Shock wave drag reduction

Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics

Volumn 36, Issue , 2004, Pages 81-96

  Bushnell, Dennis M ^a  

^a NASA LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Flow control

Indexed keywords

DRAG; GUNS (ARMAMENT); MILITARY AVIATION; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT;

AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS;

SHOCK WAVES;

DRAG REDUCTION; FLOW CONTROL; FLUID MECHANICS; SHOCK WAVE;

EID: 0347727961     PISSN: 00664189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.36.050802.122110     Document Type: Article

References (141)

1. Aerospace America. 1985. Military missions call for oblique wing. Aerosp. Am. 23:82-84
2. Ardelyn NV, Chae JO, Chuvashev SN, Kosmachevskii CV, Timofeev IB. 1999. Class of energy of saving regimes of supersonic propagation with plasma formation before streamlined bodies. AIAA-99-4986
3. Ashill PR, Fulker JL, Simmons MJ, Gaudet IM. 1996. A review of research at DRA on active and passive control of shock waves. In ICAS Congr., 20th, Naples, Italy, Sept. 8-13, Proc. 1:76-87. Reston, VA: AIAA
4. Austin F, Siclari MJ, Van Nostrand WC, Weisensel GN, Kottamasu V, Giuseppe V. 1997. Comparison of smart wing concepts for transonic cruise drag reduction. In Proc. SPIE-The Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 3044:33-40. Bellingham, WA: SPIE
5. Ayers TG, Hallissy JB. 1981. Historical background and design evolution of the transonic aircraft technology and superrritical wing. NASA TM 81356, Dryden Flight Res. Center, Edwards, CA
6. Bahi L, Ross JM, Nagamatsu HT. 1983. Passive shockwave/boundary layer control for transonic airfoil drag reduction. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 21st, Reno, NV
7. Barger RL. 1992. A method for designing blended wing-body configurations for low wave drag. NASA TP 3261, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
8. Bauer SXS, McMillin SN. 1988. Experimental and theoretical study of the effects of wing geometry on a supersonic multibody configuration. Presented at AIAA Appl. Aeronaut. Conf., 6th, Williamsburg, VA
9. Ben-Dor G, Igra O, Elperin T, eds. 2001. Handbook of Shock Waves, Vol. 1. San Diego: Academic
10. Boeing Commer. Airplane Co. 1982. Large payload capacity SST concepts-technical and economic feasibiliiy. NASA CR-165934
11. Bogdonoff SM, Vas IE. 1959. Preliminary investigation of spiked bodies at hypersonic speed. J. Aerosp. Sci. 26(2):65-74
12. Bos HJ. 1985. Optimum supersonic wings with subsonic leading edges. J. Aircr. 23(4):326-32
13. Boyd JA. 1965. Optimal utilization of supersonic favorable interference to obtain high lift-drag ratios. Presented at AIAA/RaeS/JSASS Aircr. Des. Technol. Meet., Los Angeles
14. Brown CE, McLean FE. 1958. The problem of obtaining high lift-drag ratios at supersonic speeds. J. Aero/Space Sci. 26:298-302
15. Brown CE, McLean FE, Klunker EB. 1960. Theoretical and experimental studies of cambered and twisted wings optimized for flight at supersonic speeds. Proc. Int. Congr. Aeronaut. Sci., 2nd, Zurich, 3:415-31. New York: Pergamon
16. Bur R, Corbel B, Délery J. 1997a. Study of passive control in a transonic shock wave/boundary-layer interaction. AIAA J. 36(3):394-400
17. st Fluid Dyn. Plasmadyn. Lasers Conf., Seattle
18. Bushnell DM, Huffman JK. 1968. Forward penetration of liquid water and liquid nitrogen injected from an orifice at the stagnation point of a hemispherically blunted body in hypersonic flow. NASA TM X-1493, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
19. Caballero N. 2000. Drag reduction in airfoils using control devices in the shock wave boundary layer interaction region. See Thiede 2000, pp. 379-84
20. Cain T, Boyd D. 1999. Electroaerodynamics and the effect of an electric discharge on cone/cylinder drag at Mach 5. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Exhib., 37th, Reno, NV
21. Carlson HW, Mack RJ. 1980. Studies of leading-edge thrust phenomena. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 18th, Pasadena, CA
