Army Aviation Digest - Mar 1958

8/12/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Mar 1958

1/64


2/64

EDITORIAL STAFFCapt Theodore E. WaskoLt John E. ArmstrongWilliam E. VanceJohn S. Maltrotti

The U. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST is anArmy published monthly under the supervision ofSchool.The mission of the U. S. ARMY AVIATIONDIGEST is to provide information of an operational or functional nature concerning safety andaircraft accident prevention. training maintenance operations research and development aviation medicine. and other related data.Manuscripts , photographs and other illustrationspertaining to the above subjects of interest to personnel concerned with Army Aviation are invited.Direct communication is authorized to: Editor-inChief U. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST U S.Army Aviation School Fort Rucker Alabama.Unless otherwise indicated material in the U S.ARMY AVIATION DIGEST may be reprinted pro\ ided credit is given to the U. S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST and to the author.The printing of this publication has been ap proved by the Director of the Bureau of theBudget 15 March 1956.Unless specified all photographs used are U. S.Army.


3/64

UNITED ST TESARMY AVIATION

IGESTVolume 4 March, 1958

CONTENTS

I. School and Higher EchelonII. Field Activity

III. STOLjVTOLIV. ProblemsV. Functions Defined

VI. ProgressVII. Disaster and Emergency Relief Operations

VIII. The U. S Army Aviation Board.IX. Officer Career . . . . . . . .X. Army Aviation Medicine Program

XI. Aviation Safety .XII. Kaleidoscope

XIII. Army Aviation in Seventh ArmyXIV. Development of Sky Cav .COVER

Number 3

47

1112

17

2026

27 31

34

3638

5558

Cover and interior artwork by Donald R Smith Supervisory Illus-trator for the Department of Publications and Non-Resident Instruc-tion U S Army Aviation School


4/64

The Last Three YearsOf Army Aviation

Maior General Hamilton H. Howze USADirector of Army Aviation, ODCSOPSFebruary 1955 - December 1957)

With the rapid expansion of Army Aviation over the past severalyears,l think it desit able to make known to you, who comprise thisbusiness, the most notable steps in our progress. 1 have, therefore,c01npile d this report, and will recommend to my successor that similar reports be issued annually.I did not write all this myself, but 1 will take the blame for rewriting much of it in what 1 choose to call a narrative style. Basicmaterial was submitted by those listed on the inside back cover.Many of these gentlemen will be greatly irritate,d by the liberties Ihave taken with their submissions; 1 ask their indulgence on theground that such a document as this, to be readable, must be asbrief as possible, even though an incomplete story results.It may be noted that the period covered by this narrative corresponds roughly to my own tenure of office. There isa reason forthis: I entered the field of Army A viation as a total stranger; Iobserved the state of affairs with a fresh, if ignorant, eye) at thetime; and now that 1 am about to depart m,y position, I have theopportunity to look it over once more. I wish to make clear that Ilay no personal claim to credit for the events chronicled in the paragra,phs which follow. Indeed, many of the most notable accomplishments proceeded without my participation in any way, and somein spite of my initial personal opposition.TVith rare exception names of personnel now active in ArmyA viation are not mentioned, for the sole reason that it would beimpossible not to omit many who deserve a great deal of credit.In the course 0/ work on this literary project I have been struckonce more by the extent of progress over the years-advances notapparent in the day-to-day conduct of business. And mu pride inArmy Aviation has grown appreciably . As you read this, I thinkyours will too.With this preamble, I think we might start wit

Brigadier General Ernest F. Easterbrook succeeded Major General Howzeas Director of Army Aviation on 16 December 1957 This report was com-piled before General Howze departed for his present assignment as Command-ing General 82d Airborne Division Fort Bragg N C

2


5/64

s _ p a r t

~ ~ SCHOOL HIGHER ECHELONf FIELD ACTIVITY

1 ; STOL VTOL

f ~ PROBLEMSI FUNCTIONS DEFINED


6/64

MARCH 1958

Army Aviation in the HigherLevels of Government (1952-57).War Department representa-tion on the Air CoordinatingCommittee, the President's toplevel aviation policy body, wastaken over by the Air Forcewhen it was established as aseparate service in 1947. TheArmy was represented by theAir Force in the CC until 1952,when the President added theArmy to its membership. Thisgot the Army equal voice in theformulation of domestic and international aviation policies ofthe United States.In May 1957 the Secretary ofthe Army assigned secretarialresponsibility for Army A viation matters (other than logistical) to the Assistant 8ecretary, Civil-Military Affairs, whohad previously been assigned responsibility for ACC matters.As in the case of the ACCmembership on the National Advisory Committee for Aeronau-tics had been taken over by theAir Force upon its establish-ment as a separate service. In

1954 Assistant Secretary Roderick approached the Chairmanof the NACA concerning reinstatement of Army membership.Since the NACA operates undera charter established by Congress, legislation is required forrevision of its membership. TheArmy had membership on va-4

rious important subcommitteesof NACA, but not in the topechelon. During the spring of1957, additional conferencesand correspondence between Secretary Brucker, Dr. Martin (Director of R&D), and top officialsof the NACA resulted in theNACA requesting that legislation be enacted by Congress toprovide for Army membershipat the top level in this selectaeronautical body. Favorablecongressional action is anticipated in the near future.The HANC manuals (nowproperly titled United StatesStandard Manuals as a resultof Army suggestion) whichestablish standards in aeronau-tical procedures were originallya product of Army-Navy-Civilcooperation. With the establishment of a separate Air Force,the A took on a new meaning,and the Army was not a partyto the development or nromulgation of these criteria for several years. In 1955. as a resultof its membershin in the ACe,the Armv resumed its participa-tion in the preparation of thesedocuments and again became asigna ory agency.

Control Established for ArmyAviation Activities Above FieldArmy Level (1955-57).The first complete Army A vi-


7/64

THE LAST THREE YEARS OF ARMY AVIATIONation plan for long-range guidance of the Department of theArmy was drawn up by the General Staff in November 1954 andsubmitted in draft form forcomment to all interested Armyagencies worldwide. It recognized the inherent weakness of thethen current fragmented organization for Army Aviation control and recommended a seriesof corrective actions, which inthe aggregate were admirablybold, albeit in some regards premature.In substance it proposed asimmediate measures the establishment of an Aviation Divisionin G-3 for overall staff supervision, the centralization in G-1of aviator assignment authority; the establishment of anAviation Center at Fort Rucker,Alabama, to include an AviationTest Board; the assumption bythe Army of depot maintenanceand supply; the strengtheningof procurement control by theArmy; and as an ultimate measure, the formation of an aviation branch in the Army.The immediate measures received almost unanimous endorsement, but the proposal foran aviation branch generatedmixed reactions, with the preponderance being favorable.(Editor s Note: Now a dead issue.)

After careful analysis of allcomments, G-3 presented forapproval of the Chief of Staffthose recommendations fromthe draft plan which seemed vital to the progress of Army A viation and yet acceptable to theArmy in general. On 7 January1955, the Chief of Staff approved those recommendations calling for appointment of a general

officer to coordinate Army Aviation matters in the GeneralStaff for centralization of control of aviation personnel, andfor establishment of an aviation center, including a testboard. In retrospect, this actionby the Chief of Staff must beadj udged as one of the mostsignificant of the three yearperiod.

Army Aviation Center Established at Fort Rucker (1954-57).On 29 July 1954, Departmentof the Army-after all mannerof consideration and reconsideration-announced that the ArmyAviation School would be movedfrom Fort Sill, Oklahoma, toCamp Rucker, Alabama.A period of confusion and difficulty ensued, as might be expected. In August the advanceparty arrived at Rucker. Whileclasses in progress at Fort Sillwere completed there and subsequent classes were initiated atthe new location, the post staffand school faculty at Ruckerwere transforming an infantrytraining camp into an aviationtraining base.The transfer of the Schoolwas completed by February1955. The Army Aviation Center was formally establishedmid waving wiregrass and flourishing peanut vines in February

of 1955, and on 13 October CampRucker was designated a permanent station-a real, genuine,fort.During the early stages of thereactivation of Fort Rucker, thestaff ran into many sticky problems in their efforts to tailor facilities to meet requirements.5


8/64

MARCH 1958

arly days at Ozark rmy ir FieldIn August of 1954, Ozark ArmyAir Field consisted only of thepresent runways and taxiways,two dilapidated buildings andone hangar with both ends missing. On one occasion the Chiefof Staff, aided by other staffmembers, mixed gasoline andsand in number 10 cans andplaced them along the runwayto enable a late returning pilotto land after darkness. Obviously, a fine sample of ingenuityseldom found in post chiefs ofstaff.By Christmas 1954, sevenclasses were being taught onregular schedule. Before the endof the year, Classes 54K and Lgraduated 120 officers. In 1955old programs of instruction werere-evaluated and amended, newones established. Plans wereformulated for the rehabilitation of existing facilities andconstruction of new ones.

