The pre-launch countdown, and launch maneuver, were normal. During the climb, I kept hearing calls of the altitude going higher and higher. After I had pushed over to zero a, and was still above 4,000 ft/sec, I wasn't the least bit surprised when I got a call that I was tall on energy.

During the glide and after the speed brakes went out, I pushed down to zero a, and this was still around 4,000 ft/sec. Anything that approached zero a after that was strictly off-the-cuff. It was a case of not going high on a, which I found to be easy to do with the brakes out, the nose down, and slowing up. With all that, when I pulled the speed brakes in, I was just a trifle short of the intended touchdown spot and at approximately 180 knots indicated.

The trim switch we used on this flight worked like a jewel, considering that we took less than an optimum arrangement on the actuator in deflection, and shape, etc., because it was getting close to deadline time. I really feel that I did better on this profile from having this trim switch than I would have with the roller trim. Aside from one overshoot on q during the initial pullup, due to checking the chamber pressure on the engine, I was able to put it right on q, and then zero g. and pulled up at about 1.75g at around 74 seconds.

I was past 94,000 feet indicated, and was beginning to get the impression that the profile was running slightly on the low side. I started to pull a little above zero g, and heard a call that indicated I was doing well on the profile. Judging from the velocity, at burnout, I must have been a couple of thousand feet low on altitude compared with the radar.

I had previously noted that 470 knots indicated corresponded to 500 q. I was just a shade between the marker at 470 knots indicated and 500, so it must have been about 475 or 480 indicated. I took this to be accurate compared with what NASA-l called out. I also had a reasonable q when I got to 23°a.

I was right down on the horizon after burnout on zero q, when I started rolling into the bank. I started pulling the a up right away, and q came up about 10° when I reached a positive a so I guess I did sail up in the air a little bit.

I experienced a certain lack of response now and then. The only time I used the center stick was when I put my hand down while I was pulling up to 23° a in order to be able to do something if I hit the stabilizer non-linearity, and it decided to pitch up a little faster than I wanted. I was pulling force ahead of the trim to make sure that I knew where I was, but I didn't have any particular job holding the angle of attack. I actually saw 24° a at one time. The second time at 20° a I was using a fair amount of force in excess of trim, but I had decelerated quite a bit.

I was puzzled by the sideslip indication, since it continued to read 2° to the left up to and through the launch, and during the flight it oscillated effectively ±2° about that value.

The control system really chatters when you have a high deflection input, trying to hold a up. It didn't during the 23°a pullup, but it did at, both 20°a pull-ups. This chatter was not the residual oscillation noted after launch, but was at a higher frequency and it kept coming and going. As fast as it would damp down, it would come on again. If it weren't for the notch filter we could possibly have had a dandy today.

Concerning the sideslip indication, I would judge that part of the time the airplane was in a sideslip, due to the fact that I was controlling toward zero on the angle of attack. Actually maybe the null value was at 2° left. I found that it was less than 2° left while I was coasting in, and made a manful effort to shove in the other rudder and straighten the airplane out. It took rudder force however to haul that back over 2°b subsonic. I think I had about the same departures in sideslip at 20°a in both instances and a little more than for the higher a, higher velocity evaluation.

Sideslip is good at a reasonable q although the airplane is a little loose directionally. I didn't appreciate an exceptional amount of roll associated with the sideslip, but I had a strong impression that if I didn't disturb the airplane it was on the damping side, rather than divergent. I can, with not much effort, use a counteracting lateral control to hold b down. Also, sideslip is better in the simulator, and the pitch was too.
 
 

JAW:dmo

Typed: 9-7-62