22. Carlson HW, McLean FE. 1966. Current methods for prediction and minimization of lift induced drag at supersonic speeds. NASA TM X-1275, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
23. Carlson HW, Walkley KB. 1984. Numerical methods and a computer program for subsonic and supersonic aerodynamic design and analysis of wings with attainable thrust considerations, NASA Contract. Rep. 3808, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
24. Carmichael RL. 1967. The prospects of aerodynamic performance gains from wing camber and twist at low hypersonic Mach numbers. Conf. Hypers. Aircr. Technol. (NASA SP-148), pp. 79-86
25. Chan YY, Mundis DL, Jones DJ. 1980. Transonic axisymmetric bodies with minimal wave drag. Can. Aeronaut. Space J. 26(3):231-34
26. Chang J-F. 1992. Minimizing supersonic wave drag with physical constraints at design and off-design Mach numbers. J. Aircr. 29(4):716-18
27. Chapman DR. 1955. Reduction of profile drag at supersonic velocities by the use of airfoil sections having a blunt trailing edge. NACA TN 3505, Ames Aeronaut. Lab., Moffett Field, CA
28. Charczenko N, Hennessey KW. 1961. Investigation of a retrorocket exhausting from the nose of a blunt body into a supersonic free stream. NASA TN D-751
29. Chow C-Y, Holst TL, Van Delsem WR, Chen C-L. 1985. Numerical simulation of transonic flow over porous airfoils. Presented at AIAA Appl. Aerodyn. Conf., 3rd, Colorado Springs, CO
30. Chu CW, Der J, Ziegler H. 1977. Wave Drag Reduction for Aircraft Fuselage-Wing Configurations, Vol. 1: Analysis and Results. NOR 76-190, Naval Air Dev. Cent., Warminster, PA
31. Cole JD, Zien TF. 1968. A class of three dimensional optimum hypersonic wings. Presented at AIAA 6th Aerosp. Sci. Meet., New York
32. Das A. 1973. On some basic and new aspects about the drag problem of wings and bodies in supersonic flows, pp. 3.1-3.26. In AGARD Aerodyn. Drag, Inst. Aerodyn. DFVLR: Germany
33. Dollyhigh SM, Coen PG. 1987. Advanced technology and unconventional aircraft concepts. In Unconventional Aircraft Concepts, ed. F. Sterk, pp. 65-73. The Netherlands: Delft Univ. Press
34. Dulikravich AS, Sheffer SG. 1992. Aerodynamic shape optimization of hypersonic configurations including viscous effects. In AIAA Appl. Aerod. Conf., 10th, Palo Alto, CA, June 22-24, Tech. Pap. Part I (A92-45476 19-02), pp. 343-51. Am. Inst. Aeronaut., Washington, DC
35. Eggers AJ Jr, Syvertson CA. 1956. Aircraft configurations developing high lift-drag ratios at high supersonic speeds, NACA Res. Memo. A55L05, Ames Aeronaut. Lab., Moffett Field, CA
36. Erdmann SF, Zandbergen PJ. 1976. A survey of 10 years of NLR activities on ring wing body configurations (1956-1966), NLR-TR69070U, Natl. Aerosp. Lab., Amsterdam
37. Erdos JI. 1983. Aeromechanical applications of favorable supersonic interference, Vol. I, Tech. Rep. AFWAL-TR-82-3020, Air Force Wright Aeronaut. Lab., Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH
38. Ferri A, Clarke JH. 1957. On the use of interfering flow fields for the reduction of drag at supersonic speeds. J. Aerosp. Sci. 24:1-18
39. Friedman MD, Cohen D. 1955. Arrangement of fusiform bodies to reduce the wave drag at supersonic speeds, NACA Tech. Rep. 1236, Ames Aeronaut. Lab., Moffett Field, CA
40. Froning HD Jr, Roach RL. 1995. Drag reduction, and possibly impulsion, by perturbing fluid and vacuum fields. Presented at AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib., 31st, San Deigo, CA
41. Furey RJ. 1972. Minimum-energy hypersonic nose and leading-edge shapes. J. Spacecr. 9(2):107-15
42. Gad-el-Hak M, Bushnell DM. 1991. Separation control: review. J. Fluids Eng. 113:5-30
43. Galloway T, Gelhausen P, Moore M, Waters M. 1992. Oblique wing supersonic transport concepts. Presented at AIAA Aircr. Des. Syst. Meet., Hilton Head, SC
44. Garanin AF. 2000. Pressure variation on the face of the body of revolution with a spike with variation of its length, geometry and injection of an inert gas from the spike. In Int. Conf. Methods Aerophys. Res., Novosibirsk Tomsk, Russ., July 9-16, Proc., Part I (A00-41738 11-34), pp. 94-97. Novosibirsk: Russ. Acad. Sci.
