To download as a PDF click here - US Army Center Of Military History

ReseaRch a n d developmenT In T h e aIR fo R c e 97
interceptor; the Republic Aircraft F–105 fighter-bomber; and the Boeing B–52
strategic heavy bomber. Data extracted from these tests verified in-flight thrust
calculations and assisted in the compilation of fuel consumption rates. 84 Testing
and evaluation of this type continued throughout the remainder of the 1960s
and into the following decades, especially as new military aircraft entered service,
such as the McDonnell-Douglas F–15 tactical fighter and the B–1 bomber
manufactured by Rockwell International. By the 1980s, AEDC engineers and
outside contractors were conducting separation tests on the external fuel tank and
solid-propellant rocket boosters that carried NASA’s shuttle orbiter into space.
Giant motor-driven compressors generated the 95,000 horsepower required
to produce the 7,000-mile-per-hour winds that passed over the boosters and
fuel tank during testing to ensure safe separation of the shuttle from the launch
vehicle. 85
The post-1960 diversification of the testing and evaluation functions
at the Arnold Engineering Development Center matched a corresponding
expansion of similar work on rocket propulsion technologies at Edwards Air
Force Base. In 1963, the rocket test facilities at Edwards were consolidated into
a new Rocket Propulsion Laboratory, whose civilian and military personnel
worked in collaboration with industrial contractors to improve the propulsion
units and requisite solid propellants for ballistic and air-launched missiles and
satellite space systems. The laboratory also provided technical support in the
development of upper-stage assemblies for launch vehicles. By the mid-1970s,
much of this in-house expertise was directed at the development of the MX
intercontinental ballistic missile. 86 The multiple-contractor-produced MX, also
known as Peacekeeper, entered service in 1986.
Although the ballistic missile program consumed a sizable portion of the
Air Force System Command’s in-house laboratory resources, it did not preclude
ongoing development of conventional aerial weapons. Technical progress in
this field was guided by the Armament Laboratory at Eglin Air Force Base.
Contractor-manufactured weapons technologies under development in the
laboratory in the 1960s included aircraft guns and rockets, air-delivered mines,
fuzes, explosives and gun propellants, incendiary and flame weapons, defoliants,
suspension and release equipment, and munitions ground-handling equipment.
Meanwhile, the escalation of the war in Vietnam prompted a sharp increase in
the laboratory’s workload in the 1960s; the budget increased sixfold between
84 J. Trainor, “Arnold Center Tests All Big Systems,” Missiles and Rockets 9 (14 August 1961): 31–34;
“Arnold Validates Systems Early in Design,” Aviation Week and Space Technology 75 (15 September 1961):
221–29.
85 M. L. Yaffee, “AEDC Facilities Busy, Despite Cuts,” Aviation Week and Space Technology 94 (26
April 1971): 36; C. Pugh, “Riding the Winds of Change,” Airman 27 (October 1983): 21. See also “Test
Facility to Boost Arnold Capability,” Aviation Week and Space Technology 110 (29 January 1979): 203–4;
C. Covault, “New USAF Division to Stress Research,” Aviation Week and Space Technology 112 (23 June
1980): 47–53; and B. Wanstall, “USAF Doubles Engine-Test Capability: $625 Million Boost for Arnold
Facility,” Interavia 40 (February 1985): 138–41.
86 “Rocket Lab Focuses on Advance Needs,” Aviation Week and Space Technology 101 (15 July 1974):
94–95, 97; D. E. Fink, “Minuteman Experience Aiding MX,” Aviation Week and Space Technology 105 (19
July 1976): 113–14.