army aviation digest - aug 1973

8/12/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Aug 1973

1/52


2/52

UNITED

OF ARMY AVIATION , ACSFORTHE ARMYMG William J . Maddox Jr .

, U. S. ARMY AVIATIONO LMG Allen M. Burdett Jr .

COMDT, U. S. ARMY AVIATIONCOL Earl W . Fletcher

, U. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGESTRichard K. Tierney

ABOUT THE COVERAfraid to say No to the com-mander? What if you had to sayNo to the President of theUnited States? ee page 2

5 RMY VI TION1GESJAUGUST 1973 VOLUME 19 NUMViews From Readers

No , Sir, Mr . President .Combat And Training Developments , MAJ Frank T. Pet erliConcepts And Materiel And CTD , MAJ William E. Kelle rHLH , CPT Bre nda n P. Bla ckwell .Aeromaintenance, Floyd H. Trudeau , DAC .A First .Instrument Corner .Aeromedic, LTC Royce Mose s J r., USA F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

# 32 The Professional Investigation : WHY, Not WHATBe It Ever So Humble . . .

Write To Right .USAASO Sez . Insid

The mission of the U. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST is to provide information ot antional or functional nature concern ing sa fe ty and aircraft accident pr e ve ntion , trmaintenance , op e ra t ion s , r e search and d e ve lopment , aviat ion me dicine , and othlated data.The DIGEST Is an officia l Department of the Army periodical published monthlyth e supervision of the Commandant, U. S. Army Aviation School . Views expressedare not necessarily thole of De partment of the Army or the U.S. Army AviationPhotos are U. S. Army unless otherwise specified. Material may be reprinted prcredit Is given to the DIGEST and to the author , unless otherwise indicated .Articlel, photos, and items of Interest on Army aviat ion are Invited . Direct commtion is authorized to : Editor, U S. Army Aviation Digest, Fort Rucker, AL 36360.This publication ha s be e n approved by HeadfJuarters Department of the ASeptember 1972 .Active Army units receive distribution under the pinpoint distribution sYltem alined in AI 310.1. Complete DA Form 12-4 and send directly to CO, AG Publicationte r, 2800 Eastern Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21220 . For any change in distribution rments, initiate a revised DA Form 12-4.National Guard and Army Reserve units under pinpoint distribution also IhouldDA Form 124. Other National Guard units Ihould lubmit requests through theiadiutants general .Thole not eligible for official distribution or who desire personal caples of thecan order the magazine from the Superintendent of Documents , U S Government P

Office, Washington, D. C. 20402. Annual subscription rates are 8 .00 domeltic andoverseas. Single copies are 75 cents each.


3/52

Sir:

RJEWSROME DERS

(After ca refully reading the article A

Wing And . An Arm n the June1973 issue, I feel it should be retitledA Wing And . An Arm Equals Science Fiction.

unit to which I am attached has beentasked with search and rescue responsibilities for two major Air Force training centers in the same area . Our problem is one of timeliness in successfullylocating a pilot once he has ejected orcrashed. The UH -IH helicopter slimited to FM homing capability whilethe Air Force emergency transmittersare limited to UHF guard or 243.0.Prior to deactivation, Air Force search

and rescue units employed DF equipment on their helicopters in order toachieve homing capabilities.

Sir:

MAJ Donald G. BroadhurstCombat and Training DevelopmentsFt. Rucker , AL 36360

In addition to aeromedical evacuation for the Ft Sill, OK , area, the

Doe ' the Army have, or are thereplans to obtain, a comparable systemfor UHF homing that could be utilizedn the UH -IH?

Although we have been involved insearch and rescue only a short time, ourmission of preserving life combined

Continued on page 8

Now s The TimeU HUNDERHORSE 6 this is Redlegsmoke is out."Redleg 6 I've got cherry.""Roger, from cherry go right 300, drop 100,over.""Roger, right 300, drop 100, six is inbound."These were the' days when many a groundcommander would love to hear that whop-whopwhop. He didn't care what we looked or actedlike as long as we accomplished the mission.He might even thank us for our assistanceduring a recent mission or buy us a drink inthe club when he saw us. Yes sir, we provedwe were "Above the Best" during those days,but those days are gone. COL J. J. Groundcommander now appears to us to have re-vamped his attitude toward aviators. Don't kidyourself, he hasn't changed, it's just that henow has the opportunity to take a good hardlook at us eyeball to eyeball, and determine ifwe are "professionals." How many lives wesaved in combat may help our records, but

AUGUST 1973

how's it going to help us when he's giving usour just due" for our long hair, untrimmedmustache or lack of enthusiasm in carryingout an additional duty? It's notThis is our postcombat trial period that wehave just wandered into. The majority of usin Army aviation are junior commissioned orwarrant officers. The day we received our wingswe inherited the duty to establish a precedent

for professionalism which would be used as anexample for all Army officers. Now that ourrea I test is here let's rise to the occasion aswe did in the past and prove once again thatwe are truly "professionals." Let's volunteer toset the standards of appearance, conduct andsense of duty. We owe it to all, in or out ofaviation, because we are truly "ABOVE THEBEST." 1LT Richard A. Cowell52nd Aviation BattalionAPO San Francisco 96301

1


4/522

an interview with Bill Howell rmy helicopter pilot President Dwight D. Eisenhower who always balanced missaccomplishment with good {lying sen

U s RMY VI TION DIGES


5/52

NO,SIR, MR. PRESIDENTCOL FRANCIS MAX McCULLARCOMMANDER U.S. ARMYAGENCY FOR AVIATION SAFETYI selected Bill Howell for interviewbecause of his most interestingcareer and his fine safety record.As Army helicopter pilot for thePresident of the United States) hehad to be thoroughly safety con-scious. To belabor the obvious) hecould never take a chance with thatpassenger. In addition) Bill onlyhad one aircraft accident andthat quite early in an aviationcareer that spanned 17 yea -the cause being attributed to me-chanical failure. But as he tells itthere is a lesson even in thatmechanical failure worth learningfor all of us. So I took a taperecorder and persuaded Bill to talkabout ways and means to get a jobdone safely) ranging from figuringout a way to fly night missions

AUGUST 1973

safely with no artificial horizon torefusing to fly the President in mar-ginal weather. The following is qtranscription of my interview w t ~LTC Retired) William A. HoweLL )outstanding Army aviator) and per-sonal A rmy pilot for PresidentEisenhower for years.HOWELL: COL McCullar was overat the museum the other day, andhe caught me in a talkative moodand couldn't stop me.McCULLAR: That's what I'd like todo again today, Bill. On that particular day you told us of the eventsthat took place one day when youwere flying President Eisenhowerto Camp David. I'd like to start outwith that story because I think itillustrates good flying sense.HOWELL: This was one of thosemornings in Washington where wehad about a thousand-foot ceiling

and you could see 20 miles in anydirection. President Eisenhower decided he wanted to go to CampDavid. One of the staff called me,and I told him there wasn't anyway to get to Camp David. Therewas about 2,000 feet of it stickingup in the weather. So nothing happened and about 30 minutes laterI got another call. The Presidentstill wants to know if he can go toCamp David. I said, By car, butnot by helicopter. He wants togo by helicopter. I said, Not thismorning. He was apparently anxious to get out of there. So I gotanother call. Can he go to Sunshine? That's the farm at Gettysburg. I said, We can go anywherein the world but Camp David. Hesaid, Well, he wants to go to Sunshine then.We went over to the south lawn

Continued on page 36

LTC (Retired) William A Howell, President Eisenhower's personal Army helicopter pilot from December 1957 to January 1961, was the first Presidentialhelicopter pilot and the first commander of the Executive Flight Detachment.Retiring in 1963 as Director of Test, the U S. Army Aviation Test Board,LTC Howell began his Army career with his enlistment as a private soldier in1938. He graduated from OCS in September 1942, served in the NorthAfrican and Italian campaigns, and in 1946, attended the Army Air ForceLiaison Pilot School in San Marcos, TX For the rest of his military career,LTC Howell was intimately associated with Army aviation, his assignmentsincluding such aviation-oriented positions as aviation advisor to the Republicof Korea Army during the Korean Conflict, staff and faculty member of theAviation School, commander of the 3rd Transportation Battalion (Aviation),and commander of the U S. Army Transportation Test and Support Activity.He is qualified in both single- and twin-engine fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft,having served as instrument examiner and as permanent member of the aircraft accident investigation board, student elimination board and flying evaluation board. He is now curator of the Army Aviation Museum, Ft Rucker, Al.


6/52

Combatnd Training

DevelopmentsMajor Frank T PeterlinChief, n i n ~ Literature SectionCombat and Training DevelopmentsU. S. Army Aviation SchoolFOLLOWING major revisions within the Depart-ment of the Army last July, the U. S Army Avia-tion School (USAA VNS) at Ft. Rucker, AL, hasacquired a new look and added mission responsibili-

ties.The reorganization of the major elements of theDepartment of the Army is reflected in the photoabove.Combat and Training Developments (CTD) atthe Aviation School is organized in accordance witha standard school model provided by TRADOC , theacronym for the Training and Doctrine Command.TRADOC has absorbed most of the responsibilitiesof the former Continental Army Command andthe Combat Developments Command.

TRADOC manages all basic and advanced in-dividual training, commands the Army schools andhas operational control over the Defense LanguageInstitute and Defense Information School. The keymission, however, of developing doctrine and materielrequirements rests with the Combat and Training De-velopments organizations within each major school.Coordination in the important area of enhancingthe Army s combat effectiveness is providedTRADOC by:

Combined Arms Center, Ft Leavenworth, KS Logistics Center, Ft Lee, VA

4

Key changes have taken place at the homeArmy aviation. To keep you up-to-date, articles beginning on these two pages are psented as slightly modified versions of a Vbriefing given to senior officers visiting newly organized Combat and Training Devopments at the U S Army Aviation School ,Rucker, AL. This organization was developprima ri y from resou rces of the former ComDevelopments Command Aviation Agenwhich was a class II activity at Ft. Rucker, athe Aviat ion School s Office of Doctrine Devopment, Literature And Plans

Administration Center, Ft. Benjamin Harrison, INThese centers have developed tables of organtion and equipment (TOEs) for division, corps army levels. The Combat and Training Develments organizations within the TRADOC schoare responsible for developing TOEs for units throthe brigade level for which they have proponencyBy agreement, each center has direct taskauthority for its associated schools. n the casethe Aviation School, Combat and Training Develments receives tasking from the Combined ArCenter, commonly referred to as CACDA

Service Schools Associated With CACDA Air Defense Armor

Field Artillery Institu te of MilitaryAssistance

Aviation Infantry Chemical Intelligence Combat Surve illance Military Policeand Elect ronic Warfare Engineer Signal

Continued on page

U. S ARMY AVIATION DIGE


7/52


8/52

development, has been approved by the Departmentof the Army.

UTTAS is the aircraft system intended to replacethe UH-l helicopter. Its concept formulation wascompleted by Combat and Training Developments.

The UTTAS airframe and engine programs areproponent to CTD 's Materiel Division and are onschedule. Technical performance specifications ofUTTAS are listed in the box below.

Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft Systemharacteristic Requirem ent

VFPC HOGE @ 4000 Ft/95 0 F; 500 RPMVROC(450-550 FPM Band) @ 95% IPPayload 11 Combat Equipped Troops (2,640Lbs); 4-6 Litter PatientsEndurance 2.3 Hrs Including Reserve;Capacity For 3.0 Hrs Cruised 150KTAS (145-175 KTAS Band)Air Speed 150 KTAS (145-175 KT AS Band)Maintainability 4.2 MMH/FH Corrective Maint.

@ Org, DS GS; Daily 300 HrInspectionsDeployability C-130 (1); C-141 (2); C-5A (6) SeaLiftManeuverability Avoid 200 Ft Obstacle In 1100-1300 Ft @ 150 KTAS; 1.75g/3Sec; 0.25g/2 Sec Sustained

Boeing Vertol's mockup o the proposed UTIAS

UTTAS airframe manufacturers both completedtheir preliminary design milestones last March. Amock-up review is scheduled for next month but isexpected earlier. The first flight is planned for November 1974. Boeing-Vertol and Sikorsky expect to beatthe flight milestone by 1 or 2 months . Meanwhile,General Electric has been funded to deliver 12engines-six each for Boeing and Sikorsky.6

The first flight-qualified engines are to be delivto the airframe contractors in August 1974, butwell be a month ahead of schedule.The next major system is the heavy lift helico(HLH). CTD is conducting the concept formulastudy which will establish the users ' heavy lift helicter requirements and satisfy Department of Defe

prerequisities for initiating materiel development.The HLH Joint Working Group has complethe tradeoff analysis (TOA) which is required pto identifying the best technical approach (BTthe next major milestone.The HLH concept formulation study discusabove is based on a comprehensive study of usneeds. In addition to this, AMC is conductingadvanced technology program based on initialhoc committee requirements. This is covered in article "HLH beginning on page 8.Another aircraft system receiving major atten

is the advanced reconnaissance helicopter (ARR)draft proposed required operationaL capab(DPROC) document for the ARH was writtenCTD. It was later discarded and then writtenCOMSGP (CACDA) before going to DA onMarch 1973.

ARH DPROC Mission Configurations -Baseline Aircraft Equipped For Day Mission Only Provisions For Space, Weight and Power Are IncludFor The Following Missions:

Night WeatherC C/LiaisonGround LOHAR (Ught observation helicoptarmor)

Proponent Branches Will Equip Baseline AircraftRequired For Mission Accomplishment

Advanced Reconnaissance Helicopterharacteristic

VFPC

Cruise Air SpeedEnduranceVisionics

equirement4,000 Ft P.A., 95F, 95% IP,500 FPMVROC, .25-.35g Lateral Agility120-150 KTAS2.5-3.0 HrsTGT Acquisition and Pilot's NigVision Subsystem

CTD also is deeply involved in the developmenarmament subsystems. The three highest prioriare: A point target weapon An area weapon An antipersonnel antimateriel weapon

U. S ARMY AVIATION DIGE


9/52

The point target weapon subsystem involves theTOW point target missile mounted on the AH-IQHueyCobra helicopter. As user representative, CTDidentified and commented on airframe modificationsand safety of flight items. The aircraft system is being monitored at Yuma Proving Grounds, AZ, duringdevelopment and missile firing tests which began 9April 1973.While the AH-IQ/TOW is a considerable improvement over past weapons systems, the helicoptermust come out of the nap-of-earth environment toacquire, launch and guide the missile to target impact. Time used for target acquisition, plus the 15seconds required during missile launch and guidanceto target, is well within the enemy's antiaircraftcapability to cquire nd fir on an airborne target.There is a stated requirement for a fire and forgetmissile system which will have in its final versioneither built-in laser or optical seekers----or a com oina-tion of both-for automatic homing on the targetafter launch from a helicopter. CTD supports a dualmode seeker and has an extremely high input to thisprogram. Combat and Training Developments was instrumental in establishing the need for a task forceto evaluate this requirement, and its position wassupported by the symposium at Redstone Arsenal lastMay.An area weapons subsystem also is high on thepriority list, with CTD looking to SEAS or the selective effects armament subsystem. This system is toreplace the present 2.7 5-inch rocket. t will provide agreater lethality and standoff capability while enabling the pilot to select specific warheads and fuzesettings from inside the cockpit.

Cockpit Console Concept

UZI NIL

S U I ~QUICK D l l A Y

TYPE Ull

A- HI1- SMOKIc- WPD- FllCHlTn

AUGUST 1973

HESmoke

ll IUISTIANGI

In addition to these armament systems, the Armyis developing an antipersonnel antimateriel weaponssystem. t will consist of an automatic cannon firing adual purpose round capable of penetrating lightarmored vehicles-and inflicting casualties on personnel in the open. The U. S. Army Weapons Command is conducting a study to determine the mostsuitable weapons system. Under consideration a re -The XM188 three barrel 30 mm cannon, an unsolicited proposal by General Electric.

The XM140 single barrel 30 mm cannon developed against a requirement written by Combat andTraining Developments and the XM 197 three barrel20 mm cannon currently mounted on the U.S. Marines' Sea Cobra. The system selected will be turretmounted.Combat and Training Developments is responsibleto assure that the weapons system will e compatiblewith the aircraft and to assure that user requirements

are met.CTD's next functional area is Avionics/Visionicswith these priority items: Air traffic management system (ATMS) Communications Navigation/standardization equipment Electronic countermeasuresAir traffic management systems (ATMS) requirements established by CTD have resulted in a fivesubsystem phased development plan being adopted.The first subsystem-for visual control-is in two

parts. One is a man-portable air traffic control facilitywhich is being tested by the U. S. Army AviationTest Board at Ft. Rucker. t is equipped to providewind speed and direction, barometric data and athree radio standard lightweight avionics equipment(SLAE) package for communications. AvionicsBranch representatives of CfD s Materiel SystemsDevelopment Division are monitoring the test.The second portion of the visual system involves acontract awarded last April to develop and test twotowers. These 3-man towers are transportable butrequire about 8 hours to be emplaced and becomeoperational. They will provide all of the functionsof a normal control tower, except for radar coverage.The second A TMS task identified by Combat andTraining Developments is a portable approach system; third is a digital data link to tie the air trafficmanagement system to the central computer. Fourth

is a navigation subsystem that will be the commonsystem used throughout the Army. t is anticipatedthat the system will be loran (long range navigation),available in about 1977. Last (fifth) is the air trafficContinued on p ge 2

7


10/52

to provide tactical logistics movementthe joint services are looking to the heavy lift helicopter

Captain rendan P lackwell

GREY EAGLE Control, thisis HLH 301 inbound with22 Y tons of containerized classV, over.Roger, 301, your backhaul willbe an 8-inch, self-propelled at 27tons . . . that heavy lift mission isstill on a hold until the containership is unloaded are you goingto take that mission? Over.Affirmative, that will help getour fuel down so we can take the35-ton D9 'cat' to the new site.

