SOLUTION errors are inherent in any computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation. Sources of error include spatial and temporal discretization, inadequacy or incapacity of physical models to capture complex fluid flow phenomena, and human errors in the setup and use of the CFD code. Systematic identification, reduction, and control of these various error sources is crucial if the results of CFD simulations are to be trusted for design and performance assessment of air vehicles. As Navier–Stokes solvers have matured, their role in support of design analysis has expanded considerably, and their ability to predict complex aerodynamic flows have been well demonstrated. Yet, as evidenced by the recent drag prediction workshops [1, 2], discretization errors remain a principal source of solution error, as compared with turbulence model or mesh type. Systematic grid refinement, although the commonly accepted approach to solution verification, can potentially be a laborious and