On 6 January 1955, the 351stRegimental Combat Team, composed of the 351st Infantry Bat-talion, 337th Field Artillery Bat-talion, and 517th E'ngineer Company, was organized and giventhe mission of providing troopsupport for the Aviation School,in addition to maintaining Class

III unit qualification. On 30 September 1956, the 351st was deactivated.To continue troop support forthe school, the th BattalionCombat Team was then activated, using a portion of the351st Infantry plus the 337thField Artillery Battalion.After repeated requests forengineer support the 806th En-gineer Battalion arrived in April1956 from Eleuthera AuxiliaryAir Force Base, British WestIndies, and was followed shortlyby the 929th Engineer Group inMay. The construction of BeaverLake Auxiliary Airfield N r 1and the clearing of areas forCapehart Housing constructionwere some of the more important projects undertaken.When Camp Rucker becameFort Rucker, the Center Installation Planning Board was activated and charged with formulating a planned program of permanent construction. A longrange plan was developed providing for the construction offacilities in excess of 85,000,-000.FY 1956 construction wasprincipally for Ozark Army Airfield. Facilities approved for FY


9/64

THE LAST THREE YEARS OF ARMY AVIATION1957 were hangars with shopsand an administration buildingfor the U. S. Army AviationBoard at Ozark Army Airfield;two maintenance hangars withshops for Auxiliary Nr 1; 256,-000 square yards of rigid pavement taxiways, landing pads,parking aprons) ; and an accessroad and vehicle parking areafor Auxiliary Nr 2, the RotaryWing Maintenance and Basefield.The FY 1958 program ( 7,-549,000) is composed principallyof enlisted barracks and supporting mess and administrationbuildings, and has been approved for design.

Student dormitories, a flightsimulator building, additionalpavement and night lighting forAuxiliary Nr 2, an academicbuilding, and other constructionto support the Center and theSchool comprise the FY 1959MCA Program at an estimatedcost of 10,562,000.In addition to military construction, 600 units of Capeharthousing will provide on-post

housing for 400 officers' and 200non-commissioned officers' families. This project, costing in excess of ' 9,000,000, is scheduled

Exercise SKY ROP II1954).Exercise SKY DROP II wasconducted at Fort Bragg in the

for completion in September.The construction just described will give us quarters and facilities fought for long and hardby our people on the spot, atThird Army, and in the Pentagon. Rucker is becoming a fineplace to serve-from every pointof view.

In addition to the normalnumber of U S students duringthe years 1954, 1955, and 1956,a total of seventy-one foreignstudents (some of whom ouldspeak English) were enrolled incourses at the Army AviationCenter. These students wereboth officers and enlisted men,and came from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China,Germany, Great Britain, Japan,Spain, Thailand, Turkey, theNetherlands, and Venezuela. Inaddition visitors came fromFrance, Italy, India, Korea,Sweden, and Panama. Thisproves that organic aviation forground forces is an idea that iscatching on.The Army Aviation Center -ischanging and growing-and

growing better. More and moreit is becoming an installation befitting the activity it serves:Army Aviation.

summer of 1954, employing elements of the 82d Airborne Division and certain Engineer attachments.The final report of the exer-


10/64


11/64

THE LAST THREE YEARS OF ARMY AVIATION

Float equipped Bird DogFWTT) was activated at FortRiley by DA order on 5 May1955. This company was laterredesignated the 1st ArmyAviation Company FWTT) andis presently in CONUS. Two additional companies were activa ed in 1956 and are now stationed in Germany. Another iscoming up soon.

Army Aviation. and EngineerSurvey Operations 1950-).During six consecutive summer seasons through 1955 the30th Engineers surveyed over313,000 square miles of westernand northern Alaska, from theAleutians to the Arctic Ocean.This is tough country, completely devoid of roads, withglacier-covered mountains andmuskeg bogs making surfacetravel next to impossible.During the summer of 1955,when an area of 88,000 squaremiles was surveyed, the 30thGroup operated 66 aircraft including Otters the first six wereceived), Beavers, Bird Dogs,Chickasaws, Ravens and a Sem-

inole. Otters and Beavers wereused to carry surveyors andtheir equipment to p a t oo ncamps and to keep the camps resupplied, while Bird Dogs wereused for practically everythingincluding reconnaissance, photography, and gathering data required by the cartographers wholater compiled the final map.Airplanes landed on gravel barsalong the rivers, or when suitably equipped) on snow, ice, andwater.The small reconnaissance helicopter was the primary vehicleused to move surveyors andtheir instruments from point topoint, often operating f r o mmountain peaks as high as 7,000feet. Utility helicopters maintained the flow of supplies tolocations which could not beserved by fixed wing aircraft,and established sm POLdumps out from the platooncamps to extend the range ofthe reconnaissance helicopters.The 30th has completed itswork in Alaska and the biggestpart of the group is now atStockton, California.The Inter-American Geodetic

9


12/64


13/64


and thoroughly unrealistic fashion by aircraft executing missions of resupply, wire laying,aero -evacuation, observation,etc. A narrator kept spectatorsexcited about the situation asthe demonstration unfolded. Theshow was climaxed by detonation of Little Peachy, a simulated atomic artillery warhead. The fact that Little Peachyif real would have blown updemonstration equipment, participants, spectators nd all,made no difference to anybody.But in truth, the whole Armyshow was splendidly executedeach year. In addition to theflying demonstration, the Armymade static displays of its air-

Department of Defense Studyon Short and Vertical Takeoffand Landing Aircraft (1955-56).In September 1955 we presented a briefing to the Assistant Secretary of Defense forResearch and Development onthe Army's requirements foraircraft and air support, pointing out that the one characteris

tic required of all Army aircraftis the ability to land and take offfrom unprepared fields.,As a result Defense decidedthat a study should be made primarily of the Army's qualitativerequirements for aircraft withthese objectives: (1) to reviewthe state-of-the-art; (2) to se-

craft and other equipment forpublic inspection.The National Air Show washeld at Dayton, Ohio, in 1953and 1954; at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1955; and at Oklahoma City in 1956. ' Followingthe Oklahoma City show, theparticipation of military aircraft in the National Air Showwas terminated in the interestof economy by announcement ofthe Department of Defense.Army Aviation made fine impressions at these great shows.Large portions of - the publiccame to understand that theArmy was in the aviation business on a progressive and professional basis.

leet preferred approaches forfurther development; (3) to estimate the time of service application of future STOL andVTOL systems.Dr. Clifford C Furnas, thenAssistant Secretary of Defensefor R D, assigned a group ofconsultants to study the problem. The membership of this AdHoc Group on Short and Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft of the Technical AdvisoryPanel on Aeronautics (shorttitle AHGOSAVTOALAOTTAPOA) consisted of Dr. Lipp ofLockheed, Professor Dutton ofGeorgia Tech, Professor Nikolsky of Princeton, Mr. Pratt ofPratt Whitney, Dr. Raspet of

11


14/64

MARCH 1958

Mississippi State, Dr. Schairerof Rand Corporation, and Mr.Zimmerman of NACA- a trulyeminent group. Five types ofmilitary missions were studied:observation, close support, rescue, transport for intra heateruse, and the flying crane.A short or vertical takeoffand landing with a capability forunprepared field operations wasthe common requirement for allthe missions studied. The termunprepared field was considered as meaning a reasonablylevel dirt field having no ditches,stumps, cows, or other large obstacles.

The group made a number ofsignificant and valuable recommendations, now on file in ourown R&D. The report receivedwide distribution in February1957 by the Assistant Secretaryof Defense to the military services as well as industry, providing desirable emphasis on theArmy's R&D program. This report has also influenced favorable decisions from the Department of Defense on exceptionsto the 5,000 pound empty weightlimitation on Army aircraft.Actually we can't do all thecommittee suggests, for lack ofmoney. But guidance is valuable.

IV PRO LEMS

~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~, j - , ~Army's Right to Utilize AnyMethod of Aircraft Propulsion(1955 ).In May 1955 Army Aviatorsbriefed the Secretary of Defenseand the Secretaries and Chiefsof Staff of the other services onthe Army's plans and hopes fororganic aviation. E-verythingvisualized for Army Aviationwas disclosed with complete candor including the pending Army

procurement of T-37 twin-jettrainers.The Air Force vigorously challenged this procurement, implying that jet aircraft were notwithin the Army province. Laterthe Secretary of the Air Forceproposed to the Secretary of Defense that the procurement be2

disapproved . on the groundsthat it would be an infringement upon Air Force functions.This clearly posed the questionof whether the Army was to bedenied the right to use whatever method of propulsion wouldbest serve its purposes in theperformance of its aviation functions.The Secretary of Defense referred the question to the ' JointChiefs of Staff. In general, theAir Force argued that possession of jet aircraft would leadthe Army to perform missionsassigned exclusively to the AirForce. The Army, on the otherhand, held resolutely to the viewthat nothing in the National Security Act of 1947 or in any ofthe implementing directives


15/64

THE LAST THREE YE-ARS OF ARMY AVIATION

could be interpreted as meaningor implying any limitation onthe speed or method of propulsion of aircraft used by theArmy in carrying out its assigned functions, and that theimposition of such limitationswould be tantamount to withholding from the Army the benefits of normal development inthe state of the aeronautical art.The final decision of the Secretary of Defense in September1955 compromised somewhat onthe specific issue since it cancelled the procurement and arranged for the test aircraft tobe made available on loan fromthe Air Force. But in principle,the outcome was favorable tothe Army in that it constituted

an official validation of theArmy s right to use jet or anyother type of aircraft propulsionfor the performance of its assigned functions.Army Aviation Unit TrainingCommands (1955-57).To provide necessary supervision over activation and trainingof transport a via ion uni ts,OCAFF recommended to DA on19 October 1954 that twoAAUTC's be established: onecommand at Fort Sill for singlerotor helicopter training andone at Fort Riley for tandemrotor helicopter and transport

airplane training.The missions were assignedto the 71st Transportation Battalion at Fort Riley which became operational 18 February1955, and to the 45th Battalionat Fort Sill, 1 July 1955. Theirtasks were first to supervise activation and unit training of avi-

ation companies, and second toconduct individual pilot helicopter flight transition training.This second mission was transferred to the U. S. Army Aviation School in 1957.Since inception, the twoUTC's have activated and givenunit training to twelve helicopter and three FWTT companies. They have successfullyperformed an important job.

