Missile Aerodynamic Data - Flight simulator IOS, TASC

N A S A C O N T R A C T O R N A S A C R - 2 8 3 6 R E P O R T

cr) 00 N

pc U

I

ANALYSIS A N D COMPILATION OF MISSILE AERODYNAMIC DATA

Volume I1 - Performance Analysis

I John E, Burkhalter I

Prepared by I AUBURN UNIVERSITY Auburn, Ala. 36830

for Langley Research Center

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, 0. C. MAY 1977

I

1. Repon No. 2. Government Accession No.

NASA CR-2836 4. Title and Subtitle

ANALYSIS AND COMPILATION OF MISSILE AERODYNAMIC DATA - VOLUME I 1 PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

7. Authorb) John E. Burkhal ter

9. Performing Organization Name and Address Aerospace Engineering Department Auburn U n i v e r s i t y Auburn , A1 a bama 36830

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

5. Report Date

6. Performing Organization Code May 1977

8. Performing Orgenization Report No.

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

NSG 1002

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address National Aeronautics and Space Admin is t ra t ion Langley Research Center ' Hampton, VA 23365

13. Type of Repon and Period Covered

Contractor Report

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

~~ ~ ~

16. Abstract Th is r e p o r t provides a general analys is o f t he f l i g h t dynamics o f several su r face - to -a i r

and two a i r - t o - a i r m i s s i l e conf igurat ions. The ana lys i s invo lves th ree phases: v e r t i c a l climb,

s t r a i g h t and l e v e l f l i g h t , and constant a l t i t u d e turn. Wind tunnel aerodynamic data and f u l l

sca le m i s s i l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a re used where avai lah le; unknown data a re estimated. For the

constant a l t i t u d e t u r n phase, a th ree degree o f freedom f l i g h t s imu la t i on i s used. Important

parameters considered i n t h i s ana lys i s a re the veh ic le weight, Mach number, heading angle, t h r u s t

l eve l , s i d e s l i p angle, g loading, and t ime t o make the tu rn .

t u r n i s a l s o determined. Results a re presented i n graphica l form.

The actual f l i g h t path dur ing the

19. Security Classif. (of this report1

UNCLASSIFIED

7. Key Words (Suggested by Authoris))

M i s s i l e s

M i s s i l e Conf igurat ions

M i s s i l e Performance

21. NO. of pager 22. Rice' 20. Security Classif. (of this page)

UNCLASSIFIED 3.L4 $9.75

18. Distribution Statement

UNCLASSIFIED - UNLIMITED

Subject Category 02

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

NOMENCLATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

I . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

11. ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Performance - Phase I: Horizontal Flight . . . . . . . . . . 3

Performance - Phase TI: Vertical Flight . . . . . , . . . . 5

Stability and Control - Phase 111: Constant Altitude Turn . 6

111. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 I V . R E F E R E N C E S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

V. FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -

SUMMARY

This r e p o r t provides a general a n a l y s i s of t h e f l i g h t dynamics

of several sur face- to-a i r and two a i r - t o - a i r missile conf igura t ions .

The a n a l y s i s involves t h r e e phases: v e r t i c a l climb, s t r a i g h t and

l eve l f l i g h t , and cons tan t a l t i t u d e t u r n . Wind tunnel aerodynamic

d a t a and f u l l scale missj.le c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e used where a v a i l a b l e ;

unknown d a t a are es t imated , For t h e constant a l t i t u d e t u r n phase,

a t h r e e degree of freedom f l i g h t s i m u l a t i o n is used . Important pa-

rameters considered i n t h i s a n a l y s i s are t h e v e h i c l e weight , Mach

number, heading angle , t h r u s t l e v e l , s i d e s l i p ang le , g loading, and

time t o make t h e t u r n . The a c t u a l f l i g h t pa th during t h e t u r n i s

also determined. Resul t s a r e presented i n graphica l form.

i v

Symbol

W g

wO

Ij

X

xW

2

a

B

NOMENCLATURE (CONT'D)

Def in i t i on

Weight of p rope l l an t g r a i n

I n i t i a l weight of missile

Weight f low rate of f u e l

Coordinate axis

S u m t i o n of f o r c e s on missile a long X wind axis

Summation of f o r c e s on missile along Y wind a x i s

Coordinate axis

Angle of a t t a c k

S i d e s l i p angle

Eleva tor d e f l e c t i o n

Rudder d e f l e c t i o n

Atmospheric d e n s i t y

Heading ang le

vi

t

Symbol

a

cD

cD

cL

0

‘m

‘n

C Y

d

ISP

IZZ

m

M

P

9

S

t

T

v

W

NOMENCLATURE

Def in i t i on

Speed of sound

Drag c o e f f i c i e n t

Zero l i f t drag c o e f f i c i e n t

L i f t c o e f f i c i e n t

P i t ch ing moment c o e f f i c i e n t

Yawing moment c o e f f i c i e n t

Side f o r c e c o e f f i c i e n t

Reference l eng th (diameter)

Acce lera t ion of g r a v i t y

S p e c i f i c impulse of g ra in

Moment i n e r t i a of missile about z axis

Mass of missile

Mach number

Atmospheric p r e s s u r e

Dynamic p res su re

Body axis yaw rate

Reference area

T i m e

Thrust

T i m e a t burnout of g r a i n

Vehicle speed

Weight of missi le

Y

I. INTRODUCTION

In Volume I of this report, aerodynamic coefficients for approxi-

mately 30 recently declassified missile configurations were compiled

and tabulated in a consistent format. The purpose of this report,

Volume 11, is to provide a general aerodynamic analysis of several

missile configurations with maximum utilization of the data in Volume

I. In this respect, several similar missiles in the surface-to-air and

air-to-air classes are analyzed, and results are presented in a format

for performance comparisons.

Classically, analyses in flight dynamics are divided into three

major areas. The first is performance, where such items as maximum

speed, range, ceiling and endurance are considered. These items have

special forms where tactical missiles are concerned. The second area

is stability and control. Here maneuverability (control effectiveness)

and dynamic stability are especially important when coupled with auto-

matic control systems. Finally, there is aeroelasticity. The high-g

maneuvers of missiles impose stringent requirements on the aerostructure;

however, the slender, low aspect ratio configurations in use today are

relatively insensitive to classical aeroelastic problems.

The aerodynamic behavior and performance characteristics of a missile

are highly dependent on the class of mission for which it was designed.

In the surface-to-air category five configurations of one missile are

considered; a wingless version, two similar winged versions, and a

winged design with aft-tail controls and canard controls. In the air-

to-air class, two specific designs are examined.

-2-

There are two approaches for performance anlayses. One i s strictly

an aerodynamic comparison of different designs with all variables other

than the aerodynamic coefficients remaining fixed.

dynamic comparison incorporating actual variables and initial conditions

for each configuration, which is the method used herein.

the configurations investigated are operational, information such as

overall dimensions, weight, and grain size is available.

e.g., specific impulse and moments-of-inertia - could be reliably estimated.

The other is a

.

Since most of

Othk variables -

As stated prevrously, the objective of this analysis is to provide

data on several missiles in certain aerodynamic environments. The

analysis consists of three phases; two under performance and one under

stability and control. The two phases in performance involve straight

line horizontal flight and straight line vertical climb.

tude horizontal turns due to constant rudder are examined in the stability

Constant alti-

and control phase.

In each phase, the applicable rigid body equations of motion, in

the form given by Fogarty and Howe in Ref. 1, are solved numerically on

the digital computer. The coordinate system used for translational

displacements is referenced to the flight path and, as pointed out i n

Ref. 1, "...makes much lower accuracy and speed demands on the computer

than does the body-axis system." For the rotational equations, the

body axis system is used since again maximum utilization of computer

time is realized. Assumptions, approximations and details of solutions

are discussed in subsequent sections.

TI. ANALYSIS

Performance - Phase I: Hor izonta l F l i g h t

The performance phase f o r h o r i z o n t a l f l i g h t c o n s i s t s of two p a r t s .

1x1 t h e f i r s t p a r t , the t h r u s t r equ i r ed t o produce a given s t eady state

Mach number is de te rmbed .

equat ions were written i n t h e v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l p l anes and were

so lved simultaneously i n an i t e r a t i v e manner.

I n i t i a l l y t h e v e h i c l e f o r c e and moment

These equa t ions were

T cos a = qS CD (M,a) (1)

and

Vartous v e h i c l e weights w e r e considered and t h e t h r u s t r equ i r ed

versus 'Mach number was determined a t several a l t i t u d e s . The r e s u l t s of

these h i t L a l computations indicate that the vehicle weight had l itt le

e f f e c t on t h e t h r u s t required, as shown i n Fig. 1. Consequently,

Equations (2) and (3) w e r e dropped and t h e ang le of a t t a c k w a s set at

zero. Equation (1) then reduced t o

T = qS C,, (M). (4) 0

The second p a r t of t h e h o r i z o n t a l f l i g h t c a l c u l a t i o n s was t h e

s o l u t i o n of t h e s i m p l i f i e d (a=O) h o r i z o n t a l equat ions of motion. The

purpose of t h e s e computations was t o provide i n i t i a l cond i t ion i n p u t s

t o Phase I E , t h e cons tan t a l t i t u d e turn , and t o f u r t h e r i l l u s t r a t e t h e

-4-

dependence of t h e veh ic l e f l i g h t Mach number on t h e t h r u s t and drag.

These equat ions were w r i t t e n a s

x = (T - qS CD (M)/m,

? = J 2 d t ,

M = ?/a,

W = W o - J f i d t .

(5)

(7)

For t h e s e equat ions i t w a s assumed t h a t a=O, = cons t = T/Isp and

t h a t t h e a l t i t u d e w a s cons tan t (sea l e v e l ) .

h o r i z o n t a l launch i n which t h e m i s s i l e i s allowed t o a c c e l e r a t e u n t i l

t h e g r a i n i s consumed, a t which po in t t h e f l i g h t i s te rmina ted . The

veh ic l e f l i g h t Mach number is thus determined a s a func t ion o f t h e

v e h i c l e weight o r weight of g ra in consumed.

These equat ions s imula t e a

I n making t h e s e computations, t h e i n i t i a l v e h i c l e weight and i n i t i a l

g ra in weight had t o be es t imated . A t o t a l v e h i c l e dens i ty of 100 l b s / f t 3

w a s assumed. A s a f u r t h e r check on t h e weight e s t ima t ions , t h e parameter

W/S = 750 which was used by Spearman and Fournier i n Ref. 2 , served as

a guide. Data given i n Ref. 3 w a s a l s o used as a gu ide l ine . A s a

general r u l e , t h i s number f a l l s w i th in t h e range of t h e i n i t i a l weight

estimate and t h e weight of t h e v e h i c l e a f t e r t h e g r a i n burns out .

Since po r t ions of t h e s e f l i g h t s were subsonic , subsonic aerody-

namic d a t a were requi red . I n t h e major i ty of t h e wind tunnel test r e p o r t s ,

subsonic d a t a w e r e n o t a v a i l a b l e , and subsonic drag coe .€f ic ien ts had t o be

estimated using t h e methods of Ref. 4 .

-5-

Performance - Phase 11: Vertical Climb

The vertical climb phase of t h e a n a l y s i s c o n s i s t s of vertical launch

a t some cons tan t t h r u s t level. As i n t h e o t h e r phases , t h e i n i t i a l

weight of t h e veh ic l e as w e l l as t h e i n i t i a l p r o p e l l a n t o r g r a i n weight

was requi red .

assumed cons tan t a t 250 seconds.

flow r a t e of p rope l l an t w a s assumed t o be

For each f l i g h t t h e s p e c i f i c impulse of t h e g r a i n w a s

As a f u r t h e r s imp . l i f i ca t ion t h e weight

Obviously, t h e drag and t h r u s t are q u i t e important i n t h i s a n a l y s i s .

I n o r d e r t o accu ra t e ly compute t h e drag, t h e drag c o e f f i c i e n t w a s w r i t t e n

as

A l t i t u d e e f f e c t s were taken i n t o account through equat ions de f in ing t h e

s tandard atmospheric dens i ty and speed of sound as func t ions of the

he ight 2. Because of t h e dependence of t o t a l aerodynamic f o r c e s on both

Mach number and a l t i t u d e , maximum t h r u s t l e v e l s do no t n e c e s s a r i l y mean

maximum a l t i t u d e s . That is , i f t h e t h r u s t l e v e l is h igh , t h e m i s s i l e

a c c e l e r a t i o n s are high which l e a d t o high drag a t low a l t i t u d e s .

o t h e r hand, lower t h r u s t levels may produce lower drags a t h ighe r a l t i -

tudes.

t h e t h r u s t l e v e l s which produced maximum a l t i t u d e s were determined.

On t h e

For some of t h e m i s s i l e conf igu ra t ions presented i n t h i s a n a l y s i s ,

Because of t h e v e r t i c a l launch from t h e ground, subsonic drag coef-

f i c i e n t d a t a were a l s o requi red i n t h i s phase. It w a s a l s o necessary

-6-

t o e x t r a p o l a t e t h e d a t a t o h ighe r Mach numbers than those run i n t h e

wind tunnel tests.

The procedure f o r each f l i g h t w a s t o set t h e t h r u s t at a given level,

then so lve t h e equat ions of motion f o r t h e subsequent t r a j e c t o r y and

des i r ed da ta . The governing equat ions f o r v e r t i c a l f l i g h t are

(W/g) Z = T - qS CD (M) - W, (11) 0

(12) 2 2 q = .5 p a M

W = W - / i d t , 0

M = i / a (15)

and

F l i g h t s w e r e made a t each of fou r d i f f e r e n t t h r u s t levels. The

t h r u s t levels chosen w e r e designed t o cover t h e range of t h r u s t t h a t

any one p a r t i c u l a r missile w a s assumed capable of producing. During

each f l i g h t t h e veh ic l e weight , d rag , Mach number and t i m e of f l i g h t w a s

recorded a t s p e c i f i c a l t i t u d e i n t e r v a l s and appropr i a t e p l o t s were made.

S t a b i l i t y and Cont ro l - Phase 111: Constant A l t i t u d e Turn

The t h i r d phase of t h e a n a l y s i s cons i s t ed of a cons tan t a l t i t u d e

tu rn . It is understood t h a t a l l t h e missiles considered i n this r e p o r t

w i l l , i n a l l l i ke l ihood , no t be requi red t o make a f u l l 180' t u r n .

However, t h e a b i l i t y of t h e missile t o make a t u r n is i n d i c a t i v e of i t s

- 7-

a b i l i t y t o maneuver. Consequently t h e information der ived from a t u r n

a n a l y s i s is very d e s c r i p t i v e of t h e m i s s i l e aerodynamic e f f i c i e n c y .

Three d i f f e r e n t a l t i t u d e s w e r e s e l e c t e d a t which t h e t u r n s were

t o be made; namely, sea l e v e l , 25,000, and 50,000 f e e t . Thrust levels

during t h e t u r n were cons tan t u n t i l t h e f u e l w a s consumed o r u n t i l t h e

180" t u r n is completed. Vehicle weight , g r a i n weight , and Mach number

a t t h e i n i t i a t i o n of t h e t u r n maneuver was requi red .

r e a l i s t i c as p o s s i b l e and s t i l l s t a y wi th in t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of t h e over-

a l l a n a l y s i s e f f o r t , t h e weight of t h e v e h i c l e , corresponding g r a i n

weight , and Mach number were obtained from t h e ver t ical climb phase of

t h e a n a l y s i s . For example, during t h e ve r t i ca l climb phase, t h e missi le

t o t a l weight , weight of f u e l remaining, and Mach number a t 25,000 feet

I n o r d e r t o b e as

were s t o r e d f o r f u t u r e re ference . These t h r e e parameters then served

as i n i t i a l condi t ions f o r t h e t u r n a t t h a t a l t i t u d e . This same pro-

cedure w a s used f o r t h e 50,000-foot a l t i t u d e t u r n .

For t h e sea leve l t u r n , a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t approach w a s taken.

From Phase I, t h e m i s s i l e i s allowed t o boost h o r i z o n t a l l y u n t i l a Mach

number of 1 .5 i s obta ined , then t h e t u r n procedure i s i n i t i a t e d . The

input weights , v e h i c l e and g r a i n , are obta ined from t h e Phase I a n a l y s i s

as previous ly explained.

The t u r n maneuver w a s begun wi th t h e miss i le c e n t e r l i n e on t h e X-

coord ina te a x i s . The rudder o r c o n t r o l s u r f a c e t o i n i t i a t e t h e tu rn i s

d e f l e c t e d a given amount 6 and t h e missi le then a t tempts t o n e g o t i a t e

t h e tu rn .

subsequent t r a j e c t o r y were obtained from t h e wind t u n n e l da t a . Because

R

The v e h i c l e aerodynamics which d i c t a t e t h e f l i g h t p a t h and

-8-

of t h e varying weight, t h r u s t cu to f f and c.g. s h i f t , t h e r ad ius dur ing

each t u r n w a s no t a cons tan t . It was assumed t h a t t h e g ra in w a s l o c a t e d

i n t h e a f t po r t ion of t h e v e h i c l e and consequently t h e c.g. s h i f t e d

forward as t h e g ra in was consumed. This forward c.g. travel and its

e f f e c t on moment of i n e r t i a w a s taken i n t o account i n t h e a n a l y s i s , s i n c e

s t a b i l i t y of t h e missile i s dependent on t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e c.g. Other

parameters which had t o be es t imated were t h e moments of i n e r t i a and

t h e damping d e r i v a t i v e s C and Cn . The damping d e r i v a t i v e s were ylt j,

es t imated using L i f t i n g Surface and Slender Body Theory techniques.

I n t h e i n i t i a l s o l u t i o n s of t h e governing equat ions , t h e angle of

a t t a c k , a, w a s included as a v a r i a b l e and w a s computed along wi th o t h e r

parameters . However, i t w a s observed t h a t under t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of

t h e cons tan t t u r n maneuver, ci had a n e g l i g i b l e e f f e c t on t h e r e s u l t a n t

f l i g h t pa th o r o t h e r p e r t i n e n t v a r i a b l e s . Consequently, a w a s e l imina ted

i n t h e remainder of t h e computations. I n i t i a l e f f o r t s t o use l i n e a r

aerodynamics l e d t o i n c o r r e c t r e s u l t s ; consequently, va lues of C y vs . B

and C n v s . B were inpu t i n t a b u l a r form t o inc lude non l inea r e f f e c t s .

Double i n t e r p o l a t i o n a lgor i thms were set up i n o rde r t o determine

accu ra t e ly t h e s i d e fo rce c o e f f i c i e n t s and yawing moment c o e f f i c i e n t s .

Drag c o e f f i c i e n t s , as i n Phases I and 11, were ex t r apo la t ed t o M = 1.0

and M = 6.0 and were a l s o l i n e a r l y i n t e r p o l a t e d from inpu t t a b l e s .

A s previous ly mentioned, t h e t h r u s t level f o r any one f l i g h t w a s

A t t h e beginning of he ld cons tan t a t one of fou r p re se l ec t ed va lues .

each tu rn , t h e burnout time f o r t h e g r a i n was determined from

tb0 = W g / G .

-9-

It w a s then assumed t h a t t a i l o f f ( f i n a l burning of g ra in ) occurred

over a two-second per iod and t h e t h r u s t l i n e a r l y decayed t o ze ro dur ing

t h i s t i m e .

S ince t h e t u r n was at a cons tan t a l t i t u d e , motion w a s r e s t r i c t e d

t o t h e x-y plane.

(no r o l l ) wi th t h e f i n s o r cruciform wings i n t h e "plus" conf igura t ion .

The missile w a s assumed t o " s l ide" through t h e t u r n

With t h e s e r e s t r i c t i o n s and assumptions, t h e r e s u l t a n t equat ions

of motion were wr i t t en :

Xw = T cos a cos 8 + qS(-CD cos @ + Cy s i n 8 1 ,

= - T cos a s i n 8 + qS(CD s i n 8 + Cy cos 8 ) , yW

-10-

cn = Cn(B,M) . (30)

These equations (18) through (30) were solved d ig i ta l ly and the des ired

parameters plotted. The output from the simultaneous solution of

these equations includes (1) X versus Y , (2) g-level during turn,

(3) JI during turn, (4) B during turn, (5) Mach number during turn,

( 6 ) weight of vehicle during turn, and (7 ) time required t o make the

turn.

111. RITSULTS

The t a b l e below is a gene ra l summary o f t h e missiles which were

analyzed as descr ibed i n t h e preceding s e c t i o n s .

TABLE PHASE I11

6=20° 6140' PHASE I PHASE 11 6=100

TM X-2774 X X X

TM X-1751 X X X X X TM X-1025 X X X X X

TM X-3070 X X X

TM X-846 X X X

TM X-2780/A X X X X X

TM X-2780/C X X X X X

-

For each missile conf igu ra t ion p l o t s are presented which d e p i c t t h e

r e s u l t s from each of t h e t h r e e "missions."

f icat ion number which is indicative of certain parameters as described

below. Example:

On each graph is an i d e n t i -

1005 TM X-2774

Rudder Thrus t i n Missile i d e n t i f i c a t i o n d e f l e c t i o n 1000 l b s . o r Report Number i n degrees

For t h i s example t h e rudder d e f l e c t i o n is 10 degrees, t h e t h r u s t is

5000 l b s . , and t h e missile is taken from NASA Report Number TMX-2274.

Data on each graph is presented f o r t h r e e d i f f e r e n t a l t i t u d e s ; sea

level, 25,000 f t . , and 50,000 f t .

-11-

-12-

I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number t h e f i g u r e s are numbered

r e l a t i v e t o t h e r e s p e c t i v e “mission. The Roman numeral i s r e s p e c t i v e

of t he mission as o u t l i n e d below.

I - Horizontal F l i g h t

II - Vert ical F l i g h t

I11 - Constant A l t i t u d e Turn

Other numbers i n t h e f i g u r e number des igna t ion are i n consecut ive order .

A s a t y p i c a l example of t h e d a t a presented €or each missile, t h e

m i s s i l e de s igna ted TM X-2774 i s discussed i n de t a i l . F r o m the hor i -

z o n t a l f l i g h t phase F ig . 2-1 d e p i c t s t h e te rmina l Mach number versus

t h r u s t levels f o r var ious a l t i t u d e s . For example, i f t h e t h r u s t w e r e

10,000 pounds, t h e maximum Mach number t h e m i s s i l e could o b t a i n at

sea leve l would be about M=3.3 b u t a t 20,000 f e e t a l t i t u d e t h e missile

could reach a Mach number of M=5.5.

Continuing wi th Fig. “-11, t h e t i m e requi red t o climb v e r t i c a l l y

t o var ious a l t i t u d e s is presented. Note t h a t on t h i s p a r t i c u l a r missile

the maximum a l t i t u d e s are very high - i n excess of 100 m i l e s - and con-

sequent ly t h e t r a j e c t o r i e s o r d a t a presented i - t h e s e h igh a l t i t u d e

regimes may be somewhat i n e r r o r . I n F ig . 4-11, t h e Mach number - A l t i t u d e trace is presented. Note t h a t maximum Mach numbers range from

5.5, a t 5000 l b s . t h r u s t , t o 6.5 a t 20,000 l b s .

The las t f i g u r e i n t h e Phase I1 f l i g h t set i s t h e vehicle Weight

versus A l t i t u d e .

t he v e r t i c a l boos t . From t h i s graph t h e i n i t i a l weight of t h e v e h i c l e

may be obtained as w e l l as t h e f i n a l burnout weight.

F i g . 5-11 d e p i c t s t h e weight of the vehicle during

-13-

The t h i r d phase f l i g h t , cons tan t a l t i t u d e t u r n , i s presented i n

t h e nex t series of curves .

time and v e h i c l e weight are presented as func t ions of t h e downrange

d i s t ance , Y. The i n i t i a l weight of t h e veh ic l e a t t h e cons tan t t u r n

a l t i t u d e s a r e obtained from Fig . 5-11. The f i r s t of t h e f i g u r e s ,

Fig. 6-111, i s f o r a t h r u s t level o f 5000 l b s . wh i l e t h e second, t h i r d

and f o u r t h are f o r 10,000, 15,000, and 20,000 l b s . t h r u s t , r e spec t ive ly .

I n F i g 6-111 through 9-111, t h e f l i g h t

I n o rde r t o ge t a clear p i c t u r e of t h e m i s s i l e performance, a l l

t h e f i g u r e s i n t h i s phase should be considered s i n c e they are a l l

i n t e r r e l a t e d .

J,, are presented i n F igs . 10-111 through 13-111. Note t h a t t h e i n i t i a l

Mach number f o r each a l t i t u d e i s d i f f e r e n t . The i n i t i a l va lues f o r

t h e v e h i c l e f l i g h t Mach number is taken from t h e v e r t i c a l f l i g h t phase,

F ig . 4-111. Note t h a t f o r t h i s p a r t i c u l a r m i s s i l e and t h r u s t = 5000 l b s .

a t a l t i t u d e of 50,000 f e e t , t h e g ra in b u m s out be fo re t h e 180" t u r n i s

completed. H o w e v e r , f o r t he o the r two a l t i t u d e s , f u e l s t i l l remains

a f t e r t h e t u r n is completed. Inc reas ing t h e t h r u s t level as shown on

Figs . 11-111 through 13-111 produces somewhat d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t s . The

next set of curves , F igs . 1 4 - I V through 17-111, p re sen t t h e g loading

and s i d e s l i p angle , 6 , as func t ions of t h e downrange d i s t a n c e , y . Note

t h a t a t t h e beginning of t h e t u r n maneuver, t h e missile o s c i l l a t e s

about some nominal s i d e s l i p angle bu t then damps ou t and maintains a

nea r cons tan t 6.

The Mach number dur ing t h e f l i g h t and "heading angle ,"

The f i n a l se t i n t h e Phase I11 series is t h e most d e s c r i p t i v e f o r

I n F igs . 18-111 through 21-111 t h e f l i g h t t h e cons t an t a l t i t u d e t u r n .

-14-

pa th , X versus Y , f o r each t h r u s t l e v e l i s presented. Small r e p l i c a s

of t h e missi le shape a r e drawn on t h e f l i g h t pa th t r a j e c t o r y a t d i s c r e t e

l o c a t i o n s a t i t s c o r r e c t heading and s i d e s l i p angle . The f l i g h t f o r

each of t h e t h r e e d i f f e r e n t a l t i t u d e s are shown on t h e s e f i g u r e s .

The same genera l f i g u r e s as discussed above are presented f o r t h e

o t h e r missiles as o u t l i n e d i n t h e Table. There are a few except ions;

f o r example, t h e r e i s no Phqse I o r Phase I1 f l i g h t s f o r TM X-3070 and

TM X-846 s i n c e t h e s e are a i r launched a i r - t o - a i r missiles. The i n t e r -

p r e t a t i o n of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e s e computations are l e f t t o t h e reader.

REFERENCES

1. Fogarty, L. E . , and R. M. Howe, "Computer Mechanization of Six- Degree of Freedom F l i g h t Equations," Simulat ion, - Vol. 11, No. 4, October 1968.

2 . Spearman, M. L., and R. H. Fourn ier , "An Aerodynamic Assessment of Various Missile Configurat ion Concepts ," Paper p r e s e n t a t i o n at t h e Ninth U. S. Navy Symposium on A e r o b a l l i s t i c s , Silver Spring, Maryland, May 1972.

3. J a n e ' s A l l t h e World's Aircraft; e d i t e d by J. W. R. Taylor , Jane ' s Yearbooks, Paul ton House, London, England; 1966-1975 e d i t i o n s .

4 . Moore, F. G., "Aerodynamics of Guided and Unguided Weapons," NWL Technical Report TR-3018, U.S. Naval Weapons Laboratory, Dahlgren, V i rg in i a , December 1973.

-15-

H.2L'.000 f:.

n;3o.ooo ~ i .

H:uG.000 FT.

H:50.000 f l .

,H-SER LEVEL K E I C M T m 750 L65.

t ! S l @ . @ X 3.

[email protected] FT.

,[email protected] F I .

T M X - 2 7 7 4

I I I 1 1 1

00 2 .00 3.00 9.00 5.02 6 .C0 7'. 00 MRCH NUMEFR

Fig. 2-1.

