DEVELOPMENT OF THE VEHICLE CONFIGURATION COMPENDIUM:

A COMPREHENSIVE DATA-INFORMATION-KNOWLEDGE SYSTEM TO AID IN

HIGH-SPEED VEHICLE DESIGN

by

STENILA SIMON

Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of

The University of Texas at Arlington in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements

for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AEROSPACE ENGINEERING

The University of Texas at Arlington

December 2021
Copyright © by Stenila Simon 2021
All Rights Reserved

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I want to thank my Savior Jesus Christ for strengthening me every
step of the way. None of my achievements are my own but the result of His deep mercies for
which I am forever grateful, and in Him I have found the most supportive friend.

Next, I want to thank my loving parents for their unconditional love and support through
my academic journey. They have sacrificed so much to help me get to where I am, supported me
through the long sleepless nights and cared for me when I have forgotten to care for myself. They
have seen me at my worst and continued to stand by my side.

Next of course I want to thank my supervising professor and good friend, Dr. Bernd
Chudoba, for helping me work on such a novel research topic. He has provided such valuable
insight and guidance throughout this research process and supported me throughout it all. I have
learned so much from him, both in terms of technical knowledge as well as mentoring skills. His
standards for excellence and perfectionism have inspired me to always put nothing short of the
best work forward, and I am proud to be his student.

I also want to thank each member in the AVD laboratory that supported me and cheered
me on. I want to thank Sam for his help in the publishing process and data management, and for
his guidance. I thank Ram for his prior involvement in the data collection and digitization
process. I want to thank Harin and Tony for becoming my support system during the writing
process, checking my work and giving corrections where necessary. I also want to thank Ian for
helping answer my deluge of questions regarding the historical aspects of my topic and others in
the lab. I also acknowledge and thank Aylric and Caitlin for helping check my work. I want to
thank Cody and Thomas for their friendship and humor during some of my most stressful days.
Last but not least, I want to thank Colin for being an immense help with the data sorting process.
I also thank all my friends outside the lab whom I have met through my capstone senior design
class, who have cheered for me and supported me.

This research effort would not have happened without your help, and to all of you, thank
you from the bottom of my heart.

iii
 ABSTRACT

DEVELOPMENT OF THE VEHICLE CONFIGURATION COMPENDIUM:

A COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE-KNOWLEDGEBASE SYSTEM TO AID IN

HYPERSONIC VEHICLE DESIGN

STENILA SIMON, M.S.

The University of Texas at Arlington, 2021

Supervising Professor: Bernd Chudoba

The conceptual design phase is the most crucial phase in hypersonic vehicle design.
Choices made during this phase will have significant impact on the success of the overall project
and the feasibility of the end-product. Therefore, it is of utmost importance for the design
decision-maker to be adequately informed of past-to-present projects throughout the aerospace
community and lessons learned from them. This avoids wasting valuable time and resources for
reinventing the wheel. There currently exists no one-stop solution in the aerospace industry to
address the issue of lost data, information and knowledge in the field of high-speed vehicle
design. The Vehicle Configuration Compendium (VCC) is a self-contained parametric library
envisioned by Dr. Chudoba and conceptualized and developed in the AVD (Aerospace Vehicle
Design) Laboratory with his guidance to address this need. The VCC combines a comprehensive
data, information and knowledgebase system and is currently in the alpha stage of software
development.
This compendium, developed to aid in design decision-making and forecasting, features
data, information and knowledge collected from hundreds of credible technical sources, which
have been selected, digitized, sorted and presented in a user-friendly graphical user interface to
parametrically support the education and utilization process of disciplinary analysis engineers,
multi-disciplinary designers, and students alike. Earning endorsement and high praise from
NASA for its role as a verification companion during the AVD Laboratory NASA-funded
research activity regarding hypersonic commercial transportation, the VCC is already proving
itself as a much-needed tool in the aerospace industry.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ iii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... xiv
NOMENCLATURE ...................................................................................................................xv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................1
1.1. Research Motivation and Objectives .................................................................................1
1.2. Survey of Current Aerospace Databases ...........................................................................4
1.3. The Vehicle Configuration Compendium .........................................................................7
1.3.1. Project Team.............................................................................................................9
1.4. Historical Progression .......................................................................................................9
1.5. Advantages of VCC.........................................................................................................12
1.6. The Importance of Conceptual Design ............................................................................14
1.7. VCC Methodology and Software Specification ..............................................................15
1.7.1. Standalone Software Specifications .......................................................................16
1.7.2. Integrated Software Specifications .........................................................................16
1.7.3. Future Specifications ..............................................................................................17
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................20
CHAPTER 2: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PROCESS ............................................................22
2.1. Introduction to Aerospace Design ...................................................................................22
2.2. Conceptual Design ..........................................................................................................23
2.2.1. Parametric Sizing ...................................................................................................25
2.2.2. Configuration Layout .............................................................................................26
2.2.3. Configuration Evaluation .......................................................................................27
2.2.3.1. Aerodynamics .............................................................................................29
2.2.3.2. Aerothermodynamics .................................................................................30
2.2.3.3. Propulsion ...................................................................................................31
2.2.3.4. Performance................................................................................................32
2.2.3.5. Stability and Control ..................................................................................33
2.2.3.6. Weights/Balances and Structures ...............................................................35

v
 2.2.3.8. Cost and Market .........................................................................................36
2.3. Synthesis Processes Available.........................................................................................37
2.3.1. Hypersonic Convergence .......................................................................................38
2.4. Application of a DIB-KB System in Design ...................................................................42
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................44
CHAPTER 3: AEROSPACE VEHICLE DESIGN SYNTHESIS (AVDS) .........................46
3.1. Introduction to AVDS .....................................................................................................46
3.1.1. History of AVDS ....................................................................................................50
3.1.1.1. AVDS FORTRAN .....................................................................................51
3.1.1.2. AVDS MATLAB .......................................................................................52
3.1.1.3. AVDS Python .............................................................................................54
3.2. AVDS Tool Development and Design Execution Domain .............................................55
3.2.1. Decomposition: Warehouse Domain......................................................................55
3.2.2. Synthesis Code: Generation Domain .....................................................................58
3.2.3. Design: Execution Domain ....................................................................................59
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................61
CHAPTER 4: VEHICLE CONFIGURATION COMPENDIUM SPECIFICATIONS ....62
4.1. Standalone Software ........................................................................................................62
4.1.1. Storage of Past-to-Present Design Data .................................................................62
4.1.2. Storage of Past-to-Present Information ..................................................................63
4.1.3. Storage of Past-to-Present Knowledge ...................................................................63
4.1.4. Generation of New Design Knowledge and Recommendations ............................63
4.1.5. Provide Reference Library .....................................................................................64
4.1.6. Data-Information-Knowledge Richness .................................................................64
4.1.7. Graphical User Interface ........................................................................................65
4.2. Integrated System with AVDS ........................................................................................65
4.2.1. Vehicle Decomposition – Verification ...................................................................66
4.2.2. Vehicle Decomposition – Reverse Engineering .....................................................66
4.2.3. Single-Point Vehicle Sizing with Knowledgebase .................................................67
4.2.4. Multi-Point Design Study – Trades ........................................................................69
4.2.5. Enhancing Libraries ...............................................................................................69
4.2.6. Post-Sizing: Benchmark Comparisons ...................................................................69

vi
 4.2.7. Integrating AVDS Back to VCC ............................................................................70
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................71
CHAPTER 5: METHODOLOGY AND PROCESSES ........................................................72
5.1 Vehicle Configuration Compendium Development Process: Overview ..........................72
5.2 Data-Information-Base Buildup .......................................................................................74
5.2.1. Data Organization Process .....................................................................................75
5.2.1.1. Data ............................................................................................................76
5.2.1.2. Information .................................................................................................76
5.2.1.3. Knowledge..................................................................................................76
5.2.1.4. Methods ......................................................................................................76
5.2.1.5. Process ........................................................................................................76
5.2.1.6. Synthesis .....................................................................................................77
5.2.1.7. Geometry ....................................................................................................77
5.2.1.8. Aerodynamics .............................................................................................78
5.2.1.9. Aerothermodynamics/TPS .........................................................................79
5.2.1.10. Propulsion .................................................................................................80
5.2.1.11. Stability and Control ................................................................................81
5.2.1.12. Weights and Balances ..............................................................................82
5.2.1.13. Performance and trajectory ......................................................................83
5.2.2. Digitization Process ................................................................................................85
5.3 Knowledgebase Buildup...................................................................................................89
5.4. Graphical User Interface Development ...........................................................................93
5.4.1. Standalone VCC User Interface Design .................................................................95
5.5. AVDS Integration Map ...................................................................................................97
5.5.1. Integration Practices ...............................................................................................98
5.6. Documentation Procedure ...............................................................................................99
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................101
CHAPTER 6: SOURCE MATERIAL LIBRARY...............................................................103
6.1. Data Richness ................................................................................................................103
6.1.1. Disciplinary Information Sought ..........................................................................103
6.1.2. Absolute Data-Information Richness ...................................................................103
6.2. VCC Vehicle Selection .................................................................................................106

vii
 6.2.1. X-51 ......................................................................................................................107
6.3.1.1. History and Development .........................................................................108
6.3.1.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................108
6.2.2. X-43A ...................................................................................................................109
6.3.2.1. History and Development Cycle ..............................................................110
6.3.2.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................111
6.2.3. XB-70 ...................................................................................................................112
6.3.3.1. History and Development Cycle ..............................................................113
6.3.3.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................114
6.2.4. SR-71 ....................................................................................................................114
6.3.4.1. History and Development Cycle ..............................................................115
6.3.4.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................116
6.2.5. Concorde ..............................................................................................................117
6.3.5.1. History and Development Cycle ..............................................................118
6.3.5.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................119
6.2.6. NASP X-30...........................................................................................................120
6.3.6.1. History and Development Cycle ..............................................................121
6.3.6.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................122
6.2.7. Sänger-II ...............................................................................................................123
6.3.7.1. History and Development Cycle ..............................................................124
6.3.7.2. Sources Compiled.....................................................................................125
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................126
CHAPTER 7: COMPENDIUM IMPLEMENTATION......................................................129
7.1. Data Collection ..............................................................................................................129
7.1.1. Defining Data .......................................................................................................129
7.1.2. Disciplinary Design Data .....................................................................................130
7.2. Information Conversion/Visualization ..........................................................................132
7.2.1. Defining Information ............................................................................................132
7.2.2. Disciplinary Design Information ..........................................................................134
7.3. Knowledge Generation ..................................................................................................136
7.3.1. Defining Knowledge ............................................................................................136
7.3.2. Categorizations for Comparison ...........................................................................142

viii
 7.3.2.1. Configurations ..........................................................................................142
7.3.2.2. Cross-Section Concepts ............................................................................144
7.3.2.3. Speed Regimes .........................................................................................145
7.3.2.5. Propulsion System Type ...........................................................................145
7.3.2.6. Mission Type ............................................................................................145
7.3.3. Knowledge Usefulness Rubric .............................................................................146
7.3.3.1. Scoring Knowledge Graphic Type – Vehicle Comparison ......................147
7.3.3.2. Scoring Knowledge Graphic Type – Disciplinary Comparison ...............148
7.3.3.3. No Categories Specified ...........................................................................149
7.3.4. Design Knowledge Collected ...............................................................................150
7.3.5. Knowledge Trends Generated ..............................................................................155
7.3.5.1. Aerodynamics ...........................................................................................155
7.3.5.2. Aerothermodynamics ...............................................................................157
7.3.5.3. Propulsion .................................................................................................160
7.3.5.4. Performance..............................................................................................160
7.3.5.5. Stability and Control ................................................................................161
7.4. Compendium Usage – Case Studies and Examples ......................................................163
7.4.1. Disciplinary Verification ......................................................................................164
7.4.2. Sizing Verification ...............................................................................................169
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................171
CHAPTER 8: SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................172
8.1. Mapping Out Release Schedule ....................................................................................172
8.1.1. Alpha Prototype ....................................................................................................174
8.1.2. Beta Version .........................................................................................................175
8.1.3. Release Candidate ................................................................................................175
8.2. Graphical User Interface Development .........................................................................176
8.2.1. Graphical Use Interface Logic Flow ....................................................................176
8.2.2. Coding Using Python ...........................................................................................177
8.3. User Testing ..................................................................................................................182
8.3.1. User Testing Results .............................................................................................183
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................185
CHAPTER 9: FUTURE WORK ...........................................................................................186

ix
 9.1. Expansion and Enhancement of the Compendium........................................................186
9.2. Improving Upon Current Software Interface ................................................................188
9.3. Map Out Automation of Processes ................................................................................189
9.4. Integration with AVDS .................................................................................................190
9.5. Future Technology Integration ......................................................................................191
APPENDIX A: Vehicle Bibliographies ....................................................................................192
APPENDIX B: Verification Study Conducted Using AVDS-VCC During NASA Study ......232
APPENDIX C: Vehicle Performance Overviews .....................................................................236
APPENDIX D: Software User Manual.....................................................................................241
APPENDIX F: Software User Testing Format .........................................................................252
APPENDIX G: User Testing Results .......................................................................................256
APPENDIX H: Abstracts of Topic-Related Publications from AVD Laboratory ...................259

x
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1. Hypersonic projects of the past source [1] .............................................................................. 1

Figure 1.2. Knowledge loss problem in industry visualized ...................................................................... 4
Figure 1.3. Types of data contained in databases surveyed ....................................................................... 6
Figure 1.4. Comparing Ranganathan's library trinity to the VCC ............................................................. 8
Figure 1.5. Historical timeline leading to development of the Vehicle Configuration Compendium ..... 10
Figure 1.6. Data-Information-Knowledge cycle [13] .............................................................................. 12
Figure 1.7. The conceptual design ladder with each design step illustrated [16] .................................... 15
Figure 1.8. Example of future workstation of conceptual design engineer [18] ...................................... 17
Figure 1.9. The VCC – example visual of possible holographic interface .............................................. 18
Figure 1.10. Hologram example - jet engine HUD [19] .......................................................................... 19
Figure 2.1. Aerospace vehicle design process illustrating design refinement [2].................................... 22
Figure 2.2. Three subphases of the conceptual design process and feedback loops illustrated ............... 24
Figure 2.3. Example solution space from previous capstone project [7] ................................................. 26
Figure 2.4. Vehicle stability and moment axes [1] .................................................................................. 34
Figure 2.5. Hypersonic convergence process mapped ............................................................................. 39
Figure 2.6. Solution space constrained by ICI [30] ................................................................................. 41
Figure 3.1. AVDS methodology and process diagram [3]....................................................................... 49
Figure 3.2. Evolution of AVDS system through various programming languages [5] [6] [7] ................ 50
Figure 3.3. Design toolbox [5] ................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 3.4. Fundamental AVD sizing logic [5] ....................................................................................... 52
Figure 3.5. Lex Gonzalez - breakdown of synthesis systems [6] ............................................................ 53
Figure 3.6. AVDS Python architecture [7] .............................................................................................. 54
Figure 3.7. AVDS process – decomposition warehouse domain [4] ....................................................... 56
Figure 3.8. AVDS process - synthesis code generation domain [4] ........................................................ 59
Figure 3.9. AVDS process - design execution domain [4] ...................................................................... 60
Figure 4.1. The difference between vehicle composition and decomposition ......................................... 67
Figure 4.2. Scope of mission and system concepts considered - AVDS [2]............................................ 68
Figure 5.1. Detailed VCC development process diagram........................................................................ 72
Figure 5.2. Structure of the Vehicle Configuration Compendium........................................................... 73
Figure 5.3. VCC Data collection process ................................................................................................ 75
Figure 5.4. Blank template of datasheet used for VCC-DIK organization .............................................. 84
Figure 5.5. Digitization process of a sample plot demonstrated .............................................................. 86
Figure 5.6. Overall datasheet with sample entry ..................................................................................... 87
Figure 5.7. Engine thrust ratio plot - Sänger II [11] ................................................................................ 88
Figure 5.8. WebPlotDigitizer menu ......................................................................................................... 88
Figure 5.9. Information to knowledge conversion process ...................................................................... 90
Figure 5.10. Lift-to-drag ratio against Mach number [16]....................................................................... 91
Figure 5.11. Cyclical GUI development process [17] ............................................................................. 93
Figure 5.12. VCC graphical user interface logic flowchart ..................................................................... 96
Figure 5.13. Integration of VCC in AVDS - CD phase ........................................................................... 97
Figure 5.14. Designer's ideal workstation setup [19]............................................................................... 98
Figure 6.1. Absolute Data-Information Richness - VCC prototype vehicles ........................................ 104

xi
Figure 6.2. Relative Data Richness - VCC vehicles .............................................................................. 105
Figure 6.3. X-51 geometry [3] ............................................................................................................... 107
Figure 6.4. X-51 development timeline [6] ........................................................................................... 108
Figure 6.5. Source type breakdown - X-51A ......................................................................................... 109
Figure 6.6. X-43A geometry [3] ............................................................................................................ 110
Figure 6.7. X-43A historical timeline [11] ............................................................................................ 110
Figure 6.8. Source type breakdown - X-43A ......................................................................................... 111
Figure 6.9. XB-70 geometry [3] ............................................................................................................ 112
Figure 6.10. XB-70 historical timeline [17] [18] ................................................................................... 113
Figure 6.11. Source type breakdown - XB-70 ....................................................................................... 114
Figure 6.12. SR-71 geometry [3] ........................................................................................................... 115
Figure 6.13. SR-71 historical timeline ................................................................................................... 116
Figure 6.14. Source type breakdown - SR-71 ........................................................................................ 117
Figure 6.15. Concorde geometry [3] ...................................................................................................... 118
Figure 6.16. Concorde historical timeline ............................................................................................. 119
Figure 6.17. Source type breakdown - Concorde .................................................................................. 120
Figure 6.18. NASP X-30 geometry [29] ................................................................................................ 121
Figure 6.19. NASP X-30 historical timeline.......................................................................................... 121
Figure 6.20. Source type breakdown - NASP X-30 .............................................................................. 123
Figure 6.21. Sänger II geometry [3] ...................................................................................................... 124
Figure 6.22. Sänger-II historical timeline .............................................................................................. 125
Figure 6.23. Source type breakdown - Sänger - II ................................................................................. 125
Figure 7.1. Overall percentage breakdown of DIK collected ................................................................ 129
Figure 7.2. Amount of D-I-K found by discipline ................................................................................. 131
Figure 7.3. Elements of a data table....................................................................................................... 132
Figure 7.4. Amount of D-I-K found: (a) by vehicle, and (b) by discipline ........................................... 133
Figure 7.5. Data to information transformation process [1] .................................................................. 134
Figure 7.6. Screenshot from VCC database file showcasing amount of digital data stored .................. 135
Figure 7.7. Elements of an information plot .......................................................................................... 136
Figure 7.8. Two types of knowledge graphics illustrated ...................................................................... 138
Figure 7.9. Elements of a knowledge graphic ....................................................................................... 139
Figure 7.10. Process of converting information to knowledge .............................................................. 140
Figure 7.11. Example of information-to-knowledge process carried out .............................................. 141
Figure 7.12. Various aircraft configurations – schematics reproduced from Dr. Chudoba [5] ............ 143
Figure 7.13. Various aircraft cross-sections .......................................................................................... 144
Figure 7.14. Rubric developed for determining usefulness of a knowledge graphic............................. 147
Figure 7.15. Mass ratio comparison [8] ................................................................................................. 148
Figure 7.16. Lift coefficient vs. angle of attack - Sänger II [9] ............................................................. 149
Figure 7.17. Net mass fraction vs. ascent propellant mass [10] ............................................................ 150
Figure 7.18. 𝐼𝑠𝑝 vs. Mach for various engines [11] .............................................................................. 151
Figure 7.19. Breakdown of knowledge plot: Isp vs. Mach comparison.................................................. 152
Figure 7.20. Isp vs. Mach for different engine and fuel types [12] ......................................................... 152
Figure 7.21. Breakdown of knowledge plot: Isp vs. Mach comparison (fuel types added) .................... 153
Figure 7.22. Lift-to-drag ratio against Mach number [13]..................................................................... 154

xii
Figure 7.23. Breakdown of knowledge plot: lift to drag ratio vs. Mach number .................................. 154
Figure 7.24. Knowledge plot – lift-curve slope for various vehicles comparing two configurations and
three speed regimes................................................................................................................................ 155
Figure 7.25. Knowledge plot - drag polar generated from VCC information plots ............................... 157
Figure 7.26. SR-71 temperature profile collected from VCC effort [14] .............................................. 158
Figure 7.27. Knowledge plot - maximum temperatures experienced across vehicle body.................... 158
Figure 7.28. Knowledge chart - materials comparison for high-speed vehicles (TPS and airframe) .... 159
Figure 7.29. Knowledge plot - SFC vs. Mach number comparison for four vehicles ........................... 160
Figure 7.30. Knowledge plot - comparison of mission profiles ............................................................ 161
Figure 7.31. Knowledge plot - Cm vs. AOA - multiple configurations compared ................................ 162
Figure 7.32. Using regressions to produce configurational comparison ............................................... 163
Figure 7.33. Drag polar for X-51 aerodynamics method verification using VSP model geometry[4] .. 164
Figure 7.34. Drag polar for X-51 aero method verification using VSP model geometry - closest match at
Mach 5 [4] ............................................................................................................................................. 165
Figure 7.35. X-51 verification of lift-curve slope - survey of Mach numbers to find closest match[4] 166
Figure 7.36. Thrust vs. altitude verification plot - XB-70 J-93 engine [4] ............................................ 166
Figure 7.37. Verification of X-51 mission decomposition by AVDS against VCC [4] ........................ 167
Figure 7.38. Verification of AVDS generated Concorde mission profile using VCC data [4] ............. 168
Figure 7.39. Sänger verification of supersonic lift-to-drag ratio [4]...................................................... 168
Figure 8.1. Synchronize-and-stabilize software development model used by Microsoft [1] ................ 173
Figure 8.2. VCC alpha version development cycle ............................................................................... 174
Figure 8.3. Graphical user interface logic flowchart ............................................................................. 176
Figure 8.4. VCC interface - initial window ........................................................................................... 178
Figure 8.5. VCC interface - vehicle selection ........................................................................................ 178
Figure 8.6. VCC interface - disciplinary selection ................................................................................ 179
Figure 8.7. VCC interface - vehicle bibliography pop-up window ....................................................... 179
Figure 8.8. VCC interface - viewing data and information ................................................................... 180
Figure 8.9. VCC interface - initiating knowledgebase .......................................................................... 180
Figure 8.10. VCC interface - comparing configurations ....................................................................... 181
Figure 8.11. VCC interface - viewing knowledge graphic for a specific discipline .............................. 181
Figure 8.12. VCC usability test plan format .......................................................................................... 182

xiii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1. Aerospace Database Survey Table ........................................................................................... 5

Table 1.2. Comparison between VCC and Other Databases – Common Attributes Found .................... 13
Table 2.1. Participation of Disciplines in Configuration Layout ............................................................. 27
Table 2.2. List of Design Texts To-Date ................................................................................................. 37
Table 2.3. Variables in Weight Budget Equation [30]............................................................................. 40
Table 2.4. Variables in Volume Budget Equation [30] ........................................................................... 40
Table 3.1. Aircraft and Aerospace Vehicle Class IV Synthesis Systems ................................................ 46
Table 5.1. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Synthesis ....................................................... 77
Table 5.2. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Geometry ...................................................... 78
Table 5.3. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Aerodynamics ............................................... 79
Table 5.4. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Aerothermodynamics ................................... 80
Table 5.5. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Propulsion ..................................................... 81
Table 5.6. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Stability and Control..................................... 82
Table 5.7. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Weights and Balances................................... 82
Table 5.8. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Performance/Trajectory ................................ 83
Table 5.9. List of Digitization Tools Surveyed ....................................................................................... 85
Table 5.10. Initial List of KB Deliverables by Discipline ....................................................................... 92
Table 5.11. Microsoft Guide for UI Development [18] ........................................................................... 94
Table 5.12. Common Software Integration Formats [20] ........................................................................ 99
Table 6.1. Summary of Vehicles - VCC Prototype ............................................................................... 106
Table 7.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Data ............................................................................... 130
Table 7.2. Advantages and Disadvantages of Information .................................................................... 133
Table 7.3. Advantages and Disadvantages of Knowledge Graphics ..................................................... 137
Table 7.4. Comparison of AVDS X-51 Sizing Results to Vehicle Data from VCC [4] ........................ 169
Table 8.1. Planned Release Schedule of VCC Software ....................................................................... 173
Table 8.2. Imported Python Modules .................................................................................................... 177

xiv
 NOMENCLATURE

Abbreviations

A.C. Aerodynamic Center

AB All-Body
ADIR Absolute Data-Information Richness
AFRL Air Force Research Laboratory
AI Artificial Intelligence
AIDRA- Artificial Intelligence Design and Research Assistant –
DSS Decision Support System
AOA Angle of Attack
AR Aspect Ratio
AV Air Vehicle
AVD Aerospace Vehicle Design
AVDS Aerospace Vehicle Design Synthesis
BAC British Aircraft Corporation
BB Blended Body
C.G. Center of Gravity
C.P. Center of Pressure
CD Conceptual Design
CE Configuration Evaluation
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
CI Continuous Integration
CL Configuration Layout
CMDS Complex Multidisciplinary System
DARPA Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
DB DataBase
DBMS Data-Base Management System
DBS Data-Base System
DD Detailed Design
DIK Data-Information-Knowledge
FWC Flying Wing Configuration
GASL General Applied Science Labs
GHV Generic Hypersonic Vehicle
GUI Graphical User Interface
HOTOL HOrizontal Take-Off Landing
HUD Head Up Display
HXLV Hyper-X Launch Vehicle
HyTECH Hypersonic TECHnology
ICI Industrial Capability Index

xv
 KB Knowledge-Base
KBS Knowledge-Base System
LAPCAT Long-Term Advanced Propulsion Concepts and Technologies
LCC Life Cycle Cost
m.a.c. Mean Aerodynamic Chord
MATLAB MATrix LABoratory
MBB Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm
N.P. Neutral Point
NAA North American Aviation
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASP National Aero-Space Plane
OEW Operating Empty Weight
OFWC Oblique Flying Wing Configuration
OWC Oblique Wing Configuration
OWE Operating Weight Empty
PD Preliminary Design
PDF Portable Document Format
PhD Doctor of Philosophy
Png Portable Network Graphics
PrADO Preliminary Aircraft Design and Optimization
PS Preliminary Sizing
RDIR Relative Data-Information Richness
S.M. Static Margin
SDLC Software Development Life Cycle
SFC Specific Fuel Consumption
SNECMA Société nationale d'études et de construction de moteurs d'aviation
SQLite Structured Query Language
SR Strategic Reconnaissance
SSTO Single Stage To Orbit
STL STereoLithography
TAC Tail Aft Configuration
TFC Tail Forward Configuration
TOGW Take-Off Gross Weight
TPS Thermal Protection Systems
TSC Three-Surface Configuration
TSFC Thrust-Specific Fuel Consumption
TSTO Two-Stage To Orbit
UTA University of Texas at Arlington
VCC Vehicle Configuration Compendium
WB Wing-Body
WL Wing Loading
WR Weight Ratio

xvi
Symbols

𝑏 Width
𝐶𝐷 Coefficient of drag
𝐶𝐷0 Coefficient of zero lift drag

𝐶𝐷𝑖 Coefficient of induced drag

𝐶𝑓𝑒 Coefficient of equivalent skin friction

𝐶ℓ Coefficient of rolling moment

𝐶ℓ𝛼 Variation of coefficient of rolling moment with angle of attack

𝐶ℓ𝛽 Variation of coefficient of rolling moment with angle of sideslip

𝐶ℓ𝑝 Variation of coefficient of rolling moment with roll rate

𝐶𝐿 Coefficient of lift
𝐶𝐿𝛼 Variation of coefficient of lift with angle of attack

𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑢𝑣𝑒𝑟 Coefficient of lift for maneuver

𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum coefficient of lift

𝐶𝑚 Coefficient of pitching moment

𝐶𝑚𝛼 Variation of coefficient of pitching moment with angle of attack

𝐶𝑚𝑞 Variation of coefficient of pitching moment with pitch rate

𝐶𝑛 Coefficient of yawing moment

𝐶𝑛𝛽 Variation of coefficient of yawing moment with angle of sideslip

𝐶𝑛𝑟 Variation of coefficient of yawing moment with yaw rate

𝐶𝑠𝑦𝑠 System weight constant

𝐷 Drag force
𝐸 Endurance
𝐸𝑇𝑊 Engine thrust to weight ratio
𝐹 Thrust force
𝑓 Fuel/air ratio

xvii
𝐹 ⁄𝑚̇ Specific thrust
𝑓𝑠𝑦𝑠 Fraction of system weights

𝐼𝑝 Propulsion index

𝐼𝑠𝑝 Specific impulse

𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑟 Structural index

𝑘 Drag polar constant
𝐾𝑐𝑟𝑤 Crew volume coefficient
𝐾𝑣𝑒 Engine volume coefficient
𝐾𝑣𝑠 System volume coefficient
𝐾𝑣𝑣 Void volume coefficient
𝐾𝑤 Area ratio (𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡 ⁄𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 )

ℒ Rolling moment
𝐿 Lift force
𝐿𝑓 Fuselage side-force

𝐿𝑉𝑇 Vertical tail side-force

𝐿⁄𝐷 Lift to drag ratio
𝑚̇ Mass flow rate
𝑚̇0 Freestream mass flow rate
𝑚̇𝑒 Exit mass flow rate
𝑁 Directional moment
𝑁𝑐𝑟𝑤 Number of crew members
𝑁𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 Directional moment due to asymmetric power effects

𝑁𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 Directional moment due to wing

𝑞 Dynamic pressure
𝑅 Range
𝑆 Span
𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 Planform area

xviii
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 Reference area

𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡 Wetted surface area

𝑇 Thrust
𝑇⁄𝑊0 Thrust-to-weight ratio
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙 Available thrust
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum thrust
𝑇𝑛 Net thrust
𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑞 Required thrust

𝑉 Velocity
𝑉𝑐𝑟𝑤 Volume for cabin space/crew needs
𝑉0 Freestream velocity
𝑉𝑒 Exit velocity
𝑉−𝑛 Airspeed-load factor
𝑉𝑝𝑎𝑦 Payload volume

𝑊𝑐𝑝𝑟𝑣 Weight of crew provisions

𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑤 Weight of crew

𝑊𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 Empty weight

𝑊𝑓 Final weight

𝑊𝑓𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 Fixed weight

𝑊𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 Fuel weight

𝑊𝑖 Initial weight
𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦 Payload weight

𝑊𝑇𝑂 Takeoff weight

𝑊𝑇𝑃𝑆 TPS weight
𝑥𝑐.𝑝. Position of center of pressure

xix
Greek Letters

𝛼 Angle of attack
𝛽 Sideslip angle

𝛾 Rate of climb

𝛿𝑎 Aileron deflection
𝛿𝑒 Elevator deflection
𝛿𝑟 Rudder deflection
𝜂𝑂 Engine overall efficiency
𝜂𝑃 Engine propulsive efficiency
𝜂𝑇 Engine thermal efficiency
𝜆 Taper ratio
Λ Sweep angle
𝜇𝑎 Margin on inert weight
𝜌 Density
𝜌𝑝𝑝𝑙 Propellant density

𝜏 Slenderness ratio

𝜓̇ Turn rate

xx
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

“We are drowning in information but starved for knowledge” – John Naisbitt, 1984

1.1. Research Motivation and Objectives

Knowledge requires much time and effort to gain, effort to maintain, and intention to
pass on to others. However, it takes very little work to lose knowledge in a matter of seconds.
This is a fearful tragedy for the world of science and technology, and something that continues
to happen in the world of hypersonic vehicles, unfortunately. We often hear of wonderous,
innovative projects and concepts developed in the early 1960’s when hypersonics as a field was
constantly revolutionized, yet very little information and knowledge is available from that era
that would allow a modern engineer to either replicate or learn from said projects, as evidenced
by some of the projects listed in Figure 1.1 [1].

Figure 1.1. Hypersonic projects of the past source [1]

 For most scientific and technological fields of study, innovation happens by first
observing and learning from past mistakes, then improving upon ideas that have already been
attempted, or by learning from what has not worked and trying to use that information to save
time. This process facilitates progress in the field. However, in the aerospace industry, oftentimes
this happens to go by the wayside in the process of innovation, often due to the secretive or
proprietary classification of projects. While striving for new technology, engineers often end up
repeating the same mistakes again, or taking the risk-free route of sticking to the same old
technology that has once proven itself successful. An example of this phenomenon is the British
SSTO spaceplane, the HOTOL. The HOTOL was designed as a reusable spaceplane by British
Aerospace and Rolls-Royce. However, during development, it was determined that the heavy
rear-mounted engine moved the center of mass toward the rear of the vehicle, thereby
destabilizing it. This resulted in needing to place the wings and liquid oxygen in the rear as well
due to the center of gravity location, while keeping the hydrogen tank and payload bay in the
forebody. The configuration as it was had severe stability issues due to the changing center of
gravity and center of pressure during ascent. Many design alterations were considered to mitigate
this stability issue, all of which resulted in a decrease in payload capability. This ultimately
resulted in the cancellation of the project due to the operational disadvantage of the reduced
payload volume [2] [3].
There are two issues to consider with the story of HOTOL in relation to knowledge
retention. First of all, such a critical design flaw should never have been carried through the
project but rather been identified in the early conceptual design phase and mitigated. This would
have helped avoid the waste of money and effort on a ‘dead horse’ type project. Second of all,
logic dictates that such a disadvantageous configuration would be dropped following the failure
of HOTOL. However, a very similar design derived from the HOTOL has continued to undergo
development, called the Skylon spaceplane. Skylon is meant to fix the issue of the center of
gravity from the HOTOL project by presenting a few changes to the overall design, such as
mounting the delta wings as well as the engines toward the center of the vehicle rather than aft.
The payload sits in the center of the wings as well. It is yet to be proven that these design changes
truly mitigate the issues of HOTOL and will allow Skylon to be successful as an SSTO
spaceplane [2]. Another example is the NASP X-30 spaceplane project. This project, although
cancelled, remains highly classified and hence it is difficult to obtain data or information
concerning the design of this vehicle for both students and professionals alike.

2
 Such instances may stagnate progress and is caused by the failure to pass down valuable
knowledge and information over generations. As mentioned before, hypersonic projects are often
of secretive nature which means very little is published regarding these projects. What little is
published may not be readily accessible to future designers or available in a modernized format,
but rather locked away in paper records. Regardless, if only every hypersonic project was
properly organized, and the chaos of information appropriately formatted and passed on to the
next generation or made easily available, designers would not have to go through the trouble of
trying to re-learn what has already been learnt through costly mistakes in the past. This idea has
been visualized in Figure 1.2. The ideal situation shown in Figure 1.2 must be the goal of this
generation of engineers aiming to advance the understanding in this field of study as quickly and
efficiently as possible. This would ideally mean that 100% of the knowledge accumulated during
a project is passed onto the next generation, or to the next group of project engineers, and thus
eliminates the need for redundant research studies. Then the engineers may focus only on the
accumulation of newer information whilst it is a pre-requisite that they have to be intimately
familiar with legacy studies.
Referring to Figure 1.2, the non-ideal situation describes the common tendency in the
field of aerospace engineering, where very little of the overall collected knowledge is passed
down to the next generation of engineers or designers. Sometimes this inability to pass down
knowledge and data may be due to the sensitive nature of the project, as in the case of the X-51
vehicle which was built as a demonstrator partly by the Air Force Research Laboratory and
DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) [4]. Other times it is due to an oversight
in intentional documentation organization. Unfortunately, this causes the next generation to work
hard to reinvent the wheel, to relearn the same information and hopefully come to the same
legacy conclusions followed by an advancement of the legacy state-of-the-art. It becomes clear,
poor knowledge retention results in overall slowing down of progress in the field considered.

3
 Figure 1.2. Knowledge loss problem in industry visualized

This loss of knowledge between generations recalls the lost library of Alexandria.
Founded in Egypt by Alexander the Great, this ancient library was said to house over half a
million documents from Greece, Egypt, India, Persia, and Assyria. Before being destroyed, this
place was a haven of learning, where “… over 100 scholars lived… full time to perform research,
write, lecture or translate and copy documents…” [5]. A similar digital library in the modern
world would bring about faster progress in innovation when applied to the world of aerospace
engineering. Therefore, this research effort embarks on the search for an aerospace equivalent
that will aid consistent advancements in the field of hypersonics.

1.2. Survey of Current Aerospace Databases

Before implementing a solution to the issue mentioned, it is appropriate to investigate

past-to-present currently available options to avoid redundancy in research efforts. For this
present research effort, a total of 47 aerospace databases have been surveyed to provide a
reference of aerospace related database concepts. This list shown in Table 1.1 is entirely specific
to aerospace engineering. Other generalized engineering databases, although considered during
the search, are not included as these do not provide an accurate representation of what is available
specific to aerospace professionals and students in the public domain. Table 1.1 provides a
breakdown of the types of data available in each.

4
 Table 1.1. Aerospace Database Survey Table

Name Data Formats Available

Technical Interactive
Journals Abstracts Text books Graphs Spreadsheets
Reports Tools
Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection X X X X - - -
AERADE Reports Archive - - - X - - -
Aerodesign.de - - - - X - X
Aerospace and High Performance Alloys Database - - - - X - X
Aerospace Structural Metals Database - - - - X - X
AeroWeb Database System - - - - - - X
AIAA ARC X X X X - - -
Airfleets - - - - - - X
Agile Novel Overall Aircraft Design Database - - - - - X -
AHS International – The Vertical Flight Society
X - - X - - -
Publications
Aircraft Bluebook - - - - - X -
Airfoiltools.com - - - - - X X
Airframes.org - - - - - - X
Airline Monitor - - - - - - X
Air University Library Index to Military Periodicals - X X - - - -
Airliners.net - - - - - - X
AUVSI Unmanned Systems and Robotics Database - - - - - X X
AviationDB - - - - - X -
Aviation Safety Network - - - - - - X
Aviation Week Intelligence Network - - - X - - X
Aviatorsdatabase.com
CAPA Centre for Aviation - - - X X X X
Cirium - - - - X - X
Civil Aerospace Medical Institute Publications - X - X - - -
DTIC Online - - - X - - -
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering - - - - X - X
Eurocontrol Aircraft Performance Database - - - - X - X
Evolution of Flight, 1784-1991 X X X X - - -
FAA - - - - - X -
ForeFlight - - - - - - X
ICAO Data+ - - - - X X X
IOP Electronic Journals X - - - - - -
Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft - - - - X - X
Janes.com - - - - X X X
NASA Technical Reports Server X X - X - - -
National Technical Reports Library [48] - - - X - - -
NewSpace Global - - - X - - X
NTSB Aviation Accident Database & Synposes - - - X - - X
Opensky - - - - - X -
Princeton University Aerospace Database X X X X - - -
RisingUp Aviation - - - - - - X
Scramble Military Database - - - - - - X
SKYbrary - - - - - - X
Space Report Online - - - X X X X
Stargazer - - - - - - X
TischLibrary – Aerospace database X X X X - - -
U.S. Military Aircraft Database - - - - - - X

As seen from Table 1.1, there are no aerospace databases in existence that accumulate
parametric information pertaining to the niche of high-speed vehicle design. The only database
that comes close to achieving the interactive data display format envisioned by VCC, is Access
Engineering Library, which is a general multidisciplinary engineering database. However, the
data showcased is qualitatively not on the same level as VCC, but rather generic in nature. The
majority of these databases are simply compilations of publications and journals. While such
containers do offer a very typical mode of knowledge retention to some extent, an all-
encompassing system of parametric knowledge is missing. As shown in Figure 1.3, a majority
of these databases simply house numerical data, most of which was related to performance
statistics for passenger aircraft. There is a small percentage of interactive tools, and even then,

5
these are found to be in the form of fillable forms that can be re-filled to view new data. A large
percentage (21%) of these databases are actually report servers.

Figure 1.3. Types of data contained in databases surveyed

This research effort is therefore focused on improving towards the concept of the
‘ultimate library’. Instead of merely housing resources, the envisioned parametric library adds a
crucial step missing from most document-based databases: the selection, categorization and
digital availability of parametric design information. Such a library would be a powerhouse of
knowledge for a designer and reduces the amount of time a designer must otherwise spend
searching for and extracting the needed data from stored documents. This parametric library will
also be interactive and feature innovative data visualization and manipulation strategies through
a software interface. The need for such an improvement has been aptly stated by AVD
Laboratory researcher Eric Haney in his dissertation on data engineering: “… Though practicing
engineers spend the majority of their time identifying, organizing, and transforming data [6],
there remains an opportunity to advance research into systematically developing, utilizing and
thus formalizing the data & knowledge domains…” [7]. This research effort describes the
undertaking of the AVD laboratory in its quest for pioneering an enduring novel aerospace
compendium of data, information and knowledge.

6
 1.3. The Vehicle Configuration Compendium

Imagine the scenario where a designer has immediate access to every piece of design-
relevant data, readily available to manipulate and study to directly advance the projects demands.
How much more would that availability enhance the overall research experience? This is what
the AVD Laboratory envisions with the conceptualization of the Vehicle Configuration
Compendium (VCC). The VCC is a collection of vehicle-relevant data, information and
knowledge from credible sources. The VCC aims to take legitimate data published and verified
for high-speed vehicles, filter through and only capture data that is of importance to the
conceptual design process, and to parametrically compile it into a digital compendium in one
central software application for ease of access. This will ensure for an aerospace organization
when designing a hypersonic vehicle, that they are able to access this vast database and determine
what information is available for each type or vehicle configuration contained in VCC. Clearly,
the VCC establishes a novel parametric library currently targeting supersonic and hypersonic
vehicle design. The following is the disclaimer statement developed regarding the purpose of the
VCC:
“In the same vein as that of Jane’s and Haynes, the Vehicle Configuration Compendium
(VCC) strives to provide the design engineer with impartial, accurate information, that draws
on the 18 years of legacy material and experience available to the Aerospace Vehicle Design
(AVD) Laboratory. The VCC is committed to the credibility and authenticity of the information
stored, not to be influenced by outside entities, but to assist the designer through the ability to
verify the accuracy of design tools, rapidly get up to speed on past efforts, and through the ability
to compare similar and dissimilar configurations. Through the extraction, digitization, and
organization of data gathered from reliable sources, shown in an extensively developed
bibliography for each vehicle, the critical design parameters from simulation, experimental
and/or flight data are provided at the fingertips for the designer,” [8].
In order to develop such digital parametric library, it is necessary to evaluate the logic
components minimum required. S.R. Ranganathan, famously known as the father of library
science, documentation, and information science in India, visualized a library system as a trinity
of readers, books, and staff, as shown in Figure 1.4. According to Ranganathan, “… the books
are the knowledge containers, readers are the knowledge seekers, and staff means the facilitators
or providers of various library services to the users, the knowledge seekers. Whenever and
wherever this Trinity exists, a library is born…” [9].

7
 Figure 1.4. Comparing Ranganathan's library trinity to the VCC

As visualized with Figure 1.4, the Vehicle Configuration Compendium (VCC)

incorporates this trinity of library components into a digital architecture equivalent, albeit in a
novel way. For the VCC software, the(a) universe of knowledge containers is the large collection
of digitized data, information and compiled knowledge from various sources consolidated in an
easily digestible format. The (b) universe of knowledge seekers can be anyone, of course, but in
this case the niche includes engineers, designers, technology forecasters and students. The (c)
universe of facilitators is the software GUI itself. It seems the universes of knowledge seekers
and knowledge containers have always been represented, but there has been a lack of a ‘staffing’
system to connect the two in an efficient way. In a traditional library setting this would be the
role of the librarians, helping patrons find the information they need and making
recommendations based on the patron need, as well as conducting maintenance and upkeep of
the stacks of books. A similar staffing service is needed to connect engineers, designers and
students to past project data and knowledge and provide intelligent recommendations. This is
where the VCC software comes into play, which is essentially a rich automated ‘Library of
Alexandria’ for the modern times, with the human component only needed for the upkeep of the
software.

8
1.3.1. Project Team

The Vehicle Configuration Compendium project has been initiated by a team of three
researchers – the author, Samuel Atchison, and Ramlingam Pillai. The primary involvement of
Ramlingam has been during the data collection, digitization and organization process of vehicle
disciplinary DIK during the 2020 NASA study mentioned earlier, as well as further research
regarding knowledge in the stability and control discipline. During this time, the primary
involvement of Samuel has been with the collection and organization of vehicle bibliographies,
as well as the development of the vehicle geometry models using OpenVSP, and further
development of knowledge in the geometry, aerothermal, and weights and balances disciplines.
The author has been involved in the digitization, collection and organization process of DIK, the
defining of the VCC specifications, implementation of the software interface, mapping of
AVDS-VCC integration, definition of the disciplinary knowledge conversion process, definition
of data-information richness schemes, mapping out software development timeline, and
development and initiation of software user testing, all resulting in the ultimate alpha release of
the VCC software.

1.4. Historical Progression

The concept of developing a data-information-knowledgebase system to aid in design

began in the AVD Laboratory with the doctoral research efforts of Dr. Bernd Chudoba,
supervising professor for this research work. The foundation was laid in his dissertation, where
he describes the ideal conceptual design assistant: “… Ideally, a combination of a Data-Base
System (DBS) containing information on existing designs, and a Knowledge-Based System (KBS)
with knowledge about the design process, coupled to analysis packages organized in a
multidisciplinary synthesis system, should provide the designer with a great deal of assistance
at all stage…” [10]. Since the early 2000’s, the AVD Laboratory has therefore been intentional
in the collecting and archiving of conceptual design data, information and knowledge throughout
every research effort conducted in the AVD Laboratory. The timeline of historical progression
of the VCC concept is demonstrated in Figure 1.5.

9
Figure 1.5. Historical timeline leading to development of the Vehicle Configuration Compendium

Dr. Chudoba’s dissertation on the development of methods to size vehicle stability and
control surfaces included a vast library of collected stability and control derivatives and various
parameters for a variety of aircraft configurations and flight scenarios. The level of detail to
which this work has been completed, laid the foundation for the future knowledgebase work that
would be accomplished with the creation of the Vehicle Configuration Compendium. Regarding
this knowledgebase system developed during his work, Chudoba states the following: “The
particular strength of the system manifests, in that it enables the user to advance his/her
understanding with respect to the variety of aircraft configurations by identifying aircraft
configuration commonalities and peculiarities” [10]. This is the approach adopted by the VCC
as well.
AVD Laboratory member Kristen Roberts further developed the concept in her work,
where five distinct classifications to knowledgebase systems were created, each one step ahead
of the previous:
• Collection

o “Includes a searchable collection of data, information and knowledge; displays

to user” [11]

• Interpretation

o “Performs interpretation of collection of data, information, and knowledge” [11]

10
 • Self-retrieval

o “Capable of self-retrieving interpreted knowledge pool” [11]

• Analysis
o “Capable of analyzing the self-retrieved knowledge pool” [11]

• Feedback into Knowledge Pool

o “Capable of feeding-back the analysis into the knowledge pool” [11]

Dr. Xiao Peng later conducted his doctoral dissertation on the formalization of
Knowledge Engineering as an engineering science discipline. His work on an AVD KBS system
was also fundamental to bringing the knowledgebase mentality this far in the research
environment at the AVD Laboratory. According to Peng, there are three basic knowledge
management functions that are crucial to any knowledgebase system: knowledge storage which
include activities that happen “…between humans and the knowledge documentation medium”,
knowledge education which happens “...between humans, including knowledge transfer”, and
knowledge application which happens “…between humans and work, including knowledge
utilization” [12].
In terms of the data and information, AVD Laboratory member Eric Haney conducted
his doctoral research on data engineering for aerospace forecasting and documented the ideal
steps to data processing. According to Haney, data is converted to information using the
following size-step process: collection, storage, organization, recall, analysis, and visualization
[13].
A couple of years later, the resources collected in the AVD Laboratory thus far have been
converted to organized bibliographies in 2018, thereby speeding up the development process of
the system via the addition of dedicated researchers to the project, namely Ramlingam Pillai,
Samuel Atchison, and the author of this work. The team worked together to collect and digitize
data from the massive archive of sources available for a selected list of vehicles (X-43A, X-51,
XB-70, SR-71, Sänger-II, Concorde, NASP X-30) since 2019. This is when the AVD Laboratory
begins the NASA-funded study on the feasibility of hypersonic commercial transportation. The
VCC effort contributed to this study by providing digitized verification data for the vehicle list
mentioned before. Providing such support to the NASA study required a very rapid-paced
development effort on the VCC, due to the large volume of compiled sources, thereby enabling
the completion of the data, information and knowledge collection and digitization process in less
than a year. Towards the end of this digitization effort (the end of 2020) begins the software
11
interface development initiated by the author. User testing for the GUI has been conducted in
2021 by the author, with whom the alpha version of VCC is concluded. Future researchers will
be continuing this work by further developing the VCC software and fully integrating it with the
AVDS synthesis environment, which will be discussed in detail later in the document.

1.5. Advantages of VCC

As envisioned by Dr. Chudoba, the VCC offers a unique combination of design data,
information and knowledge from past to present vehicle development efforts. In order to fully
appreciate the advantages offered by the VCC, it is important to understand the differences
between these three key components of this compendium. This is summarized nicely by Dr.
Chudoba: “Knowledge derives from information as information derives from data” [8]. Data
includes “… exact numerical descriptions of the object facts…”, information is “…
interpretation of data collections …”, and knowledge is “… generated from interlinked
information, unveiling the nature of the objects, and providing the deepest understanding…”
[10]. Based on the three-step definition provided above, the VCC contains a data-information-
base of raw conceptual design data and information, as well as a ‘derived’ knowledgebase of
configuration comparisons for the various aerospace disciplines. These comparisons are
generated based on the current number of vehicles processed through the compendium for the
initial prototype software. The relationship between this data, information, knowledge and
interactions are shown in Figure 1.6.

Figure 1.6. Data-Information-Knowledge cycle [13]

12
 What distinguishes VCC as a compendium concept from previous efforts like … is,
instead of placing the onus of finding the correct data-information-knowledge on the user, VCC
provides a self-contained and self-explanatory compendium for ease of use. Rather than just
listing data-information-knowledge (DIK), it presents the DIK in an easily accessible and
interactive format. The ease of accessing DIK also means that the VCC implementation is very
particular in the kind of vehicle substance that can be found. The current VCC prototype version
only focuses on providing data, information and knowledge pertaining to the conceptual design
phase of hypersonic vehicles. Overall, the DIK-approach is a novel contribution to aerospace
database structuring, where a very focused category is taken into consideration and the database
is designed efficiently to cater to that category. Most other databases present an overwhelming
number of generalized sources. Table 1.2 highlights the key differences observed between VCC
and other databases encountered through the initial review presented with Table 1.2:

Table 1.2. Comparison between VCC and Other Databases – Common Attributes Found
Other Databases The VCC

Lists raw material in the form of papers and books for Lists data relevant to the niche field of hypersonic
a wide variety of subjects. vehicle design, hand-picked and sorted.

Papers and journals need to be searched for – Data is presented in an organized format readily
improper searches may mean missed information for available to user, no data missed by user error.
the user.

Very old-school format of using database – user reads Very innovative format of using database – user can
through sources until they find what they need. access the data readily by visual means in the form of
plots and tables, along with sources cited.

Not always user-friendly websites/databases, user Very user-friendly GUI that has been tested and
must know exactly what to search for. proven easy to navigate after multiple iterations.

Some websites require logging in with an institution to The DIK system designed to help professionals
access data. evaluate past vehicles while also educate student
audience – versatile functionality.

No recommendations for means to use the data found;

student/professional users may require outside
guidance for navigating and utilizing data
appropriately.

13
 1.6. The Importance of Conceptual Design

During the design process of any vehicle, there are many stages to complete before being
able to get to the final design of the vehicle. The first and most important stage of that process is
the conceptual design (CD) stage. Any mistakes or flaws stemming from this initial design phase
must be identified and corrected to avoid wasting time, effort and energy, as well as money once
the actual design work has begun. “…The design of hypersonic vehicles is influenced by tightly
coupled interactions between aerodynamics, propulsion, and structures. Therefore, in the
conceptual design phases, the identification and mitigation of potential problem areas and
disciplinary interrelations are critical…” [14]. The suggested conceptual design baseline should
be correctly defined, entailing major design parameters such as the expected TOGW, basic
dimensions, and fuel volume available, before moving on to the preliminary design (PD)
followed by the detail design (DD) phase. As aptly stated by one of the previous legacy members
of the AVD Laboratory, Gary Coleman: “… As a rule of thumb, it can be assumed that 80% of the
vehicle configuration is determined during the conceptual design phase. Thus, the execution of a well-
orchestrated CD phase is vital for future success of the product…” [15]. Due to the criticality of the
CD phase, the VCC methodology and software is compiled with this phase at first in mind.
Clearly, for the VCC prototype module, DIK is identified and filtered to be pertinent to the
conceptual design of the vehicle. In general, the conceptual design (CD) process involves
analysis, integration, iteration, convergence, screening, visualization and assessment of risk as
shown in Figure 1.7.

14
 Figure 1.7. The conceptual design ladder with each design step illustrated [16]

1.7. VCC Methodology and Software Specification

In its current and also fully developed form, VCC is and it will be a highly sought-after
capability not found elsewhere in the aerospace community. Referring to the survey shown with
Table 1.1, there has been a lack of any DIK-system covering the past-to-the-present that allows
designers to examine relevant DIK for any aircraft, but of course in particular for the hypersonic
vehicle application. The VCC is positioned to become that essential support tool of every
hypersonic vehicle design engineer and company that provides the much-needed resource
gathering all relevant information in one centralized place. In the future this software could also

15
be released as a smart device application which could then be further updated as more vehicles
are added to the database.
The VCC software is planned for release both as a (a) standalone module, as well as (b)
an integrated module into the AVDS (Aerospace Vehicle Design Synthesis) system [17], another
novel product from the AVD Laboratory.

1.7.1. Standalone Software Specifications

The standalone VCC software stores past-to-present DIK and creates new design
knowledge trends and design recommendations, which is the functionality of the ‘library staffing
system’ mentioned in Section 1.3. The following provides the specification for the standalone
VCC module:
• Storage of past-to-present design data and information
o Digitized disciplinary plots
o Digitized disciplinary data and information
o Geometry overviews
o Performance overviews
o Reference collections
• Storage of past-to-present design knowledge
o Configuration breakdowns
o Configuration trends
• Creating/providing new design knowledge and recommendations
o Configuration comparisons using knowledgebase trends
o Lessons learned
o Design guidelines

1.7.2. Integrated Software Specifications

When integrated into the AVDS system, the VCC will be capable of also aiding in vehicle
method verification and filling DIK-gaps for vehicles with relatively low DIK-richness. In this
context, the AVDS system is a tool developed in the AVD Laboratory for the synthesis of
aerospace vehicles of varying configurations. This system steps through the conceptual design

16
(CD) and preliminary design (PD) phases, each of which the VCC is able to aid as defined in the
specifications below. This prototype VCC software focuses on the CD phase exclusively.
• Aid AVDS during the conceptual design (CD) phase by:
o Verifying methods library during both, the parametric sizing (PS) stage and
configuration evaluation (CE) stage using PS and CE data collected.
o Providing library of knowledge trends for baseline vehicle ideation for the
configuration layout (CL) stage.
• In the future, aid the multi-fidelity implementation of AVDS during the preliminary
design (PD) and detailed design (DD) phases by providing verification and
forecasting DIK-trends relevant to vehicle design.
Although the current iteration of the VCC focuses on the CD phase, in the future
iterations the preliminary design and detailed design relevant data would be added to increase
the versatility of the compendium. Having integrated VCC into AVDS provides the desired
future projects office or ‘cockpit design system’ where the design team is able to access VCC
while running the AVDS synthesis process for the design of new vehicles, see Figure 1.8.

Figure 1.8. Example of future workstation of conceptual design engineer [18]

1.7.3. Future Specifications

In addition to planning for the immediate version of the VCC, the researchers involved
in this effort are also interested in mapping out the far future of the software, possibly 10 years
ahead. Further advancement in technology would allow this software to truly revolutionize
aerospace vehicle design by fulfilling its potential. The following offers a possible specification
for the futuristic version of the VCC software:

17
• Incorporation of AI technology capabilities:
o Program automatically updates stored data;
o Program checks for new data or publications regularly using keywords;
o Kernel programmed to learn from past datasets to fill in gaps;
o Kernel programmed to update master list of subsonic to hypersonic vehicles
using present projects;
o Digitization process automated.
• Integration of holographic interface (examples shown in Figure 1.9):
o Enhanced user interface with versatile holographic projection;
o Software lives in a smart device and is highly portable;
o User may actively explore the inner workings of vehicles through interactive
3D renderings.

Figure 1.9. The VCC – example visual of possible holographic interface

18
 Figure 1.10. Hologram example - jet engine HUD [19]

In summary, VCC could very well evolve into the kind of intelligent support agent seen
in sci-fi movies, where the user is able to interact with a holographic version of the software
without even the need of a solid screen surface, an example of which is given in Figure 1.10.
The holograph could envelope the user and allow for a more immersive experience where they
are surrounded with the controls and can interactively change the settings for what type of DIK
they would like to access.

19
 REFERENCES

[1] Hallion, R. P., ed., The Hypersonic Revolution: Case Studies in the History of
Hypersonic Technology, Washington DC: Air Force History and Museums Program,
1998.
[2] “HOTOL,” Astronautix Available: http://www.astronautix.com/h/hotol.html.
[3] Parkinson, R. C., “The An-225/interim HOTOL launch vehicle,” 3rd International
Aerospace Planes Conference, Aug. 1991.
[4] Rondeau, C.M., Jorris, T.R., “X-51A Scramjet Demonstrator Program: Waverider
Ground and Flight Test”, SETP Southwest Flight Test Symposium, October 2013.
[5] Chesser, P., “The Burning of the Library of Alexandria,” eHISTORY Available:
https://ehistory.osu.edu/articles/burning-library-alexandria.
[6] Vincenti, W. G., What engineers know and how they know it: analytical studies from
aeronautical history, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1990.
[7] Haney, E., “Data Engineering in Aerospace Systems Design & Forecasting,” Ph.D.
Dissertation, AVD Laboratory, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas,
April 2016
[8] NASA Report: Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison,
S.C. and Van Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study
– Paving the Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-
017755, Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center,
NASA, 06 July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office:
NASA Langley Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate,
Hypersonic Technology Project, Hampton, Virginia].
[9] Ranganathan, S., Library science with a slant to documentation, Bangalore: Sarada
Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science, 1964.
[10] Chudoba, B., “Development of a Generic Stability and Control Methodology for the
Conceptual Design of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations,”
Ph.D. Dissertation, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, April 2001
[11] Roberts, K., and Chudoba, B., “Flight vehicle design heritage: Are we on the road to
the same fate as Alexandria?,” 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,
2007.
[12] Peng, X., “Formalization of the Engineering Science Discipline – Knowledge
Engineering,” Ph.D. Dissertation, AVD Laboratory, The University of Texas at
Arlington, Arlington, Texas, May 2015
[13] Haney, E., “Data Engineering in Aerospace Systems Design & Forecasting,” Ph.D.
Dissertation, AVD Laboratory, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas,
April 2016
[14] De Baets, P. W. G., and Mavris, D. N., “Methodology for the Parametric Structural
Conceptual Design of Hypersonic Vehicles”, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2005.
[15] Coleman, G. J., “A generic stability and control tool for flight vehicle conceptual design:
Aeromech software development,” Ph.D. Dissertation, AVD Laboratory, The
University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas, May 2010.
[16] Chudoba, B., “Parametric Sizing (PS) Process,” MAE 4350 Aerospace Vehicle Design
I.

20
[17] Haley, J., Gonzalez, L. and Chudoba, B., “Generic Hypersonic Vehicle Design
Configuration Verification,” AIAA-2018-5258, AIAA Space Forum, Hyatt Regency
Orlando, Orlando, Florida, 17-19 September 2018
[18] Simon, S., Atchison, S., Chudoba, B., “Development of a Hypersonic Vehicle
Configuration Compendium”, AIAA Paper 2021-2791, July 2021.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2021-2791
[19] Bitos, S., Hologram Jet engine of airplane in HUD, GUI style Futuristic engineering
illustration., Adobe. Available: https://stock.adobe.com

21
 CHAPTER 2

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PROCESS

2.1. Introduction to Aerospace Design

Before discussing the Vehicle Configuration Compendium (VCC) in more depth, it is

appropriate to give the reader an overview of the conceptual design (CD) process in the context
of the type of data, information and knowledge (DIK) collected. Since the general purpose of the
VCC is to support the conceptual design phase, it requires to understand the complexities of this
early design initiation phase first. Throughout the design process for any aerospace vehicle, there
are successive levels of design evolution that the vehicle is subjected to, each level adding more
detail overall refining the vehicle design to perform the assigned mission. Generally speaking,
there are three major design phases: conceptual design (CD), preliminary design (PD), and detail
design (DD) [1]. Starting with the mission requirements and constraints, each design phase
reduces the levels of possible design variations, as illustrated in Figure 2.1 by Heinze [2].

Mission/Design “What scale of aircraft and

constraints Synthesis technology is required for
the given mission?”

Conceptual
Design “What airframe and systems
configuration(s) meet the
mission requirements best?”

Synthesis

“How must the chosen

Preliminary configuration be improved
Design and refined to better meet
the mission requirements?”
Synthesis

Finalize performance,
Detail Design component design and begin
prototyping for flight testing

Based on W. Heinze

Figure 2.1. Aerospace vehicle design process illustrating design refinement [2]

22
 Conceptual design (CD) is the initial design phase, where the most crucial design
decisions are made. This is the phase where basic mission feasibility is determined for a design,
and configurational changes are explored accordingly. The number of variables that may affect
the overall design is highest during the conceptual design phase, which gives it the highest level
of design freedom. Preliminary design (PD) adds more detail to the initial vehicle design
configuration chosen and this phase further matures the vehicle design via higher fidelity
analysis, wind tunnel testing, etc. During the PD phase, the overall vehicle configuration
selection stemming from CD no longer changes, but relatively smaller details of the chosen
configuration are varied and refined. The detail design (DD) phase is where the design is locked
and engineered towards manufacturing. During this phase, flight hardware is prepared towards
the flight-testing campaign. Please note that each distinct design phase, from CD to DD, higher
fidelity tools are used based on the needs of the individual design phase [1].

2.2. Conceptual Design

The reason why the conceptual design (CD) phase is so crucial compared to the later
design phases is because the decisions made in this phase have the longest lasting impact on the
performance and feasibility of the overall vehicle. As Chudoba states, “… it can be assumed that
around 80% of the flight vehicle configuration and mission tandem are determined during the
CD phase alone…” [3]. The CD phase is also a cost-effective phase to make design changes, as
“… the cost of making a design change is small during conceptual design but is extremely large
during detail design…” [1]. The final output of the conceptual design (CD) phase is the vehicle
configuration, size, and shape overall, which then undergoes further refinement in the later
phases. With conceptual design being such an important phase, the current VCC prototype
focuses on this phase of design. Future iterations of VCC may end up including data, information
and knowledge that could help in preliminary design and detailed design but first the focus is on
fully developing out the compendium to aid in CD. The conceptual design (CD) phase is further
subcategorized into the following logic sub-phases:
• Parametric Sizing (PS)

• Configuration Layout (CL)

• Configuration Evaluation (CE)

23
 The iteration process throughout those sub-phases is demonstrated in Figure 2.2. As
shown, if the parametric sizing (PS) does not produce feasible design points, the mission
requirements may need to be modified for resizing. If the properly sized vehicle is unable to pass
the configuration layout (CL) step due to volume issues, then the sizing may need to be modified.
If the properly laid out vehicle does not pass the configuration evaluation (CE) phase, then the
layout may need to be redone. Finally, once a design point passes every single step in the CD
sub-phases, it may be considered a feasible CD-level design alternative to consider. It must be
noted that these three subphases of conceptual design are uniquely defined within the AVD
Laboratory, although similar activities and implementations exist elsewhere but are not fully
formulated. For the current research effort, VCC is supporting the designers through each of
these subphases defining the conceptual design.

Figure 2.2. Three subphases of the conceptual design process and feedback loops illustrated

These three sequential conceptual design activities, conducted in that order, result in the
first feasible design which can then be refined in the later PD and DD design phases. Details of
what activities are conducted in each subphase specifically are summarized in the following
subsections.

24
2.2.1. Parametric Sizing

As Coleman states, “… parametric sizing is the first step in screening the total vehicle in
terms of mission, configuration and technology to quickly assess first order design and mission
sensitivities…” [4]. The output of the parametric sizing (PS) step is the initial size information
of the vehicle itself. Takeoff gross weight, volume, tau or slenderness ratio, planform area, fuel
weight, empty weight, wing loading, engine thrust, engine loading, etc. are determined during
this stage for the vehicle [5]. These parameters give context for the overall size and energy of
the entire vehicle system. During the parametric sizing step, the following impact attributes
affect the overall design: the fixed mission, gross configuration concepts, and disciplinary
technology assumptions [4]. Each of these may be traded until a desirable combination is found
and sized to satisfy the mission requirements.
According to Coleman, there are six logic process functions that make up the sizing
process: (1) operating empty weight (OEW) estimation, (2) trajectory analysis (fuel weight
estimation), (3) convergence logic, (4) constraint analysis, (5) sizing logic, and (6) trade studies
[4]. Coleman comes to this conclusion after an extensive survey and review of both ‘by-hand’
and ‘computer-based’ sizing processes and identifying common traits among them all.
The overall objective of sizing is not to fixate on a specific design configuration. As
Chudoba states, “… The PS phase represents the opportunity for the visionary team to rationally
explore inside and outside the box…” [6]. As such, it is desirable to generate an entire solution
space of designs at the end of the sizing activity, rather than focus on one singular design, see
Figure 2.3.

