1 15 24 https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/430775cddb875139c1a668b530b471b0.pdf 76714eb4ca6e132a123fda36b73f6942 PDF Text Text Item ID Number: 00039 Author Corporate Author Hayes International Corporation RepOrt/ArtlGlB Title A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Journal/Book Title Year 000 ° Month/Day Color IJ Number of Images 15 DeSCrlptOU NOtBS Filed witn Thursday, November 16, 2000 documents from 1970 in the Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Page 39 of 46 �Anoymous A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Hayes International Corporation RNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER SYSTEM INTERNATIONAL1 CORPORATION �THE A/A45Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER The A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser, designed and manufactured by Hayes International Corporation, Birmingham, Alabama, is a complete airborne defoliant dispensing system. The dispenser is packaged to permit rapid installation into, and removal from, C-130 and C-123 aircraft, with only minor modifications required to the affected aircraft. See figures 1 and 2. The Internal Defoliant Dispenser, Part No. A/A45Y-1, provides for loading, transporting and dispensing of 1000 gallons of defoliant chemical, and in case of an emergency, dumping the full load overboard in less than 45 seconds. The tank and cradle assembly is mounted on detachable casters which are removed before anchoring in the host aircraft. A control console is electrically connected into an electrical network which in turn is connected to the aircraft electrical system, certain controls and indicators in the flight compartment and the electrically operated units within the system. Pressure is applied to defoliant chemical, by an engine and pump assembly mounted on the same frame with the tank. The defoliant is transported to a nozzle assembly mounted in the slipstream of the aircraft in such a manner that a strip 250 feet wide along the line LEADING PARTICULARS Length (app) Width (app) Height (app) (without casters) Weight Empty Full Capacity Normal operating pressure Normal dispensing interval Emergency dump duration Electrical system Dump valve operation Refill time (app) Dump valve Spray valve Suction valve 16 feet, 4 inches 4 feet, 10 inches 6 feet, 5 inches 1420 Ibs 12,420 Ibs 1000 gallons 60 + 5 psi 3 to 4 minutes Less than 45 sec. 28 volts dc (supplied by host aircraft) Electrical or manual 20 minutes Electrical, 10 inch Electrical, 3 inch Manual, 3 inch �TANK VENT MANHOLE COVER DUMP VALVE (See figure 4) TANK LIQUID LEVEL TEMPERATURE INDICATOR ENGINE EXHAUST VIBRATION ISOLATOR SEGMENT CENTRIFUGAL PUMP (See figure 3) MAIN SPRAY VALVE TIE-DOWN FITTINGS CONTROL CONSOLE (See figure 5) RECIRCULATING LINE JET PUMP REFILL CRADLE NOTE: SEE FIGURE 6 FOR TAIL BOOM AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT. SEE FIGURES 7 AND 8 FOR INSTALLATION IN C-123 AIRCRAFT. Figure 1. Major Components of Defoliant Dispenser �Figure 2. Defoliant Dispenser (right side) �of flight is effectively covered. The nozzle assembly is designed for the most effective atomizing of the defoliant and coverage of foliage to be destroyed. The dispensing operation and, in emergency, the dump valve operation can be controlled from either the control console near the tank and cradle assembly or from the pilot's position in the flight compartment. CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS The internal defoliant dispenser is capable of containing 1000 gallons of defoliant which can be completely dumped overboard by remote control or manually in less than 45 seconds. The pump is capable of maintaining 60 + 5 psi pressure during the normal 4 minute (app) period of operational spraying. Refilling the tank assembly is accomplished with power and equipment contained within the defoliation dispensing system. TANK AND CRADLE ASSEMBLY The tank and cradle assembly is the major unit of the entire system, having; a 1000 gallon tank with baffles, manhole, tube connections and stabilizing and tiedown brackets; an engine and pump assembly which consists of a four cylinder horizontally opposed engine and pump directly coupled to the engine crankshaft; and a cradle which carries the tank, and engine and pump assembly and is provided with four casters which are readily detachable. A temperature gage and a fluid quantity gage are installed in the tank. The engine is slightly modified from its original configuration to achieve adaptability to the requirements of the dispenser system. The detachable casters are to provide limited mobility and are removed when the unit is tied down. The defoliant used in the dispenser is stored in the tank and is fed through a suction line to the pump (two assemblies used on C-130 aircraft). The pump is driven by an air-cooled engine and forces the defoliant through a discharge line to a spray valve. A recirculation line is provided so that when the spray valve is closed, the defoliant will recirculate back through the tank. When the spray valve is open, the defoliant is forced into the spray boom and atomized by spray nozzles. When the tank is empty, a float-operated switch, located in the tank, automatically stops the engines. On C-130 aircraft, when either tank is empty, the engine of the empty unit will automatically shut down. The spray valve will not automatically close until the second unit's tank empties and the float switch is actuated, shutting down its engine. �The centrifugal pump consists essentially of an impeller and a pump body, and is driven by the engine through a direct drive. The engine drives the pump and the speed of the engine controls the quantity of defoliant being dispensed. See figure 3. The recirculation line incorporates a jet-pump (ejector) tank refilling system which utilizes the fluid left in the tank from prior operation to initially operate the jet pump. TEMPERATURE GAGE Temperature gage, located on the side of the tank, indicates temperature of the defoliant in the tank. LIQUID METER A liquid meter, located on the side of the tank, indicates the defoliant quantity in the tank. DUMP VALVE The dump valve is a 10 inch gate valve having both electrical or manual activation. It is designed for horizontal (vertical flow) installation and liquid flow in only one direction. The bottom of the defoliant tank incorporates a vortex interupter and adapter to which the dump valve is secured and is in perfect alignment with an opening and spring loaded door in the belly of the aircraft. A high speed motor coupled to an actuator provides 2 second operation of the dump valve in either direction and circuit manipulation to indicate open condition. See figure 4. CONTROL CONSOLE The control console is the nerve center of the defoliation system. All functions are controlled from this position; all monitoring equipment is located in this position; and the electrical supply is channeled and protected at this position. Prefabricated electrical cables tie the control console to all related parts of the system, including the controls on the pilot's instrument panel and the aircraft electrical supply system. Tandem or single installations are controlled and monitored from the control console without any changes or alterations being performed. In the event of electrical power failure of the aircraft electrical system, certain critical functions have an option of manual operation. See figure 5. �Figure 3. Centrifugal Pump �Figure 4. Dump Valve �FLUID POWER REFILL FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE FWD UNIT AFT UNIT STARTER AND SPRAY CHOKE THROTTLES INDICATORS VALVE TANK EMPTY FWD UNIT AFT UNIT ENGINES FWD UNIT OIL PRESSURE LOW OPERATE SPRAY VALVE THROTTLES OPEN t FWD /~\ UNIT \\~J\ ^ AFT \{-J\ UNIT \ CLOSED Figure 5. Control Console AFT UNIT OIL PRESSURE LOW OPERATE �MAGNETO SWITCH The MAGNETO switch (AFT UNIT and FWD UNIT) is a single-pole, doublethrow toggle switch used to control the engine magneto. In the down position the engine magneto is grounded; in the up position the ground is removed from the magneto, permitting the engine to run (if tank is not empty). CHOKE SWITCH The CHOKE switch (AFT UNIT and FWD UNIT) is a spring-loaded pushbutton switch used to control the solenoid that actuates the engine choke. When pushed in, the CHOKE switch applies power to the engine choke solenoid. START SWITCH The START switch (AFT UNIT and FWD UNIT) is a spring-loaded pushbutton switch used to control the engine starter. When pushed in, the START switch applies power to the engine starter. The START switch is guarded to prevent accidental engagement of the engine starter. THROTTLE SWITCH The THROTTLE switch (AFT UNIT and FWD UNIT) is a three-position toggle switch, spring-loaded to the neutral position. The switch has INCREASE and DECREASE positions and is used to electrically control the engine throttle through a geared servo-motor. The engine throttle may be set at any intermediate position between minimum and maximum engine rpm by positioning the switch to INCREASE or DECREASE and releasing to the neutral position when desired engine RPM is reached. A governor on the engine regulates maximum engine RPM. SPRAY VALVE SWITCH The SPRAY VALVE switch is a single-pole, double-throw toggle switch used to electrically open and close the spray valve. In the OPEN position power is applied to open the spray valve; in the CLOSED position power is applied to close the spray valve. The SPRAY VALVE switch is guarded in the CLOSED position. A cockpit SPRAY VALVE switch is provided for control of the spraying operation by the pilot. �DUMP VALVE SWITCH The DUMP VALVE switch, located at the extreme left side of the control panel (figure 5), provides electrical control for the dump valve. The switch is provided with a guard which maintains the switch in the CLOSED position. Placing the switch in the OPEN position actuates the valve motor and opens the dump valve. The cockpit DUMP VALVE switch provides positive electrical control for opening the dump valve by the pilot. Operation is in conjunction with the console DUMP VALVE switch. Placing either switch in the OPEN position will actuate the dump valve motor and open the dump valve. FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE The FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE (AFT UNIT and FWD UNIT) is a singlepole, double-throw toggle switch (with a holding coil) used to override the float switch (in tank) when the float switch has grounded the magneto. The FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE is spring-loaded in the down position and when placed in the up position, enables the engine to be run when the tank is empty (in order to fill the tank using the pump). The holding coil holds the FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE in the up position until the float switch is actuated. ENGINE TACHOMETER The engine tachometer is dual indicating (two needles) and indicates engine speed in hundreds of RPM. FLUID PRESSURE INDICATOR The FLUID pressure indicator indicates fluid pressure in increments of 4 PSL When properly calibrated this gage can be used as a flow-rate indicator. CIRCUIT BREAKERS Four circuit breakers (STARTER AND CHOKE, THROTTLES, INDICATORS, and SPRAY VALVE) control power to the control panel and provide protection from electrical overload and short circuits. 10 �SPRAY BOOM The spray boom (figure 6) is desinged to accommodate 18 spray nozzles and provide a method for dispensing the defoliant over a wide area. The spray boom is constructed of 4-1/2 inch diameter steel tubing. The discharge line is off-set from the centerline of the spray boom to allow the aircraft's ramp to operate with the dispenser installed. Eighteen spigots are welded to the spray boom to receive the spray nozzles. C-123 aircraft utilize only 12 of the spray nozzles and the remaining six spigots are capped. The spray boom is attached to the fuselage with six struts. AIRCRAFT INSTALLATION The dispenser installation in C-123 aircraft consists of towing the tank and cradle assembly (unfilled) into the aircraft and securing it to the aircraft floor utilizing twenty 10, 000-pound hook and chain assemblies and the cargo floor tie-down fittings (figures 7 and 8). All piping and hose assemblies are installed and the console assembly mounted to the aircraft floor. The spray boom and connecting struts are attached to outside fittings on the aircraft and the electrical cables are connected. In the case of the C-130 aircraft, two dispensers are installed in the same manner, and interconnected. n �TIE-DOWNS SPRAY NOZZLE TAIL BOOM INSTALLATION STRUTS Figure 6. Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing 12 �r. Figure 7. Installation in C-123 (left side) 13 �Figure 8. Installation in C-723 (right side) 14 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 004 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0039 Series The series number of the original item. Series I Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>Hayes International Corporation Title A name given to the resource A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 020 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0291 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1966-09-01 Title A name given to the resource Clipping: Spray Planes Shield Crippled Craft From Ground Fire Subject The topic of the resource Ranch Hand aircraft popular press military impact https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/5f9ee0dc48e3ce9eaf0b7eb8ac0668d6.pdf 16db34463a85f49de8f4cf645cd61bd5 PDF Text Text Item ID Number 00220 Author Commanding General, United States Army, Vietnam R8DOPt/ArtlClB TitlO Command Health Report for June 1969 (RCS MED-3 (B-4)) Journal/Book Title Year 000 ° Month/Day Color Number of Images n 4 Descriptor) Notes Monday, January 22, 2001 Page 232 of 341 �DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HEADQUARTERS. UNITED STATES A R M Y VIETNAM APO SAN FRANCISCO 66375 AVHSU-PM SUBJECT: Command Health Report for June 1 6 (RCS MED-3 (Rr-4)) 99 3 3 F~//. Commanding General United States Army Vietnam APO San Francisco 96375 A. Health of the Command 1. Personal (a) Physical condition of troops s Most major consolidated and individual Command Health Reports describe the physical condition of ITS Aray personnel as adequate or satisfactory while a few reports indicate the physical statue of their personnel as being excellent. The overall health of the command remains at a satisfactory level although there were again increases in total disease admissions. (See Tab A). (b) Sanitary discipline: The following selected comments are included because it is felt that they most accurately describe the level of sanitary discipline and personal hygiene among US Army personnel. The 1st Infantry Division reports* "Sanitation standards remain at a high level throughout most of the Division base camp areas. Some units have reached, and continue to maintain, superior sanitation standards. These units are examples of what • good command emphasis can accomplish in improving the living conditions and morale of the troops. The sanitation of IDP's and fire support bases continues to present problems. The Division Surgeon plans to visit these areas as often as air transportation will permit. Any difficulties of, a medical nature should be brought to his attention so that corrective action can be initiated at this level.. Sanitation teams should make frequent Inspections of their unit areas and report the results to the Medical Operations Officer for his action." ^ The 4th Infantry Division makes this comment on personal hygiene: "With a few exceptions personal hygiene is adequate. The monsoon season presents particular difficulty in maintaining clothing resupply. Some units, the tactical situation permitting, have periodic rotation of troops through fire �AVHSD-PM 28 July 1969 SUBJECT: Command Health Report for June 1969 (RCS MED-3 (R-4)) bases or trains area for rest, clean-up, drying out and a change of clothes. The 1 1 Infantry reports such a policy and also supplies a change of clothing /4 every four days and socks every two days. The 1/35 Infantry reports a similarly successful program which allows also health education, dental check-ups, and other medical activities." The status of sanitary discipline within the llth Armored Cavalry Regiment is described as follows: "Sanitary discipline is generally good but continued command support is still needed in the field locations. Increased emphasis on field sanitation teams with a proposed plan to have squadron MSC officers assume more supervisory control over the teams is hoped to improve sanitation in the field." From the 3d Brigade, 82d Airborne Division conies this report: "The sanitary discipline within the Brigade is good. Because of operational conditions in some of the areas} i.e., inundated areas, personal hygiene is sometimes less than desirable but it is good as can be expected under existing conditions. Adequate shower facilities are available in all permanent installations and fire bases. There is a fly problem around one of the fire bases (Hardcore, 1/508 Infantry). This is due mainly to the civilian garbage dumps surrounding the fire base. This will continue to be a problem until the garbage sites can be destroyed or relocated. Trash and garbage cans are covered within the fire base itself and field sanitation is excellent. Arrangements are being made through Brigade Vietnamese Liaison Officer to look into the possibility of relocating garbage sites away from the fire base. Rodent control seems adequate. There were only two rat bites on post during this period. There are adequate rat traps within the Brigade." Finally the 1st Infantry Brigade, 5th Infantry Division (Mech) reports: "Rodents have not been a major problem in base camp areas, primarily because of good area sanitation. Sanitation of bunker areas on camp perimeters has been of variable quality. Food and refuse in bunker areas will attract rats which in turn attract snakes, creating a hazard to those on guard duty*. Pacific Architects and Engineers have assumed the Post Engineer functions of entomology and rodent control at Red Devil and LZ Sharon. They have set out rodent anticoagulant bait boxes on these bases and refill them at scheduled intervals. Steps have been taken to insure better police in perimeter bunkers. They havealso assumed responsibij^ty^^fjgr^JLBjgJB^M^ " baseia. General area sanitationfinal water monitoring before consumption and waste disposal are still under the responsibility of each company through its Field Sanitation Teams." (c) Bathing facilities, adequacy of clothing and status of training in personal hygiene and field sanitation: The 1st Infantry Division Surgeon states: "Some units continue to need work on their shower drainage systems. Several small marshes, heavily populated with insects, have been found in the �rnjU-PM 28 July 1969 rBJECT: Command Health Report for June 1969 (RCS MED-3 (R-4)) are again meaningless due to the constant variation of numbers and locations of collecting stations, and the inability of units to timely process all collections. Trends are important, and even with the inaccuracies it can clearly be concluded that mosquito populations are sharply increasing in locations affected by the monsoon rains. Total numbers identified this quarter were: 7582 for April, 13,060 for May, and 28,830 for June. Disease and epidemiological data found elsewhere in this report indicate the continuing rise of known and suspected mosquito-borne diseases in RVN. 6. Medical Zoology Section (a) Small animal processing: Five hundred and twenty-eight (528) rodents were processed during the month of June. (b) Plague analysis: Rodent spleens, flea pools and aerology samples were forwarded to the Institute of Pasteur at Nha Trang or Saigon for plague analysis. Serology of a Bandicota indica (a large rat type rodent) from Long Binh Post was plague positive. No spleens or flea pools were positive for plague. (c) The overall average number of fleas per rodent (flea index) continued to increase as April was 0*59; May was 0.95 and June was 1.2. Whereas, this overall index may be inaccurate and of questionable value it is interesting to note that off-post the index was about 3.0 while on-post it was only O c ?c The only similarily significantly high individual location index was at Cam Ranh Bay off-post with a 3*07 which though high is down from the 3c97 of May. (b) Rodent mites were of significance in the Cu Chi area. A marked increase in Leptotrombida mites indicates a greater than usual danger of scrub typhus in that area* * 7. Aerial Dispersal of Insecticides (a) Air Force C-123 "Ranch Hand"« Both C-123 aircraft continued in use.. The target interval varied, but is approaching the desired of 10 days, The following missions were flown in the month of June. The number accompanying the area indicates the number of missions if more than one: Phu Cat (3), Hue/Phu Bai (3), Due My (6), Da Nang (6), Ninh Hoa (3), Phan Rang (3), Chu Lai U), Men Hoa (2), Ap Nam/Phuoc Tho (3), Tan Son Nhut (2), Long Binh 199th FSBs, Cam Ranh ( ) Dong Ha/Quang Trl ( ) and Pleiku. A total of 2, 3, 15,775 gallons of 95$ malathion was applied to the areas listed in"the 46 missions completed. ; (b) Helicopter Spraying: Eight Agavenco insecticide sprayers finally arrived. Four each were assigned to the 20th and 172d Preventive Medicine Units respectively. The rigs as received were unsuitable for ultra low volume (ULV, which is 0.5 Ib/acre) application of malathion. Commendable I Zl �AVHSU-PM 28 July 1969 SUBJECTS Command Health Report for June 1969 (RCS MED-3 (R-4)) work has been done by MAJ Waddell, Staff Entomologist, 20th Preventive Medicine Unit to calibrate the rigs using available nozzles and components. Due to his success helicopter spray missions should begin sometime in July. (c) Unauthorized Aerial Sprayings (1) Jfelicopter herMcide_8joijyej^_j£QjjyjaiejbQ_j)e used for.._tJie unauthorized dispersajTof Tnagcticides^incontradiotion to the provisi " Directive 4 - 0 01. " (2) From 28 February 1968 thru 1 March 1969, USAF, PA&E, and Preventive Medicine Unit activities utilized or had in stock at the end of this period about 3960 55-gallon barrels of 57J6 malathion. However, USA Inventory Control Center, Vietnam figures show that 8686 barrels were issued during the same period. Approximately 2 0 0 0 gallons of CONCENTRATED 6,0 malathion appears to have been used by unauthorized sources. (3) Authority and thus responsibility for helicopter application of insecticides has been delegated to the conaanders of the preventive medicine units and detachments. Such missions must be conducted under the supervision of a medical entomologist. Such authority has not been granted to major tactical unit chemical officers or even surgeons. NOTE: When helicopter application of insecticides are deemed advisable by the unit surgeon the nearest preventive medicine unit, detachment or section should be contacted. A list of such preventive medicine units, their addresses, and telephone numbers is contained in Appendix I, Change 1 to USARV Regulation 4 0 1 . .-2 8. Pesticides (a) Safety and Toxicology: As malathion is an insecticide with acute dermal toxicity of approximately one half that of DDT all supervisors of personnel handling malathion must adhere to the provisions of USARV Regulation 4-7 04. (b) Shortages of several items continue to exist. All instances of insecticide supply problems at any level should be documented and forwarded direct to. Headquarters, USARV, Office of the Surgeon, ATTNs Entomology Consultant, APO 96375. 28 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 018 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0220 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>Commanding General, United States Army, Vietnam Title A name given to the resource Command Health Report for June 1969 (RCS MED-3 (B-4)) Subject The topic of the resource Ranch Hand aircraft pesticide application pesticide application https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/4242c11bdf97e51356fa69dce748eb0c.pdf bdd23ee31f1fcb10cb1ed20e7e8c2e9b PDF Text Text Item ID Number 00237 Author Corporate Author Report/Article Title F°rm: Military Insecticides, Use in Vietnam, AOPA/November-December 1983, Document Source: Historical Summary (RCS: MACSJS-01) June 67 Journal/Book Title Year 000 ° Month/Day Color U Number of Images 1 DOSOrlptOU NOteS Summarizes equipment used for dispersal of insecticides in March 1967 Monday, January 22, 2001 Page 249 of 341 �Military Insecticides Use In Vietnam AOPO/ttovember-December 1983 Document Source •.-^\ S I » V x^_ ^ \ ^ ™ —\ ^^^ Date of Document ° ^ Insecticides Mentioned (Type/Quantity/Use) MfcCV I O o C Other Information If Available Method of Application : location of Application Military Unit if Different from Above Names of Personnel Mentioned Significant Event(s) - Spill, Fire, Explosion, Clean-up � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 019 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0237 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Form: Military Insecticides, Use in Vietnam, AOPA/November-December 1983, Document Source: Historical Summary (RCS: MACSJS-01) June 67 Subject The topic of the resource pesticide application Ranch Hand aircraft https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/90b72923a486d86fddcbfa9031178e82.pdf 4f245730fb6d4f290356ece15974756c PDF Text Text Item ID Number: 001 eo Howard, John D. Corporate Author RBDBPt/ArtitiB TltlB Herbicides in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations: A Cost-Effectiveness Study Journal/Book Title Yaar i Bui 1972 Month/Day March Color D 132 Introduction and background gives brief overview of Operation Ranch Hand and use of herbicides in Vietnam. Friday, January 05, 2001 Page 160 of 194 �Howard, J. D,, 5 ^ 1972 . Herbicides in support of counterinsurgency operations: a cost effectivness study I/UNLIMITED AD A0745180 Technical Report £EJEIOMEDICAL LIBRARY JAW 10 1980 distributed by fiQClIMENTS Defense Technical Information Center DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Cameron Station*Alexandria, Virginia 22314 UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED �* - -4 1.0 11.25 �o 00 NAVAL SCHOOL Monterey, California T-H THESIS HERBICIDES IK SUPFOl^ OF COUNTERIKSURGEKCy OPERATIONS: A COST-EFFECTIVENESS STUDY John DaXton Howard Thesis Advisor: NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE James R. Caora March 1972 ion pubtic. x.e£e&!>e.; datuiittien untuniltd. K. \ �Herbicides in Support of Counterinsurgency operations: A Cost-Effectiveness Study John DaIton Howard Major, United States Army B.S., United States Military Academy, 1964 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN OPERATIONS RESEARCH from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL March 1972 Author Approved by: Thesis Advisor Chainrari, Department of Operations Research // and Administrative Sciences Academic Dean �UNCLASSIFIED Cl as<unration DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA - R & D !.*!• avrrstt rmptttt tt j*. REPORT SECURITY cn-.iif ic* TIO« t of title, fcodr ttf *t>*tr*ft TtN6 A C T I V I T Y Unclassified Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California 93940 J*. SltOU* Herbicides In Support Of Courterinsurgency Operations: A Cost-Effectiveness Study of t*«6tt •nd.inC*ir»ire <****» Master's Ihesisj March 1972 John D. Howard C NO. O EPOBT D A T E 130 March 1972 M. C O M T K A C T Oft G R A N T NO. 44 M. OntCIMATOM't HE'QMT MUMICHIH ». fHOJECT NO. • 6. O T H E R *E»O*T HO(I> ( tft/« IS. D I J T A i e u T I O M t T A T E M E M T Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. It. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 11. SPONSORtNC UILIT A R T A C T I V I T Y I). A K S f K A C T This study develops costs, effectiveness criteria, and cost-effectiveness ratios for military herbicide systems and three other alternatives which can perform the missions of foliage removal and crop destruction in support of counterinsurgency operations. The results reflect the Vietnam combat environment wheie all systems were employed at sometime during the period 1965-1971. The systems considered are aerial delivery of herbicides by UH-1 helicopters and ue-123 Air Force aircraft, tactical land clearing with crawler tractors, "slash and burn" clearing with indigenous cutters, and fireboizbing with CH-47 helicopters. The effectiveness criteria focus on the ability of these systems to perfona the two missions and withstand the rigorous constraints of a hypothetical combat mission. From these criteria, two sets of cost-effectiveness vectors are obtained to allow a decision maker the opportunity to evaluate each system and determine a possible force structure to accomplish the two missions in a Vietnam-type insurgency. DD/r.,1473 UNCLASSIFIED S/N 01 Of*«Q7-«S!t Security Ctatsificitio* �UNCLASSIFIED S«eurit¥ Classification LIM K A l*N K • KKT W0»0» »OLt tri>. • c «« T Cost-effectiveness Herbicides Tactical Land Clearing Firebombing "Slash and Burn" Clearing Counterins urgency | 1 DD /,T.,!473 «8*«> ^^ UNCLA SSIFI ED Security CUstiftcttiet >.]«BI �ABSTRACT This study davelops costs, effectiveness criteria, and cost-effectiveness ratios for military herbicide systems and three other alternatives which can perform the missions of foliage removal and crop destruction in support of counterinsurgency operations. The results reflect the Vietnam combat environment where all systems were employed at sometime during the period 1965-1971. The systems considered are aerial delivery of herbicides by UH-1 helicopters and UC-123 Air Force aircraft, tactical land clearing with crawler tractors, "slash and burn" clearing with indigenous cutters, and firebombing with CH-47 helicopters. The effec- tiveness criteria focus oh the ability of these systems to perform the two missions and withstand the rigorous constraints of a hypothetical coiribat mission. From these criteria, two sets of cost-effectiveness vectors are obtained to allow a decision maker the opportunity to evaluate each system and determine a possible force structure to accomplish the two missions in a Vietnam-type insurgency. �TABLE OP CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION A. II. PURPOSE B. 6 • BACKGROUND • • 6 7 THE ALTERNATIVES 14 A. AERIAL DELIVERY OF HERBICIDES 14 1. UC-123 — 14 2. UH-1 • • 16 • 20 B. C. "SLASH AND BURN" CLEARING 28 D. III. TACTICAL LAND CLEARING ~ PIREBOMBING 30 METHODOLOGY 33 A. ASSUMPTIONS • 33 B. PARAMETERS C. COST ANALYSIS D. EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS • • 34 • 35 MEASURES E. 36 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY — 38 IV. ANALYSIS OF AERIAL DELIVERY OF HERBICIDES 40 V. ANALYSIS OF TACTICAL LAND CLEARING 75 VI. ANALYSIS OP "SLASH AND BURN" CLEARING 92 VII. ANALYSIS OF FIREBOKBING 100 VIII. INSIGHTS AND CONCLUSIONS 109 A. RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS 109 B. INSIGHTS C. CONCLUSIONS • • • — 112 114 �APPENDIX A: DETAILED HERBICIDE COSTS 116 APPENDIX B: DETAILED COSTS FOR TACTICAL LAND CLEARING— 118 APPENDIX C: DETAILED COSTS FOR FIREBQMBING APPENDIX D: DATA SOURCES 120 — BIBLIOGRAPHY — 121 — 124 INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST FORM DD 1473 • — 128 • ,»— __ .. �ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This study was made possible through the contributions and assistance of the V. S. Array Engineer Strategic Studies Group, Washington, D. C., and Major Richard C. Bennett, senior project director in that office. A special acknowledgement, goes to Mr. J. T. Soules, Vice President of the International Depar-iaent of the Rome Plow Company, whose correspondence and interest in the study provided the author with a wealth of data and many insights into the salient features of tactical land clearing. �I. A. INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to conduct a costeffectiveness evaluation of military herbicide systems in a counterinsurgency environment. The test case for the determination of relevant costs will be those dollar costs incurred during the systems' empJoyment in vegetation renoval and crop destruction missions .in support of combat operations in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) during 1965-1971. Since costs are the values of alternatives foregone, the study will address three other techniques used for foliage clearance and crop control in RVN during the same timeframe. The alternatives to herbicide operations which will be considered are: 1. Tactical land clearing operations. 2. "Slash and burn" clearing using indigenous labor forces. 3. Firebomb?ng. Each method will be discussed in detail in Chapter II. Specifically excluded from the scope of the study is consideration of the externalities that night result from possible damage to the ecological balance of the host country. The cost measures will attempt to show the relative dollar expenditores araong the systems involved. Several �measures of effectiveness will be used to Judge their output and ability to accomplish the missions of foliage reioval and crop des' =tion under combat conditions. These, coupled with the cost measures, will yield cost-effectiveness figures which will be the basis for comparisons, These comparisons will present the decision maker with sets of data on the strengths and weaknesses of the individual alternatives and combinations of the systems. B. BACKGROUND The proper use of cover and concealment has always been a critical factor ..n planning military operations. History is full of examples of armies that effectively used natural cover and foliage. Often, judicious use of these elements made up for other deficiencies in the forces. The colonial settlers of early America learned the arts of cover and concealment from the Indians and later put them to good use in the War of Independence. As warfare evolved from the strjiight-line formations of the 19th century and the trenches of World War I, it became apparent that strict adherence to the principles of concealment was not reserved solely for the guerrilla or irregular soldier. Hence, tactics and methods were developed in an attempt to deny any potential enemy, insurgent or conventionally organized, the protection and sustenance that might be offered by the vegetation. �The term "herbicide" was coined in the 1930's to enctmpass that family of chemicals which are antiplant agents. Some members of this family were found to be systemic hormones which entered broad-leaf plants touching off wild growth and eventually killing then. Others were determined to be dessicants which injured the foliage by direct chemical action on contact. Throughout World War u, military research in chemical warfare played an important role in the development of the potent herbicides now in world-wide use. Although initial efforts were directed at the discovery of suitable dessicants (for use as antierop agents), scientists from the university of Chicago determined that some of these growth regulators might be applied to grasses and tropical plants. This generated a great deal of interest in the defoliation or foliage removal properties of the chemicals since many tons of explosives had been expended on Pacific islands to deny the Japanese concealment afforded by the tropical rain forests. In early 1945, successful tests were conducted in the Florida Everglades concerning the possibility of using several inorganic defoliants in aerosol form, The results from this work prompted the Army to recommend the use of ammonium thiocynate in the Pacific theater. This recommendation was not adopted for fear of the repercussions that might arise from the agent's association with chemicals of the cyanide faaily. The war ended prior to the testing of a more suitable agent. 8 �In the late forties, the research generated during World War II was readily employed by civilian industry. The previous discovery of the organic chemicals 2,4-D and 2.4,5-T fostered revolutionary steps in chemical plant control and stimulated the development of a host of new agents. These herbicides were more effective, more selective, and less hazardous than the former compounds. Chemicals such as piclorara, bromacil, cacodylic acid, and paraquat were tailored to perform specific kinds of vegetation control. Consequently, their use at home and abroad became widespread. In 1950 the estimated market for herbicide? came to §1.5 million while by 1965, it had gruwii to over $211 million. (This was prior to extensive military purchase of certain agents for use in RVN.) In 1959 alone, American farmers treated 53 million acres of acres of agricultural land not to mention the thousands of miles sprayed by local government agencies and private corporations to control growth along highways, powerline right-of-ways, fire breaks, and ditches. (House and others, 1967.1 >, J The Department of Defense (DOD) did not become involved in herbicide operations until 1958. The success of British defoliation operations with helicopters in Malaya prompted several feasibility studies on acceptable defoliants and delivery techniques. In 1961, on request of President Diem and the government of RVK, a test program was established to assist in countering that nation's growing Communist-inspired insurgency. The Vietnamese army (ARVN) found that the most �difficult and frustrating task was locating the enemy. The dense forests and jungles offered the Viet Cong (VC) excellent concealment which permitted them to cove with relative impunity to within striking distance of key military installations , lines of communications (LOG), and government centers. By removing parts of the foliage, the Allied forces hoped to increase aerial and ground surveillance capabilities and deny the use of certain areas as sanctuaries. The actual herbicide operations began under the codename RANCH HAND in January 1962 with three specially configured U.S. Air Force (U3AF) UC-123B aircraft. The operations proceeded for the next two years at a moderate scale but with increased enemy resistance. Ground fire became so intense that in March of 1965 fighter escorts were provided on a permanent basis. The demand for defoliation and controlled crop destruction missions increased as U.S. participation in the war grev. This resulted in the RANCH HAND program being expanded in 1966 into a squadron-size unit, 12th Air Coimr-ando Squadron (later the 12th Special Operations Squadron), with an equipment level of 18 aircraft and headquarters at Bien Hoa Air Base. In the peak years of defoliation operations (1967-1968), the squadron was increased to 24 aircraft. jKcConnell, 1970.1 To supple- ment the 12th Special Operations Squadron, some U.S. division commanders were given the authority to conduct local defoliation and crop destruction missions in their area of operations (AO) with U.S. Army helicopters. These operations �were usually complementary to the RANCH HAND sorties and employed local aviation assets thit were diverted froia other lift tasks. From the inception of the test program, great effort was oade to insure proper targets were picked and spraying of friendly areas was prevented. Each mission was approved by the local Vietnamese province chief, the Military Assistance Command Vietnam (KACV), and the U.S. Embassy, crop destruction targets were subject to special scrutiny so that the most harm would be done to the VC and the least to the local inhabitants. A commission was established to contpensate and reimburse those people who had suffered financial loss as a result of herbicides. Although friendly areas were never specifically targeted, some spray did occasionally drift causing damage to rice crops or rubber trees. U.S. authori- ties attempted to take prompt action on any claims whenever this situation occurred. Iconzales 1968 J Concurrent with increased herbicide operations in Vietnam, there was an expanding controversy over the program in the united States. Critics asserted that if chemical herbicides were coroaonly used, it might not be long before more noxious chemical agents are considered usable. Others have claimed that such an indiscriminate weapon results in as much suffing for the local populace as the VC. 19681 and fLewallen |Hersh 1971 J . The scientific community raised the question of the ecological consequences of repeated herbicide applications. 11 The American Association �for the Advancement of Sciences (AAAS) has been and still is the center of the controversy. Probably the most vocal and widely quoted critic within AAAS is Dr. Matthew Meselson, a. Harvard University biologist. Or. Meselson chaired the AAAS Herbicide Assessment Commission and visited Vietnam on a five-week tour. In the committee statement to an AAAS convention, the following assertions were mades 1. fhe Army's crop destruction program was a failure. 2. Cae-fifth to one-half of Vietnam's mangrove forests had been "utterly destroyed." 3. One-half the trees in the mature hardwood forests north and west of Saigon were dead. 1 Several other scientists who had previously visited RVH in 1958-19S9 strongly recommended and lobbied for the cancellation of the herbicide operations until scientists had time to study the long-term effects of the program, Pfeiffer [orians and 1970] These recommendations coupled with severe criticism from certain members of Congress and other citizens helped bring about the suspe: sioa of herbicide operations in the summer of 1970. On 7 October 1970, Public Law 91-441 directed the Secretary of Defense to prepare a study to identify the role %offey, Phillip M., "Herbicides in Vietnam: AAAS Study Finds Widespread Devastation," Science, 15 January 1971, p. 43. 12 �of herbicides in support of combat operations and evaluate their utility in KVB. It also required him to contract with the National' Academy of Sciences (HAS) for a comprehensive study to determine the ecological and physiological effects of the herbicide program in RVN. By 1 March 1972, the Secretary of Defense was required to transmit the DOD findings together with the RnS study to the President and the Congress. It is against this background of U.S. use of herbicides and Congressional concern about the role of herbicides that the examination of the alternatives discussed in the next section has been undertaken. 13 �II. ALTERHRTIVES A. AERIAL DELIVERY OF HERBICIDES Aerial delivery is the prime method of dissemination of chemical herbicides for large-scale defoliation or crop destruction missions. Other methods, such as use of the three-gallon hand-pucp sprayer, the M-106 riot control dispenser, and boat-counted spray systems, have beep employed in Vietnam but will not be considered in the context of this study. However, all herbicide missions are designed to accomplish some or all of the following objectives: 1. Deny tlie enemy cover and concealment and channel his movement. 2. Deny the enemy the capability to forage off tne land. 3. Deny tae enemy ambush sites adjacent to LOG. 4. Provide improved aerial and electronic surveillance. 1. Delivery By Fixed Wing Aircraft (UC-123) The major portion of the U.S. herbicide effort is carried by a modified version of the Air Force's two-engine medium cargo carrier, the C-123B "Provider." Ahe aircraft is given a spray capability ("UC" designation) by the installation of the Hayes AA-45 system which consists of a 1,000 gallon internal tank, an operator console, and three high pressure spray booms. Since most missions are carried 14 �out at low altitudes and low speeds, the performance of the aircraft is significantly upgraded by the addition of turbojet engines. The intensity of enemy ground fire in Vietnam has forced the Air Force to further protect the UC-123K with additional armor plating for the crew ami engines. The DC-123K's travel in fighter escorted flights ranging anywhere from two to seven aircraft, depending on the target configuration. Each aircraft dispenses its 1,000 gallon load in four minutes at less than 150 niles per hour and 150 feet off the ground. The Hayes ays ten can be adjusted for variable dissemination rates; however, these rates are usually between one and one-half gallons to three gallons per acre. [Major Pyatt] Photo # 1: Pour UC-123 aircraft of the 12th Air Commando Squadron defoliating a jungle area east of Siigon. June 1968 U.S. Array Photograph 15 �2. Delivery By RotaryWing Aircraft (UH-1) In certain areas, ground commanders are authorized to conduct local herbicide operations. When CC-123 aircraft are not available to do the Job or the target is too small to merit fixed wing sorties, the UH-1 helicopter (commonly known as the "Huey") can be equipped with an internal tank and spray booms. In initial operations in RVU, some U.S* Army nalts used a field expedient which employed a 55-gallon drum fitted with rubber hoses and sprayers mounted on the helicopter skids. The second generation system used in the UH-1 is the AGAVENCO sprayer, developed by a Las Vegas firm for use in agricultural work. This system can be mounted in the aircraft in less than one-half hour and consists of a 200 gallon tank, pump, and pressurized nozzles. of the Array (DA) Training Circular (TC) 3-16 [Department 1969 ] . The UH-1 fitted with the AGAVENCO provides the same dissemination rates as the UC-123 but its capacity is considerably less. Although the system is designed for a 200 gallon capacity, the combat requirements of two pilots, two door gunners, and a system operator cut the UH-l's lii't capability to such an extent that the tank can only be loaded with 100 gallons. I^TC Rudrowj The use of the helicopter in RVN for delivery of herbicides has been far less standard than the operations of the 12th Spscial Operations Squadron. Since division comifcanders were the controlling authorities for these missions in each AO, the methods used varied considerably 16 �throughout the theater. Ideally, several "Hueys" should be employed for efficiency's sake. However, since no helicopters were set aside specifically for herbicide missions, they were normally diverted on a one-by-one basis from other conibat sorties. The security escorts, the AH-lG ("Huey Cobra"), faced the same problem, and while a defoliation helicopter should be supported by two Cobras, on r«any occasions, none were available. did not curtail the missions. However, this lac'k of security \LTC Rudrow and LTC Saiiches] Photo # 2: UH-1 helicopter taking-off on a defoliation mission. U.S. Army Photograph 17 �3. Chemical Agents ORANGE, WHITE, and BLUE will Toe the agents considered in this study. These chemicals do not constitute the complete spectrum of herbicides, but they were the most widely used in support of U.S. combat operations in RVN. Table II-l: Composition and Use of Selected Agents AGENT COMPOSTTTQW USES ORANGE 5056 2,4-D(r»-butyl.2-4 dicholoroph*".noxyacetate) 50% 2,4,5--7(n-butyl,2,4,5trichorophenoxyacetate) WHITE 20% Picloraro (4-araino-3,5,6- General defoliation: trichloropicoline acid) Slower acting but 80% 2,4-D(trisopropanolamine| more persistent than General defoliations wangrove, jungle, and low-land scrub trees. ORANGE BLUE 3 pounds per gallon of water of: 65?o cacoclylic acid 35% inert ingredients: sodium chloride, sodium sulfate, calcium sulfate and water. Crop destruction: Most effective against grassy plants, rice, manioc, corn, and banana trees, During defoliation operations in RW, agents ORANGE and WHITE were used interchangeably. It was found that these agents did not permanently destroy all vegetation, although the mangrove swamps still show heavy effects of the spraying. Recent pictures taken of heavily defoliated areas show considerable regrowth of foliage in hardwood forests and along waterways. The NAS study will address this question 2 DA TC 3-16, Employment of Riot Coatrol Agents, Flaree, Smoke, Antiplant Agents, and Personnel Detectors in CounterGuerrilla Operations, p. £0-81, April 1 6 . 39 18 �In detail along with other ecological effects of chemical herbicir?s. [Tschirley 1963] and [office of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (ODASD) 1971] .. 4. Coverage and Limitations The present sprayer systems used in both fixed and rotary wing aircraft allow variable dissemination of lierMcides. 'rhese rates are as follows: Table I1-2: Herbicide Dissemination Rates Mission Type Rate Defoliation Crop Destruction 3ftree gallons/acre One and one-half to three gallons/acre [DA TC 3-16 1969] The use of herbicides in support of conibat operations is limited in several respects. The best time to apply them is during the particular plant's most active growing period. While spraying during the dry season (which corresponds to the non-active period of most plants) does produce defoliation, the vegetation dies at a slower rate. In ac'lition, the proper atmospheric conditions must exist to insure maximum coverage of the aerosol, assuming the aircraft is flying at the proper speed and altitude. An inversion temperature gradient and a wind of less than eight knots insure not only proper coverage of the target but also minimize the probability of drift onto friendly areas. This is particularly important in an insurgency environment where unintentional destruction of the indigenous population's 19 �property and crops would be detrimental to the position of the counterinsurgent forces. B. TACTICAL LAND CLEARING A tactical land clearing operation is designed to support the ground tactical forces by denying the enemy any use or benefit that might be gained from heavily vegetated terrain. Unlike herbicide missions, a well-planned clearing operation seeks to not only remove foliage but also the source of it as well. This produces an advantage above those received by defoliation since surveillance is improved in the horizontal dimension as well as the vertical. This improvement is realized by: 1. An increased ground-based anti-personnel radar capability. 2. Increased visual observation. 3. Improved fields of fire. 4. Physical elimination of potential ambush sites and base areas. A secondary benefit derived from land clearing is the possible economic enhancement of the area. Marketable tiitiber felled during the operation can be extracte'"- for the local lumbering industry, and if the tactical situation pernits, there is the potential for conversion of this unused land for productive agricultural cultivation. Pamphlet (Pam) 525-6 1970 ] . 20 iDA �1. Equipment and Organization Tactical land clearing revolves around the proper use of a standard crawler tractor equipped with the Rome K/G blade and kit assembly. This item of equipment, commonly referred to as the "Rome Plow," was developed by Ernest Kissner of Lottie, Louisiana for land reclamation of heavily wooded tracts. The success of the blade prompted Mr. Kissner to sell the rights to his equipment to the Rome Plow Company of Cedartown, Georgia. Since 1957, it has been produced to fit all standard sizes and makes of tractors (Caterpillar, Allis-Chalroers, International Harvester). The tractor and Rome blade became the method accepted for pilitary land clearing in 1966 after a test period at Fort Belvoir, Virginia and Vietnam of practically all known commercial clearing equipment. [Rome Plow Company, Training Program November 19711. The Rome K/G treedozer, unlike the bulldozer blade which clears by uprooting, works on the shearing principle in that the total horsepower of the tractor is applied to the sharp cutting edge extending the length of the blade. In addition to the cutting edge, a wedge-like projection, the "stinger," extends forward from the left of the leading edge of the blade. This allows larger trees to be split in one or more passes before they are actually felled by the cutting edge. In order to permit faster operation with less operator fatigue, a flat sole is mounted on the heel of the blade to float on the surface of the ground and conform to 21 �topographic irregularities. Through the technique of shearing the vegetation at ground level or below, its disposal by burning or extraction is much faster because it is soil free. There is less soil disturbance since the tilted blade cuts the vegetation rather than uprooting it. [DA Para 525-6 1970] . 'She "Rome Flew" has become the nucleus of the recently organized Engineer Land Clearing Company whose primary mission is, "... to destroy or clear extensive der.i,e vegetation in critical areas for the purpose of denying its use by the enemy as bases of operation, supply bases, marshalling areas, ambush sites, and cover and concealment."-5 This unit, part of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer organization, has thirty medium crawler tractors each equipped with the Rome kit. It was spawned by the success of the "Rome Plow" used initially in twos and threes by practically all engineer elements in RVH. The land clearing role became so large that in 1969 the Army organized the 62nd Engineer Battalion to handle the clearing requirements in M_litary Region III. Usually one of its three plow companies was placed in support of a divisional clearing mission. Tha company was found to be the primary unit for employment since fragmenting it into smaller elements for prolonged periods of time resulted in the loss of maintenance posture. [62nd Engineer Battalion Letter February 1971] United States Army Combat Developments Command, Table of Organization and Equipment Number 5-87T - Engineer Land ClearingConpany, p. 1, 7 February 1969. 22 �Photo #3: Rome K/G blade and protection group on a Caterpillar D7F tractor. Rose Plow Company Photograph 23 �2. Clearing Estimates and Limitations It is virtually impossible to establish exact rates at which any piece of equipment can clear land. Such factors as vegetation type, terrain, climate, enemy situation, and quality of assets available will directly influence this. Accurate estimates require a detailed clearing reconnaissance to include several "tree counts" for tree size, diameter of large trees, and secondary growth estimates. The information frcra this reconnaissance can be placed into one of several forculas developed by the Rose Plow Company to determine time required per acre cleared. [Rome Industries Salesgram, 1 September 1971.1 In the event that'this procedure cannot be followed, the Department of the Army has established planning estimates for clearing operations using one land clearing tractor for various types of cuts: Table II-3: Land Clearing Estimates VEGETATION UNIT {Equipment-hours/unit) AREA CLEARING STRIP CLEARING LIGHT: Less than 12 inches in diameter Acre .4 . 6 MEDIUM: 12 to 18 inches in diameter Acre . 8 1.3 HEAVY: -Greater than 18 inches in diameter Acre 1.3 2.1 Several factors which constrain tactical clearing operations are soil trafficability, support requirements. 4 Department of the Army Parphlet 525-6, Land Clearing Lessons Learned, p. 60, 16 June 1970. ~ 24 �and determination of the enemy to resist the land clearing mission. Since the medium tractor with the Rome kit has a gross weight of more than 20 tons, the ground must be relatively solid to permit movement. This would restrict its use in areas subject to heavy seasonal rainfalls and locations that are inundated on a regular basis, such as mangrove swamps. Even if the terrain permits movement of the tractors, there is always the possibility that it is interlaced with streams, canals, or steep-sided gullies. Supporting troops are necessary to install bridging across these obstacles and assist in tractor recovery operations. Aviation support is required for proper command and control of large scale cutting operations, m many cases, the engineer commander must be airborne to guide the lead tractors since, in heavy vegetation, the operators' visibility is negligible. Aerial reconnaissance of the cut is also essential for sound planning and accurate assessment of the clearing to be accomplished. During RVN clearing operations, the land clearing companies of the 62d Engineer Battalion were furnished observation helicopters on the average of five hours per working day. |62d Engineer Battalion Letter, February 1971.J For immediate protection of the land clearing company, the desired security force is one armored cavalry troop or one mechanized infantry company. Foot infantry would have difficulty in keeping up with the tractors and would have no protection from falling trees. If the area 25 ��Photo # 5: Land clearing with the Rome K/G blade on a D7 Caterpillar tractor. Rome Plow Cornpany Photograph 27 �C. "SLASH AND BURN" CLEARING Indigenous personnel can be hired to assist in many land clearing operations or to conduct small-scale clearing efforts on their own ("slash and burn" operations). They can be eraplo*'ed in clearing vegetation adjacent to lines of communications (LOG), around support bases, and removing/ burning debris from other operations. The objectives of this technique are similar to the tactical land clearing operations with the additional function of releasing U.S. troops for more pressing combat roles. 1. Organization Usually, the personnel for the operations are recruited and hired by the U.S. force's Civil Affairs staff working in conjunction with the host country's local and national labor office. These officials determine the salaries and working conditions. They attempt to get job applicants with previous experience in clearing or lumbering. The equipiiient, support, and supervision for the clearers is furnished by the U.S. unit working in the AO. This system was used by the Army during the Korean War. It was designed to help the Republic of Krrea's massive unemployment problems and assist the allies in accomplishing tasks requiring unskilled labor. The Koreans served as ammunition bearers, porters, kitchen police, and woodcutters. Its success was such that at the end of the war the Korean Service Corps (KSC) was formed on a paramilitary basis. 28 �To the present day, the KSC has provided labor augmentation for the residual United Nations troops that have remained in Korea. 2. Clearing Estimates and Limitations Like tactical land clearing, production rates are dependent upon many variables: morale, health, state of experience, terrain, crew size, and supervision. Planners must also consider the tiice required to transport the personnel to and froca the clearing sites since security requirements would eliminate the possibility of remaining in the area overnight. The planning rates that have been established by DA are: Table I - : Clearing By Hand I 4 VEGETATION UNIT HAN-HOURS PER UNIT LIGHT: Less than 12 inches in diameter. Acre 125 MEDIUM: 12 to 18 inches in diameter. Acre 350 HEAVY: Greater than 18 inches in diameter. Acre 600 LIGHT: Same as above but strip 10 meters wide.* 100 Linear Meters 25 MEDIUM: Same as above but strip 10 roaterr. wide.* 100 Linear Meters 70** ** *Strip clearing. **Approxiir.ately 100 man-hours/linear acre and 280 man-hours/ linear acre. 5 Ibid.. p. 55. 29 �The use of "slash and burn" techniques for vegetation removal is usually limited to secure areas or where major combat operations are already in progress. Time serves as an additional constraint on the method since a great many cutters are required to clear an area in a short period. However, it is particularly useful in areas where the soil trafficability will not support the heavy equipment required for tactical land clearing. D. FIREBOMB1NG Firebonibing is a method of reducing vegetation by burning the foliage with incendiary munitions. The primary means to accomplish this is by dropping drums of thickened fuel (napalm) from helicopters or fixed wing aircraft. The technique is especially applicable to area clearance in locations where there is a definite dry season during the year. The objectives of firebombing coincide with those of herbicide operations but the results differ in "zhat the trees are permanently destroyed and not subject to regrowth. The tactic ./as first used in RVN in 1967 during Operation PINK ROSE in which Air Force aircraft were employed to drop the cannisters of napalm on the target areas. Its purpose was to burn-off enemy infiltration routes in the northern provinces and base areas in War Zone C and D, all of which had b^en previously treated with herbicides. 1970 I 30 [McCcnnsll �1. Organization and Equipment Authority to burn portions of an AO is usually delegated to the division commanders. The Array uses the twin-engine CH-47 helicopter ("Chinook") to conduct firebombing missions. Thickened fuel, consisting of gasoline Mixed with M-4 fuel thickener, is placed in salvaged 55gallon drums and sling-loaded beneath the CH-47. Fifteen to twenty drums are carried in one lift, depending on the aircraft's fuel load and weather conditions. When the aircraft is over the target, the drums are released and fall in a cluster into the impact area. The drops are supervised by a command and control officer in a light observation helicopter (LOH), and if air assets are available, security is provided by several helicopter gunships (AH-lG). JLTC Rudrow j 2. Coverage and Limitations Evaluation of the coverage of a firebombing mission is very difficult since proper burning is subject to many condition.0. Some of the factors that effect and limit the coverage are: (1) Dryness of the vegetation (2) Wind and temperature (3) Probability of a drum cluster detonation upon contact with the ground (4) Number of drums per lift. 31 �These variables dictate the use of a probabilistic model to estimate the coverage of any particular firebombing mission. In addition to the factors mentioned above, firebombing missions are limited by the utilization of the CH-47 in other roles. The "Chinook" has become the workhorse for the Army's medium lift tasks. In RVN, it has been extensively used for transportation of artillery pieces and resupply of forward bases. Hence, there is a high demand for the aircraft, and the commander roust decide on which missions he places the higher priority. 32 �III. METMDODQGY The alternatives for this study will be analyzed with respect to the two primary missions of herbicide operations: 1. Removal of foliage (defoliation) in order to deny the enemy cover and concealment. 2. Ths destruction of crops in the enemy's territory in order to curtail his ability to forage off the land. To accomplish this, costs for each method oust be isolated in some uniform manner and in units to facilitate a costeffectiveness evaluation for several measures of effectiveness (MOE). The vectors resulting from this evaluation can then be compared on an intra-systera, inter-system and forcemix basis. The analysis of the alternatives will take the form of the major subheadings below. Each of these sections attempts to amplify the "how and why" of the methodology used in Chapter IV through VII. A. GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS Implicit in the assumptions for each alternative is the adherence to the system descriptions of Chapter II. Several general assumptions are also applicable. In order to simplify the o-ialysis and the data collection, all alternatives are assisted to have commenced their operations at the same point in time. It is also assured that all systems are in "steady state" and not subject to 33 �the initial erratic fluctuations in costs that new systems often demonstrate prior to the occurrence of the "learning curve" phenomena. At the end of the systems' life, all are given a zero residual value. Finally, no adjustments are made to the costs for inflation. While inflationary pressures have abated slightly, it is doubtful that the price stability of the early 1960's will return in the near future. This could introduce some bias when looking at yearly costs, total system cost (T3C), and investment replacement of primary mission equipment (PME) over the planning horizon. [Augusta and Snyder 197 oj B. PARAMETERS The planning horizon for the analyses will be ten years. Like the explicitly stated parameters for each alternative, this is a reasonable estimate but in no way reflects any official policy. The reviewer should be cautioned that the planning horizon and other inputs are optimistic estimates and adverse conditions car change thea significantly. Where a great deal of uncertainty exists as to the parameter values, upper (U) and lower (L) cost bounds will be specified for each alternative. Most of these bounds reflect the judgement of men who were involved with these systems during counterinsurgency operations in RVN. 34 �C. COST ANALYSIS All costs will be determined in reference to one unit equipment (UE) . A UE could be one specially equipped aircraft, one crawler tractor with the Rome kit, or a crew of indigenous cutters for "slash and burn* clearing. With this in mind, life cycle costs will be identified through a generalized input structure. Since no research and develop ment (KD) costs are encountered, only the following major cost categories will be investigated: Investment Cost ( C 1) Operating Cost (OC) Procurement Costs Maintenance Stock Costs Modernization Replacement of Equipment due to Attrition or Operational Loss Initial Travel Transportation Replacement Pay and Allowance Fuel, oil and lubricants (POL) Replacement Training Munitions Security Special Control Fisher 197 l These inputs are used to obtain a system cost (SC) by evaluating each cost category with respect to the major subsystems of each alternative. The basic equation used in the analysis is: T LT SC = a L« i j TT ICi-t + a L. *— J i j OC<< J where a_ is a constant to obtain costs in the desired units (i.e., $/year, ^/mission, or $/day) and ic*j is the jth investment cost of the ith subsystem. Generally, costs will be determined in units associated with basic operating tines. 35 �Ground-based systems will be evaluated in terms of dollars per day and aviation systems in dollars per mission. Included in the operating cost input program will be several opportunity costs. Although they'will never be reflected in tables of costs held by service comptrollers, they are very real costs due to the scarcity of personnel and equipment assets in combat. There is difficulty judging what cost should be attached to a supervisory or security force that could be gainfully employed in other combat operations, m order to tackle this problem in the study, the cost assessed will be that operating cost incurred by the force over the period that it was used. D. EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Effectiveness C r i t eria The measures of effectiveness (MOE) should be closely related to the mission objectives. However, it is very hard to quantify the results of any denial operation because one soon gets into the realra of trying to determine "why something did not happen." These types of objectives force the writer away from "objective-oriented" MOE's and toward the "performance-oriented" effectiveness criteria. Two KOE's will be utilized in order that a balanced presentation of each alternative may be achieved. a. MOE * 1 - "Area" The first MOE will be that of "area treated, cleared or burned per normal operating period." 36 These �three terras show the different effects that each alternative has on the terrain. However, they present an evaluation of each system's effectiveness and give a specific indication of their performance capability during a normal operating period. b. MOE # 2 - Constrained Cost Minimization This MOE is designed to determine which alternatives can complete a given mission subject to the exigencies of combat. It attempts to take a reasonable mission of denying the enemy cover and concealment in a given area and requiring that this be completed prior to certain time limits and within theater asset constraints. In program format: Minimize the cost of denying cover and concealment in a 6,000 acre base area Subject to: (1) Mission accomplishment in 30 days or less. (2) Mission asset requirements w4thin the supply capability of the responsible commander. A vegetation removal mission was chosen since these were the roost common of the herbicide missions in RVN. The figure of 6,000 acres was designated because thij is approximately 25 grid squares on a 1:25,000 or 1:50,000 topographical map and could easily be a suspected insurgent base area. Although this is a large scale mission, it is not unreasonable since there have been defoliation/clearing operations in War Zone C and other parts of Military Region 37 �Ill in RVN that encompassed larger areas (during Operation 3W3CTIO8 CITY). The effects of reducing the mission size are also examined in Chapter VIII, Section B. Constraint # 2 of the program retires the determination of what will be the "supply capability of the responsible coonander." To resolve this, the author will use his judgement and past experience in RVN to determine whit are "reasonable" and "unreasonable" asset requirement*? to accomplish a particular mission. 2. Cost- E ffectIvenes s Measureg Using the cost measures of the analysis section and the effectiveness criteria, cost-effectiveness measures can be developed for each system in dollars per acre. These measures can then be segregated into mission categories for foliage removal and crop destruction with maximum and oiniraura cost limits. These coupled with the cost minimization v. ctors will help illuminate the differences in the systems, their costs, and their effectiveness in support of counterinsurgency operations. E. PARAMETER SENSITIVITY Sensitivity analysis will be used to test the parametric uncertainties in each system. The testing will examine the system costs as the parameters vary over a reasonable range of values. Although the only relevant costs are dollar costs, the sensitivity tables will show dollars and cents. Certainly, the calculation of costs to the actual pennies 38 �is not relevant or meant to be a serious cost estimate. However, this is done since they demonstrate the orders of magnitude of change over the range of the parameter values. 39 �IV. A. ANALYSIS OF AERIAL DELITSRY OF HERBICIDES ASSUMPTIONS 1. UC-123 a. Each aircraft has an ejected life of ten years after modification for herbicide operations. b. hours. [Major Pyatt] Each sortie has an expected duration of two [Major Hidalgo] c. Flights over a given target consist of between two and seven h^xbicide aircraft. d. Security for each flight consists of four USAF A-1E "Skyraider" aircraft. Control for each flight consists of one forward air controller (FAC) in a USAF OV-10 "Bronco." [Downs and Scrivner e,. 1970J Each UC-123K has a 90 per cent coverage effi- ciency for its 1,000 gallon load. {See sensitivity analy- sis. Sec. E) 2. UH-1 a. A variety of "Hueys" haie been employed in RVN. For this study, use of the UH-1H is assumed. b. Each sortie has a duration of one-half hour. Rudrew] c. A flight over a given target consists of one helicopter. d. The AGAVENCO sprayer wJH be the only helicopter- raounted system considered. Although the capacity of the 40 �tank is 200 gallons, weight limitations tinder combat conditions curtail the load, will be analyzed. e. A 100 gallon per mission load [t,TC Sanchesj When available, armed helicopter security consists of two AH-lG "Cobras." f. and [DA -re 3-16 1969 ] [LTC Rudrow] the OT-lH has a 90 per cent coverage efficiency for its 100 gallon load. It is employed under the same operational and climatic conditions as the UC-123 missions. {Also see sensitivity analysts, Sec. E) B. PARAMETERS ! • Flying Hours Since the DC-123K has a two-hour mission duration, 25 missions per month per aircraft (or 600 hours per year) will be the study parameter. Data indicates that the sortie rate varies considerably over a year's operation and that the use of 25 sorties per month would not be unreasonable [Major Hidalgo J . A similar number of flying hours per year for the UH-lH would dictate a sortie rate of 100 missions per month. However, this is probably less than the normal rate since the UH-lH has a prograrsed flying-hour limit of up to 960 houis per year in an active combat environment. Manual (FM) 101-20 [DA Field 1970J . This implies that the effects of the sortie generation rate for both aircraft should be examined in a sensitivity analysis (Section E). 