Burnham 1970

4
ATMOSPHERIC TURBULENCE AT THE

CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC
TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT
J. BURNHAM
Royal Aircraft Eatablishment, Bedford, England
ABSTRACT
On the basis of current knowledge, of which an outline is given, it appears that many of
the fears which have been advanced in recent years about the frequency and intensity of the
turbulence which will be encountered during cruise by supersonic transports have almost
certainly been exaggerated. Partly as the result of the characteristics of the aircraft, which
make it less rather than more sensitive to gusts than are the current subsonic jets, and partly
because, on average, turbulence of a given intensity is less frequent at the higher altitudes,
the probability of encountering gust induced accel.erations of a given size on a supersonic
transport is likely to be considerably less than it is on the current subsonic jets. Severe gusts
do occur at the higher altitudes, although less frequently, in association both with thunderstorms and with mountain waves. In the case of the latter, no change in operating practices
is likely to be needed to maintain the current level of success in avoidance. So far as thtmderstorm avoidance is concerned, care will be needed in the operation and interpretation of the
weather radar ff current levels of success are to be maintained, since problems may arise
which do not occur at the lower altitudes at which subsonic aircraft fly.
1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
W h e n design w o r k o f supersonic transport aircraft began in the early
1960's, little was k n o w n a b o u t the existence and severity o f atmospheric turbulence at their cruise altitudes o f 50,000-60,000 ft for a M a t h 2 aircraft and
60,000-70,000 ft for M a c h 3. A t that time, the only available data came f r o m
measurements m a d e by N A S A ~x) during routine flights o f a U 2 aircraft fitted
with a V G H recorder. Little military experience was available at these altitudes a n d n o n e o f this was European. T o fill this gap in knowledge, research
p r o g r a m m e s were started in the U . K . and U.S.A. using specially instrumented
aircraft a n d further experience is available f r o m test flights o f the U.S. XB 70
aircraft a n d f r o m flights o f Jindivik pilotless target aircraft in Australia. The
183
184
J. BURNHAM
results of this work and of associated meteorological studies are now (1968)
becoming available and the present is therefore a useful time to review what
is known.
High altitude turbulence research programmes in the U.K. and U.S.A. are
first described and the general picture which they have given of the extent and
severity of turbulence in the stratosphere is discussed. This is followed by
more detailed consideration of the severe turbulence and of the large and
rapid temperature fluctuations which have been found. The extent to which
the more severe disturbances will present a problem to supersonic transports
during cruising flight, and the means by which such disturbances may be
avoided, are then considered.
2. HIGH ALTITUDE TURBULENCE RESEARCH PROGRAMMES

IN THE U.K. AND U.S.A.
A knowledge of the dynamics of actual air motion (true gust velocity) is
needed to deduce the accelerations due to turbulence which would occur on
one aircraft from those measured on a different type. This knowledge is also
necessary in considering effects of gusts on aircraft flying qualities; such as
the behaviour of the aircraft and its automatic flight control system, the
definition of operational speed margins etc. Studies of turbulence directed
towards supersonic transport problems have therefore sought to measure
such true gust velocities over the wide range of wavelengths, say from 50 ft
to 50,000 ft, which are of major interest. The instrumentation problems
involved, particularly at the longer wavelengths, are severe. However, as these
are discussed in reports which describe the results of particular programmes,
no detailed comments will be made here except where it is felt that errors
may affect results of immediate concern.
The U.S.A.F. Hicat Programme has been aimed at the definition of the
spectral densities (the variation of turbulence energy with wavelength) of all
three components of turbulence in an altitude range from 45,000 ft to 70,000
ft, mainly to provide data for fatigue life studies. In Phase 1 of this programme t2) a number of flights were made from bases in the U.S.A. using a U2
aircraft fitted with fairly simple instrumentation. A more comprehensive
instrumentation system was then fitted and from October 1965 to December
1966, 256,000 miles have been flown in seven different regions during Phase 2
of the programme. ~s) The regions covered were the Eastern and Western
U.S.A., Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Australia and New Zealand, the
aircraft spending about a month in each. The time of year at which each visit
was made was chosen, on the basis of then current knowledge, to give the best
chance of finding turbulence. The routes followed on individual flights were
also planned on this basis. Since the beginning of 1967, further flights have
been made from the U.K. and over the Midwest of the U.S.A., in association
TURBULENCEAT THE CRUISEALTITUDESOF SUPERSONICAIRCRAFT
185
with R.A.E., and other flights have also been made in the U.S.A.
The R.A.E. began making turbulence measurements in the stratosphere in
the early 1960's, but the programme only really got under way in April-June
1965, when two instrumented Canberra aircraft visited Oklahoma to make
measurements of turbulence around the tops of thunderstorms in a collaborative programme with the U.S. National Severe Storms Laboratory. The
more suitable of these aircraft, a P R 9 mark of the Canberra, has continued
the high altitude work, which is summarized in Table 1. In February 1967 the
aircraft was based at NASA Ames Research Center near San Francisco and
was used to make measurements in mountain wave conditions over the
Western U.S.A., together with an instrumented T33 aircraft of the Canadian
National Aeronautical Establishment. On its return to the U.K., the Canberra
made a number of flights over the U.K. and Europe, together with the Hieat
TABLE1
REGIONSCOVEREDBY R.A.E. HIGH ALTITUDETURBULENCERESEARCH
PROGRAMMEUSINGPR 9 CANBERRAWH 793
April-June 1965
Studies of turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorm tops in

Oklahoma. R.A.E. B 6 Canberra also used.
February 1967
Studies of mountain waves and associated disturbances over the
Western U.S.A.
March-May 1967
Studies of turbulence over U.K. and Europe, including flights
with U.S.A.F. Hicat U2.
June and October 1967 Studies of turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorm tops in the
Far East.
U2. This study was followed in June 1967 by an out-and-return flight along
the likely Concorde route to the Far East and a further such flight was made
in September-October 1967, during which the aircraft spent 3 weeks based at
Singapore making detailed measurements around the tops of monsoon
thunderstorms in that region. Since April 1965 the P R 9 Canberra has flown
about 125,000 miles at altitudes above 40,000 ft, about half the distance flown
by the Hicat U2. Both aircraft have made about the same number of flights,
the difference in distance covered being accounted for by the greater endurance
of the U2. Some aspects of the results obtained in the R.A.E. programme
have already been reported t4, 5~ and reports giving further detailed results
will be issued in the near future.
Although the R.A.E. PR 9 Canberra has an absolute ceiling near 60,000 ft,
the highest altitude used in regions where significant disturbances are likely
has been restricted to 50,000 ft to give adequate margins between high Maeh
number and stall problems. The altitude range covered by this aircraft has
therefore been 40,000 ft to 50,000 ft and some extrapolation of the results is
necessary to cover the altitude range of interest to the SST during cruise.
o
186
J. BURNHAM
Results at higher altitudes have been obtained in a number of collaborative

programmes with U.S. agencies.
The basic philosophy of the R.A.E. high altitude turbulence programme
differs from that of Hicat, and is primarily concerned with the study of
severe disturbances and the behaviour of aircraft in them. By severe is meant
disturbances which are representative of the most severe which exist in the
stratosphere. An attempt is made to relate these to possible design cases for
a supersonic transport, which may be concerned with handling qualities and
systems, as well as with structural strength and fatigue. To make it more
possible to relate measured results with what is likely to happen in somewhat
different meteorological conditions, and in other parts of the world, attention is also give to understanding the physical processes which produced the
disturbances. The planning of the flights has been partly directed to help
develop such understanding, and the analysis of the results obtained is as
much meteorological as it is aeronautical. Collaboration between the
Meteorological Office and the R.A.E. in this work has been, and is, very close.
3. T U R B U L E N C E
IN T H E S T R A T O S P H E R E
3.1. The General Turbulence Environment
The only aircraft now flying which is comparable in performance and size
to an SST is the XB 70. Turbulence encountered on 57 test flights of the two
XB 70 aircraft, covering a distance of about 76,000 miles at altitudes between
40,000 ft and 76,000 ft and M a t h numbers from 1.0 to 3.0, has recently been
reviewed. ~n) At altitudes between 40,000 ft and 65,000 ft about 7 per cent of
the flight time was spent in turbulence which gave acceleration increments
greater than 4-0.06 g at the aircraft centre of gravity, but between 65,000 ft
and 75,000 ft this percentage fell to about 3 per cent as shown in Fig. 1.
(Acceleration increments of 4-0.06 g would be of some inconvenience to a
passenger who was trying to drink.) All the XB 70 flights were made from
Edwards A.F.B. and covered an area consisting of Nevada, Utah, Southern
Idaho, Northwest Arizona and the part of California from north to southeast of Edwards A.F.B. As shown in Fig. 2, the whole of this area is mountainous. Comparison is made in ref. 6 with the turbulence encountered by a
NASA U2 aircraft over the Western U.S.A. reported in ref. I, where only
about 1 per cent of the time above 40,000 ft was spent in turbulence of comparable intensity. However, the area covered by these U2 flights is known
with no greater precision than that they were made from bases in the Western
U.S.A. There is much better agreement between the XB 70 experience and
more recent Hicat U2 data given in ref. 3. In the latter, flights from Edwards
A.F.B. over roughly the same area as that covered by the XB 70 spent 6.5
per cent of the flight time above 40,000 ft in comparable turbulence.
b~
"
o ~,~n ~
m
~
~ Z
i~..,
~ ~,~-'F"" - ~ - . . ,
i~
iiii
""
....
-....4~
TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

7C
187
T ~ /_---New Zealand
"- \ \
" 2 ~ .~.._---Australia
4C Alaska
"6
3_00=
I0
AI) Hicat pi. 2 flights
20
/
30
Flight time in
turbulence, %
~ 70
,.
/XB70
Western U.S.A.
Known a rea! of
6O 4 " ~ .
') [ e
heavy turbulence
'~|k
avoided
50
~
Hical from Edwards
~J
A.F.B.
40
- NASA U2 from
Edwards AFB
I
I
30
I0
20
30
XB70
Distance travelled, miles
70 - 7 5 , 0 0 0
65 - 70,000
60 - 65,000
55 - 60,000
50 - 55,000
45 - 50,000
4 0 - 45,000
ft
ft
ft
ft
fl
ft
ff
1,174
14,041
15,149
17,540
9,264
7,958
10,631
Total 75,757
Flight time in
turbulence, %
FIG. 1. Percentageof time spentin turbulencefor XB 70 and Hicat Phase2 flights.

It is stated re) that the XB 70 flights "avoided known areas of heavy turbulence" and the object of the Hicat flights was to find turbulence. However,
current understanding of high altitude turbulence associated with mountain
waves suggests that the Hicat flights from Edwards A.F.B. were not predominantly made during the periods when such turbulence would be expected
to be most widespread and severe. The Hicat searches generally covered a
relatively large area and were not made intensively in small regions. It is
thought that the XB 70 flights were spread fairly evenly throughout the year.
The agreement between the proportions of time spent by the XB 70 and Hicat
U2 in turbulence during flights over the Western U.S.A. may not therefore b
coincidental. As will be shown later in this section, however, the NASA and
Hicat data generally differ by a factor of about 6 in terms of distance flown
per encounter with gusts of a given size and such a factor may perhaps be
representative of the "search effectiveness" of the Hicat flights from Edwards.
An alternative explanation of the difference in percentage of time spent in
rough air by the NASA U2 and the XB 70 has recently been advanced by
NASA. (7) This is based on the observation that the XB 70 encountered a
greater proportion of rough air during turns than would be expected, with
188
J. BURNHAM
the implication that some of the acceleration fluctuations which have been
identified as turbulence by both the pilot at the time and by the scientist from
the recordings taken, were in fact due to buffet. It is pointed out ~7~that many
reports of XB-70 turbulence encounters at subsonic speeds and correspondingiy lower altitudes have now been definitely identified as buffet. Such misidentifications are known to have occurred on other aircraft particularly
when, as in the case of the XB 70 results under discussion, the only aircraft
response quantity studied was a relatively slowly moving trace of normal
acceleration. The interpretation which is to be placed on the high altitude
turbulence data given in ref. 6 is therefore not entirely clear.
Although the Hicat U2 flights as a whole were made as turbulence searches,
relatively large areas were covered on each flight and only on rare occasions
were the same regions traversed more than once on any one flight, either at
the same or at a different altitude. In none of the parts of the world in which
flights were made, was the existence of turbulence confined to an identifiable
small region. It is therefore considered that the turbulence reported in refs.
2 and 3 can be taken as reasonably representative of conditions which may
occasionally be encountered by a supersonic transport operating in the same
part of the world at the same time of year as the U2.
As shown in Fig. 1, the average for all the Phase 2 Hicat flights shows 10 per
cent of the fight time in turbulence at altitudes between 45,000 ft and 55,000
ft and between 3 per cent and 5 per cent between 55,000 ft and 70,000 ft. The
most extensive turbulence was encountered in flights over Australia, when
30 per cent of the time between 45,000 ft and 50,000 ft was in turbulence,
10 per cent to 12 per cent between 50,000 ft and 60,000 ft and 6 per cent to
8 per cent between 60,000 ft and 70,000 ft. In the altitude range from 65,000 ft
to 70,000 ft, a greater percentage of time spent in turbulence occurred during
flights made from New Zealand, 12 per cent of the time being spent in turbulence in this ease. The lowest percentages of time spent in turbulence at each
of the test altitudes were found on flights made in Alaska. Practically no
turbulence appears to have been found on these, except between 50,000 ft and
55,000 It, when 7 per cent of the time was spent in turbulence.
With the exception of flights made by the R.A.E. PR 9 Canberra in Oklahoma in 1965, when fairly broad searches were made, figures likely to be
representative of supersonic transport operations cannot be obtained simply
by determining what percentage of time this aircraft spel~t in turbulence.
During flights in clear air in thunderstorm regions in Oklahoma, 11 per cent
of the time was spent in turbulence. A comparable figure for the R.A.E.
flights over the Western U.S.A. would be around 15 per cent, which compares
with about 7 per cent for the XB 70 and Hicat U2. This difference can be
entirely accounted for by the fact that all the R.A.E. flights were made at
the time of year when turbulence in that region is most likely. The Canberra
189
spent less than 5 per cent of the flight time above 40,000 ft in turbulence, in
the other parts of the world where investigations have been made.
Data from flights of pilotless target aircraft made from Woomera, Australia,
have also been used to study the existence of high altitude turbulence. In this
study tS~ the existence of rolling oscillations of the aircraft, noted on telemetered rate of roll data, has been used as an indication of the existence of
turbulence. The percentage of flights on which persistent turbulence was
found is shown, for given height bands, in Fig. 3. It will be seen that persistent
turbulence was encountered between 50,000 ft and 60,000 ft on about 40 per
6C
5C
40
o
o
Q
30
20
10
I
I
I
I
I
tO
20
30
40
50
Percentoge of flights on which persistent turbulence wos
experienced in given height bonds
FIG. 3. Percentageof flightsof a pilotless target aircraft from Woomera, Australia,

on which persistent turbulence was encountered.
cent of the flights. It is not clear how marked the effect would be on a supersonic transport of the turbulence encountered in this study but it seems likely
that it would at least have been noticeable to the passengers.
The percentages of patches of turbulence exceeding a given length are
shown in Fig. 4 from a number of studies. (8, 4, e) The longest patches am
those encountered by the Hieat U2 during flights in Australia; 50 per cent of
these exceed 20 miles and 10 per cent exceed 100 miles in length. The turbulence encountered on the Phase 2 Hieat programme as a whole, gives patch
190
J. BURNHAM
lengths, for a given probability, about 60 per cent of the length of those
encountered on the Australia flights, while the shortest patches encountered
were generally on flights from Edwards A.F.B. The XB 70 spent about the
same percentage time in turbulence as occurred in the latter flights, but the
patches encountered were only about half as long. The R.A.E. flights in
Oklahoma show the shortest patch lengths of any of the studies; 50 per cent
of these were shorter than 7 miles, 90 per cent shorter than !3 miles and
96 per cent shorter than 20 miles.
The average frequencies at which given values of derived gust velocity were
exceeded per mile of flight during Phase 2 of the Hicat programme, are shown
in Fig. 5 for a number of height bands. For altitudes below 65,000 ft, the
curves run almost parallel up to derived gust velocities of about 7 ft~sec,
Aus~ralicl
\/'()'klohomo storms ~
I~1
20
40
60
80
Porch length, n miles
"X
I00
FIG. 4. Percentage of turbulence patches exceeding a given length between

40,000 ft and 75,000 ft during a number of research programmes.
indicating that there is a proportionately smaller chance of encountering
gusts of a given size as altitude increases. The average frequency of encountering 7 ft/sec derived gust velocity, at altitudes between 60,000 ft and 65,000 ft,
is only about a tenth of that between 45,000 and 50,000 ft. The curves for
altitude bands below 60,000 ft cross at about 10 ft/sec derived gust velocity.
The reason for this is not clear and insufficient data are given in ref. 3 to allow
detailed investigation. However, the results shown in Fig. 5 are of general
origin and only rarely was the same region traversed in more than one
altitude band on a given day. It therefore seems possible that the crossing of
these curves is in some way the result of bias. The slope of the curve for
altitudes between 65,000 ft and 70,000 ft is rather steeper than that for lower
altitudes, indicating a lower value of the general level of turbulence intensity.
It is interesting to compare data such as that given in Fig. 5 with gust
experience at the lower altitudes at which present subsonic jet transport
191
operations take place. Such data are given in ref. 9 t and curves comparable
to those in Fig. 5 are shown in Fig. 6, the derived gust velooities being plotted
in the usual way in terms o f equivalent airspeed (EAS). More recent data from
subsonic transports agrees well with that given for the lower altitudes. If the
curves shown in Fig. 6 are plotted in terms of true airspeed (TAS), rather than
of equivalent airspeed, (TAS rather than EAS, where EAS = TAS x square
root of relative air density), results of the different heights collapse well
towards one curve at medium altitudes, as shown in Fig. 7. The curve for the
30,000 ft to 40,000 ft altitude band, typical of cruise altitudes of subsonic
I.O
Altitude, thousands of fl
.45-50
18,250 miles
/50-55
65,480 miles
//'//;5
- 60 60,360 mi,es
i0 ~1
%~//6o-65
10-2
48,oiomires
"6
g
10-3
9
<
10-4
10-5
t
2
I
I
I
4
6
8
Derived gust velocity, f t / s e c
I
I0
I
12
E.&S
FIG. 5. Average frequencies at which given values of derived gust velocity were
exceeded per mile of flight during the Phase 2 Hicat programme for a number
of height bands.
transports, is reproduced in Fig. 8 together with Hicat data for 50,000 ft to
60,000 ft, the range of likely cruise altitudes of a M a t h 2 supersonic transport.
Also shown in Fig. 8 is the data given in ref. 9 for the 50,000 ft to 60,000 ft
altitude band which is believed to have originated in data recorded on substantially the same flights as those reported in ref. 1. It will be seen that the
results for the Hicat searches follow essentially the same curve as the routine
data for the 30,000 ft to 40,000 ft altitude band. The Hieat results can be made
to follow the "routine" curve for the same 50,000 ft to 60,000 ft altitude band
if an (arbitrary) assumption is made that the result of searching for the
t While concerned mainly with data for missiles, ref. 9 also gives routine aircraft data
nd it is the latter which is reproduced here.
192
J. BURNHAM
turbulence during the Hieat programme was that the aircraft flew only onesixth o f the distance between encounters with gusts of a given size, compared
with routine operations. (As mentioned earlier, this is approximately the same
factor which relates the percentages of time spent in rough air by Hicat
searches and NASA routine flights with U2 aircraft from Edwards A.F.B.
California.)
10-~
t~n
10-2
i 0 -~.
c~
I0 -4
.~_ _o
~,'?~_ ~.
oJ
"6
~d
c
10-5
io-6
g
*>
,~
10-7
I0
20
30
Derived g u s t v e l o c i l y ,
40
ft/sec
50
60
EAS
FIG. 6. Distribution of derived gust velocities for routine aircraft operations on

various altitude bands (from ref. 9).
Before derived gust velocity data, such as that shown in Fig. 8, can be used
to determine average frequencies of encountering gust induced normal
accelerations of a given size and so to compare subsonic and likely supersonic gust experience during cruise in terms more directly meaningful to
future passengers, it is necessary to consider various factors which affect the
normal acceleration which a gust of a given size produces on a partimJ_lar
aircraft. Taking derived gust velocity in terms of TAS, the acceleration
produced by a given gust varies directly as the product o f (the aircraft) true
airspeed, lift curve slope and the atmospheric density and inversely as the
TURBULENCE
",5', --
I0"1
a>
10-2
._~
AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC
AIRCRAFT
"G
o
10-3
-o a>
.~ "~:
2 ]0-4
.~_ o>
30 - 40'000 f t / N ' ~ ' ~ " ~ ' ~ , ~
10_5
40-
z 2o-+o,ooof,
50-60,000 ft/
o"
10-6
,~
10-7
0
.10-20,000 ft
o,0oo.
IO
~\
~'%~
.2-10.000
20
30
40
50
Derived gust velocity, ft /secTAS
60
FIG. 7. Routine gust data from Fig. 6 replotted in true airspeed units.
Jo-' -
/50,000-60,000
ft (Ref. 3)
]o-3
5 0 _ 6 ~
~#
"o E
,c
g Io -5
(Ref. 5) with
~.~.N
- frequency of
~ .
occuren.ce :educed
%% ~ / 3 0 - 4 0
000 ft
~--~
Io -6
50-60,000 ft (Ref.9)
o
~>
10-7
I
10
20
50
40
50
Derived gust velocity, ft/sec TAS
60
Fie. 8. Distribution of dedvexl gust velocities for cruise of subsonic and

supersonic transports.
193
194
J. BURNHAM
wing loading. Typical values for a subsonic and a Mach 2 supersonic transport, corresponding to a point about the middle of the cruise phase of the
flight, are given in Table 2.
TABLE 2
Relative
air density
(P)
Lift curve
slope
(a)
True
airspeed
(V)(ft/sec)
Typical cruise
, wing loading
Supersonic transport
M = 2, 55,000 ft
0.12
2.0
1940
75
Subsonic transport
M = 0.83, 35,000 ft
0.31
3-8
800
90
supersonic
ratio - subsonic
0.39
0.53
2"4
1.2
(w/s)(lb/ft2)
pa V
w/s /supersonic
overall ratio =
---- 0.6.
pa V
- - ~ ) subsonic
Account must also be taken of dynamic response effects. Here, all that can
usefully be said at the present time is that it appears that, in their normal
cruise configurationst the existing M a t h 2 supersonic transports are likely
to be little different from current subsonic transports of similar range. (The
projected U.S. Mach 3 aircraft may well differ somewhat, mainly due to
larger size and weight, which are comparable to those of the jumbo jets rather
than current aircraft.) No reasons can be advanced which suggest that
dynamic differences between cruise eontigurations of current subsonic and
M a t h 2 supersonic transports will be such as to increase the above factor of
0.6 by more than a small amount--certainly not to increase it to unity.
The above considerations, together with the gust data given in Fig. 8,
allow the average frequency of encountering gust induced e.g. normal acceleration increments exceeding given sizes, to be estimated for the Maeh 2 supersonic transport and compared with routine experience on the subsonies. The
results are shown in Fig. 9. Taking the N A S A routine gust data for 50,000 ft
to 60,000 ft as typical of the supersonic transport cruise environment, it will
be seen that it will encounter acceleration increments exceeding a given size
t Some differences are likely to exist when the cases of aircraft with inoperative stability
augmentation systems are considered. While these may need to be taken account of in
considering design cases, they are not relevant to the present discussion, which is concerned
with the behaviour of the aircraft on normal routine operations.
TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC
AIRCRAFT
195
on average at only about one-hundredth of the frequency of encounter with

accelerations of the same size on current subsonic jet operations. Pessimistically, taking the data from the Hieat searches as typical of routin operations,
the supersonic transport is still better off by a factor of about 20. In terms of
accelerations encountered per hour, the supersonic transport will meet about
i0-I
o
E.j
c~ 10-2
transport M=2 55,00Oft

data from Ref. 3
Super
~| t
Supersonic transport M=2

1~'55,00Oft gust data from
~.,-"~
~ 10-3
. :6
\\ \
\\\
\ factorof6
~\\
transport M=0.83
35,00Oft gust data from
~/Subsonic
m u
'*6 ~ 10"5
>. ea
ob
% /
Supersoni,'rancor,
\.=z
ss,ooof, gust
.~_
~:r c
o
o
i0-6
~ j0-7
0
0"5
I'0
Incremental normal acceleration, g
FIo. 9. Average frequency of encountering gust-induced normal acceleration

increments exceeding given values for subsonic and supersonictransports using
gust data from rots. 3 and 9.
one-seventh of those encountered by a subsonic one. On the average, therefore, the passengers in a Maeh 2 supersonic transport can expect a much
smoother ride during cruise than is at present experienced in subsonic
transports.
3.2. Spectral Densities of True Gust Velocity

The shape of the spectral density of true gust velocity is of importance in
gust load considerations, particularly from a fatigue point of view, and in
studies of the effect on the response of the aircraft to gusts of stability
augmentation systems and autopilots. The way in which the spectral density
decays as wavelength decreases is, at the shorter wavelengths, essentially a
fluid mechanic property of air. At longer wavelengths, the shape of the
spectral density depends on the wavelength range over which energy is being
196
J. BURNHAM
fed into the turbulence. Examples of spectral densities of the form normally
used in design are given in Fig. 10, differences in shape being characterized
by a single parameter, L, called the "turbulence scale". For the height range
used by the subsonic transports the generally recommended value is 2500 ft
(except in describing turbulence near the ground in take-off and landing
studies).
The Hicat U2 results (8) contain a large number of measured spectra of all
three components of turbulence. All these are essentially straight lines when
to 2 _ L = 5 O O O f t
"~
](3
"*6
-~ i.o
o.
03
IO-I
I0
1.0
Wavelength,
0.1
miles
FIO.10. Spectraldensitiesof atmosphericturbulencefor threevaluesof turbulence

scale L.
plotted on log-log scales like those used in Fig. 10. The range of wavelengths
covered is such that if any turbulence scale exists, it must be greater than
6000 ft.
Many of the more severe patches of turbulence found in the R.A.E.
research are too short to permit turbulence scales to be determined from
measured spectra. A better approach here (and probably a better approach
anyway) is via the autoeorrelation function corresponding to the spectrum.
Autoeorrelation functions for six patches of moderate or severe turbulence,
computed from true vertical gust velocities measured by the PR 9 Canberra
near severe storms in Oklahoma are given in Fig. 11, together with autocorrelation functions corresponding to the spectra shown in Fig. 10. Three of
197
these patches suggest turbulence scales of about 2500 ft whilst the remaining
three suggest values of 5000 ft or more.
Whilst it is possible to have some reservations about the accuracy, at the
longer wavelengths, of the spectra given in ref. 3 (and such errors as may be
present would lead to some exaggeration of the turbulence scale), present
evidence suggests that the value of turbulence scale for altitudes above
40,000 ft is at least 2500 ft and exceeds 5000 ft for at least some turbulence
patches.
1.0
Experimental results obtained of

altitudes from 42,000 to 45,000
----
0.8
Autocorrelation functions
corresponding to spectra
shown in Fig. lO
8u o.6
g
"6
~ 0.4
o
,',,
\
\
\
0.2
<=2,500ft
\
"4.
I
tO00- . . . . . . . . 2O00
Log distance,
ft
Flo. 11. Autocorrelation function for true gust velocities measured in six patches
of moderate or severe turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorms, together with
autocorrelation functions for the spectra shown in Fig. 6.
With current subsonic transports and the present Maeh 2 supersonic types
the practical difference between scales of 2500 and 5000 ft is very small. Even
with the larger and heavier Mach 3 supersonic transport designs, it amounts to
only about 5 per cent, as shown in Fig. 12 which illustrates the effect of varying
turbulence scale on e.g. vertical accelerations for the Lockheed design.~1~
It is not the object of the present paper to enter directly into current controversies about the application of spectral methods to structural design. It
should, however, be mentioned here that in both the R.A.E. and U.S. work,
the more severe turbulence encountered above 40,000 ft tended to occur in
short patches, as it tends to do at lower altitudes,m~ Also, in most patches the
true gust velocities and normal accelerations had probability distributions
much closer to exponential than to Gaussian.
198
J. BURNHAM
0'02
f--
0'01
Turbulence scale, thousands of ft
FIO. 12. Effect of turbulence scale on rms c.g. vertical acceleration experienced by
a supersonic transport at M = 2-7, 67,000 ft (from ref. I0).
3.3. Severe Turbulence

3.3.1. General data
In this section the most severe turbulence encountered in each of the
various studies of turbulence in the stratosphere will be considered. The
results of more detailed studies made in conditions in which such turbulence
predominantly occurs, the clear air in the vicinity of thunderstorms and
mountain waves, will then be described.
The average frequencies of gusts per mile of flight is shown in Fig. 13 for a
number of encounters with severe turbulence in the stratosphere. That
reported in ref. 1 was encountered by a NASA U2 aircraft at an altitude of
52,000 ft over Japan and lasted for about 19 rain. It is suggested in ref. 1
that this turbulence may have been associated with mountain wave conditions,
and recent U.K. analysis of Japanese radiosonde data for the date of this
flight, confirms that moderate or strong waves would be expected to have
occurred in that general area. The time history of normal acceleration during
flight by a U2 aircraft through strong waves near Bishop, California (north
of Edwards A.F.B., see map Fig. 2) at a height of 60,000 ft which is given in
ref. 12, has been analysed in terms of derived gust velocities per mile and is
also shown in Fig. 13. Results from Phase 1 of the Hicat programme t2~ also
shown there, are from a 3 minute run at an altitude o f 56,800 ft travelling
northwards over the western edge of the Owens Valley, near Bishop. This area
199
is the most famous site in the world for high altitude mountain waves and
although no meteorological data are given in ref. 2, it is probable that this
patch of turbulence was also associated with mountain wave activity. The
most severe turbulence encountered during Phase 2 of Hicat, (s) also shown,
occurred during a 45 see run at an undefined altitude somewhere on a ferry
flight between Puerto Rico and Florida. N o time histories or other pertinent
data for these runs are given in refs. 1, 2 and 3.
Ref. 2 flight 33 run3 (3rain)
',
,',X
Re,.3
"\ ' ,
"-
test 155
(45see)
'~
\
\
\ ~
~,
\
~
~
"'6
~\
\" / ~
I0-1
Ref. I fhghtCW-58-2
(19 rain)
-~
RAE Feb.13 1967

"'.~
\ ' ~ /(18 ram)
,
I0-;
\
0
I
5
I
I
I0
15
Derived gusl velocity, ft/sec
I
" 20
FIG. 13. Average frequency of gusts per mile encountered in severe turbulence at
altitudes above 40,000 ft.
Derived gust velocities for the whole 18 min spent in turbulence by the
R.A.E. PR 9 Canberra during one flight in mountain wave conditions over
Nevada (February 13, 1967), at altitudes between 45,000 ft and 50,000 ft, are
also shown in Fig. 13. Turbulence as severe as this was also found on other
flights during the R.A.E. mountain wave studies. Data for the entire time
spent in turbulence by the same aircraft during 5 flights at altitudes between
40,000 ft and 50,000 ft in clear air in the vicinity of thunderstorms in Oklahoma (4) are also shown. The latter sample is 56 rain long.
The slope of the curve for the sample from ref. 12 is about the same as that
for the other examples but the average frequency of encountering gusts o f
200
J. BURNHAM
given size is about ten times that of the others. The time history of the former
sample shows turbulence of uniform intensity of the first 50 sec, tailing off
somewhat during the last 20 sec. The turbulence on the R.A.E. flights for
which results are given in Fig. 13 was certainly not of uniform intensity and
the difference between the curves for these and that for ref. 12 can largely be
accounted for by this. A similar explanation is almost certainly true for the
results shown from refs. 1, 2 and 3, but this cannot be positively checked
without reference to the time histories. The samples from refs. 2, 3 and 12 are
very short. Periods of similar length, but of more severe turbulence, can be
i0-1
40-50,000 ft
~/RAE
Hicat ph2
45-5oooott
\j
iO-Z
\\
Oklahoma storms
~9654o-so,ooo ft
m
m
g
"6
10-3
E
g
o
10-4
i0 -5
I0
15
Derived gust velocity, ft./see
,,J
20.
FIo. 14. Average number of gusts per mile encountered by NASA and Hicat U2s
compared with those encountered by the R.A.E. PR 9 Canberra during flights near
thunderstorms in Oklahoma.
found in both sets of R.A.E. results and it seems likely that this is also the
case for the data from ref. 1.
The R.A.E. Oklahoma storm data t4) are also shown in Fig. 14, replotted on
a "gusts per mile of flight" basis for comparison with the genexal Hicat and
N A S A (z) U2 results. It will be seen that the average intensity of the turbulence
encountered, as indicated by the slope of the curves, was markedly more
severe on the R.A.E. flights and on these, derived gust velocities of 10 ft/sec
were exceeded on average more than 300 times as often as they were by the
U2s.
201
3.3.2. Turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorm tops

Many of the more severe patches of turbulence encountered by the R.A.E.
aircraft near storm tops were very short. Although these appear as turbulence
to the aircraft, it is thought that they may be quasi-steady phenomena rather
than examples of genuinely turbulent flow in the atmosphere. That is, it is
thought that these gusts may retain approximately the same shape for periods
!
u
~' -'h
,w,
z
Distance, thousands of ft
-I0
6
-2o
2
4
6
Distance, thousands of ft
FIo. I5. Time histories of true vertical gust velocity encountered near storm tops.
of perhaps a minute or more. Two examples are shown in Fig. 15. The air
through which the aircraft flew before and after encountering these gusts was
essentially smooth. The shorter of the two patches was encountered at 44,000
ft a few miles on the upwind wide of a squall line, the tops of which did not
reach aircraft height. The longer patch was encountered at an altitude of
43,000 ft at least several hundred feet above the top of an active storm cell.
As well as the large vertical gusts, large horizontal gusts were found in
clear air near the storm tops. Sometimes both occurred together, sometimes,
202
J. BURNHAM
not. These horizontal gusts showed up clearly as large and rapid fluctuations
in indicated airspeed, two examples of which are shown in Fig. 16. The shorter
of the two examples occurred simultaneously with the vertical gust shown at
the top of Fig. 15. In this case the airspeed change is much too large and rapid
to be explained by anything other than a horizontal gust. During flight
through the other patch of turbulence shown in Fig. 15, the airspeed fluctuations were less than 2 or 3 knots. The second example shown in Fig. 16 was
oK
I0
2O
50
:z
4O
m
-x
c~
o_
Disfonce, th0usonds of ft
70
20 =_
-- 60
50
o
. t7
40
10
50
20
10
0
8
IO
Distance, ~housonds of ff
4
17'
14
FIG. 16. Changes in true airspeed measured near storm tops.

measured at a height of 44,000 ft about 20 miles downwind from a squall line
of which the maximum cloud top heights were below the aircraft height at
the time the measurement was made. The storms at that time were tending to
decrease in intensity. During the period shown, the altitude of the aircraft
increased by about 100 ft and the pitch attitude increased slightly. No power
changes were made either during the encounter or the previous 5 min. The
actual horizontal gust encountered was therefore somewhat larger than
shown by the airspeed change.
To give a general idea of the sizes of the horizontal gusts which were
encountered Fig. 17 has been prepared, (~) using data from all the flying of
the PR 9 Canberra at altitudes between 40,000 ft and 50,000 ft near storm
tops in Oklahoma. Only those cases are included where the aircraft response
tended to diminish the effect on airspeed of the horizontal gusts. The results
are plotted in terms of miles flown in turbulence, as usually defined (derived
TURBULENCE
AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT
203
gust velocities exceeding 2 ft/sec), but it should be remembered that a few

horizontal gusts are included which were not associated with vertical gusts
as large as this.
Airspeed changes resulting from horizontal gusts proved to be more of a
hazard to the measuring aircraft than did the vertical gusts. An account of a
particularly severe incident is given in ref. 5. The relevant time histories are
given in Fig. 18 and the pilot's description was as follows: "The aircraft was
headed southwest through some very thin cirrus at 45,000 ft and out towards
clear air between two storm tops at about 0.74 M. (The gap between the storms
was about 10 miles wide and the height of the tops was about 1000 ft above the
aircraft.) Quite unexpectedly, severe turbulence was entered which continued
1.0
iO-I
"E
i0-2
t~r
10-30
I
20
I
40
l
60
Magnitude of horizontal gust, it/seo
FIG. 17. Magnitude of horizontal gusts obtained from airspeed fluctuations

measured near thunderstormsin Oklahoma.
for 2 min at 4-1 g (derived gust velocity of about 24 ft/sec); after 1 min the
aircraft was gaining speed and height and in order to reduce the chance of
engine surge, rpm was reduced from 7500 to 7200. As the aircraft left the
disturbance, speed increased rapidly without any apparent change in pitch
angle or significant change in height. Indicated Mach number increased from
0.74 to 0"84 and the aircraft got deep into high Mach buffet. The speed
increase took place in about 20 sec, the ins change was 30 knots and a few
hundred feet of height were lost. Neither the configuration nor the power was
changed during this (latter) manoeuvre. An interesting thing was my conviotion that the aircraft was headed towards smooth air before this area of
disturbance was reached, and I could well imagine a civil captain calling 'in
the clear' before all this started".
The time histories given in Fig. 18 show that the pilot made quite large and
continuous elevator movements during this encounter with severe turbulence.
204
J. BURNHAM
Control movements of about the same magnitude have been noted in all the
encounters with severe turbulence experienced in the R.A.E. programme.
While pilots in general appear to be willing to "leave the aeroplane alone"
46,50C[- Barometric
height
4 ~ 0- ~ : 5 ~
,50.
~1
7O
500 FTrue airspeed

4501-r,. ~,-....
/,-, ~ A f ' k'-"--'~" ~ - "~,-"--'~ "~ " - " ~"
-~ 400 Moch2o X . . . .
~~]0-8
~ ~ - ~
v v-'v
.-Vertical gust velocity,
~ 4
0
~
6
0
-
0.9
'-JO'7
~, 2O
~. 0
-20
-40
~1~
gust
2f-
Trace
I~k
~ ~1~ ~l..f/uncer tain~

I'
velocity
Elevator
'
-40
angle
20 ~'~
o
AI
oo
-z
--I z
accel,
f,5
0 " 5
4k Pitch ange
123
/L.,
18.05.30
I
I
0 I
4
Statute
miles
FIG. 18. Time history of severe turbulence encountered by the R.A.E. B6 Canberra
in clear air near thunderstorms in Oklahoma.
when flying through light and perhaps through moderate turbulence, they are
most reluctant to do so if the turbulence is o f more than moderate intensity.
It is clearly o f interest to k n o w whether disturbances as severe as those
encountered by the R.A.E. aircraft between 40,000 and 50,000 ft exist at
T U R B U L E N C E A T T H E CRUISE A L T I T U D E S OF SUPERSONIC A I R C R A F T
205
greater altitudes. To help answer this question, an analysis has been made of
normal accelerations measured by the Hieat U2 aircraft during nine flights at
altitudes between 50,000 ft and 60,000 ft in the vicinity of thunderstorms in
Oklahoma in May 1967. The derived gust velocity corresponding to the
largest incremental acceleration experienced in each patch of turbulence has
been used to indicate the severity of each patch. Figure 19 shows the percentage of patches in which these largest derived gust velocities exceeded given
values for both these U2 flights and the flights of the R.A.E. PR 9 Canberra.
On this basis, it appears that the intensity of the turbulence encountered by
the U2 was about half that found by the Canberra. Since different storm
o
o
IOC
5C
"6
g
g
b
13.
I
I
I .
5
I0
15
Largest derived gust velocity in patch, ft/sec
FIG. 19. Largestderived gust velocitiesencounteredin each patch of turbulence

found near storms in Oklahoma.
situations were concerned in the flights of the two aircraft, too much should
not be read into this result. Pending the results of much fuller analysis of the
storm situations, it is felt that Fig. 19 should not be taken as implying more
than that turbulence in clear air near storm tops is not likely to be more, and
may be less, severe at altitudes between 50,000 ft and 60,000 ft than it is
between 40,000 ft and 50,000 ft. However, storms which reach altitudes of
60,000 ft are not infrequent in the Midwest of the U.S.A. and also occur in
some other parts of the world. Any aircraft flying in the vicinity of the top of
such a storm may well encounter disturbances at least as severe as those
found at lower altitudes by the R.A.E. aircraft.
The thunderstorms which occur in the Midwest of the U.S.A. differ, in
some respects, from those which occur in most other parts of the world. So
it is not immediately clear how far the experience related above can be applied
to other areas. To further understanding of this question, the R.A.E. PR 9
206
J, BURNHAM
Canberra has been used to make a number of flights near the tops of thunderstorms in the Far East. The flying done was at least equivalent to that of both
Canberras in Oklahoma in 1965 but no significant turbulence was found.
Airspeed fluctuations of about 10 knots, similar to that shown at the top of
Fig. 16 were, however, encountered on two occasions. Much more work
would need to be done before it could safely be concluded that disturbances
as severe as those found in Oklahoma never occur in the Far East, but it
seems likely that they are less common.
3.3.3. M o u n t a i n waves
The severity and extent of the turbulence encountered on 14 flights in
mountain wave conditions made by the R.A.E. PR 9 Canberra at altitudes
between 40,000 ft and 50,000 ft over the Western U.S.A. in February 1967
is comparable to that which was encountered near thunderstorms in Oklahoma. The severity and extent of the longer wavelength, essentially smooth,
disturbances were considerably greater.
The results of the flights made on February 13, along the track shown in
Fig. 20, are interesting from several points of view. Flying at the same time
as the Canberra along the same track at around the height of the tropopause,
the N A E T 33 aircraft encountered smooth light waves but no turbulence.
Similar conditions were encountered by the Canberra during runs at 45,000 ft
and 46,000 ft. At 47,000 ft, similar waves and a patch of moderate turbulence
about 5 miles long was found about 50 miles east of Lake Tahoe. At 48,000 it,
a patch, of similar intensity but about 15 miles long was found in the same
area. At 49,000 ft the waves were noticeably stronger and the turbulence
extended from 20 to 70 miles east of the Lake. The aircraft began its run at
50,000 ft in a westerly direction and was in moderate turbulence up to a point
about 60 miles east of Lake Tahoe, when the effects of a large wave caused an
inadvertent descent to 47,000 ft and the return of the aircraft to base. The
pilot's description of this incident is as follows (the aircraft was trimmed at
50,000 ft, 0" 75 M, 90 per cent power): "The aircraft entered a strong draught
(wave) and, while the power was reduced to 85 per cent it descended to
49,700 ft at 0" 80 M. Power was then increased to 92 per cent to climb the
aircraft back. On arrival at 50,000 ft, the aircraft again encountered a strong
draught and as the power was reduced to flight idle, the aircraft accelerated
to 0.82 M (0.02 above MN~, the 'never exceed' M a t h number) in a 1000 ft/min
rate of descent. An estimated 40 lb pull on the stick produced little or no
effect. Both hands were then used and an 80 lb pull reduced speed to 0.81 M.
The aircraft was finally levelled at 47,000 ft. After a breather by the crew, it
was reclimbed to 50,000 ft in moderate turbulence and returned to base."
As a result of this encounter, a ceiling of 50,000 ft was put on the aircraft for
any flights where severe disturbances might occur. A similar limit had been
used during the Oklahoma flying.
FIG. 20. Track of flight made by R.A.E. Canberra on February 13, 1967.
Nautical miles
20 r
Values of outside air temperature measured from the aircraft, together with
the temperature profile upwind of the mountains, obtained partly from
radiosonde data and partly from aircraft measurements, have been used to
construct the heights o f surfaces of constant potential temperature for the
runs made on the day on which these conditions were experienced. The
results obtained are shown in Fig. 21. If the air in the waves expands and
contracts adiabatically as it moves up and down, these curves are equivalent
(Some scaleas Ficj.16)
.,ooo,,//V/L_..-"
" - .AJ ^ v
50,O00ft
?-
IO00f~
.......
"'~"
,",
45,-~000f Y
20
I0
" \
f-,,,,
\ ~,
~ . J ' ~
I
I0
20
I I
V
~ I V ~'''
\,J,,o~o,,
N"~'~Ig'V%"
I
50
40
Distance, n miles
50
45' 000 ft
I
60
70
80
FIG. 21. Heights of constant potential temperature surfaces for the waves encountered on February 13, 1967.
to streamlines. Whilst this assumption may not be quite correct and errors
may be present in the temperature profile used, it is felt that the streamlines
shown in Fig. 21 are a reasonable approximation to the truth. These imply
vertical velocities in the larger waves of around 35 ft/sec.
This, and most of the other flights made during the wave study, were planned to take place along the direction of the wind at around flight altitude.
This direction was determined, however, on the basis of forecasts and the
actual direction, subsequently determined from radiosonde data at about the
time of the flights, sometimes differed from it by 20 or 30 degrees. Such a
difference occurred on February 13, as can be seen from the wind direction
shown in Fig. 20. Taking the actual wind direction into account, it is possible
to see a connection between the streamlines shown in Fig. 21 and the terrain
208
J. BURNHAM
near the flight track, at least west of a point about 40 miles east of Lake
Tahoe. The reason for the existence, east of this point, of large amplitude
waves and in particular of the one which caused the inadvertent descent of the
aircraft, is more obscure. This could, perhaps, be related to the gap in the
mountains east of Reno or to the change in direction of the ridge. It seems
fairly clear that the wave pattern on this particular day was three-dimensional.
Presently available theoretical treatments of mountain waves apply only to
two-dimensional flow, or three-dimensional flow over an obstruction with
circular cross-section.
The highest mountain anywhere near the track of the flight made on February 13 rises only to a height about 5000 ft above the surrounding terrain,
and there appears to be nothing very unusual about the configuration of these
particular mountains. So far as can be seen, mountains like these exist in many
parts of the world. One is therefore inclined to wonder whether disturbances
similar to those found on February 13 are relatively common.
An encounter with a larger and more hazardous mountain wave disturbance took place on the following day, when a flight was made in an eastwest direction, passing about 40 miles south of Bishop, California. (Bishop
is north of Edwards A.F.B. ; see map Fig. 2.) The pilot's description of what
happened is as follows: " A patch of moderate turbulence was encountered
at 46,000 ft and the aircraft was eased slightly nose up to check a rise in Math
number from 0.75 to 0.77. The aircraft entered a climb, in a draught, and
accelerated to 0.79 M in a 2000 ft/min rate of climb. Without any warning,
at 47,300 ft, the indicated airspeed dropped in under 1 second from 198 knots
to 150 knots. The airflow was heard breaking away over the canopy, and the
pilot pushed on about half-forward stick. The aircraft bunted over at 150
knots with --1 g (total) indicated. The aircraft settled in about a 10 degree
dive and the speed hovered around 160 knots for maybe 10 to 20 sec, before
increasing to 202 kt/0.81 M in 1 see. The aircraft was returned to level flight
at 42,000 ft. The power remained constant at 87 per cent throughout the
manoeuvre." The size of this disturbance implies horizontal gust components
of about 150 ft/sec, this change occurring over a distance of about 500 ft.
The heights of constant potential temperature surfaces for this day have
been calculated in a similar way to those shown in Fig. 21. These are given in
Fig. 22. The air encountered during the large disturbance at 46,000 ft seems,
from the potential temperatures, to have descended about 10,000 ft. A wide
range of altitudes must therefore have been affected. The previous run, at
45,000 It, was made about 10 miles further south, so that failure to encounter
a similar disturbance on this run does not necessarily imply that the disturbance was a transient phenomenon. An analysis of meteorological data
shows that a surface front passed through the area over which the severe
disturbance was encountered at about the time at which the encounter took
place. Before the frontal passage, the wind direction at mountain top height
209
was almost at fight angles to the ridge line, while after it the wind blew
essentially along this line. This would lead to the fairly rapid decay of the
low altitude wave system and it is at least possible that the large disturbance
encountered at 46,000 ft was a result of this decay.
6000
4000
200C
114*q
C
200C
12-08-30
400C
)5"C~|
12-02-30
600C
4000r
20001--
~"~
95oc
FIG. 22. Heights of constant potenial temperature surfaces for the waves encountered on February 14, 1967.
Mountain waves in the stratosphere have been known to exist in the Bishop
area for many years. The flight of February 14, discussed above, was the only
one made in moderate or strong wave conditions by the R.A.E. Canberra in
this area, since the 14th was the only day on which such conditions occurred
during the month that the aircraft spent in the Western U.S.A. Although the
disturbance found was larger than had been thought likely before the present
study was made, it cannot now be thought that such disturbances are exceptionally rare events. There are other parts of the world where similar disturbances almost certainly occur. Parts of the Andes and Himalayas are obvious
examples, and of perhaps greater direct interest to supersonic transports, the
possibility that they occur over the Alps and the mountains of Alaska and
Northern Canada, for example, cannot be ruled out.
On the occasions when moderate or more severe turbulence was encountered during the mountain wave flying in the U.S.A., the existence of turbulence at around the test altitudes would have been forecast, even in the absence
of mountains. Forecasts of the existence of waves, and whether these would be
light, moderate or strong, were accurately made for all the flights.
A peculiarity of the state of the atmosphere on the days when severe disturbances associated with mountain waves were found was a " n o t c h " in the
210
J. BURNHAM
temperature profile at, or just above, the altitude at which the disturbances
were found, accompanied by a decrease of windspeed with height. Examples
are shown in Figs. 23 and 24, where the temperature and wind profiles for the
flights made on February t3 and 14 are given. It is thought that similar
"notches" have been associated with some of the turbulence found in the
Hicat programme, (but no analysis of this aspect is given in refs. 2 and 3) and
in a number of other studies.
I 0 0 MB
Wind
~----
5 lO,O0 0 ft.
47,500 ft
///
/
///
,/
///
/
//'
//
j-2~/
_,,--/~
,8qo/
{9// /I006MS
-
/zooc
FIo. 23. Composite temperatureand wind profile for the flight made by the R.A.E.
C~mberra on February 13, 1967.
On the basis of the present results it appears that detailed examination of

temperature profiles from radiosonde ascents near proposed supersonic
transport routes would give a useful guide to the extent of mountain wave
disturbances which may be encountered. Such a study would also help in
extrapolating the present results, obtained at altitudes between 40,000 ft and
50,000 ft, to the higher altitudes of more direct concern to an SST during
cruise. For the moment it must be assumed that disturbances at least as severe
as those encountered by the Canberra occasionally exist at supersonic transport cruise altitudes.
~f~-60C
211
46,000 ft.
45,000 ft.,;
-IO
j
I000 MS
/ I0
FIG. 24. Composite temperature and wind profile for the flight made by the R.A.E.
Canberra on February 14, 1967.
4. L A R G E A N D R A P I D F L U C T U A T I O N S
OF AIR
TEMPERATURE
IN THE STRATOSPHERE
Many of the cases of severe turbulence found in the stratosphere during the
R.A.E. research programme were accompanied by large and rapid changes
in air temperature. The most severe disturbance so far found, that of February
14, 1967, was accompanied by the largest temperature gradients. The history
of the air temperature encountered is shown in Fig. 25. The major temperature
changes and the distances over which they took place are shown in Fig. 26,
the largest values being changes of 10C in 0.1 nm and 20C in 1 rim. Temperature changes found near storms tS) are also included in Fig. 26, the largest
of these being about 60 per cent of the former. Two examples of temperature
changes measured by the Hicat U2 during flights in the vidnity of storms in
Oklahoma in 1967, are also shown. A temperature change of 13C in 2 nm
encountered at 60,000 ft in wave conditions near Bishop is reported in ref. 12.
Unfortunately, no temperature data are given in refs. 1, 2 and 3.
The significance to a supersonic transport of such temperature changes lies
mainly in their possible effects on the engines and intakes during supersonic
212
J. I~URNHAM
iiz-
F'osition where severe

horizontal gusts occured
-50
-
~"-~Posilions
where s e v e r e / ' E ~
-40
o~
-50
~Y
-60
-7C
;0
Distance,
20
nautical miles
30
FIG. 25. Time history of air temperature measured in flight in mountain wave
conditions at a height of 46,000 ft on February 14, 1967.
+
o
Mountain waves (Feb. 14 1967) I 4 0 , 0 0 0 to

Storms (ref. 5)
J" 50,O00ft
U2 storm data, 1967tt
{ 6050,000to000tt
[]
Mountain wave (ref, 12)
60,000 tt
20
15
o
[]
I0
o
c
13
J=
o
0
5
O0
0'05
/X
4-
+
Z~
0"1
0-5
Distance,
1.0
n miles
Fro. 26. Air temperature changes measured in mountain wave conditions and in
clear air near thunderstorm tops.
213
flight. The magnitude of the larger of those shown in Fig.~26 is certainly large
enough to require consideration of the possibility of intake "unstarts", engine
surge and flame-out, particularly since if such occurred, all the engines might
be affected. How critical they could be to a particular type of supersonic aircraft would depend on detailed characteristics of the engine, intake and intake
control system. In view of likely limitations on the rates of operation of the
latter, the smaller changes occurring over shorter distances may be the most
important. A change taking place over 0.1 nm affects an aircraft travelling at
Maeh 2 in 0.5 see. The combination of some of these temperature changes
with large horizontal gusts would significantly increase the changes in Mach
number which occur in the intake.
Liqht or moderate turbulence
[77~
Severe turbulence
-5C
?
cI
~, - 6 c
._~
-TO
I
0
I
20
I
4.0
Distance,
I
60
I
80
I
I00
n miles
FIG.27. Air temperatureand turbulencemeasuredat 37,000ft near Palm Springs,

California,on February 3, 1967.
The association between the positions where severe turbulence was found
during the flight of February 14 and the changes in air temperature is shown
in Fig. 25. A further example from the R.A.E. mountain wave flying is given
in Fig. 27. In general, all encounters with moderate or severe turbulence during these tests were accompanied by increases in air temperature, indicating
that the turbulence occurred in the troughs of the waves. On some occasions,
however, the turbulence extended from one trough to the next. The temperature changes found where the waves were turbulent were often of similar size
and gradient to those which occurred where the waves were smooth.
214
J. BURNI4A~!
The situation is less clear in the case of turbulence and temperature changes
found near the tops of thunderstorms, partly because less data are available.
The large temperature changes which were encountered were always accompanied by some other disturbance but this was sometimes a relatively smooth
one, for example, a vertical or horizontal draught. Several cases of moderate
or severe turbulence were encountered which were accompanied either by a
temperature change of only a degree or so, or by no temperature change at all.
During R.A.E. flights in the stratosphere in areas not affected by storms or
mountain waves, light and occasionally moderate turbulence has been found
which was not accompanied by temperature changes. No severe turbulence
and no large temperature gradients have been found on these flights.
5. THE PROBLEM OF SEVERE DISTURBANCES FOR A

SUPERSONIC T R A N S P O R T D U R I N G C R U I S I N G F L I G H T AND
THE POSSIBILITY OF A V O I D I N G THEM
5.1. The Manoeuvering Capability of a Supersonic Transport

The difference in speed between a supersonic and present subsonic transport
shows most clearly in the much larger radius of turn and longer time to turn
_~,oc
~~~
2 0 bonk
I-.-
/ / ~ , ' ~ ' ~
0
I
1.0
I
1.5
~'45 bank
L
2-0
I
2.5
3-0
Math number
FIO. 28. Turn radius vs. Mach number for three values of bank angle.
through a given angle of the supersonic aircraft. This question is considered
in detail in ref. 13 and it is useful to review here the more significant features
of supersonic transport manoeuvering capability.
The turn radius of an aircraft flying at constant bank angle and altitude
increases as the square of true speed and so, at altitudes above the tropopause,
as the square of Mach number. At similar altitudes, the time taken to turn
through a given angle increases linearly with M a t h number. This is illustrated
215
in Figs. 28 and 29 for bank angles of 20 ~, 30 and 45 . 20 is about the maxim u m value which an airline would wish to use from the point of view of
passenger comfort, 30 about the maximum which the pilot of a transport
aircraft would be willing to use in normal circumstances and 45 represents
about the largest value likely to be used in an emergency. At a Mach number
of 2, the radius of a 20 banked turn is just over 60 miles; of a 30 banked
turn, 40 miles, and of 45 banked turn, 22 miles, Corresponding times to
turn through 90 are 4 min, 3 rain and 1 rain respectively.
.E
2 0 (' b
F-
q~,.5
1.0
I-5
2.0
Moch number
2"5
3-0
FIG. 29. Time taken to turn through 90 vs. Mach number for three values of
bank angle.
The distances from a circular obstacle at which a turn must be initiated, if
the obstacle is to be missed, are shown in Figs. 30 and 31 for bank angles of
30 and 45 . F o r obstacles with a radius of 10 miles, about the smallest value
of much importance from a weather point of view, these are 21 miles at
M = 2, 33 miles at M = 3 and less than 8 miles for subsonic aircraft, when
30 banked turns are used; and 15 miles, 24 miles and 5 miles for 45 banked
turns. I f the aircraft wished to turn to avoid an obstacle which was essentially
a straight line at right angles to its track (infinite radius obstacle), a 30
banked turn would have to be commenced 40 miles away at M = 2, over 100
miles away at M = 3 but only less than 10 miles away for a subsonic aircraft.
Corresponding values for 45 banked turns are 23 miles, 52 miles and less than
6 miles. The above figures include an allowance for the time taken to initiate
the turn but not for the time taken to reach a decision to do so. Since an
aircraft travelling at M ----2 covers about 20 miles in a minute, the distance
covered during the decision making process is likely to be significant.
216
J. BURNHAM
i i f'
d
6O
,J / -
50
E
"~
40
"5
o
~a
3o-
"5
c
Q
I
I
1
2
Moch
number
FIo. 30. Distance f r o m a circular obstacle at w h i c h a turn must be initiated to

miss the obstacle for 30 b a n k e d turns.
5C
~S
o
r_,
"~
4C
f=(X)
o
u
o
3c
2O
2
Math
number
FiG. 31. Distance f r o m a circular obstacle at which a turn m u s t be initiated to

miss the obstacle for 45 b a n k e d turns.
217
Thus if a supersonic transport is to turn to avoid weather hazards ahead

during cruising flight, a minimum warning distance of about 50 miles for a
Maeh 2 aircraft and 80 miles for one cruising at M = 3 should be aimed at.
These figures are considerably greater than the 10 to 15 miles which applies
to subsonic aircraft. It is, however, worth remarking that considerations of
buffet boundaries make it likely that a cruising supersonic transport will have
the ability to turn, in emergencies, at greater bank angles than would usually
be the case with a subsonic aircraft.
At supersonic speeds, it is possible to exchange the high kinetic energy
available for potential energy and zoom the aircraft to altitudes considerably
above those of normal cruising flight. An aircraft travelling at M ---- 2 at
60,000 ft could easily be zoomed to 75,000 ft. There is nothing intrinsically
dangerous in such a manoeuvre, which has been performed thousands of
times by the smaller supersonic military aircraft which have been flying for
the past 10 years or so. So far as supersonic transports are concerned, some of
the aircraft systems may require special clearance for such a manoeuvre to
be performed safely and special pilot training would be needed. Although
zoom techniques may appear unorthodox at first sight, the possibility of their
use in avoiding weather hazards should not be neglected.
5.2. Disturbances Associated with Thunderstorms

5.2.1. The penetration of storm tops
The tops of thunderstorms are known to reach altitudes around 60,000 ft,
somewhat above the height at which a Math 2 supersonic transport will
usually cruise, in a number of parts of the world. No data is available on the
severity of conditions at high altitudes within such storms but at least one
catastrophic accident has occurred when such a storm top was penetrated by
a military aircraft at supersonic speeds.
Figure 32 compares the intensity of turbulence encountered in clear air
near storm tops,C4) with that found inside storms at altitudes between 20,000 ft
and 40,000 ft. cx4) None of the storms penetrated was sufficiently intense to
reach an altitude much greater than 50,000 ft and most were probably lower
than that. Thunderstorms reaching altitudes around 60,000 ft were excluded
from the penetration study by the use of a maximum radar reflectivity criterion which was adopted to avoid encounters with damaging hail. Although,
strictly, the results given in ref. 14 do not apply to turbulence in the tops of
storms which reach altitudes about 60,000 ft, it seems probable that this
turbulence is at least as severe as that indicated in Fig. 32.
It seems almost certain that storms reaching altitudes of 60,000 ft contain
giant hail and that this hail is likely to be found near the tops of the storms.
A photograph of a giant hailstone is given in Fig. 33. They consist essentially
H
218
J. BURNHAM
of solid ice (15) and are a greater potential hazard to penetrating aircraft than
is the turbulence. The possibility that large concentrations of liquid water or
"slushy ice" may exist quite near the tops of such a storm cannot be entirely
excluded.
A further potential hazard is provided by the very low temperatures
which are probably to be found in the tops of storms reaching altitudes around
60,000 ft, tls) as illustrated in Fig. 34. A penetrating aircraft may well experience temperature changes of around 40C in a mile, which would almost
certainly cause severe engine/intake problems, possibly including flame-out.
50-
p,
Turbulence inside storms

(Ref. 14)
/
x
> o
.~. >
,o
.c
~ Turbulence near
storm tops (Fig.19)
R
"6
I
I
I
I
I
10
20
30
40
50
Largest derived gust velocity in patch, f t / s e c
I
60
Fro. 32. Comparison of the intensity of turbuleace encotmtered inside thunderstorms with that encotmtexedin clear air near their tops.
The potential hazards involved in penetrating the tops of thunderstorms

which reach altitudes of 60,000 ft, as described above, may be sufficientlygreat
to be unacceptable even in a research exercise using aircraft much stronger
than a civil supersonic transport. Such penetrations by a passenger carrying
aircraft are clearly to be avoided.
5.2.2. Disturbances near storm tops
Severe turbulence and large temperature changes have been found in cleat
air near the tops of thunderstorms, at least up to several thousand feet above
and up to 20 miles away from the nearest storm. Less severe turbulence and
c~
220
J. BURNHAM
is the largest single cause of passenger injuries in civil flying and compensation
costs the airlines a lot of money.
The avoidance of at least moderate and severe turbulence associated with
storms is therefore likely to be considered of some importance, even if it
c o
Unottenuoted echo
uolion
u~
o_"6 601"-/,,///'~"-Echo with 18dB otfenuotion
40
~
"~ ~B
ea
'~oc
r-6"
F//
20 rI
>
0
(3_"~,,
WSR 57el. zero elevation

based on 40 pelches.
I
i
I
I
t0
20
30
40
Distance, nautical miles
Percentage of polches of rough air with derived gust velocities
greater than 2ft/sec which lie within given distance of radar echoes
._ o
Unottenuated echo
=~ iooF \ ~ - ~ ~a
.c o
60~t ~
"f
ho wilh 12dB attenuation

"Echo wilh 18dB attenuation
"6 ~
F/
~
40V
o._,,2 20J~'g
I
~_.~
0
WSR 57 at zero elevation

based on 19 patches
I
I
I
I
I0
20
50
40
Distance, nautical miles
Percentage of patches of rough air with derived gust velocities
greater than 6ft/sec which lie within given distence of radar echoes
.c_ o
Unatlenuoted echo
,ooF
~
~"6
801-"
60
.~
"E-o
o~_
8=
~.~
20~_
1
\/~.:~r
/.~'Echo
with 12dB ottenuo,ion
cho with 18dB attenuation
WSR 57 at zero elevation
I b S e d l n 6 P~ches I
,o
20
30
40
Distance, nouticol miles
Percentoge of patches of rough oir with derivedgust velocities
greoler than 12ft/secwhich lie within given clistonceof rodorechoes
I~o. 35. Distance of turbulence patches found in clear air at altitudes between
40,000 fl and 50,000 ft from radar echoes of the storms (from ref. 4).
could be demonstrated that the probability that such turbulence would cause
structural failure was acceptably low.
Insufficient data are available for it to be possible to advance, with very
much certainty, storm avoidance criteria for supersonic transports during
cruising flight. On the basis of what is known at the present time, it seems
likely that avoidance of storms by 10,000 ft vertically and 30 miles laterally
would probably keep the aircraft and its passengers out of serious trouble.
The need for further research in this area is clear. It is worth remembering
that the storm avoidance criteria used by present subsonic transports are
221
based mainly on long and cosily experience, as for example, in the jet upset
accidents, ~x~ rather than on scientific data.
5.2.3. Areas of the worm where a supersonic transport might encounter

storm problems during cruising flight
If the storm avoidance criteria to be used by a supersonic transport during
cruise are to be along the lines advancedin the previous section, storms exceeding 50,000 ft in height are of concern to a Mach 2 aircraft and those exceeding
60,000 ft to one travelling at M a t h 3, assuming that the aircraft are flying at
their design cruising altitudes.
Storms exceeding 60,000 ft in altitude are known to occur in a number o f
parts of the world, those of the Midwest of the U.S.A. being the best documented. Even here, relatively little information is available Cle~ on their frequency and the distances between them when they do occur. The data that
have been collected, cover only a few of the possible occasions in the past few
years and these in an area less than a tenth of the total region in which such
storms occur in the U.S.A. There is indirect evidence ~ls~ that storms in the
pre-monsoon period in North India may well reach 70,000 ft and that those
over South-East China are comparable to those found in the U.S.A. The
possibility that storms in some other parts of the world occasionally reach
60,000 ft cannot be ruled out.
Storms exceeding 50,000 ft in altitude may occur in some seasons in many
parts of the world. {ls~ In addition to the regions mentioned above, the whole
of South-East Asia from India to Australia, West Africa, the Caribbean,
parts of South America, the Mediterranean area and even on rare occasions
the U.K., must be included. The data available are quite inadequate for an
assessment of likely supersonic transport problems to be made in any of these
areas. Relatively few storms in these areas seem likely to reach 50,000 It,
although many probably reach well over 40,000 ft, so that general statistics
of the frequency of occurrence of thunderstorms are not particularly valuable
in this connection.
The studies made by Roach cxe,la~ are most valuable, but much more needs
to be done. As examples, Figs. 36 and 37 are reproduced from ref. 16 and
show the distribution of storm tops obtained from photographs (such as
those shown in Figs. 38 and 39) taken by a U2 aircraft which was taking part
in the U.S. National Severe Storms Programme. The average distance between
storm tops above 50,000 ft is less than 30 miles on both days. The criterion
suggested above implies that a supersonic transport flying at 60,000 ft should
not pass between two storm tops above 50,000 It, if these are less than 60
miles apart. To get from one side of one of these squall lines to the other,
such an aircraft would have either to divert round one end of the line, or
zoom to a greater altitude.
222
J. BURNHAM
\
\
\
\
. / J " \,.~2310 / /
/~
Fhght [*JR-45B 25May1962

Cloud distribution observed ebout 2330 G.M.T. 25 Mey 1962
FIo. 36. Distribution of storm top heights based on photographs taken by a U2

aircraft on May 25, 1962 (from ref. 16). Key: The aircraft track is marked as a
dashed line with time (GMT) marked along it at 5-rain intervals. The flat cirrus
deck is marked by open cross-hatching. The areas defined by thick crinkled
boundaries contain distinct Cb towers. The areas defined by thin crinkled boundaries contain cloud masses of chaotic appearance which usually surround major
Cb tops. Figures such as 43 denote a storm top at a height of 43,000 ft growing
+2'5
at 2500 ft min-X. These figures were entered only when measurement was possible.
Ftc. 38. Photograph taken from a height of around 65,000 ft looking south along
the squall line shown in Fig. 39 (from ref. 16).
FIG. 39. Storm top taken from a height of about 65,000 ft (from ref. 16). (The
track of the aircraft is shown in Fig. 36.)
223
5.2.4. The detection of thunderstorms and the determination of
the heights of their tops

The weather radar which will be fitted to SSTs will detect the presence o f
thunderstorms ahead o f the aircraft at ranges in excess o f 150 miles. On the
30
I
I" li(:Jnt MH-4.tJ :)uune I ~ o c

Cloud distribution observed about 2 2 5 0 GMT. 5June 1962
FIG. 37. Distribution of storm top heights based on photographs taken by a U2

aircraft on June 5, 1962 (from ref. 16). Key: The aircraft track is marked as a
dashed line with time (GMT) marked along it at 5-rain intervals. The fiat cirrus
deck is marked by open cross-hatching. The areas defined by thick crinkled
boundaries contain distinct Cb towers. The areas defined by thin crinkled
boundaries contain cloud masses of chaotic appearance which usually surround
major Cb tops. Figures such as 43 denote a storm top at a height of 43,000 ft
+2"5
growing at 2500 ft min -1. These figures were entered only when measurement
was possible.
majority o f routes, the tops o f storms will usually be sufficiently far below
the aircraft during cruise for it to be unnecessary for the aircraft to fly a r o u n d
them. In order to decide which storms can safely be overflown and which