45. Geoggievskii PY, Lenin VA. 1988. Supersonic flow around objects with external heat evolution sources. Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 14(4): 303-4
46. Gilinsky M, Blankson IM, Sakharov VI, Shvets AI. 2001. Shock waves mitigation at blunt bodies using needles and shells against a supersonic flow. Presented at AIAA/ASME/SAE/AEE Jt. Propuls. Conf., 37th, Salt Lake City, UT
47. Gillan MA. 1993. Computational analysis of drag reduction and buffet alleviation in viscous transonic flow over porous airfoils. In AIAA Appl. Aerodyn. Conf., 11th, Monterey, CA, Aug. 9-11, Tech. Pap. Part 1, pp. 170-78, AIAA-93-3419-CP
48. Golovitchev VI, Hansson J. 1998. Some trends in improving hypersonic vehicles aerodynamics and propulsion. Presented at AIAA Int. Symp. Air-breathing Eng., 14th, Florence, Italy
49. Gord PR. 1983. Development of an analytical model for predicting the first order effects of fuselage-to-wing favorable aerodynamic interference at M = 4.5, Tech. Rep. AFWALTR-83-3049, Air Force Wright Aeronaut. Lab., Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH
50. Graham EW, Ligerstrom PA, Licher RM, Beane BJ. 1957. A theoretical investigation of the drag of generalized aircraft configurations in supersonic flow, NACA Tech. Mem. 1421, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
51. Gupta A, Ruffin SM. 1999. Optimal artificially blunted leading-edge airfoils for enhanced aerothermodynamic performance. J. Spacecr. Rockets 36(4):499-506
52. Gupta A, Ruffin SM, Newfield ME, Yates L. 2000. Aerothermodynamic performance enhancement of sphere-cones using the artificially blunted leading-edge concept. J. Spacecr. Rockets 37(2):235-41
53. Guy Y, McLaughlin TE, Morrow JA. 2001. Blunt body wave reduction by means of a standoff spike. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Exhib., 39th, Reno, NV
54. Heaslet MA, Fuller FB. 1958. Drag minimization for wings and bodies in supersonic flow. Rep. 1385, Ames Aeronaut. Lab., Moffett Field, CA
55. Hinanda M, Yamashita N, Karashima K, Sato K, Honda M. 1986. Effects of spikes and flange-like steps on rocket drag at supersonic speeds. In Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, pp. 669-77. Springfield, VA: Am. Astronaut. Soc.
