User talk:J2sande

September 2013
Hello, I'm Widr. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to VTOL have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Widr (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Your request at Files for upload
Hello, and thank you for your request at Files for upload! Unfortunately, your request has been declined. The reason is shown on the main FFU page. The request will be archived shortly; if you cannot find it on that page, it will probably be at this month's archive. Regards, -- Тимофей ЛееСуда . 00:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at VTOL. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.
 * If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place " " on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: VTOL was changed by J2sande (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.8621 on 2013-09-12T21:37:31+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Verticraft
Hi, I have attached a paper published by Georgia Tech Research Institute about the Verticraft

The information supplied can be verified by Dr. Dan Schrage, at the Gerogia Tech School of Aerospace Engineering which built the computer simulation model shown in the photo. Call him at the University to verify the information, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.173.13.179 (talk) 15:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the Wikipedia community do not regard any individual in person, such as Dr. Schrage himself, as a reliable source. Nor are an editor's personal communications with an individual acceptable. Published writings will usually be accepted, provided the reliability of the published source can be verified, for example if it is a peer-reviewed journal. Media reports, etc. can establish the existence of claims, though not their validity. If you like, I can ask my fellow editors to look at the venture capital sites and see if there is anything notable about your project and whether there might be a place for it here. But please could you give deeper urls to the relevant material, you cannot expect editors to trawl these resources themselves. To help with that, I'll restore your material below here so it is easy to find. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 15:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, Refer to:

02.101.001.13.123124 9 May 2013 DARPA/TTO 675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 Subject: DARPA-BAA-13-28 GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION (GTRC) is pleased to submit the enclosed proposal for your consideration in response to DARPA-BAA-13-28. Administrative and Financial Data This proposal is made on the basis that any resulting award will be a costreimbursement research and development type grant with a validity date 6 months beyond the closing date of receipt for proposals. The award should be made out in the name of the GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION (GTRC) which is incorporated under the laws of the State of Georgia with its business address at Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0420. Initiation Date and Duration The Contractor is prepared to initiate the proposed program immediately upon completion of contractual arrangements and 08 August 2013 is suggested as an appropriate initiation date. A contract period of thirty (10) months is contemplated by this proposal. Cost Estimate The overhead rate used in the cost estimate has been approved by the Office of Naval Research, Atlanta Regional Office (representing the Department of Defense) for the period 1 July 2012 through 30 June 2013. Information concerning the overhead rate may be obtained from Office of Naval Research, Atlanta Regional Office, 100 Alabama Street, Suite 4R15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104. This proposal is presented on the basis that your agency will accept as applicable to any resultant contract the same overhead rates and periods of application as are established by the Office of Naval Research in connection with the administration of research and development contracts. The overhead determination is made in accordance with OMB Circular A-21 and is based upon the fiscal year which ends June 30. Additional Information The CAGE Code for GTRC is 1G474. The Duns Number is 09-739-4084. The offeror is not a socially and economically disadvantaged business, a historically black/minority institution, a women owned business, or a small business. Below is a listing of Government Agencies cognizant of the activities indicated? Cognizant Federal Audit Agency Defense Contract Audit Agency, Atlanta Branch 2233 Lake Park Drive SE Suite 200 Smyrna, GA 30080-8813 (678) 309-8400 Cognizant Overhead Rates Negotiation Authority Office of Naval Research Indirect Cost, Code 242 Department of the Navy 800 North Quincy Street Arlington, Virginia 22217-5660 (703) 696-4514 Military Security Authority Defense Investigative Service Director of Industrial Security 2300 Lake Park Drive, Suite 