• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Boeing CCV tanker aircraft

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
819
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
In an Air Force sponsored study, conducted by the Boeing Company, a control configured vehicle (CCV) tanker aircraft was designed to satisfy the same mission requirements specified for an advanced conventional tanker.

General Characteristics

Wing span (ft): 251
Fuselage Length (ft): 125
Fuselage maximum diameter (ft): 18
Design weight (lb): 835,900
Cruise speed: .75 Mach
Payload: 348,900 pounds of fuel off-loaded at 30,000 feet at .68 Mach


Three-view drawing (top) of Boeing CCV tanker point design labelled BL-300. Note the lack of horizontal tail.

Comparison drawing (bottom) of Boeing BL-300 with an advanced conventional tanker design BL-767.

Source:

Walker, S. A. Design of a Control Configured Tanker Aircraft Aeronautical Systems Division, Wright-Paterson Air Force Base August 1, 1976

Abstract:
The benefits that accrue from using control configured vehicle (CCV) concepts were examined along with the techniques for applying these concepts to an advanced tanker aircraft design. Reduced static stability (RSS) and flutter mode control (FMC) were the two primary CCV concepts used in the design. The CCV tanker was designed to the same mission requirements specified for a conventional tanker design. A seven degree of freedom mathematical model of the flexible aircraft was derived and used to synthesize a lateral stability augmentation system (SAS), a longitudinal control augmentation system (CAS), and a FMC system. Fatigue life and cost analyses followed the control system synthesis, after which a comparative evaluation of the CCV and conventional tankers was made. This comparison indicated that the CCV weight and cost were lower but that, for this design iteration, the CCV fatigue life was shorter. Also, the CCV crew station acceleration was lower, but the acceleration at the boom operator station was higher relative to the corresponding conventional tanker. Comparison of the design processes used in the CCV and conventional design studies revealed that they were basically the same.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760024070_1976024070.pdf
 

Attachments

  • BoeingCCVtanker.JPG
    BoeingCCVtanker.JPG
    51.4 KB · Views: 175
  • CCVvConventional.JPG
    CCVvConventional.JPG
    51.5 KB · Views: 164
Top