Anda di halaman 1dari 38

1T

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM x-636

PRELIMINARY PERFORMANCE APJALYSIS OF A I R LAUNCHING

MANNED ORBITAL VEHICLES*


H
2 By Donald R . Bellman and Harold P . Washington
2
9
SUMMARY

A p r e l i m i n a r y performance a n a l y s i s w a s made t o determine t h e


4
c a p a b i l i t y of l a r g e subsonic and supersonic bombers f o r a i r launching
manned hypersonic and s a t e l l i t e v e h i c l e s . The bombers considered now
e x i s t o r a r e b e i n g developed i n t h e United S t a t e s . Four b o o s t e r
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s were used i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s , w i t h a winged r e h i c l e of
t h e Dyna-Soar t y p e as t h e payload. Comparisons were made on t h e b a s i s
of vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse, burnout v e l o c i t y , r a t i o of payload weight
t o launch-package g r o s s weight, and s t r u c t u r a l weight.

The s t u d y showed t h a t b o o s t e r packages weighing no more t h a n


200,000 pounds a r e capable of a c c e l e r a t i n g a 10,000-pound winged
v e h i c l e t o o r b i t a l v e l o c i t y a f t e r being launched eastward from a
subsonic bomber, i f a vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse of about 335 seconds can
be achieved i n t h e b o o s t e r engines.

It w a s a l s o found t h a t a 1-percent v a r i a t i o n i n vacuum s p e c i f i c


impulse from a nominal v a l u e of 320 seconds r e s u l t s i n approximately a
,
1 - p e r c e n t v a r i a t i o n i n burnout v e l o c i t y ; whereas a n i n c r e a s e t o
6 p e r c e n t i n t h e r a t i o of payload weight t o launch-package g r o s s weight
from a nominal v a l u e of 5 percent d e c r e a s e s t h e burnout v e l o c i t y b y
1,400 f e e t p e r second.

It w a s determined a l s o t h a t t h e high d r a g of t h e b o o s t e r package


r e q u i r e d t o f i t t h e supersonic-launch a i r p l a n e o f f s e t s t h e performance
advantage of launching s u p e r s o n i c a l l y r a t h e r t h a n s u b s o n i c a l l y .
2

INTRODU CTI ON

The use of winged r e c o v e r a b l e v e h i c l e s p r o p e l l e d by e f f i c i e n t a i r -


b r e a t h i n g engines as f i r s t - s t a g e b o o s t e r s f o r hypersonic and s a t e l l i t e
v e h i c l e s has c o n s i d e r a b l e m e r i t , ranging from reduced b o o s t e r c o s t when
a l a r g e number of launches a r e t o be made t o i n c r e a s e d o p e r a t i o n a l
v e r s a t i l i t y . The use of t h i s technique f o r launching upper-atmosphere
sounding r o c k e t s has been f r e q u e n t l y advocated. A d i s c u s s i o n of t h e
technique i s p r e s e n t e d i n r e f e r e n c e s 1 and 2 . Launching a body i n t o an
e a r t h o r b i t by such means was proposed i n 1956 by A. C . R o b o t t i , who
based h i s c a l c u l a t i o n s on an F-102 a i r p l a n e ( r e f . 3 ) . A i r launching i s
a l s o t h e o b j e c t i v e of t h e more r e c e n t P r o j e c t Caleb, conducted by t h e
U. S . N a v y , i n which F4D and F4H a i r p l a n e s a r e used ( r e f . 4).

For many y e a r s t h e a i r - l a u n c h i n g technique was used t o launch t h e