250 Smyrna, Georgia 30080-7606 (S4110) (770) 429-6340 Administrative Contracting Officer Office of Naval Research Atlanta Regional Office 100 Alabama Street, N.W. Suite 4R15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104 (404) 562-1611 Cognizant Equal Employment Opportunity Office Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights 61 Forsyth Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8909 (404) 562-7886 Contractual Arrangements GTRC requests that any award resulting from this proposal incorporate the terms and conditions that are appropriate to this offeror's status as a nonprofit, educational state institution. We will be pleased to discuss contract terms and conditions at your convenience. Organizational Conflict of Interest The Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) Policies and Procedure Manual, Statement No. 7: Federal and State law and Georgia Tech policies prohibit the establishment of legal relationships which may create the appearance of, or an actual, organizational conflict of interest. No SETA support is being provided to the government at this time. We believe that the enclosed proposal will provide you with all necessary information. However, if additional information is desired, please contact us at your convenience. Technical matters should be referred to Dr. Daniel Schrage at e-mail: (daniel.schrage@ae.gatech.edu); phone: 404-894-6257 and contractual matters to the undersigned e-mail: dan.sibble@gatech.edu, phone: 404-894-6947, or fax: 404-385-0864. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to the results of your evaluation. Sincerely, Contracting Officer Office of Sponsored Programs BAA Number: DARPA BAA-13-28 Technical Area: Tactically Exploited Reconnaissance Node (TERN) Volume I: Technical and Management Proposal TERN with Innovative Science & Technology (TWIST) Submitted by the Georgia Institute of Technology Type of business: Other Educational with Verticraft LLC Guided Systems Technologies Inc. Bain Aero LLC Other Small Business Other Small Business Other Small Business Eagle Aviation Technologies LLC Veteran-Owned Small Business A Unique, Robust VTOL Tail Sitter UAS to Provide the Navy a Large, Long-Endurance, Ship-recovered Unmanned Tactically Exploited Reconnaissance Node (TERN) Technical POC: Dr. Dan Schrage School of Aerospace Engineering, MC 0150 Georgia Institute of Technology Award type: Cost Reimbursable Place of Performance: Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Period of Performance 10 months Cost Summary $1,995,992 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 Audit Agency (DCAA) Audit Office: DCAA ATL Branch Ofc. 2233 Lake Park Dr. SE. Suite 200 Smyrna GA 30080-8813 DUNS number: 09-739-4084 TIN number: 58-0603146 Cage code: 1G474 Prepared: May 9, 2013 Validity period: May 10, 2013 through November 6, 2013 iii Table of Contents 1.1! Organizational Conflict of Interest Affirmations and Disclosure ................................... iv! 1.2! Human Use ...................................................................................................................... iv! 1.3! Animal Use ...................................................................................................................... iv! 1.4! Statement of Unique Capability Provided by Government Team Member .................... iv! 1.5! Government or Government-funded Team Member Eligibility ..................................... iv! 2! Technical Details .................................................................................................................... 1! 2.1! Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 1! 2.2! Initial TERN Objective System Conceptual Design ........................................................ 3! 2.2.1! Background ............................................................................................................... 3! 2.2.2! Key Technologies ..................................................................................................... 4! 2.2.3! TOS Initial Design .................................................................................................... 5! 2.3! Phase I Execution Plan ..................................................................................................... 7! 2.3.1! Technical Approach .................................................................................................. 7! 2.3.2! Analysis Tools .......................................................................................................... 9! 2.3.3! Shipboard Integration .............................................................................................. 10! 2.3.4! Software Development ............................................................................................ 11! iv 1.1 Organizational Conflict of Interest Affirmations and Disclosure NONE 1.2 Human Use NONE 1.3 Animal Use NONE 1.4 Statement of Unique Capability Provided by Government Team Member Not Applicable. 