Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
AD368426
CLASSIFICATION CHANGES
TO: unclassified
FROM:
confidential
LIMITATION CHANGES
TO: Approved for public release, unlimited distribution
FROM: Distribution: Further dissemination only as directed by David Taylor Model Basin, Washington DC; Nov 1965 or higher DoD authority.
AUTHORITY
Nov 1967, Group-4, 1962; DWTNSRDC ltr DoDD 5200.10, 7 Oct 1980 26 July
UNCLASSI FIED
dt
This ~ November
~
e1096 *
UNCLASSIFIED
Foreword This paper was init-ially presented at the AIAA/USN Marine Systems and ASW Conference in San Diego, California, The results presented were derived from an March 10, 1965. indeperndenL ia-nous._ exploration of the potential of a Publication of the results does not imply V/STOL vehicle. endorsement by any organization other than the Aerodynamics The authors gratefully acknowledge the asLaboratory itself. sistance of the following individuals for their contributions in the maintenance of a realistic approach to operational CAPT C. W. Griffing, ONR; Mr. F. W. S. Locke, Jr., aspects: CDR R. K. Geiger, Mr. R. L. Parris, Mr. K. E. Dentel, and LCDR P. L. Dudley, Jr., BuWeps.
e,
6
NTIS
AcsoiFof CRA&I
Ur
IDTIC TAH
JuSthfhcjutc,
By
DiStr ibution
Availbrlity Codes
UNCNC-LAS75SReFI2-UD
L'I
ItJIflhElW'UNCLA3S ,FED,
~N
C
lifting-surface mean aerodynamic chord lift in pounds pounds feet per second knots per second
drag in
pound-feet
vehicle weight in
P P
-power
parameter
w
V
-
speed
parameter
vehicle Mach number propeller propeller tip helical Mach number reference blade angle density in slugs per cubic foot
efficiency
ratio,
compressible-to-
iii
--
iRL
military engine powet setting take-off engine power setting engine, engine, engine, engine, turboprop, turboprop, single shaft double shaft turboprop, single shaft double shaft
regenerative
regenerative turboprop,
iv
PRNC-GEN-175
(Rev.
12-55
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SYMBOLS SUMMARY INTRODUCTION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS VEHICLE CONFIGURATION PREDICTED PERFORMANCE PROPULSION CONSIDERATIONS PERFORMANCE TRADEOFFS iii-iv 1 1 2 2 3 3 6 7 7 9 9 10 13 15 17
WIND-TUNNEL TESTS AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS ASW MISSIONS CONTACT MAINTENANCE COMTUTER SIMULATION COMPUTER RESULTS CONTACT INVESTIGATION TEMPORARY BARRIER
SPECIAL-PURPOSE VEHICLE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCES LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Aircraft Table 2 Physical Characteristics Fuel
18
18 21
23-24 25
1 2 3 -
Nondimensional VTOL Vehicle Comparison of Equivalent Lift-Drag Ratio Versus Speed Classical Propulsion System Loading for Hover Flight in Cruise Configuration
26 27 28 29 30 31
Figure 4 Figure 5 -
Nondimensional VTOL Vehicle Comparison Including the Seaplane Design Nondimensional Parameters Performance of Power Versus Speed
Fivtlrc 6 -
IRev.
12-55,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTrPATIONS
on Propeller Efficiency
32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
Turboprop Engine Characteristics Cruise Performance With Six Engines at 35-Percent Normal Rated Power The 1/20-Scale Unpowered Model guration in the Cruise Confi-
Figure 12 - Air Transportable Sound Surveillance System (ATSSS) Figure 1.3 Conception of V/STOL Seaplane in Artist's tional Layout for Change of Mission Command in Contact Maintenance a Func-
Figure 14 - Sequence
Figure 15 - Basic Tracking Mission Figure 16 Computer Simulation Sonar Characteristics Calculations
42 43 44 45
Figure 20 - Air Drop of ATSSS Buoy Figure 21 Figure 22 Drop Pattern (Archimedes' Investigation Entrapment Probability in Spiral) Contact for Contact Investigation
46 47
vi
PRNC-CEN-175 (Rev. 12-55)
loo
SUMMARY A V/STOL Open-Ocean and Seaplane with good payload/range capability has been investigated for specific
formance of the seaplane design and the projected capability of the Air Transportable tial Sound Surveillance System (ATSSS), indicate a good poten-
marines.
involved in
preliminary design of the 93,000-pound V/STOL seaplane are outlined. INTRODUCTION The Aerodynamics heen involved Off and only in in Laboratory of the David Taylor Model Basin has of Vertical and Short TakeHowever,
conceptual design.
information available from earlier test and development V/STOL field. Figure cepts, is the result of a performance estimate It
for several
con-
equivalent
sentiallv a power-required
Notice that the early V/STOL conthan 4. It must be and were not
for optimum cruising performance. te esc vehicles were less type of vehicle is
efficient
cruise machines;
flight, th(
speed capal)itiLes
them possessed
io a mititar-' I i r(:'mt ,
cnoironment
Only
the
vehici e (Refereuict.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS From these available data, up certain study criteria. istics the Aerodynamics Laboratory staff set
They were:
that the payload/range characterthat the design must be design practice, and
ratio of less than 10 would automatically The transition characin favor of for design
increasing the cruise potential. concepts and mission formats The aircraft to give a fair concepts. in
considerations
The outgrowth of this dilemma was a diversion of attention to Seaplane, where configuration limitations were minimal.
an Open-Ocean
The primary design consideration was the selection of the propulsion group. Figure 2 is the classical power-loading/disc-loading 2). In curve for
(Reference
high for a vehicle to exhibit satisfactory handling qualities environment. it is is Although it has not been satisfactorily
evaluated to date,
assumed that an allowable disc loading of 50 pounds per square foot operations. need The problems identified and
with operation in
a marine eniironment
further clarification;
probably necessary
20-foot-diameter
The resulting vehicle configuration canard seaplane with a rrequirement fully developed is about
-2-
(Figure 3)
is
The aircraft
the size of
(ORION).