41 �2- Cost Bounds Bounds on certain portions of the herbicide costs are set by the variation in security, control, and transportation costs that can occur in normal operations. These parameters set the "optimistic and pessimistic" bounds for system cost. Since the UC-123 flights range from two to seven aircraft, the security and control cost (for four A-lE's and one OV-10) must be pro rated in accordance with the number of herbicide aircraft per flight to obtain a cost for one unit equipment (UE). Costing the helicopter system does not present this problem since the operations are usually conducted with one UH-1 (assumption c>. Hence, the security costs for a UH-1 mission can range from zero to the cost of using two "Cobras" for one-half hour. The UH-1 has an additional bound on the i»..3stment cost formed by the mode of transporting (surface or air) the AGAVENCO system to the cornbat theater. C. COST ANALYSIS 1. Is_o la t ion o f Re le vant Cos ts A detailed breakdown of these costs can be found in Appendix A. a. UC-123K Research and Development; None. Investment Costs for the aircraft subsystem: (1) Initial procurement of the aircraft is a sunk cost since the C-123B's were drawn from air assets that 42 �existed in the Air Force inventory. Hence, it will not be considered. (2) Jet engine modification: C-123B to a turbo-jet model (C-123K)i Conversion of the $302,732/aircraft. [Miss Lucky] Operating Costs for the aircraft subsystem: [ (1) Operating and nsainteaance (O&M): $7QO,000/ ^ Captain Wallace j (2) Modernization cost: h two per cent per year cost is incurred by each aircraft for raodernization expenditures. .02 x 5870,000/aircraft = $l?,400/aircraft/year. [captain Wallace] (3) Security costs: A-1E is $200/AOur. The operating cost for one~~ Major Sims The munition expenditures for one A-iF; are $1250/raission. f LTC Cooper] For a two- hour mission with four A-lE's, the cost amounts to $6600/ mission. (4) Control costs: The operating cost for the OV-10 is $54/liour and $1000/aircraft for a full load of munitions. [liTC Monoham 1 This amounts to a control cost i J of $1108/roission. (5) Combat attrition rates are negligible since <Nfc only two aircraft have been lost to enemy fire since 1962. j Downs and Scrivner 1970 ] 43 �Investment Cost for the aerosol subsystem; (1) The dispenser mechanisii consists of the installation of the Hayes AA-45 system at a cost of $37,254/ aircraft. [Miss Lucky I (2) Additional armor plating: $19,354/aircraft. [Miss Lucky] Operating Costs for the aerosol subsystem; ( ) Maintenance of the dispenser systcs* training 1 the operators, and stocking spare parts are included in the cost of operating the aircraft. ( ) Cost of herbicides: 2 The USAF is responsible for procurement of herbicides for all users. The cost of the agent includes shipment and storage costs. [Mr. Carter] AGENT COST/GALLON COST/MISSION WHITE $7.78 $7,780 ORANGE $7.24 $7,240 BLUE $2.31 $2,310 b. UH-1H Research and Development: Hone. Investment Cost for UH-lH; This is a sunk cost since the helicopter used for herbicide operations is diverted from Army aviation assets on a "need* basis. Operating Costfor UH-lH; ( ) O&M costs are rated at 15 per cent of the 1 aircraft procurement cost. JMr. Donaldson] Since the UH-lH 44 �costs $266,578 [DA FM 101-20 1970J , the O&M cost is approximately $40,000/year. (2) Crew salaries are not included in Army O&M estimates. Normal conibat crew on a UH-1 is two pilots and two door gunners. These yearly opportunity costs amount to: 2 x $14,000/officer/year = $28,000/year 2 x $10,000/enlisted man/year = $2Q,000/year [DA Fact Sheet 1971j and I Major Howe ] (3) Security costs range from zero (no security) to $200/mission for two AH-lG "Cobras." (Appendix A) Investment Costs forthe aerosol subsystem; (1) Procurement of AGAVENCO system: $7,850 [MT. Drake| (2) Transportation cost for the AGAVENCO: $545 by ship and $1,937 by aircraft. (Major Howe 1 (3) The expected life of the UH-1H equipped for herbicide missions is ten years. [ Mr. Donaldson] Operating Costfor theaerosol subsystem; ( ) The maintenance cost of the AGAVENCO system 1 is nine per cent of the procurement cost: S707/year. [ Mr. Drake] (2) The system requires one operator: $iO,000/ year. (3) Herbicide costs: 45 �AGENT COST/GALLON COST/MISSION WHITE $7.78 §778 ORAHGE $7.24 $724 BLUE $2.31 $231 IW. CarltonJ 2. Yearly Costs Using the relevant costs and the herbicide parameter, a yearly system cost can be developed from the formula: SC = a L, L, ICjj + b Lf L» OCii J i j i 1 wr«re a_ is the reciprocal of the expected life (and equal to the planning horizon) and b is a dimensional constant to obtain costs la dollars per year. a. Identification of Costs for UC-123K Investmant Cost = 1/10 (Engine modification +• spray system + arnor) = $35,934/year. Operating Cost = O&M cost + Security cost + Control cost + Agent cost. The security and control (S&C) costs for a UE on any particular mission can be found in the following manner: Security cost (U): Security cost ( ) L: $6600/flight 2 aircraft/flight S6600/fliaht 7 aircraft/flight _ $3300/aircraft = ?943/aircraft (A similar procedure determines the control cost.) Using the parameter that a UC-123K flies 25 missions per month, 46 �the yearly mission rate would be 300 missions (msn) per year. A typical calculation, this one for the upper bound using Agent WHITE, is as fallows: Operating Cost = §700,000/yr + §17,400/yr + 300rasn/yrx §33QO/msn + 300 msn/yr x §554/msn + 300 msn/yr x §778Q/rasn = §4,207,600/year. Table IV-1: Yearly Costs for UC-123K (Costs in Millions of Dollars per Year) AGENT LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND WHITE §3.417 $.4 424 ORANGE §3.257 §4.081 BLUE §1.777 §2.603 b. Identification of Costs for UH-1H Investment Cost - 1/10 (AGAVEHCO Cost + Transportation Cost) = $979/year (U) or $840/year ( ) L. Operating Cost = O&M Cost + Security Cost + Agent Cost. The UH-1 will fly 100 missions per month. (Section B) An upper bound cost using Agent WHITE: Operating Cost §98,707/yr 4- 1200 msn/yr x $200/msn + 1200 msn/yr x $778/msn « §l,272,307/year. Table *V-2: Yearly Costs for UH-1H (Costs in Millions of Dollars per Year) AGENT LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND WHITE §1.033 §1.273 GRANGE § .968 §1.208 BLUE § .377 § .617 47 �Table IV-2: Yearly Costs for UH-1H (Costs in Millions of Dollars per Year) AGEKT LOWER BOUND WRITE $1.033 $1.273 ORANGE $ .968 $1.208 BLUE $ .377 $ .617 c. UPPER BOUND Remarks At this point a total system cost could be readily identified. However, like the yearly cost, it is extremely sensitive to the particular input parameters, The parameter of "missions per year" accounts for a major portion of the system cost solely by virtue of its multiplicative role in the cost formula. The reviewer must consider this when evaluating the systems with respect to the outlay of funds on a yearly basis for a UE. More important than the magnitude of the costs involved is the relative difference between the two systems. 3. Mission Costs cost of a herbicide mission gives the reviewer a better insight into the dollars involved for a UE. This cost is more suitable to relate to an effectiveness criterion that is oriented toward perfon=ance. Mission Investment Costt Summation of the Investment Costs (Expected Life)x(Number of Xsn/Year) 48 �Mission Operating Cost: Summation of O&M Costs/year Number of Msn/Year Summation of Security, Control, ^ ^ent costs/Mission fable IV-3: PC-123K Missioa Costs (Dollars per Hission) AGENT LOWER BOUND OPPER BOUND 1C OC SC 1C OC SC WEITE $120 $11,272 $11,392 $120 $14,025 $14,145 ORANGE $120 $10.732 $10,852 .'12® $13,485 $13,605 BLUE $120 $ 5,802 $ 5,922 $128 $ 8,555 $ 8,675 The costs are not categorized for the helicopter since the UE-lP investment cost is negligible. Tal/le IV-4t UH-lH Miss JOB Costs (Dollars per Mission) AGENT LOWER BOUN*? PPfgR BOUND WHITE $861 $1061 ORANGE $807 $1007 BLUE $314 $ 514 It is evident after this analysis that the agent cost comprises a large portion of the system cost for both alternatives. It accounts for approximately 50 per cent of the UC-123K costs and about 80 of the 0«-1 mission cost. The extent of this can be examined by locking at the two systems participating in defoliation operations. If the cost of the agent is varied from one dollar to ten dollars per gallon, the effect on "dollars per mission" can be 49 �better illustrated. This can also allow the reviewer the opportunity to examine the cost expectation of a sudden technicological breakthrough in the chemical industry causing a decrease in prices or if current trends in upward prices continue. Table IV-5s Cost Variation Due to Agent Costs (Dollars per Mission) COST OF &GEHT SYSTEM COST ($/Gal) TJH-1 (S/Msn) UC-123 Hin D. Min 183 283 383 483 583 683 783 883 983 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Max 383 483 583 683 783 883 983 4612 5612 6612 7612 8612 9612 10612 11612 12612 13612 1083 1183 1283 1083 Max 7365 8365 9365 10365 11365 12365 13365 14365 15365 16365 EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Effectiveness Criteria a. MOE fl - "Area" This measure of effectiveness, "acres treated per mission," presents the systems' overall or net effectiveness during a normal operating period. . Gallons/Mission Effectiveness criterion (EC) = e x Gailons/Acre " where e is the coverage factor. EC = .9 x For UC-123 operations, 1000 qal/tosn , 30Q 3 gal/acre 50 acres/mission �EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA (Acres/Mission) AGENT LOWSR BOUND UH-1H UC-123 UPPERBOUND UH-1H UC-123 WHITE 30 300 30 300 ORANGE 30 300 30 300 BLUE 60 600 30 300 b. MOE # 2 - Constrained Cost Minimizatior This HOE takes the following mathematical programming formats Minimize the cost of defoliating 6000 acres Subject to: Mission completion 1 30 days Assets required 1 Command's supply capability In addition to the assumptions of this chapter, several more. are necessary to restrict the analysis. (1) Flights by UC-123K's will be examined la relation to a minimum of two and a maximum of seven aircraft per flight. ( ) Agent ORANGE will be the defoliant. 2 ( ) Spraying must be completed within five days. 3 The last restriction is necessary since herbicides require approximately three to four weeks t3 act on tropical vegetation. For herbicides to be effective, they must remove a sufficient amount of foliage to deny the enemy use of the terrain for base areas and daylight movement and to permit improved aerial observation. 51 The �requirement is amplified by the following charts Defoliant Rate 1 \fk 2 Vk 1 H° 3 fto ORANGE 3 gal/acre 1/ 98 6 Ho 1 Yr 73/32 89/73 79 66 54 (The figure to the left of the slash represents percentage of leaves desicated; that to the right represents the percentage of leaves defoliated. The single figure is defoliation.)6 Therefore, it is imperative that the a«ent be applied quickly to insure naximuin defoliation at the end of 30 days. 2. Cost-Sffeetiveness Hea sures a. HOE tl Cost-Effectiveness Measure = Mission Cost Effectiveness Criterion Table IV-6A: Aerial Delivery of Herbicides (Dollars per Acre) AGENT LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND UH-lH UC-123 UH-1H UC-123 WHITE §29 $38 $35 §47 ORANGE $27 $36 §34 $45 BLUL $ 5 $10 $17 $29 Breaking these costs into the two primary mission categories (defoliation and crop destruction), isaxirauro and House, W. B. and others. Assessment of the Ecological Effects of Extensive or Repeated Use of Herbicides, p. 141, Midwest Research Institute, 1967. ' ~~~ 52 �minimum limits are formed. The mission categories facilitate comparison with the other alternatives. This is readily done since ORANGE and WHITE are general purpose defoliants and BI-UE is exclusively used for crop destruction. In the next table, the tgaximuin and ^ntiimaa limits on defoliation missions are formed by using Agent WHITE'S upper bound and QRASGE's lower bound. The uaximum and minimum cost vectors for crop destruction can be taken directly from Table IV-6A. Table IV-6B: Cost-Effectiveness Measures for Aerial Delivery of Herbicides (Dollars per Acre) MISSION UH-1H UC-123 MIN MAX MIN MAX Defoliation $27 $35 $36 $47 Crop Destruction $ 5 $17 $10 $29 b. HOE #2 Defoliation of a 6,000 acre area would require ten flights of two UC-123K's or three flights of seven IK-123K aircraft (each aircraft covering 300 acres per mission). The fiva-day dissemination period could easily be accomplished even with the smallest flight. If a squadron organization existed, the requirement would have little or no effect. Upper Bound: $13,605/aircraft/msn x 2 aircraft x 10 missions =» $272,100. 53 �Lower Bound: $10,852/aircraft/n»sn x 7 aircraft x 3 nissions - $227,892. Using the UH-lH's effectiveness criterion of 30 acres per mission, 200 sorties would be required. This implies that 100 helicopter flying hours would be needed in a five-day period. This would be a tremendous drain on the aviation assets of a division commander and would mean that he would have to divert five to ten helicopters a day for the better part of a week to psrlcrs the defoliation task, Hence, a violation of the second constraint might be realized. Table IV-7: Minimum Cost Program For Defoliation (Costs in Dollars) SYSTEM LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND UC-123K $227,892 $272,100 UH-1B** $161,400 $201,400 The program constraints make the UH-1 virtually infeasible for a mission of tteis scale. E. PARA1-CETER SENSITIVITY The sensitivity analysis is presented to determine the effect of variation of three of the parameterized inputs for the herbicide alternative. The tests are performed on the icaximura and minimum limits for the cost-effectiveness categories in Table IV-6B. 1. Sensitivity of Sortie Generation Rate a. UC-123 (Table IV-8A & SBj 54 �A sensitivity analysis indicates that this parameter is not as crucial to the system cost explanation as one might expect. Examination of the costs indicates that even at the lower number of sorties per month the system cost does not experience any appreciable rise. As flying hours increase past the 600 hour per year mark, the cost begins to experience an almost linear decrease. 55 �TABLE IV-8A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UC-123K SENSITIVITY OF SORTIE GENERATION RATE ($/ACRE) DEFOLIATION 0 & M COST MIN MAX SYSTEM COST M|N MAX HOURS PER YR. INVESTMENT COST 15. 360. 0.67 41.09 52.07 41.75 52.73 16. 384. 0.62 40.26 51.23 40.88 51.86 17. 408. 0.59 39.53 50.50 40.11 51.09 18. 432. 0.55 38.87 49.85 39.43 50.41 19. 456. 0.53 38.29 49.27 38,82 49.79 20. 480. 0.50 37.77 48.74 38.27 49.24 21. 504. 0.48 37.29 48.27 37.77 48.74 22. 528. 0.45 36.86 47.84 37.32 48.29 23. 552. 0.43 36.47 47.44 36.90 47.88 24. 576. 0.42 36.11 47.08 36.52 47.50 25. 600. 0.40 35.77 46.75 36.17 47.15 26. 624. 0.38 35.47 46.44 35.85 46.83 SORTIES PER MO. �TABLE IV-8A (Continued) SORTIES PER MO, HOURS PER YR. INVESTMENT COST 27. 648. 0.37 35.18 46.16 35.55 46.53 28. 672, 0.36 34.92 45.90 35.28 46.25 29. 696. 0.34 34.67 45.65 35.02 46.00 30. 720. 0.33 34.45 45.42 34.78 4.6 57 31. 744. 0.32 34.23 45.21 34.55 45.53 32. 768. 0.31 34, J3 45.01 14.34 45.32 33. 792. 0.30 33.84 44.82 34.14 45.12 34. 816. ' 0.29 33.66 44.64 33.96 44.93 35. 840. 0.29 33.50 44.47 33.78 44.76 36. 864. 0.28 33.34 44.32 33.62 44.59 37. 88d. 0.27 33.19 44.17 33.46 4.4 44 38, 912. 0.26 33.05 44.02 33.31 44.29 39. 936. 0.26 32.91 43.89 33.17 44.15 40. 960. 0.25 32.79 43.76 33.03 44.01 OPERATING COST MIN MAX SYSTEM COST MIN MAX �TABLE IV-8B SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UC-123K SENSITIVITY OF SORTIE GENERATION RATE ($/ACRE) CROP DESTRUCTION SORTIES PER MOT HOURS PER YR, INVESTMENT COST OPERATING COST MIN MAX SYSTEM; COST MIN MAX 15. 360. 0.67 12.66 33.83 12.33 34.50 16. 384. 0.62 12.22 33.00 11.91 33.63 17. 408, 0.59 11.84 32.27 11.55 32.86 18. 432. 0.55 11.50 31.62 11.22 32.17 19. 456. 0.53 11.19 31.03 10.93 31.56 20. 480. 0.50 1.2 09 30.51 1.7 06 31.01 21. 504. 0.48 10.67 30.04 10.43 30.51 22. 528. 0.45 10.44 29.60 10.21 30.06 23. 552. 0.43 10.23 29.21 10.02 29.64 24. 576, 0.42 10,04 28.85 9.84 29.27 25. 600. 0.40 9.87 28.52 9.67 28.92 Ul oo �TABLE IV-8B (Continued) SORTIES PER KO. HOURS PER YR. INVESTMENT COST OPERATING -COST MIN. MAX. SYSTEM COST MIN. MAX. 26. 0.38 9.71 28.21 9.52 28.60 27. 648. 0.37 9.56 27.93 9.38 28.30 28. 672. 0.36 9.42 27.66 9.24 28.02 29. 696. 0.34 9.29 27.42 9.12 27.76 30. in 624. 720. 0.33 9.17 27.19 9.01 27.52 31. 744. 0.32 9.06 26.97 8.90 27.30 32. 768. 0.31 8.95 26.77 8.80 27.09 33. 792. 0.30 88 .6 26.59 8.70 26.89 34. 816. 0.29 8.76 26.41 8.62 26.70 35. 840. ' 0.29 8.67 26.24 8.53 26,53 30. 864. 0.28 8.59 26.08 8.45 26.36 37. 888. 0.27 8.51 25.93 8.38 26.20 30. 912. 0.26 84 .4 25.79 8.31 26.05 39. 936. 0.26 8.37 25.66 8.24 25.91 40. 960. 0.25 8.30 25.53 8.18 25.78 �CHART IV-1: SENSITIVITY OF SORTIE GENE8ATION RATE (UC-123) (System Cost (SC) in Dollars/Acre) C 50.. DEFOLIATION 30 „ _ 20 . .. CROP D E S T R U C T I O N 10 . „ 4 360 -I -4 &0 600 4 720 Plying Hours per Year 60 840 {-> 960 �b. UH-1H (Table IV-9A & 9B) fable 9A and 9B show that the costs per acre fcr defoliation and crop destruction are virtually insensitive to the sortie generation rate of the aircraft. "The cause for this is the dominance of the agent cost. For a mission flown with Agent ORANGE (lower bound), the cost less the defoliant is $83 per mission. Shis condition persists throughout this analysis. 2. Sensitivity of Security and Control Costs a. UC-123K (Table IV-10) In the analysis, S & C costs range from $1100 per mission to approximately $3350 per mission. The lower spectrum of the scale shows the costs that might be incurred in a low-intensity environment that would require little or no security. The costs above $4000 per mission indicate the incremental changes when high-performance aircraft are allocated to security roles in lieu of propeller-driven "Slcyraiders." b. UH-1H (Table IV-11A & 11B) c. Both sets of tables (10 and 11) show the effect that security has on determining bounds on cost estimates. They also point out that the difference in Agent WHITE and Agent ORANGE for a similar security posture is almost negligible. 61 �TABLE IV-9A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UH-1 SENSITIVITY OF SORTIE GENERATION RATE ($/ACRE) DEFOLIATION SORTIES PER MO. HOURS PER YR. 0 & M COST MAX. INVESTMENT COST MIN V SYSTEM COST MAX. MIN. GO. 0.05 28.70 37.17 28.74 37.22 64. 384. 0.04 28.42 36.88 28.45 36.93 68. cr> to 360. 408. 0.04 28.17 36.63 28.20 36.67 72. 432. 0.04 27.94 36.41 27.97 36.45 76. 456. 0.04 27.74 36.21 27. 77 36.24 80. 480. 0.03 27.56 36.03 27.59 36.06 84. 504. 0.03 27.40 35.86 27.43 35.90 88. 528 0.03 27.25 35.72 27.28 35.75 92. 552. 0.03 27.11 35.58 27.14 35.61 96. 576. 0.03 26.99 35.46 27.01 35.48 100. 600. 0.03 26.88 35.34 26.90 35.37 104. 624. 0.03 26.77 35.24 26.79 35.26 �TABLE IV-9A (Continued) SORTIES PER MO. HOURS PER YR. INVESTMENT COST O & M COST MIN. MAX. SYSTEM COST MIN. MAX. 108. 648. 0.03 26.67 35.14 26.69 35.16 112. 672. 0.02 26.58 35.05 26.60 35.07 116. 696. 0.02 26.50 34.96 26.52 34.99 120. 720. 0.02 25.42 34.88 26.44 34.91 124. 744. 0.02 26.34 34.81 26.36 34.83 128. 768. 0.02 26.28 34.74 26.29 34.76 132. 792. 0.02 26.21 34.G8 26.23 34.70 136. 816. 0.02 26.15 34.62 26.17 34.64 140. 840. 0.02 26.09 34,156 26.11 34.58 144, 864. 0.02 26.04 34. 90 86.03 34.52 140. 883. 0.02 25.99 34.45 26.00 34.47 152. 912. 0.02 25.94 34,40 25.95 34.42 156. 936. 0.02 25.89 34.36 25.91 34.38 160. 960. 0.02 25.85 34.31 25.86 34.33 �TABLE IV-9B SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UH-1 SENSITIVITY OP SORTIE GENERATION RATE (§/ACRE) CROP DESTRUCTION SORTIES PER MO. HOURS PER YR. INVESTMENT COST O & M COST MIN. MAX. SYSTEM COST MIN. MAX. 60. 360. 0.05 6.13 18.94 6.15 18.98 64. 384. 0.04 5.99 18.65 6.01 18.69 68. 408. 0.04 5.87 18, 10 5.88 18.44 72. 432. 0.04 5.75 18,17 5.77 18.21 76. 456. 0.04 5.65 17.97 5.67 18.01 80. 480. 0.03 5.5b 3,7.79 5.58 17.83 84. 504. 0.03 5.4Q 17.63 5.50 17.66 88. 528. 0.03 5.41 17.48 5.42 17.51 92. 552. 0.03 5.34 17.35 5.42 17.51 96. 576. 0.03 5.28 17.22 5.29 17.25 600. 0.03 5.22 17.11 5.23 17.14 100. �TABLE IV-9B (Continuea) SORTIES PER MO^ HOURS PER YR. INVESTMENT COST O & M COST SYSTEM COST MIN. MAX. MIN. MAX. 104. 624. 0.03 5.17 17.00 5.18 17.03 108. 648. 0.03 5.12 16.91 5.13 16.93 112. 672. 0.02 5.07 16.81 5.08 16.84 116. 690. 0.02 5.03 16.73 5.04 16.75 120. 720. 0.02 4.99 16.65 5.00 16.67 124. 744. 0.02 4.96 16.58 4.96 16.60 120. 768. 0.02 4.92 16.51 4.93 16.53 132. 792. 0.02 4.89 16.44 4.90 16.46 136. 816. 0.02 4.86 16.30 4.67 16.40 140. 840. 0.02 4.83 16.33 4.84 16.34 144. 864. 0.02 4.80 16.27 4.81 16.29 148. 888. 0.0? 4.78 16.22 4.78 16.24 152. 912. 0.02 1.75 16.17 4.76 16.19 1S6. 936. 0.02 4.73 16.12 16.14 160. 960. 0.02 4.71 16.08 4.74 4.71 Ul 16.10 �CHART? IV-2: SENSITIVITY OF SORTIE GENERATION RATE (UH-1) (Systes Cost {SC> in Dollars/Acre) SC DEFOLIATION 30,. 25.. CROP 10.. 360 480 DESItUCIIOH 600 Flying Hours per Year �TABLE IV-10 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UC-123K SENSITIVITY OF SECURITY & CONTROL COST ($/MSN) DEFOLIATION SECURITY + CONTROL = TOTAL S & C COST SYSTEM COST ($/ACRE) (S/MSN) HIS. 0. 600. 1200. 10. 80 2400. 3000. 3600. 4200. 40. 80 50. 40 60. 00 6600. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 0 . 700. 10. 40 2100. 2800. 3500. 40. 20 40. 90 5600. 6300. 70. 00 7700. MAX. 32.50 34.84 37.17 39.50 41.84 44.17 46.50 48.84 51.17 53.50 55.84 58.17 34.30 36.64 38.97 •'•1.30 43.64 45.97 48.30 50.64 52.97 55.30 57.64 59.97 8.04 9.20 10.37 11.54 12.70 13.87 15.04 16.20 17.37 18.54 19.70 20.87 16.07 18.40 20.74 23.07 25.40 27.74 30.07 32.40 34.74 37.07 39.40 41.74 CROP DESTRUCTION 0. 600. 1200. 1800. 2400. 3000. 3600. 4200. 4800. 5400. 60. 00 6600. 0 100 200 300 400 500 500 700 800 900 1000 1100 0. 700. 1400. 21CO. 2800. 3500. 4200. 4900. 5600. 6300. 70. 00 7700. 67 �TABLE IV-11A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS... HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY 13H-1 SENSITIVITY OF SECURITY COSTS DEFOLIATIGS SECUKI7V COST ($/KSN) SYSTEM COST ($/ACRS) Mat. 0. 10. 20. 30. 40. 50. (0. 70. 80. 90. 100. 110. 120. 130. 140. 150. 160. 170. 180. 190. 200. 210. 220. 230. 240. 250. 260. 270. 280. 290. 300. MAX. 26.90 27.24 28.70 29.03 27.57 21. y& 28.24 28.57 28.90 29.24 2S.57 25.90 30.24 30.57 30.90 31.24 31.57 31.90 32.24 32.57 32.90 33.24 33.57 33.90 34.24 34.57 34.90 35.24 35.57 35.90 36.24 36.57 36.90 29.37 2S.70 30.03 30.37 30.70 31.03 31.37 31.70 32.03 32.37 32.70 33.03 33.37 33.70 34.03 34.37 34.70 35.03 35.37 35.70 36.03 36.37 36.70 37.03 37.37 37.70 38.03 38.37 38.70 �TABLE IV-11B SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UH-1 SENSITIVITY OF SECURITY COSTS CROP DESTRUCTION SECURITY COST SYSTEM COST (S/ACRE) (S/KSN) MIN. 0. 10. 20. 30. 4. 0 50. 6. 0 70. 8. 0 9. 0 100. 110. 120. 130. 140. 150. 160. 170. 180. 190. 200. 210. 220. 230. 240. 250. 260. 270. 280. 290. 3QO. MAX, 5.23 5.40 5.57 5.73 5.90 6.07 6.23 6.40 6.57 6.73 6.90 7.07 7.23 7.40 7.57 7.73 7.90 80 .7 8.23 8.40 8.57 8.73 8.90 9.07 9.23 9.40 9.57 9.73 9.90 10.07 10.23 10.47 1.0 08 11.13 11.47 11.80 12.13 12.47 12.80 13.13 13.47 13.80 14.13 14.47 1.0 48 15.13 15.47 15.80 16.13 16.47 16.80 17.13 17.47 17.80 18.118.47 18.80 19.13 19.47 1.0 98 20.13 20.46 �3. Sensitivity of Effectiveness Criterion (Table IV-12 and Table IV-13) These tables demonstrate the effect on system cost when commanders insist on conducting herbicide operations when conditions such as temperature, wind, and weather are less than favorable. 4. Remarks Prior to completing the analysis, the effect of variation of the agent cost in terms of dollars per acre c . ?n be investigated. (Reference Table IV-5) These show the dominance of the agent costs. Cost Variation Due to Agent Costs (Cost in Dollars per Acre) COST OF AGENT §1 UC-123 ($/ACRE) M1N. § 2 $ 3 $4 $ 5 $ 6 $7 $ 8 $9 §10 UH-1 ($/ACRE) MAX. MIK. MAX. $13 $15 $19 $22 $25 $29 $32 $35 $39 $42 $45 $25 $28 $31 $35 $38 $41 $45 $48 $51 $55 $ 6 $ 9 $16 $19 $23 $26 $29 $33 $36 $39 $43 $13 $16 $19 $23 $26 $29 $33 $36 70 �SABLE IV-12 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIBg DELIVERY BY UC-123 SENSITIVITY OP EFFECTIVENESS OF COVERAGE DEFOLIATION COVERAGE (ACRES/MSB) SYSTEM COST (I/ACRE) % EFFECTIVE KIN. 220. 230. 240. 250. 260. 270. 280. 290. 300. 310. 320. 330. 49.33 47.18 45.22 43.41 41.74 40.19 38.76 37.42 36.17 35.01 33.91 32.89 66.0 69.0 72.0 75.0 78.0 81.0 84.0 87.0 90.0 93.0 96.0 99.0 MAX. 64.30 61.50 58.94 56.58 54.40 52.39 50.52 48.78 47.15 45.63 44.20 42.86 CROP DESTRUCTION COVERAGE (ACRES/MSN) MIN. 220. 230. 240. 250. 260. 270. 280. 290. 300. 310. 320. 330. SYSTEM COST ($/ACRE) MIN. 6. 60 6. 90 72.0 75.0 78.0 8. 10 8. 40 8. 70 9. 00 93.0 9. 60 9. 90 71 MAX. 13.46 12.87 12.34 11.84 11.39 10.97 10.58 10.21 9.87 9.55 9.25 8.97 MAX. 40 4. 460. 480. 50. 0. 520. 540. 560. 580. 60 0. 620. 640. 650. EFFECTIVE 39.43 37.72 36.15 34.70 33.37 32.13 30.98 29.91 28.92 27.98 27.11 26.29 �CHART IV-3: SENSITIVITY OF EPFECTIVE2GSS OF COVERAGE (UC-123) S60 $50 ' ~ S401-- S 3 0 -- S 20 . . CROP DESTRUCTION S 10 .. 100 Percentage of Effectiveness 72 �TABLE IV-13 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - HERBICIDE DELIVERY BY UH-1 SENSITIVITY OF EFFECTIVENESS OF COVERAGE DEFOLIATION COVERAGE (ACRES/MSN) SYSTEM COST ($/ACRE) % EFFECTIVE MIN. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 36.68 35.09 33.62 32.28 31.04 29.89 28.82 27.83 26.90 26.03 25.22 24.45 66.0 69.0 72.0 75.0 78.0 81.0 84.0 87.0 90.0 93.0 96.0 99.0 MAX. 48.23 46.13 44.21 42.44 40.81 39.30 37.90 36.59 35.37 34.23 33.16 32.15 CROP DESTRUCTION COVERAGE (ACRES/MSN) MIN. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. SYSTEM COST ($/ACRE) MIN. 66.0 6. 90 72.0 75.0 78.0 81.0 8. 40 87.0 90.0 93.0 96.0 99.0 73 MAX. 7.14 6.83 6.54 6.28 6.04 5.81 5.61 5.41 5.23 5.06 4.91 4.76 MAX. 44. 4. 6 48. 50. 52. 54. 56. 58. 60. 62. 6. 4 66. EFFECTIVE 23.37 22.35 21.42 20.56 19.77 19.04 18.36 17.73 17.14 16.58 16.06 15.58 �CHART IV-4: SENSITIVITY OF EFFECTIVENESS OF COVERAGE (UH-1) (System Cost (SC) in Dollars/Stare) sc ,k $50 $40 • $30-- $20 , $10. CROP DESTRUCTION -I 70 80 90 100 percentage of Effectiveness 74 9- �V. A. TACTICAL LAKD CLEARING ASSUMPTIONS 1. The vehicle examined will be the D7E/D7F medium crawler tractor (made by the Caterpillar Tractor Company) equipped with the Rone K/G clearing blade and protection kit. 2. The expected life of the tractor under combat conditions is two years. | Major BennettJ The expected life of the blade and protection kit is one year. I 62d Engineer BattalionJ 3. A land clearing company has 25 of its 30 medium tractors operational at any one time. I Planning factor from DA Pam 526-6 197oJ 4. Security forces consist of one armored cavalry troop or a comparable-size mechanized infantry unit. [Major Bennett! The operation is controlled by the commander who is airborne in a light observation helicopter (LOH). 5. Crops are considered under the category of light vegetation. 6. The discount rate is ten per cent. B. PARAMETERS 1. Utilization The operating time for ^ Rome-equipped tractor will be eight hours per day. .. >rmally, these vehicles work 75 �in tine field for 45 days prior to returning to their base areas for a 15-day "stand down" and maintenance period. [&2d Engineer Battalion Letter, February 1971j This implies a 75 per cent work factor and 270 work days per year. 2. Cost Bounds a. Investment Cost The investment cost for a tractor is bounded by the consideration of inherited assets. When the Rome clearing blade was introduced in RVN, the tractors "in country" were equipped with bulldozer blades. These blades were simply converted by unit maintenance personnel. In other situations, the kits and tractors were sent to RVN to form land clearing units. Thus, the upper bound considers procurement of the initial tractor while the lower bound considers the initial tractor to be a sunk cost. b. Operating Cost The operating costs are bounded by the security, control, and readiness postures of the clearing unit. The desired security for a land clearing company is an armored cavalry troop while a mechanized infantry company (-} is a less desired but acceptable replacement. 1 DA Pam 525-6 1970J The security costs will be considered to range from $130 per day to $80 per day for a UE. (Appendix B) The control costs are directly proportional to the use of the LOU that is attached to the land clearing company during clearing operations. The attachment can be from several 76 �hours to all day. f62d Engineer Battalion 11 April 197 1] The unit readiness rating determines the equipment and personnel manning levels. High ratings dictate the assignment of two operators per tractor. However, during periods of budgetary austerity or when the manpower pool cannot support this requireoent. this is lowered to the assignment of one operator per tractor. FuSACDC TOE 5-58T 1969^j C. COST ANALYSIS 1. Isolation of Relevant Costs (Appendix Bj a. Investment Cost (1) Investment cost for D7 Tractor. This investment cost is bounded by the requireraent to procure the initial tractor. Additionally, the expected life of the D7 dictates replacement across the ten year planning horizon. Since replacement is necessary, the planner roust consider the present value cf the dollars spent in order for an equitable comparison to be made with the other alternatives. 01 2 The replacement schedule will be: 345 67 8 9 10 The present value coefficients will be: 8 8 PV1 = - _ = 3.5404 and PV2 = £o (1 + r) 1 ^ for i an even integer and r = .10. 77 --—j = 2.5404 ( I f r) 1 I Hiishleif er 1970J �D7 procurement cost: $32,916 [DA Supply Bulletin (SB) 700-200 197l] $ 2,400 [DA DCS, Logistics (LOG) $35,316 1971] (Appendix B) Itotal - Upper bound on the investment cost: 3.54 x $35,316=$125,019 Lower bound on the investment cost: 2.54 x $35,316=$ 89,703 (2) Investment cost for the Rome K/G blade and kit. The blade and kit have an expected life of one year in cosbat which means purchase from time zero to the end of year nine. 9 l Z 4 n i=0 i » 0,1,2, _. _ 6.759 where r = .10 and (1+r) ,8,9. Procurement cost: $ 7,623 Transportation to RVN: $ 900 Total = $ 8,523 [DA SB 700-200 fpA DCSLOG 197ij (Appendix B) Investment cost: 6.759 x $8,523 = $57,607. (3) Investment cost due to combat attrition. The Rome-equipped tractors of the 62d Engineer Battalion (Land Clearing) have experienced a 25 per cent attrition rate when engaged in tactical clearing. [Major Bennett] This would mean the replacement of the tractors and kits on a yearly basis. The present value "ill be: 9 PV4 = ) r = 5.759 where ~ (i+r)i i - 1,2,...,8,9. r « .10 and The investment cost for a UE is: 5.759 x .25 x ($35,316 + $8,523) = $63,117. 78 �(4) The total investment a-jrtorized over the planning horizon is §24,574 per year (U) and 521,043 per year ( ) L. b. Operating Cost (1) Hourly costs. Unless otherwise noted, the costs listed here come from the caterpillar Performance Handbook. Fuel: (Light Vegetation) 5.5 gal/hr x $.15/gal * $.83/hr (Medium Vegetation) 7.0 gal/hr x $.15/gal = $1.05Ar (Heavy Vegetation) 9.0 gal/lir x $.15/gal = $1.35/hr Lubricants and filters; $.33/hr. Tractor repairs: Using the Caterpillar repair factor, th« repair cost would be $4.60 per hour. However, a review of the data furnished by Major Bennett indicates that $7.00 per hour is a more realistic figure. Rome blade and kit repairs: $1.8Q/hr. 1 Major Bennett) Total hourly costs: Heavy vegetation Medium Vegetation Light Vegetation $10.48 $10.18 $9.96 (2) Daily corts. Operators' salaries: Security cost: Control cost: $55 (U) $130 $6 (U) $27 (L) (U) $80 (L) $4 (L) (Appendix B) 2. Daily Costs 1C = Yearly cost/365 days and OC = 8 hours/day x Hourly cost + Summation of Daily Costs. �Tab le V-lj Daily Costs (Dollars per Day) VEGETATION LOWER BOUND 1C OC UPPER BQUJJD SC 1C OC SC Light $58 $191 $249 $67 $271 $338 Medium $58 $193 $251 $67 $273 $340 Heavy $58 $195 $253 $67 $275 $342 3. Yearly Costs Investment cost: Operating coxtt 365 days/year x investment cost/day. 270 days/year* x Operating cost/day. * Tractors work 270 days per year (Section B ) . Table V-2: Yearly Costs (Dollird per Year) VEGETATION LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND 1C OC SC 1C OC SC Light 21,043 51.570 72.613 24,574 73,170 97.744 Median 21,043 52,110 73,153 24.574 73,710 98,284 Heavy 21.043 52,650 73.693 24,574 74,250 96.824 D. EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA AND COST-F-FFEfTIV'^SS MEASURES 1. EffectivenessCriteria a. KOE it 1 - "Area" This HOE considers the system's net effective- ness during a normal day's operation. The criteria takes into consideration the three classifications of vegetation and the two principal types of cuts. 80 �__, . . _ .. , Hours available Effectiveness Criterion = •- , •. —• Clearing rate Using the clearing rates from Table II-3, the effectiveness criteria for a UE can be obtained. Table V-3t Effectiveness Criteria for One Tractor (Acres per Day) VEGETATION AREA CLEARING STRIP CLEARING Light 20 13.33 Medium 10 6.15 Heavy 6.15 3,8 b. KOE # 2 - Constrained Cost Minimization Minimize the cost of clearing 6000 acres Subject to: Mission completion £ 30 days Assets required £ Ability of commander to supply In order to examine the performance of the land clearing operation under constrained cost rsiniraization, several additional assumptions are necessary: (1) Vegetation is either categorized as heavy or medium. (2) Area clearing is required. (3) Cost per day is based on 30 tractors in the unit although only 25 are operational. ( ) Land clearing cornpany has a high readiness 4 rating and security is provided by a cavalry troop (i.e., upper bound cost figures for heavy and medium area clearing will hold). Area clearing rates for a land clearing company 8t �with 25 of its 30 mediura tractors conducting sustained operations are: Heavy vegetation Medium vegetation 100 acres/day 250 acres/day j . Para 525-6 p 1970J 2. Cost-Effectiveness Measures a. KOE #1 Table V-4: Tactical Land Clearing ollars per Acre) VEGETATION AREA CLEARING STRIP CLEARING Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bcund Upper Bound Light $12 $17 $19 $25 Medium $25 $34 $41 $55 Heavy $41 $56 $66 $90 The raission categories must take into consideration the terrain sensitivity of this alternative. The Biinisuxn cost for both land clearing and crop destruction are those costs incurred during light area clearing while tl»e -axirouro costs for land clearing are those that occur tiurir.g heavy strip clearing (sasiRuiB costs for crop destruction come during light strip clearing). 82 �Table V-5: Cost-Effectiveness Measures forTactical Land Clearing (Dollars per Acre) MISSION MINIMUM MAXIMUM Land Clearing $12 $90 Crop Destruction* $12 $25 *fhe Rome-equipped tractor is lieited to areas where crops grow on trafficable terrain, This eliminates many paddy- grown crops from this type mission. b. MOB # 2 As pointed out previously, a medium land clearing company can clear 100 acres per day in heavy vegetation and 250 acres per day in medium vegetation. The time constraint on a 6,000 acre mission would require two companies working for 30 days in heavy vegetation and one company working for 24 days in medium vegetation. The cost per day for a company are: Heavy vegetation - $10,260 Medium vegetation - $10,200. The cost in_ doj-lar^ for this KOS is: UPPER BOUND: LOWER BOUND: E. $615,600 $244,800 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY 1. Utilization (Table V-6 A,B, & C) The tables show the variability in costs (dollars per acre) that occur in accordance with the operational 83 �hours per day of each vehicle. The tables indicate the importance of a high utilization factor, consistent with the operators' and support elements' ability to perform the required daily maintenance on the tractors. 2. Security (Table V-7A, B, & C) fluctuation in security cost demonstrates the effect on system cost when the commander varies his security posture from no protection to that equivalent of a reinforced armored cavalry troop. 84 �TABLE V-6As MAX COST - LAND CLEARING LYSIS - TACTICAL LAND CLEARING IIPMENT UTILIZATION - STRIP CLEARING Heavy- Clearing UTILIZATION {HOURS/DAY) R&DCOST 5.0 0.00 28.28 5.5 0.00 6.0 INVESTMENT COST C & M COST SYSTEM COST 102.14 130.42 25.71 94. a 6 120.57 0.00 23.57 88.79 112.35 6.5 0.00 21.75 83.65 105.40 7.0 0,00 20.20 79,35 99.45 7.5 0.00 18.85 75.43 9 4.20 8.0 0.00 17.67 72.09 89.77 8.5 0.00 16.63 69.15 85.78 9.0 0.00 15.71 66.53 82.24 9.5 0.00 14.88 64,18 79.07 10.0 00 .0 14.14 62.08 76.22 10.5 0.00 13.47 60. 17 73.63 11.C 0.00 12.85 58.43 71.29 11.5 0.00 12.30 56.85 69.14 12.0 0.00 11.78 55.40 67 . 18 GO ** �TABLE V-6BJ MAX. COST -CROP DESTRUCTION SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - TACTICAL LAND CLEARING SENSITIVITY OF EQUIPMENT UTILIZATION - STRIP CLEARING Light Clearing LIZATION nm 5.0 5 .5 6.0 R ft.» COST INVESTMENT cor.T 9 *• M COBT, fYSTEty coa-tf 36.95 0.00 8.08 7.35 8 26 . 7 26 .79 0.00 6.73 25 .06 31.79 6.22 7. 0 0.00 0.00 5 .77 23 .59 22 .33 29.80 28. 10 7.5 0.00 5.39 21 .24 26.63 8.0 0.00 5.05 20 .29 25.34 8.5 0.00 4.75 19 . 4 4 24.20 9. 0 0. 0 0 4.49 18 .70 23.18 9.5 0.00 4.25 18 .03 22.28 10 .0 10 .5 0.00 0. 0 0 4.04 3.85 17 .42 16 . 8 8 21.46 20.73 11 .0 0 0. 0 3.67 16 .38 20.06 11 .5 0.00 3 .51 15 .93 19.44 12 .0 0.00 3 .37 15 ,52 18.88 6.5 0.00 34. 14 �TABLE V-6BJ MIN. COST - CROP DESTRUCTION AND LAND CLEARING SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - TACTICAL LAND CLEARING ENSITIVITY OF EQUIPMENT UTILIZATION - AREA CLEARING Light Clearing INVESTMENT COST O & M COST SYSTEM COST 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.61 4.19 12.90 12.09 17.51 16.28 3.84 11.41 15.25 6.5 0.00 10. &* 7.0 0.00 3.55 3.29 10.35 14.39 13.64 7.5 0.00 3.07 9.93 13.00 8.0 0.00 2.88 9.55 12.44 8,5 0.00 9.0 0.00 2.71 2.56 9.23 8.94 11.94 11.50 9.5 0.00 8.67 11.10 10.0 0.00 2.43 2.31 8.44 10.75 10.5 0.00 2.20 10.42 11.0 0.00 2.10 8.23 8.03 11.5 0.00 2.01 7.86 9,86 12.0 0.00 1.92 7.70 9.62 UTILIZATION HOURS/DAY 5.0 5.5 6.0 3 R 6, n COST 10.13 �CHART V-l: SENSITIVITY OF TRACTOR UTILIZATION (System Cost (SC) in Dollars/Acre) S120-- S100- - SCO.. LAND C L E A R I N G S60 • • s-io.. S20. •4CROP /DEST. (L)- LC AND CD 1 5 6 1- 9 8 10 Utilization - (Hours/Bay) 88 11 T2 �TABLE V-7A: MAX. COST - LAND CLEARING SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - TACTICAL LARD CLEARING SENSITIVITY OF SECURITY COST STRIP CLEARING Heavy Clearing SECURITY COSTS (S/DAY) SYSTEM COST ($/ACRE) 0. 55.64 10. 58.2? 20. 6.9 08 30. 63.52 40 6.4 61 50. 68.77 60. 71.39 70. 74.02 80. 76.64 90. 79.27 100. 81.89 110. 84.52 120. 87.14 130. 8.7 97 140. 92.39 150. 95.02 160. 97.64 170. 100.27 180. 102.89 190. 200. 105.52 108.14 89 �TABLE V-7B: MAX. COST - CROP DESTRUCTION SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - TACTICAL LAND CLEARING SENSITIVITY OF SECURITY COST STRIP CLEARING Light Clearing SECURITY COSTS CS/DAY) SYSTEM COST ($/ACRE) 0. 15.59 10. 16.34 20. 17.89 30. 17.84 40. 18.59 50. 19.34 60. 20.09 70. 20.84 80. 21.59 90. 22.34 100. 23.09 110. 23.84 120. 24.59 130. 25.34 140. 26.09 150. 2.4 68 160. 27.89 170. 28.34 180. 29.09 190. 2.4 98 200. 30.59 90 �TABLE V-7C: MIN. COST - LANE) CLEARING AMD CROP DESTRUCTION SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - TACTICAL LAND CLEARING SENSITIVITY OP SECURITY COST AREA CLEARING Light Clearing SYSTEM COST ($/ACREj SECURITY COSTS ($/DAY) 0 . 84 .4 1. 0 89 .4 20. 9.44 30. 9.94 4. 0 10.44 50. 1.4 09 6. 0 11.44 70. 11.94 8. 0 12.44 90. 1.4 29 100. 13.44 110. 13.94 120. 14.44 130. 14.94 140. 15.44 - 150. 15.94 160. 16.44 170. 16.94 180. 17.44 190. 17.94 200. 1.4 84 91 �VI. AHALYSIS OF "SLASH AND BURN" CLEARING A. ASSUMPTIONS 1. A crew consists of 45 men with one U.S. enlisted man as supervisor. All crew members are considered workerr since no allowance is made for any internal chain of command axaong the personnel. [ Mr. Underwood! 2. Payraant of the indigenous cutters is consistent with those rates paid in Military Region IV in the fall of 1970. 3. This type of clearing takes place in secure areas or where security is provided by units already engaged in major land clearing operations. 4. The U. S. units provide transportation for the workers to and from the clearing site. are drawn from current inventories. Tools for the cutters [Mr. Underwood I 5. Crops fall into the category of light vegetation. While the first four statements can be categorized a" "assumptions," they all have basis in fact. Mr. Elton Undersood of the Array's Engineer Strategic Studies Group verified these on a trip to RVN in May and June of 1971. The data he returned with contained detailed information on a U.S.-sponsored operation in An Kuyen Province on the Cau Mau Peninsula during the period September to December 1970. However, their inclusion as assumptions is- meant to preclude their being taken as policy for MACV as a Ahole. 92 �B. PARAMETERS 1. Tha utilization parameter will be in units of "hours per day." For this portion of the study, a utilization factor of eight hours per day and 270 work days per year will be used. This corresponds to the utilization rates of Chapter V. However, both of these inputs ar3 part of the working conditions that are agreed upon by the U.S. Civil Affairs office prior to hiring the civilian crews. 2. Ccst Bounds The bounds on each method of cutting and each type of vegetation are set by the maintenance and transportation costs. These costs can range from zero to some preset value. The cost for maintenance of the workers* tools and equipment will be set at five collars per crew per day. The transportation cost will be ten dollars per crew per day (based on the utilisation of two trucks for approximately one hour per day). C. COST ANALYSIS 1. Isolation of Relevant Costs The only costs incurred by this method of clearing are operating costs. The only investment cost would ba the procurement of tools, but by assumption # 4, these are sunk costs. a. Salaries Each man is paid 200 piasters per day and furnished one meal at a cost of 37 piasters per day. �JKr. Underwood! This amounts to approximately $.86 per man or $38.80 per crew per day based on the 197Q exchange rate of 275 piasters to one U. S. dollar. b. Supervision The opportunity cost for using one U. S. enlisted man as a supervisor is $10,000 per year or $27 per day. I Major Howe] c. Transportation In some cases, the crews could walk from their assembly points to the clearing sites. If this were not feasible, two trucks would be needed for approximately an hour each day to transport the crews. Cost: (Irt or zero ( ) L. $10/crew/day (Section Bj d. Maintenance Cost: $5/crew/day (U) or zero ( ) L. (Section B) 2. Daily Costs Daily cost = Crew salaries +• Supervision -f Transportation + Maintenance Upper Bound: $81 per crew per day Lower Bound: $66 per crew per day 3. Yearly Costs Yearly cost = 270 days/year x Cost per day Upper Bound: $21,870 per year Lower Bound: $17,820 per year 94 �D. EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Effectiveuess Criteria a. HOE # 1 - "Area" This MOE presents the system's net effectiveness during a normal day's operation. Since this alternative is sensitive to the three classifications of vegetation and two types of clearing (strip and area), six criteria will be determined. , Hours available x Crew size Effectiveness Criterion (EC, —€iearjLng Rate The clearing rates are obtained from Table II-4. For light area clearing: „, EC = 8 hr/dav x 45 men . „„ ., -£—« = 2.88 acres/day 125 roan-hours/acre Table VI-1: Crew EffectivenessCriteria (Acres per Day) VEGETATION AREA CLEARING Light 2.68 3.6 Medium 1.0 1.3 .5 .5 Heavy b. STRIP CLEARING MOE # 2 - Constrained Cost Minimization Minimize the cost of clearing 6,000 acres Subject to: Mission completion 1 30 days Personnel and equipment required 1 Ability of Local Area to Supply 95 �Several assumptions are necessary to complete the examination of this MQE: (1) The vegetation is either medium or heavy. (2) Method of clearing will be "area" type. 2. Cost-Effectiveness Measures a. MOB f 1 Cost-Effectiveness Measure = Cos t/crew/day •- For area clearing in light vegetation ( ) U: $81/crev/day 2.88 acres/day = ?28 Per acre' Similar calculations yield the following tablei Table VI-2: "Slash and Burn" Clearing liars per Acre) AREA CLEARING STRIP CLEARING Lower Bound Upper Bound Lover Bound Upper Bound Light $23 $28 $18 $23 Medium $64 $79 $51 $63 $147 $180 $147 $180 VEGETATION Heavy If these costs are to be depicted by mission categories, the vegetation classifications and the method of clearing must be encompassed by the maximum and minimum limits. Although this gives a large interval for the costs to be within, the review must ren>en±>er that vegetation removal by ground personnel and equipment is extremely sensitive to the type of terrain which the work is being conducted in. 96 �Table VT-3: Cost-Effectiveness Measures for "Slashand Burn" Clearing (Dollars per Acre) MISSION MINIMUM MAXIMUM Land Clearing $18 $180 Crop Destruction $18 $ 28 b. MOE # 2 In order to analyze this program, one nmst first look at the constraints. In medium vegetation, a crew of 45 can only clear one acre per day. The size of the operation dictates that at least 200 acres must be cleared per day in order to meet the 30 day time constraint. This would mean 200 crews or 9,000 men would have to be hired. It is doubtful that the host government could supply or the U. S. units could secure that many workers. Hence, this method of clearing is considered infeasible for a large scale land clearing operation. E. PARAMETER SENSITIVITY Since indigenous cutters are paid by the day, it would be important to examine the cost fluctuation over a range of possible utilization factors. As might be expected by noting the units of the clearing rr-tes (man-hours per acre), changing the utilization factor from the established eight hours p*1'" uay results in a large cost variation. This shows the importance of negotiating a work agreement that insures enough "time on the job." It also amplifies the costs 97 �incurred if the cutters' pick-up point were far from the clearing site, causing an excessive amount of transportation time to jecrease the crew utilization, or if the supervisor were unable to motivate his crew. TABLE VI-4: VEGETATION REMOmi> SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS....SLASH AND BUBM CLEARING SENSITIVITY OF CREW UTILIZATION.. .ARES. BURNING (Heavy Clearing) UTILIZATION (HOURS/DAY) MAXIMUM SYSTEM COST i^/^C&E) 5.0 $288.61 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 262.37 240.51 222.01 206.15 192.41 180.38 8.5 9.0 169.77 151.90 10.0 10.5 11.0 144.31 131.43 131.19 SENSITIVITY OP CREW UTILIZATION STRIP CLEARING (Light Clearing) UTILIZATION MAXIMUM S1STEM COST 29.41 26.74 24.61 22.63 21.01 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 19.61 8.0 18.38 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 17.30 16.34 15.48 14.71 14.01 13.37 98 �TABLE VI-5; CROP DESTRUCTION SENSITIVITY AKALYSIS... .SLASH AKD BURN CLEARING SENSITIVITY OF CREW UTILIZATION.. .AREA CLEARING (Light Clearing) UTILIZATION (HOURS/DAY) MAXIMUM SYSTEM COST (S/ACRE) 5.0 5.5 60 . 6.5 4.0 51 41.00 37.58 3.9 46 32.21 30.06 28.18 26.53 25.05 23.73 22.55 21.47 20.50 70 . 7.5 80 . 8.5 90 . 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 SENSITIVITY OP CREW UTILIZATION.. STRIP CLEARING (Light Clearing) UTILIZATION MAXIMUM SYSTEM COST 29.41 26.74 24.51 22.63 21.01 19.61 18.38 17.30 16.34 15.48 14.71 14.01 13.37 5.0 5.5 60 . 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 90 . 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 99 �VII. ANALYSIS OF FIREBOMBING v A. ASSUMPTIONS 1. Firebombing is conducted with the C-raodel medium helicopter (CH-47C - "Chinook"). 2. Each sortie has an expected d^jration of one-half hour. I LTC Ruirowj 3. A flight over a given target consists of one CH-47C. j LTC Rudrow J 4. Salvaged slings and salvaged 55-gallon drums are used in the drops. M-4 fue:l thickener is mixed with gasoline to form a six per cent solution of thickened fuel. j DA TC 3-336 1965 j Twenty drums will be carried on one mission (or more common terminology, one "drop"). [LTC RudrowJ 5. The number of missions over a target area is dependent on the requirement to have a .90 probability of success from one or more drops. 6. When available, security forces consist of two AH-1G arnied helicopters. However, unlike herbicide missions with the UH-1, firebombing missions will not be flown unless one AH-lG is present. One OH-6A or OH-58A light observation helicopter will provide the necessary control. [LTC RudrowJ 100 �B. PARAMETERS 1. Flying Hours Initially, the flying hours for the CH-47 that will be used as basis for the analysis will be the saiae as the other aerial systems. A mission duration of one-half hour implies that the helicopter will fly 100 sorties per month in order to reach the specified 600 flying hours per year. However, like the UH-1 helicopter, this is below the CH-47's programmed limit of flying (720 hours per year) in an active combat environment. |DA FM 101-20 1970 J The effects of this difference will be examined in a sensitivity analysis of the sortie generation rate in Section E. 2. CostBounds The bounds on the mission costs are obtained by the variation cf the security and control posture that often results during normal employment. Control of a drop is accomplished by a representative of the ground commander in an LOH. However, if the Chinook pilots are familiar with the mission and the AO, the presence of the LOH is unnecessary. Under normal operating conditions, security is provided by two AH-lG helicopters. The lower cost bound is reached when only one armed helicopter is used. The use of one "Cobra," even under die most austere conditions, is due to the vulnerability and lack of maneuverability of the CH-47. 101 �C. COST ANALYSIS 1. Isolation of Relevant Costs The only costs incurred by this method of vegetation removal are those that are categorized as operating costs. The procurement of the CH-47 is treated as a sunk cost since the helicopter is diverted from normal lift missions to conduct firebombing operations. a. 0 & M cost is rated at 15 per cent of the procurement cost of the helicopter, j Mr. Donaldson! The w» *i procurement cost for the CH-47C is $1,536,424. 700-200 197l] O & M cost: b. Crew salaries: [DA SB $230,000 per ycir. Crew consists of two officers and one enlisted roan. [DA FM 101-20 1970] Total cost: $38,000 per year. (Major Howe] c. Security forces: $200 per mission (U}-2 AH-lG's. $100 per mission (L)-1 AH-lG. (Appendix A) d. Control: $ 25 per mission (U) 0 (Appendix C) e. Thickened fuel: (L) $163 per mission. (Appendix C) 2. Mission Cost SC = (O & M cost + Salaries) Number of Missions/Year + Security cosfc + Control cost + Agent cost Cost per Mission LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND $ 486 $ 611 102 �3. Yearly Costs The yearly cost is extremely sensitive to the input parameters. This, coupled with the fact that the CH-47 would never be solely employed for fireborabing missions, diminishes its importance. Cost per Year I^JWER BOUND UPPER BOUND $583,200 D. $733.200 EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1. Effectiveness Criteria a. MOE t 1 - "Area" The effectiveness of any one mission is contingent upon many variables. The condition of the vegetation, weather, scattering effect of the incendiary fuel, and the probability of detonation of the drura cluster require that the evaluation of effectiveness be accomplished with a probabalistic model. An appropriate model would be a two or three dimensional fragmenting projectile model. However, this would require the determination of a lethality function and directional variances of the bursting radii of the cluster just to obtain a conditional single drop probability of burn (pB). Since this data was not available, a model was used. The probability statement is: Prob Fire burns 50 acres in one or raore drops (missions) when n drops are made 103 = Prob(pB,n) = . 0 9. �This uses the data from assumption # 5 and has the implicit assumption that 50 acres will be burned per B drops (missions). Prob(pB,n) = 1 - (1 - pB)n where pB is the probability that 50 acres are burned on any particular drop. Inherent in this model are the assumptions that: (1) pB is the same for all drops. (2) There is statistical independence between drops (or no information is gained from one mission to the other). An evaluation of n for Prob(pR,n) £ . 0 yields: 9 PB n .2 10 .3 7 .918 .4 5 .922 .5 4 .3 98 .6 3 .936 .7 2 .1 9 .8 2 .6 9 .9 1 . 9 Prob(pB,n) . fapp) 9 For this portion of the analysis, PQ = .4, which will necessitate five drops or missions to insure a .9 probability of burning 50 acres on at least one of the five drops. b. KOE # 2 - Constrained Cost Minimization Minimiza the cost of burning 6,000 acres 104 �Subject to: Mission completion £ 30 days Assets required £ Local command supply capability Two CH-47 helicopters would be required to fly ten sorties per day for 30 days in order to be 90 per cent sure that this method would burn off 6,000 acres. Like aerial delivery of herbicides in the UH-1 constrained cass, this represents a significant drain on the area's aviation asset*:, Few commanders could afforci such a program due to the important role the "Chinook" plays in combat support and combat service support operations in an insurgency conflict. For this reason, it is felt that the second constraint is violated, and thus, the alternative is infeasible. The area would have to be reduced significantly for firebombing to be a viable alternative. 2. Cost-Effectiveness Measures N x Mission Cost System Cost = ; where N = the 50 acres/mission nuraber of missions (drops). No differentiation is made between crop destruction and foliage removal for this alternative. The reviewer should not overlook the problems encountered in RVK when attempts tfere made to burn large caches of dry rice. Therefore, live rice and other paddy-type crops would be virtually impervious to destruction by firebombing. 105 �Tafcle tfll-1: Cost-Sffecti mess Measures for FireboiBbing (DolJ ;:s per Acre) MINIMUM $49 E. MAXIMUM $61 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY 1. Sensitivity ofSortie GenerationRate (Table VII-2J Table VII-2 indicates that the number of missions flown per month has relatively little effect on the cost of burning an acre. iMs is due to the fact that only $223 per mission are subject to fluctuations caused by a variable sortie rate. (Mission cost vectorj ($611, $456).) The remainder of the costs are caused by security, control, and fuel costs and these are based OE a flat rate per sission. 2. Sensitivity of Probability of Burn on any Single Drop (pB) (Table VII-3) T*»is testing shows the effect of varying the single drop probability of burn over a reasonable range of values, In actual operations, pB would law- a tendency to be at the lower end of this spectrum rather tfian the higher. 3. Sensitivity of Security tests (Table VII-4) These parameter values raage from zero to the cost that would be ir-urred if three escort heliccpters accompanied the mission. 106 �TABLE VII-2 SENSITIVITY AKM.YSIS - FIREBOMB ING WITH CH-47 SENSITIVITY OP SORTIE GENERATION R .TE ($/ACRE) SORTIES PER MO. HOURS PER YEAR SYSTEM COST MIN. SYSTEM COST MAX. 78. 470. 54.81 67.31 80; 480. 54.22 66.72 82. 490. 53.65 66.15 83. 500. 53.10 65.60 85. 510. 52.57 65.07 87. 520. 52.07 64.57 88. 530. 51.58 64.08 90. 540. 51.11 63.61 92. 550. 50.66 63.16 93. 560. 50.23 62.73 95. 570. 49.81 62.31 97. 580. 49.40 61.90 98. 590. 49.01 61.51 100. 600. 48.63 61.13 102. 610. 48.27 60.77 103. 620. 47.91 60.41 105. 630. 47.57 60.07 107. 640. 47.24 59 74 108. 650. 46.92 59.42 110. 660. 46.60 59.10 112. 670. 46.30 58.80 113. 660. 46.01 58.51 115. 690. 45.72 58.22 117. 700. 45.44 57.94 118. 710. 45.17 57.67 120. 720. 44.91 57.41 107 �TABLE VII-3 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - FIREBOKBING WITH CH-47 SENSITIVITY OF PROBABILITY OP BURN ON ONE DROP (§/Acre) # OF DROPS 10. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 4. 3. 3. ' 3. 2. 2. 2. 2. 1. P. SYSTEM COST MIK. 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 97.27 77.81 68.09 58.36 48.63 38.91 38.91 29.18 29.18 29.18 19.45 19.45 19.45 19.45 9.73 SYSTEM COST KAX. 122.27 97.81 65.59 73.36 61.13 48.91 48.91 36.68 36.68 36.68 24.45 24.45 24.45 24.45 12.23 TABLE VII-4 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - FIREBOMBISG WITH CH-47 SENSITIVITY OF THE SECURITY COSTS ($/Acre) SECURITY COSTS ($/MSN) SYSTEM COST MIK. SYSTEM COST KAX. 0. 25. 50. 75. 100. 38.63 41.13 43.63 46.13 48.63 41.13 43.63 46.13 48.63 51.13 125. 51.13 53.63 150. 175. 200. 225. 250. 275. 300. 53.63 56.13 58.63 61.13 63.63 66.13 68.63 56.13 58.63 61.13 63.63 66.13 68.63 71.13 108 �VIII. INSIGHTS AND CONCLUSICTIS The need for defoliation and crop destruction is a direct result of the tropical growth, clinate, and peculiarities of insurgency warfare. It would be difficult to imagine the necessity of these measures in a conventional war in a barren country like the Republic of Korea or in many areas of Western Europe. Conventional war raises the additional security problem of antiair protection and the costs incurred to insure local air superiority. These and other problems of the "linear war" have not been considered here. Hence, ths conclusions drawn froa this study are applicable only to those parts of the world affected by certain climates, vegetation, and the press4-7 needs of con&ating an eneasy insurgent. A. RESULTS OF TEE ANALYSIS 1. MOE # 1 The first measure of effectiveness attempted to focus on each system's performance capability. A complete display of the results allows a better comparison of the alternatives. Table VIII-1: Cost-Effectiveness Vectors for KOE * 1 (Dollars per Acre) IGLIAGE REMOVAL HERBICIDES UC-123 UH-1H TACTICAL LAND CLEARING "SLASH AKD BURN" FIREBOMB ING MAX. $47 $35 $90 $180 $61 MIN. $3S $27 $12 $ 18 $49 109 �CROP DESTRUCTION HERBICIDES UC-123 UH-1H TACTICAL LAND CLEARING "SLASH AND BURiT, FIREBOMBING §29 MIN. $17 $25* §28 $61* $10 $ 5 $12* $18 $49* *Not appropriate where rice is the staple of the diet. Table V-5) (See Tactical land clearing and "slash and burn" clearing show considerable variability in their maximum and minimum cost limits. This is due to the terrain sensitive nature of both systems. This, coupled with the different clearing results (one improves vertical surveillance while the other improves both vertical and horizontal surveillance), makes comparison with aerial-supported methods difficult. If comparisons are made within aerial categories and within ground categories for each mission type, dominance can be used to eliminate some vectors, since the maximum and minimum limits for these two groups of systems are caused by the same factors. FOLIAGE REMOVAL Aerial Systems UH-1 Ground Systems "Rome Plow" MAX. $35 $90 MIN. $27 $12 When tactical land clearing and firebocibing are eliminated as alternatives for crop destruction, herbicide delivery by UH-1 dominates all other vectors. 110 �2. HOE # 2 This measure of effectiveness attempted to amplify which system(s) could meet a rigorous set of hypothetical combat conditions. The program format was: Minimize the cost of defoliating/clearing 6.000 acres Subject to: (1) Mission accomplishment in 30 days ( ) A reasonable amount of assets to 2 complete the task. The major additional assumptions stated: ( ) Spraying (using Agent ORANGE) must be 1 accomplished within five days. ( ) The vegetation is either medius or heavy and 2 area clearing is required. (3) Ground systems are considered to be in a high state of readiness. Table VIII-2: Cost Minimization vectors for Foliage Removal ( 0 0 acres) with Tice and Resource Constraints 60 (Costs in Dollars) Herbicides UC-123K Tactical Land Clearing IU) $272,100 §615,600 (L) $227,900 $244,800 **Infeasible alternatives are not shown. The preceding table shows that only two alternatives can meet a stringent set of combat conditions. Ill �More important than the actual dollar costs is the relative cost difference between the tvro systems. By looking at this change in the cost minimization vectors, it is possible to examine the incremental costs incurred to vgain another dimension in surveillance capability. A defoliation mission usually improves only vertical surveillance. Although roost of the leaves are off the vegetation, the trees and undergrowth remain to restrict visual and electronic surveillance frcru the ground- a tactical land clearing operation removes all vegetation and thus produces a horizontal capability ai well as the vertical. It can also be assumed that an area which has been subjected to land clearing restricts enemy movement and channelizes his movement far more th?Jt the same defoliated terrain. B. INSIGHTS In order to check the information of Table ¥111-2 is not biased by the scale of the operation, the mission size can be restricted. By reducing the area by 50 per cent, another set of cost minimization vectors can be obtained. The assumptions of KOE # 2 are maintained with the exception of having the UC-123 flights ran^e from two to five aircraft. Table VIII-3: Cost Minimization Vectors forVegetation -.emoval of 3,000 Acres (Costs in Dollars) HERBICIDES UH-1 TACTICAL LAKD UC-123 CLEARIKG (U) ?100,700 $136,050 $307,800 (L) $ 80,700 $112,930 $112,400 112 �(Firebombing would be feasible only if the area were less than 1,000 acres.) The relaxation of mission requirements indicates that the UE-1 defoliation system is minimum cost system and for this program dominates the other alternatives. However, the figures do not show the faster mission accomplishment rate of the UC-123 or the complete clearance capability of the D7 tractor equipped with the Rome K/G clearing blads. In order to gain isore insight into the problem of distinguishing between the systems, a "conanen mission" vector can be obtained for each alte .'native. This vector attempts to show the cost per acre for foliage removal under conditions that are most likely to occur in a counterinsurgency situation. It differs from the results of Table VIII-1, which were oriented toward optimistic and pessimistic estimates, in that it can be considered to be the "best estimate." The conditions making up the "coirjrson mission" are: 1. Defoliation/foliage removal operation (far more cciCTon than crop destruction). 2. The vegetation is classified as medium or heavy since thicker terrain is more valuable to the enemy for use as sanctuaries, staging areas, hospitals, and base carcps. 3. Clearing is limited to area type since strip clearance is restricted to vegetation removal (anti-arabush measures) along lines of cocnunication. 113 �4. Defoliation systems use Agent ORANGE since it is faster acting than WHITS but not as persistent. 5. Land clearing units have two operators per tractor and the optimum security and control available. Reference: Table IV-6A, Table V-4, Table VI-2, and Table VII-1. Table VIII-4: Common Mission Vectors (Dollars/Acre) HSRBICIDES UH-1 UC-123 TACTICAL LAND CLEARING "SLASH AKD BURN" PIREBOKBING () U $34 $45 $56 $180 $61 () L $27 $36 $34 $ 79 $49 Again, herbicide delivery by UH-1 helicopter dominates "*-il other alternatives. These results serve to confirm the findings shown in Tables VIII-1 through VIII-3. C. CONCLUSIONS The cost-effectiveness measures obtained in this study through the evaluation of the two measures of effectiveness indicate that a force mix of herbicide aircraft and land clearing tractors woyldrocs'-likely provide a costeffective solution to the foliage removal/crop destruction missions faced during counterinsurgency operations in an RVN-type environment, especially when one takes into account that horizontal and vertical vision is desirable. However, this is not meant to exclude the employment of fireboxr£>ing or "slash and burn" clearing %\?hen the other systems are not available to do the job. 114 �The ratio of the force-mix must be determined through further examination of the problem. The decision to use the UH-1, UC-123, or both as herbicide delivery systems would depend on the intensity of the conflict, the commitment of U.S. assets, and the desired flexibility of the over-all force structure. Certainly the helicxpter provides more flexibility since it can be used for «any other combat support tasks, fhe UC-123 accomplishes its mission at a much faster rate but is entirc-ly cojiiBitted to aerbicide operations since its configuration does not lend itself to easy modification. Likewise, the aaount of tractors and their desired organization (sections, companies, battalions) would be a function of the increased costs that the decision maker might be willing to accept to gain tJie benefit of a two dimensional '.surveillance capability. If the results of this study are to be useful in the allocation of funds to foliage removal/crop destruction missions, the decision maker must develop a detailed situation estimate and employment model. This would include a threat analysis of enemy forces and capabilities, an estimate of friendly forces and objectives, and a contingency analysis of possible commitment areas. If this were accomplished and if an RVN- type environment were encountered in the scenario, then the results of this study nay be applicable in determining a proper mix of systens to effectively accomplish these two combat support missions. 115 �APPENDIX A DETAILED HERBICIDE COSTS A. UC-123K 1. yearly operating cost for a squadron in Pacific Air Force (PACAF); [captain Wallace^ Direct element Modification/spares Maintenance - Operating Support Equipment Personnel § .5 million $1.7 million $ .1 million $2.9 million $5.2 million Major support commands Base operating Depot Maintenance $ .7 million $1.2 million $1.3 million other $3.2 million TOTAL = $8.4 million This figure is for 12 aircraft. Thus the operating cost for one aircraft is $700,000 per year. 2. Modification costs a. [Hiss LuckyJ Installation of the Hayes AA-45 system. Total of 51 aircraft modified. $1.4 million $ .3 million $ .2 million $1.9 million b. Hardware Installation Initial Spares Engine modification. $36.1 $11,2 $ 8.1 $55.4 million million million million 116 Total of I .3 aircraft. Hardware Initial spares Installation �c. Armor plating. Total of 31 aircraft. §400,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600.000 B. Hardware Initial spares Installation UH-1H Security costs for UH-1 herbicide missions. flying hour costs for AH-lG: $64 per hour 1970J or $32 per mission. Direct [DA FM 101-20 If approximately $70 were allowed for munitions and salaries of pilots, the cost of one AH-lG on a security escort mission would be $100. 117 �APPENDIX B DETAILED COSTS FOR TACTICAL LAND CLEARING A. Cost of lubricants and filters. The Caterpillar Performance Handbook (Sec. 21, p. 5) gives a quick estimate of $.26 per based on oil at $1 per U.S. gallon, grease at $.20 per pound, EP oil at $1.10 per U.S. gallon, and filters at U.S. Consumer's List Prices. Under heavy operating conditions, these costs increase by 25 per cent. B. Typical repair costs over a two-year period for medium tractor and Rome kit Number 5 2 1 5.5 18 2.5 1.2 2 C. in RVN: Major Bennett] Eguipr;.3nt Unit Cost Total Cost Engir/5 Transmissions Winch Cabs Cutting Blades Blades Radiators Track assembly $6,129 $4,498 $4,750 $1,600 $ 278 $1,887 $1,200 $1,249 $30,645 $ 8,996 $ 4,750 $ 8,800 $ 5,004 $ 4,718 $ 1,440 $ 2,498 $66,850 Security cdsts are based on the approximate field strengths of an armored cavalry troop and a aechanized infantry rifle company ( ) -. Usually, the trocp will field approximately 130 to 140roei.while the infantry company would have between 100 and 120 men. The cavalry troop would have 20 or more tracked vehicles and tbe infantry unit would have 10 to 15. 118 �D. Costs for a light observation helicopter are based on direct flying hour costs of $30 per hour. JDA FM 101-20 1970] E. Transportation Cost to RVN: Shipping, Surface General Cargo ($/Ton) Line Haul within U.S. Port Handling, West Coast Ocean Shipping " Port Handling, RVN Other " D7 Tractor: Rome kit and blade: Equipment weights: $40 $21 $72 $14 $3 $150 per Ton jpCSLOG 1971] 16 tons x $150/ton = $2400 6 tons x $150/ton = $ 900 JMr. Soules I. 119 �APPENDIX C DETAILED COSTS FOR FISIS3MBING A, Control costs are based on direct hour flying costs of the LOH which are $30 per hour. JJ3A FM 101-20 197o[| This coupled with the pilot's salary and Use ground commander's representative yields a control cost cf $25 per mission. B. Thickened Fuel: Pounds of M4 Thickener Headed for XJmrious Blends of Thickened Fuel Gallons of Gasoline 4% «3& 8% 40 5 ?% 10 50 6% 1§ 13% [DA tC 3-366 1965J Ten pounds of M4 thickener are used with each druo (55 gallon) of gasoline. M4 thickener costs $1.30 per 20 pound can. 1971 ] Using a cost of $.15 per gallon j~DA SB 700-200 of gasoline, a drum of thickened fuel «^osts $8.15. $8.IS/drum x 20 drums/mission = 5163 per mission 120 �APPENDIX D: DATA SOURCES The personnel listed in this appendix contributed in the assembly of data for the study. The contributions and the office/address (as of June 1971) are listed as documentation. 1. Aerial delivery of herbicides. Mr. Carlton W. Carter: USAF Deputy Chief of Staff (DCS), Systems and Logistics (S & L), Washington, D. C. Costs of herbicides to include transportation and storage. a. UC-123K (1) Miss Joyce B. Lucky: USAF ODCS, S & L, Washington, D. C. UC-123 codification costs for engine modifications, spray systera, and armor plating. (2) captain James A. Wallace, USAF: Office of the Coiaptroller of the Air Force, Washington, D. C. Procurement and operating costs for the UC-123K. (3) Major Robert Pyatt, USAF: ODCS, Plans and Operations {Special Operations Division), Washington, D. C. General information about herbicide operations. (4) Major Peter D. Hidalgo, USA: Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Force Development (OACSFCR), Washington, D. C. Verification of sortie duration and sortie generation rates. (5) LTC Kenneth M. Cooper, USAF: ODCS. S & L, Washington, D. C. Operating cost for A-1E. 121 �(6) LTC Arthur L. Monahan, USAF: Washington. D. C. (7) ODCS, S & L, Munition costs for FAC's. Major John D. Sins, USAF: Resources, Washington, D. C. ODCS, Programs and Hourly operating costs for the OV-10 and A-1E. b. UH-1: (1) LTC Manuel L. Sanches and LTC Robert G. Rudrow, USA: OACSFOR, Washington, D. C. Aerosol system and capa- city, attrition rates, security configurations, mission duration, and system coverage. (2) Mr. F. X. Donaldson: OACSFOR, Washington, D. C. Maintenance factors and expected life of UH-1. ( ) Mr. Drake: Operations Manager, Agricultural 3 Aviation Engineering Company, 1333 Patrick Lane, Las Vegas, Nevada, S9109. AGAVENCO System: Cost, size, maintenance factor, and capacity. (4) Major Robert Howe, USA: Engineer Strategic Studies Group, Washington, D. C. Personnel salaries costs and transportation costs for the AGAVENCO. 