NASA SP-2000-4520

Black Magic and Gremlins:
Analog Flight Simulations
at NASA’s Flight
Research Center

by
Gene L. Waltman
MONOGRAPHS IN AEROSPACE HISTORY #20
1
NASA SP-2000-4520

Black Magic and Gremlins:
Analog Flight Simulations at
NASA’s Flight Research Center

by
Gene L. Waltman

NASA History Division
Office of Policy and Plans
NASA Headquarters
Washington, DC 20546

Monographs in
Aerospace History
Number 20
2000

3
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Waltman, Gene L., 1935-
Black magic and gremlins : analog flight simulations at NASA’s Flight Research Center
/by Gene L. Waltman.
p. cm. — (Monographs in aerospace history ; no. 20)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Flight simulators—History. 2. Flight Research Center (U.S.)—History. I.Title. II.
Series

TL712.5.W35 2000
629.132’52’078—dc21
00-064321

____________________________________________________________

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328

4
Table of Contents

List of Photos.................................................................................................................................v

Foreword ......................................................................................................................................vi

Preface ....................................................................................................................................... viii

Analog Simulations .......................................................................................................................1

Four-Stage Boost-Vehicle Simulation .........................................................................................34

X-15 Simulator ............................................................................................................................46

General Purpose Airborne Simulation.........................................................................................59

Hybrid Simulations......................................................................................................................65

Lifting-Body Simulation Systems ...............................................................................................91

Short Take-Off and Landing Simulations....................................................................................94

Personal Accounts of FRC Simulation Laboratory Personnel ....................................................98
Edward N. Videan....................................................................................................................98
Richard O. Musick.................................................................................................................101
John P. Smith..........................................................................................................................106
Gene L. Waltman ...................................................................................................................108
John J. Perry...........................................................................................................................109
Donald C. Bacon....................................................................................................................114
Lawrence Caw .......................................................................................................................124
Art Suppona ...........................................................................................................................129
Charles A. Wagner .................................................................................................................132

Personal Accounts of FSL Users ...............................................................................................136
Richard D. Banner .................................................................................................................136
Richard E. Day.......................................................................................................................137
Donald Reisert .......................................................................................................................140
Robert W. Kempel..................................................................................................................145
Dwain A. Deets ......................................................................................................................148
Stanley P. Butchart.................................................................................................................153
William H. Dana ....................................................................................................................157
Thomas C. McMurtry ............................................................................................................159

Finale .........................................................................................................................................162

Appendices
1.Memorandum for Engineering Division Chief, Richard D. Banner and
Albert E. Kuhl, “The determination of the directional stability parameter
Cnβ from flight data,” 11 March 1955. ..............................................................................164

2. Richard E. Day, “Training Considerations during the X-15 Development,” paper
presented to the Training Advisory Committee of the National Security Industrial
Association, Los Angeles, California, 17 November 1959. ...............................................171

3. Milton O. Thompson, “General Review of Piloting Problems Encountered
during Simulation and Flights of the X-15” [1964]. ..........................................................189

5
iii
4.Robert E. Andrews, “The Analog Simulator Programming,” originally published
as an appendix to Windsor L. Sherman, Stanley Faber, and James B. Whitten, Study of
Exit Phase of Flight of a Very High Altitude Hypersonic Airplane by Means of a Pilot-
Controlled Analog Computer (Washington, DC: NACA Research Memorandum L57K21,
1958), pp. 19-25, 30, 40, 47-53. .........................................................................................199

Glossary.....................................................................................................................................215

Index ..........................................................................................................................................219

Bibliography ..............................................................................................................................223

About the Author .......................................................................................................................231

Monographs in Aerospace History ............................................................................................231

iv6
List of Photos

E-1841 Dick Day at GEDA Inertia Coupling Simulation ............................................ 6
E-2145 Dick Musick with Film Reader .................................................................. 102
E-2581 Iron Cross with Stan Butchart .................................................................... 153
E-2626 GEDA Analog Computers.............................................................................. 7
E-2906 Iron Cross 3-axes Side-arm Controller ....................................................... 154
E-2950 Reaction Control Stick ............................................................................... 103
E-3395A Holleman in Reaction Control Cockpit (Black Box)..................................... 10
E-4287 Crowded Analog Simulation Laboratory ........................................................ 2
E-4396 F-104 Reaction Control Simulation—Black Box Cockpit ............................ 14
E-4548 Boost Simulation Couch, Panel, Controls (in FSL)....................................... 35
E-4550 Boost Simulation Instrument Panel .............................................................. 15
E-4661 Centrifuge Seat, Gondola ............................................................................. 36
E-4662 Centrifuge Seat, Gondola ............................................................................. 36
E-4725 Boost Simulation Side Arm Controller ......................................................... 35
E-4870 Boost Program photos .................................................................................. 37
E-4967 EAI-31R and EAI-131R and Black Box (F-104) Cockpit............................... 9
E-4969 Black Box (F-104) Cockpit .......................................................................... 49
E-4990 Boost Program Centrifuge Seat .................................................................... 37
E-5035 Orbital Rendezvous program photos .......................................................... 107
E-5037 Orbital Rendezvous program photos .......................................................... 108
E-5040 Boost Program Restraint Straps.................................................................... 38
E-5636 Fixed Based Simulator Diagram..................................................................... 1
E-5808 X-15 Simulator Analog Computers .............................................................. 23
E-5809 X-15 Simulator Analog Computers .............................................................. 23
E-5810 X-15 Simulator Analog Computers .............................................................. 34
E-8100 Paresev Simulation Cockpit ......................................................................... 25
E-10278 M2-F1 Simulator Cockpit ............................................................................ 15
E-10591 Early M2 Simulator Cockpit (Norden Display and TR-48)........................... 91
E-10840 LLRV Simulator Cockpit ........................................................................... 125
E-11778 X-15-3 Instrument Panel .............................................................................. 16
E-12942 Simulation Cockpit ...................................................................................... 25
E-14648 Servo to Synchro Units (LLRV Sim Cockpit)............................................ 105
E-15530 X-15 Simulator (Iron Bird) with Bill Dana ................................................... 50
E-16219 X-15 Simulator (Iron Bird) with Bill Dana ................................................... 50
E-16464 Lifting Body Simulator Cockpit ................................................................... 92
E-18728 GP Transport Simulator Cockpit................................................................... 16
E-18902 HL-10 Simulator and Display with J. Manke............................................... 17
E-22438 STOL Simulation Cockpit (ARC Moving Base Simulator) .......................... 96
E-22756 STOL Wind-Tunnel Mode ........................................................................... 94
E-23281 STOL Simulation Cockpit, Displays and Controls........................................ 95
E-23594 DFBW Simulation (Early—pre Iron-Bird —in Lean-to) .............................. 80
E-26099 RPRV Simulator Cockpit ............................................................................. 18
E-27824 JetStar (GPAS) Simulator............................................................................. 60
E-27825 JetStar (GPAS) Computers with H. Rediess and D. Musick.......................... 61
ECN-637 LLRV with Joe Walker and Don Mallick.................................................... 126
ECN-1346 Ken Szalai and GPAS Computers................................................................. 59
ECN-1456 Larry Caw with X-15 Simulation Analog Computer and Plotter................... 53
ECN-2399 General Purpose Airborne Simulator ............................................................ 60
ECN-6375 CYBER 73-28.............................................................................................. 68
ECN-7074 F-8 DFBW Iron Bird Cockpit....................................................................... 79
ECN-7075 F-8 DFBW Iron Bird Cockpit....................................................................... 80
EC91-661-005 Research Aircraft Integration Facility............................................................. 3
ED97-44197-1 Ed Videan and Dick Musick at EAI 31-R Analog Computer ...................... 101
ED00-0091-1 Applied Dynamic AD-4 Computer System .................................................. 67
EC00-0088-1 Drawing templates used for analog wiring diagrams .................................... 19

v7
Foreword

This history of the Flight Research Center (FRC) Simulation Laboratory (FSL) de-
scribes the development of experimental flight-test simulators and the rapid evolution
of the computers that made them run. (The FRC was a predecessor of NASA’s Dryden
Flight Research Center, Edwards, California.) Gene Waltman has provided a smooth
blend of anecdotal narrative and technical jargon that maintains reader interest whether
or not the reader is computer literate.

Less than a year after the end of World War II (WWII), the National Advisory Commit-
tee for Aeronautics (NACA) moved a small group of flight test personnel from the
Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory (later, NASA’s Langley Research Center,
Hampton, Virginia) to the large dry lake at Muroc, California, in the Mojave Desert to
perform flight testing and aeronautical research on the XS-1 high-speed experimental
aircraft. (The XS stood for eXperimental Sonic, later shortened to X-1.) Among the
first personnel to arrive and set up shop was a group of “computers” under the direction
of Roxanah Yancey. These “computers” were young women who read flight-test data
recorded on film, typed these data into their mechanical calculators, and laboriously
plotted the results. This was the burdensome forerunner of today’s instantaneous
telemetered data displaying plotted information on ground-based multi-channel record-
ers, X-Y plotters, or cathode ray tubes. For many years Roxy and her complement of
“computers” performed these computations with slide rule, planimeter, and calculators.
High-speed, large-memory computers were still a decade or two in the future; nerds,
geeks and hackers were still in gestation, and college degrees in Computer Science did
not exist.

Prior to the establishment of the FSL, in the mid-fifties, the Air Force Flight Test
Center (AFFTC) purchased an analog computer on the advice of the NACA. The first
use of this computer was by NACA engineers Richard Banner and Al Kuhl who helped
assemble the computer and then mechanized (programmed) the three degrees of lateral
freedom to analyze directional stability from flight data. This analog, the Goodyear
Electronic Differential Analyzer (GEDA), was used by the NACA for a series of flight
research programs such as X-2 flight planning and pilot training, the newly encoun-
tered inertial roll coupling, reaction control, and other studies. Walt Williams, the
director of the NACA High-Speed Flight Station (HSFS, as the FRC was then named),
seeing the results of such a powerful research tool, purchased the Station’s first analog
computer in 1957.

This was the start of the FSL series of simulators that ran the gamut of aircraft and
spacecraft of this period. This was when the high key and steep approach for orbital
entries and landings were developed. This was when Neil Armstrong polished his
talents on simulations of orbital launch, as well as simulations and flight tests of the
Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV) and the X-15 rocket-powered aircraft. The
LLRV simulator simulated the LLRV “flying bedstead,” which in turn simulated the
actual Lunar Module; hence, the LLRV simulation was unique in that it was a simula-
tion of a simulator.

The history of calculation and computing is one of discovery, development, and
obsolescence with new technology replacing the old, much like the end of a geological
period with some species dying and new species evolving. As the author has indicated,
even in the brief time span of this history, the shelf life of various computers has been
brief with most of them now residing in landfills. As an example, computers went
from analog to hybrid (combined analog and digital), to all-digital using paper tape,
punch cards, and various types of magnetic devices with short half-life operating spans.

8
vi
Also during this period, as is true today, the rapid demise of particular programming
formats hastened the turnover cycle.

In this evolutionary period, digital computer speed increased to the point where digital
technology replaced analog for real-time computation and piloted simulation. In
addition to accuracy, the Boolean-logic capabilities of the digital vastly increased the
realism and selectivity of simulators. Although the analog was subject to noise and
some inaccuracies, it would render a truer answer to a rapid, continuous action and is
still being used for high-frequency phenomena. Another favorable aspect of the analog
for those working prior to the year 2000 was that analog computers were not Y2K-
prone (i.e., subject to errors because digital programmers had used two digits to
indicate calendar years, and digital computers could not tell the difference between,
e.g., 1900 and 2000).

When digital computers started to perform administrative as well as technical functions
and bottlenecks began to form, priority number one was never disputed by administra-
tive or technical personnel. Payroll always came first.

Richard E. Day
NASA engineer, retired

9vii
Preface

This publication describes the development of the Flight Research Center Simulation
Laboratory during the period from 1955 to 1975. These are the years in which analog
computers were used as a major component of every flight simulation that was mecha-
nized in support of the many different flight research projects at the High-Speed Flight
Station (HSFS–redesignated the Flight Research Center [FRC] in 1959 and the Dryden
Flight Research Center [DFRC] in 1976). Initially, analog computers were used along
with a ground-based cockpit for these simulators. This started in 1955. In 1964 a
small scientific digital computer was bought and added to the X-15 simulator. This
was the start of the hybrid (combined analog and digital) computer period of flight
simulators. Both of these periods are covered in this document.

The simulation laboratory has had a number of different names over the years. I have
chosen to use a single designation—FRC Simulation Laboratory (FSL)—to avoid
confusing the reader with different names throughout this document.

This publication discusses how we developed the many different analog simulations.
However, it is also important to mention the reasons why we did so. For this purpose I
have included in the appendices a copy of a paper by Dick Day, “Training Consider-
ations During the X-15 Development,” which was presented to the Training Advisory
Committee of the National Security Industrial Association in November 1959. In this
paper, Dick talks about the early use of analog computers to study instabilities that
were occurring with the X-1, X-2, X-3, and some of the century series aircraft. Dick
Day was an active participant in the early use of analog computers at the NACA HSFS
to study the problems that were being encountered by the pilots during the testing of
these vehicles. His paper explains the reasons that analog computers were originally
bought and used for real-time flight simulators and why flight simulators are still being
developed and used at the Dryden Flight Research Center. This paper by Dick Day
plus the comments from Dick Banner (in the section on analog simulations and in his
personal account) provide a good introduction to the events that began it all, and why it
all happened.

This narrative has been written with the help of many of the simulation programmers
and technicians, research engineers, and pilots who developed, used, and flew the many
different analog simulators. A number of these people have contributed much in the
way of information and anecdotes about what we did and how we went about develop-
ing and using those simulators. I am extremely grateful to each and every one who
contributed in any way. For most of these people, their stories are included as personal
accounts and are at the end of the narrative. These personal accounts (or PAs as they
are referred to throughout this publication) are brief biographical discussions of their
experiences with the analog simulators. Without these inputs, this would be a short and
dull accounting of the history of analog computers. We all see and experience events
and happenings in different ways. We also have our own styles and when asked to talk
about our experiences, do so in our own ways. The PAs are a very important part of
this history. They are as unique and individual as we all are and offer many personal
perspectives.

I worked for what is today the DFRC from 1957 until 1993. For the first 17 years I
was a part of the FRC Simulation Laboratory and have first-hand knowledge of a lot
that went on during those days. I also got stuck with buying many of the computer
systems that we used during that period. And as you will read, many of the events that
occurred were a direct result of the ever-changing computer systems that we bought
and used for our simulations. I also was involved with implementing several major

10
viii
flight simulators during that period. I feel fortunate to have had such a part in the on-
going evolution of the FRC Simulation Laboratory. This publication is something I
started thinking about doing after I retired from the DFRC in 1993. I have had a lot of
fun collecting the information and talking to (and doing a lot of coaxing—even beg-
ging—of) the many people who contributed. In several cases, this was the first time I
had talked with several of them since they left or retired. It has taken several years to
get this all together and to write this account, and I have enjoyed every minute of it.

I am also grateful to the NASA DFRC for providing me the opportunity to publish this
history. NASA is doing a lot to record and archive its history. I am happy to contribute
towards that goal.

This particular monograph is the first of several anticipated histories of the FRC
Simulation Laboratory. The second publication will cover the history of the FSL from
about 1975 to 1991. This period covers the first era of the all-digital simulations,
during a time when the FSL was still in the same general area as the analog systems
used to be. In 1991 the FSL moved into a new building know then as the Integrated
Test Facility (ITF). There is some overlap in simulations during the transitions be-
tween these three periods (1957-75, 1975-91, 1991 to the present). Consequently there
will be some repetition of events and simulator history that will be included in the
different studies. That is unavoidable, but necessary. The same can be said about
many of the people who were key participants during these transitions. I will try to
point these people and their contributions out appropriately.

For those who may be using the present document for information-gathering purposes,
I have included an extensive bibliography listing almost every publication during the
period 1955-1975 that was written about a project at the HSFS/FRC in which analog or
analog-and-hybrid simulations were used. Most of the bibliography is taken from
Dave Fisher’s publication: Fifty Years of Flight Research: An Annotated Bibliography
of Technical Publications of NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 1946-1996 (NASA
TP-1999-206568). I have also included many photographs. All of these photos are in
the DFRC Photo Archive, and someday they may be available on the DFRC Web site.

I wish to acknowledge and thank everyone who has helped in getting this bit of the
NASA Flight Research Center’s history into publication. They include: Dill Hunley of
the DFRC History Office for his encouragement and help in getting this publication
into print; Rob Binkley and Mike Najera of the Dryden Research Aircraft Integration
Facility (RAIF, which includes the present-day simulation facilities) for providing the
funds for this task and their support; Larry Schilling and Lee Duke for their support at
the upper management level: Dick Day, “the father of simulation,” (as research pilot
Bill Dana likes to call him) for his efforts in getting the pilots—in those early days—to
actually use the simulators for flight planning and training purposes as well as for his
contributions to this publication, including the Foreword; and every one else who
contributed to this publication. The list includes Ed Videan, John P. Smith, and Dick
Musick of the very first Simulation Group. Also: John Perry, Don Bacon, and Larry
Caw, simulation programmers; Al Myers, simulation engineer; Art Suppona and Billy
Davis, simulation technicians; Charlie Wagner, simulation hardware engineer; Stan
Butchart, Bill Dana, and Tom McMurtry, DFRC pilots; and many research engineers,
including Dick Banner, Don Reisert, Ed Holleman, Dwain Deets, Bob Kempel, Neil
Matheny, Bruce Powers, Roy Bryant, Dave Hedgley, Tom Wolf, Wilt Lock, Bob James,
Jack Ehernberger, and Don Gatlin; Judy Duffield in the pilot’s office; Dennis Ragsdale
and Erin Gerena in the Dryden library; Jim Young from the AFFTC History Office (and
anyone else I may have talked with but have forgotten to mention). Larry Schilling,
Bruce Powers, Rob Binkey, and Bob Kempel were kind enough to read an early draft
and provide technical comments that have improved the book immensely. I’ve also

ix
11
been able to go through the history files of Chester Wolowicz, FRC research engineer,
and found some important information about his analog computer usage. There are
others whom I have talked with while writing this monograph (including several who
had important roles) but who unfortunately chose not to be involved. That was their
choice, and I am sorry that I wasn’t able to get their inputs. Several active participants
have died and their inputs have been collected from friends, co-workers, publications,
and archives. A few have left the area and their whereabouts are unknown. I also want
to thank Carla Thomas and Tony Landis as well as the rest of the staff of the Dryden
Photo Lab for their help in collecting and scanning the photos in the volume; Steve
Lighthill, NASA visual information specialist, for his creative work in laying out the
book; Darlene Lister for her skill at copy editing; and Camilla McArthur for seeing the
book through the publication process.

Although I have written this publication, I feel that it is “our” story, and not just mine.
I wanted to get everyone’s input, but that was just not possible. I feel that those who
are included do provide a very good cross section of the programmers, technicians,
engineers, and pilots who developed and used the analog simulators. This story is
about us and our experiences with the analog flight simulations at the NASA Flight
Research Center.

Gene Waltman, simulation engineer

12
x
vehicles. Indications are that the
Analog Simulations designer of advanced military
Introduction aircraft will be faced with the
present “crop” of problems as well
This is a history of the many aircraft as additional problems as yet
simulations that were implemented during unborn.
the early days at what later became
Dryden Flight Research Center using the Many methods have been devised
early generations of analog and hybrid to study these problems, but
computers. The period to be reviewed is perhaps no single method of
from 1955 to about 1975. This is when analysis has achieved the success
analog computer systems were being used and universal acceptance accorded
at the Flight Research Center (and its the flight simulator as a design and
predecessor, the NACA HSFS) as major research tool. This was made
components of all the aircraft simulations possible by the tremendous ad-
that were mechanized and used in support vances in development of the
of the various flight research programs. analog computer which has been
used to solve any problem that can
In August of 1960, Euclid Holleman and be represented by a differential
Melvin Sadoff presented their report equation.
Simulation Requirements For The Devel-
opment Of Advanced Manned Military Some of the most useful simula-
Aircraft (Citation #269)1 at the Institute tions have involved the pilot in the
of Aeronautical Sciences, Inc. National control loop. A drawing illustrates
Meeting. The following is from the a pilot-operated simulator in the
beginning of that paper: control loop. [See photo E-5636.]
Illustrated is the flow of informa-
Paralleling the large increase in tion from the computer to the pilot
performance capability of present and back to the computer. The pilot
airplanes has been the increase in is the key link closing the control
the problems connected with the loop.
design and operation of these

Fixed-Based
Simulator Dia-
gram (July 1960).
(NASA photo E-
5636)

1 The Citation Number is a reference number assigned to all publications; see the Bibliography.

13
1
NASA has had considerable The following paragraph is from the
experience with a wide variety of Introduction to the paper by Smith,
piloted flight simulators, from Schilling and Wagner:
relatively simple, inexpensive,
fixed-chair types to complex and Simulation at Dryden has devel-
expensive human centrifuges and oped over the past 25 years into an
variable-stability and control integral and essential part of the
airplanes . . . . flight research program. Today,
pilots as well as engineers demand
The report went on to discuss the different that simulation be included in the
forms of piloted simulators that had been flight program. When the manager
used by the research engineers at the FRC of one joint NASA/DOD program
up to that point in time. The FRC Simula- first learned the cost of a simulator,
tion Laboratory (FSL) and its capabilities he asked, ‘What did you do before
play a very important part of the simulator simulators?’ The project pilot
history of this Center. replied. ‘We named a lot of streets
after pilots!’ [Meaning that they
In 1989, J. P. Smith, L. J. Schilling, and died in aircraft accidents.] This
C. A. Wagner wrote the paper: Simula- statement reflects the most impor-
tion at Dryden Flight Research Facility tant value of simulation as it is
from 1957 to 1982, NASA TM 101695 practiced at Dryden: flight safety.
(Citation No. 1689. ). That particular
paper reviews the history of the FRC It did not start out that way, but the role of
Simulation Laboratory, with emphasis simulation has certainly changed during
on the philosophy behind the develop- the years. Today’s simulators are much
ment and use of the simulation labora- more sophisticated and complex and play
tory (i.e., why we did simulations). This a very important role in the job that the
publication will talk about how we went NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
about the process of mechanizing does. The simulation facility has grown
analog and hybrid simulations. The era from a single analog computer in one
of all-digital simulations will be covered office in the main building into an impres-
in yet another publication. sive facility of its own known as the

Crowded Analog
Simulation
Laboratory
(October 1958).
(NASA photo E-
4287)

14
2
Walter C. Williams Research Aircraft caught on until the early ’50s, when the
Integration Facility (RAIF). (See photos development had reached a point where
E-4287 and EC91-661-0052 of the first the operational amplifiers had both the
lab and the current RAIF.) accuracy and stability that the users were
asking for. These qualities were necessary
One of the Best for aircraft simulation due to the long
periods of time used by some of the
The FRC Simulation Laboratory was (and simulation runs.
still is) one of the premier facilities of its
type in the United States. At least that is Analog Computer Courses
how we felt about it. The FSL got started
about the same time that analog comput- I graduated from Michigan Technological
ers were really beginning to be appreci- University in 1957 with a BS in Math-
ated as worthy tools for implementing ematics. Michigan Tech taught its first
real-time aircraft simulations. Not only course in analog computation in my
were airplane manufacturers beginning to senior year, which was 1956/7. This
use analog simulation to help design and course was taught by one of the Math-
study the airplanes they built, but colleges ematics Department professors (he was a
and universities were beginning to teach U.S. Navy Reserve officer and had just
classes in this technology. Analog com- returned from temporary duty at one of
puters had been around for several years. the Navy’s facilities that had analog
Both the Ames and Langley Research computers). He and one of the professors
Centers had analog computer facilities from the Physics Department had spent
before the HSFS simulation laboratory most of the 1956 summer break building
bought its first analog computer. The U.S. two Heath Kit3 analog computers. These
Navy used analog computers during the were used for the classes on analog
World War II. However, the analog computation.
computers of those days never really

Research Aircraft
Integration
Facility (1991).
(NASA photo
EC91-611-005)

2 The photo of the first sim lab was taken in late 1958 and does (more or less) represent the actual lab as it was in those days. Bill
Dana is the pilot sitting in the cockpit, and he started work the day that NASA was officially founded (1 October 1958). Normally,
only two or three people were needed in the lab to run a simulation. This particular photo was staged to give the impression of a very
crowded facility. The peripheral equipment shown in this photo was jammed together, with extra people as a ploy to finagle a larger
room for the FSL analog computers.

3 The Heath Company once manufactured electronic products in kit form that anybody could successfully build, if he or she followed
the instructions. The company no longer sells such kits.

15
3
Unfortunately, I did not take the class on 6:30 a.m. Luckily I was able to coast right
analog computation. At the time it did not into the only gas station in that area. But it
seem like something I would ever use. didn’t open until 8:00 a.m. So, I sat and
Little did I know then that I would spend waited till it opened, got gas, and was late
the next 17 years programming analog to work. What a great way to start a job!
and hybrid computer simulations. Looking back on that day and what
happened to me on the way to work, I can
While I was interviewing for jobs, during see that it was just the first of many
my senior year, I talked to an engineer strange events that were to happen to me
from the NACA facility at Cleveland. while I was a part of the FSL.
This is now the NASA Glenn Research
Center. I really did not feel like working I actually thought that I was being hired to
in Ohio, and when he told me that the program the digital computer that had
NACA had a flight research facility at recently been installed at the NACA
Edwards Air Force Base in California, I HSFS. It was an IBM CPC (Card Pro-
asked him to send my interview papers grammed Calculator). My boss, Ed
and college transcript out there. After all, Videan, upon looking at my college
I had been living in Southern California transcript and noting that I had taken quite
since 1943 and I really preferred to work a few courses in analytical mechanics and
in California. The NACA High-Speed differential equations, thought that I might
Flight Station at Edwards Air Force Base want to work in the brand-new simulation
offered me a job. This wasn’t the best facility. There really wasn’t an opening in
offer I got, but it was one of the best from the digital programming group, but there
any company in California. Most of my was one in the simulation group. So I
other offers came from companies in New agreed to try it out. I have always won-
York and Michigan. I had had enough of dered just what I would be doing now if
the snow and cold weather while attend- circumstances had been different and I
ing Michigan Tech (which is way up in had actually become a digital computer
the Keweenaw Peninsula of Michigan and programmer at that time. I never regretted
averages over 200 inches of snow each being an analog programmer. This job
winter). So I accepted the offer from the was a lot of fun, and besides, several
NACA HSFS, and I went to work on 22 years later, when we bought digital
July 1957. Just over a year later, NASA computers to add to our all-analog
was created, and the NACA HSFS simulations, I did get to program digital
became the NASA Flight Research computers.
Center.
As one of the original simulation pro-
Day 1—NACA HSFS grammers (and the only one who is still
working at Dryden), I feel that writing
I had been living in Fontana, California, down just what we did and how we went
while enrolled at Michigan Tech. The about doing our jobs in those days is an
Saturday before I actually started work for important step in documenting a part of
the NACA, I drove to Edwards Air Force the history of this simulation facility. A lot
Base and spent the day scouting the area, of aviation history has occurred in the
and locating the NACA facilities and Mojave Desert, and simulators have
housing. The following Monday morning contributed to this in a big way. Looking
I drove to Edwards, early in the morning, back on all this, I am quite proud of what
hoping to get there at 7:30, when work we did. It was fun and it was exciting. We
began. I was driving one of my were working with great people, challeng-
granddad’s cars (I did not own one, then), ing equipment, fantastic aircraft, and we
and the fuel gauge did not work. I ran out really looked forward to coming to work
of gas near the community now called every day—and a lot of nights and
Pinon Hills, on highway 138. It was about weekends, too. Unfortunately, we never

4
16
really took the time to write things down how we went about this job of program-
then. We were too busy growing and ming the analog and hybrid computers,
doing the fun stuff, and as typical pro- the various tasks involved in getting the
grammers, we hated to document. So, cockpits set up and running, and a lot of
now, let me take this time to reminisce, related tales that hopefully will illustrate
and at the same time document an impor- the myriad problems encountered along
tant part of the NACA HSFS/NASA FRC the way. Looking back on these times, I
history. can say that programming analog comput-
ers was interesting in spite of all the
The Beginnings of Simulations inherent problems that analog computers
at the FRC and analog simulators exhibited.

A lot of what is covered in this study There were times when each of us felt that
comes from the people who worked at the a part of what we did bordered on “black
HSFS and in the FSL during this period, magic.” The larger simulators, such as the
including some of the engineers and pilots X-15 simulator, seemed to have personali-
whom we worked with while implement- ties of their own. These personalities
ing the various simulations. The entire were frequently described as cantanker-
process of constructing a simulation has ous, malicious, mulish, or other less
undergone many, many changes over the friendly terms. It seemed like each of
years. This is due to the ever-changing these simulations had its own “master.”
technology in the computers, aircraft, and which was usually the original program-
other hardware that is being used. The mer. Generally they behaved themselves
difficult part of collecting the information when that programmer was operating the
for this paper comes about because we (in simulation, but if anyone else had to fill-
the FSL) were not expected to write in when the “master” was out, then the
technical papers on what and how we did ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ nature of the simulation
our jobs. Reports were not required to get showed up and changed its persona to the
promotions, so we didn’t write. I have evil side.
been able to get inputs from many of the
people who were involved with the FSL I’m sure that many a pilot or engineer
during those first years. using one of our simulators felt that we
kept a couple of gremlins hidden away in
This history is not intended to be a re- the back room and let them loose in the
hash of all the research studies that used analog computer labs when no one was
the different analog/hybrid computer around. There were too many unexplain-
mechanizations (or their results). There able incidents that happened during those
were many reports and papers written years. A few of these incidents can
covering that subject matter. A selected seemingly be considered serendipitous,
few of these papers may be briefly but there were many more that can only
mentioned, when appropriate, throughout be attributed to gremlinity.4
this monograph. Following the appendi-
ces is a bibliography of publications of For anyone familiar with the aviation
many different studies that used some history around Edwards, many of the
form of simulation during the time span aircraft that were flown are well known.
of this publication. But there were others, some of which
were only ideas or concepts and were
This history is intended to describe just never built or flown but often simulated.
4 Gremlinity, as used here, is the opposite of serendipity. Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, College
Edition, defines serendipity [a noun coined by Horace Walpole (c. 1754) after his tale The Three Princes of Serendip (Ceylon), who
made such discoveries] as an apparent aptitude for making fortunate discoveries accidentally. The opposite of such an aptitude is
creating unfortunate happenings on purpose. This is what gremlins do. So the word gremlinity, as used here, is an antonym for the
word serendipity.

17
5
We programmed many types of real-time simulations had been implemented using
simulations. It was a constant learning GEDA (Goodyear Electronic Differential
experience for us. Not only were the Analyzer) computers that had been
equations different, from simulation to bought by the Air Force. This was in
simulation, but so too was the equipment 1955. The first NACA HSFS simulation,
we were using. We were always buying on the AFFTC analogs, was a study by
and using the newest stuff. And not just Dick Banner and Al Kuhl, and is dis-
the newest of computers. We were also cussed in an in-house memo entitled “The
involved in developing the interfaces and determination of the directional stability
hardware being used in the cockpits of parameter Cnβ from flight data,” dated 11
those simulations. It really helped to be a March 1955. This was an analog com-
jack-of-all-trades in those days in order to puter investigation of the F-100, and was
get a new simulation up and running. It implemented in early 1955. A copy of this
was very much a group effort, with memo is included in the appendices. This
research engineers, simulation program- study was also reported in NACA RM
mers, and simulation technicians working H55E17B, Flight Experience of Inertia
together to implement each new simula- Coupling in Rolling Maneuvers. (Citation
tion. No. 130), by J. Weil, O. B. Gates, R. D.
Banner, and A. E. Kuhl in July 1955.
The Very First Analog Simulations
The following paragraphs from Dick
The use of analog computers for flight Banner briefly describe this first-ever
simulation had already begun when I analog simulation by anyone at the HSFS:
started work in 1957. The first such

Dick Day at GEDA
Inertia Coupling
Simulation (July
1955). (NASA
photo E-1841)

6
18
I don’t remember the dates, but it grammed” the GEDA analog
was not long after we moved from computer to simulate the flight
the main base to the new facility [a conditions and were struggling with
move that occurred in 1954]. De the high angle-of-attack simulation
Beeler, then Director of Research, when an F-100 crashed somewhere
asked Al Kuhl and me to look at between Lancaster and Rosamond.
the subject of Vertical Tail Loads in
Rolling Pullout maneuvers. He We were asked if we could simulate
apparently had been in contact with the F-100 on the GEDA. We did,
someone at the Air Force Flight and as we did, we discovered that
Test Center and had arranged for Al the lateral-directional period
and me to look at its new analog simulated with the derivatives
equipment in hopes of using it to given us did not match the flight
simulate flight conditions. When Al data. Al took a look at the way that
and I saw the equipment it was just the in-flight directional stability
being uncrated, and the Air Force parameter was obtained and
lieutenant who was assigned to decided it was not correct. He went
work with us didn’t seem to know on to derive a new set of equations,
much about it. It was manufactured which gave us a better method of
by Goodyear and called GEDA obtaining the in-flight directional
(Goodyear Electronic Differential stability parameter, allowing us to
Analyzer). [See photos of this simulate the F-100 flight condi-
equipment (E-1841 and E-2626).] tions.

The Douglas X-3 airplane, before To the best of my knowledge, we
being turned over to us at NACA, were the first at NACA, Edwards,
had undergone the usual Air Force to simulate aircraft motions on a
acceptance testing, which included computer.
rolling pullout maneuvers. I went
to Douglas and got the time history Prior to these analog investigations,
data and the flight derivatives that Hubert Drake and Joseph Weil went to the
were available. Al and I “pro- Langley Research Center to witness a 5

Dick Day with the
GEDA analog
computers (Octo-
ber 1956). (NASA
photo E-2626)

19
7
DOF5 analog simulation for studying roll The usefulness of aircraft motion
coupling. This simulation did not have a simulation was becoming obvious
cockpit, but instead used controlled to many of us at the time Al [Kuhl]
inputs. Subsequently, the NACA urged the and I were working on the GEDA,
AFFTC to buy the GEDA computers. but I had no sense of what it would
become. Langley had much more
The Banner/Kuhl simulation was fol- capability at the time, and Joe Weil
lowed shortly by several studies by Dick went there to work with Ordway
Day, Joe Weil, and Don Reisert. Day and Gates on problems of other aircraft
Weil were investigating roll coupling and similar to those of the F-100. Al
implemented a comprehensive analog and I continued to support their
simulation for that study. These results are simulation studies, sending them
reported in two different publications our GEDA results for the F-100.
written by them: NACA RM H56A06, An The results were published in a
Analog Study of the Relative Importance paper given at a conference at
of Various Factors Affecting Roll Cou- Langley, with all four of us as
pling, and NACA RM H56F08, Correla- authors (Citation 158). After that,
tion of Flight and Analog Investigations Al and I were re-assigned to other
of Roll Coupling. The GEDA analog work, and Dick Day was assigned
computers were also used for additional to the GEDA. I worked a little with
studies, including X-2 studies, analysis, Ed Videan (some kind of a commit-
pilot training, and X-1B reaction-control- tee) to choose the first type of
systems studies. It was some time before simulation equipment we were to
the Air Force had its own engineers use at our facility (REAC or
programming its GEDA computers. The something like that, using ±100
cockpits used for these simulations were volts DC). I even attended classes
very simple set-ups, using spring-loaded at Ames with Ed Videan, Dick
control sticks, voltmeters for instruments, Musick, and Dick Day on program-
and a CRT (cathode ray tube) for an out- ming the equipment. My first
the-window display. (See photos E-1841 simulation (not documented) on the
and E-2626.) The small control stick new equipment was a simple heat
shown in some of these photos is a transfer problem. I did no more
formation stick (as it was called) used in documented aircraft motion simula-
some of the later U. S. bombers during tions after the GEDA experience,
World War II. Dick Day was a B-17 pilot but I remember that Chet Wolowicz
in the 386th Bomb Group, England, worked on aircraft motions simula-
during the war and states that he was the tions on the REAC in those early
first pilot to ever use one of those “forma- days, and we consulted occasion-
tion sticks.” (See the second PA section ally. My recollection is that Dick
for the personal accounts of Don Reisert Day was working mostly on getting
and Dick Day.)6 the pilot into the simulation at that
time. I had at first thought that the
The following paragraph, also from Dick REAC equipment would be useful
Banner, further describes the events of in the coming heat transfer and
those days. aerodynamic heating studies that I

5A DOF (Degree Of Freedom) is a movement up or down, sideways, front or back, or around the pitch, roll, or yaw axis. Five
degrees of freedom are movements in five of these directions but not all six.

6 Sections at the end of the narrative contain PAs of a number of the people who worked with the early analog computers. These
accounts provide individual experiences about what these people did with the computers and are very much a part of this history. I
will identify, at the appropriate places throughout this paper, the personal accounts of interest to the subject being discussed. I
recommend that you take the time to read those accounts at that time.

20
8
had been assigned to, but as it turned first analog, an EAI 16-31R analog
out, I worked mostly with Ray computer. It had 48 amplifiers, 20 of
Jackson on the IBM digital comput- which could be used for integration. It
ers, setting up methods to predict also had a number of multipliers, resolv-
aircraft skin temperatures in flight, ers, potentiometers, and function genera-
and backing out heat transfer data tors. This computer was state-of-the-art
from the measured skin temperatures. and included a removable patch panel for
connecting the many components. Many
The X-2 simulation was the first HSFS of the first generation of analog comput-
implementation that was used for both ers (such as the GEDA and Heath Kits)
research and pilot training. Early-day did not have removable patch panels.
simulations were not completely accepted Patch panels allowed for quick
by the pilots of those days as useful tools. changeover of the analog computers from
Since analog simulations were so new, the one simulation to another. The HSFS
concept of practicing the actual maneuvers bought a second analog computer and
on the ground before they actually flew the installed it in late 1957. It was an EAI
real flight had not been accepted by many of 131R and had about the same complement
the pilots. It was several years before most of equipment as the earlier EAI 31R. (See
of the NACA/NASA pilots really accepted photo E-4967.)
this idea. The older pilots were slowest at
appreciating the value of ground-based The FSL was located in the area now
simulators. The new pilots not only ac- occupied by the Center Director for his
cepted the idea but in some cases insisted on office and conference room on the second
the development of such simulators. The X- floor in the northeast corner of building
15 simulator was the first complete ground- 4800. At that time the hallway along the
based simulation built by the FSL for pilot front row of offices on the second floor
training, mission planning, and research ended at the door to the room shared by
purposes. the FSL and the woman computers.7 The
hallway on the second floor was in the
The First HSFS Analog Computer shape of the letter T, with one hall parallel
to the front of the building and one central
In January of 1957, the FSL installed its hall extending towards the back of the

Electronic Associ-
ates, Inc EAI 31R
(on the left) and
EAI 131R and
Black Box (F-104)
Cockpit (October
1959). (NASA
photo E-4967)

7 See Sheryll Goecke Powers’ Women in Flight Research at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center from 1946 to 1995 (Washington,
DC: NASA Monographs in Aerospace History #6, 1997) for what is meant by the term “women computers.” Dick Day also explains
this term in the Foreword of the present study.

21
9
building. The Center Director’s offices was a simulation programmer, and Dick
were in the middle of the front hallway. was the electronics technician for the
The pilots and other flight operations group. Many of the other offices along the
personnel occupied the offices at the back front hall and the central hall were where
of the building on this floor. the research engineers were located. It
was a very convenient arrangement.
The office I shared (with John P. Smith) Everyone we worked with was only a few
was a small inner office in this larger steps away.
room at the east end of the front hall. My
desk faced the wall and the only window. (For further details, see the personal
This window is currently hidden by a accounts of Ed Videan, Richard Musick,
bookcase in the Director’s Conference and John Smith.)
Room, and can still be seen from the
outside, right next to the front wall of the The First Cockpit
Calibration Hangar (Building 4801). I
could look out this window and see the The FSL had one “black-box” cockpit.
Borax plant in Boron, and I could swivel This was truly a “black box” since that is
around in my chair and look down the the color the wooden cockpit had been
front hall to the other end, which hap- painted. (See photo E-3395A.) It was
pened to be the door into the Research constructed of plywood, with a movable
Library. Out the window, I could see seat, removable instrument panel, a
planes take off and land on the north base hydraulic-powered control stick, and
runway, and I could watch airplanes, such bungee-loaded rudder pedals. This first
as the X-1B, coming in to land on the dry cockpit was built in-house in the model
lakebed. Nowadays, the Data Analysis shop and originally did not have the
Facility (DAF), the Research Aircraft hydraulics. Richard Musick talks about
Integration Facility (RAIF), and the this cockpit in his PA. The hydraulics unit
Shuttle Facility block this view. was also built in-house and installed later
and can be seen in the photos. The pump
The simulation group consisted of Ed was quite loud and was moved to the
Videan, John P. Smith, Dick Musick, and other side of the wall. This just happened
myself. Ed was head of this group. John, to be inside the calibration hangar.
an Army Signal Corps lieutenant detailee, Because the pump was so loud when in

Holleman in
Reaction Control
Cockpit (Black
Box—April 1957).
(NASA photo E-
3395A)

10
22
operation, it tended to annoy the techni- using direct current vacuum tube circuitry
cians who were working there. A couple with a ±100 volt range. These components
of times, after several hours of use, they were quite accurate and linear throughout
would trudge upstairs as a group, and ask their voltage range. The primary component
us to please turn the d--- thing off. in an analog computer was the operational
amplifier. Amplifiers could be used to add,
If you were sitting in the cockpit, it was subtract, change sign, and to integrate or
important not to slouch down in the seat differentiate with respect to time, and many
when the hydraulics were on. On several other things. Analog computers also had
occasions, an electrical power fluctuation many potentiometers (usually just called
caused the pilot’s control stick to slam “pots”) to scale variables or provide
forward or back very quickly. This would constants, multipliers to multiply or divide
also happen if the computer operator two variables, and function generators to
turned the computer mode switch into generate nonlinear functions. With these
Pot-Set8 by mistake. There were physical components it was possible to build an
stops to prevent the control stick from analog computer modal of a set of nonlinear
coming back too far, but if you were differential equations, where time was the
slouched down too far, you could get a independent variable.
very unpleasant kick in a very tender part
of the anatomy. I’m surprised that no one The equations of an aircraft in flight
ever broke a thumb when the hydraulics constitute such a set of equations. It
hiccuped. Simulation was not as danger- consists of the six-degree-of-freedom (6
ous as flying, but it did have its perils. DOF) equations describing a typical
aircraft’s attitudes, accelerations, and
There were several simulators during the velocities that we programmed in imple-
early years that used hydraulic pumps to menting a simulation. In the beginning
provide power for the pilots’ controls. before we had sufficient equipment to
One essential member of those simulator implement full 6 DOF simulations, we
support crews was the building facilities simplified the equations to 3 or 5 DOF.
technician responsible for operating the The outputs of the amplifiers (summers or
hydraulics stand. The simulation techni- integrators) were the calculated accelera-
cians were not allowed to operate the tions, velocities, angles or other param-
hydraulic equipment. We had to call and eters or variables required in solving the
get someone “qualified” in this equipment very complex nonlinear 6DOF equations
to come handle this chore for us. Nowa- of an aircraft. These variables could be
days the simulations use an FSL-devel- recorded on a strip-chart recorder, plotted
oped DC-torque-motor-powered control on an X-Y plotter, or displayed in the
stick and rudder pedals. It is much better cockpit for the pilot to see. The cockpit’s
and quieter (and not so insidious!). The pilot controls were built to provide the
DC-torque-motor-powered controls were required inputs into the equations. Instru-
one of the FSL developments that greatly ments were designed and built to display
advanced simulator technology. They are the calculated variables in a manner
described later in this paper. similar (and usually identical) to what the
pilot would see in the real airplane. Visual
Analog Computer Programming display units provided an out-the-window
view to add even more realism to the
Programming an analog computer was akin simulators.
to building something out of Tinkertoys.
Except that the pieces we used were This was the state-of-the-art in analog
electrical components, which were built simulations at that time. Analog comput-

8 Pot-Set is one of the modes of the analog computer. When in Pot-Set, the operator could adjust the potentiometers used in the
simulation.

23
11
ers were quite linear throughout their difficult, but possible. Generating a
voltage range (± 100 volts) and had an nonlinear function of one variable was
accuracy of about 1 part in 10,000. This usually quite easy to do. Nonlinear
accuracy is certainly lower than what we functions of two variables were a little
get from today’s digital computers and more difficult but still possible. Functions
was one of the drawbacks in using analog of three (or more) variables took a lot of
computers. However, the digital comput- equipment and were usually not imple-
ers being built in those days were not fast mented. Many of the aerodynamic
enough for us to use in real time. Every- coefficients in the equations of motion of
one doing real-time simulations of an aircraft were functions of at least two
airplanes, submarines, nuclear reactors, or variables. The X-15 simulation had over
whatever, used analog computers. There 100 function generators, which was an
were several vendors that marketed order of magnitude greater than the
analog computers. The FSL eventually typical simulation of those days.
bought analogs from three of these
vendors (Electronic Associates Inc., The 48-amplifier analog computer that
Applied Dynamics, Inc., and Comcor was there (when I started in 1957) had
Computer Company). enough components for a fairly complete
three-degrees-of-freedom simulation with
Parallel Computing some nonlinear coefficients or a five-
degrees-of-freedom with few, if any,
One of the advantages of an analog nonlinear functions. (In photo E-4967, the
computer was that all variables were EAI 31-R is the computer on the left.)
being calculated in parallel and in real Consequently, most of my early simula-
time. You could see immediately, when tions were limited to studies using either
you went into the operate mode (as it was the lateral-directional equations or the
called), exactly what was happening. It longitudinal equations. A second analog
was also possible to either speed the time computer was installed shortly after I
frame up or slow it down, depending on arrived. With this new computer we were
just what you were simulating. I don’t able to implement two separate simula-
remember any simulations in which we tions, or we could combine the two
actually slowed the time frame for computers and implement a fairly com-
something that happened so fast it plete 5 DOF simulation with nonlinear
couldn’t be observed or studied in real coefficients and a constant velocity, or a
time. But we did on several occasions limited 6 DOF simulator with only a few
speed the time frame up and run simula- nonlinear coefficients. (In photo E-4967
tions faster. For a number of derivative- the EAI 131R is the computer on the
matching simulations, where either there right.) It wasn’t until we bought a third
was no pilot or the pilot’s inputs had been analog computer (an EAI 231R), which
recorded and could also be speeded up, had about 100 amplifiers and a corre-
we ran the simulation at up to 100 times sponding number of pots, multipliers, and
faster than normal. In fact, a number of function generators, that we were able to
the analog computers that were being implement a complete 6 DOF simulation
marketed had this capability built right with many nonlinear functions.
into the mode control. This feature was
called “repetitive operation” and allowed Cockpit Mechanizations
the outputs to be displayed on a multi-
channel oscilloscope rather than a stan- You have to remember that the aircraft
dard strip-chart recorder. More on this being built and flown then were not as
faster-than-real-time mode of simulation complex as current airplanes, especially
in the following sections. with regard to the number and type of
control surfaces. Rudders, ailerons, and
Generation of nonlinear functions was elevators were the norm. Also, the highly

24
12
complex digital control systems in today’s working with the people in the machine
planes hadn’t been built. The analog and instrumentation shops as they did
computer mechanization for simulating working in the simulation laboratory. (See
control surfaces was not a difficult task, the PAs of Richard Musick, Art Suppona,
although at times it could be frustrating and Charlie Wagner for more on the
because of their unusual nonlinear charac- efforts that went into designing and
teristics. Deadbands, hysteresis,9 limits, building the cockpits.)
and other discontinuities were quite
common in this circuitry on an analog X-1B Simulations
computer simulation. To make matters
worse, the various pieces of hardware in My first two simulations were of the X-
the simulator cockpits had their own 1B, which was still flying in 1957. I also
characteristics, and we had to occasion- did several X-1E simulations. The X-1E is
ally compensate for those characteristics now mounted on a pedestal in front of
in trying to create the characteristics for Building 4800 at Dryden. During this first
the airplane being simulated. This is couple of years I also did simulations of
where the art of analog programming some of the Century-series airplanes,
bordered on “black magic.” This type of including the F-100, F-101, F-102, and F-
analog computer programming was not 104. I can recall implementing at least
taught in the classroom. One learned it on four different F-104 simulators for various
one’s own—by trial and error, usually, or research studies. The F-104 airplanes that
by sharing circuits with the other analog the FRC had were used for both chase and
programmers. research flights for many years.

Most of the difficulties in building a new I had the task of implementing the first
simulator in those days came about in complete 6 DOF simulation in the FSL.
designing and building the hardware and The other two engineers who had been
instruments used in the simulator cock- programming analog simulations, when I
pits. The technology of analog simulation started, had both been promoted to
was so new that it was not possible to buy management and were no longer pro-
off-the-shelf cockpit hardware. We had to gramming simulations. So, I was the last
build or modify everything we used. The one of the very first official simulation
cockpit instruments used in aircraft were group and got to do many new things
not designed to accept the ±100-volt DC first. For a number of years, I was the
analog computer signals as inputs. The only one who got to program simulations
simulation technicians spent a lot of time that used moving-base cockpits. Moving-
developing the instrumentation we used in base simulators were never implemented
our cockpits. The same thing was true for in the FSL. The few that I did were
the control stick (or yoke), rudders and implemented at the Ames Research
throttles, and other controls in the cockpit. Center, and the one big one that we did
Everything we used had to be built in the used the Navy’s centrifuge at Johnsville,
machine and instrument shops downstairs. Pennsylvania (see below). There were a
Fortunately, we had the best in the indus- couple of simulations at Ames for which I
try. These were the same shops building took our own patch panels. They had the
most of the special-purpose instrumenta- same analog computers as we did, and by
tion that went into the planes we were wiring up the panels and taking them with
flying. The equipment they turned out for me, I was able to save a day or two of
us was always first rate and had a lot to do temporary duty (TDY) at another loca-
with why our simulation facility was one tion. I also did several simulations of skin
of the best in the country. The simulation temperature studies using partial differen-
technicians spent almost as much time tial equations.
9 Deadbands and hysteresis were both types of delays or lags.

25
13
Each simulation was assigned to a single changes were necessary to change our
simulation programmer and that person black-box cockpit to the next simulation.
usually “lived” with that simulation from This, of course, did not last.
beginning to end. In the beginning, when
we only had one analog computer, we As the airplanes got more sophisticated, so
took turns. These simulations usually too did their cockpit instrumentation. The
lasted for weeks. During that time other FSL kept up with this by expanding the
programmers could get their simulations number of simulator cockpits being used
programmed and ready to run. Simula- and by buying more analog computers. This
tions were usually assigned on a who’s- allowed us to have several simulations
next basis. operational at one time. More technicians
were hired to help keep up with the task of
Simulator Cockpits developing the cockpit hardware. The
“black-box” wooden cockpits gave way to
Since we only had one cockpit, getting the blue wooden boxes with metal instrument
cockpit changed over to the next airplane panels. These were designed to be even
configuration was frequently the real more flexible and to reduce the time needed
“hurry-up” task in this on-going parade of to change between simulations. The
simulations. Fortunately the pilots and instrument panels were also designed to be
engineers were willing (in the beginning) even more quickly and easily changed. (See
to get by with a generic black-box cock- photos E-4396, E-4550, E-10278, E-11778,
pit. The airplanes that were being flown E-18728, E-18902, and E-26099 for several
had similar instrument panels in the cockpits with different instrument panels as
cockpits. This meant that only minor they evolved over the years.)

