Skip to Content
AerospaceAerospace
  • Editorial
  • Open Access

31 December 2025

Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of Aircraft for Climate Neutral Aviation: Potential and Future Perspectives

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy

1. Introduction

The aviation sector has been forced to deal with a strong transformative phase driven by the urgent and non-negotiable goal of reducing its impact on the climate [1]. The continuous growth of the aviation industry and the associated increase in harmful anthropogenic emissions must be reduced as much as possible. Current forecasts predict a doubling of the number of passengers in the next 30 years [2], leading to a huge increase in greenhouse gas emissions if no actions are pursued [3,4,5,6]. Technological and methodological improvements are necessary to meet this ambitious target. On the one hand, novel technological solutions are necessary to improve the current state of the art, which is close to its maximum potential. On the other hand, each technological solution can not be investigated as an isolated techno-brick; but multidisciplinary and multi-fidelity approaches must be used in the aircraft design process in order to extract the maximum benefits of introducing new technologies. Novel technological solutions are currently being investigated in several research fields such as those concerning fuel, propulsion, and the airframe [7,8,9,10].
Regarding next-generation fuel and propulsion, three techno-bricks are currently being investigated, namely, hybrid-electric [11,12,13], hydrogen [14,15,16], and sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs) [17,18,19]. Hybrid-electric propulsion relies on the integration of thermal and electric power chains enabling fuel burn and emissions reduction [20,21,22], increase in propulsion efficiency [11], and noise mitigation [23]. Despite the numerous benefits, hybrid-electric propulsion systems face several critical barriers that currently limit their large-scale deployment. Technological barriers include limited power density and battery gravimetric energy density [11,24], thermal management challenges associated with high-power electric components [25,26], the electricity generation process [27] and lack of suitable infrastructures [28], and regulatory barriers [7]. Technological barriers limit the actual applicability of hybrid-electric propulsion to the regional sector, which occupies a small portion of the current aeronautical sector [29], thereby diminishing the impact of hybrid-electric propulsion on anthropogenic emissions. Furthermore, the production of electric energy plays a key role in the actual climate impact of hybrid-electric propulsion, and life cycle assessment is fundamental in this regard [30,31]. Regulatory barriers such as the lack of a certification process can delay the entry into service of this technology. Hydrogen represents a promising pathway toward climate-neutral aviation as it enables propulsion without CO2 emissions and offers a gravimetric energy density three times higher than conventional kerosene. However, its very low volumetric energy density (four times lower than kerosene) poses major challenges for onboard storage. Liquid and cryo-compressed hydrogen are the most viable storage options, both requiring cryogenic conditions and complex thermal management necessary to maintain those conditions, boil-off losses, and, in the case of cryo-compressed tanks, heavier structures to withstand high pressure [32,33,34]. Beyond aircraft integration, the hydrogen production process and the lack of dedicated airport infrastructure represent major barriers to large-scale deployment [35,36]. SAFs are drop-in fuels designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over their entire life cycle without requiring major changes to aircraft or infrastructure. Produced from waste-based, non-food, or synthetic feedstocks, SAFs can significantly lower life-cycle CO2 emissions [37]. However, current certification limits blending with conventional kerosene to 50%, constraining in-flight emission reductions [17]. Major barriers to large-scale adoption include high production costs, limited market penetration, feedstock availability, and insufficient regulatory support [38]. While bio-based SAFs face scalability concerns, power-to-liquid pathways offer a promising alternative, albeit at a substantial cost, and life cycle CO2 emission reduction if produced according to renewable electricity requirements [18].
Regarding the airframe, two paths are currently under investigation: (i) unconventional airframe designs to enhance aerodynamic efficiency, reduce fuel consumption, and lower emissions [39,40]; and (ii) advanced aero-propulsive integration [41]. Unconventional airframe concepts, such as box-wing [42], blended-wing-body [43], and truss-braced [44], are particularly promising for their potential lift-to-drag improvements [45,46,47], enhanced structural efficiency [48,49,50], and advanced integration of novel propulsion systems, such as hybrid-electric [51,52,53] and hydrogen [54,55,56] systems. Advanced aero-propulsive integration is the study of the interaction between the propulsion system and the aircraft airframe, aiming to enhance the aircraft’s aerodynamic performance. Currently, investigated topics are distributed electric propulsion [57], boundary layer ingestion (BLI) [58], and next-generation engines, such as ultra-high-bypass ratio [59] and open-rotor [60]. Distributed electric propulsion can enhance high-lift capability and potentially improve cruise efficiency by reducing wing wetted surface. However, its implementation is limited by increased structural complexity, weight penalties due to the presence of multiple motors along the wing, and demanding thermal management requirements [25,61]. BLI improves overall aircraft efficiency by re-energizing the low-momentum boundary layer, thereby reducing wake drag and jet mixing losses: preliminary studies indicate potential block-fuel reductions of 5–12% [62]. However, BLI still faces key challenges, including flow distortion management and complex structural integration [58]. Ultra-high bypass ratio turbofan and open rotors increase propulsive efficiency, but their integration poses significant challenges such as aerodynamic interference with the airframe, ground clearance, or noise (particularly in the case of the open rotors).
