684. A Weight Comparison of Various Small Vehicle Recovery Systems


SAWE Members get a $200 store credit each year.*

Become a SAWE Member

*Store credit coupon available at checkout, click the button in your shopping cart to apply the coupon.
Not applicable to SAWE textbooks and current conference technical papers.


D O Nevinger: 684. A Weight Comparison of Various Small Vehicle Recovery Systems. 1968.



Since the inception of target vehicles, recovery of the vehicle after a flight has been a major element in the cost effectiveness of the system. Extensive target re-use has been possible through use of proven recovery systems. This paper does not intend to encompass all the various types of recovery systems since their number is too many. The various systems that are covered are either being used or under study by the Ryan Aeronautical Company,
Table 1 lists the various systems, advantages, disadvantages and associated weights. The weights of system are expressed in percentages of recovered weight. This basic percentage has been proven to be reliable for a ‘first cut’ estimation. The advantages and disadvantages use the Ground Impact Parachute Recovery System as a base point for comparisons.
For the selection of suitable system consideration is given to more than just the weight and volume aspect of each system. Other factors involved are the use of a recovery vehicle, cost, development time, terrain for recovery,etc.
For target vehicles, other than the Precision Landing System, the recovery system forms an integral part of the aft portion of the fuselage. This concept allows for ease of deployment and packing. There is no weight allowance for the electronic or electrical portion of the recovery system as the basic target system can be utilized.
For detail design data on parachute systems it is recommended that ‘Perform-nce of and Design Criteria for Deployable Aerodynamic Deceleration’ (Ref 1) be used.


SKU: Paper0684 Category: