AN HISTORICAL SKETCH
Smoke Visual zation in Wind Tunnels
By THOMAS J. MUELLER
Notre Dame University
A few individuals played the key role in developing and refin-
ing this. irnportant tool of the aerodynamicist anddesigner
The visualization of flow patterns has played a
singularly important role in advancing our under-
standing of the mechanics of fluids. Visualization
hasTed to the discovery of flow phenomena, has
helped in the development of mathematical models
for cornplex flow problems and in the verification
of principles, and has been an important tool in the
development of complicated engineering systems.
Visual observation of flow phenomena was the first
and, for a long time, the only experimental tech-
nique available. Dust or smoke particles in air and
dirt or other debris in water provide the necessary
contamination for flow visualization. Interest in
flight led experimenters to visualize air flows in or-
der to understand the mechanics of objects moving
through the air.
Flow visualization in wind tunnels began with the
work of Ludwig Mach of Vienna in 1893. Ma.ch's
indraft wind tunnel had a cross-section of 180 x
250 mm and was driven by a centrifugal fan that
could produce a speed of 10 m/sec. Wire mesh over
the inlet straightened the flow. One side of the test
section was glass and the others were black on the
inside. The flow was observed a.nd photographed
using silk threads, cigarette smoke, and glowing
iron particles. Mach obtained only smoke-flow
photos for the flow past a plate perpendicular to the
THOMAS J. MUELLER (AF), a profes-
sorof aerospace and mechanical engi-
neering, joined the faculty at the Univ.
of Notre Dame in 1965. SinCe then he
has been engaged in teaching and re-
search in the gas dynamics of sepa-
rated flows, propulsion aerodynamics,
computational fluid mechanics, bid-
fluid mechanics, and flow visualiza-
tion. Before coming to Notre Dame he
was on the faculty of the Univ. of Illi-
nois at Champaign-Urbana, where he
received a Ph.D. in 1961, and he was a
senior research scientist at the United
Aircraft Research Laboratories from
1963 to 1965. In 1973-74 he was a visiting professor at the Von Kar-
man Institute for Fluid Dynamics in Belgium. He was an AGARD
(NATO) lecturer in fluid mechanics in 1974 and 1976. Mueller reo
ceived the 1980 AIAAASEE Educational Achievement Award and
was an AIAA Distinguished Lecturer for 1980-81.
50
flow. The smoke was faint and difficult to make
out, but studying it was a beginning.
In France, about 1899, E.J. Marey, who was fa-
mous for his photographic studies of animal
locomotion, turned his attention to photographing
air in motion. Marey, cognizant of the work of
Mach, used a vertical wind tunnel with a 200 x 300-
mm crosS section. The front and sides of the test
section were glass and the. back was covered with
black velvet. Air was drawn into the tunnel by a
small suction fan after passing through fine silk
gauze at the inlet. F-l shows a sketch of this wind
tunnel. Smoke from burning wood shavings entered
the wind tunnel upstream of the gauze straighteners
through a row of fine tubes. Marey made excellent
smoke-flow photos using a magnesium flash.
The interest in smoke visualization seems to have
waned somewhat in the first quarter of the century.
Smoke experiments began in 1911 at the National
Physical Laboratory in England. Around 1921 at
the U.S. Naval Gun FactoryA.F. Zahm may have