F-104 Reaction
Control Simula-
tion—Black-Box
Cockpit (January
1959). (NASA
photo E-4396)

26
14
Boost Simulation
Instrument Panel
(January 1959).
(NASA photo E-
4550)

M2-F1 Simulator
Cockpit (August
1963). (NASA
photo E-10278)

27
15
X-15-3 Instrument
Panel (August
1964). (NASA
photo E-11778)

In addition, the analog computer manu- computer changed over to another simula-
facturers were designing and selling tion.
computers that could be more easily
changed over from simulation to simula- Patch-Panel Wiring Diagrams
tion. Servo set potentiometers coupled
with a paper-tape reader allowed a During the first several years of simula-
programmer to have all the pots (and there tion programming at the FRC, we drew
could be hundreds of these) automatically our patch-panel wiring diagrams on large
set. The process of setting all the pots in a 22-inch drafting paper. These diagrams
simulation was one of the more time- showed just how the many analog compo-
consuming tasks in getting an analog nents were to be connected. The diagrams

General Purpose
Transport Simula-
tor Cockpit
(March 1967).
(NASA photo
E-18728)

28
16
HL-10 Simulator
and Display with
J. Manke (June
1968). (NASA
photo E-18902)

also had the component numbers and more detail in Don Reisert’s PA). I have not
other information used in wiring the patch been able to find a good example of such
panel. We typically used several different patch-panel wiring diagrams prepared by
colored pencils to indicate different anyone who programmed the FSL analogs.
attributes of the computer components. As The Langley mechanization is very similar
the simulations got bigger and bigger, the to the ones we in the FSL prepared and is
single large wiring diagrams soon became included as an example for this reason. It is
too cumbersome to use. At that point, we unfortunate that none of the early wiring
changed to 11x17-inch drafting paper and diagrams that we did were ever archived. In
put these diagrams into binders. Each addition, the many reports that were written
page usually contained a diagram of one about the simulation studies and their
of the main equations of the simulation. results never included any descriptions of
These simulation binders also included the analog mechanizations.
many other pages of data, such as the
settings for the potentiometers, function Ozalid Copy Process
generators, initial conditions, and test
cases. These wiring diagrams were made using
black ink on standard drafting paper that
Sample Wiring Diagram was translucent for copying purposes. The
only copier available in those days was
There is a wiring diagram of a typical the ozalid (blue print) machine in the
analog mechanization in the appendices to reproduction shop. These diagrams
this monograph (Appendix 4 by Robert E. always smelled of the ammonia that was
Andrews). This set of diagrams is itself used in the copy process. We had to make
from an appendix to a Langley Aeronautical the originals without any of the compo-
Laboratory report10 (and is discussed in nent numbers, since we used several

10 This facility is currently called the Langley Research Center (LaRC).

29
17
RPRV Simulator
Cockpit (May
1973). (NASA
photo E-26099)

different colored pencils to indicate Diagramming Templates
different types of information on the
diagrams about the various components For our wiring diagrams, we all used
(amplifiers, multipliers, etc.). The various plastic templates that were usually
numbers and IDs were written on the provided free by the analog computer
copies afterwards. In addition, the forms manufacturers. The accompanying photo
we used to write down the pot settings (EC00-0088-1) shows several templates.
were usually typed, on translucent copy These templates evolved over the years as
paper using a special orange copy paper the computers themselves changed. The
that was turned so that the orange coating analog computer sales representatives
was facing the back of the original. This seemed to have an endless supply of these
forced the orange coating to be deposited templates. We all had our own favorite
on the back of the page being typed. This template(s), and later on when hybrid/
page, with black type on the front and the digital components were added to the
orange type on the back, would then be computers, we usually had to have
copied with the ozalid machines. The several—one for the analog components,
orange coating was a waxy crayon-like one for the hybrid components, and
substance and wore off after a number of frequently another for the special-purpose
copies, but this process made for a very basic electrical components (i.e., resistors,
good copy. That is the way things were capacitors, etc.). These templates were
back then. always disappearing from our desks, for
they were also fancied by others around
A couple of whiffs of a binder full of new the Center. We had to lock them up along
ozalid copies was better (as a quick wake- with our slide rules.
up) than a cup of coffee, but too much
exposure caused headaches. That ammo- In those early days of analog simulation,
nia smell would linger for many weeks. In all the research engineers and all the
addition, the ozalid copies faded with age. analog programmers were still using slide
Just another couple of nuisances of those rules. The FSL even bought several of the
early days of simulation. 20-inch slide rules for use in the computer

30
18
Drawing templates
used for analog
wiring diagrams.
(NASA photo
EC00-0088-1)

labs. Fortunately the typical engineer ordered array. An amplifier used as a
would never buy one of these long slide summer or integrator had from four to
rules for personal use, so we never had eight input holes (on the patch board) and
the problem of their disappearing from a corresponding number of output holes.
the labs. They were too obvious and well Each piece of equipment (for example,
known. The calculations needed for the amplifier, pot, multiplier, function genera-
pots (i.e., four-digit accuracy) were tor) had an adequate number of input and
possible with the longer slide rules, output holes. Each piece of equipment had
although most of us usually just went with its own area on the patch panel. These
what we got from our standard 10-inch areas were silk-screened using different
slide rules. colors to designate the types of compo-
nent and the input and output holes.
Patch Panels and Patch Cords Programming an analog computer in-
cluded the task of wiring the patch panel.
All of the larger analog computers we
worked with used patch cords to intercon- The patch cords came in an assortment of
nect the many electronic components. A lengths. These varied from as short as 6
typical simulation took hundreds of patch inches (including the plug at each end) to
cords to connect all the pieces. Fortu- as long as 30 inches. The lengths were
nately, the analog computers (and espe- color-coded. There were jumper plugs of
cially the 100-volt systems) used a patch several styles to connect two adjacent
board system for this process. All of the holes in either the vertical or horizontal
component inputs and outputs were direction. The spacings between holes in
connected to the patch board in an these two directions were not the same

31
19
and required different plugs. The amplifi- plotters).
ers that could be used as a summer or an
integrator also had a special jumper plug The technicians spent many an hour
that would make the necessary selection making cables for us, and on a few
of feedback components. When used as a occasions some of the programmers
summer, the feedback component was a would chip in and help. Generally our
precision resistor, and when used as an soldering skills were not quite good
integrator, the feedback component was a enough, but we could certainly measure
precision capacitor. Special jumper plugs and cut the wires. Much of the wire and
were used to select the appropriate many of the connectors had to be bought,
components. at least in the beginning, because the
warehouse did not stock the sort of stuff
The patch cables and jumper plugs were we needed for the analog computers. This
quite expensive and used gold plating on was also true for all the precision resis-
the contacts and shielded ends of the tors, capacitors, and other such supplies
plugs. This reduced the introduction or that we were using to interface the
propagation of noise. Signal noise was not instruments and control sticks in the
tolerated and analog computers were cockpits to our simulations.
designed to reduce signal noise as much
as possible. Extensive shielding was Bob Kempel, one of the FRC research
required on all signals. Patch cords were engineers (who also learned to program
all shielded. The patch panel and patch- analog computers while working for the
panel bay were also designed to help Air Force at Edwards) recalls the follow-
eliminate noise and the propagation of ing from his experiences:
noise. Shielding also reduced crosstalk of
signals from adjacent cables. The comput- The Midnight Patcher
ers were also designed to separate the DC
and AC signals. The few AC wires were Analog computer mechanizations
kept in separate bundles and kept away were very precarious, in that the
from the DC parameter signals to help computer mechanization consisted
reduce any cross-talk pick-up. of a myriad of various length wires
on a front patch panel, which
For those simulations that required two or linked the various analog compo-
more analog computers, the patch panels nents. To the uninitiated, this panel
had many (hundreds of) holes for the looked like multicolored spaghetti.
purpose of interconnecting analog com- A complex simulation patch panel
puter components together. Cables of was typically a real mess. Once a
these interconnections (called trunks) simulation was mechanized and
linked the analog computers together. It thoroughly checked, the wires in
was also possible to slave the operational the patch panel were not to be
control of one or more analog computers touched by anyone but the simula-
to a master computer. This allowed an tion engineer. Analog mechaniza-
operator to run a simulation from a single tions were required to be statically
master analog computer. There were and dynamically checked quite
separate cables between the analog frequently (like daily) due to the
computers just for this purpose of slaving problem of occasional component
operational control. A separate and remote failure. If a component failed, the
control box was usually mounted in each simulation could be mildly or
cockpit so that the pilots could start and grossly invalid depending on the
stop the simulations. There were other criticality of that particular compo-
trunks connecting the computer and the nent.
cockpits and running to the various output
recorders (strip-chart recorders and X-Y It was always suspected that we

32
20
had a “midnight patcher” due to panel was accidentally set down on some
some of the problems with patch small item on a table, such as a pencil. It
panels found by some simulation was also possible to dislodge a cord just
engineers on their next shift. The by moving one or more of them aside
“midnight patcher” being a real or when looking through the mass of wires
mythical person who would either on a patch board. We eventually had
pull or rearrange a wire on a patch- special panel holders built to hold the
panel. These problems were panels when they were not mounted in the
typically unusual and unexplained, patch bay of the analog computer. This
ones that could only be attributed to helped to eliminate (for the most part) any
the “midnight patcher.” [See Bob problems caused by the “midnight
Kempel’s PA.] patcher.” However, a thorough check of
the backside of a patch panel was a
One might also attribute these “midnight prudent thing to do before inserting the
patcher” attacks to our gremlins! panel in the patch panel bay of an analog
computer. For simulations such as the X-
Along the same line, there was one 15, where the panels were only removed
research engineer (whose name is best left for maintenance and trouble-shooting,
unmentioned) who had the annoying habit patch cords became dislodged by pawing
of changing the position of one of the through the large number of cords on a
many switches on one of the analog panel. There was always a shortage of the
computers in the FSL. He usually longer cords, and many times the shorter
switched it back before he left the lab. But cords were stretched so tight that they
not always. I guess he thought he was almost came loose by themselves. When
never seen doing this, but he was. So, in we were checking the backside of a wired
an attempt to discourage this practice, one panel, it helped to keep a pair of needle-
of the unused switches (on the X-15 nose pliers handy to pull the loose patch
analogs) was wired up with a big battery, cords back into place.
a resistor, and a fan. When the switch was
thrown, the resistor was connected to the Room Temperature
battery and burnt up. The fan came on and
blew the smoke out though the front of the Room temperature was also an important
analog, where this engineer was standing. factor for the analog computers. The 100-
Everyone in the FSL knew about the volt vacuum-tube analog computers
switch, but no one else. It was several generated a lot of heat and required
days before the engineer actually threw special air-conditioning (A/C). The
this particular switch. The smoke must computers were mounted on top of A/C
have really shaken him up, because it was plenums with cold air blown into the
a long time before he ever did this again. bottom of the computer racks and the
Someone must have squealed, because he warm air collected out the top and re-
eventually returned to his old habit of turned to the A/C unit. Photo E-4967
randomly switching switches. We tried shows the early A/C ducting, before we
never to leave him alone in the FSL lab. had raised floors. Initially the A/C unit
Fortunately he left the FRC to work at one was hung from the ceiling. When the X-
of the other NASA centers. This was 15 analogs were installed, the A/C unit
before smoke detectors or sprinklers were was mounted on the roof above the lab,
installed throughout the building. with large air ducts between the compres-
sors and the air plenums. The sim lab was
Patch panels allowed the patch cords to always quite cold, especially on Monday
extend behind the panel in order to make mornings. Monday morning was not a
contact with the connector pins located in good time to schedule any important
the panel bay. This made it possible for simulation runs. The computer racks took
these patch cords to be dislodged if the several hours to reach a good, stable

21
33
temperature after having been turned off Amplifiers and Integrators
over the weekend. For the larger simula-
tions (such as the X-15 with over 400 The different operations of an amplifier
amplifiers), it usually took all Monday were determined by the relationship of input
morning before the equipment rack and feedback components (normally,
temperatures stabilized and the simulation resistors or capacitors). For addition and
was ready for use. The integrators tended subtraction, both the input and feedback
to drift before they were “warmed up” and components were resistors. When we
had to be continually adjusted. Each needed an integrator, the components used
amplifier/integrator had a pot and meter were input resistors and feedback capaci-
on the front of the unit just for this tors. These resistors and capacitors were
purpose. quite expensive because of their construc-
tion to assure their accuracy. They were
Fuses kept in a temperature-controlled oven inside
the computer to help maintain their specifi-
The simulator facilities were quite sensi- cations. Differentiation (input capacitor and
tive to power outages. Thunderstorms in feedback resistor) was a no-no on an analog
the area caused occasional power outages. computer due to the tendency of the
There were only a few high-power lines amplifiers to magnify any low-level noise in
coming into the lab, and they was no the amplifier, which tended to mask the
filtering for power fluctuations. The X-15 input signals. Integration had the effect of
simulator was very fragile in this respect. reducing such noise.
The X-15 simulation had over 100
function generators, 80 of which were The gain of an amplifier was determined by
specially built diode-function generators the ratio of the feedback component to the
(DFGs). This particular type of function input component. If both were resistors of
generator was used with a special type of equal value, the gain was one. If the two
servo multiplier called a “pot-padder” to components were of different values, the
generate functions of two variables. Each gain of the amplifier was determined by the
of these pot-padders had five multiplier ratio: Rf/Ri, where Rf is the value of the
“pots,” each pot having 15 equally spaced feedback resistor and Ri is the value of the
taps (or junctions). Each tap also had a input resistor. Most of the amplifiers of that
fuse to protect the servo pot. The 80 era had input and feedback resistors that
DFGs were connected to taps on the pot- provided 1 and 10 gains, respectively. Some
padders. Each DFG also had 15 fuses. of the analog computers had 5-gain inputs.
There were several occasions, after a It was also possible to wire other compo-
particular hard hit (usually lightning) on nents for different gains. We did this so
the incoming power lines, when hundreds often that the sim lab technicians were
of these fuses would blow. Replacing the always making special patchable compo-
blown fuses was a time-consuming job. nents that we could use when we needed
There were several occasions when the some unusual gains for a particular simula-
simulation pilot would join in and help. tion. These patchable components were just
In his PA, Bill Dana talks about doing high-quality resistors or capacitors with
this. It wasn’t always obvious when patch cord connectors soldered and shielded
looking at a fuse if it was blown or not. such that we could patch them in series with
Each fuse had to be removed and checked the standard analog computer components.
with an ohmmeter. 80 DFGs times 15
fuses each equalled 1,200 total fuses to be Black Boxes
checked! In addition, each of the 1,200
pots had to be set using a jeweler’s In addition to the patchable resistors and
screwdriver. The pots were that small. capacitors, the technicians were frequently
This was state-of-the-art analog computer called upon to build us a black box. These
equipment. Makes you wonder! black boxes were standard electronic

34
22
Consoles E and F
of the X-15 Simu-
lator Analog
Computer (Sep-
tember 1960).
(NASA photo
E-5808)

Console D of the
X-15 Simulator
Analog Computer
(September 1960).
(NASA photo
E-5809)

equipment boxes, of various sizes, contain- The early-generation analogs did not have
ing some special circuit or component that many components to use in generating
was not standard equipment on the analog’s nonlinearities such as limits or dead-bands.
patch panel. The multi-wafer stepping We were frequently called upon to mecha-
switches that were used for the boost (four- nize these nonlinearities using some
stage rocket) simulation that we did with the unusual circuitry built into a black box. The
Johnsville centrifuge (see below) is an box would then be patched into the patch
example of one type of black box that was panel using standard analog computer patch
built. These black boxes used very high- cords. Shielding and grounding were
quality resistors, capacitors, diodes, and always important considerations, and the
other components so as to maintain the black-box circuits were always built with
accuracy and precision of the analog these factors in mind. Many hours were
simulation. Most of these components were spent designing and building these black
ordered especially for this purpose, since boxes. There were several simulations that
the warehouse did not normally stock those would not have been completely imple-
high-quality components. The Sim Lab, mented if we hadn’t been able to use one
over the years, always had a well-stocked or more of our special black boxes. The
supply of those special high-quality compo- photos of the X-15 analog computers (E-
nents. They were essential to the operation 5808 and E-5809) show several black
of the FSL. boxes patched into the patch panels.

23
35
Because of the way we took turns imple- house, which conditioned the signals
menting simulations, there was often an going to the cockpit instruments. The
idle analog computer that could be used to black-box circuits were really the begin-
develop and test these special black-box ning of this in-house development of
circuits. I spent many an hour doing just cockpit-instrumentation signal-condition-
this. This is when we tuned and perfected ing computers. The Sim Lab technicians
these unusual circuits. Most of these and engineers were quite ingenious in
circuits were used to simulate portions of developing the many special components
the mechanical and hydraulic controls and and interfaces we needed to implement
surfaces in the airplanes of those days. We our simulations. The PAs of Richard
also implemented a number of transfer Musick and Charlie Wagner describe
functions, which involved the use of the some of these efforts.
S-plane technology.11 The downside of all
this is that many analog computer compo- Visual Displays
nents were devoted to the cockpits, and
consequently not available to be used in Almost every cockpit had some type of
the mechanization of the model. This did visual display, in addition to the normal
have an impact on the size of the model. instruments. During the early days, this
We were constantly taking analog compo- display was a large CRT with one or more
nents from the equations-of-motion lines drawn that represented the horizon
mechanization and using them in getting or the airplane or a visual representation
the cockpits on-line. Many simulations of one or more of the calculated param-
grew to almost twice the number of eters—such as angle of attack, sideslip
analog components to order to get all angle, or roll angle. Since we did not have
parts of the cockpits and visual displays an actual 8-ball,12 we many times tried to
ready to use. Nowadays, the approach is represent the parameters (normally
to simply add another digital computer. displayed on an 8-ball) with lines on the
Much better, in many ways. scope. These lines moved as the param-
eters changed. On many occasions the
Cockpit Instrumentation display tried to represent a target or the
horizon, depending on the particular study
Not only did we have to simulate unusual that was mechanized. We spent many
aircraft controls, but we also frequently hours working the equations to provide a
had to simulate unusual cockpit instru- display that the research engineer wanted.
mentation and displays. Airplane cockpits (See photos E-1841, E-10591, E-12942,
were really beginning to evolve in those and E-8100 for several cockpits that have
days. We also had to develop special CRT display units.) The out-the-window
circuitry to simulate this cockpit instru- displays were an attempt to provide
mentation and these displays. For several something more than just a set of instru-
years we did not have the luxury of being ments for the pilots to look at. Dick Day
able to use the actual instruments. We had is the one who initially came up with this
to develop “look-a-likes” that simulated idea and helped to develop the first CRT
the actual instruments. Many of the display.
instruments were driven directly from the
analog computer’s amplifiers. This was In some simulations the visual display was
before the days of the special interface an important part of the study. Dwain Deets,
computers that were later developed in- in his PA, talks about a CRT display of a

11 This term refers to the use of Fourier transforms to convert differential equations to algebraic expressions that are more easily
calculated.

12 An 8-ball is the colloquial term for the attitude indicators used in the airplanes of those days. They provide the pilot an indication of
the airplane’s pitch angle, roll angle, heading angle, and maybe even angles of attack and sideslip.

36
24
Paul Loschke in a
Simulation
Cockpit (April
1965). (NASA
photo E-12942)

Milt Thompson in
the Paresev
Simulation Cock-
pit (May 1962).
(NASA photo
E-8100)

side-view of an airplane that showed a mounted in the instrument panel (see photo E-
canard control surface and its location as 11778) rather than using a large oscilloscope
determined by the simulation that was above the instrument panel. A small special-
mechanized using one of the FSL portable purpose computer was developed under
analog computers. contract to generate the display. During the
development of the database used by this
For the X-15 simulator, one of the various special-purpose computer, the larger CRT was
displays that were provided over the years used for the display.
was an energy-management display. This
display provided a heart-shaped view on a In his PA, Charlie Wagner talks about several
CRT that outlined the area where the X-15 of the display units that he was personally
could glide to at all times during the flight. involved with. I recommend you take the time
For the X-15-3, this display was a small scope to read his PA now, for he describes many of

25
37
the problems we had with the different available on the analog computers in the
visual display units that were used with the FSL. It was quite useful for a certain class of
analog simulators. Charlie spent many problems, especially those that did not have a
hours fussing with this hardware, and his human in the loop. The analog solution was
recollections are a good accounting of the speeded up by a factor of 100. This was
troubles we had with this display hardware. accomplished by using a 0.01 Microfarad
feedback capacitor in the integrators instead of
These visual displays got more sophisticated the usual 1.0 Microfarad capacitor. The output
(and expensive) as the FSL grew. However, results were displayed (usually) on an oscillo-
there were many times when they were not scope. The computer was cycled between
enough. Many of the pilots always complained OPERATE and RESET modes 100 times
about inadequate visual displays. The out-the- faster than normal. If a solution normally took
window cues are particularly important during ten seconds in real time, in Rep Op it would
the landing phase of a flight. However, every take 0.1 seconds. There was special circuitry in
visual display we had did not have sufficient the analog computers that caused the computer
resolution to allow us to adequately simulate to repetitively switch back and forth from
this part of a flight simulator, especially for RESET to OPERATE modes. The repetitive
those simulations that were mechanized for the recalculation of the solution allowed the user
entire flight regime of an aircraft. Only those to see immediately (on the oscilloscope) the
few special landing simulations that we did (in effects of parameter changes. A solution could
which the altitude range was limited to the be attained very quickly. The strip-chart
very last portions of an approach and landing) recorders of those days could not be used
had the resolution necessary to provide a during the fast Rep Op runs, as they could not
reasonable visual presentation. Until digital keep up with the data. However, once a
computers came along, the analog systems we solution had been reached, the time constant
built or bought were just not good enough. The would be returned to one and the data plotted
approach taken at the FRC was to use an on strip-chart recorders in real time. The
airplane that had similar landing characteristics different capacitors used in the feedback
and have the pilot fly that vehicle to practice circuitry of the integrators were built into the
landings. The F-104 was often used for landing analog computer’s integrators. We did not
practice for the X-15 and several of the lifting have to use external capacitors for this
bodies, for example. purpose.

In 1964, Milt Thompson made a presenta- Rep Op was used in the FSL for derivative
tion to the Society of Experimental Test matching—a way of analyzing post-flight
Pilots Symposium. This paper was entitled data of specific in-flight maneuvers to
“General Review of Piloting Problems determine the aircraft’s derivatives. Neil
Encountered During Simulation and Flights Matheny, a research engineer, suggested the
of the X-15” (Citation 412). Since so much use of Rep Op for derivative matching at
of this paper is directly related, it is included the FRC in 1966. He received an award for
in its entirety in the appendices. It provides this suggestion. Neil was an active user of
a very good presentation of some of the the portable analog computers for a number
problems the X-15 pilots had because of the of small simulations that he programmed in
deficiencies of the X-15 simulator—and not his office. He was involved with the early
just the lack of good visual cues, but in derivative-matching activities at the FRC
other areas of the simulation. I recommend and recommended using the analog com-
that you take the time, now, to read that puter Rep Op capability to help in the
paper. determination of aircraft derivatives. Larry
Caw was the FSL programmer who was
Repetitive Operation Simulations assigned to work with Matheny to imple-
ment his first Rep-Op derivative-matching
Repetitive operation (or Rep Op, as it was programs. Initially this was implemented
usually called) was one of the features using one of the TR-48 portable analog

38
26
computers. Later on, derivative matching simulated with pulses or time-varying
was done using one of the EAI 231-RV inputs using function generators. These
analog computers. Theron Manning, John were input after the program was put into
Perry, Larry Caw, and other FSL analog OPERATE mode and the equations were
programmers also got involved in these solved, but with time being 100 times faster
Rep-Op derivative-matching simulations. than normal. The coefficients, for a particu-
lar flight condition, could be varied until the
Neil Matheny had been involved with a high-speed solution matched actual flight
similar real-time analog simulation in which recordings of the same variables using the
a tape recording was used to provide the same inputs. In this way the actual vehicle
pilot’s inputs. This short time history, derivatives could be determined. The
recorded from an actual flight, was origi- desired solution was plotted on a transpar-
nally copied onto the (magnetic) tape many ent overlay that was attached to the front of
times. The tape was read and used as input the oscilloscope. The appropriate param-
to an analog implementation of the eters being calculated were then displayed
airplane’s equations of motion, over and with the proper scaling, and the two solu-
over, but in real time. The derivatives used tions were compared (by looking at the two
in the simulation were changed between traces). Differences between the desired
runs until the output of the simulation solution and the calculated solution were
matched those recorded in real time during easy to see and correct. Many of the
flights. The magnetic tape was subsequently derivatives used in the airplane simulations
changed to a continuous loop, with only one were obtained from wind-tunnel studies.
time-history set of inputs. This process The wind-tunnel data had its limitations,
eliminated having to rewind the original due to the inherent inaccuracies of such
tape and speeded up the process of trying to research facilities. Rep Op was a way of
match the derivatives. The use of Rep Op fine-tuning the wind-tunnel data to get it to
was an outgrowth of the original process agree with the real aircraft’s data. These
that Neil was using. Since there were no derivative matching simulations were
pilots in the loop, the transition to Rep Op eventually phased out when parameter
was fairly easy. Derivative matching was a estimation algorithms were developed for a
perfect example of the type of simulations digital computer.13
that Rep Op was designed for.
Rep Op simulations did not require a
For derivative matching, the equations of cockpit and could be run by one person.
motion—frequently only 5 DOF—were Chester Wolowicz and Roxanne Yancey
implemented. The pilot’s inputs were were two more of the FRC folk who spent

13The following two paragraphs about parameter estimation (also known as parameter identification) are from Lane E. Wallace,
Flights of Discovery: 50 Years at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (Washington, DC: NASA SP-4309, 1996), pp. 56-57:

Once the X-15 flew, researchers at Dryden used the data collected during flight to understand better the relationship of
theory, wind-tunnel data, and the realities of actual flight. During the early years of the X-15 program, comparisons of flight
data with those from wind tunnels had to be done by traditional methods that were time-consuming and not fully consistent.

Moreover, the methods in use at that time were unable to provide values for many dynamic aircraft responses in flight. In
1966 Dryden researchers Lawrence W. Taylor, Jr., and Kenneth W. Iliff began developing a more automated technique for
obtaining numerical values for aircraft behavior. This involved theoretical contributions resulting in computer programs
(later improved by Richard E. Maine) for manipulating multiple differential equations to obtain the unknown values of the
parameters that define aircraft behavior. Called parameter identification, this technique allowed researchers to determine
precisely the differences between values predicted from wind tunnel data and those actually encountered in flight. Such
precision is essential for understanding and fixing undesirable or dangerous flight characteristics. This significant flight test
and flight research technique has been used on over 50 other aircraft at Dryden, including all of the lifting bodies, the XB-
70, the SR-71, the Space Shuttles, and the X-29. This technique has spread to virtually all flight test organizations through-
out the world and has been used to enhance the safety, flight procedures, and control system designs of most current
supersonic aircraft as well as to improve flight simulators, submarines, economic models, and even biomedical models.

27
39
many an hour sitting in front of one of the digital computers of that time. A
the FSL EAI 231R analog computers number of the research engineers
and running derivative-matching cases. appreciated the interactive and analo-
This type of simulation was used for gous relation between the electronic
many different airplanes over the years. analog model and the real-world sys-
The notes I have (copies of some of the tem, and they preferred to implement
files of Chester Wolowicz) contain Rep and run their own simulation studies. To
Op simulation mechanizations for the see the results being calculated in
X-15 and XB-70. These were just two parallel and in real time was something
of the many vehicles for which Rep Op most of them had never experienced
was used. The report NASA TN D-4578 before. They could see the effects of
(Preliminary Flight Evaluation of the any changes they made and could do so
Stability and Control Derivatives and immediately. They could also determine
Dynamic Characteristics of the if the equations they had programmed
Unaugmented XB-70-1 Airplane Includ- were in fact correct and accurately
ing Comparisons with Predictions by represented the real physical system.
Chester H. Wolowicz, Larry W. Struts,
Glenn B. Gilyard, and Neil W. Matheny, Testing
May 1968, [Citation No. 528]) de-
scribes the results of the use of Rep Op Each analog implementation had to be
for derivative matching purposes for the tested before it was turned over to the
XB-70. This report references another engineers for their studies. We used
report by John M. Rampy and Donald both static and dynamic tests to check
T. Berry of the AFFTC: FTC-TDR-64-8 out the simulation. Thereafter we
(Determination of Stability Derivatives usually used the dynamic test(s) for
From Flight Test Data By Means Of daily checkouts.
High Speed Repetitive Operation
Analog Matching, 1964). This AFFTC Static testing consisted of calculating
report provides an excellent overview the results of the equations, at one point
of the Rep Op process involved. in time, with known input values. This
was done using just a pencil, paper, and
The portable analog computers that a calculator (or slide rule). These test
were loaned out for the engineers to use cases were then used with the analog
in their own offices had Rep Op capa- computer set-up. Each integrator on the
bility. The TR-48s were used for such analog computers had the capability of
studies, with the outputs being dis- having a known initial value applied
played on a small CRT. These were (known as an Initial Condition or IC).
fairly simple simulations with few or no This value allowed for establishment of
nonlinear functions. It sometimes took preset conditions at the start of each
longer to get the simulation pro- run. These were usually needed for
grammed than it took to run through all variables such as altitude, velocity, X/Y
the cases under study. coordinates, and other parameters that
were not zero at the start of a run. We
Not all the research engineers were could also use the IC pots to provide
willing to do their own programming. known inputs for many of the param-
For those engineers, the FSL would do eters as a part of the static test cases.
whatever was needed to get their For those parameters that were usually
simulations operational, including provided by the pilots’ controls, etc., we
programming and helping to run the just used pots to provide an equivalent
various cases. However, the nature of input. With these known inputs, we
the analog computers provided an would then calculate the expected
interactive awareness with the problem accelerations (i.e., roll, pitch, and yaw
being solved that was not available with accelerations, alpha and beta accelera-

40
28
tions,14 etc.). We would then read out the possible, as they tended to increase the
corresponding values as calculated by the noise level correspondingly. They were
implemented equations. If we were usually the first ones to overload when
getting the correct results, we probably any analog component malfunctioned.
had the patch board patched correctly and
the pots set right. Sometimes it took Each of the amplifiers in an analog
several different static test cases to really computer had an alarm that went off
verify the correctness of the implementa- when the component was overloaded (i.e.,
tion. Since the test cases were not actually loaded over 100 volts). These alarms
run, we could use parameter values of any were annoying and really got your
magnitude. The values selected were attention. They were there to warn of
really to check out the circuits and did not equipment failure but could also be
have to be realistic flight values. It was triggered when maximum values (and
common to set most of the parameters to corresponding voltages) were exceeded.
the maximum, which usually resulted in a The use of maximum values during static
better test of the components and the testing was a good way to ferret out such
circuits. Analog computer components possible problems in scaling.
seemed to have the most problems when
calculated values were near either zero or Dynamic testing was used to further test
the maximums. These conditions tended the correctness of the implementation.
to show up any scaling deficiencies. It was frequently used to determine the
condition of the analog computer.
Scaling Because of the structure of the analog
computer, there were no diagnostics (as
The process of converting the actual there were with a digital computer) to
calculated parameters’ units of measure- determine if all the components were
ments to the analog computers ±100 working correctly. It was impractical to
voltage range was called scaling. The test every piece of equipment in an
maximum expected values of each of the analog computer every day. Generally if
variables used in an analog simulation a particular piece of equipment failed,
had to be estimated and then converted to the dynamic check case would not be
the ±100 voltage range. This was just one correct. The amplifiers had to be
of the steps in getting a simulation set up. balanced almost daily (remember these
Some variables were frequently scaled at were vacuum tube devices) in the
a maximum (or minimum) value that was mornings (after having been turned off
much greater (or much less) than would all night), and sometimes they had to be
actually be calculated. These types of balanced several times before they
parameters could easily overload the would stabilize enough that we could
amplifiers used for calculation. Dynamic use the simulator. The integrators were
pressure was one such parameter that we the worst culprits, since the slightest
always had trouble with since the maxi- offset in just one integrator could result
mum dynamic pressure (usually) calcu- in incorrect dynamic tests.
lated was often 50 to 100 times less than
possible. To get a voltage reading that The early analog computers required the
was usable and could be displayed on programmer to make the appropriate
recorders or some other display, the changes to the implementation to run such
analog circuit calculating dynamic static and dynamic tests. The later-
pressure usually had a gain of 100 or generation computers, with the paper tape
more. High gains like this were avoided if set-up, allowed for these test cases to be

14 “Alpha” is engineering shorthand for angle of attack. “Beta” means sideslip. Accelerations in alpha are increases in the change of
the angle of the relative wind with respect to the line of the aircraft’s fuselage or airfoils. Those in beta are increases in the rate of the
aircraft’s sideward motion.

29
41
set up and run by the computer itself. The particular feature or characteristic of a
programmer still had to establish the test particular airplane. Not all the simulators
case(s) initially and then program the were for pilot training or flight planning.
computer to repeat the tests on a regular And in a few cases our research pilots
basis. This really speeded up the process were never even asked to fly the simula-
of getting an analog computer changed tions. In addition, many of the research
over between simulations. engineers we worked with were pilots and
were quite adept at flying the simulations
Analog Programmers—No More themselves. We in the simulation branch
had the task of implementing the models
Looking back on those simulations and correctly. This is one of the reasons that
comparing them to today’s, I can see that we did not need to have degrees in
there are differences that are not obvious aerodynamics. Having knowledge in
to those who were not a part of both eras. aerodynamics certainly helped, though. It
In the early days, those of us doing the also helped to have an understanding of
programming were just analog program- basic electrical circuits. For some of us,
mers. Since at many times we did not these were learned on the job. Program-
have enough equipment to mechanize a ming the analog computer was a full-time
complete 6 DOF model, we were forced job, and we took great pride in doing this
to implement something less. The equa- job.
tions changed from simulation to simula-
tion. The chore of mechanizing a fairly This changed when simulation became
complete simulation was the full-time job all-digital. By then, after the Cyber 73
of the analog programmer and not the (the FRC’s digital mainframe computer)
research engineer. After the FSL got its was operational, the need for a quick
own analog computer and hired program- change-over from simulator to simulator
mers, the research engineers quit doing was a requirement, and the digital com-
their own programming. They were quite puter provided this capability quite well.
willing to have us to do that job. Also, the Cyber was large enough that a
single complete set of the equations of
Early on, the analog programmers were motion could be implemented and used
not usually responsible for the model (i.e., for nearly every model. Once this model
the equations of motion being imple- was proven to be correct, it was then used
mented). The research engineers doing the for all simulations. Many of the earlier
study knew which set of equations they sets of equations used small-angle ap-
wanted to use and were responsible for proximations and a flat earth. The new
the correctness of the model. The analog model changed that and was necessary for
programmer was responsible for program- the newer aircraft being flown at the FRC.
ming the equations correctly. The same The major difference between airplane
thing is true of all digital computer simulators was the set of derivatives and
programs. One has to prove that what has the physical characteristics unique to each
been programmed is both doing the right plane. This factor — along with the
job and doing the job right—the purposes, increasing sophistication of the aircraft
respectively, of verification and validation and especially their onboard systems,
testing. Back then, the research engineer including their control systems — led to
was responsible for the completeness and the desirability of the simulator program-
correctness of the model, while the analog mers having a greater understanding of
programmer was responsible for the aerodynamics and control-system design.
completeness and correctness of the The era of the analog programmer was
implementation of the model. over, replaced by the simulation engineer.
Analog computers were demoted to
Many of these early simulations were cockpit interface, and this too eventually
really research studies investigating some phased out as this method of interface was

42
30
transferred to the in-house-built interface Simulation’s Firsts—Christmas
units. Buffet

By this time, most of the first analog As all of this would suggest, analog
programmers had either left or had simulation development was a group effort
become hybrid computer programmers. involving all of the Sim Lab folk. There
Computer maintenance and cockpit set-up was a lot of cooperation, team spirit, and
activities were being performed by willingness to help out among those of us
contractors. The need to quickly switch in that group. And not just at work, but
from one simulator to another and the also after work. Initially, many of us were
automation that had been developed to bachelors, with similar outside interests.
make this happen had also brought about Softball, golf, fishing and backpacking in
a change in the entire development the High Sierras, basketball, tennis, and
process of a new simulation. Just like the bowling are some of the many activities
differences between the early automobile that we engaged in. The Sim Lab has the
and today’s high-tech vehicles, the hands- distinction of starting a number of Dryden
on ease of fixing and maintaining firsts. For example, it was the Sim Lab
yesterday’s hardware has been replaced that started an annual Christmas buffet.
with highly sophisticated automation We were the first office at Dryden that had
equipment and methods. a sit-down potluck Christmas buffet to
which spouses and children were invited
The same thing that happened to analog to participate. This was a very special
programming also happened to the event and later duplicated by other offices
simulator cockpits. Early on, almost within Dryden.
everything that went into simulator
cockpits was built in-house. The techni- Bi-Weekly Poker Game
cians’ job evolved in much the same way
as the analog programmers’ changed. The The guys in the FSL started a bi-weekly
technicians and the analog programmers poker game that was very popular
spent many hours developing, testing, and amongst not just us in the FSL but others
programming the instruments, pilots’ around the Center. I am sure there were
controls, and anything else that went into other similar poker games involving
the simulator cockpits. I have many specific groups of workers from the
memories working with all the techni- Center, but I don’t recall any of them
cians during these early days. The esprit being open to anyone who wanted to
de corps was great. Nowadays, in the participate. Those other games were, for
RAIF, there are as many as six different the most part, closed to outsiders. Our
full-time simulations in operational status games were originally on Thursday nights,
at any one time. I suspect that there are which was when we got paid. These bi-
times when the people working on any weekly poker nights began in 1959 at the
one simulator hardly know the folks in the large apartment that one of the FSL
next lab. There is a lot of demand for technicians (Serge Kostrakopf) and I
simulators for the many aircraft projects shared in Lancaster. After work, Serge and
being flown at the Dryden Flight Re- I would go to one of the local liquor shops
search Center. There has been tremendous and buy a pony keg of beer and drag this
progress in the state-of-the-art in simula- and a large washtub and lots of ice up the
tion development. There has been a back stairs to our apartment. Later, just
corresponding increase in the size of the before the local pizza joint closed, we
staff to build, maintain, and operate all would call and order several large pizzas
these simulators. It is extremely difficult, (with everything) to go with our beer.
if not impossible, to be proficient in all There were really only two places in those
aspects of today’s aircraft simulator days to buy pizza in Lancaster. Barones,
development and operations. on West Avenue I, was the best in

31
43
Lancaster and that is where we got ours. simulators. We did investigate this technol-
The poker games later moved to Friday ogy, though. One such investigation (if you
nights and were hosted by other FSL folk. can call it that) involved several of the FRC
The games eventually stopped when the engineers and a couple of the FSL folk (Jim
fellow that had been hosting the games for Samuels and Dick Musick). They actually
the last couple of years left and went to scheduled a trip to the Disneyland Park in
work in Los Angeles. By then, almost all of Anaheim to investigate a ride that was there
us were married with children and had other (in those days); it had a number of flying-
interests that interfered with playing poker. saucer-type ground-effects vehicles for
The stakes were not high (penny, nickel, people to ride—much like bumper cars or
and dime chips) and rarely did anyone win boats. If the person sitting in the seat leaned
or lose more than a couple of bucks. I’m in one direction, the saucer would move in
sure this factor was a big reason for the that direction. There was a skirt around the
popularity of the games. But, it was fun saucer that held pressurized air, which kept
while it lasted. the saucer off the ground—like ground-
effect boats. Leaning caused some air to
Deep Sea Fishing Trips leak from under the skirt and propelled the
saucer in the opposite direction. This air
It was also the Sim Lab folk who started the cushion was provided from a large air
annual Dryden deep-sea fishing trips. Dick chamber under the surface of the saucer.
Musick did most of the organizing and The surface had a large number of air ducts
scheduling. The first several ocean fishing that would open when the saucer was
trips were out of San Diego, south into the directly overhead. The ducts were small
waters offshore from Mexico, and were enough and close enough together that the
primarily for tuna. Later on, these fishing saucer was always over enough of them,
trips went out of Oceanside, San Pedro, and thereby providing an adequate amount of
then Oxnard. There was one particular boat pressurized air to support the saucer. This
and captain that we really liked. He kept technology was actually considered as
moving his base of operation from one port something viable for moving-base simula-
to another. So we did, too. He really worked tors! I remember thinking at the time that
hard to find us schools of fish. In addition, this trip was just a boondoggle. The group
his boat and crew were the nicest of all that went got a very extensive tour includ-
those we rented, and his wife and daughter ing a lot of behind-the-scenes looks at a
ran an excellent galley. We went with this number of the rides and attractions at
particular boat for several years, until he Disneyland.
sold his boat and retired. That was when the
fishing trips changed from looking for tuna Another (unfulfilled) venture into moving-
to bottom fishing around the Channel base simulators was the acquisition of a 6
Islands. Fishing for tuna was exciting if we DOF cockpit that had been surplused an
got into some good-sized schools. But we airline companies’ simulation facilities. This
never really had very good luck finding was a typical two-seat passenger transport
those larger schools of tuna. The bottom cockpit. It included the hydraulic actuators
fishing trips were more productive—and and everything needed (except the comput-
became quite popular. We had no trouble ers) to mechanize a 6 DOF moving-base
getting the 45 people needed to reserve a simulator. It was installed in the hangar
nice-sized all-day boat. These fishing trips lean-to that later housed the F-8 Digital fly-
were later organized and scheduled by the By-Wire (DFBW) iron-bird simulator.
Dryden Activities Committee and are still However, this piece of equipment was
scheduled about once a year. never used. For some reason, the decision to
actually do something with this cockpit was
Moving-base Simulators never made. We rarely mechanized simula-
tions of airplanes with that type of cockpit
The FSL never had any moving-base (two-seat transports) in those days. The

44
32
cockpit was eventually surplused and sat in of simulators, such as the Lunar Landing
the AFFTC surplus lot for many years Research Vehicle (LLRV), several of the
before someone bought it for its scrap portable analogs were needed because all
metal. the larger analogs were in use. The TR-
10/20 analogs did not have trunk connec-
Portable Analog Computers tions on their patch panels. Connecting
them to some other analog(s) was done
The FSL had several analog computers with a lot of very long patch cords, which
that were portable and were meant to be were usually made up just for that reason.
loaned out for research engineers to use in The portable analogs used a different
their own offices or labs. The ones we had patch cord than the larger analogs, so the
were from EAI (TR-10s, TR-20s, TR-48s cords between the two different comput-
and TR-58s). These were all ±10-volt ers had to have different ends. Cords of
transistorized systems. The first ones we this style could not be bought and had to
bought were the EAI TR-10s, and they be made in-house by the FSL technicians.
originally did not have removable patch These particular simulations had the
panels. The components were built with appearance of a big ball of spaghetti. It’s a
patch cord holes right on the front face of wonder they ever worked. The simulation
each component. These components programmer usually spent a lot of time
plugged into the cabinet in a rack similar each morning in check-out to make sure
to a standard instrument rack. The stan- there were no loose connections.
dard components included amplifiers,
pots, multipliers, and diode function Larry Caw’s personal account contains a
generators. The TR-10 and TR-20 cabi- description of the LLRV simulation. This
nets held about three dozen components simulator used several of the portable 10-
each. These components were inter- volt analog computers with one or more
changeable, so it was possible to change of the 100-volt EAI analogs.
the configuration to meet the needs of the
user. Each TR-20 had a removable patch The function generators in the TR-10/20
panel, which was also reconfigurable, just analog computers required a special shelf-
like the components behind it. The TR- like attachment to be used when setting
48s had patch panels that could not be the pots for the nonlinear function. The
reconfigured. The numbers in the model DFG was first removed from the rack and
number indicated the approximate number the shelf installed. The DFG unit was then
of amplifiers available in the analog mounted in the shelf. This exposed the
computer. We also bought small portable pots (mounted on the side of the unit and
strip-chart recorders and flat-bed plotters normally hidden from view) that were
to be used with these portable analogs. used to generate the nonlinear function.
Research engineers used these portables These pots were set using a screwdriver.
for small studies and generally did all After all the pots were set, the DFG unit
their own programming. We in the FSL was removed from the shelf, the shelf
taught courses on how to program the removed from the computer, and the DFG
portable analogs. These portable analogs unit re-installed in the computer. How’s
became quite popular and were constantly that for convenience?
on loan.

Generally the more amplifiers one had to
use, the bigger or more sophisticated the
simulation became. On several occasions
we used these portable computers to add
to the larger ±100-volt analogs for those
few simulations when we needed just a
few more amplifiers or such. For a couple

45
33
NASA for the X-15 Program for pilot
Four-Stage Boost- training, and by the Dyna-Soar pilots for
Vehicle Simulation verification studies of piloted control during
launch.
(1958-1959)
The purpose of this particular simulation
Of all the simulations that I worked on, the was to determine if a human could manu-
four-stage boost-vehicle simulation was ally control a launch vehicle and put it into
easily the most interesting. It wasn’t the an Earth orbit while being subjected to the
biggest or even the longest-running simula- high G forces that occurred during such a
tion, and it wasn’t even an airplane. Maybe launch. The alternative method was to use
that is why I remember it so well. I actually computers to control the vehicle during the
implemented this simulation four different launch and injection into orbit.
times over a period of about two years. The
third time was on one of the first analog The equations of motion that we imple-
computers ever built. This computer, as I mented were the 6 degrees of freedom
remember, was built for the U.S. Navy (DOF) equations of a four-stage rocket
during World War II. I got to use it in the launch vehicle, such as the Apollo launch
spring of 1959. It was connected to a large vehicle. The longitudinal equations were
centrifuge that provided motion with mechanized completely, since the piloting
appropriate velocities and accelerations. task was concerned primarily with the
This facility was at the Navy Aviation longitudinal modes. The lateral-directional
Medical Laboratory (a part of the Naval Air equations were simplified with constant
Development Center) in Johnsville, Penn- aerodynamic characteristics. We also
sylvania. This is only a few miles north of implemented a two-stage version, which
Philadelphia. The centrifuge was capable of was flown by all the pilots. The first two
providing accelerations in excess of what mechanizations were done using the EAI
the human pilot could endure. Our launch 31R and EAI 131R analog computers (the
profiles normally went to just over seven Gs ones shown in photo E-4967). The last
(seven times the force of gravity at sea mechanization used the newer EAI-231R
level) and simulated the acceleration forces analog computer (which was later used as
experienced by a four-stage rocket-powered one of the X-15 analog computers; see
launch vehicle during lift-off and entry into photo E-5810).
an orbit around the earth. During the latter
days of our simulation, this acceleration was The pilot’s cockpit was actually a couch on
doubled (to over 14 Gs) and flown at this which the pilot lay, with the instrument
level of acceleration by most of the pilots. panel overhead. (See photo E-4548.) This
This was the same centrifuge used by positioning was intended to provide the

Components of
the X-15 Simula-
tor Analog Com-
puter (September
1960). The EAI-
23IR has the chair
in front of it.
(NASA photo
E-5810)

46
34
Boost Simulation
Couch, Panel,
Controls (in
FSL—April 1959).
(NASA photo
E-4548)

actual orientation that would be experienced erations that would be experienced during
in the real vehicle. The Mercury, Gemini, an actual launch, the pilots used a side-arm
Apollo, and Shuttle vehicles all had this controller. The right-hand controller pro-
orientation for the pilots during launch. The vided 3 DOF (roll, pitch, and yaw). The
pilots lay on their backs with the G forces launch vehicle was configured with
almost perpendicular into their chests. Our gimbaled rocket engines to provide the
simulator was built to provide this same control inputs needed by the pilots to steer
configuration. This was quite different from the vehicle along a predetermined path that,
all other simulations we had ever built in if followed accurately, would put the vehicle
the FSL. In addition, because of the accel- into the correct orbit.

Boost Simulation
Side-Arm Control-
ler (July 1959).
(NASA photo
E-4725)

35
47
Three-Axis Side-Arm Controller participated in this centrifuge simulation.
From the FRC, there were Neil Armstrong,
The simulator cockpit had a three-axis side- Stan Butchart, and Navy pilot Forrest
arm controller that was designed and built Peterson. The other pilots were Bob Innis
in-house at the FRC. This controller was from the NASA Ames Research Center
definitely one-of-a-kind. Photo E-4725 (ARC) in Mountain View, California, Bill
shows this unit. It was mostly aluminum Alford from the NASA Langley Research
and had been made in the machine shop Center in Hampton, Virginia, and Captains
downstairs. Again, these guys in the shop Walter Daniels and Robert Rushworth from
did an outstanding job in building this the Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC) at
controller. Dick Musick spent many hours Edwards Air Force Base, California. Each
working with them to get it in its final form. pilot made a series of runs in the centrifuge
and had his own form-fitting foam insert.
There were seven different pilots who Each insert had to be installed in the seat

Centrifuge Seat
Insert with Ed
Holleman, Randy
Chambers, and
Forrest Petersen
(July 1959).
(NASA photo
E-4661)

Centrifuge Gon-
dola (July 1959).
(NASA photo
E-4662)

48
36
Boost Program
photo (September
1959). (NASA
photo E-4870)

Boost Program
Centrifuge Seat
(October 1959).
(NASA photo
E-4990)

in the centrifuge’s gondola before the pilot evenings before all the pilots finished their
could “fly.” This seat-exchange process allotment of runs. (See photos E-4661, E-
took a while. We worked many days and 4662, E-4870, E-4990, and E-5040.)

37
49
Neil Armstrong in
the Boost Pro-
gram Restraint
Straps (December
1959). (NASA
photo E-5040)

The first two fixed-based simulations at tion runs. We did have intercom, but this
the FRC were in preparation before we just wasn’t the same as being there when
went to Johnsville, Pennsylvania. This is the centrifuge was in motion. I did get to
where we got everything ready, including see the centrifuge in action, though. Our
fine tuning the equations, the instrument scheduled time period for using the
panel and related switches and controls, centrifuge followed a study by the Ames
the pre-programmed flight paths (for both Research Center. That study took longer
the four- and two-stage versions), and than planned, because bad weather
building the three-axis side-arm controller prevented the Ames group from flying. Its
to be used in the centrifuge. investigation involved comparison
between actual flight and simulated flight
The simulation lab at Johnsville was over and required the pilots to make a run or
half a mile from the centrifuge building. series of runs in the centrifuge and to then
Since I had to be in the computer lab fly those same pre-planned flights in an
during the actual runs, I never really had a actual airplane. I did get to watch several
front-row seat during any of our simula- of those ARC “flights” in the centrifuge.

38
50
Compared to our study, their centrifuge using patch cords that varied in length
runs were boring. from about 2 feet up to 50 feet. Each
amplifier was built on a metal plate
Anomalies/Aborts measuring about 8 inches by 19 inches.
These amplifiers and all the other compo-
There were times that I was glad that I nents were mounted in standard-equip-
wasn’t in the centrifuge building. During ment 19-inch racks (of that era), which
each simulation run, I had to do the actual were about 12 feet high. A ladder was a
staging. This was done using two multi- necessary piece of equipment during the
wafer switches that changed the many process of wiring up a simulation. There
parameters needing to be altered for each were actually two of these computers. I
of the four stages. I would stand in front believe the one we used was named
of the computer console and watch a Typhoon. The other one was named
timer. At the appropriate staging times I Cyclone, and the two computers had
would switch to the next stage. In addi- originally had been identical in configura-
tion, I had also to input random flight tion. The Typhoon had just recently been
anomalies. These anomalies were wind- modernized and a patch panel had been
shear, time-delays for rocket ignition, or added. Now, all the components could be
other related inputs. Many of these connected using a patch panel and patch
happened during the first-stage burn or at cords very similar to the EAI analog
staging between first and second stages. computers we had in the FSL. The patch
These were designed to see how the pilots panels were not silk-screened to help
could cope with such anomalies while identify the location of the components,
under the stress of piloting the vehicle which made patching an interesting
chore—kind of like putting a jigsaw
On several occasions, the pilots lost puzzle together that has nothing printed
control and the vehicle would deviate off on the pieces. Several of the programmers
course. When this happened, the gondola from the facility had been assigned to help
would hit one of the physical or electrical us, and they did all of the patching. It was
stops that were built in to prevent dam- our simulation, but it was their computer
age. The centrifuge would immediately and we were not really allowed to touch
shut down, the gondola would “snap the hardware, which was probably a good
back” to its home position, slow down, thing.
and then stop. This “home” position was
with the pilot sitting up rather than with Everything else in the Typhoon computer
the pilot lying on his back. This immedi- was as originally built, with the exception
ate rotation of the pilot seat to an upright of a couple of recently added high-
position was quite a jolt to the pilots. precision resolvers. (A resolver was a
Fortunately they were well restrained in multiplier where one input was an angle
the seat with wide web belts over their and the output product was the sine [or
legs and torso, and their helmets were cosine] of that angle multiplied by a
restrained to prevent sudden movement. second input.) A ladder was still needed to
All this restraint was necessary because of set the many pots used in the simulations.
the high accelerations during the typical Actually, there were two complete sets of
run in the centrifuge. Nevertheless, I was pots, which could be switched (all at
the one they blamed when they lost once) to allow two different sets of
control. parameters. This feature made for a quick
switchover to a second set of coefficients.
Patch-Panel Update We never used this feature for our simula-
tion.
The old analog computer that we used did
not originally have a patch panel. All The amplifiers were ±100-volt units, but
components were originally connected were capable of over ±150 volts. Each

39
51
amplifier had a small red light that The fourth time we implemented this
came on when the output voltage simulation, back in the FSL, the step-
exceeded about 120 volts. On almost ping switches had been rebuilt and used
every run, a number of these lights an electric stepping motor to switch
would come on. In spite of this, the positions. Analog circuits to generate
computer seemed to be working OK. I and measure time and provide the
don’t remember ever re-scaling any of necessary switch-motor inputs replaced
the parameters to eliminate these the manual switching that I had previ-
overloads. We just worked with the ously done. But I still had to be there to
scale factors we had used during the throw the other switches.
earlier fixed-base simulations. The
local programmers seemed to take this Most of my memories of this particular
in stride as an everyday experience. simulation have to do with the long
Apparently they only re-scaled if the hours I had to put in. There were seven
outputs exceeded 150 volts most of the pilots, but only one of me. I had to be in
time. The circuitry that was needed to the simulation lab during all of their
do the coordinate transformation for the runs. Videan, Musick, Bill Andrews,
centrifuge motions and forces was and Ed Holleman were normally in the
mechanized by the local programmers sim lab with me, but they also got to go
and was generally the same for each watch the centrifuge runs. Towards the
simulation that used the centrifuge. I end of our stay, those of us in the sim
suspect that a few of the red lights lab were working 12- and 16-hour work
(amplifier overloads) were from the shifts. We got up, ate breakfast, went to
amplifiers in this circuitry. They work, worked the morning shift, ate
weren’t worried, so we just accepted it lunch at the base cafeteria, worked the
too. afternoon shift, ate dinner (fortunately
we had to go out, since the base cafete-
Rocket Staging ria was not open for dinner), came back
and worked another shift. Then we went
Switching of equation parameters (for back to our motel rooms, slept, and
each rocket stage) was accomplished started it all over again—day after day
using two specially built manual after day, including several Saturdays
stepping switches. These switches were and Sundays. The pilots came and went
ganged four-position rotary devices, according to their individual schedules.
mounted inside a small metal box with They actually got bored between their
the appropriate number of plug holes turns in the simulator.
for the patch cords. During each simu-
lation run, I watched a timer and turned Ames Delay
by hand the two stepping switches by
one position at each of the correct The Johnsville facility had never previ-
staging times. This changed the param- ously scheduled two back-to-back analog
eters (by switching pots) that needed to simulations that both required the centri-
be changed for the next stage. This fuge. We learned the hard way. The
included such parameters as weight, change-over period between when the
thrust, fuel flow, inertias, and stability Ames folk left and the time we could
derivatives to correspond to the particu- really get running was almost a week.
lar stage. There were about a dozen This time was spent in reprogramming
individual wafers (switches) in each the analog computer and in re-configur-
box. I also had a number of other ing the cockpit with a new seat and
switches to throw to introduce anoma- instrument panel. We never knew from
lies such as windshear, ignition delays, day to day just when Ames was going to
and thrust misalignments. be finished, so we spent almost two
weeks, day by day, waiting for our chance

52
40
to get started. Once we got started, we if they were going to be on travel for
worked our tails off to make up for this extended periods. Since Ed Videan and I
lost time. Getting the cockpit changed were there for 7 weeks, we were getting
over took a lot more time than reprogram- only $9.00 a day for that last week. The
ming the analog. We had everything ready motel room I was sharing with Ed
in the analog computer lab. It only took a Holleman cost me $8.00 (plus tax) a
couple of days to check out the simulation night. I essentially lived on my own
and have it ready for when the cockpit salary. I actually had to move out of my
was ready. We had lots of help from the apartment in Lancaster so that I could
folks in the simulation lab. afford to make that trip. Dick Musick and
Ed Videan stayed at the BOQ at the
At the time, we were so busy getting Navy’s Willow Grove Station, just down
ready that I never really gave much the street from the Howard Johnson’s
thought to the analog computers we were Motel the rest of us roomed at. They only
using. They were at least 15 years old, at paid about $3.00 a night for their quarters.
the time, and still in use. The amplifiers That was a Navy Reserve training facility.
were chopper stabilized, and these chop- I thought about doing this, but chose not
pers were no longer being built. (The to. It was too much like my old college
chopper was a device that helped to keep dorm—small rooms, central bathroom
the amplifier stabilized. The vacuum tube facilities, etc. Maybe if I had been mar-
amplifiers of those days would “drift” ried and had kids (like Ed and Dick) I
[deviate] due to the heat they gener- might have been more inclined to stay
ated.15) The lab had two full-time techni- there. The motel room was satisfactory
cians who had the job of rebuilding these with me.
choppers. That is essentially all they did.
They would disassemble and replace worn Government travel in those days was not
out parts with new parts that they manu- something to look forward to. On top of
factured in their own shop! They couldn’t this, the finance officer (John Yoshida) at
even buy these parts. They had to make the FRC would only send me one week’s
whatever was needed. Amazing! We kept travel advance at a time. Getting these
the analog computers we bought for the checks (and my paychecks) cashed back
X-15 simulation for about 10 years, and there was quite a chore. These were both
we thought those analogs were really old government checks. Yet, I have never had
and out of date when we finally surplused so much trouble getting government
that equipment. checks cashed as there, just north of
Philadelphia—the founding seat of our
TDY Pay nation’s government. Who would have
thought it? Fortunately, Forrest Peterson
In addition to the seven pilots, there were had just recently gotten an American
six more of us, all involved with the Express (AE) travel credit card. (AE had
simulation in some way, all on travel started its credit card service only the year
status. Travel expenses in those days were before.) We were able to use this to get
quite meager. We were allowed $12.00 a checks cashed at the motel office. I was
day per diem (for both lodging and meals) so impressed with this, I sent away for my
for the first two weeks, $11.00 a day for very own AE credit card as soon as I got
the next two weeks, $10.00 a day for the home from this trip. This was in 1959 and
following two weeks, and $9.00 a day credit cards such as Diners, AE, and Carte
thereafter. I guess the government ex- Blanc were new and not yet accepted all
pected those on TDY to rent an apartment over. I used my AE card for both personal

15 For a complete technical definition of analog computer amplifier drift, see the book by Rajko Tomovic and Walter J. Karplus, High
Speed Analog Computers (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,1962), or any of the other sources on analog computers that are
referenced in that book.

41
53
and government travel purposes for many two occasions. We also got to know and
years—until I retired 34 years later. become friends with many of the folks at
the lab. The doctor assigned to our
The Fun Stuff—Before the Hard project, Randy Chambers, invited us all
Work over to his house one Sunday afternoon
for an outdoor barbecue dinner.
In spite of these long hours and meager
travel expenses, all of us who were there The Old Mill
still talk about this simulation. It was
unique for the FRC. It was fun (at times). There was one particular restaurant, in the
While we were waiting for Ames to get little community of Hatboro, only a
through, we did have some time to do couple of miles south of the lab, that we
some sightseeing. We soon found all the all got to know quite well. This restaurant
really great eating places in the area, was named The Old Mill. That is exactly
including Bookbinders (famous for great what it had been. It was a converted grain
seafood) in Philadelphia. Otto’s, a Ger- mill, with a water wheel, on a small
man-style beer Haus, with an outdoor creek. There was a large glassed porch
patio, for use when the weather was nice, overlooking the creek that was very
was also very popular. Otto’s served large pleasant, especially for Sunday brunch.
steins of a variety of good German beers. The main dinning hall was on the ground
Great goulash and Wienerschnitzel, too. floor, which was where the large grinding
Most of us stayed at a Howard Johnson’s wheels had been located. The ceiling
that had its own cafe. We ate breakfast beams were large and at just the right
there almost every morning, and after height to hit your head, if you didn’t
several weeks of this, the waitresses duck. This restaurant had just started a
always had a large table already set up Thursday evening all-you-can-eat buffet
when we showed up for breakfast. dinner the first week we were back there.
We quickly made this buffet our favorite
There was a par three pitch-and-putt golf place for Thursday’s dinner. The food was
course that we were able to play in the both excellent and varied. Several of the
evenings during the first couple of weeks folk from the lab joined us on more than
we were there, before the extra long work one occasion. So, too, did the FRC bosses
shifts began. We were back there over who happened to be on travel to Head-
the Memorial Day holiday, and because quarters and stopped by to see the centri-
the base was closed that day, Dick fuge runs. I remember De hitting his head
Musick and I drove over to Valley Forge on the overhead beams at least twice the
and spent most of the day looking around first time he went there with us.
there. Interesting! Especially since I later
found out that a number of my distant We also had many other meals, and
forefathers (second generation Waltmans, drinks, at the Old Mill. In fact the bar-
including the Waltman I am descended tender, who also happened to be the
from) were at Valley Forge with George owner, was nice enough to drive over and
Washington during the Revolutionary pick us up for one last dinner before we
War. One Sunday, several of us rode the left. We had the FRC C-47 with us and
local commuter train into Philadelphia had finished up our work on a Thursday.
and sat through a double-header at the We were intending to fly out on Friday
Phillies’ baseball stadium. morning. We had already turned in the
two GSA cars we were using and had no
Several of the bosses, who happened to other transportation. Dick Musick had
be on travel in the area, stopped and already left for New Jersey to pick up his
visited with us to see the centrifuge family for the drive home. There were
simulation. I remember Deputy Center still eight of us left, sitting around our
Chief De Beeler stopping by on at least motel rooms that Thursday evening,

54
42
when Roger Barnicki got the idea to call individually fitted foam inserts in the
the owner and ask him if he would give pilots’ seats.
us a ride to his Old Mill for one last
buffet. And, by golly, he did. But then we Toward the end of the simulation runs, we
had spent so much money there I guess began to experiment with higher G-force
he felt he owed us this courtesy. runs. We multiplied the signals that
determined the G force the pilot experi-
If you ask any one of us who participated enced by two. This meant that the pilots
in this particular simulation just what we would be subjected to twice the G forces
remember most about the area, I’m quite of the normal launch. Their bodies were
sure that all will mention the Old Mill. It not exactly prone, but with a 15-degree
was definitely one of the bright spots in heads-up tilt. At the higher G forces, the
our stay at Johnsville. I heard later that blood drained out of their heads due to
our last dinner was also the last time the this 15-degree angle, and their field of
buffet was served. It’s hard to believe that view became quite narrow (like tunnel
the 10-15 people in our Thursday night vision). I remember Neil Armstrong
dinner groups were that critical in the life saying that at 14+ Gs, the only instrument
of these dinners. We certainly enjoyed he could still see clearly was the one
them. So, in spite of the many long hours meter that provided the error signal they
in the sim lab, we did have a few pleasant used to guide the vehicle. This meter was
times. We still talk about this trip, even in the center of the instrument panel. (See
now, whenever we happen to see each photo E-4550.)
other.
Error Signal Mechanization
The Simulation
We used a standard ILS (Instrument
The group from the FRC consisted of Ed Landing System) meter to display error
(Euclid) Holleman and Bill Andrews, signals in two directions. If the pilot flew
who were the research engineers conduct- the correct (launch to orbit) path, the error
ing the study, Ed Videan, Dick Musick signals would be zero. The “correct path”
and myself (Gene Waltman) from the had been determined during the early
FRC Simulation Laboratory, Roger simulation studies at the FSL. This path
Barnicki from the pilot’s equipment was either the desired flight path, or the
office, and Neil Armstrong, Stan Butchart desired pitch angle. We used a special
and Forrest Peterson, the FRC pilots. function generator to provide this signal
as input during the simulation runs. This
Ed Videan and I flew out a week early to function generator was actually an 11-
help get the simulation ready. Dick inch by 17-inch X-Y flatbed plotter. The
Musick drove his own car with his family required trace was first plotted on paper
and left them with relatives in New (desired flight path or desired pitch angle
Jersey. The others from the FRC flew out versus velocity) and then this trace was
in its C-47. They also used this plane to covered with a special “ink” that was
go to the Langley Research Center and conductive. This ink was a silver paint,
pick up the foam inserts that the pilots and the pen was replaced with an electri-
used in the gondola’s cockpit. These cal pickup that would sense an electrical
inserts were of a Styrofoam-type plastic, signal in the ink. This signal was applied
light but cumbersome because of their to the metallic ink trace through connec-
size. They provided extra protection tors attached with a metallic solder-like
during the high-G runs. I doubt, if we adhesive. Vehicle velocity as computed
were to do this simulation over, that these during the simulation runs was used to
foam inserts would be used today. Mod- drive the plotter arm (in the X direction),
ern fighter-type airplanes subject pilots to and the pen would follow the ink trace in
similar G forces, and they do not use the Y (or vertical) direction. This signal

43
55
was then used to generate the error signal believe we mechanized a simple autopilot
for the ILS instrument the pilots used that flew the mission for him so that he
during each flight. What a kludge! did not have to do that task. He went
along just for the ride. Gutsy! But he was
Looking back on what we had to do to get right. There were no problems. I would
this special function generator opera- have liked to have seen that run.
tional, along with the black-box switches
used for manual staging, and those really We had lots of problems with the weather.
old NADC analogs, I am reminded of There were several violent thunderstorms
those old cartoons of the Rube Goldberg that came through the area during our
contraptions. 16 It is amazing that there centrifuge runs. There was quite a lot of
was any repeatability in simulations of lightning, and there were several power
this nature. Another simulation, of similar outages. On these occasions, we had to
Rube Goldberg construction, that comes shut down rather than chance an outage
to mind is the lunar lander simulation that while the centrifuge was moving. The few
Larry Caw put together several years times we had a power outage during a
later. The LLRV simulation was by far the run, the centrifuge would just coast to a
most Rube-Goldberg-like that I can stop, with the gondola in the rest position.
remember being mechanized at the FSL. There were no back-up power generators.
If Erector Sets and Tinkertoys were your We just had to wait till the storms moved
kind of toys when you were growing up, on. The gondola did not always return to
then analog computers were the thing for the staging dock after a power outage.
you. This is what made analog computers When this happened, the technicians in
fun to program. It helped to be some- the centrifuge lab would have to bring out
thing of a masochist, too. I feel sorry for a special platform to get the pilot out of
(digital) computer programmers who the cockpit.
have never had the chance to program an
analog computer. Since I did both while There were several reports or papers
at the FRC, I can easily say that program- written about this simulation. The paper
ming a digital computer is boring com- entitled “Utilization of the Pilot in the
pared to programming an analog com- Launch and Injection of a Multistage
puter. They are as different as Tinkertoys Orbital Vehicle” (Citation 289) by Euclid
and Pick-Up Sticks. Holleman, Neil Armstrong, and William
Andrews, presented at the IAS 28th
Upside-Down Centrifuge Run Annual Meeting in New York City in
January 1960, is the most complete. One
Not only did many of the pilots fly the of the photos (E-4870) was taken during
high-G runs, but so too did a representa- the centrifuge study. The photo (E-4548)
tive from the company that had designed of the couch was taken in the FSL during
and manufactured the restraint system the last fixed-base simulation, which
that was used to secure the pilots in the followed the centrifuge study.
cockpit seat. These straps can be seen in
photo E-5040. This manufacturer’s The couch used for the fixed-based
representative not only flew the simula- simulations was built of plywood in the
tion in the normal manner, but he also had FRC model shop. Roger Barnicki had one
the gondola re-positioned such that the G of the AFFTC’s shops do the upholstery
force would be in the opposite direc- for us—a really nifty tuck-and-roll royal
tion—with his body being forced out blue Naugahyde upholstery job that
against the straps. He was that sure the would have made those who ever had
straps would support him at 14+ Gs. I similar upholstery in their old ’50s classic

16 Rube Goldberg was a cartoonist known for his comical drawings of very complex machines that did very simple tasks. For more
information and examples of his artwork, see the web site: http://www.rube-goldberg.com/

56
44
hot-rods drool with envy. We kept this river from Juarez, Mexico. Booze bought
couch long after the boost simulations there and brought back into the U.S. did
were over. Some employees would not have liquor taxes added to the total
occasionally spend their lunch breaks price, providing you did not exceed a
sacked out on it. Great on-the-job anti- limit of two bottles per person. Conse-
stress therapy. I wonder where it went. It quently, we all were requested to help the
just disappeared one day. pilots carry back as much booze as we
were allowed to carry. I don’t remember
The trip home from Johnsville was which pilot paid for the whiskey, but all
another interesting experience in itself. eight of us marched across the footbridge
Two whole days, flying west, in the C-47. to a small liquor shop in Juarez, bought
We refueled in Indianapolis, the first day, our quota, and trudged back to the hotel
and spent the night in El Paso. Apparently with our duty-free booze. I think the toll
it was customary for the FRC pilots who for the footbridge across the Rio Grande
were returning from duties back east and was two cents per person. A fitting
who had to lay over somewhere to do so conclusion to a very interesting simula-
in El Paso. El Paso was just across the tion experience.