Army Participation n JointInstrumentation Program (1954-57).In December 1954 the Armyjoined the Navy in an integratedinstrumentation research pro

gram to provide Army Aviatorswith one integrated instrumentdisplay for ll flight informationnecessary for satisfactorily flying a plane in instrumentweather.Various research contracts inhuman engineering, computer,navigation, autopilot, control,communication and radar fieldswere awarded-at great expenset o provide the sensors, control,computation and presentationequipment required to accomplish the goal.Some of these projects arenow bearing fruit. Their resultsin some form will be incorporated into helicopters in the not toodistant future. The first helicopter to make use of some ofthe research devices so far produced will be modified for thistype of instrumentation in FY1958. The results of flight testwill determine the extent towhich this rake-off will be incorporated in selected Armyhelicopters.

3


16/64

MARCH 1958

Progressively, as more re-search demonstrates the feasibility of ideas, additional typesof helicopters will be equippeduntil ultimately the aviator willbe able to see both forward andbelow a simulation of the realworld superimposed on the realworld, provided the real worldis visible. (That's the w a ySignal people talk sometimes.Means that- the terrain will bevisible even in the fog.)When we get this, we ll behard to stop.Exer,cise S G E B R U S H.(1955).Exercise SAGE-BRUSH, thelargest field exercise since WWII, was conducted jointly byUSC ON ARC and TAC in Louisiana in November and December1955. Chief interest to USC ON-

ARC was evaluation of the newtype field army, ATFA. Although ATFA itself has longsince been buried with full military honors, the 1956 field armyset the pattern for current combat units.Important deficiencies uncovered, for which Army Aviation offers at least partial solutions, were: a need for morerapid acquisition of informationand delivery of intelligence tousing agencies, the inadequacyof a radiological monitoring system, and the need for all unitsto move rapidly and frequentlywith continuous communicationsand logistic support.The need for a reliable communications system for passingflight information was emphasized in the exercise report. Thisplus the need for a mutually acceptable arrangement on the reg-ula tion of airspace are still two

hawnee delivers cargo during xercise SagebrushPhoto ourtesy VERTOL orporation

4


17/64


problems of great concern foreffective employment of ArmyAviation. Although much hasbeen done toward solving theseproblems, both within the Armyand between the Air Force andArmy, the next few years mustsee much more progress.And as for vulnerability ofairstrips They are hard to hide,doubly so when they are cluttered with helicopters. If we areto live to fight another day, wemust lick this problem throughcamouflage, clever selection ofstrips, camouflage, dispersion,camouflage, concealment, andcamouflage-and maybe mostimportant of all, camouflagediscipline.In addition to testing new aviation units, the SKY CA V concept was tested. Although thistrial did not yield conclusive results, it did point the way forfurther experimentation. Thebasic concept of combininglimited air transport, close-tothe-ground air reconnaissanceand air transportable groundrecce elements into one unit under a single commander wasevaluated as sound.

Camouflage of Army Aircraft(1955- ).During SAGEBRUSH, as justnoted, Army aircraft stood outlike the traditional bar of ivory

soap in a coal scuttle. The distinctive pattern of unpaintedhelicopter rotor blades, thglossy finish, the Army markings and national insignia wereall very apparent when the aircraft were parked in the open.(They h d to be in the openbecause maneuver restrictions

forbade the cutting of trees.)As a result, additional impetus was given to the camouflage R D program at The Engineer Research and DevelopmentLaboratories (Fort Belvoir).Camouflage nets have proven tobe too heavy and bulky to becarried in an aircraft, and require too many people to erect.In addition, an airplane under acamouflage net usually appearsto be (guess?) a camouflagedairplane.As a result of a series of tests,some new camouflage paintshave been developed. Easily applied, they dry in about eighthours. Paint can be removed bywiping with a rag soaked in gasoline and the new paint applied.Paints have been treated withan ingredient to give protectionagainst infrared photography(which can distinguish betweennatural foliage and most artificial materials). The new paints,combined with proper siting totake advantage of natural foliage and the use of availablecamouflage materials to coverup windshields and the like, willgreatly aid in concealing aircraft.The laboratories are laboringaway on other camouflage materials. Under development is afoam which when released fromits container will cover a portionof the aircraft, thus breaking upthe outline. Pilots and mechanicswill not be able to shave with it.E.xperimenta ion is also continuing on a spray which willform a fine web over part of theaircraft to help make it less distinguishable, and on very lightweight nets on which naturaland artificial material can behung.

5


18/64

MARCH 1958A new training circular oncamouflage painting is in final

stages of preparation and is expected to be published in thenear future as will a new fieldmanual, FM 5-21, covering theentire subject of camouflage foraviation.The Army Aviation Plan(1956).The Draft Army AviationPlan, FY 1955-56, drawn by theArmy staff in November 1955,led to important decisions concerning Army Aviation but didnot result in an approved plan.Accordingly there was no officialdocument prior to 1956 presenting comprehensive guidance for

the development of Army A viation. On the contrary, there wasa fairly widespread view in theArmy staff that such a documentwould be unnecessary and untimely.The Aviation part of theArmy staff considered that theabsence of a formal plan wasserious because it permittedmisunderstandings throughoutthe Army as to Army Aviation strue aims and purposes. Thestaff therefore proceeded to prepare a plan which had as oneof its primary purposes the cleardelineation of the functions tobe performed by Army aircraft.The Army Aviation Plan FY1956-1960 was published on 5March 1956. It set forth for thefirst time official guidance forcoordination of the efforts of theArmy staff, headquarters, andunits in the field in their common effort to develop Army A viation as a vital contribution toour battle effectiveness. It pro-16

posed no functions not alreadywithin the authorization of theMemorandum of Understanding,but described them in more precise and understandable language.

The Army Aviation Plan, FY56-60, proved to be very effective in establishing unity ofopinion within the Army on thebroad purposes of Army A viation and in isolating for studythose specific areas requiringofficial decision. Additionally itwas of tremendous value as astandard source of informationfor dissemination to the public,the Congress, and the otherservices.

Weather Service for ArmyAirfields (1955-57).

Although the Army has always had a requirement forweather service support, eventhe requirement itself, as stated,was not sufficient to the growing needs of Army Aviation.From its infancy, aviation hasestablished itself as a voracioususer of weather information.The extent and growth of ArmyAviation created a significantworkload increase for the supplier of weather information,the Air Weather Service, andalso pointed up a need for abetter system within the Armyfor assessing needs and communicating them to the AirForce. In coordination with theA WS, procedures were instituted in 1955 which gathered together all the Army s needs insuch a manner as to 1) takeinto account the two-year leadtime necessary for the A WS toacquire the added weather serv-


19/64


ice capability, and (2) presentthe requirements to the AirForce in a reasonably intelligiblemanner; i.e., in adequate detailand proper terminology.Since the Army has a responsibility for logistical support ofAWS facilities assigned to itsunits, the commands concernedhad to be appraised of how theirweather service requirementswould be met in order to planfor this support. Informationfurnished included the schedulefor phasing in the service requested, numbers of A WS personnel involved, facilities required-even the square footageof floor space needed.The process of evaluating

Army A viation FunctionsCrystallized (1955-57).

The National Security Act of1947 legalized the separation ofthe Army Air Corps from therest of the Army but at thesame time provided for retention of that aviation which hadalready become organic to Armyunits-that is, Army Aviation.Although the wording of theAct was very general, it established the basic authority forwhatever organic aviation isnecessary for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations on land.

Implementation of the Act

present weather requirementsand anticipating new ones isnow continuous. This has resulted in the presentation, tothe Air Weather Service, of requirements for weather facilities at virtually all major Armyairfields. The AWS response hasbeen a programmed effort tomeet the Army's requirements.As a result, a substantial amountof the Army's stated needs arepresently being met. Unfilled requirements are rapidly beingsatisfied as AWS generates thenecessary added capability.We are genuinely appreciativeof this support by USAF. Wereally don't always fight withpeople.

was by the executive instrumentpopularly known as the Functions Paper. Although this DODdirective intended to spell out thefunctions assigned to each service, and although it expandsconsiderably on the aviationfunctions of the other services,it adds little to the wording ofthe Act relative to Army Aviation and must be judged nondefinitive in that regard.Temporary remedy was provided by the Secretaries of theArmy and Air Force in the formof Memoranda of Understanding, the latest of which was dated4 November 1954. While this wasa generally satisfactory document from the Army viewpoint,

7


20/64

MARCH 1958

it suffered from the disadvantage of being temporary. andsubservient to any DOD dIrectives which might be issued.This, then, was the generalsituation when the Secretary ofthe Air Force challenged thefunctional propriety of theArmy's proposed procurement ofT-37 jet trainer aircraft.Following a presentation onArmy Aviation before the Armed Forces Policy Council in May1955, the Deputy Scretary ofDefense requested the Army andAir Force staffs to examine theaviation activities of importanceto the Army and come up witha joint position as to how theresponsibilities ideally should bedivided between the two services. Accordingly, the servicesagreed to the formation of anad hoc committee which wouldexamine each requirement foraviation support of groundforces, attempt to reach agreement on responsibilities andevaluate areas of difference.

In preparation for this, t.heArmy staff formulated preCIsestatements of the functions tobe performed by and in supportof the Army. Although the adhoc committee was never convened, and although the wholequestion was referred instead tothe Joint Chiefs of Staff, thesestatements were invaluable lateras explicit bases for Army A viation planning.

In June 1955 the Secretary ofDefense directed the JCS to review not only the T-37 procurement but also the whole ArmyAviation program. Thus thestage was set for a full-scaleformal debate between all services on the aviation needed by8

the Army for its statutory re-sponsibilities. . .This debate was obVIOusly VI-tal to both the Army and AirForce and, because of its implications, was critical to the Navy;it lasted with unabated vigor until November 1956. In generalthe Air Force took the positionthat the Army, whether intentionally or inadvertently, wasslowly and steadily encroachingupon exclusive Air Force functions. The Army, on the otherhand maintained that it was developing only that aviationwhich was essential to its statutory responsibility for sustained combat incident to operations on land and which was infact noncompetitive with AirForce aviation. Having retreatednot one inch from this basicposition-because was u ~ -sailable on any baSIS of IOgICthe Army staff can take pride,now that the smoke of battle hasbeen dispelled, in having defended successfully all vital issues.The final decisions of the Secretary of Defense are set forthin a DOD Directive of 8 March1957 which supersedes thMemorandum of Understanding,but which authoritatively establishes all the Army Aviationfunctions agreed in that document. While there are detailswhich the Army would change,the assignment of functions andthe designation of the combatzone to be used in determiningArmy Aviation requirementsare very satisfactory in themain. For the first time our aviation functions are not being challenged-we are in good shape asto our functional authority andare ready to proceed with confidence.


21/64


22/64

MARCH 1958

Development of DUSAA as aProper Coverpiece for ArmyAviation 1955-57).In 1955 Davison US ArmyAir Field at Fort Belvoir consisted of a runway and threetemporary plywood buildingssituated at the northwest endof the runway-a small hangar,an administration building witha tower on the roof, and asmall building utilized to housesupplies and small parts. Alsodecorating the scenery were miscellaneous piles of rusting fueldrums, a burned aircraft carcass, and a tumble-down shackwith a drunken stove pipe. Withthe anticipated increase in scopeof mission under MDW and withthe prospective arrival of a helicopter company and supportingfield maintenance unit, existingfacilities looked a trifle inadequate.A new hangar with a building- attached to house supply andmaintenance officers and storagefor spare parts was partiallycompleted less doors) upon arrival of the helicopter company

on 15 May 1955, at which timethe building was occupied. Anoperations building, boiler houseand fire station were put underconstruction.A re-evaluation of the available buildings was made duringJanuary 1956 and it was deemednecessary to move operations to2

the new buildings on the southside of the runway and to givethe temporary buildings to thehelicopter company.Work was then commenced ona company-size heliport completewith parking aprons, runways,operations building, supplybuilding, and crash and rescuestation. A field maintenancehangar with its supporting access apron was also started, andon the same site as the heliporta modern airfield control tower isbeing erected. t is anticipatedhoped?) that all facilities willbe in use by January 1958. Secret information: constructionpeople love incompleted projects.Nothing depresses them morethan getting done and out of themud.)A TVOR is working but notyet CAA approved.t is anticipated that thegrowth of the field will continueand plans are now being formulated for construction of a battalion size headquarters building, post exchange, cafeteria,barber shop, motor pool, andtroop housing for an enlisted

s t r ng t h of 500. Also programmed is the construction ofadditional hangars, h l i p 0 r tnight lighting, a rotating beaconfor the water tower, sprinklersystem for the fixed wing hangar, an aircraft parking apron, aperimeter road, security fence,vehicle parking areas, additional


23/64


fuel storage facilities, a field operations building, and high intensity approach lighting.If we ever get this done,DUSAA will be something tolook at. t will still have a 24-hour built-in 90-degree crosswind to entertain Army A viators landing on its single runway.

Progress in evelopment(1954-57).The great strides that havebeen made in our business during the past few years are, wethink, obvious. Certain of themost important improvementsare largely the responsibility of

the Chief of Research and Development. The Indians in hisshop have made phenomenal contributions; e.g., by their actionArmy Aviation now has a heritage of ancient American folklore ( Raven on the ramp,Shawnee for takeoff, Mohawk on final ).Actually real progress hasbeen made in the area of aircraft designation. By authorityof AR 705-42 the Army, not theAir Force, will designate allArmy aircraft in the future.The new AR prescribes designations which indicate the configuration of the aircraft (airplane, helicopter, or vertical lift)and the type (cargo, utility,etc.), as well as the model.R&D, working closely with operations and other staff agencies, has the mission of establishing the course and the paceof development. During the pastfew years great effort has been

We might as well live with t s -it is bigger than all of us

exerted to set in motion a logicalprogram to develop . superiorequipment. t takes time,though, to transform ideas fromthe drawing board to hardware.Here is a brief rundown on someof the projects that are showingfavorable results; we modestlyomit a few that don't look likemuch.The Bird Dog has done a creditable job in the observation roleand will continue to do so forsome time to come; but with theintroduction of missiles and improved long range artillery, itsuse for some missions would belike sending a boy to do a man'sjob. We need faster aircrafttha can make shallow penetrations of hostile territory, observeand adjust the fire of longerrange weapons, carry the electronic gear that will become essential aids to future observation, and survive without thefriendly protection normallyavailable in the past.By 1960 the Mohawk development program will give us ahigh performance observationairplane that will be capable ofperforming the mission. Powered by two T-53 turbine engines,the Grumman Mohawk will becapable of operation from short,unimproved fields and will fly atspeeds up to 275 knots. Moreover, it's a good looking airplanedespite some of the conceptsturned out by artists.

With the availability of a satisfactory turbine powerplant, asuccessor to the Bird Dog willbe introduced. t is true that wecould get a better craft today,but it would not be sufficientlysuperior to warrant a change inproduction. With the new engineit will be possible to have a vast-2


24/64

MARCH 1958

ly impro.ved aircraft in speed,lo.ad-carrying capability, ndsho.rt field perfo.rmance. It is an-ticipated that the new 250-400ho.rsepo.wer turbine will be available abo.ut 1960 and the newairplane so.metime thereafter.

A lo t of publicity has beengiven to the deHavilland Caribou, the airplane that broke the5,000 pound barrier. By our pre-vio.us standards, the Caribou willbe o f pretty good size, weighingabo.ut 13,000 pounds empty. Itwill have a payload o f 2 2 to 3tons depending on takeo.ff run ,a cruising speed of about 150knots, and go o d short field perfo.rmance. Service tests arescheduled fo.r early 1959. Fromall indications it appears thatthe Caribou is a natural to fillthe long standing requirementfor a light transpo.rt aircraft.Opera ing in concert with trans-po.rt helico.pters, these airplaneswill provide commanders with aflexibility never befo.re achieved.

For the close-in mission, it isgenerally agreed that we needa light aircraft to replace thepresent observation helicopters.The Raven and Sioux are prettyCo stly in their present configuration, both in original cost andupkeep, and we would need greatnumbers o f this type aircraft incombat. We are presently investigating the light helicoptersdevelo.ped by Brantly andHughes to fill this requirement.Actually, this is the Mo del T appro.ach: a lightweight, low-co.st,lo.w-maintenance machine. Thisprogram, initiated in 1957,should produce an acceptableitem by 1960-62.Fo.r the utility helicopter mission, the Army began develo.p-

22

ment of the Iroquo.is H-40) in1954. This is the first U. S helicopter designed to use a gasturbine engine T-53). It will bea rugged, versatile aircraft withgreatly increased performancecapabilities o.ver present utilitymodels. Before this year is overthe engineering tests on theIroquois will be completed andservice tests begun. Actual delivery of production models isscheduled for 1958.A troo.p transport version ofthe Iroquo.is is po.ssible. Ideallysuited fo.r the missio.n, it wouldprovide Sky Cav units with alight aerial squad personnel carrier and a fire support weaponscarrier.In 1958, we will also see the

Mojave H-37) delivered to theunits. This, the largest U. S.pro.duction helicopter, recentlycompleted 1,000 hours of testingin only six months.To improve the present lightcargo helicopters, we are investigating the desirability of replacing the present engines with gasturbine po.werplants. Installatio.ns are being made in the Navyversion of the Choctaw H-34A),and there is a multiturbine version of a Shawnee YH-21D)that will be ready for flight testin a few months.Since the intro.duction of thehelicopter to Army Aviation,o nly passive measures have been

available as a defense againstenemy ground fire. This year wehave started a program to co r-rect this deficiency. Success willmean that helicopters will carrytheir own light weapons to deliver suppressive fire. Varioustypes of weapons will be utilizedin the initial installations.


25/64


26/64

MARCH 1958

The newest field of interestfor the Army is that of directlift devices The Army s initialapproach in this area has beenmade with the DeLackner Aero-cycle and the Pawnee HillerFlying Platform). The Pawneehas shown much promise and theArmy is moving quickly to ex-ploit it. However, it cannotcarryall the equipment the sol-dier needs on today s battlefield,much less that of the future.Accordingly, the next logicalstep is, probably, the aerial jeep.Until a few years ago such anidea was purely fantasy, butwith the successful operation ofthe ducted fan, it is now well

within possibility. This yearthree different manufacturersaccepted contracts to producetest bed models. Designed tocarry a soldier and his equip-ment a few feet over the groundat slow speeds, the aerial jeepwill be ideal for reconnaissance,messenger work, or patrolling.A logical outgrowth of this pro-gram will be to develop a ve-hicle which can stay in the airfor several hours, move atspeeds up to 50 miles an hourand carry 1,000 pounds or so ofequipment and weapons. Thepossibilities of this weapon, i itcan be built at a reasonable cost,are limited only by the imagina-

Artist s concept of flying cr ne utilizing tip propulsion principlesPhoto ourtesy HILLER HELI OPTERS

24


27/64


tion.All of the listed aircraft aredependent upon satisfactorypowerplants. Limitations of size,weight, and ease of maintenancehave made conventional enginesunsatisfactory. As a result, theArmy is developing a family offree shaft gas turbine engines.Already in production, the Lycoming T-53 engine develops ap

proximately 800 horsepower andwill be used in the Iroquois (H-40) and the Mohawk. A largerengine, the Lycoming T-55, developing 1500 to 1800 horsepower, will power later cargohelicopters and transport airplanes. In addition, there aretwo smaller engines-the T-66of 55 hp that will be used inindividual lift devices, and a 250hp model for low-powered aircraft.Successful development ofthese engines will give the Armya wide latitude in powerplant selection. The entire aviation industry, as well as the militaryservices, is greatly interested inthis program.

The trend is obvious-fastermore versatile, more m o i l ~equipment is in the offing. Wefeel we are on the right trackand that the results will bevastly superior equipment in thefield.

Equipment for the Observation Role (1955-57).It is increasingly evident thatthe observation function ofArmy A via ion is destined toachieve new importance. Thevalue of visual reconnaissancefrom Army aircraft has long

been established, and the qualityof aerial photography obtainedby Army aircraft indicates asignificant capacity in that business. Now we look to the employment of new and more sophisticated methods.In 1955 various Army activities and developmental agencieswere already exploring the possibilities of radar, infrared andtelevision as reconnaissance sensors. Since radar, being an olderart, had reached a more advancedstate of development, it wasonly natural that emphasis herewould bring quicker results.Wha was needed was somemeans of observing deep intoenemy territory from the relative safety of our own territory.A radar which could be mountedon the side of an airplane andflown along the line of contactlooking into enemy territorywould be one such means.Work was directed along theselines and by the spring of 1957an interim side-looking airborne radar (inevitably becoming known as the SLAR )was adopted. This model is expected to be improved upon substantially as development of radar as a reconnaissance sensorcontinues. Progress in the fieldof infrared devices has notreached the stage of hardwarein the hands of troops, butknowledge gained to date clearlypoints the way toward the earlyadoption of a device of this kindfor use in Army aircraft.By virtue of these gadgetsArmy commanders may have afighting chance of keeping tabson what gives on that fluid, confused, rapidly moving, helterskelter battlefield that everybody keeps talking about.

25


28/64

MARCH 1958

Army Aviation has turned upregularly at sites of trouble.Among the more unusual missions are:a. Support of civil and military agencies during a volcaniceruption on Hawaii in 1955.Army aircraft were used indamage survey and transporta-tion of key relief officials.b. Support of civil authori-ties in the airliner collision overthe Grand Canyon, June 1956;you'll remember they both fellinto the hole at almost inac-

Grand anyon disaster

cessible spots. Under dangerouswind conditions, Army hel1-copters transported CAA investigation personnel to the wreckage and evacuated bodies of thevictims. This was a great featof flying, and received broadrecognition.

c Evacuation of survivorsof a forced landing of an AirForce aircraft on an island inthe Han River near Seoul, Korea, in 1956. Rapid evacuationof these people by our aircraft,under very difficult circumstances and at night, preventedtheir being swept out to sea bythe rising tide, and got the injured quickly to hospitals. USAF was extremely laudatoryabout the job done.

d Support during a tidalwave in Hawaii in the spring of1957. We provided an immediatemeans of conducting rapid sur-vey of the stricken areas foraccurate damage assessmentand emergency relief.e Support of rescue operations following Hurricane Au-drey on 27-28 June 1957 in thevicinity of Cameron and LakeCharles, Louisiana. Our aircraftwere used to evacuate injuredand to fly in food and otheremergency supplies.f. Flight into the jungles ofEcuador to find and bury thebodies of the missionaries killedby the Auca Indians. This mission was accomplished by an


29/64


rmy aviators search for missing missionariesArmy helicopter. Identificationpapers and personal possessionsfound on the bodies were flownout and turned over to properauthorities for disposition.Army aircraft also assisted inemergency relief during morethan fifteen floods notably inNew England and Californiaand forty-five forest firesthroughout CONUS; transport-ed food, fuel and supplies tosnowbound persons during the

blizzard in the Texas Panhandlein March 1957; and performednumerous search, rescue andevacuation missions for lost orinjured individuals in the RockyMountains.g. There was also something about blowing water offcherry trees, but the detailsescape us.Well, anyway, our aviation hasl xibility which is why we dosuch a variety of rescue work.

VIII U S ARMY AVIATION BOARD

~ . I , ~ I I I . , , j B , ~During the period 1945 to1955, while Army Aviation as awhole was blowing up considerably, the capability to conductservice testing of Army aircraft

and allied equipment did notkeep pace.The Army had conducted itsown service testing since 1946when an Army Aviation Service27


30/64

MARCH 1958

Test Division was created. During the 10-year period, this Division had experienced insignificant expansion. In January of1955, the Army Policy Councilapproved a long-range ArmyAviation plan that had beenprepared in G-3; one of the recommendations in this plan wasthat an Army Aviation Boardbe established at Fort Rucker.A t the time, service testing wasbeing conducted by the ArmyAviation Division at Fort Sill,and was part of CON ARC BoardNr 1In October 1954 this Divisionwas placed under command ofBoard Nr 5 Fort Bragg) foradministrative purposes, andwas moved to Rucker. The purpose of this was to permit closecoordination between the Division of Board 5 and the Center,which was responsible for thetraining of personnel and the development of doctrine, tactics,and techniques for Army Aviation.On I August 1955 Board Nr 6Continental Army Command,was officially established. Theinitial personnel authorizationconsisted of those 55 personnelpreviously authorized the ArmyAviation Division of Board Nr1 A new TD was immediatelyprocessed and on 1 December1955 the personnel authorization was increased from 55 to222. This brought the capabilityto conduct service testing ofArmy aircraft and allied equipment back in consonance withthe size of the whole Army A viation program.On 1 January 1957 the nameof the Board .was changed fromBoard N r 6 CONARC, to theU. S. Army Aviation Board. At28

this point the Board Presidenttook a long breath and got firedup again.Board 6 has already systematically conducted a large number of major equipment tests,thus providing Army Aviation asound machinery with which toevaluate available equipment andto determine, where necessary,what modifications must bemade in it. In 1956 the first testswere made which were conductedjointly by the Army and AirForce with the Army directingthe test and assuming primaryresponsibility. Several were conducted during the year of 1956,among them climatic hangartesting of Seminole de-icing andanti-icing systems, e x p o r ation of the effect of wingtip vortices and sonic shock waves onArmy aircraft in flight, and theweather capability of the Seminole.

Centralized Testing at Rucker(1956).E stablishment .of . the Army

Aviation Board on a sound footing did not solve the entire problem of testing Army aircraftand allied equipment. If theBoard was to accomplish its mission properly, it required speGialized supply and maintenancesupport beyond that which couldbe provided by the normal systems of supply and maintenance.In addition, the testing of Armyaircraft was slowly becomingfragmented. At this time, Transportation Corps proposed theinitiation of a logistical evaluation of aircraft for the purposeof developing supply and maintenance information. The initial


31/64


proposal by TC was to conductthis testing at Fort Eustis, Virginia. But in an effort to centralize geographically the testingfunction (we could hardly support more than one test center ,to still stay within commandchannels, and to provide thespecialized supply and maintenance support required by theArmy Aviation Board, CONARC, in September 1955, recommended to DA that Transportation Corps and SignalCorps establish activities atFort Rucker. This recommendation was debated with some heatby the Army General Staff forseveral months. But in March1956, the Vice Chief of Staff directed that TC and the SignalCorps establish Class II activities at Fort Rucker. This wasa major step forward. t notonly provided an organizationthat could support expeditioustesting but it also provided acentralization of testing thatwould permit detailed coordination and maximum-mutual benefit from each hour flown. In Julythe U. S. Army TransportationTest and Support Activity wasorganized as a Class II activityat Fort Rucker, followed in September with the establishmentof the U. S. Army Aviation Signal Test and Support Detachment at the same place, samestatus.Everybody now seems happilyestablished in the same nest.Shortly after TATSA and SCATSA were established at Rucker,a master plan of facilities wasprepared for all test activities.All were to be located on OzarkArmy Airfield and sufficient facilities were included in theplans to meet the needs of all

three detachments. Creation ofthe permanent establishmentwill require many years;- however, the first major step wastaken when the contracts werelet in the summer of 1957 forone administration building, onepermanent-type hangar, and twoLuria-type hangars along withthree supply buildings to supportthe facilities. Word was also received at this time that a 360.man barracks had been approved to be constructed fromthe FY 58 appropriation.Accelerated Aircraft Logistical Evaluation (1956-57).U. S. Army TransportationAircraft Test and Support Activity (TATSA) was establishedat Rucker in July 1956. Studiesmade by the TransportationCorps indicated as early as 1953that accurate advance data onnew aircraft would result insavings. If, before a new aircraft went into general production and operational use, theArmy knew the answers to a fewhighly intriguing questions itwould take some of the guesswork out of planning. t washard to get together essentialpilots, mechanics and crewchiefs of necessary calibre; thusit was early in 1957 before theunit became operational. Maintenance was contracted to a sub

sidiary of Southern Airways.Personnel assigned were 15 officers, warrant officers, enlistedmen and DA civilians. TATSAwas placed under TSMC, St.Louis.First job was the H-37 Mojave. TATSA was told to put1,000 hours flying time on it29


32/64

MARCH 1958

within a maximum of sixmonths. Night and day, sevendays a week, the bird was flowndespite adverse weather, Alabama mosquitoes, and the dustwhich gave maintenance personnel fits. Much of the equipmentused for maintenance, such asstands and lights, was designedand constructed as the workprogressed. All maintenance wasperformed outside.

Maintenance men worked inshifts, so that the maximumnumber was available when theaircraft was not flying. Fiftyone-hour inspections were scheduled for weekends. Pilots flewall hours of the day and night.In May a sister ship startedthrough the test cycle, increasing the problems of mainte-nance, refueling, flight scheduling, and personnel.The test ended successfully atFort Rucker on August 22, 1957,when the remaining machineone was destroyed by accident)landed before a number of high

ranking officers and civiliansfrom the Army and indust.ry.Results of the test were good:the Army discovered that helicopters could be operated forlonger periods than had beenconsidered possible, that majorsavings will result from theestablishment of service life ofvarious components, and that requirements and supply personnel were now on firm ground in

ordering repair parts for the future.Aircraft Procurement 1955-57 .Procurement has proceededaccording to a planned program.The administrative procedures

have been reduced in complexityby several factors, major amongwhich is the stabilization of theprogram within the objectivesoutlined by the Army AviationGuidelines and Five Year Materiel Program. Additionally,ighty oiave underwent rigid testing

3


33/64


through a series of interserviceconferences between the Army,Navy, and Air Force, the Armyhas authority as of July 1957to procure aircraft througheither the Air Force or theNavy, making unnecessary someof the fantastically complicatedactions involving all three serv-ices.The old timers among fixedwing aircraft (Cubs, L-17s, andLC-126s) are gradually disappearing from the scene, beingsuperseded by Bird Dogs, Beav-

ers, and Seminoles. Later modelsinclude an instrument trainingversion of the Bird Dog, and theL ~ 2 3 D , a decidedly improvedmodel of the Seminole. And wehave improved Sioux (Hs) andRavens (Ds) coming off thelines.Future procurement will continue efforts to streamline procedures for integration of newaircraft into production schedules, DCSLOG is trying to getthem to us before they're obsolete.

IX OFFICER CAREER

~ ~ ~ I I I I; ~ ' ~Major Personnel Policy Actions (1955-57).With the advent of the KoreanWar, it became necessary inearly 1951 to suspend the initial

aviator career program estab-lished by SR 605-95-1, as allaviators were made availablefor full-time aviation duty.By the time that fracas ended,Army Aviation had entered themilitary limelight and had ensured itself a more prominentplace in the Army structure, butthis turn of events carried withit the responsibility for developing aviation officers in the broadfields of military operations andmanagement.On 1 July 1955 a new c reerprogr m was staffed by theDeputy Chief of Staff for Per-sonnel which encompassed theconcept of centralized control

for aviators. hat put the eggin the fan, producing two thou-sand four hundred and eight opposing ideas on how to producecompetent pilots. Bearing inmind the old adage Patienceand Perseverance made a Bishopof his Reverence (Clausewitz,Suvorov, or von Moltke, I for-get which), our personnel peoplebore ever onward, undaunted,cheerfully meeting every challenge. Various compromises resulted in an acceptable solutionwhich was approved on 14 April1956 and published as AR 600-105, Army Aviation Career Pro-gram, on 18 April.Essentially, the major objective of the career program is toproduce and develop qualified officers for the professional andtechnical phases of Army A viation with simultaneous provision for career opportunities on

3


34/64

MARCH 1958

an equitable basis with otherofficers. Full implementation hasnot been accomplished due to theexpanding nature of Army A viation activities and the changingstructure of the Army, but aconsiderable start in career programming has nevertheless,been made. For one thing, weare at long last getting an evenbreak on schooling.

Warrant Officer Pilots.Warrant officers and enlistedmen in any grade were author-ized to volunteer for trainingas Army helicopter aviatorsthey are all given Warrants ongraduation) on 21 February

1951, and a course of instruc-tion to train selected individualswas established shortly there-after.The effectiveness and efficiency of the helicopter trans-port company program standsas first class testimony to thesoundness of the concept ofusing warrant officers as pilots.Our WOs are devoted, capableaviators and a credit to theArmy.

The Building of the Body.The changes of the early1950 s found Army Aviation farshort in aviators and even in

applicants for flying training.Officer promotions had not keptpace with the demand for aviators in the higher grades andsevere imbalances in aviationqualifications existed.To meet the demand, exten-sive selling campaigns were initiated concurrently with increas-3

es in training capacity. By 1956nearly all of the existing 2,700officer positions could be filled.Applications for flight trainingaveraged nearly 300 per monthand the outlook for the following year was bright.In 1957 the picture wasbrighter. More than 5,000 aviators were on flying status in theactive Army. f the officersmore than 50 percent were helicopter qualified, 30 percent instrument qualified and steadyincreases were being reported.Shortages in the senior gradesand in some qualifications continued to exist, but most requirements were being met withadequate overages for schooling.Finally, rotation to branch dutyunder the career plan was becoming possible.

Grade Structure.Next most important amongimprovements is the recentlypublished C2, SR 210-20-15, establishing a revised grade struc-

ture for aviators. To obtain thislong needed and partially equitable arrangement we found ourselves, once again, attacking ahotly contested objective. Wegloriously prevailed, however,and now battalion aviation officers are authorized in grade ofcaptain with a one-grade increase authorized at each successive command level, exceptfor corps headquarters. Moreover, the commanding officer ofan aviation company is now authorized the grade of major andaviators are authorized to beeither captain or lieutenantgrades. Overall, these constitutea major accomplishment toward


35/64


achieving a better managedArmy Aviation.Aeronautical Engineers.We needed-and still need-toeducate more aviators as aeronautical engineers to providescientifically qualified, well developed aviation officers in positions requiring aircraft engi

neering know-how. Only fouraviators were given graduatetraining in aeronautical engineering, commencing in 1949.Provisions have been m a d ewithin the civil school programto qualify approximately tenmore.Senior Army Officers FlyingTraining Program.By early 1955 an expandingprogram found us with a requirement for more colonels andlieutenant colonels. Due to thelimited time available to initiatea training program the firstclass of twelve officers was selected by Department of theArmy without a general announcement f o r applications.This class entered training atFort Rucker in September 1955and graduated in May 1956. Ofthe twelve personnel enteredinto training, one failed to complete the course because of physical deficiency incurred duringtraining. .In January 1956 a DA circular announced an FY 1957 ArmyA viation flight training coursefor senior officers. The resultwas that eleven more very capable officers were qualified asArmy Aviators.

Senior officer training wasdiscontinued as a separatecourse of instruction-becausethe requirement had been largely m et a t the end of FY 57.AR 611-110 provides for training Army officers in Army gradenecessary for support of the approved Army force structure.

Army Flight Status SelecUonSystem Becomes Operative. -The first flight status reviewboard was convened by The Adjutant General on 6 March 1957.This board reviewed all recordsof aviators completing 7 14 and21 years service and any othersneeding special attention. The

board recommended retention orsuspension. Aviators recommended for suspension were notified and offered an opportunityto appeal while others with marginal performance records wereenj oined to do better.This self-policing action is abit rough-but it is necessary,for no group can hope to main

tain high standards unless thereis a drain-off at the bottom. Review of effectiveness and necessary changes are to be expected.Flight Manuals (1955).In 1955 the Army started providing Jeppesen Airways Manuals (TM 11-2557) to all ArmyAviators in the U. S., thuseliminating the need for a cockpit full of Esso road maps, farmers almanacs, and divining rods.Jeppesen manuals require considerable space in the airplaneand are imparting a one-shoul-

33


36/64


37/64

sf t _ p a r t 3

AVIATION SAFETY (1955-1957)

--------1 KALEIDOSCOPE

1 1......... ARMY AVIATION IN.......... SEVENTH ARMY (1955-1957)DEVELOPMENT OF SKY CAV......... (1955-1957) .


