Development
To facilitate development of the long-range SM-64 Navaho surface-to-surface cruise missile, North American Aviation developed the RTV-A-5, or X-10 in 1951. This vehicle was to prove out critical flight technology for the design of the cruise vehicle of the Navaho missile design. These included proving the basic aerodynamics out to Mach 2, flight testing the inertial guidance unit and flight control avionics to the same speed, and finally validate the recovery system for the next phase in the Navaho program. Preliminary design of the X-10 was completed in February 1951 and the first vehicle was delivered to Edwards Air Force Base in May 1953. The first flight occurred on October 14, 1953.
The X-10 was powered by two Westinghouse J40 turbojet engines with afterburners, and equipped with landing gear for conventional take off and landing. The combination of a delta wing with an all-moving canard gave it extremely good aerodynamics in the trans-sonic and supersonic environments. It also made the vehicle unstable requiring active computer flight control in the form of an autopilot. Thus, the X-10 is similar to modern military fighters which are flown by the onboard computer and not directly by the pilot. In this same regard, though the X-10 was receiving directional commands from a radio-command guidance system, these commands were sent through the on-board computer which in turn implemented the commands. Later X-10s included an N-6 inertial navigation system which completely controlled the vehicle through the cruise portion of the flight.
Read more about this topic: North American X-10
Famous quotes containing the word development:
“Other nations have tried to check ... the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions.”
—John Louis O’Sullivan (1813–1895)
“I’ve always been impressed by the different paths babies take in their physical development on the way to walking. It’s rare to see a behavior that starts out with such wide natural variation, yet becomes so uniform after only a few months.”
—Lawrence Kutner (20th century)
“Dissonance between family and school, therefore, is not only inevitable in a changing society; it also helps to make children more malleable and responsive to a changing world. By the same token, one could say that absolute homogeneity between family and school would reflect a static, authoritarian society and discourage creative, adaptive development in children.”
—Sara Lawrence Lightfoot (20th century)