45
57
computers had already been ordered by
The X-15 Simulator then and were installed in the fall of 1960.
(1960-1969) This was right after I had finished the
fourth and last simulation of the four-
stage boost vehicle, which is described
The X-15 simulator was the largest analog above.
simulation ever mechanized in the FSL. It
also became the first hybrid computer NAA X-15 Simulator
simulation when we added a digital
computer to the simulator in 1964. The North American Aviation built the three
simulator was in use from 1961 until after X-15 rocket-powered aircraft. NAA
the last X-15 flight on 24 October 1968. implemented an analog simulation for use
This simulation was used for many in designing and developing the vehicles.
purposes, including pilot training, flight The simulator was used for some time and
planning, systems hardware design and included the iron-bird cockpit. The X-15
checkout, emergency procedures develop- simulation at the NAA facility near Los
ment and practice, and many different Angeles International Airport was used
research programs. From the program- for flight planning for the initial 20 flights
mers’ perspective it was, in many ways, of the X-15. Dick Day spent a consider-
the most complicated and frustrating able amount of time there during 1959
mechanization that we had to contend and 1960 for this flight planning and for
with. For most of us who had to deal with pilot training purposes. During this
it on a daily basis, we were both glad and period, the original engineering analysis
sad to see it go. The X-15 Project was was done that resulted in the removal of
both exciting and rewarding, and the the lower vertical stabilizer on the air-
simulator played a big part in the overall craft.17 Dick Day also recalls that upon
accomplishments of the program. For that his proposing to have the ventral fin
reason we were glad to be a part of the X- removed, Bikle said “Dick, pilots have
15 team. By the same token, we were sad always wanted more tail and now you
to see the X-15 simulator go, in spite of want to take it away.” The first flight with
all the grief it had inflicted over the years. the lower ventral removed was the 42th
It was like losing a favorite pet, even flight on 4 October 1961. The NAA
though that pet was part gremlin. simulator was used for these and other
purposes for the first 31 flights. The initial
There were numerous different program- envelope expansion flight planning was
mers involved with this simulation also completed with the NAA X-15
throughout its lifetime. John P. Smith simulator.
began the process by working with the
project office to select the original set of Computer Room False Floor
equations for implementation. He also
worked on the procurement of the new The computers used for the FRC’s X-15
analog computers. Much of this early simulation were installed in the area
preparation work was done using the currently occupied by the Center
North American Aviation (NAA) X-15 Director’s office and conference room. A
simulation as a guide. Shortly after John false floor was built, in-house, of 2x4s,
began this process, he was promoted to plywood, angle iron, and metal rebar
section chief. At that time he passed the (reinforcing metal bars). It was covered
X-15 programming job along to me. The with an ugly brown linoleum tile. Holes

17 The large, wedge-shaped vertical stabilizers on the X-15 were a solution to the difficulty of stabilizing an airplane at high angles of
attack. The lower half of the lower vertical stabilizer had to be jettisoned before landing because it extended below the landing gear,
and eventually the X-15 team (notably, Dick Day as discussed below) discovered that it was not really needed for stability and in fact
made the airplane less controllable, so the program stopped using it.

58
46
were cut where needed for the circulation of mechanization of the X-15 simulation.
cold air and for the many cables between This included drawing the wiring dia-
the computer racks. The design of this false grams, wiring the three main patch panels,
floor made it quite difficult to string cables. setting all the pots, programming the
The under-the-floor support structure was a many function generators, and running
lot like a cheap bridge and really interfered many types of tests for check-out. It was
with getting our analogs connected. Years the wiring diagrams for the X-15 simula-
later, the good store-bought false flooring tion that forced me to convert from large
materials were installed, but not in the X-15 drafting paper to 11x17-inch drawing
analog area. One of the photos (see E-5808) paper (see above). There was one page for
showing the X-15 analog computers was each of the main equations, and there
taken before the plywood flooring was were many more for the auxiliary equa-
covered with linoleum. The linoleum was tions. The many function generators
standard GSA supply and obviously not required several pages of their own. Later
intended for fancy offices. It was thin and on, when we were simulating the two
flexible and molded itself to the uneven different control systems, several more
plywood floor. You could even see the nail pages were added for those equations. It
heads in the plywood under the tiles. After was quite a chore to keep this folder of
being used for several years, it became quite wiring diagrams up to date. It was too
worn and always looked dirty, no matter easy to make temporary wiring changes
how often it was cleaned. This lab was and forget to make the appropriate
where we did some serious work and was changes to the wiring diagrams. This
not one of the fancy “glass-walled” com- happened quite frequently and caused
puter rooms that some companies had for many problems.
their big, fancy digital computers. That ugly
brown tile floor was somewhat symbolic in The simulation was declared fully opera-
that sense. tional on the first working day of 1961
(which was Tuesday, 3 January 1961). The
The analog computer air conditioning (A/C) first X-15 flight that occurred after this date
units were mounted on the roof directly was number 32, which was on 1 February
above the X-15 simulation lab. Large holes 1961 and was flown by Jack McKay.
were cut in the raised floor, ceiling, and roof
for the air ducts. The A/C units were located When we went to two and three shifts of
in an aluminum shack for weather protec- operation, with a different analog pro-
tion. There were two large blowers in the grammer on each shift, the accuracy of
X-15 analog room to distribute the cold air. this folder of wiring diagrams became an
These blowers were in sheet-metal boxes. important issue that we all had to deal
The fans in them were large and, when the with. This was especially true for the
bearings wore out, got very noisy. The second-shift programmers, since that was
blower boxes were about three feet tall and the shift when the research engineers were
were used as tables for many different always trying new things. The day shift
items. Because of the large amount of heat was used almost exclusively for flight
generated by the analog computers, the air planning and pilot training. Fortunately
temperature in this room would get quite the shifts overlapped one-half hour, which
warm in the afternoons. In the mornings, allowed the oncoming crew to get a brief
though, it was very chilly before we turned update from the departing crew about any
the analogs on and all those vacuum tubes changes that had been made.
started to heat up.
In spite of all this coordination between
Wiring Diagrams programmers and careful diligence to
keeping the wiring diagrams correct, there
It took the last three months of 1960 to do were many instances of unlabeled, loose,
all the tasks involved with the actual or missing patch cords. We were always

47
59
searching for one more missing patch were modified to agree with true flight-
cord or the one that shouldn’t have been determined data. In this way, the simula-
there (according to the diagrams). Fortu- tor was kept up-to-date and became an
nately these computers were not time- even more useful tool.
shared with any other program. This
meant that the patch panels were not SAS & Adaptive Controllers
removed from their patch bays very often.
This process of changing patch panels One of the most useful features of any
was often the reason for loose or dis- iron-bird simulator was the capability to
lodged patch cords. If the wired panel was connect actual flight hardware and use it
accidentally set down on a small object, just as it would be used in the real air-
such as a pencil, one or more of the patch craft. The fixed-gain Stability Augmenta-
cords could be pushed loose from the tion System (SAS) and the variable-gain
backside of the panel. And it wasn’t Minneapolis Honeywell (M-H) Adaptive
always obvious until something did not Controller were the two different control
work as expected. systems that were initially simulated as a
part of the X-15 simulation. Later, the
Function Generator Set-up simulator used actual hardware just like
what was installed in the real airplanes.
A large portion of this three-month set-up There were many reports written about
time was spent in programming the many these various studies. The report Adaptive
nonlinear diode-function generators Control and the X-15, written by
(DFGs). The DFGs were used to generate Lawrence W. Taylor and Elmer J. Adkins
functions of angle-of-attack (AOA). in1965, describes the M-H Adaptive
These were then connected to the taps on Controller, its development, and the role
the pot-padder multipliers that were of the X-15 simulator. The authors
driven by Mach number. The resulting commented: “It should be emphasized
outputs were functions of both AOA and that all of the problems were encountered
Mach number. and corrected before the flight article
existed, by virtue of the extensive and
The DFGs used for this simulation were realistic simulation possible with the X-
not the store-bought version available 15 flight simulator,” indicating yet
from EAI. These DFGs were designed another use of analog simulations. In this
and built in-house and installed in stan- case, the concept and design of the
dard 19-inch racks. They can be seen in adaptive-control and stability-augmenta-
the photo E-5809 and were located tion-system capabilities were thoroughly
between the D and E consoles. There tested using the simulator before any
were 15 pots for each DFG. The pots were actual hardware was built and flown.
the 20-turn type, quite small, and were set Both the SAS and the M-H Adaptive
using a small jeweler’s screwdriver Controller required many hours of
instead of a knob. It was quite a chore to simulation time during the design and
set all these pots. We also had some of the testing phases of their development.
EAI DFGs and pot padders for other
nonlinear functions. A lot of this simulator time occurred on
second shift with Jim Samuels (one of the
Nonlinear Functions Updates FSL programmers) working with the
research engineers to mechanize and test
During the first part of the X-15 program, the different X-15 stability-augmentation
the data used for the nonlinear functions systems. Jim was the only FSL analog
came mostly from wind-tunnel tests and programmer, during those early years,
theoretical studies. As the X-15 flew, and who had a college degree in aerodynam-
the collected flight data were analyzed, ics. He was the one we all turned to when
the coefficients in the X-15 simulation we had questions concerning the equa-

60
48
tions of motion or matters relating to This iron bird was a replica of the X-15,
aerodynamics. Jim was a happy-go-lucky including the complete cockpit, and had
person who enjoyed regaling us with tall simulated control surfaces (rudder, elevator,
(real tall!) tales of his (supposed) past and ailerons). The control surfaces were
experiences. According to him, he was a simulated using weighted beams, but the
combination of Indiana Jones, Sir Francis hydraulics and other components were the
Drake, and Kit Carson. Jim was very real things. This eliminated having to
imaginative and would creates his stories simulate those mechanical and hydraulic
on the fly. If you added up the time spans components. (See photos E-4969, E-5808-
of all these adventures, Jim would have 10, E-15330 & E-16219 of the computers,
had to have been at least 150 years old to cockpit, and the X-15 iron bird.)
have done all the things he told us.
The first cockpit was installed in the same
Simulator Cockpits room as the analog computers. We used this
cockpit for many months until the iron bird
The first cockpit we had for this simulator could be delivered and installed. The iron
was the one used for the full-scale X-15 bird was located inside the calibration
simulation on the Navy’s computers and hangar along the east wall. A wall was built
centrifuge at the Johnsville, Pennsylvania, around the iron bird to divide the hangar
facility. That simulation was operational and provide the security and protection
long before we had our computers. All of needed for this project. The windows in the
the original X-15 pilots were able to fly the hangar door had to be painted over to
simulator and experience the G loads eliminate the glare on the instrument-panel
expected in the real flights. The hardware meters. The cockpit faced away from the
we got at the FRC included the seat, the hangar door. The door faced southeast and
instrument panel, and the pilots’ controls. the morning sunlight caused a lot of prob-
Later on, we also received the full-scale lems for the pilots until the windows were
iron-bird simulator from North American. painted.

Black Box (F-104)
Cockpit (October
1959), “flown” in
preparation for
the X-15. (NASA
photo E-4969)

49
61
X-15 Simulator
(Iron Bird) with
Bill Dana (August
1966). (NASA
photo E-15530)

X-15 Simulator
(Iron Bird) with
Bill Dana (August
1966). (NASA
photo E-16219)

Patch Cords and Trunks one time. The main three computers were
used for the basic equations, two for
We never kept a count of the total number control-system simulations, and later on
of patch cords used in this simulation, but another one was needed for the interface to
there were at least 500 on each of the three the SDS 930 digital computer (see below).
main analog computers. With that many They were connected together with hun-
patch cords, the panels weighed a lot. Later dreds of signal trunks. There were at least
on, other analog computers were added, as two occasions when—for some small short-
needed, for special purposes, such as term experiment—one of the portable
control-system development and interface analog computers was also connected to the
to the digital computer. We had as many as simulation. There were also many trunks to
six analog computers connected together at connect to the cockpit.

62
50
Cockpit Trunking flight-planners that we frequently had a
second shift for use by the research engi-
After the iron bird was installed in the neers, and especially those developing the
hangar, we had to connect it to the comput- different control systems that were being
ers. There were several hundred trunks to/ investigated for use in the X-15s. Later,
from the cockpit. These trunks were routed after a general-purpose digital computer
in cable trays originally hung on the outside was added to the simulation, almost all of
wall of the second floor of the mezzanine. the time needed for programming of this
These went to the X-15 iron bird. The digital computer was on third shift (mid-
trunks eventually were relocated to cable night to 8:00 a.m.).
trays that hung above the false ceiling of the
mezzanine offices. Earlier X-15 Simulations

This length of trunks (over 200 feet) for that The X-15 had been simulated using
many analog signals always caused difficul- analog computers at other facilities before
ties due to grounding problems. In fact, we started our simulation. Besides North
grounding problems were a real headache American’s complete 6 DOF analog
for a number of years in our simulation lab. simulation described above, the Ames
The FSL technicians spent a lot of time Research Center had a simulator that used
working this particular problem. A separate a 3 DOF moving-base cockpit. The
grounding buss of copper pipes and large Langley Research Center also imple-
copper wires was eventually installed to mented a fairly complete simulation but
help alleviate grounding problems. The without the iron-bird cockpit. The centri-
copper pipes were under the false floors of fuge at NADC was also used for X-15
the simulation labs and were mounted on simulations, as already discussed in part.
special stands that provided signal isolation. There were actually three different such
Large-core copper wires were then attached simulations at both the LaRC and NADC
to these pipes and to the computers and during the years in which the X-15 was
equipment racks as needed. These large- being designed and built. There were
core copper wires were also strung to the several conferences having to do with the
cockpit(s) in the labs or in the hangar. The X-15 development beginning in the mid-
pipe and wires were all shielded with a 1950s. Some of this happened before I
thick plastic covering. started working at the NACA HSFS in
1957. Each simulation, as you might
X-15 Simulator Hydraulics expect, got better and better as the devel-
opment of the X-15 progressed. Our
The hydraulics stand for the iron-bird simulation took a lot from those earlier
cockpit was originally located next to the efforts, and it too evolved over the years.
mockup inside the hangar. The hydraulics
unit was later relocated into its own shed, The digital computer added in 1964 was
outside the Calibration Hangar. As with the used to generate the nonlinear coefficients
early black-box simulators, someone from for the re-built No. 2 X-15. This was the
the facilities maintenance group had to start X-15 that was damaged during an emer-
and stop the hydraulics unit. On second and gency landing on one of the back-up
third shift, we sometimes waited 30 minutes landing sites. The airplane was rebuilt,
or more after calling before he would show with external tanks and other modifica-
up and power up the hydraulics. We also tions for the higher-speed flights. Because
had to allow time for him to shut down the of the modification to the No. 2 X-15, the
hydraulics before we left at the end of the original set of equations was also modi-
night shift. fied to include the additional dynamics
due to the external tanks. John Perry was
The X-15 simulator was used so much the lead programmer at the time, and he
during the day shift by the pilots and the did this upgrade. This was after I had left

51
63
the X-15 simulation group and was tor practicing these emergency landings.
involved with other FSL projects. There were ten of these real-life emergency
landings that were required during the
Energy Management Computer actual flights. Without the extensive practice
in the simulator, there could easily have
The SDS (Scientific Data Systems) 930 was been several more-serious emergency
originally bought to simulate an airborne landings than really did occur. I’m sure that
computer that Minneapolis Honeywell was each X-15 pilot who had to make an
building for installation in the X-15-3. The emergency landing was quite thankful for
M-H Energy Management Computer was all the hours he spent in the simulator
designed to calculate the landing area (or practicing those very same maneuvers.
footprint, as it was called) available to the There is no doubt that this type of emer-
X-15 in case of an early engine malfunc- gency-procedures practice is one of the big
tion. This footprint was essentially a map of reasons that real-time simulators are still
the surrounding ground area with dry being built and used by all the major
lakebeds that the X-15 could land on. The airlines.
footprint gave the pilot a schematic, shown
on a scope in the cockpit, of the attainable A malfunction panel was added to the
landing sites based on the speed, altitude, simulation after the iron bird was opera-
weight, attitude, etc., of the X-15 at the time tional. This panel contained about 3 dozen
the engine shut down. If this engine shut- switches that allowed the flight planners to
down was premature, the X-15 did not turn off signals going to the X-15 cockpit
always have enough energy to make a instruments or to many of the aircraft
landing at Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB), systems, such as the auxiliary power units,
and the pilot (and control room personnel) SAS, M-H adaptive controller, reaction
had to make a quick decision as to which control system, and the engine. The pilots
emergency landing site the pilot would head spent many hours practicing emergency
for. There were always several emergency procedures that could occur during their
landing sites selected, and they had emer- flights. A number of these emergencies did
gency crews standing by in case of such an in fact occur, but the pilots were always able
event. to cope and either continue the flight or
make a more or less successful landing at
Before the actual airborne M-H computer one of the back-up lakebeds. Before the
was built, there was an interim system built, panel was installed next to the iron-bird
under contract, to be used in the mission cockpit, someone in the computer room
control room during flights. This Energy initiated these “emergencies.” The malfunc-
Management Console (EMC) was an all- tion panel just made this task easier for the
analog unit. Unfortunately, the company flight planners who frequently were there
that built it did not stay in business very and sitting alongside the cockpit.
long. The unit had lots of problems. Charles
Wagner, one of the FSL simulation engi- My tenure as lead X-15 sim programmer/
neers, inherited the job of trying to make it operator lasted only a couple of years.
work, right after he started working at the Because of the multiple shifts needed to
FRC in 1964. In his PA, Wagner describes provide an adequate number of hours each
his efforts with the unit. Wagner spent a lot week for the many users, several other FSL
of time getting the EMC unit to work, but programmers very quickly became full-time
by then it wasn’t really needed. The mission X-15 sim operators and programmers. John
control room personnel had enough experi- Perry, Larry Wells, Jim Samuels (and
ence from having used the simulator to others) were drafted to help operate and
predict the best emergency landing site, program the X-15 analogs. Dick Musick,
anyway. Gerry Perry, Bill Sebastian, Art Suppona,
Billy Davis (and others) were the sim
The pilots spent a lot of time in the simula- technicians who supported the maintenance

64
52
and development of the X-15 analogs and ers to warm up after a weekend of non-use.
iron bird. The X-15 Project Office quickly learned not
to expect much “up-time” before noon on
When I got very involved in programming Mondays. It usually took us that long to get
the SDS 930, I was put on graveyard shift the analog computers warmed up and
and John Perry took over as the lead X-15 stabilized. There were several “checkout
analog programmer. The graveyard shift flights” that we (the X-15 sim operators)
was the only time available for the SDS- would fly to see if the simulation was ready
930 programming activity. The first two to go. We all got quite proficient in flying
shifts were used for pilot training and flight these check flights—both in the first cockpit
planning (day shift) and control-system (the one we got from NADC) and later in
studies (swing shift) and other such re- the iron bird. After we installed the iron
search studies that the FRC research bird, daily checkout of the simulation
engineers were involved in doing. Any time became a two-person operation because of
the second shift was not used for research the distance between the cockpit and the
studies, I gladly used that time for the SDS analogs. Several of the technicians also got
930 programming. I much preferred swing proficient in flying the checkout flights,
shift to the later graveyard shift. I had a while the operators were upstairs observing
hard time getting enough sleep while the analogs and various output displays in
working graveyard. It took a long time to the sim lab. There was an intercom we used
adjust my internal clock to working a to talk back and forth between the sim lab
graveyard shift. It was also hard to find a and the iron bird.
car pool, to keep from having to drive the
hour-and-a-half round trip to the FRC every Plotters and Strip-Chart Recorders
day.
The analog computer output devices
Monday Morning Blues included several 8-channel strip-chart
recorders and a large X/Y flatbed plotter.
The daily operation of the X-15 simulator This X/Y plotter had two independent pens.
was quite a chore. We spent a lot of time One pen plotted the X-15’s position on a
each morning getting the simulator ready. map of the area. The second pen showed the
Monday mornings were always the worst X-15’s altitude along a north-south axis.
because of the time it took for the comput- (See photo ECN-1456.) These two traces

Larry Caw with X-
15 Simulation
Analog Computer
and Plotter
(August 1966).
(NASA photo
ECN-1456)

53
65
were plotted on special maps that were tions. The first major mod was replace-
made specifically for this job. These maps ment of the initial cockpit with the iron
were also used on the mission control bird. The next was the addition of a SDS
room’s X/Y plotters during the actual 930 general-purpose digital computer.
flights. There were different maps depend- This was a state-of-the-art small-scale
ing on the launch site chosen for a particular digital computer. It was originally in-
flight. These maps showed the launch site tended to be used to simulate a special
and the emergency-landing dry lakebeds purpose airborne digital computer that M-
available for such landings and the dry lake H was building for the X-15 aircraft. We
at Edwards Air Force Base, along with the never programmed the SDS 930 for that
more prominent landmarks in the vicinity of particular job. Later, a special purpose
these dry lakebeds. The plotter would take computer was built to simulate the
maps up to 36 inches in both directions. The airborne M-H computer.
maps we used were that size. The flight
planners spent a lot of time draped over the Originally, M-H had planned to build
edges of this plotter in our sim lab, looking another of its airborne computers (just
at the traces. There were thousands of sim like the ones planned to go in the X-15)
runs flown during the life of this project. for use in the simulator. M-H was behind
The plotter had ink pens which caused schedule and the extra airborne computer
many problems, as they tended to clog up never got built. At about the same time,
when not used for some time (like over the we in the FSL were thinking about buying
weekend). The pens were also quite messy a general-purpose digital computer to
and got ink on everyone’s elbows or provide the extra function generation
shirtsleeves and ties. The plotter was just capability needed for the No. 2 X-15.
the right height to rest your elbows on. A lot When we learned of the M-H problem
of coffee got spilt there, too! with its airborne computer, we offered to
buy the digital computer and connect it to
One of the jobs of the X-15 flight planners the X-15 simulator, provided that the Air
was to prepare for each flight, which Force buy us another analog computer
included selecting the launch site and and the interface equipment to connect the
practicing emergency landings. Later in the two different computer systems. The Air
program, the M-H energy management Force (AF; actually, it was an AF contrac-
computer aided in the emergency-landing- tor that was also involved in the X-15
site selection. The flight planners had to do Project—Litton Data Systems as I recall)
this job as a part of each flight preparation. bought the interface equipment and had it
Flight planning also included the job of delivered to us in the FSL. This simulator
trying to integrate all the maneuvers the was not only a strange collection of
many research engineers wanted the pilots hardware but also had an even stranger
to perform during the flights. In addition, collection of participants. Many different
the flight planners were trying to “expand companies around the U.S. were involved
the envelope.” This envelope expansion in the X-15 Project throughout its many
process was an important “step-by-step” years of existence.
investigation of the performance limits that
the FRC has used in most all of its flight I was sent to SDS programming class and
programs. There were several flight plan- set about programming this new set of
ners, over the years: Dick Day, Warren non-linear functions for our real-time all-
Wilson, Jack Kolf, and others from the analog X-15 simulation. Combined
FRC, and Bob Hoey from the AFFTC. analog/digital simulation techniques were
just then being developed within the
SDS 930 simulation community. This was a whole
new ball game—an environment that no
The X-15 sim was used for many years one at the FRC had any previous experi-
and underwent several major modifica- ence with. I had taken some introductory

66
54
classes in hybrid (combined analog- arithmetic. The 930 was the first small
digital) simulation at EAI and UCLA. So pseudo-parallel computer of its time.
as the lead X-15 programmer, I had the Previous computers of that era, in this class,
job of integrating this new technology were serial computers. In serial computers,
into our analog simulation. It took a arithmetic and other operations were
while, but I did get the job done. The performed one bit at a time, in serial. The
analog simulation was modified so that it 930 actually used a combined serial, parallel
could be switched between the old set of process that did its operations on octal
non-linear functions (using the analog characters in a serial manner. This structure
function generators) and the new set of allowed the 930 to run about four times
No. 2 X-15 digital functions. We now faster then the previous (SDS 920) com-
had an X-15 simulation that could be used puter, while using the same speed silicon
for all three X-15s again. logic. This was state-of-the-art in those
days. Today, you can buy school calculators
SDS Fortran that are faster and have more memory than
the 930 we used in our X-15 simulator.
The use of digital computers in hybrid
simulations was still new. The Fortran The operating system was not memory-
programming language was also quite resident. It was loaded into memory when-
new, and very few computer vendors had ever it was needed. The system software
a real-time Fortran compiler and run-time programs—Fortran, real-time Fortran,
package available. Fortunately, many Assembler, Utilities, and Libraries—were
SDS customers were buying their com- all stored on magnetic tape. (Actually, the
puters for real-time applications. Conse- original system was delivered with all this
quently, there was a lot of pressure on software on paper tape. Was that ever slow!)
SDS to develop a real-time Fortran (RTF) We had one 8-track magnetic-tape unit, one
system. We acquired this system, which card reader, one paper-tape reader and
we used for a number of applications. punch, and an IBM Selectric typewriter.
This turned out to be quite a challenge, These were the only input/output (I/O) units
due almost exclusively to the state-of-the- that came with the original SDS 930. No
art of real-time SDS software. printer or cardpunch or hard disk. We did
not add a line printer until some time later.
Real-time software packages (such as the The original program was written in the
RTF from SDS) were designed to respond SDS Assembly language. All arithmetic
to real-time interrupts from external and function generation was done using
events. There were several of these scaled fixed-point arithmetic. Because the
signals used in the simulation program on operating system was on mag tape, we
the SDS 930. The RTF, being so new, had wrote the binaries of the programs we
many bugs in it. We found more than our developed onto paper tape. It took over an
share and spent many hours programming hour to assemble and punch out (on paper
work-arounds until SDS fixed its soft- tape) the original X-15 digital simulation
ware. program. It took several hours to list this
program on the typewriter. It was probably a
SDS 930 Characteristics good thing that there was only one person
programming the SDS 930 at that time,
The original SDS 930 used 1.75-microsec- considering how long it took to get anything
ond silicon-logic circuitry. It had 8K of 24- done.
bit (word) memory. The memory was state-
of-the-art iron-ferrite magnetic core. The Analog Interface
CPU (central processing unit) had an
arithmetic register, an index register, and an There were numerous D to A (digital to
auxiliary arithmetic register. These three analog) and A to D (analog to digital)
registers were 24-bit and used octal (3-bit) converters for input and output of the

55
67
analog variables. There were priority of the Navy airplanes that Pete had
interrupts and real-time clocks (connected been flying read the reverse of the
to priority interrupts) that were used for AF indicators, and every time there
timing and other signals that required the was a lightly damped or unstable
digital computer program to respond alpha, Pete’s correction was
instantaneously. We also had a large immediate and violent. Retraining
number of single-bit on/off-type functions Pete was unthinkable, so the
(which were called discretes) that could solution to the problem was to
be connected to devices such as switches, reverse the polarity on the instru-
lights, and relays. These discretes were ment both in simulator for training
connected to both the cockpits and the and on the actual X-15 for flight.
analog computers. This collection of This worked perfectly, Pete never
interface devices allowed the two differ- PIO’d18 again either in training or
ent types of computers to communicate in flight. Of course, the instrument
with each other. We acquired another had to be reversed to the original
analog computer and added this to the X- polarity before a different pilot
15 simulation. This additional analog would fly. This is a prime example
provided the connections to the digital (and there are many more) of the
computer. There wasn’t any room on the early analog simulator’s large role
original analogs to handle the additional in safety-of-flight.
circuitry and trunking required for the
SDS 930. Later on, when we started to The X-15 simulator was not programmed
use the SDS 930 for other simulations, the to handle landings. The visual cues that
availability of this interface analog the pilots normally used for landing any
computer made it quite easy to connect airplane (the out-the-window views) were
those simulations to the SDS 930. not readily available and were quite
expensive. In addition the precision
X-15 Simulator Sidelights needed to calculate parameters such as
altitude and rate of climb/descent for
Dick Day, one of the flight planners for landing studies was not really possible
the X-15 program, recalls the following: with the parameter scaling used for the
rest of the flight. Analog computers were
I can think of several interesting accurate to about one part in ten thousand.
anecdotes that occurred while the For the X-15 simulation, with altitude
X-15 simulator was still at NAA scaled such that 400,000 feet=100 volts,
and we did our flight planning and one tenth of a volt was equal to 40 feet.
training in Los Angeles. Any altitude less than this value would be
down in the noise level of the analog
When [then-] Commander Pete components and barely detectable. It was
Peterson [joined] the X-15 pro- not possible to accurately calculate
gram, we had several training altitudes for the landing phase of the X-15
sessions for him at the NAA, Los within these scaling restrictions.
Angeles, facility. There were
periods during the training when The pilots found that the F-104 could be
Pete would become confused and configured to provide similar characteris-
suddenly pull all the way back on tics to the X-15 during the final approach
the side-arm controller, producing and landing phases, and this became the
excessive indicated g-levels and preferred simulation method for landing
halt the run. It was soon discovered practice. Larry Caw did, however, mecha-
that, at that time, the needle on nize a simple 4 DOF simulation of the X-
angle-of-attack (alpha) indicators 15 for studies of the X-15 landing gears.
18 I.e., created a pilot induced oscillation of the airplane.

68
56
This simulation calculated the forces and features simply because they cost too
moments that occurred during touchdown much. For example, the cockpits did not
and rollout of the X-15.19 This simulation provide any motions at all. The cost of
was done at the request of Jim McKay. adding six degrees of motion to the iron
Jim was a research engineer at the FRC bird was prohibitive. Most of the first
and, with Eldon Kordes, documents this group of pilots did get to fly the simula-
study in a NASA Technical Memorandum tions that were implemented using the
(TMX-639, 1962, item 342 in the bibliog- centrifuge at the Johnsville, Pennsylvania,
raphy). This TM discusses landing loads facility. However, the pilots who entered
and dynamics of the X-15 airplane. The the program later did not fly the centri-
paper talks about loads measured during fuge simulation. This lack of real motion
actual landings of the X-15 and also simulation caused some problems when
discusses the purpose and results of the these pilots actually flew the X-15s. In his
simulation. Early X-15 landings showed paper, Milt said:
that the pilots landed the vehicle in a
similar way on each flight. Because there Prior to my first flight, my practice
was so little difference, an analog simula- had been done in a relaxed, head
tion study was conducted to study a wider forward position. The longitudinal
variation of factors. The forces that acceleration at engine light forced
occurred on the landing gear were quite my head back into the headrest and
significant because of the locations of the prevented even helmet rotation. The
nose wheel and the rear skids. The instrument-scan procedure, due to
moments that were generated by the this head position and a slight
locations of the nose wheel and rear skids tunnel vision effect, was quite
caused larger forces than the actual different than anticipated and
touchdowns. After the initial touchdown practiced. The acceleration buildup
on the rear skids, the nose would rotate during engine burn (4g max) is
downward and then slam down quite hard uncomfortable enough to convince
on the front wheel. The simulation was you to shut the engine down as
conducted to see if relocation or redesign planned. This is the first airplane
of either part of the landing gear would I’ve flown that I was happy to shut
reduce these loads. Changes were made to down.
the landing gear over the years as the X-
15 evolved, mainly due to increased Engine shutdown does not always
weight. relieve the situation, though, since,
in most cases, the deceleration
X-15 Simulator Deficiencies immediately after shutdown has
you hanging from the restraint
In 1964, Milt Thompson wrote a paper for harness, and in a strange position
a SETP conference entitled “General for controlling.
Review of Piloting Problems Encountered
During Simulation and Flights of the X- Milt went on to discuss other differences
15” (item 412 in the bibliography). In this between flight and simulator, and con-
paper, Milt talked about the differences cludes his report with the following
between the simulator and the real aircraft paragraphs:
and the problems that the pilots had to
deal with because of them. Many of the Although relatively sophisticated
differences were due to extra costs fixed-base simulation of the X-15
associated with including particular was generally satisfactory for
features or hardware and the decision(s) flight-mission studies and flight-
made to not include these additional envelope-controllability investiga-

19 Since the X-15 used rear landing skids rather than conventional landing gear, the “rollout” was really more of a slideout.

69
57
tions, it was unable to predict all of These words from Milt’s paper point out
the flight problems experienced, the love-hate relationship that frequently
particularly when differences in existed between the pilots and the simula-
aerodynamics, control system, or tors. They really appreciated the simula-
cockpit equipment existed between tions for what they did but were the most
simulator and airplane. A constant outspoken about what they didn’t do. And
updating of the simulator is there- heaven help us if there was something
fore required. Absence of accelera- implemented incorrectly,20 as happened
tion, motion, or visual cues in the on many occasions. It was at the insis-
simulator has limited the adequacy tence of the pilots that we got the money
of pilot training for specific flight (directly or indirectly) to include those
phases and sometimes resulted in capabilities that originally were neither
surprises or in-flight problems. budgeted nor even considered. This paper
by Milt is included in the appendices and
The actual flight environment must is well worth reading in its entirety. I was
still be investigated, since the not able to interview Milt for his inputs to
effects of apprehension and anxiety this paper. He died only one week after I
on the pilot cannot yet be simu- retired from NASA in 1993. I suspect that
lated. It is simple to evaluate a if I had been able to interview him, many
flight condition on a simulator, rate of his comments would have been the
it subjectively, and reset when you same or similar to what is in that particu-
lose control. Until a reset capabil- lar publication. Milt wrote a number of
ity is provided in the airplanes, the other publications during his career at the
success of a mission is still up to FRC, several of which are included in the
the pilot. bibliography.

20While reviewing this part of the study, Bob Kempel made the following comment: “We found in the lifting-body program that it
was far better to give the pilots no impression . . . than [to give them] the wrong impression.”

70
58
are a part of every flight. On many
General Purpose Air- occasions, the visual and motion cues do
borne Simulator influence the performance and judgment
of the pilot. The GPAS was developed to
(1960-1975) provide these and other simulation
capabilities. Photos ECN-1346, ECN-
In May 1960, the Center acquired a 2399, and E-27824 show the GPAS and
Lockheed JetStar, a small jet passenger its computer system. The left-hand seat in
transport, and equipped it with an on- the cockpit was modified to be the test
board computer system to simulate the pilot’s seat with the modified controls and
flight characteristics of a wide range of displays. The right seat was for the safety
aircraft. The JetStar was also equipped pilot and had the normal controls and
with an electronic variable-stability displays.
flight-control system. It was called a
General Purpose Airborne Simulator My only real involvement with this
(GPAS), and the aircraft could duplicate simulator was to help buy the analog
the flight characteristics of a wide variety computer that was installed in the air-
of advanced aircraft. It was used for plane. The GPAS was a flying simulator
supersonic transport and general aviation that had an analog computer inside. This
research. Later on, it was used as a computer was used to model the dynam-
training and support system for the Space ics of another airplane or to mechanize
Shuttle Approach and Landing Tests at another experimental flight-control
Dryden in 1977. system. There were special controls and
other equipment that essentially forced
No matter how sophisticated our ground- the real airplane to follow the model
based simulations were, they could not programmed on the analog computer. The
provide the visual and motion cues that Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory (CAL),

Ken Szalai and
GPAS Computers
(1974). (NASA
photo ECN-1346)

59
71
General Purpose
Airborne Simula-
tor. (NASA photo
ECN-2399)

JetStar (GPAS)
Simulator (Sep-
tember 1974).
(NASA photo E-
27824)

Inc. of Buffalo, New York, modified the acceptance testing, the analog program-
JetStar to be the GPAS. Several reports ming task was handled mainly by the FSL
were written describing the design, folk. Actually the FSL provided more
development, and validation of the GPAS. than just analog programmers. John J.
There were many reports describing the Perry of the FSL became the GPAS
many studies that used the GPAS. The project engineer. Larry Caw and Dick
bibliography contains references to a Musick provided programming and
sampling of these many reports. maintenance support for the analog
computers and flew on many missions.
This airborne simulator was flown at the The personal accounts of Stan Butchart,
FRC in the mid-to-late 1960s. After Dwain Deets, Bob Kempel, John Perry,

72
60
JetStar (GPAS)
Computers with
H. Rediess (in
back) and D.
Musick (Septem-
ber 1974). (NASA
photo E-27825)

Larry Caw, and Dick Musick all include harsh-environment use. These compo-
comments about their experiences with nents were located in the computer in
the GPAS. There are some interesting such a way that one could connect them
tales of events that happened with this using patch cords as if there were a
simulator. removable patch panel. The photo ECN
1346 of the inside of the GPAS shows
Process-Control Analog Com- these components in the cabinet on the
puter left and the holes for the patch cords can
be clearly seen.
The analog computer that was finally
selected and ordered was built by EAI For the GPAS, the computer system had
using that firm’s process-control analog been modified so that all analog compo-
computer (TR-5) components. Normally nents were connected to a patch-panel
these components were programmed very bay, and a patch panel (visible in photo
much like the original EAI TR-10 por- ECN 1346) was used when programming
table analog computer. The TR-5s were this particular computer. The EAI process-
±10-volt, solid-state (transistor) analog control analog components were designed
computers. The original TR-5s did not to be used for manufacturing processes in
have a patch panel. Each analog compo- which there were infrequent changes to
nent had patch cord holes directly on the the program. These process-control
front of the component. These were computers were usually installed inside a
essentially the same components used in cabinet that could be locked. Conse-
the early TR-10, but “ruggedized” for quently, there was no need for a remov-

73
61
able patch panel. The process-control dynamic airplane.21 The GPAS was better
components were also designed to with- suited to simulating larger, heavier
stand the harsh environment found in a airplanes than smaller, more maneuver-
typical factory. The GPAS needed a able ones.
computer that could withstand the forces
and vibrations that would be encountered Interesting GPAS Sidelights
during flight and the temperatures inside
the plane when it was in the hangar and When the EAI TR-5 analog computer
not being used (especially during the components were delivered, they were to
summer months). The TR-5 process- be sent directly to CAL for installation in
control analog computer was suited to this the JetStar, which was there being modi-
environment. fied. Several of us went to Buffalo to
discuss delivery and acceptance of the
The complement of analog components computers prior to their installation in the
and their patch-panel arrangement had JetStar. As it turned out, there was another
been determined by the engineers in the group from the FRC also there–for some
Control Systems Branch of the Research work on the airplane modification pro-
Division. These engineers (Dwain Deets cess. Our flights back to California were
and Ken Szalai) were heavily involved in the same morning after both groups had
the development and acceptance testing of finished their work at CAL. Since we had
the GPAS and did all the early program- the evening to ourselves, both groups
ming of the on-board analog computer. decided to go to Niagara Falls for a little
sightseeing and for dinner. We also made
This computer was connected to the reservations for a concert by Kate Smith
JetStar systems for input and output. One who was performing locally. Kate was a
of the two pilot’s controls (stick, rudders, popular singer of that period with a
throttles, etc) was modified to provide powerful soprano voice. This happened to
inputs to the analog model. The calculated be during the winter, and the drive to
outputs of the model were sent both to the Niagara Falls was quite scary because of
simulation pilot’s cockpit instrumentation the icy roads. The Falls were mostly ice,
and to special circuitry connected to the and very little water was actually falling.
JetStar’s control systems. This special
circuitry forced the JetStar to follow the The Seagram Tower (which overlooks the
signals calculated in the model and Falls) was still being built, but the restau-
thereby force the airplane to fly just like rant at the top was open for business.
the vehicle being simulated in the analog Although the elevator was operational at
computer. The other (safety) pilot’s the time, some of us (pseudo-macho
controls were unchanged, and the safety types) just had to climb the stairs (at least
pilot was always ready to take over the 10 stories, as I remember) to get there.
controls if the GPAS got into some The dinner was quite good, but the
situation that was dangerous. There were restaurant hadn’t received its liquor
several exciting situations that happened license at the time, so we couldn’t have
during some of the more risky maneuvers. drinks with our dinner. One of the group
They had those in the passenger compart- ordered baked Alaska for dessert, and
ment looking for parachutes and barf bags since it could not be served with the
at the same time. traditional flaming brandy, it was served
with a (4th of July-type) sparkler. Cute.
The GPAS could simulate another air-
plane whose dynamics were the same as The concert, with Kate Smith, took place
or slower than the basic JetStar. It was not on a theater-in-the-round type stage. It
practical to force the JetStar to be a more was superb. Our seats were in the second
21 I.e., oscillate faster or respond more quickly to a pilot’s or control system’s input.

74
62
row, and the music with Kate Smith really coffee. They were mostly cham-
singing was fantastic. That was the first pagne with a dash of coffee to make them
time I had ever seen her in person, and we look like coffee. Jim didn’t seem to mind
all enjoyed every minute of the show. and drank all his. I had never had cham-
pagne with coffee before, and it tasted
Our flight home the next day was also horrible to me. I did drink some, but only
quite interesting. There was a very nasty because I didn’t want to disappoint the
winter storm moving through the Mid- attendant. It was a long, difficult flight for
west. We weren’t sure when we left the attendants. They really earned their pay
Buffalo if we were going to get home that that night, with the weather the way it was.
day. We changed planes in Chicago. Both The plane was full with a lot of folks
groups from the FRC were on the same wanting to get out of there and just get
plane. Somehow because of overbooking, home. The first-class seat was enough of a
or whatever, several of us ended up in bonus for me. It was a luxury I rarely
first class on the flight from Chicago to experienced as a government employee.
Los Angeles. I was sitting next to Jim Government travel regulations generally
McKay (who was with the other FRC prohibit the typical government employee
group). Our seats were near the food from arranging such accommodations.
preparation area. Both Jim and I had
noticed, as we boarded, that as the flight That takeoff and climb-out was by far the
attendants were storing the bottles of steepest I have ever experienced on a
champagne, they hid several bottles (we commercial jet. I felt like I was lying in a
suspected for an after-flight party). hammock. And it was very turbulent. Kind
Because of the bad weather, we had to sit of scary. But it was the only way to quickly
and wait on the taxiway quite a while for get through and above the storm cells. I
an opening between storm cells before the was in no mood for lukewarm coffee-
plane could take off. Therefore, the flavored champagne. The first part of that
champagne (excluding the bottles that had trip was the closest I have ever come to
been hidden) ran out even before we took getting sick on an airplane. We could look
off. Or at least that is what the passengers out the window and see the thunderheads
were told—but Jim knew otherwise. He all around us. There was a lot of lightning,
kept pestering our attendant for another also. As we got close to the top of the
glass of champagne. Although he never clouds, we could see the moon, which was
threatened to say anything about the almost full and which created a very eerie
hidden bottles of champagne, the atten- outlook between the tops of the thunder-
dant knew he knew. heads—pretty and surreal at the same time.

Some time later, after we had gotten To shift from flying commercially to flying
airborne and above the storm clouds and the GPAS—which in some ways was not
had been served dinner, our attendant all that different—Bob Kempel, who
decided to grant Jim’s request for more worked on one GPAS flight program,
champagne. She probably figured Jim recalls:
would quit pestering her. All along, I had
said nothing to her—in spite of Jim’s I remember when Larry Caw was
many requests for more champagne. I assigned to the JetStar. He became a
knew we were in for a very rough trip very good real-time analog pro-
because of the bad weather, and I didn’t grammer. We were looking at
want any champagne. Drinks with carbon different control schemes for riding
dioxide in them are not the best things to qualities as I remember it. I remem-
be drinking during rough flights. Not for ber the incident when we were
me, at least. Anyway, she brought us what airborne and we were looking at
appeared to be cups of coffee (in the usual different feedback schemes. I had
Styrofoam cups). But the contents weren’t mechanized a beta [sideslip] feed-

75
63
back. Well, as you know, signs flight, the airplane was restored to a
[sign conventions] were sometimes standard JetStar configuration and used
confusing. Fitz Fulton was the for a number of other research programs
pilot. The sign on beta was wrong, in following years. John Perry talks about
and we ended up with a dynami- this incident in his personal account. Don
cally unstable airplane because of Gatlin, the project engineer on the GPAS
it. We turned on the system for Fitz at the time, provided the following in
to evaluate, and the airplane response to my inquiry about this inci-
immediately began an oscillatory dent:
divergence! Larry and I were in the
back hollering to Fitz to turn it off, I was not on that particular flight. I
but Fitz was intrigued with the was the project engineer and was
thing so he wanted to watch it as it monitoring the flight from the radio
diverged or maybe just teach us a room in the pilots’ office. I believe
lesson. He finally punched the Dick (Musick) was on board and a
thing off and Larry and I sighed in KU [University of Kansas] grad
relief. Larry changed the beta-input student whose name I don’t remem-
sign, and we proceeded with the ber. [Actually, it was Dick Musick
test. and larry Caw.] Don Mallick was
the pilot, Stan Butchart in the right
The JetStar was a fun airplane to seat. I don’t believe we even
fly in, but I always had a feeling of scheduled telemetry so there was
impending doom or something else no real time record of the event. As
going wrong. Herm Rediess was I remember, we got a call that
my boss at the time and when he “We’ve had a problem here. Get
wanted me to fly in the thing all the someone up to look us over.” Betty
time I told him “thanks, but no Callister and I sent Gary Krier up
thanks,” and I don’t think Herm in an F-104 to check them out.
ever liked that. Don Gatlin can tell Stan told me afterward that as the
you about the incident where they limit cycle went on, he just looked
almost tore the wings off. I think out the cockpit window to see
Musick was aboard that flight too. where they would crash as he
believed the wings would be torn
The particular flight that Bob is talking off. As I remember, there was no
about was the last flight of the GPAS. The damage, although the airplane
aircraft got into a serious flutter problem required a thorough inspection
that almost shook the wings off. This before flying again.
flight was on 7 May 1975. Following the

64
76
using to build the simulators. The basic
Hybrid Simulation analog computers could not keep up with
Systems (1964-1976) these changes. At first we added digital
logic and other digital-like functions to
simulate the needed features, but this, too,
The beginning of the hybrid (combined was not enough. The only way to really
analog and digital) era in the FSL started simulate some of the newer features and
even before we expanded the all-analog functions that were needed was to add a
X-15 simulator to include a digital general-purpose digital computer to the
computer. I took my first class in hybrid analog systems. The digital computers not
simulations more than a year before we only provided the additional computa-
started to buy our first digital computer. tional capabilities needed to simulate the
Also, the vendors that were making those addition systems in the aircraft but also
analog computers were constantly ex- added a variety of set-up and operational
panding their systems to include more and functions that improved the daily use of
more digital capabilities. Digital logic the computer facility. All of these will be
components and a separate digital logic discussed in the following parts of this
patch panel had been added to the newer section.
lines of analog computers. In addition, the
internal mode control system had become Users were asking, moreover, that the turn-
more digital in nature. The paper-tape around time in getting an analog computer
servo-set pot subsystem gave way to a reprogrammed for the next simulation
subsystem that also allowed a digital become as short as possible. Analog
computer to do this job. The analog mode computers were expensive, and the turn-
control (reset, run, and hold) was eventu- around time between simulations was taking
ally digitized and controlled from the too long and costing too much. Tying the
internal circuitry, the logic patch panel, or analogs to a digital computer allowed some
an external digital computer. These analog functions to be controlled by that
changes evolved over a number of years digital computer. It also allowed the use of
and were brought on by the many users the digital computer for those computations
who requested more and more digital better suited to the digital. We now had
computer capabilities. The consistency three different types of computational
and repeatability of digital computers capabilities available for developing
were gradually being added to analogs. In simulations: analog, digital, and hybrid.
addition, the analogs were being built so Moreover, the digital computer could now
that they could be interfaced and used be programmed to handle set-up, check-out,
with digital computers. and operational-run-time management. The
pots could be set by the digital computer
The aircraft we were simulating were also and check cases run automatically, which
becoming more advanced. The instrumen- greatly reduced the time to change over to
tation in the cockpit was more complex, another simulation. The digital computer
with digital displays and digital comput- could also be used to calculate check cases,
ers providing the inputs to the instru- to draw the maps that were frequently used,
ments. The aircraft controls were chang- and to handle other set-up needs. All these
ing, with more control surfaces, and features now allowed the research engineers
stability control systems being added to to load up their simulations and then run
augment the pilots’ inputs. The pilots’ them without having to have a simulation
controls were also being changed and programmer do these tasks for them. The
becoming more complex to simulate. The simulation contractor-support staff took care
aircraft were becoming more dynamic in of switching the instrument panels and other
nature, with increased maneuverability such tasks involved in getting the cockpit
and performance. All these factors forced ready. So instead of a simulation being set
the evolution of the equipment we were up and kept on the analogs for weeks at a

65
77
time, we now had a sim lab that could be with this new technology—combined
scheduled in 2- and 4-hour segments, analog and digital simulation. Several of us
thereby allowing for many different simula- in the FSL belonged to the Simulation
tions to be scheduled each week. It took Councils Inc. (SCI), a professional organi-
several years to get to this point, but that is zation for those involved in one way or
what buying digital computers and tying another with computer simulation. The role
them into the analogs did for the FSL. The of SCI evolved over the years, from analog
following tells how that all came about. to hybrid to digital methods of simulation.
We went to many different meetings, both
Many of the following paragraphs tend to locally (in Southern California) and nation-
be more technical than those in the preced- ally. The national meetings of SCI were, for
ing sections and are included for those many years, scheduled at the same time and
interested in such technology. Many of the place as the national computer conferences.
subjects to be discussed are specifically In those years, the national meetings
about features and capabilities of the class occurred twice a year: once in the eastern
of digital computers and digital logic used part of the United States and the other in the
in hybrid computers. The topics are not west. The western conference was almost
always related to specific aircraft but are always held in Los Angeles, San Francisco,
features that were needed in the real-time or Las Vegas. Because these cities were
simulations that we were implementing. For close, we were able to go to many of these
this reason, some readers may want to skip western meetings of the SCI. These confer-
parts of this section. I have assumed some ences provided an excellent way to meet the
knowledge of digital computers and do not vendors and see the newest equipment. The
always define some of the terms I use. The conference presentations were also a good
computer industry has spawned an enor- way to keep up-to-date on just what others
mous number of new words and acronyms, around the country were doing with their
and even new definitions to very common simulation equipment.
words. It is almost impossible to write about
computers without using some of the terms Patchable Digital Logic Units
of the trade. To avoid these terms would
distract from the story, as would pausing to In the FSL, hybrid simulation actually
define every term. began with the purchase of a set of digital
logic components that were meant to be
In order to use this hardware in real-time used very much like analog computer
simulations, we had to become intimately components. They were connected with
familiar with what the hardware did. And patch cords. This happened shortly after
unfortunately, in talking about how we did we started using the X-15 simulation—
this, I have to describe in some detail how it about 1963. The racks of digital logic
worked. Many of the problems we had in modules were mounted in some spare
dealing with the computer’s hardware, rack space in the third X-15 analog
software, and vendors would be difficult to computer. The digital logic included AND
describe without this detail. We had many and OR gates, flip-flops, and digital
problems that were due to the nature of our relays. The voltage levels of these compo-
application and the newness of the use of nents were only 0 volts and 5 volts
general-purpose digital computers for real- (which represented 0 and 1). Using these
time use—in particular when combined components and some black boxes (built
with the analog computers we already had. in-house), we were able to breadboard
(build preliminary logic circuitry for)
We were not alone. Many other simulation simple hybrid devices such as a digital-to-
laboratories were also having to contend analog (D/A) 22 converter. The black box

22A digital-to-analog converter converts a number in digital format to the equivalent number as an analog voltage. An analog-to-
digital device does the opposite, converting an analog voltage to the equivalent digital number.

78
66
needed in this case contained the precision logic to justify buying that part of a
resistor ladder used as the voltage divider. HYDAC. We were able to get by with
An analog-to-digital (A/D) converter was relays, diodes, and similar components to
also possible, but a little more complicated. implement those functions that had
It was essentially a high-gain analog unusual characteristics—such as limits or
summing amplifier with a D/A converter in hysteresis or deadbands.
the feedback. I don’t remember if any of
the other analog programmers ever used However, this type of digital logic did not
these units, but I had a lot of fun trying satisfy all of the requirements resulting
different things. It was a good way to try from the ever-increasing complexities of
this digital logic with analog circuitry, the aircraft being simulated. The only way
which helped us to better understand the to really provide all the needs was to
use of these capabilities. interface analog and digital computers
together and use each for what they were
Early Hybrid Computers better at doing.

This type of digital logic was eventually Photo ED00-0091-1 shows a typical
added to the analog computers we bought Applied Dynamics hybrid system with an
later, such as the EAI 231-RV and the two AD-4 analog computer on the right. This
Applied Dynamics AD-4 analogs. EAI photo was taken in the early 1970s and
sold a hybrid system, which was called shows just how much smaller hybrid
the HYDAC (Hybrid Digital and Analog systems had become by then. This was
Computer). The HYDAC included an due to the solid-state electronics used at
EAI 231-RV and a digital logic computer that time. The AD-4 Hybrid System did
that had a large assortment of digital have a general-purpose digital computer
components. The HYDAC did not have a in it. The digital logic and digital opera-
general-purpose digital computer in it; tions modules were included on the same
however one could be connected with patch panel as the analog modules. We did
interface equipment, such as A/Ds and D/ buy two of the AD-4 analog computers
As. We never bought one of the EAI logic later on for use with the CDC CYBER
computers. The sort of simulations we 73-28. We did not buy the digital com-
were doing did not use enough digital puter portion of the AD Hybrid System

Applied Dynamics
AD-4 Computer
System. (NASA
photo ED00-0091-
1)

79
67
(the computer rack on the left side in coefficients. The analog was also used for
photo ED00-0091-1). the cockpit interfaces, the output displays
(strip charts, recorders, plotters, etc.), and
Integration on the Analog Com- any control-system simulations. This
puter separation of tasks between the analog and
digital computers remained constant until
Until digital computers became fast enough the FSL bought a second digital computer—
(or the really fast ones became cheap an SDS 9300. The 9300 was a faster
enough that we could afford them), we were computer than the 930. It had true parallel
forced to go with the current-day small bit processing of its 24-bit words and ran
digital computers. Even then, these comput- about four times faster than the 930 with
ers were not fast enough to do a complete 6 essentially the same silicon logic. However,
DOF simulation. There were several this still wasn’t quite fast enough to do all of
approaches as to just how much of the 6 the integration on the digital. The later
DOF equations of motion would be versions of ICARUS23 did do the integra-
squeezed into the digital computers and tion of the longitudinal equations. The
how much would be implemented on the frequency content of the lateral directional
analog computer. The approach initially equations was still too high for digital
chosen by the FSL was to do the integration integration. The FSL eventually got a digital
(with respect to time) of the accelerations computer that was both big enough and fast
and velocities on the analog and to use the enough. This occurred when the FRC
digital computer to calculate the actual received the CDC (Control Data Corp.)
accelerations and velocities. The digital CYBER 73 in 1973, along with the special
computer calculated the right side of the analog interface hardware and software that
equations of motion, which including doing also had been built by CDC. (See photo
the function generation of the nonlinear ECN-6375 of the CYBER 73-28.)