The above paragraphs have highlighted that numerous technological solutions are currently being investigated, demanding the development of proper design tools to assess the actual impact at the aircraft level. The first key enabler is the adoption of a multi-fidelity approach where simulation techniques, ranging from low- to high-fidelity, allow for the accurate investigation of aerodynamics, structures, propulsion integration, and mission performance in early-design phases, thus reducing uncertainty and design risk [63,64,65]. Building on this, multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) represents a second strategic pillar, enabling the integrated treatment of aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, cost, emissions, and operational aspects within unified optimization environments. These frameworks support design-space exploration, trade-off identification, the high-fidelity integration of design tools and treatment of uncertainties [66,67,68]. A third methodological innovation is the implementation of digital twins (DTs), i.e., dynamic virtual replicas of aircraft and subsystems continuously updated through sensor data and physics-based models. DTs enhance lifecycle management, predictive maintenance, and structural health monitoring [69,70,71]. Finally, a fourth emerging pillar is artificial intelligence, used to accelerate aerodynamic and structural optimization, create surrogate models, analyze aeroelastic phenomena, support uncertainty quantification, and enable damage detection, especially when combined with physics-informed approaches to ensure physical reliability [72,73,74,75].
As described above, the aviation sector is evolving to target the sustainability goal. Regarding propulsion, hybrid-electric-, hydrogen-, and SAF-powered aircraft are the most promising solutions, but due to their various weaknesses, SAF is expected to be the most practical near-term solution, hydrogen is regarded as a long-term decarbonization option, and batteries are regarded as a regional air mobility solution [76,77]. Unconventional airframes and advanced aero-propulsive integration are promising solutions, particularly when coupled with novel propulsion technologies; however, an increase in knowledge and maturity is to be pursued in order to increase the technology readiness level. In this regard, the development of advanced interdisciplinary design tools play a crucial role in designing robust, efficient, and sustainable next-generation aircraft. Within this broader framework, shaped by the evolution of propulsion technologies, airframe solutions, and innovative design methodologies, as well as by the need to assess their future potential and integration, this first edition of the Special Issue “Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of Aircraft for Climate-Neutral Transport Aviation”, available here [78], was conceived. This Special Issue set out to collect the most up-to-date methods, modeling strategies, and research results for the design of next-generation aircraft. In what follows, an overview of the research works published in this Special Issue is provided.

2. Overview of the Published Articles

A total of nine contributions are included in this Special Issue, addressing the topic of the multidisciplinary design optimization of aircraft to mitigate their impact on the climate. The paragraphs below provide an overview of these works, outlining their scope and emphasizing the key results achieved by each study.
Ref. [79] proposes an integrated operational and fleet-level methodology to assess the transition of short- and medium-haul aviation from conventional jet fuel to hydrogen propulsion under realistic infrastructural constraints. The approach combines preliminary aircraft sizing, route operability analysis, and fleet assignment optimization, explicitly accounting for the uneven availability and cost of hydrogen refueling across airports. A key innovation is the systematic modeling of hydrogen tinkering (i.e., carrying additional hydrogen from the departure airport in order to enable the return flight or reduce refueling at the destination) as an enabler of network coverage, allowing hydrogen-powered aircraft to reach destinations without refueling infrastructure within specific range limits, while quantifying the associated energy and cost penalties. The methodology is applied to representative European networks, exploring the impact of aircraft design range reduction on route coverage and efficiency. Results indicate that depending on hydrogen infrastructure availability and aircraft design range, hydrogen-powered aircraft can operate between 81% and 96% of the short- and medium-haul network considered. Building on this operational feasibility, the optimized fleet transition scenarios show that the associated aviation-induced temperature change can be reduced by up to 57% relative to an all-jet-fuel baseline, as quantified using the Average Temperature Response metric.
Ref. [80] presents an efficient methodology for mission power management optimization of parallel hybrid-electric regional aircraft suitable for the conceptual design phase. The methodology is embedded in the THEA-CODE multidisciplinary design framework and focuses on minimizing fuel consumption through the optimization of the power supply profile. In particular, the thermal engine supplied power is modeled as a time piecewise function composed of a pre-defined number of intervals: the value of thermal power supplied in each interval is treated as design variable, whereas the electric contribution is derived from the aircraft flight equilibrium equations. The main innovation lies in the parametric study on the number of intervals composing the piecewise function describing the power supplied by the thermal engine. The approach is applied to a 40-passenger regional aircraft with an entry into service in 2035 and design range of 600 nm. The results show that the optimum thermal power supply profile is composed of three intervals since finer discretizations do not yield additional performance benefits. The optimized configurations achieve significant block fuel reductions compared to a full-thermal reference at the expense of increased battery mass and MTOW.
