DTIC ADA540673: Aircraft Survivability. Spring 2011

2.2 MB·English

by  Defense Technical Information Center

Published by the Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office
SPRING 2011

VuLNERABILITY
REDuCTION
9
INTEGRALLY ARMORED
HELICOPTER FLOOR
13
HELICOPTER HOsTILE FIRE
INDICATOR TEsT FACILITY
24
TODAY’s IRCM sYsTEMs:
sMARTER THAN us?
Report Documentation Page Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington
VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it

does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. REPORT DATE 3. DATES COVERED
2011 2. REPORT TYPE 00-00-2011 to 00-00-2011
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
Aircraft Survivability. Vulnerability Reduction. Spring 2011
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
JAS Program Office,200 12th Street South,Crystal Gateway #4, Suite REPORT NUMBER
1103,Arlington,VA,22202
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)
11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT
NUMBER(S)
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF
ABSTRACT OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE Same as 32
unclassified unclassified unclassified Report (SAR)
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
Aircraft Survivability is published Table of Contents
three times a year by the Joint
Aircraft Survivability Program
Office (JASPO) chartered by the US
Army Aviation & Missile Command,
US Air Force Aeronautical Systems
Center, and US Navy Naval Air
Systems Command.
4 News Notes
by Dennis Lindell
5 JCAT Corner
by Lt Col Dave Bartkowiak, USAFR, and Lt Col Jeff Ciesla, USAFR
6 Survivability Assessments—The Fire Prediction Model (FPM)
by Jaime Bestard
Onboard fires are the main damage mechanism responsible for air system losses. Aircraft fuel
and hydraulic systems and their adjacent dry bays are particularly vulnerable during combat,
since the effectiveness (lethality) of modern conventional weapons is directly proportional to
ignition capability. Furthermore, peacetime and civilian operations are also affected by
unanticipated design flaws and mishaps resulting in fires.
JAS Program Office
200 12th Street South
Crystal Gateway #4, Suite 1103 9 Integrally Armored Helicopter Floor
Arlington, VA 22202
by Connie Bird, Mark Robeson, and Alan Goodworth
United Technologies Research Center and the US Army Aviation Applied Technology
Views and comments are welcome
Directorate developed and demonstrated an affordable, lightweight integrally armored
and may be addressed to the:
helicopter floor. Using the Sikorsky H-60 platform architecture, the floor demonstrated
ballistic protection from the 7.62 x 39 millimeter (mm) Armor Piercing Incendiary round at
Editor
44% lighter weight than the baseline floor/armor system. The integrally armored floor also
Dennis Lindell
maintained the structural functions of the current floor.
Assistant Editor
Dale B. Atkinson
13 Helicopter Hostile Fire Indicator Test Facility
by Joseph Manchor
To order back issues of the
ASnewsletter, please visit Helicopters are particularly susceptible to threat impact from small arms and unguided
http://www.bahdayton.com/ munitions due to their inherent low-and-slow flight parameters. It is often not obvious to
surviac/inquiry.aspx. aircrew when they are under fire. A large amount of projectiles may be expended, with the
attack occurring over a considerable period of time until the craft may actually be impacted by
On the cover: the enemy. It would be of immense value if the pilots of these craft could be quickly alerted to
An AH-64D conducts a combat incoming fire so that they may take evasive maneuvers.
patrol in support of Operation
Enduring Freedom.
16 Excellence in Survivability—John J. Murphy, Jr.
by Ralph Speelman
1
1
20 The JASP is pleased to recognize Mr. John J. Murphy, Jr. for Excellence in Survivability.
g
n John is Technical Director for the Air Armament Center, 46th Test Wing, 46th Test Group,
Spri Aerospace Survivability and Safety Operating Location at Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton,
y • OH. For 25 years John has been a leader in advancing and applying technology to predict,
bilit evaluate, and improve combat survivability of US flight vehicles. John graduated from the
a
viv University of Cincinnati in 1986 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering.
ur He followed that with a 1991 Master of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering from the
S
aft University of Dayton.
cr
Air
2
Mailing list additions, deletions,
changes, and calendar items may be
directed to:
18 2010 NDIA CSD Aircraft Survivability Awards and Presentations SURVIAC Satellite Office
by Dennis Lindell
13200 Woodland Park Road
Suite 6047
The National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Combat Survivability Division (CSD)
Herndon, VA 20171
held its annual Aircraft Survivability Symposium at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS)
on 2-5 November 2010. The Aircraft Survivability 2010 theme was, “Today’s Successes,
Tomorrow’s Challenges.” The symposium focused on identifying and applying the
Promotional Director
survivability lessons from current combat aircraft to address the new threats and requirements
Jerri Limer
that challenge the survivability programs of tomorrow’s aircraft.