25
 Figure 2.3. Example solution space from previous capstone project [7]

The solution space is a visual of the entirety of feasible vehicle design points visualized
in a continuum diagram. A design point is typically a specific combination of takeoff gross
weight and any other size factors, and variations in any of the factors creates the next design
point. A ‘web’ can therefore be created to show the range of design parameters that fall within
the feasible range from parametric sizing. This web of design points is called a solution space.
The solution space may afterward be constrained further during the configuration evaluation
(CE) subphase, which will be described in more detail later.

2.2.2. Configuration Layout

Configuration layout (CL) is the subphase where the vehicle layout is determined based
on the sized values from the preceding parametric sizing (PS) subphase. During CL, the vehicle
configuration choice and component placements are mapped out and the vehicle gains more
detail in the design. According to Raymer, configuration layout begins with sketches that show
“… the landing gear, crew station, payload or passenger compartment, propulsion system, fuel
tanks, and any unique internal components…” [8]. These sketches are then refined to add more
detail and are used among the engineering team to conduct disciplinary analysis in the
configuration evaluation (CE) subphase. Roskam provides a similar breakdown for what needs
to be taken into consideration during the configuration layout (CL) phase: cockpit, fuselage,

26
wing and empennage layout, structural arrangement, then landing gear, weapons, and other
system layouts [9] [10].
The parametric sizing (PS) and configuration evaluation (CE) subphases are highly
multidisciplinary synthesis phases, whereby the creative configuration layout (CL) subphase
simply requires the input of each of the disciplines without much actual synthesis involved.
Disciplinary inputs in the CL phase are helpful for providing recommendations of the ideal
placement of each of the components of the vehicle. Some of the major components that each
discipline may make recommendations for are listed in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1. Participation of Disciplines in Configuration Layout

Discipline Component Placement in CL Subphase

Geometry volume allocation/internal layout

placement of wings/lifting surfaces and lift enhancement components,

Aerodynamics
supersonic/hypersonic area ruling, conforming to shock envelope

Aerothermodynamics TPS material placement

Propulsion placement of engines and fuel tanks, propulsion/airframe integration

Structures/Weights systems placement, center of gravity location

Stability and Control control surface placements

During this CL phase, there may be certain assumptions made in the sizing process (PS)
that are found to be not valid, which means “… the parametric sizing may need to be repeated
with corrected assumptions…” [4]. The other subphases follow a similar iterative process.
The entirety of the conceptual design (CD) process is iterative and reiterative, meaning
flaws can be fixed by simply returning to the last design activity and reconducting that activity
with new assumptions or modified inputs. This level of flexibility is reduced as the process
advances through to the preliminary design (PD) and detailed design (DD) phases due to the
high cost or changes associated.

2.2.3. Configuration Evaluation

First the vehicle is sized in the PS subphase, this size is then translated to a layout of the
vehicle components throughout the CL subphase, and lastly this vehicle is then passed through

27
a series of disciplinary checks during the configuration evaluation (CE) subphase that determine
whether the vehicle meets the specific requirements of each of the disciplines involved.
According to Raymer, this evaluation process “… will almost always tell you that the design you
drew doesn’t really work…” [8] and will result in a need to resize the vehicle with varied
assumptions.

The following disciplines are typically a part of the configuration evaluation stage:

• Aerodynamics

• Aerothermodynamics

• Propulsion

• Performance

• Stability and Control

• Weights and Balances

• Structures

• Cost and Market

Each of these disciplines has its own analysis that is conducted during this phase. If the
vehicle design does not meet the criteria for any one of the disciplines, it is not considered
feasible, and parametric sizing must be redone with modified inputs. Mission requirements
would be redefined and adjusted since no vehicle of the chosen configuration would be able to
meet the basic requirements for the vehicle. The following subsections of the chapter provides a
very brief overview of some of the major deliverables of each discipline in terms of evaluating
a new design. It must be noted that the parameter calculations presented in this section are the
bare minimum and NOT representative of the entirety of the disciplinary analysis procedure.
Rather, this simplistic description hopes to convey a general understanding of the analysis
procedure. Detailed evaluation criteria are found described in several design texts by authors
such as Raymer, Nicolai, and Roskam [1] [8] [11].

28
2.2.3.1. Aerodynamics
Aerodynamic analysis is typically the first conducted after the configuration layout stage
to calculate “… a refined estimate of the lift and rag to determine baseline takeoff and fuel
weights. …” [1]. Aerodynamic evaluation involves calculating the aerodynamic forces and
coefficients acting on the vehicle. Methods for these calculations vary based on whether the
vehicle travels through the subsonic, transonic, supersonic, or hypersonic speed regimes.
The main source of lift is the wing, obviously, but there are other components that can
enhance the overall amount of lift produced. The lift “at a given angle of attack can be increased
by increasing camber”, which may be done in two ways: active or passive [12]. This may be
done by using either trailing-edge devices or leading-edge devices. Typical trailing-edge lift
enhancing devices include “flaps, split flaps, slotted flaps, and Fowler flaps”, whereas leading-
edge devices include “fixed slot, leading-edge flap, Krueger flap, and plain slats” [12].
The maximum lift coefficient for the wing is important as this “will usually determine
the wing area” [8]. The basic equation for lift is given by:
𝐿 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐿

where 𝑞 is the dynamic pressure, 𝑆 is the wing reference area, and 𝐶𝐿 is the lift coefficient.
Similarly drag force is given by:

𝐷 = 𝑞𝑆𝐶𝐷

where 𝑞 is dynamic pressure, 𝑆 is the wing reference area, and 𝐶𝐷 is the drag coefficient.
There are two basic types of drag: parasite drag, or zero-lift drag, and induced drag. Parasite drag
is not associated with lift, but rather “is comprised of all the forces that work to slow an aircraft’s
movement” [13]. This may be estimated with the simple equation given below [1].

𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡
𝐶𝐷0 = 𝐶𝑓𝑒
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓

Here 𝐶𝑓𝑒 is the equivalent skin friction coefficient, 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡 is the wetted surface area, and 𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 is
the reference area.

Induced drag, otherwise known as drag due to lift, “is always present if lift is produced”,
[13] and can be expressed by the equation below:

𝐶𝑑𝑖 = 𝑘𝐶𝑙2

29
Here 𝐶𝑙 is the lift coefficient, and 𝑘 is defined by the following equation:

1
𝑘=
𝜋𝐴𝑅𝑒

where 𝐴𝑅 is the aspect ratio, and 𝑒 is the wing efficiency factor [12].

It is important to calculate these parameters to figure out what the maximum lift to drag
ratio is for the vehicle, whether this supports any cruise/glide mission segments adequately and
allows for safe landing, etc. Also knowing the maximum lift coefficient is important because it
will “usually determine the wing area”, and “have a great influence upon the cruise drag”,
which affects takeoff weight of the vehicle [8]. These aerodynamic parameters then become
inputs for the other disciplines such as performance and stability and control to determine the
flying characteristics of the vehicle. This helps the other disciplines conduct their own evaluation
of the feasibility of the design.

2.2.3.2. Aerothermodynamics
In terms of the conceptual design of aerospace vehicles, engineers working on this
discipline play a crucial role in ensuring the survivability of the vehicle. Especially for
hypersonic vehicles which experience higher heating loads during their missions. For example,
a space-faring vehicle will encounter incredibly high heating rates during atmospheric re-entry.
Hypersonic vehicles that operate within the earth atmosphere may still encounter the heating
effects associated with high-speed travel. As Sziroczak mentions, “the heat generated is
proportional to the atmospheric density and to the third power of velocity” [14]. This means that
hypersonic transport vehicles may experience less overall heating during long hypersonic cruise
mission segments, whereas launchers experience “brief but very intense heat loads” [14].
Outside the realm of hypersonics, even supersonic vehicles experience some amount of heating
during flight, although not as intense. For vehicles like the Concorde that remain within the
subsonic-to-supersonic flight regime, “the material used for the vehicle itself will have to be
carefully chosen to withstand the increased temperature without compromise in structural
integrity” [15].
The dynamic pressure may be defined as “the kinetic energy of a flowing fluid per unit
volume” [16]. It may be expressed using the following equation:

1 2
𝑞= 𝜌𝑉
2

30
where 𝑞 is the dynamic pressure, 𝜌 is the density of the fluid, and 𝑉 is the velocity. For high-
speed aerospace vehicles, this density is the density of the fluid medium of air, which may be
obtained by utilizing the U.S. Standard Atmosphere Air Properties model [17]. For aircraft
design, as Raymer says, “a maximum q limit is specified in the design requirements and used by
the structural designers for stress analysis” [8].
Thermal protection systems (TPS) are external materials added to a vehicle to reduce the
effects of incredibly high heating experienced during the mission. This is more crucial in
hypersonic vehicles, as “materials alone are insufficient to deal with all the heat problems” [18].
However, materials that are able to withstand incredibly high temperatures may not always be
structurally stronger. “The solution is to combine different schemes of protections, using them in
the most effective arrangements” [18].
The topics discussed are a very brief introduction into the aerothermal analysis, which
comprises of more detailed analysis methods and deliverables. References like Anderson’s
Aerodynamics text will provide the reader with a deeper look at the complexities of both
aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic evaluation [19].

2.2.3.3. Propulsion
Propulsion is important in analysis as the discipline that determines if the performance
of the engines used in the vehicle during the mission. The propulsion discipline determines if the
engines produce enough thrust to carry the vehicle throughout its mission profile, what amount
of fuel is necessary, etc. There are various types of propulsion systems, including propellers, gas
turbines, ramjets, pulsejets, and rockets, as well as combined cycle systems [1]. The choice of
propulsion system obviously has a significant impact on the performance of the vehicle overall.
Thrust is the key parameter in propulsion. Thrust is basically the driving force moving
the vehicle, which is “generate through the reaction of accelerating a mass of gas” [20]. The
very basic equation for thrust is given by:

𝐹 = 𝑚̇𝑒 𝑉𝑒 − 𝑚̇0 𝑉0

Here 𝑚̇ is the mass flow rate, and 𝑉 is the velocity, where ‘𝑒’ and ‘0’ correspond to the exit and
inlet of the engine respectively. Calculating thrust helps determine if adequate thrust force is
being generated for the completion of the mission. There are different types of thrust, such as
installed vs. uninstalled thrust, specific thrust, etc. which will not be discussed in detail in this
section but can rather be found in any design or propulsion textbook.

31
 Another important parameter in the propulsion analysis is the calculation of the fuel
consumed during the mission. A general equation to describe this is:
𝑇𝑆𝐹𝐶 = 𝑊𝑓 ⁄𝑇𝑛
Here 𝑊𝑓 is the fuel weight flow, and 𝑇𝑛 is the net thrust [1]. 𝑇𝑆𝐹𝐶 is “thrust specific fuel
consumption” and is basically a ratio of the fuel mass flow to the thrust generated. Calculating
the fuel consumption of the vehicle over the course of the mission helps to figure out any C.G.
shift experienced due to the emptying fuel tanks which is a stability issue. This also helps to
calculate the fuel required to complete the mission with a safety margin of excess fuel reserves
in case of an emergency scenario.
The parameters discussed in this section barely touch the basics of the propulsion analysis
involved in configuration evaluation. Entire engine cycle analysis methods are available in detail
in references such as Mattingly’s text [21] for an in-depth look at the various methods employed
based on the specific engine type.

2.2.3.4. Performance
The performance discipline has the task of determining the mission characteristics and
whether the vehicle can meet the requirements based on the operational details of the mission. It
combines a variety of outputs from the other disciplines in order to decide the overall
performance of the vehicle.
One of the outputs of the performance discipline is the details of the flight path, also
called a mission profile or a flight envelope, defined by altitude over range. This is typically
defined before the sizing begins in order to constrain the design outcome to operate within these
conditions. The flight envelope is determined by “aircraft limitations such as
minimum/maximum dynamic pressure and aerodynamic heating, and operational limits such as
sonic boom, noise and air pollution” [1]. Typically, the flight path of an aircraft involves the
takeoff, climb, cruise, gliding and landing phases for horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing.
For spaceplanes, this may be varied depending on whether the takeoff is vertical with the
assistance of a booster stage or air-launched, etc.
For configuration evaluation, performance discipline checks for the range achieved by
the aircraft. The famous Breguet Range equation shown below can be used to calculate the range
of the vehicle.
𝑉𝐿 𝑊𝑖
𝑅= 𝑙𝑛 ( )
𝐶𝐷 𝑊𝑓

32
where 𝑉 is the flight speed, 𝐶 is the specific fuel consumption, 𝐿⁄𝐷 is the lift to drag ratio, and
𝑊𝑖 ⁄𝑊𝑓 describes the initial and final weight of the vehicle [6].

Endurance is also calculated by the performance discipline, given by the following

equation:
𝐿1 𝑊𝑖
𝐸= 𝑙𝑛 ( )
𝐷𝐶 𝑊𝑓
Here 𝐿⁄𝐷 is the lift to drag ratio, 𝐶 is fuel consumption, and 𝑊𝑖 ⁄𝑊𝑓 is the initial weight
compared to the final weight of the vehicle. Calculating endurance gives information about “the
amount of time an aircraft can remain in the air” [8].
For parts of the flight mission such as gliding flight, thrust is set to zero and the glide
ratio is determined to see how far the vehicle may glide before coming to a stop. Glide ratio is
simply the ratio between “horizontal distance traveled and altitude lost” [8] and is the equivalent
of the lift to drag ratio. Therefore, the maximum lift to drag ratio calculated earlier by the
aerodynamic discipline is so important.
In addition, the performance discipline typically checks to see if the vehicle is able to
carry out any maneuvers that are part of its mission. Some basic requirements that must be met
for maneuverability include [22]:
𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑢𝑣𝑒𝑟 < 𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥

𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑑 < 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥

This means that the lift coefficient associated with the maneuver (𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑢𝑣𝑒𝑟 ) cannot
exceed the maximum lift coefficient (𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 ), and the thrust required for this maneuver (𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑑 )
cannot exceed the maximum thrust produced (𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 ).
For a more detailed look at the performance metrics to analyze a vehicle’s ability to
conduct its mission, texts from Phillips or Raymer may be utilized [23] [8].

2.2.3.5. Stability and Control

Perhaps the most critical discipline in the configuration evaluation phase, the stability
and control discipline determines whether the vehicle is stable and controllable in all flight
phases. The safety of the passengers and the entire mission is compromised if the vehicle does
not pass the stability and control checks. There are three types of stability for a vehicle:
longitudinal, lateral, and directional stability [1]. These three types of stability may be either

33
static or dynamic in nature. Static stability is the inherent tendency of the vehicle to return to
equilibrium by itself, while dynamic stability measures the ability of the aircraft to return to
equilibrium due to the motion of the unsteady forces and moments eventually [1].
Longitudinal stability is determined by the pitching of the vehicle about the lateral axis,
lateral stability is determined by the roll of the vehicle about the longitudinal axis, and directional
stability is determined by the yaw of the vehicle about the vertical axis, as seen in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4. Vehicle stability and moment axes [1]

The vehicle is said to be in trim when the total pitching moment about the C.G. equals
zero. The location of this center of gravity can be determined by simply dividing the sum of the
moments by the sum of the weights of the aircraft [8]. As Nicolai states, the main static stability
criterion “is that its value of 𝐶𝑀𝛼 be negative” [1]. The equations for calculating 𝐶𝑀𝛼 vary
depending on the configuration of the aircraft.
For static lateral stability, the rolling moment coefficient 𝐶ℓ is taken into consideration
(not to be confused with the aerodynamic lift coefficient). Rolling moment coefficient is given
by the equation:
ℒ
𝐶ℓ =
𝑞𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑏

Here ℒ is the rolling moment, 𝑞 is dynamic pressure, 𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 is the wing reference area, and
𝑏 is the aircraft wingspan. The static lateral stability derivative is given in terms of the sideslip
angle 𝛽 as [1]:

34
 𝑑𝐶ℓ
= 𝐶ℓβ
𝑑𝛽

For static directional stability, the directional moment coefficient is given by [1]:

𝑁
𝐶𝑛 =
𝑞∞ 𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑏

Here 𝑁 is the directional moment, given by the equation [1]:

𝑁 = ℓ𝑓 𝐿𝑓 + ℓ𝑉𝑇 𝐿𝑉𝑇 + 𝑁𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 + 𝑁𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔

Here 𝐿𝑓 is the fuselage side-force, and 𝑁𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 and 𝑁𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 are the moments due to the asymmetric
power effects and wing respectively. The directional stability derivative is also based on the
sideslip angle 𝛽, and is given by [1]:
𝑑𝐶𝑛
= 𝐶𝑛𝛽
𝑑𝛽

To restate what was mentioned earlier, the listed variables and calculations are simply a
few major parameters out of many more that are typically involved in the configuration
evaluation stage of conceptual design. Stability and control in particular is a discipline with an
abundance of variables, the extent of which would be out of the scope of this introductory
chapter. A full list of stability and control variables may be found in the knowledge buildup of
Dr. Chudoba’s dissertation [24].

2.2.3.6. Weights/Balances and Structures

This discipline, as the name suggests, deals with the weight placements of the vehicle,
and checks for structural strength of the vehicle. Depending on the complexity of the project,
this may be split into a separate weights and balances team and a structures/materials team.
For the weights team, it is very important to calculate the TOGW (takeoff gross weight),
which is a very important design parameter because it sizes the vehicle [1]. Nicolai describes the
TOGW as comprised of the following:

𝑊𝑇𝑂 = 𝑊𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝑊𝑓𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 + 𝑊𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦

35
Here the fixed weight (𝑊𝑓𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 ) includes a variety of expendable and non-expendable equipment,
empty weight (𝑊𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 ) includes “structure, propulsion, subsystems, avionics, instruments, and
so on”, and fuel weight (𝑊𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 ) is the total weight of the fuel needed, which can be determined
using fuel fraction throughout the entire mission [1].
In contrast to the disciplines listed before, there are no overall equations that typify
weights in general, that may be found across various methodologies. Each design group or
company may have their own methods for estimating component weights of an aircraft, some of
which use statistical data. Raymer presents two basic methods for weight estimation: the first is
a crude buildup of component weights based on “planform areas, wetted areas, and percents of
gross weight” [8]. The second method utilizes statistical equations. Either method may work
depending on the specifics of the project and the level of detail to which the this is applied.

2.2.3.8. Cost and Market

The cost and market discipline determines the expenses associated with the vehicle and
determines if the vehicle developed is marketable and competitive in industry. This discipline is
important for forecasting the survivability and sustainability of a new design.
There are many different methods for calculating cost of a vehicle, and the methods
chosen for calculating such could vary depending on the mission specifics. For example, Nicolai
and Carichner discuss cost estimation based on life cycle cost (LCC), which includes the
following four phases: research, development/test/evaluation, acquisition, and
operations/maintenance [1].
On the other hand, Koelle discusses cost as consisting of three major categories in his
TRANSCOST methodology [25]: development cost, production cost, and operations cost.
Development cost accounts for the cost involved in the development effort for the technologies
associated with a vehicle. This is a non-recurring cost and includes “all activities from detailed
design to hardware implementation and verification” [25]. Production cost is associated with
the manufacturing of the vehicle and engine, as well as integration and verification. Operations
cost finally deals with the costs associated with the actual operation of the vehicle for its mission
and is a recurring cost. The equations associated with these costs vary depending on the
reusability of the vehicle and engine, as well as component selection.
For cost estimation, there is no overall strategy for estimation as methods and fidelity
levels of these methods vary; nonetheless this discipline is crucial to forecasting the basic
economic feasibility of a project.

36
 2.3. Synthesis Processes Available

There are several aircraft synthesis processes available. Some are computer integrated
and others are by-hand methods published by those with a good foundational knowledge and
understanding of the multidisciplinary process. The AVD Laboratory has spent time and effort
surveying these methods to forecast the need for a novel synthesis system, and to develop a
multidisciplinary method based on the best-candidate references. Table 2.2 lists these processes
found which are a combination of survey results from Chudoba, Coleman, and Omoragbon [26]
[4] [27]. The alternating colors shown in the table serve to distinguish between the different
decades.

Table 2.2. List of Design Texts To-Date

Text Name Author Year Decade
Birdflight as the Basis of Aviation Lilienthal, O. 1889 1800’s
Aeroplane Design Barnwell, F.S. 1917 1910’s
Airplane Design - Performance Warner, E.P. 1927 1920’s
Airplane Design Manual Teichmann, F.K. 1939 1930’s
Aerospace Vehicle Design, Aircraft Design Wood, K.D. 1963 1960’s
Design for Flying Thurston, D.B. 1978
1970’s
Supersonic and Subsonic, CTOL and VTOL Airplane Design Corning, G. 1979
Subsonic Aircraft: Evolution and the Matching of Size to Performance Loftin, L.K. 1980
Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane Design Torenbeek, E. 1982
The Design of the Aeroplane Stinton, D. 1983
Fundamentals of Aircraft Design Nicolai, L.M. 1984
Aircraft Design Heinemann, E.H. et al 1985 1980’s
Airplane Design, Parts I-VIII Roskam, J. 1985
Design for Air Combat Whitford, R. 1987
The Technology of the Modern Transport Hünecke, K. 1987
Fundamentals of Flight Shevell, R.S. 1989
The Sportplane Builder Bingelis, T. 1992
Aircraft Design Handbook - Aircraft Design Aid and Layout Guide Kirschbaum & Mason 1994
Introduction to Aircraft Design Fielding, J.P. 1994
Systems Engineering for Commercial Aircraft Jackson, S. 1997
Modern Combat Aircraft Design Hünecke, K. 1998 1990’s
The Anatomy of the Aeroplane Stinton, D. 1998
Fundamentals of Sailplane Design Thomas, F. 1999
Civil Jet Aircraft Design Jenkinson, L.R. et al 1999
Aircraft Performance and Design Anderson, J.D. 1999
Fundamentals of Fighter Design Whitford, R. 2000
Aircraft Conceptual Design Synthesis Howe, D. 2000
The Elements of Aircraft Preliminary Design Schaufele, R.D. 2000
Flight Physics Torenbeek, E., et al 2002
Design of Aircraft Corke, T.C. 2003
Aircraft Design Projects for Engineering Students Jenkinson, L.R. et al 2003 2000’s
Simplified Aircraft Design for Homebuilders Raymer, D.P. 2003
Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach Raymer, D.P. 2006
Evolution of the Airliner Whitford, R. 2007
Lessons Learned in Aircraft Design Roskam, J. 2007
Managing Aviation Projects from Concept to Completion Flouris & Lock 2009
Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design, Vol.1 Nicolai & Carichner 2010
Commercial Aircraft Projects Altfeld, H.H. 2010
Aircraft Design Kundu, A. 2010
Flight Vehicle Synthesis and Systems Engineering Chudoba, B. 2012
General Aviation Aircraft Design Gudmundsson, S. 2013
Advanced Aircraft Design Torenbeek, E. 2013 2010’s
Aircraft Design: A Systems Engineering Approach Sadraey, M.H. 2013
Commercial Airplane Design Principles Sforza, P.M. 2014
Manned Spacecraft Design Principles Sforza, P.M. 2016
Unmanned Aircraft Design - A Review of Fundamentals Sadraey, M.H. 2017
Conceptual Aircraft Design: An Industrial Approach Kundu, A.K. 2019
Conceptual Design of Supersonic Commercial Aircraft Torenbeek, E. 2020 2020’s

37
 As seen in Table 2.2, from the 1980’s onward, there has been an increasing number of
design-specific publications generated each decade. Each author has a somewhat unique
approach to aircraft design, while retaining some common elements of design. For example,
many texts generally follow the sizing-layout-evaluation logic flow demonstrated in Figure 2.2,
although some may phrase this line of thinking differently with differing names for each
subphase of conceptual design. Some authors choose to focus on a larger subset of layout
processes while spending little time in the parametric sizing realm, or vice-versa, etc. Such
methods and other computer implementations were surveyed by Chudoba when determining the
specification for the design system developed within the AVD Laboratory, which will be
described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2.3.1. Hypersonic Convergence

Hypersonic convergence is a conceptual design process for hypersonic vehicles that is

utilized in this context for a basic understanding of a convergence-based design process, which
the texts mentioned in the previous chapter do not address explicitly. The sizing process of the
AVDS system (detailed in Chapter 3) with which the VCC will eventually become fully
integrated, has been developed based on the general convergence logic employed by Dr. Paul
Czysz in his Hypersonic Convergence method [28]. Hence it is of use to the reader to gain some
insight into the hypersonic convergence method through a review of an implementation of such
a convergence-based logic, which will provide much-needed context for the next chapter
discussing AVDS. The chart shown in Figure 2.5 shows the derived sizing, layout, and
evaluation process in a flowchart schematic.

38
 Figure 2.5. Hypersonic convergence process mapped

This chart is derived from a previous two-stage-to-orbit system sizing project conducted
by the author for her undergraduate capstone design project [29]. The sizing process, as seen in
Figure 2.5, starts off with the determination of the mission requirements such as the weight of
the payload, the orbital altitude to achieve, number of stages for the vehicle, the number of crew
members for a manned mission, etc. Then this information is fed into the performance discipline
that calculates the delta V required to meet these mission requirements, as well as the thrust
required and the weight ratio desired. This is then output to the propulsion team which uses the
required thrust to calculate the propulsion outputs needed for the hypersonic convergence logic.
The geometry team calculates the tau or slenderness ratio that feeds into the convergence logic
as well. The equations shown below describe the convergence criteria:

𝑂𝑊𝐸 = 𝑂𝐸𝑊 + 𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦 + 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤

39
 Here 𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦 is the payload weight, 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 is the crew weight, and OWE is the volume
budget and OEW is the weight budget, described by the equations given below:

𝑊𝑅
𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑟 𝐾𝑊 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 + 𝐶𝑠𝑦𝑠 + 𝑊𝑐𝑝𝑟𝑣 + 𝑇⁄𝑊0 . 𝐸 (𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦 + 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑤 )
𝑇𝑊
𝑂𝐸𝑊 =
1 𝑊𝑅
⁄
1 + 𝜇𝑎 − 𝑓𝑠𝑦𝑠 − 𝑇 𝑊0 . 𝐸𝑇𝑊

Table 2.3. Variables in Weight Budget Equation [30]

Variable Nomenclature

𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑟 Structural Index

𝐾𝑊 Area Ratio (Swet/Spln)

𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 Planform area (top down)

𝐶𝑠𝑦𝑠 System weight constant

𝑊𝑐𝑝𝑟𝑣 Crew provisions

𝑇⁄𝑊0 Thrust to weight ratio (lift-off)

𝑊𝑅 Weight Ratio

𝐸𝑇𝑊 Engine T/W Ratio

𝑊𝑝𝑎𝑦 Weight of payload

𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑤 Weight of crew

𝜇𝑎 Margin on inert weight

𝑓𝑠𝑦𝑠 Fraction of systems weights

1.5 (1
𝜏. 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 − 𝑘𝑣𝑣 − 𝑘𝑣𝑠 )(𝑉𝑐𝑟𝑤 − 𝑘𝑐𝑟𝑤 ) . 𝑁𝑐𝑟𝑤 − 𝑉𝑝𝑎𝑦
𝑂𝑊𝐸 =
𝑊𝑅 − 1
+ 𝑘𝑣𝑒 . 𝑇⁄𝑊0 . 𝑊𝑅
𝜌𝑝𝑝𝑙

Table 2.4. Variables in Volume Budget Equation [30]

Variable Nomenclature

𝜏 Slenderness parameter

𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 Planform area (top down)

𝑘𝑣𝑣 Void Volume Coefficient

𝑘𝑣𝑠 System volume coefficient

40
 𝑉𝑐𝑟𝑤 Cabin space/crew needs

𝑘𝑐𝑟𝑤 Crew volume coefficient

𝑁𝑐𝑟𝑤 Number of crew members

𝑉𝑝𝑎𝑦 Payload volume

𝑊𝑅 Weigh ratio

𝜌𝑝𝑝𝑙 Propellant density

𝑘𝑣𝑒 Engine volume coefficient

𝑇⁄𝑊0 Thrust to weight ratio

As seen from the equations above as well as the tables detailing the inputs for
convergence, the basic sizing and convergence logic is highly multidisciplinary in nature.
The output from hypersonic convergence is a solution space that provides an array of
design points. The example shown in Figure 2.6 visualizes a solution space, as demonstrated
within the Hypersonic Convergence methodology:

Figure 2.6. Solution space constrained by ICI [30]

41
 A solution space may have any number of major design variables identified on the axes,
but the typical parameters shown are planform area, slenderness ratio, payload weight, takeoff
gross weight, and range. From this continuum graph of design points, one or several baseline
design vehicles are chosen to advance further to the configuration layout (CL) phase where the
geometry, weights and balances disciplines interact to detail the layout of the vehicle
components.
The sized vehicle with the defined layout is then advanced to the configuration evaluation
(CE) subphase of conceptual design. During configuration evaluation (CE), as shown in Figure
2.5, analysis is conducted for each discipline to determine if the vehicle meets disciplinary
requirements for the mission. Landing analysis is conducted to determine if the vehicle meets
the lift requirements to make a smooth landing. The aerodynamic team conducts other analysis
to calculate the lift and drag coefficients, aerodynamic center calculation, and dynamic pressure
experienced by the vehicle. The performance/trajectory discipline calculates the trajectory of the
vehicle, the weights team determined whether the weight converges, or the weight budget
exceeds what is allowed by the volume of the vehicle. The stability and control team determines
whether the vehicle is stable and controllable in all phases of flight, and the cost team calculates
the recurring and non-recurring cost associated with the vehicle.
All this analysis then determines whether the vehicle can perform the mission. Further
design points from the solution space may be explored to check whether there is a more efficient
design available and feasible with potentially increased performance capabilities.
It must be emphasized that the process described here is a generic conceptual design
cycle, and not necessarily reflective of the exact process followed by the AVDS system. AVDS
follows the convergence logic employed by hypersonic convergence; however, within each
subphase of conceptual design, AVDS system completes disciplinary analysis of varying levels
of fidelity. There is a very basic level of disciplinary analysis that AVDS employs in the
parametric sizing subphase, with very low-fidelity methods. With the completion of
configuration layout and configuration evaluation, the fidelity level of the disciplinary analysis
employed is increased. Configuration evaluation is conducted using the highest fidelity methods
available to AVDS, which will be discussed in detail in the following chapter.

2.4. Application of a DIB-KB System in Design

42
 With the design advantages offered within the conceptual design (CD) phase, it is
imperative to spend more time and effort within this phase than is typical before moving onto
the more detailed design iterations. This will ensure the passing on of an efficient design point
before spending more money and resources on it. What could support this is a database-
knowledgebase system, as Chudoba states:
“… Ideally, a combination of a Data-Base System (DBS) containing information on
existing designs, and a Knowledge-Based System (KBS) with knowledge about the design
process, coupled to analysis packages organized in a multidisciplinary synthesis system, should
provide the designer with a great deal of assistance at all stages…” [24].
The level of convenience offered by such a system would be outstanding. For example,
the designer might want to compare the lifting capabilities of a variety of configurations before
choosing one. Also, the designer may want to verify that a particular method chosen works by
comparing C.G. shift tendencies of a vehicle. Having an all-encompassing database and
knowledgebase at their fingertips would enable the designer to move forward at a quicker pace
rather than spending valuable time searching for such data. This would become a reference
manual of sorts for the designer. This need was made clear during the capstone senior design
project that the author was involved in. The amount of time and effort spent searching for the
relevant data, information and knowledge that could help with verification and for making design
decisions was immense. Comparatively, the time left to implement the design process was rather
lacking. Knowledge was so scarce that the team often questioned whether it was worth spending
effort and time developing knowledgebase diagrams to begin with, because of the time constraint
of the project. A DIK system like the VCC, at that point in time, would have helped accelerate
the pace at which the project was completed. It is then clear that, if a simple student project had
such an obvious need for a design companion, the need in industrial design settings would be
much greater.
Currently there is a gap in the world of aerospace design for such a singular library of
design data, information, and knowledge to be “… readily available for design-decision making
…” [24]. This is the gap that the VCC seeks to fill. Working in tandem with the AVDS system,
the connection between VCC and AVDS will be detailed in the next chapter.

43
 REFERENCES

[1] Nicolai, L. M., and Carichner, G. E., Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design,
Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2010.
[2] Heinze, W., Ein Beitrag zur Quantitativen Analyse der Technischen und
Wirtschaftlichen Auslegungsgrenzen Verschiedenster Flugzeugkonzepte fur den
Transport grober Nutzlasten. Braunschweig, Germany, PhD. Dissertation, Technical
University Braunschweig, 1994.
[3] Chudoba, B., and Heinze, W., “Evolution of Generic Flight Vehicle Design Synthesis,”
The Aeronautical Journal, vol. 114, Sep. 2010, pp. 549–567.
[4] Coleman, G. J., “Aircraft Conceptual Design - An Adaptable Parametric Sizing
Methodology,” dissertation, Proquest, Umi Dissertation Publishing, 2011.
[5] L. K. Loftin and L. R. Center, Subsonic Aircraft: Evolution and the Matching of Size to
Performance. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Scientific and Technical
Branch, 1980
[6] Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison, S.C. and Van
Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study – Paving the
Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-017755,
Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center, NASA, 06
July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office: NASA Langley
Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate, Hypersonic Technology
Project, Hampton, Virginia].
[7] Simon, S., and Chudoba, B., “Conceptual Design and Sizing Study of Reusable TSTO
Launch System,” ASCEND 2021, Nov. 2021.
[8] Raymer, D. P., Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, Reston, VA: American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1999.
[9] Roskam, J., Airplane Design Part III: Layout Design of Cockpit, Fuselage, Wing and
Empennage: Cutaways and Inboard Profiles, Lawrence, Kan: DARcorporation, 2002.
[10] Roskam, J., Airplane Design Part IV: Layout Design of Landing Gear and Systems,
Lawrence, Kan: DARcorporation, 2004.
[11] Roskam, J., Airplane Design, Lawrence, Kan: DARcorporation, 2004.
[12] Corke, T. C., Design of Aircraft, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.,
2003.
[13] Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge: Faa-H-8083-25B, Newcastle: Aviation
Supplies & Academics, 2016.
[14] Sziroczak, D., and Smith, H., “A Review of Design Issues Specific to Hypersonic Flight
Vehicles,” Elsevier Progress in Aerospace Sciences, vol. 84, 2016, pp. 1–28.
[15] Simon, S., Atchison, S., and Chudoba, B. “Conceptual Design Decision-Making
Assisted by a Comprehensive High-Speed Knowledgebase Library” AIAA ASCEND
2021
[16] “Dynamic pressure,” Engineering ToolBox Available:
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/dynamic-pressure-d_1037.html.

44
[17] The U.S Standard Atmosphere, 1976. U.S. Government Printing Office. Also filed as
NASA TM X-74335
[18] Hamm, D., and Best, D., “Hypersonic design,” AlAA 4th International Aerospace
Planes Conference, 1992.
[19] Anderson, J. D., Fundamentals of aerodynamics, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Education, 2017.
[20] “General thrust equation,” NASA Available: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-
12/airplane/thrsteq.html.
[21] Mattingly, J. D., and Boyer, K. M., Elements of Propulsion: Gas Turbines and Rockets,
Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2016.
[22] Roskam, J., Airplane Design Part VII: Determination of Stability, Control and
Performance Characteristics: FAR and Military Requirements, Lawrence, Kan:
DARcorporation, 2006.
[23] Phillips, W. F., Mechanics of flight, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010.
[24] Chudoba, B., “Development of a Generic Stability and Control Methodology for the
Conceptual Design of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations,”
Ph.D. Dissertation, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, April 2001
[25] Koelle, D. E., Handbook of Cost Engineering and Design of Space Transportation
Systems With TRANSCOST 8.2: Statistical-Analytical Model for Cost Estimation and
Economical Optimization of Launch Vehicles, TransCostSystems, 2013.
[26] Chudoba, B., “Anatomy of Aerospace Forecasting”, AE 5368 Flight Vehicle Synthesis
and Systems Engineering (AE 5368), Arlington, TX, 2012
[27] Omoragbon, A., “Complex Multidisciplinary Systems Decomposition for Aerospace
Vehicle Conceptual Design and Technology Acquisition,” dissertation, 2016.
[28] Haley, J., Gonzalez, L., and Chudoba, B., “Generic Hypersonic Vehicle Design
Configuration Verification,” 22nd AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonics
Systems and Technologies Conference, Sep. 2018.
[29] Simon, S., and Chudoba, B., “Conceptual Design and Sizing Study of Reusable TSTO
Launch System,” ASCEND 2021, 2021.
[30] Czysz, P., and Vandenkerckhove, J., “Transatmospheric launcher sizing,” Scramjet
Propulsion, 2001, pp. 979–1103.

45
 CHAPTER 3

AEROSPACE VEHICLE DESIGN SYNTHESIS (AVDS)

3.1. Introduction to AVDS

The AVDS (Aerospace Vehicle Design Synthesis) methodology and software is the
design environment software which the VCC is intended to support. It is therefore important to
contextualize the integration of the two systems by detailing the inner workings of the AVDS
software as well as the history of its development. As such, further sections in this chapter aim
to provide this context as well as identify the ideal integration points between VCC and AVDS.
AVDS is a generic Class V synthesis system framework [1], meaning that it is configuration-
independent and built to generically handle a wide range of aerospace vehicle applications. This
is in stark contrast to other currently available class IV synthesis systems which are typically
focusing on singular configurations or concepts. A survey of such currently available systems
was conducted by Dr. Chudoba [2] and shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1. Aircraft and Aerospace Vehicle Class IV Synthesis Systems

AAA Advanced Airplane Analysis DARcorporation
ACDC Aircraft Configuration Design Code Boeing Defense and Space Group
ACDS Parametric Preliminary Design System for Aircraft and Spacecraft Configuration Northwestern Polytechnical University
ACES Aircraft Configuration Expert System Aeritalia
ACSYNT AirCraft SYNThesis NASA
ADAM - McDonnell Douglas
ADAS Aircraft Design and Analysis System Delft University of Technology
ADROIT Aircraft Design by Regulation Of Independent Tasks Cranfield University
ADST Adaptable Design Synthesis Tool General Dynamics/Fort Worth Division
AIDA Artificial Intelligence Supported Design of Aircraft Delft University of Technology
AircraftDesign - University of Osaka Prefecture
APFEL - IABG
AProg Auslegungs Programm Dornier Luftfahrt
ASAP Aircraft Synthesis and Analysis Program Vought Aeronautics Company
ASCENT - Lockheed Martin Skunk Works
ASSET Advanced Systems Synthesis and Evaluation Technique Lockheed California Company
AVID Aerospace Vehicle Interactive Design N.C. State University, NASA LaRC
AVSYN - Ryan Teledyne
BEAM - Boeing
CAAD Computer-Aided Aircraft Design SkyTech
CAAD Computer-Aided Aircraft Design Lockheed-Georgia Company
CACTUS - Israel Aircraft Industries
CADE Computer Aided Design and Evaluation McDonnel Douglas Corporation
CAP Configuration Analysis Program North American Rockwell (B-1 Division)
CAPDA Computer Aided Preliminary Design of Aircraft Technical University Berlin
CAPS Computer Aided Project Studies BAC Military Aircraft Devision
CASP Combat Aircraft Synthesis Program Northrop Corporation
CASTOR Computer Aircraft Synthesis and Trajectory Optimization Routine Loughborough University
CDS Configuration Development System Rockwell International

46
 CISE - Grumman Aerospace Corporation
COMBAT - Cranfield University
CONSIZ CONfiguration SIZing NASA Langley Research Center
CPDS Computerized Preliminary Design System The Boeing Company
DesignSheet - Rockwell International
DRAPO Definition et Realisation d' Avions Par Ordinateur Avions Marcel Dassault/Breguet Aviation
DSP Decision Support Problem University of Houston
EASIE Environment for Application Software Integration and Execution NASA Langley Research Center
ESCAPE - BAC (Commercial Aircraft Devision)
ESP Engineer's Scratch Pad Lockheed Advanced Development Co.
FASTPASS Flexibly Analysis for Synthesis, Trajectory, and Performance for Advanced Space Systems Lockheed Martin Astronautics
FLOPS FLight OPtimization System NASA Langley Research Center
FPDB & AS Future Projects Data Banks & Application Systems Airbus Industrie
FPDS Future Projects Design System Hawker Siddeley Aviation Ltd
FVE Flugzeug VorEntwurf Stemme GmbH & Co. KG
GASP General Aviation Synthesis Program NASA Ames Research Center
GPAD Graphics Program for Aircraft Design Lockheed-Georgia Company
HASA Hypersonic Aerospace Sizing Analysis NASA Lewis Research Center
HESCOMP HElicopter Sizing and Performance COMputer Program Boeing Vertol Company
HiSAIR/Pathfinder High Speed Airframe Integration Research Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Co.
Holist - -
ICAD Interactive Computerized Aircraft Design USAF-ASD
ICADS Interactive Computerized Aircraft Design System Delft University of Technology
IDAS Integrated Design and Analysis System Rockwell International Corporation
IDEAS Integrated DEsign Analysis System Grumman Aerospace Corporation
IKADE Intelligent Knowledge Assisted Design Environment Cranfield University
IMAGE Intelligent Multi-Disciplinary Aircraft Generation Environment Georgia Tech
IPAD Integrated Programs for Aerospace-Vehicle Design NASA Langley Research Center
MacAirplane - Notre Dame University
MIDAS Multi-Disciplinary Integrated Design Analysis & Sizing DaimlerChrysler Military
MIDAS Multi-Disciplinary Integration of Deutsche Airbus Specialists DaimlerChrysler Aerospace Airbus
MVA Multi-Variate Analysis RAE (BAC)
MVO MultiVariate Optimisation RAE Farnborough
ODIN Optimal Design INtegration System NASA Langley Research Center
OPDOT Optimal Preliminary Design of Transports NASA Langley Research Center
Paper Airplane - MIT
PASS Program for Aircraft Synthesis Studies Stanford University
PIANO Project Interactive ANalysis and Optimisation Lissys Limited
POP Parametrisches Optimierungs-Programm Daimler-Benz Aerospace Airbus
PrADO Preliminary Aircraft Design and Optimisation Technical University Braunschweig
PreSST Preliminary SuperSonic Transport Synthesis and Optimisation DRA UK
PROFET - IABG
RCD Rapid Conceptual Design Lockheed Martin Skunk Works
RDS - Conceptual Research Corporation
Rubber Airplane - MIT
SENSxx - DaimlerChrysler Aerospace Airbus
SSP1 System Synthesis Program University of Maryland
SSSP Space Shuttle Synthesis Program General Dynamics Corporation
SYNAC SYNthesis of AirCraft General Dynamics
TASOP Transport Aircraft Synthesis and Optimisation Program BAe (Commercial Aircraft) LTD
TRANSYN TRANsport SYNthesis NASA Ames Research Center
TRANSYS TRANsportation SYStem DLR (Aerospace Research)
VDEP Vehicle Design Evaluation Program NASA Langley Research Center
Vehicles - Aerospace Corporation
VizCraft - Virginia Tech
WIPAR Waverider Interactive Parameter Adjustment Routine DLR Braunschweig
X-Pert - Delft University of Technology
- Dialog System for Preliminary Design TsAGI
- Hypersonic Aircraft Conceptual Design Methodology Turin Polytechnic
- Design Methodology for Low-Speed High Altitude UAV's Cranfield University (Altman)
- Preliminary Design of Civil Transport Aircraft ONERA
- Numerical Synthesis Methodology for Combat Aircraft Cranfield University (Siegers)
- Synthesis Model for Supersonic Aircraft Stanford University (Van der Velden)
- Spreadsheet Analysis Program Loughborough University

Most of these Class IV approaches are not generic in nature, whereas AVDS is a multi-
fidelity and multi-vehicle capable design synthesis forecasting implementation. Of most
importance to note is that the AVDS system overall engages in the development of generic
synthesis codes based on design choices made by a designer, making it a unique system in
comparison to any other currently existing synthesis program.
AVDS progresses a design through the conceptual design and preliminary design phases.
It employs a vast library of references, data, information, knowledge, variables, methods,

47
processes and deliverables for any desired configuration. The primary objective of the AVDS
system is to support decision-makers (program managers), the integrators (chief engineers), and
the technologists (specialists) by providing a consistent approach to composing and delivering
multi-disciplinary design synthesis codes and results. This allows for consistent and rapid
comparisons of a wide range of potential design configurations once robust disciplinary methods
have been selected for the synthesis code build. The strength of this synthesis implementation
lies in how the system integrates, “… the disciplinary analysis environments and their methods
libraries into a total system convergence logic process. …” [3].

48
Figure 3.1. AVDS methodology and process diagram [3]

49
 The purpose of developing a synthesis system is to bridge the apparent gap observed
between the conceptual design (CD) phase of aerospace vehicles when compared to the wealth
of development effort and detail that goes into the preliminary design (PD) and detailed design
(DD) phases and supporting tools. As Chudoba states, most current computer-aided design
methods use “… statistical data when available, without necessarily questioning and balancing
the physical rationale of the solution. …” [4]. This rationale is almost entirely addressed during
the conceptual design (CD) phase, which is why the AVD Laboratory focuses on further
development and evolution of the AVDS best-practice system seeking to revolutionize the world
of aerospace design and forecasting. The process chart for the architecture of the AVDS system
is shown in Figure 3.1.

3.1.1. History of AVDS

The AVDS system as it currently stands was iterated multiple times before finalizing the
current, refined Python version. Dr. Chudoba, supervisor for this research effort and director of
the AVD Laboratory, used his previous experience from industry future projects office
environments to lay the foundation for the conceptualization of the AVDS system. Three major
contributors to its development included AeroMech, PrADO, and Hypersonic Convergence by
Professor Paul Czysz [4]. Working on projects together with these systems and individuals
influenced the defining characteristics of the system developed later and enabled for the
evolution of the AVDS system into the current capabilities it possesses.

Figure 3.2. Evolution of AVDS system through various programming languages [5] [6] [7]

50
 As shown in Figure 3.2, the history of the AVDS system may be considered as made up
of three distinct eras: the FORTRAN era, MATLAB era, and current Python era.

3.1.1.1. AVDS FORTRAN

The very first software implementation of the AVDS sizing methodology has been
accomplished with FORTRAN. AVD Laboratory researcher Gary Coleman primarily worked
on developing this system during his doctoral research [5]. This system establishes the initial
design toolbox, consisting of a design process library, a disciplinary methods library, and a
disciplinary deliverables library, as shown in Figure 3.3 [5].

Figure 3.3. Design toolbox [5]

After a thorough literature review of the available parametric sizing methods – both ‘by
hand’ and ‘computer-integrated’ – the AVDS sizing logic was developed as shown in Figure 3.4.
This logic has been based on Hypersonic Convergence by Paul Czysz [8] which employs the
convergence of the weight budget and volume budget as a means of generating a solution space
of feasible designs (described in Chapter 3). As Coleman states, this is in contrast to the typical
sizing processes seen where only weight is converged and “… volume is checked as an inequality
constraint …” [5].
51
 Figure 3.4. Fundamental AVD sizing logic [5]

This FORTRAN-implemented AVD sizing system used an input file to carry out the
calculations. The method has been verified with the sizing of the B777-300ER, the Learjet 24,
Sänger-II, and LAPCAT vehicles [9].

3.1.1.2. AVDS MATLAB

The MATLAB era of the AVDS system has been spearheaded by former AVD Lab
researcher Lex Gonzalez as part of his dissertation work, with supporting work from Amen
Omoragbon, and Amit Oza [6] [10] [11]. Gonzalez, Omoragbon and Oza worked together on an
initial decomposition of the components that defined the “CMDS”, or “Complex
Multidisciplinary System”. The purpose of such a decomposition study was to develop a
methodology for the composition of a multidisciplinary system, the techniques of which are then
applied to the synthesis of aircraft. This process yielded the following blocks that make up an
aircraft synthesis system: product, analysis process, and disciplinary methods, as shown in the
breakdown in Figure 3.5 [6].

52
 Figure 3.5. Lex Gonzalez - breakdown of synthesis systems [6]

Gonzalez then worked on the composition of these components back into a synthesis
system, with the AVD-DBMS (Aerospace Vehicle Design - Database Management System) as
an integrated component of the synthesis method. AVD-DBMS has been a sort of precursor to
the VCC-DIK (Vehicle Configuration Compendium – Data-Information-Knowledge) system,
allowing the user to interact with and query stored data. The DBMS helped the user to define a
process, architecture, vehicles and methods to generate a generic sizing code with AVDS tailored
to the design problem at hand [3].
The decomposition process implemented by Gonzalez results in an understanding of the
crucial components of a complex multidisciplinary system, which are shown in Figure 3.5. The
CMDS described by Gonzalez contains the following four steps: matching, selecting, arranging,
and generation. Matching is the phase where all disciplinary methods are queried, and it returns
“… all disciplinary methods that are applicable to the problem requirements …” [6]. The
selecting phase is where the user reviews the methods returned and selects the appropriate ones
for the CMDS to integrate into a tailored vehicle synthesis code. Arranging is then the step where
an integration blueprint is generated for the AVD-DBMS based on an assessment of, “… the
combination of Product, Analysis Process and Selected Disciplinary Methods …” [6]. Finally,
the generation phase creates an analysis architecture (the logical structure and organization for

53
analysis) based on the previous blueprints. This concept is then coded up using a combination of
Microsoft Access, Microsoft Visual Basic with Applications for the GUI, SQL for the database,
and MATLAB for the analysis script. AVDS-MATLAB was verified using the GHV, X-20, and
X-51A vehicles [6][12]

3.1.1.3. AVDS Python

The current AVDS system is Python-based, and it is under development to be capable of
the full conceptual design cycle shown in Figure 3.1, with the preliminary design and detail
design phases planned for the future. Several AVD Lab researchers have been involved in the
development of the Python-era AVDS system, notable of which is work by Thomas McCall on
what he called the “AIDRA-DSS” (Artificial Intelligence Design and Research Assistant
Decision Support System) [7]. AIDRA-DSS has been the first iteration of the AVDS-Python
architecture, which has evolved into its current implementation. For detailed information on
AIDRA-DSS, see the PhD dissertation by McCall [7]. The architecture of the system McCall
developed is demonstrated in Figure 3.6.

Figure 3.6. AVDS Python architecture [7]

This software utilizes Python QT for the GUI as well as SQLite for the back-end database
files. The front-end consists of the following subsystems: “… the Project Builder, Variable
Library, Reference Library, Methods Library, Vehicle Library, and Process Library …” [7].

54
Each of these front-end subsystems has a corresponding back-end database file, with an
additional synthesis assembler file.
The Python-era AVDS system has been verified using the X-51A, X-43, XB-70, SR-71,
Concorde, Sänger II, and Orient Express as part of the NASA-funded study on hypersonic
commercial transportation conducted by AVD Laboratory in 2020 [4]. This study along with
verification activities has been conducted in tandem with the development of the VCC, which is
detailed later in the document.

3.2. AVDS Tool Development and Design Execution Domain

The AVDS system as it currently stands has three main domains of function: the
warehouse domain, the generation domain, and the execution domain, each of which are
described briefly in the further sub-sections. The VCC is able to aid the AVDS system by direct
integration into one or more of these domains.

3.2.1. Decomposition: Warehouse Domain

The warehouse domain of AVDS, shown in Figure 3.7, houses several different reference
libraries that feed into the design system. The VCC described in this present research effort fits
into this warehouse domain as an all-encompassing DIK system with past-to-present vehicle
data, information and knowledge. The overall purpose of this domain is to provide relevant
vehicle attribute entries for hypersonic vehicles for both synthesis code generation and to enable
an informed design execution [4]. The warehouse domain consists of extensive information-rich
libraries, and hence it may be comparable to the backbone of the AVDS system.

55
 Figure 3.7. AVDS process – decomposition warehouse domain [4]

Described below are the individual libraries which make up the AVDS warehouse domain:

• Reference Library
The reference library contains sources of past-to-present hypersonic projects that have
been collected since before the conception of the AVD Laboratory, by Director Dr. Chudoba. A
variety of sources, both physical and digital, have been compiled since the early 1990s, that are
rich in design information, methods, and processes which define the foundation of the AVDS
system. This reference material stems from sources like public domain literature, DOD &
company internal sources, research institutes, and witness and expert interviews. This collection
of reference material has been utilized to generate the bibliographies for the VCC effort, which
is detailed below [4].

• Vehicle Configuration Compendium

The research topic presented by the author, the VCC, is a conceptual design (CD) data-
information-knowledge (DIK) compendium that houses conceptual design-relevant data,
information, and knowledge for selected high-speed vehicles. A total of seven high-speed
vehicles have been compiled in the VCC currently; the sum of all bibliographies for these
vehicles is 1300 sources. The vehicles contained in the current VCC include the X-51, X-43A,
SR-71, XB-70, Concorde, Sänger-II, and NASP X-30. Although currently in the prototype phase,
the data contained within the VCC has been utilized for verification purposes along with the
AVDS system as part of the NASA study mentioned earlier, proving the power of such a

56
compilation. The VCC research team consisting of the author along with Samuel Atchison and
Ramlingam Pillai has been providing the digitized data and information for the AVD Laboratory
research team for such verification activities. The results from this verification study are
provided in the upcoming chapters in greater detail.

• Data/Information Library
The data/information library is simply a further categorization of the data already
contained within the VCC, based on disciplinary categories, with the source material
appropriately referenced.

• Knowledge Library
The knowledge library houses the knowledge gained during past design projects that
often is not passed down effectively. As Dr. Chudoba states, “knowledge represents a mixture
of experiences, values, contextual information, and expert insight” [4] which is incredibly
valuable to use in new design initiatives. After all, such valuable knowledge is built up over time
and with years of experience, and hence takes more time to build up from scratch but is rather
better utilized by learning from others who have already made the time and money investment.

• Variables Library
The purpose of the variable library is to store all of the input, analysis, and output
variables that are required for each disciplinary method code. It also provides additional
information for each variable such as definition of the variable, the English and SI units of the
variable, whether it is a global/local variable, whether it is independent/dependent, etc. When
selecting or developing a disciplinary method in AVDS, input and output variables are assigned
to that method by using the available variables defined in the variable library. These variable
assignments are used during the stitching process where the synthesis codes are built from
individual disciplinary method codes [4].

• Methods Library
The methods library consists of various disciplinary methods for estimating
aerodynamics, propulsion, performance, weights and balances, etc. This helps the designer
choose from the available options, the methods that best fit their design and sizing needs. Each
method is broken down into the details of the assumptions and applicability which helps the user

57
make an intelligent decision. There may be disciplinary methods found and documented during
the VCC activity that are also stored in this library [4]. The VCC supports the selection of
methods by providing verification data for the listed methods, or the VCC could also provide
error percentages for each of the methods listed based on previous verification attempts. This
would help the designer choose the methods best suited for the design needs of the project.

• Process Library
The process library is a collection of hands-on and computational conceptual design
approaches. This library provides the key elements of each process in a tabulated format for easy
comparison and helps in the implementation of the best practice design process. Most of the
processes collected are specific to certain vehicle configurations or component technologies,
which means these configurational assumptions may be utilized for faster process execution.
Any processes collected along with the VCC activity may be added here as well [4].

• Deliverables Library
The deliverables library collects relevant disciplinary DIK and their presentation
visualizations that assemble the standardized deliverables library for each subphase of the
conceptual design process. This library is updated with the identification of pertinent
deliverables observed as meaningful to the designer. The VCC exposure is permanently updating
the deliverables library. If the VCC exposure identifies certain disciplinary or multi-disciplinary
deliverables that tend to be utilized by the professional community, then this sub-deliverable is
added to the library to possibly enable meaningful consistent comparisons [4].

3.2.2. Synthesis Code: Generation Domain

In this domain, visualized in Figure 3.8, the system generates tailor-made synthesis
systems based on the needs of the problem to be solved [4]. This domain utilizes the
decomposition and subsequent composition process described by Gonzalez in his dissertation
[6]. The four sequential steps involved are the following: “… (1) matching, (2) selecting, (3)
arranging, and (4) generating. …” [4]. This results in the generation of a series of parametric
sizing-level synthesis codes that are then available for run-time execution at the execution
domain to address the problem at hand.

58
 Figure 3.8. AVDS process - synthesis code generation domain [4]

As Chudoba states, the overall goal for the synthesis code generation domain is to
“tailor-make synthesis systems” for aerospace vehicle conceptual design as well as preliminary
design [4]. There is no ‘one-size-fits-all” synthesis method that works for every single aerospace
vehicle configuration, which is why currently available synthesis systems are found to be tailored
to a singular vehicle configuration at a time. The AVDS is unique in its approach of formulating
generic synthesis methodology through the modeling of multiple synthesis codes to accurately
compare several different similar or dissimilar vehicle concepts or configurations.

3.2.3. Design: Execution Domain

The final step is the execution domain where the generated synthesis system(s) are
executed, as shown in Figure 3.9. This execution results in PS-deliverables that address the
decision-maker, integrator, and specialist.

59
 Figure 3.9. AVDS process - design execution domain [4]

Chudoba describes the primary deliverable from this domain as “… the continuum
solution-space topographies …” that support the identification of any alternative designs.
During the execution of the conceptual design process, all three sub-phases described in Chapter
2 are engaged. After the parametric sizing (PS) synthesis process that defines feasible alternative
design solutions to consider, the configuration layout (CL) phase is employed to “… formulate
vehicle alternatives with the boundary conditions dictated by parametric sizing. …” [4]. After
this, the configuration evaluation (CE) sub-phase conducts a more refined or higher-fidelity
synthesis assessment of the defined baseline designs to “… independently re-confirm feasibility.
…” [4].
During the CL phase, the VCC engages for verification purposes. The synthesis process
employed is verified by comparing CL synthesis results with the actual size values identified by
the VCC compendium. The VCC may also assist with benchmark comparisons between a newly
sized vehicle concept versus past-to-present existing or projected vehicles of a similar
configuration or speed regimes.
The development history and architecture details presented in this sub-chapter
communicates that the AVDS system is a novel synthesis implementation, in that it custom-
develops new synthesis codes to address the design problem posed. It is also clear that there are
multiple critical layers in the AVDS methodology where the VCC module serves as an integrated
module. The specifications for the standalone and integrated VCC system are provided in the
following chapter.

60
 REFERENCES

[1] Chudoba, B., “Managerial implications of generic flight vehicle design synthesis,” 44th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Jan. 2006.
[2] Chudoba, B., “Development of a Generic Stability and Control Methodology for the
Conceptual Design of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations,”
Ph.D. Dissertation, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, April 2001
[3] Haley, J., Gonzalez, L., and Chudoba, B., “Generic Hypersonic Vehicle Design
Configuration Verification,” 22nd AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonics
Systems and Technologies Conference, Sep. 2018.
[4] Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison, S.C. and Van
Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study – Paving the
Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-017755,
Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center, NASA, 06
July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office: NASA Langley
Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate, Hypersonic Technology
Project, Hampton, Virginia].
[5] Coleman, G., “Aircraft Conceptual Design: An Adaptable Parametric Sizing
Methodology,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2010
[6] Gonzalez, L., “Complex Multidisciplinary System Composition for Aerospace Vehicle
Conceptual Design”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2016
[7] McCall, T.P.D., “Automating Aerospace Synthesis Code Generation”, Ph.D.
Dissertation, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, The University of
Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2020
[8] Czysz, P., and Vandenkerckhove, J., “Transatmospheric launcher sizing,” Scramjet
Propulsion, 2001, pp. 979–1103.
[9] Chudoba, B., Coleman, G., Oza, A., Gonzalez, L., Czysz, P., “Solution-Space Screening
of a Hypersonic Endurance Demonstrator”, NASA-CR-2012-217774, University of
Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, October 2012.
[10] Omoragbon, A., “Complex Multidisciplinary Systems Decomposition for Aerospace
Vehicle Conceptual Design and Technology Acquisition,” Ph.D. Dissertation,
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, The University of Texas at
Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2016
[11] Oza, A.R., “A Generic Methodology for Flight Test and Safety Evaluation at
Conceptual Design,” M.S. Thesis, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2009.
[12] Rana, L., “Designing Space Access Systems,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington,
Arlington, TX, 2017

61
 CHAPTER 4

VEHICLE CONFIGURATION COMPENDIUM SPECIFICATION

4.1. Standalone Software

The Vehicle Configuration Compendium (VCC) is initially developed as a standalone

prototype software, with the intent to integrate into the AVDS system in the near future. The
prototype standalone software operates with its own GUI for the time being. This standalone
software is currently developed as the alpha prototype of the VCC system, and the following
specifications of this version are presented with the following subsection.

4.1.1. Storage of Past-to-Present Design Data

The Vehicle Configuration Compendium (VCC) must store past-to-present conceptual

design related data. These attributes would include any numerical DIK available for any of the
eight CD-relevant design disciplines (aerodynamics, aerothermodynamics, propulsion,
geometry, synthesis, stability and control, performance/trajectory, and weights/balances). Such
numerical attributes are typically available in tabulated format within the source material. Pieces
of data such as mission characteristics, vehicle configuration or geometry parameters, lift/drag
values, etc. are examples of data tables or data values that must be identified and stored.
Design data collected and presented in the compendium would end up functioning as
lookup tables for the designer, providing concise design-pertinent data in a quickly navigable
format with column and row identifiers.
The data being collected must be ‘past to present’ since the compendium aims to collect
both old and new knowledge as the industry evolves in understanding. This will allow the VCC
to become an all-encompassing high-speed vehicle compendium that evolves and grows with the
industry, similar to Jane’s All the World Aircraft [1]. Jane’s publication, which began in 1989,
continues to produce aircraft volumes every single year, thereby documenting vehicles as the
industry continues to work on new designs.

62
4.1.2. Storage of Past-to-Present Information

Information is the interpretation of data. This would mean any graphical figures found
that represent raw data in a visual format is considered information. This information is
important since it is easier to digest and understand than looking at numbers in a table. For
example, looking at a mission profile with the altitude plotted against speed or range would give
more context regarding the vehicles flight path than reading these numbers from a table. As such,
the VCC needs also to house past-to-present vehicle information collected from the sources listed
earlier.
Collecting design information helps the designer and forecaster by providing data in a
visual, easy-to-digest format. By providing these information plots which are categorized by
discipline, the VCC must fulfil the need for a reference manual to guide the designer during the
design activity, with each disciplinary category functioning like a separate chapter of a reference
book.

4.1.3. Storage of Past-to-Present Knowledge

If information is the visual interpretation of numerical data, then knowledge is the

organization of this information in an intelligent format to allow the designer to come to a
conclusion about a vehicle design. Knowledge plots have to include any trends or regressions
that compare a variety of vehicle configurations based on chosen parameters of interest.
28% of the design parameters identified relevant are in the form of knowledge plots,
which is less than half the amount of information plots identified. Of these, a majority of plots
are disciplinary knowledge plots comparing the effects of varying specific disciplinary
parameters, rather than comparing entire vehicle configurations or vehicle types. However, this
does not limit the ability of the researchers involved to generate knowledge using the tools
available, which leads to the next and most important specification of the compendium.

4.1.4. Generation of New Design Knowledge and Recommendations

The most powerful requirement for the standalone VCC is its ability to generate new
knowledge trends and regressions using the data and information collected for the various
vehicles. This data is, after all, being stored in a local database and easily recalled. For the

63
prototype version, the knowledge generation ability has to be hard coded into the system due to
the time constraint associated with processing a large volume of data, information and
knowledge. In future iterations the system has to evolve to be capable of generating and storing
knowledge of its own according to user input. This knowledge generated has to be retrieved to
support the designer to make decisions on configurational design changes that may benefit the
project.
The knowledge plots generated have to be annotated for easy referencing for the designer
(annotations provide guide to the user). Design recommendations have to be generated alongside
the knowledge plots based on the individual configurations the designer is considering. For
example, if a user chooses to compare between the tail-aft and tail-forward configurations, the
VCC has to be able to recommend one or the other alternative based on the type of performance
the user is trying to obtain.

4.1.5. Provide Reference Library

The VCC collection process has to result in the accumulation and digital storage of
hundreds of reliable design sources in the form of PDF documents. The VCC is required to
provide a reference list of these sources for each of the vehicles to the user, in addition to
providing citations at the bottom of each of the disciplinary plots displayed. This supports the
user to rapidly locate the reference of origin for each element of DIK to be showcased in VCC,
if the document may be of interest.