cannot, a knowledge o f the height o f the storm tops is necessary, and this
information is needed when the aircraft is no closer than a b o u t 100 miles
to the storms.
224
J. BURNHAM
The relationship between the included angle of a radar beam and the radar
wavelength is shown in Fig. 40 for a radar with a 36 in. diameter antenna.
The curve given is only approximate (19) but is sufficiently accurate for present
purposes. (Values for particular radars are not likely to vary by more than
20 per cent from the curve and variations would have to be by factors of two
or more to invalidate the argument which follows.) Beam width is inversely
proportional to antenna diameter at a fixed wavelength, the 36 in. dish quoted
in Fig. 40 being about the largest which is likely to be fitted to a supersonic
transport. Figure 41 shows the distance covered by a beam of given included
angle as a function of range.
I0
8
"o
g
"Q
~4
o
"ID
u
0.5
I0
Wavelength,
cm
Fro. 40. The relationship between beam width and wavelength for a radar with a
36 in. diameter dish.
Weather radars currently planned for supersonic transports operate on
wavelengths around either 3 cm (X band) or 5 cm (C band). Since thunderstorms are essentially cylindrical in shape with diameter about equal to height,
it can be seen from Figs. 40 and 41 that the volume occupied by a 60,000 ft
thunderstorm will just fill the beam of a 3 cm radar at a range of 200 miles.
The corresponding figure for a radar operating on 5 cm wavelength is about
130 miles. Also, at supersonic transport altitudes geometrical effects imply
that the choice of antenna tilt can have significant effects on the results
obtained, as illustrated in Fig. 42. The radar reflectivity of a thunderstorm is
a measure of its content of liquid water and wet hail and is not spread
uniformly throughout the volume which the storm occupies. The retteetivity
225
60,000
50,000
E" 40,0oc
.o
.~_
.c
3o,ooc
.c_.
E
:
20,00(
"~
I0,00(
Range,
n miles
FIG 41. Distance covered by a beam with given included angle, as a function of
range.
Radar beam width 3.5
.Altitude
"Hole" in storm
shows region giving
strong radar return
50 miles
What is seen at this
range depends critically
an returns from upper
level of storm. More
down tilt gives better
picture but more
distant storms will
probably not be seen
I00 miles
More down tilt gives
better picture b~Jtrncy
result in more distant
storms being lost in
ground return
55,000it
200 miles
Lcrger down tilt results
in storm being lost in
ground return
FIG. 42. Diagram showing geometrical effects on radar view of a large storm from
supersonic transport cruise altitudes.
of the storm core, which occupies about 10 per cent o f this volume, will be
about 105 times the average value for the outer 25 per cent o f the storm. A
sketch o f the typical shape of radar reflectivity contours o f a large storm in
the Midwest o f the U.S.A. is given in Fig. 43. (Since in a given storm the
reflectivity changes with time and no two storms arc exactly alike, too much
should not be read into the detail shown. This picture may not be typical o f
storms which occur in some other parts o f the world. It seems possible that
226
J. BURNHAM
~l
\ \ 'l!'l I : / i',,'~'~," " / " - - " - ' - ~

I1~o~3t
,V,
''~ll
, ![ ii!/ i'.1
i, ' - - 7 < - P l o ' ~
t ,,o
;/!V-,O;~7
\Cirrus
anvil
o, v,s, ,e c o0d
I ,
ti:l i,ql '~ iI.'

J
ir i
iI
I i
i I III
I
I
I
~ \ " x \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
J_
I0
n miles
_ J
FiG. 43. Sketch showing a possible distribution of radar reflectivityin a 60,000 ft

thunderstorm.
the high reflectivities in thunderstorms in monsoon areas do not reach the
heights attained in the Midwest of the U.S.A.) Thus, although the visible
cloud will fall the radar beam at ranges of 100 miles, the part of the cloud
effectively seen by the radar is not likely to occupy more than 30 per cent to
50 per cent of the beam at this range. The picture given by an X band or
C band airborne radar o f a storm at ranges beyond 100 miles is likely to be
more strongly dependent on details of the radar beam shape than on the
distribution of refleetivity in the storm. Useful measurements of maximum
reflectivity, which would be of interest in determining the intensity of the
storm and so, perhaps if more were known, of its maximum height, are clearly
impossible at ranges of this order.
The accuracy with which measurements of storm top heights can be made
cannot possibly be significantly better than the radar beamwidth. At 30 miles
range this is 10,000 ft at X band and 15,000 ft at C band. The effects of side
lobes in the antenna characteristics would reduce the accuracy of such
measurements still further. Thus, although airborne weather radars operating on X band or C band are quite capable of detecting the presence of storms
at ranges required by a supersonic transport, such radars would be quite useless as a means of determining the height of the top of a storm at anything like
the required range. A major breakthrough in antenna design would be required for this to be possible.
The maximum size of weather radar scanner which can be fitted to a supersonic transport is strictly limited by the size and shape of the nose of the aeroplane and scanner diameters are not likely to exceed about 36 in. The only
way in which the radar beamwidth could be usefully reduced would be to work
at much shorter wavelengths. A beamwidth of 0- 5 would be possible at 0.5
em wavelength and such a beam would only include a slice 5000 ft high at a
range o f 100 miles. Useful airborne measurements of storm top heights might
just be possible with such a radar. There are, however, two snags in this idea.
227
First, the radar reflectivity 5000 ft below the top of the storm might well be
at least a thousand times that in the top itself, so that with the beam pointed
at the storm top from a range of 100 miles, a bigger return might be obtained
from the antenna sidelobes than from the main lobe itself. Secondly at wavelengths less than around a centimetre, echoes would be obtained from practically every piece of visible cloud in the sky, and probably from some clouds
which are not visible. It might be possible to distinguish between echoes from
storm tops and those from other clouds on the basis of echo intensity. So far
as is known, no measurements of radar echoes from storm tops have been
made at wavelengths less than about 3 cm. The use of radar with wavelengths
less than a centimetre would offer some advantages to a SST and, despite the
snags outlined above and the fact that X or C band equipment would probably still be needed for use at lower altitudes, some exploratory work with
such a radar would be valuable.
Radar measurements of storm top heights, at ranges exceeding 50 miles,
can be made more accurately from the ground than from aircraft since larger
antenna can be used. In practice, however, sidelobe effects cause difficulties.
The author has seen an echo at 65,000 ft from a storm the top of which was
below 55,000 It, due to sidelobe effects, using an X-band radar with a vertical
beamwidth of 0.5 . Since such effects are conservative, from the aircraft point
of ~iew, their existence does not preclude ground radar measurements of storm
top heights being useful to a SST. Strong, and possibly even detectable, echoes
do not exist from storm tops during the early growth of a storm for wavelengths longer than about a centimetre. Whilst this probably means that there
is no hail in the storm tops at this time, severe turbulence is likely to exist
there, at least during the growing stage. The use of wavelengths shorter than
about 3 cm is not practicable for a ground radar since very high power would
be needed to be sure that high reflectivities at low altitudes would not completely absorb the beam on a significant number of occasions. A further
possibility which would be worth exploring is that a reasonably precise
relationship may exist between the maximum reflectivity of a storm (which
can be measured accurately by a suitable ground radar at ranges up to at
least 100 miles) and its maximum height, when other factors such as the wind
and temperature distribution in the atmosphere, are taken into account. So
far as is known, no work has been done on this.
Although information from ground radars can be of considerable help to a
supersonic transport during cruise, it is most unlikely that such radars will
exist, anyway during their early years of operation, in many parts of the world
affected by storms. So far as is known, no plans have been made anywhere in
the world to measure storm top heights by radar as a routine service. It is
therefore necessary to consider other possibilities.
Even if a pilot could see the top and bottom of a storm and knew its range,
his visual judgement of the height of the cloud top, when 50 miles away from
228
J. B U R N H A M
it, is likely to be in error by more than 5000 ft on many occasions. Most of the
time, his view in storm areas will be somewhat similar to that shown in Fig.
38, where the cirrus "blow off" from the storm hides everything but the peaks.
Even larger errors in estimating storm top heights are likely in such cases. At
shorter ranges, such as those at which the photographs shown in Fig. 39 were
taken, errors of 5000 ft are known to have been made. Thus even in daylight,
the pilot's visual judgement of the height of storm tops will not be a safe
guide in deciding which storms can safely be overflown.
/
60-o
x
D
I
U.K
Florida
india (monsoon}
Oklahoma
(top bar is max height on
a particular day
/
"5 5O
/
/
o
E
//
"5
30
_E
E
2O
I
I
I
20
30
40
Height of enviromenfol tropopouse,
I
50
thousonds of ft.
I
60
P~O. 44. Heights of tops of thunderstorms m severalparts of the world, in relation
to the height of the environmental tropopause (from ref. 18).

The height of the tropopause is not a useful predictor o f storm top heights
in many parts of the world, as shown in Fig. 44. Roach's work described in
refs. 16 and 18 does, however, provide what may be a possible solution to the
problem of deciding which storms can safely be overflown. This method uses
a relatively simple-minded theory, "parcel theory", ~ to determine from radiosonde temperature and humidity measurements, the maximum height that
storms are likely to reach in a given region on a given day. F o r the relatively
This theory considers the behaviour of a parcel of air from low altitudes, as it ascends.
No mixing with surrounding air is assumed to take place.
229
small sample of data which is available to test the theory the agreement, as
shown in Figs. 45 and 46, shows great promise. Clearly much more work is
needed before confidence could be placed in the method as a forecasting tool.
T-Height of environmental tropopouse
P - Maximum parcel height

24 Moy62
25 May 67.
5 dune 62
31 May 63
_p
o.
0
E
8 5O
"6
.C
'E 40 ]
-T
-T
-T
I
5
0
5
5
Number of storms with maximum height in given bonds
-p
FIG. 45. Distributions of storm top height for four squall lines in Oklahoma,
showing tropopause height and maximum storm top height predicted by parcel
theory from data in ref. 16.
60
*
U.K.
D
T
I/
Florida
India (monsoon}
Oklahoma
,t,
"-r)~,/
~o
.J- u
/I
J. a particular day)
50
.T/I
I/I I
I crop bar ~s max height on

"6
I JT /
//
40
~,Y
~
30
/e
~'I,~
./.,~
f~'~
E
e j
//
.~.
/
Storm top height
Z o Maximum parcel
- height
Ze Equilibrium "parcel"
height
Zs
j"
2C
f
.e
q"
20
30
40
50
60
Maximum "parcel" height,
thousands of ft.
F~o. 46. Maximum heights attained by thunderstorms vs. maximum height

predicted by "parel theory" for storms in that area on that day (from ref. 18).
230
j. BURNHAM
In particular, enough data needs to be obtained and analysed to give some idea
of the probability that a storm might exceed the "maximum parcel height" by
altitudes of about 5000 and 10,000 ft. If these probabilities turn out to be
sufficiently small, a satisfactory storm avoidance criterion for a supersonic
transport during cruising flight might take the following form. (The numbers
are given only as a guide. Necessary further research may well suggest some
modification of them.) " I f the 'maximum parcel height' in a given region on
a given day is more than 12,000 ft below flight altitude, all storms in this
region can safely be ignored. If the 'maximum parcel height' is nearer the
flight altitude than this value, all storms in the region must be avoided with a
clearance of at least 30 miles (from the radar echo at and below tropopause
height, using an X or C band radar) unless there is positive evidence that the
top of a particular storm is more than 12,000 ft below flight altitude." The
positive evidence referred to might come from ground or airborne radar but
not from the pilot's visual judgement. This evidence would also have to be
recent, as rates of storm growth around 1000 ft/min are possible in the
stratosphere.
So far as can be seen at the present time, the only safe solution to the question of how a decision is to be made about which storms can safely be overflown by a supersonic transport and which cannot, is likely either to be along
the lines outlined above, or will involve a large number of unnecessary diversions. Further work on this subject is therefore considered to be of great
importance.
5.3. Disturbances Associated with Mountain Waves
It is clear that severe disturbances occur, at least up to the cruising altitude
of a M a t h 2 supersonic transport, in mountain wave conditions over the
Western U.S.A. In how many other parts of the world they occur is largely
unknown at the present time. Results obtained to date suggest that it may be
over-optimistic to assume that turbulence associated with mountain wave is
no more prevalent in the stratosphere than at the heights flown by present
subsonic transports. On the basis of the R.A.E. mountain wave research,
however, it appears that moderate or strong waves only occur in the stratosphere when wave motion of comparable intensity would be forecast in the
troposphere by existing forecasting methods. Further, the supersonic transport
will be sensitive, in a way which subsonic transports are not, to the large and
rapid temperature fluctuations which sometimes occur in wave conditions in
the stratosphere. These temperature fluctuations have not been investigated,
to any worthwhile extent, at lower altitudes nor, from a supersonic transport
point of view, would these be significant.
Airlines which operate over the Western U.S.A. have put considerable
effort into the improvement of mountain wave forecasting at present jet
231
transport altitudes.~20,21, 22, 28) The forecasts produced are used to route
flights away from areas in which moderate or severe wave activity is forecast
