DOCSLIB.ORG

Fighter Agility Metrics, Research, and Test Phase I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fighter Agility Metrics, Research, and Test Phase I FIGHTER AGILITY METRICS, RESEARCH, AND TEST PHASE I REPORT KU-FRL-831-2 by: Randall K. Liefer, John Valasek and David P. Eggold Supervised by: Dr. David R. Downing THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH, INC. Flight Research Laboratory Lawrence, Kansas ABSTRACT Proposed new metrics to assess fighter aircraft agility are collected and analyzed. A framework for classification of these new agility metrics is developed and applied. A complete set of transient agility metrics is evaluated with a high fidelity, nonlinear F-18 simulation provided by the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Test techniques and data reduction methods are proposed. A method of providing cuing information to the pilot during flight test is discussed. The sensitivity of longitudinal and lateral agility metrics to deviations from the pilot cues is studied in detail. The metrics are shown to be largely insensitive to reasonable deviations from the nominal test pilot commands. Instrumentation required to quantify agility via flight test is also considered. With one exception, each of the proposed new metrics may be measured with instrumentation currendy available. Simulation documentation and user instructions are provided in an appendix. Table of Contents Abstract ............................................. i Table of Contents ...................................... ii List of Figures ......................................... vi List of Tables ......................................... ix List of Abbreviations .................................... x 1. Introduction ........................................ 1 1.1 Background of Agility ........................... 1 1.2 Current State of Agility .......................... 3 1.3 Objectives of this Project ......................... 5 2. Problem Definition ................................... 8 2.1 Summary of Traditional Metrics .................... 8 2.2 Published Agility Metrics ......................... 18 Transient, Functional, Potential ............... 20 Lateral, Pitch, Axial ....................... 22 ii 2.3 Vehicle Description (F-18 HARV) and Simulation Overview .......................... 25 2.4 Simulation Plan ................................ 31 3. Simulation Study .................................... 33 3.1 Axial Agility .................................. 33 3.1.1 Introduction ............................ 33 3.1.2 Axial Agility Metrics ...................... 33 3.1.3 Power Onset and Power Loss Parameters ........ 34 3.1.4 Axial Agility Test Case Description ............ 36 3.1.5 Axial Agility Data Reduction Methods .......... 41 3.2 Pitch Agility .................................. 45 3.2.1 Introduction ............................ 45 3.2.2 Published Pitch Agility Metrics ............... 47 3.2.3 Pitch Rate versus Angle of Attack Metric ........ 58 3.3 Lateral Agility ................................. 62 3.3.1 Introduction ............................ 62 3.3.2 Time-to-90 Metric ........................ 66 3.3.3 Test Method ............................ 69 3.3.4 Data Reduction and Analysis ................ 71 ooo ILl 3.3.5 Simulation Results ........................ 72 4. Flight Test Issues .................................... 76 4.1 Background .................................. 76 4.2 Analysis of Cuing Method ........................ 79 4.3 Sensitivity to Cue Following Errors .................. 81 4.3.1 Sensitivity of Pitch Agility Metrics ............. 81 4.3.2 Sensitivity of Lateral Agility Metrics ........... 92 4.4 Instrumentation for Agility Flight Testing .............. IX 5. Summary .......................................... 10l 5.1 Conclusions .................................. 105 5.2 Recommendations for Further Research ............... l(I) 6. References ......................................... 111 Appendices A. Specific Excess Power (P_) ........................ 116 B. Published Agility Metrics ......................... III C. Simulation Documentation ......................... 142 C.1 Introduction ............................. 142 C.2 Capabilities and Models ..................... 144 C.2.1 Aerodynamics ...................... 144 C.2.2 Flight Control System ................ 145 iv C.2.3 Actuators ......................... 145 C.2.4 Equations of Motion ................. 