used smoke to analyze the air flow over naval
vessels. Ludwig Prandtl and his a.ssociates used
smoke in their Gottingen wind tunnelin 1923 to
study flow over airfoils and bluff bodies.
Interest in this technique developed rnore rapidly
after 1925. Around 1930, smoke visualization was
used in England by L.F.G.Simrncms, N.S. Dewey,
and T. Tanner to study the flow about circular disks
and symmetrical airfoilS. The srnoke was produced
by titanium tetrachloride. In 1933, K.W. Clark used
stannic chloride smoke in conjunction with other
techniques to study the flow over several wings.
In 1932, for lectures at Cambridge Oniv., W.S.
Farren used a modified version of Simmons' smoke
tunnel at the National Physical Laboratory. The
NACA built its fitst smoke tunnel about 1933 and a
second one in 1938. These tunnels seem to have
been used mostly for demonstrations. The tunnel
built by R.W. Griswold, II, at Old Lyme, Conn.,
about 1940, used smoldering rotten wood to gener-
ate smoke.
Although the interest in the period frOID 1925 to
\111\\\11\1\\1\\U\1\\111\\111\11\\\1I\il\\1\\111\
TRP00668
the early 1940s was in using smoke visualization to
help solve practical aerodynamic problems, the
smoke photographs were not as good as Marey's.
Many of the visual results were useful, but few if
any significant quantitative results were obtained.
All these tunnels were two-dimensional and various
types of "smoke" were used, the most popular be-
ing obtained by burning rotten wood or usingtita-
nium tetracholoride.
The. best of these. early. two-dimensional tunnels
was developed by A.M. Lippisch in Germany. He
obtained a large number. of good smoke photos of
the flow around plates, cylinders, and airfoils, in-
cluding the Lippischrotor wing. He also began de- operational in 1937, was developed primarily for
veloping an intermittent smoke-delivery system. class-room demonstrations. It had a 38:1 con-
Lippisch's evaluation of the potential of the smoke traction section and produced speeds of up to 3
tunnel is clear when he writes: "The value of the m/sec. Brown made photos using titanium tetra-
smoke tunnel consists chiefly in demonstrating the chloride for smoke. In 1940 he began operating a
effects of a given body on the flow and to show the three-dimensional indraft smoke tunnel. This tun-
true course of flow in the case of special devices. nel had a single screen followed bya 9: 1 contraction
Without carrying out tedious force measurements in area. Its 610 X 61O-mm test section was about
we are, therefore, in a position to develop aerody- 914 mm long, and speeds of up to 12.2 m/sec could
namically good designs or to observe a special flow be attained using a 1 hp d.c. motor. Smoke was pro-
phenomenon which enable us, for instance, to de- duced by coking wheat straw and was introduced
termine the true causes of stalling effects." upstream of the anti-turbulence screen through a
There was, evidently, no serious consideration row of tubes (a rake). Brown made another new
given then to obtaining quantitative data from such three-dimensional smoke tunnel but made little pro-
experiments. gress with it during World War II. (In 1943, the first
About this same time, F.N.M. Brown at the really successful oil-smoke generator was developed
Univ. of Notre Dame began his research in flow by Preston and Sweeting in England.)
visualization. His first smoke tunnel, which became In 1947 work began at the Univ. of Notre Dame