and, if necessary, significantly longer distances are flown in order to do so.
It seems certain that similar procedures will have to be applied, on some
routes, to supersonic transport. The extensive flying reported in ref. 3 is of
no help in assessing how many routes will be affected, as consideration of the
flight tracks which are given~a~shows that only a small amount of time was
spent in areas and at times when waves would be expected on the basis of the
R.A.E. studies. The latter suggests ways in which radiosonde data could be
studied to give what is believed to be a reliable indication, on a world-wide
basis, of the supersonic transport routes which may be affected. It is important
that such studies be made, both to give some idea of the likely extent of the
problem and to suggest areas where further flight measurements could most
usefully be made. Further flight research is clearly needed if an adequate
understanding of severe disturbances due to mountain waves is to be obtained.
Only with the results of such work can reliable forecasting methods be developed and proved which will allow such disturbances to be avoided during
routine supersonic operations.
No technique similar to the use of weather radar in the detection of thunderstorms is currently available for the detection of mountain waves and of
the disturbances associated with them. Much money and effort has been spent
in recent years, particularly in the U.S.A., which it was hoped would lead to
the development of airborne instruments capable of detecting the existence of
clear air turbulence at useful distances ahead of aircraft. It seems fair to say
that the only technique which shows any worthwhile promise is the use of
infra-red radiometry to detect temperature changes which may be associated
with the turbulence. Only a fairly small propol~ion of the overall effort has
gone into this technique. As mentioned earlier, all the severe disturbances
associated with mountain waves which have so far been measured (and many
of those associated with thunderstorms) occur near, but not necessarily
simultaneously with, large and rapid temperature fluctuations. However,
while the angular resolution of such radiometers can easily be made small
compared with a radar, their ability to resolve range is very inferior. The best
that it seems reasonable to hope for is an ability, in effect, to measure the
difference between the average temperature over some tens of miles at 50 miles
range, and that of the air close to the aircraft. In view of the short distance and
duration of most of the large temperature changes which have been measured,
doubt may be expressed as to the ability of an infra-red radiometer to
unambiguously detect them. Although it may well be worthwhile to pursue
radiometer development with supersonic transport in mind, a few further
words of caution are necessary. First, it is not known how transient are the
large disturbances; if these exist for periods less than a few minutes, detection
at useful ranges of the large disturbances themselves is not possible in
232
J. BURNHAM
principle. Secondly, the relationship between the magnitude of a temperature

change and that of the other disturbances associated with it may not be
straightforward, although it does appear from present results that, in general,
the larger the one the larger the other, so far as mountain wave disturbances
are concerned. Temperature changes of a few degrees at wavelengths around
10 miles occur at constant altitude in smooth wave conditions. But the
detection of such changes at ranges which would allow the whole region
affected by the waves to be avoided would require a radiometer of vastly
better range resolution than can be thought near the current state of the art.
For the latter task, a range of 200 miles, spatial resolution of 1 mile and
temperature resolution of 0.5C probably define about the minimum useful
performance.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The R.A.E. high altitude turbulence reseamh programme has attempted to
find and measure severe atmospheric disturbances in the altitude range from
40,000 ft to 50,000 ft. Such disturbances have been found in clear air in the
vicinity of thunderstorms, at distances up to 20 miles from the storms, and in
mountain wave conditions. In both cases, large horizontal gusts and large and
rapid fluctuations in air temperature have been measured, as well as severe
turbulence. The only severe turbulence reported in refs. 1, 2 and 12 occurred
at altitudes between 45,000 ft and 60,000 ft in mountain wave conditions. In
these studies~1, *, m the region around the tops of thunderstorms was not
specifically investigated.
Although none of the turbulence measured in any of these research programmes is of sufficient intensity to cause direct structural damage to a supersonic transport designed to current standards, the longer period horizontal and
vertical gusts might cause handling difficulties and the temperature fluctuations arc sufficiently large to be a potential source of intake and engine problems. In view of the very limited time spent, during any of these research
programmes, in conditions where it is considered that severe disturbances in
the stratosphere are likely, it is most improbable that those so far encountered
are the worst that may exist. It is concluded that severe disturbances exist in
the stratosphere, at least up to altitudes around 60,000 ft which would best
be avoided by supersonic transports.
The avoidance of thunderstorms during cruising flight will have to be
accomplished by the use of weather radar carried on the aircraft itself except
in a very few regions where ground-borne weather radars am (or may be within
the necessary timescale) linked with e n - r o u t e air traffic control facilities. To
the extent that many thunderstorms do not reach altitudes where they would
affect a cruising supersonic transport, whereas practically all extend up to and
often above the cruise height of subsonic transports, thunderstorm problems
233
with supersonic transports will be less severe. Present airborne weather radars
however, will not allow the height of the storm top to be determined with
worthwhile accuracy. Although there should be no difficulty in detecting the
presence of a thunderstorm at a sufiieient range for it to be avoided by a
supersonic transport, geometrical considerations suggest that care will be
needed in setting tilt of the radar if optimum avoidance is to be accomplished.
Severe mountain wave disturbances have been found in the stratosphere on
those days when strong wave activity would have been forecast at lower
altitudes using existing methods. In frequently affected areas, particularly the
Western U.S.A., such low altitude forecasts are used on subsonic transport
operations to route flights away from affected areas. I t appears probable that
the same methods would be equally effective with supersonic transports.
Although all severe disturbances so far encountered in the stratosphere
were associated with thunderstorms or with mountain waves, the possibility
that they m a y occur in other situations cannot be ruled out. The extensive
flying reported in refs. 1, 2 and 3 does, however, make this possibility appear
rather remote. The results obtained in this work suggests that, although
turbulence is not so widespread as at lower altitudes, up to about 15 per cent
of the time, at altitudes up to 60,000 ft, may be spent in noticeable turbulence
in some regions at certain times of the year.
So far as the general turbulence environment in which the supersonic
transports will cruise is concerned, it appears that the distance between encounters with gust induced accelerations exceeding given values will be
considerably greater than is the case in current subsonic transport operations
at least in the case of the M a t h 2 aircraft. This is partly due to the lower
overall incidence of turbulence at the higher altitudes at which the supersonic
transports will cruise and partly because the effect of the increased speed of
the supersonic transport is more than compensated (at least in the case of
typical M a t h 2 aircraft) by effects due to lower air density and lift curve slope
in determining the response of the aircraft to given gusts.
REFERENCES
1. COLEMAN,T. L. and STEIr~R,R. Atmospheric turbulence measurements obtained from
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
airplane operations at altitudes between 20,000 ft and 75,000 ft for several areas of the
Northern Hemisphere. NASA TN D 548 (1960).
CROOKS,W. High altitude clear air turbulence. AFFDL-TR-65-144 (1965).
CROOKS,W., HOnLET F. M., and PROPHET,D. T. An investigation of high altitude clear
air turbulence. AFFDI..-TR-67-123 (1967).
BURNHAM,J. and SPAVINS,C. S. Some results of a study of atmospheric turbulence in
clear air above thunderstorms and of its relationship to weather radar pictures. ESSA
IERTM NSSL 30 (1966).
BURNSA. and HAnnOLD,T. W. An atmospheric disturbance encountered by a Canberra
over storms at Oklahoma on May 27 1965. ESSA IERTM NSSL 30 (1966).
KORDES,E. E. and Low, B. J. Preliminary evaluation of XB 70 airplane encounters
with high altitude turbulence. NASA TN D 4209 (1967).
234
j. BURNHAM
7. STEINER, R. Some observations on the XB 70 response and pilot comments. NASA

Conference on Aircraft Response to Turbulence, Langley, Va., 1968.
8. SPILLANE,K. T. Clear air turbulence at high levels and supersonic transport. Nature,
Vol. 214 (5085), pp. 237-239.
9. PRESS,H. and STEINER,R. An approach to the problem of estimating severe and repeated
gust loads for missile operations. NASA TN 4332 (1958).
10. STAUFFER,W. A. Development of a power spectral gust design procedure for aircraft.
Lockheed California Company unpublished report.
11. KING, G. E. Civil aircraft airworthiness data recording programme. Study of severe
turbulence encountered by civil aircraft. Unpublished Mintech Report.
12. HEmNG, W. S. Ozone measurements for diagnostic studies of atmospheric circulation.
A I A A Paper 65, 462 (1965).
13. PINSKER, W. J. G. The capability of high speed transport aircraft to avoid areas of
adverse weather. Unpublished Mintech Report.
14. BURNHAM,J. A study of turbulence intensity inside thunderstorms and of its relationship to weather radar echoes based on measurements made in Oklahoma in 1965.
Unpublished Mintech Report.
15. BURNHAM,J. and CHAPLIN,J. C. Some measurements of the specific gravity of large
hailstones. Unpublished Mintech Report.
16. ROACH, W. T. On the nature of summit areas of severe storms in Oklahoma. Q.J. Roy.
Met. Soc. Vol. 93, No. 397 (1967).
17. BlSC,OOD, P. L. and BURNHAM,J. A review of the jet upset problem. Unpublished
Mintech Report.
18. ROACH, W. T. Giant convective storms as a potential weather hazard to aviation.
Unpublished Meteorological Office Paper.
19. BATTAN,L. J. Radar Meteorology. University of Chicago Press, 1959.
20. HARRISON,H. T. Synoptic features of the mountain wave at Denver, Colorado. UAL
Met. Circ. 41 (1965).
21. HARRISON,H. T. Forecasting the mountain wave at Denver, Colorado. U A L Met.
Circ. 42 (1957).
22. HARRISON,H. T. The mountain wave. NASA CR 315 (1965).
23. HARRISON,H. T. Mountain wave exposure on jet routes of Northwest Airlines and
United Air Lines. U A L Met. Circ. 60 (1966).

Burnham 1970

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Burnham 1970

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4

ATMOSPHERIC TURBULENCE AT THE

2. HIGH ALTITUDE TURBULENCE RESEARCH PROGRAMMES

TURBULENCEAT THE CRUISEALTITUDESOF SUPERSONICAIRCRAFT

Studies of turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorm tops in

Results at higher altitudes have been obtained in a number of collaborative

3.1. The General Turbulence Environment

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

AI) Hicat pi. 2 flights

FIG. 1. Percentageof time spentin turbulencefor XB 70 and Hicat Phase2 flights.

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

FIG. 3. Percentageof flightsof a pilotless target aircraft from Woomera, Australia,

FIG. 4. Percentage of turbulence patches exceeding a given length between

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

FIG. 6. Distribution of derived gust velocities for routine aircraft operations on

AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC

30 - 40'000 f t / N ' ~ ' ~ " ~ ' ~ , ~

Fie. 8. Distribution of dedvexl gust velocities for cruise of subsonic and

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC

on average at only about one-hundredth of the frequency of encounter with

transport M=2 55,00Oft

Supersonic transport M=2

Incremental normal acceleration, g

FIo. 9. Average frequency of encountering gust-induced normal acceleration

3.2. Spectral Densities of True Gust Velocity

FIO.10. Spectraldensitiesof atmosphericturbulencefor threevaluesof turbulence

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

Experimental results obtained of

Turbulence scale, thousands of ft

3.3. Severe Turbulence

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

Ref. 2 flight 33 run3 (3rain)

RAE Feb.13 1967

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

3.3.2. Turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorm tops

FIG. 16. Changes in true airspeed measured near storm tops.

AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

gust velocities exceeding 2 ft/sec), but it should be remembered that a few

Magnitude of horizontal gust, it/seo

FIG. 17. Magnitude of horizontal gusts obtained from airspeed fluctuations

500 FTrue airspeed

~ ~1~ ~l..f/uncer tain~

FIG. 19. Largestderived gust velocitiesencounteredin each patch of turbulence

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

On the basis of the present results it appears that detailed examination of

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

F'osition where severe

Mountain waves (Feb. 14 1967) I 4 0 , 0 0 0 to

U2 storm data, 1967tt

Mountain wave (ref, 12)

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

FIG.27. Air temperatureand turbulencemeasuredat 37,000ft near Palm Springs,

5. THE PROBLEM OF SEVERE DISTURBANCES FOR A

5.1. The Manoeuvering Capability of a Supersonic Transport

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

FIo. 30. Distance f r o m a circular obstacle at w h i c h a turn must be initiated to

FiG. 31. Distance f r o m a circular obstacle at which a turn m u s t be initiated to

TURBULENCE AT THE CRUISE ALTITUDES OF SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

Thus if a supersonic transport is to turn to avoid weather hazards ahead

5.2. Disturbances Associated with Thunderstorms

Turbulence inside storms

The potential hazards involved in penetrating the tops of thunderstorms

WSR 57el. zero elevation