USAARL Report No. 95-19

Transmittance Characteristicsof U.S. Army Rotary-Wing Aircraft Transparencies

DTIj ByStELECTF B

JUL 2 0 1995 Sean L. Wentworth

Everette McGowin IIIF Rebecca H. Ivey

Clarence E. RashWilliam E. McLean

Aircrew Health and Performance Division

19950719 055 March 1995

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

DTIu QuALI INECTED 5

United States Army Aeromedical Research LaboratoryFort Rucker, Alabama 36362-0577

Notice

Oualified requesters

Qualified requesters may obtain copies from the Defense TechnicalInformation Center (DTIC), Cameron Station, Alexandria, Virginia22314. Orders will be expedited if placed through the librarianor other person designated to request documents from DTIC.

Change of address

Organizations receiving reports from the U.S. Army AeromedicalResearch Laboratory on automatic mailing lists should confirmcorrect address when corresponding about laboratory reports.

Disposition

Destroy this document when it is no longer needed. Do not returnit to the originator.

Disclaimer

The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this report arethose of the author(s) and should not be construed as an officialDepartment of the Army position, policy, or decision, unless sodesignated by other official documentation. Citation of tradenames in this report does not constitute an official Departmentof the Army endorsement or approval of the use of such commercialitems.

Human use

Human subjects participated in these studies after giving theirfree and informed voluntary consent. Investigators adhered to AR70-25 and USAMRDC Reg 70-25 on Use of Volunteers in Research.

Reviewed:

RIHA R. L ELTC, MS YDirector, Aircrew Health and

Performance Division

Released for publication:

Ren W. WI Y,-.D., Ph.D. DENNIS F. SHANAHANChairman, Scientific Colonel, MC, MFS

Review Committee Commanding

Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Oo. A7pro0ed

Ia. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS* Unclassified

2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY OF REPORTApproved for public release, distribution

* 2b. DECLASSIFICATION / DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE unlimited

4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)USAARL Report No. 95-19

6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATIONU.S. Army Aeromedical (If applicable) U.S. Army Medical Research and MaterielResearch Laboratory MCMR-UAD Command

6c. ADDRESS (City, State. and ZIP Code) 7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)P.O. Box 620577 Fort DetrickFort Rucker, AL 36362-0577 Frederick, MD 21702-5012

Sa. NAME OF FUNDING I SPONSORING 8b. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION (If applicable)

Sc. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS I

PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNITELEMENT NO. NO. NO. ACCESSION NO.

_____________________________0602787A 3MI62787AA879 PE 164

11. TITLE (Include Security Classification)

(U) Transmittance Characteristics of U.S. Army Rotary-Wing Aircraft Transparencies

12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)Sean Wentworth, Everette McGowin, III, Rebecca Ivey, Clarence Rash, William McLean

i13a. TYPE OF REPORT lb. TIME COVERED 14. DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day) 15. PAGE COUNTFinal FROM TO 1995 March 29

16. SUPPLEMENTAL NOTATION

17. COSATI CODES 18. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP Windscreen, transparency, optical testing

13 04

19. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)This report documents a survey of the spectral and luminous transmittance characteristicsof transparencies (windscreens) used in currently fielded U.S. Army rotary-wing aircraft.The survey was conducted in two phases. In the first phase, samples of windscreens fromeach aircraft type were evaluated in the laboratory for phototopic (day) and scotopic(night) luminous transmittance. The spectral transmittance of each sample also wasmeasured. Based on laboratory measurements of unused samples, all windscreens metspecifications. However, field measurements on windscreens showed consistent failure ofluminous transmittance requirements. This loss of transmittance is attributed to hazeresulting from exposure to environmental factors.

20. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONX UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED [] SAMEASIRPT. 0 DTIC USERS Unclassified

22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b. TELEPHONE (Include Area Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOLChief, Science Support Center (334) 255-6907 MCMR-UAX-SS

DD Form 1473, JUN 86 Previous e@Mtons are obsolete. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

Unclassified

Table of contents

Page no.

List of tables ................ ........................... 2

Introduction ...................... .................... .... 3

Specifications and requirements ............. ................ 3

Methodology ....................... .......................... 9

Spectral transmittance ............... ................. 9

Luminance transmittance .............. ................ 10

Field measurements ............... ................... 10

Data .......................... ............................ 10

Spectral transmittance ............. ................. 10

Luminous transmittance ......... ................. ... 19

Summary ... ........................... ................ 23

References .................. ......................... ... 24

Appendix A - List of transparency manufacturers ......... ... 26

Appendix B - List of equipment manufacturers ... ........ .. 29

List of fiQures

Figure no. Page no.

1. The AH-I Cobra ................. ..................... 4

2. The AH-64 Apache ................. .................. . 4

3. The CH-47D Chinook ............... ................... 5

4. The OH-6 Cayuse ................ .................... 5 5

5. The OH-58A Kiowa ................. .................... 6

6. The OH-58C Kiowa ................. .................... 6

7. The OH-58D Kiowa ................. .................... 7-I s

1 I ~~Dist pca

List of figures (Continued).