January 1983 51
 on a research three-dimensional smoke tunnel. As a
result of the lessons learned earlier, this smoke
tunnel had five bronze screens at the inlet of the
AIRIN 12:1 Smith-and-Wang contraction section and the
same size test section. With it useful speeds of 10.7
m/sec could be attained using a squirrel-cage fan
driven by a 5-hp motor. Coked wheat straw pro-
duced the smoke. A total of 12,000 watts of steady
lighting was used to photograph the flow.
BLACK VELVET This three-dimensional smoke tunnel evolved
slowly into the one used today. F-2 shows the 1958
version of this tunnel, and F-3, the latest version of
Brown's smoke tunnel. In conjunction with his
smoke-tunnel development, Brown developed a
movable smoke rake and the first easy-to-use
AIRTO keros~ne smoke generator that could produce large
FAN
l1~r;'IoH::> .
"q!Je~tloH:s of smoke. he was also the fIrst to take 3-D
F1 The low-speed smoke tunnel of E.J. Marey in 1899. and stereo photographs of smoke flows.

F2 Brown's threedi
mensional smoke tun SMOKE PIPE
nel in 1958.
- LAYERS OF SCREENING
PREVENT TURBULENCE

SMOKE GENERATOR

F3 Latest version of Brown's

threedimensional sub-sonic
15H P A.C. MOTOR smoke tunnel.
WITH VARIABLE SPEED
DRIVE

2169

CONCRETE FLOOR VENTILATED SHELTER

52 Astronautics & Aeronautics

 In fact, most of the progress and refinement of INLET SECTION
TEST SECTION
smoke-visualization techniques are credited to
Brown. The photos at the beginning of this article
show examples of his work.
After World War II, aeronautical developments
rapidly spread interest in two-dimensional smoke
tunnels,associated equipment and techniques, and

~
JDARKROOM
smoke-flow experiments. The most notable smoke
. ~..-.--J
MODEL DRIVE

tunnel outside of Brown's laboratory was Lip- ' - LIGHTING SYSTEM OF

pisch's. In the U.S., he had continued the work
with two-dimensional smoke tunnels that he had be-
gun in Germany in the late 1930s. Hispost-WW II
smoke tunnel (F-4), with minor refinements, was
the same as the one he used in Germany. But he
switched from burning rotten wood to the oil-
smoke generator developed by Preston and
Sweeting.
A unique feature of Lippisch's work was the de-
velopment of periodic smoke injection to produce
"time lines" in the test section. The velocity distri-
bution around the model was obtained by taking
high-speed movies of these "time lines." Lippisch
also built a three-dimensional smoke tunnel.
Smoke photos taken by Lippisch and published
in 1958 are excellent. F-4 includes an example of the
intermittent smoke-injection technique he devel-
oped. It shows three exposures of the smoke front
as it passed over an airfoil section in the two-dimen-
sional smoke tunnel. (H.V. Borst recently com-
pleted a book on the work of Lippisch.)
Only Lippisch and Brown seemed to realize that
importa'iIt quantitative data could be obtained from
smoke-tunnel experiments. They had another thing
in common. Although each kept a careful record of
his smoke-tunnel research, very little of their work
was published in the open literature. Thanks to the
Arthur A. Collins Corp. of Dallas, Tex., all of
Lippisch's unpublished data reports have lJe~npre
serv~d .. The best. record of Br?wn's.sIll?ke-tunnel
researchwilLbe found in the Master theses of his
stude.Tltsand afeW government contraetreports.
AIthough< ~ro\Vn and~ippisch both<estapIished
subsonic Smoke-tunnel. techniquesistill/ipllse,
Br?\Vn'sequipIllent offered imPortanta~vantages
over Lippisch's...Brown's .three-diIllensional/tun-
nels, ',Vith Illuchlarger contractionrati?s (24:1c?m-
pared to 12:1) and more anti-turbulense.< screens,
have less turbulence at the higher velocities. Infact,
by making smaller test sections while increasing the
-
contraction to 48:1 and 96:1, Brown was able to
achieve low turbulence at speeds..--- up to about 60
]!l&c. Furthermore, by introllicing the smok~
upstream of the screens instead of inside the tunnel,
tie kept the mjection rake from adding to the dis-
turbance in the test section. It is not surprising that
THE TEST SECTION
F4 A.M. Lippisch did pioneering work with this two-dimensional
low-speed smoke tunnel, such as taking this three-exposure
subsonic smoke photo.
Brown's wind tunnels, smoke generators, and
photo techniques have been extensively copied.
In the ea.rlLJ,.250s, David Hazen at Princeton
Univ. became interested in smoke visualization. He
contracted with Lippisch to construct a two-dimen-
sional smoke tunnel, 51x 914 mm, similar to the
one he had built in Darmstadt, Germany. While
waiting for its delivery, Haien built a 51 x 356-mm
pilot smoke tuunel from rough sketches of Lip-
pisch'si DarIllstadttunneLThei two-dimensional
smoke tunnel built at Princeton c'on~isted?f i p
eiltrance.bell.with. a fan,<a.diffuser'i.andi a.]ettIing
chamber with eightlayersofs~reen.an~ the sIlioke-
iIJjector~followed by a contraction cone with
the smoke-injector. ~<thei test <sectlo ll ,< the.
downstream diff~ser and, finally a. d?\Vl1stream
fan. After leaving the. dowllstream fan,the air \Vas
fedinto.a plenuIllchaIllber andexhaust~dinahigh
speed jet to theoutside.Th~ test section. measured
610 mIll long, 356mmhigh, and51mm wide.
Operated on two universal motors of approx-
imately 113 hp,each driving two-bladed propellers,
this tunnel gave a maximum test section velocity of
15.25 m/sec with the rear plenum chamber
removed. For photography, all testing was done at
speeds from 0.6 to 3 m/sec. At higher speeds the
smoke lines diffused rapidly due to increased me-

January 1983 53
 '\ SMOKE STREAM INJECTOR
\ YAWING MECHANISM
\\
F5 Threedimensional lowspeed smoke tunnel at Princeton
Univ. was later scaled up to almost twice the size.
questions that the force and pressure distribution
investigations had been unable to."
\" DOWNSTREAM
\ DIFFUSER
Useful results were obtained in this tunnel and in
the larger 51 x 914-mm tunnel built by Lippisch for
\ \ Princeton. The two major improvements in the
latter tunnel over the pilot one were its size and
speed range. It also had a large contraction ratio of
19.5:1. Test velocities usually ranged between 9 and
12 m/sec, and, with a great deal of adjustment to
the pitch and yaw of the injector tubes, smokelines
could be maintained to a speed of 20 m/sec. Com-
bined with the use of 406-to-61O-mm-chord models,

F6 e su ersonic
smoke tunnel eveloped
by V.P. Goddard at
Notre Dame Univ. With
it he made photos like
ALL DIMENSIONS IN MM.

1'51650 1810 ---r 405 T 350

these (Mach 1.38): A

smoke lines and B si-
multaneous smoke line
] DIFFUSER I VA~VE
and Schlieren photo of
flow over a wedge.
\
1346

~ TEST SECTION
M o =1.38

t
1 290
SUPPORT

CONCRETE FLOOR

. ~... . . ~. ' .... "~ .. - ' .. ',.,.,'.', "";' . '" ....... : ,'. ' ....

chanical vibration. According to Hazen and this permitted test Reynolds numbers of up to
Lehnert: "This tunnel is notable for the fact that, 830,000.
although it contains a large number of incorrect de- These two-dimensional smoke tunnel studies led
sign features, it proved the value of such flow to the design and construction of a 305 x 406-mm
visualization techniques and answered many of the three-dimensional smoke tunnel at Princeton.
(Continueclon page 62)
54 Astronautics & Aeronautics
 Smoke Visualization
(Continued from page 54)
CAREER OPPORTUNITIES. Shown in F-5, it used a %-hp d.c. motor to deliver
rtbw speeds from 0 to 9 m/sec, the Preston-and-
Sweeting smoke generator, and a number of differ-
BeechAireraft Is Hiring ent types of smoke delivery. Smoke was supplied to

Ai.f.
E
the test section in single or multiple heavy streams,
similar to the method used by Brown, by injecting
from tubes in the honeycomb or in much finer
streams from the injector rake in the first con-
traction section. Smoke was bled directlY"Through

!!II ~1", ~'leiTI\'

i.irBrs
funded engineering
projects in the R&D and Product Engineering areas.
If you are looking for challenge and employment stabil-
holes in the model surface for some experiments. A
large number of aerodynamic problems were
studied; most of the results are contained in reports
and student theses.
ity, Beech Aircraft can offer you both; we now have By scaling up this small three-dimensional tunnel,
openings in the following disciplines:
Hazen and his associates at Princeton built. what
Airframe Designers may be the largest smoke tunnel in existence. Still
BSAE plus experience or formal education in com- operatIOnal, It has a test-sectIOn cross section of 914
posite structure design.
-1219 mm and develops flow speeds of up to:30
Structural Analyst m/sec.
BSAE or BSME plus minimum of 3 years aircraft
experience in structural analysis and design '--Expanding the technique of Brown, V.P.
support. Goddard at the Univ. of Notre Dame built the
Structural Dynamics
BSME or BSAE plus minimum of 3 years experience
in loadS analysis.
Propulsion Systems
World's first and only supersonic smoke tuhnel in
--
1959. F-6 shows this indraft tunnel. It has seven
. . . . . ----
screens and an inlet contraction of about 96'1 to the
nozzle throat. A modified Schlieren system per-
BSAE or BSME plus 7 - 10 years design experience
on general aviation, piston and turboprop engine mitted simultaneous photographing of smoke and
installation. shock-wave patterns. Using the same smoke-gener-
Cockpit Systems ation and injection techniques as in "the subsonic
BSAE, BSME or BSEE plus 4 years experience in tu oke photos were taken at seeds
instrument panel layout and design.
404 m/sec Mach 1.38). F-6 includes examples of
Furnishings and Styling sm e mes at supersonic speeds: a direct photo of
BSME plus minimum of 3 years experience in layout the smoke lines in the tunnel with no model present
and design of all interior appointments. Mock-up
experience is also a requirement. and a simultaneous smokeline-Schlieren photo of
Electrical Design the flow over a two-dimensional wedge.
BSEE plus 8 years experience in making wiring dia- By 1959a few researchers realized that the smoke
grams, component installation, production drawings tunnel was. an important research tool. The tech-
and load analysis.
niques established by Brown, Goddard, and
Mechanical Systems: Lippisch have not changed to the present day. Asa
Environmental Design result of unique data Brown obtained,especially on
BSME or BSAE plus 4 years experience in layout boundary-layer transition, there has been. a. very
and design of air conditioning/heating, pressuriza-
tion and de-ice systems. great interest in using these smoke techniques to
Flight Control Design
study a wide. variety of basic and applied fluid-dy-
BSAE or BSME plus 4 years experience in layout namic problems.
and design of mechanism and cable systems.
Landing Gear Design References
BSAE or BSME plus 4 years experience in system 1.Mueller, T.J., "Smoke Visualization of Subsonic
design trade-offs. and Supersonic Flows (The Legacy of F.N.M. Brown),
For application or additional i .
Univ.ofNotre DaIlle. Report UNDAS TN-3412-1, or
