AD-780 081

METHODOLOGY INVESTIGATION: TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF FIELD ARTILLERY DIGITAL AUTOMATIC COMPUTER (FADAC) TAPES

Donald H. McCoy

Army Test and Evaluation Command Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland

13 August 1973

DISTRIBUTED BY:

um National Technical Information Service U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 5285 Port Royal Road. Springfield Va. 22151

UMCJLA&SiriED J^urtt^lM^ncjUo^ /)2> 7Za 0 $7

DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA • II 4 D

I ©«laiNATINO ACTIVITY rC«flM»»»««ol»>«> -♦ ' «»^»«-^BKS. .

Systems Anslysls Dlrsctorste US Army Test end Evelustlon Command Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005

UNCLASSIFIED M.

»■ RCPONT TITL«

Technical Evaluation of FADAC Tapes

4. OKICMIPTIVI MOtnt (Typ» »I nptt md toetunn dmf) Methodology Investigation, Final Report August 1973

■■ AUTHOMtai (Ftnt mm, mlBR initial, Bu nmmu)

Donald H. McCoy

• ■ NK^O'^T OAT«

13 August 1973 im. TOTAL NO. or »AOK«

^ ^3 7k. NO. or NKFt

••. CONTRACT OR aRANT NO.

6. RROJKCT NO.

M. ORiaiNATOR'S RCRORT NUM«KR(*I

M. OTHER RKI >(•! (Atv eM«r r «MT M «aai

• 0. DISTRIOUTION ITATIMKNT

äjfjQ/lbOid' ifa teA+b- ßdldAAiA.^ ciui^AuUuh^ us*-£öm*/z£~

II. tURRLKMCNTARV NOTES 12. «reNaORIN« MILITARY ACTIVITY

Systems Analysis Directorate, AMSTE-SY, HQ, TECOM, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

| 21005 <». kCT

This st -dy was conducted by the Systems Analysis Directorate of Headquarters, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, for the purpose of demonstrating the need and feasibility of complete technical testing of revised FADAC tapes. Better technical testing was shown to be feasible and desirable. Recommendations were made to have Frankford Arsenal conduct completely automated technical tests.

"NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERWT:

SpnnRfrtlld VA ??151

ixS^"»sr^r^M*3r'TS5LT««roo''össM4»»T^Ä«^3i^s!i«!H« V i *•*••! ^/JJ OMetsTi ro« •»•» »»•«. • UNCLASSIFIED ££

EeSfltr Claaalflcallon '»*«.«/« va»

—ii/iiij^tniu/ifin

14. LINK A

ROkt WT

LINK ■ LINK C

NOLI NT MOLK «TT

FADAC Coaputcrs Software Automated Testing Test Methodology

Ih

DNCLASSIPIKD ■•cwity Claasiaeatton

METHODOLOGY INVESTIGATION

FINAL REPORT

TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF

FIELD ARTILLERY DIGITAL AUTOMATIC COMPUTER (FADAC) TAPES

BY

DONALD H. McCOY 13 AUGUS." 1973

///.

FOREWORD. AcknowlcdgMMnt 1« fftVMl to Ms. Joyce Brunsell for her computer support effort end Mre. Evelyn Lldke end Mrs. Joyce Roszek for menuecrlpt preperetlon.

Preceding page blank lv

*»•*»(

TABLE OF COHTEMTS

PACE

ABSTRACT ill FOREWORD lv

SECTION I. SUMMARY

1. BACKGROUND 1

2. OBJECTIVES 1

3. DETAILS OF THE INVESTIGATION 1

4. CONCLUSIONS 3

5. RECOMMENDATIONS '". 3

SECTION II. APPENDICES

A. CORRESPONDENCE A-l

B. REFERENCES B-l

C. DATA . C-l

D. DISTRIBUTION LIST D-l

.... ...v.. ■MMMHPMMMHMi

SECTION I. SUMMARY

1. BACKGROUND.

This report concludes a methodology Investigation concerning technical testing of Field Artillery Digital Automatic Computer (FADAC) tapes conducted by the Systems Analysis Directorate, US Army Test and Evaluation Conmand (TECOM). The Methodology Proposal is Inclosed In Appendix A. The purpose of the investigation was to determine the feasibility of conducting a technical evaluation of revised FADAC tapes using an automated procedure.

