Launch Point Coordinates: 36° 20' N; 115° 59' W.

1. Launch, light engine, increase to 100%T. Rotate at 10° a until q = 20°.

2. q = 20° - maintain q = 20°.

3. Pushover to O "g".

4. Reduce to minimum thrust (42%).

5. Modulate speed brakes ( » 35° ) to maintain slow longitudinal acceleration. Increase a to maintain H = 72,000 ft.

6. Burnout. Maintain H-dot = O until V = 3000 ft/sec.

7. Retract speed brakes. Descend at » 200 ft/sec.

8. Cuddeback - turn Yaw damper off, perform moderate rudder pulse.

9. Turn Roll damper off, perform moderate aileron and rudder pulses.

10. Engage Roll and Yaw dampers. Vector to High Key, speed brakes as required. Engine master off.

11. High Key.

P.C.: The only comment on the prelaunch check list was the slowness of #l APU in coming up on hydraulic pressure. I shut it off and then got a call from NASA 1 that it was working, and shortly thereafter the pressure came up. So I waited till it wound on down and then restarted with no problem.

I don't think there were any other unusual occurrences. I did mention this trim still being way too loose as far as I'm concerned. When we started the M-H check he asked me to center the trim, and it was the trim that was off. I had my hand over on the mike button and had moved it 5°, so I am real concerned about this.

B. Was the launch accomplished without incident?

P.C.: During launch I rolled over to the left, probably 20°, and then came back to wings level just prior to bringing the throttle on.

P.C.: In the boost phase it seemed this time, very likely due to the simulator practice, I had a lot more time to look at things, and it went pretty much as the simulation indicated. However, even though I was a degree or so low in the round-out phase, I came up on theta about 2 seconds early. I also reached pushover altitude of 54,000 at somewhere near 36 seconds, rather than the 38 which was programmed. I started the pushover there, and from then on the checks looked pretty good. I believe at 66,000 ft indicated it looked like I was going to be a little low, so I backed off from zero g and then shortly thereafter went back to zero g.

I believe my inertial altitude indicated 70,000 ft when I rounded out on top, and at 4300 fps which occurred pretty close to the 65 seconds, I came back on the throttle and shortly thereafter started the brakes out.

I had one heck of a time getting the speed brakes out because of the forces in the control itself. However, in the landing approach pattern, the speed brakes seemed to be operating normally again.

At 70,000, once I reached there, I held about 3, 4°a, and got an indication I was low, so I went up another degree and still was getting calls that I was low. I had no indication from the inertial rate of climb that I was climbing and I think I ended up between 5° and 6° of alpha and finally got an indication that I was starting up .

B. Was any change noted in the control characteristics during heating run? (H » 72,000 ft, V » 4500 fps, 0° < a < 3°)

P.C.: There wasn't really any change in control characteristics during this time. It seemed that I had real precise control over angle-of-attack and had no problem selecting an alpha and holding it. Laterally I had no problem at all. I was a little off in heading, but I knew this and it didn't bother me because I could see the lake.

The telemetry data shows a pitch oscillation just before engine shutdown. I'm not sure why this occurred. It could be the relaxing of the longitudinal forces as you tend to come off the back of the seat a little bit. I sensed, very definitely, the deceleration when I came back on the throttle and there was one thing - I have an extra pad behind my elbow, so I have no slop from the elbow to the side arm. It may very well be that because of this lack of slop, any sudden change in acceleration is going to give me a control input.

C. Rate the piloting task during the heating run.

q 2.5 , f 2.5 , y 2.5 .

P.C.: The piloting task ratings during the heating run are as indicated. It's all pretty good. As I indicated earlier, there was no problem in achieving an alpha, or holding it, and as long as you have adequate instruments to tell you where you are, and if they correspond, as far as the control system is concerned, you can very easily hold a given situation.

P.C.: After burnout, which kind of surprised me because I don't think I was looking at the clock, but it makes such a change in your environment, so to speak. You start hanging on the straps, there is a very decided deceleration, and it could be quite possible during this period to make an inadvertent control input. I didn't notice that I had moved the controls, but as soon as I recovered the control characteristics were still very good.

I turned off the yaw damper and kicked it and it acted very much like the simulator. There was no apprehension at all that we had any problem even with the damper off. With the roll damper off I was a little more cautious but still kicked it a couple of times and didn't seem to excite anything abnormal and I tried some of the short control pulses laterally in achieving a bank angle and it felt real good.

I think the airplane is more stable than the simulator, however I'm not sure I was at the same Mach number that I had been practicing in the simulator, but somewhere in that range. The impression is that the airplane is better - not nearly as much oscillation with the roll and yaw damper off.

B. Rate the pilot control task following pulse inputs.

Yaw damper only off q 2.5 , f 2.5 , y 3 .

Roll and yaw dampers off q 2.5 , f 3 , y 3 .

P.C.: I'11 rate the pilot control task as shown. I imagine I made the largest pulses when only the yaw damper was off. The others were probably a little more conservative.

C. Compare the airplane response with the simulator during the dampers "off" portion of the flight.

P.C.: In the comparison with the simulator the plane seems to be more stable.

D. Was approach from high key and landing accomplished without incident?

P.C.: The approach and landing were pretty much without incident. My only concern was with the discrepancy which appeared in both barometric altitude and indicated velocity. Other than that - no problem.

I used. speed brakes from 12,000 ft down to 7,000 ft and then brought them back in. I made the roundout and dropped the flaps pretty close to 300 knots. The gear came out probably about 26O - 270 knots and then I started opening the speed brakes about the time I went by the smoke. I think I had the brakes full open after touchdown.

The attitude didn't seem too high at touchdown. I dumped the stick forward and slideout was pretty normal. I noticed a slight drift to the left, so I cranked in a little right aileron and then shortly after came back on the stick to slow it down even a little more.

I did get into a slight pitch oscillation while I was level and maybe a half mile short of the smoke. A couple of cycles, I suppose, but as soon as I saw it occurring I just relaxed a little bit and it damped right out - no problem. It could have been one of these things initiated by me while I was looking for the speed brake handle and not paying attention to the control.