DTIC · 2. Impacting was accomplished by striking the test car (specimen car) into a line of five...

i I ILL & ,

m~ RMEPORT NO. EVT 26 - 87

0

RAIr- WI" RANSPORTABILITY TEST

OF THE

REMOTELY PI LOTED VEHICLE(RPV)

SYSTDEM

DTICELECTE

US ARMY

ARMAMENT

MUNITIONS

EVALUATION DIVISION CHEMICAL COMMANDUS ARMY DEFENSE AMMUNITIONSAVANNA, ILLINOIS 6 107 4-9 39 4 2c5ER Alc4L2

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (WMen Dote Entered)

READ INSTRUCTIONSREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBERET 26-871

4. TITLE (and Subtitle) IS. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVEREDRail Transportability Test of the Remotely FINALPiloted Vehicle (RPV) System

S. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(,) 0. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(&)

J. H. Krohn

g. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGFAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School AREA& WORK UNIT NUMBERS

Evaluation Division (SMCAC-DEV)Savanna, IL 61074-9639

11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School - June 1987

Evaluation Division (SMCAC-DEV) 13. NUMBER OF PAGES

Savanna, IL 61074-9639

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & AODRESS(if different from Controlling Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS: (of this report)

U.S. Army Missile Command UNCLASSIFrED,ATTN: AMCPM-RP-TRedstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5791 ,Sa. OECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE"

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of tale Report)

Unlimitad

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered In Block 20, if different from Report)

IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

IS. KEY WORDS (Continue an reverse side if necessary and Identify by block number)

21L AITh ACT r(Ct aue afiee fneev 81nd IdOWify by block nu.,ber)

--The U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School (USADACS) conducted atransportability test of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) System at the requestof the U.S. Army Missile Command (MICOM) and to satisfy requirements of theMilitary Traffic Management Command (MTMC) Transportation Engineering Agency(TEA) and USADACS. The transportability test consisted of a rail impact testin which the maintenance shelter, the ground control station, the air vehiclehandler, the launch assembly, the remote ground terminal and the recovery

JA" M i £IMTtO OF 9 NOV S Is O6SOLETE

SECUINTY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAIIE (When Date Entered)

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGEbmb Dote Bnlemd)

20. (continued)

;'assembly of the RPV System were each blocked, braced, and tied down on a rail-

road flatcar. After each unit of the RPV System was rail impacted, the unit

was operationally tested within the RPV System.

The method of blocking, bracing, and tieing down each item was approved for

rail transport. The shock loads resulting from the rail impacts were not

detrimental to the operation of the equipment.

?tSj Gii&IDTIC TAB|nannouced

By to

JusI IIIiI IcII I Io

DistrlbutioD/A~eIab~ity codes

1Availl and/or

Dist. Special

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wlion Does Entered)

AVAILABILITY NOTICE

A copy of this report is furnished each attendee on automatic distribution.

Additional copies or authority for reprinting may be obtained by written

request from Director, U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School.

ATTN: SMCAC-DEV, Savanna, IL 01074-9039.

DISTRIBUTION INSTRUCTIONS

Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return.

Citation of trade names in this report does not constitute an official

endorsement.

The information contained herein will not be used for advertising purposes.

#**ABSTRACT***

The U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School (USADACS) conducted a

transportability test of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) System at the

request of the U.S. Army Missile Command (MICOM) and to satisfy requirements of

the Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC), Transportation Engineering

Agency (TEA), and USADACS. The transportability test consisted of a rail

impact text in which the maintenance shelter, the ground control station, the

air vehicle handler, the launch assembly, the remote ground terminal and the

recovery assembly of the RPV System were each blocked, braced, and tied down on

a railroad flatcar. After each unit of the RPV System was rail impacted, the

unit was operationally tooted with the RPV System.

The method of blocking, bracing, and tieing down each item was approved for

rail transport. The shock loads resulting from the rail impact were not detri-

mental to the operation of the equipment.

ii

U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School


REPORT NO. EVT 20-87

Rail Transportability Test of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) System

TABLE OF CONTENTS

pagePART I - GENERAL

A. INTRODUCTION ............................................ I-i

B. AUTHORITY ............................................... I-I

C. OBJECTIVE ............................................... I-I

D. CONCLUSIONS ............................................. 1 -2

E. RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 1-2

PART II - LIST OF ATTENDEES ....................................... II-1

PART III - RAIL IMPACT TEST PROCEDURES ............................. III-1

PART IV - TEST SPECIMEN AND RESULTS

SYNOPSIS OF TESTS

MAINTENANCE SHELTER ................................. IV-1

GROUND CONTROL STATION .............................. IV-2

AIR VEHICLE HANDLER ................................. IV-3

LAUNCH ASSEMBLY ..................................... IV-4

AIR VEHICLE HANDLER ................................. IV-5

RECOVERY ASSEMBLY ................................... IV-8

REMOTE GROUND TERMINAL .............................. IV-7

AIR VEHICLE CONTAINER ............................... IV-S

RECOVERY ASSEMBLY ................................... IV-9

STATIC PULL TEST .................................... IV-10

iii

PART I

GENERAL

A. INTRODUCTION:

The U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School (USADACS) wag requested

to conduct a transportability test of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV)

System. The blocking, bracing, and tiedown procedure for each item of

the RPV was designed by the commercial systems contractor. USADACS tested each

item by securing it to a railroad flatcar and rail impact testing the item.

We also performed static pull tests on slinging and tiedown provisions on

the launch assembly and recovery assembly.

B. AUTHORITY:

Testing was accomplished in accordance with mission responsibilities

delegated by the U.S. Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command (AMCCOM).

Reference is made to the following:

1. Change 4, 4 October 1974, to AR 740-1, 23 April 1973, Storage and

Supply Activity Operations.

2. AMCCOM-R 10-17, 13 January 1986, Mission and Major Functions of

USADACS.

3. Message, USAMICOM, AMCPM-RP-T, 071314Z Feb 87, subject: Remotely

Piloted Vehicle (RPV) Aquila Rail Impact Test.

C. OBJECTIVE:

The primary objective of this test was to establish that the blocking,

bracing, and tiedown method designed for the RPV System loaded on a railroad

flatcar was adequate to safely secure the items and eliminate damage to

the items when subjected to the Association of American Railroads (AAR)

I-1

rail impact test criteria. Other objectives of this test were to determine

the response of the RPV items to shock loads and the affect of static pulls

on the slinging and tiedown provisions on the RPV system.

