DARPA/USAF Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON) program

What exactly does that mean? What was the planned duration of the glide phase? Does this mean they simply lost the data link before it "splashed down" or something more serious?
 
Unknown, just following DARPA tweets.

Latest:

Downrange assets did not reacquire tracking or telemetry. #HTV2 has an autonomous flight termination capability. More to follow.
 
jjnodice said:
blackstar said:
Hypersonics is in trouble. The powers that be don't want to fund it. Even if this test is successful, don't expect that it will go any further.
Click to expand...

Which powers that be? Congress? President? Military? All of the above? Give us names. ;)
Click to expand...

Hypersonics funding for NASA was cut in the most recent proposed budget, and the USAF research budget for hypersonics was also chopped. I don't know who or why, but there was clearly a decision made at least at the agency/department level (NASA/USAF) to reduce the funding, and that decision must have had approval from higher up. Hypersonics in general needed a success with X-51 or HTV-2 and they didn't get one. That doesn't help them.
 
I'm shocked. SHOCKED I tell you. ::) This is what happens when a branch of research is so disorganized and starved for resources that you are effectively doing something for the first time - every time.
 
Some official comments:

http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2011/2011/08/11DARPA_HYPERSONIC_VEHICLE_ADVANCES_TECHNICAL_KNOWLEDGE.aspx

Sounds like the transition from reentry to glide phase bit it again. I'll have to retract my comment that it made it farther than the last flight.
 
So Far, So Good: DARPA's Falcon Hypersonic Test Vehicle-2 launched from Vandenberg AFB, Calif., aboard a Minotaur IV rocket early morning on Aug. 11. It was second launch attempt for HTV-2, the first failed to complete its 30-minute glide over the Pacific Ocean due to "higher-than-predicted yaw, which coupled into roll," according to the conclusions of an independent review panel. However, the vehicle still managed to collect nine minutes of "unique flight data, including 139 seconds of Mach 22 to Mach 17 aerodynamic data," according to a factsheet on DARPA's website. HTV-2 is an unmanned, maneuverable aircraft that glides through the Earth's atmosphere at an astounding Mach 20—the equivalent of flying from New York City to Los Angeles in less than 12 minutes. The vehicle design and trajectory for flight were optimized based on lessons learned in the first flight. "The goal of the second flight is to validate current assumptions and increase technical understanding of the hypersonic flight regime," according to the factsheet.
 
sferrin said:
Too bad nobody will get to. It's cancelled.
Click to expand...

It was only planned for two flights, so it's over, but not canceled. We'll see if the USAF single planned flight to demonstrate conventional prompt global strike is still a go for 2012.
 
Data Gleaned From "Global Strike" Glider Flight Before Crash Friday, Aug. 12, 2011 A U.S. hypersonic drone aircraft sent out information for more than nine minutes before an "anomaly" disrupted transmissions during a flight test on Thursday, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency said (see GSN, Aug. 11; U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release, Aug. 11).
The Hypersonic Technology Vehicle-2 is one system being considered to provide the United States with the "prompt global strike" capability to deliver non-nuclear warheads to any location in the world within an hour. Washington could tap that asset to strike an Iranian atomic facility or hit a North Korean missile prior to liftoff, the New York Times reported. Such a capability might also be employed against a critical terrorist location if no other weapon could carry out a sufficiently rapid attack (Thom Shanker, New York Times, Aug. 12).
Preliminary findings suggest the aircraft crashed into the Pacific Ocean midway through its intended flight course, the Defense Department office said.
The glider started on its planned flight path and "transitioned to Mach 20 aerodynamic flight" after a video feed confirmed its detachment from a rocket, according to an agency press release. "This transition represents a critical knowledge and control point in maneuvering atmospheric hypersonic flight," the document states (U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release).
Still, “there’s no way you can call it a success," one insider told Wired magazine. "Let’s be blunt about it” (Noah Schachtman, Wired, Aug. 11).
The Minotaur 4 booster rocket lifted off with the glider at 7:45 a.m. local time from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.
“Here’s what we know,” Maj. Chris Schulz, who heads the glider program, said in the DARPA statement. “We know how to boost the aircraft to near space. We know how to insert the aircraft into atmospheric hypersonic flight. We do not yet know how to achieve the desired control during the aerodynamic phase of flight. It’s vexing; I’m confident there is a solution. We have to find it.”
The agency must address unique aerodynamic, aerothermal, and command-and-control issues in each stage of the glider's movement, Schulz said.
“To address these obstacles, DARPA has assembled a team of experts that will analyze the flight data collected during today’s test flight, expanding our technical understanding of this incredibly harsh flight regime,” he said. “As today’s flight indicates, high-Mach flight in the atmosphere is virtually uncharted territory” (U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release).
The glider also failed nine minutes into its first trial flight, conducted in April 2010, the Times reported (see GSN, Aug. 19, 2010; Shanker, New York Times).
“Prior to flight, the technical team completed the most sophisticated simulations and extensive wind tunnel tests possible. But these ground tests have not yielded the necessary knowledge. Filling the gaps in our understanding of hypersonic flight in this demanding regime requires that we be willing to fly,” DARPA Director Regina Dugan said in the statement. “In the April 2010 test, we obtained four times the amount of data previously available at these speeds. Today more than 20 air, land, sea and space data collection systems were operational. We’ll learn. We’ll try again. That’s what it takes” (U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release).
This week's test, though, was intended to be the final DARPA trial of the aircraft, Wired reported. The Air Force or another military service might be hesitant to take control of the program, given its setbacks, according to the magazine.
“Yes, we got this wonderful data set from the two flights. Yes, you can cross-reference it with the wind tunnel data,” an informed source said. “Whether that’s worth $308 million, I’m not so sure" (Schachtman, Wired).
The glider is theoretically suited to reach Los Angeles from New York City in under 12 minutes, Agence France-Presse reported. Such an aircraft could prove more capable of carrying out evasive movements than a conventionally armed ICBM, and experts said it does not pose the same risk of being inaccurately identified as a nuclear weapon and prompting an atomic retaliation (see GSN, April 7).
"The military has a long way to go before hypersonic vehicles are ready for deployment," Lexington Institute specialist Loren Thompson said (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Aug. 11).
 
“As today’s flight indicates, high-Mach flight in the atmosphere is virtually uncharted territory” (U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release).

:(

did I imagine the space shuttle and other previous attempts on hypersonic gliding "craft"
 
Catalytic said:
“As today’s flight indicates, high-Mach flight in the atmosphere is virtually uncharted territory” (U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release).

:(

did I imagine the space shuttle and other previous attempts on hypersonic gliding "craft"
Click to expand...

Someone should mail them a copy of Lighting Bolts. ::)
 
Catalytic said:
“As today’s flight indicates, high-Mach flight in the atmosphere is virtually uncharted territory” (U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency release).

:(

did I imagine the space shuttle and other previous attempts on hypersonic gliding "craft"
Click to expand...

That's what I wanted to know. The space shuttle comes in at 17 thousand MPH, the HTV was doing 13 thousand MPH. Wasn't there several lifting body tests that did actual re-entry prior to the shuttle?

Yes, I'm aware of this thread: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,722.0.html

But which ones did a re-entry at shuttle speeds?
 
sublight said:
That's what I wanted to know. The space shuttle comes in at 17 thousand MPH, the HTV was doing 13 thousand MPH. Wasn't there several lifting body tests that did actual re-entry prior to the shuttle?

Yes, I'm aware of this thread: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,722.0.html

But which ones did a re-entry at shuttle speeds?
Click to expand...

The shuttle has a hypersonic lift to drag ratio of about... 1. HTV-2 has a L/D of between 3 and 4 (closer to 4 than 3). HTV-2 was designed to be able to glide and maneuver in ways the shuttle and previous MaRV-like vehicles could not. With that came severe technical challenges across the board.
The HTV-2 flights have demonstrated a number of things that will be critical for hypersonic flight test to move forward. Communication with the vehicle worked. GPS worked. All of the new range safety and tracking technology built into the vehicle worked - that lays to foundation for every program that comes after this one.
 
I guess we wont know for the foreseeable future if the mysterious Have Space project (HGV / strategic boost glide vehicle) has already answered any of the questions that HTV-2 was supposed to address.
 
More info on the flight is coming out:

http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2011/2011/09/11_DARPA_HYPERSONIC_VEHICLE_SPLASH_DOWN_CONFIRMED.aspx

Good to hear that this failure is unrelated to flight one's failure. At least the ball got moved forward some.
 
...
 

Attachments

  • HTV-2-.jpg
    HTV-2-.jpg
    16 KB · Views: 738
LENS I at CUBRC
http://www.aiaa.org/documents/industry/presentations/MHolden_Culpeper_Lecture_2011.ppt
 
Maybe not so bad as initially thought?
Take the HTV-2. (Or try.)

The highly secretive HTV-2 is a global strike program expected to feature an unmanned, boost-glide vehicle that could carry a payload to a target at Mach 20.

"Twenty times the speed of sound," Gabriel told officials in Washington about the HTV-2, which would make it the fastest high lift-to-drag ratio aircraft ever built. "That means anywhere in the world in 60 minutes or less. Or New York to Los Angeles in 11 minutes and 20 seconds, with the surface of the vehicle at blast furnace temperatures--3,500 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature of molten steel. We are essentially burning the airfoil as we fly it. It might seem impossible. It's not. It's just hard."

There have been two test flights of the HTV-2 so far. The first failed because, Gabriel testified, planners underestimated an aerodynamic effect of hypersonic flight.
During a second test, the prototype reached Mach 20 for a full three minutes. Though both aircraft were ultimately lost, the two tests combined yielded more data about hypersonic travel than has been collected in the past 40 years.

From: For DARPA, Defense Planning Proceeds at Mach 20
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2012/03/21/for-darpa-defense-planning-proceeds-at-mach-20
 
Flight 2 initiated it's self-destruct (nosedive into the ocean) protocol after a couple minutes of cruise. I think they blamed it on software.
 
ENGINEERING REVIEW BOARD CONCLUDES REVIEW OF HTV-2 SECOND TEST FLIGHT

April 20, 2012

Aerodynamic design validated and new understanding of thermal material properties gained

Following an extensive seven-month analysis of data collected from the Aug. 11, 2011, second flight of DARPA’s Hypersonic Technology Vehicle (HTV-2), an independent engineering review board (ERB) investigating the cause of a flight anomaly completed its report. The findings of the ERB validated the vehicle’s aerodynamic design and uncovered new information regarding the thermal material properties of the vehicle.

“The greatest achievement from Flight Two, which the ERB’s findings underscored, was that we successfully incorporated aerodynamic knowledge gained from the first flight into the second flight,” said Air Force Maj. Chris Schulz, DARPA program manager, who holds a doctorate in aerospace engineering.

A technology demonstration and data-gathering platform, the HTV-2’s second test flight was conducted to validate current models and increase technical understanding of the hypersonic regime. The flight successfully demonstrated stable aerodynamically-controlled flight at speeds up to Mach 20 (twenty times the speed of sound) for nearly three minutes. Approximately nine minutes into the test flight, the vehicle experienced a series of shocks culminating in an anomaly, which prompted the autonomous flight safety system to use the vehicle’s aerodynamic systems to make a controlled descent and splashdown into the ocean.

“The initial shockwave disturbances experienced during second flight, from which the vehicle was able to recover and continue controlled flight, exceeded by more than 100 times what the vehicle was designed to withstand,” said DARPA Acting Director, Kaigham J. Gabriel. “That’s a major validation that we’re advancing our understanding of aerodynamic control for hypersonic flight.”

The ERB concluded that the “most probable cause of the HTV-2 Flight 2 premature flight termination was unexpected aeroshell degradation, creating multiple upsets of increasing severity that ultimately activated the Flight Safety System.”

