Next Article in Journal
Numerical Study on the Non-Oscillatory Unstarted Flow in a Scramjet Inlet-Isolator Model
Next Article in Special Issue
Design, Analysis, and Testing of a Scaled Propeller for an Innovative Regional Turboprop Aircraft
Previous Article in Journal
A Multidisciplinary Possibilistic Approach to Size the Empennage of Multi-Engine Propeller-Driven Light Aircraft
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Aerospace
Volume 9
Issue 3
10.3390/aerospace9030161
Review Report
aerospace-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effect of Progressive Integration of On-Board Systems Design Discipline in an MDA Framework for Aircraft Design with Different Level of Systems Electrification

Aerospace 2022, 9(3), 161; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace9030161
by Marco Fioriti 1,*, Pierluigi Della Vecchia 2 and Giuseppa Donelli 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Aerospace 2022, 9(3), 161; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace9030161
Submission received: 8 February 2022 / Revised: 10 March 2022 / Accepted: 12 March 2022 / Published: 15 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Turboprop Aircraft Design and Optimization)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper deals with the interesting topic of on board systems and its integration in overall aicraft design processes. The paper is well organized and the methodology is clear. However, I have a few interrogations and suggestions that must be addressed before it can be accepted. Especially, showing only the mass variations regarding OBS electrification is too limiting. The power variations should be also outlined. I think the authors have already the data or at least the tools to address that point.

Questions:

  • Regarding the FCS, it is not clear which is the reference conventional architecture. Mechanical power (line 109-110) or hydraulic power (line 417)? 
  • It is not clear for me which design process is achieved. An MDO (optimization) or simply an MDA (analysis)?
  • It is not clear for me if the effect of new air intakes for the electric ECS for example is considered?

Suggestions:

  • Thermal management seems not to be addressed in this work. This should be furthermore emphasized in the conclusions.
  • I would recommend to give a bit more detail on the models used for OBS. Even if references are given, it would be interesting for the reader to have an idea of what type of models are used which may differ between the systems. My feeling is that we have more detail on the aircraft design process that the OBS.
  • One significant contribution in this work is the consideration of the effect of OBS electrification on the power off takes. However, very poor detail is given in the result section. I would like to see more quantification of this effect, as achieved for the mass variation. For example, I would be delighted to see in Figure 13 the variation of systems power.

Miscelaneous:

  • Line 96 and 143: "L_E" is not rendered as latex symbol.
  • Line 522-525: the sentence structure is incorrect making it difficult to understand.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

please consider the critics

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I agree with the authors responses. Thank you for adding power off takes results. The paper can be accepted in the present form

Reviewer 2 Report

it is ok

Back to TopTop