operation redwing, preliminary report. in flight participation of a b-66 airplane. october 1956

8/6/2019 Operation Redwing, Preliminary Report. In Flight Participation of a B-66 Airplane. October 1956

1/72
http://www.blackvault.com/


2/72

l l l l ' S l ~ aUonal Nuclear 5ecurityAdministrsffon

Mr. John Greenewald, Jr.

Dear Mr. Greenewald:

Department of EnergyNational Nuclear Security AdministrationService CenterP. 0. Box 5400Albuquerque, NM 87185

MAR 0 1 2010

This letter is the final response to your June 16 , 2009 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)request for a copy of In-Flight Participation ofa B-66 Airplane, dated October 1956.Pursuant to Title 10 , Code of Federal Regulations, Section 1004.6 (1 0 CFR 1004.6), the Officeof Classification, Office ofHealth, Safety and Security, in the Department ofEnergy (DOE) hascompleted its review of the document responsive to your request. This document located in thefiles of the Defense Technical Information Center, contains information properly classifiedFormerly Restricted Data (FRD); therefore, it is provided to you with deletions.Title 5, United States Code, Section 552(b)(3) (5 USC 552(b)(3) (Exemption 3), exempts fromdisclosure information "specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than section552(b) of this title), provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from thepublic in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue , or (B) establishes particularcriteria for withholding or refers to particular types ofmatters to be withheld ...." The AtomicEnergy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, 42 USC 2011 et seq ., is an Exemption 3 statute.Sections 141-146 of this Act (42 USC 2161-2166) prohibit the disclosure of informationconcerning atomic energy defense programs that is classified as either Restricted Data or FRDpursuant to the AEA, as amended. The portions deleted from the subject document pursuant toExemption 3 contain information about weapon yields that has been classified as FRD.Disclosure of the exempt data could jeopardize the common defense and the security of thenation.To the extent permitted by law, the DOE, pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.1, will make availablerecords it is authorized to withhold under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) whenever itdetermines that such disclosure is in the public interest. With respect to the information withheldfrom disclosure pursuant to Exemption 3, the DOE has no further discretion under the FOIA orDOE regulations to release information currently and properly classified pursuant to the AEA, asamended.


3/72

Mr. John Greenewald, Jr. 2 MAR 0 1 2Dt0Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.6(d), Dr. Andrew P. Weston-Dawkes, Director, Office ofClassification, Office ofHealth, Safety and Security, is the official responsible for the denial ofthe DOE classified information.Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004 .8, the denial of a FOIA request may be appealed, in writing, within 30days after receipt of a letter denying any portion of the request, to the Director, Office ofHearings and Appeals, Department ofEnergy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington,DC 20585. The written appeal, including envelope, must clearly indicate that a Freedom ofInformation appeal is being made, and the appeal must contain all other elements required by 10CFR 1004.8. Judicial review will thereafter be available to you in the District ofColumbia or inthe district where: (1) you reside, (2) you have your principal place of business, or (3) theDepartment's records are situated.There are no fees chargeable to you for processing your request.If you have questions, please contact me by e-mail at [email protected] or write to theaddress on the first page. Please reference Control Number FOIA 10-00005-C in yourcommunication.

Office of Public MfairsEnclosure


4/72

MAR 0 1 2010cc with copy of redacted document:Wanda Peigler, SSO


5/72

!j

f''

AD3385Dooo 1673

IN-FLIGHT PARTICIPATION OF A 8-66 AIRPLANE (U)

SANDIA NATIONAL LABS ALBUQUERQUE NM

OCT 1956

Distribution authorized to U.S. Gov't. agencies and theircontractors; Administrative/Operational Use; OCT 1956. Otherrequests shall be referred to Atomic Energy Comnission,Washington, DC. Restricted Data.


6/72

LASSIFIED

- . . . .

.AD .3385 2,7 :...

DEFENSE DOCUMENTATION CENTERFOR

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAl INFORMATIONCAMERON STATION. ALEXANDRIA . VIRGINIA

CLASS FIE .zoo1ooo 31.''


7/72

U!iCLASSIFIED

NOTICE: Wben government or other drawings, speci-fications or other data. are used for any purposeother than in connection vith a definitely relatedgovernment procurement operation, th e u. s.Government thereby incurs no responsibility, no r anyobligation 'Whatsoever; and th e fact that the Govern-ment may have formulated, furnished, or in 8.ZlY waysupplied the said drawings, specifications, or otherdata is not to be regarded by implica.tion or other-wise as in any manner licensing th e holder or anyother person or c . ~ r , t 1 o m ~ i o n or conveying any rightsor permission to manufacture, use or sel l anypatented invention that may in any way be relatedthereto.

NOTICE:THIS DOcuMENT CONTAINS INFORMATIONAFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OFTHE UNITED STATES "w'i'l'HIN THE MEAN-ING OF THE ESPIONAGE LAWS, TITLE 18,U.S .C, 1 SECTIONS 793 end 794. THETRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION .OFITS CO!fl'ENTS IN ANY MANNER TO ANUNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITEDBY LAW.

t .. .;

ASS.Li

,,

I .


8/72

WDDTECHNICAL LIBRARY

,t:_ so7Document No. J YJ>-


9/72

' .

- - --- -- - ---------------_U_ .__ __ .. :::.-- --- __ . _ _ : _____:. .

.. . CLASSIFIED

This is a preliminary report based on al l dataavailable at the close of this project's participatiort in Operation REDWING. The contents of thisreport are subject. to change upon completion ofevaluation for the final report. This prel iminaryreport will be superseded by the publication ofthe final (WT) report. Conclusions and recommendations drawn herein, if any, are thereforetentative. The work is reported at this earlytime to provide early test results to those concerned with the effects of nuclear weapons and

. to pr9vide for an mterchange of information between projects for the preparation of final re ports.

When no longer required, this document may be~ e s t r o y e d in accordance with applicable securityregulations. When destroyed, notification shouldbe made toAEC Technical Information Service Extension

P. 0. Box 401Oak Ridge, Tenn.DO NOT RETURN THIS DOCUMENT

,.;.

%!Iis docmment contains iiJf'ormation affeating the NationalDefsose of the United S ~ a t e s within the meaning of theEspionage Laws, Xitle 18, U. S. c., Section 793 end794. I ts transmission the revelation of its oontentsin any mam1er to en unauthorized person is prohibitedby la'l'o I

'

.

:- . .: ._...~ . . . _ .


10/72

___......

f ,

.. . :. ._ .... .:.. . : ..

OPEWION BEDWING :- PllBliiMllU!t! :IU!IPBR!. PBOJmT 5.,3OCTOBER 1956

Aircraft LaboratoryWright Air Developnent CenterWright-Patterson Air Force BaseDayton, Ohio

: y .

L. L. Wood\fe.rd, Col. , USA!'Technical Dil'ector , / ij)

~ 3 R } ? . ; : ; r ~ ~ ~ X. D. ColeiiiiD, Col. , USAFCoiiiiii8Dder, Taak Unit 3

017.J&__J.I. Dabl ,. CDR, USN .Director, Progtam 5


11/72

. .. 1:' ..

SUMMARY OF SHOT DATA, OPERATION REOWINGShot- Date Time L- t iCXI Typa(Uilc:is.ad.t'ied) (PPG) (App!.'CIEI.Date).............. 0629 Eni.wtok Stir!'acey,-- Lan4Ch.robe 2 1 . ~ OS51 Bilc:lJ11 A ir Drop (1,320tl.50 f i )Of t Cbaz'Ue Orer l l . tc -Zuni 28 May 05S6 1Wdn1 Sin-race7..,.. Land Vater.Y- 28 May rnS6 En iwtok 200-tt r....,..

' Sal.l3,.l!r le 311-hy 0615 Ezdwtol< 3 ~ 1 ' - -

YvC8'UleSp (6!l035 t t )Yvonne o....r Lao!Inoe 22 JUDe 0956 Eniwtak 200-f't 'riMI1'Pearl.Dakota ;z6 Jim& 0606 Bild.ld ~ s e Of ! Dog Wt.tartfollawl< 3 Jlil 0606 En i - tok 3oo-tt TcnoarRubyApuhe 9.Taq 0606 Ezd.wetak Barge

F 1 o z < ~ . ""'tar.lf..,..;lo l l Jal;r 05S6 B1.lr:1n1 BargeOf ! Dog Watllll'T- 2 1 . 1 ' ~ 0546 Bild.Jd BarpObarll-g R- t ' i l a t e rllU1'0il 2 2 ~ o6l.6 En i ... ok Barge

- L_ F l . o z < ~ . l la ter - ----&see 1:!&-1344 t:or turtber dete1l


12/72

----- - - - - - -- ---- ---- - --- -- - - - ---

j:,.."

UNCLASSIFIED- - - - - - - - , . ; . - - : - ~ ~: - - ~ . ~ = = - - - ; . - ~ -

.\

...

..

- _... . ., - - ' " " " - ..

Alruldljl OboeAlruklraru PeterAomoen OeoraeArrllkan Yolu>BIJI,rtn a., Bikini Haw

CHEROKEE _,>'"'''*) /Un1111NIIt

Boktlletol


13/72

SIFIED

SOIII'*-'11 II\AJUOf l #.ISllelllllUIW

Wll NUIII

Aananblru Vera Chlnleero Alvin lpr ln Olenn Rlblllon JamesAll Olive Cllinlmi Clyde Japtan David Rlgllt LeroyAnlyUIIU Bruce Coehlta Daily Klrlnian ;...cy 11oJoa UreulaADman Sally Coral Hnda Mack, Clacar ""'" Zona Ruehl ClaraBlljiri Tilda Ellertru Ruby Mui Henry Rujoru PearlBopll'lkk He leo Elugelab Flora ll!uzin Kate RW\It YvonneBogallua Allee Eagebi Janet Pury Elmer SandUdelonao Edn&Bogoabogo Belle En!YI!tok Fred Pllraal Wilma Telteirlp\ICchl GeneBD&M Irene Glr11nlen Keith Pakon Irwin Yelri NancyBollonurappu MaryEniwtok Atoll. locations ot test detonations during Oparation.HEDWIHGue indiea.t.ed b} la:rp h t ~ ' f ~ and a:rrow. Hr.ti."'f'a uld naaawith c o r r e s p o n d ~ lidlltary identitiers ue given 1n tb!a tal;lulation

... .


14/72

...

- '

- . .. -- - - - .. ------- - - - -- ... - ---- - - -- - ------ ---

UNCLASSIFIED.ABSTRACT

rhe objective o! this proJect was to measure the overpressure, gustand thermal effects o! a nuclear dotonation on a B-66 aircraft in t l ightto detemiD& ita delivery capabilit) Tbe measured effects will be usedto correct the B-66 Weapons Ielivery Halldbook, In addition, the projectprovided buic research data for the desip criteria of' future milltB.17a i r c r a f t , ~ 'rhe a"irefart was instrumented by the Douglas Ail"craft CompiZil{D.AC) !or the Air Force to record gust load stresses, thermal atreasea,temperatures, overpressures, accelerationa, allli other airt-ratt aDd inputdata, The aircraft waa flow to a timezero position vbich provided themaximm available load combination during each of ten nuclear d e t o n a ~ i o nrhe highest temperature recorded was 444"1 on an elevator of 0,016inch thick aluminum skin painted to have an absorptivity of 0,45, Themaxhmam thermal stress mea.suremente indicated a local stre8s of 39,600psi induced by .a temperature rise of 37"//F on 0,016 inch thick aluminumskin located at Station 94 of. the elevator.Maximum overpressure recorded was l.OZ psi. The max:hnnm gust loadreceived was ),26 g at the center of gravity, This value is 107 perceDtof the gust allovable load factor, The resultant s ~ s s level at WingStation /1)7 vas equivalent to uo percent of the limit allowabl8 J,oad onthe wingo The max1mull1 measured dynamic magnification factor was 1.59at Wing Station 407l:lased upon preliminary data reduced under i'iald coDditions, i t wasconcll1ed that the B-66 has nuclear wapon delivery capabilities equalto or in e:zcess of those stated in the special wapon :feasib111tystwy made by DAC for the Wright Ai r Developmant Center (WAOO) durizlg1955. No further testing of th e effects of nuclear detonations on theB-66 is reeOJIP!If!nded.