Ref. [81] investigates the integration of an auxiliary solar power system (SPS) for short-range, daylight-operated aircraft, using seaplane air taxi operations as a representative case study. An enhanced multidisciplinary design and analysis framework is developed to assess SPS feasibility at the aircraft level, explicitly accounting for mission-dependent effects such as solar irradiance variability, cloud coverage, temperature-dependent photovoltaic efficiency, and realistic system weight estimation, including encapsulation and wiring. The framework is embedded within a multidisciplinary analysis and optimization environment and applied to Harbour Air’s DHC-2 Beaver operations. Results show that during peak seasonal operations, the SPS can supply the aircraft’s secondary electrical loads for up to 86% of mission time and generate excess power that could supplement hybrid-electric propulsion. Although current technologies yield modest fuel-burn reductions at mission level, a design-of-experiments analysis highlights clear trends toward increasing benefits, with higher cell efficiency and lower system mass. This study demonstrates that solar-assisted architectures can contribute to emissions reduction and improved ground operations, supporting their role as a viable technology enabler for climate-neutral regional aviation.
Ref. [82] presents a framework to quantify the full climate impact of individual real-world flights by explicitly accounting for both CO2 and non-CO2 effects. The methodology combines validated aircraft and engine models with atmospheric conditions that vary along the flight trajectory, allowing for the simulation of realistic operating conditions. Emissions of NOx and soot are evaluated using multiple correlation methods, while contrail effects are evaluated by explicitly accounting for the formation of persistent contrails along the flight trajectory. The computed emissions are then used as inputs to a Linear Temperature Response model, which estimates the resulting change in global surface temperature over a 77-year time horizon. The results show that non-CO2 effects driven by NOx emissions dominate the climate response shortly after the flight, whereas CO2 becomes the main contributor over longer time horizons. Moreover, for short-range missions, the climb phase is identified as a relevant contributor to the overall climate impact, highlighting the importance of segment-level analyses. Sensitivity analyses reveal differences up to 13–14% in temperature response depending on the emission modeling strategy, underscoring the importance of integrated, flight-specific climate assessment tools.
Ref. [83] presents a conceptual-level assessment of a radical short–medium-range aircraft configuration based on a blended-wing-body (BWB) airframe combined with turbo-electric distributed propulsion, developed within the European IMOTHEP project. The methodology relies on an integrated aircraft–mission–powertrain modeling framework that enables consistent whole-aircraft performance assessments under representative top-level aircraft requirements and 2035 entry-into-service technology assumptions. The main innovation lies in the quantitative isolation of the propulsion system contribution from the intrinsic aerodynamic benefits of the BWB architecture, accounting for both boundary-layer ingestion effects and the mass and drag penalties associated with electric components. Results indicate that the turbo-electric BWB configuration achieves a measurable reduction in fuel consumption compared to an A320neo-based reference aircraft. However, when benchmarked against an advanced BWB configuration with conventional turbofan propulsion and comparable technology assumptions, the additional fuel-saving potential of the turbo-electric architecture is found to be limited.
Ref. [84] investigates the potential of advanced pilot assistance systems to simultaneously reduce fuel consumption and noise during aircraft approach. Building on the Low-Noise Augmentation System (LNAS), a pilot assistance concept that continuously monitors the aircraft energy state to support energy-optimal, low-noise descents, the study introduces enhanced Flight Management System (FMS) functionalities developed within the SESAR DYNCAT project, aimed at improving aircraft energy management under realistic air traffic constraints. The methodology relies on real-time pilot-in-the-loop cockpit simulations using an Airbus A321 FMS test bench, coupled with high-fidelity fuel consumption assessment and detailed noise modeling via sonAIR, a validated high-fidelity aircraft noise simulation framework that models both airframe and engine noise and their propagation to the ground. Results show that the proposed system enables more uniform and optimized approach profiles, with engines operating mostly at idle; later deployment of high-lift devices and landing gear; and reduced use of speed brakes. On average, fuel savings of about 5 kg per approach are achieved, alongside localized noise reductions in the critical final approach segment. The study also highlights the existence of Pareto-optimal trade-offs between noise and fuel, demonstrating that operational optimization requires multi-objective strategies rather than single-metric minimization.