1.5 Government or Government-funded Team Member Eligibility NONE 1 2 Technical Details 2.1 Executive Summary Georgia Tech proposes the TERN With Innovative Science and Technology (TWIST) as our baseline concept for both the TERN Objective System (TOS) and the TERN Demonstrator System (TDS). TWIST is a tail-sitter configuration that incorporates several innovative technologies to make it the simplest, most efficient, and most robust TERN concept possible. Our initial TOS conceptual design includes the following technologies: 1. A large diameter coaxial prop rotor for low disk loading and improved hover efficiency and controllability. 2. A free-wing that pivots in response to the downwash velocity generated from the coaxial prop rotor and adjusts in response to ship air wake flows and crosswinds to always allow vertical takeoff into the wind with 15 to 45 degrees tilt. 3. All moving vertical and horizontal tail surfaces for enhanced controllability. 4. A tiltable turboprop engine with an inline connection to the prop rotor without directional gearboxes. 5. An adaptive neural net flight control system that automatically adjusts to changes in the air vehicle’s dynamic characteristics making it highly suitable for a tail-sitter with a very broad flight regime. The TWIST configuration is based on the Verticraft concept developed by Stan Sanders of Verticraft LLC. Over the past two years Georgia Tech has analyzed and simulated this concept in the Integrated Product Lifecycle Engineering Laboratory (IPLE). The results of this analysis indicate that this configuration can readily meet DARPA’s overall goals for the TERN program. We propose a complete system with the following key elements: • Air vehicle – a tail-sitter configuration with coaxial prop rotors and a free-wing and horizontal stabilizer. Compared to tail-sitter designs developed in the 1950s, the use of a free-wing is a unique feature that greatly improves handling performance in the transition region between vertical and forward flight. It also improves the ability of the system to effectively hover in the airflow near a ship. • Ground control station – compatible with the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) unmanned system common control architecture. Using the common control architecture leverages functionality already available for other unmanned systems and reduces the logistics and support requirements for integrating the TERN system on the LCS. • Automated landing system – compatible with the existing approach and landing system and Light Harpoon Landing Restraint System (LHLRS) used by Fire Scout. Unique features of the landing system include flight control algorithms to match the aircraft’s motion to the ship’s motion and gust disturbance rejection algorithms to mitigate the effects of the ship’s air wake during landing. Another unique feature incorporated is an adaptive neural net flight control system, the development of which was pioneered at Georgia Tech for UAV applications. 2 • Container – the system consisting of two air vehicles and support equipment is contained in standard ISO shipping containers, the preferred method for packaging unmanned systems for the LCS. To develop the conceptual design and concept of operations for TWIST, Georgia Tech has assembled a team with significant experience in the design, development, and operation of unmanned aerial systems. The Georgia Tech School of Aerospace Engineering (GT AE) and the Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI) will jointly lead the team which includes Verticraft LLC (creator of the Verticraft concept), Guided Systems Technologies Inc. (a UAV developer), Bain Aero LLC (CFD specialist), and Eagle Aviation Technologies LLC (a proven prototype manufacturer). GT AE is well suited to lead the team having served as the prime contractor or integrator on numerous programs such as DARPA’s Software Enabled Control (SEC), Helicopter Quieting, Mission Adaptive Rotor, and Phase 2 Heliplane programs and the Army’s Autonomous Scout Rotorcraft Testbed (ASRT) Program. Similarly, GTRI, the applied research arm of Georgia Tech, has been the prime contractor and system integrator for a wide variety of DoD prototype development programs and served as the prime contractor for several helicopter flight test programs for the U.S. Air Force. Our team leverages experience from several previous and ongoing efforts for the U.S. government and other agencies. GTRI has several current programs directly relevant to the TERN program including the development of the Common Software Architecture for the LCS mission packages, sponsored by Navy PMS 420, and the development of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), sponsored by Navy PMA 213. Another program that will be leveraged is Guided Systems Technologies’ successful effort to develop the flight control system for Aerovironment’s SkyTote, a tail-sitter UAV sponsored by the Air Force Research Lab for cargo delivery. GST and Georgia Tech closely collaborated to develop the flight dynamics simulation and an adaptive