4.1.6. Data-Information-Knowledge Richness

The VCC must provide a means of quantifying the wealth or richness of attributes
available for each of the vehicles collected in the compendium in the form of DIK-R (Data-
Information-Knowledge Richness). The DIK-R is a factor to be utilized when choosing to add a
qualified vehicle for the VCC software in the first place. Such a richness scale has to provide the
user of VCC with an idea of the availability of design-relevant attributes, broken down by
disciplines, vehicle types, and individual vehicles. This combined with the reference library
helps the user gain insight into the ease or difficulty of obtaining conceptual design-related
parameters for certain vehicle-types, as this may vary depending on the timeline or nature of the
project and its subsequent success or failure.

64
4.1.7. Graphical User Interface

The graphical user interface of VCC must provide the users with an interactive, easy way
of viewing the data, information and knowledge contained within the compendium. The GUI
must employ a user-friendly landscape to allow for maximum efficiency. The user interface must
be easily navigable and provide quick performance overviews, vehicle bibliographies, data and
information graphics, as well as annotated knowledge graphics.
The compendium must store and make available through the GUI, the entirety of the data
set collected from the bibliographies of each of the vehicles. The data must be stored in an SQLite
database, and during the packaging of the standalone software, this must be packaged together
with other integrated elements of the software to generate an executable file. This local SQLite
database will also enable integration with the database file used by the AVDS system for easy
recall of the numerical data values. Details of AVDS-VCC integration are provided in the next
section.

4.2. Integrated System with AVDS

In addition to the standalone software, the VCC has to be integrated into the AVDS
system as described in Chapter 3, which is the overall purpose for which the VCC is
conceptualized. The AVDS system steps through the conceptual design (CD) and preliminary
design (PD) phases, each of which depend on the VCC to aid as defined in the specifications
below. This prototype VCC software must focus on the CD phase exclusively. Together this
combination of a synthesis methodology and VCC-organized DIK system will totally
revolutionize the way in which conceptual design has been conducted to date. It is required that
the VCC provides an immense amount of design freedom (through the generic synthesis system)
while not overwhelming the designer but providing adequate guidance (through
recommendations curated by the VCC-DIK module). The designer must be able to obtain all the
available knowledge and understanding needed at their fingertips before making design
decisions. In short, VCC is tasked to provide a strategic advantage to its users in comparison to
designers without access to such a synthesis-DIK system.
The fully integrated design module (AVDS+VCC) will have the following
specifications:

65
4.2.1. Vehicle Decomposition – Verification

The VCC, when integrated with the AVDS system, is required to be a powerful
verification tool. Currently, the compendium is required to store past-to-present project DIK for
seven chosen high-speed vehicles that are useful to any designer for reference. The designer may
choose to verify either the disciplinary analysis method employed for AVDS (PS), or the
disciplinary analysis methods chosen for AVDS (CE) using this compendium. It is required that
verification be conducted by implementing the method of choice to either PS or CE for the seven
vehicles minimum stored in VCC, using the stored compendium DIK to check for accuracy of
the analysis method.
Future iterations of the AVDS-VCC have to be able to provide quick error margin
analyses based on the users input values to make this verification process easier for the designer.
Such a system has to automatically check the sizing results by consulting the database library of
the VCC stored in SQLite to produce these error margins.

4.2.2. Vehicle Decomposition – Reverse Engineering

One functionality of the AVDS system must be the utilization for the purpose of reverse
engineering a vehicle from an initial set of known parameters. Reverse engineering a vehicle
means starting with a given vehicle and using synthesis and analysis methods to extract the
disciplinary relations and parameters from what is already known, which is the difference
compared to sizing and verifying a vehicle. This concept is demonstrated in Figure 4.1. For the
integrated AVDS-VCC system, it is required to have a capability where a vehicle can be reverse
engineered that has been stored in the VCC compendium. The VCC must provide any data or
information that supports the designer to extract the required elements of DIK for such a vehicle.
If, however, the user is reverse engineering a vehicle that is outside the library of collected
vehicles in the VCC, then the VCC must support the usage of data from similar vehicles within
the compendium to be used as a first estimate of the parameters that are needed to execute the
reverse engineering process.

66
 Figure 4.1. The difference between vehicle composition and decomposition

4.2.3. Single-Point Vehicle Sizing with Knowledgebase

The knowledgebase described as part of the standalone version of the VCC is required to
aid in the ideation process supporting designers using the AVDS system to size a new vehicle.
The AVDS system provides the designer with a vast array of design choices before finalizing
the configuration of the vehicle. Just from the specification of the mission itself, as shown in
Figure 4.2, the designer is given the option of choosing from over a million different unique
design combinations. Deciding on a concept to implement is greatly assisted with the usage of
the knowledge trends generated by the VCC. Knowledge trends compare the strengths and
weaknesses of choosing a particular propulsion concept or a geometry concept, or a particular
configuration. VCC is tasked to help the designer make these decisions wisely rather than being
forced into a time-consuming trial-error iteration loop.

67
 Figure 4.2. Scope of mission and system concepts considered - AVDS [2]

After the selection of the mission specifics, the user is tasked with specifying the value
of certain independent design variables. Sizing cannot begin without an array of engineering
assumptions for the input deck of AVDS. For numerical parameters, the AVDS utilizes a stitcher
code which analyzes the unknown parameters and determines the order in which to implement
each of the disciplinary methods. However, there are certain parameters for which the stitcher
code is unable to find dependencies since these design parameters must be specified by the user
and they are independent of any interdisciplinary relationships. This is where the knowledge
plots stemming from VCC are used.
For the AVDS user, having access to plots that compare and contrast the effects of
choosing certain design parameters, or ranges of values, is helpful to determine the inputs
required for the AVDS system. A knowledge plot is tasked to for example identify a common
mission range to expect from a particular configuration-propulsion system combination. This
way, the VCC should provide the much-needed design assistance during the stage where design
variable assumptions are being made.

68
4.2.4. Multi-Point Design Study – Trades

If AVDS is used to conduct a design study where multiple design trades are being
compared at once, VCC is tasked to help with the identification of intelligent trades to conduct.
For example, if the user would like to vary the design choices made for a particular configuration,
but needs recommendations of useful component or design trades, the VCC is to be consulted.
Ideally, future versions of VCC are tasked to accommodate hundreds of high-speed vehicles as
a complete archive. This VCC compendium must then be able to provide a list of trade studies
that have been conducted in the past for certain vehicle configurations. In addition, VCC should
also provide results from those trade studies to help the designer understand what type of
performance was affected by a certain trade. For example, if a particular trade study resulted in
a vehicle with higher speed but less fuel efficiency, or if a particular trade improved the vehicle’s
aerodynamic performance, etc.

4.2.5. Enhancing Libraries

It has already been established that the VCC is a self-contained parametric library. As
such, data, information, knowledge, methods, and processes have been collected from external
references by surveying all relevant sources listed for each of the seven vehicles mentioned
earlier. This bibliography is provided in Appendix A for each of the vehicles compiled within
the prototype VCC. As mentioned in the previous chapter, the AVDS system also has its own
libraries that feed into the process (the warehouse domain). The methods and processes collected
for the VCC have to be integrated into the methods and processes libraries of the AVDS system
to enhance and expand them.
VCC is also capable to provide method recommendations to users of the AVDS system.
During the disciplinary method selection, in order to help the user who may be overwhelmed by
the vast number of choices, the VCC is tasked to be integrated as a pop-up side-panel in AVDS
with a recommended list of methods based on the user’s choice of configuration. In the future,
this may also be accompanied by a percentage of error for each of the methods based on method
verification results.

4.2.6. Post-Sizing: Benchmark Comparisons

69
 In addition to aiding before and during the design process, the VCC is tasked to support
the user make smart comparisons at the end of a design activity. If the VCC has vehicles in its
library that are similar in configuration to the newly sized vehicle, then comparing the new
design against these vehicles would be useful to understand the effects of changing particular
design elements of that configuration. This would also be useful as a final ‘sanity check’, where
the user may want to determine if the final design makes sense – if certain parameters like the
ratio of TOGW to thrust available or propellant mass to payload mass fall within a reasonable
range compared to other vehicles of this type. Even if there are no similar vehicles in the VCC,
it would still be useful to compare or verify the new vehicle against others to understand the
advantages and disadvantages of configurational tradeoffs.

4.2.7. Integrating AVDS Back to VCC

The AVDS system is also tasked to dynamically contribute back to the VCC by
expanding the existing VCC library. This can be seen as a sort of ‘symbiotic’ relationship
between the two systems. Commonly used in biology, the term ‘symbiotic’ refers to the
interdependent relationship between two organisms. In this case, the VCC is providing AVDS
with collected past-to-present project data, information, and knowledge, and in return, the AVDS
feeds newly generated data, information and knowledge back to the VCC to plug in any missing
pieces and try to complete the compendium. Any newly designed vehicles by AVDS can be
added to the VCC catalogue, complete with the disciplinary information generated from the
evaluation process of AVDS-CD. Any missing disciplinary information for vehicles already
existing in VCC may be filled in by the reverse-engineering process of AVDS. As such, the
AVDS-VCC integrated system becomes a unique system that could someday soon be automated.
Automation of the aforementioned processes would allow the system to evolve and learn on its
own, which is a reasonable goal for the developing age of artificial intelligence.

70
 REFERENCES

[1] Jackson, P., Peacock, L., Bushell, S., Willis, D., and Winchester, J., Jane's all the worlds
aircraft: Development and production, Coulsdon: IHS Markit, 2018.
[2] Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison, S.C. and Van
Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study – Paving the
Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-017755,
Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center, NASA, 06
July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office: NASA Langley
Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate, Hypersonic Technology
Project, Hampton, Virginia].

71
 CHAPTER 5

METHODOLOGY AND PROCESSES

5.1 Vehicle Configuration Compendium Development Process: Overview

In order to outline the specific methodology followed for the development of the Vehicle
Configuration Compendium (VCC), a process visual has been used to plan out the development
steps, see Figure 5.1. The purpose of this chart is to provide a breakdown of the specific steps
taken toward the completion of a project, from start to finish, similar to the function of a
flowchart. Developing a well-planned process diagram at the beginning of a project provides a
schedulable task breakdown for the remaining timeline. The Nassi-Schneiderman diagram
format has been selected to develop the process flowchart towards structured programming, as
shown in Figure 5.1 [1].

Figure 5.1. Detailed VCC development process diagram

72
 The initial stage of the VCC development process is the creation of the database. The
compendium is a combination of a data, information and knowledge compilation that generates
useful information for the designer to help forecast optimal design decisions, as shown in Figure
5.2. The data-information-base houses all the raw digitized data and information plots generated
from this data, organized by discipline, vehicle, configuration and cross-section.

Figure 5.2. Structure of the Vehicle Configuration Compendium

Once a thoroughly organized data-information-base (DIB) is developed as detailed in the

following section, this paves the way for the build-up of the knowledgebase which provides
intelligent knowledge trends using the collected data, information and knowledge. Ideally the
VCC system should be programmed to identify relevant pieces of data from the database and
generate knowledge trends automatically. However, since this compendium is still in prototype
development phase, the automatic knowledge-generation function has been postponed for later
integration. For the prototype software, the knowledge trend generation is rather facilitated by
the developer manually.

73
 After the database and knowledgebase development comes the implementation of this
system in a user-friendly software interface (GUI). The graphical user interface streamlines how
the collected data is presented to the end user and is meant to increase the accessibility of the
compendium for individuals who may be unfamiliar with the compilation strategy used for VCC.
The compendium interface is developed using Python’s Tkinter standard GUI toolkit due to its
versatility of use across different operating platforms [2].
Once the standalone user interface is finalized for the VCC, plans for integration with the
AVDS system are made for the reference of future researchers, and any information pertinent to
the software developer is documented thoroughly to encourage further iteration of the software
and integrated system in the future. This is part of the final step of the research process, the
finalization of thorough documentation. In addition to producing documents relevant to the
developer, a software user guide is also generated for front-end users of the compendium.

5.2 Data-Information-Base Buildup

To begin the development of the data-information-base, the data must be collected,

categorized, and digitized for ease of storage. As shown in Figure 5.3, the first step is the
generation of thorough vehicle bibliographies for each of the seven vehicles processed in the
VCC prototype: X-51, X-43A, SR-71, XB-70, Concorde, Sänger-II, and NASP X-30. Each
source collected in the bibliography is checked to ensure the credibility of the information
available in these sources. The collected data is subjected to a specific categorization and
digitization process outlined in Figure 5.3. This includes searching, collecting, storing,
categorizing, and digitizing relevant data. It must be noted that these steps are followed very
precisely with a high level of attention to detail to ensure the highest level of accuracy in the
provision of design-relevant parameters to users of the VCC. This is also compounded by the
fact that the collection process of DIK for this compendium has played a crucial role in the 2020
NASA study conducted by the AVD Laboratory, which will be discussed in a later chapter [3].
Hence it has been of utmost importance to the VCC research team to perform due diligence in
the collection, digitization, and storage process of VCC-DIK.

74
 Figure 5.3. VCC Data collection process

The bibliographies for the first step of the process are generated from the archived
references of legacy material stored within the AVD Laboratory, as well as any additional
material found published on these vehicles. The bibliography lists generated for each vehicle
include published academic papers, journals, textbooks, flight test reports, technical reports,
technical presentations, magazine articles, flight manuals, accident reports, transcribed
interviews, company briefings, technical memorandums, and other miscellaneous legitimate
publications on the given vehicles. A total of 1300 sources have been collected for the purpose
of the initial VCC prototype. These sources are then compiled and stored in a shared reference
management library “Zotero” in PDF format. The physical sources are scanned as digital
documents and added to this same library.

5.2.1. Data Organization Process

The data collected is organized in two different ways for proper cross-referencing. First
and foremost, the collected parameters are categorized based on the type of information offered,
namely, the following: data, information, knowledge, methods, and processes, each of which is
defined below:

75
5.2.1.1. Data
Data is defined as “… factual information such as measurements or statistics used as a
basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation” [4]. In terms of aerospace engineering, data
would be typically found tabulated for storage or plotted for visualization.

5.2.1.2. Information
“… Data reaches a more complex level and becomes information by integrating them to
a context” [5]. In searching for information, this research effort seeks to collect contextual
information for the conceptual design process of vehicles, to allow a better understanding of the
data collected.

5.2.1.3. Knowledge
Knowledge found for the vehicles because of the culmination of data and information to
produce an interlinked understanding of the best direction to proceed with the design. According
to Chudoba, “… Knowledge represents a mixture of experience, values, and contextual
information, and expert insight that provides a setting for evaluating and incorporating new
experiences and information” [6]. Plots and other figures containing continuum guidelines with
multiple configurations of vehicles presented is collected and categorized as knowledge found.

5.2.1.4. Methods
In addition to the three primary categorizations mentioned prior, any methods found for
the various disciplines is also stored and categorized. This may include disciplinary analysis
methods, or, in the case of synthesis, overall sizing methods described in detail in the sources.

5.2.1.5. Process
If any of the vehicles on the list contain the conceptual design process and disciplinary
integration process description, this is also collected, although only very few instances of this
have been found. This would give insight into the steps undertaken by various past design teams
to finalize a vehicle design. As mentioned in the earlier chapters, Dr. Chudoba has conducted an
evaluation of available synthesis systems in general [7], as these provide insight into the design
process undertaken by various research groups and vehicle design companies. This mentality has
continued to be applied during the VCC compilation process, as the research team has made the

76
 effort to document any occurrences of such process details in the sources collected for each
vehicle.
In addition to these categories, the collected parameters are also organized according to
the eight aerospace disciplines that play a crucial role in conceptual design for any vehicle, which
is inherently a multidisciplinary activity. The disciplinary categories include the following:
Synthesis, geometry, aerodynamics, aerothermodynamics, propulsion, performance,
weights/balances, and stability/control. Some of these disciplines were discussed earlier in the
conceptual design chapter when detailing their role in configuration evaluation. In this section,
each of the eight disciplines are explored in terms of the type of design parameters and attributes
required for conceptual design.

5.2.1.6. Synthesis
Synthesis is the “primary integration capability that is the key to close (converge) the
design through iteration” [8]. As such, synthesis brings together the inputs from the rest of the
disciplines mentioned to achieve a converged design point. Parameters of interest include:

Table 5.1. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Synthesis

PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
- Max M - - - - - -
altitude
- Max speed m/s - - - - - -
- Max range M - - - - - -
Mission
- Payload Kg - - - - - -
Definition
capacity
- Flight - - - - - - -
Envelope
limits
- - - - Component - - - -
placements
Configuration
- - - - Component - - - -
dimensions

5.2.1.7. Geometry
The geometry discipline deals with the entire vehicle geometry and its components,
configurational characteristics, and cross section, etc. The configuration layout process is mostly
handled by this discipline. The geometry discipline produces dimensions using the final sized
design point, but also provides some initial inputs prior to the sizing process. Parameters of
interest are categorized in Table 5.2.

77
 Table 5.2. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Geometry
PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Unit Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
s
𝐿 Length 𝑚 - - - - - -
𝑊 Width 𝑚 - - - - - -
Fuselage
𝜏 Slenderness - - - - - - -
ratio
𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 Planform 𝑚2 𝑠 Wing span 𝑚 - - -
area
- - - 𝐴𝑅 Aspect ratio - - - -
- - - Λ Sweep angle 𝑑𝑒𝑔 - - -
Wings
- - - 𝜆 Taper ratio - - - -
- - - 𝑚. 𝑎. 𝑐. Mean % 𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑑 - - -
aerodynamic
chord
Vertical - - - 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 Planform 𝑚2 - - -
Control area
Surfaces - - - 𝑠 Span 𝑚 - - -
Horizontal - - - 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 Planform 𝑚2 - - -
Control area
Surfaces - - - 𝑠 Span 𝑚 - - -
Propulsion - - - 𝐿 Length 𝑚 - - -
System

5.2.1.8. Aerodynamics
This discipline deals with the aerodynamic phenomena, coefficients, and derivatives that
are crucial to understanding the interaction between the vehicle and its fluid medium during
flight, at a basic level. Aerodynamic coefficients and forces are important inputs for performance
and stability and control disciplines to evaluate the vehicle. The most important part of the
aerodynamic analysis is dealing with the lifting surfaces of a vehicle. In addition to the wings,
there are other lifting surfaces a vehicle may have, including the canard, lifting body planform
area instead of wings, or horizontal tailplane, and lift enhancing components such as flaps or
slats. A vehicle may have any combination of these which is part of what defines different
configurations.
There is a variety of methods that may be employed to conduct aerodynamic analysis,
ranging in levels of fidelity from simple first order numerical derivations to high fidelity CFD
calculations. The different elements of interest as well as the parameters associated with them
are listed in Table 5.3.

78
 Table 5.3. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Aerodynamics
PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
𝐿 Lift force 𝑁 - - - 𝐿 Lift force 𝑁
𝐷 Drag force 𝑁 - - - 𝐷 Drag force 𝑁
Forces
𝐿 ⁄𝐷 Lift-drag - - - - 𝐿 ⁄𝐷 Lift-drag ratio -
ratio
𝐶𝐿 Lift - 𝐶𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum - 𝐶𝐿 Lift Coefficient -
Coefficient lift
coefficient
𝐶𝐷 Drag - - - - 𝐶𝐷 Drag -
Coefficient Coefficient
- - - - - - 𝐶𝐷𝑖 Induced Drag -
Coefficient
Coefficients - - - - - - 𝐶𝐿𝛼 Variation of lift -
coefficient with
AOA
- - - - - - 𝐶𝑚𝛼 Variation of -
pitching
moment
coefficient with
AOA
- - - - - - 𝐶𝐷0 Zero lift drag -
coefficient
- - - - Wing Area 𝑚2 - - -
- - - - Flap area 𝑚2 - - -
- - - - Slat area 𝑚2 - - -
- - - - Canard 𝑚2 - - -
area
- - - - Horizontal 𝑚2 - - -
tailplane
Components area
- - - - Fuselage 𝑚2 - - -
area ruling
- - - 𝑥𝑐.𝑝. Center of % 𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑑 - - -
pressure
location
- - - 𝐴. 𝐶. Aerodynam % 𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑑 - - -
ic Center

5.2.1.9. Aerothermodynamics/TPS
The aerothermodynamics discipline is of particular interest for hypersonic vehicles
which experience higher heating at increasing speeds. “… Thermal problems much greater than
those in present supersonic vehicles will be found at these hypersonic speeds. …” [9]. The
heating loads experienced by the vehicle introduces the need for the careful selection of thermal
protection systems (TPS) materials, as “… the most fruitful structural approach for hypersonic
vehicles will be based on external insulation. …” [9]. Parameters of interest are listed in Table
5.4.

79
 Table 5.4. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Aerothermodynamics
PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
T Temperature K Tmax Temperatur K T0 Stagnation K
e limits of temperature
material
- WTPS TPS kg
Weight
Thermal
- Compon Maximum K
Protection
ent temperatur
Systems
Tmax es
experience
by vehicle
component
s
T Temperature K Tmax Temperatur K T0 Stagnation K
e limits of temperature
material
Compon Maximum K
Airframe ent temperatur
Material Tmax es
experience
by vehicle
component
s

5.2.1.10. Propulsion
The propulsion discipline plays a crucial role in the inputs for the preliminary sizing of
the vehicle. As Bowcutt mentions in his paper on hypersonic vehicle design, “… One of the
greatest challenges to hypersonic flight is having a propulsion system that can efficiently
accelerate vehicles from rest to hypersonic speed and then cruise at hypersonic speed. …” [10].
There are several types of propulsion systems available currently, including rockets, ramjets,
scramjets, turbojets with and without afterburners, etc. The analysis methods used for an engine
differs depending on the type of engine in the first place. There are two types of engine
parametric cycle analysis that may be conducted, according to Mattingly: ideal cycle analysis,
and real engine analysis.
Ideal cycle analysis makes the assumption that the compression and expansion processes
in the inlet, compressor, fan, turbine, and nozzle are isentropic (reversible and adiabatic),
combustion is constant-pressure, air behaves as a perfect gas, and that engine exhaust nozzles
expand the gas to ambient pressure [11]. As such, ideal cycle analysis is based on idealizations
which may not be accurate to real performance scenarios. In contrast, real engine analysis uses
realistic assumptions for each engine component.

80
 Once a method is selected based on the engine type and analysis type, then the parameters
of interest may be extracted from the analysis of specific components of an engine. The different
components of an engine include but are not limited to the following listed in Table 5.5:

Table 5.5. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Propulsion

PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
- - - - Engine 𝑚 - - -
length
Components - - - - Nozzle 𝑚2 - - -
area
- - - - Inlet area 𝑚2 - - -
𝑊𝑝𝑝𝑙 Propellant 𝑘𝑔 - - - 𝑇𝑆𝐹𝐶 Thrust-Specific (𝑘𝑔⁄ℎ𝑟)⁄𝑁
weight Fuel
Fuel Consumption
- - - - - - 𝑓 Fuel/air ratio -
- - - - - - 𝑚̇ Mass flow rate 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑞 Thrust 𝑁 - - - 𝜂𝑜 Engine overall %
required efficiency
𝑇𝑅 Thrust ratio - - - - 𝜂𝑇 Engine thermal %
efficiency
- - - - - - 𝜂𝑃 Engine %
Overall
propulsive
efficiency
- - - - - - 𝐼𝑆𝑃 Specific 𝑠𝑒𝑐
impulse
- - - - - - 𝐹 ⁄𝑚̇0 Specific thrust 𝑁⁄(𝑘𝑔⁄𝑠 )

5.2.1.11. Stability and Control

The stability and control discipline is highly prevalent in the configuration evaluation
(CE) stage of conceptual design, when determining whether a generated design point satisfies
the flight requirements for safety. As Chudoba aptly states in his dissertation, “…in all cases,
the aim is to ensure that the vehicle is safe to fly and that it has desirable flying qualities” [6].
During the conceptual design process, the safety evaluation conducted as part of this stability
and control analysis often results in reiterating the design point with the newly learned
information to either select another design point or to generate a new solution space if this is
necessary.
There are three major categories of stability: longitudinal, lateral, and directional. These
could be static or dynamic. The different parameters of interest may be derived from each of
these categories and are listed in Table 5.6.

81
 Table 5.6. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Stability and Control
PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
𝑆. 𝑀. Static 𝑚 𝐶𝑚 Pitching - 𝐶𝑚𝛼 Variation of -
Margin moment Cm coefficient
coefficient with respect to
AOA
- - - 𝛿𝑒 Elevator 𝑑𝑒𝑔 𝐶𝑚𝑞 Variation of -
Longitudinal
deflection Cm with
angle respect to pitch
rate
- - - - Elevator 𝑚2 - - -
Area
- - - 𝐶𝑙 Rolling - 𝐶𝑙𝛽 Variation of Cl -
moment with respect to
coefficient sideslip angle
Lateral - - - 𝛿𝑎 Aileron 𝑑𝑒𝑔 𝐶𝑙𝑝 Variation of Cl -
deflection with respect to
angle roll rate
- - - - Aileron area 𝑚2 - - -
- - - 𝐶𝑛 Yawing - 𝐶𝑛𝛽 Variation of Cn -
moment with respect to
coefficient sideslip angle
Directional - - - 𝛿𝑟 Rudder 𝑑𝑒𝑔 𝐶𝑛𝑟 Variation of Cn -
deflection with respect to
angle yaw rate
- - - - Rudder area 𝑚2 - -

5.2.1.12. Weights and Balances

Another important discipline that works closely with the Stability and Control and sizing
disciplines as well as geometry is weights and balances (W&B). This discipline operates in all
three conceptual design phases. It determines the distribution of masses along the airframe.
Parameters of interest are listed in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Weights and Balances
PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
- Empty Kg - Component Kg - - -
Dry Mass
weight weights
Wet Mass - Fuel mass kg - - - - - -
TOGW Takeoff Kg C.G. Center of M - - -
Gross gravity
Overall Weight
WR Weight - - - - - - -
Ratio

82
 5.2.1.13. Performance and trajectory
The performance and trajectory discipline are crucial to the parametric sizing (PS) and
configuration evaluation (CE) phases, as it defines the initial mission requirements that the
vehicle must meet. During the CE phase, this discipline produces updated mission profiles and
analyzes the performance characteristics of the newly sized vehicle design point. Phillips defines
this process: “… In the design process, certain performance parameters, for example minimum
airspeed and maximum range, are specified as engineering design requirements, and the design
parameters and operating conditions necessary to meet these requirements must be determined.
…” [12].
Unlike the breakdown of the other disciplines mentioned, with performance and
trajectory, the breakdown of parameters is associated with the different portions of a vehicle’s
mission profile. Since the performance and trajectory discipline uses various disciplinary
parameters to evaluate whether the vehicle can perform its mission, there is no specific hardware
associated with this discipline alone. The “hardware” is rather a combination of other
disciplinary hardware and the way they contribute to the vehicle performance during a mission.
The various phases of a typical mission profile include but are not limited to:
• Takeoff
• Climb/Ascent
• Cruise
• Payload delivery
• Maneuvers
• Approach/Descent
• Landing
For each of these mission segments, the aerodynamic and propulsive performance of the vehicle
may be evaluated. The parameters of interest for each of these phases are listed in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8. Parameters of Interest for Conceptual Design: Performance/Trajectory

PS CL CE
Categories Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units Variable Parameter Units
𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑞 Thrust 𝑁 - - - 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum thrust 𝑁
required
Takeoff 𝑇𝑂𝐺𝑊 Takeoff 𝑘𝑔 - - - 𝑉𝑇𝑂 Takeoff speed 𝑚/𝑠
Gross
Weight
- - - - - - 𝛾 Rate of climb 𝑑𝑒𝑔
Climb/
- - - - - - 𝑇𝑆𝐹𝐶 Thrust specific (𝑘𝑔⁄ℎ𝑟)⁄𝑁
Ascent
fuel consumption
Cruise 𝑅 Range 𝑚 - - - 𝐸 Endurance 𝑚𝑖𝑛

83
 - - - - - - 𝜂0 Engine overall
efficiency
- - - - - - (𝐿⁄𝐷)𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum lift-to- -
drag ratio
- - - - - - 𝜓̇ Turn rate 𝑑𝑒𝑔/𝑠
- - - - - - 𝑇𝑆𝐹𝐶 Thrust specific (𝑘𝑔⁄ℎ𝑟)⁄𝑁
fuel consumption
- - - - - - Minimum thrust to -
weight ratio
Maneuvers - - - - - - 𝑊𝐿 Wing Loading 𝑘𝑔/𝑚2
- - - - - - 𝐶𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum lift -
coefficient
- - - - - - 𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑞 Thrust required 𝑁
- - - - - - 𝑆 Distance covered 𝑚
Descent
- - - - - - - Descent angle 𝑑𝑒𝑔
- - - - - - 𝐶𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum lift -
Approach/
coefficient
Landing
- - - - - - 𝑅 Range 𝑚

For each vehicle being processed through this data compilation process, a separate
datasheet is filled out as one of the first steps. This datasheet organizes the data and information
retrieved into columns and rows that make it easy for any reader to quickly identify all the data
available for either one particular discipline throughout all the sources or for one particular
source through all the disciplines. Figure 5.4 shows a blank template of this organization
structure:

Figure 5.4. Blank template of datasheet used for VCC-DIK organization

The numbers to the left side represent the source number in the bibliography for each
vehicle. The bibliography is typically listed at the bottom of the datasheet for easy reference. As

84
seen in Figure 5.4, the datasheet allows for easily viewing what pieces of data, information,
knowledge, methods, and processes are available from each source for each discipline listed.

5.2.2. Digitization Process

Each of the plots and tables collected are digitally extracted using the built-in snipping
tool on Windows and stored locally as .png files before digitization. Each snipped piece of data,
information or knowledge plot is stored locally with file names that represent the source of origin
as well as the page number. This allows for ease of retrieval and organization.
Digitization is the process in which images are converted into a processible digital
format. In this research activity digitization refers to the conversion of plots and data tables on
paper or a digital document into numerical datasets. The tables are digitized directly by manual
data entry, but the plots are digitized using a specific software called WebPlotDigitizer [13]. This
web-based software allows the user to specify the axes and then identify the plot lines by color
and specify the distance between data points as needed by preference for precision levels. Several
digitizers have been initially considered before deciding upon WebPlotDigitizer, as shown in
Table 5.9. WebPlotDigitizer has been chosen because it is free to use, requires no download as
it is available on the web, and due to the ease of using the interface compared to the other
digitizers.

Table 5.9. List of Digitization Tools Surveyed

Digitizer Cost Import File Format Data Format

DCS Digitiser $423 .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Unscan it $423 .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Dagra $49.95 .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

DigitizeIt $49 .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Xy Extract Graph $45 .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Data Thief $25 .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Engauge Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

G3data Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Get Data Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Graph Click Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Im2graph Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

Graph Data Extractor Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

85
 Image J plugin Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

MATLAB grabit Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

PlotDigitiser Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

WebPlotDigitiser Free .jpg/.jpeg/.png .csv

The digitization process using the WebPlotDigitizer app is detailed in Figure 5.5 for the
example of a temperature plot collected for Sänger II [14].

Figure 5.5. Digitization process of a sample plot demonstrated

86
 The plot shown in Figure 5.5 contains data for total temperature vs. Mach number for the
inlet and combustor of the Sänger II vehicle. Once the researcher confirms the relevance of this
data for the conceptual design phase, it is advancing to the digitization process. Before digitizing,
the overall datasheet shown in Figure 5.4 is updated by adding this plot under the
‘Aerothermodynamics’ section into the Data category, similar to the sample shown in Figure
5.6. The table entry is to be as descriptive as possible to facilitate future retrieval. Note that the
overall datasheet also allows for entering the data specific to the sources listed under the collected
bibliographies. These sources are listed under the Document # column in the table, with the full
citation.

Figure 5.6. Overall datasheet with sample entry

For easy retrieval of the plots at a later stage, comments are added to each entry in the
table with the page number within the specified source where the plot is located. After this step
the digitization process is facilitated using WebPlotDigitizer.
When WebPlotDigitizer is accessed, the initial landing page points to a file upload
option. The image is uploaded to the site, which loads the plot on the interface. The app then
allows the user to align axes so the data is accurately extracted from the image, as shown in
Figure 5.5b.
Any two points on each axis are selected and the values entered [Figure 5.5c] which
calibrates the software to understand the scale of the x- and y-axes and extrapolate the distance
between any other two points in either direction.
After the initial setup, the manual digitization may be conducted in a couple of different
ways depending on the specifications and complexity of the plot. If, for example, the plot has
very few data points as shown for the example in Figure 5.7, the software may be run in ‘manual
extraction’” mode where the user manually marks (by clicking) the datapoints using the ‘add

87
point’ software feature. At this point, minor adjustments may be made to center each point on
the actual data point.

Figure 5.7. Engine thrust ratio plot - Sänger II [11]

In the case of the plot shown in Figure 5.5, the plot is a curve with no distinguishable
datapoints, so the entire line may be considered as made up of infinite number of datapoints and
it is up to the user to select how many data points to extract. In this case, the digitizer may be
operated in ’automatic mode’, using the color scheme. The menu
shown in Figure 5.8 shows the options available for automatic
digitization. The pen tool may be used for drawing directly
following the plot line, or the box tool may be used to select the
entire area surrounding the plot line if it is easily distinguishable
from other plot lines in the same image. For the most part during
the VCC digitization process, the pen tool has been utilized for its
versatility.
Once the pen tool is used to select the plot line to digitize
as shown in Figure 5.5d, the correct color option is selected for
‘foreground color’ in the menu, which in this case would be black. Figure 5.8. WebPlotDigitizer
menu
Then the digitization is run, which provides the result shown in
Figure 5.5e.
Note that the resulting set of datapoints in Figure 5.5e is due to the algorithm averaging
option chosen in the menu. The values for ∆𝑥 and ∆𝑦 have been selected to be 10 pixels each,
which is the distance along the respective axes between any two datapoints. If a higher number

88
of datapoints is desired, the averaging rate may be increased by decreasing the pixel distance
between individual datapoints. For the VCC datasets, the averaging has been set to be 5 pixels
for most of the plots except for ones with clearly distinguishable datapoints as in Figure 5.7. The
result from using 5-pixel distancing is shown in the example in Figure 5.5f.
For plots with multiple trendlines of data plotted together, the initial digitized dataset can
be stored under a specific name, and then a new dataset can be added to then digitize the second
trendline. In this example shown, the first digitized dataset would be the “initial temperature”
line; “combustion temperature” can then be stored under a different name within the same .csv
file that would be downloaded for this plot. Once the data is digitized, the data is then
downloaded as a .csv file and added to the respective datasheet for each discipline. The .csv file
is difficult to work from which is why the data is then transferred by copying onto a central excel
sheet located in a shared Microsoft Teams folder. Later on, this data is then transferred to an
SQLite database using the SQLite Studio software [15].

5.3 Knowledgebase Buildup

The knowledgebase serves the greater purpose of using the data collected to generate
useful trends and inform the designers, forecasters, or students using the VCC. Each of the
involved disciplines will eventually contain a full knowledgebase created from the currently
processed vehicles list. Therefore, the continuation of work on the compendium is crucial to the
relevance of the software. Adding more vehicles of varying configurations to the compendium
will allow comprehensive cross-comparisons between different types of vehicles. This will
significantly expand the options available for the designer’s consideration.

89
 Figure 5.9. Information to knowledge conversion process

The knowledgebase buildup process is demonstrated in Figure 5.9. The six steps to
building a well-informing knowledge graphic include the following:
• Retrieve
This step includes retrieving relevant information plots from various sources
• Digitize
Once the needed information plots are retrieved, they are digitized following the
procedure discussed in the information section prior
• Organize
Once the information plots have been digitized to retrieve the raw data from them,
these are then organized depending on the x and y axes
• Group
The plots are then grouped based upon what information is most useful to the
designer. This is where the knowledge compiler makes intelligent decisions about the
information collected. There may be some trendlines that are well-informing on their
own but may not contribute to a knowledge plot when combined and compared with
other trendlines.
• Combine
Next is to combine the various grouped information plots into one singular plot. This
will result in a knowledge plot that features multiple trendlines to compare between
various categories based on what was decided on for comparison – whether it be
configurations, cross-sections, speed regimes, etc.

90
 • Annotate
Perhaps the most important step in the process, a well-built knowledge graphic will
have intelligent annotations to guide the designer on how to use the plot. Annotations
that help would include commenting on the obvious conclusions that may be made
about the tendencies of certain configurations, providing visual labeling as a means
of better visualizing the configuration as shown in Figure 5.10, etc.

Figure 5.10. Lift-to-drag ratio against Mach number [16]

For the knowledgebase buildup, initially a list of design-critical knowledgebase plots is

created as a guideline. Then the relevant data for each of those plots is sorted from the available
data collected for the larger database. It is not guaranteed that every single vehicle will have the
specific data required for every knowledgebase plot, of course. For example, although the lift-
curve slope at supersonic speeds may be a desired knowledgebase plot for every single vehicle
compiled, the reality may be that only 5 out of 7 vehicles have that dataset. In such cases, the
knowledgebase plot will simply only show those 5 vehicles and the remaining two vehicles may
be marked down as ‘seeking’, so future researchers may add the missing trends to the plot if
found later.
A preliminary list of desired knowledge guidelines has been compiled and shown in
Table 5.10:

91
 Table 5.10. Initial List of KB Deliverables by Discipline
Synthesis/Sizing Geometry Aerodynamics Aerothermodynamics

Solution Space 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡 vs. 𝑉𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐶𝐿 vs. h/b 𝑞 vs. Mach

𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 vs. 𝐼𝐶𝐼 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡 vs. 𝑉𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝐶𝐿 vs. 𝛼 (low-speed) Heat transfer vs. Mach

Tau vs. 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 𝑆 vs. tau 𝐶𝐿 vs. 𝐶𝐷 TPS thickness

𝑇𝑂𝐺𝑊 vs. 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛 𝐾𝑉 vs. 1/tau L/D vs. Mach TPS materials selection

𝐾𝑊 vs. tau 𝐶𝐿 vs. 𝛼 Heat flux vs Time/Mach

𝐾𝑠𝑡𝑟 vs. tau 𝐶𝐿 vs. Mach Surface temperature vs. Mach

𝐶𝐷 vs. Mach Temperature vs. Mach

L/D vs. 𝛼 Temperature vs. Time

L/D vs. 𝐶𝐿

Pressure distribution vs. Altitude

𝐶𝑚 vs 𝐶𝐿

Propulsion Performance/Trajectory Stability and Control Weights and Balances

𝑆𝐹𝐶 vs. Mach Altitude vs. Mach 𝐶𝑚 vs. Mach 𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑟 vs. payload weight

𝐼𝑠𝑝 vs. Mach Altitude vs. Range 𝐶𝑙𝛽 vs. Mach 𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑟 vs. Temperature

𝐼𝑠𝑝 vs. Altitude Payload vs. Range 𝐶𝑚𝛿𝑒 vs. Mach 𝑇𝑂𝐺𝑊 vs. 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛

𝐼𝑝 vs. Mach 𝛼 vs. Mach 𝐶𝑛𝛿𝑟 vs. Mach 𝑂𝑊𝐸 vs. 𝑆𝑝𝑙𝑛

𝐼𝑝 vs. Range 𝑆𝐹𝐶vs. Mach 𝐶𝑛𝛿𝑎 vs. Mach Gross Weight vs. 𝑂𝑊𝐸

Propellant mass V-N diagram 𝐶𝑙𝛿𝑎 vs. Mach

Thrust for level flight vs. Speed Separation characteristics for multi- 𝐶𝑙𝛿𝑟 vs. Mach
stage systems

T/D vs. Mach 𝐶𝑚 vs. Alpha

Thrust vs. Mach 𝐶𝑛𝛽 vs. Alpha

Nozzle performance characteristics 𝐶𝑙𝛽 vs. Alpha

𝑊𝑅 vs. Range A.C. vs. Mach

Thrust vs. Altitude N.P. vs Mach

C.G. Shift vs. Mach

Ideally the knowledgebase for the VCC knowledgebase would be programmed into the
standalone user interface to where the software automatically plots relevant data using user input.
Even further, the AVDS-VCC integrated system would then work to continually update this KB
system to enhance the quality of knowledge-generation from the VCC side by the addition of
more projects. However due to the tight deadlines for the development of the software, the
current prototype VCC will house manually created knowledgebase plots hard coded into the
interface, displayed according to the user selection of desired configurations.

92
 5.4. Graphical User Interface Development

Once the foundation for the database and knowledgebase has been laid, next is the
development of the actual software interface that the users of the compendium will directly
interact with. Creating such an interface allows for a seamless experience for users to manipulate
and study the data, information and knowledge contained within the compendium. The software
development process detailed here is applied to the standalone VCC interface application. Best
practices from this development activity may be adopted into the software upkeep of the
integrated AVDS-VCC system which will be explained in the next subchapter.
The ideal cyclical nature of the proper development of a graphical user interface is
demonstrated in Figure 5.11. The process consists of multiple iterations of the following four
steps until the design is finalized: determining objectives and constraints, evaluating alternatives
and identify risks, develop next product, and plan the next phase [17].

Figure 5.11. Cyclical GUI development process [17]

Microsoft has a published guide to the development of user interfaces, which states a
similar approach but goes into more detail. Listed in Table 5.11 are the typical phases of GUI
development, according to the Microsoft guide.

93
 Table 5.11. Microsoft Guide for UI Development [18]
Functional Requirements Determine the initial requirements and goals for the application

User analysis Identify the user scenarios and understand the needs and
expectations of users for each scenario

Designing Conceptual design Model the underlying business that the application must support

Logical design Design the process and information flow of the application

Physical Design Decide how the logical design will be implemented on specific
physical platforms

Prototype Develop paper or interactive screen mockups that focus on the

Implementing interface and don’t include distracting visual design elements

Construct Build the application and prepare for design change requests

Usability testing Test the application with various users and scenarios
Testing
Accessibility testing Test the application with accessible technologies and automated
test tools

The functional requirements of the standalone compendium application have already

been determined with the conceptualization of the VCC itself. The needs and expectations of the
users are defined in that the users of this interface would be designers or design learners, seeking
to revisit past project data and use this to aid in forecasting their own designs. The conceptual
design models the business supported by the interface, which in this case would be vehicle
design. The logical design stage is where the information flow is determined, and for the VCC,
this has been modeled using a simple flowchart shown in Figure 5.12. For the final stage of the
design of the GUI, which is physical design, has to do with the hardware used to implement the
logical design.
The next step is implementation, where first a prototype is created, after which the actual
application build happens. For the VCC, the prototype is implemented in the alpha version of
the software. After implementation, the software is sent for user testing and accessibility testing.
The VCC as it currently stands has an alpha software developed and sent for initial user testing.
User testing is important for the standalone software especially, since the ease of accessing and
viewing data, information and knowledge is the focus for the standalone software. Therefore, the
graphical user interface does drive the software logic to some extent. For the integrated system
with AVDS, which will be described later, the software logic is driven rather by the existing

94
AVDS architecture with the primary goal being smooth integration to allow for a seamless design
experience overall.
The future iterations of VCC would need to undergo more thorough user testing and
further accessibility testing to make sure that the application is truly usable by everyone. The
need for testing is aptly stated by Microsoft: “… Developers should recognize that they are not
typical users. They have more intimate knowledge and understanding of the system that they are
developing than the average user ever will.”, and “... there is no substitute for the real
interactions of actual users with the product” [18].

5.4.1. Standalone VCC User Interface Design

The standalone software is designed and iterated based on user input. Hence the design
phase of the user interface is facilitated by the initial creation and iteration of a process flow
diagram. Such a diagram details the functionality of the graphical user interface as experienced
by a user. Figure 5.12 demonstrates the latest iteration of this flow diagram:

95
 Figure 5.12. VCC graphical user interface logic flowchart

As per this flowchart, once the software is run, the first choice the user will be able to
pick from is between ‘View Data’ and ‘Compare Data’, which will lead the user down either the
data-information-base path or the knowledgebase path respectively.
If the user selects the database path, the user will then be given the option to select from
the list of seven high-speed vehicles that have undergone the data compilation process (X-51, X-
43A, XB-70, SR-71, Concorde, Sänger-II, NASP X-30). Upon the selection of this vehicle, a
quad-chart snapshot of the vehicle will be displayed, which will be explained in more detail later.
In short, this quad-chart is a quick overview of the most important characteristics of the vehicle
chosen.
Once the vehicle is selected, another menu will appear that allows the user to select which
of the 8 aerospace disciplines they would like to view data for. Once the discipline is selected,
the user may then either choose to view all data or choose a specific predefined plot from a drop-

96
down menu for viewing in a larger format. If the user chooses to ‘view all data’, then every single
plot digitized and uploaded for that specific discipline and vehicle combination will appear in a
3x3 grid on the same window.

5.5. AVDS Integration Map

In addition to the VCC software being capable of running the database and
knowledgebase system as a standalone software, the end goal for the fully developed system is
to integrate this compendium with the AVDS (Aerospace Vehicle Design Synthesis) system in
the future as mentioned in Chapter 1. The AVDS system is a synthesis software developed by
the AVD Laboratory at UTA. The system steps through the conceptual design and preliminary
design processes using a vast warehouse of methods, references, variables, processes, and data.
The result is a sized, analyzed vehicle that meets performance requirements specified by the user
initially.

Figure 5.13. Integration of VCC in AVDS - CD phase

97
 As seen in Figure 5.13, the VCC is to be accounted for in all phases of design conducted
by the AVDS software, thereby creating an all-encompassing ideal design ‘workspace’ as
envisioned in Figure 5.14. This ‘cockpit’ design system would be the designer’s playground of
sorts, increasing the quality of the design work done and enhancing the experience, streamlining
the process of consulting past project data, and also streamlining the educational process.

Figure 5.14. Designer's ideal workstation setup [19]

For each stage in design, AVDS pulls from the vast VCC library the pertinent information
required. Since the scope of the current VCC prototype is the conceptual design (CD) phase, the
later iterations will focus on incorporating preliminary design (PD) as well. For the current
prototype version, the entry points for integration are identified, the pros and cons listed and
documented, and the foundation laid for future research efforts to begin the full integration
process between the VCC module and AVDS. Since the AVDS system is a Python-based
software, VCC is also written using a Python script in order to facilitate future integration. The
SQLite database is used by VCC for storage of data, which is also easily integrable into the
AVDS for accessing raw data.

5.5.1. Integration Practices

For the integration of two pieces of software into a singular functioning unit, there are a
few different approaches one may take, as listed in Table 5.12:

98
 Table 5.12. Common Software Integration Formats [20]
Type of Integration Description

Vertical Integration Subsystems are merged according to their functionalities

Star Integration Subsystems connect with other subsystems through point-to-point connections

Horizontal Integration A subsystem is used as an interface for other subsystems.

Common data integration Sets down an application-independent format with a goal of achieving a single format
format system.

In the mapping out of the best future integration strategies for the AVDS and VCC
systems, these types are studied in more depth and recommendations created and documented.
Another aspect of software integration to consider for the future development of both systems is
the concept of continuous integration (CI). Continuous integration is described as “… a software
development practice where members of a team integrate their work frequently, usually each
person integrates at least daily – leading to multiple integrations per day. …” [21]. This approach
is said to increase opportunities for feedback and to decrease the risk of major issues in the
integrated system due to the high frequency of integration and fixes of broken builds and utilizes
a version control repository [22].

5.6. Documentation Procedure

The final step in the process is creating proper documentation for the research conducted.
This will ensure proper continuation of the project in the future and encourage consistency in the
quality of work done by multiple researchers. An important aspect of this step is producing
documentation that will enhance the experience of developers and users alike when dealing with
either the backend or front end of the code. The user guide operates like a manual and helps the
user of VCC understand how to gain the most out of the experience by helping them navigate
the interface, while the developer’s guide helps the programmer understand the architecture of
the code and learn how to follow this to further develop the software later on.
One method to adapt for higher quality documentation is the Docs like Code method
described by Anne Gentle, technical product manager for Cisco. According to Gentle, what often
happens is “… You want user-centered docs but instead you get project-centered docs. You want

99
technically accurate docs but instead you get vague hand waving from your reviewers and a
dearth of tests. …” [23]. The proposed solution is to literally treat the documentation similar to
how code is handled. The following steps are recommended for treating documents like code:
• “Store the doc source files in a version control system” [23].
• “Build the doc artifacts automatically” [23].
• “Ensure that a trusted set of reviewers meticulously reviews the docs” [23].
• “Publish the artifacts without much human intervention” [23].
There are two major documents developed as part of this research effort. The first one is
the user manual for the front-end user of the VCC software. This includes basic instructions on
how to operate the interface, suggestions for the learning process, and recommendations on how
to draw conclusions from the knowledgebase shown.
The second document will be a more thorough data collection and digitization process
document for future researchers to follow, along with a software developers guide. This will
ensure that any future researchers are following the same process while maintaining quality of
research. The software developers guide will be following the ‘Docs like Code’ method for
iterating through the documentation, with intermittent reviews and storing the source files in an
easily accessible repository such as GitHub [24].

100
 REFERENCES

[1] Simon, S., Atchison, S., Chudoba, B., “Development of a Hypersonic Vehicle
Configuration Compendium”, AIAA 2021-2791. AIAA AVIATION 2021 FORUM.
August 2021
[2] “Tkinter - Python interface to TCL/TK¶,” tkinter - Python interface to Tcl/Tk - Python
3.10.0 documentation Available: https://docs.python.org/3/library/tkinter.html.
[3] Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison, S.C. and Van
Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study – Paving the
Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-017755,
Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center, NASA, 06
July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office: NASA Langley
Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate, Hypersonic Technology
Project, Hampton, Virginia].
[4] The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Incorporated,
2016.
[5] “The differences between data, information and knowledge, and why you never find it
when it's needed!,” iEngage.ai Available: https://iengage.ai/the-differences-between-
data-information-and-knowledge-and-why-you-never-find-it-when-its-needed/.
[6] Chudoba, B., “Development of a Generic Stability and Control Methodology for the
Conceptual Design of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations,”
Ph.D. Dissertation, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, April 2001
[7] Chudoba, B., “Development of a Generic Stability and Control Methodology for the
Conceptual Design of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations,”
Ph.D. Dissertation, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, April 2001
[8] McCall, T., Alavi, K.S., Rana, L., Chudoba, B., “Artificial Intelligent Research
Assistant for Aerospace Design Synthesis – Solution Logic”, AIAA Paper 2018-5387,
September 2018. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-5387
[9] Hill, M. L., Akridge, J. M., and Avery, W. H., “Thermal Insulation for Hypersonic
Vehicles,” APL Technical Digest, Jul. 1962.
[10] Bowcutt, K. G., “Physics Drivers of Hypersonic Vehicle Design,” 22nd AIAA
International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference,
2018.
[11] Mattingly, J. D., and Boyer, K. M., Elements of Propulsion: Gas Turbines and Rockets,
Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2016.
[12] Phillips, W. F., Mechanics of Flight, Hoboken (New Jersey): John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
[13] Rohatgi, A., WebPlotDigitizer - extract data from plots, images, and maps Available:
https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/.
[14] Staufenbiel, R. “Horizontal Aerospace Transport Systems,” Paper No. 21. Space Course
on Low Earth Transportation and Orbital Systems, Aachen, Germany, 1991.
[15] “Sqlitestudio,” SQLiteStudio Available: https://sqlitestudio.pl/.
[16] Edwards, G. “Review Lecture: The Technical Aspects of Supersonic Civil Transport
Aircraft,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A,
Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 275, No. 1254, pp. 529-565, 21 March 1974.
[17] Mondava, S. V., “A process in user interface development,” thesis, ProQuest LLC,
2014.

101
[18] Hickeys, “Overview of UI development - win32 apps,” Overview of UI Development -
Win32 apps | Microsoft Docs Available: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
us/windows/win32/appuistart/the-process.
[19] Simon, S., Atchison, S., and Chudoba, B., “Development of a Hypersonic Vehicle
Configuration Compendium”, AIAA Aviation Forum 2021
[20] “Integration challenges and solutions in software development,” Section Available:
https://www.section.io/engineering-education/integration-challenges-and-solutions-in-
software-development/#challenges-in-software-integration.
[21] Fowler, M., “Continuous integration,” martinfowler.com Available:
https://www.martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html.
[22] Duvall, P. M., Matyas, S., and Glover, A., Continuous Integration: Improving Software
Quality and Reducing Risk, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley, 2013.
[23] Gentle, A., Fleming, D., and Holcomb, K., Docs like Code: Write, Review, Test, Merge,
Build, Deploy, Repeat, Austin, TX: Just Write Click, 2017.
[24] “Where the world builds software,” GitHub Available: https://github.com/

102
 CHAPTER 6

SOURCE MATERIAL LIBRARY

6.1. Data Richness

6.1.1. Disciplinary Information Sought

Data richness is a gauge developed as part of this VCC data collection process.
Developing an accurate data richness scheme would provide a good way to categorize each of
the hypersonic vehicles being processed in terms of how rich they are in terms of conceptual
design data published. There are two ways of approaching this: relative data richness, and
absolute data richness. Absolute data richness depends on comparing the data collected to a
standard list of deliverables. Based on the conceptual design process discussed earlier, a list of
disciplinary parameters is generated, as was provided for each discipline in section 5.2.1,
categorized by the different subphases in conceptual design: parametric sizing, configuration
layout, and configuration evaluation. This gives an idea of what to filter for when surveying the
sources.

6.1.2. Absolute Data-Information Richness

Absolute data-information richness (ADIR) is the determination of how rich the vehicle
data is based upon a predetermined set of parameters sought for each discipline, which is based
on the list of parameters mentioned in Chapter 5. This means that for each discipline involved in
design, a set of variables or parameters is determined as crucial to the conceptual design process.
This list is then considered 100% rich in ‘absolute data’ and serves as the scale against which
the collected data is normalized. Absolute data richness is then output as a percentage value.
For example, let us consider the case where the propulsion discipline has seven
parameters listed. If a vehicles data is looked through and it is determined that data was found
for only three of the seven parameters listed, then that means that the absolute data richness is
calculated as:

# 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑
𝐴𝐷𝐼𝑅 = 𝑥100
# 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑠𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑡

103
For this example case, this would result in an absolute data richness of:

3
𝐴𝐷𝐼𝑅 = 𝑥100 = 42.86%
7
for the propulsion discipline. In addition to the disciplinary absolute data richness, overall data
richness is also calculated, which is simply calculated from a summation of the different
disciplinary parameters. It is worth noting that the absolute data richness does not represent the
wealth of data that was found for each vehicle, which means a low ADIR percentage does not
necessarily mean that data was scarce for that particular vehicle. ADIR only captures the amount
of data found that was considered crucial to conceptual design. It is possible that other pieces of
data that fall within the preliminary design or detail design phases were found but are not
reflected within this data richness scheme.
The absolute data richness of the vehicles compiled for the VCC prototype are shown in
Figure 6.1.

Figure 6.1. Absolute Data-Information Richness - VCC prototype vehicles

104
 As seen in Figure 6.1, very few vehicles are 100% rich in ‘absolute data’ as determined
by the parameter table. Sänger II yielded 100% of the performance data sought, as did the X-
43A and NASP X-30.

7.1.3. Relative Data Richness

Next is the relative data richness, which is simply a measure of how many
variables/parameters have been found broken down by discipline, regardless of whether the data
found matched the earlier parameter list or not. Hence the data mentioned in the relative data
richness section may not always be of use for conceptual design strictly. The results of the
relative data richness for each of the vehicles compiled for VCC prototype is shown in Figure
6.2.

Figure 6.2. Relative Data Richness - VCC vehicles

The relative data richness aims more to give an idea of the relative weight of the amount
of data found for each discipline. As seen above, about 50% of the data and information found
for the XB-70 is stability & control data, while very little weights & balances information has
been published. It is interesting to see how this varies for each of the vehicles. In the future, when

105
many vehicles are populating the VCC, correlations may be developed between various factors
surrounding the vehicle development or time period and the subsequent tendency to heavily
feature a particular discipline in published literature regarding the project.

6.2. VCC Vehicle Selection

Seven high-speed aerospace vehicles have been processed and added to the VCC in its
initial prototype phase. These vehicles are selected based on the archived data available within
the AVD Laboratory, as well as due to the 2020 NASA study conducted by AVD Laboratory to
utilize as verification and trade vehicles. This sample pool of vehicles represents a variety of
configurations and mission characteristics. Full bibliographies have been compiled for each of
these vehicles, as mentioned in Chapter 2, and the number of sources found for each vehicle is
represented in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1. Summary of Vehicles - VCC Prototype

Vehicle Developed by: Year Developed # of Sources
Available

X-51 AFRL, DARPA 2010 34

X-43A NASA 2004 162

XB-70 NAA 1964 123

SR-71 Lockheed Corporation 1964 94

Concorde Aerospatiale, BAC 1965 257

Sänger II MBB 1960’s 180

NASP DARPA 1986 424

Some of these vehicles were developed to the point of a solid operational life as well as
test flights, such as the Concorde, while others were unfortunately cancelled due to a lack of
funding or other technical issues before a unit could be manufactured, such as Sänger-II or NASP
X-30. Regardless of current status, documentation available on these vehicles are treasure troves
of DIK to learn from, and therefore must be preserved accordingly. The following chapter
sections will introduce the seven vehicles mentioned in Table 6.1, by first providing a general

106
vehicle description with a discussion of any unique characteristics, a short discussion of the
history and development cycle, as well as mentioning the types of data sources found for each
vehicle.

6.2.1. X-51

The X-51 was the first vehicle to be subjected to the VCC documentation and compilation
process, and thereby served as a test subject to understand the effectiveness of the methods used
in this research effort. This allowed for the finalization of a system for all remaining vehicles
moving forward. The X-51 is a hypersonic research vehicle that uses a scramjet engine,
developed by the combined efforts of the US Air Force, DARPA, NASA, Boeing, and Pratt &
Whitney companies. It was designed for an air-launch from the B-52 aircraft, and the primary
objective of the program was to test the U.S. Air Force scramjet engine [1]. Due to the secretive
nature of this project, very few sources of published data are available. It is said that over $250
million has been invested into this project for the sake of advancing hypersonic flight technology
[2].

Figure 6.3. X-51 geometry [3]

The technologies featured on the vehicle includes a scramjet operating from Mach 4.5 to
7, an affordable high lift-to-drag airframe, and storable endothermic hydrocarbon JP-7 fuel [4].
The vehicle was about 14 ft long and almost 2 ft wide, as shown in Figure 6.3.

107
6.3.1.1. History and Development
The X-51 vehicle comes after the termination of the NASP program in the 1990’s. The
HyTECH program by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) was focused on development
efforts for hypersonic propulsion. Pratt & Whitney developed the SJX61 engine, originally
meant for the X-43C, which was then used for the X-51 after the cancellation of the X-43C
program by NASA [1]. The development of the X-51 began in 2003, as shown in Figure 6.4.
The first flight test of the X-51A was conducted in 2010, with minimal issues. There was
an inlet unstart about two minutes into the flight, from which the vehicle quickly recovered. The
X-51A achieved a maximum speed of Mach 4.87 [1]. The flight was ended a little early due to a
nozzle breach. The second flight in 2011 ended with an unstarted engine shortly after scramjet
ignition and was hence unsuccessful. During the third flight test in 2013, the vehicle experienced
loss of control before the engine could even be ignited due to a run-away control fin actuator.
The fourth and final flight test was successful and resulted in a peak Mach of 5.1 and a 361-
second-long controlled flight duration [5].

Figure 6.4. X-51 development timeline [6]

6.3.1.2. Sources Compiled

A total of 34 public domain sources have been collected for the bibliography of the X-
51. This vehicle has the least number of published sources of data due to the secret classification
of the technology as applied to the project, compared to the other vehicles added to the VCC
prototype. The breakdown of the types of sources identified for this vehicle is shown in Figure
6.5.

108
 Total: 34 Sources
Technical Report
Presentation 20%
32%

News Article
13%

Academic Paper
Magazine
16%
19%

Figure 6.5. Source type breakdown - X-51A

As seen in this chart, most of the sources published for the X-51 are technical
presentations, with the close second being technical reports and magazine articles regarding the
new technology. The remaining sources are news articles regarding the project, and academic
publications.

6.2.2. X-43A

The X-43 legacy series includes four variants: X-43A, B, C, and D. From this series, the
X-43A, shown in Figure 6.6 has been the focus of the VCC effort. This vehicle has been part of
NASA’s Hyper-X program in the early 2000’s to validate different experimental methods
including design methods for scramjet powered hypersonic vehicles, and various tools and
analysis techniques by conducting flight tests [7]. These experiments aimed to obtain data for
scramjet propulsion feasibility, aerodynamic, aerothermal, structural, and guidance systems for
the vehicle. This project involved an investment of $230 million [8]. Although the Hyper-X
series set speed records of up to Mach 9.6, the project was eventually replaced by the X-51
project [9].

109
 Figure 6.6. X-43A geometry [3]

This small-scale research vehicle was developed based on the NASP effort to provide
data for a hydrogen-fueled, airframe-integrated scramjet engine [10]. In addition to the integrated
scramjet engine, the vehicle featured two aft vertical control surfaces and two all moving wings
and was about 12 feet long and 5 feet wide, seen Figure 6.6.

6.3.2.1. History and Development Cycle

A competition was held for contractors to develop the finalized design of the Hyper-X
research vehicle, at the end of which a team including Micro Craft of Tullahoma and Boeing was
awarded the contract in 1997. The development program concentrated on three main technology
goals: risk reduction, flight validation of design predictions, and continued development of
advanced tools [11].

Figure 6.7. X-43A historical timeline [11]

110
 As seen in the timeline in Figure 6.7, three flight tests have been conducted in total. The
first flight was in 2001 and ended in a mishap soon after separation from the carrier aircraft,
where the right and left fins and rudder broke off [8]. The cause of the failure was cited as the
following: “… The X-43A HXLV failed because the vehicle control system design was deficient
for the trajectory flown due to inaccurate analytical models which overestimated the system
margins. …” [12]. After this incident, the model was refined for the next two flight tests. The
second flight in 2003 achieved Mach 7 with all systems on both stages functioning well. The
quality of data acquired from this flight was good and the engine performance was within 3% of
the predictions. Finally, the third test flight in 2004 achieved a speed of Mach 10 and was another
successful flight. This flight yielded the largest amount of test data for a Mach 10 scramjet. Later
in 2006, the project ended up being replaced by the X-51 program [8].

6.3.2.2. Sources Compiled

For the X-43A, 162 sources have been compiled in total, a large majority of which are
academic/conference publications, making up 56% of the total sources. The second largest group
are technical reports, making up 24%. The rest of the sources are divided amongst presentations
and magazine and news articles, see Figure 6.8.

Total: 162 Sources

Book Magazine
3% Internal
3%
Miscellaneous 1%
6%

Presentation
7%

Academic
Paper/Conference
Proceedings
56%

Technical Report
24%

Figure 6.8. Source type breakdown - X-43A

111
 The ‘miscellaneous’ sources for the X-43A include a few graduate thesis documents and
some standalone articles from NASA that are not technical reports or news articles.

6.2.3. XB-70

The XB-70, also known as the Valkyrie, was a supersonic Mach 3 vehicle developed by
North American Aviation as a nuclear bomber prototype for the B-70 project. It was designed to
cruise at Mach 3 and higher, and was designed with stealth considerations, as it was capable of
moving out of radar range during bomber missions. The vehicle was built to carry out the same
mission as the B-52 bomber but at the higher supersonic speed of Mach 3, according to the
requirements of the US Air Force [13]. The XB-70 was expensive, with each vehicle costing
$750 million, and the development cost was around $1.5 billion. The program was cancelled for
several reasons, but it all came down to the fact that the technology for the vehicle was developed
before its time which created many issues, unfortunately [14]. However, the fact remains that
this vehicle pioneered many new technologies for supersonic aircraft and had the potential to
become a Mach 3 passenger transport had it not been for the extreme costs associated with such
repurposing [15].

105 ft

185.75 ft
28.81 ft

15 ft

Figure 6.9. XB-70 geometry [3]

The XB-70 is 185 ft long, with a wingspan of 105 ft as seen in Figure 6.9. One of the
unique characteristics of the vehicle is the wing droop. At subsonic speeds, the wings could make
use of the large lifting surface to increase the lift to drag ratio, which helped with the takeoff and

112
landing performance by utilizing compression lift, a concept that had been developed well before
this project [16]. At supersonic speeds, this lifting surface could be decreased by folding down
the wing tips, which reduced induced drag. These drooped wing tips also provided increased
directional stability [16].

6.3.3.1. History and Development Cycle

North American Aviation was awarded a contract to build Weapons System 110 in 1959.
This vehicle was meant to achieve a cruise altitude of 70,000 ft, a range of 7,500 miles, and
cruise at Mach 3. After searching through literature available on aerodynamic studies conducted
prior, they came across a paper detailing the advantages of compression lift, a method of
increasing lift by utilizing a conical body under the center of a wing. This was then used to
conceptualize the XB-70, which applied compression lift using the wing droop mechanism
detailed above.
The XB-70 bomber program was cancelled shortly after, in 1961, as shown in Figure
6.10. This was then replaced with a high-speed flight research program which called for three
XB-70 prototype aircraft, each slightly different from each other. The initial prototype or AV/1
(Air Vehicle/1) broke the sound barrier, decelerated, and broke again through the sound barrier
many times to check for transonic stability. Several subsequent flights of the first prototype
experienced issues with things like drag chutes failing to deploy and several instances of
hydraulic system failures and fuel leakage. Then in 1965 the second prototype, AV/2 made its
first flight. This vehicle had more flexible hydraulic fittings, and an improved honeycomb skin,
as well as carefully placed fuel tanks to avoid leakage. This vehicle had issues with dihedral
effect, and pitch stability issues at Mach 3 [16].