146 C.2.5 Integration Method .................. 146 C.2.6 Multi-Rate Calculations ............... 146 C.2.7 Autopilot Modes .................... 147 C.3 Program Organization ...................... 147 C.4 User Instructions .......................... 170 C.5 Check Case Comparisons .................... 172 ¥ List of Figures 2.1 T-38 V-n Diagram .................................. 12 2.2 Typical Ps Diagram for a Single Aircraft ................... 14 2.3 Differential Ps Plot .................................. 15 2.4 Turn Rate, Turn Radius Relationships ..................... 16 2.5 F-5E Turn Performance ............................... 17 2.6 Proposed Classification Framework ....................... 24 2.7 F- 18 Physical Characteristics ........................... 26 2.8 Simulation Flow Diagram ............................. 30 3.1 Axial Acceleration Example, Mach .6, Sea level .............. 37 3.2 Axial Acceleration, Mach .4 - .9, Sea level ................. 38 3.3 Axial Deceleration Example, Mach .6, Sea Level ............. 39 3.4 Axial Deceleration, Mach .4 - .9, Sea Level ................. 40 3.5 Power Onset Parameter ............................... 43 3.6 Power Loss Parameter ................................ 44 3.7 Maximum Pitch Up Time History ........................ 48 3.8 Time to Pitch to Maximum Load Factor ................... 50 3.9 Time to Pitch From Maximum to Zero Load Factor ........... 51 3.10 Maximum Load Factor Rate ........................... 52 3.11 Minimum Load Factor Rate ........................... 53 vi 3.12 Maximum Pitch Rate from Steady Level Flight ............. 55 3.13 Max Neg. Pitch Rate During Unload ..................... 56 3.14 Maximum Pitch Rate Capability at 15,000 ft ............... 59 3.15 Minimum Pitch Rate Capability at 15,000 ft ................ 60 3.16 Kinematics of a Loaded Roll .......................... 63 3.17 Body Axis Rates for Stability Axis Roils .................. 67 3.18 Control Time History for a Typical TgoManeuver ............ 70 3.19 Time to Capture • = 90* at 15,000 ft .................... 73 3.20 Time to Capture • = 90* at 30,000 ft .................... 74 4.1 Time to Max Load Factor Error Sensitivity, 15,000 ft .......... 84 4.2 Pitch Up Load Factor Rate Error Sensitivity, 15,000 ft ......... 86 4.3 Nose Up Pitch Rate Error Sensitivity, 15,000 ft .............. 87 4.4 Time to Zero Load Factor Error Sensitivity, 15,000 ft .......... 89 4.5 Pitch Down Load Factor Rate Sensitivity, 15,000 ft ........... 90 4.6 Nose Down Pitch Rate Error Sensitivity, 15,000 ft ............ 91 4.7 Stick Deflections for Typical TgoManeuver ................. 92 4.8 TgoError Sensitivity, Mach .4, 15,000 ft .................... 95 4.9 TgoError Sensitivity, Mach .5, 15,000 ft .................... 96 4.10 Tg0Error Sensitivity, Mach .6, 15,000 ft .................. 97 4.11 TgoError Sensitivity, Mach .7, 15,000 ft ................... 98 vii 4.12 T9oError Sensitivity, Mach .8, 15,000 ft .................. 99 A.1 Flight Path Geometry for Accelerated Climb ................ 118 B.1 Relative Energy State ................................ 129 B.2 Concept of Combat Cycle Time ......................... 132 B.3 Def'mition of Pointing Margin .......................... 133 B.4 Dynamic Speed Turn Plots ............................ 135 C.1 Generalized Simulation Flow Diagram .................... 148 C.2 Detailed Simulation Wiring Diagram ..................... lff_ C.3 Sample Input File for SIM 2 ........................... 171 C.4 Longitudinal Check Case, Mach .6, 10,000 ft ................ 173 C.5 Longitudinal Check Case, Mach .8, 35,000 ft ................ 175 C.6 Longitudinal Check Case, Mach .9, Sea Level ............... 177 C.7 Lateral Check Case, Mach .4, 20,000 ft .................... 179 C.8 Lateral Check Case, Mach .6, 10,000 ft .................... 181 C.9 Lateral Check Case, Mach .8, 35,000 ft .................... 183 C.10 Lateral Check Case, Mach .9, Sea Level .................. 185 ,oo Vlll List of Tables 2.1 Typical Wing Loading and Thrust to Weight Ratios ........... 10 4.1 Deviations for Pitch Sensitivity Tests ..................... 83 4.2 Deviations for Lateral Sensitivity Tests .................... 94 C.1 SIM 2 Initialization Sequence .......................... 163 C.2 Dynamic Loop Sequence for One Frame ................... 164 C.3 Common Simulation Variables .......................... 