EXPLORATION

Recommendations

Info

70 CHAPTER 3 A New Agency, 1958–1959 represented as the red triangle dart across the NASA meatball logo.” 36 At Langley, development of the wing concept was spurred on by an evolving military need for flight at Mach 3. As tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union increased during the 1950s, one of the highest priority projects for the U. S. Air Force was developing an intercontinental supersonic bomber with an unrefueled combat radius of 4,000 nautical miles and the capability to deliver nuclear weapons to the Soviet Union. In 1955, the Air Force initiated Weapon System 110A (WS-110A) for industry design studies that ultimately led to the North American XB-70 and its demonstrated Mach 3 capability. In view of the criticality of supersonic efficiency to the WS-110 mission, a special classified study was led by Langley to assess the aerodynamic benefits of a 75-degree twisted and cambered arrow-wing bomber designed by Brown and McLean. The wing was contoured to provide trim and stability at the design condition for the WS-110A mission, including the necessary internal volume for fuel and weapons. The configuration was referred to within Langley as the “Brown Bomber.” The testing effort included evaluations of the Brown-McLean design in the Langley Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel in 1957 and 1958 and the Langley 7- by 10-Foot High-Speed Tunnel in 1958. 37 The objective 36 Funeral pamphlet for Elliott D. Katzen, to be deposited in the NASA HRC. Also see the announcement of Katzen’s passing in the Ames Astrogram, Spring 2012, p. 6. 37 Entered in test log of Langley Unitary Tunnel Test Section I as “Test 70 WS-110A Brown Bomber in UWT Low- Mach Number Test Section,” Langley Historical Archives, Wind-Tunnels by Donald Baals. Results of two supersonic tunnel entries are reported in Hallissy, Joseph M., Jr., and Hasson, Dennis F.: Aerodynamic Characteristics at Mach Numbers 2.36 and 2.87 of an Airplane Configuration having a Cambered Arrow Wing with a 75° Swept Leading Edge, NACA RM L58E21, 4 August 1958. of the Unitary tests was to measure aerodynamic performance at Mach 3, and the 7- by 10-Foot Tunnel test was to determine the low-speed landing, takeoff, and subsonic performance and stability characteristics of the configuration. 38 Both tests included the isolated wing and addition of components necessary for a real airplane including tail surfaces, engine pods, etc. Although the results of the supersonic wind-tunnel tests at Langley indicated an impressive maximum lift-drag ratio of 6.0 for the isolated wing at Mach 3, Brown was extremely disappointed because this value was appreciably lower than that anticipated based on his theoretical studies. Flow visualization studies revealed that flow separation on the upper wing surface occurred that could not be predicted using the limited theories of the day. The results of the research programs on the advanced wing concepts at Ames and Langley were reported in a session at the NACA Conference on High- Speed Aerodynamics held at Ames 18–20 March 1958. The primary purpose of the conference was to convey to the military services and their contractors the results of recent supersonic research and to provide those in attendance with an opportunity to discuss the results. Katzen reported on his efforts at Ames, and Donald D. 39, 40 Baals presented the results of the Langley activities. 38 The subsonic tests are discussed in Davenport, E. E. and Naseth, R. L., Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Investigation of the Aerodynamic Characteristics of an Airplane Having a Cambered Arrow Wing with a 75° Swept Leading Edge, NASA TM X-185, 1960. 39 Baals had a long and active career at the NACA and NASA, having designed Langley’s 4 by 4-Foot Supersonic Pressure Tunnel in the 1940s. He continued his career at Langley after the Center became a part of NASA and retired in 1975. 40 Elliott D. Katzen, “Idealized Wings and Wing-Bodies at a Mach Number of 3,” Paper 38, pp. 509–520; and Donald D. Baals, Thomas A. Toll, and Owen G. Morris, “Airplane Configurations for cruise at a Mach Number of 3,” Paper 39, pp. 521–542.