X - 1 , X - 2 , and D-558-11 a i r c r a f t and i s now being used w i t h t h e X - 1 5
r e s e a r c h a i r p l a n e s . The r e s u l t a n t g a i n s i n performance and o p e r a t i o n a l
s a f e t y have been a p p r e c i a b l e . To a i r - l a u n c h manned s a t e l l i t e v e h i c l e s ,
however, w i l l r e q u i r e much g r e a t e r launch-package weight. Some a n a l y s t s
have proposed t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of l a r g e , s p e c i a l l y b u i l t a i r p l a n e s
p r o p e l l e d by t u r b o j e t and ram-jet engines f o r b o o s t i n g s a t e l l i t e v e h i c l e s
of such s i z e t h a t t h e y could be manned ( r e f s . 5 and 6 ) . Because of t h e
enormous c o s t and t h e time t h a t would be r e q u i r e d t o develop such a i r -
planes, i t i s b e l i e v e d expedient t o explore t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s of t h e
l a r g e r bombers t h a t now e x i s t o r a r e being developed i n t h e United
S t a t e s . Presented i n t h i s paper a r e t h e r e s u l t s of a p r e l i m i n a r y
a n a l y t i c a l s t u d y of t h e performance of s a t e l l i t e v e h i c l e s launched from
two of t h e s e bombers. S i m i l a r s t u d i e s have a l s o been made by o t h e r
i n v e s t i g a t o r s ( r e f . 7, f o r example).

I n t h e i n v e s t i g a t i c n , most of t h e launches were made a t a high


subsonic Mach number; however, t o show t h e e f f e c t of launch speed and
a l t i t u d e a few launches were made a t a Mach number of 3. A l t i t u d e s
were chosen t h a t were a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e speed and t y p e of a i r p l a n e
being considered. Launch-package weights ranged up t o 200,000 pounds
using f o u r d i f f e r e n t b o o s t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . Although a payload weight
of 10,000 pounds was used f o r most of t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s , l i g h t e r and
heavier weights were a l s o i n v e s t i g a t e d .

The launch
3

of n i t r o g e n t e t r o x i d e and mixed hydrazine f u e l as t h e p r o p e l l a n t . A


range of vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse from 300 seconds t o 340 seconds was
chosen i n o r d e r t o cover t h e p r a c t i c a l v a l u e s of t h i s p r o p e l l a n t combi-
n a t i o n and t o show t h e e f f e c t of vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse on v e h i c l e
performance .
C a l c u l a t i o n s were made a t t h e NASA F l i g h t Research Center, Edwards,
Calif. An IBM 650 d i g i t a l computer was used w i t h a program t h a t
considered t h e c u r v a t u r e o f t h e e a r t h , b u t n o t t h e e a r t h ' s r o t a t i o n .
H
2
2 SYMBOLS
9
ax l o n g i t u d i n a l a c c e l e r a t i o n , g units

CD drag c o e f f i c i e n t , based on a r e f e r e n c e a r e a of 330 sq f t

l i f t - c o e f f i c i e n t v a r i a t i o n with a n g l e of a t t a c k
CLa
D drag, l b

F t h r u s t , lb

g l o c a l a c c e l e r a t i o n of g r a v i t y , f t / s e c 2

gv c e n t r i p e t a l a c c e l e r a t i o n , f t / se c2

h altitude, f t

1; rate of change of a l t i t u d e with time, f t / s e c

vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse, sec


ISP
L l i f t , lb

M Mach number

P ambient p r e s s u r e , l b / s q f t

q dynamic p r e s s u r e , l b / s q f t

r r a d i u s of t h e e a r t h , f t

S t o t a l wing a r e a , sq f t
1.
t time, s e c
4

v velocity, f t / s e c

ir rate of change of v e l o c i t y w i t h t i m e , f t / s e c 2

nv incremental change i n v e l o c i t y , f t / s e c

W v e h i c l e weight, l b

a angle of a t t a c k , deg
H
7 f l i g h t -path a n g l e , deg 2
2
i. r a t e of change of f l i g h t - p a t h a n g l e w i t h t i m e , deg/sec 9
P atmospheric d e n s i t y , s l u g s / c u f t

Subscripts :

0 sea-level condition

bo burnout

vac vacuum

CONFIGURATIONS

I f a launch vehicle-booster-payload package, u t i l i z i n g a p r e s c r i b e d .


payload and an e x i s t i n g bomber, i s t o b e compatible, v a r i o u s modifi-
c a t i o n s t o t h e bomber w i l l be n e c e s s a r y and t h e b o o s t e r must be designed
t o f i t b o t h t h e bomber and t h e payload. With launch-package weights
approaching t h o s e of t h e launch v e h i c l e , p o s i t i o n i n g of t h e c e n t e r of
g r a v i t y i s very important, and, because t h e payload w i l l be manned,
a c c e s s t o t h e cockpit i s h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e . These f a c t o r s have been
considered i n t h i s study. An a r t i s t ' s conception of a subsonic bomber
c a r r y i n g one of t h e payload-booster combinations i s shown i n f i g u r e 1.