information call or write: AFOSR TR-78-1262, June 1978.
Jerome Williams 2. Mueller, T.J., "On the Historical Development of
9709 East Central
Wichita, Kansas 67201
eechcraft Apparatus and Techniques for Smoke Visualization of
(316) 681-7700 Subsonic and Supersonic Flows," AIAAPaper 80-0420,
An EquarOpportunity Employer M/F
Veterans Accorded Preference
11th Aerodynamic Testing Conference, Mar 18-20,1980.
3. Borst H.V., The Aerodynamics of the Un-
conventionalAir Vehicles ofA. Lippisch, Henry V.
Borst and Associates, Wayne, Penn. 1980. <i1
62 Astronautics & Aeronautics
NASA's Laser-Propulsion Project, Sep, p. 66. Means Higher Fees, Jan, p. 22. Feb, p. 10.
JONES, ROBERT R. 1982 Highlights in Legal Aspects of Aeronautics Weinberger Moves His Flag Out to Sea, May, p. 16.
Prepare for Ada, Oct, p. 26. and Astronautics, Dec, p. 83. Lessons of the Falklands, JullAug, p. 6.
JONES, ROBERTT. MULLEN, JAMES F. and OTHLlNG, JR., WILLIAM F. SIMON, ALLAN D.
Advanced Transports: Promising Design Concepts, The Cruise-Missile Technical Challenge, Jan, p. 24. The Coming Weapons, Nov, p. 40.
Feb, p. 40. MURDEN, WILLIAM P. (see LITTLE, ROBERT C.) SIMPSON, ROBERTW.
KAMEL, AHMED MURROW, HAROLD N. FAA Files Its 20Year Flight Plan, Apr, p. 10.
1982 Highlights in Astrodynamics, Dec, p. 44. 1982 Highlights in Flight Testing, Dec, p. 74. SIVO, JOSEPH N.
KEEFER, DENNIS R. (see JONES, LEE W.) NELMS, PRESTON 1982 Highlights in Communications Systems, Dec,
KEYWORTH II, GEORGE A. 1982 Highlights in V/STOL Aircraft Systems, Dec, p_ p.56.
The Federal Approach to Defense Systems, Sep, p. 122. SKOUMAL, DONALD E.
30. NEWBAUER, JOHN 1982 Highlights in Structures, Dec, p. 113.
KIRBY, CECIL E. and GREENE, HERBERT L. Defense Commitment Under Attack, May, p. 20. SMEAD, FRANK W.
Garbage Fuels an Aerospace Success: Affordability and Internationalism, Oct, p. 14. 1982 Highlights in Digital Avionics, Dec, p. 67_
NASA/Hampton's Refuse-Fired Steam Plant, Jan, NORWOOD, ROBERT SMITH, AUBREY T.
p.66. AIAA 1981-82 Budget Year, JullAug, p. 72. AIAA Computers in Aerospace III Con-
KLINE, RICHARD L. OBERG, JAMES E. ference~Voice of the Computer to Carry More
Critiquing the Air Force's Space Technology More Soviet Space Mysteries, Feb, p. 20. Authority, Mar, p. 48.
Program, Mar, p. 38. Soviet Developments Point for Space Operations STACY JR., ALBERT B. (See BARRINGER,
LANGSTON, PAUL R. Center, May, p. 74. SHERIDAN R.)
Kevlar in U.S. Aerospace, June, p. 32. O'DONNELL, J. J. STEHLING, KURT
LANZEROTTI, LOUIS J. (see PAULIKAS, GEORGE On NASP: Must Protect From Political Vagaries, Blazing a Trail to the First U.S. Satellites, May, p. 78.
A.) Oct, p. 56. STEINER, JOHN E.
LEIKAM, JERRY D. OTHLlNG, JR., WILLIAM F. (see MULLEN, JAMES Advanced Transport: Competitive Pressure, Feb, p.
1982 Highlights in Systems Effectiveness and F.) 44.
Safety, Dec, p. 116. OVEREND, WALTER J. STEINER, JOHN (see MONTLE, LOUISE)
LENNON, CARL L. and PDEHLER, HORST A. Advanced Transports: Real Service Conditions, Feb, STONE, DENNIS
Lightning Detection and Ranging, Mar, p. 29. p.56. Reis of OSTP Outlines Shuttle Role in Space Policy,
LEVA, JOSEPH L. OWEN, KENNETH Jan, p. 17.