Figure 6.10. XB-70 historical timeline [17] [18]

113
 Over the course of the next few years of flight tests through 1966, the vehicle established
and broke its own records for longest sustained supersonic flights. The program was eventually
abandoned as “… the flight frequency went down and the costs went up. …” [17].

6.3.3.2. Sources Compiled

A total of 138 sources have been located for the XB-70. Almost half of these resources
are accounted for by various technical reports, most of which have been produced by NASA, as
shown in Figure 6.11. The rest of the sources are mostly a mix of academic papers and conference
proceedings, published books, and miscellaneous sources.

Total: 123 Sources

Presentation
Magazine 4%
5%

Boo
k…

Technical
Miscellaneous Report
14% 49%

Academic
Paper/Conference
Proceedings
16%

Figure 6.11. Source type breakdown - XB-70

In reference to the XB-70, ‘miscellaneous sources’ consists of a mix of website articles

and academic thesis documents.

6.2.4. SR-71

The SR-71, also known as the Blackbird, is a reconnaissance vehicle designed and
produced by Lockheed for the U.S. Air Force in the 1960s. The vehicle has been designed to be
capable of conducting both single-legged and multi-legged reconnaissance missions with aerial
refueling factored in [19]. The vehicle is about 107 feet in length and has a wingspan of 55 feet,
as shown in Figure 6.12. Several new technologies were developed that went into the SR-71,

114
which made it a unique vehicle at the time. Kelly Johnson, design engineer who conceptualized
the vehicle, said of the technologies developed: “… everything on the aircraft, from rivets and
fluids, including materials and power plants had to be invented from scratch. …” [20].

Figure 6.12. SR-71 geometry [3]

The Blackbird features a delta wing with two vertical tails that are canted inward to
reduce the coupling of the vertical tails on the rolling moment. The vehicle utilizes two turbo-
ramjet engines which allow for operation at both low speed and high speed as the airflow
transitions between the turbojet and ramjet accordingly [19].
The forward fuselage is a blended body design, featuring fuselage chines. A chine is
defined as a “… long, narrow sideways extension to the fuselage, blending into the main wing.
…” [21]. The chine has multiple functions, including the increase of the effective lifting surface
with minimal increase in drag at supersonic speeds, and reducing the radar cross section of the
vehicle for stealth [20].

6.3.4.1. History and Development Cycle

Although technically the official contract for the development of the SR-71 was awarded
in 1962, the technologies that eventually have been applied with this reconnaissance vehicle
were under development beforehand. The A-12, the predecessor of the SR-71, was developed

115
by Skunk Works under project ARCHANGEL which was the replacement program of the
previous U-2 vehicle [22].
The next iteration in this line was the YF-12, which was developed as an experimental
fighter-interceptor version of the A-12 [23]. By the end of 1962, the US Air Force awarded a
contract to Lockheed to build six SR-71s following interest in obtaining versions of the Blackbird
meant for reconnaissance.

Figure 6.13. SR-71 historical timeline

As shown in Figure 6.13, the first flight of a developed prototype SR-71 was in 1964.
The first operational SR-71 mission was flown in 1968, and within the four years leading up to
that mission, many test flights of the YF-12, A-12, and SR-71 occurred, a few of which ended
up in the loss of the aircraft [22].
In 1975, the big tail SR-71 took its first flight. Within the decade prior, several more SR-
71 vehicles were lost during operational missions. Eventually the program was terminated by
the Air Force and Intelligence Officials in 1989, although 3 units were shortly reactivated in
1995 [22].

6.3.4.2. Sources Compiled

A total of 95 sources have been compiled for the SR-71 vehicle, with an additional 26
collected for the YF-12. The breakdown of the sources type shown in Figure 6.14 only addresses
the 95 sources specific to the SR-71. As seen in Figure 6.14, the majority of the sources collected
are physical or digital books, with conference proceedings and technical reports making up the
remaining majority.

116
 Total: 94 Sources
Miscellaneous Internal
5% 3%
Presentation
6%
Book
Magazine 31%
8%

Technical
Report
23% Academic
Paper/Conference
Proceedings
24%

Figure 6.14. Source type breakdown - SR-71

The small number of miscellaneous sources found for this vehicle included AVD
Laboratory internal documents, websites, and uncategorized documents such as the SR-71
historical timeline by Hildebrant [22].

6.2.5. Concorde

Concorde is a supersonic transport aircraft developed in the 1960’s. The aircraft was
originally envisioned to carry 128 passengers over 4,000 miles at Mach 2.2, but after further
development activities, these ambitious mission criteria were reduced to a passenger capacity of
90 to 100 at Mach 2.05 [24]. The vehicle employs a unique design, featuring many revolutionary
design concepts for the time, most notable of which is the ogival planform thin delta wing as
shown in Figure 6.15.

117
 Figure 6.15. Concorde geometry [3]

As seen in Figure 6.15, Concorde is 202 ft long, with a wingspan of 84 ft and a vertical
tail that raises 37 ft from the fuselage. The vehicle is an all-aluminum design and is powered by
four Bristol/Siddeley Olympus turbojet engines, which also feature afterburners for use during
takeoff and acceleration to cruise velocity [24].

6.3.5.1. History and Development Cycle

The Supersonic Transport Advisory Committee was formed in Britain in 1956 to
investigate the possibility of supersonic air travel. As shown in Figure 6.16, development
activities began in 1960, shortly after which France decided to join in. The four companies
involved primarily were BAC (British Aircraft Corporation), Sud Aviation, Bristol Siddeley
(now renamed Rolls-Royce) and SNECMA [25]. The construction of two prototypes began in
1965, and the first flight of a Concorde was in 1969 in Toulouse, France [26].
Concorde’s commercial operations were kicked off with the first commercial flight in
1976, with flights from Paris to Rio de Janeiro by Air France and from London to Bahrain by
British Airways. The Concorde had a long operating history commercially despite being
described as a supersonic bust and as having disastrous economics [24].

118
 Figure 6.16. Concorde historical timeline

This long-standing legacy of the Concorde was damaged by the fatal accident that took
place in the year 2000. The vehicle was taking off from Paris to New York with one hundred
passengers and nine crew members, when the landing gear ran over a metal piece left behind by
a previous aircraft, which punctured a tire at the left landing gear. Debris from this destroyed tire
ruptured the underside of the left-wing fuel tanks, causing a severe fire to break out. This then
resulted in both left-wing engines 1 and 2 suffering from a loss of thrust, after which the vehicle
crashed into a nearby hotel. This accident resulted in the loss of the lives of all 100 passengers,
all nine crew members, and four employees of the hotel [27].

6.3.5.2. Sources Compiled

For the Concorde, a total of 257 sources have been compiled. Most of the sources are
internal documents from the AVD Laboratory, academic papers, and magazine articles as well
as print books. The rest of the sources are divided between technical reports, news articles, and
presentations, as shown in Figure 6.17.

119
 Total: 257 Sources
Presentation
Miscellaneous 2%
5%
Internal Docs
Technical Report
25%
8%

Book
17%

Academic
Paper/Conference
Magazine Proceedings
22% 21%

Figure 6.17. Source type breakdown - Concorde

The miscellaneous sources for Concorde contain course material, thesis documents,
engineering notes, standalone case study documents that are not full reports, etc.

6.2.6. NASP X-30

The NASP (National AeroSpace Plane) program began in 1986 as a DARPA project to
investigate the technologies to enable a single stage to orbit flight. The vehicle was meant to be
a horizontal takeoff horizontal landing manned spaceplane with a rocket-based combined-cycle
(RBCC) engine, capable of achieving Mach 25. The project was meant to receive a total of $3.33
billion in funding from the Department of Defense, for phase 2 of the development [28].

120
 Figure 6.18. NASP X-30 geometry [29]

The vehicle, as shown in Figure 6.18, is about 314 ft high, with a span of 118 ft and a
fuselage width of 52 ft. This project required technology advances in the following five areas:
supersonic combustion jet propulsion, active cooing with hydrogen-based fuel, computational
fluid dynamics (CFD), materials, and avionics [30]. NASP has been the first design that
incorporated actively cooled surfaces to reduce the extreme heating from drag during hypersonic
flight [31].

6.3.6.1. History and Development Cycle

In 1975, NASA began exploring an alternative to the Space Shuttle for routine space
transportation. Of the two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) and single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) options
explored, the SSTO benchmark concept for NASP was found more appealing due to resembling
the operational concept of transport aircraft. Phase 1 of this effort began with the Copper Canyon
project in the 1980’s, as shown in Figure 6.19.

Figure 6.19. NASP X-30 historical timeline

121
 The concept of a vehicle capable of transporting people from the Continental U.S. to East
Asia in 2 hours or less was from Tony DuPont, with his idea for the Orient Express [32]. The
companies involved in the NASP study decided that his initial concept was worth exploring,
after which Marquardt and GASL worked on DuPont’s engine study while Boeing, McDonnell
Douglas, Lockheed, and General Dynamics focused on the airframe. Despite this fact, Du Pont’s
aerospace company was excluded from involvement in the development and production of the
vehicle due to the massive engineering requirements that he may not have been able to provide
at the time, but he remained a consultant [33].
Eventually in 1987, due to budget constraints, Boeing, Lockheed, and General Electric
were eliminated from the contract, thereby downsizing the program. Phase 2 of the development
was originally intended for as early as 1986 but ended up being extended to 1990 [34]. The
following few years were met with more budget struggles, as the NASP mission objectives
needed to be reassessed continually: “… No amount of coordination, however, could
counterbalance the continual funding turmoil that kept the JPO in a constant state of reviewing
options…” [33]. This led to the official cancellation of the program in 1993, before any units
could be produced, or flight tests conducted.

6.3.6.2. Sources Compiled

The NASP X-30 has the largest bibliography of the seven vehicles considered for this
compendium prototype, with 424 sources. The majority of these sources are academic papers
and conference publications, as seen in Figure 6.20. The rest of the sources is comprised of
printed books, technical reports, presentations, magazine articles, and AVD Lab internal
documents.

122
 Total: 430 Sources
Internal Magazine
6% 3%
Book
7%

Presentation
7% Academic
Paper/Conferenc
e Proceedings
Technical Report
41%
12%

Miscellaneous
24%

Figure 6.20. Source type breakdown - NASP X-30

The miscellaneous sources collected for the NASP X-30 include a wide variety of notes
and informal memos produced during the development of the vehicle, communications back and
forth with Tony DuPont, and other drawings and data collected during the project.

6.2.7. Sänger-II

The Sänger II was based on the German Sänger reference concept for a fully reusable
two-stage-to-orbit system. Based on the design by German aerospace engineer Eugene Sänger,
this vehicle featured an airbreathing, horizontal take off horizontal landing first stage and a rocket
powered second stage. The vehicle was meant to be capable of delivering 8,500 kg of payload
to low-earth orbit, and 3,000 kg if it was a manned mission [35]. The first stage was to be capable
of reaching an altitude of 3100 km to separate, and the second stage would then take the payload
of up to 6,000 kg to low-earth orbit [36].

123
 147.97 ft

270.67 ft

47.2 ft

Figure 6.21. Sänger II geometry [3]

As seen in Figure 6.21, the vehicle is 270 ft long, with a span of 148 ft, and a fuselage
width of 47 ft. One of the features of Sänger II is the airbreathing propulsion system that
consisted of five turbojet engines, with a ramduct capable of transitioning between Mach 3.3 and
3.8 [35]. This vehicle was also meant to form the basis for a European hypersonic transport with
an 11,000 km range capability.

6.3.7.1. History and Development Cycle

The Sänger concept was initiated by MBB (Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm) in 1985. This
led to a feasibility study contract by the German Ministry for Research and Technology in 1987.
As shown in Figure 6.22, in 1988, the configurational characteristics of the Sänger-II vehicle
were established, some of which were mentioned at the beginning of section 3.7 [37]. The time
period from 1988 to 1993 saw further funding under Germany’s Hypersonic Technology
Program, which resulted in the ground run of Europe’s first turboramjet engine in 1991.
However, the Sänger program was cancelled due to the realization that further development
would be incredibly costly with any design advantages being less than that offered by the Ariane
5 expendable vehicle at the time [36].

124
 Figure 6.22. Sänger-II historical timeline

6.3.7.2. Sources Compiled

A total of 180 sources are compiled for the Sänger II vehicle. As shown in Figure 6.23,
a large majority of the Sänger data has been located from academic publications and conference
proceedings, making up 63% of the total bibliography. The rest of the sources are books,
technical reports, magazines, and internal documents in the AVD Laboratory, as well as a very
small percentage of presentations.

Technical Report Total: 180 Sources

4% Presentation
Magazine 1%
5%
Internal
6%
Miscellaneous
9%

Academic
Book Paper/Conference
12% Proceedings
63%

Figure 6.23. Source type breakdown - Sänger - II

For the Säenger-II bibliography, the miscellaneous sources are mostly dissertations,
brochures, and various project specific drawings obtained.

125
 REFERENCES

[1] Murphy, J. S., Hank, J. M., and Mutzman, R. C. "The X-51A Scramjet Engine
Demonstration Program: Technology Maturation Thru Flight Tests 1 & 2," RTO-MP-
AVT-208-P-16, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH.
[2] Vogel, J. “X-51A Scramjet Engine Demonstrator ‐ Waverider,” 2010 Aviation Week
Program Excellence Initiative, 2010.
[3] Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison, S.C. and Van
Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study – Paving the
Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-017755,
Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center, NASA, 06
July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office: NASA Langley
Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate, Hypersonic Technology
Project, Hampton, Virginia].
[4] Reed, J. “X-51A Scramjet Engine Demonstrator - Waverider,” [Presentation], Air Force
Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, 26 April 2010.
[5] Brink, C. "X-51 Flight Four Results and What's Next for High Speed Weapons,"
Presentation for the WPAFB Chapter of the Daedalians, Air Force Research Laboratory,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, 20 August 2013.
[6] Mutzman, R., and Murphy, S. “X-51 Development: A Chief Engineer’s Perspective.”
17th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies
Conference, Presentation, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San
Francisco, CA, 11-14 April 2011.
[7] Anon. “X-43A Project Overview: Adventures in Hypersonics,” [Presentation], NASA,
2005.
[8] Engelund, W., and Neal, B. “X-43A Lessons Learned,” [Presentation], Hypersonic
Lessons Learned Workshop, Arlington, VA, 10 December 2013
[9] “April 28, 2001: The First Captive-Carry Flight NASA's X-43A Hypersonic Research
Vehicle,” Air Force Test Center Available: https://www.aftc.af.mil/News/On-This-
Day-in-Test-History/Article-Display-Test-History/Article/2554297/april-28-2001-the-
first-captive-carry-flight-nasas-x-43a-hypersonic-research-ve/.
[10] Voland, R. T., Huebner, L. D., and McClinton, C. R. “X-43A Hypersonic Vehicle
Technology Development,” IAC-05-D2.6.01. 56th International Astronautical
Congress, Fukuoka, Japan, 17-21 October 2005.
[11] Freeman, D., Reubush, D., McClinton, C., Rausch, V., and Crawford, L. “The NASA
Hyper-X Program,” IAF-97-V.4.07. 48th International Astronautical Congress, Turin,
Italy, 06-10 October 1997.
[12] Root Cause MIB Report dated 03/08/2003
[13] Crede, E., Simpson, A., and Shannon, J. “XB-70 Valkyrie,” [Presentation], Department
of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blacksburg, VA, 2007.
[14] Roedts, R., Somero, R., and Waskiewicz, C. “XB-70 Valkyrie,” [Presentation],
Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2005.
[15] Mizokami, K., “The XB-70 Valkyrie Bomber Could've Been a Mach 3 Passenger Jet,”
Popular Mechanics Available:

126
 https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a34788426/xb-70-valkyrie-
bomber-mach-3-passenger-jet-air-force-plan/.
[16] Barnes, T. D., “The XB-70 valkyrie story,” XB-70 Valkyrie Story and photos by
Thornton T.D. Barnes Beatty Tracking Station NASA High Range Available:
https://area51specialprojects.com/xb70story.html.
[17] Matranga, G., and Schweikhard, W. G. “Early Supersonic Flight and Technology
Contributions at Edwards AFB in Retrospect.” AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and
Control Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Austin, TX, 11-14 August 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-5766
[18] Barnes, T. D., “The XB-70 Valkyrie Story,” Secret Heroes Available:
https://area51specialprojects.com/xb70story.html.
[19] Xue, H., Khawaja, H., and Moatamedi, M. “Conceptual Design of High Speed
Supersonic Aircraft: A Brief Review on SR-71 (Blackbird) Aircraft.” 10th International
Conference on Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Aerospace and Sciences, AIP
Publishing, Narvik, Norway, 15-18 July 2014. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4904694
[20] Urie, D. “Case Studies in Engineering: The SR-71 Blackbird,” Course AE107,
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 1991.
[21] “Wing Chine,” Aviation Glossary Available: http://dictionary.dauntless-
soft.com/definitions/groundschoolfaa/Wing+Chine.
[22] Hildebrant, D., “Timeline of the SR-71” 2002.
[23] Dunbar, B., “Lockheed YF-12,” NASA Available:
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-047-DFRC.html.
[24] McLean, F. E. “Supersonic Cruise Technology,” NASA-SP-472, National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., 1985.
[25] Anon. “25 Years Ago...Concorde,” p. 62.
[26] Taylor, “Concorde.”
[27] Anon. “Accident on 25 July 2000 at La Patte d'Oie in Gonesse (95) to the Concorde
Registered F-BTSC Operated by Air France,” Report Translation f-sc000725a, BEA,
France.
[28] Wade, M., “X-30,” Astronautix Available: http://www.astronautix.com/x/x-30.html.
[29] Chavez, F. R., and Schmidt, D. K. “Analytical Aeropropulsive/Aeroelastic Hypersonic-
Vehicle Model with Dynamic Analysis,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics,
Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 1308-1319, November - December 1994.
[30] Schweikart, L. “Command Innovation - Lessons from the National Aerospace Plane
Program,” Innovation and the Development of Flight, Texas A&M University Press,
College Station, TX, 1999, pp. 299-323.
[31] Orloff, B. S. “A Comparative Analysis of Singe-State-to-Orbit Rocket and Air-
Breathing Vehicles,” Master's Thesis, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of Technology,
Air University, June 2006.
[32] Gibbs, Y., “Patch: X-30 national aero-space plane (NASP),” NASA Available:
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/multimedia/imagegallery/logos_patches/X-
30.html.
[33] Schweikart, L. The Hypersonic Revolution - Case Studies in the History of Hypersonic
Technology - the Quest for the Orbital Jet - the National Aero-Space Plane Program

127
 (1983-1995), Air Force History and Museums Program, Vol. III, Bolling AFB,
Washington, D.C., 1998.
[34] Anon. X-30 Timeline.
[35] Weingartner, S. “SANGER - the Reference Concept of the German Hypersonics
Technology Program,” AIAA-93-5161. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace
Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[36] Wade, M., “Sänger II,” Astronautix Available:
http://www.astronautix.com/s/Sängerii.html.
[37] Koelle, D. E. “SANGER II, A Hypersonic Flight and Space Transportation System,”
ICAS-88-1.5.1. 16th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical
Sciences, Jerusalem, Israel, 28 August - 02 September 1988.

128
 CHAPTER 7

COMPENDIUM IMPLEMENTATION

7.1. Data Collection

7.1.1. Defining Data

As Haney mentions in his dissertation, the data domain contains “… facts, statistics, and
media stored for future information requirements” [1]. Data is purely numerical information
about a system provided in raw format. Datasets by themselves do not provide further
understanding regarding a topic but rather serve as lookup reference tables, although these do
provide a more efficient way of storing data in tabulated format. Data is not as immediately
useful as information or knowledge to the designer due to its nature. Dr. Chudoba explains: “…
Data represents raw material without implying any judgement or interpretation, thus it says
nothing about its own importance or irrelevance. …” [2]. Therefore, it takes intentional effort
to define information from a dataset, or to organize it into digestible information.

Overall Breakdown - DIK

Data
13%

Information
Knowledge 59%
28%

Figure 7.1. Overall percentage breakdown of DIK collected

As seen in Figure 7.1, about 13% of the design relevant parameters extracted are datasets
in the form of tables and other numerical sets of data. This data has been categorized into the

129
eight disciplines in a follow-on step. Table 7.1 lists some of the advantages and disadvantages
of using raw data, especially for aerospace vehicle design.

Table 7.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Data

Advantages Disadvantages

Pure, raw numerical data presented directly; no Does not provide any meaningful interpretations
extraction needed

Easy to categorize and organize Inconvenient to search through hundreds of

datapoints for necessary information

Although tabulated data provides a structured and organized format for showcasing
vehicle parameters and disciplinary design values, in larger numbers of entries, it becomes
inconvenient to search for a particular value. Also, the lack of a visual element also makes this
inconvenient. However, for storage purposes data is the simplest to handle; it is easier to recall
data from a storage system since data is typically organized by header names.

7.1.2. Disciplinary Design Data

For the purpose of high-speed vehicle design, data includes any numerical parameter
values that are either tabulated or mentioned within the text of technical reports and publications,
etc. which would help a designer understand certain aspects of a particular vehicle. For example,
the designer may be interested in knowing the maximum speed achieved by a certain vehicle, or
the maximum lift to drag ratio achieved by a wing planform type. This type of inquiry can be
quickly made using data stored as a lookup table, as long as the data is collected and organized
accurately.

130
 Data Information Knowledge

400

300

200

100

0
AE AT GE PE PR WB SC SY

Figure 7.2. Amount of D-I-K found by discipline

As seen in Figure 7.2, from the survey of the sources collected as part of this research
effort, the disciplines with the highest amount of data in comparison to information or knowledge
are geometry, weights and balances, and synthesis. This is to be expected as most of the
parameters found for each of these disciplines is typically presented in the form of tables. For
example, the final weights and dimensions of a vehicle are not typically found to be changing
with relation to any particular parameter to warrant plotting this as information, other than the
change of fuel weight during a mission.
There are certain elements that may be considered crucial to the usefulness of a data table.
This includes the following: appropriate column/row headers and identifiers, and units of
measurement. If a data table is showcasing the relationship between two parameters and how
one parameter is dependent on the other, then appropriate column headers do allow the user to
easily identify the independent vs. dependent variables in this relation. If instead the data table
is merely representing a series of numerical values accumulated for a particular vehicle, then
appropriate row headers are to be expected as well. This is represented in Figure 7.3.

131
 Figure 7.3. Elements of a data table

Column and row headers must be self-explanatory and may be abbreviated as necessary
as long as it is clear to the user what the parameters are. In addition to clear and concise headers,
the data tables must also include the units of measurement used for each row or column of data.
This helps the user gain context for the physical meaning of the numbers and is important for the
accurate use of the data contained in these data tables.

7.2. Information Conversion/Visualization

7.2.1. Defining Information

Most of the collected design parameters are presented in the form of information,
specifically 59%, as seen in Figure 7.1. Even when looking at the number of data tables vs.
information plots vs. knowledge visuals collected for an individual vehicle by discipline,
information dominates in most of these categories, see Figure 7.4. This is to be expected due to
the nature of information. Haney calls information the central figure to the decision-making
process. He states that information may be singular in nature due to it influencing one decision
at a time [1]. However, information is one step ahead of data in that there is a clear visual element
to information. An information graphic provides a clear understanding of the relationship
between two or more parameters of interest.

132
 Data Information Knowledge Data Information Knowledge

250 400

200
300

150

200

100

100
50

0 0
Concorde NASP Saenger-II SR-71 X-43A XB-70 X-51 AE AT GE PE PR WB SC SY

Figure 7.4. Amount of D-I-K found: (a) by vehicle, and (b) by discipline

A few plots that come to mind that are standard deliverables include the lift-curve slope
(defines the relation between coefficient of lift and angle-of-attack of a vehicle), or a plot
comparing the fuel consumption of an engine against the flight Mach number, etc. These plots
may only influence a small number of design decisions at a time, and therefore may lessen their
versatility with reference to the overall decision-making process when compared to a knowledge
plot. Some of the main advantages and disadvantages of information plots are shown in Table
7.2.

Table 7.2. Advantages and Disadvantages of Information

Advantages Disadvantages

Visual representation of relationship between two Numerical values not readily available; extraction
parameters; provides more context than numbers from graph needed

Singular nature of information allows for simpler Showcasing singular relationships at a time
understanding process lessens the number of design decisions that
could be supported from an information plot
compared to a knowledge plot with multiple
regressions

The conversion process from data to information has been defined by Haney via the
following step-by-step process, see Figure 7.5:

133
 Figure 7.5. Data to information transformation process [1]

• Collection – this is the process of transferring data from its source to the working
directory used by the researcher.
• Storage – this is simply the storage of the collected data in a database environment.
• Organization – the stored data must then be sorted base on the contents, dependent and
independent variables, etc.
• Recall – Haney specifies this step separately to account for the querying process of
existing data for use in a design context.
• Analysis – Analysis includes using mathematical operations and statistics to understand
a dataset, which includes creating useful regression trends.
• Visualization – this is simply the process of representing the data in a visual format
through the creation of figures or graphs.

There have not been many instances of utilizing such a conversion process during the
VCC effort since a majority of the design parameters collected have already been in the form of
information. The few data tables that have been collected did undergo this process as needed to
produce information graphics.

7.2.2. Disciplinary Design Information

Aerodynamics, aerothermodynamics, stability & control, propulsion, and performance

are the disciplines with a majority of the parameters represented in the form of information
graphs. This is due to the fact that these disciplines typically showcase parameters with respect
to other parameters (lift vs. drag, lift vs. angle of attack, temperature vs. Mach, etc.), as this
information is important to the designer rather than standalone tabulated values of lift or
temperature. Such parameter dependencies are important to understand the overall behavior of

134
the vehicle with respect to each of these disciplines. These information plots have been extracted
through the digitization process detailed in the Chapter 5, and the resulting extracted information
is stored within an SQLite database alongside direct data found.

658 Data Tables

produced from digitized
information plots and
data tables

Figure 7.6. Screenshot from VCC database file showcasing amount of digital data stored

As seen in Figure 7.6, there are a total of 658 individual data tables added to the SQLite
database for VCC. This includes the data tables manually typed and entered from sources, as
well as the data extracted from information plots that are digitized. In order to express the effort
invested in the current context, the effort required for the entire digitization and sorting process
for the seven selected vehicles for the current VCC prototype spanned one year, with the labor
divided amongst the author and two co-researchers: Samuel Atchison, and Ramlingam Pillai.
The key elements to a good information plot are as follows: well-defined visual axes with
appropriate axis labels, units of measurement for each axis as necessary, and a descriptive
plot/chart title, as seen in Figure 7.7. Information plots are typically found to be two-dimensional
as these are easiest to represent in publications and for circulation. Three-dimensional plots are
best visualized using a computer software or in a faux-3D environment such as a hologram.

135
 Figure 7.7. Elements of an information plot

Being two-dimensional in nature, information plots must have a clearly identified set of
axes with a reasonable range of values that allow the capturing of the largest amount of
information within the plot area. These axes must also include axis labels that include the
parameters for each axis as well as the units of measurement for each parameter. Information
plots should also include a descriptive plot title. This should provide context for the plot, and
include such details as whether the information has been collected during flight test or simulation
or wind tunnel test, etc., what the general conditions of this test have been – what is the speed or
altitude of the flight, any major assumptions accompanying the test, etc. It is also useful to
include what particular data collection methods have been utilized.

7.3. Knowledge Generation

7.3.1. Defining Knowledge

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines knowledge as “… the fact or condition of

knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association” [3]. It becomes
clear that knowledge comes primarily with experience in the topic of interest, which not all
targeted users of the VCC may have. It is in fact impossible for every design engineer to gain
direct experience with every single high-speed vehicle project, past to present, in order to gain
knowledge from these projects. Hence the incentive to transition data and information generated

136
by design teams with that profound experience into transferrable knowledge for the next
generation.
Clearly, it is important to define and distinguish between all three terms - data,
information, and knowledge – as accomplished for this research effort to contextualize. In
addition to defining these terms as introduced in the previous chapters, a distinction must be
made between each, to easily differentiate them from one another. With regards to the difference
between information and knowledge, the Merriam-Webster dictionary provides a secondary
definition for knowledge: “… the range of one’s information or understanding. …” [3]. Then,
knowledge is the result of a buildup of information, hence why it measures the range of
information/understanding. Applying this same theory to the current research study, knowledge
plots consisting of a range of information plots are deduced to deepen one’s understanding of
the subject matter. For example, a lift vs. drag plot informs a designer of the relationship between
the two parameters but does not necessarily deepen their knowledge on the same subject matter.
However, a plot with several lift vs. drag trends that vary depending on configurational
characteristics, helps to understand the tendencies for this relationship to change, depending on
the configuration. This visualization-style obtained becomes knowledge regarding the nature of
this relationship. Table 7.3 describes a few of the advantages and possible disadvantages of a
knowledge plot:

Table 7.3. Advantages and Disadvantages of Knowledge Graphics

Advantages Disadvantages

Visual representation of relationship between two In large amounts of trends, could result in knowledge
parameters and the effect of varying a third parameter. overload and overwhelm the user.

Helps to gain deeper understanding regarding a Without proper annotation and labeling, a knowledge
subject area. plot might become confusing.

Aids in design decision-making by providing multiple

design considerations.

Although a basic understanding has been established about the nature of the relationship
between information and knowledge, there must also be some clear parameters established that
differentiate between a knowledge and information graphic. It is simple to distinguish between
data and information due to the stark contrast between numerical data and visual plots. However,
the distinction between information and knowledge may be less obvious since both are based on

137
data to some extent. From the extent of the literature review conducted for this research activity,
no sources have been identified that discusses specific metrics to distinguish between the two.
Hence it is up to the author to establish the criteria for such a differentiation based on the
observations from this research effort, having dealt with hundreds of data tables, information
plots, and knowledge graphics. These criteria will be useful for categorizing plots or other such
graphics that are debatable about whether they fall into information or knowledge primarily.
Before specifying such criteria, it must be noted that knowledge graphics in this context
may be of two types: ones that allow for overall vehicle type comparison, and ones that allow
for disciplinary parameter comparisons, as shown in Figure 7.8. Both types of graphics provide
useful comparisons that aid in design decision-making to be considered ‘knowledge’.

Figure 7.8. Two types of knowledge graphics illustrated

Each of the following are the minimum criteria for a plot to be considered ‘knowledge’
and not information. A knowledge plot must satisfy at the very least one of the following criteria:
• Compares at least 2 different configurations.
• Compares at least 2 different cross-sections.
• Compares Mach numbers from at least two different speed regimes (the range of Mach
numbers crosses between subsonic and supersonic, or supersonic and hypersonic).
• Compares at least 2 different fuel types/propulsion concepts.
• Compares at least 2 different mission types.

138
 • If the plot is comparing disciplinary parameters, it must compare at least three variations
of that parameter.
It must be noted that plots comparing a vehicle wind tunnel test with flight test results,
or comparing multiple methods of calculating the same parameter, are not considered knowledge
plots in this study. The reason for this stems from the earlier definition of the basic function of a
knowledge plot – to aid in making design decisions. If the multiple trendlines shown in one plot
do not provide design options to the designer, then this is not considered a design knowledge
plot. Method comparison plots may be considered as falling under ‘verification’ if the vehicle’s
true flight-measured values are plotted for comparison. Such graphics rather provide knowledge
regarding the accuracy of certain methods, and hence are not considered ‘design knowledge’.

Figure 7.9. Elements of a knowledge graphic

The components of a knowledge plot that are necessary include the following: axis labels
and units as necessary, descriptive figure title, well-defined legends, and verbal commentary and
visual annotations to guide the user. This is demonstrated in Figure 7.9 with an example of a
knowledge graphic produced as part of the AVD Laboratory NASA study [4] to which the VCC
contributed to, the results of which will be discussed later in this chapter.

139
 Figure 7.10. Process of converting information to knowledge

Similar to how Haney defined the process of data to information conversion in his study
[1], this study adapts the steps to convert multiple pieces of information into knowledge. The
conversion process is following the following six steps as outlined in Figure 7.10:
• Retrieve
This is the process of digitally retrieving the information plots – by snipping them
and storing them as .png files.
• Digitize
These .png files are digitized to extract the numerical data that makes up the
information plots.
• Organize
This data is then organized based on the x and y axes presented, as well as based
on what is most useful to the designer. For example, all the lift-curve slopes for a
particular mission segment may be grouped for combining together, etc. This will then
determine the contents of the plot legend.
• Combine
Then the grouped datasets are combined by plotting them on one set of axes, to
visualize multiple trendlines together.
• Average
In addition to combining the different information plots, an average can be
generated for each configuration or vehicle type if there is enough variation in
information present in the same plot. For example, if there are multiple sets of
information for each configuration, then those sets can be averaged to generate a general

140
 trendline that represents the tendencies of a particular configuration. This is added to the
side as an additional step that may or may not be followed based on the quantity of
information available for each configuration.
• Annotate
Perhaps the most important step of producing a good knowledge plot, intelligent
and helpful annotations must be provided that will guide the user. The legend discussed
earlier is a part of such annotation. Knowledge graphics must be self-explanatory and
leave no pressing questions to a designer who may already be overwhelmed with the
intricacies of design. Annotations may include labeling trendlines with images of the
vehicle or the vehicle name or both, adding legends that guide the user to the meaning
behind particular plotting schemes, highlighting regions within the plot of particular
significance, etc.

Provided is an example of this process carried out, shown in Figure 7.11. This is the
process of compiling various Cl vs. AOA (angle-of-attack) plots into one knowledge plot.

Figure 7.11. Example of information-to-knowledge process carried out

141
 As shown, first the relevant information plots are retrieved by snipping them from the
digital PDFs and storing as .png files for each vehicle. Next is the digitization process, where the
numerical data that defines each plot is extracted. This data is plotted again using Microsoft
Excel in order to visually verify the accuracy of the data extracted compared to the original
images. After that comes the organization process, where the numerical data is sorted by vehicle
name, vehicle category, and x and y axes, in an Excel spreadsheet. After this, the data is then
combined into one singular plot on one single set of axes. Next comes the annotation process
where the vehicle types compared are identified, as well as labeling of the trendlines for each
vehicle with a visual of the vehicle and the Mach number of operation where this data has been
collected.
It is clear to see that before annotation, the knowledge plot is of little use and would be
rather confusing to someone trying to gain understanding from such a graphic. The annotations
make up the key element that allows a knowledge graphic to be dissected and studied for the
gaining of the knowledge contained within.

7.3.2. Categorizations for Comparison

For the building up of knowledge plots, there are many different comparison graphics
that may be created depending on what a designer would find most useful to compare. Depending
on the type of design activity conducted, the designer may be looking into comparisons based
on configurations, specific cross-sections for the same configuration, specific wing sweep angles
for the same cross-section, etc. Hence it becomes apparent that there are a multitude of
possibilities for conducting comparisons. Some of the major categories for comparisons are
described below for reference. It must be emphasized that the categorizations showcased in the
following sub-sections are only for one of the two major knowledge types, which is vehicle-to-
vehicle comparison. The identification of every single possible comparison on a disciplinary
level is beyond the scope of this project. It must also be noted that the categories presented here
are merely a suggested handful for illustration purposes, as there are multitudes of more vehicle
categorizations of relevance.

7.3.2.1. Configurations
There are various flight vehicle configurations that may be considered for an aircraft, a list of
which is shown in Figure 7.12 with the configurational characteristics demonstrated in the right column
[5]. The configuration of an aircraft consists of the general layout of the vehicle with the placement of its

142
major components. Different configurations may provide performance advantages for specific mission
types or speed regimes.

Figure 7.12. Various aircraft configurations – schematics reproduced from Dr. Chudoba [5]

The configurations shown in Figure 7.12 include the following:

• TAC (Tail-Aft Configuration) [X-51, X-43A, NASP X-30]
This configuration features wings and an aft horizontal tailplane.
• TFC (Tail-Forward Configuration) [XB-70]
In contrast to TAC, TFC features a horizontal lifting surface that sits in front of the wings
(canard).
• TSC (Three-Surface Configuration)
This configuration typically features a set of wings, an aft horizontal tailplane, and a
forward canard surface to generate increased lift.
• FWC (Flying-Wing Configuration) [Concorde, Sänger-II, SR-71]
Flying wing aircraft have no auxiliary horizontal tailplane but a prominent wing structure
blended or intersecting with the fuselage.
• OWC (Oblique-Wing Configuration)
This configuration features a wing that is designed to pivot on the center point so one of
the wing tips is swept forward.
• OFWC (Oblique Flying-Wing Configuration)

143
 An Oblique Flying Wing is an oblique wing-only aircraft with no fuselage like a typical
flying wing concept.

7.3.2.2. Cross-Section Concepts

Another option is to allow the user to compare between various cross-sections of
vehicles. There are three major types of cross-sections for aircraft that are considered, as shown
in Figure 7.13.

Figure 7.13. Various aircraft cross-sections

• All-Body [X-51, X-43A, NASP X-30]

These aircraft do not have distinguishable wings. Many all-body (AB) aircraft are
typically lifting body vehicles where the body itself produces the lift instead of wings.
• Blended-Body [SR-71, Sänger-II]
Blended-body (BB) aircraft have wings that blend with the fuselage, and therefore
it is difficult to find a distinguishing line where the wing stops and the fuselage begins,
or vice versa.
• Wing-Body [XB-70, Concorde]
This is the typically aircraft concept, common among passenger aircraft. There is
a distinct fuselage and a set of wings that are clearly differentiated from one another.

144
7.3.2.3. Speed Regimes
Another useful comparison metric for a designer may be to compare the performance
characteristics for various design speed regimes. Since a variation in speed does greatly affect
the aerodynamics and stability & control of the vehicle overall, the designer may choose a
specific Mach range for operation based on such comparison. There are three primary speed
regimes:
• Subsonic (< Mach 1)
• Supersonic (Mach 1 >, <Mach 5) [SR-71, XB-70, Concorde]
• Hypersonic (> Mach 5) [X-51, X-43A, Sänger II, NASP]

7.3.2.5. Propulsion System Type

There is a large variety of propulsion systems that may be used in high-speed vehicles.
A designer may want to compare the performance capabilities of vehicles that have been
powered by different types of systems to understand the advantages and disadvantages of a
specific type of engine. Given below are the primary engine types that may be considered as
individual engines or combined-cycle implementations:
• Turbojet
• Afterburning turbojet
• Ramjet
• Scramjet
• Rocket

7.3.2.6. Mission Type

There are various missions for which high-speed vehicles are developed, and comparing
certain parameters based on the mission definition might help a designer make technological
decisions. The mission for which the vehicle is conceptualized affects the extent to which the
vehicle is able to perform, which is why each high-speed vehicle is custom-tailored to its mission
definition. The major types of mission types considered for this study include, but are not limited
to the following:
• Technology demonstrator
Some high-speed vehicles are developed as technology demonstrators. The sole
purpose of such vehicles is to showcase the performance capabilities and allow an
opportunity to collect data on a new piece of technology that has been developed. An

145
 example of this is the X-51A which was used by AFRL for demonstrating the new SJX61
scramjet engine [6].
• Aerospaceplane
There are high-speed vehicles that may be developed as spaceplane concepts.
There is currently a rise in interest in space due to the increasing popularity of space
tourism, which means the concept of spaceplanes may be of interest in the future. An
example of a previous project is the NASP X-30. Although the project was cancelled, the
vehicle aimed at becoming a manned spaceplane in addition to vehicle derivatives
capable of being a hypersonic cruiser, which leads to the next high-speed vehicle mission
type.
• Reconnaissance
High-speed vehicles may be used for reconnaissance purposes, such as the SR-
71 or the F-15 which are considered long-range reconnaissance vehicles. Such vehicles
may be used to collect intel from other countries, as well as for surveillance [7].
• Passenger Aircraft
There are also high-speed passenger vehicles, such as supersonic business jets,
which aim to cut down on travel time between major airports. The Concorde was one
such vehicle that was cancelled after a few decades of successful operation in industry.
Currently there are companies like Boom and Hermeus competing to be the next to bring
such a passenger transport vehicle into industry.

7.3.3. Knowledge Usefulness Rubric

Some knowledge plots and graphics are more useful to the designer than others
depending on the relevance of comparisons that may be made between different categories of
vehicles. It is therefore of interest to develop a rubric by which to grade each of the knowledge
plots identified or also generated in the next couple of subsections. This provides a scale to
evaluate the relevance of individual knowledge plots.
As seen in the previous subsection, there are several ways to categorize vehicles to
facilitate comparisons in one singular plot or graphic. The rubric shown in Figure 7.14 assumes
that a single knowledge graphic is able to compare up to five different categories, and up to 50
individual trends/entries at once. It is the author’s opinion that comparing any number of
categories above 5 or any number of entries above 50 would lessen the usefulness of the visual

146
and rather result in a ‘knowledge overload’ that could detract from the point of knowledge in the
first place. This downward trend has not been accounted for in the rubric yet, as there are no
existing examples from the VCC collection activity, and hence is outside the scope of this
research activity.

Figure 7.14. Rubric developed for determining usefulness of a knowledge graphic

As shown in Figure 7.14, there is no score designated for a plot with only one category
and one trend for that category, since this is simply defining the contents of a typical information
plot. There are up to five different categories that may be compared in one singular plot. The
score given by the rubric depends upon the number of trends showcased for each category
involved in the plot. Recall that for example ‘speed regimes’ is a single category with three
different entries possible (subsonic, supersonic and hypersonic). This is explained more
efficiently with the aid of actual knowledge graphics, such as the ones shown in the following
subsections.

7.3.3.1. Scoring Knowledge Graphic Type – Vehicle Comparison

Recall that earlier within this chapter two major types of knowledge graphics have been
identified: vehicle-to-vehicle type comparisons, and disciplinary comparisons. The first example
shown is that of a comparison of vehicle types.

147
 Figure 7.15. Mass ratio comparison [8]

Considering Figure 7.15, this plot provides the relationship between payload weight and
gross lift-off weight for a variety of vehicles. At first, the number of categories compared is
determined. Note that individual vehicles do not count as categories. From the graphic, it looks
like the number of stages is being compared, which means there is only one category of
comparison (category = ‘number of stages’). For this category, there are three types within that
category compared: single stage, two-stage, and hybrid. This means there are three ‘entries’ in
that same category. According to the rubric developed, this means the overall usefulness score
of this graphic is calculated to be 0.2 (3-5 entries) x 1 (corresponds to 1 category) = 0.2. The
highest score a plot may receive on this scale is 1 (25-50 entries) x 3 (corresponds to 5 categories)
= 3. Therefore, the usefulness of this knowledge graphic is 0.2 out of 3. Had the same plot
compared multiple categories, as in comparing number of stages as well as propulsion concepts,
then the score would have been higher.

7.3.3.2. Scoring Knowledge Graphic Type – Disciplinary Comparison

The other major type of knowledge graphic is identified as disciplinary in nature, in that
the comparisons are not made across various vehicles or vehicle types but rather across a range

148
of values for certain disciplinary parameters. Shown in Figure 7.16 is an example of this type of
plot.

Figure 7.16. Lift coefficient vs. angle of attack - Sänger II [9]

Figure 7.16 shows how the lift coefficient of the Sänger II vehicle changes in relation to
the angle of attack of the vehicle. Even though this plot is only based on one singular vehicle,
this is still considered a knowledge plot since a range of different Mach numbers is compared
(Mach 1.6 through Mach 7).
In terms of scoring this knowledge graphic based on the rubric mentioned before, there
is only one category being compared, which is the Mach numbers, which means the score from
the rubric is multiplied by 1. The number of trends within this category is 6 (six different Mach
numbers), which means the final score for this would be: 0.3x1 = 0.3 out of 3.

7.3.3.3. No Categories Specified

In addition to the two major types of knowledge plots sampled in the previous sections,
an additional example is given for the extended rubric section shown in Figure 7.14. This is for
scoring a knowledge plot that has no categories defined but rather represents an amalgamation
of data points, with each data point representing a singular vehicle. Such knowledge plots are
not as useful as the plots which provide a focused categorization for the vehicles shown. The
usefulness of these plots depends on whether one or both of the following are present: a list of
individual vehicles, and a regression or trendline generated for the datapoints.

149
 The example used here shows a number of vehicles plotted to show the relation between
their net mass fraction and ascent propellant mass, as seen in Figure 7.17.

Figure 7.17. Net mass fraction vs. ascent propellant mass [10]

As seen with this example, there is both an identification of the vehicles listed, as well as
a trendline/regression generated based on the general trend of the datapoints. According to the
extended rubric, this results in a higher score since both elements that are seen as useful for such
a plot are present. There are 15 individual data points/vehicles shown in this figure, meaning the
overall score is 0.35 for this plot.

7.3.4. Design Knowledge Collected

Although there has been a lesser number of knowledge-graphics identified during the
VCC search and digitization process compared to information, there are a few prominent ones
that come to mind as potentially useful to the designer, which are shown below. Each of the
knowledge plots are broken down to provide the following information:
• Figure title
• X-axis, units
• Y-axis, units
• Source of the figure
• Type of knowledge plot (disciplinary or vehicle to vehicle comparison)

150
 • Number of comparisons made in the plot
• Highest number of trendlines/data entries found for any one category
• Type of annotation (Verbal annotation or visual annotation, or both)
• Knowledge usefulness score

The first knowledge plot shown is comparing various engines by their Isp range, as seen
in Figure 7.18. This plot has been selected from a source that is part of the NASP X-30
bibliography. As denoted in the image, there are clear axes and units identified and there are
multiple engine types compared in one singular plot. Each engine type is indicated by text
annotations.

Figure 7.18. 𝑰𝒔𝒑 vs. Mach for various engines [11]

However, there is no legend for references, which means the reader is unable to decipher
the difference between the datapoints and the shaded regions in the graph, if there is any. Not
every data set is labeled either, which is not convenient. This is why legends are important
additions to any knowledge graphic. This knowledge graphic is further broken down as shown
in Figure 7.19.

151
 Figure 7.19. Breakdown of knowledge plot: Isp vs. Mach comparison

The next knowledge plot shown also addresses the propulsion discipline, see Figure 7.20:
This graphic is providing similar information as the first knowledge graphic, but in addition to
comparing the different engines, this graphic also compares fuel types within the same plot. This
knowledge plot is useful for a designer considering the effect of choosing hydrogen over a type
of liquid hydrocarbon fuel, for a particular engine type.

Figure 7.20. Isp vs. Mach for different engine and fuel types [12]

152
 As seen in Figure 7.20, this knowledge plot also provides verbal annotations, and a
legend is also present which allows the reader to distinguish between the two types of lines
shown in the plot. The further breakdown of this knowledge plot is shown in Figure 7.21.

Figure 7.21. Breakdown of knowledge plot: Isp vs. Mach comparison (fuel types added)

The third and last sample knowledge plot from the collection activity for the VCC is
shown in Figure 7.22. This figure compares the lift-to-drag ratios of a variety of vehicle
slenderness ratios.

153
 Figure 7.22. Lift-to-drag ratio against Mach number [13]

The visual annotations help to some extent to understand the comparison made in this
plot, but there needs to be more detail added to this figure to make it useful for a designer. The
subsonic speed regime is clearly defined in the graph but the same is not done to distinguish
between the supersonic and hypersonic regimes. The full breakdown of this knowledge graphic
is provided in the Figure 7.23:

Figure 7.23. Breakdown of knowledge plot: lift to drag ratio vs. Mach number

154
7.3.5. Knowledge Trends Generated

In addition to the knowledge trends collected, a few knowledge trends have been
generated using the information to knowledge conversion process mentioned in section 7.3.1.
These knowledge trends serve as examples of what can be achieved even using such a small
sample size of vehicles for the prototype VCC. The entirety of the data and information set
collected for VCC has been surveyed including lists of relations generated for each vehicle and
discipline. This then allows for the selection of disciplinary knowledge plots that address the
highest number of vehicles for comparison, in order to produce the most useful knowledge plots
possible.

7.3.5.1. Aerodynamics
For aerodynamics, the lift-curve slope has been isolated for four vehicles – the Concorde,
Sänger-II, XB-70, and X-43A. In addition, the Sänger-II data contains lift vs. angle of attack
values for all three speed regimes – subsonic, supersonic, and hypersonic. Combining this
information with the other vehicle data sets allows the development of the knowledge plot shown
in Figure 7.24 with two trends for each speed regime.

Figure 7.24. Knowledge plot – lift-curve slope for various vehicles comparing two configurations
and three speed regimes

155
 In Figure 7.24, each of the speed regimes is represented with a different color scheme,
and the two different vehicle geometries (wing-body and all-body) are represented with distinct
data markers. In addition to this, each of the trendlines are labeled with the specific Mach number
for which this data applies to. This allows the designer to quickly compare vehicle geometries
and speed regimes if needed, to view the tendency of the lift coefficient to angle of attack relation
for these combinations. However, if the designer still likes to know the individual vehicles used
in this comparison, that information is available as a secondary legend on the right side of the
plot, and the trendlines are labeled using the vehicles as well. As such this knowledge plot makes
every attempt at providing as much detail to the designer as possible while being as concise as
practical.
Using the scoring rubric developed earlier, this plot receives the following score:
0.4 (3-5 entries per category – 4 entries for all-body) x 1.5 (corresponds to two categories
compared – speed regimes and vehicle geometries) = 0.6 out of 3.
For aerodynamics, another knowledge graphic generated is the comparison of drag-
polars, see Figure 7.25. A total of five vehicles has this information available in the VCC
collection: NASP X-30, Sänger-II, X-51, Concorde, SR-71, and XB-70. For this knowledge
graphic, the vehicles are compared based on their configuration. Three configurations are
compared in Figure 7.25, namely the flying-wing configuration (FWC), the tail-aft configuration
(TAC), and tail-first configuration (TFC). These configurations are identified using specific data
point markers. In addition, the vehicle list is provided as an additional legend and so are the
vehicle labeled on the trendlines.

156
 Figure 7.25. Knowledge plot - drag polar generated from VCC information plots

In addition to these characteristics, lift-to-drag ratios are plotted in the same graphic for
a baseline comparison for the designer. L/D ratios ranging from -3 up to 15 are provided as
dotted lines. This allows the designer to quickly relate the range of lift-to-drag ratios for a
particular vehicle by visual inspection. For example, it is seen that the vehicle with the highest
lift-to-drag ratio is Concorde, reaching approximately L/D = 11 according to the figure.
According to the knowledge usefulness rubric developed earlier, this plot scores as
follows: 0.2 (3-5 entries per category: up to 3 FWC lines) x 1 (only one categorization of
vehicles: configuration) = 0.2 out of 3.

7.3.5.2. Aerothermodynamics
Aerothermodynamic knowledge plots are more difficult to generate since most of the
temperature information is typically provided in the form of labeled vehicle schematics, an
example of which is shown in Figure 7.26.

157
 Figure 7.26. SR-71 temperature profile collected from VCC effort [14]

Hence components of the vehicle, that are common to most of the vehicles, are
considered. As seen in Figure 7.27, these components included the nose, vertical and horizontal
tail surfaces, and forward and mid fuselage. This temperature information has been collected for
four vehicles (X-43A, Concorde, SR-71, and Sänger-II) plus a generic Mach-10 cruiser which
describes the information collected in analogy to the X-43A.

Maximum Temperatures
Mach 10 Cruiser X-43A Concorde SR-71 Saenger II

4000
3500
Temperature (deg F)

3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Nose Forward Mid Wing LE Vertical Tail Horizontal
Fuselage Fuselage Tail

Figure 7.27. Knowledge plot - maximum temperatures experienced across vehicle body

As seen in Figure 7.27, the Mach-10 cruiser and X-43A have the highest temperatures
compared to the other vehicles, while the Concorde experienced the lowest temperatures. This
is to be expected since the Concore is a supersonic vehicle while the X-43A and cruiser are

158
hypersonic vehicles. According to the knowledge scoring rubric, this plot needs to be scored
using the extended rubric since there are no vehicle categorizations offered but simply a
comparison of different vehicles. There is no regression or trendline produced; however, there is
a vehicle list provided as a legend. There are five different vehicles plotted together, which means
the score of this plot would be a 0.2 out of 3.
Another aerothermal knowledge plot generated is seen in Figure 7.28. This is a chart
comparing different materials used for the vehicles covered in the VCC. This chart is divided
into the hypersonic and supersonic regions, as the material needs for both speed regimes are
significantly different. Hypersonic vehicle’s structural material typically require thermal
protection systems (TPS) for protection from the heat experienced at high speeds, while
supersonic vehicle’s specific airframe material are required to protect from heating at supersonic
speeds.

Figure 7.28. Knowledge chart - materials comparison for high-speed vehicles (TPS and airframe)

This separation is also clearly identified in the chart. Another classification shown is
between the different vehicle geometries. The hypersonic vehicles considered are mostly all-
body (AB) concepts while supersonic vehicles are mostly wing-body (WB) concepts with two
examples incorporating the blended-body (BB) vehicle concept. A designer may gain
understanding of what type of geometry is typically used for what speed regime, while
simultaneously reading the maximum temperatures reached by each of the vehicles. The

159
maximum speeds achieved by each vehicle are identified to the right side along with the actual
vehicle names in case the designer needs to know the specific vehicle in addition to comparing
general vehicle geometries.

7.3.5.3. Propulsion
For the propulsion discipline there are generally a smaller number of plots available that
are consistent among multiple vehicles. The one relation that is frequently quantified is the
specific fuel consumption (SFC) versus Mach number. The four vehicles showcased in this
knowledge plot are the Concorde, Sänger-II, NASP X-30, and XB-70, see Figure 7.29.

Figure 7.29. Knowledge plot - SFC vs. Mach number comparison for four vehicles

As shown with Figure 7.29, two vehicles each representing two different speed regimes
are plotted together. The speed regimes are identified by distinct markers. This plot does only
score 0.1 on the knowledge usefulness rubric developed since there is only one categorization
(speed regime) and there are only two vehicles per speed regime.

7.3.5.4. Performance
For the performance and trajectory disciplinary knowledge category, the different flight
trajectories for each of the vehicles are super-positioned as seen in Figure 7.30. Five different
vehicles are plotted together: the Sänger-II, SR-71, XB-70, NASP X-30, and Concorde. For the
NASP X-30 vehicle, there are two flight envelopes presented: the supersonic mission and the
hypersonic cruiser mission. NASP X-30 and Sänger-II both have flight profiles in the hypersonic

160
region which is designated on the plot and also identified on the mission profiles as dotted lines.
The supersonic mission profiles of the other vehicles are presented using solid-colored lines, and
the legends are once again shown on the right of the knowledge plot.

Figure 7.30. Knowledge plot - comparison of mission profiles

The designer may use such knowledge graphic to see the differences between the mission
profiles of different speed regimes. Each of the vehicles are listed as well in case the designer
compares different mission types and what the typical altitude or speed values might be for a
particular mission type. For example, the designer may compare design attributes of the
Concorde, which is a supersonic passenger aircraft, versus the SR-71 which is a supersonic
reconnaissance vehicle.

7.3.5.5. Stability and Control

For stability & control, the coefficient of pitching moment (Cm) is plotted against angle
of attack (𝛼) for a variety of VCC vehicles. The only vehicle for which this relationship is not
available is the Concorde. Once again, the knowledge conversion process is followed:

161
 Figure 7.31. Knowledge plot - Cm vs. AOA - multiple configurations compared

As seen in Figure 7.31, three different configurations are compared: the FWC (flying
wing configuration), TAC (tail-aft configuration) and TFC (tail-first configuration). These
different configurations are denoted by the plot markers used, as shown in the legend. This
graphic presents three trends for TAC and FWC each, while there is only one representative
trendline for the TFC vehicle (XB-70). In addition to showcasing this collectively for
comparison, another means of comparison are possible through adding averaging trendlines for
each of the configurations, thereby representing each configuration with only one regression
each. This is visualized in the following images:

162
 Figure 7.32. Using regressions to produce configurational comparison

As seen in Figure 7.32, each of the configurational information plots of Cm vs. AOA can
be used to generate regressions that provide a general trend for the relation between these two
variables. This is done for TFC, TAC, and FWC separately; these trendlines can be combined
into one plot as shown in Figure 7.32. This provides a general sense of the tendencies of various
configurations. Such a method of averaging would be even more useful and more accurate with
a larger number of vehicles to retrieve average data from.

7.4. Compendium Usage – Case Studies and Examples

The Vehicle Configuration Compendium (VCC) is developed with the aim to evolve into
its full potential as a valuable addition to any flight vehicle design setting, such as the AVDS
synthesis methodology and software. However even in its prototype phase, the VCC has already
proven its worth, albeit before the AVDS-VCC integration process.
In 2020-21, the AVD Laboratory has been involved in a research study funded by NASA
Langley Research Center regarding the feasibility of hypersonic commercial transportation [4].
It has been a requirement to verify the AVDS system with a variety of high-speed vehicles to
confirm the relevance of the methods chosen. For this purpose, the VCC has been utilized. This

163
has been the first official use of the VCC data, information, and knowledge for verification before
the implementation of the compendium in a graphical user interface. The NASA study verified
the usefulness of this compendium design assistant early in the development process of the VCC.
VCC proved to the research team the need to continue developing the compendium to its full
potential. It must be noted that the usefulness of the VCC as an aid in this study resulted in full
endorsement and highest compliments from the NASA support engineers. This also led to an
explicit endorsement of the author, Samuel Atchison, and Ramlingam Pillai within the NASA
report for the supporting work provided through the VCC collection process [4]. Provided in the
following subsections are some verification examples from this study.

7.4.1. Disciplinary Verification

The VCC has been applied for the verification of the disciplinary methods selected within
the AVDS system. Some examples are shown:
0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10
CL

0.00

-0.10

-0.20

-0.30
0.01 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.09 0.11
CD

X51_AVDS_Mach2 X51_AVDS_Mach3 X51_AVDS_Mach4

X51_AVDS_Mach5 X51_AVDS_Mach6 X51_VCC

Figure 7.33. Drag polar for X-51 aerodynamics method verification using VSP model geometry[4]

Seen in Figure 7.33 is the verification of the X-51 drag polar by comparing the AVDS
results with the plot collected as part of the VCC effort. One of the advantages of using the VCC
compendium alongside the AVDS system is the ability for both systems to complement each
other, as seen in this example. The drag polar constructed during the VCC effort has no specify

164
Mach number due to the secretive nature of the X-51 project. However, the method used in the
AVDS system is addressing a range of Mach numbers for comparison, until the closest Mach
number match is found in a reverse-engineering effort; the results are shown in Figure 7.34.

0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
CL

0.00
-0.10
-0.20
-0.30
0.01 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.09 0.11
CD
X51_AVDS_Mach5 X51_VCC

Figure 7.34. Drag polar for X-51 aero method verification using VSP model geometry - closest
match at Mach 5 [4]

As seen in Figure 7.34, the X-51 drag polar documented is for Mach 5 since the Mach 5
curve generated by AVDS matched closely with the VCC data. The Mach number associated
with the drag polar collected has been a piece of information missing from the X-51 VCC set.
However, this could not have been verified by AVDS in case the original drag polar would not
have been located in the first place. In this way, the VCC and AVDS can be integrated for mutual
assistance. Similarly, the X-51 lift-curve slope has been also verified for Mach 5, see Figure
7.35.

165
 0.40 0.40
0.30
0.20 0.20
0.10

CL
CL

0.00
0.00
-0.10
-0.20
-0.20
-0.40 -11 -1 9 -0.30
AoA, degrees -11 -1 9
AoA, degrees
X51_AVDS_Mach2 X51_AVDS_Mach5 X51_VCC
X51_AVDS_Mach3
X51_AVDS_Mach4
X51_AVDS_Mach5

Figure 7.35. X-51 verification of lift-curve slope - survey of Mach numbers to find closest
match[4]

Another vehicle verification example from the NASA study has been the XB-70, here in
particular the propulsion system. During the engine sizing phase, the VCC data identified for
thrust vs. altitude of the J-93 engine has been utilized for verification of the sized engine. Shown
in Figure 7.36 is a side-by-side comparison of the original plot stemming from VCC, and a plot
of the digitized data from that graph (labeled ‘Actual XB-70’) plotted against the thrust-altitude
relation produced using the AVDS (labeled ‘XB-70 Verification’).

Figure 7.36. Thrust vs. altitude verification plot - XB-70 J-93 engine [4]

166
 Mission profile trajectory decomposition for the X-51 has also been verified using a
mission segment identified for the vehicle stemming from the VCC compilation process.
Specifically, the 131-second cruise segment of the X-51 has been verified against the mission
profile for X-51, see Figure 7.37. This verification is simultaneously proving the usefulness of a
compendium like VCC for quick verification activities, as well as the accuracy of the AVDS
synthesis system due to the low errors seen.

Figure 7.37. Verification of X-51 mission decomposition by AVDS against VCC [4]

Similarly, the Concorde mission profile retrieved via VCC has been used to verify the
AVDS methodology for the entirety of the Concorde mission. Figure 7.38 shows both the
mission profile of Concorde (altitude vs. Mach), and the altitude-range correlation. Note that the
VCC provides three different altitude vs. range plots for the Concorde. This is most likely due
to the original source material comparing this information between slightly differing flight
conditions for the Concorde. However, the general trend for this can still be used for verifying
that the AVDS method calculates similar altitude and range values.

167
 Figure 7.38. Verification of AVDS generated Concorde mission profile using VCC data [4]

Another example shown is how the lift to drag ratio for the Sänger vehicle is verified for
a range of supersonic Mach numbers, see Figure 7.39. The dotted lines represent the results from
the AVDS aerodynamics method, and the solid lines represent the actual Sänger values retrieved
with VCC. Once again, VCC is providing data for comparison and to evaluate the accuracy of
the methods chosen from the AVDS methods library.

Figure 7.39. Sänger verification of supersonic lift-to-drag ratio [4]

168
7.4.2. Sizing Verification

In addition to verifying the disciplinary analysis methods selected within the AVDS
system, the VCC material has also been used for verifying the sizing capability of AVDS. A few
examples of vehicles sized included the X-51, the XB-70, and the SR-71. The results from the
sizing verification of the X-51 are summarized in Table 7.4.

Table 7.4. Comparison of AVDS X-51 Sizing Results to Vehicle Data from VCC [4]

Sized Vehicle Attributes X-51 AVDS X-51 % Error

[SI] [SI]
Operating Weight Empty, lb or kg 555 548 -1.29

Operating Empty Weight, lb or kg 555 548 -1.29

Takeoff Gross Weight, lb or kg 682 673 -1.38

Structural Weight, lb or kg - 133 -

Fuel Weight, lb or kg 127 124 -1.79

Payload Weight, lb or kg 0 0 -

Tau, Vtotal/Spln1.5 0.214* 0.214 -

Total Planform Area, ft2 or m2 2.27* 2.26 -0.50

Wing Planform Area, ft2 or m2 2.27* 2.26 -0.50

Wetted Surface Area, ft2 or m2 8.45* 7.95 -5.90

Total Volume, ft3 or m3 0.729* 0.725 -0.56

Ratio of Wetted to Total Planform Area 3.73* 3.52 -5.43

Structural Index, Istr = Wstr/Swet, lb/ft2 or N/m2 - 16.7 -

Propulsion Index, Ip = ρfuel/(WR-1), lb/ft3 or kg/m3 3,507 3,531 0.68

Industrial Capability Index, 10∙Ip/Istr - 2,116 -

Total Fuel Fraction, Wfuel/TOGW 0.186 0.185 -0.42

Total Weight Ratio, TOGW/OWE 1.23 1.23 -0.10

Total Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Spln, lb/ft2 or N/m2 2,951* 2,925 -0.88

Wing Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Swing, lb/ft2 or N/m2 2,951* 2,925 -0.88

As seen in the table, a variety of attributes of the sized vehicle design are compared to
the actual vehicle data contained with VCC. This includes a variety of weight comparisons,
planform and surface area comparisons, and important ratios to understand the vehicle such as
fuel fraction or weight ratio, etc. The results for the X-51 include a very small margin of error,
with the highest error being 5.9%. This shows the level of accuracy that the AVDS system can

169
achieve in sizing a vehicle. This error margin is calculated due to the readily available data
prepared via the VCC system, thereby making VCC a PRIMER or design companion that not
only helps a designer while using AVDS, but also helps to build credibility for the synthesis
system itself. If, however, the results would have shown much larger error percentages, then the
VCC would still be helping the synthesis system by providing corroborating data, which allows
for the refining of the AVDS system until the desired level of accuracy is achieved. The sizing
verification results for the other vehicles mentioned are provided in Appendix B for reference.

