US Lifting Bodies Studies - START (ASSET/PRIME), FDL, X-24, etc.

[blackstar]

3-man Titan III-launched orbital HL-10:

http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19760073130

That's neat. Alas, the one thing--okay, two things--that made the HL-10 such a cool vehicle was that bubble canopy up front, and the smooth overall lines, particularly the upper fuselage, and this vehicle eliminates both of them. It is interesting that they proposed parachute recovery. They obviously figured out that the high landing speeds for lifting vehicles were not good.

 

[Howedar]

Amazing after all those flights ending with X-24B which demonstrated sharper nose flat bottom planform was far superior to the blunt bodies with vertical winglets. FDL-7 planform series incorporated these design attributes. So what does NASA and mainstream aerospace do? They ignore all that and to this day NASA is still generating blunt designs? Did a generation of engineers forget the lessons of the past?

In case this isn't a rhetorical question, Fay and Riddell demonstrated (at least for stagnation regions) that convective heat flux into a leading edge scales as the inverse of the square of the nose radius.

I measured X-24B's nose radius some time ago as on the order of 2-3". HL-10 is probably in excess of a foot. This is a heating rate different by a factor on the order of 20-30.

Orders of magnitude matter.

 

[airrocket]

There was a way to deal with the "sharp" nose heating issue. If one studies detailed drawings of the FDL-7 "sharp" LE the solution for the LE was very simple yet effective. Similar to a double pane glass window.

 

[quellish]

Alpha Draco is covered pretty extensively in "Engineering the space age: a rocket scientist remembers"

Most of the book is available freely online:
http://books.google.com/books?id=y-_qkTUY_MMC&lpg=PA163&ots=eDE15HvshG&dq=%22low%20level%20run%20in%22%20reentry&pg=PR6#v=onepage&q=alpha%20draco&f=false

There is some mention of ASSET as well.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Alpha Draco! I've always like that one. Thank you.

 

[DSE]

Alpha Draco is covered pretty extensively in "Engineering the space age: a rocket scientist remembers"

Most of the book is available freely online:
http://books.google.com/books?id=y-_qkTUY_MMC&lpg=PA163&ots=eDE15HvshG&dq=%22low%20level%20run%20in%22%20reentry&pg=PR6#v=onepage&q=alpha%20draco&f=false

There is some mention of ASSET as well.

Or grab a copy of the PDF: http://aupress.au.af.mil/digital/pdf/book/brulle_engineering_space_age.pdf

 

[Retrofit]

"Quote" deleted :-X

So the FLD7 (1967) was a result of the MDD model 176 (1964), not the contrary?

 

[flateric]

Retrofit, do you know term 'extensive overquoting'?

 

[blackstar]

Retrofit, do you know term 'extensive overquoting'?

At least break the quote up a bit into easy-to-digest pieces.

 

[Retrofit]

Retrofit, do you know term 'extensive overquoting'?

At least break the quote up a bit into easy-to-digest pieces.

Sorry All for my previous TTGTB post. I was trying to plot, years by years, the different AFFDL lifting bodies researches and I was just wondering about the following comment by Paul Czyst (presented in Flateric's post #25 dated August 08, 2007):

"In a 1964 brief, Roland Quest of McDonnell Douglas Astronautics, St. Louis, presented a fully reusable hypersonic glider, the so-called model 176, ...
The Model 176 began with the collaboration of Robert Masek of McDonnell Douglas and Alfred Draper of AFFDL in the late 1950’s on hypersonic control issues. After a series of experimental and flight tests with different configurations the “X” tail configuration and the FDL-7C/D glider configurations emerged as the configuration that was inherently stable over the Mach range and had earth circumferential glide range. The result was the FDL-7MC and then the McDonnell Douglas Model 176."

In the here-attached chart named "Delta body spacecraft development", the FDL-7 is dated around 1967.

Therefore my previous post' interrogation "So the FLD-7 (1967) was a result of the MDD model 176 (1964), not the contrary?"

Sorry again for the confusion!

 

[Desert Dawn]

"Quote" deleted :-X

So the FLD7 (1967) was a result of the MDD model 176 (1964), not the contrary?

