SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Topics discussed include: a) UAV s at NASA Dryden, Past and Present; b) Why Do We Flight Test?; c) The Blended (or Hybrid) Wing-Body Advantage; d) Program Objectives; e) The X-48B Vehicle and Ground Control Station; and f) Flight Test Highlights & Video.
The Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC) has been participating in the flight testing of the Space Shuttle since 1976. An independent assessment of the reentry and landing capabilities of the Orbiter was conducted with respect to Department of Defense (DOD) missions. This activity is on-going and reports have been published after each flight. AFFTC participation in this conference is not directly related to the DOD assessment activity, however, and the views presented by myself and other AFFTC authors discuss the technical aspects of testing and the technology emanating from these tests.
Volume 1 of the AG 300 series on ´Flight Test Instrumentation´ gives a general introduction to the basic principles of flight test instrumentation. The other volumes in the series provide more detailed treatments of selected topics on flight test instrumentation. Volume 1, first published in 1974, has been used extensively as an introduction for instrumentation courses and symposia, as well as being a reference work on the desk of most flight test and instrumentation engineers. It is hoped that this second edition, fully revised, will be used with as much enthusiasm as the first edition. In this edition a flight test system is considered to include both the data collection and data processing systems. In order to obtain an optimal data flow, the overall design of these two subsystems must be carefully matched; the detail development and the operation may have to be done by separate groups of specialists. The main emphasis is on the large automated instrumentation systems used for the initial flight testing of modern military and civil aircraft. This is done because there, many of the problems, which are discussed here, are more critical. It does not imply, however, that smaller systems with manual data processing are no longer used. In general, the systems should be designed to provide the required results at the lowest possible cost. For many tests which require only a few parameters, relatively simple systems are justified, especially if no complex equipment is available to the user. Although many of the aspects discussed in this volume apply to both small and large systems, aspects of the smaller systems are mentioned only when they are of special interest. The volume has been divided into three main parts. Part 1 defines the main starting points for the design of a flight test instrumentation system, as seen from the points of view of the flight test engineer and the instrumentation engineer. In Part 2 the discussion is concentrated on those aspects which apply to each individual measuring channel, and in Part 3 the main emphasis is on the integration of the individual data channels into one data collection system and on those aspects of the data processing which apply to the complete system.
Ares I-X was the first test flight of NASA's Constellation Program's Ares I crew launch vehicle. Ares I is a two stage to orbit launch vehicle that provides crew access to low Earth orbit for NASA's future manned exploration missions. The Ares I first stage consists of a Shuttle solid rocket motor (SRM) modified to include an additional propellant segment and a liquid propellant upper stage with an Apollo J2X engine modified to increase its thrust capability. The modified propulsion systems were not available for the first test flight, thus the test had to be conducted with an existing Shuttle 4 segment reusable solid rocket motor (RSRM) and an inert Upper Stage. The test flight's primary objective was to demonstrate controllability of an Ares I vehicle during first stage boost and the ability to perform a successful separation. In order to demonstrate controllability, the Ares I-X ascent control algorithms had to maintain stable flight throughout a flight environment equivalent to Ares I. The goal of the test flight reference trajectory development was to design a boost trajectory using the existing RSRM that results in a flight environment equivalent to Ares I. A trajectory similarity metric was defined as the integrated difference between the Ares I and Ares I-X Mach versus dynamic pressure relationships. Optimization analyses were performed that minimized the metric by adjusting the inert upper stage weight and the ascent steering profile. The sensitivity of the optimal upper stage weight and steering profile to launch month was also investigated. A response surface approach was used to verify the optimization results. The analyses successfully defined monthly ascent trajectories that matched the Ares I reference trajectory dynamic pressure versus Mach number relationship to within 10% through Mach 3.5. The upper stage weight required to achieve the match was found to be feasible and varied less than 5% throughout the year. The paper will discuss the flight test requirements, provide Ares I-X vehicle background, discuss the optimization analyses used to meet the requirements, present analysis results, and compare the reference trajectory to the reconstructed flight trajectory.