Pay1oad

The payload used i n t h i s s t u d y was a winged v e h i c l e of t h e D y n a -


Soar type, having an assumed wing area of 330 square f e e t . A l i f t i n g
payload was s e l e c t e d because i t r e p r e s e n t e d t h e more d i f f i c u l t b o o s t e r -
d e s i g n problem. A n o n l i f t i n g payload would have s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r
performance c a p a b i l i t y because of reduced drag and i n c r e a s e d p r o p e l l a n t J
mass r a t i o as a r e s u l t of l e s s demanding s t a b i l i z i n g - f i n requirements.
I

L ~
5

For most of t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s a payload weighing 10,000 pounds was


used. A f e w c a l c u l a t i o n s were made using 5,000-pound and 15,000-pound
payloads t o determine t h e e f f e c t of payload weight.

Boosters

The f o u r b a s i c b o o s t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s used t o perform t h e c a l c u -


l a t i o n s are d e s i g n a t e d as t y p e s A, B, C, and D . V a r i a t i o n s of t h e
H b o o s t e r s are i n d i c a t e d by numerical s u b s c r i p t s , f o r example A1. Phys-
2 i c a l d a t a on t h e b o o s t e r s are p r e s e n t e d i n t a b l e I . Each b o o s t e r was
2 equipped w i t h s u f f i c i e n t f i n area t o make t h e booster-payload combi-
9 n a t i o n n e u t r a l l y s t a b l e a t launch. All of t h e f i n s were considered
f i x e d , s i n c e it was assumed t h a t a j e t a t t i t u d e - c o n t r o l system was i n
o p e r a t i o n a t launch.

A drawing of t h e t y p e A b o o s t e r s w i t h f i n s a t t a c h e d i s shown i n
f i g u r e 2 . These b o o s t e r s were assumed t o be s i n g l e s t a g e and t o have
t h r e e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y f i r i n g r o c k e t engines of 100,000 pounds vacuum
t h r u s t each.

The t y p e B b o o s t e r s were of t h e two-stage tandem type, as shown i n


f i g u r e 3. These b o o s t e r s used t h r e e engines, two during t h e f i r s t
s t a g e and t h e remaining one f o r second-stage o p e r a t i o n . Each of t h e
t h r e e engines produced a vacuum t h r u s t of l50,OOO pounds.

F i g u r e 4 and f i g u r e 5 show t h e type C and t y p e D b o o s t e r configu-


r a t i o n s , r e s p e c t i v e l y . These c o n f i g u r a t i o n s were a l s o equipped w i t h
f i n s t o make t h e v e h i c l e n e u t r a l l y s t a b l e a t launch. Both configu-
r a t i o n s used t h r e e engines, two during t h e f i r s t - s t a g e o p e r a t i o n and
t h e remaining one for second-stage o p e r a t i o n . Each engine of b o t h
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s produced a vacuum t h r u s t of l50,OOO pounds. Placement
of t h e payload d i f f e r e d between t h e type C and t y p e D c o n f i g u r a t i o n .
For t h e t y p e C c o n f i g u r a t i o n , t h e payload was p l a c e d ahead of t h e
c l u s t e r of b o o s t e r s ; f o r t h e t y p e D c o n f i g u r a t i o n , t h e payload was
p l a c e d on t o p of t h e b o o s t e r c l u s t e r .