1(:5 ix List of Abbreviations Nondimensional variation of rolling moment with control surface El 8 deflection Nondimensional variation of pitching moment with control surface Cm 8 deflection CAS Control Augmentation System E Total mechanical energy E, Specific mechanical energy D Drag FCS Flight Control System HARV High Angle of Attack Research Vehicle HQDT Handling Qualities During Tracking Moment of inerfias about X, Y and Z axes Ixz XZ product of inertia Ls Dimensional variation of rolling moment with control surface deflection MBB Messershcmitt-BSlkow-Blohm Ms Dimensional variation of pitching moment with control surface deflection Ps Specific Excess Power R Turn Radius X S Reference wing area Time to capture 90 ° bank angle change T/W Thrust to weight ratio TR Turn rate V Velocity V/Vc Relative Energy State W Weight WVR Within Visual Range W/S Wing Loading b Wing span Mean aerodynamic chord g Acceleration due
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Semiempirical Simulation of Contemporary Fighter Planes
    | Mathematics | UDC 629.735.33.015.075 Zhelonkin M. V. Semiempirical simulation of contemporary fighter planes engaging in dogfight in order to estimate the possibility of using supermanoeuvrability modes The paper presents investigation results concerning employing supermanoeuvrability modes in dogfight. We selected one of the standard manoeuvres and demonstrated the efficiency of using it. Keywords: features, supermanoeuvrability, dogfight, semi-empirical simulation, tactical employment, Split S manoeuvre. Introduction of attack, which lead to intense deceleration of Fighter aviation is mostly used for dogfighting the aircraft and to a decrease in energy height, and one of the main tasks of preparation for en- therefore a Split S manoeuvre will compensate gaging enemy air targets is the training of flight such a decrease to some extent. personnel in operating fighter aircraft weapons in Thus, in order to evaluate the efficiency of order to achieve the best performance to destroy supermanoeuvrability modes, we have selected enemy aircraft during dogfighting in various a Split S manoeuvre. Fig. 1 shows the aircraft weather and operational conditions when acting flight path when making the manoeuvre. solo or as part of an aircraft group. Modern 4++ The most important parameter that defines and 5th generation fighters are able to fly in a su- tolerable conditions for making a Split S man- permanoeuvrability mode, i.e. at angles of attack oeuvre is minimum altitude loss during the ma- beyond stall while maintaining balanced control. noeuvre, which depends on the entry speed and That is why flight personnel need to be properly altitude, as well as on the current g-load and air- trained in order to use all the aircraft capabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Technical Memorandum 102629
    NASA Technical Memorandum 102629 QUALITATIVE EVALUATION OF A CONFORMAL VELOCITY VECTOR DISPLAY FOR USE AT HIGH ANGLES-OF-ATTACK IN FIGHTER AIRCRAFT DENISE R. JONES JAMES R. BURLEY II JUNE 1990 (NA_A-F_-10752_) .._tJALITATIVL i_VALLIATIjN I-!F A L.'_;_:,JPi,!,_.L V_Lr)CI'IV VLzfi[i!K ,..;[SPLAY l--,.}E US.'_- AT _IGH A_C, LzS-OF-ATTACK IN FIuHI-_H, AIRCRAFT (NASA) i1 D L;SCL Oi.r, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23665-5225 SUMMARY A piloted simulation study has been conducted in the Langley Differential Maneuvering Simulator (DMS) to evaluate the utility of a display device designed to illustrate graphically and conformally the approximate location of a fighter aircraft's velocity vector. The display device consisted of two vertical rows of light- emitting diodes (LED's) located toward the center of the cockpit instrument panel, with one row of lights visible to the left of the control stick and the other row visible to the right of the control stick. The light strings provided a logical extension of the head-up display (HUD) velocity vector symbol at flight-path angles which exceeded the HUD field-of-view. Four test subjects flew a modified F/A-18 model with this display in an air-to-air engagement task against an equally capable opponent. Their responses to a questionnaire indicated that the conformal velocity vector information could not be used during the scenarios investigated due to the inability to visually track a target and view the lights simultaneously. INTRODUCTION During the course of fighter aircraft display format research, many pilots have expressed a desire to have the direction in which the aircraft is traveling (aircraft's velocity vector) presented in the cockpit.
