SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Program considerations and results of feasibility study for small, recoverable lifting reentry vehicle test bed launched by Scout vehicle
Aerodynamic characteristics of HL-10 reentry vehicle model at subsonic and supersonic speeds
Lifting body vehicle handling qualities, considering X-24A, M2-F3 and HL-10 reentry vehicles flight characteristics and simulation requirements
Joint NASA-USAF lifting body flight test program and M2/F2, HL-10 and SV-5P research vehicles
Landing characteristics of dynamic model of HL-10 MANNED lifting entry vehicle
Refurbishable composite thermostructural heat shield panels for manned lifting entry vehicles
Air launch characteristics of HL-10 manned lifting reentry vehicle
Lift and drag measurements have been analyzed for subsonic flight conditions for seven blunt-based reentry-type vehicles. Five of the vehicles are lifting bodies (M2-F1, M2-F2, HL-10, X-24A, and X-24B) and two are wing-body configurations (the X-15 and the Space Shuttle Enterprise). Base pressure measurements indicate that the base drag for full-scale vehicles is approximately three times greater than predicted by Hoerner's equation for three-dimensional bodies. Base drag and forebody drag combine to provide an optimal overall minimum drag (a drag "bucket") for a given configuration. The magnitude of this optimal drag, as well as the associated forebody drag, is dependent on the ratio of base area to vehicle wetted area. Counter-intuitively, the flight-determined optimal minimum drag does not occur at the point of minimum forebody drag, but at a higher forebody drag value. It was also found that the chosen definition for reference area for lift parameters should include the projection of planform area ahead of the wing trailing edge (i.e., forebody plus wing). Results are assembled collectively to provide a greater understanding of this class of vehicles than would occur by considering them individually.
The origins of the lifting-body idea are traced back to the mid-1950's, when the concept of a manned satellite reentering the Earth's atmosphere in the form of a wingless lifting body was first proposed. The advantages of low reentry deceleration loads, range capability, and horizontal landing of a lifting reentry vehicle (as compared with the high deceleration loads and parachute landing of a capsule) are presented. The evolution of the hypersonic HL-10 lifting body is reviewed from the theoretical design and development process to its selection as one of two low-speed flight vehicles for fabrication and piloted flight testing. The design, development, and flight testing of the low-speed, air-launched, rocket-powered HL-10 was part of an unprecedented NASA and contractor effort. NASA Langley Research Center conceived and developed the vehicle shape and conducted numerous theoretical, experimental, and wind-tunnel studies. NASA Flight Research Center (now NASA Dryden Flight Research Center) was responsible for final low-speed (Mach numbers less than 2.0) aerodynamic analysis, piloted simulation, control law development, and flight tests. The prime contractor, Northrop Corp., was responsible for hardware design, fabrication, and integration. Interesting and unusual events in the flight testing are presented with a review of significant problems encountered in the first flight and how they were solved. Impressions by the pilots who flew the HL-10 are included. The HL-10 completed a successful 37-flight program, achieved the highest Mach number and altitude of this class vehicle, and contributed to the technology base used to develop the space shuttle and future generations of lifting bodies.
This paper examines flight-measured subsonic lift and drag characteristics of seven lifting-body and wing-body reentry vehicle configurations with truncated bases. The seven vehicles are the full-scale M2-F1, M2-F2, HL-10, X-24A, X-24B, and X-15 vehicles and the Space Shuttle prototype. Lift and drag data of the various vehicles are assembled under aerodynamic performance parameters and presented in several analytical and graphical formats. These formats unify the data and allow a greater understanding than studying the vehicles individually allows. Lift-curve slope data are studied with respect to aspect ratio and related to generic wind-tunnel model data and to theory for low-aspect-ratio planforms. The proper definition of reference area was critical for understanding and comparing the lift data. The drag components studied include minimum drag coefficient, lift-related drag, maximum lift-to-drag ratio, and, where available, base pressure coefficients. The effects of fineness ratio on forebody drag were also considered. The influence of forebody drag on afterbody (base) drag at low lift is shown to be related to Hoerner's compilation for body, airfoil, nacelle, and canopy drag. These analyses are intended to provide a useful analytical framework with which to compare and evaluate new vehicle configurations of the same generic family.
This report examines subsonic flight-measured lift and drag characteristics of seven lifting-body and wing-body reentry vehicle configurations with truncated bases. The seven vehicles are the full-scale M2-F1, M2-F2, HL-10, X-24A, X-24B, and X-15 vehicles and the Space Shuttle Enterprise. Subsonic flight lift and drag data of the various vehicles are assembled under aerodynamic performance parameters and presented in several analytical and graphical formats. These formats are intended to unify the data and allow a greater understanding than individually studying the vehicles allows. Lift-curve slope data are studied with respect to aspect ratio and related to generic wind-tunnel model data and to theory for low-aspect-ratio platforms. The definition of reference area is critical for understanding and comparing the lift data. The drag components studied include minimum drag coefficient, lift-related drag, maximum lift-to drag ratio, and, where available, base pressure coefficients. The influence of forebody drag on afterbody and base drag at low lift is shown to be related to Hoerner's compilation for body, airfoil, nacelle, and canopy drag. This feature may result in a reduced need of surface smoothness for vehicles with a large ratio of base area to wetted area. These analyses are intended to provide a useful analytical framework with which to compare and evaluate new vehicle configurations of the same generic family.
Manned lifting body flight test program, noting NASA M2-F2 and HL-10 and USAF SV-5P
NASA has a technology program in place to enable the development of a next generation Reusable Launch Vehicle that will carry our future payloads into orbit at a much-reduced cost. The VentureStar, Lifting Body (LB) flight vehicle, is one of the potential reusable launch vehicle configurations being studied. A LB vehicle has no wings and derives its lift solely from the shape of its body, and has the unique advantages of superior volumetric efficiency, better aerodynamic efficiency at high angles-of-attack and hypersonic speeds, and reduced thermal protection system weight. Classically, in a ballistic vehicle, drag has been employed to control the level of deceleration in reentry. In the LB, lift enables the vehicle to decelerate at higher altitudes for the same velocity and defines the reentry corridor which includes a greater cross range. This paper outlines the flight stability and control aspects of our LB heritage which was utilized in the design of the VentureStar LB and its test version, the X-33. NASA and the U.S. Air Force have a rich heritage of LB vehicle design and flight experience. In the initial LB Program, eight LB's were built and over 225 LB test flights were conducted through 1975. Three LB series were most significant in the advancement of today's LB technolocy: the M2-F; the HL-10; and the X-24 series. The M2-F series was designed by NASA Ames Research Center, the HL-10 series by NASA Langley Research Center, and the X-24 series by the U. S. Air Force. LB vehicles are alive again today with the X- 33, X-38, and VentureStar.
NASA has a technology program in place to build the X-33 test vehicle and then the full sized Reusable Launch Vehicle, VentureStar. VentureStar is a Lifting Body (LB) flight vehicle which will carry our future payloads into orbit, and will do so at a much reduced cost. There were three design contenders for the new Reusable Launch Vehicle: a Winged Vehicle, a Vertical Lander, and the Lifting Body(LB). The LB design won the competition. A LB vehicle has no wings and derives its lift solely from the shape of its body, and has the unique advantages of superior volumetric efficiency, better aerodynamic efficiency at high angles-of-attack and hypersonic speeds, and reduced thermal protection system weight. Classically, in a ballistic vehicle, drag has been employed to control the level of deceleration in reentry. In the LB, lift enables the vehicle to decelerate at higher altitudes for the same velocity and defines the reentry corridor which includes a greater cross range. This paper outlines our LB heritage which was utilized in the design of the new Reusable Launch Vehicle, VentureStar. NASA and the U.S. Air Force have a rich heritage of LB vehicle design and flight experience. Eight LB's were built and over 225 LB test flights were conducted through 1975 in the initial LB Program. Three LB series were most significant in the advancement of today's LB technology: the M2-F; HL-1O; and X-24 series. The M2-F series was designed by NASA Ames Research Center, the HL-10 series by NASA Langley Research Center, and the X-24 series by the Air Force. LB vehicles are alive again today.