Hi Retrofit:

The family tree for FDL-7 is (in progressing order):

FDL-7 C/D

FDL-7 MC (that's the one with the more rounded fuselage shape (but cross section still fairly trapezoidal) in the group photo of USAF lifting body desk models)

FDL-7 Model 176 A

FDL-7 Model 176 B (longuer than the A version).

(and without counting all the little sub-variants, like the earlier conical nose variants of Model 176).

Model 176 was the most recent one and the one that most recently started to get declassified.

Stephane
Stratosphere Models
Website: http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Lookin through DRJ's 2001 edition of SPACE SHUTTLE, in the color pages I saw an image of an M2-F2 atop a Titan II. Was there actually a serious proposal for that? And where can I find it?

 

[sferrin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkIJS7bNoNc&feature=g-u-u

(Forward to 11:55 for ASSET)

 

[sublight]

The system kills the part of the link that starts the vid at 11:55. This linky works.

http://youtu.be/nkIJS7bNoNc?t=11m55s

 

[Orionblamblam]

Lookin through DRJ's 2001 edition of SPACE SHUTTLE, in the color pages I saw an image of an M2-F2 atop a Titan II. Was there actually a serious proposal for that?

Yes.

And where can I find it?

In my files, somewhere...

 

[sferrin]

The system kills the part of the link that starts the vid at 11:55. This linky works.

http://youtu.be/nkIJS7bNoNc?t=11m55s

Thing is there is other interesting stuff on that video too. Hound Dog launch, Titan II RV reentry, conical Atlas RV, Mace launch, etc.

 

[Triton]

McDonnell ASSET model found on eBay.

URL:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-TOPPING-MCDONNELL-ASSET-RE-ENTRY-VEHICLE-DESK-SHELF-MODEL-/180897860383?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a1e5a4b1f

Seller's Description:

RARE TOPPING MODEL OF THE MCDONNELL "ASSET" RE- ENTRY VEHICLE. DESIGNED IN 1960 - THIS SUB-SCALE VEHICLE WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO VERIFY THE INTEGRITY OF THE HEAT SHIELD ON THE BOEING X-20 DYNASOAR PROJECT VEHICLE. LATER USED FOR SPACE SHUTTLE RE-ENTRY DATA. SIX WERE BUILT, SEVERAL LAUNCHED, AND ONLY ONE SURVIVES. MODEL AND STAND IN EXCELLENT CONDITION - ORIGINAL DECALS INTACT. NOSE AND BOTTOM OF DELTA PAINTED AS IF IN RE-ENTRY MODE - SEE PHOTOS. MEASURES 3.5" LONG & 2.75" W/S. VERY COLORFUL MODEL IS SOLID AND STRAIGHT - DISPLAYS VERY WELL. VERY HARD TO FIND IN ANY CONDITION.

 

[Triton]

Northrop HL-10 heavyweight lifting body contractor model found on eBay.

URL:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/HL-10-Contractor-Model-NASA-Northrop-in-house-model-/180900000363?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a1e7af26b

NOTE: Mistake corrected in text and title.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Anybody have copy of this study from Northrop?

Fallis, William B.: Feasibility Study of Minimum Manned Lifting Body Entry Vehicle. Vol. I. Publication NB 66-9 (Contract No. NAS 4-840), Northrop Norair, Jan. 1966.

I saw it referenced in James Sparks' Winged Rocketry, tracked the title down, but only managed one hit on Google, as a reference in another report.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

MANEUVERING AEROTHERMAL TECHNOLOGY (MAT) PROGRAM

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA118876

Found this while looking for the Northrop study.

Arrow down to Page 81. There's a reference to Hoyt, T. L., "Small Evader Vehicle (SEE) Feasibility Study AerodynamicFinal Report," (U) GE-ALDM-72-120, November 1972 (Secret).

Anyone ever hear of the Small Evader Vehicle?

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Here's a 1960 report from Convair, HYPERSONIC GLIDE VEHICLE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS. It's actually kinda "meh".

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/681567.pdf

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Here's a nice one, EVOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF HYPERSONIC COlFIGURATIONS 1958-1990

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA242768

128 pages including all the cover pages and bibliography. Check out the illustrations on 70,84,85, 99, & 108. From 111 on, Beta shows up.

Some of these drawings were in Sweetman's Aurora book.