The Airborne Spacing for Terminal Arrival Routes (ASTAR) Flight Test was conducted by the NASA Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration – 1 (ATD- 1) project to demonstrate the use of NASA’s ASTAR algorithm beyond a simulated environment and assess the operational risks of performing a multi-aircraft flight test of Flight-deck Interval Management (FIM). Utilizing contemporary tools of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) such as ADS-B, the ASTAR algorithm calculated speeds that the flight crew flew to achieve a precise spacing interval behind another aircraft at the final approach fix. Airspeed commands issued by the algorithm were flown by the flight crew of the FIM-equipped aircraft to achieve or maintain an assigned spacing goal from a target vehicle. The ASTAR algorithm was integrated with the Boeing supplied B-787 ecoDemonstrator aircraft, and five flight trials were conducted as a joint effort between NASA and Boeing on December 12, 2014. Initial results indicated arrival times within several seconds of accuracy of the planned termination point between two aircraft performing FIM in a real world environment. This flight test opened the way for the much more expansive ATD-1 Avionics Phase II flight test which occurred in early 2017. The flight trials under Phase II preceded further testing by the community in preparation for inclusion of the Interval Management concept as a part of the NextGen environment.
A 3.5-year effort to characterize the aerodynamic behavior of the Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle (AIX FTV) is described in this paper. The AIX FTV was designed to be representative of the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV). While there are several differences in the outer mold line from the current revision of the CLV, the overall length, mass distribution, and flight systems of the two vehicles are very similar. This paper briefly touches on each of the aerodynamic databases developed in the program, describing the methodology employed, experimental and computational contributions to the generation of the databases, and how well the databases and underlying computations compare to actual flight test results.
The Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) mission is the unmanned flight test for the upcoming Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). During entry, the EFT-1 vehicle will trigger several Landing and Recovery System (LRS) events, such as parachute deployment, based on on-board altitude information. The primary altitude source is the filtered navigation solution updated with GPS measurement data. The vehicle also has three barometric altimeters that will be used to measure atmospheric pressure during entry. In the event that GPS data is not available during entry, the altitude derived from the barometric altimeter pressure will be used to trigger chute deployment for the drogues and main parachutes. Therefore it is important to understand the impact of error sources on the pressure measured by the barometric altimeters and on the altitude derived from that pressure. The error sources for the barometric altimeters are not independent, and many error sources result in bias in a specific direction. Therefore conventional error budget methods could not be applied. Instead, high fidelity Monte-Carlo simulation was performed and error bounds were determined based on the results of this analysis. Aerodynamic errors were the largest single contributor to the error budget for the barometric altimeters. The large errors drove a change to the altitude trigger setpoint for FBC jettison deploy.
A quasi-tailless flight investigation was launched using the X-31A enhanced fighter maneuverability airplane. In-flight simulations were used to assess the effect of partial to total vertical tail removal. The rudder control surface was used to cancel the stabilizing effects of the vertical tail, and yaw thrust vector commands were used to restabilize and control the airplane. The quasi-tailless mode was flown supersonically with gentle maneuvering and subsonically in precision approaches and ground attack profiles. Pilot ratings and a full set of flight test measurements were recorded. This report describes the results obtained and emphasizes the lessons learned from the X-31A flight test experiment. Sensor-related issues and their importance to a quasi-tailless simulation and to ultimately controlling a directionally unstable vehicle are assessed. The X-31A quasi-tailless flight test experiment showed that tailless and reduced tail fighter aircraft are definitely feasible. When the capability is designed into the airplane from the beginning, the benefits have the potential to outweigh the added complexity required.
Established by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) to function under the supervision of the Pilotless Aircraft Research Division (PARD) of the Langley Research Center, the Wallops Island flight test range began operations in 1945. Before the end of the decade, researchers at Wallops Island had developed two techniques for studying transonic problems - the free-falling body technique and the wing-flow technique - accomplishments which won NACA the needed funds to develop a guided missile for the Army Armed Forces. PARD kept abreast of developments in solid rocket motor technology and added new rockets to its inventory as they became available, and by 1955 Wallops Island programs encompassed sounding-rocket and spaceflight research. By 1959, after the Wallops range had become a NASA facility, it had played essential roles in the development of such satellite programs as Echo and Project Mercury.
