PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM IN DIFFUSION VOLUME I

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 269
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 28, 2014
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: July 1, 1958
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH PAPERS
No. 59
STAT
STAT
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM
IN DIFFUSION'
VOLUME I
EDITED BY
MORTON L. BARAD
JULY 1958
? ? "...No, ewa ?
?
GEOPHYSICS RESEARCH DIRECTORATE
AIR FORCE CAMBRIDGE RESEARCH CENTER -
AIR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
BEDFORD, MASSACHUSETTS
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
STAT
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Ii
rf).
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH PAPERS
No. 59
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS,
A FIELD PROGRAM IN DIFFUSION
Volume I
Edited by
MORTON L. BARAD
July 1958
Project 7657
Atmospheric Analysis Laboratory
GEOPHYSICS RESEARCH DIRECTORATE
AIR FORCE CAMBRIDGE RESEARCH CENTER
AIR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
Bedford, Mass.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
4
PREFACE
During the Summer of 1956, sixty scientists, technicians,
and test support personnel participated in an experimental pro-
gram in micrometeorology. This program, nicknamed Project
Prairie Grass, was conducted in north-central Nebraska near the
town of O'Neill. Four universities and two government agencies
participated in the field program, which was conceived and di-
rected by personnel of the Atmospheric Analysis Laboratory of
the Geophysics Research Directorate, Air Force Cambridge Re-
search Center. The participants represented Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology, Texas A&M Research Foundation, University
of Washington, University of Wisconsin, Air Weather Service, and
units of the Air Force Cambridge Research Center.
The primary objective in Project Prairie Grass was to de-
termine the rate of diffusion of a tracer gas as a function of
meteorological conditions. The purposes of this paper are (1) to
describe the equipment and procedures used in dispensing and
sampling of the gas, analysing gas samples, measuring meteoro-
logical parameters, and reducing and processing data; and (2) to
present tabulations of the data collected. It is not the intention
here to present analyses of the data, evaluate existing diffusion
models, or develop new models. Such analyses have been initi-
ated by the research teams that participated in Project Prairie
Grass and by other research groups under contract with the
Geophysics Research Directorate. It is expected that their find-
ings will be published in professional journals and in contract
reports. It is hoped that other scientists, using the material con-
tamed in this report,will also undertake studies of the diffusion
problem.
This report is being presented in three volumes to facilitate
reading of text and use of data. Volume I contains an introductory
111
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
chapter which provides a background of the field program. Chap-
ter 2 contains a description, by Texas A&M personnel, of the field
site at O'Neill. The surface weather observations made by the
Texas A&M group are presented in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 contains
the surface synoptic charts prepared by GRD personnel. A de-
scription of the diffusion technique as well as tabulations of the
diffusion data are presented in Chapter 5 by MIT personnel. Chap-
ter 6 includes a description of the instrumentation used by MIT
to measure wind speed and direction parameters, as well as tab-
ulations of the wind data.
Volume II opens in Chapter 7 with a description of the in-
strumentation used by the Texas A&M group to determine .mean
profiles of air temperature, soil temperature, and wind speed as
well as other terms necessary in calculating the heat budget at
the air-earth interface. Chapter 8 includes the profile data col-
lected during the test periods as well as during other periods
during the summer. In Chapter 9, Texas A&M scientists describe
a method of computing heat budget terms and present a tabulation
of such terms for the test periods. Another technique for deter-
mining the heat budget terms was employed by a University of
Wisconsin team. Their technique and computed heat budget terms
appear in Chapter 10. A technique of determining temperature
profiles by optical methods is being developed by research
workers at the University of Washington. A description of the
optical method technique and the data collected at O'Neill are
presented in Chapter 11. The rawinsonde data collected by Air
Weather Service personnel and edited by GRD personnel are
presented in Chapter 12. This volume concludes with a descrip-
tion by GRID personnel of the instrumentation and techniques used
in airplane observations of temperature and humidity; and the data
collected during the gas releases are tabulated.
Volume III is not expected to be ready for publication before
iv
the end of 1958. Present plans for this volume call for presenting
(1) descriptions of the bi-vane anemometry employed by MIT in
the measurement of eddy components for determining turbulence
spectra and scales of turbulence; descriptions of the procedures
employed by Iowa State College in reducing bi-vane data, and by
GRD in computing spectra and scales of turbulence; and (2) de-
scriptions of the sonic anemometry employed by the University of
Wisconsin in determining turbulence spectra. The spectra and
scale data will also be presented in Volume III.
The people who participated in Project Prairie Grass are to
be congratulated for the diligence and efficiency they exhibited
during the planning for and the performance of the field experi-
ments and during the preparation of this report. They are to be
commended for a spirit of cooperation, so necessary in making
the program a successful one. A list of the participants follows:
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Round Hill Field Station
Robert Carr
Harrison E. Cramer
George Fontes
Harry V. Geary, Jr.
John Luby
John E. Luby, Jr.
Richard Ormerod
James H. Peers
Frank A. Record
Harry C. Vaughan
O'Neill, Nebraska
Max Bohn
Richard Bohn
Lloyd Fusselman
James Hoffman
Gary Holly
Merle Krugman
Mike Liddy
Robert Loomer
Marvin Miller
Ronald Murphy
James Reynolds on
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
O'Neill, Nebraska (cont)
Richard Smithson
James Tomlinson
Bruce Weier
Robert Young
TEXAS A&M RESEARCH FOUNDATION
W. Covey
M. H. Halstead
S. Hillman
J. D. Merryman
R. L. Richman
A. H. York
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
Robert G. Fleagle
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
G. Ettenheim
F. Hatch
P. M. Kuhn
M. Santos
P. Schoffer
V. E. Suomi
AIR FORCE CAMBRIDGE RESEARCH CENTER
Morton L. Barad
Peter A. Giorgio
Patricic J. Harney
James F. Murphy
Lt. E. E. Clark
Lt. Robert P. Ely
Lt. George A. Sexton
Lt. Donald W. Stevens
A/lc Joseph H. Driever
A/lc Joseph Hess
A/lc John I. Knutila
A/lc Richard T. McGeehan
A/2c Joseph J. Hanley
A/2c William J. Kostic
A/2c Jon Miller
vi
,4
=El
AIR WEATHER SERVICE (6th Weather Squadron, 4th Weather
Group)
S/Sgt D. C. Hedegard
A/lc H. D. Hanson
A/lc H. C. McIlrath
A/lc E. Shidel
A/lc P. E. Stoltenberg
A/2c R. Hall
A/2c C. G. Thorp
Our thanks go to the residents of O'Neill, Nebraska for their
valuable assistance in the solution of a variety of problems which
arose in the course of the field program.
Morton L. Barad
Geophysics Research Directorate
vii
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
1
ABSTRACT
Project Prairie Grass was a field program designed to pro-
vide experimental data on the diffusion of a tracer gas over a
range of 800 meters. In each of 70 experiments the gas was re-
leased continuously for 10 minutes at a source located near ground
level. The gas releases were made over a flat prairie in Nebraska
under a variety of meteorological conditions during July and
August of 1956.
This paper includes a brief history of the project and de-
tailed descriptions of the tracer technique and the meteorological
equipment used in the field program. Tabulations of the diffusion
data and the meteorological data collected during the gas releases
are also presented. In addition, this paper contains data on the
heat budget at the air-earth interface during other selectedperiods
during the Summer of 1956.
ix
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
c
CONTENTS
VOLUME I
Chapter
Preface iii
Abstract ix
Illustrations xiii
Tables xv
1. Introduction 1
2. A Description of the Field Site in Pro-
ject Prairie Grass 8
3. Surface Weather Observations 16
4. Synoptic Information 20
5. Diffusion Measurements during Project
Prairie Grass 57
6. Slow-response Meteorological Observa-
tions during Project Prairie Grass 202
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
?
e.
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure page
1.1 Topography of Field Site and Layout of Equip-
ment 6
2.1 View Looking Southwest from Center of Obser-
vation Line at North Side of Site 9
4.1-4.36 Sectional Sea-Level Pressure Maps 21
5.1 Schematic Diagram of Sulfur-Dioxide Generator 59
5.2 Field Installation of Sulfur-Dioxide Generating
Apparatus 60
5.3 Release-Point for the Tracer 60
5.4 Midget Impinger Mounted on Steel Fence Post 63
5.5 Close-Up of Midget Impinger in Operation 63
5.6 Vacuum Unit Used to Aspirate Midget Impingers 65
5.7 Tower Array at 100-m Arc 65
5.8 Close-Up of Impinger Installation on Tower 66
5.9, Exterior of Laboratory Building 68
5.10 Filling Impingers with Solution 68
5.11 Shelves for Storage of Impinger Baskets 68
5.12 Analysis Team Determining Conductance of Aspi-
rated Solutions 69
5.13 Calibration Curve Showing Specific Conductance
as Function of Normality and Concentration 71
5.14 Apparatus for Determining Collection Efficiency 71
5.15 Collection Efficiencies of Midget Impingers 72
6.1 Cup Anemometer Assembly- 203
6.2 Azimuth Vance Assembly 203
6.3 Azimuth Wind-Direction Vane and Recorder
Installation . 203
6.4 Wiring Diagram for Azimuth Wind-Direction
Assembly 206
6.5 Wiring Diagram for Remote Operation of Record-
ers 206 -
S.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Number
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.1
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
6.1
6.2
TABLES
Page
Values of Bulk Density 10
Values of Albedo 11
General Weather 12
Values of Soil Moisture as Percent Dry Weight 14
Values of Heat Capacity Per Unit Volume 15
Surface Weather Observations at Gas Release
Times 17
Source Strengths Q Expressed in g sec-1 for
Individual Prairie Grass Diffusion Experi-
ments 78-
Ten-Minute Average Gas Concentrations Meas-
ured During Project Prairie Grass 79
Ten-Minute Average Gas Concentrations Meas-
ured Along the Vertical 193
Correction Factors by which Concentration Data
Should be Multiplied to Compensate for Evap-
orational Loss of Impinger Solution during
Aspiration 200
Summary of Slow-Response Meteorological
Measurements 209
Frequency Distributions of Azimuth Wind Direc-
tion 215
XV
Declassified in Part: Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM IN DIFFUSION
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
M. L. Barad
Geophysics Research Directorate
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
Project Prairie Grass is the name given to a field program con-
ducted near O'Neill, Nebraska during the Summer of 1956. The main
objective in this program was to learn how the diffusion of a tracer
gas emitted continuously at a point source near ground level varies with
meteorological conditions. This report contains descriptions of the
techniques and procedures employed in the program and summaries of
the data collected. The purpose in this introductory chapter is to
present an account of the historical background of Project Prairie
Grass in order that the reader may understand why the research was
undertaken and why certain techniques were employed in the field
program.
There is little doubt that advances made in diffusion theory and
experimentation directly aid in solving a number of practical problems
in the atmospheric boundary layer. In the field of air pollution abate-
ment, for example, advances made in diffusion research lead to more
intelligent choices of plant location, design of plant buildings and stacks,
periods of stack emission, etc. In the field of crop spraying, as another
example, progress made through diffusion studies leads to better se-
lection of spray altitudes, spray periods, etc.
There are, however, a number of other boundary layer problems
which can also be brought nearer to solution by the insight gained
through diffusion research. To solve such problems as the forecasting'
NOTE: Editor's manuscript approved 6 May 1958
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
of fog, frost, or low-level wind shear, for example, an increased
understanding of the basic mixing processes at work in the lower at-
mosphere is necessary. In attempts to understand these processes,
investigators have studied the diurnal and height variations of turbu-
lent fluxes of momentum, heat, and water vapor. Although these fluxes
can be measured at a number of points in space, research workers
generally find it difficult to interpret such measurements. Though one
may have some success in describing the region through which the
property is transported, he is usually at a loss to quantitatively define
the source of the property. However, if a distinctive tracer is introduced
into the atmosphere at a source which can be precisely defined as to
location and strength and if concentrations of this tracer are measured
downwind from this source, a means is provided of gaining greater
insight into the basic mixing mechanism present in the atmosphere.
It is not surprising then that micrometeorologists and hydrodynam-
icists interested in turbulence phenomena should apply general
hypotheses to the development of diffusion theory and should seek to
employ data from diffusion experiments to test their diffusion hy-
potheses. Diffusion theory and experimentation, then, provide more
than solutions to specific air pollution problems; they provide a means
of improving our understanding of turbulence phenomena.
In this analysis of the situation, the chain of activity goes from
general turbulence hypotheses to a specific diffusion hypothesis to
experimental verification. A study of the literature reveals that much
work has been done, particularly in the past 25 years, in the develop-
ment of general turbulence and diffusion hypotheses. However, very
little has been done in the collection of accurate diffusion data with
which to test the diffusion hypotheses.
In January of 1953, a number of university and government
scientists engaged in micrometeorological research assembled in
Boston to participate in the planning of the Great Plains Turbulence
Field Program, a program held later that year near O'Neill, Nebraska.'
2
4
?
Although the participants at this planning session were prepared to
make-a variety of meteorological measvrements, ho one was prepared
to make quantitative measurements of diffusion. It seemed that none of
the participants had both a satisfactory tracer technique and the equip-
ment necessary to collect tracer sainples in a dense network of stations.
At this point the Geophysics Research Directorate decided to sup-
port the development of a tracer technique which would be suitable for
studying diffusion rates over a range of about 1 km when the tracer
was emitted continuously at a fixed point near ground level. Actually,
the development of two tracer techniques was supported. The first
involved the use of tritiated ethane, a radioactive tracer.2 Because of
the relatively high costs in manpower and material which would have
been imposed if this technique had been used, it was shelved in favor
of the second technique, developed by MIT at its Round Hill Field
Station.* This technique called for the use of sulfur dioxide as the
tracer.
It will be noted that the tracer technique was developed for con-
tinuous emission. Historically, theoretical work usually starts with
diffusion from an instantaneous point source, with the growth of a small
puff of smoke, for example, and then proceeds by integration to other
sources such as the continuous source, line sources, etc. Yet, his-
torically, most of'the experimental work has begun with the continuous
point source. There appear to be at least three reasons for preferring
the continuous source over the instantaneous one. .First, the engineering
of the continuous source with reproducible characteristics, experiment
after experiment, is generally simpler. Second, the statistical inter-
pretation of the concentration measurements at downwind stations is
simpler, particularly where time-mean concentrations are found, as
they were in Project Prairie Grass. Third, the determination of what
constitutes pertinent meteorological data and the provision of such data
*See Chapter 5 for a description of the technique developed by MIT.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
are generally simpler. For these reasons, principally, a continuous
source was chosen for Project Prairie Grass.
In the diffusion experiments an emission time of 10 minutes was
chosen. This time was a compromise, arrived at after considering
such factors as the cost of tracer gas, practical rates of emission,
distance between the samplers closest to the source and the most
distant ones, and desirability of having fairly stable time-mean dif-
fusion patterns in the area downwind from the source.
In experiments of this sort, it is desirable that the cost of tracer
material be low and that the tracer can be emitted at a fairly constant
rate. It is desirable that tracer losses on ground, vegetation, and
other surfaces in the area sampled be negligibly low. It is desirable
that the sampling rate for each sampler be constant throughout an
experiment and that this rate be uniform from sampler to sampler.
If the measurements are to be used to evaluate existing hypotheses or
to construct new models, it is important that there be an adequately
dense network of samplers. Therefore, if hundreds of samplers are
to be exposed at one time and if spares are to be available, the
samplers must be relatively inexpensive. It is necessary that the
analysis of samples be accurate, cover a wide range of concentrations,
and be accomplished in relatively short time. It is believed that the
diffusion technique developed by MIT meets these requirements very
well.
By the Spring of 1955, a decision was made to shift the experi-
mental program from the Round Hill Field S.tation of MIT to a site
which would permit the collection of sulfur dioxide samples over
greater downwind distances and over more uniform terrain and vege-
tation. A section of land near O'Neill, Nebraska was chosen as the site
of the field program.*
*The land leased was Section 14, Township 29 North, Range 11 West,
Holt County, Nebraska.
4
The square mile chosen had the following characteristics:
1. It was a fairly flat area, as Figure 1.1 indicates. The
contour lines shown in Figure 1.1 are for 1-foot intervals.
The gas source was located at the center of five concen-
tric semicircles having radii of 50, 100, 200, 400, and
800 meters. North of the E-W line passing through the
source, the topography is very flat, being within+ 3 feet
of the mean elevation in that part of the section:- The
topography rises gently to the southwestwith an average
grade of about 10 feet per half-mile, and to the south-
east with an average grade of about 20 feet per half-mile.
2. Logistical and technical considerations had led to the
decision to sample the gas on semicircular arcs rather
than on full circular arcs. In a study of the wind cli-
matology of the O'Neill area, it was found that wind di-
rections between 120' and 240' occur more than5Opercent
of the time in July and August. On this basis, primarily,
the sampling grid was laid out as shown in Figure 1.1.
3. The vegetative cover was fairly uniform as to grass
type. The "hayfield" was mowed prior to the experiments,
and since there was little precipitation during the months
of July and August, the grass height was fairly uniform
during the program.
4. The site was relatively free of obstructions to air
flow. Most of the equipment used in dispensing the gas
was placed in a dugout 50 m upwind of the actual source.
A laboratory building and three Jamesway huts were
erected over 300 m east-southeast of the source. With
the exception of cup anemometers and wind vanes
mounted.on wooden posts near the source and 450 m
north of the source, the meteorological equipment,
trailers, and Jamesway huts were all located on the ob-
servation line, downwind of the 800 m sampling arc.
5. The nearest farmhouse was over 1300 m north-
west of the source. As a result, there were no com-
plaints from nonparticipants about the gas which, on a
few occasions, was pungent on the observation line,
about 900 m from the source.
6. Stable a-c power was brought to various points in the
field. The overhead power line starting at Opportunity
Road is shown in Figure 1.1.
The O'Neill area had other advantages: friendly and cooperative
townspeople, an airport, and adequate housing.
In diffusion experiments of the type conducted at O'Neill, it is
5
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
?Art.
are generally simpler. For these reasons, principally, a continuous
source was chosen for Project Prairie Grass.
In the diffusion experiments an emission time of 10 minutes was
chosen. This time was a compromise, arrived at after considering
such factors as the cost of tracer gas, practical rates of emission,
distance between the samplers closest to the source and the most
distant ones, and desirability of having fairly stable time-mean dif-
fusion patterns in the area downwind from the source.
In experiments of this sort, it is desirable that the cost of tracer
material be low and that the tracer can be emitted at a fairly constant
rate. It is desirable that tracer losses on ground, vegetation, and
other surfaces in the area sampled be negligibly low. It is desirable
that the sampling rate for each sampler be constant throughout an
experiment and that this rate be uniform from sampler to sampler.
If the measurements are to be used to evaluate existing hypotheses or
to construct new models, it is important that there be an adequately
dense network of samplers. Therefore, if hundreds of samplers are
to be exposed at one time and if spares are to be available, the
samplers must be relatively inexpensive. It is necessary that the
analysis of samples be accurate, cover a wide range of concentrations,
and be accomplished in relatively short time. It is believed that the
diffusion technique developed by MIT meets these requirements very
well.
By the Spring of 1955, a decision was made to shift the experi-
mental program from the Round Hill Field Station of MIT to a site
which would permit the collection of sulfur dioxide samples over
greater downwind distances and over more uniform terrain and vege-
tation. A section of land near O'Neill, Nebraska was chosen as the site
of the field program.*
*The land leased was Section 14, Township 29 North, Range 11 West,
Holt County, Nebraska.
4
The square mile chosen had the following characteristics:
1. It was a fairly flat area, as Figure 1.1 indicates. The
contour lines shown in Figure 1.1 are for 1-foot intervals.
The gas source was located at the center of five concen-
tric semicircles having radii of 50, 100, 200, 400, and
800 meters. North of the E-W line passing through the
source, the topography is very flat, beingwithin+ 3 feet
of the mean elevation in that part of the section:- The
topography rises gently to the southwestwith an average
grade of about 10 feet per half-mile, and to the south-
east with an average grade of about 20 feet per half-mile.
2. Logistical and technical considerations had led to the
decision to sample the gas on semicircular arcs rather
than on full circular arcs. In a study of the wind cli-
matology of the O'Neill area, it was found that wind di-
rections between 120' and 240' occur more than 50percent
of the time in July and August. On this basis, primarily,
the sampling grid was laid out as shown in Figure 1.1.
3. The vegetative cover was fairly uniform as to grass
type. The "hayfield" was mowed prior to the experiments,
and since there was little precipitation during the months
of July and August, the grass height was fairly uniform
during the program.
4. The site was relatively free of obstructions to air
flow. Most of the equipment used in dispensing the gas
was placed in a dugout 50 m upwind of the actual source.
A laboratory building and three Jamesway huts were
erected over 300 m east-southeast of the source. With
the exception of cup anemometers and wind vanes
mounted.on wooden posts near the source and 450 m
north of the source, the meteorological equipment,
trailers, and Jamesway huts were all located on the ob-
servation line, downwind of the 800 m sampling arc.
5. The nearest farmhouse was over 1300 m north-
west of the source. As a result, there were no com-
plaints from nonparticipants about the gas which, on a
few occasions, was pungent on the observation line,
about 900 m from the source.
6. Stable a-c power was brought to various points in the
field. The overhead power line starting at Opportunity
Road is shown in Figure 1.1.
The O'Neill area had other advantages: friendly and cooperative
townspeople, an airport, and adequate housing.
In diffusion experiments of the type conducted at O'Neill, it is
5
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
OPPORTUNITY R
? A
1 (11
?,/
,
/
/
/
/
E
x
F x -
/ .
1980
D
it
..... ..,
\
0
0
\
\
/
/ V
,
/
/ /
,
N
N \
\
\
a \ ,
/ /
I /
I
/
i
...
\ \
-. \ \
1
1
1
1
1
GAS SOURCE
NO
N
L
,--
,
19 5
198
1985
iii
? ? ?
I99p-----------j%
1 LEGEND loom
A-Ml T HUT E-TEXAS A GM HUT i-U OF WISCONSIN TRAILER
8-GUARD HUT F-TEXAS A 8 M TRAILER K-AWS TRUCK
C-HEADQUARTERS HUT G-MIT TRUCK L-LABORATORY
D-AWS RAWINSONDE ANTENNA H-U OF WISCONSIN HUT M NO-MIT HUTS
00
Figure 1.1 Topography of field site and layout of equipment
6
considered essential that a number of meteorological measurements
be made to characterize the experiments and to provide measurements
of parameters required for evaluating diffusion models calling for the
use of these parameters. Thus, in the Prairie Grass experiments,
many of the ineasurements were suggested by existing diffusion hy-
potheses. For example, the Sutton hypothesis calls for determining
wind profile and gustiness parameters. The Calder-Deacon hypotheses
suggest the determination of wind profile parameters and, in implying
that the Richardson Number or stability ratio is useful, suggest the
measurement of temperature profile. The works of Inoue and Ogura
suggest the determination of turbulence spectra and scales of tur-
bulence. Other meteorological measurements were made because
there was some evidence that they might be called for in new diffusion
models or in the forecasting of diffusion patterns from limited
meteorological data.
For the meteorological measurements to be useful, past history in
experimental micrometeorology has shown that they must be repre-
sentative and very accurate. It was the overall impression of the
biased participating scientists, as well as those who visited the field
program, that the meteorological measurements which accompanied
the diffusion experiments were of very high caliber.
REFERENCES
1. Lettau, H. H. and Davidson, B., "Exploring the Atmosphere's
First Mile," Pergamon Press Inc., N. Y. (1957)
2. "Development of a Tracer Technique," Final Report, Contract
No. AF19(604)-1045, Tracerlab, Inc. (1955)
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
7
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-
CHAPTER 2
A DESCRIPTION OF THE FIELD SITE
IN PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS
R. L. Richman* and W. Covey
Texas A&M Research Foundation
The observation site was an extensive, virtually level field pre-
viously used to pasture cattle. The field was uncultivated and covered
with native prairie grasses. Prior to the first observation period, the
grass was mowed and little growth occurred thereafter due to arid
climatic conditions.
2.1 Location
The experimental site was located about five miles northeast of
the center of O'Neill, Nebraska. Geographical coordinates are Lati-
tude, 42? 29.6' North; Longitude, 98? 34.3' West; altitude at gas source,
1980 feet above mean sea level.
2.2 Landscape
The field is part of a nearly-level upland. The land rises moder-
ately to the southeast to a hill about 0.6 miles from the gas source.
There is no surface drainage pattern at all. Rain water soaks into the
soil immediately, or accumulates in small depressions until it all in-
filtrates or evaporates. The drainage pattern of Redbird Creek (a
tributary of the Niobrara River) has advanced southward to within
about a mile of the site. To the west, south, and east, there are not
even intermittent streams for several miles.
From the site, then, except for carefully placed project equipment,
one has an unobstructed view for miles (Figure 2.1). Since there are
no hills or mountains in the distance, there is no distinct horizon.
Toward the southeast the hill forms a visibility mask at 1.5 miles. The
unobstructed view is felt only when distant thunderstorms, etc., are
observed. Otherwise, there is nothing to see in the distance.
*Present affiliation: U. S. Navy Electronics Laboratory
8
?
?
Figure 2.1 View looking southwest from center of observation line
at north side of site. Photograph taken in mid-August
Land is laid out in mile-square fields, with a farmstead on many
of these "country blocks." There was one farmstead, with its cluster
of buildings and trees, about 1300 meters northwest of the gas source.
2.3 Soil
The site was in a hayfield on O'Neill loam,, upland phase.' This
soil has a black, top soil about 25 cm thick. It is loose and friable,
and with profuse grass roots forms a tough sod. Organic matter
content was determined to be 4 percent. The top soil is underlain by a
brown subsoil, about 20 cm thick. Both these layers have good water-
holding capacity. From a 45-cm depth to 60 cm, there is a light brown
layer of compacted soil. Soil particles are plate-like and horizontal,
and this layer is very difficult to cut into from above. However, a
small clod of this material may easily be crumbled by lateral com-
pression. Through this compacted layer, few grass roots penetrate.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
9
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-
There are decayed roots, up to 1 cm diameter, of shrubs which once
grew here and which did penetrate this layer to the sand below.-
Below. the compacted layer, from a 60-cm depth to at least a
120-cm depth, the soil is a loose, coarse sand with much gravel.
Water held.here is only very slowly available to the grass, because
few roots penetrate to the sand and water movement upward through
the sand and the compacted layer is extremely slow.
Bulk densities of the soil were determined on 10 July, 16 July,
6 August, and 29 August near the Texas A&M instrumentation location.
The best values, in grams of dry soil material per cubic centimeter of
the natural soil, are given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1.
Values of bulk density
DE PTH
BULK DENSITY
(cm)
(gm/cm3)
0 -10
1.05
10-20
1.15
20-30
1.25
30-40
1.34
40-50
1.35
50-60
1.36
60-70'
1.41
70-80
1.47
80-90
1.54
90- 100
1.60
2.4 Vegetation
The wild hay was cut on 28 June. Through July and August, the
field was dominated by the brown stubble 5 to 6 cm high, with some
sparse stubble up to 20 cm high. After a rain, the field had a greenish
brown appearance for a day or two. This was due to a short, fine,
green grass coming up, and to the greening of some species of brown-
ish grass that was still alive. Growth of the vegetation, as a whole,
was slight, and the amount of dead and living plants standing up
remained fairly constant. In late August, scattered, small, green
10
3
?
shrubs became more conspicuous. These shrubs attained a height of
approximately 18 centimeters.
There were a few small prickly pears in the field. There was
scarcely any litter of plant material lying loose on top of the soil. Dried
and weathered cakes of cow dung were spread about rather evenly, about
one per three square meters.
2.5 Albedo
Measurements of albedo on 10-11 July; 24-25-26 July; and 8-9
August show that the albedo is lowest at solar noon? and greater near
sunrise and sunset. Average values for those days are given in
Table 2.2.
Table 2.2. Values of albedo
TIME (CST)
ALBEDO
0605
0.331
0705
&
1805
.254
0805
&
1705
.212
0905
&
1605
.203
1005
&
1505
.190
1105
&
1405
.187
1205
&
1305
0.184
The albedo varies somewhat with solar angle, cloudiness, moisture
on the grass, and changes in the vegetation with time.
2.6 General Weather
Precipitation was measured daily from 29 June through 28 August.
Maximum and minimum instrument shelter temperatures were meas-
ured from 10 July onward. These data-are given in Table 2.3. On most
of the days that precipitation occurred, one or more huge thunderstorms
were visible from the site. These were accompanied by many cloud-to-
ground lightning flashes. No lightning strikes near the site were ob-
served, although electrical interference sometimes halted the use of the
thermoelectric temperature measuring system. The only hail storm
of the summer, with hailstones about 2 cm in diameter, occurred on
29 June.
11
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
?????? ?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 2.3. General weather
Maximum Minimum
Temperature Temperature Precipitation
(?F) (?F) (in.)
? Notes
29 June
-
-
0.58
Hail 2 cm in diameter
30
-
-
.00
1 July
-
-
.23
2
-
-
.00
3
-
-
.00
4
-
-
.21
5
-
-
.00
6
-
-
.00
7
-
-
.00
8
-
-
.00
9
-
-
.00
10
90.0
51.0
.00
Moisture determination
11
96.1
69.2
.00
12
89.7
60.4
.01
13
88.0
59.6
.00
14
98.8
64.9
.08
15
85.0
64.4
.00
16
87.1
60.3
.00
Moisture determination
17
90.9
57.2
.00
18
87.0
60.3
.21
19
77.7
55.6
.04
20
81.6
50.9
.00
21
*
52.0
.00
22
*
*
.00
23
92.0
*
.00
24
890
65.0
.00
25
96.0
55.0
.00
26
103.9
69.8
.00
27
88.8
69.6
.00
28
78.3
60.4
.00
29
85.8
57.2
.00-
30
95.8
69.0
.03
31
69.2
64.2
.04
1 August
81.5
63.9
.32
2
92.8
67.8
.08
3
96.8
69.0
.19
4
90.0
69.2
.11
5
93.1
58.3
0.00
*Thermometers were not reset.
12
le
Table 2.3.
(cont.)
Maximum Minimum
Temperature Temperature Precipitation
(?B') (?F) (in.)
Notes
6 August
88.2
63.0
0.06
Moisture determination
7
89.8
61.0
.00
8
89.0
59.4
.04
9
89.9
58.5
.01
10
84 .9
ga n
uv.v
.04
kr?
11
84.5
57.7
.00
? ?
Z.;
12
90.0
63.5
.01
13
93.0
60.0
.00
14
96.2
66.0
.00
15
100.0
54.1
.25
16
86.9
65.5
.00
17
83.2
66.0
.00
18
68.0
56.0
.20
19
72.0
43.7
.00
20
73.8
49.7
.00
'21' '
88.3
46.2
.00
22
95.9
51.6
? .00
23
90.4
56.3
.00
24
92.8
48.9
.00
25
95.5
58.0
.00
26
99.8
67.0
.00
27
95.5
58.4
.01
28
94.1
58.7
0.00
, ..
29
-
50.3
-
Moisture determination
, ,..
?
2.7 Soil Moisture
Soil moisture was generally deficient, and no crop of hay was
produced after the mowing in late June. Moisture determinations
were made on 10 July, 16 July, 6 August, and 29 August along with the
bulk density determinations. The values are sufficiently accurate for
estimating the heat capacity of the soil. They are not, in themselves,
sufficient for specifying availability of soil moisture for evaporation
and transpiration. No independent determinations of soil wilting point
were made. Due to lateral variability and inadequacy of sampling,
these moisture determinations do not permit the computing of changes
in soil moisture content for the field.
13
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Values of soil moisture, as percent dry weight, are given in
Table 2.4.
Table 2.4. Values of soil moisture as percent dry weight
DEPTH 10 JULY 16 JULY 6 AUG 29 AUG AVE OF 4
(cm)
...11M?????,
0-10 7.2 6.8 9.2 6.6 7.5
10-20 7.0 6.3 6.6 6.5 6.6
20-30 3.8 6.3 3.0 6.0 4.8
30-40 4.2 4.9 2.8 4.4 4.1
40-50 5.1 3.9 2.9 5.6 4.4
50-60 3.1 3.7 3.5 6.7 4.2
60-70 1.9 3.4 6.2 3.8 3.8
70-80 1.8 3.2 3.8 2.9 2.9
80-90 2.9 4.8 2.6 2.4 3.2
90-100 5.7 4.8 1.8 2.4 3.7
Most likely all of these values, except those above a 20-cm depth on
6 August, and those of the compacted layer and the sand below, represent
the wilting point of the individual samples, or are very slightly higher.
These soil samples at the wilting point were dusty and dirty. The loose
sand below was cool (about 25?C) and moist to the touch throughout the
summer. However, its actual content of water was slight. The high
moisture percentages dawn to 20 cm on 6 August reflect an increase in
available Moisture from recent rains. The soil in the field, as a whole,
appeared to be driest on 29 August although the sample moisture deter-
minations do not bear this out.
Since the soil was near the wilting point all summer, average values
of the heat capacity per unit volume are sufficiently accurate for all
soil heat computations. These values are given in Table 2.5.
14
:71
??4
Table 2.5. Values of heat capacity per unit volume
DEPTH pC?
3
(cm) (cal/cm deg)
0-10 0.26
10-20 .28
20-30 .28
30-40 .30
40-50 .30
50-60 .30
60-70 .31
70-80 .31
80-90 .33
90-100 0.35
REFERENCES
1. Moran, W. J., et al., "Soil Survey of Holt County, Nebraska,"
United States Department of Agriculture (1938)
411.6.
15
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
CHAPTER 3
SURFACE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS
W. Covey, M. H. Halstead, S. Hillman,
J. D. Merryman, R. L. Richman, A. H. York
Texas A&M Research Foundation
The surface weather observations at gas release times are given
in Table 3.1. -
16
4P
i ?,..'
4.-..r.
g".-R
Ac 50 Sc 30
Cu 15
Clear (few)
Clear (few)
As thin
Thin Sc hazy
No haze, band of Sc on E horizon
1.Cu to 40 2 11 50
Clear
H Sc 35 CD
Sc 305W & S
3 Cu 50 ID
Scattered thin Si
Lightning N it NNE distant
1) Cu lightning north
Clear
e
-
Remarks and Supplemental Coded Data
14
At-:
-voq2
Wind
.g2.4
kl=
Li-
g
_
0
.04......................40
eter -ft (MSL
Sea
Ceiling?," Weather and Level I Dew
(Hundreds)?Sky Ob tructions Press. Temp. Pt.
of Feet)
> 5 to Vision (mbs) CF) CF)
4
3 6 7 8 9
.122=322322222.112:122FAZXZR.
PPZZORTaR222grAVIPRgV274;52gg
N....on...a...m..0o.... ..
wirY
4.7 444/iE4
ggggggggffigP666g
gq 71
OP
e
e Ei"
/ P.c_.)
.a
8288n2FEE???E???R88818F.
V.:!N87. . 74 ... Q.,4c4c... ge4
.
z
1 iB..
4
.NVIVWW,WMO.NrIVWW1.W00.NMV
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
m
....
m
n
m
n
to
nu
CLOUDS AND OBSCURING PHENOMENA
2
r-21 ON
>. :c
1..E
rig
Dig
a,
z
w z
2 .62
4g
.._
sogn
P.
.. .
SECOND LAYER
Type
Amt. and Did Height
25 28 27
s s
g .
. .
*LOWEST LAYER
Type
Amt. and Dir. Height
22 23 24
ao 0
R222 WW V 2R22
...- ...... .- \\ii /
m a" d 63m8dma
amsq. van .
Ligg
M.W.0000r).00f4000tr.WW0W00
.
'1,'.:;2
Z.N30
.4p;c4
Gt=
.v.Incso.w.or ...... . ......
,ommv.....in ..... 4pw.. ......
Illgo
0,t....
,e.v...immo.oveamnovmmo.vm.
4ouswot-rww.,.c..o.noot-csovar-uswww
,g1Fc42.
....azgvaamom.ftm....x2rg
Ag,
8!488:18:18?s8w8??888s?ss
O. ..,...._
.......................
. ?
z
-
3
_
Remarks and Supplemental Coded Data
14
v, t
= --
jilt a
8 V." e
I:I>. 6
t z Sig g 11 w
ibl g,4
s A za -,':' Pill 12P!pd
:Z A.ZM Evt;ii ,,,8.4 2
3 12012Ea$ RY ?,t 4....f1?..tk?..,8?205
t gg--tn :-30 12f.,%17111r..ftill
t..attgn g.f.6; 1.20: 4 .E 1
d,x8 seei 0.. d;isaud. .. dlyaga
A..--
1
a
ts
ran
g4
Lim
.214
g
g g
.h
0
. . .. .
A4E..
VSS22:2222SVS22222S 2 2: 2:
4
iloQe
Ht.
szg: MMMMMM coon : ::
411'
11S
IT'
IV
_
(P08u)?,
41114111IA
....... ..... ..,.. ..
... ...-. .....
a
a k ,
,:..'
- Siw-
. ..5
,
sgggiggg gg8gg ggg8 g g
e
i Ag'.
MIIPAIIMERAW F. vl =1
N 0.-,
te 4
nr.tsagnx4:=ans.v.1 41 s* "44.-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
un,
o
v
3
n
.c..
W2
ne
Astuway?
ommamn
CLOUDS AND OBBCURING PHENOMENA 1
_ _
ce i.....
J .-
" .
1 . ,....:
"wg
5 a
rx
1-
Pa"
x
. Iry
4 3:
W
1 !.:
1412
In
hi
.1-..
cc .v.N
w ...
>? Pc
8
1 14
gilt
u
ft,*
IC 5588
w J
to 4:
n wne.
I;
fs Tr.
_
S2C 28 2
1 4
.pl-
-.. it ti,/,
'8m8 ,-88m4m a dd 4888m
j
In
2.. .-...
. -
i t
ktr.
t. u
2.". ... ....... onsomn
tL"
zi?
meg
4g
RUS222224'S 2:ZgRAC
g2F-
_
2grga s:ss:mss:::;:s
"
ggEt
22;22IgP282:3??'''''SIg:
kir:.
IMMAIIigniinliar.:Am
:
ply.
4
rAmtstannx4r,r,Rxr,svuozys.7.-
_
18
Table 3.1 (Continued)
1
2
AT /9. in, N.,
te.2
.. ..
mt.:*
8 4
Puffy Cu
Sc bank N, E, Haze S
Sc bank N, NE, E, Haze S
Wispy Cirrus
Wispy Cirrus Puffy Cu
Clear
Wind Moderate
Wind Moderate
St Cu to N & SE Haze to S
Alto Cu moving in from N/NE
Heavy cloud bank W/NW
Dark heavy clouds to E
Star & moon partly obscured,
can be seen through clouds
Rain NE & SW, St Cu on all
horizon, clear over head
Thunderstorm to NE, rainshowers
to W, N, E
Bank of Sc N & NW horizon
Lightning dist. NW & ENE
Sc bank, W, E
to
..
??????? ---- ?
Remarks and Supplemental Coded Data
14
?
V
112
E
4
VIM
k"
V aw,
!Etc
g
0
u 0
a) .
4
NaUkjiMONEA.
I'l a
Ma A., a PO
a
te-
Q t.
74:22222:s.7=r4
's:, z 2
USE;
&
fl?'
.132g2.3g=1:422g
gg 2 m
...3.0
fitit-
..irta
Ug
t.I1L0
6e).
gg2
(I"-
Amemsm
nnnnnnnnnnnn nn n 2
nnn
z k ,
,
?._
0..
0
55gg g5gg5gg v. 5 C ggg
E
E g
A ,u
.E
8828A:188282R
f.18.9.1".12RN8224
ER 8 8
R8 = .1'.
?99
.H5
2 mi
sa-
4
ssa:sg2222s22
2s .1 V
2S2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
o
v.
m
n
n
n
y
..,.m
w.4m
z72n
"LP
Apuarway ,
aJnIcam ."
CLOUDS AND OBSCURING PHENOMENA
?n
on
m
4
ET.P.2"
g A
0 J
W 42
A
p.12
.,
I
be.
a.
A
1 1.1
?..0.9
VI
E
.
t. ..:
1`1
IMI
r-
COND LAYER
Type
?and Dir. Height
26 27
s ? 8
w .1
m In
. .
LOWEST LAYER
Type
Amt. and Did Height
22 23 24
s 0.
n
8mmu8 '.4 8-' M m 5 8
to.... o oN . n .0.
... 1.
ZW..
?Mtn
1...i.,
.....00c000n in r. n co .ON
>1..
Zao...,
4V.
Cg gggN2222:7; 41P 2 R CSA
VACM
,. .
.0 hOON0VMON .0 n .00
.. ......... wn go V cc.
t AC M
QMt...."
pl,WMWOONONO.06 .. 3 01 .S.
W.C.MMV?WW..0, t?t.. 03 1. C.
..
'A t
88n8AVA3g2.-T4' ?r1' ,5 8 RO.
:I.
0-4.
M
Zmm0...vincoo,
vvv000000noo ow a a maw
19
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
CHAPTER 4
SYNOPTIC INFORMATION
P. A. Giorgio and Lt. D. W. Stevens
Geophysics Research Directorate
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
At an early stage of the field program, it became very apparent
that use of only National Weather Analysis Center facsimile maps and
prognoses would not suffice for the purposes of forecasting wind di-
rection for gas releases. Consequently, sectional, sea-level,
pressure maps were plotted and analyzed, using hourly airways se-
quences from the network of stations lying in the area extending from
approximately 93?W to 104?W Longitude.and from the United States-
Canadian border southward to 37?N Latitude. Occasionally, coverage
was extended westward as far as approximately 120?W, and southward
to about 35?N. Isobars were drawn at 1 mb intervals. These maps
revealed many small-scale features of the circulation which seldom
appeared on the large-scale facsimile maps, and which often exer-
cised primary control over the airflow at O'Neill. This type of
analysis greatly facilitated the wind direction forecasting problem, and
enabled more effective scheduling of gas releases.
The accompanying maps were prepared from hourly airways se-
quences. Times were selected so that, in most cases, the map
represents the sea-level pressure pattern existing midway between two
gas releases. The only values plotted are the surface wind speed and
direction and the sea-level pressure report from the station. Tem-
peratures were used in some of the analyses, but omitted from the
figures in the interest of clarity of reproduction. Standard analysis
procedure was used, except that the isobar interval is 1 millibar. All
analyses were checked for consistency with the U. S. Weather Bureau
analyses for the same period. The isobar labels are the last two
digits of the sea-level pressure: 13 = 1013 millibars.
20
?
AU,
DATE 3 July 1956
TIME1330CSTTEST No. 1 - .2
LEVEL SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50 Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA RDP81-0
ob?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
e
DATE 5 July 1956
TIME2330CETTEST No. 3 - 4
LEVEL SURFACE
DATE 6 July 1956
TIME1530CSTrEST No.5 - 6
LEVEL SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-
J
129
131
-r
125
1
1
1
132 \
1
?
jT?
--j'
1-, ?
11
10
98
143
1
1
/0-149 I 1146
S.
1L9
10
151
16
17
12
125
/
3
146
DATE .10 July 1956
TIME1530CSTTEST No.? - 8
LEVEL SURFACE
_1155
138 , I
4 114915
059
16 163
17
24
II
I 1-
120
12
0 22
\043.2.9
L12 cr-t19-6*
11
1
a????? ???????
O'NEILL
0
mml
13
14
0
105
11
.72
15
11
108
DATE n_ July 1956
TIME11300ST TEST No. 9 - 10
LEVEL SURFACE
106
102 II
1 1413
153
25
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: ICIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
08
I
I
08
09 088
091
i 0
166
---
--
17
I I
0
132
:NM*
129
1146
DATE 14 July 1956
TIME0930CETTEST No. 11-12
LEVEL SURFACE
4/42 139
5 I
132 12
26
jso15
?
_
17
18
19
167
1
?
\
Q195
(390
)90
1v5
Om= ??=?? vm.?
?193'
-??}?
0166 183 4..-'l 9
18
DATE 22 July 1555
TIME21300sTTEST No. 13-114
LEVEL SURFACE
19
169
18 17 \
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
071
co C*7
27
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
17 16 15 14 13 1
?A139
DATE 23 July 1956
TIME0930CSTTEST No.15-16
LEVEL ? SURFACE .
TDATEE 23.2330Jrstili 1956
nA
----, EST No. 17-18
LEVEL- SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
05 06010
DATF. 25 July 1956
TIME 1230CS'ITEST No. 19-20
LEVEL ? SURFACE
DATE 25 July 1956
TIMEt3300ST TEST No. 21-22
LEVEL SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
mi???
20
t
13
0
L__
196
11
19
memo ????I
0
$2
18
DATE 29 July 1556.
TIME 2230CST(EST No. 23-24
LEVEL ? SURFACE
1314 129
13
13
133
17
14 15 16
32
Owe .mam. .m????
14151617
I 125
?1-
---I 1
1"
?.1 ?
183
191
IL
/
93 1900/
9193
?
180
/
1 17,
16
t--
\ 122
122
150
12
DATE .1 August 1956
TIME 1330CSITEST No. 25
LEVEL SURFACE
33
1
117
12, 13 14 15 I
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
,
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-
- - -Tr- -
10
1
1
L_
1
1
1
M. ?IMmi.....0 OEM..
-
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t-
1
1
411ME.8.
OM...IMO .???? .MMI
09085
08 I 074
1
08
DATE 2 August 1956
TIME1330C8TTEST No. 26-27
LEVEL SURFACE 09
95
095
10
34
4
,.
DATE 3' August 1956
TIME0130CSTTEST No.28 - 29
LEVEL ? SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
09 ????093.
O'NEILL
DATE 6 August 1956
TIME2030CST TEST No. 32
LEVEL- SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
lama ...lam
12
,
41.39
-----
14
15
? ? ? ? ---
\ 129
135
a?IIMP
O' NE L\
??k 135
079
DATE 7 August 1956
TIME 1330CSITEST No. 33414
LEVEL SURFACE
0 909, 014/ 12
..":..,t,"09/104"-'4)1/ En 13
11
38
?oztor
14 1
11
10
*-o
...A I
/112
13
14 15
122
59
098
91
01.4
09
_
10
11
0 kN\
152
59
DATE 11 August ;956
TIME 2230CST
TEST No. 35,-36
LEVEL SURFACE
58
32
132
16
15
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
39
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
0.9 0
DATE 12 August 1956
TIME0430CSTTEST No37-38
LEVEL SURFACE
DATE 13 August 1956
TIME 2330C8TEST No. 39-140
LEVEL SURFACE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
156
?156 16
163 I
;163
DATE 11x August 1956
TIME0330CST TEST No. 41 - 42
LEVEL, SURFACE
163 16/-----:41
NVVV,?"
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
17
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
produced by the thermocouples. The net voltage was then amplified and
indicated on the meter. The following example illustrates the operation
of the temperature measuring system:
To measure the temperature (assumed to be between 200 and 30?C)
at the 50-cm depth in the soil: .
(1) Set the selector switch for the -50 cm soil-measuring junction,
(2) Set the reference temperature compensator dial for 20?C com-
pensation and adjust the balance control,
(3) Set the amplifier gain dial for the 20? to 30?C increment, and
(4) Read the meter (assume a reading of 6.35 is obtained)
(5) Apply a meter correction, in this case +0.02.
The temperature (26.37) is the compensation (20?C) plus the meter reading
(6.35?C) plus the metercorrection (+0.02).
A platinum resistance thermometer (Leeds and Northrup), which had
been calibrated by the National Bureau of Standards, and a Mueller Bridge
(Rubicon) were used to calibrate the copper-constantan thermocouple wire.
A thermocouple circuit was constructed from a length of No. 16 B&S gauge
copper-constantan lead wire. One junction was placed in a 0?C reference
bath and the other junction was immersed in a large thermos flask filled
with water (approximately five gallons). A Beckman differential thermo-
meter and the resistance thermometer were immersed in this calibrating
bath. The thermocouple junction, Beckman thermometer bulb and resist-
ance thermometer bulb, were placed in close proximity near the center of
the bath. A motor-driven 'stirring mechanism was used to agitate the
water., The thermocouple wires'weie connected in a circuit with an ampli-
fier, meter,' and reference temperature compensator as shown in Figure
7.13.. The amplifier and meter merely served as a sensitive null indicator,
hence their calibrations had no influence on the wire calibration.