Because of t h e s p e c i f i c c o n f i g u r a t i o n s of t h e launch a i r p l a n e s
s e l e c t e d , t h e A, B, and C types w o u l d b e most s u i t a b l e f o r t h e subsonic-
launch a i r p l a n e and t h e D t y p e f o r the supersonic-launch a i r p l a n e . It
would b e p o s s i b l e , however, t o d e v i s e a D-type c o n f i g u r a t i o n t h a t could
be used w i t h b o t h launch a i r p l a n e s . This d e s i g n would i n c r e a s e v e r s a -
t i l i t y f o r a s i n g l e - b o o s t e r development, b u t d e c r e a s e t h e performance
'r c a p a b i l i t i e s from t h e subsonic launch.

Booster volumes were based on the u s e of n i t r o g e n t e t r o x i d e and


mixed hydrazine f u e l as t h e p r o p e l l a n t . This combination h a s an average
d e n s i t y of 75 pounds p e r cubic f o o t . For most of t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s , t h e
6

basic booster structure was assumed to be 4 percent of the combined


weight of the structure and the fuel. In a few instances, values of
2 percent and 8 percent were used. The fins were assumed to weigh an
additional 6 pounds per square foot. The 100,000-pound-thrust and
150,000-pound-thrust engines were assumed to weigh 1,250 pounds and
1,900 pounds, respectlvely. The chosen propellant combination has a
theoretical vacuum specific impulse of about 330 seconds, with a
'+O to 1 expansion nozzle. In the calculations, vacuum specific-impulse
values of 300 seconds, 320 seconds, and 340 seconds were used to show
the effect of the variable on performance. H
2
2
Carrier Airplanes 9
None of the proposed launch packages will fit completely in the
bomb bay of either the subsonic or the supersonic carrier airplane being
considered. However, for this study the packages are designed so that
required modifications to the carrier airplanes would involve only the
landing gear and nonstructural components of the fuselage and, possibly,
strengthening of the attach points.

For most of the launch-package configurations, the landing gear of


the subsonic-launch airplane would have to be extended and the tread
widened, which would make it impractical to retract the landing gear in
flight. In the computations the launch speed and altitude were reduced
from the normal cruise conditions to account for the increased drag
caused by the launch package and the extended landing gear.

It was assumed that the supersonic-launch airplane would have


sufficient excess power to compensate for the added drag of the launch
package, but streamlined fairings would have to be added.

COMPUTATION METHOD

The trajectories used for this preliminary analytical study were


calculated on an IBM 650 digital computer by using the Runge-Kutta
method of numerical integration. The equations of motion solved
assumed a nonrotating spherical earth. The two-dimensional equations
of motion then are
7

h = V sin 7
H
2 where
2
9

L =
2

During t h e n u m e r i c a l - i n t e g r a t i o n process, t h e r e q u i r e d values of


p r e s s u r e and d e n s i t y were o b t a i n e d from a s e r i e s of curve f i t s f o r t h e
ARDC model atmosphere ( r e f . 8 ) . Each c o n d i t i o n was computed by using
an i n t e g r a t i o n i n t e r v a l of 2 seconds from launch t o burnout.

P r e s e n t e d i n f i g u r e s 6 ( a ) t o 6(d) are p l o t s of t h e aerodynamic-


drag c o e f f i c i e n t s used i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h e various configu-
r a t i o n s . The elements which made up t h e s e drag c o e f f i c i e n t s were based
on wind-tunnel r e s u l t s from r e f e r e n c e 9 and a compilation of e m p i r i c a l
r e s u l t s from r e f e r e n c e 10.

Values of C b used f o r t h e four launch-package c o n f i g u r a t i o n s


were c a l c u l a t e d from t h e o r y f o r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s s i m i l a r t o t h o s e used i n
t h i s paper. For c o n f i g u r a t i o n s A, B, C, and D, t h e values of
cLa
used were, r e s p e c t i v e l y , 0.0556 deg-l, 0.0449 deg-l, 0.0274 deg-l, and
0.0375 deg-l. These values were based on t h e t o t a l l i f t i n g - s u r f a c e
a r e a ( s e e t a b l e I ) and were assumed c o n s t a n t throughout t h e Mach
number range.
8

TRAJXCTORIES AND STAGING

For t h e purposes of t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s , it was assumed t h a t each


c o n f i g u r a t i o n was launched i n t o a h o r i z o n t a l f l i g h t p a t h w i t h t h e
simultaneous i g n i t i o n of t h e f i r s t - s t a g e b o o s t e r engines and w i t h an
a n g l e of a t t a c k of 1.5". This a n g l e of a t t a c k was h e l d c o n s t a n t f o r a
s p e c i f i e d t i m e , then a zero-g t r a j e c t o r y was induced and h e l d u n t i l
burnout. The t i m e t o change a n g l e of a t t a c k was considered n e g l i g i b l e .
The time s p e n t a t an a n g l e of a t t a c k of 15" was a d j u s t e d t o o b t a i n
v a r i o u s f l i g h t - p a t h a n g l e s a t burnout of t h e l a s t s t a g e . The i d e a l
burnout p o i n t would be when t h e f l i g h t - p a t h a n g l e i s zero and t h e a l t i -
t u d e and v e l o c i t y are t h o s e r e q u i r e d f o r e q u i l i b r i u m g l i d e .

On t h e v e h i c l e s launched s u b s o n i c a l l y , t h e f i n s were dropped a t t h e


end of t h e p u l l - u p . F i n s were r e t a i n e d u n t i l t h e f i r s t - s t a g e burnout
on v e h i c l e s launched s u p e r s o n i c a l l y , s i n c e f i r s t - s t a g e burnout occurred
soon a f t e r t h e end of t h e p u l l - u p .

A t f i r s t - s t a g e burnout, t h e f i r s t - s t a g e b o o s t e r s were immediately


s e p a r a t e d from t h e v e h i c l e , and t h e second-stage b o o s t e r i g n i t e d imme-
d i a t e l y and remained w i t h t h e payload f o r t h e remainder of t h e t r a j e c -
t o r y . For t h e s u b s o n i c a l l y launched v e h i c l e s , s t a g i n g occurred a t
dynamic p r e s s u r e s of 50 pounds p e r square f o o t , o r l e s s . For t h e
s u p e r s o n i c a l l y launched v e h i c l e s , s t a g i n g occurred a t lower dynamic
pressures.

Figures 7(a) and 7 ( b ) show t r a j e c t o r i e s f o r t y p i c a l subsonic and


supersonic launches. F l i g h t - p a t h a n g l e , v e l o c i t y , dynamic p r e s s u r e ,
a l t i t u d e , and l o n g i t u d i n a l a c c e l e r a t i o n a r e p l o t t e d a g a i n s t time.

RESULTS

Results of t h e v a r i o u s computations a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t a b l e I1 and


i n f i g u r e 8. The t a b l e shows t h e i n t e r p o l a t e d values a t which a h o r i -
z o n t a l f l i g h t - p a t h angle c o i n c i d e s w i t h b u r n o u t , r a t h e r t h a n t h e e x a c t
p o i n t s of t h e computations. I n a c t u a l f l i g h t , it would b e n e c e s s a r y
f o r burnout t o occur when t h e v e h i c l e a l t i t u d e i s n e a r t h e e q u i l i b r i u m
r e e n t r y p a t h and a l s o when t h e f l i g h t p a t h i s w i t h i n 1" or 2" of
h o r i z o n t a l . A s can be seen i n f i g u r e s 8 ( a ) t o 8 ( h ) , t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s
a r e not always compatible. However, adjustments of t h e b o o s t e r - t h r u s t
programing and t h e i n i t i a l f l i g h t - p a t h a n g l e can o f t e n produce t h e
d e s i r e d r e s u l t s . Because of t h e p r e l i m i n a r y n a t u r e of t h i s i n v e s t i -
g a t i o n , o n l y f l i g h t - p a t h - a n g l e v a r i a t i o n s were made. No a t t e m p t was
made t o a d j u s t b o o s t e r - t h r u s t programing.
9

O r b i t a l v e l o c i t y i s achieved when t h e r e l a t i v e v e l o c i t y i s about