D. CONCLUSIONS:

The Maintenance Shelter, Ground Control Station, Air Vehicle Handler,

Launch Assembly, Remote Ground Terminal and Recovery Assembly of the RPV

System were each separately loaded, blocked, braced, and tied down on a

railroad flatcar equipped with a non-cushioned (standard) draft gear. The

loaded flatcar was rail impacted and the results met the AAR test para-

motors, and MIL-STD-810 rail impact test criteria. The equipment necessary

for an operational check was tested following the rail impact and found to

be functional.

E. RECOMMENDATIONS:

It is recommended that all items secured to the Launch Assembly and

Recovery Assembly be secured with 3/4-inch or 1-1/4-inch wide metal banding

replacing the 1/2-inch wide banding used in testing.

It is recommended that the blocking and bracing and wire rope tiodown

method tested be used for preparation of the AMC 19-48 series carloading

drawings for railcar shipment of the RPV System.

1-2

PART II

LIST OF ATTENDEES

Transportability Test, 15 April - 2 May 9Z7

ATTENDEE TELEPHONE ADDRESS

Ernie Rickel Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 386-1168 Company. Inc.

8800 Burleson RoadAustin, TX 78744

Torrence Matthews Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 386-2723 Company, Inc.


Eugene R. Mitchell Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


John J. Somos Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


Stevie Gilmore Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


Kevin Triplett Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


Raymond Teague Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 386-2723 Company, Inc.


Boardman Hierholzer Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


11-1


Richard Riddle Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


Alan Ruter Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 386-2723 Company, Inc.


Ed Collins Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.


Lloyd Mulligan Commercial - Lockheed Missiles and Space(512) 388-2723 Company, Inc.

8800 Burleson RoadAustin. TX 78744

David Sipp Commercial - Harris Corporation(305) 727-5730 P.O. Box 37

Melbourne, FL 32902

Loren DeBolt Commercial - Harris Corporation(305) 727-5730 P.O. Box 37

Melbourne, FL 32902

Gregory Jandizo Commercial - Harris Corporation(305) 727-5730 P.O. Boz 37

Melbourne, FL 32902

Philip J. Livers Commercial - Commander(804) 599-1113 Military Traffic ManagementAV 927-4846 Command

Transportation Engineering AgencyATTN: MTT-TRNewport News, VA 23806-0278

Curtis L. Vest AV 748-9957/9958 CommanderU.S. Army Missile CommandATTN: AMCPM-RP-ERedstone Arsenal, AL 35898

Vincent Xearns AV 748-9087/9088 CommanderU.S. Army Missile CommandATTN: AMCPM-RP-TRedstone Arsenal, AL 35898

11-2


Gary Schrader Commercial - Commander(201 544-4919 Communications ElectronicsAV 995-4919 and Materiel Readiness Command

Fort Monmouth, NJ

Charles Schelleng Commercial - Commander(201) 544-2859 Communications ElectronicsAV 995-2859 and Materiel Readiness Command

Fort Monmouth, NJ

William Frerichs Commercial - Director(815) 273-8927 Defense Ammunition Center and SchoolAV 585-8927 ATTN: SMCAC-DEO


Melvin Daeumer Commercial - Director(815) 273-8927 Defense Ammunition Center and SchoolAV 585-8927 ATTN: SMCAC-DEO


Ralph Arnold Commercial - Director(815) 273-8927 )efense Ammunition Center and SchoolAV 585-8927 ATTN: SMCAC-DEO


William Meyer Commercial - Director(815) 273-8927 Defense Ammunition Center and SchoolAV 585-8927 ATTN: SMCAC-DEO


Jerry Krohn Commercial - Director(815) 273-8908 Defense Ammunition Center and SchoolAV 585-8908 ATTN: SMCAC-DEV


Alfred MclntoshJr. Commercial - Director(815) 273-8989 Defense Ammunition Center and SchoolAV 585-8989 ATTN: SMCAC-DEV


11-3

PART III

RAIL 7 ACT TEST PROCEDURES

A. RAIL IMPACT TESTING:

Rail impact testing was accomplished in compliance with previously

approved and standardized testing procedures as shown on Page 111-3 and

described as follows:

1. The 'Specimen Car' was scheduled to be impacted four times; three

times at speeds of 4, 8, and 8 mph in one direction, and one time at 8 mph

in the opposite direction. The latter two impacts cited are minimum speed

requirements.

2. Impacting was accomplished by striking the test car (specimen car)

into a line of five stationary cars (buffer cars). The buffer cars were

coupled with all connecting draft gears compressed together to the maximum

extent possible under prevailing conditions, with all air brakes in a "set"

position.

3. A locomotive (switch engine) was utilized to start the test car

rolling in the direction of the buffer cars along an approximate 800-foot

segment of level trackage.

4. The test car was cut loose from the engine approximately 75

feet from the point of impact and allowed to roll freely into the first

of the buffer cars.

5. Impacting speeds were determined by the utilization of an electronic

counter which measured the time required for the test car to traverse an

11-foot distance immediately prior to impact; recorded elapsed time was

converted to mph speeds. Additional verification of impacting speeds was

accomplished by utilization of an electronic stop clock.

III-1

B. INSPECTIONS AND DATA COLLECTION:

At selected intervals during testing, thorough inspections ot the

specimen load were made by technically proficient personnel to collect data

on the specimen load and equipment resulting from impacts. These data are

recorded in Part IV following.

111-2

CL CL . a C

z 0 0 OD w>Zi c W~ W

(j w. 000

w w0. tw ooo

0C 1-4

-i

Iz

0

a0. I-4z

(I) -J 0

D a.C.) 0 a.

z 0

wox Lfl

I- 0

c <-op

4 40)

cr. 0 L

LL. ILg wZ IL0

111-3

PART I V

TEST SPECIMEN AND RESULTS

MAINTENANCE SHELTER

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The Maintenance Shelter was ioaded on a 52-foot long railroad flatcar

equipped with noncushioned (standard) draft gear, and with a complete wooden

plank floor. The door end of the Shelter was facing the 'A end of the

flatcar. The Shelter was blocked and braced with 2-inch X 10-inch wooden

planks and cabled with 5/8-inch diameter wire rope. The method of

securement was furnished by the system contractor.

Accelerometers measuring vertical and longitudinal forces with the force

duration were mounted on the floor of the railroad flatcar, equipment rack

(inside shelter), aviation pedestal (inside shelter), air conditioner mount

and center of gravity of the container.

The shelter was rail impacted at 4, 6, 8, and reverse 8 mph, per the

Association of American Railroads (AAR) and MIL-STD-810 rail impact test

criteria. Following the 6 mph impact, inspection revealed a slight

lifting of the top 3 layers of 2-inch X 10-inch planks of the header on the

Impacted end of the Shelter. The Maintenance Shelter's skid was being

forced between the layers of planks in the header.

The system contractor's drawing did not specify 5/8-inch thimbles under

the wire rope where the wire rope passes over an edge of a railroad flatcar

stake pocket and the tiedown provisions on the Shelter. Although no damage

occurred to the wire rope, it is recommended that the thimbles be used at

stake pockets and Shel'-- tiedown provisions.

The Maintenance Shelter including interior components sustained no

damage and the securement method remained in an acceptable condition during

exposure to the rail mode of transportation.

IV-1

TEST SPECIMENS AND RESULTS

RAIL IMPACT TEST DATA

TEST NO. 1 LOAD NO. 1 DATE: 15 April 1987

SPECIMEN LOAD: Maintenance Shelter of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle Systemloaded on a railroad flatcar.

TEST FLATCAR NO. SP&S 34004 LT. WT. 47,200 Lbs.

REFERENCE LOAD NO. I WT. 5,724 Lbs.

TOTAL SPECIMEN WT. 52,924 Lbs.

BUFFER CAR (5 CARS) WT. 251.000 Lbs.

IMPACT END STRUCK VELOCITY (mph) REMARKS

1-A a 4.10 No significant movement.

2-A B 6.19 Slight lifting of 2-in X10-in planks in headerswhere Maintenance Shelterskid being forced betweenplanks.

3-A B 8.00 No signifieant movement.

4-B A 8.04 No significant movement.

00a~aa- LT. 1 C -aC4

I - 0 W) 0 IC) I Cau a

~.cI I z - -a a

50.0 a- a-a-s 1(01C.1 ** 1 Vs I- a N- aI -- aI D

a Das4a4 z FOX aDoa t i.W ssE. 0 . 5Laafa~

a 1 a 1a-a-4-I~ a r ~ l ~ a~~~a a a, Ca aa-a-------a--a-I

a ~ 0 sca Ciaa aI ~ E Iu Ic i~ o

I C> IV5t 0 1 0 is 6a a~a a *a 4a~a

a azja 0C1 a * a *a4 w :ma a 0----- a-s-- -a

a a in a1 a 1a 0a 1a

44 a : C.) c a a a a an (

a C44 a 0 O2 i 1 a 4 *4 I

a1 a. i, 1.~ 10 it-

a OFa c1q oaaIa0 a Is- s a ~ ea 4 E . 3 m I-- - s - - a -~i~52az1z a~to) IaC

Ia cqs~ i 2I naI t)I t3aI~~~ Q a E-1a -a -1a a 0a O._ a s ~ -

0a ~ w-s 9d -aoiet1i01ia a a a - i

; a 50 IWO -.2 at- co -- ao cob --

w- ~ a o4 a~ a o-I-w I

~a a 002 a * * i -i -a it a s.C)-4 Ia

sp~a ~ a-a a-a -

it

t cr

IL.

I.

V..

01

u0

.4

S.

C)

-4a0

.4U

0

ar S

a

z a0.

0- a

-I

U) 4)a4)0S

oo 4)

U00 -4

(I)4)

0z

S.S

-4.

10 54)A-4Q~.

A

aA04)S4),..oes.

A 0C,

0041( a

0m@4)

A

zLii .6.La-LU 00.a0.o 4)OiS

* A4)

S.0604)0

-4Cl ~44)

o ~* K

o Se~ S

-4 Uo ~~'s4) -4o .0.0 a4. 0

m0

Ma,

40.0

-4 0

f: 00 .0

0 .0

50AQ 4p'0

L-.-4

0 0

$ .0

42

04 0(1)

8a

40

. 0

0

U) 936

zz

0

00 A -

.........

A-.

zS

0

0 o

0

4zz4

-J000U)

0z4

wI.-zLU S

S.

USz

0 '4

0

a0aS

4

LU0)ZLUIi~ 43

ILIo

03.4).4

t- '40

o 3~ S

-40 b.4)0A0,

LI

od

uci

0. 0zi

4 D

-4

4

-a00Ic~) 4Cl) 0

4)4-4oz

4 40S.

-4(r: .4wI-z -Lii0 a

0-4z -

00

0

S4 4)

zS.

Lii SIL. 4)

Sif0S.S

-4SUU4

0

o 3~ S

.4o ~.4)0

-J

S0z -~

S

S

C,)is

-j0oIC.)U)

4,

SoS

4 -4

isLiJI.- 4,z

Sa.

.4

o SS

0

S4,

0LaJU)z

0

U

0

0

o 3~ S

.4

o ~4,0

a.

WNW0

6v

uj .4

PA

4zz

I-J00z0Co0z4 3

I- 0-4z

taJ .4

C-,00z

0 -4

A

0

S

wCoZ 6.ILl SILW 0

o S-4SUU

C.- *~4

0

o 3= S.4o ~

0A

S.S43

44z Sz(I)44 SU44

Cl)S

43II(.) 0Cl)

.4

0z44 0

43

a:w 3.I-..z '.4

0S.S43

0 S0

I-

43'3

44 S43

Lii 0Uz

I&lIj~ 43

ILl U0 0S.

S-4SU0

'.4

0

o 3~ S

.4o ~

430

-J0

z05 %4U. -6

w

-J 0

0

4

00

GROUND CONTROL STATION

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The Ground Control Station tGCSJ was loaded on a 54-foot long railroad

flatcar equipped with noncushioned (standard) draft gear. The railroad

flatcar floor was composed of 5-1/2-inch wide wooden planking alternating

with a 5-1/2-inch wide steel channel positioned laterally on the floor

of the flatcar. With the GCS centered on the flatcar, the headers fell on

the 5-1/2-inch wide steei channel which prohibited nailing the header to the

car floor. The OCS was moved 4 inches off center to permit nailing of

the headers into the 5-1/2-inch wide wooden plank. The GCS was blocked and

braced with 2-inch X 10-inch wooden planks and tied down with 5/8-inch

diameter wire rope. The system contractor furnished a plan of the secure-

ment method.

