Dyna-Soar question

Which, amazingly and rarely enough, is actually on-topic for this newsgroup.
I've been rereading Milt Thompson's "Flying Without Wings", about the
lifting body program at Dryden, and he writes about the waning days of
the X-20 Dyna-Soar program (which he blames mainly on infighting within
the USAF between the manned aerodynamic vehicle advocates, and the
expendable rocket/ manned ballistic capsule advocates) and states that
the manned aerodynamic vehicle crew were trying to get the complete
Titan III/Dyna-Soar stack under the manual control of the pilot during
the whole ascent.
This sounds like something that would very tricky to do, and frankly I
have a hard time understanding what exactly the advantage of such an
approach would be, other than possibly for quick retargeting of the
Dyna-Soar during a military mission.
But in that case you would have to give the Dyna-Soar's guidance system
the data anyway, so that the pilot would know what ascent profile to
fly, so wouldn't it be just as easy to program the Titan III's guidance
system with it?

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:
Which, amazingly and rarely enough, is actually on-topic for this
newsgroup.

wow, bonus points for Pat g

I've been rereading Milt Thompson's "Flying Without Wings", about the
lifting body program at Dryden, and he writes about the waning days of
the X-20 Dyna-Soar program (which he blames mainly on infighting within
the USAF between the manned aerodynamic vehicle advocates, and the
expendable rocket/ manned ballistic capsule advocates) and states that
the manned aerodynamic vehicle crew were trying to get the complete
Titan III/Dyna-Soar stack under the manual control of the pilot during
the whole ascent.
This sounds like something that would very tricky to do, and frankly I
have a hard time understanding what exactly the advantage of such an
approach would be, other than possibly for quick retargeting of the
Dyna-Soar during a military mission.
But in that case you would have to give the Dyna-Soar's guidance system
the data anyway, so that the pilot would know what ascent profile to
fly, so wouldn't it be just as easy to program the Titan III's guidance
system with it?

yep, file that one along with McDivitt's early rendezvous technique in
the "USAF Hubris" category...


--
Terrell Miller


"Every gardener knows nature's random cruelty"
-Paul Simon George Harrison

Terrell Miller wrote:

Pat Flannery wrote:

Which, amazingly and rarely enough, is actually on-topic for this
newsgroup.


wow, bonus points for Pat g


Particularly in that it regards Dyna-Soar, as we've discussed it enough
on this newsgroup that I think I could take a crack at building one if
someone can find me some Columbium, Rene 41 steel, and a supply of
zirconia rods for the nose.
I located this illustration from Boeing of the Dyna-Soar cockpit; is
sure doesn't agree with the photo of the mock-up's cockpit in Jay
Miller's X-plane book; the instrument layout is different, and the
cockpit window layout is _way_ different:
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...414054405F425F
Anybody have any data on this?
They also have some other nice Dyna-Soar illustrations:
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...464359435F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...4643564B5F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...4643574B5F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...464356445F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...464357445F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...464359425F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...464357455F425F
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...4643564A5F425F

Pat

In article ,
Pat Flannery wrote:
...the manned aerodynamic vehicle crew were trying to get the complete
Titan III/Dyna-Soar stack under the manual control of the pilot during
the whole ascent.
This sounds like something that would very tricky to do...

Manual piloting of the Saturn V was explored in simulation, and to most
everyone's surprise, it turned out that it actually worked fairly well.
Not as good as automatic control, but it had a pretty good chance of
giving a usable orbit insertion. Starting with, I think, Apollo 10, it
was available as a last-ditch backup option, in case both the launcher and
the CSM computers messed up.

Might be a little trickier for Dyna-Soar, given the higher acceleration of
the Titan stack, but I'd guess it would be feasible.

I have a hard time understanding what exactly the advantage of such an
approach would be...

Well, yes, *that's* a different question...
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |

Henry Spencer wrote:


Might be a little trickier for Dyna-Soar, given the higher acceleration of
the Titan stack, but I'd guess it would be feasible.




Given the aerodynamic skip concept of the vehicle on a orbital
bombardment mission, and how few of the X-15 flights ever got a perfect
match in regards to the planned flight trajectory vs. what was really
flown under manual control...and it sounds like a perfect recipe for a
highly abnormal mission profile with a great deal of non-optimal use of
of velocity and potential range.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:



Terrell Miller wrote:

Pat Flannery wrote:

Which, amazingly and rarely enough, is actually on-topic for this
newsgroup.



wow, bonus points for Pat g



Particularly in that it regards Dyna-Soar, as we've discussed it
enough on this newsgroup that I think I could take a crack at building
one if someone can find me some Columbium, Rene 41 steel, and a supply
of zirconia rods for the nose.
I located this illustration from Boeing of the Dyna-Soar cockpit; is
sure doesn't agree with the photo of the mock-up's cockpit in Jay
Miller's X-plane book; the instrument layout is different, and the
cockpit window layout is _way_ different:
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...414054405F425F

Anybody have any data on this?


The cockpit layout was in a constant state of flux. Even though the
prototypew as under construction at program cancelletion, I can't state
with confidence that the cockpit had been fully agreed to by that point.

Scott Lowther wrote:



The cockpit layout was in a constant state of flux. Even though the
prototypew as under construction at program cancelletion, I can't
state with confidence that the cockpit had been fully agreed to by
that point.


This variant doesn't seem to use the jettisonable thermal protection
hood as was shown on the mock-up, unless it is now a multi-part
jettisonable structure.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:



Scott Lowther wrote:



The cockpit layout was in a constant state of flux. Even though the
prototypew as under construction at program cancelletion, I can't
state with confidence that the cockpit had been fully agreed to by
that point.



This variant doesn't seem to use the jettisonable thermal protection
hood as was shown on the mock-up...


It also looks like PR art, too. Take a close look at it... a lot of it
just doesn't seem to line up right. The windows are the wrong shape, the
interior is far less cluttered than it should be, the wrong space suit
is used, etc.

Scott Lowther wrote:



It also looks like PR art, too. Take a close look at it... a lot of it
just doesn't seem to line up right. The windows are the wrong shape,
the interior is far less cluttered than it should be, the wrong space
suit is used, etc.


The windows seem to be at the bottom of deep wells unless they are very
thick; the side ones have a very odd shape to them.
Unless they are supposed to be ventilators (it's got a windshield
defroster?!), it looks like there are supposed to be pushbutton switches
in the two groups of three rectangular holes flanking the central
display dial display that never got installed.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...

Terrell Miller wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
Which, amazingly and rarely enough, is actually on-topic for this
newsgroup.
wow, bonus points for Pat g

Particularly in that it regards Dyna-Soar, as we've discussed it enough on
this newsgroup that I think I could take a crack at building one if
someone can find me some Columbium, Rene 41 steel, and a supply of
zirconia rods for the nose.
I located this illustration from Boeing of the Dyna-Soar cockpit; is sure
doesn't agree with the photo of the mock-up's cockpit in Jay Miller's
X-plane book; the instrument layout is different, and the cockpit window
layout is _way_ different:
http://delivery.gettyimages.com/comp...414054405F425F

Anybody have any data on this?

Parts look oddly similar to Gemini cockpit ..... hmmm

gb