Roger, 301 , they're standingby.In this particular fictitious opera-

8

tion six Army heavy lift helicopters(HLHs) are providing the principallogistics movement support for anentire tactical operation. Specifically the Army aviator quoted abovefinished the approach and placement of the container load of ammunition after having flown a newheavy lift helicopter over obstacleswhich were making surface operations difficult. Surface methods ofdischarging the ships were fightingsuch barriers as rocky beaches, ex- ,tensive sand dunes, cliffs and lowlying coastal marshlands. Thesewere combined with 15-foot tides


11/52


12/52

that required the ships to remainclear and well offshore. Also tactical pressures precluded anchoring the ships.The military unit involved inthe rapid airborne deployment wasbeing supported inland by self-

10

Integr:ated self-contained air transportableshops hospitals and electronics centers forboth communications and data proceSSingare also supporting the airmobile operation

propelled artillery constructionequipment mobile bridges armored troop carriers M551 Sheridan vehicles and antiaircraft missile defense. Supporting the heavyyet airmobile vehicles was a tailored logistics network that re-

quired only a small percentagethe array of road networks secuforces roadway transport vehicsupply areas and support eqment needed in the past. Integraself-contained air transportshops hospitals and electro

U. S RMY VI TION DIGE


13/52

equipment for both communications and data processing also supported the mobile operation.One hour later HLH 301 pickedup the D9 cat.Grey Eagle Control, this isHLH 301 on final with a big cat.Have mobile maintenance signal itslocation for placement, over.Roger, 301, Blacksmith issignaling . . . come up on its control frequency, over.Wileo, Grey Eagle Blacksmith, 301, over.301, this is Blacksmith putyour load at the designated point. . . thanks for the haul . . . we'llhave this thing fixed before midnight, out.The sun slipped lower on the

i ~ o n as the aircraft commanderof HLH 301 pointed the aerialworkhorse toward his base area fora crew change. Additional container ships were moving slowlyoffshore waiting to feed the demanding machines, weapons, aircraft and men of the deployingfriendly forces . A new crew wouldtake over and fly the night segment.When the HLH aircraft is heard

on a battlefield, it will signal thearrival of a new level of airmobilelift capability that will not onlystretch the imagination of fieldcommanders but also provide critical lift support to ensure the im-

plementation of dynamic logisticsand airmobile concepts to counterenemy threats.The vertical lift capabilitieshighlighted above are on the horizon for the U S Army as part ofan enlightened and integrated aviation development effort led by theDepartment of Defe,nse (DOD).The DOD has monitored the vitallyimportant activities of aviation elements that have pointed to thenecessity for greater vertical takeoff landing capabilities in futureconflicts.The fluidity of opposing military elements must be counteredwith the latest ainnobile conceptscarried out by a family of helicopters with the improved perfonnance capabilities needed todefeat the enemy. The HLH is acritically important element in thisrespect.On 17 September 1970 theDeputy Secretary of Defense. approved a joint Army/Navy development of an HLH This multiservice program is the culminationof investigations that began in the1950s with feasibility studies in-vestigating helicopters with payload capabilities greatly in excessof those then available. Subsequentstudies and hardware developmentsenabled the Army to field helicopters capable of lifting 10- to 12-tonpayloads. This not only substan-

tiated the value. of vertical mobilityin military operations but alsopointed to the need for a greaterlift capability. The Army was designated as the lead service toundertake an advanced technologycomponent program.In June 1971 a contract wassigned with the Boeing VertolCompany for the development ofthe critical components of an HLHAmong the many elements receiving attention within the programare the rotor/drive system, the flyby-wire flight control system andthe cargo handling system.The advanced technology component program seeks maximumreduction of technical and cost risks

associated with the development ofan HLH system through the design,fabrication and testing of selectedcritical HLH components. Theseare primarily those that will integrate into an HLH capable of lifting 22.5 tons while hovering outof-ground effect at sea level 95degrees F. and of completing two25-nautical-mile round trips withthe design payload. By reducingthe number of sorties, the range,the ambient conditions and/or theload factor (2.0 g's instead of 2.5g's), the vehicle will lift up to 35tons.

The rotor/drive system development effort will produce com-The L provides critical li t support to ensurethe implementation of dynamic logistics and airmobile operations

CompleteBridge Section.


14/52

Rotor System Advanced airfo ils 3000 hour MTBR On condition no T O Redundant load path Replaceable erosion cap Elastromeric bearing Diagnost ics andfailure warning

FlightControlSystem High combatsurvivability Reduced crewfatigue Fly by wire Central computer Automatic flight control IFR capabilityponents with verified performanceand reliability. Both survivabilityand reliability have received increased emphasis. The rotor bladespar is designed with integral crackdetection imd to retard crack propagation. Further, the airfoils willwithstand hits from projectiles upto 23 mm and still permit flightoperations to continue.

The rotor head will incorporatedual redundant load paths for failsafe operations, permitting safeflight after experiencing battledamage to one load path. Elastomeric bearings (which are bondedunits of rubber and metal plates)will eliminate hinges and hingelubrication requirements while reducing the number of hub components from about 500 to lessthan 70.

The transmissions to be employed in the drive system willdemonstrate the integration of les-12

Drive System 3000 hour MTBR On condition no T O Dual lu brication Integral cooling Operable with lube loss Self sealing sumpsand case Diagnostics and

failure warning Reduced noiselevel

External Cargo System Dual and single pointsuspension Pneumatic pow r-nonflammable Adjustable span

sons learned in combat. For example, each transmission will haveintegral lubrication and cooling syst m ~ r m o v i n g the necessity forlong, vulnerable and often leakingfluid lines and oil coolers. The advanced gear materials will result inlighter units with an increased service life. n the event of loss of themajor portion of the transmissionoil a secondary system will providethe minimum essential lubricationfor critical components to ensure survivability. Investigations inprogress will determine if self-sealing capabilities in the sumps alsowill be incorporated to protectagainst battle damage.

A dynamic systems test rig(DSTR) will integrate the rotor anddrive system to drive the aft rotorand cycle the system through thewidest range of representative loadsthat may be experienced in flight.The tests will validate system in-

Infl ight levelingcapability Vision augmentation Static electricitydischarge systemtegration, performance, downwand the acoustic environment.DSTR will be powered by Detroit Diesel, Allison Divi(DDAD) 501-M62B engine whbeyond producing power for test rig will provide essential dfor an initial indication of airfrcompatibility as well as substiate engine reliability and mtainability characteristics.

The flight control system (Fwill depart from conventional ccepts in helicopter controls in respects. The first, cmd generthe most interesting to visualizeaviators, is the basic fly-by-wconcept that will eliminate pupull tubes, rod end bearings control horns with the myriadfixtures, bolts and vulnerable lhydraulic tubes of today s systePsychologically, modern helicopilots feel comfortable knowthat they have direct mechan

U S ARMY AVIATION DIGE


15/52

ilitarycommanders will notbe burdened with constructing logistics nets that resultin f ir weather deliveries onlylinks to swashplate actuator valveseven though they are not provideda mechanical link to the swashplate themselves. Now the link between the control stick and thehydraulic actuator in the HLH willbe closed with electronic components and circuitry.

The second difference that willbe obvious is the type of demandthe pilot will be making whenmanipulating the flight controls.Currently, when an aviator at ahover translates into flight he mustgo through a mental process wherehe determines power available forthe conditions, demands a pitchdown attitude that will permit acceleration to the desired velocity,and upon reaching the velocityapply the required pitch attitudeand power adjustments to maintainthe desired speed .The FCS in theHLH will be a velocity demandsystem, i.e., a stick input will directly command aircraft speed.Protection is to be provided againstautomatic overtorques by computergenerated controller envelope limitsbu t in an emergency the pilotwill retain the capability to command the necessary power. Tooverride and maintain control thesystem will have built-in redundancy for both reliability and survivability.The system consists of components not common to Army aviation. A six-channel redundant direct electrical link will furnish an

electrical equivalent of conventional mechanical control inputs tothe swashplate. The triply redundant automatic flight control system will provide the necessary automatIc ntrol functions includingthose of a conventional stabilityaugmentation system. Electricalsignals from the pilots will bemixed electronically with stabilityand control augmentation signalsAUGUST 1973

and transmitted to the electrohydraulic swashplate actuator. Within this FCS effort will be a loadcontrolling crewmember (LCC)controller and a self-contained precision hover sensor foran extremelystable hover capability.The cargo handling. system efforts will produce tested hardwareand subsystems and thus reducethe technical risk of developingan effective lifting crane system forsupport of the primary mission ofthe HLH The concept chosen consists of a winch system, a suspension system, controls and displayssystem, and a visual augmentationsystem (VASr The advanced technology component program is intended to demonstrate hardwareon a large test tower to verifyfeasibility, functional performanceand reliability/maintainability. Thedual point suspension system willbe the desired operating mode because of the increased aerodynamicstability of this concept. The dualhoists for each hook are being designed to traverse a limited rangeto ensure better center of gravitycontrol. Single point operationsalso can be perfonned by employing an adapter assembly.

The winches will be driven by a

responsive air turbine motor powered by bleed air from either themain propulsion units or the auxiliary power unit (APO). n theevent of one engine out operations,the APU can be engaged in flight,without risk, to provide air fornormal operations of the winch assemblies. The VAS employing alow light level television will permit operations during periods ofdarkness and also operations encountering dust, blowing snow andrain without the necessity of penetrating illumination.Two contracts signed last January represent logical steps towardan eventual HLH production decision and are in full support of thepolicy of prototyping major weapons systems. A prototype HLHprogram (Boeing Vertol) supportedby a prototype engine development

(DDAD) which is known as theXT701 is aimed at satisfying thefly before you buy requirementsof the Department of Defense. Thisstep in the acquisition process will .result in the integration of the critical components and subsystemsinto an airworthy flying test-bedwhich will proceed into performance substantiation tests and anearly user assessment of the HLH13


16/52

design concept. The HLH prototype engine will draw extensivelyfrom the DSTR engine programand build upon this baseline toachieve the XT70 l-AD-700 prototype engine.The first HLH flight is sched

uled for August 1975. Throughtesting it will permit a decisionrelative to the advisability of entering engineering development atthe earliest date with the least cost.The new breed of container shipsare called non-self-sustainingwhich means they have clear decksthat are not cluttered with thebooms and cranes normally foundon today's self-sustaining containerships. During future deploymentsdelivery times will be measured inminutes and unloading times forships will be hours instead ofmonths, s was sometimes experienced early in the commitment inthe Republic of Vietnam. TheHLH will integrate into a total system to include the normal varietyof surface vessels when they be-

come operational. Piers, Jargedockside cranes, extensive highwaynets, large secure supply areas andbattalions of trucks will not paceinitial deployment but will be employed as the situation matures tothe point where resources permitthe use of the manpower-densesurface systems.