56. Hsieh S-J, Lee L-C. 1989. Numerical simulation of transonic porous airfoil flows. In International Symposium on Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 1, ed. R Gruber, J Periaux, RP Shaw, pp. 601-8. Boston: Computational Mechanics
57. Hsiung J-L, Chow C-Y. 1993. Drag reduction of transonic projectile by porous surface. AIAA-93-0417
58. Hsiung J-L, Chow C-Y. 1995. Computed drag reduction on a projectile using porous surfaces. J. Spacecr. Rockets 32(3):450-55
59. Jahn RG. 1956. The refraction of shock waves at a gaseous interface. J. Fluid Mech. 1(5):457-89
60. Jameson A. 1990. Automatic design of transonic airfoils to reduce the shock induced pressure drag. In Israel Ann. Conf. Aviation Astronautics, 31st, Tel Aviv, Israel, Feb. 21, 22, Collect. Pap. (A91-4306 18-99), pp. 5-17. Haifa, Israel: Technion-Israel Inst. Tech.
61. Jones EP, Townsend SM, Guy Y, McLaughlin TE. 2000. Reduction of the wave drag of a blunt body by means of a standoff spike. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 38th, Reno, NV
62. Jones RT. 1952. Theoretical determination of the minimum drag of airfoils at supersonic speeds. J. Aeron. Sci. 19:813-22
63. Jones RT. 1959. Aerodynamic design for supersonic speeds. In Advances in Aeronautical Sciences, ed. Th von Kármán, AM Ballantyne, RR Dexter, H Blenk, HL Dryden, M Roy, pp. 34-51. New York: Pergamon
64. Jones RT. 1972. Reduction of wave drag by antisymmetric arrangement of wings and bodies. AIAA J. 10(2):171-76
65. Jones RT. 1976. Theory of wing-body drag at supersonic speeds, NASA Tech. Rep. 1284, Ames Res. Cent., Moffett Field, CA
66. Jones RT. 1991. The flying wing supersonic transport. Aeronaut. J. March:103-6
67. Karlovskii VN, Sakharov VI. 1986. Numerical investigation of supersonic flow past blunt bodies with protruding spikes. Fluid Dyn. 21(3):437-45
68. st Century: Proc. 6th Int. Space Conf. Proc. Basin Soc., pp. 273-84. San Diego, CA: Am. Astronaut. Soc.
69. Kremeyer K, Nazarenko S, Newell A. 2000. The effect of fore-shock hearing in the plasma drag-reduction problem. Presented at AIAA Aerodyn. Meas. Technol. Ground Text., 21st, Denver, CO
70. Kubota H, Watanuki T, Matsumoto S, Fujita M. 1994. Effect of nose configuration of spike attached on a hemisphere in hypersonic flow. Proc. Asian-Pac. Conf. Aerosp. Tech. Sci., 1st, Hangzhou, China, pp. 363-69. Beijing: Int. Acad.
71. Küchemann D. 1960. Aircraft shapes and their aerodynamics for flight at supersonic speeds. In Advances in Aeronautical Sciences, ed. Th von Kármán, AM Ballantyne, RR Dexter, G Bock, HL Dryden, M Roy, pp. 221-52. New York: Pergamon
72. Küchemann D. 1978. The Aerodynamic Design of Aircraft. New York: Pergamon
73. Kulfan RM. 1978. Application of hypersonic favorable aerodynamic interference concepts to supersonic aircraft. Presented at AIAA Aircr. Syst. Technol. Conf., Los Angeles
74. Kulfan RM. 1990. Application of favorable aerodynamic interference to supersonic airplane design, SAE Tech. Pap. 901988, SAE, Warrendale, PA
75. Kulfan RM, Yoshihara H, Lord BJ, Friebel GO. 1978. Application of supersonic favorable aerodynamic interference to fighter type aircraft, Tech. Rep. AFFDL-TR-78-33, Air Force Flight Dyn. Lab., Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH
76. Latypov AF, Fomin VM. 2002. Evaluation of the energy efficiency of heat addition upstream of the body in a supersonic flow. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 43(1):59-62
