
STRANGE SHAPES.
The operational vision
behind the Walrus -- the ability to mobilise and manoeuvre forces quickly
-- is based on the lessons of previous wars, says Hunt.
osborn
3,002 words
13 September 2005
Flight International
They look familiar because they are concepts
that have been around for decades -- shape-changing aircraft, oblique
flying wings and ultra-large transports. They are back on the drawing
boards because, this time around, technical maturity and operational
necessity might actually coincide.
The three concepts are being pursued by the
US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which prides itself
in taking on challenging -- sometimes baffling -- ideas and demonstrating
their feasibility and utility. The Department of Defense agency's
successes include the internet and stealth. DARPA has also had its
failures, or dead ends.
Shape changing is being pursued under
DARPA's Morphing Aircraft Structures (MAS) programme, now coming to the
end of its second phase with windtunnel tests under way at NASA Langley.
Phase 1 studies of the Walrus ultra-large aircraft have just begun, and
industry proposals for the first phase of the Switchblade oblique flying
wing (OFW) project will be received by early next month. All three could
result in X-plane flying demonstrators.
The programmes are part of a resurgence in
aeronautics research at DARPA at a time when NASA funding for air vehicle
technology is in decline. Other aeronautics-related programmes under way
include the Boeing A160 Hummingbird long-endurance unmanned helicopter and
X-50 Dragonfly canard rotor/wing (CRW) vertical take-off and landing
demonstrator; Lockheed Martin's Cormorant submarine-launched and
-recovered multipurpose unmanned air vehicle and Falcon hypersonic cruise
vehicle; and Vought's Kingfisher sea-going UAV (see P50).
What these programmes have in common is that
each is built around an idea that, if proved feasible and useful, could
transform aircraft design. For the morphing aircraft it is flexible,
adaptable structures that enable vehicles to change their form and
function. For the ultra-large aircraft, it is the ability to control a
combination of aerodynamic, buoyant and propulsive lift. And for the
oblique wing it is the unique combination of supersonic speed, long range
and endurance.
"DARPA's task is to take the technology
argument off the table," says Dr Arthur Morrish, director of the research
agency's Tactical Technology Office. "If we don't, we go back and try
again." The three programmes represent "DARPA-hard" technical challenges,
with no guarantee that they will produce viable aircraft.
The first thing Walrus programme manager
Phil Hunt says is: "This is not an airship. This is a heavier-than-air
vehicle." Large transport airships have a long history dating back to the
Zeppelins of the early 1900s, but advances in fixed-wing aircraft quickly
left them behind. The last and largest US rigid airship, the US Navy's
239m (785ft)-long USS Akron, crashed into the sea in April 1933 during a
violent storm. Smaller non-rigid "blimps" continue to be used today and
there is a resurgence of interest in high-altitude airships for
surveillance missions.
The concept of a large hybrid aircraft,
combining buoyant and aerodynamic lift, emerged in the 1990s, and in 1999
NASA announced plans to demonstrate a piloted subscale model of a
partially buoyant cargo airship -- the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works
Aerocraft -- under its Revolutionary Concepts (RevCon) programme. But the
RevCon programme was cancelled soon after.
The hybrid aircraft concept then arrived at
DARPA, which decided it had too many shortcomings and not enough military
utility, says Hunt. Instead the agency decided to take the next step by
demonstrating the technology for an ultra-large aircraft combining
aerodynamic, buoyant and propulsive lift.
Lessons of war
The operational vision behind the Walrus --
the ability to mobilise and manoeuvre forces quickly -- is based on the
lessons of previous wars, says Hunt. To determine whether the concept is
reasonable, DARPA employed an analysis tool used by the Joint Strike
Fighter programme to look at the needs of multiple customers and identify
operational tasks that can be performed by the aircraft.
The four notional tasks identified for
Walrus are strategic lift from the continental USA to the theatre of
operations; theatre lift to move forces closer to the front; support of
sea-based operations; and missions requiring persistence, including mobile
command and control, airborne hospital, aerial refuelling and UAV launch
and control.
"We do not have formal service customers,
but we have a notion of where to go and something for each of the
services," says Hunt. Deciding the operational tasks allowed DARPA to
identify goals for the Walrus programme, the principal one being "to
control lift at all times, in the air and on the ground". If successful,
the programme will address the major failings of airships in the past,
including their inability to operate in adverse weather and the need for
ground infrastructure to handle loading and unloading. "The Walrus will be
able to fly in, set down, unload and not get blown away," he says.
As envisaged by DARPA, the operational
vehicle would be able to carry a 500t payload 22,000km (12,000nm) in less
than seven days at a competitive cost, operating without significant
support infrastructure from unimproved landing sites and deploying the
components of an army combat unit that can be ready to fight within 6h of
disembarking. The vehicle would be capable of vertical, short or
conventional take-off and landing "not just from an airfield, but from an
open field", says Hunt.
"The vehicle is almost as big at the Nimitz
[aircraft carrier] and a darned sight fatter," says Hunt. Whether the
structure will be rigid, semi-rigid or non-rigid has not been decided.
"The jury is out. It's a real challenge," says Hunt. "The propulsion
system is also a challenge, as is the space available for storage.
Life-cycle cost and survivability are also issues, but these will be dealt
with later."
The first critical challenge is the control
of lift, which will be generated in multiple ways, says Hunt. Much of the
lift will be provided by lighter-than-air gas, such as helium, which could
be superheated to increase buoyancy for take-off and supercooled for
landing. "If we raise the temperature 35ƒC we get an extra 15% lift," he
says. Other ways of controlling buoyancy include ballonets inside the
envelope, which can be filled with offboard air and then superheated or
supercooled.
The second source of lift will be the
aircraft's body and aerodynamic surfaces such as canards. Techniques to
change aerodynamic lift and reduce boundary-layer drag will be required,
says Hunt. The third source will be direct lift, either by vectoring the
propulsion engines or by embedding thrusters in the airframe. Each
lift-producing mechanism has a different frequency of response, and they
must be integrated to provide a "fly and forget" control system, he says.
Two contractors have been selected for the
12-month first phase of the Walrus programme: Lockheed's Skunk Works and
small US airship manufacturer Aeros Aeronautical Systems. "They have
significantly different approaches," says Hunt. During Phase 1 they will
develop conceptual designs for the operational vehicle and define a
technology demonstration plan for the three-year second phase.
DARPA plans to award one Phase 2 contract to
fly a subscale demonstrator and take the operational vehicle to a
preliminary design review. Although the agency does not need a sponsor to
enter the second phase, it will need interest from the services. A
go/no-go decision on the demonstrator is due midway through Phase 2, by
which time DARPA hopes to have a service sponsor for Walrus.
DARPA's morphing aircraft programme has as
its goal the design of a wing that can change its shape drastically to
meet the conflicting mission requirements of efficient loiter and
transonic dash. "UAVs fit two classes," says MAS programme manager Terry
Weisshaar. "Strike aircraft are fast and survivable, but have inefficient
aerodynamics and can't loiter if the target moves. Surveillance aircraft
are aerodynamically very efficient, but can't dash." Morphing would allow
the roles of long-endurance surveillance platform and high-speed unmanned
combat air vehicle to be combined in a single hunter-killer UAV.
The fact that shape-changing is not new is
best illustrated by variable-geometry aircraft, such as the Grumman F-14
Tomcat carrier-based fighter, which use a variable-sweep wing to provide
good low-speed and high-speed performance. But the idea goes back much
further, says Weisshaar, citing a morphing-wing design, the Eole, proposed
by French aviation pioneer Clement Ader in 1890. Ader proposed a bat-type
wing that could reduce its size by a half to a third. "We will get down to
about half with MAS," he says.
Among the first practical "polymorphous"
aircraft was Westland's Pterodactyl IV, a tailless monoplane designed by
Geoffrey Hill and first flown in 1931, which had a wing sweep that could
be varied manually by just under 5ƒ to accommodate shifts in centre of
gravity. Another early example cited by Weisshaar is the Russian
Nikitin-Shevchenko IS-1 fighter, first flown in 1940, which converted from
manoeuvrable biplane to faster monoplane by pneumatically folding most of
its lower wing into the fuselage.
The Pterodactyl, and later variable-geometry
aircraft such as the F-14, are examples of in-plane morphing, involving a
two-dimensional surface movement to change wing sweep or span. The IS-1
was a three-dimensional morphing design, using out-of-plane wing segment
folding to change area. Another form of three-dimensional morphing was
used by the North American XB-70 bomber, first flown in 1964, in which the
outer panels of the delta wing rotated downwards by up to 65ƒ to increase
directional stability and aerodynamic efficiency at supersonic speed. At
Mach 3, the wedge-shaped lower fuselage and drooped wingtips created an
air dam that slowed the airstream and generated compression lift that
carried 35% of the aircraft's weight.
Shape changing has always incurred penalties
in cost, complexity and weight, but in the cases of the F-14 and XB-70,
these were outweighed by the advantages to the overall design. "Grumman
chose a variable-geometry aircraft over a fixed-wing design that was
5,000lb [2,300kg] heavier because it needed a bigger wing, bigger engines
and more fuel," says Weisshaar. The XB-70's wing joints and actuators
weighed 10,000kg, but drooping the wingtips improved the bomber's
supersonic performance. "There will be cost and weight penalties, but you
will get a better aircraft," he says. "You have to think at the system
level."
Morphing designs
The two designs chosen for the 18-month
second phase of the MAS programme are examples of in-plane and
out-of-plane morphing. Lockheed's Agile Hunter design folds the inner wing
sections upwards against the fuselage to "hide" a substantial portion of
the area to reduce drag during the low-altitude transonic dash. NextGen
Aeronautics' design has an articulated wing structure that can transform
from a low-sweep, long-span loiter shape to a high-sweep, reduced-area
dash shape. During Phase 2, both contractors have built small-scale
radio-controlled flying models and full-scale semi-span windtunnel models
of their morphing UAV designs.
Lockheed's wing folds in two places, the
outboard section rotating downwards to remain level while the inner
section rotates upwards and inwards to lie against the side of the
fuselage. The windtunnel model uses F-16 flap actuators, and the joints
are covered by flexible, silicone-based skins to provide a seamless,
aerodynamically clean surface. A slight vacuum is applied to the inner
joint during folding to prevent binding. An operational vehicle could use
a shape-memory polymer, says Weisshaar. When heated, the material would
become elastic, allowing the joint to rotate, then "remember" its
original, rigid shape when the heat is removed.
When the wing is folded, a flap on the
inboard leading edge folds against the fuselage side to stop air flowing
through the gap. This is the first use of a thermopolymer actuator, says
Weisshaar. Compact enough to fit inside the small space available, this
uses a material that expands when heated to drive the flap then locks the
surface in place when the plastic cools and solidifies. "Bigger
thermo‚polymer actuators could be used to move the wing," he says.
NextGen's wing design is based on a jointed
endoskeleton that is moved by a distributed array of actuators to adjust
span, area and shape. The semi-span windtunnel model uses 10 small
hydraulic actuators to provide redundancy, says Weisshaar. The metal wing
structure is covered with stretchable and compressible elastomeric
silicone skins that are reinforced with titanium or steel mesh to prevent
out-of-plane "puckering" that could affect aerodynamics. Attaching these
skins is a challenge, "but they think they have solved it", says Weisshaar.
An alternative approach is to use sliding skins.
Windtunnel testing of both wings up to Mach
0.85 and 50,000ft (15,000m) is due to be completed in October. The tests,
in NASA Langley's transonic dynamics tunnel, are focusing on the
aero-elastic behaviour of the morphing wings, and on measuring the
actuator loads, which are hard to predict, says Weisshaar. The wings take
about a minute to change shape, a time set by DARPA, but faster morphing
could be used for flight control or to compensate for battle damage, he
says.
The third phase of the programme, during
which one of the contractors would build the MAS-X flying demonstrator,
has yet to be funded, and DARPA is seeking a service sponsor. "When we are
done with windtunnel testing, we will be at a TRL [technology readiness
level] of 5. Then we will need to fly," he says. "We need a decision soon
on whether they see value in advancing to a higher TRL."
The oblique wing was first proposed by
German designer Richard Vogt in 1942, for the Blohm & Voss P.202
variable-geometry jet fighter project. This had a pivoting oblique wing
mounted atop the fuselage, a configuration that was to recur several times
over the ensuing decades. Famous NASA aerodynamicist Robert T Jones
developed the theory for oblique-wing aircraft in 1952, and concluded they
would have significantly lower wave drag than traditional swept-wing
aircraft. And, as early as 1961, Handley Page designer Geoffrey Lee
proposed a Mach 2 oblique flying-wing airliner, the Sycamore.