 

[Stargazer]

The Small Evader Vehicle is mentioned in an interesting post here:
http://www.espacial.com/contacto/10/viewtopic.php?f=10&p=25161&sid=a2ab1deec35f16c410cacad9f710a003

 

[Tuomasn]

Thanks for these. But when, oh when, will we get three-view drawings of any of the MDC Mach 6/Mach 12 designs from the 1960s-1980s?

 

[Stargazer]

I could be wrong, but I don't think I have seen any reference to this PDF document before.

It's a 102-page file about Lockheed's X-24C proposal which contains sketches and data, and a lot of wind-tunnel model photographs (I've attached six of them, which I found representative and interesting):

STRESS ANALYSIS OF THE 1/30-SCALE X-24C HYPERSONIC RESEARCH VEHICLE WIND TUNNEL MODEL

 

[quellish]

AMARV tunnel model, from ADA-A276 296

 

[Stargazer]

A lot more X-24C in this fantastic 93-page file:

JOINT USAF/NASA HYPERSONIC RESEARCH AIRCRAFT STUDY
Frank S. Kirkham and Robert A. Jones, NASA Langley Research Center
and Melvin L. Buck and William P. Zima, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory
August 4-8, 1975

Passing mention is made of the following design variations (bold type indicates images):

• X-24C-9
• X-24C-10
• X-24C-12-I
• X-24C-12-X
• X-24C-12-X2
• WHRA-52
  
• HSRA
• HYFAC
• Winged HYFAC

I suggest the X-24C be split and made into a separate topic.

 

[bobbymike]

Stargazer do you have a PDF of that wonderful 93 page document?

A lot more X-24C in this fantastic 93-page file:

JOINT USAF/NASA HYPERSONIC RESEARCH AIRCRAFT STUDY
Frank S. Kirkham and Robert A. Jones, NASA Langley Research Center
and Melvin L. Buck and William P. Zima, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory
August 4-8, 1975

Passing mention is made of the following design variations (bold type indicates images):

• X-24C-9
• X-24C-10
• X-24C-12-I
• X-24C-12-X
• X-24C-12-X2
• WHRA-52
  
• HSRA
• HYFAC
• Winged HYFAC

I suggest the X-24C be split and made into a separate topic.

 

[Stargazer]

Stargazer do you have a PDF of that wonderful 93 page document?

Silly me! I forgot to include the link (I have fixed that mistake now, the link has been added).

However, please keep in mind that the pics in the original report are far from being as clean as the attachments here. I did a heavy amount of cleaning-up and enhancing on them, in fact, I nearly spent the whole afternoon just on this handful of scans... but I really believed they were worth it!

This being said, the rest of the document (hand notes, etc.) is priceless as it is for anyone with a serious interest in the lifting bodies and spacecraft projects of the 1960s and 1970s, especially since it describes the parallel design evolution of USAF and NASA projects—all culminating into the X-24C—and the engine choices that were considered.

 

[bobbymike]

As some of these studies come from the Ballistic Missile Office I wonder what other studies are available as you can see below the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent PMO recently reviewed more than 250 prior studies to do with all aspects of a future ICBM which I assume included RV technologies.

In an Oct. 31 email provided by a Kirtland AFB spokesman, GBSD Provisional Program Manager Antonio Rendon said the Air Force has completed a number of activities since February, including reviewing more than 250 studies in an effort to properly leverage previous GBSD-related findings.

 

[blackstar]

In an Oct. 31 email provided by a Kirtland AFB spokesman, GBSD Provisional Program Manager Antonio Rendon said the Air Force has completed a number of activities since February, including reviewing more than 250 studies in an effort to properly leverage previous GBSD-related findings.

Military jargon. Blah.

 

[Stargazer]

Military jargon. Blah.

Maybe, maybe not...