CYBER 73-28.
(NASA photo
ECN-6375)

23 The ICARUS (Immediate Checkout Analog Research Unity Scaled) program is described in detail in a later part of this section.

80
68
The hybrid systems described in this coefficients were different due to the
document are those that were mechanized addition of the external tanks to the
before the switch from analog integration number two X-15. The plane also had a
to digital integration. This is an arbitrary longer body with the addition of another
point in time, since analog computers fuel tank for the ramjet studies planned
were used for many years after this date for that particular X-15.
for cockpit interface and even some
control-system simulation. Even today’s This need to modify the simulator oc-
highly sophisticated digital flight simula- curred about the same time as Minneapo-
tions still have some analog circuitry in lis Honeywell (M-H) was having trouble
them. But there are no general-purpose in fabricating the airborne computers that
analog computers involved in the mecha- were to be used in the X-15. M-H was
nization of the equations of motion. This behind schedule in this fabrication and
end to the analog and hybrid simulation would not have time to build a back-up
eras, while arbitrary, is easily accepted. unit that was planned to be used with the
However, it was really all the other simulator. Since the FSL was in a position
problems that were characteristic of of having to expand the X-15 simulator
analogs that led to their phase-out for for the number two modifications, we
flight simulation. agreed to buy a general-purpose digital
computer, provided that the Air Force pay
Analog computers had a number of for the interface equipment needed to
undesirable characteristics that we had connect this general purpose digital
to deal with—signal-ground problems, computer to the all-analog X-15 simulator.
amplifier drift, limited precision, warm- This digital computer would be used to
up times, crosstalk, extensive set-up provide the additional capability needed
times, fuses, and other things. These to handle the different number two X-15
problems that were inherent in analog nonlinear derivatives. The new computer
computers are what eventually led to would also be used to simulate the M-H
their replacement with all-digital airborne computer. This was agreed to,
simulations. Unfortunately, all-digital and we set about buying the digital
simulations still don’t provide a number computer and interface hardware.
of the insights that are sometimes
needed to understand the processes The thought of building up another set of
being modeled. In addition, the all- function generators like those already in
digital simulations are still sampled use was probably considered, but not by
data systems moving though time in me or any of the other X-15 simulation
short but finite steps. While these time programmers. We had had enough of all
intervals are getting smaller and smaller those fuses and dinky pots. The idea of
(as the computers get faster and faster), using a digital computer to do this job was
they are not yet truly real-time or unanimously and immediately accepted.
parallel in nature, as are the pilots that No discussion was needed. We were going
fly them. But they are good enough, hybrid.
and that is what simulation is all about.
The Digital Side of the FSL
The First FSL Hybrid Simulation
We bought the SDS 930 computer after
The X-15 simulation was the first hybrid we had gone out with a competitive
simulator in the FSL. It did not begin that solicitation. We were not even aware that
way. The accident to the number two X- this particular model existed. It was so
15 in late 1962 and the resulting changes new that SDS had not started to advertise
that were made during its reconstruction it. The FRC Radar/Telemetry (TM)
forced us to have to deal with a major group—on the third floor of Building
change in the simulation. The nonlinear 4800—had an SDS 920. Our statement of

81
69
work was for a computer of the 920 class/ to stop this flow (i.e. end-of-record,
speed/capability. The 920 was state-of- malfunction, etc.). The analog interface
the-art for that class of small scientific equipment used this direct-memory
computer. We were quite surprised when feature, and thus this form of I/O could go
SDS proposed its newest model—the 930. on in parallel with CPU operations. Large
The 930 was about four times as fast as volumes of data could be read or written
the 920 and all the other computers in this without interfering with what the CPU
class. This speed factor led us to select the was doing. This capability of the SDS 930
SDS 930. I now had my very own digital was a big selling point, and many of these
computer to program. computers were sold because of this
direct-memory access feature. It provided
First SDS 930 Out the Door some of the advantages that the larger
mainframe computers had with respect to
The 930 that SDS delivered was the first the smaller scientific class of computers,
one built using its regular manufacturing especially for real-time applications such
production line. We got number six. The as aircraft simulations.
first five 930s had all been built in the
engineering department as a part of the Our SDS 930 included the basic CPU
development process. Because we bought with 8,000 words of 24-bit-word ferrite
the very first 930 that was delivered, SDS core memory. The initial operating system
seemed to bend over backwards in subse- was on paper tape and was not memory-
quent dealings with us. I guess it was resident. (The mag-tape version came
proud of the fact that a NASA facility had later.) The memory-resident part of the
bought one of its newest computers. This operating system was small and included
extra attention went all the way to the top. a bootstrap, a few standard constants used
There were a few problems later on that by all the SDS software, and a very small
involved the SDS sales or service staff. routine that loaded the operating system
They were resolved by the president or the into memory whenever it was needed. (A
vice president. The fact that we could call bootstrap routine was a small program of
the president directly was a useful tool in only a few instructions that loaded itself
dealing with the company. into memory and then followed this by
loading a larger, more comprehensive
SDS 930 Characteristics loader routine.) Fortunately the paper-tape
unit had a winder/rewinder. The system-
Some of the really great features of the SDS software paper tape filled a 10-inch reel.
930 were the memory access capabilities The bootstrap, the standard constants, and
that were included in its design. It had the priority interrupt transfer instructions
direct memory access for its data chan- occupied the lowest memory and used
nels. Most of the other computers (in this another 200 words of memory. This was
class) required the use of the arithmetic the state of the art, then. Today’s comput-
unit to handle memory access during data ers with their nanosecond instruction
input or output operations. The SDS 930 times, megabytes of memory, and
had several types of data channels that had gigabytes of disk storage weren’t even
direct memory access and did not need the imaginable then.
use of the computer’s arithmetic registers
for memory access. This meant that The silicon logic cards in the 930 were
almost all types of input or output (I/O) about 6 by 8 inches in size and contained
could be initiated and data would flow in one or two basic circuits, such as a couple
or out of memory without interfering with of AND gates, flip-flops, or one-shots.
the CPU doing its work. Interrupts were There were thousands of wires running
tied to the data channels and would trigger everywhere in the CPU chassis. All these
when events happened—such as the end wires were connected using wire-wrap
of data flow or if something had happened equipment. When the wire wraps were

82
70
installed correctly, they provided excel- stepping through instructions one by one
lent connections and could be removed and checking the arithmetic, branching,
and refastened in the field by maintenance and analog input or output, but that was
technicians. In addition, SDS provided really the only way to do this part of the
diagnostic routines that could pinpoint the checkout with the equipment we had. Not
exact circuit board that was malfunction- only did we have to check every instruc-
ing. Generally, all we had to do to fix a tion this way, but we had to try every
hardware problem was to run the diagnos- different path through the code. Every
tic, and then swap the sick circuit board option had to be tested using all the
with a good board. We had bought enough appropriate input values. Fortunately,
spare circuit boards to fill several storage there weren’t too many different paths to
cabinets. The sick circuit boards were test.
returned to SDS for repair.
It was mandatory to have taken the SDS
Program Debug Process programming class. This was the only way
to quickly get up to speed on the Assem-
As the only 930 programmer for many bler, Loader, and other software that SDS
months, I had the entire computer to provided. The class was where I learned
myself during the development and debug the many basic machine instructions and
phase of the X-15A-2 simulation pro- how to write Assembler code. Without this
gram. There were no debugging tools class, it was almost impossible to develop
available—especially for real-time code. software of any kind. The X-15 program
Debugging a real-time program, in those was written in the SDS Assembler lan-
days, meant sitting in front of the guage, which took the input instructions
operator’s console, stepping through the (on punched cards or paper tape) and
instructions one at a time, and examining turned them into machine-readable
the results of each instruction. Really! Try instructions. The input instructions were
doing that today. The computer console called the source code and were written by
could display the main computer registers the programmer. The SDS Loader took the
involved in the instruction execution. The machine-readable instructions and put
display had several 24-bit registers, where these into memory in machine-executable
each bit had a small light indicating if the form. The printed listings provided by the
bit was zero or one. The 930 CPU had one Assembler gave us the information that we
arithmetic register (called the A register) needed while we stepped through instruc-
where an operand (the data item being tions (i.e. executed the instructions
operated on) was loaded before the manually, one at a time). By knowing
instruction was performed. The instruc- what each instruction was supposed to do
tion itself was first loaded into the instruc- and knowing what the operand was, we
tion register (called the C register). There could determine if the program was
was also an Index register (called the X calculating the right results.
register) that was used to determine the
memory address of the operand or storage Remember this was all in internal data
location. It could be used for repetitive or format, which is certainly not how we
looping operations on a sequential group learned to do arithmetic in grade school.
of operands. And finally there was a B Binary arithmetic in twos-compliment form
register that was an extension of the A is a long way from the decimal arithmetic
register and allowed for double-word we learned in school. In addition, all the
operations. These four registers (A, B, X, equation’s variables were in a scaled format
and C) along with the memory addresses similar to the scaling used in analog com-
of the instructions and operands were puter programming. We not only needed to
about all we could look at. This, however, know what the parameters were but the
was enough for us to actually debug our scaling factors that had been applied when
real-time programs. It took a long time, the analog program had been implemented.

83
71
In the X-15 digital program all variables reel of paper tape. Reading this tape took
were scaled to ±1.0 as the maximum. This quite a while. The program almost
is similar to scaling the analog variables to completely filled the 8K memory.
the ±100-volt range of the analog comput-
ers. The D/A and A/D converters used this That’s right—8K (or, to be precise, 8,192)
same scaling.24 Consequently the input words of 24-bit memory for both the
parameters were already scaled and we just program and all the data. That sounds sort
used this scaling in the calculations in the of ludicrous now, considering the ad-
digital computer. vances that have been made in computers
since then. But that is all we had—and
Input/Output Routines that was enough. We had to make some
sacrifices in our design and coding to
Some of the first routines I had to write get everything to fit in this limited space.
were the ones needed to read in the data The only one I can remember that may
that was used in the X-15-2 simulation have had an impact on the quality of the
program. Although SDS did have a library simulation was having to limit the data
of general-purpose subroutines for the files (for all the nonlinear derivatives) to
card reader, typewriter, and paper-tape a smaller size than was desirable. The file
reader/punch units, we were not able to size was quite adequate for the data we
use most of these as they were too gen- had. As mentioned above, we could not
eral-purpose in nature and therefore took use the standard SDS-supplied I/O
up too much memory space. For our routines. They were just too big and had
programs, we had to write our own a number of capabilities that we could do
shorter, simpler I/O routines. Since the without. The ones I wrote were bare-
X-15 program calculated so many nonlin- bones code that did not check for any of
ear coefficients for the number two X-15, the possible hardware malfunctions that
getting all this data into memory was an could happen while data was being read.
important part of the program. In fact If the card reader crunched a card or the
reading the data was the first thing the paper-tape reader tore the tape, we just
program did. This data was constantly stopped the load process, repaired or got
being updated as the number two X-15 another copy of the card deck or tape,
flew, the research engineers wanting to and restarted the load process. When you
update the data in the simulation to match are the only user, you can make these
what they were getting from flight. In the choices. You don’t have to worry about
beginning, this data was read from any other programs that might also be
punched cards. Once the data was read, it running.
was converted from the alphanumeric
characters to the proper internal binary Computer Program Listings
format. After all the data was read,
converted, and stored, it was possible to In the beginning, we only had the type-
punch this data along with the entire writer for the printed listings generated by
program out on the paper-tape punch in a the assembler. This was slow. It took
memory-dump format that was easily hours to type out the complete program.
reloadable. Thereafter (until the next Because of this, there were many times
change in coefficients), this paper tape when the program was re-assembled
was all that was needed to load the X-15 without a new printout—especially if the
simulator digital program. The entire changes were only a couple of instruc-
program with all the data filled an 8-inch tions. We just marked up the last printout
24An analog value of +100 volts was converted to +1.0, zero volts was +0.0, and -100 volts was a -1.0 in the digital computer. The
digital computer really didn’t know what scaling had been applied to the numbers it did its arithmetic on. The programmer had to
keep track of this throughout the entire program. The scaling assumed maximum values of 1.0. Therefore the numbers we were
working on were really a decimal (actually, the binary equivalent), which when multiplied by the maximum value gave the correct
value for the parameter.

84
72
with a red pencil and used it. This was OK coiling these shorter utility tapes up and
if the changes were minor and did not were always getting paper cuts on our
affect the addresses (memory locations) of fingers. If you set a roll of the black tape
the instructions or operands by more than down on a piece of paper, it would leave a
one or two locations. But after several re- doughnut-shaped oil ring on the paper.
assemblies without a listing, the listings Nasty stuff!
got so marked up with pencil changes that
it became almost impossible to determine We also used the green tape for our final
the actual memory addresses. This made it output tapes, after the source-code assem-
very difficult to debug the program. We bler had finished its work. The green tape
then had to take the time to assemble the was not oiled, which was good. It also
program with a new listing. I tried to cost a lot more. However, the green tape
schedule these assemblies so that I could was hard on the punch and caused it to
take my lunch break while the computer wear out quickly, so we did not use it until
typed the printout. This situation also we were ready to punch out the final
meant that, when I was working graveyard memory-dump (self-loading) tapes.
shift, I could not start one of these assem- Because of the Mylar (between two layers
blies (with listing) during the last hour of of paper tape), it was a lot easier to cut
the shift. That would have interfered with your fingers with the green tape than with
the day shift and the training or flight- the black kind.
planning activities. We eventually bought
a line printer when we expanded the 930. None of these supplies were stocked in
That was a welcome improvement to the the local warehouse in those days. We had
operation of the computer. to keep track and order supplies when we
needed them. Fortunately the guys in the
Paper Tape TM lab, with the SDS 920, used the same
stuff, and we were always borrowing from
There were two forms of the paper tape each other when our orders were late.
we used. One was a black all-paper tape
for temporary files. This was oiled and SDS Programming Classes
this oil got all over our hands and stank
like mineral oils usually do. The oil also The basic programming classes were not
caused the rubber bands (that were used to long enough to really cover in detail the
keep the rolled-up tapes rolled up) to get writing of input and output routines or the
quite soft and mushy after a while. When individual instructions for the special-
this happened, we had to throw the roll of purpose analog interface. I talked my boss
tape away and punch another copy from into letting me contract for a week of SDS
the master tape. There was also a green programmer support. I spent two days at
Mylar-reinforced paper tape. This was SDS with different programmers learning
quite strong and almost impossible to tear. how to write I/O routines. The first day
The system software and all the utility was a total waste, and I really got nothing
routines came on this green tape. We had accomplished. The second day, a different
boxes and boxes of these tapes in cabi- SDS programmer was assigned to help
nets. All sorts of utility routines. The and this turned out to be most productive.
larger software programs, such as the His name was Rider Anderson and he was
Assembler, operating systems, mathemati- very good. We designed the digital
cal routines, etc., usually came on alumi- program for the basic X-15 simulation
num reels. Each programmer had a that day. We even started on some of the
personal collection of the utility routines I/O routines. With this start, I was able to
that he or she used most. We carried them completely write and debug all the I/O
around much like today’s computer nerds routines for the X-15 simulation program
carry their diskettes and CDs around in in about one week. This included the card-
their backpacks. We spent a lot of time reader input of the data, the paper-tape

85
73
routines, and typewriter routines. I also was a set of documents required by
had to write routines to convert the input NASA Headquarters to justify a com-
data from alphanumeric characters to the puter procurement. I finally got to go
proper internal binary format. For some- to a class on how to write statements of
one who had never written digital com- work in 1992, the year before I retired.
puter programs before, I was quite proud Timely? By then, I had written well over
of myself to do all this in about one 40 quite lengthy SOWs for all sorts of
week—in Assembly language—with the computer systems. Come to think of it, I
limited peripherals we had. Following never really had a class on basic analog
this, I was also able to write, in about two computer programming. That was some-
more weeks, all the function-generation thing else I learned the hard way—by
code that did the actual interpolation for doing it.
the nonlinear coefficients and the real-
time I/O routines to read the analog But that is the way analog computers
inputs and to write the calculated coeffi- were; you could actually teach yourself
cients back to the analogs. It took a lot how to program one of them. Too bad
longer to actually check out all this code digital computers weren’t quite the same.
than it took to write the programs in the Maybe that is why I never chose to defect
first place. I did make a third one-day trip from the FSL and transfer to the digital-
to SDS to go over what I had done with programming branch in those days.
Rider Anderson, but by then the program Analogs were a lot more fun. It helped to
was nearly complete and I really didn’t have a good sense of humor and a ton of
need any more help. patience to cope with all their frustrating
idiosyncrasies. Digital computers never
I never used the other two days of the had the same appeal, even though I spent
contracted programming support. SDS more years programming them than I ever
did eventually offer a more comprehen- did programming analog computers.
sive course covering its computer’s data
channels and peripherals. SDS also Analog Interface
provided a one-week class devoted to its
special-purpose data channels—such as The interface equipment between the
the analog interface. These types of analog and digital computers was very
interfaces had a special class of instruc- state-of-the-art and built by SDS. There
tions, which was not covered in the basic were A/D converters, D/A converters,
classes. This class was also helpful for priority interrupts, real-time clocks, and
when we got the SDS 9300. The I/Os in single-bit discretes.25 The real-time clocks
these two different computers were quite were programmable and allowed us to
similar. I was able to take this class about generate timing signals (connected to
two years after we had received the priority interrupts), which we used to
original 930. slave the calculations to a preset interval.
We were able to use a 10-millisecond
NASA did this to me on several occa- frame time for the X-15 simulation. The
sions—that is, allowed me to attend a converters were also timed by this clock-
class I needed to do my job, many years interrupt.
after I actually started doing that job. For
example, I started buying computer The analog inputs had simultaneous
systems in about 1958. That was when I sample and hold circuits on each channel,
wrote my first-ever statement of work which made it possible for all the analog
(SOW) and automated data processing inputs to be sampled at the same instant,
(ADP) acquisition plan. An ADP plan then converted to digital and read in a

25A discrete is a single-bit data value (of zero or one) and is used to represent those types of data that only have two distinct values—
such as on or off, switch up or down, light on or off, true or false.

86
74
sequential manner. Also, the output could be set to generate a continuous timing
parameters from the digital computer were signal that could be set anywhere between 1
written to the D/A converters, which were and 1x223 microseconds. The clock could
double-registered, whereby the outputs also be set to generate a single interrupt
were written sequentially to the first register signal (also between 1 and 1x223 microsec-
in each D/A and then all these registers onds). We rarely used this second mode,
were transferred to the final output registers except during check-out of timed routines.
simultaneously. This technique eliminated Normally, we just started the timer at the
time-skew differences and the problems that appropriate interval desired for the particu-
were associated with using parameters (in lar simulation. In the beginning, this frame
the equations) that were not sampled time was 10 milliseconds. During the
simultaneously. following years, as the calculations got
more complicated, the frame time grew to
The discretes were single-bit data items and 50 milliseconds. This occurred during the
usually connected to such things as latter days of the hybrid period and espe-
switches (as input parameters) and cockpit cially when we started to do all the pro-
lights (as output signals). These discretes gramming in Fortran on the Cyber 72
were hard-wired to individual bits in a 24- computer in the middle ’70s. This 50-
bit register. There were instructions to read millisecond time interval was about as long
these 24-bit registers on input or to write to as could be tolerated for the aircraft simula-
similar registers for output. The basic 930 tors of those days.
instruction set included the instructions to
test or set the individual bits or groups of 930 Expansion
bits together.
Several years after we bought the 930, it
Priority interrupts were similar to discretes, was expanded to its maximum size in
in that a single input line was connected to a terms of memory (from 8K to 32K). The
single interrupt. These interrupts—for number of D/As, A/Ds, single-bit
example, the analog computer mode control discretes and priority interrupts were also
or a timer—were connected to signals that expanded to at least twice the original
required the computer to respond immedi- configuration. We were really into hybrid
ately. The interrupts were ordered in a simulation, and getting the digital com-
hierarchical chain. This meant that the puter expanded permitted us to do even
programmer had to select the order of more with it. For one thing, the X-15
priority for the interrupt routines. When a program, while still the main user, was not
priority interrupt occurred, the CPU would using the 930 all the time. Since the 930
first determine if any interrupts of higher was only needed for X-15-2 simulation
priority were active. If so, the new and practice or flight-planning purposes, it
lower priority interrupt(s) would have to was available for other simulations. Other
wait. If there were no higher priority simulations were also developed to use
interrupts active, the new interrupt would this 930. Having a larger computer
then become active and the routine tied to it allowed us to better support this need.
would be run. If the active interrupts were Several of the FSL programmers had
of lower priority, the routine tied to the new taken classes at SDS and were also using
and higher interrupt would be run to this computer. The SDS Fortran software
completion, after which control would be was available and the computer needed
returned to the interrupted lower priority more memory to handle the programs that
routine(s). were being written in Fortran.

The real-time clocks were tied to priority A Really Hot Computer
interrupts. We had several of these special
clocks, but rarely used more than one. The This additional memory was a sole-source
real-time clocks had two modes. They procurement, and it went OK. Or so we

87
75
thought. In expanding the computer we maintenance manuals were quite expen-
had to add another bank of power sup- sive, SDS agreed to send out a truck to
plies. Both banks required 220-volt, 3- pick them up. The SDS plant was in Santa
phase service and the power lines in the Monica, California. The truck got to the
X-15 sim lab were rewired to accommo- Flight Research Center in the afternoon.
date the expansion. What we didn’t know We loaded all the extra boxes of manuals
at the time was that in wiring up the onto the truck and it left. The next day, the
power, the electricians wired both sets of same truck was back, the same manuals
power supplies incorrectly. Besides the were unloaded at our warehouse, and the
three phases, there were also a ground truck left before anyone called me. (After
wire and a neutral wire in the incoming all, the shipping labels still said these
power lines. Somehow, the ground wire were for us.) Apparently, when the truck
got connected to only one bank of power had arrived at the SDS warehouse the
supplies and the neutral wire was only night before, the boxes were unloaded and
connected to the other bank of power just left on the dock. The next morning,
supplies. Both of these lines should have the day-shift crew found these boxes
been connected to both banks. In spite of sitting there, decided that they were ready
this mistake, the computer worked, until to be delivered and sent the truck back
one day, about a year later, when someone out, but with a different driver. The driver
accidentally kicked loose the power cord from the day before wasn’t there to stop
from one of the banks of power supplies. this from happening. This time when I
The computer shut down, as you might called SDS, I was told to throw them
expect. Fortunately, the power cord that away. We did.
was kicked loose was the one that had the
neutral wire in it. If the other power cord In spite of these strange happenings with the
(the one with the ground wire) had been SDS computers, we had a good working
the one kicked loose, the entire cabinet— relationship with the company. Its offices in
including the outer metal skin—would Santa Monica were in a very nice locale to
have been at 220 volts! That probably go to for programming classes. It was close
would have seriously injured someone. to the beach; it was nice and cool; and there
We were really lucky, that time! The were many really good restaurants in the
power cords were rewired. near vicinity of the classrooms. This
included (or so we thought) the best place in
Lots of Manuals all of the Los Angeles area to get prime
rib—Cheerios—at the junction of Ocean
Another interesting (and funny) tale about and Pico Boulevards. Everyone who went
the 930 expansion had to do with docu- there agreed with us. And collectively,
mentation. When we wrote the specifica- among all of us, we had tried every other
tions for the expansion, we asked for a highly touted prime rib restaurant in the Los
number of manuals. These were to be Angels basin. That slab of prime rib, very
delivered with the hardware. We asked for nicely aged, was as big as the plate, and at
20 copies of the several different pro- least one inch thick. It was so tender you
gramming manuals and 2 copies each of could cut it with your fork. Many of us
all the maintenance manuals. Somehow, continued to go there, even after we no
the people who packed the manuals at longer had SDS computers.
SDS for deliver sent us 20 copies of
everything, including all the maintenance SDS was a small company, and we got to
manuals. There were about three dozen know many of the top brass, including the
different maintenance manuals. And we president and founder. I was even offered
now had 20 copies of each of these— the opportunity to buy 100 shares of stock
boxes and boxes full. A small truck load! I when it went public, at only $25 a share.
called SDS and explained what had Unfortunately, I had to turn down this
happened, and since all these extra offer—some sort of conflict-of-interest

88
76
concern. I kept track of the stock for board used in the SDS 930. Unfortunately
several years, until SDS merged with the there were parts of the computer for
Xerox Company in 1969. At that time the which we did not have spares—such as
stock had gone up by almost a factor of power supplies and the memory units.
19. That $2,500 worth of shares I was When one of these parts failed, we just
offered was worth over $47,000. That was had to wait until they were replaced with
a lot of money in those days. It still is. good parts.

SDS Maintenance Most computer companies (in those days)
took four hours to respond to maintenance
We had a very turbulent experience with calls to our area. Very few computer
the maintenance of the SDS 930. We companies had local facilities staffed for
contracted with SDS to provide both maintenance calls anywhere in the high
preventative and corrective maintenance desert. Almost all these calls were to
services. From Santa Monica it took offices in the Los Angeles area, and it
several hours for an SDS maintenance took at least four hours for those compa-
man to get to the FRC after we had called nies to respond. We had other mainte-
about a hardware problem. Fortunately, nance contracts that stipulated four-hour
there were computer diagnostic routines response times. I guess SDS considered us
we could run, which were able to isolate to be good customers. The fact that SDS
specific circuit boards that were malfunc- 930 computer we bought was the first one
tioning. These diagnostics proved to be delivered was both good and bad, for we
quite handy. On many occasions, espe- did have some unusual problems that were
cially during night shift, I was able to most likely due to our computer being the
diagnose and change out circuit boards to first one out the door. On the other hand,
fix a problem. There were several times we did get a lot of support from the top
when the SDS repairman had been to the managers at SDS. I think they liked the
FRC, done his thing, and left to return to idea that NASA was using one of their
Santa Monica, whereupon the computer computers for the X-15 project. This
broke down again. Now we had to wait project had a lot of visibility both locally
for him to get back to the shop before he and nationally.
could be sent back. This was long before
cellular phones existed. Salesman of the Month Club

SDS eventually had a maintenance man During the next couple of years (follow-
living in the high desert. Its policy was ing the delivery of the SDS 930), SDS
that it would not provide a local mainte- seemed to have a lot of trouble in keeping
nance office unless there were at least a sales representative in our area. There
three computers in the same vicinity. The weren’t a lot of sales opportunities out in
Jet Propulsion Laboratory had a tracking the desert. There was one year when we
station at its Goldstone facility near actually had 12 different sales reps
Barstow that also had computers main- assigned to the area. A couple of these I
tained by SDS. The FRC had an SDS 920 never met and only talked with over the
computer in the telemetry facility, on the phone. When we were getting ready to
third floor. Because of these three SDS expand the 930, and had the money and
computers, all in the high desert, SDS specifications ready to go, I called the
hired a technician who lived in the sales rep (of the month) and asked him if
Palmdale area, and he was able to get to he could come up and discuss our require-
the FRC, usually within an hour, to fix ments. He agreed to a date but never
hardware problems. This arrangement did showed up. When I called and asked what
improve the response time in getting our had happened, he gave no excuse and
hardware problems fixed. We also bought agreed to another date about a week later.
a large supply of every type of circuit Again he never showed up. This meeting

89
77
was rescheduled for a third time. Still, he frame time, we set about re-configuring
never showed up and never called to say the SDS 930 real-time operating system to
why. This time my boss called the SDS allow us to run two different ICARUS
president and mentioned that we were programs simultaneously, using the SDS
ready and willing to buy but his sales 930 computer. This was a big improve-
representatives seemed to have some ment in permitting the FSL to support all
aversion to driving out to the desert. The the many simulations asked of it.
very next day we had a brand new sales
rep show up to help us out. I don’t know ICARUS was written using fixed-point
what happened to the “no-show” guy. He (scaled-integer) arithmetic. It was pos-
may have been fired, because I never sible to reprogram ICARUS for airplanes
heard of him again in subsequent visits to that varied from the norm. That was
the SDS facility in Santa Monica. discouraged to maintain a certain standard
to the hybrid simulations. But basically,
ICARUS ICARUS remained as it started out to be.
This was a very successful program and
The ICARUS (which was an acronym for definitely was worth the effort spent in its
Immediate Checkout Analog Research development. I was able to use it for the
Unity Scaled) program was a digital Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL)
computer program that calculated the 6 simulations, even though the STOL
DOF equations of motion of a typical aircraft had a number of nonlinear coeffi-
airplane (see list below). The computed cients of four variables (see the section on
accelerations and velocities were output STOL Simulations for more on this
(via D/A converters) to an analog com- simulation). ICARUS was developed and
puter. There, the accelerations were programmed by Lowell Greenfield and
integrated with respect to time to get the Don Bacon.
velocities and the velocities were inte-
grated with respect to time to get the Before ICARUS was put into general use,
angles or distances. These quantities were it had to be validated. This testing in-
then input to the ICARUS program (via volved trial runs using both all-analog and
A/Ds converters) and used in the calcula- hybrid simulations of the same airplane
tions for the accelerations and velocities and comparing results obtained. It took
according to the equations of motion. several weeks, but the ICARUS imple-
ICARUS calculated a large number of mentation proved itself equal to the task
nonlinear coefficients of three variables. and was accepted as the preferred method
We programmed any control systems from then on. The HL-10 lifting-body
needed by the particular airplane being simulation used ICARUS on either the
simulated on the analog computer. Also SDS 930 or SDS 9300 and one or more
the analog computer was the interface to EAI 231R analog computers. This par-
the cockpit and all such signal condition- ticular simulation was the first to use
ing was programmed using the analog ICARUS. Don Bacon talks a lot more
components or a special-purpose cockpit about ICARUS in his PA in the section on
interface box. The pilots’ inputs were also FSL Personnel’s PAs.
input to ICARUS through A/D converters
for use in the equations. ICARUS was used for the following
aircraft:
ICARUS was written in Assembly
language, originally for the SDS 930. It Lifting Bodies (M2, HL-10)
was later ported to the SDS 9300 that we F-8 Digital Fly-By-Wire
bought in 1967. Initially, ICARUS ran YF-12
using a 10-millisecond clock. However, Hyper 3 Remotely Piloted Vehicle
since most of the airplanes of those days STOL
could be simulated using a 20-millisecond Oblique Wing

90
78
AD-1 housed the X-15 iron bird. Photos ECN-
F-4E 7074 and E-23594 show the F-8 DFBW
F-8 Oblique Wing cockpit and some of the hardware and
F-8 Supercritical Wing wiring that tied it into the hybrid com-
JetStar puter system in the Sim Lab and the
PA-30 airborne computers on which the software
Shuttle (Approach and Landing Tests) was developed. There are many papers
Wake Vortex research and reports about this project. A book
Lightweight Fighters—YF-16, YF-17 chronicling this project has now been
F-18 (engineering studies) written (James E. Tomayko, Computers
F-104 Take Flight: A History of NASA’s Pioneer-
T-33 ing Digital Fly-By-Wire Project, NASA
T-37 SP-2000-4224.)

As can be seen from this list, ICARUS The ICARUS program along with the
was used for many different projects. quickly changeable EAI 231-RV and
Several, such as the Lifting Body and cockpits resulted in a large number of
Digital Fly-By-Wire (DFBW) were very simulations sharing the same hardware
important projects for the FRC. For and being scheduled for two- and four-
programs like the F-8 DFBW, the mecha- hour periods each day. Weekly schedules
nization of the computer portion of these were prepared, usually for two weeks at a
simulators was not the most important time, and re-done each week because of
aspect of the program. The F-8 DFBW the somewhat variable flight schedules.
program led to the development of aircraft The early era of simulations’ being able to
electronic control systems that are used in use a computer (or computers) for weeks
many of today’s military and commercial on end was essentially over. Projects that
aircraft. The software development, needed more than two-hour time periods
testing, and certification that went on frequently worked second shift. The
using the F-8 DFBW simulator is the real ICARUS/Hybrid systems provided an
story behind this simulation. This was almost assembly-line mode of operation
done using the “iron-bird” cockpit that that was a long time in the making. This
was installed in the same lean-to that had went on for several years until those

F-8 DFBW Iron
Bird Cockpit.
(NASA photo
ECN-7074)

91
79
F-8 DFBW Iron
Bird Cockpit.
(NASA photo
ECN-7075)

DFBW Simulation
(Early—pre Iron-
Bird—in Lean-to,
September 1971).
(NASA photo E-
23594)

computer systems were replaced by the had over 20 proposals from companies all
CDC CYBER 73. over the United States. It took quite a
while to evaluate all these proposals and
DUHOS narrow the field to the best qualified.
There were lots of small companies that
DUHOS (Dual Hybrid Operating System) were developing software systems.
was a special real-time operating system However, very few of them had much
we had developed under contract to allow real-time experience, and only a couple
us to run two different simulations (such had any experience with using combined
as with ICARUS) simultaneously on the analog/digital computers. We had asked
SDS 930 computer. This was my first for an operating system that would allow
experience with a competitive solicitation us to use the SDS Real-Time Fortran,
for a software development system. We Assembler, Loaders, and Libraries in a

92
80
two-user (only) time-shared mode. We did Fortran system had these capabilities.
not have enough memory to run more
than two at a time. This was during the Compared to today’s computers, this
very early days of such time-shared multi- probably doesn’t sound like anything
user operating systems. Most of the significant. But this was quite a feat for
proponents had experience with multi- the computers of that era—especially in
user, transaction-based systems that were view of the fact that the 930’s basic
being developed for on-line applications, instruction cycle time was 1.75 microsec-
but few had any true real-time simulation onds and most instructions took two or
background or even knew what the more of these cycles to execute. CUC
difference was. Fortunately, there were took about a year to design and imple-
several companies that did have the ment DUHOS, working mostly on second
proper experience. and third shifts (and lots of weekends).
Unfortunately, the lead programmer (John
DUHOS was developed and written by Swanson) quit about three-fourths of the
CUC (Computer Usage Company, Los way through the contract. Swanson had
Angeles, California). The SDS 930 had previously worked for SDS and was
been expanded to its maximum size. Its involved in the development of SDS’s
instruction format only allowed for Real-Time Fortran system. He was an
executable code to reside in the lower avid bridge player—one of the best in
16K of memory. The upper 16K could California—and he quit so that he could
only be used for data. There were instruc- spend full time in preparation for an
tions that allowed the programmer to important national bridge tournament that
store and access anything in the upper was coming up. This really hurt CUC and
16K of memory, but only as operands and it took an extra three months (on a nine-
not instructions. DUHOS ran two month fixed-priced contract) to finish the
ICARUS simulations, using the lower job. The company took the FRC to court
16K for executable code and the upper in the attempt to get the extra costs paid, but
16K for the data for the two different to no avail. The extra costs were only about
simulations. Each simulation used 10 $8,000. The original contract was about
milliseconds (or less), and both simula- $75,000 (as I remember) and should have
tions were run at a 20-millisecond frame been finished in nine months.
time (i.e., 50 frames per second). DUHOS
was written so that each simulation could The DUHOS program was not written to
be operated completely independently of run on the SDS 9300 we bought for the
the other. For example, it was possible to Lifting Body Program. The 9300 was a
have one simulation in full real-time faster computer, with more of its operating-
operation, slaved to an analog computer system memory resident than was true of
for run/reset/hold control modes and the the 930. The instruction format allowed a
second simulation in the process of program to directly access any word-
loading the data required by the program. instruction or data in its 32K memory. Also,
The two simulators were completely the 9300 SDS Real-Time Fortran was much
independent and could be in any mode better and we started to use it in addition to
needed for set-up, checkout, and opera- the SDS Assembly language for our digital
tion. The normal operating system for the programs. The analogs we were buying had
SDS-930 was not a multi-user real-time servo set pots and could be reprogrammed
system. It was not designed for more than in less than an hour. This meant that we
one user at a time. The DUHOS required could change over from one simulation to
that the system routines be able to handle another, including the cockpit, in about an
two different users essentially simulta- hour. Our simulations programs were
neously. Most of the operating system getting bigger and bigger, which also
software was neither re-entrant nor prevented us sharing the 9300 between two
recursive, although SDS’s Real-Time typical simulation programs. Because of the

93
81
increasing usage of the 9300 with ICARUS, circuitry in the SDS 9300 to work closely
the 930/DUHOS/ICARUS usage declined with this analog circuitry was accomplished
and the computer eventually was surplused only with a lot of patience and ingenuity, a
to get it out of the old X-15 simulator area lot of sweat, and a great deal of trial and
of the FSL. The X-15 Program had ended error. This digital/analog circuitry seemed to
and the analog computers used for the function as erratically as the temperature in
simulator were surplused. The Center the sim labs. The SDS programmers slaved
wanted the office space for other uses and for weeks to get the many digital subrou-
the 930 was going to have to be moved. tines operational. The sad part of this story
Rather than do this, FSL management made is that we never really used this special-
the decision to get rid of it. The useful life purpose software that SDS gave us. We
of the new DUHOS had also ended. One of never used that portion of the new 9300
the computer facilities at UCLA requested interface that allowed the digital computer
the SDS 930 and we donated it to the to control the mode of the analog computer,
university. either. Our simulations were still set up so
that the digital computer was slaved to the
I’m not sure what UCLA used this com- analog computer. That had been our
puter for. The cost of maintenance was philosophy all along, and we never changed
getting higher each year as the company as long as we were doing hybrid simula-
lost interest in providing people or parts. tions.
This maintenance problem seemed to
always plague us in the FSL (and many Who’s The Boss
other customers), as the computers we
bought got old and the original manufactur- In the world of hybrid simulations, there
ers quit supporting them. There were many seemed to be two different philosophies
companies that sprouted up to provide concerning the slaving of the two different
maintenance of older-generation computers. kinds of computers. The larger camp, which
The computers of those days were expen- included most of the analog/hybrid
sive, and not like the throw-away PCs that computer manufacturers, contended that
are being bought nowadays. the digital computer should be the master
and the analog computer the slave. The
SDS 9300 hybrid systems they were selling were
designed around this philosophy, includ-
When we bought this computer, via a ing their operating system software. The
competitive procurement, SDS’s proposal smaller group, which included the FSL,
included a fully developed interface to our always had the analog computer as the
newest analog computer. Our new analog master and the digital computer software
(an EAI 231-RV) included very sophisti- was slaved to what was happening on the
cated digital logic and digital automatic set- analogs. The digital computer program
up capabilities. SDS also, unfortunately for would just sit and wait for something to
the company, bid its interface to this happen in the analog world. This seemed
analog’s set-up hardware at no additional more like real life than the other way
cost! This turned out to a mistake on around. To us, slaving the analog world to
someone’s part at SDS, but it was in the the discrete happenings of a digital
proposal, and was a significant factor in computer seemed backwards.
SDS’s being selected. It was free to us. It
took SDS about one whole year to design, The special-purpose software was de-
develop, and debug this software. A lot of signed to allow the program in the SDS
the analog automatic set-up circuits were 9300 not only to control the operating
relay- and servo-based, and developing modes of the analog (i.e., reset, operate,
digital logic and software to tie into this hold, etc.,) and the A/D and D/A interface
type of analog hardware was an extremely but also to set all the servo-set pots on the
frustrating process. Getting the digital analog computer. We never used that part

94
82
of the digital software, either. We always during the day shift when the EAI 231-RV
set the pots either manually or with the computer was not being used.
paper-tape reader. This method was
actually faster and more reliable than Applied Dynamics, Inc. AD-4
other methods. Analog Computers

SDS 9300 Acceptance The FSL bought two AD-4 analog com-
puters from Applied Dynamics, Inc.
Because of this mistake by SDS in its (ADI), in 1970. These were the most
proposal, we could not take acceptance of sophisticated analog computers we had.
the 9300 computer and interface until Don Bacon, Larry Caw, and I attended an
almost one year after it was installed. AD-4 programming class that was being
Fortunately the HL-10 Lifting Body taught by Applied Dynamic at the Atomic
Project took a long break due to stability Energy Commission Facility in Oak
problems on the very first HL-10 flight. Ridge, Tennessee. This facility had also
That forced the Program Office to back bought some AD-4s and had contracted
off and study what had really happened. with ADI to teach the class at its site. We
Until the problem was found and fixed, were able to get seats in the class. Other-
the simulation was not really needed. The wise we would have had to wait for the
problem turned out to be flow separation next normally scheduled class, which if I
over the afterbody, resulting in severe remember correctly would have been after
handling characteristics. Modifications to our computers were delivered.
the vehicle were designed and tested in
wind tunnels to correct the problem. Once Photo ED00-0091-1 shows an ADI AD-4
the vehicle was modified, the pilots found Hybrid Computer System. The computer
it to be a very nice craft to fly, and they on the right is the analog computer similar
all wanted to do so. By then the simula- to our two AD-4s. The computer on the
tor was operational. left is the digital computer. Since we were
going to use our AD-4s with the new
SDS had several programmers using our central computer system, we did not buy
computers, mostly on second and third the digital computer part of the hybrid
shifts, for a number of months trying to system.
get its software operational. It seems
strange that the company would even The AD-4 analog computer had a large
propose such a subsystem when it did not amount of digital logic, including func-
even have the proper analog computer tions not previously available with the
system to develop and test the software EAI analogs. After the AD-4s were
and interface that it proposed. SDS was accepted, they were used with the 9300
forced to use ours on a time-available digital computer, and the EAI computers
basis or buy its own computer. Because were eventually surplused. The Rocket
we could not officially accept the com- Site26 did opt to get the EAI analogs
puter, we were only allowed to use it to about a year after they were surplused.
convert our 930 software (that was to be
used to run acceptance tests) and to The AD-4 analog computers were bought
become familiar with the different operat- for use with the new digital computer that
ing system and other software. Any other was being bought for the central data
usage would have been in violation of the processing center, known as the CYBER
contract. So, the 9300 sat there almost one 73-28. The specifications for the interface
full year before we could really use it for to that digital computer were based on the
anything productive. This also allowed two specific AD-4s that we bought, which
the SDS programmers to use the 9300 were not the standard AD-4s. ADI also
26 An Air Force facility on Edwards AFB where rocket and missile testing and development occurred.

95
83
marketed a hybrid system that included mers were more inclined to use the digital
an AD-4 as the analog half of that computer for everything that could be
system. The standard AD-4 was built to done there. Even the aircraft-control-
interface easily with the ADI digital systems simulations eventually were
computer. Consequently our AD-4s moved into the CYBER. Analog and
were slightly different. This led to some hybrid simulation was no longer the way
problems later on, since CDC devel- to go. The FSL had started a new chapter
oped its analog interface on information in its evolution.
it had gotten from ADI, which turned
out to be incorrect. However, our The history of that chapter will be told
statement of work (SOW) for the digital elsewhere, but a key figure in the transi-
computer and analog interface very tion from the period of analog and hybrid
clearly specified that the new digital simulations to the digital simulations that
computer had to be interfaced with our followed was Al Myers, who recalled his
specific analogs. CDC had to make early work at the Flight Research Center
some changes to the interface system and the FSL in an interview in 1998 as
after it was installed at the FRC. This follows:
caused some problems during the
checkout and acceptance of the new I was with NASA from 1971 through
digital computer. ’81, for about ten years, which was
an interesting ten years. I came to
Since the new software that we used (see NASA as what I think was the last
below) was a full 6 DOF simulation, with Army detailee. When NASA was
digital integration, many of the capabilities originally created out of elements of
of the AD-4s were never really used. This is the Army’s Redstone Arsenal and the
particularly true of the digital logic units on old NACA, there was an exchange
the AD-4s. The AD-4s soon became just program between the Army and the
cockpit interface systems. After several NASA to cover the technical needs
years and especially after the special in- over a transition period. After a
house-built cockpit interface units were put couple of years, the Army decided
into use, the AD-4s were no longer needed they didn’t need any more NASA
and were also surplused. people. But NASA, never turning
down a free help from the technical
The only time I can recall working with side, continued it until the early
the AD-4s was during the acceptance ‘70’s. I know I was the last Army
testing that we did upon delivery. I was detailee here. I think I was the last
not able to complete all the testing, as I one in the program itself.
was reassigned to the STOL Project to
handle its simulations needs. Don Bacon When I came to NASA, I became
had to complete the testing and accep- involved with the simulation activity
tance. I don’t remember Larry Caw ever and what was then the Data Systems
actually doing any programming of either Director. And it was an interesting
of these two AD-4 analogs. Larry was time in the technical history of that
very much involved with the GPAS and technology. Because we were just at
spent most of his time working on its the early stages of the transition
analog computers. Don had been pro- between doing simulation with
moted to a management position in the analog computers and moving into
Simulation Branch. There were none of the realm of doing them digitally.
the older simulation programmers left, And I just had the luck to have
which I am sure contributed to the poor arrived right at the right time and
usage of the AD-4 analogs as an impor- kind of oversaw the transition from
tant part of the hybrid simulation capabili- one generation of technology to
ties of the FSL. The newer FSL program- another.

96
84
At the time I came, major elements circle of engineers involved in the
of most of the simulation activity program itself could participate and
we were doing—particularly those understand the implementation of
that had higher frequency content the simulation and the control-
to them, such as the simulation of system code.
the active control systems associ-
ated with the airplane or the And we went on to simulate the F-
actuation system—the dynamics 15 through the full range of angle
were still being done in an analog of attack up to 90 degrees, as a
fashion. Also, doing a simulation of matter of fact, and to simulate the
a vehicle in an analog computer entire F-15 MCS and SCS control
that would have involved all of the systems—both the mechanical
realm of flight dynamics at high control system and the electroni-
angles of attack, for instance, cally augmented augmentation
simply was too complex a problem system that overlaid the MCS, and
to solve in anything but what would were actually able to both develop
have been a truly gargantuan and understand the spin modes of
analog simulation. the aircraft and to develop recovery
techniques on it. That caused a little
And we found right at this time that bit of consternation initially,
we were soon to be in need of the particularly with the F-15 prime
ability to simulate that. And the contractor, McDonnell Douglas,
program that really kind of initiated who held that the airplane couldn’t
that was an RPV [remotely piloted be spun. The contractor personnel
vehicle] program—one of the first ultimately determined that the same
research RPV programs the Center spin modes were, in fact, possible
took, which was a three-eighths on the full-scale aircraft. So that
scale F-15. And that program’s was an interesting program and an
aircraft went on to become known interesting point in time, not only
as the Spin Research Vehicle. But from an aerodynamic (aeronautics)
then its purpose was to examine the perspective, but also in terms of the
high-angle-of-attack regime for the technology and support and the
Air Force’s new F-15 and to get ground aspects of it—in this case
some actual flight experience in the simulation.
that regime prior to the time the
full-scale airplane was going to be It was also the period in which we
flight tested in the same regime. were about at the height of our
lifting-body programs. We’d been
And initially it was felt that the in them a few years. The M2-F3
ability to simulate airframe dynam- was still flying right at the tail end
ics at high angles of attack with no of the HL-10 program and we were
small angle approximations and just getting started on the X-24, all
equations of motion was simply not of which were genuinely fascinat-
within the state of the art of the ing programs at the time.
computer systems at the time.
Fortunately, that turned out to not Also, I came to Dryden right at the
be the case. And at the same time completion of the test activity of
we were able to do that, we also the first phase of the F-8 Digital
moved the digital computation Fly-By-Wire program. During the
from the realm of Assembly first phase the aircraft had been
language into the realm of doing converted to a fly-by-wire system,
things in Fortran, which had the which utilized the Apollo flight
additional benefit that a wider computers. These were extraordi-

97
85
narily reliable but rather limited in Through that activity, we had a
terms of the amount of memory number of subcontractors. But the
and from the computational basic integration and development
through-put point of view. At the activity was directed and done right
time, the program was getting here at Dryden.27
ready to redesign that system to a
triplex system using a more modern CYBER 73-28
flight computer. It turned out we
picked the IBM AP-101 computer, The CYBER 73-28 was to be shared by
which was an airborne-worthy both the simulation lab and the general-
system. It actually turns out to have purpose data processing facility. These
been the predecessor of the systems two different branches, up until then, had
that were ultimately chosen for the been separate and independent. That
Shuttle. And the simulation tech- changed when we got ready to buy the
nology activity and the F-8 Digital CYBER. We started working on this
Fly-By-Wire program were totally procurement long before we even went
intermeshed with each other. out for bid—even before the two groups
were re-organized into one division (see
We used the iron bird of the F-8 to below). Several of us were relocated to a
do all the flight systems qualifica- small office for the purpose of analyzing
tion and, of course, the simulation the uses and needs of the two computer
that provided all the simulated facilities and preparing some sort of
inputs, if you will, to the iron bird design specification that could be used for
was an integral part of that. So I the SOW for the procurement. CDC,
had the real pleasure of participat- IBM, Xerox, Univac and others were all
ing in a rather direct fashion in the very interested in our upcoming RFP.28
qualification of that system on the We talked with many different companies
F-8. We learned an incredible before we ever started to prepare the
amount about the qualification of SOW for this procurement. Large hybrid
digital flight control systems computers were not the norm, and of the
through the experience of that ones that had been developed, none were
whole program—an amazingly exactly what we needed.
productive program—and really
did an excellent job of laying the I remember working with some IBM folks
foundation for a whole new tech- who were in the process of developing
nology area in aeronautics, with hardware and software for combined
fly-by-wire clearly becoming the analog/digital simulations. IBM, while
new generation of military aircraft. mostly a business computer manufacturer,
And now, in the last few years, we did have an extensive line of scientific
see it also being implemented in the computers, and it also was interested in
commercial aircraft. this new hybrid technology. Its hybrid
research facility was at the Stanford
And the genesis for all of that and research labs in Palo Alto, California.
how to go about developing and During a period of about one year, I made
qualifying that system was right four or five trips (at government expense)
here at Dryden. It was also an with our local IBM sales representative to
interesting program, from the this facility, which had an IBM 7040-class
prospect that Dryden actually acted computer connected to an Applied Dy-
as its own prime contractor. namics Inc. AD-4 analog computer. There

27 Interview of Al Myers by Peter Merlin, 14 Aug. 1998, copy on file in the Dryden Historical Reference Collection.

28 Request For Proposal, which is a solicitation for bids on a contract.

98
86
were others from the FRC who went with Along their way, Lowell spotted what he
me on a couple of these trips. I’m not sure thought was a marijuana plant growing in
that what we did was totally above the ditch beside the road. He picked a
board—that is, helping IBM develop the sprig and brought it to where the rest of us
hybrid system that it most likely would were standing, waiting for the CDC folks
propose when we sent out our RFP. to show up, in front of the motel’s restau-
rant. Lowell showed us this sprig and
When we finally sent out the RFP, the one asked if anyone else agreed that it was
mailed to IBM went to its Los Angeles marijuana? Ed Videan took the sprig,
office. This was the address that IBM looked at it, and agreed that he too
requested we send the RFP to. However, thought it was marijuana. Two strangers,
all this work we had done with IBM and who just happened to be walking from
its hybrid development lab in Palo Alto their car to the restaurant, stopped, looked
was handled through the IBM office in at the plant, and stated that it definitely
Riverside, California. This is the office was marijuana. When Ed asked why they
that was covering the high desert area and were so sure, they proceeded to display
Edwards AFB. The Los Angeles team that their badges and announced that they
IBM put together to write the proposal were vice squad officers from the local
knew nothing about what had been going law enforcement agency. These two men
on for the last year. Apparently these two told us that marijuana grew wild all over
IBM offices did not talk to each other that area. One of the officers then stated
very much. The proposal they submitted that picking the plant was illegal, and
in response to our RFP was so far from since Ed was the one holding it when they
what we asked for that we had to elimi- walked up, the officer then proceeded to
nate IBM during the very first go-around (begin to) arrest Ed. He was just kidding,
of evaluations. All that work was for but Ed lost a few heartbeats before he
nothing. I don’t know if a proposal from found out that the two officers weren’t
the Riverside office would have been serious. The officers kept the marijuana.
selected, but I’m sure it would have been
a lot closer to what we wanted. After all, The CDC CYBER 73-28 included a very
we had helped them build their prototype. complete system to be used for flight data
Strange happenings! This was another processing and general-purpose engineer-
instance of gremlinity. ing and scientific computations. The new
Fortran language was being used more
Pot or Not? and more by the research engineers at the
FRC, and a bigger and faster computer
An interesting event occurred on a trip to was needed. Previously, most of the
the CDC facility in Minneapolis to engineering programming had been done
discuss our requirements with the CDC by the programmers in the data processing
staff involved in our procurement. The branch.
group from the FRC included Ed Videan,
Mary Little, John P. Smith, Ernie Dunn, In addition to the standard data processing
Lowell Greenfield, Bob Halasey, and capabilities, the CDC 73 included two
myself. We flew into Minneapolis and identical analog interface subsystems that
spent the night at a motel outside the city were connected to our two new AD-4
near the CDC plant. In the morning, we analog computers. There was also a real-
were to meet for breakfast with some of time data-communication line that was
the CDC folks who would drive us to the connected to the SDS 920 in the radar and
plant. The motel was out in the suburbs telemetry facility. Unfortunately, this link
and there were open fields nearby with a was never used for its intended purpose. It
variety of farm products being grown. had the capability of transferring real-time
Greenfield and Little had gone for a short data directly from the radar/telemetry
walk before the get-together with CDC. system to the CDC 73. That facility only

99
87
had only one programmer developing completed before output could
software, and he never had the time to occur. It would technically be
develop the software to use the link to the possible to set the tolerance to 20
CDC 73. We tried this circuit during the msec and have the output occur at
acceptance period and it worked. That the same time as the input for the
was in 1973. Dryden still hasn’t imple- next frame. This was avoided
mented a similar capability even now (in because if several output discretes
1999 when these lines were written). changed state (a 5-volt change), the
resulting EMI could be seen on the
The interface that CDC developed to A/Ds, so settling time was neces-
connect to our analogs was both complex sary. The great advantage of this
and extensive. There were two complete interrupt scheme is that the output
subsystems, one for each of the AD-4 parameters changed state at a
analog computers. They included D/A and predictable and controllable time in
A/D converters, discretes, real-time every frame. This deterministic
clocks, and control circuits for the analog capability is of great value. I have
computers. The AD-4 analogs were the not seen a better scheme developed
most sophisticated hybrid computers of since. To the best of my knowl-
that era and had lots of digital logic and edge, CDC only sold two comput-
other digital computer-like capabilities ers with our version of HRTM (and
that made them particularly well suited just a few more with a later ver-
for large complex hybrid simulations. sion), so we had a rare bird.

Larry Schilling, the Director of Research This was probably the first time CDC had
Facilities at the Dryden Flight Research ever built such analog interface hardware,
Center, observed in the year 2000: and the team it put together to do this job
included not only some of its best hard-
The CDC Cyber 73-28 utilized a ware designers but also a couple of its top
unique hardware/software scheme system programmers. Impressive. It took
for interrupt handling and real-time them a while, but they got it working.
I/O. It was called HRTM (Hard-
ware Real-Time Monitor). This This new hybrid system was the only one
scheme gave full control to the the FSL used that shared a digital com-
programmer in setting up interrupts puter with the general-purpose data
and linking them to real-time code. processing group. The two branches
The user could specify the period (Simulation and Data Processing) were
and the tolerance for each interrupt. combined and a new division was created
Clock resolution was 10 microsec- to use and support this new system.
onds (2000 counts or ticks for 20 Besides the two different programming
msec), remarkable for its day. Real- groups, a new Systems branch was
time input occurred at the begin- created that included systems analysts
ning of the frame. Output occurred from both original branches. I was one of
as specified by the programmer about eight in this group. We had the job
using the tolerance setting. For of overseeing the development, installa-
example: if the frame was 20 msec tion, checkout, acceptance, and initial
long, and the code took 10 msec to operation of this new computer. We also
execute, the user could specify got involved in the conversion of software
when the output would occur by to this CDC 73.
setting the tolerance to a value
between about 11 msec and 19 CYBER Software Conversion
msec. The tolerance parameter also
affected the CPU priority since the For us in simulation, this conversion
calculations would have to be process was not difficult. All we had was

100
88
the ICARUS program. Converting this Los Angeles airport. There were three
one program turned out to be easy. different phone companies involved in
Actually, it wasn’t converted at all. getting the telephone line between these
Instea, new software was developed. The two facilities. None of these telephone
new simulation programs, written mostly companies had much experience in
by Al Myers, were in Fortran and were providing telephone lines for use with
designed to use all this new capability. digital data. This was quite early in the
ICARUS had been written specifically for use of telephone lines for digital data, and
the SDS computers. Converting it to the every phone company did things differ-
CYBER wasn’t necessary. ently. It took some time before they were
able to provide us with a working link.
As Larry Schilling pointed out on review- This link went from Edwards to Bakers-
ing these lines: field to Los Angeles.

The new simulation program The remote batch terminal did allow us to
written by Al Myers (with collabo- convert programs to be used on the new
ration by Lowell Greenfield) was computer. The terminal included a card
known as RTSIM (Real-Time reader, printer, and cathode ray tube. The
Simulation). It was quickly re- communication line was only about 110
placed with RTSIMII (Real-Time baud and quite slow. It took forever to get
Simulation II) which was in use a large program compiled, run, and the
when I arrived [in 1978]. There was output listed. It seemed as if we were
also a batch version called SIMII. sharing this CDC computer with everyone
All of Dryden’s current sims trace else in the Los Angeles area. For those
their heritage back to this work. programs that required magnetic tapes, we
Not only was this a 6 DOF formu- had to either take the tapes there or use a
lation, but it avoided small angle courier service. I remember having to
approximations and used a full make several trips to the CDC facility just
floating-point implementation. The for this purpose.
digital integration algorithm was a
modified 2nd order Runge-Kutta Before the CDC computer was delivered,
that was developed by Myers and the FRC employees had handled the daily
Greenfield (at least I think Al said operations of the previous central data
Lowell had a hand in it).29 processing computers. I believe that this
new computer was the first one for which
Unfortunately, the ease with which those the FRC contracted for computer opera-
in simulation converted to the CDC 73 tional support. Until this contract started,
was not the rule for all the data processing we in the new Division got stuck with the
programs. Conversion of these programs job of being computer operators. Most of
turned out to be a lengthy job. CDC us had no real experience doing this sort
provided a remote batch terminal to be of work. CDC provided a one-week
used for this purpose. This was the FRC’s training class, which we all took. Every-
introduction into the world of digital data one in the Systems Branch and all the
communications. I remember working programmers in the Programming Branch
with the telephone companies to get this got drafted to be computer operators.
remote batch terminal operational. Each day, the Systems folks worked two-
Edwards AFB is in Kern County, while hour shifts, and the programmers worked
the CDC computer facility was near the one-hour shifts as operators. Mounting

29The RTSIM program as Bacon remembers (Don was Myers’ boss at that time) was written for the XDS 9300 in Fortran, and Don
does not remember any airplanes that had simulators built using this program. It was done to study if such a Fortran sim could
actually run on the XDS 9300 in real time and to see what problems might arise. RTSIM was ported to the CYBER, and the all-digital
CYBER version (RTSIMII) was the one used for subsequent simulators.

101
89
mag tapes, changing disc packs, handling tions in the FSL. Many of the original and
stacks of punched cards, and fussing with more experienced analog/hybrid program-
the printer outputs were not the types of mers had been transferred to other jobs.
activities we were used to. This went on New simulation engineers were being
for a number of months until the new hired, many with no analog programming
service contract started and its personnel experience, and this too had an influence
took over the job of operating our new on the way things were done. From then
system. on, almost everything was done all-
digital. The analog computers were still
The CDC 73 was so much faster and more being used to simulate the control sys-
powerful than the previous computers in tems, but that too was to be replaced a
the FSL that the new simulation software couple of years later with an all-digital
included the integration of the accelera- simulation programming capability that
tions and velocities with respect to time. was developed at Dryden by John
This part of the simulations was no longer Edwards. He developed the algorithms
done on the analog computers. Those that allowed for these very complex
brand new, very sophisticated AD-4 aircraft control systems to be simulated
hybrid computers at that point in time using a digital computer in real time. It
became very expensive cockpit interfaces. wasn’t too much later that all the analog
This also meant that a lot of the new computers in the FSL were surplused.
digital interface hardware and software Simulation was all-digital. The cockpit
that CDC had developed for us was never interface was now handled by special-
really used as intended. This was the purpose hardware developed mostly by
beginning of the end of hybrid simula- Charlie Wagner, and built in-house.

102
90
Lifting-Body Simula- in the X-15 program.

tions (1967-1972) The following paragraphs are from Don
Bacon, one of the simulation program-
The lifting-body simulations30 were mers for the Lifting Body Program. His
mechanized by Don Bacon, Lowell personal account below includes much
Greenfield, and Larry Caw. Initially, the more on the lifting-body simulations.
simulations were all analog. However,
they became hybrid with the use of the The HL-10 was the first one I did
SDS 930 computer and the ICARUS myself. In the early days of the lifting
program. The aerodynamic coefficients bodies, it was all analog. We took
for the HL-10 vehicle were very nonlinear several consoles to do one, and you
and could not be adequately mechanized could only do one at a time. In the
using analog components. The Lifting- long run, we did the M2-F2 and M2-
Body Project Office agreed to pay for the F3, which Lowell Greenfield was
purchase of a new digital computer for the responsible for. The HL-10 was mine
FSL for the purpose of implementing the and the X-24 was over at the Air
HL-10 simulator. The computer we Force. We also did some work on the
bought was an SDS 9300, and after it was Hyper III (which was the switchblade
accepted, the ICARUS program was wing design) and another one, all of
modified to run on this computer. which contributed to what later
became the Shuttle.
This simulation was operational in 1967,
which overlapped with the period when The derivatives were nonlinear and
we were running the X-15 simulator. The the aero people had constructed the
HL-10 simulator did not have an iron-bird family of curves. Ken Iliff did a lot of
cockpit like the X-15. It used several the work—and Bertha Ryan. I still
different simulation cockpits. (See photos remember the first time I went down
E-10278, E-10591, E-16464, and E-18902 to ask her a question, and she stood
of the M2 and HL-10 cockpits.) It did up and drew herself up to her full
have a visual display device to give the height and said “I am a theoretical
pilot a rudimentary “out-the-window” aerodynamicist and I don’t chase
display. Also, the pilots used the an F-104 wind-tunnel data for simulation
airplane for landing practice, as they did guys.”

Bob Hoey in the
Early M2 Simula-
tor Cockpit
(Norden Display
and TR-48—
October 1963).
(NASA photo
E-10591)

30 There have been several lengthy papers and books written about the Lifting Body Program. These are listed in the bibliography.

91
103
Lifting-Body
Simulator Cockpit
(March 1967).
(NASA photo E-
16464)

The nonlinear curves were set up things that happened: the process in
with families of independent vari- going from paper [recording] to
ables, so every Mach number had a plastic [overlay] stretched the curves
set of curves—and alpha and beta on the plastic. If you took the
[angle-of-attack and angle-of- original and laid the overlay on it,
sideslip, respectively] were indepen- they didn’t match any more. . . .
dent variables. They were all done on
pot-padders [a type of analog So it was kind of a trick to get an
function generator]. During that time, overlay that would work. That took
they wanted to fly each airplane another 10-15 minutes. So it was
every two weeks. We took about a common to spend an hour—after you
week to get the pilot ready—to learn were sure everything was all right—
what to do for the next flight. It took on just checking things. And then, of
40 hours to reset the pot-padders for course, you flew it. You’d pick a
each airplane. Lonnie [Cooper— sample mission and fly it just to
EAI maintenance support team lead] make sure the computers, model,
and the EAI guys worked all week- controls, and displays were all right.
end. They worked around the clock You didn’t have those problems with
to get the 40 hours needed between simulations that were set on dedi-
Friday afternoon and Monday cated equipment and were flown day
morning to switch from one lifting- after day, such as the LLRV and X-
body simulation to the other. . . . 15.

Static checks were done. We’d Lowell Greenfield was the primary digital
calculate the frequency and damping programmer on the ICARUS project. He
for dynamic checks and then run left NASA sometime after we had received
them out on the strip-chart recorders. the CDC CYBER 73 to work for an
Again, once you had done this to aerospace company in the Los Angeles area.
check them—we had plastic overlays He has subsequently died, and his achieve-
prepared in the reproduction shop— ments and experiences are for the most part
you could lay them over the strip unrecorded. After he got into digital com-
charts and see. One of the interesting puter programming, he concentrated his

104
92
efforts in the systems programming support Body Program.
area, and especially operating systems, such
as the CDC CYBER Operating Systems Both Bob Kempel and Don Bacon, in their
(SCOPE, etc.). Lowell took a number of PAs, talk about speeding up the simulation
courses through both UCLA and USC on so that the time period was shorter than real
computer-systems software design and time. This was the idea of Jack Kolf, one of
programming and became thoroughly the lifting-body flight planners, after talking
involved in that particular line of program- with the pilots following several flights.
ming. Lowell and Stan Yount were sent to Apparently the pilots felt that the events
the Navy’s computer laboratory at during a typical lifting-body flight seemed
Johnsville, Pennsylvania, in the fall of 1972 to happen faster than they actually did. To
to get hands-on experience with the CDC provide a similar feeling in the simulator,
SCOPE Operating System. Their travel the time constant (used in integration with
duty was before we received delivery of the respect to time) was set so “simulator time”
CDC CYBER 73-28 that was installed at was about 40 percent faster than normal.
the FRC in 1973. Lowell and Stan spent This procedure was not used during the
about four weeks there learning about the normal flight-preparedness simulator runs.
software from a systems programmer’s The day before a flight, the time constant
point of view. This is the same Navy facility was changed and the pilots made a number
that had the centrifuge used for the boost of practice runs. This simulated a “faster
simulation described previously. than real-time” sequence of events. The
pilots thought that these runs helped them
Larry Caw was a backup programmer on get ready for the actual flight. The typical
the lifting-body simulations (M2 and HL- lifting-body flight lasted only about eight
10). Larry did very little digital program- minutes, and many were less than four
ming; his work was mainly with the analog minutes.
computer and cockpit interface. Larry was
still responsible for the LLRV simulator at Milt Thompson wrote a paper31 that
the time, so his involvement with the discusses his experiences with the Lifting
lifting-body simulation was primarily as a Body Project and the role of the simulations
backup analog programmer. He did this job that the FRC and the AFFTC implemented
for only a couple of years, until he was in support of this project. Milt made the first
assigned to work on the GPAS program. five flights of the M2-F2 in 1966. Milt also
Larry’s PA is included below. flew a large number of flights in the
wooden M2-F1. This lifting body was
Robert (Bob) Kempel, one of the NASA originally towed behind a souped-up 1963
research engineers, was heavily involved Pontiac Catalina convertible that had been
with the Lifting Body Program. His PA modified to tow the M2-F1. Later, the
account is included below and contains a aircraft was towed behind the FRC’s C-47.
lengthy discussion on the lifting-body In the book entitled Flying without Wings
simulations. Bob also wrote a document in by Milton O. Thompson and Curtis Peebles,
1998 entitled Simulation and Modeling Milt describes the early flights he made in
Support in the Flight Testing of Lifting the M2-F1 and M2-F2 lifting bodies.32 This
Reentry Vehicles. This, too, is an excellent book is a very interesting accounting of the
discussion of the role of simulation in the Lifting Body Program from the viewpoint
Lifting Body Program. See the bibliography of one of the pilots involved with that
for other publications by Bob on the Lifting project.

31The paper by Milt Thompson, which is unpublished, is entitled “Lessons Learned from Flight Research,” and is available in the
DFRC Historical Reference Collection, location L1-5-11B-10.

32Milton O. Thompson and Curtis Peebles, Flying Without Wings: NASA Lifting Bodies and the Birth of the Space Shuttle (Washing-
ton, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1999).

105
93
cients, was one of those that we imple-
STOL Simulations mented for airplanes that did not really
(1971-1972) exist. There were models developed for
wind-tunnel studies and the like, but the
This set of simulations comprised the last real planes were never built. (See photo
ones I did. A special Short Take-Off and E-22756.) At least not the ones we
Landing (STOL) Project Office had been simulated. The two we simulated were
established to study STOL aircraft tech- just models of what STOL airplanes might
nology. The office was located where the be. Airplane manufacturers have, I’m
X-15 simulation computers had been. Jim sure, benefited much from such studies by
Adkins was the project manager. Fitz NASA.
Fulton was our project pilot. Harold
Washington, John Gibbons, Bruce Pow- The STOL Project seemed to have
ers, Dave Kier, Terry Putnam, and I were sufficient clout to do most of the tasks
also assigned to the project. I was about that were planned; however, the STOL
halfway through the check-out and simulation did not share in this high
acceptance of two brand new Applied priority. I had to work around all the other
Dynamics, Inc. AD-4 analog computers simulations that were being run. This also
that had just been delivered to the FSL. manifested itself in such a way that I had
Don Bacon had to complete this accep- little help in getting the cockpit set up. I
tance testing after I was re-assigned to do was essentially on my own, and could not
the STOL Project simulations. depend on much help from any of the sim
technicians, because they were all busy
There were two different STOL aircraft working on other simulation tasks. They
configurations, an externally-blown-flaps helped out whenever they could. We used
configuration, and an augmentor-wing an existing cockpit, with few or no
configuration. (See below for explana- changes. I either did all of the cockpit
tions of the two configurations, and see scaling by myself or enlisted the help of
the reports written about these simula- one of the engineers in the project office.
tions, citation numbers 738 and 770, for For the first implementation, this wasn’t
further information.) This simulator, with too difficult, since the cockpit we used
two different sets of nonlinear coeffi- was in the same lab as the SDS 9300 and

STOL Wind-
Tunnel Model
(February 1971).
(NASA photo E-
22756)

106
94
the EAI 231-RV computers. Later the 9300 program for use in the calculations
cockpit was moved to another room as of the equations.
this particular sim lab was reconfigured.
For the first implementation, the EAI 231-
Many Nonlinear Functions of RV was also used for the cockpit inter-
Four Variables face. The second implementation used a
Comcor portable analog computer for
What I remember most about these two cockpit interface. The second implemen-
simulations was that I had to implement a tation was required when the cockpit was
large number of nonlinear derivatives of moved to a different room. This necessi-
four variables. Analog computers were tated the use of a second computer for
not well suited for functions of four cockpit interface. The ground-based
variables. One- and two-variable cockpit is shown in photo E-23281. The
nonlinearities were not difficult. Three- simulation equations were very typical for
variable function generation took a lot of this type of vehicle. ICARUS was set up
equipment and was avoided, if possible. to do a large quantity of functions of three
Four-variable function generation had variables. By using this capability and
never been done in the FSL. I used the interpolating for the fourth variable
ICARUS program, running on the SDS (coefficient of thrust [Cµ ]) on the analog,
9300, and two different analogs for two I was able to do this four-variable func-
different implementations. The 9300 was tion generation. Not very difficult, just
connected to an EAI 231-RV. This analog never been done like this before. The
was used for integration of the accelera- cockpit that we used was configured for a
tions and velocities calculated by the typical transport aircraft with a yoke,
digital program. It was also used for the rudder pedals, and two or four throttles.
fourth variable interpolation of the Both of the STOL vehicles we simulated
derivatives, which were read back into the had four engines.

STOL Simulation
Cockpit, Displays,
and Controls
(June 1971).
(NASA photo E-
23281)

107
95
The cockpit shown in photo E-23281 is Two Different STOL Configura-
the one we used for the STOL simulation. tions
Besides the SDS 9300 and EAI 231-RV, I
also had to use one of the FSL portable In the two different STOL configurations,
analog computers, a Comcor 175. This the big difference lay in the design of the
was the only time I used this particular wings to provide additional lift. For the
analog in any of my simulations. The augmentor-wing version, a portion of the
Comcor analog computer was a solid-state jet engine exhaust was deflected down by
computer. It had about 100 amplifiers but large flaps, thereby providing additional
limited function-generation capability. For lift during takeoff and landing. The
this simulator, it was used primarily for externally-blown-flaps aircraft diverted
interface to the cockpit instrumentation bleed air from the jet engines over the
and pilot’s controls. An out-the-window wings, thereby creating additional wing
display was provided by the Norden lift during takeoff and landing. In both
Contact Analog. It generated a fake cases, this additional lift was mechanized
ground plane consisting of random as the derivative Cµ [coefficient of thrust,
checkerboard squares or other repeating deflected downward to increase lift].
patterns. It also had fake oval clouds in Many of the aircraft nonlinear coefficients
the sky. The display patterns moved and were mechanized as functions of alpha
changed, depending on the aircraft’s (angle-of-attack), beta (angle-of-sideslip),
position, velocities, and attitude. Cµ, and Mach number.

STOL Simulation
Cockpit (ARC
Moving-Base
Simulator—
January 1971).
(NASA photo E-
22438)

108
96
Ford Tri-Motor Flights almost all day flying the simulator. When
we flew home, we were vectored east
Besides flying this simulator, Fitz was almost to the high Sierras, to get around
also able to fly several aircraft using the weather over the valley, before we
STOL-like approaches and landings. He could turn south for Edwards. It was nice
got to fly one of the few Ford Tri-Motors and clear here. So, guess what? Fitz
that was still in use. This plane was being decided to shoot some touch-and-go
used for short ferry hops to islands in landings before he finally landed! Almost
Lake Erie that were being serviced by a 11 hours after we had taken off that
small commuter airline in the area. The morning. These test pilots are a hardy
runways on the islands were quite short breed!
and required a STOL approach and
landing. The Tri-Motor was capable of My Last Simulation
doing this. Fitz also got to fly some larger
commercial jets that flew in and out of a This was my last complete simulation of
number of small islands in the South any kind. My career as a simulation
Pacific. Most of these islands had short programmer was coming to an end.
runways and the jets also had to use Shortly after this, I was transferred into a
STOL-like approaches and takeoffs. different group to help buy a new com-
Normal takeoff and landing procedures puter system for the central computer
could not be used for the short runways. facility. Several years later, I got drafted
to do some programming for the HiMAT
ARC Moving-Base Simulator (Highly Maneuverable Aircraft Technol-
ogy) and DAST (Drones for Aerodynamic
We also used the moving-base simulator and Structural Testing) simulations, but
at the Ames Research Center at Moffett that programming task was to
Field, Mountain View, California. It had a decommutate the real-time telemetry data
large 6 DOF motion simulator for such stream from these two RPVs (Remotely
studies, with a commercial-jet-type Piloted Vehicles) for both the Simulation
cockpit. The ARC had implemented a and the RPV laboratories. Also, I was
similar configuration STOL simulation on getting more and more involved in buying
the computers connected to the motion- computers. Computer procurements
based cockpit. (See photo E-22438 of the always took a long time in the govern-
ARC STOL cockpit.) I still remember the ment. Shortly after the STOL simulators
day we went to Ames so that Fitz could were no longer needed, we began to
fly the moving-base simulator there. We reconfigure the entire simulation labora-
flew up in one of the small airplanes that tory. The FSL offices moved into the area
the FRC had. The weather over the San where many of the simulation cockpits
Joaquin Valley was extremely bad, with had been located. It was also about this
clouds, rain, lightning, you name it. The period of time that we began getting ready
local FAA vectored us clear out over the to replace our SDS 9300 computer. The
Pacific before we could turn north for SDS 930 had already been donated to
Ames. Fitz was flying. He then spent UCLA.

109
97
tions, but about the FSL personnel who
Personal Accounts of implemented those simulations. I have
the FRC Simulation tried to mention all those people, but I am
sure I have missed some. I have spent
Laboratory Personnel many hours in the DFRC Research
Library reading and scanning as many of
The following personal accounts (PAs) of these technical reports as possible, in an
members of the FRC Simulation Labora- attempt to collect as much information as
tory were prepared from responses to possible about the actual simulation
letters, phone calls, and electronic mail. implementations. Unfortunately, most of
The inputs received varied widely both in these reports only mention the use of
format and content. Some were dictated analog computers and do not provide
onto audio cassettes either by the people details. Many of the reports only list the
themselves or during interviews. Some equations that were programmed. Almost
were pieced together from letters and e- none of them actually discussed the
mails. A few of the FSL personnel were specifics of how the simulation was
not located and have moved and left no implemented. Since we in the FSL were
forwarding addresses with friends or the not required to write reports about how
FRC personnel office. Several of the FSL we mechanized these simulations, very
personnel chose not to return any infor- little remains that could be used in the
mation, which is unfortunate, for some of preparation of this study. So far as I can
them were very active participants in the determine, analog computers are no
development and use of the FSL. At least longer manufactured or used for real-time
one has died, and his account will never simulations,33 so the details of how we
be written. implemented ours is perhaps no great
loss, except to those of us who were there.
The following sections are, for the most
part, as written or recorded. I have taken In many cases the data presented in these
few liberties in transcribing and editing PAs overlaps what is written in other
the material and then only to try to sections. This is particularly true when a
maintain a certain approach in this FSL member was very much involved in
publication. I have also added informa- the development of one of the more
tion, suggested by the individuals, when important (and bigger) simulations that
their recollections were dim and they are discussed in detail. But, even though
could not recall events exactly. In some there is some repetition of data about
cases information has been added by other specific simulations, what follows are the
FSL members during the review process. words of the different participants, and an
For the most part, the PAs are the indi- important part of this monograph. We all
viduals’ own words. see and experience things differently, and
our memories are as different as we are.
The many reports that were written about
the results of the various simulations have
also provided data. The many research Edward N. Videan
engineers who used our simulations and
wrote technical papers have also provided Ed Videan was the first chief of the
information, not only about the simula- original Simulation Laboratory. This
33 I based this statement on considerable research on the Internet. I also talked with Mike Najera (who heads the sim hardware group
in the RAIF), and he says that there are still some analog circuits in almost all of the simulators being built today. The newer “glass
cockpits” with the computer-driven displays have eliminated most of the analog circuits that were used in simulators built since this
building opened. However, there are no analog computers in use with the simulators. Just analog circuits (i.e., variable voltage
devices) as opposed to digital circuits—digital computer I/O words of some number of bits (1s or 0s). The electric stick used in all the
cockpits is an analog device and so are some of the instruments, and these instruments still use the SIMLINK interface that Charlie
Wagner designed and had built to replace the use of analog computer components (amplifiers, pots, etc.).

110
98
organization had several different names Other required functions such as
throughout the years, and as mentioned the multiplication of two indepen-
earlier, is referred to as the FRC Simula- dent variables and function genera-
tion Laboratory (or the FSL) throughout tion were performed by servo
this monograph to avoid any confusion devices.
caused by the different names.
When the AFFTC acquired its first
The History of the First analog computer (the GEDA), the
Analog Computer at the HSFS made arrangements with the
FRC AFFTC to use this system to start
investigating the roll-coupling
The analog computer (or more problem. I believe it was Richard
properly, the electronic differential Day who led this effort along with
analyzer) first came into use at the several others. I believe Albert
HSFS in 1956, as best I can re- Kuhl was also working on this
member. The date might be as late problem. After two or three months
as 1957. The requirement which of successful work, the HSFS
drove the introduction of the analog decided to acquire its own com-
computer was a need to analyze a puter system. During the procure-
dynamics problem troubling the ment cycle, a small delegation of
then-current jet fighters, known as people from the HSFS traveled to
roll coupling. The F-86 fighter (and the Ames Laboratory for a week of
others, I believe) were exhibiting training on the programming and
large uncontrolled excursions in use of an analog computer. Those
angle of attack and sideslip in from the HSFS were Richard
response to high-speed rolling Banner, Richard Day, Richard
motions. At this time there existed Musick, and Ed Videan. Our host at
at the HSFS no practical way to Ames was Stanley Schmidt, who
solve the differential equations of headed up the Ames facility.
motion which describe such a Shortly after this, the FSL received
complicated dynamics problem. its first system, the EAI 31R, built
Digital computers were in their by Electronics Associates, Inc. I
infancy, and the limits on speed and believe this early system contained
memory ruled out any practical about thirty amplifiers, two servo
way to solve the equations. multipliers, plus a complement of
scaling potentiometers. The cost
Both Langley and Ames Laborato- was about $60,000. I am not sure
ries were beginning to use analog about the number of amplifiers, but
computers and had acquired some this is the number that comes to
facilities. In addition, the AFFTC mind.
had recently purchased a modest
facility built by Goodyear. This Since the analog computer was able
machine was known as the GEDA to solve the aircraft equations of
(Goodyear Electronic Differential motion in real time, it was recog-
Analyzer). The heart of the analog nized to be a natural for aircraft
computer system was a high- simulation with a pilot in the loop.
quality operational amplifier, However, in these early days there
which, suitably configured, could were no controls or displays which
sum several electrical signals and in any way looked, acted, or felt
also integrate the resultant sum. like anything found in an airplane.
This capability was exactly what There were no commercial sources
was needed to solve a set of aircraft known, and no resources available
differential equations of motion. to develop suitable devices. For the

99
111
early roll-coupling investigation, experimental model which was not
the stick input was provided by a really practical because of size,
wooden stick attached to a potenti- cost, and very importantly, reliabil-
ometer. Displays were provided by ity. As I remember, it was almost
voltmeters with a scale and pointer the size of a washing machine. I
calibrated for the appropriate guess the moral of the story is,
quantity. Some side-arm controllers sometimes it pays to listen to the
were borrowed from the space dreamers.
program at a later date to be used as
pilot input devices. Through the In 1958, I believe, the FRC became
years, FSL personnel designed and interested in the piloting aspects of
developed a rather full range of the manned space program, specifi-
general-purpose displays and cally, the problem of piloting a
controls which could be tailored for space vehicle from launch to orbit.
use in a wide variety of applica- The Navy possessed a human
tions. Richard Musick, Charles centrifuge at its Johnsville, Penn-
Wagner, and others were key to this sylvania, facility, and the FRC
effort and can supply much more obtained the Navy’s cooperation to
detailed info. I believe this was one utilize this facility for a piloted
of the genuine innovations which launch investigation. This program
the FSL made to the art of simula- was the largest simulation at-
tion. tempted by the FSL up until this
time. A special function generator
Here is an anecdote which might be was developed and built at the FSL
of interest. It concerns the rivalry to simulate atmospheric density
which developed between the from sea level to space. The full
analog and digital computer simulation was designed and tested
approaches to simulation during in the FSL prior to traveling to the
those early days. A simulation Johnsville facility. The Navy had a
conference was held in El Paso, large simulation facility at
Texas, in 1958, I believe. I attended Johnsville which was devoted
this conference along with Stanley principally to investigating subma-
Schmidt of Ames. One speaker rine warfare. The FSL program was
described early efforts to solve the installed on the Navy computers
aircraft equations of motion and interfaced to the centrifuge. If I
utilizing a digital computer. Be- remember correctly, NASA, Air
cause of the limited speed and Force, and Navy pilots participated.
memory of the [then-]current I think Neil Armstrong was a
digital machines, this effort did not participant. The program required
demonstrate any practical capabil- seven weeks of time at Johnsville
ity. However, the speaker predicted plus all the preparation time at the
that one day, digital computers FSL.
would supercede analog machines
in the field of flight simulation. The The next large program was the X-
conference attendees were mainly a 15 simulator. John Smith and others
very partisan group of analog- were much closer to the program
computer loyalists who then heaped and can supply more details. One
ridicule on the speaker. In addition episode stands out in my memory. I
to the problem of limited digital believe the X-15 was the first time
computer capability, there existed we attempted to include an airplane
no analog-to-digital and digital-to- and its systems in a simulator loop.
analog converters. General Dynam- While the simulation was success-
ics in San Diego had built an ful, I remember how we struggled

100 112
to solve the [electrical-signal] formed after the NACA moved
ground loop problems between the from the south base to north base. I
aircraft (hangar ground) and believe that to be 1955 or there-
simulation facility (facility abouts.35 My duties during the pre-
ground). As I recall, we finally ran move period and shortly after were
a ground cable from the [analog building special flight-data instru-
computer] laboratory to the air- mentation, repairing standard flight
plane and lifted the hangar instruments, and maintaining the
ground.34 The solution sounds so data reduction equipment. At that
simple and logical now. time the data reduction equipment
was composed of three telereader/
telecondex machines, typewriters,
Richard (Dick) O. Musick and IBM relay-operated card
reader/punch machines. [See photo
Dick Musick was the first FSL technician E-2145.]
and was assigned to this job from his
previous position in the instrumentation An interesting sidelight to the data-
shop. He also provided support for the reduction process and a definite
data-reduction equipment that was in use credit to the ladies operating the
at that time. Most of this PA is from a equipment involved the conditions
letter that Dick sent me. Photo ED97- [under which they worked]. All units
44197-1, taken in 1957 (from the 1957 were crowded into a small, darkened
AFFTC Year Book), shows Ed Videan room with no special air-conditioning
and Dick Musick in front of the first equipment (it was quite warm.) Each
analog computer in the FSL. telereader/telecondex had well over
200 tubes consuming a lot of energy
The simulation laboratory was and converting it into heat. I would

Ed Videan ( on
left) and Dick
Musick at EAI 31R
Analog Computer
(1997—from
AFFTC 1957 year
book). (NASA
photo ED97-
44197-1)

34 There was almost a 1/2 volt difference between the hangar’s signal ground and the computer’s signal ground. To get around the
problems this difference was causing, all the trunks had their shields grounded only at the computer end. The hangar end of each
trunk had to have its shields disconnected (i.e., not connected to the hangar’s signal ground). The computer ground was also con-
nected to the hangar equipment. Consequently the electronic equipment in the hangar was using the same ground as the computer
equipment in the simulation laboratory.

35 Actually, it took place in 1954.

113
101
Dick Musick with
film reader
(December 1955).
(NASA photo
E-2145)

go in there periodically to perform lem, which required attention. A
some duty and within 15 minutes, I’d plenum chamber had to be fabricated
be sleepy. The operators had to stay in upon which all the equipment would
the room eight hours a day. rest to blow refrigerated air through it. I
can’t recall all the initial installation, but
The analog equipment and I first made it seemed to me to be an EAI 31R
contact when it arrived at the HSFS. console, a rack of amplifiers, a rack of
Since I had the best electronic back- servo multipliers that also contained
ground of all the technical people in the several resolver units, and a rack of pot
instrumentation division, the finger was padders.
pointed at me, and I was told “From
now on, you are a computer specialist.” Following the decision to set up a
And so it was! flight simulation facility at the
HSFS, we assessed our on-board
Since our new equipment—an EAI equipment and talent and found it
31R—used tubes, it had a heat prob- lacking. Like nada.36 We started

36 Spanish for “nothing.”

114
102
from scratch. Ed Videan drew the place and working; now all we
short straw as simulation engi- needed was to provide a simula-
neer, and I was informed I was tor cockpit. Our first effort was,
the tech for the project. At the as best I can recall, a cutoff
time, I was the sole support for broomstick, which was spring-
the research-film-data-reduction loaded to represent an aircraft
equipment and was to continue in control stick. The instruments
that capacity. I didn’t think I were an oscilloscope display to
could do it. represent the horizon, and micro-
ammeters with limited needle
Ed arranged for the computer displacement to display necessary
equipment to be purchased. I just flight parameters. This was crude
twiddled my thumbs (and worked (pre-caveman stuff) to say the
on telereaders) while waiting for least, but it was a start. [This
the EAI technical manuals, my control stick is shown in photo E-
source of training, to arrive. 1841 and the display is shown in
photos E-2950 and E-3395A.]
The equipment arrived and it was
installed on a plenum chamber Instruments
for cooling. I guess we did OK
because when Ed Videan, Al I’ll start with the instruments,
Wilson, the electrician, and I which were the highest priority in
finished fumbling around, the coming up to speed on our physical
system worked. I don’t remember aircraft simulators. In looking at the
in the slightest if we had any instruments locally, we found our
major problems. stockroom grossly lacking, but we
adapted. Although we were not able
OK, we had our computer in to match the aircraft instrument in

Reaction Control
Stick (April 1957).
(NASA photo
E-2950)

103
115
appearance, we faked it as best we Boost Simulator Instrument Panel
could. The instruments in stock in photo E-4550.]
were micrometers, low-level
voltmeters, and milliammeters,37 The next priority in instruments
all of which were single-needle, was for multi-turn-needle units
limited-needle excursion and of such as Mach-meters and altim-
course not scaled for flight simula- eters. We ended up taking several
tors. [The earlier instruments can steps in the development of a
be seen in the photos mentioned in totally satisfactory unit. We went
the previous paragraph and also in over to the Air Force surplus and
photo E-2626.] talked the people there into contrib-
uting some altimeters and Mach-
We enlisted the aid of John Bostain meters as well as other things that
and the photo lab to produce a looked interesting. No paper work!
more realistic face. At first, the
simulation techs would draw up an We delivered the instruments
oversize instrument face and John (unmodified) to Rebel Harwell and
would downscale the size as the machine shop for modifications
required. It worked OK. [Several of per oral directions (plus a pseudo
these instruments with the photo work order). Rebel and his techni-
background can be seen in the cians were to adapt the altimeter to
photo E-4969.] be driven by a Kerfott synchro unit.
They did this both expertly and
Later on, the photo lab employed a quickly. We then drove the synchro
draftsman, Jerry Lyons, who did receiver with a synchro transmitter,
the artwork for the instrument which was in turn driven by a
faces. shaft-to-shaft coupling with a servo
unit responding to the analog
As a matter of interest, the instru- altitude signal. There was a lot of
ments we used at first were manu- slop in this arrangement but it did
factured by Triplett, Simson, and the job. [Three of these servo-
GE. The greatest needle movement synchro units can be seen in photo
was about 100 degrees stop-to- E-14648.]
stop.
The next step up was the purchase
Knowing that the in-house- of a cylindrical-shaped servo unit
supplied meters were inadequate with the power and input plug
from the start, the technicians located on one end and a rotating
started searching for a better unit output shaft on the other. They
with a larger face and greater were manufactured by Spectrol. We
needle movement. A meter manu- adapted the output shaft to the input
factured by Weston was found, gear of the instrument being
which met our immediate needs. It fabricated. The overall unit was big
was larger in diameter, had better but operated better then the syn-
damping, and had a needle excur- chro-driven instruments.
sion of 300 degrees. It was the
answer to our prayers for a single- As a final step in producing panel
turn instrument. We invested in the instruments for single- and mul-
Weston meter for quite a few units tiple-turn needs, we designed and
over the years. [Several of these built, in-house, a DC servo unit that
instruments can be seen in the was both small and easy to inte-
37 Instruments for measuring electric currents in milliamperes (multiples of one-thousandth of an ampere).

116
104
Servo to Synchro
Units (LLRV Sim
Cockpit—April
1966). (NASA
photo E-14648)

grate into the instrument. Not only each axis); we would drive one of
was it compact; it also operated our servo units with a computer
smoothly throughout its entire output representing the parameter.
range and cost a small fraction of We then mechanically connected
the Spectrol servo’s price. This was the servo output shaft to a synchro
the final phase for the development transmitter drive shaft and wired
of a universal DC servo, which was the three-phase output to the input
used throughout our aircraft plug on the back of the 8-ball.
simulators thereafter. Voila! The servo unit we created
solved many of our instrument
Much credit has to go to Bob problems and found a lot of other
Ballard and Robby Robertson of uses as well.
the machine shop for their expertise
in putting life into our instrument Cockpits
servos.
Our cockpits were a little slow in
One other instrument problem getting started. The first was a
which required attention was how common chair (with no lap belt) for
to drive the three-axis 8-ball the pilot to sit in and a spring-loaded
[attitude indicator] without modify- cut-off broom handle to provide
ing the instrument itself. Built by (simulated) flight inputs. [See photo
Bendix, it was flight-qualified and E-1841.] The flight instruments (all
would be too expensive to physi- electrical) were located in a narrow
cally modify for our needs. The aluminum pseudo panel, which
answer turned out to be very bridged a large Dumont CRT that
simple, since it took a synchro represented an “out-the-window”
signal to be the input (one for view. We got by with this by using a

105
117
lot of imagination. torque motors provided by Inland
Motors of Roanoke, Virginia, the
The first real attempt at simulating same manufacturer that provided our
a cockpit came about a bit later. We instrument servo torque motors.38
made contact with Flight Opera-
tions and borrowed blueprints for
an F-104 cockpit. Using this, we John P. Smith
recorded critical measurements
around which a semi-realistic John Smith was the first FSL program-
“black box” could be built: our mer/engineer and was initially a lieuten-
aircraft cockpit. The cockpit was ant in the U.S. Army Signal Corps who
fabricated in our model shop by had been assigned to work at the NACA
Ernie [Lowder] and Chuck HSFS in 1957.
[Garvey]. They did a hell of a job
in making all the measurements we I reported to the High-Speed Flight
gave them to meet. The first major Station on 4 April 1957. The first
cockpit was built of 3/4-inch analog computer had been installed
plywood with the plywood edges early that year, around January or
finished with oak strips. It came February. The log for use of the
complete with a removable seat computer had as the first applica-
mounted on rails for fore and aft tion a program, which Harriet39
seat movement. Two other features provided in February, solving an
need to be mentioned. The floor integral and not a true simulation.
was about 12 inches above the base She says it didn’t work too well,
floor and was hinged for access. It which is not surprising, considering
was all painted flat black. The unit the poor repeatability and low
was basic and needed a control accuracy of the analog computers
system, instruments, and other at that point in time. My first
electrical and mechanical devices, simulation was a derivative match-
which were added later. If I remem- ing program with Chet
ber correctly, the stick and pedals [Wolowicz].40 We used a pen
were spring loaded. follower as the control input in a
five-degree-of-freedom simulation
Several instrument panels were program. Chet said we did the work
manufactured by our model shop in one hour that it used to take a
and configured to represent the mathematician a month to accom-
instrument layout for specific plish.
aircraft. Panel exchange was quite
easy. During that period we did either
five-degree- or three-degree-of-
The final aircraft simulator control freedom simulation programs. That
system was fabricated using DC was because of limited computer

38 Following his reading of this study in manuscript, Robert W. Kempel appended a note at the end of this PA: “One thing that really
made FRC ‘tick’ was the fact that there were so many talented people who were willing to apply their talent to unusual jobs [in places
like the] photo lab, machine shop, etc. Inventiveness, innovativeness, and the common cause. Dick was one of the greatest!”
Kempel also commented, “I remember going to Dick with some problem, and Dick would pull out a shelf from his desk with a sign on
it that said ‘pound here’ [meaning, if you were frustrated, you could pound your head there and get rid of your frustrations without
bothering him further]. Dick had a great sense of humor!”

39 Harriet Stephenson (who later married John Smith) was a research engineer at the HSFS.

40 Chester Wolowicz was a research engineer at the HSFS. He wrote a number of reports on such subjects as stability characteristics
of aircraft, stability derivatives, a simulator investigation of orbital derivatives, and operational and performance characteristics.

118
106
capability. The equations were ones control laws. This was a three-
that had been developed at Langley degree-of-freedom simulation, and
several years before. For pilot-in- we got some strange results. We
the-loop simulations we used a found that when we pulled to high
classroom chair, which had a angles, the airplane would just keep
writing surface on the side. We going up. That is when we found
mounted a B-17 formation stick on out that the Langley equations were
the writing surface. The display small-angle approximations. After
system was a CRT for the horizon that experience, we derived our
and up to three voltmeters mounted own equations.
on the side of the CRT for critical
cockpit instruments. We used We also did several simulations in
grease pencils to calibrate the CRT support of the future space pro-
and the voltmeters. When we had to gram, including looking at various
have a center stick, Dick would fix concepts for multi-stage rockets to
up a pipe with springs and mount it use for orbit and reentry systems.
on a plate. [See photos E-1841 and For our first visual simulation,
E-2950.] which was for orbital docking, Dick
[Musick] modified a projector
One of the early simulations I did aperture so that we could control it
was on the X-1B. It was a program with a servo. We programmed the
Wendy [Stillwell]41 tried [in an system so that the size of an image
attempt] to refine the reaction- projected on a wall would represent
control-system design for the X-15. the size of the docking target as it
The objective was to define a zoom was approached. [See photos E-
maneuver, which would give the 5035 and E-5037.].
maximum amount of time at low q
[dynamic pressure] where the In 1958 we started our work on the
reaction control system would be X-15 simulator. One of the major
effective, and to develop the best things we did was the development

Orbital Rendez-
vous program
simulation equip-
ment (October
1959). (NASA
photo E-5035)

41 Wendell Stillwell was a research engineer at the HSFS. He, too, wrote a number of reports on such things as flight measurements,
reaction controls, and simulator studies of reaction controls, plus several studies on the X-15 including one well-known special publication.

107
119
Orbital Rendez-
vous program
simulation
equipment
(October 1959).
(NASA photo
E-5037)

of the round-earth equations. That discussed throughout the other parts of
was a major step in being able to this monograph, this is just a brief sum-
predict the maximum performance mary, listing the major tasks, accomplish-
of the vehicle. I also did the ments, and other facts related to my
simulation with Jim McKay on the career in simulation. I have included a
landing-gear problem. That turned number of the computer procurements in
out so well that when the Air Force this list because they were an important
needed to define runway width for part of the FSL history. I worked at
the Dyna-Soar Program, its engi- NACA HSFS-NASA DFRC from July
neers asked us to develop the 1957 to July 1993.
dynamic simulation of their landing
gear and its run-out characteristics. • Worked in the FSL from July 1957 to
J. L. [Samuels] and [John] Perry about 1975, plus a brief period for
developed the equations of motion, HiMAT and DAST Real-Time TM
but we did not have the equipment decommutation software for Sim and
to do the simulation. So the simula- RPV labs in 1978.
tion was done at FDL [Flight
Dynamics Laboratory]. • Worked as an analog programmer,
hybrid programmer, and systems
In the early days, the time needed to analyst during that period and
bring a new simulation on line was • Implemented several X-1B and X-
about one to two weeks. We made a 1E simulations: 1957-1960
big use of transfer functions, which • Implemented a number of F-100
involved the use of the S-plane series aircraft simulations: 1957-
technology. We would come up with 1960
black boxes that used electronic • Implemented 4 different 4-stage-
components in the feedback and boost simulations (3 fixed-base and
input of amplifiers to simulate non- 1 moving-base):1958-1960
linear functions. The checkout and • Programmed the X-15 simulation,
validation of simulations was a new all-analog:1960-1964,
and changing environment. • Programmed the X-15 hybrid
simulation:1964-1968
• Programmed the STOL simulations:
Gene Waltman 1970-1972
• Programmed several other moving-
Since much of what I did has been base simulations, 1958-1972, at the

120
108
Ames Research Center Sanderson [in instrumentation] . . .
• Programmed several heat transfer and John took me. He took me on a
programs—analog (1958-1960), tour and showed me the digital
and digital (1964-1968) computer, which at that time was
• Taught analog computer program- an IBM 650. This was a room full
ming classes of computers. I had never seen a
computer up close and personal. I
• Investigated the early hybrid computer didn’t even know what an aeronau-
technology: 1960-1975 tical research engineer did.42 They
• Programmed in Assembler, Fortran, offered me a job, and I figured if
and real-time Fortran languages for they thought I could do it, I could
the SDS, CDC, HP, and Varian do it. So, I accepted.
computers
Orbital Rendezvous Simu-
• Procured at least one major computer lation
system (hardware or software) each
year from 1958 through 1975, mostly My first involvement with simula-
for the FSL, but also several systems tion was really primitive. I had
for other computer facilities at the been at the FRC about 6 weeks. My
Center. I was actually involved in first simulation was an orbital
such procurements until I retired in rendezvous. We were supposed to
1993—but not all for the FSL. Many simulate two bodies orbiting in
of these procurements were for one- space, rendezvousing. And of
of-a-kind systems and not off-the- course, we had nothing, hardware-
shelf systems, due to the unusual wise. All we had were the equa-
needs of the FSL. tions that described the phenom-
• Computer procurements: 1958- enon. So it was my job to use either
1975 the TR-10 or the EAI 31R, that first
• Including collecting requirements, analog with the rotary voltmeter....
writing the SOW, and working with I don’t remember which I used. I
Procurement on the request for was working with Dick Musick to
proposal, proposal evaluations, develop the hardware. What we
negotiations, and selection ended up with was a strange-
• Working with vendors during looking contraption. He went out
system buildup, installation, and and built this cylindrical screen that
acceptance testing couldn’t have been more than five
• Working with users for conversion feet tall. We took one of the metal
and startup of new equipment. wastebaskets, turned it upside
• Searching out new equipment and down, and mounted a hand control-
technologies for possible use in the ler on it. Then he put a couple of
FSL dials on a makeshift instrument
panel. He also modified a slide
projector aperture so that as we
John J. Perry closed on the target, the picture on
the screen got bigger. And he
I started 1 September 1959. That projected the image on a servo-
was my first day. I had two inter- driven mirror to simulate attitude.
views—I interviewed with John That was the first simulation I
Smith [in simulation] and Ken worked on as a young engineer.

42John Perry graduated from Florida A&M University, Tallahassee, Florida, in 1959, with a BS in Mathematics. He got an MBA in
Management Decision Systems from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles in 1977. He also received a Certificate in
General Business Management from the UCLA Extension in 1973.

109
121
[See photos E-5035 and E-5037 for myself of how it used to be. Those
the final set of equipment used in patch cords were hanging off the
this simulation.] patch panels, some connected by all
of those multiples. As I recall, we
We had pilots come in there, sit, were still using the 131R. I remem-
and try to dock, and it was amaz- ber how the servo resolvers used to
ing. We had a distance meter, just a get stuck. I used to have to go in the
simple little voltmeter dial, show- back to put some torque on the shaft
ing distance from the target. And to get them unstuck. One day I was
the picture got bigger as we got in there, and I put my hand back
closer, and we could rotate. It was there to unstick a resolver and
very primitive, but it was effective. touched something hot. The natural
Orbiting in space is a no-brainer reaction was to jerk my hand away,
these days, but it was an interesting but there was a bar above the
challenge as I think about it now. opening. Since it was in a pretty
Back in those days we wondered, tight space, my hand just bounced
“How are we going to do this?” I’m back and forth between the hot
sure we didn’t contribute to the big source and that bar. It beat the heck
solution that NASA finally came up out of the back of my hand before I
with, but we were probably among was able to remove it. We had to do a
the first to figure out, “How can we lot of things to make those simula-
do this?” And what kind of system tions work. But they worked!
do we need to practice this, before
we have to do it live. I think I As the project engineer on the X-
worked on this simulation up to the 15 simulator, my job, first thing in
time I got assigned to work on the the morning, was to make sure that
X-15 simulation. it going to play that day. As you
know, with analogs, sometimes
X-15 Simulator they would play and sometimes
they wouldn’t. We had those two
At that time the X-15 simulation test runs that we did—the one was
was on the EAI 31R and 131R an altitude run and the other was a
computers. We then went “big speed run. Every day, before the
time” and got three brand new pilots came down, we had to be
EAI 231Rs. The voltmeter on the sure it was going to work right that
131R had digital panels, and the day. We had this little fudge factor
numbers would come up on the on a pot—we’d twist that factor
different panels. I thought that until it came out right. I’ll never
was the craziest voltmeter I had forget, that altitude flight was
ever seen. I thought that was an 314,000 feet. If the computer
improvement over the dials. would do that flight, then we could
Then, we got the 231Rs with the practice altitude flights that day. If
newer voltmeter—I don’t know we were planning to practice speed
what the technology was, but the stuff, where we wanted constant
numbers were all on one plane; dynamic pressure or constant
the numbers just changed around. altitude or something like that, then
That was great. we would have to do the low-
altitude speed runs to see if that
I remember having the job of was going to work. We would play
working on that X-15 simulation, with it and play with it until we
with all of those patch cords. I were ready. Then we would call
think I still have a couple of the Flight Ops and say, “OK, we are
multiples that I keep just to remind ready to go.” The pilots would then

122
110
come down to practice. got along, but we rode together to
and from work. We would fuss
Some of the pilots were more excited from the time he picked me up
about practicing than others. Jack until we got to work, and as soon
McKay never wanted to practice. But as we got in the computer room, all
people like Joe Engle would practice our arguing stopped, and we
until they were blue in the face. They worked well together. We used
just wanted to get it right. Bob Sanborn recorders, with the red ink
Rushworth was another one; he was flying everywhere. We had over-
probably the most precise low- lays, and we put them on the inked
altitude pilot we had. If we told Bob paper to see if we were matching
we wanted a certain dynamic pres- the derivatives. When we were off
sure for a certain number of seconds, at midnight, and as soon as we got
that is what we got. He would to the car, we started fussing again.
practice on the simulator until he was However, we did some serious
sure he could do that in flight. So, it business during our work shift.
was fun working with those guys. That was a part of my simulation
career when I was basically
I don’t remember when I came into supporting Stability and Control in
the program. I just remember that I the derivative matching process. I
worked on it for six and one-half wasn’t doing anything other than
years. I started before we got the making sure the computer was
SDS 930. I never really made the working. They were the ones doing
hybrid transition. I went to the GPAS all the work, but I think it was
from the X-15. Other people were important work that I did as well.
working on the 930, and later on the We were trying to refine the wind-
9300. tunnel data so that we could make
the simulations more accurate.
We had some significant challenges,
but we were up to them. That is what X-15 Landing Simulation
made working for NASA so much
fun. Because NASA was the glamour That was true up until we got to the
agency of the federal government, point where we decided that,
we could attract and retain the best because of some problems we had
and brightest. We believed we were with some of the landings, we
good, and we set out to prove it wanted to write a simulation of the
every day. That didn’t mean we X-15 landing. I was given the
didn’t have conflict and didn’t fuss responsibility of coming up with
and fight, but we brought our best the equations to do that. I’ll never
every day. We didn’t leave anything forget—it was right before I was
on the practice field. getting ready to go on vacation,
and I was going to be flying to
Derivative Matching Florida. I took that stuff with me,
and on my flight back to Florida, I
I remember Glenn Robinson and I did a lot of work on those equa-
were doing derivative matching 43 tions. It turned out it was 10
on swing shift. Glenn and I never degrees of freedom (DOF) because

43 As explained more briefly above, derivative matching, on an analog computer, was a process of determining the nonlinear deriva-
tives for a particular airplane. Most of the X-15 derivatives used in the simulator were originally obtained from wind-tunnel tests and
were not always accurate or complete. Derivative matching was used to update the wind-tunnel data using actual flight data. Over the
years, derivative matching was done using several different analog computers and for many different airplanes. This analog process
was eventually replaced with digital parameter-estimation techniques developed by research engineers at the FRC.

111
123
we had to do the 6 DOF for the to take it out of the hands of
airplane and four for the landing Research and Dwain Deets and
gear. We had to include sliding Ken Szalai, who were working on
friction for the skids, rolling it, and put it back into simulation.
friction for the tires on the nose GPAS was fun work, too, because
gear, and the torque created by the it basically was the same thing we
struts. I was working with Jim had done, but in the air. It was a
McKay on that project. We ended different kind of challenge because
up getting that job done in terms of we had to try to make the GPAS—
the design of the system to simu- the JetStar—fly like other kinds of
late the landing of the X-15, and airplanes. Again, we were playing
then the FRC lost interest. How- the programming role because
ever, it was implemented at Herm Rediess and those guys in
Wright-Patterson. I never got to see Stability and Control and Handling
it, but I heard that it worked really Qualities were designing the
well. That was probably the most experiments. We were just trying to
challenging job I had ever had to make sure that we turned their
do in applying the math I had designs into effective simulations.
learned in college, primarily And we got to fly and run the
because we had to do it from computer in the air while they were
scratch. We already had 6 DOF doing the testing. It was fun work,
equations for the aircraft, but we and it was exciting work.
had to add the 4 DOF for the
landing gear and integrate them. The first couple of flights we went
We also had to add ground effects. up on, I took Dramamine. I sure
I never got a chance to play with it didn’t want to get motion sickness
after I had done it, but I was told up there because I knew we were
that Wright-Patterson did and going to be all over the sky. I could
thought it was successful. It would tell from the work we were doing
have been a real challenge for in the hangar that it was going to
analog computers, and I believe we be a wild ride. But Dramamine just
were still analog at that time. It wiped me out. We usually tried to
might have been a lot easier if we fly in the morning when the
had had faster digital computers. turbulence was low. I decided I’d
just rather be sick because once we
I think my last major piece of work landed, I was worth nothing for the
on the X-15 was that landing gear rest of the day [because] I was so
problem. Although that wasn’t the lethargic. I stopped taking the
end of the program, it was basically Dramamine. When I was a kid, I
the end of my active involvement fished. I’d go out in the Atlantic in
in it. I had been kind of moving a rowboat and fish all day; yet I
into supervision, and watching never had motion sickness. I don’t
Larry Caw with the TR-48s and the know why I thought an airplane
LLRV thing he had—that mess he would create some. I never got sick
had. Man, he had the messiest on the GPAS, but most of the other
hook-up I had ever seen—wires folks did. Larry Caw did! Owen
running everywhere. Larry had a Parish used to brag about how he
hornet’s nest over there. was a pilot and never got sick. I
saw him walk off the GPAS one
GPAS day with that [barf] bag full. The
GPAS got him. I don’t remember if
I then moved on to the JetStar. Musick ever got sick. I know Herm
Bikle basically made that decision did. Herm would get sick at the

124
112
drop of a hat. The thing is, they was flying. That was scary. I was
were always looking at these low- sitting in the control room, and
static-stability configurations, so from what I could determine from
you knew the thing was going to be what they were saying on the
unstable. The pilots were always aircraft, it was going to be a
interested in seeing just how un- disaster. When they landed and we
stable it was before ever trying to went out to look at the airplane, we
control it. I would tell them “we’re had buckled some skin and popped
ready,” and they would take their some rivets. We had probably come
hands off the controls to see how very close to a situation where the
quickly it would go divergent. They airplane would just come apart. In
were saying, “That is interesting,” fact, Butchart said that he was
and I was saying, “Come on— looking for the spot where they
somebody control this thing.” We’d would likely crash.
be all over the sky. Herm couldn’t
handle it; he’d get sick almost So we had some interesting times
every flight when we were flying with the GPAS. I think Bob Baron
low-static-stability configurations. took over [as project manager] after
I left. They did some more interest-
We had several interesting experi- ing things with it. I was more into
ences. One, we were looking for managing the hardware when I was
turbulence for Ken Iliff to work on working with Charlie [Wagner] and
his doctoral dissertation and were those guys. Charlie developed the
down in these canyons looking for first effective version of a variable-
rough air.44 The pilots were up feel stick: the electric torque motor
there talking about “this is just light stick. He did a great job on that.
chop,” and I couldn’t even keep my The interesting thing about Charlie
feet on the floor in the back of the [was that] his degree was in me-
airplane. I was saying, “Hey, wait a chanical engineering. He had to
minute, this is light chop? What are teach himself electrical engineering
we looking for?” We finally found to make that work. And of course,
some good turbulence that Ken did, he did it, and it worked very well.
in fact, use for the parameter
estimation part of his dissertation. So, I got into that part of simulation
He did give us acknowledgement where we were developing and
for having gone through that. In testing hardware. My primary role
fact, I still have a copy of his was that of managing that opera-
dissertation in my office. tion. Charlie was the primary
engineer, and Dick [Musick], Art
The second thing was when we Suppona, Gerry Perry, and Billy
added those side-force generators [Davis] were doing all the building
to the fuselage and the direct-lift and testing. My role became one of
devices to the wings. The modifica- coordinating with the project
tions were done at Lockheed managers, negotiating for re-
Georgia. We were flight testing sources, including time. My deal
them, and we got into a flutter with those guys was this: [as stated
situation. I wasn’t flying. Larry was by John,] “I don’t know how to do
in the airplane, and Stan Butchart what you do, so you tell me what

44 Ken Iliff is a research engineer and is currently the Chief Scientist for the DFRC. Actually, the JetStar was not flying as an airborne
simulator when it was gathering data for Iliff’s dissertation but just gathering data about turbulence. The reference for the dissertation
is K. W. Iliff, “Identification and Stochastic Control with Application to Flight Control in Turbulence,” UCLA-ENG-7340 (Ph.D. diss.,
University of California, Los Angeles, 1973).

113
125
you need and how long it is going that time, I could disappear for an
to take. I’ll take that to the bank. afternoon and go play golf, and no
All I ask you to do is, if you find one would miss me. There was
out that you need more or are going nothing for me to do. My job was
to take more time, let me know as simply dealing with Procurement,
soon as you know. I don’t want to dealing with John Yoshida45 on
get blindsided out there.” We budget issues, and trying to make
worked that way for years. They’d sure the guys had what they needed
tell me what they needed, and I’d to do their job. I was doing no
go out and get it from the project technical supervision and was
managers. If the project managers primarily working with the project
said they needed it in six months, managers to make sure that we
and those guys said it would take understood their requirements and
nine months, I’d tell them they negotiating with them for exten-
could get it in nine months because sions in schedule or money. That
we can’t do it in six. So, that was wasn’t a frequent occurrence
my job. Gerry Perry usually over- because those guys were so good at
estimated his time, so I learned estimating what they needed and
how to calibrate his estimates. how long it would take. That is
Gerry always wanted about 50 basically the reason I applied for
percent more time than he thought full-time graduate study. I was
he needed, just in case. We had a getting bored with that job because
good group of folks, and Charlie there was nothing for me to do. I
was the main man. He developed never thought they would accept
some wonderful stuff and he did so me as a full-time graduate-school
up till the end of his career. candidate, but they did. Then I had
to figure out what I wanted to do
That was basically the end of my once I was accepted. That was
career in simulation because I basically the end of my simulation
moved up to become John’s deputy. career. When I came back from
I still managed that part of the graduate school, I went into
organization up until I got ready to Administration.
go to graduate school, which was
’76. As John’s deputy, I was still
managing Charlie and that crew. Donald C. Bacon
That was getting to be a no-brainer
because those guys were so good I arrived on 1 September in ’64.
that they didn’t need anything from The 930 was just delivered. In the
me. The Division pretty much ran first six months or so I did things to
itself. And there wasn’t anything I get familiar. One of the things was
could do for the digital side. I that Jim Samuels46 sat down with
didn’t understand what they did me to teach me to derive the
anyway. So, I knew it was time to equations of motion, beginning
do something else if I wanted a with F=ma from basic physics.47
reason to get up each morning. At We worked on that for a couple of

45 John Yoshida was the chief financial officer at the FRC.

46 Jim Samuels was the first analog programmer in the FSL who had a college degree in aeronautical engineering.

47 Newton’s second law of motion asserts that the rate of change of momentum of a body is proportional to the force acting upon the
body and is in the direction of the applied force. This is usually stated as the equation F = ma, where F is the vector sum of the
applied forces, m is the mass, and a is the vector acceleration of the body. The equations of motion for an aircraft can be derived
starting with this basic equation.

126
114
weeks. He’d say to me, “Think the Hyper III,48 which was the
about this How does that work; switchblade wing design, and
what assumptions did you make?” another configuration [of the Hyper
The example he used, and one of III]. All of these contributed to what
the simplifications we made, was later became the Shuttle.
that forward velocity was greater
than vertical velocity. If you ever The all-analog, I still remember, was
get into an airplane and it is drop- drawn out on one sheet of paper the
ping faster than it is going forward, size of a table—so you could see all
then you’ve lost terms [from your the connections for the basic simula-
equations that] you now need. And tion. And then each section was on
particularly, there were different 11 x 17 pieces of drafting paper—
kinds of airplanes that were experi- grid paper—with all the inputs and
mental; you constantly had to keep outputs carefully labeled so you
in mind the assumptions that you could look at one section. You could
made in the equations you were look at the big picture as well as the
using. individual pieces.

Lifting-Body Simulations Testing

The first one I was assigned to do There was a lot of work involved in
was the HL-10—in ’65. Lowell testing. I still remember the first time
Greenfield was the guy assigned to I got it all ready to turn the HL-10
help, and Gene Waltman was the on. Ten or twelve simulation guys
technical advisor. By that time, Jim gathered around. I said, “What I’ve
Samuels had either just left or was done is set the basic parameters for
in the process of leaving. He the initial conditions49 to zero so that
wanted to do more “hands-on” I won’t have any trouble when I turn
work and John [Smith] wanted him it on.” And half the group snickered,
to do more management work. because they knew what was com-
They came to a parting of the ways ing. So I said, “OK, I’m ready” and
over how much time he spent on turned it on. Whistles went off, bells
the 930 and how much he spent went off, servos went winding, and
with the guys. [Jim went to work amplifiers’ alarms screamed all over
for the Lockheed Rye Canyon the place—and they said. “Shut it
Simulation Facility.] off, shut it off.” So I shut it off. They
said, “Think about it—you set
The HL-10 was the first one I did velocity and weight to zero, didn’t
myself. In the early days of the you?” And I said, “Yes.” “Well, you
lifting bodies, it was all-analog. We divide by those numbers and that
took several consoles to do one, and screwed everything up—what do
you could only do one at a time. In you get when you divide by zero?”
the long run, we did the M2 [both the So everybody had a good laugh—but
M2-F2 and M2-F3], which Lowell it was a lesson learned: Sometimes
was responsible for. The HL-10 was what you think is the simplest way to
mine and the X-24 was over at the approach something is not really
Air Force. We also did some work on going to work.

48 There is an excellent description of the Hyper III project in the book by R. Dale Reed with Darlene Lister, Wingless Flight: The
Lifting Body Story (Washington, DC: NASA SP: 4220, 1997), pp. 158-166

49 Initial conditions are the values for those parameters in the equations that are normally not equal to zero when a simulation run is
started. Velocity, altitude, weight, heading, etc., are examples of calculated parameters that have initial values at the start of each run.