24,600 f e e t p e r second, assuming an eastward launch from t h e l a t i t u d e s
of t h e s o u t h e r n p a r t of t h e United S t a t e s . The s t u d y showed t h a t a
10,000-pound payload could r e a c h t h i s o r b i t a l v e l o c i t y from t h e subsonic-
launch c o n d i t i o n b y means of b o o s t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s B and C2 ( f i g s . 8 ( c )
and 8 ( e ) ) . However, vacuum s p e c i f i c - i m p u l s e v a l u e s of about 335 seconds
would be r e q u i r e d . The supersonic-launch c o n d i t i o n reduces t h e r e q u i r e d
vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse t o 305 and 301 seconds f o r B and C2 b o o s t e r
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , r e s p e c t i v e l y ( f i g s . 8(d) and S ( f ) ) . It a l s o p e r m i t s t h e
use of b o o s t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n D, b u t , again, a vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse of
H 335 seconds i s r e q u i r e d ( f i g . 8 ( h ) ) . Thus, it i s a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e
2
2 advantange of t h e s u p e r s o n i c launch can be l o s t i f i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o
use a high-drag c o n f i g u r a t i o n such a s t y p e D.

Although n o t as s i g n i f i c a n t as o r b i t a l v e l o c i t y , a v e l o c i t y of
I . 20,000 f e e t p e r second i s a valuable r e s e a r c h g o a l . A v e h i c l e a t t a i n i n g
speeds i n t h i s range can experience the maximum h e a t i n g rates of a
I -
r e e n t e r i n g o r b i t a l v e h i c l e . F i g u r e 8 ( b ) shows t h a t such a v e l o c i t y can
be a t t a i n e d w i t h a s i n g l e - s t a g e 150,000-pound b o o s t e r package, w i t h a
vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse o f l e s s t h a n 340 seconds, launched s u b s o n i c a l l y .
To avoid d u p l i c a t i o n of booster-development e f f o r t , a p r a c t i c a l p l a n
might be t o c o n s t r u c t a type C booster which i n i t i a l l y w i l l a t t a i n
v e l o c i t i e s i n e x c e s s of 20,000 f e e t per second, b u t n o t o r b i t a l speed.
Engine and s t r u c t u r a l improvements or, p o s s i b l y , a switch t o a s u p e r -
s o n i c launch would permit f u t u r e a t t a i n m e n t of o r b i t a l speeds.

The v a r i o u s b o o s t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a r e compared on t h e b a s i s of
vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse and burnout v e l o c i t y i n f i g u r e 9 ( a ) f o r t h e
subsonic launch and i n f i g u r e g ( b ) for t h e s u p e r s o n i c launch. These
d a t a are combined i n f i g u r e 10, which shows t h e i n c r e m e n t a l v e l o c i t y
r e s u l t i n g from d e v i a t i o n s i n vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse from a value of
320 seconds. A 1 - p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e i n vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse r e s u l t s
i n about a 1 - p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e i n burnout v e l o c i t y ; t h e r e f o r e , a
1-second change i n vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse r e s u l t s i n a change of about
70 f e e t p e r second i n burnout v e l o c i t y .
For a subsonic launch, burnout v e l o c i t i e s of v a r i o u s payload
weights w i t h a t y p e C b o o s t e r a r e shown i n f i g u r e 11. The e f f e c t on
burnout v e l o c i t y of v a r i a t i o n s i n the r a t i o of payload weight t o g r o s s
weight was i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n C b o o s t e r b o t h b y varying
t h e payload weight w i t h a c o n s t a n t gross weight and b y varying t h e g r o s s
weight f o r a c o n s t a n t payload weight. The r e s u l t s are compatible, as
shown i n f i g u r e 12. Changing t h e payload weight by 1 p e r c e n t of t h e
launch-package g r o s s weight from the nominal value of 5 p e r c e n t a f f e c t s
t h e m a x i m u m v e l o c i t y i n v e r s e l y by 1,400 f e e t p e r second for t h e type C
b o o s t e r launched s u b s o n i c a l l y .
10