    [Show full text]
  • Design, Analyses, and ,. Simulation Results
    NASA Technical Paper 3446 _:i,2 _ .,/, ! High-Alpha Research Vehicle (HARV) Longitudinal Controller: Design, Analyses, and ,. Simulation Results Aaron J. Ostroff Langley Research Center • Hampton, Virginia Keith D. Hoffler ViGYAN, Inc. • Hampton, Virginia Melissa S. Proffitt Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company • Hampton, Virginia :' National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center • Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 • : J July 1994 /: The use of trademarks or names of manufacturers in this i! report is for accurate reporting and does not constitute an official endorsement, either expressed or implied, of such products or manufacturers by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Acknowledgment The authors wish to acknowledge the following individuals who made important contributions to the research described in this paper: Philip W. Brown, Michael R. Phillips, and Robert A. Rivers, all from NASA Langley Research Center, who served as test pilots and provided ratings and insightful comments for the piloted simulation tasks. Michael D. Messina, Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company, Hampton, VA, who maintained the nonlinear batch simulation and organized test cases for transportingreal-time code. Susan W. Carzoo, Unisys Corporation, who maintained the real- time software for the piloted simulation. Dr. Barton J. Bacon, NASA Langley Research Center, who constructed and tested the real-lt algorithms used for robustness analysis. John V. Foster, NASA Langley Research Center, who performed some engineering-test
    [Show full text]
  • 22. Maneuvering at High Angle and Rate
    12/3/18 Maneuvering at High Angles and Angular Rates Robert Stengel, Aircraft Flight Dynamics MAE 331, 2018 Learning Objectives • High angle of attack and angular rates • Asymmetric flight • Nonlinear aerodynamics • Inertial coupling • Spins and tumbling Flight Dynamics 681-785 Airplane Stability and Control Chapter 8 Copyright 2018 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only. http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331.html 1 http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/FlightDynamics.html Tactical Airplane Maneuverability • Maneuverability parameters – Stability – Roll rate and acceleration – Normal load factor – Thrust/weight ratio – Pitch rate – Transient response – Control forces • Dogfights – Preferable to launch missiles at long range – Dogfight is a backup tactic – Preferable to have an unfair advantage • Air-combat sequence – Detection – Closing – Attack – Maneuvers, e.g., • Scissors • High yo-yo – Disengagement 2 1 12/3/18 Coupling of Longitudinal and Lateral-Directional Motions 3 Longitudinal Motions can Couple to Lateral-Directional Motions • Linearized equations have limited application to high-angle/high-rate maneuvers – Steady, non-zero sideslip angle (Sec. 7.1, FD) – Steady turn (Sec. 7.1, FD) – Steady roll rate " F FLon % F = $ Lon Lat−Dir ' $ FLat−Dir F ' # Lon Lat−Dir & Lon Lat−Dir FLat−Dir , FLon ≠ 0 4 2 12/3/18 Stability Boundaries Arising From Asymmetric Flight Northrop F-5E NASA CR-2788 5 Stability Boundaries with Nominal Sideslip, βo, and Roll Rate, po NASA CR-2788 6 3 12/3/18 Pitch-Yaw Coupling Due To Steady
    [Show full text]
  • 00002-X Challenges in High-Alpha Vehicle