115
127
The derivatives were nonlinear and took about a week to get the pilot
the aero people had constructed the ready—to learn what to do for the
family of curves. Ken Iliff did a lot next flight. It took 40 hours to reset
of the work in getting the data the pot-padders for each airplane.
ready—as did research engineer Lonnie [Cooper—EAI maintenance
Bertha Ryan.50 I still remember the support team lead] and the EAI
first time I went down to ask her a guys worked all weekend. They
question—and she stood up and worked around the clock to get the
drew herself up to her full height 40 hours needed between Friday
and said “I am a theoretical afternoon and Monday morning to
aerodynamicist and I don’t chase switch from one [lifting-body
wind-tunnel data for simulation simulation] to the other.
guys!” She left soon after to go to
work at China Lake. They wouldn’t And then we checked the deriva-
let her do the theoretical work she tives out by sweeping them using
wanted to do and they wouldn’t the Rep Op51—we had plastic
let her in the hangars near the overlays and the Rep Op scope that
planes, so she left to work at China we had for derivative matching. We
Lake. used that to sweep through the
independent variables and be sure,
Simulation Switch-over ‘cause every now and then we’d get
a spike in one [of the derivatives].
The nonlinear curves were set up
with families of independent Static and Dynamic
variables—so every Mach number Checks52
had a set of curves—and alpha and
beta were independent variables. Static checks were done first. Next,
They were all done on pot-padders. we’d calculate the frequency and
During that time, they wanted to fly damping for dynamic checks—and
each airplane every two weeks. We then run them out on the strip-chart

50 Bertha Ryan and Harriet Smith were the research engineers responsible for the earlier M2-F1 analog simulation. Al Readiger was
the FSL programmer for this simulation. There is an excellent description of this simulation in Dale Reed’s Wingless Flight, pp. 26-
31.

51 Rep Op (which is short for Repetitive Operation) was a feature available on most analog computers. Rep Op allows the operator to
reduce the problem solution time by a ratio of 100:1 and the computer alternates between the RESET and OPERATE modes, causing
the solution to be produced many times a second. This allows the calculated outputs to be displayed on an oscilloscope at a rate
(usually) that is fast enough that the entire solution can be seen at one time. The operator can make changes to almost any of the
parameters in the equations (usually via one or more pots) and the effects of the changes can be seen immediately. Once the desired
solution is attained, the time constant can be returned to normal and the solution calculated in normal time, with the results plotted on
a recorder. Although not really intended for the use described, Rep Op was a very convenient method of displaying the nonlinear
derivatives. If one or more of the data points in the functions had been incorrectly programmed (or if there was a blown fuse), the bad
data point(s) would be immediately visible on the oscilloscope.

52 Static checks on an analog computer provided a method of determining if the implementation was correct (i.e., were all the
components correctly connected and were all the pots and function generators correctly programmed?). Static checks were done with
the computer in the RESET mode (i.e., computer time was equal to zero and not changing.) Dynamic checks were performed with the
computer in the OPERATE mode (i.e., computer time was changing.) Normally, for a dynamic check, a known time history solution
(with known initial conditions and known inputs) was used to determine if the implementation was working correctly. If the results of
the dynamic check were different (with the same inputs used in the known solution), then there was something wrong with the
implementation. This problem was usually some analog component that was malfunctioning, as might happen if a fuse were blown.
Many hardware problems did not always show up when the computer was in the RESET mode and would only be noticeable when the
computer was in OPERATE. Both static and dynamic checks were run during the initial implementation of the simulation. Thereafter
the daily dynamic checks were adequate to determine if the simulator was working correctly for that day. If changes were made to the
implementation, then new static checks were calculated for checkout purposes.

128
116
recorders. Again, once we had done Landing Simulation Capa-
this to check them, we had plastic bility
overlays prepared in the reproduc-
tion shop; we could lay them over One of the problems we always had
the strip charts and see where we was simulating landings. There was
were. One of the interesting things a lot of work done on visual
that happened [was that] the displays and techniques to simulate
process in going from paper to landings. Our group finally adopted
plastic stretched the curves on the the policy: with the equipment and
plastic. If you took the original and the technology we had, we could
laid the overlay on it, they didn’t not adequately simulate landings
match any more. for research airplanes. So what was
worked out was to take the air-
The same thing happened on all planes that were closest to the
copiers—everyone doing engineer- research airplane in performance
ing work and using the copiers and use them to practice landings.
knew that the copiers stretched the The F-104 in a very dirty configu-
scale. So it was kind of a trick to ration53 was used to practice
get an overlay that would work. landings for the lifting bodies. The
That took another 10 to 15 minutes. Grumman Gulfstream II was used
So it was common to spend an for Shuttle approach studies. This
hour—after you were sure every- [landing simulation] was always a
thing was all right—just checking terribly difficult problem—even
things. And then, of course, we though a lot of work went into
flew it. We’d pick a sample mission trying to provide better visual
and fly it just to make sure the displays to the pilot.
computers, model, controls, and
displays were all right. Another thing we did with the
simulation was prepare the pilot for
We didn’t have those problems with whatever was new. Typically, pilots
simulations that were set on dedi- flew 40 hours of simulation for a 4-
cated equipment and were flown day minute flight of a lifting body,
after day, such as the LLRV and X- though the pilots—Bill Dana, Milt
15. One of the powerful uses of the Thompson (who flew the first M-2
simulations was that you could take flight), and Bruce Peterson (who
pieces of hardware off the airplane flew the first HL-10 flight)—could
and tie them in [the simulation]. I better tell you how long that was in
remember we took servos from effect. And of course there were
airplane stock and instruments and surprises. The airflow over the back
tied them into the simulations as a end of the HL-10 wasn’t as ex-
way of being sure they were ready pected. It was a year between the
for flight. Of course, there were some first and second flights. Bob
things that were very difficult to Kempel and Wen Painter did a lot
simulate. Now the whole aircraft is of work as the controls guys, and
tied in at the RAIF routinely. We had Iliff was the aero guy on the HL-10.
iron birds for the X-15, PA-30, and
F-8 DFBW. The JetStar flight vehicle They also used the simulator in
was tied to its computers for systems later years to draw the maps that
development and model checkout. were used in the range. We’d go in

53 This is the term used to describe an airplane that is not aerodynamically clean, which usually means that the landing gear is down,
or the speed brakes are extended, or the flaps down, or for some other reason something is causing a reduction in the airplane’s
performance.

117
129
early on the morning of a flight. lifting-body simulations was to
We’d call the Air Force and get the use it for generation of the very
weather data, plug it in as extra nonlinear derivatives. We had
velocities [i.e., as crosswinds in the derivatives as functions of control
appropriate directions] and their surfaces, alpha, beta and Mach
altitudes, and then fly that day’s number—four or five independent
mission and draw the expected variables for some of these. Some
ground-track maps for the control of them were very unusual.
room. Derivatives that you’d expect to
be all one sign crossed the axis
Faster than Real-time and caused roll reversal, for
Simulation example, at certain conditions.
Coupling between roll and yaw
It was only a 4-minute flight to go also occurred. The table lookup
from 45,000 feet to the ground; [nonlinear function generation]
they were falling like a rock. The was the first thing we did. Of
pilots were [extremely] busy during course that completely changed
the actual flight, and as I recall it the load on switching from one
was Jack Kolf who came up with sim to another. 55
the idea of making the simulation
run faster than real time. We did The next thing was the calcula-
that and as I recall it was about 40 tion of the longitudinal or slowly
percent54 faster than real time. The changing variables. So now we
pilots said that it now felt like the are talking about velocity, dy-
workload they were seeing in namic pressure, and altitude—
flight. They didn’t do the research parameters that were very diffi-
that way. What they would do is, cult to do on an analog computer,
the day before a flight we’d change because they had large ranges of
the time constants by changing the variables. We always had a
gains on all the integrators and run precision problem with altitude
the simulator about 40 percent and velocity when the aircraft got
faster than real time with the pilots near the ground.
flying the next day’s mission. That
way, they were sure to get enough There was a lot of experimenta-
time to do everything on the tion that was done coming up
checklist of research tasks the with the integration schemes. A
engineers wanted them to do each lot of tests were run; we’d set it
flight. This was late in the program. up and let it run all night. We let
It wasn’t that way in the beginning. it calculate analytic functions like
sin 2 + cos2 = 1, and the deriva-
Use of SDS 930 tive of one is the other, so we
could take derivatives, and
The first thing we did when the integrate and square and let it run
SDS 930 became available for the all night and see how close to one

54Several different values were tried, from 20 percent to as much as 50 percent faster. The pilots seemed to prefer a value of about 40
percent faster as being the one most like what they experienced in flight.

55The use of the digital computer for function generation of the lifting-body nonlinear derivatives eliminated the use of much of the
analog-function-generation hardware. This also eliminated the need to reprogram these analog function generators whenever the
simulation had to change from one vehicle to the other. This function-generator-reprogramming job was usually done over a weekend
by the simulation support contractor, as described above. The simulation could then be changed from one vehicle to the other in a
matter of hours, rather than days.

130
118
we still were. ‘Cause one of the about [any more]. Another early
problems with digital integration use—in table lookup—was to do
was phase shift. Another problem the atmospheric tables. We could
was predicting what a parameter go in with altitude and tempera-
was going to be at the beginning ture and get the parameters
of the time frame—so that we needed to calculate dynamic
were calculating with the correct pressure and Mach number. That
variables. 56 Our solution—it was was a big advantage.
Lowell Greenfield’s idea—was,
instead of using a complicated We were very concerned about
integration scheme, as they were doing anything that was high
teaching in the classes, we used a frequency—anything that was
very simple integration scheme faster than 3 cycles a second
and ran it very fast. We were (because we needed 30 samples
running at 100 samples per per second), which we got from
second where other people were the theoretical work we did
running at 10 or 20. This was taking courses and working with
done by taking advantage of the professors at UCLA and USC. 59
fact that a lot of the parameters Many courses were taught at
only needed engineering preci- Edwards and others were taught
sion. 57 So a lot of the terms in the in Los Angeles. In those days, the
power-series calculations were young engineers had car pools
dropped out of the standard going to UCLA one night a week.
digital functions. Or taking classes out at Edwards,
which were usually taught by
The next thing that was done on USC. You must realize that in the
the 930 involved sines, cosines, middle ‘60s, digital computers
and square roots 58—since those were not fast enough to do what
were noisy operations on the they do today. And they didn’t
analog. And we worked on have the parallel architecture that
powers (exponents) so [calcula- they have today—where we could
tions of] things like dynamic take a problem and divide it up
pressure and altitude were a piece among a bunch of computers that
of cake since we didn’t have were yoked together. So people
functions of altitude to worry were working all kinds of
56 This refers to one of the problems with combined analog and digital (hybrid) simulations. The digital computer calculated param-
eters using inputs read in from the analog at the start of each digital time frame. The parameters calculated during that frame were
then sent out to the analog at the beginning of the next frame. This resulted in a time delay, which usually affected the accuracy of the
simulation. The shorter the time period, the smaller the error. One method of dealing with this time delay was to try to predict, at the
beginning of each time period, what the input parameters would be at the end of the time period. These predicted values would then
be used in the calculations (instead of the actual inputs).

57 Engineering precision means that the degree of exactness (or refinement) of the measurement being made or the calculation being
performed is both adequate and sufficient to provide the accuracy needed for the task at hand. For example, in combined analog/
hybrid simulations, there was no need to calculate mathematical functions in the digital computer to a degree of exactness that
exceeded the analog computer’s accuracy (which was only about one part in 10 thousand.) This was a waste of the digital computer’s
time and memory, both of which were quite limited and better used for more significant calculations.

58 There are numerous terms in the equations of motion of an aircraft that require the calculation of mathematical functions such as
sines, cosines, and square roots. We used algebraic series, such as: Sine = A0 + A1 1 + A2 2 + A3 3 + A4 4 +...An n. We did
these kinds of approximations whenever we could, since it was faster to do so than to do a table lookup. On the other hand, there were
no such simple equations for approximations of the density parameter needed in the calculation of dynamic pressure, so we had to do a
table lookup in the 930. We did this since it was better than doing so on the analog (as we had to do earlier with the all analog sims).

59 University of Southern California.

119
131
schemes to do integration and to fying a faster digital computer. In
try to do other things where there the early ’70s, Gene Waltman’s
were time frames, time shifts, and team specified and bought a time-
phase shifts that had to be dealt shared digital computer. It was a
with. Control Data CYBER 73-28—in
which we put everything. In those
There were lots of Simulation days, it was a good strategy to get
Councils Inc. meetings where the the biggest, fastest digital computer
analog guys and the digital guys and put everything on it. We had
were basically calling each other business on it, we had batch on it,
crazy, and those doing hybrid—like we had range on it, and we had
us—would say: “Well, you’re both simulation on it. We had one
right and you’re both wrong.” Our processor dedicated to batch and
view was to take the strengths of one processor dedicated to real-
the digital and the strengths of the time. I don’t remember how many,
analog, with due respect for the but there were 10 or 12 small
time delays, time shifts, and phase processors that just fed stuff in and
shifts that were inherent in using a out of the big processors.
digital and the precision constraints
inherent in using an analog. ‘Cause As I recall, there were only five of
100 volts represented whatever it the CYBER 73-28s built. We had
was—whether it was 50,000 feet of one; the Army Missile Command
altitude or ±5 degrees of beta. The had one; there was one in Eu-
±100 volts had to be spread60 over rope—and they wouldn’t even tell
that calculation. So we took the us on which side of the Iron
strengths of both systems. We kept Curtain it was located.
the control systems on the analog
to take advantage of parallel These special 73-28s (with the
processing and instant results. We real-time front ends) collapsed of
kept the lateral equations on the their own operating system
analogs and the longitudinal weight 61 —it was so expensive
equations—such as altitude and that the customers had to pay for
velocity—on the digital. The all the system upgrades. And
analogs by now had logic compo- when we got tired of doing that,
nents that were programmed on a the design group went on to other
separate panel. This allowed things. So the support wasn’t
decisions to be made and alterna- there. Everyone else (to the best
tives selected. For example, gear of my knowledge) ran batch and
up/gear down could be more real-time on different shifts. We
accurately simulated. were the only ones who ran real-
time and batch at the same time—
In the middle phase of all this— and not time-sharing but in true
from ’64 to ’68—we began speci- parallel processing, because there

60 This refers to the scaling of parameters on the analog computers. Depending on the dimensional units, variables could have values
or rates of change that went from very small to very large numbers. Scaling is the process of setting the expected maximum values to
be equal to the ±100 volt range of the analog. For example, if the maximum altitude is 100,000 feet, then its scale factor would then
be 100 volts/100,000 ft. or 0.001H(volts/foot), where H = altitude (in feet). To convert a value to the corresponding analog voltage,
we would multiply the value by the scale factor. If the altitude was 40,000 feet, the voltage would then be 40,000 feet times 0.001
volts/foot—or 40 volts. To convert an analog voltage to the corresponding value, we would divide that voltage by the scale factor. A
voltage reading of 50 volts would therefore be equal to 50 volts/ 0.001 volts/foot—or 50,000 feet.

61This refers to the large size and complexity of the special software that CDC developed to manage the real-time front-end hardware
connected to the two analog computers in the FSL. CDC had a very limited set of customers.

132
120
were two processors running. We ICARUS
simply forced CDC to make it
work. The acceptance testing that Another thing that happened about
was supposed to take 30 days took that time was the ICARUS simula-
a year. tion. ICARUS started with Ken
Iliff’s idea of using the digital
At the same time we acquired the computer to help set up the analog
CYBER, we acquired two Ap- computers and help run the check
plied Dynamic Inc. analog cases to minimize the load on the
computers. They had a lot of simulation engineer. He suggested
digital logic and what today this because in addition to the
would be called firmware. One research engineers and the pilots, we
comment—all the programming needed a simulation engineer present
we’ve been talking about was anytime a simulation was running to
done in Assembly language, handle set-up problems, to be sure
although Fortran was available. the analog computer was running
There was real-time Fortran, and right, and to be sure the digital and
Fortran designed for simulation. analog were in sync, plus all the
But it was so slow we couldn’t kinds of things that could go wrong
use it for the kind of vehicles we with the cockpits, which were the
had. At that time you could write displays to the pilots. The thought
Fortran routines that ran batch. was if we simplified the set-up and
So basically you were solving the the checking by moving them onto
same set of equations two differ- the digital computer, then use unity
ent ways—one in Assembly scaling—in which we took the
language and using the analogs biggest value of a variable and called
and the other in Fortran. If they that 100 volts—and let the digital
didn’t match, we knew something computer do the scale factors for us,
was wrong in one of them, but we research engineers could then set up
didn’t know which one. If they the simulation and run it for a basic
did match, we had a fair confi- engineering problem. That would
dence that the check worked, also allow us not to need all those
since we were using the computer other people there, which would
in two different modes and with permit us to run off-shift or on
two completely different languages. weekends.

It wasn’t until we got the CYBER There was always a problem when
in the ’70s that the computer was we had emerging projects. They
fast enough—what with two main didn’t yet have any money or
processors and 10 small processors priority, but there was a lot of hard
feeding it—and the Fortran com- work that was needed to get going,
piler was efficient enough that we and there were usually two or three
could actually write simulations in excited research engineers and pilots
Fortran. It was Al Myers who wrote who were ready to get going. The
the first Fortran simulation to run in structure wasn’t there to support
real time on the CYBER. There them, ‘cause they weren’t ready to
were lots of thought processes, a lot fly.
of agony, a lot of gnashing of
teeth—if you will—over whether ICARUS meant Immediate Check-
we were really ready to switch. It out Analog Research Unity Scaled.
turned out it really was a viable We started with the word ICARUS,
way to do simulation, and it turned and we sat around the office one
out to be a powerful tool. afternoon and made the words fit.

121
133
The idea was that Icarus, the son of could control the analog and there-
Daedalus, escaped from prison with fore control the whole simulation by
his father, using wings made of wax resetting it or stopping it in the
and feathers. He got so excited with middle of something. Later he gave
what he was doing that he flew too up on HOLD and there were only
close to the Sun, melted the wax, and OPERATE and RESET. There wasn’t
fell into the Aegean Sea. That is what any point in going to HOLD in the
we told the research engineers. It’s middle of something since there
wonderful and you can really use it, but wasn’t anything to get out and look
if you lose track of the assumptions, if at. Gerry Perry designed that, and by
you lose track of the simplifications that this time Charlie Wagner had de-
say you can do this and that, and you signed the cockpit setup. It had a card
can’t do other things, you’ll get too reader, which used a punched card to
close to the Sun and fall into the sea of turn switches on or off and set the
misleading results. That was a graphical pots (initial values) on that interface
way of telling them not to forget about computer that was built at the FRC
those terms that were taken out to together with the electric stick, with
simplify the model. torque motors to provide forces.

So, that was a project that I did— So now we had a system in which
making it a practical thing to use the an engineer could come in (having
digital. You could put in the maxi- had a simulation setup), load a
mum values of the parameters; you copy, turn it on, go sit in the
could put in a simple set of the cockpit, and fly the simulation. The
derivatives. We had functions of criterion now was 30-minute setup,
Mach number, alpha, and beta. The and simulation time was scheduled
tables were predetermined—we by Dick Webb in 2-hour blocks.
could set the breakpoints wherever Because now, in 30 minutes you
we wanted—but the numbers of could change the cockpit and
tables, the kinds of derivatives, and computer. So, ICARUS was used
which ones we had were all pre-set for dozens of projects, particularly
up. So if an engineer wanted to use those in the early stages and also
it, he could bring in a simple set of where there was control-system
wind-tunnel data. That is usually all work to be done. At this time, the
he had in the very early stages of the FRC moved to many projects that
project—a few wind-tunnel runs. involved control-systems work—as
Then he could make some linear opposed to performance work. A lot
adjustments on them—out in the of the guys were setting up fairly
maximum values for the parameters. straightforward, simple control
ICARUS would scale it and set it up. systems on the analog patch boards
He could then type in the initial themselves. ‘Cause they were
conditions for the run he wanted to Control Systems guys and were
make. turning the computers on and
running the system. We were
By then, switches had been installed running 16 hours a day and fre-
in the cockpit. Gerry Perry did that. quently on Saturdays and Sundays,
He was the one who figured out how if needed. Typically, if a pilot was
to run the analog from the cockpit. preparing for a mission, that was
Ken Iliff was confined to a wheel- done in the daytime. Even the high-
chair and couldn’t jump in and out of priority guys would bring in their
the cockpit. It was his idea to put requirements. They were schedul-
controls in the cockpit so that a guy ing on a two-week basis, with the
running a simulation by himself first week being firm and the

134
122
second week preliminary. At the end delivery with that kind of crite-
of the week, we would redo the rion.62
preliminary schedule into a firm
schedule and make another prelimi- And I was one of the ones who
nary schedule for the following switched over, too. At the time the
week. CYBER was being specified, I took
a look at Mary Little as she was
ICARUS allowed a lot of work that running the flight and business data
did not have the priority and would and John Smith running simulation,
never have gotten any time to be both on the same computer, and I
done under the previous arrange- decided that was not going to work—
ment. This resulted from these two that somehow, someway we were
simple ideas: Immediate Checkout going to have to have one group
using the digital to run the static and that ran the machine and specialists
dynamic checks, and Unity Scaling, who ran the applications. The
again using the digital to set up the Systems Analyst Group—under
scale factors for all the variables that Dave Hedgley—was also founded
had to be displayed in the cockpit. then. I went off and took a lot of
We still had the control systems with work at UCLA in statistics—in
the high frequencies on the analog— mathematical statistics ‘cause no one
but now we were doing the deriva- else was doing that. I was working
tives and equations on the digital. towards a certificate in numerical
analysis. About that time a Ph.D. was
The period we are talking about was hired—under contract—to do
the late ’60s and the ’70s. It was statistics.
about ’73 when the CYBER came
on-line. So we’re talking about ’69 to So I shifted over to the kinds of
’72. Then, with the advent of Fortran things needed for operations. On
and with the CYBER running the my own—while taking some
simulations, two things happened. classes—I did a lot of work talking
The flight data ( from Telemetry) to people and looking at what kinds
was in terrible trouble; it was taking of problems there were in running a
two weeks to get flight data turned computer center. Because at that
around, and simulation was a breeze. time, it was all magic. I remember
going to the guy who was head of
The decision was made to take the programming and asking how long
guys who had been in simulation it would take to do a job. He said,
and move them to solve the flight- “Well, you know, it’s a creative
data problem. Larry Caw was the process. It might take a week or it
first. Gene Waltman was one of the might take a month.” And he leaned
early ones. John Perry moved over, back in his chair and puffed on his
and Lowell Greenfield became the pipe and said, “You can’t push
systems guy on the CYBER. So the creativity,” and of course in those
simulation group was broken up days that was a long-standing
(except for a couple of younger argument whether software was an
guys) and moved in to attack the art or an engineering practice. There
flight-data problem. In a couple of were lots of attempts to come up with
years we were getting 24-hour turn criteria—they did things like
around [on the flight data]. We “count lines per day” and it was all
were getting 90 percent on-time a big game. And in my perspective,

62 The goal was to get the data collected from a flight processed and ready for use by the flight project personnel within 24 hours after
a research flight was completed.

135
123
there was no way to predict—based of all, we had taken the people and
on IBM studies—who would be a sent them to do other things—
good programmer. You couldn’t systems work or whatever. And
predict based on education or secondly, the structure didn’t really
intelligence, and the only thing I ever allow for a simulation engineer. So
saw that really worked was that, in one of the changes that was made in
general, people with music back- the latter ’70s, which went on for
grounds made good programmers. several years, was that a simulation
And I’ve been told that is also true group was re-established within the
with people working in the early software part of that structure. Larry
days of communications. Schilling and others became what we
would call simulation engineers
In my own view, it does make a again—or what NASA calls special-
difference. My son studied music ists in theoretical simulation tech-
in college. The idea came to me niques.
while talking with him about this.
A musician has to pay attention to One of the interesting things was that
both the theme and the flow of the in the early days, around the ’60s, we
piece of music—as well as the were classified as mathematicians.
details of the structure of the To give an indication of the flavor of
music. For example, on a keyboard the work positions, we had mathema-
you have to pay attention to what ticians, aerodynamicists, and physi-
every finger is doing and at the cists—there weren’t any computer
same time to the whole flow of degrees. They didn’t know what to
music in terms of the quality of the do with the computer people. In the
music. My son is a drummer, so he later ’60s and early ’70s, if you were
had both hands and both feet more software than hardware, you
going, six or seven pieces of were considered a mathematician,
equipment. So that’s my own and if you were more hardware than
thought on why music can be a software, you were an electronics
predictor of success in software— engineer. My own classification
because you have to pay attention changed several times during that
to both the big picture and the period. I used to say I became an
details. engineer by act of Congress just like
officers became gentlemen. They
So at that point I became the chief of didn’t know what to do. There was
the operations group when the two no computer scientist series among
divisions were combined—that is, civil service job classifications. The
the whole CYBER organization was only thing there was for a person
realigned into a software group, a who did data entry, or keypunch, was
hardware group, and an operations a clerical work category. It wasn’t
group. Within the operations group until the computer scientist’s series
that I headed, we saw a major loss of was created that there was any
simulation engineering capability semblance of order.
because simulation required all three:
operations, engineering, and soft-
ware. We did all those. We had a Lawrence (Larry) Caw
technician assigned who was an
expert in all areas of electronic and Larry worked in the FSL from 1962 to
mechanics. To the extent that it was a 1975. I (Gene Waltman) wrote this PA from
separate skill area to be a simulation a number of notes, letters, and various other
technician, simulation was out of inputs provided by Larry, with additional
control in my view at that point. First information from others in the FSL.

136
124
X-15 Landing Studies King. It was implemented using an
unusual collection of different analog
The first simulation Larry had as his own computers, including an EAI 31R, EAI
was an X-15 landing-loads-analysis study 231R, and several portable analogs (TR-
for the research engineer Jim McKay. Jim 10s, TR-20s, etc.). Because of the differ-
was the twin brother of John (Jack) McKay, ences between the larger analogs (31R
the X-15 pilot. Jim wrote several reports and 231R) and the portable analogs (TR-
dealing with the landing characteristics of 10s), there were many home-made patch
the X-15. This simulation did not involve cords connecting the two different types
any cockpit and only had four degrees of of computers together, giving this particu-
freedom: main-gear motion, nose-gear lar simulation the appearance of one huge
motion, airplane pitch, and vertical transla- Rube Goldberg kludge. Photo ECN 637
tion. A brief description of this simulation is shows one of the LLRVs. Larry spent
in an appendix to the report: (Citation No. many morning hours making test runs and
342) Landing Loads and Dynamics of the trying to get this mass of patch cords and
X-15 Airplane by James M. McKay and computers to work before he could call
Eldon E. Kordes, NASA TM X-639, March the project office and tell the pilots to
1962. This simulation used a single EAI- come fly. The portable analog computers
231 analog computer. Larry also worked as were situated on one of the air-conditioner
a programmer on the X-15 simulation. blower housings in the X-15 simulation
Photo ECN 1456 shows him standing in lab. This housing was in a corner of the
front of the X-Y plotter used by the simula- lab and across from the EAI 231R that
tion to display ground track and altitude was also used in the simulation. The
during flights. Larry and several other FSL extra-long patch cords were hung from
programmers were assigned to help out the ceiling. The wood flooring used in the
with the X-15 simulator when we went to X-15 lab interfered with running the
two and three shifts of operation. trunks under the floor. The cockpit was in
the next room, which had no false floor,
LLRV Simulation and also required the use of some over-
head trunking. Photo E-10840 shows the
The next significant simulation Larry Caw simulation cockpit. Unfortunately, no
did was of the Lunar Landing Research photo was ever taken of the computers. If
Vehicle (LLRV). This simulation earned there had been a photo taken, I’m sure
Larry the dubious title of the FSL Kludge Larry would have had a copy mounted on

Frank J.
VanLeynselle in
the LLRV Simula-
tor Cockpit
(January 1964).
(NASA photo
E-10840)

125
137
a dartboard in his office. This simulation was designed and built by Bell and tested
shared the lab with the X-15 simulation using the simulation. Later, these vehicles
computers, and there were many morn- were transferred to the Manned Space
ings, when I would be in the process of Flight Center (later redesignated the
checking out the X-15 simulation, that I Johnson Space Center) in Houston, Texas,
heard all sorts of grumblings emanating for use by the Apollo astronauts. NASA
from the other corner where the LLRV also had three more of these vehicles built
simulation was situated. Thinking back on for training use. The training vehicles
this simulation and the overhead mass of were called Lunar Landing Training
patch cords, I am reminded of the Vehicles (LLTVs) exclusively.
Munsters’ mansion and all its vines and
cobwebs in a popular TV program from Besides Larry Caw, the FSL technicians
the 1970s. involved in this simulation included Art
Suppona, Gerry Perry, and Leo (Dick)
This simulation was unique in that it was Webb. This simulation lasted for about
a simulation of a simulator. The actual three years. The research engineers
LLRVs—there were two built by Bell included Gene Matranga, Cal Jarvis, and
Aerospace—were eventually used by the Wilt Lock. Many reports were written
Apollo astronauts to practice Moon- about the LLRV program. A number of
landing maneuvers on the Earth. The pilots flew the simulation and the simula-
actual LLRVs had the capability of tor, including Joe Walker and Don
simulating the Moon’s gravity (one-sixth Mallick from the FRC, and Jack Kluever
that of Earth’s), thereby allowing the from the Army. See photo ECN-637 of
astronauts to perfect their landing tech- one of the LLRVs with the FRC pilots.
niques before ever going to the Moon. Houston pilots Joseph Algranti and H.E.
The two LLRVs were first flown at the Ream also flew the LLRVs during the
FRC during the early check-out and early days of the program. Deke Slaton
development phases of the landing and Neil Armstrong were two of the
studies. The on-board avionics system astronauts who also flew the LLRVs (in

LLRV with Joe
Walker (on right)
and Don Mallick.
(NASA photo
ECN-637)

138
126
Houston) and the ground simulation. complained about this, since it was
distracting. Later on, they found that there
This ground simulation also had flight was a pattern to the noise and they could
hardware tied into the analog mechaniza- use this as an indication of just how the
tion. This particular black box was a vehicle was doing with the control system
prototype of the electronics used in the engaged. Because of this, a study was
LLRV. The engineers were trying to conducted with the simulation using a
duplicate actual system responses as white-noise generator to simulate the
closely as possible, and rather than try to attitude rocket jets to try to determine if
simulate this particular piece of hard- the noise patterns could, indeed, be of any
ware, a prototype unit was connected to use. I don’t know what the results of this
the simulation. It was several years later study showed but I doubt if it had any
before aircraft were connected to FSL impact on the ultimate purpose of the
simulators. Once the FSL moved into the LLRV—which was to train the Apollo
mezzanine in the Calibration Hangar, this astronauts to land their lunar lander on the
began to happen more and more. Our moon and to provide data for the design
experiences with trying to simulate on- of the actual lunar lander. But this little
board computers was never good. It was ancillary study shows just another of the
far easier to actually connect the real interesting things that our simulators were
hardware, either in an iron-bird cockpit or used for.
the real aircraft. The new Integrated Test
Facility (ITF) was built with this concept Lifting-body Simulation
in mind. There were many simulations in
the FSL that used real avionics. In the The next major simulations that Larry
current facility (now called the Research Caw was involved with were those for the
Aircraft Integration Facility [RAIF]), lifting bodies. There were several differ-
entire aircraft are connected just for this ent mechanizations during the Lifting
reason. Body Program. The first simulations were
all-analog implementations. As the X-15
The LLRV was a unique simulation with Program was winding down, the SDS 930
somewhat unusual equations. At that digital computer used in the X-15 simula-
time, the FRC was heavily involved with tor became available for use with other
the X-15 Program, and there weren’t a lot implementations. The lifting-body
of resources available to devote to this simulations also began using this digital
simulation. The oddball collection of computer. Because of the many different
analog computers made it an especially lifting-body configurations, it became
difficult and frustrating simulation to necessary for the simulation to be easily
keep up and operational from day to day. and quickly re-configurable. Using the
Larry and the FSL technicians who SDS 930 for the many different nonlinear
worked on this simulation have a lot to be coefficients helped in achieving the rapid
proud of. We kidded Larry a lot about this changeover needed by the Lifting Body
kludge, and the other sim programmers Program Office. Larry Caw was a backup
(that filled in for him when he was on programmer to Lowell Greenfield and
leave) did not look forward to having to Don Bacon on this simulation. Larry
work on his simulation. It definitely had programmed and operated the analogs and
its own personality, and Larry was its never got involved in the digital side of
only “recognized and accepted” owner. the implementation. I don’t remember
But it was so temperamental that it gave Larry ever going to any of the SDS
even Larry fits at times. It was like programming classes. These lifting-body
having a Tasmanian devil as a pet. simulations overlapped with his support
of the LLRV, which was his main concern
The attitude rockets on the LLRV made at the time. Like the X-15 simulation,
quite a bit of noise. At first the pilots the lifting-body simulations originally

139
127
used pot padders for the many nonlinear own way as the LLRV simulation. Larry
functions in the equations of motion. Pot worked on these simulations from 1968 to
padders were very time-consuming to set up 1973. The various simulations were all
and check out. Larry spent a lot of time analog and included studies of the concept
working with these components. The of a flying simulator. This was done both
integration of the SDS 930 (see below) into here and at CAL (Cornell Aeronautical
the simulation was a definite improvement Laboratory in Buffalo, New York). CAL
and resulted in a significant decrease in the was the organization that was selected to
time needed to re-configure the simulation. build the airborne simulator. These studies
Even so, the Air Force and the FRC split the helped determine the feasibility of such a
simulation effort, with the Air Force provid- flying lab and to design the appropriate
ing the early M2 simulations (while the control systems. After the JetStar was
FRC was installing the SDS 9300) and the modified and the on-board analog com-
X-24 simulations. The FRC implemented puters installed, there were closed-loop
the HL-10 and the latter M2 simulations simulations that used the on-board
(which used the SDS 9300 digital computer analogs and external ground-based analog
instead of the original SDS 930). Larry computers. There were also simulations
worked with the lifting-body simulations that used ground-based analog computers
from 1966 to 1969. tied into the airplane control systems. The
analog computers used in these different
There are several excellent publications phases of the simulations were EAI 231Rs
about the Lifting Body Program that include and EAI TR-58s. The section on GPAS
discussions of the simulations. I particularly further describes the on-board analog
recommend: (1) NASA RP-1332, by Robert computer system.
W. Kempel, Developing and Flight Testing
the HL-10 Lifting Body: A Precursor to the The GPAS was used for a number of years
Space Shuttle, (2) Dale Reed’s book with in many different types of studies: handling
Darlene Lister, Wingless Flight: The Lifting qualities, stability and control studies,
Body Story, and (3) the Bob Hoey study, parametric studies, noise turbulence studies,
“Testing the Lifting Bodies at Edwards.” and variable stability control systems
The publication by Reed is available on the studies. During the latter years of the
DFRC Web page at URL http:// program, direct-lift and side-force surfaces
www.dfrc.nasa.gov/History/Publications/ were added to extend the simulator capabili-
WinglessFlight/. The Hoey publication is ties. The GPAS employed a modified
also available on the DFRC Web page at Lockheed C-140 JetStar. Photos ECN-2399
URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/History/ and E-27825 show the airplane and the on-
Publications/LiftingBodies/contents.html. board computer system. There were many
There is also a document on the website by technical reports written covering the
Bill Dana, which is his talk to the National various studies and the results.
Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian
Institution as a part of the Charles A. Larry Caw worked on this project with John
Lindbergh Lecture at URL http:// J. Perry and Dick Musick from the FSL.
www.dfrc.nasa.gov/History/lifting_bodies/ Herman Rediess, Dwain Deets, and Ken
lifting-1.html. This document contains many Szalai were the control systems engineers,
really great photos of different lifting and the FRC pilots included Stan Butchart,
bodies. These photos are all downloadable, Don Mallick, Hugh Jackson, and Fitz
and many are in color. Fulton. Many guest pilots also flew the
GPAS, including Wernher von Braun, who
GPAS (General Purpose Air- stated that flying the GPAS was like dialing
borne Simulator) an airplane. The GPAS did have the capabil-
ity of simulating many other aircraft in
As a simulator of different aircraft con- actual flight. Larry flew 176 flights in the
figurations, the GPAS was as unique in its GPAS as the simulation specialist.

140
128
Art Suppona and we were able to do our work
rather unimpeded—except we had to
I got there—Computation and always be on the alert as to where we
Simulation [the FSL]—the day after were stepping as it was very easy to
Labor Day in 1961. The big simula- stumble on the steel supports, which
tion then was for the X-15 Program. were threaded arrangements, each
And, of course, all of us technicians one of which supported the corners
were either under the floors pulling of four floor tiles. The idea was to
cables or pulling parts of the EAI get those tiles adjusted precisely so
analog computers apart, every day, that there were no edges sticking up
doing maintenance on them, and for someone to stumble over later.
trying to do preventative mainte-
nance. Most of that effort was with Glider Simulator
the operational amplifiers, which
were tube types, and trying to keep Now, the X-15 having all the
them free of noise, basically, in that funding, when someone from
the doggoned machines would another program came up with a bit
integrate on noise and they were of an oddball request of some kind,
chopper stabilized amplifiers.63 we had to do a lot of improvising.
Ninety percent of that work was And my first experience with that
trying to check the tubes and to was when an individual—I cannot
check that the chopper stabilization remember the guy’s name—had a
circuit was working. private project (if you will); he came
in with some kind of a glider pro-
Cleaning Spirits gram that he wanted to establish.
Lowell Greenfield was the program-
The resolvers were another big thing, mer for the simulation. But I built the
which entailed cleaning the various simulator for him. They wanted
parts using 200-proof alcohol, which absolute simplicity; the objective of
only Dick Musick was authorized to the simulation would be achieved
withdraw from stock. He was the strictly by instruments. The only
only one authorized in Computation reason I bring this up is that the
and Simulation to sign for it, in pint control stick was a cutoff broom
bottle quantities. Needless to say, handle and the rudder pedals were
some people just might have a also made from a part of the broom
temptation to have a little stronger handle. Everything was strictly
refreshment during the day, but that tension-type springs, for providing
was one thing we never saw happen. the force and maintaining a zero
position. There were pots, of course,
Floor Tiles for stick-and-rudder-position indica-
tors and for input into the portable
We ended up having to get under the computer, which was a TR-10 analog
floors for all the cables. That was computer. It only took a few days to
always a fun thing. Sometimes jury-rig this thing up. This guy and
someone came up with a radical Lowell were very anxious to show it
change in programming; and we to Paul Bikle.64 Paul got in and
would literally have to tear the floors operated it as Lowell and this
up as much as we could. Luckily, engineer looked on. Paul flew it,
they came out in two-foot squares, with the ever-present cigar in his

63 Choppers are described in the section on Four-Stage Boost-Vehicle Simulation. See also glossary.

64 Paul Bikle was a world-class glider pilot as well as the center director.

141
129
mouth, and then he got up and said cockpit we used was an old one that
that it was totally unrealistic—and had been sitting there, alongside the
stomped out. That was my introduc- equipment in the analog room, but it
tion to the frailties of simulation. We served the purpose. Anyway, Joe got
thought we did pretty well in getting in there, flew it for about five
that thing cranked out in such a short minutes, got his questions answered,
time and achieving the objectives of and that was the end of that!65
the project engineer. We really got
shot down, but good! Early Lifting-Body Cockpit

F-104 Stick Kicker Once again, working in simulation
was an education to us, at least for
There was another simulation that this guy [himself] who was new to
was, more or less (shall we say?), not this type of work and making his first
done on a formal work request and endeavor in any kind of research
involved making do with what we work. It was a good precursor of
had or getting around the normal things to come. And of course, when
methods of procurement, if you will. the lifting bodies came along, this
Joe Walker came in one day and was (for me) an introduction from
expressed a desire for a simulation of beginning to end in getting a simula-
the “stick kicker” function of the F- tor built (I mean from scratch). The
104. As I remember, when the F-104 program wanted it as nearly realistic
was put into a certain climb or nose- [as it possible could be], not only in
up attitude, it would fall flat and get the handling of it but in the visual
unstable unless the pilot reduced the environment for the pilots. The first
stick position. [The stick kicker was heavy-weight lifting body—the one
a device that vibrated the control Bruce Peterson got hurt in—[was the
stick to remind the pilot that he was M2-F2]. We had the square box
getting into an undesirable situation.] simulator cockpit, but everything
I had no engineering guidance on else was pretty good as far as the
this, just his verbal request. I remem- handling qualities went, and of
ber that I had to buy an electro- course the programming was pretty
mechanical clutch. For the life of me, straightforward. To get the stick
I don’t remember how I got that forces, we used surplus aircraft parts.
through the mill. I think we put it on Dick Webb and I were sent to buy an
some other program’s charge assortment of parts from surplus
number. It only took about 10 days of aircraft shops in the L[os]A[ngeles]
work in the machine shop; we basin. We bought quite a few items
already had a stick of some kind that we thought we would be able to use
needed some minor refinements. The in simulators. The first lifting-body
biggest thing was getting a function simulator used quite a bit of that
generator that would respond to the stuff. We acquired a fiberglass
attitude of the airplane. This time cockpit that Northrop had used to
things worked out a little bit differ- configure the vehicle. This was used
ently in the end. We busted our butts for the simulator. It provided a very
getting what Joe wanted. Anyway, I realistic environment.
forget the name of the programmer I
was working with. As I remember, Electric Stick
we got things ready, and we gave Joe
a call and said we think we have It was just a few years later that Dick
what you want. By the way, the Musick and Charlie Wagner came up
65 The simulator was flown only that one time!

142
130
with the design for the electric heavy monitor around between the
[control] stick. There was one different cockpits. We got to be
cockpit that Dick Johnson [not in experts at moving these heavy loads
Simulation] had designed that used around the lab. Another big thing
hydraulics and was built by then was when Charlie [Wagner] got
Northrop. It was a typical hydraulics the patent for the rotating video
thing. By golly, if you weren’t display, which made the visual
leaking hydraulics fluid, you were presentation much better for the
fighting to get it in tolerance. pilots.

Dick and Charlie came up with the Soldering Standard
design for the electric force genera-
tor, which everyone called the In ’79, I got tasked by our boss to
electric stick, and we also had one come up with a soldering standard.
for the rudder pedals.66 This really Headquarters had come up with a
was a better unit and got rid of a lot directive that simulation was a part
of the mechanical problems in the of the “system,” and should have a
old stuff.67 It was a close-tolerance soldering standard, just like the
design that provided better forces aircraft technicians used. Simula-
and travel and feel. We originally did tions, even though they were ground-
most of the construction and com- based, still had to have the same
puter circuitry in-house, but eventu- quality standards. So we had to
ally we had to contract this out, develop the specifications for this.
which was a first. We either had to We took what was being used
do this or hire more people, and downstairs by the aircraft technicians
NASA was reluctant to hire more and adapted it to simulation. I don’t
people for this job. The design kept believe anyone was ever put in
getting better, especially as solid- charge of enforcing this standard.
state devices came along. This was
used quite extensively for the various F-8 DFBW Iron Bird
RPV (Remotely Piloted Vehicle)
simulations and every simulation I was also involved in the modifica-
thereafter.68 tion of the F-8 iron bird for the
Digital-Fly-By-Wire simulator.
Visual Displays This was a real F-8 airplane, and
we spent a lot of time getting it
Then there were the video displays ready for use as a simulator. It
that started out being pretty crude but was located in the lean-to that
got better as we went along. Since was attached to the side of the
we weren’t allowed to buy more than calibration hangar. This modifica-
one of the big monitors, we had to tion of the F-8 took a lot of our
design and have built a rather time, but once it was done and
elaborate hoist system to move this connected to the computers, we

66 The “electric stick” was put into operation about 1971. It was first used for lifting-body simulators and almost every simulator after
that.

67The “old stuff” mentioned here is in reference to all the pilot’s controls that have been discussed in previous sections; it includes the
various hydraulics and spring- and bungee-loaded sticks and rudder pedals that were used in the earlier cockpits in the FSL. These
hydraulic and mechanical devices had undesirable characteristics that made their use a very frustrating experience. The electric stick
was a major factor in the on-going development of the simulation capabilities and had a lot to do with the FSL being one of the best
sim labs in the world.

68 See Charles Wagner’s PA in the following section for further discussion of the electric stick.

143
131
hardly ever had to go back down in the control room during X-15
and make changes. It worked flights. It produced a heart-shaped
quite well for many years. display on a CRT [Cathode Ray
Tube] that outlined the area where
Tools the X-15 could glide to at all times
during its flight. A transparent map,
We spent a lot of time waiting for attached to the CRT face, depicted
our stuff to be manufactured in the the available landing sites. The EMC
sheet metal and machine shops. received real-time flight data, in-
Simulation did not have a lot of cluding altitude, speed, and direction.
priority there. We got to thinking
about this and just how much time Energy Management Con-
we wasted waiting for things to be sole
built. It occurred to us that if we
had some of our own equipment, Unfortunately, the EMC had been
we could make a lot of the stuff we built by a start-up company, which
needed. John Smith approved the apparently went belly up right after it
purchase of a metal lathe, milling was delivered. I was told the com-
machine, and a band saw. Unfortu- pany consisted of two guys in a
nately, this was when Dave Scott garage. The EMC was poorly
was center director and had been constructed, even by the standards of
directed to reduce unnecessary its time, and a technician and I spent
duplication. He had procurement many hours finding and replacing
go through all outstanding PRs and hundreds of defective parts. We
canceled those that appeared to be finally got it to working (sort of), and
duplications. Our orders for the it found its way into the control
lathe and milling machine got room. The feedback I got indicated
canceled. Some time later, one of that the EMC worked, but the flight
the buyers in small purchases controllers did not need it by the time
called and said that the order for it became available; they already
the band saw had been misfiled (at knew by experience which landing
the time that the other two had been sites could be reached at any time
canceled) and was still there and during the flights. Simulation had
she wondered if we still wanted the been involved in the original re-
band saw. So we did eventually get search to determine the database
our (Sears, Roebuck, and Co.) band needed to define the X-15’s landing
saw. area, and I believe John Smith had
been responsible for ordering the
device. So, when it arrived and did
Charles Wagner not work, his group inherited the
responsibility of trying to fix it.
I started working for NASA in late
1964, right after Thanksgiving. My Dalto Visual Simulator
first assignment was to try to help get
an EMC [Energy Management My next project was the Dalto
Console] up and running.69 This was Visual Simulator. It was on order
an all-analog device that was sup- when I started working at the FRC,
posed to provide a real-time display and when it arrived I became its

69 The X-15 was launched from a B-52 mothership long distances from the Flight Research Center and Rogers Dry Lakebed, its
intended landing site. Flight planners identified intermediate dry lakebeds for emergency landings when necessary. Flying at speeds
up to Mach 6.7 and altitudes up to 17 miles, the X-15s had a lot of energy that needed to be managed carefully so that the airplane
could reach a lakebed and land at the proper speed.

144
132
caretaker. This device was intended Analog. It usually worked, and it
to provide an out-the-window view generated a fake ground plane
of the area around Edwards. It was consisting of random checkerboard
probably funded by the X-15 project squares or other repeating patterns. It
(the only one with any money), but it also had fake oval clouds in the sky.
was never used for the X-15. The [See photo E-10591.]
Visual Simulator (VS) was an all-
analog device that took a vertical Simulator Cockpits
picture of a terrain transparency
(something like an aerial photo- Then, [it was] on to the simulation
graph) and distorted the picture to cockpits themselves. The earliest
make it appear as if it were being cockpits I can remember working on
viewed in perspective from a flying were little more than wooden boxes
aircraft. It used a now-obsolete with spring-loaded sticks and panels
camera known as a flying-spot consisting mostly of simple, cheap
scanner to view the transparency. It meter movements with dials printed
seems the military had ordered a in the photo lab.
bunch of these devices for its flight
trainers and had quickly discarded Altimeters were a particular prob-
them when they did not work well. I lem. Dick Musick put together
must have spent a couple of years on homemade altimeters that worked
this gadget and learned a lot about pretty well, considering what he had
electronics in the process. I even to work with. But because of their
wrote a couple of technical papers on very high amplification (20 milli-
it. Like the EMC, the VS was built volts represented 1,000 feet, or one
by a not-too-reputable company that full revolution of the fast hand),
delivered something that was small electrical errors looked really
unreliable and performed poorly big. A typical problem was that the
even when it did work. I eventually altimeters were jumpy, with the fast
got it working better than the factory hand oscillating constantly over 50
had been able to, but the technology or 100 feet. They were annoying
was inadequate for it to provide a when they did that. The problem was
useful picture. At high altitudes, the that even a slightly noisy amplifier
visual range was limited to about on the analog computer would make
three miles, which is fairly useless. a good altimeter look bad.70
At low altitudes, the picture resolu-
tion was too poor for it to be useful Another type of instrument that was
as a landing aid. It turned out to be used fairly extensively was the
an expensive toy that never really did synchro.71 It was used when the total
much useful work for the various movement of the needle had to
simulations. exceed the limits of a simple meter
movement. A synchro could revolve
Norden Contact Analog through a full revolution (or many
revolutions). The problem was that
The visual device that was actually the available drivers that could
used for many years by several of the convert DC voltage to synchro were
simulations was the Norden Contact expensive and unreliable (a common
70Due to the high scaling normally used for altitude, if the amplifier that was providing the input to the altimeter was even a little bit
noisy (i.e., not steady, but jumping around) the altimeter’s needle would also jump around. The vacuum tubes in the amplifiers would
get old and cause this noise. This was distracting to the pilot. For most signals to the cockpit instruments, a little bit of noise in the
amplifiers (that provided the signal) did not have such an effect, but the altimeters seemed unusually sensitive to this noise.

71 The synchros used were three-phase 400-cycle alternating current motors. Many of the aircraft’s instruments were synchro-driven.

145
133
problem with early solid-state computers to program it. It was
devices). I remember seeing many fairly successful and was used for
burned synchro converter boards. some early simulations. (I don’t
They were always burned in the remember for sure which ones, but
same place, indicating that it was the I think it was used on a lifting-body
same component that always failed. simulation.) One of its problems
was that if the trim integrator
Cockpit Interface Equip- drifted, it could drive the motor
ment hard against the mechanical limit
and eventually burn out the motor.
Another early problem was that we These were expensive gadgets to
had both 10-volt and 100-volt replace.
analog computers driving the
cockpit displays. The interconnects Electric Stick
were made via patch panels. If an
incorrect patch was made, or the I inherited the job of refining the
wrong patch panel was put in place, electric stick. I repackaged the
100-volt signals could get into physical stick assembly and hooked
places such as the output of a 10- it up to a more sophisticated
volt amplifier, and the result was program on a TR-48 computer. I
usually a blown component. I got began incorporating safety features
the assignment of trying to prevent to eliminate the motor burnout
these disasters, and I came up with problem and to relieve some fears
an interface console that could of some of the pilots. It seems that
withstand 100-volt signals at both there was an old hydraulic-powered
the inputs and the outputs without stick (or maybe it was a control
damage. The original interface wheel) around that had a habit of
console was programmed using a going hard over right into the pilot,
punched-card reader. The card where it threatened his physical
reader was very difficult to wire up safety. (I remember seeing one pilot
without short circuits, and the leaping out of the seat, fearing for
switch contacts were unreliable. his life!) This gave powered sticks
Even so, the interface consoles a bad reputation, and some pilots
usually had enough working said they would never get into a
channels to be useful. A follow-on cockpit with one. Eventually, I was
model eliminated the card reader able to make the electric stick safe
and was more reliable. We con- enough for pilots that there were no
structed several copies of this threats or close calls. Gradually,
version and used them for many they began to accept it as safe and
years. began asking for more variable feel
characteristics to more closely
The spring-loaded sticks were a model the aircraft. I eventually
constant problem. The pilots said developed a self-contained equip-
that they did not feel like [those on ment rack that included all of the
the] the airplane. They also usually electronics required (including the
had a lot of slop (free play). I power amplifiers) and eliminated
began work on a better spring- the clumsy TR-48 and external
loaded stick that was adjustable, but power amplifiers. This was the
before I got very far, Dick Musick most successful project I ever
had begun to demonstrate some worked on. Eventually, six copies
success with an electric-powered of the stick were built, and these
stick. He and Art Suppona put one were in use for many years on
together using TR-5 and TR-10 virtually every simulation.

146
134
More on Sim Cockpit In- has the characteristic of touching
struments intermediate voltages of unknown
origin on its way to the correct
I remember working on cockpit position. This was another one of the
instrument panels to make them causes of the blown components
interchangeable. This was so a single described earlier, and it helped spur
box with an electric stick could be on the desire to develop an overload-
used for several different aircraft proof interface console. Eventually,
simulations. Thus, a standardized the rotary switches were replaced
cockpit was born, and panels could with a massive patch-panel assembly
be arranged in many different ways. known as DISPATCH [Distributive
The standardized panel interface was Patching]. It was built in-house. I
matched to the interface console designed it and Gerry Perry built it. I
described above, which incorporated believe it contained somewhere
all of the stuff required to run 8-balls around 20,000 wires, and Gerry built
and other specialized aircraft instru- it without a single wiring error!
ments.
The world of analog computers,
We began buying simulator instru- requiring a trunk line for every input
ments from a small company in New or output variable, and analog
Jersey. (I don’t remember the name, cockpits with the same requirement
but there are a lot of its instruments led to literally miles of cables under
still around.) They looked like actual the floor. Art Suppona, Gerry Perry,
aircraft instruments. Our first and the other technicians spent years
purchase was for altimeters, and they of their lives fabricating trunk cables.
were quite successful. It seems we Working hard, one man could make
finally found a company that knew about two cables a day. Thus, every
what it was doing. With the better time some major change was
amplifiers and some filtering in the required, much work went into
cockpit interface, the altimeter noise making new cables.
problems disappeared, and the pilots
were happier. We bought dozens A cockpit usually required about 20
(maybe hundreds) of various simula- cables, so there were about two
tor instruments, ranging from simple weeks of solid cable building
one-turn instruments with replace- required just to hook up one single
able dial faces to altimeters and cockpit. I remember Don Bacon
converted 8-balls that ran on DC once remarked that it sure took a
inputs instead of synchro. long time to build a cable. Various
connector manufacturers began to
Trunk Switches introduce connectors that could be
installed in less time. Unfortu-
Because we had a variety of analog nately, every analog computer
computers and a variety of cockpits maker had its own favorite trunk
that needed to be interfaced, there connectors, so we had no choice
was always the problem of connect- about which ones we could use.
ing the correct cockpit to the correct Even worse, those connectors were
combination of computers via the usually both expensive and difficult
many trunk lines running around the to install. So we had to stock a
lab. Dick Musick came up with an large variety of connectors and
early solution by using (I believe) tools to build all of those cables.
motor-driven rotary switches to
select the correct computer. While
this solution worked, a rotary switch

147
135
equipment in hopes of using it to
Personal Accounts of simulate flight conditions. When Al
FSL Users (Research and I saw the equipment, it was just
being uncrated, and the Air Force
Engineers and Pilots) lieutenant who was assigned to
work with us didn’t seem to know
much about it. The lieutenant, Fred
This section contains personal accounts of Smetana, was very willing to let us
research engineers and pilots who pro- help unpack it and assemble the
grammed, used, or flew a number of the parts. It was manufactured by
different analog and hybrid simulations. Goodyear and called GEDA
These PAs are in a somewhat chronologi- (Goodyear Electronic Differential
cal order with the first group being the Analyzer).
engineers in the order that they were
involved with the analog sims throughout The Douglas X-3 airplane, before
those early years. The same is true for the being turned over to us at the
pilots’ PAs. The PAs are in somewhat NACA [High-Speed Flight Station],
different styles, depending on how the had undergone the usual Air Force
information was collected. For some of acceptance testing, which included
the people, the PA is in the form of a rolling maneuvers. Flight data was
narrative or story. Several of the people available for the aircraft motions
have sent me information via e-mail and from these maneuvers. I went to
letters, and their PAs have been pieced Douglas and got the time-history
together into narratives. A couple of these data and the flight derivatives that
are from interviews, and the PAs are in were available. Al and I “pro-
more of a question-and-answer form. grammed” the GEDA analog
Again, I have tried to edit what they say computer to simulate the flight
as little as possible and to keep their conditions, and we were struggling
information in their own styles. with the high angle-of-attack
simulation when an F-100 crashed
somewhere between Lancaster and
Richard (Dick) D. Banner Rosamond. We were asked if we
could simulate the F-100 on the
The following is from several e-mails and GEDA. We did, and as we did, we
notes from Dick Banner: discovered that the lateral-direc-
tional period simulated with the
The Very First Analog Simulation derivatives given us did not match
the flight data. Al took a look at the
I don’t remember the dates, but way the in-flight directional stabil-
[what I am about to relate occurred] ity parameter was obtained and
not long after we moved from the decided that it was not correct. He
main base to the new facility.72 De went on to derive a new set of
Beeler, then Director of Research, equations which would give us a
asked Al Kuhl and me to look at the better method of obtaining the in-
subject of vertical tail loads in flight directional stability param-
rolling pullout maneuvers. He eter, allowing us to simulate the F-
apparently had been in contact with 100 flight conditions. [See the
someone at the Air Force Flight appendices for a copy of the in-
Test Center and had arranged for Al house memo written by Banner and
and me to look at its new analog Kuhl on this study.]
72The move from the South Base facility took place in June 1954. The new facility marked the beginnings of the present facilities at
Dryden Flight Research Center.

148
136
To the best of my knowledge, we thought that the REAC equipment
were the first at NACA, Edwards, would be useful in the coming heat-
to simulate aircraft motions on a transfer and aerodynamic heating
computer. The usefulness of studies that I had been assigned to,
aircraft motion simulation was but as it turned out, I worked
becoming obvious to many of us at mostly with Ray Jackson on the
the time Al and I were working on IBM digital computers, setting up
the GEDA, but I had no sense of methods to predict aircraft skin
what it would become. Langley had temperatures in flight and backing
much more capability at the time, out heat-transfer data from the
and Joe Weil went there to work measured skin temperatures.
with Ordway Gates on problems of Somewhere along the line, I
other aircraft similar to the F-100. supplied the equations to program
Al and I continued to support their the X-15 simulation to read out
simulation studies, sending them skin temperature, but I don’t
our GEDA results for the F-100. remember the details.
The results were published in a
paper given at a conference at
Langley, with all four of us as Richard (Dick) E. Day
authors. After that, Al and I were
reassigned to other work, and Dick I started at the NACA High-Speed
Day was assigned to the GEDA. Flight Research Station in 1951. I
left to go to Houston in February of
I worked a little with Ed Videan 1962. I came back in 1975 to do
(some kind of a committee) to Shuttle work and retired at Dryden
choose the first type of simulation in 1981.
equipment we were to use at our
facility, REAC73 or something like Initially, when the X-2 came to the
that, using ±100 volts DC. I even desert for its flight tests, Walt
attended classes at Ames [Aeronau- Williams assigned me as the NACA
tical Laboratory] with Ed Videan, Project Engineer. At this time, we
Dick Musick, and Dick Day on served in an engineering advisory
programming the equipment. My capacity to the Air Force prior to
first simulation (not documented) that service’s turning the airplane
on the new equipment was a simple over to the HSFS for flight re-
heat transfer problem, which I search. The Air Force had engi-
bungled at first. Your [Waltman’s] neers, but they were not sufficiently
recollection of using the wrong acquainted with the research
time constant on a heat transfer aspects of flight test, so Joe Weil
problem probably came later than and I went down and programmed
this, but I don’t remember. I did no (mechanized) the Goodyear Elec-
more documented aircraft motion tronic Differential Analyzer
simulations after the GEDA (GEDA) with the equations of
experience, but I remember that motion and the airplane’s aerody-
Chet Wolowicz worked on aircraft namic and physical characteristics
motions simulations on the REAC to make the X-2 simulator. We used
in those early days, and we con- an iron pipe with centering springs
sulted occasionally. My recollec- for the control stick and control
tion is that Dick Day was working position transducers (CPTs) to
mostly on getting the pilot into the provide control-surface-position
simulation at that time. I had at first input to the analog. Rudder control

73 REAC (Reeves Electronic Analog Computer) was an earlier acronym for the EAI analog computers.

149
137
was not provided because the X-2 maybe one degree—until he
rudders were locked at supersonic slowed to Mach 2.2. He then
speeds. The display was a CRT, and started turning (increasing angle of
I believe Ed Videan provided the attack), but Pete was not painted
equations for that. They were pretty into a corner as Mel Apt was going
simple, but at the time, I didn’t to be on the final flight.
know how to do that. So we had a
wing as viewed from the rear on Oh, something that is pretty
the CRT. The wing would indicate important, these are all at one
sideslip, angle of attack [AOA], Mach number—5 DOF at one
and roll, and that was our first Mach number—because we didn’t
simulator. [See photo E-1841.] The have the capability to do 6 DOF. So
simulations were all performed we did [Iven] Kincheloe’s at
using 5 DOF. We didn’t have the different altitudes up to the altitude
capability to calculate 6 DOF, so he finally got to, and a little higher.
we would set the aerodynamic I think he had 19 pounds of dy-
parameters to the various Mach namic pressure. [Mel] Apt was the
numbers and altitudes predicted by third and final X-2 pilot to be
performance calculations. Because trained on the simulator. Then we’d
this was only a 5 DOF lateral- go to Mach 2.6, 2.8, 3.0. I’m not
directional simulation, there were sure if we went to 3.2; I think 3.0
no meters, such as a Mach meter or was the highest we got. We showed
altimeter. We used the GEDA for him if he increased AOA to about 5
many aerodynamic programs prior degrees, he would start losing
to acquiring our own analog directional stability. The tail would
devices and going to Ames for be in the shadow of the wing. He’d
analog programming instructions. start this, and due to adverse
aileron, he’d put in stick one way
Pete Everest made all the powered and the plane would yaw the other
flights except five. He incremen- way. We’d say all you had to do
tally increased Mach number on was push over. We showed Apt
each flight until he reached Mach this, and he did it many times.
2.4, and after burnout, he would get
aileron pulses while decelerating. Unfortunately, on the final flight,
We made analog matches to the the unexpected increase in perfor-
flight data and plotted the flight mance to Mach 3.2 positioned the
data along with the wind-tunnel X-2 farther from the landing site
and theoretical calculations. We (Rogers Dry Lake) than planned,
then came up with a curve for the placing the airplane at a possible
Cnβ [yawing moment coefficient point of no return. Apt was now
with respect to sideslip] vs. Mach literally painted into a corner. He
number [X-2 paper: TM X-137 had to decide whether to decelerate
(Citation No. 246), Fig. 7].74 Using to Mach 2.4, as briefed, to make a
these data, the simulator showed safe turn, thus increasing the
that beyond Mach 2.4 the airplane distance even farther from the
entered into uncontrollable diver- landing site, or try to make the turn
gences when increasing angle of immediately and risk the instabili-
attack beyond four or five degrees. ties that had been predicted and
So when Pete made his Mach 2.8 “flown” on the simulator.
flight, after burnout he kept the
angle of attack to almost zero— Well, the simulator was a new
74 Cnβ is the yawing moment coefficient with respect to sideslip.

150
138
device that had never been used with his theory and my piloting and
previously for training or flight analog work [see NASA TN D-
planning. Most pilots had, in fact, 746-Flight Controllability Limits
expressed a certain amount of and Related Human Transfer
distrust of the device. Whether Functions as Determined from
distrust of the simulator or a fear of Simulator and Flight Tests. (Cita-
not making it back to the landing tion No. 304)]. [This report dis-
site affected Apt’s decision, he cusses the results of a simulator
opted for the turn. His radio study and associated flight and
message was, “OK, she’s cut out. centrifuge studies that were per-
I’m turning.” There was an omi- formed to determine the levels of
nous silence of 20 seconds before static stability and damping neces-
Apt uttered an almost unintelli- sary to enable a pilot to control the
gible, “She goes. . . .” longitudinal and lateral-directional
dynamics of a vehicle for short
You can see his aileron input here periods. Novel piloting techniques
[TMX-137, Fig 6]. He started a were found which enabled the
right turn. Then he put the stick in pilots to control the vehicle at
left and he still kept rolling to the conditions that were otherwise
left. Then he put the stick in 10 uncontrollable.]
degrees to the right. He kept
staying at a constant roll velocity, We had a pretty good X-15 centri-
until he hit here, and that is when fuge program that lasted about two
he got this AOA and beta75 and he months. That was all analog. [This
hit roll coupling. On his final flight, is in reference to a X-15 simulation
he was so far out because he went using the NADC centrifuge at
so fast (Mach 3.2). He may have Johnsville, Pennsylvania.]
been at what he thought was the
point of no return. He thought, I made one statement, that the
“Gosh, I’d better get back.” But he GEDA down at the AF was the
knew, from the simulator, if he very first flight test simulator;
made the turn and increased his however, I qualified it quite well by
AOA, he’d get in trouble. So, saying [it was] used for pilot
anyway, he chose to make the turn training, obtaining aerodynamic
and got in trouble. That’s the Apt data, derivative extraction, and
story.76 flight planning. Other people had
analogs and they were doing design
The foregoing is a fairly condensed work, and other such things, but I
history of what happened with don’t think an analog had ever been
NACA’s use of the Edwards Air used as a flight-test tool to the
Force Base GEDA prior to NACA’s extent that the GEDA was. It was
obtaining its own analog system. I the first of its kind, even with all
think it also indicates the impact of these qualifications. There were the
the first analog simulator at old training simulators—the Link
Edwards and the HSFS on the simulators—that were only training
conduct of flight-test and flight- simulators and not research simula-
research programs. tors. I guess research would go
with these others. It had fixed
Larry Taylor and I did some work derivatives, all servo-driven, and

75 Angle of sideslip

76 Apt lost control of the X-2 due to roll-coupling and lost his life when the aircraft’s nose section hit the desert floor.

151
139
even 50 years ago there was a One note I had, after we had the X-
simulator that was the same thing— 15 simulator, with the iron bird
all servo-driven displays and that sort downstairs: Bill Johnson of North
of thing. American Aviation called up and
asked—now that we had the X-15
One of the first jobs I did on our simulation—if we would do a favor
analog was to run an F-104 3 DOF for him. He wanted us to see what
climb program. The last time I used we could do if we were to attach a
the GEDA was after Apt’s flight, to so-and-so rocket to the X-15 and
get some data to put into the accident launch it near the maximum height.
report. It was after that—in 1956— So I did that for him. I took different
that we got the (analog) simulator. I heights and launch angles—and we
was using that simulator to try to didn’t have any dynamic pressure; it
duplicate the flight. I did the pro- was pure space. It didn’t get to orbit,
gramming on it. Dick [Banner] did whatever the rocket was. It was a
his own, and I guess Videan did North American missile of sorts.
some. I always programmed my John Perry was doing the simulator
own. work for me. This is when we were
still in the X-15 program. I had to
I did all my own mechanizing. sneak that one in for Bill. He had
Here’s what I did at FRC with our always been generous with his time
new computer [he refers to TMX when the X-15 simulator was still at
137]. The input was silver ink.77 The the North American Aviation site at
rest of them are the actual flight the Los Angeles International
records and the analog records. Airport.
That’s at the end of that report. I used
it for that. I think we got it very
quickly—around the first of 1957. Donald Reisert
All I had was the Boeing B-17 side-
arm controller. We got it from Ralph I found two reports on projects that
Sissle. It was a formation stick. I used analog computers to help
don’t know if you know the details guide the flight programs: TM-137
of it, but the copilot had one and the [X-2, Citation No. 246] and ARS
pilot had one, and there was a red No. 1674-61 [F-104A, Citation No.
button on top. When you wanted to 297]. Both reports mention the use
take over, you’d push the button and of computers to provide simulation
start flying. It was a good thing, but I of the aircraft.
never tried landing with it. There
weren’t many others with it then. I X-2 Simulation
think the reason I got it was because
I’d had so many hours flying in the I don’t have dates but I believe
Canadian Air Force. I guess they about six or seven of the thirteen
figured they’d let this old geezer use powered flights of the X-2 were
it, and. . . . made during 1956.78 Dick Day and

77 This term “silver ink” is in reference to a method of implementing a nonlinear function using an X-Y plotter. This had the ink pen
replaced with a sensor that follows a path drawn on a piece of plotting paper with silver ink. An electrical signal was transmitted
through the ink path by means of wires attached at each end of the path. The plotter arm was driven by the independent signal (in this
case, time) in the horizontal direction, and as the pen arm moved across the paper, the pen sensor followed the “silver ink” path. The
output of the pen arm was then the signal that represented the input parameter (in this case a time history of the pilot’s input) that was
used in the simulation model. Not very elegant, and it took some time to set up; but it worked.

78 The correct number of flights in 1956 for the X-2 was 12.

152
140
I started the computer program and two pots. There was a strip
about this time. This work was chart that had six or eight pens to
performed on the Air Force com- record the data. A photograph was
puter and was to help guide the taken of me at the controls demon-
Mach-altitude flight-envelope strating the setup. I was growing a
expansion. The X-2 was in the beard for some contest and looked
Research Airplane Program that pretty bad. For the later runs, Dick
was paid for by the NACA, Air Day brought in a B-17 formation
Force, and the Navy. control stick to replace the broom-
stick and made things look better.
The Air Force pilots were to fly
these flights to obtain the Mach The early flights were made by Lt.
number and high-altitude records Col. [Pete] Everest, and after one
before the NACA was allowed to visit to the simulator when we were
fly it. Bell Aircraft supplied people having some trouble because we
to maintain the vehicle and help to didn’t believe data, he declared that
train some NACA mechanics and machine no good. (The problem
rocket people. NACA instrumenta- occurred when presenting the
tion people performed the installa- stability data at the higher angles of
tion and maintenance of the attack. The wings would not remain
instruments to measure the flight level after starting the run, and the
data. aileron inputs to level the wings
made things worse until the roll
The computer was only large mode was lost after full aileron
enough to perform the three- input.) I remember one meeting
degree-of-freedom equations for with the Air Force, probably after
the speed and altitude runs or some some flights were made where
five-degree-of-freedom equations Col. Hanes 79 strongly suggested
(for stability and control) with the to Lt. Col. Everest that he go
Mach number held constant. The back and fly the simulator again
constants and coefficients of the as we tried to present the flight
equations were installed by setting conditions for each flight before
rotational resistors that were all the envelope expansion to higher
connected together with plug-in Mach number. He did fly the
wires. When ready to run, it was a simulator again.
mass of wires on top of a shelf
about waist high. Some values were The flight program went slowly. I
put in using pots (about 100) that think the X-2 was designed to go
covered a vertical panel above the to Mach 4; however, the wind-
shelf. tunnel data indicated a low
directional stability at the Mach
The cockpit simulation was very numbers below 4.0.
sparse. I think we calibrated
voltmeters with a grease pencil. Our procedure was to use the
Dick Musick made a two-axis directional period 80 at the highest
control stick using a broomstick flight Mach number to calculate
79 Col. Horace A. Hanes, Director of Flight Test and Development, AFFTC.

80 The period (length of time) between peaks in the oscillations that occurred after a disturbance (such as a stick or rudder pulse by the
pilot) that caused the aircraft to oscillate about one or more of the aircraft’s axes. For the case mentioned, the pilot would put in a
small rudder pulse and the plane would oscillate about the vertical axis—the nose would move from side to side, and this motion
would then die out over a short period of time. Using the recording of this motion, the research engineers could determine the
appropriate aircraft derivatives for the corresponding conditions (i.e., Mach number, attitude, etc.).

153
141
the coefficient C nβ (using the also preparing for a new assign-
Dick Banner-Al Kuhl equation); ment with relocation and had only
use the flight data to modify the a limited amount time to fly the
computer inputs; fly the simula- X-2. This was during the summer
tion to the next safe, highest of 1956. At this time, Capt. Iven
Mach number; write a flight plan Kincheloe was assigned to
to obtain flight data at this point; perform the high-altitude flight,
then continue until the flight and Capt. Mel Apt was assigned
envelope was fully expanded. to finish the Mach-number
expansion. Another time con-
The X-2 did not have any stability straint was that the aircraft was to
augmentation, so after it went be delivered to the NACA on 7
supersonic, the beta (sideslip) vane October 1956.
would start to oscillate and the
period would lengthen as the Mach Capts. Kincheloe and Apt came
number increased (indicating a by to fly the simulator often and
decrease in directional stability). were very cooperative. I don’t
We did not ask for many specific remember how many flights Capt.
flight-data maneuvers and re- Kincheloe performed, but he did
quested periods of fixed controls, have more than one and was
especially at the higher speeds near exposed to the X-2 gliding charac-
engine burnout, so we could teristics before he made the high
measure a clean period of beta altitude flight.82 On 7 September
oscillation. 1956, Capt. Kincheloe very suc-
cessfully performed the high-
Lt. Col. Everest made about four altitude flight (flight A of TM X-
flights, the last two achieving Mach 137). With the turn-around time
2.7 and Mach 2.87 (shown as flight required, there was time for one
B in TM X-137).81 He must have more flight before delivery of the
believed some of what we said aircraft to the NACA.
about not going to high lift at high
speeds as flight B data show he The last Air Force flight was to be
pushed over slightly after engine an introductory and high-speed
burnout, even though the aircraft flight for Capt. Apt. The drop,83
was speeding away from the engine start, and rotation for the
landing site and started to turn climb out were very important for
about 35 seconds later near Mach 2. the success of the high-speed flight
We had a problem getting our (as it left more fuel for the high-
lateral-directional period for the speed end of the flight). I remem-
flights above Mach 2.4 to calculate ber being at the simulator with
the Cnβ. The period was getting Capt. Kincheloe guiding Capt. Apt
longer, and we could not find even in the launch and climb-out as he
a half cycle without some lateral flew the three-degree-of-freedom
control inputs to invalidate the data. performance setup. Capt. Apt flew
a very efficient engine start and
As Lt. Col. Everest was preparing climb-out in his flight. I was on the
for the last two flights, he was lakebed for this flight and remem-

81 Everest actually made ten flights, the last one going to Mach 2.87.

82 Kincheloe made four flights, with the fourth reaching 126,200 feet on 7 September 1956.

83 From a modified Boeing B-50 mothership.

154
142
ber watching the flight after engine history of the flight, as shown in
start. As the X-2 passed over the flight C of the report. After the
south lakebed, I was impressed flight data was worked up, a six-
with the speed, as I had never seen degree-of-freedom analog com-
a contrail laid down that fast. After puter simulation was performed at
burnout and the contrail stopped, the NACA HSFS. Also, The
the chase planes could not find the Langley Laboratory performed
X-2, and there was no response to some more wind-tunnel tests on the
radio calls. The Air Force had a X-2 models to provide higher
small tower, I believe on the east Mach number Cnβ and Cn/aileron.85
side of the lakebed, with personnel
who had watched the flight with Large overlays of the data were
high-powered glasses and wit- made and the control inputs were
nessed the rolling as the wings plotted to this large scale and then
flashed in the morning sun. The covered with soft wire.86 These
people [in the tower] also were able wires (elevator and aileron only)
to see the capsule dropping (there were then used as control inputs
was a small stabilizing parachute starting at burnout. Small mouse-
that inflated after the capsule like items ran over the wires in real
separated from the aircraft) and time, making control inputs to the
reported its location.84 A helicopter six-degree-of-freedom simulation.
with a medic on board was sent to Dick Musick made the wire inputs
the capsule. and Glenn Robinson and Herman
Rediess performed the computer
The aircraft survived pretty much program.
intact as with the weight of the
nose capsule and pilot removed, the F-104 Reaction Control
center-of-gravity traveled aft and Analog Simulation
allowed the aircraft to recover from
the inverted spin that was indicated The F-104 program studied the use
by the over-the-shoulder camera. of reaction controls at low dynamic
The aircraft glided and contacted pressures. The F-104 was outfitted
the ground at a shallow angle. It with small rocket motors to control
landed to the east of the base. I got the three axes as described in report
a ride out to the wreckage. The ARS-1674-61 [Citation No. 297].
aircraft was upright and the vertical
tail did not touch the ground (some As the aircraft was being modified,
people felt the tail would break off a three-degree-of-freedom analog
if high-Mach-number maneuvers program was started to determine
were performed). the performance characteristics of
the F-104 at low dynamic pres-
The instrumentation was in the sures. We also had to define a task
nose capsule and the aircraft, and it for the pilot to perform using the
survived to let us plot a time reaction controls.

84 The X-2 featured a nose capsule in which the pilot could eject from the aircraft. Once it stabilized, he would then separate from it
and descend to the ground using a seat-pack parachute. Unfortunately, Apt never got out of the nose capsule before it hit the desert
floor.

85 Yawing moment coefficient with respect to sideslip and aileron deflection, respectively.

86 This refers to a method of generating a nonlinear function that was very similar to the “silver ink” method described earlier. In this
case, the plotted trace was covered with a piece of soft wire that was bent to match the trace. This wire was glued to the paper, a
signal was transmitted through the wire, and the sensor on the arm would follow the wire as the pen arm moved across the paper.

155
143
We wanted to provide a familiar combine the aerodynamic controls
computer cockpit for the pilot, so I and reaction controls on the center
measured the F-104 instrument stick.
panel and gave Dick Musick a
cardboard cutout of the panel, and Comments on Don Reisert’s
he had one made in aluminum. F-104 Simulation
Dick also made up an open box
about the cockpit size with a seat at [I believe Don is talking about three
the proper distance from the panel. different F-104 reaction-control-simula-
A center stick for aerodynamic tion mechanizations, with some time in
controls and a three-axis reaction between. There were two different
stick on the left side of the instru- simulations that happened before I got
ment panel were installed. Dick there. The first one was mechanized on
also had the panel and the cockpit the AF GEDAs (see NACA RM
painted a flat black, which did a lot H58G18a, Citation No, 214). The second
to clean up the presentation. To simulation was done using the HSFS’s
start the program, Dick installed new EAI 31R. In his PA, John Smith
gauges to show angle of attack, mentions doing an F-104 simulation for
bank, and sideslip as located on the Wendell Stillwell, which Don worked on,
aircraft panel. Airspeed, altitude, too. The cockpit Don describes was
and g meter were also installed so already here when I got here. Also, the
the zoom maneuver could be flown. analog computer that was here (an EAI
After the initial performance data 31R) did not have enough equipment to
were defined, the simulator was do a 6 DOF simulation. I suspect that for
changed to six degrees of freedom. his first mechanization, Don did his own
Joe Walker (the project pilot) flew analog programming, with possibly some
the simulation and commented that help from Videan or Day. The third
it was better than our usual simula- mechanization was done after we had
tions. bought more analogs. I remember doing
such a simulation about that time, which
The F-104 instrument panel was must have been the one Don mentions. I
modified to include an X-15 three- also remember the 8-ball being installed
axis ball, and we were able to also in the black cockpit and getting to use it.
get one for the simulator, which There were no true 6 DOF simulations
helped in keeping the simulator as a implemented from when I got there until
valid tool. The three-axis ball was a after we had bought our third analog.
new design, and NASA wanted to There was at least one 5 DOF with a time
get some experience with it. [Photo varying velocity parameter (i.e., velocity
E-4287 shows the first cockpit was input as a function of time, which I
with the reaction-control stick but refer to as a 5 1/2 DOF simulation) being
before the three-axis ball was used in the other equations. Again, the
installed. This photo was taken in lack of good records interferes with being
late 1958.] completely certain about these facts.

Other NASA and Air Force pilots This 5 1/2 DOF simulation could have
flew the F-104, but I don’t remem- been the one Don is talking about. This
ber if they flew the simulator. The study had the pilots doing a zoom maneu-
program didn’t last very long, as ver until the F-104 got to its maximum
the X-15 was coming along and altitude and went into almost a zero-g
everyone was assigned to that ballistic type arc—during which the pilots
project. We never got to modify the did a number of maneuvers using the
simulator or the aircraft to use the reaction controls (i.e., under near-zero
reaction controls as rate dampers or dynamic-pressure conditions). This

156
144
particular simulation was done using the Robert (Bob) W. Kempel
31R and 131R analogs.
Bob Kempel is an aeronautical research
The report Simulation Studies of Jet engineer who spent a lot of time working
Reaction Controls for Use at High with the simulation lab. He started at
Altitude (NACA RM H58G18a) by NASA in 1960 and left to work for the
Wendell H. Stillwell and Hubert Drake AFFTC in 1963 because he wasn’t
references another report entitled Study allowed to program the analogs as much
of Exit Phase of Flight of a Very High as he wanted to. He returned to NASA in
Altitude Hypersonic Airplane by Means of 1966 and worked on the Lifting Body
a Pilot-Controlled Analog Computer Program. There has already been a lot
(NACA RM L57K21) by Windsor L. written about Bob and his involvement
Sherman, Stanley Faber, and James B with the Lifting Body Program, both in
Whitten of the Langley Aeronautical papers by Bob, and in Dale Reed’s book
Laboratory. This report has an appendix Wingless Flight. In April 1994, Bob,
written by Robert E. Andrews that along with Wen Painter and Milt Thomp-
describes the analog mechanization in son, published the NASA Reference
complete detail. This is by far the best Publication 1332, entitled Developing
such documentation I have been able to and Flight-Testing the HL-10 Lifting
find of any analog mechanization from Body: A Precursor to the Space Shuttle.
those early days. The study is also very This publication is an excellent and
similar to the 5 1/2 DOF that I did. The informative history of the HL-10 flight-
only real differences are the particular test program. Dale Reed, in his book, tells
airplane used and the cockpit mechaniza- about all the lifting bodies that were
tion. The HSFS study used an F-104, flown at the FRC. Both of these publica-
while the Langley study used a hypotheti- tions discuss the involvement of the FSL
cal hypersonic aircraft. simulations of the different lifting bodies.
The AFFTC also implemented simulators
Since I have not been able to find a of the M2-F2 and X-24B. This division of
similar document written by anyone here, tasks was due in part to the FSL simula-
I have included many of the pages of that tion capabilities being so tied up with the
specific appendix in the appendices to X-15 program. Like the X-15 Program,
this monograph. In his appendix, Robert the Lifting Body Program was another
Andrews not only describes the details of example of the FRC-Air Force team
the analog mechanization but also talks working together to accomplish the goals
about certain equipment inaccuracies that requested of it. 87
plagued all of us who had to program
those computers. He also describes the Bob’s activities at NASA include working
special testing and work-arounds that he on the X-15 program during his early
used to deal with these problems. This years at the FRC. Following this job, he
mechanization happened during those was heavily involved with the Lifting
early days in the use of analog computers Body Program as the principal stability-
for flight simulations and is a good and-control, handling-qualities, and
example of the state-of-the-art of analog flight-simulation engineer on the HL-10
programming at that time. The techniques and M2-F3 lifting bodies. He has also
employed at Langley and Ames had an been actively involved with the Highly
early influence in the way similar simula- Maneuverable Aircraft Technology
tions were programmed at the HSFS in (HiMAT) and Controlled Impact Demon-
the beginning.] stration (CID) programs, both of which

87
The Navy and North American Aviation were also part of the X-15 team. The lifting-body team also included Northrop and
Martin.

157
145
involved RPVs, and the GPAS flying us in the sim mechanization. We
simulator. flew the sim, and it looked OK to
us. Then Greenfield told us that it
The lifting-body simulations in the FSL was all-digital. That is the first all-
began as all-analog mechanization and digital sim I remember working
became hybrid in the late 1960s, first with with. I remember ICARUS, but I
the use of the ICARUS program on the don’t think we did [much] with that
SDS 930 and later on the SDS 9300. The in the sim. ICARUS, as I remember
SDS 9300 was bought to improve the ,used linearized (simplified)
simulation capabilities because the lifting- aero[nautical] derivatives. I really
body nonlinear derivatives were, in fact, can’t remember, though. I never
too nonlinear for analog-computer used it very much. It was a good
implementation. Fortunately for the FSL, idea, but I had the full nonlinear
the HL-10 was down for such a long HL-10 to work with and I worked
period of time between the first and with that a lot.
second flights that the extended SDS
9300 checkout and acceptance period (of Both of these documents mentioned
almost one year) did not affect the flight above [Wingless Flight and Developing
program. The SDS 9300 had been ac- and Flight Testing the HL-10] refer to the
cepted by the time the HL-10 Project ICARUS simulation program performing
group had resolved the problem encoun- the integration (with respect to time) of
tered on the first flight. all the calculated accelerations and
velocities on the digital computer. The
In one of the e-mails I got from Bob, he early version of ICARUS did no integra-
recalls: tion on the digital computer. A later
version of the ICARUS program used by
As I remember the situation, after the HL-10 simulation did digital integra-
the HL-10’s first flight on 22 tion of only the longitudinal equations—
December 1966, we grounded the such as horizontal and vertical accelera-
vehicle. We went to the Langley tions and velocities. The natural frequen-
Research Center (LaRC) and told cies of the lateral-directional equations
the involved engineers there about were too high for digital integration on
the aerodynamic problem. Once a either the SDS 930 or the SDS 9300. The
modification was proposed, or I integration of these parameters was
should say two possible vehicle always done on the analog computer. The
configuration changes were pro- M2-F3 was the last simulation to use the
posed, they wouldn’t choose either. 9300/ICARUS hybrid system. This was
They insisted that we at the FRC do followed by a new all-digital 6 DOF
that. I did all the plotting by hand Fortran program that used the XDS 9300
and picked one based on all my (formerly SDS 9300) and a new set of
comparisons, and then I remember large-angle equations for the three-
Larry Caw doing something with eighths-scale F-15/SRV (Spin Research
all the data. I remember Larry and Vehicle) in the early1970s. The program
John Smith coming to me, indicat- was later ported to the CYBER 73.
ing that the data were too nonlinear
to mechanize on the analog. That The following paragraphs are also from
was when we approached John Bob:
McTigue [the Lifting Body Pro-
gram manager] to buy us a digital Acceleration due to Gravity
computer to do the function genera-
tion. We did that. Then one day, Then there was the story about
Lowell Greenfield came to us and daily checks of analog computers
wanted to demo[nstrate] a mod to because they were known to

158
146
possibly be different from day to simulation could be mildly or
day. One day the dynamic checks grossly invalid, depending on the
didn’t come out quite right. Differ- criticality of that particular compo-
ences between the standard dy- nent.
namic check and that day’s dy-
namic response were very subtle. It was always suspected that we
Don Bacon, the sim engineer, had a “midnight patcher” due to
insisted that everything was OK some of the problems with patch
and nothing had changed. Upon panels found by some simulation
further investigation, I remained engineers on their next shift, the
unconvinced. I determined that the midnight patcher being a real or
acceleration due to gravity (32.174 mythical person who would either
feet per second squared) was pull or rearrange a wire on a patch-
wrong! Don said this was impos- panel. These problems were
sible! Don looked at me and said, typically unusual and unexplained,
“How could this be?” I insisted that ones that could only be attributed to
the only thing I could determine the “midnight patcher”.
from the dynamic responses was
that the acceleration due to gravity Electric Stick and the “Blue
had to be wrong. Don went back Box”
and did more checking and then
came to me kind of sheepishly and Significant innovations were
admitted he had found the mistake. pioneered in the FRC simulation
It was indeed the acceleration due lab. The electric stick was one. The
to gravity that was wrong. He never development of this stick enabled
did tell me how it was incorrectly engineers to duplicate the stick
mechanized. We just never said characteristics of many different
anything more about it. Looking airplanes. These sticks had the
back, it was kind of humorous, capability to vary stick breakout
though. force, force gradient, mass damp-
ing, range of deflection, etc. This
The “Midnight Patcher” was a significant development and
many aerospace agencies across the
Analog computer mechanizations USA were interested in using this
were very precarious . . . in that the technology in their labs.
computer mechanization consisted
of a myriad of various-length wires The “blue box” (so called because
on a front patch panel, which of its color) was a generic cockpit
linked the various analog compo- enclosure that had interchangeable
nents. To the uninitiated, this panel instrument panels representing
looked like multicolored spaghetti. different airplanes. Cockpits could
A complex simulation patch panel be reconfigured from one airplane
was typically a real mess. Once a to another in about 30 minutes.
simulation was mechanized and With more than one blue box, a
thoroughly checked, the wires in tight simulation schedule could be
the patch panel were not to be maintained.
touched by anyone but the simula-
tion engineer. Analog mechaniza- JetStar
tions were required to be statically
and dynamically checked quite I remember when Larry Caw was
frequently (like daily) due to the assigned to the JetStar. He became a
problem of occasional component very good real-time analog program-
failure. If a component failed, the mer. We were looking at different

147
159
control schemes for riding qualities, no real time record of the event. As
as I remember it. I remember the I remember, we got a call that
incident when we were airborne “We’ve had a problem here. Get
and we were looking at different someone up to look us over.” Betty
feedback schemes. I had mecha- Callister and I sent Gary Krier up in
nized a beta (sideslip) feedback. an F-104 to check them out. Stan
Well, as you know, signs (sign told me afterward that as the limit
conventions) were sometimes cycle went on, he just looked out
confusing. Fitz Fulton was the the cockpit window to see where
pilot. The sign on beta was wrong, they would crash as he believed the
and we ended up with a dynami- wings would be torn off. As I
cally unstable airplane because of remember, there was no damage
it. We turned on the system for Fitz although the airplane required a
to evaluate, and the airplane thorough inspection before flying
immediately began an oscillatory again.
divergence! Larry and I were in the
back hollering to Fitz to turn it off,
but Fitz was intrigued with the Dwain A. Deets
thing so he wanted to watch it as it
diverged or maybe just teach us a Waltman: I’d like to get your
lesson. He finally punched the thing comments on some of the simula-
off and Larry and I sighed in relief. tions that you might have been
Larry changed the beta-input sign, involved with; talk about what they
and we proceeded with the test. did or didn’t do, their capabilities,
and any problem areas, or anything
The JetStar was a fun airplane to that you thought might have been
fly in, but I always had a feeling of lacking, or any of their good
impending doom or something else features.
going wrong. Herm Rediess was
my boss at the time and when he Deets: OK. Do you want me to start
wanted me to fly in the thing all the with the F-8, or does it matter?
time, I told him “thanks, but no
thanks.” I don’t think Herm ever Waltman: The GPAS.
liked that. Don Gatlin can tell you
about the incident where they Deets: OK. I can even go back
almost tore the wings off. I think before the GPAS—you’re starting
Musick was aboard that flight too. in which year?

The following is from Don Gatlin in Waltman: In 1955—that’s when the
regard to this particular flight: simulations started. Were you
involved with the X-15?
I was not on that particular flight. I
was the project engineer and was Deets: No, I was thinking about a
monitoring the flight from the radio precursor to the GPAS—the F-100
room in the pilots’ office. I believe airborne simulator, our first vari-
Dick [Musick} was on board and a able stability airplane. Are you
KU [University of Kansas] grad interested in airborne simulators in
student whose name I don’t remem- your study, or are you restricting
ber. [Actually, it was Dick Musick your study to ground-based simula-
and Larry Caw.] Don Mallick was tors in support of research air-
the pilot, Stan Butchart in the right planes.
seat. I don’t believe we even
scheduled telemetry, so there was Waltman: This publication is about

160
148
simulators/simulations that used simulation.
analog (and hybrid) computers,
which includes the GPAS, but not Waltman: Did you ever fly in and
the F-100 airborne simulator. It also use it—go up in the airplane?
includes some moving-base simula-
tions that we implemented at other Deets: Oh, yeah. I definitely did. If
computer centers. you want to consider the GPAS as
one of your simulation tools rather
GPAS than how did simulation support
GPAS, one of the stories occured as
Deets: The things that come to my we were checking out the system—
mind are where you had analog back at CALSPAN [Cornell
computers, general-purpose analog Aeronautical Labs]. Basically, we
computers in your office, the were hooking up a ground-based
portables—like the TR-10 or TR- simulation outside the airplane to
48—those kinds of things, where actually try everything before the
you could work with them in your first flight. We spent the whole
office and then take them down summer checking everything out so
next to the airplane and tie them in that we had complete confidence
somehow. But it wasn’t anything that we had done everything right
like the X-15 simulator—they with the model and hooking up the
weren’t that grand and capable and airplane. There were some points
in a sim lab like that. The GPAS, all where you couldn’t use the actual
along, when I was involved with it, hardware, like the sideslip vanes.
used analog equipment. And as we You couldn’t actually flow air over
progressed to the more capable any of the vanes. So you bypassed
computers—like TR-48s that were the vane itself and tested the sim
upgraded—we started getting more model of the vane as best you
user-friendly function generators. could. We did a lot of worrying
And that became an important about the dynamics of the vane and
thing. How easy is it to change whether you needed to model it or
your breakpoints and function not. We stewed about that a lot.
generators? What kind of mecha-
nism is it? It became sort of a So, when we were finally ready to
mechanical issue—did the fly, I was test engineer for the first
jitteriness of the mechanics of the series of flights. The first time we
function generators show up when engaged the lateral control system
you turned the knob? It was those so that we were using feedback
kinds of issues that we stewed from the sideslip vane, among other
about. signals, we obtained an estimate of
the sideslip rate [beta dot] using
A lot of things I remember about analog circuitry. Its purpose as a
the GPAS (the JetStar) involved feedback was to provide damping
getting to the point of having an to the Dutch roll. As I turned up the
analog computer on board the gain, after the system was engaged,
airplane. It served as a model of the we started veering off as I was
airplane you were trying to simu- turning it up. The more I turned it,
late. We actually specified a good the more the airplane started to
share of that system. So, it was wobble back and forth—more and
kind of built to our specs. The more unstable in the lateral
layout of the patch panel was as we directional axis. This was not
requested, and things like that. So, supposed to be happening. My
that certainly was part of the whole reaction was: I am doing something

161
149
wrong. I’d better crank it up some ment, (2) had a read-out that we
more. I actually considered this a could see soon enough—that didn’t
PIO, although I as the test engineer have too much delay between when
was in effect the pilot. And I was in something happened and when we
the back of the airplane doing this, could see something in the
and the pilots were calling out, records—and (3) could be seen
“What’s going on back there?” So right away because of the type of
they shut it down and called me paper and pen. The pen was some
forward to have me explain what sort of heat thing, but what it wrote
had happened. (They were sup- wouldn’t necessarily be really vivid
posed to be “hands off” to let the right away and we would have to
system respond alone.) wait for the record to develop. So,
that was always a challenge.
Well it turned out, through that
whole summer, we had been Another thing I remember was just
working with reverse polarity in in the analog computers. This is
our signal for the sideslip. The more in the ground checkout
person who calibrated it set it up around the airplane. Sometimes
wrong. It wasn’t clear in his mind when things weren’t quite checking
which way was positive when the out when they had been working
vane moved for positive sideslip, previously, the first step in trouble-
and we didn’t have a carefully shooting was to take your hands
reviewed calibration procedure and push against the patch cords,
throughout a summer-long check- hoping that by doing that, suddenly
out. So, everything we did was it would start working. And some-
based on that wrong sign. And we times it did start working. You had
never knew about it until we some connections that were pretty
actually turned the system on in unreliable. That’s the analog days.
flight.
F-8 DFBW (Digital Fly-By-
Ken Szalai was the other person Wire)
flying about that time. There was a
series of flights as we were expand- I’ll now move to the F-8. This is
ing the flight envelope. One person, just simulation and support of
as I remember, who was a Cornell advocacy stuff. In the early days,
person responsible for overseeing we used TR-10s or TR-48s. Ken
the flutter clearance—I can’t Szalai and I were trying to sell the
remember his name, but he always idea of a CCV (Control Configured
insisted on wearing the parachute Vehicle), and so we had the idea
when he was in the cabin. We had a that you could put a canard up
special [escape] chute that would there somewhere near the nose of
allow crew egress by dropping the airplane and take the tail off.
down through the floor of the We were going to demonstrate the
cabin. It always unnerved me that fact through computerized fly-by-
he thought he couldn’t take time to wire, although at the time we only
put his parachute on if we had a had analog flight control. We
problem. weren’t bold enough to think about
digital. But we were bold enough
One of the other stories that comes to think about taking that horizon-
to mind is that one of our real tal stabilizer off. Our main argu-
challenges was getting a strip-chart ment was that the force of the rear
recorder that (1) was rugged tail was in a direction that was
enough for the aircraft environ- down in order to trim things up,

162
150
which meant that the wing had to cally brute force—the flight control
offset that or carry more lift and system was a fixed-point digital
therefore more drag because of the computer. One of the primary
lift. So, we thought that if we put concerns was overflow. All param-
the canard up in the front, we could eters must be scaled relative to the
actually be using the lifting sur- maximum value the parameter
faces of the canard for part of that could take on. But they had to
lift. We kind of analyzed that to the check what happened if something
point where that would be a better overflowed in some register in
airplane. Not so much in the there. So, you had to do hundreds
savings in weight, but just where and hundreds of cases to see what
the lift was being applied. broke down and how that impacted
the closed-loop system. So, much
So we hooked up the TR-10 with a of what we did wasn’t piloted
model of this, and we concocted a simulation; it was batch simulation.
side view of the airplane display We ran so many cases, and then we
that showed where the canard examined every case to see whether
would have to be [located] to what had happened was reasonable.
stabilize the airplane. We had just a We didn’t try to predict everything,
stick figure of the fuselage and but rather we would just look at it
where the canard would have to go. and see if it all made sense. Did the
So we did some very early concep- things seem to be happening that
tual research, I guess, using this ought to be happening?
mechanism, to see what that canard
would be doing under any kind of So, that was a learning experience
maneuvers. It never went any- on how to use simulation. And then
where, but it was instructive to us we came back here and basically
and we were always looking for a tried to do the same type of thing
way of using some dynamic visual but using a lot more pilot-in-the-
representation to help sell the loop as compared to the batch
whole idea. We put it on a scope. It stuff—and tying in more and more
was just Ken Szalai and me. If hardware to the simulations. So
there was someone from the sim many of our simulations were a
group, I can’t remember who [it build-up to get more and more of
was]. I know there was interest in it. the hardware—actual actuators and
hydraulics. So, that is what was
That’s applying simulation to the really happening with the F-8 iron
world of advocacy. And then when bird that was down in the lean-to.
we actually got into the F-8 Digital Each one was kind of a step
Fly-by-Wire [Project] itself, we progression towards more and more
made use of a lot of the Apollo completeness of our simulation to
simulation capability that was back the point where we were ready to
at Draper Laboratory. And in my go out and fly. Some of the big
own case, I became educated in a issues involved components that
big way on what was already being were digitally embedded within
done in the world of simulation, all things that still had to be analog.
in support of the Apollo Program. We were trying to understand any
The engineers at the Draper Lab effects that the digital [systems
were very methodical about the had]—the sample rate, any latency.
way they would do things.They Also, we had simulation up in the
were very systematic in testing a mezzanine and the iron bird
software load. A lot of what they downstairs and we had the commu-
did in the F-8 program was basi- nication lines between these, all

151
163
artifacts of the simulation that airplane, we had some degrees of
wouldn’t necessarily be in the real freedom matched and we didn’t
flight world. We probably spent have others. But still, we were
more attention on all those simula- interested in trying to figure out
tion artifacts than we did in the what were the effects of washout
elements that would be in the real filters and those things that would
flight environment. have to be in a moving-base ground
simulator—a motion simulator—
The step from analog to digital on which would have to be taken into
the flight-control side brought in a account. We didn’t have any of the
lot of other issues. One of the motion simulators here at the FRC
aspects of that is trying to bring the because that was not highly impor-
whole management system [to- tant to us. But when we got inter-
gether]—it is more of a cultural ested in the research aspects of it,
thing than anything else. It in- we did some of it in the airplane,
volved the different types of and some of it we’d go up to Ames
people, whoever it was, such as the and use its moving-base simulators.
head of the safety office, people But that was a pretty small part of
with their own particular past what we did.
experience that they felt comfort-
able with—which [consisted of] [The following comments are] on
all-analog type systems, whether the subject of the controllers—the
they were computers or whether stick or the wheels—and how
they were hardware, mechanical important that is in having a good
hardware that was analog in nature. overall simulation. I was involved
So [we had] to bring that set of with a lot of research studies from
people along to being comfortable the standpoint of how the differ-
about this box that they didn’t ences in feel affect the pilot—in
understand. They only knew that it terms of the net results or evalua-
had zeros and ones, and a one could tion of the airplane. So, [we dealt
turn into a zero, and so they could with] topics such as: should you
imagine the worst things that could pick off the force that the pilot
happen. So, that was a very impor- applies to the stick or the [control]
tant thing. I’m trying to think wheel as your input to the simula-
whether the same concern was tor, or should it be the position of
shared by those types of people the stick? How are these two
towards the simulators that they different? [What are] the dynamics
depended on as building confidence between the two of them? Should
towards what was going on with you use mechanical devices such as
the airplane. I don’t know if they bungies, springs, and [similar]
had the same worries about the devices in order to give [a simula-
simulators. tor] the right feel, or should you
have servo actuators that are
GPAS Again moving the controller? . . . If you
have something that is program-
On the GPAS, we did studies in the mable, . . . you are going to have to
effects of motion—where we had use some sort of actuator to move
the real-world motion to some the stick according to the pilot’s
degree—if you want to say what- input. That gives you the flexibility
ever the JetStar did in the way of to change it easily so that you can
motion was the real-world motion. go from one simulation of an
Then we had it exactly. If we were airplane to a different one. The
trying to simulate some other problem with mechanical systems

164
152
is that you can’t make those kinds Waltman: Let’s start with anything
of changes easily. So, much of the you want to say about the Iron
debate over GPAS requirements Cross simulator.
struggled with that issue because
we had to figure what to put in the Butchart: On the Iron Cross—from
GPAS. A lot of what we were the pilot’s point of view—the first
struggling with was also a major thing was getting the controls in
item of concern to the ground- the right direction. Roll was pretty
based simulators for other rea- straightforward, twisting the wrist,
sons—issues such as whether you [as was] yaw. [See photo E-2906
needed a hydraulic actuator for the for a picture of the pilot’s control
servo controlling the stick; whether stick.] When it came to pitch
electrical-mechanical was better or control, the engineers had set it up
worse, [or at least] adequate, [and] to go one way—I can’t remember
how did that affect the dynamics of which way it was, now—like, for
the controller? I’ll leave it at that. the nose to go up, I think they had
That was a major topic of interest it so that you went down [with] the
and, therefore, research. stick. It soon became obvious to us
that the normal way of thinking
was to get the nose up, you lifted—
Stanley P. Butchart rather than the logical way, as if
you had a normal stick for pitch
Stan joined the NACA HSFRS in May control. 89 So, that sort of thing
1951 as a research pilot. Most of the didn’t take too long to straighten
aircraft he flew did not have flight out.
simulators, since there were no such
simulators in those days. Some of the The development of the amount of
simulators he did fly were the Iron thrust that was required to control
Cross88 [see photo E-2581], F-100, F- it took a lot longer. It seemed like it
104, GPAS, and the Boost Program. took a long time to determine the

Iron Cross with
Stan Butchart
(September 1957).
(NASA photo
E-2581)

88 The Iron Cross was a mechanical device to simulate reaction controls designed for flight research on the X-1B airplane. Most of the
flight research actually occurred on an F-104, as discussed above, because of fatigue cracks in a propellant tank of the X-1B. Then,
further research occurred on the X-15.

89 In typical aircraft with the usual control stick for pilot’s inputs, the pilot would pull back on the stick to get the nose of the aircraft
to go up. Thus, going down with the stick was the opposite of what the pilots were used to.

153
165
Iron Cross 3-axes
Side-arm Control-
ler (April 1957).
(NASA photo E-
2906)

right amount of thrust to get the In the early days, too, there was no
proper response. As with any motion or feel to it. And I think an
simulator, there was quite a learn- awful lot of the ability of a pilot
ing technique—how to beep it, how flying an airplane has to do with
long to beep it. Fortunately they his feel of the motion and of the
had the crash bars on it, so if you degree of motion and that sort of
hit them, you’d start over again. thing. Until they got the advanced
part of it where you could get the
Waltman: Do you remember any motion and the feel of it, it was just
other simulations? a pinball game. I didn’t get much
out of ‘em.
Butchart: I don’t really recall what
we had. For the early simulations, Waltman: That was one of the
the biggest problem I had was with things we looked at in the early
the displays. They didn’t seem real. days—whether or not we should
It wasn’t a true-life thing. It was have moving-base simulators. I did
hard to correlate between real life some simulation at Ames, where
and looking at a meter. The fellows we used moving-base simulators.
who rigged them up were the But it just never happened at the
pinball experts who could run them FRC.
better than we could when we got
in and tried to fly ‘em. Butchart: Probably a money thing?

166
154
Jack McKay and I participated in a could do without it. We made those
simulation at Ames on the centri- chairs back at Langley. We went
fuge there. There you have all the back there and took our suits. It
motions. It was a whole lot more was kind of interesting how they
realistic. We would go up there on made them. We would lie in sand
Monday on the Gooney Bird and and they would shoot some kind of
stay there three or four days using gas into the sand to harden it. And
the centrifuge. We did this for a [they would] make the Styrofoam
number of weeks. I don’t remember seats from that. I have a photo from
what the Ames engineers [were back there that shows all of us
after]—it was a general-purpose sitting in our seats, except for
thing they were doing. You had the [Neil] Armstrong; he was off
ability to dial in all the param- somewhere and not in the picture.
eters—to develop the best airplane
you could—by yawing moment One of the things that struck me,
coefficient or whatever the deriva- and I guess all the pilots about the
tives were. You could dial it in—up same, [was that] as I remember we
or down—until they all matched did a single-stage, a two-stage, and
and you had the best airplane you a four-stage [launch]. The pilot’s
could fly. But we got up there one job was to keep the needles cen-
morning and they weren’t quite tered [on an instrument that was
ready. We crawled into the simula- usually used for instrument land-
tor and were looking at it, and all of ings]. There were vertical and
a sudden we noticed there was a horizontal needles and we had to
Mach meter that goes up over 3, keep those centered, and they were
and an altimeter that goes up to programmed with what your
100,000 feet. And we wondered, trajectory should be. You just kept
what are they looking at? Lockheed them centered and you went
was using the thing on weekends. through the whole thing. But
We had seen Lew Shock of between stages it was very critical.
Lockheed there. They were devel- From my recollections, if it was
oping early SR-71 [actually A-12, more than half a second, you’d lose
in all probability] stuff—before it. The whole program, as I recall,
they flew—and they were using the was aimed at looking at whether or
Ames simulator for that. not a pilot could be in the loop, fly
it, and launch it into orbit.
I always had the feeling that the
best thing you could do was to get Waltman: The control stick was
motion. The centrifuges seemed to built here—the three-axis controller
have an awful lot, because you —it was one of the things we did
could get the G inputs, all of the during the first two fixed-base
real-life feels to the thing. studies at the FRC.

I guess we could on and talk about Butchart: Was that made out here?
the program we did back at
Johnsville on the centrifuge. When Waltman: Yes.
was that? The spring of ’59. I was
the only one who had two chairs Butchart: That may have been why
made, one for my regular flying Joe [Walker] and I went up to MIT
suit and one for my T-100 pressure and stopped at Johnsville on the
suit. I could get up—it seemed way back. We were looking at a
like—to 14 or 15 Gs in the pressure three-axis controller that they were
suit—2 or 3 Gs above what you developing at that time. It seemed

155
167
to work pretty well, considering I flew the X-4 and the X-5 and the
that you had 10 or 12 Gs on you Skystreak and Skyrocket [two
and you were able to sit there and different version of the D-558]. I
control the thing through your wrist didn’t have any simulation work
motion. because there wasn’t any in those
days. Then I did most of the work
That time at Johnsville was an on the B-47 when we had it instru-
interesting one. We had a lot of fun, mented at Langley and brought it
going out to dinner and places. As we out in ’53, I guess it was.
talked about earlier, we went to the
Old Mill. I guess every Thursday I did a lot of work on the F-100—
night we’d wind up out there for the roll coupling stuff that I got into
dinner. De [Beeler] was going to buy kind of by accident. I was doing a
us all dinner one night, and I’ve still series of rolls for—I don’t remem-
got the check that he signed with a ber who the engineer was—but we
fictitious name so it wouldn’t go had straps attached to both sides of
through. I roomed with Neil the cockpit with a chain and a piece
Armstrong back there and he got in of metal with holes drilled in it for
trouble when they lost his laundry two degrees, four degrees, eight
one time and we were busy buying degrees, etc., for aileron throw. We
shirts and underdrawers and the would put a pin in the stick and you
whole nine yards. could pop it over—and it would be
exactly six degrees or eight degrees
I can’t think of much more since I or whatever you needed. One of the
didn’t use many of the simulators. funny incidents that happened one
The first simulators that I remem- day: [Iven] Kincheloe was chasing
ber, in 1957, were so simple that I me, and I was at 40,000 [feet] at
couldn’t see from the pilot’s point the speed I should have been for
of view where it was going. 30,000 feet (it was my mistake as
much as the engineer’s), and when
Waltman: That’s the way it was in I popped it over, it uncoupled like
those days. We spent a lot of time crazy. It went in such a direction
those first couple of years working that you couldn’t sit and tell
out the cockpits and problems with anyone which way it went or what
the cockpits, and hydraulics and happened. It was just over with.
instruments and developing new Kincheloe was flying chase and he
instruments and such. laughed and he thought that was
the funniest thing he had ever seen.
Butchart: Looking back, I remem- He said, “Do that again.” And I
ber that you were doing more work said, “No thank you.” When they
on the instrumentation—was it real uncork, they really go ape. Gene
and so [forth]? Matranga was running that pro-
gram. Early on, the F-100 had 30
Waltman: That was part of growing degrees of plus and minus aileron
up during that period. Once we got and about two inches of stick
started, we had one of the best throw. It was very sensitive. Two
facilities in the country, and now it inches and you got 30 degrees.
probably is the best. Later on, they doubled the stick
throw to four inches on each side
Butchart: I think it is amazing what for full aileron. But his study was
they have now, where they can tie to see if we really needed the full
the airplane right into the comput- 30 degrees of aileron. I’m quite
ers upstairs. certain they changed that later on,

168
156
‘cause it was a whole lot more And as soon as we got that check
aileron than you could live with. I case done to Dick’s satisfaction,
don’t remember if there were any then generally the simulator
simulations about that. worked all day reliably. I remember
one of the sim engineers, of course,
was you and one was John Smith.
William (Bill) Dana And the third one I remember was
J.L. Samuels.
Note: These comments from Bill Dana’s
interview have been edited to eliminate Then about 1961, as I remember,
some discussion that seemed unrelated to we moved the X-15 simulator [iron
the main theme of the personal account. bird] up from El Segundo. You
The original interview—along with all the might remember exactly what year
others that are included as personal that was. And then we became
accounts in this document—are available really pretty sharp in our simula-
in their original form and will be (with tion. We had the inertias of the
any other pertinent information collected) control surfaces simulated and real
in the Dryden Historical Reference hydraulics driving the actuators. So
Collection. we had actual hysteresis in there.
And it was a very good simulation.
X-15 Simulators I didn’t fly the X-15 simulation
that came up from El Segundo
Dana: I came here the first of much until I got in the program
October of 1958. To put that in a much later, in mid-1965. So from
time perspective, it was about two about the time the simulator moved
weeks before they rolled out the up from El Segundo to when I
first X-15 for a press conference at checked out, I did not fly the X-15
El Segundo. And I remember Vice simulator very much. But it was
President Nixon was there. I wasn’t considered a high-fidelity simula-
at the press conference, but Vice tor at that time.
President Nixon was there. And it
was interesting that at that time I And I remember one anecdote
was working on the X-15 simula- about it. The electronics for the X-
tion that Dick Day had. I don’t 15 simulator were up in the room
remember how many degrees of presently occupied by the center
freedom it was. It was probably director’s office and the executive
only three. It was probably pitch conference room. And there were
axis only. Because Dick was literally about 1,000 fuses in that
looking for the maximum Mach analog simulator. And every time
number and maximum altitude he we’d have a summer electrical
could get out of the X-15 with the storm, why it would blow every
interim engines [two XLR-11s one of those 1,000 fuses. And J.L.
instead of the single XLR-99 [Samuels] would walk down the
designed for the X-15] in it. That back of that analog computer with
was the program he was doing, and one bucket full of good fuses that
I was his cockpit pilot. he was putting in and another
bucket he was filling up with
And about the only thing I remem- burned out fuses that had been shot
ber about the technology was that by the lightning system. And the
Dick had to run a check case every only technicians whose names I can
morning to make sure the analog remember from those [days were]
computer was putting out the same Dick Musick and Bill Sebastian. I
output it had put out the day before. guess we had Gerry Perry. And

157
169
then from ’65 till the end of the X- the X-15 program in 1968, and
15 program in 1968, I worked on then I went into the lifting bodies—
the X-15 simulator on an almost first into the HL-10 and then into
daily basis. Sometimes I’d spend the M2. And the engineer I worked
50 hours simulating for one ten- with most on the lifting bodies was
minute flight if I had the time Jack Kolf. He was a flight planner
available due to weather or the for both the HL-10 and the M2.
aircraft [being] out of commission. And the lifting-body simulator, in
contrast to the X-15 simulator, was
There was something else I wanted digital. And now of course, we
to say about the X-15 simulator. think of digital simulators as being
Oh, it was interesting that one of the Cadillacs of simulation. But it
the X-15s had a research instru- wasn’t always so. At the time we
ment panel in it. It had vertical made the transition from the X-15
instruments, which were the rage in to the lifting bodies, the analog
those days, as contrasted to the simulator was quite mature and
round dials that were in the number well-developed and the digital was
one and number two X-15s. The a new thing. And we had a lot of
number three X-15 had this re- trouble—a lot of reliability prob-
search panel, which was very lems—with the digital simulator.
significant research at that time. And I think that’s a little vignette
And the X-15 was a challenging that ought to be recorded because
airplane to do instrumentation now we think of digital computers
research in. [See photo E-11778 of as being quite reliable and quite
the X-15-3 instrument panel.] capable. But it wasn’t always so.