neural net flight control system for the SkyTote. The proposed schedule for developing and testing a TERN prototype system, presented below in Figure 1, is closely aligned with the requirements laid out in the TERN BAA. The conceptual designs for the TOS and TDS will be completed within Phase I (10 months). Also during Phase I a more detailed schedule and budget will be prepared for Phases II and III that meets DARPA’s timeline and funding constraints for the TERN program. Figure 1: Proposed Schedule Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Phase+I System'Req.'Definition '''Initial'Design '''TOS'conceptual'design Tech.'Maturation'Plan Phase'II/III'Prg.'Plan '''TDS'conceptual'design Phase+II TDS'Peliminary'Design Risk'reduction'testing TDS'Detail'Design Phase+III Fabrication Assembly'&'Integration Preliminary'flight'testing L&R'demonstration FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 PDR TMP CDR rollFout flt'demo L&R' demo SRR' Prg.'Plan Review'3 Review'2 Review'1 Test'Results 3 2.2 Initial TERN Objective System Conceptual Design 2.2.1 Background One aircraft configuration that is highly suitable for UAV operations from the decks of small Navy ships is the tail-sitter. Such a vehicle has few operational requirements other than a small clear area for take-off and landing. In addition, the tail-sitter has other unique benefits. In comparison to helicopters, a tail-sitter vehicle does not suffer the same performance penalties in terms of dash-speed, range, and endurance because it spends the majority of its mission in a more efficient airplane flight mode. The only other VTOL concepts that combine vertical and horizontal flight are the tilt-rotor and tilt-wing; however, both involve significant extra mechanical complexity in comparison to the tail-sitter, which has fixed wings and nacelles. The tail-sitter configuration was first realistically evaluated for naval applications in the 1950s with the Convair XFY-1 Pogo and the Lockheed XFV-1 proof of concept vehicles. Both were converted conventional takeoff and landing propeller fighter aircraft which were far from optimized as tail-sitter aircraft. In spite of this, the Pogo successfully demonstrated vertical takeoff, transition, cruise and landing which proved the potential of tail-sitter aircraft for small Navy shipboard operations. Figure 2. Early Tail-Sitter Aircraft While the Pogo did demonstrate the feasibility of the tail-sitter concept, the configuration has never been adopted for use as a manned aircraft. One of the main issues with these early prototypes was that the pilot had poor visibility and orientation in vertical flight mode. To see the ground, the pilot had to look back over his shoulder and his forward view was blocked by the fuselage. This made controlling the aircraft during takeoff and landing extremely difficult. On the other hand, in a UAV application sensors can be located wherever necessary to obtain an unobstructed view; thus, a tail-sitter UAV is not subject to the limitations of an onboard pilot. Another reason that these aircraft were not further developed was the rapid growth of jet power and the military’s need for speed. Neither of these aircraft was capable of flying faster than 580 mph; thus, they were not fast enough to assure survival in a conflict where an adversary possessed jet power. However, in a UAV application, such as TERN, survival through speed is not an issue. In short, many of the problems encountered with tail-sitters in manned aircraft applications are not present in a UAV application. Since these early proof-of-concept tail-sitters, a number of unmanned tail-sitter concepts have been developed as prototypes, such as the Aerovironment SkyTote and the Aurora Golden Eye. However, none of these have reached production for a variety of reasons. They were too Convair XFY-1 Pogo Lockheed XFV-1 4 complex or had insufficient control power and damping in hover and low speed flight, especially in higher sea states. Also, both concepts had fixed wings, without pivot, leaving them susceptible to varying wind conditions in hover and transition. Figure 3. Tail-Sitter UAVs 2.2.2 Key Technologies To overcome some of the limitations of earlier tail-sitters, Georgia Tech proposes to develop the TWIST tail-sitter based on the Verticraft concept created by Stan Sanders, a former Navy and American Airlines pilot and now president of Verticraft LLC. The Verticraft concept incorporates several key technologies to achieve superior performance over previous designs. One key technology is the use of a large diameter coaxial prop rotor for low disk loading and better hover efficiency. The large diameter prop rotor should also be fairly quiet in loiter, if the tip speed is low enough, allowing lower surveillance altitudes with low risk of acoustic detection. Another key technology is a controllable free-wing concept for the main wing. A free-wing freely rotates about its pitch axis to align itself with the relative wind and maintain a constant angle of attack. Thus, the free-wing