    Pergan~,on Prog. Aerospace ScL Vol. 31, pp. 291-334, 1995 Copyright © 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved 0376-0421(95)00002-X 0376-0421/95 $29.00 CHALLENGES IN HIGH-ALPHA VEHICLE DYNAMICS Lars E. Ericsson Engineering Consultant, Mountain View, California, U.S.A. Abstract--The evolution of aerospace vehicles towards ever-increasing maneuverability, including flight at high angles of attack and vehicle motions of large amplitudes and high angular rates, has led to the need for prediction of veh:Lcleaerodynamics that are dominated by unsteady separated flow effects. The existing data base is reviewed lo determine to what degree the following critical issues are understood: 1. Cause and effect of asymmetric fo:~ebody flow separation with associated vortices. 2. Cause of slender wing rock. 3. Effect of vehicle motion on dynamic airfoil stall. 4. Extrapolation from subscale tests to full-scale free flight. To extend the present knowledge to include the coupling existing between novel aerodynamic controls and the vehicle dynamics is the challenge facing designers of future agile aircraft operating at high angles of attack. CONTENTS NOTATION 1. INTRODUCTION 292 2. ASYMMETI~:IC FOREBODY FLOW SEPARATION 292 2.1. Introduction 292 2.2. Yaw characteristics 294 2.2.1. Moving wall effects 295 2.2.2. Flat spin 296 2.2.3. Reversal of coning motion 300 2.3. Roll characteristics 300 2.3.1. Dynamic forebody/leading-edge vortex interaction 301 2.4. Summary 306 3. SLENDER WING ROCK 306 3.1. Introduction 306 3.2. Recent e~perimental results and discussion 307 3.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Aeronautical Engineering
    NASA SP-7037 (275) February 1992 AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING A CONTINUING BIBLIOGRAPHY WITH INDEXES (NASA-SP-7017(27t>» AERONAUTICAL N92-28&79 ENGINFERING: A CONTINUING BIBLIOGRAPHY ** INDEX ! .PPLEMENT 275) (NASA) 112 p Uncl 00/01 0099273 STI PROGRAM SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL IMCORMATION NASA SP-7037 (275) February 1992 AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING A CONTINUING BIBLIOGRAPHY WITH INDEXES National Aeronautics and Space Administration Scientific and Technical Information Program NASA Washington, DC 1992 INTRODUCTION This issue of Aeronautical Engineering—A Continuing Bibliography (NASA SP-7037) lists 379 reports, journal articles, and other documents originally announced in January 1992 in Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports (STAR) or in International Aerospace Abstracts (IAA). Accession numbers cited in this issue are: STAR (N-10000 Series) N92-10001 - N92-11965 IAA (A-10000 Series) A92-10001 - A92-13248 The coverage includes documents on the engineering and theoretical aspects of design, con- struction, evaluation, testing, operation, and performance of aircraft (including aircraft engines) and associated components, equipment, and systems. It also includes research and develop- ment in aerodynamics, aeronautics, and ground support equipment for aeronautical vehicles. Each entry in the publication consists of a standard bibliographic citation accompanied in most cases by an abstract. The listing of the entries is arranged by the first nine STAR specific categories and the remaining STAR major categories. This arrangement offers the user the most advantageous breakdown for individual objectives. The citations include the original ac- cession numbers from the respective announcement journals. Seven indexes—subject, personal author, corporate source, foreign technology, contract number, report number, and accession number—are included. A cumulative index for 1992 will be published in early 1993.