ALT I TUOF @I SFfi LEVEL 0 10,OCO FT. A 2C.000 F T . -i 3 0 , O C O FT. X U 0 , O C O FT. 0 50,OOC F T .

Thrust vs. Terminal Mach No.

17

T Y x-27711 PI T = 5COO 0 T = l C O @ c ! A T = 15002 + T = 2000I!

Fig. 3-11. Altitude vs. Flight Time.

18

. cc

T M X-27711 cl 0 A

+

T = 51300 T = 1Oc 'OC T = 1SOCO T = 2OCCiJ

7.00 MFlCH NUMRER

Fig. 4-11. Altitude vs. Mach No.

19

in

T M X-27711

q c

ill T = 5000 0 T = 10000 A T = 15000 + T = 20000

w - c. I c,

CJ

1 I .@C 200.00 225.co

Fig. 5-11. Altitude vs. Vehicle Weight.

20

I

c3

LL: M

=a 0

1 0 0 5 T Y X - 2 7 7 4

I I I I I 1

1005TMX-2774

Fig . 6-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

21

0 G GLT I TUDE [FT , I

I I I 1 1 ciJ'.oc 30. OC! 50. cc 90. no 120.00 150.00 1913.00 Y - F E E T % i o 3

Fig. 7-111. Flight T i m e and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

22

fiLT ITUDF I F 1 . I

L i l 3 c e

0 . 25200. 5 0 0 0 0 .

I I I 1 I 1

F ig . 8-111. F l i g h t T i m e and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

23

. o c

c?

C

R L T I TUOF LFT. I

c3 0. 0 25000.

io

1 0 2 0 T Y X - 2 7 7 4 c

- 0

-0 X G

0 9 ,-.

in m

t-G I n c3

A 50000.

w - I 1 I I 1 1 1

4 . 0 0 30 .00 60. C O 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y-FEE-.T X 1 o 3


24

0 c:

1 0 0 5 T V X - 2 7 7 4

I I 1 1 1 1 00 30. OC! 50. CC! 9c. 0 0 120 .02 150.00 iao.co

Y - F E E T % l o 3

Fig. 10-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. v s . Downrange Distance, Y.

25

1010TMX-2774

1 0 i O T M X - 2 7 7 4

Fig. 11-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

26

-7--- - 1 - - 7 - 1 0.00 30 .00 6 8 . oc! 90.00 12O.C!Cl ; 5 o . c c 18iJ.QrJ

Y - F E E - T 4 0 3

Fig. 12-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs . Downrange Dis tance , Y .

27

0 i2

''1 1 0 2 O i Y X - 2 7 7 4

I I 1 1 1 --or. 00 30.00 50. 0C 90.00 h o . 00 lkO.00 IS@. 00

Y-FEET % l o 3

Fig. 13-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

28

1005TMX-277U

I I I I I 1 CC 30.00 60.00 3Cl.00 i20.CO 150.00 la@.@C

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ~

Fig. 14-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

29

I I I I . cc 3 0 . r?c 6 C . C C 90 .02 1 2 a . c 2 15o.rJo ;80.02 Y - F E E T % i o 3

1010TMX-2774

I I I 1 I 1 . 02 30.00 EO. 00 90.00 120.00 i s n . 0 0 i m . 0 0

Y-FEE.:T 4 0 3

Fig. 15-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs.. Downrange Distance, Y .

30

1015TMX-2774

0 3

I I 1 -- - '0.00 ? O . O @ Fjc. 02 90. CJO 12C.00 15i1.00 180.00

Y-FEET n 1 0 3 Fig. 16-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

31

1020TMX-277Q

Y-FFF'T ~ 1 0 '

E' I- LL; MO

13

0 t-7- I 1020TMX-277U

0 0

0 3

I I I 1 1 1

4 i

33

- i

k

-1 U

34

35

X ;r t- 3 cu 0 d

I 1 I

011 ' 0 6 O C ' S L C I J ' S 1 - 0 0 ' 0 ,OI* 1:13j -x

36

P

I I I 1 I G O 2 . C O 3.00 4.00 5.CO 6.00 7'. 00 MRCH NUMBE'R

GLT I TUDE El SFR LEVEL 0 1 0 , O C C FT. A 2C,OCO FT. + 30.000 FT . X ~ 0 . 0 0 0 F l . 0 5 0 , O C O FT.

Fig. 22-1. Thrust vs. Terminal Mach No.

37

T Y X-1025 PI T = 5 O i l C

A T = 151100 + T = 20000

a .r= i o o o o

- TIMF-SFC

Fig. 23-11. Alt i tude vs. Fl ight Tim.

38

c v

c -rv x - 1 c 2 5

/--

MFlCH N U M S E R


39

. 3:


40

. \

k /

,/

4

i /

1 I I I I . c c 3 c . c c 6 0 . 2 0 3 0 . r)C 1 2 0 . ~ 2 150.00 1 ~ o . c ' ~ Y-FEEIT . l o 3

Fig. 26-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

I

F i g . 27-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

42

\

i

_- -----I I I r-7 , C O 3 @ . o c 5 2 . 0 2 90. 02 120.00 l s l ~ . o 2 19C.C3

Y - F E E T w 10'

Fig . 28-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehic le Weight vs. Downrange Dis tance , Y .

43

0 0

I 1 I 1 I 1

30 3 0 . 0 0 6 Q . c0 913.00 120.cc 1 5 o . c c iBO.CC! Y-FEE--T m3

d5: ‘1 1020TMX-1025

-0; I\ -0

FiLT I TUDE [ F T . I

a 0. 0 2 5 0 0 0 . A ‘50000.

0

I I 1 I I 1 ?I1. 00 30.00 60 .00 90.00 120.00 i 5 0 . 0 0 i 8 0 . 0 0

Y-FEET % l o 3

Fig. 29-111. Fl ight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

44

1 O O S T Y X - 1 0 2 5

CI, G

I-' -

10CISTMX-1025

A L T I T U 2 E IFT.1

E 0. 0 25000.

5C!@c!O.

Y-FEET % l o 3

q-- I

I I 1 -0. @ @ 30.00 G b . 00 9 b . 02 i20.00 15O.OC 18

Y-FEET % l o 3 ' 0 .00


45

10iUTYX-102S


46

0 ci

"1 I F1

Q'"

u

1015TMX-102S

I I I I I

3C.QO Gc! . c c 30. rJ2 120.0Q 15o.cc !8?.CC? Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0 '

-0'. 00 30 .00 60.00 90.00 120.00 1so.00 iai3 Y-FEEiT x 1 0 3

. 0 2


47

PLT I Tl iDE ( F T , J

lG2GiMX-1025

120.00 150.00 180.90 Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0 '


48

1 0 0 5 T P X - 1 0 2 5

'i I- ii;

0

0

1 O O S T M X - 1025

3 1 I 1 I

lo . oc 3 0 . 0 0 60.00 9u.00 i '20.00 I~CGT-T'~~.O~ Y-FEF-T x 1 0 3

Fig. 34-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

49

1 0 1 G i M X - 1 0 2 5

l a'-

I I 1 I 1 -1 __ . c o 3 0 . C O G O . c!? 9e. 00 120.00 15i).rJ@ 1 9 O . c ' C

U-FEEIT x 1 0 3 Fig . 35-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

50

10 1 5 T M X - 1 C25

I I I 1 - r - - - 1 90 30. O C F j r 3 . m 30. Qr3 120.c32 150.90 ! O G . O O

Y-FEET x 1 U 3

Fig. 36-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs . Downrange Distance, Y.

51

1 1 I I I 1 30.22 5Q.QO 90.22 i 2 0 . 2 0 15O.C;O 130.CO

Y-FEElT ~ 1 0 '

1020TMX-1025

I . - - w

FlLT I TUCE [ F T . 1

ill O - 25020 . 50000.

1020 iMX-1025

1 I I . 00 30 .00 50.00 90.00 1>0.00 lk0.CO 18c. 00 'I-FEET X 1 o 3

Fig. 37-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.,

51

I I I I I I I

105.co I0 15.cc 30.00 us. cc EO. Cil 75. oc 90 jc!o Y-FEET ~ 1 0

Fig. 39-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y.

54

I I I I I I I .oil 15.l!u" 30. Cil us. oc 63.00 75.00 9oj00 105.23

Y-FEE:T *10 Fig. 38-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y .

53

I

1 I I I I I I 30.03 !is. c c 5 2 . 0 0 7 5 . cc 9 0 p 105.20 0 ;s.c3

Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0 Fig . 40-111. Constant Al t i tude F l i g h t Path, X vs. Y.

5s

FlLT I TUDE (FT . I 0 25000. I3 0.

A sooeo.

I I I I 1 I I C3 15.22 30. 00 15.C3 [email protected] 75. @O 90 j o O 105.00

Y-FEFT ~ 1 0 Fig. 41-111. Constant Altitude Fl ight Path, X vs. Y.

56

2 C j C S i Y X -

P L T i TLSE I F T . 1

0. 0 2 5 s c 0 . A 50000 .

1 I 1 I I

50 3 c . 00 6C. 29 90.00 120.co !50 .00 1BC.CO Y - F E E T H ~ G ?


57


58

0 c

2015TMX- I025

- 1 1 I I 1 1 30 30. an 60. cc 99. CC 120.00 iSO.00 i80.00

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

Fig. 44-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight VS. Downrange Distance, Y.

1 I 1 c c 3 c . c c sc!.cc 9c. c 2 150. cc 1’sa. E 2 l i ? . ‘Jc Y-FEET % l G ’

c c* FlLT I TUi lF LFT. 1

2 0 2 0 i M X - 1 0 2 5

- 00 “I\

;?be+---- v,

I 1 1 I 1

4 . 0 0 30.00 50.00 90. co 120.00 1sc.cc 180.00 Y-FEET wlC’

F i g . 45-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

60

I I I I 1 -----z. c!2 00 6c!, CO 90. c!cl 120.01 i 5 c 7 . C C li30.39 Y-FFE-T 3410'

20GSTMX-lG25

- @ @ 30. C O 60. ca 90. oo 120.CC 1 5 O . O C 180.

I I - I I I 1

Y - F E E T ' ~ 1 0 ' 00

Ftg. 46-111. Heading Angle and Plach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

61

0 G

20 iOTMX-1025

FlLT I TUDE ! F T . I

0 2 5 0 0 0 . 500ca .

a 0.

6b. 00 90. '30 1'20.00 1so .90 l a 0 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

B O 0


. 62

G c) +

c 3

-7-- 1 1 I I

c‘i! 3 2 . c 2 5c. co 9c. c o 12c. ec 1 5 ~ . c o I X . L G Y-FEEIT % 1 C 3

- 1 I I I I I I 1 0 . 0 0 3 0 . c c 60. CO SO. 00 120.CO 1 5 O . O C 180.

Y-FEET n 1 0 3

Fig. 48-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Domrange Distance, Y .

63

00

CO

0 i3

2G2CiMX-1025

0 Y-FEET % l o y

6b. 00 9b. 00 Y-FEET % l o y

1>0. co

F l L T I i U O E ( F T . 1 0.

(lJ 2scoc. A 50000.

7 150.00

1 1 ao .GO


2UCSTMX-lC25

1 1 1 1 oc. 02 6 2 . ec 30. c o 120.co 15i).oc! 192.C!C! Y - F F k T ~ 1 0 '

2005TMX-1025

1 1 1 1 1 1 '0.00 30. OC 60.c0 90. c 3 120.~10 1si1.00 iao.oo

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ' Fig. 50-111. Number of G's and Sidesl ip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

65

0 CI

0. .7

0 0

0 m

0 c,

(30 z rJ

0 0

0 e

C

0

2010TMX-1025

0 1 1 1 c E. C O 30. co 60. ca 90. cc 112o.cc 1kc.co 18c.co

Y - F E E T 4 0 '

0 e;

FlLT!TUOE [ F T . l

13 O -

2010TMX-1025

Fig. 51-111. N d e r of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle VS. Downrange Distance, Y.

66

120.00 150.C3 ii3il. Y-FEE:T ~ 1 0 ’

l

201STMX-1025

3 0

2015TMX-1025

I 1 1 I I I oa 30.00 61!. 00 SO. 03 120.00 ‘150.00 - 180.@1!

Y - F € f T %IO’ Fig. 52-111. Number of G’s and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

67

0 5

I l-u- a'

mo

I- w

0

C 0- I

0 0

ALT 1 TUDE (FT . I

I3 (TJ 2 5 0 c c . A socoo.

2020TMX-1025

0 3 1 1 1 1>0.00 1ko.00 i 'so.co '0.00 30.00 6O.C)Cl 9u.cl3

'I-FEET x 1 0 3

Fig. 53-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

68

F i g . 54-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y .

69

-1

I I I I I 1 I 1 6 2 . (IC 7 5 . DO 90 $20 105.OC i20.0C 33 :s.oo 3c.cc l is . i!c

Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0

..

RLTITUDE (FT.1 Z I

0 t

Q c1-

I I I 1 I I I


70

I I I I I I 1

20 15.Ou” 3 0 . 0 3 i s . ?C Ei!. CC 7 5 . 0 3 30. CC! 105.05 Y-FEE:T m3

Fig. 56-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y .

71

I I I I 1 I I 00 15.co 30.00 35.CO 60.00 75.20 90,cc 105.P:! Y-FEET ~ 1 0


72

4005TYX-1025

I I 1 1 I

20 3 c . c 2 6c' . c3 9c. cc 12C.30 1 5 O . C O i3C.CO Y-FEF-T M I C ?

F i g . 58-111. Flight T i m e and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

73

I 1

i2C.33 t 5 C . 0 3 132.282

4010TMX-1025

\ L-B----

I 1 I I I i

00 30.00 60.CC 90. co 120.co 150.00 190.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

Fig. 59-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

74

S T Y X - 1 0 2 5

-. L A 3

I 1 1 1 I 1 30.00 60. cc 9L'. co 12C. CO i50. CC 19il. CC

Y-FEET w 1 0 3

Fig. 60-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight VS. Downrange Distance, Y .

7s

Q020TVX-1025

cn m -Jz

I . F 0-

0

LG x

i?

w

0 3

I 1 I C O 3 c . c c c-c. cil 9c. 00 1h. GO 150. c c l a c . c o

Y-FEEiT * l o 9

-

I 1 I 1 I


I I 1 I I

30. i!i! 62.02 9c. 02 120.00 150. 00 i P C . C8 Y-FEElT x!U'

'es-

C C -_

I I 1 I 1

30. c c 60. CC 90.00 120.00 15o.oc 1$0 Y - F E E T * l o ?


. o o

0 3

4GiOiMX-1025

0 c

FILTiTbDE [ F T . l 0. 2 5 z c o .

A scocc .

Y-FEE:T ~ 1 0 '


78

f l LT !TUCE (FT. I

c: 0. p-J 25000. A SCCCO.

I I I I 90.00 120.cc 1 ~ 0 . ~ 0 i a o

Y-FEET % l o ’ .!?o


79

. oc


80

.---- I I I I t

02 : c . oc 60.02 9u. cc i 2 L ? . O C 1 5 2 . 2 2 i ? z . Y-FEkT ~ 1 0 '

'4005TMX-1025

c c

FlLT 1 TI!DE (F.T. j i-lJ 2 . 0 2 5 0 0 0 . A 5 C C O O .

C s

I I I I I 1

3c . cc 5 0 . 0 0 9c. eo 1 2 C . C O i 5C .00 i8O.SO '0. oc Y - F E E T m3, .

I

)?$.g. 66-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

81

0 c,

'1

4010TMX-1025

FlLT I TUCE LF T . 0. 25000.

A soooa.

4010TMX-1025

U

31 I 1 I

0. co 30.00 60.00 90.00 1i0.00 1'sc.Cc iko.oc I '

Y-FEET *IO2 Fig. 67-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

82

UOi5TMX-1025 \ 1 s \

- I I I 1 1

IC 30. cc 6C. CI] 90. cc 1211.00 i5C.CC i9C.GO Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0 '

. I

FlLTiTUCE (FT . )

i!l 0. 0 2scoo. A soooo.

4015TMX-1025

0 0

0 3

I 1 I 1 i

0.00 3C. CO 60.00 9c. 00 l>O.C3 lkO.00 1 b O Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

.a0

Fig. 68-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

83

c c

3

4020TMX-1025

I I 1 I 1

U020TMX-1025

F i g . 69-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

84

85

d . . LLi 0 0 0 3 0 0 t- 3 0

I- 0 N L . 3 - . L 3 0

J = a a a

i 86

- t- k

J

87

'Ln N 0

I .-(

X I

00

- I-

%

I - o m i n

88

I I I I I 1

3. c o 3.OC 5.00 6. CO 7.00 0 2.00 MFlCH NUMBER

FiLTITLIDE El SFR LEVEL 0 10,CCO FT. A 20.000 FT. + 30,000 FT. X UC,CCO FT. 0 50.000 FT.

Fig . 74-1. Thrust vs. Terminal Mach-No.

89

T M X-i75!

T -I

150.00 IME-SEC

T = 5000 0 T = 10300 A T = 150OC + T = 20000

$00. 1. 250.00 300 .uo

Fig. 75-II. Altitude VS. Flight Time.

7 -I-__

- 1 I I 1

5.00 6.UO 7.

:I i /.---------- .- - _- _-- : . o o 2 . 0 0 3 . DO 9.03 ,

MFlCH NUMEFR

..-- Fig. 76-11. Altitude vs. Mach No.

91

c3 T = 5000 0 T = 10000 A T = 15000 + T = 20000

T M X - 1 7 5 1

~- I I I - . - I

I. 00 75.00 lbO.03 125.00 1SO.Op 175.00 200.00 225.2C WEIGHT-LBS ~ 1 0


92

r.

1 0 G S T M X - 1 7 ‘ 1 J

- I I I I I

6 2 . Pi! 90. PZ 120.00 150.00 1Bi3.QO -1 .I :-I ., 30.2;s Y-FEET % l o 3

m I

=O C1, I I

I 1 1 1 %I. 02 30.00 50.0c 90. cc 120.00 1so.00 I iaa.oo I

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ~


93

I I I I I

130 3 0 . 0 2 60. c c 90. cc! I20.CC 15o.cc 1 9 2 . c 2 Y-FEEIT w l G ’

FIL

9

A

T I T U D E I F 1 ’ 0. 2 s 0 3 9 . 5oocc!.

. c o

Fig . 79-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

94

0 c7 /'

- OC O I \

GLT I TUDE (FT. 1

a 0 - 0 25000. A saooo.

I I I I I I 1

%'. eo 30.00 6O.UO 90. oil 120.r30 150.00 180.00 Y - F E E T . l o 3


95

I I I I 1 30. CC 60.22 9c. co 1 2 0 . C C 150.00 1BL7.OC

Y-FEFIT ~ 1 0 '

v, m

t- c- -iJz I i3

L3 c(

I 1 I 4 4. 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 1'20. oe i's0.00 i 8o .00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '


96

>’ . . i . . .

. G

Y - F E E T 4 0 3 0.00

Fag. 82-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

91

3

1 , ,, 'I .

CQ

RLTITUOE LFT. 1

1 0 1 0 i M X - 1 7 5 i

1 180.

Y-FEET ~1 00 . ,

Pig. 83-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. VS. Downrange Distance, Y.

4 . 6

. . . .

.. .

1015TMX-1751

1 I 120.00 15O.FJC iSC.c'C

Y-FEt:T ~ 1 0 '

RLT I TUOE rFT. I

1015TMX-1751 0' 25000. A 50000.

I 1 I I 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.cc 150.00 190 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

. 00

' Pi,$. 84-111, Heading Angle wd Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y,**

, ..

CzJ c 0

I

1020TMX-1751

Y - F E E T x 1 0 3

0 0

= a I 1 0

Y-F 9b .

E E T

' I . . c t ,

RLT I TUDE (FT. I

E 0. 0 25000. A 50000.

- % i o 3 no 120.co 150.00

1 180 .oo

Fig. 85-111. Heading Angle and Mach N o . vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

100

0 t

1005TMX-1751

1 1 I - 4 - - - - - - *

I I 1 - -

C!O 3 0 . C 2 60. CC! 9c. oc? 120.0c 150.oc 180.02 'I-FEET % l o 3

0 FlLT I TUDE (FT. 1 0

0 0

I

0 c,

1005TMX-1751

Fig. 86-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

101

1 1010TMX-1751

1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 3 0 . 0 0 50. Ci! 90. oc 1 2 0 . ~ 0 1so.c~ iao.co 1 :

Y-FEET x 1 0 3 Fig. 87-111. Number of G ' s and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

102

1 0 i 5 T M X - 1 7 5 1

FlLT I T U O F i F T . I

A scooo.

1015TMX-1751

I I I I I 1 00 3 0 . 0 0 6 0 . 0 c 90. C'O i2o.00 150.00 ia0.00

T'-FEkT x l C s

Fig. 88-111. Number of G ' s and Sidesl ip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

103

0 0

1020TMX-1751

JJ--I- ’- , 3 O . r J O 6 0 . oc! 9C!. 0 0 120.00 ; so .oo :ijz G ‘ 0 . o:!

Y-FEE-T w l O ’ . D C

1020TMX-1751

I 1 1 1 I 1 30. CO 60.. 00 9o.uo 120.00 150.00 182.00 . o o

Y-FEET % l o ’ Fig. 89-111. Number of G’s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

1 04

FiLT I TUOE (FT. 1

0 25000. A 50000.

I I I I I I I

CO :s.r?c 3c. co %S.CC 6 2 . 00 75.0C 90. cc 105.c3 Y - F E E T * i o 3

Fig. 90-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs . Y .

105

/

F i g . 91-111. Constant Altitude Fl ight Path, X vs. Y.

I

I

106

FlLT I TUDE IFT . I

El 0 - @J 25000. a 5 O O f l O .


107

I I I I I I 10 15.00 30.00 35.00 6@. 00 7S.CO SO. 00 105.oc

Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0 ’


108

200STMX-1751

-- I I

20 30. E2 EO.C i ! 90. oil 1 i o m l ' s 0 . O C 1 a o . 2 2 Y - F E E T my

2005TMX-175

I 1 I I 1 I 20 30.00 60.00 90. co 120.CO 150.0C 19C.CO

Y - F E E T % i o y


109

I I I I I 3 0 . i2C 6 2 . T:c 9c'. c:! 120. CC 150. c c :9o.i2c!

P F F U NP P L T I T C j 3 E ( F T . ! E 0. 0 25000.

1 I 1 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 . PO 60.00 90. !la 1 2 0 . 0 0 1 s o . 0 2 1 9 u . G O

Y - F E E T x l G ?


110

a 0 - 0 2 s c c o . A 513000.

I 1 I I I 1 3c. c o 50. oa go. oa i2a.ua 150.00 i8o.00

Y - F - E E T ~ 1 0 '


111

2 0 2 G i M X - 1 7 5 1

1 1 1 C O 30. QC 6 0 . G C 9c. 00 150. oc iko. 00 ; B o . oo

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

FlLT I TLjrJE ( F T . 1

2020TMX-1751

a

I 1 1 1 1 1 00 30 .00 60. C O 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y - F E F T n 1 0 3


112

/

2005TMX-1751

I I 1

30. c!c 6 2 . co 90. so c c

2GG5TMX-1751

ALT 1 TClCjE (FT. I E 0.

I 1 ~~

00 30. CO 60.00 9b. 00 1!20.@0 lkO.00 180.00 Y-FEET % l o 3

Pig. ,98-111. Heading Angle and Mach N o . vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

113

g P.. Y

2010TYX-1751

0 i;

r'l 2010TMX-1751

RLT I TUDE t F T . 1 . , I3 0. * . .

Y -FEET ~ 1 0

Fig. 99-111. Heading Angle end Mach No. VS. Downrenge Distance, Y.

114

2015TYX-1751

Y-FEET Mlc '

F I L T I T U C F I F T . J

cj c a c * Q 2 5 0 0 0 .

201STMX-1751 A 5 0 0 0 0 .


* 115

FlLT I T U O E [ F T . I E 6 . 0 25000. A soooa.

Fig. 101-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, X.

116

2005TMX-1751

Y-FEET 34103

2005TMX-1751

I 1 1 1 1 1

OC 30. 0@ GO.CC! 90.00 120.00 150.00 1 a o . c c Y-FEE-:T X 1 o 3

102-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

117

2010TMX-1751

0.00

0 0

0 3

GLT I i U O E IFT. I

1 I 1 I 1

I - I LL;

G

2010TMX-1751

2015TMX-1751

QLT I TliSE I F T . I

I I 1 I I - '0. o o 30.02 G O . 00 90.00 i 2 0 . 0 0 1 5 O . C O 180.20

Y-FFLT % l o 3 Fig. 104-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

119

2020TMX-1751

n PLT I TU3E [FT. 1

0 4 c

t-

G

0

0 0

0 :I 2020TMX-1751

31 0.00 30.00 60. oa 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00 I ' 1 1 1 1 I 1

' I-FEET ~ 1 0 ' Fig. 105-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

1 20

‘1 c I c, O I

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’


i21

FlLT I TLI2E [FT . I

II1 0.

A 50000. 0 2 5 O C O .

I I 1- I I I I cc i 5 . C C 30.0C j5.30 80.CO 75.00 90.00 105.22 Y-FEE:T my

Fig. 107-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs . Y .

122

1

0 C

I

v) c_

0 G

3 c,

ALTITUDE LFT.1 I3 0. 0 25000. A sc)ooo.

I I

123

ALTITL iOE (FT.)

0 25000. A 50000.

II] 0.

I I I I I 1 1 30.00 45.00 60.00 75.00 90.00 105.i20

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’ 00 15.co

P$g. 109-111, Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y .

124

d

1 I I 1 1 6 0 . c 0 90.00 120.00 1 5 C . O C iBO.cs

Y-FEET x I G 3 0 G

FILT i TLGE ( F T . I

I I 1 I 1 1 oc 3c . oc so. 00 9c. cc 120.co 15o.co 13c.00 Y-FEET M I G ~


125

i I

1 I 1 I 1 0 2 3G. 0 0 5 c . e o 9c . c'o 12C. CO i 5 C . C O l 3 2 . c2

Y - F E E - T

RLT I TUCE (FT. I ffi (TJ 2 5 0 0 0 . A 50000.

I 1 I I 1 I 1 . o o 30.00 6 0 . 0 0 90. c c 120.00 150.00 190.00

Y-FEET % l o 3

F i g . 111-111. Flight T i m e and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

126

0 0

4 O i 5 T Y X - 1 7 5 1

i

0 e: RLTITCCE ! F T . I

E 0. 25000.

A 50000.

1 I I 1 90. co 120. CO i50 . OC 130. CC

Y - F E F T W 1 o 3


127

1 I 1 I 1 T. 0 0 30. c c S C . 0 0 9c.03 - 12c.cc ;SO.CC i30

0 0

C in c

-0 x o

4

. oc r - t t t - i w u

4020TMX-1751

RLT I TUDE ( F T . I

1 1 I 1 1 30.00 60.00 90.00 1>0.00 150.00 180.00

Y - F E E T M 1 o Y


128

G ci "1 l i C ' C S T ? i X - 1 7 5 1

0 c

1 I 1 I I I

sc. u 3 9c. cil 12c.co 1 5 C . C O 130 -c: cc 30. CO Y-F'EE;T * l o 3

1 co


129

0 G

T M X - 175 1

.rl; -_---. I 1 I 1 i

3.00 30. oc 60.00 90. cc 120.0C i ' i O . C C i3C. Y-FEEIT ~ 1 0 ~

co

FlLTITLlCE (FT.1

El 0- (rJ 25000. A 50000.

0 5

Q010TMX-1751

2.00


150

0 Q

c: w. .- i /

1 *d -- I 1 I I

“0.00 3c. 00 5 Q . 00 9c. cc 12O.OC i50.2C iB2.0C Y-F-EE-T ~ l @ ?

f l L T I T U C E IFT . )

13 O * 0 25002. A 5co00.

.oc


131

4 0 2 O i Y X - 1 7 5 1

1-- 1 1 I I

1 2 C . C O i 5 2 . 0 3 i 2 2 . 0 0

0 c r-

0 c i7

z I I

E .. ("

0 3

"C

4 0 2 0 T M X - 1 7 S l

I 1 I I I 1 oc 3 0 . 0 0 6 0 . 0 0 9o.uo 120.co 15c.co 180.00

Y-FEET % l o 3

N g . 117-111. Heading Angle and Mach N o . vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

132

4

c e

h

4005TYX-1751

-: ---+--A - I I I I I

02 3c * ci! 60. C2 9C'. 8C 1zo .cc 150.c0 ; 3 2 . 0 2 Y-FEEiT x l U '

R L T I T U C F : ( F T . 1 rn e .

1 U

4005TMX-1751

I i i o . 0 0 3 8 o . o i l -1 CO 30. CC 60.02 90. oil

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

Fig . 118-XfX. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y..

133

4 0 1 C T M X - 1 7 5 1

T- 1- 1 I 1 . o o 3 0 . 0 0 S C . uc 9 0 . C C 12c .oc : 5 c . c o 1 9 2 . c 2 Y-FEEIT m3

FlLT I TUCE (FT . 1

E (TJ 25000.

4010TWX-1751

I I I 1 1

. 00 :30. c c 6C. cc 9c. 00 1 2 C . C O i5C.00 1 S C . C C Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '


134

c 13

I40i 5 T M X - 1 7 5 1

pJ u . (l-J 25020.

4 0 1 5 T M X - 1 7 5 1

T------r-------T-- 1 , - c a 70. CC! 60 . C C 9u. cc 1 2 C . C C ;5C.C(? i 8 0 . 0 0

T'-F.EE:T x I 0 3

Fig. 120-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

135

i'

I

4020TMX-1751

I 1 1 I 1 * 00 30. 00 60.00 9u. co 120.00 '150.00 1 B O . C O

' I-FEET % l o 3

Fig. 121-111. Number of G'a and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

136

I x z. b-- Ln

LL; . . 0 0 CJ 3 0 CJ I- 0 0

CJ C;

0 Cj

L? - I

137

t- k w . . c rj o

138

\

139

I i

\ I I

j

i lE"

' CJ l o f -*

140

00

Fig. 126-I. Thrust vs. Terminal Mach No.

141

T M X-2730/fi

0.00 TIME-SEC

I

TIME-SEC

Fig. 127-11. A l t i tude vs. F l ight T i m e .

142

P

I I I 1 I 1 : . c ' 2 2. c'o 3. C O 4 . @ G 5 . 2 0 5.CJ 7 .

MQCH N U M 2 E S

F i g . 128-11. Altitude vs. Mach No.

143

T Y X-2733 /A

a \

\\\ \

Fig. 129-11. Alt i tude vs. Vehicle Weight.

144

1 O O S T M X - , 2 7 8 O

I

3 3G. 00 SC. 22 9 0 . 2 3 120.cc 15o.cc 1ac . . Jo Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’

\ 1 G05TMX-2780

F I L T i i C 3 E ( F T . 1

IT) 0. (TJ 25030. m 50000 .

1 1 I

co 30. oil 60. C C 90.22 l 5 0 . C C I k 0 . C C I k L \ . C O Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’


145

0, a?

0 3

c3

LL - =cI 0 -

I I I I 1


146

0 3

0 e IC STMX-2780

\ i015TMX-2780

1 I 1 I 120.00 150.00 I 180.00 1 30.00 60. CO 90. cc

Y-FEET xlC3


147

1 0 2 0 i M X - 2 7 8 0

I , co 3 0 . 0 0 6 0 . 0 0 90. c o 1So.ocl liC.00 1 ' 3 @ . C O

Y -FEET % l G ' 0 c: F l L T I T L C E [ F T . I

'1 1 0 2 C i M X - 2 7 8 0 c3 0 25CGO. A soaco.

I I 1 I I 1 la: 00 30.00 EO. 00 90. co 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

Fig. 133-111. Fl ight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

148

0 3

I I I I I 39.02 60.03 90. co 12C.CO 15O.CC igO.OO

Y-FEET M ~ C '

1035TMX-2780

ALT I TLIDE I F T . I

E 0. 0 2 5 C O O . A 59000.

\ I I 1 I 1 1

20 30.00 60.00 90.02 120. cc 150. oil 180.00 Y-FEET x 1 0 3

Pig . 134-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

149

1ClCTMX-2780

. 00


150

0

-. L.2

1. .--

I I I I 1 2 0 . C C 153 .50 1 13C.20 3 0 . rJC 6U. 00 90. crl -I n -Iu

Y - F E E T 1 C’

1015TMX-2780 7

I I I 1

3C. O C G C . C G 9c. co 120.OC 150.00 180.00 Y -FEET %IC3


151

0 a

1 I I 1 I I 30. CC 6'J. 50 90. CiD 120.0C 150.00 13L7.90

Y-FEET u l C '

102CTMX-278C

.oo


152

\

1 I I I I

C O 3 6 . 0 3 6 2 . c c 90. c o 1 2 G . C C iSC.CO i B O . ' J ? Y - F E E T xIC'

c

100STMX-2789

I I 1 I 1 '0.00 3 0 . 0 0 6C.00 90. cc 120. CO 1 5 C . C O 13C. 1 0 2 Y-FEE-IT X l O ?


153

1OlCTMX-2780

I I I 1 1 . oc 30.00 SC!.C!C 90.00 l>C.CO 1SO.CO 18Q.90 Y - F E E T

139-111. Number of G’s and S i d e s l i p Angle .vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

154

\

\

lClSTMX-278C

I I I I 1 !a 3G.00 60. rJc 90.00 120.00 1 5 O . C C 130.CC Y-FEET x1C '

1015TMX-278C

1 1 1 I I 1 30 30. OC! EO. cc 90. co 120.00 1sc.00 180.00

Y-FEET x 1 0 3 Fig. 140-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

15s

0 0

"P

102CTMX-278C

I 1 a c c 3 0 . 0 0 6C.C)O 90. co 1120.c0 l 'sO.00 1 B Q . r J O Y - F E E T xlC'

cno 3 I . I

0 0 il

R L T I i U O E (FT . 1

E 0 25000. A 5 0 0 0 ~ .

1020TMX-2780

0 3

I 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 30.00 60.00 90. co 120.00 15C.00 180.00 I '

Y - F E E T % l o 3 Fig. 141-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

156

I I I 1 I I I

00 15.22 30. Oil 45. CO 6[!. GO 75. co 90 1c5.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0


157

0 0

L n

I -_ 0 0

0 co

158

R L T I T U D E (FT.1

0 . 0 250CC. A 50000.

I I 1 1 1 1 1

0 t

Ln +_

I

0 t

0 0

159

F l L T I T l i D E (FT.1

I3 0. 0 25000. A 5ooco.

I I 1

.- .I

iG20 iMX-2780

I I I 1 1 I 00 15.00 30. C O 4s. PO 6b.00 :s.co 9 0 p 105.co

Y-FEET ~ 1 0


160

I t

U

I- O a

200STMX-2783

P

h 20ClSTYX-2780

F I L T I T U Z E ( F T . 1

CI O * p) 2 s c o o . A 5000il.

I 1 I I

C O 30.00 50. cc 9O.c iO 120. C O 150. GO 1 b C . 00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’


161

1 1 1 1 . cc 30.30 60. CC 90. cc 120.co 1sc.cc 180.00

GLT I TbZE (FT. I

Y-FEET x 1 C 3

t- t- I i.9 c3*

‘A w

=a J

27 -1 2c1 O ~ v x - 2 7 8 C

I 1 1 1 1 1

0. 25CCO.

Fig. 147411. Fl ight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

162

2015TMX-278C

1 1 I I 1 1

s o 2 313.00 GO. 00 9C. OG 120.co 1so.00 190.02 Y - F E E T w 1 c 3

c;

2CiSTMX-278C “A

’ . I

xo 0 I 1 I 1 I 1

4.00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.C0 150.00 180.00 Y - F E E T M 1 o 3

Fig. 148-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight VS. Downrange Distance, Y .

163

2020TMX-2783

U 0 ._

I 1 1 I I - . c o 3 0 . 0 0 60 . c 0 90. 00 120. C C 150 .00 13C. rJC Y - F E E I T ~ 1 0 '

=: '1 2C2CTMX-2783

F l L T I T U D E I F T . I

1 I 1 1 I 1 "0. C O 30. O G 60 .00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y - F E E T w 1 0 '

Fig. 149-111, Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

164

0 3

1 20C5TMX-2783

1 1 I I I

00 3 0 . 0 0 6 0 . C 0 9c. 00 12c.cc 15o.co 19c7.9c Y-FEET x 1 0 3

2005TMX-2780

0 3

I \ - I 1 I 1

-of. c o 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 i a Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ~

0.00

F i g . 150-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

165

I

;i 2010TMX-278S

1 I 1 I 1 3 0 . 0 0 60.C2 9c. co 120.2c) 150.02 1 3 2 . 2 c

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

I \

I I I I i 00 30. 0Cl 60.00 90. cc 120.00 150.00 190.00

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '


1 66

0 0

r. L i

'5 .-

3 5

P '.

P

c 2 I I I I

3c. co 5c. LZ 9b. 9 2 12u.rJ3 150. oc 132.CS Y - F E E I T x l C '

2 C 1 5 T M X - 2 7 8 0

I

"0. G O 30. C O s b . c c 90 . c o 120.00 15o.co 180.CC Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '


167

0 c3

3 o? c

I

‘L - QT. c3

2 C 2 0 i M X - 2 7 8 2

-3

a.

0 3

I 1 1 1 1 3 0 . 00 6 0 . C C 90. cc 12c.00 1so.ca 130.

Y-FEEiT w l C ’ c o

0 0

2C2CiMX-2780

z I 1

c“

0 0

I 1 1 1 1 -0: 0 0 3 b . 0 0 60.00 90.00 1 2 0 . ~ 0 1so.00 180.00

Y - F E E T % i o 3

1

I 1 1 1 1 -0: 0 0 3 b . 0 0 60.00 90.00 1 2 0 . ~ 0 1so.00 180.00

Y - F E E T % i o 3


168

0 a

0 CJ ;r

2 0 0 5 i M X - 2 7 8 0

1 1 1 1 1 7

30 3 G . 00 6O. c)o 90.c0 1 2 G . C O 15C.CO 18O.SC Y-FEEfT ~ 1 0 '

. I

t- [L;

ma 3

t 0. I

0 0

0 3.

' c

2005TMX-2780

I 1 1 1 1 1 co 30 .00 6C. CO 9c. c10 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEET * l o 2


1 69

I -7

2CiOTMX-2730

t 0 I

Q 0

G 3

'I

Fig.

GLT I TUZE i FT . 1

2ClGiMX-2780

1 1 I I 1 1 ,00 3c. co 60. C O 90.00 12O.CC 1SO.CO 180.0C

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

155-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

170

i3 5

C

D 3

0

I -

0 0

!

2015TMX-2783

I 1 1 1 1

c 0 30.00 60. 00 90. 00 120.00 I5U.OC 1130.00 I ,

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

ALT I TCSE (FT. 1

0 25CC2. A 50000.

El 0 .

2015TMX-2780

I 1 1 1 1 1 B O O 30.00 .60.30 90. oil 120.0c 150.00 18O.Kl

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ~

Fig . 156-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

171

2 0 2 C i M X - 2 7 8 3

0 m- I

0 0

0 s

A L T I T U 3 E [ F T . J

E

A 50000. 2 5 0 0 0 .

2 0 2 0 i M X - 2 7 8 0

1 I 1 1 1 1 00

F i g . 157-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

1 72

0 C

I

0 t

2GCSTMX-2780

* I :A I I I I

'0.00 1 s . c o 30.00 9s. c3 5c. 00 7 5 . u 3 90 )CC 1ns.c:! I 1 I

Y-FEET ~ 1 0


1 73

2 O i C T M X - 2 7 3 0 J

0 * I ..I I 1 I I 1 I I

'0. cc 15.c: 30. C C $ 5 . co 6::. 0 3 75. CO 9 c g c c 105.02 Y-FEET ~ 1 0

Fig. 159-111, Constant Altitude Flight Path, X v s . Y.

1 74

L?

I d

0 0

0 m-


il-i 0. 0 25000. A 500CC.

I 1 I I

1 75

2020 iMX-2780

r 1 I I 1 I I 00 15.20 3.0. 50 35.00 6C.30 75. co s o p 105.co

Y-FEET ~ t l G

Fig. 161-111, Constant Altitude Flight Path, X VS. Y.

176

‘4005TMX-2780

- I I I I

, 2 c 30.03 60. C3 90.02 12C.CC 1 5 0 . 0 8 i B i ‘ . C Z Y - F E E T %103

RLTITUCE ( F T . 1

4005TMX-2780 pJ 0. 0 2 5 0 0 0 .

I I I I 1

00 30. C C 60.00 90 .00 120.0C i 5 0 . 0 0 13O.CO Y-FEET ~ t 1 O ’

Fig . 162-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y . r L

. .

177

'4010iMX-2780

4 L-- . ce 30.00 6 0 . oc 9c. I cc 1'20.00 1'sC.c;: ihU.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

I 0

1 1 1 I 1 1 4.00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 lSci.00 180.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '


178

3

W

1 I I 1 I

30.00 SC. co 90. c3 121?.C'O i5O.CO i aC.20 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

4015TMX-2780 .

A L T I T U D E (FT.)

1 I I

cc 30.00 60. 00 90.00 1>0.00 l'sO.00 I80.00 Y-FEET % l o 3


1 79

4 0 2 0 i M X - 2 7 8 0

d - I 1 I 1 1 3’. 2 2 30.00 6 0 . CO 90.00 120.00 15C.90 ia2.Cc Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’

FlLT I TUDE ( F T . 1

I13

0 i3

4 U 2 0 i Y X - 2 7 8 U 0 25000. A sooao. -. -- “i 0

I I I f 4. OC 30.00 6 C . 00 90. co l(20.0iI 15O.CO 180.00 Y-FEET % l o 3

Fig. 165-111. . Flight Time and Vehicle Weight VS. D o w n r a n g e D i s t a n c e , Y .

180

i

0

0 ,-7

z I I

4 -

Em ?r :-

("

c; i J "1 qC05 iMX-2782

F i g . 166-111. Headhg Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

181

G i i .- I-

O 0 -

a'" z

I

I I I 1 I ,: 1 CCI 3c. c c 6C. 20 90. GI! 12c. GCI 150.00 1 3 L . sc

Y-F-'EE-:T 4 c 3

A i

4 0 1 0 i M X - 2 7 8 0

FILT I TECE [ F T . 1

E 0 . 0 2 s c o o . A 50000.


182

4015T IX-2799

4015TMX-2710

I___ 22 3C. 00 6G. Y-FEET O i l 90. % l o 3 cc 12o.co 130.00 19O.CJ


183

4020TMX-2782

1’- 1 1 1 I 02 30.13 6C. 03 90. E 2 120.00 i5O. L‘O 190. ‘30 Y-FEET x l C ’

F I L T I T E C E IFT.1

U02GTMX-2780

1 I 1 I 1 I - 0 0 30.00 62. G O 9G. c3C 120.c0 150.00 132

Y-FEET % l o 3 . oo


184

c: ..J

C

- I I I

0 3

f; +

0 c 0 3.

4005TMX-2789

Q U O S T M X - 2 7 8 0

_ _ Y - F E E T % l C ’

Fig. 170-111. Number of G’s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

185

Y

U010 iMX-2780

. 00

Fig. 171-111. Number of G's a d S i d e s l i p Angle VS. Downrange Distance, Y.

186

0 P G 3

0 3

G (n

0 c3

c3 0. z c-J

0 3

0.

0 0

%

0 c3

0 4

I

C 3 0 Lila

I- LL: mo 0

0 0- I

0 3

0 3 I

4015TMX-2780 \

:$-k 4015TMX-2780

I 1 1 1 1 1

I 1 1 , 30.00 60. CO 90.00 1120.0a 1ki0.00 iBC.00

Y-FEET % l o 3

Pig. 172-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

187

402UTMX-2780

-I * I 1 1 I

3 0 . 2 2 5 3 . 0 0 9c. c 0 120.20 i 5 C . C O 132.Z2 Y -F-'EET 10 '

U020 iMX-2780

I 1 I I I oc 30 .30 oc!. oc 90. CCI 120.00 150.00 i8O.Co Y-FEE-IT % l o 3

F i g . 173-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

188

0 c

Fig. 174-111. Constant Altitude Fl ight Path, X vs. Y.

189

4 C i C T Y X - 2 7 8 0

ci c,

.n - 3

c,

0 -0 X c j

0- c

I-

LLi -

0 tr

Ln e_

I

0 0

0 0


1 90

- I I I 1 1 1 1

2

LlOi5TMX-2780 “i

RLTITUDE [FT.)

el 0. Q 25000.

I 1 I I I I 1

3p. 00 35.co 6Cl. c:! 75. (!E 90 105.02 ‘0. co :5.(!2 Y-FEET ~ 1 0


191

0 CI

In c_ I

0 0

0 F,

FlLT I TUCE (FT. 1

(3 0. 0 25000. A 50000.

I I I I I

T M

- 1 I 1 I 1 1

2.00 3.00 4.00 5. c0 6.00 7.00 5 il MFlCH NLMEER

FlLT i TLi i iE ffi SEFl LEVEL 0 10,000 FT. * 20,000 FT. + 30,000 FT. X 40,000 FT. 0 50,000 FT.

Fig. 178-1. Thrust vs. Terminal Mach No.

1 93

4

T Y X-27aU/C

..-

5b. o p 1 b o . 23 150. a0 2bc. 00 2 h . ca 300 TIME-SEC

. 00

Fig. 179-11. Altitude vs. Flight Time.

1 94

T Y X-27:?2/C

oc


1 95

T Y X - 2 7 3 t i / C

Fig . 181-11. Altitude vs. Vehicle Weight.

196

f lLTITL3E ( F T . 1

I I I 1 r 1 oc 30. C O 6 C . oil 9c. 00 120.cc 1 5 0 . ~ 0 iao.00 Y-FEET % l G ?


197

10

c3

I L c-(

=a 0

C i

I 1 I 1 I 1

I>(-2780

Fig, 183-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

198

1 C i 5 T Y X - - 2 7 8 S

f iLT1TC;CE ( F T . 1 I. c- ..2

.n

IC15TMX-2732 d

- 0 - 3 - . -G x c j

#

3 0 c7

I I 1

%:CO . 3 b . 0 0 6 C . 0 0 90. c o h o . 0 0 l ' S O . C C 13a Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '


199

-a x 3.

4

LL;

3

I I I 1 I

c 3 3 0 . 2 c 6 2 . C C 9c. CcI 120.rJc 150.20 i B i 3 . C C Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

R L T I T L Z E I F T . 1 a c . (rJ 2 5 9 c c . A 500GO.

I I 1 I I i . clo 30. co 60 .00 90. oc 120.09 1so.cc 180 Y -FEET % l o 3

c c


200

I q gG

0 L x )

2- 1 1 I I

9. cc 3c . ci! 50. C O 9c. 90 1 2 2 . C C 15o.cc l b i ) . 0 0 Y - F E E T * l o ‘

p P p Fig. 186-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

20 1

lCI lCTMX-278Cl

I 1 1 1 I 1 80 30.03 60.C9 9c. c10 12c.co 150.00 182.00

Y - F E E T m3

Ftg, 187411. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

202

i lCi5TMX-279C

FlLT i TlrSE IFT . 1

E (7J 25'3CG.

I I I I I 1 co 30. CO EO. GO 9c. 00 12G.C-2 150.00 180.00 Y-FEET n l C 3

F i g . 188-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

203

. o o


204

d 1 CCSTPlX-278S

1005TMX-278S

1 ! I I 1 I

oil 3 0 . 3 0 60. C C 9u. oc 1 2 C . C C 150.313 i317.CC ' Y - F E E T xw!C3

Fig. 190-111. Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

205

0 c 0 Zr

c 0

oc, -7 c-d L

0 0

C c

0 G

c;

F

30

flLT I T C C E ( F T . 1

1 0 1 C i M X - 2 7 8 0

I I 90. eo

Fig. 191-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

206

1C15TMX-2782

I I I 1 .cl5 30 .00 5c. 20 9c. CC 1 h C O 1so.co i8C.CJ2

Y - F E E T x I G ?

RLTITLZE ( F T . )

1 I I I 1 1 c o 30. 00 GC. C 2 90. co 1zc .c2 15c.00 [email protected] ' Y-FEET * l G ?


207

R L T i TLCE i F T . 1

E c . r p o o

(7-J 23uLIL.J. a 5 0 0 3 0 .

1020TMX-2780

I I I -- . o c 3 0 . 0 0 si:. c c 911. co 120.00 150.00 180.00 ' Y - F E E T x 1 G'

Fig. 193-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

208

X \ \

7

0

- I- %

209

I

6

210

C

21 1

- I- LL

212

2 0 OS T M X -- 2 7 89

0 3

\ 2C05TYX-2783

I I I

00 30. O C 6 0 . CD 90. co l > O . C ) O 1ka. oc 138 . c 2 Y-FEE:T % l o 3


213

2 0 l O i M X - 2 7 8 0

T-~-------r-- -- I co 30 .00 60 .00 90.00

Y -FEE:T 10'

\ 2UiOTMX-2780

R L T I T L I E E I F T . 1

13

A 50000. 0 25000.

1 I I I I 1 00 30.00 6C. co 90.00 12O.CI2 150.00 iSO.CC

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '


214

0 0

0 a2

0 0

0 (D

0 w o i o

w=r E

t-

m?

U

0 3

0 CJ

2015TMX-2780

0 u

~. -

150.00 l k 0 . c o 1bo. o c

I 0' I I I I I 1

3 0 . 0 0 6L'. 00 90. cc 120.00 150.0C i 3 0 . 0 0 0. co Y - F E E T % l o 3

Fig. 200-IIX. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

215

0 3

0 W

0 0

0 W

u L i O

I O us =E

t-

m3.

U

0 3

0 N

0 0

ci

% 0

0 0

1 1 1 +

2020TMX-2780

1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 15c.00 19o.cc Y - F E E T 4 0 '

2020TMX-2780

RLT I TUDE (FT. I

PI O * (TJ 25000. A 50000.

w - I

F i g . 201-111:. Flight T h e and Vehicle Weight VS. Downrange Distance, Y .

216

0 0

2005TMX-2780

0 . o o


217

0 0

00

0 3

7

2010TMX-2780

FlLTITUDE (FT.1

(3 0 . 0 25000. A 50000.

/

T -I-) 1 1 00 30.00 60. CO 90.00 120.00 150.00 iOC.00

Y - F E E T % i o 3

Fig. 203-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. VS. Downrange Distance, Y .

21 8

c .-

0 G

:: 2

2 0 i 5 T M X - 2 7 8 0

R L T I T L ' D E L F T . j

c! c - 0 25000. A 5011co.

1 I I 1 I , 30 30.00 60.02 90. oil 120.CO i5O.CO 180.00

Y-FEET % I O 3


21 9

0 0

1 1 1 1 1 , c o 30.00 60.00 90.c0 120.00 150.00 1ao.30 Y -FEET ~ 1 0 '

F lLTJTUDE IFT.1

El O. 0 25000. A 50000.

+----l--- 1 1 1 -0. c c 30. CO 6 0 . 0 0 90.00 120.00 150.0C 180.

Y - F E E T W 1 o 3 CO


220

0 0

0 3

0 G

0 0

0 0

ad ru

0 0

0

0 0

ct

0 0

0

0 0

0

I 4

c30 wo

I (u.

cr.' t- LLJ mo 0

0 m. I

0 3

0 3.

' c

n / I

------&

2005TMX-2780

I I 1 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y-FEET w103

I

5+ /

- 1 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 6 0 . 0 0 9c. 00 12U.CO 150.00 180.00 Y-FEET x l O '

2005TMX-2780

Fig. 206-111. Number of G's and Sidesl ip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

22 1

0 C

2010TMX-2780

0 0

0-

0 0

0 -. I

0 cc)

I

0 0

0 3

' (

2010TMX-2780

I 1 1 1 1 1 - 0 0 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 1 9 O . O C

Y - F E k T x 1 0 3 Fig . 207-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

222

0 u c

c C

c I c

(3C W? O C

a1 I- w COO

I &

i3

0 Cr)

I

0 0

0 3 I I

2015TMX-2780

1 I 1 I I 1 30 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 l8O.UO

Y-FEET x103

c .-, / -

* - r -

RLT I TUDE (FT. I II1 O * 0 25000. A 50000.

2015TMX-2780

7---- I --.-

I I 1 1 DO 30.00 60. OC SO. 00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEET % I O ' Fig. 208-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

223

2020TMX-2780

0

0

I c_

c30

00

( L 1 t- W

WY I N-

mo 0

0 0-

1

0 0

0 s

. c c

I 1 1 1 1 1 '0.00 30.00 EO. oil 90.00 120.00 150.00 iB0.CO

0 0

FILTITUJE (FT.1

0 25000. A 50000.

I3 O .

2020TMX-2780

Fig. 209-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

224

2005TMX-2780

RLTITUCE (FT.1

0 25000. A 5000C.

1 1 I I 1 - Q 5 . C l l 60. c o 75. CO 90. co 1115.02 30 - T 5 T c ; i - 30 .0 : : --

Y -FEET m3 Fig. 210-111. Constunt Altitude Fl ight Path, X vs. Y .

125

0 0

o 2010TMX-2780 m

0 0

L7 I-

O 0

t W

0 0

v) 9

c1

0 -a x o 0 m *

w W L O

I;;

10

ALTITUDE (FT. 1

m 0. 0 25000. A 50000.

0 3

0 I -7- 7

.~-- "-I--- T------. I

[ I . ca 15.00 30.00 45.CO SC. 03 75. CO SO. GO 105.Cu" Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '


226

2015TMX-2780

-7 I 1 A_

co ------- 30. CC qs. 00 6 ( ! . 00 7 f, . I: 0 911.03 I O t i . ? J Y - F E E T % l o f


227

2020iMX-2780

RLT I TUDE IFT. 1

(II 0. 0 2 5 c o o . A sccoo.

I ---,---- 0. oc 15.cc 30. CO 45.00 FU. co 75.CO 90.00 10S.@O

Y-FEET lo' F i g . 213-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y.

228

‘4 00 5 T M X - 27 8 0

00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 190.00 Y-FEET % l o 3

4005TMX-2780

A L T I T U D E (FT.J D O * 0 25000. A soeoo.

1 1 1 1 1 - 02 30.00 60 .00 9c. co 120.83 150. CO 139. Ci2

Y-FEET x 1 0 3

214-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

229

UC10TMX-2780

1 1 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 EO. 00 90.00 120.00 iS0.CO 180.00 Y - F E E T X 1 o 3

' 4010TMX-2780

1 1 1 1 1 7

00 30.00 60. 00 90.00 120.co [email protected] 1 8 0 . C Z Y - F E E T x 1 0 3


230

0 0

4015TMX-2780

I I 1 I I

30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 i 8 0 . 0 3 Y-FEET x 1 0 3

0 cl

4015TMX-2780

I I 1 I

41.00 30. oc 6 0 . CO 90.02 120.00 1 5 O . C C i 3 i 3 . C C *c------T-

Y-FEET g 1 0 3

Fig. 216-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange D i s t a n c e , Y.

23 1

0 0

0- W

c LLO v,':

a= z t-

IO-

m

0 a

4020 iMX-2780

0 0

d 0 x 0-, 4

v, m $ t- 0- I i7 c3

W c-.(

=a 0

A ; - -

I 1 1 1 1

Fig . 217-111, Fl2ght Ttme and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

232

QC05TMX-2780 0 i3

0 I I i i

0. c o 30. C O EO. 00 90.00 120.0(1 Y -FEET ~ 1 0 '

0 0

Y005TMX-2780

IS0.CO 1bo. 00

R L T I T U D E (FT.1

13 0 25000. A 50000.

-I--- I 1 1 (1 o n 30. no 6 0 . c o 90.00 120.00 i s c . c o 1 ~ o . o ~

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

Fig. 218-111, Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

233

0 i3

7 I-

O 0 -

a* z

'4010TMX-2780 0 0

I I 1 +? 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 1 io .00 lkO.00 1bo. Y-FEET % l o 3

4OlOTMX-2780

O C

FlLT I T U C E (FT. 1

I3 0 . 0 25000. A 50000.


234

1 .

0 0

i c 03- e

0 0

00 iL: cv- m- 0 c3 LL: y z -0- c n c [L

4015TMX-2780 0 0

I I 1 1 1 1 %? "0 30.00 6 0 . 0 0 90.00 120.co 150.00 190. Y-FEET x 1 0 3

CO

0 0

4015TMX-2780

0 0

flLT I TUDE (FT. 1

3 0. (IJ 25000. A 50000.

., I

*i-----l---------7--- r- 1 1 1 -0.00 30. CO 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.02

Y - F E E T X 1 o 3

Fig, 220-111. Heading Angle and Nach No, vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

235

0 0

‘4020TMX-2780

i

120.00 1 5 0 . 0 0 . 180.00 g1 ob. 00 30 .00 60 .00 90.00 I

Y-FEET x 1 0 3

0 0

4020TMX-2780 ;1

I I 1 1 1 1 3 0 . O C 60.00 90. 0c 120.03 150.00 130.00

,t 0 . 0 0

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 ~

Fig. 221-111. IIeading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

236

400SPMX-2780

I

C 3 0 LL;=

m ' I- w

a d I cu-

mo u 0 0-

I

0 a 0 -3

I --

3 . oo 30.00 60.00 90.00 1 i o . 0 0 l'sO.00 lbC.00

I 1 1

Y - F E E T % l o 3

4005TMX-2780

-_ 1 1 1 1 1

F lLT ITUDE ( F T . 1

0 - 25000.

A 50000.

F i g . 222-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs . Downrange Distance, Y.

237

I

d I

4010TMX-2780

1 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 i 5 0 . 0 0 i80.CC

Y-FEE!T % l o 3

RLT I T U C E [ F T . I O .

0 25000. A 50000.

4010TMX-2780

7 1 1 1 1 1 00 3 0 . 0 0 EO. 00 90.00 120.00 i 5 0 . CC 190. C3

Y-FEE:T x 1 0 3

F i g . 223-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Di s t ance , Y.

238

0 0

0 s

0 0

0 m

0 3

0

0 0

ct

0 0

4020TMX-2780

I 1 1 co 30. C O 60.00 90. ca i'2a. oo iSc. co i'ao.cn, Y - F E E T X 1 0 3

R L T I TUCE (FT. I c3 O * 0 25000. A 50000.

--v11 1 I 60. GO 90. Of) 120.03 i5c.00 i s o m

Y - F E E T % i o 3

U020TMX-2780


239

0, 3

0 G

4015TMX-2780

!i

. oc

a- rn

0 a

0 0 - z CJ

I .

FlLT I T U C E ( F T . 1

l - - - - - 1 - 1 1 1 tlj (! . 0 0 9 0 . 0 0 120.00 15o .cc IY0.CO

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

4015TMX-2780

Fig. 225-111. Number of G ' s and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

240

U005TMX-2780

r- I I --

I I I I 105, c'o '[I. c3 15.I 'C 3c. 2c !4!5.cc 6 0 . co 75. PI! 90. co

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

F i g . 226-111. Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y.

24 1

0 0

0 m

0 G

b7 r-

0 0

t m

0 0

Ln 3

el

0 -0 x o 0 CTI

t- Li: w L O

L;

lo

-

0 o < 1

0 o In I .-.

0 0

0 ("

'(

4010TMX-2780

""\ RLT I TUDE IFT. 1

CI 0. (lJ 25020. A 501)OO.

Fig. 227-111, Constant Alt i tude Fl ight Path, X vs . Y .

242

u 0

C a

C C

L' r

c c C (I

0 C

L? =r

n 0 -0 x o 0 (*r

I- LL: w La IC.

X ' L7 c

0 z 1

0 G

L7 4. I

0 t

0 m. 'I1

U015TMX-2780

R L T I T U C E (FT. 1

m 0. (rJ 25coo. A 50000.

- 1 I

1 1 - - 1- ----Z.cn 30.30 1;5: OC 5n. co 75. flc! 90. n o 105.co 0

Y-FEET w 1 0 '


243

0 t

0. 0 3

0 G

L? , r‘

0 0

0. W

0 CJ

0. 3

I”

0 -0 X C 0. (n

t- w w l U

%. d

0 < 0 G

I.?

I c

0 0

0 0

’(

U020TMX-2780

1 1 1 1 1 00 15.00 30.00 q5.c0 60. 00 75.00 90.00 10s. 00 11

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’


244

0 cj

0 1 .

T M X-3070

7.00 MRCH NUMEFR

ALT I TUOE PI SEA LEVEL 0 10.000 FT. A 20,000 FT. + 30 .000 FT . X 40 ,000 FT. 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 FT .

Fig . 230-1. Thrust vs. Terminal Mach No.

245

0 0 '1 1C01TMX-3070

I 1 1 1 1 1 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ' 0 0

0 '1 1001 TMX-3070

FlLT I TUOE (FT. 1

cs O. (rJ 2scoo. A 50000.

I I 1

30. Oil 6C.02 90. co 1!20.00 1ko.00 1'3o.co Y - F E E T m3


246

1092TMX-3070

1 I 1 1 1 1 00 30 .00 6 0 . 0 0 90 .00 120.00 1so.00 180 .00

Y-FEET * l o '

FlLT I TUDE (FT. 1

1C02TMX-3070 E (lJ 25000.

1 I I I 1 I 0 0 30 .00 60.00 90 .00 120.00 150.00 180 .00

Y -FEEIT 1 O 3

Fig. 232-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehicle Weight vs . Downrange Distance, Y.

247

1 O05TMX-3070

150.00 l'sO.00 1'90. GO

1005TMX-3070

4 5 S - A - - - a

flLT I TUDE (FT. I

PI O * 0 25000. A 50000.

I 1 1 1 I t 00 30.00 60.00 90. oc 120.00 15O.CO 180.C3

Y - F E E T w l O '


248

I 0

I 0

0 0

101OTMX-3070

1 1 1

30 3 0 . 0 0 60 .00 90.00 1h.00 lkO.00 IBO. c o Y-FEET x 1 0 3

~ 10 1 OTMX-3070

I 1 1 I I

, o o 30.00 60. Q O 91). 00 12c.00 15c.00 19o.co Y-FEEiT x 1 0 3


249

0 0

1 0 0 1 T M X - 3 C 7 C

1 91'.

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ' C O

0 0

1001TMX-3070

0 0

1001TMX-3070

0. CO Y-FEET w103


.2 50

0 0

00

0 0

F l L T I T U D E ( F T . 1

25000. A 5 C O C O .

. oo

Fig . 236-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

25 1

0 0

0 0

1005TMX-3070

RLTITUDE (FT.1

(I) O m 0 25000. A 5000G.

0 . c 3


252

- 3. tn w

“V 0

lC10TMX-3070

I 1 1 1 1 1 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 130.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ‘

0 0

1010TMX-3070

R L T I T U D E (FT . )

D (lJ 25000. A 50000.


253

0 0

1 i

120.00 150.00 180.00

1CClTMX-3070

flLT I i b D E ( F T . I O * 25000.

A 50000.

0 0

1001TMX-3C70

0 . 0 0

F i g . 239-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

254

0 0

1002TMX-3070

I 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 lBi3.00

Y-FEET x 1 0 3

F l L T I T U C E (FT. I [3 0.

25000. A 50000.

0

0 0

0

I w

C 3 0 LLiy 00 I N CL' I- LL mo 0

0 m I

0 0

c3 3

I 1 1 1 0. c o 30 .00 GO. 00 90.00 120.00 150.00 1813.CO

Y-FEET ~ 1 6 '

1002TMX-3070


255

0 0

0 T

0 0

0 m

0 0

z rJ

0 0

0 4

0 Q

ci

0 0

0 3,

0 0

1 1 1 1 1 1

1005TMX-3070

I 1 1 1 1bO.00 150.00 180.00

1

, o o 30.00 60.00 90.00 Y-FEET % l o 3

FlLT I TUDE (FT. I

0 25000.

1005TMX-3070

00


I 256

0 0

0 3

0 0

0. m

0 0

c3 t. ZnJ

0 0

0- -

0 0

%

0 0

:1 1010TMX-3070

I 1 1 1 1 1

30 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

I - I

0 0 ?I

FlLTITUOE IFT. J

PI 0. 25000.

A 50000.

1010TMX-3070

2 I 1 1 1 1 1

0 . 0 0 30.00 6 0 . 0 0 90.00 120.co 150.00 180.00 Y-FEET % l o 3

&L Fig. 242-111. Number of G ' s and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

257

10ClTMX-3070

I 1 I I I 1 1’05. OC oc 15.co 30.00 lic3.00 60.30 75.CO 90.00 Y--FEET ~ 1 0 ’

Fig. 243-111, Constant Altitude Flight Path, X vs. Y.

250

1002TMX-3070

. I

ALT I TUDE [FT. I ffi 0 . Q 25000.

I -_- --- 1 I I

10 15.00 30.00 115. E C 60.00 75.00 90.00 lCI5. co Y-FEET nlO'


259

1005TMX-3070

I 1 - I I 1 I 1 00 i 5 . c o 30.00 45.1!C 6(!. 00 75. rl3 9c .00 l f l 5 . P C

Y - f EE:T m3

Fig. 245-111. Constant Alt i tude Fl ight Path, X vs . Y .

260

C 0

C t

J r

C c f CL

c c U 3

rn 0 -c X C

t r

I- w Lu k c

I.;

I c-

-

tj ci

0

1 0 c-4 L3

I - 0 cj

C ) m

' I

10iOTMX-3070

1 I 1 I I 1

105. c:3 ? T - - - z z a 30.00 2s. ('0 FO.CiY 75.co 911.00 Y-FEE:T M I G '

Fig. 246-111. Constant Al t i tude F l i g h t Path, X vs. Y .

261

0 0

I 1 1 1

, o o 30. GO 60.00 9o.cc - l i O . 0 0 150 . co l b 0 . c 0 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

2001TMX-3070

+---&-A

1 1 - 1 1 1 1 - , co 30.00 EO. c!2 90. cc 1 2 C I . O C 1 5 O . C O 1 8 C . C C l

Y -FEET x ! 0 3

Fig. 247-111. Flight T i m e and Vehicle Weight vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

262

0 0

c3 m

0 0

2 0 0 2 T M X - 3 0 7 0

I I I

00 30.00 6 0 . CO 90. G O l > C . 00 l k 0 . 00 lbcl .00 Y - F E E T m3

2CC2TMX-3070

1 I I 1 I 1 00 30 .00 Gc ‘ . 0 0 9u. 00 1 2 0 . 0 0 i 5 o . o a i a i 7 . m

Y - F E E i T ~ 1 6 ‘

Fig. 248-111. F l ight Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

263

0 0 7

. I

I- 0 0

0- CJ

1 1 1 1 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

EET % l o 3 0 0

0 in

-0

v)

20OSTMX-3070

QLTITUDE IFT.1

c3 O - Q 25COG.

~

A 50000.

LL; 3 P

1 1 1 1 1 1 4 . 0 0 30.00 60.00 90. oil 120.00 1 5 O . C O 180.CO

Y - F E E T m3

Fig. 249-111. Flight Tim and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

264

2@10TMX-3070

1 1 1 1 - 0 0 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEET w 1 0 3

201CiMX-3070

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

, c'i) 30.00 6c'. 00 90. co 1 2 0 . ~ 0 150.co i a c . 0 0 Y-FEEIT w 1 c 3


265

1 1 I 1 I I 00 3 0 . 0 0 60 .00 90.00 120.00 150.00 132.00

Y-FEET x1C'

20ClTMX-3070

flLT I TUOE I F T . 1

(II O * 0 251100. A 5 C O O G .

I I 1 I I I 3C. OC G O . 00 90. co 12O.CO 150.00 1 8 c I . C O

Y - F E E T 4 0 3


266

0 0

0 C i -

a)L"

2002TMX-3C7C 0 0

1 I I 1 1 7 5: 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 i s o . 0 0 i a o . Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

CC

0 0

2CC2TMX-3070

FlLT I TCiGE (FT. 1

CI: 0. 0 25000. A 5000G.

Fig, 252-111. Heading Angle and Mach Yo. VS. Downrange Distance, Y .

0 0

0 0

2 C S 5 T M X - 3 C 7 C 0 0

I 1 I 1 I

%? 00 3 0 . 0 0 G O . 00 90.00 120.00 150.00 l a c . Y - F E E T w l G '

oc

FlLT I TLiGE IFT. J

ffi

A 5 R O O O . 0 25000.

20CSTMX-307C

I I 1 1 90.00 120.00 150.00 130

Y - F E E T m3 I I 1 1

90.00 120.00 150.00 130 Y - F E E T m3 . o o


268

I 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 60.00 9u. 00 120.00 150.00 18O.CO Y - F E E T m3

2ClGTMX-3C70

1 1 1 1 1

30 30, c o 60 .00 90. co 120.00 150.110 180.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’

Pig. 254-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

269

0 0

0 3

0 t

0 P,

0 0

uc; Z N

0 G

C3 -4

0 0

ct

2001TMX-3070

1 1 1 1 1 1 c o 30. C O GO. 00 90.00 120.00 15o.oc 1BO.CO Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

R L T 1 T U D E I F T . I

[I3 0 25000. A 5CG00.

2001TMX-3070

1 1 1 1 1 t . no 3 0 . 0 0 6L'. 00 9 0 . 0 0 120.00 150.00 18G. 00 Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 '

Fig . 255-111. Number of G ' s and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange D i s t a n c e , Y .

270

0 C3

0 i3

0 :n

0 0

0 c

c3 0

I

2002TMX-3070

1- I 1 C'O 30.00 60.00 90. co 1bO. 00 lk0 . co 1ao. cc

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ~

RLT I TUDE [ F T . 1

PI 0 - (IJ 25000. A 50000.

