[1]. Joseph R. Chambers and Sue B. Grafton, “Aerodynamic Characteristics of Airplanes at High Angles of Attack,” NASA TM-74097 (1977).
[2]. For detailed discussions of contributions of NASA Langley and its partners to high-angle-of-attack technology for current military aircraft, see Chambers, Partners in Freedom: Contributions of the NASA Langley Research Center to Military Aircraft of the 1990s, NASA SP-2000-4519 (2000).
[3]. D. Bruce Owens, Jay M. Brandon, Mark A. Croom, Charles M. Fremaux, Eugene H. Heim, and Dan D. Vicroy, “Overview of Dynamic Test Techniques for Flight Dynamics Research at NASA LaRC,” AIAA Paper 2006-3146 (2006).
[4]. Fred E. Weick and Robert T. Jones, “The Effect of Lateral Controls in Producing Motion of an Airplane as Computed From Wind-Tunnel Data,” NACA TR-570 (1937).
[5]. See, for example, Montgomery Knight, “Wind Tunnel Tests on Autorotation and the Flat Spin,” NACA TR-273 (1928), which states, “The results of the investigation indicate that in free flight a monoplane is incapable of flat spinning, whereas an unstaggered biplane has inherent flat-spinning tendencies.”
[6]. Over 100 designs were tested in the Langley Spin Tunnel during World War II.
[7]. Chambers, Radical Wings and Wind Tunnels (Specialty Press, 2008); Anshal I. Neihouse, Walter J. Klinar, and Stanley H. Scher, “Status of Spin Research for Recent Airplane Designs,” NASA TR-R-57 (1960).
[8]. Charles Donlan, “An Interim Report on the Stability and Control of Tailless Airplanes,” NACA TR-796 (1944).
[9]. Martin T. Moul and John W. Paulson, “Dynamic Lateral Behavior of High-Performance Aircraft,” NACA RM-L58E16 (1958).
[10]. Neihouse, Klinar, and Scher, “Status of Spin Research.”
[11]. Interview of James S. Bowman, Jr., head of the Langley Spin Tunnel, by author, NASA Langley Research Center, June 5, 1963.
[12]. For a detailed discussion of NASA contributions to the F-4 high-angle-of-attack issues, see Chambers, Partners in Freedom; Chambers and Ernie L. Anglin, “Analysis of Lateral Directional Stability Characteristics of a Twin Jet Fighter Airplane at High Angles of Attack,” NASA TN-D-5361 (1969); Chambers, Anglin, and Bowman, “Analysis of the Flat-Spin Characteristics of a Twin-Jet Swept-Wing Fighter Airplane,” NASA TN-D-5409 (1969); William A. Newsom, Jr., and Grafton, “Free-Flight Investigation of Effects of Slats on Lateral-Directional Stability of a 0.13-Scale Model of the F-4E Airplane,” NASA TM-SX-2337 (1971); and Edward J. Ray and Eddie G. Hollingsworth, “Subsonic Characteristics of a Twin-Jet Swept-Wing Fighter Model with Maneuvering Devices,” NASA TN-D-6921 (1973).
[13]. Funds cited in then-year dollars.
[14]. Aeronautical System Division/Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory Symposium on Stall/Post-Stall/Spin, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, Dec. 15–17, 1971.
[15]. The significance of the Dayton symposium cannot be overstated. It was one of the most critical high-angle-of-attack meetings ever held, in view of the national R&D mobilization that occurred in its wake.
[16]. Key individuals at NASA Headquarters included William S. Aiken, Jr., Gerald G. Kayten, A.J. Evans, and Jack Levine.
[17]. William P. Gilbert and Charles E. Libby, “Investigation of an Automatic Spin Prevention System for Fighter Airplanes,” NASA TN-D-6670 (1972).
[18]. For individual details and references for Langley’s activities, see Chambers, Partners in Freedom.
[19]. Gilbert, Luat T. Nguyen, and Roger W. Van Gunst, “Simulator Study of Automatic Departure- and Spin-Prevention Concepts to a Variable-Sweep Fighter Airplane,” NASA TM-X-2928 (1973). Although the initial concept had been identified in 1972, over 20 years would pass before the concept was implemented in the F-14 fleet. During that time, over 35 F-14s were lost because of departure from controlled flight and the flat spin.
