AERO4110 - Aerospace Design 2
Progress Report 2 - Rubric
Unsatisfactory
Problem definition
(10%)
Proposed configuration and
justification
(10%)
Key project objectives missing or
incomplete. Does not demonstrate
understanding of RFP, or only shows
a limited understanding of RFP.
Identifies some project objectives and
challenges based on the RFP. Shows
a basic understanding of RFP
requirements, including regulations.
Proposed configuration does not
match engineering justification and
data. Proposed configuration is
unlikely to meet RFP requirements
and requires significant rework.
Drawing of proposed configuration is
low quality, missing views, hard to
read, or missing entirely.
Proposed configuration is acceptable
based on justification and updated
analysis presented. More detailed
analysis in some areas may result in
further changes to the design
configuration. Drawing of proposed
configuration includes three-view and
isometric CAD drawings, is
acceptable quality and easy to read,
some minor elements may be
missing.
Detailed configuration design
excludes one or more required areas.
OR
Design decisions are made arbitrarily
Detailed configuration and payload
or not linked to engineering data and
(30%)
logical reasoning. Difficult to
understand and follow design choices.
Sources of information are missing or
may be unclear.
Design aircraft performance and
comparison
(15%)
Acceptable
Detailed configuration design includes
all required areas (payload, wings,
fuselage, tail, control surfaces,
propulsion, landing gear, internal
layout, special missions, major
structural layout, materials). While
design decisions are based on
engineering data and analysis, some
areas require more detailed analysis
and assessment. Reasoning may be
difficult to follow in places. Sources of
information related to justification and
design choices are clear.
Expected performance of the design
aircraft for RFP performance
Aircraft performance analysis has not
parameters has been analysed and
been performed.
compared to RFP requirements,
OR
demonstrating the design meets
Aircraft performance analysis shows
requirements. Performance analysis
the aircraft does not meet a significant
of proposed configuration is
number of RFP performance
reasonable with regards to available
requirements.
design data and mission profiles but
OR
may include some inaccuracies or
Aircraft performance analysis is
require additional iterations or rework.
incomplete or does not accurately
If the analysis shows the proposed
reflect configuration, range, or mission
design does not meet any specific
profiles.
requirement, this is identified and
discussed.
Revised sizing analysis
(10%)
Revised weight sizing analysis has
not been performed.
OR
Revised sizing analysis is incomplete
or does not accurately reflect
configuration, payload, range, or
mission profiles.
OR
Calculations are not included in the
main report.
Application of engineering crossdisciplinary principles
(10%)
Configuration presented includes
consideration and integration of some
Configuration presented is disjointed, disciplines (including aerodynamics,
or greatly favours a small number of structures and materials, propulsion,
disciplines, neglecting others.
performance, stability and control,
etc), but may be lacking in some
areas.
Communication
(15%)
Report is mostly clear and organised,
may be hard to follow in various
areas. Design process and thoughts
Report is hard to follow or disjointed. are present but may require some
Some required sections are missing. interpretation. Most tables, charts and
Some tables, charts and diagrams are diagrams included are relevant to the
missing or do not support the design design, some may be missing.
decisions and conclusions. Regular
Headings define appropriate topics
structural, grammatical, and spelling and mostly fit the content within.
errors make it hard to read. Page limit Paragraphs and sentences are wellmay not be respected.
formed with some structural or
grammatical errors. Report includes
spelling mistakes. Page limit is
respected.
Revised weight sizing analysis has
been completed including new detail
regarding updated configuration and
payload information. Reasonably
represents updated design
configuration, payload, range, and
mission profiles, but includes some
inaccuracies or requires additional
iterations or rework. Calculations are
included in the main report.
Good
Superior
Identifies all project objectives and
challenges based on a clear
Identifies all project objectives and
understanding of RFP requirements,
challenges based on a clear
including regulations. Extrapolates
understanding of RFP requirements,
requirements meaningfully and
including regulations.
demonstrates a key understanding of
customer expectations.