170
 REFERENCES

[1] Haney, E., “Data Engineering in Aerospace Systems Design & Forecasting,” Ph.D.
Dissertation, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, The University of
Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2016.
[2] Chudoba, B., "Stability and control of conventional and unconventional aircraft
configurations", Books-on-Demand GmbH, 2001 ISBN 3-8311-2982-7
[3] The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Incorporated,
2016.
[4] Chudoba, B., Maynard, I.W., Patel, H.R., Connerly, C.N., Atchison, S.C. and Van
Ausdoll, A.S., “Hypersonic, Commercial Transportation Feasibility Study – Paving the
Way to Revolutionary Aircraft Shapes and Propulsion,” NASA-CR-2021-017755,
Hypersonic Technology Project (HTP), NASA Langley Research Center, NASA, 06
July 2021 [Available only with approval of the following issuing office: NASA Langley
Research Center, System and Analysis Concepts Directorate, Hypersonic Technology
Project, Hampton, Virginia].
[5] Chudoba, B., “Development of a Generic Stability and Control Methodology for the
Conceptual Design of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations,”
Ph.D. Dissertation, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, April 2001
[6] Reed, J. “X-51A Scramjet Engine Demonstrator - Waverider,” [Presentation], Air Force
Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, 26 April 2010.
[7] Boyne, W. J. “Reconnaissance on the Wing,” Air Force Magazine, Air Force
Association, Arlington, VA, 10 July 2008.
[8] Hogenauer, E. “A Space Transporter for the Year 2000,” EIR Science & Technology,
Vol. 14, No. 8, pp. 28-37, 20 February 1987.
[9] Weiland, C. Aerodynamic Data of Space Vehicles, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany,
2014.
[10] Koelle, D. E., Sacher, P., and Grallert, H. Deutsche Raketenflugzeuge Und
Raumtransporter-Projekte, Band 34, Die deutsche Luftfahrt, Buchreihe uber die
Entwicklungsgeschichte der deutschen Luftfahrttechnik, Berndard & Graefe, Bonn,
Germany, 2007.
[11] Sacher, P., “Engineering/Airframe Integration for Fully Reusable Space Transportation
Systems,” Chapter 1, RTO-EN-AVT-185, NATO Science and Technology
Organization, 16 September 2010.
[12] Anon. “Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives – Special Report,” OTA-
ISC-419, Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C., August 1989.
[13] Edwards, G. “Review Lecture: The Technical Aspects of Supersonic Civil Transport
Aircraft,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A,
Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 275, No. 1254, pp. 529-565, 21 March 1974.
[14] Carpenter, B., “Kelly’s Greatest Challenge – The Blackbirds,” [Presentation], ICNS
Gathering, April 2017

171
 CHAPTER 8

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

The ultimate goal with the Vehicle Configuration Compendium is two-fold, as mentioned
before: the first is to produce a standalone software interface that will serve as the data-
information-knowledge compendium design assistant, and the next is for this software to be fully
integrated as a module of the AVDS system to directly aid in synthesis. This chapter therefore
discusses the software development aspect of the VCC, for the standalone prototype. The first
step is the full implementation of the VCC as a standalone software interface, without which
future AVDS-integration will be impossible.

8.1. Mapping Out Release Schedule

In order to allow the effective planning of the VCC software, every future iteration must
be well-defined. Obviously the very first version that is packaged and published will not be the
best version of the software, but merely an ‘alpha’ version that will be the stepping stone for
future iterations to build upon. Setting the performance boundaries and milestones for each
iteration of the foreseeable future is important to allow the author working on the current iteration
to understand the ultimate goal and to implement the prototype in a way that will support the
future versions.
The software development life cycle (sdlc) model adopted for the VCC is called the
“synchronize-and-stabilize” model, which is typically used by companies like Microsoft [1].
This is an iterative SDLC model involving multiple releases before finalizing the system. In this
way the developers are able to gain customer feedback during the development process with
each release and fix any issues before the final product design is locked.

172
 Figure 8.1. Synchronize-and-stabilize software development model used by Microsoft [1]

As seen in Figure 8.1, this model involves three or four different releases. First is the
alpha release, followed by up to two beta releases before the final release. Each release is
preceded by a period of development, termed the “development subcycle”, as well as a buffer
time to allow developers to respond to unexpected issues or delays. The advantage of using such
a development cycle compared to other models is the ability to add new or previously unplanned
features during development, and the flexibility to evolve the specification of the software with
each release cycle. As such the VCC adopts such a development model with the current research
effort ending on the alpha release of the software.
The planned release schedule of the VCC software along with the overall goals for each
iteration are shown in Table 8.1, to be discussed in more detail in the following subsections.

Table 8.1. Planned Release Schedule of VCC Software

Alpha Version Beta Version Release Candidate
Fully functional database of eight Additional hypersonic vehicles added to All known hypersonic vehicles to date
hypersonic vehicles database added to the database
Knowledgebase with predefined Knowledgebase made user-friendly with Knowledgebase made capable of
knowledgebase plots included interactive options to choose data to conducting interpolations to fill in
plot missing data to allow for forecasting
trends of various configurations
First iteration of GUI packaged and Second iteration of improved GUI with GUI made professional and fully user-
made available as an executable professional input friendly
standalone application
Integration points with AVDS mapped Full integration with AVDS software VCC software plus integrated AVDS
out achieved, VCC+AVDS packaged and software packaged together along with
made available together as single full user manual and downloadable
executable file bibliography plus database, made
available for clients to download
Coding manual provided for future
developers to build upon current work

173
8.1.1. Alpha Prototype

The alpha prototype version of the VCC aims to prove the usefulness of a data-
information-knowledge compendium and the enhancement of the user experience through an
easy-to-use interface. The prototype houses a total of seven high-speed aerospace vehicles,
which as discussed earlier, are the following: X-51, XB-70, SR-71, Concorde, Sänger-II, X-43A,
and NASP X-30.
The development timeline for the alpha version of VCC is shown in Figure 8.2. As seen,
the software development process began in December of 2020 with the initial specifications and
user interface mapped out.

Figure 8.2. VCC alpha version development cycle

A majority of the development subcycle was allotted for the building up of the data and
information base of the VCC, as there was a large volume of information to be showcased. The
knowledge functionality was added in September of 2021, and as of December of 2021, the
aesthetics and troubleshooting has begun, with concurrent user testing conducted during the
conclusion of the alpha version in December.
The data and information base of the alpha iteration of the software displays the
disciplinary data and information as plots based on the user selection. The user is also able to
zoom in to each of the information plots as needed. The data-information base also displays a
breakdown of the major configurational and performance details of the vehicles. The

174
knowledgebase of the alpha iteration displays a handful of selected knowledge plots based on
the user selection of comparison criteria. The user may select to compare between configurations
or geometries.

8.1.2. Beta Version

For the beta release of the software, the vehicle library of the VCC will be expanded to
include more high-speed vehicles. There may be multiple ‘beta’ level releases in the future due
to the high volume of vehicles available from past to present projects. In general, the beta release
will also have a more interactive user interface compared to the current version. The user will be
able to select data points directly from the information plots and make live annotations on these
graphs to have an engaging experience with the software.
Instead of the current knowledgebase model, the beta software will have a more
interactive knowledgebase with a higher number of graphics. The limited number of knowledge
graphics in the current version is due to the small sample size of vehicles housed in the
compendium. With the addition of more vehicles in the beta phase, the VCC will house more
knowledge overall, over a larger variety of vehicle configurations.
The beta phase will also feature the first attempt at direct integration of the VCC with the
AVDS software interface. This process will likely result in an iterative process and therefore
require multiple beta phase testing in order to fix issues that arise in the integration process.

8.1.3. Release Candidate

The release candidate will be the first full package of the AVDS+VCC system. The
integration between the two software will be finalized and the dual software system will be
packaged by this release. For this version of the VCC, the goal is to have all currently known
high-speed vehicles added to the compendium ideally.
With such a large volume of data, information and knowledge housed in the
compendium, the release candidate will require a data management system with higher storage
capacity. Optimization activities will be required to address any lag in processing speeds
associated with showcasing such a large volume of information. The GUI itself will be in its
final version after having undergone multiple iterations to make it the most user-friendly and
self-explanatory.

175
 8.2. Graphical User Interface Development

8.2.1. Graphical Use Interface Logic Flow

Upon reviewing the initial design for the graphical user interface, modifications were
made to the flow of the user input and output process from interactions with the software, and
the following flowchart was created as a proposed restructuring of the interface:

Figure 8.3. Graphical user interface logic flowchart

As per this flowchart, once the software is run, the first choice the user will be able to
pick from is between “View Data” and “Compare Data”, which will lead the user down either
the database path or the knowledgebase path respectively.
If the user selects the database path, the user will then be given the option to select from
the list of eight hypersonic vehicles that we have compiled data for. Upon the selection of this

176
vehicle, a quad-chart snapshot of the vehicle will be displayed, which will be explained in more
detail later. In short, this quad-chart is a quick overview of the most important characteristics of
the vehicle chosen.
Once the vehicle is selected, another menu will appear that allows the user to select which
of the eight aerospace disciplines they would like to view data for. Once the discipline is selected,
the user may then either choose to view all data or choose a specific predefined plot from a drop-
down menu for viewing in a larger format. If the user chooses to “view all data”, then every
single plot digitized and uploaded for that specific discipline and vehicle combination will appear
in a 3x3 grid on the same window.

8.2.2. Coding Using Python

In the coding process of this software, each of the Python modules shown in Table 8.2
are used. These modules are imported within the code in order to support different functions of
the GUI.

Table 8.2. Imported Python Modules

Module Imported Purpose
tkinter Standard Python interface to Tk GUI toolkit
pandas Data analysis toolkit
matplotlib Data visualization/plotting toolkit for Python
sqlite3 Database connection
os Manipulate paths for reading from files
PIL Imaging library for including AVD logo as
image file

Each of the packages mentioned above have a specific use within the code for the GUI.
The coding on the alpha prototype results in the following GUI layout:

177
 Figure 8.4. VCC interface - initial window

The software opens up with the disclaimer statement already displayed on the screen
regarding the authenticity of the data compiled and provided through the VCC, as seen in Figure
8.4. The portion of the window where the disclaimer statement is situated will be the canvas
where anything that the user has selected will be displayed.
The user is then given the option between viewing and comparing data which opens either
the data-information-base or knowledgebase function. Selecting the DI-base functionality leads
to:

Figure 8.5. VCC interface - vehicle selection

Here the user is given a menu of vehicle options to choose from, on the left sidebar as shown in
Figure 8.5.

178
 Figure 8.6. VCC interface - disciplinary selection

After the user selects a vehicle, two things happen. First of all, the user is shown a quad-
chart in the same white box where the disclaimer statement was first displayed, where they can
see a quick snapshot of the vehicle they have chosen. Inside this quad-chart, a button has been
added for each vehicle that displays a pop-up window with a full bibliography list for that
vehicle, as seen in Figure 8.6 and Figure 8.7. This bibliography shows every single source that
we searched through while compiling data for the software.

Figure 8.7. VCC interface - vehicle bibliography pop-up window

Second, the user is also given a list of aerospace disciplines for which they are able to
view data, toward the bottom of the left sidebar.

179
 Figure 8.8. VCC interface - viewing data and information

After the user selects the discipline they would like to view data or information for, per
the flowchart the user is able to view a 3x3 grid of disciplinary plots representing the data and
information collected. Each plot has the source number at the bottom which allows the user to
locate the origin of each piece of data/information displayed in the grid, as seen in Figure 8.8.
If, the user instead would like to access the knowledgebase, they must simply click on
the “compare data” button, which will allow the user to compare between different
configurations, or cross-sections. This is shown in Figure 8.9.

Figure 8.9. VCC interface - initiating knowledgebase

For example, if the user chooses to compare configurations, they are then given a list of
currently available configurations in the VCC to select from, as seen in Figure 8.10. They are
also shown a reference schematic with visuals of the different configurations, as well as the

180
vehicles listed for these configurations in the VCC currently. The same happens if the user
chooses to compare cross-sections instead.

Figure 8.10. VCC interface - comparing configurations

Then the user is able to select from a list of disciplines to view knowledge plots for,
which results in the displaying of the knowledge graphic as seen in Figure 8.11. These graphics
contain legends with the configuration/cross-section information for the user to clearly identify
the information they are looking for, and for easy comparison.

Figure 8.11. VCC interface - viewing knowledge graphic for a specific discipline

181
 8.3. User Testing

As mentioned earlier, user testing is an important part of the development process of the
interface, since the VCC must be user-friendly to professionals and students alike. The goal is to
provide as much assistance for conceptual design as possible. The actual user interface should
therefore not pose a hindrance in the design process with complicated functionality but must
rather present a sensible and useful interface to the user. The best way to determine this is to
conduct direct user testing, for which purpose a set of testing procedures is established. The
usability test plan provided in Figure 8.12 is being followed:

Figure 8.12. VCC usability test plan format

As seen, there is a series of six tasks ranging in complexity given to the user to complete
using the graphical user interface of the VCC. The user testing is given in a setting where direct

182
supervision is present, so as to make observations regarding user behavior during the activity.
This provides insight into the level of difficulty experienced by the user during the use of VCC.
For each task, it is documented whether the user was able to successfully complete the
task, and the amount of time it took to complete each task. Then the accuracy of completion is
measured, by comparing the results of the user activity with the expected results. For example,
did the user find the correct source for the SR-71 aerodynamic plot, did the user correctly identify
the year of XB-70 development, etc. Finally, the level of assistance required to help the user
complete the task is also assessed. This is an open-ended entry as the test facilitator may enter
details like how many questions the user asked while navigating the interface, or what level of
questions were asked.
These results will provide a first-order understanding of the ease with which the VCC
may be used. In order to test both professional and non-professional usability of the software,
test subjects are chosen from a variety of backgrounds, including aerospace engineering students,
aerospace engineering researchers, professors, and students outside the field of aerospace
engineering.

8.3.1. User Testing Results

A total of four user tests were conducted on the VCC software prototype. It must be
especially noted that the software used for testing purposes did not include the entirety of the
DIK of the alpha version. The entire alpha version houses multiple pages of data and information
for each vehicle and discipline, and so the prototype version used for testing housed only a small
percentage of that total data/information. The detailed results of the user testing are given in
Appendix G.
From the user testing conducted with four aerospace researchers, it was shown that the
biggest issue with the current alpha prototype is the lag time. This lag may be associated with
the large volume of data that the compendium software must process in order to produce the
information plots to display to the user. Further iterations will need to work on reducing this lag
time. Users also felt that there needed to be more options to expand components of the GUI
window to view data in a bigger font/format. Users overall expressed that the GUI is logical and
the organization of the components make sense, with very little elements that are confusing
except for the lag time.

183
 Regarding the survey ratings, users rated the overall experience of using the software a
3.75 out of 5 and gave the VCC software an overall rating of 4 out of 5. This means that the user
experience has been generally positive from the tests conducted. Detailed survey results are
shown in the Appendix. Further user testing is needed to receive a larger sample of test results
to gain more feedback.

184
 REFERENCES

[1] Cusumano, M.A., Yoffie, D.B., “Software Development on Internet Time”, Computer,
vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 60-69, Oct. 1999, doi: 10.1109/2.796110

185
 CHAPTER 9

FUTURE WORK

9.1. Expansion and Enhancement of the Compendium

As seen in the previous chapter, the VCC is already proving to be an incredible asset to
designers, engineers, forecasters, and students alike. The plans for the compendium moving
forward include continued development and passing down to future researchers who will
inevitably improve upon the work and truly enhance the interface.
As mentioned in the previous chapter, the development of the Vehicle Configuration
Compendium may be conducted based on the alpha, beta and release versions, with development
between each. In addition to such a timeline applying to the software, the concurrent data-
information-knowledge collection process may be conducted alongside the software with the
same schedule. As such the following is the proposed timeline plan for the development of the
VCC.
In this alpha prototype, the VCC needed the following team structure for development:
• 1 researcher to compile the bibliographies
• 2 researchers to collect and digitize data, information and knowledge from the sources
• 1 researcher of the collection team to develop the software interface
With this three-person team, the digitization itself took a total of 8 months of time for a total of
seven vehicles. So, the future may be mapped out based on the following assumptions:
• 1 vehicle takes 5-6 weeks for the compilation process
• 1 researcher solely focused on bibliography generation
• 2 researchers solely focused on collection and digitization
• 1 researcher focused on software maintenance and further implementation
• 1 researcher focused on the continued integration between VCC and AVDS
With such a work team, 1 vehicle could be processed in about 5-6 weeks of time, resulting
in an average of 9 vehicles added to the compendium per year. Of course, if the number of
researchers added to the bibliography and collection teams increases, this development cycle
could increase in pace. So in order to produce an accurate timeline for the full development of
the VCC, there must be a survey conducted of all the currently known high-speed vehicles,
including vehicles that have been flown, tested, or even only conceptualized. This will provide

186
a comprehensive list to work from that will enrich the Vehicle Configuration Compendium, so
that the knowledge generated using this compendium will be as inclusive as possible.
One of the further categorizations that was not conducted for the current VCC data was
the type of collection conducted for the data or information. For example, the parameters
retrieved from the sources may have been generated as a result of a flight test, a computer
simulation, a wind tunnel test, a numerical prediction, or even collected during a normal
operational flight of the vehicle. Showing this information with every single information plot or
data table collected would be incredibly helpful to the designer using VCC, as it would provide
context for the data viewed.
Another important aspect to be added to the data tables and information plots that would
be of use is the context for technology capability at the time of the project. Technological
capabilities change over time, as new advancements are made in industry. Therefore, a certain
piece of information collected during a specific time period in the past may no longer make sense
based on the current technological capabilities. For example, if a certain engine type had a
particular thrust specific fuel consumption 30 years ago, it may very well be the case that there
have been advancements in the technology concerning this engine type. Therefore, the same type
of engine may currently be able to produce a lower fuel consumption and be more efficient in
this regard. In such a situation, the old data might be misleading regarding the true nature of this
engine type. However, providing some form of quantification or visualization of the technology
capability at the time of the project alongside this plot would help the user understand the context,
and make a judgement for themselves.
In addition, as the compendium expands, more vehicle projects will be added to the VCC,
some of which may be very recent projects. If the compendium truly expands in the way that the
author envisions and ends up housing almost all currently known supersonic and hypersonic
vehicles, then it could very well be easy to generate a technological advancement history from
the data available. For example, it may be that in the future the VCC is able to generate a
comparison of the fuel consumption of the same engine over several years or even decades, and
therefore show a chronological progression of the development of this technology. This would
be incredibly useful to the designer, but at the same time can only be accomplished by continued
development of the VCC and the continued adding of a large variety of vehicles to the
compendium.
Another aspect of this situation of changing technological capabilities that must be
mentioned is that the Vehicle Configuration Compendium is not always going to operate on its

187
own. It will be soon packaged together with the AVDS system mentioned earlier in this
document, and therefore the combined system will be a synthesis system with an incorporated
parametric library that provides the designer with the highest level of design assistance. This
could very well mean that if a plot generated from the VCC no longer holds true due to
advancement in technology, the AVDS system will then be able to verify by implementing its
own methods to check such values. This checking procedure together with VCC would provide
the most context for a designer about the relevance of certain plots or parameters. This means
that in addition to VCC verifying AVDS methods, AVDS methods could in turn verify the VCC
data relevance. Once again, the AVDS-VCC system is showing the potential to become a truly
integrated system with the highest usefulness to the designer.

9.2. Improving Upon Current Software Interface

The current software interface developed would be greatly enhanced by adding certain
capabilities to the software that are not added due to the time constraint of the project. These
additional capabilities would only serve to enhance the user experience.
For example, a capability useful to the designer would be to program the VCC to generate
knowledge graphics on its own. The current prototype version houses knowledge plots generated
using specific combinations of information sets; however, the retrieval of the information-
datasets that make up the trendlines on these plots are currently hard-coded into the interface.
Hence if new datasets were added to the SQLite database, they would not be automatically
included in the knowledge plots but would require further coding to the original plot code. A
way to avoid this issue is to program the software to be capable of checking through the entire
data-informationbase and picking out datasets that could go into a knowledge plot based on its
data table name.
In order to allow for this capability in the future, the data tables included in the SQLite
database have already been named based on a simple format: each data table name includes the
vehicle name, followed by a two-letter disciplinary code, followed by the x-axis variable and the
y-axis variable. This would make it easier to simply program the software to be able to check
through every dataset in the database and call datasets that contain a particular combination of x
and y axes. In order to call specific configurations and geometries, etc., for a small number of
vehicles it would be incredibly easy to just code the program to search for specific vehicles that

188
belong to these categories. For example, if programming the software to automatically plot the
lift vs. AOA trends of every single wing-body vehicle in the compendium, with the small handful
of vehicles it would just be a matter of programming it to look for specific vehicle names in the
database. However, if there is an incredibly large collection of vehicles in the compendium, then
it would be more difficult to add these to the search list for the program. At this point the database
tables would need to incorporate certain characteristics of the vehicle like the configuration or
cross-section. Another approach to doing this would be to create a separate master file that
contains a list of the entire set of vehicles included in the VCC, with the various categorizations.
From the user testing conducted, the results of which were shown in chapter 8, it was
apparent that users would like to be able to interact with a live OpenVSP model instead of only
viewing the 3-view of the vehicle as it currently is in the quad-chart performance overview slide.
This can be accomplished by utilizing the API integration between OpenVSP and Python
software interfaces. For Python Tkinter, the package “numpy-stl” could be utilized to display the
STL file generated using OpenVSP, after exporting the VSP model as an STL file.
From user testing as well, the users would like to be able to expand the software window
as needed. This capability has not been implemented as the GUI size is set to specific dimensions
at the moment but can be implemented in the next iteration.

9.3. Map Out Automation of Processes

The VCC should be capable of conducting certain processes automatically in the future
without the need for direct human input. Technology capabilities change over time and seeing
as there is currently development in artificial intelligence, it would be beneficial to map out what
features of the compendium may be automated in the future. By the time such a map is
completed, it could be that the technology is available to begin implementation.
For example, the data and information digitization process could be automated. As
described earlier, for this current project the entire digitization and collection process for data,
information and knowledge was conducted by a three-person research team, including the author.
If this tedious process was automated it would save valuable time for future research teams to
then spend more energy and focus on further developing the insightful knowledge generation
process or working on updating the standard deliverables list and producing more thorough

189
standards and practices. This would be time well spent rather than on digitization which does not
require much intelligent insight from a person, per se.
There are various aspects of the DIK collection process that an intelligent system may be
able to take over, starting even with the bibliography collection. Of course, for a long time the
research team working on the VCC will be dependent upon the vast library of sources collected
within the AVD Laboratory. However as newer projects continue to be added to the growing
vehicle list for the VCC, a computer algorithm may be developed that searches the entire internet
and all of the libraries currently known for sources that are written specifically on certain
vehicles, to build that thorough bibliography.
Another aspect that could be automated is the snipping of relevant DIK images from the
PDF sources. Perhaps a program could be developed that knows what parameters to search for
in any given document, that relate to design. The program could be trained to snip any plots or
tables that showcase these parameters and store them with the source name as the filename.
The actual digitization of such plots and tables may also be digitized in the future.
Perhaps even with some of the technology available today, this may be achieved. It is definitely
a worthy endeavor to pursue as this would save valuable time that the human researchers with
expertise and insight could be spending on more insightful developments relating to the research
project.

9.4. Integration with AVDS

The other part of the future work for VCC would be to fully integrate the system with the
AVDS software described in Chapter 3. The VCC data-information-base housed in SQLite must
be integrated with the SQLite database of the AVDS software, in order to allow seamless
retrieval between the two systems. The user interfaces of both software must be integrated which
is a task heavily involved in software development, and this integration must be conducted
regularly as each system is updated with new information throughout different project timelines.
The integrated system must undergo user-testing to achieve very valuable feedback regarding
the usability of the combined synthesis-DIK system for a designer.

190
 9.5. Future Technology Integration

The VCC standalone software, as well as the VCC-AVDS integrated system – both have the
potential to go far in the industry and be of much use to individuals of every level of expertise
in the field of aerospace engineering. For example, an embedded AI program may be developed
that automatically updates the stored data and checks for any new data regularly by scouring the
internet for public domain academic papers and journals, adds these to the reference collection,
and alerts the developers of new data found by searching through the new sources for keywords
that described some of the previously stored data. The AI could be programmed to learn from
the past hypersonic vehicle datasets to see what is missing and be on the lookout for data that
would help us fill in those gaps, as well as be on the lookout for new hypersonic launch vehicles.
The AI program could be taught to digitize and store data to make the VCC software self-
sustainable in the future.
In addition, from a pure user-experience perspective, it would be hard-pressing to think
that the holograph technology will not be used in the future with the VCC. It may not be in the
current generation that this is accomplished but it is very possible years into the future. The VCC
could very well evolve into what is envisioned in sci-fi movies, where the user is able to interact
with a holographic version of the software without even the need of a solid screen surface. The
holograph could envelope the user and allow for a more immersive experience, with the user
surrounded by the controls to allow them to interactively change the settings for viewing and
manipulating data.
Overall, the Vehicle Configuration Compendium has already proven itself to be incredibly
valuable in its current form, and in the future with further development this software combined
with the AVDS system will change the way aerospace vehicle design has been conducted.

191
 APPENDIX A
VEHICLE BIBLIOGRAPHIES

192
A.1. X-51 Bibliography

[1] Anon. “Roadmap for the Hypersonics Programs of the Department of Defense,” No. 109-364, Report to Congress, Joint Technology Office
on Hypersonics Director, Defense Research & Engineering, 01 February 2008.
[2] Anon. “US Military to Test Hypersonic Vehicle over Pacific: X-51A to Reach Mach 6,” The Associated Press. http://phys.org/news/2012-
08-military-hypersonic-vehicle-pacific-X-51a.html, 14 August 2012.
[3] Anon. “Unmanned US Military Hypersonic Craft Failed,” The Associated Press. http://phys.org/news/2012-08-unmanned-military-
hypersonic-craft.html, 15 August 2012.
[4] Anon. “USAF Vehicle Breaks Record for Hypersonic Flight,” The Associated Press. https://phys.org/news/2010-5-usaf-vehicle-
hypersonic-flight.html, 27 May 2010.
[5] Anon. “High-Speed Air-Breathing Propulsion,” Aerospace America, AIAA High-Speed Air-Breathing Propulsion Technical Committee,
December 2008.
[6] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[7] Anon. “Assessment of Aerothermodynamic Flight Prediction Tools through Ground and Flight Experimentation,” RTO-TR-AVT-136,
Research & Technology Organisation, November 2011.
[8] Borg, M. P. “Laminar Instability and Transition on the X-51A,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, August 2009.
[9] Borger, W. U. “Disruptive Technology: Hypersonic Propulsion,” AFRL HQ 07-0083, [Presentation], Air Force Research Laboratory,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, September 2007.
[10] Bowcutt, K. G. “Tackling the Extreme Challenges of Air-Breathing Hypersonic Vehicle Design, Technology, and Flight.” Mathematics,
Computing & Design Symposium, [Presentation], Boeing, Stanford University, CA, 21 November 2014.
[11] Brink, C. “X-51 Flight Four Results and What's Next for High Speed Weapons,” Presentation for the WPAFB Chapter of the Daedalians,
Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, 20 August 2013.
[12] Candler, G., Johnson, H., Alba, C., and MacLean, M. “Analysis of Modal Growth on the Leeward Centerplane of the X-51 Vehicle,”
AFRL-RB-WP-TM-2010-3001, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, September 2009.
[13] Chen, P. C., Starkey, R., Chang, K. T., and Sengupta, A. “Integrated Aero-Servo-Thermo-Propulso-Elasticity (ASTPE) for Hypersonic
Scramjet Vehicle Design/Analysis:,” United States Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Arlington, VA, 04 December 2009.
[14] Eichhorn, D. J. “Test Like You Train…Train Like You Fight: How Today’s Complexity Drives Future Range Requirements,”
[Presentation], Air Force Flight Test Center, Edwards Air Force Base, CA, October 2008.
[15] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[16] Hank, J., Murphy, J., and Mutzman, R. “The X-51A Scramjet Engine Flight Demonstration Program,” AIAA-2008-2540. 15th AIAA
International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Dayton, OH, 28 April 2008. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-2540
[17] Kazmar, R. “Hypersonic Propulsion at Pratt & Whitney — Overview.” AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics
Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16-20 May 2012.
[18] Kelly, C. “Speeding into the Future: In a History-Making Flight, the X-51A Showed the Possibilities of Hypersonic Travel,” Boeing
Frontiers, July 2010.
[19] Lane, J. “Design Processes and Criteria for the X-51A Flight Vehicle Airframe,” RTO-MP-AVT-145. UAV Design Processes / Design
Criteria for Structures, Research and Technology Organisation, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France, 2007.
[20] Leugers, J. “Airbreathing Hypersonic Technologies in the Air Force S&T Portfolio.” 13th Annual Science & Engineering Technology
Conference, [Presentation], NDIA, North Charleston, SC, 18 April 2012.
[21] Lewis, M. “X-51 Scrams into the Future,” Aerospace America, pp. 26-31, October 2010.
[22] Moerel, J.-L., and Halswijk, W. “Ramjets: Airframe Integration,” RTO-EN-AVT-185, TNO Defence, Rijswijk, The Netherlands,
September 2010.
[23] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[24] Murphy, J. S., Hank, J. M., and Mutzman, R. C. “The X-51A Scramjet Engine Demonstration Program: Technology Maturation Thru
Flight Tests 1 & 2,” RTO-MP-AVT-208-P-16, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Pattterson Air Force Base, OH.
[25] Mutzman, R., and Murphy, S. “X-51 Development: A Chief Engineer’s Perspective.” 17th AIAA International Space Planes and
Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, [Presentation], American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Francisco, CA, 11-
14 April 2011.
[26] Norris, G. “High-Speed Strike Weapon to Build on X-51 Flight,” Aviation Week & Space Technology.
http://aviationweek.com/awin/high-speed-strike-weapon-build-x-51-flight, 20 May 2013.
[27] Ormsby, C. “Air Force FY15 S&T Program,” [Presentation], U.S. Air Force, Arlington, VA, 12 March 2014.
[28] Osborn, K. “AF Chief Scientist: Air Force Working on New Hypersonic Air Vehicle,” Defense Tech.
https://www.military.com/defensetech/2015/06/01/af-chief-scientist-air-force-working-on-new-hypersonic-air-vehicle, 01 June 2015.
[29] Reed, J. “X-51A Scramjet Engine Demonstrator - Waverider,” [Presentation], Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, OH, 26 April 2010.
[30] Rondeau, C. M., and Jorris, T. R. “X-51A Scramjet Demonstrator Program: Waverider Ground and Flight Test.” SFTE 44th International
/ SETP Southwest Flight Test Symposium, Ft Worth, TX, 28 October 2013.
[31] Shaffer, A. “Technology Surprise - Need for Rebalance of R&E Investments,” Department of Defense, Arlington, VA, 18 March 2014.
[32] Stephenson, D. “'Pretty Cool' Vehicles,” Boeing Frontiers, pp. 30-33, February 2008.

193
[33] Vogel, J. “X-51A Scramjet Engine Demonstrator ‐ Waverider,” 2010 Aviation Week Program Excellence Initiative, 2010.
[34] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.2. X-43A Bibliography

[1] Albertson, C., and Emami, S. “Alleviation of Facility/Engine Interactions in an Open-Jet Scramjet Test Facility,” AIAA-2001-3677.
37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Salt
Lake City, UT, 08-11 July 2001. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2001-3677
[2] Anon. “Nasa’s X-43A Scramjet Achieves Record-Breaking Mach 10 Speed Using Model-Based Design,” MathWorks.
[3] Anon. “Real-Time Simulation of Aeroheating of the Hyper-X Airplane,” Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards,
California.
[4] Anon. “X43 Program.” Accurate Automation Corporation, Chattanooga, TN.
[5] Anon. “X-43A Hyper-X Launch Vehicle Fact Sheet,” Orbital, Dulles, VA.
[6] Anon. “X-43 Emergency Summary,” 04 November 2004.
[7] Anon. “Report of Findings: X-43A Mishap,” Vol. 1, X-43A Mishap Investigation Board, 08 May 2003.
[8] Anon. “Advances on Propulsion Technology for High-Speed Aircraft. Volume 2.” von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics,
Belgium, 12-15 March 2007.
[9] Anon. “Advances on Propulsion Technology for High-Speed Aircraft. Volume 1.” von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics,
Belgium, 12-15 March 2007.
[10] Anon. “Fiscal Year 2001 Accountability Report,” NASA, 2001.
[11] Anon. “X-43A Project Overview: Adventures in Hypersonics,” [Presentation], NASA, 2005.
[12] Anon. “NASA Hyper-X Program Demonstrates Scramjet Technologies: X-43A Flight Makes Aviation History,” NASAFacts, NASA,
2006.
[13] Anon. “Pegasus User's Guide,” Release 7.0, Orbital Sciences Corporation, April 2010.
[14] Anon. “NASA “Hyper-X” Program Demonstrates Scramjet Technologies: X-43a Being Readied for Reflight,” FactSheet, Langley
Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, July 2003.
[15] Anon. “Technical Training on High-Order Spectral Analysis and Thermal Anemometry Applications,” Langley Research Center,
NASA, Hampton, VA, September 2003.
[16] Bahm, C., Baumann, E., Martin, J., Bose, D., Beck, R., and Strovers, B. “The X-43A Hyper-X Mach 7 Flight 2 Guidance, Navigation,
and Control Overview and Flight Test Results,” AIAA-2005-3275. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics
Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 2005.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3275
[17] Bakos, D. R. “Current Hypersonic Research in the USA,” RTO-EN-AVT-150. Advances on Propulsion Technology for High-Speed
Aircraft, Research and Technology Organisation, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France, 2008.
[18] Bakos, R., Tsai, C.-Y., Rogers, R., and Shih, A. “Hyper-X Mach 10 Engine Flowpath Development - Fifth Entry Test Conditions and
Methodology,” AIAA-2001-1814. 10th AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24 April 2001.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2001-1814
[19] Bakos, R. J., Tsai, C.-Y., Rogers, R., and Shih, A. “The Mach 10 Component of Nasa’s Hyper-X Ground Test Program,” Langley
Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 01 January 1999.
[20] Bathel, B., Danehy, P., Inman, J., Alderfer, D., and Berry, S. “PLIF Visualization of Active Control of Hypersonic Boundary Layers
Using Blowing,” 26th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 23 June 2008, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-4266
[21] Baumann, E. “X-43A Flight Controls,” [Presentation], Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, 06 March 2006.
[22] Baumann, E. “Tailored Excitation for Frequency Response Measurement Applied to the X-43A Flight Vehicle,” NASA/TM-2007-
214609, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, January 2007.
[23] Baumann, E., Bahm, C., Strovers, B., Beck, R., and Richard, M. “The X-43A Six Degree of Freedom Monte Carlo Analysis,”
NASA/TM-2007-214630, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, December 2007.
[24] Baumann, E., Pahle, J. W., Davis, M. C., and White, J. T. “The X-43A Flush Airdata Sensing System Flight Test Results.” AIAA
Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Honolulu, Hawaii, 18-
21 August 2008.
[25] Bermudez, L., Gladden, R., Jeffries, M., McMillan, D., Porter, J., Allen, V., and Engelund, W. C. “Aerodynamic Characterization of
the Hyper-X Launch Vehicle.” 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-7074
[26] Berry, S., and Berger, K. “NASA Langley Experimental Aerothermodynamic Contributions to Slender and Winged Hypersonic
Vehicles,” Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA.
[27] Berry, S., Daryabeigi, K., Wurster, K., and Bittner, R. “Boundary Layer Transition on X-43A,” AIAA-2008-3736. 38th AIAA Fluid
Dynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 23-26 June 2008.
[28] Berry, S., DiFulvio, M., and Kowalkowski, K. “Forced Boundary-Layer Transition on X-43 (Hyper-X) in NASA Larc 31-Inch Mach
10 Air Tunnel,” NASA/TM-2000-210315, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, August 2000.
[29] Berry, S., DiFulvio, M., and Kowalkowski, K. “Forced Boundary-Layer Transition on X-43 (Hyper-X) in NASA Larc 20-Inch Mach
6 Air Tunnel,” NASA/TM-2000-210316, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, August 2000.

194
[30] Berry, S., and Nowak, R. “A Comparison of Active and Passive Methods for Control of Hypersonic Boundary Layers on Airbreathing
Configurations.” JANNAF 27th Airbreathing Propulsion Subcommittee Meeting, Langley Research Center, NASA, Colorado
Springs, CO, 01-05 December 2003.
[31] Berry, S., Nowak, R., and Horvath, T. “Boundary Layer Control for Hypersonic Airbreathing Vehicles,” AIAA-2004-2246. 34th
AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Portland, OR, 28 June 2004.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-2246
[32] Berry, S. A., Auslender, A. H., Dilley, A. D., and Calleja, J. F. “Hypersonic Boundary-Layer Trip Development for Hyper-X,” AIAA-
2000-4012. 18th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Denver, CO, 14-17
August 2000.
[33] Berry, S. A., and Horvath, T. J. “Discrete Roughness Transition for Hypersonic Flight Vehicles.” 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 08-11 January 2007.
[34] Blocker, W., and Ruebush, D. “X-43A Stage Separation System - a Flight Data Evaluation,” AIAA-2005-3335. AIAA/CIRA 13th
International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3335
[35] Bowcutt, K. G. “Tackling the Extreme Challenges of Air-Breathing Hypersonic Vehicle Design, Technology, and Flight.”
Mathematics, Computing & Design Symposium, [Presentation], Boeing, Stanford University, CA, 21 November 2014.
[36] Brock, M. A. “Performance Study of Two-Stage-to-Orbit Reusable Launch Vehicle Propulsion Alternatives,” Master's Defense,
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of Technology,
Air University, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, March 2004.
[37] Buning, P., Wong, T.-C., Dilley, A., and Pao, J. “Prediction of Hyper-X Stage Separation Aerodynamics Using CFD.” 18th Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Denver, CO, 14-17 August 2000.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2000-4009
[38] Choudhari, M., Li, F., and Edwards, J. “Stability Analysis of Roughness Array Wake in a High-Speed Boundary Layer.” 47th AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, January 2009. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-170
[39] Cockrell, C. “Aerosciences, Aero-Propulsion and Flight Mechanics Technology Development for NASA's Next Generation Launch
Technology Program.” 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-6948
[40] Cockrell, C., Auslender, A. H., White, J., and Dilley, A. “Aeroheating Predictions for the X-43 Cowl-Closed Configuration at Mach
7 and 10,” AIAA 2002-0218. 40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Conference & Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Reno, Nevada, 14-17 January 2002.
[41] Cockrell, C., Davis, S., Robinson, K., Tuma, M., and Sullivan, G. “NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Flight Test Options.” 57th
International Astronautical Congress, Valencia, Spain, 02-06 October 2006.
[42] Cockrell, J., Charles, Engelund, W., Dilley, A., Bittner, R., Jentink, T., and Frendi, A. “Integrated Aero-Propulsive CFD Methodology
for the Hyper-X Flight Experiment.” 18th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Denver, CO, 14-17 August 2000. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2000-4010
[43] Cook, M., Murphy, K. L., and Schneider, T. “Advanced Materials for Exploration Task Research Results,” NASA/TM-2008-215465,
Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA, MSFC, AL, July 2008.
[44] Corpening, G. “X-43A: The First Flight of a Scramjet Powered Airplane.” AIAA Space 2004 Conference, [Presentation], American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Diego, CA, 28 September 2004.
[45] Crawford, J. L., and Cruciani, E. “2000 - 2001 Research Engineering Annual Report,” NASA/TM-2004-212025, Dryden Flight
Research Center, NASA, Edwards, California, January 2004.
[46] Crawford, J. L., and Cruciani, E. “2002 Research Engineering Annual Report,” NASA/TM-2004-212851, Dryden Flight Research
Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, September 2004.
[47] Danehy, P. M., Bathel, B., Inman, J. A., Alderfer, D. W., and Jones, S. B. “Stereoscopic Imaging in Hypersonics Boundary Layers
Using Planar Laser-Induced Fluorescence.” 38th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 23-26 June 2008.
[48] Daryabeigi, K., Berry, S. A., Horvath, T. J., and Nowak, R. J. “Finite Volume Numerical Methods for Aeroheating Rate Calculations
from Infrared Thermographic Data,” AIAA-2003-3634. 36th AIAA Thermophysics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 23-26 June 2003.
[49] Davidson, J., Lallman, F., McMinn, J., Martin, J., Pahle, J., Stephenson, M., Selmon, J., and Bose, D. “Flight Control Laws for
NASA's Hyper-X Research Vehicle,” AIAA-99-4124. Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Portland, OR, 09 August 1999. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-4124
[50] Davis, M., and White, J. “Flight-Test-Determined Aerodynamic Force and Moment Characteristics of the X-43A at Mach 7.0.” 14th
AIAA/AHI Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Canberra, Australia, 06-09 November 2006. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-8028
[51] Davis, M. C., Sim, A. G., Rhode, M., and Johnson, K. D. “Wind-Tunnel Results of the B-52B with the X-43A Stack,” Journal of
Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 871-877, 2007. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.27191.
[52] Dennehy, N., Lebsock, K., and West, J. “Guidance, Navigation & Control (Gn&C) Best Practices for Human-Rated Spacecraft
Systems,” Presentation for Program Management Challenge 2008, Daytona Beach, FL, 26-27 February 2008.
[53] Dickeson, J., Rodriguez, A., Sridharan, S., and Korad, A. “Elevator Sizing, Placement, and Control-Relevant Tradeoffs for
Hypersonic Vehicles.” AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2010. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-8339
[54] Dickeson, J., Rodriguez, A., Sridharan, S., Soloway, D., Korad, A., Khatri, J., Benavides, J., Kelkar, A., and Vogel, J. “Control-
Relevant Modeling, Analysis, and Design for Scramjet-Powered Hypersonic Vehicles.” 16th AIAA/DLR/DGLR International Space
Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Bremen,
Germany, 2009. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-7287
[55] Douglas, M., and Lindgren, J. “Hypersonic Weapons Technology for the Time Critical Mobile Ground Threat: A State-of-the-Art
Review,” DMSTTIAC SOAR 99-01, DMSTTIAC IIT Research Institute, Huntsville, AL, January 1999. [retrieved 2020-01-21
18:36:41].

195
[56] Drummond, J. P. “Methods for Prediction of High-Speed Reacting Flows in Aerospace Propulsion,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 52, No. 3,
pp. 465-485, 2014. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J052283.
[57] Drummond, J. P., Cockrell, C., Pellett, G., Diskin, G., Auslender, A. H., Exton, R., Guy, R. W., Hoppe, J., Puster, R., Rogers, R.,
Trexler, C. A., and Voland, R. T. “Hypersonic Airbreathing Propulsion - an Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics, and Acoustics
Competency White Paper,” NASA/TM-2002-211951, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, November 2002.
[58] Ellsworth, J. “An Analytical Explanation for the X-43A Flush Air Data Sensing System Pressure Mismatch between Flight and
Theory.” 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chicago, Illinois, 2010.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-4964
[59] Engelund, W., and Neal, B. “X-43A Lessons Learned,” [Presentation], Hypersonic Lessons Learned Workshop, Arlington, VA, 10
December 2013.
[60] Engelund, W. C. “Hyper-X Program Overview,” Aerospace and Ocean Engineering Dept. Seminar, Virginia Tech, 02 May 2001.
[61] Engelund, W. C., Holland, S. D., Cockrell, C. E., and Bittner, R. “Propulsion System Airframe Integration Issues and Aerodynamic
Database Development for the Hyper-X Flight Research Vehicle,” ISOABE-99-7215. XIV ISOABE, Florence, Italy, 05-10 September
1999.
[62] Engelund, W. C., Holland, S. D., Jr, C. E. C., and Bittner, R. “Aerodynamic Database Development for the Hyper-X Airframe-
Integrated Scramjet Propulsion Experiments,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 38, No. 6, p. 8, 2001.
[63] Erdos, J., Bakos, R., Castrogiovanni, A., and Rogers, R. “Dual Mode Shock-Expansion/Reflected-Shock Tunnel.” 35th Aerospace
Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 1997. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1997-
560
[64] Erickson, G. E. “Overview of Supersonic Aerodynamics Measurement Techniques in the NASA Langley Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel,”
NASA/TM-2007-214894, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, August 2007.
[65] Ferleman, P. “Comparison of Hyper-X Mach 10 Scramjet Preflight Predictions and Flight Data,” AIAA-2005-3352. AIAA/CIRA 13th
International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16-20 May 2005.
[66] Ferleman, S., McClinton, C., Rock, K., and Voland, R. T. “Hyper-X Mach 7 Scramjet Design, Ground Test and Flight Results.”
AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16-20 May 2005.
[67] Fidan, B., Mirmirani, M., and Ioannou, P. “Flight Dynamics and Control of Air-Breathing Hypersonic Vehicles: Review and New
Directions.” 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-7081
[68] Freeman, D., Reubush, D., McClinton, C., Rausch, V., and Crawford, L. “The NASA Hyper-X Program,” IAF-97-V.4.07. 48th
International Astronautical Congress, Turin, Italy, 06-10 October 1997.
[69] Freeman, M. “The Space Plane: Hypersonic Flight Is Ready for Take-Off,” Executive Intelligence Review, Vol. 31, No. 45, p. 8, 19
November 2004.
[70] Gibson, C., Neidhoefer, J., Cooper, S., Carlton, L., Cox, C., and Jorgensen, C. “Development and Flight Test of the X-43A-Ls
Hypersonic Configuration UAV.” AIAA's 1st Technical Conference and Workshop on Unmanned Aerospace Vehicles, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Portsmouth, VA, 20-23 May 2002. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2002-3462
[71] Gibson, C., Vess, R., and Pegg, R. “Low Speed Flight Testing of a X-43A Hypersonic Lifting Body Configuration,” AIAA-2003-
7086. 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-7086
[72] Glaessgen, E. H., Dawicke, D. S., Johnston, W. M., James, M. A., Simonsen, M., and Mason, B. H. “X-43A Rudder Spindle Fatigue
Life Estimate and Testing,” NASA/TM-2005-213525, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, March 2005.
[73] Grindle, L. “Hyper-X/ X-43A: Dryden’s Role,” Presentation for Lockheed Martin Interchange, Dryden Flight Research Center,
NASA, Edwards, CA, 14 August 2012.
[74] Grindle, L., and Bahm, C. “The X-43A (Hyper-X) Flies into the Record Books,” Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA.
[75] Gupta, K. K., Choi, S. B., and Ibrahim, A. “Aeroelastic-Acoustics Simulation of Flight Systems.” 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting, [Presentation], American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 05-08 January 2009.
[76] Harrington, B. H. “Magnetogasdynamic Flow Acceleration in a Scramjet Nozzle,” Master's Defense, Department of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of Technology, Air University, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base, OH, June 2004.
[77] Harsha, P., Keel, L., Castrogiovanni, A., and Sherrill, R. “X-43A Vehicle Design and Manufacture,” AIAA-2005-3334. AIAA/CIRA
13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3334
[78] Holland, S. D., Woods, C., and Engelund, W. C. “Hyper-X Research Vehicle (HXRV) Experimental Aerodynamics Test,” AIAA-
2000-4011. AIAA 18th Applied Aeronautics Conference, American Institute of Aerounautics and Astronautics, Denver, CO.
[79] Horvath, T. J., Berry, S. A., and Merski, N. R. “Hypersonic Boundary/Shear Layer Transition for Blunt to Slender Configurations -
a NASA Langley Experimental Perspective,” RTO-MP-AVT-111, RTO AVT Specialists' Meeting on “Enhancement of NATO
Military Flight Vehicle Performance by Management of Interacting Boundary Layer Transition and Separation”, Prague, Czech
Republic, 04-07 October 2004.
[80] Huebner, L., Rock, K., Ruf, E., Witte, D., and Andrews, E. “Hyper-X Flight Engine Ground Testing for X-43 Flight Risk Reduction,”
AIAA-2001-1809. 10th AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2001-1809
[81] Huebner, L., Rock, K., Witte, D., Ruf, E., and Andrews, E. “Hyper-X Engine Testing in the NASA Langley 8-Foot High Temperature
Tunnel,” AIAA-2000-3605. 36th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Huntsville, AL, 17-19 July 2000. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2000-3605
[82] Hunt, J., and Rausch, V. “Airbreathing Hypersonic Systems Focus at NASA Langley Research Center.” 8th AIAA International Space
Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA,
27-30 April 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-1641
[83] Hunt, J. L. “Airbreathing/Rocket Single-Stage-to-Orbit Design Matrix,” AIAA-95-6011. Sixth International Aerospace Planes and
Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.

196
[84] Hunt, J. L., Pegg, R. J., and Petley, D. H. “Airbreathing Hypersonic Vision-Operational-Vehicles Design Matrix.” World Aviation
Congress & Exposition, 1999. https://doi.org/10.4271/1999-01-5515
[85] Jenkins, D., Landis, T., and Miller, J. American X-Vehicles: An Inventory X-1 to X-50, Centennial of Flight Edition ed., National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, June 2003.
[86] Johnson, W., and Weeks, C. “Evaluation of a Gamma Titanium Aluminide for Hypersonic Structural Applications,” NAG-1-02018,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, April 2005.
[87] Joyce, P., Pomroy, J., and Grindle, L. “The Hyper-X Launch Vehicle: Challenges and Design Considerations for Hypersonic Flight
Testing,” AIAA-2005-3333. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3333
[88] Karlgaard, C., Martin, J., Tartabini, P., and Thornblom, M. “Hyper-X Mach 10 Trajectory Reconstruction.” AIAA Atmospheric Flight
Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Francisco, CA, 15 August 2005.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-5920
[89] Karlgaard, C., Tartabini, P., Blanchard, R., Kirsch, M., and Toniolo, M. “Hyper-X Post-Flight Trajectory Reconstruction,” AIAA-
2004-4829. AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Providence, RI, 16-19 August 2004. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-4829
[90] Karlgaard, C., Tartabini, P., Blanchard, R., Kirsch, M., and Toniolo, M. "Hyper-X Post-Flight-Trajectory Reconstruction," Journal
of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 105-115, January-February 2006.
[91] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[92] Ko, W. L. “Stress Analysis of B-52B and B-52H Air-Launching Systems Failure-Critical Structural Components,” NASA/TP-2005-
212862, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, April 2005.
[93] Ko, W. L. “Thermal Buckling Analysis of Rectangular Panels Subjected to Humped Temperature Profile Heating,” NASA/TP-2004-
212041, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, January 2004.
[94] Ko, W. L., and Chen, T. “Extended Aging Theories for Predictions of Safe Operational Life of Critical Airborne Structural
Components,” NASA/TP-2006-213676, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, May 2006.
[95] Ko, W. L., and Gong, L. “Thermostructural Analysis of Unconventional Wing Structures of a Hyper-X Hypersonic Flight Research
Vehicle for the Mach 7 Mission,” NASA/TP-2001-210398, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, October 2001.
[96] Ko, W. L., and Gong, L. “Thermoelastic Analysis of Hyper-X Camera Windows Suddenly Exposed to Mach 7 Stagnation
Aerothermal Shock,” NASA/TP-2000-209030, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, September 2000.
[97] Ko, W. L., Tran, V. T., and Chen, T. “Incorporation of Half-Cycle Theory into Ko Aging Theory for Aerostructural Flight-Life
Predictions,” NASA/TP-2007-214608, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, January 2007.
[98] Labbe, S. G., Gilbert, M. G., and Kehoe, M. W. “Possible Deficiencies in Predicting Transonic Aerodynamics on the X-43A,”
NASA/TM-2009-215711, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA.
[99] LaRouche, L. H. “We Must Save the X-43A: How I Defined the Scramjet,” Executive Intelligence Review, Vol. 31, No. 45, p. 2, 19
November 2004.
[100] Leonard, C., Amundsen, R., and Bruce, W. “Hyper-X Hot Structures Design and Comparison with Flight Data.” AIAA/CIRA 13th
International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3438
[101] Lin, Y., Baumann, E., Bose, D., Beck, R., and Jenney, G. “Tests and Techniques for Characterizing and Modeling X-43A
Electromechanical Actuators,” NASA/TM-2008-214637, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, December 2008.
[102] Liu, Y.-b., and Lu, Y.-p. “Conceptual Research on Modelling and Control Integrative Design Methods for Hypersonic Waverider,”
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, Vol. 225, No. 12, pp. 1291-1301,
December 2011. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954410011406629.
[103] Lockwood, M. K., Hunt, J., Kabis, H., Moses, P., Pao, J.-L., Yarrington, P., and Collier, C. “Design and Analysis of a Two-Stage-to-
Orbit Airbreathing Hypersonic Vehicle Concept,” AIAA-96-2890. 32nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Lake Buena Vista, FL, 01-03 July 1996.
[104] Lux, J., and Burkes, D. A. “Hyper-X (X-43A) Flight Test Range Operations Overview,” NASA/TM-2008-214626, Dryden Flight
Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, January 2008.
[105] Lux-Baumann, J., Dees, R., and Fratello, D. “Control Room Training for the Hyper-X Program Utilizing Aircraft Simulation.” AIAA
Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Keystone, CO,
21 August 2006. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-6264
[106] Lux-Baumann, J., Dees, R., and Fratello, D. “Control Room Training for the Hyper-X Project Utilizing Aircraft Simulation,”
NASA/TM-2006-213685, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, November 2006.
[107] Malmuth, N. D., Shalaev, V., and Fedorov, A. “Mathematical Fluid Dynamics of Store and Stage Separation,” SC71193.RFRFTV,
Rockwell Scientific Company, Thousand Oaks, CA, May 2005.
[108] Mangus, D., Mendelsohn, C., Starin, S., Stengle, T., and Truong, S. “Flight Dynamics Analysis Branch End of Fiscal Year 2002
Report,” Flight Dynamics Analysis Branch, Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA, Greenbelt, Maryland, December 2002.
[109] Marshall, L., Bahm, C., Corpening, G., and Sherrill, R. “Overview with Results and Lessons Learned of the X-43A Mach 10 Flight,”
AIAA-2005-3336. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3336
[110] Marshall, L., Corpening, G., and Sherrill, R. “A Chief Engineer's View of the NASA X-43A Scramjet Flight Test.” AIAA/CIRA 13th
International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3332
[111] McCIinton, C. R., Holland, S. D., Rock, K. E., Engelund, W. C., Voland, R. T., Huebner, L. D., and Rogers, R. C. “Hyper-X Wind
Tunnel Program,” AIAA-98-0553. 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Reno, NV, 12-15 January 1998.
[112] McCIinton, C. R., Rausch, V., Sitz, J., and Reukauf, P. “Hyper-X Program Status,” AIAA-2001-0828. 39th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 08-12 January 2001.
[113] McClinton, C. “X-43: Mach 7 and Beyond,” Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA.
[114] McClinton, C. “X-43: Scramjet Power Breaks the Hypersonic Barrier.” 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,
[Presentation], American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 09 January 2006.

197
[115] McClinton, C. “X-43 - Scramjet Power Breaks the Hypersonic Barrier: Dryden Lectureship in Research for 2006,” AIAA-2006-1.
44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 09-12 January
2006. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-1
[116] McClinton, C., Hunt, J., Ricketts, R., Reukauf, P., and Peddie, C. “Airbreathing Hypersonic Technology Vision Vehicles and
Development Dreams,” AIAA-99-4978. 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference and
3rd Weakly Ionized Gases Workshop, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-4978
[117] McClinton, C. R. “High Speed/Hypersonic Aircraft Propulsion Technology Development,” RTO-EN-AVT-150. Advances on
Propulsion Technology for High-Speed Aircraft, Research and Technology Organisation, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France, 2008.
[118] McClinton, C. R., Rausch, V. L., Nguyen, L. T., and Sitz, J. R. “Preliminary X-43 Flight Test Results,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 57,
No. 2-8, pp. 266-276, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2005.03.060.
[119] McNamara, J., Friedmann, P., Powell, K., Thuruthimattam, B., and Bartels, R. “Three-Dimensional Aeroelastic and
Aerothermoelastic Behavior in Hypersonic Flow.” 46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Austin, TX, 18 April 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-2175
[120] Meyer, B. “A Comparison of Computational Results to Transonic Test Data from a Hypersonic Airbreathing Model with Exhaust
Simulation,” AIAA-2003-4411. 39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Huntsville, AL, 20-23 July 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-4411
[121] Miller, C. “Aerothermodynamic Flight Simulation Capabilities for Aerospace Vehicles,” AIAA-98-2600. 20th AIAA Advanced
Measurement and Ground Testing Technology Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Albuquerque, NM,
15-18 June 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-2600
[122] Miller, J., Leggett, J., and Kramer-White, J. “Design Development Test and Evaluation (DDT&E) Considerations for Safe and
Reliable Human Rated Spacecraft Systems,” NASA/TM-2008-215126/Vol II, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, April
2008.
[123] Morelli, E., Derry, S., and Smith, M. “Aerodynamic Parameter Estimation for the X-43A (Hyper-X) from Flight Data,” AIAA-2005-
5921. AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San
Francisco, CA, 15-18 August 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-5921
[124] Morelli, E. A. “Flight-Test Experiment Design for Characterizing Stability and Control of Hypersonic Vehicles.” U.S. Air Force T&E
Days, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Los Angeles, CA, 05-07 February 2008.
[125] Moses, P., Bouchard, K., Vause, R., Pinckney, S., Taylor, L., Ferlemann, S., Leonard, C., Robinson, J., Martin, J., Petley, D., and
Hunt, J. “An Airbreathing Launch Vehicle Design with Turbine-Based Low-Speed Propulsion and Dual Mode Scramjet High-Speed
Propulsion,” AIAA-99-4948. 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference and 3rd Weakly
Ionized Gases Workshop, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-4948
[126] Nilsen, J. K. “Performance Study of Staging Variables on Two-Stage-to-Orbit Reusable Launch Vehicles,” Master's Defense,
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of Technology,
Air University, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, March 2005.
[127] Ohlhorst, C. W., Glass, D. E., Bruce, W. E., Lindell, M. C., Vaughn, W. L., Smith, R. W., Dirling, R. B., Hogenson, P. A., Nichols,
J. M., Risner, N. W., Thompson, D. R., Kowbel, W., Sullivan, B. J., Koenig, J. R., and Cuneo, J. C. “Development of X-43A Mach
10 Leading Edges.” 56th International Astronautical Congress, Fukuoka, Japan, 17-21 October 2005.
[128] Pak, C. “Aeroservoelastic Stability Analysis of the X-43A Stack,” NASA/TM-2008-214635, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA,
Edwards, CA, April 2008.
[129] Parikh, P., Engelund, W., Armand, S., and Bittner, R. “Evaluation of a CFD Method for Aerodynamic Database Development Using
the Hyper-X Stack Configuration.” 22nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Providence, RI, 16-19 August 2004.
[130] Peebles, C. The X-43A Flight Research Program: Lessons Learned on the Road to Mach 10, edited by Allen, N., Library of Flight,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 01 March 2008, p. 311.
[131] Peebles, C. “Learning from Experience: Case Studies of the Hyper-X Project,” AIAA-2009-1523. 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Orlando, FL, 05-08 January 2009. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-1523
[132] Peebles, C. “The X-43 Fin Actuation System Problem – Reliability in Shades of Gray.” Space Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Jose, CA, 19-21 September 2006.
[133] Peebles, C. Eleven Seconds into the Unknown: A History of the Hyper-X Program, edited by Allen, N., Library of Flight, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 31 March 2011, p. 342.
[134] Petersen, K. “X-43A Mach 7 Flight: A Defining Moment in Hypersonics,” [Presentation], Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA,
Edwards, CA.
[135] Quinlan, J., McDaniel, J. C., Drozda, T. G., Lacaze, G., and Oefelein, J. C. “A Priori Analysis of Flamelet-Based Modeling for a
Dual-Mode Scramjet Combustor.” 50th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Cleveland, OH, 28 July 2014. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2014-3743
[136] Rausch, V., McCIinton, C. R., and Crawford, J. L. “Hyper-X: Flight Validation of Hypersonic Airbreathing Technology,” Langley
Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 01 January 1997.
[137] Rausch, V., McClinton, C., and Sitz, J. “NASA's Hyper-X Program,” IAF-00-V.4.01. 51st International Astronautical Congress, Rio
de Janeiro, Brazil, 02-06 October 2000.
[138] Reddy, D. R. “70 Years of Aeropropulsion Research at NASA Glenn Research Center,” NASA/TP-2013-216524, Glenn Research
Center, NASA, Cleveland, OH, September 2013.
[139] Redifer, M., Lin, Y., Bessent, C. A., and Barklow, C. “The Hyper-X Flight Systems Validation Program,” NASA/TM-2007-214620,
Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, May 2007.
[140] Reubush, D. “Hyper-X Stage Separation - Background and Status,” AIAA-99-4818. 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic
Systems and Technologies Conference and 3rd Weakly Ionized Gases Workshop, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-4818

198
[141] Reubush, D., Martin, J., Robinson, J., Bose, D., and Strovers, B. “Hyper-X Stage Separation--Simulation Development and Results,”
AIAA-2001-1802. 10th AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2001-1802
[142] Reubush, D., Nguyen, L., and Rausch, V. “Review of X-43A Return to Flight Activities and Current Status.” 12th AIAA International
Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15
December 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-7085
[143] Rivers, H. K., and Glass, D. “Advances in Hot-Structure Development.” 5th European Workshop on Thermal Protection Systems
and Hot Structures, Noordwiji, Netherlands, 17 May 2006.
[144] Robinson, J., and Martin, J. “SACD's Support of the Hyper-X Program,” AIAA-2006-7031. 11th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary
Analysis and Optimization Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Portsmouth, VA, 06-08 September 2006.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-7031
[145] Rogers, R., Capriotti, D., and Guy, R. “Experimental Supersonic Combustion Research at NASA Langley,” AIAA-98-2506. 20th
AIAA Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Technology Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Albuquerque, NM, 15-18 June 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-2506
[146] Rogers, R., Shih, A., and Hass, N. “Scramjet Development Tests Supporting the Mach 10 Flight of the X-43,” AIAA-2005-3351.
AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3351
[147] Rogers, R., Shih, A., Tsai, C.-Y., and Foelsche, R. “Scramjet Tests in a Shock Tunnel at Flight Mach 7, 10, and 15 Conditions,”
AIAA-2001-3241. 37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Salt Lake City, UT, 09-11 July 2001. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2001-3241
[148] Schultz, J. Crafting Flight: Aircraft Pioneers and the Contributions of the Men and Women of NASA Langley Research Center, NASA
History Series, 2003.
[149] Smith, R., Sikora, J., and Lindell, M. C. “Test and Analysis of a Hyper-X Carbon-Carbon Leading Edge Chine,” NASA/TM-2005-
213765, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, May 2005.
[150] Sparkman, B. “Scramjet Fuel Injection Array Optimization Utilizing Mixed Variable Pattern Search with Kriging Surrogates,”
Master's Defense, Department of Operational Sciences, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of
Technology, Air University, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, March 2008.
[151] Spivey, N. “NASA Armstrong's Structural Dynamics Airworthiness Processes for Aircraft.” NESC Loads & Dynamics TDT Annual
Face-to-Face Meeting, [Presentation], San Diego, CA, 27-29 October 2015.
[152] Stoliker, P., Flick, B., and Cruciani, E. “2004 Research Engineering Annual Report,” NASA/TM-2006-213677, Dryden Flight
Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, June 2006.
[153] Stoliker, P. C., Flick, B., and Cruciani, E. “2003 Research Engineering Annual Report,” NASA/TM-2005-212874, Dryden Flight
Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, July 2005.
[154] Tartabini, P., Bose, D., McMinn, J., Martin, J., and Strovers, B. “Hyper-X Stage Separation Trajectory Validation Studies,” AIAA-
2003-5819. AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Austin, TX, 11-14 August 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-5819
[155] Tartabini, P., Bose, D., Thornblom, M., Lien, J., and Martin, J. “Mach 10 Stage Separation Analysis for the X43-A.” 44th AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 09 January 2006.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-1038
[156] Tartabini, P. V., Roithmayr, C., Toniolo, M. D., Karlgaard, C., and Pamadi, B. N. “Verification of the Constraint Force Equation
Methodology for Modeling Multibody Stage Separation,” AIAA-2008-7039. AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies
Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Honolulu, Hawaii, 18-21 August 2008.
[157] Thomas, D. J. “Design and Analysis of UHTC Leading Edge Attachment,” NASA/CR-2002-211505, Glenn Research Center, NASA,
Cleveland, OH, July 2002.
[158] Thomas, J. “Flight Test of the Engine Fuel Schedules of the X-43A Hyper-X Research Vehicles,” Dryden Flight Research Center,
NASA, Edwards, CA, 01 June 2006.
[159] Vachon, M., Grindle, T., St. John, C., and Dowdell, D. “X-43A Fluid and Environmental Systems: Ground and Flight Operation and
Lessons Learned.” AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3337
[160] Voland, R., Rock, K., Huebner, L., Witte, D., Fischer, K., and McClinton, C. “Hyper-X Engine Design and Ground Test Program,”
AIAA-98-1532. 8th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-1532
[161] Voland, R. T., Huebner, L. D., and McClinton, C. R. “X-43A Hypersonic Vehicle Technology Development,” IAC-05-D2.6.01. 56th
International Astronautical Congress, Fukuoka, Japan, 17-21 October 2005.
[162] Woods, W. C., Holland, S. D., and DiFulvio, M. “Hyper-X Stage Separation Wind-Tunnel Test Program,” Journal of Spacecraft and
Rockets, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp. 811-819, 2001. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.3770.

199
A.3. XB-70 Bibliography
[1] Andrews, W. “Summary of Preliminary Data Derived from the XB-70 Airplanes,” NASA-TM-X-1240, National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, Washington, D. C., June 1966.
[2] Anon. "Standard Aircraft Characteristics: B-70 Valkyrie," 57WC-4984, 08 June 1960.
[3] Anon. “Interim Flight Manual: XB-70A,” USAF Series Aircraft, United States Air Force, 25 June 1965.
[4] Anon. "Flight Handbook Supplement: XB-70A," USAF Series Aircraft, United States Air Force, 30 September 1964 (Changed 15
February 1967).
[5] Anon. "B-70 Technology Applicable to the Supersonic Transport," NA-62-601, Los Angeles Division, North American Aviation,
Los Angeles, CA, 1962.
[6] Anon. “Faster Than a Bullet: Premiere of the North American XB-70A,” Interavia, pp. 982-984, 1964.
[7] Anon. “XB-70,” NASAFacts, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, 2003.
[8] Anon. "Estimated Performance of Two G.E. J93-3 Engines," 89B00980R, August 2007.
[9] Anon. “Flight Control Systems: XB-70 Air Vehicle,” NA-60-2, Control Systems Group, North American Aviation, January 1960.
[10] Anon. “Analysis of External Aerodynamic Effect of Inlet Operation on the XB-70 at Mach Numbers of 1.2 to 3.5 in the North
American Aviation Trisonic Wind Tunnel and the Ames 8x7 Supersonic Wind Tunnel,” NA-62-575, Aero-Thermo Design, B-70
Division, North American Aviation, June 1962.
[11] Anon. “Estimated Rigit and Flexible Aerodynamic Derivatives for XB-70 Air Vehicle No. 1,” TFD-65-396, Aerodynamics Group,
North American Aviation, June 1965 (rev. October 1966).
[12] Arnaiz, H. H. “Flight-Measured Lift and Drag Characteristics of a Large, Flexible, High Supersonic Cruise Airplane,” NASA-TM-
X-3532, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., May 1977.
[13] Arnaiz, H. H., Peterson, J. B., and Daugherty, J. C. “Wind-Tunnel/Flight Correlation Study of Aerodynamic Characteristics of a
Large Flexible Supersonic Cruise Airplane (XB-70-1): III - a Comparison between Characteristics Predicted from Wind-Tunnel
Measurements and Those Measured in Flight,” NASA-TP-1516, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, March 1980.
[14] Arnaiz, H. H., and Schweikhard, W. G. “Validation of the Gas Generator Method of Calculating Jet-Engine Thrust and Evaluation
of XB-70-1 Airplane Engine Performance at Ground Static Conditions,” NASA-TN-D-7028, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, D. C., December 1970.
[15] Baker, P. A., Schweikhard, W. G., and Young, W. R. “Flight Evaluation of Ground Effect on Several Low-Aspect-Ratio Airplanes,”
NASA-TN-D-6053, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October 1970.
[16] Bartley, S., Urquidi, N., and Lurie, D. “XB-70, SR-71, & TU-144: Large Supersonic Transports,” [Presentation], Department of
Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 22 March 2006.
[17] Beatovich, G. “A Case Study of Manned Strategic Bomber Acquisition: The B-70 Valkyrie,” Master's Defense, School of Systems
and Logistics, Air Force Institute of Technology, Air University, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, September 1990.
[18] Beaulieu, W., Campbell, R., and Burcham, W. “Measurement of XB-70 Propulsion Performance Incorporating the Gas Generator
Method.,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 312-317, 1969. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.44057.
[19] Berry, D. T., and Powers, B. G. “Handling Qualities of the XB-70 Airplane in the Landing Approach,” NASA-TN-D-5676, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., February 1970.
[20] Blume, J. A., Sharpe, R. L., Kost, G., and Proulx, J. “Response of Structures to Sonic Booms Produced by XB-70, B-58 and F-104
Aircraft,” AF-49(368)-1739, John A. Blume & Associates Research Division, San Francisco, CA, October 1967.
[21] Boyne, W. J. “The Ride of the Valkyrie,” AIR FORCE Magazine, Vol. 89, No. 6, pp. 76-79, Air Force Association, Arlington, VA,
June 2006.
[22] Campbell, J. M. North American XB-70 Valkyrie: The Legacy, Schiffer Military History, Schiffer Publishing, Atglen, PA, 1998, p.
96.
[23] Campbell, J. M., and Pape, G. R. North American XB-70 Valkyrie: A Photo Chronicle, Schiffer Military/Aviation History, Schiffer
Publishing, Atglen, PA, 1996, p. 48.
[24] Child, R. D., and Schlosser, D. C. “Substantiation of the XB-70 Air Vehicle Drag,” NA-61-703-1, North American Aviation, Los
Angeles, CA, 28 March 1963.
[25] Conrady, T. “The Experimental Aircraft XB-70 Valkyrie,” Euroavia News, pp. 12-14, April 1996.
[26] Cox, T. H., and Jackson, D. W. “Evaluation of High-Speed Civil Transport Handling Qualities Criteria with Supersonic Flight Data,”
NASA-TM-4791, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, 1997.
[27] Cox, T. H., and Marshall, A. “Longitudinal Handling Qualities of the Tu-144LL Airplane and Comparisons with Other Large,
Supersonic Aircraft,” NASA/TM-2000-209020, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, May 2000.
[28] Crede, E., Simpson, A., and Shannon, J. “XB-70 Valkyrie,” [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2007.
[29] Daugherty, J. C. “Wind-Tunnel/Flight Correlation Study of Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Large Flexible Supersonic Cruise
Airplane (XB-70-1): I - Wind-Tunnel Tests of a 0.03-Scale Model at Mach Numbers from 0.6 to 2.53,” NASA-TP-1514, Ames
Research Center, NASA, Moffett Field, CA, November 1979.
[30] Davidson, D. L., and Domal, A. F. "Emission Measurements of a J93 Turbojet Engine," AEDC-TR-73-132, Engine Test Facility,
Arnold Engineering Development Center, Air Force Systems Command, Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee, September 1973.
[31] Davies, P. E. North American XB-70 Valkyrie, X-Planes, Vol. 7, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, England, United Kingdom, 2018, p. 80.
[32] Domack, C. S. “Results of a Preliminary Investigation of Inlet Unstart on a High-Speed Civil Transport Airplane Concept.” First
Annual NASA High-Speed Research Workshop, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Williamsburg, VA, 16 May 1991.

200
[33] Dussart, G., Lone, M., O'Rourke, C., and Wilson, T. “In-Flight Wingtip Folding: Inspiration from the XB-70 Valkyrie,” International
Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and Aerospace, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2019. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15394/ijaaa.2019.1343.
[34] Eggers, A. J., and Syvertson, C. A. “Aircraft Configurations Developing High Lift-Drag Ratios at High Supersonic Speeds,” NACA-
RM-A55L05, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, 5 March 1956.
[35] Ehernberger, L. J. “Meteorological Aspects of High-Altitude Turbulence Encountered by the XB-70 Airplane.” AIAA 3rd National
Conference on Aerospace Meteorology, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, New Orleans, LA, 6-9 May 1968.
[36] Ehernberger, L. J. “Atmospheric Conditions Associated with Turbulence Encountered by the XB-70 Airplane above 40,000 Feet
Altitude,” NASA-TN-D-4768, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., September 1968.
[37] Elmer, K. R., and Joshi, M. C. “Variability of Measured Sonic Boom Signatures.” NASA HSR Sonic Boom Workshop, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center, NASA, 12-14 May 1993.
[38] Elmer, K. R., and Joshi, M. C. “Variability of Measured Sonic Boom Signatures: Volume 2 - Data Report,” NASA-CR-191483,
Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, January 1994.
[39] Elmer, K. R., and Joshi, M. C. “Variability of Measured Sonic Boom Signatures: Volume 1 - Technical Report,” NASA-CR-191483,
Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, January 1994
[40] Filippone, A. “Data and Performances of Selected Aircraft and Rotorcraft,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 36, No. 8, pp. 629-
654, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-0421(00)00011-7.
[41] Findley, D. S., Huckel, V., and Henderson, H. R. “Vibration Responses of Test Structure No. 1 During the Edwards Air Force Base
Phase of the National Sonic Boom Program,” NASA-TM-X-72706, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, June 1975.
[42] Fisher, D. F., and Saltzman, E. J. “Local Skin Friction Coefficients and Boundary-Layer Profiles Obtained in Flight from the XB-70-
1 Airplane at Mach Numbers up to 2.5,” NASA-TN-D-7220, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C.,
June 1973.
[43] Foxworth, T. G. “North American XB-70: Half Airplane - Half Spacecraft Part I,” Historical Aviation Album: All American Series,
Vol. VII, pp. 76-87, Historical Aviation Album, Temple City, CA, 1969.
[44] Freschl, E., and Steel, E. S. “Development of the XB-70A Propulsion System.,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 147-153, 1966.
https://doi.org/10.2514/3.43719.
[45] Fulton, F. L. “Lessons from the XB-70 as Applied to the Supersonic Transport.” 21st Annual International Air Safety Seminar,
Anaheim, CA, 7-11 October 1968.
[46] Gainer, T. G. “Low-Speed Investigation of Effects of Vertical Tails on the Static Stability Characteristics of a Canard-Bomber
Configuration Having a Very Thin Wing and a Slender Elliptical Fuselage,” NASA-TM-X-436, Langley Research Center, NASA,
Langley Field, VA, January 1961.
[47] Gallagher, R. J. “Investigation of a Digital Simulation of the XB-70 Inlet and Its Application to Flight-Experienced Free-Stream
Disturbances at Mach Numbers of 2.4 to 2.6,” NASA-TN-D-5827, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.
C., June 1970.
[48] Goecke, S. A. “Flight-Measured Base Pressure Coefficients for Thick Boundary-Layer Flow over an Aft-Facing Step for Mach
Numbers from 0.4 to 2.5,” NASA-TN-D-7202, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., May 1973.
[49] Greene, L. P. “Airframe Systems Design Evaluation,” AGARD Preliminary Design Aspects of Military Aircraft, March 1970.
[50] Griffin, J. A., and Gable, F. A. “XB-70A Electrical System - a Unique Environment for Equipment,” ASME Publication.
[51] Hallion, R. P. NASA's Contributions to Aeronautics, Vol. 2, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C.,
2010.
[52] Hatton, W. H., and Modiest, L. J. “The XB-70 Reliability Program.” Symposium on Deep Submergence Propulsion and Marine
Systems, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Forest Park, IL, 28 February 1966.
[53] Incrocci, T. P., and Scoggins, J. R. “An Investigation of the Relationships between Mountain-Wave Conditions and Clear Air
Turbulence Encountered by the XB-70 Airplane in the Stratosphere,” NASA-CR-1878, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington D.C., July 1971.
[54] Irwin, K. S., and Andrews, W. H. “Summary of XB-70 Airplane Cockpit Environmental Data,” NASA-TN-D-5449, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C., October 1969.
[55] Jenkins, D., and Landis, T. Valkyrie: North American's Mach 3 Superbomber, Specialty Press, North Branch, MN, 2004, p. 264.
[56] Jenkins, J. M., DeAngelis, V. M., Friend, E. L., and Monaghan, R. C. “Flight Measurements of Canard Loads, Canard Buffeting, and
Elevon and Wing-Tip Hinge Moments on the XB-70 Aircraft Including Comparisons with Predictions,” NASA-TN-D-5359, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washigton, D.C., August 1969.
[57] Jones, L. S. U.S. Bombers: B1-B70, Aero Publishers, Fallbrook, CA, 1966, p. 237.
[58] Jung, T. P., Starkey, R. P., and Argrow, B. “Modified Linear Theory Sonic Booms Compared to Experimental and Numerical
Results,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 52, No. 6, pp. 1821-1837, 2015. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033088.
[59] Kordes, E. E., and Love, B. J. “Preliminary Evaluation of XB-70 Airplane Encounters with High-Altitude Turbulence,” NASA-TN-
D-4209, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October 1967.
[60] Larson, T. J., and Schweikhard, W. G. “Verification of Takeoff Performance Predictions for the XB-70 Airplane,” NASA-TM-X-
2215, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., March 1971.
[61] Lasagna, P. L., and McLeod, N. J. “Preliminary Measured and Predicted XB-70 Engine Noise,” NASA-TM-X-1565, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., April 1968.
[62] Lasagna, P. L., and Putnam, T. W. “Engine Exhaust Noise During Ground Operation of the XB-70 Airplane,” NASA-TN-D-7043,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., January 1971.
[63] Lewis, T. J., Dods, J. B., and Hanly, R. D. “Measurements of Surface-Pressure Fluctuations on the XB-70 Airplane at Local Mach
Numbers up to 2.45,” National Aerospace and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., March 1973.
[64] Lock, W. P., Kordes, E. E., McKay, J. M., and Wykes, J. H. “Flight Investigation of a Structural Mode Control System for the XB-
70 Aircraft,” NASA-TN-D-7420, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October 1973.
[65] Lorell, M. A., Saunders, A., and Levaux, H. P. Bomber R & D since 1945: The Role of Experience, RAND, Santa Monica, CA, 1995,
p. 77.

201
[66] Maglieri, D., Sothcott, V., and Hicks, J. “Influence of Vehicle Configuration and Flight Profile on X-30 Sonic Booms.” AIAA 2nd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5224
[67] Maglieri, D. J., Henderson, H. R., and Tinetti, A. F. “Measured Sonic Boom Signatures Above and Below the XB-70 Airplane Flying
at Mach 1.5 and 37,000 Feet,” NASA/CR-2011-217077, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, April 2011.
[68] Maglieri, D. J., Sothcott, V. E., and Keefer, T. N. “A Summary of XB-70 Sonic Boom Signature Data,” NASA-CR-189630, Eagle
Engineering, Inc., Hampton, VA, April 1992.
[69] Martin, A. W., and Beaulieu, W. D. “XB-70 Flight Test Data Comparisons with Simulation Predictions of Inlet Unstart and Buzz,”
NASA-CR-1631, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., June 1970.
[70] Martin, R. A. “Dynamic Analysis of XB-70-1 Inlet Pressure Fluctuations During Takeoff and Prior to a Compressor Stall at Mach
2.5,” NASA-TN-D-5826, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., June 1970.
[71] Mason, W. H. "Some Supersonic Aerodynamics," [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
[72] Mason, W. H. "Supersonic Aerodynamics," Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, VA, 31 July 2016.
[73] Matranga, G., and Schweikhard, W. G. “Early Supersonic Flight and Technology Contributions at Edwards AFB in Retrospect.”
AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Austin, TX,
11-14 August 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-5766
[74] McKay, J. M., Kordes, E. E., and Wykes, J. H. “Flight Investigation of XB-70 Structural Response to Oscillatory Aerodynamic
Shaker Excitation and Correlation with Analytical Results,” NASA-TN-D-7227, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Washington, D. C., April 1973.
[75] McLeod, N. J. “Acoustic Attenuation Determined Experimentally During Engine Ground Tests of the XB-70 Airplane and
Comparison with Predictions,” NASA-TM-X-2223, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., March
1971.
[76] Nangia, R. K. “Assessment of Air Vehicle Design Evolution over Mach Number and Altitude Operating Envelope with and without
S&C Considerations as Part of the Design Synthesis,” Defense Technical Information Center, Fort Belvoir, VA, August 2011.
[77] Nicolai, L. M., and Carichner, G. E. Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design Volume I - Aircraft Design, AIAA Education Series,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2010, p. 881.
[78] Oliveira, P. D., and Libeau, M. “The Blackbird, Revisited in Blacksburg,” [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean
Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 21 April 2000.
[79] Pace, S. North American Valkyrie XB-70A, Aero Series, Vol. 30, Aero Publishers, Fallbrook, CA, 1984, p. 104.
[80] Petersen, R. H. “The Effects of Wing-Tip Droop on the Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Delta-Wing Aircraft at Supersonic Speeds,”
NASA-TM-X-363, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, May 1960.
[81] Peterson, J. B., Mann, M. J., Sorrells, R. B., Sawyer, W. C., and Fuller, D. E. “Wind-Tunnel/Flight Correlation Study of Aerodynamic
Characteristics of a Large Flexible Supersonic Cruise Airplane (XB-70-1): II - Extrapolation of Wind-Tunnel Data to Full-Scale
Conditions,” NASA-TP-1515, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, February 1980.
[82] Pike, I. “B-70: The State-of-the-Art Improver Part 2,” Flight International, pp. 18-24, 2 July 1964.
[83] Pike, I. “B-70: The State-of-the-Art Improver Part 1,” Flight International, pp. 1055-1062, 25 June 1964.
[84] Polhamus, E. C. “A Concept of the Vortex Lift of Sharp-Edge Delta Wings Based on a Leading-Edge-Suction Analogy,” NASA-
TN-D-3767, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., December 1966.
[85] Powers, B. G. “Statistical Survey of XB-70 Airplane Responses and Control Usage with an Illustration of the Application to Handling
Qualities Criteria,” NASA-TN-D-6872, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., July 1972.
[86] Powers, B. G. “A Review of Transport Handling-Qualities Criteria in Terms of Preliminary XB-70 Flight Experience,” NASA-TM-
X-1584, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., May 1968.
[87] Putnam, T. W., and Smith, R. H. “XB-70 Compressor-Noise Reduction and Propulsion-System Performance for Choked Inlet Flow,”
NASA-TN-D-5692, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., March 1970.
[88] Razgonyaev, V., and Mason, W. H. “An Evaluation of Aerodynamic Prediction Methods Applied to the XB-70 for Use in High Speed
Aircraft Stability and Control System Design.” 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Reno, NV, 9-12 January 1995. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-759
[89] Remak, J., and Ventolo, J. XB-70 Valkyrie: The Ride to Valhalla, MBI Publishing Company, Osceola, WI, 1998, p. 128.
[90] Roedts, R., Somero, R., and Waskiewicz, C. “XB-70 Valkyrie,” [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2005.
[91] Rogerson, D. B. “Technological Advancements Resulting from XB-70 Performance Requirements,” SAE Technical Paper 650798.
Aeronautic and Space Engineering and Manufacturing Meeting, February 1965. https://doi.org/10.4271/650798
[92] Ross, J., and Rogerson, D. “XB-70 Technology Advancements.” Aircraft Prototype and Technology Demonstrator Symposium,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 23-24 March 1983.
[93] Saltzman, E. J., and Ayers, T. G. “Selected Examples of NACA/NASA Supersonic Flight Research,” NASA-SP-513, Dryden Flight
Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, May 1995.
[94] Saltzman, E. J., Goecke, S. A., and Pembo, C. “Base Pressure Measurements on the XB-70 Airplane at Mach Numbers from 0.4 to
3.0,” NASA-TM-X-1612, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., September 1968.
[95] Simons, G. M. Valkyrie the North American XB-70: The USA's Ill-Fated Supersonic Heavy Bomber, Pen & Sword Aviation, Barnsley,
South Yorkshire, England, United Kingdom, 2015, p. 256.
[96] Sisk, T. R., and Andrews, W. “Utilization of Existing Aircraft in Support of Supersonic-Transport Research Programs.” Testing of
Manned Flight Systems Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Edwards Air Force Base, CA, 04-06
December 1963.
[97] Sisk, T. R., Irwin, K. S., and McKay, J. M. “Review of the XB-70 Flight Program.” NASA Conference on Aircraft Operating
Problems, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 10-12 May 1965.

202
[98] Smith, R. E., and Lum, E. L. “Linear Optimal Control Theory and Angular Acceleration Sensing Applied to Structural Bending
Control on the XB-70,” AFFDL-TR-66-88, February 1967.
[99] Smith, R. H., and Schweikhard, W. G. “Initial Flight Experience with the XB-70 Air-Induction System.” Conference on Aircraft
Aerodynamics, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, May 1966.
[100] Soban, D. S. “Subsonic Wing Optimization for Handling Qualities Using ACSYNT,” Master's Defense, Aeronautical Engineering,
California Polytechnic State University, October 1996.
[101] Sotham, J. “The Legend of the Valkyrie,” Air & Space, pp. 46-57, September 1999.
[102] Spivak, W. A. "XB-70A Mach 3 Design and Operating Experiences," SAE Transactions, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp. 114-126, 1967.
[103] Stenton, T. E. “Theoretical Frequency Response Functions and Power Spectra of the XB-70 Response to Atmospheric Turbulence,”
NASA-CR-1621, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., August 1970.
[104] Stricker, J. M. “The Gas Turbine Engine Conceptual Design Process- an Integrated Approach.” Design Principles and Methods for
Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines, Research and Technology Organisation, Toulouse, France, 11-15 May 1998.
[105] Tanner, C. S., and McLeod, N. J. “Preliminary Measurements of Take-Off and Landing Noise from a New Instrumented Range.”
NASA Conference on Aircraft Operating Problems, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center,
NASA, Hampton, VA, 10-12 May 1965.
[106] Taube, L. J. “B-70 Aircraft Study Final Report: Volume I,” SD-72-SH-0003, Space Division, North American Rockwell, April 1972.
[107] Taube, L. J. “B-70 Aircraft Study Final Report: Volume II,” SD-72-SH-0003, Space Division, North American Rockwell, April 1972.
[108] Taube, L. J. “B-70 Aircraft Study Final Report: Volume III,” SD-72-SH-0003, Space Division, North American Rockwell, April
1972.
[109] Taube, L. J. “B-70 Aircraft Study Final Report: Volume IV,” SD-72-SH-0003, Space Division, North American Rockwell, April
1972.
[110] Taylor, J. W. North American Valkyrie: XB-70, Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1965-66, Jane's All the World's Aircraft Publishing,
England, United Kingdom, 1965, p. 533.
[111] Thorpe, D. G., Escher, D., and Rhodes, R. E. “Sub-Orbital Passenger Aircraft for Space Launch Operations.” 51st AIAA/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 27-29 July 2015.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-3894
[112] Tinetti, A. F., Maglieri, D. J., Driver, C., and Bobbitt, P. J. “Equivalent Longitudinal Area Distributions of the B-58 and XB-70-1
Airplanes for Use in Wave Drag and Sonic Boom Calculations,” NASA/CR-2011-217078, Langley Research Center, NASA,
Hampton, VA, March 2011.
[113] Walker, H. J. “Performance Evaluation Method for Dissimilar Aircraft Designs,” NASA-RP-1042, Dryden Flight Research Center,
NASA, Edwards, CA, September 1979.
[114] Wilson, R. J., and Larson, R. R. “Statistical Analysis of Landing-Contact Conditions for the XB-70 Airplane,” NASA-TN-D-4007,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., June 1967.
[115] Wilson, R. J., Love, B. J., and Larson, R. R. “Evaluation of Effects of High-Altitude Turbulence Encounters on the XB-70 Airplane,”
NASA-TN-D-6457, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., July 1971.
[116] Wilson, R. J., and McKay, J. M. “Landing Loads and Accelerations of the XB-70-1 Airplane,” NASA-TN-D-4836, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October 1968.
[117] Wolowicz, C. H. “Analysis of an Emergency Deceleration and Descent of the XB-70-1 Airplane Due to Engine Damage Resulting
from Structural Failure,” NASA-TM-X-1195, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., March 1966.
[118] Wolowicz, C. H., Strutz, L. W., Gilyard, G. B., and Matheny, N. W. “Preliminary Flight Evaluation of the Stability and Control
Derivatives and Dynamic Characteristics of the Unaugmented XB-70-1 Airplane Including Comparisons with Predictions,” NASA-
TN-D-4578, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., May 1968.
[119] Wolowicz, C. H., and Yancey, R. B. “Comparison of Predictions of the XB-70-1 Longitudinal Stability and Control Derivatives with
Flight Results for Six Flight Conditions,” NASA-TM-X-2881, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C.,
August 1973.
[120] Wolowicz, C. H., and Yancey, R. B. “Summary of Stability and Control Characteristics of the XB-70 Airplane,” NASA-TM-X-2933,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October 1973.
[121] Wykes, J. H., and Lawrence, R. E. “Estimated Performance and Stability and Control Data for Correlation with XB-70-1 Flight Test
Data,” Los Angeles Division, North American Rockwell, Los Angeles, CA, July 1971.
[122] Wykes, J. H., and Mori, A. S. “XB-70 Aerodynamic, Geometric, Mass, and Symmetric Structural Mode Data,” Los Angeles Division,
North American Rockwell, Los Angeles, CA, March 1970.
[123] Wykes, J. H., Nardi, L. U., and Mori, A. S. “XB-70 Structural Mode Control System Design and Performance Analyses,” NASA-
CR-1557, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., July 1970.

203
A.4. SR-71 Bibliography
[1] Anderson, E., and Lopata, J. “Using a Modified SR-71 Aircraft and Air-Launched Expendable Rockets to Place Small Payloads into
Orbit.” 32nd AIAA, ASME, SAE, and ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Lake Buena Vista, FL, 1-3 July 1996. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1996-2774
[2] Anderson, E., Lopata, J., Hoar, P., and Nelson, D. “Performance Analysis and Optimized Design of an SR-71 Based Air Launch
System for Small Payloads.” 33rd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 06-09 July 1997. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1997-3123
[3] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[4] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[5] Anon. “Functional Check Flight Procedures: SR-71A and SR-71B Aircraft,” SR-71-6CF-1, Technical Manual, 1 March 1986.
[6] Anon. “Black Shield Mission BX6723,” NPIC/R-194/67, National Photographic Interpretation Center, 17 September 1967.
[7] Anon. “Inventing the SR-71 Engine Inlets,” Air & Space Magazine, Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D. C., 22 March 2006.
[8] Anon. “SR-71 Current Status,” 24 January 1996.
[9] Anon. “SR-71A Flight Manual,” 25 May 1987.
[10] Anon. “Black Shield,” Air Force Magazine, Air Force Association, Arlington, VA, 30 August 2008.
[11] Anon. “The Oxcart Story,” Air Force Magazine, Air Force Association, Arlington, VA, 30 August 2008.
[12] Anon. Lockheed SR-71 Supersonic/Hypersonic Research Facility Researcher's Handbook, Vol. II: Technical Description, Lockheed
Advanced Development Company, Palmdale, CA, 1995.
[13] Anon. “Deactivation of the SR-71 Program at Beal Air Force Base, California,” Department of the Air Force Headquarters, Strategic
Air Command, Offutt Air Force Base, NE, July 1989.
[14] Anon. “SR-71 Group Weight Estimate,” May 1966.
[15] Bartley, S., Urquidi, N., and Lurie, D. “XB-70, SR-71, & TU-144: Large Supersonic Transports,” [Presentation], Department of
Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 22 March 2006.
[16] Bouchard, G. “Lockheed Advanced Development Company (LADC), Aka Skunkworks, May 12, 1993,” 25 July 1995.
[17] Boyne, W. J. “The Early Overflights,” Air Force Magazine, Air Force Association, Arlington, VA, 2 July 2008.
[18] Boyne, W. J. “Reconnaissance on the Wing,” Air Force Magazine, Air Force Association, Arlington, VA, 10 July 2008.
[19] Byrnes, D. A., Byrnes, S. L., Hurley, K. D., and Hurley, J. Blackbird Rising: Birth of an Aviation Legend, Sage Mesa Publications,
Los Lunas, NM, 1999.
[20] Colville, J., and Lewis, M. “An Aerodynamic Redesign of the SR-71 Inlet with Applications to Turbine Based Combined Cycle
Engines.” 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 11-14 July 2004. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-3481
[21] Colville, J., Starkey, R., and Lewis, M. “Extending the Flight Mach Number of the SR-71 Inlet.” AIAA/CIRA 13th International
Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua,
Italy, 16-20 May 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-3284
[22] Conners, T. R. “Predicted Performance of a Thrust-Enhanced SR-71 Aircraft with an External Payload,” NASA-TM-104330, Dryden
Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, 1997.
[23] Corda, S., Moes, T. R., Mizukami, M., Hass, N., Jones, D., Monaghan, R. C., Ray, R. J., Jarvis, M. L., and Palumbo, N. “The SR-71
Test Bed Aircraft: A Facility for High-Speed Flight Research,” NASA/TP-2000-209023, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA,
Edwards, CA, June 2000.
[24] Corda, S., Neal, B. A., Moes, T. R., Cox, T. H., Monaghan, R. C., Voelker, L. S., Corpening, G. P., Larson, R. R., and Powers, B. G.
“Flight Testing the Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment (LASRE),” NASA/TM-1998-206567, Dryden Flight Research Center,
Edwards, CA, September 1998.
[25] Cox, T. H., and Jackson, D. “Supersonic Flying Qualities Experience Using the SR-71.” Atmospheric Flight Mechanics, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, New Orleans, LA, 11-13 August 1997.
[26] Cox, T. H., and Jackson, D. W. “Evaluation of High-Speed Civil Transport Handling Qualities Criteria with Supersonic Flight Data,”
NASA-TM-4791, Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 1997.
[27] Cox, T. H., and Marshall, A. “Longitudinal Handling Qualities of the Tu-144LL Airplane and Comparisons with Other Large,
Supersonic Aircraft,” NASA/TM-2000-209020, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, May 2000.
[28] Crickmore, P. SR-71 Blackbird: Lockheed's Mach 3 Hot Shot, Osprey Colour Series, Osprey Publishing, London, England, United
Kingdom, 1987, p. 128.
[29] Crickmore, P. Lockheed SR-71: The Secret Missions Exposed, Osprey Publishing, London, England, United Kingdom, 1993, p. 222.
[30] Crickmore, P. Lockheed's Black World Skunk Works: The U-2, SR-71, and F-117, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, England, United
Kingdom, 2000, p. 112.
[31] Crickmore, P. Lockheed A-12: The CIA's Blackbird and Other Variants, Air Vanguard, Vol. 12, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, England,
United Kingdom, 2014, p. 64.

204
[32] Davies, S., and Crickmore, P. Lockheed SR-71, Haynes Owners' Workshop Manual, Haynes Publishing, Somerset, England, United
Kingdom, 2012, p. 156.
[33] DeHart, R. M. “High Altitude Radiation Exposure in the SR-71: A Preliminary Report,” Air War College, Air University, Maxwell
Air Force Base, AL, April 1974.
[34] Drendel, L. SR-71 Blackbird in Action, Squadron/Signal Publications, Carrollton, TX, 1982, p. 50.
[35] Elam, S. K. “Test Report for NASA MSFC Support of the Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment (LASRE),” NASA/TM-2000-210076,
Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center, AL, February 2000.
[36] Ennix, K. A., and Corpening, G. P. “Evaluation of the Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment (LASRE) Oxygen Sensor,” NASA/TM-
1999-206589, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, November 1999.
[37] Fouladi, K. “CFD Predictions of Sonic-Boom Characteristics for Unmodified and Modified SR-71 Configurations.” High-Speed
Research: 1994 Sonic Boom Workshop, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 1-3 June 1999.
[38] Goodall, J. SR-71 Blackbird, Squadron/Signal Publications, Carrollton, TX, 1995, p. 80.
[39] Goodall, J., and Miller, J. Lockheed's SR-71 'Blackbird' Family: A-12, F-12, M-21, D-21, SR-71, Midland Publishing, Hinckley,
England, United Kingdom, 2002, p. 128.
[40] Graham, R. H. The Complete Book of the SR-71 Blackbird, Zenith Press, Minneapolis, MN, 2015, p. 288.
[41] Green, K. S., and Putnam, T. W. “Measurements of Sonic Booms Generated by an Airplane Flying at Mach 3.5 and 4.8,” NASA-
TM-X-3126, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October 1974.
[42] Haering, E. A., Ehernberger, L. J., and Whitemore, S. A. “Preliminary Airborne Measurements for the SR-71 Sonic Boom
Propagation Experiment.” NASA High Speed Research Program Sonic Boom Workshop, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Hampton, VA, 11-13 September 1995.
[43] Haering, E. A., Whitmore, S. A., and Ehernberger, L. J. “Measurement of the Basic SR-71 Airplane Near-Field Signature.” High-
Speed Research: 1994 Sonic Boom Workshop, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 1-3 June 1994.
[44] Hallion, R. P. NASA's Contributions to Aeronautics, Vol. 2, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C.,
2010.
[45] Hass, N., Mizukami, M., Neal, B. A., St. John, C., Beil, R. J., and Griffin, T. P. “Propellant Feed System Leak Detection: Lessons
Learned from the Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment (LASRE),” NASA/TM-1999-206590, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA,
Edwards, CA, November 1999.
[46] Hildebrant, D. “Time Line of the SR-71,” 2002.
[47] Iorio, C., and Lind, R. “Parameter Estimation of the SR-71 Fuselage Dynamics Using an Additive Beam Model.” 39th
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Long Beach, CA, 20-23 April 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-1730
[48] Iorio, C., Napolitano, M., Seanor, B., An, Y., and Bowers, A. “Parameter Estimation for the NASA SR-71 Longitudinal and
Lateral/Directional Dynamics.” 24th Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Portland, OR, 09-11 August 1999. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-4172
[49] Ivanteyeva, L. G., Kovalenko, V. V., Pavlyukov, E. V., Teperin, L. L., and Rackl, R. G. “Validation of Sonic Boom Propagation
Codes Using SR-71 Flight Test Data,” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 111, No. 1, pp. 554-561, January 2002.
[50] Jenkins, D. Lockheed SR-71/YF-12 Blackbirds, Warbird Tech Series, Vol. 10, Specialty Press Publishers and Wholesalers, North
Branch, MN, 1997, p. 100.
[51] Johnson, C. L., and Smith, M. Kelly: More Than My Share of It All, Smithsonian Books, Washington, D. C., 1985, p. 209.
[52] Kloesel, K. J., Ratnayake, N. A., and Clark, C. M. “A Technology Pathway for Airbreathing, Combined-Cycle, Horizontal Space
Launch through SR-71 Based Trajectory Modeling.” 17th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Francisco, CA, 11-14 April 2011.
[53] Klyde, D. H., and Mitchell, D. G. “Development of Supersonic Demonstration Maneuvers with the NASA SR-71 Aircraft and
Simulator.” 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 12-
15 January 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-493
[54] Larson, R. R. “Automated Testing Experience of the Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment (LASRE) Controller,” NASA/TM-1999-
206588, Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, September 1999.
[55] Law, P. "SR-71 Propulsion System P&W J-58 Engine (JT11D-20)," [Presentation].
[56] Lux, D., Ehernberger, L. J., Moes, T. R., and Haering, E. A. “Low-Boom SR-71 Modified Signature Demonstration Program.” High-
Speed Research: 1994 Sonic Boom Workshop, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 1-3 June 1999.
[57] Maglieri, D., Sothcott, V., and Hicks, J. “Influence of Vehicle Configuration and Flight Profile on X-30 Sonic Booms.” 2nd AIAA
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5224
[58] Maglieri, D. J., Huckel, V., and Henderson, H. R. “Sonic-Boom Measurements for SR-71 Aircraft Operating at Mach Numbers to
3.0 and Altitudes to 24384 Meters,” NASA-TN-D-6823, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C.,
September 1972.
[59] Mason, W. H. "Some Supersonic Aerodynamics," [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
[60] Mason, W. H. "Supersonic Aerodynamics," Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, VA, 31 July 2016.
[61] Matranga, G., and Schweikhard, B. “Early Supersonic Flight and Technology Contributions at Edwards AFB in Retrospect.” AIAA
Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Austin, TX, 11-14
August 2003. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-5766
[62] Merlin, P. W. “SR-71 Blackbird,” Advanced Materials & Processes, Vol. 161, No. 5, pp. 27-29, ASM International, Materials Park,
OH, 01 May 2003.

205
[63] Merlin, P. W. “Design and Development of the Blackbird: Challenges and Lessons Learned.” 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting
including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL,
05-08 January 2009. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-1522
[64] Merlin, P. W. “Mach 3 Legend: Design and Development of the Lockheed Blackbird.” 2012 National Space and Missile Materials
Symposium (NSMMS), [Presentation], Tampa, FL, 25-28 June 2012.
[65] Merlin, P. W. From Archangel to Senior Crown: Design and Development of the Blackbird, Library of Flight, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2008, p. 202.
[66] Miller, J. Lockheed SR-71 (A-12/YF-12/D-21), Aerofax Minigraph, Vol. 1, Aerofax, inc, Arlington, TX, 1985, p. 40.
[67] Miller, J. Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works, Rev. ed., Midland Publishing, Leicester, England, United Kingdom, 1995, p. 216.
[68] Mixon, B., and Chudoba, B. “The Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird - a Senior Capstone Re-Engineering Experience.” 45th AIAA Aerospace
Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 08-11 January 2007.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-698
[69] Mizukami, M., Corpening, G. P., Ray, R. J., Hass, N., Ennix, K. A., and Lazaroff, S. M. “Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment
(LASRE): Aerospace Propulsion Hazard Mitigation Systems.” 34th Joint Propulsion, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Cleveland, OH, 13-15 July 1998.
[70] Mizukami, M., Jones, D., and Weinstock, V. D. “Flow-Field Survey in the Test Region of the SR-71 Aircraft Test Bed Configuration,”
NASA/TM-2000-209025, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, August 2000.
[71] Moes, T. R., Cobleigh, B. R., Conners, T. R., Cox, T. H., Smith, S. C., and Shirakata, N. “Wind-Tunnel Development of an SR-71
Aerospike Rocket Flight Test Configuration,” NASA-TM-4749, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, June 1996.
[72] Moes, T. R., Cobleigh, B. R., Cox, T. H., Conners, T. R., Iliff, K. W., and Powers, B. G. “Flight Stability and Control and Performance
Results from the Linear Aerospike SR-71 Experiment (LASRE).” Atmosphere Flight Mechanics, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Boston, MA, 10-12 August 1998.
[73] Moes, T. R., and Iliff, K. W. “Stability and Control Estimation Flight Test Results for the SR-71 Aircraft with Externally Mounted
Experiments,” NASA/TP-2002-210718, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, June 2002.
[74] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[75] Morgenstern, J. M., Bruns, D. B., and Camacho, P. P. “SR-71A Reduced Sonic Boom Modification Design.” High-Speed Research:
1994 Sonic Boom Workshop, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 01-03 June 1994.
[76] Nicolai, L. M., and Carichner, G. E. Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design Volume I - Aircraft Design, AIAA Education Series,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2010, p. 881.
[77] Norris, S. R., Haering, E. A., and Murray, J. E. “Ground-Based Sensors for the SR-71 Sonic Boom Propagation Experiment.” 1995
NASA High-Speed Research Program Sonic Boom Workshop Volume I, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton,
VA, 12-13 September 1996.
[78] Oliveira, P. D., and Libeau, M. “The Blackbird, Revisited in Blacksburg,” [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean
Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 21 April 2000.
[79] Pedlow, G. W., and Welzenbach, D. E. “Chapter 6 - the U-2's Intended Successor: Project Oxcart, 1956-1968,” The Central
Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance: The U-2 and Oxcart Programs 1954-1974, Skyhorse Publishing, New York
City, NY, 15 March 2016, pp. 259-313.
[80] Peebles, C. Dark Eagles: A History of Top Secret U.S. Aircraft, Revised ed., Presidio Press, Novato, CA, 1999, p. 353.
[81] Poling, H. W. “Sonic Boom Propagation Codes Validated by Flight Test,” NASA-CR-201634, Langley Research Center, NASA,
Hampton, VA, October 1996.
[82] Powers, B. G. “Structural Dynamic Model Obtained from Flight Use with Piloted Simulation and Handling Qualities Analysis,”
NASA-TM-4747, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., 1996.
[83] Reithmaier, L. "Appendix B: Development of the Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird," Mach 1 and Beyond: The Illustrated Guide to High-
Speed Flight, TAB Books, Blue Ridge Summit, PA, 1995, pp. 219-237.
[84] Ricco, P. “The Heart of the SR-71 “Blackbird” : The Mighty J-58 Engine,” 2002. URL: www.aerostories.org
[85] Rich, B. R. “F-12 Series Aircraft Aerodynamic and Thermodynamic Design in Retrospect,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 11, No. 7, pp.
401-406, July 1974. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.60356.
[86] Robarge, D. S. Archangel: CIA's Supersonic A-12 Reconnaissance Aircraft, 2nd ed., Center for the Study of Intelligence, Washington,
D.C., January 2012.
[87] Suhler, P. A. From RAINBOW to GUSTO: Stealth and the Design of the Lockheed Blackbirds, Library of Flight, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2009, p. 284.
[88] Thornborough, A. M., and Davies, P. E. Lockheed Blackbirds, Ian Allan Ltd, Shepperton, Surrey, England, United Kingdom, 1988,
p. 144.
[89] Thorpe, D. G., Escher, D., and Rhodes, R. E. “Sub-Orbital Passenger Aircraft for Space Launch Operations.” 51st AIAA/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 27-29 July 2015.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-3894
[90] Tomaro, R. F., and Wurtzler, K. E. “High Speed Configuration Aerodynamics: SR-71 to SMV.” 17th Applied Aerodynamics
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 28 June 1999. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-3204
[91] Urie, D. “Case Studies in Engineering: The SR-71 Blackbird,” Course AE107, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA,
1991.
[92] Weaver, B. “SR-71 Disintegrates around Pilot During Flight Test,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, 08 August 2005.
[93] Whittenbury, J. R. “Lockheed Blackbirds (A-12, YF-12, M-21, and SR-71),” Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design Volume
2 - Airship Design and Case Studies, AIAA Education Series, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2011,
pp. 431-512.

206
 [94] Xue, H., Khawaja, H., and Moatamedi, M. “Conceptual Design of High Speed Supersonic Aircraft: A Brief Review on SR-71
(Blackbird) Aircraft.” 10th International Conference on Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Aerospace and Sciences, AIP
Publishing, Narvik, Norway, 15-18 July 2014. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4904694
[95] Yenne, B. Area 51 Black Jets: A History of the Aircraft Developed at Groom Lake, America's Secret Aviation Base, New ed., Zenith
Press, Minneapolis, MN, 06 March 2018, p. 192.

A.5. Concorde Bibliography

[1] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[3] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[4] Anon. “History of Concorde G-BBDG (202),” Concorde at Brooklands. http://www.brooklandsconcorde.com/history.html,
[5] Anon. “Concorde: The Supersonic Passenger Aircraft,” Aerospatiale-British Aerospace.
[6] Anon. “BAC-SUD Concorde.” http://www.aemann.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/aircraft/british/concorde.html,
[7] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[8] Anon. “25 Years Ago...Concorde,” p. 62.
[9] Anon. “Additional Considerations for Supersonic Aircraft,” Supersonic Aircraft Fuselage Design.
http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/fuselayout/sstfuse.html,
[10] Anon. “Accident on 25 July 2000 at La Patte d’Oie in Gonesse (95) to the Concorde Registered F-BTSC Operated by Air France,”
Report Translation f-sc000725a, BEA, France.
[11] Anon. “The Supersonic Transport: A Factual Basis for Decision,” American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA,
01 March 1971.
[12] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[13] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[14] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[15] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[16] Anon. “Fuel Leak Seals Concorde’s Fate,” Flight International, p. 4, 06-12 May 2003.
[17] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[18] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[19] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[20] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[21] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[22] Anon. “Concorde Crash Negotiations Break Down.” SPACE.com,
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/business/concorde_breakdown_010108_wg.html, 08 January 2001.
[23] Anon. “Type Certificate Data Sheet No. A45EU,” Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, 09 January 1979.
[24] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[25] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[26] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[27] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[28] Anon. Concorde Flying Manual, Vol. 2(b), British Airways, 11 November 1994.
[29] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[30] Anon. Concorde Flying Manual, Vol. 2(a), British Airways, 11 October 1994.
[31] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[32] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[33] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[34] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[35] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[36] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[37] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[38] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[39] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[40] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[41] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[42] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[43] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[44] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[45] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[46] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[47] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[48] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[49] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[50] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[51] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

207
[52] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[53] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[54] Anon. “Concorde Crashes in France.” SPACE.com, http://www.space.com/news/concorde_crash_000725.html, 25 July 2000.
[55] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[56] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[57] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[58] Anon. “AFCS: Automatic Flight Control System for SST Concorde,” Elliot-Sfena, London, England, 27 May 1971.
[59] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[60] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[61] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[62] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[63] Anon. “Concorde for the Airlines,” Flight International, London, England, 1971.
[64] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[65] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[66] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[67] Anon. “Concorde Engineering Notes Sections 1, 2 & 3,” Commercial Aircraft Division, British Aircraft Corporation, Bristol,
England, 1975.
[68] Anon. Concorde TSS Standards: Supersonic Transport Aircraft, 1976.
[69] Anon. “Noise-Induced Building Vibrations Caused by Concorde and Conventional Aircraft Operations at Dulles and Kennedy
International Airports - Final Report,” NASA-TM-78769, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 1978.
[70] Anon. “Concorde.” Aircraft Group, British Aerospace, Weybridge, England, 1980, p. 39.
[71] Anon. “Study of High-Speed Civil Transports,” NASA-CR-4235, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.
C., 1989.
[72] Anon. Concorde Flying Manual, Vol. 1, British Airways, 1990.
[73] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[74] Anon. U.S. Supersonic Commercial Aircraft: Assessing NASA’s High Speed Research Program, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C., 1997.
[75] Anon. “Concorde,” [Lecture Slides], Cranfield University, Cranfield, England, 1997.
[76] Anon. “A Study of Concorde Performance,” AAE 190, 2000.
[77] Anon. “Concorde: The Supersonic Passenger Aircraft,” British Aerospace, 2005.
[78] Anon. “De Concorde Aux Nouveaux Projets D’avions Supersoniques,” AAE Dossier #46, Academie de L’Air et de L’Espace, 2019.
[79] Anon. “Design of a New Generation Supersonic Transport Aircraft,” 2019-3332-AJTE-MEC, 2019.
[80] Anon. “Concorde Noise-Induced Building Vibrations: John F. Kennedy International Airport - Report No. 3,” NASA-TM-78727,
Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, April 1978.
[81] Anon. Part 1: Advanced High-Speed Aircraft, Impact of Advanced Air Transport Technology, Office of Technology Assessment,
Washington, D. C., April 1980, p. 93.
[82] Anon. “Concorde Noise-Induced Building Vibrations, Montgomery County, Maryland - Report No. 3,” NASA-TM-X-73947,
Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, August 1976.
[83] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[84] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[85] Anon. “Concorde Noise-Induced Building Vibrations, Sully Plantation - Report No. 2, Chantilly, Virginia,” NASA-TM-X-73926,
Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, June 1976.
[86] Anon. “Concorde Noise-Induced Building Vibrations for Sully Plantation, Chantilly, Virginia,” NASA-TM-X-73919, Langley
Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, June 1976.
[87] Anon. “21 Years of Supersonic Majesty,” Aerospace Magazine, pp. 8-12, March 1997.
[88] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[89] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[90] Anon. “Concorde Noise-Induced Building Vibrations: International Airport Dulles - Final Report,” NASA-TM-74083, Langley
Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, September 1977.
[91] Becker, H. J. Concorde, Flugzeuge Die Geschichte Machten, Motorbuch Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany, 1991, p. 149.
[92] Beniada, F., and Fraile, M. Concorde, Zenith Press, Minneapolis, MN, 2006.
[93] Berger, J. “A Comparison of Predictions Obtained from Wind Tunnel Tests and the Results from Cruising Flight (Airbus and
Concorde),” NASA-TM-75238, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., August 1979.
[94] Bohme, F., Cadete, S., and Dannet, G. "Concorde 2.0: On-Going Supersonic Projects." TMAL02 Expert Conference 2019, Linkoping
University, Linkoping, Sweden, 2019.
[95] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[96] Burdun, I. Y. “Virtual Test and Evaluation of Air France Concorde Flight No. AF4590: Preliminary Case Study,” 26 July 2000.
[97] Burgess, E. “Concorde Inaugurates the Supersonic Era.” 9th Annual Meeting and Technical Display, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Washington, D. C., 08-10 January 1973. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1973-16
[98] Cado, and Broihanne. “The Flight Control System for the Concorde Supersonic Civil Transport Aircraft,” Library Translation No.
1615, Royal Aircraft Establishment, July 1973.
[99] Calder, P. H., and Gupta, P. C. “Engine Options for Supersonic Cruise Aircraft.” AIAA/SAE 14th Joint Propulsion Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Las Vegas, NV, 25-27 July 1978. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1978-1054
[100] Calvert, B. Flying Concorde, Airlife Publishing, Shrewsbury, England, 1989.
[101] Candel, S. “Concorde and the Future of Supersonic Transport,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 59-68, 2004.
[102] Carioscia, S. A., Locke, J. A., Boyd, I. D., Lewis, M. J., and Hallion, R. P. "Commercial Development of Civilian Supersonic
Aircraft," IDA Science & Technology Policy Institute, Washington, D. C., August 2019.
[103] Carlier, P., Debelmas, C., Pilon, J. C., and Velot-Lerou, A. “Avant-Projet D’un Avion De Transport Commercial Supersonique,”
Aerospatiale, 1992.
[104] Castel, F. “Concorde: A Space Age Relic.” SPACE.com, http://www.space.com/news/concorde_techno_000725.html, 15 June 2005.

208
[105] Chudoba, B. “Investigation of Inherent Slender-Body Characteristics Using the CONCORDE Simulator,” Cranfield University,
Cranfield, England, 27 February 1997.
[106] Chudoba, B. “Primary Control Surfaces on Supersonic Transport Aircraft,” Final Thesis, Fachbereich Flugzeugbau, Fachhochschule
Aachen, Aachen, Germany, 1994.
[107] Chudoba, B., Coleman, G., Oza, A., and Czysz, P. A. “What Price Supersonic Speed? A Design Anatomy of Supersonic
Transportation Part 1,” The Aeronautical Journal, March 2008.
[108] Clark, F. G., and Gibson, A. Concorde: The Story of the World’s Most Advanced Passenger Aircraft, Paradise Press.
[109] Coen, P. G. “The Effect of Advanced Technology on the Second-Generation SST.” AIAA/AHS/ASEE Aircraft Systems, Design and
Technology Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-22 October 1986.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1986-2672
[110] Collard, D. “Concorde Airframe Design and Development,” SAE-TP-912162. Aerospace Technology Conference and Exposition,
SAE International, Long Beach, CA, 23-26 September 1991.
[111] Cormery, G. "Supersonic Transport Vis-a-Vis Energy Savings," NASA-TM-75464, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Washington, D.C., September 1979.
[112] Cowell, A. “British and French to Halt Concorde Flights.” The New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/business/worldbusiness/10CND-CONC.html, 10 April 2003.
[113] Curwen, K. R. “Turbine Blade Pyrometer System in the Control of the Concorde Engine,” Instrumentation for Airbreathing
Propulsion, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1971, pp. 399-407.
[114] Davies, R. E. G. Fallacies and Fantasies of Air Transport History, Paladwr Press, McLean, VA, 1994.
[115] Davies, R. E. G. Supersonic (Airliner) Non-Sense: A Case Study in Applied Market Research, Paladwr Press, McLean, VA, 1998.
[116] Domini, A., and Chicot, J. "Case Study Report from Concorde to Airbus," Mission-Oriented R&I Policies: In-Depth Case Studies,
European Commission, February 2018.
[117] Donin, R. B. “Safety Regulation of the Concorde Supersonic Transport: Realistic Confinement of the National Environmental Policy
Act,” Transportation Law Journal, Vol. 8, pp. 47-69, 1976.
[118] Dornheim, M. A. “Concorde Report Uncovers Inflight Fire in 1979 Incident,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 52-54, 04
February 2002.
[119] Dornheim, M. A. “Engine, Fuel Tank Show Damage in 1979 Concorde Incident,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 75, 04
September 2000.
[120] Dornheim, M. A. “Concorde Had a Chance until 2nd Engine Failed,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 54-55, 11 September
2000.
[121] Dornheim, M. A. “Details Emerge of Earlier Fuel Tank Penetrations,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 33-34, 28 August
2000.
[122] Dornheim, M. A., and Morrocco, J. D. “BA Plans Concorde Ops into Next Decade,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 39-40,
14 August 2000.
[123] Dornheim, M. A., and Sparaco, P. “Concorde Probe Finds Accident Oddities,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 440-441, 15
January 2001.
[124] Doyle, A. “Twenty Years Young,” Flight International, pp. 41-43, 07-13 February 1996.
[125] Doyle, A., Moxon, J., and Kingsley-Jones, M. “Broken Water Deflector Probed in French Concorde Crash Inquiry,” Flight
International, pp. 4-5, 08-14 August 2000.
[126] Driver, C. “What Gross Weight and Range for an Advanced HSCT?”. High-Speed Research: Sonic Boom Volume II, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 25-27 February 1992.
[127] Dubin, A. P. “Supersonic Transport Market Penetration Model.” AIAA Conference on Air Transportation: Technical Perspectives
and Forecasts, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Los Angeles, CA, 21-24 August 1978.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1978-1557
[128] Edwards, G. “Review Lecture: The Technical Aspects of Supersonic Civil Transport Aircraft,” Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 275, No. 1254, pp. 529-565, 21 March 1974.
[129] Emling, S. “Concorde Is Grounded after a Life of High-Tech and Low Returns.” SMH,
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/30/1054177726628.html?oneclick=true, 31 May 2003.
[130] Field, E. J. “Appendix K: British Aircraft Corporation/Aerospatiale Concorde,” Flying Qualities of Transport Aircraft: Precognitive
or Compensatory? College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, Cranfield, England, June 1995, pp. 283-288.
[131] Fiorino, F. “Concorde Tire Blowout Concerns Date Back to Late ‘70s,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 36-37, 31 July 2000.
[132] Flottau, J. “Concorde Victim Cases Could End up in U.S.,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 75-76, 04 September 2000.
[133] Forsgren, R. “The Concorde Accident: A Case Study,” APPEL, Knowledge Services, NASA.
[134] Funtanilla, J. G. “Supersonic Commercial Aircraft,” American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 13 December 2016.
[135] Gardner, J. H., and Rogers, P. H. “Thermospheric Propagation of Sonic Booms from the Concorde Supersonic Transport,” NRL-
MR-3904, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D. C., 14 February 1979.
[136] George, A. R., and Kim, Y. N. “High-Altitude Long-Range Sonic Boom Propagation,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 16, No. 9, pp. 637-
639, September 1979.
[137] Gillman, P. "Supersonic Bust - the Story of the Concorde," The Atlantic Monthly; Vol. 239, No. 1, pp. 72-81.
https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/77jan/gillman.htm, January 1977.
[138] H. O. F. “Concorde Then, Now and in the Future,” Guild News, No. 106, pp. 12-14, The Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators,
London, England, January 1998.
[139] Hamilton, J. “Concorde - An Exercise in Collaboration.” AIAA 5th Annual Meeting and Technical Display, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Philadelphia, PA, 21-24 October 1968. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1968-990
[140] Harpur, N. “Structural Testing of Concorde Aircraft: Further Report on United Kingdom Tests.” Advanced Approaches to Fatigue
Evaluation, Sixth ICAF Symposium, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Miami Beach, FL, 13-14 May 1971.
[141] Harpur, N. F. “Concorde Structural Development.” AIAA Commercial Aircraft Design and Operation Meeting, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Los Angeles, CA, 12-14 June 1967. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1967-402

209
[142] Harpur, N. F. “Structural Development of the Concorde: An Account of the Design Philosophy Adopted to Meet the New
Considerations Involved in the Construction of a Supersonic Transport,” Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 40,
No. 3, pp. 18-25, March 1968. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb034351.
[143] Harriss, J. A. “The Concorde Redemption: Can the Superplane Make a Comeback?”. Air & Space Magazine, Smithsonian Institute,
Washington, D. C., August/September 2001.
[144] Henne, P. A. “Case for Small Supersonic Civil Aircraft,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 765-774, May-June 2005.
https://doi.org/10.2514/1.5119.
[145] Hitch, H. P. Y. “Concorde Dynamics - A Review.” AIAA/ASME/SAE 13th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Antonio, TX, 10-12 April 1972. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1972-
381
[146] Horinouchi, S. “Conceptual Design of a Low Boom SSBJ.” 43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 10-13 January 2005. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-1018
[147] Horwitch, M. Clipped Wings: The American SST Conflict, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982.
[148] Humi, P. “Supersonic Concorde Wings Its Way to 30,” Travel Guide News. CNN,
http://www.cnn.com/TRAVEL/NEWS/9903/02/aging.concorde/, 02 March 1999.
[149] Johnston, J., Trivellini, G., Rodriguez, R., Kirkby, N., and Parraguirre, C. “Revisiting the Concorde: A New Approach to Delta-
Winged Flight,” 22 July 2010.
[150] Kingsley-Jones, M. “Retrospective: Concorde as Viewed from the Flightdeck,” Flight International.
https://www.flightglobal.com/programmes/retrospective-concorde-as-viewed-from-the-flightdeck/131502.article, 01 March 2019.
[151] Kingsley-Jones, M. “The Fast Show,” Flight International, pp. 36-37, 06-12 November 2001.
[152] Kingsley-Jones, M. “BA Cautious on Concorde Plans,” Flight International, p. 27, 12-18 February 2002.
[153] Kingsley-Jones, M. “Flawed Icon,” Flight International, pp. 34-45, 21-27 October 2003.
[154] Kloster, M. "Die Bewertung Kunftiger Uberschall-Verkehrs-Flugzeuge Mittels Des Schallknallkriteriums," D-85747. DLGR -
Workshop "Bewertung von Flugzeugen", Technische Universitat Munchen Luftfahrttechnik, Garching, Germany, 26-27 October
1998.
[155] Koff, B. L., and Koff, S. G. “Engine Design and Challenges for the High Mach Transport,” AIAA-2007-5344. 43rd
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Cincinnati,
OH, 08-11 July 2007. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-5344
[156] Lassere, J. "ICARE - No 34 Summer 1965 Why Did the "CONCORDE" Project Have to Be Saved?," Cap Avenir CONCORDE - The
Shared Passion. http://cap-avenir-concorde.fr/les-dossiers-de-presse/icare/icare-n-34-ete-1965-pourquoi-le-projet-concorde-devait-
etre-sauve,
[157] Learmount, D. “Damage Leads to Checks for Concorde Elevons,” Flight International, p. 17, 03-09 June 1998.
[158] Learmount, D. “‘Poor Repair’ to DC-10 Was Cause of Concorde Crash,” Flight International, p. 4, 24-30 October 2000.
[159] Learmount, D., Doyle, A., and Moxon, J. “Concorde Grounded: Investigations Shed New Light on Tyre and Engines,” Flight
International, p. 6, 22-28 August 2000.
[160] Learmount, D., and Moxon, J. “The Concorde Dilemma,” Flight International, p. 39, 12-18 September 2000.
[161] Learmount, D., and Moxon, J. “Trials of Strength,” Flight International, pp. 34-35, 23-29 January 2001.
[162] Leney, D., and Macdonald, D. Aerospatial/Bac Concorde, Haynes Owners’ Workshop Manual, Haynes Publishing, Somerset,
England, July 2010.
[163] Lewis, R. Supersonic Secrets: The Unofficial Biography of Concorde, Expose, London, England, 2003.
[164] Leyman, C. S. “A Review of the Technical Development of Concorde,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 185-
238, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-0421(86)90007-2.
[165] Leyman, C. S., and Scotland, R. L. “The Effect of Engine Failure at Supersonic Speeds on a Slender Aircraft - Predicted and Actual,”
AGARD-CP-119, April 1972.
[166] Maglieri, D., Sothcott, V., and Hicks, J. “Influence of Vehicle Configuration and Flight Profile on X-30 Sonic Booms.” AIAA 2nd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5224
[167] Mann, P. “Concorde Sparks Debate on Criminalizing Crashes,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 41-42, 14 August 2000.
[168] Marlow, P. Concorde: Last Summer, Thames & Hudson, London, England, 2006.
[169] Mason, W. H. "Some Supersonic Aerodynamics," [Presentation], Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
[170] Mason, W. H. "Supersonic Aerodynamics," Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, VA, 31 July 2016.
[171] McKim, F. R. Vol Supersonique: De Bernoulli a Concorde, 1974.
[172] Mckinlay, R. M. “Concorde Systems in Airline Operation,” AIAA-76-925. AIAA Aircraft Systems and Technology Meeting,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dallas, TX, 27-29 September 1976. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1976-925
[173] McLean, F. E. “Supersonic Cruise Technology,” NASA-SP-472, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.
C., 1985.
[174] Ménéxiadis, G., and Varnier, J. “Long-Range Propagation of Sonic Boom from the Concorde Airliner: Analyses and Simulations,”
Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 45, No. 5, pp. 1612-1618, September-October 2008. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.33899.
[175] Merritt, L. R. “Concorde Landing Requirement Evaluation Tests,” AD/A-000 014, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.
C., August 1974.
[176] Morgan, M. “A New Shape in the Sky,” Aeronautical Journal, January 1972.
[177] Morrocco, J. D. “BA Keeps Its Fleet of Concordes Flying,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 31, 07 August 2000.
[178] Morrocco, J. D. “Technical Team Forges Concorde Work Plan,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 44-45, 13 November 2000.
[179] Morrocco, J. D. “BA Tests Concorde Safety Modification,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 46-47, 23 July 2001.
[180] Morrocco, J. D., and Sparaco, P. “Concorde Team Activates Return-to-Flight Plan,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 38-40,
22 January 2001.

210
[181] Nangia, R. K. “Assessment of Air Vehicle Design Evolution over Mach Number and Altitude Operating Envelope with and without
S&C Considerations as Part of the Design Synthesis,” AFRL-AFOSR-UK-TR-2011-0035, Air Force Research Laboratory, August
2011.
[182] Nangia, R. K., Palmer, M. E., and Doe, R. H. “Towards Design of Mach 1.6+ Cruise Aircraft,” AIAA-2004-5070. 22nd AIAA Applied
Aerodynamics Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Providence, RI, 16-19 August 2004.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-5070
[183] Nguyen, V. P., and Perrais, J. P. “Fatigue Tests on Big Structure Assemblies of Concorde Aircraft.” Advanced Approaches to Fatigue
Evaluation, Sixth ICAF Symposium, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Miami Beach, FL, 13-14 May 1971.
[184] Orlebar, C. The Concorde Story, Fully Revised ed., The Hamlyn Publishing Group, London, England, 1994.
[185] Orlebar, C. The Concorde Story: 21 Years in Service, New ed., Osprey Publishing, Oxford, England, 1997.
[186] Orlebar, C. The Concorde Story, Sixth ed., Osprey Publishing, Botley, Oxford, England, 2004.
[187] Owen, K. Concorde: New Shape in the Sky, Jane’s Publishing Company, London, England, 1982.
[188] Owen, K. Concorde and the Americans, Smithsonian History of Aviation Series, Smithsonian Institution Press, 1997.
[189] Owen, K. Concorde: Story of a Supersonic Pioneer, Science Museum, London, England, 2001.
[190] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[191] Pinet, J. “Aircraft Simulation Application to the Development of the Concorde Project,” AIAA-70-923. AIAA 2nd Aircraft Design
and Operations Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Los Angeles, CA, 20-22 July 1970.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1970-923
[192] Plotkin, K. J., and Maglieri, D. J. “Sonic Boom Research: History and Future,” AIAA-2003-3575. 33rd AIAA Fluid Dynamics
Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 23-26 June 2003.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-3575
[193] Powell, C. A., and McCurdy, D. A. “Comparison of Low-Frequency Noise Levels of the Concorde Supersonic Transport with Other
Commercial Service Airplanes,” NASA-TM-78736, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., October
1978.
[194] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[195] Rech, J., and Leyman, C. A Case Study by Aerospatiale and British Aerospace on the Concorde, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, New York, 1980.
[196] Reithmaier, L. Mach 1 and Beyond: The Illustrated Guide to High-Speed Flight, TAB Books, Blue Ridge Summit, PA, 1995.
[197] Renaudie, J. “Concorde and C.E.V. - Cooperation between Firms and Government Offices or Establishment in the Flight Test
Program - Certification Flights,” AIAA-71-784. AIAA 3rd Aircraft Design and Operations Meeting, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 12-14 July 1971. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1971-784
[198] Reuters. “Concorde - An Uneconomic Triumph.” SPACE.com, http://www.space.com/news/concorde_sidebar_000725_wg.html, 25
July 2000.
[199] Richter, G., and Hoch, R. “Concept and Characteristics of the Concorde Flight Silencer.” AIAA Commercial Aircraft Design and
Operation Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Los Angeles, CA, 12-14 June 1967.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1967-391
[200] Richter, G., and Hoch, R. “Concept and Characteristics of the Concorde Exhaust Noise Suppressor,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 6, No.
2, pp. 98-101, March 1969.
[201] Ripley, E. L. “The Philosophy Which Underlies the Structural Tests of a Supersonic Transport Aircraft with Particular Attention to
the Thermal Cycle.” Advanced Approaches to Fatigue Evaluation, Sixth ICAF Symposium, Miami Beach, FL, 13-14 May 1971.
[202] Robinson, W. “Coming of Age,” Flight International, pp. 46-47, 16-22 December 2003.
[203] Salmon, M. “Concorde and the Aeronautical Research,” NASA-TM-76973, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Washington, D. C., August 1982.
[204] Satre, P. “Supersonic Air Transport - True Problems and Misconceptions,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 3-12, Jan.-Feb.
1970. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.44113.
[205] Seebass, A. “The Prospects for Commercial Supersonic Transport,” AIAA-94-0017. 32nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 10-13 January 1994. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1994-17
[206] Seebass, R. “History and Economics of, and Prospects for, Commercial Supersonic Transport.” Fluid Dynamics Research on
Supersonic Aircraft, RTO AVT, Rhode-Saint-Genese, Belgium, 25-29 May 1998.
[207] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[208] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[209] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[210] Shackleton, E. Bristol Aero Collection Celebrates 25 Years of Concorde, Bristol Aero Collection, 1994.
[211] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[212] Sieker, B. “Why-Because-Analysis Tools and the Concorde Accident.” First Bieleschweig Workshop on Systems Engineering, RVS
Group, Bielefeld, Germany, 2002.
[213] Siuru, B., and Busick, J. D. Future Flight: The Next Generation of Aircraft Technology, 2nd ed., TAB AERO, Blue Ridge Summit,
PA, 1994.
[214] Skinner, S. Concorde, Midland Publishing, Surrey, England, 2009.
[215] Smith, D. G., Yamartino, R. J., Benkley, C., Isaacs, R., Lee, J., and Chang, D. “Concorde Air Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Program at Dulles International Airport,” Vol. 1, FAA-AEQ-77-14, Office of Environmental Quality, Federal Aviation
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D. C., December 1977.
[216] Smith, M. J. T., Lowrie, B. W., Brooks, J. R., and Bushell, K. W. “Future Supersonic Transport Noise - Lessons from the Past,”
AIAA-88-2989. AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 24th Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Boston, MA, 11-13 July 1988. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1988-2989
[217] Sparaco, P. “Concorde Tire Blowout Expected to Stir Controversy,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 74, 04 September 2000.
[218] Sparaco, P. “Concorde Accident to Affect Paris Airports,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 32, 07 August 2000.
[219] Sparaco, P. “France’s Concordes Still Grounded,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 28-30, 07 August 2000.
[220] Sparaco, P. “A Concorde Comeback Is Becoming More Elusive,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 56-57, 11 September
2000.

211
[221] Sparaco, P. “Concorde Fuel Line Testing Progresses,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 34-35, 12 February 2001.
[222] Sparaco, P. “Pace of Concorde Probe Angers British,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 43-44, 13 November 2000.
[223] Sparaco, P. “Concorde Investigation Focuses on Burst Tire,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 38-39, 14 August 2000.
[224] Sparaco, P. “Judging the Judiciary,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 49, 17 October 2005.
[225] Sparaco, P. “Upgraded Concorde Awaits New Flight Tests,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 96-98, 18 June 2001.
[226] Sparaco, P. “Concorde Crash Upsets French Airport Strategy,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 43-44, 18 September 2000.
[227] Sparaco, P. “Official Optimism Grows for Concorde’s Return,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 41, 19 February 2001.
[228] Sparaco, P. “French, British Prepare Fresh Concorde Start,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 42, 27 August 2001.
[229] Sparaco, P. “Franco-British Team Plans Concorde Modifications,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 32-33, 28 August 2000.
[230] Sparaco, P., and Dornheim, M. A. “Final Concorde Report Supports Past Findings,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 46-48,
28 January 2002.
[231] Sparaco, P., Fiorino, F., and Dornheim, M. A. “Concorde Troubles Began on Takeoff Roll,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp.
32-34, 31 July 2000.
[232] Sparaco, P., and Flottau, J. “End of an Era,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, p. 34, 14 April 2003.
[233] Stratford, A. H. Air Transport Economics in the Supersonic Era, 2nd ed., The MacMillan Press, London, England, 1973.
[234] Strohmeyer, D., and Seubert, R. "Improvement of a Preliminary Design and Optimization Program for the Evaluation of Future
Aircraft Projects," AIAA-98-4828. 7th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, St. Louis, MO, 15-18 September 1998.
[235] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[236] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[237] Sun, Y., and Smith, H. “Sonic Boom and Drag Evaluation of Supersonic Jet Concepts,” AIAA-2018-3278. 2018 AIAA/CEAS
Aeroacoustics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Atlanta, GA, 25-29 June 2018.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-3278
[238] Swadling, S. J. “Commercial Supersonic Operations - Thirteen Years of Experience with Concorde,”
[239] Swadling, S. J. “Prospects for a Second Generation Supersonic Transport.” ICAS 1992, International Council of the Aeronautical
Sciences, Beijing, China, 1992.
[240] Syon, G. “Consuming Concorde,” Technology and Culture, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 650-654, July 2003.
[241] Tanner, C. S., and McLeod, N. J. “Preliminary Measurements of Take-Off and Landing Noise from a New Instrumented Range.”
NASA Conference on Aircraft Operating Problems, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 10-12 May 1965.
[242] Taverna, M. A., and Morrocco, J. D. “Concorde Moves Closer to Resuming Service,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 43-
44, 30 July 2001.
[243] Taylor, J. W. “Concorde,” Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 19??-??, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft Publishing, England, United
Kingdom, pp. 104-106.
[244] Thorpe, D. G., Escher, D., and Rhodes, R. E. “Sub-Orbital Passenger Aircraft for Space Launch Operations,” AIAA-2015-3894. 51st
AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 27-29 July 2015.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-3894
[245] Trubshaw, B. Concorde: The inside Story, Sutton Publishing, Gloucestershire, England, 2000.
[246] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[247] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[248] Truscott, P. R., Dyer, C. S., and Flatman, J. C. “Surface Activation of Concorde by Be-7.” First Post-Retrieval Symposium, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center, NASA, 1992.
[249] Turnill, R. Celebrating Concorde, Ian Allen Publishing, Surrey, England, 1994.
[250] Walsh, D. “Concorde: Its History and Tragedy,” World Socialist Web Site. The International Committee of the Fourth International,
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jul2000/con1-j28_prn.shtml, 28 July 2000.
[251] Webber, D. “Point-to-Point People with Purpose—Exploring the Possibility of a Commercial Traveler Market for Point-to-Point
Suborbital Space Transportation,” AA-2-2011-22. 2nd International IAA Conference on Private Human Access to Space, Arcachon,
France, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2012.04.046
[252] Wilde, M. G., and Cormery, G. “The Aerodynamic Derivation of the Concorde Wing.” 11th Anglo-American Aeronautical
Conference, London, England, 08-12 September 1969.
[253] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[254] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[255] Wolz, R. “A Summary of Recent Supersonic Vehicle Studies at Gulfstream Aerospace,” AIAA-2003-0558. 41st Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 06-09 January 2003.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2003-558
[256] Woolley, P. K. “A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Concorde Project,” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.
225-239, September 1972.
[257] Zaitsev, M. ““Consent” (“Concorde”) Does Not Exist Any More “ “Tupolev” PSC in Mass Media. Public-Stock Company Tupolev,
http://www.tupolev.ru/English/Show.asp?SectionID=60,

212
A.6. Sanger-II Bibliography
[1] Anon. “Revell Sanger 3-View Drawing.”
[2] Anon. Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives, 1st ed., Books for Business, 24 May 2002.
[3] Anon. “Reusable Launch Vehicle Programs and Concepts,” Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST),
January 1998.
[4] Anon. “Aerospace Plane Technology: Research and Development Efforts in Europe,” Report to the Chairman, Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, GAO/NSIAD-91-194, National Security and International Affairs Division,
United States General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., July 1991.
[5] Bardenhagan, A. “Massenabschatzung Und Gesamtauslegung Der Unterstufe Von Hyperschall-Raumtransportern,” Dr.-Ing,
Dissertation, ZLR-Forschungsbericht 98-04, Institut fur Flugzeugbau und Leichtbau, Technische, Universitat Braunschweig,
Zentrum fur Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik, Braunschweig, Germany, 05 November 1997.
[6] Bardenhagen, A., Kossira, H., and Heinze, W. “Weight Estimation of Hypersonic Waveriders within the Integrated Design Program
PrADO-Hy,” AIAA-96-4546. Space Plane and Hypersonic Systems and Technology Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.
[7] Bardenhagen, A., Kossira, H., and Heinze, W. “Interdisciplinary Design of Modern Hypersonic Waveriders Using the Integrated
Program PrADO-Hy,” ICAS-94-1.4.1, ICAS 1994. 19th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences,
Anaheim, CA, 18-23 September 1994.
[8] Bayer, M. “Comparative Assessment of Rocket Propelled SSTO Concepts,” AIAA-98-1555. AIAA 8th International Space Planes
and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30
April 1998.
[9] Berens, T. M., and Bissinger, N. C. “Study on Forebody Precompression Effects and Inlet Entry Conditions for Hypersonic Vehicles,”
AIAA-96-4531. AIAA 7th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.
[10] Berens, T. M., and Bissinger, N. C. “Forebody Precompression Performance of Hypersonic Flight Test Vehicles.” AIAA 8th
International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[11] Bertin, J. J. Hypersonic Aerothermodynamics, AIAA Education Series, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Washington, D.C, 1994.
[12] Beyes, G. “Eugen Sanger: Astronautical Pioneer and Trailblazer,” EIR Science & Technology, Vol. 14, No. 9, pp. 22-28, 27 February
1987.
[13] Breitsamter, C., Laschka, B., Zahringer, C., and Sachs, G. “Wind Tunnel Tests for Separation Dynamics Modeling of a Two-Stage
Hypersonic Vehicle,” AIAA-2001-1811. AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS 10th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001.
[14] Bruhl, C., Crutzen, P., Grabl, H., and Kley, D. “The Impact of the Spacecraft System SANGER in the Composition of the Middle
Atmosphere,” AIAA-92-5071. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[15] Buhl, W., Ebert, K., and Herbst, H. “Optimal Ascent Trajectories for Advanced Launch Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5008. AIAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992.
[16] Chiesa, S., Russo, G., Fioriti, M., and Corpino, S. “Status and Perspectives of Hypersonic Systems and Technologies with Emphasis
on the Role of Sub-Orbital Flight,” Aerotecnica Missili & Spazio, Vol. 94, No. 2, pp. 81-90, April-July 2015.
[17] Chiesa, S. G., and Maggiore, P. “Hypersonic Aircraft Conceptual Design Methodology,” ICAS-94-1.4.2. 19th Congress of the
International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Anaheim, CA, 18-23 September 1994.
[18] Decker, K., and Laschka, B. “Unsteady Aerodynamics of a Hypersonic Vehicle During a Separation Phase,” AIAA-2001-1852.
AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS 10th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001.
[19] Dujarric, C. “Proposed Orientations for Future European Launchers Concepts and Associated Aerothermodynamics Technology
Development Requirements.” 3rd European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles, ESTEC, Noordwiik, The
Netherlands, 24-26 November 1998.

213
[20] Dujarric, C. “Possible Future European Launchers - A Process of Convergence,” ESA Bulletin 97, February 1999.
[21] Dujarric, C., Caporicci, M., Kuczera, H., and Sacher, P. “Conceptual Studies and Technology Requirements for a New Generation
of European Launchers - A FESTIP Status Report,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 41, No. 4-10, pp. 219-228, August-November 1997.
[22] Eggers, T. “Aerodynamischer Entwurf Von Wellenreiter-Konfigurationen Fur Hyperschallflugzeuge,” Dr.-Ing. Disseration,
Forschungsbericht 1999-10, Institut fur Entwurfsaerodynamik des DLR, Deutsches Zentrum fur Luft- und Raumfahrt, e. V.,
Braunschweig, Germany, 08 December 1998.
[23] Eggers, T., and Novelli, P. “Design Studies for a Mach 8 Dual Mode Ramjet Flight Test Vehicle,” AIAA-99-4877. 9th International
Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk,
VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[24] Eggers, T., Radespiel, R., Waibel, M., and Hummel, D. “Flow Phenomena of Hypersonic Waveriders and Validation of Design
Methods,” AIAA-93-5045. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[25] Engler, V., Coors, D., and Jacob, D. “Optimization of a Space Transportation System Including Design Sensitivities,” AIAA-98-
1553. AIAA 8th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[26] Fossati, F. A., and Denaro, A. “A RLV Concept Selection from the Thermo-Mechanical Outlook the Lessons Learned in FESTIP,”
AIAA-99-4976. 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[27] Furniss, T. “Sanger Aerospaceplane Gains Momentum,” Flight International, pp. 39-41, 12 August 1989.
[28] Gonzalez, P. “Influence of the Abort Capability in Reusable Systems Reliability. FESTIP Results Overview,” AIAA-99-4928. 9th
International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[29] Grallert, H. “Synthesis of a FESTIP Air-Breathing TSTO Space Transportation System,” AIAA-99-4884. 9th International Space
Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA,
01-05 November 1999.
[30] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[31] Grallert, H., and Hermann, O. “Generic Derivation of a Promising Air-Breathing TSTO Space Transportation System - from Sanger
to FESTIP,” AIAA-98-1552. 8th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[32] Grallert, H., and Keller, K. “Metallic Thermal Protection Concept for Aerodynamic Controlled Hypersonic Vehicles,” ICAS-88-
2.3.2. 16th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Jerusalem, Israel, 28 August - 02 September 1988.
[33] Grallert, H., and Kuczera, H. “Kick-Stages - A Mandatory Element of Future Reusable Space Transportation Systems,” AIAA-99-
4885. 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[34] Grallert, H., and Vollmer, K. “Conceptual Design of the Thermal Protection System for the Reference Concept SANGER by Means
of Advanced Methods,” AIAA-93-5085. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[35] Gruhn, P. “Einfluss Einer Heckklappe Auf Die Dusenstromung Im Hyperschall,” PhD Dissertation, Rheinisch-Westfalischen
Technischen Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen), Aachen, Germany, 30 July 2004.
[36] Hald, H., Petersen, D., Reimer, T., Ruhle, F., Winkelmann, P., and Weihs, H. “Development of a CMC-Based TPS for Two
Representative Specimens of Cryogenic Tank RLVs,” AIAA-98-1609. AIAA 8th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems
and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[37] Hall, R. C. “Essays on the History of Rocketry and Astronautics: Proceedings of the Third through the Sixth History Symposia of the
International Academy of Astronautics,” Vol. 1, NASA-CP-2014, 1977.
[38] Hanel, D., Krause, E., and Henze, A. "Supersonic and Hypersonic Flow Computations for the Research Configuration ELAC I and
Comparison to Experimental Data," Zeitschrift fur Flugwissenschaften und Weltraumforschung, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 90-98, 1993.
[39] Hannigan, R. J. Spaceflight in the Era of Aero-Space Planes, Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, FL, 1994.
[40] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[41] Haug, T., Ehrmann, U., and Knabe, H. “Air Intake Ramp Made from C/Sic Via the Polymer Route for Hypersonic Propulsion
Systems.” AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[42] Heitmeir, F., Lederer, R., and Herrmann, O. “German Hypersonic Technology Programme - Airbreathing Propulsion Activities,”
AIAA-92-5057. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[43] Hendrick, P. “SSTO & TSTO LOX Collection System Performances: Influence of LOX Plant Architecture,” ICAS-96-5.7.5. 20th
Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Sorrento, Italy, September 1996.
[44] Hendrick, P., and Saint-Mard, M. “Sanger-Type T.S.T.O. Using in-Flight LOX Collection,” AIAA-97-2858. 33rd Joint Propulsion
Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 06-09 July 1997.
[45] Herholz, J. “European Space Transportation System Projects Since 1998.” 9th International Mars Society Conference, [Presentation],
Washington, D.C., 03-06 August 2006.
[46] Hirschel, E. “Aerothermodynamics and Propulsion Integration in the SANGER Technology Programme,” AIAA-91-5041. AIAA 3rd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December
1991.
[47] Hirschel, E. “The Hypersonics Technology Development and Verification Strategy of the German Hypersonics Technology
Programme,” AIAA-93-5072. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[48] Hirschel, E., Arlinger, B., Lind, I., and Norstrund, H. “German-Scandinavian Cooperation in the Field of Aerothermodynamics of
the German Hypersonics Technology Programme,” AIAA-95-6073. AIAA 6th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.

214
[49] Hirschel, E. H., and Kuczera, H. “The FESTIP Technology Development and Verification Plan,” AIAA-98-1567. 8th AIAA
International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[50] Hirschel, E. H., and Kuczera, H. “Technologische Herausforderungen Des Hyperschallfluges: Das Technologieentwicklungs- Und
Verifikationskonzept Des Deutschen Hyperschalltechnologie - Programms 1988-1995,” EHHuHk/RAeS/25.4.2013, [Presentation],
DGLR Vortrag, Hamburg, Germany, 28 November 2013.
[51] Hirschel, E. H., Prem, H., and Madelung, G. Luftfahrtforschung in Deutschland, Band 30, Die deutsche Luftfahrt, Buchreihe uber
die Entwicklungsgeschichte der deutschen Luftfahrttechnik, Bernard & Graefe, Bonn, Germany, 2001.
[52] Hirschel, E. H., Prem, H., and Madelung, G. Aeronautical Research in Germany - from Lilienthal until Today, Springer Publisher,
2004.
[53] Hirschel, E. H., and Weiland, C. Selected Aerothermodynamic Design Problems of Hypersonic Flight Vehicles, Progress in
Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 229, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Springer, Reston, VA, 2009.
[54] Hirschel, E. H., and Weiland, C. “Design of Hypersonic Flight Vehicles: Some Lessons from the Past and Future Challenges,” CEAS
Space Journal, Vol. 1, No. 3-22, September 2011.
[55] Hogenauer, E. “Entwicklungstendenzen Bei Raumtransportern,” in Jahrbuch 1986 II. DGLR-Jahrestagung 1986, DGLR, Munich,
Germany, 08-10 October 1986.
[56] Hogenauer, E. “A Space Transporter for the Year 2000,” EIR Science & Technology, Vol. 14, No. 8, pp. 28-37, 20 February 1987.
[57] Hogenauer, E., and Koelle, D. “SANGER - the German Aerospace Vehicle Program,” AIAA-89-5007. AIAA 1st National Aero Space
Plane Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989.
[58] Hornung, M. “Entwurf Eines Luftatmenden Oberstufe Und Gesamtoptimierung Eines Transatmospharischen
Raumtransportsystems,” PhD Thesis, Fakultat fur Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik, Universitat der Bundeswehr Munchen, Neubiberg,
Germany, 15 January 2003.
[59] Husken, D., and Funk, D. “Der Neue Weg Ins All. Raumtransporter Der Nachsten Generation: Eine Ausstellung Der Deutschen
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).” Broschure, Kollen Druck, December 2002.
[60] Jabs, A. “Turboramjet Engine,” Patent No.: 5,094,071, MTU Motoren und Turbinen Union Muenchen GmbH, Fed. Rep. of Germany,
United States, 10 March 1992.
[61] Jackson, A. A. “Eugen Sanger, from the Silverbird to Interstellar Voyages,” [Presentation], History Lunch & Learn, Visiting Scientist
Lunar and Planetary Institute, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Houston Section, Organized by the
Section's History Technical Committee (Chair: Douglas Yazell members Ted Kenny and Chester Vaughan), 22 April 2016.
[62] Jacob, D., Sachs, G., and Wagner, S. Basic Research and Technologies for Two-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles: Final Report of the
Collaborative Research Centres 253, 255 and 259, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA,
Weinheim, Germany, 2005.
[63] Jadhav, V. B., and Warke, A. “Investigation of ELAC 1 Aerodynamics Using CFD in Supersonic Flow,” Applied Mechanics and
Materials, Vol. 592-594, pp. 1955-1961, 2014.
[64] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[65] Kania, P. “The German Hypersonics Technology Program,” AIAA-95-6005. 6th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.
[66] Kerstein, A., and Matko, D. “Eugen Sanger: Eminent Space Pioneer,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 61, No. 11-12, pp. 1085-1092,
December 2007.
[67] Keuk, J., J, B., Schneider, A., and Koschel, W. “Numerical Simulation of Hypersonic Inlet Flows,” AIAA-98-1526. AIAA 8th
International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[68] Knoblock, E. The Shoulders on Which We Stand - Wegbereiter Der Wissenschaft, 1st ed., Springer, 25 October 2012.
[69] Koelle, D. E. Figures, Diagrams, Photos, Personal Conversation with B. Chudoba.
[70] Koelle, D. E. “Launch Cost Assessment of Operational Winged Launch Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5021. AIAA 4th International Aerospace
Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[71] Koelle, D. E. “Advanced Two-Stage Vehicle Concepts (SANGER),” AIAA-90-1933. AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 26th Joint Propulsion
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 16-18 July 1990.
[72] Koelle, D. E. “SANGER II, A Hypersonic Flight and Space Transportation System,” ICAS-88-1.5.1. 16th Congress of the
International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Jerusalem, Israel, 28 August - 02 September 1988.
[73] Koelle, D. E. “Launch Cost Analyses for Reusable Space Transportation Systems (Sanger II),” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 19, No. 2,
pp. 191-197, February 1989.
[74] Koelle, D. E. “Handbook of Cost Engineering and Design of Space Transportation Systems,” Report No. TCS-TR-200, Registered
Copy No. 568, Revision 4c, TransCost 8.2 Model Description, Statistical-Analytical Model for Cost Estimation and Economic
Optimization of Launch Vehicles, TCS-TransCostSystems, Ottobrunn, Germany, February 2020.
[75] Koelle, D. E. “On the Optimum Cruise Speed of a Hypersonic Aircraft,” IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, Vol. 4,
No. 5, May 1989.
[76] Koelle, D. E., and Kuczera, H. “Sanger II, An Advanced Launcher System for Europe,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 63-
72, 1989.
[77] Koelle, D. E., Sacher, P., and Grallert, H. Deutsche Raketenflugzeuge Und Raumtransporter-Projekte, Band 34, Die deutsche
Luftfahrt, Buchreihe uber die Entwicklungsgeschichte der deutschen Luftfahrttechnik, Berndard & Graefe, Bonn, Germany, 2007.
[78] Kopp, S., Hollmeier, S., Rick, H., and Herrmann, O. “Airbreathing Hypersonic Propulsion System Integration within FESTIP FSSC-
12,” AIAA-99-4813. 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[79] Kordulla, W., Radespiel, R., Krogmann, P., and Maurer, F. “Aerothermodynamics Activities in Hypersonics at DLR,” AIAA-92-
5032. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-
04 December 1992.
[80] Koschel, W., Rick, W., and Ruggeberg, T. “Study of Flow Phenomena in High Speed Intakes,” AIAA-92-5029. AIAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992.

215
[81] Koschel, W. W. “Basic Research in German Universitites and DLR on High Speed Airbreathing Propulsion,” AIAA-96-4579. AIAA
7th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.
[82] Kossira, H., Bardenhagan, A., and Heinze, W. “Investigations on the Potential of Hypersonic Waveriders with the Integrated Aircraft
Design Program PrADO-Hy,” AIAA-93-5098. 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[83] Kossira, H., Bardenhagen, A., and Heinze, W. “An Integrated Computer-Program-System for the Preliminary Design of Advanced
Hypersonic Aircraft (PrADO-Hy),” A95-87373. 3rd Aerospace Symposium, Braunschweig, Germany, in: “Orbital Transport:
Technical, Meteorological and Chemical Aspects”, 26-28 August 1991.
[84] Krammer, P., Heitmeir, F., Bissinger, N. C., and Voss, N. “German Hypersonics Technology Programme Propulsion Technology -
Status 1993,” AIAA-93-5094. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[85] Krause, E. “German University Research in Hypersonics,” AIAA-92-5033. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[86] Krause, E. “Numerical Simulation of Supersonic and Hypersonic Flow Around Delta Wings in Comparison to Experimental Results,”
RWTH-CONV-177871. European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering (ECCOMAS 2000),
Barcelona, Spain, 11-14 September 2000.
[87] Krause, E., Limberg, W., Kharitonov, A. M., Brodetsky, M. D., and Henze, A. "An Experimental Investigation of the ELAC 1
Configuration at Supersonic Speeds," Experiments in Fluids, Vol. 26, pp. 423-436, 1999.
[88] Kuczera, H. Figures, Diagrams, Photos, Personal Conversation with B. Chudoba.
[89] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[90] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[91] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[92] Kuczera, H. “FESTIP (Future European Space Transportation Investigations Programme).” Proceedings of the International
Workshop on Spaceplane/RLV Technology Demonstrator, Tokyo, Japan, 10-12 March 1997.
[93] Kuczera, H. “FESTIP System Study - An Overview.” AIAA 8th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies
Conference, [Presentation], American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[94] Kuczera, H., and Hauck, H. “The German Hypersonics Technology Programme - Status Report 1992.” AIAA 4th International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[95] Kuczera, H., Hauck, H., Sacher, P., and Krammer, P. “The German Hypersonics Technology Programme Status 1993 and
Perspectives,” AIAA-93-5159. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[96] Kuczera, H., and Johnson, C. “The Major Results of the FESTIP System Study.” 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic
Systems and Technologies Conference, [Presentation], American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05
November 1999.
[97] Kuczera, H., and Sacher, P. Reusable Space Transportation Systems, Springer-Praxis Books in Astronautical Engineering, 2011.
[98] Kuczera, H., Sacher, P., and Dujarric, C. “FESTIP System Study - An Overview.” AIAA 7th International Space Planes and
Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22
November 1996.
[99] Kuczera, H., Sacher, P., and Krammer, P. “The German Hypersonics Programme - Status Report 1991,” AIAA-91-5001. AIAA 3rd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December
1991.
[100] Kunkler, H. “Airbreathing Propulsion for Space Transport - New Concepts, Special Problems and Attempts at Solutions,” AD-P007
943, AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 479 (AGARD-CP-479). Hypersonic Combined Cycle Propulsion.
[101] Lang, N. “Investigation of the Supersonic Flow-Field Around a Delta Wing Using Particle-Image-Velocimetry,” 2000.
[102] Lederer, R. “Testing the Actively Cooled, Fully Variable Hypersonic Demonstrator Nozzle - Results from the Test Campaign
1995/96,” AIAA-96-4500-CP. AIAA 7th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.
[103] Lederer, R., Schwab, R., and Voss, N. “Hypersonic Airbreathing Propulsion Activities for SANGER,” AIAA-TP-91-5040. 3rd AIAA
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December
1991.
[104] Lentz, S. “Gesamtentwurf Eines Zweistufigen Raumtransportsystems Mit Einer Anlage Zur Extraktion Von Sauerstoff an Bord Der
Unterstufe,” PhD Dissertation, Fakultat fur Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik, Universitat der Bundeswehr Munchen, Neubiberg, Germany,
2006.
[105] Lentz, S., Hornung, M., and Staudacher, W. “Conceptual Design of a Reusable Aces TSTO Space Transportation System,” AIAA-
2005-3246. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16-20 May 2005.
[106] Leyland, P., Perez, A., Perusset, X., Olivier, H., Henze, H., and Bleilebens, M. “ELAC: A Case Study for High Speed Transportation,”
ESA-SP-487. 4th European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles, European Space Agency, Capua, Italy, 15-18
October 2001.
[107] Limberg, W., and Stromberg, A. "Pressure Measurements at Supersonic Speeds on the Research Configuration ELAC I," Zeitschrift
fur Flugwissenschaften und Weltraumforschung, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 82-89, April 1993.
[108] Longo, J. M. A., Barth, T., and Eggers, T. “Aerothermodynamics Issues of the DLR Hypersonic Flight Experiment SHEFEX-I,”
AIAA-2008-4038. 38th Fluid Dynamics Conference & Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Seattle,
Washington, 23-26 June 2008.
[109] Lopez-Reig, J., Rebolo, R., Matesanz, A., Velazquez, A., and Rodriguez, M. “Integration of Hypersonic Aerothermodynamics Design
Methods,” AIAA-96-4502-CP. AIAA 7th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.

216
[110] Mayrhofer, M., and Sachs, G. “A Contribution to Mission Safety for a Two-Stage Hypersonic Vehicle,” AIAA-99-4886. 9th
International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[111] Mayrhofer, M., and Sachs, G. “Mission Safety Concept for a Two-Stage Space Transportation Vehicle,” AIAA-2001-1789.
AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS 10th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001.
[112] Mayrhofer, M., and Sachs, G. “Mission Safety Improvement: A Key Factor for the Success of Next Generation Launchers,” AIAA-
2005-5255. AIAA/AAAF 11th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orleans, France, 29 September - 04 October 2002.
[113] Mayrhofer, M., Sachs, G., and da Costa, O. “Mission Abort Trajectories of Orbital Stage with Maximum Longitudinal and Lateral
Ranges,” AIAA-2003-7078. 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003.
[114] Messe, C. “Thermostructural Problem of Hypersonic Airbreathing Flight Systems - Modeling and Simulation,” PhD Thesis,
Department of Aerospace Engineering and Geodesy, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, 04 August 2017.
[115] Moelyadi, M. A., Jiang, L., and Breitsamter, C. “Investigation of Steady and Unsteady Flow Characteristics of Space Transport
System During Separation,” AIAA-2005-3248. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16-20 May 2005.
[116] Mooij, E. “Direct Model Reference Adaptive Control of a Winged Re-Entry Vehicle,” AIAA-99-4834. 9th International Space Planes
and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05
November 1999.
[117] Mooij, E. “Linear Quadratic Regulator Re-Entry Control: Performance Assessment Using a Taguchi Approach,” AIAA-98-1629.
AIAA 8th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[118] Moore, G. “European Spaceplanes Hermes, Sanger, or Hotol?,” Electronics & Power, pp. 252-254, April 1987.
[119] Muller, H. “The High-Flying Legacy of Eugen Sanger,” Air & Space, pp. 92-99, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.,
August/September 1987.
[120] Myhra, D. Sanger: Germany's Orbital Rocket Bomber in World War II, Schiffer Military History, Schiffer Publishing, Atglen, PA,
2002.
[121] Neuwerth, G., Peiter, U., Decker, F., and Jacob, D. “Reynolds Number Effects on the Low-Speed Aerodynamics of the Hypersonic
Configuration ELAC-1,” AIAA-98-1578. AIAA 8th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[122] Oertel, H. “Gaskinetical and Navier-Stokes Simulation of Reentry Flows.” Proceedings of INRIA and GAMNI-SMAI Workshop on
Hypersonic Flows for Reentry Problems, Antibes, France, 22-25 January 1990.
[123] Olivier, H., and Gronig, H. “Hypersonic Model Testing in a Shock Tunnel,” AIAA-93-5004. AIAA/DGLR 5th International
Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich,
Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[124] Olivier, H., Gronig, H., and Le Bozec, A. “Hypersonic Model Testing in a Shock Tunnel,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 262-
265, February 1995.
[125] Paschen, H., Coenen, R., Gloede, F., Sardemann, G., and Tangen, H. “Technikfolgenabschatzung Zum Raumtransportsystem
SANGER,” Drucksache 12/4277, Deutscher Bundestag 12. Wahlperiode, Bonner Universitats-Buchdruckerei, Bonn, Germany, June
1992.
[126] Pfeffer, H. “The Actions of the European Space Agency to Prepare for Future Space Transportation Systems - the FESTIP
Programme,” AIAA-92-5003. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[127] Rahn, M., and Schoettle, U. “Safety and Flight Abort Aspects of the SANGER Space Transportation System,” AIAA-93-5092.
AIAA/DGLR Fifth International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[128] Rahn, M., Schottle, U. M., and Messerschmid, E. “Impact of Mission Requirements and Constraints on Conceptual Launch Vehicle
Design,” AIAA-98-1554. AIAA 8th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 27-30 April 1998.
[129] Raible, T., and Jacob, D. “Sensitivity-Based Optimization of Two-Stage-to-Orbit Space Planes with Lifting Body and Waverider
Lower Stages,” AIAA-2003-7048. 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003.
[130] Rocci Denis, S., Kau, H. P., and Brandstetter, A. “Experimental Study on Transition between Ramjet and Scramjet Modes in a Dual-
Mode Combustor,” AIAA-2003-7048. 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003.
[131] Rocci Denis, S., Maier, D., Erhard, W., and Kau, H. P. “Free Stream Investigations on Methane Combustion in a Supersonic Air
Flow,” AIAA-2005-3314. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy, 16-20 May 2005.
[132] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[133] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[134] Sacher, P. “European Experimental Test Vehicle Options (EXTV) Proposed within FESTIP,” AIAA-99-4876. 9th International
Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference and 3rd Weakly Ionized Gases Workshop, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 01-05 November 1999.
[135] Sacher, P. “The Engineering Design of Engine/Airframe Integration for the SANGER Fully Reusable Space Transportation System,”
Chapter 16, RTO-EN-AVT-185, NATO Science and Technology Organization, 16 September 2010.
[136] Sacher, P. “Engineering Engine/Airframe Integration for Fully Reusable Space Transportation Systems,” Chapter 1, RTO-EN-AVT-
185, NATO Science and Technology Organization, 16 September 2010.
[137] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

217
[138] Sacher, P. “Hypersonic Flight Testing Issues,” AIAA-93-5078. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics
Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December
1993.
[139] Sacher, P. “European Experimental Test Vehicle Options: Proposed within FESTIP,” Air & Space Europe, Vol. 3, No. 1-2, pp. 85-
91, January-April 2001.
[140] Sachs, G., and Schoder, W. “Robust Control of the Separation of Hypersonic Lifting Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5013. AIAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992.
[141] Samuelsson, L., and Satmark, T. “Design and Testing of an Actively Cooled Nozzle Component for a Hypersonic Ram Engine,”
AIAA-96-4551. AIAA 7th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.
[142] Sanger, E. “Recent Results in Rocket Flight Technique,” NACA-TM-1012, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics,
Washington, D.C., 01 April 1942.
[143] Sanger, E. “Accurate Calculation of Multispar Cantilever and Semicantilever Wings with Parallel Webs under Direct and Indirect
Loading,” NACA-TM-662, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, D.C., 01 March 1932.
[144] Sanger, E. “Dinner Speech on the Occasion.” 16th AIAA/DLR/DGLR International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and
Technologies Conference, Bremen, Germany, 19-22 October 2009.
[145] Sanger, E. Raketen-Flugtechnik, Verlag von R. Oldenbourg, Munchen und Berlin, 1933.
[146] Sanger, E. “Zur Theorie Der Photoraketen,” Band 21, Ingenieur-Archiv, 1953.
[147] Sanger, E. Raumfahrt-Technische Uberwindung Des Krieges - Aktuelle Aspekte Der Uberschall-Luftfahrt Und Raumfahrt, Rowohlt,
Hamburg, Germany, 1958.
[148] Sanger, E. “Photon Propulsion,” Handbook of Astronautical Engineering, edited by Koelle, H. H., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961.
[149] Sanger, E. Space Flight - Countdown for the Future, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965.
[150] Sanger, E. “Rocket Flight Engineering,” NASA-TT-F-223, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C.,
September 1965.
[151] Sanger, E., and Bredt, I. A Rocket Drive for Long Range Bombers, Technical Information Branch Buaer, Navy Department, Santa
Barbera, CA, August 1944.
[152] Sanger, E., and Bredt, I. “A Ram-Jet Engine for Fighters,” NACA-TM-1106, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics,
Washington, D.C., October 1947.
[153] Sanger, H. E., and Szames, A. D. “From the Silverbird to Interstellar Voyages,” IAC-03-IAA.2.4.a.07. 54th International
Astronautical Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, International Academy of Astronautics, International Institute
of Space Law, Bremen, Germany, 03 October 2003.
[154] Sanger-Bredt, I. “The Silver Bird Story: A Memoir,” Essays on the History of Rocketry & Astronautics: Proceedings of the Third to
the Sixth History Symposium of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA), Vol. 1, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, D.C., 1977.
[155] Sanger-Bredt, I., and Engel, R. “The Development of Regeneratively Cooled Liquid Rocket Engines in Austria and Germany, 1926-
42,” No. 10, Smithsonian Annals of Flight. First Steps Towards Space: Proceedings of the First and Second History Symposia of the
International Academy of Astronautics, Belgrad, Yugoslavia, 26 September 1967, and New York, USA, 17 October 1968.
[156] Schoettle, U., and Rahn, M. “Effects of Extended Airbreathing Operation by Scramjet Propulsion on Vehicle Design of a Two-Stage
Launch System,” AIAA-93-5009. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[157] Schoettle, U. M., Grallert, H., and Hewiit, F. A. “Advanced Air-Breathing Propulsion Concepts for Winged Launch Vehicles,” Acta
Astronautica, Vol. 20, pp. 117-129, 1989.
[158] Sobieczky, H., and Stroeve, J. C. “Generic Supersonic and Hypersonic Configurations,” AIAA-91-3301CP. 9th AIAA Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Baltimore, MD, 23-26 September 1991.
[159] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[160] Staudacher, W., and Wimbauer, J. “Design Sensitivities of Airbreathing Hypersonic Vehicles,” AIAA-93-5099. AIAA/DGLR 5th
International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[161] Staufenbiel, R. “Horizontal Aerospace Transport Systems,” Paper No. 21. Space Course on Low Earth Transportation and Orbital
Systems, Aachen, Germany, 1991.
[162] Steinebach, D., Kuhl, W., and Gallus, H. “Design Aspects of the Propulsion System for Aerospace Planes,” AIAA-93-5127.
AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[163] Steinhoff, J., and Mersch, T. "Computation of Vortex Formation over ELAC-1 Configuration Using Vorticity Confinement," AIAA-
95-6157. AIAA Sixth International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.
[164] Strobel, C., Knott, U., and Kruger, W. “Lightweight Structures for Hypersonic Propulsion Systems,” AIAA-93-5037. AIAA/DGLR
5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December.
[165] Strohmeyer, D., Eggers, T., Heinze, W., and Bardenhagen, A. “Planform Effects on the Aerodynamics of Waveriders for TSTO
Missions,” AIAA-96-4544-CP. AIAA 7th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22 November 1996.
[166] Stromberg, A., and Decker, F. “Aachener Hyperschallkonfiguration ELAC I Im Hochdruckwindkanal Der DLR,” Luft- und
Raumfahrt, pp. 14-17, DGLR, June 1993.
[167] Treinies, N., and et al. “Das Raumtransportsystem SANGER - Billiger in den Orbit?,” DLR-IB 30106-91/4, Vorstudie für eine
Technikfolgenabschätzung, Im Auftrag des Büros für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung des Deutschen Bundestags, DLR Hauptabteilung
Systemanalyse Raumfahrt (HA-SR), Leitung: H. Sax, Koln-Porz, Germany, 21 December 1990.

218
 [168] Trollheden, S., and Streifinger, H. “Secondary Power System Study for the SANGER First Stage Vehicle,” AIAA-93-5033.
AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[169] Van den Abeelen, L. “Competition and the Others: Spacecraft from Around the World,” Spaceplane Hermes - Europe's Dream of
Independent Manned Spaceflight, Spring-Praxis Books, Cham, Switzerland, 2017, pp. 173-177.
[170] Weiland, C. Aerodynamic Data of Space Vehicles, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2014.
[171] Weingartner, S. “SANGER - the Reference Concept of the German Hypersonics Technology Program,” AIAA-93-5161. AIAA/DGLR
5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[172] Weingartner, S., and Kuczera, H. “Selection and Design Guidelines for Future Space Transportation Systems,” AIAA-93-5013.
AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[173] Williamson, M. “Hypersonic Transport ... 30 Years and Holding?,” Aerospace America, pp. 40-45, May 2012.
[174] Winter, F. H. “History of Rocketry and Astronautics,” AAS History Series Proceedings of the 33rd History Symposium of the
International Academy of Astronautics, Vol. 28, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1999.
[175] Wolf, D., and Daum, A. “DSL - A Near Term Aerospace Plane Concept,” AIAA-93-5100. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace
Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30
November - 03 December 1993.
[176] Zaganescu, N.-F. “Dr. Irene Sanger-Bredt: A Life for Astronautics,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 55, No. 11, pp. 889-894, December
2004.
[177] Zahringer, C. “Untersuchung Der Separationsdynamik Eines Zweistufigen Hyperschall-Flugsystems Unter Besonderer
Berücksichtigung Der Seitenbewegung,” Doktor-Ingenieur Dissertation, Lehrstuhl fur Flugmechanik und Flugregelung, Technische
Universitat Munchen, Munich, Germany, 19 April 2005.
[178] Zahringer, C., Heller, M., and Sachs, G. “Lateral Separation Dynamics and Stability of a Two-Stage Hypersonic Vehicle,” AIAA-
2003-7080. 12th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 15-19 December 2003.
[179] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[180] Zellner, B., Sterr, W., and Herrmann, O. “Integration of Turbo-Expander- and Turbo-Ramjet-Engines in Hypersonic Vehicles,” 92-
GT-204. ASME 1992 International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exposition, The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, Cologne, Germany, 01-04 June 1992.

A.7. NASP X-30 Bibliography

[1] Acosta, M. G. “The Retro-Rotary (REM) - NASP Aerospace Plane - Concept Design Evaluation,” CIFRA doc. 09-021, Bogota,
Colombia, 14 July 2012.
[2] Alberico, J. “The Development of an Interactive Computer Tool for Synthesis and Optimization of Hypersonic Airbreathing
Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5076. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5076
[3] Anderson, R. H. “Zero Margin Requirements Allocation for WBS 1133 and 1200,” BN09879, NASP General Dynamics, Fort Worth
Division, 27 February 1991.
[4] Anon. X-30 Timeline.
[5] Anon. “Accessibility - Margin Issues,” NPO-SE-9101, National Program Office, NASP.
[6] Anon. “Compatibility of SCS-6/Beta 21S with the NASP Environment to 1500 °F,” New Aircraft and Missile Products, McDonnell
Douglas Aerospace, St. Louis, MO.
[7] Anon. “Engine Weight Reduction Plan Near-Term Goals,” [Presentation], NASP.
[8] Anon. “HYFLITE Hypersonic Flight Test Experiment Technical Status,” [Presentation], NASP.
[9] Anon. “Impact of Engine Performance and Empty Weight Reductions on the NASP Vehicle Closure.”
[10] Anon. “Multidisciplinary Methods Used in CSO,” Press Flyer, Double-Side, Final NASP Configuration.
[11] Anon. “NASP Low-Speed System Summary.”
[12] Anon. “X-30 National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) - Made in America, Our Nation Cannot Afford the Alternative.”
[13] Anon. “NDV Airbreather/Rocket HT/HL SSTO Technology Level Evaluation.”
[14] Anon. “Vehicle 200 Hot vs. Cold Structure Trade Study - Qualitative Summary,” NASP Special Program Data, Structures/Materials
Team, NASP.
[15] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[16] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[17] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[18] Anon. Cabin Layout, Top View, Economy/First Class. McDonnell Douglas.
[19] Anon. “Beta-21S Titanium Alloy.”
[20] Anon. “Aerospaceplane to NASP: The Lure of Air-Breathing Hypersonics,” AERONAUTICS. http://ourairports.biz/?p=2411, 02
November 2015.
[21] Anon. “Williams Names 6 Topics for Academic Research,” Military Space, Pash Publications, Arlington, VA, 03 August 1987.
[22] Anon. “National Aero-Space Plane: Restructuring Future Research and Development Efforts,” GAO/NSIAD-93-71, Report to
Congressional Requesters, National Security and International Affairs Division, United States General Accounting Office,
Washington, D.C., 03 December 1992.
[23] Anon. “Aerospace Plane Technology: Research and Development Efforts in Japan and Australia,” GAO/NSIAD-92-5, National
Security and International Affairs Division, United States General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., 04 October 1991.
[24] Anon. “DSB Review of NASP - 1987,” DSB CH14, Charter and Results, 10 March 1992.
[25] Anon. “NASP Status Report - Response to Defense Science Board,” 12 May 1992.

219
[26] Anon. “Ten-Year Space Launch Technology Plan,” NASA-TM-108701, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 12
November 1992.
[27] Anon. “Comparison of Current NASP Configuration to DARPA Government Baseline Vehicle (GBV) Concept (U),” Memo, 15
August 1991.
[28] Anon. “Weekly Design Review Agenda,” CFG-9001-CF13, National Program Office, NASP, 16 August 1990.
[29] Anon. “National Aero-Space Plane: A Need for Program Direction and Funding Decisions,” GAO/NSIAD-93-207, Report to
Congressional Requesters, National Security and International Affairs Division, United States General Accounting Office,
Washington, D.C., 18 June 1993.
[30] Anon. “Engine System Weight Status,” [Presentation], NASP, 21 July 1992.
[31] Anon. “Aerospace Plane Technology: Research and Development Efforts in Europe,” GAO/NSIAD-91-194, Report to the Chairman,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, National Security and international Affairs Division,
United States General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., 25 July 1991.
[32] Anon. “Alternate Low Speed Accelerator Study - Trade Study #130,” LSA 100, NPO Engineering Council Review, National Program
Office, NASP, 26 February 1991.
[33] Anon. “National Aero-Space Plane: A Technology Development and Demonstration Program to Build the X-30,” GAO/NSIAD-88-
122, Report to Congressional Committees, National Security and International Affairs Division, United States General Accounting
Office, Washington, D.C., 27 April 1988.
[34] Anon. “Propulsion System Margin Summary,” RD-835-MDC-01, NASP, 27 February 1991.
[35] Anon. “Base Pressure Control and Mixing at High Speeds,” RD-RE-4/91-CC001, Informal Discussions at NASA-LaRC, NASP, 29
February 1991.
[36] Anon. “Propulsion System Status Volume - E22A Preliminary,” NASP, 29 June 1992.
[37] Anon. “Integrated Technology Plan for the Civil Space Program,” NASA-TM-107988, Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology,
NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
[38] Anon. “Low Speed Nozzle Performance - Factors Considered in Estimates,” misc., around 1989.
[39] Anon. “Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives - Special Report,” OTA-ISC-419, Office of Technology Assessment,
U.S. Congress, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., August 1989.
[40] Anon. NASP and Md-2001 Flight Vehicle Renderings. McDonnell Douglas Corporation, St. Louis, MO, January 1989.
[41] Anon. “Into Orbit with Reusable Spacecraft,” Spaceflight: The International Magazine of Space and Astronautics, Vol. 35, No. 3,
The British Interplanetary Society, March 1993.
[42] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[43] Anon. “Five Firms Will Study Advanced Avionics Design,” Defense Week, Monday, 14 February 1983.
[44] Atamanchuk, T., Sislian, J., and Dudebout, R. “An Aerospace Plane as a Detonation Wave Ramjet/Airframe Integrated Waverider,”
AIAA-92-5022. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5022
[45] Augenstein, B. W., and Harris, E. D. “The National Aerospace Plane (NASP): Development Issues for the Follow-on Vehicle -
Executive Summary,” R-3878/1-AF, A Project Air Force Report, RAND, 1993.
[46] Augustine, N. R., Letter to Harold D. Altis, Executive Vice President. McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 06 October 1983.
[47] Ault, D., and Van Wie, D. “Comparison of Experimental Results and Computational Analysis for the External Flowfield of a Scramjet
Inlet at Mach 10 and 13,” AIAA-92-5100. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5100
[48] Balepin, V., Czysz, P. A., Maita, M., and Vandenkerckhove, J. “Assessment of S.S.T.O. Performance with In-Flight LOX Collection,”
AIAA-95-6047. 6th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, April 1995.
[49] Balepin, V., Czysz, P. A., and Moszee, R. H. “Combined Engine for a Reusable Launch Vehicle (KLIN Cycle),” AIAA-2001-1911.
10th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001.
[50] Bardina, J., Coakley, T., and Marvin, J. “Two-Equation Turbulence Modeling for 3-D Hypersonic Flows,” AIAA-92-5064. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5064
[51] Barthelemy, R. R. “The National Aerospace Plane Program: A Revolutionary Concept,” John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol.
11, No. 3 and 4, pp. 312-318, 1990.
[52] Bennett, G. “X-30 National Aero-Space Plane Mockup Set to Roll Out,” Release: 92-XX, 10 June 1992.
[53] Benson, J. “Requirements and Integration - External Rocket System (ERS),” WBS 1311.7, Engineering Council Review, External
Rocket System Team, National Program Office, NASP, 02 May 1991.
[54] Benson, J. “External Rocket System (ERS) Concept Trade Study (#217) Final Results,” No. 91-195, System Engineering Use,
Coordination Memorandum, National Program Office, NASP, 26 April 1991.
[55] Benton, M. G. “Design Synthesis of Shuttle-Class Hypersonic SSTO Vehicle,” AIAA-90-0297. 28th Aerospace Sciences Meeting,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 08-11 January 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-297
[56] Billig, F. S., and Schetz, J. A. “Analysis of Penetration and Mixing of Gas Jets in Supersonic Cross Flow,” AIAA-92-5061. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5061
[57] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[58] Bogue, R., and Erbland, P. “Perspective on the National Aero-Space Plane Program Instrumentation Development,” AIAA-92-5086.
AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04
December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5086
[59] Borling, J. E. “High-Speed Propulsion Overview,” [Presentation], Pratt & Whitney, June 1991.
[60] Bowcutt, K. “Hypersonic Aircraft Optimization Including Aerodynamic, Propulsion, and Trim Effects,” AIAA-92-5055. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5055

220
[61] Boyden, R. P., Dress, D. A., Fox, C. H., Huffman, J. K., and Cruz, C. I. “Subsonic Static and Dynamic Stability Characteristics of a
NASP Configuration,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 879-885, July-August 1994.
[62] Brewer, G. D. “Hypersonic Aircraft,” Hydrogen Aircraft Technology, 1st ed., CRC Press, 1991, pp. 247-300.
[63] Brinson, M. “Phase 2D Technical Objectives Document and National Aero-Space Plane Phase 2 Exit Criteria,” NASP Facsimile
Record, 06 February 1991.
[64] Brinson, M. “201 Sensitivities,” message to Larry Hunt, 24 March 1992.
[65] Brown, S. F. “Reusable Rocket Ships: New Low-Cost Rides to Space,” Popular Science, pp. 49-55, February 1994.
[66] Brown, S. F. “X-30 - Out of This World in a Scramjet,” Popular Science, pp. 70-112, November 1991.
[67] Brumfield, G. “On Wings and a Prayer,” Nature, Vol. 421, News Feature, pp. 684-685, Nature Publishing Group, 13 February 2003.
[68] Bruner III, W. W. “National Security Implications of Inexpensive Space Access,” Beyond the Paths of Heaven: The Emergence of
Space Power Thought, Air University Press, Maxwell AFB, AL, September 1999, pp. 365-436.
[69] Burkardt, L. A. “NASA Lewis Two Stage to Orbit System Studies,” TSTO1a.DRW LAB/KMH, [Presentation], Propulsion Analysis
Branch, 15 November 1990.
[70] Butler, D., and Moore, R. “Liquid and Slush Hydrogen Ground Support Facilities for Aerospace Planes,” AIAA-92-5068. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5068
[71] Butrica, A. J. “Reusable Launch Vehicles or Expendable Launch Vehicles? A Perennial Debate,” Critical Issues in the History of
Spaceflight, The NASA History Series, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 09 November 2013, pp. 301-341.
[72] Calise, A. J., Corban, J. E., and Flandro, G. A. “Trajectory Optimization and Guidance Law Development for National Aerospace
Plane Applications,” Final Report, Langley Research Center, NASA Supported, December 1988.
https://doi.org/10.23919/ACC.1988.4789941
[73] Canan, J. W. “Mastering the Transatmosphere,” AIR FORCE Magazine, pp. 48-54, June 1986.
[74] Carter, P. “Ground System Requirements for Aerospace Planes,” AIAA-92-5069. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5069
[75] Castleberry, G. “External Rocket Concept Trade Study Status,” No. 90-181, System Engineering Use, Coordination Memorandum,
National Program Office, NASP, 15 November 1990.
[76] Chang, K. T. “25 Years Ago, NASA Envisioned Its Own 'Orient Express',” The New York Times, 20 October 2014.
[77] Chaput, A. J. “International Competition - the NASP Challenge,” AIAA-89-5018. AIAA National Aerospace Plane Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5018
[78] Chaput, A. J., and Imfeld, W. F. “CTM/GTM Technical Exchanges,” ED-NPO-91-001, Engineering Directive.
[79] Chase, R. L. “Performance Assessment of Single-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicle Propulsion Concepts, or Is Atmospheric Oxygen Really
Free?,” AIAA-89-2293. AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 25th Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Monterey, CA, 10-12 July 1989.
[80] Chase, R. L. “A Comparison of Horizontal and Vertical Launch Modes for Earth-to-Orbit NASP-Technology Enabled Vehicles,”
AIAA-91-2388. AIAA/SAE/ASME 27th Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Sacramento, CA, 24-26 June 1991.
[81] Chase, R. L., and Tang, M. H. “A History of the NASP Program from the Formation of the Joint Program Office to the Termination
of the HySTP Scramjet Performance Demonstration Program,” AIAA-95-6031. AIAA 6th International Aerospace Planes and
Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-6031
[82] Chavez, F. R., and Schmidt, D. K. “Analytical Aeropropulsive/Aeroelastic Hypersonic-Vehicle Model with Dynamic Analysis,”
Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 1308-1319, November - December 1994.
[83] Cheng, P., Chan, S., Myers, T., Klyde, D., and McRuer, D. “Aeroservoelastic Stabilization Technique Refinement for Hypersonic
Flight Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5014. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[84] Clifton, J. V. “Margin Issues WBS 1133 - Engine-Airframe Integration,” NPO-AERO-9101, NASP, National Program Office, 27
February 1991.
[85] Cole, S. R., Florance, J. R., Thomason, L. B., Spain, C. V., and Bullock, E. P. “Supersonic Aeroelastic Instability Results for A
NASP-Like Wing Model,” NASA-TM-107739, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, April 1993.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-1369
[86] Collier, C. “Structural Analysis and Sizing of Stiffened, Metal Matrix Composite Panels for Hypersonic Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5015.
AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orland, FL, 01-04
December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5015
[87] Conesa, E. “Organizational Dynamics and the Evolutionary Dilemma between Diversity and Standardization in Mission-Oriented
Research Programmes: An Illustration,” IR-97-023, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg,
Austria, May 1997.
[88] Cook, R. “External Rocket Trade Study Plans,” No. 90-139, System Engineering Use, Coordination Memorandum, National Program
Office, NASP, 23 October 1990.
[89] Cooper, H. F. “On Spaceplane and X Vehicles,” Testimony to the House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics Committee on
Science, 11 October 2001.
[90] Corsmeyer, C. “NASP News Reference,” Viewgraphs, Aerospace Technology Innovation Workshop, NASA Ames, Sponsored by
NSF, McDonnel Douglas.
[91] Cox, T. H., Sachs, G., Knoll, A., and Stich, R. “A Flying Qualities Study of Longitudinal Long-Term Dynamics of Hypersonic
Planes,” NASA-TM-104308, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards AFB, CA, April 1995. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-
6150
[92] Cribbs, D. “Performance Uncertainty Briefing,” NASP Special Program Data, General Dynamics Fort Worth Division, NASP, 10
January 1991.
[93] Cribbs, D. “Performance Uncertainty,” NPO-SE-AJC, National Program Office, NASP, 15 January 1991.
[94] Cribbs, D. “Performance Uncertainty Analysis for NASP.” 2nd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5209

221
[95] Czysz, P., and Warnecke, M. “Earth to Orbit Aerospace Planes - Dream or Reality?,” AIAA-92-5083. AlAA 4th International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5083
[96] Czysz, P. A., Geometric Descriptors.
[97] Czysz, P. A., Paired Comparison.
[98] Czysz, P. A. “McDonnell Aircraft Company Hypersonic Configuration and Control Development,”
[99] Czysz, P. A., Kw, Sp, Kgeo, Swet, Ktotal, Kp, Etc. Correlations.
[100] Czysz, P. A., Flight Boundaries Based on Wing Loading, Load Factor, and Material Temperature Limits.
[101] Czysz, P. A., Cross-Section Study for Fighters.
[102] Czysz, P. A., Spatula Sanger, Modified Sänger.
[103] Czysz, P. A. “Combined Cycle Propulsion - Is It the Key to Achieving Low Payload to Orbit Costs?.” 14th International Symposium
on Air Breathing Engines (ISABE), Florence, Italy, 05-12 September 1999.
[104] Czysz, P. A. “System Concepts and Technology Challenges for the XXI Century.” Short Course on Integration of Space
Transportation Vehicles, Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), NASA, 07-11 February 2000.
[105] Czysz, P. A. “Testing Hypersonic Airbreathing Engines: A Perspective,” ISABE-97-7036. 13th International Symposium on Air
Breathing Engines, Chattanooga, TN, 07-12 September 1997.
[106] Czysz, P. A. “A SSTO Launcher/Demonstrator Concept for International Development of a Flight Test Vehicle,” St. Louis University.
Proceeding of the International Workshop on Spaceplane/RLV Technology Demonstrators, Tokyo, Japan, 10-12 March 1997.
[107] Czysz, P. A. “Interaction of Propulsion Performance with Available Design Space.” 12th International Symposium on Air Breathing
Engines (ISABE), Melbourne, Australia, 10-15 September 1995.
[108] Czysz, P. A. “Energy Analysis of High Speed Flight Systems - Size and Thrust Potential.” JANNAF Workshop on Scramjet
Performance, Albuquerque, NM, 11-12 December 1996. 2
[109] Czysz, P. A. “'Supersonic Hydrogen Combustion Studies' - Retrospective 1993.” 1st JANNAF Workshop Scramjet Combustor
Performance, AIAA 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, 14 January 1993.
[110] Czysz, P. A. “System Concepts and Technology Challenges for the XXI Century Integration of Rocket and Air-Breathing Propulsion
Systems.” The AIAA Space Transportation Technical Committee 'Great Debate', 14 March 2000.
[111] Czysz, P. A. “SSTO Launcher/Demonstrator with Combined Cycle Propulsion Options,” Hypersonic Aircraft: Lifting Re-Entry and
Launch, Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 357, No. 1759, pp. 2285-2316, 15
August 1999.
[112] Czysz, P. A. “SSTO Launcher Design Space Convergence and Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) Propulsion Systems,” by
invitation. 2nd National Conference on Air Breathing and Aerospace Propulsion, Thriuvananthapuram, India, 15-17 December 1994.
[113] Czysz, P. A. “Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) Offers Developmental and Operational Advantages,” IAF-93-S.4.477. 44th
Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Graz, Austria, 16-22 October 1993.
[114] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[115] Czysz, P. A. “Advanced Propulsion Concepts for the XXIst Century.” IAA Workshop on Advanced Space Propulsion Concepts, A
World View of Space Propulsion for the Next 40 Years, 20-21 January 1998.
[116] Czysz, P. A. “Air Breather vs. Rocket, Is the Rocket the Only Reliable, Demonstrable Space Propulsion System?,” Presented at
Hypersonic Propulsion Session, 3HP2. 1993 SAE Aerospace Atlantic Conference, Dayton, OH, 20-23 April 1993.
[117] Czysz, P. A. “Hypersonic Aircraft as a Vehicle to Teach Practical Aircraft Design,” Presented at Hypersonic Systems Concepts
Session 3HP3. 1993 SAE Aerospace Atlantic Conference, Dayton, OH, 20-23 April 1993.
[118] Czysz, P. A. “Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) Propulsion Systems Offer Additional Options.” 11th International Symposium
on Air Breathing Engines (ISABE), American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Tokyo, Japan, 20-24 September 1993.
[119] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[120] Czysz, P. A. “Propulsion Concepts and Technology Challenges for the XXIst Century,” Propulsion in Space Transportation. 5th
Symposium International, Carre des Sciences, Paris, France, 22-24 May 1996.
[121] Czysz, P. A. “Oral Introduction to Paper: Propulsion Concepts and Technology Challenges for the XXIst Century.” 5th International
Symposium, Carre des Sciences, Paris, France, 22-24 May 1996.
[122] Czysz, P. A. “Combined Cycle Propulsion for the XXIst Century.” RBCC Workshop, The University of Alabame in Huntsville,
Huntsville, AL, 25-26 February 1998.
[123] Czysz, P. A. “Foreign SpacePlane Concepts,” AIAA-90-3836. AIAA Space Programs and Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Huntsville, AL, 25-28 September 1990.
[124] Czysz, P. A. “Can Combined Cycle Propulsion Lower Launch 21st Century Launch Costs.” NSJSASS Meeting, Sendai, Japan, 27
February 1998.
[125] Czysz, P. A. “Space Transportation Systems Requirements Derived from the Propulsion Performance,” IAF-92-0858, Hypersonic
and Combined Cycle Propulsion Session, 1991 IAF Congress. 43rd Congress of the International Astronautical Federation (IAF),
Washington, D.C., 28 August - 05 September 1992.
[126] Czysz, P. A. “Earth to Orbit Aerospace Planes: What Prevents the Realization of This Long Held Dream,” by invitation. International
Workshop on Aerospace Planes/Hypersonic Technology, Tokyo, Japan, 28 February - 02 March 1994.
[127] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[128] Czysz, P. A. “Conservation of Available Energy - An Excellent Return on Investment,” invited keynote address. NASA Langley
Workshop on 'Performance Enhancement for Hypervelocity Airbreathing Propulsion', [Presentation], by invitation only, 29-31 July
1991.
[129] Czysz, P. A. “Addendum to Presentation Conservation of Available Energy.” NASA Langley Workshop on 'Performance
Enhancement for Hypervelocity Airbreathing Propulsion', [Presentation], by invitation only, 29-31 July 1991.
[130] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[131] Czysz, P. A. “Hypersonic Vehicles,” Aeronautical Technology 2000: A Projection of Advanced Vehicle Concepts, Report of the Panel
on Vehicle Applications, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 45-58.
[132] Czysz, P. A. “Transatmospheric Vehicle,” Aeronautical Technology 2000: A Projection of Advanced Vehicle Concepts, Report of
the Panel on Vehicle Applications, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 45-58.