--
The canard arrangement gives a location for the six engines within reasonable structural considerations and offers the advantage of longitudinal trim control in hover and transition without the use of a tail rotor. The vertical and short take-off lifting capabilities of the respectively, Figure 4 and
The "no fuel" operational weight should be about 81,000 pounds. Table 1 summarizes additionai configuration specifications. PREDICTED PERFORMANCE
Figure 5 shows the predicted performance of the DTMB seaplane in comparison with the early vehicles. alent lift/drag ratio is bil.:y. It is noted that the predicted equivthe generation the Looking in excess of 10, the initial limit for accepta-
at the data in this manner leads to the often-stated argument that the cruise power requirements installed power. for VTOL aircraft are about one-third of the This observation immediately suggests that with a six-
engine vehicle, cruise might be effected with two engines at high power, four engines at medium power, or six engines at low power. An investigation of the propulsive efficiencies and fuel consumptions of various engine combinations is required to establish the most efficient operation.
level is dependent
Main-
flight requirements.
propulsive systems will show up poorly when compared with powerplant/airframe combin tions.
PROPULSION CONSIDERATIONS The curves is 0.9 of Figure 7 indicate how the maximum propulsive efiiciency is increased beyond recent
dograded as the tip Mach number of the propeller (Reference logy in 3). These curves do not take
the most
t.techno
contemporary propeller
deSign which
geonlevt y
do ind icat
that( i n thie
-3
VTOL vehicle (where static conditions dictate the selection of propeller diameter and power train gearing), seemingly well-matched propellers
may not retain a high propulsive efficiency when operating at an altitude cruise condition. If the tip speeds are not maintai ed near a maximum the hover condition, wnere the demands on the prothere will necessarily be a weight Assuming that this requirement one should look The progiven
permissible level in
peller helical tip Mach number fir the forward flight condition is
MT
M(, V/) + 1
At the cruising altitudes and speeds considered for most ASW mission profiles, the aircraft cruise Mach number would be between 0.4 and 0.5.
To avoid the compressible flow losses associated with operating a conventional propeller above a tip Mach number of 0.9, variables appearing in one or more of the With a given only engine
can be diminished.
running at nearly constant rpm for any power setting, be drawn that efficient VTOL aircraft
may require
normal-rated
no speed
,
reduction with
power.
The doulbi
-shaft
or tree-turbine
"4
(TP- DS )
pe r1ceInt
engi ne,
power;
shows almost
20 percC'lt
rot2tiOnal
rcgcnerati vt
speed reduction at 35 percent normal rated power (see References 4 through 6). The curve also shows an RTP-DS engine with approximately turbine speed at low power. Such an engine This engine is
30 percent reduction in
suggested as the type which may be necessary to optimize performance over the large span of flight requirements vertical take-off and high-speed cruise. In addition to considering turbine speed, power output through the propeller efficiency, which changes air horseit is necessary to consider The for VTOL aircraft, including
desirable effect of reducing turbine speed at low power will be lost if the engine sfc is high. For example, turbine speed characteristics of
shown are nearly satisfactory with the engine However, the sfc at this power setting At ap-
of the single-shaft
characteristics.
VTOL aircraft would essentially incorporate the best features of the free
turbine power). ends of If in (speed relaxati on) and the regenerative cycle (low sfc at low both
This is
the gas cycle. the cruise speeds for the aircraft require the maximum reduction efficiencies, to as then low
then
indicatt, that
conditions
be cruised with all consi doration 11111 bht t lilt ;lICCLs t ofor
rnllllning Lt
given to four-engine
believed
cru'lise
range wotuld
requirements
t his aircraft.
S-
go
hs
Many VTOL" design concepts have not given serious consideration propulsive efficiency in cruise.
to
vidual design makes many of them unacceptable. Performance predictions engine specifications (Reference st-t-of-the-art p'esntly in 6). for this vehicle have been made using the regenerative is turboprop engine reasonable
of a single-shaft,
The regenerative
turboprop
considered to be a
PERFORMANCE
toward a
specific aircraft
speed,
it
is
necessary to select the operating point on the power/speed curve or equivalent lift/drag curve. If payload/range characteristics are of Cruising
cruise must be at the maximum equivalent L/D. aircraft, but it often requires
flying at
Flying at (L/D)max
issued by Air Programs,
Recommendations
Naval Application Group of the Office of Naval Research indicate that a cruise speed of the order of 300 knots, most ASW missions altitude limits, is, off its it (Reference is 7). or greater, is desirable for
payload/range
of accepting
cruise speeds.
overweight mode. sents It if is
The additional
the, initial
take-off
tihe vertical
landing weight
that repre-
an eqtiivalent
10.35.
the
-6(--
performance of the airplane, within propeller-tip Mach-number limits of 0.9, (RTP-SS) are the predicted performance of a regenerative turboprop and the hypothetical VTOL engine (RTP-DS). With the regener-
ative turboprop,
speeds from 260 to 290 knots are attainable at altitudes At these speeds, is the specific range of almost constant at 0.095.
The hypothetical engine allows a significant improvement in aircraft efficiency, feet). but only by operating at very high altitudes (above 25,000
These altitudes are not considered consistent with mission Furthermore, the hypothetical engine installation does the seaplane cruise speed.
requirements.