Figure no. Page no.

8. The TH-67 Creek .................. .................... 7

9. The UH-l Iroquois ................ ................... 8

10. The UH-60 Black Hawk ............... .................. 8

11. Spectral transmittance curve for AH-I Cobra ....... .. 11

12. Spectral transmittance curve for AIH-64 Apache .... 12

13. Spectral transmittance curve for CH-47D Chinook 13

14. Spectral transmittance curve for OH-58A/D Kiowa 14

15. Spectral transmittance curve for OH-58C Kiowa .... 15

16. Spectral transmittance curve for TH-67 Creek ........ 16

17. Spectral transmittance curve for UH-1 Iroquois .... 17

18. Spectral transmittance curve for UH-60 Black Hawk 18

19. Example of surface abrasion present in an AH-64windscreen .............. .................... .. 23

List of tables

Table no. Page no.

1. Luminous transmittance (in percent) ... ......... .. 20

2. Field measurements of photopic luminous transmittance(in percent) .... ......... ............... ... 21

3. Comparison of laboratory and field photopic luminoustransmittance measurements ...... ............ .. 22

2

Introduction

This report documents a survey of the spectral and luminoustransmittance characteristics of transparencies (windscreens)used in currently fielded U.S. Army rotary-wing aircraft (AH-lCobra, AH-64 Apache, CH-47 Chinook, OH-6 Cayuse, OH-58A/C/DKiowa, TH-67 Creek, UH-I Iroquois, and UH-60 Black Hawk [Figures1-10]). These characteristics are essential to addressing issuesrelated to aviator and crewman visual performance. In addition,spectral transmittance characteristics impact the performance ofhelmet-mounted imaging systems, such as the AN/AVS-6 Aviator'sNight Vision Imaging System (ANVIS).

Previous investigations of the optical characteristics ofU.S. Army rotary-wing aircraft transparencies (Chiou, 1975, 1976;Chiou, Park, and Moser, 1976; Crosley, 1968) may no longer berepresentative of currently fielded transparencies. Manufact-urers of U.S. Army aircraft transparencies often change with eachprocurement contract. Appendix A provides a list of currentmanufacturers.

The survey was conducted in two phases. In the first phase,samples of windscreens from each aircraft type were evaluated inthe laboratory for photopic (day) and scotopic (night) luminoustransmittance. The spectral transmittance of each sample alsowas measured.

Installed transparencies are exposed continuously to theenvironment, collision with airborne particulate matter, and theabuses which often accompany aircraft maintenance. Therefore, toprovide a more realistic assessment of transmittance values asexperienced in the field, a second phase consisting of fieldmeasurements of photopic luminous transmittance for windscreensinstalled on aircraft on the flight line was conducted.

The laboratory measurements were taken on new (or notpreviously used) transparency samples. Due to limitedavailability of such transparencies, only a single sample of eachforward windscreen could be obtained for each aircraft type. [Anexception to this was the inability to obtain any frontwindscreens of the OH-6 or the right front windscreen for the UH-60.] Therefore, the data reported herein should be consideredonly representative of transparency performance. Fieldmeasurements (photopic transmittance only) were made on sixaircraft per type.

Specifications and reauirements

MIL-W-81752A(AS), "Military specification: Windshieldsystems, fixed wing aircraft, general specification for,"

3

Figure 1. The AH-1 Cobra.

Figure 2. The AH-64 Apache.

4

ýFigure 3. The CH-47D Chinook.

Figure 4. The OH-6 Cayuse.

Figure 5. The OR-58A Kiowa.

Figure 6. The OH-S8C Kiowa.

Figure 7. The OH-58D Kiowa.

Figure 8. The TH-67 Creek.

Figure 9. The UH-1 Iroquois.

Figure 10. The UH-60 Black Hawk.

8

requires attack type aircraft to have an average luminoustransmittance of not less than 80 percent when measured at normalangles of incidence to the surface. Other aircraft are requiredto have an average luminous transmittance of not less than 60percent when measured at normal angles of incidence to thesurface.

During day flights, pilotage and other external tasks areprimarily accomplished by naked eye viewing through thewindscreens and windows. However, current U.S. Army doctrinerequires pilots and crewmen to perform missions successfullyduring periods of low illuminance, e.g., at night and in foulweather. To achieve acceptable performance under theseconditions, devices based on the principle of image intens-ification are used in the cockpit and crew areas. The mostprominent of these devices is the ANVIS. This night visionsystem has a spectral response of 450-950 nanometers (nm) with anenhanced sensitivity from 625-900 nm (MIL-L-85762A). Windscreensand windows must provide adequate spectral transmittance overthis latter spectral range to optimize ANVIS performance.

MIL-W-81752A(AS) states the windshield shall be (ANVIS)compatible over the wavelength range of 600-900 nanometers.