These tapes are created by US Army Weapons Command (WECOM) (Software Engineering Branch, Fire Control Division, Frankford Arsenal) and tested by TECOM (the Field Artillery Board). During testing, problems of a technical nature and operational nature are being confounded. An attempt is made to simultaneously test the technical correctness of the revised tape, as well as user problems, i.e., the capability of man-machine Interaction.

This work was done in conjunction with the Firing Tables Branch of the Ballistic Research Laboratories (BRL) and Frankford Arsenal (FA). BRL supplied the necessary trajectory data (see Appendix C); FA made the necessary FADAC runs. The major thrust of the Systems Analysis effort was to fully automate an already existing ballistic test pro- cedure and to investigate other areas of testing where automation should be accomplished.

2. OBJECTIVES.

The primary objectives of this investigation are (1) to demonstrate that technical and service testing of revised FADAC tapes can and should be separated; and (2) to determine the feasibility of fully automating the technical testing.

3. DETAILS OF THE INVESTIGATION.

During the lifetime of FADAC, at least five major revisions have been implemented. Both Frankford Arsenal and the Field Artillery Board have stated that the testing situation is unsatisfactory. No effort Is made in this study to ascertain the exact reasons. The pursuit of this task would be counterproductive. Hopefully, fully automated tech- nical testing will alleviate the old problems associated with each revision of the FADAC tapes.

I»

Frankford Arvenal has, In fact, partially automated the testing of ballistic programs for FADAC. This Is done by operating two FAOACs In a tandem arrangement (see Figure 1). One of the FADACs Is used as an Input/output (I/O) driver for the other FADAC, which Is loaded with the ballistic program to be tested. The I/O driver replaces the man-ln-the-loop. The driver bypasses the keyboard and causes the test results to be written on a teletype. The test Is conducted free of operator error. This Is an ideal situation ^or technical testing; I.e., testing which Is conducted to determine If the FADAC Is performing accurately for known test scenarios.

The Systems Analysis Directorate wrote a computer program to automatically generate the large number of Inputs required for the Field Artillery Board automated ballistic test procedure. This pro- gram, contained in Appendix B, voids the requirement for Field Artillery Board to manually prepare exhaustive input in order to completely check out the ballistic programs. The complete test cycle is shown in Figure 2.

A sample of the output from this program is shown in Figure 3. x..e appearance of the output is rather confusing; however, once the basic concept is understood, it is really quite simple. A pair of digits addresses the particular position on the FADAC input matrix and the value required for input follows, separated by delimiters.

The output from this program is used to drive the ballistic test. Hardcopy output from a sample run is shown in Figure 4. A "C" in Column 1 indicates the correct solution. The "true" answers and the FADAC answers, labeled "F", which do not agree within a preset tolerance are flagged with a "$$".

In order to conduct the investigation, two basic training exercises were necessary. First, the format of the BRL tapes was studied. The BRL tapes contain trajectory data for a weapon/charge combination that are included in the FADAC programs. A conservative estimate of the number of cases run is 50,000. Second, the format of the automatic ballistic test program input had to be learned.

A delimiter is a special character used to separate items in an input list. The delimiter in this case is a "+".

To teat the concept, some 2,000 In- c» for the 155nm Howitzer were generated. A sublet of theae 2,0i vaa randomly aelected and run on the tandem FADACa. Sample Inputa and outputa from theae rune were aa ahown In Flgurea 2 MU 4.