can pivot in response to the changing slipstream angle caused by the combination of the forward velocity, the downwash generated from the coaxial prop rotor, and the ship air wake flow. This allows the aircraft to launch and land into the wind with 15 to 45 degrees of tilt from vertical. An engine capable of operating in both a horizontal and vertical orientation is another key technology for the tail-sitter concept. The proposed engine for the TERN demonstrator system is the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C, a new PT6 turboshaft derivative designed for tiltrotor operation in the Agusta Westland AW609. Engine certification is slated for 2015. The 1,200 to 2,000 shaft horsepower class PT6C series has been produced in three models and its versatility has been demonstrated in a wide variety of applications. For the TERN objective system other propulsion systems will be considered. Regardless of the specific engine, having the prop rotor mounted at the nose of the vehicle offers the advantage of a straight line connection to the coaxial prop rotor. This eliminates the need for directional gearboxes that may be found in configurations such as a tiltrotor with a single fuselage-mounted engine. To control the aircraft an adaptive neural net controller will be used. Guided Systems Technologies (GST), in partnership with Georgia Tech has developed, validated, and transitioned a new adaptive control technology tailored to the requirements of aircraft applications. This adaptive control technology was successfully demonstrated on the Aerovironment SkyTote tailsitter prototype UAV and the DARPA Software Enabled Control (SEC) program. As a result of 5 its adaptive nature, the controller does not require precise knowledge of the vehicle’s dynamic characteristics. This makes it ideal for an application like a tail-sitter that has a very broad flight regime with transitions between vertical and horizontal flight. Such flight transitions are challenging to model accurately in simulation; thus, having a control technique that can compensate for modeling errors is crucial to developing a successful flight controller. The landing system will leverage the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) currently in development. JPALS is the Navy’s next generation ship-based landing system. It provides a differential GPS navigation solution for conducting precision approaches for both manned and unmanned air platforms. It consists of a Shipboard Relative GPS system, a JPALS Air Subsystem on the aircraft, and a JPALS UHF encrypted specific data link between the aircraft and the ship. 2.2.3 TOS Initial Design The TOS initial baseline design was sized based on the TERN BAA concept of operation and identified mission requirements using the Georgia Tech Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) Concept Definition approach (see section 2.3.1). The conceptual design mission, used to size the baseline, is based on the mission profile shown in Figure 4. The resulting design (Figure 6 and Figure 7) is a 4,193 lb aircraft with a minimum range of 600 nm and an on-station loiter endurance of over 7 hours. The baseline TWIST is capable of dash speeds up to 293 knots, and flight altitudes of over 40,000 ft, as shown in the forward flight envelope in Figure 5. Control of the free-wing allows the aircraft to maintain a body attitude for minimum drag while the wing attitude is for the desired flight condition. This allows the baseline vehicle to be capable of high lift to drag ratios over a large range of forward flight speeds, as shown at cruise altitude (26,000 ft) in. Table 1. TWIST Baseline Specifications Vehicle Rotor Wing Gross Weight 4193 lbs Disk Loading 18 lb/ft2 Wing Loading 40 lb/ft2 Installed Power 1100 SHP Rotor Diameter 17.2 ft Area 104.8 ft2 Empty Weight 2411 lbs Solidity 0.12 Wing Span 32.4 ft Fuel Weight 1182 lbs Tip Speed (Hover) 750 ft/s Aspect Ratio 10.0 Mission Payload 600 lbs Tip Speed (Cruise) 675 ft/s Taper Ratio 0.6 Height (on deck) 13.8 ft ηP (Cruise) 0.732 Cruise CL 0.82 Fuselage Equiv. Drag Area 2.08 sqft ηP (Loiter) 0.739 Wing CD0 0.007 Figure of Merit 0.684 Cruise L/D 14.9 6 Figure 4: Baseline Mission Profile Figure 5. Baseline TWIST Performance Figure 6. TWIST 3-View Takeoff'Hover! SL!103°F! (2!min!OGE)! 600lb!Payload! Climb' minimum!! 1000!;/min! Cruise'Out' 600nm!at!180!KTAS! 26,000!;!ISA! (~3.3!hours)! Decent' miximum! 1000!;/min! Loiter' 440!min!(~7.3!hours)! !125!KTAS! 15,000!;!ISA! Cruise'In' 600nm!at!180!KTAS! 26,000!;!ISA! (~3.3!hours)! Reserve'Loiter' 30!min!at!1000!;!ISA! Recovery'Hover! SL!103°F! (7!min!OGE)! Turn'Around' 40M60!min!for!recovery,!! hot!refuel,!system!checks,! !and!launch! 