Methodology

Spectral transmittance

Spectral transmittance data were obtained in a darkenedlaboratory using an EG&G Gamma Scientific* model C-9 spectralscanning system and a model RS-I tungsten source. Spectro-radiometric data were measured over the wavelength range of 350-950 nanometers in 5-nm steps for the reference tungsten sourcealone and for each transparency sample/source combination. Thetransmittance curves were obtained by performing a division, bywavelength, of the transparency/source combination data by thesource data.

A sample of the left front windscreen was measured in eachaircraft with side-by-side seating. A lower front windscreensample was measured for the attack aircraft, which have tandemseating. In order to minimize scratching of the unusedtransparencies during measurement, the protective sheeting wasremoved from as small an area as possible. Therefore,measurements were taken at arbitrary and different points on eachsamples. [Note: This was not considered to be a relevant factorsince an investigation of several samples showed a variation ofless than 5 percent across the sample. A similar investigation

*See Appendix B.

9

of the effect of slant (deviation from normal) also showed avariation of less than 5 percent.] Settings of 900 voltsphotomultiplier tube anode voltage and 1-degree aperture size onthe collection optics were used.

Luminous transmittance

Photopic and scotopic luminous transmittance values weremeasured in a darkened laboratory using a Photo Research* model1980A photometer and EG&G Gamma Scientific model RS-l tungstensource. Following a prescribed warm-up period for the photometerand the reference lamp, luminous transmittance measurements weretaken for each sample using the photopic and scotopic filtersintegral to the photometer. Each measurement consisted ofreading the luminance of the reference lamp, placing therespective transparency sample normal to the optical path, andtaking a second luminance reading. The transmittance wascalculated by dividing the luminance value obtained of thesample/source combination by the value obtained of the sourcealone. Three readings were obtained for each sample. The meanof these three values was calculated and reported.

Field measurements

Field measurements of photopic transmittance values wereacquired for six of each aircraft type on flight lines at U.S.Army airfields at Fort Rucker, Alabama. [Note: An exception wasthe OH-58C aircraft, where only four aircraft were measured.]Measurements were made using an EG&G Gamma RS-1 tungsten sourcepowered by a field generator and a Minolta* 1-degree apertureluminance meter. Each measurement consisted of reading theluminance of the reference source alone and reading the referencesource luminance from a position of the left seat for aircraftwith side-by-side seating and from the front seat of aircraftwith tandem seating. The transmittance was calculated bydividing the value obtained from the cockpit by the value of thesource alone.

Data

Spectral transmittance

The transmittance curves for the windscreen sample areprovided in Figures 11-18. The samples from AH-64 (except aftwindscreen), CH-47, UH-i, and UH-60 aircraft were of glasscomposition. The AH-I, OH-58A/C/D, and TH-67 samples were ofacrylic composition. All samples were of "clear" material exceptfor the TH-67, which had a bluish tint.

10

*0

M 0)

0

*44

U0

0, >

-o 01 -

.U41

10~

0)

u oLO 0

.0l 0 0 001 0 + I I I co2

To wi Wu w

I uJ H

> rz4

F-q1W

0

00

00

U

0)0 u'

a))

0 4*0

ý4-

1U-to

_ _ _ _ _ _O_ 0)

0 P4 IED 0 0 0 0 ril

II w wi

ui u 9U244TWSU2Jj

F> 04

12

0

L~O _0

00

_ _ _ _0 0

E UCD 0

U

0 >

0 (D0

4-)________E

0 r- I4

0 LO 004

__ _ 0 41

000 0 0 0+ I II

Wd u GueqqTwsue.jl

13

________________ 017 CY c t(D LO LO Cm 0 (7

0

< <H - -0__ _ _

-oo

0)CC

W0

0 (El

IN,

0O

4J-

-fa-

_ *0 41-

0o(

0 0 U)

T-0 -n cu

0.._j H

H>

14

_________________ 0,7(DN

cncnl

CD

00

_0 0

4J

CDaj LOl

w 0-0 >

to 0

II)- 0 d)

LO Lfl

41

r~41

H-E

00 0-

II p

i03 ui;twu) 0

H-

L44

10

•00

0I

omoC1 O

0

0 0

, C,--o

0 >\

o ý4

al

c 4.W U 0( Lyc_ _ 0 4J-

1I 0TI +I t

Iw HSu 3 U e L SU2Q6

HJ

16

0

1 co LO

17 C -o 000

0

0

00

'00

D ý4

*0

00

'0

0 L]

H- -in U

w w WU wTI '

H>

17

I LI

00

00

E >

3: 0

*4J

0

0 0C) -o

U Q*)

EOE

44

ul]]

0 LO w

LO 1 0 0 0 04II + I I I Jw w w

LU z

18

The spectral curves in Figures 11-18 correspond to thedescriptions above. The curves for the A H-I, OH-58, and TH-67samples demonstrate the spectral transmittance characteristics ofacrylic materials. These include an ultraviolet cut-off between350-380 nm and excellent spectral neutrality (flatness oftransmittance) over the visible spectral range 400-780 nm. Theseacrylic windscreens also provide high, relatively flat, trans-mittance over the spectral response range of the ANVIS, 450-930nm. The TH-67 sample has a deviation from neutrality over therange 560-780 nm (Figure 16). This decrease in transmittance ofthe red wavelengths produces the bluish color of the tint.

The glass samples of the AH-64, CH-47, UH-1, and U1H-60 alsoprovide a relatively neutral transmittance over the measuredspectral range with a similar UV cutoff around 360 nm, butpresent some relative falloff in transmittance beyond 600 nm.This is of little significance to naked eye vision, which peaksat 550 nm. It also has little effect on ANVIS performance, whichhas enhanced sensitivity over the spectral range of 625-900 nm.

Note 1: The OH-6, while not available for laboratorymeasurement of spectral transmittance, is manufactured fromacrylic material and should have optical characteristics similarto the AH-i, OH-58A, and TH-67 samples.

Note 2: The apparent increase of transmittance below 360 nmpresent in the curves is an artifact of the collection optics andspectral sensitivity of the spectroradiometer.

Luminous transmittance

Clear glass materials typically provide 80 to 92 percentphotopic luminous transmittance; acrylic typically provides 85 to92 percent (IES, 1984). The photopic and scotopic luminousvalues obtained in the laboratory measurements are presented inTable 1. The photopic values ranged from 73 to 93 percent;scotopic values ranged from 81 to 91 percent. When the TH-67tinted samples are excluded, the photopic values for the glasssamples ranged from 82 to 88 percent and the values for theacrylic samples ranged from 90 to 93 percent. The lowestphotopic values, 73 and 77 percent, were for the tinted TH-67samples.

The scotopic values generally tracked within a fewpercentage points of their corresponding photopic values. Thiswas due to the flatness of the transmittance properties of glassand acrylic. The exception, as noted, of the TH-67 samples andtheir attenuation of red light produced higher scotopic values.

19

Based on the laboratory measurements, all of the testedwindscreen samples met the requirements of MIL-W-81752A(AS).

4The photopic luminous transmittance values obtained for

flight line aircraft are presented in Table 2. These valuesranged from 58 to 84 percent.

Table 1.

Luminous transmittance (in percent).

Aircraft Panel position and FSN* Photopic Scotopic

AH-I front 1560-01-028-0476 92 91

AH-64 forward 1560-01-170-7475 82 81AH-64 center 1560-01-170-7474 82 81AH-64 aft 1560-01-165-9621 88 89

CH-47 right 1560-00-133-7158 83 82CH-47 center 1560-00-113-7857 85 87CH-47 left 1560-00-133-7157 82 82

OH-6 left 1560-00-133-6186 ** **right 1560-00-133-6229

OH-58A right 1560-00-127-3179 90 91OH-58A left 1560-00-127-3181 92 91

OH-58C right 1560-01-070-5360 92 91OH-58C left 1560-01-070-5359 92 91(curved)

OH-58D right 1560-00-127-3179 90 91OH-58D left 1560-00-127-3181 92 91

TH-67 right 206-031-115-105 73 82TH-67 left 206-031-115-0335 77 85

UH-1i right 1560-00-433-7271 89 89UH-I left 1560-00-433-7321 93 89

UH-60 right 1560-01-084-2250 ** **UH-60 center 1560-01-207-7485 82 82UH-60 left 1560-01-084-2249 84 81

* Federal stock number; for TH-67, manufacturer part numberis given.

** Samples of OH-6 and OH-58 flat windscreens and the rightfront UH-60 windscreen were not available.

20

Table 2.

Field measurements of photopic luminous transmittance(in percent).

Aircraft Photopic transmittances Mean Standardwindscreen (in percent) deviation

AH-i 83, 75, 76, 81, 77, 82 79 3.4front bottom

AH-64 71, 67, 76, 72, 73, 70 72 3.0front bottom

CH-47 -- , 62, 68, 70, 63, 48* 66 3.9front left

OH-6 80, 70, 67, 70, 71, 75 72 4.6front left

OH-58A 77, 77, 75, 78, 76, 75 76 1.2front left

OH-58C curved 53, 62, 59, 58* 58 3.7front left

OH-58C flat 70, 60, 58, 63, 58, 66 63 4.8front left

OH-58D 71, 72, 73, 74, 70, 76 73 2.2front left

TH-67 65, 64, 62, 64, 63, 67 64 1.7front left

UH-i 83, 86, 84, 82, 84, 84 84 1.3front left

UH-60 5, 75, 75, 71, 74, 75 74 1.6front left

* Note: For the CH-47, the first reading was invalid dueto a recording error and for the last reading, condensa-tion on the interior of windscreen produced an erroneousvalue; neither value is shown in the table. For theOH-58C with curved windscreen, only four aircraft wereavailable for measurement. These windscreens exhibitedsignificant levels of abrasion and the obtained valueswere further affected by condensation and fogging.

21

In Table 3, a comparison between the laboratory and fieldphotopic luminous transmittance values (for front leftwindscreens) is presented. The percent decrease in photopictransmittance between the unused and fielded windscreens arepresented in the last column. In each case, the field valuedecreased from the laboratory value. Percent decrease

Table 3.