The purpose of NASA's Constellation project is to create the new generation of spacecraft for human flight to the International Space Station in low-earth orbit, the lunar surface, as well as for use in future deep-space exploration. One portion of the Constellation program was the development of the Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV) to be used in spaceflight. The Orion spacecraft consists of a crew module, service module, space adapter and launch abort system. The crew module was designed to hold as many as six crew members. The Orion crew exploration vehicle is similar in design to the Apollo space capsules, although larger and more massive. The Flight Test Office is the responsible flight test organization for the launch abort system on the Orion crew exploration vehicle. The Flight Test Office originally proposed six tests that would demonstrate the use of the launch abort system. These flight tests were to be performed at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico and were similar in nature to the Apollo Little Joe II tests performed in the 1960s. The first flight test of the launch abort system was a pad abort (PA-1), that took place on 6 May 2010 at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Primary flight test objectives were to demonstrate the capability of the launch abort system to propel the crew module a safe distance away from a launch vehicle during a pad abort, to demonstrate the stability and control characteristics of the vehicle, and to determine the performance of the motors contained within the launch abort system. The focus of the PA-1 flight test was engineering development and data acquisition, not certification. In this presentation, a high level overview of the PA-1 vehicle is given, along with an overview of the Mobile Operations Facility and information on the White Sands tracking sites for radar & optics. Several lessons learned are presented, including detailed information on the lessons learned in the development of wind placards for flight. PA-1 flight data is shown, as well as a comparison of PA-1 flight data to nonlinear simulation Monte Carlo data.
The aerodynamic flight test procedures and results for the Space Shuttle orbiter are presented. The aerodynamic characteristics used in testing were determined from flights STS-1 and through STS-4. Normal force and pitching moment were different than predicted, suggesting an unanticipated aerodynamic force acting upward on the end of the orbiter. However, lateral-directional aerodynamic characteristics were in good management with good predictions. The flight measured aerodynamics are repeatable and show good correlation with angle of attack and angle of sideslip.
A flight test experiment was conducted at the Langley Research Center to evaluate a wing leading-edge vortex flap concept designed for use on an aircraft with highly swept wings. The flap concept was designed as a modification to the wing leading edge of an F-106B airplane. The flight testing required operations at conditions that would exceed the structural load envelope of the basic airplane in order to acquire desired research data for the modified configuration. Accordingly, the operational envelope of the modified aircraft was incrementally expanded and real-time monitoring of airframe strains at critical wing locations was mandated to insure safety of flight. The flight tests were conducted in two phases: Phase I to establish baseline data with the unmodified wing, and Phase II to determine the effects of the vortex flap on performance, handling qualities, and flow field characteristics. This paper focuses on a description of the approach and procedures used to provide the strain-gage monitoring to insure structural integrity. Highlights of the wing modification and the overall operation are also included. Within a -year period, 110 research flights were successfully completed, providing researchers with sufficient data to assess the potential benefits ascribed to the vortex flap concept without encountering severe structural problems or mishaps.
The Structures Flight from 412th Test Wing and the Aerostructures Branch at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base have developed a set of best practices for training a structures flight test engineer. These practices represent the hard-won lessons learned and best practices from training generations of engineers to perform high risk envelope expansion and developmental flight test. Collectively, these organizations have tested many of the world's most advanced and innovative aircraft, including the B-2, C-17, F-22, F-35, RQ-4, X-29, F-18 High Angle of Attack Research Vehicle, X-53, G-III Adaptive Compliant Trailing Edge, and X-56.
The airborne integrated flight test data system (AIFTDS) is described. This system integrates an airborne digital computer with a high-bit-rate pulse code modulation system. Its design was influenced by in-house technical experience with similar modules and by the multiproject environment in which it was expected to operate. The present work describes events leading to the development of the system, reviews factors that influenced the objectives for the system and the resulting design, and describes the elements themselves. Block diagrams supplement the text.