Grey Eagle, 301, will be downhour for fuel , maintenance anda crew change, over.Roger, 301.HLH 301 positioned to a refueling point where the crewchief attached the refueling nozzle to theaircraft.The crewchief signaled the aircraft commander to activate theonboard self-fueling system whichbegan to draw fuel into the nearlyempty tanks from fuel bladderspositioned by the HLH company.The flight engineer, who managesthe monitoring of all onboard aircraft systems, noted the faultswhich occurred during the long

The L can be used to lift sections of field fuel tanks which will store 10 000 barrels

flight period and isolated the signicant modularized components freplacement. Within an hour fresh crew was airborne.HLH 301 flew into the darkneout to sea to begin offioading twell protected but heavily burden

seaborne supply carriers. OthHLHs were operating in the darness. As predicted the forecastefrontal activity became apparentsurface winds increased while tsea state, looking angrier in the faiing light of ensuing darkness anlowering overcast, approached sstate three limits of 5-foot wavwith IS-knot winds. Conditiowere rapidly deteriorating.Pack Horse 32, this is HL

301 inbound to continue offloadinunderstand we will operate blackout conditions, over.That's affirmative, 301we're engaging the tactical landinaid system at this time chefor a signal . . . you'll be workinforward will have no obstrutions the bow is 185 degrewith the wind 25 degrees off staboard at 30 knots over the deck

we will remain steady underwaover.This is 301, we have yosignal . . . we're 2 minutes out this time.Within the aircraft the copildetermined the delivery point fthe container and arranged the rdios for the return leg. The LCengaged his precision hover sens(an onboard laser signal sourthat will e engaged when estalished at a hover over the shiphold) thus enabling the helicopt

to hover very accurately for placment of the container lifting deviprecisely within the containguides. He also engaged his VA(low light level TV) so that would be able to see the ship anthe load. The flight engineer at hstation checked all subsystems anset up the position of the twpoint cargo handling system for t20-foot-Iong container to e lifte


17/52

Extensive road security and mainte-nance resources will not be factorsin early phases of an operation asthe HLH and its valuable logisticcargos overfly destroyed bridgesmud or any other obstructionswhich hinder overl nd tr nsport

After the hooks were armed andthe winches properly positioned afunctional check was performedindicating circuit integrity.The aircraft commander, employing cues from the flight director and weather radar, completedthe automatic approach to a hoverand aligned the helicopter with thelongitudinal axis of the ship atabout 150 feet. The LCe then acquired the ship in the visual display and using his four axis sidearm controller gri p maneuveredthe aircraft to acquire a lock in theprecision hover sensor (PHS).The FCS, employing the fly-bywire concept, had been advancedto a point where the LCe couldconcentrate on achieving preciseposition, while acquiring the load.The velocity demand control system removed the requirement forconstantly making pilot control input to counter gusts or trying to

optimize attitudes to achieve accelerations to desired velocities.The actuation of the PHS automode allowed the Lee hand-offprecision hover capability and contained the hook within an accuracyof 4 inches in the three axes.

The LCe descended to a 50-foothover height and moved 4 feetlaterally by sidearm controllerbeep demands of low velocitiesto the desired position. The aircraft constantly moved to counterthe gusting headwind quartering .off the right from the northeast, butthe Lee only needed to employ hiscontroller to adjust his preciseposition.While the Lee maneuvered, the .aircraft commander .monitored hisown VAS display in order to retain full awareness of all aircraftmotions. The winches were ac-AUGUST 1973

tivated to payout cable to lowerthe lifting device to the containerwhich was three levels below deck(30 feet). The guides were contacted and the device was loweredinto the guides to the box wherethe device locked on. The Lee reversed the winch taking up cableslack to the container down in thehole. The cable tension indicatorat first fluctuated as the suspensionmembers came tight, then settledat an indication of over 22 tons.Two minutes had elapsed andthe aircraft commander had contacted the area controller for clearances and routing to the landingzone as the climb was initiated. TheLee monitored snugging up thebox, completed the operation andinstructed the flight engineer tosecure the cargo handling systemwhile this second generation aerialcrane continued to climb and accelerate. The PHS and the V ASwere then placed in a standby modeuntil after termination of the instrument approach and the subsequently established hover at thedesignated landing zone.Automatic built-in test equipment onboard continually monitored the triply redundant flightcontrol system by both the detection and the locating of faulty elements of the system. Other parameters were monitored by theautomatic inspection diagnosticsand prognostics system such as

engine performance and mechanical status, transmission condition,drive shafting, fuel system and selected structural components. (Theaircraft will also be capable of performing the design mission withone engine out adding to the mission reliability confidence levelsunder all conditions of flight.)

HLH 301 spent 51 2 hours moving containers 25 nautical milesone way and on return trips hauleditems of equipment that neededmajor work. During that 5 hours301 alone delivered nearly 500,000pounds of cargo to its supportedelements. Numerous large itemswere returned to ships for majorrepair work. This movement tookplace at night when seas were_veryrough, 35-knot wind velocities andwith a violent surf, low ceilings andrain.Blacksmith, this is 301 inboundfor a backhaul one big cat,over.Stand by, 301 . . . we'll get aman out there to hook up the load. . . it'll e pretty tough in thatweather, over.

No problem, Blacksmith. We'llhover at 100 f ~ e t and make surethe hooks are within reach . . .when your man moves away, we'llmove down and lift up the cat,over.That'll be fine, Blacksmith,out.This movement of the D9 trac-15


18/52

tor 6 hours after it has been movedfrom the work site and repairedat the mobile site would return itto the operating unit.Logisticians and field commanders can plan on the capabilities ofthe HLH in the 1980s. Army aviators flying a new generation of lightobservation, utility, attack andheavy lift helicopters will form anintegrated team for the support ofairmobile combat operations andbolster the national defense objectives of the United States.Military commanders in the future will not be burdened with constricting logistics nets that result infair weather deliveries only or thatstop at night and that employ costly

manpower resources.Ships will not la y low in thechoked harbors for many long,vulnerable, expensive weeks waiting to be offloaded.Break bulk cargo will not sit inmarginally secure dockside yards

which require large numbers ofmen for physical security to preventdestruction and pilferage, though,retaining both /ulnerability to artillery and airborne weapons systems.Secure road nets which wouldemploy extensive security andmaintenance resources if constructed during early phases of anoperation will have been diminished, reducing risk link whichcan be interrupted by a destroyedbridge or by mud and or the performance of the many trucks andoverland transport vehicles.The associated maintenance support and operator manning is eliminated releasing a higher number of men for combat duty.

Tactical operations will be ehanced with the short reaction timavailable for resupply and the lostock age levels required to bmoved aboard vehicles organic the line units. Terrain obstaclwill not bog down units which wbe able to count on resupply ane n n c e 24 hours a day.Airmobility concepts have beevalidated in the field in a sevetest and have pointed out the fetures that are being corrected that the Army will be ready to meany future threats to the nationsecurity.

CPT Brendan P. Blackwell, a graduate of Washington StateUniversity, received his masters degree from SouthernIllinois University. He is presently attending the Transporta-tion Officers Advanced Course and was a project officer inthe technical management division of the heavy lift helicop-ter project at the U. S. Army Aviation Systems Commandwhen writing this article. In 1972 he was awarded the FederalService Award for commissioned officer of the year. He is aworld recordholder for altitude performance in the CH 54

HELP,16

Finite life items are beingdiscarded for lack of records

Floyd H. Trudeau, DAC

N UMEROUS AIRCRAFf assemblies have bereceived at overhaul facilities with either thDA Form 2410 or the (component) DA Form 24016, or both, missing.These forms, properly annotated, are extremeimportant to any maintenance facility performinmaintenance on, or installing or removing a component.

U S ARMY AVIATION DIGES


19/52

Engineering has determined that certain aircraftparts must be replaced after a specified maximumnumber of operating hours to prevent failure of thatpart in flight. This time limit has been designated themaximum allowable operating time ( f i n i t ~ life orTBO ) of the item. Of course, a reasonable safetymargin has been included in this time.