    [Show full text]
  • Time-Optimization of High Performance Combat Maneuvers
    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2005-06 Time-optimization of high performance combat maneuvers Carter, Benjamin R. Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/2176 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS TIME-OPTIMIZATION OF HIGH PERFORMANCE COMBAT MANEUVERS by Benjamin R. Carter June 2005 Thesis Advisor: R.M. Howard Co-Advisor: I.M. Ross Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED June 2005 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Time-Optimization of High Performance Combat Maneuvers 6. AUTHOR(S) LTjg Benjamin R. Carter, USN 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION REPORT Monterey, CA 93943-5000 NUMBER 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING N/A AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Thrust Vectoring for Lateral
    tv:'ASA-C"?- / ~C:, O/(P NASA Contractor Report 186016 Thrust Vectoring for Lateral .. Directional Stability Lee R. Peron and Thomas Carpenter Contract NCC 2-586 March 1992 NI\S/\ National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1111111111111 /1/11111111111 11111 I111I 11111111' . NF00259 NASA Contractor Report 186016 Thrust Vectoring for Lateral­ Directional Stability Lee R. Peron and Thomas Carpenter California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Prepared for Dryden Flight Research Facility Edwards, California Under Contract NCC 2-586 1992 NI\S/\ National Aeronautics and Space Administration Dryden Flight Research Facility Edwards, California 93523-0273 This Page Intentionally Left Blank CONTENTS ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Purpose ............................................. 1 Aircraft Description . 1 Project Scope . 2 Organization. 3 NOMENCLATURE 3 ADVANTAGES OF THRUST VECTORING CONTROL SYSTEMS 6 Agility .............................................. 6 Poststall Maneuvering ..................................... 7 Stealth .............................................. 8 Thrust Vectoring Concepts . 8 THRUST VECTORING CONTROL SYSTEM 10 Postexit Vanes. 10 Thrust Vectoring Simulation . 12 Aircraft Configuration ..................................... 12 AERODYNAMIC PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS SYSTEM 14 Stability Coefficients . 14 Vertical Tail Considerations .................................. 15 TVCS Aerodynamic-Induced Results ............................. 15 Drag Effects . 16 Spinning ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vectored Propulsion, Supermaneuverability and Robot Aircraft
    Benjamin Gal-Or Vectored Propulsion, Supermaneuverability and Robot Aircraft With 190 Figures Springer-Verlag New York Berlin Heidelberg London Paris Tokyo Hong Kong Professor Benjamin Gal-Or Technion-Israel Institute of Technology Department of Aeronautical Engineering 32000 Haifa Israel Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gal-Or, Benjamin. Vectored propulsion, supermaneuverability, and robot aircraft / by Benjamin Gal-Or. P. em. I. Airplanes - Jet propulsion. 2. Drone aircraft. 3. Jet planes, Military. 4. stealth aircraft. I. Title. TL685.3.G23 1989 629. I 34'353-dc20 89-21797 © 1990 by Benjamin Gal-Or All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder, except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, elec­ tronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, etc. in this publication, even if the former are not especially identified, is not to be taken as a sign that such names, as under­ stood by the Trade Marks and Merchandise Marks Act, may accordingly be used freely by anyone. Typeset, Printed, and Bound by Keterpress, Jerusalem, Israel ISBN-13: 978-0-387-97161-2 e-ISBN-13: 978-1-4613-8961-3 DOl: 10.1007/978-1-4613-8961-3 Dedicated to my family; Leah, Amir and Gillad, who, by their respective professions, and by their encouragement, have given me invaluable help in preparing this volume, and to the members of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Team, Azar, B.; Cohen, Z.; Dekel, E.; Friedman, E.; Golijow, E.; Mashiach, E.; Rasputnis, A.; Soreq, I.; Turgemann M.; and Vorobeichik, S., to whom I am greatly indebted.