5..... . .

cAs


15/72

. ~ - - . . . - ..... .. - - - - - ------ - -- - - ----

FOREWRD

This report preaents the results ot oDe ot the 48 projects par-ticipating 1n the Mlli ary Effects Program of Operation REDWDiG, whichincluded 17 test detonations.For readera interested in other pertinent test information, refer-ence 1s made to ITRl344, SU111111817 lleport or the Oolll!llal:lder, Tuk Unit ; .This 8UIIIIII817 report includes the following 1n1'ormat1on or generalinterest: (l) an overall description..of each detonation, inclwlillg7!eld, height or bunt, grouzd zero location, time of detonation, 8lldambient atmospheric conditioDB at detol:l8tion; (2) a discussion of allproject resultsi (3) a SUJIIIIIB.17 of each project, including objectivesand results; and (4) a complete l1st1Dg of all :reports coverillg theMilitary Effects Program.

PREFACE

This report presents prel1millary data reduced in the test area andis subject to revision BDd correction tolloving th e detaUed reductionand analysis of the data. However, i t is auieved that :re!ineiiiSllt ofthe measured effects wil l result in final figures \lbicb are near theapproximate ones given in this :report.'l'he author aclalovledges the help of 2/Lt Gerald E. Holmes and 2/LtJohn P. Betma:r, \lhose wrk u aasista:nt project otf1cel'8 materilllJ.:r' aided in mald.ng Project 5.; a success. The work of-Walter E. Workman,project coordinator fo r the Dou8J.as Aircraft Comp8IJ1, bas been .out-standing; without his constant efforts to achieve the required timeschedules, the project could not have been completed. In aadition, theproject officer aclalovledges the participatin& persoDDSl of the DouglasAircraft Compflll1, the Wright Air .IlevelopDent Center fiight crew andground m.aintell.8JlC8 crew, BDd the JIWl1 other orgenizations and illdivid-ual.s wboee efforts have gone into the completion of the project. .Anorgenization chart for Project s.; or ._Operation .REDWlNG is presented asAppelldix A to this report

- - - - - - - - - "7 ' " " " - - - - - ---- - .. -.

..


16/72

...

..

--...--- -.-- - - - - - CLASSIFIED.

ABSTRACT.FOREWORD,PREFACE CHAPrER 1 INTRODUCTION.1.1 Objective

1.2 Ba.clrgrOUDd

CON'l'EIITS

1 3 Tbeoey . 1 3,1 Capabilitr C a l c u l a t i o n ~ . 1 3.2 B-66 PositioniDg Curves.1 3 3 Positioning Limitations,CHAP'l'ER 2 INSTRUMENTATION 2.1 General 2.2 Tranaducer Types rmd IDCatiODI 2.2.1 Thermal Meaaurementa 2.2.2 Gust ~ a d J ~ s a a u r e m e n t s 2.2 3 Fhoto-Panel Instrumentation, 2.2.4 Engine Instrumentation 2.2. 5 Thermal Inputs2 3 Recording EquiJlll&nt 2 3.1 Junction Poane1 2.3.2 Control Fanele 2 3. ) Oscillographs

2 3.4 Pboto Recorder

2.4 Inatallation aDd Calibration.2.4.1 Strain Gage Installation2.4.2 Strain Gage caJJ.bration,2.4.3 Thermocouple IDBtallatioo

2.4. Thermocouple Calibration

..

2.4.5 Acoelerc:a.etar Inatallatioo and Calibration 2.4.6 !\'assure Transduce Installation and CalibrationCHA.Pl'ER 3 OPERA.TIONS 3.1 Aircratt Pre}:U'ation.3.2 Aircratt Configuration 3.3 Shot Participation 33.1 Shot Lacroase 3.3.2 Shot Cherokee

3 3.3 Shot Zuni 3 3.4 Shot Erie .3.3.5 Shot Flathead 3 3.6 Shot Inca

: I ., ,_; ' , ' ; '

.7

..

. 5. 6 6.u.11.11.ll.12.12.12 16 16.16,1 6 18.2 2,22.2 2.24. 24.24.24.24 26.26.26.26.2C.26 27,28.28.28 28 .31 .32 .32 32.32 32


17/72

,.

- .. .. -- -- - -UNetA:SSIFIED

; .; .7 Shot Dakota.;.;.s Shot Mohawk 33.9 ShOt Apache ).).10 Shot N&vajo J,J, ll Shot Tewa ),),12 Shot Huron 3.4 Data Reduction 3.5 Correlation

CHJ.PTER 4 RESULTS

t

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION ,5.1 Desired Effects 5.l, l Overall Considerations 5,1.2 .Ei'tects Desired from Shot to Shot 5,1,) Degree of Attainment 5.2 Input and Response Predictions 5,2,1 Thermal Input 5,2.2 Thermal Response 5,2,3 Shock Wave 5.2.4 Gust Response 5 3 Sp!cial Areas of Concern Affecting Positioning5.3.1 Participation in Low-Yield Tests 5 3.2 Engine Criticalness 5.3.) Temperature Rises in the Nose Radome 5.4 Weapons Delivery Handbook

5.5 Thermal Protective Paint 5,6 Application of Data to Future Military Aircraft5. 7 laboratory Testing CHAP'JD 6 CONCWSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Conclusions 6,2 Recommendations

PBO;JW! OliD.AN12A'l'lON

ERRATA

t

32 .32 33 JJ 33 33 .33 33t

37505050505252525253535454545454555555 .

565656

58 APPENDIX B

REFERENCES 5960

Photo-panel Instrumentation Quantity and location of FuselageMiscellaneous Instrumentation Quantity and Location of Horizontal-stabilizerand Elevator Instrumentation Quantity and location of Wing and AileronInstrumentation SbOt Data , SllDIIIlB.l'y' of *'teorologicel Data SU1111!1a%'y of Aircraft Position and Attitude

20212325343535

'"


18/72

..

... ~ - ~ - - -- - -- - .. - . ---- --------------- --UNCLASSIFIED,. .

. . . . /. ' i. .. .

..34 Summary of Performance Data , , , , .35 C Q ! ! I P ~ i r ~ o . n of Desired and Ac-ual Positions 4-l Summary o! Thermal R e ~ u l t s 4.2 Summary or Shock Arrival Results .. 5.1 Summary of Planned and Measured Ei'i'ects Area& s, ::: Postsbot Comparison or Predicted and Recorded Values,FIGURES1,1 B-66 feasibility for 6,boo-root airburst and abnormalday , , , , , , , 1.2 B-66 feasibility for surface burst and normal day ,1 3 Typical high-yield positioning envelopes , ,1,4 Typical low-yield posit ionin envelopes ,1,5 Typical uedium-yielci positioning envelopes ,2,1 Typical thermocouple installation , , , . , ,2,2 Typical w1llg section, showing strain gage and

.36 3"6 .39 39 51 5.3

1.31414 15 15 17thermocouple installation , , , 172,.3 Typical horizontal stabilizer section, showing straingage and thermocouple installations , 182,4 Typical elevator section, 13howing strain gage andthermocouple installations , , , , , , 192,5 Typical strain gage installation, shoving protectivecoatings , , , 193.1 Typical mission profile at Bikini Atol l , , , 293,2 Typical mission profile at Eniwtok Atoll , 293,3 Configuration or the test aircraft , , , .304,1 Typical plots of thermal input versus time, Shot Dakota 404,2 Typical plots or skin telilperature from Shot Apache , 404,.3 Typical histories or shock-arrival tine, Shot Dakota. , 414.4 Maximum temperatures or thin skin 414, 5 Maximum temperature rises of thin skin , , , , 424o6 Summary of total temperatures o , , , 4.34o 7 Summary of temperature rises , , , 434,8 Percent of limit stress versus ving station o 444. 9 Dynamic-magnification !actor versus wing station , 444,10 Radom damage; tail radome after Teva ml AN/ARN-6antenna cover after Dakota , , 454,11 Damage to elevator due to Shot Dakota , . , 464,12 S1lllllll8l"y of radiant exposure received and comparisonto predicted values , , , , , 474.13 Incidence angles, thermal input , , 474.14 Incidence angles, overpresSQre , 484,15 Incidence angles, mte:dal velocity , , , , 484,16 Critical values or blast , , , , , , , , 49.4,17 Estimated maximum o v e r p ~ s ~ to uncboke the jetnozzle . 49

- - : ;JL. _ ' ... ; ~ - .

__ ._...,.______


19/72

. ... . -. . - ---- - -- -- -- - -- . ------ --- -------"---- -tJNCLASSIFIED

1.1 OBJECTIVE

CHAPl'ER lINl'RODUCl'ION

The objective or this project vas to measure the overpressure,gust,8lld thermal effects of a nuclear detonation on a B-66 aircraft in flightto determiDs its delivery capabUity. The measured data can be uaed tocorrect the B-66 Weapons Delivery Handbook and to provide basic researchdata fo r the design criteria of future USAF aircraft.

1.2 BACKGROUNDThe initial wrk or wapon effects on aircraft consisted or appror

imate and ~ t h e t i c a l studies performed to r Operations CROSSROADS andSANDSTONE. Followicg Operation SANDSTONE, Massachusetts Institute o!Teclmology (MIT) was contracted by Wright Air Iavelopment Center (WAOO)to develop theories !or predicting the effects o! nuclear eJCplosions onaircraft structures. nurteen aircraft wre wsed duriDg OperationGREENHOUSE to gather data !or veritication of those theoretical studies.These tests resulted in the puhl.ication o! a W.W:: weapon effects repcrt(Reference l ) .

A B-47 (Reference 2) and a B-36 (Reference 3) participated duringOperations M and CASTLE, and a B-50 (BefereiiCe 4) and a B-36 (Reference 5) participated duriDg Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE. The testsgathered additional data !or veri!'ication, correction, and extension of existil:lg theories developed !rom GREENHOUSE. The tests also determinedthe ma'""nmm delivery capabilities of th e B-36 and B-50 aircraft and re -sulted in weapon-delivery handbooks for these ai.l'cratt. The capabil-ities of the B-47, as limited by thermal e!fects, ware investigated fo rinclusion in a handbook. lethal volume studies were made duriDg Operation TEAPOT by the useor drone QF-00 aircraft and telemetered data (Reference 6). OperationTEAPOT also involved two F-84F aircraft in an investigation of thermalstress phenomena and the e!!ects or side blast loads on escort typeaircraft (Reference 7). 1.3 THEORY

Eight wapon effects aircraft participated during OperationBEDWlNG since i t vas not deemed feasible to establish the deliverycapabllities or an aircraft b)' other tban_direct exposure to thell


20/72

overpressure, gust, and thermal phenomena. Analytical methods used tocalculate aircraft delivery capabilities were not adequately proven,and i t was considered impractical and inconclusive to reproduce thaNtests ' in the la.boratory, It is li.k:ely tha.t ths IllUSive data. acquiredon m.iny types of aircraft during the operation will result in adequateaDd proven analytical methods of determinillg a1rcra.tt-del1verr capabil-ities.

