Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Constraints in the Problem of Finding Optimal Trajectories for a Supersonic Non-Maneuverable Aircraft

  • Published:
Mechanics of Solids Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The influence of phase and other constraints on the method of searching for the trajectories of a civil supersonic aircraft that are optimal in terms of fuel consumption is considered. Based on the solutions found by the dynamic programming method, which take into account the numerous conditions that must be satisfied by the flight altitude, pitch angle, normal overload, aircraft speed, engine thrust, etc., it is shown that almost all of these conditions can be ignored during the initial stage of calculations, since these constraints do not affect the optimal solutions. Therefore, one can first apply the maximum principle and use the dynamic programming method only in those cases where a sizeable part of the constraints turns out to be significant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

REFERENCES

  1. L. S. Pontryagin, V. G. Boltyanskii, R. V. Gamkrelidze, and E. F. Mishchenko, The Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes (Wiley, New York, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. Bellman, Dynamic Programming (Univ. Press, Princeton, 1957).

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Rosenow, D. Strunck, and H. Fricke, “Trajectory optimization in daily operations,” CEAS Aeronaut. J. 11, 333–343 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. A. Murrieta-Mendoza and R. M. Botez, “Methodology for vertical-navigation flight-trajectory cost calculation using a performance database,” J. Aerospace Inf. Syst. 12 (8), 519–532 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. R. Alligier, “Predictive distribution of mass and speed profile to improve aircraft climb prediction,” J. Air Transp. 28 (3), 114–123 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. A. Franco and D. Rivas, “Optimization of multiphase aircraft trajectories using hybrid optimal control,” J. Guid. Control Dyn. 38 (3), 452–467 (2015).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. A. Murrieta-Mendoza, C. Romain, and R. M. Botez, “3D cruise trajectory optimization inspired by a shortest path algorithm,” Aerospace, No. 7, 99–119 (2020).

  8. M. Soler, A. Olivares, and E. Staffetti, “Multiphase optimal control framework for commercial aircraft four-dimensional flight-planning problems,” J. Aircraft 52 (1), 274–286 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. J. Garca-Heras, M. Soler, and F. J. Saez, “Collocation methods to minimum-fuel trajectory problems with required time of arrival in ATM,” J. Aerospace Inf. Syst. 13 (7), 243–265 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. J. W. Langelaan, “Long distance/duration trajectory optimization for small UAVs,” in Proc. AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conf. (Hilton Head, 2007), pp. 3654–3667.

  11. J. Rosenow, M. Lindner, and J. Scheiderer, “Advanced flight planning and the benefit of in-flight aircraft trajectory optimization,” Sustainability 13 (3), 1383–1401 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. S. A. Kumakshev and A. M. Shmatkov, “Optimal fuel consumption trajectories of a civil supersonic aircraft,” J. Comput. Syst. Sci. Int. 61 (4), 664–676 (2022).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. J. Rosenow, S. Förster, M. Lindner, and H. Fricke, “Multi-objective trajectory optimization,” Int. Transp. 68 (1), 40–43 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. A. Kumakshev and A. M. Shmatkov, “Flight trajectory optimization qithout decomposition into separate stages,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 468, 012033 (2018).

  15. A. F. Bochkarev, V. V. Andreevsky, V. M. Belokonov, et al., Aircraft Aeromechanics: Flight Dynamics (Mashinostroenie, Moscow, 1985) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  16. N. M. Grevtsov, S. A. Kumakshev, and A. M. Shmatkov, “Optimization of the flight trajectory of a non-manoeuvrable aircraft to minimize fuel consumption by thedynamic programming method,” J. Appl. Math. Mech. 81 (5), 368–374 (2017).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Yu. N. Zhelnin, A. E. Utemov, and A. M. Shmatkov, “Minimum time loop maneuver with no speed loss,” J. Comput. Syst. Sci. Int. 51 (6), 833–848 (2012).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was partially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grant no. 21–51–12004) and the State Assignment of the IPMech RAS (State registration no. 123021700055–6).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ishlinsky Institute for Problems in Mechanics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IPMech RAS), Moscow, Russia

    S. A. Kumakshev & A. M. Shmatkov

Authors
  1. S. A. Kumakshev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. M. Shmatkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. A. Kumakshev.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Translated by V. Selikhanovich

Publisher’s Note.

Allerton Press remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumakshev, S.A., Shmatkov, A.M. Constraints in the Problem of Finding Optimal Trajectories for a Supersonic Non-Maneuverable Aircraft. Mech. Solids 58, 2586–2594 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654423070130

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654423070130

Keywords:

Search

Navigation