A flight test method has been developed for determining the level flight drag and propulsive efficiency of propeller-driven aircraft. The overall drag of the aircraft is expressed in terms of the measured increment of power required to overcome a corresponding known increment of drag, which is generated by a towed drogue. The simplest form of the governing equations, D = delta D SHP/delta SHP (where D is drag and SHP is the horsepower delivered to the propeller) is such that all of the parameters on the right side of the equation can be measured in flight. An evaluation of the governing equations has been performed using data generated by flight test of a Beechcraft T-34B.
This paper describes the techniques developed for a flight test program of a human powered aircraft, the application of these techniques in the winter of 1987/88 and the results of the flight testing. A system of sensors, signal conditioning and data recording equipment was developed and installed in the aircraft. Flight test maneuvers which do not exceed the aircraft's limited capability were developed and refined in an iterative sequence of test flights. The test procedures were adjusted to yield maximum data quality from the point of view of estimating lateral and longitudinal stability derivatives. Structural flexibility and unsteady aerodynamics are modeled in an ad hoc manner, capturing the effects observed during the test flights. A model with flexibility-extended equations of motion is presented. Results of maneuvers that were flown are compared with the predictions of that model and analyzed. Finally the results of the flight test program are examined critically, especially with respect to future applications, and suggestions are made in order to improve maneuvers for parameter estimation of very flexible aircraft.
The Crossflow Attenuated Natural Laminar Flow (CATNLF) flight test is an experimental evaluation of a laminar flow design approach that will be conducted on a small transonic wing-like model suspended from the Centerline Instrumented Pylon (CLIP) underneath an F-15 vehicle. The upcoming flight test is anticipated to provide experimental data that may be useful for transition prediction code calibrations or laminar flow computational studies. For the computational results to be reliable, relevant aerodynamics must be included in the simulations. It has been shown that the F-15 vehicle produces a notable aerodynamic influence on the CATNLF test article, and that removing the F-15 vehicle from the simulation significantly alters the laminar flow behavior. Because the F-15 vehicle is not a publicly-releasable geometry, if the CATNLF flight test dataset is to be widely used by the community, an alternative method to ensure that the CATNLF test article flight configuration aerodynamics is properly modeled is required. The objective of this research is to use the CDISC aerodynamic design tool to perform a remote design of a surface that would replicate the aerodynamic influence on the CATNLF test article. This new design approach, referred to as the Equivalent Loading via Interference Surface Effects (ELISE), is presented in this paper, including the details on the design setup and results. The ELISE design successfully reproduced the F-15 influence on the CATNLF test article, with predicted transition location within an average of 4% chord of the full flight configuration. An off-design assessment is included for small perturbations in Mach and sideslip angle that suggest the ELISE design can cover a reasonable range of expected flight conditions with the same geometry. This paper is intended to explain the design approach, as well as show results that can be expected when utilizing the ELISE design method.
The Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle is the first in a series of flight test vehicles that will take the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle design from development to operational capability. Ares I-X is scheduled for a 2009 flight date, early enough in the Ares I design and development process so that data obtained from the flight can impact the design of Ares I before its Critical Design Review. Decisions on Ares I-X scope, flight test objectives, and FTV fidelity were made prior to the Ares I systems requirements being baselined. This was necessary in order to achieve a development flight test to impact the Ares I design. Differences between the Ares I-X and the Ares I configurations are artifacts of formulating this experimental project at an early stage and the natural maturation of the Ares I design process. This paper describes the similarities and differences between the Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle and the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle. Areas of comparison include the outer mold line geometry, aerosciences, trajectory, structural modes, flight control architecture, separation sequence, and relevant element differences. Most of the outer mold line differences present between Ares I and Ares I-X are minor and will not have a significant effect on overall vehicle performance. The most significant impacts are related to the geometric differences in Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle at the forward end of the stack. These physical differences will cause differences in the flow physics in these areas. Even with these differences, the Ares I-X flight test is poised to meet all five primary objectives and six secondary objectives. Knowledge of what the Ares I-X flight test will provide in similitude to Ares I - as well as what the test will not provide - is important in the continued execution of the Ares I-X mission leading to its flight and the continued design and development of Ares I.