222
[133] Czysz, P. A. “Definition of the Design Space in Which Convergence Can Occur with a Combined Cycle Propulsion System,” Acta
Astronautica, Vol. 37, pp. 179-192, 1995.
[134] Czysz, P. A. “A Demonstrator for the SSTO Launcher with Combined Cycle Propulsion,” Phil Trans, Royal Society London, Vol.
357, pp. 2285-2316, 1999.
[135] Czysz, P. A. “Propulsion Sharpens the Focus for Hypersonic Design,” AIAA-93-4012. Aircraft Design Systems, and Operations
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Monterey, CA, August 1993.
[136] Czysz, P. A. “Hypersonic Convergence Interdependence: Airframe - Propellant - Propulsion,” McDonnel Douglas Corporation,
February 1987.
[137] Czysz, P. A. “Maximize the Energy Conserved, Minimized the Energy Expended, Yields Excellent ROI,” invited keynote address.
European Space Agency FESTIP Workshop, Frascati, Italy, February 1992.
[138] Czysz, P. A. “Definition of the Design Space in Which Convergence Can Occur with a Combined Cycle Propulsion System,” IAF-
94-S.4.427. 45th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Jerusalem, Israel, October 1994.
[139] Czysz, P. A., and Bruno, C. “Interaction of the Propulsion System and System Parameters Determine the Design Space Available for
Solutions,” IAF Paper 00-S.5.07. 51st International Astronautical Congress, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 02-06 October 2000.
[140] Czysz, P. A., Bruno, C., and Kato, K. “Interactions between Propulsion Systems and the Configuration Concepts Defines the Design
Space,” AIAA-2001-1924. 10th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyoto, Japan, 24-27 April 2001.
[141] Czysz, P. A., Bruno, C., and Lee, Y. M. “Is the Most Versatile Earth-to-Orbit Launcher a TSTO and Not a SSTO,” Paper IAC-04-
V.P.10. 55th International Astronautical Congress, Vancouver, Canada, 04-08 October 2004.
[142] Czysz, P. A., and Froning, H. D. “A Propulsion Technology Challenge - An Abortable, Continuous Use Vehicles,” IAF-95-S.2.03.
46th International Astronautical Congress, Oslo, Norway, 02-06 October 1995.
[143] Czysz, P. A., and Froning, H. D. “A Propulsion Technology Challenge - An Abortable, Continuous Use Vehicles,” Acta Astronautica,
Vol. 38, No. 4-8, pp. 235-249, 1996.
[144] Czysz, P. A., Froning, H. D., and Longstaff, R. “A Concept for an International Project to Develop a Hypersonic Flight Test Vehicle,”
AIAA-97-2808. 33rd IAAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Seattle, WA, 06-09 July 1997.
[145] Czysz, P. A., Froning, H. D., and Longstaff, R. “A Concept for an International Project to Develop a Hypersonic Flight Test Vehicle.”
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Spaceplanes/RLV Technology Demonstrators, Tokyo, Japan, March 1998.
[146] Czysz, P. A., Froning, H. D., and Murthy, S. N. B. “Payload Mass and RBCC Engine Performance Determine the Industrial Capability
Required,” IAF-95-S.5.05. IAF 46th International Astronautical Congress, Oslo, Norway, 02-06 October 1995.
[147] Czysz, P. A., and Little, M. J. “The Rocket Based Combined Cycle Engine (RBCC) - A Propulsion System for the 21st Century,”
AIAA-93-5096. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
[148] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[149] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[150] Czysz, P. A., and Murthy, S. N. B. “Energy Management and Vehicle Synthesis,” AIAA-95-6101. 6th International Aerospace
Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07
April 1995.
[151] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[152] Czysz, P. A., and Murthy, S. N. B. “SSTO Launcher Demonstrator for Flight Test,” AIAA-96-4574. 7th International Spaceplanes
and Hypersonics Systems and Technology Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Norfolk, VA, 18-22
November 1996.
[153] Czysz, P. A., and Murthy, S. N. B. “Energy Management and Vehicle Synthesis,” Developments in High-Speed-Vehicle Propulsion
Systems, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 165, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 1996,
pp. 581-686.
[154] Czysz, P. A., and Murthy, S. N. B. “Energy Analysis of High-Speed Flight Systems,” High-Speed Flight Propulsion Systems,
Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 137, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, September
1991, pp. 143-235.
[155] Czysz, P. A., Murthy, S. N. B., Froning, H. D., and McKinney, L. “Space Launchers,” ISABE-97-7202. 13th International Symposium
on Air Breathing Engines, Chattanooga, TN, 07-12 September 1997.
[156] Czysz, P. A., and Rahaim, C. P. “Perspective of Launch Vehicle Size and Weight Based on Propulsion System Concept,” IAC-02-
V.4.08. 53rd International Astronautical Congress - The World Space Congress - 2002, Houston, TX, 10-19 October 2002.
[157] Czysz, P. A., and Rahaim, C. P. “Comparison of SSTO Launchers Powered by an RBCC Propulsion System and a Pulse Detonation
Wave Propulsion System,” Paper S19-2. 6th International Symposium on Propulsion for Space Transportation XXIst Century,
Versailles, France, 14-16 May 2002.
[158] Czysz, P. A., and Rahaim, C. P. “Conceptual Design of a Hypersonic Deep Interdiction Aircraft,” ISABE-2003-1199. AIAA
Proceedings of the XVIIIth ISABE, 31 August - 02 September 2003.
[159] Czysz, P. A., and Rahaim, C. P. “Perspective of Launch Vehicle Size and Weight Based on Propulsion System Concept,” Space
Technology, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 37-62, 2003.
[160] Czysz, P. A., and Richards, M. J. “Benefits from Incorporation of Combined Cycle Propulsion,” IAF-98-S.5.10. 49th International
Astronautical Congress, Melbourne, Australia, 28 September - 02 October 1998.
[161] Czysz, P. A., and Richards, M. J. “Benefits from Incorporation of Combined Cycle Propulsion,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 44, No. 7-
12, pp. 445-460, 1999.
[162] Czysz, P. A., and Vandenkerckhove, J. “Transatmospheric Launcher Sizing,” Scramjet Propulsion, Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, Vol. 189, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2000, pp. 979-1103.
[163] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[164] Davies, R. E. G. Supersonic (Airliner) Non-Sense: A Case Study in Applied Market Research, Paladwr Press, McLean, VA, 1998.
[165] Davis, J., Campbell, R., Medley, J., and Hornung, H. “Hypervelocity Scramjet Capabilities of the T5 Free-Piston Tunnel at Caltech,”
AIAA-92-5037. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5037

223
[166] Davis, J., and Murrow, H. “Enabling Technologies Research and Development Structures,” AIAA-89-5011. AIAA First National
Aero-Space Plane Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989.
[167] DeAngelis, M. V., and Anderson, K. F. “Thermal-Structural Test Facilities at NASA Dryden,” NASA-TM-104249, Dryden Flight
Research Facility, NASA, Edwards, CA, 1992.
[168] DeWitt, R. L., Hardy, T. L., Whalen, M. V., and Richter, G. P. “Slush Hydrogen (Slh2) Technology Development for Application to
the National Aerospace Plane (NASP),” NASA-TM-102315. Prepared for the Cryogenic Engineering Conference Sponsored by the
University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 24-28 July 1989.
[169] DeWitt, R. L., Hardy, T. L., Whalen, M. V., Richter, G. P., and Tomsik, T. M. “Background, Current Status, and Prognosis of the
Ongoing Slush Hydrogen Technology Development Program for the NASP,” NAAS-TM-103220, Lewis Research Center, NASA,
Cleveland, OH.
[170] Dress, D., Boyden, R., and Cruz, C. “Supersonic Dynamic Stability Characteristics of the Test Technique Demonstrator NASP
Configuration,” AIAA-92-5009. AIAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
[171] DuPont, T. “Effect of On Board Oxygen on NASP Gross Weight,” Report, 28 March 1991.
[172] Edwards, J. B. “The Great Technology Race - Why We're Losing and What We Need to Compete,” Hampton Roads Publishing Co.,
Inc., 1993.
[173] Edwards, T. A. “CFD Applications in Hypersonic Flight,” AIAA-92-5025. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orland, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5025
[174] Ehernberger, I. J. “Stratospheric Turbulence Measurement and Models for Aerospace Plane Design,” NASA-TM-104262, Dryden
Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards, CA, December 1992.
[175] Ehernberger, L. J. “Stratospheric Turbulence Measurements and Models for Aerospace Plane Design,” AIAA-92-5072. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5072
[176] Elias, T. “Consensus X-30 Boundary Layer Transition Prediction Method “BLT-1A”,” No. 90-111, Coordination Memorandum,
National Program Office, NASP, 02 October 1990.
[177] Ellis, D. A. “Overview - Design of an Efficient Lightweight Airframe Structure for the National Aerospace Plane,” AIAA-89-1406-
CP. 30th Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Mobile,
AL, 03-05 April 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-1406
[178] Ellison, J. C., Whitehead, P. R., and Tyson, R. W. “NASP Government Work Package Implementation,” AIAA-95-6053. 6th
International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-6053
[179] Emanuel, G., and Rasmussen, M. L. “An Integrated Aerodynamic/Propulsion Study for Generic Aero-Space Planes Based on
Waverider Concepts,” NASA-CR-188691, Final Report, University of Oklahoma, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
August 1991.
[180] Escher, W. J. D. “A U.S. History of Airbreathing/Rocket Combined-Cycle (RBCC) Propulsion for Powering Future Aerospace
Transports, with A Look Ahead to the Year 2020,” Report/Patent Number IS-30, Document ID 19990062726, Approved Final Draft,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Los Angeles, CA, 20-25 June 1999.
[181] Escher, W. J. D. “Technical Background for Vehicle Mass/Flight Speed Trends (SSTO Cases),” SAIC, NASA, 21 March 2003.
[182] Escher, W. J. D. “Extended Synopsis - Draft,” about the Schweikart Report, 31 May 2001.
[183] Ferrante, R. “NASP Difference Interferometry Tests - Comments,” Informal Memo to T. Bogar, 20 December 1988.
[184] Fields, R. A., Richards, W. L., and DeAngelis, M. V. “Combined Loads Test Fixture for Thermal-Structural Testing Aerospace
Vehicle Panel Concepts,” NASA-TM-2004-212039, Dryden Flight Research Center, NASA, Edwards AFB, CA, February 2004.
[185] Finley, D., Bender, E., and Hopping, B. “Assessment of the Effect of Inlet Fairings on a Powered Nozzle Plume Using 2-D PNS
Codes,” AIAA-92-5046. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5046
[186] Froning, D., Gaubatz, W., and Mathews, G. “NASP: Enabling New Space Launch Options,” AIAA-90-5263. 2nd International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5263
[187] Froning, H. D., and Czysz, P. A. “Exploitation of an Advanced Propulsion Development for Demonstration of Aerospace Plane Art,”
Abstract and Research Material, Unpublished.
[188] Froning, H. D., and Czysz, P. A. “Test Bed Vehicle for Demonstrating Both Rocket and Airbreathing Launch Vehicle Art,” IAF-95-
V.4.03. 46th International Astronautical Congress, Oslo, Norway, 02-06 October 1995.
[189] Froning, H. D., and Czysz, P. A. “Impact of Emerging Technologies on Manned Transportation between Earth and Space,” MDC
91H1076. 42nd Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Montreal, Canada, 07-11 October 1991.
[190] Gabrynowicz, J., Graham, J., Bille, M., and Bille, D. “The Case for International Cooperation on Hypersonic Technology
Development,” AIAA-92-5000. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5000
[191] Gallicao, P. “Planes Leaving for Shanghai - Paris - “ The Reader's Digest, August, 1935.
[192] Gatlin, G. M. “Wind-Tunnel Investigation of the Low-Speed Aerodynamics of Slender Accelerator-Type Configurations,” SAE-
881356. Advanced Aerospace Aerodynamics, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, October 1988.
[193] Goad, J., and Benson, J. “External Rocket System (ERS) Concept Trade Study (#54) Results,” No. 90-207, System Engineering Use,
Coordination Memorandum, National Program Office, NASP, December 1990.
[194] Gonzales, D., Eisman, M., Shipbaugh, C., Bonds, T., and Tuan Le, A. “Proceedings of the Rand Project Air Force Workshop on
Transatmospheric Vehicles,” MR-890-AF, Project AIR FORCE, 1995.
[195] Gottemoeller, R., and Brooks, N. “Soviet Reactions to the National Aerospace Plane,” N-3127-AF, A Rand Note, Prepared for the
United States Air Force, The RAND Corporation, November 1990.
[196] Gregory, I. M., McMinn, J. D., Shaughnessy, J. D., and Chowdhry, R. S. “Hypersonic Vehicle Control Law Development Using H
Infinity and Mu-Synthesis,” AIAA-92-5010. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5010

224
[197] Griffin, G. M. “Transmittal of Zero-Margin Requirements Allocation,” No. NAA 91-024, System Engineering Use, Coordination
Memorandum, North American Aircraft, NASP, 25 February 1991.
[198] Gulcher, R. “The Past as Prologue,” AIAA-89-5004. AIAA First National Aerospace Plane Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5004
[199] Gupta, K., Petersen, K., and Lawson, C. “On Some Recent Advances in Multidisciplinary Analysis of Hypersonic Vehicles,” AIAA-
92-5026. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL,
01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5026
[200] Gwynne, P. “Space Plane,” Air & Space, pp. 26-33, August/September 1986.
[201] Hall, K. R., Brown, S. W., Bennett, A. G., and Rais-Rohani, M. “Construction of a One-Third Scale Model of the National Aerospace
Plane-NASP,” Int. J. Engng Ed., Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 153-159, 1997.
[202] Hames, J. “Single-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicle Performance Evaluation Methods,” AIAA-92-5056. AlAA 4th International Aerospace
Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5056
[203] Hamm, D., and Best, D. “Hypersonic Design,” AIAA-92-5077. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5077
[204] Hamm, D., and Best, D. “Hypersonic Design,” ICAS-92-1.8.1. 18th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical
Sciences, Beijing, China, 20-25 September 1992.
[205] Hammond, W. E. Space Transportation: A Systems Approach to Analysis and Design, AIAA Education Series, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 1999.
[206] Hammond, W. E. Design Methodologies for Space Transportation Systems, AIAA Education Series, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2001, pp. 85, 108, 112, 211-212, 315-316.
[207] Hank, J. M. “Comparative Analysis of Two-Stage-to-Orbit Rocket and Airbreathing Reusable Launch Vehicles for Military
Applications,” Master's Thesis, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Graduate Schoool of Engineering and Management,
Air Force Institute of Technology, Air University, March 2006.
[208] Hannigan, R., and Sved, J. “True Space Transportation: The Key to a New Era in Space Operations,” AIAA-92-5082. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5082
[209] Hannigan, R., and Webb, D. “Spaceflight in the Aero-Space Plane Era,” AIAA-91-5089. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5089
[210] Hannum, N., and Berkopec, F. “Fueling the National Aero-Space Plane with Slush Hydrogen,” AIAA-89-5014. AIAA First National
Aero-Space Plane Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989.
[211] Harris, E. D. “The National Aerospace Plane: Cost Considerations for the Follow-On Vehicle.” 5th International Aerospace Planes
and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November -
03 December 1993.
[212] Harris, W. “Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies - An Overview for the United States,” AIAA-93-5157. AIAA/DGLR
5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-5157
[213] Harsha, P., and Waldman, B. “The NASP Challenge: Testing for Validation,” AIAA-89-5005. AIAA First National Aerospace Plane
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5005
[214] Hattis, P., and Malchow, H. “Evaluation of Some Significant Issues Affecting Trajectory and Control Management for Air-Breathing
Hypersonic Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5011. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5011
[215] Hawkins, R., and Dilley, A. “CFD Comparisons with Wind Tunnel and Flight Data for the X-15,” AIAA-92-5047. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5047
[216] Heeg, J., Zeiler, T. A., Pototzky, A. S., Spain, C. V., and Engelund, W. C. “Aerothermoelastic Analysis of a NASP Demonstrator
Model,” NASA-TM-109007, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, October 1993.
[217] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[218] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[219] Heppenheimer, T. A. Hypersonic Technologies and the National AeroSpace Plane, 1st ed., Pasha Publications Inc, 1990.
[220] Heppenheimer, T. A. “Toward Transatmospheric Flight: From V-2 to the X-51,” NASA's Contributions to Aeronautics, edited by
Hallion, R. P., Vol. 1, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2010, pp. 277-358.
[221] Heppenheimer, T. A. “The Hypersonic World of Robert Williams,” Air & Space, pp. 52-55, February/March 1988.
[222] Heppenheimer, T. A. Facing the Heat Barrier: A History of Hypersonics, The NASA History Series, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, D.C., September 2007.
[223] Hermann, J. A., and Schmidt, D. K. “Fuel-Optimal SSTO Mission Analysis of a Generic Hypersonic Vehicle,” AIAA-95-3372-CP.
Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Baltimore, MD, 07-10 August
1995.
[224] Hickman, R., and Adams, J. “Operational Design Factors for NASP Derived Vehicles,” AIAA-91-5081. AIAA 3rd International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5081
[225] Hicks, J. W. “Propulsion Modeling Techniques and Applications for the NASA Dryden X-30 Real-Time Simulator,” AIAA-91-2937.
AIAA Flight Simulation Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, New Orleans, LA, 12-14
August 1991.
[226] Hielm, L. N. “NASP Materials Lessons Learned Workshop,” Air Force Research Laboratory Materials Directorate, Wright-Patterson
AFB, OH, 28-29 October 1997.
[227] Hoekie, S. J., Outlaw, R. A., and Sankaran, S. N. “Surface Compositional Variations of Mo-47Re Alloy as a Function of
Temperature,” NASA-TP-3402, Office of Management, NASA, December 1993.

225
[228] Hoey, R. G. “X-15 Contributions to the X-30,” NASA-CP-3105. Proceedings of the X-15 First Flight 30th Anniversary Celebration,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Edwards, CA, 01 January 1991.
[229] Hoffman, E., Bird, R., and Dicus, D. “Effect of Braze Processing on the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of SCS-6/Beta21s
Titanium Matrix Composites,” AIAA-92-5017. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5017
[230] Holland, S. D., and Murphy, K. J. “An Experimental Parametric Study of Geometric, Reynolds Number, and Ratio of Specific Heats
Effects in Three-Dimensional Sidewall Compression Scramjet Inlets at Mach 6,” AIAA-93-0740. 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 11-14 January 1993. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-740
[231] Horton, D. “National Aero-Space Plane Project Overview,” AIAA-89-5002. AIAA First National Aero-Space Plane Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5002
[232] Hunt, J. L. “CSO Structures Support for NASP NPO Alternative Engine Study.”
[233] Hunt, J. L. “Design Bias in Configuration 201,” W/DSGN BS 201/Hunt.
[234] Hunt, J. L. “Exit Criteria Milestones,” [Presentation].
[235] Hunt, J. L. “Material Benefits,” [Presentation].
[236] Hunt, J. L. “NASP from a National Perspective,” [Presentation].
[237] Hunt, J. L. “The National Aero-Space Plane Program.”
[238] Hunt, J. L. “The Spinoff Potential for Technology Development in the National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) Program.”
[239] Hunt, J. L. “Generic NASP SSTO Vehicle Sensitivities,” G/GNRC NASP.
[240] Hunt, J. L., Handnotes. pp. 01-03.
[241] Hunt, J. L. “Propulsion Concepts Validated by 4 Years of Research and Hardware Development.”
[242] Hunt, J. L. “Hypersonic Airbreathing Vehicle Conceptual Design (Focus on Aero-Space Plane),” N89-25210. Recent Advances in
Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Part 3, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 01 April 1989.
[243] Hunt, J. L. “Subscale Scramjet Free Flyer Design,” SAO/NASPO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 02
September 1991.
[244] Hunt, J. L. “Airbreathing/Rocket Single-Stage-to-Orbit Design Matrix,” AIAA-95-6011. Sixth International Aerospace Planes and
Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.
[245] Hunt, J. L. “Possibility of Point-of-Departure Design Region Becoming a Premature Solution for the X-30 ... And How to Avoid It,”
Reply to Attention of 350, NASP JPO, NASA LaRC, 05 February 1991.
[246] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Design Activities in Hypersonic Technology Office (HTO),” Presented to OAST Management Council,
CSO/HTO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 07 April 1992.
[247] Hunt, J. L. “National Aero-Space Plane - Figures of Merit,” SAE Technical Paper SAE-92-XXXX. Aerospace Atlantic Conference,
Society of Automotive Engineers, Dayton, OH, 07-10 April 1992.
[248] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Design Activities in Hypersonic Technology Office (HTO),” Presented to OAST Management Council,
CSO/HTO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 08 April 1992.
[249] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Vehicle Design Briefing,” [Presentation], CSO/HTO, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 08
November 1991.
[250] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Interim Technical Review 2 - Debrief,” ITR-2, SAO/HVO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton,
VA, 09 November 1994.
[251] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Overview,” Presentation to Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, CSO/HTO/LaRC, Langley Research Center,
NASA, Hampton, VA, 10 March 1992.
[252] Hunt, J. L. “Unclassified Figures - Airbreather to SSF (SSTO, HT/HL),” SAO/NASPO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA,
Hampton, VA, 10 March 1993.
[253] Hunt, J. L. “Air Core Enhanced Turboramjet (AceTR),” HVO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 12 July 1994.
[254] Hunt, J. L. “A/R SSTO Vehicle Designs for Three Low-Speed Propulsion Systems,” HVO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA,
Hampton, VA, 12 July 1994.
[255] Hunt, J. L. “Trade Studies Conducted by HTO in Support of NASP,” [Presentation], Conceptual Studies Office, Langley Research
Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 17 June 1991.
[256] Hunt, J. L. “Airbreathing Orbital Concepts/Technology,” SAO/HVO/LaRC, Briefing to USAF Scientific Advisory Board, Space
Launch Study Committee, 20 July 1994.
[257] Hunt, J. L. “GBL 3.2.1 Vehicle Sizing Trends,” [Presentation], Lessons Learned, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA,
20 March 1991.
[258] Hunt, J. L. “Hypersonic Airbreathing Vehicle Design Issues,” [Presentation], Briefing to AFSAB, CSO/HTO, Langley Research
Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 21 June 1991.
[259] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Vehicle Status Briefing,” CSO/HTO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 21 March 1991.
[260] Hunt, J. L. “Critique of NASP Vehicle Design at Preliminary Vehicle Baseline Review (PVBR),” Configuration/Flow Path
Optimization Technical Team, NASP Status Report Response to Defense Science Board, 21 May 1991.
[261] Hunt, J. L. “Conceptual Studies Office (CSO) - Strategic Planning Review,” Conceptual Studies Office (CSO), Langley Research
Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 22 February 1991.
[262] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Vehicle Status,” [Presentation], SAO/NASPO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 23 October
1992.
[263] Hunt, J. L. “Performance Appraisal for James L. Hunt,” W/SAO Accomplishment, Systems Analysis Office (SAO), 24 August 1994.
[264] Hunt, J. L. “Conceptual Study of Symmetric Scramjet Flight Experiment - Status,” [Presentation], 24 September 1992.
[265] Hunt, J. L. “NASP Interim Technical Review 2 - Debrief,” ITR-2, SAO/HVO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton,
VA, 25-27 October 1994.
[266] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[267] Hunt, J. L. “Hypersonic Propulsion Research Peer Review - Systems Analysis Studies,” SAO/HVO/LaRC, Langley Research Center,
NASA, Hampton, VA, 27 April 1994.
[268] Hunt, J. L. “Scramjet Accelerator Flight Test Vehicle - HYFLIGHT III,” Preliminary, SAO/NASP/LaRC, 27 January 1993.
[269] Hunt, J. L. “The Hypersonic Airbreathing Vehicles/Technologies,” SAO/HVO/LaRC, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton,
VA, 27 September 1995.

226
[270] Hunt, J. L. “Propulsion Integration Characteristics/Sensitivities for LOX Augmented Aerospace Planes,” CSO/HTO/LaRC. NASA
Langley Workshop on 'Performance Enhancement for Hypervelocity Airbreathing Propulsion', [Presentation], 29 July 1991.
[271] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[272] Hunt, J. L. “Aero-Space Plane Matrix,” 1991.
[273] Hunt, J. L. “Configuration Trade Study Matrix - Relative to 201,” for J.R. Thompson, July 1991.
[274] Hunt, J. L., Dyer, D., Brinson, M., Burkardt, L., Bullock, R., Collier, C., Hicks, J., Martin, J., Moses, P., and Pinckney, Z.
“Configuration/Flowpath Technical Team Report,” The National Aero-Space Plane Interim Technical Review, 19-21 November
1991, 11 December 1991.
[275] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[276] Hunt, J. L., and Martin, J. G. “Aero-Space Plane Figures of Merit,” AIAA-92-5058. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5058
[277] Imfeld, W. F. “Engineering,” ASD/NAE, [Presentation], 12 February 1991.
[278] Imfeld, W. F. “Technical Support Team Structure and Operating Procedures,” AFSC, Department of the Air Force, 19 February 1991.
[279] Imfeld, W. F. “NASP Interim Technical Review (ITR),” NASP JPO, WPAFB, AFSC, Department of the Air Force, 25 February
1991.
[280] Ishmael, S. D. “What Is the X-30?,” NASA-CP-3105. Proceedings of the X-15 First Flight 30th Anniversary Celebration, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Edwards, CA, 01 January 1991.
[281] Jackman, C., Douglas, A., and Brueske, K. “A Simulation of the Effects of the National Aerospace Plane Testing on the Stratosphere
Using a Two-Dimensional Model,” AIAA-92-5073. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5073
[282] Jenkins, D., Landis, T., and Miller, J. American X-Vehicles: An Inventory X-1 to X-50, Centennial of Flight Edition ed., National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, June 2003.
[283] Johnson, D. “Beyond the X-30: Incorporating Mission Capability,” AIAA-91-5078. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5078
[284] Johnson, D., Espinosa, A., and Althuis, J. “NASP Derived Vehicles: Not Just to Space,” AIAA-92-5020. AlAA 4th International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5020
[285] Johnson, D., Hill, C., Brown, S., and Batts, G. “Natural Environment Application for NASP/X-30 Design and Mission Planning,”
AIAA-93-0851. 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 11-
14 January 1993. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-851
[286] Johnson, D., Hill, C., Vaughan, W., Brown, S., and Batts, G. “Natural Environment Requirements Definition and Significance for
Aerospace Plane Development,” AIAA-93-5074. AIAA/DGLR 5th International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Munich, Germany, 30 November - 03 December 1993.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-5074
[287] Johnson, K. “Around the World in 60 Minutes (or Less!),” Commentary, CSIS Aerospace Security Project, Center for Strategic and
International Studies, 17 January 2018.
[288] Johnson, K. F. “The Need for Speed: Hypersonic Aircraft and the Transformation of Long Range Airpower,” Master's Thesis, The
School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, Air University, Maxwell AFB, AL, June 2005.
[289] Jones, G. “Q vs T Diagram,” Pratt & Whitney, National Aero-Space Plane, 10 March 1992.
[290] Kamath, P., and Mao, M. “Computation of Transverse Injection into a Supersonic Flow with Ship3d PNS Code,” AIAA-92-5062.
AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04
December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5062
[291] Kang, B. H. “Air Data and Surface Pressure Measurement for Hypersonic Vehicles,” Master's Thesis, Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 1989.
[292] Kasten, T. “Value of NASP to This Country - the Return on Investment from a National Perspective.”
[293] Kazmar, R. “Hypersonic Propulsion at Pratt & Whitney — Overview,” AIAA-2005-3256. AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space
Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Capua, Italy,
16-20 May 2012.
[294] Kazmar, R. R. “Hypersonic Propulsion at Pratt & Whitney — Overview.” 11th AIAA/AAAF International Conference on Space
Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orleans, France, 29
September - 04 October 2002.
[295] Kelly, H. N., and Blosser, M. L. “Active Cooling from the Sixties to NASP,” NASA-TM-109079, Langley Research Center, NASA,
Hampton, VA, 01 July 1994.
[296] Kock, B. “HYFLITE III Progress Report,” Detachment 5, National Aero-Space Plane Joint Program Office, 15 January 1993.
[297] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[298] Konsewicz, R. “Configuration 200A Controllability Assessment,” [Presentation], NASP, 28 February 1991.
[299] Kumar, A., Drummond, J. P., McClinton, C. R., and Hunt, J. L. “Research in Hypersonic Airbreathing Propulsion at the NASA
Langley Research Center.” Fifteenth International Symposium on Airbreathing Engines (ISABE), Bangalore, India, 02-07 September
2001.
[300] Kuperman, G., and Sobel, A. “Information Requirements Analysis for NASP-Derived Vehicles,” AIAA-92-5078. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5078
[301] Kussoy, M., and Huang, G. P. G. “Hypersonic Flows as Related to the National Aerospace Plane,” NASA-CR-199365, Ames
Research Center, NASA, Mountain View, CA, 09 May 1995.
[302] Lau, K. Y. “Effect of Turbulence Transition Prediction on Heating Rate,” Informal Memo, 18 February 1991.
[303] Launius, R. D. “Chapter 10: History of Civil Space Activity and Spacepower,” Toward a Theory of Spacepower: Selected Essays,
Government Printing Office, 07 March 2011.

227
[304] Lawrence, S. “Application of Space-Marching Methods to Hypersonic Forebody Flow Fields,” AIAA-92-5030. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5030
[305] Lindley, C. A. “International Aerospaceplane Efforts.” NASA Lewis Research Center Rocket-Based Combined-Cycle (RBCC)
Propulsion Technology Workshop, Tutorial Session, 1992.
[306] Little, M. J., and Czysz, P. A. “Rocket Based Combined Cycle Integrated with Liquid Air Collection, A Propulsion Concept for the
21st Century.” 9th Annual Midwest Space Development Conference, Indianapolis, IN, 22-24 October 1993.
[307] Liu, S. K. “Aerospace-Plane Flight and Stratospheric Ozone: Review and Preliminary Assessment of the National Aerospace Plane
(NASP) Operations,” N-3464-AF, A Rand Note, Prepared for the United States Air Force, The RAND Corporations, 1992.
[308] Liu, S. K. “Numerical Simulation of Hypersonic Aerodynamics and the Computational Needs for the Design of an Aerospace Plane,”
N-3253-AF, A Rand Note, Prepared for the United States Air Force, The RAND Corporation, 1992.
[309] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[310] Logsdon, J. M. ““A Failure of National Leadership”: Why No Replacement for the Space Shuttle?,” Critical Issues in the History of
Spaceflight, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 09 November 2013, pp. 269-300.
[311] London III, J. R. “LEO on the Cheap: Methods for Achieving Drastic Reduction in Space Launch Costs,” Report No. AU-AIR-93-
8, Air University Press, Maxwell AFB, AL, October 1994.
[312] Lovell, T. A., and Schmidt, D. K. “A Parametric Sensitivity Study for Single-Stage-to-Orbit Hypersonic Vehicles Using Trajectory
Optimization,” NASA-CR-194618, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, 21 March 1994.
[313] Lu, P. “Trajectory Optimization for the National Aerospace Plane,” NASA-CR-194618, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton,
VA, November 1993.
[314] Lu, P., and Samsundar, J. “Closed Form Solutions of Constrained Trajectories: Application in Optimal Ascent of Aerospace Plane,”
AIAA-92-5012. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5012
[315] Maglieri, D., Sothcott, V., and Hicks, J. “Influence of Vehicle Configuration and Flight Profile on X-30 Sonic Booms,” AIAA-90-
5224. AIAA 2nd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-
31 October 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5224
[316] Magnuson, G. G. “Manufacturing Producibility,” [Presentation], NASP, 25 February 1991.
[317] Martin, J., Kabis, H., and Hunt, J. L. “The Necessity of On Board Oxygen for Airbreathing Single-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles,” AIAA-
91-5016. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, Presentation, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991.
[318] Martin, J. G., Kabis, H. Z., and Hunt, J. L. “The Necessity of On Board Oxygen for Airbreathing Single-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles,”
AIAA-91-5016. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 03-05 December 1991.
[319] Martindale, D. “Frequent Flyers' Date with the Final Frontier - the U.S. Moves Closer to Launch of a Hypersonic Plane,” March
1987.
[320] Mattern, S. “System Safety Activities Supporting an Aero-Space Plane Ground Support Technology,” AIAA-92-5070. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5070
[321] Maurice, L., Leingang, J., and Carreiro, L. “The Benefits of In-Flight LOX Collection for Airbreathing Space Boosters,” AIAA-92-
5059. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-
04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5059
[322] McCIinton, C. R., Mao, M., Bittner, R., and Riggins, D. “Experimental and Numerical Base Pressure at Mach 13.5 to 17,” GWP 54,
Numerical Applications Office, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, February 1992.
[323] McClinton, C., Bittner, R., and Kamath, P. “CFD Support of NASP Design,” AIAA-90-5249. AIAA 2nd International Aerospace
Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5249
[324] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[325] McClinton, C. R. “SSTO Studies - Tasks,” National Program Office, NASP, 20 January 1993.
[326] McCormick, J. B. “NASP - Phase 3 Program Development Plan Reference Program Description Draft,” X30NP91021, CDRL. ITEM
A016 (DI-S-30559/T), First Draft Release, NASP, FSCM:ONPDO, 15 November 1991.
[327] McGrory, W., Huebner, L., Slack, D., and Walters, R. “Development and Application of Gasp 2.0,” AIAA-92-5067. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5067
[328] McIver, D. E., and Morrell, F. R. “National Aero-Space Plane: Flight Mechanics.” AGARD 75th Symposium of the Flight Mechanics
Panel on Space Vehicle Flight Mechanics, Luxembourg, France, 13-16 November 1989.
[329] McLucas, J. L., and Marin, J. J. Hypersonic Technology for Military Application, 2nd Printing, National Academy Press, Washington,
D.C., November 1990.
[330] McNelis, N., Hardy, T., Whalen, M., Kudlac, M., Moran, M., Tomsik, T., and Haberbusch, M. “A Summary of the Slush Hydrogen
Technology Program for the National Aero-Space Plane,” AIAA-95-6056. AIAA 6th International Aerospace Planes and
Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.
[331] Mcquilkin, F., and Logan, T. “Optimization and Validation of a Fuselage Fuel Tank Structural Concept for the NASP,” AIAA-90-
5262. AIAA 2nd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-
31 October 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5262
[332] Mehta, U. B. “The Aerospace Plane Design Challenge: Credible Computational Fluid Dynamics Results,” NASA-TM-102887, Ames
Research Center, NASA, Mountain View, CA, December 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5248
[333] Mehta, U. B. “Air-Breathing Aerospace Plane Development Essential: Hypersonic Propulsion Flight Tests,” NASA-TM-108857,
Ames Research Center, NASA, Mountain View, CA, November 1994.
[334] Mendez, B. “The National Aero-Space Plane,” 19890009016, NASA Ames Summer High School Apprenticeship Research Program:
1986 Research Papers pp. 49-53, Ames Research Center, NASA, Moffett Field, CA, 01 September 1988.

228
[335] Menees, G. P., Adelman, H. G., Cambier, J. L., and Bowles, J. V. “Wave Combustors for Trans-Atmospheric Vehicles,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 8, No. 3, May-June 1992.
[336] Miller, J. The X-Planes - X-1 to X-45, Chapter 34: X-30A, First Published by Midland Publishing, 2001, pp. 308-315.
[337] Morgan, M. G. “Access to Space: The Future of U.S. Space Transportation Systems,” OTA-ISC-415, Office of Technology
Assessment, U.S. Congress, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., April 1990.
[338] Morris, C. “NASP Technology Transfer,” Presentation to ITP Workshop, Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology, 18 March
1992.
[339] Morris, C. E. K. “National Aero-Space Plane Achievements and U.S. Space-Launch Goals,” AIAA-95-6052. 6th International
Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN,
03-07 April 1995. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-6052
[340] Moses, R. A. “Design Data Book - X-30 Configuration 202,” X30NP92001, Book 6, Vol. 2, 10 August 1992.
[341] Moszee, R. H., and Snyder, C. D. “A Propulsion Development Strategy for the National Aero-Space Plane,” AIAA-89-2751. 25th
Joint Propulsion Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Monterey, CA, 10-12 July 1989.
[342] Murthy, S. N. B., and Czysz, P. A. “An Approach to Air-Breathing High Speed Vehicle Synthesis,” AIAA-91-0225. 29th AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, invited paper, Reno, NV, 07-10 January 1991.
[343] Odabas, O., and Sarigul-Klijn, N. “On the Coupled Thermomechanical Analysis of Hypersonic Flight Vehicle Structures,” AIAA-
92-5018. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL,
01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5018
[344] Ohlhorst, C. W., Vaughn, W. L., and Bresina, J. J. “NASA Langley Research Center National Aero-Space Plane Mission Simulation
Profile Sets,” NASA-TM-102670, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, October 1990.
[345] Orloff, B. S. “A Comparative Analysis of Singe-State-to-Orbit Rocket and Air-Breathing Vehicles,” Master's Thesis, Department of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, Air Force Institute of Technology, Air University,
June 2006.
[346] Orton, G. “External Rocket System Concept Trade Study - Interim Review/Concept Screening Agenda,” [Presentation], NASP
Subsystem Team, NASP, 28 November 1990.
[347] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[348] Pace, S. N. “The Aerospace Plane: Goals and Realities,” Issues in Science and Technology, pp. 20-24, Spring 1987.
[349] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[350] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[351] Pamadi, B. N. “A Simple Analytical Aerodynamic Model of Langley Winged-Cone Aerospace Plane Concept,” NASA-CR-194987,
Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, October 1994.
[352] Parks, S., and Waldman, B. “Flight Testing Hypersonic Vehicles - the X-30 and Beyond,” AIAA-90-5229. AIAA 2nd International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5229
[353] Pegg, R. J., and Hunt, J. L. “HYFLITE Design Review,” [Presentation], SAO, NASPO, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton,
VA, 07 October 1993.
[354] Pegg, R. J., Hunt, J. L., Petley, D. H., Burkardt, L., Stevens, D. R., Moses, P. L., Pinckney, S. Z., Kabis, H. Z., Spoth, K. A., Dziedzic,
W. M., Kreis, R. I., Martin, J. G., and Barnhart, P. J. “Design of a Hypersonic Waverider-Derived Airplane,” AIAA-93-0401. 31st
Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 11-14 January 1993.
[355] Pinckney, S. Z. “Flight Test Inlet Design - NASP,” [Presentation], 11 September 1992.
[356] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[357] Pototzky, A. S., Spain, C. V., Soistmann, D. L., and Noll, T. E. “Application of Unsteady Aeroelastic Analysis Techniques on the
National Aerospace Plane,” NASA-TM-100648, Langley Research Center, NASA, Hampton, VA, September 1988.
[358] Powell, W. E. “NASP X-30 Propulsion Technology Status,” NASA-CP-10090. Rocket-Based Combined-Cycle (RBCC) Propulsion
Technology, Tutorial Session, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Huntsville, AL, 01 January 1992.
[359] Ranger, R. “Red Horizons: The U.S. Response to Soviet Military Gains in Space,” REPORT Europe. 14 September 1988.
[360] Reda, H. “NASP and the Environment,” AIAA-91-5051. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5051
[361] Reubush, D. E. “A Historical Perspective on Hypersonic Research at the NACA/NASA Langley Research Center (1944-1984),”
AIAA-92-5034. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5034
[362] Richardson, P. F., McClinton, C. R., Bittner, R. D., Dilley, A. D., Edwards, K. W., Eppard, W. M., Morrison, J. H., Riggins, D. R.,
Switzer, G. F., and Parlette, E. B. “Hypersonic CFD Applications for the National Aero-Space Plane,” SAE-TP-892310. Aerospace
Technology Conference and Exposition, Anaheim, CA, 25-28 September 1989.
[363] Riggins, D., McClinton, C., and Rogers, R. “Flow Enthalpy Effects on Scramjet Mixing and Combustion,” AIAA-92-5097. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5097
[364] Rizzi, S., Robinson, J., and Chiang, C. “Dynamic Response and Sonic Fatigue Analysis at NASA Langley for Hypersonic Vehicle
Structures,” AIAA-92-5019. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5019
[365] Ronald, T. “Structural Materials for NASP,” AIAA-91-5101. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5101
[366] Ronald, T. “Status and Applications of Materials Developed for NASP,” AIAA-95-6131. AIAA Sixth International Aerospace Planes
and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-6131
[367] Ronald, T. M. F. “Materials Challenges for NASP,” AIAA-89-5010. AIAA First National Aerospace Plane Conference, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5010
[368] Ronald, T. M. F. “Materials for Hypersonic Engines,” in AGARD-CP-479, Hypersonic Combined Cycle Propulsion. 75th Hypersonic
Combined Cycle Propulsion Panel Symposium, Madrid, Spain, 28 May - 01 June 1990.
[369] Rowland, F. “Future Roles for Hyper-Velocity Vehicles,” Fort Worth Division, General Dynamics Corporation, January 1990.

229
[370] Rumerman, J. A. “Hypersonics: The National Aerospace Plane Program,” NASA-SP-2000-4012, NASA Historical Data Book, Vol.
VI, The NASA History Series, NASA History Office, Office of Policy and Plans, Washington, D.C., 2000.
[371] Salsbury, S. C. “Validation of License to Export Unclassified Technical Data Pertaining to the X-30 National Aerospace Plane
(NASP) to the United Kingdom,” Memo, SCS-786-1125-EL0641-88, 27 June 1988.
[372] Sams, H. “The NASP Challenge - Management Innovation,” AIAA-89-5006. AIAA First National Aerospace Plane Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5006
[373] Sanford, T. H. “2-4 April Preliminary Vehicle Baseline Review (PVBR),” Directorate of Engineering (ASD/NAE), NASP JPO,
WPAFB, Dayton, OH, 20 May 1991.
[374] Schmidt, D. K. “Problems in Control System Design for Hypersonic Vehicles,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, Vol. 25, No. 22, pp. 89-
96, September 1992. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-6670(17)49638-8.
[375] Schmidt, D. K., and Lovell, T. A. “Mission Performance and Design Sensitivities of Air-Breathing Hypersonic Launch Vehicles,”
AIAA Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 158-164, March - April 1997. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.3204.
[376] Schwartz, I. “Revolutionary Hybrid,” AP Newsfeatures Photo, Bob Williams holds a model, 24 November 1986.
[377] Schweikart, L. The Hypersonic Revolution - Case Studies in the History of Hypersonic Technology - the Quest for the Orbital Jet -
the National Aero-Space Plane Program (1983-1995), Air Force History and Museums Program, Vol. III, Bolling AFB, Washington,
D.C., 1998.
[378] Schweikart, L. “Command Innovation - Lessons from the National Aerospace Plane Program,” Innovation and the Development of
Flight, Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX, 1999, pp. 299-323.
[379] Schweikart, L. “Hypersonic Hope: Planning for NASP, 1986-1991,” Air Power History, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 36-48, Spring 1994.
[380] Shea, J. F. “Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) Program,” AD-A274 530,
Defense Science Board, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, Washington, D.C, November 1992.
[381] Shih, P., and Neumann, R. “The Value of Sub-Scale Flight Tests in the Development of NASP Vehicles,” AIAA-91-5048. AIAA 3rd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December
1991. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5048
[382] Shore, C. P. “Review of Convectively Cooled Structures for Hypersonic Flight,” NASA-TM-87740, Langley Research Center,
NASA, Hampton, VA, May 1986.
[383] Siebenhaar, A., Leonard, J. R., and Orton, G. F. “Thrust Cell Technology for Modular Engines,” AIAA-93-2561.
AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 29th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Monterey, CA, 28-30 June 1993.
[384] Smith, B. C., Suarez, C. J., Porado, W. A., and Malcolm, G. N. “Aerodynamic Control of NASP-Type Vehicles Through Vortex
Manipulation,” Vol. IV, NASA-CR-177626, Ames Research Center, NASA, Moffett Field, CA, September 1993.
[385] Smith, F. W. “Practical Applications of Hypersonic Flight ... Possibilities for Air Express.” Proceedings of the 1st High Speed
Commercial Flight Symposium, in J.P. Loomis (Ed.), High Speed Commercial Flight, The Coming Era, Columbus, OH, 22-23
October 1986.
[386] Snyder, C. D., and Pinckney, S. Z. “A Configuration Development Strategy for the NASP,” AIAA-91-5044. AIAA 3rd International
Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5044
[387] Spain, C., Soistmann, D., Parker, E., Gibbons, M., and Gilbert, M. “An Overview of Selected NASP Aeroelastic Studies at the NASA
Langley Research Center,” AIAA-90-5218. AIAA 2nd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5218
[388] Spoth, K. A., and Moses, P. L. “Structural Design and Analysis of a Mach Zero-to-Five Turbo-Ramjet System,” AIAA-93-1983.
AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 29th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Monterey, CA, 28-30 June 1993.
[389] Stafford, J. R. “SSTO RLVs: More Global Reach? A Study of the Use of Single Stage to Orbit Reusable Launch Vehicles as Airlift
Platforms,” Master's Thesis, Graduate School of Logistics and Acquisition Management, Air Force Institute of Technology, Air
University, November 1996.
[390] Stangeland, M. I. J. “Turbopumps for Liquid Rocket Engines,” SP-924. 9th Cliff Garrett Turbomachinery Award Lecture, SAE
International, 07 April 1992.
[391] Stull, F. D. “Scramjet Propulsion,” AIAA-89-5012. AIAA First National Aero-Space Plane Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5012
[392] Suarez, C. J., Kramer, B. R., Smith, B. C., and Malcolm, G. N. “Aerodynamic Control of NASP-Type Vehicles Through Vortex
Manipulation - Static Wind Tunnel Tests,” Vol. II, NASA-CR-177626, Ames Research Center, NASA, Moffett Field, CA, September
1993.
[393] Suarez, C. J., Ng, T. T., Ong, L. Y., and Malcolm, G. N. “Aerodynamic Control of NASP-Type Vehicles Through Vortex
Manipulation - Static Water Tunnel Tests,” Vol. 1, NASA-CR-177626, Ames Research Center, NASA, Moffett Field, CA, September
1993.
[394] Sullivan, W. “Conducting the NASP Ground Test Program,” AIAA-91-5029. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5029
[395] Swartwout, W., Erdos, J., Engers, R., and Prescott, C. “An Oxidation and Erosion Test Facility for Cooled Panels,” AIAA-92-5095.
AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04
December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5095
[396] Sweetman, B. AURORA - the Pentagon's Secret Hypersonic Spyplane, Mil-Tech Series, MBI Publishing Company, Osceola, WI,
1993.
[397] Swihart, J. “Keynote Address: Advanced Technology Demonstrators, Prototypes and Hypersonic Flight,” AIAA-92-4999. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-4999
[398] Sypniewski, C. “The NASP Challenge: Technical Breakthrough,” AIAA-89-5017. AIAA First National Aero-Space Plane
Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5017
[399] Tang, M. H. “National Aero-Space Plane Organization and Management (Lessons Learned).” NGLT Workshop, Presentation,
Williamsburg, VA, 11 December 2003.

230
[400] Tang, M. H. “National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) Program,” N91-28214, [Presentation], Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, PA, 26-29 June 1990.
[401] Tarifa, C. S. “Hypersonic Propulsion: Past and Present.”
[402] Terry, C. E., and Kent, T. J. “Risk Analysis of Hot/Cold Structure Concepts,” BN09861, General Dynamics, NASP Program, NASP
GD, 26 February 1991.
[403] Throckmorton, D. “Enabling Technologies Research and Development for the National Aero-Space Plane,” AIAA-89-5009. AIAA
First National Aero-Space Plane Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5009
[404] Toten, A., Fong, J., Murphy, R., and Powell, W. “NASP Derived Vehicle (NDV) Space Launch Operating Costs and Program Cost
Recovery Options,” AIAA-91-5080. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5080
[405] Townend, L., Broadbent, E., Nonweiler, T., Pagan, G., Parker, E., and Pike, J. “Aero-Propulsive Effects on Configuration Shaping,”
AIAA-91-5064. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando,
FL, 03-05 December 1991. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1991-5064
[406] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[407] Vandenkerckhove, J., and Czysz, P. A. “S.S.T.O. Performance Assessment with In-Flight LOX Collection,” IAF-94-S.4.426. 45th
Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Jerusalem, Israel, 09-14 October 1994.
[408] Vandenkerckhove, J., and Czysz, P. A. “S.S.T.O. Performance Assessment with In-Flight LOX Collection,” Acta Astronautica, Vol.
37, pp. 167-178, 1995.
[409] Vaughan, W., and Anderson, B. “Environmental Effects Consideration: A Case Study - Lessons Learned,” AIAA-92-5075. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5075
[410] Ventura, T., and Czysz, P. “Aurora & Beyond: Paul Czysz on Hypersonic Aircraft.” American Antigravity.com, 26 July 2006.
[411] Voelcker, J. “The Iffy 'Orient Express',” IEEE Spectrum, pp. 31-33, August 1988.
[412] Voland, R., and Rock, K. “NASP Concept Demonstration Engine and Subscale Parametric Engine Tests,” AIAA-95-6055. AIAA 6th
International Aerospace Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Chattanooga, TN, 03-07 April 1995. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-6055
[413] Wagner, E., Li, I., Nguyen, D., and Nguyen, P. “NASP Guidance Design for Vehicle Autonomy,” AIAA-90-5245. AIAA 2nd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5245
[414] Waldman, B., and Harsha, P. “NASP: Focus on Technology,” AIAA-92-5001. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5001
[415] Waldman, B., and Harsha, P. “The First Year of Teaming: A Progress Report,” AIAA-91-5008. AIAA 3rd International Aerospace
Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 03-05 December 1991.
[416] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[417] White, M. E. “The National Aerospace Plane Program and the APL Role,” John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.
218-229, 1992.
[418] Whitehead, A. “NASP Aerodynamics,” AIAA-89-5013. AIAA First National Aero-Space Plane Conference, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 01-04 December 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5013
[419] Wierzbanowski, T., and Kasten, T. “Manned Versus Unmanned: The Implications to NASP,” AIAA-90-5265. AIAA 2nd
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 29-31 October 1990.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-5265
[420] Wierzbanowski, T., Reda, H., Duecker, G., and Brown, C. “An Environmental Study of the National Aero-Space Plane,” AIAA-92-
5074. AlAA 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-
04 December 1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5074
[421] Wilhite, A. W., Powell, R. W., Scotti, S. J., McClinton, C. R., Pinckney, S. Z., Cruz, C. I., Jackson, L. R., Hunt, J. L., Cerro, J. A.,
and Moses, P. L. “Concepts Leading to the National Aero-Space Plane Program,” AIAA-90-0294. 28th Aerospace Sciences Meeting,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NV, 08-11 January 1990.
[422] Wilson, G. “Time-Dependent Quasi-One-Dimensional Simulations of High Enthalpy Pulse Facilities,” AIAA-92-5096. AlAA 4th
International Aerospace Planes Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 01-04 December
1992. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-5096
[423] Wright, H. “National Aero-Space Plane Technology Development Overview,” AIAA-89-5003. AIAA First National Aero-Space
Plane Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Dayton, OH, 20-21 July 1989.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-5003
[424] Yeager, C. “America's Orient Express,” Popular Mechanics, pp. 72-75, August 1986.

231
 APPENDIX B
VERIFICATION CONDUCTED USING AVDS-VCC DURING NASA STUDY

232
B.1. X-51 Sizing Verification

Sized Vehicle Attributes X-51 AVDS X-51 X-51 AVDS X-51 % Error

[EN] [EN] [SI] [SI]

Operating Weight Empty, lb or kg 1,225 1,209 555 548 -1.29

Operating Empty Weight, lb or kg 1,225 1,209 555 548 -1.29

Takeoff Gross Weight, lb or kg 1,504 1,483 682 673 -1.38

Structural Weight, lb or kg - 292 - 133 -

Fuel Weight, lb or kg 279 274 127 124 -1.79

Payload Weight, lb or kg 0 0 0 0 -
1.5 * *
Tau, Vtotal/Spln 0.214 0.214 0.214 0.214 -

Total Planform Area, ft2 or m2 24.4* 24.3 2.27* 2.26 -0.50

Wing Planform Area, ft2 or m2 24.4* 24.3 2.27* 2.26 -0.50

2 2 * *
Wetted Surface Area, ft or m 90.9 85.6 8.45 7.95 -5.90

Total Volume, ft3 or m3 25.7* 25.6 0.729* 0.725 -0.56

Ratio of Wetted to Total Planform Area 3.73* 3.52 3.73* 3.52 -5.43
2 2
Structural Index, Istr = Wstr/Swet, lb/ft or N/m - 3.42 - 16.7 -

Propulsion Index, Ip = ρfuel/(WR-1), lb/ft3 or kg/m3 219 220 3,507 3,531 0.68

Industrial Capability Index, 10∙Ip/Istr - 645 - 2,116 -

Total Fuel Fraction, Wfuel/TOGW 0.186 0.185 0.186 0.185 -0.42

Total Weight Ratio, TOGW/OWE 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 -0.10

Total Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Spln, lb/ft2 or N/m2 61.6* 61.1 2,951* 2,925 -0.88
2 2 * *
Wing Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Swing, lb/ft or N/m 61.6 61.1 2,951 2,925 -0.88
*
Values that have been obtained using the X-51 VSP geometry model

233
B.2. XB-70 Sizing Verification

Sized Vehicle Attributes XB-70 AVDS XB-70 XB-70 AVDS XB-70 % Error

[EN] [EN] [SI] [SI]

Operating Weight Empty, lb or kg 256,148 265,258 116,147 120,277 3.56

Operating Empty Weight, lb or kg 206,148 214,668 93,475 97,338 4.13

Takeoff Gross Weight, lb or kg 542,029 544,814 245,776 247,038 0.51

Structural Weight, lb or kg 124,203 105,837 56,318 47,990 -14.8

Fuel Weight, lb or kg 285,881 279,557 129,629 126,761 -2.21

Payload Weight, lb or kg 50,000 50,000 22,672 22,672 -

1.5 * *
Tau, Vtotal/Spln 0.0549 0.0549 0.0549 0.0549 -

Total Planform Area, ft2 or m2 7,099* 7,093 660* 659 -0.09

Wing Planform Area, ft2 or m2 6,297 6,291 585 584 -0.09

2 2 * *
Wetted Surface Area, ft or m 18,981 18,964 1,763 1,762 -0.09

Total Volume, ft3 or m3 27,442* 27,406 777* 776 -0.13

Ratio of Wetted to Total Planform Area 2.67* 2.67 2.67* 2.67 0.00
2 2 * *
Structural Index, Istr = Wstr/Swet, lb/ft or N/m 6.54 5.58 313 27.2 -14.7

Propulsion Index, Ip = ρfuel/(WR-1), lb/ft3 or kg/m3 45.3 48.0 726 769 5.90

Industrial Capability Index, 10∙Ip/Istr 69.26* 86.0 227* 282 24.2

Total Fuel Fraction, Wfuel/TOGW 0.527 0.513 0.527 0.513 -2.71

Total Weight Ratio, TOGW/OWE 2.12 2.05 2.12 2.05 -2.94

Total Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Spln, lb/ft2 or N/m2 76.3* 76.8 3,656* 3,678 0.60
2 2
Wing Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Swing, lb/ft or N/m 86.1 86.6 4,122 4,146 0.60
*
Values that have been obtained using the XB-70 VSP geometry model

234
B.3. SR-71 Sizing Verification

Sized Vehicle Attributes SR-71 AVDS SR-71 SR-71 AVDS SR-71 % Error

[EN] [EN] [SI] [SI]

Operating Weight Empty, lb or kg 60,203 60,652 27,298 27,502 0.75

Operating Empty Weight, lb or kg 56,203 56,083 25,485 25,430 -0.21

Takeoff Gross Weight, lb or kg 140,853 143,024 63,868 64,852 1.54

Structural Weight, lb or kg 26,101 27,168 11,835 12,319 4.09

Fuel Weight, lb or kg 80,650 82,372 36,570 37,350 2.13

Payload Weight, lb or kg 4,000 4,000 1,814 1,814 -

1.5 * *
Tau, Vtotal/Spln 0.0442 0.0442 0.0442 0.0442 -

Total Planform Area, ft2 or m2 2,491* 2,518 231* 234 1.08

Wing Planform Area, ft2 or m2 1,795 1,815 167 169 1.09

2 2 * *
Wetted Surface Area, ft or m 6,469 6,540 601 608 1.09

Total Volume, ft3 or m3 5,493* 5,583 156* 158 1.63

Ratio of Wetted to Total Planform Area 2.60* 2.60 2.60* 2.60 0.01
2 2 * *
Structural Index, Istr = Wstr/Swet, lb/ft or N/m 4.03 4.15 193 20.3 2.97

Propulsion Index, Ip = ρfuel/(WR-1), lb/ft3 or kg/m3 36.1 36 579 571 -1.36

Industrial Capability Index, 10∙Ip/Istr 89.54* 85.8 294* 281 -4.20

Total Fuel Fraction, Wfuel/TOGW 0.573 0.576 0.573 0.576 0.58

Total Weight Ratio, TOGW/OWE 2.34 2.36 2.34 2.36 0.79

Total Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Spln, lb/ft2 or N/m2 56.5* 56.8 2,707* 2,720 0.45
2 2
Wing Planform Wing Loading, TOGW/Swing, lb/ft or N/m 78.5 78.8 3,757 3,774 0.45
*
Values that have been obtained using the SR-71 VSP geometry model

235
 APPENDIX C
VEHICLE PERFORMANCE OVERVIEWS

236
C.1. X-51 Performance Overview

C.2. X-43A Performance Overview

237
C.3. SR-71 Performance Overview

C.4. XB-70 Performance Overview

238
C.5. Concorde Performance Overview

C.6. Sänger-II Performance Overview

239
C.7. NASP X-30 Performance Overview

240
 APPENDIX D
SOFTWARE USER MANUAL

241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
 APPENDIX F
SOFTWARE USER TESTING FORMAT

252
 VCC Usability Test Plan
Name of Product: Vehicle Configuration Compendium
Goals: Test the usability and accessibility of the software interface of the Vehicle
Configuration Compendium. Ensure the application is easily navigable to professionals and
non-professionals alike.
Time:
Date:
Location:
Format: In-person
Participant Name:
Field of Study: Aerospace / Non-Aerospace
If Aerospace, # years of engagement:

Introduction:
This is the Vehicle Configuration Compendium, which is meant to be a compendium of aircraft
design-related data, information and knowledge to help designers as well as design enthusiasts.
The software we will be testing today is a prototype implementation of this compendium, so you
will see a very low number of vehicles listed. We will begin with a series of tasks for you to
complete. If at any point you need assistance, feel free to ask. Also feel free to vocalize what
you are experiencing as you walk through each of the tasks.
Tasks: Moderator notes:
1) Find out the year the XB-70 was developed.
2) Open up the XB-70 bibliography.
2) View the propulsion plots for XB-70.
3) Expand one of the XB-70 propulsion plots.
5) Find the source number of the third aerodynamic plot for SR-71.
6) Compare the aerodynamic performance of two different configurations.

Task # Completed? Time to Assistance

Y/N completion required?
1
2
3
4
5
6

253
This page to be filled by test moderator only
Post-Test Survey:
Q1. How did you find using the VCC software to view disciplinary data for the XB-70?

Q2. What is a feature of the software that you found confusing to use? Why?

Q3. What is a feature of the software you found easy to use? Why?

Q4. Were there any features you expected to see in such a system that you did not?

This page to be filled by test user

254
Q4. How would you rate the GUI on the following: (on a scale of 1 to 5)

Bad Good
Overall experience: 1 2 3 4 5

Confusing Clear
Layout of software: 1 2 3 4 5

Simplistic Too Complex

Complexity of the system: 1 2 3 4 5

Low High
confidence confidence
Confidence level to use the system without help: 1 2 3 4 5

Not useful Very useful

Level of usefulness of the information displayed for design: 1 2 3 4 5

Poorly Well
organized organized
Organization of the information on the screen: 1 2 3 4 5

Inadequate Adequate
detail detail
Level of detail of the information provided for each vehicle: 1 2 3 4 5

Bad Good
Overall rating of the VCC: 1 2 3 4 5

This page to be filled by test user

255
 APPENDIX G
USER TESTING RESULTS

256
G.1. Task Completion
User # Completed? Time to Completion Assistance Required?
Task # 1 1 Yes 0:04:00 Yes
2 Yes 0:02:00 Yes
3 Yes 0:00:35 No
4 Yes 0:01:27 Yes

Task # 2 1 Yes 0:00:03 No

2 Yes 0:00:05 No
3 Yes 0:00:13 No
4 Yes 0:00:04 No

Task # 3 1 Yes 0:00:03 No

2 Yes 0:00:30 Yes
3 Yes 0:00:15 No
4 Yes 0:00:01 No

Task # 4 1 Yes 0:00:02 No

2 Yes 0:00:02 No
3 Yes 0:00:08 No
4 Yes 0:00:02 No

Task # 5 1 Yes 0:00:14 No

2 Yes 0:00:15 No
3 Yes 0:00:24 Yes
4 Yes 0:00:43 Yes

Task # 6 1 Yes 0:00:26 No

2 Yes 0:01:00 Yes
3 Yes 0:00:57 Yes
4 Yes 0:00:17 No

257
G.2. User Testing Survey Results
User # 1 2 3 4 Average:
Overall
Experience 4 4 3 4 3.75
Layout of
software 5 4 4 5 4.5
Complexity of
the system
2 3 3 2 2.5
Confidence
level
to use the
system
without help 5 4 4 3 4
Level of
usefulness of
the
information
displayed for
design 4 5 5 - 4.666667
Organization
of
the
information
on the screen 3 4 4 5 4
Level of detail
of the
information
provided for
each vehicle
4 5 3 4 4
Overall
rating of the
VCC 4 4 4 4 4

258
 APPENDIX H
ABSTRACTS OF TOPIC-RELATED PUBLICATIONS FROM AVD LABORATORY

259
H.1. Chudoba, B., and Huang, X., “Development of a dedicated aerospace vehicle conceptual
design knowledge-based system,” 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2006.

What has to be avoided most is that when knowledge stops evolving, it turns into opinion or
dogma. This statement challenges rebuttal which immediately can be counter-acted by
asking: How many truly capable aerospace vehicle design knowledge-based systems can be
found to take advantage of design data, information, experience, and knowledge of past and
present aerospace projects easily available at the fingertips? A major inconsistency can be
observed in the ability to design advanced aerospace vehicles with respect to design
knowledge required and design knowledge available. Advanced and especially ‘novel’ vehicle
design is, as a fact, characterized by permanent lack of knowledge available at the conceptual
design stage. As implied by novelty, design knowledge available naturally lags behind design
knowledge required. The degree of this discrepancy is a measure for the design risks involved.
As a consequence, the ability to perform efficient multi-disciplinary design is quickly
becoming a lost skill without persistent knowledge-maintenance. A wide range of technical
solutions for a multitude of problems have been assessed and demonstrated in aeronautical
history. Unfortunately, much of that knowledge is either ignored for a variety of reasons or
it has been simply forgotten. Some of today’s conventional and unconventional flight vehicle
design proposals would appear less risky or radical, if an up-to-date vehicle design
knowledge-based system would be available to the practicing engineer and project lead. As a
result, a striking discrepancy has to be accepted between ‘what can be done’ to ‘what could
be done’. This paper outlines the research strategy adopted at the AVD Laboratory towards
the development of a dedicated aerospace vehicle conceptual design knowledge-based system
(KBS). This apparent ‘white space’ is readily confirmed having provided a perspective on the
original contribution the research makes to aerospace science and engineering. An approach
towards the construction of a dedicated conceptual design KBS is presented, placing strong
emphasis on a systematic and thorough knowledge utilization process. The researchers are
confident that not only is the study distinctive and different from previous research, but that
it is worth doing.

260
H.2. Roberts, K., and Chudoba, B., “Flight vehicle design heritage: Are we on the road to the
same fate as Alexandria?,” 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2007.

Throughout the generations of aircraft design, much knowledge has been gained.
Undoubtedly, much time, money, and energy have been expended towards this goal, both in
the plans for commercial gain as well as in the scientific pursuit of knowledge. However, with
any vast accumulation of knowledge comes the question: how do we organize it, remember it,
and learn from it? Libraries, technical servers, and commercial collections have thus far
strived towards serving this purpose. However, the requirement of an extensive literature
survey from which historical insight can be extracted requires a large amount of time the
design project engineer may not, and probably does not, have readily available. Additionally,
what becomes of the knowledge and experience that the design engineers throughout the ages
have learned personally? How is this information collected and learned from? Unfortunately,
too much of this experiential knowledge has been lost. To help in solving these problems, a
system that can incorporate engineering knowledge into aerospace conceptual design must be
developed and implemented. In order to form a specification for such a system, an assessment
of current knowledge management capabilities must be completed. This paper details this
assessment, which involves significant research into the current state of knowledge
management, as well as the level to which knowledge management is used in aerospace design
today. In order to complete this assessment, a categorization system for KBS design has been
established. Additionally, research into how an engineer works, thinks, processes, applies, and,
overall, gains knowledge is included. This research helps to establish both the specification for
the prototype of a KBS design system, as well as the ‘ideal’ KBS specification to be
implemented in the future. Finally, a description of how the prototype specification is applied
in the KBSDESIGN system in the conceptual design phase. It is the authors’ view that with an
adequate understanding of the knowledge generated in the past, design engineers will gain a
clear perspective to apply to future vehicles.

261
H.3. Peng, X., and Chudoba, B., “Knowledge engineering - formalizing the engineering
science discipline,” 15th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations
Conference, 2015.

Knowledge is the most precious ingredient facilitating aerospace engineering

research and product development. Inefficient knowledge retention methods have
become a primary obstacle for knowledge transfer from the experienced to the next
generation of engineers. Consequently, aerospace progress is impeded since few
engineers pay attention as to how to efficiently manage past-to-present data,
information and knowledge for future decisionmaking. The problem is: flawed input
data, information, and knowledge yield flawed results, regardless of the quality of the
analysis being conducted. Therefore, the task of how to efficiently manage data,
information, and knowledge is vital to the future of aerospace growth. In order to
provide development environments with a pragmatic knowledge management
mindset and toolset, a best-practice knowledge management methodology – AVDKBS
is proposed, resembling a dedicated aerospace design Knowledge-Based System
(KBS). The research motivation, background and methodology of AVDKBS is
explained in details. In addition, a quantitative evaluation criteria is proposed for the
first time to measure the performances of the knowledge management methods,
which works as an objective scale to determine their efficiencies. Lastly, a brief
discussion is made on future developments.

H.4. Peng, X., and Chudoba, B., “Paving the way from the past to the future: AVDKBS, a
software development in knowledge engineering,” 15th AIAA Aviation Technology,
Integration, and Operations Conference, 2015.

Based on the unique knowledge engineering methodology, This paper does

demonstrate the advantages of the new knowledge methodology via the functional
software prototype AVDKBS.This dedicated aerospace knowledge-based system and
software does introduce seven knowledge management functions: Knowledge
Educating, Knowledge Updating, Knowledge Deleting, Trend Predicting, Data
Updating, Data Deleting and Parametric Sizing Analysis. Both the function method
logic and Graphical User Interface (GUI) developments are explained in detail. The
advantages of AVDKBS is illustrated through a case study: Launch Vehicle Design.
At the end of each application example throughout the case study, the AVDKBS
efficiency advantages over traditional manual knowledge management methods are
quantified summarized.

262
H.5. Simon, S., Atchison, S., and Chudoba, B., “Development of a hypersonic vehicle
configuration compendium,” AIAA AVIATION 2021 FORUM, 2021.

Knowledge loss between projects or generations of designers and engineers is an issue that
happens more often than it should, especially in the world of high-speed aerospace vehicle
design. This results in future generations wasting valuable time and resources relearning
information that has already been generated through experimentation in the past. This issue
could be resolved with the creation of a parametric library that houses data and knowledge
and is continually updated for generations to come, which is the undertaking of the research
project detailed in this paper. The solution to this issue (as formulated by the collective effort
of members of the University of Texas at Arlington AVD Laboratory) is the Vehicle
Configuration Compendium, or the VCC. The VCC aims to keep vehicle designers better
informed of past projects and able to easily access conceptual design-relevant project data
and knowledge by housing them in an interactive software. Currently, seven high-speed
vehicles have been processed into the compendium of gathered information, using a carefully
formulated data and knowledge compilation and review process. This data is then
incorporated into a user-friendly software interface that will in the future encourage
designers and design enthusiasts of all experience or proficiency levels to consider various
vehicle configurations and forecast any new vehicle design performances by consulting past
projects.

H.6. Simon, S., Atchison, S., and Chudoba, B., “Conceptual design decision-making assisted
by a comprehensive high-speed vehicle knowledgebase library,” ASCEND 2021, 2021.

In the recent years, the need for high-speed (supersonic to hypersonic) vehicle design has
gained major significance in the aerospace industry. This is especially the case for within the
commercial passenger transport area. A conceptual design tool has been initially developed
called the Vehicle Configuration Compendium, or VCC, that can strategically collect and
compare disciplinary data. This tool allows the storage of available design knowledge and can
implement a multi-disciplinary approach to perform configuration studies through the
analysis of comparing the unique configurations of the vehicles stored within. With seven
representative high-speed vehicles compiled in the tool, the knowledgebase of the VCC can
then be used to investigate a particular issue, or issues, in high-speed vehicle design to provide
initial observations and recommendations on configuration choices given the issue(s)
considered. This paper will conduct a case study of diving into one of these design issues and
utilizing the knowledgebase functionality of the software for effective decision-making in the
process.

263