MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335184367 · doi:10.2514/6.2010-5114

Advanced Concept Studies for Supersonic Commercial Transports Entering Service in 2030-35 (N+3)

2010· article· en· W2335184367 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupersonic speedService (business)AeronauticsComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NASA has chartered teams to study commercial transports that can overcome significant performance and environmental challenges for the benefit of the general public. The key technical objective of this effort was to generate promising supersonic concepts for the 2030-2035 timeframe and to develop plans for maturing the technologies required to make those concepts a reality. The N+3 program is aligned with NASA's Supersonic Project and is focused on providing alternative system-level solutions capable of overcoming the efficiency, environmental, and performance barriers to practical supersonic flight. 1.0 Summary Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company (LM Aero), working in conjunction with seven industry and academia sub-contracting teammates, executed an 18 month program responsive to the NASA sponsored N+3 NRA: ―Advanced Concept Studies for Supersonic Commercial Transports Entering Service in the 2030-2035 Period.‖ ‗N+3' denotes three generations beyond the current commercial transport fleet. The N+3 program is aligned with NASA's Supersonic Project and is focused on providing alternative system-level solutions capable of overcoming the environmental, efficiency and performance barriers to practical supersonic flight. The environmental goals focus on low sonic boom, airport noise and cruise emissions. The program considered promising concepts and enabling technologies in an extensively integrated analysis process required particularly to achieve low sonic boom with efficiency. The reason for investigating alternative system-level solutions has to do with the projected status of our air transportation system. In addition to FAA regulations, the Next Generation (NextGen) Air Traffic System (ATS) congestion levels are a concern as they are expected to increase by a factor of 2 to 3 in the 2030 timeframe. Understanding how supersonic aircraft affect future congestion levels requires a system of systems analysis that integrates vehicle design, operating environment, and economic interaction into a single process. LM Aero worked with a sister company, Transportation Security & Solutions (TSS), and Purdue University to assess the value that a supersonic transport concept vehicle brings to the NextGen ATS. A fast time modeling and simulation study done by TSS revealed that commercial supersonic vehicles will not impact future airport capacity. However, supersonic air vehicles in the 2030 timeframe will exert additional demand for airport operations. Purdue University simulated numerous future Civil Air Transport System scenarios, allocating N+3 vehicles to maximize system-wide productivity while also computing fleet-wide emissions and direct operating costs. These results showed that the total value of time saved by passengers on N+3 supersonic transports exceed the added operating costs incurred by the aircraft. These system-level scenarios showed that supersonic transport is a viable solution for increased productivity and promotes the renewed viability of supersonic travel. Our extended team contributed to a preferred supersonic configuration and developed plans for maturing the identified, enabling technologies required to meet the N+3 performance and environmental goals. Working in conjunction with GE Global Research Center (GRC), John Hansman from MIT, Helen Reed & Bill Saric from Texas A&M, Wyle Laboratories, Purdue, and Penn State - an initial low-boom, supersonic configuration was used to assess potential airframe and propulsion technologies that were projected to meet or exceed the future supersonic boom, noise, emissions, cruise speed, range, payload, and fuel efficiency goals. Multi-Disciplinary Analysis and Optimization (MDAO) showed it was possible to achieve the N+3 boom goal with an ―inverted-V‖, engine-under wing configuration. Further sizing and quantified analysis proved that using revolutionary technologies enabled this configuration to achieve the range, payload, and cruise speed goals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it