WIND-TUNNEL TESTS Wind-tunnel tests have been conducted in facilities at the Aerodynamics Laboratory, the handling qualities, the 8by 10-foot subsonic
Figure 10 shows the unpowered version of Figure 11 shows the powered model
trim conditions throughout the transition phase of flight. Results of the tunnel tests to date indicate that the configuration, as shown, demonstrates slight static longitudinal instability in cruise. when compared with finite wing theory, substantiate tests and a
the prediction that the downwash from the canard destroyed the elliptic lift distribution on the main wing. Results of the wind-tunnel for thf! seaplane cruise performance are reported in Reference 6, report of transition characteristics It is is in preparation. the aircraft geometry can A small investiga-
tion for the optimization of high-aspect-ratio canard configuration geometry is planned. AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS In discussion with personnel in Weapons, the ASW Office of the Bureau of Naval
Transportable Sound S-rveillance System (ATSSS) buoy concept, the activepassive unit now under development (Reference 9). it This system would prowould prevent data
vide the aircraft with multi-sensor deployment; degradation from tuowing effects; and it tact during aircraft manueverso
While the ATSSS concept considers both active and passive operation, was further suggested that if
for target tracking, a buoy designed for purely passive operation might have only half the weight of the ATSSS system (about 1,500 pounds), a three-fold increase in battery life could be expected (permitting nearly 24 hours of operation), improved in and the bearing accuracy might be The cyclic operation would be ap-
proximately the same as the initial ATSSS concept--15 minutes to lower the array and 30 minutes to raise it. It is assumed that The size would It is further con-
sidered that a modified A-New Data Handling System would be incorporated The system modifications would delete items not re-in the airplane. quired to perform. the mission selected. Other systems considered for the 180 0 -scan radar, low-light-level
aircraft are: a limited Jezebel capability, TV, and automatic ECM. An artist's
layout is
Volume requirements
for specified equipment have been considered, Minimum personnel requirements would
include: a three-man flight crew, a five-man tactical crew, and a buoy handler. The inset, Figure 13, shows the stowage location for four buoys:
two aft of the main wing and two in a trough under the floor of the data compartment. These buoys will be ejected and retrieved through a buoy A large portion of buoy handling
would have to be done with automated power equipment because of their weight and size. Proposals are in existence whereby buoy deployment feasible.
-8-
ASW MISSIONS
The seaplane has been considered for three ASW missions: contact maintenance It is (tracking), contact investigation, and the temporary barrier.
not implied specifically that the seaplane cannot perform such amphibious area screen.ing,
missions as convoy and task-force screening, and open-ocean search. It is, however,
be more economically performed by other vehicle systems. CONTACT MAINTENANCE The principal mission for the seaplane is considered to bE that of
maintaining contact with enemy nuclear submarines for extended time periods. It is further considered that continuous tracking would be in
a passive mode of operation without the submarine being aware of the aircraft's presence. by some other means. Contact maintenance presupposes target localization Target localization by some other means signifies essentially the take-over of a tracking
Figure 14 shows the sequenace of events to complete a mission Considering the case of a target 1,000 miles from the
transit and buoy deployment--from cold start to rest--can be Near the end of the cruise-out leg of would initiate an interrogation This interro--
of the computer on board the vehicle holding the target. gation would be done ia
automatic radio data link, where the memory in read into the memory of the arriving aircraft. completed, a data presentation is available in
allows the arriving aircraft to transition and effectively deploy three of its four buoys in the 4 hours and 18 minutes. The basic tracking or contact maintenance mission is ure 15. It is shown in Fig-
believed that this coverage represents a satisfactory if attack is not imminent. Buoys 2, 3, The aircraft and 4 are
deployed.
The circles around each buoy represent the acoustical range for 40 percent detection probability against a 5-knot
(24 kiloyards)
-9-
. 12-55)
situation,
detection probability
for an assessment
mathematical analysis. The detection probabilities lishing seaplane maneuvering with any one buoy must be at must total 50, are used as a set of limits for estabioe., the percentage associated
the percentages
for all
plane should remain at rest. In an actual passive is a tracking situation, signal strength in a given sea
environment
attenuated
These acoustical energy phenomena will influence from any signal source. treatment in is the The obvious.
analogy of the physical conditions COMPUTER SIMULATION following paragraphs. Initial Condition3 all
---
to the mathematical
detailed
It
is
obvious
For this reason a simulation procedure for the IBM 7090 computer devised. Thus far, it has been applied It
the submarine
at speeds
from 0 to 5 knots.
This
tracking
A simple representation of the computer Initial conditions are established by speed, and duration on a the true
simulation is
random selection of the submarine true-course, particular leg, In small time intervals,
to the aircraft
VW -CGEH-1i75 (Re
-ifL
Sensor Characteristics sensor characteristics. are presented. rates -- At this point, it is necessary to consider In Figure 17, the assumed buoy characteristics incorpoThe curve at the left, lateral detection range,
some machinery noise from pumps and generators and can be assigned a finite detection range (10 kiloyards). assumed that the submarine is range is At a 15-knot transit speed, it is
detectable at 40 kiloyards.
The detection
assumed constant beyond 20 nautical miles because of convergence The right-hand side of the curve, smoothed for computa-
associated with the reliable acoustic path. curve is tion. It essentially the transmission-loss
reflects the logarithmic variation associated with sonar devices. Returning to Figure 16, a random number system,
dictates when tactical data are available to the Under actual tactical conditions, data would
probably be available only in bits and pieces. lates the real data availability quite well. computer analyzes the data given, quired. It
Arbitrary
statistical rules for aircraft maneuvering must be established as program inputs, and the aircraft can only maneuver within the constraints of the While the program remains flexible and can the
incorporate nearly any maneuver that can be expressed mathematically, computer will exercise that maneuver only when the criterion for the required maneuver is and, satisfied. A human TACCO could exercise judgment
a choice not available in this simulation program. Aircraft Maneuvers -is buoys changes constantly. In any tactical situation, unless the submarine The TACCO monitoring the situation should order
maneuvers as the confidence level of the data presentation reaches some lower limit. Figure 18 shows a typical maneuver. It is an extension
flying from its original position 1 (at the lowr left) and depositing buoy 1 (which was on board) ahead and beside the predicted track of the
submarine.
