FactSheet

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration
Langley Research Center
Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 FS-1999-08-46-LaRC
___________________________________________________________________________
August 1999

NASA Contributions to F/A-18E/F

An F/A-18F on approach to an aircraft carrier.

technology assessments to helping with a vexing

Centerpiece of US Navy’s aerodynamic problem during critical flight tests.
NASA research inspired a solution to the highly-
Carrier-Based Fighter/Attack publicized “wing drop” problem that threatened to
Fleet Updated with NASA delay Congressional funding.

Aeronautics Technology The Aircraft

The F/A-18 Hornet is the centerpiece of the US
The F/A-18 E/F — the single-seat E and the two- Navy’s carrier-based fighter/attack fleet. The F/A-
seat F — are the latest high-performance aircraft 18E/F Super Hornet is a larger version of the F/A-
that have benefitted from a rich history of 18C/D Hornet. The E/F is roughly 25% larger than
cooperation between NASA, the Department of the C/D, with a 25% increase in operating radius
Defense (DoD) and U.S. industry. NASA’s and a 22% increase in weapons load capability. The
contributions to development of the F/A-18E/F were single seat F-18E fighter is intended to replace the
many and varied, from taking part in early F-18C and the two-seat F/A-18F attack airplane will
eventually replace the F-14. Langley engineers then proposed more radical
The F/A-18E/F, designed and built by Boeing design options that, based on prior research with
(formerly McDonnell Douglas), recently completed other configurations, would potentially satisfy these
engineering and manufacturing development flight requirements. Favorable wind tunnel results led to
testing at Patuxent River Naval Air Station, further refinement of one of the design options and a
Maryland. configuration that met all design goals. This
configuration is the wing leading edge extension on
NASA Knowledge the production F/A-18E/F.
The leading edge extension redesign effort is an
Called Upon Early example of the value that NASA provides as a
NASA’s involvement with the F/A-18E/F began center for national corporate knowledge in high-
in the early stages of the proposed aircraft angle-of-attack technology and its application to
development when the Office of the Secretary of solve major problems in the development of U.S.
Defense became concerned with range estimates for fighter/attack aircraft.
the vehicle. A three-member NASA/DOD/industry
team conducted an independent review of fighter-
escort mission range estimates in April 1992. A Thousands of Hours
NASA Langley engineer was a member of this team. of Tunnel Testing
Favorable results from this review were critical to Extensive testing of the F/A-18E/F with the
the airplane program proceeding forward to the redesigned leading edge extension was conducted in
Defense Acquisition Board for funding advocacy. a variety of NASA and industry wind tunnels to
A series of tests in a completely define its
Langley wind tunnel (8- aerodynamic
Foot Transonic) the characteristics. Data
following month from these tests were
indicated that a spoiler used to generate the
on the leading-edge aerodynamic database
extension, designed to used for flight simulation
improve stability at high and to develop the flight
angles of attack* and control software for the
reduce aerodynamic airplane. NASA
buffeting of the vertical engineers worked
tails, caused closely with engineers
unacceptable reductions from McDonnell
in maximum lift. As a Douglas and the U.S.
result of these tests, a Navy to assure that
reassessment of the design requirements and
leading edge extension national goals were met.
design was begun. Langley structural-aerodynamic tunnel tests increased The vehicle’s
Redesigning the confidence in the E/F. performance at subsonic
leading edge extension and transonic speeds was
was the job of a 15-member national team of validated in a series of wind tunnel tests at NASA
experts, which included three Langley engineers. Ames (11-Foot Transonic Tunnel, 1991-94).
This team was active through the first six months of During approximately 3,000 hours of tunnel
1993. Initially the team explored small occupancy, data were obtained on four different
modifications to the size and shape of the extension scale models to determine performance and stability
to regain the required lift and improve stability. and control characteristics. The tests included
Subsequent wind tunnel tests showed that this aerodynamic measurements to evaluate a series of
incremental approach would not be successful. aircraft design options, such as engine inlet studies.

* “Angle of attack” describes the angle of an aircraft’s body and wings relative to actual flight path. During maneuvers,
pilots often fly at extreme angles of attack — with the nose pitched up while aircraft flies in original direction — often
resulting in loss of lift needed to maintain altitude and control.
Tiny holes in a small section of the wing redirect airflow to delay loss of lift.

Stability and control characteristics at high- unique two-cable mount system, which allows the
angle-of-attack flight conditions were evaluated in model to actually fly in the center of the tunnel with
numerous wind tunnel tests at Langley (approx. assistance from a pilot in the control room. The
1,500 occupancy hrs in 30- by 60-Foot Full Scale tests verified that the aircraft was free from
Tunnel, 1993-4). Free-flight testing was also aeroelastic instabilities including flutter within its
conducted to provide confirmation of the stability flight envelope.
and flight dynamic characteristics. In this test The E/F’s new engine inlet system was analyzed
technique, a tethered model powered by high- for icing characteristics at NASA Glenn (formerly
pressure air is flown in the tunnel in a flight control NASA Lewis). The analysis determined the
simulation consisting of a team of pilots and a sensitivity of the inlet to icing and determined the
representative flight control software package. The best location for an icing sensor in the inlet. Critical
control system logic used was similar to that in the icing tests followed (Icing Research Tunnel, 1994).
actual aircraft, providing validation of the flight Glenn also provided advice on thermal problems
control system at high-angle-of-attack prior to full- encountered in the accessories gearbox for hydraulic
scale flight demonstration. and electrical power — specifically, how to manage
Hundreds of free-spin tests quantified aircraft oil flow in the gearbox to provide lubrication and
spin modes, determined the acceptable spin chute cooling flow in critical areas where heat is
size and identified the optimal spin recovery generated.
procedures prior to flight test (Langley 20-Foot
Vertical Spin Tunnel, 1993-96). Motion time The Flight Test Phase
histories from these tests were used by McDonnell
As a result of NASA’s corporate knowledge of
Douglas to validate their spin simulation. Data from
the airplane’s aerodynamics gained from the efforts
rotary balance tests conducted in this facility
provided an analytical assessment of spin modes, mentioned above, the U.S. Navy requested direct
spin-recovery characteristics and a database for NASA involvement when the F/A-18E/F moved
incorporating rotational aerodynamic characteristics into the flight test. NASA continued to work closely
into the flight simulation. with the U.S. Navy and Boeing during the
An F/A-18E/F structural vibration — or flutter engineering and manufacturing development phase.
— clearance test program was also conducted at NASA support included flight test planning and data
Langley (Transonic Dynamics Tunnel, 1993- 95). evaluation, especially in the high angle-of-attack
Phase one testing insured that each pair of
regime.
dynamically-scaled surfaces (wings, horizontal tails,
One example of NASA’s contribution to high-
and vertical tails) was clear of flutter throughout the
scaled flight envelope. The second phase of tests performance aircraft flight technology is the
was with and without stores (bombs, fuel tanks, etc.) development of a method for predicting and
mounted to the wings. These tests used the tunnel’s evaluating the complex out-of-control flight mode
known as “falling leaf.” Initiated at Langley in Drop Model Testing
1995, this research was performed as a result of the Risk reduction for the high-angle-of-attack part
flight mode observed on the F/A-18A, B, C and D of the flight test program is provided by a drop
versions of the aircraft. The fundamental cause of model operated by NASA Langley at the NASA
the phenomena on the A through D versions was Wallops Test Range. These tests, using a one-
identified, and a prediction and evaluation quarter-scale remotely-piloted model, supplement
the aircraft flight test program by providing flight
methodology was defined. This technology, applied
dynamics data for the airplane at conditions outside
by Boeing engineers in F/A-18E/F program,
the planned operating envelope.
contributed to alleviation of the mode for the
aircraft, as proved using the evaluation methodology
during the flight test phase.

Helping to Resolve Wing Drop

During the winter of 1997-98, the Navy asked
NASA for assistance in resolving a phenomenon
known as “wing drop,” which was a growing
concern during flight tests. Wing drop is an abrupt,
uncommanded rolling motion of the aircraft during
certain flight conditions. Although not a safety of
flight issue, the roll-offs occur during high-speed,
high-g maneuvers and prevent the pilot from
performing close-in tracking maneuvers on potential
adversaries.
Having identified wing drop as a problem in
early 1996, the Boeing/Navy team performed wind
tunnel tests and computational fluid dynamic (CFD)
studies in an effort to identify the root cause.
Though the cause of the wing drop was determined,
knowing how to moderate the air flow separation
differences between the left and right wings was not.
A wide variety of solutions were explored.
During this period, Langley engineers suggested
that the flight program apply a NASA-developed
technology — passive porosity— to a small section
of the upper surface of the wing at the point where
the wing folds for aircraft carrier operations. This
solution, refined by the NASA and Boeing team,
resolved the wing drop problem and permitted the
Department of Defense to authorize continued
production of the aircraft.
To contrast the airflow patterns between the F/A-
18E/F and earlier F-18’s, NASA Dryden flew an F- Remotely piloted drop model tests probe the limits of
the flight envelope.
18B to visualize in-flight wing surface flow field
data. The data verified that there are significant
differences between airflow characteristics of the
two aircraft. NASA engineers also served on a For more information, contact:
Department of Defense blue ribbon panel convened NASA Langley Research Center
to review the approach taken by Boeing to resolve Office of Public Affairs
the wing drop, and participated on various Boeing/ Mail Stop 115
Navy “tiger teams” created to resolve issues related Hampton, VA 23681
to the wing drop problem. http://www.oea.larc.nasa.gov