Vertical and longitudinal forces were measured from accelerometers

mounted on the floor of the railroad flatcar, disk drive, control monitor

group, air vehicle display and center of gravity of the OCS. The longitudi-

nal measuring accelerometer on the bed of the railroad flatcar malfunc-

tioned during this test and no data was obtained.

The OCS was rail impacted at 4. 6, 6 and reverse 8 mph per AAR and

MIL-STD-810 rail impact test criteria. The total accumulated movement in

either the forward or reverse rail impacts was less than 1/2-inch.

The GCS, including the interior electrical control units, was not dam-

aged, and the tiedown method succesfully restrained the GCS during the

rail impact.

IV-2




SPECIMEN LOAD: Ground Control Station of the Remotely Piloted VehicleSystem loaded on a railroad tlatcar

TEST FLATCAR NO. ON 60270 LT. WT. 53,700 Lbx.

REFERENCE LOAD NO. - - WT. 8.956 Lbs.


BUFFER CAR (5 CARS) WT. 251.000 Lbs.


I-A A 4.60 Moved 1/8-inch forward.

2-A A 6.00 No movement.

3-A A 8.04 Moved additional 1/4-inchforward.

4-B B 8.08 Moved rearward 3/8-inch.

t Cb I P 1. C*l can Cleo

ro) GOD "1, .1 100)0 U,

12, .1 00 lion 42 11 C614 .1

n a

I Im I eq C', 0 1. "1

1 1 1 C14 1 N 1 C4 1

CA 3 1 :w 94 W 1 0 1 1 1 0 10 Cl 1 10 . 00 10

us 1 0 1 40 19d 0 1 916 1.3 Q

0494 14 4c gn 1 0 1 0 1

11 1- . CO 1. C*40 03 1 r; C4 9 C.: I t

r 1 . CC, 0 1. 06 I W!

IC04 C44 .1 C'4 .1 "4

to I gn I C. I V) I

w 0! 1. Ci Ci 11 0! .1

E-4 IC03 1 9- 1 0 1 0 0 It 0

1 02 1 4 I U! 4

1 1. 00 .1 1. Cc, .1 00 .1E- 14

0 W!0 CO I

01"I

to 1 0 1 0 1

I C* I

U, I W! I W! 11 e9% 45 4 C; .1 .0

0 1 C'Q 1 0 0

C.) in 1 a I IPC

r; I C4

C! C!U') 1 60 1 V'i I

C9 C! 191068 it C 1 -4 8 -4 1 1

3210 Ct Ct Ct Ct

1 0 9% 00 Ctl-4 1. IC04 11 cob 1.

1 ce I n .0 1.

zzic~

(~)

-J002:0C,)

5.

0z 4)-4*6'4

LiI- -4-4z aS.

aa4)

0I-

5.SU

a-44)a

Li 4)(nz -4

Li S.IL 4)Li a0

a5.0

a

-J

44zz44C,,

-Jo 0

O -~

4,4,

(I,

4,0

0

LaJ0

I-.0

ILl0

4,

.4z aoI.-

S

g44 Ma

0.

0-4

4)U

-4

a

I

C-)(I)

0z

-4

I~J g4)

zLaJ -~(~) 0

S.

4)

z0 C.)

0

'-4

0

.0LIC,)

0zLIt.a~ -4

LI0

aS-44)

£'2 '14

ao 3

2 S-4

o ~4)0AA.

-J

z

00

00

00zwa(Li 430

z 00

z 00 C0

0

0

zIcl

00

Sp-4

.4

zz

C,,

-400IC-,

0 0z -44)

(a

C)

0

0I-

4)

'.40

3LLI 0

0

zli.ILLLU 0

0 43

-4

~0

-4

0mn 0

-I

V 0 3~

-40 ~4)0

S'a4

*U

0z -.4

4)4

5 4)

U)4)

Uo .4

o *z4)C.) 0U) 4)

4)o04

-4'.4

CI4)z -40 '4

a406.-4.44I.

4)

0

Ii~

S-4SUCI4

* '40

0 3= S

.. 40 ~'.4)0

AA.

zz

0 4

01z

w0L

- -z4

-J00I0cnaz4

wI-0z

L&JC.) S.0

-44a

I-. -4

0

40U

4 S.4

40

zIAIIA.w0 S.S

-4S0C)0

* '.40

03S-4

0 ~

0.4

0-----

00

-4

wao Uz

0

4 CA.

0

cr..

z 4P

w r.0

0

z '44 0

zS

wU

I- 0

0

AIR VEHICLE HANDLERSYNOPSIS OF TEST

The purpose oz this Air Vehicle Handler tAVUD rail impact test was to

simulate the AVH and the Air Vehicle (AV) so as to obtain. thru

instrumentation. the expected loads induced on the AV.

A 5-ton cargo truck was substituted for the AVH and three Air Vehicle

Containers were positioned in the cargo bed of the 5-ton cargo truck to

simulate the actual load of two Air Vehicle Containers and the truck crane.

The middle of the three containers loaded on the 5-ton cargo truck contained

the instrumented dummy AV.

rhe 5-ton cargo truck was blocked and braced and cabled to the all-

wooden floor railroad flatcar per a previously approved tiedown procedure.

Web strap tiedown assemblies were used to secure the three Air Vehicle

Containers to the cargo bed of the 5-ton truck.

Following the 4 mph rail impact. two additional web strap tiedown

assemblies were added to restrain the middle container with the AV inside.

Evaluation of the instrumentation test data from this rail impact test with

the dummy AV validated that forces were at a magnitude that the AV could

safely withstand.

Based on this engineering test, a rail impact test with the actual AV

on the AVH can be performed without inflicting damage to the AVH.

IV-3




SPECIMEN LOAD: 5-Ton Cargo Truck (simulating the Air Vehicle Handler)containing three Air Vehicle Containers.


REFERENCE LOAD NO. 3 WT. 32,383 Lbs.


BUFFER CAR (5 CARS) WT. 251,000 Lbs.


I-A A 4.70 Middle Air VehicleContainer moved for-ward 2 plus inchesand rebounded 2 inches.

2-A A 8.13 Middle Air Vehicle Con-tainer moved forward andrebounded an additional3/4 inch.

3-A A 8.07 Middle Air Vehicle Con-tainer moved forwardand rebounded an addi-tional 1/4 inch.

4-B B 8.18 Middle container movedrearward in the truck andrebounded 2-1/8 inches.

I CD 0 Ii E- 0w0

Q w 0 c nI

I II - 1 I , -C =n .4 I

1 64~ 0 r I QD0 -

E - =) .4C. 0 I n o .1

I cI tIo0 0 01

I 0 1 0 0' 1- '01I *I I W i : 2 1.- I -C!

U L0 in 0 co Ico t- a -A I

I I 10 0 - I.

I E -- - ---

W I- I n In In4 nE I I lC42 ~ .- C

CA I In

I I NI 0 l m0 0 0No I I = 0 I civ D (0 1

ICI I 0. . .I ~~~ I 9 10 0 0 0

Ior E- Q

OM l0 n 0 W0 II I I I .1.

C4 , - a, I - C

I IA I -001 4 4 In ;

I I I 0 1 C . In ' _ID

I I I 0 I - .

0S.

4.4

0 :

-4 r

0

4zz4

S-4Li.4

S

4oo .4

I0Q)

0

oz4 4-.

05.

LiiI,0Szw 0c~) Li

-4-4

S.

-. 4U

0

-VS

4

S.

SwU

IA-.S-4SLiUa

oa0

03I ~ S- -4

0 >-

m 0I

LL.4

4>0,

AI

-J

44

S

0

S

'3

z 0

.4

S

.3

S

4USS

zIL.LU p..C

SUci

4* .40

o Rz S

-40 ~.30

z

-4ci.4o 4,o 5..S

C-)(I)

U

aCz 5..

S.4a4)

Liici

I.-.z -40

ASzo.4

I.-2 A4)

a

S0

LU-4

Cl) 0.zS

La.. SUQ 05.S

-4Scicia

a ~4)0

A0.

LAUNCH ASSEMBLY

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The Launch Assembly (LA) was removed with a mobile crane from the

chassis of the 5-ton cargo truck and placed at the center of the railroad

flatcar. The floor of the railroad flatcar was composed of wooden planking

and steel channel alternately positioned across the flatcar.

The system contractor's restraint procedure included 2-inch X 10-inch

lumber for blocking and 5/8-inch diameter wire rope for tie down. Several

items, including a removable ladder and a set of mudflaps from the 5-ton

cargo truck, were secured to the base of the Launcher with 1/2-inch wide

metal banding.

During the three forward impacts, the accumulated movement of the ladder

was 2-1/2-inches and the accumulated movement of the mudflaps was 1-1/4-

inches. The 8 mph reverse impact caused failure of one of two 1/2-inch

metal straps securing the ladder.

The use of 1/2-inch steel strapping to restrain various items to the LA

is not recommended. Recommend all steel strapping be of at least 3/4-inch

width or preferrably 1-1/4-inch width for rail movement.

The LA remained operational following the rail impact test.

IV-4




SPECIMEN LOAD: Launch Assembly of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle Systemloaded on a railroad flatcar.

TEST FLATCAR NO. ON 80270 LT. WT. 53,700 Lbs.





I-A B 4.53 Ladder moved forward3/8 inch.

2-A B 6.01 Ladder moved forward anadditional 1/2 inch.

3-A B 8.00 Ladder moved forward anadditional 1-1/4 inches.Mudflaps moved forward1-1/4 inches.

4-B A 8.08 Metal strap over ladderbroke. Ladder movedrearward 8-1/8 inches.Mudflapo moved rearward2-1/4 inches. LaunchAssembly moved rearward5/8 inch.

I CD I 01 0 a

* r)s 0 0 (ID w q

1- m 1) o~ 0

aC4 an 00 a fn 0

a .I IQ 0 0 Ca

# 0i 0 0

a 0 0 Os0

s : a o o o

M-4 a 1. 00a C;

11 r-) 150 0 10 Caa~ ~ ~ a aWa~ a0 0 0 O

Id I N .5A I- I

C~C4

a0 00 a

34 I4 1. E- .F - -a -4 a - - s - Ineq

o 0 0gn ma 0 am1m

cq~ :-W- tn II ~ t 0O I 5 0 C

C 0 Ca

C 0 in-I-

Q 0 0 05

6d 0 0 0 4a

I I 0 R 003 Ca a a aM) a n C

20 00 5 00 *0

* a a a. a . eq ~ . m

Uf)

z

4

0

a.

X.0

4,

Cox

00

w 10

04 0

04 .4

0

____ 0

p 0

z 0wS

U.U

w

z 00

z

z

0

D

U-4

-4r

00

-J

4c~zz

-J00I0U)

a.)

-4

g

I.-z -4.0w a

(~) SNU

z0 0

I- 4

*

0

-o0

lLi 5.(j, cizw

5.S

04

-4

S.04)

'a..0

o 3~ S

.4

0 ~.4)

0.0

zz 4

0I it.

z4 ..

w 4

aa

0a 0

42 W

0

w.

0

-4

0

5..

S

zz

4.,

0C,')

4~

S-4o -

oIoC,') .0

6SUUzLI

wr S

c~) ".4-~ " 0

S

z 4,

SS34)

S.0

0

Id .40.

0

4,0 5

-~

,'w £1.~ 4)

AIR VEHICLE HANDLER

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

This Air Vehicle Handler (AVE) test Is a ollowup test to the previous

engineering transportability rail impact test performed with a simulated AVH

and simulated Air Vehicle (AV). In this tent, the actual AVH was posltioned

on the all-wooden floor railroad flatcar and restrained per a previously

approved tiedown procedure. Each of the two Air Vehicle Containers were

secured to the cargo bed with five web strap tiedown assemblies.

The instrumented AV was placed in the Air Vehicle Container immediately

forward of the AVE on-board crane.