Although there are many aircraft parts that fallin this category, it will be much easier to explain ifwe talk about a particular aircraft component suchas the AH-1G HueyCobra main rotor hub assemblyfor example:A DA Form 2410 is required to be filled out andsent to the Commander, U S Army Logistics DataCenter, Lexington Blue Grass Army Depot, Lexington, KY 40507, whenever a selected aircraft component is removed or installed. Lexington providesthe U. S Army Aviation Systems Command (AVSCOM) with the information concerning aviationitems. (There are other conditions which require aDA Form 2410; also, see TM 38-750.) The DAForm 2410 should be shipped with and received atthe overhaul facility with the component.

f the component is received without the DA Form2410, maintenance personnel can determine the timeon the component by contacting the U. S ArmyAviation Systems Ccmmand, P. O. Box 209, St.Louis, MO 63166, and obtaining the latest DA Form2410 information. They can, with this information,reconstruct the time on the hub assembly in question.For some of the finite life items the DA Form 2410

is not forwarded but maintained locally (your biblehere is TB 55-1500-307-25). The only record of thetime on these items is the aircraft form, DA Form2408-16, for the hub assembly. The (component) DA- orm 2408-16 is supposed to be forwarded alongwith the assembly when it is shipped, but in manycases it is not included or it gets lost. When thishappens the overhaul people are in trouble. Hereis why: the serial number of one Cobra main rotor hubassembly received at the U. S Army AeronauticalDepot Maintenance Center (ARADMAC), CorpusChristi, TX, without records was checked with thenational maintenance point and determined to have3,359 hours on it with two previous overhauls. The(component) DA Form 2408-16 would no doubtreflect that some of the finite life items were replacedat either the first or second overhaul and would havetime remaining on them; however, since the (component) DA Form 2408-16 was not available thetime on many of the parts could not be determinedand they had to be replaced.

Many other assemblies have the same problem.Engines, transmissions, tail rotor hub assemblies andAUGUST 1973

others are often received at overhaul facilities without the (component) DA Form 2408-16, and manyexpensive parts which have hundreds of useful flyinghours remaining on them have to be discarded forsafety'S sake.Thus it can be seen how important that (component) DA Form 2408-16 is Each time that amaintenance-type takes the necessary precautions toensure that an accurately prepared (component) DAForm 2408-16 is included with a component (rotorhub, engine, swashplate, etc.), he can hold his headhigh and flatly state, I just saved Mr. Taxpayer (andthis includes me) several thousand dollars.Another problem arises because there are two dataplates (sometimes t h r ~ e affixed to the yoke near thecenter of the hub assembly. One of the data plates hasthe serial number of the hub assembly on it; the otherdata plate has the serial number of the yoke on it. Thethird data plate, when used, has overhaul informationand is not relative to the subject at hand. When DAForm 2410 information is copied the individual reading the serial number from the data plate sometimespicks up the wrong number. We get DA Form 2410s.with the nomenclature Hub Assembly and the FSNfor a hub assembly, but the serial number is theyoke serial number. This is easy enough to correctat the overhaul facility but it confuses the computer.In the event the DA Form 2410 is lost the overhaul facilities asks the computer for the latest DAForm 2410 information by hub serial number. Thecomputer, which has the latest information filed underthe yoke serial number, provides the latest correctinformation it has on the hub assembly. t does notrecognize that this particular hub assembly was incorrectly reported under a yoke serial number. Fromthat time on the finite life item is questionable and tobe safe we must discard them. The cost of this mistake could be $5,000. To assure having the rightserial number and that you are looking at the rightplate, compare the part number on the plate with thepart number and nomenclature as listed in TB 55-1500-307-25. After the comparison validates theright plate, then the serial number on that plate is theone to report on DA Form 2410 when removing arotor hub assembly.

The author is a management ana-lyst at the U S Army AeronauticalDepot Maintenance Center Cor-pus Christi TX Mr. Trudeau isqualified as a test pilot

17


20/52

JEWSROE DERS

Continued from page 1

with foresight dictates the necessity ofacquiring a compatible system before itis required to save a life.I would appreciate any informa-tion you have available.

CW2 William R. YanceyOperations Officer4th Flight Platoon 507 Medical CoFt. Sill, OK 73503

The following information pertainingto CW2 Yancey's letter was obtainedfrom Combat and Training Developments, V S. Anny Aviation School, Ft.Rucker, AL:

There are systems available that willprovide the capability as described, andcan be obtained either from the V S.Air Force or from a commercial vendor. The V S. Air Force employs theNIARA-50 and NIARA-59 UHF-ADF systems for search and rescuemissions. Engineering and test datafor the installation of the ARA-50on the UH l has previously beendeveloped by Bell Helicopter Company. The cost of the system is approximately 1,200 per unit and the weightis approximately 15 pounds.

The commercial item is a VHF homing antenna designated 705-CA, developed by the Magnavox Corporation,and has been flight tested by the V S.Anny Electronics Command. The costof the system is approximately 500per unit, and the weight is approximately 5 pounds. In addition to theitems that are available, the U. S. AnnyElectronics Command is in the processof awarding a contract to Collins Ra-dio Company for the development of amultiband (30-175 & 225-400 megahertz) ADF system for engineering design tests to commence in January 1974.The proposed system will be used inconnection with the conventional air-craft UHF communication set (ARC-51,ARC-116) to provide an ADF capability over the Anny tactical frequencies aswell as those of other services. This systern is similar to the ARA50 dimensionsand weighs approximately 7 pounds.18

INSTRUMENTORNER

Request clarification of the following situation and question pertaining to instrument minimums.SITUATION: Airfield does not have an instrument procedure published in authorized publications DOD FLIP). A current JeppesenChart .s on hand with minima of (800-1). To list this field as analternate AR 95-1, paragraph 4-24, says to add 400 feet to ceiling and 1V miles to visibility for fixed wing (which would be1200 2V2. AR 95-1, paragraph 4-24-2, says that helicopter pilotsmay reduce the visibility above by 50 percent.QUESTION: Does this mean that you always add 400 and 3/4 inhelicopters as one of the questions in version III of the 1973Annual Written Examination indicates), which would be 800-1plus 400 3/4 which would be 1200-1 3/4; or do you derive thefixed wing minima first, then take 50 percent of it, which wouldbe 1200 and V2?ANSWER: In the situation presented in your letter, authorizationby an installation commander is required to enable your use othe Jeppesen Chart described AR 95-1, paragraph 4-19&).

DOD FLIP is the official IFR publication for use by Army aviators. The permission to use the Jeppesen Chart you describeddoes not fulfill the intent of AR 95-1, paragraph 4-19 (officiaIFR publication).The provisions of AR 95-1, paragraph 4-24c(2), apply when pertaining to choosing an alternate airfield when instrument procedures are not published in authorized publications.During the period from 1 hour before through 1 hour after ETAto your alternate airfield, the ceiling must be at or greater than400 feet above the appropriate approach minima. The visibilitymust be at or greater than 1V miles above the appropriate published minima.The provisions of AR 95-1, paragraph 4-24c(3), enable aviatorsflying helicopters to reduce the visibility (mentioned in the paragraph above) by 50 percent.AR 95-2, dated 8 May 1970, has been superseded by AR 95-1,dated 1 January 1973. The old AR sta1ed that for helicopter usethe derived visibility may be reduced by 50 percent. The oldmethod was to add 1V miles to the published visibility, thenaviators flying helicopters could take half of this derived visibili ty. The correct method according to AR 95-1, paragraph4-24c(3), is for aviators flying helicopters to reduce the visibilityrequirement by 50 percent before applying it. Therefore, aviatorsflying helicopters would always.add 3/4 mile to the appropriatevisibility minima. . . .U. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGES


21/52

Combat nd TrainingDevelopmentsontinued from pageIn keeping with the Continental Army reoganization, the box below contains a standard school model.

The two new key elements are the Deputy AssistantCommandant for Combat and Training Developmentsand the Deputy Assistant Commandant for Trainingand Education.School .\'Iode l

EduratiollA(lviso ,'IIFaeultyDev .iEdu('Teeh

Del' Ass t ComdtCht T I l ~ Dev

.Ia te rielDev Hoctt' ineTnl OrgOi\'

COIl('epts, Studies,T&E Div

Lo -d sties Brigad eDel' Ass t COI11{1t Till Educ

R IOpe"ation s Res identDepts

Tnl :\'IG'tTWithin USAA VNS, Combat and Training Developments became an operational reality on 1 March1973 when the Combat Developments CommandAviation Agency was merged with the Office Of Doc

trine Development, Literature And Plans.USAA VNS organizations which were combined toform Combat and Training Developments are listedin the box below. CTD now performs the missions ofeach of these former sections and organizations. As aresult, CTD is the program manager for force/combatdevelopment; Army-wide aviation training literature;command-wide training literature; development oftraining aids/devices; occupational analysis of MOSand CMF (command management function); and theu. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST.

USAA VNS ReorganizationTo Form

Combat Training Developments

ODDL&P1 Mar 73

AUGUST 1973

CDC AviationAgency1 Mar 73

To accomplish this major new US V S mission,Combat and Training Developments is functionallydesigned as shown in the figure below.Deputy Ass is tant Commandant

ForCombat And Tt'aining Deve lopmen tsIr I I:\1atelid Concepts. S tudies . Do('trine. TraininlSystems Test Alld Eval And Organization

Di vi sion Divi sion Divi s ionI II o ~ I OO(':"ine)'stf'ms A"iolli(' s 1'l al1lZatwnIl .a ('h Yi siollics Il,'anch l-hanchEW Ilnll1f'i, Ta skAnalysis. I I B , a ~ c h( .olleept s Test &Stlldi(' ' Eval

Bl'allch BranehCTD's Materiel Division initiates, evaluates andprepares required operational capability (ROC) documents relating to areas listed in the box below.

Airframes Weapons Avionics Visionics

Electronic Warfare Ground SupportEquipment Life Support Equipment

Due to the wide area of this division's responsibilities,those USAAVNS training departments and class IIactivities having expertise in these major fields areinvited to participate in ROC developments. This willensure a well-rounded USAA VNS position in theseimportant Army aviation developmental fields. Highpriority items being worked on by the Materiel Division include the advanced attack helicopter; antiicing/ deicing equipment for helicopters; air trafficmanagement systems; and night vision systems forhelicopters.The Concepts, Studies, Test and Evaluation Division is tasked with the responsibility to see to it thatfuture Army aircraft systems requirements, for itemswhich USAA VNS is ~ h e proponent, meet the needsof the field army in all major areas. This includessupporting proponent agencies in aircraft systemformulation / integration; identifying future aircraftsystems requirements; participating in test planningand programing; participating in operational testsand evaluations (OTEs); and analyzing test results.High priority actions include the heavy lift helicopterconcept formulation study, position and navigationsystems for Army aircraft, and electronic warfareaircraft self-protection systems.

19


22/52

The Doctrine, Training and Organization Divisionis CTD s largest. It manages the USAAVNS portionof the Army-wide training literature program; develops/reviews TOEs, basis of issue plans, manningtable equipment lists and manning authorizationcriteria; systems engineers individual training andtraining literature; develops MOS test material; anddevelops/reviews aviation standardization literature.

CTD s major training literature workload springsfrom its primary USAA VNS responsibility to developand write all new and revised Army-wide trainingliterature except that developed by the Departmentof Army-Wide Training Support.

In the past the primary responsibility for writingtraining literature rested with the Aviation School straining departments. Assistance in this major areais obtained from these departments. Highly technicalportions of some training literature is still being written in first draft within the training department having the most expertise on the subject, as determinedby the USAA VNS training literature board. In allcases USAA VNS training departments havingmajor subject matter expertise are responsible forassuring the technical correctness of new or revisedArmy-wide training literature. The roles of each ofthe USAA VNS training departments will be workedout during the first meeting of the USAAVNS training literature board. This meeting is scheduled to takeplace as soon as the recently rewritten USAA VNSregulation on training literature has been staffed andapproved.

As a result of recent Department of the Army actiens, USAA VNS has been assigned materiel proponency for several major aviation related systems (seebox below). These systems produce a major workloadwithin CTD.

Medium LiftHelicopter Utility Airplanes Avionics Visionics

Supression/Vulnerability Ground SupportEquipment Life Support Equipment

ir Crewman PeculiarEquipment

Due to the wide area covered by these proponencies,CTD personnel are required to be TDY much of thetime in support of other centers and schools working on aviation projects.In keeping with these proponent materiel actions,USAA VNS now has organizational proponency forthe TOB units listed below:

20

Army Aviation Company Assault Support Battalion, Ambulance Division Headquarters and Headquarters Company, AssaSupport Helicopter Battalion, Ambulance Divisio Assault Support Helicopter Company, AmbulaDivision Headquarters and Headquarters Company, AviatGroup Headquarters and Headquarters Company, AviatBattalion Aviation Brigade Medical Transportation Helicopter, CH-47 Aviation Medical Helicopter Company Aviation Company, Corps Aviation Operation Teams Assault Support Helicopter Company, ir Cava

Combat Brigade Aviation ir Traffic Control Unit

USAAVNS has the primary responsibility fdeveloping all aviation related materiel, concepdoctrine and training literature for the listed uniProponency for troop tests, field evaluations, combevaluations and related actions parallels these TOassignments.The training literature program to support tdoctrinal and unit proponency responsibilities is etensive. At the start of fiscal year 1974, Combat a

Training Developments had the primary responsibilfor 129 major pieces of Army-wide aviation trainiliterature.One of the most significant literature actions acomplished during the past fiscal year was the torevision of FM 1-40, Helicopter Gunnery. Thmanual includes information and guidance necessafor the conduct of helicopter gunnery training at tunit level.Also, draft TC 1-15, Nap-Of-The-Earth (NOFlight Training, was developed by Combat and Traiing Developments to support NOE flight training

the unit level. This TC outlines the training requirfor both initial qualification and annual requalifiction. It has been approved by DA for publication.The final draft of TC 1-65, Helicopter OperatioFrom Amphibious Assault Ships, is near completioThis training circular provides guidelines for commanders, staff officers and personnel of Army avition units for employment of Army helicopters froamphibious assault ships.To accomplish all of these actions, for which Com

U. S ARMY AVIATION DIGES


23/52

bat and Training Developments has primary respon- **ibility, requires constant coordination with the activi-ties listed in the box below.Combat r a i n i n ~ Developments

Cool'dinationrSAAVNS Classll A('tivities

Local coordination with the Aviation School'straining departments and class II activities is accomplished in two ways: When possible, direct action officer to actionofficer contact is used. When a formal school position is required, it isrequested in writing through appropriate commandchannels.Since coordination is a key factor, other agencieswill become accustomed to seeing CTD action officersin their organizations. Combat and Training Developments will never be accused of undercoordinating aU S Army Aviation School position.

Army agencies worldwide frequently will be dealing with Combat and Training Developments at theA viation School on matters pertaining to Army A viation. Listed below are the telephone numbers forCTD (AUTOVON prefix 558):

Deputy Assistant CommandantConcepts, Studies, Test Evaluation Div

Concepts Studies BrTest Evaluation Br

Doctrine, Training Organization DivTask Analysis BrOrganization Br

Materiel Systems Development DivSystems BrAvionics, Visionics EW Br

Doctrinal Literature, Training LiteraturePrograms Br

Standardization SectionTraining Literature SectionDoctrinal Literature Section

AUGUST 1973

32033500351224053212541249055511270424063212321238013801

*********************************************************************************************

Concepts nd Materielnd CID

ontinued from pagemanagement automated center. Here are the areaswhich need to be addressed: Resolution of aircraft and artillery conflicts Resolution of aircraft and aircraft conflicts Position data of all aircraft To pass and receive data to the Army tacticaldata system

The next major avionics system established byCTD's Materiel Systems Division is the helicopterintegrated multifunction system (HIMS), otherwiseknown as rotor blade radar. The Avionics Branchparticipated in the military potential test with theA viation Test Board and wrote the required operational capability.

HIMS can be used in these functional tasks: Landing aid Navigation Station keeping Surveillance Weather avoidance Terrain warning Beacon interrogation modeDuring the military potential test conducted by theAviation Test Board, it was detennined that theHIMS aircraft, while sitting on the ground in an unimproved area, can provide an unequipped aircrafta surveillance type radar approach. An airborne moving target indicator has been added. Testing is continuing at Headquarters, Modern Army Selected Systems Test Evaluation and Review (MASSTER), Ft.Hood, TX, with the Avionics Branch monitoring.CTD also prepared a requirements document for aDustoff (medical evacuation) aircraft avionicsstabilization system to allow medical evacuation missions to be performed under nearly all-weather conditions, day or night.CTD has prepared three electronic warfare documents establishing requirements for warning devices

to detect radar, infrared and electr ptical threats.These are being staffed at Department of the Army.Concurrently a DA decision was made to procure 200AN/APR-39 radar warning receivers, identified byCombat and Training Developments, to meet contingencyneeds in USAREUR (U. S Army, Europe)and for testing and training.

The final CTD functional area to be covered hereis associated equipment.

21


24/52

In the life support area USA A VNS is proponentfor the anti-icing/ de-icing system for vertical take-offlanding VTOL) aircraft and for the escape systemfor AH-IG and AH-IQ helicopters.The Army has an approved requirement for lightweight anti-icing/ de-icing equipment which willallow VTOL airmobile operations in moderate icing

conditions. CTD efforts have consisted of chairing ajoint working group at the Aviation Systems Command to develop the required operational capability.Helicopter in-flight escape systems have been receiving considerable attention the past few years.In December 1971 Teledyne/ McCormick/Self andSikorsky aircraft demonstrated the feasibility ofsevering rotor blades in predetermined directions using an S-61, 5-bladed aircraft. The transmission andframe were tied down while the blades were turning.The success of this demonstration was a major stepforward in the development of helicopter escapesystems.A required operational capability (ROC) for ahelicopter in-flight escape system for attack helicopters was written by Combat and Training Developments and is being processed by DA. This ROC provides for low level extraction at unusual attitudes.There are many other high interest areas in which

CTD is involved. Some of the more significant arediscussed below and introduced in boldface type.CfD has furnished the senior U S representativeto the Quadripartite working group on Anny aviationequipment the last 2 years. This group consists of theAustralian, British, Canadian and American representatives to the committee for Army aviation equipment standardization. CTD will present a briefing onthe family of Army aircraft at this year s formal meeting. Communications among the representatives iscontinuous.Area refueling equipment also is a matter of highinterest. CTD has provided the supply agency with adetailed requirement for an air transportable area refueling system with a 300 gallon per minute outputand a capability of refueling five aircraft simultane

ously. Both open and closed refueling rates of existing and proposed aircraft systems were furnishedwith the requirement s justification. A proposedsystem was tested at MASSTER and monitored byCombat and Training Developments. t was obviously transportable, but not by air and it completely failed to meet aviation requirements.

A more appropriate system for airmobile operations exists in the Federal supply system. CTD provided comments on the shortcomings of the projectedsystem to the supply agency.22

Proposed three man transportable towerwhich can be fully operational in 8 hoursThe family of scatterable mines, envisions utilhelicopters as special purpose aircraft, when quired, to employ the XM56 mine dispensing sytem to close the lanes in the engineer s b r r i ~ r plaCfD has furnished munitions command, PicatinnArsenal, with input on employment (air speed, titude, bands of performance), ~ t r i n e (NOE-5

Low Level 50-200), training, basis of issue, identifiction of units and mid-intensity threat criteria.The working party for guns (WPFG) is a sugroup of the joint technical coordinating group fair launched non-nuclear ordnance JTCG-ALNNOBoth are tri-service groups. WPFG coordinates dvelopment and technology, starting with research aincluding all steps up to final standardization weapons, ammunition and installations. In addition the service developments the working party almonitors independent development programs bei

U. S ARMY AVIATION DIGES


25/52

conducted by private industry. Here again Combatand Training Developments provides input to a highlevel committee.Night vision devices are an extremely high interest/manpower consumption area. A joint workinggroup recently was convened and chaired by Combatand Training Developments which prepared a re

quired operational capability for a night visionsystem for Army aircraft. These systems are classified by function. irst is the pilot's which envisionsthe PVS-5 goggles as an interim system with a 12-hour, 40-degree field of vision, at a weight penaltyof 1.9 pounds. The armed services have agreed on astandard design. Another system under developmentfor the pilot is the helicopter night landing systemwith a 50-degree-high by 170-degree-wide field ofvision.The se ond function is the observer's target acquisition and remote surveillance system which could in

clude the AAS-25 forward looking infrared system.It would allow the observer a 95 percent probabilityof identification of a target at 3,000 meters.The Army tactical data system required 5 manmonths expended at Ft. Hood, TX, to ensure computer interface with the air traffic management system. This resulted in a Combat Developments Command study titled Functional Interoperability OfTactical Data Systems In Support Of The Army InThe Field And Continuity Of Operations. CTD 'sAvionics Branch is a standing member of the Armytactical data system ARTADS) requirement co

ordinating committee and makes significant contributions to this system.Engineering change proposals and product improvement proposals would appear to be an insignificant item; however, cureful monitoring of 45 itemssubmitted in the first half of 1973 resulted in recommended disapproval of unnecessary items and atotal savings of $4 million-plus $:2 thousand perutility aircraft.Concerning test and evaluation, CTD is deep inthe establishment of the new test methodology. As aresult of the reorganization of the Army, the combat

developer now plays a greater role in test and evaluation. The responsibility for operational testing, onceheld by the materiel developer (AMC), now rests withTRADOC. The proponent branch school representsthe user during the operational testing phase of development. In the near future USAAVNS will serveas the user representative for several proponent systems. This new methodology will close the develop-

I:I:i:::I:i:ent loop and allow the user to ensure that the materiel developer produced what we asked for in :the first place. What you want is what you get A

AUGUST 1973

irstCW3 Billy G. Tomlinson, an instructor pilot with Headquartersand Headquarters Detachment,Kentucky Army National Guard,

Frankfort, KY, is the first to enrollin the Aviation Warrant OfficerIntermediate CorrespondenceCourse offered by the U. S. ArmyAviation School, Ft. Rucker, AL.The new career oriented correspondence course was announcedin the June issue of the AVIATION

DIGEST and parallels the residentcourse conducted at USAA VNS.Upon completion of the course administered by the Department ofArmy-Wide Training Support,CW3 Tomlinson will receive a diploma and credit identical to thatreceived by the resident coursegraduate. All materials needed tocomplete the course are suppliedby the Aviation School (and in themail to CW3 Tomlinson).

Warrant Officers of the activeArmy, as well as the Reserve Components' interested in enrolling inthe A WOICC may apply on DAForm 145, obtain approval fromtheir commanding officer, and submit the form to:

CommandantU S. Army Aviation SchoolATIN Dept. ofArmy-Wide Training SupportP. O. Box JFt. Rucker, AL 36360

23


26/52

st Woman CandidatBrigadier General Mildred C. Baile

di rector of the Woman's Army Corpchats with Barbara Elizabeth Schoeafter admini stering her enli stment oaJuly 25, at the U.S. Army AviatioSchool, Fort Rucker, AL. Mi ss Schoeseated in a TH-55, the Army s primatraining helicopter is th .e f irst womanenl ist for the Army s fl ight traininprogram.

Mi s s Schoen, a Flori da elementarschool teacher, entered the Army on thDelayed Entry Program and wi II begher 9 months of f l ight training in thWa rran t Offi cer Rotary Wi n g Av atoCourse in January after completion oWAC Basic Training.

eromedical Factors n MidairTHE ACCOMPANYING article gives a penetrating review of the aeromedical factors involvedin midair collision. These factors are important toknow and understand for to some extent man cancompensate for them. In certain circumstances . . .where rates of closure are high speed, man's limitations may exceed human ability to compensate.Such a situation recently was emphasized in themidair collision accident between a Hughes AirWest DC-9 and a U. S. Marine Corps F-4B. TheNational Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigated this accident. An extract of their reportemphasizes this kind of limitation for which theonly apparent solution is technical development.There are some things for which training andexperience cannot compensate. These must beresolved with development and use of supportiveequipment.The board reiterates the position takenmany times before that for certain operationalconditions, the 'see and avoid' concept is simplyinadequate and the development of collisionavoidance systems must be vigorously pursued.24

This situation can apply to Army aviation paticularly when the opposing aircraft is not ArmHowever, a more common situation exists etweArmy aircraft as the NTSB points out:Whereas this accident resulted from high csure rates and, consequently, small target siuntil shortly before the collision, the board alrecognizes the more common type of midair clision occurring between aircraft at relatively loclosure rates. The board believes that for this latttype of collision, the detectability and assessmeof the collision threat from an intruding aircrcan be enhanced by proper pilot techniques ana more thorough understanding of visual phnomena.So while there are exceptions, those of usArmy aviation should be knowledgeable of olimitations because most of the time we c n copensate for them in our flying environment.NICHOLAS E. BARRECA M.LTC MC SFSDeputy DirectorOAET USAAVNSU S RMY VI TION DIGES


27/52

M IDAIR COLLISIONS shouldbe an area of vital concern toall crewmembers since such accidents remain one of the most critical hazards faced during a flight.For example, a flight of four highperformance Air Force jet aircraftrecently took off on a routine combat training mission. The crewsconsisted of one instructor pilotand three students who were transitioning to a new aircraft. Thetime was midmorning with a reported visibility of 10 to 15 miles.There was no cloud cover on thisbright, clear day. Join-up was accomplished and the four aircraftwent into an extended route formation in order to reduce the "midaircollision hazard. They entered ahigh-volume jet operational area atan 8,000-foot altitude with a rate ofclimb of 1,500 feet per minute.Shortly thereafter, the instructorAUGUST 1973

Provided by the Society ofu S. A rmy Flight Surgeons

Lieutenant Colonel Royce Moses JrUnited States Air Force

pilot, in aircraft number 2, movedcloser to aircraft number 1 inorder to evaluate a problem withthe right external fuel tank of number 1 (figure 1 . He had just stabilized in the new position when heheard number 3 call, "Light planeat 12 o'clock " The instructor pilotlooked ahead and saw a lightcolored blur which passed betweenhis aircraft and number 1 The leadpilot in number 1 stated he hadbeen scanning ahead but did notsee the light airplane. Number 3,who called the warning, had beenclearing the area but estimated heonly saw the light aircraft when itwas less than 300 feet in front ofnumber 1 and number 2The vertical stabilizer of thenumber 2 fighter sheared the rightwingtip of the civilian aircraft,which crashed with all occupantsfatally injured. The Air Force air-

craft involved had no control problems and returned to base safely.Recent Air Force experience emphasizes that this is not an isolatedinstance but rather only one example of a major problem area. AnAir Force analysis of this experience is particularly pertinent andprovides the source for the following data.

On initial evaluation we mightconsider we are making satisfactory "progress since the Air Forcemidair collision rate per 100,000flying hours has steadily declinedsince 1947-from 0.8 in 1947 to0.16 in 1968. However, other typesof aircraft accidents have declinedat even greater rates, and the relative frequency of midair collisions(the number of collisions per 1,000major accidents) has increasedfrom 19 per 1,000 in 1947 to 41per 1,000 in 1968.25


28/52

L2

FigureAircraft position immediately prior to collision between

fighter number 2 nd civilian light aircraft

As in the example described atthe beginning of this article, theseaircraft collision accidents are ofparticular concern since they oftenproduce fatalities. During the 10-year period of 1959 to 1968, almost one-half (45 percent) of theAir Force's midair collisions produced fatalities. (By comparison,20 percent of all USAF aircraft accidents during this period producedfatalities.) The percentage of fatalcol1ision accidents varied depending on whether the aircraft involvedhad ejection seats: 27 percent produced fatalities if both aircraft involved had ejection seats, but thepercentage rose to 60 percent ifneither aircraft involved had ejection seats.

As might be anticipated from thegreater speeds involved, most ofthe midair collisions reviewed inthe analysis involved jet aircraft:82 percent involved only jet air-

craft; 9 percent involved a jet andreciprocating aircraft; and the remaining 9 percent involved onlyreciprocating aircraft.

Formation flying demands precision and it is notable that 55percent of the collisions occurredduring formation flight. Associatedflying, involving two or more aircraft operating in a limited airspace where each pilot knows of theother aircraft but does not know theother aircraft's exact location, contributed 23 percent. It thus appearsthat any time aircraft are placed inproximity to each other the hazardincreases. In view of the increaseddensity of air traffic, it is not suprising that 40 percent occurred within20.9 miles of an airport.It also is pertinent that most ofthe midair collisions (82 percent)occurred during daylight hours.Naturally most of our flying is accomplished during daylight hours.

However, one might expect a higherrisk at night because of reducedvisibility. Offsetting factors duringnight flight include decreased aircraft density, probable higher experience level of the general aviation pilot flying at night, effectiveidentification lights on aircraft andpossible increased use of positivecontrol.

Aeromedical ConsiderationsAfter the significance of thishazard is recognized, the next question is: What do we do about it? thas been repeatedly emphasizedthat we must stress and utilize thesee and avoid concept i we are

to prevent midair collisions. However, analyses of the midair collisions clearly demonstrate the needto recognize physiologic limitationsin using this procedure. A pilot'sfailure to recognize his limitationscan readily set the stage for onemore midair collision. It, therefore, seems appropriate to reviewbriefly the many factors which canaffect our ability to use the se6and avoid concept before considering methods of improving theprocedure.

Visual acuity: As one might anticipate, the ability to see clearlyis crucial. This, of course, is thereason flight surgeons are so concerned about vision during theperiodic examination. For practicalpurposes a person with 20/ 20 vision can detect an object which occupies minute of arc (figure 2).Stated another way, a person with2 / 2 vision can detect an aircraft with a fuselage diameter of7 feet about 4Y2 miles away. fthe crewmember is nearsighted(myopic) he will not be able todetect the object until it is closer.The more severe the myopia, thecloser the other aircraft would haveto be before it could be detected.

Peripheral vision: Peripheral vision poses a significant hazard dur-26 U S ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


29/52

ing high speed flight. All too frequently an individual believes hecan rely on his peripheral vision todetect an aircraft approaching fromthe side of the flight path. Unfortunately, however, visual acuitydecreases sharply in the peripheryof the retina. A person with 20/ 20vision will have vision of 2 / 200or worse in the periphery. Thismeans a target must be much closerbefore it would be detected. Forexample, an aircraft which couldbe detected at 4Y miles if viewedin the center of the field of visioncould not be seen until it was lessthan Y mile away if it were only20 degrees off from the center ofthe field of view.Relative motion: Relative motion is of particular importance indetecting another aircraft. An object moving across the field of viewwill be detected much more readilythan will an object of the same sizewhich is on a parallel course. Thelatter situation occurs not onlywhen overtaking an aircraft butalso when two aircraft are on ahead-on course. Consequently, inthe most critical situations the opportunity for detection is significantly reduced as a result of lackof relative motion.Contrast: This also plays an important role in the see and avoidconcept. An aircraft which contrasts with its background will bedetected earlier than one of thesame size ' which blends with thebackground. This is the principlebehind the use of camouflage. Regrettably, the color of many aircraftblends with sky conditions frequently present and it is correspondingly more difficult to detectthese aircraft. As a result the aircraft must come closer to be detected and the risk is correspondingly increased.Accommodation time: This isthe time necessary to change theeyes' focus from an object at onedistance to an object at a differentdistance. For example, time is re-AUGUST 1973

a b cSize of Size SizeObject Angular geometric image projected projectedsubtense in eye to 100 miles to 10 miles

Retinal cone cell size 12 sec. 1.0-1.5 u 31 ft 3.1 ftfovea) 1.0-1.5,u minimum

Minimum visible line 0.5 sec. 0.05,u 1Y4 ft 1Y in.Minimum separable 15 sec. 1 25JL 38 ft 3.8 ft.two-point discrimination)Aligning power 2 sec. 0.17,u 5 ft .5 ftdetection of break incontour)Visual acuityresolution threshold) 1 min. 5.0 u 154 ft 15 4 ft

whole letters) 5 min. 25.0,u 770 ft 77.0 ft

Figure 2Theoretical and experimental summary of maximum visual capab ilit iesSource: Ophthalmology Branch, Clinical Sciences Division, USAFSAM

quired to shift the view from outside the aircraft to the instrumentpanel, to focus the eyes to perceiveand scan the instruments, and thenlook back outside and refocus theeyes to distant objects. The timenecessary to shift vision from outside the aircraft to the instrumentpanel and then back outside againhas been estimated to be at leastY seconds. Obviously, instrument grouping and method of display can affect this time. For example, if it is necessary to scan largeportions of the cockpit interior tosee all the instruments, or if it isnecessary to read small numbersrather than scan pointers, the timespent looking in the cockpit will be

increased. Also, accommodationtime increases with both fatigueand age, thus posing more of aproblem whenever either of theseconditions exists.Glare: Produced whenever lightinvades the eye, glare reduces distinct vision. Glare may be producedby reflection during mist or hazeconditions and also by reflectedlight from a bright cloud layer below the aircraft. Of course, blinding glare also may occur w i l ~scanning near or into the sun orafter exposure to a fireball. All suchglare results in a temporary hazeover the visual field; this reducesthe ability to see objects and presents obvious hazards to the crew-27


30/52

member looking for other aircraft.Empty-field myopia: n interesting phenomenon called empty-fieldmyopia or nearsightedness can occur in flight. At high altitudes apilot may have no distant object onwhich to focus. As a result theeyes accommodate to a focal pointnearer than their usual point. Ineffect, the pilot has become nearsighted. Because of the resultantout-of-focus blurring, a target mustbe closer to be detected. The 41;2mile detection distance could bereduced to 3 miles or even in someindividuals to less than one-half ofthe normal detection distance. Thesituation can be readily correctedby consciously focusing on someobject, such as a wingtip, that is 20

to 30 feet away.Hypoxia: Naturally, no aeromedical discussion would be complete without mentioning hypoxia.Even the mild hypoxia present at4,000 feet can affect night vision,and vision under daylight conditions will be affected at 12,000 feetunless additional oxygen is supplied. The smoker must rememberthat a recent cigarette will reducethe altitude at which the effects onvision are detected because someof his red blood cells are carryingcarbon monoxide from the cigarettesmoke rather than oxygen. As aresult there is less oxygen in theblood available for the body andvision is affected at a lower altitudethan it would be otherwise. Forexample, the carbon monoxidesaturation produced by smokingthree cigarettes can have an effecton ViSllal sensitivity equal to thatof an altitude of 8,000 feet.Design factors: There are designfactors and human engineeringconsiderations that can compromise the crewmember's abilityto see and avoid. A canopy bowcan effectively produce a blindspot in a visual field. Dirt or otherobscuring items on the canopy cansimilarily reduce the ability to detect another aircraft. As mentioned28

earlier, grouping of aircraft instruments and arrangements of pointers or indicators can affect theamount of time the crewmemberhas to spend looking inside thecockpit. These and 'other designfactors can play an important rolein setting the stage for a midair collision.Acceleration: Forces caused byacceleration may be a factor, particularly during formation or combat maneuvers. Grayout, blackoutand redout all directly affect acrewmember's ability to see another aircraft in time to avoid acollision. Proper G protection andflight profiles are essential to correct these situations.

Vibration: This is usually ofminor significance but can be ofconcern during high-speed, lowlevel flight. In this instance, reduction of visual ability is coupledwith possible greater aircraft density, including light planes, andthe hazard is proportionately increased.

Other factors: In special circumstances other factors may compromise the see and avoid concept. Hood use eliminates at leastone set of eyes otherwise availablefor outside scanning. Directing attention to a problem inside or outside theaircraft correspondinglyreduces the chance to see anotheraircraft which is on a collisioncourse. During night flight, failureto accomplish complete darkadaptation or failure to rememberthe central blind spot while scanning the sky can create obvioushazards. Night myopia can occurin the same manner as empty-fieldmyopia and the resulting nearsightedness presents additionalproblems for the crewmember.Perception and reaction time: Amajor problem in today's highspeed aircraft is that which resultsfrom the time necessary to perceive and react to a hazard (figure3). It takes 0.4 second from thetime an object is detected in the

Perception and reaction timein seconds)Detect and visualize 0.4Recognize 1 0Decide what to do 2.0Direct muscle movement, move 2.5controls, change flight path

Total 5.9Figure 3

peripheral visual field until it isseen by central vision, approximately 1 second to recognize theaircraft and 2 seconds to determinethe flight path of the other aircraft and decide what to do. Thenthe time required for the brain todirect muscle movement, for themuscles to respond, for the controls to move and for the aircraftto change its flight path representsanother 2.5 seconds. Together thetotal time required to detect, seeclearly, recognize, react and changethe flight path can require 5Y to6 seconds under optimum conditions. Stated another way, an aircraft traveling 600 miles per hourwill travel about 5,000 feet, orabout a mile, before the flight pathchanges. f two aircraft travelingat that speed approach head-on,they will have to detect each otherat a distance greater than 10,000feet or a collision will be inevitable.What if an aircraft flies much slower? It will, of course, travel ashorter distance before the flightpath changes. I t must be remembered, however, that the other aircraft may be approaching at 600mph. Consequently, it will benecessary to add the distancetraveled, by the slower aircraft tothe nearly 1 mile it will require -theother pilot to change his flight path.

Continued on page 8U. S. RMY VI TION DIGEST


31/52

WHY

AUGUST 1973

The ProfessionalInvestigation:ot WH T

Lieutenant olonel Lester R Kerfoot Jr.[RCRAFT ACCIDENTS can be prevented when.il.. heir causes (emphasis supplied) are known.Causes can be determined only by investigation. Anaircraft accident generally indicates a weakness inthe accident prevention effort. Only a thorough in

vestigation will provide the necessary information onwhich