Recommended design configuration is
Recommended design configuration is well-justified based on given RFP
justified based on given RFP criteria, criteria, updated analysis, missions
updated analysis, missions
requirements, data analysis and
constraints. Configuration
requirements, data analysis and
constraints. Drawing of proposed
demonstrates understanding of future
configuration includes three-view and detailed design requirements.
isometric CAD drawings, is high
Drawing of proposed configuration
includes three-view and isometric
quality, complete and easy to
understand, and includes all key
CAD drawings, is high quality,
complete and easy to understand, and
elements.
includes all key elements.
Detailed configuration design includes
all required areas (payload, wings,
fuselage, tail, control surfaces,
propulsion, landing gear, internal
layout, special missions, major
structural layout, materials). Design
decisions are based on a thorough
analysis of engineering data and
logical reasoning for most areas, one
or two areas may be lacking. A variety
of sources of information are utilised
to provide justification and support
design choices, and these are
referenced clearly.
Detailed configuration design includes
all required areas (payload, wings,
fuselage, tail, control surfaces,
propulsion, landing gear, internal
layout, special missions, major
structural layout, materials). Design
decisions are based on a thorough
analysis of engineering data and
logical reasoning across all areas. A
variety of sources of information are
utilised to provide justification and
support design choices, and these are
referenced clearly.
Expected performance of the design
aircraft for RFP performance
Expected performance of the design
parameters has been analysed and
aircraft for RFP performance
compared to RFP requirements,
parameters has been analysed and
demonstrating the design meets
compared to RFP requirements,
requirements. Performance analysis
demonstrating the design meets
of proposed configuration is accurate
requirements. Performance analysis
and reasonable with regards to
of proposed configuration is accurate
available design data and mission
and reasonable with regards to
profiles. Performance analysis has
available design data and mission
also considered potential extrapolated
profiles. If the analysis shows the
requirements and mission profiles. If
proposed design does not meet any
the analysis shows the proposed
specific requirement, this is identified
design does not meet any specific
and discussed, and a plan is
requirement, this is identified and
presented to address this.
addressed with proposed design
changes presented to correct this.
Revised weight sizing analysis has
been completed including new detail
Revised weight sizing analysis has
regarding updated configuration and
been completed including new detail
payload information. Revised sizing
regarding updated configuration and
analysis of proposed configuration is
payload information. Revised sizing
accurate and reasonable with regards
analysis of proposed configuration is
to updated design configuration,
accurate and reasonable with regards
payload, range requirements, and
to updated design configuration,
mission profiles. Sizing analysis has
payload, range requirements, and
also considered potential extrapolated
mission profiles. Calculations are
requirements and mission profiles.
included in the main report.
Calculations are included in the main
report.
Configuration presented includes
Configuration presented includes
consideration and seamless
consideration and integration of
integration of disciplines (including
disciplines (including aerodynamics,
aerodynamics, structures and
structures and materials, propulsion,
materials, propulsion, performance,
performance, stability and control,
stability and control, etc) in a
etc).
congruous manner.
Report is mostly clear and organised,
may be hard to follow in some areas. Report is clear, well organised and
Design process and thoughts are
professionally presented. Design
easy to follow and understand.
process and thoughts are easy to
Tables, charts and diagrams included follow and understand. Tables, charts
are complete and support
and diagrams included are complete
understanding of the design process and support understanding of the
and decisions. Headings clearly
design process and decisions.
define appropriate topics and match Headings clearly define appropriate
the content within. Paragraphs and
topics and match the content within.
sentences are well-formed with
Paragraphs and sentences are welloccasional structural or grammatical formed and free from grammatical
errors. Report includes occasional
errors. Report is free from spelling
spelling mistakes. Page limit is
mistakes. Page limit is respected.
respected.
Some aspects of your designs and submissions may not be able to be fully captured by the rubric. Academic judgement will be exercised as necessary during the assessment process.
AERO4110 - Aerospace Design 2
Progress Report 2 - Rubric
Dr Sonya A Brown
2023