    [Show full text]
  • IBP7*717771Ttitl Secretary of the Air Force Edward C
    ^ y.i / m ] -1 /AJ f A f J IBP7*717771TTiTl Secretary of the Air Force Edward C. Aldridge, Jr. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen Larry D. Welch Commander, Air University Lt Gen Truman Spangrud Commander, Center for Aerospace Doctrine, Research, and Education Col Sidney J. Wise Professional Staff Editor Col Keith W. Geiger Associate Editor Maj Michael A. Kirtland Contributing Personnel Hugh Richardson, Associate Editor John A. Westcott, Art Director and Production Manager The Airpower Journal, published quarterly, is the professional journal of the United States Air Force. It is designed to serve as an open forum for presenting and stimulating innovative thinking on m ilitary doctrine, strategy, tactics, force struc- ture, readiness, and other national defense mat- ters. The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, the Air Force, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government. Articles in this edition may be reproduced in whole or in part without permis- sion. If reproduced, the Airpower Journal re- quests a courtesy line. Editorial— Blinders, Too, Are Made of Leather 2 The Essence of Leadership: Views of a Form er C om m ander Lt Gen Evan W. Rosencrans, USAF, Retired 6 Soviet “Tactical” Aviation in the Postwar Period: Technological Change, Organizational Innovation, and Doctrinal Continuity Dr Jacob W. Kipp 8 Soviet Maskirovka Charles L. Smith 28 Doctrinal Deficiencies in Prisoner of War Command Col John R. Brancato, USAF 40 Superm aneuverability: Fighter Technology of the Future Col William D.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Aeronautics Book Series
    . Douglas A. Joyce Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Joyce, Douglas A. Flying beyond the stall : the X-31 and the advent of supermaneuverability / by Douglas A. Joyce. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Stability of airplanes--Research--United States. 2. X-31 (Jet fighter plane) 3. Research aircraft--United States. 4. Stalling (Aerodynamics) I. Title. TL574.S7J69 2014 629.132’360724--dc23 2014022571 During the production of this book, the Dryden facility was renamed the Armstrong Flight Research Center. All references to the Dryden facility have been preserved for historical accuracy. Copyright © 2014 by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The opinions expressed in this volume are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the United States Government or of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ISBN 978-1-62683-019-6 90000 9 781626 830196 This publication is available as a free download at http://www.nasa.gov/ebooks. Author Dedication v Foreword: The World’s First International X-Airplane vii Prologue: The Participants xi Chapter 1: Origins and Design Development .......................................................1 In the Beginning…: The Quest for Supermaneuverability ........................3 Defining a Supermaneuverable Airplane: The Path to EFM ......................5 Design and Development of the X-31 ................................................. 13 Fabrication to Eve of First Flight .........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Some High Alpha and Handling Qualities Aerodynamics
    Some High Alpha and Handling Qualities Aerodynamics W.H. Mason Configuration Aerodynamics Class Slide 1 4/19/18 Issues in Hi-α Aero • General Aviation – Prevention/recovery from spins – Beware: Tail Damping Power Factor (TDPF) » Sometimes advocated for use in design » Has been shown to be inaccurate! • Fighters – Resistance to “departure” from controlled flight – Carefree hi-α air combat maneuvering » Fuselage pointing » Velocity vector rolls » Supermaneuverability » etc. • Transports – Control/prevention of pitchup and deep stall (the DC-9 case study) Slide 2 4/19/18 High Angle of Attack • Aerodynamics are nonlinear - A lot of flow separation - Complicated component interactions (vortices) - Depends heavily on WT data for analysis - This means critical conditions outside linear aero range • Motion is highly dynamic - often need unsteady aero • Keys issues (from a fighter designer’s perspective): - adequate nose down pitching moment to recover - roll rate at high alpha - departure avoidance - adequate yaw control power - the role of thrust vectoring Slide 3 4/19/18 The Hi-α Story Longitudinal Typical unstable modern fighter – the envelope is the key thing to look at + Max nose up moment Pinch often around α ~ 30°-40° Cm 0° Cm* α 90° Max nose down moment - Minimum Cm* allowable is an open question Issue of including credit for thrust vectoring Suggested nose down req’t: Pitch accel in 1st sec: -0.25 rad/sec2 Slide 4 4/19/18 Example: F-16 An α-limiter was Found in flight, and put in the control also in tests at the system to prevent NASA Full Scale pilots from going Tunnel, other above 28° tunnels didn’t find this, and so the design was made with this “issue” NASA TP-1538, Dec.
    [Show full text]