload controlSurveillanceExample civilian applicationsSWAT team monitoring, covert law enforcement and monitoring, and agriculture/animal monitoring +Table 6 . Specifications and basic attributes of Cargo UAS6Length (ft.)38.0 (rotor)Wingspan (ft.)38.0 (wing) -hybridMax. gross weight (lb.)7250Range (nmi.)2800-5500 (based on cargo)Endurance (hr.)Up to 20Max. altitude (ft.)35000Navigation modesAuto-takeoff, auto-land, waypoint, electronic tethering, and auto-trackingExample civilian applications Cargo transport +Table 7 . Specifications and basic attributes of NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL7Length (ft.)LxWxH: 9.0 x 3.1 x 2.8; rotor diameter: 9.8Wingspan (ft.)N/A (rotorcraft)Max. gross weight (lb.)176Range (nmi.)87Endurance (hr.)2Max. altitude (ft.)10000Communication capabilitiesRF Line-of-sight, dedicated datalink for payloadNavigation modesAuto-takeoff, auto-land, waypoint, electronic tethering, and auto-trackingSurveillanceEO/IRExample civilian applications Law enforcement, and search & rescue +Table 8 . Specifications and basic attributes of Hunter UAS (MQ5B)8Length (ft.)23.0Wingspan (ft.)34.25Max. gross weight (lb.)1800Range (nmi.)144Endurance (hr.)21Max. altitude (ft.)22000Communication capabilitiesLDS datalink, UAV airborne relay, and voiceSurveillanceEO/IRExample civilian applicationsSurveillance: fuel pipelines, power lines, ports & harbors, and law enforcement +Table 9 . Specifications and basic attributes of Fire Scout9Length (ft.)23.9 (length); 27.5 (rotor); 4.42 (height)Wingspan (ft.)N/A (rotorcraft)Max. gross weight (lb.)3150 +.2 Four Aircraft from General AtomicsGray Eagle and DHS Avenger/Predator C. Important aircraft specifications and basic attributes of these aircraft are shown in Table10, Table11, Table12and Table13.Manufacturer data for four aircraft were provided by General Atomics (GA): Predator A,Predator B, +Table 10 . Specifications and basic attributes of Predator A10Length (ft.)27.0Wingspan (ft.)55.0Max. gross weight (lb.)2250Range (nmi.)4800Endurance (hr.)40Max. altitude (ft.)25000Communication capabilitiesC-Band line-of-sight, Ku-Band over-the-horizon SATCOM, UHF/VHF voice, communications relayNavigation modesFully autonomousSurveillanceMTS-A EO/IR, Lynx Multi-mode radar, SIGINT/ESM systemExample civilian applicationsCrop and cattle monitoring, ice passage monitoring, national disaster support, and airborne pollution observation +Table 11 . Specifications and basic attributes of Predator B11Length (ft.)36.0Wingspan (ft.)66.0Max. gross weight (lb.)10000Range (nmi.)5700Endurance (hr.)30Max. altitude (ft.)50000Communication capabilitiesC-Band line-of-sight data link control, Ku-Band beyond line-of-sight/SATCOM data link control, communications relayNavigation modesFully autonomousSurveillanceMTS-B EO/IR, Lynx Multi-mode Radar, Multi-mode maritime radar, SIGINT/ESM systemBorder patrol, search and rescue, maritime surveillance, aerialExample civilian applicationsimaging and mapping, and chemical and petroleum spillmonitoring +Table 12 . Specifications and basic attributes of Gray Eagle12Length (ft.)28Wingspan (ft.)56Max. gross weight (lb.)3600Range (nmi.)200Endurance (hr.)30Max. altitude (ft.)29000Communication capabilitiesTCDL line-of-sight satellite communication, TCDL air data relay communications, over-the-horizon Ku-Band SATCOMNavigation modesAuto-takeoff and landing +Table 13 . Specifications and basic attributes of DHS Avenger/Predator C13Length (ft.)44.0Wingspan (ft.)66.0Max. gross weight (lb.)15800Range (nmi.)Endurance (hr.)18Max. altitude (ft.)50000Communication capabilitiesCommunication relayNavigation modesSurveillanceEO/IR, Lynx Multi-mode Radar, SIGINT/ESM SystemEnvironmental monitoring and mapping, in-situ atmosphericExample civilian applicationsresearch, sea-ice observations, crop monitoring, TV signaltransmission, and cell phone signal platform +Table 14 . Industry data for Shadow B (RQ7B). Provided by AAI. Operations Performance Files (OPF)14Design Range685 nmi.Design Endurance9 hr.Basic GeometryWing Aspect Ratio11.1Wing span19.8 ft.Wing taper0.7Fuselage length63.1 in.Fuselage fineness0.181Tail sizeTail Volume Coefficient0.65% (horizontal volume coefficient)Drag PolarsEquation or GraphC D = 0.0497 + C L2 /(pi*0.9*AR) → Wing drag polarMassMax. mass of aircraft333 lb. (Aircraft without fuel. Pop 300 installed) +Table 15 . Airframe drag model substitutions for UAS aircraft. MACS files for Orbiter, Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL were not simulated.15UAS AircraftSubstitution AircraftShadow BCessna 172Global HawkNo substitutionAerosondeNo substitutionOrbiterNot simulatedPredator ACessna 172Predator BNo substitutionGray EagleCessna 172Predator CNo substitutionHunterCessna 172Cargo UASNot simulatedFire ScoutNot simulatedNEO S-300 Mk II VTOLNot simulated +Table 16 . Summary of the actual engines used and the engine decks used in the project to model BADA and MACS for UAS aircraft Aircraft (Engine Type)16Engine NameBADA ModelMACS ModelCommentsShadow B (Piston)UEL 741AR74-1102FLOPS internal piston engineO-320-H2ADEngine data from manufacturers were used to change parameters in FLOPS. No changes made to the MACS modelGlobal Hawk (Jet)Rolls-Royce F137-AD-100AE3007PW_JT8D-07AE3007 mimicked the RR F137 parameters provided by manufacturersPredator A (Piston)Not givenFLOPS internal piston engineO-320-H2ADLack of higher granularity engine data resulted in faulty climb rates and fuel flow ratesPredator B (Turboprop)Honeywell TPE331-10YGDFlops internal turbopropPW118Better thrust model provided by manufacturers used to alter the FLOPS model. Awaiting validationGray Eagle (Piston)Thielert Centurion 2.0L HFEFlops internal piston enginePW_PT6A-34Indicative measures given by manufacturers used to alter FLOPS piston deck. Awaiting validationAvenger (Jet)Pratt & Whitney 545BAE3007PW_JT8D-07Lack of higher granularity engine data resulted in faulty climb rates and fuel flow rates. AE3007 is not suitableHunter UAS (Piston)APL HFEFlops internal piston engineO-320-H2ADIndicative measures given by manufacturers used to alter +Table 17 . FLOPS sizing results for Shadow B17Shadow-BIndustry data from AAI DataFLOPSOperating Empty Weight333 lb.412 lb.Payload Weight60 lb.60 lb.Gross Weight467 lb.593 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.0.1970.225Max. Cruise Speed136 KTAS100 KTASCruise Altitude8000 ft.8000 ft.Reference Wing Area35.41 ft.2 39.22 ft.2 Max.Thrust at Cruise Unknown 287.2 lb. +Table 18 . FLOPS sizing results for Global Hawk18Global HawkIndustry Data from AAIFLOPSOperating Empty Weight9200 lb.9500 lb.Payload Weight2000 lb.2000 lb.Gross Weight26700 lb.27200 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.65Max. Cruise Speed400 KTAS (estimated)343 KTASCruise Altitude31000 ft.31000 ft.Reference Wing Area551.3 ft. 2570.3 ft2Max. Thrust at Cruise7059 lb.7600 lb. +Table 19 . DATCOM-JSBSim sizing results for Orbiter19OrbiterIndustry data from AAIDATCOM-JSBSimOperating Empty Weight12.13 lb.12.13 lb.Payload Weight2.9 lb.2.9 lb.Gross Weight16.5 lb.16.5 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.11Max. Cruise Speed70 KTAS45 KTASCruise Altitude8000 ft.8000 ft.Reference Wing Area8.8 ft. +Table 20 . DATCOM-JSBSim sizing results for Aerosonde20AerosondeIndustry data from AAIDATCOM-JSBSimOperating Empty Weight48.9 lb.48.9 lb.Payload Weight13.3 lb.13.3 lb.Gross Weight75 lb.75 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.12Max. Cruise Speed65 KTAS61 KTASCruise Altitude15000 ft.15000 ft.Reference Wing Area9.67 ft.2 9.67 ft. 2 Max.Thrust at Cruise 4.9 lb.(estimate) 12.4 lb. +Table 21 . FLOPS sizing results for Predator A21Predator AIndustry data from GAFLOPSOperating Empty Weight1665 lb.1745 lb.Payload Weight450 lb.450 lb.Gross Weight2250 lb.2770 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.24Max. Cruise Speed120 KTAS111 KTASCruise Altitude16000 ft.16000 ft.Reference Wing Area132 ft. 2143 ft. 2Max. Thrust at Cruise140 lb.330 lb. +Table 22 . FLOPS sizing results for Predator B22Predator BIndustry data from GAFLOPSOperating Empty Weight4900 lb.4823 lb.Payload Weight4800 lb.4800 lb.Gross Weight10500 lb.10462 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.0.380.38Max. Cruise Speed160 KTAS209 KTASCruise Altitude31000 ft.31000 ft.Reference Wing Area256 ft. 2251 ft. 2Max. Thrust at CruiseUnknown1680 lb. +Table 24 . FLOPS sizing results for Predator C24Predator CIndustry data from GAFLOPSOperating Empty Weight8650 lb.8545 lb.Payload Weight6500 lb.6000 lb.Gross Weight15800 lb.14920 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.0.620.62Max. Cruise Speed400 KTAS331 KTASCruise Altitude40000 ft.40000 ft.Reference Wing Area267 ft. 2243 ft. 2Max. Thrust at Cruise1000 lb.1220 lb. +Table 25 . FLOPS sizing results for Hunter UAS25Hunter UASIndustry data from AAIFLOPSOperating Empty Weight1450 lb.1510 lb.Payload Weight630 lb.650 lb.Gross Weight1950 lb.2090 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.2Max. Cruise Speed120 KTAS119 KTASCruise Altitude18000 ft.18000 ft.Reference Wing Area106 ft. 2111 ft. 2Max. Thrust at CruiseUnknown300 lb. +Table 26 . DATCOM-JSBSim sizing results for Cargo UAS26Cargo UASIndustry data from AAIDATCOM-JSBSimOperating Empty Weight12050 lb.12050 lb.Payload Weight8000 lb.8000 lb.Gross Weight22750 lb.22750 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.40Max. Cruise Speed250 KTAS270 KTAS +Table 27 . RPAT sizing results for Fire Scout27Fire ScoutIndustry data from AAIRPATOperating Empty Weight1457 lb.1510 lb.Payload Weight600 lb.600 lb.Gross Weight3150 lb.3234 lb.Max. Operating Mach No.Unknown0.22Max. Cruise Speed125 KTAS128 KTASCruise Altitude20000 ft.20000 ft.Fuselage Wet Surface Area286 ft. 2291 ft.2 +Table 28 . RPAT sizing results for NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL Industry data from AAI RPAT28Operating Empty Weight187.4 lb.222.6 lb.Payload Weight99.2 lb.99.2 lb.Gross Weight330.7 lb.387.8 lb.2 +Table 29 . Features of Shadow B flight simulation using KTG29OriginKIADDestinationKJFKCruise speed93 KTASCruise altitude8000 ft.Total flight time138 min.Total flight distance201 nmi. +Table 30 . Stall speeds and corresponding altitude constraints employed by KTG. Stall speeds are Calibrated Airspeeds (CAS) in knots Flight phase Altitude constraint Stall speed in .OPF file Buffer factor30Climb< 400 ft.TO1.2400 ft. to 2000 ft.IC1.3> 2000 ft.CR1.3Top of climbNot applicableCR1.3CruiseNot applicableCR1.3Descent≥ 8000 ft.CR1.33000 ft. to 8000 ft.AP1.3< 3000 ft.LD1.3LandingNot applicableLD1.3 +Table 32 . Results of Global Hawk flight simulation using KTG32OriginKMSPDestinationKMCOFlight time217.9 min.Flight distance1167.7 nmi.Cruise speed343 KTASCruise altitude31000 ft.Takeoff mass14203 kgLanding mass10774.93 kgDuration of climb13.9 min.Duration of cruise179.8 min.Duration of descent23.7 min.Duration of landing0.5 min. +Table 33 . Features of Orbiter flight simulation using KTG33OriginKATLDestinationKBHMFlight time177.6 min.Flight distance117.4 nmi.Cruise speed39 KTASCruise altitude8000 ft.Takeoff mass7.5 kgLanding mass7.496 kgDuration of climb8.3 min.Duration of cruise149.9 min.Duration of descent15.8 min.Duration of landing3.6 min. +Table 35 . Features of Predator A flight simulation using KTG35OriginKATLDestinationKJFKFlight time395 min.Flight distance715.3 nmi.Cruise speed111 KTASCruise altitude16000 ft.Takeoff weight1020.5 kgLanding weight870.7 kgDuration of climb12.9 min.Duration of cruise354 min.Duration of descent26.3 min.Duration of landing1.7 min. +Table 36 . Features of Predator B flight simulation using KTG36OriginKMSPDestinationKMCOFlight time350.4 minFlight distance1167.6 nmi.Cruise speed209 KTASCruise altitude31000 ft.Takeoff weight3734.6 kgLanding weight3072.28 kgDuration of climb23.8 min.Duration of cruise292 min.Duration of descent31.7 min.Duration of landing2.9 min. +Table 37 . Features of Gray Eagle flight simulation using KTG37OriginKATLDestinationKJFKFlight time234.4 min.Flight distance714.9 nmi.Cruise speed203 KTASCruise altitude32000 ft.Takeoff weight1620.2 kgLanding weight1542 kgDuration of climb45 min.Duration of cruise136 min.Duration of descent53.8 min.Duration of landing1.5 min. +Table 38 . Features of Predator C flight simulation using KTG38OriginKMSPDestinationKMCOFlight time230.5 min.Flight distance1168.6 nmi.Cruise speed331 KTASCruise altitude40000 ft.Takeoff weight7166.7 kbLanding weight4951 kgDuration of climb19.8 min.Duration of cruise174.8 min.Duration of descent35.1 min.Duration of landing0.8 min. +Table 39 . Features of Hunter flight simulation using KTG39OriginKATLDestinationKJFKFlight time372.7 min.Flight distance715.2 nmi.Cruise speed119 KTASCruise altitude18000 ft.Takeoff weight907.2 kgLanding weight792.28 kgDuration of climb21.2 min.Duration of cruise306.6 min.Duration of descent40 min.Duration of landing4.7 min. +Table 40 . Summary of nine UAS flights using KTG. Only origin, destination, cruise altitude and cruise speed are included here. Validation of BADA files implies the aircraft reached target cruise altitude in simulation.40UASOrigin DestinationTarget Cruise Altitude (ft.)Target Cruise Speed (KTAS)Reached Target Cruise Altitude & SpeedBADA files validated by manufacturerShadow B (RQ7B) KIADKJFK800080YesYesGlobal Hawk (RQ4A)KMSPKMCO31000343YesYesOrbiter (ORBM)KATLKBHM800039YesYesAerosonde (MK47)KATLKBHM800049YesYesPredator A (MQ1B)KATLKJFK16000111YesYesPredator B (MQ-9) KMSPKMCO31000209YesYesGray Eagle (MQ1C)KATLKJFK32000203YesYesPredator C (AVEN)KMSPKMCO40000331YesYesHunter (MQ5B)KATLKJFK18000119YesYesCargo UAS(CUAS)Fire Scout (MQ8B)Rotorcraft cannot be simulated in KTG. Hence, BADA files not validated.NEO S-300 Mk IIVTOL (S350) +Table 41 . Features of Shadow B flight simulation using MACS41OriginKBNADestinationKATLFlight time149.4 min.Flight distance191.5 nmi.Cruise speed86 KTASCruise altitude8000 ft.Takeoff weightNot availableLanding weightNot availableDuration of climb3.6 min.Duration of cruise127.2 min.Duration of descent12 min.Duration of landing6 min. +Table 44 . Features of Predator A flight simulation using MACS44OriginKBNADestinationKATLFlight time100.8 min.Flight distance185.1 nmi.Cruise speed117 KTASCruise altitude16000 ft.Takeoff weightNot availableLanding weightNot availableDuration of climb69.4 min. +Table 45 . Features of Predator B flight simulation using MACS45OriginKBNADestinationKATLFlight time87.7 min.Flight distance181.5 nmi.Cruise speed209 KTASCruise altitude31000 ft.Takeoff weightNot availableLanding weightNot availableDuration of climb31.12 min. +Table 46 . Features of Predator A flight simulation using MACS46OriginKBNADestinationKATLFlight time97.84 min.Flight distance181.9 nmi.Cruise speed203 KTASCruise altitude32000 ft.Takeoff weightNot availableLanding weightNot availableDuration of climb23.47 min.Duration of cruiseDid not reach Cruise +Table 47 . Features of Predator C flight simulation using MACS47OriginKBNADestinationKATLFlight time75.8 min.Flight distance182.1 nmi.Cruise speed331 KTASCruise altitude40000 ft.Takeoff weightNot availableLanding weightNot availableDuration of climb33.1 min.Duration of cruiseDid not reach CruiseDuration of descent29.7 min.Duration of landing12.6 min. +Table 48 . Features of Hunter flight simulation using MACS48OriginKBNADestinationKATLFlight time123.9 min.Flight distance191 nmi.Cruise speed119 KTASCruise altitude18000 ft.Takeoff weightNot availableLanding weightNot availableDuration of climb81.2 min.Duration of cruiseDid not reach CruiseDuration of descent17.4 min.Duration of landing24.82 min. +Table 49 . Summary of nine UAS flight simulations in MACS. Only origin, destination, cruise altitude and cruise speed are included here.49UASOrigin DestinationTarget Cruise Altitude (ft.)Target Cruise Speed (KTAS)Target Cruise Altitude & Reached? SpeedSimilar to KTG? += 0.55 lb./hp-hr.at Sea Level; Static @ 100% RPM BSFC max = 0.55 lb./hp-hr.at Sea Level; Static @ 100% RPM BSFC cruise = 0.55 lb./hp-hr.at Sea Level; Static @ 100% RPMMax. payload Max. fuel weight Flight Envelope Loiter Speed V MO (in CAS or TAS) M MO (Mach Max. Operating) H max Aerodynamics S wet (Total) S wet (Fuselage) S ref Clb. o (Buffet Onset Lift Coeff.) 1.6 13.3 lb. 45 KIAS 65 KTAS N/A 15423 ft. DA (Service ceiling) 5718 in. 2 1642 in. 2 1392 in. 2 Stall Speed (Initial Climb) 35 KIAS Stall Speed (Cruise) 35 KIAS Stall Speed (Take Off) 35 KIAS Stall Speed (Landing) 35 KIAS Stall Speed (Approach) 35 KIAS Engine Thrust Max. Thrust at Climb vs. Height N/A Max. Thrust at Cruise 4.9 lb. (estimated) Max. Thrust at Descent N/A Propulsion Engine 75 HFDI Engine (heavy fuel direct inject JP5/Jp8) Brake Engine Power 4 hp No. of cylinders 1 Baseline Engine Power 6 (derated to 4) hp Critical Turbocharger Altitude N/A Fuel Consumption BSFC min = 0.05247 gal./hr. (estimated) BSFC max = 0.8767 lb./hp-hr. (estimated) BSFC cruise = 0.5973 lb./hp-hr. (estimated) Maximum Engine Crankshaft Speed ECU Limited to 5750 RPM Maximum Propeller Shaft Speed ECU Limited to 5750 RPM Engine displacement 75 cc Equation or Graph Mass Max. mass of aircraft (Empty Weight) 4900 lb. Max. mass of aircraft (Gross Weight) 10500 lb. Max. payload 4800 lb. Max. fuel weight 3764 lb. Flight Envelope Loiter Speed V MO (in CAS or TAS) 230 KIAS or 249 KTAS M MO (Mach Max. Operating) 0.38 H max 30000 ft. at MTOW under ISA conditions Aerodynamics S wet (Total) 529.41 ft. 2 S wet (Fuselage) S ref 256 ft. Stall Speed (Initial Climb) 100 KTAS @ 5000 ft. (MGTOW) Stall Speed (Cruise) 110 KTAS @ 20000 ft. (8000 lb.) Stall Speed (Take Off) 93 KTAS @ Sea Level (MGTOW) Stall Speed (Landing) 70 KTAS @ sea Level (6000 lb.) Stall Speed (Approach) 75 KTAS @ 5000 ft. (6000 lb.) Engine Thrust Max. Thrust at Climb vs. Height Proprietary Max. Thrust at Cruise Proprietary Max. Thrust at Descent Proprietary Propulsion Engine Brake Engine Power N/A No. of