Comparison of laboratory and field photopic luminoustransmittance measurements.

Laboratory Field PercentAircraft value value decrease

AH-i 92 79 14

AH-64 82 72 12

CH-47 83 66 20

OH-6 -- 72 --

OH-58A 92 76 17

OH-58C 92 58 37curved

OH-58C 63 --

flat

OH-58D 92 73 21

TH-67 77 64 17

UH-1 •93 84 10

LT UH-60 S4 74 12

Note: Unused samples of OH-6 and OH-SC flatwindscreens were not available.

ranged from 10 percent for the UH-1 to 37 percent for the OH-58C(curved). The mean percent decrease was 18 percent. (If therelatively large percent decrease value of 37 for the OH-58C isexcluded, the mean percent decrease was 15 percent.) Severalfactors attributed to this decrease. As would be expected underfield conditions, the windscreens were dirty both inside andoutside. In addition, because the field measurements were

22

taken at night, condensation and fogging also were present invarying degrees. These factors, while contributing, areconsidered secondary to the effects of haze resulting from thehighly abraded external surfaces of the windscreens. Figure 19shows an example of an AJI-64 windscreen having a significantlevel of abrasion.

Summary

All of the windscreen samples (except for the tinted TH-67)were found to be spectrally neutral over the visible spectrum.Likewise, all samples indi-ated sufficient spectraltransmittance over the spectral range required for optimalperformance of ANVIS.

For luminous transmittance, all of the unused samplesmeasured in the laboratory met the requirements of MIL-W-81752A(AS). However, an analysis of the field measurements of

VTV

Figure 19. Example of surface abrasion present in an AH-64 wind-screen.

23

luminous transmittance, while qualified by the small sample size,shows significant decreases in transmittance for all windscreentypes. These decreases are considered to be caused by hazeresulting rrom the physical abuse to which the windscreens aresubjected.

The governing specifications require attack aircraft to havean average luminous transmittance of not less than 80 percent andnonattack aircraft to have not less than 60 percent. Allwindscreen samples met this requirement in the laboratorymeasurements. However, based on field measurements, neitherattack aircraft, the AH-l or AH-64, met the 80 percentrequirement. The OH-58C curved windscreens, with a mean value of58 percent, failed to meet the 60 percent requirement fornonattack aircraft. The conclusion which can be drawn from thisstudy seems to be that all windscreen samples meet thespecification for luminous transmittance upon delivery, butduring usage degrade in performance. Since data were notavailable to correlate performance degradation with length ofservice, it is not possible to formulate a recommendation on howoften to replace the windscreens. However, it is obvious fromthe data that in the harsh environments of military flight, theoptical performance of the windscreens does degrade below thatrequired by the specification and this situation warrants apolicy of closer inspection at the unit level.

Chiou, W. C. 1975. Visible spectral transmission characteris-tics of windscreens in Army aircraft. Fort Rucker, AL: U.S.Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory. USAARL LR-75-29-7-8

Chiou, W. C. 1976. Visible and near infrared spectraltransmission characteristics of windscreens in Armyaircraft. Fort Rucker, AL: U.S. Army Aeromedical ResearchLaboratcry. USAARL Report 76-14.

Chiou, W. C., Park, C. K., and Moser, C. E. 1976. Attenuationof light transmission in Army aircraft transparencies-due toslatincr. Fort Rucker, AL: U.S. Army Aeromedical ResearchLaboratory. USAARL Report 76-23

Crosley, J. K. 1968. Tinted windscreens in U.S. Armyaircraft. Fort Rucker, AL: U.S. Army Aeromedical ResearchLaboratory. USAARU Report No. 68-7

Department of Defense. 1988. Military specification: Lighting,aircraft, fnterior. niQht vision imaainQ system compatible.Washington, DC: Department of Defense. MIL-L-85762A.

24

Department of Defense. 1988. Military srecification: Windshi'eldsystems, fixed wing aircraft, general specification for.Washington, DC: Department of Defense. MIL-W-81752A(AS),Amendment 1.

Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) of North America. 1984.IES liQhtinQ handbook. J. E. Kaufman, editor. New York, NY:IES of North America.

25

ADA296675

ApendixA

List of transparen cy manufacturers.

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.6'00 E Hurst Blvd.P.O. Box 482Fort Worth, TX 76101-8020(817)280-2011

LP Aero Plastics Inc.Road 1P.O. Box BJeannette, PA 15644-9730(412)744-4448

AF-64McDonald Douglas Helicopter Co.Sub of McDonald Douglas Corp.6775 Centinela Ave.Culver City,-CA 90230-6370(310)305-6562.

P PG"Aircraft Product Sales1719 Highway 72EP.O. Box 040004Huntsville, AL 35804(205)851-7001

PPGAircraft Product Sales1719 Highway 72EP.O. Box 2200Huntsvi lle, AL 35804(205)859-2500

Boeing HelicopterDivision of the Boeing Co.Boeing CenterIndustrial Hwy Bldg 3-25Ridley Park, PA 19078(215)591-3010

ADA296675

Appendix A (Continued)

List of transparency manufacturers

OH -6McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Co.6775 Centinela Ave.Culver City, CA 90230-6370(310)305-6562

Ten Cate Aerospace Inc.5101 Blue Mound Rd.Fort Worth, TX 76106

Texstar802 Ave. J EastGrand Prairie, TX 75050-2552(214)647-1366

OH-58Bell Helicopter Textron Inc.600 E Hurst Blvd.P.O. Box 482Fort Worth, TX 76101-8020(817)280-2011

Texstar, Inc.802 Ave. J EastGrand Prairie, TX 75050-2552(214) 647-1366

Bell Helicopter Textron Inc.600 E Hurst Blvd.P.O. Box 482Fort Worth, TX 76101-8020(817)280-2011

PPG Industries, Inc.Aircraft Product Sales1719 Highway 72 EP.O. Box 040004Huntsville, AL 35804(205)851-7001

ADA296675

Appendix A (Continued)

List of transparency manufacturers

U14-60FPG Industries, Inc.I PPG PLPittsburgh, PA 15272-0001(412) 434-3131

PPG1719 Highway 72EP.O. Box 2200Huntsville, AL 35804(205)859-8500

Davis Aircraft Product Co. Inc.1150 Walnut AvenueP.O. Box 525Bohemia, NY 11716-2105(516) 563-1500

ADA296675

Appendix B

List of equipment manufacturers

EG&G Gamma Scientific Inc.3777 Ruffin Rd.San Diego, CA 92123

Minolta Corporation101 Williams DriveRamsey, NJ 07446

Photo ResearchDivision of Kollmorgen9330 DeSoto Ave.P.O. Box 2192Chatsworth, CA 91313-2192

ADA296675

Initial distribution

Commander, U.S. Army Natick Research. Executive Director, U.S. Army HumanDevelopment and Engineering Center Research and Engineering Directorate

ATrN: SATNC-MIL (Documents A'ITN: Technical LibraryLibrarian) Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005

Natick, MA 01760-5040Commander

Chairman Man.Machine Integration SystcmNational Transportation Safety Board Code 602800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Naval Air Development CenterWashington, DC 20594 Warminster, PA 18974

Commander Commander10th Medical Laboratory Naval Air Development CenterATIN: Audiologist ATTN: Code 602-BAPO New York 09180 Warminster, PA 18974

Naval Air Development Center Commanding OfficerTechnical Information Division Armstrong LaboratoryTechnical Support Detachment Wright-PattersonWarminster, PA 18974 Air Force Base, OH 45433-6573

Commanding Officer, Naval Medical DirectorResearch and Development Command Army Audiology and Speech Center

National Naval Medical Center Walter Reed Army Medical CenterBethesda, MD 20814-5044 Washington, DC 20307-5001

Deputy Director, Defense Research Commander/Directorand Engineering U.S. Army Combat Surveillance

ATTN: Military Assistant and Target Acquisition Labfor Medical and Life Sciences ATTN: SFAE-IEW-JS

Washington, DC 20301-3080 Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703-5305

Commander, U.S. Army Research DirectorInstitute of Environmental Medicine Federal Aviation Administration

Natick, MA 01760 FAA Technical CenterAtlantic City, NJ 08405

LibraryNaval Submarine Medical Research Lab DirectorBox 900, Naval Sub Base Walter Reed Army Institute of ResearchGroton, CT 06349-5900 Washington, DC 20307-5100

ADA296675

JAF Liaison Officer for SafetyUSAF Safety Agency/SEFF Commander9750 Avenue G, SE US. Army Aviation and Troop CommandKirtland Air Force Base ATTN: AMSAT-R-ESNM 87117-5671 4300 Goodfellow Bouvelard

St. Louis, MO 63120-1798Naval Aerospace Medical

Institute Library U.S. Army Aviation and Troop CommandBuilding 1953, Code 03L Library and Information Center BranchPensacola, FL 32508-5600 AMTN: AMSAV-DIL

4300 Goodfellow BoulevardCommand Surgeon St. Louis, MO 63120HQ USCENTCOM (CCSG)U.S. Central Command Federal Aviation AdministrationMacDill Air Force Base, FL 33608 Civil Aeromedical Institute

Library AAM-400ADirector P.O. Box 25082Directorate of Combat Developments Oklahoma City, OK 73125ATTN: ATZQ-CDBuilding 515 CommanderFort Rucker, AL 36362 U.S. Army Medical Department

and SchoolU.S. Air Force Institute ATTN: Library

of Technology (AFIT/LDEE) Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234Building 640, Area BWright-Patterson CommanderAir Force Base, OH 45433 U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research

AMTN: SGRD-USMHenry L Taylor Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6200Director, Institute of AviationUniversity of Illinois-Willard AirportSavoy, IL 61874 Air University Library

