PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE

Flight: 3-46-70

Date: August 10, 1965

Pilot: Capt. Joe Engle

PRELAUNCH AND LAUNCH PHASE

A. Evaluate briefly flight performance of the following items during the prelaunch period and/or the launch maneuver.

1. Ball nose operation - Worked O.K.

2. Damper system - Damper system failed in yaw at launch. It was reengaged and stayed engaged through about 30 seconds, up to about q. It dropped off again, we reengaged it and it stayed engaged another 20 - 30 seconds. Then it failed right at shutdown. I reengaged it and it stayed engaged again for another 20 seconds or so.

3. Launch transients - I didn't notice any particular launch transients. We had a pretty good roll off to the right, about 15 degrees or so, which didn't seem that much in the airplane.

4. Unforeseen incidents - The yaw damper failure was the only unforeseen incident in this phase.

II. BOOST PHASE A. Evaluate flight performance in the following areas, during the "power on" portion of the flight.
1. a control - Didn't really seem too difficult. I got up to about 12 degrees, 11 degrees I guess, indicated. The damper failed and it dropped off to about 9 while I was resetting the damper and then got back up to about 10 1/2 to 11 degrees and it didn't seem too difficult to control.

2. q control - q wasn't particularly difficult to control, although I think I was a little bit out of trim as far as the pitch rate vernier wheel is concerned. When the yaw damper dropped off and I reset it and came back, I was about a degree to 2 degrees off on pitch. "Just lack of attention?" Yes, lack of attention more than anything else. It wasn't difficult holding it when I could concentrate on it.

3. Altitude profile versus simulator - I think the altitude profile is about as close as we could possibly get to the simulator. I shut down with about 5300 feet per second max showing on the velocity indicator, and about 148,000 feet. Because of the yaw damper failure, I got about 15 degrees angle of attack in rather than holding the 8 degrees that I had intended. So I think with this additional a plus 100 feet per second probably accounted for the 3,000 to 4,000 feet that we went high.

4. Unforeseen incidents - Again, the unforeseen incidents were nothing more than the yaw damper dropping off.

III. GLIDE PHASE A. Evaluate flight performance in the following areas during the "power off" portion of the flight. 1. Burnout transients - Weren't objectionable at all. I think the pitch trim was partly due to pulling back on the stick when I pulled back on the throttle and didn't catch it right away because my attention was diverted to the yaw damper.

2. ^·y operation - Was pretty normal. I guess I let it get out to maybe 4 degrees during the ballistic portion of the flight, but it didn't seem like it wanted to run off any place. In other words, the rates it was diverting from zero were very slow and I could bring it back without any problem at all. I think it drifted off to the left and right at random. It didn't seem like it wanted to go the same direction every time.

3. Ballistic flight:

q 3 , f 1 1/2 , y 1 1/2 .

a. Controllability with BCS - I would rate pitch at about a 3. This was evidently due to the fact that I probably was out of trim on the system, or the follow-up probably was giving me a little bit of problem in trying to establish my theta. It wasn't particularly difficult or bothersome, but it did require attention. Roll I would rate 1 1/2 and yaw 1 1/2.

b. Stability with BCS -

q 1 1/2 , f 1 1/2 , y 1 1/2 .

4. Reentry - Again, it seemed like it took a little while to determine the right pitch rate vernier setting to give us the desired theta and then alpha. In the simulator we'd used about 3 degrees on the indicator; in the airplane about 1 1/2 seemed to give us about the same airplane response. After determining this number, as far as controllability is concerned, initial part of the reentry:

q 2 , f 1 1/2 , y 2 .

When the yaw damper would drop off, the stability was a little lower. It wasn't divergent by any means, but it would drift off from zero sideslip slightly. During the terminal part of the reentry (High g, high q):

q 3 , f 1 1/2 , y 1 1/2 .

5. Glide energy management versus simulation - Energy management was very much like the simulator. There wasn't any difficulty in eye-balling the field and determining what course of action to take as far as speed brakes and either going to higher or lower dynamic pressure. I think each flight gets to be a little easier to determine what to do as far as managing energy back to the field.

6. Approach and landing - Were normal with the exception of the yaw damper again, which dropped off, I'd say maybe twice in the pattern, perhaps more than that. I would say overall the yaw damper dropped off at least a dozen and a half times during the flight.

7. Unforeseen incidents - This was the only unforeseen incident.

B. Describe and rate the most adverse piloting task experienced on this flight.

q 3 , f 1 1/2 , y 1 1/2 .

Controlling pitch during the high g portion of the reentry. Same ratings as terminal reentry. The airplane didn't feel uncomfortable at any portion of the flight. Even when the yaw damper went off it was more of an attention diversion than a controllability problem.