Systems Engineering QFD on an Aerial Fire Fighting Aircraft

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Quality Function Deployment (QFD) in the design of an aerial fire-fighting aircraft for wildfire response. Participants explore customer needs and engineering characteristics relevant to this specific aerospace systems engineering challenge.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests identifying customer needs such as maximizing fire retardant capacity and payload drop, while struggling with the engineering aspects of the QFD table.
  • Another participant proposes creating a list of aircraft characteristics (e.g., flyaway cost, operating cost, thrust, cargo size) and developing a matrix to relate these to customer needs.
  • A participant disputes the claim that modified commercial or military airframes create inefficiencies, asking for clarification on which aircraft are being referenced.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of improving situational awareness and communication systems in the aircraft design, referencing a specific incident to highlight potential failures.
  • Another participant argues that using existing aircraft designs may offer cost benefits, suggesting that modifications could be more economical than developing new designs.
  • A different participant expresses skepticism about the initial claim regarding inefficiencies, stating that a variety of aircraft may meet requirements effectively and that modifications can be less costly than new designs.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the efficiency of modified aircraft versus new designs, with some supporting the use of existing airframes for cost reasons, while others challenge this perspective. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the effectiveness of current firefighting aircraft and the best approach to design.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not reached a consensus on the efficiency of modified versus new aircraft designs, and there are unresolved assumptions regarding the specific aircraft referenced in the debate.

ashah99
Messages
55
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Coming up with a QFD (House of Quality) list on an Aerial Fire Fighting Aircraft
Relevant Equations
None
Hi everyone, I am currently taking an aerospace systems engineering course and right now, the focus is on Quality Function Deployment (QFD), which is basically a method driven by customer requirements, which can capture customer requirements and systematically convert them into engineering characteristics and quantitative design parameters. I'm looking to come up with as many customer needs and engineering characteristics as possible based on the topic of designing an aerial fire-fighting aircraft for wildfire response. The majority of the aircraft currently in service for firefighting purposes are modified commercial or military airframes, which creates inefficiencies and affects payload delivery. As for needs, I would say maximizing fire retardant capacity, payload drop, savings lives, etc, but really struggling with the engineering aspects of the QFD table.

I wanted to brainstorm with this thread to see how I should approach this problem from a systems perspective. Appreciate any input!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have no experience with this, but since you are only asking to "brainstorm":
Suppose you make a list of aircraft characteristics (flyaway cost, operating cost/hour, thrust, cargo size, speed, landing strip requirements, maneuverability, range, crew size, etc.). Then you can develop a matrix of the relationships between the two sets.

PS. If you are in Aeronautical engineering, you may be able to put these qualities into more specific terms.
 
Last edited:
ashah99 said:
The majority of the aircraft currently in service for firefighting purposes are modified commercial or military airframes, which creates inefficiencies and affects payload delivery.
I would dispute that statement, expecially with respect to the latest FF air-drop fixed wing aircraft. Do you know which aircraft I'm referring to? (the latest and greatest)

 
Last edited:
ashah99 said:
I wanted to brainstorm with this thread to see how I should approach this problem from a systems perspective.

Also, since you are wanting to think about the overall system design, consider how to improve situational awareness of the aircraft in the Fire Zone, and improve communications. Consider this very troubling failure (from my perspective, I could have been on the ground near this...), and what improvements in the overall systems you could propose to prevent this problem:

1654470559149.png

https://www.firehouse.com/safety-he...y-injured-in-hermits-peak-wildfire-water-drop
 
ashah99 said:
Homework Statement:: Coming up with a QFD (House of Quality) list on an Aerial Fire Fighting Aircraft
Relevant Equations:: None

The majority of the aircraft currently in service for firefighting purposes are modified commercial or military airframes, which creates inefficiencies and affects payload delivery.
Maybe. But engineering real world products is an exercise in cost-benefit. There are huge savings in using existing proven designs with lower manufacturing, service, and operational costs. If you design the best ever air tanker, but it's too expensive, no one will buy it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and FactChecker
ashah99 said:
The majority of the aircraft currently in service for firefighting purposes are modified commercial or military airframes, which creates inefficiencies and affects payload delivery.
IMHO, it is premature to state this before any analysis is done. There are a wide variety of airplanes and some may fit the requirements very well. Modifications can be much less expensive than an entirely new design and production effort.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
426
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
3K