2. Tactical Land Clearing. a. Major Richard Bennett, USA: Engineer Strategic Studies Group (ESSG), Washington, D. C. 07 tractor and Rome kit repair costs and rates. b. Mr. Jim Guthrie: Supervisor of Defense services Section, caterpillar Tractor Company, Peoria, Illinois. General information about the Caterpillar tractor. 122 �c. Mr. J. T. Soules: Vice President of International Department, Rome **low Company, Cedartown, Georgia. General information about the Rome clearing blade and kit. 3. "Slash and burn" Clearing. Mr. Elton Underwood: ESSG, Washington. D. C. Payaent rates for indigenous clearing crews and verification of clearing rates.__ 4. Firebopbing. LTC Robert G. Rudrow, USA: OACSFOR, Washington, D. C. Security, control, equipment, and duration of the missions. 123 �BIBLIOGRAPHY Some sources listed in this bibliography are classified. However, the information used in this study came from unclassified sections of these documents. 1. American Ersbassy, Report on theHerbicide Policy Review (U) , ySOlil'IDttft'PBf, Saigon, August 1968. 2. Augusta, Joseph H, and Snyder, Christopher L., Defense Planning In A High Inflation Economy, paper presented at 26th Military operations Research Symposium, Monterey, California 17-18 Kovember 1970. 3. Boffey, Philip M., "Herbicides in Vietnam: AAAS Study Finds Widespread Devastation," Science, v. 171, p. 43-47, 8 January 1971. 4. Caterpillar Tractor Coir.pany, Peoria, Illinois, The Caterpillar Performance Handbook, e«I. I, section 21, Deceirber 1970. 5. Cook, Robert E., Haseltine, William, and Galston, A. W., "What Have We Done to Vietnam?" The new Republic, p. 18-21, 10 January 1971. 6. "Defoliants-A Closed Case?" 15 January 1971. 7. Department of the Air Force, Air Force Manual 172-3, USAF Planning Factors (U), iTi'll lliliLll Hi . H Washington, 'i D. C., 31 March 1971. 8. Department of the Army, 18th Engineer Brigade, APO San Francisco 96307, Demonstration and Testing in Vietnam, July-August 1966. • Commonweal, p. 363-364, 9. , DA PAH 525-6, Lessons Learned - Land Clearing, p. 23-79, Washington, D. C,, June 1970. 10. , DCS Logistics, Transportation Analysis Division, Budget Cost Factors for Cargo Movements, p. 1-3, Washington, D. C., 15 July 1971. 124 �11. , Fact Sheet.- Personnel Investnsant Costs, Washington, D. C., 12 October 1971. 12. , FM 101-20, united States Army Aviation Planning Manual (U), CONFIDENTIAL, p. 1-10, p. 4-2 4-3, Washington, D. C., August 1970. 13. , SB 700-200, Array Adopced/Other Selected Items and List ofReportable Items, p. 2-355 - 2-358. Washington, D. C., December 1970. 14. , TC 3-16. Employment of Riot Control Agents, Flame, Smoke, Ahtiplant Agents, and Personnel De tec tors in Co untergue r r ilia opera t ions, p. 62 - 81, Washington, D. C., April 1969. 15. , TC 3-366, Flame FueIs, p. 3 - 5, p. 8 - 13. Washington, D. C., July 1965. 16. Directorate, Tactical Evaluation, Project CHECO Southeast Asia F°p^rt July 1961 - June 1967 (u), SECRET, Headquarters pacific Air Force, 11 October 1967. 17. Downs, E. D. and Scrivner, J. H., De fo1iat ion Opera tions in Southeas t Asia (U), SECRET, Maxwell AFB, Alabama, 1970. 18. Fisher, Gene H., Cost Considerations in Systems Analysis. p. 63-118, American Elsevier Publishing Co.. 1971. 19. Gonzales, Arturo F., "Defoliation - A Controversial U.S. Mission in Vietnam," Data, v. 13, p. 12-15, October 1968. 20. Goodell, Hon. Charles E. (New York), U.S., Congress, Senate, Congressional Record, 91st Cong., 2d sess., S-1574-S-1580. 21. Headquarters, 62d Engineer Battalion, APO San Francisco 96491, Letter, Subject: "Ea^ic Land Clearing Briefing," February 1971. 22. , Letter, Subject: "Narrative to Accompany Slide Briefing, 11 April 1971. 23. Headquarters, 169th Engineer Battalion, APO San Francisco, Letter, Subject; "Land Clearing Test Program Completed, 16 August 1971. �24. Hersh, Seymour M. , Chemical and Bio log-teal Warfare America's Hidden Arsenal, p. 144-167, Bobbs -Merrill Company, 1968. 25. Heyroont, I. and others, A Guide for Reviewers of Studies Containing Cost Effectiveness Analysis, Research Analysis Corporation, July 1965. 26. Hirshleifer, J. , Investment, Interest, and Capital, p. 48-49, Prentice-Hall, 1970. 27. House, W. B. and others. As sesstnen t o f Ecolog ical Effects of Extensive or Repeated Use of Herbicides, p. 1-72 and p. 108-150, Midwest Research Institute, 30 November 1967. 28. Kastenroeier, Hon. Robert W. (Wisconsin)* U.S., Congress, House, "Ecological Destruction in Vietnam," Congressional Record - Extension of Remarks, 92d Cong., 1st sess., E-22SC - E-2293. 29. Lewallen, John, Ecology of Devastation; p. 58-94, Penguin Books, 1971. Indochina, 30. McCarthy, Richa7.-d p. , The ultimate Folly, p. 75-98, Alfred A. Knopf/ 1971. 31. McConnell, Arthur F. (LTC, USAF) , "Mission: Ranch Hand," Air University Review, p. 89-94, v. 21, n. 2, JanuaryFebruary 19^0. 32. Nelson, Hon. Gay lord (Wisconsin), U.S., Congress, Senate, "Environmental Warfare," congressional Record , 91st Cong., 2d sess., S-14217-S-14230. 33. Office of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Systems Analysis') , Southeast Asia Analysis Report - March/April 1971 (U) , SECRET, p. 35-36 and p. 41-43, Washington, D. C., 14 May 1971. 34. Orians, Gordon H. and Pfeiffer, E. W. , "Ecological Effects of the Wai in Vietnam," Science, v. 168, p. 544-554, 1 May 1970. 35. _ , and _ , "Mission to Vietnam - Part I," Scientific Research, v. 4, p. 22-30, 9 June 1969. 36. _ , and _ , "Mission to Vietnam - Part II," Scientific Research, v. 4, p. 26-30, 23 June 1969. 126 �37. Rome plow company, cedartown, Georgia, Land Clearing Equipment for Vietnam, p. 1-5, 22 April 1966. 38. , Presentationto U. S. Army - Equipment for Land Clearing in Vietnam, p. 108, 9 February 1966. 3S. , Salesgraro; Guide for Estimating Production with Rome K/G Clearing Blade, 1 September 1971. 40. , Military Applications of the Rome K/G Clearing Blade, November 1971. 41. Tschirley, Fred H., "Defoliation in Vietnam," Science, v. 163, p. 779-786, 21 February 1969. 42. U.S. Anxsy Combat Developments Command (USACDC), Table of Organization and Equipment 5-87T - Engineer Land Clearing Company, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, 7 February 1969. 43. Westing, Arthur H., "Ecocide in Indochina," Natural History, v. 80. p. 56-60, March 1971. 44. Young, Hon. Stephen K. (Ohio), U. S., Congress, Senate, Congressional Record. 91st Cong., 2d sess., S-21486 S-21488. 127 �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 015 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0160 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Howard, John D. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972-03-01 Title A name given to the resource Herbicides in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations: A Cost-Effectiveness Study Subject The topic of the resource Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide application military impact https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/293c71af89da87614c118285fe2c4494.pdf 7f7f144e445462eed16aad842ebd06e1 PDF Text Text Item ID Number °0363 Author Smallwood, A. M. Corporate Author Hayes International Corporation RepOrt/ArtlClO Title lnternal Defoliant Dispenser A/A45Y-1 Journal/Book Title 1967 Month/Day Color Octot er > n Number of Images 62 DOSOrlptOH Notes ^lvin L- Youn9 nac) tnis item filecl under the category "Equipment - How Developed, How Used"; contracts AF 08(635)-3609 and AF 08(635-4894 Monday, January 29, 2001 Page 363 of 382 �Smallwood, A.M., 1967 /UNLIMITED Internal Defoliant Dispenser A/A 45Y-1 AD 833 990 Technical Report distributed by Defense Technical Information Center DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Cameron Station • Alexandria, Virginia 22314 ^ERQMEDICAE LIBRAI JAN 10 1980 UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED COCUMENTS �THIS REPORT HAS BEEN DELIMITED AND CLEARED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE UNDER DOD DIRECTIVE 5200,20 AND NO RESTRICTIONS ARE IMPOSED UPON ITS USE AND DISCLOSURE, DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED, ��AFATL-TR-67-127 Internal Defoliant Dispenser A/A45Y-1 A. M. Small wood R. I Dear . A. R. O r t H J HAYES INTERNATIONAL CWPORATION T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A F IT L - T R - 6 7 - I 2 7 OCTOBER 1967 This document is subject to special export controls and each transtnittal to foreign governments or foreign nationals may bo made only with prior approval of the Air Force Armament Laboratory (ATCB), Eglin AFB, Florida 3 AIR FORCE ARMAMENT LABORATORY AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND E G L I N A I R FORCE B A S E . F L O R I D A �INTLKNAL DEl'OLIANT DISPENSER A/AU5Y-1 A. M. Smallwood R. L. Dear A. R. Ortell Tills document is subject to special export controls ami each transmittal to foreign governments or I'ureign nationals may be made only with prior approval of the Air i'orce 'Armament Laboratory (ATCD), Eglin AID, Ilorula �FOREWORD Under Contracts AF 08(G35)-3609 and A F 08(G35)-4804, Hayes International Corporation, Birmingham, Alabama has developed the A A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser as a quick in-out system for the C-130 and C-123 aircraft. This report, covering tlie period of October 19G5 thru October 196.7, formally records the engineering data generated under the above contracts including results, conclusions, and recommendations. This report is covered under project number 2525 and task o der number 02 and deals primarily with AF Contract AF 08(635)-<t894. The cognizant USA F'project engineers for this program were Lt Arnold \V. Blomqaist, Lt Jon II. Arvik, Lt W. J. Crea, Jr. and Lt K. A. Reynard of the Air Force Armament Laboratory, RTD, Biological-Chemical Division (ATCB), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Messrs. A.M. Smallwood (project engineer), R. L. Dear, and A.R. Ortell.wcrc the principal investigators and authors of this report. Mr. J. F. Cundiff provided considerable technical assistance in programming the digital computer for the program and writing the fh'id analysis. Messrs. F. J, Weatherbee, J. D. Stewart, and B. L. Lewis provided considerable technical assistance in the design of the A/A45Y-1 dispenser. Mr. J. L. Harrington, Chief of the Airborne Weapons Group, was responsible for the overall effort. Information in this report is embargoed under the Department of State International Traffic In Arms Regulations. This report may be released to foreign governments by departments or agencies of the U. S. Government subject to approval of the Air Force Armament Laboratory (ATCB) Kglin AFB, Florida 32542, or higher authority within the Department of the Air Force. Private individuals or firms require a Department of State export license. Publication of this report does not constitute Air Force approval of the report's findings or conclusions. It is published only for the exchange and stimulation of ideas. Nicholas H. Cox, Colonel, USAF Chief, Bio-Chemical Division ii �ABSTRACT Hayes International Corporation has developed the internal defoliant dispenser, A/A45Y-1,suitable for quick in-out installation in the C-1^0 and C-123 aircraft. The internal defoliant dispenser provides for loading, transporting, and dispensing of 058 gallons of defoliant chemical, and in case of an emergency, dumping the full load of chemical overboard in leas than one minute. The dispenser was designed to deliver agent at a concentration of three gallons per ncrc over an effective swath width of 120 feet from an altitude of 150 feet in either the C-123 or C-130 aircraft. The results of tests conducted at h'glin Air Force Base, Florida indicated that the optimum parameters for the C-K10 aircraft were an altitude of one hundred feet and a maximum swath of .seventy feet to obtain a concentration of three gallons per acre. The optimum parameters for the C-12;J aircraft were an altitude of 150 feet and a maximum swath of 10 icet for the same concentration. The fuselage-mounted spray boom does not deliver the defoliant agent far enough outboard to be affected by the action of the wingtip vortices. Previous testing with defoliant agent demonstrated that wing mounted booms subject the spray to these vortices and produce wider swath width. It is recommended that an optimized wing boom be developed in order to increase the swath width. This document is subject to special export controls and each transmittal to foreign governments or foreign nationals may be made only with prior approval of the Air Force Armament Laboratory (ATCH), l.'glin A F B , Florida :',2~>1'2. iii (The reverse side of this page is b l a n k . ) �BLANK PAGE �TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I H IE IV V INTRODUCTION DESCRIPTION OF A/A-I5Y-1. INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER TANK AND CRADLE ASSEMBLY DUMP VALVE CONTROL CONSOLE MAGNETO SWITCH . CHOKE SWITCH START SWITCH THROTTLE SWITCH SPRAY VALVE SWITCH DUMP VALVE SWITCH FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE ENGINE TACHOMETER FLUID PRESSURE INDICATOR CIRCUIT BREAKERS SPRAY BOOM AIRCRAFT INSTALLATION DEVELOPMENT TEST OF THE A A-15Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER SYSTEM PERFORMANCE LIQflD LEVEL GAGE CALIBRATION CONVERSION FACTORS FOR VARIOUS AGENTS REFILL BY MEANS OF THE I N T E R N A L DEFOLIANT DISPENSER JET PUMP EMERGENCY DUMP TEST FLOW HATE TEST USING AN INDUCED PRESSURE . . . . SYSTEM PRESSURE LOSS ANALYSIS DISPENSER PERFORMANCE RANGE SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND CONSEQUENT RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES I SPRAY BOOM DRAG ANALYSIS n AIRCRAFT WEIGHT AND iw\LANCE IH STRESS ANALYSIS (C-123 AIRCRAFT) IV STRESS ANALYSIS (C-130 AIRCRAFT) V MILITARY SPECIFICATION REFERENCES PAGE 1 2 4 G G f, 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 10 13 17 17 17 IK 24 2-1 2-1 <17 r>:$ .r>r> f»7 05 99 127 Ml �LIST OF ILLUSTHATIONS FIGURE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1-1 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 D d f g II h^ K = = = = = - Major Components of Defoliant Dispenser Defoliant Dispenser (right side) Centrifugal Pump Dump Valve . Control Console Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing Installation in C-123 (left side) Installation in C-123 (right side) Typical Agent Deposition (C-123 Aircraft) Typical Agent Deposition (C-130 Aircraft) . . . .Refill Test Apparatus Refill Rate with Various Agents Using A 10-Foot Length of Refill Hose Refill Rate with Various Agents Using A 20-Foot Length of Refill Hose Refill Rate with Various Agents Using A 30-Foot Length of Refill Hose Refill Rate with Various Agents Using a 50-Foot Length of Refill Hose Emergency Dump Rate lor Various Agents with A/A45Y-1 Dump Valve Flow Rate Test Apparatus System Performance Test Results A/A45Y-1 Fluid Flow Schematic A/A45Y-1 Fuselage-Mounted Spray Boom System Pressure Loss A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: Water. A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: Orange or Purple A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: Blue . A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: White . Speed Penalty Determined From C-123 Speed/Power Data . 20 21 22 23 . . 25 26 27 29 35 4^ 49 . . .. . . 50 51 52 50 ^ LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS internal diameter of pipe, feet internal diameter of pipe, inches friction factor in formula hj j ;i fLv"/D2g acceleration of gravity, 32.2 feet per second per second total head, feet of fluid loss of static pressure head due to fluid flow, feet of fluid resistance coefficient or velocity head loss in the formula, h L = Kv 2 /2g vi PAGE 4 5 7 y 9 10 n ..12 14 15 19 �LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS (Concluded) L L/D P Q q R S = = = = = = length of pipe, feet equivalent length of a resistance to flow, pipe diameters pressure, pounds per square inch gauge rate of flow, gallons per minute rate of flow, cubic feet per second at flowing condition Reynolds number specific gravity of liquids relative to water, both at standard temperature (00°K) v A ft We = = = mean velocity of flow, feet per second differential between two points weight density of fluid, pounds per cubic feet absolute viscosity, pound mass |>cr foot second or poundal seconds |x>r square loot Me = absolute viscosity, slugs per loot second or pound force seconds per square foot vii (The reverse side of this page is blank.) �SECTION I INTRODUCTION The purpose of this technical rc|x>rt is to present engineering dnta generated under Contracts AF »8(G35)-3G09 and AF 08(G35)-4894. These contracts resulted in the development of the internal defoliant dispenser, A/A45V-1, designed to disseminate various chemical agents-utilizing C-123 and C-130 aircraft. The capability for quick installation and removal of the dispensing system with minimum modification to the aircraft was a prime requirement under these contracts. Compliance with this requirement resulted in the use of a fuselagemounted spray boom. Due to the narrow spray swath width generated by the fuselage-mounted boom, an Air Force-developed wing spray boom is used to achieve a wider swath width in current tactical applications. The report contains a description of the dispenser. This is followed by a section on development tests of the internal defoliant dispenser. System performance is then provided encompassing liquid level gage calibration, conversion factors for various agents, refill by jet-pump, emergency dump test, flow rate test using an induced pressure, fluid analysis of system with thirtyfoot fuselage-mounted spray boom and dispenser performance. Within the appendices arc fuselage spray-boom drug analysis, weight and balance analysis for C-123 and C-130 aircraft, stress analysis, and dispenser specifications. 1 (The reverse side of this page is blank.) �SECTION II DESCRIPTION OF A/A45Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER The A A-15Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser is a complete airborne defoliant dispensing system. The dispenser is packaged to permit rapid installation into, and removal from, C-130 and C-123 aircraft, with only minor modifications required to the affected aircraft. 809 figures 1 and 2. . The Internal .Defoliant Dispenser, Part No. A/A45Y-1, provides for loading, transporting and dispensing of 958 gallons of defoliant chemical, and in case of an emergency, dumping the full load overboard in less than one minute. The tank and cradle assembly is mounted on detachable casters which are removed before anchoring in the host aircraft. A control console is electrically connected to the aircraft electrical system, controls and indicators in the flight compartment, and the electrically operated units within the system. Pressure is applied to defoliant chemical by an engine and pump assembly mounted on the cradle assembly. The defoliant is transported to a 30-foot fuselage-mounted spray boom. The fuselage boom incorporates eighteen (18) whirljet spray nozzles through which the defoliant chemical is discharged into the airstrcam. LEADING PARTICULARS Length (app) Width (app) Height (app) (without casters) Weight Empty Full Capacity Normal operating pressure Normal dispensing interval Emergency dump time Electrical system Dump valve operation Refill time (app) Dump valve Spray valve Suction valve 16 feet, 4 inches 4 feet, 10 inches G feet, 1905 Ibs 12, 055 Ibs with agent having a specific gravity of 1.27 958 gallons 55 +_ 5 psi 3 to 4 minutes Less than 1 minute 28 volts dc (supplied by host aircraft) Electrical or manual 15. 5 minutes with an agent having a specific gravity of 1.27 through a 50-foot length of refill line Electrical, 10-inch diameter Electrical, 3-inch diameter Manual, 3-?nch diameter The dispensing operation and emergency dump valve operation can be controlled from either the control console near the tank and cradle assembly or from the pilot's position in the flight compartment. The pump is capable of maintaining 55 \_ 5 psi pressure during the normal 3-1/2 minute (approx) period of operational sprnying. Refilling the lank assembly is accomplished with power and equipment contained within the dispensing system. �,TANK VENT MANHOLE COVER DUMP VALVE TANK ENGINE EXHAUST LIQUID LEVEL VIBRATION ISOLATOR SEGMENT CENTRIFUGAL PUMP MAIN SPRAT VALVE CONTROL CONSOLE TEMPERATURE INDICATOR JET PUMP REFILL CRADLE Figure 1. Major Components of Defoliant Dispenser Tank and Cradle Assembly The tank and cradle assembly is the major unit of the entire system comprising (1) a 058 gallon tank with baffles, manhole, tube connections and stabilizing and ticdown brackets: (2) an engine and pump assembly consisting of a four cylinder horizontally opposed engine and pump directly coupled to the engine crankshaft; and (.'!) a cradle equipped with four detachable casters which carries the tank and engine and pump assembly. A temperature gage and a fluid quantity gage ai-e installed in the tank. The engine is slightly modified from its original configuration to achieve adaptability to the requirements of the dispenser system. The detachable casters arc provided for limited mobility and arc removed after the unit has been positioned in the aircraft. �'Figure 2. Defoliant Dispenser (Right Side) �The defoliant in the tank is fed through a suction line to the pump (two assemblies used on C-130 aircraft). The pump driven by an air-cooled engine forces the defoliant through a discharge line to a spray valve. A recirdilation line is provided so that the defoliant will'reeirculate back through the tank when the spray valve is closed. \Vhen the spray valve is open, the defoliant is forced into the spray boom and atomized by spray nozzles. When the lank is empty, a float-pi>erated switch located in the tank automatically stops the engines. On C-130 aircraft, when either tank is empty, the engine of the empty unit will automatically shut down. The spray valve will not automatically close until the second unit's tank empties and the float switch is actuated. Tlu centrifugal pump (figure 3) consists essentially of an impeller and pump body and is driven by the engine through a direct drive. The speed of the engine controls the quantity of defoliant being dis|>ensed. The recalculation line incorporates a jet-pump (ejector) tank refilling system which utilizes the fluid left in the tank from prior operation to initially operate the jet pump. A temperature gage and liquid-level indicator located on the side of the tank indicate defoliant temperature and quantity respectively in the tank. Dump Valve The dump valve is an electrically or manually operated 10-inch diameter gate valve (figure -1). It is designed for horizontal (vertical flow) installation and liquid flow in only one direction. The bottom of the defoliant tank incorporates a vortex interrupter and adapter to which the dump valve is secured. The dump valve assembly is aligned with an opening in the belly of the aircraft. Tlus ojxming is covered by a spring-loaded door. A high speed motor coupled to an actuator provides 2-second operation of the dump valve in either direction. Valve-open condition is electrically indicated on the control console and on the pilot's instrument panel. Control .Console ft The control console is the nerve center of the defoliant system (figure 5). All functions arc controlled from this position; all monitoring equipment is located in this position; and the electrical supply is channeled and protected at this position. Prefabricated electrical cables tie the control console to all related parts of the system including the controls on the pilot's instrument panel and the aircraft electrical supply system. Tandem or single installations are controlled and monitored from tlie control console without any changes or alterations being performed. In the event of failure of the aircraft electrical system, (certain critical functions have an option of manual operation. Magneto Switch - The MAGNETO switch (AFT UNIT and F\VD UNIT) is a singlcpblci double-throw toggle switch used to control the engine magneto. In the down position the engine magneto is grounded. In the up position the ground is removed from the magneto permitting the engine to run (if lank is not empty). �Figure 3. Centrifugal Pump Choke Switch - The CHOKE switch (AFT UNIT and F\VD ITCIT) is a springloaded pushliutton switch used to control the solenoid that actuates the engine choke. When depressed, the CHOKE switch applies power to the engine choke solenoid. Sta_ Switch - The START switch (AFT ITs'IT and FU'I) I^IT) is a spring-loaded pusi iiitton switch used to control the engine starter. When depressed, the START switch applies power to the engine starter. The START switch is guarded to prevent accidental engagement of the engine starter. Throttle SwUch - The THROTTLE snitch (AFT UNIT and FU'I) UNIT) is a threeposition toggle switch spring-loaded to the neutral position. The switch lias INCREASE and DECREASE positions and is used to electrically control the engine throttle through a geared servo-motor, The engine throttle may be set at any intermediate position between minimum and maximum engine vpm by positioning the switch to INCREASE or DECREASE and releasing to the neutral position when desired engine RPM is reached. A governor on the engine m a i n t a i n s engine speed at a given setting. �Figure 4, Dump Valve Spray Valve Switch - The SPRAY VALVE switch is a single-pole double-throw toggle switch used to electrically open and close the spray valve. In the "OPEN position power is applied to open the spray valve. In the CLOSED position power is applied to close the spray valve. The SPRAY VALVE switch is guarded in the PILOT position. A cockpit SPRAY VALVE switch is also provided for control of the spraying operation by the pilot. Dump Valve Switch - The DUMP VALVE switch, located at the extreme left side of the control panel (figure 5), provides electrical control of the dump valve. The switch is provided with a guard which maintains the switch in the CLOSED position. Placing the switch in the OPEN position actuates the valve motor and opens the dump valve. The cockpit DUMP VALVE switch provides electrical control for opening of the dump valve by the pilot. Operation is in conjunction with the console DUMP VALVE switch. Placing either switch in the OPEN position actuates the dump valve motor and opens the dump valve. Float Switch Override - The FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE (AFT UNIT and FWD UNIT) is a single-pole double-throw toggle switch (with a holding cc.l) used to override the float switch (in tank) when the float switch has grounded the magneto. The FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE is spring-loaded in the down position and when �FLUID REFILL f t O A l SHITCM OvrKKIOt fwD UNtl A F T UH1T STARTIR AND CHOKf T H R O I T L C S IMOICATOR1 IPRA1 VALVf © OICBfAlt © © Figure 5. Control Console placed in the up position, enables the engine io be run when the tank is empty (in order to fill the tank using the pump). The holding coil holds the FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE in the up position until ihc float switch is actuated. Engine Tachometer - The engine tachometer is dual indicating (two needles) and indicates engine speed in hundreds of HPM. Fluid Pressure Indicator - The FLUID pressure indicator indicates fluid pi'ossurc in increments of 2 PSI. When properly calibrated this gage can be used as a flow-rate indicator. Circuit Breakers - Four circuit breakers (STARTER AND CHOKE, THROTTLES, INDICATORS, and SPRAY VALVE) control power to the control panel and provide protection from electrical overload and short circuits. Spray Boom The spray boom (figure (>) can accommodate 18 spray nozzles for dispensing the defoliant. The spray boom is constructed of 4-1/2-inch diameter steel tubing. The discharge line is off-set from the ccntcrlinc of the spray boom to allow the aircraft's ramp to operate with the dispenser installed. The spray boom is attached to the fuselage with six struts. �INSTALLATION SlUUTi SPRAT NOZZLI SPRAY BOOM INSTALLATION iTKUTS Figure C. Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing Aircraft Installation Installation of the dispenser in C-123 aircraft consists of towing the tank and cradle assembly (unfilled) into the aircraft and securing it to the aircraft floor utilizing twenty 10, 000-pound hook and chain assemblies and the cargo floor tie-down fittings (figures 7 and S). All piping and hose assemblies, and the dump valve chutes, are installed and the console assembly mounted to the aircraft floor. The spray boom and connecting struts are attached to outside fittings on the aircraft and the electrical cables are connected. In the case oJ the C-130 aircraft, two dispensers are installed in the same manner and ; interconnected. . 10 �Figure 7. Installation in 0123 (I,clt Si<!o) 11 �^'4- Figure 8. Installation in C-12.3 (Right Side) 12 �SECTION III DEVELOPMENT ThST OF THE A/A45Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER Development tests and evaluations of A/A45Y-1, In the C-130 and C-123 aircraft Force Base, Florida,, durlm; the period of for the C-130 and 26 June 1964 to 22 July objectives were to determine: the internal defoliant dispenser, were conducted by APGC, Ef-.lin Air 2 October 1963 to 20 December 1963 1964 for the C-123. The test compatibility of the dispenser with the aircraft capability of instillation servicing (refilling) capability removal'of the dispenser from the particular aircraft in accordance with Hayes* operation and maintenance manuals are.?, coverage capability. It was fouvi'l during these/evaluations that the dispensers were compatible with both aircraft. The aircraft commander reported no unitsu.il effects on the flight characteristics of either aircraft in transporting the loaded dispenser. Dispenser iiv-t .illation and removal tests scheduled for the C-130 aircraft were not accomplished due to desip.n chanr.es that affected the [-.round h a n d l i n g of the dispenser. Three i n s t a l l a t i o n and removal tents wen- conducted durin-.-, the C-123 test program. The three t»-sts (install and remove) required 12, 5, and It manhours, respectively. Thr> refillini-. procedure as recomnendcd by Hayes' operations and maintenance nanuals was satisfactory but somewhat inefficient (40 minutes per dispenser for the C-lJO aircraft). A r;e 1 f - 1 i 11 infeature was incorporated by Hayes prior to the C-123 test, program which reduced the time required to f i l l each tank iron 40 minutes to 20 ninultv; when fillinc, is done from 35-tviilon drum::. The area coverage capability test of the dispenser (s) in the C-130 and C-123 aircraft was conducted to determine ground concentration of defoliant: agent (gallons per acre), swath width (feet.), droplet si/.e (microns), and flow race (gallons per minute). The desired ground concentration of three gallons per acre for a 120-foot swath width was not obtained. Figure-; ') and 10 illustrate typical agent deposition from the tvo aircraft. In both test--;, the desired droplet size of 150 to 30G milrons mass median diameter was obtained. The maximum flow rate obtained during' the C-130 and C-123 tests were 390 and 275 gallons per minute, respectively. 13 �C-123 AIRCRAFT SWATH WIDTH (FEET) Figure 9. Typical Agent Deposition (C-123 Aircraft) �C-130 AIRCRAFT 6 CPA (GAL) 5GPA H o 4 CPA 03 O Q ' , 3GPA I 2 CPA — I GPA 210 180 150 120 90 60 30 30 SWATH WIDTH (FEET) Figure 10. Typical Agent Deposition (C-130 Aircraft) 60 90 �SECTION IV SYSTEM PERFORMANCE Liqiii d -Level Gago Ca lib rat ion Before any system performance tests could be conducted, it was necessary to calibrate the liquid-level gage which is mounted on the siiie of the defoliant dispenser. To calibrate this gage, the dispenser was first weighed in the empty condition and the weight recorded. The t.ank was then filled with water to the 1/4 mark on the gage and weighed. Water was then added until the 1/2 mark on the gage was reached, and the tank again weighed. Filling then continued to the 3/4 mark and the weight: recorded. The dispenser Was then filled to the "Full" level and the weight recorded. At this point, the water was pumped out through the spray valve until it reached the level at which the float switch cuts the system off. The dispenser was then weighed again and the weight recorded. This procedure was repeated twice to obtain an average weight for each level. From these weights, the volume (in gallons) was calculated for each level on the gage, The results were: Gage. Level Volume (Gal) Full 958 3/4 807 1/2 495 1/4 184 Float Switch Cut-Off 54 Conversion Factors for Various All system performance testing was conducted using water as the agent; however, values were also needed for the agents which are used in the system. For this reason, additional small-scale tests were conducted to determine factors whic. could be used to convert the values obtained for water to values for each agent. To determine chc conversion factors applicable to refilling the tank, a small pump rated au 2.3 gallons per minute was used to pump one gallon of water and one gallon of each agent from one container into another through 3/4-inch tubing. The time required to accomplish this for each liquid was recorded. The conversion factors were then calculated by dividing the average values of pur.iping time for each agent by the pumping time for water. 17 �Results wore as follows: Specific Gravity Viscosity (75°F) (Cent is tokos) Conversion Factor Purple 1.27 38.2 1.161 Orange 1.27 38.2 1.161 Blue 1.335 8.8 1.124 White (Tordon 101) 1.15 243.0 1.312 Agent In determining conversion factors applicable to the gravity dump time through the A/A45Y-1 dispenser's emergency dump valve, a Zahn #3 cup was used. Forty-four millilitcrs of each agent and water were allowed to flow through cup and the time recorded for each. Here, again, conversion factors were obtained by dividing the values for each agent by the value for water. Results were as follows: Agont Orange Conversion Factor . 0.90 Purple 0.90 Blue 0.85 White (Tordon 101) 1.45 Refill by Moans of tlio Internal poi'oll.-mt Dispenser Jet Pump The apparatus used in performing this test is illustrated in figure 11. It was set up such that the inlet end of the refill hose was at the same elevation as the jet pitnp so that induced head loss would not be present. Using a ten-foot section of refill hose (MIL-H-8974-32), the time was recorded for filling che dispenser to the 1/4 level on the liquid level gape. The water was then .pumped out until the float switch cut off the system. Time was then recorded for filling the system to the 1/2 level. This procedure was repeated for 3/4 and "Full". Three tests were run at each level in order to obtain an average time. Those tests were repeated using 20, 30, and 50-foot lengths of refill hose. The values of refill time obtained for water were converted to the agent values by the methods discussed in Lho previous section. Refill time as a function of quantity of liquid is presented in figures 12 through 15 for each agent. 18 �JET PUMP 59 GAL DRUM WATER SUPPLY LINE Figure 11. He-fill Test Apparatus �1000 FULL LEVEL (958 GAL) 3 4 LEVEL (807 GAL) 1/2 LEVEL (495 GAL) to o ORANGE OR PURPLE WHITE (TORDON 101) 1/4 LEVEL (1S4 GAL) 100 FLOAT SWITCH CUT-OFF LEVEL (54 GAL) 10 11 12 13 14 15 REFILL TIME (MINUTES) Figure 12. Refill Kate with Various Agents Using A 10-Foot Length of Refill Hose 16 1? 18 �1000 FULL LEVEL (958 GAL) 3 ' 4 LEVEL (807 GAL) 1 2 LEVEL (495 GAL) ORANGE OR PURPLE WHITE (TORDON 101) 1/4 LEVEL (184 GAL) 100 FLOAT SWITCH CUT-OFF LEVEL (54 GAL) 10 11 12 13 14 REFILL TIME (MINUTES) Figure 13. Refill Rate with Various Agents Using A 20-Foot Length of Refill Hose 15 16 17 18 �1000 FLOAT SWITCH CUT-OFF LEVEL (54 GAL) 11 12 13 14 15 Figure M. Kefill Hate with Various Agents Using A 30-Foot Length of Hel'ill Hosts 16 17 18 �1000 FULL LEVEL (958 GAL) 3 4 L E V E L (807 GAL) o 1/2 LEVEL (495 GAL) o ORANGE OR PURPLE 300 ^ WHITE (TORDON 101) 1/4 LEVEL (184 GAL) 200 100 FLOAT SWITCH CUT-OFF LEVEL (54 GAL) 1 2 3 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 REFILL TIME (MINUTES) Figure 15. He-fill Rate with Various Agents Using a 50-Foot Length of He-fill Hose 16 17 18 �Emergency Dump Test In determining the dump rate through the A/A45Y-1 emergency dump valve, the tank was filled with water three times to each of the liquid levels indicated on the liquid level gage. In each case, the valve was actuated electrically and the flow of water from the tank timed until the water level reached the float switch cut-off point (54 gallons). The values of time were converted for each agent and plotted as a function of gallons of water or agent to be dumped (figure 16). FlowRate Test Using an Induced Pressure The objective in conducting this test was to determine the flow rate of the dispenser for any given pressure or head. The apparatus used in the performance of this test is illustrated in figure 17. A flowmetcr (Scries 5000, Pottermeter) with a three-inch nominal inside diameter was mounted to the downstream side of the spray valve. A three-inch manual gate valve was mounted immediately downstream of the flowmeter. In addition, an indicator (Potter Aeronautical Corporation Model 519) was connected to the flowmetcr to indicate flow rate in gallons per minute. In conducting the test, pressure was induced into the system by manually changing the orifice area of the ga.te valve thus varying the restriction imposed upon the flow of water. At all times the level of the water in the tank was held between the "3/4 level" and "full" to iisure the same positive head of liquid on the suction side of the pump and a constant engine speed ot 3600 RPM was maintained. At each position of the gate valve blade, the spray valve was electrically actuated to the open position. The pressure from the indicator on the console and the flow rate from the flow indicator were recorded. The test was conducted three times, moving the valve blade from "closed" to "full open" in small increments, to insure reliable data. The test results were plotted in terms of induced back pressure versus flow rate. The conversion factors, previously discussed, were applied to the values for water and curves were plotted for the specific agents involved. These test results arc presented in figure 18. System Pressure Loss Analysis The purpose of this analysis is to ?.»«.ilytlcally determine the dispenser pressure loss at various fluid flow rates. In the following section the results of the analysis is combined with the previously mentioned flow rate test to form the dispenser performance range. The majority of the formulae used in this analysis is extracted from Reference 2. Many of the values used are extracted from Reference j{. When a formula or value taken from this paper is used, the page number ofl which it is found is noted on the right hand side of the page. 24 �1000 i i i r^ FULL LEVEL (958 GAL) 7 900 3 4 LEVEL (807 GAL) 800 \WATER BLUE- 7 700 ORANGE OR PURPLE' a. £00 500 1 7 LEVEL (495 GAL) z in O _J O \ WHITE T (TORDON 101) 3 O Ul (O 400 L 7 7 300 '/ 200 1.4 L E V E L (184 GAD- 100 FLOAT SWITCH CUT-OFF LEVEL (54 GAL) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 DUMP TIME (SECONDS) Figure 1C. Emergency Dump Kate for Various Agents with A A'15Y-1 Dump Valve 80 �3 IN. MANUAL GATE VALVE Figure 17. Flow Rate Test Apparatus First of all, the line sizes must be determined. Determination of line size from tank to spray boom: Requirements: 400 p,pm @ 15 ft/sec v = 0.408 Q/d2 d = 0.408 Q/v 400 0 408 15 d = 3.298 inches 26 Page 3-2 �90 -t S 80 ID */> S a. o £ o S 70 60H i o 50 40- 30 20 0 100 200 FLOW RATE - CPM Figure 18. System Performance Test Results 400 �However, the 3-inc'i suction and discharge ports on the Gorwan-Rupp pump necessitated using 3-inch outside diameter (O.D.) tubing with a 0.0d25-inch wall thickness. Thus, a slit-Jit: increase in velocity occurs. The fuselage-mounted spray boom is constructed of 4.5-inch O.D. stainless steel tubing with a wall tliicknoss of 0.237 inches. The increase in line size in the boom was dictated by structural stiffness requirements for Ll.e C-130 aircraft which has a considerably greater speed capability than the. C-123 aircraft. The agent which is pumped through the tubing system shown in figure 19 has a specific gravity of 1.3 and a viscosity equal to 30.0 ccntistokes @ The total head is found in four parts. The first part to be. analyzed is the suction line; i.e., the section of line between the spray tank and the pump. Suction Head: Suction line velocity: Page 3-2 Equation 3-2 .408 .408 v = (2.S75)2 10.74 ft/sec Reynolds number: Page 3-2 Equation 3-3 32.2 /-Co. = JJJc 8.2 x 10-4 (81.2>(0.240)(19.74) (32.2) (8.2 x 10'4) Rc = 1.456 x 104 28 Page 11-5 �359.1 1 A =^ y WHtRL JET SPRAV NOZZLE - NO 3 < Bl?0 5C-ELBO* REDUCER OME INCH TO 3 i 1 IN POPPET V A L V E VEE B*Mt> COUPLING 3 IN DIA FLEX LINE 3 IN. POPPET CHECK VALVE 3 IN. VALVE - WOTOR OPERATED 3 IN VALVE - MANUALLY OPERATED PUMP - MOTOf! DRIVEN SUCTIOMCONE PIUKIO O U T L E T '1 IN LilA LINE TAIL BOOM - 4 1 2IN. 0 0 19. A/A45Y-1 Fluid Flow Schematic �Friction factor: For a 3-inch SolieiUilc-40 pipe at a flow having an RC = 1.456 x 10* the friction factor Is: f = 0.029 Page A-25 = £ - .'°4 = 1.38 C .029 Page A-26 Suction cone: L/D 12 inch radius 90° bend: L/D = 13.6 Page A-27 L/D = 7.5 Page A-27 30 Page A-30 12 inch radius 29° bend: Schedule 40 90° standard elbow: L/D = Exit into pimp: L/D = £ = —L. = f .029 34.43 Summation o£ L/D's: L/D = 1.38 + 13.6 + L/D L 7.5 + *= = 34.48 86.96 = (DHL/0) = L 30.0 + (69)(.4) 8.6 020 20.87 feet Total equivalent length oC pipe: L = 2/12 + L = 0.167 +.1.0 L 12/12 = + 53/12 + 4.417 * 26.,45 feet 30 + 20.87 20.87 �Head loss due to flow through suction cone, tubing, bends, and exit i n t o pinup: hL h, L = hi. = 0.1863 0.1863 = &— Page 3-2 Equation 3-5 d 2.875 19.368 foot of a«;cnt Head loss for 9-incli f l e x i b l e hose (3-inch O.D.): For AGO gpm, the pressure drop is 0.7 p s i / f t 0.7 p s i / f t x 0.75 ft hL = (0.525) (2. 31) hL = = (1.213)(1.3) = Anaconda Catalog G-700, Page D-5 0.525 psi 1.213 feet of water = 1.577 foot of agent Head loss for a 3-inch gate valve: The formula for A l l in inches is: For 400 gpin, /'-.I I hL = (7. 34) (1.3) = = AH = 0.0000:459Q2 7.34 inches O t 7 9 6 Fcot of agcnt Total Suction Head: hL = 14/12 + 19.368 + 1.577 + 0.796 hL = 1.167 + 19.368 + 1.577 + 0.796 hL = 22.908 feet of agent Next the head is found for the discharge l i n e ; i.e., the line between the ^ump and the spray boom.: The line velocity and the friction factor arc the same as for the suction line. i Sharp edged entrance to pump: L/D = £ = f -.* °.5 0.029 = 17.24 Page A-26 �Two (2) Schedule-40 90° standard elbows: L/D 45° - ()3) = 2(0 60.0 Page A-30 12-inch radius: L/D = (40(53 = 1.).3) 7.50 Page A-27 45° Miter bend: L/D 45° = 15.0 Page A-27 9-inch radius through fuselage: L/D = 12.0(.533) = 6.4 Summation of L/D's: L/D = 17.24 + 60.0 + 7.5 4- 15.0 + 6.4 L/D L = L/D(D) - •= 106.14 (106.14)(0*240) = 25.47 feet Total equivalent length of pipe: L = L = 14 18 21.5 . 26.75 . 192 , 46.625 . , , - , - , 12 + 12 + ~TT + ~W~ T T2 + ~12~ + 25 ' 47 1.167 + 1.500 + 1.792 + 2.229 + 16.00 + 3.885 + 25,47 L = 52.043 feet Head loss due to flow oF agent through elbows, bends, tubing, and sharp-edged entrance to pump: hT h. = L hL <= 0.1863 0.1863 ( . 2 ) (52.043)(19.74) 009 2.875 = 38.109 feet of agent Head loss for 3-inch check valve: 32 �Tlio formulae for the pressure drop and lici.nl loss thronj'.li t h i s chock valve are: 1 A P = .-0.005Q + l«l. = 2.0 CAP)(2.3l)(S) For tin- Q of /»00 npm: AP = 0 therefore However, for flow ralos loss than A 00 upm, there w i l l he a p p r e c i a b l e head loss. lleaJ loss Tor 'Uinch v.ate v a l v e : Tliis value is Hie same as for t h e \\mc v a l v e In the sue- 1 ion l i u o . iij = 0.7% feet of ai-.fnt Head loss for C l o x i b l o hose ( J - i n o l i O.D.): Tlu-ro are llireo (3) sod ions of f l e > - i h l e l i n e between the spr.iy valve and the spray boom. I, Pressni-e drop = .: K ». 'yS^JjJvjq 0.7 p s i / f t b (j = !),_ =, 20.80 feet (see l >-iiu-h f l e x hose in sue I ion l i n e ) (0.7 |>si/l'l)(:>O.K'))C>. •}]) (!..:>) = A 3.0 1 J foe( of at-ent T o t a l Dl.sehari',0 Head: -Ih. '- :W.lO l l h. 0.7'K. -I- 0.7'Xi + 4J.'M3 = 8 2 . 7 I A feet: of no'nL - �At this point in the system, the flow of agent leaves the 3-inch lino and enters the spray boom, which is shown in figure 20. The line size for the spray boom has .already been determined as 4.5-inch O.D. stainless steel pipe with a wall thickness of 0.237 inches. The nozzle arrangement is symmetrical about the centerline of the spray boom; however, the entrance to the boom is offset approximately six feet from the centerline. In this analysis, the worst condition, which is the longer section of spray boom. Is analyzed for a flow rate of 200 gpm. There are a total of eighteen nozzles on .the spray boom. Each nozzle dispenses agent at a rate of 400 gpm/18 nozzles or 22.22 gallons per minute. As the flow passes each nozzle, the total flow rate is reduced by this amount. With each chance in flow, the agent velocity, friction factor, and Reynold's number also change. These values must be recalculated at cacli nozzle location in order to find the head loss in the next section of line. In calculating the spray-boom head loss, the first head loss is encountered where the 3-inch O.D. discharge line exits into the 4.5-inch O.D. boom. This is calculated on the basis of a sharp-edged exit. K = L/D L 1.00 = - L/D(D) = L = Page A-26 34.48 (44) (,4) 3.8 020 81275 feet Head loss due to exit from discharge line: h. L h L = 0.1863 ~^d = 0 1863 ( , P29) (3.275) (19.74)2 0• " ' 2.875 hT = 6.059 feet of agent Station 0.0 to Sfation 149.63 /.a r,i 12.47 feet 34 �STA 25138 SI* 233 A3 STA 22163 STA 20ft] STA 19763 STA IBS 43 STA 1736} STA 16163 STA 1496} STA CC 4 SYMETRlCAL EXCEPT AS SHO»N If"fl'"T T 3-E I !—17 3 i- • 7 EQUAL SPACES — - 101 3 4 Figure 20. A, A45Y-1 I^usclagc-Mounted Spray Boom �Velocity: v v .408 Q/d 2 = ,408 = 20 ° (.2) 4062 .0 48 v = 16. 087 / 5.034 f i / s e c Reynolds number: Dv R0 32.2 /rc (81.12)(.3355)(5.034) 32.2 (8.2 x = R0 I0"f) 5190 Friction factor: f = 0.037 Head loss: "L IIT L .1863^ 1863 ( . 0 3 7 ) ( 1 2 . A 7 ) ( 5 . 0 3 4 ) 2 4.026 = ' j^ = = 0.541 foot of agent Station 149.63 to Station 161.63 L Q = = Q = 3G 1.0 feet 200 - 22.22 177.78 B pni �v .408 Q/il 2 = 177.78 v " .408 v = 4.47 1 } f l / s o c (4.02() 2 (8l.l2)(.333--,)(4.475) ( 3 2 . 2 ) ( 8 . 2 x 10*') Re 0.038 hL h, = ll| = ,18ft 3 .J863 =. - .015 s 4.026 fCH't Of flJ'.CMlt S l a t i o i i 161.63 I o S t a t i o n 173.63 L Q = = 177.78 - 1.0 foot 22.22 = 135.56 (4.026) 2 v R0 = = 3.<)H) it /sec _(».!. U) (.33!>5) ( 3 2 . 2 ) (8. 2 x 10-'1) Re = 1030.90 R0 = x 4037 x velocity velocity �f hL = (.040) (1.0).(3.916)3 .1863 . h^ = 0.040 0.028 feel of agent Station 173.63 to Station 185.63 L Q = v 155.56 = .408 Rc « - 1.0 feet 22.22 14 • , (4.026) 2 = = f .- l« T '= = = 3.356 ft/sec 3460 0.0415 (.0415)(1.0)(3.356) 2 1 nir 4.026 -,«<•-. J .1863 = 133.34 ft/sec 1030.90 x 3.356 Re , h = 0.022 feet of aj;cnt Station 185.63 to Station 197.63 L Q = 133.34 = - 38 1.0 feet 22.22 = 111.12 gpm �v v Re = /ft0 .408 = = 1T.I.12 (4.026)2 2.797 ft/sec 1030.90 x 2.797 t = = 2883 0,044 (P044)(1.0)(2.797): * f 4 7 0 2 6 ,0,, .1863 h^ = 0.016 feet of agent Station 197.63 to Station 209.63 L Q v = = 1.0 feet 111.12 - 22.22 88.90 408 " Rc = = 2 238 ft/sec - = 2307 0.047 1863 (•0^7)(1.0)(2.238) : 4.026 - L h, 88.90 gpm (1030.90)(2.238) = f h, = = 0.011 feet of agent 39 �Station 2 ' . 3 to Station 221.63 0)6 L Q - 88.90 = 1.0 Coct - 22.22 = 66.68 66.68 v = .408 R_ = 2 = (1030.<>C) (1.678) = 0 IL = = 1730 0-037 "^ hj 1.678 ft/soc 4,026 0.005 foot of ap.ont Station 221.63 to Station 233.63 L Q = 66.68 v - .408 R0 = = - 1.0 foot 22.22 , , , -.2 v { -t • VJ..O^ = 44.46 >-,pm = 1.119 f t / H o c (1030. «())< 1.110) 1 1 5'. -10 = = 0.055 1154 �hT . .1863 L 4.026 hL = 0.003 ffiet of agent Station 233.63 to Station 251.38 - Q - Rc .0 48 » 1.479 feet 22.22 gpm 22.22 (.2) 4062 = 0>559 Et/scc - (1030.90)(0.559) = h, L 576.27 1863 (0.ni)(l.A70)(0|.559)2 ' 4.020 hL * 0.002 feet of agent Total Spray Room Head Exit from discharge line Station 0.0 to Station 149.63 Station 149.63 to Station 161.63 Station 161.63 to Station 173.63 Station 173.63 to Station 185.63 Station 185.63 to Station 197.63 Station 197.63 to Station 209.63 Station 209.63 to Station 221.63 Station 221.63 to Station 233.63 Station 233.63 to Station 251.38 Total Spray Boom Head 6.059 feet 0.541 0.035 0.028 0.022 0.016 0.011 0.005 0.003 0.002 6.722 foot of agent 41 �An illustration of the plumbing through which the flow of agent travels from the point it leaves the spray boom until it enters the airstream is presented also in figure 20. Since the maximum pressure change between pump and nozzle occurs at the outboard nor.sle (Station 251.38), the head loss is calculated at this station. In leaving the spray boom, the agent flows through a sudden contraction. However, the flow must also make a 30° turn. In order to properly analyze this condition, the L/D ratio is found for a sudden contraction and also a 30° miter bend. Head Loss -_ Spray Boom to Check Valve; Flow; Q = 22.22 gpm Velocity: v= -^TiToi^ v «' 8.239 ft/sec Reynolds number: R e (81.12)(.087)(S.239) (32.2)(8.2 x 10"4) Re = 2203 Friction factor; f = 0.050 30° Miter bend: L/D = 8.0 Sudden contraction: d^ = 1.049 inches; d., * 4.026 inches T • 4.026 rr d 42 Page A-27 �K = 0.43 Page A-26 K 0.43 f " 0.05 L/D 8.6 Summation of L/D's: 3.0 + 8.6 L/D 16.6 L « L/D(D) -f- 5'875 L = L 16.6(.087) + 0.490 = L 1.444 -t- 0.490 = 1.934 feet Head loss: h = L 1863 ( . 5 ) d.934) (8.239)2 000 ' 1.049 hj ** 1.166 feet of agent Check valve head loss: Pressure drop = 1.85 psl @ 22.22 gpra h^ = 5.556 feet of agent Contraction upstream of 3/4 inch street elbow: dj^ = 0.719 inches d2 = li = 0.801 d2. K = O f 12 45 43 0.897 inches James, Pond' & Clark, Inc. Catalog,Pg 6. �22.22 v » 17.537 ft/sec R = (81. 12) ( 0 ) (17. 537) .6 (32. 2) ( . 2 x 10"4) 8 Re = 3233 f - 0.045 , K " I 0.12 0.045 •' = 2 67 6 ' L = L/D(D) = (2.667) .(P-719) L * 0.160 feet hj = .1863 (-045)(0.160)(17.537)2 h^ = 0.573 feet of agent 90° street elbow: L/D = 50 Average internal diameter V = 408 - = 0.88 inches 22.22 (.82 08) v = 11.707 ft/sec R = (81.12)(.073)(11.707) (32.2)(8.2 x 10"4) Rc = 2626 f = 0.0475 44 . �L h 10 = L/D(D) = = L S.O—^ « 3.67 feet 1863 (•M75)(3.67)(11.707)2 ' . 0.88 HL = 5.058 feet of agent Contraction downstream of 3/4-inch street elbow: di = 0.500 Inches dl d£ = 0.941 inches _ 0.500 ~ °5 '3 K = 0.32 v = 0.408 .(2.2!-2..2). (0.50) 2 R = 36.263 ft/sec (81.12)(.042)(36 263) (32.2)(8.2 x I ' ) D4 = e „ 0.042 T/n L/D = — = --—•• 32 = 7 7 f 0.042 L/D(D) = L = 0.317 feet = 1863 ( 0 2 ( . 1 ) 3 . 6 ) .4)037(6232 0.50 hL = 6.523 feet of agent Spray Nozzle: From the data available in the Spray Systems Company Catalog 25, a formula was derived to calculate the pressure required to dispense a known flow of agent. The formula is: 45 �P = 0.069215 f Q per Kozzle 12 I Conversion Factor I The value of the conversion factor can also be extracted from this catalog if the specific gravity of the agent is known. QPN = 22.22 gpm C.F. 0.877 0.069215 P •= 44.431 psi (44.431 lb/in2)(144 in2/ft2) 81.12 lbs/ft3 = 78.872 feet of agent Total head loss downstream of spray boom: Spray boom to check valve: Check valve: Upstream contraction: 90° street elbow: Dowastream contraction: Spray nozzle: 1.166 feet 5.556 0.573 5.058 6.523 78.872 97.748 feet of agent Total pump head for 400 gpm: Suction head: Discharge head; Spray boom head: Head downstream of spray boom: Total Mead ( 0 gpm) 40 22.903 82.714 6.722 97.748 H 210.092 feet of agent This analysis demonstrates the procedure lor determining the total head for a certain agent at a certain flow rate. The head for any flow rate can he calculated in the same manner. Likewise the total head £an be found for any liquid agent hy changing the values for specific gravity, viscosity, and the spray nozzle conversion factor. 46 �This procedure has been programmed for the IBM Model 360-30 computer. The program was exercised for four different agents currently being used in conjunction with the A/A45Y-1 system in addition to water. Flow rates ranging from 1 to 400 gpm were analyzed. The agents and their characteristics are shown in the following cable. Liquid Agent Viscosity (? 80°F (Ccntistokcs) Specific Gravity Water Orange Purple Blue White (Tordon 101) 1.000 1.270 1.270 1.335 1.150 . Spray Nozzle Conversion Factor 1.00 38.2 38.2 8.8 243.0 ' 1.000 0.887 0.887 0.865 0.931 The results of the computer tabulations were plotted for total head (feet) versus flow rate (gpm) and are illustrated in figure 21. Dispenser Performance Range Successful operation of the dispenser depends upon the ability of the crew to recognize the dispenser's capabilities and limitations. The dispenser performance information presented herein is sufficient in scope to permit an estimate of what may be expected of the dispenser under normal conditions. In order to determine the operating range of the dispenser, it was necessary to perform a test to establish the pump performance curve and secondly, to mathematically perform a fluid analysis of the entire dispenser from the tank to the spray nozzles. This test and analysis has bo:;,-! explained in the two previous sections. Figures 22 through 25 combine the aforementioned test and analysis curves to establish the operating range of the dispenser for various chemical agents. The intersection of the two curves represents the maximum flow rate obtainable at 3600 engine KPM. In using these graphs, locate the desired flow rate on the horizontal scale of the appropriate agent graph; move vertically to the point of intersection with the theoretical system loss curve; then move horizontally and read the required pressure from the vertical scale. The speed (rpm) of the engine must be adjusted while spraying, so that che required pressure is indicated on the pressure indicator located on the control console. The cross-hatched area labeled "Operating Range" encompasses all values of back pressures or pressure losses that the system can theoretically pump against as a function of engine speed and flow rate. 47 �UJ UJ u. < UJ £ 200 FLOW RATE - GPM Figure 21. System Pressure Loss 300 400 �9080- 70- UI HI u. 1 a < itto o o_ UJ X 50100 40UJ D. 302010- o- 200 FLOW RATE - GPM Figure 22. A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: Water �300 90- 200 ,-PUMP PERFORMANCE CURVE - 3600 RPM 80- 70- tu ui m en o 60- 1U X i ////, 50- UJ 100 u en a. 40- as m ^h s ^OPERATING; RAKGE ^ 30- 20- 10- 0- 100 200 300 FLOW RATE - GPM Figure 23. A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range -Agent: Orange or Purple 400 �9080- 7060Q. i 01 o: UJ HI u. 1 o < til X 5040- Of Q. 30 - 20- 10- 0- 100 200 FLOW RATE - GPM Figure 24. A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: Blue 400 �300 90- 200 ^Tmrr-^ 8070to o 60- ui ui X a. V//7WK 50100 UJ ce A M L3 UI tfs ae. • PUMP PERFORMANCE CURVE - 3400 40- X -MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE POINT CL 30- \THEORETICAL SYSTEM LOSS CURVE 100J 100 200 300 FLOW RATE - GPM Figure 25. A/A45Y-1 Dispenser Performance Range - Agent: White 400 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 025 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0363 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Smallwood, A. M. R. L. Dear A.R. Ortell Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>Hayes International Corporation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1967-10-01 Title A name given to the resource Internal Defoliant Dispenser A/A45Y-1 Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide application https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/bbe3dd5ae7a23003154d445c92e1fa7b.pdf 2829adad1af30d0df77eb7a31551d451 PDF Text Text Item ID Number 0031G Author Young, Alvin L. Corporate Author Manuscript: Meeting Notes: Meeting with Dr. Terry Biery and Lt. Col. George Rowcliffe at AF/Pest Control Board Meeting, WRAMC, Washington, D.C., 13 September 1979 Journal/Book Title Year 000 ° Month/Day Color Ll Number of Images 4 Desoripton Notes Monday, January 22, 2001 Page 316 of 341 �13 £c ���- TV L. &jgtfo '. ^r A,<"oa ^i r^€^oUoi^j0etc LA& ^r'csQ*^ V � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 020 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0316 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Young, Alvin L. Title A name given to the resource Manuscript: Meeting Notes: Meeting with Dr. Terry Biery and Lt. Col. George Rowcliffe at AF/Pest Control Board Meeting, WRAMC, Washington, D.C., 13 September 1979 Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/58a7d9a18a2abe0dd4ae92d2e5b0789b.pdf c843cda6ed20c9de795623c8c12e1d65 PDF Text Text Item ID Number Author Corporate Author Report/Article Title Memorandum: Requirement for Defoliant Agent White, |18 September 1967 Journal/Book Title 0000 Year Month/Day Color n Number of Images Found in a file labeled: "Correspondence Concerning the Use of Defoliants in SEA and the Role of Air Force Personnel, Nov 1962 - Oct 1967"; date stamped 19 Sep1967 Monday, January 22, 2001 Page 252 of 341 �SEP .TCB (Lt Reynard/882-2457) icquireiaont for Defoliant Agent White MMA (SAOQT/Mr. Vanderventer) APGC (PGOW) has stated a need for 1500 gallons of Tordon 101 Wiite). This agent will be used for spray tests with the C-123K lirci'aft. !. Reference Confidential TWX AFRDQ 78693, 13 Jul 67 has authorized .dequate allocation of defoliant for these tests. In view of the trgency of this testing, AFATL requests an expedited shipment of gent White to: Transportation Officer AFB 2823 AFATL (ATCB/Lt Reynard 882-2457) Eglin AFB, Fl 32542 'OR THE COMMANDER 1. COX, Colonel, USAF :hief, Bio-Chemical Division Name, Office^,Symbol of Originator AFATL Form . ^ COORDINATION SHEET 06 Nov 1%6 Date Phone Typist's Initials AFSC - EOL^N^&^T1<A. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 019 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0252 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Reynard Title A name given to the resource Memorandum: Requirement for Defoliant Agent White, 18 September 1967 Subject The topic of the resource herbicide white Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide testing https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/f6466e4a220a26a2f5aa0f104ad4f369.pdf ac11cb87888be563c26479549f6a3976 PDF Text Text Item ID Number Author 20 Anonymous Corporate Author Report/Article Title Minutes A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Journal/Book Title Year ™GQ Month/Day Color M Number of Images 4G Pages 33, 34, and 38 fold out; includes addendum: memo and replacement page for Item 9-66-2 of the minutes Tuesday, November 14, 2000 Page 20 of 25 �Anonymous 1966 Minutes A/A45Y-1 internal defoliant dispenser system: Support Conference ES A/A45Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER SYSTEM SUPPORT CONFERENCE 25 AND 26 AUGUST 1966 .r •^•^••Kjtr.&.x.- *>y:s'vrT«£?3n£*' ''^^^•M^^^-^^^>'?'--'^^ - 'JOftSf-Z':'* - JSW--^ f'.>5^ */S*^":/,' I £>*r*Sst .-. ./-TSBS&e'J*sS7- . -. _ Sel. '<'*,;'. J <i'-J^-- �INDEX Item Number Title Page Number Summary 1 Section I Introduction/Ranch Hand Report 2 Section n A/A45Y-1 System Status Technical Manual Status 3 Section DI 9-66-1 9-66-2 4 9-66-7 Action Items Ground Support Equipment TCTQ for Installation of A/A45Y-1 System in UC-123B Aircraft, Class V Mod 1776 Retrofit Installation of MARK HI Engine Spares Retrofit Installation of Optimized (Redesigned) Wing Boom onUC-123B Aircraft Maintenance Data and Technical Order Verification Maintenance Training of Ranch Hand Personnel 13 Section IV General Comments/Observations 14 Section V A/A45Y-1 Defoliation Conference Attendees 16 Section VI Distribution 17 Section VII A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System System Description Capabilities and Limitations Leading Particulars Tank and Cradle Assembly Control Console Dump Valve Spray Boom Aircraft Installation Viet Nam Ranch Hand Operations Optimized Defoliant Handling System Portable Defoliant Handling Unit 18 9-66-3 9-66-4 9-66-5 9-66-6 5 5 7 8 10 11 12 18 18 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 32 37 �Figure Number Title Page Number Illustrations Figure 1 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 10 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Major Components of Defoliant Dispenser Control Console Dump Valve Tail Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing Wing Spray Boom Existing Defoliant Transfer System Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Viet Nam Optimized Defoliant Handling System Layout Defoliant Handling System Components Tank Trailer Defoliation Liquid Refill 19 22 23 24 25 29 33 34 38 Photographs Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 2 3 8 9 11 12 13 14 Defoliant Dispenser (right side) Centrifugal Pump Installation in C-123 (left side) Installation in C-123 (right side) Ranch Hand Work Area Hour Glass Tank and Pump Hour Glass Tank and Pump (insulated) Hour Glass Spider Pump 20 21 26 27 30 30 31 31 �SUMMARY 1. The first Logistics Support Meeting for the A/AU5Y-1 Defoliant Dispenser was held at Hayes International Corp, Birmingham, Ala., on 2li and 25 Aug 1966. 2. The purpose of this meeting was to review program status, evaluate "Major Problem Areas", and initiate and assign action as required to assure the timely and successful completion of program requirements for enhancement of logistic support. 3. Areas within this program requiring action, further refinement and overall close surveillance are documented in section III and IV of these minutes. Lu A follow-up meeting was determined essential in order to review progress made on action items, reassess support posture, and include representatives of agencies absent from this meeting. 5. The minutes of this meeting will be used as a basis of agenda for the next meeting. Each action agency should complete their assigned action in accordance with the scheduled dates, if possible, and be prepared to present status of action taken at the next scheduled meeting. Additional items may be added to the agenda for review and discussion at this time. However, to assure adequate time for evaluation and staffing, it is necessary that proposed agenda items be submitted to WRAMA (WRNQO) at least one week before the scheduled meeting date. 6. The next meeting is tentatively scheduled at Hayes International Corp., Birmingham, Ala., 11-13 Oct 1966. Confirmation of date and location will be provided by separate correspondence. 7. It is desired to take this opportunity to compliment each representative for his active participation and support. Especially appreciated are the efforts of Hayes International in hosting this meeting and the fine assistance rendered. The productive results obtained and anticipated as a result of this meeting will be beneficial to all agencies concerned, and should improve SEJu-support and operational capability. ROBERT N. SCHEIDECKER Major, USAF Chief, Operations Branch Directorate, Materiel Management �SECTION I INTRODUCTION/RANCH HAND REPORT 1. Mr. W. B. O'Neal welcomed the conferees and opened the meeting. Introduction was given by Lt William Crea, Air Force Project Engineer. Status of the program was reviewed by Mr. Don Smallwood, Hayes Project Engineer (Reference Section II). 2. Captain Peshkin gave the report from Ranch Hand. They are growing very rapidly and a considerable number of problems have developed. As early as January or February, it was realized that additional aircraft were going to be programmed for SEA. Storage, maintenance, and training requirements were anticipated; however, no staff support was furnished after discussions with operations and maintenance personnel at Tan Son NHut. Finally, the aircraft began to arrive. Storage problems still exist as does spare parts support. Flying continues at approximately 25 sorties per aircraft per month. This is the MACV planning figure for programming chemicals. Ranch Hand would like to be able to operate from an additional operating location in the II Corps area to increase sortie effectiveness. There are presently 9 aircraft in the country 3 at Da Nang and 6 at Tan Son NHut. The operation continues successful because the equipment is basically good and the air frame is the best available. The defoliant system has the same characteristics, simplicity, and reliability. The main problems are as indicated below. Ranch Hand has been fortunate in their maintenance support resulting in almost 100$ aircraft availability. Many of Ranch Hand's problems could be helped by better staff support. �SECTION II A/A45Y-1 SYSTEM STATUS ITEM CONTRACT 1. A/A45Y-1 Prototype 08(635)3609 2. A/A45Y-1 Production 08(635)3609 3. Dump Valve Kit 08(635)4894 4. Wing Boom Prototype 08(635)5710 5. Wing Boom Production 08(635)5710 6. Engine Mod Mark III 08(635)4894 QUANTITY DELIVERY DATE REMARKS Sept. 1963 Used in C-130 Test at Eglin Systems started at Hayes 20 Aug. 1964 Six Operational Systems in Viet Nam. One destroyed in C-123 crash in Viet Nam. Seven delivered to FairchildHiller Corp. for installation in C-123. One awaiting dump valve and will be shipped to Fairchild-Hiller. One remaining at Hayes for Wing Boom Test. One unassigned. Three cannibalized for spare parts by Eglin. 17 Aug. 1965 All operational A/A45Y-1 systems equipped with dump valve. Sept. 1966 Fabrication complete by 23 Aug. 1966. 20 March 1967 (Anticipated) Delivery to be 150 days after approval of Prototype. 15 Jan. 1967 (Anticipated) Twelve to be installed on new purchase of twelve A/A45Y-1 by WRAMA and the remaining three for spares. �TECHNICAL MANUAL STATUS ITEM STATUS REMARKS T. O. 11C15-3-4-2 FIELD, DEPOT OVERHAUL WITH IPB INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER MODEL A/A45Y-1 Awaiting validation of System Manual. In process review performed at Hayes by WRAMA, 20 and 21 July 1966 T. O. 11C15-3-4-2 FIELD, DEPOT OVERHAUL WITH IPB INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER MODEL A/A45Y-1 In process. Manual change to add Mark III engine pump controls T. C. T. O. (Proposed) No contractural requirements. Never was negotiated as per supplemental agreement number 2. Contractor recommends preparation of T. C. T. O. for installation of system in C-123 aircraft T. O. 11C15-3-4-2 FIELD, DEPOT OVERHAUL WITH IPB INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER MODEL A/A45Y-1 In process. Change to cover wing boom program T. C. T. O. In process. To cover installation of wing boom A/A45Y-1 on C-123 for aircraft T. O. 's To cover installation of Mark HI engine controls in field to retrofit existing systems T. C. T. O. Awaiting receipt of 118A and contract coverage �SECTION III ACTION ITEMS Item Number 9-66-1 - Ground Support Equipment; a. Problem Presented; (1) There are four 1,000 gallon Transfer Tanks (Hour Glass) and one 2,5'00 gallon Fuel Servicing Unit, Type F-7 currently located at Tan Son NHut with a 5>000 gallon R-2 Storage Tank in the process of installation. There are also three 1,000 gallon Transfer Tanks (Hour Glass) located at Da Nang. The unsystemized arrangement and limited capacity of this equipment does not give sufficient capability to; (1) Fill aircraft that are located at Tan Son NHut, (2) Turn-around aircraft as rapidly as necessary, and (3) Operate with the three different type chemical agents now being used. The present system is characterized by the following; (a) Insufficient tank storage capacity, (b) Insufficient transfer capacity which limits turnaround time, (c) Inability to systematically select proper chemical appropriate to target requirements, (d) Inability to evacuate unused agent from tanks in aircraft. (2) The present system is progressively deteriorating due to use of 1952 vintage Hour Glass transfer equipment. This system cannot be supported and therefore will be eliminated from inventory at failure or when sooner replaced. Glaring deficiencies of this system are as noted; (a) Non-standard system, (b) Limited or no spare parts available, (c) Fire hose used to connect transfer tanks deteriorates in from h to 10 days, (d) Contamination of flow system (mainly due to rubber particles from fire hose lining plus sand and other foreign particles introduced by siphoning probes) because of lack of well thought out systems approach, (e) Inadequate pumping capability (Spider pump used for siphoning agent from 55 gallon drums is old and weak). b. Progress to Date: (1) An R-2 Storage Tank (5,000 gallon), salvaged from an R-2 Servicing Unit, is to be installed by Ranch Hand to provide additional transfer and storage capability and is awaiting plumbing installation by Base Civil Engineer. (Compatibility of this tank with existing chemical agents is doubtful). (2) One F-7 Servicing Unit is now in use with five more on order. (So far this equipment is functionally satisfactory, but will need teflon hosing and seals for compatibility with existing agents). �(3) Use of ARMY Bladder Tanks for storage is being investigated by 377 Combat Support Group (Base Fuels), Tan Son NHut. (Question of agent compatibility still remains) . (I;) The A/AU5T-1 System has a self -filling capability, but was found to be too slow and therefore incompatible with quick turn-around requirement. Use of B-l and B-1A Nitric Acid Servicing Units (2,000 gallon capacity) were proposed by Hayes as they were believed to be in excess storage. Investigation by WRAMA Vehicle Manager revealed these units to be unsatisfactory for their designed purpose and were dismantled and removed from inventory. c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency; (1) Provide adequate bulk storage and pumping facilities for three different chemical agents at two, possibly three different bases. A requirement exists for the simultaneous filling of as many as nine aircraft at Tan Son NHut and three at Da Nang with a possible total of five at Da Nang and three at another operating location (does not include Lucky Tiger). Action agency to be determined. (2) Provide additional F-7 Servicing Units to Ranch Hand WRAMA (WRNR). (3) Provide teflon hoses and gaskets for F-7 Servicing Units WRAMA (WRNR). d. Forecast for Completion; (1) Fixed facility - to be determined. (2) Additional F-7 Servicing Units - accomplished. (3) Teflon hoses and gaskets - to be determined. �Item Number 9-66-2 - TCTO for Installation of A/AlpY-1 System in UC-123B Aircraft, Class V Mod 1776: a. Problem Presented; Eglin AFB Contract AF 08(635)-l|89lj, dated 20 Oct 1963', provided a line item for data in accordance with DD Form llj.23 covering preparation of TCTO for installation of A/Al^Y-l System in UC-123B Aircraft (AFPI 71r ;>'31-(l8). Repeated attempts by Contractor, AFATL, and A/Al^T-1 IM have been unsuccessful in obtaining from C-123 SSM appropriate documentation (AFLC Form 118A) identifying type of TCTO and aircraft handbook revisions desired. Ranch Hand representatives advised that considerable difficulty is being experienced by Flight crews and Aircraft Maintenance personnel due to lack of appropriate -1 Flight Manual Supplement and Aircraft Maintenance Handbook data reflecting this systems installation. This creates an obvious problem with operation and maintenance as well as a serious problem with indoctrination of new crews due to high percentage and frequency of personnel rotation. k' Pro gre s s to Da t e: None c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency: (1) WRNB initiate documentation for preparation of TCTO covering installation of basic A/Al^Y-1 system using Hayes tail boom and de-modification of aircraft (removal of tank and cradle assy) back to cargo configuration. (2) WRNB initiate documentation for preparation of TCTO covering installation of Ranch Hand wing and tail boom and marriage with basic Hayes A/Al^Y-l System. (3) WRNB establish requirement for preparation of Aircraft Maintenance handbooks concurrent with requirement for respective TCTO's. (li) "WRNB initiate immediate action to provide Ranch Hand with required supplement to T. 0. 