Based on state-of-the-art models, ground testing of high-temperature materials and understanding of thermal effects in other more well-known flight regimes, a gradual wearing away of the vehicle’s skin as it reached stress tolerance limits was expected. However, larger than anticipated portions of the vehicle’s skin peeled from the aerostructure. The resulting gaps created strong, impulsive shock waves around the vehicle as it travelled nearly 13,000 miles per hour, causing the vehicle to roll abruptly. Based on knowledge gained from the first flight in 2010 and incorporated into the second flight, the vehicle’s aerodynamic stability allowed it to right itself successfully after several shockwave-induced rolls. Eventually, however, the severity of the continued disturbances finally exceeded the vehicle’s ability to recover.

According to Schulz, “HTV-2’s first flight test corrected our models regarding aerodynamic design within this flight regime. We applied that data in flight test two, which ultimately led to stable aerodynamically controlled flight. Data collected during the second test flight revealed new knowledge about thermal-protective material properties and uncertainties for Mach 20 flight inside the atmosphere, which can now be used to adjust our assumptions based on actual flight data and modify our modeling and simulation to better characterize thermal uncertainties and determine how to assess integrated thermal systems.”

Aerodynamic assumptions and extrapolations from known flight regimes proved inadequate when preparing for HTV-2 inaugural flight test. The data from second flight revealed that extrapolating from known flight regimes and relying solely on advanced thermal modeling and ground testing could not successfully predict the harsh realities of Mach 20 atmospheric flight.

“A group of nationally-recognized experts from government and academia came together to analyze the flight data and conduct extensive additional modeling and ground testing for this review,” Schulz said. “The result of these findings is a profound advancement in understanding the areas we need to focus on to advance aerothermal structures for future hypersonic vehicles. Only actual flight data could have revealed this to us.”

Moving forward, the HTV-2 program will incorporate new knowledge gained to improve models for characterizing thermal uncertainties and heat-stress allowances for the vehicle’s outer shell. The remediation phase will involve further analysis and ground testing using flight data to validate new tools for this flight regime. The ERB findings and remediation phase efforts will inform policy, acquisition and operational decisions for future Conventional Prompt Global Strike initiatives executed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Acquisition, Technology & Logistics, Strategic Warfare directorate—the goal of which, ultimately, is to have the capability to reach anywhere in the world in less than one hour.
Click to expand...
http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2012/04/20.aspx
 
DSE said:
sublight said:
sferrin said:
Meant to post this some time ago. Video of the HTV-2 in flight.
Click to expand...
Nice, except now I have the hots for the former DARPA director.... :)
Click to expand...

You're safe, she recently resigned.
Click to expand...

Do you know why she resigned? She seemed to be enthusiastic about DARPA.
 
I imagine having, "DARPA Director" on your resume would open all kinds of interesting doors.
 
sferrin said:
I imagine having, "DARPA Director" on your resume would open all kinds of interesting doors.
Click to expand...

Not any more than any other gov't R&D/science agency. It is not that special of an organization.
 
Byeman said:
sferrin said:
I imagine having, "DARPA Director" on your resume would open all kinds of interesting doors.
Click to expand...

Not any more than any other gov't R&D/science agency. It is not that special of an organization.
Click to expand...

What other agency has it's hands in as big a variety of R&D projects of similar caliber?
 
sferrin said:
Byeman said:
sferrin said:
I imagine having, "DARPA Director" on your resume would open all kinds of interesting doors.
Click to expand...

Not any more than any other gov't R&D/science agency. It is not that special of an organization.
Click to expand...

What other agency has it's hands in as big a variety of R&D projects of similar caliber?
Click to expand...

There are not that many and they are not that big.

NASA, DOE, NRL, AFRL, CIA, NRO, etc.

Being the head of DARPA means you are an administrator and not engineer.

The "mistique" surrounding DARPA is unwarranted, it is no more inovative than other equivalent agencies.
 
Interesting that it hit "mainstream news" in some respects:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2133584/Hypersonic-drone-tore-apart-hull-heated-3-500-degrees-20-TIMES-speed-sound.html
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom