1、 I c-/f-Q/ MIL- HDB K-336-3 4 FEBRUARY 1983 MIL-HDBK-336 -3 HI 3373970 0053273 3 - MILITARY HANDBOOK SURVIVABILITY, AIRCRAFT, NONNUCLEAR, ENGINE-VOLUME 3 h NO DELIVERABLE DATA . REQUIRED BY THIS DOCUMENT FSC MISC Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license fr
2、om IHS-,-,-DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE WASHINGTON 25, DC MIL-EJIDBK-3 3 6-3 Military Handbook for Military Aircraft Nonnuclear Survivability. 1. Defense with the assistance of the Air Force Wight Aeronautical Laboratories (AFVAL/FIE) in accordance with established procedures 2. This standardization handbo
3、ok was developed by the Department of This publication was approved on 04 February 1983 for printing and inclusion in the military standardization handbook series. 3. This document provides basic and fundamental information on military aircraft survivability design requirements and assessment method
4、ology. provide valuable information and guidance to personnel concerned with the de- sign and assessment of military aircraft. The handbook is not intended to be referenced in purchase specifications except for informal purposes, nor shall it supersede any specification requirements. It will . 4. Ev
5、ery effort has been made to reflect the latest information on mili- tary aircraft design techniques and assessment methodology. It is the intent to review thic.handbook periodically to insure its completeness and currency. Ucersof this document are encouraged to report any errors discovered and any
6、recommendations for changes or inclusions to Air Force Systems Command, Attn: ASD/ENESS, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433. ii Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-HDBK-33b -3 NI 9799970 0053275 7 W MIL-HDRK-336-3 FOREWORD 1.
7、 This is a four volume Military Handbook. The titles of the four volumes are : a. Volume 1 - Survivability, Aircraft, Nonnuclear, General Criteria b. Volume 2 - Survivability, Aircraft, Nonnuclear, Airframe c. Volume 3 - Survivability, Aircraft, Nonnuclear, Engine d. Volume 4 - Survivability, Aircra
8、ft, Nonnuclear, Classified, General Criteria The information contained in volumes 1, 2 and 3 is unclassified to permit greater utilization and accessibility to the user. In areas where classified data is applicable, ithas been incorporated into volume 4, and is referenced as such in the text of each
9、 volume. 2. This handbook has been prepared to provide military planners and industry with the information and guidance needed for the conceptual and detail design of the new aircraft where nonnuclear-survivability enhancement is to be inte- grated into the system. It is also structured to provide d
10、ata and guidance for the incorporation of survivability-enhancement features into existing aircraft systems as a retrofit modification. Both fixed and rotary wing aircraft design information are contained in this publication. of this handbook in the design process. It is a task-flow diagram of the m
11、ajor elements involved in the development of new aircraft. are initiated by the using command that defines the operational requirements and capabilities desired to perform specific combat missions. are studied by the appropriate service agencies in the form of conceptual (Phase O) design analyses. T
12、he optimum mission and performance parameters are defined, along with system/cost effectiveness comparisons of candidate concep- tual design candidates. This is accomplished through an analysis to identify the mission-essential functions that must be performed in order to accomplish the specific mis
13、sion objectives. With these functions defined, an analysis is conducted to identify the subsystem-essential functions that must be provided to perform the mission-essential functions. At the same time, an analysis is conducted to identify the hostile threat system to which the aircraft system may be
14、 expected during the conduct of its operational mission. The results of these analyses are then used by the S/V engineer to conduct an evaluation of the various candidate survivability-enhancement techniques that may be used in the design concepts. This design handbook will be the basic source for i
15、denti- fication of the basic principles and techniques that may be employed. It will also provide references to other information sources for more detailed and/or specialized data. The. results of this analysis are summarized into recommenda- tions for the development of candidate conceptual aircraf
16、t designs. As each candidate system is evolved, vulnerability and survivability assessment are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of their individual. S/V design features. As shown, this design handbook is used directly by the conceptual designers, Figure 1 illustrates the role The system requi
17、rements These requirements iii Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-f I- NIL-HDBK-33b -3 NI W 7977770 0051276 7 = MIL-HDBK-336-3 c Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-HDBK-3
18、3b -3 VI 7777970 0053277 O MIL-HDBK-336-3 vulnerability assessment analysts, and survivability assessment analyst in the design process. At the same time, design trade-off studies are conducted that evaluate the benefits and penalties associated with candidate system and subsys- tem elements. The re
19、sults of vulnerability, survivability, and design tradeoff studies are used as input data for system/cost effectiveness analyses. evaluation provides the system design management and the S/V engineer with the overall system benefits and penalties for the various design concepts. It permits selection
20、 of the most effective combinations of survivability-enhance- ment features for the specific system applications, and identifies areas of deficiencies or over design that may be improved. The process is iterative, and is continued until the most cost effective design concept is developed, It then be
21、comes the baseline design for the production aircraft. The same process is repeated through the validation, full-scale development, production and This operational phases of the aircraft system. . 3. Military aircraft survivability enhancement began in World War I with makeshift efforts by the pilot
22、s to provide themselves with some form of ballis- tic armor protection. This progressed from steel infantry helmets and stove lids fastened to the pilot seats to all-steel pilot seats 0.3-inch thick. In 1917, Germany designed an armored, twin-engine bomber, with 880 pounds of 0.29- inch steel plate
23、armor located in sensitive areas. installing steel seats and 0.50- to 0.625-inch nickelchrome steel armor around radiators, gas tanks, and the aircrew in some of their aircraft. In the late 1930s, the United States began to install armor in some of their fighter air- craft. In World War II, the grea
24、test threat against aircrews was fragments for antiaircraft artillery shells. The available body armor in 1942 was awk- ward and heavy and thus rejected. The need for lightweight armor led to the development in 1943 of fiberglass bonded into a laminate and called Doron, after Col. G.F. Doriot. Most
25、of the body am.or of WW II was Doron Type 2. The intro- duction and use of flak suits reduced casualties from 6.58 wounds per 1,000-man sorties to 2.29 wounds per 1,000-man sorties in 1943-44. None of the armor of this period was effective against API bullets, however. The aluminum nylon Y12 vest wa
26、s developed as an improvement over Doron and was field.-tested in Korea. An all-nylon vest consisting of 12 layers of 2 x 2-inch basketweave nylon also developed was attractive because of its flexibilitv and effectiveness against mortar and shell fragments. Flat plate armored glass was incorporated
27、into the windshields of combat aircraft as an added protection for the crew. Self-sealin? fuel bladders and lines were developed for bomber and fighter aircraft during World War II and were credited with saving many of these systems. Some atten- tion was also directed to the suppression of fuel fire
28、s in bomber aircraft. Balsa wood was installed around some of the voids in wing fuel tanks to prevent fuel leakage fires in those areas. The British experimented with fire extin- guishing systems in the fuel tank areas of some oftheir multiengine aircraft. Considerable research on specific problems
29、of aircraft protection and vulner- ability was condiicted during the war, with particular attention being directed to penetration of mata,ials by bullets and fragments, and the effect of blast on aircraft structures. In 1948, the First Working Conference on Aircraft Vul- nerability was held at the 1
30、J.S. -Army RallJstic Research Laboratory at the The British countered by Aberdeen Proving Grounds, arvland . The from the Air Force Air Xiaterial Command, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics participants were recognized exprts i the Army Ballistic Research Laboratorv, Laboratory, Ihiversity of
31、ChicaEo Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-c -_ I. MIL-HDBK-336 -3 HI W 9797770 00.53298 2 W MIL-HDBK-336-3 Ordnance Research, General Electric Engine Company, New Mexico School of Mines, the Navy Ordnance Explosive Group, and the Rand C
32、orporation. this meeting was to define the problem of military aircraft vulnerability and to identify the technology required to develop design improvements.- Unfor- tunately, the exceilent beginning initiated by this group was curtailed by the philosophy that all future wars would be fought with nu
33、clear weapons. This idea continued through the 1950s and early 1960s where little attention was paid to nonnculear survivability of military aircraft. flict, a limited revival of interest in nonnuclear survivability was experi- enced. The eRphasis was primarily directed to fighter and attack aircraf
34、t. The major survivability enhancement techniques were mainly improvements in armor and self-sealing fuel tank designs The use of coordinated tactics in air-to-air combat with fighter aircraft became an area of interest to the Air Force and Mavy that proved to be an important factor in the one-sided
35、 kill ratios enjoyed by the United States. Again, after this conflict, the emphasis of military aircraft design was directed to general nuclear war considerations that hamnered research on non-nuclear survivability considerations, The purpose of During the Korean con- The Army recop,nized the threat
36、 of small arms and light AAweapons to aircraft operating in direct support of forward area units, and in the late 1950s ini- tiated action to develop protective measures for the aircrew and critical air- craft components against these threats. The Air Vehicle Environmental Research Team, consisting
37、of technical representatives from the user and the appropriate technical service laboratories was forned, and they developed the original con- cepts for ballistic protection systems that were later employed in all Army combat aircraft. These concepts were also used in varying degrees by the USAF and
38、 Navy. These efforts led to the develoDment of a new family of lightweight amor materials, damage tolerant components, and major advances in fuel pro- tec t ion. The employment of laree numbers of U.S. aircraft in Southeast Asia, in the mid- i96Os resulted in an awareness of their susceptibility to
39、hostile non-nuclear weapon systems. Helicopters were used for the first time in combat roles where exposure to enemy gunfire was commonplace. aircraft shot down or critically damaged by small-caliber weapons provided the motivation to conduct research and testing geared to providing improved surviv-
40、 abilitv for these systems. Fanv of the design improvements were pioneered bv this effort. The Air Force and Navy were also experiencing unacceptable air- craft losses and embarked on programs to analyze the problems and develop new weans to r-iodify the existine. aircraft to make them more survivab
41、le. The use of reticulated foan! inside fuel cells was one of the major improvements devel- 0pt.d. Considerable advances were made in the field of armor materials. Cerarnic coFposite armors were developed for protection against armor-piercing projec- tiles in an effort to ohtain hin?ier levels of ba
42、llistic protection with smaller weiqht penalties. Later in this conflict when the sophistication of hostile weapon system was raisd,to a level never before experienced, many new surviv- ability enhancenent methods were developed and employed. homing and warninrr systems (RHVS) , electronic warfare c
43、ountermeasures, infrared emission supression methods far afrcraft enpines, evasive tactics against irr:ce-.ti-air missiles, improved weapon delivery systems (missiles, smart borbs, czc? visi:nl an3 atira1 sicnatiire reductions, tactics, and manv other techniques. The large numbers of rotary-wing The
44、se included radar vi Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-. MIL-HDBK-33b -3 NI = 7977770 0051297 MIL-HDBK- 3 36-3 The analytical capabilities for survivability assessment programs were expanded tremendously through the use of high-capacity
45、, high-speed electronic computers, providing military and industry with valuable new tools. proliferation of computer models by each of the services and most of the air- frame manufacturers. The military services recognized the need for an integrated effort to standardize the growing methodology and
46、 research and tesx programs. An -organization was developed through triservice efforts to accomplish these objectives. Aircraft Survivability (JTCG/AS), with the charter signed by the Joint Command- ers on 25 June 1971. implement interservice efforts to develop more effective and efficient methods t
47、o enhance aircraft nonnuclear survivability. The organization has maintained close liaison with each service activity to ensure that all.survivability and vulnerability data and systems criteria are made available to developers of new aircraft. aircraft survivability technology for high-energy laser
48、 weapons that are pro- jected as the next major threat system in potential future conflicts. This activity has been pursued for the past several years. Rapid advances in sur- vivability enhancement methods are being accomplished through numerous research programs, Considerable savings in manpower an
49、d resources are expected to be realized through the coordination of this new technology through the efforts of the JTCG/AS in the future. This publication will serve as the vehicle by which the analytical and design data will be dispersed to the S/V community. The fruits of the coordinated efforts are currently being enjoyed, as is evi- . denced by the significantly higher levels of survivability that have been incorporated into new military aircra