Accumulated movement during the rail impact tests never exceeded one

inch. The actual Air Vehicle in the container remained undamaged during the

test.

IV-5




SPECIMEN LOAD: Air Vehicle Handler loaded with two Air Vehicle Containers,one of which contains an actual Air Vehicle.

TEST FLATCAR NO. SP&S 34094 LT. WT. 47,200 Lbm.

REFERENCE LOAD NO. 5 WT. 32,383 Lbu.



IMPACT END STRUCK VELOCITY (phi RBEMARXS

1-A B 4.58 Rear container movedforward 1/2 inch.

2-A B 5.90 Web strap securing on-board crane is slightlyloose.

3-A B 8.28 Air Vehicle Handler

moved forward one inch.

4-B A 6.13 No movement.

* 3 03 9m O 0 0 0

I C' q 40 cn t-

303 WS-3 40 m

~~s C4W 3 C e2 0

923 1 b 0 3- 0 04C4

*~~I n.4 II a

94 M CD I0

0 I 0 0n 0 0

S~E 00 E-n Un In w0I4 c-4 - q e) I

I ~ ~ ~ C .5 ~ 3 C)n I Nta~l ~ ~ )I n eq~E-4s~3 E~S 0 03

Q ca IqS 3 n*~ CD I 0 0

Ic 34 . O30 I 0 0

rU w Os-4.2(A0 ~ ~ n I n *

32 3 0 0 0W 03

3 3 3 3 . * !.

31 I I ' 0 0 0 0 031

1 1s e q 0 o~

1 C4 31. eq -0 - 0

04 to IW

1 5 ~ 0 tv. -- eqi) 4

Om~ co~: V -W

r4~

34..

w 4

0

0,j~ ~r 0

I0

~ 0

w

C.-)

L-I

4,

0

10 0S

4.)

-. 4..

0

o R~-4

0 :~.4)0

0.

;- ~d'd

I-J00I0Co

0z

wF-zIdC-)

F-S

z -4

0

S-40

-'3S

I.-4

IdC/)

6-'

Id

Id0 S

F-

S£3

0

o 3~ 0

o ~*4,0£3p..

RECOVERY ASSEMBLY

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The Recovery Assembly (RA) was removed with a mobile crane from the

chassis of the 5-ton cargo truck and centered on the all-wooden floor

railroad flatcar. The system contractor's restrait procedure included 2-

inch X 10-inch lumber for blocking and 5/8-inch diameter wire rope for tie

down. Rub blocks were built and located wherever a wire rope contacted the

RA. Several items, including a cable spool and two outriger pads, were

secured to the pallet of the RA.

During rail impact, longitudinal movement of the RA was minimal and

lateral movement of 5/8-inch was recorded on the trailing end of the RA

following the 8 mph forward impact.

Inspection of the RA following the reverse impact revealed permanent

deformation under the arms that set on the metal box-type beams of the main

structure of the EA. Wooden pads, 1/2-inch thick, were cut and installed

under the arms prior to any rail impact testing. The intent of the wooden

pads was to cushion the impact and distribute the force over a larger area

on the metal box-type beam. The reverse rail impact crushed the wooden pad

and deflected the metal box-type beam under it.

Permanent deformation of the metal box-type beam resulted in falilin the

tested securement system. Recommend the RA be retested using a securement

system that contributes no damage to the RPV System during rail impact.

(Reference Test Page IV-9).

Although the RA sustained minor deformation, the operational check

uncovered no problems.

IV-8



TEST NO. 6 LOAD NO. a DATE: 29 April 1987

SPECIMEN LOAD: Recovery Assembly of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle Systemloaded on a railroad flatcar.



TOTAL SPECIMEN WT. 61,801 Lbm.

BUFFER CAR (5 CARS) WT. 251,000 Lbg.


I-A A 4.80 No movement.

2-A A 6.02 No movement.

3-A A 8.45 Trailing end of RecoveryAssembly moved laterally5/8 inch.

4-B B 8.30 Permanent deformation ofthe box-type beam of themain structure of the RPV.

I C.,* , -I 0 IC0d

0 0~~ 0 . 0 01

to MR30 0 05 CO 14 al

I~ ~ 0 W35 I- - -I

s i -1~ 'I t 0 0

I 5 Ul.. 1CA a -I -

* I 15 50 0 0 DI4 1 4 0 ,I . ..I 0 0 fm~d C 0 0I I __5 D6

CA..

us o 5 Z 00 .

IL I I3 -

I I l0~ 0 C; C C C-- -~ - --- -- -

-C; 0. C

30 w -

j ~ C W:: :I ) 0 5 (

C 4 0

4-J

~ri

-,7

0i

(~) to.

CA.

-

L)

W~

z ..

L-o

0

0

044

0

MAI

Al)

c-

4,zz

0

0Lwc-,

l'

x.

0

zaz0

.0

00

00x -0

0

0

0

u.

-J

4zz

I0(0

0z4

0S

zo4'

I-Sz

-4

44.0

0

Saz

S

4'

'0 .40

o 3~ S

-4o ~4,0

REMOTE GROUND TERMINAL

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The Remote Ground Terminal (RGT) mounted on a 3/4-ton cargo trailer was

blocked, braced, and tied down on the wood/metal floor of a railroad

flatcar. The system contractor's restraint procedures used 3/8-inch wire

rope, wood chock blocks, and a lunette support block.

The rail impact test produced no movement of the ROT. The operational

check of the RGT was completed without incident.

IV-7



TEST.NO. 7 LOAD NO. 7 DATE: 30 April 1987

SPECIMEN LOAD: Remote Ground Terminal of the Remotely Piloted VehicleSystem loaded on a railroad flatcar.

TEST FLATCAR NO. ON 60270 LT. WT. 53,700 Lbs.

REFERENCE LOAD NO. 7 WT. 2.840 Lbs.




