NACA Langley’s Mach 18 Low Lift/Drag Glider - Becker’s Winged Satellite

SpaceMonk

ACCESS: Restricted
Senior Member
Joined
12 November 2021
Messages
36
Reaction score
77
The successor to the X-15 was - a winged satellite? In the mid-1950s, NACA was pushing the boundaries of hypersonic flight. After the X-15, the Air Force's Project HYWARDS aimed to design a Mach 12 successor. Visionary engineer John Becker at NACA Langley proposed an even more ambitious goal: a hypersonic glider reaching Mach 18.

Becker's study group at Langley initially targeted Mach 15 but soon realized Mach 18 was more suitable, representing the peak heating environment for boost-gliders.

Key innovations included a delta wing with a flat bottom surface, which minimized heating area and reduced the need for coolant and thermal protection. The fuselage was positioned to cross the cooler, shielded region atop the wing, further reducing thermal protection needs. The design optimized wing loading and skin temperature to balance structural weight and thermal protection. Operating at a high angle of attack during reentry, the glider had enhanced aerodynamic efficiency and reduced the need for surface coolant.

Becker's design utilized centrifugal lift at near-orbital speeds, carrying the glider's weight mainly by centrifugal force. This reduced the importance of the aerodynamic lift-drag (L/D) ratio, allowing a focus on reducing heating and structural weight: "at the near-orbital launch speed required for "once-around" or global range, the group found theoretically that the glider weight would be carried initially almost entirely by the centrifugal force produced by the launch. Considering this, the group perceived that aerodynamic L/D lost most of its importance. Thus, for global range, the study showed that a certain glider design with low L/D would require only about three percent higher launch velocity than a design with L/D four times higher."

A technical debate with Ames Laboratory, which focused on maximizing L/D ratio, led to a compromise. Langley's smaller wing design with a high-lift, high-drag trajectory increased the glider's range from 4,700 to 5,600 nautical miles.

Becker's work highlighted the importance of balancing aerodynamic efficiency with thermal protection. In 1957, as Sputnik launched, NACA held its last major conference on high-speed aerodynamics. Cones, lifting bodies, and gliders became differentiated opinions. Becker's paper, "Preliminary Studies of Manned Satellites, Winged Configurations", dissenting from the consensus favoring ballistic projectiles, presented a vision for a winged, hypersonic vehicle capable of precise reentry and landing, influencing future aerospace innovations. "According to Becker, this paper...created more industry reaction- "almost all of it favorable" -than any other he had written."

Were it not for Sputnik and consensus toward a ballistic projectile, "Becker today believes, "the first U.S. manned satellite might well have been a [one-man] landable winged vehicle," a miniature (3000-pound) version of the later (180,000-pound) space shuttle."

National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), "Engineer in Charge," Detailed report on Project HYWARDS, including technical details on centrifugal lift, aerodynamic heating, collaborative efforts between NACA Langley and Ames Laboratories, and John V. Becker's contributions. Published in 1986, all of the information contained herein has been in the public domain for 38 years.
Available at:

The image used in this document is sourced from the NACA archives, depicting early hypersonic glider testing in a wind tunnel. Available at: https://picryl.com/media/high-lift-...he-10x10-foot-wind-tunnel-test-section-6eaaae.
 

Attachments

  • FD6B83AE-DC10-4C04-AA4D-51CA7FD3885A.jpeg
    FD6B83AE-DC10-4C04-AA4D-51CA7FD3885A.jpeg
    622.9 KB · Views: 59
  • 957F721D-C696-4ED6-81C2-0956ADB8146B.jpeg
    957F721D-C696-4ED6-81C2-0956ADB8146B.jpeg
    413.2 KB · Views: 58
The problem with the winged (or lifting in general) was they tended to weigh more than a ballistic capsule and were harder to launch into space. It was very much an issue of not knowing we needed to know some things we didn't know :)

Becker's "3,000lb" vehicle sounds about right for the thinking of the time but that turned out to be far lower than anything practical. The Mercury capsule weighted in about that weight but the Dynasoar was over 10,000lbs and still climbing when it was canceled and pretty much reflected Becker's design philosophy.

Granted that until Sputnik went up MONEY for any research was few and far between but I kind of agree that had the Sputnik panic not happened the US probably would have gone the piloted spaceplane approach, it was the more popular concept at any rate.

The fact they have the mockup scramjet standing off the bottom of the model is interesting. Given the implied flight profile would mean it would kind of have to be that far from the bottom of the vehicle to pick up and good air flow and so far back it can't really use the aft end of the vehicle as a good expansion ramp. Neat stuff and thanks very much!

Randy
 
Centrifugal lift data I picked here and there. It's fascinating stuff. Around Mach 18, lift gives way to suborbital. Not in orbit yet, but getting close.
 

Attachments

  • Capture d'écran 2023-11-14 104118.png
    Capture d'écran 2023-11-14 104118.png
    316.2 KB · Views: 18
  • Capture d'écran 2023-11-13 170256.png
    Capture d'écran 2023-11-13 170256.png
    100.2 KB · Views: 13
  • 3.46438.fp.png
    3.46438.fp.png
    240.5 KB · Views: 15
Notice that the configuration is strikingly similar to the one chosen by Talon-A (Stratolaunch), except, obviously, for the propulsion.
 
What I noticed the strongest is the wingtip protection in some of the photos.
After that, was noticing that what appears to be anhedral in 2 photos may just be an illusion created by wing shape interacting with viewing angle.

And thanks y'all for finding the information and photos, cool stuff! :)

255-GRC-1957-C-46403_small.jpg



 
After that, was noticing that what appears to be anhedral in 2 photos may just be an illusion created by wing shape interacting with viewing angle.
I think it's an optical illusion - part of this study was based on 'flat bottom' shapes. If you check the first picture in my last post the reflections of the guy's arm gives you a good idea of the flatness
 
I think it's an optical illusion - part of this study was based on 'flat bottom' shapes.
Yep, that's logical.
Also in my head from recent reading was wind tunnel models can have alternate parts to test varying configurations.
See, that's a thing, what you read can affect what you think.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom