TF-2004-09 DFRC

Paresev
"The Paraglider Research Vehicle"

The overhead lever used for lateral control on the original Paresev-1 is clearly seen in this photo of the vehicle
in flight behind a towline.
NASA Photo E-8009

A NASA aeronautical research project conducted in the early 1960s at the Dryden Flight Research
Center studied the feasibility of using a steerable kite-like parawing as a replacement for parachutes used
then to safely land spacecraft on Earth. The project was called Paresev, an acronym for Paraglider Research
Vehicle.

The unpowered Paresev was based on the design of the Rogallo wing, conceived in the late 1940s by
Francis Rogallo, an aeronautical engineer who worked at the Langley Research Center for the NACA
(National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the predecessor agency of NASA).

1
 The unpowered Paresev had the shape of a world. Rogallo-type parawings are also used on
triangular kite with a pilot sitting in the open on a ultra-lights, simple powered flying machines that
seat suspended beneath an aluminum triangular resemble the original Paresev research vehicle
frame covered with fabric. When subjected to air evaluated by NASA pilots more than four decades
pressure, the fabric formed a billowy lifting surface. ago.
The pilot controlled pitch and lateral movement of
the parawing with an overhead control stick attached
to the frame. Paresev History

The Dryden tests also included evaluation of The Paresev project originated in early 1961
an inflatable Rogallo-type wing similar to the design during the formative days of America’s first venture
of the parawing considered for spacecraft use. into space. As the Mercury program was putting
the nation’s first astronauts into space, the Gemini
During the NASA study, the Paresev was program was fully underway planning for the next
towed into the air by ground vehicles and aircraft. phase.
At pre-determined altitudes, pilots released the
towline and landed on Rogers Dry Lake following Parachutes had already been chosen as the
their brief flights that were measured in minutes, primary means of slowing the descent of a spacecraft
and often in seconds. Between 1962 and 1964, the returning to Earth, and they were proven to be safe
Paresev was flown nearly 350 times to test four and reliable. But the exact location of the landing
versions of the vehicle. site on a broad ocean could not always be identified
correctly, and the retrieval of astronauts and
The Paresev evaluation, underway at the height spacecraft could become costly when a large fleet
of the Mercury spaceflight program, was looking at of recovery ships had to be deployed. Some NASA
the parawing concept as a possible replacement of planners also feared the risk of astronauts drowning
the parachute recovery system on future Gemini and and spacecraft being lost because of water leaking
Apollo spacecraft. The parawing concept was not into capsules or from total immersion.
selected for the spaceflight program, but interest it
generated because of the NASA study helped Most NASA officials were already aware of
popularize the Rogallo wing which made the sport the Rogallo wing. The designer had first proposed
of hang gliding one of the most widespread forms the parawing concept to Langley in the late 1940s
of flying throughout the world. as a simple, inexpensive approach to recreational
flying, but the idea was not accepted as a project. In
Rogallo created the flexible wing on his own early 1961, however, NASA spaceflight planners
and successfully flew a prototype in 1948. He began looking for a better way to land astronauts in
patented the design in 1951, but the first real public their space capsules and called for a study of a
exposure didn’t come until 11 years later when Rogallo-type parawing. The initial idea was to use
NASA began evaluating the concept for the manned an inflatable parawing that would be folded up and
spaceflight program. stowed on the Gemini capsules. At a pre-selected
altitude, the parawing would be deployed, inflated,
Rogallo wings and variations on the original and the capsule would be steered to an airplane-like
design are now being flown by hundreds of landing on the ground. This would eliminate the
thousands of hang glider enthusiasts around the

2
need for an ocean landing and a large flotilla of rate by either tilting forward or aft. On the first
recovery ships. model, turns were initiated by tilting the wing from
side to side with an overhead control stick.
The need for baseline parawing experience and
developmental testing shifted the operational effort The first Paresev flights were made with
to NASA Dryden where Paresev-1 was built in just triangular frame covered with linen, but it took just
seven weeks within a timetable that Center five flights to show that linen was too flexible and
management said must be “quick and cheap.” The caused trailing edge flutter. There was also an
cost was only $4,280, and it was the first NASA undesirable time delay between a control command
research aircraft to be built totally in-house. and aircraft movement. Rigging modifications failed
to improve flying characteristics and longitudinal
and lateral control forces remained severe.
The Paresev and the Flight Test
Program On the fifth ground tow the vehicle and pilot
plunged to the ground from a height of 10 feet. The
pilot was not hurt seriously, but the Paresev had to
The Paresev flight test program began in
be rebuilt.
February 1962 and ended two years later after nearly
350 flights. During this period, the original Paresev
vehicle was modified for testing three times. Each Dacron was used to recover the wing on the
version had its own designation: Paresev-1, 1-A, 1- rebuilt vehicle, now called Paresev 1-A, and better
B, and 1-C. aerodynamics and handling qualities were quickly
noticed. The original overhead control lever was
also replaced with a more conventional stick and
Paresev’s main three-piece frame, made of
pulley system on Paresev 1-A. The new control
aluminum tubing, came together at a forward point
system was linked to lines attached to the outboard
to create a triangular shape with a leading edge sweep
tips of the parawing where movement would cause
angle of 50 degrees. The sweep angle was held firm
a change in attitude and pitch. Other alterations
by a spreader bar. The wing fabric was attached to
included larger wheels, salvaged from a Cessna 175
the two leading edges and the center longitudinal
aircraft, and auto-type shock absorbers.
keel. In flight, the cloth billowed into two half-cone
lobes that created the parawing’s unconventional
look and shape. Paresev 1-A became the first version to be
towed by an aircraft. Following a series of ground
tows to check handling qualities at low altitudes, a
The pilot seat was attached to a three-wheeled
rented Stearman biplane pulled Paresev 1-A to
frame that supported a tripod mast on which the
10,000 feet above Rogers Dry Lake where the pilot
parawing was mounted. The basic vehicle was
reported great improvements in control forces. That
slightly more than 11 feet high from the top of the
altitude became the normal tow release point on most
parawing to the ground, while the length of the center
flights when towed by an aircraft.
keel was 15 feet. Total weight was about 600
pounds.
Paresev 1-B evolved from the same vehicle
when project officials made the wing smaller to study
As a vehicle or another aircraft was towing
lower lift-over-drag values, giving it a gliding ability
the Paresev it usually rose from the ground at about
that was described as “pretty scary” by more than
46 mph and had a maximum air speed of about 65
one test pilot.
mph. The pilot controlled the ascent and descent

3
 reentry where the nitrogen-filled chambers would
form the steerable parawing to bring the capsules
and crews back to Earth.

Paresev flight tests at NASA Dryden, however,

showed that the inflatable parawing concept was
very unstable in flight and difficult to fly, even after
rudder pedals had been installed as a booster
mechanism for roll control.

After evaluating the results of the Paresev

flight test program and additional reentry studies by
NASA and North American Aviation, the parachute
recovery concept was retained for the Gemini and
Apollo spaceflight programs, and the Paresev
concept was discarded.

The Paresev vehicle was turned over to the

Smithsonian Institute’s Air and Space Museum
following the flight test program, and is now on loan
to the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)
NASA Dryden pilot Milton Thompson, right, and NASA museum in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.
astronaut Gus Grissom are pictured with the modified Paresev
1-A. The original lateral control lever was replaced on Paresev
1-A with a stick and pulley system of control wires linked to Pilots who took part in the Paresev flight
the tips of the parawing. research program were NASA Dryden research
NASA Photo E-8937 pilots Milton Thompson, Bruce Peterson, and Neil
Armstrong, Robert Champine of NASA Langley,
and NASA astronaut Gus Grissom.
After sufficient data were generated with the
smaller wing, the final project modification was
made. The vehicle was called Paresev 1-C and used
a half-size inflatable parawing based on the concept
originally envisioned for the Gemini and Apollo
space capsules.

The new wing, 179 square feet in size, had

three chambers that became rigid support spars when
pressurized with nitrogen. The gas-filled center spar
was nearly 16 feet in length, while the other two
inflatable spars formed the two leading edges. When
pressurized, this half-scale configuration resembled
the larger space-capsule version. For reentry use,
the larger parawings on Gemini spacecraft would The inflatable wing tested on Paresev 1-C is clearly seen in
have been folded and stowed during spaceflight. this photo of the vehicle mounted on a flatbed truck. The half-
They would have been deployed upon atmospheric scale parawing is the same design as the larger version once
considered for reentry use on Gemini and Apollo spacecraft.
NASA Photo E-10365