CHAPTER 3 A New Agency, 1958–1959 71 FIGURE 3-12. The Brown Bomber configuration during tests in the Langley Unitary Plan Tunnel in February 1958. (NASA LAL 58-826) After testing of the NACA Brown Bomber was completed at Langley in 1958, a red plastic display model was made from a mold of the wind-tunnel model. The red model was on display for visitors in Brown’s office and was then exhibited at the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel for many years. 41 In summary, the evidence gathered in this study— based on interviews of James Modarelli—reveals that he was inspired to include the arrow wing shape in the NASA logos by his encounter with the model during the Ames inspection. He then became aware of similar models at Langley and used common features to create his own artistic interpretation of a representative wing used in the NASA emblems. As previously discussed, his wing design changed as the interactions with the Army Heraldic Branch proceeded. A fitting conclusion 41 Jerry C. South, Jr., “Meatball Logo Based on Wind Tunnel Model,” The Researcher News, in-house newsletter, NASA Langley Research Center, 14 August 1992, p. 2. Also, Roy V. Harris, Jr., interview by Joseph Chambers, 1 November 2012. is that all three Centers and NASA Headquarters played a role in the creation of the NASA seal and insignia. 42 The U.S. Air Force and its industry teams that were part of the WS-110A project rightfully considered the highly swept cambered arrow-wing concept an unacceptably immature approach that would require years of extensive research in a number of disciplines, including propulsion integration, aeroelasticity, and flight control. Nonetheless, the lessons learned from wind-tunnel testing and theoretical analyses by Katzen, Brown, and McLean provided building blocks that later played key roles in NASA research on civil high-speed transports. The superior performance of the arrow wing for supersonic missions continues to make it a strong contender for future supersonic transport designs. 43 42 Letter from Harry J. DeVoto, retired Chief of Graphics and Exhibits at NACA Ames, to Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator, 11 June 1992. Headquarters Historical Records Collection, file 4540. 43 F. Edward McLean, Supersonic Cruise Technology, NASA SP-472, 1985.
Page 1:
EMBLEMS OF EXPLORATION Logos of the
Page 4 and 5:
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-P
Page 6 and 7:
iv Contents CHAPTER 3 A New Agency,
Page 8 and 9:
vi Preface the public in 2013, to g
Page 10 and 11:
viii Preface (WFC 1974-1981); Wallo
Page 12 and 13:
x Acknowledgments Many active and r
Page 14 and 15:
2 CHAPTER 1 Wings of Eagles, 1915-1
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
10 CHAPTER 1 Wings of Eagles, 1915-
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33: 20 CHAPTER 1 Wings of Eagles, 1915-
Page 34 and 35: 22 CHAPTER 2 Maturity and Pride, 19
Page 70 and 71: 58 CHAPTER 3 A New Agency, 1958-195
Page 87 and 88: CHAPTER 4 Fly Me to the Moon, 1960-
Page 101 and 102: CHAPTER 5 Controversy, 1975-1991 Th
Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 5 Controversy, 1975-1991 91
Page 117 and 118: CHAPTER 6 Back to the Future, 1992-
Page 133 and 134:
CHAPTER 6 Back to the Future, 1992-
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
CHAPTER 7 Summary This brief review
Page 143 and 144:
About the Authors Joseph R. Chamber
Page 145 and 146:
The NASA History Series Reference W
Page 147 and 148:
The NASA History Series 135 Garber,
Page 149 and 150:
The NASA History Series 137 Bowles,
Page 151 and 152:
The NASA History Series 139 Anderso
Page 153 and 154:
Index A Abbey, George W. S., 105, 1
Page 155 and 156:
Index 143 cowling concept, 10, 49 C
Page 157 and 158:
Index 145 Katzen, Elliott D., 59, 6
Page 159 and 160:
Index 147 meatball nickname for, 89
Page 161:
Index 149 supercritical-wing techno
show all

EXPLORATION

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?