The temperature of the calibrating bath was. varied through the range
of '-20?C to .50?C and 15 evenly-distributed calibrations points were
obtained. Methanol antifreeze was added to the bath water for temperatures
less than 0?C. The temperature of the bath was determined by the resistance
Figure 7.12 Reference temperature compensator
Figure 7.13 Thermocouple wire calibrating circuit
Declassified in Part - Sanitized C
eease ? 5 - r 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-n1n4f1Pnn9cinnonnrml
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
thermometer, and the rate of change of temperature was monitored by the
Beckman differential thermometer. At each calibration point, a reference
temperature compensator setting was determined which produced zero
current flow in the measuring circuit as indicated by the amplifier meter
null detector; that is, a setting was determined which caused the compen-
sator output to be equal in magnitude to the emf produced by the thermocouple
junctions. The emf temperature characteristic of the copper-constantan
wire was then determined by measuring the output of the compensator for
each of the dial settings. A potentiometer (Leeds and Northrup Type K),
a precision voltage divider, an amplifier-meter null detector, and an auxiliary
emf source were used for this measurement as shown in Figure 7.14. The
amplifier and meter were calibrated by means of the circuit shown in
Figure 7.15. In this circuit, the compensator serves as a calibrated micro-
voltage source which simulates the output of a thermocouple circuit. With
the auxiliary microvoltage source set at zero output, the compensator was
set for 10?C and the setting of the amplifier gain control which produced
full-scale meter deflection was determined. The output of the auxiliary
microvoltage source was then adjusted until it was equal in magnitude to
the compensator output. Since the two microvoltage sources were connec-
ted so that their polarities were in opposition, a condition of equality was
indicated by a reading of zero on the meter. (The zero reading, of course,
is independent of the amplifier-meter calibration.) The setting of the com-
pensator was then changed to 20`C and the amplifier gain setting for full--
scale meter deflection was determined. The auxiliary microvoltage source
was again adjusted for a condition of equality and the process was repeated.
By this method, amplifier gain settings were established for a series of
overlapping operating ranges, that is, 0? to. 10?C,
5? to 15?C, 10? to 20?C,
etc. The transfer characteristic of the amplifier-meter combination was
determined and it was found that deviations from linearity were due primarily
to meter movement and scale ?irregularities. Corrections to be applied to
meter readings were established whyi corrected for the irregularities in
the amplifier-meter transfer characteristic and the curvature of the emf
temperature characteristic of the thermocouple wire.
20
AMPLIFIER
REFERENCE
TEMPERATURE
COMPENSATOR
PRECISION
DIVIDER
Figure 7.14 Calibrating circuit
AMPLIFIER
REFERENCE
? TEMPERATURE
COMPENSATOR
MICROVOLT
SOURCE
Figure 7.15 Amplifier calibrating circuit
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
21
POTENTIOMETER
IIIMMEMONSMIEN,
1119?111MISIGI!
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
The emf temperature characteristic of the No. 36 B&S gauge copper-
constant= thermocouple wire had been established to be virtually the same
as that of the No. 16 B&S gauge thermocouple wire by the Leeds and
Northrup Company. This was verified by experimentation. A series circuit
was constructed from lengths of No. 16 BO gauge copper wire, No. 16 B&S
gauge constantan wire, No. 36 B&S gauge copper wire, and No. 36 B&S
gauge constantan wire.
- Four junctions were formed: (1) No. 16 B&S gauge copper to No. 36
B&S gauge copper, (2) No. 36 B&S gauge copper to No. 36 B&S gauge
constantan, (3) No. 36 B&S gauge constantan to No. 16 B&S gauge constan-
tan and (4) No. 16 B&S gauge constantan to No. 16 B&S gauge copper.
This circuit was connected to an amplifier-meter null detector. The No.
16 B&S gauge copper-constantan junction and the No. 36 B&S gauge copper-
constant= junction were maintained at the same temperature by immersing
them in a thermos flask filled with water. The No. 16 B&S gauge to No. 36
B&S gauge copper junction and constant= junction were heated separately.
No thermoelectrical emf was obtained.
An overall statement of the accuracy of the temperature measure-
ments cannot be made. The accuracy of the air temperature measurements
is a function of the prevailing atmospheric conditions at the time the measure-
ments were made. Errors inherent in thermal measurements further compli-
cate an assessment of accuracy. It is possible, however, to designate the
sources of error 'and to estimate, in some cases, the magnitude.
Absolute accuracy can be defined as the deviation of a measurement
from true temperature. Relative accuracy can be defined as the deviation
of a measured difference from true temperature difference. The signifi-
cant errors in air temperature measurements are calibration 'error, radia-
tion error, and sampling error.
The calibration of the thermocouple wire is the basis of the calibra-
tion of the temperature measuring system. The accuracy of the wire cali-
bration is difficult to evaluate. However, the calibration was conducted
with extreme care and several determinations of each measured value
22
??
showed the calibration to be reproducible. A conservative estimate of the
error due to calibration inaccuracies is 0.05?C for an absolute measure-
ment and 0.02?C for a relative measurement. Error caused by loss of
calibration due to change in characteristics of the system components (in
particular, a change in the emf temperature characteristic of the thermo-
couple wire) can be considered insignificant. A comparison of this wire
calibration (conducted in April 1956) with a calibration conducted in May
1953 shows an average difference of 0.05?C. An unknown fraction (be-
lieved to be small) of this difference is probably due to a change in the
emf temperature characteristic of the wire. Frequent checks of the
amplifier calibration were made by the method illustrated in Figure 7.15
to insure no loss in accuracy due to this component.
Probably the most detrimental effect on the accuracy of the air tem-
perature measurements was produced by radiative transfer at the
measuring junctions. The magnitude of the radiation error is difficult to
determine since it is a function of atmospheric conditions, time, height,
and vertical distribution of wind velocity. In the daytime with a clear sky
and low wind velocity this error would be greatest. All measured air
temperatures would be higher than true air temperature. Air movement
decreases the effect of radiation. The measurement nearest the ground
would have the greatest error since the wind speed there is less than the
wind speed aloft. At night with a clear sky the radiation error would pro-
duce measured temperatures lower than real, and variable with height and
wind speed. Under cloudy and windy conditions, the radiation errdr would
be less significant. Under isothermal conditions with zero net radiation
at the surface, the radiation error would be Completely absent. It is con-
ceivable that the radiation error could be as high as VC; however, for.
most of the observations made at O'Neill it probably did not exceed 0.1?C.
A handy means of checking the relative accuracy of air temperature
measurements independent of sampling error makes use of Nature's heat
bath which exists with adiabatic thermal stratification. At these times, the
thermocouples on the mast are exposed to the same constant potential
23
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
temperature.* That is, since the potential temperature is constant through-
out the depth of measurement, and over the time of measurement, no breath
of air of different potential temperature can come along to introduce sam-
pling error. Since meteorological sampling error is missing, only radia-
tional error and calibration error remain.
Adiabatic thermal stratification near the ground occurs typicallytwice
a day, shortly after sunrise and a while before sunset. However, these -
are also times of rapid heating in the morning and cooling in the afternoon,
so that the length of time that adiabatic stratification exists may be very
short. On some occasions the entire 16-meter depth of measurement -
will not be at uniform potential temperature at any one time. Adiabatic
profiles may be caused at other times by high turbulence if the turbulent
heat flux is relatively small.
Analyses were made of six adiabatic or nearly adiabatic air tempera-
ture profiles (20-minute periods) obtained during the 3-day observation
period 6-9 August 1956. Profiles of mean temperature and mean potential
temperature were plotted for each of the six runs (see Figures 7.16, 7.17,
7.18, 7.19, 7.20 and 7.21). It was assumed that the logarithrnicprofile
equation holds:
6=0 + rib.0 ,
where AO does not vary with height in the lowest 16 meters. Logarithmic
profiles were fitted-by-eye, and the standard error of mean potential
temperature for the 20-minute period was estimated as 1.25 times the
average deviation of the points from the fitted line. The values are given
in Table 7.1. This *standard error ranges from 0.0048?C to 0.031?C,
with an average value of 0.020?C. Since some meteorological sampling
*More precisely, to the same value of 0 = T +? z where z is meas-
ured from the surface of the ground.
24
rfrrrf-')
co
cr
c\J
s)34atu tqCsia
25
tO
tr)
? 0
F-4
a)
H
Ci)
L.)
cr .cd
?
4-1 CD
g 00
(NI
st. tr)
ch
g
cd
(r)
o
;A to
rt. cl 2000.
Even though turbulent motion is present, a laminar sublayer ad-
jacent to the boundary can still exist. The thickness of this layer is
determinable from Re for flow over smooth surfaces. Assuming a
linear profile within the laminar layer, the surface friction 1 is
To = .332p4/ fire-.
From integration of Eq. (2), assuming T T (Z)
T0= p
Thus, the localized Reynolds' number is
Rc = 3u6 6/EL = 135.
(4)
(5)
It should be noted that the flow pattern at z = 6 will not be strictly
laminar or turbulent. That is, z = ? cannot be interpreted as a point
but rather as a region. However, for purposes of discussion here, 6
will be regarded as the thickness of the laminar layer.
To apply Eq. (2) to a turbulent regime, the molecular viscosity
must be replaced by a term, usually referred to as the eddy viscosity,
which will be a function of the distance from the bounding surface.
Inasmuch as division between laminar and turbulent flow does
not occur at a precise point, it appears reasonable that the eddy
viscosity should be so defined that it reduces to the molecular vis-
cosity. That is, Eq. (2) could be written as
Tz = K du/dz ,
(6)
where K will be equal to p. at z = 6.
Consider a flow of gas over a smooth surface and assume n
hypothetical surfaces inserted in the gas above the boundary, each a
mean distance 6 units above the layer preceding it. That is, the first
5 - r 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-n-In4mPnn9onn-,nririn4
99
rA?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release
surface is coincident with the top of the laminar sublayer. The effect
of turbulence may be thought of as a factor of area distortion of a
given surface. Hence, the area of the surface at elevation j will be
greater than the area of the surface at j - 6 and less than the surface
at elevation j + o. This is shown in Figure 9.1.
flowing gas
3
2
8 I
turbulent
boundary
layer
laminar
sublayer
Figure 9.1 Distorted Area Pattern
The first surface has the same area as the smooth boundary itself
inasmuch as below z = 6 the flow is laminar. Above z = o, a given
surface becomes distorted due to the distortion of the preceding surface,
plus any inherent distortion of the surface itself.
Let r be the ratio of areas of any two adjacent surfaces. Then
r = An/An-1?
Hence, Eq. (6) may be written Tz = pAn/A0 du/dz. (7)
Thus, the area of the nth layer at elevation z will be
An = Al rn*
100
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release
50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Since A1 = A0,
An/A0 = r z/6
Substituting Eq. (8) in Eq. (7), we obtain,
Tz = rz p./6 du/dz,
(8)
(9)
as applicable to turbulent flow.
The shearing stress Tz will vary with elevation, being a maximum
at z = 0, and decreasing with elevation. For the atmosphere, Tz will
vanish at z = H, where H is the geostrophic wind level.
Assuming a linear variation of shearing stress with height*, we
may write,
Tz =
(10)
where T is the stress at the top of the laminar layer, which for all
practical considerations for the atmosphere will equal the shear stress
at the surface. Hence,
To (1- Z/H) = p (Lrz/36) du/dz (11)
Actually, p and E and L will vary with height also, but for the lower
layers of the atmosphere this variation will be small.
Separating variables and integrating from 6 to z, we obtain,
uz = u6 + 36T0 (in z/6 - z/H)/p ELr (12)
From integration of Eq. (7) from z = 0 to z = 6 (T0 = Tz , K =
u6 = 3T06/p .
(13)
*This is equivalent to assuming a unidirectional mean velocity, negligible
Coriolis acceleration, and a uniform horizontal pressure gradient.
50-Yr 2014/05/28 . CIA-RDP8i-ninaflPnn9cinnonnnn4
101
Thus,
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
uz = u6[1 + (ln z./6 - z/H)/r] . (14)
Inasmuch as the discussion is restricted to the region where z is
of the order of a few meters, while H will be of the order of 500 meters,
z/H of Eq. (14) will be insignificant with respect to ln z/6 and the former
term may be neglected. Thus,
uz = uo [1 + (ln z/6) r . (15)
Equation (15) is analogous to the wind profile equation derived
from mixing length concepts, that is,
uz = u* [A + (ln u*z/v)/k1 (16)
where u* = k is von Karman's constant (k = 0.40), and A is a
constant. It is interesting to convert Eqs. (15) and (16) to identical
form, inasmuch as A and k have been evaluated from empirical studies.
From Eqs. (5) and (13),
u6 = Rev/6 = u*2 6/v .
Substituting in Eq. (15)
(17)
uz = u4A + (lnzu*/6)k] (18)
which is identical to Eq. (16) When
and
A = u6/v[ 1 - (in u*O/v)/r] (19)
k = v r/u* 6 ?
(20)
Using Nikuradse's (Sutton5) data for flow near a smooth surface,
A = 5.5 for k = .40; hence, r 4.65.
More recent work by Laufer at the Bureau of Standards affirms
the Nikuradse data and leads to the same r value.
102
Substituting this value in Eq. (15),
uz = u6[ 1+ anz/6)/4.65] , z >6 (21)
for flow near a smooth bounding surface.
Within the laminar sublayer (z < 6), u is given from Eq. (17)
and using p.= 1.8 x 10-4 gm/cm sec, p = 1.2 x 10-3 gm/cm3,
U6 = 20.3/6. (22)
Figure 9.2 shows Eqs. (21) and (13) for several T values,
plotted as velocity versus the logarithm of elevation. The turbulent and
laminar regimes are separated by the line along which u6 6 = 20.3.
The applicability of Eq. (21) is limited to small elevations and
smooth surfaces. We can rigorously define elevation but not a smooth
surface. Aerodynamically speaking, a smooth surface means a
surface that does not physically protrude through the laminar sublayer.
However, since the thickness of this layer depends upon the velocity,
a surface consisting of No. 4 sandpaper could be a smooth surface;
and, under other flow conditions, a pane of glass could be a rough
surface.
While a satisfactory theoretical treatment of the effect of surface
roughness has yet to be developed, it is reasonable to think of the
roughness elements as sinks of momentum which in total are equiva-
lent to a "drag velocity." Hence, for the postulated type of flow over a
rough surface, Eq. (21) can be modified to
uz = u6[ 1 + (ln z/6)/4.65] - us, (23)
where us is the drag velocity corresponding to momentum transferred
to surface roughness elements, assuming no modification of the rough-
ness elements by the flow. Further, the length 6 must then represent,
not the thickness of an actual sublayer, but more generally, the thick-
ness of any layer which would give a distortion r. Since it is im-
possible to determine the sink strength of a surface theoretically or to
103
.11111941?11r.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release
50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
measure us directly, it is necessary to eliminate the "drag velocity"
by solving Eq. (23) simultaneously, for more than one level.
In the presence of a vertical gradient of potential temperature, the
modification of the flow pattern can be significant, as the density, mean
free path, and root mean quare velocity of the gas will change with
elevation. That is, a buoyancy term will be present. This will be true
in the laminar as well as in the turbulent region. For the lower
layers of the atmosphere to which this discussion is restricted, the
effects of buoyancy can be large, varying velocities and transfer rates
through one or two orders of magnitudes. Fortunately, however, these
effects do not appreciably influence the logarithmic nature of the pro-
files in the layers below one or two meters, hence need not be con-
sidered. Actually, this requires that z be no greater than the eleva-
tion for which u vs In z is linear.
In general, the argument presented implies that turbulent transfer
is not a function of an exchange coefficient varying with lateral or verti-
cal displacement but a rate of distortion of laminar flow area which will
vary from case to case, but will remain constant for a given flow pattern.
In order to apply the development to measurements of momentum
transfer to the surface, we require the difference in velocity between a
height z and 2z. From Eq. (23)
u2z - uz = (uo ln 2)/r. (24)
Substituting Eq. (23) in (13) and recalling that r = 4.65, then the total
momentum flux at the surface (or any elevation, z, since Eq. (23) is
essentially based on constancy of shearing stress with height) is given
by
Inasmuch as this equation will be used again in the evaluation of
the convective and evaporative fluxes of heat, it will be worthwhile to
repeat the meaning of the various terms entering this equation.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release . 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
These are listed below:
uz = mean wind speed at elevation z,
uo = mean speed at the top of the laminar sublayer (fictional
for flow over a rough surface) ,
r = 4.65, increase in surface area due to turbulent dis-
tortion of a single layer of mean thickness 6,
6 = thickness of layer producing a constant distortion r
(for flow over smooth surfaces, the thickness of the
laminar sublayer).
9.3 The Flux of Sensible Heat
The rate of vertical transfer of heat (qc) per unit time and unit
area within a gas is proportional to the density qf the medium, the
specific heat, and the gradient of potential temperature, or for non-
turbulent flow,
=vc pcp dT/dz ,
c
(26)
where p is density, c is the specific heat at constant pressure, T is
potential temperature, and vc is a constant of proportionality related
to the product of molecular mean free path and root-mean-square
velocity, and generally referred to as the thermal diffusivity. It has
the same units as kinematic viscosity, cm2/sec in the cgs system.
If air is in turbulent motion, transfer of heat is still expressible
by Eq. (26) but with a dependency on the scale of motion within the
fluid., That is, heat is transferred by parcels of air as well as by in-
dividual .molecules.
As in the case of flux of momentpm, consider a flow of air over
a smooth boundary with hypothetical, equally spaced surfaces sepa-
rating layers' of the moving air. For laminar flow, each surface will
be parallel to every other surface, or each surface will have the same
area. For turbulent flow, however, each surface will have a different
area depending on the degree of turbulence. The first of this hypo-
thetical group of surfaces will be parallel to the solid surface itself,
if it is located at the top of the laminar layer, which is at a distance 6
106
above the solid boundary. Surface number two, at a mean distance 6
above number one, will be distorted to a degree depending on the scale
of motion between the two surfaces. Surface number three (at a mean
distance 6 above surface two) will be distorted according to the scale
of motion between it and surface one, or between it and number two,
plus the distortion between surfaces one and two.
The area of a surface at a given height, z, is a measure of the
opportunity for energy transfer. This area An , divided by the area of
surface number one (or the area of the boundary itself, A0), will be
equal to rn where r is the fractional increase in area due to turbulent
distortion and n is the number of surfaces, each a mean distance 6
apart, between the boundary and elevation z.
Thus,
An = Ao rz/6 (27)
Hence, Eq. (26) may be written as
q =Kc pcp dT/dz , (28)
c
where
K = v for z < 6 (laminar flow)
c c
and for turbulent flow (over smooth surfaces) as,
q = vc rz p cp/6 dT/dz .
(29)
Restricting the application of Eq. (29) to small values of z, con-
stancy of vc, p, and cp may be assumed. This, in effect, means
negligibility of any buoyancy terms.
For the same conditions given in the preceding section for stress
varying linearly with elevation, we assume a linear variation of q
with elevation, or
qc = qo (1 - z/H) , (30)
where H is the thickness of the turbulent layer, or geostrophic wind
level.
107
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Substituting Eq. (30) in (29), separating variables, and integrating
from the top of the laminar layer to an elevation z,
Tz = T[ 1 + (in z/S - z/H)/r] ,
where
(31)
TS = qcS/p cp vc . (32)
For small values of z, the term z/H will be negligible in com-
parison with In z/t5 and may be omitted. Thus,
Tz = T6 [1 + (in z/S)/r] , (33)
for flow over smooth surfaces.
For flow over aerodynamically rough surfaces, we parallel the
previous view concerning momentum. That is, we will regard rough-
ness elements to act as sources or sinks of heat, according to the
temperature differences between the elements and the ambient, and
postulate a potential temperature equivalent to the magnitude of the
sources or sinks. In this view, Eq. (32) may be modified to
Tz = T0[1 + (lnz/6)/r1 + Ts. (34)
Generally, Ts will be unknown, but it is not involved when Eq. (34)
is applied to potential difference between two levels. For the particu-
lar levels z and 2z,
T2 - T = T15 (In 2)/r.
z z ?
Combining Eqs. (17), (24), (32), and (35), we obtain
q =c r2 pv c (T?z - T) (u2z - u )/R v (In 2)2,
c p z z z c
for evaluation of the flux of sensible heat.
(35)
(36)
Using the values
p = 1.2 x 10-3 gm/cm3
c = 0.24 cal/gm deg C,
vc = 0.21 cm2 /sec,
= 0.15 cm2/sec ,
= 4.65, and
Rc = 135,
in Eq. (36)
qc = .124x 10-3 (u2z uz) (T2z Tz)
with qc in cal/cm2 sec, velocity in cm/sec, and temperature in
degrees Centigrade.
9.4 The Flux of Water Vapor
(37)
Evaporation of a fluid is a measure of the difference of exchange
rates of molecules of the fluid between the surface and the surrounding
medium. For the case in which molecules escaping from the surface of
the fluid are influenced only by their concentration and the molecular
properties of the surrounding medium (for example, still air over water),
the evaporation is given by,
E = d pt/dz , (38)
where a is the diffusion coefficient, and p' is the density of the fluid
vapor. While a will vary slightly with temperature, it may be con-
sidered constant for purposes of this discussion. Its value for 15?C
is .250 cm2/sec.
If the air is in turbulent motion, Eq. (38) requires modification
to allow for non-molecular transfer. As in the previous cases of
transfer of momentum and heat, we will generalize the laminar flow
109
108
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
case to include turbulent flow by introducing a factor to allow for the
increased area of contact between the turbulently distorted layers,
or
E = or z/o dp'/dz . (39)
Using the same reasoning that has been applied for the wind and
temperature profiles with respect to variations in E with height,
surface roughness, and thermal buoyancy, the evaporation is given
as
E = o-(u2z - uz) (p' 2z -p')/3,
where E will be given in gm/cm2 sec for p' in gm/cm3, and u in
cm/sec.
In order to compute the flux of latent heat by evaporation, Eq. (40)
must be multiplied by the latenf heat of vaporization of water for the
particular temperature concerned. Using 20?C as an average tem-
perature and converting absolute humidity to an equivalent vapor
pressure by use of
(40)
where
13' = eM/RT (41)
M = 18, molecular weight of water,
R = 8.31 x 10-7 erg deg, universal gas constant,
T = 293?K,
e = vapor pressure (millibars), and
qe = evaporative flux of heat,
we can write approximately,
qe .240 x 10-3(u2 z- uz)(e2z- es),
when qe is given in cal/cm2 sec.
110
(42)
9.5 Soil Heat Flux
Inasmuch as transfer of heat energy within the soil is by conduc-
tion, the equation for heat flux in the soil is given by the Fourier
relation,
a T/at = vcV2T (43)
where T = temperature, and vc = thermal diffusion coefficient. If
32T/8 x2 = a2T/ay2 = 0, using Eq. (26) to define the heat flux, and
considering z to increase positively with height,
qo = qz + f p cp ( T/at) dz . (44)
Since it is desirable to determine the surface heat flux from soil
temperature difference with time, qz must equal zero. That is,
measurements must cover the range from the surface to a point
where aT/az = 0. Hence,
q0= f p (aT/at)dz.
z
(45)
9.6 Computation of Surface Heat Budgets
During the 70 gas releases of Project Prairie Grass, personnel
of the Texas A&M Research Foundation made measurements of net
radiation as well as of wind velocity, vapor pressure, air tempera-
ture, and soil temperature at several levels. These data have been
used in the energy balance equation as a measure of the applicability
of the expressions developed for evaluating the fluxes of sensible
and evaporative heat.
The systems of measurement employed in the study are de-
scribed in Chapter 7 of this report and need not be repeated here. The
method of analysis of the data as pertinent to the various flux compu-
tations, however, is given below.
Referring to Eq. (37), evaluation of Au = (u2z - uz) and AT = (T2z Tz)
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
111
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
is all that is required to evaluate the flux of sensible heat. These
values, of course, are obtainable from profile measurements of wind
speed and air temperature. Specifically, the mean values of u and T at
12.5, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600 centimeters were measured
for a 20- to 30-minute interval surrounding the gas release intervals
and plotted versus the logarithm of elevation. Inasmuch as the de-
veloped relationships apply in the region where u is linear with In z,
the portions of the profiles significant to the study are straight lines,
and the double-level variation is merely the abscissa increment be-
tween any two successive levels along the profile.
To minimize plotting and reading errors, the increments were
read between four levels and divided accordingly. Of course, not all
profiles were strictly linear. In such cases the "best sight" fit to a
linear profile was used with greatest weight given to the lowest levels
where deviation from linearity was a minimum.
In the u evaluation, extrapolation of the profile to u = 0 gives
the roughness parameter zo, as can be seen from
u = (u* ln z/z0 )/k
(46)
which is another form of Eq. (16). A value of 0.6 cm was found to be
the zo value for the measuring station location. This value represents
the average value of the in z versus u intercepts of 16 profiles that
were essentially linear at all levels. Hence, all wind profiles were
drawn as straight lines from the point z = 0.6 cm, u = 0, through the
lower four points of u versus the logarithm of z.
The increment of vapor pressure e = (e2z - ez) was obtained
similarly from measurements of vapor pressure at the same eleva-
tions used for wind speed and air temperature.