.1.,),1 Capability calculations. At the request of WAOO, theDouglas Aircrart Company (DE) mad.e a complete investigation am reportor the capability or the B-66 for the deliverr or nuclear wapons(Reference 8) , The report indicated the suitability of the B-66 air-craft as a c ~ i e r or nuclear weapons up to and inclw:lillg the multi- .megaton yields, The use of' a reflective white paint vas r e c o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e J i d e d inthe report, The pre-REDWING general limitations of the aircra.tt are~ h o w in Figures l . l and 1.2 for the specific conditions iJldicated,

1,. ),2 ll-66 Positioning Curves, From the analysis given in Reference 8, positioning curves were drawnto indicate the locus of timezero positions of the aircraft which produce specific load responses(Figures 1,.3, 1.4, aiJd 1,5). From such curves, the best poslible posi-tion of tb8 aircraft at tim zero fo r the measuremnt of effects on tbeaircraft can be selected, The instrumentation to measure these et'f'ectsis described in Chapter 2,

The positioning of' the aircraft fi"om calculations and curves of .this has been conservative in the past, In particular, the select-ed position vas that which would give the effects required to achievethe project objectives, 'l'bia Dl8ant that in order to obtain the de-sired loads, a combination of actual weapon yield near that of thep o ~ i t i o n i . n g yield and predicted atmospheric collditions vas necessary,With only a m1nimmn number or te .sts acb:lduled for an operation and anina.bUity to predict the test yields or meteorological conditiona ac-curately, the probabilities or obtaining the desired. loads were verylow, In addition, the inherent conservatisms of the prediction theoriesreduced the chances ot achieving tb:l desired loads,The phUosoplJ.v of posi ioniJ:!8 fo r Operation REDW.mG vas developedto achieve posi iona at which responses were sate but, nevertheleas,would provide tbe data required to i'ul.!ill the test objectives, I t vaahoped that this posi tioning philosophy would provide a ll neceasary in-puts during tbe siDgl.e series or tests in order to assure ear4 avaUabUity or accurate wapon-delivery haadbooltB to interested agenciesSlid to avoid costly retestill& of' tbe same aircraft during fUture operations,

l.3.i6 Positioning Limitations, For thermal effects tbe positionsof' the B- ware selected so that neither the temperature rise nor totaltemperature would be more than I:I:XPF in the critical ~ r a f t SfCtiQn,based on the positioning yield, and not IIIQre than 4000f fo r the e rpected yield, In addition, a l:imit temperature of JI;:IJOF on the noseraclome vas establ ished, Special panels which differed in absorbtivitybecau2e of differences in paint color wre allowed to obtain

12 .,. .. . .... .. : ~ _ x '


21/72

,.

.UNCtASSIFIED-- - - - - - ' i , - v ~ - - - . i f ~ - ~ temperatures up to 9000F buecl on the positioniDg y1elcl, For gustef'.tects the p o s i t i o ~ V ~ J r e ~ $ l . e . c t e d to giw .no more than 9 percent ofthe limit allowable loeda at the, positioning yield d not _,re than8:> percent of the l imit allowable loads at the ezpected )'ields, Foroverpressure effects the positions were seleoted to give not . ,re than100 percent of limit allowable noiidamagillg overpressure (2.0 psi) ,asbased on the positioning )'ield. For nuclear radiation eftects, thepositions were selected to give not ~ r e than l nm per test at thepositioning yield nor ~ r e tban a total ot 7 rem to r the entireoperation

..

l ~ T l ~ f ' . .I .MFIIGhl-v l/1/Lt.-Toro ~ - , Y 1\_/--------v Wloo o.. f - ~ - - " '

I--" l ,>b, l 1/ )ill ----Dr'0'"'' kUft' IOIIIJ SOWTl i ~ 1.1 B-66 f'easibllity to r 6,000-foot airburst and abnormal day:{l) visib1lit7, 60 statute mlles; (2) water-vapor pres81.1re, 2 m of

11181'CU1'1j (3) albedo, o.si (4) hue-layer height, 10,000 feet; and (5)aiN:ra!t painted White (.He!erence l)

. - - - - .. - - - . -- ... - -


22/72

I 1\.... ,.,_ t'-

T&n

0 ' l /v

0 v/ 1-)1/ v"' - I- 1--0101('1 100 JilT ,., '"" ~ O I I T Moxtmum Ot lh'err Yltld

Figure 1,2 B-66 feasibility !or surface burst 8Dd normal d11: {l)visibility, lO statute miles (2) water-vapor pressure, 5 llllll oi'mercll17i (3) albedo, 0.3; {4j hazel&j'8r height, 10,000 teet; (S)aircraft painted white (Reference l); and (6) v1ng over descendingturn, 8lld :Ilm!e.lmann i 'euibWty exceeds 100 Ml'.

- ~ ~ ~ ~ ; t = = = r t - ~ t i \ l t = ~ = = ~ ~ ~ ~ : : ~ 00 Ptrctfll GLII67 ,_, __ ---+--!-_...., '1..,, s o , . . ~ l 11i i--_.::L=:"'"_:;:00::...' ..:. --- !- - --- !- - I- - - , /-W--l,---#== 80 P.rellftt G&leti ~ ~ ~ ~ ..

. .. - - ' - --+-----


23/72

--- ----- - - -UNCLASSIFIED

(b)(3)

(b)(3)

... .. "" '"" . . (] ... ... .f.


24/72

CHAPTER 2INSTRUMENTATION

The instrumentation vas installed 1n the B-66 b1 DAC lmder thesupervision of WAOO proJect personnel. Installations were made to permit IIIBaSUl"8JDBnt of: {l) load distributions on the wing aM horizontalstabllizer; {2) temperat\11'8 rises of critical skin aJ:1 stringer com-binations; {3) thermally induced structural strains azW. stresses; {4)radiant e:zposure; {5) irradiance; {6) !raestream overpressure; {7)spectral distribution of the thermal radiation; {8) dynamic responsedue to the gust ef'i'ects; {9) radome skin-temperature rises; {10) re -sponse or the engine to the thermal and blast phenolll8na; aJ:1 {ll) additional supporting data pertinent to the extrapolation and refinementof the response measureamts to other yields, test parameters, andaircraft. The instrumentation is summarized in Tables 2.1 to 2.4.A large number or chmmels vas i.nstall.Eid to cover the gust andthermal JDBasurememts, either separately or combined. The selection o!the channels to be recorded on any particular shot vas made to obtainthe measurement of the predominant effect .2.2 'rRANSDUCER mrs AND lllCAT!ONS

2.2.1 Thermal Measurements. Skin temperaturaa wre measured bymeans of two types of thermcouple iustallations. The moat COIIIIIlonthermocouple vas a washer type. On some thick skin installations ahollow acrev type vas employed. Typical installations ot lDtb t1P'sare shovn 1u Figure 2.1. Ice baths were used to provide a temperaturereference of 320F.The aircraft had 65 thermocouples distributed over six stations onthe left vi.Dg. The thezmocouples made apanviee aJ:1 chordvise akin tem-perature surveys, as well as panel temperature distributions. Sixthel'IIIOCouples located at one station on the riibt wing correlated thetwo viDgs. A typical wing station is shown in Figure 2. 2.'lhe left aileron had six aDd the right aileron had three thermocoupaa to meuure inner and outar skin temper6.t\lrea on the aurtaceskin 1M internal skin doubler.The left stabUizer had 75 thermocouples at four a p ~ ; ~ i i J e stationsto measure span'4se aDd chordvise temperature distribution. For cor-relation, the r!ght stabilizer had four themocouples at tw stations.A typical stabilizer station is show in Figure 2.3.

l.6 rt .


25/72

SCREW TYPE INSTALLATION WASHER TYI'E INSTALLATION

hollow shanl; screw \_\...--___"\ : 2 Pair Copper Constantan thor.,ocouple

lead wirt

Lead wires ora solderedto thin oappw washer

Figure 2.1 Typicel thermocouple installations,

'--11-f"-o:::-- AirlaadShearStrain Gaoo

Strlnoer Wob 8 FloogoTherMOCouple

RdF T-raturo GogoAirfood Stroio Gaoo& oo IMido aOutlide Skin SurfOCM

Sponwloo 8 Chordwiu Strain Gooos

Scraw T.YIII ThlltiiiCICGIIflll (SurfOOI T1111911VIUrt)Woahtr Typ1 Tharmoc:ouplo (Skin Tlnii*Qiurtl

Figure 2,2 l'ypical wing section, shov.t..ng strain gageand thermocouple installations


26/72

Stringer Axial Lood Stroln Goot

Figure 2 3 Typical horizontal stabilizer section, .shoving strain gage and thermocouple installations.The left elevator had 18 thermocouples at three stations, and theright elevator had eight . t b e r m o c ~ p l e s at one station These thermo-couple a JDSuured skin . emperatures of the upper and lower surfaces , Atypical station is shown in Figure 2.4.The nose radome had 11 thermocouples at three stations measuringradome skin temperatures beneath the .i'ull lcypolon coating and coatingtemperatureJ betwen the t irst and second coats of Hypolon.The fuselage had 11 the:rmocouples at eight stations to iaeasure alover skin temperature distribution !rom nose to tall.Tbe vertical stabilU8r .bad two thermocouples tor the lii8U\Il'81118ntof skin temperatures at the le t t and right t in tip.Temperature measurements in the e ~ ~ g i n e are covered in Section2.2,4 . Skin stresses occur as a result or tbe thermal inputs, becausethe external skin heats rapidly to a high temperature while tbl mainstructural components increase l i t t le in temperature and otter nearlycomplete resistance to thermal expansion or the skin. Baldwin LimaHamilton Corporation (BLHC) type E B D F ~ l 3 D strain gages were installedto IIIBUure these strai.lls in the spanvise BDd cbordwise directions.The le t t ving had 70 channels or thermal stress gaps at tour stations.The left stabilizer had 26 channels at tour stations. One elevatorstation had six elwmels on the le t t and six on the right. BOO Type RDFtemperature gages were constructed similar to type EBDFl)D straingages vith tine wire grids imbedded between thin bakelite sheets andwere installed at each thermal stress measurement area. The temperatures recorded tro:m the g&&es wre used to determine . emperatures otthe thermal stress gagee, a requirement fo r the data :reduction.2.2.2 Gust Load Measurements. The gust loads resulting tro:m t.tmaterial velocity associated with the overpressure shock vave weremeasured on the vi:ag and stabilizer by the use ot BLHC EBDF-1.3strain gages. A typical gage installation is ahovn in Figure 2.5.


27/72

Spanwiu a Chordwlao Strain Gaqoa on lnaide Surface alOulor Skin wthin Bead Ana (Therma l Strain l

Soclion Showl"'l lolountinq ol Sttain Goqos aTbermocoupl"' on a within BICidod Soctlons

ThormOCOJpiiS !Skin Tomporaturel

Figure 2.4 Typical elevator section, shoVing strain gage and thel'IIIOcouple installations.

ECBO I

EBDFI30 Strain GageBaldwin BCIUIHt StlllinGage C001ut

Epon VI on Electrlcot Conneation Ooly

Figure 2.5 Typical strain gage installation, showing protective coatings.19


28/72

-TABLE 2.1

00000 Lilhh () 10111 1111Uoaie00@@@@)@ Right bomb doar IPlett bollb door , . . , .@@I I@@ llloae par door llf'Right par dool' llf'(@@@@@@G) lett par door llf'Jll!llL cu .n Nllo@@@@)@@@ 11110 oalib, bolt oo, 1Corralation,

Faa, lzlltn.Dt HaUID'II1 CoUDten :u.- 111 aooliiS12 Clock rs . or da,r3 IJ.tU.ier Rafezuce T1mk hot11un4 Dift , Preaa, Cap ADs! of: !ttaclt .' IJ.tt..ter &Uva1't 11 IJ.Utlllle6 Unpeed lliiSI.Cator Ullaratt' Ainpaecl78 Dual Allto1711 lliiSioatol' lluddar (1) am 'thl'ott.l.e ( 2) Pod l..oll9 Dual Allto1711 lliiSioator Right (1) am left (2) .lilaro11 PololO Alltol)'ll llldicat.or C, 0, llozul Al:oellraU01111 Haabllllical .&coallrcmetar 1101'11&1 . iaoelel'&UOD12 IJ.U..ier .BoQa I J . U i u ~ M .13 AiriiJllld lliiSioatol' Boaa AiriiJllecl14 ' t a o ~ ta r Rip t .EDcia lp llS Dual .Auto711 lliiSicatol' Ript (1) am left (2) SpoUer Poa.16 Dual Alltoa;ya ladicator Elnator (1) IIIII Stall1ll .r (2) poa,

17 .F.lDv Rata Illdioatol' .Pual Flov to lef t EagiDe18 &v Rata 1111S1catol' .Pual Flov to Rip t EngW19 .Auto1;ya lliiSioatol' lllddar 1aroe20 Alltoe;ya lDdicator J.ileZ'OI1 Porce21 Ttllpll'atun ladioator Ullaratt' ou22232.4 l'ual Tctalilll ' Total Pual to left .Ebgioe2S 'l'llapratll!'l 1Dd1oator Rlght Ellgilla taUpipe T e ~ ~ p ~ r a t l l ! ' l 26 III 10 Tuperature IIIIS. Teat OA!27 . A u t o 1 ; r ~ ~ IIIIS1cator EliT&tol' Pol'Oe28 .ltUtlllle Gp-o Ai.rplCIIII . l tU ta29 .UU..t l l ' Bolli> Ba,y AlUtude30)1 .1'1181 fot&UMr 'total l'uel to IU.ibt Ellg1.qe.32 Maaitold hotllurw Gap IU.ibt Ellgilll TaUpipe l 'n111n

T.1e locations of the majoritr 'of the gust gages wre selected at pointsidentical to the gage installations on tbe Air Force Flight Loads Surver aircrart (RE-66 52-829). This duplication enabled st:resa masUl'8-mnts to be related di.Z'ectly to previous a.irload night test data. Toaccomplish the co111parison and to permit postshot bending moment cal-culations, alllocatioHS are installed 8lld .calibrated in terms ofstress at_a specific point. The number 8lld location of the strain gagebridge channels are as follows:The let t v1ng had 65 chlimlels at six stations. The right v1nghad 16 c ~ l s at tvo stations.

20

E


29/72

...UNCLASSIFiED

Item Sta.0External(lladol!lll) 2

Sta,82. lcoelero.terP r e u u r e ~ 1Rate G,rooDe!.l. c ... aa

TABlE 2,2 QUANTITY AND lOCATION OF FUSELAGEMlSCELLANEOUS INSTRUMENTATION

Sta, Sta. Sta, Sta, Sta, Stl, Sta,40 74 83 2455 4l l 6)9 6412 7 l 1 l l 1

Sta, St.a, Sta, Sta. Sta, Sta, Sta,246.5 407 643 '/lO 745 '193 4l 1 6 l 1)2( llillg) 1(tail)

Sta, Sta, St.a,64) 7l.l m4 1 l

St&. Sta,l 1

Vertical StabilU.r: l'hanw>caupl.ea, .lcceleroalten1 Praaaurea, &ad lliag .lcoelei'DIIIttan &ad Pratlllll'IIBV,S, Sta, Fin Tip L.lliag 1\llil>& L.111zlc l..lliag L,lliag Lt!'t Ript197 l'ip raP llp.Sur!, fLo.Sur!, rw Hacel.ll Jlacella

The Z'IIIOcouplea 2Accelel'OIII8tera l l l ) JPreuurea 2 l l l

Tailpipe IDlet Fuel 1'\ial Fuel Turbine l!o5alaR.W Duct Contl'Ol Mani!old PIDpThe:r.oocouplee sPreaaurea 1 12 2 l 1T a c b o ~ ~ ~ e t e r lFlov Hotar lPo. Indicator l

JIRDL Mo1111te: Calor.latere1 Radiomtera1 &lid c . aaTail Botto11Turrlt FwlolAigo

c ... . . 6 2

The horizontal stabilizer had 16 channels to measure elevatoractuator loads 8lld 4 cbamlels to measure elevator binge loads.Tbe linear acceleration of tbe aircraft center of gravity andother specific structural compoDents wal'e !IIB&Sured b;y Statham. I.aboratories (SL) Types A43 and A-4/J aceelerometers. For meaaurelll8nt or.angular accelerations, SL 'l'ype AA-17 accelerometers were used. I.ocation 8lld type or meaa'lireiiiBnts were as follows:.Measurements at tbe center or gravity wre made or li.Dear acceleration, in three .ams, 8lld or .fuselage pitching acceleration. Fin tiplateral acceleration a,nd left 8lld right wing plus lett stabilizer tip21


30/72

- ---------------- - -- - -- - ---- --- -- - - -- - - -- - --- - - --- -

accelerations were also .measuret1. Vertical linear accelerations at thenose ami taU sections ot the fuselage wre measured to obtidn the com-ple-e dynamic response or the tu:sel age. . Prusure mea&ure1118nts wre l!l&de with SL Types P-"128, Pl)l, and P-l40pressure transducers. To reduce lag in the system, alllilles !rom thepressure intakea to the tranaducers wre maintained at lengths oi' 18inches or lesa. To maintain a atatioD&%'1 base pressure at shock arrival,a ll differential-pressure transducers wre vented to a ret'erence tankmounted ill the fuselage. At 15 Beconds prior to shock arrival the rei'erence tank was closed to the ambient air pressure b,- meana o a solenoid valve. One pressure measurement waa made at eaoh oi' five stationson the i'uselage, at the ti n t ip, at the upper and lower sur!aces of thelet t wing, and at the upper surface or the let t stabllizer. AD additionU fuselage station measured overpressure at six points about thefuselage circumference.Rates oi' roll , pitch, 8lld yaw were measured at the center of gravit;yby' Daystrom Pacii'ic Corporation (Dlt) Type R-2l.A rate gyros.lef t and right wing ti p defiections wre recorded b,- a 16-mm N-9gun-sight-aiming-point lD)tion picture (GSAP) camera i'or each wi.Dg. Thesame tJ'l)t or camera was used to record deflections or the lei't stabilizer tip.

2.2.3 Pboto-Fanel Inatrumentation. A photo panel was used torecord 27 miscellaneous items or information. These itema wre recordedon two Pacii'ic Laboratories (PL) V-1 cameras and are itemized ill Table2.1.2.2.4 Engine Inatl'UIII8Dtation. Inatrumentation was installed torecord specii'ic engine-operating parameters during the thermal andblut phenomena. Items masured wr e five temperatures in a taUpiperake; 12 pressures at the inlet d u c ~ j .t'ual control fuel inlet pressure;fuel control ail' inlet pressure; tallpipe pressure; .t'uel manit'old pressure; fuel pump pressure; tuel i'low; engine speed; aXld nozzle position.

Pressure tranaducers wre or the types described in Section 2.2.2.Special g&Bes and izlstrumsntation ve:re developed by DAC and ..AllisonDivision or General Motors (AmM) i'or other measurements.2.2.5 Thermal Inputs. Thermal inputs were measured in conjunc tion with Project 5.7 using GSAP cameras .and various t)'P8s or calorimeters and radiometers supplied b1 the Naval Radiological Defense Labor-atories (.NlUlL). The instruments and cameras were munted in twlocations on the fuselage. An NlmL mount capable or conte.1ning as many aa six cameras aDd 2lradiometers or calorimeters was iDBtalled on the taU gun turret. The-.ount could be preset at an angle tram 0 to 70 degrees aft from the fuselagerei'arence line {FRI.) to allow the instrumentation to be preset to aimat grcniDd zero at time zero.A secOIId NRDL munt vas installed in the bottom or the art fuSelage and was capable or contai.Ding as IJIIUl1 as eight cameras and 21cal.orimBten or radiometers. Part o.f the bottom lD)UDt was i 'md to aimverticall,- and was c ~ a b l e or contaiDiDg two cameras and three

- : ~ . u . "" "";"

..


31/72

... -- - - - - ---- - -- - - - -- -- - - - - - - - --

Sta- s\IZ'-tl011 !&at

Tl6.5 WebB50 TB86 ,.B

127.5 'tB.Lt't HActuat

16.5 TWebB127.5 B.Lt't HJ.otuat

29.5529497

CLASSIFIEDTABlE 2.3 QUANTlTY AND IOOA1'ION OF HORIZON'l'.AL-STABILI2ER

AND ElEVATOR INSTRMNTMION

hont a.t-11 Strizlc Stri!IB St.rl.Di Stt1JI( ~ - 3 0 50 pot 60-75 lietWHD lieU'Spc l'l"ant llo. 1 llo. 5 No. 6 Ko. 7 pot Cbord pot P.IIZ' SpuoSper Cllord Cbord SpqIJld .&dj 1114.&dJStt1JI( St.rizlc1 ~ 2 ~ 2 - < 1 1 ~ 2 1 ~ 2 o-o-22-


32/72


33/72

calorimeters. The remail11ng portion o! the Wnmt could be set atangle i'rom 60 to 90 degrees from the t!iL. - ' I I ~ also prel!lft tothe instrument at groUDd zero at time zero this portion or the mo1mtvas capable of mo1mting six cWDSras and 18 c1fU.or1meters or rad1oll8tere.When the aircraft time zero position w!ll at an &Zigl.e or 0 to 60degrees between the FRL allli groUDd zero, tb!" tail turret mount vas UHd;vben the angle was between 60 and 70 degre !'s, both mounts were used;lllXl when the angle was between 70 mi 90 g r e e s , the bottom 1'uselage

JD:)UDt vas used. 1The total DUIIlber or instruments never exceeded 12 cll!IBras aDd 2l.calorimeters or radiometers ! o ~ case, even when both 1110unts wareuaed simultaneoualy.2 3 D::ORDIHG EQUIPMENT