32.4’& 17.2’& 13.8’& 10.2’& Configuration+Item Weight+ (lbs) Longitudinal+ CG+(in)* Blades'(Upper) 184 12.0 Swashplate/Controls 213 24.0 Hub 135 30.0 Blades'(Lower) 184 36.0 Transmission 151 48.0 Hydraulic'Boost 68 55.0 Avionics 75 55.0 Engine'Installation 35 56.0 Flight'Control'System 165 58.0 Fuel'System 47 60.0 Engine 230 66.0 Fuselage 451 76.0 Electrical 75 80.0 Wing 88 87.0 Landing'Gear 200 145.0 VQTail 55 150.0 HQTail 55 150.0 Fuel 1182.0 80.0 ISR'Payload 600 110.0 CG'(Takeoff) Q 75.5 CG'(Landing) Q 73.8 7 ! Figure 7. TWIST Features 2.3 Phase I Execution Plan 2.3.1 Technical Approach The Georgia Tech Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) Concept Definition approach is a six step process illustrated in Figure 8. The initial TOS baseline design was developed from the first pass through this process. For Phase I, subsequent iterations through six steps will be undertaken to conduct tradeoffs for finalizing the TOS and TDS. Figure 8. TWIST Concept Definition Flow The six steps in the Concept Definition approach are: Free$Wing)for)smoother) transi1on)and)gust)rejec1on))) Coaxial)Proprotor)allows)ver1cal) takeoff)with)no)an1$torque) Control)tabs)allow)op1mum) wing)AoA)independently)of) body) Inline)mounted)propulsion)system) eliminate)direc1onal)gearboxes) Adap1ve)neural)network)reduces) need)for)system)iden1fica1on) Landing)system)leverages) JPALS) TERN BAA CONOPS/Utility TERN Mission and System Requirements Parametric Sizing System Analyses Configuration and Layout Available and Enabling Technology Portfolio Concept Refinement and Solutions Mission Evaluation and Cost Analysis Concept Evaluation and Selection 1 2 4 3 5 6 Vehicle Synthesis Performance Aerodynamics Propulsion Structures Mass Properties Stability Control System Landing System Shipboard Integration System Sustainability Life-Cycle Cost Unified'Tradeoff' Environment'(UTE)' Concurrent Engineering 8 Step One: TERN CONOPS Evaluation: Initial Concept of Operations (CONOPS) was based on TERN BAA and Industry Day Presentation. CONOPS definition is an iterative process that drives sizing and military utility trades. Step Two: TERN Mission Analysis: Based on new or updated CONOPS definition new TERN Mission Analysis will be required. Step Three: Technology Identification and Evaluation by Disciplinary Teams will be provided for updated Vehicle Synthesis. Step Four: Parametric Sizing & Performance Analysis will be conducted with updated requirements and technology assessment. Step Five: Concept Definition Solutions will be identified for further refinement, and Mission and Cost Effectiveness Evaluation. Step Six: Concept Alternative Evaluation will be made using Qualitative and Quantitative Decision Techniques to select the Final TOS Design and the TDS Design. The largely deterministic Concept Definition approach used for the initial TOS Baseline Configuration will be expanded in Phase I for subsequent iterations to include higher fidelity tools to create the Unified Tradeoff Environment (UTE), illustrated in Figure 9, to address risk and uncertainty of top level requirements, concepts, and technologies. To realize the quantification of reachability, UTE was formulated to simultaneously vary requirements, vehicle attributes, and technology factors using surrogate models. Figure 9. UTE for Trading Off Requirements, Concepts and Technologies The application of this UTE methodology involves a procedural tradeoff process, with a dynamic objective based on a precise systematic definition of the problem and identification of system evaluation criteria. Continuous assessment of tradeoffs with Overall Evaluation Criterion (OEC) results in a design solution that satisfies all the design objectives in the best manner. Specific configuration elements and design attributes are correlated to design objectives through system synthesis through multidisciplinary optimization (MDO) and robust design assessment and optimization. By incorporating life-cycle cost analysis in this tradeoff process, alternatives can be assessed by their effective value to the overall system. This methodology allows for trades of system elements, processes, and technologies in a conceptual design synthesis as well as scaling for application in preliminary and detailed design in Phase II and III. 9 In order to create a robust design assessment and optimization environment for conceptual system and technology tradeoffs, Georgia Tech will utilize a set-based concurrent engineering team approach. Discrete design teams will perform “offline” disciplinary analysis of subsystem and system design concepts simultaneously while in close coordination with program management. This allows for concurrent elimination of infeasible concepts and identification of promising concepts. It will be used to calculate many of the design metrics defining mission and cost effectiveness or elements of Overall Evaluation Criterion (OEC) from each discipline. Additionally, the approach permits teams to harness the impressive catalog of more advanced design and analysis tools at Georgia Tech’s and its partners’ disposal. Thorough analysis will also allow for more flexible management and careful mitigation of identified critical risks. As tradeoff decisions are made, design teams will converge on a single conceptual design solution that best meets the requirements of the system with the lowest risk and highest affordability. 