X-15 OPERATIONS FLIGHT REPORT



FLIGHT NO: 1-62-103 DATE OF REPORT: 12/22/65

PILOT: William H. Dana DATE OF FLIGHT: 11/4/65

CARRIER AIRCRAFT: B-52 #008 LAUNCH LAKE: Hidden Hills

ENGINE SERIAL: 110 APU #1 16 APU #2 20

PURPOSE OF FLIGHT: 1. Pilot Checkout
 
 

I. Discussion of Previous Operations

A. The cockpit pressure regulator serviceability continues to be of concern. Problems associated with the severe environment of the Station 200 bulkhead have been partially compensated for by elaborate nitrogen purging prior to the flight and cycling the regulator by closing the sense line immediately before the B-52 engine start. Although more intensive ambient checks are accomplished at NAA-LAX to functionally demonstrate regulator operation prior to return to X-15 stock, the maintenance level or parts quality are not equivalent to the original program level as evidenced by the recent cabin regulator operation of flights l-A-102, 1-62-103 and flight 3-A-68. II. Aircraft Configuration Changes A. The mechanical portions of the stick pusher installation were completed. The system was not activated for flight.

B. The instrumentation and power wiring for the Autonetics High Altitude Infrared Background (experiment #24) was completed, and a preliminary interface electrical operation was satisfactorily accomplished.

C. Engine S/N 108 was replaced with engine S/N 110 to comply with a thirty minute inspection (approximately 6 minutes overdue).

D. The modified main landing gear oleo-struts with revised relief valve setting and lowered air spring pressure were installed, improving maximum landing loads capability.

E. The wing flap gear box electrical power source was moved from the emergency battery bus to the DC primary bus. The flap actuator includes a heater which would require continuous power and deplete the battery.

F. A circuit modification was incorporated into the SAS Hi-Lo-Hi Gain Box to provide low gain fail safety in case of a relay failure. The relay is a suspect cause for the dropout of the Yaw channel on flight 1-61-101.

III. Preflight Events A. After the normal post flight inspections were in progress, a request was made for a serviced aircraft natural frequency determination. The aircraft was prepared for mating to B-52 #008 on 10/18/65. The tests were accomplished with wing jacks under the B-52 outriggers. The results were:

Axis Empty X-15 Serviced

(Lox, NH3, Eng. H2O2)

Pitch ---- 2.6 cps (approx.)

Yaw 4.15 cps 4.05 cps

The 2.6 cps later proved to be a B-52 wing bending mode frequency.

B. The No. 2 APU generator was replaced as a precautionary measure because of unexplained power transients noted on IFDS power data parameters.

C. The F-13 side fairing was replaced with a new skin because of extended cracks originating in the permanent heat buckle which appeared in the early heat build-up flights.

D. The yaw SAS servo was replaced because of operating time limit.

E. Both APU controllers were replaced because of failure to pass the functional checkout.

F. The SAS-case was replaced when blown fuses and a damaged malfunction detector module were discovered. Since no direct cause was found, an incident involving a shorted external power supply during engine setup was suspected. Also damaged in the same incident was the pilot's indication of generator-out and engine fire warning; investigation revealed the damage occurred in the pilots indication flasher unit.

G. An engine run with engine S/N 110 was accomplished on 10/28/65. Pump oscillations were noted on the pump leak check runs. A pump run was made with the hydraulic pump disconnected to verify proper catalyst bed function. Subsequent operations showed improvement, and the engine was accepted for flight. The fuel manifold pressure indications in the cockpit and on T/M were inoperative during the run.

H. The X-15 pilot's breathing O2 selector valve was found to have a reversed B-52, X-15 port position because of a manufacturing error. Modification was made to the valve shaft to allow proper indexing.

I. A pilot-cockpit fit check and simulated flight was accomplished with William H. Dana on 11/1/65.

J. Replacement of the X-15 Zenner Diodes was necessary because of low ground resistance. Units from stock with exact part number and manufacturer were reversed in conducting direction and therefore were unusable. Units were obtained from X-15-3.

K. The aircraft was mated at 3:45 AM on 11/2/65.

L. Flight l-A-102 was accomplished on 11/2/65 with William H. Dana as pilot and carried on B-52 #008. The abort was caused by loss of cockpit pressure after suit check due to a frozen-open regulator and loss of PDM signal strength. APU starts were accomplished and the simulated launch was carried through engine igniter idle.

M. The cockpit pressure regulator was replaced. The PDM antenna was found to have low ground resistance and replaced to correct the signal output strength conditions.

N. Post flight engine functions revealed a severe helium leak from the fuel pump shaft seal. Back pressure and pump spinup were ineffective in reducing the leakage rate. The condition was accepted, however, based on a propellant wetting action improving seal operation.

O. The flight was accomplished on 11/4/65.

III. Flight Events A. The cockpit pressure regulator set point shifted to a nominal 38,000 ft. altitude regulation. Use of the auxiliary pressure system was, of course, ineffective in changing the altitude, and resulted in eventual shock down of the gas converter with discharge of LN2 to the oscillograph and tape recorder area. The tape recorder case distorted causing loss of an inspection window, which jammed the mechanism. Failure of the oscillograph mirrors also occurred.

B. Engine shut-down occurred on the first start attempt after launch. The restart was successful. Post flight evaluation of data indicated a sticky metering valve with an excessive undershoot actuated the low fuel manifold pressure-switch. The engine start was accomplished at 50% throttle which would aggravate the metering valve deficiency.

C. The landing with the revised MLG oleo-struts was normal, and the expected lower static position did not materialize. A lower static position of the aircraft would require adjustments to the dolly installation procedure.
 
 
 
 

Approved by: Prepared by:

Perry V. Row Ronald S. Waite

X-15 Senior Project Engineer X-15 Project Engineer