Creative Director
Jerri Limer
20 Aircrew and Aircraft Occupant Vulnerability Demonstration
by Gregory Fuchs, B. Joseph McEntire, Patricia Frounfelker, and Marsha Fridie Art Director
Michelle DePrenger
The Joint Aircraft Survivability Program (JASP)-sponsored Threat Weapons and Effects
Seminar (TWES) is hosted by the Joint Combat Assessment Team (JCAT) every April. This Technical Editor
seminar draws information from threat exploitation, live fire testing, and combat experience Daniel Eckroad
to provide a complete picture on threat lethality. Whereas the seminar’s primary objective is to
train JCAT personnel and facilitate the dissemination of survivability data, in 2010, the team Newsletter Design
collaborated with the US Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory (USAARL) and the Tammy Black
US Army Research Laboratory, Survivability/ Lethality and Analysis Directorate (ARL/SLAD)
to demonstrate the effects of a rocket propelled grenade (RPG) type system against Illustrations, Cover Design, Layout
helicopter occupants. Tammy Black
Distribution Statement A:
24 Today’s IRCM Systems: Smarter Than Us? Approved for public release; distribution
unlimited, as submitted under NAVAIR
by Brad Thayer
Public Release Authorization 11-198.
Over the last 10 years, fielded missile warning and infrared (IR) countermeasures systems
(MWS and IRCM) have rapidly increased in complexity and performance. This has pushed the
test community to develop ever more sophisticated test capabilities in order to fool the systems
into thinking the aircraft is being fired upon by an actual live Man Portable Air Defense
Systems (MANPADS) or other IR-guided missile. This is a necessity, since firing actual
MANPADS at manned, flying aircraft is currently impossible to do with acceptable safety.
28 AH-64D Apache Longbow Helicopter Live Fire Ballistic
Vulnerability Testing
by Andrew Bajko and Frederick Marsh
The product of the Apache modernization program, the AH-64D Apache Longbow is an
upgraded version of the AH-64A Apache attack helicopter. Primary modifications to the
Apache were the addition of a millimeter-wave fire control radar (FCR) target acquisition
1
system, the fire-and-forget Longbow HELLFIRE air-to-ground missile, updated T700-GE- 1
0
2
701C engines (for FCR-equipped Apache Longbows), and a fully integrated cockpit. In g
n
addition, the aircraft received improved survivability, communications, and navigation pri
S
capabilities. McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Systems (now part of the Boeing Company) y •
delivered the first AH-64D to the Army in March of 1997. bilit
a
v
vi
ur
S
aft
cr
Air
3
News Notes
by Dennis Lindell
Joel Williamsen Receives Larry Eusanio: In Appreciation studies of the Eagle missile warhead-
NASA Award With sadness, we note fuze combination. This was one of the
The National Aeronautics and Space the loss of Larry first digital end game models, and it
Administration (NASA) selected Eusanio on 6 October served to speed design trade studies.
Dr. Joel Williamsen to receive the 2010. His career in Prior to that time, end game studies
NASA Engineering and Safety Center aircraft survivability were done manually using physical
(NESC) Leadership Award. The award was long, productive, scale models to work out the geometry.
