Army Aviation Digest - May 1978

8/12/2019 Army Aviation Digest - May 1978

1/52

UNITE ST TES RMY

VI TIONUSAARL

SCI SUPPORT CENTERFORT P BOX620577

RUCKER AL 36362 0577


2/52

VOL l TioKi IGEST NUMBER 5* ** *rigadier General Charles E. Canedy

Army Aviation OfficerODCSOPS, Headquarters,

Department of the Army

Major General James C. SmithCommander

U.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, Alabama

Brigadier General James H. PattersonDeputy Commander

U.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, Alabama

page

@0 cP

~ P

~ l0DIRECTION OF FIRE

H IG STANDOFF - 2500

page 10

Richard K. TierneyEditor

1 Army Aviation In The Pacific, MG James C. Smith2 Air Combat Engagements, MAJ Charles C. Crowley4 HELLFIRE-A Weapon System Whose Time Has

Come MAJ Jeffrey H. Thomason10 2.75 Update. Whatever Happened To The Egg

On The Wall"? COL James L. Tow16 We Can No Longer Chase The Four Winds20 DES Report To The Field

22 A Story Of Survival, Thomas E. Martin24 First 175/40 IERW Graduates, CPT Thomas P.

Brown Jr.26 EPMS Corner: Air Traffic Controllers And Flight

Operations Coordinators, MAJ Melvin L. Davis28 OPMS Corner: Graduate Flight Training And Aviator

Management, MAJ Jacob B. Couch Jr .29 Helicopter Control System30 Reliability Testing- Why We Need It, Robert L.

Miller33 Protection Of Medical Aircraft, Part Two, COL

Waldemar A. Solt (Retired)37 Views From Readers40 Air Assault School, MAJ A. T. Brainerd41 Know The Threat42 Summer Thunderstorm, Pilot Enemy Number 146 PEARL48 ATC Action Line

Inside Back Cover: You Wanna Hear From MeBack Cover: AVNEC

ABOUT THE COVERWhat's new with the HELLFIRE missile and the

2.75 inch rocket? See articles beginning on pages6 a 4 and 10. Cover art by Fred Martin

page 16

page 4

page 6

The mis s io n of t he U.S . Army Aviation Digest is to pr o vide inform a tion of a nope ratio n al. functio nal n ature co ncerning sa fety a nd a ir craft acc ident preve ntio n . trai n ing , ma inte nanc e , op e ratio ns research a nd d eve lop me nt , av iationme d icine and ot her related data .

Th is publicatio n has bee n app rov ed by The Adju ta nt Gen e ra l, Hea dq ua rte rsDepartment of t he Ar my , 23 Decem b er 1975, i n accor d a nce with AR 310 -1 .

Act ive Army uni ts rece ive distribu ti on un d e r th e p inpoint dis tributi on s ys te mas ou tl ined in AR 310 -1 . Complete DA Fo rm 1 2-5 a nd se nd di r ec tly to CDR.AG Pub lications Ce nt er , 2800 Eas tern ' Bo ul e var d , B a lt imo re , MD 2 122 0 . Fo rany c hange in d is tr ibut io n requi re men ts , initi a te a re vi se d DA Form 1 2-5 .

Th e Digest is an off icial Depar tme nt of the Army pe r io di ca l publ ishe d m o nthl yund er th e su p er vision o f the Comman ding Ge ne ra l, U.S . Ar m y Avia tio n Ce nt er .Vie ws ex pr esse d he rei n are not necessa ri ly those o f th e De p a rtm e nt of th eArmy no r t he U .S . Arm y Avia t io n Center . Photos a re U.S . Arm y u nless o the rwi sespeci fied . Mater ial may b e re pr inted pro v ided cre dit is give n t o t he Digest andto t he au tho r , unless otherwise in d ica te d .

Art icles , pho tos and items o f inte res t o n A rmy a viation a re i nv ite d . Direc tcommun icatio n is au tho rized to : Ed itor . U.S . Army Aviation Digest Fort Ru ck e r.AL 36362 .

Na t iona l Guard a n d Arm y Reserve u n its un de r pinp o int di s tr ibution al s os hould su bmi t DA Form 12-5 . Other Nat io na l Gu ar d unit s sho uld s ubmit requests throug h the ir s ta te adjuta n t ge n er a l.

Those not elig ib le fo r official dis t rib utio n or who de s ire pe rson a l copie s othe Digest ca n or de r t he maga zine from th e S uperintendent of DocumentsU.S . Governmen t P rin ting Offi ce . Washi ng t o n. DC 20402 . Annua l s ubscriptionra tes are $15 .70 domestic and $19 .65 ov e rse as .


3/52

General Smith

Arr-\\y v i ~~ nit\ th

PAClFlCMajor General James C. Smith

CommanderU.S Army Aviation Center

Fort Rucker AL

The Commander U.S. Army Aviation Center and Ft. Ruckerreflects on his recent trip to visit Army aviation units in the Pa-cific. He shares concerns and problem areas expressed to him

and what is being done to offset them.

T HE u.s. ARMY Aviation Center is dedicated to providingthe latest doctrine and highest professional training for Army aviationpersonnel who serve as membersof the combined arms team andwill face the enemy on the highthreat battlefield. Our objective isto prepare for and ensure victory inthe first battle. In order to accomplish this mission, it is essential tostay abreast of unit problems, monitor operations and employment ofaviation units and talk to personnelin the field who employ aviationdoctrine and training produced bythe Aviation Center.

Last November and December Ivisited Army aviation units in thePacific. These included elementsof the 17th Aviation Group, the 2dInfantry Division, the 45th Transportation Company, and the 377thMedical Company stationed in Korea. Enroute home I also visited withmembers of the aviation detachmentin Japan and the 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii. Throughout the tripI was impressed by the high state

MAY 1978

of readiness and can do attitudefound in the units I visited .

There were several problem areaspresented to me which I feel theAviation Center can help solve. Inthis article I want to share with theDigest $ readers several actions being taken by the Aviation Center tohelp resolve certain of these problems which appear to be worldwide.

ATe Training: During our discussions on air traffic control I mentioned that FOC FCC training atskill level 10 is in the final stages ofdevelopment and that instructionis expected to begin in May. TheAviation Center ATC school, in coordination with the Initial EntryRotary Wing (IERW) program hasinitiated tactical field training thatwill include the 71P, the 93H/J andstudent aviators. The scenario depicts receip t of a mission from theunit operations (71P students) atthe Division Instrumented Airfieldwhich is operated by the students.The IERW students execute the mis-sion flying under FOC FCC controloperated by the 93H/J students. As

the mission progresses, FOC FCCcontrollers implement missionchanges which direct the IERW students to varied tactical beacons inforward LZs. Beacons are set upand operated by ATC students whoalso act as tactical tower (foxhole)control teams to assist and guidethe student pilots into the LZ.

In addition, all training materialin 93H and J is being reviewed andwill become more comprehensivewith programed revisions. Otherchanges include area orientation forCONUS and overseas areas. Orientation consists of classes, film strips,and related information for studentswho desire the training prior to geographical area assignment. Additionally the Aviation Center has incorporated radio procedure and routineopt-rator maintenance training inthe program for ATC and flight operation students.

The 93H J SQTs for skill levels 2through 4 have been prepared andunits will receive test instructionsin July, August and September this

Continued on page

1


4/52

N OT 10 YEARS ago U.S. Armyhelicopters were employedat altitudes unheard of today.Becoming more aware of thethreat and its air defense capability, the Army started a tacticsdevelopment phase that wouldallow it to fight and simultaneously increase its survivability . Thisresulted in our training being

shifted from wild blue yonder into flight modes known as napof-the-earth (NOE) or terrainflight. Now few persons questionthe advantages of terrain flightmodes or that there are problemsassociated with it.

Again, the U.S. Army is evaluating its helicopter tactics andtraining. Sure, we still have theground threat but now anothermajor threat has been introducedagainst our forces, both air andground. This threat is the Mi-24Hind attack helicopter. The Mi-24 is being fielded in three versions, the Hind A, Band D. Fordiscussion purposes, this articlewill concentrate only on the totalsystem and its capabilities, notthe model differences.

The Mi-24 is a twin engine helicopter possessing a five-bladedmain rotor and a three-bladed

2

Major Charles C. CrowleyAttack Helicopter TSM Office

F t. Rucker , AL

tail rotor system. Its speed is in known as Air Combat Engageexcess of 140 knots. Like our ment (ACE), is underway at thattack helicopters, a various Aviation Center .ordnance mix can be carried. In order to assess effectivelyThis mix can consist of a 12.7 the impact of ACE, i t is plannedmillimeter (mm) swivel-mounted to be conducted in mult iplemachinegun, located in the heli - . phases. Phase I was started incopter s nose. There are indica- November 1977 and was comtions that this cannon also could pleted in December 1977. Duringbe replaced with a 23 mm radar- Phase I an instrumented AH-1

directed gun. Cobra was employed against aHard points on each wing allow UH-1 M Huey in a one-on-onethe aircraft to carry four 57 mm evaluation using six tactical scerocket pods (32 rockets per pod). narios. The AH-1 S was evaluatedThese rockets can be fitted with in three major areas: detectionvarious types of warheads. Also avoidance, evasive maneuverson the wing tipsarefourantitank and current weapons effectiveguided missile (ATGM) launch ness against armed helicopters.rails. This allows the Hind to carry Throughout Phase I the U H-1 Mfour Swatters or four Sagger air was employed, using currentto ground missiles. threat flight profiles. The AH-1

Using all onboard weapons, flight profiles were not held conthe Hind helicopter poses a seri- sistent with current doctrine, ious threat to both ground and an effort to investigate any andair assets of U.S. forces. all possibilit ies of a tactics o

Since enemy planners normal - technique that would allow thIy employ vehicles en masse on AH-1 S an advantage. While nothe battlefield , it is envisioned always flying current antiarmorthat will hold true also for employ- doctrine, the AH-1 S crew wament of their helicopters. If this instructed that its profiles musassumption is valid, U.S. forces always consider the ground andmust be prepared to counter the air defense threat, consistentair threat. To assess this problem, with the given scenario.a tactics developments program, During Phase I it was apparent

U S RMY AVIATION DIGEST


5/52

that terrain flight will allow theAH-1 S a marked advantage invisual detection avoidance. Although not surprising, pilots mustnow think about flying NOE inslightly different terms. Areaspreviously free from ground observation quickly can becomedanger areas when an air threatis introduced. Additionally, aircrews must now divide their attention to not only searching forground targets but must also bealert for an aerial threat.

Another area of increased difficulty is that of NOE navigation.Crewmembers must concentratetheir attention outside the cockpitand not stay on the map" constantly. For once detected, theirresponses must be immediate.This response time was found,after numerous simulated aerialengagements, to be less than10 seconds after the aircraft visually was detected by anotherattack helicopter. This fast paceof aerial combat highlights thefact that crew integrity is vital.During Phase I nontest personnel were inserted as AH-1 Screwmembers. Immediately theAH-1 S crew performance wasdegraded seriously. A marked

MAY 978

advantage is afforded the firstaircraft able to place quick accurate firepower on its adversary.Since time now becomes critical,it was found that cockpit switchesrequired to fire weapons, mustnow be relocated to minimizeengagement times.

Phase II is scheduled to beginsometime in 1978. During thisPhase about 30 aviators will betrained in aerial combat, usingtactics and techniques learnedfrom Phase I. This training willbe modified continually so as toenable the Aviation Center todevelop a training program thatis suitable for force training. Additionally, steps are underway toreplace the U H 1 M threat simulators with aircraft that more closelysimulate the threat in terms ofsize, speed and performance.

Upon completion of Phase IIit is envisioned that follow-ontesting will continue. Test personnel consider one-on-one testing as only a stepping stone toforce-on-force testing. Numerous one-on-one engagementsthat occurred during Phase Iwould have been altered significantly with the involvement ofmultiple aircraft. When a single

aircraft is moving on the battlefield it is vulnerable to beingattacked from the rear where vision is void. Employment of multiple aircraft will require tacticsthat will allow movement whilesimultaneously covering yourwing's 6 o'clock position.

As in all areas of tactical employment training is the key.

It has been proven time andagain that Soldiers fight like theyare trained. No aerial combattraining exists for Army aviators.This is not to advocate that weshould train to seek out and killan aerial threat, but we at leastshould equip our aviators withthe capability and training needed to defend themselves. Training essential in air-to-air is:

Aircraft recognition Threat detection Range estimation Threat capabilities and limi

tations Action on contact Know your aircraft's capabil

ities and limitations Crew/team trainingWe must train n o w - not tomor

row After the first threat helicopter attack it is too late fortraining programs to commence.

3


6/52

A Weapon SystemWhose Time Has Come

Major Jeffrey H. ThomasonHELLFIRE TSM Office

Ft. Rucker L

The author wishes to thank Rockwell Internationaland the Project Manager HELLFIRE office for

assistance in preparing this article

T HE ARMY'S newest and mosteffective antitank weapon syst em the HELLFIRE derives itsname from Helicopter LaunchedFire And Forget, due to its employment as the major armament subsystem of the AH-64 advanced attack helicopter, its standoff range,and seeker growth potential to a

fire and forget missile.The AH-64 provides battlefield

mobility and tactical agility, whilethe HELLFIRE missile delivers thedevastating and deadly punch (figure 1).

The materie l need for the HELLFIRE was approved by the Department of the Army on 29 Dec 1972.Since, it has been revalidated andupdated to reflect current AH-64and HELLFIRE program philosophy.

In February 1976 HELLFIRE wasdesignated the point target weaponfor the advanced attack helicopter,now designated the AH-64. Followinga comprehensive evaluation of proposals submitted by competing contractors, the full-scale engineeringdevelopment con tract was awardedto the Missile Systems Division,

Figure 1

HELLFIRE Modular Missile System

Rockwell International, Columbus,OH. HELLFIRE is in its second yearof a 5-year development program.

The versatile HELLFIRE Modular Missile System, as a part of thAH-64, will relentlessly seek out anddestroy armored vehicles which area major threat to ground forces.HELLFIRE will be the nemesis othe tank. I t will leave enemy armorno place to hide.

The HELLFIRE missile (figure2 is armed with a shaped chargewarhead and is designed to accepta variety of follow-on seeker modules.

4 U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


7/52

It offers a variety of employmentoptions for maximum effectivenessunder diversified conditions. Theemployment concept s for the HELLFIRE missile system with laser seekerare as depicted and each is addressed

separately.Remote Ground Or Scout Desig

nator Mode: The remote mode provides the launch and leave capabilityfor the AH-64. Targets are designated by a scout helicopter equipped

1--1-------1778 MAXIMUM) - - l

WEIGHT:4 kg MAXIMUM)

SEEKER

HELLFIRE Modular Missile

t Figure 2 Weight and length are for mis-sile with longest and heaviest seeker

Remote Control Mode Ground Designator)

MAY 978

F i g u r e 3

with a laser designator or a forwardobserver using a ground laser locator designator GLLD). Prior to unmasking, the AH-64 communicateswith the remote designator to coordinate target location, launch method, firing technique, lock-on option,and start of designation, therebyreducing both designator and AH-64 exposure time. The AH-64 immediately remasks after launch andthe remote designator illuminatesthe target during terminal homing.

In the event a remote designatoris not available, HELLFIRE can befired in the utonomous mode. Thismode provides for an airborne selfcontained capability using the AH-64 fire control system to acquire

and designate the target. However,in this mode the AH-64 must remain exposed throughout target acquisition missile launch targetdesignation and missile impact figure 3).

HELLFIRE includes both the di-rect and indire t launch methods.Direct fire launch can be employedusing either a lock-on before LOBL)or lock-on after LOAL) seeker option. In the LOBL seeker optionthe missile seeker locks onto the

remotely designated target prior tolaunch figure 4).

In the LOAL seeker option theHELLFIRE missile can be launchedon a trajectory toward the targetwith seeker lock-on occurring inflight figure 5).

Using the indirect launch methoothe AH-64 can eliminate totally thepossibility of being detected by enemy radar. In this method the missile is fired while the helicopter isconcealed behind masking terrainfeatures such as trees or hills. Aselect switch on the fire control panelactivates a preprogramed autopilotsequence to cause the missile to flyan elevated trajectory over the mask.The scanning seeker then locatesand locks on the remotely designated target figure 6).

An increase in firepower is achievedin either the remote or autonomousdesignation mode by employing the

5


8/52

Direct FireLock On Before Launch)

Direct FireLock On After Launch)

... ~ ~igure 5 t

,rS L- Indirect Fire y

f .

== ==~ ~

.

~

6 U S RMY AVIATION DIGEST


9/52

Figure 7 ' Figure 8 ..

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - -R i p p l ~ i r e

\

k / h e H , ~ ~cvte M)GiialJe

J u ~ ~ ~~ i H ~

rapid fire technique. In this firingtechnique , multiple missiles are firedat intervals against multiple targetsdesignated in succession. As a missile impacts each target, the designator slews to the next target (figure 7).

A further increase in firepowers available through the use of the

ripple fire technique when multipletargets are to be serviced and multiple designators are available. Eachdesignator operates on a separatecode to illuminate its respective target. The AH-64 then launches multiple HELLFIRE missiles, one oneach designator code virtually one

MAY 1978

after the other (figure 8 ).HELLFIRE has been designed for

use by the troops in the field. It willbe manufactured and issued as acertified round , and requires noassembly or maintenance prior toemployment. Its simple Ram-HomeLocking feature not only expeditesrearming , but also eliminates thehassle for personnel at night andduring periods of inclement weather. Built-in test equipment of theAH-64 isolates faults to a line replaceable unit and eliminates tediousmanual effort and guesswork.

HELLFIRE can do the job forwhich it was designed and will con-

tribu te significantly to the effectiveness of the combined arms team.Employed on the AH-64 , it will destroy enemy armored vehicles andshort range air defense weapons.

Its interchangeable follow-on guidance seeker modules on a commonairframe make it effective equallyaround-the-clock and during periodsof limited visibility. Its indirect firecapability make it possible to hittargets while the helicopter s protected by masking terrain. Its firstround accuracy and superior exchange ratios help the combinedarms team beat the enemy to thepunch.

7


10/52


11/52

the Army. I recommend readingMajor Gogolkiewicz' article, T ACInstruments-Here We Go Again,in the April Digest

Another a rea of great interest wasthe Aircrew Training Manuals. InMarch of this year, the AviationCenter hosted a proponent coordination meeting for the purpose ofreviewing and revising all ATM tasklists. The second generation of themanuals will be in the hands of fieldunits by 1 September for implementation on 1 October 1978. Manualswill contain standardized task listsfor each aircraft which include standards, conditions, and a description for each maneuver/task. Inaddition, the manuals will be in standardized format, include many provisions of the old TCs and containprovisions for commanders to compute unit training readiness at leastpartially based on aviator readinesslevels. These computations alongwith appropriate ARTEP completions should provide commanders

MAY 1978

P ctFtC TRf

with a more comprehensive approachto readiness reporting. Provisionsof the revised ATMs also will provide commanders grea ter flexibilityand the basis for establishing annualtraining and flying hour programs.A new title: Aviator Readiness andTraining Manuals (ARTMs) is being considered for the revised ATM.

There are other developments underway at the Aviation Center whichwill facilitate worldwide aviationtraining. For example, our currentmultitrack IERW (175/40) programprovides two training tracks. Allstudents comple te 24 weeks of common training and starting the 25thweek students will follow either theUH-1 track or the aeroscout (OH-58 track for the remaining 8 weeks.This program is being analyzed forfurther expansion to include twomore tracks-AH-1 and CH-47. Another example of areas we are expanding and improving is in ourInstructor Pilot Cour ses (IPC). Weare analyzing and plan to consoli-

date and compress all IP coursesinto a one time, one shot systemsIP course. More will come out lateron these programs.

As I emphasized during my visitto your units, the Aviation Center isconcerned about problems and requirements of troops and deployedunits. Our goal at the Aviation Center is to develop and provide training and doctrine which fulfill aviation training requirements worldwide. The Aviation Center is doingeverything in its power to ensurethat you receive the latest doctrineand the highest quality trainingwhich, combined with the best equipment and top leadership, will enableus to suppor t all commanders if warshould come. You can help by reporting problem areas to representatives from the Center Team asthey make regular field visits. Also,write to us at the Aviation Centerwith any ideas that you feel will improve any aspect of our readinessposture. iIIiIJiaII

9


12/52

2.75 UpdateWhatever appened To' 'The Egg O n The Wall ?

A FEW years ago my predecessor,Brigadier General Frank (Rags)Ragano, described in this magazinea new lethal warhead, the Multipurpose Submunition (MPSM) Warhead. Its functioning characteristicwas likened to that of a raw eggthrown against a wall. (See Zee EggVersus Zee Tank , May 1975 Digest .

By means of these written wordsI am pleased to present to you anupdate on this and other 2.75 inchrocket system improvements.

My subject separates nicely intoseveral general categories: those improvements on the aircraft that aregoing to contribute to better rocketry; improvements in system lethality; progress with our nonlethal or

supporting warheads; improvementswhich increase system range andreduce its weight; and finally, someoff-the-wall warhead concepts for

your consideration.Improvements To Better Rock

etry. First then, a look at the aircraftsystem improvements to rockets.Very briefly and perhaps in review,the rocket related tactics, equipmentand effects we had in Vietnam areknown to most of you. As we lookedto mid-intensity, the Army rapidly

identified and developed new tactics and doctrine. The complement-ing new equipment takes a littlelonger; nonetheless, much work isbeing done in this regard and that'swhat this article is all about. Theeffects that come from this equipment, of course, are the type thathave been identified as being necessary to fight and win in that midintensity environment. They were

10

Colonel James L TowProject Manager

2 .75 Inch Rocket SystemRedstone Arsenal, AL

supported by Training and DoctrineCommand's Pass In Review Study(see Pass In Review, Apri l 1975Digest, and The Up-Gun Dilemma,May 1975 Digest and by the Selected Effects Armament System (SEAS)Cost and Operational EffectivenessAnalysis (see SEAS COEA, April

975 Digest .Shown in s 'haded boxes of figure

1 are those areas for which the 2.75inch rocket system project officehas responsibility, and under the

equipment category that means thefuze, the warhead, the motor andthe launcher. The fire control andstores management are responsibilities that fall under the purview ofthe aircraft project manager; butlet me touch on them briefly as towhat they mean to the rocket system.

First, the fire control. The criticalpart of fire control is the laser rangefinder which will correct the massiveproblem related to a 25 percent rangeestimation error which is experienced

1. Comparative Use Of 2.75 Rocket System

2.75 INCH ROCKET SYSTEM

TACTICSSHORT RANGE

DIVE

TACTICS

LONG RANGE

NAP Of THE-

EARTH

VIETNAM ERA

EOUIPMENTNO f iRE CONTROL

WOODEN ROUNDS

MIDINTENSITY

EOUIPMENT

l RE CONTROL

EffECTS

EffECTS

u s ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


13/52

with our human system and bring itdown to 1 percent (figure 2). Thismeans that the aim point variationdue to this range error will be drastically reduced in size. In terms ofthe traditional ellipse pattern we willsee an 80 percent reduction in theaim point variation. The currentMark 40 Motor has a ripple ballisticpattern of some 19 mils. With theexisting range error combined withthe rocket ballistic characteristics,it's not surprising that one gets thelarge inaccuracies that many knowso well. Unfortunately, and all toooften, the wide spread knowledgeof these inaccuracies provides thebasis by which many improperlyjudge the worth of ongoing system

improvements. I t is readily seen thata significant improvement will result just by eliminating the currentrange estimation error, and this thefire cont rol will do. You will sta rt tosee fire control in AH-l Cobras inthe latter part of 1979.

The second area I would like tomention relates to stores manage-ment ndfuze setting On a cockpitpanel similar to the one of figure 3,pilots will be able to choose the typeof warhead they want to fire by se

lecting the zone within the launchersfrom which it is to come. They willapply the fuze setting that they wantfor the rocket depending upon itspurpose and they will select the quantity to be fired. Pilots also will beable to set the rate of firing and, asyou can see from the panel, muchother information will be availableto them, all key benefits.

One point further about storesmanagement and the zone fromwhich a rocket will come: in ourcurrent launchers, we don t havesuch a capability, but in the future,the Lightweight 7-Tube Launcherwill have two zones, one consistingof three tubes and the other of four.

Moving to the 19-Tube Launcher,these same zones are retained withinthe center seven tubes, but, a thirdzone of 12 rockets is added with theouter ring. Fuze setters and storesmanagement will begin appearing

MAY 1978

HeliCOPTER/ROCKET SYSTEM ACCURACY AT HOVER

4 K\1 RANGE

AIM

POINT

AH IS

FIRE CONTROL DISPERSION

1 R.E .

500M

AH IG

25 R.E .

ROCKET DISPERSION

PIP MK66/HE

MK40/HE

TARGET

o100 X 100M

2. Fire Control System ccuracy t Hover 4KM Range

on our AH-l Cobras around the endof this year.Lethal Warhead Improvements

I would like now to move into thespecific improvements for which Iam responsible, dealing first withthose related to improvements toour lethal warheads.

Two old friends are still in ourinventory, the M229 17-pound Warhead and the M151 10-pound highexplosive (HE) Warhead (figure 4).Fuzes available are proximity and

point detonating. Well, what are wedoing to these old friends? We areadding the new remotely set M433multioption fuze (figure 5 . With it,inflight and from the cockpit, thepilot then can select a super quick

3. Cockpit Fuze Set Panel

mode or two variations in delay;one is related to tree height for aforested target area and the otheris the delay necessary to achieve apenetration through a bunker orbuilding. The M433 fuze should verymuch enhance the utility of the HEWarhead. With availability dependent upon the allocation of procurement funds, this new warhead isscheduled to become available during 1980.

The other fuze of the remotely

set family is the M439 fuze (figure6). It is settable in terms of range,either manually dialed from thecockpit in l00-meter increments, orau tomatically set from the rangefinder input to the fire contro l com-

- = = = = = =


14/52

4 M-229 Warhead( l l And M-151 (Rl

puter and then through the fuzesetter electrically to the rocket warhead. This means that the aircraftfrom a given firing position will becapable of engaging several different targets at differing rangeswith different warheads, all without moving the aircraft.

With the performance of this fuzekept in mind, I would next like todescribe the most impressive of thenew developments, the MPSM Warhead. It is the warhead to which theegg on the wall concept applies.

The concept is alive and technicallyvery well. Shown in figure 7 in cutaway, this warhead will have 9 submunitions stacked as shown. Using

5 M-433 Remote Set Multioption Fuze/2.75 H Warhead

variable range feature of the M439fuze they will be expelled at a se

lected point along the trajectory.Each submunition is multipurposein that it is effective against personnel, materiel and armor. The submunition has a high drag device suchthat when each is expelled from thewarhea d it is in short order, reducedin velocity and separated from others,achieving a vertical orientation asit falls to the ground.

As determined by the ArmyMateriel System Analysis Agency,(AMSAA) effectiveness against pronepersonnel is particularly impressive.Each warhead has five times morelethal area than the standard 10-pound warhead. Significant resultsalso are obtained against materieland penetration of armor is achievedfrom the shaped charge that is within each submunition. Given hits, verysignificant probabilities of kill are

obtained against point targets ofarmor. Consequently, while the

MPSM Warhead is not designed tobe an antiarmor type weapon, itnonetheless carries with it a lethalitythat could not comfortably be ig-nored by an enemy.

How have we done in tests to date?During the spring of last year atYuma Proving Ground, AZ the airlaunched phase of DT I Tests wasconducted. Most of the impact dataare described by figure 8. Noticethe 250 meters by 350 meters pat tern,the direction of fire, and the factthat AH-IG was standing off 2,500meters.

6. M-439 Range Remote Set Fuze/2.75 Cannister Warhead

For reasons of economy duringthe advanced development phase,only seven submunit ions were contained in each warhead. Shown arethe results of 32 warheads, fired froma hover or 20 knots (kts) single or inpairs. A new sight alignment wasassumed prior to each single or pairfiring. F iring from a hover was performed intentionally with sight settings of both 39 and 129 mils. Wewanted to confirm that variationsof pitch attitude normally unintentional, did not significantly affectthe pattern s location; and indeedwe found that to be consistently true.

2000 M FlECHETTE WARHEAD j l l ; ; ~ I W ~.. . . PERSONNel TARGETRANGE TO TARGET-KM

COCKPIT FUZE SET PANel

12

4000 M SUB MUNITION WARHEADMIXED TARGET

The final firing of eight warheadswas with 20 kts forward flight, firingsingles. This was done by eight consecutive passes over the firing pointat that same speed and while the

u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


15/52

sight setting was 83 mils. We didhave unintentional variations in pitchattitude; nonetheless, the impact

area and pattern remained essentially unchanged from that of warheads fired from the hover. Thefindings are more significant andclearly show a vast improvement intightening up of the impact patternover that which we expect todaywith the standard lo-pound HE Warheads.

Now what does this mean in terms

c o

AHIG STANDOFF - 2SOOM

250 METERS

:lWHDS AIR TYPE SITESPEED FIRE SETTING

HOVER SINGLES 39 M i l S

8 HOVER PAIRS 9 MILS

8 HOVER SINGLES 128 MILS

8 20 KTS SINGLES 83 MILS

8. OT 1 Results Air Launched)

7. XM-261MPSM Warhead

of effectiveness'? Available analyses tell us that today with 38 rocketsfired on l00-square meter pronepersonnel target at 4,000 meters(with our current AH-IG, 25 percent range error, and StandardHE Warhead), we could do littlemore than frighten the enemy. However, with the Submunition Warhead combined with the fire cont rolnow being developed for the Cobra,the casualties would exceed anyand all expectations.

There is every reason to be optimistic about what to expect fromthis high payoff warhead. Tests showthat we have an acceptable item already from the standpoint of lethalarea and armor penetration. Pitchvariation sensitivity virtually has beeneliminated because of the excellentperformance of the high-drag deviceof the submunition. We officiallycompleted advanced developmentin October of 1977 and progres s infiscal ye ar (FY) 78 is dependent upon the extent to which funding canbe identified.

Supporting Warheads. Turningnow to the supporting type warheads,the first one that I would mention isthe Screening Smoke Wick Warhead. Shown in figure 9 in cut-awayis the new warhead. I t has 1 perforated metallic wicks filled withfiberglass which are contained in acanister filled with white phosphorus.When the warhead functions thecanister bursts, creating a cloud ofwhite phosphorus in the air, with

9. Smoke Warhead XM-2S9

the 1 wicks streaming individuallyto the ground. One would see thetrail they cause for about 5 minutes.These wicks provide a continuingsource of smoke, thereby creatinga very effective smoke screen.

Two different configurations willprovide for both fixed and variablerange fuzing. The fixed distancesmoke as demonstrated during DTOT I could be available in 14 months.This period reflects the time neededto obtain the money, administer acontract, and then produce the warhead. A special in-process review(lPR) was held in September whichrecommended that the warhead be

type classified; thus, it will be cleared soon for an urgent procurementto meet contingency and trainingneeds. Procurement is planned forFY 79.

With respect to the preferredSmoke Warhead, the remotely setfuzed variable range version, wehave just completed a year of inactivity due to a lack of dollars, butengineering development will nowstart in earnest in FY 78 with fielding planned soon thereafter.

Many va luable lessons should follow the fie lding of a Smoke Screening Warhead. There are differingopinions as to the use of Smoke Warheads from attack helicopters capable of carrying antitank missiles.Some believe that missiles mustmake up the total wing store load,but I strongly believe that if it hasnot already arrived, the day willcome soon when the firing of smokein support of tank killing missionsis as much a part, one with the other,as fires are to maneuver and that


16/52

DROGU CHUTE10 Illumination Warhead XM 262/263

habitually, some of the attack helicopters assets will always fire smokeand other supportive suppressivefires while the balance of the forceengages tanks with its missiles. Thisview is not widely held.

It might be useful to ponder some

key question s with regard to smoke11 Illumina tion Warhead Firing

for aviation; for instance, who delivers it? When and how is it employed? If the answers to these questions require rocket delivery ofsmoke , we will need to tra in for thisrole. Hopefully, the imminent typeclassification action will clear the

way for a procurement so attack

Enemy Returns Fire Attack Helicopter Repositions Self

Helicopter Attacks Illuminated Targets With TOW Or HELLFIRE

helicopter units can get on with thisimportant training task.

The Illumination Warhead is another one that we are working on.Shown in figure 1 as a cut-away, itwill ultimately use the same variablerange fuze that I have already described. In concept the expecteduse of the Illumination Warhead isshown in figure 11. First, we see anaircra ft firing illumination into thedarkness, toward a suspected targetarea. By the illumination provided,targets are illuminated and then subsequently engaged by either groundantitank weapons or from the aircraft firing tube-launched, opticallytracked, wire-guided (TOW) or Helicopter Launched Fire and Forget

(HELLFIRE).What s the status today? As youare probably aware, there is a current Standard M257 IlluminationWarhead which we are now procuring for the first time. In fact, a recently signed contract with Thiocolwill provide for 50,000 illuminationrockets. The first of this quantityshould reach the field around theend of 1978. The M257 will providemore than a million candle powerfor 2 minutes but there is one draw

back. It functions at the single rangeof 3,000 meters. This means thatthe parachute flare was designedfor low ejection velocity. The needfor variable ranges requires a newdesign development hence thefollow-on illumination warhead isessential. With regard to the newdevelopmen t item, progress was begun in FY 76, then stopped whendollars ran out. No further progresshas been made or will be made pending the availability of dollars. Theyare not now programed until theFY 80 budget because of the lowpriority of the effort.

The Variable Range IlluminationWarhead will have the same performance as the M257 in terms of illumination and duration but it willincorporate the fuze which can bemanually or automatically set fromthe cockpit for the desired range. I twill be designed for the variable


17/52

3 W ra p a round Fins

De te n t lg n ito Groove a t Af t En d

MK66 MOD 0 Motor

M K66 MO 1 Development Goals Retain MK66 MOD 0 Performance Redesign Fin And Nozzle Increase Spin To Achieve 7-9 Mil Accuracy At Hover Relocate Detent/Ignitor Contact For Launcher Compatibility

12. Mark 66 MO 1 Tri-service Motor

velocities that the parachute wouldexperience at the near and far ranges.Because of our delay in getting started it may not be available for some5 to 6 years.

Less Weight And Greater Range

concepts for achieving an improvedballistic accuracy when rockets arefired from a hovering helicopter. Byfocusing on fin and nozzle redesign,we can expect a motor which is lesssensitive to the very difficult downwash environment. From this program should come tighter patterns,greater range and higher velocity.

The Lightweight Launcher LWL)is under development by HughesAircraft Company. One of the latestprototypes is shown in figure 13.This launcher is quite different fromwhat we have today. The 19-tubelauncher is expected to weigh 80pounds; that is nearly 65 poundslighter than one of our current

launchers when modified for remotefuze setting . The 7-tube launcherwill weigh under 40 pounds. Thelaunchers will be capable of eightor more firings per tube. Today s

M200 Launcher is reusable, manymore than eight times , and is repairable . The LWL will incorporate thewiring for the remote fuze settingand also will have the provisionsfor environmental protection of therockets so that they can be firedunder flight conditions of moderateicing. There are a number of improvements to be found in the new"Lightweight Launcher." Deliveriesare expected during the last half of1979 .

In this article, I have tried to present the latest status of our fundedrocket system improvements. Recognizing that some of what I havewritten may spark a response , thisauthor invites the comments and / orinquiries from your readers . I appreciate fully that ideas of value cancome from anyone within our broadbase of rocket users and supporters.

Whether or not you have comments or ideas regarding the 2.75inch rocket system, you can be certain of one th ing- it is a totally newsystem which is coming with capabilities so vastly improved over whatwe now have - you may have to seeit to believe it. And see it you will

Next, I would like to address thesystem improvements which brightenthe picture regarding system rangeand weight; first the range improvement. In FY 78 we have begun thedevelopment work necessary to introduce the Navy-developed Mark66 higher velocity rocket -motor into the Army and eventually TriService inventory. In view of thegoal to maintain interoperabilitywith North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) launchers, I am confident we will see it there too (seefigure 12). 13. New 19-Tube Lightweight Launcher

The Army has decided that itwants the Mark 66 because of itshigher velocity, which in turn givesus a direct fire range capability to

6,000 meters; this is about a 2,000-meter improvement over that of theMark 40. While we want to retainthe velocity characteristics of theMark 66, its current design in thefin and nozzle area and of the electrical contact are incompatible withcurrent Tri-Service launchers.

Our program will address the compatibility problem and, at the sametime, incorporate into the fin andnozzle area the best known design

MAY 1978

II _ .

.


18/52

T H JOB OF investigating air-cralt accidents has alway s

belonge d to the unit having theaccident . This meant doing the in-vestigation, preparing the reportand coming up with corrective ac-tions to prevent similar mishaps. Onthe first of April all of this changed.Under a new concept called Cen-tralized Accident Investigation, orCAl , the United States Army Agen-cy for Aviation Safety USAAAVSjis investigating on a trial basis allmajor and selected minor accidentsworldwide. o ji nd out how CAlwill work, we decided to interviewColonel Keith 1 Rynott , USAAA VScommander.

Digest Why was CAl needed?COL Rynott There were severalreasons. The need first became apparent when we developed a procedure to analyze accidents to identify inadequacies in the aviationsystem that allowed or caused theaccident to happen rather than looking at single occurrences. This approach identified inadequacies andremedies which could be p resented

16

to decision-makers at the systemslevel of the Army. After analyzingtwo years of accident data it became apparent that we needed toimprove our source data the investigation report because an excessiveamount of time and manpower wasrequired to analyze the informationwe were getting.

Another reason was the situationwhich developed concerning ourassistance visit program. For yearsUSAAA VS was the only agency providing on-site assistance to field unitsto help them in their accident prevention programs. However in 975each major command was taskedto come up with a resource manage

ment team to perform essentiallythe same duties we were performing during our assistance visits. Sowe had a duplication of effort. Wefelt that we could better redirectour resources out of the assistancevisit business and into somethingwe thought would give us a higherpayoff and that was professionaltimely and responsive accidentinvestigation.

These reasons along with the

need for better and more timelydata for our analyt ical system ledus to look for a better way to conduct accident investigations.Digest What are the advantages ofCAl over field investigations?COL Rynott First there are fewprofessional investigators in the field.We are looking for professional investigations by professional investigators. Many aviators never becomeinvolved in an accident investigationand I would say that only a fewhave ever been involved in morethan one investigation. The difference is experience and we havethat experience at USAAA VS.

Secondly we are looking for con

tinuityin

our investigations. Withthe same people investigating accidents we can build up some continuity and some institutional memory.

Thirdly CAl is more timely andresponsive. For example on an investigation we recently conductedwe completed the field work reportand analysis cranked the information into our data base and wereworking on countermeasures within30 calendar days after the accident.

U.S. RMY AVIATION DIGEST


19/52

The field is allowed 15 workingdays to give us a direct copy of anaccident report and it's rare thatthis deadline is met. Then they have40 working days to get in the channelcopy of the report. That s the copy

which goes up through the chain ofcommand for review and approval.Divide this by five and you re talking about 8 weeks or 50 to 60 days.Again, this deadline is seldom met.So the information in the accidentreport is between 2 and 3 monthsold before we get it for analysis.Then, if the report is not completeor does not meet our data requirements, we must go back to the fieldfor additional information. We thenfind it very difficult to reconstitutethe board and get the needed information. CAl will give us a timely report and therefore earlier detectionof Army-wide trends and problems.

With the same people doing allthe investigations we are going toget quality in our reports-quali tythat will go into our analysis system.And we will have the report 30 to60 days sooner.

The greatest advantage of CAl isthat a single organization will beresponsible for investigating the accident, acquiring and recording theinformation, performing the analysisand developing countermeasures.But I want to stress that the CAlconcept will be on trial for an indefinite period of time. While we donot know all the things this systemholds in store for us, I think we regoing to find that the benefits willfar exceed what we expect rightnow.Digest: What will dete rmine whether

or not CAl continues on a permanent basis'COL Rynott: We will have to lookat the dollars and the resources expended during the trial period andsee what we got for our money. Ithink it will take an extended periodto get the data we need to comparethe results of CAl reporting and analysis with previous experience to seeif in fact, CAl produced all thethings we anticipated. In other words,

MAY 1978

is CAl meeting the needs of ourAgency and, foremost and uppermost, is it meeting the Army's needs'

f it does not meet the needs of theArmy and the local commander,then, of course, we will have to

look for another way.Right now our accident rate is at

an all-time low, around 6 accidentsper 100,000 flying hours. Fifteenyears ago we had 26 or 27 accidentsper 100,000 flying hours. So insteadof cutting down trees in the forest,today we are grubbing stumps. Ouranalysis procedure demands thebest data we can get. t must betimely and complete. f we findthere is no great difference betweenour CAl product and that provided

by field investigati ons, then we willend up somewhere in between.Digest: Will CAl be a more expensiveoperation than field investigations?COL Rynott: No, CAl will not bemore expensive, mainly because ofimproved efficiency. I think ourinvestigators will be able to do theinvestigation quicker, and unit peopleparticipating in the investigationwill get back to duty sooner thanthey would have had they beenconducting the investigation alone.The only real difference is travel toand from the acc iden t site. However,60 percent of the accidents for thepast 5 years occurred within 3 to 4hours C-12 or U-21 flight time fromFort Rucker. So, we are only talking about what it takes to load theteam in one of our airplanes, takethem to the unit, drop them off, support them while they are there, andbring them back.

Most accidents occur within the

proximity of Army installations, soour people will stay on post. Thissame support has to be providedregardless of who does the accidentinvestigation, so there's no additionalexpense there.

We are offsetting the travel expense by trading off those man-dayswe would have used for our assistancevisits. For the trial period, we aregoing to discontinue the assistancevisits and use those resources, both

personnel and funding, to conductthe CAl program. Now we don t expect to be out of the assistance visitbusiness forever. I think we need toevaluate the major commands accident prevention programs.

Digest: So the assistance visit program is not dead'COL Rynott: No, it's not dead. Butwhen we start these visits again,they will have a different thrust.They will be targeted more at themanagement of the accident prevention program than at the implementation of the program. We willdo a stovepipe evaluation within aMACOM. That is, we will take arandom sampling of units and tracetheir programs up through the intermediate headquarters, finallyending up at the MACOM wherewe will give a good evaluation andreport on how well we feel theiraccident prevention program isworking.Digest: Is the unit having the acci-

The greatest advantage o fCAl s that a single organi-zation will be responsible forinvestigating the accident, ac-quiring and recording the in-formation, performing theanalysis and developing coun-termeasures.

17


20/52

WE CAN NO LONGER CHASE m FOUR WINDS

dent now relieved of all responsibility for investigation?COL Rynott: No, not at all. Ourteams will be composed of a boardpresident, a recorder, and probably

one air safety specialist or technician, a civilian with expertise in theparticular type of accident we aredealing with. We will tailor the teamsas needed. f there is a lot of medicalinterest we will dispatch our flightsurgeon. f there's a need for humanfactors expertise then we will senda human factors guy out with theteam, or he may later augment theteam, as appropriate.

At the time we are notified of anaccident, we will advise the field

that we would like an SIP in thetype, model, and series of aircraftinvolved in the accident and possiblya maintenance officer. The field unitwill always have representation onthe board and they will still have toprovide the same support as in thepast. When we arrive at the crashsite, we will take over the responsibility for the investigation and forpreparing the report. We will comeequipped to do the investigation.However, the unit will have to provide personnel to search for lostparts, crate and ship exhibits forteardown analysis, remove the aircraft from the crash site and disposeof it. These jobs still belong to theinstalla tion.Digest: What part does the unit ASOplay in the investigation ?COL Rynott: The ASO will reallybe the coordinator between our teamand the unit. He will be the point ofcontact to the board. We will exploit to the fullest his knowledge ofthe particular area, the unit, andits mission.Digest: How quickly will CAl teamsbe dispatched after notification ofan accident?COL Rynott: We have a CAl operations center which is manned 24hours a day, 7 days a week. We arecommitted to dispatching a teamfrom Fort Rucker within 2 hours ofaccident notification. We have a go

18

team and a standby team on call atall times. When they are at work,their luggage is with them. The aircraft crew is on alert and the aircraft is preflighted and ready to go.

When the go team is sent out, thestandby team becomes the go teamand the next team becomes standby.We have six full-time teams. f allof these are out at one time, wehave three surge teams that willmove up. We currently have a C-12and a U-21 and as I mentioned earlier, 60 percent of all accidents occurwithin a 4 -hou r C-12 or U-21 radiusof Fort Rucker. Soon we are goingto have good overseas connectionsout of Atlanta with direct flights to

Europe. So we don t see any bigproblem in getting to the accidentsite.Digest: The accident report is finalized after the CAl team returnsto USAAAVS. f additional information or a change in the findingsis required, how will the unit members who served on the board be

able to participate?COL Rynott: Well, there could bea lot of telephone communication.But I don t anticipate any drastic orradical changes in the findings and

conclusions the team arrived at before it left the unit. I think they willhave found the "what" in the systemthat allowed the accident to happenat the installation level. When theteam returns, they will be lookingat remedies to inadequacies in thetotal Army aviation system, not justsomething to correct at installationlevel.

Now this is the beauty of CAl.Once our team comes home, wecan tap the expertise not only in

USAAA VS but also all the expertiseat the Aviation Center. We will havethe benefit of instructor pilots with6,000, 8,000, 10,000 hours in theparticular aircraft in question andall the people we work with regularlyat the Directorate of Evaluation andStandardization. We can get theirhelp in preventing a particul ar type

" we're all n green suits; we're all in the rmy and we'retrying for the same things the guy in the field s trying fo r-

more operational readiness and greater combat effectiveness.

.1.

II jl ~A . / d


21/52

Right now our accident rateis at an all-time 1 w around6 accidents per 100,000 flying

hours. Fifteen years ago wehad 26 or 27 accidents per100,000 hours. So instead ofcutting down trees in the forest, today we are grubbingstumps. Our analysis procedure demands the best data

te can ge

of accident. f changes are made,unit board members will be kept upto speed and the report will be sent

to them. They will have to review itbecause if they don t agree with itsomething will have to be workedout. f they do agree, the report willthen be sen t through normal Armychannels as always.Digest: Will unit commanders bebriefed before your team leaves theaccident site?COL Rynott: Yes. The responsibleofficers in the chain of commandwill be briefed on the tentative findings, conclusions and recommenda

tions. The commander will be givenprogress reports as the investigationgoes along. We have no secre ts. Weare there to prevent accidents, toassist the commande r in determiningas accurately as possible what causedthe accident and how to preven tsimilar accidents in the future. Sowe see no problem in keeping theunit commander informed as towhat is going on. f there is something that we think should be taken

MAY 978

care of immediately, we will tellthe commander at the time so hecan take whatever action he deemsappropriate.

Digest: Are the Navy and Air Forceinvestigation programs similar toCAl'?

COL Rynott: No, they aren t. Thissubject was brought up by the AirForce at the Joint Services AviationSafety Conference at Norton AirForce Base last September. Boththe Army and Air Force presentedtheir accident investigation concept sat that time. The Air Force systemplaces responsibility for accidentinvestigation at the major commandlevel rather than at the installationlevel as does the Army. On the firstof January this year, the Air Forcesafety people started a limited testprogram using professional mishapinvestigation teams to investigateselected accidents. The last timewe talked with the Air Force, theyhad been out on one investigationsince the first of the year. I believethey would like to do more in theinvestigation business, but they resomewhat const rained by resources.

f I recall correctly, Navy investigations are conducted by the squadronhaving the accident and the reportis then sent up through the chainof command.Digest: What do you think the payoff from the CAl program will be'?COL Rynott: CAl is new and different. Often, we are suspicious andnot completely at ease with thingsthat are new and different, things

we want to reduce thenumber o f accidents whichhave only suspected causes.Suspected causes don' t allowus to do much about pre ventinf accidents.

requiring drastic changes. We knowthat the job ahead will not be easy.We are going to be under the gunto produce a professional investigation based on facts. The effec-

tiveness of the prevention effort iscompletely dependent upon thequality of the investigation and report and a sound analysis so thateffective countermeasures can bedeveloped.

We cannot chase the four windsin trying to prevent accidents. Wehave to identify and concentrateon those accidents we know aregoing to happen over and over andthat we can do something about.The effectiveness of this effort isbased on the quality of the accidentinvestigation and report. We havefound that the quality of past reporting, although good, did not meetour total needs. Timely reporting isvital to prompt identification ofproblems and prompt developmentof corrective actions.

Foremost, we want to reduce thenumber of accidents which haveonly suspected causes. Suspectedcauses don t allow us to do muchabout preventing accidents. I havegreat optimism that CAl will reducethe number of accident investigations ending with suspec ted causes.

There are just so many advantages

to the program. I have been out ontraining exercises which came to agrinding halt because of an aircraftaccident. Or else I was pluckedaway from my duties to investigatean accident. I feel that CAl willprovide a real service to the field.When a unit has an accident theycan just pick up the phone andwe'll relieve them of the investigation burden, at least the management part of it.

Sure, we re still going to needsome expertise from the local unit.But we re all in green suits; we reall in the Army and we're trying forthe same things the guy in the fieldis trying for-more operational readiness and greater combat effectiveness. CAl is just another way toachieve this goal and we will achieveit together by accurately determining accident causes and then comingup with real remedies.Digest: Thank you, COL Rynott.

19


22/52

U S ARMY

AVIATION

STANDARDIZATION

Directorate of Evaluation/Standardization

REPORT TO THE FIELDES welcomes your inquiries and requests to focus attentionon an area of major importance. Write to us at: CommanderU.S. Army Aviation Center ATTN: ATZQ-ES Ft. Rucker AL36362; or call us at AUTOVON 558-3617 or commercial 2 5255 3617. After duty hours call AUTOVON 558-6487 or com-

mercial 2 0 5 2 5 5 6 4 8 7 and leave a message

The Directorate of Evaluation and Standardization (DES) beginningthis month is back in the Aviation Digest. Each month the Digest willcontain items of interest from DES in a report to the field. Subject mat-ter will come from information gained during DES Evaluation and As-sistance Visits to various aviation units Armywide and areas identifiedthrough the directorate s mission.

The directorate as organized at Ft. Rucker, AL has the mission of eval-uating the training program at the Aviation Center. DES constantly re-ceives important information from the field. This provides a data basewhich assists in determining the adequacy of the Ft. Rucker graduatesand the training they received. The standardization mission supportsboth the Aviation Center and aviation in the field through evaluations,augmenting major command aviation survey teams and assistancevisits. We ll discuss what happens when DES goes on a trip in a futureissue of Aviation Digest.

R ECENT WORLDWIDE evaluations of Activeduty and Reserve component aviation elementshave revealed that Army aviators are aware of operating limitations imposed upon them by center ofgravity (CG) limitations. But a problem area arises inthat many aviators are not familiar with how to compute correctly a DD Form 365F, Weight and BalanceClearance Form. For example, in a UH-1H when fly-ing at an aft CG (Station 140 to 144), the approach

must beterminated at

aminimum of

5-foothover

toprevent striking the tail on the ground. Knowing thislimitation is commendable, but how do aviators knowwhen to terminate their approach at a 5-foot hover orcontinue the approach to the ground? I f computedproperly, the DD Form 365F can answer this andother pertinent questions related to weight and balance.

CG limits, the unit training program should be tailored to present that information necessary to compute accurately the DD Form 365F for loading thespecific aircraft assigned.

In addition, all aviators should be familiar with thebasic forms and publications used to establish theweight and balance record. The necessary publications include TM 55-405-9, that defines the principlesof weight and balance and gives general information;AR 95-16 , which provides a weight and balance control system for all operational Army aircraft to ensure aircraft safe flight within their re spective designlimitations; and the appropriate - 10, - 2 0 and - 3 5maintenance manuals. The appropriate forms areDD Forms 365, 365A, B, C , F and Chart E.

DD Forms 365 and 365A provide a listing of theweight and balance technicians and a basic weightchecklist, respectively. The DD Form 365A ChartA lists that equipment which is, or may be, installedin the aircraft. In addition, it provides the basicweight, arm and moment for use in correcting the

The safe operation of an aircraft is dependentupon many factors; one of these is the aviator sability to ensure the aircraft is operated within specific weight and balance parameters. In order toavoid hazardous flight conditions associated with



23/52

DO Form 365C. The actual weighing data is compiled on the DO Form 365B, calculated for variousinclusions or exclusions, then entered on the DOForm 365C. This information, the basic weight andmoment, establishes the foundation for the continuous history of adjustments made to the aircraft withthe last entry on the DO Form 365C representing themost current weight and balance status of the aircraft. With this data and the Chart E, found in theappropriate Operator s Manual, the aviator or unitweight and balance technician can successfully compute the DO Form 365F clearance form. Correctcomputation of the DO Form 365F provides the operator with the necessary information to ensure the aircraft is loaded properly within its design capabilities.

Commanding officers of units operating, maintaining, repairing or modifying Army aircraft must ensurethat all assigned aviators are complying with currentweight and balance directives. However, it is the

responsibility of the unit standardization instructorpilot and instructor pilots to monitor the type ofinstruction being presented to unit aviators and ensuremaximum correlation with the assigned mission.

Those units that do not have established lessonplans and programed text can request this literaturethrough the Extension Training Developmen t Branch

of the Directorate of Training Developments, U.S.Army Aviation Center, Ft. Rucker, AL 36362 . Standardization instructor pilots also should ensure thatall - 1 examinations include several weight andbalance and performance chart questions.

AR 95-16 states it is the duty of the unit weight andbalance technician to maintain up-to-date weight andbalance records, comply with weight and balanceprovisions of applicable modification work orders(MWOs) and to assist aviato rs in the use of weight andbalance data. It is the responsibility of the aviators toensure that the weight and balance conditions of theiraircraft are within safe limits according to TM55-405-9. The operators of utility, observation andattack helicopters currently are not required to file aDO Form 365F for each flight; however, they shouldcheck the available weight and balance data as a partof their flight planning.

In order to make copies of the DO Form 365Fs that

are located in the aircraft s weight and balance filereadily available to the aviator, it is recommendedthat these copies be placed in the flight planningroom or in individual aircraft logbooks. This willensure that aviators not only know the aircraft s takeoff and landing weight, but also know what theiraircraft center of gravity limitations are.

NOTICE

Reference: Atmospheric Nuclear Test 946 To 963

H eadquarters, Defense Nuclear Agency announced the establishment of a toll freetelephone number for use by military or civilian employees of the military whoparticipated in the atmospheric nuclear test from 1946 to 1963. Participants in Conti-nental United States should call 800-638-8300. Participants residing in Alaska should

call COLLECT to 202-295-0586, and Hawaii residents should call COLLECT to 808-422-9213.Participants residing outside of the United States should write to: AFRRI, Defense

Nuclear Agency, National Naval Medical Center Bethesda, MD 20014, USA. Thefollowing information is requested: Name social security number, service number,address telephone number, dates involved with test military service and unit at test.The Public Affairs point of contact for this effort is the Public Affairs Officer, DefenseNuclear Agency Washington DC 20305, telephone 202-325-7095 or AUTOVON221-7095 Major Stewart AUTOVON 227-5081).

MAY 1978 21


24/52

snap on the chinstrap had becomea little rusty and was hard to unsnap.I had known about it for some timeand one of these days I was goingto get it fixed.

I couldn't get my helmet off and

tation near the aircraft to analyzemy situation.

U V vas beginning to panic; I suddenlyr 1 realized I was going to bum to death.I took the chinstrap in my right

hand and jerked. Something broke

First, I checked my injuries. Myleft arm was black and yellow, andbadly swollen from the burns. I re

member thinking it would have tobe amputated but because I was inshock the thought did not seem repulsive. My face was burned andwhen I put my hand on it I felt theskin move. I decided not to lookat it. My left leg was the only thingthat really hurt, but the pain wasnot unbearable.

Thomas E artin

La Cayce SC

L S TRADIO call wasa fraction of a section be

fore a large grey tree

appeared just in front; then therewas a collision. The main rotor system and aircraft parted company.

The rotor continued across thevalley like a frisbee. The aircraftpivoted to the right around a treeand impacted the ground, tail first.I t then rolled a number of timesdown the hill, coming to rest upright in a dry streambed pointingback up the hill it had just rudelydescended.

I was stunned - to say the least-but I was conscious. My head waspinned back to my left and the collective was in the full raised position. I don t remember seeing thecylic at all.

I could hear the engine out audioin my helmet and could feel theheat on my left arm and buttocks.I reach with my right hand andturned the battery switch off. I don' tknow why, I guess I was in a state ofshock but I remembered from flightschool that once on the ground after an emergency, you should turnthe main fuel and battery switchesoff.

I became concerned with gettingmyself out of the burning aircraft.The fire was growing and I wasbecoming more uncomfortable. Icould not unfasten my helmet. The

22

and my head was free.I tried to get up but couldn't. I

thought, My back is broken, butthen I remembered my seatbelt. I twas fastened across my chest fromthe submarining of my body in thecrash. I unfastened it took one stepforward and was clear of the air

craft. The time elapsed since I knewI was going to crash was perhaps10 to 12 seconds.

With myself free my next thoughtswere for my crewchief. Like allOH-6 Cayuse crewchiefs, he hadbeen sitting on the floor with hisseatbelt on very loose so that hecould lean out the door to fire hisM-60. He had been doing this justbefore we hit the tree. I don't knowhow he managed to survive the crashbut he was alive and conscious whenI reached him.

He was lying on the ground onthe right side of the aircraft with his

Next, I inventoried my equipment.My Air Force survival vest had beenburned and the majority of the equipment was gone. All that remained

was the first aid kit, strobe light,mirror and compass. My survivalradio, my most important piece ofequipment, was gone, but all wasnot lost. I knew I could signal withthe mirror in the daytime and thestrobe at night.

The compass would help if I wasforced to walk out, or so I thought.I checked the first aid kit to seewhat was left. The few things thatwere not damaged were of no useto me, but I kept the kit with me. Ina survival situation, do n t throw any-thing away.

legs pinned under the aircraft from 3id-thigh down. He was begging y now I'm sure it's obvious

for help. I grabbed his arms and that this crash occurredtried to pull him away from the air- in combat in Vietnam.craft, but he was firmly pinned. I But it is my belief that many of thecould not move him or the aircraft. lessons learned could be applied toI began to panic again and searched almost any combat situation in whichfrantically for something to pry the Army aviation may become involved.aircraft off him. The only thing I My next problem was which waycould find was rotten bamboo, which to go. Up the hill were the bad guysjust splintered when force was ap- - down the hill was the river andplied. As I searched for something open ground. Along the side of theelse, his cries for help stopped. I hill was vegetation. I knew I had tolooked back and his body was en- get to the river sooner or later.gulfed in flames-h is agony was over. f I went directly to the river I

With my crewchief dead my next would be seen and probably beconcern was my own survival. I caught or killed. I elected to movemoved into the edge of the vege- toward the river, staying in the thick

U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


25/52

vegetation as long as I could.I began to hear enemy voices.

They were moving down towardthe aircraft. I had to move now Ipicked the thickest stuff I could

find - bamboo. I got low to theground and crawled in. I moved tothe center of the thicket so I couldn'tbe seen and tried to put as muchground as possible between theenemy and me.

Soon, I heard the enemy lookingfor me. I also heard someone elselooking for m e helicopters. Hiddeninside the thicket I was in the worseposition I could be in to be seen bymy people. I watched as the helicopters flew right over me at about5 to 75 feet. I was not seen. I thenknew that if I was to get out aliveI would have to walk.

Only a short time after my rescuers left, the jets came. They wouldget revenge for the loss of a brother.The bombs felt hot and heavy. fonly I could let them know I wasdown here found a small openingin the trees and tried to use my sig-nal mirror. The jets would start theirruns from very high, drop their ordnance and climb out steeply. I continually tried to signal them, but Icouldn't get their attention. Then Isaw an OV-lO spotter plane, veryhigh. I tried to signal the pilot, butthe aircraft was so high I couldn'tbe sure I was hitting it with theflash of light.

As the jets let up, I tried to movefarther away from the target. I stayedbusy trying to signal, dodge friendlyshrapnel, move away from the target and stay out of sight of the enemy.

I finally managed to reach a bombcrater on the edge of the thicketand the open field between me andthe river.

The jets completed their missionand left. Now I faced another problem how to cross the field withoutgetting caught. I decided I couldn' tmake it in the daytime, so I settled

MAY 1978

back to wait for darkness. I wasafraid to relax too much. I felt if Iwent to sleep, I would not wake up.

Before long, I heard another aircraft engine. It wasn't a jet though.

I began looking and soon I saw anold A lE Skyraider. The pilot wasall alone and making cannon runsat the hill above my aircraft froman altitude of about 300 feet. I felt Iwould soon have company. I beganto signal the aircraft with the signalmirror. It seemed I had its attention.The aircraft made a turn and startedstraight for me. The pilot had seenthe flash, but what was that personthinking it was a mirror or an automatic rifle?

r y t h i n gnow was on the linefor me. I stepped out into

the open so the pilotcould see me. The aircraft passedover and wagged its wings to let meknow I had been seen. But the pilotdidn't see me standing in open area;my flashing had been spotted beforeand I had needlessly compromisedmy position to the enemy. Still, itwas a chance I thought I had totake.

Knowing I would soon be rescued,I lay back in the bomb crater anddid the most dangerous thing possible. I relaxed and went to sleep.

I awoke with a start. A Jolly GreenGiant CH-53 rescue helicopter wasjust going behind an adjacent hill,away from me. I had slept throughmy rescue attempt. The pilot wouldleave and I would die where I wasand no one would ever know how

close I had come to being rescued.The Jolly Green made a big hovering turn and came back to where Iwas. As it hovered overhead, crewmembers lowered a rescue hoist witha jungle penetrater on it. As soonas it touched the ground, I openedtwo of the arms and got on.

As I rode the hoist back up, I

could see my still smoldering OH-6A Cayuse. I had managed to crawlabout 400 meters.

As we flew to safety, the medicaboard checked my wounds and

gave me something to drink. He attempted to start an l.V., but couldn'tfind a vein in my right arm. I askedthe crew to notify my commanderthat I had been picked up. I wastold this already had been done.

After we landed I was admittedto an evacuation hospital at about17 hours. Allowing about a 45-minute flight before I was shot downand an hour flight back to the hospital, I had been down about hhours.

My wounds consisted of third degree burns to 2 percent of my bodyand second and first degree bumsto an additional 7 percent for a totalsurface burn area of 27 percent.

Why did I survive? I think thatcan be contributed to several things.

First and foremost was a will tosurvive. Second, I used what I hadbeen taught about survival at theU.S. Army Aviation Center at FortRucker, AL, and in other military

schools I had attended in my 5 yearsprior to flight school.Third, and last but not least, things

fell in the right place at the righttime. I could have been killed inthe crash, in the fire, by the enemy,by the bombs, or just from exposure.

You may call it whatever youwish, but I believe it was DivineProvidence.

In the same situation, would youhave survived? I hope you neverhave to answer that question, but

if the situation arises and you arein it, I hope this article helps saveyour life.

23


26/52

Firs t

I RWCaptain

Departm

TH 55 during primary phase

24

OH 58 performs NOE flight

Students performin

I N MARCH 978 the first students were graduated from the United S tates ArmyAviation Center's Dual Track 175/40 Initial Entry Rotary Wing Aviator Course.At 2-week intervals the Aviation Center will graduate new aviators eager to applythe talents and techniques they have learned during 9 months of extensive academic and flight training.

At present each new graduating class contains a mixture of 75 percent aviatorsschooled in UH-1 Huey academic and tactical flight subjects, and 25 percent aviators schooled in aeroscout subjects. Never before has the Aviation Center producedan aviator capable of performing as an aeroscout.

The 175/40 Course is a compact training system. (See Dual Track 175/40 IERWCourse, November 977 Digest. Graduates receive increased training in tacticalflight and academic subjects, and increased training in night operations. Graduatesare better able to accomplish missions in adverse weather during peacetime orcombat. The 175/40 Course emphasizes principles and techniques of operatingaircraft down in the t rees to include navigating during nap-of-the-earth flight. Italso places greater emphasis on the latest tactics and aviation doctrine directed

U.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


27/52

5 4 0aduates

Brown Jr.Training

Runway lights during night training

UH 1 flight simulator

ht in UH 1 Huey

against the threat.As mentioned earlier, 25 percent of each 175/40 graduating class are taught aero-

scout doctrine and tactics. Subjects learned include air cavalry operations, attackhelicopter operations and aerial adjustmen t of artillery fire.

The goals of the Dual Track Course are basically twofold: To produce aviators having basic mechanical skills and academic knowledgeneeded to survive against the threat.

To graduate aviators who are better prepared to enter a unit's training program.The new 175/40 graduates possess a better basic knowledge of aviation subjects

and skills, and they will require less time to be trained for their unit's mission.After many months of planning and implementation the Dual Track 175/40

Initial Entry Rotary Wing Aviator Course is finally a reality. Through regular feed-back from field commanders, the Aviation Center constantly will improve andrefine its flight program. Such cooperation and communication between the Avia-tion Center and the field ensures the rmy has the best possible aviators to flyAbove the Best.

MAY 1978 25


28/52

.

~ \ \ R N R

Enlisted Personnel Management System

ir Traffic ControllersandFlight Operations Coordinators

T HE INTRODUCTION of theSoldier's Manual and the skillqualification test (SQT) to the fieldhas prompted a myriad of questionsto be asked by concerned Soldiersas they become increasingly involvedand acqua inted with these new training and evaluation instruments. Withthis in mind, this article is offeredto help clear up questions aboutSoldier's Manuals and SQT developed for military occupational spe

cialties (MOS) 71P, 93H and 93J.Some of the most pertinent and frequently asked questions are amongthose discussed below.When will I receive my Soldier'sManual?

The first editions of Soldier's Manuals for Air Traffic Controllers andFlight Operations Coordinato rs havebeen distributed to active Army fieldunits using a push distribution system which is based on assignedstrength in each MOS and skill level.

Major Melvin L DavisDirectorate of Training Developments

Ft Rucker AL

Distribution schedules for the manuals are shown in the figures 1 and 2

The U.S. Army Reserve components receive their manuals bymeans of the push distributionsystem, with one exception - USARtraining divisions and National Guardunits are on a pull system, i.e.,they request the number of manualsneeded through appropriate publications requisition channels.

The U.S. Army Training and Doc

trine Command (TRADOC) keepsfield commanders and test controlofficers (TCO) informed on Soldier'sManual distribution status by wayof electrically transmitted messages.By checking a status message againstpersonnel reports, commanders/TCOs can identify units needingmanuals and determine if the manuals have arrived in sufficient copiesfor distribution to Soldiers havingthe primary MOS for which the specific manual applies.

Figure 1:Within the Continental Limits of the United States

MOS

7 P93H93J

Skill Level1 and 21 Mar 771 Dec 77

15 Dec 77

Skill Level3

1 Nov 761 Dec 77

c 77

Skill Level4

1 Nov 761 Dec 771 Dec 77

Skill Level5

1 Nov 76

1 Dec 77

Soldier's Manuals should be distributed as follows:

SL 1 Manual: SLI Soldier thruhighest SL Soldier in MOS

SL 2 Manual: SLI Soldier thruhighest SL Soldier in MOS

SL 3 Manual: SL2 Soldier thruhighest SL Soldier in MOS

SL 4 Manual: SL3 Soldier thruhighest SL Soldier in MOS

SL 5 Manual: SL4 and SLS Soldiers

In the event you have not received your initial issue of manuals, makeyour needs known through the chainof command. I f you should lose amanual, you may order a new onedirectly from:

CommanderU.S. Army Aviation CenterATTN: ATZQ-T-EFort Rucker, AL 36362

There is a Soldier's Manual reorderform in the back of each manualfor this purpose.When will I take my SQI?

Active duty Soldiers in grade E6or below with an air traffic control leror flight operations coordinator primary MOS are to be tested for thefirst time during the period Julythrough December 1978. Those ingrade E7 are to be tested during theperiod July through December 1980The development of SQT for EB/E9 testing has been deferred pending



29/52

further study of the need to testthese grades.

The testing of Reserve compone nt Soldiers is scheduled to beginin 1979 with E6s and below beingtested first during the period Julythrough December. Testing of E7sis expected to begin in July 1981.The decision to test E8s and E9sis pending.When wlll I receive my SQT Notice?

Your commander / supervisorshould give you your SQT Noticeat least 60 days prior to your scheduled test date. The SQT Notice isan important part of the SQT program and is used to tell you specifically which tasks in the Soldier sManual will be tested. As you re

view the SQT Notice, you will beable to determine what additionalstudy or training is needed to prepare you for your SQT. Your SQTNotice should be studied in conjunction with your Soldier s Manual and those references listed inyour manual.What is a Job Book?

The Job Book is a small, pocketsize training circular designed toassist supervisors to keep track ofskill level 1 and 2 Soldiers ability toperform the tasks described in theirSoldier s Manual. The Job Book isnot an official record nor is it to beretained by the unit or forwardedto the Soldier s new unit. When aSoldier is reassigned , has a changeof supervisor or progresses to skilllevel 3, the Job Book is turned overto the Soldier who may retain it orpass it on to a new supervisor forinformation purposes. Supervisorsshould be issued a Job Book foreach skill level 1 and 2 Soldier undertheir supervision. Distribution of JobBooks for MOS 71P, 93H and 93Jis scheduled to be completed thismonth.Who develops my Soldier s Manualand SQT?

The U.S. Army Aviation Center,Ft. Rucker, AL is the proponentagency for all MOS related trainingand evaluation programs for airtraffic controllers and flight opera-

MAY 978

Figure 2:Outside the Continental Limits of the United States

MOS Skill Leveland 2

Skill Level Skill Level Skill Level54

7 P

93H93J

Apr 77

1 Jan 785 Jan 78

Feb 77

Jan 78Jan 78

Feb 77

Jan 781 Jan 78

Feb 77

1 Jan 78

tions coordinators. This includesthe development of institutional andextension training programs of instruction, Soldier s Manuals , JobBooks, SQT and Commander s Manuals for the three MOSs.

Any questions or comments concerning subject matter may be ad

dressed to :Extension Trainin g DevelopmentBranch

U.S. Army Aviation CenterP.O. Box JFort Rucker , AL 36362

Is there a Primary Technical Course(or Basic Technical Course) for myMOS?

Both of these courses are available through the Army Correspondence Course Program. The PrimaryTechnical Course is a self-teachin gexportable package (STEP) that isdesigned to prepare skill level 1 Soldiers for skill level 2 duties. Thus, italso helps prepa re you for your SQT.The Basic Technical Course also isa STEP. I t is designed, however,to prepare skill level 2 Soldiers forskill level 3 duties.How do I go about enrolling in thePrimary (or Basic) Technical Course?

You may enroll by completingDA Form 145 (Army Correspondence Course Enrollment Application) and mailing to:

Army Correspondence CourseProgram (ACCP)

U.S. Army Training SupportCenter

Newport News, VA 23628Before you do, however , you maywant to check with your supervisor /commander to see what the unithas planned to meet your trainingneeds. Guidance for commanders /

su pervisors is provided in a Commander s Manual published for yourspecific MOS.

Of importance to commandersare the addresses listed in the Commander s Manual for obtaining instructional material for your MOS.In addition to the addresses, the

Aviation Center recently has established a 24-hour answering serviceto provide information and assistance to the 2,200 plus Active Armyand Reserve component activitiesit serves. The telephone numbersof the answering service are: A UTOVON 558-3098 or Commercial (205)255-3098. The Commander s Manual is designed to assist commandersin fulfilling their responsibilities toSoldiers in their command and tohelp them understand the Enlisted

Personnel Management System(EPMS). By understanding EPMS ,commanders are better preparedto see to it that their Soldiers getappropriate schooling and trainingfor career development. The distribution of Commander s Manualsfor MOS 71P , 93H and 93J was completed last April.What is the Soldier s Manual ofCommon Tasks?

The Soldier s Manual of CommonTasks has been published for Soldiers who will not have an MOSspecific Soldier s Manual such asyours. This manual is not intendedto be used for SQT purposes, butrather as a reference and trainingguide for those in an MOS for whicha Soldier s Manual will not be published. It also serves as a referenceand guide for training developerswho write MOS-specific Soldier sManuals. . {

27


30/52

\ \\RNERC . )

E

Officer Personnel Management System

Graduate Flight Training

andviator ManagementMajor Jacob B Couc h Jr

Aviation Management BranchU S Army Military Personnel Center

Alexandria VA

D URING THE past year, articles have appearedthat discussed the many facets of the OfficerPersonnel Management System (OPMS) aviation specialty. However, the Military Personnel Center (MIL

PERCEN) continually receives inquiries from thefield concerning the graduate level training coursestaugh t by the various aviation-related service schools.These questions usually revolve around the need forobtaining a quota for a particular course. In hopes ofanswering these questions, the following informationaddresses graduate level training for Army aviators.

Aviator Training - Quotas for the various graduatelevel training courses are based on Army requirements to meet the needs of the Army. These coursesare listed in Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet351-4, Formal Schools Catalog. Once established,the Aviation Management Branch manages the allocation of quotas for the entire Army . This centralizedmanagement ensures maximum use of quotas, sinceeach quota is directly equivalent to allocated trainingdollars.

Individuals are selected to attend graduate levelcourses either on temporary duty (TDY) enroute toa permanent change of station (PCS) or in a TOYstatus. Regardless of the situation, individuals mustneed the training to meet the require