Despite this brisk start, oblique wings
failed to make much progress, although several experimental aircraft were
tested over the years. NASA Dryden flew a small, remotely piloted
oblique-wing research aircraft in the mid-1970s and followed this with the
single-seat AD-1, a subsonic research aircraft that made 79 flights
between 1979 and 1982 with its fuselage-mounted oblique wing pivoted up to
60ƒ. This was intended to be followed in 1989 by a supersonic oblique-wing
research aircraft based on NASA's Vought F-8 fly-by-wire testbed, but the
programme was cancelled.
Oblique all-wing
NASA Ames, meanwhile, continued work on R T
Jones' oblique all-wing aircraft, completing a preliminary design study of
a 500-seat, M1.6 supersonic transport in 1991. The 124m-span aircraft was
designed to take off and land with 37.5ƒ oblique sweep, increasing to 68ƒ
in the cruise. Because of the control challenges posed by a tailless,
unstable, oblique flying-wing, NASA built a small-scale remotely piloted
demonstrator. The 6.1m-span model flew once in May 1994, for 4min, but
demonstrated stable, controlled flight over a range of sweep angles from
35ƒ to 50ƒ.
Despite their advantages over conventional
supersonic airliner configurations, oblique-wing designs -- with or
without fuselages -- were ultimately rejected by NASA's High Speed
Research programme, which was eventually cancelled, ending US work on a
high-speed civil transport. DARPA is now rekindling work on the oblique
flying wing, while acknowledging that challenges still have to be
overcome.
Back in 1952, R T Jones showed that a
variable-sweep oblique flying wing is the most efficient configuration
over a wide range of subsonic and supersonic speeds, and DARPA sees the
opportunity to produce an aircraft that will combine high speed with long
range and endurance. Challenges range from ground manoeuvring, and the
integration of fully embedded engines into the airframe, to the control of
a tailless, unstable, variable-sweep flying wing at speeds up to Mach 2.
The oblique wing's problem over the years
has been the control challenge posed by the unique coupling between the
asymmetric aircraft's aerodynamic and aerostructural modes. "Any time it
came close, another configuration that was nearly as good would be
selected because of the perceived risk for a manned aircraft," says
Stephen Morris who, as a graduate student at Stanford University, built
and flew the small oblique flying-wing model for NASA. "It's ideal for an
unmanned aircraft."
This early in the Switchblade OFW project,
there is no service sponsor and no specific mission, so DARPA has drawn up
two requirements for a conceptual, 2020-timeframe vehicle: a surveillance
mission with a 4,600km radius and 15h subsonic loiter at 60,000ft carrying
an 1,800kg payload; and a bomber mission with a 4,600km radius, maximum
speed of M2, cruise of M1.6 and 6,800kg payload. The vehicle must be
tailless in the subsonic loiter and supersonic cruise.
Because of the technical challenges, DARPA
has not set the funding or timescale for Phase 1 of the Switchblade
programme. Instead, bidders will propose a baseline programme to mature
the OFW to a TRL of 4 or 5 by the end of the first phase. A supersonic
unmanned X-plane demonstrator could fly by 2010 under a planned Phase 2,
with the goal of demonstrating the concept's feasibility so that a
variable-sweep flying wing can be considered for a surveillance or bomber
aircraft in the 2020 timeframe. "Of all the crazy ideas in aeronautics,
this is one with a relatively large payoff," says Morris.
About Aeros:
Aeros is the world's leading lighter-than-air, FAA-certified aircraft
manufacturing company. The company's operations involve the research,
development, production, operation and marketing of a complete family of
Aeros-branded air vehicles used in government and commercial applications.
These include non-rigid FAA Type Certified Aeros 40D Sky Dragon Airships,
Advanced Tethered Aerostatic Systems and New Type Rigid Air Vehicle -
Aeroscraft.
Contact:
Edward
Pevzner
Business Development Manager
Tel. 818 344-3999 x 106
Edward@AerosML.com
Send update news to me