The soil heat flux at the surface is given by Eq. (45). Both p
and c vary with depth but so slightly, for the interval considered,
that they may be treated as constant. For the type of soil in question
(O'Neill loam, upland phase) p c = 0.28, as determined from six
p
112
different soil tests performed during the period covered by the data.
Thus, the value of soil heat flux is proportional to the area between
profiles of temperature versus depth at the beginning and the end of the
sampling period. The above, of course, is based on the assumption
that 3T/8z = 0 at some level z.
Soil temperatures were measured at 3.12, 6.25, 12.5, 25, 50, and
100 centimeters. If a maximum or minimum occurred at a depth of
less than 100 centimeters, then the integral is represented by the area
between the two profiles from the surface to the critical depth. If no
maximum or minimum temperature occurred, then the integral was
evaluated to 100 centimeters, provided the temperature at that depth
did not vary significantly with time during the gas release period. In-
asmuch as surface temperature was not measured, this point on the
profile was obtained from a graph of surface temperature versus
time of day for that location as given by an analog computer4 from
local input data.
Table 9.1 gives a summary of the analysis for 48 release periods
for which complete data were available. The fluxes in this table are
given in kilocalories per square centimeter per second. To facilitate
comparison of these fluxes with values determined by the University
of Wisconsin group, the fluxes are presented in calories per square
centimeter per minute in Table 9.2.
The line of best fit* of the data of Table 9.1 is y = .99x, where
y represents the net radiation values and x is the negative of the sum
of the fluxes of latent heat, sensible heat, and soil heat. The average
error (that is, between the net radiation values and the sum of the
fluxes) is 0.43 x 10-3 cal/cm2 sec. If release No. 10, which is obvi-
ously suspect, is omitted, the line of best fit is y = 0.97x and average
error is 0.36 x 10-3 cal/cm2 sec.
*Determined by the method of least squares. The second significant fig-
ure in the equation of best fit should not be taken to imply an accuracy
of 1 percent, but is given only as a means of comparison with other equa-
tions based on different methods of evaluating heat fluxes.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
113
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 9.1. Heat budget data collected by the Texas A&M Research Foundation
Gas Mi AO Aeqs + E q.
qc qe Eqi R n Rn
Kcal Kcal Kcal Kcal Kcal Kcal
Rel. cm mb 2 2 2 2 2 2
No. sec cm sec cmsec cmsec cmsec cmsec cmsec
2
23
- .28
-.42
- .80
-2.32
;07
- 3.05
2.90
.15
7
54
-1.07
-.33
- 7.16
-4.28
-1.58
-13.02
12.80
.22
8
54
- .51
-.20
- 3.41
-2.59
.23
- 5.77
5.70
.07
9
84
- .53
-.23
- 5.52
-4.64
-1.18
-11.34.
11.40
- .06
10
57
- .90
-.13
- 6.36
-1.78
-1.39
- 9.53
12.80
-3.27
15
40
- .70
-.09
- 3.47
- .86
-1.11
- 5.44
5.00
.44
16
42
-1.03
-.23
- 5.36
-2.32
-2.38
-10.06
10.00
.06
19
73
- .60
-.10
- 5.43
-1.75
-1.08
- 8.26
8.10
.16
20
112
.83
-.05
-11.53
-1.34
-1.43
-14.30
13.70
.60
21
72
.10
-.01
.89
- .17
.22
.94
- .90
- .04
22
83
.15
-.02
1.54
- .40
.28
1.42
- 1.40
- .02
25
34
- .52
-.48
- 2.19
-3.92
.03
- 6.08
6.20
- .12
26
79
- .63
-.30
- 6.17
-5.69
-1.06
-12.92
12.60
.32
27
73
- .82
-.18
- 7.42
-3.15
-2.68
-13.25
12.30
.95
30
83
- .70
-.25
- '7.20
-4.98
-1.52
-13.70
12.90
.80
31
99
- .38
-.14
- 4.66
-3.33
- .95
- 8.94
9.20
.26
32
20
.33
-.06
.82
- .29
.99
1.52
- 1.30
.22
33
90
.48
-.30
- 5.36
-6.48
.78
-11.06
10.90
.16
34
110
.55
-.15
- 7.50
-3.96
- .35
-11.81
11.30
.51
35s
44
.12
-.04
.65
- .42
.76
.99
- .70
- .29
35
10
.12
.00
.15
.00
.82
.97
- .91
- .06
36
16
.23
-.06
.46
- .23
.61
.84
- .85
.01
38
48
.10
.00
.60
.00
.35
.95
- .85
.10
39
22
.26
-.02
.71
- .11
.78
1.38
- 1.35
- .03
40
20
.23
-.04
.57
- .19
.70
1.03
- 1.14
.06
41
42
.16
-.01
.83
- .10
.51
1.24
- 1.23
.01
42
.70
.15
-.01
1.30
- .17
.26
1.39
- 1.92
.53
43
65
- .83
-.17
- 6.69
-2.65
- .63
- 9.97
10.80
- .83
44
71
- .85
-.07
- 7.48
-1.19
-1.35
-10.02
9.70
.32
45
70
- .20
-.03
- 1.74
- .50
.66
- 1.58
, 1.40
.18
46
66
.13
-.04
1.06
- .63
1.34
1.77
- 1.40
- .37
48s
38
- .77
-.34
- 3.63
-3.10
-.1.54
- 8.27
7.00
1.27
48
91
- .51
-.11
- 5.75
-2.40
-1.01
- 9.16
8.10
1.06
49
.82
- .76
-.15
- 7.73
-2.95
-1.67
-12.35
12.90
- .55
50
81
- .90
-.13
- 9.04
-2.53
-1.33
-12.90
12.80
.10
51
82
- .67
-.13
- 6.81
-2.56
- .52
- 9.89
8.80
1.09
52
55
-1.25
-.19
- 8.52
-2.51
- .68
-11.71
11.00
. .71
53
21
. .43
-.03
1.12
- .15
.98
1.95
- 1.50
- .45
54
46
.17
.00
.97
.00
.67
1.64
- 1.70
.06
55
69
.15
.00
1.28
.00
.55
1.83
- 1.50
- .33
56
56
.10
.04
.69
1.54
.64
1.87
- 1.40
- .47
57
85
- .13
-.02
- 1.37
- .41
.34
- 1.44
1.30
.14
59
26
.26
-.01
.84
- .06
.58
1.36
- 1.40
.04
60
54
.17
-.01
1.14
- .13
.52
1.53
- 1.40
- .13
61
96
- .70
-.08
- 8.33
-1.84
-1.21
-11.38
11.90
- .52
62
63
- .37
-.17
- 2.89
-2.57
- .60
- 6.06
7.20
-1.14
63
3
.83
.47
.31
.34
.95
1.60
- 1.10
- .50
64
3
.43
.18
.16
.13
.96
1.25
- .50
- .75
114
Table 9.2. Heat budget data collected by the Texas A&M Research Foundation
?
Gas
Release
No.
qc
cal
qe
cal
qs
cal
R.Il
cal
2 .
cm min
2 .
cm rain
2 .
cm rain
2 .
cm min
2
-.048
-.139
.004
.174
7
-.430
-.257
-.095
.768
8
-.205
-.155
.014
.342
9
-.331
-.278
-.071
.684
10
-.382
-.107
-.083
.768
15
-.208
-.052
-.067
.300
16
-.322
-.139
-.143
.600
19
-.326
-.105
-.065
.- .486
20
-.692
-.080
-.086
.822
21
.053
-.010
.013
-.054
22
.092
-.024
.017
-.084
25
-.131
-.235
.002
.372
26
-.370
-.341
-.064
.756
27
-.445
-.189
-.161
.738
30
-.432
-.299
-.091
.774
31
-.280
-.200
-.057
.552
32
.049
-.017
.059
-.078
33
-.322
-.389
.047
.654
34
-.450
-.238
-.021
.678
35s
.039
-.025
.046
-.042
35
.009
.000
.049
-.055
36
.028
-.014
.037
-.051
38
.036
.000
.021
-.051
39
.043
-.007
.047
-.031
40
.034
-.011
.042
-.068
41
.050
-.006
.031
-.074
42
.078
-.010
.016
-.115
43
-.401
-.159
-.038
.648
44
-.449
-.071
-.081
.502
45
-.104
-.030
.040
.084
46
.064
-.038
.080
-.084
48s
-.218
-.186
-.092
.420
48
-.345
-.144
-.061
.426
49
-.464
-.177
-.100
.774
50
-.542
-.152
-.080
.768
51
-.409
-.154
-.031
.528
52
-.511
-.151
-.041
.660
53
.067
-.009
.059
-.090
54
.058
.000
.040
-.102
55
.077
.000
.033
-.090
56
.041
.032
.038
-.084
57
-.082
-.025
.020
.078
59
.050
-.004
.035
-.084
60
.068
-.008
.031
-.084
61
-.500
-.110
-.073
.714
62
-.173
-.154
-.036
.432
63
.019
.020
.057
-.066
64
.010
.008
.058
-.030
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
115
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Figure 9.3 is a scatter diagram of the data of Table 9.1.
A comparison of Eq. (40) with the Thornthwaite-Holzman evapo-
ration formula Shows that the latter relation differs from the former
by a constant factor. The equations are, respectively,
qie = AuP
cl (pk2 Aub.h)/(ln 2)2
2e
(46)
(47)
where Ah is the difference in specific humidity between elevations z
and 2z, and all other symbols have the meanings previously used.
Replacing h in Eq. (47) by the ratio of absolute humidity to air density
cl/q2e = cr/v (ln 2)2/ 3k2 .
le
That is,
(48)
cl2e (49)
At 20?C, the ratio of crh is equal to 1.6 or
qie 1.6 q2e (50) ?
Hence, the evaporation amount and the flux of latent heat, as computed
by the developments in this paper, are approximately 50 percent
greater than the corresponding values obtained by the Thornthwaite-
Holzman equation.
The sensible heat flux, according to the developments of this
paper, also differs from the usual computations based on equivalence
of the eddy conduction of heat and momentum by approximately 50 per-
cent. - That is,
qui = KH cp p dO/dz (51)
where KH is the eddy coefficient for heat. Assuming that Km = KH =
ku*z, where the subscript m refers to momentum, then
qui = ku* z cpp dO/dz (52)
116
0 ko
201 x 03S -z1/40/1V0 NOLLVICIVH .13N
117
LINE OF BEST FIT
????
:Pr
.10
???
0
X
Cn
j
0
Nebraska,
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-^
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Comparing this with Eq. (29)
cl2h ye r(z/O) p cp de /dz
and using Eq. (20) to evaluate ku*,
cilh/q2h = KinrICH'
which is the Prandtl number for air (.711). Hence,
th ,
c1211 1.4 q
(53)
(54)
or, as noted above, the sensible heat flux based on the reasoning of
this paper is approximately one and one-half times the flux compu-
tations based on equivalence of the Austauch values for heat and
momentum. Figure 9.4 is a scatter diagram of the O'Neill data
based on the latter concept.
The supposition that the exchange coefficients for heat and
momentum are equal or nearly so probably dates from the Reynolds'
analogy, that is,
Tip = (v + K) du/dz =Km du/dz (55)
and
-q/c p = (vc + K) de /dz = KH de/dz.
Assuming that v arid vc represent insignificant contributions to the
coefficients, KH and Km should be nearly equal.
The development used in this paper is equivalent to the postulate
that
(56)
Tip = K du/dz = Km du/dz, (57)
-q/p cp = vc K dO/dz = KH de/dz, (58)
hence, using Eqs. (9) and (29),
118
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Km/KH = v/vc.
(59)
It is not intended to imply that the equivalence of the eddy co-
efficients for momentum and heat has been universally accepted in
the past. Swinbank6 from experiments conducted in Australia says
..? there is a certain notable consistency about the manner in which
KH exceeds K ... Not only is this order of the coefficients main-
tained from one occasion to another, but also, broadly, the propor-
tionality among them." From five measurements of K and KH'
his .average ratio is
KH/Km = 1'8'
(60)
which is certainly of the magnitude of the ratio of vc to v.
Data obtained by Rider4 at Cardington, England, also supports
this value of the ratio of Km and KH, although Rider did not interpret
the results as support for the non-equivalence of the two coefficients.
From averaging of nine evaluations of KH and Km (at 75 centimeters)
from observed energy balance computations, Rider finds as an average
ratio
Km/KH = .70.
While this value is indeed near unity, it is remarkably near the
Prandtl number (.711) for air.
While detailed profiles of wind, temperature, and humidity have
been utilized in verifying the turbulent transfer equations, the equa-
tions themselves require measurements at only two levels. Since
measurement of a detailed profile requires a large number of highly
accurate instruments and a comparable amount of technical time and
attention, it would seem important to determine the degree of accuracy
with which the various terms in the energy budget would have balanced
had only two levels been available. Further, the data available should
be sufficient to determine the optimum levels at which measurements
could have been made.
tr-
120
The matter of optimum levels must require a compromise which
will minimize three possible sources of error. First, the lowest level
needs to be far enough above the surface that irregularities in that
surface do not cause an appreciable uncertainty in determining the
height of that level. Second, the difference in height between the two
levels needs to be sufficiently great (in terms of doubled levels) so that
errors caused by instrument inaccuracies and sampling errors are not
too great. Third, the top level needs to be as low as possible so as to
avoid the effect of buoyancy.
To study the combined effect of these three error sources, the data
of the previous section have been treated in the following way. Values
of Au, AO, and ie have been obtained from the 21 pairs of levels; 25 to
50 cm, 25 to 100 cm, 25 to 200 cm, 25 to 400 cm, 25 to 800 cm, 25 to
1600 cm, 50 to 100 cm, 50 to 200 cm, 50 to 400 cm, 50 to 800 cm, 50 to
1600 cm, 100 to 200 cm, 100 to 400 cm, 100 to 800 cm, 100 to 1600 cm,
200 to 400 cm, 200 to 800 cm, 200 to 1600 cm, 400 to 800 cm, 400 to
1600 cm, and 800 to 1600 cm. The number of Auts, AO's and he's, ob-
tained in this manner (per pair of levels) that fall within 10 percent of
the corresponding profile determinations are shown in Table 9.3.
As can be seen from this table, the levels at 25 and 100 cm appear
to give the most satisfactory representation of the entire profiles. This
is further substantiated by Table 9.4 which lists the best fit equations
and average error for the four best level pairs, as well as that obtained
from use of the profiles to determine Au, AO, and Ae.
9.7 Conclusion
The method developed in this paper appears to be satisfactory for
calculating the turbulent transport of sensible and latent heat over the
range of conditions represented by the data available.
However, since it differs from earlier methods by approximately
50 percent and since the test data are restricted to a summer season
with exclusively southerly winds, it would appear desirable that it be
tested further, preferably by other workers in the field.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
121
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 9.3. Percentage of double-level values within 10 percent of
profile values
Level
Pair
(cm)
Au
cm/sec
AO
?C
A e
mb
%
Level
Pair
(cm)
Au
cm/sec
AO
ie
mb
25-50
17
19
19
38
100-200
15
12
10
26
25-100
25
25
18
47
100-400
15
14
8
26
25-200
28
20
17
45
100-800
8
8
15
22
25-400
24
18
11
37
100-1600
7
8
12
19
25-800
12
17
11
28
200-400
12
9
9
21
25-1600
12
15
15
29
200-800
6
10
12
19
50-100
18
13
8
27
200-1600
3
6
14
16
50-200
17
13
13
30
400-800
4
5
6
10
50-400
19
17
11
33
400-1600
4
4
6
10
50-800
10
11
12
23
800-1600
4
3
6
9
50-1600
9
8
8
17
Table 9.4. Statistical analysis of heat budget balance
Method
Average Error
Line of Best Fit* (cal/cm2 sec)
Levels
Employed
CLASSICAL
DISTORTED AREA
DISTORTED AREA
DISTORTED AREA
DISTORTED AREA
DISTORTED AREA
y= 1.37X
y= .92X
y = 1.0 X
y = 1.0 X
y = 1.0 X
y= .99X
1.60 x
1.14 x 10-.2
1.06 x
1.25 x 10-2
1.40 x 10-2
.43 x
Profiles
25-50 cm
25-100 cm
25-200 cm
25-400 cm
Profiles
*Line of regression
122
I?
REFERENCES
1. Blasius, H., Z. Math. u. Physik 56, 1908.
2. Halstead, M. H., "The Fluxes of Momentum, Heat, and Water
Vapor in Micrometeorology." Publications in Climatology 7,
No. 2, The Johns Hopkins University Laboratory of Climatology,
Seabrook, New Jersey, 1954.
3. Halstead, M. H., et al., "A Preliminary Report on the Design of
a Computer for Micrometeorology." Scientific Report No. 1,
Project 93, Texas A&M Research Foundation, College Station,
Texas, 1956.
4. Rider, N. E., "Eddy Diffusion of Momentum, Water Vapor, and
Heat Near the Ground." Proc. Roy. Soc. A246, 481-501, 1954.
5. Sutton, 0. G., Micrometeorology, McGraw-Hill, New York,
198 and 80, 1951.
6. Swinbank, W. C., "The Measurement of the Vertical Transfer
of Heat, Water Vapor, and Momentum by Eddies in the Lower
Atmosphere, with Some Results." Geophysical Research
Papers No. 19, Geophysics Research Directorate, AF Cambridge
Research Center, 363, 1952.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
123
_
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
CHAPTER 10
HEAT BUDGET DETERMINATIONS MADE BY THE
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN GROUP
V. E. Suomi and P. M. Kuhn
University of Wisconsin
10.1 Instrumentation
The instrumentation used in heat budget determinations during
Project Prairie Grass was, with two exceptions, the same as that
used by the University of Wisconsin during the Great Plains Tur-
bulence Field Program in 1953.1 The exceptions are as follows:
a. In 1953 the thermocouples in the psychrometers were wired
to give the dry bulb temperature difference and the difference in the
wet bulb depressions. During these experiments the thermocouples
were wired to give the dry bulb temperature difference and the wet
bulb temperature difference so that the vapor pressure difference is
given by the relation
Ae= (K+ k) Tw -k A Td
(1)
where k is the psychrometric constant and K is the slope of the vapor
pressure vs. temperature curve at the mean wet bulb temperature.
Every 10 minutes the positions of the two psychrometers were
reversed but the connection to the recorder was not. This has the
effect of doubling the sensitivity and yet eliminating dead zone and
zero errors. Therefore, the vapor pressure and temperature gradi-
ents obtained during the Prairie Grass experiments are more accurate
than those obtained in 1953. This is especially true during those times
that the gradient is small.
b. Soil heat flow was obtained by measuring the change in the
heat content of the layer 0-5 cm and the heat flux through the -5 cm
124
a
level. The change in mean temperatur.e of the 0-5 cm layer was meas-
ured using 12 spAce-integrating thermometers similar to those used in
1953. Instead of a manual balancing of a Wheatstone bridge, the out-of-
balance current was recorded on the 12-point Brown recorder. The out-
of-balance current depends on battery voltage as well as resistance;
however, the former was held constant by employing mercury alkaline
batteries. The heat flow through the -5 cm layer was measured using 5
heat flux plates connected in series. The soil term G listed in the tables
in Section 10.2 is the sum of the change in the heat content of the layer 0
to -5 cm and the heat flux through the -5 cm level.
10.2 Heat Budget Data
The heat budget values listed in Table 10.1 are 20-minute averages
centered, in each case, on the period of gas release. Estimated values
are shown in parentheses. Missing values, due to instrument failure,
are denoted by dashes. Positive signs indicate fluxes toward the air-
earth interface; negative signs indicate fluxes away from the interface.
125
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 10.1
Heat budget data* collected by the University
of Wisconsin
Table 10.1 Heat budget data* collected by the University
of Wisconsin (cont)
Gas Release
Number
Date
Time
(CST)
RN
Gas Release Date Time RN L
Number (CST)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
7/5
7/6
7/6
7/6
7/10
7/10
7/11
2200
0100
1400
1700
1400
1700
1000
1.30
.73
1.35
.75
1.06
-.10
-.10
1.08
.50
.82
.36
.61
-.39
-.23
-.30
-.26
-.12
-.18
-.12
.01
-.13
43 8/15 1200 1.11 .93 --
44 8/15 1400 1.13 .93
45 8/15 1200 .41 .25 --
46 8/15 1845 .05 -.03 .04
47 8/20 1000 .85 .45 -.21 -.14 -.11
48 8/21 0900 .39 .21 -.11 -.05 -.04
10
7/11
1200
1.23
.76
-.38
-.24
-.14
All heat budget entries are in langleys per minute.
11
7/14
0800
.72
.39
-.21
-.12
-.05
12
7/14
1000
1.15
.73
-.38
-.21
-.14
I represents insolation
13
7/22
2000
.03
-.08
.01
0
.06
RN represents net radiation
14
7/22
2200
0
-.07
.01
.01
.05
L represents convective heat transfer
15
7/23
0800
.70
.38
-.19
-.08
-.10
E represents evaporation
16
7/23
1000
1.15
.70
-.36
-.18
-.16
G represents soil heat transfer
17
7/23
2000
.05
-.06
0
.01
.05
( )
denotes estimated value
18
7/23
2200
0
-.09
__
--
.04
denotes missing data due to instrument failure
19
7/25
1100
1.10
.69
-.40
-.16
-.14
20
7/25
1300
1.30
.85
-.52
-.26
-.06
21
7/25
2200
0
-.05
.02
.01
.02
22
7/26
0000
0
-.07
.02
.01
.05
23
7/29
2100
0
-.09
.04
.02
.02
REFERENCE
24
7/29
2300
0
-.08
.03
.02
.02
25
8/1
1300
.72
.46
-.19
-.23
-.04
26
8/2
1200
.86
.61
-.20
-.33
-.08
1.
Lettau, H. H. and Davidson, B. Exploring the Atmosphere's First
27
8/2
1400
.97
.64
-.19
-.37
-.08
Mile. Pergamon Press, New York, 1957, Volume 1, Chapters 2,
28
8/3
0000
0
-.09
--
--
--
3, and 4.
29
8/3
0200
0
-.06
--
.01
30
8/3
1300
1.22
.84
-.34
-.39
-.10
31
8/3
1500
.89
.58
-.25
-.31
-.03
32
8/6
2000
.02
( -.09)
--
--
.04
33
8/7
1300
1.09
.83
-.39
-.35
-.08
34
8/7
1500
1.10
.84
-.44
-.36
-.05
35
8/11
2130
0
-.06
.02
.01
.03
36
8/11
2330
0
-.07
.01
0
.05
37
8/12
0300
0
-.05
--
.02
38
8/12
0500
.01
-.07
--
.02
39
8/13
2230
0
0
-.01
-.02
.03
40
8/14
0030
0
-.01
-.01
-.02
.04
41
8/14
0300
0
-.01
-.01
-.01
.02
42
8/14
0500
0
0
-.01
-.01
.02
126
127
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release
:j
CHAPTER 11
OPTICAL MEASUREMENTS OF LAPSE RATE
R. G. Fleagle
University of Washington*
11.1 Introduction
Detailed and very accurate observations of temperature structure
in the lowest 50 cm of the atmosphere have been made above a cold
water surface by an optical method.' These observations reveal a
minor anomaly in the temperature profile at a height of about 10 cm of
air (equivalent to an optical path length of 10-4 gm cm-2 of water
vapor) which is consistent with simple numerical calculations based on
extrapolated radiative absorption coefficients for water vapor. At this
height above a cold surface, the air cools by radiation at several de-
grees Centigrade per hour; and, this cooling is reflected in the observed
anomaly in the temperature profile.
Optical observations were incorporated in Project Prairie Grass
to determine the detailed temperature structure above a warm land
surface. The method used was essentially that described in reference
1, but certain modifications in detailed technique were necessary. The
instrument used was a field artillery range finder operated in the verti-
cal position. In lapse conditions the two light paths from instrument to
target diverge from their respective straight-line directions as shown in
Figure 11.1, whereas in inversions the light paths converge from their
respective straight-line directions. The instrument is mechanically
* Personnel of the Texas A&M Research Foundation, under the direction
of Professor Maurice Halstead, constructed the optical targets and
made the time series observations.
Max Scoggins, General Electric Company, Richland, Washington, helped
in installation of the equipment and in making the profile observations.