1C-123-1 Flight Manual reflecting Defoliant Spray configuration. d. Forecast for Completion: Delinquent - In view of non-participation in this meeting by C-123 SSM personnel, a report of intended action and progress made is required at next meeting tentatively planned for 11-13 Oct 1966. �Item Number 9-66-3 - Retrofit Installation of MARK III Engine: a. Problem Presented; AFATL (ATCB) has provided for complete modification kits to retrofit present operational Ranch Hand Dispensers, utilizing MARK I and MARK II engines, to latest ARMY standardized MARK III engine configuration. The A/Al^Y-l system has not been made full standard by AFSC; therefore, responsibility rests with AFSC to provide retrofit kits and required TCTO for Field installation. b. Progress to date; Required number of kits have been placed on Contract AF 08(635)-k&9k with Hayes International. c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency: (1) AFATL (ATCB) submit request to WRAMA (WRNSTR) for AFPI 18 covering this modification and appropriate handbook revisions. (2) WRNSTR provide AFPI 18 as required. (3) Contractual provisions by AFATL for TCTO and handbook revis ions. d. Forecast for Completion; (1) 25 Sep 66. (2) Provide AFPI to AFATL within five days after receipt. (3) To be determined - contingent on authority for reprogramming funds within project 2^25 and subsequent initiation of Purchase Request. �(2) Reference a(2) above. WRAMA (WRNQ) will review this problem with appropriate personnel at "WRAMA and Eglin AFB to determine specific cause and remedial action. (3) Reference a(3) above. WRAMA (WRNQ) will review end item spares requirements to determine proper course of action necessary to provide adequate spare assemblies to support Field operations where battle damage or loss might be incurred requiring complete assembly replacement. Coordination with the using activity will be required. d. Forecast for Completion; (1) Reference c(l) above. (a) Revision of AFLC Form 2? - 15 Sep 1966. (b) Spare parts recomputation - lii Oct 1966. (c) Release of spare parts orders to contractor/vendors to be determined based on method to be employed. (2) Reference c(2) above. 13' Sep 1966. (3) Reference c(3) above. 30 Sep 1966. �Item Number 9-66-14 - Spares; a. Problem Presented; (1) Requirement for M&O spare parts for support of A/Ai^I-1 System is expected to reach critical proportions in the very near future due to, (1) increase in number of spray aircraft, (2) late provisioning action in relation to first operational units, and (3) system contamination by grit and rubber particles resulting from poor system arrangement and servicing equipment that is incompatible with presently used chemical agents. Also, WRAMA has received a flood of requistions for spare parts exceeding initially provisioned quantities, which did not consider system contamination problem. Lack of spare parts support is a limiting factor in Ranch Hand operations. (2) Spare parts orders are not being received by Hayes from Eglin AFB, procurement agency (APGC), in a timely manner. (3) No provisions have been made to procure and stock spare complete assemblies, such as, Tank and Cradle Assembly, Engine and Pump Assembly, and Control Console Assembly. b. Progress to Date: (1) Reference a(l) above. A quantity of stop-gap spare parts were procured by AFATL on Contract AF 08(63£)-U89U. However, these have proven inadequate to sustain desired degree of Ranch Hand operation pending delivery of spare parts as a result of formal provisioning by WRAMA. Some support has been furnished by Hayes International through their engineering representative previously stationed with Ranch Hand. Further, WRAMA and DCASO at Hayes are working together with the contractor in an attempt to expedite vendor delivery of specific spare parts. (2) Reference a(2) above. A previous review of this problem with Eglin AFB, procurement activity, was supposed to have alleviated this condition or at least improved flow of documentation from Eglin to Hayes. Further investigation is in order. (3) Reference a(3) above. No progress to date, c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency; (1) Reference a(l) above. The programming check list (AFLC Form 2?) will be revised to reflect increase in number of systems and bases to be supported, and spare parts requirement will be recomputed for appropriate procurement action. 10 �Item Number 9-66-5 - Retrofit Installation of Optimized (Redesigned) Wing Boom on UC-123B Aircraft: a. Problem Presented; No authorization currently exists for installation of the Optimized Wing Boom on Ranch Hand and Lucky Tiger Aircraft. The__wirig..,b,oqra,,npjrf.jgmpl.Qyed by aircraft in SEA, is a ^wn-sl^dajd^^ "c^mpa"tible™¥itff~agen"t"s""n'o*w'"in use, and is not logisticailV"supportable,. f-,,. L™., « „„ „, * ™ . , v , ( ^ n . . ^ * ^ ' - * f !*.* ?-.* < w , h ™ « ^ - « ^ * " * " ' -•«! •.•..^^-*«'^***«f-^^-^''*M'~'*^-mt*l**^™*^-*-»™-'*VKKf~f:<i.-*KX***VJVKVt<*VK* b. Progress to Date: The Optimized Wing Boom is presently being developed by AFATL under Contract AF 08(635)5710 with Hayes International. c. Action to be Taken; The using command will establish appropriate requirement for installation of Optimized Wing Boom. d. Forecast for Completion: 23 Sep 1966. 11 �Item Number 9-66-6 - Maintenance Data and Technical Order Verification; a. Problem Presented: Maintenance data has not been provided field activities due to delayed verification of technical order. This has created considerable difficulty regarding system maintenance and identification of spare parts requirements. b. Progress to Date: Hayes has completed technical order draft in MIL Spec format. Preliminary review of blue line draft has been accomplished by WRAMA at Hayes. Equipment is currently available at Hayes and ready for verification. However, it has a MARK I configured engine installed. The MARK III engine is still pending delivery from vendor's plant where it is being mated to the pump. It was agreed that the difference between the MARK I and MARK III engine was not sufficient to warrant further delay in verification of technical order. WRAMA agrees to accomplish verification on existing equipment with MARK I engine. Final draft is to reflect the MARK III configuration, which will be verified against engineering drawings. c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency; (1) Hayes will take immediate action to establish a date with WRAMA (WRNSTR) for verification meeting at Hayes. Time of meeting should be established to allow a minimum of l£ days for proper notification of participating activities. Ranch Hand representatives agreed there will be no requirement for participation by their activity in this verification. In lieu thereof WRAMA will explore the possibility of obtaining using command assistance from personnel of SAWC at Eglin AFB, who have a current and specific knowledge of .Ranch Hand operation. (2) Assistance of the Hayes - DCASO Quality Office will be required in the performance of this certification and will be primary point of contact relative to WRAMA/Hayes coordination of proposed date of certification meeting. d. Forecast for Completion: At the earliest possible date. 12 �Item Number 9-66-7 - Maintenance Training of Ranch Hand Personnel a. Problem Presented: Newly assigned Ranch Hand Maintenance personnel upon arrival have little or no knowledge as to maintenance of the A/AU5Y-1 dispenser due to there having no prior training on this system. The resulting problems are obvious. b. Progress to Date; None c. Action to be Taken; (1) Ranch Hand should establish and submit an official requirement in accordance with AF Regulation 50-9 to Air Training Command citing type and scope of training required. However, due to extreme urgency of existing requirement, it was requested by Ranch Hand that a contractor representative (Hayes) be provided in the interim, pending development of training capability by ATC. If interim contractor support for indoctrination of Ranch Hand Maintenance personnel is not provided, some other immediate means of training must be investigated. (2) Discussion of contractor support indicated the most feasible and expeditious approach would be use of an existing Eglin AFB contract. However, this will require approval and funding by Hq USAF. d. Forecast for Completion: (1) Ranch Hand submit requirement as soon as possible. (2) Final action on this requirement is yet to be determined. 13 �SECTION IV GENEIUL COMMENTS/OBSERVATIONS 1. Forthcoming flight test of the protype optimized wing boom was introduced as a discussion item by AFATL representative, Lt. Crea. Also recognized was the recent diversion of UC-123B aircraft to Dallas, Texas, pending deployment and voluntary participation and support of Hayes International for the purpose of spraying insecticide in encephalitis infected areas. It was noted that this disease is not restricted to the CONUS as was indicated by an Associated Press report reflecting loss of 381i lives so far this year out of 1616 cases throughout Japan. As a result of the tremendous effectiveness and publicity of the C-123 spray operation in Dallas, it is envisioned that additional requirements are forthcoming for use of A/Alji?Y-l equipped aircraft for insecticide spraying on a world-wide basis, especially in SEA. Lt. Crea indicated he would communicate with TAG regarding intended use of insecticides with the defoliant system. If use is contemplated, TAG will be asked to establish a formal requirement for test of insecticides concurrent with test of defoliants during flight test of optimized wing boom at Eglin during September and October 1966. 2. The Ranch Hand mission is not consistent with the mission of the organization to which they are assigned. This leads to competition for resources, maintenance, and Staff Support. Proper emphasis or priority has not been placed on the defoliation mission thereby restricting the establishment of appropriate facilities for storage and transfer of more than one type chemical agent at Tan Son NHut and other operating locations. A definite advantage is envisioned by identification of the defoliation system as a weapons systems for the delivery and dissemination of chemical ordnance. Specifically, one advantage of a weapons systems identification would be to rationalize the storage and.loading problem by having the chemicals handled by personnel who handle other Air Force ordnance. This could possibly result in taking the aircraft maintenance people out of the ordnance loading business. This was not introduced as a problem as appropriate agencies were not in attendance for proper discussion and action assignment. However, aforementioned weapons systems identification has considerable merit and should be evaluated by PACAF and Hq USAF to determine specific advantages to be derived for further discussion during next meeting. 3. A need was expressed by Ranch Hand for a pamphlet depicting defoliation spraying in SEA covering subjects such as: a. Chemical type, effect and hazzards. b. Type crop and vegatation recognition. c. Psyochological effect on populace. �Such a pamphlet would be invaluable for indoctrination of new crews upon arrival in SEA and would be used to supplement present verbal instructional methods which are accomplished mostly during normal spray missions. Hayes International expressed an interest in preparing such a manual as they have the knowledge and capability. However,, discussion was deferred to next meeting at which time it is hoped that the office of primary responsibility may be able to offer some constructive advice relative to obtaining this pamphlet. 15 �SECTION V A/A45Y-1 DEFOLIATION CONFERENCE ATTENDEES Mcij Robert N. Scheidecker, WRAMA Capt Richard Peshkin, Ranch Hand Lt William J.Crea, Jr., ATCB SMS Charles Lightner, Ranch Hand Mr. Gene Smith, WRAMA W.B. O'Neal, Hayes C.F. Conklin, Hayes J.L. Harrington, Hayes John Bonta, Hayes Don Smallwood, Hayes J.E. Merk, Hayes Stan Burkot, Hayes Ronnie Dear, Hayes M.J. McMahan, Hayes 16 �SECTION VI DISTRIBUTION Nr of Copies 2 2 Activity 2 MACV 7th AF (DOPR) (DMP) (DAFSC/AFSC Lia Off) 315th ACW (DO) h 309th ACS (SASF) 1 1 3 1 1 h 377th CSG (DGM) (D/fo) 377th QMS llith ACW (Comdr) PACAF (DM) (DM) (DMMB) Hq USAF (AFRDDA) (AFRDQRA) (AFSMEAA) (AFXOP) (AFSMSDA) TAG (DOFT-S) (DOO-S) (DORQ-FM) ATC (ATTAT-B) Dept of Aerospace Munitions (GS-WC) AFLC (MCMTA) (MCMTE) (MCO) (MCOOM) ASD (ASJB) 1 1 l 1 3 3 AFSC (SCSMM) HQ RTD (RTTtf) UljOSth CCT3 SAWC-LC AFATL (ATCB) SAAMA (SANM) 12 (SANNR) (SAOR) WRAMA (WRNQO) Name J-3 Chemical Branch Major Haugaton Lt Col McCellan Maj Richard Engian Lt Col Reddrick Major Kline Lt Col Ferguson Major Dresser Captain Peshkin S/MSGT C. B. Lightner Col Harris Lt Col Carter Major Sibley Colonel Bradburn Colonel Thomas B. Kennedy Lt Col C. N. Powell Maj ¥. A. McKinney Lt Col Carter Lt Col May Mr. Ed Dougherty Maj Vinson Maj White Maj Marshall Capt Adams Maj Novikoff Lt Col Gibson TSgt Gailes Mr. Fields Mr. Whitacre Mr. Finch Mr. Clark Mr. Brown Mr. Brothers Mr. Pfiefer Mr. Goodwin Capt John R. Spey Lt Col Huston Lt Crea Mr. Arthur Miller Mr. Jack Burton Maj R. N. Scheidecker 17 �SECTION VII A/A45Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER SYSTEM SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser, designed and manufactured by Hayes International Corporation, Birmingham, Alabama, is a complete airborne defoliant dispensing system. The dispenser is packaged to permit rapid installation into, and removal from, C-123 aircraft, with only minor modifications required to the affected aircraft. (See figures 1 and 2.) The Internal Defoliant Dispenser, Part No. A/A45Y-1, provides for loading, transporting and dispensing of 1000 gallons of defoliant chemical, and in case of an emergency, dumping the full load overboard in less than 45 seconds. The tank and cradle assembly is mounted on detachable casters which are removed before anchoring in the aircraft. A control console is electrically connected into an electrical network which in turn is connected to the aircraft electrical system, certain controls and indicators in the flight compartment and the electrically operated units within the system. Pressure is applied to defoliant chemical, by an engine and pump assembly mounted on the same frame with the tank. The defoliant is transported to a nozzle assembly mounted in the slipstream of the aircraft in such a manner that a strip 250 or 300 feet wide along the line of flight is effectively covered. The nozzle assembly is designed for the most effective atomizing of the defoliant and coverage of foliage to be destroyed. The dispensing operation and, in emergency, the dump valve operation can be controlled from either the control console near the tank and cradle assembly or from the pilot's position in the flight compartment. CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS The internal defoliant dispenser is capable of containing 1000 gallons of defoliant which can be completely dumped overboard by remote control or manually in less than 45 seconds. The pump is capable of maintaining 60 + 5 psi pressure during the normal 3- to 4-minute period of operational spraying. Refilling the tank assembly is accomplished with power and equipment contained within the defoliation dispensing system. 18 �A / A 4 5 Y - 1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER .TANK VENT .MANHOLE COVER DUMP VALVE (SEE FIGURE 5) TANK LIQUID LEVEL ENGINE EXHAUST VIBRATION ISOLATOR SEGMENT CENTRIFUGAL PUMP (SEE FIGURE 3) TIE-DOWN FITTINGS MAIN SPRAY VALVE RECIRCULATING LINE CONTROL CONSOLE (SEE FIGURE 4) JACKING LUG TEMPERATURE INDICATOR JET PUMP REFILL CRADLE NOTE: SEE FIGURE 6 FOR TAIL BOOM AND FIGURE 7 FOR WING BOOM. FIGURES 8 AND 9 SHOW A/A45Y-1 INSTALLED IN C-123 AIRCRAFT. Figure 1. Mo/or Components of Defoliant Dispenser 19 �Figure 2. Defoliant Dispenser (right side) LEADING PARTICULARS Length Width Height (without casters) Weight Empty Full Capacity Normal operating pressure Normal dispensing interval Emergency dump duration Electrical system Dump valve operation Refill time (approx) Dump valve Spray valve Suction valve 16 feet, 4 inches 4 feet, 10 inches 6 feet, 5 inches 1420 pounds 12,420 pounds 1000 gallons 60 + 5 psi 3 to 4 minutes Less than 45 seconds 28 volts dc (supplied by host aircraft) Electrical or manual 20 minutes Electrical, 10 inch Electrical, 3 inch Manual, 3 inch 20 �TANK AND CRADLE ASSEMBLY The tank and cradle assembly is the major unit of the entire system, having a 1000-gallon tank with baffles, manhole, tube connections, and stabilizing and tiedown brackets; an engine and pump assembly which consists of a four cylinder, horizontally opposed air-cooled, engine and pump directly coupled to the engine ,H Figure 3. Centrifugal Pump crankshaft; and a cradle which carries the tank, the engine and pump assembly, and is provided with four casters which are readily detachable. A temperature indicator and a liquid lever gage are installed in the tank. The engine is slightly modified from its original configuration to achieve adaptability to the requirements of the dispenser system. The detachable casters are to provide limited mobility and are removed when the unit is tied down. The defoliant used in the dispenser is stored in the tank and is fed through a suction line to the pump. The pump is driven by an air-cooled engine and forces the defoliant through a discharge line to a spray valve. A recirculation line is 21 �provided so that when the spray valve is closed, the defoliant will recirculate back through the tank. When the spray valve is open, the defoliant is forced into the spray boom and atomized by spray nozzles. When the tank is empty, a float-operated switch, located in the tank, automatically stops the engines. The centrifugal pump consists essentially of an impeller and a pump body, and is driven by the engine through a direct drive. The engine drives the pump and the speed of the engine controls the quantity of defoliant being dispensed. (See figure 3.) The recirculation line incorporates a jet-pump (ejector) tank refilling system which utilizes the fluid left in the tank from prior operation to initially operate the jet pump. CONTROL CONSOLE The control console is the nerve center of the defoliation system. All functions are controlled from this position; all monitoring equipment is located in this position; and the electrical supply is channeled and protected at this position. Prefabricated electrical cables tic the control console to all related REFILL FLUID POWER FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE FWD UNIT AFT UNIT STARTER AND SPRAY CHOKE THROTTLES INDICATORS V A L V E TANK EMPTY FWD UNIT AFT UNIT ENGINES FWD UNIT OIL PRESSURE LOW OPERATE AFT UNIT OIL PRESSURE LOW OPERATE MAGNETO SPRAY VALVE © THROTTLES OPEN INCREASE t PILOT POSITION FWD UNIT (o) (o) AFT UNIT DECREASE Figure 4, Control Console 22 �parts of the system, including the controls on the pilot's instrument panel and the aircraft electrical supply system. Tandem or single installations arc controlled and monitored from the control console without any changes or alterations being performed. In the event of electrical power failure of the aircraft electrical system, certain critical functions have an option of manual operation. (See figure 4.) DUMP VALVE The dump valve is a 10 inch gate valve having both electrical or manual activation. It is designed for horizontal (vertical flow) installation and liquid flow in only one direction. The bottom of the defoliant tank incorporates a vortex interrupter and adapter to which the dump valve is secured and is in perfect alignment with an opening and spring loaded door in the belly of the aircraft. A high speed motor coupled to an actuator provides 2 second operation of the dump valve in either direction and circuit manipulation to indicate open condition. (See figure 5.) Figure 5. Dump Valve 23 �SPRAY BOOM The prime function of the spray boom is to discharge the defoliant under pressure at such a location and at such an angle that air flow, in the proximity of the discharge (spray) nozzle, contributes to the proper density of spray, the consistency of the defoliant blanket; and the lateral dimension of the effective strip. Two spray booms are available when the C-123 model aircraft is used and each boom satisfies a specific set of requirements. TIE-DOWNS TAIL BOOM INSTALLATION STRUTS Figure 6. Tail Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing 24 �LEFT HAND SIDE OF FUSELAGE AT THIS POINT CENTER WING PIPING EXTERNAL BOOM I 3 >Q CO •o CD o o NOZZLE FAIRING SPRAY NOZZLES INBOARD OF NACELLE NOZZLES OUTBOARD OF NACELLE <L FUSELAGE �The tail spray boom (figure 6) is mounted outside the aircraft, approximately midway of the aft cargo loading door. It is designed for simple and fast installation and removal and erovldesjjoyerage of a 250 foot strip. The wing spray boom (figure 7) is installed in the inside of the center wing and externally underneath the outboard wing. As compared to the tail boom, its instaltion and removal is more complex and is considered a more permanent installation. The wing boom provides coverage of a 300 foot strip and the effectiveness of the application is more uniform. Installation and removal of either spray boom does not require special skills or special tools. Figure 8. Installation in C-723 (left side) �AIRCRAFT INSTALLATION The dispenser installation in C-123 aircraft consists of towing the tank and cradle assembly (unfilled) into the aircraft and securing it to the aircraft floor utilizing twenty 10,000-pound hook and chain assemblies and the cargo floor tie-down fittings (figures 8 and 9). All piping, hose assemblies and electrical cables are installed which tie the A/A45Y-1 dispenser into the aircraft (as modified) systems, and the control console is secured to the aircraft floor; thus, making the aircraft-dispenser combination ready for servicing and operation. Figure 9- Installation in C-123 (right side) 27 �VIET NAM RANCH HAND OPERATIONS A sketch of the ground support equipment used by RANCH HAND to refill the A/A45Y-1 dispensers with agent is shown in figure 10. The refill system presented here is the system used at Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Viet Nam. It utilizes four 1000 gallon HOURGLASS tanks. A similar refill system is used at Da Nang, but utilizes only three HOURGLASS tanks. These tanks are the predecessor to the A/A45Y-1 and incorporate a 10-horsepower engine and pump unit by which the agent is transferred into the aircraft. The agent is delivered in 55-gallon drums, then pumped from three drums at a time into the refill tanks. This is the slowest part of the operation. The procedure for filling tanks is as follows: a. The number 2 tank is filled from 55-gallon drums. b. The agent in the number 2 tank is pumped into tank number 3. c. Agent in tank number 3 is then pumped into tank number 4. d. Tank number 2 is refilled and the agent pumped into tank number 3. e. Tank number 2 is again refilled from the drums and pumped into tank number 1. f. All other tanks now filled, tank number 2 is refilled again. Upon return from a mission, the aircraft is backed as close as possible to the refill tanks and the systems are refilled with agent using a commercial fire hose. After completion of the days work the HOURGLASS tanks are filled and the agent transferred into the aircraft. The refill tanks are then refilled in preparation for a second mission. Due to the long time needed to fill from the drums, the RANCH HAND crews are limited to only one turn around, or a total of two missions. A big disadvantage of refilling in this manner is the problem of contamination to the agent. Foreign matter gets into the refill tanks and from there into aircraft defoliant dispensing system. The rubber inside lining of fire hoses, presently used, is acted upon by the defoliant and causes large pieces of rubber to be released into the defoliant stream, thereby reducing the system effectiveness. See figures 11 thru 14 for potographic on-site refill operations. 28 �Figure 70. Existing Defoliant Transfer System Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Viet Nam 29 �Figure 17. Ranch Hand Ytork Areo Figure 12. Hour Glass Tank and Pump 30 �Figure 13. Hour Glass Tank and Pump (Insulated) Figure 14. Hour Glass Spider Pump 31 �OPTIMIZED DEFOLIANT HANDLING SYSTEM GENERAL A complete optimized defoliant handling system utilizes three engine-pump combination units to transfer the defoliant from original containers to A/A45Y-1 units in aircraft readied for an operational defoliation mission. A storage tank, platform, control consoles, hoses, and nozzles, combined into a well balanced system, accomplish the entire defoliant handling operation. Economy of man-hours, reduction of turn-around time and elimination of wasted defoliant are the prime factors for consideration. (See figures 1 and 2.) GENERAL LAYOUT DESCRIPTION A platform, having a height compatible with a flat bed trailer and an area to accommodate a 10,000 gallon tank and three engine-pump transfer units, is located in close proximity to truck roadways and aircraft parking ramp. The platform would have one engine-pump unit on the side adjacent to the truck roadway, a 10,000 gallon tank in the center and two engine-pump units on the side nearest the aircraft parking ramp. Hoses, nozzles, and manifolds are used to tie all major components into a well balanced and efficient system. SPECIFIC The actual arrangement of the defoliant handling system is contingent on the complexion and layout of the particular air base; however, certain specifics must be met to achieve maximum effectiveness. PLATFORM The platform is a locally manufactured structure approximately the same height as a flat bed trailer and having lateral dimensions as necessary to accommodate the shape and size of the 10, 000-gallon tank plus the related units. A support for a suction hose and manifold is located on the truck side of the platform and is designed so that the suction manifold is supported at approximately the centerline of the flat bed trailer. The platform deck has 1/4-inch cracks between decking members to dissipate any defoliant spillage. ENGINE AND PUMP UNIT The engine and pump unit is identical to that incorporated in the A/A45Y-1 dispenser and is specifically engineered for effective transfer 32 �Figure 15. Loyo«f �FOi LIME LIME 55 GAL FOR f If 16. Defoliant 34 �of defoliant under sustained operation. The engine is a government standard, air-cooled, four cylinder, four stroke cycle, horizontally opposed model modified for remote control when mated with the control console. The engine is available in large quantities, economical to operate, proven in performance, and easily maintained due to maximum accessibility. It is designed to operate a minimum of 1500 hours at rated load and speed between major overhauls. Its extensive use in defoliation operations tends to standardize maintenance and provide a spare parts source through controlled cannibalization. The pump has been modified by the manufacturer so that it attaches to the engine at the blower section and the drive end of the crankshaft thus giving the engine and pump a one to one ratio. Shock mounting is provided to the engine-pump unit. CONTROL CONSOLE The control console is located at the end of the storage to permit visual monitoring of any engine-pump unit on the platform. All transfer functions are controlled by a single operator at the control console position. In addition to control functions, there are certain monitoring gages and instruments installed in the instrument panel of the control console. The electrical network is considered semi-permanently installed and so arranged that simple maintenance is quickly accomplished. TANK The tank has a 10, 000-gallon capacity, protected sight gage, manhole, vent, drain line connection, and facilities for securing to the platform. The sight gage is a vertically mounted glass tube with connections to tank at each end, protectors to reduce the probability of breaking, and calibrations to indicate tank contents. MISCELLANEOUS Suction Hose. Suction hoses are provided having an inside diameter which will not be too restrictive to defoliant flow and having a wall structure to prevent collapse of hose. Hoses which are frequently disconnected have quick-disconnects to prevent rapid deterioration at connecting points. Pressure Hoses. Pressure hoses are capable of pressures up to 100 psig and have adapters in cases where control nozzles are attached. Hose material is selected to withstand the chemical action of the defoliant. 35 �SYSTEM TIE-IN The storage tank is located in the approximate center of the platform with one engine-pump unit on the truck side of the platform and two engine-pump units on the aircraft side of the platform. The single engine-pump unit has a 3-inch suction hose connected between the pump and the suction manifold. The suction manifold has three 1-1/4 inch suction hoses attached which are suspended from the suction manifold in such a manner as to hang directly over three 55-gallon drums on the flat bed trailer. A control console is secured to the platform deck in the proximity of the end of the storage tank and is electrically connected to the engine-pump unit. Two engine-pump units and their companion control console are located on the aircraft side of the platform and are shock mounted to the platform deck. The suction ports of the two engine-pump units are manifolded so that a single line attaches to the bottom of the storage tank. The discharge (pressure) ports of the two engine-pump units are also manifolded and after the pressure manifold, a single line conveys the defoliant to the aircraft having A/A45Y-1 dispensers to be serviced. Check valves are installed in pump discharge lines to permit operation of a single engine-pump unit when demands are less than maximum. At each aircraft position, a smaller pressure line with a shutoff nozzle is connected into the main line hose. These two engine-pump units are controlled concurrently from a single control console. An electrical network is provided which gives electrical tie-in of all related electrically functioning units. Cable insulation is chemically unaffected by defoliant in the environs of the defoliant handling system. CAPABILITIES Transfer 10, 000 gallons from drums to storage tank (less truck move time) Service two A/A45Y-1 dispensers (in aircraft) Service four A/A45Y-1 dispensers (in aircraft) Remotely controlled functions: 1. Drums to storage tank shutoff valves 2. Storage tank to aircraft main lines (2) shutoff valves 25 minutes 5 minutes 5 minutes 3. Engine throttle ^ Engine starter Engine & ignition 6 36 �PORTABLE DEFOLIANT HANDLING UNIT The portable defoliant handling unit idea is conceived for military installations where limited servicing of A/A45Y-1 dispensers might be required. The trailer is capable of traveling at faster speeds and for greater distances than the A/ A/A45Y-1 dispenser and, being a powered unit, it speeds up the servicing of the dispensers installed in aircraft. Overall dimensions are kept within limits which will permit air transportation of loaded units to isolated landing fields or airstrips. Technical data and capabilities are contained in figure 17. 37 �DESCRIPTION HAOt FtOM- HAYfS /wr<S*«*t tefOLIATIOM StSfitNSeX. _ fOR MlttTHAY UHfgLS j TMfS »gf VSfO. It » 8 to PI.Y FIK1 tttiiS VtttHT 1,O6O «.»$, IS,OOO ISS. t,t»6O Og vtrtt nspioTt .ceNrtot. sr/ineM POM tHttee WUCMFT 8V OCCSATOS IHStif ffltCSfifr n» PltfYtNT SOftP&lfT. Ktt*S.Ufl6HTS,fST. UHftii tiffin SPIillM®, ttOSf 3 JW, DIA. X 10 f f LON6 Hosts uirnoutcx coMwecroMS taun£D IN rusrs. fsott svi^fNsioN. s@i/st,e VflLVt xCO</PLM6 LU.H1 TMl f STOP suirctf THtOTTiE Figure 17, Tank Trailer F l t l f R FOSL SA4E FUEL Litjoid Refill 38 �66 IWIEPft/lTIOVXl CORPORATION SMTWTFS SMTWTFS SMTWTFS SMTWTFS JAN FEB MAR APR 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 31 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 o 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 8 15 22 29 1 6 7 8 13 14 15 20 21 22 27 28 MAY 1 2 8 9 15 16 22 23 29 e 3 10 17 24 31 4 11 18 25 O 3 10 17 24 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 JUN 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 SEP 4 6 7 11 12 13 14 18 19 20 21 25 26 27 28 2 9 16 23 1 8 15 22 29 2 3 9 10 16 17 23 24 30 — 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 31 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 4 11 18 25 O 3 5 11 12 10 17 18 19 24 25 26 31 6 13 20 27 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 3 AUG 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 NOV 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 1 .._ 2 8 15 16 22 23 29 30 1 2 "~3 10 17 24 JUl OCT 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 2 3 4 9 10 11 16 17 18 23 ® O 30 2 9 16 23 30 -3 10 17 24 31 DEC 5 12 19 26 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 © * NOTES 39 �NOTES 40 �I I I t METROPOLITAN SCALE ONE INCH F.QUftiS APPROXIMATED 2 = MILES Controlled Access Highways 'fi'.-s-:e c-o ?. ' w-'v =• !--ec-c'ges' Other Dual Thoroughfares Principal Through Routes Other Paved Roads Streets and Connecting Roads Mileage Distances between red dots Highway £gj) ,nterstate Numbers. \~S @ U.S ^""^ @State [77] Counts I �MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION AIR LINES Air France Alitala Air Lines BOAC & BOAC Cunard Delta Air Lines Eastern Air Lines Southern Airways Trans World Air Lines United Air Lines Hotels: Pick-Bankhead 2300 5th Ave. North Dinkler-Tutwiler 2005 5th Ave. North Essex House Hotel 605 North 21st Redmont Hotel 2101 5th Ave. North Thomas Jefferson Hotel 1631 2nd Ave North PHONE 251-7076 324-1291 323-7259 592-9601 323-7711 595-3737 WX-9000 592-9611 251-3231 252-8161 322-1771 251-0171 252-7141 (apartments) (apartments) Motels and Motor Inns: Anchor Motel 4121 3rd Ave South Birmingham Airport Motel Municipal Airport Downtowner Motor Inn 2224 5th Ave North Guest House Motor Inn 951 South 18th Holiday Inn (downtown) 1313 3rd Ave. North Holiday Inn (Irondale) 7941 Crestwood Blvd. Parliament House Motor Hotel 420 South 20th Roebuck Motels 9229 4th Ave. South Sheraton Motor Inn 2040 Highland Ave. South Town House Motor Hotel 2008 8th Ave South 595-6157 592-0061 324-0601 324-8653 323-8931 592-0311 323-7211 833-9152 323-4413 251-9235 Physicians And Surgeons Exchange 871-4611 TAXI CABS Yellow Cab Co. Two Way Cab Co. Checker Cab Co. Stricklin Taxi Cab Co. 252-1131 592-7421 323-7741 841-3239 42 �DEPAR"MEHT OF THE 1 AIR FORCE HtADQUARTERS V.ARNER ROBINS AiR MATERIAL AREA (AFLC) ROLJINi AiR FORCE BASti, GEORGIA 31093 A V , N o r ° w i i N Q O (Mr. Ginith/^Olj1?) T0: 1? Oct 1?66 l,o/U sties Support Conference, A/Ai^Y-l Dispeaser, Defoliant, C-123 A i r c r a f t (WIAMA(WRNQO) Ltr, 19 Sep 1966 and WRAMA Msg (U) WRNQ-3256?, /O Sop 1966) r rAC (DOFT-S/Maj Marshall) Langley Al^B Va 23365 Request action Item Number 9-66-2 "TCTO for Installation of A/Al6'Y-l System in UC-123B Aircraft, Class V Mod 1776" be removed from referenced conference minutes and replaced with attached revised Item Number 9-66-2 "Installation of A/Ali$Y~l System in C-123B Aircraft" . K)H THE COMMANDEJi-y ROBERT N. SCHEIDECKER Major, USAP1 Chief, Operations Branch Directorate, Materiel Management 1 Atch Subj Minutes Item Number 9-66-2 )DOF1 �Horn Number 9-66-2 - Inatf^Ut^ a . Problem Presented; Difficulty was reported by AFATL personnel in obtaining appropriate documentation from C-123 Aircraft SSM for procurement of data on Eglin APB Contract AF 08(635)-l489ii dated 20 Oct 1965. Also, problems were reported in obtaining -1 Flight Manuals and Maintenance Handbooks by Ranch Hand Personnel. b. Progress to Date: 1. Since the A/Alt5l-l System was being procured on an R & D Contract and had not been approved by CSAF/AFLC for installation in the C123 Aircraft, no action could be taken by the SSM to provide for procurement of TCTO data. 2. Flight and operational information for those C-123 Aircraft having A/Al^Y-l System installed is provided in T. 0. 1C-123(B)-1 dated 15 July 1965 and 1C-123B(1)-15-1 dated 23 Apr 1966. WRAMA is now conducting a complete review of the -1 Manual and at completion any change needed will be made. MR. ll;78-3 dated 21 Jun 1966 approved procurement of necessary installation TCTO 1C-123-590, Engineering Data and Handbooks changes for the approved Class V Mod 1??6. Procurement action is now being negotiated with Fairchild-Hiller for this data. Pending delivery of this data, the schematics and sketches as shown in the operational manual may be utilized to perform minimum maintenance. c. Action to be Taken an_d Action Agency; 1. Ranch Hand Personnel take action through appropriate distribution channels to obtain available Dash One Handbook data for A/Ali5Y-l System installed in C-123 Aircraft. ?. SSM make follow-up action to assure procurement of additional required data in a timely manner. 3. d. SSM expedite - 1 Flight Manual Review. Forecast fo_r_ Completion: Target date for delivery of additional data including published -1 Flight Manual is Feb 1967. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 002 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0020 Series The series number of the original item. Series I Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1905-05-19 Title A name given to the resource Minutes A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/1c371b863916809cb625476bd6ed4682.pdf 33ad85cdca7b643ae6a0411c790b26a2 PDF Text Text Item ID Number: oooes Author Scheidecker, Robert N. Corporate Author u.s. Air Force RBDOrt/ArtlOlO TltlO Minij es: t A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Journal/Book Title Year 1 66 Month/Day Au ust Color w Number of Images 45 DeSCPlptOn Notes Pa9es 32-34 missing 9 a Friday, December 01, 2000 Page 65 of 91 �, 1966 * Minutes A/A45y-l internal defoliant dispenser system: Support Conference f / A/A45Y-1 INTERMAL DEFOLIANT '25 AND 26 AUGUST 1966 �D E P A R T M E N T OF THP MR F O R C E HLADOUAR"CRS EARNER ROBINS Aift MATERIEL AREA fAFLO ROtlINi AIR FORCE BASE, GEORGIA 31093 •••'• iN "'•!" Wii'NQO (Mr. 1? Oct 1966 - .-JK i. I,or, I sties Support Conference, A/Al^Y-l Dispenser, Defoliant, C-123 A L r c r a f t (WHAMA(WRNQO) Ltr, 19 Sep 1966 and WRAMA Msg (U) WRNQ/O Sep 1966) ro: TAG (DOFT-S/Maj Marshall) Langley AFB Va 23365 Request action Item Number 9-66-2 "TCTO for Installation of A/AloY-1 System in UC-123B Aircraft, Class V Mod 1776" be removed from re-ferenced conference minutes and replaced with attached revised Item Number 9-66-2 "Installation of A/Aii5Y-l System in C-123B Aircraft". FOR THE COMMANDER,, ROBERT N. SCHEIDECKER Major, USAF Chief, Operations Branch . Directorate, Materiel Management 1 Atch Subj Minutes Item Number 9-66-2 �Item Number 9-66-2 - .Installation of A/AJj$Y-3^ System in C-123B Aircraft: a. proM.em Presented: Difficulty was reported by AFATL personnel in obtaining appropriate documentation from C-123 Aircraft SSM for procurement of data on Eglin AFB Contract AF 08(635)-l489li dated 20 Oct 1965. Also, problems were reported in obtaining -1 Flight Manuals and Maintenance Handbooks by Ranch Hand Personnel. b. Progress to Date; 1. Since the A/Al^Y-l System was being procured on an R & D Contract and had not been approved by CSAF/AFLC for installation in the C123 Aircraft, no action could be taken by the SSM to provide for procurement of TCTO data. 2,, Flight and operational information for those C-123 Aircraft having A/Al^Y-l System installed is provided in T. 0. 1C-123(B)-1 dated 1$ July 1?65 and 1C-123B(1)-15-1 dated 23 Apr 1966. VRAMA is now conducting a complete review of the -1 Manual and at completion any change needed will be made. MR 1^78-3 dated 21. Jun 1966 approved procurement of necessary installation TCTO 1C-123-590, Engineering Data and Handbooks changes for the approved Class V Mod 1??6. Procurement action is now being negotiated with F'airchild-Killer for this data. Pending delivery of this data, the schematics and sketches as shown in the operational manual may be utilized to perform minimum maintenance. c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency : !„ Ranch Hand Personnel take action through appropriate distribution channels to obtain available Dash One Handbook data for A/AliSl-l System installed in C-123 Aircraft. i ?„ SSM make follow-up action to assure procurement of additional required data in a timely manner. d. 3. SSM expedite - 1 Flight Manual Review. i Forecast for Completion; Target date for delivery of additional data including published -1 Flight Manual is Feb 196?. �INDEX Item Number Title Page Number Summary 1 Section I Introduction/Ranchijland^Report 2 Section n A/A45Y-1 System Status Technical Manual St atu s 3 4 9-66-7 Action Items Ground Support Equipment TCTO for Installation of A/A45Y-1 System in UC-123B"Aircraft, Class V Mod 1776 Retrofit Installation of MARK m Engine Spares Retrofit Installation of Optimized (Redesigned^ Wing Boom on UC-123B Aircraft Maintenance Data and Technical Order Verification M aintenance T raining of Ranch Hand Personnel 13 Section IV General Comments/Observations 14 Section V A/A45Y-1 Defoliation Conference Attendees 16 Section VI Distribution 17 Section A/A45Y-1 Internal DefolIant Dispenser System System Description Capabilities and Limitations Leading Particulars Tank and Cradle Assembly 18 Section III 9-66-1 9-66-2 9-66-3 9-66-4 9-66-5 9-66-6 Control Console Dump Valve Spray Boom Aircraft Installation Viet Nam Ranch Hand Operations Optimized Defoliant Handling System Portable Defoliant Handling Unit 5 5 7 8 10 11 12 18 18 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 32 37 �Figure Number Title Page Number Illustrations Figure 1 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 10 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Major Components of Defoliant Dispenser Control Console Dump Valve Tail Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing Wing Spray Boom Existing Defoliant Transfer System Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Viet Nam Optimized Defoliant Handling System Layout Defoliant Handling System Components Tank Trailer Defoliation Liquid Refill 19 22 23 24 25 29 33 34 38 Photographs Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Defoliant Dispenser (right side) Centrifugal Pump Installation in C-123 (left side) Installation in C-123 (right side) Ranch Hand Work Area Hour Glass Tank and Pump Hour Glass Tank and Pump (insulated) Hour Glass Spider Pump 20 21 26 27 30 30 31 31 �SUMMARY 1. The first Logistics Support Meeting for the A/AkSY-l Defoliant Dispenser was held at Hayes International Corp, Birmingham, Ala., on 2li and 25 Aug 1966. 2. The purpose of this meeting was to review program status, evaluate "l-'ajor Problem Areas", and initiate and assign action as required to assure the timely and successful completion of program requirements for enhancement of logistic support. 3. Areas within this program requiring action, further refinement and overall close surveillance are documented in section III and IV of these minutes. h. A follow-up meeting was determined essential in order to review progress made on action items, reassess support posture, and include representatives of agencies absent from this meeting. 5. The minutes of this meeting will be used as a basis of agenda for the next meeting. Each action agency should complete their assigned action in accordance with the scheduled dates, if possible, and be prepared to present status of action taken at the next scheduled meeting. Additional items may be added to the agenda for review and discussion at this time. However, to assure adequate time for evaluation and staffing, it is necessary that proposed agenda items be submitted to WRAMA (WRNQO) at least one week before the scheduled meeting date. • 6. The next meeting is tentatively scheduled at Hayes International Corp., Birmingham, Ala., 11-1.3 Oct 1966. Confirmation of date and location will be provided by separate correspondence. 7. It is desired to take this opportunity to compliment each representative for his active participation and support. Especially appreciated are the efforts of Hayes International in hosting this meeting and the fine assistance rendered. The productive results obtained and anticipated as a result of this meeting will be beneficial to all agencies concerned, and should improve SE.A-s.upport and operational capability. ROBERT N'. SCHEIDECKEY'"' ""*" Major, USAF Chief, Operations 'Branch Directorate, Materiel Management �SECTION I INTRODUCTION/RANCH HAND REPORT 1. Mr. W. B. O'Neal welcomed the conferees and opened the meeting. Introduction was given by Lt William Crea, Air Force Project Engineer. Status of the program was reviewed by Mr. Don Smallwood, Hayes Project Engineer (Reference Section II). 2. Captain Peshkin gave the report from Ranch Hand. They are growing very rapidly and a considerable number of problems have developed. As early as January or February, it was realized that additional aircraft were going to be programmed for SEA. Storage, maintenance, and training requirements were anticipated; however, no staff support was furnished after discussions with operations and maintenance personnel at Tan Son NHut. Finally, the aircraft began to arrive. Storage problems still exist as does spare parts support. Flying continues at approximately 25 sorties per aircraft per month. This is the MACV planning figure for programming chemicals. Ranch Hand would like to be able to operate from an additional operating location in the II Corps area to increase sortie effectiveness. There are presently 9 aircraft in the country 3 at Da Nang and 6 at Tan Son NHut. The operation continues successful because the equipment is basically good and the air frame is the best available. The defoliant system has the same characteristics, simplicity, and reliability. The main problems are as indicated below. Ranch Hand has been fortunate in their maintenance support resulting in almost 100$ aircraft availability. Many of Ranch Hand's problems could be helped by better staff support. �SECTION II A/A45Y-1 SYSTEM STATUS ITEM CONTRACT 1. A/A45Y-1 Prototype 08(635)3609 2. A/A45Y-1 Production 08(635)3609 3. Dump Valve Kit 08(635)4894 4. Wing Boom Prototype 08(635)5710 5. Wing Boom Production 08(635)5710 6. Engine Mod Mark IH 08(635)4894 QUANTITY DELIVERY DATE REMARKS Sept. 1963 Used in C-130 Test at Eglin Systems started at Hayes 20 Aug. 1964 Six Operational Systems in Viet Nam. One destroyed in C-123 crash in Viet Nam. Seven delivered to FairchildHiller Corp. for installation in C-123. One awaiting dump valve and will be shipped to Fairchild-Hiller. One remaining at Hayes for Wing Boom Test. One unassigned. Three cannibalized for spare parts by Eglin. 17 Aug. 1965 All operational A/A45Y-1 systems equipped with dump valve. Sept. 1966 Fabrication complete by 23 Aug. 1966. 20 March 1967 (Anticipated) Delivery to be 150 days after approval of Prototype. 15 Jan. 1967 (Anticipated) Twelve to be installed on new purchase of twelve A/A45Y-1 by WRAMA and the remaining three for spares. �TECHNICAL MANUAL STATUS ITEM STATUS REMARKS T. O. 11C15-3-4-2 FIELD, DEPOT OVERHAUL WITH IPB INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER MODEL A/A45Y-1 Awaiting validation of System Manual. In process review performed at Hayes by WRAMA, 20 and 21 July 1966 T. O. 11C15-3-4-2 FIELD, DEPOT OVERHAUL WITH IPB INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER MODEL A/A45Y-1 In process. Manual change to add Mark HI engine pump controls T. C. T. O. (Proposed) No contractural requirements. Never was negotiated as per supplemental agreement number 2. Contractor recommends preparation of T. C. T. O. for installation of system in C-123 aircraft T. O. 11C15-3-4-2 FIELD, DEPOT OVERHAUL WITH IPB INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER MODEL A/A45Y-1 In process. Change to cover wing boom program T. C. T. O. In process. To cover installation of wing boom A/A45Y-1 on C-123 for aircraft T. O. 's To cover installation of Mark HI engine controls in field to retrofit existing systems T. C. T. O. Awaiting receipt of 118A and contract coverage �SECTION III ACTION ITEMS Item Number 9-66-1 - Ground Support Equipment; a. Problem Presented; (1) There are four 1,000 gallon Transfer Tanks (Hour Glass) and one 2,^00 gallon Fuel Servicing Unit, Type F-7 currently located at Tan Son NHut with a 5,000 gallon R-2 Storage Tank in the process of installation. There are also three 1,000 gallon Transfer Tanks (Hour Glass) located at Da Nang. The unsystemized arrangement and limited capacity of this equipment does not give sufficient capability to; (1) Fill aircraft that are located at Tan Son NHut, (2) Turn-around aircraft as rapidly as necessary, and (3) Operate with the three different type chemical agents now being used. The present system is characterized by the following; (a) Insufficient tank storage capacity, (b) Insufficient transfer capacity which limits turnaround time, (c) Inability to systematically select proper chemical appropriate to target requirements, (d) Inability to evacuate unused agent from tanks in aircraft. (2) The present system is progressively deteriorating due to use of 1952 vintage Hour Glass transfer equipment. This system cannot be supported and therefore will be eliminated from inventory at failure or when sooner replaced. Glaring deficiencies of this system are as noted; (a) Non-standard system, (b) Limited or no spare parts available, (c) Fire hose used to connect transfer tanks deteriorates in from h to 10 days, ( d ) Contamination of flow system (mainly due to rubber particles from fire hose lining plus sand and other foreign particles introduced by siphoning probes) because of lack of well thought out systems approach, (e) Inadequate pumping capability (Spider pump used for siphoning agent from 55 gallon drums is old and weak). k- Progress to JDate; (1) An R-2 Storage Tank (5,000 gallon), salvaged from an R-2 Servicing Unit, is to be ins tolled by Ranch Hand to provide additional transfer and storage capability and is awaiting plumbing installation by Base Civil Engineer. (Compatibility of this tank with existing chemical agents is doubtful). (2) One F-7 Servicing Unit is now in use with five more on order. (So far this equipment is functionally satisfactory, but will need teflon hosing and seals for compatibility with existing agents). �(3) Use of ARMY" Bladder Tanks for storage is being investigated by 377 Combat Support Group (Base Fuels), Tan Son NHut. (Question of agent compatibility still remains). (l») The A/A15Y-1 System has a self-filling capability, but was found to be too slow and therefore incompatible with quick turn-around re quirement. (5) Use of B-l and B-1A Nitric Acid Servicing Units (2,000 gallon capacity) were proposed by Hayes as they were believed to be in excess storage. Investigation by WRAMA Vehicle Manager revealed these units to be unsatisfactory for their designed purpose and were dismantled and removed from inventory. c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency; (1) Provide adequate bulk storage and pumping facilities for three different chemical agents at two, possibly three different bases. A requirement exists for the simultaneous filling of as many as nine aircraft at Tan Son NHut and three at Da Nang with a possible total of five at Da Nang and three at another operating location (does not include Lucky Tiger). Action agency to be determined. (2) Provide additional F-7 Servicing Units to Ranch Hand WRAMA (WRNR). (3) Provide teflon hoses and gaskets for F-7 Servicing Units WRAMA (WRNR). d • Forecast for Completion: (1) Fixed facility - to be determined. (2) Additional F-7 Servicing Units - accomplished. (3) Teflon hoses and gaskets - to be determined. �Item Number 9-66-2 - TCTO for Installation of A/AiuY-1 System in UC-123B Aircraft, Class V Mod 1776; a. Problem Presented; Eglin AFB Contract AF 08(635)-lj89ij, dated 20 Oct 1965, provided a line item for data in accordance with DD Form 11423 covering preparation of TCTO for installation of A/AJj5Y-l System in UC-123B Aircraft (AFPI 71531-(l8). Repeated attempts by Contractor, AFATL, and A/Ah5Y-l IM have been unsuccessful in obtaining from C-123 SSM appropriate documentation (AFLC Form 118A) identifying type of TCTO and aircraft handbook revisions desired. Ranch Hand representatives advised that considerable difficulty is being experienced by Flight cre*s and Aircraft Maintenance personnel due to lack of appropriate --1 Flight Manual Supplement and Aircraft Maintenance Handbook data reflecting this systems installation. This creates an obvious problem with operation and maintenance as well as a serious problem with indoctrination of new crews due to high percentage and frequency of personnel rotation. k* Progress to Date; None Ct Action to be Taken and Action Agency; (1) WRNB initiate documentation for preparation of TCTO covering installation of basic A/Alj5Y-l system using Hayes tail boom and de-modification of aircraft (removal of tank and cradle assy) back to cargo configuration. (2) WRNB initiate documentation for preparation of TCTO covering installation of Ranch Hand wing and tail boom and marriage with basic Hayes A/Alt^Y-l System. (3) WRNB establish requirement for preparation of Aircraft Maintenance handbooks concurrent with requirement for respective TCTO's. WRNB initiate immediate action to provide Ranch Hand with required supplement to T. 0. 1C-123-1 Flight Manual reflecting Defoliant Spray configuration. d. Forecast for Completion; Delinquent - In view of non-participation in this meeting by C-123 SSM personnel, a report of intended action and progress made is required at next meeting tentatively planned for 11-13 Oct 1966. �Item Number 9-66-3 - Retrofit Installation of MARK III Engine; a. Problem Presented; AFATL (ATCB) has provided for complete modification kits to retrofit present operational Ranch Hand Dispensers, utilizing MARK I and MARK II engines, to latest ARMY standardized MARK III engine configuration. The A/Aij^Y-l system has not been made full standard by AFSC; therefore, responsibility rests with AFSC to provide retrofit kits and required TCTO for Field installation. b. Progres s to da te ; Required number of kits have been placed on Contract AF 08(635) -l489h with Hayes International. c. Action to be Taken and Action Agency: (1) AFATL (ATCB) submit request to WRAMA (WRNSTH) for AFPI 18 covering this modification and appropriate handbook revisions. (2) WRNSTR provide AFPI 18 as required. (3) Contractual provisions by AFATL for TCTO and handbook revisions. d . Forecast for Completion : (1) 25 Sep 66. (2) Provide AFPI to AFATL within five days after' receipt. (3) To be determined - contingent on authority for reprogramming funds within project 2$23> and subsequent initiation of Purchase Request. �(2) Reference a ( 2 ) above. WRAMA (WRNQ) will review this problen with appropriate personnel at WRAMA and Eglin AFB to determine specific cause and remedial action. (3) Reference a(3) above. WRAMA (WRNQ) will review end item spares requirements to determine proper course of action necessary to provide adequate spare assemblies to support Field operations where battle damage or loss might be incurred requiring complete assembly replacement. Coordination with the using activity will be required. d. Forecast for Completion; (1) Reference c(l) above. (a) Revision of AFLC Form 2? - 15 Sep 1966. (b) Spare parts recomputation - lij Oct 1966. (c) Release of spare parts orders to contractor/vendors to be determined based on method to be employed. (2) Reference c(2) above. 15 Sep 1966. (3) Reference c(3) above. 30 Sep 1966. �Item Number 9-66-Ii - Spares; a. Problem presented: (1) Requirement for M&O spare parts for support of A/Alj5Y-l System is expected to reach critical proportions in the very near future due to, (1) increase in number of spray aircraft, (2) late provisioning action in relation to first operational units, and (3) system contamination by grit and rubber particles resulting from poor system arrangement and servicing equipment that is incompatible with presently used chemical agents. Also, WRAMA has received a flood of requistions for spare parts exceeding initially provisioned quantities, which did not consider system contamination problem. Lack of spare parts support is a limiting factor in Ranch Hand operations. (2) Spare parts orders are not being received by Hayes from Eglin AFB, procurement agency (APGC), in a timely manner. (3) No provisions have been made to procure and stock spare complete assemblies, such as, Tank and Cradle Assembly, Engine and Pump Assembly, and Control Console Assembly. b. Progress to Date; (1) Reference a(l) above. A quantity of stop-gap spare parts were procured by AFATL on Contract AF 08(635)-li89k. However, these have proven inadequate to sustain desired degree of Ranch Hand operation pending delivery of spare parts as a result of formal provisioning by WRAMA. Some support has been furnished by Hayes International through their engineering representative previously stationed with Ranch Hand. Further, WRAMA and DCASO at Hayes are working together with the contractor in an attempt to expedite vendor delivery of specific spare parts. (2) Reference a ( 2 ) above. A previous review of this problem with Eglin AFB, procurement activity, was supposed to have alleviated this condition or at least improved flow of documentation from Eglin to Hayes. Further investigation is in order. (3) c Reference a(3) above. No progress to date. • Action to be Taken and Action Agency; (1) Reference a(l) above. The programming check list (AFLC Form 2?) will be revised to reflect increase in number of systems and bases to be supported, and spare parts requirement will be recomputed for appropriate procurement action,. 10 �Item Number 9-66-5 - Retrofit Installatiqn of Optimized (Redesigned) Wing Boom on UC-123B Aircraft: a. Problem Presented; No authorization currently exists for installation of the Optimized Wing Boom on Ranch Hand and Lucky Tiger Aircraft. The wing boom, now ^employed by aircraft in SEA, is a non--stajid^r^jJ^gm^as^jMPJlQejvts which are^jipX "cToTSpatibie"witlT~agenJts now in use, and is not logistically supportable. _ T __±_ ^ ii .. |nr .._ m-,,i ,-!•-• , T\ .immi-"'^-"— "• J*"i"""'-'*'*r'M'^''"T'"~ "'" ' " " -—'""-•"•-""••*J**J-V*—•*"' " -.1 • *^u^-»Mf»iart-.•^J.<fa. ...-»^*••>*••. — •« *• b. Progress to Date^ The Optimized Wing Boom is presently being developed by AFATL under Contract AF 08(635)5710 with Hayes International. c. Action to be Taken; The using command will establish appropriate requirement for installation of Optimized iVing Boom. d. Forecast for Completion: 23 Sep 1966. 11 �Item Number 9-66-6 - Maintenance Data and TechnicalOrder Verification; a * Problem Presented; Maintenance data has not been provided field activities due to delayed verification of technical order. This has created considerable difficulty regarding system maintenance and identification of spare parts requirements. kf Progress to Date; Hayes has completed technical order draft in MIL Spec format. Preliminary review of blue line draft has been accomplished by WRAMA at Hayes. Equipment is currently available at Hayes and ready for verification. However, it has a MARK I configured engine installed. The MARK III engine is still pending delivery from vendor's plant where it is being mated to the pump. It was agreed that the difference between the MARK I and MARK III engine was not sufficient to warrant further delay in verification of technical order. WRAMA agrees to accomplish verification on existing equipment with MARK I engine. Final draft is to reflect the MARK III configuration, which will be verified against engineering drawings. c. Action to be Taken arid_Action_Agency; (1) Hayes will take immediate action to establish a date with WRAMA (WRNSTR) for verification meeting at Hayes. Time of meeting should be established to allow a minimum of 15 days for proper notification of participating activities. Ranch Hand representatives agreed there will be no requirement for participation by their activity in this verification. In lieu thereof WRAMA will explore the possibility of obtaining using command assistance from personnel of SAWC at Eglin AFB, who have a current and specific knowledge of Ranch Hand operation. (2) Assistance of the Hayes - DCASO Quality Office will be required in the performance of this certification and will be primary point of contact relative to WRAKA/Hayes coordination of proposed date of certification meeting. d. Forecast for Completion; At the earliest possible date. 12 �Item Number 9-66-7 - Maintenance_Training_of Ranch Hand Personnel a. Problem Presented: Newly assigned Ranch Hand Maintenance personnel upon arrival have little or no knowledge as to maintenance of the A/Ali$Y-l dispenser due to there having no prior training on this system. The resulting problems are obvious. b. Progress to Date; None c. Action to be Taken; (1) Ranch Hand should establish and submit an official requirement in accordance with AF Regulation 50-9 to Air Training Command citing type and scope of training required. However, due to extreme urgency of existing requirement, it was requested by Ranch Hand that a contractor representative (Hayes) be provided in the interim, pending development of training capability by ATC. If interim contractor support for indoctrination of Ranch Hand Maintenance personnel is not provided, some other immediate means of training must be investigated. (2) Discussion of contractor support indicated the most feasible and expeditious approach would be use of an existing Eglin AFB contract. However, this will require approval and funding by Hq USAF. d. Forecast for Completion: (1) Ranch Hand submit .requirement as soon as possible. (2) Final action on this requirement is yet to be determined. 13 �SECTION IV GENERAL COMMENTS/OBSERVATIONS 1. Forthcoming flight test of the protype optimized wing boom was introduced as a discussion item by AFATL representative, Lt. Crea. Also recognized was the recent diversion of UC-123B aircraft to Dallas, Texas, pending deployment and voluntary participation and support of Hayes International for the purpose of spraying insecticide in encephalitis infected areas. It was noted that this disease is not restricted to the CONUS as was indicated by an Associated Press report reflecting loss of 3Qk lives so far this year out of 1616 cases throughout Japan. As a result of the tremendous effectiveness and publicity of the C-123 spray operation in Dallas, it is envisioned that additional requirements are forthcoming for use of A/Ali5Y-l equipped aircraft for insecticide spraying on a world-wide basis, especially in SEA. Lt. Crea indicated he would communicate with TAG regarding intended use of insecticides with the defoliant system. If use is contemplated, TAG will be asked to establish a formal requirement for test of insecticides concurrent with test of defoliants during flight test of optimized wing boom at Eglin during September and October 1966. 2. The Ranch Hand mission is not consistent with the mission of the organization to which they are assigned. This leads to competition for resources, maintenance, and Staff Support. Proper emphasis or priority has not been placed on the defoliation mission thereby restricting the establishment of appropriate facilities for storage and transfer of more than one type chemical agent at Tan Son NHut and other operating locations. A definite advantage is envisioned by identification of the defoliation system as a weapons systems for the delivery and dissemination of chemical ordnance. Specifically, one advantage of a weapons systems identification would be to rationalize the storage and loading problem by having the chemicals handled by personnel who handle other Air Force ordnance. This could possibly result in taking the aircraft maintenance people out of the ordnance loading business. This was not introduced as a problem as appropriate agencies were not in attendance for proper discussion and action assignment. However, aforementioned weapons systems identification has considerable merit and should be evaluated by PACAF and Hq USAF to determine specific advantages to be derived for further discussion during next meeting. 3. A need was expressed by Ranch Hand for a pamphlet depicting defoliation spraying in SEA covering subjects such as: a. Chemical type, effect and hazzards. b. Type crop and vegatation recognition. c. Psyochological effect on populace. 14 �Such a pamphlet would be invaluable for indoctrination of new crews upon arrival in SEA and would be used to supplement present verbal instructional methods which are accomplished mostly during normal spray missions. Hayes International expressed an interest in preparing such a manual as they have the knowledge and capability. However, discussion was deferred to next meeting at which time it is hoped that the office of primary responsibility may be able to offer some constructive advice relative to obtaining this pamphlet. 15 �SECTION V A/A45Y-1 DEFOLIATION CONFERENCE ATTENDEES Maj Robert N. Scheideoker, WRAMA Capt Richard Peshkin, Ranch Hand Lt William J. Crea, Jr., ATCB SMS Charles Lightner, Ranch Hand Mr. Gene Smith, WRAMA W.B. O'Neal, Hayes C.F. Conklin, Hayes J.L. Harrington, Hayes John Bonta, Hayes Don Smallwood, Hayes J.E. Merk, Hayes Stan Burkot, Hayes Ronnie Dear, Hayes M.J. McMahan, Hayes 16 �SECTION VI DISTRIBUTION Activity Nr of Copies 2 2 MACV 7th AF (DOPE) (BMP) Name J-3 Chemical Branch Major Haugaton Lt Col McCellan (DAFSC/AFSC Lia O f f ) 2 315th ACW (DO) h 309th ACS (SASF) 377th CSG (DCM) (D/M) 1 1 3 377th OMS llith ACW (Coradr) PACAF (DM) . (DMM) 1 1 (DMMB) Hq USAF (AFRDDA) (AFRDQRA) (AFSMEAA) (AFXOP) (AFSMSDA) TAG (DOFT-S) (DOO-S) (DORQ-FM) ATC (ATTAT-B) Dept of Aerospace Munitions (GS-WC) AFLC (MCKTA) (MCMTE) (MCO) (MCOQM) ASD (ASJB) 1 1 1 1 3 3 12 AFSC (SCSMM) HQ RTD (RTTW) kkOQth CCTS SAWC-LC AFATL (ATCB) SAAMA (SANM) (SANNR) (SAQR) WRAMA (WRNQO) Maj Richard Engian Lt Col Reddrick Major Kline Lt Col Ferguson Major Dresser Captain Peshkin S/MSGT C. B. Lightner Col Harris Lt Col Carter Major Sibley Colonel Bradburn Colonel Thomas B. Kennedy Lt Col C. N. Powell Maj W. A. McKinney Lt Col Carter Lt Col May Mr. Ed Dougherty Maj Vinson Maj White Maj Marshall Capt Adams Maj Novikoff Lt Col Gibson TSgt Gailes Mr. Fields Mr. Whitacre Mr. Finch Mr. Clark Mr. Bro'rfn Mr. Brothers Mr. Pfiefer Mr. Goodwin Capt John R. Spey Lt Col Huston Lt Crea Mr. Arthur Miller Mr. Jack Burton Maj R. N. Scheidecker 17 �SECTION VII A/A45Y-1 INTERNAL DEFOLIANT DISPENSER SYSTEM SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser, designed and manufactured by Hayes International Corporation, Birmingham, Alabama, is a complete airborne defoliant dispensing system. The dispenser is packaged to permit rapid installation into, and removal from, C-123 aircraft, with only minor modifications required to the affected aircraft. (See figures 1 and 2.) The Internal Defoliant Dispenser, Part No. A/A45Y-1, provides for loading, transporting and dispensing of 1000 gallons of defoliant chemical, and in case of an emergency, dumping the full load overboard in less than 45 seconds. The tank and cradle assembly is mounted on detachable casters which are removed before anchoring in the aircraft. A control console is electrically connected into an electrical network which in turn is connected to the aircraft electrical system, certain controls and indicators in the flight compartment and the electrically operated units within the system. Pressure is applied to defoliant chemical, by an engine and pump assembly mounted on the same frame with the tank. The defoliant is transported to a nozzle assembly mounted in the slipstream of the aircraft in such a manner that a strip 250 or 300 feet wide along the line of flight is effectively covered. The nozzle assembly is designed for the most effective atomizing of the defoliant and coverage of foliage to be destroyed. The dispensing operation and, in emergency, the dump valve operation can be controlled from either the control console near the tank and cradle assembly or from the pilot's position in the flight compartment. CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS The internal defoliant dispenser is capable of containing 1000 gallons of defoliant which can be completely dumped overboard by remote control or manually in less than 45 seconds. The pump is capable of maintaining 60 + 5 psi pressure during the normal 3- to 4-minute period of operational spraying. Refilling the tank assembly is accomplished with power and equipment contained within the defoliation dispensing system. 