At this time,
commanded to rise,
via the UHF command link, and the pilot flys the aircraft to the position of buoy 2 for retrieval. is given in Figure 19. The frequency of aircraft maneuvers is controlled by the necessity The sequence of events for an on-station maneuver
of continuously maintaining a satisfactory level of target localization. If some minimum level is violated, Therefore, there is a high risk of losing the buoys must be periodically moved to a new location A total of 120 percent cumulative The total of 140 perFigure 18, provides
target.
that will hold the target satisfactorily. probabiliLy on three buoys was shown in
Figure 15.
as given in
additional target coverage so that another buoy replacement would not be required for some time. Probability, which is a measure of target distance corrected for is not the single basis for determi-
signal strength due to target speed, nation of buoy replacement. rays from pairs of buoys
nmsL
The intersection angle between the detecting also be considered. For example, although
the signal strength may be high when the distance between a buoy and the target is small, no accurate target fix can be made if the lines of signal
A technique for handling a target lost during a tracking mission has been incorporated into the simulation program. Ideally, the "go lost" tracking
target speed or
the available data from a conventional buoy deployment pattern The recommended
second alteration to standard procedure was that the remote buoy was commanded to rise immediately when the "go lost" routine was ordered. During on-station maneuvers, determines the take-oif, drop, the index of sea-state condition Where
sea states are low, short take-offs and landings would be used to conserve fuel. In the digital program, the dividing line for VTOL maneuvers per manuever, is quite
Fuel consumption,
either case because of the full power required for take-off and a nominal saving is experienced in STOL operations.
landing; however, It is
maneuver,
that makes the system competitive on the basis of pounds of fuel Typical transit distances involved in an on-station The time per maneuver is maneuvering, usually
there may be a
the line-of-sight data link between buoy and aircraft. the buoys may
require a short-term tape memory 6ystem which could be interrogated when the data link is reestablished. Several thousand hours of simulated tracking have Table 2 is a summary of some submarine was maintaining
COMPUTER RESULTS --
track patterns and the fuel used by the seaplane while it target contact.
Figure 16 throughout the time spans considered. Because the submarine tracks are generated from random inputs, is tracking problem for the seaplane sensor system. it difficult to assess which submarine maneuvers present the most exacting The average hourly fuel
consumption of the seaplane, which depends primarily upon the number of maneuvers required, difficult cases. The number of times the target is lost may also prove to be a good In should be weighed heavily in estimating the more
the results show that any submarine track which includes abrupt or quality of fix (bearing change) for a tactical coordinator.
with that of contemporary airborne tracking systems shows that the seaplane represents a substantial improvement. No direct comparison is
made regarding the relative merit of the seaplane versus the conventional fixed-wing aircraft in stdying with a target. It may be stated, however,
that tracking an on-station submarine with magnetic-anomaly detection (MAD) gear represents a considerably more difficult assignment, and in
the assumed time frame may be impossible. Looking at the amount of fuel burned per hour would indicate that the seaplane should be capable of staying on-station for extended time periods. Crew endurance rather than fuel limitation may then become the A double, or nearly double, crew may be reUnfortu-
In one mission that was assumed to have a mean level of fuel consumption, 35 hours transpired from crew briefing to debriefing. The time
This schedule produces about 60 percent useful utirequired coordinated refuelings with and duty assignments inconsistent
the previous and following seaplanes, with the number of personnel on board.
One additional aspect of the data available to the TACCO showed that the quality of the fix varied. a displacement and bearing error in A part of the simulation results was the predicted target position. The
human operator would see the geometry of target-buoy deployment, would be displayed on the TACCO console in the real mission.
as it
There are
patterns which yield high quality fixes and those of low quality--thus, the display is a quality index. It is most significant that the posiassumed for the buoy, is
well within the acquisition range of present weapons when the quality of fix is high.
A simulation of the contact maintenance problem on the IBM 7090 computer is ASW mission. not intended to be a final statement of the case for the All of the inputs used in the program %ere based upon the
-14-RG7e2
__ PRM-GEN-I75 (Rev. i2-55)
However,
in
many cases
to specific
The random number and probability technique used to generate submarine tracks and assess data availability is followed in lieu of a
satisfactory definition of enemy submarine tactics and final sensor capability. If an estimate of the length of time and the accuracy with the computer
which a tracking mission could be carried out resulted, simulation has guidelines concept
then served the intended purpose of providing a set of The final usefulness of the seaplane sub-system
limitations
to specific Navy requirements. CONTACT INVESTIGATION The second major ASW problem compatible with the seaplane is contact investigation. in As initially considered, transport aircraft. that of
conducted
conjunction with a
of the ATSSS proposal showed a parachute deployment of the buoy from the P-3 aircraft, vehicle, as shown in Figure 20. The seaplane would be the tactical The transport would be a In addition, it is
considered that the transport would carry additional The transport requires
To establish the framework for this mission, must be made. It is assumed that a contact aircraft It is is
reported,
from an over-flight
a periscope sighting.
further assumed that this fix might have a five nautical miles. The contact may be posi-
an acoustical one from a fixed passive array in which the initial tioning error may be 50 nautical miles.
contact can be updated constantly as the airplane progresses on the outward track, the mission for the visual sighting of a 15-knot transiter and
nMOP-
A third
assumption considers that the area commander has placed a very high priority on entrapment of this target. this type of mission is Finally, it is assumed that
craft and crews on immediate standby status. Figure 21 represents a visual contact, which is miles from base. assumed to be 600 for 1,500
assumed that a transit speed of 15 knots has been assigned. and trinsport cruise speeds were 275 knots and 325 knots, however, both aircraft are dispatched together.
The seaplane
respectively;
arrives in Archimedes'
the tactical area and begins deployment of buoys on the spiral prior to arrival of the seaplane, the seaplane will be The
within monitoring distance when the first buoy data are available. seaplane proceeds into the area and deposits two buoys (Is lands beside buoy 2s for monitoring purposes.
essentially established with the planting of buoy 11, and the pattern can be abandoned at any time a positive identification is earlier buoy. If established by an
the estimate of submarine transit speed was not low and the initial con(five nautical miles), then entrapment is quite certain.
tact area was not greater than the 75 square miles associated with the positioning error If
the submarine should continue on any heading at 15 knots or less from then detection with this system would be only an index of the probability of detection dropped. The specific
Figure 22 is
as a function of the time after the first buoy is assumption is heading, This is
that the subrmarine did transit at 15 knots, along any given only remotely realistic. Actually,
from the time of initial contact until the barrier was intercepted. a very specific case, which is
It the submarine would, in all probability, exercise evasive tactics. can be assumed that the submarine would have a better acoustical range
than the buoys (through the use of a conformal array or some other technique), and therefore could identify the active buoys beyond the However, the entrapment fence would be closed If the submarine were to continue its This
this seaplane operation dictate that the seaplane should be capable of air-to-air refueling from a transport tanker. With this capability, the
seaplane (with the buoys already deployeJ1 in the water) can sanitize the center area in 12 buoy movements, rather difficult work. This mission has been considered as requiring active ATSSS (3,000pound buoys) to prevent escape of the most quiet boats. It may be reasoned that the 15-knot transiter is mode buoys. sufficiently noisy to allow the use of passive requiring approxLmacel. tour hours of
tion to the target and establishing the entrapment fence with less expensive buoys. Perhaps the initial assessmnent of target threat should include an assumption as to boat propalsion system. * The quiet diesel-electric system
might require the more expensive active-buoy system; but concurrently, the transit speed assessmetit will lower the level of effort applied. Obviously, it is difficult for the aircraft designer to more than suggest where tactical doctrine is so question-
TEMPORARY BARRIER The third ASW mission for which the seaplane is the temporary barrier. idea)ly suited is
PRNC-GEN-175 (Rev.
12-5
Block time is
of the
order of 10 hours for the fully operational configuration. Specialized equipment and manpower support is of this mission. a natural necessity
Providing this support would suggest the coordinated Where deployment is enhanced by high-speed seaplane loading
a variety of alterations in
exists; and no conjecture will be made as to best procedure. Although this mission has not been detailed to any specific degree in this paper, it is not difficult to imagine that a contact investigaestablish
about 375 to 400 nautical miles of barrier net in a similar time frame to that used in the contact investigation, if the transit legs were of the would be if order of 600 miles. With these buoys deployed along a line, it
Further,
a contact maintenance mission were to develop from a contact investigation in the temporary barrier, then an additional seaplane (fitted with passive An airplane so configured could be
buoys)
used as the second monitoring aircraft by leaving the active barrier net and concentrating on the contact maintenance, if that should be desirable.
SPECIAL-PURPOSE VEHICLE The Navy has a variety of other missions where a seaplane, good seaworthiness, submarine resupply, would be advantageous. command control, etc. with
the performance curves of Figure 9 could be An exception exists in the case of air-
sea rescue where a high "dash speed" may be required for the outbound leg. At the sacrifice of propeller efficiency, appears feasible. However, a dash speed of 355 knots
careful cruise control would be required on the return leg to complete the mission within the available fuel supply. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The V/STOL seaplane with its specified svstems and predicted performance would provide aii ASW capab ilitv not now available.
"" - 18 .-
This,
l
to
r kJ AI
some extent,
is
dependent upon a presumption that the degree of sensor to achieve the desired level of performance, requires
sophistication,
that the buoys be inexpendable and that they be recovered a very high percentage of the time. Other recognized ASW systems appear to be much less suited to prolonged passive tracking. Only an airborne system (acoustically isolated) or complex fixed-barrier arrays can amass large stores of signature data for target classification reference. Only such a self-sustaining airborne
system can remain with a target long enough to establish enemy tactical doctrine. Both signature and tactics of a target aware of being tracked Achievement of the passive deoffer an important
tection capability described in this paper will, thus, step forward in the solution of the entire ASW problem.
To have an ASW vehicle/sensur combination like the V/STOL seaplane concept ready for operational use in be required in the following areas: the 1970's, considerable work would
1.i Propulsion a. Engine development emphasizing low sfc at low power (regen(double shafting).
including variable camber with supersonic tip design. c. mediumn. 2. Aerodynamics a. b. A design study to establish weight and structural limits. Definition ot handling qualities through the transition Propeller environmentally designed for the recirculation
phase of flight. 3. Sensors a. b. c. Continuing development of air transportable systems. Attending to the development of a purely passive buoy. (non-
-19-
4.
Avionics a. b. c.
Improvements in long and short range precisi a navigation. Relaying of tactical data through communication channels. Sophistication of data reduction, analysis, and display.
5.
recognizing specific stowing and structural problems. b. Testing various configurations to establish which wil give
the greatest attenuation of wave motion in the open-ocean; hopefully allowing crews to operate effectively in 6. Naval Environment a. Investigation of the particular handling problems involved sea state 5 or greater.
in operating over water at a disc loading of 50 pounds per square ifoot (sea spray, dynamic and static stabi]ity). b. operation Determine the acoustic signature generated in all modes of (hover, take-off, landing, sitting with only auxiliary power).
Many of the development areas enumerated are included within the continuing effort to improve existing systems, and only moderate alter-
ations would be required to adapt these improvements to the seaplane concept. Other arcas, however, present problems peculiar to this vehicle
Aerodynamics Laboratory David Taylor Model Basin Washington, D.C. september 1965
REFERENCES
1. Vought Aeronautics Div. (LTV Aerospace Corp.). XC-142A Performance
Data. 2. Rafner,
(N.Y.), 3. Stack,
Dallas, R.
Jul 1963.
v.1,
John,
Draley,
Feldman.
Investigation of the NACA 4-(3)(08)-03 and NACA 4-(3)(08)-045 TwoBlade Propellers at Forward Mach Numbers to 0.725 to Determine Effects of Compressibility and Solidity on Performance. G.P.O., 1950. 32 p. Rpt. incl. 999) Navy Model T56-A-10W Military 42 p. illus. (Model illus. Wash., the
for Aeronautics. 4.
Specification 479-C) 5. General Electric Co. T64-GE-6. Lynn, Engine, Aircraft, lurboshaft T64-GE-2 and incl. illus. (Model
Mass.,
Mar 1961.
[356] p.
Specification E1057) 6. Allison Div. (General Motors Corp.) Navy Models T78-A-2 and YT78-A-2 [Title Unclassified]. (Model Specification 649) CGNFIDENTIAL 7. Coates, L. D. Solicitation of Technical Inputs for Open Ocean ASW
Wash.,
[14] p.
Wind-Tunnel Investigation of a in
Powered Model Tilt-Wing V/STOL Seaplane Wash., Rpt. 9. Aug 1965. 2079. 32 1. incl. 1093) U.S. illus.
Aero Rpt.
Navy Air Transportable Sonar Surveillance Canoga Park, Calif,, Jun 1964. CONFIDENTIAL 100,000 Normal Deviates.
"10.
1955.
200 p.
Ii.
Dewey,
D. B.
Table I Aircraft Physical Characteristics Lifting Surfaces Wing Area in sq ft Span in M.A.C. ft in ft 1000 100.0 10.34 0.5 10.0
Taper ratio Aspect ratio Dihedral in degrees WS 0 to WS 195 WS 195 to WS 600 Airfoil section Root Tip Flaps (plain) Canard Area in sq ft
Span in ft
0 5.5
250
50.0
M.AoC.
in
ft
WS 0 to WS 60
WS 60 to WS 300 Airfoil section Root Tip Flaps (plain)
0
5.5
-23-
PRN-GF4-175
(Rev.
12-55)
(quarter-chord)
Airfoil section Root Tip Dorsal fin area in Rudder -sq ft NACA 0012 NACA 0008 42.0 0.30
Rur1
Hull Length in Width in Height in ft ft ft cu ft (approx.) fiber) 20.0 120 10 15 3000
(reenforced ft
synthetic
Diameter in
1884 0.13
increased 22 percent)
Military Normal
Vertical Floats Diameter in Wing-tip ft float (pneumatic; internally coiled)
4682 4122
Table 2 Summary of Submarine Tactics and Aircraft Fuel Consumption [0 to 5-knot submarine. Averaged over a 300-hour period] Average Course Changes in deg Predominately high and low speeds; 12 stops taking 58.2 percent of time Predominately high and low speeds; stops taking 29.4 percent of time 10 73 Average Course Duration in hours 6.0 Seaplane Fuel Consumption in lb/hr 345.7
70
4.5
475.5
Even distribution; 0-4 knots only; 19 stops taking 32.5 percent of time Even distribution; 0-4 knots only; 16 stops taking 17.5 percent of time Even distribution; 9 stops taking 21.8 percent of time Biased slightly toward low speeds; 11 stops taking 20.5 percent of time Biased slightly toward low speeds; stops taking 9.3 percent of time Biased slightly toward low speeds; stops taking 11.3 percent of time Even distribution; no stops Predominately high and lov speeds; 11 stops taking 12 percent of time 11
70
3.1
507.0
68
3.0
604.8
58
4.0
616.8
66
3.1
650.4
70
4.5
682.2
12
68
4.0
711.8
70 75
3.1 6.0
730.0 803.2
Biased slightly toward low speeds; 6 stops taking 14.9 percent of time Even distribution; no stops
70
6.0
814.7
70
4.0
898.8
-25-
PRWC-GflI-I7
e,
10
9
7'
LV
6_
TILT-WING TRANSPORT
-
5 4
--
(PREDICTED)
-TANDEM HELO
-
-*-1
,,,, # 2 l
Figure 1 - Nondimensional VTOL Vehicle Comparison of Equivalent Lift-Drag Ratio versus Speed
3.0
-. j
6- 2.0
S2O
z
0
-!
-F 1.0 ""i0
LtJ3:PROP
0.0
r7
I-
1 ,
3
Figure 2
-
10
20 30
50
100
200
500
1000 2000
5000
-27-
PRNC-GFN-175 (Rev.
12-55)
C7)
-28-'
QRCGM
15 (e .1-5
T4o
337
6.2 5 50.0
16-25
-
--
900.0 I D
S.
----
. .
-. H6.7
Note:
Dimensions
are
in
feet.
i3.3 .
h.
. 23.4
-
28.8
24.9
-
~~75.0
Z,
81.1
/ , . _. T
-
-- 137-
245
233 -:
L2.92
6.8
.........
/
/ i --$"-M/
..-..-.....
15-0
216.3
12
-DTMB
VTOL SEAPLANE
10-
--
7--5
-
" ___
TILT-WING TRANSPORTJ
(PREDICTED)
TANDEM HELO 3--2 _ " m CONVERTIBLE I.., ROTOR I I <DUCTED FAN I f -VECTORED SLIPSTREAM
"o
Figure 5
2.8
-r-
FAN
2.4
2.0 SP 12.0 = |--ECTORED SLIPSTREAM ,m * t HELO TILT-WING TRANSPORTt (PREDICTED) 'DTMB VTOL SEAPLANE 56789 V VPSm
Figure 6
-
W\
0.4
PRNC-GEN-175
(Rev.
12-55)
CONFIDENTIAL
1.1
S>"
0.9
I-V U. ,T0.8
XJ
'
:IE
1.0
1.1
-32-
CONFIDENTIAL
PRNC-CFN-175 (Rev. 12-55)
---..
TP-SS TP-DS
-...... 100
RTP-DS REGENERATIVE TURBOPROP DOUBLE SHAFT (VTOL) RTP-SS REGENERATIVE TURBOPROP SINGLE SHAFT
9000
PERCENT S70 RPM ,TP-SS-MIL
70
60
-
5011 0
20
Figure
40
60
80
100
120
140
PO--N-I
,v--2-5
0.14
z0.10
.1( .1
0.1
z'
0.10
0.06
SEA LEEL_____j___
26 0 2208
6 1
720
-301
11
120
-a 20,sed
Opr60o
upo.
L0/
03
-34-WEGT
1-
PROC-GEN-!75
~s
2~~
0
5-
5-
5-
0 0 V
5-
rf
-K-M
00
-36-
-If
F.37
-38-4
ow
IUI-
I-t
w~
I I
z0
U 0
Wj
_j 0
u L)<0 Z
I
0
0> 0 -1
L)
0
z 0~
i-j
0L
LU
I:
wo
uz
-3-PRNMC-GEM-175S
e.T~
CONFIDENTIAL
SUBMARINE POSITION
--
=''(70%)
SBUOY 3
S(30%)
(20%)
(I)
AIRCRAFT POSITION
Figure 15 - Basic Tracking Mission in Contact Maintenance
Satisfactory level of passive localization, cumulative probability is 120 percent. The circles represent 40 percent detection for a S knot submarine.
-4o-
CONFIDENTIAL
PRNC-GEN-175 (Rev.
12-55)
INITIAL CONDITIONS
TIME
[TRUE
SUBMARINE COURSE
BUOY DETECTION PROBABILITY
SC
AIRPLANE MANEUVERS
ii :www
iia -
1-ILI
oe UJ
I.
0
z
z
0
CONFIDENTIAL
"JoZu
,,, I,-
Go
II
=4L
oo
00a
o,
So
.-
W0
40
Z>
%
~06
:34)
0E
C0
CO;FIDENTIA
z CID
-43-CONFIDENTIAL
"PRNC-GFN-175
(Rev. 12-55)
'
lfVRTTOJ
CRUISEI
BUOY DROP
CRUISE
VL/SL
REMOTE BUOY
Figure 19 - On-Station Manieuver Sequence
",,,
.-
'--
u-
rI)
I-
1.
I
-45-
TRANSPORT
-
SEAPLANE
CONTACT AREA
--46-
100
m
z i0~ U 60 -LU
. 40 _z -
c 20 S
1.6
1.8
2.0
-47-
CopieG S
Copies
I
-
DIR of Army Research (Attn: Physical Sciences Div.) CH European Res. Office U.S. Army R&D Liaison Grp.
(Attn: TC Liaison Officer)
j-6
.-Cedar Rpfd.-1--owa
Inc.
20 I
Curtiss-Wright Corp. VTOL Sys. Grp. Caldwell, New Jersey Curtiss-Wright Corp.
Aerospace Corp.
Los Angeles, (Attn: Lib. Calif. Tech. Doc. Corp. Grp.) I
Wash.,
D.C.
Bell Aerospace
-iraf B- o A
Tore _-
-Co.
4f. Inc.
Airccaft Div.
Long Beach, Calif.
Boeing Co.
Wichita, Kansas
.1- .- Do"ug-AircxafL
El Segundo, Div.
Go.,
Inc.
(Attn:
1
Chief Engr.)
2
El Segundo,- Calif.
General Dynamics Corp. Convair Fort Worth Oper. Fort Worth, Texas
Boeing Co. Transport Div. Seattle, Wash. (Attn: Libr.) Boeing Co. Vertol Div. Morton, Pa. booz-Allen Applied Res., Bethesd& Md. Cessna Aircraft Co. Res. Dept. Wichita, Kansas Chrysler Corp. Defense Operations Div. Detroit, Mich. (Attn: Lihr.) Inc.
Div.
Genera. Electric Co. FPD Tech. Info. Center Cincinnati, Ohio General Electric Co. Small Acft. Engine Dept. West Lynu, Mass. General Motors Corp. Nllison Div. indianapolis, Indiana (Attn: Engrg. ReE. Lib.)
--- i-PRMC-G[N*i7b
-o)9-
(kev.
!2-55)
__mig
Copies 2 Goodyear Aircraft Corp. Akron, Ohio Grumman Aircraft Engrg. Corp.
Bethpage, L. I., N.Y.
Copies I McDonnell Aircraft Corp. St. Louis, Mo. North American Aviation,
Autonetica Div.
Inc.
Downey, 1 Gyrodyne Co. of America, Dept. of Aero. Engrg. St. James, L. I., N.Y. inc. I
Calif. Inc.
1-Northrop Corp. 1 Hiller Aircraft Corp. Advanced Res. Dept. Palo Alto, Calif.
Hughes Tool Co.
Hawthorne, Calif.
Piasecki Aircraft Corp. Philadelphia, Pa.
Air-Craft Div. Culver City, Calif. (Attn: Chief, Tech. 1 Kaman Aircraft Corp. Bloomfield, Conn.
Rocketdyne Div. North American Aviation, Canoga Park, Calif. Ryan Aeronautical Co. San Diego, Calif. (Attn: Chief Engineer) Solar Aircraft Co. San Diego, Calif. United Aircraft Corp. Pratt & Whitney Acft. East Hartford, Conn.
Inc.
P~~nier-A ircre f t -Gp.Xarlto~z, N.J. 1 LTV Vought Aeronautics Div. Dallas, Texas Lockheed Aircraft Corp. Lockheed-Cal ifornia Burbank, Calif. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.
Lockheed-Georgia Marietta, Ga. 2 Martin-iAarietta Bahtimore, Md. Co.