Here's another very nice piece of the X-24C puzzle, a 159-page document dated April 1975 which goes over the design's inception and compares the different versions' merits. The study sort of contradicts itself at times as to what version carries which designation, but here is probably the most reliable breakdown:

• X-24C-9: Feasibility study, 46.1-foot long (1973).
• X-24C-10: Concept I, 48.5-foot baseline configuration, with internal propellant tanks (August 1974).
• X-24C-10B: Concept II, recommended enlarged baseline with improved shape, conical nozzle, 65% ramp and increased propellant capacity (November 1974).
• X-24C-11: Concept II, 53-foot variant, 43% ramp.
• X-24C-11B: Concept II, 50.4-foot variant, improved shape, 65% ramp.
• X-24C-10C: Concept III, 48.5-foot variant with full-depth payload bay, conical nozzle, 82% ramp and external droppable propellant tanks (January 1975).
• X-24C-12: Concept III, similar to X-24C-10C but with a 46% ramp.

Final recommended version is X-24C-10C, but in other pages it seems to be X-24C-12. This leads me to wonder if the latter is not just a redesignation of the former, though the inclination of the lower surface ramp is doubled on the -10C variant.
Once again, the attachments below have been heavily reworked and enhanced from a very lousily scanned set of documents. More will follow.


Source:
Experiments Impact on X-24C Flight Research Vehicle
Martin Marietta, April 1975

 

[Stargazer]

Not 250 files for sure, but an amazing online resource for everything related to the X-24C, HYFAC and L-301 programs at NASA's CRGIS website.

We've only just dug up the surface...

• HYFAC Subsonic Test
• NASA-TM-X-1922
• NASA-TN-D-5932
• HRA Drawing and Data
• FDL-8H and X-24C
• 12 Foot L.S. Tunnel
• Propul. 225
• HRA Free Flight Tunnel Test
• Hypersonic Research Vehicles
• Aero Info
• HYFAC Model Drawings
• Test Logs Basic HYFAC
• X-24C 12-I
• NASA Flight Experiments X-24C Final Briefing
• X-24C 12I and L-301
• X-24C-12I Model
• L-301 Plotted Data Long. Lat.
• Experiments Impact on X-24C Flight Research Vehicle
• X-24C Full Scale
• X-24C 12I
• X-24C-12I Data M=6
• M=6 20" Tunnel Test
• Subsonic LTPT Test X24C-12I
• X24C-12I Drawings
• L-301
• LRC Wind Tunnels "Test Info"
• X-24 Model Drawing
• Boat Tailed 12I Data
• X-24C-12I and X-1
• Low Speed Wind Tunnel X-24 test
• X-24C-L-16
• Scramjet Drag
• L301 Model
• X-24C Catch 2x File
• Penland's X-24C-12I Aero Work-up 10/76
• NHFRF Study Configurations
• L-301 in UPWT
• L-301 Model Pictures and Reports
• X-24 Drawings
• L-301 in M=6 20" Tunnel
• Lockheed X-24C (L-301)
• HYFAC Sketches
• L-301 in 8' TPT
• L-301 Calculations and LTPT Data
• L-301 in LTPT
• X-24 Test Log and X-24 Technical Paper
• Original Penland Paper Drafts
• Computer Drawings

 

[Retrofit]

Final recommended version is X-24C-10C, but in other pages it seems to be X-24C-12. This leads me to wonder if the latter is not just a redesignation of the former, though the inclination of the lower surface ramp is doubled on the -10C variant.
Once again, the attachments below have been heavily reworked and enhanced from a very lousily scanned set of documents. More will follow.

It seems that the X-24C-12I was the basic configuration for the next researches (NHFRF),
Then the X-24C-12IBT (Boat Tail), the X-24-X1, the X-24-L16 and finally the X-24C-L301.

Sources:
http://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/crgis/images/3/36/PEN00280.pdf Page: 22/142
http://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/crgis/images/4/47/PEN00275.pdf Page 1/104

 

[Dynoman]

Here is a poor pic of the screen of the Lockheed Film "Hypersonics," showing the mockup of the HLD.

 

[Dynoman]

Here are a couple more from the same film.

 

[OM]

...Can't believe this flick isn't on YouTube. Anyone got an online source for it?

 

[flateric]

Anyone got an online source for it?

Check screenshots watermark...

 

[dannydale]

I think this might be it. I searched "hypersonic" on that site for the lulz and found awesome!

 

[OM]

I think this might be it. I searched "hypersonic" on that site for the lulz and found awesome!

...Yessir, either that's the clip, or at least the clip encompasses the footage in question. Excellent bit of detective work, sir. A tip of the OM Hat goes your way, natch!