A new version of the aeroprediction code (APC), the AP02, has been developed to address the requirements arising from advanced weapon concepts. The AP02 was formed by adding significant new technology and several productivity improvements to the previous version of the APC, the AP98. New technology added included 6 and 8 fin aerodynamics, improved nonlinear aerodynamics, improved pitch damping predictions, improved power-on base drag estimates, base-bleed effect on base drag estimation, improved axial force of nonaxisymmetric bodies and trailing-edge flap capability. Other improvements and productivity enhancements include an aerodynamic smoother, ballistic and three degree-of-freedom simulation modules as well as refinements for the pre- and post-processor for inputs and outputs of the AP02. Comparison of the predicted aerodynamics of the AP02 to AP98 and experimental data showed the AP02 to be slightly better than the AP98 in most cases that both codes would handle. However, due to the additional new technology incorporated into the AP02, many new options are available in the AP02 that are not available in the AP98. Therefore, the AP02 is more robust and, on average, is slightly more accurate than the AP98 in predicting aerodynamics of weapons.

A new version of the aeroprediction code (APC), the AP02, has been developed to address the requirements arising from advanced weapon concepts. The AP02 was formed by adding significant new technology and several productivity improvements to the previous version of the APC, the AP98. New technology added included 6 and 8 fin aerodynamics, improved nonlinear aerodynamics, improved pitch damping predictions, improved power-on base drag estimates, base-bleed effect on base drag estimation, improved axial force of nonaxisymmetric bodies and trailing-edge flap capability. Other improvements and productivity enhancements include an aerodynamic smoother, ballistic and three degree-of- freedom simulation modules as well as refinements for the pre- and post- processor for inputs and outputs of the AP02. Comparison of the predicted aerodynamics of the AP02 to AP98 and experimental data showed the AP02 to be slightly better than the AP98 in most cases that both codes would handle. However, due to the additional new technology incorporated into the AP02, many new options are available in the AP02 that are not available in the AP98. Therefore, the AP02 is more robust and, on average, is slightly more accurate than the AP98 in predicting aerodynamics of weapons.

The adaptation of ZONA unified hypersonic/supersonic method ZONA7U and its integration/development into a ZONA aerothermoelastic software system for transatmospheric vehicle (TAV)/thermal protection system (TPS) design/analysis was proven a successful tool through feasibility study with cases of a CKEM body, blunt cones, and a modeled X-34 wing body. Preceding the feasibility study, substantial effort was directed toward further development of a new code, ZSTREAM, and using it and ZABRO to replace the outdated modules in SHVD, thus to couple them with SHABP for aerothermoelastic applications. In the feasibility study, the cases are well validated with FD solutions. Next, computed heat rates by applying ZONA aerothermoelastic software to X-34 through two assigned hypersonic trajectories were shown and found to agree with those using MINIVER. A potential TPS design procedure was established using the obtained heat rates as an input to MINIVER, resulting in a minimum weight TPS per hot-wall consideration. With FEM/TRIM modules, ASTROS* yields the trim solution and stress distribution for a flexible X-34 at a typical trajectory joint, demonstrating the multifunctionality in MDO for the aerothermoelastic software.