2002TMX-3070

I------- 11--1-1 ci? 30. OC! 6C. Cr! 90. CC 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y-FEEIT % l o 3


271

t3 0

I 1 1

00 3 0 . 0 0 6 0 . eo 90.n0 1bO. 0 0 l'sO.00 l h . 00 Y - F E E T x 1 c 3

RLT I TLOE (FT. 1

ffi 0. (IJ 25000. A 5 0 0 0 0 .

2 C C S T M X - 3 0 7 C

Fig . 257-111. Number of G's and Sidesl ip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

272

I 1 1 1 1 1 30.00 60. OC 90. cc 12c. oc 150.00 1ao. 00

.t " 0 . 0 0

Y-F'EE:T ~ 1 0 '

'3 0

L? 0,

CI:' + L

I N-

mo C-J

0 0-

I

0 0

CS s I

0 0

201 OTMX-3070

- r - r - 1 1 1 1

RLT I TUDE IFT. 1

(3 O. (r) 25000. A 50000.


273

20GlTMX-3070

- 1 I 1 I I I 1

, oo 15.02 30.00 rl5.00 so. 00 75. eo 90. CI? 105.00


MEKT M 1 o 3

274

0 0

2G32TMX-3070

flLT I TLJDE [FT. I ffi 0. 0 25000. A 50000.

01 O ! dl

11----- ' I 1 1 7- I 1 0.03 :5.c0

Fig. 260-111.

0 '

1ns.co 30.00 qs. cil 5o.co 7 5 . r!o 90. co Y-f'EE:T ~ 1 0 '

Constant A l t i t u d e Flight Path, X vs. Y .

275

200STMX-3070

ALTITUDE [FT . I

0 25000. A 50000.

- I I 1 1

00 15.20 30.03 45. c0 sc!. no 75. co 90.03 1 [IS. CL' --I--

Y-FEET w l G '

Fig. 261-111. Constant A l t i t u d e Flight Path, X vs. Y.

2 76

20iOTMX-3070

1 I I 7-- -r- ' 0 . 0 0 15.05 3-5.20 hl'. 00 75. co 90.00 i ( '5 . ; ' J

Y - t EET n l C '

Fig . 262-111. Constant A l t i t u d e F l i g h t Path, X vs. Y.

277

T M X - 8 ' 4 G

I I I I I 1 1

0' 1 .oo 2.00 3.00 11.00 s. oa 6.00 7.00 MRCH NUMEER

A L T I T U D E El SEA LEVEL 0 10,000 FT. A 20,000 FT. + 30,OOC FT. X 110,000 FT. 0 50,000 FT.

Fig, 263-1. Thrust vs. Terminal Mach No.

278

0 0

0 0

bU. UU *d.

. ._ %. 00 30.00

1 1 1 1 1 90.00 120.03 150.00 180

^ ^ ^ ^

Y-FEET * l o 3 0 0

0 '1 1002TMX-846

4 0 '4 4

cn

RLTITUDE ( F

I3 0. 0 25000. A 50000.

. 00

"T. 1

1-1- 1 1 1 1 6IJ. 00 90. 00 120.00 150.00 180. 30.00

Y - F E E T X 1 o 3

Fig. 264-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Dis tance , Y .

279

0 0

0 m

0 0

0 (D

0 W O

I O us E

I-

cn9

H

O 0

0 rd

0 0

.i 0 0

1005TMX-845

1 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

A L T I T U D E (FT. 1

Y-FEET x 1 0 3

O * 0

1005TMX-8'46 0 25000. A 50000.

0.00


280

0 0

C a

C C

c U

0 w=

L L l j

c n c I O

t-i

I- O 0

0 cu

0 0

ct 0 0

1010TMX-846

I 1 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 19O.UO Y - F E E T x 1 0 3

0

1010TMX-8U6

-0 x o

v,

R L T I T U O E IFT . 1

El 0 - 25000.

A 5 0 0 0 0 .

I I 1 1 1 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

.t-- %. 00 Y - F E E T % i o 3

F i g . 266-111. Flight Time and Vehicle Weight vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

281

0 0

a. OD

0 0

0. W

0 W O

w” II:

t-

(n9 I 0.

H

0 0

0 ru

0 0

ci 0 0

0 ~

VI-

- 0

-0 x o - 07

4

v, m f z t- 0-

10 15TMX-8146

U

1015TMX-8‘46 0 25000. A 50000.

.

1 1 1 r 1 t 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 138.00

Y - F E E T % i o 3 FlLT I TUOE [FT . I rn 0.


202

0 0

1002TMX-846

I I i 1 i 1 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180

Y-FEE:T M103 .oo

0 0 ‘1 1002TMX-8U6

ALT I TUOE [FT. 1

O 9 0 25000. A 50000.

0 .oo


283

0 0

0

100STMX-8'46

0.00 Y-FEET % l o '

1005TMX-8'46

F ILT ITUDE(FT .1

0 25000. A 50000.

O *

I 1 I 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 19

Y - F E E T X 1 o 3 0. CO

F i g . 269-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

284

0 0

0 m. -

0 0

4

101GTMX-846

1 1 I I I - 8 00 30.00 60 .00 90. co 120.90 iso.oo i a o .

Y-FEUT s 10’ 0

0 0

RLT I TUDE IFT. 1

IT 0 ’

. o o

Fig. 270-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

285

1015TMX-8UG

1 I 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEEL1 ~ 1 0 '

RLTITUDE (FT.1

8 2 5 C O O . A 50000.

El O - 0

101STMX-8 '46

. o o

Fig. 271-111. Heading Angle and llach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

286

1002TMX-846

%. 00 30.00 6 b . 00 9b. 00 1 ~ 0 . 0 0 l ! jO.OO lBO.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

I

RLT I TUOE (FT. I 13 0 25000. A 50000.

1002TMX-846

1 1 1 1 1 00 G . 00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 190.00

Y - F E E T % i o 3 Fig. 272-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

287

0 0

0 s

0 0

0 0

0 G

c3 d. Z (U

0 0

0. c

0 0

c1;

0 0

0

0 0

0

I c

C 3 0 LLJO 0;

a1 I C U

I- w MO 0

0 m.

I

0 0

0 3.

IC

Fig.

1005TMX-846

- 1 1 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 * 190.00 Y-FEET x103

I

P FlLT ITUOE (FT. I D O * 0 25000. A 50000.

- 1 1 1 1 1 1

00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 190.00 Y-FEET % l o 3

273-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

288

1010TMX-846

1 1 1 1 1 1 30.00 60. co 90.00 120.00 150.00 130.00

Y-FEEiT ~ 1 0 '

FILT I TUDE I F T . I el 0. (I-J 25000. A 50000.

1010TMX-846

7--- -- 1- 1 1 1 1 on 311.00 6 U . GO 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEElT % l o 3

Fig. 274-111. !lumber of G ' s and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

289

0 0

0. 3

0 0

0. 0

0 u 0 d. z'u

Q 0

0. w

0 0

%

00 W O

CI:' t- w

a d I cv-

mo 0

0 0- I

0 0

0 3.. I

0 0

1015TMX-846

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 00 30.00 6b. 00 90.00 120.00 150.00 lbO.00

Y-FEET w 1 o Y

101STMX-846

0

0 0

0

I 4

Fig. 275-111. . Number of G's and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y

1002

RLT ITUOE (FT. 1

D 0 25000. A 50000.

I 1 I - 75.00 90 )OO 105.00

Y - I E E T ~ 1 0

Fig . 276-111. Constant Al t i tude Fl ight Path, X vs. Y.

ALT I TUOE (FT. 1

(TJ 25000. A 50000.

1 1 1 GOC 75. c c 90 )C3 105.oil ---- 7- IO 15.00 30.00 60. C3

Y-FEE:T ~ 1 0


292

FILT ITUDE [FT . I e10 (TJ 2s000. A 50000.

1 1 - - 1 1 1

3C 15.c0 33.0C l iS.00 60.00 75. [IC 911juo 105.00 Y - F E E T w l C

F i g . 278-111. Constant Altitude F l i g h t Path, X vs. Y.

293

0 Ci

15TMX-845

R L T I TUDE (FT. 1

PI 0. (TJ 25000. A 50000.

1 I I I 1 1

10 l t ; . C O 30. C'O 45.00 60.00 7b. 23 90 )GO 105.02 Y-FEE.T ~ 1 0

F i g , 279-111. Constant Altitude F l i g h t Path, X vs. Y.

294

0 0

0 m

0 0

0. W

0 wo

I 0. W” z I-

m3

U

O 0

0. CJ

in, w

& O

-0 00

3- v, m -$

2002TMX-846

2002TMX-846 25000. A ~ o o c o .

.+-----T---l----------, %. 00 30 .00 60.c10 90.00 120. co I ’SO.OO iko . 00

Y - F E E T ~ 1 0 ~

Fig. 280-111. Flight Time and Veliicle Weight vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

295

0 0 '1 2005TMX-846

0 0

v, I

2005TMX-8YG

RLT I TUDE [FT. 1

6 25000. A 50000.

E O.

0 r I 1 1 1 f

%: 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 1so.00 Y - F E E T * l o 3

Fig. 281-111. F l i g h t Time and Vehicle Weight vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

296

0 0

0 CQ

0 0

0 (D

0 L L ; a cn9

I C 3 .=r

E

I- U

O 0

0 rJ

0 0

oi 0 0

0

20 1 OTMX-8146

1 1 1 1 1 1 30 .00 60 .00 90 .00 120.U0, 150.00 180.00

Y -FEET ~ 1 0 '

A L T I T t i D E ( F T . 1

'1 2C10 iMX-846

c

t- 01

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

?I: 00 30.00 60.00 90 .00 120.00 150.00 180.00 Y-FEE:T ~ 1 0 '


197

,2G 1 S T M X - 8 4 6

1 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 i50.00 180.00

Y-FEET H1oY

2015TMX-846

RLTITUDE (FT. I D 0. 0 25000. A 50000.

1 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 1SO. 00 180.00

Y - F E E T % i o 3


298

0 0

X-8116

I I I 1 30.00 60.00 SO. 00 190.00 1!20.00 150.00

I

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 ’

2G02TMX-846

ALT I TUOE [FT. 1

0 25000. A 50000.

EIl O *

I I 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 1 ~ O . a O 150.00 180

Y-FEET %lG’ .oo

Fig. 284-111. Heading Angle and Mach No. VS. Downrange Distance, Y.

299

0 0

" I

I 1 I

30.00 6 0 . 0 0 90.00 I i O . 00 l'sO.00 1ko:oo Y-FEET x 1 0 3

A L T I T U O E (FT. I CI] 0. c; 25000. A 50000.

. o o


300

0 0

201CTMX-846 0 0

I 1 1 1 1 1 +I? a0 30.00 60.0C 90.00 120.00 150.00 180 Y-FEET % l o 3

201CTMX-846

0 I 1 1 1 1 1

30.00 60.0C 90.00 120.00 150.00 180 Y-FEET % l o 3

0 0

.oo

Fig. 286-111, Heading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

301

2015TMX-846

0 0

'1 2015TMX-8UG

00

FlLT I TUDE (FT. 1

LI3 0 . 25000.

A 50000.

-0'. 00 30 .00 6C. 0 0 9iJ. 00 15fl. 0 0 Y-FEEIT

00

Fig. 287-111. Ileading Angle and Mach No. vs. Downrange Dis tance , Y.

302

0 0

t5 .-3

0 0

0 0-7

0 0

c3 d. z (\I

0 0

0. .4

0 0

.i:

\ 2002TMX-8UG

1 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 1m.00

Y-FEET % l o 3

RLT I TUDE (FT. I cl 0 -

25000. A 50000.

2002TMX-846

-7 I 1 1 1 1 Ci! 30.00 60 .00 9n. ca 120.00 150.00 150.00

Y-FEE:T m3 Fig. 288-111. Number of G ' s and Sideslip Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

303

0 0

0 0 :I 0 0 "!

2005TMX-846

I I 1 1 1

30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 lk30.00 Y-FEEIT x 1 0 3

0 0

2005TMX-8U6

0.00

F i g . 289-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y.

0 0

0

0 0

0

I c(

0 0

0 3.

' C

2 0 1 0 i M X - 0 4 6

1 1 1

00 30.00 60.00 90.00 150.00 1 k O . 00 1 k o . u o Y - F E E T m3

2010TMX-846

1 -T- 1 1 1 1 30. CO 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y - F E E T w103

Fig. 290-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs . Downrange Distance, Y .

305

0 0

0 T

0 0

0. 0

0 0

C3 d. z w

0 0

0. ..-

0 0 +

0 0

0

0 0

0

I c

C3 0 Lua

ICU a' I- Lu

a d

ma 0

0 m.

I

0 0

0 3.

'I

I

2015TMX-846

I 1 1 1 1 1 00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 180.00

Y-FEET ~ 1 0 '

A L T I T U D E (FT.1

[I: 0 25000. A 50000.

2C15TMX-846

I 1 1 1 1 1 , 00 30.00 GO. Oi l 90.00 120.co 150.00 190.0i)

Y-FEET m3 Fig. 291-111. Number of G's and S i d e s l i p Angle vs. Downrange Distance, Y .

6

0

I- !5 W . . 0 0 0 .3 0 0 b- 0 0 l-4 -In0 I - O N I n

i+ 0 0 4

0 (D

0 0

L7 3

m 0 -0

~ X O

.- I

2 0 0

h

I I I I 1 1 1

IO 15.00 30.00 95.00 60.00 75.00 90 joo 105.00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0

Fig . 293-111. Constant Alt i tude Flight Path, X vs. Y.

308

0 0

C rn 2010

ALTITUOE (FT.1

f.3 0. Q 25000. A 50000.

I I I I 1 I ' 0: 00 - - - - -Go 30.CO lis. no 60. co 75. CO 9Q joo 105.oc Y-FEt:T *10


309

0 0

tj. co

I W LO lo

I

a 4

i c C

U

I c

C C

C CI I

RLTITUDE (FT.1 [3 0- @J 25000. A 50000.

I I 1 I I i'S.00 30.co lis.00 60.00 75. CO sb ,oo 105.00 00 Y-FEET ~ 1 0

Fig. 295-111, Constant Alt i tude Flight Path, X vs . Y. 311 0

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1977 - 735-004/5

Documents

Missile Aerodynamic Data - Flight simulator IOS, TASC