Passive Aircraft Location, Sep, p. 52. Europe Positions Itself for Competition, Feb, p. 12. STONE, DON
LIESE, HUBERT Harrier and Sidewinder Swept Falklands Skies, Sep, Remembering Columbia, Nov, p. 15.
Toward VLA Air-Cargo Service, Apr, p. 36. p.12. STONE, ROBERT H.
LITTLE, ROBERT C., MURDEN, WILLIAM P., and Defending Europe Without the Bomb, Nov, p. 10. Kevlar 49 in the Lockheed L-1011 Tristar, June, p. 36.
SCHAEFER, ROBERT K. PANK, WILLIAM F. . STUESSEL, ROLF
High Technology Raises Fighter Force Readiness, Advanced Transports: A Lender's Concerns, Feb, p. Advanced Transports: Fuel-Cost Impact, Feb, p.58.
June, p. 38. 61. SWIFT, DAVIDW.
LLOYD-JONES, DONALDJ. PARK, GARY D. SETI Without Saucers? Apr, p. 52.
Advanced Transports: Airline Productivity, Feb, p. 1982 Highlights in Atmospheric Flight Mechanics, TANNA,H.K.
52. Dec, p. 54. 1982 Highlights in Aeroacoustics, Dec, p. 22.
LUXENBERG,BARBARA PAULIKAS, GEORGE A. and LANZEROTTI, LOUIS J. TATINENI, P. K.
Hat in the Ring for Direct Broadcast Satellites, Sep, Impact of Geospace on Terrestial Technology, India to Stress Own Aircraft Designs, Sep, p. 26.
p.32. JuilAug, p.42. THOMAS, DAVID D.
LYNN, ROBERT R. PEOPLES, PHILIP L. On NASP: More Management Than Technical
Rotorcraft Reforms for Competing in World lower-Deck Capacity May Boost Air Cargo, Nov, p. Challenge, Oct, p. 56.
Markets, Oct, p. 53. 12. THOMPSON, CHARLES E_
MACKEY, DAVIDA. POEHLER, HORST A. (see LENNON, CARL L.) 1982 Highlights in Aerospace Maintenance, Dec, p.
1982 Highlights in Support Systems, Dec, p. 114. POPE,ALAN 30.
MAGLIERI, DOMENIC J. and DOLLYHIGH, SAMUEL The 1981 Tax Law and You, AIAA Member, Feb, p. TITCOMB, GORDON A.
M. 63. Advanced Transports: Engine Technology, Feb, p.
We Have Just Begun to Create Efficient Transport PORITZKY, SI EG BERT B. (see HELMS, J. LYN N) 48.
Aircraft, Feb, p. 26. PRITCHARD, WilBUR TOWER,JOHN
MARCHINSKI, LEONARD Arianenik: 8eeping Another Challenge, Sep, p. 22. Preparedness in a Dangerous World, Oct, p. 24.
Toward All-Composite Helicopter Fuselage, QUINBY, G. F. TRIBUTSCH, HELMUT
JullAug, p. 61. On NASP: Criticisms of Forecasts and Transition Solar Bacterial Biomass Farm for Space Vehicles,
MARCINIAK, COL. JOHN J. Unwarranted, Oct,p. 61. June, p. 66.
Technology Needed for C31 Evolution, JullAug, p. 57. QUINN, CHRISTINE A. TURCHI, P. J. (see HYDER, IT. COL. A. K.)
MARCUS, MILTON 1982 Highlights in Interactive Computer Graphics, VANDENKERKHOVE, JEAN A.
1982 Highlights in Liquid Propulsion, Dec, p. 87. Dec, p.82. Tankers-Refueling Satellites in Geosynchronous
MARK, HANS (see DJINIS, WILLIAM) RALPH, JOHN E. Orbit, Sep, p. 54.
MAZZA, CARMAN J. On NASP: New Computers a Must, Oct, p. 59. VANTHIER, DOMINICK
1982 Highlights in Guidance and Control, Dec, p. 80. RAY, JAMES Kevlar in the European Aircraft Industry, June, p. 34.
McHUGH,DAN Composite Use on Helicopters, Jui/Aug, p. 60. VELTEN, KENNETH R.
Black and Decker Revisits NASA-AiAA Corporate RAYMER, DANIEL P_ 1982 Highlights in Air Transportation Systems, Dec,
Associates Report, Jan, p. 19. CDS Grows New Muscles, June, p. 22. p.39.
Casting a Novel Industry/NASA Bond, Feb, p. 19. REILLY, J. DONALD VOSS, JOSEPH M.