77. Liang S-M, Fu J-K. 1991. Passive control method for drag reduction for transonic projectiles. In AIAA Appl. Aerodyn. Conf., 9th, Baltimore, MD, Sept. 23-25, Tech. Pap. Vol. 1 (A91-53726 23-02), pp. 100-8. AIAA-91-3213-CP
78. Licher RM. 1956. Reduction of drag due to lift in supersonic flight by distributing lift along a fuselage. J. Aeronaut. Sci. 11:1037-48
79. Licher RM. 1959. Calculation of the thickness and radial force distribution for a ring wing having zero drag at supersonic speeds, Tech. Rep. SM-23579, Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica, CA
80. Love ES. 1952. The effects of a small jet of air exhausting from the nose of a body of revolution in supersonic flow. NACA RM L52119a
81. Luk'yanov GA. 1999. Drag of an object in a supersonic flow with an isobaric region of energy release in front. Tech. Phys. Lett. 25(1):68-74
82. Macheret SO, Martinelli L, Miles RB. 1999. Shock wave propagation and structure in non-uniform gases and plasmas. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Exhib., 37th, Reno, NV
83. Maikapar GI. 1987. Selection of an optimal shape for a supersonic flight vehicle. TsAGI, Uchenye Zapiski (ISSN 0321-3429), 18(1):18-27
84. Maise G. 1970. Wave drag of optimum and other boat tails. J. Aircr. 7:477-78
85. Mason WH, DaForno G. 1979. Opportunities for supersonic performance gains through non-linear aerodynamics. Presented at AIAA 12th Fluid Plasmadyn. Conf., Williamsburg, VA
86. McMillin SN, Wood RM. 1987. Planform effects on the supersonic aerodynamics of multibody configurations. NASA Tech. Pap. 2762, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
87. Meyer B, Nelson HF, Riggins DW. 2001a. Hypersonic drag and heat-transfer reduction using a forward = facing jet. J. Aircr. 38(4): 680-86
88. Meyer R, Palm P, Plönjes E, Rich W, Adamovich IV. 2001b. The effect of a nonequilibrium RF discharge plasma on a conical shock wave in a M = 2.5 flow. Presented at AIAA Plasmadyn. Lasers Conf., 32nd, Weakly Ionized Gases Workshop, 4th, Anaheim, Calif.
89. Miele A, ed. 1965. In Theory of Optimum Aerodynamic Shapes, Vol. 9. New York: Academic
90. Morris O. 1962. Aerodynamic characteristics in pitch of several ring-wing-body configurations at a Mach number of 2.2, NASA Tech. Note D-1272, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
91. Morris OA, Lamb M. 1968. Aerodynamic characteristics in pitch of a modified half-ring wing-body combination and a swept-wingbody combination at Mach 2.16 to 3.7, NASA Tech. Memo. 1551, Lewis Res. Cent., Cleveland, OH
92. Morris OA, Mack RJ. 1968. Aerodynamic characteristics of a parasol-wing-body combination utilizing favorable lift interference at Mach 2.16 to 4.63, NASA Tech. Note D-4855, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
93. Myrabo LN, Raizer YP. 1994. Laser-induced air spike for advanced transatmospheric vehicles. Presented at Plasmadyn. Lasers Conf., 25th, Colorado Springs, CO
94. Mysliwetz F. 1963. Supersonic interference lift. AIAA J. 1:1432-34
95. Nagamatsu HT, Ficarra RV, Dyer R. 1985. Supercritical airfoil drag reduction by Passive shock wave/boundary layer control in the Mach number range .75 to .90. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 23rd, Reno, NV
96. Nagamatsu HT, Orozco RD, Ling DC. 1984. Porosity effect on supercritical airfoil drag reduction by shock wave/boundary layer control. Presented at AIAA Fluid Dyn., Plasmadyn., Lasers Conf., 17th, Snowmass, CO
97. Natl. Res. Council. 2001. Commercial supersonic technology: the way ahead, ISBN 0309-082TI-3. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
98. Nichols MR. 1966. Aerodynamics of airframe-engine integration of supersonic aircraft, NASA Tech. Note D-3390, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
99. Nielsen JN. 1985. Arrays for minimum wave drag of bodies of revolution. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 23rd, Reno, NV
100. Nielsen JN, Pitts WC. 1956. General theory of wave-drag reduction for combinations employing quasi-cylindrical bodies with an application to swept-wing and body combinations. NACA TN 3722, Ames Aeronaut. Lab., Moffett Field, CA
101. Partington R, Baker TJ. 1982. The effect of nose blunting on the wave drag of ogive forebodies. Aeronaut. Q. 33:258-70
102. Pittman JL. 1987. Supersonic airfoil optimization. J. Aircr. 24(12):873-79
103. Pugh PG, Ward LC. 1974. A parametric study of the use of nose blunting to reduce the supersonic wave drag of forebodies. ARC Curr. Pap. 1271, Aeronaut. Res. Counc., London
104. Raghunathan S. 1986. Effect of porosity strength on passive shock-wave/boundary-layer interation. AIAA J. 25(5):757-58
105. Raghunathan S, Gray JL, Cooper RK. 1987. Effect of inclination of holes on passive shock wave boundary layer control. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 25th, Reno, NV
106. Raghunathan S, Watterson JK. 1997. Passive boundary layer bleed for supersonic intakes. In International Symp. Air Breathing Engines, 13th, Chattanooga, TN, Sept. 7-12, Proc. 2:1027-34. Reston, VA: AIAA
107. Raj P, Miranda LR. 1981. A cost-effective method for shock-free supercritical wing design. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 19th, St. Louis, MO
108. Raymer DP. 1985. Supercruise for a STOL dogfighter. Aerosp. Am. 23:72-75
109. Redeker G, Wichman G, Oelker H-C. 1984. Aerodynamic investigations of an adaptive airfoil for a transonic transport aircraft. In Int. Counc. Aeronaut. Sci., Congr. 14th, Toulouse, Fr., Sept. 9-14, Proc. 2 (A84-44926 22-01): 868-80. New York: AIAA
110. Reding JP, Guenther RA, Richter BJ. 1977. Unsteady aerodynamic considerations in the design of a drag-reduction spike. J. Spacecr. Rockets 14:54-60
111. Reding JP, Jecmen DM. 1983. Effects of external burning on spike-induced separated flow. J. Spacecr. Rockets 20:452-53
112. Reding JP, Jecmen DM. 1994. An advanced aerospike to minimize nose drag. Lockheed Horiz. 15:46-54
113. Reneaux J, Coustols E. 1999. Wave drag reduction technologies. Presented at ONERA DLR Aerosp. Symp., Paris
114. Riggins DW, Nelson HF. 1999. Hypersonic flow control using upstream focused energy deposition. AIAA J. 38(4):723-25
115. Riggins D, Nelson HF, Johnson E. 1999. Blunt-body wave drag reduction using focused energy deposition. AIAA J. 37(4):460-67
116. Robins AW, Carlson HW, Mack RJ. 1980. Supersonic wings with significamt leading edge thrust at cruise, NASA Tech. Pap. 1632, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
117. Romeo DJ, Sterrett JR. 1963. Exploratory investigation of the effect of a forward-facing jet on the bow shock of a blunt body in a Mach y freet stream. NASA TN D-1605
118. Rosemann H, Birkemeyer J, Knauer A. 2000. Shock control by adaptive elements for transportation aircraft wings. In Active Control Technology for Enhanced Performance Operational Capabilities of Military Aircraft, Land Vehicles, and Sea Vehicles, pp. 16.1-16.6. Germany: Inst. Ström.