[20]. Nguyen, Gilbert, Joseph Gera, Kenneth W. Iliff, and Einar K. Enevoldson, “Application of High-Alpha Control System Concepts to a Variable-Sweep Fighter Airplane,” AIAA Paper 80-1582 (1980).
[21]. For an account of the background and development of the F-14 DFCS, see “F-14 Tomcat Upgrades” GlobalSecurity.Org, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-14-upgrades.htm, accessed June, 5, 2009.
[22]. The F-14 ARI scenario is in direct contrast to the beneficial “cradle-to-grave” technology participation that the NACA and NASA enjoyed during the development of the Century series fighters.
[23]. Gilbert, “Free-Flight Investigation of Lateral-Directional Characteristics of a 0.10-Scale Model of the F-15 Airplane at High Angles of Attack,” NASA TM-SX-2807 (1973).
[24]. Euclid C. Holleman, “Summary of Flight Tests to Determine the Spin and Controllability Characteristics of a Remotely Piloted, Large-Scale (3/8) Fighter Airplane Model,” NASA TN-D-8052 (1976).
[25]. Steve Davies and Doug Dildy, F-15 Eagle Engaged: The World’s Most Successful Jet Fighter (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2007), pp. 82–83.
[26]. NASA’s participation had begun with the YF-16 program, during which testing in the Full-Scale Tunnel, Spin Tunnel, and 7- by 10-Foot High-Speed Tunnel contributed to the airframe shaping and control system design. For an example, see Newsom, Anglin, and Grafton, “Free-Flight Investigation of a 0.15-Scale Model of the YF-16 Airplane at High Angle of Attack,” NASA TM-SX-3279 (1975).
[27]. Gilbert, Nguyen, and Van Gunst, “Simulator Study of the Effectiveness of an Automatic Control System Designed to Improve the High-Angle-of-Attack Characteristics of a Fighter Airplane.”
[28]. Nguyen, Marilyn E. Ogburn, Gilbert, Kemper S. Kibler, Philip W. Brown, and Perry L. Deal, “Simulator Study of Stall/Post Stall Characteristics of a Fighter Airplane With Relaxed Longitudinal Stability,” NASA TP-1538 (1979).
[29]. For examples, see reports by Thomas R. Sisk and Neil W. Matheny, “Precision Controllability of the F-15 Airplane,” NASA TM-72861 (1979), and “Precision Controllability of the YF-17 Airplane,” NASA TP-1677 (1980).
[30]. Daniel G. Murri, Nguyen, and Grafton, “Wind-Tunnel Free-Flight Investigation of a Model of a Forward-Swept Wing Fighter Configuration,” NASA TP-2230 (1984); David J. Fratello, Croom, Nguyen, and Christopher S. Domack, “Use of the Updated NASA Langley Radio-Controlled Drop-Model Technique for High-Alpha Studies of the X-29A Configuration,” AIAA Paper 1987-2559 (1987).
[31]. Neihouse, et al., “Status of Spin Research” NASA TR-R-57; Fremaux, “Wind-Tunnel Parametric Investigation of Forebody Devices for Correcting Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamic Characteristics at Spinning Attitudes,” NASA CR-198321 (1996).
[32]. Raymond D. Whipple, Croom, and Scott P. Fears, “Preliminary Results of Experimental and Analytical Investigations of the Tumbling Phenomenon for an Advanced Configuration,” AIAA Paper 84-2108 (1984).
[33]. Fratello, et al., “Updated Radio-Controlled Drop-Model Technique for the X-29A,” AIAA Paper 1987-2559.
[34]. Iliff and Kon-Sheng Charles Wang, “X-29A Lateral-Directional Stability and Control Derivatives Extracted from High-Angle-Of-Attack Flight Data,” NASA TP-3664 (1996).
[35]. John H. Del Frate and John Saltzman, “In-Flight Flow Visualization Results From the X-29A Aircraft at High Angles of Attack,” NASA TM-4430 (1992).
[36]. The advocates and planners for the NASA program were Chambers (Langley), Kenneth J. Szalai (Dryden), and Leroy L. Pressley (Ames).
[37]. Szalai, “Cooperation, Not Competition,” NASA Dryden X-Press newspaper, Issue 96-06, June 1996, p. 4.
[38]. Chambers, Partners in Freedom, p. 108.
[39]. Albion H. Bowers, et al., “An Overview of the NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle,” NASA CP-1998-207676 (1998).
[40]. Norman Lynn, “High Alpha: Key to Combat Survival?” Flight International, Nov. 7, 1987; William B. Scott, “NASA Adds to Understanding of High Angle of Attack Regime,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, May 22, 1989, pp. 36–42; Gilbert, Nguyen, and Gera, “Control Research in the NASA High-Alpha Technology Program,” in NATO, AGARD (Aerodynamics of Combat Aircraft Controls and of Ground Effects) (1990).
[41]. Farhad Ghaffari, et al., “Navier-Stokes Solutions About the F/A-18 Forebody-LEX Configuration,” NASA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, vol. 1, sessions 1–6, pp. 361–383 (1989).
[42]. Bowers, et al., “Overview of the NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle,” NASA CP-1998-207676 (1998).
[43]. Robert M. Hall, et al., “Overview of HATP Experimental Aerodynamics Data for the Baseline F/A-18 Configuration,” NASA TM-112360 (1996); David F. Fisher, et al., “In-Flight Flow Visualization Characteristics of the NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle at High Angles of Attack,” NASA TM-4193 (1991).
[44]. Marilyn E. Ogburn, et al., “Status of the Validation of High-Angle-of-Attack Nose-Down Pitch Control Margin Design Guidelines,” AIAA Paper No. 93-3623 (1993).
[45]. Murri, Gautam H. Shah, Daniel J. DiCarlo, and Todd W. Trilling, “Actuated Forebody Strake Controls for the F-18 High-Alpha Research Vehicle,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 32, no. 3 (1995), pp. 555–562.
[46]. The HATP program produced hundreds of publications covering aerodynamics, control concepts, handling qualities, aerostructural interactions, flight instrumentation, thrust vectoring, wind tunnel test techniques, inlet operation, and summaries of flight investigations. Conference proceedings of the High Alpha Conferences were published as NASA CP-3149 (1990), NASA CP-10143 (1994), and NASA CP-1998-207676 (1998). The volumes are unclassified but limited in distribution by International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) restrictions.
[47]. Chambers, Partners in Freedom. pp. 216–218.
[48]. Fisher, et al., “Reynolds Number of Effects at High Angles of Attack,” NASA TP-1998-206553 (1998).
[49]. The most notable foreign advances in high-alpha technology have come from Russia, where close working relationships between the military and the TsAGI Central Aerodynamic Institute have focused on providing exceptional high-alpha maneuverability for the latest MiG and Sukhoi aircraft. Current products such as the Su-35 employ multiaxis thrust vectoring and carefully tuned high-alpha aerodynamics for outstanding capability.
[50]. Letter from James A. Blackwell, Lockheed vice president and general manager of the Lockheed ATF Office, to Richard H. Petersen, Director of the NASA Langley Research Center, Mar. 12, 1991.
[51]. The F-22 has outstanding capabilities at high angles of attack. However, for a number of reasons, the aircraft was designed with thrust vectoring only in pitch. Based on NASA fundamental high-alpha research on many configurations, yaw vectoring would significantly increase high-alpha maneuverability.
[52]. Chambers, Partners in Freedom. pp. 45–46.
[53]. Croom, Holly M. Kenney, and Murri, “Research on the F/A-18E/F Using a 22%-Dynamically-Scaled Drop Model,” AIAA Paper 2000-3913 (2000).
[54]. Robert M. Hall, Shawn H. Woodson, and Chambers, “Accomplishments of the Abrupt Wing Stall Program and Future Research Requirements,” AIAA Paper 2003-0927 (2003).
[55]. Ibid.; Francis J. Capone, D. Bruce Owens, and Hall, “Development of a Free-to-Roll Transonic Test Capability,” AIAA Paper 2003-0749 (2003); Owens, Jeffrey K. McConnell, Jay M. Brandon, and Hall, “Transonic Free-To-Roll Analysis of the F/A-18E and F-35 Configurations,” AIAA Paper 2004-5053 (2003).
[56]. Hall, Fremaux, and Chambers, “Introduction to Computational Methods for Stability and Control (COMSAC),” http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/
200.400.84128_200.408.6282.pdf, accessed Sept. 10, 2009.
[57]. Bradford E. Green and James J. Chung, “Transonic Computational Fluid Dynamics Calculations on Preproduction F/A-18E for Stability and Control,” AIAA Journal of Aircraft, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 420–426 (2007); Green, “Computational Prediction of Roll Damping for the F/A-18E at Transonic Speeds,” AIAA Paper 2008-6379 (2008).