was presented 16 November at the and influential,
Marshall Space Flight Center beginning in 1956 In another early study (1964),
Larry Eusanio
(Huntsville, AL). The citation reads: and continuing until Mr. Eusanio led a project to determine
shortly before his the effectiveness of conventional
“In recognition of outstanding leader- death. He was recognized in recent munitions in realistic environments such
ship and technical insight into the years with two major professional as vegetation and snow. Up until that
NASA Engineering and Safety Center awards. In 2004, he was presented the time, effectiveness estimates were based
micrometeoroid and orbital debris American Institute of Aeronautics and on a bald earth. These models and data
assessment (M/OD) activities.” Astronautics (AIAA) Survivability later were used by the Joint Technical
Award for his achievements in the field Coordinating Group on Munitions
The award is based on four NASA of aircraft survivability. In 2007, NDIA Effectiveness (JTCG/ME) to produce
tasks Joel has supported since 2003, presented him the Arthur Stein Award the Joint Munitions Effectiveness
including: Columbia Accident for outstanding contributions in Live Manuals (JMEM) for this type of
Investigation (2003), M/OD Risk Fire Test and Evaluation (LFT&E). weapon system, which were urgently
Assessment Program Validation (2006), needed for the Southeast Asia conflict.
Orion M/OD Protection Assessment He began his career at Cornell
(2008), and International Space Station Aeronautical Laboratory (later called In the 1970s and 1980s, his primary
M/OD Protection Evaluation (2010, Calspan) in Buffalo, NY, where he emphasis was on the effectiveness of
currently underway). worked on a variety of survivability and countermeasures as a function of
effectiveness programs. One of his first various flight profiles. His trade
Joel is one of our own and we innovations was the development of a analyses led to the identification of
congratulate him on a job well done. digital simulation to conduct end game optimal countermeasure suites, tactics,
and flight profiles for Army and
Air Force standoff aircraft such as
Guardrail, Quick Fix, and Joint Stars.
The Joint Stars Program Manager
unofficially gave him credit for
saving the program from early
cancellation due to Office of the
Secretary of Defense (OSD) concerns
for platform survivability.
In 1989, Larry Eusanio moved to the
Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA).
It is fitting that he was hired, in part,
based on a strong recommendation
from Arthur Stein, an early pioneer of
1
1 the aircraft survivability discipline.
0
2
g Mr. Eusanio led the Air Systems
n
pri LFT&E project for manned aircraft,
S
y • anti-air weapons, missile defense
bilit systems, Joint Live Fire (JLF) of aircraft,
a and the Joint Aircraft Survivability
v
urvi NASA ESC Chief Engineer (right) and Chief Astronaut bestowing the award on Dr. Williamsen Program. In 1991, Larry Eusanio
craft S Rcoe-saeuatrhcohr Cedo ua nbcriile’sfi Cngo mtom thitet eNe aotnio nal
Air Weapons Effects and Airborne Systems
concerning the applicability of aircraft
4
survivability test and evaluation Most importantly, though, Larry an aviation test and analysis
methodologies for the LFT&E of Eusanio was loved and respected by all support contractor for the SURVICE
such aircraft as the C-17 and F-22. who worked with him. He was fair in Engineering Company for 7 years.
his analyses, even-tempered in his
Mr. Eusanio provided analytical demeanor, and strong in his advocacy of Bill was known as a practical,
support for most of the aircraft and aircraft survivability. He chose to stay nuts-and-bolts expert on both foreign
anti-aircraft programs conducted to involved in his work even as he suffered and domestic rotorcraft systems,
date under LFT&E statutory declining health, and he has left us with particularly propulsion systems, rotor
requirements. A number of these test a wealth of personal memories and a drives, and rotor blades. He will be
and evaluation programs have resulted legacy of analytical contributions. greatly missed by his family, long-time
in substantial improvements to system coworkers, and those who continue in his
survivability through changes to aircraft Bill Keithley, Long-Time Aircraft work of making helicopters safer and
design or operational employment. Survivability Practitioner, Dies more survivable for American warfighters.