38/64

MARCH 1958

In 1955 the Department of theArmy was advised of Army aircraft accidents by the newspapers-this was a system, buterratic. Everyone conceded thatthere were accidents but no onereally knew how many, whatkind, or what to do about it.In July the Office of A via ionSafety Inspector was established. For the next year the inspector sleuthed .around the ZIand overseas to get acquaintedwith the problem.In January 1956 a system oftelegraphic reports was initiated. The so-called crash report was devised to give immediate notice of an aircraft accident to Department of theArmy, intermediate commanders, and various other interestedagencies. The telegram supplanted the newspaper (more reliable) .Arrangements were mad ewith Cornell Aviation Crash Injury Research to assist theArmy in analyzing the causes ofinjury in survivable Army accidents, the data obtained fromthis analysis to be used in design to delethalize aircraft.Somewhat akin to this arrangement is one with the TechnicalDevelopment Center of the CAAat Indianapolis, the first tangibleresult of which has been thedevelopment of materials forcrash-resistant fuel systems. Itnow appears that systems can36

be designed for new aircraft sothat fire will not result in acrash that the occupants otherwise would survive, and currentaircraft can be retrofitted togive much greater protectionthan at present.The Army Aviation SafetyBoard, formerly established asan activity of the U. S. ArmyAviation Center, was established as a Class II activity underthe jurisdiction of DCSOPS byGO 22, 1 May 1957. Mission isprescribed in AR 15-76. As theBoard's activities developed, itbecame apparent that its mostuseful endeavor was the utilization of aviation accidents as research subjects, and accordinglyit was redesignated the UnitedStates Army Board for AviationAccident Research by GO 37, 25July 1957. In its relatively shortlife the Board has produced ninedesign criteria for applicationto future aircraft, and has initiated action on several engineering changes in aircraft, aswell as many safety-of-flighttechnical orders. These criteria,changes and technical orderswere evolved from accident research, and were processed byDCSOPS through DCSLOG andCRD, as appropriate. heBoard's studies also evolvedmany changes in operating techniques and practices which havebeen disseminated directly byDCSOPS.


39/64

rmy viation Safety Course members probe actual wreck

In October 1956 the ArmyAviation Safety Course was established by contract with theUniversity of Southern California to train senior staff aviatorsin aviation safety. Five fields arecovered - aircraft accident investigation, prevention, aeronautical engineering, aviationpsychology and aviation phys-iology. The course producesabout 7 graduates each year,and has resulted ,in a note-worthy improvement in investigation and reporting of aviationaccidents.The Office of Flight Safety Inspector was redesignated A viation Safety Division in 1956. Acivilian assistant was author-ized, and a man with wide experience as an instructor in fixed

and rotary wing aircraft wasselected to fill it.Liaison has been established

with other agencies active inaviation safety e.g., NACA andGuggenheim Flight a f e t yFoundation in order to draw onworldwide experience for thebenefit of the Army, and wehave representatives at theNaval Aviation Safety Center,Norfolk, and the USAF Directorate of Flight Safety Research, San Bernardino.We still have plenty of accidents, a situation which demands our continuing effort toalleviate. But we have now aworkable and going machinerywith which to attack the problem.

7


40/64


41/64

THE LAST THREE YEARS OF ARMY AVIATION89,425. If you can subtract, youcan detect a commendable upward trend.F'our hundred and seventy-onehighly experienced aviation per-sonnel were employed in NGArmy Aviation maintenanceduring FY 57; some of thesehave been qualified airplane andengine mechanics for over 18years. A number have been employed by leading airlines, whileothers have worked as instruc-t o r s in aviation mechanicsschools, both civilian and military.NG aircraft look good, flywell, and are a credit to theArmy.

Military Construction Pro-gram for H'elicopter Companies(1956-57).The lack of adequate facilitiesfor support of Army Aviationwas recognized in 1955 at theU. S. Army Aviation Center andat other major posts such asFort Bragg. However, no com

prehensive study of overall construction requirements to support the expanding aviation program had been undertaken before FY 56. Field commanderswere advised of proposed sta-tioning schedule for helicopterunits and requested to submitappropriate requests for necessary construction. Based on theinventory of facilities and computed requirements, the aviation items in the FY 58 construction program were successfully defended (lots of fast footwork necessary in successivereviews. As a result of a soundprogram 20.6 million was approved by Congress for the fol-

lowing posts:Ft Devens Ft KnoxFt Meade Ft BenningFt Rucker Ft HoodFt Polk Ft RileyFt Belvoir Ft RichardsonFt Bragg Ft CampbellFt Lewis Ft OrdAtlanta General DepotFt Worth General DepotNew Cumberland Gen. DepotSharpe General DepotThe Annual Army AviationTraining Conference (1956-57).The first conference was heldin July 1956 at Fort Rucker.With the Army soon to assumecomplete training responsibility,the conference was designed toreview th existing flightcourses.Representatives from Depart-ment of the Army, ContinentalArmy Command, and all majorcommands within the ZI wereinvited. Working in four committees the conferees hashedover each training program and

presented recommended modifications to meet immediate andfuture known needs.The second conference washeld again in the WiregrassArea (local promotional plug)in August 1957. The turnover tocomplete Army responsibilityfor aviation training had beencompleted. t was deemed advisable this time to invite notonly representatives from DA,CONARC, and major ZI commands, but also people from themajor overseas commands. Witheach area possessing a differentenvironment, a better cross section of the Aviation School product, aviators and mechanics,

39


42/64

MARCH 1958

was obtained.These are the courses currently conducted or programmedat Fort Rucker:Army Avia ion TacticsArmy Helicopter AviationTacticsInstrument Flight ExaminersArmy Aviator Transport Pilot(Rotary Wing), Phase IIIArmy Helicopter TransportTacticalH-37 Helicopter PilotTransition Flight TrainingArmy Aviation OrientationAerial Observer, OfficerArmy Aviation MedicineAdvanced Aviation OfficersOrganiza ional MaintenanceOfficerFlight Simulator Operationsand MaintenanceAircraft Maintenance (Entry)Airplane MaintenanceReconnaissance HelicopterMaintenanceDepot Support for Army A viation 1955-57).In October 1955 the AssistantSecretary of Defense approved,in principle, the transfer of depot support from the Air Forceto the Army. In March 1956,after extensive staffing, the detailed plan for implementationwas approved and the DepotPlan was rolling.The major areas of responsibility that accrued to Armywere depot maintenance; the receipt, storage and issue of allArmy aircraft, repair parts andallied equipment; and the technical support of Army aircraftand allied material. Responsibilities remaining with the AirForce were the procurement of

40

Army aircraft and repair partsand equipment, and the necessary engineering services alliedto Army Aviation.The Transportation Supplyand Maintenance Command atSt. Louis is charged with centralized stock control and accountability for all TC air items.When the plan is fully functioning the excessive administrativelags in supply action will be, wehope, eliminated.The Depot Plan was originallyenvisioned as a three-year timephased program with the targetdate for the fully completedtransfer, AF to Army, set for1 April 1959. We are progressingaccording to the establishedschedule and, barring unforeseen difficulties, should makethe deadline.The Army Aviation Digest1955-57).The mission of this publication is to provide informationof an operational or functionalnature concerning safety andi r c r f t accident prevention,training, maintenance, operations, research and development,aviation medicine, and other related data.Circulation during the firstyear of publication 1955) was3,200 copies per issue. After thefirst year, the official circulationwas increased to 6,000 with copies being provided to aircraftcompanies in return for theirpublications, and also distributed to the aviation editors ofmore than 200 leading newspapers. Surprising Early in1957, t h e DIGEST becameavailable by subscription from


43/64


44/64

MARCH 1958

quirement for a plan for initiating flight instruction as partof the ROTC program. A proposed plan was developed byUSCON ARC and presented toDA representatives on 21 December 1955, as a basis for a DAbriefing of the Senate ArmedServices Committee in January.Public Law 879, 84th Congress, established authority toinitiate Army flight training in40 selected institutions duringthe academic year 1956-57. Institutions were selected to train400 students by contract withcivilian agencies on a C program for fixed wing t rainingabout 70 hours instruction, halfand-half ground and flight, onan extra-curricular basis. Students agree to serve a threeyear tour after being called toactive duty, and are then available for entry into the ArmyAviation program.In FY 56 nearly 250 studentscompleted ROTC flight training.In FY 58 it is planned to trainapproximately 700 in 48 approved colleges, including manyof the best in the land.

ANe w Concept of AircraftMaintenance Support (1956-57).In early 1956 the Atomic TestField Army ATFA) conceptwas developed, tested, andfound wanting. But not in vain

f o r one thing, it greatly increased the number of aircraftorganic to division, corps, andarmy. And then it became apparent that the present maintenance and supply concept wasnot adequate.Out of the ashes came ROCID,ROCAD, and ROTAD, together42

with some refinements of theATFA Corps and Army Aviation companies to form the nucleus of the new organization.As these new TOEs were beingdeveloped, so was the newmaintenance concept.

t was considered necessarythat all direct support units be100 percent mobile, that on-thespot field maintenance be provided the operator, that technical assistance contact party)service be provided the operatoron a dependable scheduled basisby all direct support units, thatorganizational stock levels be reduced to a minimum by providingexpeditious delivery of requirements through a highlyresponsive supply system, andthat maintenance exchange ofaircraft be effected to the maximum extent possible.How things will work:A transportation maintenanceand supply group will providecommand, control and supervision for the five maintenancebattalions within the type fieldarmy.Using outfits will contain aone-day level of spares for organizational maintenance andwill be supplied daily from supporting maintenance units.Third echelon field maintenance and supply support for division and corps aircraft will beprovided by two T AAM ba talions.A direct support battalion consisting of three support companies will provide support fordivision combat aviation companies. An intermediate supportbattalion will consist of four intermediate support companiesto provide support for all aircraft attached to and operating


45/64


in the corps, as well as for therm y headquarters aviation

company.Third echelon field maintenance and supply support forthe cargo helicopter units willbe provided by two transportation aircraft maintenance battalions, each consisting of threecompanies two light cargo helicopter maintenance and onemedium cargo aircraft maintenance) and a supply company.Fourth echelon field maintenance and supply support will beprovided for all aircraft by aTAAM battalion consisting offour companies: one aircraftheavy maintenance, two helicopter heavy maintenance, and onesupply. Fourth echelon companies will maintain a 15-daylevel of spares in support of direct, intermediate, and heavymaintenance companies, in accordance with the appropriatesupply manuals.In overseas areas 5th echelonmaintenance and supply supportwill be provided for all aircraftby a transportation army aircraft depot support battalion,located in the Comm Z with anHand S Company, an aircraftcomponent repair company, andan aircraft repair and overhaulcompany. The depot supply company will maintain a 90-daylevel of spares.Some day, we may g t enoughspark plugs.

Reporting System for ArmyAircraft and for Installed andSpare Engines 1956-57).The Army has come a longway in the past few years in refining the reporting system for

aircraft and engines we had along way to come).The aircraft inventory statusand flying time report AR 710-1500-8) has been refined to greatbenefit. Today we are able toknow within 45 days the statusof operational effectiveness andsupport effectiveness for eachaircraft in the Army; we alsoknow authorizations and assetsof aircraft by serial number

right down to the unit level. Distribution has been improvedthereby. The present reportingsystem has attained accuracyand timeliness, and covers abroad area of supply support,maintenance and operations.A similar system keeps tabson engines. By virtue of it wecontrol distribution, develop better engine failure rates withbetter engine life expectancyfactors, and arrive at betterevaluation of engine logistics.Speed and Endurance Recordsfor Helicopters; In-Flight Refueling 1956).In the spring of 1956 theArmy Aviation Board decided,with commendable initiative, toinvestigate a few unknowns:How fast could a standard helicopter fly and what distancecould it fly at these high speeds?What was the maximum rangethat a standard cargo helicoptercould achieve nonstop carryingits own fuel? How long could ahelicopter be kept in the airwithout any type of maintenance? How long could a crewsustain helicopter flight without rest? And how could therange of the helicopter be extended?

4


46/64


47/64

THE LAST THREE: YEARS OF ARMY AVIATION

At the National Air Show inSeptember 1956 at OklahomaCity, a Sioux helicopter took offwith the intent of staying airborne throughout the entire AirShow. Did it, too. The crewswere changed every four hoursby bringing the helicopter to ahover and changing the crewone man at a time without permitting the aircraft to touch theground. It was refueled fromthe hover. Flown by eight pilotsthe helicopter remained aloft for57 hours and 50 minutes, establishing a new endurance recordfor helicopters.All these were thoroughly fineaccomplishments.

Oxygen and De-Icing Equipment on Army Aircraft (1956-57).

Airplane pilots have a well developed built-in aversion for airplanes that gradually and inexorably lose their ability to remain airborne. As a result, deicer boots on the wings and tailand anti-icer slinger rings forthe propellers of Seminoles havebeen created, and a Scott oxygen system is now available tofield units. All have been service tested by the Board. Weightlimitation on the earlier modelL-23s precludes the installationof this stuff, but the B and allD models will be modified.The rebuild program will ultimately provide this equipmentin all of our L-23 type airplanes.

~ m y Airplanes Heavier than5,000 Lbs (1956-57).The objection cited most fre-

quently by Army critics of theMemorandum of UnderstandingRelating to Army Organic A viation was that it limited Armyfixed wing aircraft to 5,000pounds empty weight. Whileconscious that this limitationwas not restrictive on Army intentions when the Memorandumwas signed, the Army staffnevertheless persisted in an effort toward its removal or modification. Interest in the subjectwas intense throughout 1956,highlighted by the JCS studyof the entire Army Aviationprogram.As a matter of principle theArmy staff desired complete removal of the weight limitationand freedom to select whateveraircraft were best suited to theeffective performance of assigned Army functions. Recognizing, however, that some compromise w s necessary toachieve any progress, the staffpressed successively for complete removal, substantial modification, and provision for individual exceptions. After repeated and strong personal representations by the Chief of Staffand the Secretary of the Army,the Secretary of Defense announced in a directive of 26November 19 56 (subsequentlyin a directive of 18 March 1957)that Specific exceptions toweight limitations for specificpurposes may be granted by theSecretary of Defense after coordination of U. S. Army requirements and appropriate U. S.Air Force functions and capabilities.The first exception concernedthe Army's requirement for organic aircraft to transport smallcombat units rapidly from one

45


48/64

MARCH 1958

part of the battle area to another on very short notice andto adapt the supply system generally to the demands of atomicwarfare. Obviously the provision of the necessary aircraftfor these missions was of urgentimportance. Under the originalconcept this was to be accomplished by the family of transport helicopters, but the necessity for economy soon made itevident that helicopters wouldhave to be supplemented by fixedwing aircraft wherever battlefield landing conditions wouldpermit. Obviously lacking was a3-ton payload transport airplanewhich could land and take offfrom small unprepared areasand thus perform some of themissions of the 3-ton helicopter.DeHavilland of Canada had under development a twin enginelight transport (the DHC-4Caribou ) which together withthe Otter would provide theArmy with short field airplanescomparable in payload to thestandard transport helicopters.Citing the long range economiesto be realized, the Army requested and received authorization to procure five DHC-4s forevaluation.The second request for a specific exception concerned a higher performance observation airplane (HPOA). During WorldWar II and the Korean campaign, the Army accomplishedits missions of artillery observation and adjustment with lightairplanes comparable in performance to the L-19. In futurecombat, however, the mobilityof ground units, their dispersalover wide distances, and the interspersion of friendly ndenemy units were expected to46

create situations in which Armyaircraft, either by design oraccident, would fly over enemyareas defended by modern antiaircraft means. Manifestly therewas an urgent need under suchconditions for an improved aircraft to supplement the standard observation type, one whichwould have appreciably greaterspeed while retaining the capability to operate from short unimproved fields. Acknowledgingthe validity of this requirement,and the fact that the Army andMarines had initiated development of an appropriate aircraftwhich would necessarily weighmore than 5,000 pounds, the Secretary of Defense authorized theArmy to continue the development and procure a test quantity of this aircraft.More important than the direct benefits to be realized fromthese exceptions is the fact thatthe Secretary of Defense has indicated clearly that his intent isnot to limit the size of Army aircraft categorically, but rather torequire thorough justificationfor large aircraft.

Electronic Gear (1955-57).In 1953 the Army along withthe other services adopted aplan to convert from VHF toUHF for air-ground communications, and, having adopted it,has been squabbling about itever since. Initially conversionwas to be accomplished by 1July 1956 but lack of equipmentcaused a slippage in the schedule.The services adopted a new dateof 1 July 1958 for conversion,but complete changeover winot come for another year or


49/64


eighteen months. The Army wasthe last of the services to reallygain momentum on the conversion, but now all new productionaircraft are being delivered withUHF radio communications anda retrofit program on in-serviceaircraft will be started in thefuture. By early 1959, Armyshould be completely equippedwith UHF so we can join everybody else jabbering away simultaneously on 255.4) with the exception of areas where other frequency bands are necessary because of the ground equipmentof the particular area.In 1956 the AN ARC-44 FMradio was adopted for airborneuse. This radio nets with theFM channels of Armor, Artillery, and Infantry, performingthe functions previously attempted with little success bythe AN/PRC 8 9 and 10 in airground communication. t shouldbe a real pleasure to be able totalk to people on the groundhereafter, the PRC jobs not having contributed much in this respect.In 1956 and 1957 the Armytested and adopted the ANGRN-6 low frequency radio beacon. t is transportable in a-ton truck or cargo helicopterand can be placed in operationin less than two hours. t operates in the 190 - 500 kc rangeand is used in conj unction withthe ADF for navigation. In 1956and 1957 we adopted the ANARN-59 ARC Type 21) lightweight ADF. t weighs approximately 45 pounds less than theARN-6, which is a comfort, andwill be installed in all new pr

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	aviationspace-history-library
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Army Aviation Digest - Mar 1958

Documents