Approximately 60 problema per hour can be run In the auto-teat mode, veraua about 20 per hour In the manual mode. This timing conalderatlon la Important alnce there are at leaat 350 teat problema that can be run for every weapon/ammunition charge/fuze combination. Alao, teating in the automatic mode can be eaally rerun sud reteating in FADAC haa been a common problem.

If the user and the developer cooperate in this effort, a teat- bed or benchmark set of problema should evolve which will eliminate virtually all technical test nroblema.

4. CONCLUSIONS.

Since the trial with the ballistic procedure v s successful, there is no reaaon to believe that other facets of technical teating will be unauccessful. Additional work la required to automate the chronograph, registration, trllateratlon and survey programs.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS.

A letter has been sent to US Army Armament Command (ARMCOM) (see Appendix B) which includes the recommendations of this study. The recommendations are essentially the following:

(1) Complete technical testing of revised FADAC tapaa la required.

(2) Technical testing should precede service testing.

(3) Frankford Arsenal should be responsible for technical testing.

(4) TECOM should observe all technical testing.

(5) TECOM should conduct service tests upon satisfactory completion of technical tests.

(6) Action should be taken to develop automated testing pro- cedures for the survey, chronograph, trilateration, and registration problema.

c Card Input FADAC I

I/O Driver

Hard Copy

Test Results

FADAC II

Test Bed System

Figure 1. Auto-Balllstlc Test Configuration

4

"wmpHV'Hmim

Generator for

Automatic Ballistic

Program Input

Test Bed Syst«

Figure 2. Automatic Input and Auto-Balllstlc Test Configuration 5

tdlltt«—Q9«-?lfl*?'*<»*2?*,;*?6*l—^S+lf^lO"»* l20«»*f.O* Sf)*—OO^l* 2» 6.3* 20 £6l007*~9<)»2l*l*^2*f)»2U'»*t->t,*2--45tU3300* I209*t0* 30*—OO*!* 2* 6.5* 20 CGlO.'m —9<l*?Ul*??»P*23»«5*26*3--45+U?3O0* UOO+CO* 3)*--üHl* 2* 6,0* 20 r.filOe**—ot>*2l*l*?2Vl**2 4»f'*,?6*7—45*l*3300* 1209*':U 30*--0Ü*l* 2* 6.2* 20 tf.lO!)5*—99*2l*l*22*!>*?3»9*26*l—*?>MO3()0* 29f>rt«-e0«- O^* —r>")*l* 38*3*.W»llO

■6tl00ft«--r'<>*2Ul*?;»*ö«-23*tH'h*?--45*l»3300* 20P8*Cü* n*—ÜO*l* 3n*35.3*110 £f4l007*—«9«-»l*l*??»:l«.23»9*2A*}—<»5*l*3300* 29P8*K0» 5)*—)0»l* 3fl*45.0*llO £f.lüpS*--9^*2Ul*22*C*23*4*?6*7--A5*l*3300* 2983*f,C* 30*—)0»l* 38* T-V. A* 11 3 t£?00l*—99*2l*>l*22»0*2»*9*26*l—45* I«0075* 32'»7*C0*2'> H—00* l*322fl« 36. 3«-110 ££2002«--c)'>*2l»l»<;2*r*21*9»26 + 2--4S*l*0O75* 32O74-C0* in ■»♦--00* l*3721*3fi, 8* 110 ££200 3*—9 9*?Ul*2?*0*?3*«»*?ft*?—45* I »007 5* 32«»7*f.0*?0 !♦—OO* l*3?20*36. 0» 11 0 r.£2eO<»*--t>^2l*l*22*0*2 3*<>*2M7--4S*UO«7«>* 3797*£0* lBO*--00» l*3223* 15. 9* 110 ££3üOl*—<»'>*21«-l*??*(U2 3*9*?6*I—4S*l«-61 I 5» 2e6a* RO*lO,)*—P.U l*43 30*3^, I» 110 ERIJO?*—99*2U1*22*^*2J*9*26»2—45*U6l 15* 2'16P»£0* 80*—00* l»^P30*3/». &♦ 110 ££1003*—CQ*2 l*l*22*Ü*'3*<'*2(.*3—^♦[♦öl 15* 2 868* CO+IOO^—OT* I ^8 30*3^. 0* 110 tt30ö*»--9Q*2Ul»22*0«-23*<'*26*7--«»?>*U61l5* 2fl<.<Hf.O* ^0*—00* 1*AP 30*33. 7* 110 f.f.'»()Ol* —9q*2l*l*2?*0*?3*t)*?6M—<*5* I* **'*'*'>* 330?*£n* I SO*—OD* I ♦ Ui 31* 36. 3* 110 £U|fl2*--c»f>«-2l*l*22*ü*2 3*9*2'. + 2—45*l*<»4 3'>* 33 )?♦ £0*1 3o'+—Ou* 1*1^31 *36.'>♦ 110 ££4003*—r'<**.'> l*l+2?*«*23> 9*26*3—<,5*l*'«43S* .3 312* T.i)* IS H—Uff« 1*1631*36* 0* 1 10 ££400^* —90*2 I* 1*22*0*2 3* 9+26 7--45* I»^V 35* *5 3M* »io* 13 )♦—00* 1* 16 31* 35. i* 110

Figure 3. Sample Input for Che Auto-Ballistic Test

6

!)5

2201

v 0*#21®1 COt*' CO CHG DEFL TF GE

t C 1 2 6J 200 F 1 6.1* 20fei

Fh<f 1l«tr. 1 CUI-IP CD CMC re ri. IF rE

HC 1 2 6J 200 »F 1 2 6.1* 200

PR»2201 CÜN" CD CHG CEH TF GE

C 1 3 228 36J 1100 F 1 3 228 36J llbtf

PR §20^1 COhP CD CriG □EFL TF GE C 1 28 36J 11k)0

F 1 3 23 5 37.6 1115 PR »23 fc 1 COMP

CD CHG □EFL TF GE C 1 1*63 0 31* .5 1100

F 1 1*630 31* .4 1100 PRftH'bl CÜfiH

CO CHG CEFL TF CE * C 1 30 31*.1 1100

F 1 1*633 31* .5 1106 PR #2*01 COMP

CD CHG DEFL TF GE C 1 1631 3 6.0 1100

F 1 163 1 36.0 1100 PR #1*001 COMP

CD CHG CEFL TF CE C 1 31 36J 1100 F 1 163 6 37.2 1110

tt

I

n

Figure 4. Sample Output for the Auto-Balllstlc Test

■ ■'iMwmjggi

SECTIOW II. APPENDICES

APPEWDII A. SgBJggBHSS

COPY

DISPOSITION PORM

AMSTE-ME SUBJECT: Technical Evaluation of PADAC Tape»

TO Dir, Sysccas Analysis PROM Math Xaprv Dir DATE 29 Mar 74 CMT 1 LTC Stons/dg/5145

1. Raquast you conduct subject invastigation in accordanca with the attached Methodology Investigation Proposal.

2. Punds in the aaount of $3,500 have been authorised to support the effort. These funds include $1,000 to support trsvel. In order to cite these funds the aethodology X Order should be used in conjunction with the Systeas Analysis Cost Center. The reasinlng funds sre designated Cor the support of field effort in the event it is decided to taak APG coaputer progrsa preperation. In such cases the funds will be distributed to APG as needed by this Directorate.

/s/ W. L. Stone LTC 1 Incl /for/ SIDNEY WISE MIP Director

i A-l

" ——

COPY Systems Analysis Directorate US ARMY TEST AND EVALUATION COMMAND

Methodology InvestIgstIon Proposal, FY 73 9 March 1973

1. TITLE; Technical Evaluation of FADAC Tapes.

2. INSTALLATION; HQ, TECOM.

3. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR; Donald H. McCoy, Systems Analysis Directorate, AMSTE-SY, AUTOVON 870-2093.

4. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM; WECOM periodically provides new tapes for the FADAC fielded system. This action establishes the precedence for TECOM*s role in post-deployment of all future fielded computer systems. The current testing program at the Field Artillery Board combines both technical and user evaluation of a new FADAC tape. For the latest revision, five weeks per tape is required to conduct the evaluation. A significant portion of this time is used to input a large number of test cases by hand. This study will Investigate the feasibility of conducting technical evalu- ation of FADAC tapes automatically.

5. DESCRIPTION OF THE INVESTIGATION, a. Systems Analysis Directorate will determlae whether the technique currently used by Frankford Arsenal to evaluate new FADAC tapes can be extended to permit direct inputting of BRL trajectory data (on tape) into FADAC. Currently, Frankford Arsenal tests new tapes by connecting two FADACsin tandem, and using one FADAC as the input/output driver to the other FADAC. The input to FADAC must be keypunched from BRL printouts and converted to paper-type.

b. Systems Analysis Directorate will determine the feasibility of preparing a computer program that will convert the BRT. tape format Into the FADAC input format. If it is estimated that 0.5 manmonths of effort is required to write the computer program, Analytic Branch, MTD will be tasked to prepare the computer program. If APG does not have the resources available to complete the task in the required time frame. Systems Analysis Directorate will prepare the program.

c. Upon completion of the conversion program, the tape for the M109A1 will be evaluated using two FADACs in tandem. This will conclusively establish the feasibility of conducting technical evaluation of FADAC tapes automatically.

d. A TOP will be prepared detailing the procedures for the technical evaluation of FADAC tapes.

A-2

7. JPSTIFICATIOH» A significant reduction of total tost tlM will roralt If TBCOM con ovoluoto tho tochnlcol oapoctt of FADAC tapaa autoaatleally. Furthanoro, a aoro thorough checkout of tha tapaa can ba parfonad by using aora taat caaaa.

9. »E80DRC»8 KBQÜIRED;

Hanaontha Sourca Salarlaa TOY

2 HQ, TECOM 1000 1 APG 2000 500

T555

10. SCHEDULE; Final raport dua 30 Juna 1973.

A-3

COPY Mr. McCoy/einl/2093

AMSTE-SY 30 JUL 1973

SUBJECT: Technical Testing of Revised FADAC Tapes

Commander US Army Armament Command Rock Island, Illinois 61201

1. Reference conversation between CG, TECOM, and CG, ARMCOM, on above subject at the AMC Summer Commanders' Conference on 13 July 1973, and meetings held between Mr. Harold Brodkin, Fire Control Development and Engineering Directorate, Frankford Arsenal, and Mr. Donald H. McCoy Headquarters, TECOM, on 15 February, 16 April, 17 May, and 23 May 1973.

2. Background.

a. The Field Artillery Digital Automatic Computer (FADAC) is a fire control computer for cannon artillery. The computer is a second genera- tion device with limited memory (8,192 words), utilizing machine language programming. The FADAC peripheral devices Include a keyboard input, low- speed paper tape, high-speed paper tape, and a teletype output.

b. Frankford Arsenal (FA) has the responsibility for providing soft- ware (cannon program tapes) for the FADAC system. This includes ballistic programs, as well as auxiliary functions like the survey and transfer pro- grams. FA coordinates the need with the user before updating and revising these programs. TECOM (the Field Artillery Bcat'd) has the responsibility for product improvement tests of these tapes.

c. Since the original fielding of FADAC, the cannon programs have been updated and reissued at least five times. Theoretically, there should be no technical errors in these tapes when they are released to TECOM for testing. On every release, however, major problems have been found by the Field Artillery Board (FABD). This means FA must correct the software and send the corrected fape to the FABD for retestlng. This Headquarters be- lieves the "find-fix loop" can be avoided by a thorough technical test of the software tapes prior to the FABD tests.

d. FA has taken the basic steps toward an automated technical test pro- cedure by automating a ballistic test routine. This routine uses one FADAC

A-4

AMSTE-SY 30 JUL 1973 SUBJECT: Technical Testing of Revised FADAC Tepee

computer as en input/output driver for testing the bellistic routines. A similar procedure cen end ehould be developed for the survey, trileteration, chronograph end K-transfer programs.

e. The Systems Analysis Directorete et this Heedquerters has written e computer progrem which augments the FA automated bellistic test procedure. This program is designed to automatically create input to the FA test program from Ballistic Reeearch Laboratories (BRL) test data tapes. In the pest, hand preperetion of the BRL input on punched cerds wss prohibitive, and pre- cluded e complete technicel test of a ballistic tape for all fuse/projectile combinations. The automatic preperetion of these inputs meens thst a complete technicel test of a ballistic tape cen now be easily accommodated in a timely and efficient manner.

3. As indiceted by the reference above, TECOM and FA have been actively working to solve some mutual problems. The solutions to these problems concerning technical testing of FADAC software require a more formal arrange- ment between ARMCOM and TECOM. Therefore, TECOM recommends that:

a. TECOM and ARMCOM initiate action to develop a mutually agreeable baseline for an automated technical test procedure for FADAC tapes.

b. FA be responsible for the technical testing, to include a complete check of the ballistic programs and all auxiliary functions.

c. TECOM witness these tests.

d. Upon completion of technical testing, these tapes be submitted to TECOM for service testing.

e. Action be taken to develop automated testing procedures for the survey, chronograph, trilateration and K-transfer programs.

4. The Systems Analysis Directorate, Headquarters, TECOM, will continue to actively support the automation aspects of this effort. The technical point of contact is Mr. Donald H. McCoy, AUTOVON 870-2093.

5. The Field Artillery Materiel Testing Directorate, Headquarters, TECOM, will provide technical assistance and will effect coordination with the Field Artillery Board. The point of contact is Mr. Emmet O'Brien, AUTOVON 870-4875.

CHARLES P. BROWN Major General, USA Commanding

A-5 CF: Cdr, Frankford Arsenal ATTN: SARFA-N-7400 (Mr Brodkin)

■■■-• -.. ■.-■"■■

4

APPENDIX B. REFERENCES

1. PM 6-40-3, Operation of th« Gun Direction Computer M18, Cannon Gunnery Application, Auguet 1970.

2. Theodore Lafferty, Jr. and Harry Ontey, Cannon Artillery Ballletlc Programs for Computer, Gun Direction, M18 (PADAC). Report R-1976, Prankford Areenal, July 1970.

B-l

I

APHNDIX C. DATA

1. TAlUr P»r>r.9AM!

ni<4CN<'tN RiiFF«?oi,irF (*),inFty<4»

INTfr.Fp CHr,TVPfTPAjNntCT|tfT?

OATA TTC /J,l700,4ft0Ü,l(S00/ PäTA -**,n 1MrTs,rTifr

T?,PL'i</,ri '•.'^,,•A• »«w« .«r.« ,» ^ATA T14/« '•"A»/ "^A'A MASK /Jl^MZI«»/ HATA L^eT/A*l/ LL«0

1 RFAO<<).?fc'»»»P<«|FNP»qq» A

? FHOMA'C^'A4) Icn4( ISI.Nf.TOAI.^vn. ( Af-^SJ.NF.TOA) K.n TT I IPUmi.'^.TOAi r,r •r-' 12