He authored, co-authored, or made On 16 November
major contributions to more than 2010, William Joint Aircraft Survivability Program
seventy publications in survivability (Bill) Keithley, (JASP) Changes
and effectiveness. He took a special an aircraft
interest in initiatives to improve the survivability New Army Principal Member
state-of-the-art of LFT&E, to place specialist for Steering Group (PMSG) Co-Chair
greater emphasis on the evaluation of almost four John Kamadulski, who was the Army
human casualties, to integrate Battle decades, passed JASP Principal Member since August
Damage Assessment and Repair into Bill Keithley away due to 2003, passed the baton to Don Hubler
LFT&E, and to integrate LFT&E with complications in July 2010. In addition to serving on
related safety tests. from an infection. Bill was a former the PMSG for 7 years, John led the
Air Force sergeant and decorated
Throughout his professional life, Vietnam veteran who spent most of his
Mr. Eusanio provided sustained civilian career working at the Philips
analytical contributions to improve Army Airfield at Aberdeen Proving
the survivability and effectiveness of Ground, MD. There, he worked as an
US military aircraft and weapon aircraft mechanic and inspector for
systems. These contributions were Ross Aviation for 6 years; as an
visible at high levels in OSD and engineering technician, senior test
Congress and addressed all classes of director, and range manager for the
manned aircraft currently in the defense US Army Ballistic Research Laboratory
inventory and acquisition process. (and later the US Army Research
COL John Leaphart, PM ASE recognizing John
Laboratory) for 27 years; and finally as
Kamadulski at John’s retirement party
Continued on page 8
JCAT Corner
by Lt Col Dave Bartkowiak, USAFR, and Lt Col Jeff Ciesla, USAFR
The Joint Combat Assessment The Operation Enduring Freedom JCAT through the wreckage and debris, an
Team (JCAT) continues its tradition experienced a very busy late summer exterior panel exhibiting telltale signs
of providing aircraft operational and early fall as the traditional fighting and critical fragments were identified
support to the warfighter. Now that season in Afghanistan drew to a close. and collected. The weapon employed
the emphasis of warfighting efforts A JCAT record of five battle damage against the aircraft was correctly
have shifted to areas of operation in assessments were conducted in one day assessed by the JCAT and later positively
Afghanistan, the in-theater JCAT by Maj Mark Friedman, US Air Force, identified via metallurgical analysis of
presence in Iraq officially ceased during a peak period in late August in the recovered fragments. While tragic in
upon the departure of LCDR Dave RC-South. A catastrophic engagement in outcome, this event once again
Schubkegel from Baghdad on late July resulted in the loss of an AH-1 substantiates the value and rigor of the 1
1
19 August 2010. The JCAT (Forward) Cobra helicopter in RC-Southwest. training JCAT members receive prior to 20
g
will continue to track and capture CDR Craig Fehrle and LT Oral John deployment and the ability of JCAT to n
available data related to aircraft battle responded to the incident and conducted provide accurate recognition and Spri
damage incidents occurring in Iraq an initial assessment. The aircraft analysis of battle damage discriminators y •
via the cooperative effort by the Army wreckage and associated components to provide actionable feedback to the bilit
a
Combat Action Badge personnel were recovered and returned to Camp warfighter command element. viv
deployed in the area of operations there. Leatherneck/Bastion where a thorough ur
S
assessment was conducted. After sifting Continued on page 31 aft
cr
Air
5
Survivability Assessments—
The Fire Prediction Model (FPM)
by Jaime Bestard
Onboard fires are the main damage mechanism responsible for air system losses. Aircraft fuel
and hydraulic systems and their adjacent dry bays are particularly vulnerable during combat,
since the effectiveness (lethality) of modern conventional weapons is directly proportional to
ignition capability. Furthermore, peacetime and civilian operations are also affected by
unanticipated design flaws and mishaps resulting in fires.
Traditionally, fire risks have been Development fire sustainment and suppression while
identified by subject matter experts and The Joint Aircraft Survivability taking into account various ignition
educated trial and error during Live Fire Program (JASP) and its predecessor, the sources (e.g., ballistic threats), target
Test and Evaluation (LFT&E), Joint Technical Coordination Group for configurations, and environment and
Operational Test and Evaluation , and Aircraft Survivability, have sponsored encounter conditions. An alternate
actual aircraft operation in peacetime the development of the Fire Prediction Ground Vehicle Fire Model (GVFM)
and combat. In addition, vulnerability Model (FPM) since 1991. Originally was developed and combined with the
analyses have relied heavily on “best” known as the Dry Bay Fire Model DBFM in 2003 to form the FPM.
guesses based on coarse modeling and (DBFM), the model provided guidance
simulation (M&S) and/or costly test on the realism of surrogate targets used Model Overview
and evaluation (T&E). Therefore, a in place of the actual vehicle during the The FPM performs simulations of the
credible, fast-running, physics-based C-17 LFT&E program. The original events during penetration of a single
fire modeling capability has been model was an algorithm capable of threat through a vehicle and impacting
required for system design and simulating the ignition of fuel sprays by a container holding a flammable fluid
optimization, survivability assessments, armor piercing incendiary (API) (e.g., a fuel tank or pressurized line
and LFT&E support. Such a capability projectiles. Since then, the model has with either fuel or hydraulic fluid). This
identifies and reduces fire risks and evolved to simulate not only fuel spray unique capability distinguishes FPM
decreases the costs of LFT&E. ignition, but also ullage explosions and from models outside the survivability
discipline, where the latter concentrate
primarily on the sustained combustion
phase of fires and do not address
Aircraft Dry Bay
ballistic-initiated fires.
Fuel Line
FPM contains a library of generic
threats to combat aircraft (including
API and high explosive incendiaries or
HEI) and other ignition sources such as
sparks and hot-surfaces (from engine
and heating components). The model
also provides fluid properties for
standard JP-4, JP-5, JP-8, and diesel
fuels and MIL-H-5606 and
Hydraulic MIL-H-83282 hydraulic fluids and
Fluid Line Shot Location Fire Snapshot allows the user to enter custom fluids
into simulations. Fire extinguishing is
11 Leading Edge Dry Bay also included in simulations and the
0 Fuel Line
2
g model has an extensive library of
n
pri agents available.
S
y •
bilit FPM analyses include complex
a mechanisms that affect fire behavior,
v
urvi such as hydrodynamic ram (HRAM),
craft S Figure 1 Effects of an aircraft dry bay fire flmuiigdr astpiorany, gaenodm ceotmryb, uflsotiwo na npdro ducts.
Air In addition, the model outputs
probabilities of ignition and key time
6
of fire, i.e., threat penetration and
characterization, ignition, growth
Fuel Tank
and sustainment, and suppression.
Supporting modules will ensure
Fuel LIne
seamless interaction with other
system-level tools (e.g., COVART)
Outlet Hole
and projectile penetration models
(i.e., FATEPEN and ProjPen).
Furthermore, modularization will
Shot-Line streamline model development and
verification and validation (V&V)
efforts, thereby reducing costs and
minimizing programmatic risks.
A parallel effort to the FPM
Dry Bay
modularization has been the
development of enhanced fragment flash
Inlet Hole
characterization techniques and a
corresponding fragment flash model.
Pooling Fuel
Previous versions of FPM were limited
Dry Bay Clutter
by the inability to predict front-face
(impact-side) flashes (a survivability-
Figure 2 Typical FPM simulation community deficiency). As such, flashes
that lingered with sufficient energy and
duration on the dry-bay side of fuel
series, such as temperature, heat flux, Ongoing and Future Efforts tanks had a high potential of igniting
species concentrations, and oxygen and During 2010, the FPM underwent a the fuel spray and causing sustained
fuel vapor densities. major restructuring (modularization) fires. The model was not capable of
effort. Previous versions of FPM were predicting such events. Furthermore,
Uses and Users structured around different fire previous ballistic testing performed to
The FPM has been used for test scenarios, i.e., dry bay fires, spray fires, characterize the magnitude of such
predictions and design engineering and ullage fuel-air explosions. These flashes predated digital high-speed
within the aircraft, ground vehicle, different scenarios required redundant video. For that reason, the Aerospace
and threat lethality communities. routines for threat penetration, Survivability and Safety Operating
Various organizations have supported incendiary function or fragment flash Location (USAF AFMC 46 TG/OL-AC)
predictions over a wide range of characterization, spray characterization, and the Aeronautical Systems Center at
platforms. Principal users of the model and fire initiation, among others. As Wright-Patterson Air Force Base have
have included the SURVICE these routines had to be modified, the been involved in a ballistic testing effort
Engineering Company, Lockheed developer had to go through the code to characterize the magnitude of
Martin, the Northrop Grumman and ensure that changes were replicated fragment flashes and produce enhanced
Corporation, The Boeing Company, throughout similar routines in the flash characterization routines
the Naval Surface Warfare Center, the model. The new FPM v4.0 has been applicable to FPM and COVART and
Army Research Laboratory, and the restructured around the various stages replacing the current methodologies.