The recording equipmont conei.sted or recording oscillographs andphoto equipment 'With the necessary associated equipmont required tocontrol imd convert the transducers 1 electrical signals to a recording.The associated equipment consisted or a junction panel and controlunits. 2 3.1 Junction Panel. All inputs from the transducers wre routedto a large junction panel which consisted or 540 cannon plugs mountedalong the starboard side o! the bomb bay and identified fo r simplifiedselections., installation, and. checking. This panel permitted ~ c h a n

ne l or i.nformation: to be connected to a desired osclllogreph.2 .3.2 Control Panels. The Wheatstone bridge type instruments,such as strain gages, p r e s s ~ transducers, 8Ild accelerometers, wrerouted from the junction panel to a bridge control panel. The panelprovided bridge voltage control !or sensitivity adjustment, bridgebalance control !or balancing current flov to zero in a no-load condi

tion, and an electrical calibration by means of shunting a predeterlldDed reeistance acrose one arm of the bridge. The shunt resistancevaa selected to produce a specific, fixed ,trace deflection. The control panel vas set to calibrate automatically at the beginn1ng or eachoscillograph record.Thermocouple control panels wre used fo r all thermocouples. 1'hep8I18lB consisted or necessary c11'cuitl7 to adjust th e aeuitiv1ty o!the system by the .application or an electrical calibration using amillivolt insertion method and wre calibrated automatically at thebeginning or each osoWograph record.. 2.3.1 Oscillographs. Eight Consolidated El.ectrod1JW!ics Corpora-tion (CEO Type 5-119P336 o.scUlographs wre installed in the bomb bay.The galvanometers used were em Type 7-315, which operate on theD1Arsonal principle. Each oscillograph measured and recorded .36 channels or information.2 3.4 Photo Recorder. The photo recorder, which was installed in

f ASSI


34/72

- ... ... --------- --------UNCtASSIFIED

TABIE., 2 . ~ 4 QUANTITY AND I.OOATION OF WING AND Am:RON lNSTRl!MENTAUON

Sta S\ll'!aattion

52 L f..Bl35L TlltbB2471. 't..BJ68L tllebB4071. tW.bB518L B

5li!R B

lJ5l! TW.bB

St& Sur!acetion

'18 rBJ28 TB

328 rB

ll'ozlt Il l wi l l StriDe St.r.l.aiSPil' Pront llo, l No, '3Spu-aDd .AdJSt.rJ.Di

o-!>-2o-!>-2

~ ~ 0 1822-D-258-2 3-o-D 3-2-DQ-0-2o-!>-2~ ~ 2 32-o

I )-2-Do-o-2o - ~ 2

3-c>-O 7-o-2 3201-o-0

l-D-0

o-D-2o-o-2 D-0-2le f t Aileron: .... ouplaeOuter lmr lnb 14 lnb 14SkiD Skl.n t, E. r. E.Doubler

2 l2 1

2 1

Strizl( "po t 50 pot li t wil l .Rear lllit'ba O!it'b14Na, 4 Cbord Cbor4 Alar Spuo ! rai lSpu- Ida- l l lplll4 .AdJ DouAl.ll'Str111&

Oo0-2 Oo0-2 Q-0-2o-!>-2 ~ ~ 2 Q-0-2

~ 2 - D ll62 18-2 0-D-26-123 5+2 o-o-o0-D-2 0-D-2 0-D-24-D-2 Q-0-2

Q-0-2 o - ~ 2 o-!>-2lo-2 Q-0-2s-o-o 3-c>-O 2-o-o

s-o-o

o-D-2 ~ 0 : . 2 o-o-20-D-2 Q-0-2

Fira digit or 3 !Jiufta 1ndic&tea~ r m o c o u p l a a , Sacolld digit 1nd1cataa Ue ru l at.rainIa& Thl.rd digit 1Ddicatea ai r load at ai nKIIP

25


35/72

- - - .. - . .. - - - - - -- -- --- --- - -- - -- -- ------- ...-------- - - - -----

the bomb bay, used two FL Model V-1, 35-uim mtion picture cameras. Theinstruments faced a front surrace-sllvered mirror, and the image a! theinstruments was reflected into the cameras.

2,4 INSTALLATION AND CALIBRATION2,4,1 Strain Gage Installation. Strain gages were installed 'byuse of BLHC 'bakell e strain &age cement. Surfaces were cleaned androughened prior to gage installation with fine sandpaper and emerycloth and ware washed with methyl ethyl ketone, Electrical leads weretreated with Shell Oil Company (SOC) Epon VI cement. Gages were moisture proofed vith a layer of Products Research Company (FRO) 1301,which was covered by a layer of Minneapolis M1niDg Corporation lMMC)

EO 801.2.4.2 Strain Gage Calibration. Load calibrations of the straingages were not made on the B-66 prior to Operation REDWING, because theinstallation of the instrumentation and construction of tbe aircraft

required a ll the time available, Plans were made to perform a loadpoint calibration immediately after the operation, In order to obtainappro:.dmate stress levels .ill the field, a gage correction factor wasapplied to each e.irload gage, 1'bis !actor vas obtained b7 comparisono! identical .peak tall loads and s ~ t r i c a l pul.lup demnstratiOn testsoi' the REDWING aircratt and the airload aircraft (RB-66 No, 2, AFSN52-829). . . .2.4.3 Thermocouple Installation. Thermocouple leads wre of twosizes, 5 and 10 mil, and were increased to .20-gage vires at an adjacent

terminal strip. The vaaher type thermocouple, used !o r all measurements of thin skin temperatures, was attached to the skin with l/16-inchrivets. Inside skin temperatures of thick skins and internal componenttemperatures used the washer type thermocouples attached by macbin.escrew. Outside skin temperatures on thick skins were measured 'b7 thehollow screwtype thermocouple , which vas installed in a tapped hole inthe thick skin. The final installation vas machined to llldn level to. provide a SID)Oth surface.2.4.4 Thermocouple Calibrat ion . Bureau oi' Standard Tables orelectrical potential versus temperature .were wsed instead or a specificcalibration. Laboratory calibrations were made t however, or both typesor thermocouples .installed on various skin thicknesses. The calibrations were performed at various heat input rates to establish time la gcorrection factors fo r the installed thermocouples.2,4,5 Accelerometer Installation and Calibration. The accelerometers were installed on brackets rigidly attached to the structure atthe point or measurement. The instruments were calibrated with a

Genisco centrll'uge, which subjected tlie accelerometers to a specificcentrifugal force and tbe associated acceleration at a constant speedcondition.

ASS. Fl


36/72

. .'

2.4.6 Pressure Transducer Installation 8lld Calibration, Thepressure transducers were mounted on brackets attached to the aircraftatruotur.e near the point of' mea:s'lll'ement. The iiisti"Wiint"B were cillbrated by the uae or a mercU17 manomater to appl,- a series o! knownfixed preSSill'eSt


37/72

..... , ~ ... . . _ . ~ : : . . .'.

3.1 AIRcRAFT PREPARATION

CHAP'.rER 3OFRATIONS

In Jant18l7 of 1955, an addition vas mads to the BUIIJIIIS.17 ll-66 production contract to have DAC install the Decessary inst.runsntation inthe B-66 for this project. Initallation of the instrumentation and ini t ial fabrication of the aircraft were started s i l l l u l t ~ o u s 1 y in March1955 and completed on 15 January 1956. Practice flights and maintenance checks were made at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Theaircraft was flow to Eni\letok Atoll via Trav.l$ AFB and Hickam AFB.3.2 AIHCIW'T CONFIGURATION

The JB-66B aircraft differed from the production model B-66B in thefollowing ways at the onset of the series of tests:The underside of the aircraf't waa painted white with Vita-Var Pl-100, with B-103 overcoat. All Fiberglas radcms end fairlilgs were covered with white Hypal.on (Gates qineer1Dg IP-104). The twin 20-mnguns wre removed from the tai l turret, and the NRDL instrumentation vas mounted on this turret. Another mount fo r NRDL 1nstru118ntat1on vasplaCed in the bottom of the art fuSelage. Test instrumentation wighillg 5,000 pounds was aboard the aircraft; 2,500 pounds of this waslocated in the bomb bay. Two wing deflection CUI3ra i 'airinp were lo -cated on top of the .fuselage above the wing, and protective curtaillBwre installed in the cockpit to minimise the possibility of flashbJ 1nclness. Figure 3.3 illustrates the changes in the aircratt configuration.. .3.3 SHOT PARTICIPATION

.Aircra.tt positions \181'8 selected fo r each shot from positioningcurv8s such as those shown in Figures 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5. 7he proJectparticipated in tle following shots: Lacrosse, Cherokee, Zuni, Flathead,Inca, Dakota, Mohawk, Apache, Navajo, Teva, and Huron. The shot schedule, location, and other associated shot data are shown in Table 3.1.Aposition was selected fo r each shot to achieve the desired loadson the aircraft. From tbe selected on-time position, :mission profilesvere draw to establish tlight altitudes, patterns, and takeoff andlending timea. Bept"8senta.tive mission profiles are shovn in Figures3.1 and 3.2.


38/72

CLASSIFIED

~ E n o l Climb at Crullo Alllluclo

Rtlurn lo Boltat Etinlok Begin Clmb 1o Cnne Allllude

!'igurs 3.1 Typical mission profile at B1ldni Atoll.

J'igure 3.2 Typical mission profile at Eniwtok Atoll.29


39/72

. '

--- --u ----.-----------------------------NCLASSIFIED- - - - - - - - ..

Durizli Shots Cherokee, Lacrosse, Z-.mi, l'lat.hBad, Navajo, Mohawk,. and Apacbt, the aircraft K ~ S navigation aDd bombing radar SJStem vuused as tbiJ sole method of poeitiorWI8 In order to position the &11-craft co1'1'ectly at the desired point in space at the preciM tilDe ot.detoution ot the teet dev1oe, a time-colllpll'iaon computer and indicatorw:re designed and manufactured by Radiation, Inc,, and installed u IDawdliary aid to the pUot and uncator , The computer receiwd asigDal trom the K5 e:yetem to repreient the tU. remdning prior to arrival or tbe ail'cratt at the desired point in space. I t also receiwda time tone signal from the t ir i l lg blmk8r at a know tilDe prior to

Hypalon Coa tinQli'!25) Vita- Var Palftl

Figure ) , ) Coni'iguration or the test aircratt,detonation. The computer 118&Sured the diUerence between tbt tw t iDeaDd presented a constant indication to tbe pUot and navigator or thenumber ot seccmda to be gained or loat in order to be in the proper po.s.1 tiOJl at tbe proper t iD .During Shot Inca, H)QlA ground radar vas 'WIEld tor tracld.ng theaircratt. I t vas intended as a tracking dence .or p o s t ~ h o t int'ormationaDd vas aet up to be capable _or assllllling priJaa.ey control tor positioz:d.Dgin the event the aircratt radar IIIBltunctioned. 1'be mission waa aborted,because tbe navigator could not see the target clearl)' untU he had com-pleted his final run-in to ground ~ t r o . :t'he pl.&ule would ha w been outot poeition at tiae zero.