Ref. [85] presents a preliminary performance assessment of a box-wing medium-range aircraft powered by liquid hydrogen (LH2). An optimization-based multidisciplinary design framework is developed to retrofit the kerosene-based box-wing aircraft designed in the PARSIFAL project by integrating cryogenic hydrogen tanks within the fuselage. The core methodological contribution lies in the systematic exploration of tank sizing and layout solutions, accounting for thermo-structural tank design, hydrogen thermodynamics, and mission-level performance simulation. The study highlights the key trade-offs between available internal volume for LH2 storage, payload capacity, and achievable range. Results show that liquid hydrogen integration leads to significant payload penalties compared to the kerosene-fueled baseline, with reductions of about 50% at design range (5700 km) and around 25% for short-range missions (1500 km). Despite these penalties, the box-wing architecture emerges as a key enabler for hydrogen-powered operations. The retrofitted configuration can still transport approximately 230 passengers over 1500 km or about 170 passengers over 4800 km, figures that remain compatible with current medium-haul requirements. By contrast, an equivalent hydrogen retrofit applied to a conventional tube-and-wing aircraft can transport 90 passengers for a 4800 km mission.
Ref. [86] proposes a data-driven competency assessment framework for civil aviation pilots operating under wind shear conditions, addressing a critical safety challenge linked to adverse meteorological events. The study develops a wind-shear-operation-based competency model by decomposing pilot actions into observable behaviors and task-specific check items aligned with ICAO and IATA competency frameworks. Methodologically, the authors integrate three-dimensional competency assessment, capturing behavioral frequency, behavioral coverage, and threat-and-error management outcomes, with an optimization algorithm that automatically calibrates quantitative evaluation thresholds from historical simulator training data. The principal innovation lies in transforming traditionally subjective examiner judgments into a transparent and reproducible assessment process grounded in operational data. Validation using simulated wind shear scenarios from training session of 200 pilots demonstrates strong agreement with expert evaluations, achieving a correlation coefficient of 0.854 and an overall assessment accuracy of 93.33%. The proposed framework enhances the consistency, interpretability, and scalability of pilot competency evaluation, offering a robust foundation for evidence-based training under complex and safety-critical flight conditions.
Ref. [87] proposes a gate-to-gate simulation environment designed to capture both air traffic dynamics and localized operational details within the European Air Traffic System. The methodology combines flight trajectories and ground operations: airborne operations are modeled through BADA (Base of Aircraft Data), which provides a specific trajectory according to a predefined route, ground operations are instead described by a discrete-event simulation that explicitly represents turnaround processes and selected taxiing activities at airports. This allows for the analysis of interactions between airports, terminal areas, and traffic flows, allowing local operational phenomena to be studied in terms of their impact on the overall air traffic network. Monte Carlo simulations, driven by real operational delay statistics, demonstrate the capability of the framework to quantify network-scale performance effects such as delay propagation. The results highlight the suitability of the proposed environment as an facilitating tool for assessing future operational concepts, including the large-scale introduction of alternative-propulsion-based aircraft.

3. Concluding Remarks

Climate-neutral aviation cannot rely on isolated technological breakthroughs alone. Novel propulsion solutions such as hybrid-electric, hydrogen, and sustainable aviation fuels, together with unconventional airframes and advanced aero-propulsive integration concepts, require advanced modeling, simulation, and optimization environments. Multi-fidelity and multidisciplinary optimization frameworks, digital twins, and AI-driven tools emerge as key methodological enablers capable of consistently integrating aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, operations, and climate metrics from the early-design stages. Only through this tight coupling of technology development and robust modeling strategies can the aviation community assess realistic impacts, reveal trade-offs, manage uncertainties, and effectively support the transition toward sustainable aircraft concepts.
The contributions included in this Special Issue have strengthened this position, addressing hydrogen transition strategies at fleet and network level, hybrid-electric power-management optimization, the integration of solar-powered aircraft to support regional operations, the quantification of climate impact, including non-CO2 effects, radical configurations such as blended-wing-body with turbo-electric propulsion, and hydrogen integration within box-wing architecture. Complementary research has highlighted the role of advanced pilot assistance systems in simultaneously mitigating noise and fuel consumption, proposed data-driven pilot competency assessment frameworks for safety-critical operations, and introduced gate-to-gate simulation tools to understand future traffic and operational scenarios. Collectively, these papers demonstrate the central role of multidisciplinary, multi-scale, and multi-objective design environments in assessing the feasibility, performance, and climate effectiveness of next-generation aircraft.
The results presented in this first edition clearly underline both the maturity of the field and the significant work still required to achieve sustainability goals. Building on the scientific advances gathered herein, the next edition of this Special Issue [88] will further expand in scope, encompassing higher technology readiness, enhanced integration on technological innovations and modeling frameworks, and stronger links with operations, infrastructure, and regulatory evolution. The aim is to continue fostering a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and forward-looking discussion, providing the community with the robust tools and insights necessary to design, enable, and evaluate the sustainable aircraft and air transport systems of the future.