1(Itl»"»Ctl

'■.n "T n i? n 14 r=i,?o 14 R< 1,1) «Mt + 2n

J";TA9TS2

13 ^T 4 J»JST»9T,49,2 JTFL»J-l PCAOJO.^.cpo.og.FNns«»")* iFmi'n.c'),-"'») r.r ▼-> 5 IF(AI3'5).rO.TOA» W Tl 15 OH 6 T»l,?l "(r,j»»(V(i)

f "<( T» J*l I«*»!»»-») nn 'n 4

15 JOFI«j"rL»l PT 16 I«1,21

16 «M I, »)«A(I) r,T TT 5

5 VaJOFL RAfK^PA'P 0 WPITC((Sf 7M(>0K

7 FH^MATt l<,?nA4) no R j=t,N KPITF(6,7)(n(r , JJ.irl^-»)

q rOMTTNUF LcN«<»0

ip<«"(7,N).'-o.nsT.r«>.0<T,'-D^o.isur.t Tn i C«LL n'FC^iJFF.Lc»'- C-l 4PITe(N",>UM»MH(MK, i) .K-l ,^0»

i. .-<t>ismi JJ*^ ■> JMWIHMÜ

TAU COaE(«»IPe,t es, «PA'MNmiHOZI^AJNn.MrT

M PnOM4T<204*| 32 PT0M»T»TIK ,I2,A?>

TALI COOF^Iiee.LPN»

CALL rn<>F(nijFP,iCM|

iFnop.r.T,800K.o ^P I*

GO TT 15

31 CHI Ci9FmHFe,LcN) M«tTe(Nni|Mt31)(n(Kf |? I.Kai,?0I CALL CnoeimjpPjLC^) »PA^CVOUM.IMICHr.NO.CHr.TVP

■»f, Fn9MA'-(46'<,Tl»Al» IPfrHr.'VP.eo.rTi jCHR'vp.Q TP«CMr,Tvr».co,rT2jfHr,TYP«Q jRFr«N-l IP ( R(l, N», =0.«lNX»JBP'«N-4 CALl '■nUFf'^iec.i.FM) Hi>IT = (N'VjM,iiHP<t<,JB»:n .K> 1,70) CALl CORffUDFC.LPN» HCAfXNO'lx.lTITnc.ir.nrFL

37 Pn'»MftT(c8.a,cJ)',T,>,I5X,F6,0» lOFFfOCPL*.?

TF.IT1F .|orr«j"»ec*i TAIL cn'Fd^iicp.irNi WOIT=(NniJH,3lM«(K,jOFr)tK»l,?0) CALL C"BF(BUFF,LFNI RFAD(NniJM,3fl)FSl,FS?

3fl "PMiT(3^)(,7F6,0) W0ITe|6,3'?»TRAJNn,MFT,I0P,LnHI,ICHGNnlrHGTYP,TE,nEFl,Irnc,FSl,

IP«2 IP Pn9^AT«//iy,I2,lX,A2,l»,7(T5,1«I,2(P6.2I//»

01 40 JMFT.1,4 lF«MeT,NF.HrTN( J^PTU G" Tn ^,1 ir,T.IOTHZ(j"FT) LL»L«FT(JM=T|

LMeT(jMCT) s LMPTtJMCT) * 4 inEFL»inFFL«-ir)c« JMrT» r.n TT 4s

40 ONMNIJC 45 OT 41 LOO"«!,4

ION«JHCT«l'>',,'<*LL*LPPP-l IV«nFLY(JMPT» IPiJTyp.iFT(i nnn) TFdFTCLCOPt.FO.ll 1V»IY42'1 lFJL0np,iE3,3» Gp rr 42 IF (L'iiP.EO.l» p^ E TnF je (1000,^5.2) PS«PS2 IFinpP,F0.4I PS«Ffl WPIT = (6,43» inN,KHr,MO,l"Ht,rHr,TVPf »FZTVP, If.T.IF.IV.TCHGNn,

♦lOFFL.FS.IOP WP ff (7,53 t IPM, jr--A^,Lr,^I.CMr,'-VP,?P7',VO,Tr,T,iF,TY,r:t»GNT,

