Tell me about a time you led a cross-functional team (e.g., aerodynamics, structures, systems) to resolve a significant aircraft design trade-off. How did you align conflicting priorities, and what was the final design decision and rationale?

Question

VirtualInterview.AI · Accepted Answer

On a regional turboprop program, I led a 12-person configuration team looking at increasing wingspan to hit a tough field-length and climb requirement. Aero wanted a 9% span increase for about 4% better L/D, but structures showed that drove a 6% weight penalty at the wing–fuselage junction and pushed us close to gear load limits. Systems was worried about flap complexity and cost.

I pulled everyone into a focused three-week trade study, agreed on a common scoring metric (DOC, OEW, and cert risk weighted 50/30/20), and had each discipline quantify impacts in the same units—either kilograms, kilowatts, or dollars per cycle. That cut a lot of opinion-based debate. We landed on a 5% span increase with modest wingtip devices and a simplified double-slotted flap. We still gained ~2.5% L/D, kept the weight hit under 3%, met the field-length margin by 90 meters, and avoided any new gear certification tests.

Sample Answer

Keywords