cylinders N/A Baseline Engine Power 900 hp @ 100% RPM Critical Turbocharger Altitude N/A Fuel Consumption Max. mass of aircraft (Empty Weight) 8650 lb. Max. mass of aircraft (Gross Weight) 15800 lb. Max. payload 3500 lb. (external); 3000 lb. (internal) Max. fuel weight 9000 lb. Flight Envelope Aerodynamics S wet (Total) 555.4 ft. 2 S wet (Fuselage) S ref 267 ft. Stall Speed (Initial Climb) 105 KIAS Stall Speed (Cruise) 112 KIAS Stall Speed (Take Off) 105 KIAS Stall Speed (Landing) 98 KIAS Stall Speed (Approach) 98 KIAS Engine Thrust Max. Thrust at Climb vs. Height Proprietary Max. Thrust at Cruise 1000 lb. Max. Thrust at Descent Proprietary Propulsion Engine Brake Engine Power No. of cylinders N/A Baseline Engine Power N/A Critical Turbocharger Altitude N/A Fuel Consumption BSFC min = Proprietary BSFC max = Proprietary BSFC cruise = Proprietary Integrated design lift coefficient (for blade) Ground Movement Landing Length 2200 ft. Take Off Length 1275 ft. Width of Runway 100 ft. Aircraft Length 23 ft. BSFC Mass Loiter Speed V MO (in CAS or TAS) Airline Procedures File (APF) 400 KTAS M MO (Mach Max. Operating) Climb Operating Speed 60-80 KIAS 0.62 H max Cruise Operating Speed 80 KIAS 40000 ft. at MTOW under ISA conditions Descent Operating Speed 60-80 KIASEngine compression ratio Engine Envelope Maximum Engine Crankshaft Speed Maximum Propeller Shaft Speed8.9:1 N/A X = 222 mm Y = 336 mm N/A2 Clb.o (Buffet Onset Lift Coeff.)1.23 (no flaps); 1.51 (30° flaps) min 2 Clb.o (Buffet Onset Lift Coeff.)1.26 (Maximum CL with no flaps) 15.10 Cargo UAS (CUAS) +Table 61 . Industry data for Cargo UAS. Provided by AAI.61Basic GeometryOperations Performance File (OPF) Design Range 600 nmi.(with 20 min.reserve) Design Endurance 2.16 hr.(with full cargo load) +MPAS_SYNONYM.LST: No changes are necessary SYNONYM_ALL.LST (a single continuous line):CD -RQ4A Global Hawk UAVNorthrop Grumman RQ4A__RQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ARQ4ASYNONYM_ACES_KTG.OLD (a single continuous line):CD * RQ4ANORTHROPGLOBAL HAWK UAVRQ4A__ RQ4A / +Table 64 . Flight crossing altitudes in TRACON airspace by aircraft weight and engine type64Nominal CAS data were derived from the following sources (except as otherwise footnoted): Shen, M.M and Hunter, C.G. "Time to Fly in the DFW Tracon", Seagull TM 92120-03, November, 1992.Shen, M.M., Hunter, C.G. and Sorensen, J.A., "Analysis of Final Approach Spacing Requirements Part II", Seagull TM 92120-02, February, 1992.Hunter, C.G., "Aircraft Flight Dynamics in the Memphis TRACON", Seagull TM 92120-01, January, 1992.Dorsky, S. and Hunter, C.G., "Time to Fly in the Boston TRACON", Seagull TM 91120-01, May, 1991.2.Surrogate CAS data: Same as 2JS3.Surrogate CAS data: Same as 2JL 4. Surrogate CAS data: Same as 3JL 5. Surrogate CAS data: Same as 2TS 6. Surrogate CAS data: Same as 1PS 7. Surrogate CAS data: Same as 4PL 8. Surrogate CAS data: Same as 2PS Following the procedure described earlier, the different speeds of Global Hawk for inclusion in ACES aircraft database yields the values in Table 66.No. of EnginesEngine TypeAircraft Weight CategoryRwy Takeoff Threshold (ft.)Rwy Landing Threshold (ft.)Final Approach Fix (ft.)Cruise Fix (ft.)Arrival Fix (ft.)Departure Fix (ft.)JS00200020001000010000JL00200020001000010000JH00200020001000010000JS00200020001000010000JL00200020001000010000JH00200020001000010000JS00200020001000010000JL00200020001000010000JH00200020001000010000JS00200020001000010000JL00200020001000010000JH00200020001000010000TS001500150080008000TL001500150080008000TH001500150080008000TS001500150080008000TL001500150080008000TH001500150080008000TS001500150080008000TL00150015008000 +Table 66 . Different speed settings of Global Hawk for inclusion in ACES aircraft database. Speeds are Calibrated Airspeed in knots (KCAS).66AIRC RAFT _CHA RACT ERIST ICS_D S_IDAIRC RAF T_TY PE_ CAT EGO RYAIRC RAFT _TYP EEN GIN E_ TY PESEPA RATI ON_C ATEG ORYFINA L_A PPR OAC H_FI XDE PA RT UR E_ FIXAR RIV AL_ FIXCR UIS E_ FIXRUNW AY_LA NDING _THRE SHOL DRUNW AY_TA KEOF F_THR ESHO LDTAK EOF F_ST ALL_ SPE EDLAN DIN G_S TAL L_S PEE D14073748851T/M RQ4ATM123143 155 1551151158376.785931 + + + + +AcknowledgmentsThe research represented in this study was funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under contract NND11AQ74C.We would like to thank the Technical Monitor, Maria Consiglio as well as the project COTR, Eric Mueller, for their technical guidance during the project.The authors acknowledge extremely valuable feedback, testing & analysis suggestions from members of the MACS simulation community as well as the NASA UAS 14 References + + + +MACSMACS performance files were generated by mapping the BADA files.The following MACS drag model and engine thrust model were used respectively for Predator B: MQ-9 (created externally and added into the database) and PW118. +Gray EagleGray Eagle is a small-scale, fixed-wing aircraft equipped with a Thielert Centurion 2.0L heavy fuel engine.The aircraft cruises at an altitude of 32000 ft., with maximum altitude also at 32000 ft. and weighs approximately 3600 lb.The BADA model of Gray Eagle was developed using data provided by GA.FLOPS piston engine deck was generated using engine data provided by the manufacturer.A comparison of sizing results from FLOPS and manufacturer provided data is shown in Table 23.FLOPS generated values for the drag polar, speed schedules, climb rates and fuel flow are used in the MATLAB-based BADA model to generate BADA specific coefficients.These coefficients are further used to generate the .PTF file for Gray Eagle.During BADA production it was identified that the cruise, climb and descent TAS of Gray Eagle were over-predicted by the BADA model due to the stall speed buffer condition employed in BADA.Simulation tools compatible with BADA also apply this limit, making it a hard constraint on the aircraft.Additional discrepancies, if any, are currently being investigated by the manufacturers. +Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitationsBADA deficiencies: None BADA limitations: Stall speed buffer constraints in BADA overshoot the speed of Predator B in cruise, climb and descent.Manufacturer reported cruise speed at 24000 ft. is 140 kts while BADA constraint sets the speed at 177 kts.Further limitations can be identified only after complete validation of the aircraft +MACSMACS performance files were generated by mapping the BADA files.The following MACS drag model and engine thrust model were used respectively for Gray Eagle: C172 and PW_PT6A-34.The method getMinimumSpeed() is invoked by the method getVerticalSpeed() in the file calculators/AltChgCalculator.java to determine the vertical speed at climb.The following is the logic which returns a value of zero for vertical speed: +Issue 2: Simulation of Slow Flying UAS AircraftIt was found that simulation of slow flying UAS aircraft, such as Shadow B and Predator A, in MACS required large computer memory.For example, during the simulation of Predator A from KMSP to KMCO (about 1160 nmi.) at a cruise speed of 93 KCAS and cruise altitude of 16000 ft., resulted in the software's memory usage exceeding 4 GB and crashed the Java Virtual Machine (JVM) since the MACS JVM's maximum memory was set to 4 GB.As a result, the flight was modified to fly from Nashville International Airport (KBNA) to KATL, which are much closer to each other (about 190 nmi.).Even with this short distance, MACS required about 2.5 GB of memory.This issue was also observed when simulating Global Hawk.However, Global Hawk has a higher cruise speed (225 KCAS) compared to Predator A, and MACS was able to complete the simulation before exceeding its memory limits.It is not known as to why MACS cannot successfully simulate a slow flying aircraft, or what modifications are necessary to solve this issue.Therefore, no immediate solution was found to address this issue.Equipage files were created for each UAS aircraft to enable the flights to use each of the Comm., Nav. and Surv.models as onboard and integrated systems.The exceptions to this were: 1) since VOR/DME navigation system will most likely never be used for UAS (currently GPS is the standard due to its technology advantages) no equipage files were created, and therefore, no flights were simulated using VOR/DME model, and 2) it was decided that for the two smallest UAS aircraft (Orbiter and Aerosonde) the equipment size for use of VHF Radios would to be restrictive to ever expect them to be operated onboard those aircraft, and therefore no equipage files were generated (nor flights flown) for these UAS with Voice VHF. +Simulation of Aerosonde (MK47) using MACS +Simulations: Tabulated ResultsForty three simulations were conducted using each of the different Comm., Nav. and Surv.models (mentioned earlier) configured as onboard systems.The results of the simulations are shown in Table 51.Included are data in the