Empennage Area versus Wing Area
Once the wing area is established along with fuselage length and matched engine size, the empennage areas (i. e., H-tail, SH, and V-tail, SV) can be estimated from the static stability requirements. Section 3.22 discusses the empennage tail-volume coefficients to determine empennage areas.
Figure 4.10 shows growth for H-tail and V-tail surface areas with the MTOM. The variants in the families do not show change in empennage areas to maintain component commonality.
Figure 4.11. Wing span versus wing-loading and aspect ratio 4.5.7 Wing Loading versus Aircraft Span |
Figure 4.11 substantiates Equation 3.43 in Section 3.20.1, which states that the growth of the wing span is associated with the growth in wing loading.
With steady improvements in new-material properties, miniaturization of equipment, and better fuel economy, wing span is increasing with the introduction of bigger aircraft (e. g., Airbus 380). Growth in size results in a wing root thickness large enough to encompass the fuselage depth when a BWB configuration becomes an attractive proposition for large-capacity aircraft. Although technically feasible, it awaits market readiness, especially from the ground-handling perspective at airports.
The aspect ratio shows a scattering trend. In the same wing-span class, the aspect ratio could be increased with advanced technology but it is restricted by the increase in wing load. Current technology provides for an aspect ratio from 8 to 14.