Fluid Fiow at NASA-Ames, Mar, p. 11. On NASP: Attacks Only Half the Problem, Oct, p. 64. 1982 Highlights in Aerospace Power Systems, Dec,
NASA Takes Another Space Mate, Apr, p. 17. RICKETTS, RODNEY H. (see HERTZ, TERRENCE J.) p.32.
Industry Awakens to NASA Technology, June, p. 62. RODIER, ROBERTW. WADE, JR., JAMES P.
Wall Street Hears R&D Needs, Jul/Aug, p. 22. 1982 Highiights in Aerodynamic Decelerator and New Directions in Defense, Sep, p. 44.
MciNTOSH, FRED B. Balloon Technology, Dec, p. 28. WAGNER, PHIL L.
1982 Highlights in Aircraft Operations, Dec, p. 42. ROWE, BRIAN H. R&D on Kevlar, June, p. 33.
McLUCAS, JOHN L. Advanced Transports: ATC and Engines, Feb, p. 51. WALENCYK, NORMAN A.
On NASP: No Moves to Increase Airport Capacity, Why GE Made a Moteur d'Aviation, Oct, p. 40. 1982 Highlights in Software Systems, Dec, p. 102.
Oct, p. 57. RUPINSKI, TIMOTHY L. (see CLAPP, DAVID C.) WARDLE, MARILYN
McMILLAN, DAVID R. SCAGGS, NORMAN E. Kevlar's Impact-Damage Tolerance, JullAug, p. 64.
Introducing C31, JullAug, p. 48. 1982 Highlights in Ground Testing, Dec, p. 79. WEAVER, RUSSELL E.
1982 Highlights in Command, ContrOl, Com- SCHAEFER, ROBERT K. (see LITTLE, ROBERT C.) Keeping a Watch on Computer Technology, Nov, p.
munications, and Intelligence, Dec, p. 48. SCHAUFElE, ROGER D. 20.
MELICK, H. CLYDE Advanced Transports: Driving Technologies, Feb, p. WEISSHAAR, TERRENCE A. (see HERTZ,
1982 Highlights in Airbreathing Propulsion, Dec, p. 42. TERRENCE J.)
36. SEIKEL, GEORGE R. WHITING, FRANK
MILLER, BERNARD P. 1982 Highlights in Plasmadynamics and Lasers, 1982 Highlights in Computer Systems, Dec, p. 62.
Japan Up to Date in Space Applications, June, p. 16. Dec, p. 96. WILSON, GEORGE C.
MINER, LOUIS H. SEYMOUR, EDWARD H. Reagan's Space Policy Colored USAF Blue, Sep, p.
Characteristics of Kevlar 49 and Its Use in Com- AIAA Sets Sights on a Science and Technology 15.
posites, June, p. 33. Center, Jan, p. 70. WilLIAMSON, RAY
MIZERA, PAULF. SHAPIRO, SIDNEY OTA Eyes Space Applications, Science, In-
1982 Highlights in Space Sciences and Astronomy, Europe Quick Off the Line with Direct Broadcast ternational Competition, Oct, p. 18.
Dec, p. 106. Satellites, Feb, p. 19. WRIGHT JR., DAVIS B. (see BARRINGER,
MONTLE, LOUISE and STEINER, JOHN AIAA Foreign Members on Upswing, Feb, p. 19. SHERIDAN R.)
Highlights of Annual Meeting-Directions in India: Number 2 in Reusable Boosters, Apr, p. 16. YARYMOVYCH, MICHAEL I.
Aerospace, JullAug, p. 74. Two Hours in 1986, Nov, p. 16. Editorial: Revitalization for a Fast Track, June, p. 21.
MOORE, JESSE W. SHEVELL, RICHARD S. Editorial: Key Issues for AIAA, JullAug, p. 27_
Effective Planetary Exploration at Low Cost, Oct, p. 1982 Highlights in Aircraft Design, Dec, p. 18. Editorial: Seize the Shuttle Opportunity! Sep, p. 35.
28. SHIRK, MICHAEL H. (see HERTZ, TERRENCE) Editorial: On Preventing Nuclear War, Oct, p. 27.
MORAIS, BERNARD G. (see BRODSKY, ROBERT F.) SIMMONS, HENRY Editorial: Cooperation and Competition, Nov, p_ 21.
MOSSINGHOFF, GERALD J. Space Decisions Coming Up, Feb, p. 8. ZAFRAN, SIDNEY
Rejuvenating the Patent and Trademark Office Recasting the Role of the National Laboratories, 1982 Highlights in Electric Propuision, Dec, p. 71.

January 1983 61