(AUL/LSE)Chief, National Guard Bureau Maxwell Air Force Base, Al 36112ATMN: NGB-ARSArlington Hall Station Product Manager111 South George Mason Drive Aviation Life Support EquipmentArlington, VA 22204-1382 AMTN: SFAE-AV-LSE

4300 Goodfellow BoulevardAAMRL/HEX St. Louis, MO 63120-1798Wright-PattersonAir Force Base, OH 45433

ADA2966Tb

Commander and Director Aeromechanics LaboratoryUSAE Waterways Experiment Station U.S. Army Research and Technical LabsATTN: CEWES-IM-MI-R, Ames Research Center, M/S 215-1

CD Department Moffett Field, CA 940353909 Halls Ferry RoadVicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Sixth U.S. Army

ATITN: SMACommanding Officer Presidio of San Francisco, CA 94129Naval Biodynamics LaboratoryP.O. Box 24907 CommanderNew Orleans, LA 70189-0407 U.S. Army Aeromedical Center

Fort Rucker, AL 36362Assistant CommandantU.S. Army Field Artillery School Strughold Aeromedical LibraryATTN: Morris Swott Technical Library Document Service SectionFort Sill, OK 73503-0312 2511 Kennedy Circle

Brooks Air Force Base, TX 78235-5122Mr. Peter SeibHuman Engineering Crew Station Dr. Diane DamosBox 266 Department of Human FactorsWestland Helicopters Lirrmted ISSM, USCYeovil, Somerset BA20 2YB UK Los Angeles, CA 90089-0021

U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground U.S. Army White SandsTechnical library, Building 5330 Missile RangeDugway, UT 84022 ATTN: STEWS-IM-ST

White Sands Missile Range, NM 88002U.S. Army Yuma Proving GroundTechnical Library Director, Airworthiness Qualification TestYuma, AZ 85364 Directorate (AITC)

ATTN: STEAT-AQ-O-TR (Tech Lib)AFFTC Technical Library 75 North Flightline Road6510 TW/TSTL Edwards Air Force Base, CA 93523-6100Edwards Air Force Base,CA 93523-5000 Ms. Sandra G. Hart

Ames Research CenterCommander MS 262-3Code 3431 Moffett Field, CA 94035Naval Weapons CenterChina Lake, CA 93555 Commander

USAMRMCATI"N: SGRD-UMZFort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702-5009

Commander Directorate of Training DevelopmntU.S. Army Health Services Command Building 502ATTN: HSOP-SO Fort Rucker, AL 36362Fort Sam Houston, TX 782134-6000

ChiefU. S. Army Research Institute USAHEL/USAAVNC Field OfficeAviation R&D Activity P. 0. Box 716ATTN: PERI-IR Fort Rucker, AL 36362-5349Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Commander, U.S. Army Aviation CenterCommander and Fort RuckerU.S. Army Safety Center AMTN: ATZQ-CGFort Rucker, AL 36362 Fort Rucker, AL 36362

U.S. Army Aircraft Development Dr. Sehchang HahTest Activity Dept. of Behavior Sciences and

ATTN: STEBG-MP-P Leadership, Building 601, Room 281Cairns Army Air Field U. S. Military AcademyFort Rucker, AL 36362 West Point, NY 10996-1784

Commander Canadian Army Liaison OfficeUSAMRMC Building 602ArTN: SGRD-PLC (COL R. Gifford) Fort Rucker, AL 36362Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702

German Army Liaison OfficeTRADOC Aviation LO Building 602Unit 21551, Box A-209-A Fort Rucker, AL 36362APO AE 09777

French Army Liaison OfficeNetherlands Army Liaison Office USAAVNC (Building 602)Building 602 Fort Rucker, AL 36362-5021Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Australian Army Liaison OfficeBritish Army Liaison Office Building 602Building 602 Fort Rucker, AL 36362Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Dr. Garrison RapmundItalian Army Liaison Office 6 Burning Tree CourtBuilding 602 Bethesda, MD 20817Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Commandant, Royal Air ForceInstitute of Aviation MedicineFarnborough, Hampshire GU14 6SZ UK

Defense Technical Information U.S. Army Research and TechnologyCameron Station, Building 5 Laboratories (AVSCOM)Alexandra, VA 22304-6145 Propulsion Laboratory MS 302-2

NASA Lewis Research CenterCommander, U.S. Army Foreign Science Cleveland, OH 44135

and Technology CenterAIFRTA (Davis) Commander220 7th Street, NE USAMRMCCharlottesville, VA 22901-5396 ATTN: SGRD-ZC (COL John F. Glenn)

Fort Derrick, Frederick, MD 21702-5012CommanderApplied Technology Laboratory Dr. Eugene S. ChanningUSARTL-ATCOM 166 Baughman's LaneATrN: Library, Building 401 Frederick, MD 21702-4083Fort Eustis, VA 23604

U.S. Army Medical DepartmentCommander, U.S. Air Force and School

Development Test Center USAMRDALC Liaison101 West D Avenue, Suite 117 ATMN: HSMC-FREglin Air Force Base, FL 32542-5495 Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234

Aviation Medicine Clinic NVESDTMC #22, SAAF AMSEL-RD-NV-ASID-PSTFort Bragg, NC 28305 (Attn: Trang Bu3)

10221 Burbeck RoadDr. H. Dix Christensen Fort Belvior, VA 22060-5806Bio-Medical Science Building, Room 753Post Office Box 26901 CA Av MedOklahoma City, OK 73190 HO DAAC

Middle WallopCommander, U.S. Army Missile Stockbridge, Hants S020 8DY UK

CommandRedstone Scientific Information Center Dr. Christine SchlichtingATCN: AMSMI-RD-CS-R Behavioral Sciences Department

/ILL Documents Box 900, NAVUBASE NLONRedstone Arsenal, AL 35898 Groton, CT 06349-5900

Aerospace Medicine Team CommanderHO ACC/SGST3 Aviation Applied Technology Directorate162 Dodd Boulevard, Suite 100 ATTN: AMSAT-R-TVLangley Air Force Base, Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577VA 23665-1995

34

COL Yehezkel G. Caine, MD 71st Rescue SquadronSurgeon General, Israel Air Force 71st RQS/SGAeromedical Center Library 1139 Redstone RoadP. 0. Box 02166 I.D.F. Patrick Air Force Base,Israel FL 32925-5000

HQ ACC/DOHP Director205 Dodd Boulevard, Suite 101 Aviation Research, DevelopmentLangley Air Force Base, and Engineering CenterVA 23665-2789 ATTN: AMSAT-R-Z

4300 Goodfellow Boulevard41st Rescue Squadron St. Louis, MO 63120-179841st RQS/SG940 Range Road CommanderPatrick Air Force Base, USAMRMCFL 32925-5001 ATIN: SGRD-ZB (COL C. Fred Tyner)

Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702-501248th Rescue Squadron48th RQS/SG Commandant801 Dezonia Road U.S. Army Command and General StaffHolloman Air Force Base, CollegeNM 88330-7715 ATTN: ATZL-SWS-L

Fort Levenworth, KS 66027-6900HQ, AFOMAATrN: SGPA (Aerospace Medicine) ARNG Readiness Center -

Boiling Air Force Base, ATrN: NGB-AVN-OPWashington, DC 20332-6128 Arlington Hall Station

111 South George Mason DriveARNG Readiness Center Arlington, VA 22204-1382ATrN: NGB-AVN-OPArlington Hall Station Director111 South George Mason Drive Army Personnel Research EstablishmentArlington, VA 22204-1382 Farnborough, Hants 0U14 6SZ UK

35th Fighter Wing Dr. A. Kornfield35th FW/SG 895 Head StreetPSC 1013 San Francisco, CA 94132-2813APO AE 09725-2055

ARNG Readiness Center66th Rescue Squadron AATN: NGB-AVN-OP66th ROS/SG Arlington Hall Station4345 Tyndall Avenue 111 South George Mason DriveNellis Air Force Base, NV 89191-6076 Arlington, VA 22204-1382

35

Commander, U.S. Army Test U.S. Army Materiel Systemsand Evaluation Command Analysis Agency

Directorate for Test and Evaluation ATTN: AMXSY-PA (Reports Processing)A1TN: AMSTE-TA-M (Human Factors Aberdeen Proving Ground

Group) MD 21005-5071Aberdeen Proving Ground,

MD 21005-5055 U.S. Army Ordnance Centerand School Library

Naval Air Systems Command Simpson Hall, Building 3071Technical Air Library 950D Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005Room 278, Jefferson Plaza IIDepartment of the Navy U.S. Army EnvironmentalWashington, DC 20361 Hygiene Agency

ATTN: HSHB-MO-ADirector Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010U.S. Army Ballistic

Research Laboratory Technical Library Chemical ResearchATTN: DRXBR-OD-ST Tech Reports and Development CenterAberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

21010-5423CommanderU.S. Army Medical Research Commander

Institute of Chemical Defense U.S. Army Medical ResearchATTN: SGRD-UV-AO Institute of Infectious DiseaseAberdeen Proving Ground, ATTN: SGRD-UIZ-CMD 21010-5425 Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702

Commander Director, BiologicalUSAMRMC Sciences DivisionAITN: SGRD-RMS Office of Naval ResearchFort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702-5012 600 North Quincy Street

Arlington, VA 22217HQ DA (DASG-PSP-O)5109 Leesburg Pike CommandantFalls Church, VA 22041-3258 U.S. Army Aviation

Logistics School ATTN: ATSQ-TDNHarry Diamond Laboratories Fort Eustis, VA 23604AITN: Technical Information Branch2800 Powder Mill Road Headquarters (ATMD)Adelphi, MD 20783-1197 U.S. Army Training

and Doctrine Command

ATTI: ATBO-MFort Monroe, VA 2-3651

36

Cdr, PERSCOM HQ, AFOMAATrN: TAPC-PLA ATTN; SGPA (Aerospace Medicine)200 Stovall Street, Rm 3N25 Boiling Air Force Base,Alexandria VA 22332-0413 Washington, DC 20332-6188

37