18 �A / A 4 5 Y - I I N T E R N A L DEFOLIANT DISPENSER . T A N K VENT .MANHOLE COVER DUMP VALVE (SEE FIGURE 5) TANK LIQUID LEVEL ENGINE EXHAUST VIBRATION ISOLATOR SEGMENT CENTRIFUGAL PUMP (SEE FIGURES) TIE-DOWN FITTINGS MAIN SPRAY VALVE RECIRCULATING LINE CONTROL CONSOLE (SEE FIGURE <) JACKING LUG TEMPERATURE INDICATOR JET PUMP REFILL CRADLE NOTE: SEE FIGURE « FOR TAIL BOOM AND FIGURE 7 FOR WING BOOM. FIGURES 8 AND 9 SHOW A/A45Y-1 INSTALLED IN C-123 AIRCRAFT. Figure 1. Major Components of Defoliant Dispenser 19 �Figure 2. Defoliant Dispenser (right side) LEADING PARTICULARS Length Width Height (without casters) Weight Empty Full Capacity Normal operating pressure Normal dispensing interval Emergency dump duration Electrical system Dump valve operation Refill time (approx) Dump valve Spray valve Suction valve 16 feet, 4 inches 4 feet, 10 inches 6 feet, 5 inches 1420 pounds 12, 420 pounds 1000 gallons 60 ± 5 psi 3 to 4 minutes Less than 45 seconds 28 volts dc (supplied by host aircraft) Electrical or manual 20 minutes Electrical, 10 inch Electrical, 3 inch Manual, 3 inch 20 �TANK AND CRADLE ASSEMBLY The tank and cradle assembly is the major unit of the entire system, having a 1000-gallon tank with baffles, manhole, tube connections, and stabilizing and tiedown brackets; an engine and pump assembly which consists of a four cylinder, horizontally opposed air-cooled, engine and pump directly coupled to the engine I^S^SiSfs^SQ ^^^^iiMK^is^^^i:i^XiJ&^ Figure 3. Centrifugal Pump crankshaft; and a cradle which carries the tank, the engine and pump assembly, and is provided with four casters which are readily detachable. A temperature indicator and a liquid lever gage are installed in the tank. The engine is slightly modified from its original configuration to achieve adaptability to the requirements of the dispenser system. The detachable casters are to provide limited mobility and are removed when the unit is tied down. The defoliant used in the dispenser is stored in the tank and is fed through a suction line to the pump. The pump is driven by an air-cooled engine and forces the defoliant through a discharge line to a spray valve. A recirculation line is 21 �provided so that when the spray valve is closed, the defoliant will recirculate back through the tank. When the spray valve is open, the defoliant is forced into the spray boom and atomized by spray nozzles. When the tank is empty, a float-operated switch, located in the tank, automatically stops the engines. The centrifugal pump consists essentially of an impeller and a pump body, and is driven by the engine through a direct drive. The engine drives the pump and the speed of the engine controls the quantity of defoliant being dispensed. (See figure 3.) The recirculation line incorporates a jet-pump (ejector) tank refilling system which utilizes the fluid left in the tank from prior operation to initially operate the jet pump. CONTROL CONSOLE The control console is the nerve center of the defoliation system. All functions are controlled from this position; all monitoring equipment is located in this position; and the electrical supply is channeled and protected at this position. Prefabricated electrical cables tie the control console to all related FLUID REFILL POWER FLOAT SWITCH OVERRIDE FWD UHIT AFT UNIT STARTER AND SPRAY CHOKE THROTTLES INDICATORS VALVE ENGINES FWD UNIT OIL PRESSURE LOW OPERATE MAGNETO AFT UNIT OIL PRESSURE LOW O P E R A T E MAGNETO INCREASE ol p UNIT DECREASE Figure 4, Control Console 22 �tfoliant Handling System Loyovf �parts of the system, including the controls on the pilot's instrument panel and the aircraft electrical supply system. Tandem or single installations are controlled and monitored from the control console without any changes or alterations being performed. In the event of electrical power failure of the aircraft electrical system, certain critical functions have an option of manual operation. (See figure 4.) DUMP VALVE The dump valve is a 10 inch gate valve having both electrical or manual activation. It is designed for horizontal (vertical flow) installation and liquid flow in only one direction. The bottom of the defoliant tank incorporates a vortex interrupter and adapter to which the dump valve is secured and is in perfect alignment with an opening and spring loaded door in the belly of the aircraft. A high speed motor coupled to an actuator provides 2 second operation of the dump valve in either direction and circuit manipulation to indicate open condition. (See figure 5.) Figure 5. Dump Valve 23 �SPRAY BOOM The prime function of the spray boom is to discharge the defoliant under pressure at such a location and at such an angle that air flow, in the proximity of the discharge (spray) nozzle, contributes to the proper density of spray, the consistency of the defoliant blanket; and the lateral dimension of the effective strip. Two spray booms are available when the C-123 model aircraft is used and each boom satisfies a specific set of requirements. INSTALLATION STRUTS TIE-DOWNS TAIL BOOM INSTALLATION STRUTS . Figure 6. Tail Spray Boom and Associated Plumbing 24 �• LEFT HAND SIDE OF FUSELAGE AT THIS POINT FUSELAGE CENTER WING PIPING EXTERNAL BOOM :.-—J O VJ CO O O HOZZLE FAIRING SPRAY NOZZLES INBOARD OF NACELLE NOZZLES OUTBOARD OF NACELLE Cn �The tail spray boom (figure 6) is mounted outside the aircraft, approximately midway of the aft cargo loading door. It is designed for simple and fast installation and removal and £rovides coverage of a 250 foot strip. The wing spray boom (figure 7) is installed in the inside of the center wing and externally underneath the outboard wing. As compared to the tail boom, its installation and removal is more complex and is considered a more permanent installation. The wing boom provides coverage of a JOO foot strip and the effectiveness of the application is more uniform. Installation and removal of either spray boom does not require special skills or special tools. U ^^te^;'fe';'"^ £5S£S^ V&K^--v* Figure 8. Installation in C-123 (left side) 26 �AIRCRAFT INSTALLATION The dispenser installation in C-123 aircraft consists of towing the tank and cradle assembly (unfilled) into the aircraft and securing it to the aircraft floor utilizing twenty 10,000-pound hook and chain assemblies and the cargo floor tie-down fittings (figures 8 and 9). All piping, hose assemblies and electrical cables are installed which tie the A/A45Y-1 dispenser into the aircraft (as modified) systems, and the control console is secured to the aircraft floor; thus, making the aircraft-dispenser combination ready for servicing and operation. if- SSSSS«ti'i«V.f!. Fi'gure 9- Installation in C-123 (right side) 27 �VIET NAM RANCH HAND OPERATIONS A sketch of the ground support equipment used by RANCH HAND to refill the A/A45Y-1 dispensers with agent is shown in figure 10. The refill system presented here is the system used at Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Viet Nam. It utilizes four 1000 gallon HOURGLASS tanks. A similar refill system is used at Da Nang, but utilizes only three HOURGLASS tanks. These tanks are the predecessor to the A/A45Y-1 and incorporate a 10-horsepower engine and pump unit by which the agent is transferred into the aircraft. The agent is delivered in 55-gallon drums, then pumped from three drums at a time into the refill tanks. This is the slowest part of the operation. The procedure for filling tanks is as follows: a. The number 2 tank is filled from 55-gallon drums. b. The agent in the number 2 tank is pumped into tank number 3. c. Agent in tank number 3 is then pumped into tank number 4. d. Tank number 2 is refilled and the agent pumped into tank number 3. e. Tank number 2 is again refilled from the drums and pumped into tank number 1. . f. All other tanks now filled, tank number 2 is refilled again. Upon return from a mission, the aircraft is backed as close as possible to the refill tanks and the systems are refilled with agent using a commercial fire hose. After completion of the days work the HOURGLASS tanks are filled and the agent transferred into the aircraft. The refill tanks are then refilled in preparation for a second mission. Due to the long time needed to fill from the drums, the RANCH HAND crews are limited to only one turn around, or a total of two missions. A big disadvantage of refilling in this manner is the problem of contamination to the agent. Foreign matter gets into the refill tanks and from there into aircraft defoliant dispensing system. The rubber inside lining of fire hoses, presently used, is acted upon by the defoliant and causes large pieces of rubber to be released into the defoliant stream, thereby reducing the system effectiveness. See figures 11 thru 14 for potographic on-site refill operations. 28 �Figure 70. Existing Defoliant Transfer System Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Viet Worn 29 �Jiff, Figure 11. Ranch Hand Worfc Area ss^vavirrc .i«w«-i..7iBas.Mj-is-.e!* 2 ^^nr.«!!«*'•• iiS*-j^rn'«—.5 \ • •-'. ;-. 'O^^s&s^ ? ^praiw^s^s lv%3$StiSt3&M&*5Jg*£e> ^.^3^S^-^ •^X^V^.^«*SS* ^ai^k^^sssa^s^^^ Figure J2. Moor Class Tank and Pump 30 �^r^PS Pump (Insulated) •,-, i *•" : •"• '- •Ofc-^a^^^^ .- V—-»* _,-./^•S^^^^^^f^^^. s^c -;%*/---< "^V . 5:5-,.-•• '-' .* \Jfe*i Figure ?4,. Hour Class Spider Pump �SUPPORT FOR FLEXIBLE LIKE 55 GAL DRUM NOZZLE FOR REFILLING A/A45Y-1 TRUCK FLAT-BED ;re 16. D*fo//oof Handling System Components �of defoliant under sustained operation. The engine is a government standard, air-cooled, four cylinder, four stroke cycle, horizontally opposed model modified for remote control when mated with the control console. The engine is available in large quantities, economical to operate, proven in performance, and easily maintained due to maximum accessibility. It is designed to operate a minimum of 1500 hours at rated load and speed between major overhauls. Its extensive use in defoliation operations tends to standardize maintenance and provide a spare parts source through controlled cannibalization. The pump has been modified by the manufacturer so that it attaches to the engine at the blower section and the drive end of the crankshaft thus giving the engine and pump a one to one ratio. Shock mounting is provided to the engine-pump unit. CONTROL CONSOLE The control console is located at the end of the storage to permit visual monitoring of any engine-pump unit on the platform. All transfer functions are controlled by a single operator at the control console position. In addition to control functions, there are certain monitoring gages and instruments installed in the instrument" panel of the control console. The electrical network is considered semi-permanently installed and so arranged that simple maintenance is quickly accomplished. TANK The tank has a 10, 000-gallon capacity, protected sight gage, manhole, vent, drain line connection, and facilities for securing to the platform. The sight gage is a vertically mounted glass tube with connections to tank at each end, protectors to reduce the probability of breaking, and calibrations to indicate tank contents. MISCELLANEOUS Suction Hose. Suction hoses are provided having an inside diameter which will not be too restrictive to defoliant flow and having a wall structure to prevent collapse of hose. Hoses which are frequently disconnected have quick-disconnects to prevent rapid deterioration at connecting points. Pressure Hoses. Pressure hoses are capable of pressures up to 100 psig and have adapters in cases where control nozzles are attached. Hose material is selected to withstand the chemical action of the defoliant. 35 �SYSTEM TIE-IN The storage tank is located in the approximate center of the platform with one engine-pump unit on the truck side of the platform and two engine-pump units on the aircraft side of the platform. The single engine-pump unit has a 3-inch suction hose connected between the pump and the suction manifold. The suction manifold has three 1-1/4 inch suction hoses attached which are suspended from the suction manifold in such a manner as to hang directly over three 55-gallon drums on the flat bed trailer. A control console is secured to the platform deck in the proximity of the end of the storage tank and is electrically connected to the engine-pump unit. Two engine-pump units and their companion control console are located on the aircraft side of the platform and are shock mounted to the platform deck. The suction ports of the two engine-pump units are manifolded so that a single line attaches to the bottom of the storage tank. The discharge (pressure) ports of the two engine-pump units are also manifolded and after the pressure manifold, a single line conveys the defoliant to the aircraft having A/A45Y-1 dispensers to be serviced. Check valves are installed in pump discharge lines to permit operation of a single engine-pump unit when demands are less than maximum. At each aircraft position, a smaller pressure line with a shutoff nozzle is connected into the main line hose. These two engine-pump units are controlled concurrently from a single control console. An electrical network is provided which gives electrical tie-in of all related electrically functioning units. Cable insulation is chemically unaffected by defoliant in the environs of the defoliant handling system. CAPABILITIES Transfer 10, 000 gallons from drums to storage tank (less truck move time) Service two A/A45Y-1 dispensers (in aircraft) Service four A/A45Y-1 dispensers (in aircraft) Remotely controlled functions: 1. Drums to storage tank . shutoff valves 2. Storage tank to aircraft main lines (2) shutoff valves 25 minutes 5 minutes 5 minutes 3. Engine throttle 4> Engine starter Engine ignition b & 36 �PORTABLE DEFOLIANT HANDLING UNIT The portable defoliant handling unit idea is conceived for military installations where limited servicing of A/A45Y-1 dispensers might be required. The trailer is capable of traveling at faster speeds and for greater distances than the A/ A/A45Y-1 dispenser and, being a powered unit, it speeds up the servicing of the dispensers installed in aircraft. Overall dimensions are kept within limits which will permit air transportation of loaded units to isolated landing fields or airstrips. Technical data and capabilities are contained in figure 17. 37 �-Tr^^z^^^L 96 fcs5> ;T~ CZIiD Figure 17. Tank Trailer De �66 SMTWTFS SMTWTFS SMTWTFS JAN III MAR : r i ^ ~li> ~~i~~i~i'. s i B| 71 8 9 10 11 12JJ3: 14! 15 16" 17: 18 19! 20i 2li 22 23 24 25 26! 27 28[29 1)31. , ! 1 6 7 8 13 14 15 20 21 22 28 27 i— —) 2 9 16 23 2j 3J 4i 5! BJ 7 1 ^8 9' 10 1l! 121 13] 14 5 6 7 8 12 13 14 15 19 20 21 22 26 27 28 29 15 TB 17 18 19 20; 2T 22 23 24 25 26, 27 28 : • 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 4 11 18 25 ' ; . . 3 10 17 24 4 11 18 25 5 12 '19 26 6 7 ,3 14 20 21 27 28 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 i ! J ll 2' 3 40! 6 ! 7 8 9 10 11 12! 13! 14! is; 16; 17 18 19: 20, 21; 22| 23 24 25 26! 27: 28; 291 30: ; 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 31 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 AU6 1 2 Q ^tf_ 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 » 18 19 «L 21 ^2 23 24 » 26 27 28 29 30 31 © 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 NOY ! r~i ' i i ' 4 5 11 12 18 19 25 26 , 0 OCT SEP i_ 3 10 17 24 31 JUl JUM f 1 29© 31 7 14 21 28 6 13 20 27 1 2 8 9 15 16 22 23 29 30 AM ....... ; MAY i— 3 4 5 10 11 12 17 18 19 24 25 26 SMTWTFS 6 7 13 14 20 21 27 28 1 8 15 22 29 6 7 13 14 20 21 27 28 1 8 15 22 29 •3 10 17 24 31 4 5 6 11 12 13 18 19 20 25 26 27 DEC 2 3 4 5 9 10 11 12 16 17 18 19 23 ® 26 30 4 5 6 11 12 13 18 19 20 27 7 14 21 28 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 3 10 17 24 30 31 L.J NOTES 39 �NOTES �5C»H OM IfHlH FQlMlS HfftlQK.lt Controlled Access : Other Dual Thoroughfares Principal Through Routes Other Paved Roads Streets and Connecting Roads it Mileage Distances between red dots Iniersiaie J28 US @ Stale j77] Count X. ii * If \ { I / :: \ Lewisourg t. -^vi/vf \ A KrK"j^^^'^ ^^my^^^F^^4 ^-^^^^^£j^^^ iX -r " ^&WP^s•/ 1 ^' yjp ^'--''m^rv^ fr/^ ^iT *' '^ &«^ ^' 7 3 t J ! l r ^"fe >« ^V. -^t« Jr"~SsH# »-*^Z ^t? r> ?-#~^ " f-A-^ t?^=-£^m^ui/ if ^^s-Jf^yul/ 2 1S :: ! jyftEi '»OMnf>''' «. .•«!•«•• i iX^ tf (P0p*.»t W fc_- /^frfr^^^^ ^' ""H^S^^^^^-^ W^T/ J " ^ f **$& iX*% c d P * /--•>CtftIVc-' r-;--**MlCahaba *^* /-"J^^TV;'' r-:" ^Cahaba «;' '^j^'-Vestavia/.;.. :».".;•: v » \^iHillsl''i ; •' ): N ^^S« 1 " ~ A>K *^5\ BSL W � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 007 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0065 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Scheidecker, Robert N. Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>U.S. Air Force Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1966-08-01 Title A name given to the resource Minutes: A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/015a729b1af5623d424441746a06bc4d.pdf 0d438b62c4671f25db3c1b731cdd1b84 PDF Text Text Item ID Number 00355 Author Scheidecker, Robert N. Corporate Author u.s. Air Force Minutes: A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Journal/Book Title Year 1966 Month/Day Au ust Color M Number of Images 1 DBSCrlptOU Notes pages 32-34 missing; figures 4 and 17 incomplete. This item was filed by Alvin L. Young under the category Military Use of Herbicides (item no. 65) and under the category Equipment, How Developed (item no. 356) 9 Monday, January 29, 2001 Page 356 of 382 �Item No.: 356 Author(s): Scheidecker, Robert N. Editor/Translator: Corporate Author: Article/Report Title: Minutes: A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Journal/Book Title: Date: August 1966 Publisher: This item was filed by Alvin L.Young under the category Military Use of Herbicides (item no. 65) and under the category Equipment, How Developed (item no. 356). Item no. 356 is a duplicate of item no. 65 Please see item no. 65 for the complete document. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 024 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0356 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Scheidecker, Robert N. Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>U.S. Air Force Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1966-08-01 Title A name given to the resource Minutes: A/A45Y-1 Internal Defoliant Dispenser System Support Conference, 25 and 26 August 1966 Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide application https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/42cf7c14e91a84772f29cd3f258ff731.pdf fd2cf2b6a328349550d5cf305cdc8e80 PDF Text Text INFO PLAIN McConnell, A.F. 1970 Mission: Ranch Hand T f N t. T I. * O OF An« /;- U,./ UJ CM CM N^ «K I— -X ^ • « O •£> •, CJ o o x ua oooooooool o>»ocxooooooWt » « * * » * * * <y l^J ^fj ^jg gQ 50 tibn11w f PFY JANUARY-FEBRUARY 1970 C H A N G ? IN E A R N t D R t l H B M UOO CFY REIMS UOQ 1ST UOO uno ,«F V' �AIR UNIVERSITY THE P R O F E S S I O N A L review J O U R N A L OF THE UNITED S T A T E S THE AIR STAFF Gen. John C. Meyer, USAF AIR FORCE MANAGEMENT Lt. Gen. Duward L. Crow, USAF MILITARY PROGRAMMING AND BUDGETING PRACTICES D. V. Schnurr •/THE ENVIRONMENT AND FUNCTIONS OF MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS IN THE 1970s Dal Hitchcock INFORMATION PROCESSING STANDARDS FOR COMPUTERS Col. Lucius Theus, USAF ON THE LEVERAGE OF MULTIPLE-PURPOSE WEAPONS Richard H. Anderson Dr. Bruno J. Manz SOME ASPECTS OF AIR FORCE-UNIVERSITY RELATIONS Dr. William J. Price ^HE TIME BARRIER: PSYCHOLOGICAL FRONTIER OF STUDENT ACTIVISM 1st Lt. Charles M. Plummer, USAF Air Force Review SIDE-FIRING WEAPON SYSTEMS Lt. Col. Ross E. Hamlin, USAF MISSION: RANCH HAND Lt. Col. Arthur F. McConnell, Jr., USAF In My Opinion LAUNCH ON WARNING—A COUNTER TO THE ARMS RACE Robert I. Widder Books and Ideas ON HISTORY AND STAFF WORK Dr. I. B. Holley, Jr. MILITARY HISTORY AND THE FIRST GREAT AIR WAR Dr. James J. Hudson THE CONTRIBUTORS Address manuscripts to: Editor, Air Univcrtity Review, Aerospace Studies Institute. Maxwell Air Force Buse, Ala. 36112. Printed by Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Subscriptions are sold by Air University Book Department, Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala. 36112: yearly $4.50, back issues 75 cents. USAF RECURRING PUBLICATION 50-2. Vol. XXI No. t JANUARY-FEBRUARY 1970 AIR FORCE 2 10 19 . . . . 28 36 46 57 65 76 89 95 101 109 114 the cover With General John C. Meyer's article, "The Air Staff," Air University Review enters a new year and a new decade by beginning a new series of articles about the Air Staff. In this, the first installment, Comptroller of Air Force activities are the center of interest. Subsequent issues will focus on other Air Staff agencies. Review readers will thus be given an up-to-date accounting of some of the important plans and programs coming from the Air Staff. �^MISSION: RANCH HAND LlEUTKNANT COLOVEL AnTHXJK F. McC()NVKLL, Jit. T HE nature and environment of the conflict in South Vietnam have required the U.S. and its allied military forces to revise many traditional strategic and tactical concepts of operations. Without question one of the most difficult and frustrating problems facing these forces is that of actually locating the enemy. The many densely forested areas throughout the country afford the enemy excellent concealment, which permits him to move personnel and supplies rapidly and with impunity to within striking distance of key government centers, lines of communication. Special Forces camps, and other military installations. The use of air-delivered chemical defoliants as a tactical weapon to deny the enemy concealment in forest areas evoked considerable interest in Southeast Asia as early as 1945. British forces operating in Malaya employed this tactic with a fair degree of effectiveness during the late 1940s, with helicopters applying the defoliant along lines of communication. It was not until 195&-59, however, that the United States undertook any largescale defoliation tests. As a result of the tests, several acceptable defoliants and delivery techniques were selected for further consideration. In late 1961 a test program in South Vietnam was approved for the United States Air Force. With the lull concurrence and support of the government of the Republic of Vietnam (CVN) and the Vietnamese Air Force, this project, under the code name RANCH IIAVD, began trial operations in January 1962 with three specially equipped UO-123 aircraft based at Tan Son N'hut Airport. Saigon. The initial unit designation was "Special Aerial Spray Flight." Because of the newness and uniqueness of this weapon sv stern, the volunteer crews assigned to the RANCH IIAVD project designed their own concept of operations and an entire range of tactics and delivery techniques. Constantly innovating and modifying, the crews slowly developed a highly effective defoliant-delivery operation geared to the varied tropical vegetation, foliage, and terrain of Southeast Asia. By June 1962 the crews of the Special Aerial Spray Flight were ready to fly tactical missions, and it was not long before the merits of the delivery sxstem were proven. A notable effort occurred in October 1962. when the crews successfully completed their first largescale defoliation mission on the Can Man Peninsula in the Mekong River delta. This project was personally observed and evaluated by the Chief of the U.S. Army Chemical Corps as "outstanding." Even so, defoliation operations in the following months wen- mostly conducted on a moderate scale. By mid-1964. however, authority had been received to expand project coverage and to establish limited operations from Da Nang Air Base. The program \vas proving its worth, and new target requests were constantly being received. As hostile ground fire became more intense;, the mission became extremely hazardous. The heroic efforts of the early spray crews were not without cost. Since the need to assign fighter aircraft to escort and support the defoliation project had not yet been recognized, the spray aircraft were entirely defenseless. However, despite the considerable number of problems inherent in their mission, the RANCH HAND crews delivered increasing amounts of defoliant on targets from the Demilitarized Zone (n\fz) to the delta. Although RANCH HAND aircraft received heavy automatic-weapons fire from the ground with increasing regularity, it was not until January 1965 that approval was granted to prestrike targets with fighter aircraft and to provide a fighter escort for the spray aircraft. From that point forward, close-in fighter support was a vital part of the defoliation pro- �90 AIR i:\ivF.nsin' gram and made a significant contribution toward minimizing the effect of ground fire against tho defoliation aircraft, although it could not entirely eliminate losses of aircraft and crews. Operations continued to increase during 1965, and tlie Special Aerial Spray Flight successfully completed defoliation of a number of critical target areas. Particularly noteworthy was the unit's work in the Rung Sat Special Zone, a dense mangrove-covered swamp along the main shipping channels into Saigon. Because of the excellent cover afforded by the mangrove swamp, hostile forces operated with near impunity throughout the area and constantly harassed allied shipping into and out of the capital city. In March 1965 Rung Sat was placed on the list of critical targets, and in the following weeks sp. ay crows Hew 42 missions into the area, delivering over 77.000 gallons of defoliant on the target. The results rank as one of the most successful de-foliation projects carried out by RANCH HAND crews, enabling friendly forces to sweep the area and secure the shipping channels against further enemy encroachment. Another \ital target during this period was War Zone D. In spite of hcav\ hostile troop concentration within the target area and almost continuous ground fire, tho spray crews returned again and again until the project was successfully completed. Because of a greatly increased demand for defoliation throughout South Vietnam, the United States and South Vietnamese governments directed that the HANOI HAND program be expanded. On 15 October 1966, the 12th Air Commando Squadron (HA.NCIJ HAND—VILTVAM) became an administrative and operational reality. It was initially equipped with 18 UC-123 spray aircraft, and the crews—all handpicked volunteers—quickly established an outstanding reputation for mission accomplishment throughout South Vietnam. Several important events occurred in the months following establishment of the 12th ACS. including approval to assign OIK; aircraft to Operation Flyswaltor, a program designed to deliver insecticides over various populated areas throughout the country, to control ma- laria mosquitoes and other disease-bearing insects. Using techniques similar to those employed in defoliation, the insecticide crews made an outstanding contribution to the health and welfare of the people of Vietnam. I5y late 1966 the 12th ACS had significantly increased ils defoliation operations and embarked upon another key project: the southern half of the DM/, was approved for targeting. Flying o\er flat terrain and visible to the enemy for many miles throughout the target run. the HAVCII HAND crews courageously defied groat odds to place their defoliant precisely on the briefed targets. As a result of these operations, much of the southern portion of tho DM/, was exposed, and the enemy was denied ready access to his hitherto secure; infiltration and supply routes into South Vietnam. In December 1966, as RANCH HAND crews continued their country-wide defoliation schedule, the 12th ACS moved its operational headquarters to Bien Iloa Air Base, where it remains today. During early 1967 the main areas of activity were War Zones C and D. while Da Nang-based aircraft concentrated on targets along enemy infiltration routes in South Vietnam. One of the highlights of this period was Operation Pink Rose, a jungle-burning project carried out by RANCH HAND crews. They (lew approximately 225 sorties and delivered over a quarter-million gallons of herbicide on selected target areas in War Zones C and D. successfully completing their part ill tho project in April 1967. Target areas throughout the country wen; sprayed during the remainder of 1967, particular emphasis being placed on vital targets in the IV Corps area. This accounted for a significant increase in hits received from ground fire during 1967. since the flat terrain of the delta region allowed enemy gunners to see the spray aircraft coming from miles away. The flexibility of the 12th Air Commando Squadron \\as severely tested in February 196S. in the throes of the Communist Tet offensive 1 . The unit was directed to assume an airlift role under diree;tion of its parent organi/ation. the- 315th Air Commando Wing. The; �A/rt FORCE REVIEW RANCH HAND team stripped the aircraft of all defoliation equipment, including tanks and spray booms, and reported in. "Ready to go." in the amazing time of 24 hours. During the weeks that followed, crews of the 12th flew 2866 productive sorties in the airlift role, with the same professionalism and /.eal which had become the RANCH HAND trademark. After the Tet offensive was blunted, the UC-]23s were restored to their defoliation mission. Again in minimum time, maintenance teams reconfigured the aircraft, and spray operations were quickly resumed. The remainder of 196S reflected a continning increase in the amounts of herbicides dispensed and in the testing of new formations and tactics. So that seasonal weather for spraying priority targets in I Corps might be used to advantage, a significant increase was made in the size of the detachment operating from Da \ang Air Base, and the sortie rate doubled. RANCH HAND crews operating from this forward base flew highly successful defoliation missions against some of the most heavily defended areas in South Vietnam, including the A Shau Valley, Khe Sanh. and as far south as Pleiku. In defiance of the rugged mountain terrain and accurate enemy antiaircraft fire, the defoliation crews frequently went in over these vital targets in order to open them np for aerial observation. The results were always outstanding, as attested to by Army commanders and aerial observers. On 1 August 1968 all units in Southeast Asia with an "Air Commando" designation were renamed "Special Operations," and RANCH HAND became the 12th Special Operations Squadron. Between the date of the first RANCH HAND flight in January 1962 and 1 January 1969, defoliation crews made more than 19,000 combat sorties, all of which were flown under the extremely difficult and hazardous circumstances associated with defoliation work. With rare exceptions, target areas were occupied and/or utilized by unfriendly forces, consisting primarily of hostile base camps and lines of communication. In this hostile low-level environment the RANCH HANDS received more than 3500 hits 91 from all types of enemy ground fire. Yet, without hesitation, with complete disregard for personal safety, and in outstanding displays of courage and determination, combat crews daily flew their four-minute target runs—the "run of terror"—arid laid the defoliant with near-perfect precision. The enemy has testified to the effectiveness of HA NCI r HAND operations. A Viet Cong prisoner of war observed that after a base area had been sprayed the camp would be moved. Kach man would pick up his hammock and backpack and walk about three hours to a new camp site. Another i>ow stated that defoliated areas hampered the vc in moving and stationing troops. These areas had to be avoided for nearly a year before they could be reused. When it was necessary to cross a defoliated area en route to an objective, the vc waited for nightfall or crossed singly—either course of action delaying the movement. When it was necessary to cross small defoliated areas, they crossed in daylight, provided the unit could assure itself that no aircraft were in the vicinity. With regard to the defoliation along GVN lines of communication, the vc published orders making the removal of brush and trees along roads and waterways a punishable offense: they used the cover for hiding places from which to spring ambushes. Our defoliation and subsequent removal of vegetation along such lines were therefore a prudent exercise. ^—,„.., ....... —•- "*Trp 'Defihite""a3vantages accrued from the de- 4/ foliation program, particularly along the lines of communication in South Vietnam. In one instance, no ambushes or hostile incidents occurred after defoliation. In another, there were only eleven in a four-month period. In a third, the number of incidents decreased from six in four months to four in six months. During this same period, the amount of traffic along the roads remained constant or increased. Thus defoliation resulted in a dramatic decrease in the incident rate, and the potential for ambush was greatly reduced. Defoliation along one river caused the vc to evacuate their sheltered positions there. Along another river, defoliation caused at least three Continued on page 94 �Defoliation Operations The boundaries of a defoliation objective must be carefully observed, to ensure maximum concentration of the herbicide on Viet Cong areas. The formation leader and following aircraft keep lateral distance so as to cover the proper swath. . . . The Hayes AA-45 internal defoliant system . . . A C-123 modified for defoliation operations . . . Spray as seen from the tail. ��94 AIR UNIVERSITY REVIKW ainbush attempts to fail in a region when; / they had regularly succeeded. There was a vivid improvement in the ability to find enemy routes of travel, bunkers, structures, and defenses after the foliage cover had been removed. Ground commanders reported increased visibility from 40 to 60 percent, while forward air controllers reported improved aerial visibility from 70 to 90 percent. ~1 War Zones C and D were heavily defoliated. Prior to defoliation, seven brigades wen; necessary to maintain U.S./GVN presence in War Zone C; after defoliation, only three were required. In War Zone D, only one brigade was necessary after defoliation. In one instance plans called for a 22s-division effort to be conducted. Defoliation made this operation unnecessary. These examples emphasized the value of the defoliation operations and underlined the need for continuation of the program. IN SUMMARY, the defoliation program did what it was intended to do. Viet Cong routes of movement were revealed, and their hiding places were eliminated. They were forced to divert resources to noncombatant tasks—moving base camps, waiting for hours of darkness, etc. The number of our trucks and troops lost in ambushes decreased because of defoliation operations. The unique role played by RANCH HAND in Southeast Asia bred an esprit de corps among its members that became respected throughout the area of operations. Taking immense pride in their mission, their aircraft, and their purple scarves, RANCH HAND crews displayed gallantry and courage of the highest order. With full knowledge of the importance of their work, as well as its hazardous nature, they continued on countless target runs while receiving intense and accurate hostile ground fire. They significantly increased the ability of aerial observers to monitor the movements of hostile forces and to direct fighter-bomber strikes against them. More important, they provided allied ground forces with protection against sneak attack by depriving enemy troops of valuable ambush positions, resulting in many allied lives saved. In totality, they enhanced the combat effectiveness of allied air and ground forces fighting in Vietnam. The obvious corollary to a successful air mission is a reliable ground operation. The dedication of the maintenance crews of the 12th Special Operations Squadron in preparing the aircraft for flight, in continually repairing battle-damaged aircraft, and returning them to operational status in minimum time is equally responsible for the success enjoyed by the RANCH HAND mission. The 12th has written a new page in the history of aerial warfare. Ent Air Force Basv, Colorado � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 015 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0159 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource McConnell, Arthur F., Jr. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Air University Review Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource January-February 1970 Title A name given to the resource Mission: Ranch Hand Subject The topic of the resource Ranch Hand aircraft military impact https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/bc319e3111ea0218ef09e3aae8852d2d.pdf 04e7e763c1b62eddf0b80cf3ed977a60 PDF Text Text Item ID Number Author Corporate Author Report/Article Title 00338 Brown, James W. [U.S. Air Force, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S.J (Modification and Calibration of Defoliation Equipment KC-123 First Modification) Journal/Book Title Year Month/Day Color Number of Images Doscrlpton Notes 185 This item was filed by Alvin L. Young under the category Military Use of Herbicides (item no. 61) and under the category Equipment, How Developed (item 338); OSD/ARPA Order 256-62, Amendment 4; Supplement: Graphs of Spray Deposit not included Tuesday, January 23, 2001 Page 338 of 341 �Item No.: 338 Author(s): Brown, James W. and Donald Whittam Editor/Translator: Corporate Author: Article/Report Title: Modification and Calibration of Defoliation Equipment (C-123 First Modification) Journal/Book Title: Date: July 1962 Publisher: This item was filed by Alvin L.Young under the category Military Use of Herbicides (item no. 61) and under the category Equipment, How Developed (item no. 338). Item no. 338 is a duplicate of item no. 61 Please see item no. 61 for the complete document. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 021 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0338 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brown, James W. Donald Whittam Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>U.S. Air Force, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Army (Cml Corp) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1962-07-01 Title A name given to the resource Modification and Calibration of Defoliation Equipment (C-123 First Modification) Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide application https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/ddefb13719614505e1f0c0aa461f14cc.pdf eb024c221a893d868ed9a2e5f48db212 PDF Text Text Item ID Number 00379 Author Ramsauer, Larry R. Defense Technology Laboratories, FMC Corporation RepOrt/ArtiClO TitlO PWU-S/A Modular Internal Spray System Journal/Book Title Year ™™ Month/Day Januar Color L] Numbor of Images DOSOrlptOD NOtOS v 201 Alvin L Your) 9 had this item filed under the category "Equipment - How Developed, How Used"; contract no. F08635-69-C-0213, project no. 5172, task no. 05, work unit no. 00 Monday, January 29, 2001 Page 379 of 382 �Hamsauer, L.R., 1972 I/UNLIMITED PWU-5/A Modular internal Spray system AD 904481 Technical Report distributed by Defense Technical Information Center DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Cameron Station. Alexandria, Virginia 22314 AEROMEDICAL LIBRARY 10 1980 UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED DOCUMENTS �..; i THIS REPORT HAS BEEN DELIMITED AND CLEARED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE UNDER DOD DIRECTIVE 5200.20 AND NO RESTRICTIONS ARE IMPOSED UPON ITS USE AND DISCLOSURE, DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED, " �i-.'' ?&5$$c3 1.0 % II 1*1 t is B2£ ku 1.25 IIIU.4 11.6 MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART �TiiJijfcJHliiliiiffltt'fc'irffH^tn feS^&-j&&x^:iS?-3i;" jtffwSitifisvw**^*,. j^r .,1 .1- - -4im •»;. w**s m;. K^^^/^'^mMm^mm^m^s^ M MODULAR INTERN A ^••'^•^^••• SPRM SYSTEM EFENSE TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES TECHNICAL REPORT AFXiUTR-72-13 ntitrib ition limited to U. S. Government agencies only; Sis reportdocuments test and evaluation; distribution limitation applied January 1972. Other requests for SS focuLnfmust be referred to the AirTorce Armament Laboratory '"'TC^ Pfr14n Air Force Base'Florida 3254Zl .J FORCE ARMAMENT < I. FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND • UNITED STATES EGLIN ^^:'^^X^Vlt''- ' ; ''(i" '^:''' •••"*-H / ••'-•-• ••-•^pip J Di^UiS&^J .^y^b^^3^^ «^-t.:'i^^.wA i.^*;^J\:,4.:>-.;^^Sfe£f �PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System Larry R. Ramsauer Distribution limited to U. S. Government agencies only; this report documents test and evaluation; distribution limitation applied Januarv 1972 . Other requests for this document must be referred to the Air Force Armament Laboratory (OLIF), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida 32542. �FOREWORD This report has been prepared by the Defense Technology Laboratories (DTL) of FMC Corporation* San Jose/ California, under Contract F08635-69-C-0213. Program monitors for the Armament Laboratory were Mr. Marshall G. Solomon (DLGZ) and Captain Harold L. Hebert (DLIP). The design, development, fabrication, testing and delivery of the PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System was conducted from •7 July 1969 through 30 September 1971 by DTL under the direction of Mr. Atlee H. Bussey, Program Manager, and Larry R. Ramsauer, Project Engineer. Technical personnel assigned to the program were William P. Farris, David N. Singletary, Richard W. Triebel, and Forrest A. Hettinger. This technical report has been reviewed and is approved. —-y/t ^ j'£s t^j^"^/*/• Ftfanklin (XDavi)/s, Colonel, USAF Chief, Flame, Incendiary, and Explosives Division ii �ABSTRACT The PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System (MISS) has been designed and developed to fit ten cargo/utility-type aircraft, including the C-47, C-54, C-123, and C-130. The system was designed to disseminate herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers in chemical solution, suspension, or slurry form at ground deposition rates from 3 ounces/acre to 3 gallons/acre with a minimum swath width of two times the applicable aircraft wing span. The system is completely self-supporting, requiring no aircraft power, and includes provisions for suction filling, agent recirculation/ agitation, dissemination, system flushing, aircraft washdown, and emergency dumping of the full agent payload. The system used aerospace adhesive to secure all external hardware, allowing system installation with minimum aircraft modification. A complete C-123K MISS was installed and flight tested at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The system was subjected to the complete flight envelope and functioned as designed. Flight test results indicated that manual operation of the emergency dump took too long to initiate. The dump chute should be moved to the aft portion of the jump door to minimize emergency dump contamination, and the right-hand fuselage spray station should be capped off to eliminate fuselage spray contamination. Distribution limited to U. S. Government agencies only; this report documents test and evaluation; distribution limitation applied January 1972. Other requests for this document must be referred to the Air Force Armament Laboratory (i^LIF), Eglin Air Force Base, rlorida 32542. iii (Tne reverse of this page is blank.) �TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SECTION I i- • 1 II INTRODUCTION SUMMARY III DESCRIPTION 5 3.1 5 3 System Description 3.2 System Parameters 7 3.3 7 Component Description SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT 33 4.1 Aircraft Consideration 33 4.2 4.3 4.4 IV 81 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 V Appendix I II III Chemical Agents Agent Transfer System Plastic Agent Transfer System Flow Model 88 96 99 105 Tank Module Power Module Internal Plumbing External Plumbing Electrical System 108 110 117 4.10 Ground Operations 4.11 Reliability and Maintainability 4.12 Safety Considerations 4.13 Value Engineering 4.14 Category I Testing -i 4.15 Category II Testing CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 117 123 123 126 126 127 129 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION CATEGORY I TESTING REPORTS 131 147 STRESS ANALYSIS 161 VTV �LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 PAGE C-123 Modular Internal Spray System Kit No. 4373716 6 2 3 4 5 6 Agent Transfer System Schematic Agent Transfer System Power Module Piping Pneumatic System Schematic Power Module Assembly (Front View) Power Module Assembly (Back View) 7 Power Module Assembly (Left View) 17-18 8 Power Module Assembly (Right View) 17-18 9 10 Tank Module Assembly (side View) Tank Module Assembly (End View) 21 22 11 Tank Module Assembly Electrical Cable Connection 23 12 Control Panel 25 13 Vent Valve Control Schematic 27 14 Pilot Controls 30 15 C-47D Floor Plan 38 16 C-54G Floor Plan 17 C-123K Floor Plan 18 C-130E Floor Plan 46 19 C-46D Floor Plan 49 20 21 C-97G Floor Plan C-118A Floor Plan ,,. 50 52 22 C-119G Floor Plan - 55 23 C-121G Floor Plan - 57 24 25 C-131E Floor Plan C-47 Modular Internal Spray System Kit No. 4374132 •• 58 26 9 10 12 15-16 15-16 :;- , . . . . - . , . 40 44 59 C-130 Modular Internal Spray System Kit No. 4374236 60 27 Mounting Plate (First Design) 64 28 Bonded Mounting Plate Load-lime History 65 29 Modified Mounting Plate Design No. 1, Picture Frame 66 VI �LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) FIGURE 30 . Modified Mounting Plate Design No. 2, • Picture Frame with Gussets 31 32 33 "34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 PAGE Modified Mounting Plate Design No. 3, Slotted Plate Modified Mounting Plate Design No. 4, Individual Bonding Pads Wing Boom Drag Coefficient Aircraft Loading Nomenclature — Module Envelope C-47 Installation Wing Vortex Effect Effective Swath Width Thixotropic Nature of Slurried Fertilizer Agent Transfer System (Original Proposed Concept) Agent Transfer System (Second Concept) Agent Transfer System (Third Concept) Agent Transfer System (Fourth Concept) Plastic Agent Transfer System Flow Model Plastic Flow Model Schematic Tank Module (Original Concept) Split Series Tank Module (First Concept) 500-Gallon Tank 500-Gallon Tank Module Power Module (Early Design) Power Module (Later Concept) Check Valve Type Nozzle Nozzle Valve Assembly Dynamic Wing Boom Operation Wing Boom Strap Assembly Field Fill Airfield Fill Mixing/Filling Operation with Wettable Powders vii 67 68 69 71 - 74 76 77 80 82 86 91 92 94 95 97 98 101 102 103 104 106 107 111 113 115 116 119 120 121 �LIST OF FIGURES (Concluded) FIGURE PAGE 59 Tank Flushing 122 60 Functional Level Diagram for the Modular Internal Spray System 124 1-1 Main Power Circuitry 132 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 Circuit Breaker Delay Curves Flowmeter Circuit Engine Control Circuit Agent Level System Circuit Liquid Level System Automatic Engine Shut-off Electrical Schematic Spray Circuitry Dump System Circuitry Vent Valve Control System Logic Diagram (One Valve) Vent Valve Control System Schematic (One Valve) 134 135 137 139 1-7 1-8 1-9 1-10 Vlll 140 141 143 144 145 �LIST OF TABLES TABLE TITLE I PWU-5/A Modular .Internal Spray System Parameters II PACE 8 Aircraft Characteristics 34 Aircraft/System Parameters 36 IV Enviroirnental Factors 37 V C-54G Tie-Down Details 41 VI C-123 Tie-Down Details 45 VII C-130E Tie-Down Details 47 VIII C-97G Tie-Down Details 51 C-118A Tie-Down Details 53 C-119G Tie-Down Details 56 III IX X XI XII XIII XW XV XVI XVII ' Aircraft Performance Degradation and Horsepower Increase Required to Maintain Cruise Condition Using Streamlined Wing Boom 72 Installation/Removal Data 74 Contamination Possibilities 79 Spray Parameters 83 , PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System Agents 85 Agent Application Rates 87 PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System Agent Compatibility 89 Compatibility 89 ix (The reverse of this page is blank) �SECTION I INTRODUCTION This report describes the work performed in the development of the PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System, designed to disseminate various chemical agents utilizing ten different cargo/ utility-type aircraft. Major effort was devoted to the design of a modular spraying system which would exploit the full payload capabilities of all applicable aircraft by using multiples of the modular components, allow for installation and removal at the organizational level without permanent modification to the aircraft, and permit spraying of a large variety of chemical agents over a wide range of deposition rates. Compliance with these requirements resulted in the use of a modular power unit and multiple modular 500-galloncapacity tank units. All hardware attached to the aircraft skin (wing booms, etc.) was attached using adhesive to avoid metal cutting or welding. Emergency dumping was accomplished through the use of internal ducts, manifolded into a single duct, which exhausted at an open rear jump door. To assure an optimized agent transfer system, a complete system flow model was built and tested. This report contains a complete description of the PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System; a development history of each of the major subsystems and components; discussions of contamination and safety considerations; ground and flight testing results; and discussions of reliability, maintainability, and cost effectiveness. The appendices contain the stress analysis for the various system internal components. Analysis of the C-47, C-123, and C-130 external hardware and complete installation instructions are presented in the modification documents for these aircraft. 1 (Tl'.e reverse of this page is blank.) �SECTION II SUMMARY The detailed design requirements were defined in the contractual document. The design and development effort was directed at the complete system, including aircraft compatibility; material/agent compatibility; minimizing aircraft modification; internal tanks, power module, and agent transfer system; emergency dump, and sealed tank venting system; external wing booms, nozzles, and positive shut-off nozzle valves; operator and pilot controls; flow rate monitoring and control; contamination prevention; builtin ground support features including self-filling and draining, system flushing, and aircraft washing; reliability, maintainability and supportability. The PWU-5/A MISS was designed to be compatible with and exploit the full payload capabilities of the C-46, C-47, C-54, C-97, C-118, C-119, C-121, C-123, C-130, and C-131 aircraft. Each system uses a single power module; multiple tank modules; multiple standard wing boom, dump, and vent sections; and miscellaneous plumbing fittings. Due to the unique geometry of each aircraft, different length hoses and other special fittings are used for each installation. These special parts are kept to an absolute minimum, utilizing the modular concept to the fullest extent possible. The agent transfer system contains all necessary controls and monitoring equipment to fill, mix, and disseminate chemical solutions, suspensions, or slurries. Dissemination rates may be varied from 2.5 to 600 gpm while controlling tho flow rate to within + 5.0 percent. This flow rate range permits all aircraft to meet the required 3-ounce to 3-gallon per acre ground deposition rates while maintaining an effective swath of at least two times the wing span of the applicable aircraft. To minimize agent transfer system components and insure system effectiveness, a complete agent transfer system flow model was built and tested. All system components were studied to reduce hardware costs while maintaining functional effectiveness. The C-47, C-54, C-123, and C-130 aircraft were selected as primary, and complete PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray Systems wers designed, fabricated, tested, and delivered for the C-47, C-123, ind C-130 aircraft. �The C-123K MISS wa& installed and flight tested at Eglin Air Force Base. The delivered C-130 system, to be used for Air Force flight testing, utilizes four tank modules instead of the eight tank modules normally installed in a C-130 aircraft. Complete system fitment tests for the C-47, C-123, and C-130 aircraft were made at NAS Moffett Field, California, to insure aircraft/system compatibility. Material/agent compatibility studies were made to select compatible system materials at minimum cost. Several prime system components were cycle tested to verify a minimum 5-year life. Flowmeter accuracy tests were performed' as were functional tests of major hardware components. �SECTION III DESCRIPTION 3*1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The PWU-5/A is an airborne, modular, reusable system capable of disseminating defoliants, herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers as chemical solutions, suspensions, or slurries. The system consists of a power module with a control panel, multiple agent reservoirs, an emergency dump system, wing booms and fuselage spray stations with positive shut-off nozzle valves, a sealed tank venting system, and miscellaneous piping and fittings. The system can be assembled in various combinations to fit the ten specified cargo-type aircraft. Figure 1 shows the C-123 MISS installation, which is a typical two-tank system. Larger air-' craft use additional tanks. The C-130 uses eight tanks, four on each side of the power module. The C-54 uses four tanks, two on each side of the power module. The C-47 MISS installation is unique in that it uses two tanks, both on the same side of the power module. The power and control module contains all necessary equipment for controlling filling, priming, recirculating, disseminating, emergency dumping, flushing, and draining the fluid system. Thn system is entirely self-supporting, requiring no aircraft power. System power is provided by an air-cooled, internal combustion engine which drives the main pump, an air compressor, and generates necessary electrical power., The control panel includes all gages and controls for complete system operation and .monitpring. In addition, the aircraft pilot is provided with controls for ' both disseminating and emergency dumping. . . . . . . u.- :•.• • The agent reservoirs have a usable capacity of 500 gallons each and include a filler cap, vent line, level sensors, inlet and outlet tubes, and an emergency dump valve. The entire system is closed to insure no escape of agent or agent vapors inside the aircraft. The power module' a'nd tank modules have captive, retractable casters for/mobility,. All nozzle stations have pneumatically actuated positive shut-off valves that prevent agent leakage at the nozzles when spraying is stopped. These valves are fail-safe; if the pneumatic actuation line fails, the valves continue to function as agent shat-off valves but will only sc-al against agent pressures less than 5 psig. Minimal aircraft modification is assured by routing all -external plumbing, the tank vent system line, and the emergency dump outlet line through the aircraft jump Joors, and by bonding che external plumbing and wing boom mounting plates to the aircraft with an aerospace adhesive. �TANK MODULE ( ) 2 POWER MODULE (I) FUSELAGE HOSE ASSEMBLY l-BOOM TRANSFER TEE ASSEMBLY Figure 1. C-123 Modular Internal Spray System Kit No. 4373716 �3.2 SYSTEM PARAMETERS The parameters given in Table I apply to the complete MISS system as installed in;-the ten specified aircraft. Parameters of the individual system modular components are discussed in paragraph 3.3. 3.3 3.3.1 COMPONENT DESCRIPTION Agent Transfer System The agent transfer system consists of all components which transfer agent from the tanks to the wing booms. The transfer system is shown in schematic form in Figure 2, and the power module piping portion of the system is shown in Figure 3 for crossreference. . .:„. The system uses twin 4-inch suction lines to draw agent from the tanks. These 4-inch suction lines merge and feed the centrifugal pump. The pump output may be directed four ways; (1) recirculated back to the tanks, (2) disseminated through the high volume spray system, (3) disseminated through the low volume spray system, (4) drained through the power drain port. The amount of recirculation is controlled by a butterfly valve, and recirculation may continue during spraying. Both the high and low volume spray systems have turbine flowmcters for accurate flow rate monitoring. Each system also has its own throttle valve to allow adjustment of flow rates. The low volume system has a fine mesh strainer to filter out foreign matter, which may tend to plug the extremely small orifices of the low voldme spray nozzles. The MISS agent transfer system is self-supporting in that it includes provisions for self-priming, suction filling, and power draining. Self-priming is accomplished by using an air eductor which draws agent through the ground fill hose and the centrifugal pump. Once the centrifugal pump is primed, it becomes the pumping source for suction filling. During power draining, the centrifugal pump transfers agent from the tanks through the appropriate ground support hose. The agent reservoirs are equipped with motor-driven vent valves, which automatically open when the desired function switch is thrown on the control panel (i.e., pump prime, fill, dr.iin, etc.). �TABLE I. PWU-5/A MODULAR INTERNAL SPRAY SYSTEM PARAMETERS SMALLEST SYSTEM LARGEST SYSTEM 2 TANKS, 1 POWER MODULE 8 TANKS, 1 POWER MODULE CAPACITY 0 - i*,000 GALLONS (MAX.) DISSEMINATION RATE 2.5 GPM CHIN.) s6o GPM (MAX.) FLOW RATE MONITORING ERROR LESS THAN i 5.0% FROM 2.5 TO 600 GPM SUCTION FILLING RATE USING 50-FOOT, 2-INCH DIAMETER HOSE 1U5 GPM 57-INCH LIFT WITH WATER 125 GPM 16.5-FOOT LIFT WITH 55-GALLON DRUM SUCTION PROBE ATTACHED, 75 GPM 57-INCH LIFT WITH WATER 50 GPM 16.5 FOOT LIFT EMERGENCY DUMP TIME LESS THAN U5 SECONDS FOR 1/2 AGENT PAYLOADFORALL AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 28 VDC, ALL CIRCUITS INDIVIDUALLY PROTECTED BY BREAKERS NOZZLE VALVE 3/14-INCH PNEUMATIC DIAPHRAGM DUMP VALVE k-INCH BUTTERFLY, PNEUMATIC WITH MANUAL OVERRIDE 3-INCH BUTTERFLY, PNEUMATIC SPRAY VALVE SELF-SUPPORTING FEATURES NO AIRCRAFT POWER REQUIRED SUCTION FILL POWER DRAIN TANK WASHING NOZZLE PROBE AIRCRAFT WASHING GUN RECIRCULATION MIXING �TO WING BOOMS © <2> d> ® <D © © <D DISSEMINATION EDUCTOR EXHAUST AND AGENT. » * 3 3 3 3 I 3 INCH INCH INCH INCH INCH 1KCH INCH tNCH TANK SUCTION VALVE SUCTION VALVE SUCTION FILL VALVE POWER DRAIN VALVE RECIRCULATION VALVE HIGH VOLUME SPRAY LOW VOLUME SPRAY THROTTLE SPRAY -ON-OFF" VALVE LEGEND = = LSU-T =4 CS3-Q LOW VOLUME STRAINER TURBINE FLOWMETER = BUTTERFLY VALVE, MANUAL LEVER = BUTTERFLY VALVE, MANUAL HANOWHEEL = BUTTERFLY VALVE, PNEUMATIC = DIAPHRAGM VALVE, MANUAL _J I-1 inure 2. • Agent Transfer System Schematic �L.V. THROTTLE(7 OH OFF SPRAY VALVE(? L.V. FLOWMETER U.V. FILTER OISSEHIMATIOX (3 INCH LINE) H.V. TfcROJJLE VALVE RECIRCUUTtON (3 »HCH LIME) RECIRCULAT10H SUCTIOi1 VALVEU. Figure 3. SUCTION (4 INCH LIKE) Agent Transfer .System Power Module. Piping �3.3.2 Pneumatic System The pneumatic system generates, stores, and directs compressed air for control of various system functions, as shown in Figure 4. Compressed air is generated by a single 7.4-CFM .two-cylinder air compressor, which is belt-driven by the Packette PE90-7 internal Combustion engine. The compressor is:,equipped with a governor and unloader assembly which allows the compressor to exit-out and free-wheel after a preset air reservoir pressure has been reached. When the air reservoir pressure drops below a certain level, the air compressor automatically cuts back in, and supplies compressed air. When free-wheeling, the compressor continues to cycle but without compressing air. Normal range between cut-in and cut-out pressure is 17-22 psig. The cut-out pressure is adjusted to 130 psig for use with the PWU-5/A MISS. Compressed air is stored in two 1200-cubic-inch primary reservoirs and a single 634-cubic-inch emergency dump reservoir. The emergency dump reservoir supplies air through a filter-regulator set at 100 psig and 4-way solenoid valve to the emergency dump valves on the tank modules. The emergency dump air reservoir is isolated from the primary air reservoirs by a check valve so that the emergency dump air supply cannot be depleted except by actuation of the emergency dump system. The emergency dump air system can, however, utilize the primary air supply when the emergency air supply pressure falls below the primary air supply pressure. All three air reservoirs are equipped with drain petcocks, and both the primary and emergency air systems employ safety valves to prevent excessive pressure build-up due to any system malfunction. Both the primary and emergency air supplies are monitored by individual pressure gages. . . The primary air supply passes through a filter-regulator set at 60-30 psig and supplies air for the spray valve, eductor, wing boom purge, and the wing boom nozzle diaphragm valve air pressure regulator. Both the eductor and wing boom purge air supplies are controlled with 2-way solenoid valves and are protected from spray agent by check valves. Air supplied to the eductor creates a vacuum in the agent transfer system piping for priming the centrifugal pump. The wing boom purge function allows air to pass through the external aircraft plumbing and out of the spray nozzles, purging agent from 'uhe wing booms. The nozzle diaphragm valve air supply utilizes a regulator to maintain pressure at 40 psig and a 3-way solenoid valve to control air direction. Air is supplied to the nozzle valves at all times when not spraying and is exhausted when spraying. 11 �7.11-CFM AIR COMPRESSOR 8 x 26, PRIMARY . RESERVOIR(I200 CU IN) (O DRAIN EHERG. DUMP AIR PRESSURE GAGE OH-OFF SPRAY VALVE 100 PSIG II-WAY 3/8 1/2 DUMP SOLENOID VALVE ^H DRAIN -DUMP RVOIR. CU IN) PSIG U © 60-80 . f I3/8 IAI 2-WAY . CS r~"~ tQ EDUCTOR 3/8 3/8 , Jl«3/8 2-WAY 500-GAL \ *T\EM^ ) / 3/8 " ' W PSIG REG H 3/8 C AA - r A 1 OUU'OAL. \ I 1 S ) ! LEGEND IAn MM P" J EXHAUST -^—V-f*^- / " WING ..- • - !• '• - .-: r: BOOM ! 3/8 [$ ^1 1^! 3/8 "IMMOM. n-R'1 = FILTER-REGULATOR 3/8 Jl i^V^''^ ^ = CiECK VALVE 3/8 = QUICK DISCONNECTS r T = SAFETY AIR RELEASE VALVE O ! Figure 4. Pneumatic System Schematic 12 D BB77irp 1 lr U 3 WAY 1 = SOLENOID VALVE g [ • APHRAGM VALVEt «»«.»fc\ TYP) 3/8 �3•3•3 Power Module Assembly The power module assembly is the heart of the PWU-5/A MISS and contains all necessary equipment to transfer, monitor, and control the spray agsnt. The power module incorporates an agent transfer system, pneumatic system, and electrical system. Figures 5, 6, 7, and 8 show the major power module components. The power module assembly measures 51-1/4 inches from front to back by 60 inches wide by 51 inches high. Approximate dry weight is 2000 pounds. 3.3.3.1 Frame The frame is a structural aluminum weldm-jut and has retractable castors, lifting jacks, engine heat deflector, forklift slots, belt guards, and tie-down eye bolts. The castors are held in the extended or retracted position with captive ball-lock pins, and the lifting jacks are used to raise or lower the front and back sides of the power module when extending or retracting the castors. The entire frame is coated with heavy-duty industrial epoxy paint. 3.3.3.2 Engine The engine is 110-hp piston-driven, air-cooled, four-cylinder, four-stroke gasoline engine. It is a PE90-7 Packett engine produceby Continental Motors Corporation, FSN 2805-633-6689, and is currently in the Air Force inventory as the power source for several types of ground support equipment. To drive the pump and air compressor, a 0.75:1 reduction gear housing (FSN 2805-960-1916) is used. This provides a single pad power take-off to which a splined stub shaft is attached with an outboard bearing to support the main drive pulleys. Two sets of four each 3V belts drive the pump; a single 3V belt drives the air compressor. On the opposite end of the engine from the power take-off, a loadsensing governor and a 28V, 50-ampere generator are mounted or. power take-off pads provided for them. The dual exhaust pipes are manifold into a single pipe exhausting upwards. A commercial spark arrester is mounted to the exhaust pipe. Gasoline is supplied to the engine by a separate tcink and connected with drip tight quick-disconnect fittings. 3.3.3.3 Centrifugal Pump The centrifugal pump is a 316 stainless steel chemical process pump with TFE mechanical seals. It is constructed to AVS size A70 envelope with a 10.0-inch casing and a 9.5-inch open impeller. The suction port is 4.0-inch diameter and discharge is 3.0-inch 13 (The reverse of this page is blank.) �HIGH VOLUME FLOWMETER LOW VOLUME STRAINER LOW VOLUME FLO*M£TER EDUCTOft AN!) W I N G BOOM PURGE A I R R r OULATOR LOW VOLUME fHROHLE — — WING BOOM N07ZUE <ALVE A I S REGULATOR HIGH VOLUME. THROTTLE CONTROL PANEL 3 INCH D l S S E M I N A i ION KECIRCULATION v A L < 2 INCH RECIRCULATION U INCH SUCTION PUMP CASING D R A I N JACK POWER PRAIN Figure 5. Power Module Assembly (Front View) �24 VDC B A K E R Y EXHAUST STACK SPARK ASREST 3 IHCH OlSSEMtHATil EM£<if,?NCV DUMP AIR RESERVOIR PE90-7 E K O I N i Alk E M f S G E H C Y DUMP A I R HLTER/REGULAIOR A I R RESESVOIS JACK Figure 6. AUK MODULE ELECTRICAL A PNEUMATIC CONNECTIONS Power Module Assembly (Back View) 15 (The rcvcvso of this [lago is l>l;ink) �-EDUCTOR AIR RUER/REGULATOR 2<*-VDC BATTERY EXHAUST STACK EDUCTOR 3 INCH DISSEMINATION 28-VDC G E N E R A T O R 3 INCH RECIRCULATION INCH SUCTION AIR W I N G BOOH CONNECTIONS FUEL LINE - Figure 7. A I R RESERVOIR Power Module Assembly (Left View) �3 INCH DISSEMINATION LINE WING BOOM AIR CONNECTION 2i»-VOC BATTERY — WING BOOM NOZ/LE YHVE A I R REGULATOR EMERGENCY DUMP RESERVOIR PE30-7Q EN CONTROL BOX BE :£NSiONEi< PUMP PUUEY (8 GROOVE) COMPSESSOR PUMP BELT TENSIONER (8 GROOVE) — AIR RESERVOIR Figure 8. Power Module Assembly (Right View) 17 (The reverse of tliis i>age is blank) �diameter; both ports are fitted with ASA 150-pound drilled flanges. The casing has a 3/8-inch drain port. Pump bearings are oil lubricated, and the mechanical seals are pressure lubricated with a spring-type grease cup. The pump is designed to handle slurries and highly viscous agents as well as highly corrosive chemicals. 3.3.3.4 Air Compressor and Air Tanks The air compressor is a reciprocating, power-driven, air-cooled, self- lubricated design used as a source of compressed air in the air brake system of military and commercial wheeled vehicles. Its rated delivery is 7.4 CFM of free air at 100 psig nominal. The compressor is belt-driven off the engine power take-off shaft. A pressure unloader allows the compressor to free-wheel when the air tanks have been pressurized to 130 psig and cuts t;»e compressor back into the system when the pressure falls to approximately 90 psig. The air tanks are cylindrical in shape and are secured to the power module with strap brackets. 3.3.3.5 Agent Valves The 3-inch and 4-inch-ciiameter butterfly valves are aluminum body with TFE sleeves and seals and 316 stainless discs. The butterfly valves are gearwheel, lever, and pneumatically actuated. The low volume spray throttle valve is a TFE diaphragm/stainiess steel valve. 3.3.3.6 Piping 3-inch, and 4-inch-diameter pipi-n9 is 304 stainless and a conbanation of, schedule 5 pipe and 0.065-inch wall tubing. All piping is welded and passivated. Piping connections are made with corrosion weight flanges, sanitary fittings, or quick disconnect fittinc (used for ground support hose connections) . The low volume spray system is 1-inch, schedule 40, 304 stainless screwed pipe. 3.3.3.7 Solenoid Valves The solenoid air valves are commercial 24 Vdc brass. 3.3.3.8 Pneumatic Actuator The pneumatic actuator on the main spray valve is an alaminum body, twin piston-type actuator. 3.3.3.9 Eductor The eductor is 304 stainless and obtains a maximum suction of 27 inches of mercury at 80 psig input air pressure. Air consumption at 80 psig is about 11.4 SCFM. At 60 psig, air consumption is 9.0 SCFM, and a suction of 25 inches of mercury is ojtained. 19 �3.3.3.10 Flowmeters Two flowmeters are used: 3-inch-diameter high volume (up to 600 gpia). and 1-inch-diameter low volume (2.5 to 6D gpm). The meters are turbine-type, constructed of stainless steel with carbide bearings. (The prototype MISS flowmeters were supplied with TFE bearings due to the unavailability of carbide.) The meters are fitted with ASA ISO-pound drilled flanges. 3.3*4 Tank Module Assembly The tank module assembly i** shown in Figures 9 and 10. The assembly measures 48 inches wide by 72, inches long by 64 inches high and weighs approximately 670 pounds dry. Agent capacity is 500 gallons. 3.3.4.1 Tank The tank is constructed of 14-gage 304 stainless steel. The tank ends are ASME low crown flanged and dished heads. Access into the tank is through a 10-inch by 19-inch manhole in the tank top. The manhole cover has a fill cap, cup-type strainer under the fill cap, liquid level transmitter assembly and 2-inch pipe vent line. Agent slosh is controlled by a single vertical internal baffle of perforated sheet, which covers the lower half of the tank and is curved for strength. One tank end has three 3/4-inch14 NPT plugged openings to provide for possible instrumentation during testing. Two of these openings were used for a visual liquid level indicator designed for water testing only, since the indicator materials are not agent compatible. Two 4-inch agent pick-up pipes are provided on the bottom of the tank, one at each end. Attached to these pipes with sanitary fittings are 90°, 4-inch elbows. A 4-inch dump valve is located on one lower end of the tank. 3.3.4.2 Cradle The cradle is a weldment of structural aluminum, coated with heavy duty industrial epoxy paint, and secures the tank with two band straps. Castors are provided on each corner of the cradle, retained with ball-lock pins, and can be easily extended or retracted after lifting the end oi" the tank module assembly with the captive jacks provided. Forklift tubes are located on the cradle side. Eye bolt tie-downs are located at each cradle corner. 3.3.4.3 Electrical Junction Box The electrical junction box is secured to the top of one forklift tube. Extending from the electrical junction box is a cable which connects to either an adjacent tank or the power module, es shown in Fidure 11. 20 �LIQUID LEVEL TRANSMITTER/ FL.OAT ASSEMBLY MOTOR-DRIVE* VEKT VALVE FUt CAP MANHOLE LIQUID LEVEL , INDICATOR (FOR WATER TESTS ONLY) 3/t PIPE HALF-COUPLING HOLD-DOWN STRAPS H INCH DIAMETER 90 ELBOW *GEHT LI " JACK CASTOP AIRLINE CONNECTIONS ELECTRICAL CABLE COKNECTOP, ELECTRICAL , JUNCTION BOX Figure 9. Tank Module Assembly (Side View) 21 �MOTOR-DRIVEN VENT VALVE 2 INCH DIAMETER VENT LINE VENT VALV? __ ELECTRICAL CABLE UMP VALVE WITH PNEUMATIC ACTUATOR IMNCH DIAMETER 90 ELBOW AGENT LINE DUMP AIRLINE ELECTRICAL CABLE DUMP A I R L I N E CONNECTIONS Figure 10. Tank Module Assembly (End View) 22 �0UMP PQRT ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOX rj i i * v ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOX CABLE POWER MODULE I i i i ) FRONT TANK MODULE ( T Y P ) Fiauro 11. Tank Module Assembly Electrical Cable Conne -t �3.3.4.4 Dump Valve The dump valve, located at the bottom of one tank end, is a 4-inch butterfly with TFE sleeve, 316 stainless disc, and aluminum body. The valve is actuated by a twin-piston pneumatic actuator, which is equipped with a handle for manual operation. The actuator uses air to open and close the valve and; therefore, air pressure must be relieved before manual valve operation is possible. The dump valve air lines are connected in exactly the same sequence as the electrical junction box cable (Figure 11). The air lines on the tank module nearest the power module are connected to the power module, the next outermost tank module air lines are connected to the tank nearest the power module, etc. The two dump valve air lines are different sizes, eliminating the possibility of incorrect connection. 3.3.4*5 Vent Valve The vent valve is a 2-inch brass ball valve with TFE seats. It is driven with a 28-Vdc motor actuator which provides feedback to the power module control panel to indicate vhether the valve is open or closed. 3.3.4.6 Fill Cap and Strainer The fill cap is 304 stainless with a fluorosilicone gasket. It is spring-loaded and will seal up to about 15 psig internal tank pressure. Located below the fill cap is a removable stainless steel strainer to filter out foreign matter if agent is poured directly into the tank. 3.3.4.7 Liquid Level Float/Transmitter Assembly - - The liquid level transmitter is a sealed resistive-type level indicator made of nickel-plated brass, stainless steel, and TFE. It is bolted to the manhole cover and suppor^c'd at the bottom of the tank by a short vertical tube which forms a slip-joint. This method of connection allows the tank to expand and contract due to temperature changes, etc., without damaging the float assembly. When the float reaches the top of its travel during ground filling, it trips an internal switch which closes the tanks vent valve, preventing agent from being pumped through the vent line. When all tanks in any size PWU-5/A MISS have been filled in this manner, the power module engine magneto is grounded, stopping the engine to prevent overpressurization of the tanks. 3.3.5 Power Module Controls and Instrumentation The power module control panel is shown in Figure 12. It contains all instrumentation and remote controls for the PWU-5/A MISS. All indicator lights are the press-to-test type and can be dimmed by 24 �AGENT PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE VENT VALVE INDICATORS — AND CONTROL OPERATOR EMERGENCY DUMP SWITCH AGENT LEVti SYSTEM FLOWMETER ELECTRONICS R RESERVOR PRESSURE ,,. OPERATOR— SPRAY SWITCH •NGINE CONTROLS r"!7,«AS,- -.'i-vw.c-- *i!:-^V*"*VfJIl-;_>4 CIRCUIT BREAKERS "(COVER OPENED) Figure 12. Control Panel 25 �rotating. The control panel is hinged for easy access to the control box immediately behind the control panel. The control box contains the majority of the system's electrical equipment. 3.3.5.1 Agent Temperature and Pressure . The agjent temperature and pressure gages are located at the upper left-hand corner of the control panel. Agent pressure is read •'at.the centrifugal pump output and agent temperature at the pump intake. 3.3.5.2 Air Pressure Two air pressure gages are located below the agent temperature antf pressure gages. The upper gage reads the air pressure in the emergency dump reservoir, and the lower gage reads the pressure in the primary air reservoirs. 3.3.5.3 Number of Tanks The switch at _the top center of the control panel is used to set the system for the total number of tanks in the system. For all systems (2, 4, 6, or 8 tanks) except the C-47, the tanks are located symmetrically about the power module. The C-47 MISS installation uses two tanks both on the same side of the power module and therefore requires a special switch position. 3.3.5.4 Vent Valves Figure 13 shows the vent valve control display and how it relates to the MISS tank placement. The switches marked "End Tank Left" and "End Tank Rinht" are used to set the system electronics for the correct end tank. For a two-tank symmetrical system, the switches would be set at 1 and 2; for a four-tank system, they would be set at 3 and 4, etc. The C-47 has special switch positions because it is not a symmetrical system. The vent valve switch in the center of the vent valve panel opens and closes all tank vert valves simultaneously. Each tank has indicators to display whether its vent Valve is open or closed. Red lights indicate open, and green lights indicate closed. 3.3.5.5 Dump The dump switch opens all tank vent valves and dump valves, simultaneously. This switch is in parallel with the pilot's dump switch so that either the operator or pilot can start and stop the dump sequence. (The same switch must be used to both start and stop the dump operation.) 26 �LEFT -<- •>- RIGHT i POWER 7 5 3 2 1 4 6 MODULE • i .....i ..... ^x FRONT I— TWK MODULES NUMBER OF TANKS 6 to -j OPEN OPEN O O © © © 5 3 CLOSED V*LVES © © 2 © 4 O O © © TV > CLOSEO \ END UKK RI'SHT S W I T C H OPENS/CLOSES ALL VENT VALVES SIMULTANEOUSLY INDICATOR LIGHTS OPEN - RED CLOSED - GREEN Figure 13. Vent Valve Control Schematic 8 �3.3.5.6 r 11 The fill switch opens all tank vent valves for ground filling using the power module suction fill function. As each tank is • filled, its vent valve automatically closes. When all tanks are filled, the engine magneto is grounded, stopping the engine and preventing overfilling the tanks. Turning the fill switch off allows the engine to be restarted. If the tanks are not filled full v?hen ground filling is terminated, turning off the fill switch will close all tank vent valves. 3.3.5.7 Pump Prime The pump prime switch supplies air from the primary air reservoirs to the eductor for priming the pump when the system is dry and opens the end tank vent valves to allow venting of the eductor exhaust air through the recirculation line and the end tank vent's..' 3.3.5.8 ••• - ...'.. . ,:. .. Air Purge The air purge switch supplies air from the primary air reservoirs to the 3-inch dissemination line just after the main on-off spray valve. The air purge switch will not function unless the main on-off spray valve is closed, preventing the possibility of blowing air back through the system and into the tanks. 3.3.5.9 Drain The drain switch opens the end tank vent valves only. sequential draining of the tank modules. 3.3.5.10 Agent Capacity System ........ ?. . . . . . . ^. This allows ; The agent capacity system includes a twin opposed needle indicator with each needle reading 0-500 gallons, and a four-position selector switch marked 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8. With the selector switch in the 1-2 position, the agent capacity of tank number 1 is displayed on the left needle indicator and number 2 tank agent capacity is displayed on the right needle indicator. In the same manner, the agent level in tanks 3 through 8 can be read. If a tank is selected which is not in the given system (i.e., tank No. 6 in a two-'fahk system), the indicator needle will pin off scale, above the full mark. 3.3.5.11 Spray The spray switch opens the end tank vent valves and the on-off main spray valve (3-inch butterfly) simultaneously, allowing the tanks to empty sequentially from the end tanks to the innermost tanks (both sides of the power module simultaneously). The 28 �operator spray switch is in series with the pilot's spray switch s>o that both switches must be thrown to initiate spraying, but eitbtsr the operator or pilot can terminate spraying. Two indicator: lights next to the spray switch indicate if the pilot's or operator's spray switch is on. 3.3.5.12 Main Powei: The main power switch supplies power to all system functions and is also a circuit breaker. All subcircuits are individually protected with circuit breakers, and an indicator light illuminates if any circuit breaker is activated to the OFF position. A hinged panel provides circuit breaker access. 3.3.5.13 Engine Controls Engine- controls include a start button, ignition switch (magneto ground), throttle, and choke. The choke and throttle levers are the push-pull type. Pulling the choke lever activates the choke; the throttle lever is pulled to decrease throttle and. pushed in to increase throttle. Rotating the throttle lever clockwise will lock it in a given setting. The engine tachometer is located above the engine controls. 3.3.5.14 Engine Instruments A twin needle indicator displays oil and engine head temperature. The hourmeter indicates elapsed operation time. The ammeter shows battery charging or discharging rate, and the oil pressure gage indicates engine oil pressure. -3.3.5;. 15 Panel Illumination Lights *. ... , Two flexible goose-neck panel lights are provided. These lights may be positioned as desired, include dimming devices, and can be adjusted to illuminate with either white light for day flying or red light for night flying. 3.3.6 -Pilot Controls Pilot controls are shown in Figure 14. Switches for spraying and dump are provided. A dump indicator illuminates if either the pilot or operator activates the function. Separate indicators for the pilot and operator are provided with the spray switch. The indicators are the press-to-test type and can be dimmed by rotating them. The pilot control box is connected to the power module control box with an electrical cable. 29 �PILOT'S CONTROL BOX Figure 14. Pilot Controls 30 �3.3.7 Electrical System The main electrical power system consists of a 28-volt lead-acid aircraft battery, 50-ampere - 28.5-volt direct current generator powered by the PE90-7 engine, a carbon pile voltage regulator, and a reverse current relay. All secondary electrical systems are individually protected with circuit breakers. A detailed explanation of the complete PWU-5/A MISS electrical system is presente-i in Appendix I of this report. • 3.3.8 Emergency Dump System The emergency dump system allows one-half the agent payload to be jettisoned overboard in less than 45 seconds. Each tank dump valve output is manifolded into a 10-inch-diameter duct which extends through ah aft jump door. A single 10-inch dump line can handle up to four tanks; larger systems require two dump lines. The ducting is silicone-coated glass fiber, and fittings are stainless steel. 3.3.9 Tank Vent System The complete MISS is sealed to prevent leakage of agent or agent vapors inside the aircraft. To accomplish this, the 2-inchdiameter tank vent hoses are manjfolded into a 3-inch vent line and routed out a rear jump door. Each 3-inch line will handle four tanks; larger systems use two 3-inch vent lines. At the jump door the 3-inch vent line chute is positioned so the airstream causes slight ram-air pressurization of the tanks, decreasing emergency dump time. All vent line ducting is siliconecoated glass fiber, and all fittings are stainless steel. 3.3.10 Internal/External Aircraft Plumbing Ayent suction lines are 4-inch-diameter flexible hose. The first MISS prototypes were supplied with a vinyl interim hose which should not be used with agents containing aromatic hydrocarbons. A stainless steel suction hose, which is compatible with all MISS agents, is specified with the system. Recirculation and spray hoses are 3-inch-diameter- cross-linked polyethylene-lined pressure hoses rated at 150 psig working pressure. All suction and pressure hoses are sanitary^type couplings. Each aircraft used with the PWU-5/A MISS requires certa:.n custom fittings to route the spray hose out the jump door to the wing booms. For complete information regarding internal/external plumbing for a specified aircraft, consult the PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System, Class II modification documentation for that aircraft. 31 �3.3.11 Wing Boom System The wing boom is a 2-inch stainless pipe streamlined with an aft fairing. Standard wing boom lengths are 8 feet and 4 feet. Variations of shape and length are required on certain aircraft. Sections are joined with flexible connectors, which allow angular movement but restrain axial movement and rotation. Nozzle stations are located every two feet along the boom. Air- ... assisted diaphragm nozzle valves are used at each nozzle station to insure positive termination of spraying and prevent agent leakage through the nozzles when not spraying. A pneumatic line is located inside the boom fairing to supply air pressure to the nozzle shut-off valves. Two size stainless steel nozzles are used: 1/2-inch high capacity nozzle rated at 7.5 gpm/nozzle at 10 psig to 23.7 gpm/nozzle at 100 psig; 1/4-inch low volume nozzle rated at0.10 gpm/nozzle at 10 psig to 0.32 gpm/nozzle at 100 psig. The booms are positioned underneath the wing and secured by struts and bonded mounting plates (bonded to the wing with aerospace adhesive). 3.3.12 Ground Support Equipment Ground support equipment consists of: • 50-foot, 2-inch-diameter suction/pressure hose • 50-foot, 1-inch-diameter pressure hose • 55-gallon drum suction probe'assembly • Tank washing probe • Aircraft washing gun • Adaptor fittings. The 2-inch hose is used for suction filling or power draining. Attaching the drum suction probe assembly allows suction filling directly from 5r-gallon drums. The 1-inch hose may be either connected directly to the power module or to the end of the 50foot, 2-inch hose. The tank-washing probe includes a spherical spray head to wash down all internal tank surfaces when cleaning the system and is inserted through the tank fill cap opening. The aircraft washing gun has a variable spray which may be changed from a jet stream, cone spray, or shut off according to the gun's trigger position 32 �SECTION IV SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT Tithe following sections of this report present the development sequence of all FWp-5/A MISS hardware plus discussions of design criteria such as aircraft characteristics, chemical agents, and field operations. • ..,„. . „„... , - -r..^4.1 AIRCRAFT CONSIDERATIONS The PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System has been designed for use on a wide variety of cargo-type aircraft: C-46D, C-47D, C-54G,, C-97G, C-118A, C-119G, C-121G, C-I23K, C-13QE, and C-131E. Some of these aircraft date back to the late 1930's while others are modern-day sophisticated transports capable of carrying up to 45,00.0 pounds of cargo. This wide range of aircraft technology required extensive investigations to insure that suitable system/ aircraft combinations resulted. The aircraft were divided into two groups: primary and secondary. The primary aircraft are the C-47D, C-54G, C-123K. and C-130E;'other aircraft are termed as secondary. Some specific aircraft characteristics are shown in Table II. The aircraft design considerations included aircraft compatibiliL , modifications required, installation and removal restraints, aircraft contamination, and spray performance. These subjects are discussed in the following sections to show the restraints placed on the design and to show how the design satisfies the restraints:. 4.1.1 Aircraft Compatibility . 1 . ' •••••* '- ' ' ' ' To determine aircraft compatibility, several requirements v.'ere established. These requirements include: • Using full aircraft payload capacity • Attention to floor load limits • Attention to center of gravity • Fitment in allowable cargo-space • Attention to tie-down requirements • Permitting access to emergency exits • Permitting access to service points • Withstanding airborne environments. 33 �TABLE II. ( AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS PRIMARY AIRCRAFT SECONDARY AIRCRAFT C-470 C-54G C-123K C-13QE C-97G C-460 C-HB* C-1196 C-121G C-131E SPAN FT 95,0 117.5 MO.O 132.6 108.0 141.3 1 17. 5 109.3 123.0 K>5.7 LENGTH FT 6t}. 5 93.9 75.8 97.7 76.3 110.3 106. 9 86.5 113.6 79.,' HEIGHT FT 16.9 27.5 34. 1 38.0 21.8 38.3 28.4 26.3 24.8 27.8 2 4 2 4 2 4 4 2 4 290 200 326 260 310 329 242 295 2 295 167 IIH 291 129 200 229 146 212 170 ENGINES MAUMUM SPEED KNOTS 221 CRUISE SPEED KNOTS 142 - OPERATING WEIGHT LB 20,000 MO, 000 39,100 71,500 31,000 92,500 60,000 45,000 110,000 38,000 LOADED WEIGHT L8 33,000 73,000 60,000 153.000 61,900 169,000 112.000 72,700 145,000 60,500 LB 9.000 24,000 13.000 45,000 16,000 40,000 20,000 30,000 18,500 M A I N CARGO DOOR • • • SIDE SIDE REAR REAR SIDE REAR SIDE REAR SIDE SIDE DOOR HEIGHT IN. 55-70 67 ICO 109 55.5-78.5 78 78 96 DOOR W! CTri IN. 84 95 no 123 95.5 73 124 CO 74 112 72 120 HEIGHT IN. 80 80 98 ' 109 80 86 93 92 WIDTH IN. 79 103 98- 1 10 123 109 88-107 104 110 80 120 LENGTH IN. 270 420 444 492 510 764 816 443 984 79 93.6 554 MAX. PSF 200 200 200 1080 185 200 200 200 300 300 ' M A X . PAYLOAD CAR30 30,000 COMPARTMENT: FLOOR LOAD ' N O T E : PAYLOADS SHOWN ARE MAXIMUM FOR MISSIONS U T I L I Z I N G THE PWU-5/A MISS. �Since the PWU-5/A .MISS must be capable of use on a wide variety of aircraft with cargo capacities varying from 9,000 pounds to 45,000 pounds, several trade-offs were made resulting in the fin. : system. The system is able to satisfy the requirements of the large aircraft, and by rearranging the modules and connective plumbing and reducing the number of tank modules, the system is made compatible with other aircraft. Parameters of the various aircraft/system combinations are shown in Table III. The weights and payload efficiencies do not includ<> the weight of connective plumbing and booms. It is seen that the payload efficiency (without plumbing) is high, varying from 95 percent to 67 percent. For those aircraft which are payload limited, the PWU-5/A MISS utilizes nearly 100 percent of the aircraft payload capac.ity when the internal and external plumbing are included. Since the system moduL..- must be interchangeable, the most extreme environmental factors of the group of aircraft were considered. These f actors,_ which were established as design goals, are presented in Table IV. Load factors were determined to meet the requirements of the applicable Air Force technical orders for normal and crash conditions. Aircraft attitude angles determined the amount of center of gravity control which must be provided by the PWU-5/A MISS. Altitude and temperature ranges were determine ' to aid in the design of system components. A design dynamic pressure was established for the determination of maximum air loads on external components. Specific module layouts for the various aircraft arc discussed below. Particular attention was given to satisfyinq floor loadin compartment loading, and center of gravity requirements while exploiting maximum possible payload capacities. '• ..... •; -1 4.1.1.1 Primary Aircraft • C-47D The module layout for the C-47D is presented in Figure 15. Tvo. tank modules and ono power module are shown. The fuselage is divided into compartments along its length. Each compartment hn: a weight capacity independent of other compartments. Center of gravity conditions were satisfied assuming a basic aircraft, crew, and fuel e.g. at the forward aircraft e.g. limit. The modules were then positioned such that the aircraft e.g. remained within limits. These e.g. requirements limited the load of the aft tank. The forward portion of the main cargo door is removed for routing of connective plumbing. 35 �TABLE III. AIRCRAFT/SYSTEM PARAMETERS T A N K MODULE W E I G H T : 653 POUNDS EMPTY AIRCRAFT POWER MODULE WEIGHT: AGENT (T) CAPACITY (GAL.) NUMBER TANK MODULES MODULAR© WEIGHT (POUNDS) PAYLOAD© EFFICIENCY 2.0SO POUNDS LI. Ml TING FACTOR C-U6D t4 9% 12,982 0.81 CCVPftRTKENT LOAD C-i«7D 2 i466 7,250 0.81 CENTER OF GRAVITY C-5^G U 1,925 20,738 0.86 LATERAL RESTRAINT C-97G 8 3 ,W 36,U50 0.91 PAYLOAD C-118A 6 2,592 27,598 0.92 PAYLOAD C-119G i4 1,72*4 - 19,050 0.95 PAYLOAD C-121G 6 2,592 27,598 0.92 PAYLOAD C-123K 2 992 11,712 0.90 PAYLOAD C-130E 0; 3,9fc8 140,698 0.90 PAYLOAD C-131E k 932 12.U50 0.67 COMPARTMENT LOAD \ NOTES: Q SPECIFIC G R A V I T Y 1.0 © INCLUDING POWER MODULE, TANK MODULES. W I T H S.G = 1.0 AGENT, EXCLUDING CONNECTIVE PLUMBING, WING BOOHS, ETC. © R A T I O OF MODULAR WEIGHT TO MAXIMUM A I R C R A F T PAYLOAD. �TAM.K IV. I) ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOHS LOAD FACTORS KORKU FORWARD 3.0 9 6.0 g AFT 3.0 g 1.5 g UP 3.0 g 2.0 g DOWN i».5 g 9.5 g SI OF 2) CRASH 1.5 g t.b g AIRCRAFT ATTITUDE FOR C.G. CONTROL PITCH * 30* ROLL i 60" ALTITUDE CRUISE: SPRAY. 4) 0 FEET TO 20.000 FEET - MEAN SEA LEVEL 0 FEET TO 10,000 FEET - MEAN SEA LEVEL DESIGN DYNAMIC PRESSURE 400 KTAS AT SEA LEVEL = r,m» psr TEMPERATURE STORAGE (WITHOUT AGENT) -65"F TO H65°F INSTALLED WITH AGENT -65"F TO +IUCTF (OUTSIDE) •»20'F TO +I"»0"F (INSIDE) SPRAYING +WF TO 37 �TOT»L 3000 C TY ( C A L . S.G. 1.0) 22CO 231 i xEIC-HT (L3) 185 E 3000 3000 L I M I T (L8) 7250 2050 O 17 INCHES .10 INCHES •NS-V5-:-: I^ISScf^ FrfD INCHES oo f 22.5 JNCHES U.5 INCHES FULL 'ALLOrfASLE PAYLOAD C. G. FULL ACTUAL PAYLOAO f.G. 'ALLOWABLE PAYLOW c.t. <////. *///////////A EMPTY EMPTY ACTUAL fAYLOAO C. G. •BASED ON ASSUMPTION THAT BASIC AIRCRAFT C.G. (iHCL. fUEl AHO CREW) IS AT THE FWO C.G. LIMIT. Figure 15. C-47D Floor Plan �Tie-down of modules should be in accordance with the cargo load inT.O.'s of.the applicable C-47 model. Due to extreme variance of tie-down locations and strengths between C-47 models, no simile tie-down procedure is applicable. • C-54G The 4-tank module layout proposed for the C-54G is presented in Figure 16. The versatility of the modules, necessary to maximize payload capabilities, may be seen in this layout. The modules are oriented crosswise in the cargo compartment in order to satisfy center-of-gravity requirements. The two end tanks will empty first, and the two center tanks will empty l?..it. The forward portion of the aft cargo door will be removed to provide the opening for connective plumbing. Due to restraint capability of the cargo tie-downs, the forward tank must be limited to a total weight of 4332 pounds. In addition, it is required to directly bolt the cradles to floor fittings and to use several tie-down brackets to maximize the available restraint. Table V presents the recommended tie-down scheme. The tie-down fitting number is composed of the compartment, ths row (from left to right), the type fitting (primarily used for engine tie-down or general cargo), and the numerical position (from forward) of the fitting in the particular compartment row. • C-123K The module layout for the C-123K is presented in Figure 17. 'iVo tank modules and a power module are used, and the small c.n. banu requirements are satisfied by this arrangement as shown. The tanks empty simultaneously. Cargo tie-down fittings are adequate, passageways are sufficient, and the forward bail-out chute is not obstructed. Floor and compartment loading requirements are satisfied. The two aft jump doors are removed to provide openings for connective plumbing. Tie-down details are presented in Table VI; fitting' nomenclature is standard to tho aircraft. • C-130E The module layout for the C-130E is presented in Figure 18. The full capacity eight-rank system is shown. The module layout satisfies e.g., floor loading, and compartment loading requirements, and the jump doors provide openings for connective plumbin Tic-down details are presented in Table VII. Fitting ncmer.~l.alur. is standard to tho aircraft. For the prototype tent system, a four-tank assembly was designed and fabricated. 39 �,L,GH,- (is) •Cm 20,, 7 23 3050 U776 C A P A C I T Y (GAL. S.G. 1.0) r U35 U36 U925 COMPARTMENT, (capacity) (WOO) EMPTYING SEQUENCE (H300) (WOO) (WOO) ' (H800) o f"- 12 INCHES O —*i «-12 INCHES }*— 12 INCHES tj.-r 7>, FKO 16 INCHES •ALLOWABLE PAY LOAD C.G. ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. IS////,'/* FULL ® FULL •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD C.G. ^77777777/////r//r//////7//77//////7/7/\ ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. Q EMPTY EMPTY 'BASED OH ASSUMPTION THAT BASIC VIRCRAFT C.G.i(H*CL. FUEL AND CREW) IS AT THE FWO C.G. LIMIT. NO T.O. DATA Figure 16. C-54G Floor Plan �TABLE V. MODULE I (HOST AFT) TIE-DOWN FITTING NO. C-54G TIE-DOWN DETAILS TIE-DOWN DEVICE QTY SIZE 1 6-A-C-3 H-A-t-J l 12 50 t ATTACHMENT POINT LEFT AFT CORNER H-B-C-I H-C-C-I LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER H-D-C-I H-E-C-I RIGHT AFT CORKER fl-F-C-3 H-F-C-I 6-B-C-l i I 12 50 BOLT 0-6-E-l RIGHT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER THROUGH CRADLE i G-.6-C-? G-B-E-2 G-B-C-3 G-C-C-I G-C-C-2 G-C-C-3 G-D-C-I 6-0-E-l G-D-t-2 , G-O-t-2 G-D-C--3 G-E-C-I G-E-E-I 6-E-C-2 i G-E-E-2 1 G-E-C-3 2 BOLT THROUGH CRADLE F-A-C-I 1250 LEFT FWD CORNER F-A-C-2 i i LEFT FWD CORNER f-A-'.-3 LEFT AFT CORNER G-A-C-I LEFT AFT CORNER G-A-C-2 LEFT AFT CORNER F-B-C-I RIGHT FWD CORNER F-C-C-I F-O-C-I RIGHT FWD COftlER LEFT FWO CORNER F-E-C-I F-F-C-I F-F-C-2 LEFT FWD CORNER \ ( l RIGHT FHO CORNER 1250 RIGHT FHO CO<HER 41 �TABLF V. ; mm 2 (CONTINUED) (CONTINUED) TIE-DOWN DEVICE TIE-DOWN F I T T I N G NO. QTY SIZE F-F-C-3 1 1250 I ATTACHMENT POINT RIGHT AFT CORNER , G-F-C-I G-F-C-2 1250 RIGHT AFT CORNER RfGHT AFT CORNER F-8-E-I BOLT THROUGH CRADLE F-8-C-2 F-l-C-3 t \ i F-C-C-2 F-C-C-3 F-O-E-I F-D-C-2 F-D-E-2 F-D-C-3 F-D-E-3 F-E-E-1 F-E-C-2 F-E-C-3 POWER MODULE BOLT THROUGH CRADLE E-A-C-2 1250 LEFT FWD CORNER ! E-A-C-3 LEfT AFT CORNER 1 E-F-C-2 ' •' RI-1HT FWD CORNER E-F-C-3 1250 RIGHT AFT CORNER E-C-C-I E-C-C-2 BOLT THROUGH CRADLE I \ E-C-C-3 E-D-C-I E-O-E-I E-O-C-2 I f E-O-E-2 1 E-O-C-3 E-D-E-3 3 t BOLT D-A-C-2 D-A-C-3 ' THPfHlfiK C8imF E-A-C-I E-8-C-I LCFT LEFT LEFT LEFT D-F-C-2 RIGHT AFT CORKER 1250 j 1 AFT AFT AFT AFT CORNER CORNER CORNER CORNER D-F-C-3 E-F-C-I E-E-C-I D-B-C-I 1 ' t 1 t 1250 SIGHT AFT CORNER BOLT THRJUGM CRADLE 42 �V. MODULE 3 (CONTINUED) TIE-POWN F I T T I N G f'O. (CONCLUDED) TIE-DOWN DEVICE QTV D-8-C-2 ATTACHMENT POINT SIZE BOLT THROUGH CRADLE BOLT TIE DOWN BRACKET BOLT THROUGH CRADLE D-6-E-I D-fl-C-3 0-B-E-C D-C-C-I D-C-C-2 t AFT CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE I i D-C-C.J D-O-C-; - D-D-C-2 D-O-E-I . 1 D-O-C-3 0-1/-E-2 MLT TIE DOWN BRACKET BOLT BOLT TIE DOWN BRACKET D-E-C-I O-E-C-2 THROUGH CRADLE AFT CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE AFT CRADLE O-E-E-I O-E-C-3 D-E-C-2 il (MOST FWD) M C-A-C-I TIE DOWN BRACKET 1250 TIE DOWK BRACKET C-A-C-2 D-A-C-I C-F-C-I C-F-C-2 D-f-C-l 1 1 LEFT SIDE LEFT SIDE LEFT AFT CORNER XiGKT S'lOE RIGHT SIDE 1250 RIGHT AFT CORNER C-B-C-I BOLT THROUGH CRADLE C-B-E-I 1 C-B-C-2 C-C-C-I C-C-ft-2 C-D-C-I C-D-E-I C-D-C-2 C-E-C-I C-E-E-I C-E-C-2 IN ADDITION 1 1 BOLT • TIEDOWN BRACKET 1 43 THROUGH CRADLE INTERCONNECT MODULE NO. 1 TO NO. 2 AND MODULf NO. 3 TO HO. t �4831 2050 MODULE H E I G H T (IB) UPACITY ( G A L . S.G. 1.0) = 11,712 992 U36 COMPARTMENT TOTAL I IOW CAPACITY (LB) EMPTYING SEQUENCE 7500 7500 7500 7500 © © r FWO L... •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO c.e. FULL ACTUAL PAYLOAO C.6. FULL EMPTt •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO C.6. EMPTT ACTUAL PAYLOAO C.O. •PER T.O. tC-l236-9 Figure 17. C-123K Floor Plan �TABLE VI. O123 TIE-DOWN DETAILS WOOULE TIE-DOWN FITTING NO. FORWARD TANK A- 8 ATTACHMENT POINT A- 9 A-10 RIGHT AFT CORNER E- 9 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER E-10 A-11 RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER A-12 LEFT AFT CORNER E-11 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER E-12 RIGHT AFT CORNER A-U LEFT AFT CORNER A-16 LEFT FORWARD CORNER A-18 LEFT AFT CORNER E-1U RIGHT AFT CORNER E-16 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER E-18 AFT TANK LEFT AFT CORNER E- 8 POWER MODULE LEFT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER NOTES; TIE-DOWH DEVICE: QUANTITY = 1 SIZE = 10.000 45 �MODULE WEIGHT (L8) CAPACITY(6AL. S.C. <«83I ', 1.0) COMPARTMENT 196 , U LOAD CAPACITY (L8) 0 12,900 i(83l U83I K96 H96 ¥831 «»96 E 19. -.00 . F . ' 28,000 »L ' 48 31 U96 2050 H83I <m ),000 30,000 MO,698 496 W6 « t,Wt 2H.UOO 12.700 t H G M83I = »5, EMPTY INd SEQUENCE FWO •ALLOKASLE PAYLOAO c.c. V////271 AfTJAL PAYLOAO C. G. ® •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO c.o. ACTUAL ?uu. FULL EMPTY V/////////S7//77//////777/S//A Q PAYLOAO C. 0. EMPTY 'PER T.O. IC-I30E-5 Figure IS. C-130E Floor Plan �TABLE vn. C-ISOE TIE-DOWN DETAILS MODULE 8 (HOST FWD) TIE-DOWN FITTING NUMBER «A ATTACHMENT POINT LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER no .... :.. 5A 50 6B 6F 7 6 5 POWER MODULE i» 3 2 1 (MOST MOTES: AFT) TIE-DOWN DEVICE QUANTITY = 6A 66 8A 86 9B 9f 9A •90 IOA 100 MB IIF IIA 110 I2A 120 138 I3F m 118 I"»F (KG LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER ' R I G H T FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER LEFT RIGHT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORKER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER ••- LEFT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORnER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LCFT AFT COSHER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT FORWARD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT FORWARD CORNEA RIGHT FORWARD CORNER I6A 166 ISA I8G 198 I9F I9A 190 201 20G 218 2IF 2IA 2IG 22A 220 2KB 2HF 23A 230 25A 258 25F 256 1 SIZE = 47 10.000 �4.1*1.2 Secondary Aircraft Tim compatibility restraints of the secondary aircraft are satisfied in a similar manner as the primary aircraft. Figures 19 through 24 and Tables VIII through X <how the module layouts and tie-down details where tie-down data was available. 4.1.2 Aircraft Modifications One primary goal in designing the MISS was to allow the system to be rapidly installed while minimizing aircraft modification. Welding and metal-cutting operations were to be avoided. This philosophy was followed; major internal hardware is secured using standard tie-down devices. External hardware is attached to mounting plates which are bonded to the external aircraft surfaces. Complete modification information for the C-47, C-123, and C-130 is contained in their respective Class II modification documents. Figures 25 and 26 show the MISS test kits as installed on the C-47 and C-130 aircraft. Figure 1 (Section III of this report) shows the C-123K installation. 4.1.2.1 Internal Modifications The jump door openings were chosen as the location for the internal/external plumbing connection, the vent and dump outlets, battery and gas tank vents, and engine exhaust. This requires the jump doors to be removed for spraying but provides convenient routing without modifying the aircraft. The plumbing at tho- 'doors• can be removed and doors closed for ferrying. Several alternate openings were considered. A hole could be conveniently cut in the fuselage to minimize pipe length requirements, but this is time-consuming and is a major metal-cutting operation. Removal of a window was considered, but it would not adequately serve as a route for the emergency dump line since the dump line must be below the tanks to allow gravity flow. Removing an emergency exit is fast; again/ this does not present an attractive means of routing the dump line. The pilot's control box location was determined for each aircraft during the system fit tests according to the pilot's preferences. Most pilot control box brackets can be either bonded or bolted in place. The C-123 box bracket is bonded, the C-130 bolted to the window frame, and the C-47 pop-riveted to the central control console. The dump chute, vent chute, and exhaust chute, located at the jump door, are mounted to brackets which, in turn, are bc-.ided-to the aircraft interior. The bonding agent specified is silicone which can be easily removed when desired to reutore the aircraft interior to its original non-modified condition. Another method �TOTAL 12.982 MODULE WEIGKT(LB) CAPACITY (GAL. S.6. i,024 COMPARTMENT LOAD CAPACITY 'ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD C.O. ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.O. 'ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO C.G. ACTUAL PAY LOAD c.o. FULL FULL EMPTY EMPTY •BASED ON ASSUMPTION THAT M3»C AIRCRAFT C.G. (IMCL. FUEL AND CREK) IS AT THE FWO C.fl. UMIT. Figure 19. C-46D Floor Plan �M03UIE WEIGHT ( L B ) 1300 *300 1300 U300 4300 1300 1300 138 438 138 138 438 20 50 1300 M38 TOTAL = 36.800 • CAPACITY (GAL. S.G. ».0) 138 ; 138 r L r i 1r—+—+—^ E COMPARTMENT 9500 LOAD C A P A C I T Y EMPTYING SEQUENCE .O f G H 9000- 7500 " 75CFO 9000 u) (3) m CO (a; 3.«« i i ' i »•!*—t—t—^—Hi 7000 (z) 7000 7000 7000 (i FWD en o J~ HATCH HATCH ' A ^ - J . *. 'J''t •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO c.o. . FULL FULL ACTUAL PAY LOAD C.G. •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO C.G. ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. Y//7////7777/77/77/A & EMPTY EMPTY 'PER T.O. IC-97A-9 Figure 20, C-97G Floor Plan �TABLE VIII. MODULE TIE-DO WN FITTING NO. C-97G TIE-DOWN DETAILS TIE-DOWN DEVICE qn SIZE ATTACHMENT POINT L-«IL 1 TIE-DOW BRACKET LEFT SIDE L-U2R POKER MODULE 4 TC-DOWH BRACKET RI6HT SIDE H-5U 10,000 LEFT AFT CORNER M-5IR 10.000 RIGHT AFT CORNER • I-1IL BOLT THROUGH CRADLE (An TANK) J-m.R BOLT THROUGH CRADLE L-7IL L-7IR 10,000 10,000 LEFT AFT CORNER . RI6HT AFT CORNER L-5IL 10,000 LEFT FM> CORNER L-5IR 10,000 RIGHT FWD CORNER H-H3L BOLT BOLT THROUGH CRADLE I-OIR H-81L N-6IR 25,000 25,000 FWD LEFT CORNER FWD RI2HT CORNER H-Hk H-UIR BOLT THROUGH CRADLE BOLT THROUGH CRADLE 2 3 |J THROUGH CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE 25,000 25.000 FWO LEFT CORKER K-8IR FWO RIGHT CORNER F-UIL BOLT THROUGH CRADLE F-UIR 6 BOLT BOLT K-8IL 5 G-'HL G-1IR BOLT BOLT THROUGH CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE BOLT 25.000 THROUGH CRADLE E-4iL E-«HR I-8IL 25,000 I-8IR 7 o-mt C-H2L D-4IR G-8IL G-8I.< IK ADDITION RIGHT FWO CORNER BOLT BOLT D-UIR & (FWD TANK) LEFT FWO CORNER , THROUGH CRADLE THROUGH CRADLE BOLT THROUGH CRADLE BOLT THROUGH CRADLE 25,000 FWO LEFT CORKER 1 25.000 FWD RIGHT CORNER 2 2 BRACKET BRACKET CONNECT MODULE 2 AND 3 2 BRACKET CONNECT MODULE K AND 5 2 BRACKET CONNECT MODULE 6 AID 7 51 CONNECT MODULE 1 A*D 2 �WOUU «IGHT{18) 42S8 UPACITY(QAL. S.G. 1.0) COMPAHTKEKT C LOAD CAPACITY ; 432 , L 432 0 EH»niK5 SEQUENCE J I 5120 U32 y 432 r—T—T J 5200 4258 H25S 432 432 r —h—T 4800 2050 \ 5200 " 5200 • I TOTAL = 27,538 2.592 432 " 5HW T—i I I J720 O 1 16.S INCHES 12 'NCHES 30 10 1HCHES Ul NJ •22 * ALLOW ABLE PAYLOAD C.Q. ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. 10 INCHES \777777777A ® FULL FULL •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD c.s. EMPTY ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.Q. EMPTY "PER T.O, IC-II6A-9 Figure 21. C-118A Floor Plan �TABLE IX. TIE-DOUN MODULE FITTING NO. 1 i-» (AFT TANK) 8-30 8-3! 1-32 C-2> C-118A TIE-DOWN DETAILS TIE- DOWN DEVICE <m SIZE 1 5000 4 i 2 3 K LEFT AFT CORNER i k i C-31 C-32 A-33 B-29 D-30 0-bl D-32 E-2S £-30 £-31 £-32 F-2« F-33 A- 19 A-23 A- 23 A-2S F-19 F-23 F-25 F-26 A- 18 A- 20 A-21 A-22 F-18 F-20 F-21 F-22 A-IU A-l* A-16 F-lt F-15 F-16 8-16 B-16 0-16 D-18 ATTACHMENT POINT i LEFT AF T CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER I i RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FWD CORNER LEFT FWD CORNER LEFT FWD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER LEFT FWO CORNER LEFT FWO CORNER LEFT' FWD CORNER 1 ' 5000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 53 RIGHT AFT CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNE? LEFT FWD CORNER LEFT FWO CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNEl RIGHT AFT CORNEl �TABLE IX. MODULE 5 TIE- DOWN FITTING NO, A-IO A-ll A-f2 A-13 (CONCLUDED) TIE-DOWN DEVICE OTY 1 ATTACHMENT POINT SIZE I LEFT FWO CORNER 5000 4 t t T LEFT FWO CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER * F-IO 6 RIGHT F*i> CORNER F-ll F-12 F-13 A-U RIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWO CORNER SIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FWO CORNER A-7 A-8 A-9 ( B-t LEFT FWO CORNER 4IGHT FWO CORNER C-4 F-¥ F-7 F-8 F-9 1 RIGHT FV 0 CORNER .0-1 POWER MODULE B-17 E-15 E-17 B-16 B-18 E-16 E-18 ADDITION 1 B-IS 1 i 2 2 2 2 LEFT FWO CORNER LEFT FWO CORNER SIGHT FWD CORNER RIGHT FWD CORNER LEFT AFT CORNER 1 6000 BRACKET &RACKIT BRACKET BRACKET LfFT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER RIGHT AFT CORNER CONNECT MODULE NO. 1 TO NO. 2 CONNECT MOOUIE NO. 2 TO NO. 3 CONNECT MODULE NO. 4 TO NO. 5 CONNECT MODULE NO. 5 TO NO. 6 �4250 MODULE WEIGHT ( L S ) «S250 1250 2050 431 CAPACITY(OAL. S.fl. 1.0) COMPARTMENT 5WO LOAD CAPACITY I' —r ' 'I- 5300 5300 J 5W) -I- ' •!• 5500 L 5500 * " 4 5300 5300 EMPTY I KG SEQUENCE H 19.5 INCHES FWD j< 10 IKCKES T en •ALLOWABLE PAY LOAD c.o. Y/////A ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. FULL ^ FULL Y/////////77A 'ALLOWABLE PAYLOAO C.G. EMPTY EMPTY ACIUAL PAYLOAO C.G. 'PER T.O. IC-H9B-9 Figure 22. C-119G Floor Plan 5300 �TAgLE X. WODUIE C-119G TIE-DOWN DETAILS TIE-DOWN FITTING NO. ATTACHMENT POINT 2 LEFT FORWARD CORKER 5 LEFT FORWARD CORKER 7 * LEFT AFT CORNER 65 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 68 RIGHT FORK ."> CORKER 70 RIGHT AFT CORKER 3 LEFT FORWARD COT.NER 6 LEFT FORWARD CORKER 8 3 LEFT AFT CORNER 24 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 71 10 RIGHT AFT CORNER LEFT FORWARD CORNER 23 LEFT AFT CORNER 56 RIGHT AFT CORNER 73 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 9 LEFT FORWARD CORNER 12 LEFT FORWARD CORNER 13 LEFT FORWARD CORNER 72 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 75 76 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER RIGHT rORWARD CORNER II LEFT FORWARD CORNER HI LEFT FORWARD CORMEft 15 r RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 69 2 RIGHT AFT CORNER 66 POWER MODULE LEFT AFT CORKER 57 LEFT AFT CORNER 30 RIGHT AFT CORNER 63 LEFT AFT CORNER 7» RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 77 RIGHT FORWARD CORNER 78 RIGHT AFT CORNER NOTES: Tl£-DOWN DEVICE: QUANTITY SIZE = = 1 10,000 5<5 • �4258 432 CAPACITY (GAL. S.G. 1.0) COMPARTMENT LOAD CAPACITY (LB) • f ^ 5400 EMPTYINft 4258 432 MODULE VEiGHT(LB) 1(32 • . . 1 6100 2050 •fr—: 6100 6300 4253 4258 4258 432 432 2,592 432 L * 6)00 -I. 6100 'I " 6100 H» 6100 © © G © 1 24 INCHES -•{ }«-36.5INCHES-*j J4-23.5 INCHES T / ft 1 ' / fo1.^' tn . 14 INCHES M! FWD* ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD C.G. 'PER T.O. IC-I2IC-9 FULL FULL ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD C.G. EMPTY ACTUAL PAY LOAD C.O. EMPTY Figure 23. O121G Floor Plan �TOTAL 2600 2600 2600 2050 2600 MODULE WEIGHT(lB) i •' 233 E 1300 . 233 F G IMOO IWO f—:—H 1100 . 1233 233 K CAPACITY(GAL.S.G. 1.0) COMPARTMEKT J IWO- J300 •!• ' -I' L M 1300 -^fr I 2. "*» • 1300 1300 1600 j LOAD L I M I T FWOEMPTY 1H<3 SEQUENCE 23 INCHES J«- 8 IKCHES IHCHES CO \t- 1 INCHES -k| }*— 8 INCHES 'ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD C.G. FULL ACTUAL PAYLO.D C.6. •ALLOWABLE PAYLOAD C.fl. ACTUAL PAYLOAD C.G. Y//////////////////////////}, ® EMPTY EMPTY 'BASED OH ASSUWTIOH THAT BASIC AIRCMFT C.G. ('SCL. FUEL A«0 CREW) IS AT THfc H<0 C.6.'LIMIT. Figure 24. C-131E Floor Plan 932 �MINE CXHAU5T 2 INCH SPRAY HOSE ASSEMBLY VINT. DUMP CHUTE ASSEMBLY SPRAY BOOM TEE Figure 25. C-47 Modular Internal Spray System Kit No. 4374132 59 �WIKG BOOM (2) -VtNT/OUMP CHUTE ASSEMBLY ( I ) FUSF.LAGE HOSF ASSEMBLIES HOTE: THIS is A IUTAKX SYSTEM FOR AIR FORCE TESTING ONLY. THE ACTUAL C-130 MISS USES 8-TWK MODULES, FOR A TOTAL CAPACITY OF MOOO GALLONS. FUSELAGE SPRAY S T A T I O N ASSEMBLY (2) Figure 26. C-130 Modular Internal Spray System Kit No. 4374236 �considered was bolting the hardware to existing tie-down points, but this would require special brackets for each aircraft and would reduce the .modularity of the PWU-5/A MISS. 4.1.2.2 External Modifications The only modifications reouired to the exterior of the aircraft are those necessary to attach external plumbing, consisting of high-pressure hose along the fuselage and wing booms located approximately 12 inches under the wings. Several methods of attachment were considered: • Drilling and riveting • Projection welding stuus to the aircraft surface • Bonding mounting plates. Drilling and riveting would mean permanent aircraft modification, require highly trained modification personnel, would mean metalcutting advised against by the Air Force, and could not be performed on wet wing aircraft. Therefore, this method of attachment was eliminated. Projection welding studs to existing aircraft r.'vets or thick skin appeared to be a satisfactory solution, since it could be ground flush during demodification to restore the aircraft to its original condition. This method was rejected, however, after several tests proved that the rivet alloys were not compatible with stud welding since micro-cracks formed in the weld zone which would be vulnerable to fatigue propagation and subsequent weld failure. As a result, bonding was selected as the best attachment method. To aid in the selection of a bonding agent, optimum requirements were established: • Require little or no quality control • Bond to an aluminum surface without special surface preparation other than solvent washing and priming • Require no pressure or heat for curing • Flexible (not subject to impact or fatigue) • Viscous (allow adapter plates to be held in- place without fixtures while the bonding agent cures) • Resistant to temperature (-65 to +165°F), weather, aromatics, aliphatics • Not critical to film thickness 61 �» 40-psi tensile strength minimum with good peel • Readily removed, if desired, to allow 100 percent aircraft dejroodification. Using the above criterion, Dow Corning 93-046 two-part'silicone adhesive was selected. Using this adhesive, several laboratory tests were run to determine adhesive tensile and shear ultimate strengths as a function of surface preparation and bonding agent thickness, the best results were obtained by preparing the alumnun test samples as follows: 1. Pemove all paint using commercial paint stripper or wire brush. 2. Abrade surface with Scotch Brite pad Uf-ing Scotch 3911 degreasing primer. 3. Allow primer to dry and dust off powder. 4. Reapply 3911 (do not abrade with Scotch Brite), allow to dry, and dust off powder. 5. Prime all surfaces with Dow Corning 1200 primer and allow to dry. 6. Apply DC 93-046 adhesive, making sure all aluminum surfaces are wetted. :7v." Press samples together (hand pressure) and'allow adhesive to cure. Dow Corning recommends 24 hours for cure and 7 days for ultimate strength. Using the above procedure to prepare the aluminum samples, the following tensile and shear ultimate loads were obtained: Type of Tost 93-046 Thickness (inQ Ultimate Load Jpsi) Type of Failure Tensile 0.010 496 Cohesive Tensile 0.050 410 Cohesive Tensile 0.100 328 Cohesive Lap Shear 0.010 212 Cohesive Lap Shear 0.050 262 Cohesive Lop F.hear 0.100 229 Cohesive G2 �These results were obtained using the adhesive as it would be used in the field, without degassing the adhesive prior to bonding. As explained in the C-123 Class II modification documentation, the worst case tensile load on the bonding agent (for the C-123K system) is 8.72 psi, and the worst case shear load is 3.33 psi. Therefore, the DC 93-046 bonding agent has a safety factor of over 30 based on ultinate strength. An additional test was performed using two MISS wing boom mounting plates (Figure 27). These mounting plates were bonded together with outdated DC 93 -046 adhesive by following the prescribed surface preparation and bonding procedure. After allowing the adhesive to fully cure, these plates were pulled in tension to failure. Figure 28 shows the results of this test. As can be seen, the plates held 10,000 pounds for over 20 seconds before yielding (tearing), and still supported 7600 pounds after yielding at 10,000 pounds to 7600 pounds. The maximum C-123K mounting plate tensile load is 258 pounds. Since the exposed edges of the DC 93-046 adhesive could be wetted by fuel or spray agent in the actual MISS application, Dow Corning 94-003 Dispersing Coating was specified to coat all exposed silicone adhesive. This suspension coating is fluorosilicone which is resistant to fuels and agents, whereas the DC 93-046 adhesive could be degraded slightly by exposure to these agents. The entire method of bonding was reviewed by personnel at WrightPatterson Air Force Base who stated that polymer reversion would occur inside the silicone bonding agent whenever the bonding agent width exceeded 2 inches. Although there was no data available to prove this theory, several vented mounting plates were designed to provide a maxitmra bonding agent width of 2 inches, as shown in Figures 29 through 32. Of these special designs, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base personnel chose Design No. 2, Picture Frame with Gussets. Several ot these plates were submitted to WPAFB for testing. For many of these tests, the bonded mounting plates were soaked in jet fuel, and subsequent tension tests revealed that the DC 94-003 dispersion coating did not protect the silicone bonding agent, and the silicone was badly degraded. After discussion with Dow Corning personnel, DTL suggested the use of DC 94-002 fluorosilicone sealant as a protection for the 93-046, since it could be applied thicker. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base personnel stated that even if the edges of the silicone bonding agent could be adequately protected, the bonding agent could be degraded by fuel leaks at rivets under the bonding agent when the MISS was installed on wet-wing aircraft. Because of this leaking rivet problem, Wright-Patterson Air Force Ease personnel stated that silicone bonding agent could not be used to attach the wing booms on the MISS. Subsequently, WrightPatterson Air Force Base personnel specified certain epoxies which could be used. DTL then designed a mounting plate with removable hanger specifically for use with epoxy bonding agents. �0.375 INCHES MATERIAL: 60CI-T6 ALUMINUM P/H 2H882-W39UJ-I Figure 27. Mounting Plate (First Design) 64 �10- I- MAI C-I23X WOlfflTIM fUT£ Kit 101 2M LI » s TIME IN MINUTES Figure 28. Bonded Mounting Plate Load-Time History �ft INCHES o INCHES 1.0 INCH TYP 2.0 •— «» u> o O INCHES TVP o i 20 INCHES ^ 2.0 INCHES f PROOF PULL TEST POINTS 2.0 INCHES O Figure 29. Modified Mounting Plate Dsaign No. 1, Picture Frame �30. 67 �i o 1 «• 2 INCHES O •» I 1 0.50 INCH < i O / / / / -- - o i uinti iff it ii i / / / '-™^ / / / X«X ^ / ! 1 i ^ ! I! 1I 8 INCHES f t r O I o \ 1 PROOF PULL TEST POINTS Figure 31. Modified Mounting Plate Design No. 3, Slotted Plate �6 INCHES -TAPE TEMPLATE WING SURFACE 8 I ICHES •. CLEAN AND PRIME (DC 1200) b. LET DftY c. APPLY TAPE TEMPLATE d. APPLY DC 93-0*6 ADHESIVE 3 EACH 2 INCH x 6 INCH HOLES IN TAPE TEMPLATE 2.0 INCHES «. PEEL OFF TAPE TEMPLATE WING SURFACE INCH x 6 INCH PATCHES OF ADHESIVE a. REPEAT ABOVE PROCESS ON 6x5 tNCH MOUNTING PLATE b. ATTACH POUNTING PLATE TO NIKO SURFACE C. ALLOW ADHESIVE TO CUKE d. FLOOD COAT ALL EXPOSED ADHESIVE WITH DC 9H-OQ3 DISPERSION COATING VIKG SURFACE VOID THROUGH •TEST POINTS APHf.SIVE Figure 32. Modified Mounting Plate Design No. 4, Individual Bonding Pads 69 �The C-123K MISS was consequently installed and flight tested, using epoxy to attach the wing boom system and DC 93-046 silicone adhesive (protected with DC 94-002 fluorosilicone) to attach the engine exhaust, vent chute/dump chute, and fuselage hose assemblies. All systems worked as designed, and both bonding agents performed well. The components bonded with the silicone were easily removed during aircraft demodification, but the epoxybonded mounting plates remained in place as & permanent (Class V) aircraft modification. 4-. 1.3 Performance Degradation Since the external MISS wing boom system will cause additional drag, several wing boom configurations were investigated. The drag coefficients for these shapes are shown in Figure 33, and the projected performance degradation in percentage of horsepower increase required tc maintain cruise condition for several aircraft is shown in Table XI. As can be seen, a maximum increase of 3.4 percent horsepower is required to maintain cruise condition if a fully streamlined boom were used. This data was then combined with actual hardware designs to develop a wing boom which was easily manufactured and exhibited minimal drag. The actual designs investigated are-covered 1:1 paragraph 4.8.2 of this report. The final selection design was the aft fairing type, which was flight tested on a C-123K at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The pilot stated that additional drag was minimal and did not adversely affect flight characteristics. 4.1.4 Ins tallat ion and Remova1 Based on a review of ANA Bulletin 518, Cargo Aircraft Compartment Dimensional Data, the available aircraft T.O.'s, and other sources, a summary of data pertinent to MISS loading operations was compiled. Figure 34 and Table XII present this data for the specified aircraft. During loading, ANA Bulletin 518 specified that 6 inches clearance should be maintained between the cargo and the aircraft. Temporary wood shoring or tracks may be required to distribute the wheel loads on the aircraft floor, particularly in those cases where the treadways are spaced wider than "the wheels. -Several of the aircraft haYe built-in winches to assist loading. In the C-97, the winch is mounted on an overhead monorail and can be used to hoist cargo as well. Portable winches, either manual or power types, can be used on virtually all of the aircraft. However, these portable items are not a permanent part of the aircraft and, therefore, cannot be assumed to be available in all cases. The? tank and power modules are supplied with captive castors and jacks which facilitate installation and removal. These jacks and wheels were found to be extremely helpful during installation of the- O123K MISS at Eglin Air Force Base. 70 �THICKNESS/CHORD INDICATED .2 TYPE: - o ao> CYLINDER HEMISPHERICAL NOSE AFT FAIRING Figure 33. STREAMLINE oo ELLIPTICAL Wina Boon Drag Coefficient �TABLE XI. AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE DEGRADATION AND HORSEPOWER INCREASE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN CRUISE CONDITION USING STREAMLINED WING BOOM COMPONENT CONTRIBUTION INO TOUL IX PERCENT AIRCRAFT VELOCITY (KTAS) ALTITUDE WING BOOM NOZZLE FUSELAGE FUSELAGE (FT BOOM BRACKETS STATIONS STAN&OFF NOZZLE USD TOTAL C-470 •si 5.000 2.40 2.25 1.62 0.11 0.11 6.5 C-54G to 142 157 5.000 1.76 1.54 1.12 0.06 0.06 4.5 C-97G 193 5.000 1.76 1.48 1.15 0.05 0.05 4.S C-118* 198 10.000 1.76 1.53 1.16 0.06 0.06 4.6 C-U9G 151 5.000 1.04 O.S8 .72 NIL 0.09 2.8 C-I21G 212 10.000 1.64 1.45 1.08 0.06 0.06 4.3 C-123K 136 5.000 1.04 0.96 0.08 NIL 0.09 2.9 C-I30E 263 20.000 2.00 1.75 1.31 NIL 0.14 5.2 C-131E . 165 5.000 2.44 2.15 1.58 0.08 0.08 6.3 �000* CONVENTIONAL LANDING GEAR (SIDE LOADING) -NOR. WIDTH TRICYCLE LANDING GEAR (SIDE LOADING) FLOOR HEIGHT TAIL LOADING FLOOR HEIGHT 1 RAMP ANGLE Figure 34. Aircraft Loading Nomenclature 73 �TABLE X I I . r INSTALLATION/REMOVAL DATA AIRCRAFT MAIN DOOR FLOOR ANGLE RAMP ANGLE FLOOR HEIGHT (DEGREE) (DEGREE) BUILT-IN (INCH) WINCH WINCH CAPACITY (POUNDS) DOOR WIDTH DOOR HEIGHT (INCH) (IBW) C-460 SIDE 9.5 N.A. 90-97 AT DOOR HO N.A. 81 + C-47D SIDE II. 5 M.A. 56.5 AT DOOR NO N.A. 84.5 + C-54G SIDE (0) N.A. 106.7 NO N.A. 95 67 C-976 AFT (0) 24 112 TES IIKCH HOIST 7500/5000 (88) 84 C-H8A SIDE (0) N.A. 106 NO N.A. 124 78 C-H9G AFT (0) 10 45.5 YES • (HO) (92) C-I2IG SIDE (0) N.A. 112.5 • • C-l23R AFT (0) 12.1) 33. b TES +C-130E AFT (0) 12.5 41.6-45 fES SIDE (0) N.A, NO -f C-I31E NOTES: •f N.A. * ( ) - PRIMARY A I R C R A F T NOT APPLICABLE NO DATA NOMINAL CR APPROXIMATE 89 69-79 55.7 - 70.6 112.5 74.5 no 98 25.000 120 108 N.A. 100 72 (3300) �The installation and removal studies resulted in a required module envelope, as shown in Figure 35. The required and actual dimensions of the tank and power modules are shown. The C-47 aircraft, due to its small size and side-loading cargo door, places the greatest restriction on the MISS design. During the design effort it became apparent that, to be cost effective and minimize the number of tank modules, the system would be a tight fit in the C-47. As a result, the tank module must be loaded from the end, as shown in Figure 36. During the fit test of the actual MISS hardware into the C-47, this end-loading technique was used successfully. 4.1.5 Aircraft Spray Contamination Analysis of contamination possibilities on all ten aircraft was performed. Both normal spray operations and emergency dump were considered. Small throe-view drawings of the specified aircraft were used as an aid in this study. External MISS components were added to these drawings on the basis of preliminary component placement studies. The wing booms were 70 percent of the wing span in each case. Wing nozzle stations were spaced every eight feet on the booms, starting at the tip and working inboard. A minimum (of three nozzles) was used on each wing boom; on some long-span aircraft, four nozzles were used on each wing. Later design changes specified nozzles every 2 to 4 feet along the 70 percent span, but this design change does not affect the contamination data presented here. To provide for fuselage spray stations on side-loading aircraft, a single central nozr.le station extending down from the open cargo door was used. On tail-loading aircraft, a pair of central nozzle stations were used, with one nozzle extending outward from each open jump door. The dump line was assumed to be mounted in the open cargo or jump door, with the end of the tube protruding only slightly from the fuselage line. Normal spray patterns were superimposed on the drawings using an arbitrary expanding conical form. If portions of the aircraft appeared to fall within these spray patterns, a contamination possibility was assumed to exist. Likewise, the estimated dump pattern was superimposed on the aircraft and contamination possibilities were investigated. 75 �ALLOWED O POWER MODULE 60 85 LEHGTK (t»CKES) TiU MODULE 72 «9 WIDTH 56 HEIGHT f t » C H E S ) 0 = DETEftttfKEO FROM C-U7 LOAD (NO CHARTS. (2) = DETERMINED FROM C-«^ COMPAftTMEHT WIDTH Of 7$ ALLOWS 2 - 0 = IS IMCH AISLES. DETERMINED FROM C->»7 CARGO DOOft. fOrt* MODULE OFfSET IH C-*7 TO ALLOW ONE AISLE l> I»CHES WIDE Figure 35. Module Envelope 76 �DOOR FLOOR Figure 36. C-47 Installation �The results of the study are summarized in Table XIII. Note that three spray nozzle orientations are considered, ranging from straight aft to straight down. It appeared that a 45-degree down or straight-down orientation was attractive from the standpoint of reducing the possibility of wing contamination. The actual nozzle orientation selected was straight down. Emergency dump contamination/ although present/ is not considered to be a significant problem due to the overriding safety requirements for the dump. Results of the flight test of a C-123K Modular Internal Spray System at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, indicated that: 1. No contamination resulted from the wing boom nozzle stations. 2. The right-hand fuselage nozzle station caused minor contamination of"the right-hand aft fuselage (apparently due to the vacuum created by the dump chute directly behind the nozzle station or due to the aircraft propeller rotation direction). ' 4.1.6 3. The emergency dump caused contamination of the aft fuselage up to the horizontal stabilizer, and slight internal contamination due to sprayback through the jump doors. All personnel present at the flight tests agreed tnat moving the dump chute to the rear of the jump door would prevent internal contamination. .The dump chute was relocated accordingly on subsequent MISS kits. - ; ' - - . . Spray Performance Contractual requirements stated that the effective ground swath width must be at least twice the applicable aircraft wing span when agent is disseminated at 100 feet abovs ground level (AGL). To accomplish this, it is necessary to take advantage of the dispersing effects of the wing tip vortices. «• Figure 37 illustrates the general nature of these vortices. As the vortex moves aft, it expands, forming a conical pattern. The swirling effect causes agent introduced into the vortex to disperse laterally. The size and strength of the vortex depends upon flight conditions and the specific aircraft but, in general, it can be expected to cause sufficient lateral dispersion to meet the swath width requirement. Propwash also can be expected to cause agent swirl, but generally it is not sufficient to guarantee a wide swath. 73 �TABLE XIII. CONTAMINATION POSSIBILITIES NORMAL SPRAY OPERATIONS NOZZLE ORIENTATION AIRCRAFT STRAIGHT AFT C-46D EMERGENCY DUMP A. B C-54G STRAIGHT DOWN «, B C-470 «5* MMI A. 1 C. D C-97G C-II8A A. B C-U9G A. S C-12IC C-I23K A, B C, £ C-I30E A, B C, E C-I3IE A. C. F NOTES: 0 = NO CONTAMINATION A N T I C I P A T E D A - POSSIBLE CONTAMINATION OF LOVER VU& SURFACE ABOVE ANO AFT OF NOZZLES B = POSSIBLE CONTAMINATION OF TIP OF HORIZONTAL STABILIZER c = LIKELY CONTAMINATION OF FUSELAGE SIOE 0 -- LIKELY CONTAMINATION OF HORIZONTAL STABILIZER (LOVER SUrffACE) E = POSSIBLE CONTAMINATION OF EXTERIOR OF CARGO RAMP .F -- POSSIBLE CONTAMIHATICN OF LO«R SURFACE OF HORIZONTAL STABILIZER G -- POSSIBLE CONTAMIUTICK OF TAIL BOM 79 �WING VOR1EX DISPERSION Figure . Wing Vortex E f f e c t 80 �A relatively uniform deposition level over the swath width is important for avoiding undue agent concentrations or voids. If a single tail spray nozzle station is used, a large peak would be expected along the aircraft flight path. It should be noted that effective swath width differs from total swath width, as illustrated in Figure 38. For efficient spraying, it is therefore desirable to have relatively, uniform deposition curve with steep ends. It must be pointed out that nozzle placement can have an effect on the ground spray pattern and therefore warranted investigation., However, nozzle placement can never be expected to achieve a perfect ground pattern, for it cannot overcome or change the basic airflow characteristic of a given aircraft. These characteristics determine the gross ground spray effects. Spray performance data was ~en«l"'"t**d as an aid to design studies. This data was based on a ' ray speed of 150 mph and assumed ideal conditions . , agent sprayed was to be evenly distributed in a sw a equal to twice the aircraft wing span with no peaks or je. Table XIV presents the spray performance data. Note that v.ie 3 ounce/acre deposition columns were based on four times the aircraft wing span. This is justified by previous low volume spray testing results, which show greater lateral drift of the fine low volume spray. Using the specified extremes of agent deposition, flow rates were calculated. Eased on total agen.t capacity and flow rate, maximum spray time was computed for both deposition level extremes. From a practical standpoint, the spray times for the 3 ounce/acre deposition level arc far in excess of normal mission time. In fact, they generally exceed the maximum airborne endurance cap3bilitics of the aircraft. Maximum area coverage was then calculated, based on spray time and area coverage rates. To actually achieve effective swath widths equal to those shown, it will be necessary to spray at greater than the indicated flow rates (due to deposition peaks and trail-off), which will, in turn, reduce spray time and area coverage figures. 4.2 CHEMICAL AGENTS Contractual requirepients dictated that the PWU-5/A MISS was to disseminate a variety of chemical agents, including defoliants, herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers in the form of chemical solutions, suspensions and slurries. The range of physical properties for these agents as stated in the contract were: PROPERTY RANGE LOW HIGH Specific Oravity 1.0 2.0 Viscosity, Centipoise 1 350 81 �CURRENT AIR FORCE RESULTS DESIRED DEPOSITION LEVEL S«TH IIIOTH (FT) Figure 38. Effective Swath Width R2 �TABLE XIV. SPRAY PARAMETERS AIRCRAFT VELOCITY = 150 MPH AIRCRAFT SIATH IIOTH ( F T ) AGENT CAPACITY (GAL) SPECIFIC GRAVITY = 1.0 RECTANGULAR DISTRIBUTION FLOW RATES } 01 *eRC + 3 S»L'*CI£ SPRAY TIKE ) 02/ACU + (•IN) ) SAl/XCftC <"tH) AREA COVERAGE 1 SH'JCif j o:'tcic <CM») <cm> 3.CS 196 335 5.3 43.700 345 <»C«f$) (ACICS) C-45D 216 1024 C-i/C 190 480 2.7 173 178 2.7 20.600 158 C-54G 235 15*4 3.34 214 576 9.0 82.000 637 C-97G 283 3550 4.02 257 883 13.7 151,000 HBO c-iie* 235 2592 3.34 214 776 12.1 110.000 860 C-1I9G 219 1752 3.10 199 735 8.7 74.600 S79 C-I2IG 246 2592 3.48 224 745 11.8 112,000 870 C-123K 220 992 3.12 200 318 5.0 42.500 334 C-I30E 265 3968 3.76 241 1053 16.5 169.000 1320 C-13!E 211 960 3.00 192 320 4.6 37,500 292 * 8 A S E O ON FOUR TIMES NIKS SPAN. , �4.2.1 Agent Characteristics Using the above requirements, a survey of existing and potential future chemical agents was made to determine their chemical, physical, and toxicity characteristics. Table XV lists several such agents. As can be seen* most agents have specific gravities less than 1*5 and viscosities less than 50 centtpoise. Although there^ were no contractual toxicity requirements, the agent toxicity was a necessary consideration to provide a system which is safe for operating personnel. As shown in Table XV, certain of the pesticides have high toxicity. This toxicity dictated that the MISS agent transfer system be sealed to prevent agent or agent vapor leakage inside the aircraft. As a result, sanitarytype plumbing connections were used throughout the system and the tankage venting system was sealed and designed to vent harmful vapors overboard. Many of the wettable powder and suspension-type agents tend to settle if not agitated constantly. Agitation can be mechanical or can be accomplished by agent recirculation of at least 10 percent of the tankage volume per minute. The recirculation method was chosen for the MISS since it could be easily and inexpensively accomplished with the MISS centrifugal pump dissemination system. The MISS can rccirculate. over 500 gpm (250 gpii through each 500gallon tank) and therefore provide 50 percent tank volume recirculation. In addition, the tank agent pickup lines are designed to provide maximum agitation at the bottom of the tanks, allowing remixing of any settled agents. The contractual requirements for suspension and slurry-type agents also dictated the use of abrasion-resistant materials and mechanical-type pump seals in the agent transfer system. "Of particular interest is the capability requirement for slurrytype agents. Investigation into the various possible agents showed that the only true slurry-type agents were certain advance fertilizers which exhibited thixotropic viscosity characteristics, as shown in Figure 39. As can ba seen, thes<* fertilizers had viscosities well above the 350-centipoiso contractual limit. In addition, these fertilizer slurries were extremely abrasive and would severely limit mechanical component lifts if used. Table XVI shows several of the MISS agents and their typical application rates. As can be seen, they all fall within the 3 ounces to 3 gallons per acre contractual application rate requirer.ent. 4.2.2 Agent/Material Compatibility The chenical nature of the applicable MISS agents dictated certain r;ysten rwitcrials. Several materials were laboratory tested at r^on ter^erature and reflux temperatures with the chemical agents. :;',tii t.k;o corrosive and solvent action of the materials were �TABLE XV. PWU-5/A MODULAR INTERNAL SPRAY SYSTEM AGENTS SPECIFIC GRAVITY AGENT NAME VISCOSITY, Toxicmr* DENTIPOISE tD5B, mg^g DEFOLIANTS AGENT ORANGE ARENT IHITE AGENT BLUE 1 .28 1.14 1.336 <uo 12.5 550 3 030 1 .600 HERBICIDES TANDEX 1.5 350 3.000 36 <50 2.800 190-350 450 135 PESTICIDES MA LATH ION FENTHION OIBROU OURSBAN 1.2315 1.245 1.842-1.846 1.062-1.175 FERTILIZER N-Sol 32 (Urea~NN 4 NQ3) UREA SOLUTION 504. AMMONIUM PHOSPHATE 14-14-14 SUSPENSION * •UWIT 10JUC tO w = 1-20 45* 1.327 1.158 1.36 1 .404 43 28 3-18 20 2.0, 1.8 MOOU4IUY T O X I C lOy) = IW-7SD 29 280 NONE NONE NONE >5000 PRODUCT FORM LIQUID LIQUID WATER SOLUTION *P EC, IP. LO* VOLUME (LV) LY LV. EC, DUST EC, WATER SOLUTION WATER SOLUTION WATER SOLUTION WATER SUSPENSION SUGHUY TOXIC IDyj = 600*3000 �30,000 20,000 10,000 5,000 C9 C^ V* 1,000 , 0 10 20 » «0 SHCU RITE. IteWFtflB RN Figure 39. Thixotropic Nature of Slurried Fertilizer 86 �TABLE XVI. AGENT CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS AGENT APPLICATION RATES APPLICATION RATE 3 02 TO J (UL/ICHE PRODUCT FORM SUSPENSION. SOLUTION, SLURRY DEFOLIANTS ORANGE 3 GPA .LIQUID WHITE 3 GPA LIQUID BLUE 3 GPA WATER SOLUTION HERBICIDES TANOEX 1-2 GPA WET TABLE POWDER PESTICIDES MALATHION 3 OZ/ACRE LV FEN TH I ON 6 OZ/ACRE LV OIBROM 3 OZ/ACRE LV DURSBAN 3 OZ/ACRE LV FERTILIZERS UREA IIHWU 3 GPA 1-2 GPA 87 WATER SOLUTION WATER SUSPENSION �investigated, and the results of these tests were combined with previously collected data to analyze the select cost-effective piping, valving, tankage, sealing, and hose materials. The results of the most applicable tests are shown in Table XVII. Previous studies involving defoliants for military use indicated that Agent Blue has a heavy corrosive action upon aluminum and eliminated it as a candidate material without costly and troublesome protective coatings. Investigations of MF-1, 401, 301, 304, and 316 stainless steels indicated the use of 304 or 316 stainless for tanks and piping. The 304 was selected as being more cost effective. Several .plastic and elastomeric materials were investigated for use as seals, bushings, valves, hoses, etc. The results indicated that Teflon* , nylon, and cross-linked polyethylene were the most stable plastics, while fluorosilicone was the only truly acceptable elastomer (mostly due to the Xylene content of certain. . insecticidesy. Another problem concerning agent-material compatibility is the availability of the compatible materials in a usable and cost-effective product. As an example, cross-linked polyethylene is cost-effective and was used for high-pressure hoses, but it is not available for seals or flexible enough for suction hoses. Teflon9 was used for the centrifugal pump mechanical shaft seal and several valve seals (suitably reinforced with isolated elastoraeric material), since it was chemically compatible and available from manufacturers in those product forms. Cuctom seals, such as for the tank manhole, were compression molded from fluorosilicone. Nylon was utilised for nozzle valves. Silicone, reinforced with fiberglass cloth, was selected for the dump and vent hoses after laboratory testing with pure Xylene. Teflon® could have been used but was prohibitively expensive. 4. 1 AfiENT TRANSFER SYSTEM The agent transfer system consists of all those components which contain, move, or control the agent on board the aircraft. Section III of this report contains a description of the final MISS agent transfer system and the related pneumatic and electrical systems. The MISS Operation ami Maintenance Manual contains a complete description of "eacn agent transfer system operation. Several najor design changes were made to the agent transfer system during the course of the contract. Changes were nade to either increase system flexibility and performance or decrease cost. From the origination of the contract, a gasoline engine-driven centrifugal pump was selected as the best mechod for moving the aocnt. A pneumatic agent expulsion system was considered, but it was el initiated due to the complexity and danger of such a system 88 �TABLE XVII, PWU-5/A MODULAR INTERNAL SPRAY SYSTEM AGENT COMPATIBILITY 'INSECTICIDES SUBSTRATE DIBROK MALATHIQN HERBICIDES OURSBAN ORANGE r WHITE BLUE FERTILIZERS ; « •ETUIS "UNCHANGED ALUMINUM MIL3 STftL (UXUKEO) STAINLESS STEEL ; NOT SIQ. SIG. HIUH SIG. . , SIG. KOT SIG. "%t NOT SlGv '316 NOT SIG ' PLASTIC HOT SIQ. •NOT SIQ. *0 EFFECT NO EFFECT NOT SIG.flF SIG. ACID FREE) PASSIVE COAT ING FORKED y. SIG. SIC. IN KANT CASES. EROSION FROM ABRASION NOT 5|<i. EXCEL. ABRASIVE RESISTANCE * NYLON 66 UNCHANGED ?LEXIGLAS N.A. ; . UNCHANGED *UVEMT CRACK'S t DISSOLUTION EVIDENT NOT SIO. UNCHANGED POLYPROPYLENE WITHSTANDS SOLVENT SWELLING I CRAZING V. SLIGHT WITHSTANDS SOLVENT SWELLING I CRAZING CRQSSL INKED POLYETHYLENE SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT WITHSTANDS SOLVENT SWELLING ( CRAZING MO.riEO CRCSSLINKED POLYETHYLENE TEFLON . NOT SIQ. NOT SIQ. NOT SIQ. WITHSTANDS HERBICIDE AGENTS UNCHANGED UNCHANGED UNCHANGED DOES XOT REACT WITH STD AQ CHEMICALS SIQ. SIQ. V. SIQ. SOLVENT SWELLING IN THESE AGENTS in N A. VERY SIQ. SIQ. JOLVINT SWELLING IN THESE AGENTS SILUONE rUMtR NOT S'G." NOT S'S? NOT SI<J." T AFFECTED I'Y HERBICIDE AGENTS FL'JCROSILiCONE RUdBER UNCHANGED UNCHANGED MOT SIO. ' NOT AFFECTED BY HERBICIDE AGENTS ~'*7AWeTH*!<E , 1 NOTES: "AS LONG AS PASSIVATEO AND THE COATING IS INTACT. NOT T0 BE USED FOR S10RKE. •IF NOT F3RHUUTED WITH XYLEHi. XYLENE 25 PERCENT SHELLS. C . �because a pneumatic expulsion system could not provide agent agitation as required for the various wettable powder suspensiontype agents. A centrifugal pump was selected for its inherent safety (can be run at stall conditions) and because it cou,ld pump suspension-type agents without being damaged. Figure 40 shows the agent transfer system schematic as originally proposed. This system used a single agent reservoir assembled from two end sections and several center sections depending on the load-carrying capacity of the aircraft. Filling was done directly into the tank using peripheral ground support equipment. Tandem centrifugal pumps were used and agent control valves were electrically operated. A single electromagnetic induction-type flowmeter was used to monitor agent flow. Wing boom nozzle valves' with spring-loaded poppets were proposed to seal agent at the nozzles when dissemination was stopped. One large dump valve was employed, and an air tank was used to pressurize the tank during emergency dump to decrease dump time. Detailed investigation of the center-of-gravity requirements for all ten aircraft indicated that a single tank could not adequately maintain fluid center of gravity, and a multiple tank concept was generated. Two sets of tanks were used, one set on each side of the power module. Each set of tanks was connected in series, and each set was provided with its own pickup (power module pump suction) and recirculation connections. By providing each tank with a remotely actuated vent valve, fluid movement could be controlled by opening or closing certain tank vents. Closing^all tank vents prevented movement of agent between tanks and fulfilled the aircraft center of gravity requirement. Opening the vent'.1 on the tanks furthest from the power module (outside tanks on both sides) allowed the tanks to sequentially empty from the furthest outside tanks to the tanks nearest the power module during dissemination. Closing the end tank vents when dissemination was stopped prevented further agent movement between tanks even with the agent being recirculated through both sets of tanks. This multiple tank concept with tank vent valves was utilized in the final PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System. Figure 41 shows the multiple tank system as used in the second major agent transfer system concept, which included several major changes over the original concept (Figure 30). A single large capacity centrifugal pump replaced the previous tandem pumps to decrease hardware costs and weight. The centrifugal pump was also used to suction fill and power drain the system, and a small ground pump was used for pump priming. Agent control valves were pneumatically operated with air being supplied by a pneumatic system built into the power module. The emergency dump valves on each tank were also pneumatically operated, but the air pressure was supplied by an isolated air reservoir which would maintain pressure even if the primary air cystem failed (leaked). The concept of pressurizing the tanks during emergency dump was eliminated due to the large volume of compressed air required and the 90 �RECIRCULATE VALVE VO SPRAY BOOM I- <Sert DRAIN—/ Figure 40. Agent Transfer System (Original Proposed Concept) �'iWO-WAT M CHECX VALVE -Jxt! THXEE-WV —V vO COUM.IKOS FOUR-WAT A HOZZLE H ^ VALVE, niEUMATIC ;: D SL VALVE, SOLEKOIO Jfr" 1' Figure 41. -w- VALVE, HAHUAL O FLOW HCTEI 1 -c*- VALVE, CLEC. HOTM H Agent Transfer Systen (Second Concept) �system complexity. Tank vent valves were electric motor-driven bali valves, selected to minimize hardware costs and complexity ajard also provide positive feedback indication of their open or closed position to the operator control panel. An electromagnetic induction flowmeter was used in conjunction with a flow totalizer to indicate total fluid volume on board' at ahy'-tfiven time. Pneumatically assisted diaphragm check valves were installed at each wing boom nozzle to provide absolute agent shutoff after dissemination and assure no agent leakage at the nozzles even when the aircraft underwent maximum airborne maneuvers. The agent transfer system was further refined as shown in Figure 42. As a result of flow model tests (paragraph 4.4 of this report), the pneumatically operated recirculation line valves were eliminated and the agent pickup (tank suction) valves were—changed from..... pneumatically operated to manual in order to reduce system complexity. The small ground pump, used to prime the main centrifugal pump, was eliminated in favor of an air-activated eductor which used the primary power module air system pressure to create a vacuum in the centrifugal pump and draw agent into the pump. Adoption of the eductor greatly simplified the cys'cem and ground support operations and allowed the centrifugal pump to be easily primed at any time.- even if prime were lost during system operation. Figure 43 shows the fourth agent transfer system concept. The pickup tubes inside the tanks were changed so that both tubes in each tank picked up agent off the tank bottom. This was done to increase system flexibility by allowing the suction and recirculatio'h connections at the tank to be interchanged for ^different aircraft applications as required. Also, this positioning of the tubes provides maximum agitation (during recirculation} at the bottom of the tank to insure complete nixing and suspension of wettable powder-type agents. The electromagnetic induction flowmeter system was eliminated because several spray agents did not exhibit sufficient electrical conductivity, the induction flowmeters could not withstand airborne.vibrations, and the peripheral equipment for the induction flowmeters was extremely heavy and co'stly. Dual turbine flowmeters were selected to monitor agent dissemination rate. The low volume system reads agent flow rates from 0 to 60 gpm and includes a fine mesh agent strainer. The high volume system reads 0 to 600 gpm. Dual flowmeters were required to meet the +5.0 percent agent flowrate monitoring contractual requirement. The fill bypass system was eliminated with on-board agent volume being indicated by separate liquid level sensors in each tank. An air purge system was added to allow purging of the wing boom system after final mission dissemination. For the final MISS agent transfer system, the recirculation line check valve was eliminated as a result of preliminary system tests, and the low volume agent strainer was moved upstream of the flowmeter to prevent foreign matter from fouling tht: flowmeter turbine. 93 �AIU BUHP srsuis MOT JHII») Yt« *»wfe LEGEND: r vo VALVE. HW8AL TMIITIU *=£» ^ttitei = VALVE. MOTOR ACTUATED = VALVE. PKEtWWTIC ACTUATED = CHECK VALVE nil fMT tUtl Figure 42. Agent Transfer System (Third Concept) �4g T_ig TANK VENT (TYP FILL PICKUP PICKUP r> RECIRCUUT PMUp (PNEUMATIC S DUMP SYSTEMS HOT SHOWH) 21 DRAIN LEGEND: EHUCTOR 100 PSI AIR-OJ VALVE, MANUAL * H.V. FLOKMETER L.V. FLOWMETER ^ VALVE, PNEUMATIC H.V. THROTTLE L.V. THROTTLE loo MESH STRAINER!! VALVE, ELECTRIC MOTOR y^-Tj SPRAY VALVE CHECK VALVE AIR PURGE - 100 PSI AIR £H Figure 43. Agent Transfer-System (Fourth Concept) �•4 ..48 PLASTIC AGENT TRANSFER SYSTEM PLOW MODEL To investigate all phases of operations of the multi-tank agent »transfer system concepts, DTL built the one-quarter scale plastic flow model shown in Figure 44. The model utilized eight agent reservoirs and was equipped with all the piping, valving, and electrical controls required for complete system operation. The tanks had a scale volume of 325 gallons each. Figure 45 shows the flow model schematic and controls. The following operational modes were investigated with the model level and with the model sloped to the horizontal (aircraft nose up or nose down): • *•< • Suction filling • Recirculation/agitation • Dissemination with and without recirculation 4-4.1 Suction Filling To suction fill, the pump was switched on> and the fill switch was thrown. This opened all tank solenoid vent valves and closed the pickup shutoff valves. The recirculation valve was manually opened. To prime the pump the 55-gallon drum we^s pressurized to 2 psig, forcing agent through the suction fill recirculation line into the reservdirs. When filling at a scaled flow rate equivalent to 350 gpm, the outermost tanks filled slightly faster than the innermost tanks. As each tank filled, its magnetic float closed the upper reed switch, closing that tank's vent valve, which prevented further filling of that tank. When all tanks were filled, the recirculation switch was thrown, opening the pickup shutoff valves, causing the system to enter the recirculation mode. The suction fill valve was then closed by hand, and the fill switch was turned off. When filling with the model on an angle to the horizontal (such as the C-47), the lower tanks filled first due to the fluid head caused by the upper tanks. Closing the lower tanks' vent valves prevented those tanks from filling and allowed the upper tanks to continue filling. 4.4.2 RGcirculation In the recirculation mode, agent was pulled from the innermost tanks by the pump and forced into the outermost tanks. In full recirculation, the model pumped at a scale flow rate equivalent to 600 gpm, moving 300 gpm through each tank. Thus, each tank had a 90 percent volume/minute recirculation rate (300 gpm/325gallon capacity). Qfi �* -j-r* vo Figure .44,- Plastic Agent Transfer System-Flow Model i . >__ —1 . As"**"*-**.* �•SOLENOID VENT VALVES ^y?^xjf CENTRIFIGAL ELECTRIC PUMP DISSEMINATE VALVES SUCTION FILL LINE oo PRESSURE <USE;0MLY INITIALLY PRIME PUMP) RECIRCULATIQN VALVE POKER OK FILL OISS. RECIRC DISSEMINATE LINE MANUAL VALVE I 1 lAJ SOLENOID VALVE O—"O REED SWITCH (-> Figure 45. ) MAGNETIC FLOAT Plastic Flow Model Schematic : �The fluid level in each tank remained constant regardless of model orientation since sach tank vent was closed. To test the mixing capability of the scaled 1300 gpm' through each tank, dye was introduced into one end tank. With all tanks onehalf full, the dye dispensed evenly through the first four tanks within 1-1/2 minutes and through all eight tanks within five minutes. With all tanks full of fluid, the dye evenly dispersed throughout all eight tanks within nine minutes. 4.4.3 Dissemination ..When the dissemination switch was thrown, the solenoid dissemination valve opened disseminating the fluid into the 55-gallon drum, and the two outermost tank solenoid vent valves opened. Various dissemination rates were tried up to a scale 600 gpm. While disseminating, the outermost tanks emptied first, then the next outermost, etc. As the innermost tanks emptied, their pickup shutoff solenoid valves closed independently just before the pickup tube started to suck air. This arrangement assured maximum agent would be disseminated in case the tanks were filled somewhat unevenly. When disseminating with the model on a slope to the horizontal, the upper four tanks emptied slightly sooner than the lower four tanks, but nearly all agent was disseminated due to the automatic pickup shutoff valves. This automatic pickup shutoff concept was later eliminated from the final system concept "due to complexity and expense. The dissemination process was identical with or without recirculation. When recirculating through an empty tank, the fluid passed right through the tank and did not fill it, since fluid was being withdrawn at a faster rate than it was being introduced (dissemination+recirculation-recirculation). 4.5 TANK MODULE The modular concept of the MISS dictated that as many components and parts of the system be designed in such a manner that they could be assembled together in appropriate combinations in order that the payload capacity of each aircraft be exploited. The agent reservoir, as a primary part of the system, received the closest attention in modularizing the spray system. First, the .maximum pay load capacities of the four primary arid six secondary aircraft were obtained. The estimated weights of the power module, spray booms, and interconnecting plumbing were subtracted from those payload weights to obtain the estimated specific gravity of 1.0 or Water at a nominal 8.34 Ib/gal. If specific gravity 2.0 agent is used, the agent volume in the tank would be halved. Coincident with the weight analysis, dimensional constraints were evaluated to establish the width, height, and length of the power module and agent reservoir. 99 �Secondly, these estimated weights and dimensional requirements were applied to ths power module and agent reservoir, and various cargo* compartment arrangements were made for all aircraft. It soon became apparent that the. control of the aircraft center of gravi'ty was of critical importance. The center of gravity of each aircraft had to be within very specific limits from empty to full payload capacity. Since the agents to be sprayed were liquid, constraints against its movement during aircraft flight were also to be imposed. For this reason, the original tank concept, as shown in Figure 46, was abandoned. The approach was then taken to place the pov/er module on the center of gravity and split the agent into two series of tanks, one set forward and one set aft of the power module. By extracting from both sets of tanks at the same rate during spraying, the aircraft center of gravity would not change from full to empty. The tanks are separate, connected only by an agent transfer tube at the tank bottom with each tank's vent being individually controlled. Closing a tank's vent prevents movement of agent into or out of the tank. This solves the problem of slosh or movement of agent between adjacent tanks. During dissemination, only the vents on the tanks furthest from the power module are opened, allowing the tanks, to empty sequentially from the outside tanks inward. The first split series tank module concept is shown in Figure 46. The tanks had a capacity of 325 gallons each and were 42 inches in diameter. The cradle was designed with captive castors; integral dump, vent and recirculation lines; and built-in ferklift slots. The tank ends included agent inlet and outlet tubes and an integral emergency dump valve. The fill port was offset to reduce the module height. Upon further study, it was decided to change the tank capacity to 500 gallons by increasing its diameter to 48 inches. Tfyis was done to substantially decrease the number of tank modules in each aircraft installation, and thus reduce cost, parasitic*hardware weight, installation time, and system complexity. The inlet and outlet ports were moved underneath the tank (Figure 48) to allow both end-to-end and side-by-sido installation possibilities. The inlet and outlet tubes were curved up, over, and down inside the tank to provide maximum recirculation agitation at t»ie tank bottom and to allow either tube to be used as the suction port. Using the 500-gallon tank concept, the nearly finalized tank nodule was generated, as shown in Figure 49. Because the tanks were designed for the possibility of side-by-side installation, the integral dump, vent, and recirculation lines were removed. A completely new, lightweight cradle was designed and included captive castors, lifting jacks, and forklift slots! Eye bolts v/ere provided for sling lifting and aircraft tie-down. An 100 �"V" BAND FWD RECIRCULATION MIXING JET EMERGENCY DUMP VALVE Figure 46. Tank Module (Original Concept) �POWER MODULE Figure 47. Split Series Tank Module (First Concept) �o CO IHLET AND OUTLET PARTS- Figuire '48. 500-Gallon Tank �FILLER CAP VENT VALVE ACTUATOR FILLER CAP TANK TIE DOWH EYES SCREW JACK FORK LIFT ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOX DUMP VALVE •RETRACTABLE CASTORS Figure 49. 500-Gallon Tank Module �electrical junction box was provided for the liquid level indicator and motor-driven vent valve electronics. Both the electrical cable and dump valve air connections were designed to allow the tanks to be connected in scries to minimize wiring and air hose connecting errors and simplify installation. The tank fill port was increased in size to three inches and a screen was added to trap foreign matter if the tanks were filled through their fill ports. The fill cap, liquid level indicator, and tank vent were mounted on a manhole cover, and the manhole was sized to allow entry into the tank if desired. An internal agent slosh baffle was added which consisted of a curved, perforated sheet in the center of the tank, covering the bottom half of the tank's circular cross-section. This plate was designed to adequately control slosh at minimal cost and weight by taking advantage of the inherent strength of a curved sheet. . — The final MISS tank module was the same as shown in Figure 49 except the vent line and valve were increased in size from 1 to 2 inches in diameter to decrease emergency dump time. Detailed evaluation of reservoir and power module arrangement in each aircraft is presented in paragraph 4.1. As can be seen from Figures 15, 20, 21, 22, and 23 of paragraph 4.1, slight variances from the concept of symmetrical tanks around the power module were necessary to insure compatibility with all aircraft. 4.6 POWER MODULE The power module must contain plumbing, valving, electrical diagnostic equipment and controls,'and a._power''SQurce andjnust be " designed to mate with all aircraft configurations and meet, floor;-, loading requirements. During the design" and development effort, consideration was given to ease of operation, accessibility of f components, balancing of fluid paths, and weight and safety ~ requirements. Several preliminary and subsequent designs of the power module were made to incorporate the various system changes. One early design is shown in Figure 50 and incorporated J£h.e PE90-7 engine which was also used on the final design*,. It-had an electromagnetic induction flowmetar which was later eliminated in favor of dual turbine-type flowmeters. Captive castors and lifting jacks were incorporated to simplify aircraft installation and removal. The operator seat was attached to the power module,, with the control console located as shown. The power module, which is almost finalized, is shown in Figure 51. This module was designed by taking all necessary components and generating several sketches of different plumbing positioning concepts. The most functional design was selected, and the actual hardware assembly was fabricated. During fabrication, the cradle was simultaneously designed and fabricated to adequately support the various components. All controls were positioned within easy 105 �CONTROL CONSOLE PE9Q-7 AIR-COOLED 1KG IHE (fSN 2805-633-6689) FLWHETER ^OPERATOR'S SEAT (REMOVED FOR CLARITY)/""^. PULLET (BELT GUARD OHITTW FOR CLARITY) A I* COMPRESSOR DISSEMINATION LIKE OII-OFF VALVE OISSLHIKATION LIME OUTLET 01 SUM I NAT I ON LINE XAKUAL THROTTLE VALV PICKUP LINE ON-OfF YAL?E (?. PLACES) tECIRCUUTIOII LINE MANUAL TffltOTTlE SALTS CElTRfFUOAL fUMP Figure 50. RtCIRCULATION LINE OII-OFF VALVE (2 PUCES) -> Power Module (Early Design) �DISSEMINATION RtCIRCULATION TANK SUCTION SCREW JACK COMPRESSOR PUMP RETRACTABLE CASTORS (») Figure .51. Pow^r Module (Later Concept) �reach of the operator, and the operator seat was designed to be positioned in front of, and separately tied down from, the power module. The control box was designed with a hinged panel to permit easy access to the control box components. The final MISS power module design (see Figures 5, 6, 7 and 3 in Section III of this report) included some minor cradle and plumbing changes. The lower cradle channels were inverted to provide better aircraft floor loading, angled corner cradle supports were replaced with gussets, an idler pully was ad<3ed to the air compres"sor drive belt, and the system battery and emergency dump air reservoir were added to a structure behind and above the control box. A circuit breaker box was added below the main control panel, and a second primary air reservoir, was ..added underneath 'tffd pump drive train. 4.7 INTERNAL PLUMBING The MISS internal plumbing includes the tanks/power module agent hoses, the dump, vent, and engine exhaust systems, and the internal dissemination hoses and hardware. Laboratory agent compatibility tests were conducted on agent hoses to determine acceptable materials (see paragraph 4.2 of this report). For actual locations of internal plumbing on the various aircraft, see the respective aircraft Class II modification documentation. 4.7.1 Agent Hoses Two types of agent hoses are required: High pressure hose used., for agent dissemination and recirculation, and, suction hose used to connect between the tanks and to connect the power module to the inside tanks. These hoses must be compatible with all MISS agents. In addition, the hose must be flexible enough to allow connection at the desired points. As a result of preliminary laboratory chemical agent compatibility testing, Teflon*- or nylon-.lined hoses were determined to be acceptable. A survey of available hoses indicated that nylonlined hosas were not manufactured to rr.eet the MISS requirements, and TetIon* hoses were extremely costly. Further research indicated that a cross-linked polyethylene-lined hose was available to meet the 100 psi high pressure hose requirement. Although extremely stiff, this hose waa selected to reduce costs without sacrificing system performance. A Teflon®-lined duct was selected for suction line applications, and tha system was designed accordingly. The cross-linked polyethylene-lined hose worked perfectly during the remainder of the program, but the Teflon*-lined suction duct exhibited both leakage at the Teflon* liner seam and suction collapse of the liner. After several attempts by the manufacturer 108 �to correct these problems, they discontinued their effort and agreed that their product was misrepresented and should not be for fluid service, Th«j failure of the suction duct created a problem because it was 'rejKttKsanely flexible and the suction portion of- the system had been diasigned around this duct flexibility. The resulting search indicated that no hoses were available to meet the chemical compatibility requirements, match the duct flexibility, and be relatively inexpensive. As an interim solution, vinyl hoses were provided on the prototype system. Vinyl is not compatible with all agents but sufficed for Air Force system flight testing Using glycerin and water as an agent simulant. An all Teflon® hose was located which met the compatibility and flexibility requirements, but was extremely expensive and lacked good seal-ing at the end fittings. The final solution to the problem was an all stainless steel bellows hose with the end flanges welded on. This hose was then specified for all MISS suction hose applications. - - 4.7.2 ~* Internal Dissemination Hardware High wing aircraft had to use two fuselage hose assemblies to feed the separate wing boom assemblies, and it was decided to design the spray system to include fuselage spray stations at the jump doors. For lower performance aircraft such as the C-123, this was accomplished by constructing a stainless steel tee which was bolted to the cargo floor using existing cargo tie-down points. This tee was designed to accept the single 3-inch-diameter dissemination hose from the power module and distribute the agent to :> 'the twin fuselage hose assemblies. '," '". • JAt the point of attachment of the fuselage hose assemblies, nozzle spray stations were incorporated. For high performance aircraft such as the C-130, twin 3-inch hose dissemination lines from the power module were connected to individual elbows which subsequently fed the fuselage hose assemblies and the fuselage spray stations. For low wing, low performance aircraft such as the C-47, a single 2-inch dissemination line was run from the power_;module, out through the side cargo door, under the fuselage, and connected directly to the wing boom system. Since nozzle stations were placed uniformly along the wing boom system, including under the fuselage, fuselage spray stations were not required. 4.7.3 Dump System The dump system was Originally conceived as exhausting through the aircraft rear jump door to eliminate metal-cutting operations. The Mse of modular tanks which could be installed in various configurations then dictated that the dump system also be modular. To achieve this, a 10- inch-diameter silicone-coated glar.s duct was selected for the main dump duct which has sufficient capacity to accept four tank module 4-inch-diameter dump ducts. A -i2-inch 109 �nodular length was selected for the 10-inch duct, and connections were mede to the 4-inch-diameter tank dump ports with stainless steel tees and band clamps. A dump chute was located at the jump door which projected about 12 inches into the windstream to minimize dump contamination of fuselage. This dump chute was beveled at 4b« facing aft to allow the windstream to create a slight vacuum condition in the dump line and thus reduce dump time. The dump chute was designed to be mounted with a plate, which was bonded to the aircraft floor with silicone adhesive. 4.7.4 Vent System The vent system consists of modular lengths of a main 3-inch•diameter silicone-coated glass duct attached to the 2-inch-diameter tank vent ducts with stainless steel tees and band clamps. The tank vent hoses and vent valves were originally designed as 1-inch diameter but were later changed to 2-inch diameter to decrease dump time. A vent chute was utilized in the aft jump door which projected into the airstream. This vent chute was chamfered 30° facing forward to allow slight ram air pressurization of the tanks to decrease emergency dump time. 4.7.5 Engine Exhaust The engine exhaust was ducted from the engine spray arrester to the exhaust chute at the aft jump door using 3-inch-diameter silicone-coated glass duct. Due to the Air Force objection to the silicone glass duct, it was replaced with asbestos-packed stainless steel exhaust hose. For certain aircraft such as the C-123, the exhaust hose was? secured to the overhead pa!heliivg,usTng mounting brackets,'bonded to the aircraft with silicone adhesive! For other aircraft, the exhaust hose was secured tc existing aircraft internal structure using standard hose brackets and band clamps. 4.8 EXTERNAL PLUMBING Aircraft external plumbing includes the nozzles and nozzle valves, wing boom system and fuselage hose assemblies. Complete descriptions and installation instructions for the various aircraft MISS installation wing boom systems can be found in the applicable aircraft Class II modification documentation. During the MISS program, Class II modification documentation packages were generated for the C-47, C-123, and C-130 aircraft. 4.8.1 Nozzles and Nozzle Valves The original nozzle/nozzle valve approach is shown in Figure 52 and used a spring-check valve method of sealing the nozzle when dissemination was terminated. The nozzle and valve were customfabricated parts. This concept was abandoned when further investigation of the sealing pressure requirements at the nozzle valve 110 �S'. .. NYLON OR STAINLESS STEEL CAP STAINLESS STEEL COMPRESSION SPRING NYLON OR STAINLESS STEEL' POPPET NYLON OR STAINLESS STEEL BODY Figure 52. Check Valve-Type Nozzle 11 1 �indicated that a spring-check valve could not seal against agent presssures generated within the wing boom when certain larger aircraft saw maximum lateral airborne g-loadings. In addition, the custom nozzle approach was expensive and did not comply with the concept of using readily available hardware when possible. . Research of standard valves revealed that an inexpensive, small diaphragm check valve was available (Figure 53). The checking function of the valve was increased by supplying compressed air behind the diaphragm at all times except during spraying. When air pressure is not available, such as during aircraft downtime, the check valve spring will continue to seal up to 5-psig agent pressure to prevent leakage at the airfield. The valve is fail safe in that it will allow spraying even if the air source fails. In addition, the inherent design of the valve prevents "water hammer" in the dissemination pluiribing. After testing and rejecting Teflon'*' and silicone, a fluorosilicone diaphragm was added to the agent side of the standard fairprene diaphragm to insure chemical compatibility with the agents. (See Category I Reliability Test Reports in Appendix II of this report.) The complete nozzle valve assembly was successfully cycled through a 5-year life during Category I testing, and the ability of the valve to prevent water hammer was also demonstrated successfully. Standard, inexpensive, and readily available vee-type stainless steel nozzles were selected for use with the diaphragm check valves. For optimum droplet size control, different nozzles are required for different spray rate ranges. ... '• ' 4.8.2 Wing Boom System Several wing boom constructions were considered; Round, elliptical, full aerodynamic fairing, and aft fairing. The round pipe design was considered to create too much drag. The elliptical was more streamlined but presented end connection and mounting difficulties. The full aerodynamic fairing was optimum from a drag standpoint but required costly fabrication techniques. The aft fairing design was selected as being the best tradeoff between drag, cost, and complexity, and the nozzle valve nylon air line was routed through the aft wing boom fairing. Modular wing boom lengths of 8 feet and approximately 4 feet, with nozzle stations spaced every 2 feet (2 each on 4-foot boom, 4 each on 8-foot boom), were selected from preliminary layouts of the wing boom system on all applicable aircraft. Flow rates for the larger aircraft, such as the C-130, dictated the 2-inch-diameter wing boom ,?,gent pipe. The C-123 required special wi.ig boom sections to pass under the nacelle fuel tanks and were equipped with a spray station located on the nacelle centerline to try and fill in the spray pattern void created by the propellers. The C-130 system used special heat-resistant, 4-foot boom sections behind the engines which were manufactured without nozzle stations end used copper air line in place of the standard nylon. 11 -> �OUTLET CONN. ISLET CONN. NYLON BODY ALUMINUM 60NHET AIRLINE Co SPRING NL STAINLESS STEEC DIAPH( DIAPHRAGM , FAIRPRENE ISTD.) TAINLESS STEEL SEAT FLOUROSILICONE DIAPHRAGM Figure 53. Nozzle Valve Assembly �At first the wing boom end connections were the non^-flexible tubing type,, but analysis of the larger aircraft indicated that a rigid wing boom system would not be compatible with aircraft wing flexufe during flight. As a result, a flex-type wing boom system, as shown in Figure 54, was designed. Wing boom connect.rons allowed axial flexing as shown but prevented axial rotation and end movement. The wing boom strut bolts were positioned to allow the struts to sway during wing flexure, and an inboard brace was added to prevent side movement of the wing boom. The C-123 nacelle wing boom sections were equipped with slip joints to allow the fuel nacelles to be jettisoned, and the boom air line was equipped with quick-disconnects which actuated after the boom began to separate. Silicone O-rings were added to protect the connector, seals from the agents since the standard seals were not compatible with ail agents. Contractor testing of the wing boom systems for the C-47, C-123, and C-130 indicated that the wing boom self-restrained connectors do not restrain over 100-psi pressure- when used with stainless steel pipe, although they are rated for 150-psi working pressure. Also, the connector seals are not adequately protected from the agents with the added silicone 0-ring, and fluorosilicone seals cannot be used for self-restrained type connectors. As a result, it is recommended that the self-restrained connectors be replaced with non-self-restrained connectors of the same type (allow boom flexure), fluorosilicone gaskets be used for complete agent compatibility, and the restraining function be accomplished with external mechanical ties. , Three different wing boom brackets were designed to pllow attachment of the struts. One was designed to mate with the airfoil porx/ons of the wing boom (Figure 55). This design was vulnerable to overtorquing the nut and deforming the curved tab at the rear of the bracket. As a result, a two-piece bracket was designed which bolted together at both the front and rear. Another bracket was designed to attach to the boom connectors, and the third bracket to attach to the wing boom pipe at the nozzle stations. Both of these designs used band clamps for attachment.., The three bracket types were required to allow variable positioning of the bonded mounting plates bonded to the wing surface. A telescoping strut was designed to allow complete installation flexibility. The strut uses a band clamp to fix its length during system installation and is subsequently riveted after the entire wing boom assembly is installed. The telescoping strut was originally aluminum but was changed to stainless steel to increase strength and chemical agent resistance. �IING »!NS BOOM END VIE* UNFLEXED FLEXED Figure 54. Dynamic Wing Boom Operation �— Figure 55. Wing Boom Strap Assembly f �*>8'3 Fuselage Hose Assemblies The fuselage hose assemblies consist of the same type of high pressure hose as used for internal plumbing and include an external air line to supply compressed air to the nozzle valves. The hose assemblies are attached to brackets which are bonded to " fuselage skin with silicone adhesive. .rvn:: -.-.. . ;. 4.9 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM The design of the electrical system was finalized after the agent transfer system design was completed. The foremost design objective was to keep the system as simple as possible and thus make it easy to understand, check out, and repair. Because the MISS may be used in remote areas and foreign countries, the electrical "system was designed so that it can be completely diagnosed with ..... a volt-ohm meter. These design criteria ruled out the use of sophisticated solid state electronics; the MISS uses conventional relays for all logic circuitry. The use of relays required more wiring, but the additional wiring expense was justified to keep the circuitry uncomplicated. Ai; electrical system relays, switches, and indicator lights are a single type to reduce logistics. Every individual electrical circuit is protected by its own circuit breaker. All circuitry was positioned for easy access and replacement, and each individual wire in the system is coded to correspond to the system wiring diagram. ..4.10 GROUND OPERATIONS Ground operations may be defined to include the following: • Fill the agent tanks from 55-gallon drums, open agent containers, or tanker trucks. • Drain the system into above containers. • Flush the system, including tanks. • Wash down the aircraft if contaminated. During the development effort, it became apparent that the centrifugal pump, used in the MISS agent transfer system, could be used as the power source for all ground operations and simultaneously reduce the quantity of ground-based support equipment. A selfpriming p.ump could have been used, but it would have required hand priming when the system was completely dry, and it would ; have weighed more than the non-self-priming type pumps. It became apparent that the air supply, already on the power module, could be used to actuate a pneumatic eductor, which, in turn, 117 �would create a vacuum condition in the centrifugal pump. By Attaching a ground suction hose to the suction side of the pump, the eductor could be turned off and the centrifugal pump would continue to fill t^e system. To prevent overfilling the tanks, each tank was equipped with a level switch which would close its vent valves when the tank was filled. When all. tanks" in a given system are filled, the engine magneto is shorted. to-'.ptevetnt overpressurlzation of the tanks. Turning off the fill switch allows the engine to be restarted for recirculation and/or spraying. Figure 56 shows an operator filling the system from 55-gallon drums using the drum suction probe connected to the suction fill hose. The drum suction probe is equipped with a valve which is shut off when transferring the probe from one drum to another. Closing this suction probe valve will cause the centrifugal pump to cavitate but will not -cause pump damage if closed for short periods of time. Figure 57 shows ground filling directly from a tanker truck. Filling the MISS with wettable powder-type agents can be accomplished by filling the system as explained above with the liquid carrier agent and introducing the powdered agent directly into the tanks through the 3-inch fill caps. Mixing the agent can be accomplished by placing the system in the recirculation mode. If the powdered agent is toxic, it can be mixed remotely using a spare tank and power module, as shown in Figure 58, and pumped onboard using the ground power module. Draining is accomplished by attaching the ground support hose to the power drain connection on the power module and using the onboard centrifugal pump to draw agent from the tank$; and pumpt it into the ground agent containers. " . System flushing is accomplished by suction filling with flushing agent and operating the system in the recirculation mode. To minimize the amount of flushing agent needed, a tank washing probe is supplied (Figure 59). This probe is attached with a hose to the power drain connection on the power module and moved from tank T'td-tank as required. : -Aircraft washing is accomplished --Jith a trigger-operated washing gun, attached with up to 100 feet of hose to the power drain connection. The gun is a variable spray-type, allowing the operator to select a cone spray, solid stream, or complete shut-off as desired. All hose/probe/washing gun connections are the quick-disconnect type to provide leak-tight connections with minimal effort. 118 �vo Figur'e 56. Field Fill �Figuro 57. Airfield Fill �ISJ T^y^y^l^ gy''-Jj' "~i m in T — -"-•--- •• ._g^- Figure 58. Mixing/Filling Operation with Wettable Powders �FLUSHING PROBE TO POWER DRAIN OUTLET ON POWER MODULE Figure 59. Tank Flushing 122 �4.11 RELIABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY A basic functional level breakdown of the system is shown in Figure 60. These diagrams were generated by functionally dissecting each block. The process stops when the next dissection would result in specific part identification. ~ • . Analytical reliability and maintainability studies were not completed due to a change in the scope of the contract. Several key hardware components were cycle tested through a 5-year life, as explained in paragraph 4.14, Category I Testing. Reliability requirements were that the system have a probability of mission success oC 0.99 at a confidence level of 90 percent when disseminating an agent with viscosity of 350 .cp at. a .flow rate of three gallons per acre. Maintainability requirements were that the system be capable of operation away from a military installation for periods of up to six months with a spares kit containing only seals and nozzles. No field or higher maintenance was to be designed for a service life of 500 hours when disseminating agents Orange, Blue, and White. The nozzles {excluding tips, cores, and diaphragms) were to have a minimum predicted service life of 400 hours when disseminating agents Orange, Blue, and White. The nozzle tips and cores were to retain their calibration accuracy for a minimum time period of 10 hours. The flowmeter was to retain its calibration accuracy for a minimum period of 10 hours when disseminating agents Orange, Blue, and White. 4.12 SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS • Requirements specified that operational use of the dispenser system, including ground loading, must not be hazardous to personnel. As a result, the complete agent transfer system (including tankage) was designed as a sealed system with all agent vapors vented overboard both during ground and flight operations. ' In addition, both the lead-acid power module battery and the gas tank vents were routed overboard. All power train mechanisms {belts, pulley, etc.) were adequately shielded from operating personnel. A centrifugal pump was used as the prime agent mover and, due to system design, the pump could be operated at stall conditions without danger to the equipment or operating personnel. The power and tank nodules were provided with captive castors to simplify system installation and removal and minimize danger to personnel. Pressure relief valves were provided on both the primary and emergency dump pneumatic systems, and all electrical systems were protected by individual circuit breakers. Adequate system instruments and controls provided the operator with complete system monitoring capabilities. All indicator lights were the press-to-test type. 123 �i• ! MODULAR NTERNAL SPRAY SYSTEM • I 1 POWER AND CONTROL MODULE STRUCTURE AGENT TRANSFER STRUCTURE INTERNAL AIRCRAFT EXTERNAL AIRCRAFT PLUMBING PLUMBING SYSTEM RESERVOIR MODULE 1 STRUCTURE STRUCTURE 1 tO 1 1 EMERGENCY AGENT 1 AGENT FLOW SYSTEM IHSTRUXEN- STORAGE DUMP SYSTEM r CONTROLS PQKER TAT ION r 1 ELECTRICAL I PNEUMATIC Figure 60. MANUAL X3 o Functional Level Diagram for the Modular Internal Spray System ; �' ELECTRICAL 1 1 1 I WIRING SOLID STATE DEVICES CONNECTORS RELAYS 1 SWITCHES METERS to (J\ 1 I LIGHTS SOLENOIDS I MOTORS (•) PNEUMATIC 1 1 I 1 1 VALVES Figure 60. 1 VALVE ACTUATORS FITTINGS REGULATORS AIR RESERVOIRS COMPRESSOR Functional Level Diagram for the Modular Internal Spray System (Concluded) �The entire- system is structurally sound, conforming to all applicable aircraft technical orders. The internal hardware is tied c?own to withstand normal flight and crash g loads. The external hardware is designed to withstand the maximum flight speed of each applicable aircraft. *4'>.i3'c*"VALtiE ENGINEERING . . ' * • • Throughout the development phase, the MISS was constantly analyzed to reduce costs without compromising performance, reliability, or maintainability. Specific examples of cost savings are: • Used standard off-the-shelf hardware extensively. • Used Government-furnished engine to reduce logistic problems. • Selected modified cross-linked polyethylene high pressure hose to replace costly TPE hose. • • Designed the agent transfer system to adequately control e.g. while minimizing the number of hardware components. • Selected 500-gallon-capacity tank modules to replace previous 325-gdlon tanks, thus reducing costs, installation time, and plumbing complexity. • Replaced TFE dump and vent ducts with silicone-coated glass at a substantial cost savings. • Changed flange seals to reduce seal, costs by 90 percent without compromising performance. • Designed the electrical system to use a single type of switch and relay to minimize logistics. • 4.14 Provided complete ground support capabilities built into the power module. Changed to corrosion weight flanges to reduce hardware costs and parasitic weight. CATEGORY I TESTING Category I Contractor Testing was performed by DTL in three phases: Component Testing, Reliability Testing, and Reliability Retesting. Appendix II contains summaries of these reports. Component testing was performed to determine operating characteristics of prime system components such as the pneumatically operated valves, eductor, air compressor, and fLowmeters. Also included in the tests were agent/material compatibility, ground 126 �operations, 500-gailon tank sealing, and emergency dump. Reliability re-testing consisted of several cycling tests with the nozzle valve to verify a 5-year diaphragm life. All components tested performed as designed and exceeded the 5year life requirement. 4.15 CATEGORY II TESTING The MISS C-123K system installation and aircraft modification was performed at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida from 27 April 1971 to 7 May 1971,. The installation progressed smoothly/ and only a few pieces of minor hardware were modified for improved functionability. System flight tests were started on 17 May 1971 and included: • Dry system flight compatibility. • High volume spray, dump and manual dump using water as an agent. • Full takeoff and landing (880 gallons glycerin/water solution). • High volume spray at 240 gpm using glycerin/water solution; included turns while spraying. • Full load flight compatibility. • Low volume spraying. During all tests, the system performed well with no major complications. The self-supporting features of the system proved effective. The aircraft pilot said the system felt solid, did not adversely affsct flight characteristics, and agent slosh was not perceptible even with the tanks half full (maximum slosh condition). The system operator stated the operation was simple, straightforward, and all controls were positioned for easy handling. Slight spray contamination of the right aft fuselage from the right-hand fuselage spray station was eliminated by plugging that spray nozzle. The contamination was apparently due to the vacuum created by the dump chute or due to the direction of the propeller vortices, since the left-hand fuselage spray station caused no contamination. Emergency dump contamination of the fuselage was as expected, but some internal spray-back was apparent since the diarap chute was mounted forward in the jump door. The dump chvte was consequently positioned aft in the 'jump door for future MISS aircraft designs. The pilot felt that manual emergency dumping took too long for combat missions but would be fine for noncombat-type spraying. 127 �SECTION V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Flight characteristics of the C-123 aircraft arr not adversely affected by the installation of the PWU-5/A MIf.L kit. 2. Maximum payload capabilities of all ten applicable aircraft are effectively utilized. 3. The system self-supporting features perform effectively. 4. The system exceeds required flow rates for all ten aircraft. 5. The system can be readily installed at the organizational level" using standard tools. 6. The system is safe. 7. The spray nozzle valves effectively prevent agent leakage during maximum airborne maneuvers. 8. The flowmeter system is functional and meets the contractual accuracy requirements. 9. The emergency dump system will dump at least one-half the agent payload in 45 seconds. 10. Operator and pilot controls provide effective system monitoring and adjustment and meet human engineering requirements. 11. The agent transfer system provides effective recirculation agitation. 12. The system extensively utilizes standard, readily available hardware. 13. The agent reservoir design adequately prevents agent slosh. 14. The sequential tank-emptying design allows maximum modular installation flexibility. 15. Attachment of external hardware and limited internal', hardware by bonding is an effective modification method. 16. Polysulfide or polysulfide/epoxy adhesive should be investigated to replace the epoxy wing boom bonding agent; the PWU5/A MISS installation would th^n require no permanent aircraft modification. 129 �17. The self-restraining wing boom connectors should be replaced with non-self-restraining connectors of the same type and used with fluorosilicone seals. Connection restraint should bo done with mechanical ties between wing boom sections. 18. A cable system should be designed to allow manual emergency dump operation from the operator's console. 130 �APPENDIX I ELECTRICAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION X.I MAIN POWER SYSTEM The electrical power system consists of a 24-volt lead-acid aircraft battery (AN3150-2A), a 30-volt carbon pile voltage regulator (FSN 6110-373-8691), a 10-ampere maximum reverse current relay (FSN 2925-554-6956), and a 50-ampere, 28.5-volt aircraft direct current generator {FSN 2920-873-4396).Figure 1-1 shows a simplified diagram of the main power circuitry. When the generator voltage reaches 26 to 27 volts, the generator is connected to the battery by the reverse cur-rent relay allowing charging current to flow. The charging voltage is regulated to 30 volts by the carbon pile voltage regulator. When the engine speed is decreased, the generator voltage drops, causing a reverse current to flow, discharging the battery through the generator. The reverse current relay disconnects the generator from the battery when the reverse current exceeds 10 amperes (engine idle). 1.2 CIRCUIT BREAKERS The main power is monitored by the ammeter before being distributed to the secondary circuit breakers by the primary circuit breaker, CB-1, which is a d.c. 50-ampere, medium delay circuit breaker. The medium delay allows 'all tank vent valve motors to Start at , once without causing nuisance trips. The secondary circuit breakers are shown in Table 1-1, and their delay curves are shown in' Figure 1-2. All circuit breakers are double pole. Each of the circuit breakers is equipped with an auxiliary microswitch which, when the circuit breaker is tripped, will light the breaker-tripped indicator light on the main control panel. The toggle action on these circuit breakers is trip-free, making it impossible to hold the circuit closed against a fault. All circuit breakers are .weather-proofed. 1.3 FLOWMETER The flowmeter is supplied with 24-28 Vdc by circuit breeiker CB-2 through connector P-ll, as shown in Figure 1-3. Inputs from the 1-inch and 3-inch turbine meter magnetic pickups are received at the flowmeter instrumentation package through cables W-4 and W-5. These are two-couductor shielded cables with the shields; insulated at the flowmeter connector an<? grounded at the instrumentation package connector. 131 �—5 AMMETER ••MEG 121 S H pig jig 1 BAT CUTOUT RELAY 122 122 122 123 124 L+ J19 MAIN POWER TO SYSTEM I F+ VOLTAGE REGULATOR P19 -f—-f 0+ C8-1 ELECTRICAL BOX POKER MODULE Figure 1-1. * l- Main Power Circuitry �TABLE 1-1 SECONDARY CIRCUIT BREAKERS BREAKER LOAD ( m a x ) R A T I N G (amps) DELAY .080 1,00 1 3.U50 7.50 1 .3WJ 2.50 1 CB-5 PUMP PRIME *4.920 2.50 1 CB-6 DRAiN 44.500 10.00 2 CB-7 A I R PURGE .820 2.50 1 CB-8 AGENT LEVEL .1*00 1.00 1 CB-9 SPRAY 5.980 10.00 2 CB-10 DUMP 20.7M3 30.00 2 19.360 30.00 2 19.360 30.00 2 CB-2 FLOWMETER CB-3 ENGINE CB-i* PANEL LIGHTS OJ CB-11 VENT CB-12 PILOT ! �tmi E.-:r.T«±=: -i^m^ pr.".'.rfi'::.Tr-T_;"._"...'.".- ^p_._~ APC oc convc (m 'e ^ «a|4*%M " - »« ~ «»* tat w* "*» •*» M« w« - !?-"v."Mt ^ ^=?5f **f??!?'?=*^ Ml"' B &3E: Pp||P^pa^ ^.ta-t-vfe^T I N ^™fe^^^^F^fp^^^ —rr - -^-i tr=;t-.tr-?i:=~ n-f--*— r «- --71 ,_. ~.]~ I 7.-. t ijii...rz I Figure 1-2. Circuit Brea.:er Delay Curves 134 �I I y-JIH PICKO. 1 INCH MFTF1* dU ! ff I 1 r~ Jl 3 PI3-\ r 1 - 1 i_ L PM —i _ l« / -r-L 1 1_ P <^" rv _J "*,. \^ 1 /-\ ^J i I * i V J PICKUP ItCH hETER f"~ 1 I i i i •— [ ' 1 1 "" PM FLOWMETER IHSTRUHEHTATIOh M3 "~"""jf ^~ PIS 1 JU-J* -c1 1 ^T f \ —> 1 L MS JM -v 1 i' . -J— ^ STUFF1MG TUBE / JI8-L-*- JI-V -»• pj-V -*J BOX S*^\ -^ Av POWER MODULE Figure 1-3. I * -JI2 12 s~K rt , , _ . _ . . V\ r -X 1 1 1 -^ L_EI.ECTRICAL 211-28 VOC INPUT I \ ' . x-JIB . / Flowmeter Circuit • | v_ PII •*--P18-L •*•-JI8-L -»--JlJ , -. �1.4 ENGINE Power is supplied to the engine electrical controls through circuit breaker CB-3, as shown in Figure 1-4. When the ignition switch (S-l) is switched on, power is supplied to the hourmeter., and ground is supplied to the starter pushbutton (8-13?. When S-l is in the off position, the engine magneto is grounded and 24 Vdc is supplied to the normally opened contact of the oil pressure-actuated microswitch (S-16). If S-l is switched off with the engine running (S-16 actuated to the normally opened position by oil pressure), 24 Vdc is supplied to the fuel shutoff solenoid until oil pressure decreased, allowing S-17 to deactuate to the normally closed position. This function prevents possible engine backfiring if the. ignition switch (S-l) is switched off with the engine operating at high throttle -settings. If the oil pressure drops too low with the engine running (S-l), S-16 deactuates and the fuel shutoff solenoid is energized with power from the magneto. 1.5 PANEL LIGHTS Power is supplied to the two gooseneck panel lights through CB-4. Each of these lights has its own intensity-controlling rheostat. •1.6 PUMP PRIME Power is supplied to the pump prime switch through circuit breaker CB-5. The pump prime switch opens the vent valves on the end tanks, removes power from the closed side of the vent valves, and energizes the eductor air solenoid valve. 1.7 DRAIN Power is supplied to the drain switch '-hrough circuit breaker CB-6. The drain switch opens the vent valves on the end tanks and removes power from the closed side of the vent valves. 1.8 AIR PURGE Power is supplied to the air purge switch through circuit breaker CB-7. The air purge switch energizes the air purge solenoid and the wing boom nozzle valve air solenoid. The positive power coming from CB-7 is in series with the spray switch so that the air purge switch will not function unless the spray switch is in the off position. 1.9 AGENT LEVEL Power is supplied to the agent level system through circuit breaker CB-8. The power is dropped through a 75-ohm, 25-watt resistor or a 50-ohm, 25-watt resistor, depending on the number of tanks in the system used. The total number of tanks in the 136 �—I OIL PRESSURE-ACTUATED MICROSWITCH SI6 p —- fr *—G PI-F!JI-F 1— '16 TB5-!) —16—• • SI3 P| E Jl £ 20 19 17 16NIT ION SWITCH SI M'KJJI-K no NO ' STARTER PUSHBUTTON I STARTER MAGNETO PI6-T T 9 FUEt SHUTOFF SOLENOID lO I HOURHETER I I I I I I I f I I t JI-2 JI-Y P l - O l^_J LJ. PI-Y CB-3 »-i 10 POWER MODULE J ; i I i I i I I I | Figure 1-4. Engine Control Circuit 137 �system used is selected on the number of tanks switch (S-12) at the top of the control panel. This switch also programs the automatic engine cutoff circuitry for the number of tanks used. (Refer to Figures 1-5 and 1-6.) The agent level system consists of a tank selector switch (S-5) and a dual meter readout (K-2). The tank selector switch receives the incoming signals from the tank sending units. Tanks are selected in pairs to be read out on the dual meter. The sending units in the tanks consist of a sealed resistance comb running from the top to the bottom of the tank (70 ohms) with a sealed reed switch at the top. A floating magnetic runner causes the resistance of the circuit to change and actuates the reed switch at the top when the tank is full. The closing of this reed switch on each tank actuates some or all of relays K-9 through K-16, depending on the number of tanks used. The relays form part of a 2 to 8 input "and" gate, which shuts the engine down when all tanks are full. This automatic shut-down will only occur when the fill switch is in the "on" position. I.10 SPRAY The spray function, as shown in Figure 1-7, is supplied with power through circuit breaker CB-9 and controlled by switch S-6 on the main control pnnel and switch S-14 on the pilot's control box. Thuce two switches are wired in series so that the decision to spray must involve both the operator and the pilot. Positive power from cn-9 is supplied to terminals 2 and 11 of the operator's spray switch, S-6. When S-6 is switched on, the operator's indicator light, L-9, on the main control panel is illuminated arid' positive power is supplied to the pilot's control box through CB-12, lighting the operator's indicator light on the pilot's control box, L-15. Terminal 5 of S-6 is part of the six input "and" circuits which supplys a closed signal to the vent valves. When S-6 is switched on, this closed signal is interrupted. Terminal 8 of S-6 is in series with the air purge function so that air purge cannot be operated during the spray function. When S-14, the pilot's spray switch, is switched on, the end vent valves are opened through power from terminal 2. Terminal 5 of S-14 has received power from S-6 through CB-12. When S-14 is switched on, the spray solenoid and the wing boom nozzle air solenoid are energized with power from terminal 5. Terminal 3 of S-14 has power provided by CB-9. When S-14 is switched on, the pilot's spray, light, L-ll, on the pilot's control box is illuminated with power from terminal 3. The pilot's spray light on the main control panel, L-10, is also illuminated. 7o summarize this function, when the operator actuates his spray switch, the operator's spray lights on the main control panel and <,n the pilot's box are both illuminated. When the pilot actuates 138 �TO JI6-AA LIQUID LEVEL TANK SELECTOR SIUC.4 « -^f. 75 OHH.20 W A T T J4 P4 A.A A K K vv— TT, 1 1 ,-7f I •l' JI7.AA M! AGENi LEVEL KETER A B C D E F G H J J4 J3 D C B A J3 A B C 0 E F G H J „ -> P4 P3 0 C B A P3 Rl 1 36 | 34 SO C KM. 20 W A T T t, .«^r:— 1j j J. a 2 * S2 " ^-w -*—< 1 1-« * 34 PI8 Jl{ j, 6 j a Ji PI G { a i pi vk OF 4 -V C8-8 -/ */ P I 8 J I 8 4* l GROUHO i NUMBER TANKS SWITCH 35 h f T 1— 28V DC MAIN POWER vo 39 HI 42 43 44 45 ' " «> OL UJ 1— 119 > PIS\ 119 52 PI9 JI9 at PI9 HG . JK ac-j ^f = JI9 PI9 Figure 1-5. Agent Level System Circuit �f TANK 7 +28VDC T4NKS TAKK "1 x1 T&NK I 1 1 1 ' ec 1^1 1=1 X l~l 1= 1 1 ee x IriJ 1=1 TANK 2 1 TANK H .TANK 5- V / V 6» 12 HUMBER.IOF TANKS C-47 Figure 1-6. Liquid Level System Automatic Engine Shut-off Electrical Schematic — »• TO MAGNETO (OMLY OPERATES WHEN FILL SWITCH IS OH) �W I N G BOOM A I R NOZZLE SOLENOID Figure 1-7. Spray Circuitry �his spray switch, the pilot's box and the main control panel indicators ar6 illuminated/ the end tank vent valves are opened, the wing boom nozzle air solenoid is energized, and the spray solenoid is energized. The same order of events occurs if the pilot's spray switch is actuated before the operator's spray switch. However, the first switch to be turned off is the one which de-energizes the two solenoids and closes the vent valves. 1.11 DUMP The dump function, as shown in Figure 1-8, is supplied with power through circuit breaker CB-10 and controlled by switch S-7 on the main control panel and switch S-15 on the pilot's control box. These two switches are wired in parallel so that either the operator or the- pilot can initiate the dump function. Positive power from CB-10 is supplied to terminals 2 and 8 of switch S-7, the operator's dump switch. Negative power from CB-10 is supplied directly to the dump solenoid through P-l and P-21. When S-7 is switched on, the operator's dump light, L-13, is illuminated, K-18 is energized through P-19 and D-19 cutting off the closed vent valve signal, the pilot's dump light, L-12, is illuminated, and all vent valves are opened through S-9. The pilot's dump switch will perform these same functions. 1.12 VENT VALVES A logic diagram of this system is shown in Figure 1-9, and a schematic is shown in Figure 1-10. These figures show only one vent valve circuit since all are similar. Power is supplied to the vent valve system through circuit breaker CB-11. When the fill switch, S-8, is switched on, the vent valve is opened through the normally closed contacts of relay K-l. The open indicator light on the main control panel for that vent valve will light as will the closed indicator light when the valve is closed. When this tank is full, the agent level full switch is closed energizing relay K-l. The normally closed contacts on K-l open, cutting off the open signal to the vent valve. The normally open contacts close providing a closed signal to the vent valve through S-8. Besides K-l being energized, relay K-10L is also energized, which forms part of the engine shut-down circuit when all of the tanks are full. (See Figure 1-6.) Only when tho fill switch is in the off position is power supplied to the S-9 open/closed switch. This switch either opens or closes the vent valves independent of the fill system. The closed signal to the vent valves flows through a normally closed pole on: • K-18, dump relay. • S-7, dump switch. • S-G, spray switch. 142 �ELECTRICAL BOX 87 DI9 ?! LL> P19 JI9 -R 016 TO WIRE #28 -R 44- • i •52KI8 il l S-9 JI8-M 55 j- i I l_. J5-0 Jl-e JI-A6 JI-M PS-O PS-F PI-H PI-AG x-K • •- DUMP SOLENOID '• C8I2 -5H- POWER MODULE P6-G J6-G 5552 S-,5 " LI2 I I P I L O T ' S CONTROLS Figure 1-8. Dump System Circuitry 143 TO S-9 JI-P 86 1)21 Tf: _ 6 ^—i --B-j pi-p �RELAY Kl ENERGIZED FLOAT SWITCH OPEN 'I " 1 I CLOSED RELAY Kl TANK FULL N.O. CLOSED I . J FILL RELAY Kl ON SWITCH OFF POWER TO OPEN/CLOSE SWITCH N.C. IN OPEN OPEN ; INDICATION LIGHT IN CLOSED INDICATION LIGHT , Figure 1-9. VENT OUT OUT PILOT'S SPRAY RELAY KI9 Vent Valve Control System Logic Diagram (One Valve) a UJ V) VALVE �VEMT VALVE (IN OPEH POSITIOH) FILL +28V Kl D2 OPES/CLOSE SWITCH S9 I OPEM^ | ^T>-2" FILL SWITCH SS OFF • » / ! < | "•"W «^..j i I I K! Figure 1-10. Vent Valve Control System Schematic (One Valve) �• K-ly, pilot spray switch. • S-3, drain switch. • S-2, pump prime switch. The diodes (D-l and D-2 in Figure 1-10) in the vent valve circuitry are to prevent unwanted interaction between different tank systems. 146 �APPENDIX II CATEGORY I TESTING REPORTS Category I MISP testing consisted of the following: • Component Tests • Reliability Tests • Reliability Retests Summaries of the results of these tests are given in the following sections. , II.I CATEGORY I COMPONENT TEST RESULTS II.1.1 Introduction From 25 May 1970 to 31 August 1970, DTL conducted the following MISS component tests: 1. Nozzle Valve 2. Motor-Driven Vent Valve 3. Dump Valve with Actuator 4. Spray Valve with Actuator 5. Sealing of 500-Gallon Tank Assembly 6. Agent/Material Compatibility 7. Centrifugal Pump Eductor 8. Suction Filling (55-Gallon Drums) 9. Air Compressor : 10. Flowmeters 11. Emergency Dump System (500-Gallon Tank) 12. Emergency Dump (4 each 500-Gallon Tanks) 147 �II.1.2 Results Summary All components met or exceeded design parameters, except emergency dunp. The 1-inch-diameter vent valve and ver.t tubes restricted tank venting too severely and dictated the use of 2-iuch-diameter vent valves and vent lines. In addition, the dump chute and vent chute, which project into the air stream through the aircraft jump doors, were designed to allow ram air pressurization of the vent system and a slight vacuum condition in the dump duct system With these changes, emergency dump time requirements were met. 11.1.2.1 Nozzle Valve The valve sealed drip tight against 58-psig water pressure with 40-psig air behind the diaphragm. With 0 psig air pressure, the valve sealed.against approximately 6.5 psig water pressure. The valve absolutely eliminates water hammer effects uince it readily opens at water pressures above the nominal sealing pressure. 11.1.2.2 Vent Valve At 24 Vdc, the average opening and closing times were 1.9 seconds. 11.1.2.3 Dump Valve With 100-psig air pressure, the average opening and closing times were less than 0;4 second. 11.1.2.4 Spray Valve Opening time Ccin be varied from 0.14 to 1.06 seconds, and closing time can be varied from 0.45 to 1.25 seconds. 11.1.2.5 Sealing of 500-Gallon Tank Assembly All tanks were tested to 20.-psig hydrostatic pressure. remained leak tight and structurally integral. 11.1.2.6 Agent/Material Compatibility Agents used were: • The tanks Dibrom (4.6 Ib/gal - 3 oz/acre solution) Orange White Blue Modified Cross-linked Polyethylene Hose The modified cross-linked polyethylene hose withstood all agents at 140°F for 3-1/2 months with no degradation. 148 �• TFE Lined 4-inch Suction Duct The TFE liner withstood all agents at 140°F for two months without degradation. Constant exposure of the duct exterior to agents may cause slight delamination of the fiberglass layers. • Silicone Vent and Dump Ducts The silicone vent and dump ducts withstood all agents at 140°F for one month without degradation and withstood Orange, White and Blue for two months without degradation. The Xylene content of the Dibrom decomposed the silicone aftar two months of constant exposure at 140°F. This is equivalent to about eight months of constant liquid (agent) contact. Xylene will permeate the silicone duct in six days at ambient temperature. After drying, Xylene will repermeate the silicone after two days. II.1.2.7 • Eductor-Centrifugal Pump 50-Foot-Long, 2-Inch-Diameter Suction Hose Height of Suction Lift 57 inches 108 inches 16.5 feet Time to Prime (sec) Maximum Fill Rate (gpm) Engine RPM 15.4 17.9 26.0 145 130 125 1000 1000 1000 50-Foot-Long, 3-Inch-Diameter Suction Hose System modification will have to be made to allow connection of 3-inch hose for ground fill - test performed for information only. 'Height of Suction Lift 57 inches 108 inches 16.5 feet II.1.2.8 Maximum Time to Prime (seel Fill Rate 24.4 28.5 41.0 390 390 250 Engine RPM (gpm) 1300 1300 1300 Suction Filling (55-Gallon Drum) These tests were performed using the 50-foot-long, 2-inch-diameter suction hose with the drum probe assembly attached. Approximately one gallon of water was left in each 55-gallon drum when the probe began sucking air. 149 �Maximum Fill Rate (gpm) Time to Prime (sec ) Height of Suction Lift 57 inches 20.0 108 inches 16.5 feet 22.5 27.0 II.1.2.9 Engine RPM 75 70 50' 1000 1000 1000 Air Compressor Engine RPM Time to Fill All Three Air Reservoirs to 128 psig from 0 psicf ( sec ) 283 197 144 120 112 1000 1500 2000 2500 2750 (max ) II.1.2.10 Flowmeters Size Flowmeter (inch) Flow Range (gpm) 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 Indicated Flow (gpm) 0-600 0-600 0-200 0-200 0-60 0-60 0-20 0-20 100 300 : 100 50 41 15 15 1.5 Actual Flow (gpm) 100.977 288.11 100.469 51.311 40.644 15.048 15.128 1.5948 Percent Error 0.97 3.96 0.47 2.62 0.86 0.32 0.85 6.32* II.1.2.11 Emergency Dump, Single 500-Gallon Tank Using 1-inch-diameter vent valve and 84 inches of 1-inch-diameter vent line, time to dump one-half a full tank was 61 seconds. Water was used. * Reading e rror was excessive percentage of error shown. 150 �With the fill cap off, the time to dump one-half a full tank of water was 40 seconds. Using a 2-inch-diameter ball vent valve with 5 feet of 2-inch vent hose, time to dump one-half a full tank of water was 41.7 seconds. Addition of a blower which simulated ram air pressurization of the vent duct (about 6 inches of water pressure) decreased dump time by about 3 seconds. II. 1.2. 12 Emergency Dump, Four 500-Gallon Tanks Four 500-gallon tanks were manifolded into a single 10-inch-diameter duct. Using the 1-inch-diameter vent valves, one-half the agent (water) was dumped in 61 seconds. With the fill caps removed, the tank nearest the dump discharge expelled one-half of its agent (water) in 42 seconds, and the fourth tank (furthest from discharge) expelled one-half of its agent within 48 seconds. The average time was 45 seconds. This test did not include ram air presaurization of the vent system nor the slight vacuum condition in the dump duct, both of which will decrease dump time and will occur during any aircraft flight. II. 1.3 Conclusions All component testing has been successfully completed. With the previously described modifications to the emergency dump system, all system components are expected to equal or exceed the system design requirements. II. 2 CATEGORY I RELIABILITY TESTING RESULTS I I . 2.1 Introduction From 13 May 1970 to 9 June 1970, DTL conducted reliability tests of the following components: • Vent valve with actuator • Nozzle valve • Spray valve with actuator • Dump valve with actuator The context and results of these tests are explained on the Test Information Sheets that follow. Included, also, is an explanation of Standard Component Certification. 151 �II.2.2 Vent Valve Test Information Sheet TEST CATEGORY: COMPONENT OR SYSTEM: Reliability Vent Valve (KcCannaflo 600, 1-inch F602-S3-T ball valve DATE AND TIME TEST INITIATED: DATE AND TIME TEST COMPLETED: TEST OBJECTIVE: with Ramcon 8B-4 (WP) motor actuator). 13 May 1970, 0900 hour's 22 May 1970, 1145 hours The ball vent valve controls venting of the agent reservoirs and operates during filling, pump prime, and spraying. Normal air pressure on the valve is less than 4 feet of water. Test objective is to determine valve cycles to failure or prove active life'is in excess of five years. 5-year life: 15 cycles/mission, 2/missions/day, 5 days/week, 52 weeks/year. Total: 39,000 maximum cycles/5 years. TEST DESCRIPTION: The vent valve with actuator was installed as shown below. Differential air pressure across the valve was 10 psig The valve was opened and closed every 10 seconds by applying 24 Vdc to the Ramcon Actuator using the DTL Electrical Cyclic Tester. TEST RESULTS: The ball valve and motor actuator underwent 39,125 open/close cycles without failure. The ball valve was bubble tight against 10 psig air pressure. TEST CONCLUSIONS: The vent valve assembly will exceed the 5-year life requirement. 152 �II.2.3 Nozzle Vent Test Information Sheet TEST CATEGORY: COMPONENT OR SYSTEM: DATE AND TIME TEST INITIATED: DATE AND TIME TEST COMPLETED: TEST OBJECTIVE: Reliability Nozzle Valve (Spraying Systems No. 12328-NY-3/4, modified) 27 May 1970, 0830 hours 1 June 1970, 1130 hours The nozzle valve is a diaphragm check valve modified to allow pressurization behind the diaphragm, increasing its sealing pressure. Normal air pressure behind the diaphragm valve will be 40 psig. Determine cycles to failure or prove active life is in excess of 5 years. 5-year life: 10 cycles/mission, 2 mission/day, 5 days/week', 52 weeks/year. Total: 26,000 maximum cycles/5 years TEST DESCRIPTION: The nozzle valve was installed as shown below. The water valves were adjusted so that water pressure on the diaphragm was 60 psig with the nozzle valve closed and 20 psig with the nozzle valve open. The nozzle valve was cycled open/closed by applying 24 Vdc to the ASCO 3-way valve using the DTL Electrical Cyclic Tester. Cycles were measured with a digital counter. DTL 7117 DTL 71 HI FAUCET 60 PSI WATER ={X} 90 PS' AIR 60442T ASCu 3 WAY 24 VDC VALVE SS WHIRLJET NOZZLE SPRAYING SYSTEMS 12328 3/4 IMCH HYLON CHECK VALVE 153 �TEST RESULTS: ' A standard nozzle valve was modified to allow air pressure behind the diaphragm and fitted with a 0.025-inch thick silicone-coated glass diaphragm. Air pressure was set at 50 psig. This diaphragm failed at 22,000 cycles due to a sharp edged stainless steel ring inside the valve. The ring was removed (does not degrade valve); all sharp edges which the diaphragm would rub against were broken. In addition, a sealing ridge in the valve bonnet which had partially cut through the diaphragm was removed. A new 0.025-inch-thick silicone diaphragm was fit and testing resumed. The diaphragm failed at 9485 cycles. Inspection of the diaphragm indicated that the glass fabric was powdering due to fatigue. Therefore, glass fabric was eliminated as a design choice. A 0.050-inch-thick Buna-N coated Nylon fabric diaphragm was fitted and testing resumed. Buna-N is not compatible with the MISS agents; the purpose of the test was to fatigue test the diaphragm fabric. The diaphragm pulled away from the edges where it was compressed between the bonnet and valve body. This failure occurred after 200 cycles. The bonnet was replaced with a standard bonnet complete with sealing ridge (machined off on previous bonnet). A 0.025-inch Buna-N coated nylon diaphragm was fitted and testing resumed using 40 psig air pressure. A total of 26,016 cycles was completed without failure. The diaphragm wets removed and visually inspected for damage. Only slight wear was apparent. The final diaphragm will be Fluorosilicone-coated Dacron. TEST CONCLUSIONS: Based on the test with Buna-N coated nylon, the final diapliragm should exceed the 5-year life requirements. Cyclic testing of the Fluorosilicone/Dacron diaphragms will be initiated as soon as they are received by DTL. 154 �II.2.4 Spray Valve Test Information Sheet TEST CATEGORY: COMPONENT OR SYSTEM: DATE AND TIME TEST INITIATED: DATE AND TIME TEST COMPLETED: TEST OBJECTIVE: Reliability Spray Valve (Weco Model 12, 3-inch butterfly valve with Worchester Model C38W pneumatic actuator) 22 May 1970, 1130 hours 27 May 1970, 1420 hours The spray valve is a fully open or fully closed valve which controls agent release to the spray booms. Test objective is to determine cycles to failure or . prove active life is in excess of five years. 5-year life: 10 cycles/mission, 2 missions/day, 5 days/week, 52 weeks/year Total: 26,000 maximum cycles/5 years TEST DESCRIPTION: The spray valve was mounted between 150-pound ASA flanges and mounted to the DTL water lines. Water pressure was 63 psig. The valve was opened and closed by supplying 24 vdc to the solenoid of the Worchester Actuator using the DTL Electrical Cyclic Tester. Cycles -were measured with a digital counter. Air pressure was 100 psig. ^ ORCHESTOft ACTUATOR c c WECO MODEL 12 3 INCH BUTTERFLY ICYCLIC TESTOR ^=<R£fi>"AIR PRESSURE PS I WATER MANUAL VALVE WATER MAIN PRESSURE = 63 PSIG TEST RESULTS: After 12,125 cycles, a slight leakage past the butterfly at the pivot points was noticed. The valve was left closed for two days, and the leakage stopped. At 26,025 cycles, the same leakage was noticed. The ASA 150-pound flanges were retightened, and the leak was reduced to about two drops/minute. 155 �The valve was left closed and mounted for two days. All leakage stopped. The valve was cycled ten times and remained leak-free. Visual inspection showed slight TFE butterfly disc seat wear. TEST CONCLUSIONS: Rapid cycling of the valve (about 12,000 cycles/6 hours) tended to relax the TFE butterfly disc seat seal and allowed slight leakage. After setting for two days, the TFE seat returned to its original sealing position, eliminating all leakage. Cycling the valve an additional ten times did not reproduce the leak. Based on the above, no leakage is expected during a normal 5-year life if the valve will be cycled about 20 times/day. II.2.5 Dump Valve Test Information Sheet TEST CATEGORY: COMPONENT OR SYSTEM: Reliability Dump Valve (Weco Model 12, 4-inch butterfly valve with Model B38N Worchester actuator mounted) DATE AND TIME TEST INITIATED: DATE AND TIME TEST COMPLETED: TEST OBJECTIVE: 2 June 1970, 1115 hours 9 June 1970, 1055 hours The dump valve is a fully open or fully closed valve, which controls release of agent from the tank to the emergency dump line. Agent pressure on butterfly is minimal (only the tank fluid head). Normal air operating pressure is 70 psig. • Test objective is to determine cycles to failure or prove active life is in excess of five years. 5-year life: 2 cycles/mission, 2 missions/day, 5 days/week, 52 weeks/year. Total: 5200 cycles/5 years. TEST DESCRIPTION: The dump valve with actuator was installed as shown below. The butterfly valve was mounted between bolted flanges with the butterfly disc irranersed in water and actuated, using regulated air pressure through a 4-way ASCO solenoid valve. The solenoid valve was actuated by applying 24 Vdc using the DTL Electrical Cyclic Tester. 156 �WORCHESTOR ACTUATOR HOUSE A I R « INCH WE GO BUTTERFLY MOUNTED IN CORROSION WEIGHT ORES FLANGES ASCO it-WAY SOLENOID VALVE TEST RESULTS: Valve would not open at 70 psig but required 110 psig After five cycles, required pressure dropped to 65 psig. Operating pressure was increased to 100 PSI. After 2000 cycles the valve was closed and let stand for 2-1/2 hours, after which 70 psi air was required to actuate (open) the valve. One-hundred psig cycling was continued. After 5500 cycles the valve remained leak tight. Visual inspection indicated no wear. The valve was closed and let set for one day; opening pressure was 72 psig. The valve was closed and let set for six additional days; opening pressure was 78 psig. TEST CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year life requirement has been met and .exceeded. The original actuation pressure of 70 ' -g will have to be increased, as will the or^g-'nal aii eservoir pressure of 100 psig. The air reservoir pressure can be increased to 125 psig maximum (maximum pressure available from the air compressor), and the valve actuator pressure can be increased to 110 psig. Further testing of the dump valve actuation system will be performed during Category I Component Testing, Both the individual valves and the dump system will be tested. Since minimal fluid pressure is seen by the valve, it may be possible to provide a spacer between the duir.p valve and its bolted flanges to allow less compression of the TFE seat, thus reducing the butterfly seating torque. This will not decrease the valve's sealing capabilities for the fluid pressures it will encounter. 157 �II.3 CATEGORY I RELIABILITY RETEST RESULTS II•3.1 Introduction From 14 July 1970 to 23 July 1970, DTL conducted reliability retests of the nozzle"v&lves'-with fluorosilicone diaphragm. The context of these tests are explained in the Test Information Sheets that follow. The final diaphragm configuration was cycled through 38,500 complete open/close cycles without any apparent wear on the components. A life duration of 7.38 years is equivalent to 38,400 cycles. II.3.2 Nozzle Valve Test Information Sheet TEST CATEGORY: COMPONENT OR SYSTEM: Reliability Nozzle Valve (Spraying Systems No. 12328-NY-3/4, modified) 14 July 1970, 1515 hours 23 July 1970, 1440 hours DATE AND TIME TEST INITIATED: DATE AND TIME TEST COMPLETED: TEST OBJECTIVE: Previous testing of the nozzle valve during May 1970 indicated that a glass fabric diaphr." gm v;as not applicable since the fabric powdered due to fatigue. A nylon fabric diaphragm was tested and found to exceed the 5-year life requirement. The nozzle valve was subsequently retested as explained below, using a dacron fabric diaphragm impregnated with Fluorosilicone (necessary for chemical agent compatibility). A 5-year life is represented by a total of 26,000 on/off cycles as follows: 10 cycles/mission, 2 missions/day, 5 days/week, 52 weeks/year. TEST DESCRIPTION: ' * The nozzle valve was installed exactly as was done for the previous tes -ng (see June 1970 Category I Reliability Testing Results). Water pressure on the diaphragm was 60 psig with the valve open (no air pressure behind the diaphragm). Air pressure behind the diaphragm was regulated to 40 psig. TEST RESULTS: A standard Spraying System valve was modified to allow air pressurization behind the diaphragm, and the stainless steel annu?,us insert was removed as was done for previous tests. A Fluorosilicone diaphragm was fitted �and the was the the valve was assembled hand tight. At 6,500 cycles valve was disassembled for inspection. The diaphragm severely cut where the bonnet sealing lip was holding diaphragm in place. The sealing lip was sanded down slightly to reduce the cutting effect, and a new diaphragm was fitted. The valve was reassembled. Testing was resumed and stopped after 27,621 cycles. The valve was disassembled and inspected. The diaphragm was cut at tne bonnet sealing lip. A new valve was modified for air pressure behind the diaphragm, the stainless annulus ring was removed, a new diaphragm was fitted, and testing was resumed. After 5,000 cycles, air was passing through the diaphragm. The diaphragm was again cut et the bonnet sealing lip. The bonnet sealing lip was measured at 0.027-inch high, and *:he standard Spraying Systems diaphragm was measured at 0.027-inch thick. Therefore, it was felt that the bonnet sealing lip should be cut down to 0.015-inch high to try to eliminate diaphragm cutting. A new bonnet was machined for a 0.015-inch high sealing lip. A new diaphragm was fitted and testing resumed. After 5,553 cycles, the test was stopped due to air leakage past the diaphragm. The diaphragm was cut. Aft'sis point it was fej.t that cutting the Fluorosilicone could Ijest be avoided by using the Fluorosilicone diaphragm in front of the standard Spraying Systems diaphragm and using a standard bonnet. This was tried and the test was stopped after 26,120 cycles. No failure was noticed, but the Fluorosilicone diaphragm was cut in one place (due to sealing lip on bonnet). The Spraying Systems diaphragm was uncut. Investigation of the slightly cut Fluorosilicone diaphragm indicated that overtightening of the bonnet clamping bolts was very likely the cause of the cutting. New diaphragms were fitted, the bolts were torqued to 15 in.-lb , and testing was resumed. Testing was stopped after 30,720 cycles. Inspection of the diaphragms showed no cutting, but the Fluorosilicone diaphragm did have impressions of the Spraying Systems diaphragm cloth pattern. Bolt torquing tests were performed and at 10 in.-lb the Fluorosilicone showed no effect; at Is in.-lb , the Fluorosilicone retained impressions of the Spraying Systems diaphragm cloth pattern. 159 �Now diaphragms were fitted to the torqued to 10 in.--lb, and testing was stopped after 38,400 cycles. phragms showed no cutting or wear test valve, the bolts resumed. The test Inspection of the diapoints. CONCLUSIONS^ The Spraying Systems No. 12328-NY-3/4 diaphragm check valves can be successfully used as a MISS wing boom nozzle valve by performing the following modifications: use the Fluorosilicone diaphragm in front of the Spraying System diaphragm; use a standard bonnet modified only to accept air pressurization behind the diaphragm; torque the bolts to 10-12 in.-lb. The standerd bolts should be replaced with the safety-wire-type bolts to prevent the possibility of accidental overtightening. 160 �APPENDIX III STRESS ANALYSIS This appendix contains detailed calculations for the 500-gallon MISS tank and cradle. For analysis of the tie-downs and aircraft external plumbing, refer to each individual aircraft Class II modification documentation. 161 �TANK SIZE AND WEIGHT ASME F&D TAN HEAD I I GA (.078) Ud IN. MAJOR RADIUS 2.88 IK. K I N RADIUS I IN. FLANGE BAFFLE ¥8.0 IN. OUTSIDE DIAMETER X. 14 GA (.078) 9.16 IN. — 52.0 IHCHES -70.38 INCHES OUTSIDE VOLUME: Tank Head - Cylinder 48-inch, 12 gage standard volume including dish and inside corner radius = 38.22 gallons Ours is 48-inch, 16 gage = 38.3 gal/head 52.0 long by 47.844 diameter Add 2 inches for heads flange .. = 54 inches long by 47.844 dia' meter Volume ..() (4'-844)2(54) (4. 329 * Vol Total Volume . 420.05 2 heads @ 38.3 = 76.6 i cylinder @ 420.05 496.65 Total Volume = 496.65 gallons AGENT WEIGHT: SG = 1.0, Tank Pull, (496.65) (1) (8.34) = 4142 Agent Weight = 4142 pounds SG =l.o' 162 �WEIGHT Tank Ends Based on 48-inch, 12 gage (.109) with 2-inch flange »" 74.9 pounds Less 1-inch flange ( ) (H) (48^.109) 1 (.109) (.28) « 4.59 76.31 We have .078- inch thick, not .109 ,0 Cylinder Total mo ~ (70.31) « 50.31 pounds each 52 inches long (H) (48-.078) (52) ( 0 8 (.28) * 170.9 .7) 2 each tank ends @ 50.31 * 100.62 1 each cylinder 170.9 271.52 Bare Tank Weight = 271.52 TANK & CRADLE ASSEMBLY WEIGHT Tank 1 each Baffle 15.0 1 each Tank Complete 271.52 1 each Cap, Wisco 0.5 1 each Filler Neck, Wisco 0.5 1 each Valve, Ball, Raincon Motor Driven 8.5 1 each Valve, 4-inch Butterfly, Weco w/Pneu Act 9.0 2 each Flange, 4-inch @ 8.25 16.5 1 each Tube, 4-inch OD x .065 wall 1.86 2 each Ferrule, 3-inch, Laddish @ .43 0.86 2 each Elbow, 3-inch Laddish @ 2.0 4.0 4 each Tri Clamp, Laddish, 3-inch @ 0.5 2.0 4 each Gasket, Laddish @ 0.5 0.1 2 each Elbow, 90°, 3-inch Tube @ 3.06 2 each Elbow, 45°, 3-inch Tube @ 1.7.7 1.54 1.3 feet Tube, 3-inch 2.80 1 each Float, Level Indicator, Pneumercator 5. CO (est) 1 each Float Mounting Hardware ?.oo (est) 1 each Miscellaneous Weld Rod, Electric Wire, Hardware 2C.OO (est) TOTAL TANK ASSY 365.74 pounds 163 �Cradle New (final) cradle 144 inches 88 inches. 61 inches" 164 inches" 80 inches 160 inches 200 inches 165 inches: 292 inches' 252 inches 4 each 4 4 4 1 2 2 4 4 1 1 1 1 each each each each each each each each each each each each 22.27 Angle 4 x 2-1/2 x 1/4 £ 1.856 Ib/ft 14.57 Angle 4 x 3 x 1/4 @ 1.988 Ib/ft , 5.97 Sheet .190 x 4 x 80" i .098 Ib/in, Sheet .190 x 8 x 54" @ .098 lb/inj 16.07 (2 each) 8.53 Angle 3 x 3 x 3/16 @ 1.28. Ib/ft Angle 1-1/2 x 1-1/2 x 1/8 @ .42 Ib/ft 5.59 (8 pieces 20" long) Angle 1-1/2 x 1-1/2 x 1/8 @ .42 Ib/ft 6.99 (8 pieces 25" long) , 16.17 Sheet 1/8 @ .098 Ib/in-^ Sheet 3/16 @ .098 lb/in4 28.62 48.72 Channel 5[2.32 @ 2.32 Ib/ft Castor, Darnell @ 3.18 12.70 6.24 Strap Assy, Marman @ 3.12 Pivot Block @ 2.9 11.60 Ball Lbk Pins, Carr Lane @ .12 0.50 Lot Aluminum Weld Rod 5356 8.0 0.2 Padding, Strap @ 0.1 Jack, Marvel @ 5.0 10.0 Corner Block @ 4.0 16.0 Eye Bolts, @ 4.0 16.0 Lot Paint 10.0 Electric Box, Elco 5. Electric Harness Assy 5. Lot Electric Wiring & Misc _ 5. TOTAL CRADLE 279.78 pounds TOTAL CRADLE ASSEMBLY =279^78 pounds DRY TOTAL TANK & CRADLE ASSEMBLIES = 645.52 pounds WET TOTAL TANK & CRADLE ASSEMBLIES = 4788 pounds Full SG = 1.0 agent 164 �TANK HEAD STRENGTH P = U.OoDJU A 6'&e where A V*. T U . J. t (Pressed Metal Handbook) __ «. i rt pg. -4A-10 P = Design pressure (psi) (Maximum working pressure) t = Wall thickness (inch) * 0.078 S = Maximum allow _e stress (psi) » 16,000 psi (200°F) page 2A-8f 304ss L - Inside crown radius (inch) 48.0 Pmax (.885)(J8T+ (0.1)(.078) T 29.37 psi Maximum loading Pressure = (8g)(Fluid Head Pressure) Fluid Head Pressure = "£%«"• (-433 if » n^ = 2 «526 psi Maximum Loading Pressure = (8) (2.526) Maximum Loading Pressure =20.21 psi Safety factor on working stress ©r working pressure §F = 1.45 on working stress (ASME) which has SF = 4 on material stress 165 �TANK HEAD BUTT WELD STRENGTH where S = Maximum allowable stress t = Wall thickness E = Joint efficiency (single butt weld without backing strip) R = Tank radius _ _ _ (2) (16,000) (.078) (.6) F Pmax « 62.40 psi Maximum Loading Pressure = 20.21 psi S.F. = 3.09 on working pressure TANK SHELL STRENGTH (INCLUDING LONG. WELD) Pmax = S E t R = = = = P max "" S^ T E +0 (Pressed Metals Handbook, pg. 2A-18) Maximum allowable working stress 60% joint efficiency Wall thickness 14 gage (.078) Radius (16,000) (.0.78) 24 + (.6) (.078) Pmax = 31.14 psi Maximum Loading Pressure - 20.21 psi (8g forward - pressure § forward tank end) S.F. = 1.54 on working pressure 166 �TANK SLOSH PLATE 750 INCH DIAMETER HOLES, 1-1/2 INCH CENTERS 221 OPEN TOTAL WEIGHT = 15 IB Pressure: Assume tank 1/2 full sg = 2.0 agent at 8 g's, full 35" head is seen by baffle plate. p = (§ ( . 433 () ! (2) (8g) Pmax = 20.21 psi Stress: For a 30" radius curved plate PR _ (20.21) (30) t ~ r .078 w •w a = 7773 psi 167 (14 gage-.078 thick) Assume �The perforated plate appears like .0 o o o oo LTD o o 2.60 IN. .75 IN. -J Cross sectional area is reduced by .75-0 inch in 2.60 inches which is 28.8% decrease in area or 71% the cross section area of a solid plate. Stress concentration: Approximate like 1.5 IN. Fron Shigley page 613, Kfc » 2.18 Therefore, a <7773 23,866 psi For 304ss, SF = Noto: o viri 30 23.886 3 kpsi minimum S.F. = 1.26 This is conservative since full 8g fluid head will never be :;ocii by the baffle plate. 168 �TANK/CRADLE INTERFACE Tank (full sg - 1.0) « 4493 pounds (page 1 & 2) Maximum Down Load Factor = 4.5g (normal and crash) Maximum Forward Load Factor = 8.0g (crash). [3g normal! Maximum Up Load Factor = 3.0g (normal) Maximum Side Load Factor = 1.5g (normal & crash) Then, loading of tank is as follows: t 67HO LB (35,9*4) (35,944) 6740 LB FORWARD (OR LATERAL DEPEND I Hi OK AIRCRAFT) 13,479 LB 35,944 LB 20,219 LB 169 �Vertical Load per Strap = 13,479/4 = 3370 pounds per strap 1,685 LB Strap is : MBB90857 .080 thick 301 Cres 1/4 Hard. 3/8 - 24 bolt (9350 yield) 431 Cres Minimum Band Yield Strength 12,000 pounds (page 45, Aeroquip 821-A) qp - ^,000 SF ~ 1685 S.F. = 7.12 yield HORIZONTAL FORWARD LOADING Tank is prevented from slipping by interference at the lower tank supports 170 �1 F (STRAP t^AD) 35,944 13.0 IN. 35,W L8 AT 89 CRASH f II.0 EM. * 0 A 4-30.5 IN. (F)(30.5) =(35,944)(13.0) F » 15,320 Strap Strength = £ » 7660 pounds SF = 12000 7660 S.P. « 1.57 Load/bolt = 7660 pounds Bolt strength = 9350 yield S.P. = 1.22 171 �HORIZONTAL LOAD BEARING Load/bearing pad 35944 17,972'pounds 17,972 THICK H- &S BOTH SIDCS OF CRADLE WEB. BOTH SIDES OF TANK. 1 U.O ALL DIMENSIONS IN INCHES Weld Shear Total of 10" v/eld fillet 1/8 fillet Shear area = (10)(.125) = 1.25 inches 304ss ° yield = 30 kpsi e yield ».15 kpsi (1.25)(15 kpsi) = 18,750 pounds yield S.F. yield = 1.04 crash conditions 172 �7ANK TEAROUT I • 17,972 LB - -- r V ^ - ,„. hi 1 «- 2.0 -J 0.190 ALL DIMENSIONS IN INCHES Moment = (17,942) (.190) = 3408 in-lb $ l.< F = i p = 1704 pounds z Weld Shear: 4" weld 1/8 fillet A = (4) (.125) = 0.50 in2 (15K)(0.50) - 7500 pounds maximum load 7500 SF . , , =» 4.4 @ Crash Condition yield Skin Tear Out: 4" long x .078 wall = .312 in2 (.312) (15K) = 4.68K SF = 4'68K SF . , , = 2.75 @ Crash Condition NOTK: All these calculations are based on conservative assumption that no friction exists at the pads. 173 �I.ATKRAL LOADING Assume like: 17,972 SAME STRAP LOADS IF TANX PIVOTS AT BOTTOM 17,972 2 Straps at 8986 Strap Force = 8986 SF = ^QOPA f • SF « 1.33 @ 8g crash 8986 yield Bolt Force = 8986 SF = , SF = 1.04 e 8g crash yield _ 174 �STRAP BOLT ATTACHMENT TWO !/>» INCH GUSSETS IK LIKE WITH OUTSIDE GUSSETS TANGENT TO .190 IN. THICK TANK LOWER WEB SUPPORT BOTH GUSSETS 5086-H32 -I/if 0.75 IN. l»— 1.50 —*l INCH Shear: Area = 7" of 1/4" fillet weld + 3/4" 5083-HO (welded) Area Weld « ( 7 . 0 ) ( . 7 0 7 ) ( . 2 5 ) = 1.24 Area Plate = (1.5) (.75) = 1.13 Allowable Load - (1.2.4) ( 3 . 5 K ) + ( 1 . 1 3 ) ( 8 K ) t 6061-TO e yield =• 13,380 pounds t 5086-HO e yield Actual Load = 8987 S.F. = 1.4 on yield, @ 8g crash 175 �PLATE BENDING 6986 i 1.0 INCH ASSUME ENDS FIXED *J M (maximum) = 1/8 WL = (1/8) (8986) (1.0) M (maximum) = 1123 in-lb « (2.0 - . 5 ) (.75)3 Stress Concentration K=2.0 (Page 613 Shigley) n - v®L = (2.0) (1123) (.375) I .0527 a = 15,981 Material is 5086-H112, o. = 16K SF = 1.001 on 8g crash yield 176 �A.\GLK SUPPORTS 6986 LB I I I II 38' I 1/2 x 1/8 5086- F cos 34° + F_ cos 45° + Fr cos 38° = 8986 pounds A B v, F Pi x ;83 + F0 x .707 + F_x.787 - 8986 pounds V- B Assume load split evenly between the 3 members .*. Load/Member 8986 = 2995 pounds Worst Member is @ 45' .*. Load = 2995 Load = 4237 pounds 177 �Tension: A = 0.36 in2 o = 11,769 psi 5086-H112 o . ,, = 14 kpsi minimum (HO condition) SF = 1.19 @ 8g crash yield CRADLE STRUCTURE - 8G SIDE LOADING 35.9H1 18 REACTION 4 x 2 - 1 / 2 ANGLE 35,91(4 LB f II' i- 4; ;•i r < F2 1 ^ F ,/-* = 691 L B / I H . H< i 1 F 3 .52 IN »- 69 IN. • 5528 LB J*Rs* 4.0 IN. 15.0 IN. 7.0 IN. 0, (5528) (4) = (15) = 1474 pounds 16,497 pounds 178 �Beam fixed at paints F,, F,,'F'3, and F4. Find beam failure point between F~ and F~. x 2-1/2 x \h IM. 0.190 IN. .643 IK. Angle: AA = 1.58 in2, I =0.81 Nt Axis @ 0.57 Plate: Area = (.190) (4.5) = 0,855 in2 Nt Axis @ 1.3T- IM00 = 0 (1.58)(0.57) + (.855) (1.35) = y (2.435) y « 0.843 Angle I— = 0.81 -f (1.58) (.843 - .57)2 = .9277 179 �Plate I-- = () (2.3)3 ' * <-855)-(.843 - .775)2 * 0.3729 Distance between supports =29.0 For beam in uniform loading of moment in center of beam * 691 Ib/in with fixed ends, * '(Jr) (691> ^29) 2 \ax = 24'213 My , »._i in lb - - = (24.213K)(1.8) £-_ o max = 33,527 kpsi Material is 5086-H111 extrusion °ult = 36 kpsi SPult =1.07 8g crash . This is conservative since the tank was considered to add no strength. 180 �STRENGTH AT SUPPORTS I/I IN. GUSIFT 16,917 IB 8G CRASH 1-1/2 x l - t / 2 x 6086-HIII Shear: Cannot shear since load puts 1-1/2 x 1-1/2 x 1/8 angle plus 1/8 sheet in tension. Tension: Length of 1/8-inch plate needed to hold 16,947 pounds. 0= A A= o 'Lmin Sheet is 5086-H32 , . . _ . _ 16,947 °ult = 4°kpS1' min ~ (40K)(.125) L . =3.38 inches Tnin _ . Obviously strong enough 181 �LONGITUDINAL BEAM BENDING The tank support chalks.can be considered rigid members. • 1 6 , 9 4 7 LB Assume load is carried equally by all four longitudinal members, This is conservative since cross-bracing structures actually distribute load. W = 16,947 K- 60 ALL DIMCHSIOKS IN where "S" is summary of all INCHES four longitudinal beams s =. i/y Upper beams : S = Y~QQ Lower beams : x 2= I-44 S = (3.00) (2) =6.00 in 182 �0 sa (16947)(18) 7 . 44 . o » 41 kpsi . °ult *40 This is okay since cross-bracing and friction forces were neglected. DOWNWARD G LOADING- Two cradle straps -2Fcos 32° = 20419 F = 20419 (4TU8477 6026 pounds Assume 1/8 x 8 belly strap must support total 6026 pounds Tension: o - A = T8TT1/8) ! • o = 6026 psi °yld = 2S kpsi SF = 4.6 Entire chalk structure is overly strong. 183 �TIE-DOWN LOADS 32,010 -»» 10,330 Maximum loads as determined by aero tie-downs: TOP 17,620 SIDE VERTICAL COLUMN Compressure load = 17/520 pounds _ For pinned ends - (20). ^ (17, 520) -• ( n 2 ) ( l 0 . 3 - x 106) I , mm °-0546 Beam is 3 x 3 x 3/16 < Imih =0.38 SF = 7.60 134 �Convpressure Stress = x^bft 16 222 * Psi ' SF - 18 Yl* comp. SF = i:n y j eld •" "" '" END Tensile Load = 32,010 pounds 4 x 3 x 1/4angle A = 1.69 o » 18,940 psi 01 v SF s 1^7910- ' SF - 1 . 1 1 yld LONGITUDINAL BEAMS 4 x 2-1/2 x 1/2 angle SIE; = 21 F75T . A - 1.58 . SF » 3.21 yield 185 ' " �WELD SHEAR (END ANGLE) To break the weld, block must pull out of corner. Weld length in shear =2.75 + 4.25 + 2.25 +3.5 Shear length •» 12.75 inches 1/4 Fillet e'ult • 21 kpsi Strength = (.707)(.25)(12.75)(21K) ~ 47,320 pounds Maximum load = 32,010 SF - 1.47 ult (crash @ 3g) x 3 x (/<( IN. 5086 I/"» FILLET WF.LO EH0 ANGLE TO CLOCK, THEN WELD L O N G I T U D I N A L ANflLE TO BLOCK AND ENb ANGLE * x 3 x i/x IN. /» 5086 CUT TO 1 x 2 1/7. x I / I OR STO U x 3 x 1/4 IF AVAILABLE 186 �CORNER BLOCK DETAIL MUST HAVE FUSION OF ALL 3 PARTS EQUAL TO lh FILLET TOP VIW SIDE VIEW /'/ / / rl. •I ll il H II / /'. \l I / o / / / / / 187 / / / / / / I-8UHC-28 3 |M. BEEP TYP C' BORE .675 DEEP TYP �EYE BOLTS Use 3014T shoulder eye bolt 1-inch shank, 1-8UNC-2A thread,, 2-1/2-inch shank. Macarco, Ult load = 40,000 pounds If the maximum load imposed is vector sum of maximum component loads, • • • • • . ' • Maximum load = 37,924 pounds SF = 1.054 ult This is conservative since more than one tie-down will be used for the maximum load condition. Also, maximum normal load = 3/8 crash load. THREAD SHEAR ' Thread is 1-8UNC-2B Engagement - 1.90 inches minimum Shear area » (J|)(n)(50%)(1.90) = 2.794 in2 Material is 5868H32 ' cult = 25 kpsi Maximum load permissible = 69,850 pounds SF = 1.84 ult 188 • �INITIAL DISTRIBUTION AF3C CSDHM) 1 HOS USAF (AFXOWO) 1 HOS USAF (KDPA) 1 HOS USAF (SAFKDE1 1 ASD (ENYS) 1 TAG CDORO) ,1 AUL (AUL-LSE-70-239) • 1 TECH INFO (ARPA) ' 1 DDRSE (TECH LIB) .'X DDR6E (OEM TECH) 1 SMUEA-TS-L (TECH'LIB) 2SHJEA-D 1 USA ENGR RSD LABS . • '2 USNWC (TECH LIB) 2 USN WEAPONS LAB (TECH LIB) ; 1 DESERET TEST CTR (TECH LIB) 4 DTC-STEPD-TC-AFLO 1 USA COMBAT DEVCOMD (CSGSB-ST) 1 DDC 2 AMCRD-WB 5 : VJRAMA (MMCTB) 2 OOAMA (MMNOP) HQ PACAF (IGY) DL DLOSL DLIF ' 1 1 1 2 1 189 ' (The reverse of this page is blank) �UNCIASSTFIED • Srcunt* DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA -ft& 0 lj Ho* »f ( I , fcorf,D> «l»in<.t( II, OMIC.IMA IIN«i- AC t*»Y» V (C<U|»nfr* UNCLASSIFIED Corporation/Defense Technology Laboratories P. 0, Box 1201, 333 Brokaw Road San Jose, California 95108 1 . CHOW* * IW-5/A MODULAR INTERNAL SPRAY SYSTEM « oucniPfive NOTcsfTyp* »t r*pw( Mdinchnlw <fa>*«> Final Report - July 1969 to September 1 7 91 » AuTM6Rts7ffiratn«Mr,«M4dl< Larry R, Ramsauer 1 HEPORT D A T E ' . 194 **. C Q N T R A C t OR ^RAMT NO. AFATL-TR-72-13 r-1 on '- Task No. OS „ Work Unit No. 000 NUU«C<«I| OMIOINA1OR-I F08635-69-C-0213 fc. PBOJEC T NO. lib. HO.'or i >«. T O T A L wo. or PACE* January 1972 ' OIH CR REPORT NCfS) lAnf aUtft nu«b«» AMI «t^r *• M«l«Mff AFATL-TR-72-13 |O. pISTOIBUTIOM S T A T E M E N T Distribution limited to U. S. Government agencies only; this report documents test and evaluation; distribution limitation applied January^ 1972 . Other requests for this document must be referred to the Air Force Armament Laboiatory (DLIF), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida 32542. II. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Available in DDC 12- SPONSORING Mlt.lt A R V A C T I V I T V Air Force Armament Laboratory Air Force Systems Command Eglin Air Force Basc,^ Florida. 52542 The PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System has been designed and developed to fit ten cargo/utility-type aircraft, including the C-47, C-54, C-123, and C-130. The system was designed to disseminate herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers in cher.ical solution, suspension or slurry form, at ground deposition rates-from 3 ounces/acre to 3 gallons/acre with a minimum swath width of 2 times tha applicable aircraft wing span. The system is completely self-supporting, requiring no aircraft power/ and includes provisions for suction filling, agent recirculation/agitation, dissemination, system flushing, aircraft wasMown, and emergency dumping of the full agent payload. The system used aerospace adhesive to secure all external hardware, allowing system installation with minimal aircraft modification. A complete C-123K MISS was installed and flight tested at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The system was subjected to the complete flight envelope and functioned as designed. Flight- test results indicated that manual operation of the emergency dump took too long to initiate. Also, the dump chute should be moved to the aft portion of the jump door to minimize emergency dump contamination and the right-hand fuselage spray station should be capped off to eliminate fuselage spray contamination. DO, UNCLASSIFIED Security Cl*ssificatiM« �•Sceuii'y CU«tiflc»tion ^ • V4. LINK A K f V WOKO* NOLI Modular Internal Spray System Modular System Aircraft Spray Dissemination Herbicide Dissemination Pesticide Dissemination Fertilizer Dissemination Aircraft Modular System Internal Spray Tanks Cargo Aircraft Spray System Utility Aircraft Spray System •T . - ' . " . LINK C LINK t NOLI ROLC WT • I - ' :• .• • • - UNCLASSIFIED Security C'lassifiCi •TT ��80X7 UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED PLEASE DO NOT RETURN THIS DOCUMENT TO DTIC EACH ACTIVITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DESTRUCTION OF THIS DOCUMENT ACCORDING TO APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 026 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0379 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ramsauer, Larry R. Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>Defense Technology Laboratories, FMC Corporation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972-01-01 Title A name given to the resource PWU-5/A Modular Internal Spray System Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide application https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/1315041a21c910eaaa5eb001942c60a0.pdf dd86b9720e49a795f08aaf172cf6baa3 PDF Text Text Item ID Number ou354 Author Corporate Author U -S- Army Test and Evaluation Command, U.S. Army Av Report/Article Title Report of Test USATECOM Project Numbers 5-4-3001 01 and -02, Integrated Engineering/Service Test of an Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force, Part I - Service Test Journal/Book Title Year 1965 Month/Day Ma Color Number of Images y 25 D 52 ^'vin ^- Young had this item filed under the category "Equipment - How Developed, How Used"; DA Project No. 1C543603D432; USATECOM Project No. 5-43001-02 Monday, January 29, 2001 Page 354 of 382 �6 UNCLASSIFIED Project w». t 5-q- jooc owd - ox Terf" Defense Documentation Center Defense Logistics Agency Cameron Station • Alexandria, Virginia UNCLASSIFIED �-•••.• • , . . . . - • . • . » -•-••••_ ' •• : •.' ..v. •'•-!;•;••'•.•.!'.'•• • - • - . - ; > • ' : • * .i.-:'/j:f,\--;: J;"v,."^;r.-:>' "'.i/i-';"^'^,!^ ::: :; '.$•. '-vV^^-'. "?V.''t'^'t^'fi" ;. '^: ' �K REPORT OV TEST PROJECT NUMBERS 5-4-3001-01 «nd -02 INTEGRATED ENGINEERINC/SERVICE TEST OF AN INTERIM DEFOLIANT SYSTEM CONDUCTED JOINTLY BY THE US ARMY AND US A» FORCE PART I - SERVICE TEST. USATECOM PROJECT NO. «-4-30<H-0? PA PROJECT NO. !CS43(>0-iD432 28MAY1S55 Jli U S ARMY AVIATION TEST BOARD FORT RUCKER, ALABAMA TIS A ' �NOTICE: Hher government or other drawings, specifications or other data are used for any purpose other than in connection with a definitely related government procurement operation, the U. S. Government thereby incurs no responsibility, nor any obligation •whatsoever; and the fact that the Government nay have formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other data is not to be regarded by implication or othervise as In any manner licensing the bolder or any other person or corporation, or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use or sell any patented Invention that may in any way be related thereto. �COPY DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HEADQUARTERS, US ARMY TEST AND EVALUATION COMMAND Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005 AMSTE-NB 17 Jun 1965 SUBJECT: Final Report of ES Test of an Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by U. S. Army and U. S. Air Force, USATECOM Project 5-4-3001-01/02, DA Project 1B543603D432 TO: Commanding General, U. S. Army Materiel Command, ATTN: AMCPM-AI, Washington, D. C. 20315 Commanding General, U. S. Army Combat Developments Command, ATTN: USACDC LnO. USATECOM, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. 21005 1. References: a. Report of Test Project 5-4-3001-01/02, ES Test of Interim Defoliant System, Conducted Jointly by U. S. Army and U. S. Air Force Parti, Service Test, USATECOM Project 5-4-3001-02, 28 May 1965, U. S. Army Aviation Test Board. (Incl 1). b. Appendix n to above, classified CONFIDENTIAL. (Incl 2) c. Final Report of ES Test of Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by U. S. Army and U. S. Air Force, Part n, Physical and Climatic Tests, USATECOM Project 5-4-3001-01, May 1965, Dugway Proving Ground. (Incl 3) d. Final Report of ES Test of Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by U. S. Army and U. S. Air Force, Part IH, Dissemination Tests, May 1965, Dugway Proving Ground, classified CONFIDENTIAL. (Incl 4) COPY �£OP Y ' AMSTE-NB 17 Jun 1965 SUBJECT; Final Report of ES Test of an Interim Defoliant System ' Conducted Jointly by U. S. Army and U. S. Air Force, I USATECOM Project 5-4-3001-01/02, DA Project 1B543603D432 2. The final report consisting of three parts, reference 1, has been reviewed by this Headquarters and the USA TECOM evaluation of the Interim Defoliant System is as stated in the following paragraphs. 3. Tanks were filled using gravity flow from 55 gallon drums in . the absence of standard filling equipment. It is not expected that the use of hand pump (FSN 4930-255-9132) wil1 create any problems. 4. Standardized ground equipment of the type necessary for handling and mounting the spray tank did not exist in the Army inventory at the time of this ES test. 5. The maintenance package, which consisted of Review Manuscripts MP 3-1040-240-12 and -20P, was evaluated and considered unsuitable. The system was not operated long enough to give adequate data for determination of the spare parts list requirements. 6. Two (2) deficiencies were found during engineering and service tests, as follows: a. Rupture of forward coupling hose during a high internal pressure condition. b. Rupture of rear coupling hose during a high internal pressure condition. Corrective modifications were incorporated into the systems prior to their delivery to U. S. Air Force for the service test. 7. The system, as tested, complied with the operational characteristics of the approved SDR, except for reliability. 8. The modifications incorporated in the Defoliant Systems delivered to the U. S. Air Force for their service test should correct the 2 COPY �CO£Y_ AMSTE-NB 17 Jun 1965 SUBJECT: Final Report of ES Teat of.an Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by U. S. Army and U. S. Air Force, USATECOM Project 5-4-3001-01/C2, DA Project 1B543603D432 deficiencies and shortcomings found in this test. The U. S. Air Force testing should be monitored closely to determine the suitability of these corrections and to compile data to complete the maintenance package, to evaluate agent transfer equipment and system reliability. The requirement for a confirmatory or check test should be determined after results of U.S. Air Force testing has been evaluated. 9. Conclusions: a. The interim defeliant system should be suitable for Army use on the armed OV-1C Airplane after the deficiencies and shortcomings have been corrected. b. The interim defeliant system was found to be compatible with the armed OV-1C Airplane.. c. The flight time alloted for the service and dissemination tests was insufficient to determine adequately the reliability and life of the system and to compile an adequate spare parts list. 10. It is recommended that: a. Provided that the reliability requirement is achieved, the interim defeliant system, modified to correct the deficiencies and shortcomings, be considered suitable for Army use on the armed OV-1C Airplane. COPY �COPY_ b. The results of the U. S. Air Force serivce test of the modified system be reviewed to determine any requirement for further Army testing. c. The Review Manuscripts MP 3-1040-240-12 and-20P should be revised prior to production procurement of the interim defoliant system. i . , , . •_: :, ,.-.. .: , FOR THE COMMANDER: r 4 Incls as USANC - 5 cys of each Incl USA CDC - 10 cys of each Incl .;..:•. i Copies furnished: OLIVER H. ASPINWALL, JR. Capt, AGC Asst Admin Officer CO, USAMC, ATTN: AMCRD-DB (w/1 cy of each Incl) CO, USAMUCOM (w/1 cy of each Incl) CO, USA Edgewood Arsenal (w/5 cy of each Incl) CO, DPG (w/o Incls) Pres, USAAVNNTED (w/0 Incls) 4 COPY �DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY UNITED STATES ARMY AVIATION TEST BOARD "Fort Rucker, Alabama 36362 REPORT OF TEST USATECOM PROJECT NUMBERS S-4-3001-01 and -02 INTEGRATED ENGINEERING/SERVICE TEST V 'OF AN INTERIM DEFOLIANT SYSTEM CONDUCTED JOINTLY BY THE "US ARMY AND US AIR FORCE PART I - SERVICE TEST. USATECOM PROJECT NO. 5-4-3001-02 DA PROJECT NO. 1C543603D432 DDC AVAILABILITY NOTICE US Government agencies may obtain copies of this report directly from DDC. Other qualified DDG users shall request through Commanding General, US Army Materiel Command, ATTN: AMCPM-MO, Washington D.C. 20315. l Bf niff.nwi QtJABTEBS PENDING Colonel, Artillery President �I Previous page was blank, therefore not filmed. I �I Previous page was blank, therefore not filmed. [ ABSTRACT This report on the Integrated Engineering /Service Test of the Interim Defoliant System consists of three parts. Dugway Proving Ground is responsible for the Physical Test and the Dissemination Test, and reports of these tests will be submitted later. The Service Test of the Interim Defoliant System on the armed OV-1C was conducted by the USAAVNTBD at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, during the period 14 September through 6 October 1964. Two deficiencies and three shortcomings were found during this test. It was concluded that the interim defoliant system should be suitable for Army use after correction of the deficiencies and shortcomings, that the system was compatible with the armed OV-1C Airplane, that the Review Manuscripts MP 31040-240-12 and -20P should be revised prior to production procurement of the system, and that the time allotted for test was insufficient to compile an adequate spare parts list. It was recommended that the interim defoliant system be considered suitable for Army use on the armed OV-1C when the deficiencies and shortcomings are corrected and that the results of the US Air Force service test be reviewed to determine any requirement for further Army testing. �previous page was blank, therefore not filmed. I DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY UNITED STATES ARMY AVIATION TEST BOARD Fort Rucker, Alabama 36362 REPORT OF TEST PART I - SERVICE TEST OF AN INTERIM DEFOLIANT SYSTEM Table of Contents Page No. SECTION 1 - GENERAL 1. 1, 1.2. 1. 3. 1.4. 1.5. 1. 6. 1.7. 1.8. 1.9. 1. 10. . References Authority Test Objectives Responsibilities Description of Materiel Background Findings Discussion Conclusions Recommendations , SECTION 2 - DETAILS AND RESULTS OF SUBTESTS . . . 2.0. 2.1. 2. 2. 2.3. 2.4. Introduction. . . Installation Requirements Flight Safety Aspects and Dimension Data . . . Operational Data. ; . . . . . Rocket and Machine-Gun Firing During Spray Operation 2.5. Servicing Requirements . 2. 6. Evaluation of Safety Aspects. • vii 1 1 2 2 3 3 8 9 16 16 16 17 19 19 20 21 22 25 26 �Table of Contents (Continued) Page No. SECTION 3 - APPENDICES 27 I. Test Data IL Comparison with the SDR (Classified CONFIDENTIAL: presented under separate cover) m. Deficiencies and Shortcomings IV. Detailed Description of Materiel V. Coordination VI. Distribution List viii l-l II>1 III-l IV-1 V-l VI-1 �SECTION 1 - GENERAL 1.1. REFERENCES. a. Letter, STEDP-CB, Headquarters, Dugway Proving Ground, 20 February 1964, subject: "Dugway Proving Ground Test Plan . ... (OPGTP) C 432, Integrated Engineering/Service Test of an Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by the US Army and US Air Force, USATECOM Project No. 5-4-3001-01 and -02, " with one inclosure. b. Letter, AM3TE-NBC, Headquarters, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, 30 March 1964, subject: "Test Directive, USATECOM Project No. 5-4-3001-03, ED Test of Interim Defoliant System for OV-1 Mohawk, " with two inclosures. c. Letter, CDCMR-U, Headquarters, US Army Comb&t Developments Command, 4 May 1964, subject: "Department of the Army (DA) Approved Small Development Requirement (SDR) for an Interim Defoliant System, " with o n e inclosure. ••• " d. Letter, AMCRD-SR, Headquarters, US Army Materiel Command, 25 May 1964, subject: "Department of the Army (DA) Approved Small Development Requirement (SDR) for an Interim Defoliant System." e. Letter, AMSTE-NBC, Headquarters, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, 19 June 1964, subject: "Engineering/Service Test of Interim Defoliant System, USATECOM Project No. 5-4-3001-00. " f. Review Manuscript, MP 3-1040-240-12, "Operator and Organizational Maintenance Manual, Spray Tank, Biological, Airplane, E44 (End Item Code 958)," Department of the Army, June 1964, as corrected 8 September 1964. g. Summary Report 64-10, "Automatic Spot Counter and Sixer, " Dugway Proving Ground, July 1964. h. Letter, BUWEPS RAAD-131/14: CMM, 31 August 1964, subject: "Model OV-1 Aircraft - Recommended Flight Operating Limitations (Armament Aircraft); Revision to. " �i. Review Manuscript, MP 3-1040-240-20P, "Organizational Maintenance Repair Parts and Special Tools Lasts for Spray Tank, Biological, Airplane, E44, (FSN ), (End Item Code 958), " Department of the Army. 1.2. 1.2. 1. Directive. . , Letter, AMSTE-BG, Headquarters, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, 10 December 1963, subject: "Directive for Conducting an Integrated Engineering /Service Test of an Interim Defoliant System for the OV-1 (Mohawk) Aircraft Jointly with the US Air Force, USATECOM Project No. 5-4-3001-00," as amended 30 January 1964. 1. 2. 2. Purpose. To determine the suitability of the interim defoliant system on the OV-1 (Mohawk) for the purpose of recommending type classification. 1. 3. TEST OBJECTIVES. 1.3.1. Primary. To determine whether the performance, reliability, maintenance requirements, and suitability of the Army Interim Defoliant System for the OV-1 (Mohawk) Aircraft meet the SDR. 1.3.2. Secondary. 1. 3. 2.1. To determine whether the interim defoliant system will interfere with the defensive capability of the OV-1 armed with machine guns and rocket subsystems and whether the use of such systems will adversely affect the spray tanks. 1.3. 2. 2. To obtain data for prediction of contamination densities and area coverages for a variety of release heights and wind velocities. �1.4. : RESPONSIBILITIES. . 1.4. 1. Dugway Proving Ground. , . -L •" • . \ ' ' ^' I—• : .Dugway Proving Ground was responsible for: 1.4.1.1. Consolidating and coordinating the plan of teat. ',<••, • '' 1.4.1.2. Providing support for the Service Test accomplished at Dugway Proving Ground. , ; : 1.4. 1. 3. Conducting the Physical and Dissemination Testa. 1.4,1.4. Providing a representative to monitor the Climatic Test conducted by the US Air Force for the US Army. * -, : .v 1.4. i.5. Providing USATECOM with part IE, Physical Te«t (to include US Air Force Climatic Test) and part m, Dissemination Test, of the report of test. ; • . _ ' • • " * • • . 1 *4'2' " US Arm • ' • . - • • . - ' - - • - ' - y Aviation Test Board (USA.AVNTBD). The USAAVNTBD was responsible for: 1.4.2. 1. Providing support for, and participating in, the Dissemination Test accomplished at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah. 1. 4. 2. 2. Conducting the Service Test. 1.4. 2. 3. Providing USATECOM with part I, Service Test, of the report of test. 1.4.3. US Army Biological Laboratories. The US Army Biological L/aboratorieB were responuible for providing the defoliant system for all tests. 1.5. DESCRIPTION OF MATERjEL. The defoliant system consists of two E-44 biological onvay tanko designed to epray chemical agents from an rirplane fitted for external wing stores. The system was installed on an armed OV-1C Airplane. A detailed description is contained in appendix IV. �Figure 1. Nose-cone section with four-bladed ram-air drive turbine. 1. 5.1. Tank. , The tacks are modified Aero 1C 150-gallon auxiliary fuel tanks. The npse-cone section contains a variable pitch, four-bladed, ram-air drive turbine which is coupled directly to a centrifugal pump (figures 1 and 2). The pump provides the pressure necessary to disseminate the agent at a rate up to 350 gallons per minute. The nose-cone section was protected by an aluminum bulkhead which reduced the tank capacity to 134 gallons. On the armed OV-1C Airplane, �Figure 2. Nose-cone section with upper cowling removed. the tank was further limited to a capacity of 80 gallons of agent by the store - station weight limitations. The tail section houses a motoroperated gate valve which controls the fluid flow from the chemical transfer line (pump output) to a spray boom horizontally mounted on the rear of the tank. (See figure 3.) The spray boom has 32 tapped outlets which accommodate the number of nozzles for the desired dissemination rate (figures 4 and 5). �Figure 3. .Tail section with inspection plate removed showing motoroperated gate valve. 1.5.2. Agent, The defoliant agent used during testing consisted of a 50/50 mixture of LNA and LNB called "Orange" (Chemical Corps purchase description: 198-2-47EA, Herbicide Mixtuve, Orange). The agent was dyed with six grams of Dupont Oil Rerl (C. I. 258) per liter of agent for test purposes. 6 , �Figure 4. Rear view of the interim defoliant system installed on wing station No. 4, showing the Spray boom with 32 nozzles installed. An LAU 32/A 2. 75-inch FFAR pod is mounted on wing station 6 with the XM-14 50-caliber machine-gun pod on wing station 5. 1.5.3. Controls. The gate valve and turbine brake are electrically controlled from the armu.ment panel in the cockpit, utilizing the 28-volt d. c. electrical system. "" " �Figure 5. 1.6. Close-up view of spray boom nozzles. BACKGROUND. 1. 6.1. The requirement for the defoliant system is contained in subparagraph 129d(4), appendix E, of the Combat Developments Objectives Guide. 1.6.2. The US Army Biological Laboratories were the prime contractor for developing the defoliant system for use by both the US Army and US Air Force. �1. 6. 3. The defoliant system was given a safety- of -flight release on 31 August 1964 (reference h). , <• - * j. \ ' - \* ' . * t '• -. .'V-O/' 1 "^* f 1.6.4. A coordination' meeting of all participating agencies was held at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, on 23 March 1965. The following resulted: . ' . - . .^ •*"- , . - - > > 1.6.4.1. The USATECOM representative authorized: v *-*vC*' 1 "". . ' ' , "' "'• "W*--1 a. Submission of a three -part report of test instead of one integrated report. Part I, the Service Test report, contains a complete "Section I - General" (including findings, conclusions, and recommendations of all the parts of test), and is the responsibility of the USAAVNTBD. Part II, the Physical Test, includes the Climatic Test conducted by the US Air Force. Part ffl is the Dissemination Test. Dugway Proving Ground is responsible for parts n and in and will submit these parts directly to USATECOM. '- *** j •- - ' ' : ' ' : . b. Use of pertinent data from the US Air Force test with the modified tanks to evaluate the maintenance package and refilling procedures. If possible, previous Dissemination Test data based on prediction will be confirmed. > • ' . ' • .• • 1. 6. 4. 2. Suitability of the maintenance and refilling data obtained from the US Air Force service test on the modified tanks will determine the requirement for a check test. Two tanks will be modified and made available for a check test if required. 1.7. FINDINGS. 1.7.1. General. ...,< l . v 1. 7. 1. 1. The system was installed on the armed CV-1C Airplane with adequate clearances and without exceeding center -of-gravity (e.g.) limits in any configuration. Initial installation and system check-out including filling time required 7. 72 man-hours. (Tanks were filled after being mounted on the aircraft. ) The only reconfiguration of the airplane was disconnecting the electrical cannon plugs for the Aero 65 racks on wing stations 3 and 4. The spray tank wiring was connected directly into the wing outlet located in the pylon; therefore, only manual jettison was possible. �- "" '-''.' ." ^iv%~ . "- ""-£.' '•'"'7..'V3 - • ^ ' : ..' <-- %;••:•• :,-| .*>**£&. -'• ^ : k \::^-?-.3*i .-.'•! 4 '""""J;.-'4 -' Jt ':^S'^S ^/..V;^'' 7fc« Iv^-^i^/^^^k ''i^ " • ^ >y fc^ ^^5*^- vJ^4f:^^.v-v;-r^^r?4i^V .-. - ' llfe'iS Figure '6. Gravity-f?o\v filling of installed spray tank usi:ig a 55gallon drum and an MJ-3 loading trailer. 10 �Figure 7. The MJ-3 loading trailer with load spreader supporting a spray tank in position. 1. 7.1. 2. Gravity-flow filling of the system (used to fill tanks mounted on the airplane) required 1.5 man-hours. No special transfer equipment was provided. Equipment uscr' \vaa a 55-gallon drum with attached nozzle (figure,6). A simpler and faster method of filling the tank is needed. No difficulty was encountered in filling the tank when external stores were carried on wing stations I, 2, 5, and 6. 1.7.1.3. The use of MJ-3 loading trailers which incorporate a lift platform expedited mounting and filling operations (figure 7). The only other ground-handling equipment utilized was a utility transport 11 �Figure 8. Utility transport trailer with two spray tanks installed. trailer (figure 8) capable of carrying two full tanks. This equipment is not Army standard. Mounting empty tanks on the wing stations and then filling them with agent was faster and safer than mounting full tanks. 1. 7.1. 4. The tank and packaging were not damaged and had not deteriorated, and the tank was functional after exposure to the following tests (details are contained in part U, Physical Test): a. High temperature b. Low temperature 12 �c. Temperature chock d. Rain "' e. " ' •' - '• • Humidity f. ' '"' " ' • " """• '• ; -: "- : »* Salt spray g. Sand and dust .. ... „ .1 h. Incline impact (except for splitting of cleats in shipping , i. Corner-wise drop j. Rough road haul crate) . , . _ k . Slosh . , .-..'.".'•; 1. Ground transportation vibration m. Air transportation vibration (packaging was damaged but tr>^ tank was operable) 1, 7.1. 5. Safety features of the system were considered adequate; however, there was nc de-vice to prevent spillage through the overflow tube during ground handling and accelerations. The agent was a. mild skin irritant and harmful to macadam surfaces. Spills on a sod field would cause discoloration which could be an undesirable tactical feature as it would invite attention to the area by cir craft. 1.7. 1.6. The maintenance package, which consisted of Review Manuscripts MP 3-1040-240-12 and -20P, was evaluated and considered unsuitable. The system was not operated long enough to give adequate data to determine a spare parts list required. No special skills or tools were required for maintenance performed during »hi? tsst. 1.7.2. Effects of the System on the Airplane Performance. 1.7,2.1. Degradation of airplane performance was minimal. No agent impinged on the airplane surfaces during spraying runs utilizing either maximum or lesser flow rates. All electrical controls in the system ops-rated satisfactorily (see appendix I). 13 �.1.7.2.2. Armament firing during spraying was satisfactory. There was no significant effect on the system operation from the firing of machine guns and rockets. When rockets were fired from stations 2 and 5, a thin layer of rocket waste materiel was deposited on one side of the *pray boom. Also, a fin-retainer button released when the rockets fired made a small dent in the spray boom. Neither of these impingements affected the operation of the system. 1.7.3. Dissemination Performance. fordetaUsT) (See part TIT, Dissemination Test, 1.7.3.1. The maximum flow rate of the system was approximately 700 gallons per minute. Lower flow rates were obtained by decreasing the number of spray nozzles prior to takeoff. 1. 7. 3.2. During 200-Vnot spraying runs utilizing the maximum flow rate, the system produced a particle-size distribution having a mas« medium diameter of 250 to 300 microns. 1.7.3.3. A deposit rate of three gallons per acre over an area greater than or equal to 20 acres can be attained under most operational conditions. 1. 7.4. Deficiencies. Two deficiencies were found during the Service and Dissemination Tests: a. Rupture of the forward coupling hose during a high internal pressure condition (figure 9). b. Rupture of the rear coupling hose during a high internal pressure condition (figure 9). These deficiencies have been corrected and the modifications incorporated in the systems delivered to the US Air Force for their service test. A complete list of deficiencies and shortcomings is contained in appendix 1«7.5. Compliance with tlvs Sm«J? Development Requirement (SDR). * The system as tested complied with the operational characteristice of the approved SDR. 14 �firm Figure 9. Ruptured forward coupling hose with torn teflon line (above) and ruptured rear coupling hose prior to removal (below). 15 �1. 8. DISCUSSION. The modifications incorporated in the defoliant systems delivered to the US Air Force for their service test should correct the deficiencies and shortcomings found in this test. The US Air Force testing should be monitored closely to determine the suitability of these corrections and to compile data to complete the maintenance package and evaluate agent transfer equipment. The requirement for a confirmatory or check test could be determined after the results of the US Air Force test are evaluated. , ' ' 1.9. CONCLUSIONS. 1. 9.1. The interim defoliant system should be suitable for Army use on the armed OV-1C Airplane after the deficiencies and shortcomings have been corrected. . '• 1. 9.2. The interim defoliant system was found to be compatible with the armed OV-1C Airplane. • - , 1. 9. 3. The Review Manuscripts MP 3-1040-240-12 and -20P should be revised prior to production procurement of the interim defoliant system. 1. 9.4. The flight, time allotted for the Service and Dissemination Tests was insufficient to determine adequately the life of the system and to compile an adequate spare parts list. 1.10. RECOMMENDATIONS. It is recommended that; 1. 10.1. The interim defoliant system, modified to correct the deficiencies and shortcomings, be considered suitable for Army use on the armed OV-1C Airplane. 1.10. 2. The results of the US Air Force service test of the modified system b* reviewed to determine any requirement for farther Army testing. • 16 �SECTION 2 DETAILS AND RESULTS OF SUBTESTS 17 �I Previous page was blank, therefore not filmed. I SECTION 2 - DETAILS AND RESULTS OF SUBTESTS 2.0. INTRODUCTION. The service teat was conducted at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, uuring the period 14 September through 6 October 1964. A total of 13 spraying missions were attempted with the interim defoliant system installed on the armed OV-1C Airplane; ten missions were successfully accomplished. ' . . <„.-,i 2.1. INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS. 2.1.1. Objective. • '•:••• . - . . • . . - . • • • : - • ::; ,-..-.-»( y V.T.;-. Y To determine installation requirements. 2.1.2. Method. , t . -• . The defoliant system was installed using both empty and full tanks. The time and equipment required to uncrate the system and install it were determined. The tanks were installed using the MJ-3 loading trailers. After a full spray tank was mounted on the Aero 65A rack on one wing, the MJ-3 loading trailer platform was lowered slightly to insure that the rack-mounting lugs had locked. The trailer platform left in this position precluded a high wing condition on the opposite wing' and assisted in mounting the second full spray tank. 2. 1. 3. Results. 2, 1. 3.1. A total of 6. 22 man-hours was required for initial installation and checkout. Time and equipment required for uncrating and initial installation is as follows: a. Uncrating Time: 6 men @ 25 minutes = 2. 5 man-hours Equipment used: MJ-3 loading trailer b. Installation on aircraft (1) First spray tank empty, minus spray boom: ... Time: 4 men @ 20 minutes = 1. 33 man-hours Equipment used: MJ-3 loading trailer 19 �...... (2) Second spray tank empty, minus spray boom:" Time: 4 men @ 16 minutes = 1. 06 man-hours" .,.,..,-.;•; ^Equipment used: MJ-3 loading trailer ; ., , . . . c. -v Electrical check, - J J Time: 2 men @ 10 minutes = 0. 33 man-hour Equipment used: Airplane electrical system and armament stores controls .--'..V ••_'-.';• d. Spray boom installation - (two tanks) .• , • , Time: 4 men @ 15 minutes = 1.0 man-hour ' 2. 1. 3. 2. Average time to install defoliant system empty: Time: 4 men @ 36 minutes = 2. 4 man-hours •;..: - , Equipment used: Two MJ-3 loading trailers < 3 2.1.3.3. Average time to install defoliant system full: •;; t- ; (•,:-•<. . , Time: 4 men @ 40 minutes = 2. 67 man-hours Equipment used: Two MJ-3 loading trailers ; . • • - : ',; ... 2. 1. 3.4. Initial installation and system checkout including filling time required 7. 72 man-hours. The only reconfiguration of the airplane was disconnecting the electrical cannon plugs for the Aero 65 racks on wing stations 3 and 4. . • -. . .•• 2. 1. 4. Analysis. Not applicable. 2.2. FLIGHT SAFETY ASPECTS AND DIMENSION DATA. 2. 2. 1. Objective. Determine flight safety aspects and dimension data. 2. 2. 2. Method. 2. 2. 2. 1. Weight and balance were computed for takeoff weight with full internal fuel, a two-man crew, and each spray tank filled to 80 20 �gallons. Landing weight was computed-for a 30-minute fuel reserve, two-man crew, and empty spray tanks. .£..';.. 2. 2. 2. 2. Weight and balance were computed for takeoff weight full internal fuel, a two-man crew, the spray tank full (80 gallons each), and two XM-14 machine gun pods and two LAU 32/A rocket pods all with full complements of ammunition. Landing weight was computed for a 30-minute fuel reserve, a two-man crew, empty spray tanks, empty machine gun pods, and empty LAU 32/A pods. 2. 2. 2. 3. The installation was measured to determine applicable dimensions. 2. 2. 2. 4. The system was weighed empty and filled (80 gallons of agent per tank). - - . ; . . - . ; . \- : •:-.••;-.-..-,. \-_ •; 2. 2. 3. Results. 2. 2. 3.1. Both configurations were within takeoff and landing e.g. and gross-weight limitations. DD Forms 365F are contained in . appendix I. ...... . , .....-,.- / .,/-. 2. 2. 3. 2. Ground clearances were adequate. Clearance from spray tank to ground was 21. 75 inches. 2. 2. 3. 3. Clearance from the spray boom and the closest point on the aircraft, the inboard end of the ailerons was 36. 0 inches and was adequate. 2. 2. 3. 4. Weight of the defoliant system empty was 443. 52 pounds, and weight with 80 gallons of agent per tank was 2149. 12 pounds. 2.2.4. Analysis. Not applicable. 2.3. OPERATIONAL DATA. 2. 3. 1. Objective. To determine operational data on the defoliant system with specified flow rates of 700 (normal) and 350 gallons per minute. 21 �2. 3. 2. Method. 2. 3. 2. 1. : The flow rate was set on the ground at 700 gallons per minute. The airplane proceeded along flight path and altitude designated by DPG. test officer at a true airspeed of 200 knots. The spray operation was initiated and discontinued over designated points. The test was performed twice. -.A-'-;"'.". .' ' - : . .".--. -..-v,' -. ,> V 'i-.-^..r :*;,:; •.,-!•2. 3. 2. 2. This test was repeated using a flow rate setting of 350 gallons per minute.::;;,;,;.^ ,*,-., - r - ,., i: -,.• :.•-.-:.• = <:,<,•>:; -.: ;/.v ••:ci*z.U»r;;*i: y-fil J .'•,-> .•• • a "Q, -2?. '.:.'< :";!:.• 2. 3. 3. Results. (For dissemination data, see part III, Dissemination Test. ) 2. 3. 3. 1. No agent impinged on the aircraft. 2. 3. 3. 2. ON-OFF control was effective; however, after closure of the gate valve, agent remaining in the spray boom was emitted as a fine : : ! mist for approximately eight seconds. • : 2. 3. 3. 3. Degradation of airplane performance was minimal. 2. 3.4., Analysis. Not applicable. 2.4. ROCKET AND MACHINE-GUN FIRING DURING SPRAY OPERATION. 2.4.1. Objective. To determine the effect that firing of rockets and machine guns has on the defoliant system and its operation. . 2.4.2. Method. 2.4.2.1. Test Configuration 1. .. With defoliant system tanks mounted on wing stations 3 and 4, LAU 32/A 2. 75-inch FFAR pods mounted on wing stations 1 and 6, and XM-14 50-caliber machine-gun pods mounted on wing stations 2 22 �Figure 10. Front view of interim defoliant spray tank mounted on wing station 3, LAU 32/A FFAR pod on wing station 2, and XM-14 50-caliber machine-gun pod on wing station 1. and 5 (figure 4), delivery of the spray was initiated in the firing range area. Rockets and machine guns were fired during spray delivery. 2. 4. 2. 2. Test Configuration 2. With defoliant system tanks mounted on wing stations 3 and 4, LAU 32/A 2. 75-inch Folding Fin Aerial Rocket (FFAR) pods mounted on wing stations 2 and 5, and XM-14 50-caliber machine-gun pods mounted on wing stations 1 and 6 (figure 10), delivery of the spray was initiated in the firing range area. Rockets and machine guns were fired during spray delivery. 23 �2. 4. 3. Results. 2.4.3.1. Test Configuration I. ", 2. 4. 3. 1. 1. Rocket and gun blast had no apparent effect on defoliant system operation. 1; ••, > 2.4. 3. 1.2. Rocket and machine-gun blast had no effect on spray system ' components. Spent rounds and links ejected downward from the machinegun pods were well clear of the spray boom. V , '. 2.4. 3. 1.3l No difficulties were encountered in using firing controls while disseminating spray. As the ON-OFF controls for the spray tanks a->-e on the BOMB fuze circuit, the rocket and gun-firing circuits are not affected. .. , (, •::. ""'-.' - ; V' ,'. • ' •": : ' '., • V ' ' ' ' . 2.4. 3. 1. 4. The spray tanks can be installed and filled with the weapon ' systems mounted in this configuration. 2.4.3.2. Test Configuration 2. • '" ' - . , . . : • „ _ - ~ , - ' 2. 4. 3. 2. 1. Rocket and gun blast had no apparent effect on defoliant system operation, ,. , 2. 4. 3. 2. 2. Gun blast had no effect on spray system components. Rocket blast, deposited a thin layer of waste material on one side of the spray boom. One rocket fin-retainer button dented the forward edge of one side of the spray boom. 2. 4. 3. 2.'3. No difficulties were encountered in using firing controls while disseminating spray. As the ON-OFF controls for the spray tanks were on the BOMB fuzing circuit, the rocket and gun-firing circxtits were not affected. 2. 4. 3. 2. 4. The spray tanks can be installed and filled with the w pon systems mounted in this configuration. 2. 4. 4. Analysis. , Because of impingement on the spray boom of burned material and the fin-retainer button, continued use of test configuration 2 could have a damaging effect on the spray boom. ' 24 ^ �2.5. SERVICING REQUIREMENTS. 2. 5.1. Objective. To determine time, equipment, and personnel requirements to fill the spray tanks. _ , „,_ i - r ; . v ,_: 2.5.2. Method. . i; ' ^ ^ ' - The tanks were installed full 11 times. Twice the tanks were installed empty and filled on the airplane. The time, equipment, and personnel required for each filling operation were observed and recorded. Ease of filling was evaluated. Scales were used for test purposes and would not be required for tactical employment. - i i: - . . _ : * • . • • ' - 2.5.3. Results. - . •• - ..•*•. . ' 2. 5. 3. 1. Standard filling equipment was not available with the defoliant system during the period of the Service Teat. The filling equipment consists of a hand-driven, dispensing pump (FSN 4930-255-9132). Gravity-flow filling using one MJ-3 loading trailer to elevate the supply drum required three men an average of 30 minutes (1. 5 man-hours) to fill two spray tanks mounted on the airplane. 2. 5. 3. 2. A comparison between loading filled tanks (80 gallons) using the MJ-3 loading trailer and filling the tanks when installed on the airplans was made. Time required to load filled tanks averaged 2. 67 man-hours. Time required to fill the tanks installed on the airplane averaged 1. 5 man-hours. 2. 5. 3. 3. The filled spray tank, loaded on the MJ-3 loading trailer, could be moved around without difficulty on smooth terrain by three men. A minimum of two men was required to move the fully-loaded spray tank on the MJ-3. Three men accomplished this task with more ease and efficiency. The lack of baffles within the tank permitted sloshing during movement; therefore, one man stabilised the filled tank while two pulled the trailer. 2. 5. 3. 4. Using two MJ-3 loading trailers to remove the two spray tanks from the airplane, place on scales for measured filling, pick up, reinstall, and hook up on the airplane required an average e'«.psed time of 47 minute*. This action was accomplished by four men. 25 �2.5.4. Analysis. Not applicable. 2.6. EVALUATION OF SAFETY ASPECTS. 2.6.1. ; Objective. ;, ; .;,,,. . To determine data for compliance with USATECOM Regulation 385-7, "Safety Confirmation." 2. 6. 2. Method. Safety aspects were evaluated during system operation. Effects of the system on aircraft operation were qualitatively evaluated. 2.6.3. Results. . .: . . .'.. ., .: 2.6.3.1. Safety features were adequate. 2. 6. 3. 2. The spray tanks were jettisoned safely at Patuxent River, Maryland (reference g, section 1). • ?••'. 2. 6.4. Analysis. Not applicable. 26 �SECTION 3 - APPENDICES 27 �APPENDIX I TEST DATA �WEIGHT AND IAUNCE CLEARANCE FORM F r. o. JW» Air •»» TACTICU. 17 S«Dt»nbtr 19*4 MOT 10 62-58S1 C*j*. Ktach KBehMlAAP MMHT ZDtfoIiutSpny 9 4. 5 M«C MWUIK ( A*B CWM O Tufa oa Wlnf 5. $Utfa»185 (3«ad4) DOTDMtmOH Or UMD i 00 400 ? Tufty OWVTU HAW MI 1 fWt/MM taMraxUM«. «*. »tfto< f«t •*#><•* toMf <uirf CIOTT rfwA* tmlfftH* JM««« • 4I 9 7.1 comtEcriom <«* in •on/ 160 K»Uoai uci* B.T n ( 297 0, HttWHL ( »>nii MJ. run ( MTO c« mro TOTM. WDCHT KMOVia 10 TiiuoorT cmaincii (fknmcM) TOTAL KIOKT WOCO TAODIT C-«.»I%M. o.c.b«m. •CT wnmcs (*/. in i_i 159 2 4 .2 Q. i 76 UTOOCl MTO UMITATICNS 1AWMT <»0 tsiso (ttJ 11994 • PtXMISSIKE C.G.TAK10TT 3. Sprty 160 *»lloni crniuTio Lioona amcmo* > Bmntf r«/M«* /real owrMnt >ypHffl>»>» T. O. < ApplivM* 1* *«a* v«4At (*•*. Ml. • AffUoOti* lofmt <**tl<t («•/. /». DD 1 ,{' 2.1. nniuno UMOM c «. p flaeaMtMxw. 154.60 <arwr>r>) / a / F. J. Kir sen WCtf KT AMO »ILAMCt AUTMOKTT L 7 k. t �WEIGHT AND BALANCE CLEARANCE FORM F DATE 17 September 1964 Masnvnup/rueMT'iia Teat r o. i-if-tt * TACTICAL <vst KtveKse FOK THAHSTORT missions} WVLAWTYPI moM JOV-1C Michael AAF SCRHU.NO. 10 62-5851 Michael AAF REMARKS REF 2 Defoliant Stray Tankt on Wing Station 185(3 and 4) Ft. Rocker, Ala. PHOT Cape. -Kindt ITEM 1 OIL ( 1 MOM/ I 0 S 3 2 3 S CM.) $ • INDEX OR WEKHT •ASK AMPLANC (FV«« Ov( C) 2 2 XM-14 Caliber .50 Machine Gun Podi on Wing Station 21 3 (2 and 5) 2 IAU 32/A 2.75H FFAR Rocket Launcber Pods on Wing Station 237 (1 and 6) fMOI-tf-tf HOME STATION r 9 1. S S. 3 OKTRIOIiriON OF LOAD fRIW a CAMS mo not ««« i^P*. .*»; '*>*/W's5 185 2 Tanks k,i»..i: '^in>. f*1. **-jw3 4 0 0 t 4 4 213 2 M.C. Podl 4 > fl if J , ft 237 2 LAU 32/A 8 1 1 p. 5 NO 2 •tlGHI 400 2 t. 0 7 3. 4 COMPUTER PLATE NO. (tfMtf) fmrtl n*nt i furructfMU to tho pilot lor •hitting tomd antf <h».'K4 Imktot .~/ ImiuliKt «*ouM kt «<,(«/. 60.. 4 S 1 2 D 8 3 1 9 9 2. 6 O^IUTING WEIGHT COMPT. CALIBER ROUNDS wsm^iMi&s CORRECTIOKS (Kif. II) CHAN6CS (-f IT -) rim COMrT. 1 INDEX OH MOM/ WEIGHT 1 5 e « Is S 7 FORWARD t 7 0 6 4 4 2 2 5 2 160 gtllota acent me 1500 rdi. immo. 14 2.75" rockets 2 1 2. 5 7 9. 9 t 2. 1 1 9 3 0 3 1 0. 6 EXTERNAL KOCXCTI 297 BUILT IN ( «*0 BOM* RAT ( <M-> EXTERNAL ( (M.) I WATER MJ. FUND ( 0*U 9 10 JATO OR RATO 11 12 13 14 CORRECTIONS d ' TOTAL WEIGHT REMOVED - TOTAL WEIGHT ADDED + + *CT DIFFERENCE (Rtf. Ill LIMITATIONS tCROS* WT. TAUOFF (».. 1S413 I PERMISSIBLE C. O. TAKEOFF • PERMISSIBLE C. C. LANC1NS P t 12S63 >£nt.r cottmtmnt ui» J. App lembt* to trot* weight (A*/. JJ). *App Ue«ftA» to tfrow weight (/?•/. /J). ™^r» 1 • dinf vafiM* /rom current mpplic*t>l» T. O. 9 TAKEOFF C O. IN SI 14. A. c. OR m. 1 6 4 1 3 2 |6 3 7. 160.71 7 JATO OR RATO AMMUNITION ttrayIrocketx,50caL, FUEL 2 4 0 3 1 4 5 0 3 3 4. S 2 3 3. 7 ?<£$**** 156.36 156.36 ttfff^vlrtf} TAKEOFF CONDITION (GprrRftrf) BOMBS 1 GROSS WT. LAKCMhG (M.) rww TAKEOFF CONDITION (CAmmcM) 15 16 ESTIMATED LANOING CONOTTION CSTIMATtD LANDING C. G. COMPUTED BY (-SifnarBrt) Bgtff&IStom /s/ F. J. Kirsch WEIGHT AND ftALAHCC AUTHDRITy <<tfful«r<) PILOT (Slf.1«f«r«) 1 Z S 6 3 2 0 6 9, 5 *. 164.73 �APPENDIX n COMPARISON WITH THE SDR (Classified CONFIDENTIAL,; Presented Under Separate Cover) �APPENDIX in DEFICIENCIES AND"SHORTCOMINGS - -.'•.•/'.•'" 'Tif-ftTi-' 'I' •' A. Deficienciea. The following deficiencies were found during the Service and Dissemination Tests: •,,* - • ; ; . ; , ; ../•- •-,>'. Deficiency Suggested Corrective Action 1. The forward coupling hose (centrifugal pump to transfer line) ruptured during s. 700gallon-per-minute dissemination and rocket firing run at approximately 200 knots true airspeed. Replace with hose which can withstand high pressures generated during spraying. 2. The rear coupling hose (gate valve to spr.ay boom) ruptured during 350-gallon-perminute -dis s eminatica flight at approximately 200 knots true airspeed. Replace with hose which can withstand maximum pressures generated during spraying. Remarks x This suggested modification has been in- ,. eluded in the tanks sent to the USAF. ; This suggested modification has been included in the tanks sent to the USAF. ... B. Shortcomings. The following shortcomings were found during the Service and Dissemination Tests: Shortcoming 1. Removal of the nose cone upper cowling (a structural member of the nose cone) for inspection and/or msiwouuii-' 2. caused the lower , Suggested Corrective Action Weld the lower half of the cowling to the tank section. in-i Remarks This suggested modification has been included in the tanks sent to the USAF. �U: Suggested . Corrective Action Shortcoming hall of the cowling to displace downward. The resulting misalignment caused difficulty in reinstalling the upper cowling. Remarks ; 2. 'There was no method of preventing agent over-flow after filling the tank to 80 gallons in a level attitude, when the tank was tilted, raised, accelerated, transported or during normal ground handling. Change to a different method of limiting the tank capacity to 80 gallons. ' 3. Wire to the ram air turbine solenoid control separated in flight. Exercise better quality control in wiring the turbine controls. 4. The cleats split in the bottom of the shipping crate. Provide shock-resistant cleats and fastenings for Level-A packaging of the item. Ill-2 ' This suggested " modification has been included in the tanks sent to the USAF. The wire was too short and was under tension. �APPENDIX IV DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF MATERIEL 1. General. defoliant system consists of two F— 44 biological spray tanks. The spray tank is a modified Aero 1 .50-gallon auxiliary "- ' fuel tank'.' The capacity was. limited to 80 gallons of agent by an over- ; flow stand pipe. ' The system is operated by the 28 -volt d. c. electrical system controlled from the armament panel in the cockpit. The spray unit develops pressure for spraying by means of a centrifugal pump, " directly coupled to a variable pitch, four-bladed, ram-air driv turbine. The centrifugal pump transfers fluids from the main tank section through a suction line, and forces the fluids at high pressure through the transfer line to a gate valve control, to the spray boom. ' I'-i'HY;- •-•':-.- ',:'-.•••-• .l;-i.r •; > :•*»•;'•:<:-'.••" o.';r: , • • • - ; • . ' • ; . • . 4 •••.-; ;?b 7,-^ »:•••..••;••£ \-iV't 2. Major Components. .... , . ., .. % . .,, K... ...,,„.,.,,...; :v/,i* ,,<*} hi - ' • • . ( , : ; - . •:.•'••; :•:--•• :.-',-". _-<->r, ••• > .-. -•' ! .-.-. -.- . :,.,,. . . - ; , • ( - . , . .... , ^ r • ,.,f. ~ - . . , v ; . v . . : .. ,: The spray tank consists of three major components; the nose-, cone section, tank section, and tail section. , , t : ,,....., a. Nose-Cone Section. ........ >..,'•-,.. The nose -cone section contains the variable pitch, fourbladed, ram-air drive turbine which is mounted on a support plate. The rain-air drive turbine is directly coupled to the centrifugal pump. The centrifugal pump is connected to the suction line transfer lines by two teflon-lined rubber hoses. Electrical wiring is introduced into the nose -cone section through a conduit line. Access to the nose -cone section is accomplished by removal of the upper cowl. , b. Tank Section. This section contains the suction line and a check valve to keep the pump primed during intermittent operation. This section also contains the transfer line and an electrical conduit through the tank body. Drainage is provided by a drain plug on the bottom of the tank. Two access plates are provided on the left mid-section of the tank to accomplish maintenance and inspection of the fluid storage area. Suspension lugs with 14-inch spacing are provided. A cable with a quick-disconnect fitting on the tank end provides for electrical control IV-1 �from the airplane. An attached lanyard on the quick-disconnect fitting allows emergency separation if the spray tank is jettisoned. c. Tail Section. •MMWV^^MMMBMBMH^W • ., ., I ,'„! .Ll f ?c j ••*>••• . *"i. , * t I ....... The tail section houses an electric-motor-operated gate valve which controls the fluid flow from the transfer line to the spray boom. The spray boom is connected to the gate valve by a teflon-lined hose. The spray boom is attached to the horizontal fins with six mounting clamps. An access door is provided for maintenance and ' ' inspection of the aft section. A modified Aero 1C tail cone fairing fits over the spray boom. - , . , . . . v . - . , . , . . - , . . . ' • . . . — ..r..,,..,, . ,.., :,..,; .*,. ,,,-*.,.. ', ( . '"'3. •' Details of Operating Components and Operation. ;; •'"*•' The ram-air drive turbine incorporates a solenoid-operated brake. In the de-energized state, the ram-air drive turbine is in a braked condition with the propellers feathered. When the solenoid is energized, the propellers unfeather and rotate in a counter-clockwise direction until the ram-air drive is in the governed range of 3600 to 4000 r. p. m. at 200 knots. The ram-air drive is directly coupled to the centrifugal pump and at a drive speed of 3800 r. p. m., the pump is capable of delivering 300 gallons per minute, depending on the number of nozzles selected for the spray boom. The slide-terminating motoroperated gate valve io controlled by a stepping solenoid. Controls for operation are on the BC MB fuze circuit on the armament panel in the cockpit. The TAIL position of the BOMB fuze circuit energizes the ram-air drive brake solenoid only, and the NOSE and TAIL, position energize the ram-air drive brake solenoid, the gate valve stepping solenoid, and the gate valve motor. After the desired airspeed is attained, the armament circuit breakers are pushed in, armament power is switched on, and the BOMB fuze switch is placed in TAIL, position. To begin spraying, the BOMB fuze switch is moved through the SAFE position to the NOSE and TAIL, position, which opens the gate valve. The switch is then returned to the TAIL, position. To terminate the spraying operation, the switch is again moved to the NOSE and TAIL position, which permits the gate valve to close. The switch is then placed in the SAFE position. 4. Weights and Measurements of the Defoliant Tank. a. Capacity: 80 gallons IV-2 �b. Weight: Empty Full 221.76 pounds 1074.56 pounds c. Overall Length: 166.10 inches d. Diameter: 21.16 inches (maximum) e. Center of Gravity: Empty Full 77. 50 inches 79.18 inches f. Spray Boom: Length 73.0 inches Number of orifices: 32 IV-3 �APPENDIX V COORDINATION The following ageacie* participated in the review of the final report: US Army Aviation School US Army Combat Developments Command Aviation Agency �AP US Ar»r Arlrtta* T«» ktW, tat tactar. Atetoav. »»»•« «t UtMtCOM Nifrg *». % 4 MM-M. FM I S«*fc» TMI rf •» hurt* Ctafattuc S*tm M^BCM *Mlr kr *• US A»r •* «» A* N»w. CM IW)Mt N^ ICMMOXMU, n Mn- IMS. K r*^S »» OM. TW US-AMr *•«•«*• TM iMHl »» •*!««« U» »«rHc« M« w <W I ..... i nifcHm »>•«• «• tt» mM4 ov-» HIM 1^ rii.il, mat Omt dw M«!M W UM US AJ> ta« «r*lM Ml AD US Atmr ArtMMB TM *OM< tat tachw. AtofcMm. M^ni W U1ATICCM T»i|nt I Hit I - Wnta TM. << UMTICOM IW^A �» "•' i.'4 • " • • • ' Vv ""•'"•'.•' > * • • - / ."L /'^ • •• •' :iW'V«fr' ". X t V i •.#••• T - irV y . i"* ' ' 1 ,'" '^Sl'irTjr?,-W3^:*W '/•*•' " •• tr'1'* r .r-'** r 'JH' * ' •> * • JC "**• *•'? , ** ' **•' -«•(»"'*'• "- � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange Description An account of the resource <p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;">The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.</p> <p>For more about this collection, <a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a">view the Agent Orange Exhibit.</a></p> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Box The box containing the original item. 024 Folder The folder containing the original item. 0354 Series The series number of the original item. Series II Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource <strong>Corporate Author: </strong>U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command, U.S. Army Aviation Test Board, Fort Rucker, Alabama Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 25 1965 Title A name given to the resource Report of Test USATECOM Project Numbers 5-4-3001-01 and -02, Integrated Engineering/Service Test of an Interim Defoliant System Conducted Jointly by the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force, Part I - Service Test Subject The topic of the resource spray equipment Ranch Hand aircraft herbicide application