1 Corp.
Vanguard Air & Marine Corp. Bala Cynwyd, Pa. Harlan D. Fowler Burlingarne, Calif.
-50-
PRMC-GEN-.tb5 'Rev.
2-55)
and
-L ...
t"Tg7a ry
University of Md. Dept. of Aero. Engrg. Miss. State College Aerophysics Dept. Princeton Univ. Forrestal Res. Center (Attn: Libr.) Virginia Poly. Inst. Carol M. Newman Library
Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps (A04E) G-4 Div., Washa., D.C. The Garrett Corp. Airesearch Mfg. Co. Phoenix, Arizona
(Attn: L.ibra-Er(iavn)
I
S-5].
PRNC-UENI-175
(Rev.
12-55)
S.
Security Classification
JNCI.ASSIFIED
DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA - R&D
2 1
(Security
lOtaasllcatiar, of title, body of abatract and indexing annotation must be entered when the overall report is classified)
LASSIFICATION
FAerodynamics Laboratory
David Taylor Model Basin 20007 Washington, D. C.
3 REPORT TITLE
2b GRoup
Formal Report
S. AUTHOR(S) (Lost name, first name, initial)
Murphy,
Richard D.,
Bart, Robert,
and Williams,
Robert M.
6. REPORT DATE
7b. NO
OF: REFS
_l
November 1965
80. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO.
51 [vi]
b. PROJECT NO.
Report C-2106
9b OTHER REPORT this report) NO(S) (Any other numbers that ma" be assigned
C.
d.
0o. AV
ly to this document and must be met, rements whic -In kdition to security r st have prior e the Department of De ansmittal each ureau of Naval Weapons (RAAD-3), Washington, the Chie-,
I.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY
D.
C.
20360
The results of preliminary vehicle design and mission-oriented operations analysis for predicted ASW systems are incorporated tc form an index of tactical capability of an open-ocean seaplene. The vehicle is a canard configuration with free-propeller propulsion on tilting lifting surfaces. Regenerative cycle turboprop engines power six 20-foot-diameter propellers to achieve VTOL capability and efficient cruise at 275 knots for the 93,000-pound VTOL or 125,000-pound STOL aircraft. Computer simulation of mission performance covering several thousand hours indicates favorable utilization of manpower and equipment. (C)
UNICLAtSSIFIED.
DD
JAN54
1473
3 T
.-
assitication
'0fi
14.
1aFc~o
KEY WORDS
'fit____________
LINK A ROLL: WT LINK 8 ROLE w LINK C ROLE W
Seaplane Design
V/STOL
Tilt-Wing Free-Propeller
Canard Planform Vertical Floats ASW Performance Prediction Computer Simulation Contact Maintenance Contact Investigation Temporary Barrier
ATSSS Sonobuoy A-New
INSTRUCTIONS 1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY: Enter the name and address of the contractor, subcontractor, grantee, Department of Defense activity or other organization (corporate author) issuing
the report.
2a. REPORT SECUI1TY CLASSIFICATION: Enter the overall security classification of the report. Indicate whether "Restricted Data" is included. Marking is to be in accordance with appropriate security regulations. 2b. GROUP: Automatic downgrading is specified in DoD Directive 5200. 10 and Armed Forces Industrisl Manual. Enter the group number. Also, when applicable, show that optional markings have been used for Group 3 and Group 4 as authorized 3. REPORT TITLE: Enter the complete report title in all capital letters. Titles in all cases should be unclassified. If a meaningful title cannot be selected without classification, si-ow title classification in all capitals in parenthesis immediately following the title,
4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES. If appropriate, enter the type of
Give the inclusive dates when a specific reporting period is or in the report.
5. AUTHOR(S): Enter the name(s) of author(s) as shown on
Services, Department of Commerce, for sale to the public, in~dicate this fact and enter the price, it known. 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: Use for additional explane-
tory notes.
If military, show rank and branch of service. The name of the principal author is an ahsolute minimum requirement. 6. REPORT DATE: Enter the date of the report as day, month, year. or month, year. If more than one date appears
12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY: Enter the name of the departmental project office or laboratory sponsoring (par ing for) the research and development, Include address.
13.
ABSTRACT:
should follow normal enter the shold pagination painaionproeduesi~e, ollw nrma procedures, i.e., eterthe
number of pages containing information. 7b. NUMBER OF REFERENCES, references cited in the report. Enter the total number of
summary of the document indicative of the report, even though it may also appear elsewhere in the body of the technical repr.I diinlseei .,pace is reqi, etieacniuto ired, a continuation sheet port. If additional he shall hl be attached. It is highly desirable that the abstract of classified reports be unclassified. Each paragrap'i of the abstract shall end with an indicatioa of the military security classification of the information in the paragraph, repiesented as (TS), (S), (c), n, (U) There is no limitation on the length of the abstract. however, the suggested length is from I50 to 225 words 14 KEY WORDS: Key words are technically meaningful re;ms or short phrases that characterizer a report and may be used as index entries for cataloging the report. Key words must be selected so that no sez-ursty clsssification is required. Identifiers, such as equipment model designation, trade name, military project code name, geographic lccation, may be used as hey words but will be followed by an indication of technical con!text. The assignment of links, rales,, and weights is optional.
8a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER: If appropriate, enter the applicable number of the contract or grant under which the report was written. 8b -'c. & 8d. PROJECT NUMBER: Enter the appropriate .- mil!itary department identification, such as project nuriber, 's6bproject number, system numbers, task number, etc. 9a. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S): Enter the official report number by which the document will be identified and controlled by the originating activity. This tumber must be unique to this report. -)b. "OTIlER REPORT NUMBER(S): If the report has been assigned uny otlier report numnbers (either by the originator "o" by the sponsor), also enter this number(s). 10,. AVAILAABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES: Enter any lirr'taltionci on further dissemination of the report, other than thos'?
YSecurity
Classification