But the interesting thing was that Waltman: We did have a digital
we had to build two separate computer in the X-15-2. It was an
instrument panels for the X-15 interesting period going from
simulator. We had one with the analog to hybrid.
round dials, and we had another
one with the vertical tapes in it. Dana: Yes, it was. That’s right. I
And these were heavy. They had forgotten the hybrids. But you
probably weighed a couple of were definitely right about ship
hundred pounds. They were more two. A portion of the X-15 number
than one man could wrestle in and two simulation was digital. And
out of the simulator. So we had a they weren’t very reliable because
little fork-lift—a little cherry picker the digitals weren’t very reliable
that we lifted the round dial for awhile.
instrument panel out of the simula-
tor with when we were going to fly Other Simulations
ship three. And we dropped the
vertical-tape instrument panel in And when the M2 program—the
with that same cherry picker and M2-F3 program—ended in the fall
then “flew” our simulation. And of 1973, I went on to the sub-scale
then when the next pilot came F-15 program. I was alternate pilot
along, why we put his instrument on that to Einar Enevoldson. And I
panel in. And it was a lot of admin- flew some sub-scale F-15 simula-
istration, but it worked very tions.
efficiently.
Well, I can’t remember any other
And we flew the analog X-15 programs before ’75 that I flew
simulator all the way to the end of besides the rocket airplanes. There

170
158
probably were others. I guess we ground-breaking work on the
had a Vigilante [A-5 (1963)] simulator. And that would have
simulator. Don Hughes would have been about 1974.
been the principal investigator on
that. And I think we had a Vigilante Waltman: Yes. I got some stuff
simulator up. But I don’t remember from Bob Kempel just the other
much about it. And I don’t remem- day, and he said the same thing.
ber any of the other participants in This faster than real time seemed to
it except Don Hughes, who was the ...
principal investigator
Dana: More accurately simulate
I think I’ve mentioned about all the the boost portion of the flight.
early players that I remember from
simulation. Dick Day, of course,
was kind of the father of analog Thomas C. McMurtry
simulation. And I worked with him
on the X-15 early in the X-15 Supercritical Wing Program
program. He’s got just about total
recall. So you’ll get a lot of infor- I came here in late 1967. The first
mation out of Dick. I’m having a program I really got involved in,
little trouble dredging up players. that had any simulation associated
You and Ed Videan and John Smith with it, was the F-8 Supercritical
were in simulation when I got here. Wing (SCW) program. Wilt Lock
And I think you and John were was the controls engineer on that
mainly working analog. airplane. We spent a lot of time in
the simulator looking at gain
John [Perry] was probably here in schedules, looking at the modifica-
’59, if I remember correctly—’59 tion to the control system. The
or ’60. He was an early comer. simulation activity was never one
that I got enchanted with [and I
I remember one other little vignette never] spent a lot of time looking at
about the M2 simulation. We didn’t the approaches to simulation.
use this technique during the flight Instrumental from my view was
program, but we investigated it on putting together a usable simulator
the simulator after the flight that served two purposes. One was,
program was over. And that was we had not flown a significantly
that rocket pilots always com- modified airplane. It wasn’t a brand
plained that the mission went new airplane, but one with the new
faster—seemed to go by faster than wing on it, a change in the configu-
the simulation did. So Jack Kolf ration. The basic airplane had an
had the idea, why not run the arrangement where the fuselage
simulator at faster than real time moved down and changed the
and see if that reminds the pilot of incidence angle for landing. And of
the actual flight. And we did that on course we didn’t have that. But
the M2-F3 simulator—ran the there were a lot of major changes to
simulator at faster than real time the control system that had to be
and experimented with 1. 2 and 1. 5 done to make the airplane have the
times the real time and finally flying qualities we wanted it to
empirically came up with the idea have, and also to see what kind of
that about 1.4 times real time was a performance we thought the
good representation of how the airplane would have. It served the
mission appeared to the pilot in real purpose of preparing for the
time. And so Jack did some real characteristics of the airplane from

171
159
a stability-and-control level and drop flights on the X-24B.
[for] me as a pilot. Wilt worked the All of the simulations, from my
auto-gain scheduling and every- view, were beneficial in that they
thing. I obviously factored in my provided the mission planning and
thoughts about the qualitative gain settings. They gave us a good
judgments of how the airplane look at variances in the behavior of
behaved. the airplanes, especially in stability
and control. The analog systems
The second thing that the simulator did that well enough, I thought. We
provided was mission planning. could look at some variations as to
The benefits I got out of the simula- the good characteristics and
tion—the engineering simulation changes that made us start to be
approach, where we had just basic sensitive or overly sensitive. I
cockpits, basic controls—were thought we were able to do that
adequate. I felt for my entire career effectively with the simulations
here at NASA that that was all we that I was exposed to. Interestingly,
needed. We didn’t need a mockup I made a note. The first flight of
of the cockpit with all the frills and the F-8 Supercritical Wing air-
fancy furnishings that airplanes plane, for example, that I got to
have. The engineering simulation make. When I came back, I have to
approach has been completely tell you honestly that it was so
adequate, in my view, to provide much fun and so exciting and such
the benefits that a simulation can a thrill to fly that airplane the first
provide to a piloted program. time, that I probably would have
said that the simulator was exactly
Again, the first program I was like the airplane or the airplane
involved with that really used was exactly like the simulator, I
simulation to a great extent was the should say. I think that oftentimes
F-8 Supercritical Wing Program. I it takes a flight or two before a
also got in on the F-8 Digital Fly- pilot is able to feed back to the
By-Wire Program—participated in simulation. Well, obviously, there
the simulation there—but that was is quantitative data that you can
driven primarily by Gary Krier as use to change the simulation. But
the project pilot. I’m trying to the qualitative data sometimes isn’t
remember who led that simula- completely effective until the pilot
tion—Wilt Lock was involved in has had a chance to fly the airplane
that pretty extensively, also. a couple of times. ‘Cause that first
time you are so excited, so enthusi-
Then the other program was the astic that you could make it all
Lifting Body Program. I only flew work. Unless there was something
two flights in the X-24B. I used to that was really major, it is pretty
go out and fly the F-104 and hard to sort out the minor differ-
practice simulated approaches with ence between the simulation and
that airplane. My experience with flight.
the simulator was pretty limited.
The Air Force had the simulator. I I mentioned that the engineering
spent a lot of time practicing with simulation approach has been an
Jack Kolf. By that time, the simula- adequate approach here at Dryden.
tion had really matured. They kept Another thing that I would add to
enhancing the simulation based the engineering simulation ap-
upon the results of flights. The proach is that, the way we do
simulation was a great preparation business here, a pilot preparing to
for me to go out and fly a couple of fly something that is new and

172
160
unique could go out to the airplane; So, moving-base simulators do add
a lot of procedures can be devel- to a better representation of a
oped between the time that is spent vehicle’s characteristics—both
in the cockpit before the flight [with respect to] performance and
takes place and [time in] the [to] stability and control. And then
simulator. So you don’t need a full- the visual presentation adds
up simulation to develop all the another dimension. But I still say
procedures that are needed to that the engineering approach taken
accomplish a research test-flight. here with a minimum of visual
display and no moving base has
Moving-Base Simulators been adequate.

Moving-base simulators add some to Aircraft Speed Is a Factor
a simulation. I do believe that. It’s
another characteristic that is added to Another thing that strikes me: the
your total perspective. To say, speed of the vehicle is definitely a
though, that moving-base simulators factor here, too. Now, the simula-
add a dimension, big step, and a tions that I have been associated
great dimension to simulators, quite with, with minor exceptions, are
honestly I don’t feel [that they do]. subsonic activities. I’ve flown the
They do add something. SR[-71] simulator a little bit—for
several hours before I flew the
Visual Presentations airplane for one time. I’ve flown
the F-15 at supersonic speeds, and
The biggest need in simulation is an some other vehicles. Obviously a
accurate visual presentation. That’s vehicle like the X-15 had different
the feature of simulations, in my cues to the pilot that, I think, would
view, that is most lacking even today. have [made] a visual representation
I’ve not stayed with simulations and more beneficial to them. On the
looked at the most modern simula- simulations for the F-8 Super-
tions. I did go up to United Airlines critical Wing and others, the
and flew its 747 simulator. They engineering approach was adequate
have some fairly recent technology without a really good visual
there. It’s good simulation, it’s good presentation. The faster you go, I
visual presentation, but it’s still not think, the greater the need is to
real-world; it’s got a long way to go have a really useful visual display,
to get to that point. at least when you get down in the
atmosphere and you are starting to
make approaches and landings.

161
173
very first day when I was given the
Finale opportunity to work in the simulation
laboratory. Simulation is an important
This is our story. It was interesting and component of almost every flight project
challenging. It started in 1955 and went to that Dryden is involved in. The analog/
the mid-’70s. Analog/hybrid simulation hybrid simulation systems of the NACA
had run its course and, after about 20 HSFS and NASA FRC were an important
years, was no longer the preferred foundation in the development of today’s
method. Analog computers were not able capabilities. Dryden is a unique institu-
to keep up with the advances being made tion. So, too, is the Dryden Simulation
in the airplanes we were simulating. Laboratory.
Digital computers had grown up and were
the better type of computer to use. We had The X-15, the Lifting Body, LLRV,
to move on, and the present simulation GPAS, the F-8 DFBW, and other flight
laboratory is doing that. programs owe a lot to the simulators that
we built. It is difficult to imagine any of
This was the end of a very exciting period these programs having been as successful
in the history of the NASA Flight Re- as they were if simulators had not been
search Center. Those of us who were there included.
(and I’m sure I speak for most of us) are
all very happy and proud of having been a For those of you who are a part of the
part of that history. In a sense, we were present-day simulation facility, you have a
the “barnstormers” of flight simulations at strong and proud heritage—keep up the
the FRC. Looking back on this period, I good work. I say that both as a commen-
will never regret the decision I made that dation and as a challenge!

174
162
Appendices

175
163
Appendix 1. Memorandum for Engineering Division Chief, Richard D. Banner and Albert E. Kuhl, “The determination
of the directional stability parameter Cnβ from flight data,” 11 March 1955.

164
176
177
165
178
166
179
167
180
168
181
169
170
182
Appendix 2. Richard E. Day, “Training Considerations during the X-15 Development,” paper presented to the Training
Advisory Committee of the National Security Industrial Association, Los Angeles, California, 17 November 1959.

183
171
184
172
185
173
186
174
187
175
188
176
189
177
190
178
191
179
192
180
193
181
194
182
195
183
196
184
197
185
198
186
199
187
200
188
Appendix 3. Milton O. Thompson, “General Review of Piloting Problems Encountered during Simulation and Flights of
the X-15” [1964].

201
189
190
202
203
191
204
192
205
193
206
194
207
195
208
196
209
197
210
198
Appendix 4. Robert E. Andrews, “The Analog Simulator Programming,” originally published as an appendix to Windsor
L. Sherman, Stanley Faber, and James B. Whitten, Study of Exit Phase of Flight of a Very High Altitude Hypersonic
Airplane by Means of a Pilot-Controlled Analog Computer (Washington, DC: NACA Research Memorandum L57K21,
1958), pp. 19-25, 30, 40, 47-53.

211
199
200
212
213
201
202
214
215
1203
216
204
217
205
218
206
219
207
220
208
221
209
222
210
223
211
224
212
225
213
226
214
Glossary
A/C Aircraft

A to D (and A/D) Analog to Digital

ADI Applied Dynamics Inc

ADP Automatic Data Processing

AE American Express

AFFTC Air Force Flight Test Center

Alpha See AOA

AOA (alpha) Angle of Attack

AOS (beta) Angle of Sideslip

ARC Ames Research Center

Beta Angle of sideslip

Bootstrap A small program of only a few instructions that loaded itself into memory and then
followed this by loading a larger more comprehensive loader routine

Breadboard To build preliminary logic circuitry

CAL (also CALSPAN) Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory

CD Compact Disc

CDC Control Data Corporation

Chopper A device to keep an amplifier stabilized. The early tube-type amplifiers would drift
(deviate) because of the heat they generated.

Cµ Coefficient of thrust deflected downwards to provide additional lift

Cn/aileron Yawing moment coefficient with respect to aileron deflection

Cnb The yawing moment coefficient with respect to sideslip

CPC Card Programmed Calculator

CPU Central Processing Unit

CRT Cathode Ray Tube

CUC Computer Usage Company

DAST Drones for Aerodynamic and Structural Testing

D to A (and D/A) Digital to Analog

DC Direct Current

227
215
Deadband A type of delay or lag

Derivative matching A process of determining the nonlinear derivatives for a particular airplane

DFBW Digital Fly-By-Wire

DFG Diode-Function Generator

DFRC Dryden Flight Research Center

Dirty configuration A term used to describe an airplane that was not aerodynamically clean, which usually meant
that the landing gear was down, or the speed brakes were extended, or the flaps down, or for
some other reason something was causing a reduction in the airplane’s performance

Discretes Single-bit, on/off-type functions

DOD Department of Defense

DOF Degree of Freedom, a movement either up or down, sideways, front or back, or around
the pitch, roll or yaw axis

DUHOS Dual Hybrid Operating System

Dynamic checks Checks of an analog computer in which, usually, a known time history solution (with
known initial conditions and known inputs) was used to determine if a particular imple-
mentation was working correctly

EAI Electronic Associates Inc.

Eightball (8-ball) The colloquial term for the attitude indicator used in the airplanes of the 1960s and 1970s

EMC Energy Management Console

Engineering precision A level of exactness in which the degree of refinement of the measurement being made or
the calculation being performed is both adequate and sufficient to provide the accuracy
needed for the task at hand but nothing more

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FDL Flight Dynamics Laboratory

Fortran Formula Translation software

FRC Flight Research Center

FSL FRC Simulation Facility

GE General Electric

GEDA Goodyear Electronic Differential Analyzer

GPAS General Purpose Airborne Simulator

GSA General Services Administration

Heath Kits “Build-it-yourself” electronic kits sold by the Heath Company of Benton Harbor,
Michigan. The company quit selling these kits in 1992.

228
216
HiMAT Highly Maneuverable Aircraft Technology (RPV)

HP Hewlett Packard Company

HSF High-Speed Flight Station

HYDAC Hybrid Digital and Analog Computer

Hysteresis A type of delay or lag

ICARUS Immediate Checkout Analog Research Unity Scaled

I/O Input and/or Output

IAS Institute of Aeronautical Sciences, Inc.

IBM International Business Machines

ILS Instrument Landing System

KU University of Kansas

LaRC Langley Research Center

LLRV Lunar Landing Research Vehicle

LLTV Lunar Landing Training Vehicle

MH Minneapolis Honeywell (now Honeywell, Inc.)

NAA North American Aviation

NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics

NADC Naval Air Development Center

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

PA Personal Accounts

Parameter estimation An automated method for obtaining numerical values for aircraft behavior by manipulating multiple
differential equations; this technique allowed researchers to determine precisely the differences
between values predicted from wind-tunnel data and those actually encountered in flight.

PIO Pilot Induced Oscillation

Pot padder A special type of servo multiplier

Pots Potentiometers

RAIF Research Aircraft Integration Facility

REAC Reeve’s Electronic Analog Computer

Rep Op A feature available on most analog computers that allowed the operator to reduce the
problem solution time by a ratio of 100:1 with results displayed on a multi-channel
oscilloscope

229
217
RFP Request For Proposal, which is a solicitation for bids on a contract

RTF Real-Time Fortran

RPV Remotely Piloted Vehicle

SCI Simulation Councils, Inc.

SCOPE CDC Cyber Operating System

SCW Supercritical Wing

SDS Scientific Data Systems

SETP Society of Experimental Test Pilots

SAS Stability Augmentation System

Static checks A method of determining if the implementation was correct (i.e., were all the components
correctly connected and were all the pots and function generators correctly pro-
grammed?)

Stick kicker A device that vibrated the pilot’s control stick to remind him or her that he or she was
getting into an undesirable situation.

STOL Short Take Off and Landing

TDY Temporary duty

TM Telemetry

UCLA University of California at Los Angeles

USC University of Southern California

WWII World War II

Y2K Year 2000

218
230
Index
A-5, 159 Comcor Computer Company, 12
Adkins, Elmer J., 48 Computer “languages” (software programs)
Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC), vi, 20, 28, 36, 136, Assembler, 55, 71, 109
137, 145 Fortran, 55, 75, 109
Alford, Bill, 36 Libraries, 55
Algranti, Joseph, 126 Loader, 71
Alpha, see angle of attack Real-time Fortran (RTF), 55, 81, 109, 121
Ames Research Center (Ames Aeronautical Laboratoryun- SDS Assembly, 55, 81
der NACA), 8, 36, 38, 40-41, 51, 96-97, 108-109, 137, Utilities, 55
152, 155 Computers (human), v, 9 n.
Amplifiers, 11 Computers (analog), see also Goodyear Electronic Differen-
Drift, 41 tial Analyzer
Analog programmers, 30-31 AD-4, 67 ill., 83-84, 86, 90, 121
Analog simulations, passim but esp. 1 ill., 5-12, 30-31, 33, Comcor 175, 96
39-40, 74-75, 98 n. Cyclone, 39
Anderson, Rider, 73-74 EAI 31R, 9 ill., 34, 99, 102, 109, 110, 125, 144
Andrews, Robert E., 145 EAI 131R, 9 ill., 34, 99, 102, 110
Andrews, William, 43, 44 EAI 231-RV, 12, 27, 34, 67, 79, 95, 110, 125, 128
Angle of attack, defined, 29 TR-5, 61, 134
Apollo Program, 35 TR-10, 33, 61, 109, 125, 134, 149-151
Applied Dynamics Inc., 12, 67, 83 TR-20, 33, 125
Apt, Milburn G. (Mel), Capt., 138-139, 142-143 TR-48, 28, 33, 91, 112, 134, 149-150
Armstrong, Neil A., v, 36, 38 ill., 43, 44, 100, 126, 155, 156 TR-58, 33, 128
Army Missile Command, 120 Typhoon, 39
Atomic Energy Commission Facility, Oak Ridge, Tn., 83 Computers (digital)
CDC 73, 89-90
B-17 side-arm controller, 140, 141 Cyber 72, 75
Bacon, Donald C. (Don), 78, 83, 84, 89, 91, 93, 94, 114-124, CYBER 73-28, 67-68 ill., 80, 83, 86-87, 92-93, 120-123
127, 135, 147 SDS 920, 55, 69-70
Ballard, Robert R., 105 SDS 930, 50, 52-55, 70-71, 74-77, 81-82, 97, 111, 118-
Banner, Richard D (Dick), vi, viii, 6, 7, 8, 99, 136-137, 140 121, 127, 146
Barnicki, Roger, 44 SDS 9300, 68, 74, 81-83, 89 n., 91, 94-97, 146
Beeler, De Elroy, 7, 41-42, 136, 156 XDS 9300 (formerly SDS 9300), 89 n., 146
Bell Aircraft, 141 Computers (hybrid), 55-56, 65-90
Berry, Donald T., 28 AD-4, 67 ill., 83
Bikle, Paul, 46 HYDAC, 67
Black boxes, 22-24, 25 ill. Computer Usage Company, 81
Black magic, 5, 13 Control configured vehicle (CCV), 150
Blue box, 147 Control Data Corporation (CDC), 68
Boeing 747, 161 Control stick, 11, 130-131, 155
Boost-vehicle simulation, 15 ill., 34-45, 35-38 ill., 108, 153 Controlled Impact Demonstration (CID), 145
Bostain, John M., 104 Converter
Breadboard, defined, 66 Analog-to-digital, 66 n., 67
Butchart, Stanley P. (Stan), 36, 43, 60, 64, 113, 128, 148, Digital-to-analog, 66 n., 67
153-157 Cooper, Lonnie, 92, 116
Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory (CAL), 59-60, 128, 149
C-47, 42 Coupling dynamics, 118
Calibration Hangar, 127 Credit cards, 41-42
Callister, Betty J., 148
Caw, Lawrence J. (Larry), 26, 27, 33, 44, 56, 60, 61, 63, D-558, 156
83-84, 91, 93, 112, 123-128, 146-148 Daedalus, 122
Centrifuge, Navy, 13, 23, 36-37 ill., 100, 155, see also Dalto visual simulator, 132-133
Johnsville Dana, William H. (Bill), 3, 22, 50 ill., 117, 128, 157-159
Cockpit simulations, 10 ill., 14-18 ill., 49 ill., 91 ill., 92 ill., Daniels, Walter, 36
95 ill., 96 ill., 105 ill., 105-106, 131, 133-134, 135 Davis, Billy E., 52, 113

231
219
Day, Richard E. (Dick), vi-viii, 6, 8, 24, 46, 54, 56, 99, 137- Gemini Program, 35
140, 141, 144, 157, 159 General Electric (GE), 104
Deets, Dwain A., 24, 60, 62, 112, 128, 148-153 General Purpose Airborne Simulator, 59-64, 60-61 ill., 111,
Degree of Freedom (DOF), defined, 8; mentioned, passim, 112-114, 128-129, 146, 148-150, 152-153
esp. 68 G-forces, 43 and see centrifuge
Derivative matching, 26, 111 (including definition in n.), 116 Gibbons, John, 94
Digital data communications, 89 Gilyard, Glenn B., 28
Digital integration, 118-120 Glider simulation, 129-130
Diode-Function Generator (DFG), 22, 33 Goodyear Electronic Differential Analyzer (GEDA), v, 6-9,
Discretes, 74-75 20, 99, 136-137, 138-139, 144
defined, 74 n. Greenfield, Lowell, 87, 91, 92, 115, 123, 129, 146
Distributive patching, 135 Gremlins, Gremlinity, 5, 21, 87,
Drake, Hubert M., 7, 145 Grounding, 51
Draper Laboratory, 151
Drones for Aerodynamic and Structural Testing, (DAST), 97, Halasey, Robert L., 87
108 Hanes, Horace A., Col., 141 n.
Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC), v, passim Harwell, Rebel, 104
Dual Hybrid Operating System (DUHOS), 80-82 Heat transfer, 109
Heath Company, 3, 8
Edwards Air Force Base, 4, 20, 36, 52, 139 Hedgley, David R., Jr. (Dave) 123
Edwards, John, 90 Highly Maneuverable Aircraft Technology (HiMAT) project,
Electric control stick, 130-131, 134, 147 97, 108, 145
Electronic Associates Inc. (EAI), 12, 55, 92, 99 and see High-Speed Flight Station (HSFS), v, 137, 143, 144
Computers HL-10, 17 ill., 83, 85, 91, 93, 115, 117, 128, 146
El Paso, Texas, 45 Hoey, Bob, 54, 91 ill.
Enevoldson, Einar, 158 Hold mode, 122
Engineering precision, defined, 119 n. Holleman, Euclid (Ed), 1, 10, 40, 41, 43, 44
Engle, Joe H., 111 Hughes, Donald L., 159
Error signals, 43-44 Hybrid Digital and Analog Computer (HYDAC), 67
Everest, Frank (Pete), Lt. Col., 138, 141, 142 Hyper III, 91, 115

F-8 Digital Fly-By-Wire (DFBW) program, 32, 79, 85-86, IBM CPC (Card Programmed Calculator), 4
117, 131-132, 150-152, 160 Icarus, 122
F-8 Supercritical Wing (SCW), 159-161 Iliff, Kenneth W., 27 n., 113, 116, 117, 121, 122
F-15 Remotely Piloted Vehicle, 85, 146, 158 Immediate Checkout Analog Research Unity Scaled
F-100, 6, 7, 13, 108, 136, 148, 153, 156 (ICARUS), 68 n., 78-80, 91-92, 121-124, 146
F-101, 13 Initial conditions (IC), 28, 115 n. (defined)
F-102, 13 Innis, Bob, 36
F-104, 13, 14, 26, 56, 143-145, 160 Input/Output (I/O) routines, 55, 70, 72-74
Reaction controls, 143-144 Instruments, 103-105
Stick kicker, 130 Integrated Test Facility (ITF), 127 and see Research Aircraft
Faster-than-real-time simulation, 93, 118, 159 Integration Facility
Film reader, 102 ill. International Business Machines (IBM), 86-87, 101, 124, 137
Flight Dynamics Laboratory (FDL), 108 Iron bird, 32, 46, 117, 151
Flight Research Center (FRC, later Dryden), v, passim Iron Cross, 153 ill., 154 ill.
Move from South Base, 136 n.
Flight Research Center Simulation Laboratory (FSL), vi, 2 Jackson, Hugh, 128
ill., 108, passim Jackson, Raymond H., 137
Ford Tri-motor, 97 Jarvis, Calvin R., 126
FRC, see Flight Research Center JetStar (Lockheed C-140), 59-64, 60-61 ill., 112, 117, 128,
FSL, see Flight Research Center Simulation Laboratory 147-148 see also General Purpose Airborne Simulator
Fulton, Fitzhugh L., Jr., 94, 97, 128 Johnson, Richard G., 131
Function generators, 11, 43, 48 Johnson, William (Bill), 140
Fuses, 22 Johnsville, Pa., 13, 23, 34-45, 100, 155, 156
Juarez, Mexico, 45
Gates, Ordway B., Jr., 6, 8, 9, 137
Gatlin, Donald H. (Don), 64, 148 Kempel, Robert W. (Bob), 20-21, 58 n., 60, 63, 93, 117, 128,

220
232
145-148, 159 Navy Aviation Medical Laboratory, 34
Kerfott (synchro manufacturer), 104 Norden display, 91 ill., 133
Kier, David A., 94 North American Aviation, 46, 49, 140
Kincheloe, Iven, Capt., 142 Northrop, 131
Kluever, Jack, 126
Kolf, Jack, 54, 93, 118, 159 Operate mode, 116 n., 122
Kordes, Eldon, 57, 125 Orbital rendezvous and docking, 107-108 ill., 109-110
Kostrakopf, Serge, 31 Ozalid copy process, 17-18
Krier, Gary, 148, 160
Kuhl, Albert E. (Al), vi, 6, 7, 8, 99, 136, 142 PA-30, 117
Painter, Weneth D., 117, 145
Landing simulations, 117-118, see also X-15 Paper tape, 73
Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, v, 17, 143, 145 Parameter identification, 27 n.
Langley Research Center, v, 7, 8, 36, 43, 51, 146 Paresev, 25 ill.
Lewis Aeronautical Laboratory (now Glenn Research Parish, Owen O., 112
Center), 4 Patch panels and cords, 19-20, 61, 135
Lifting-body program, 85, 145-146, 160 Perry, Gerald D., 52, 113, 114, 122, 126, 135, 157
simulations, 15 ill., 17 ill., 91-93, 115, 127-128 Perry, John J., 27, 51, 52, 60, 64, 108, 109-114, 123, 140
Little, Mary, 87, 123 Peterson, Bruce A., 117, 130
Lock, Wilton P. (Wilt), 126, 159, 160 Peterson, Forrest (Pete), 36, 41, 56
Lockheed, 115, 155 Pinon Hills, 4
Loschke, Paul, 25 ill. Plotters, 53-54
Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV), vi, 33, 44, 92, 93, Pontiac Catalina tow vehicle, 93
112, 117, 125 ill.-127, 126 ill., 128, 162 Pot-Set, defined, 11 n.
Lunar Landing Training Vehicle (LLTV), 126 Potentiometers, 9, 11, 16, 17, 99
Lyons, Jerry, 104 Powers, Bruce G., 94
Putnam, Terrill, 94
M2-F1, 15 ill., 93, 117
M2-F2, 91, 93, 115, 130, 145 Rampy, John M., 28
M2-F3, 85, 91, 115, 145, 146, 158-159 Reaction controls, 107, 143
Maine, Richard E., 27 n. Readiger, Al, 116 n.
Mallick, Donald L., 64, 126 ill., 128, 148 Real-Time Simulation (RTSIM), 89
Manned Space Flight Center (later Johnson Space Center), RTSIMII, 89
126 SIMII, 89
Manning, Theron, 27 Ream, H. E., 126
Matheny, Neil W., 27, 28 Reeves Electronic Analog Computer, 137
Matranga, Gene J., 126, 156 Rediess, Herman A., 61 ill., 128
McKay, John B. (Jack), 47, 111, 125, 155 Redstone Arsenal, Al., 84
McKay, James M., 57, 63 , 112, 125 Rediess, Herman A., 112-113, 143
McMurtry, Thomas C. (Tom), 159-161 Reisert, Donald (Don) 8, 17, 140-145
McTigue, John, 146 Remote Batch Terminal, 89
Mercury Program, 35 Remotely Piloted Research Vehicle (RPRV), 85, 131, 146
Michigan Technological University, 3, 4 and see F-15
Midnight patcher, 20-21 Cockpit simulation, 18 ill.
Milliammeter, defined, 104 n. Repetitive operations (Rep Op), 26-28, 116 n. (defined)
Moving-base simulations, 32-33, 96 ill., 161 Research Aircraft Integration Facility (RAIF), ix, 3 ill., 10,
Musick, Richard O. (Dick), 5, 8, 10, 13, 24, 32, 36, 40, 41, 31, 127
42, 43, 52, 60, 61 ill., 64, 99, 100, 101-106, 101-102 ill., Reset mode, 116 n., 122
107, 109, 128, 129, 130, 133, 134, 135, 137, 141, 143, Rio Grande River, 45
144, 148, 157 Robertson, Robby, 105
Myers, Albert F. (Al), 84-86, 89, 121, Robinson, Glenn H., 143
Rocket Site, 83
NASA, vi, 13-162 Rocket staging, 40
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), vi, Rogers Dry Lake, 138
1- 13, 84, 101, 139, 143 RPRV lab, 108
Navy, U.S., 3, 34-45, 100, 145 n. Rushworth, Robert, 36, 111
Naval Air Development Center (NADC), 34, 51, 139 Ryan, Bertha M., 116

233
221
Sadoff, Melvin, 1, Visual displays, 131, 161
Samuels, J. L. (Jim), 32, 48, 52, 108, 114, 157 von Braun, Wernher, 128
Sanderson, Kenneth C., 109
Scaling, 29-30, 120 n. Wagner, Charles A. (Charlie), 2, 13, 24, 25-26, 90, 122, 130,
Schilling, Lawrence J (Larry), 2, 88, 89, 124 132-136
Schmidt, Stanley, 99-100 Walker, Joseph A., 126 ill., 130, 144, 155
Scientific Data Systems (SDS), 52, 54, 76-78 and see Waltman, Gene L., v, ix, 42, 87, 94-97, 108-109, 115, 120,
computers 123, 124
Scott, David, 132 Washington, Harold, 94
Sebastian, Bill, 52, 157 Webb, Leo R. (Dick), 122, 126
Servo units, 104, 105 ill. Weil, Joseph E., 6-8, 137
Shock, Lew, 155 Wells, Larry, 52
Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) simulations, 78, 94-97, Weston (instrument maker), 104
94-96 ill., 108 Williams, Walter C. (Walt), 3, 137
Side-arm controller, 35 ill., 36-39 and see B-17 Willow Grove Naval Air Station, 41
Silver ink, 140 n. Wilson, Al, 103
Simson (instrument maker), 104 Wilson, Warren, 54
Simulation Councils Inc. (SCI), 66, 120 Wolowicz, Chester H. (Chet), x, 8, 27-28, 106, 137
Simulations, see aircraft designations, computers Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 112
Sissle, Ralph, 140
Smith, John P., 2, 9, 19, 46, 87, 106-108, 123, 146, 157, 159 X-1, vi, viii, and see X-1B
Slaton, Deke, 126 X-1B, 8, 10, 13, 107, 108, 153
Soft wire, 143 n X-2, vi, viii, 8, 9, 137, 138-141, 142, 143
Space Shuttle, 35, 91, 115 X-3, viii, 7, 136
Approach and Landing Tests, 59 X-15, vi, viii, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 16 ill., 21, 22, 23 ill., 25, 26,
Spectrol (servo manufacturer), 104 27, 28, 34 ill., 41, 46-58, 65, 66, 69, 71-79, 91, 92, 94,
S-plane technology, defined, 24 n. 100, 107, 143, 108, 110-112, 117, 125, 127-129, 132,
Static checks, 117-118 136, 138-139, 144-145, 148, 153, 157-159, 162
Stillwell, Wendell, 144, 145 Centrifuge program, 139
Strip-chart recorders, 53-54 Energy management, 52-54, 132
Struts, Larry W., 28 Landing simulation, 56, 111-112
Suppona, Art, 13, 52, 113, 126, 129-132, 134, Lower vertical stabilizer, 46
Swanson, John, 81 Minneapolis Honeywell adaptive controller, 48, 69
Synchro units, 104, 105 ill. Stability Augmentation System (SAS), 48
Systems Analysis Group, 123 X-24, 85, 115, 160
Szalai, Kenneth J., 59 ill., 62, 112, 128, 150-151 XLR-11 engines, 157
XLR-99 engines, 157
Taylor, Lawrence W., Jr., 27 n., 48, 139 XS-1, vi
TDY (temporary duty), 41-42
Telemetry (TM), 69-70, 108 Y2K, vii
Temperature, 21-22, 53 Yancey, Roxanah, vi, 27-28
Templates, 18-19 ill. Yawing moment coefficient, 138, 142, 143
Testing, 28-30 Yoshida, John, 41, 114
Dynamic, 29
Static, 28
Thompson, Milton, 25 ill., 26, 57-58, 93, 117, 145
Transport simulation, 16 ill.
Triplett (instrument maker), 104
Trunking, 51, 135

United Airlines, 161
University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), 55, 82, 119
University of Southern California (USC), 119

VanLeynselle, Frank J., 125 ill.
Videan, Edward N. (Ed), 4, 5, 8, 10, 40, 41, 43, 87, 89, 98-
101, 101 ill. 103, 137, 138, 140, 144, 159

234
222
Biblography

These references are all taken from the NASA/TP 1999-206568: Fifty Years of Flight Research: An Annotated
Bibliography of Technical Publications of NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 1946-1996, by David F.
Fisher of the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. The numbers at the beginning of each reference are taken
from that bibliography and are the chronological number of citation. Those numbers are used throughout this
paper as an easy way to identify the report being referenced. The documents listed here are all the reports that I
have been able to find that were written by Dryden personnel about studies that used any of the FSL’s (and other
simulation facilities’) simulation equipment during the period from 1955 to 1976. They are listed below using the
conventions in Fisher’s bibliography as explained below.

Key to Citations
Typical Citation

11993. 2Burcham, Frank W., Jr.; Maine, Trindel; and Wolf, Thomas. 3Flight Testing and Simulation of an F-15
Airplane Using Throttles for Flight Control. 4NASA TM-104255, 5H-1826, 6NAS 1.15:104255, 7AIAA Paper 92-
4109. 8Presented at the AIAA Flight Test Conference, Hilton Head, SC, 24 Aug. 1992. 9August 1992, 1092N32864, 11
# 12 (see also 2004).

1 Chronological number of citation (not a date)
2 Author(s)
3 Title
4 NASA publication number
5 NASA Dryden production number
6 GPO number
7 Assigned conference publication number
8 Conference name, place, and date

9 Date of publication (underlined)

10 Accession number

11 Available on microfiche (#)

12 Chronological number of cross-reference citation

113. Holleman, Euclid C.; and Triplett, William C.: Flight Measurements of the Dynamic Longitudinal Stabil-
ity and Frequency-Response Characteristics of the XF-92A Delta-Wing Airplane. NACA RM H54J26A,
January 1955, 87H24535.

120. *Gates, O. B., Jr.; Weil, J.; and *Woodling, C. H.: Effect of Automatic Stabilization on the Sideslip and
Angle of Attack Disturbances in Rolling Maneuvers. In NACA Conf. on Autom. Stability and Control of Air-
craft, March 30, 1955, pp. 25–41, (see N72-73193 12-99), 72N73195.
* Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, Hampton, Virginia

235
223
148. Weil, Joseph; and Day, Richard E.: An Analog Study of the Relative Importance of Various Factors
Affecting Roll Coupling. NACA RM H56A06, April 1956, 87H24558.

158. Weil, Joseph; and Day, Richard E.: Correlation of Flight and Analog Investigations of Roll Coupling.
NACA RM H56F08, September 1956, 87H24591, 93R19575.

161. Stillwell, Wendell H.: Control Studies. Part B: Studies of Reaction Controls. Research-Airplane-Commit-
tee Report on Conference on the Progress of the X-15 Project, Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, Langley Field,
Virginia, October 26, 1956, 93R21728. Declassified per NASA ccn 14, dated 25 April 1967.

183. Drake, H. M.: Flight Research at High Altitude, Part 1. AGARD Proceedings of the Seventh AGARD
General Assembly, 1957, pp. 74–75, (see N82-73409 12-01), 82N73414.

190. Holleman, Euclid C.; and Boslaugh, David L.: A Simulator Investigation of Factors Affecting the Design
and Utilization of a Stick Pusher for the Prevention of Airplane Pitch-Up. NACA RM H57J30, January 1958,
87H26852.

203. Holleman, Euclid C.; and Stillwell, Wendell H.: Simulator Investigation of Command Reaction Controls.
NACA RM H58D22, July 1958, 87H26855, 87H26220.

204. Holleman, E. C.; and Stillwell, W. H.: Simulator Investigation of Command Reaction Controls. In NACA
Conference on High-Speed Aerodynamics, 1958, pp. 157–165, (see N71-75285), 71N75297. (See also 203.)

208. Finch, Thomas W.; Matranga, Gene J.; Walker, Joseph A.; and Armstrong, Neil A.: Flight and Analog
Studies of Landing Techniques. This paper is from the Research-Airplane-Committee Report on Conference on
the Progress of the X-15 Project held at the IAS Building, Los Angeles, California on July 28–30, 1958, NACA-
CONF-30- Jul-58, July 30, 1958, pp. 83–93, 93R21698. Declassified per NASA ccn 14, 29 Nov. 1966.

214. Stillwell, Wendell H.; and Drake, Hubert M.: Simulator Studies of Jet Reaction Controls for Use at High
Altitude. NACA RM H58G18A, September 1958, 87H26229, 87H24697, 93R19525.

227. Finch, Thomas W.: Flight and Analog Studies of Approach and Landing Characteristics of Low L/D
Configurations. NASA Conference on Review of NASA Research Related to Control Guidance and Navigation
of Space Vehicles, NASA Ames Research Center, February 25–27, 1959.

229. Holleman, Euclid C.: Utilization of Pilot During the Boost Stage of Multistaged Vehicles. NASA Confer-
ence on Review of NASA Research Related to Control Guidance and Navigation of Space Vehicles, NASA Ames
Research Center, February 25–27, 1959.

230. Boslaugh, David L.: Investigation of Precise Attitude Control—Simulator Program. NASA Conference
on Review of NASA Research Related to Control Guidance and Navigation of Space Vehicles, NASA Ames
Research Center, February 25–27, 1959.

238. Williams, Walter C.: Pilot Considerations in the X-15 Research Airplane Program. Presented at the
Annual Meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 29, 1959.

246. Day, Richard E.; and Reisert, Donald: Flight Behavior of the X-2 Research Airplane to a Mach Number
of 3.20 and a Geometric Altitude of 126,200 Feet. NASA TM X-137, September 1959, 87H25418.

247. Finch, Thomas W.; and Matranga, Gene J.: Launch, Low-Speed, and Landing Characteristics Determined
from the First Flight of the North American X-15 Research Airplane. NASA TM X-195, September 1959,
62N72019, 87H25292.

224
236
256. Day, Richard E.: Training Considerations During the X-15 Development. Presented to the National
Security Industrial Association Training Advisory Committee Meeting, Los Angeles, California, November
17, 1959, NASA CC-H-157 OTP-1959, 1959.

259. Beeler, De Elroy: The Supersonic Transport. A Technical Summary. OTP-1959, 1959.

269. Holleman, E. C.; and Sadoff, M.: Simulation Requirements for the Development of Advanced
Manned Military Aircraft. NASA TM X-54672, Presented at the IAS National Meeting, San Diego,
California, August 3, 1960, 75N72588.

278. Wolowicz, C. H.; Drake, H. M.; Videan, E. N.; Morris, G. J.; and Stickle, J. W.: Simulator Investiga-
tion of Controls and Display Required for Terminal Phase of Coplanar, Orbital Rendezvous. NASA TN
D-511, October 1960, 62N71085, 87H27353.

280. Beeler, De E.: The X-15 Research Program. AGARD Report 289, Tenth Annual General Assembly of
AGARD, Istanbul, Turkey, October 3–8, 1960.

284. Andrews, W. H.; and Holleman, E. C.: Experience With a Three-Axis Side-Located Controller
During a Static and Centrifuge Simulation of the Piloted Launch of a Manned Multistage Vehicle.
NASA TN D-546, November 1960, 62N71120, 87H26912.

286. Holleman, E. C.: Utilization of the Pilot During Boost Phase of the Step 1 Mission. In its Joint
Conference on Lifting Manned Hypervelocity and Reentry Vehicles, Part 2 1960, pp. 261–272, (see N72-
71002 06-99), 72N71021.

289. Holleman, Euclid C.; Armstrong, Neil A.; and Andrews, William H.: Utilization of the Pilot in the
Launch and Injection of a Multistage Orbital Vehicle. Presented at the IAS 28th Annual Meeting, New
York, New York, January 25–27, 1960, 87H30992.

295. Day, Richard E.: X-15 Simulation and the X-15 Flight Program. Presented to the National Academy
of Sciences, Panel on Acceleration Stress, ARC, March 11, 1961.

297. Reisert, Donald; and Adkins, Elmor J.: Flight and Operational Experiences With Pilot-Operated
Reaction Controls. ARS Paper-1674-61. Presented at the ARS Missile and Space Vehicle Testing Confer-
ence, Los Angeles, California, March 13–16, 1961.

302. Weil, Joseph; and Adkins, E. J.: Review of Selected X-15 Development and Operating Experiences.
Presented at the ISA Aero-Space Instrumentation Symposium, Dallas, Texas, April 30–May 4, 1961.

304. Taylor, Lawrence W., Jr.; and Day, Richard E.: Flight Controllability Limits and Related Human
Transfer Functions as Determined From Simulator and Flight Tests. NASA TN D-746, May 1961,
87H27401.

305. Matranga, Gene J.: Analysis of X-15 Landing Approach and Flare Characteristics Determined
From the First 30 Flights. NASA TN D-1057, July 1961, 62N71631, 87H27661.

309. Taylor, Lawrence W., Jr.: Analysis of a Pilot-Airplane Lateral Instability Experienced With the X-
15 Airplane. NASA TN D-1059, November 1961, 62N71633, 87H27667.

322. Hoey, R. G.; and Day, R. E.: X-15 Mission Planning and Operational Procedures. Research-Air-
plane-Committee Report on Conference on the Progress of the X-15 Project, 1961, pp. 155–169, (see N71-
75443), 71N75454.

237
225
338. Hoey, Robert G.; and Day, Richard E.: Mission Planning and Operational Procedures for the X-15
Airplane. NASA TN D-1159, March 1962, 62N10585, 87H27608.

342. McKay, James M.; and Kordes, Eldon E.: Landing Loads and Dynamics of the X-15 Airplane. NASA
TM X-639, March 1962, 63N12564, 87H26336, #.

348. Taylor, Lawrence W., Jr.; Samuels, James L.; and Smith, John W.: Simulator Investigation of the
Control Requirements of a Typical Hypersonic Glider. NASA TM X-635, H-226, March 1962,
72N71506, 87H26322.

356. Armstrong, Neil A.; and Holleman, Euclid C.: A Review of In-Flight Simulation Pertinent to Piloted
Space Vehicles. AGARD Report 403, 21st Flight Mechanics Panel Meeting, Paris, France, July 9–11, 1962.

357. Holleman, Euclid C.; and Armstrong, Neil A.: Pilot Utilization During Boost. Presented at the Inter-
Center Technical Conference on Control Guidance and Navigation Research for Manned Lunar Missions,
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, July 24–25, 1962, 63X14567.

366. Tremant, R. A.: Operational Experiences and Characteristics of the X-15 Flight Control System.
NASA TN D-1402, December 1962, 63N11123.

369. Holleman, Euclid C.; and Wilson, Warren, S.: Flight-Simulator Requirements for High-Performance
Aircraft Based on X-15 Experience. ASME Paper 63-AHGT-81, ASME Aviation and Space, Hydraulics,
and Gas Turbine Conference and Products Show, Los Angeles, California, March 3–7, 1963, 63A17579.

370. Row, Perry V.; and Fischel, Jack: Operational Flight-Test Experience With the X-15 Airplane. AIAA
Paper 63-075, AIAA Space Flight Testing Conference, Cocoa Beach, Florida, March 18–20, 1963,
63A15995.

376. Matranga, G. J.; Washington, H. P.; Chenoweth, P. L.; and Young, W. R.: Handling Qualities and
Trajectory Requirements for Terminal Lunar Landing, as Determined From Analog Simulation. NASA
TN D-1921, August 1963, 63N19606.

378. Videan, Edward N.; Banner, Richard D.; and Smith, John P.: The Application of Analog and Digital
Computer Techniques in the X-15 Flight Research Program. Presented at the International Symposium on
Analog and Digital Techniques Applied to Aeronautics, Liege, Belgium, September 9–12, 1963.

381. Weil, Joseph: Piloted Flight Simulation at the NASA Flight Research Center. Presented at IEEE 10th
Annual East Coast Conference on Aerospace and Navigation Electronics, Baltimore, Maryland, October 21–
23, 1963.

378. Videan, Edward N.; Banner, Richard D.; and Smith, John P.: The Application of Analog and Digital
Computer Techniques in the X-15 Flight Research Program. Presented at the International Symposium on
Analog and Digital Techniques Applied to Aeronautics, Liege, Belgium, September 9–12, 1963.

385. Rediess, H. A.; and Deets, D. A.: An Advanced Method for Airborne Simulation. NASA TM X-
51360. Presented at the AIAA, AFFTC, and NASA FRC Testing of Manned Flight Systems Conference,
Edwards, California, December 4–6, 1963, pp. 33–39, 64N12880.

406. Rediess, H. A.; and Deets, D. A.: An Advanced Method for Airborne Simulation. NASA RP 337.
Reprinted from J. Aircraft, Vol. 1, No. 4, July–August 1964, pp. 185–190. Presented at the AIAA, AFFTC,
and NASA FRC Testing of Manned Flight Systems Conference, Edwards AFB, California, December 4–6,
1963, 64N31214.

226
238
412. Thompson, M. O.: General Review of Piloting Problems Encountered During Simulation and Flights of
the X-15. NASA TM X-56884, Society of Experimental Test Pilots Ninth Annual Report. Presented at the SETP
Symposium, Beverly Hills, California, 1964, 66N83857.

415. Windblade, R. L.: Current Research on Advanced Cockpit Display Systems. NASA TM X-56010, 1964,
65N20814.

443. Andrews, W. H.; Butchart, S. P.; Sisk, T. R.; and Hughes, D. L.: Flight Tests Related to Jet-Transport Upset
and Turbulent-Air Penetration. NASA SP-83, NASA Conference on Aircraft Operating Problems, May 10–12,
1965, 1965, 65N31114.

450. Smith, Harriet J.: Human Describing Functions Measured in Flight and on Simulators. NASA SP-128,
Second Annual NASA-University Conference on Manual Control, M.I.T., Cambridge, Massachusetts, February
28– March 2, 1966.

457. Taylor, L. W., Jr.; and Iliff, K. W.: Recent Research Directed Toward the Prediction of Lateral-Directional
Handling Qualities. NASA TM X-59621, AGARD paper R-531 presented at AGARD 28th Meeting of the Flight
Mechanics Panel, Paris, France, May 10–11, 1966, May 1966, 67N23242.

458. Berry, D. T.; and Deets, D. A.: Design, Development, and Utilization of a General Purpose Airborne
Simulator. NASA TM X-74543, AGARD Paper 529. Presented at AGARD 28th Flight Mechanics Panel, Paris,
France, May 10–11 1966. May 1966, 77N74646.

478. *Rolls, L. S.; *Snyder, C. T.; and Schweikhard, W. G.: Flight Studies of Ground Effects on Airplanes With
Low-Aspect-Ratio Wings. NASA SP-124, (see N75-71754 05-98), 1966, pp. 285–295, 75N71774.

* Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California

482. Jarvis, Calvin R.: Fly-By-Wire Control System Experience With a Free-Flight Lunar-Landing Research
Vehicle. AIAA Paper 67-273, AIAA Flight Test, Simulation, and Support Conference, Cocoa Beach, Florida,
February 6–8, 1967.

483. Matranga, Gene J.; Mallick, Donald L.; and Kluever, Emil E.: An Assessment of Ground and Flight Simu-
lators for the Examination of Manned Lunar Landing. AIAA Paper 67-238, AIAA Flight Test, Simulation, and
Support Conference, Cocoa Beach, Florida, February 6–8, 1967.

488. Jarvis, C. R.: Flight-Test Evaluation of an On-Off Rate Command Attitude Control System of a Manned
Lunar-Landing Research Vehicle. NASA TN D-3903, April 1967, 67N23293.

492. Lytton, L. E.: Evaluation of a Vertical-Scale, Fixed-Index Instrument Display Panel for the X-15 Air-
plane. NASA TN D 3967, May 1967, 67N25037.

508. Thompson, M. O.; Weil, J.; and Holleman, E. C.: An Assessment of Lifting Reentry Flight Control Re-
quirements During Abort, Terminal Glide, and Approach and Landing Situations. NASA TM X-59119.
Presented at Specialists meeting on Stability and Control, Cambridge, England, September 20–23, 1966, 1967,
68N27404.

512. Taylor, L. W., Jr.: Relationships Between Fourier and Spectral Analyses. Three-D Annual NASA University
Conference on Manual Control, 1967, pp. 183–186, (see N68-15901 06-05), 68N15913.

521. Van Leynseele, F. J.: Evaluation of Lateral-Directional Handling Qualities of Piloted Reentry Vehicles
Utilizing a Fixed Base Simulation. NASA TN D-4410, March 1968, 68N19226.

239
227
522. Reed, R. D.: Flight Testing of Advanced Spacecraft Recovery Concepts Using the Aeromodeler’s
Approach. AIAA Paper 68-242. Presented at the 2nd AIAA and Flight Test Simulation and Support Conference,
Los Angeles, California, March 25–27, 1968, March 1968, 68A23665, #. (See also 510.)

528. Wolowicz, C.H; Strutz, L.W.; Gilyard, G. B.; and Matheny, N.W.: Preliminary Flight Evaluation of the
Stability and Control Derivatives and Dynamic Characteristics of the Unaugmented XB-70-1 Airplane
Including Comparisons With Predictions. NASA TN D-4578, May 1968, 68N24498, #.

556. Kock, B. M.; and Painter, W. D.: Investigation of the Controllability of the M2-F2 Lifting-Body Launch
From the B-52 Carrier Airplane. NASA TM X-1713, December 1968, 71N15004, #.

560. *Newell, F. D.; and Smith, H. J.: Human Transfer Characteristics in Flight and Ground Simulation for a
Roll Tracking Task. NASA TN D-5007, February 1969, 69N17814.

* Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Inc., Buffalo, NY

562. Taylor, L. W., Jr.; Iliff, K. W.; and Powers, B. G.: A Comparison of Newton-Raphson and Other Methods
for Determining Stability Derivatives From Flight Data. AIAA Paper 69-315, 3rd AIAA and FTSS Conference,
Houston, Texas, March 10–12, 1969, 69A22379.

564. Wagner, C. A.: Visual Simulation Image Generation Using a Flying-Spot Scanner. NASA TN D-5151,
April 1969, 69N23194.

567. Painter, W. D.; and Kock, B. M.: Operational Experiences and Characteristics of the M2-F2 Lifting Body
Flight Control System. NASA TM X-1809, June 1969, 71N14526, #.

574. Taylor, L. W., Jr.; and Iliff, K. W.: Fixed-Base Simulator Pilot Rating Surveys for Predicting Lateral-
Directional Handling Qualities and Pilot Rating Variability. NASA TN D-5358, August 1969, 69N35762.

590. Deets, Dwain A.: Optimal Regulator of Conventional Setup Techniques for a Model Following Simula-
tor Control System. Fourth NASA Inter-Center Control Systems Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, November
4–5, 1969. (See also 969.)

600. Szalai, K. J.; and Deets, D. A.: An Airborne Simulator Program to Determine if Roll-Mode Simulation
Should Be a Moving Experience. AIAA Paper 70-351. Presented at the AIAA Visual and Motion Simulation
Technology Conference, Cape Canaveral, Florida, March 16–18, 1970, 70A24202.

621. Holleman, E. C.: Flight Investigation of the Roll Requirements for Transport Airplanes in Cruising
Flight. NASA TN D-5957, H-616, September 1970, 70N38625.

626. Wagner, C. A.: Frequency Responses and Other Characteristics of Six Fast-Decay Phosphors Applicable
to Flying-Spot Scanners. NASA TN D-6036, H-609, October 1970, 70N42118, #.

630. Manke, J. A.; *Retelle, J. P.; and Kempel, R. W.: Assessment of Lifting Body Vehicle Handling Qualities.
NASA TM X-2101, October 1970, pp. 29–41, 71N10104.

* Air Force Flight Test Center, Edwards, CA

673. Kempel, R. W.: Analysis of a Coupled Roll Spiral Mode, Pilot Induced Oscillation Experienced With the
M2-F2 Lifting Body. NASA TN D-6496, H-633, September 1971, 71N33307 fixed center fin lessened the pilot-
induced-oscillation tendencies in the critical flight region.

240
228
677. Szalai, K. J.: Validation of a General Purpose Airborne Simulator for Simulation of Large Trans-
port Aircraft Handling Qualities. NASA TN D-6431, H-591, October 1971, 71N37823.

678. Szalai, K. J.: Motion Cue and Simulation Fidelity Aspects of the Validation of a General Purpose
Airborne Simulator. NASA TN D-6432, H-648, October 1971, 71N36672.

680. Kempel, R. W.; and Thompson, R. C.: Flight-Determined Aerodynamic Stability and Control
Derivatives of the M2-F2 Lifting Body Vehicle at Subsonic Speeds. NASA TM X-2413, H-520, December
1971, 72N11900, #.

697. Layton, G. P., Jr.; and Thompson, M. O.: Lifting Body Flight-Test Techniques. NASA TM X-68306,
AGARD-CP-85, Paper 10. Flight Test Tech., (see N72-20976 12-02), February 1972, 72N20986.

718. Smith, J. P.: Research Aircraft Simulators. Western Simulator Council, Los Angeles, California, July
27, 1972.

722. Deets, D. A.; and Szalai, K. J.: Design and Flight Experience With a Digital Fly-By-Wire Control
System Using Apollo Guidance System Hardware on an F-8 Aircraft. AIAA Paper 72-881, presented at
the AIAA Guidance and Control Conference, Stanford, California, August 14–16, 1972, 72A40060.

724. Strutz, L. W.: Flight-Determined Derivatives and Dynamic Characteristics for the HL-10 Lifting
Body Vehicle at Subsonic and Transonic Mach Numbers. NASA TN D-6934, H-708, September 1972,
72N30903.

738. Kier, D. A.; Powers, B. G.; Grantham, W. D.; and Nguyen, L. T.: Simulator Evaluation of the Flying
Qualities of Externally Blown Flap and Augmentor Wing Transport Configurations. NASA SP-320,
1972, (see N73-32934 24-02), pp. 157–800, 73N32948.

770. Powers, B. G.; and Kier, D. A.: Simulator Evaluation of the Low-Speed Flying Qualities of an
Experimental STOL Configuration With an Externally Blown Flap Wing on an Augmentor Wing.
NASA TN D-7454, H-780, October 1973, 73N31951.

799. Matheny, N. W.: Flight Investigation of Approach and Flare From Simulated Breakout Altitude of
a Subsonic Jet Transport and Comparison With Analytical Models. NASA TN D-7645, H-803, April
1974, 74N19672.

812. Gilyard, G. B.; Smith, J. W.; and *Falkner, V. L.: Flight Evaluation of a Mach 3 Cruise Longitudinal
Autopilot. AIAA Paper 74-910, AIAA Mechanics and Control of Flight Conference, Anaheim, California,
August 5–9, 1974, 74A37890.

* Honeywell, Inc., Minneapolis, MN

837. Smith, J. W.; and Berry, D. T.: Analysis of Longitudinal Pilot-Induced Oscillation Tendencies of YF-
12 Aircraft. NASA TN D-7900, H-805, February 1975, 75N16560.

867. Gee, S. W.; Wolf, T. D.; and Rezek, T. W.: Passenger Ride Quality Response to an Airborne Simula-
tor Environment. NASA TM X-3295, DOT-TSC-OST- 75-40. The 1975 Ride Quality Symposium, Novem-
ber 1975, pp. 373–385, (see N76-16754 07-53), 76N16770.

869. Manke, J. A.; and *Love, M. V.: X-24B Flight Test Program. Presented at the Nineteenth Society of
Experimental Test Pilots Symposium, Beverly Hills, California, September 24–27, 1975, Society of Experi-
mental Test Pilots, Technical Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1975, pp. 129–154, 76A18659.

241
229
* USAF, Edwards AFB, CA

875. Holleman, E. C.: Summary of Flight Tests to Determine the Spin and Controllability Characteristics of
a Remotely Piloted, Large-Scale (3/8) Fighter Airplane Model. NASA TN D-8052, H-889, January 1976,
76N17156.

882. Petersen, K. L.: Evaluation of an Envelope-Limiting Device Using Simulation and Flight Test of a
Remotely Piloted Research Vehicle. NASA TN D-8216, H-914, April 1976, 76N21218, #.

230
242
About the Author

Gene Waltman graduated from the Michigan Technological University in 1957 with a bachelor’s degree in
mathematics, and started to work at the NACA High-Speed Flight Station in July of 1957. He worked in the
Simulation Laboratory as an analog and hybrid computer programmer and engineer until about 1971. The Sim
Lab had received its first analog computer earlier that year and as one of the first programmers he had the
opportunity to participate in the early development of the lab. He not only programmed several major simula-
tions but also began buying the lab’s computer systems very early in his career. After reassignment to the
Systems Analysts Branch in 1971, he became involved with the development of several flight-data processing
systems used to process the large volume of aircraft data collected during all of the Dryden’s aircraft research
flights. He continued to buy computer systems for Dryden until his retirement. When the Center was
merged with the Ames Research Center, he became the Dryden representative on the Ames ADP Management
Board and also was involved with the process of planning and acquiring the Dryden’s computer systems. He
became involved with the early development of the Dryden’s personal computer (PC) evolution by buying the
first personal computer and participating in the procurement, training, and support activities for these PCs for
several years. Following his retirement from NASA in 1993, Gene returned to Dryden as an employee of the
Woodside Summit Group Inc. in 1996, when that company was awarded the Center’s computer support
service contract. He has been involved with computer software documentation and the Center’s Y2K pro-
gram. He began to collect information and write about the history of the Simulation Laboratory shortly after
returning to Dryden.

Monographs in Aerospace History

Launius, Roger D., and Gillette, Aaron K. Compilers. The Space Shuttle: An Annotated Bibliography. (Mono-
graphs in Aerospace History, No. 1, 1992).

Launius, Roger D., and Hunley, J.D. Compilers. An Annotated Bibliography of the Apollo Program. (Mono-
graphs in Aerospace History, No. 2, 1994).

Launius, Roger D. Apollo: A Retrospective Analysis. (Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 3, 1994).

Hansen, James R. Enchanted Rendezvous: John C. Houbolt and the Genesis of the Lunar-Orbit Rendezvous
Concept. (Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 4, 1995).

Gorn, Michael H. Hugh L. Dryden’s Career in Aviation and Space. (Monographs in Aerospace History,
No. 5, 1996).

Powers, Sheryll Goecke. Women in Flight Research at the Dryden Flight Research Center, 1946-1995
(Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 6, 1997).

Portree, David S.F. and Trevino, Robert C. Compilers. Walking to Olympus: A Chronology of Extravehicular
Activity (EVA). (Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 7, 1997).

Logsdon, John M. Moderator. The Legislative Origins of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958:
Proceedings of an Oral History Workshop (Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 8, 1998).

Rumerman, Judy A. Compiler. U.S. Human Spaceflight: A Record of Achievement, 1961-1998 (Monographs in
Aerospace History, No. 9, 1998).

243
231
Portree, David S.F. NASA’s Origins and the Dawn of the Space Age (Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 10,
1998).

Logsdon, John M. Together in Orbit: The Origins of International Cooperation in the Space Station Program
(Monographs in Aerospace History, No. 11, 1998).

Phillips, W. Hewitt. Journey in Aeronautical Research: A Career at NASA Langley Research Center (Mono-
graphs in Aerospace History, No. 12, 1998).

Braslow, Albert L. A History of Suction-Type Laminar-Flow Control with Emphasis on Flight Research (Mono-
graphs in Aerospace History, No. 13, 1999).

Logsdon, John M. Moderator. Managing the Moon Program: Lessons Learned from Project Apollo (Mono-
graphs in Aerospace History, No. 14, 1999).

Perminov, V.G. The Difficult Road to Mars: A Brief History of Mars Exploration in the Soviet Union (Mono-
graphs in Aerospace History, No. 15, 1999).

Tucker, Tom. Touchdown: The Development of Propulsion Controlled Aircraft at NASA Dryden (Monographs in
Aerospace History, No. 16, 1999).

Maisel, Martin D.; Demo J. Giulianetti; and Daniel C. Dugan. The History of the XV-15 Tilt Rotor Research
Aircraft: From Concept to Flight. (Monographs in Aerospace History #17, NASA SP-2000-4517, 2000).

Jenkins, Dennis R. Hypersonics Before the Shuttle: A History of the X-15 Research Airplane. (Monographs
in Aerospace History #18, NASA SP-2000-4518, 2000).

Chambers, Joseph R. Partners in Freedom: Contributions of the Langley Research Center to U.S. Military
Aircraft in the 1990s. (Monographs in Aerospace History #19, NASA SP-2000-4519).

Those monographs still in print are available free of charge from the NASA History Division, Code ZH, NASA
Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546. Please enclosed a self-addressed 9x12" envelope stamped for 15 ounces
for these items.

244
232

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful