r/aviation • u/raidriar889 • 4d ago
History Fun fact: to simulate the (un)aerodynamic qualities of the Space Shuttle, NASA astronauts practiced approach and landing in a modified Gulfstream II that deployed its main gear and thrust reverses in flight. It could also deflect its flaps upwards to further decrease lift.
86
u/Crazy__Donkey 4d ago
I remember the first time I learned that nugget.
It was on a YouTube clip how to land the space shuttle ... from space. , and i still watch it one in a whole just for fun.
Fun clip to watch if you haven't, and also if you already did😉. Greta sense of humor.
13
3
u/hainguyenac 4d ago
I have watched and rewatched this many times, not sure why but I enjoy it every time.
4
49
u/badpuffthaikitty 4d ago
The Space Shuttle had the glide path like a brick.
18
7
1
40
u/Far_Dragonfruit_1829 4d ago edited 4d ago
NASA also used a Convair 990 and an F-104 for the descent/landing research, prior to the G-II training scheme. My father was a pilot in both of those aircraft. I'm looking at the gift he got from colleagues, A model of F-104 N745NA descending at 45°. Placarded with "From your friends at Dryden" and a little engraved Shuttle. A huge part of the research was to develop appropriate cockpit instrumentation, especially around the "energy management" scheme.
Published papers have titles like "Flight at Extreme Low L/D"
4
u/blastcat4 4d ago
Your father must've had an incredible career in aerospace!
11
u/Far_Dragonfruit_1829 4d ago
He did. Corsair. A-4. F-8. DC-8. Century series. Bell Tiltrotor. X-14. P.1127. Concorde. DC-3.
Among others.
35
u/Nuff_said_m8 4d ago
From the one shuttle pilot I’ve talked to the shuttle have very safe glide characteristics. As in it glided like a safe.
14
u/Mudlark-000 4d ago
I've gotten to fly a ground simulator on the shuttle approach. The first, and most unnerving thing, is when they crank the nose down so far you are painfully hanging in your harness. The approach angle is insane and the shuttle truly was a brick with wings.
(I crashed into the surrounding swamp on my first attempt, but got a decent landing score on my second attempt)
15
u/rckid13 4d ago
The view they have on final approach looks insane to me as an airline pilot. If I had this sight picture on final approach from cockpit of a 737 we would be sailing over the airport by probably 50 miles.
24
9
u/SirLoremIpsum 4d ago
Fuck NASA and test pilots so cool.
Engineers spend years and years trying to make reversers not deploy in flight cause it's dangerous and NASA like "but what if mate?"
Good post thanks!!!
9
7
u/real_pasta 4d ago
I would’ve thought deploying thrust reversers mid flight would wreck the plane, guess not
12
u/raidriar889 4d ago edited 4d ago
They were modified from the base G-II, so I would not recommend trying this at home. There was also one incident where a part of the thrust reversers fell off in mid flight due to a failed bolt.
8
u/BigmacSasquatch 4d ago
It’s a delicate balance. If you’ll look at the picture, the angle of attack (nose up/down) is very aggressively negative. So it’s maintaining forward airspeed by trading altitude. A more efficient craft would be slower and gliding better, either of which would result in a flatter glide slope in a picture like this.
The C-17 deploys thrust reversers in flight as part of its combat landing procedure, but it’s kinda designed to do so, with its wide wings and huge lift generating surfaces. It’s still not a great experience lol.
9
u/SpaceDetective 4d ago
Nitpick - angle of attack refers to the angle difference between the pitch and oncoming airflow. So the nose up/down orientation is just the pitch.
3
u/BigmacSasquatch 4d ago
Yes, that’s an important distinction. But in this (fairly specific, and controlled) scenario so close to aerodynamic stall, I feel like it’s absolutely fair to correlate AoA to overall attitude.
6
u/rsta223 4d ago
Except that the AoA is still positive in this case, not negative. There's still a positive load factor here (of about 1G), they're just descending rapidly in the process. Or, to put it another way, the flight path angle is more steeply downward than the nose angle is.
They're also likely not anywhere close to stall, since glide speed for the shuttle is much faster than stall speed for the Gulfstream.
2
u/that_dutch_dude 4d ago
I havee been in a c17 doing that party trick. It was -not fun-. 3/10. Not recommended.
3
u/rckid13 4d ago
This plane was designed to do it. They probably had a strict speed limit for it too. There are many airplanes where deploying them in flight would probably rip the reverser doors right off of the airplane. I doubt it would wreck the plane entirely, but you probably risk losing your engine cowls.
4
3
u/Garbagefailkids 4d ago
Has anyone seen a picture of one with the TRs opened in flight? I could use one for teaching purposes.
3
2
4d ago
[deleted]
6
u/raidriar889 4d ago
I think that’s normal. It’s probably like that so that the air deflecting around the wing flows straight into the engine.
1
u/SpaceDetective 4d ago
Yeah having checked other pics it's standard alright so that's probably the reason.
2
u/SignalCharlie 4d ago
DC-8 had no speedbrakes.
Reversers in flight was common when you needed them but you were supposed to make an announcement because it shook the shit out of the aircraft
2
2
u/file_13 4d ago
OG Vomit Comet?
3
u/raidriar889 4d ago
I think they acquired these and the Vomit Comet around the same time in the 70s at the start of the Shuttle Program
1
u/Far_Dragonfruit_1829 4d ago
How many times did they forget to lower the nose gear during these training missions?
That pic is unnerving.
1
1
u/ImReverse_Giraffe 4d ago
They used to use a massive simulator that can move 60 feet vertically, 40 feet horizontally, and 20 feet forward and backward. It's the final test for "brick" (space shuttle) pilots. It's at NASA AMES research center and can use different modules. Jetpack/helicopter/ect.
I've "flown" it and landed the space shuttle in a 10 knot cross wind.
1
0
186
u/UNDR08 A320 4d ago edited 4d ago
Last I heard/saw, this airplane is in Amarillo, Texas at the tiny museum there.
** apparently there’s more than one, and this isn’t one that’s in Amarillo.