»lOEFL,6«;,!^1 C-2

43 FORMAT(t 6r.itut r—99*2l*«,Il.,*22*,,Il,,*23*,tIl»,*26*,fIU I • ♦ — 45* I ♦ •, A4 , • ♦ • , 15 , • ♦ SO♦ • , 13 , • ♦—00* • 1111 • ♦• • 11 ♦# • ♦ • f 2F4.lt,*,fl4,«*-«l

53 F0RM4T( •66SI4, •♦—99*2l*» 111, • ♦22»« 11 It •♦23*» 11 It • ♦Zft*« f II t I *—45«l^*t«4t'«*ffI5tt^&04>*fI3t,^->00«*tIlt*«>ff4t*>*t 2F4.lt,*»fI4,«*«l

GO TO 4i 42 IF (LOHI.F0.0I IY«IV*70

KPITB(6t43l IPN,ICHGNO,L0HItCMGTYP,IFZTVP,lCTtIF,IV,ICHGM0, UOEFLtTF ,IOF WBITE(7,53) IPNtirHGNn,LnHItCHGTVPtIFZTVPtIGTtIFtIYtICHGN3, HOFFLtTF ,IOF

41 CONTINUF 9 CPMTIMUF GO TO 99

9fl HRITPf6tlT)A 17 F0RH4T(lXt20A4//20A4)

WPITE(6tl8l 18 FORMAT!• ERR ACTION LABEL*)

OFBUG SUBCM« 99 CALL FXIT

END

C-3

2. SAMPLE TMJBCTORY DATA;

TRAJECTDPV ^0. 2A

l55MMf HEt M107/M114A1

PL^V STP. MV STO. WT nFL MV P.T, DEL MT N ACT, MV ACT, WT ^%U. L&r 17 HCT TGT HGT MOP CHAPGE

«TLS M/S i^ M/S D?G F L« PAC'n'« M/S LB :OFF, nf-G MILS M M .... . . .

1100. 207,? q^.OD 0.0 TO. O.O -0,A60 207.30 05,00 ?,106 40» 10Q5» 0, 0, IG - - - -.—_.-

Cn«B. RANG« Cl F2 F3 DECL uporT uaboT KO M/ifH PFTARO

TOP . NO. CDFFF.

S^C M M M M MILS /S**' M/S**2 1/SfC M564

ui U2 U3 uinnt FS

0.00 0. 0. 0. 0. -11,4 -0.03 0.0500 0.61 -0.00«6

' l.^l 'JT. 07. • 177. -0. -11.2 -0.00 0.0500 O.SR -0.0010

2,0.? 194. 104, 343. -0. -11.0 O.OI 0.0500 0.55 -^.r'-75

3.02 290. 200. 4<)q. -0. -10.3 0.00 O.OSOO 0.52 -0.0070 4.03 3««5. 3«5, -642. 0.

-10.7 0.00 0.0500 0.53 -O.1"^ 5.04 479. 479, 776. 0.

-1(7.6 0.00 0.0500 3.47 -0.0061

17.P4 1630. 1630. ISfl^'. *. -9.P 0.01- O.05O0 0.27 -0.0032

36.37 3707. 3207. -0. 3. -«.5 "."I ^,"5'"'. "».SS -r.',',7«

MILS M/S » M/S M/S M/S M/S**2 M564 M52r.

0.00 207.3 97,7 182.8 ■ 0,0 -0.9 -Ä.l 0.1

• »

0,15 .197.0 96.9 m.6 -0,0 -0.8 0.9 1.1

0.32 187.1 96.1 160.5 •-3.0 -0.7 1.9 2.1.

0.49 177,4 95.A 140.6 9.0 -0.7 2.9 3.1

0.68 168,1 94.8 133,8 0,0 -0.6 3.«» 4.1

o.^o 159.0 04.2 128.2 0.0 -0.6 4.9 5.2 -

5.58 89.2 89.2 0.0 O.I -0.3 17.6 18.1 ■

42.08 188.2 81.7 -16°.6 ".3 -".6 36.0 36.8

C-4