Barnell Aerospace Hypersonic Project SPRING 2017 Barnell Aerospace

Barnell Aerospace Hypersonic Project SPRING 2017 –

Barnell Aerospace Hypersonic Project An Opportunity For Near-Term Hypersonic Flight A STORY BOARD Mr. James Beaver– DRAFT FOR REVIEW and EDITS WARNING - This document contains technical data whose export is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U. S. C. , Sec 2751, et seq. ) or the Export Administration Act of 1979 (Title 50, U. S. C. , App. 2401 et seq. ), as amended. Violations of these export laws are subject to severe criminal penalties. Disseminate in accordance with provisions of Do. D Directive 5230. 25. Joseph Barnell David Eichhorn

NOTICE TO ACCOMPANY THE DISSEMINATION OF EXPORT CONTROLLED TECHNICAL DATA Export of the attached information (which includes, in some circumstances, release to foreign nationals within the United States) without first obtaining approval or license from the Department of State for items controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), or the Department of Commerce for items controlled by the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), may constitute a violation of law. Under 22 U. S. C. 2778, the penalty for unlawful export of items or information controlled under the ITAR is up to ten years imprisonment, or a fine of $1, 000, or both. Under 50 U. S. C. , appendix 2410, the penalty for unlawful export of items or information controlled under the EAR is a fine of up to $1, 000, or five times the value of the exports, whichever is greater; or for an individual, imprisonment of up to 10 years, or fine of up to $250, 000, or both. In accordance with your certification that establishes you as a “qualified U. S. contractor, ” unauthorized dissemination of this information is prohibited and may result in your disqualification as a qualified U. S. contractor, and may be considered in determining your eligibility for future contracts with the Department of Defense. The U. S. Government assumes no liability for direct patent infringement, or contributory patent infringement, or misuse of technical data. The U. S. Government does not warrant the adequacy, accuracy, currency, or completeness of the technical data. The U. S. Government assumes no liability for loss, damage, or injury resulting from manufacture or use for any purpose of any product, article, system, or material involving reliance upon any or all technical data furnished in response to the request for technical data. If the technical data furnished by the Government will be used for commercial manufacturing or other profit potential, a license for such use may be necessary. Any payments in support of the request for data do not include or involve any license rights. A copy of this notice shall be provided with any partial or complete reproduction of these data that are provided to qualified U. S. contractors. 2

Agenda The Problem – near-real-time ISR on the tactical edge Some thoughts I ultimately want a TAV (Trans Atmospheric Vehicle). Our Solution – Theseus How doe we get there and get paid along the way? We need to do a rapid series of flights with progressive aircraft, each with the potential an off ramp to potential revenue. Our Strategy – early IOC and lower risk Today we are working on a plane and a missle .

Bottom Line Up Front – BMC can fly a hypersonic craft at Mach 6 in 12 months We offer – Near Term Flight of a Mach 6 Vehicle ◦ Realistic, affordable and timely ◦ Paradigm shift, “leap-frogging” peer-competitor and peer-adversary nations ◦ First Flight in 12 months - Growth to larger plane / TAV in 36 months. What about Follow –on Craft Peer Competition (China, Russia, India) leading U. S. – We are behind the power curve. ◦ Foreign expenditures are increasing, have demonstrated results; ◦ Financial Pressure will continue; US losing the technological edge- A 2/AD, Space, etc. ◦ Worldwide threats are expanding in scope and complexity AF and USN plans are extremely expensive and many, many years away USG Partnership is critical to our mutual success ◦ Near-team capability, where past programs did not deliver on time, on budget, and on capability ◦ Manageable risk, that Maximizes investment ◦ A hedge makes solid schedule and financial sense Timely and cost effective solution

Rapid development of airborne capability – it has been done before Lockheed SR-71 Designed in 1959, only 14 years after the first operational jet. Paper to First flight in 32 months. Abandoned in 1998 – Retreated to 1956 U-2

Re-Establish and Extend a Lost Capability Up to Mach 3. 3 at 85 kft ◦ Essentially invulnerable ◦ Stealth unnecessary Long-retired Still complained-about! Multiple uses ◦ Recon ◦ Intercept ◦ Attack

ASALM-PTV Worked Great in Flight Test Design cruise Mach 4 at 80 kft Well-established technologies ◦ Integral rocket booster ◦ Liquid fuel ramjet ◦ Supersonic inlet Simple and inexpensive Runaway flight test (low alt. ) ◦ 2. 5 -M-”near 6” in several seconds ◦ In ramjet after boost!

US High Speed Flight Experience Our first flight goal DISTRIBUTION C. Distribution authorized to U. S. Government Agencies and their Contractors. Export Controlled, Critical Technology. 10 May 2016. Other request for this document shall be referred to AFRL/RQHV, WPAFB, OH 45433.

Small source with Right value, Big Performance SIMPLICITY - Combinations of shape, engine and materials, reduces risk, maximizes opportunity; Innovative, Disruptive and contactable VERSATILITY - Many missions; Rapid and modular development - multiple usable outputs COST EFFECTIVE - Deliver first craft within 12 months HIGH PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS - Leveraging proven tech with an experienced team, known contracting methods

COST EFFECTIVE - realistic, affordable and timely Using proven technologies in an innovative way ◦ No need for long and expensive technology investment Time is money! ◦ Flight in 2019 and not 2030 Sustainment will be a known, as these are known technologies ◦ Not the $1 Trillion F-35 through life cost Our concern and challenge ◦ Challenge to the Large Industry Players who need and have planned for the R&D funding for the next 10 years…then add on the procurement costs

Some things which make us different Small, flexible, agile organization able to adopt and take advantage of modern development, manufacturing (low volume, high quality) and operational approaches for complex systems. No baggage. - Have engineering talent, tools, and systems inplace. Focus on the documented unmet needs. We have Incentive. Not cannibalizing an existing product line. - Emerging market demands are focused on price and timeliness; two metrics that have been historically ignored by existing manufacturer oriented, capital intensive, R&D dependent stock values. Recognizing the value of available knowledge and applying it optimally to emerging needs. – Using what “we have forgotten” in combination with new practices. - e. g. parallel ramjet/rocket – not combined cycle or scramjet Rapid parametric engineering; mathematical solutions supporting CAD Models Focus on standardization vs. customization; value vs. performance; sustainability vs. single missions. Right Team, Right Time, Right Now

Rational, Means and Mechanisms for USG Investment "Other Transactional Agreement – to deliver initial flight Authorized by 10 U. S. C. 2371 b for prototype projects. This type of OTA is treated by Do. D as an acquisition instrument, commonly referred to as an "other transaction" for a prototype project or a Section 2371 b "other transactions. Exceptional circumstances justify We are a “Nontraditional Defense Contractor” As defined in section 2302(9) of title 10, United States Code. OTAs allows for the implementation faster and streamlined methods and do not carry all the requirements of traditional Federal Acquisition Regulation-based procurement contracts.

Exit Strategies Highly Viable M&A Prospects Multiple buyers possible → competitive bidding Valuable user base with recurring revenue stream Clear fit into product portfolios Solid IP foundation Large companies competing in Aerospace Diversified holding companies Space Launch Companies IPO Considerations Depends on the user base and consideration of M&A High stand alone potential Potential valuation

From the October 9 th, 1903 edition of the New York Times: “[A] flying machine which will really fly might be evolved by the combined and continuous efforts of mathematicians and mechanicians in from one million to ten million years. ” From Orville Wright’s diary October 9 th, 1903: “We started assembly today. ”

A PLAN TO GET TO FLIGHT IN TWELVE MONTHS Rapid Managed Risk Program Hedge against others Long Drawn-out program can easily lose support Ground Rules for Approach Tier One Plan ◦ Extensive simulation to rapidly converge the Baseline DS concept design and performance ◦ Baseline DS design used to create ground test hardware for testing of critical components ◦ Conduct the wind tunnel tests not later than 6 months into the program ◦ While test hardware is in design, conduct Baseline flight demo performance predictions Opportunity to change the dynamic in hypersonic flight testing Approaching the limit of ground testing The extensive hypersonic vehicle modeling in the U. S. has minimal verification data – We are going to change that!

Ground rules for Approach 1 year plan from startup to first flight demo test Accept parallelism in planning and a higher degree of uncertainty than is typical Rely primarily on extensive CFD/Multiphysics/Do. E simulation (simulation) and limit ground testing to what can be accomplished in the first half of the 1 year window ◦ ◦ to analyze critical elements and to validate/tune up simulations to create the basis for design of critical elements for wind tunnel test of key components Accept 80 -90 % solutions for the designs of the hardware in these tests Save any component re-testing and integrated systems testing for after the flight demo testing is completed and basic concept is proven To accelerate startup ◦ ◦ Create an Opsec plan with customer approval before beginning. Use cloud network to start rapidly; no outflow/only inflow Where possible isolated air gaped and sneaker netted. Use Encrypted drives for data storage. Rely on experienced people to create the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), Statement of Work (SOW), and Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) within the first 2 -4 weeks. These are needed to keep the team working to the intense, concurrent schedule needed to meet the flight dates. Chose suppliers on day one with no competitions to minimize supplier contract time delays.

Extensive simulation to rapidly converge the Baseline DS concept design and performance ◦ Create parametrics around key design features which will drive the design and to run simulations to rapidly create data that enables informed design choices to be made - conduct a multidisciplinary optimization (MDO) where possible ◦ Conduct computer modeling through the length of the program to continuously update the DS design until the commitment to build drop dead milestone is reached. ◦ In parallel with this DS concept definition, develop environments for the subsystems that must survive during the demo flights ◦ create contracts with the suppliers immediately since their timelines can become critical path drivers if they are started too late. ◦ Decide immediately on which US test facility will be used for the DS testing and have experienced flight test engineers begin to work with the range safety officer (RSO) to ensure that he will approve the final testing plan. Also immediately begin work with the launch aircraft supplier to ensure parallel development of the test plan consistent with their availability and capability.