119. Ross JM, Reaser JS, Bourchard EE. 1985. Optimization of a supersonic wing by combining linear and Euler methods, SAE Tech. Pap. 851791. Warrendale, PA: SAE
120. Rossow VJ. 1956. A theoretical study of the lifting efficiency at supersonic speeds of wings utilizing indirect lift induced by vertical surfaces. NACA Res. Memo. A55L08, Ames Aeronaut. Lab., Moffett Field, CA
121. Ruffin SM, Gupta A, Marshall D. 2000. Supersonic channel airfoils for reduced drag. AIAA J. 38(3):480-86
122. Schmitt V, Destarac D. 1998. Recent progress in drag prediction and reduction for civil transport aircraft at ONERA. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Exhib., 36th, Reno, NV
123. Sears WR, Tan HS. 1951. The aerodynamics of supersonic biplanes. Q. Appl. Math. 9:67-76
124. Sigalla A, Hallstaff TH. 1967. Aerodynamics of powerplant installation on supersonic aircraft. J. Aircr. 4(4):273-77
125. Sommerer A, Lutz T, Wagner S. 2000. Design of adaptive transonic airfoils by means of numerical optimisation. Presented at Proc. Eur. Congr. Comput. Methods Appl. Sci. Eng., Barcelona, Spain
126. Squire LC. 1965. The use of excess engine exit are over intake area to reduce zero lift drag at high supersonic speeds. Aeronaut. Q. Aug:260-74
127. Stanewsky E, Krogmann P. 1985. Transonic drag rise and drag reduction by active/passive boundary layer control. In Aircraft drag Prediction and Reduction, AGARD Rep. 723, pp. 11.1-11.41. Loughton, Essex: Specialised
128. Stanewsky E, Rosemann H. 2000. Aspects of shock control and adaptive wing technology. See Thiede 2000, pp. 221-28
129. Suikat R, Farokhi S. 1988. Method to optimize nacelle shape in a supersonic cruise aircraft. J. Aircr. 25:717-23
130. Sun J, Hansen SG. 1982. Transonic nose wave drag of axisymmetric bodies. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet., 20th, Orlando, FL
131. Thiede P, ed. 2000. Aerodynamic Drag Reduction Technologies. New York: Springer
132. Thiede P, Krogmann P. 1986. Improvement of transonic airfoil performance through passive shock/boundary-layer interaction control. In Turbulent Shear-Layer/Shock-wave Interactions (A88-51151 22-02), ed. J Délery, pp. 113-23. New York: Springer-Verlag
133. Visich M Jr, Martellucci A. 1958. Theoretical and experimental analysis of a cowling as a means of drag reduction for an axisymmetric center body. Tech. Rep. AFOSR TN-58-760, Air Force Off. Sci. Res., Arlington, VA
134. Whitcomb RT. 1974. Review of NASA supercritical airfoils. Presented at Congr. Int. Counc. Aeronaut. Sci., 9th, Haifa, Israel
135. Whitcomb RT, Sevier JR Jr. 1960. A supersonic area rule and an application to the design of a wing-body combination with high lift-drag ratios, NASA Tech. Rep. R-72, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
136. Wood RM, Miller DS, Brentner KS. 1983. Theoretical and experimental investigation of supersonic aerodynamic characteristics of a twin-fuselage concept, NASA Tech. Pap. 2184, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
137. Wood RM, Rose OJ, McMillin SN. 1985. Multi-body aircraft: old concept-new application. In Langley Symposium on Aerodynamics, NASA CP-2398, ed. SH Stack, 2:235-49, Hampton, VA: Langley Res. Cent.
138. Wood RM, Rose OJ, McMillin SN. 1986. Effect of body cross-sectional shape on the supersonic aerodynamics of multibody configurations, NASA Tech. Pap. 2587, Langley Res. Cent., Hampton, VA
139. Yamauchi M, Fujii K, Tamura Y, Higashino F. 1993. Numerical investigation of supersonic flows around a spiked blunt-body. Presented at AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Exhib., 31st, Reno, NV
140. Yuriev AS, Pirogov SY, Savischenko NP, Leonov SB, Ryizhov EV. 2002. Numerical and experimental investigation of pulse-repetitive energy release upstream body under supersonic flow. Presented at AIAA Flow Control Conf., 1st, St. Louis, MO
141. Zaidi SH, Shneider MN, Mansfield DK, Ionikh YZ, Miles RB. 2002. Influence of upstream pulsed energy deposition on a shock wave structure in supersonic flow. Presented at AIAA Aerodyn. Meas. Tech. Ground Test. Conf., 22nd, St. Louis, MO