1-A A 4.75 No Movement



4-B B 7.98 No Movement(Less than reqd 8)

5-B B 8.35 No Movement

1 Cb 1 0 01 C

0 - 8 E -4 01 10 1! 0i 0

a,0 1 C; C; 0

C ~ l 4 . 40 0 40 0 . CI

414o1 ca 0 1 - 4 I .C. FMI I C! I

I I C; 4O0 0 0 01

C>') Il-C 10 0 0 CI

to w C.)- CII -W -W --I as1 I n I. t 0 0> 0 Vn

43 1- 1C2in Cn C-in W 0 1q

. 5 1) -m -4 -

I O o 0 016IW- cu Il do~I I a,

I I ~ I Cl S I 0 0 4

II t- M~. l i inI

0 CD I

I. 1. I ! 0 0I <> 1 0 0 0n WI

I in I 31 0 0 0>I I t- 2 I - 0

94 o C---, I1

I ; I 2 I C! C!I ~ ~ ~ 1 ID0 * . * .

0I I , 1 213. I ~ 1 n i

I I I C 0 0 C)1I eI ccl -n

W -W-* In -D L I

Id S cOIW t- c

4

er>. ~. I

-4

~ -ti

4 a0

V -4-.

K aS..

a4,

~b. 00

-4

a-40S..S

E-.

L&JU)

0w 5.LA..LaJQ 0

0S

S

-I *~

0 ~~ 0

-4

_________

,0 :~.-

*

*1'.4

-J

4

Cl) -'

-1" I aEu0S.

t.1dr~ C

wI- C

0 5.SE-4

C :10

I- '4a

S

S-c4,

0

.4-4-4Sp.4.)

c-I] -.6' 0

3

20 :'~4)0

Srn-I.

~7 41jI! (I.,

-4

SU

S

z0

0

S

.3

b>~t\ At'. 0

0

* 0'-4

0 >I-)0

II.

0

0z-

:J

0

I-~zd

0

zo0

C04

"At,

z0-

D C4

0

a

5s.

ZII 0

-J

4zz44U,

-J00IC-)U,

0z4

wI-z -~

a)-d

zo a)-4I-

.4 a)JJCwa

(/)zw a)La.. a)W

0a)

-4a)C.)C.)Ca

0o ~

Z a)

a >

0

444

p.))

-J.4 11

0

41

-4-1

03

0 -4

0

0I

00

z -w a

VV

0

z

"-1

0

-J

4c~

-4.4

C,) S..4,

-4

S.S0 E-.(I')

Ect0S

S

4,

.g-4

0

zo S

I-S..

3S.0

0

LiCl) 0

z SLiLa..L&l0 0

S.

SS..

0

o 3~.4

0 ~4)0

i~.

-J

z

cr-4

z 1-4

I- Ix

0

43

0

L I-

AIR VEHICLE CONTAINER

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The system contractor requested the Air Vehicle Container tAVC) with the

actual Air Vehicle be removed from the Air Vehicle Handler, instrumented and

secured on a railroad flatcar. Using 2-inch banding and wooden floor-line

blocking, the AVC was rail impact tested in the longitudinal and iaterai

directions.

In the first rail impact test. the AVC was positioned with the

longitudinal axis of the Air Vehicle parallel with the longitudinal axis of

the railroad fiatcar. The container remained stationary during the four

rail impacts. The AVC was then rotated O degrees. which positionea the

longitudinal axis of the Air Vehicle perpendicular to the iongitudinal axis

of the railroad flatcar. Neither the container, nor the Air Vehicle.

received any damage during either rail impact test.

The two rail impact tests performed with the AVC secured to the railroad

flatcar were for the sole purpose of obtaining, thru instrumentation, the

expected 1oads induced directly from the railroad flatcar. Movement of the

AVC in this configuration is not anticipated and no approval is necessary.

IV-6



TEST NO. 8 LOAD NO. 8 DATE: I May 1987

SPECIMEN LOAD: Air Vehicle Container with Air Vehicle loaded on railroadflatcar. Air Vehicle tested positioned (a) longitudinally and (b) laterallyon the flatcar.

TEST FLATCAR NO. ON 60270 LT. WT. 53.700 Lbs.

REFERENCE LOAD NO. 8 WT. 1.144 Lbs.


BUFFER CAR (5 CARSJ WT. 251,000 Lbs.


(a) Longitudinally

I-A B 4.82 No movement

2-A B 6.13 No movement

3-A B 8.28 No movement

4-B A 8.35 No movement

(b) Laterally

I-A A 4.62 No movement

2-A A 6.22 No movement

3-A A 8.20 No movement

4-B 4-B 8.28 ao movement

a ~ ~ ~ I-0 in W

ODI InC 0 C

I cC C C C

3M' C!~* 0=4N3L 0 031

I ~ L 303 CD1 0 I) 0

C4IM 2 0 0 IL) 0

I I 30 0O 0) 01

0 ~ G Ci U

0 0 01

I~- -- -- ---- -- I

* * I~J 10 0 )

IW Q C.) 14 ) 4 C

I 'D 1 0 0n C

C.

I ~ ~ ~ ~ O I 2 1 ) 0 I)I

E- IE-1 4 30 0o so W2

Q I CD - o I

Iq C4 I 4

UI 1 1.4 - 4 V

I0 I I aWI4 CA 1 001 0 0

C1 C; I

1 ~ ~ 0 0414 C

03 I4 a g0o0I 3 1W I - -

WI I ~*-- I -

S..

C,)0

-4

o 0o05.o

(1) -4a.5..

o 0

1.)

0

Lia

Hz -4

LiC..)

0o '-4

Ua,

a,

-4

a(n 4',

0LiiLi..Li Uo -4

a,

S..

-4 *.-4

0

o 3~ 0

'-4o >

0'.1~~_____________________ .1, '~.*' ~

4* *i~. ~ - 4

-I

:~~4.

.~ 4C,)

* I-j0

0~ ~

~Th~*' ** 0

4,

-4

w

-4.4

z04,

0SU

'~'p~' ~ *~.. 0

:~2 6

.4

0 ~4,

0

zz

-4'-9

0 a0

U)S.

Id

aS.

Id(J)zIdIL. -4

Lii C'

0 .4

S

S.'-4

t') *9..0

0 ~~0~ ~4,0

~1.

RECOVERY ASSEMBLY

SYNOPSIS OF TEST

The results if the previous rail impact test of the Recovery Assembly

(RA) necessitated a retest. The blocking, bracing, cabling, and bearing

plates under the arms of the RA were revised.

The previously tested RA was removed from the chassis of the 5-ton cargo

truck with a mobile crane and centered on the all-wooden floor railroad

flatcar. The amount of blocking and bracing material used in the retest

was reduced in both quantity and size of pieces (2-inch X 10-inch vs 2-Inch

X 6-inchi. The quantity of 5/8-inch wire rope tie-down was reduced by 50

percent in the retest.