B-1B, CH-53K, C-27J, C-5, C-17, and
P-8 programs.
Target Target Target
The model supports key design areas
within the survivability discipline,
Spall
including test planning, vulnerability
assessments, and system design. Model
uses in test planning and evaluation
Impact-Side Exit-Side
include shot-line selection, pre-test Flash Flash
predictions, post-test analysis, and the
identification of required 1
1
instrumentation for test data collection. 20
Fragment g
Vulnerability assessments benefit from n
physics-based ignition probabilities, Spri
descriptions of the fire environment, y •
and the identification of heat fluxes and bilit
a
durations affecting structural strength viv
and thereby kill level definitions. ur
S
aft
cr
Figure 3 Fragment flash phenomena Air
7
Future FPM enhancements include a fuel and hydraulic systems remain the 3. Ballistic Fire Modeling and Simulation. Dexter,
full V&V effort of the new FPM v4.0 focus of survivability assessments, Ronald M. 2009. Palm Springs, California :
and subsequent versions including vulnerability reduction (including ullage American Institute of Aeronautics and
enhanced flash characterization and the and dry bay protection), and countless Astronautics, 2009. AIAA 2009-2399.
interface with standard penetration T&E and M&S efforts. To support 4. Dexter, Ronald M. 2008. Fire Modeling with the
algorithms. Additionally, the these efforts, the JASP has supported Fire Prediction Model (FPM)—Application for
survivability community has identified the development of a fire modeling tool Survivability Discipline. Aircraft Survivability.
deficiencies in characterizing HRAM in the form of FPM. This model has Spring, 2008.
that possibly affect FPM predictions been used for various purposes within
due to its effect on fluid spray and spurt the system acquisition and survivability
characteristics and timing. Reviewing communities. This JASP tool has
HRAM characterization methodologies provided reductions in the costs of
and enhancing engineering-level models major LFT&E programs and has
of this damage mechanism will benefit supported the identification of
fire and damage predictions. Finally, vulnerabilities in new and operational
one of the requirements for FPM is fast systems. Its development has pushed the
runtimes and this is accomplished by state-of-the-art in combat survivability
simplifying geometries to rectangular fire modeling and ongoing efforts will
tanks, bays, and clutter. Model users minimize future risks of fast-paced
have expressed interest in a seamless acquisition programs and war-fighter
interface with common modeling tools survivability projects. n
(e.g., BRL-CAD and FASTGEN) to
streamline their fire modeling process. References
The FPM configuration control board 1. Aircraft Ballistic Initiated Fire Modeling. Dexter,
has included these concerns in the Ronald M. and Pascal, Andrew. 2005. Austin,
model development roadmap. Texas : American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2005. AIAA 2005-2332.
Summary 2. Ball, Robert E. 2003. The fundamentals of aircraft
Fire damage has been identified as the combat survivability analysis and design. Reston,
major damage mechanism involved in Virginia: American Institute of Aeronautics and
the loss of combat vehicles. Therefore, Astronautics, 2003. 1563475820.
Division Chief, and Chief Systems leaving active duty, he served in Iraq as
News Notes
Engineer within PM ASE. He is a Black Hawk Maintenance Test Pilot
Continued from page 5
currently working on the AN/AVR-2B with the 101st Airborne Division. While
laser detecting set program. Mr. Hubler we hate to see Matt go, we wish him
PMSG from March 2006 – April 2008. serves as the Assistant Project Manager and his family all the best.
John retired from the US Army Aircraft for Laser Countermeasures.
Survivability Equipment (ASE) Project Ken Branham returns to JASPO
Manager’s Office in September 2010. Matt Crouch moves onto the Federal CAPT Ken
Aviation Administration (FAA) Branham, United
Mr. Don Hubler After five years at the States Navy (USN),
holds a BS degree JASPO, first as the finished a two year
in Mechanical Vulnerability tour as the JASP
Engineering from Reduction Deputy Military Deputy
North Dakota Program Manager Program Manager
State University (DPM) and then as and Joint Live
and has been a Susceptibility Ken Branham Fire/Aircraft
civilian with the Reduction DPM, Systems Joint Test
Matt Crouch
Army for over Matt Crouch accepted Director in September 2009. Following a
34 years. He has a position at FAA short sabbatical with the Institute for
1 Don Hubler, APM LCM been a member Headquarters updating their Research Defense Analyses, Ken “Mad Dog”
1
20 of the ASE & Development plan. His last day at Branham has returned to the JASPO.