For most of t h e computations, t h e s t r u c t u r a l weight w a s 4 p e r c e n t


of t h e combined f u e l and s t r u c t u r e w e i g h t . For t h e type A b o o s t e r
c o n f i g u r a t i o n , v a l u e s of 2 p e r c e n t and 4 p e r c e n t were used; f o r t h e
t y p e C b o o s t e r , v a l u e s of 4 p e r c e n t and 8 p e r c e n t were used. The e f f e c t
of t h e v a r i a t i o n s i s shown i n f i g u r e 13. Decreasing t h e r a t i o of
s t r u c t u r a l weight t o f u e l - p l u s - s t r u c t u r e weight from 4 p e r c e n t t o
3 percent i n c r e a s e s t h e burnout v e l o c i t y by 750 f e e t p e r second. I n -
c r e a s i n g t h i s r a t i o from 4 p e r c e n t t o 5 p e r c e n t w i l l d e c r e a s e t h e burn-
o u t v e l o c i t y by 550 f e e t p e r second f o r t h e c a s e s c o n s i d e r e d .
H
CONCLUSIONS 2
9
From a p r e l i m i n a r y performance a n a l y s i s of t h e u s e of l a r g e bomber
a i r p l a n e s t o a i r launch manned hypersonic and s a t e l l i t e v e h i c l e s , it i s
concluded t h a t :

1. Booster packages weighing no more t h a n 200,000 pounds a r e


capable of a c c e l e r a t i n g a 10,000-pound winged v e h i c l e t o o r b i t a l
v e l o c i t y a f t e r being launched eastward from a subsonic bomber, i f a
vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse of about 335 seconds can b e achieved i n t h e
booster engines.

2 . For most of t h e b o o s t e r c o n f i g u r a t i o n s s t u d i e d , a d e v i a t i o n of
1 percent i n vacuum s p e c i f i c impulse from a nominal v a l u e of 320 seconds
r e s u l t s i n about a 1-percent v a r i a t i o n i n burnout v e l o c i t y .

3. I n c r e a s i n g t h e r a t i o of payload weight t o launch-package g r o s s


weight t o 6 p e r c e n t from a nominal v a l u e of 5 p e r c e n t d e c r e a s e s t h e
burnout v e l o c i t y b y 1,400 f e e t per second f o r t h e t y p e C b o o s t e r
launched s u b s o n i c a l l y .

4. C o n f i g u r a t i o n requirements imposed on t h e b o o s t e r package by


t h e launch a i r p l a n e are a n important c o n s i d e r a t i o n . I n t h i s s t u d y t h e
h i g h drag of t h e b o o s t e r package r e q u i r e d t o f i t t h e supersonic-launch
a i r p l a n e o f f s e t s t h e performance advantages of launching s u p e r s o n i c a l l y
r a t h e r than s u b s o n i c a l l y .

F l i g h t Research Center,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Edwards, Calif ., October 9, 1961.
11

REFERENCES

1. ROSS, Malcolm D . : A i r c r a f t Launched Rockets, P a r t I . Rockair.


Sounding Rockets, Homer E. Newell, Jr., ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
I n c . , 1959, pp. 165-180.

2. K r a f f , Louis, J r . , and S l a v i n , Robert M . : A i r c r a f t Launched Rockets,


P a r t 11. Rockaire. Sounding Rockets, Homer E . N e w e l l , J r . , ed.,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., I n c . , 1959, pp. 181-189.

3. Robotti, Aurelio C.: S a t e l l i t e Launching From an F-102. Missiles


H and Rockets, v o l . 1, no. 2, Nov. 1956, pp. 54, 56, 58.
2
2 4. Anon. : Navy's Air-Launch S a t e l l i t e Program S t a r t s F l i g h t T e s t s
'9 Under "Caleb" P r o j e c t a t Mugu. Western Aviation, Missile and
Space I n d u s t r i e s , vol. 40, no. 10, Oct. 1960, pp. 4-5.
c
5. Kappus, P e t e r G . : Air-Breathing Power P l a n t s i n t h e Space E r a .
Aero/Space Eng., v o l . 17, no. 11, Nov. 1958, pp. 62-65, 69.

6. F e r r i , A., Daskim, W., Feldman, L., and Nucci, L. M . : The Launching


of Space Vehicles by Air-Breathing L i f t i n g Stages. Vol. 2 of
Vistas i n A s t r o n a u t i c s . P a r t I V Y Morton A l p e r i n and Hollingsworth
F. Gregory, eds., Pergamon Press, 1959, pp. 163-173.

7. Bulban, Erwin J . : B-52 Use as F i r s t - S t a g e Booster S t u d i e d .


Aviation Week and Space Technology, vol. 75, no. 9, Aug. 28, 1961,
PP* 72, 77.

8. Minzner, R. A., and Ripley, W. S . : The ARDC Model Atmosphere, 1956.


A i r Force Surveys i n Geophysics No. 86 (AFCRC-TN-56-204), A i r
Force Cambridge Res. Center (Bedford, Mass.), Dec. 1956.

9. Johnston, P a t r i c k J. , and Ladson, Charles L. : Experimental I n v e s t i -


g a t i o n of L o n g i t u d i n a l S t a t i c S t a b i l i t y o f a G l i d e r and 11 Booster
Configurations a t Mach Numbers From 1.62 t o 6.86. NASA TMX-356,
1961.
10. Hoerner, Sighard F. : Fluid-Dynamic Drag. Pub. by t h e a u t h o r
(148 Busteed D r . , Midland Park, N. J . ) , 1958.
12

3 W
9 1
( u . 3

r - r - I - I - I - I - I -

9 9
r - "r .-
n
000000
N t-ri 0 W - f
+ N c o O f o\
0; 4- 0; mi ;3-
rlNN(uNN

000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d SdQ"cu*; Eo
;- ;f-G-f-&-;;
tnC-o\QOrl
CUNNCUrr)W
rlma tnt-rnmo4
NN(u NNNNrr)(r

p:-
0
t-9-
O m
.-
c
3
?-
3
.-9-m

0
0
0-
tn n t n
m m t -

0
0
0-
0
-
0
m

000 300000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 300000


0Nif 3 N-f 0 N f O N 3 ON7i;fON-f 3 Nif 0 N;f
H m mmm 7 ? m m m m w mmm m m m m m m rnmmmmm

Q
k rl d w
4 V V
M
.d
14 "
k
a,
-P
rn
0
0
P

a
4
cd
a
s
16
.
c

c
u1
0
0
P

cd
k
P
I
18

c
/

a
0

Y
20

4-
.
" 2 30
rl
x
cd
9
k
a,
c,
rn
0
0
P

- - - - ----

-
T
cu 00

0. 0
0
21
22

s!
0
.d
+J
.
5
bo
.d
k
8
0

a
cd
0
rl
x
cd
?
k
e,
+I,
m
0
0
P
FI

E
E+

a
v
23

X
0

8
D

b
I I I I I
>- I I
0 0 0 0 000 0 0
c)3gooooo
m u c = M (u
-
24

IC) c c
25

--+
I I
I

0 0 0 0-
0 0 0
m cu -
4
26

m
0
X

-
m
PI
v1
000
O N 3
M M M
H
on0

m
0
x
0
0
Tf-
27

.
.

0
0
e " 7 1
0
rc)

t
w-
I '

c
I:

.
28

?n
n
U

rn M
V
a,

-
Ln

Pi
rn
000
O N 3
MMM
H
00 0
x

X
0 0
lo 0
M m
4
I
rc)
0

X ‘ I
0 1 0 c
0 I I 0 U
m cu cu
4-
Y-

.
32

X f I I
0 0 0 0 ON
Lo
Ln
rr)
0
rr)
Lo
cu
0
cu -

4-
re
c
L
33
.

k
0
rn
.ri

$
P

>-

4-1
0

V I
Q,
v) m
34

M
0
X

--T
\

\
\

\
\
0
In
M
1
,
I
0
cu
M
-
rc)

u
Q)
v,
c
a
-v)
35

0
a
rc)

0
Ln
rc)

0
d-
rc)

0
rc)
rc)

. 0
N
m

-
0
m

0
0
rr)

0
m
N

0
3
I I I

t-
Y-
m
21

In In 0
37

V I I
aJ
v)
1
cc
38

NASA-Langley, 1962 H-229