40/72

R - --- " "' " ' " 0 - '"" ' -- --- ---- - -" w - -- "CLASSIFIEDAs a result of post-Inca discuseioDB, i t wu apparent tbat MSQ-Uor the Raydist positioning system could sene a more useful pUrpOse thanto act o ~ _ y etandby .to r the. possibW.ty of cW'i'iculties; 1 ' h t " " M S Q ~ a - and Raydist systems wre capable or providillg considerable assistance

to the crew to position the aircraft. Following the discussions, the conversion or the B-66 to a caj)abUity !o r use o! MSQlA and the llqdist positioni.Dg system -VBB made.This was only a capability installation, since all KSQ m i Rqdiatsystems in REDWmG were assigned to speaitic ail'crart, and use or asystem depended on withdrawal or an airoratt trom a abot .In order to d.etel'llline the compatibility of tbe K-5 aircra.tt radarpositioning methodS and the !light profiles with tba M3QlA and ~ s t system, a practice mission was flow, using each system as a combill8dbackup and auxi J 'ary navigation sistem. The pattel'!lB !low w:re . thoseof a K-5 .mission, because the radar could not position the ail'crattwithout the use or racetrack and wind-box !l ights. At the conclusionof the wind box, the airborne radar navigator and the .MSQ or ~ s t controller wuld use tbe information of both systeDIB to reach tba ini t ia l point on timB. During the 40-mil.e run in from tbe initialpoint to ground zero, the pllot had & dual presentation or in.t'ormation,one from the ground system and one !rom his airborne system. In everycase, these systems wre alike in thB presentation of position withreference to tima, &lld tbe crew vas able to reach the d.esired positionon tim much easier with the dual system aapabllity worldzlg togetl:ar.In a d d i ~ i o n to the compatibUity, i t was determined that With a malfunction or either airborne or ground positioning &)'Stem, the flightcould be continued by use o! the reJM1n1ng system to position theaircra.tt.For Huron, the aircraft U8ed the lQlA system, because of the nonparticipation of a M)Q-lA controlled aircraft. All airoraft participated in Shots Apache and Navajo by using the existing M)Q andsystems, and the B-66 was forced to use the K5 aircra.tt radar withouteither or the backup systems on these tests.During CherokBe, !lathead, Dakota, Navajo, and Tewa, the ~ a t tracking system gave atter-theract positions or the aircraft at timzero end timB or shock arrival, For Zuni, Apache, and Mohawk, tbaaircra.tt position at time zero wu dete:mined from radarscope photosand in-tl.igbt recording or the pilot's colllllents on how early or latethe aircraft was at time zero. b recorded tiD or shock arrival and an integration of photopallSl airSpeeds during the period trom tille zero to shock arrival wreused to detemine a:l.rcra.tt position at .shock arrival, During Huron,positions wre determined by use or the methods of Zuni, Apache, andMobavk, plus the data recorder or.erated by Radiation, Inc. The recorder used inputs from the M S Q - l A t r a c ~ radar

.3 3.1 Shot Le.crosse. For this shot, the airci-a.rt t o o ~ ort at tbecorrect time and cli.JiU)ed to shot altitude. Arter cruising to theinitial point, the a:l.rcratt proceeded on course fo r tbe racetrack andwind box pattel'tlS. At 13 m i n u ~ s prior to: shot tim the aircraftinstrull2nt powr system failed, am this resulted in tbe loss of beadiz18 reference to the K-5 system and the loss of the !light attitude

3l


41/72

,.,

CLASSIFIEDgyro. The courae to zero pod ion was continued by use of the standbycompass .as a heading reference. The pilot was unable to keep the aircra.t't straight and level without the attitude gyro. A3 a a u . u . ~ theflight was aborted at 2 minutes prior to shot time. The aircrlli't was inno-effects position at time zero and at tims of shock arrival and re-turned ba:le to land at the correct landing time.

3.,3.2 Shot Cherokee. The aircraft took off at the correct time andclimbed to shot altitude. After cruising to the initial point, the aircraft proceeded on course for the racetrack and wind box patterns. Atapproximately ) minutes prior to shot ti.ll8 the timing calls of the dropaircraft becag erroneous for tho correct aircratt. position. The aircraft mde an abort turn of 146 degrees to the right to a beading of 251degrees. The aircraft rolled out on a level night heading approximately5 seconds prior to time zero. After shock arrival the aircraft returned .to base and landed at the correct tiDe.3 3 3 Shot Zuni. The aircraft took off at the correct time andclimbed to shot altitude. A successful mission profile was ! low.3.3.4 Shot Erie. The aircraft did not participate in this shotbecause of a malfunction of a relay in the le t t engine. The engiiiBwould not atart, and the .f.'light was cancelled.3 3.5 Shot Flathead. The aircra!t took off at the correct tima,climbed to the shot altitude, and suceesstully flew th e mission pro-file. At the beginning of the final ran in to target, approximately Sminutes prior to shot time, the K-5 radar becll!e erratic and was onlyparti&l.ly effective. The aircraft was accelerated to aaaure arrivaleither on time or early vithout use or radar. Arter shock arrival, theaircraft retur.ced to the base and landed at the correct tims .3.3.6 Shot Inca. !be aircraft took ott at the correct time,

cl.abed to shot altitude, and success.t'ull.y flew the mission profile. Ontbo f inal run-in at 1 l/2 minutes prior to shot time, the aircraft was5 secondes late at a point whore 2 aeconda late would result' in de.structi:ve loading on the aircraft. Becawse of the bigh run-in. speed,aircraft cou.l4 not make up the ti118, so an abort :-as made with a 90-degree right turn to roll out on a heading of 1.40 degrees tor a noeffects position at time zero and shock arrival. The drcrat t returnedto base and landed at the correct ti.ll8.3.3.7 Shot Dakota. The aircra.rt took off at the correct time andclimbed to shot altitude. A successful mission profile waa f'lown, anda.f.'ter shock arriv&l the aircraft returned to the base to land at thecorrect tima.3.3.8 Shot Mohawk. The aircraft took of f at the corl'ect time andclimbed. to shot altitude. A mission protile was flown, and atter shockarrival the aircraft returned to base and landed at the correct time.A postflight inaplction revealed that the oscillograph-on and the. I

"':-. .... . _) ...... . . . . . ' V ~


42/72

UNCLASSIFI -Dphoto-recorder-on switches were accidentally tUrned ort pri,or to takeoffand remained off during the entire flight. No data were recorded, e:venthough aircraft p o s i t i o ~ good.

3.3.9 Shot Apache. The aircraft took oft at the correct tiDIB,climbed to the shot altitude, 8Jlli flew a successful mission profile.After shock arrival, the aircraft retUl"DBd to base and landed at thecorrect ti.ue.

3c.3.10 Shot NavaJo. The aircraft took off at the correct time andclimbed to shot altitude. After cruiSing to the initial point, the aircraft flew the desired mission profile. I t vas apparent on the racetrackpatterns that cloud coverage did not allow the target to be cl8arly distinguished untU late on the ti:ming run to ground zero. .No usable vindruns wre obtained as a result of the heavy cloud cover. On the finalrun the cover caused the aircraft to be 28 seconds late at 4 minutesprior to shot time. This vas beyond the capability of the aircraft tocorrect, so the aircraft followed the assigned re-position plan with aturn at one lllinute 10 seconds prior to shot time to a heading of 241degrees. The effects were small, as predicted fo r the re-positio:p.-'After shock arrival, the aircraft returned to base and landed at the c o ~ r e ~ t i m e .

3.3.11 Shot Teva. The aircraft took ort at the correct time andclimbed to the shot altitude. A successfUl mission profile was flovn .3 3 ..12 Shot Huron. The aircraf't took off at the correct timB,clilllbed to shot a l 1 ude, and success.f.'ully !lew the mission profUe

.3.4 DATA REDUCTIONAt the test si te, a ll records were developed and Jeak values of theselected key channelB wre read. Where necessary to complete the datacomparison, a fev tim histories wre also read and plotted. The read1ng methods emplo)'ed were by use of ruler and pencil. In special in stances, where additional data wre required and bulk and tiDe werecritical factors, the WAOO data-reduction tra.1ler was used. The datapresented in this report are approximate and are subject to revisionprior to the final report.After a ll correlation data required at the proving grounds wrereduced, the original records and necessary data reduction instructionsware shipped to the DAC Flight Test Division, Santa Monica, California,fo r complete data reduction.

,3.5 CORRELATIONIn order to define accurately the errors and consistencies in prediction mathods, _he Ibuglas positioning criteria personnel submittedestimates of tbe responses expected from a ll key channels prior to eachshot. Upon determination of an estimated actual yield and mateorological

:.n

- - - - - ---- . . - - . ... .; '.-


43/72

. .. '

IDd position data, as shown in Tablaa 3.2, 3.3, ID4 3.4, tbe anticipatedn.aponaes were n)::ll'tclicted. l'be data were ftcluced tor theN ks;ychamlala , and prel:IJD1J:w7 comparisons-ot tlle J18&8U1'8cl data- to -tla pN dieted data wre -... 1'he meuu:ed data the key c h ~ U J . D e l a 81'8 shownin Ta.bles 4.1 and 4. 2. Wherever the meuUl'ed loada dittered cona1cler-abl1 from the preclioted loads, a tield ~ D a l y a i s vu ll&de to reolwdifterences, and tbe positioning criteria wre adjuated to oompenaate torthe difterenc

..

Iero11e

ZUlliBral latbud

~ . , ... -.

(b)(3)


44/72

... . - . -- - .... . . .

-- - -- - . . -- . ' . - . . ......

- - -- -- -- ------- ---- - - -C L A S S I F I E D

TABU: 3.2 SUMMA.RI OF MED:OROIDGIO.AL DATA.P ,..o !I I .. - . ! t ~ ; - i j~ ' " ' 0 ii... u- . ; ~ i ~ - ~ !! Ji !.2. .. ! ~ " ' 0 ,$11:1 ..i ~ I I ' ... !:1 .. l .a..d a c!E : .Ill ::o:U ,u ,u .!::

OF 111l.11 k:aota dig, HI! or or p c ~ t ot 114!-t.croslt Flight Abol'ted - See Pvlcnpb ).J , lCblroat 47 ) ,6) lO 8 250 1009 Il l 73 '1'6 20,6Zuni 20 7,32S 8 10 120 1010,5 81 'II'> 80 u.ssl'latblld 28 8.225 10 9 160 1012,9 82 'II'> 82 23E r ~ Fll&bt 110t ""co!ipllebld See PIJ'III'Ipb ) , o4IDea Fli&bt !Jorttd- Set Puo_,rapb 3,3,6Dakota 2.7 js.l 110 I 8 1160 11009.11 82 17S 180123.8ltlbawlc Tllght CCIDplated. IDatrlantatioll Ott See Plni!'lpll 3.),8Apaobl 48.4 ll.OOb 10 19 l.2C 1010,S 80,3 74.9 84 22..4llavaJo 2.5 6, l'JS 10 20 80 1010.2 81.2 74 81 21,6H u n ~ n 48.3 10.)10 lO 90 1007.8 81,4 '11'>,2 84 22.6%eva lb,7 7,2S 10. ll 12.0 1009.3 82 ., 85 23.8

Chorolale )6 ooo S2 ,64019,000 27,000 ), 6 'l'SD 97. fJJlb,OOO 17,8)0 ), 7 'l'SD 51,9 59,100

(Fliaht not. ICCOIIIpliahed See Pu.gnph 3.3.4lnea Fl!.ght aborted See IVIIl'&pb 3,3 6

222

DU:cta I 16,000 I 3,100 IM !&D j 28,5 I 3S,050 I 2lbhavlc 'Fli8ht complllted Inatru.ntation ott - See Parqraph ).3,8Apache 8,000 2)1SOC 2,0 'tEll 47,7 60 1500 2NavaJoHuroriTeva

2.1,000 71,000 4.5 1'0 lJO10,000 &1540 1,1 'ltD lB19,000 27,250 1.5 'JED 50

Note; 'n:D - Trailing E ~ S t e Dow,

180.,00022,44065,900

222


45/72

II 8'... 0 ...... iB ... .. ....s t:H :1 .. ...II. I)B ... J;.. h ..Ill J8.tt.. tt., J m g ~ wt lb. lllin, l l in.1'01M lli&h\ aborted See l'ul&ftph ),3.1

Cblroklte ;32,,00 )6,000 4 9 ~ 498 ~ 8 , 6 ) 0 22.4 H-93 11t48Zuni 1 8 ~ 19,000 . 514 491 58, 7.20 22.4 H8) l i t ) ~ Fl.&tblld 15,3(,0 16,000 498 59,050 22.8 HB3 llt)5Erie Fli&ht IIDt a c c o ~ a h l d See Paragraph 3.3.4IDea fl1&h\ aborted - See l ' lngrl j l l l 3.3.6Dako\a 15,51,0 I 16,000 1 458 I 457 1 60,!110 !23 I 8) l i l t ) ~ Hohavlt 1llcbt co.pleted - I.u\:111811\ation 0!! See Paragraph ),3,8ip.cbe 7,785 8,000 4'10 4Sl 62,240 2) H-77 lltl(,ll&'f-.10 19,980 21,000 ~ ) 2 474 59,610 22.9 H83 .llt35INroZI a 10,ooo 11/J 11/J S8,6)0 22,7 H-77 llt16few a 19,000 457 457 (.0 ,2?'0 23 H8) llt49