Acknowledgments

I sincerely thank all the authors whose valuable contributions made this Special Issue possible. I am also grateful to the referees for their careful and professional reviews, which ensured the high scientific quality of the published works. My special thanks go to the Aerospace Editorial Office for their constant, professional, and highly appreciated support.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Platzer, M.F. A perspective on the urgency for green aviation. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Graver, B. Polishing My Crystal Ball: Airline Traffic in 2050, International Council of Clean Transportation Report 2022. Available online: https://theicct.org/global-aviation-airline-traffic-jan22/ (accessed on 26 December 2025).
  3. Rupcic, L.; Pierrat, E.; Saavedra-Rubio, K.; Thonemann, N.; Ogugua, C.; Laurent, A. Environmental impacts in the civil aviation sector: Current state and guidance. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2023, 119, 103717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Graver, B.; Zheng, X.S.; Rutherford, D.; Mukhopadhaya, J.; Pronk, E. Vision 2050 Aligning Aviation with the Paris Agreement; International Council of Clean Transportation Report; International Council of Clean Transportation: Washington, DC, USA, 2022; Available online: https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Aviation-2050-Report-A4-v6.pdf (accessed on 26 December 2025).
  5. Lee, D.S.; Fahey, D.W.; Skowron, A.; Allen, M.R.; Burkhardt, U.; Chen, Q.; Doherty, S.J.; Freeman, S.; Forster, P.M.; Fuglestvedt, J.; et al. The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018. Atmos. Environ. 2021, 244, 117834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Graver, B.; Rutherford, D.; Zheng, S. CO2 Emissions from Commercial Aviation: 2013, 2018, and 2019; International Council of Clean Transportation Report; International Council of Clean Transportation: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; Available online: https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CO2-commercial-aviation-oct2020.pdf (accessed on 26 December 2025).
  7. Carrera, E.; Palaia, G.; Abu Salem, K. The green transition in commercial aviation. Rend. Fis. Acc. Lincei 2025, 36, 785–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Platzer, M.F. The prospects for green aviation by 2050. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Afonso, F.; Sohst, M.; Diogo, C.M.; Rodrigues, S.S.; Ferreira, A.; Ribeiro, I.; Marques, R.; Rego, F.F.; Sohouli, A.; Portugal-Pereira, J.; et al. Strategies towards a more sustainable aviation: A systematic review. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 137, 100878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Delbecq, S.; Fontane, J.; Gourdain, N.; Planès, T.; Simatos, F. Sustainable aviation in the context of the Paris Agreement: A review of prospective scenarios and their technological mitigation levers. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Abu Salem, K.; Palaia, G.; Quarta, A.A. Review of hybrid-electric aircraft technologies and designs: Critical analysis and novel solutions. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kuśmierek, A.; Galiński, C.; Stalewski, W. Review of the hybrid gas—Electric aircraft propulsion systems versus alternative systems. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rendón, M.A.; Sánchez, R.C.D.; Gallo, M.J.; Anzai, A.H. Aircraft Hybrid-Electric Propulsion: Development Trends, Challenges and Opportunities. J. Control. Autom. Electr. Syst. 2021, 32, 1244–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Soleymani, M.; Mostafavi, V.; Hebert, M.; Kelouwani, S.; Boulon, L. Hydrogen propulsion systems for aircraft, a review on recent advances and ongoing challenges. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2024, 91, 137–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tiwari, S.; Pekris, M.J.; Doherty, J.J. A review of liquid hydrogen aircraft and propulsion technologies. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2024, 57, 1174–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Adler, E.J.; Martins, J.R.R.A. Hydrogen-powered aircraft: Fundamental concepts, key technologies, and environmental impacts. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Undavalli, V.; Olatunde, O.B.G.; Boylu, R.; Wei, C.; Haeker, J.; Hamilton, J.; Khandelwal, B. Recent advancements in sustainable aviation fuels. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 136, 100876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cabrera, E.; de Sousa, J.M.M. Use of Sustainable Fuels in Aviation—A Review. Energies 2022, 15, 2440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Overton, J. An Introduction to Sustainable Aviation Fuels Part 1 of a Series, Sustainable Aviation Fuels: A Critical Emissions Mitigation Strategy Gaining Momentum; EESI: Washington, DC, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  20. Figueroa, R.Q.; Cavallaro, R.; Cini, A. Feasibility studies on regional aircraft retrofitted with hybrid-electric powertrains. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2024, 151, 109246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Marciello, V.; Di Stasio, M.; Ruocco, M.; Trifari, V.; Nicolosi, F.; Meindl, M.; Lemoine, B.; Caliandro, P. Design Exploration for Sustainable Regional Hybrid-Electric Aircraft: A Study Based on Technology Forecasts. Aerospace 2023, 10, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Decerio, D.P.; Hall, D.K. Benefits of Parallel Hybrid Electric Propulsion for Transport Aircraft. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2022, 8, 4054–4066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Greenwood, E.; Brentner, K.S.; Rau, R.F.; Gan, Z.F.T. Challenges and opportunities for low noise electric aircraft. Int. J. Aeroacoust. 2022, 21, 315–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mavris, D.; Pattanayak, T. Battery technology for sustainable aviation: A review of current trends and future prospects. Appl. Energy 2025, 397, 126356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Asli, M.; König, P.; Sharma, D.; Pontika, E.; Huete, J.; Konda, K.R.; Mathiazhagan, A.; Xie, T.; Höschler, K.; Laskaridis, P. Thermal management challenges in hybrid-electric propulsion aircraft. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2024, 144, 100967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Coutinho, M.; Bento, D.; Souza, A.; Cruz, R.; Afonso, F.; Lau, F.; Suleman, A.; Barbosa, F.R.; Gandolfi, R.; Junior, W.A.; et al. A review on the recent developments in thermal management systems for hybrid-electric aircraft. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2023, 277, 120427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lenzen, M. Current State of Development of Electricity-Generating Technologies: A Literature Review. Energies 2010, 3, 462–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Trainelli, L.; Salucci, F.; Riboldi, C.E.D.; Rolando, A.; Bigoni, F. Optimal Sizing and Operation of Airport Infrastructures in Support of Electric-Powered Aviation. Aerospace 2021, 8, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ansell, P.J.; Haran, K.S. Electrified airplanes: A path to zero-emission air travel. IEEE Electrif. Mag. 2020, 8, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ziemińska-Stolarska, A.; Sobulska, M.; Izquierdo, D.; Cruz, D.N.D.; Pietrzak, M.; Zbicińśki, I. Life Cycle Assessment of Hybrid-Electric Aircraft Technologies—A Review. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 49989–49999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Scholz, A.E.; Trifonov, D.; Hornung, M. Environmental life cycle assessment and operating cost analysis of a conceptual battery hybrid-electric transport aircraft. CEAS Aeronaut. J. 2022, 13, 215–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bagarello, S.; Campagna, D.; Benedetti, I. A survey on hydrogen tanks for sustainable aviation. Green Energy Intell. Transp. 2024, 4, 100224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mital, S.K.; Gyekenyesi, J.Z.; Arnold, S.M.; Sullivan, R.M.; Manderscheid, J.M.; Murthy, P.L.N. Review of Current State of the Art and Key Design Issues with Potential Solutions for Liquid Hydrogen Cryogenic Storage Tank Structures for Aircraft Applications; Technical Reports, Server ID:20060056194; NASA: Washington, DC, USA, 2006. Available online: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20060056194 (accessed on 26 December 2025).
  34. Bagarello, S.; Campagna, D.; Benedetti, I. Computational thermo-mechanical modelling and design-space exploration of cryogenic hydrogen tanks for aviation. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2026, 168, 110755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Degirmenci, H.; Uludag, A.; Ekici, S.; Karakoc, T.H. Challenges, prospects and potential future orientation of hydrogen aviation and the airport hydrogen supply network: A state-of-art review. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Rasul, M.G.; Hazrat, M.A.; Sattar, M.A.; Jahirul, M.I.; Shearer, M.J. The future of hydrogen: Challenges on production, storage and applications. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022, 272, 116326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Watson, M.J.; Machado, P.; da Silva, A.; Saltar, Y.; Ribeiro, C.; Nascimento, C.; Dowling, A. Sustainable aviation fuel technologies, costs, emissions, policies, and markets: A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 449, 141472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Shahriar, M.F.; Khanal, A. The current techno-economic, environmental, policy status and perspectives of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Fuel 2022, 325, 124905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bravo-Mosquera, P.D.; Catalano, F.M.; Zingg, D.W. Unconventional aircraft for civil aviation: A review of concepts and design methodologies. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2022, 131, 100813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Cavallaro, R.; Demasi, L. Challenges, ideas, and innovations of joined-wing configurations: A concept from the past, an opportunity for the future. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2016, 87, 1–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Abu Salem, K.; Palaia, G.; Bravo-Mosquera, P.D.; Quarta, A.A. A review of novel and non-conventional propulsion integrations for next-generation aircraft. Designs 2024, 8, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Abu Salem, K.; Palaia, G.; Frediani, A.; Carrera, E. The box-wing configuration: A critical review of design approaches and applications. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2025, 157, 101108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Okonkwo, P.; Smith, H. Review of evolving trends in blended wing body aircraft design. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2016, 82, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wang, Z.; Wang, Y.; Wang, M. Review on the Development of TBW Configuration Civil Aircraft: History, Progress and Prospect. In Proceedings of the 2nd Aerospace Frontiers Conference (AFC 2025), Beijing, China, 11–14 April 2025; Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer: Singapore, 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Abu Salem, K.; Palaia, G.; Carini, M.; Méheut, M.; Maganzi, M.; Falcone, C. A CFD-Based Collaborative Approach for Box-Wing Aircraft Aerodynamic Assessment: The PARSIFAL Study Case. Aerotec. Missili Spaz. 2023, 102, 385–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Nickol, C.L.; Haller, W.J. Assessment of the Performance Potential of Advanced Subsonic Transport Concepts for NASA’s s Environmentally Responsible Aviation Project. In Proceedings of the 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA, 4–8 January 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Meadows, N.A.; Schetz, J.A.; Kapania, R.K.; Bhatia, M.; Seber, G. Multidisciplinary design optimization of medium-range transonic truss-braced wing transport aircraft. J. Aircr. 2012, 49, 1844–1856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Scardaoni, M.P.P.; Montemurro, M.; Panettieri, E. PrandtlPlane wing-box least-weight design: A multi-scale optimisation approach. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2020, 106, 106156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Liebeck, R.H. Design of the blended wing body subsonic transport. J. Aircr. 2004, 41, 10–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chiozzotto, P.G. Wing weight estimation in conceptual design: A method for strut-braced wings considering static aeroelastic effects. CEAS Aeronaut. J. 2016, 7, 499–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Palaia, G.; Abu Salem, K.; Quarta, A.A. Comparative Analysis of Hybrid-Electric Regional Aircraft with Tube-and-Wing and Box-Wing Airframes: A Performance Study. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 7894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Gilbrook, A.; Ma, Y.; Elham, A. Effect of ultra-high aspect ratio wings and distributed propulsion on the viability of fully electric regional aircraft. Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 2025, 97, 272–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Centracchio, F.; Rossetti, M.; Iemma, U. Approach to the Weight Estimation in the Conceptual Design of Hybrid-Electric-Powered Unconventional Regional Aircraft. J. Adv. Transp. 2018, 2018, 6320197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Cipolla, V.; Zanetti, D.; Abu Salem, K.; Binante, V.; Palaia, G. A Parametric Approach for Conceptual Integration and Performance Studies of Liquid Hydrogen Short–Medium Range Aircraft. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 6857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Jagtap, S.S.; Childs, P.R.; Stettler, M.E. Conceptual design-optimisation of a subsonic hydrogen-powered long-range blended-wing-body aircraft. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2024, 96, 639–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wahler, N.F.M.; Ma, Y.; Elham, A. Conceptual Design and Aerostructural Trade-Offs in Hydrogen- Powered Strut-Braced Wing Aircraft: Insights into Dry and Wet Ultra-High Aspect Ratio Wings. Aerospace 2025, 12, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Fard, M.T.; He, J.; Huang, H.; Cao, Y. Aircraft distributed electric propulsion technologies—A review. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2022, 8, 4067–4090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Moirou, N.G.M.; Sanders, D.S.; Laskaridis, P. Advancements and prospects of boundary layer ingestion propulsion concepts. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 138, 100897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Magrini, A.; Benini, E.; Yao, H.D.; Postma, J.; Sheaf, C. A review of installation effects of ultra-high bypass ratio engines. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2020, 119, 100680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Van Zante, D.E.; Collier, F.; Orton, A.; Khalid, S.A.; Wojno, J.P.; Wood, T.H. Progress in open rotor propulsors: The FAA/GE/NASA open rotor test campaign. Aeronaut. J. 2014, 118, 1181–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Hospodář, P.; Klesa, J.; Demovič, D.; Žižkovský, N. Aerodynamic and Structural Aspects of a Distributed Propulsion System for Commuter Airplane. Aerospace 2022, 9, 712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hall, D.K.; Huang, A.C.; Uranga, A.; Greitzer, E.M.; Drela, M.; Sato, S. Boundary layer ingestion propulsion benefit for transport aircraft. J. Propuls. Power 2017, 33, 1118–1129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Martins, J.R. Aerodynamic design optimization: Challenges and perspectives. Comput. Fluids 2022, 239, 105391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Cavagna, L.; Ricci, S.; Riccobene, L. Structural sizing, aeroelastic analysis, and optimization in aircraft conceptual design. J. Aircr. 2011, 48, 1840–1855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Marco, A.D.; Trifari, V.; Nicolosi, F.; Ruocco, M. A simulation-based performance analysis tool for aircraft design workflows. Aerospace 2020, 7, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Saporito, M.; Da Ronch, A.; Bartoli, N.; Defoort, S. Robust multidisciplinary analysis and optimization for conceptual design of flexible aircraft under dynamic aeroelastic constraints. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2023, 138, 108349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ciampa, P.D.; Nagel, B. AGILE Paradigm: The next generation collaborative MDO for the development of aeronautical systems. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2020, 119, 100643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Werner-Westphal, C.; Heinze, W.; Horst, P. Multidisciplinary integrated preliminary design applied to unconventional aircraft configurations. J. Aircr. 2008, 45, 581–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Eisenhut, D.; Bender, A.; Grüning, N.; Mangold, J.; Strohmayer, A. Comparison of Actual Hybrid-Electric Flights with a Digital Twin in a Preliminary Aircraft Design Environment. Aerospace 2025, 12, 401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Tavares, S.M.; Ribeiro, J.A.; Ribeiro, B.A.; de Castro, P.M. Aircraft structural design and life-cycle assessment through digital twins. Designs 2024, 8, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Xiong, M.; Wang, H. Digital twin applications in aviation industry: A review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2022, 121, 5677–5692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zhang, S.; Dinavahi, V.; Liang, T. Towards hydrogen-powered electric aircraft: Physics-informed machine learning based multi-domain modeling and real-time digital twin emulation on FPGA. Energy 2025, 322, 135451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wang, Y.R.; Ma, Y.H. Application of Deep Learning Models to Predict Panel Flutter in Aerospace Structures. Aerospace 2024, 11, 677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Li, J.; Du, X.; Martins, J.R. Machine learning in aerodynamic shape optimization. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2022, 134, 100849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Le Clainche, S.; Ferrer, E.; Gibson, S.; Cross, E.; Parente, A.; Vinuesa, R. Improving aircraft performance using machine learning: A review. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2023, 138, 108354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Ansell, P.J. Review of sustainable energy carriers for aviation: Benefits, challenges, and future viability. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2023, 141, 100919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Abrantes, I.; Ferreira, A.F.; Silva, A.; Costa, M. Sustainable aviation fuels and imminent technologies—CO2 emissions evolution towards 2050. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 313, 127937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Multidisciplinary Design Optimization for Climate-Neutral Transport Aviation (1st Edition), Aerospace, Special Issue, 2025. Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/aerospace/special_issues/HHM62301BB (accessed on 26 December 2025).
  79. Sirtori, G.; Trainelli, L. From Potential Routes to Climate Impact: Assessing the Fleet Transition to Hydrogen-Powered Aircraft. Aerospace 2025, 12, 1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Palaia, G.; Abu Salem, K.; Carrera, E. Efficient Methodology for Power Management Optimization of Hybrid-Electric Aircraft. Aerospace 2025, 12, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Liscouët-Hanke, S.; Mir, M.; Bashir, M. Exploration of Solar Power System Integration for Sustainable Air Transportation—A Case Study for Seaplane Air Taxi Operations. Aerospace 2025, 12, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Awde, M.; Stuart, C. Characterizing the Full Climate Impact of Individual Real-World Flights Using a Linear Temperature Response Model. Aerospace 2025, 12, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Vankan, W.J.; Lammen, W.F.; Scheers, E.; Dewitte, P.J.; Defoort, S. Concept Evaluation of Radical Short–Medium-Range Aircraft with Turbo-Electric Propulsion. Aerospace 2024, 11, 477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Wunderli, J.M.; Meister, J.; Boyer, J.; Gerber, M.; Bauer, T.; Abdelmoula, F. Pilot Assistance Systems for Energy-Optimized Approaches: Is It Possible to Reduce Fuel Consumption and Noise at the Same Time? Aerospace 2024, 11, 450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Palaia, G.; Abu Salem, K.; Carrera, E. Preliminary Performance Analysis of Medium-Range Liquid Hydrogen-Powered Box-Wing Aircraft. Aerospace 2024, 11, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Li, F.; Xu, X.; Li, J.; Hu, H.; Zhao, M.; Sun, H. Wind Shear Operation-Based Competency Assessment Model for Civil Aviation Pilots. Aerospace 2024, 11, 363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Yildiz, B.; Förster, P.; Langner, J.; Feuerle, T.; Hecker, P. A Hybrid Gate-to-Gate Simulation Environment for the Air Traffic System. Aerospace 2023, 10, 882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Multidisciplinary Design Optimization for Climate-Neutral Transport Aviation (2nd Edition), Aerospace, Special Issue, 2025. Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/aerospace/special_issues/B97NVC5WPS (accessed on 26 December 2025).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.