2.3.2 Analysis Tools Georgia Tech is unique in its ability to bring a large array of analysis tools to bear on the design of the TERN air vehicle. As a leading research institute in aerospace engineering Georgia Tech has developed and obtained numerous analysis codes through its collaborative efforts with NASA, DoD research laboratories, and industry. Here are descriptions of some of the tools that will be used. Sizing and Performance: Georgia Tech has a library of in-house developed sizing and performance tools, in addition to its development of a custom tail-sitter sizing algorithm, based on the RF (fuel fraction) method. Additionally, Georgia Tech maintains expertise in a host of available sizing and synthesis products such as NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft (NDARC) and FLight OPtimzation System (FLOPS). Phoenix Integration’s ModelCenter is a graphical integration environment that supports automation of design processes and tools. It allows rapid exploration and exploitation of design space to reduce development time and cost. Aerodynamics: NASA’s OVERFLOW computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code is an overset structured compressible Navier-Stokes solver. It is widely used by industry, government, and academia for a range of aerospace applications. The overset grid method allows for modeling complex and moving geometries. It features high order temporal and special schemes and the recently added capability to dynamically adapt to flow features. The Army's comprehensive rotorcraft code RCAS will be used for aerodynamic and dynamic analysis of the rotor. RCAS is capable of analyzing the blade natural frequencies, the rotor blade loads, and the stresses in the blades. In Phase I, as initial analyses of rotor blade dynamics are undertaken, bending and torsional stiffnesses will be used as design variables. Propulsion: NASA’s Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS) is a full propulsion system simulation tool for predicting and analyzing the aero-thermodynamic behavior of commercial and military jet engines. Flight Simulation: X-Plane is commercial flight simulator capable of modeling fairly complex aircraft designs while being fairly easy to set-up and use. X-Plane is highly suitable for initial control effector tradeoff investigations. The Georgia Tech UAV Simulation Tool GUST is capable of modeling fixed and rotary wing aircraft flight dynamics and includes a ship motion model and an LCS1 graphical model with deck geometry and a deck contact model. GUST also provides for real-time hardware-in-the-loop simulation of the complete flight control system. An 10 illustration of GUST simulation usage is provided in Figure 10. FLIGHTLAB is a high fidelity rotorcraft simulation code developed by Advanced Rotorcraft Technology, Inc. FLIGHTLAB is widely used in the rotorcraft industry and academia to study flight dynamics, handling qualities, and control system design. Figure 10. Example of GUST Simulation in DARPA SEC Program Computer Aided Design: Georgia Tech uses CATIA from Dassault Systemes for 3D modeling and design. CATIA is widely used in the aerospace industry for design and systems engineering. Life Cycle Cost Analysis: The Tailored Cost Model (TCM) is an aircraft life cycle cost (LCC) analysis tool used in the system definition and optimization process. TCM encompasses flexible and modular combination of cost algorithms selected from various parametric models. Excelbased TCM was developed in-house to support rapid conceptual design studies and to provide a mechanism for providing should-cost targets for functional organizations. The cost elements estimates are integrated into a MIL-STD-881 type Work Breakdown Structure. 2.3.3 Shipboard Integration The design for shipboard integration will be accomplished using GTRI’s Human System Integration tool, Jack, which is an ergonomic and human factors software package. Jack can import 3D Solid Edge models of the LCS mission module systems and create virtual environments such as mission module spaces and LCS deck space. Anthropometrically and biomechanically correct human models can be positioned in these virtual environments to study human-environment interactions for the various tasks associated with operating the TERN system aboard ship (Figure 11). Jack has recently been used to study clearance issues with ISO containers on the LCS for stowing equipment and systems such as the Q-20 autonomous underwater vehicle. Another key shipboard integration task is integrating the vehicle’s control system with the Common Software Architecture (CSA) used onboard the LCS for mission packages. GTRI is currently supporting the LCS Mission Modules Program Office (PMS 420) to develop CSA by focusing on the common control station functionality for LCS based on the CSA’s Service- Oriented Architecture (SOA). GTRI is creating software services that support common mission planning and common control of unmanned systems. Many of these services are based on the UAV