FLIGHT NO: 1-78-138 DATE OF REPORT: 24 July 1968
PILOT: Maj. Knight DATE OF FLIGHT: 16 July 1968
CARRIER AIRCRAFT: B-52 #003 LAUNCH LAKE: Railroad Valley
ENGINE SERIAL: 104 APU #1 17 APU #2 23
PURPOSE OF FLIGHT: 1. WTR Experiment (20)
2. Sky Brightness (19)3. Fluidic Probe
4. Fixed Alpha Ball (31)
I. Discussion of Previous Operations
B. The sky brightness experiment (19) was installed in the left-hand rear tip-pod. Some modification was required in the fixed alpha cone for clearance.
C. Both the rear facing tip-pod cameras were removed. A GSAP was installed in the right hand forward pod to look at the WTR experiment.
D. The ejection seat was sent to NAR for foot snatcher installation, the X-15-2 seat was used for flight. The lightweight foot manacles were installed.
E. The Saturn insulation panels were removed from the lower speed brakes and the brakes painted black.
F. The C-band beacon was rewired from instrument power to ships primary DC power.
G. The ball-nose was changed.
H. Due to normal wear new skids were installed on the main landing gear.
I. The yaw servo was replaced.
J. Ship 2's rudder with the fluidic probe was installed.
K. The MIT experiment was removed and replaced by ballast on 11 July. The experiment was returned to MIT to repair the tracking system.
B. APU-BCS runs were accomplished on 27 June. The RAS roll valve was replaced and the BCS run was repeated on 28 June. The number one system right roll motor was replaced and the BCS run repeated satisfactorily on 2 July.
C. The aircraft was weighed in a ready-to-mate condition on 2 July.
D. The aircraft was mated to B-52 #003 on 3 July.
E. Flight was rescheduled from 5 July to 8 July due to missile schedules. Flight was canceled for 8 July due to weather, and rescheduled for 11 July due to Ballarat being wet. Flight was canceled on 10 July due to Grapevine being wet, and rescheduled for 15 July.
F. Flight was aborted (l-A-137) on 15 July due to intermittent firing of Roll RAS. The RAS case was changed.
B. The pilot reported an indication of hydraulic pressure failure of number two system. This was found to be a bad transducer and not a hydraulic system problem.
C. The pilot reported buffet at 200K feet and 65K feet.
This presently looks like a flight control and SAS problem rather than
an aircraft aerodynamic problem, and is still under investigation.
Perry V. Row Vincent N. Capasso
X-15 Senior Project Engineer X-15 Project Engineer