1 liot available,

TABIE 3.5 COMPAR!SON OF IESIRED AND ACTUAL KlSITIONS- ..: l'j"'I i-'-! "'f i j ... ..: ... .. I! "!. ....B .. '3 ... ... ill11 !U . ! ! : ! ~ o ! ~ u .li!! .u

cloo&l"'lt degree tt.. tt.. tt.. tt.. tt.. tt..x.cra. .. 135 ~ a l3,QQO l ) , tm 5,300 Abort 22.,500 1b>rtChlrokae lOS 251b )6,ooc )6,000 )8,000 52,640 102,000 143,609ZUlli 0'10 0'10 19,000 19,000 25,800 27,000 69,900 9 7 , ~ Erie Cllllltlld u,ooo 2,7io lb,)OOl'l.&Uwad l20 l20 16,000 16,000 12,000 17,1Kl0 )7,500 '9,100Inca 050 u,ooo . 11,000 850 Allort 11,400 AbortD&kote 124 124 16,000 16,000 13,500 13,100 39,150 )5,050Hohavk oso oso 6,000 6,000 12,?00 . 12,?00" .28,450 .28,450"Naujo 124 24lb 21,000 21,000 ~ . 5 0 0 71,500 62,500 18:),000. l ~ oso 080 s,ooo s,ooo 20,500 2),500 4),000 60,500Tava 124 124 19,000 19,000 27,100 27,250 67,000 65,900lluron ID,ooo 10,000 8,?00 8,450 ~ . c o o 22,4Xl

a Allort.

) '


46/72

CHAPl'ER 4RF..SULTS

.UNCLASSIFIElt

The prelim1.Iiary peak values of the effects on thi! critical portionsof' the aircraft at time zero and time of' shock arrival are given inTables 4.1 and 4.2.Typical tins history plots from which the ta'rul.ar peak values wreselected are shown in Figures 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3.Figures 4.4 and 4.5 show detailed results of' the recorded temperatures and temperature rises. During all shots, other than Cherokee, theaircraft was gust critical. Therefore, the variations in absorptivityshown on these plots were necessary to obtain data throughout a r&tlge of'temperatures up to tm limit used iD Reference 8 calculations {42JF).These figures illustrate the completeness of' data throughout the temperature range on skin thickrlesses of 0.016, 0.025, and 0.040 inch andprovide an indication or the temperature effects on thicknesses up to0.070 inch.The temperatures measured on the 0.016 inch thick elevator with aprotective coat of' white Vita-Var PV-100 paint (absorptivity of' 0.15}compared closely with the temperatures measured on the nose radome.Since the instrumented areas were repainted prior to Shot Dakota !orhigher absorptivities, no m e a s u r e ~ ~ S n t s of' the original surface conditionwere made during Dakota or later shots. For this reason, the noserado!D3 temperatures f'ro:n Dakota and later shots, as show in Figures 4.6and 4. 7, may be considered as equivalent to the temperatures attained bya white-painted, 0.016 inch thick elevator panel.

The small stresses :measurad on the horizontal stabUizer appear tcbe a negligible consideration in the gust analysis.The s panwise variations of' me uured percent llm1 stress on thewing (Figure 4 . ~ ) show the critical section of' the viilg to be an outboard section. The dynamic-1118gtlif'ice.tion factor (IMP') is the primefactor in relating the streases measured by an aircratt exposed to anuclear explosion to .the stresses predicted with the maneuvering rigidbody gust analysis. measured values or the 00 are shown in Figure4.9 for the saue shots and wing stations as the measured stress levels orFigure 4.8.

Soma damage to secondary structural items occurred during the tests,primarily on radomes and seals. Photographs of' principal damage areasare presented as Figures 4.10 and 4.11.The J ~ S a s u r e d values of' radiant exposure varied from the predictedvalues as show in Figure 4.12. Recorded values wre less than predictedfor m:;)St of' the shots but we:re eqilal or greater than predicted fo r twoshots. The data are shown fo r the radiant exposure masured on areeeiver parallel to the ground plane (vertical radiation) and a receivernormal to the radial from the burst to the aircraft (direct radiation).

)7

..-------- , - - --- - - - --- - ED


47/72

... -.- : : : . ~ ~ _ U N C t . A . S S i F J E Dile c Q I ~ l . a O D ot the_: nputi -u !oe i&ted iDeidenceqgles for radiant expoaure, material velocity, and ovvpressure are

s h ~ in figw's /.,JJ, 4.14, aDd 4 .15.The positions selected were based on a critical aircratt structureCCIIIponent. This resulted in the collection of a minimum amQUJlt ofusable erigiDe-response data. The critical gust overp:eaiUl'es far thestructure and the qiDe ue plotted in Figure 4.16, The curves showthat the critical overpressure fa r the structure to be blast critical isconsidera'bl1lover than the critical overprea8\ll'e tar the eDgi.ne in allcoaditions, The relations of the power setting aDd overpresaure to thepoa&ib1lit1 ot unoholdng the jet nozzle are shown iD Figuz'e 4.17. Theaircraft has a l1m1t overp:essure of 2.0 }:ei. DellVWf speeds are madeat pover settings on the arder ot 98 J;ercent ar greater. Therefore, thep:robabilit1 ot unchold.rlg the je t nozzle waa negligible.Ot 288 oscillograph channels recarding each test, au average of 96percent operated auocessf'ully. or l2 cameras and 27 J:bcto-psnel instru-ments, an average ot 99 percent operated successfully.The aircraft positions and other parameters at:fecting the data areshown 1n Tables 3.2, 3.3, aDd 3.4.All values quoted are based upon observations made in the field.Appraximatel1 20 percent ot the data recarcled were reduced to peakvalues at the test site, This reduction is estimated to be accuratewithin t 10 percent tar a ll cases il!o which no major error was made.Rechecks were made onJ.r when answers were obvi0i1817 incorrect, ADaccrurate value ot wing stress levels receivecl cazmot be determined untila.tter the airload calibrations are per!armed. These callbraticms arescheduled to begin immediatelf following the REDWING test series.

s


48/72

j

NCLASSIFIED

CherawZuoiFlatheadErieInca

cal/o.'l

7,J

TABLE 4.1.

Total _I AT Total I T Tot.&l ITemp. 0PJ 0P Temp. " ' 0r Temp. F I ,night Abortell - See Paragraph ) ,J , l

4511487

Pl1sht !lot Accompliehell - See Paregraph J,J,4night 4bonell - See Pua&nph J,J,6

JO)717

Total I .TTemp, 0 1 or,012710)

5751JO

1,0004,290

Dakota JO I 436 I St I I I I 204 I Jt I 39 ,5t0ApacheNavaJoHuron'l'eva

....0'"''l

1 4 c ~ l l l

CherckeeZuniFlatheadErieIncaDakota~ : O h a v k

ApacheNavaJoilm'ol1Teva

Flight Cclllplet811 lnatrwaDntation orr S.. Paregreph ) ,) ,819 187 89 152 55 107 910,6 129

)6J)22

56276258

ll5257254

lS191

143l l2

5554

UBLE 4.2. SUMMARY OF SHOCK ARRIVAL RESULTS ...IIII

. , 1 ~ a I" I" 0 s s1 s.u .." ~ . , . .;.I .s 1 1 ~ ~ oi:'" .,..,I:' .;s ~ i 1 'i $., Jr: e . ~ u :1 :1r.o .f..a.S " ' ~ pe1 (tot.&l) 1 pen:ent poi po:raentnight Ahoriell - See Paragraph ).),1

0,16 1.4 45.5 1.58 6,950 520,)7 1.47 48 1.47 6,180 47O,JJ 1.39 /J>.4 1.52 6,01,0 4S

night Not Accollpliabt4 - See Parasn;>b ,3,3 ,4night Abortell - See J'angraph ) ,) 6

0.9) I 2,75 I 94 I 1.)9 I 1.3,300 I 88Fliiht Compltttcl - wirulaentaUDn Ott - See P a : ~ g r ~ p b ,3.),8

0,85 1.7 57 1.1.4 4,')00 480,17 1.14 )7.4 1.74 4,7UJ /J>,21,02 ),:/b 107 1.56 1.3,287 1100.84 1.68 56 1.59 8.,62'1 65

8 :ltreaa l lwls &Ill not at &ll8 s location 11111 to 1111Calibl'at.ed colldition. Six chlllllell &Illrecorcled at oach station llld each baa cliflel'llnt l ' l l a ~ n a llld l.1:adt atl'llea, !'uk YLl'lll orthe channel .bavin& tJw b1gbtat ~ r c e n t or l1111t allowable 1treaa ia illd1aattcl.

ASS

),8.411

/g..J.I"Dtpz111111

I 11ll1

39


49/72

40

II 1 od.ant r ~ ~ ~ . . . . . INR'L 90" Ouarlr Calor_,. ,J . "'J ,._,., -I v"' ------ - -- - . -.0 ' ---

10 15 10 II 10 Tine fr01n T., HCOncllFigure 4.1. Typical plots or tbel"'IIBl inpu.t versus time, Shot Dakota.

zoo

ISO

150j 40jen 120 -00

10 0 I 10 It zolime from T0 , IICondsFigure 4.2. T7Pical plots ot skin temperature i'l'om Shot Apacbe

, .)', : . \ ~ .. . . ~ ~

c


50/72

- - - - . ~ - - - -

IIIII! _.,.0>.If..l1..Q .Ii"l'i

fl

3

2

I

z.oo.sr--1.0

0.15

0, -w

DDOO

0000-4000 r!000

0

f -A t C.G.1\vII\/ ' I'-. . / 'L f'-Jtv./'.....,L :::::., ...."'"'" "...,_ ,.... _,-..1"------F .....

1"\.I \I \I 1 \ /.r-- /.....__At St a. 40T 'I'--' I0 01 o.z o.'llme from Shoclt Arrival, seconds

Figure 4 .3. Typ1.cal. hist.;,ries oshock-arriv al t iDB, Shot Dakota.

40 0

400

M ,:100!

!r_{ 2!101jj 20 0

1!0

100'

eo:

'

4B e

40445

4 0 . 454

35 435

40 X 45 136x

4e120 14 020 140

12A14A

-010 .020 --03 0Skin Thrc

Figure 4.4. Marlo th1n skin .


51/72

li

i . .~ : : .

400 TJ8e - DaloolllII z...

50 0 Flftt.d45 sa I 6 ClllroiiN--+:: X Unlln .105 ~ 1 lilt AIIIOrp!Wifln-I 456 ol ...... In Pliant46

110

! 1:i 46I'i1 ,..!6I 40 l --f-----25-' 45l 15i 14ei llfil . Ji!.. - 1----36 I - --- - 1--" -

; 100l 111010

i \ ~ & 1


52/72

'i:-

'

u.D

u.D.."'f..!5e!

600

S S I F I E D

1.!!...

.i& I !cFigure 4.6 s'UliiiiiSrY or total tempsraturea.

~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ On 0.016 " Elevator SkinOn NoH Radome

c:l While Surface Gfay Surface5 ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

40 0

30_0

z

Figure 47 SUJ!llll8%7 of 'te!lllJI'l'&tul'e rises.4'3

- -- - - - - - - ----- .... ----- - ---- - - -


53/72

1:

:t:E::;-:8

120 Tewo !Von.. . . _Qakotao o r ~ Z ~ ~ t l " Cil FlatheadA Chenak

l Apache10

40

20

0

.. .. .- .

llA 0 BI

\ Normal 1-g Fli9fllIGross w1iQht sapoo lbll

IX. 247Wing Station

X.. 407

Figure 4.8 Percent of limit stress versus wing station

.6 !Tewo Huron Dakota El.4 II Zlli -ll Flatt.ai 0ll. CherokN GI A!lache.2 6 I0

I.0 s I

0 .. 1 1:55

Wng StatiOnFigure 4.9 Ynamic-magn1.1'ication !'actor ~ r e u s viDg station.


54/72

{.1'2

" #

,, ;: ' '' '. !.._\- ~ ; , \ ' ~ l' ;.' ; )", ,:: i ::_., : ;L ; '({ l-,. : . l " f ;;:: ' f# . ;.J!. i . - ' ," - .... _--, . - . - - : v .

J . , \T .:J ... '

1'. ' t CL . .r "'!"\ ~ . . , . . j(' ...... I .;- '.! I . . "}k;- - , . . . :' .. < ;, .).f .

.. . . . )'\; .I


55/72

------------ - - - - -- - - - - # - - - - - -

. ,. ;_.. i:

' I ..-,t, .:,..,_ .-;. .

.L i = - - - - " = - ~ . J - - : ~ .... '" ''l

- ~ - - - ..- :. ..... . ,-..

ED


56/72

..

------- - .... -

(b)(3)

i8..Js'6

UNCLASSIFIEDTal Rodomn ~ a d HypoiOn on Ohlrollte and Apoclla oolyvoro vor PV 100 Yltd on ol olhtt !hell0 Olrtcl Roclol'on Predicloda. -l)hel -Radlollon --f!OCIIWida V011 icol RodlotiO'I Proili


57/72

'iI

I'tr

... .. '. ' :

T TIWIIH HuronC O..roloeo0 DakotaF FlatheadA ApacheZ Z u ~ l

T TewaH H U ~ Q f t c Chll'akooo DaloolaF FlattwadA ApaclMZ ZUlli

-uNCLASSIFIED

'i

J0.60 0

-1.00

o

-8 0

o

l'igure 4.15. IDcidence a!:tgl.ea, terial velooitr


58/72

- - - - - ~ - - - - - - C L A S S I F I E1

'l

4

~ ~ r - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - , - - - - - ~ - - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - 666 A ~ r a f l , 100% Gust (Carllln: DyftiiNc lilagn t f l l ; p l : .LG.; Gtoss Wtitjrt. ;.54,000 .lbsl- . .--- B i ! S L ~ ~ ~ O i l t . kMLA119It.-41- AIIoek .:S!' .fCoservalive Limit l I----4--- Ale VeloellI ~ - l

10 2.0 2.5(Mrpres$1e, psi

F iFe 4 . 1 ~ . Critical values ot blABt. Aircraftl.illl1ta are extrapolated above .30,000 teet

". ..; .. "\s';.' \ \. I:: 1\

.. I \~ ..r: " 1/ I... 10./ 1/ J

CM:rprusure , DS iFigure 4.17. Eatiated 1118Jilr.llll overpressure to unchoke the jetnoszle. J7l-A-ll engine; aircratt veloc1't7, 0.76 Mach; thesedata. baaed on Eaivetok: standard dq .

to


59/72

. , . - - -- ---- - - - - - - - - - -

CHAPTER 5DISCUSSION

The c011111ents of this chapter are based .on the prellminary resultsof Chapter 4, and the field observations made by the ~ o j e c t p e r s ~ l . 5.1 DESIRED EFFECTS

In order to accCIIIplish the objectives ot the B-66 participatlon inOperation REDWING, certain generill information vas required. Table 5.1itemizes the desired effects and indicates for each shot which effectvas expected. Some of these effects were used as the determin1Dg factorin the selection of a final desired position, and such influencing factors are so indicated, In order to obtain a generaliDdication ot thei tem1 accCIII.plished, a note wu made fo r each shot and effect to i.Ddicatethe specific accomplished items.

5.1.1 OVerall Considerations. The general objective of the testrequired the measurement of a spread of temperatures on several skinthicknesses and at several points on the aircraft having ditterent convective cooling coefficients. I t also required measurement of a spreador overpressures, accelerations, and limit-allowable stresses. In eachcase, the desired spread of data up to the limiting value vall to bemeasured. It vas considered adequate f'or satisfactory canpletion of theindividual objectives to obtain a maxlmum measurement of 70 percentof the limit effect.Since the B-66 vas designed for tactical usage and has deliverycapabilities at all altitudes tram sea level up to at least 40,000 feet,the positions ware selected to obtain a variety of altitudes and anglesof incidence of the 1npata. The flight time required to p : ~ r f a r m the K5radar-positioning mission profiles and the range performance limitationsof the aircraft were such that low altitude participations could not bemade at Bild.ni. The low altitudes provided the best positions fo r theB-66 when a max1mum amount of data was desired; therefore, the shotsfollowing Cherokee were nown at medium or low altitu:les wherever possible. The high altitude position provided the specif'ic 1nforme.tion of a high eqle gust loading and no other data.

5.1.2 Ftfects Deaired f\-Qm Shot to Shot. 'the pceitian selectedfor each shot vas cme vhieh would give the JIWlx:!mm amounts and t7P8S ofdata which had not ~ e n ~ a e m r ~ 1;Q ~ . t:lmQ Q! the. selection. Asdata &egan to acouarul.ate frau the more successful shots and as ga:J;a inthe data occurred trau aborted shots, the positions were reshuf.t'l.ed toobt.ain the missing data

...........- ~ - - - - - - - - - - - . - - ~ - = - - ~ - --. --------- --..- ..-.--c A


60/72

iIi

1'ABLE 5.1 StJMM.m OF PLANNED AW MEASURED EFFECT'S AREAS, . 87=oll "

Ezpeoted E t t e o ~ 1 H P'iila1 IW1UOII DetenliMCIb7 the S 1 r a i f 1 o ~ ot .. 1~ h i s Deline! E f t e o ~ il 1 ..ESIRED i'IIERM&L EFFEC1'S I 4cOCIIplilbed Etfectl ,Q 1l gj .. .. II =D g ~ ~ i !- " l:lPrilllrT N , ?. '"', . l'b11Hid.lll*l c011tro1 llll'f&etl.. Im tuporatlll ' ll (0.150"1) I I t 1 X I 4lb. lllten.4iate teaporatlll'll (150-JOOOrl I I X I I JXo. llodium teaper,.t\lllel (J()().4200f) if I 1: x I )X4; J!1&h taporature (l'VIIIDI11t s a ~ .I I I u42001')II , Rea U 1t1o ra41allt upoeure + peranea.t Cumot obtaill thi l data 011 a gzoOIIIId burl t11 t em 1101'1111 paillt oollt1SIIl'at1oo (vh!te) lillol sun cODJicieraticu bee - cntical.2. NOll R a e ! ~ a. Lor.t t e m p e r a t u r e ~ (o.l!SOOF) I I I I X 1 I 71.b. llodiia tllllporat.uru (250.350'7) I I I I ox3. halaca . Im t a p e r a t ~ ~ ~ ~ e a OD realiltio 1tructure 1 I I I I 1 oxb. lladiua t11111porature1 011 real.Utic

X Utill'o. H1Bb teapent\ll'lll oa. teat pu. l onq I uSeo!IIIIW7l . SI!IW!of:zpaaure t o r.aliatio rldiaa.t upaiUI 'o I lX2. Tail Rac!a.E&poe\llle to :NalUtio radiut.- I I 2llzpoi\IZ'e

1. Quata, Lov peroea.tqe Ual.t e l l G ~ a U . la.&l 'faotczr (.t.0-60J) b, Madim J l l l ' o e ~ ~ t l i e l iait allCIIablt 1o.d 1 1aator ( 6 0 - 8 ~ ) I l Olo. ~ : ( " ~ llait a l l c w t . ~ lo.d I I l l I I 'I X 2l

2. Oftrpreaaure Low "'"'J:I'enr (0,1-o,?s pei ) I x x x 1' 4Xb. Mad11a cmrpreuun (-o.?s-1.5 poi) X I x x 1 I 4Xo. Ub \ . -1111' (1.5-2.0 -1 ) I I Ol_______.w____ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ - ---

I I X 1 1 X bl

DESIRED PlllO.P' O.P' !'!lAS!: I (RetVIIl l l l 8)1.. lf1&b. Ni .u . t ( w . ~ tram- I x I N Nl 2Xburlta) .2, Low J.ltitu:le upoe1111e (0.30 daJZ'tt trca l l I 21boriaoa.tal).3 . Ia.te1Wdiate ucl e:r;poaure U0-.45 dagzoMI ) I I X II 4X4. Hisb .Altitude upoeure (4s-&O da v . ~ c a I .I 2XbariaCDtal)s. Lc q Thcwl f'lllll I I .I .I .I 1 .5X6. l l i llurat IX u


61/72

S.l.3 Degree ot .Atte.:tseut. S)lotaT - .. aDd Huron cODtpletecl nearqall the gap111 1D the data uaept. ff # the med11111l tamperatU1'81 on the noseradane, th medlum peroent Of ?'_if't ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o z . ; ili8h -:_o v e r p r ~ I H H I ~ -- no-a:u---ourst-aa1ia-w.a Uiil'on\lllateq CCIIlpt-CIIIiafid -.Y thetimiDg bambing errora of Shot Oberokee, aDd cmq a Jlli.DtJINm. amOUDt otdata vu obtd.Deci. iD view ot the problema of maaauriiiiBnt of the radCDe temperaturesaDi 1D view of the atu4iea now lmder wq or ptoopoaed fo r i.Dc.reuing th estrength of the nose radome on tbis airoratt, the lack of bieber t8111)B1"atures OD thia ipecUic ra4CIIIe is not a matter of great concern.Tbe aircraft receiYed tvo cl1fferent meaaur81118nts of high load.factor -am stress l8'9el data which vere better than plazmed.H1gb overpreaaure clata were extrame]J cU.fticult to obtaiD duringthe operation, because of tbe other lim1t1Dg criteria of the aircraftwbioh require poa1tiordng at lov altitudes. The measured overpressureswere adaquateq large to s ~ t a n t i a t e the data correlation.As a result of the acccapl.isbment of a ll tbe desired ei'f'ecta, ezcepttpe few items of m1.n1Jnma iaportlllCe 11181ltiODed above, the project was successful iD the canpl.etian of the objectives.5.2 D1POT AND RESRJNSE FBEDICTIONS

During REDWING, poe1tioD1ng criteria were aatiatactor;y, except to rthe shock-wa'Ye time of arrival and the }rediotion of OYerpressure. GustreapciDIIe cal.culatiOIUI vere modified to renect more realisticeffects. Radiant exposure predictions agreed with measured inputs, andno moditications were deemed necessary for this input ar associatedresponse. More srecitic discussion of these items is iftS8nted below.Field reduced clata evaluated tar positioning and camparison of predictedand recorded inputs aDd respCID888 are shown in Table 5.2. 5.2.1 .Thermal Inprl;. The method of CbaJIIIIIll.Seavq (RefereDCe 11)vas used with mOdification for the operation. The I}U"ead of the data

VLB exrected, because ot the .unknowns involved regardil3g specificcloud and veathar clata required in the calculations. CODditions assumedthroughout the teat were: (l) al

operation redwing, preliminary report. in flight participation of a b-66 airplane. october 1956

Documents