Control Segment (UCS) specifications. In addition, GTRI will use a model-driven 11 software development approach to create an interface application for the JPALS based on the Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) standard. Figure 11. Examples of Task Simulation and Stowage in Jack 2.3.4 Software Development GTRI has adopted the Agile software development approach for a subset of its projects. These projects can be characterized as having a set of very high-level requirements with many of the lower-level requirements unknown at the time of project initiation. The lower-level requirements are subsequently developed and defined during the development process through interactions with the customer via the periodic demonstration of working software. GTRI follows the SCRUM Agile methodology that is heavily focused on short development iterations (i.e., 2-4 week development sprints). Each sprint is planned with customer engagement and then executed by the project team. At the end of the sprint, working versions of the software are produced for demonstration/testing. These working versions allow for early-on customer review and comments, allowing the customer to direct the development of the software product to better fit their needs. In support of the Agile software development process, GTRI uses a variety of software tools. For sprint planning and tracking, both Redmine and Atlassian JIRA with Green Hopper are used. For configuration management of software source code, both git and Subversion are used. For configuration management of documents, Subversion is used.
 * as'measured'from'nose


 * First, I had trouble with that email dump - it was illegible and I had to reformat it. It was also top-posted, which we do not do here. I took the liberty of correcting those mistakes, but you will communicate with us more effectively if you can follow the formatting conventions and markup used by other editors. In particular, please sign each post with four tildes thus  which will automatically sign and timestamp your post.
 * Second, I am also concerned that you have publicly posted contact, career and other information about private individuals and company business and possibly without obtaining their consent, which would be illegal here in the UK though I cannot speak for the USA. For the sake of their personal privacy I have removed large parts of your post, though I do not know the status of the commercial material so I have left much of that. You may wish to confirm with those named that they are content for their names to remain publicly findable in this page's history logs, and also to establish the company's position. Alternatively, you may wish to contact the Wikipedia administrative community and ask for the relevant parts of the page log to be purged. Let me know if you need any help there.
 * To the point in hand: as I said, private correspondence is not acceptable source material, the material must have been previously published and you need to provide the details (journal edition, website, ISBN, etc). If you are not prepared to take the time to follow my advice and digest the verifiability guidelines, there is little point in your pursuing Wikipedia as a medium for your information. As a Wikipedia editor, you only get out what you put in. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC) [Updated 11:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)]
 * P.S. As a project it looks most interesting, I wish you all the best with it and if I come across it somewhere appropriate be sure I will be delighted to post information on Wikipedia. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Material removed from VTOL article
The Verticraft is a vertical takeoff and landing aircraft ( US patent 8505846) that can fly nearly as fast as a private jet but takeoff and land like a helicopter. The Verticraft maximizes safety by eliminating the airport convergence problem of aircraft and the ground collision possibilities of ground vehicles. The 2 passenger commuter version will be plugin electric battery powered which will make zero operating cost for the average distance traveled. The average travel time by Verticraft is about 8 minutes per day versus 55 minutes by car to travel the average 31 miles. The 4 minutes of air or electricity consumed would be recharged by nearly invisible translucent wind turbines and solar panels at the destination. At home the Verticraft would land on top of the garage roof which would descend on a counter balance weight system to the floor of the garage. The heat generated to compress the air can be used for the home or business hot water heater. Residential or business solar panels will generate enough electricity to recharge the batteries at no operating cost. The eight passenger Verticraft uses compressed air expansion rotary engines that use high pressure compressed air stored in cylinders to run the engines and compressed natural gas for trips of longer than average.]
 * Web sites:
 * www.gust.com
 * angel.co
 * sharktankzone