IMPROVED ANAMORPHIC VIEWING SYSTEM [CONTRACT INSPECTION REPORT]

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: NGA Records (Formerly NIMA)
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78B04770A000400020023-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 28, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 8, 2004
• Sequence Number: 23
• Publication Date: December 20, 1966
• Content Type: FORM

X1
X1
lliSECRET LI CONFIDENTIAL ohi c
fl
UNCLASSIFIED
4 Appruved Fu Icte 2O04I1130 .
CONTRACT INS T I ON REPORT
AC .
TASK NO.
A
TO:
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION & SETTLEMENT
BRANCH/PD/OL
DATE
Pa Deceraboar
INSPECTION REPORT NO. (If1566 final, so state)
11
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE
1 February 1c47
NAME OF CONTRACTOR .
Declass Review by NCA.
TYPE OF COMMODITY OR SERVICE
Improved Anamorphic Viewing System
THE CONTRACTOR IS ON SCHEDULE
YES
In
NO
THE CONTRACTOR WILL PROBABLY REMAIN WITHIN ALLOCATED
FUNDS 0 YES Fi NO IF ANSWER IS "NO" ADVISE REC-
OMMENDATION AND OR ACTION OF SPONSORING OFFICE. ON
REVERSE HEREOF. IF KNOWN. INDICATE MAGNITUDE OF AD-
DITIONAL FUNDS INVOLVED.
PER CENT OF WORK COMPLETED -
4
PER CENT OF FUNDS EXPENDED - .4 2 Dec. 66
HAS AN INTERIM REPORT. FINAL REPORT, PROTOTYPE. OR OTHER END ITEM BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE CONTRACTOR
DURING THE PERIOD? YES NO (If yes, give details on reverse side.)
HAS GOVERNMENT-OWNED PROP TY BEEN DELIVERED TO CONTRACTOR DURING THIS PERIOD? YES
(If yes, indicate items, quantity, and cost on reverse side.)
11
NO
INCENTIVES
IS THIS AN INCENTIVE CONTRACT YES
IF YES. CHECK TYPE
COST 0 AFWEAERO fl_ PERFORMANCE
9
III NO
111 DELIVERY
NOTE:
USE REVERSE SIDE FOR COMMENTS.
FINAL REPORT MUST CONTAIN INCENTIVE EVALUATION.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTOR
1. OUTSTANDING 4.
2. EXCELLENT S.
3. VERY GOOD 6.
IF OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTOR
REASONS ON REVERSE SIDE.
14
ABOVE AVERAGE 7. UNSATISFACTORY
AVERAGE
MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE
IS UNSATISFACTORY OR MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE INDICATE
RECOMMENDED ACT ION
FORM
RECEIVED.
X
CONTINUE AS PROGRAMMED WITHHOLD PAYMENT PENDING
SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE
TERMINATE El OTHER (Specify)
IF TERMINATION IS RECOMMENDED OR IF THIS IS A FINAL REPORT PUT COMMENTS ON REVERSE IN NARRATIVE
ON CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE AND CERTIFY THAT ALL DELIVERABLE ITEMS UNDER THE CONTRACT HAVE BEEN
THESE INCLUDE. WHERE APPLICABLE, THE FOLLOWING:
ITEM
RECD
DOES NOT
APPLY ,
ITEM
RECD
DOES NOT
APPLY
PROTOTYPES
MANUALS
DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FINAL REPORT
PRODUCTION AND/OR OTHER
END ITEMS
SPECIAL TOOLING
OTHER GOVrRNMENT PROPERTY
DATE OF LAST CONTACT WITH CONTRACTOR
16 December 1966
SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
DIVISION
,--
I
41????
F
Approved For Release 2004/11/30 : CIA-RDP78604770A000400020023-2
8 66 If :.g.?if::11.),S
AL
(12-36)
5
X1
X1
X1
X1
OSECRET q[CONFIDENTIAL ['UNCLASSIFIED
5P78604770A000400020023-2
INTERIM ? 0 FINAL
Approved For Release 2004/11/30 : CIA-R
NARRATIVE REPORT
Inspection Visit of 16 December 196G:
1. Attendees
a.
b.
C.
CL.
on
2. supplied the information
that expended expended
this effort as
of 2 December 196G end expects
to complete the project
for an
estimated cost
of He VUB again instructed
to submit his information
to the contracting
officer.
3. The assembled eyepieces were inppected and found to be quite satis-
factory with the following exceptions:
a. There was vignetting or a non uniform image transmission at the
edge of the field of view. This can be corrected by alignment of the
lower peahen prism.
b. The anamorDhic magnification control moves too freely in that
it can drift when released. The friction within the control (Drag) will
be increased to eliminate the drift.
c. The instrument had not been optically aligned and some optical
runout copeared upon rotation of the anamorphic axis control. Optical
alignment will eliminate this Problem.
A. A ghost image appears in the field of view. The rechan prisms
will tv;',..4 to be modified slightly to eliminate this difficulty.
e. This system, like the original anamorphic eyepieces, has slight
field curvature (Downward in the middle of the field of view).
claims this cta!-t be eliminated.
. f. The anamorphic magnification scale was not accurate. When the
scale indicated an anamorphic magnification of 2.0 the actual magnifi-
cation was 2.175 or almost a 9% error.. Eecanse of this large error'
the scale will have to be re-engraved.
g. It is impossible to perfectly superimpose grids in the object
& eyepiece planes. I Palms this is due to the nechan prism mis-
alignment and will be corrected upon their alignment.
4. The following measurements were made and recorded.
a. Resolution (Resolution target with 25 LP/MM Steps)
OPTICAL TRAIN
f. - RIGHT OPTICAL TRAIN
W/o Anamorphics
With Anamorphics
M/o Anamorphics With Anamorphics
on axis 125 LP/MM
150*
150 150
.77field100
125*
150
125
The only explanation for this increase in resolving power is the
7ossibi1ity of some optical correction of the Zoom 70 by the anamorphic
eyenieces.
b. rilunination. The anamorphic eyepieces in combination with the
Zoom 70 transmit 42% of the light that is transmitted by the Zoom TO
without the eyepieces. When the anamorphic magnification is increased
to the maximum setting this transmission factor is reduced to 25%.
i8
25
uNcussevingyed F elease 2004/111114bffiellftp1170B04 000400020023-2 0 SECRET
X1
Approved FilleeNHONIARDP78B04.000400020023-2
CONTRACT IN ON REPORT Continued
e. Interpupilary Distance. The measured distance varies
from 52 to 89 MM.
5. 1----lbelieve8 tbat manufacturing the peahen priame out of water
white glass will improve the intensity and color of the transmitted
Ugkt but this investigation probably will not be undertaken under this
contract.
6. laimination of the above mentioned problems will require about 3
weeks. An inspection visit is planned for early January 1967.
Approved Foreaa
? In
N1TACIA-RDP78B04770A000400020023-2