g
n Project Manager’s Office since 1987, JASPO was Friday, 22 October 2010. Effective Monday, 25 October, Ken is
Spri where he has worked on numerous ASE the JASP Vulnerability Reduction
y • programs to include all Army legacy Before coming to JASPO, Matt served Deputy Program Manager. Please join us
bilit systems as well as Advanced Threat as an Aerospace Engineer in the Utility in welcoming Ken back to the JASPO. n
a
viv Infrared Countermeasures, Common Division of the Aviation Engineering
ur Missile Warning Systems, and Suite Directorate at Redstone Arsenal, AL.
S
aft of Integrated Radio Frequency Matt received his BS degree in Civil
cr Countermeasures. He has held positions Engineering from the United States
Air as the Test Division Chief, Tech Military Academy in 1996. Before
8
Integrally Armored Helicopter Floor
by Connie Bird, Mark Robeson, and Alan Goodworth
United Technologies Research Center and the US Army Aviation Applied Technology Directorate
developed and demonstrated an affordable, lightweight integrally armored helicopter floor.
Using the Sikorsky H-60 platform architecture, the floor demonstrated ballistic protection from
the 7.62 x 39 millimeter (mm) Armor Piercing Incendiary round at 44% lighter weight than the
baseline floor/armor system. The integrally armored floor also maintained the structural
functions of the current floor.
Requirements and Baseline
From the project’s conception, the
integrally armored floor (IAF) was Core
required to provide ballistic protection
from the 7.62 x 39 mm Armor Piercing Hard Armor Layer Spall Shield
Incendiary (API) round at service
velocity, while still performing all of the
functions of the current floor. The IAF Figure 2 Production UH-60 Floor Panel with Figure 3 Selected Floor Configuration with
was also required to weigh at least 33% Attachment Features Integral Armor
less than the baseline floor/armor
system using parasitic high hardness to access features in the floor, such as In addition to the ballistic protection
steel armor. seat posts and cargo tie down rings. requirement, the IAF had to meet load
However, these holes do result in bearing and durability requirements.
Since the H-60 platform architecture significant unprotected floor area for Historically, the most difficult durability
was used for this project, a baseline typical add-on armor. Another requirement is the pine box drop. A
system of the current UH-60 floor with important consideration is that the 200-pound (lb) pine box filled with
add-on high hardness steel armor was spacing of the I-beams beneath the floor rocks is dropped on one corner from a
defined, depicted in Figure 1. Weight requires an armor floor tile of at least height of 15 inches onto an 18-inch by
and thickness of the current floor 22” by 22” to span the distance 18-inch section of the floor supported on
(including features) and the steel armor between beams. two edges. Post impact, any resulting
were developed for comparison impression in the floor’s top surface
purposes. [1] Holes, shown in Figure 2, cannot exceed 0.3 inches in depth.
were developed in the armor protection
Configuration and Material
Trade Studies
UH-60M Cabin Floors Design trade studies were conducted to
1.8 LB/FT2
High Hardness Steel develop an IAF design that affordably
13.4 LB/FT2 met or exceeded the 33% weight
Installs on Top of Floor
reduction goal. The design studies
examined both variations in the floor
geometry as well as different armor
material systems.
Hole in Each candidate configuration integrated 1111
Armor Plate a hard armor layer into the lower portion 2020
fRoirn gT iAe-cDcoewssn 6 FT 12.5 FT omfe tmheb eflro. oEra acnhd c ounsefidg uitr aatsi oa nlo aaldso-c uasrerdy ian g Spring Spring
common soft spall shield material at or y y ••
near the top of the core stack. The bilitbilit
aa
.33” HH Steel sfoelaemct eodr dheosnigeync ionmclbu dseadn daw liigchht owpetiigohnt as urvivurviv
SS
.81” UH-60M Floor the top layer (Figure 3). aft aft
crcr
Figure 1 Baseline Floor/Armor System in UH-60 Cabin AirAir
9