FDSs for the simulations such as aircraft names, the cruise speed and altitude, the distance of the flight route, and the origin and destination airports.Also identified are the results of the simulation and a comment column that briefly defines the information that was checked in the output data to verify successful operation of the tested CNS model.The UAS aircraft studied in this project were simulated in KTG.Further, their communication, navigation and surveillance capabilities were simulated in ACES using KTG as the trajectory generator.As mentioned earlier, Cargo UAS, Fire Scout and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL could not be simulated using ACES and KTG, and hence were excluded from these simulations.This section describes the procedure used to configure KTG and ACES databases to simulate these nine UAS aircraft. +Configuration of KTG DatabaseThe four BADA files described and presented earlier for each UAS aircraft were added to the KTG database folder in ACES: TrajectoryGenerators\ktg\core\data.In addition, the following KTG files were configured to support UAS simulations:The different entries in this table are: AIRCRAFT_CHARACTERISTICS_DS_ID: This is unique number assigned to each aircraft.The simplest way to assign this number would be to continue the sequence in the table. AIRCRAFT_TYPE_CATEGORY: It specifies the number of engines and type, and the aircraft weight category.J = Jet, T = Turboprop, P = Piston.S (small) = up to 12,500 lb.; M (medium) = 12,500 to 41,000 lb.; L (large jet) = 41,000 to 255,000 lb.; H (heavy) = more than 255,000 lb.For example, the Global Hawk has one turbofan engine and belongs to the "M (medium)" weight category.Since ACES does not support the "turbofan" engine type, turboprop (T) was used for Global Hawk.Hence, its entry in this field is "1T/M". AIRCRAFT_TYPE: Aircraft code; RQ4A for Global Hawk. ENGINE_TYPE: J = Jet, T = Turboprop, P = Piston. SEPARATION_CATEGORY: S (small) = up to 12,500 lb.; M (medium) = 12,500 to 41,000 lb.; L (large jet) = 41,000 to 255,000 lb.; H (heavy) = more than 255,000 lb. FINAL_APPROACH_FIX: Speed at final approach fix in KCAS.The values for conventional aircraft are obtained from Table 64 and , based on engine type, number of engines and aircraft weight class.However, due to the large variation in the actual weight of UAS aircraft for the same weight and engine categories, speed corresponding to final-approach-fix's altitude from the .PTF BADA file was used.For example, the Global Hawk belongs to the weight category M and has engine type T, resulting in an altitude of 1500 ft. for its finalapproach-fix.From the .PTF file, this altitude corresponds to 125 KTAS during descent (green-box in Figure 69), since final-approach corresponds to the descent phase of flight.It should be noted that the speeds in .PTF file are in KTAS.Therefore, these were converted to KCAS. DEPARTURE_FIX: Same procedure as above, but using the speed corresponding to departure-fix altitude for a given weight category and engine type in Table 64.For Global Hawk, this is 161 KTAS at 8000 ft.during the climb phase (blue-box in Figure 69). ARRIVAL_FIX: Same procedure as DEPARTURE_FIX.For Global Hawk, this is 174 KTAS at 8000 ft.during the descent phase (blue-dotted-box in Figure 69). CRUISE_FIX: Same value as ARRIVAL_FIX. RUNWAY_LANDING_THRESHOLD: Same procedure as above but corresponding to descent speed at FL0 (Flight Level 0) in the .PTF BADA file.For Global Hawk, this is 115 KCAS (orange-box in Figure 69).It should be noted that at FL0, KTAS and KCAS are equivalent. RUNWAY_TAKEOFF_THRESHOLD: Same procedure as above, but using climb speed at FL0.For Global Hawk, this is 115 KCAS (orange-dotted-box in Figure 69). TAKEOFF_STALL_SPEED: This is indicated in the .OPF BADA file.For Global Hawk, this is 83 KCAS (highlighted with red-box in Figure 70). LANDING_STALL_SPEED: Same procedure as above.For Global Hawk, this is 76.7 KCAS (highlighted with orange-box in Figure 70). + + + + + + + Bio-inspired Predator and Anti-predator Mechanisms for Unmanned Aerial Systems + + Predator B ................................................................................................................. + + 10.2514/6.2022-0274.vid + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + Predator B .................................................................................................................. + + + + + Summary of Reported Deficiencies + + KlausRother + + ................................................... + + + 10.1159/000318546 + + + Hereditary and Acquired Complement Deficiencies in Animals and Man + + KARGER + + + + + 6.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations .................................................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 6.2 MACS .................................................................................................................. + + + + + MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-1C Gray Eagle) + + TimothyRBaxter + + 7 Gray Eagle ................................................................................................................. + + + 10.21236/ada613350 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 7 Gray Eagle .................................................................................................................. + + + + + Summary of Reported Deficiencies + + KlausRother + + ................................................... + + + 10.1159/000318546 + + + Hereditary and Acquired Complement Deficiencies in Animals and Man + + KARGER + + + + + 7.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations .................................................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 7.2 MACS .................................................................................................................. + + + + + LVIII the avenger + + AlexandreDumas + + 8 Predator C (Avenger) ................................................................................................. + + + 10.1093/owc/9780199537266.003.0059 + + + Twenty Years After + + Oxford University Press + + + + 8 Predator C (Avenger) .................................................................................................. + + + + + Summary of Reported Deficiencies + + KlausRother + + ................................................... + + + 10.1159/000318546 + + + Hereditary and Acquired Complement Deficiencies in Animals and Man + + KARGER + + + + + 8.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations .................................................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 8.2 MACS .................................................................................................................. + + + + + Service-Oriented Separation Assurance for Small UAS Traffic Management + + GeorgeHunter + + 9 Hunter UAS................................................................................................................ + + + + PengWei + + 9 Hunter UAS................................................................................................................ + + + 10.1109/icnsurv.2019.8735165 + + + 2019 Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference (ICNS) + + IEEE + + + + 9 Hunter UAS................................................................................................................. + + + + + Summary of Reported Deficiencies + + KlausRother + + ................................................... + + + 10.1159/000318546 + + + Hereditary and Acquired Complement Deficiencies in Animals and Man + + KARGER + + + + + 9.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations .................................................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS ................................................................................................................. + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 9.2 MACS .................................................................................................................. + + + + + Aircraft Cargo Systems - Missing Restraint Limitations Layouts + 10.4271/arp5492a + + null + SAE International + + + Cargo UAS ................................................................................................................. 8.10.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations ............................................. + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 10.2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 10.2 MACS ........................................................................................................... + + + + + MQ-8 Fire Scout Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-8 Fire Scout) + + JeffreyDodge + + Fire Scout ................................................................................................................... 