The deformed area of the structural box-type beam under the arms oz the

RA was covered with a ./4-inch thick steel plate. The steel piate trans-

ferred the zorce applied near the center of the box-type beam to the edge oi

the box-type beam. which has greater strength. The plate also distributed

the force over a larger area on the box-type beam.

The four rail impacts were completed without further damage to the box-

type beam. A design change, installing a permanent stiffener plate on the

box-type beam for'the arm to contact, is a requirement to prevent permanent

deformation of the beam.

IV n m



TEST NO. Q LOAD NO. DATE: 2 May 1987

SPECIMEN LOAD: Recovery Assembly of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle Systemloaded on a railroad flatcar.



TOTAL ZPECIMEN WT. 61,801 Lbs.

BUFFER CAR t5 CARS) WT. 251,000 Lbs.

IMPACT END STRUCK VELOCITY imp REMARKS

I-A A 4.92 No movement.

2-A A 6.26 Assembly moved forward1/16 inch.

3-A A 8.20 Assembly moved an addi-tonal 1/16 inch forward.

4-B B 8.2i Assembly moved rearward3/4 inch.

9d 04 0 0.1

30 0 an an

IA I 0. C4 :I a)

C;l C;lI 0 0C'1a ~ 04 FA~ 10 0 0

a~a a 0 0 0 0

E s. Ia an an an

I I 1 ) 10 40 40 Qa

an a C4n 0L3 0

I. I I 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 01a1 10 0 0 0* IS~aU 1 10 0 0

a d coI Ia a n

*~ a l00

I III4 I 0 0 (ID C4

0 a a.. w a i 1 1 114 1 C,) 0 0 0

In a :C*4. n n

a2 i inaa a I Ui 0 0 10

I4 9d I a 0 0 0 o

* I I6f

IId1 1 0 10 0 0

SI I4 rI -W I

I

-J

zz

-J002:C)C,,

S..

o 00

w 0S.

H -iz -'

I.

S

0

0H

S

.4

5..4,wS5.

LUCl) -~

.0fiw SIL. Uwo

5.S

0

S

.- 4 *4

0

0 R2 S

-4

0 ~..

hlS

0

z 4)

w 0LL.

AI0.La

* ~:- **. ~

* 4

-4 1

4

-J

-J00IUU)

z

1-z-4.0SS

CU1-

S

0

U..wC

-4-I-4

'44)

1~) *4

0

o 32 S

~6o ~.50

A4

0

U

434

-40.

-4SS4)U

S..S

-J

Az0U

-4U

aU0.

o S

U.0

'43

LAJ 0.

0.US.43U

U

-40.

-4SS4 43U

Z AId 43

IL1*5o 1

S..* ~

-4

35U

* "4W044

o 3~a Si.

-. 4 So ~43 0o uA S0.

-J

zz

(~)

-4.0o wo U

U

3..

S

o az

aU

Lii S

I- -4z -.4

U.4-4

zo S.

.0

430S4)a

44 S.51.

0

Lii 43

zLU

UIAJo aa

-4.0

.0

U.

U) *s..ao 3

~ S-4

a ~4)0

.0

-J

4zz4

20m0oza0

0

z4

024.LI-a

LI 0a.a-0

GD

-o

0

-U4 04,

2zLI 0La. 4,S

LI 20

0-4SUU4.

C ~-.0

o R~ S

-.4o ~4,0

-to

.2

o w

wU

4c ILLGD

LL3

ot

z

z

o00

z 0

zjzzI

-4

0N0oQ

0

It

0

.9

zp

z-

0-

0S

z-

wa

0zp

wS

z 040S

0C)

z4

wa

STATIC PULL TESTS

SYNOPSIU OF TESTS

At the request of MTMC, static pull tests were administered to the

slinging and tiedown provisions of the Launch Assembly and Recovery Assembly

to satisfy MIL-STD-2OF.

During static pull testing oi the tiedown provisions on the Launch

Assembly, a forward longitudinal pull of 22,550 pounds was administered to

the tiedown fitting. The tiedown fitting had no reinforcing plate to

prevent the attachment bolt from pulling thru the pallet saide wall. Later,

MTMC revised the forward longitudinal pull requirement from 22,550 pounds to

5,638 pounds, which was accomplished without incident. The remaining

tiedown provisions and slinging fittings on the Launch Assembly were pulled

to the forces specified without failure.

All slinging and tiedown provisions on the Recovery Assembly were pull

tested and no deficiencies noted.

IV-10

STAT.IC ..RULL TEST

RECOVERY_ASSEMLY

LOCATION DIRECTION PULLUPOUNDS) DURATION(SECONDS)

Lift Points 45 degrees 23.213 g0

Lift Points Forward 11,521 6 - 10

Lift Points Rearward 9,600 6 - 10

Lift Points Lateral 10.800 6 - 10

Lift Points Lateral 7.254 6 - 10

Tiedown Points Longitudinal 11.521 6 - 10

STATIC PULL TEST

LAUNCH ASSEMBLY

LOCATION DIRECTION PULL(LBSt DUR.ATION(SECONDS)

Slinging Provisions 45 degrees 12.800 95(each of four fittings)

Slinging Provisions Longitudinal 5.638. 10(each of four fittings) (fore and aft)

Slinging Provisions Lateral 4,228 10(each of four fittings)

Slinging Provisions Downward 5,638 10teach of four fittings)

Tiedown Provision 45 degrees 12,756 95(each of tour fittings)

Tiedown Provision Longitudinal 5,638 10teach of tour fittings)

Tiedown Provision Lateral 4,228 10(each of tour fittings)

Tiedown Provision Downward 2.819 10(each of four fittings)

*Revised pull to 5,538 pounds after taiiure at 22,550 pounds

Cf)

II

It

0o

-4M

0

c0--

z ,

0

0

.4 '-4V

000 3

0

0

y 4.D

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1987-744-927/62023

DTIC · 2. Impacting was accomplished by striking the test car (specimen car) into a line of five...

Documents

Transcript of DTIC · 2. Impacting was accomplished by striking the test car (specimen car) into a line of five...