Baseline DS design used to create ground test hardware for testing of critical components. ◦ History would indicate that these should include the following: ◦ ◦ forebody/inlet/etc vehicle aerodynamics/stability launch aircraft drop testing Ground Testing of Engine (upto four test plans) ◦ Engine ground testing should begin immediately; ◦ Round one Engineering Test Order (ETO) is written – Fuel Injection and Engine Start Conditions ◦ Round two ETO, in process. ◦ Commit to hardware design and fab immediately after Baseline DS is defined

While test hardware is in design, conduct Baseline flight demo performance predictions ◦ Compare with “relevant capabilities” and define design mods that can be conducted with low schedule risk for integration with the demo vehicle Final design ◦ CFD must continue to run to tune up with data from the wind tunnel tests and to fold into the whole vehicle and stack design for the DS. In parallel with the Final design effort conduct operations analysis for the Operational Concept and use the results to develop a path for transition of the Demo vehicle to OS design ◦ Create the Transition plan and Operational vehicle design Use last 6 mos of the program to design/build the demo vehicle, obtain fight safety approval and conduct the demo test plan.

Test Hardware Built, Need Facility Open air testing 3 to 6 pps air subscale 200 -600/1200 F total temperature (facility dependent) Fail-safe/no-shrapnel 200 psig design Two fuel injection locations Easily modified injection patterns Gas torch ignition & flight-like igniters Can investigate zirconia ceramic insulation

Basic Open-Air Facility Rough-Out

Air Regulators and Pebble Bed Heater

Altitude Capability Designed

Planned Testing Engineering Test Orders – Written ◦ Round 1 ◦ Round 2 ◦ Round 3 ◦ Round 4 Set injection and fuel details, open-air nozzle, 3 -4 pps air, 200 -600 F Open-air nozzle, 3 -6 pps air, 300 -1200 F, low-alt blowout, perf. doc Altitude Diffuser, ~0. 5 -3 pps air, 1000 -1200 F, high-alt blowout, perf. doc Altitude Diffuser, ~0. 5 -3 pps air, 1000 -1200 F, flight-type igniters, perf. doc Operations Manual for Test Hardware – Written

Let’s Get Money Anticipated Design Expectations

Overview Vehicle Must have sufficient Margin ◦ ◦ Aerodynamic control Mass Properties Structural safety margins Power Propulsion / propellant External and internal thermal management Very involved design trade studies will likely waste too Not all “red” risks must get to green/yellow in Phase I Be open to government and investors about known design problems

Configuration and Aeromechanics Outer Mold Line (OML) fixed Main internal components laid out (load bearing)with Mass properties (incl. MOIs) based on CAD drawings Minimum fidelity of aerodynamic databased on Euler CFD calibrated with Navier Stokes ◦ Database includes full motion of all control surfaces ◦ Vehicle trimmable for nominal flights using only 50% of control surfaces For unstable flight modes, times to double within range of actuation devices All nominal and off-nominal Design Reference Missions (DRMs) modeled in 3 DOF trajectory simulations to bound the vehicles’ performance capability Load cases developed based on entire profile of each DRM including necessary off- nominal load cases Aeroheating loads over entire vehicle estimated using boundary layer approximations for all nominal and off-nominal DRMs and checked with Navier Stokes Hinge moment analysis for all nominal and off-nominal DRMs determined Aeroacoustic and propulsion acoustic loads estimated

Control system architecture defined including software and hardware At least one vendor determined for (flight computer, PNT, etc. ) Preliminary control law defined Control approach (PID, LQR, etc. ) Gains set based on current vehicle Modeling 6 DOF simulation of all nominal DRM using preliminary control laws Software development plan including verification and validation finalized

Structural and Thermal managmemt All materials identified including at least one vendor Structural layout completed Manufacturing approach determined for all structural components including assembly of all structural components Full vehicle Finite Element Model (FEM) with thermal and mechanical response refined in necessary areas of the vehicle Structural & Material experimental payloads integration method determined Driving structural and internal loads defined Aeroelastic modes analyzed over nominal and off-nominal DRMs to determine flutter boundaries based on engineering methods and checked with FEM

Propulsion Progress of overall engine development Requirements, performance, schedule, packaging, interface with vehicle, P&IDs Trade studies and analyses (if necessary) are complete Preliminary component level designs established with analyses (thermal, structural, etc. ) with necessary margin Test, qualification, and verification plans established Tracablity of test plan to engine requirements demonstration System analysis completed showing documenting processes Preliminary long lead items for manufacturing addressed

Power, Fluid, Thermal, and Actuation Power and thermal management budget with appropriate margins defined Ranges of control effectors determined with actuator loads and slew rate determined over flight profile of DRMs Landing recovery system selected and packaged All propellant feed lines packaged Propellant slosh throughout flight analyzed Vendor identified for each sub system with corresponding price quote Heat limits and loads determined for each component