8.11.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations ............................................ + + + 10.21236/ad1019503 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + Fire Scout ................................................................................................................... 8.11.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations ............................................. + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 11.2 MACS ........................................................................................................... + + + + + L. Müller's Nonius, Part II - Nonii Marcelli Compendiosa Doctrina, Pars II. Emendavit Lucianus Muller. 12 Mk. + + JHOnions + + 12 NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL .............................................................................................. 8.12.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations ............................................ + + + 10.1017/s0009840x00195423 + + + The Classical Review + The Class. Rev. + 0009-840X + 1464-3561 + + 3 + 7 + + + Cambridge University Press (CUP) + + + 12 NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL .............................................................................................. 8.12.1 Summary of BADA deficiencies and limitations ............................................. + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 MACS .......................................................................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 12.2 MACS ........................................................................................................... + + + + + Supplementary file 1. Validation statistics for FimA model + + BADA File Validation .................................................................................................... + + 10.7554/elife.31662.019 + + null + eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd + + + 9 BADA File Validation ..................................................................................................... + + + + + Development of the Seasonal Korean Aviation Turbulence Guidance (KTG) System Using the Regional Unified Model of the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) + + Dan-BiLee + + RQ7B) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + Hye-YeongChun + + RQ7B) using KTG .............................................................. + + + 10.14191/atmos.2014.24.2.235 + + + Atmosphere + Atmosphere + 1598-3560 + + 24 + 2 + + + Korean Meteorological Society + + + 9.1 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using KTG ............................................................... + + + + + Part III The EU Resolution Regime, 11 Institutional and Cross-Border Issues + + GleesonSimon + + 1 Issues and Resolution ......................................................................................... + + + + GuynnRandall + + 1 Issues and Resolution ......................................................................................... + + + 10.1093/law/9780199698011.003.0011 + + + Oxford University Press + + + 1.1 Issues and Resolution .......................................................................................... + + + + + Anomalies of Choice and Reason + + LeightonVaughan Williams + + 2 Reason for Anomalies ......................................................................................... + + + 10.1201/9781003083610-6 + + + Probability, Choice, and Reason + + Chapman and Hall/CRC + + + + + 1.2 Reason for Anomalies .......................................................................................... + + + + + Author Index– Autogenerate form corrected SGMl files + + ..................................................... + + 10.1016/s1007-5704(06)00106-7 + + + Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation + Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation + 1007-5704 + + 11 + 8 + VII + + Elsevier BV + + + 1.3 Simulation results using corrected BADA files...................................................... + + + + + Development of the Seasonal Korean Aviation Turbulence Guidance (KTG) System Using the Regional Unified Model of the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) + + Dan-BiLee + + RQ4A) using KTG .......................................................... + + + + Hye-YeongChun + + RQ4A) using KTG .......................................................... + + + 10.14191/atmos.2014.24.2.235 + + + Atmosphere + Atmosphere + 1598-3560 + + 24 + 2 + + + Korean Meteorological Society + + + 9.2 Simulation of Global Hawk (RQ4A) using KTG ........................................................... + + + + + Development of the Seasonal Korean Aviation Turbulence Guidance (KTG) System Using the Regional Unified Model of the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) + + Dan-BiLee + + ORBM) using KTG ................................................................... + + + + Hye-YeongChun + + ORBM) using KTG ................................................................... + + + 10.14191/atmos.2014.24.2.235 + + + Atmosphere + Atmosphere + 1598-3560 + + 24 + 2 + + + Korean Meteorological Society + + + 9.3 Simulation of Orbiter (ORBM) using KTG .................................................................... + + + + + GPS Remote Sensing Measurements Using Aerosonde UAV + + MichaelGrant + + MK47) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + StephenKatzberg + + MK47) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + RolandLawrence + + MK47) using KTG .............................................................. + + + 10.2514/6.2005-7005 + + + Infotech@Aerospace + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + + + + 9.4 Simulation of Aerosonde (MK47) using KTG ............................................................... + + + + + Development of the Seasonal Korean Aviation Turbulence Guidance (KTG) System Using the Regional Unified Model of the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) + + Dan-BiLee + + MQ1B) using KTG ............................................................. + + + + Hye-YeongChun + + MQ1B) using KTG ............................................................. + + + 10.14191/atmos.2014.24.2.235 + + + Atmosphere + Atmosphere + 1598-3560 + + 24 + 2 + + + Korean Meteorological Society + + + 9.5 Simulation of Predator A (MQ1B) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + + Important and Critical Psychological Attributes of USAF MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper Pilots According to Subject Matter Experts + + WayneChappelle + + MQ-9) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + KentMcdonald + + MQ-9) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + KatharineMcmillan + + MQ-9) using KTG .............................................................. + + + 10.21236/ada545552 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 9.6 Simulation of Predator B (MQ-9) using KTG ............................................................... + + + + + MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-1C Gray Eagle) + + TimothyRBaxter + + MQ1C) using KTG ............................................................ + + + 10.21236/ada613350 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 9.7 Simulation of Gray Eagle (MQ1C) using KTG ............................................................. + + + + + Development of the Seasonal Korean Aviation Turbulence Guidance (KTG) System Using the Regional Unified Model of the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) + + Dan-BiLee + + AVEN) using KTG ............................................................. + + + + Hye-YeongChun + + AVEN) using KTG ............................................................. + + + 10.14191/atmos.2014.24.2.235 + + + Atmosphere + Atmosphere + 1598-3560 + + 24 + 2 + + + Korean Meteorological Society + + + 9.8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using KTG .............................................................. + + + + + Development of the Seasonal Korean Aviation Turbulence Guidance (KTG) System Using the Regional Unified Model of the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) + + Dan-BiLee + + MQ5B) using KTG ................................................................... + + + + Hye-YeongChun + + MQ5B) using KTG ................................................................... + + + 10.14191/atmos.2014.24.2.235 + + + Atmosphere + Atmosphere + 1598-3560 + + 24 + 2 + + + Korean Meteorological Society + + + Simulation of Hunter + 9 Simulation of Hunter (MQ5B) using KTG .................................................................... + + + + + MQ-8 Fire Scout Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-8 Fire Scout) + + JeffreyDodge + + 10.21236/ad1019503 + NEO S-300 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 10 Simulation of BADA Files for Cargo UAS (CUAS), Fire Scout (MQ8B) and NEO S-300 + + + + + A High-Speed, High-Efficiency VTOL Concept Using CoFlow Jet Airfoil + + IIMk + + S350) using KTG............................................................................................... + + + + Vtol + + S350) using KTG............................................................................................... + + + 10.2514/6.2020-2792.vid + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + Mk II VTOL (S350) using KTG................................................................................................ + + + + + Supplementary file 1. Summary of MD simulations. + + 11 Summary of UAS Simulations in KTG ......................................................................... 10 MACS File Validation .................................................................................................... + + 10.7554/elife.25850.017 + + null + eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd + + + 11 Summary of UAS Simulations in KTG ......................................................................... 10 MACS File Validation ..................................................................................................... + + + + + Low Altitude, High Speed Personnel Parachuting: Medical and Physiological Issues + + DavidJWehrly + + 1 Issues and Resolution ................................................................................................. ; Altitude Constraints in MACS ......................................... + + + 10.21236/ada181199 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 1 Issues and Resolution ................................................................................................. 10.1.1 Issue 1: Speed vs. Altitude Constraints in MACS .......................................... + + + + + Wake vortex encounter modeling and simulation of a small flying-wing UAS + + UAS Aircraft ........................................... + + 10.2514/6.2022-4066.vid + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + 1.2 Issue 2: Simulation of Slow Flying UAS Aircraft ............................................ + + + + + Aircraft and Rotorcraft Flight Simulation Using the Julia Language + + UmbertoSaetti + + Electric Aircraft................................... + + + + JosephFHorn + + Electric Aircraft................................... + + + 10.2514/6.2022-2354 + + + AIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + + + + 1.3 Issue 3: Simulation of Rotorcraft and Electric Aircraft.................................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 2 Simulation of Shadow B (RQ7B) using MACS ............................................................ + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + RQ4A) using MACS ....................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 3 Simulation of Global Hawk (RQ4A) using MACS ........................................................ + + + + + GPS Remote Sensing Measurements Using Aerosonde UAV + + MichaelGrant + + 4 Simulation of Aerosonde (MK47) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + StephenKatzberg + + 4 Simulation of Aerosonde (MK47) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + RolandLawrence + + 4 Simulation of Aerosonde (MK47) using MACS ........................................................... + + + 10.2514/6.2005-7005 + + + Infotech@Aerospace + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + + + + 4 Simulation of Aerosonde (MK47) using MACS ............................................................ + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + MQ1B) using MACS .......................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + Simulation of Predator A + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 5 Simulation of Predator A (MQ1B) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + + Important and Critical Psychological Attributes of USAF MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper Pilots According to Subject Matter Experts + + WayneChappelle + + MQ-9) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + KentMcdonald + + MQ-9) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + KatharineMcmillan + + MQ-9) using MACS ........................................................... + + + 10.21236/ada545552 + + + Simulation of Predator B + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + + 6 Simulation of Predator B (MQ-9) using MACS ............................................................ + + + + + MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-1C Gray Eagle) + + TimothyRBaxter + + MQ1C) using MACS ......................................................... + + + 10.21236/ada613350 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + Simulation of Gray Eagle + 7 Simulation of Gray Eagle (MQ1C) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS .......................................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 8 Simulation of Predator C (AVEN) using MACS ........................................................... + + + + + Source code 1. Code used to analyze raw sequencing files using the programs STAR, Bowtie2, MACS, and Homer. + + MQ5B) using MACS ............................................................... ; MQ8B) and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350) using MACS .................................................................. + + 10.7554/elife.40167.016 + + + 10.10 Simulation of BADA Files for Orbiter (ORBM), Cargo UAS (CUAS), Fire Scout + + eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd + null + + + Simulation of Hunter + 9 Simulation of Hunter (MQ5B) using MACS ................................................................. 10.10 Simulation of BADA Files for Orbiter (ORBM), Cargo UAS (CUAS), Fire Scout (MQ8B) and NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350) using MACS ................................................................... + + + + + On the Accuracy of Flexible Antennas Simulations + + SimaNoghanian + + 11 Summary of UAS Simulations in MACS ...................................................................... 11 ACES Simulations for CNS Capabilities ....................................................................... + + + + MichaelGriesi + + 11 Summary of UAS Simulations in MACS ...................................................................... 11 ACES Simulations for CNS Capabilities ....................................................................... + + + 10.47037/2020.aces.j.351175 + + + Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society + ACES + 1054-4887 + + 35 + 11 + + + River Publishers + + + 11 Summary of UAS Simulations in MACS ...................................................................... 11 ACES Simulations for CNS Capabilities ........................................................................ + + + + + FAA Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Sighting Reports: A Preliminary Survey + + UAS Aircraft/BADA Data Installation and Preparation for CNS Simulations ................ 11.1.1 Installation of UAS Aircraft Models into ACES and KTG .............................. + + 10.2514/6.2023-4099.vid + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + 1 UAS Aircraft/BADA Data Installation and Preparation for CNS Simulations ................ 11.1.1 Installation of UAS Aircraft Models into ACES and KTG ............................... + + + + + Researching Data Sets to Develop State Library Standards + + LesleyS JFarmer + + 2 Develop Flight Data Sets ............................................................................. + + + 10.29173/iasl7765 + + + IASL Annual Conference Proceedings + iasl + 2562-8372 + + + University of Alberta Libraries + + + 1.2 Develop Flight Data Sets .............................................................................. + + + + + FastTest Plugin: a New Plugin to Generate Moodle Quiz XML Files + + MilagrosHuerta + 0000-0001-5805-4886 + + 3 Develop CNS Plugin Configuration Files ...................................................... + + + + ManuelAlejandroFernandez-Ruiz + + 3 Develop CNS Plugin Configuration Files ...................................................... + + + 10.20944/preprints202202.0282.v1 + + + MDPI AG + + + 1.3 Develop CNS Plugin Configuration Files ....................................................... + + + + + Navy-wide Personnel Survey (NPS) 2003: Tabulated Results + + KimberlyPWhittam + + 2 Simulations: Tabulated Results .................................................................................. + + + + JessicaBJanega + + 2 Simulations: Tabulated Results .................................................................................. + + + 10.21236/ada441225 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 2 Simulations: Tabulated Results ................................................................................... + + + + + Poster session 1: Test results: Mammalian cells; Test results: Drosophila & plants; Test results: Micronucleus/cytogenetics; Test results: Comet assay; Test results: Battery of assays; Test analysis: Risk assessment; Test development + + Test Results ............................................................................................................... + + 10.1002/(sici)1098-2280(1998)29+<37::aid-em5>3.0.co;2-f + + + Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis + Environ. Mol. Mutagen. + 0893-6692 + 1098-2280 + + 31 + S29 + + + Wiley + + + Test Results ................................................................................................................ + + + + + On the use of the variance in resolving two practical problems often encountered in input-output analysis + + SDGerking + + ................ + + + 10.1007/978-1-4613-4362-2_4 + + + Estimation of stochastic input-output models + + Springer US + + + + + 4 Problems Encountered and Precautions for use of CNS models with UAS ................. + + + + + Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Work + 10.6027/9789289328692-9-en + + + Nordic Council of Ministers + + + Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 13 Recommendations for Future Work ............................................................................... + + + + + Small-Format Aerial Photography and UAS Imagery + + 1 Recommendations to Modify BADA Format for UAS Simulations .............................. + + 10.1016/c2016-0-03506-4 + + + Elsevier + + + 1 Recommendations to Modify BADA Format for UAS Simulations ............................... + + + + + How To Increase The Life of Your SSD Drives On Windows 7 + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + + JakieMacsJakie Macs + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations .......................................... + + + 10.4016/26630.01 + + + SciVee, Inc + + + 2 Recommendations to Modify MACS for UAS Simulations ........................................... + + + + + Validation of a Rotorcraft Mathematical Model for Autogyro Simulation + + SSHouston + + Rotorcraft and Hybrid Aircraft ...................... + + + 10.2514/2.2640 + + + Journal of Aircraft + Journal of Aircraft + 0021-8669 + 1533-3868 + + 37 + 3 + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + 3 Validation of BADA and MACS Files for Rotorcraft and Hybrid Aircraft ....................... + + + + + Are Analysts’ Recommendations for Other Investment Banks Biased? + + ErikDevos + + Other Recommendations ........................................................................................... + + + 10.1111/fima.12031 + + + Financial Management + Financial Management + 0046-3892 + + 43 + 2 + + + Wiley + + + Other Recommendations ............................................................................................ + + + + + Current References + + References ................................................................................................................... + + 10.1109/9780470547038.ch2 + + + Voltage References + + IEEE + + + + References .................................................................................................................... + + + + + Appendix A: UAS Organisations + + Appendix A: Industry Data of UAS Aircraft .................................................................... + + 10.1002/9780470664797.app1 + + + Unmanned Aircraft Systems + + John Wiley & Sons, Ltd + + + + + Appendix A: Industry Data of UAS Aircraft ..................................................................... + + + + + Joe Shadow Nursery Company [price list] / + + AJShadow + + RQ7B) ..................................................................................................... + + + + Joe.Shadow + + RQ7B) ..................................................................................................... + + + + WAShadow + + RQ7B) ..................................................................................................... + + + 10.5962/bhl.title.136604 + + + Joe Shadow Nursery Co., Inc., + + + Shadow B (RQ7B) ...................................................................................................... + + + + + Global Hawk Systems Engineering. Case Study + + BillKinzig + + 2 Global Hawk (RQ4A) ................................................................................................. + + + 10.21236/ada538761 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 2 Global Hawk (RQ4A) .................................................................................................. + + + + + MAG Solar Orbiter magnetometer + 10.5270/esa-ux7y320 + + null + European Space Agency + + + 3 Orbiter (ORBM) ......................................................................................................... + + + + + Aerosonde Technical Development + + DSEberhardt + + 4 Aerosonde (MK47) ................................................................................................... + + + + JurisVagners + + 4 Aerosonde (MK47) ................................................................................................... + + + + EliLivne + + 4 Aerosonde (MK47) ................................................................................................... + + + + Uy-LoiLy + + 4 Aerosonde (MK47) ................................................................................................... + + + 10.21236/ada630376 + + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + 4 Aerosonde (MK47) .................................................................................................... + + + + + Bio-inspired Predator and Anti-predator Mechanisms for Unmanned Aerial Systems + + APredator + + MQ1B) .................................................................................................. + + + 10.2514/6.2022-0274.vid + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + Predator A (MQ1B) ................................................................................................... + + + + + + + BPredator + + MQ-9) ................................................................................................... + + + + + Predator B (MQ-9) .................................................................................................... + + + + + + + GrayEagle + + MQ1C) ................................................................................................. + + + + + Gray Eagle (MQ1C) .................................................................................................. + + + + + Reliability Achievement + + TerjeAven + + Predator C (AVEN) .................................................................................................. + + + 10.1201/9781351076340 + + + Chapman and Hall/CRC + + + Predator C (AVEN) ................................................................................................... + + + + + Hunter, John Alexander (1882–1963), hunter + + MartinBooth + + MQ5B) ........................................................................................................ + + + 10.1093/ref:odnb/39753 + + + Oxford University Press + + + 9 Hunter (MQ5B) ......................................................................................................... + + + + + Vertiports - Infrastructure and equipment for vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) of electrically powered cargo unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) + + Cargo UAS (CUAS) ................................................................................................. + + 10.3403/30426830u + + null + BSI British Standards + + + Cargo UAS (CUAS) .................................................................................................. + + + + + MQ-8 Fire Scout Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-8 Fire Scout) + + JeffreyDodge + + MQ8B) ................................................................................................... + + + 10.21236/ad1019503 + + + 11 Fire Scout + + Defense Technical Information Center + + + + 11 Fire Scout (MQ8B) .................................................................................................... + + + + + L. Müller's Nonius, Part II - Nonii Marcelli Compendiosa Doctrina, Pars II. Emendavit Lucianus Muller. 12 Mk. + + JHOnions + + S350) ................................................................................ + + + 10.1017/s0009840x00195423 + 12 NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL + + + The Classical Review + The Class. Rev. + 0009-840X + 1464-3561 + + 3 + 7 + + + Cambridge University Press (CUP) + + + 12 NEO S-300 Mk II VTOL (S350) ................................................................................. + + + + + Appendix A: UAS Organisations + + KTG to Simulate UAS Aircraft ..................... + + 10.1002/9780470664797.app1 + + + Unmanned Aircraft Systems + + John Wiley & Sons, Ltd + + + + + Appendix B: Configuration of ACES and KTG to Simulate UAS Aircraft ...................... + + + + + Introduction + + JonathanWolff + + 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. + + + 10.1093/hepl/9780199658015.003.0001 + + + An Introduction to Political Philosophy + + Oxford University Press + + + + 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... + + + + + eLongated Double Wing (LDW) Aircraft Configuration + + 2 Configuration of KTG Database ................................................................................ 16.2.1 Configuration of "aircraft_control_gain.csv" ................................................ + + 10.2514/6.2022-3517.vid + + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + 2 Configuration of KTG Database ................................................................................ 16.2.1 Configuration of "aircraft_control_gain.csv" ................................................. + + + + + synonym + + Mpas_Synonym + + "SYNONYM_ACES_KTG.OLD" .................................................................................. + + + + Lst + + "SYNONYM_ACES_KTG.OLD" .................................................................................. + + + 10.1007/springerreference_26234 + + + SYNONYM_ALL.LST" and + + Springer-Verlag + null + + + 2.2 Configuration of "MPAS_SYNONYM.LST," "SYNONYM_ALL.LST" and "SYNONYM_ACES_KTG.OLD" ................................................................................... + + + + + A Gain-enhanced Dual-band Microstrip Antenna using Metasurface as Superstrate Configuration + + HuqiangTian + + 3 Configuration of ACES Database ............................................................................. + + + + JunlinWang + + 3 Configuration of ACES Database ............................................................................. + + + + DingHan + + 3 Configuration of ACES Database ............................................................................. + + + + XinWang + + 3 Configuration of ACES Database ............................................................................. + + + 10.13052/2021.aces.j.361210 + + + The Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society Journal (ACES) + ACES Journal + 1054-4887 + 1943-5711 + + + River Publishers + + + 3 Configuration of ACES Database .............................................................................. + + + + + Thrust at Cruise 11350 lb + + Max + + + 12450 lb + + + Max. Thrust at Cruise 11350 lb. 12450 lb. + + + + + Base of Aircraft Database (BADA) version 3.9 + + ExperimentalEurocontrol + + + Centre + + + + April 2011 + + + EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre, "Base of Aircraft Database (BADA) version 3.9," April 2011. [Online]. Available: http://www.eurocontrol.int/eec/gallery/content/public/document/eec/other_document/2011/E EC-Technical-Report-110308-08.pdf. + + + + + The Airspace Operations Laboratory (AOL) at NASA Ames Research Center + + ThomasPrevot + + + NancySmith + + + EverettPalmer + + + JoeyMercer + + + PaulLee + + + JeffreyHomola + + + ToddCallantine + + 10.2514/6.2006-6112 + + + + AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + June 2011 + + + NASA + Airspace Operations Laboratory (AOL), "The Multi Aircraft Control System (MACS)," NASA, [Online]. Available: http://hsi.arc.nasa.gov/groups/AOL/technologies/macs.php. [Accessed June 2011]. + + + + + KTG: A Fast-Time Kinematic Trajectory Generator for Modeling and Simulation of ATM Automation Concepts and NAS-wide System Level Analysis + + YingchuanZhang + + + GoutamSatapathy + + + VikramManikonda + + + NikhilNigam + + 10.2514/6.2010-8365 + + + AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference + Toronto, Canada + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + 2010 + + + Y. Zhang, G. Satapathy, V. Manikonda and N. Nigam, "KTG: A Fast-time Kinematic Trajectory Generator for Modeling and Simulation of ATM Automation Concepts and NAS- wide System Level Analysis," in AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference, Toronto, Canada, 2010. + + + + + Studying NextGen Concepts with the Multi-Aircraft Control System + + JoeyMercer + + + ThomasPrevôt + + + RichardJacoby + + + AlbertGlobus + + + JeffreyHomola + + 10.2514/6.2008-7026 + + + AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit + Honolulu, HI + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + 2008 + + + J. Mercer, T. Prevot, R. Jacoby, A. Globus and J. Homola, "Studying Nextgen Concepts with Multi Aircraft Control System," in Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference, Honolulu, HI, 2008. + + + + + The USAF Stability and Control DATCOM + + McdonnellDouglas + + + AstronauticsCompany + + + + 1979. 9d0267197b8160bffff8ab6ffffe415 + + + McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company, "The USAF Stability and Control DATCOM," 1979. [Online]. Available: http://www.holycows.net/datcom/media/e9d0267197b8160bffff8ab6ffffe415.zip. + + + + + JSBSim: An Open Source Flight Dynamics Model in C++ + + JonBerndt + + 10.2514/6.2004-4923 + + + + AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit + + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics + August 2012 + + + J. Berndt, "JSBSim Reference Manual," [Online]. Available: http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/JSBSimReferenceManual.pdf. [Accessed 28 August 2012]. + + + + + Blender Overview + + Blender Foundation + + 10.1007/978-1-4302-1977-4_1 + + + + Foundation Blender Compositing + + Apress + August 2012 + + + + Blender Foundation, "Blender Website," [Online]. Available: http://www.blender.org/. [Accessed 28 August 2012]. + + + + + Author response image 3. + 10.7554/elife.03700.025 + + + August 2012 + eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd + + + JSBSim + "Aeromatic 2 Website," JSBSim, [Online]. Available: http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/aeromatic2.html. [Accessed 28 August 2012]. + + + + + Open-Source Visualization of Reusable Rockets Motion: Approaching Simulink - FlightGear Co-simulation + + Flightgear + + 10.2514/6.2021-0410.vid + + + August 2012 + American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) + + + FlightGear, "FlightGear Website," [Online]. Available: http://www.flightgear.org/. [Accessed 28 August 2012]. + + + + + Helicopter Performance, Stability, and Control + + RWProuty + + + 1986 + PWS Engineering + Boston, MA + + + R. W. Prouty, Helicopter Performance, Stability, and Control, Boston, MA: PWS Engineering, 1986. + + + + + Helicopter Sizing by Statistics + + OmriRand + + + VladimirKhromov + + 10.4050/jahs.49.300 + + + Journal of the American Helicopter Society + j am helicopter soc + 2161-6027 + + 49 + 3 + + 2004 + American Helicopter Society + + + O. Rand and V. Khromov, "Helicopter Sizing by Statistics," Journal of the American Helicopter Society, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 300-317, 2004. + + + + + Private Communication with FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center + + MKonyak + + + August 16, 2012 + Atlantic City, NJ + + + Konyak, M., Private Communication with FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center, Atlantic City, NJ, August 16, 2012. + + + + + BADA: An advanced aircraft performance model for present and future ATM systems + + AngelaNuic + + + DamirPoles + + + VincentMouillet + + 10.1002/acs.1176 + + + International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing + Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process. + 0890-6327 + + 24 + 10 + + 2010 + Wiley + + + A. Nuic, P. Damir and V. Mouillet, "BADA: An Advanced Aircraft Performance Model for Present and Future ATM Systems," International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing, pp. 850-866, 2010. + + + + + Appendix A: UAS Organisations + 10.1002/9780470664797.app1 + + + Unmanned Aircraft Systems + + John Wiley & Sons, Ltd + + + + + Appendix A: Industry Data of UAS Aircraft + + + + + REEFS AND BIOACCUMULATIONS IN THE MIOCENE DEPOSITS OF THE NORTH CROATIAN BASIN – AMAZING DIVERSITY YET TO BE DESCRIBED + + JasenkaSremac + + + MarijaBošnjak Makovec + + + DavorVrsaljko + + + BojanKaraica + + + KristinaTripalo + + + KarmenFio Firi + + + AnaMajstorović Bušić + + + TihomirMarjanac + + 10.17794/rgn.2016.1.2 + + + Rudarsko-geološko-naftni zbornik + MGPB + 0353-4529 + 1849-0409 + + 31 + 1 + + + Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering + + + 575 lb + Design Endurance 24 hr. (575 lb. of fuel and loiter at 10000 ft.) + + + + + +