128
50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
limited to measuring converging angles; consequently, in lapse conditions
it was necessary to use targets separated by a vertical distance less than
the separation of the lenses. The separation used in lapse conditions was
90 or 95 cm, whereas the separation of lenses is 100 cm. For this reason,
In lapse conditions the upper path sloped slightly with respect to the lower
path, but not enough to affect the measurements appreciably. From Figure
11.1 and Eq. (1) of reference 1, it follows that
h1
h2'
=
h1 x'
me (n-1)
[g
R
?
g
h2 x'
2nT
xx' (n-1)
2 nT
R
T\
\8 zi2
where n represents index of refraction for air; T, absolute temperature;
z, height coordinate; x, horizontal distance between instrument and target;
and x', apparent distance to point of convergence of tangent lines (instru-
mental reading). Also, Figure 11.1 shows that
h2' -h1' = (Z-L) - Z
where L represeRts the vertical separation at the target lines and Z the
vertical separation of the lenses. Substitution of Eqs. (1) and (2) in Eq.
(3) gives
2 nT LZ-L Z
8 z)2 a
T
2 8 z ) x(n-1) x'
For L = Z, Eq. (4) reduces to Eq. (5) of reference 1. Nine targets, each
consisting of two (or more) horizontal black lines on white backgrounds
were mounted at varying distances from the instrument. The black lines
are indicated as target lines in Figure 11.1. Flashlightibulbs were in-
stalled at a vertical separation of 100 cm for night observations. Heights
of the lower black line, equal to height of the lower lens, were chosen as
(3)
(4)
129
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
indicated in the accompanying data. In order to minimize effects of in-
homogeneities in terrain, targets were placed as close as was feasible
to a radial line running outward from the instrument. For the first 50
yards the land was extremely flat, the math obstructions to vision being
small tufts of grass. On. July 11, the grass was cut to lawn height along
the light path out to about 100 yards permitting observations at a mean
height of about 6 cm above .the soil. Between 50 and 300 yards the land
was flat except for a few areas of small scale roughness. Between 300
and 500 yards a ridge in the terrain may have influenced the 500 yard
(50 cm) readings. However, the portion of the light path near the target
is less important than the portion near the lenses, so that the effect of
inhomogeneous terrain probably was small compared with the effect of
variations in time.
11.2 Observations
The differences in lapse rates at the heights of the upper and lower
lenses computed from Eq. (1) are tabulated in Tables 11.1, 11.2, and
11.3. Five of the nine profiles are shown in Figure 11.2. On July 10 at
1715 CST, prior to grass cutting, the anomaly was unmistakable at about
16 cm. On July 11 and 12, after the grass was cut, the anomaly was
present at a height of about 12 cm; but the height of the anomaly above
the effective radiating surface was comparable to the earlier observa-
tions.
In order to develop the temperature profile from the differences in
lapse rate, the lapse rate at one height must be known. The lapse rate
at 150 cm was approximated by extrapolating the curves of the type
shown in Figure 11.2 linearly to 150 cm and assuming that this value
represents the lapse rate at this height. Although this assumption may
be grossly in error, the lapse rate is in any case small enough in magni-
tude at this height that subsequent Calculations are not significantly
affected. Numerical integration then gives the temperature profiles shown
in Figure 11.3. The anomaly is evident on all but the inversion profile,
and in this case the data reveal a slight anomaly at about 25 cm height.
130
A time series of observations at 12 cm (50 yard range) was made on
25 July, 26 July, and 2 August. On 2 August four observations were taken
during each 5 minutes for 25 minutes out of each hour between 1155 and 1620
CST. These data are tabulated and are shown in Figure 11.4. They show
that the variations encountered in 25 minutes are as large as one-fourth to
one-half of the difference on lapse rate, itself. It must be concluded that
the profiles shown in Figures 11.2 and 11.3 are subject to error from time
variation in lapse rate. However, the reality of the anomaly is not in doubt
because the anomaly appeared consistently and because the anomaly in
lapse rate exceeds the variation in time by roughly an order of magnitude.
REFERENCE
1. Fleagle, R. G. ."The temperature distribution near a cold surface."
J. Meteor. 13, 160-165, 1956.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
131
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 11.1 Values of AO T/8 z) Found by Optical Method*
Lower Lens
Height
Distance
AO T/0 z)
(cm)
(yd) ?
("C/cm)
1715
1110
1845
2155
1130
1550
2135
10July
11 July
11 July
11 July
12 July
12July
12 July
100
500
I-.006
50
500
-.008
-.027
50
300
.015
+.021 to.024
+.005
-.006
.00
+.011
-.110
30
200
.025
.040 to .049
.011
.00
+.050
.017
-.600 to +.004
20
125
.041
.059 to .069
.024
.00
.074 to .090
.029
+.007
.18
75
.060
17
50
.076
15
75
.073 to .082
.042
-.025
.110
.040
+.018
14
'
30
.013
12
50
.120 to.159
.050
-.048
.170
.045
-.380
12
20
.462
10
30
.121
.00
-.066
.105
.016
.00
8
' 25
.027
-.080
.399
.096
-1.20
6
20
1.29
.096
-.092
.438
.204
-.48 to -2.1
Table 11.2 Values of A(aT/8z) Found by Optical Method*
Date
Time
(CST)
Lower Lens
Height
(cm)
Distance
(yd)
A (8T/8z)
(?C/cm)
?
21 Jay
1300
6
20
+.280
1309
12
50
.100
1425
12
50
.255
.
23 July
0800
12
50
.073
0803
6
20
.261
0905
8
25
.140
0808
10
30
.098
0810
12
50
.110
0813
15
75
.064
0815
20
125
.050
0819
30
200
.034
0822
50
300
.020
0905
8
25
.200
0909
10
30
.160
0913
12
50
.127
0917
15
75
.098
0921
20
125
.064
0925
30
200
.047
0955
12
50
.145
1007
12
50
.138
1015
12
50
.174
1200
12
50
.150
1210
12
50
.188
1355-1400
12
50
.158, .171, .171,.176,
1510
12
50
.160, .160, .135
1555
12
50
' .130, .138, .128
1655
12
50
.105, .097, .103
.
1755
12
50
.063, .065, .058
31 July
1130
6
20
.200
.200
133
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
=K-c-213war.m.lorPrtrwm-m-immrs.-7-
. _
_
'"...,",,...=.e".....`U'+m.meaeewsw.snc.naoeprnteanrz?se.ao.esnmr,,yomtw=rms.A_.moex s.rr?..-3"n`r,tnC. 15.17.C4V=VrAfftTAI
Table 11.3
Time Series of A(aT/Oz) at Height of 12 cm
Date
Time
(CST)
A (at/az)
(?C/cm)
Date
Time
(CST)
A (3T/az)
(?C/cm)
Date s
24 July
0555
.-.005,+.003,-.003
24 July
2215
-.097, -.124, -.120
25 July
0615
+.005 .002, .002
2255
-.098, -.100, -.102
0655
.015, .022, .015
2358
-.133, -.146, -.150
0717
.034, .040, .030
25 July
0015
-,130,-.104,-.128
0755
.055, .055, .058
0100
-.107, -.126, -.098
0915
.073, .071, .071
0115
-.127, -.137, -.140
0355
.080, .078, .088
0155
-.157, -.128, -.126, -.130
0915
.090, .093, 082
0215
-.197, -.193, -.222, -.257
0955
.107, .112, .109
0256
-.140, -.156, -.157, -.152
1015
.097, .097, .104
0315
-.150, -.138, -.142, -.126
1055
.106, .106, .104
0355
-.130, -.132, -.138, -.113
1115
.109, .118, .112
0415
-.112, -.111, -.075,-.092
1155
.118, .119, .120
0455*
-.105, -.097, -.098, -.094
1215
.135, .139, .140
0455*
-.004, -.014, -.010 ?
1255
.148. .149, .154
0515
-.004, -.014, -.002
1315
.144, .160, .156
0555
-.000, -.004, -.006
1355
.144. .144, .152
0615
.010, .020, .015
1415
.144, .152, 142
0655
.063, .063, .061
1455
.164, .148, .130
0715
.079, .074, .063
1515
.125, .168, .125
0755
.060, .065, .067
111.
1555
.119, .117, .121.
0815
.078, .068, .068
1755
.092, .095, .086
0855
.063, .061, .063
26 July
1815
.097, .092, .102
0915
.057, .061, .055
1855
.043, .060, .054
0955
.090, .092, 088
1915
.052, .060, .052
1015
.086, .092, .096
1955
-.011,-.016,-.009
1055
.124, .129, .134
2015
-.030, -.030, -.032
1115
.109, .092, .096
2055
-.192, -.180,- 184
1155
.134, .137, .140
2115
-.120, -.117, -.120
1215
.128, .134, .134
2155
-.094, -.102, -.130
1255
.126, .123, .129
0355
.000, .009, .000
0615
.007, .013, .011
0355
.037, .034, .046
0715
.060, .071, .063
0755
.037, .031, .033
11
0815
0355
.041, .045, .045
.073, .075, .085
0915
.115, .115, .106
0955
.137, 125, .132
1015
.100, . 1 097, .093
Time
(CST)
A (a Vaz)
('c/cm)
1315
1355
1415
1455
1515
1555
1615
1655
1715
1755
1816
1855
1917
1955*
1955*
2054
2124
2155
2255
2315
.135,
.123,
.120,
.119,
.123,
.108,
.094,
.088,
.080,
.046,
.143,
.123,
.117,
.117,
.117,
.102,
.102,
.090,
.076,
.048,
.140
.125
.119
.115
.115
.106
.096
.086
.080
.039
?
.053, .055, .058
.025, .027, .036
.017, .025, .021
.025, .023, .015
-.079, -.076, -.069, -.072
-.107, -.092, -.101, -.100
-.096, -.082. -.078, -.094
-.080,-.105,-.081,-.066
-.113, -.098, -.094
-.112,-.112,-.107,-.111
2315 -.071, -.063, -.063
0015 -.036, -.031, -.047, -.047
0056 -.053, -.056, -.057, -.059
0150 -.052, -.063, -.047, -.036
0215 -.054, -.052, -.052, -.053
0255 -.047. -.039, -.049, -.047
0315 -.058, -.050, -.051, -.047
0355 -.072,-.096,-.098,-.099
0415 -.100, -.080, -.102, -.107
0515 .017, .017, .017
*Observations were made at 0455 and 1955 on 25 July 1956 using both lights mounted 100 cm apart and black lines 90 cm apart. The members
of each pair of observations differ significantly from one another. This indicates an error in one or both types of observation. An error in
positioning of one of the target lights of two millimeters would result in an error 0.1C cm-1 in the lapse rate measurements. An error in
positioning of this magnitude easily may have occurred, so that all nighttime observations may be in error by roughly -0.1C cm-1.
X
i="L.2:..42t11;i:?`:.11614,',20j;:.' "
4
\
OBJECTIVE
LENSES
XI
TARGET LINES
?????????
Ar
Figure 11.1 Light paths and related geometry.
-
h
hI2
17
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
100
50
40
-E 30
0
020
ce
w
)-4
co
0?J 0 5
Ui
0
10
-N
N
N
N
?
?
\
?
??? .......\\NN 1 ?
?. ,% 1 X 1
1
?
4-
-..
it
? ?
I ix*:
----
7-
x
10
'7 5
4
x
-
.. .... .. x
x...... - ...
-,.. .,...
1
/e
I ii
0
176,
/
//
10-2 10-1
(9T/3 z ) ( deg. C )
10 ?
Figure 11.2 Optical observation of A,(8 TAz), O'Neill, Nebraska,
10-12 July 1956.
30
0
?
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10
"7' '47'7: . 7:"F A ;.:'::7?5=.7.771
7/5
PRIOR TO
GRASS
CUTTING
r 111110 12 1/30
0
?
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0
1 2
T -T30 (DEGREES CENTIGRADE)
3 4
Figure 11.3 Optical temperature profiles, O'Neill, Nebraska,
10-12 July 1956.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
??????
??Th
?
cr)
?Ts
a)
w , 0
2 N bn
co 0
o
cr Ef c\I
_ co
_
????------e
?
?. _
? 0
in
c.) ?. 0 - V
( , _ U13 9 60p)(Ze/ le) V
7-1
a)
txr;
138
CHAPTER 12
RAWINSONDE DATA
P. A. Giorgio
Geophysics Research Directorate
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
The table in this chapter contains rawinsonde measurements
made by the 6th Weather Squadron (Mobile)., Tinker AFB, Oklahoma.
A rawinsonde ascent was made at the test site for all gas releases
except those numbered 35s and 48s. For each ascent, GMD-1A equip-
ment was used and tabular data computed according to the instruc-
tions contained in the USWB Circular P and Air Weather Service
Addenda. The computations were reviewed by an independent group
using the same techniques.
Values of pressure, height, temperature and relative humidity
are given for the significant and mandatory levels. The pressure
is given in whole millibars, the height in meters above the ground
(elevation of site above mean sea level is 603 meters), the tempera-
ture in tenths of degrees centigrade and the relative humidity in
percent.
Values of the wind are given for standard heights. The height
is given in meters above the ground, the direction in degrees
(360 degree compass) to the nearest ten degrees, and the speed
to the nearest tenth of a meter per second.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
139
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1
Table 12.1 (Cont1ntied)
Gas Release No. 1
3 July 1956 1050C
Gas Release No. 2
3 July 1956 1450C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
945
0
22.5
65 ,
945
0
24.0
66
934
20.0
67
933
21.8
61
900
420
17.6
78
900
423
19.0
72
860
14 4
91
850
912
14.7
86
850
906
13.8
91
844
14.3
88
800
1416
111
93
800
1423
11.5
93
744
7.9
94
771
9.4
96
730 ,
5.5
81
729
7.5
100
706
3.8
45 -
700
2530
5.4
100
700
2522
4.7
52
679
3.9
100
694
5.5
58
655
3.5
100
638
1.6
61
620
- 1.6
100
600
3767
1.1
70
609
604
- 1.5
0.0
97
89
600
3778
- 0.1
82
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
120
1.
SFC
02
140
1.6
350
140
2.7
370
120
2.0
630
160
2.2
690
140
2.6
920
180
3.0
960
170
3.1
1200
190
3.9
1250
160
2.6
1470
200
4.1
1530
160
2.1
1770
190
3.5
1820
170
2.3
2050
220
2 6
2120
190
2.2
2320
250
3.2
2410
230
2.7
2630
250
3.4
2710
250
3.9
2920
230
3.2
3030
270
8.8
3190
210
3.0
3320
260
10.6
3470
190
2.9
3620
250
9.0
3750
190
2.1
3930
270
10.3
4020
190
3.2
Gas Release No. 3
5 July 1956 2150C
Gas Release No. 4
6 July 1956 0050C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(57)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
948
19.8
85
947
19.1
94
940
24.8
61
926
25.8
74
900
454
21.9
62
900
446
23.4
61
882
20.5
63
880
21.6
52
850
948
18.1
54
851
19.0
63
'
837
.
17.1
50
850
941
19.0
63
805
14.5
58
800
1459
15.6
56
800
1464
14.1
56
731
10.6
45
762
11.9
45
700
2578
8.2
44
725
9.0
60
661
4.1
42
700
2578
6.5
62
626
0.9
57
695
5.9
62
611
0.9
35
672
4.0
64
600
3831
- 0.1
35
636
0.8
54
600
3823
- 3.1
55
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
if
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
140
1
SFC
02
180
2
250
140
3.2
380
190
5.4
520
160
3.0
630
180
4.3
810
180
1.9
910
170
3.8
1080
140
1.8
1170
160
3.2
1380
130
2.2
No Data
1630
190
0.6
2990
290
9.9
1920
270
0.6
3280
290
8.1
2220
300
4 5
3600
310
9.5
2460
290
5.0
3850
300
10.8
2710
280
5.2
2980
290
5.0
.
3230
3490
300
300
5.2
6.0
?
3730
280
8.2*
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
P '
(mb) .
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P ?
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
946
0
31.1
34
944
0
31.5
34
932
27.5
38
900
. 425
26.8
42
900 ?
440
24.1
43
866
23.1
50
885
22.6
44
850
926
856
22.0
33
822
20.8
39
850
938
21.5 '
34
800
1449
20.2
45
800
1462
17.8
47
734
13.1
38
720
11.5
67
700
2579
10.0
42
700
2591
' 94
71
660
6.0
50
660
4.9
76
600
3843
2.5
34
632
2.8
47
.
600
3849
0.0
40
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
160
4
SFC
02
170
5
280
170
7.4
300
180
11.8
550
170
6.8
700
180
13.4
850
190
6.2
Signal F
inure
1130
200
6.2
No Data
1470
210
5.8
1800
210
5.9
2100
220
7.7
2440
220
11.0
.
2750
230
10.6
3050
-240
9.8
3380
230
13.9
3700 .
230
16.0
4020
220
15.6
,
-
?
?
. .
.
.
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 7
10 July 1956 1350C
Gas Release No. 8
10 July 1956 1650C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.II.
NO
r
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
946
0
31 0
30
945
0
31.6
30
938
26.8
28
930
28.9
30
904
24.5
35
900
433
25.9
35
900
439
24.1
37
850
931
20.9
42
850
935
19.5
49
837
19.4
45
800
1433
14.6
59
821
18.6
52
732
7.4
76
800
1451
16.7
55
702
5.5
GI
705
8.0
66
700
2564
5.4
GO
700
2571
7.3
65
666
4.1
23
674
4.5
59
655
5.1
nib
655
3.5
32
633
3.8
nib
644
4.5
21
600
3817
1.0
nib
GOO
3824
11
mb
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(in)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
190
4.1
SFC
02
190
4.1
310
210
6 1
330
170
4.7
670
210
5.1
690
190
5.8
1050
210
4.7
1060
200
7 2
1430
220
4 8
1410
220
6.4
1780
260
3.4
1710
230
6.8
2130
300
5 6
2100
250
8.3
2460
310
8 5
2400
290
9.4
2800
310
9.4
2660
310
7.8
3130
310
9.5
2940
330
6.7
3450
310
9 6
3200
330
8.4
3780
300
9 5
3460
320
7.8
4120
300
10.1
3720
320
7.1
4000
330
7.4
143 .
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued) .
Gas Release No. 9
11 July 1956 0950C
Gas Release No. 10
11 July 1956 1150C
(m)
(?C)
R.H.
(96)
(m)
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
941
930
900
890
874
850
803
800
716
200 ?
635
600
390
888
1414
2548
3812
27 2
24.9
22.2
21.4
23.4
22.4
20.5
20.2
12.5
10.9
4.4
0.7
52
48
52
54
57
53
48
47
35
40
64
66
941
925
900
850
846
832
800
768
714
700
663
600
0
394
892
1415
2545
3804
30.8
26.5
24.4
19.9
19.4
-20.5
18.6
16.5
10.9
9.7
6.1
0.2
44
47
52
63
64
57.
50
43
56
52
46
65
Winds
ddd
(deg)
If
(m/sec)
ddd
(deg)
If
(m/sec)
SFC
02
350
680
960
1220
1520
1830
2120
2410
2720
3000
3240
3510
3750
4000
180
210
220
220
210
210
220
230
250
260
290
290
290
290
290
4.6
10 0
8.2
75
8.5
8.8
70
7.2
80
6.9
63
8.5
11 0
12.1
14.2
SFC
02
280
580
900
1220
1600
1950
2300
2670
3000
3330
3690
4070
220
230
230
220
210
210
220
240
250
260
270
280
290
3.6
6.0
5.9
6.0
8.0
7.8
6.8
6.7
7.5
9.5
11.2
11.2
13.2
- - -
144
^
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 11
14 July 1956 0750C
Gas Release No. 12
14 July 1956 osnc
P
(mb)
Z
(n)
T
(?e)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
(%)
944
0
24.5
66
944
0
30.0
48
933
22.4
65
936
26.0
56
902
22.8
68
900
421
22.9
67
900
417
22.P
68
896
22.5
68
850
916
21.7
48
890
23.5
64
816
20.8
34
850
920
23.1
35
800
1442
19.4
36
843
23.1
30
727
12.2
42
800
1446
19.9
30
700
2570
9.4
52
752
15.8
32
664
5.3
63
700
2577
10.3
49
624
3.4
34
648
4.4
66
600
3829
1.2
48
624
3.2
42
604
1.4
60
600
3836
1.1
59
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
If
(n)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
180
4.6
SFC
02
190
3.6
300
190
11.8
300
200
11.0
630
210
14.7
680
200
12.8
940
210
12.8
1030
200
12.5
1280
210
10.0
1400
200
10.3
1650
210
6.8
1780
210
6.5
1960
210
4,7
2130
210
5.0
2250
210
4.6
2470
220
4.4
2600
230
3.5
2850
250
4.4
2980
230
3.5
3270
280
5.2
3350
280
6.5
3530
310
9.4
3730
290
8.5
3850
290
9.8
4080
300
10.6
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
145
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 13
22 July 1956 1950C
Gas Release No. 14
22 July 1956 2150C
P
(nib)
_
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(V
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
949
940
900
850
800
747
700
685
645
634
622
601
600
0
459
950
1462
2566
3807
21.9
22.8
19.9
15.9
11.8
7.1
4.4
3.4
- 0.4
1.0
- 0.1
- 0.6
- 0.6
69
59
65
73
82860
...
92
80
76
80
80 '
34
22
nib
950
940
900
898
.
802
800
700
654
631
620
600
0
467
957
1468
2569
3807
16.4
22.2
19.8
19.7
15.7
11.5
11.4
4.0
0.2
0.5
0.6
- 0.8
89
64
58
57
70
86
85
77
72
49
21
mb
Winds
Winds
Z
(m)
ddd
(deg)
If
(m/sec)
Z
(m)
ddd
(deg)
If
(m/sec)
SFC
02
350
700
1020
1340
1660
1960
2270
2670
2880
3200
3520
3840
170
180
180
180
180
180
190
260
310
320
320
340
340
1.0
4.6
4.6
5.0
4.0
3.0
1.8
11
2.9
4.7
6 0
7.6
9.3
SFC
02
290
610
900
1210
1500
1800
2100
2390
2660
2930
3210
3500
3800
160
170
180
190
230
260
270
300
310
310
310
310
,310
330
1.0
4.8
4.5
3.0
3.2
2.9
1.3
2.1
5.0
7.5
8.2
7.8
7.9
8.3
146
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 15
23 July 1956 0750C
Gas Release No. 16
23 July 1956 0950C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(nib)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
949
21.0
64
948
0
26.5
48
940
19.4
66
935
23.3
54
924
21.1
67
900
454
20.8
60
900
458
20.8
59
850
945
16.7
69
897
20.7
58
841
15.9
70.
853
17.0
66
810
14.4
33
850
948
16.8
65
800
1458
13.6
34
. 800
1462
13.0
48
769
10.9
38
728
7.2
19
728
7.1
59
700
2569
6.8
nib
715
6.7
50
698
6.7
nib
708
6.4
27
644
4 0
nib
700
2564
6.4
26
600
3820
0.0
nib
681
6.4
22
658
3.9
46
600
3812
- 0.5
37
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
230
2.1
SFC
02
180
2.1
300
230
4 4
300
200
2.6
600
240
2.8
610
190
2.6
910
230
1 8
950
190
2.0
1210
230
1.0
1300
180
1.1
1500
260
0.9
1650
360
4.2
1800
330
2 0
1980
010
7.3
2090
360
4.7
2280
010
10.6
2380
360
7.8
2600
010
12.5
2680
350
9 5
2910
010
13.5
2980
350
10.7
3230
010
13.2
3290
340
10.9
3570
010
12.4
3580
350
10.0
3880
350
10.2
3850
350
8.9
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
147
Gas Release No. 17
23 July 1956 1950C
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
r
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 18
23 July 1956 2150C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
943
0
28.0
39
943
0
23.6
54
928
29.0
32
926
27.6
35
900
414
27.0
35
900
411
26.0
33
850
916
23.1
40
898
25.9
33
804
19.5
43
850
911
23.1
39
800
1441
19.1
45
841
22.8
39
?700
2571
9.8
64
800
143.5
18.9
47
600
3829 .
- 0.7
85
'700
2564
9.0
64
684
2755
7.2
67
Winds
Winds
_
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
ff
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
170
2.1
SFC
02
180
2.1
310
190
9.8
300
200
13.1
620
200
1.5
650
220
15.2
930
220
12.5
1000
240
13.2
1280
230
13.6
1310
260
13.6
1620
250
12.0
1670
280
15.0
2000
270
10.4
2000
290
14.5
2330
310
10.8
2310
300
14.5
2670
320
13.9
3010
320
15.8
3350
320
16.8
3700 .
320
18.1
4060
230
18.9
148
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 19
25 July 1956 1050C
Gas Release No. 20
25 July 1956 1250C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
RH.
(%)
945
0
28.8
38
942
0
31.0
30
932
25.8
41
917
36.6
33
900
429
22.8
47
900
406
25.1
35
878
20.5
51
870
22.0
38
850
923
20.5
26
850
904
22.3
27
823
20.8
21
838
22.5
18
800
1447
19.1
24
804
21.2
23
711
11.9
38
800
1430
20.9
24
700
2577
11.1
36
70Q
2565
11.5
38
678
9.5
28
687
10.6
24
600
3844
2.4
30
610
2.6
31
600
3827
1.8
34
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
160
3.6
SFC
02
160
6.7
320
170
6.3
360
180
12.8
620
180
7.6
700
180
11.2
900
180
8.8
1020
190
9.6
1130
190
9.0
1370
200
6.8
1380
190
6.6
1700
240
5.5
1620
210
2.8
2050
250
5.1
1820
220
2.0
2420
260
4.8
2060
250
1.4
2770
270
5.7
2280
300
2.0
3140
270
7.0
2480
310
2.3
3380
270
7.4
2700
300
2.4
3630
270
7.8
2880
300
3.0
3900
290
10.0
3080
290
4.5
3260
280
5.0
3430
250
4.0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
149
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 21
25 July 1956 2150C
Gas Release No. 22
25 July 1956 2350C
(m)
(?C)
(in)
? T
(?C)
ItJL
00
938
911
900
889
861
850
844
806
800
728
700
678
632
620
367
875
1408
.2557
3563
29.0
27.1
28.3
29.6
28
26.5
25.5
24.8
24.2
16.8
14.0
11.6
4.7
3.0
41
39
34
30
27
27
27
25
26
35
41
44
59
70
937
910
900
896
850
800
749
700
636
600
0
355
859
1390
2532
3800
26.5
25.5
26.3
26.8
25.2
23.4
19.0
13.4
5.7
2.0
45
45
43
42
36
27
29
38
50
55
Winds
Winds
ddd ff
(deg) (m/sec)-
ddd If
(in) (deg) (m/sec)
SFC
02
160
370
540
780
1030
1300
1630
2020
2380
2660
2950
3150
3340
3550
180
200
220
220
230
250
260
260
260
265
260
270
270
260
260
4.1
8.0
11.3
12.3
12.3
14.4
17.0
14.0
15.0
20.8
17.5
9.0
12.0
19.5
19.5
SFC
02
300
660
930
1220
1500
1800
2080
2360
2630
2930
3180
3450
3750
4080
170
190
200
210
220
240
260
260
250
250
250
250
250
250
270
4.6
20.0
25.0
24.6
25.3
22.0
16.0
16.0
18.8
21.0
19.5
17.0
17.0
13.0
11.4
150
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 23
29 July 1956 2050C
Gas Release No. 24
29 July 1956 2250C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.II.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(n)
T
(?C)
RH.
(%)
-
-_
944
0
23.9
70
945
0
22.2
80
900
417
21.7
78
. 936
22.4
80
860
19.4
84
900
424
19.9
85
850
011
19.5
82
897
19.7
85
838
19.1
80
854
209
75
804
17.5
76
850
919
20.9
75
800
1432
17.6
70
815
19.5
65
776
18 6
47
800
1443
18.5
69
700
2567
11.9
45
774
16.3
72
696
11.4
44
750
15.9
64
685
10.1
54
700
2576
11.1
66.
614
3.9
63
684
9.6
67
600
3837
2.2
65
659
7.0
57
600
3842
1.0
72
,
Winds
Winds
,
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
ff
(n)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
120
4.6
SFC
02
130
3.8
290
130
13,1
290
150
13.3
600
120
15.0
600
160
14.4
890
090
11.5
_
930
190
13.7
1190
070
11.5
1270
210
14 2
1480
050
11.1
1620
230
12.4
1730
020
7.8
1920
250
10.2
2020
030
5.6
2270
260
8.1
2290
030
4.1
2600
260
6.1
2520
020
3.7
2910
260
5.3
2820
010
5.3
-
3230
260
5.3
3100
010
6.4
3590
270
5.7
3360
360
6.6
3880
270
6.0
3630
360
6.5
3920
360
6.0
_
_
151
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 25
Aug 1956 1257C
Gas Release No. 26
2 Aug 1956 1150C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
946
0
24.7
66
942
0
30.3
56
934
22.4
70 .
922
25.4
64
900
436
19.7
78
900
404
23.6
70
878
18.0
84
883
22.1
73
850
927
16.6
84
850
901
20.7
70
800
1443
13.9
84
800
1424
18.4
64
700
2559
8.2
83
790
18.0
62
694
7.8
83
705
10.6
78
636
3.8
83
700
2555
10.1
79
620
3.4
79
648
5.9
85
600
3819
1.8
78
600
3822
2.4
83
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
ft
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
180
If) CD ?-4 ?-.1 N
???; c..6 cc; tri c.6 N N cri ci tr.;
SFC
02
170
3.6
350
190
230
180
9.7
680
200
500
190
11.2
960
200
770
200
11.0
1200
210
1030
200
11.5
1450
210
1300
210
12.5
1780
220
1590
210
13.8
2120
220
1910
210
13.5
2420
220
2210
210
13.5
2720
220
2520
210
14.7
3080
230
2820
230
16.0
3460
220
3130
230
17.0
3670
220
3420
230
17.0
3990
220
3730 -
230
18.0
4030
230
19.0
152
,71
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 27
2 Aug 1956 1350C
Gas Release No. 28
3 Aug 1956 0035C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.Ii.
(%)
941
0
32.2
48
940
0
25.9
66
934
29.6
52
925
28.0
59
900
398
26.6
56
900
385
26.6
55
850
898
22.0
60
892
26.1
54
813
18.5
65
878
26.6
51 .
800
1421
18.6
56
850
889
24.2
51
700
2551
10.5
69
810
21.0
51
668
7.7
73
800
1416
20.0
54
600
3817
2.6
72
721
700
2551
13.1
11.1
74
78
630
4.1
90
600
3818
1.9
89
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
ff
OW
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
170
5.1
SFC
02
170
3.1
280
190
9.2
300
200
13.2
- 580
180
7.0
590
210
18.4
880
180
8.5
830
210
22.2
1200
190
12 0
1090
210
21.3
1500
200
13.9
1320
210
20.5
1800
210
14.0
1580
210
20.1
2100
210
15.6
1870
220
21.5
2420
210
17.0
2200
220
24.0
2720
210
18.5
2490
220
20.0
3020
220
18.5
2770
210
18.5
3320
220
19.8
3020
210
18.5
3620
210
19.8
3300
210
18.7
3920
210
19.3
3550
210
18.7
3820
210
17.0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
153
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Gas Release No. _29
3 Aug 1956 0150C
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 30
3 Aug 1956 1250C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
'
T
(?C)
R.II.
(%)
P
(rub)
Z
(n)
T
(?C)
RH.
(%)
941
0
25.5
61
941
0
34.6
36
928
26.6
56
93231.6
42
900
393
25.4
54
900
401
28.7
49
893
25.1
53
850
906
23.9
56
870
25.1
48
846
23.5
57
850
895
23.8
50
800
1432
19.1
63
800
1422
20.4
54
757
14.8
70
787
19.4
55
732
14.3
60
700
2557
10.9
72
700
2564
11.5
62
668
7.5
80
630
4.8
68
601
1.9
79
607
3.7
66
600
3824
1.8
80
600
3834
3.0
66
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ft
Z
ddd
if
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/see)
SFC
02
300
180
200
4.3
16 0
SFC
02
290
190
190
5.1
9.5
620
210
20 0
580
190
11.7
950
210
23 0
880
190
11.8
1270
210
23.8
1180
190
8.4
1600
220
21.0
1450
200
8.6
1900
220
19 0
1800
200
13.4
2210
220
19.0
2150
210
18.5
2530
220
18.0
2480
210
18.5
2850
220
15.5
2780
210
18.5
3150
210
16.2
3040
210
19.0
3470
210
17.0
3300
210
21.0
3780
200
19.0
3560
220
20.0
.
4100
200
19.0
3810
4100
220
220
20.5
20.8
154
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 31
3 Aug 1956 1450C
Gas Release No. 32
6 Aug 1956 1950C
P
(mb)
Z
(n)
T
(?c)
R.H.
(cD
P
(mb)
Z
(ni)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(V
941
0
34.0
37
945
0
24.3
36
932
31.5
40
933
27.0
35
900
400
28.8
46
900
430
24.7
38
850
906
24.2
56
850
929
21.0
43
800
1433
19.7
66
800
1450
17.3
48
738
13.6
80
783
16.0
49
700
2565
10.5
76
770
15.0
41
617
3.5
68
758
14.4
51
600
3833
2.7
72
700
2576
9.2
60
647
4.1
67
600
3834
0.3
53
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
if
Z
ddd
if
OW
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
200
5.1
SFC
02
130
2.1
320
200
9.7
300
170
11.0
690
210
9.0
630
160
14.5
1010
210
10.1
980
160
17.0
1360
210
12.0
1300
150
16.0
1690
210
12.0
1680
140
16.2
2000
210
11.8
2030
130
16.2
2300
210
12.9
2400
130
13.1
2620
220
13.6
2720
140
8.8
2930
220
15.9
3080
160
8.8
3390
220
15.5
3470
220
9.6
3620
220
13.5
3840
260
12.2
3940
230
15.0
155
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Gas Release No. 33
7 Aug 1956 1258C
(m)
(?C)
944
900
894
864
850
800
700
677
640
600
0
422
921
1444
2570
3832
28.8
24.2
23.6
23.3
22.2
18.0
9.0
6.9
5.5
1.8
SFC
(m)
02
300
600
960
1320
1700
2080
2450
2830
3170
3470
3800
Winds
1 ddd
(deg)
170
170
170
170
180
190
180
150
150
170
200
230
Table 12.1 (Continued)
48
49
49
38
40
48
66
70
51
43
944
928
900
868
850
800
798
700
620
600
Gas Release No. 34
7 Aug 1956 1455C
(m)
0
422
918
1440
2569
3833
(?C)
30.5
26.0
23.6
20.7
20.3
18.7
18.6
10.3
3.3
1.0
if
(m/see)
4.6
13.3
15.2
14.5
14.5
14.0
8.4
5.3
7.2
8.0
7.8
7.3
SFC
(m)
02
340
620
960
1290
1630
1930
2210
2500
2800
3060
3330
3620
3900
Winds
ddd
(deg)
170
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
240
240
240
R. H.
38
46
53
58
55
42
41
48
55
57
ft
(m/sec)
4.6
13.0
15.4
15.5
13.8
11.9
11.0
12.1
14.1
13.7
12.0
9.5
6.8
6.1
156
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 35
11 Aug 1956 2122C
Gas Release No. 36
11 Aug 1956 2328C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
610
T
(?C)
R.11.
(%))
945
0
20.0
62
943
0
18.8
85
938
24.8
59
930
23.5
79
900
426
900
406
21.8
74
850
920
860
19.5
66
806
15.0
67
850
900
19.0
68
800
1436
800
1418
15.7
74
700
2549
5.4
90
738
11.3
83
682
4.9
77
700
2537
7.6
70
656
4.0
24
693
6.8
68
600
3799
1.3
mb
677
6.3
24
650
6.0
mb
618
3.4
24
GOO
3794
1.3
30
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/see)
(m)
(deg)
(m/see)
SFC
02
170
1.6
SFC
02
180
1.6
300
160
6.1
350
180
11.3
, 630
180
7.0
600
190
10.0
940
200
7 0
880
200
8.0
1240
220
8.6
1170
220
7.0
..
1580
240
9 8
1420
240
9.0
1950
250
10.8
1700
250
13.0
2250
260
11.9
2000
260
15.7
2510
260
11.5
2300
260
15.0
2760
260
11.4
2660
260
13.3
3000
270
11.2
2930
270
12.0
3260
280
13.1
3270
280
12.0
3480
290
16.2
3580
300
13.8
3710
300
17.8
3900
300
16.2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
157
",??
'Gas Release No; 37
12 Aug 1956 0250C
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 38
12 Aug 1956 0450C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
, (mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R:H.
(%)
942
0
20.0
75
942
0
20.0
81
912
22.8
77
905
22.5
55
900
398
22,2
71
900
395
22.5
51
883
21.3
61
886
22.5
45
850
894
19.3
61
852
20.5
45
823
17.6
62
850
891
20.3
45
800
1413
16.0
66
800
1411
16.9
59
726
11.0
81
735
12.1
78
702
9.3
69
712
10.5
54
700
2538
9.0
64
700
2534
9.1
59
677
7.6
23
673
6.0
66
622
2.0
30
656
5.0
34
600
3794
- 0.1
41
633
3.5
24
600
3787
0.2
33
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
if
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
180
3.1
SFC
02
180
3.6
300
190
14.9
330
180
14.0
630
190
15.8
680
190
18.3
950
200
12.3
1020
200
19.7
1240
220
13.4
1370
210
17.5
1520
230
15.4
1670
230
12.5
1830
250
14.8
1950
240
10.0
2140
270
12.5
2300
250
8.8
2410
270
11 2
2600
260
8.5
? 2700
260
10.9
2900
240
10.0
3000
260
9.0
3220
240
9.0
3300
260
7.8
3480
240 ,
10.0
3640 ?
260
7.4
3760
230
13.0
3960
260
6.8
4000
230
14.6
OD
158
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 39
13 Aug 1956 2220C
Gas Release No. 40
14 Aug 1956 0020C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
948
0
20.5
41
948
0
20.6
62
937
25.4
38
940
25.5
49
930
27.4
35
932
27.6
40
900
457
25.4
30
900
457
25.1
42
886
24.6
28
850
955
21.0
46
850
955
21.9
36 ?
805
17.0
49
800
1477
17.9
48
800
1476
16.9
50
761
14.5
56
763
15.0
56
700
2599
8.6
69
700
2598
8.4
49
680
6.4
71
676
5.8
46
637
2.5
26
628
0.1
53
600
3849
- 0.2
24
609
0.0
24
600
3849
- 0.6
mb
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ft
Z
ddd
- ft
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
160
2.6
SFC
02
200
2.0
420
150
10.3
300
200
12.8
850
170
9.0
600
210
14.2
1200
200
9.0
900
210
13.8
1580
230
10.3
1230
210
12.3
2030
260
12.0
1570
230
10.2
2460
280
13.0
1870
270
9.5
2780
290
13.0
2160
300
9.3
3170
300
14.0
2470
310
11.4
3580
300
14.6
2760
320
14.0
4000
310
16.0
3080
320
15.5
3400
320
16.5
3700
320
15.5
3990
320
12.5
,
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
159
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 41
14 Aug 1956 0250C
Gas Release No. 42
14 Aug 1956 0450C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
947
0
20.0
66
947
0
21.7
55
933
24.2
60
920
26.6
31
915
26.0
40
900
448
26.0
30
900
446
25.3
40
869
24.9
30
850
946
22.8
36
850
948
22.9
41
840
- 22.2
36
841
22.0
46
800
1470
18.9
52
800
1473
20.0
53
793
18.2
55
792
19.5
54
700
2597
9.3
59
733
12.7
67
696
8.9
59
711
11,1
53
600
3850
- 2.3
65
700
2603
10.0
52
674
7.1
51
614
-0.8
73
600
3858
- 2.0
69
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ft
Z
ddd
ft
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/see)
SFC
02
180
3.1
SFC
02
210
4.6
280
210
13.2
340
230
20.9
530
220
14.2
690
230
20.6
830
220
14.0
1020
240
16.3
1130
240
12.2
1330
260
17.1
1450
260
11.0
1680
260
16.5
1780
270
10.8
2000
270
14.0
2100
280
12.0
2330
270
12.4
2430
290
12.8
2630
270
11.0
2730
290
14.0
2940
280
12.0
3050
300
14.2
3270
290
12.0
3400
310
15.0
3590
290
14.0
3680
310
15.0
3910
300
15.5
4000
310
16.5
160
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 43
15 Aui 1956 1150C
Gas Release No. 44
15 Aug 1956 1350C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
945
931
900
850
846
832
800
762
746
705
700
685
630
600
0
436
937
1462
2598
3863
34.5
30.4
27.6
22.9
22.4
23.3
20.1
17.2
16.1
12.0
11.8
10.7
4.2
0.9
24
26
30
35
36
18
24
49
41
56
53
47
53
69
943
930
900
874
850
806
800
746
718
700
695
658
600
0
418
922
1448
2585
3853
36.8
31.9
29.1
26.8
24.5
20.6
20.1
16.5
13.3
11.9
11.6
8.5
1.2
19
22
25
27
30
35
57
52
54
43
40
37
64
Winds
Winds
Z
(m)
ddd
(deg)
ft
(m/sec)
Z
(m)
ddd
(deg)
If
(m/see)
SFC
02
280
570
750
1130
1430
1720
2050
2390
2700
3000
3300
3600
3910
160
160
150
140
150
200
220
250
260
260
260
260
260
260
1.5
5.0
4.2
5.0
5.8
4.4
5.7
7.0
8.7
9.8
10.7
11.2
11.2
11.2
SFC
02
280
570
880
1210
1550
1920
2300
2650
3000
3380
3720
4080
150
150
150
160
170
200
230
250
250
240
240
250
250
4.1
6.0
8.5
9.2
8.3
7.7
8.4
10.2'
11.9
11.5
10.2
9.2
10.1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
161
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 45
15 Aug 1956 1658C
Gas Release No. 46
15 Aug 1956 1835C
P
(mb)
. Z
(In)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(11)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(;)
940
0
36.5
21
939
0
33.5
24
930
33.6
22
919
33.2
22
900
392
31.0
26
900
379
31.6
26
862
27.8
30
850
888
26.9
34
850
899
26.6
31
842
26.0
37
800
1429
22.0
40
800
1420
22 3
41
700
2569
12.0
59
778
20 4
44
600
3839
2.6
77
700
2564
12.9
62
68.7
116
65
656
7.6
63
600
3834
1.9
71
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ft
Z
ddd
ft
(n)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
160
4.1
SFC
02
140
4.6
310
160
7 4
300
140
11.2
620
160
9 0
600
140
12 7
980
160
9 2
900
160
12.3
1300
170
9.5
1210
180
13.5
1610
190
9 (3
1570
190
12 9
1870
210
8.5
1890
210
12.8
2180
230
9 5
2210
220
14.0
2470
230
12 0
2590
230
14.6
2760
240
12 6
2910
240
14 0
3020
240
11 3
3240
240
13 6
3290
240
11 2
3570
250
13 6
3550
240
13 5
3880
260
13 0
3800
250
13.5
4060
260
13 9
162
1
1
Gas Release No. 47
20 Aug 1956 1005C
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 48
21 Aug 1956 0850C
P
(mb)
Z
(In)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(17)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
955
0
19.0
50
947
0
18.8
59
945
16.5
40
930
15.8
63
900
502
13.1
51
900
433
13.5
69
850
979
9.1
63
888
14.5
62
842
8.4
65
850
915
12.3
48
800
1477
4.9
60
849
12.3
48
754
0.9
56
824
10.5
51
729
- 0.4
75
812
10.9
22
706
- 1.8
43
800
1420
11 8
mb
700
2550
- 1.1
39
792
12.3
mb
694
- 0.5
34
756
11.6
mb
666
- 3.1
24
716
8.5
mb
645
- 3.3
mb
700
2532
8.0
mb
600
3768
- 6.5
mb
686
610
7.7
1.6
mb
mb
600
3787
0.5
mb
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
if
Z
ddd
ft
(111)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
320
250
230
3.1
3.7
SFC
02
330
180
210
5.7
9.0
690
250
2.5
680
230
10.8
1050
260
0.8
1030
240
12.3
1420
010
2.7
1400
250
11.0
1800
350
2.8
1730
260
9.7
2150
320
3.9
2050
260
9.0
2530
320
6.5
2380
290
11.2
2900
340
8 9
2730
290
14.0
3270
340
9.5
3050
290
16.0
3620
340
10.0
3400
290
16.5
3990
340
11.4
3710
4030
300
300
16.8
16.0
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
163
3E?
a.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 49
21 Aug 1956 1050C
Gas Release No. 50
21 Aug 1956 1350C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(V
946
0
23.8
44
943
0
29.0
38
912
17.1
44
937
25.7
40
900
430
16.5
48
900
408
22.3
48
874
14.9
54
895
21.9
49
860
15.3
54
850
901
19.0
40
850
914
14.8
56
826
1'7.4
35
800
1424
11.2
65
800
1417
14.1
37
796
11.0
66
793
13.3
37
782
9.6
20
764
11.9
20
767
11.8
mb
742
11.9
mb
728
8.8
mb
700
2533
8.8
mb
715
9.8
mb
600
3790
0.9
mb
700
2533
8.6
mb
608
1.4
nib
600
3788
0.5
nib
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
180
5.7
SFC
02
200
5.1
330
210
7.8
230
200
8.0
700
230
10.3
480
220
8.0
1050
250
12.2
700
240
7.6
1400
260
13.8
950
250
9.7
1780
260
13.3
1200
270
11.0
2120
270
13.2
1480
280
11.0
2480
280
13.2
1750
290
12.0
2800
290
14.5
2010
300
13.5
3130
290
15.3
2290
300
15.0
3480
290
16.5
2590
300
14.8
3800
290
17.5
2870
300
13.5
3110
300
16.0
3320
300
17.5
3620
300
18.5
3910
300
17.0
164
?
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 51
21 Aug 1956 1520C
Gas Release No. 52
24 Aug 1956 1105C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
RAI.
(%)
942
0
31.0
33
952
0
25.0
22
932
26.7
36
932
20.7
29
900
403
23.9
41
900
485
18.2
33
850
899
19.4
50
850
971
14.1
39
818
16.4
57
848
13.9
39
800
1417
14.6
60
800
1482
13.3
-19
770
11.6
66
793
13,1
50
733
8.3
54
740
8.5
60
722
8.3
22
713
8.9
25
700
2530
7.6
nib
700
2593
7.4
42
695
7.5
mb
688
6.5
30
600
3784
0.8
nib
676
600
3842
5.5
- 2.7
41
56
Winds
Winds
'
Z
ddd
ft
Z
ddd
ft
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
240
4.6
SFC
02
140
3 1
320
240
9.5
400
110
6.1
680
250
13.0
760
110
5.0
1010
250
13.5
1100
080
2.8
1370
260
12.8
1460
340
3.6
1710
270
10.4
1810
320
5.9
2050
280
9.5
2190
310
7.2
2400
290
11.8
2600
310
8.5
2780
300
12.0
3020
330
8.4
3080
300
13.2
3400
330
8.1
3400
300
14.5
3760
330
9.2
3720
310
15.6
4030
310
17.0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
165
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
1
Gas Release No. 53
24 Aug 1956 1950C
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 54
24 Aug 1956 2150C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
-
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(in)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
948
0
18.0
44
949
0
20.0
51
940
22.7
41
918
20.8
42
900
450
21.0
35
904
20.0
35
850
941
17.2
42
900
459
19.8
35
825
15.1
45
850
950
17.3
43
800
1455
14.4
42
800
1466
14.6
50
774
13.8
38
772
13.6
32
700
2572
8.0
41
700
2583
8.7
42
686
7.0
42
600
3833
- 2.0
67
600
3822
- 1.4
63
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
If
OW
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
150
3.1
Equipmen
Failure
380
160
12.5
No Soundi
ig
730
1080
180
190
13.2
9.2
1450
210
4.9
1760
240
2.0
2100
270 -
3.0
2460
280
5.9
2800
300
7.3
3160
310
8.9
3520
320
10.2
3900
320
11.6
166
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 55
25 Aug 1956 0055C
Gas Release No. 56
25 Aug 1956 0250C
P
(mb)
Z
(111)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(In)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
948
0
17.0
60
948
0
15.0
66
904
20.0
43
900
444
20.0
47
900
446
19.9
43
850
936
19.4
49
862
19.0
48
815
18.8
50
850
938
18.4
49
800
1457
17.2
51
800
1456
15.0
52
761
13.3
56
756
11.9
56
726
10.7
44
710
9.2
41
700
2579
8.2
50
700
2576
8.2
50
600
3829
- 2.1
74
694
7.3
54
615
- 0.5
70
600
3825
- 2.1
70
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
If
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
150
8.2
SFC
02
160
6.9
360
160
14.3
260
170
11.8
700
180
12.0
560
190
14.6
1030
200
10.2
1040
200
12.9
1350
210
9.2
1500
220
8.1
1680
220
6.0
1900
230
7.5
1980
230
4.0
2370
240
8.6
2280
240
4.6
2760
240
8.5
2600
250
5.8
3190
250
7.9
2900
260
5.7
3550
270
6.0
3230
270
7.0
3900
290
6.5
3600
290
7.7
3920
300
7.4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
167
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12,1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 57
25 Aug 1956 1720C
Gas Release No. 58
25 Aug 1956 1920C
P
(mb)
' Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(96)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
940
0
34.5
18
939
0
29.2
25
900
390
30.5
. 22
932
31.5
25
850
897
25.2
30
900
379
29.0
27
800
1425
19.9
39
850
884
25.0
30
784
18.0
42
800
1410
20.6
33
738
15.0
23
762
17.1
36
700
2557
11.1
31
744
15.5
23
600
3819
0.4
50
700
2546
11.3
33
610
20.0
52
600
3812
1.0
u!)
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
ft
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
200
9.8
SFC
02
180
2.1
430
200
13.0
360
200
12.8
870
200
13.0
730
200
14.5
1250
210
14.0
1110
210
14.6
1640
210
17.8
1500
220
15.0
2200
220
17.5
1900
220
15.0
2650
230
15.8
2280
240
11.9
3000
240
14.0
2630
240
11.1
3300
250
10.2
3020
250
111 4
3620
200
9.0
3350
250
8.5
3950
270
8.0 ?
3750
260
8.9
4030
260
9.5
168
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 59
25 Aug 1956 2220C
Gas Release No. 60
26 Aug 1956 0020C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
939
0
25.5
38
938
0
25.5
35
913
31.0
23
907
29.1
26
900
378
30.2
24
900
375
29.0
35
855
27.4
24
860
27.4
25
850 ?
886
26.9
25
850
882
26.6
35
800
1417
21.9
32
800
1413
22.0
28
716
12.9
45
784
20.6
29
700
2554
11.3
43
720
14.0
42
648
6.1
37
700
2552
11.8
47
600
3816
0.3
57
600
3818
0.4
72
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ft
Z
ddd
ff
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
190
2.6
SFC
02
210
6.2
400
200
15.8
440
220
22.5
780
210
16.6
850
220
24.1
1170
210
15.3
1200
220
19.2
1570
220
15.0
1520
220
21.8
1960
230
14.0
1850
220
14.2
2350
240
11.3
2270
220
15.3
2730
240
11.0
2750
220
11.2
3160
240
10.8
3150
210
7.9
3600
250
8.0
3490
210
8.1
4000
?
260
6.6
3850
200
.
9.0
169
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 61 .
27 Aug 1956 1050C
Gas Release No. 62
27 Aug 1956 1350C
P
(mb)
Z
(n)
T
(?C)
R.H. '
VD
P
(mb)
Z
(11)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
934
0
31.8
26
934
0
29.0
37
916
28.0
?
30
924
28.0
30
900
330
26.0
30
900
329
26.9
30
888
24.5
30
869
25.4
.30
874
26.2
27
850
831
23.9 .
32
850
832
24.3
29 .
800
1357
19.6
38
800
1358
20.2
32 .
744
14.5
43
735
14.4
39
700
2488
10.3
54
700
-2492
10.9
' 47
635
3.8
71
634
3.8
62
600
3749
0.2
75
600
3754
'
- 0.1
62
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
(IT)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
317
180
200
5.7
9.7
SFC
02
280
180
210
1.6
6.5
660
210
11.8
550
200
4.2
990
220
8.0
800
200
3.0
1290
220
7.0
1050
210
4.4
1600
210
8.7
1250
220
5.6
1900
210
8.4
1500
230
5.6
2180
210
9.0
1730
220
5.9
2490
220
9.2
1950
220
8.0
2800
220
7.3
2200
.220
"
9.5
3070
230
7.5
2500
220
10.5
3370
230
8.6
2800
'
230
? 12.0
3650
3950
230
240
9.7
10.5-
-
3090
3350
3700
230
230
230
11.2
11.7
12.0
?
4000
220
10.5
,
'
170
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 63
27 Aug 1956 1950C
Gas Release No. 64
27 Aug 1956 2220C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(V
P
(mb)
Z
(n)
T
(?,C)
R.H.
(%)
931
0
24.5
47
932
0
19.6
67
923
30.7
34
921
29.1
40
900
302
29.0
34
900
309
29.6
30
853
25.4
34
894
29.7
28*
850
807
25.1
34
858
,27.3
28
800
1335
21.3
32
850
816
26.6
28
773
19.1
31
800
1346
22.0
29
700
2473
11.8
34
742
16.5
29
654,
6.9
36
700
2484
11.9
35
600
3739
1.1
45
600
3747
6.0
41
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
If
OW
(deg)
(m/sec)
(n)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
240
1.0
SFC
02
Calm
230
230
3.4
360
230
3.0
480
220
5.0
720
230
4.6
720
210
6.1
1080
230
6.6
990
210
7.7
1460
230
8.0
1290
210
6.0
1780
230
7.7
1520
210
3.7
2110
240
5.8
1810
210
3.5
2450
240
5.3
2100
210
3.2
2790
240
4.4
2370
220
3.5
3100
240
3.3
2660
220
3.5
3490
240
4.6
2940
230
2.4
3880
230
5.8
3200.
240
1.8
3450
260
2.5
3680
280
3.8
3970
280
4.0
171
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 65
29 Aug 1956 1920C
Gas Release No. 66
29 Aug 1956 2120C
P
(nib)
Z ,
(m)
T
(CC)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(In)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
933
0
26.5
28
933
0
21.0
42
900
315
24.9
32
916
25.6
37
850
812
19.9
40
900
316
24.9
33
800
786
1331
15.8
14.4
50
52
850.
848
814
22.1
22.0
23
23
700
658
2447
7.1
3.4
42
39
800
750
1336
18.0
13.4
28
34
600
3696
- 1.2
24
700
650
2460
8.4
3.0
46
58
600
3711
- 2.0
56
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
ff
Z
ddd
if
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
360
180
180
3.1
11.8
SFC
02
380
180
180
3.6
15.3
700
180
13.6
750
190
17.4
1080
190
13.0
1100
200
14.5
1440
200
11.0
1420
220
14.1
1830
220
10.6
1800
220
13.9
2200
240
11.0
2150
230
10.2
2530
250
11.5
2460
250
9.1
2900
260
11.2
2750
250
9.6
3220
260
12.2
3130
260
12.0
3580
270
12.2
3520
260
14.1
,
3900
270
10.0
3920
270
15.0
,
172
Table 12.1 (Continued)
Gas Release No. 67
30 Aug 1956 0020C
Gas Release No. 68
30 Aug 1956 0220C
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
P
(mb)
Z
(m)
T
(?C)
R.H.
(%)
932
0
21.0
47
931
0
21.0
45
911
24.6
37
916
24.2
40
900
304
23.8
40
900
295
23.6
37
876
21.9
45
850
791
21.3
30
850
801
21.1
34
830
20.4
27
830
20.5
24
800
1312
17.7
30
800
1323
17.8
30
700
2434
8.0
43
700
2444
7.9
46
672
5.2
47
686
6.4
49
635
2.2
43
-50
600
3687
- 2.4
59
600
3685
- 1.8
Winds
Winds
Z
ddd
If
Z
ddd
if
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
(m)
(deg)
(m/sec)
SFC
02
180
3.1
SFC
02
180
4.6
380
190
16.0
400
210
14.6
730
200
16.5
800
220
15.3
1030
210
16.8
1160
220
13.8
1320
220
17.3
1530
210
13.8
1680
220
16.4
1920
210
12.7
2000
220
13.6
2290
200
10.2
2300
210
13.0
2640
200
9.1
2620
210
11.0
3020
210
7.7
2950
230
7.0
3380
240
6.4
3230
260
5.0
3770
260
8.3
?
3530
250
6.0
3900
260
7.3
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
173
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
CHAPTER 13
AIRPLANE OBSERVATION DATA
P. J. Harney
Geophysics Research Directorate
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
13.1 Introduction
The aircraft soundings taken at O'Neill, Nebraska at the times of
the diffusion experiments are tabulated on the following pages. The data
were recorded on an AFCRC Aerograph (Kollsman KS-4). In addition,
altitude was read from a calibrated sensitive altimeter by an observer
who also noted air conditions.
The pattern for the sounding which was regularly followed consis-
ted of horizontal passes at constant airspeed and altitude along the north
mile of the site section for altitudes up to 1000 ft. Then a box climb was
made with observations on each side in level flight for 30 seconds. Unless
clouds intervened, this was continued to 7000 ft above the site itself (9000
ft mean sea level indicated altitude). A spiral descent followed with one
observation at either 1000 ft or 300 ft and a final traverse at an altitude
similar to the initial run.
13.2 Tabulated Data
The first column Z gives the pressure altitude obtained from
altimeter readings. The height of the lowest level was adjusted to match
the pilot's intention to fly by his own calibrated altimeter and by visual
reference to 50-foot instrument towers nearby. The other levels were
corrected for scale and installation errors but can be as much as 25 feet
too high due to a lack of up-to-date information on these errors and on
the airport elevation.
The Pmb column is the pressure in millibars obtained by converting
altimeter readings through use of. a standard altitude table.
174
The T column is the temperature in ?C read from a thermistor bead
in a stagnation type probe on a boom on the wing. The value represents
an average for the traverse when the trace was changeable and a value at
the end of the traverse when a drift of temperature was noted. The value
represents a free air temperature because it has been corrected for
dynamic heating using a recovery factor of 0.85, found to be typical for
the equipment used. The accuracy was of the order ? 0.2?C. Part of
this spread was due to a modification to make the recorder more sensi-
tive, which allowed the indicator to hunt through this range during the
time of high ambient temperatures.
A column marked # refers to the behavior of the temperature
trace. The code used is similar to the one used for pressure tendency
reports. The first figure indicates the trend shown by the trace during the
traverse, which lasted about 30 seconds. (The time taken to cover the one
mile at 100 knots indicated air speed.) The second figure is the amount of
change (plus or minus) indicated by an oscillating trace or the amount of
temperature shift as indicated by the drifting of the trace. The significant
values are given in the legend prefacing the table.
The RH column lists the estimated relative humidity obtained from
a carbon-element electric hygrometer. The calibration curve used was
that for a batch of pre-production elements. This was checked against
apron values of a sling psychrometer before and after the flights. Com-
parison was made with the daily radiosonde upper air observations
(lithium chloride elements) and the calibration curve was shifted to match
the deviation of the overall average. As is customary, allowance was made for
a small temperature shift; also in this RH column an allowance was made
for the increase in probe pressure of 15 mb. The same element was used
throughout because no deterioration nor regular shift could be proven in
the field. The accuracy is of the order of 5 percent.
The VP column for vapor pressure in millibars and the DP column
for dew point in ?C are slide rule values. They are computed without
allowance for the above mentioned probe-pressure effect. The gradient
0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
175
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
values are considered good due to the fast response of the humidity
element at these high temperatures. The accuracy of the absolute
values is limited as noted above.
The TIME shown for each sounding is generally that of the time
of gas release for convenient reference. The sounding actually started
with the first pass; this first pass almost always corresponded with the
start of the ground meteorological observations which was 5 minutes
before gas release time. The first traverse followed the radiosonde
balloon release by 5 minutes. The top level of a complete sounding was
reached about 30 minutes and the final run about 45 minutes after the
first traverse.
13.3 Remarks
Aircraft observations were not made for tests 23, 24, 31, 32, 33,
and 34. At these times the aircraft was at Omaha for engine change and
installation of additional instruments. An extra run of note was made
and this is included as Field Test No. 48S.
The aircraft used was a standard USAF L-20, instrumented by the
Research Airborne Engineering Branch of the Hanscom Air Force Base,
Bedford, Mass. The crew consisted of Lt. George A. Sexton, Lt. E. E.
Clark, pilots, and A/lc John I. Knutila, A/1c Joseph H. Driever, crew
chiefs.
The thermistor used was modified for a response time of about
three seconds and calibrated by James H. Meyer of the Lincoln Labora-
tory. The calibration used with the carbon element was provided by
Alfred Spatola of the Cloud Physics Section of GRD.
176
First Figure
2
3
8
dash
Table 13.1 Aircraft Observations
LEGEND
Code for the # symbol
Temperature Behavior
Unsteady or oscillating trace, may include a jump or a hump.
Drift to warmer temperature which is maintained.
Drift to colder temperature which is maintained.
Smooth trace, no temperature change.
Second Figure
none
2
4
5
6
Temperature Oscillation Temperature Drift
? 0.2?C
? 0.3
? 0.5
? 0.6
? 0.8
less than 0.5?C
0.5
1.0
1.2
1.5
Abbreviations used are those of the airways teletype code and con-
tractions whose meaning is evident.
The observer's initials are listed because non-meteorological
aides made frequent flights onwhich their observations are sparse. The
pilots alternated in flying and no difference in techniques was noted.
177
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 1 3 JULY 1956 1100 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
943.5
21.0
97
24.4
20.7
100
941.5
21.3
95
24.4
20.6
180
939.0
21.1
22
91
23.0
19.7
390
932.0
20.4
--
91
22.0
19.0
610
924.0
19.2
94
21.2
18.4
830
917.0
19.1
98
21.9
19.0
1000
911.0
18.6
>100
21.4
18.6
1520
893.5
17.3
>100
19.7
17.3
Ocn1 bump lower levels
2015
876.0
16.3
>100
18.5
16.3
In clear
2400
865.0
15.1
>100
17.2
15.1
Base of clouds-in wisps
990
911.5
17.5
>100
20.0
17.5
130
940.5
20.6
>100
24.3
20.6
50
943.5
21.1
96
24.4
20.7
50
943.5
21.2
95
24.4
20.7
Second pass Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 2 3 JULY 1956 ram CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
943.0
23.5
82
24.0
20.4
85
941.5
23.4
83
24.1
20.5
160
939.0
23.4
83
24.1
20.5
Bump
430
931.0
22.6
85
23.2
19.9
630
923.0
21.9
86
22.8
19.6
840
916.0
21.1
85
21.6
18.8
1025
909.5
20.7
89
22.0
19.0
1515
893.5
19.6
82
92
21.2
18.5
2025
876.5
18.2
96
20.4
17.8
Steady
2535
860.0
17.0
99
19.4
17.0
Ocn1 bump
3020
844.5
15.7
--
100
17.8
15.7
In clds
3545
828.0
14.4
>100
16.4
14.4
Thru hole in clds
4065
812.0
13.6
82
>100
15.6
13.6
Thru thin clds
5040
782.5
11.7
>100
13.7
11.7
Between clds
First bump about 1200'
1000
910.5
18.8
32
>100
21.7
18.8
Descending 500' /minute
60
943.0
21.4
22
100
25.4
21.4
Abrupt descent to here
60
943.0
22.3
94
25.4
21.4
Traverse after 30 seconds
Obsr P.H.
It See Legend
178
No. 1 & 2
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 3 5 JULY 1956 1100 CST
Z
P
P
T
11
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
22.4
95
25.7
21.5
220
940.0
26.0
58
19.7
17.3
160
942.0
25.8
60
20.2
17.7
390
934.5
25.2
21
60
19.6
17.2
600
927.0
24.5
63
19.7
17.2
840
919.0
24.0
62
65
19.7
17.2
1010
913.0
24.3
66
20.0
17.6
1520
896.5
23.0
82
67
19.1
16.8
2010
880.0
21.9
82
67
17.9
15.7
2505
864.0
20.6
72
17.6
15.5
3025
847.5
19.1
67
15.0
13.0
3505
832.5
18.0
65
13.8
11.7
4045
815.5
16.5
60
11.5
9.0
5025
786.0
14.7
64
11.0
8.4
220
940.0
23.9
32
73
21.8
18.9
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 4 6 JULY 1956 0100 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
20.6
92
21.8
18.9
Equip Osc ?0.2?C per 10 sec-taxiing
180
941.0
25.9
--
60
20.2
17.7
Tmp max on Sdg
405
933.5
26.1
--
60
20.4
17.8
615
926.0
25.4
--
60
19.6
17.2
820
919.5
24.8
21
60
19.0
16.7
1010
913.0
24.4
22
59
18.5
17.3
1500
896.5
23.4
60
17:4
15.3
1995
880.0
22.0
59
15.8
13,8
2495
860.5
20.6
69
16.9.
14.9
3000
848.0
19.2
75
16.8
14.8
Pireps slight turbc
3505
832.0
17.8
74
15.2
13.3
above 3000'
3990
817.0
16.6
71
13.6
11.5
5025
785.5
14.4
58
9.8
6.7
190
941.0
23.6
44
82
23.8
20.3
Pireps slight turbc
Sharp 2? inversion Obsr J.D.
It See Legend
179
No. 3 & 4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 5 6 JULY 1956 1400 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
60
944,0
29.4
47
19.2
16.9
75
943.5
29.4
47
19.3
17.0
Ocnl gust all levels
170
940.0
29.3
47
19.2
16.9
375
933.0
28.5
22
48
18.8
16.5
630
924.5
27.8
49
18.6
16.3
820
918.0
27.2
22
50
18.2
16.1
Bumpy below
990
912.0
26.2
22
53
18.3
16.1
1500
895.0
25.3
82
52
17.0
1.50
One gust
2000
878.5
23.8
82
54
16.3
14.3
2505
862.5
22.3
22
56
15.5
13.6
3005
846.5
21.2
22
49
12.6
10.4
3495
831.0
20.1
22
49
11.5
9.1
4030
814.5
18.2
49
10.9
8.2
5045
784.0
17.4
52
10.4
7.6
300
935.5
26.5
32
63
.22.1
19.1
35
945.0
28.5
32
52
20.0
17.5
Obsr J.D.
FIELD TEST NO. 6 6 JULY 1956 1700 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(96)
(mb)
(?C)
50
942
30.3
22
43
18.5
17.3
75
941
30.7
--
46
20.3
17.8
165
938
30.2
46
19.8
17.3
375
930.5
29.0
46
18.4
16.2
635
922
29.0
82
46
18.6
16.4
805
916
28.3
46
17.8
15.7
1005
909.5
27.8
48
18.1
15.9
1515
892.5
26.7
46
16.3
14.3
1995
876.5
25.3
82
50
16.4
14.4
2500
860.5
23.3
82
54
15.6
13.6
3020
843.5
22.8
50
14.2
12,2
3560
827.0
21.2
46
11.5
9.1
4000
813.0
20.5
42
10.3
7.4
5010
783.0
18.3
49
10.4
7.4
275
934.0
27.7
33
54
20.3
17.7
65
941.0
30.0
47
20.0
17.5
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
No. 5 & 6
180
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 7 10 JULY 1956 1400 CST
Z
P
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(DC)
#
RH
(%)
e
(mb)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
50
944.5
30.1
22
38
16.3
14.3
90
943.0
29.6
39
16.3
14.3
Obrep sounding
180
940.0
29.2
22
40
16.0
14.1
Rough aloft
390
933.0
28.6
39
15.3
13.4
590
926.0
27.8
41
15.5
13.5
820
916.0
27.2
22
42
15.4
13.4
1000
912.0
26.9
42
14.8
12.8
1520
894.5
25.3
45
14.4
12.4
2015
878.5
23.8
22
47
13.8
11.8
2505
862.5
21.8
50
13.0
10.9
3005
846.5
20.5
82
52
12.6
10.4
3515
830.5
18.9
82
56
12.4
10.2
4035
814.5
17.3
59
11.9
9.6
5045
784.0
14.6
82
62
10.4
7.6
6085
753.5
12.3
82
66
9.6
6.4
7090
725.0
9.8
68
8.4
4.5
Turbulence noted
290
936.0
26.4
32
45
15.6
13.6
90
943.0
29.1
32
41
17.0
15.0
Obsr J.D.
FIELD TEST NO. 8 10 JULY 1956 1400 CST .
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
943.0
30.5
22
39
17.1
15.0
Oen' bumps and drafts
90
941.5
30.1
23
39
16.7
14.7
Drafts
180
938.5
29.8
23
41
17.4
15,2
395
931.0
29.3
22
42
17.3
15.2
Ocnl bumps
640
922.5
28.2
43
16.4
14.4
830
916.0
27.8
42
15.8
13.8
Bumpy
1000
910.5
27.0
44
15.5
13.6
1500
894.0
25.7
45
14.7
12.7
2015
877.0
23.8
48
14.2
12.1
Ocnl yaw
2525
860.5
22.1
22
50
13.4
11.3
3035
844.0
20.5
54
13.4
11.3
Smoother
3545
828.0
19.0
59
13.2
11.0
Bumps
4045
813.0
17.6
59
13.0
10.8
Yawing
5065
782.0
14.6
68
11.6
9.1
Smooth, some cloud bases
6075
752.5
11.9
73
10.3
7.4
Cloud bases these altitudes
7090
723.5
9.3
79
9.5
6.2
Wallowy
320
937.0
29.1
32
39
15.8
13.8
Obsr P.H.
95
941.5
30.7
22
39
17.3
15.2
# See Legend
0
181
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
No. 7 & 8
1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 9 11 JULY 1956 1000 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
(%)
(nib)
(?C)
50
939.0
25.9
23
62
21.2
18.4
Bumpy
100
937.5
25.6
23
62
20.8
18.2
165
935.0
25.3
22
65
21.2
18.4
385
927.5
24.7
22
67
21.0
18.3
Drafts
610
920.0
23.9
22
70
21.1
18.4
825
912.5
23.1
22
72
20.4
17.8
990
907.0
23.2
72
19.3
16.9
Bumps lift
1490
890.5
21.1
23
73
18.4
16.2
2025
875.0
21.4
16
73
18.8
16.5
Slow osc
2515
857.0
22.4
23
66
18.3
16.1
Steady
3015
841.5
21.5
22
68
17.6
15.5
Hazy vsb 8 to 10
3495
826.5
20.9
65
16.4
14.4
4035
809.5
20.6
54
13.2
11.1
5025
780.0
18.6
50
11.0
8.4
6035
750.5
16.1
47
8 7
5.0
Ac clds 5000' above
7060
721.5
13.1
49
7.4
2.6
Hazy
280
931.5
25.2
34
70
22.7
19.5
55
939.0
26.6
23
60
21.3
18.5
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 10 11 JULY 1956 1200 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
((X))
(nib)
(?C)
45
939.0
28.4
22
55
21.5
18.7
90
937.5
28.2
23
56
21.8
18.8
185
934.0
27.8
22
56
21.2
18.5
405
926.5
26.9
22
60
21.7
18.8
635
919.0
26.3
23
63
21.8
18.8
820
912.5
25,4
66
21,7
18.8
990
907.0
25.5
22
66
21.8
18.9
1490
890.5
23.6
22
70
20.8
18.2
2005
873.5
21.9
22
72
19.3
17.0
Pireps rough below
2505
857.5
20.4
22
74
18.0
15.8
Relatively smooth above
3015
841.5
19.7
14
70
16.3
14.3
3515
825.5
20.3
32
62
15.0
13.0
4015
810.0
19.7
22
54
12.5
;0.3
5015
780.0
18.1
54
11.4
8.8
6025
750.5
15.5
22
53
9.5
6.3
7040
722.0
12.9
22
60
9.1
5.6
290
930.5
27.7
22
58
21.9
19.0
60
938.5
29.0
32
55
22.3
19.2
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
No. 9 & 10
182
?
Table 13,1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 11 14 JULY 1956 0800 CST
ZP?
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(nib)
(?C)
40
942.5
23.5
23
83
24.2
20.6
Bump
90
941.0
32.4
23
88
24.2
20.5
190
937.5
23.1
22
83
23.7
20.2
Drafts
380
931.0
22.4
22
83
22.7
19.5
640
922.0
21.8
22
85
22.4
19.3
840
915.5
22.4
23
84
23.0
19.8
Bumps
1040
908.5
23.1
23
76
21.8
18.8
Steadier
1520
892.5
22.8
32
82
22.8
19.6
2010
876.5
23.6
50
14.8
12.8
Smooth
2495
861.0
22.6
22
55
15.2
13.2
3025
844.0
22.4
42
11.5
9.0
3495
829.0
22.2
42
11.4
8.8
4035
812.5
20.8
39
9.7
6.5
Oscillation
5035
782.5
17.7
46
9.4
6.2
Smooth
6035
753.0
15.5
46
8.1
4.0
7080
723.5
12.5
43
6.3
0.4
Oscillation bumps at 1300'
290
934.0
23.8
32
85
25.2
21.3
50
942.5
23.9
83
80
23.8
20.3
Obsr P.H,
FIELD TEST NO. 12 14 JULY 1956 1000 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
(%)
(nib)
(?C)
75
941.0
27.8
22
66
24.8
21.0
160
939.5
27.2,
22
66
24.3
20.6
Bumpy
360
931.5
26.7
22
70
24.8
21.0
Lifts begin
620
922.5
25.9
22
73
24.7
20.9
800
916.5
25.4
22
77
25.4
21.4
Gusts at end
1000
909.5
24.9
22
78
24.8
21 0
1510
892.5
24.4
24
72
22.2
19.1
Occasional bumps
2005
876.5
24.6
23
52
16.4
14.4
Smooth
2485
861.0
23.9
22
50
14.8
12.9
3015
844.0
23.1
22
39
11.1
8.5
Steady
3495
829.0
21.9
--
38
10.0
7.0
4030
812.5
21.1
35
8.8
5.0
5035
782.5
18.4
39
8.4
4.4
Yaw
6035
753.0
16.1
40
7.3
2.4
7040
724.5
13.0
48
7.1
2.1
Steady
Bumps at 1900
280
934.0
27.6
34
44
16.4
14.4
70
941.5
29.2
24
50
20.8
18.2
Bump Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
183
No. 11 & 12
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 13 22 JULY 1956 2000 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
Rif
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
45
947.0
23.3
82
62
18.1
16.0
SC vesperalis 9000'
80
945.5
22:8
65
18.2
16.0
Sun low at the horizon
180
942.5
23.1
--
59
17.0
15.0
Smooth
400
935.0
23.0
59
16.9
14.9
620
927.0
21.8
32
62
16.6
14.6
Very smooth
830
920.0
21.2
65
16.5
14.5
One lift; sunset
1000
914.5
20.9
67
16.9
14.9
1505
897.5
19.6
82
71
16.5
14.5
2000
881.0
18.0
72
15.0
13.1
Very light turbc
2500
865.0
16.6
72
13.8
11.8
Smooth
3020
848.0
15.1
73
12.8
10.6
3505
833.0
13.7
77
12.2
10.0
R H Osc
4045
816.5
12.6
90
13.3
11.2
Smooth
5030
786.5
10.4
97
12.4
10.1
6070
756.0
8.1
100
11.3
8.1
Cloud base 5800
7080
727.0
6.3
96
9.4
6.0
Top about 6500 vrbl
285
938.5
22.3
62
17.0
15.0
180
942.5
22.6
22
60
16.8
14.8
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 14 22 JULY 1956 2200 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(nab)
(?C)
170
943.5
21.7
22
57
15.0
13.0
355
937.0
22.4
54
14.8
12.9
600
928.5
21.8
60
15.8
13.8
820
921.0
21.4
22
59
15.2
13.2
985
915.5
21.0
56
14.3
12.3
1500
898.5
19.6
62
14.4
12.4
1985
882.5
18.1
73
15.4
13.4
2485
866.0
16.7
22
81
15.6
13.6
Light turbc
2985
850.0
15.0
83
14.4
12.4
Light turbc
3495
834.0
14.4
90
15.0
13.0
4005
818.0
13.1
99
15.0
13.1
4990
788.0
11.3
82
11.2
8.7
Ocnl bump above
6025
758.0
9.4
75
9.0
5.4
7020
729.5
6.9
87
8.8
5.1
260
940.0
22.3
54
14.8
12.8
170
943.5
22.3
22
53
14.5
12.5
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
184
No. 13 & 14
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 15 23 JULY 1956 0800 CST
ZP
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(?C)
#
RI!
(To)
e
(mb)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
50
947.0
19.4
22
84
19.2
16.8
75
942.5
19.2
22
83
18.8
16.5
185
942.0
19.0
84
18.8
16.5
395
935.0
18.9
84
18.6
16.4
Occasional H turbc
635
926.5
20.1
22
80
19.1
16.8
845
919.5
20.3
81
19.6
17.2
1005
914.0
20.1
82
19.6
17.2
Hazy level not sharp
1525
897.0
20.0
65
15.8
13.6
2020
880.5
18.8
69
15.2
13.2
2500
865.0
17.1
--
78
15.5
13.5
3030
848.0
15.9
84
15.3
13.3
3520
832.5
15.2
59
10.4
7.5
Above smoky layer
4050
816.0
13.9
--
47
7.5
2.8
5040
786.0
11.7
42
5.9
-0.4
6060
756.0
9.4
36
4.3
-4.1
7085
727.0
7.8
32
3.5
-6.5
Few Ac on horizon
285
938.5
20.4
32
84
20.3
17.8
A few little bumps
60
946.5
21.3
75
19.3
14.9
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 16 23 JULY 1956 1000 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
946.5
24.4
24
62
19.4
17.0
100
944.5
24.4
24
62
19.2
16.9
190
938.0
24.1
22
62
18.8
16.6
400
934.0
23.3
22
65
18.8
16.6
610
927.0
22.6
82
64
17.8
15.7
830
919.5
21.0
22
72
19.3
17.0
1010
913.5
21.5
22
76
19.7
17.3
Obreps bumpy to here
1500
897.0
20.3
22
73
17.6
15.5
2005
880.5
18.8
22
74
16.2
14.2
2495
864.5
17.9
--
78
15.5
13.5
3015
848.0
16.0
78
14.5
12.5
3495
833.0
14.8
22
71
12.2
9.9
4035
816.0
14.7
42
7.3
2.2
A light layer of
scattered clouds
5025
786.0
12.4
38
5.5
1.2
6045
756.0
10.3
54
6.9
1.8
7050
727.0
8.0
74
8.1
3.9
300
937.5
24.4
32
58
18.1
16.9
50
946.0
25.8
32
50
16.7
14.7
Obsr J.D.
-- -- ^ --
# See Legend
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
185
0.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO.17 23 JULY 1956 2000 CST
ZP
P
'T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
941.0
29.0
37
14.6
12.6
80
940.0
28.8
37
14.4
12.4
180
936.5
29.3
--
35
14.4
12.4
390
929.0
29.5
22
33
13.7
11.6
620
921.5
29.4
29
12.0
9.6
820
914.5
28.6
22
31
12.2
10.0
990
909.5
28.2
33
10.7
10.5
1480
892.5
26.9
22
32
11.9
9.5
2005
875.5
' 25.5
34
11.3
8.8
Pireps temp 72?F
2505
859.0
24.8
12
36
11.2
8.7
2985
844.0
23.2
38
10.8
8.2
3505
827.5
21.7
39
10.2
7.3
3995
812.5
20.3
44
10.4
7.6
5015
781.5
17.5
49
9.9
6.8
6005
752.5
14.9
52
8.9
5.4
7040
723.5
11.8
60
8.4
4.5
Very lgt turbo Pireps 53?F
280
933.0
28.4
--
35
13.7
11.6
180
936.5
28.4
22
36
14.1
12.1
Obsr J.D.
FIELD TEST NO. 18 23 JULY 1956 2200 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C) .
(%)
(nib)
(?C)
160
939.0
27.6
32
39
14.3
12.2
(St Cu drifted out,
345
932.5
2/.9
22
35
13.3
11.2
wind varied with
605
923.5
27.9
32
36
13.4
11.2
cloud cover)
815
916.5
27.7
82
33
12.4
10.2
985
911.0
27.2
22
33
12.1
9.8
1475
894.5
26.4
32
11.1
8.6
Fst bump
1980
878.0
25.6
--
36
11.7
9.3
Lgt turbc continuous
2490
861.5
24.4
39
11.8
9.4
Bumps not gusts
2970
846.0
23.4
22
39
11.3
8.8
(Pireps alt changes rather
than airspeed changes
noted)
3510
829.0
21.8
82
42
11.1
8.6
4010
813.5
20.3
22
46
10.9
8.2
Bumps small but pitching
5010
783.5
17.4
22
54
10.8
8.2
Choppy
6010
754.0
14.6
61
10.3
7.4
Wallowy
7030
725.5
11.5
65
9.0
5.5
Up & down drafts
255
935.5
26.4
62
42
14.4
12.4
Smooth below about 1200'
155
939.0
26.7
43
15.0
13.1
Obsr P.H.
41 See Legend
186
No. 17 & 18
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 19 25 JULY 1956 1100 CST
ZP
P
T
11
RI!
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
(%)
(nib)
("C)
50
943.0
27.0
23
40
14.2
12.1
Cirrus clouds sun out
75
042.0
26 7
22
40
14.0
11.9
Bouncy
175
939.0
26.4
22
41
14.0
12.0
*390
931.5
25.7
22
42
13.9
11.9
Bumps
620
923.5
25.2
43
13 8
11.8
850
916.0
24.5
22
45
14 0
12.0
Drafts
1000
908.5
24.0
22
45
13 5
11.4
1500
894.0
22.4
23
50
13.5
11.4
Bouncing
2015
877.0
21.0
22
53
13.4
11.4
2505
861.0
20.5
24
35
8.4
4.5
Less drafty
3025
844.5
20 3
22
25
6.0
-0.3
RII data doubtful this
test, response sluggish
3515
929.5
20.0
22
25
5.9
-0.5
4035
813 5
20.0
22
25
5.9
-0.5
5035
783.0
18 2
12
28
6.0
-0.3
Smooth
6045
753.5
16.2
31
5.7
-0.4
7080
724.0
13.5
36
5.7
-0.9
Slow osc
Bumps at 2500'
300
934.5
26.8
22
43
15.1
13.1
Lift at 800
100
941 5
28.4
22
40
15.4
13.4
Big bump Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 20 25 JULY 1956 1300 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
(%)
(nib)
(?C)
32.8
Humidity element
75
939.5
29 4
23
31
12.7
10.6
inspected
175
936.0
29.3
23
29
11.8
9.4
375
929 0
28.6
22
31
12.1
9.8
595
921 5
27.7
22
33
12.4
10.1
805
914.5
27.0
22
36
12 8
10.6
1015
907.5
26.2
22
36
12 4
10.2
1505
891 0
25.1
22
35
11.3
8.8
2000
875.0
23 2
35
10.2
7.2
2480
859.5
21.8
22
43
11.1
8.5
3020
842.5
21.8
26
28
7.4
2.6
3490
827 5
22.0
24
25
6 6
1.0
4010
811.5
21.4
23
25
6 8
0.6
5020
781.0
19.4
22
28
6.4
0.6
6030
751.5
17.0
28
5.6
-1.1
7045
723.0
13 8
36
5.8
-0 6
Turbc below 3000 ft
275
932.5
30.0
33
25
10 5
7.7
85
939.0
30.5
82
24
10.8
8.0
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
187
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO, 21 26 JULY 1956 2100 CST
zp
P
T
#
JUL
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
175
932.0
390
924.5
600
917.5
Rough
850
909.0
28.6
32
34
13.3
11.2
Ltng to N
1020
903.5
29.5
22
32
13.2
11.1
Smooth suddenly
1490
888.0
28.8
32
29
11.5
9.0
2015
870.5
27.7
28
10.4
7.6
2495
855.0
27.6
24
8.9
5.3
Steady
2995
839.5
26.9
25
8.9
5.3
3495
824.0
25.4
26
8.5
4.6
Temp min sharp about 3800'
3995
808.0
24.4
29
8.8
5.2
Smooth
5020
778.5
21.2
24
31
7.8
3.4
Bumpy then steady
6045
749.0
18.1
35
7.3
2.4
Ilvy ling to N Smooth
7070
719.5
16.5
32
27
5.1
-2,2
-1.5?C tmp blip on climb
Equipment looks OK
295
928.0
28.7
31
12.2
10.0
Bumps at 800'
180
932.0
28.7
30
11.8
9.4
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 22 26 JULY 1956 0000 CST
zn
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(It)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
180
931.0
27.6
37
13.7
11.6
Pireps strong winds aloft
400
923.5
271
22
37
13.3
11.1
Bumpy
640
915.5
26.6
35
37
12.9
10.8
850
908.0
26.4
24
38
13.0
10.9
1030
902.0
26.2
25
38
12.9
10.8
1500
886.5
27.5
84
34
12.5
10.2
2025
869.5
27.4
29
10.6
7.8
2515
853.5
27.5
22
25
9.2
5.8
3035
837.5
27.0
22
24
8.6
4.8
3515
822.5
25.9
22
23
7.7
3.2
Very lgt turbc
4035
806.5
24.9
23
7.3
2.4
Lgt turbc at 4500'
5025
776.5
21.6
23
5.9
-0.4
Smooth at 5500'
6045
747.0
19.5
22
23
5.2
-1.9
7080
719.0
16.6
22
23
4.4
-4.0
Lt turbc at 5600' descent
into haze at 4400'
280
927.5
26.6
--
36
12.6
10.4
Out haze at 1400'
200
930.0
26.9
36
12.8
10.6
Bumps at 300' Obsr J.D.
if See Legend
188
No. 21 & 22
fp
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 25 1 AUGUST 1956 1300 CST
ZP
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(?C)
#
1111
(%)
e
(nib)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
50
944.0
22.6
22
96
26.5
22.0
Bouncy
100
942.5
22.6
22
94
25.8
21.6
190
939.5
22.0
22
06
25.5
21.4
410
932.0
21.4
22
94
24.3
20.6
Drafts and acceleration
630
924.5
20.7
>100
24.7
20.7
R II sluggish
845
917.0
20.0
>100
24.4
20.0
Bumpy
1035
910.5
19.5
>100
23.7
19.5
R H sluggish
1510
895.0
18.2
>100
22.2
18.2
Bumpy at base about 1600'
In clouds at 1750'
and drafts
1000
912.0
19.4
>100
23.2
19.4
Bumpy
50
944.0
22.9 32
96
27.0
22.4
Est 60 ft by the tower
40 ft indicated Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 26 2 AUGUST 1956 1200 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
940.0
27.3
24
66
24.2
20.5
80
939.0
26.9
23
68
24.4
20.6
190
935.5
26.9
23
67
24.0
20.4
Drafts
395
928 (I
26.3
23
72
24.8
21.0
Bumpy
630
920.0
25.6
22
75
24.9
21.0
830
913.5
25.6
22
71
23.7
20.2
Bumpy
1010
907.5
24.4
22
78
23.9
20.4
1490
891.5
23.0
82
82
23.2
19.9
2005
874.5
21.2
92
23.4
20.0
Turbc
2460
860.0
20.4
14
91
22.0
19.1
Wobbles no drafts
2985
843.0
18.6
66
88
19.0
16.7
3495
827.0
18.6
24
81
17.6
15.4
Sctd cld bases below
4035
810.5
18.4
63
13.6
11.5
Passing cld bases at 3700'
5025
781.0
16.2
83
82
15.3
13.3
Climb in clear
6045
751.0
14.0
--
78
13.7
10.6
7050
722.5
11.8
95
12.9
9.6
In clds 4500 to
4800 ft on descent
1020
907.0
24.8
34
73
23.1
19.8
Bases est 3500 ft Bumps
295
931.5
27.6
33
57
21.4
18.6
Bumps
50
940.0
28.4
22
54
21.2
18.4
Low 50' pass Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
189
No. 25 & 26
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 27 2 AUGUST 1956 1400 CST
ZP
P
T
it
RIT
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(rub)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
939.5
29.9
24
50
21.2
18.5
Bumpy
80
938.5
30.1
23
49
21.0
18.3
Drafts already
175
935.5
29.6
23
50
20.8
18.2
390
927.5
29.2
63
50
20.5
17.8
Drafts
615
920.0
27.9
23
52
20.0
17.5
Occasional gusts
830
913.0
27.5
22
54
20.2
17.6
,Ups & Downs
1020
906.5
26.9
22
56
20.4
17.8
Negative G acceleration
1500
890.5
25.4
67
22.0
19.0
Bumpy
2015
873.5
23.6
79
23.2
19.0
2495
858.0
22.1
80
21.4
18.6
Now under clouds, bumpy
3025
841.5
20.6
84
20.6
18.0
3515
826.0
19.0
22
93
20.7
18.0
Wobbly
4025
810.5
17.6
98
19.9
17.4
Base of clouds just above
5035
780.0
16.4
22
72
13.7
11.6
Cloud haze at 4800 ft
6045
750.5
14.6
75
12.6
10.4
Cld tops 5000-5500 ft
7065
721.5
11.7
81
11.3
8.7
Deck Ac est 1000' above
Lgt moisture content in clds
290
931.0
30.1
22
50
21.6
18.7
Bumps at 300'
70
938.5
31.0
23
49
22.0
19.0
Bumpy Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 28 3 AUGUST 1956 0000 CST
Z
P
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(?C)
#
RH
(%)
e
(mb)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
26.2
165
934.5
26.4
22
72
25.0
21.1
Bumpy
385
927.0
26.5
22
70
24.6
20.8
Lgt rain bumps
605
919.5
26.4
22
70
24.6
20.8
Humidity sluggish
835
911.5
26.5
22
65
22.8
19.6
1005
906.0
26.9
61
20.3
17 7
1505
889.5
26.4
22
52
18.2
16.0
1980
873.5
25.2
51
16.7
14.7
Ltng to N
2490
857.5
23.8
52
15.5
13.6
Omit bump
2980
841.5
23.8
22
51
15.4
13.4
Smooth
3510
825.0
23.0
49
13.7
11.6
4030
809.0
21.4
50
12.8
10.6
5040
779.0
19.1
54
12.1
9.8
Smooth
6050
749.5
15.6
76
13.6
11.6
Strong S Wind
7025
722.0
12.8
82
12.3
10.0
Freq ling N
-3?C at about 700' due R
1475
890.5
26.4
50
17.2
15 1
High pass account wea
175
934.0
27.4
22
55
20.4
17.8
Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
No. 27 &28
190
'4
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 29 3 AUGUST 1956 0200 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
165
935.0
27.4
22
50
18.4
16.2
365
928.0
26.8
22
50
17.7
15.6
595
920.0
26.5
12
50
17.6
15.5
Gusts
795
913.5
25.9
49
16.5
14.5
Accelerations felt
995
906.5
26.0
22
50
16.7
14.7
1475
890.5
26.2
45
15.3
13.4
Smoother ling E & SW
2000
873.5
25.8
32
45
15.0
13.0
2470
858.5
24.2
45
13.8
11.8
Smooth
3010
841.0
22.7
46
12.6
10.4
3490
826.0
21.3
22
47
12.1
9.8
4000
810.5
19.8
49
11.3
8.8
Rain encountered
approaching tstrm
965
907.5
26.2
32
48
16.3
14.3
Bumps at 700
No low pass Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 30 3
AUGUST 1956 1300 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
75
938.0
31.8
23
42
19.8
17.3
Rough Obsr P.H.
175
935.0
31.4
23
43
19.7
17.2
Bumpy
375
928.0
30.8
23
45
20.2
17.7
Drafts
625
919.5
30.0
23
46
19.5
17.1
Drafts,
850
912.0
29.4
--
50
20.7
18.0
Drafts
995
907.0
28.6
63
47
18.5
16.2
1465
891.5
27.4
12
50
18.4
16.2
2030
873.0
25.7
22
54
18.2
16.0
Occasional light bumps
2505
857.5
23.9
22
61
18.3
16.1
Drafts
3020
841.0
22.5
12
64
17.8
16.7
3525
825.5
20.7
72
17.8
15.7
Wallowy
4010
810.5
19.0
22
76
17.0
15.0
5060
779.0
16.4
--
83
15.7
13,7
Occasional bump
6050
750.0
14.8
64
11.0
8.4
(Approaching base level at
7105
720.0
11.9
32
76
10.8
8.1
5800) Edge of FrCu
Base clds 6000' tops 7000'
985
907.5
28.6
62
47
18.2
16.0
No level pass account
of boom oscillation
It See Legend
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
191
No. 29 & 30
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 35 11 AUGUST 1956 2100 CST
Z
P
r
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
22.6
Smooth Ocn1 draft
160
939.0
25.6
55
18.3
16.1
Tiny bumps
360
932.0
25.5
53
17.4
15.3
590
924.5
25.4
22
51
16.7
14.7
810
917.0
24.5
22
54
16.7
14.7
980
911.0
23.7
54
16.1
14.1
Occasional bump
1490
894.0
22.5
22
58
16.2
14.2
1995
877.5
20.8
68
16.8
14.8
2465
862.5
19.5
70
16.1
14.1
Blue sky above
3000
845.5
18.3
74
15.7
13.7
3470
830.5
17.4
72
14.5
12.5
4030
813.0
16.4
68
13.0
10.8
Altostratus deck
5015
783.5
13.7
78
12.3
10.0
6015
754.0
11.3
--
84
11.3
8.8
Hazy
7030
725.5
8.9
89
10.3
7.4
Possible draft
980
911.0
23.7
51
15.2
13.3
Smooth
140
940.0
24.0
63
19.0
16.7
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 36 11 AUGUST 1956 2300 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
165
939.0
22.9
66
18 7
16.4
365
932.0
23.7
60
18.0
15.8
595
.924.0
24.8
54
17.2
15.2
815
916.5
24.4
--
54
16.8
14.8
995
910.5
24.0
52
15.6
13.6
1495
894.0
22.5
53
14.6
12.6
1990
877.0
21.1
59
16.1
13.1
2480
861.5
19.9
68
16.1
14.1
2970
846.0
18.5
72
15.5
13.5
3480
830.0
17.5
74
15.1
13.1
3990
814.5
16.5
77
14.6
12.6
5010
783.5
13.4
84
13.2
11.1
6010
754.0
11.7
90
12.5
10.3
7035
725.0
9.6
96
11.6
9.2
985
911.0
23.5
54
15 8
13.8
165
938.5
22.9
66
19.9
16.8
Obsr J.D.
_
# See Legend
192
No. 35 & 36
?
oe.
4.?
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 37 12 AUGUST 1956 0300 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
19.1
165
936.5
21.1
32
84
21.3
18.5
Bumps ltng N & NE
385
929.0
22.4
78
21.6
18.7
605
921.5
22.9
74
20.8
18.1
810
914.5
22.9
72
20.4
17.8
975
909.0
23.0
58
16.7
14.7
.
1475
892.5
22.6
--
54
15.0
13.0
2000
875.0
21.5
--
53
13.8
11.8
Lgt trubc pirep
2510
858.5
20.6
53
13.1
11.0
2995
843.0
19.8
53
13.5
10.2
3470
828.5
18.4
52
11.2
8.7
4000
812.0
17.2
53
10.7
8,0
Very light turbc
5010
781.5
16.2
76
10.2
7.3
6020
752.0
14.2
74
12.1
9.8
7040
723.0
11.3
83
11.2
8.7
Ltng E
Light turbc at 3500
975
909.0
22.1
--
77
20.9
18.2
155
937.0
21.2
12
84
21.5
18.6
Bumpy Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 38 12 AUGUST 1956 0500 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
21.2
170
936.0
21.1
85
21.5
18.6
Pireps sic the same
380
929.0
22.6
33
78
21.5
18.6
630
920.5
23.2
22
70
20.2
17.6
830
914.0
23.3
61
17.6
15.5
1010
907.5
23.6
49
14.3
12.3
1510
891.0
24.0
42
12.6
10.4
2015
874.5
22.4
48
13.2
11.1
2495
859.0
21.7
44
11.8
9.4
3005
843.0
20.0
--
47
10.9
8.2
3515
827.0
18.6
50
10.7
8.0
4015
811.5
17.8
59
12.3
10.0
Light turbc
5025
781.0
16.5
51
9.7
6.5
6035
751.5
13.9
87
14.0
12.0
R H jump about 5200'
7040
723.5
11.2
89
12.0
9.7
Pireps lgt turbc
RHdrop about 5600'
990
908.5
22.5
63
17.4
15.3
30
941.0
20.5
82
89
21.8
18.9
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
193
No. 37 & 38
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 39 13 AUGUST 1956 2200 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(? C)
190
941.5
26.2
12
44
15.3
13.4
Oen' bump at 300'
420
933.5
27.1
63
43
15.8
13.8
620
927.0
27.3
42
15.3
13.3
Smooth
850
919.0
27.3
22
40
14.4
12.4
One bump, ocn1 draft
1060
912.0
26.4
22
40
13.8
11.8
1525
896.5
25.7
--
39
12.8
10.6
2045
879.0
24.3
39
11.8
9.4
Smooth
2515
864.0
23.0
22
39
11.0
8.4
3035
847.5
21.8
42
11.0
8.3
3525
832.0
20.0
47
11.0
8.3
4040
816.0
18.3
50
10.6
7.9
Pireps added power needed
5040
785.5
16.3
62
55
10.3
7.4
Several bumps, lgt turbc
6070
755.5
14.3
67
11.1
8.5
Some bases at 5500, turbc
7090
726.5
11.3
72
9 8
6.7
Clds above, turbc, drafts
1000
914.0
26.4
--
40
13.7
11.6
Bumps at 500
205
941.0
25.0
32
14.2
12.2
Turbc noted thruout Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 40
14 AUGUST 1956 0030 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
150
942.5
26.4
82
44
15.1
13.1
385
934.5
27.2
22
44
15.8
13.8
No turbc noted
610
926.5
27.9
22
43
16.2
14.2
810
919.5
27.3
22
43
15.6
13.7
Pireps strong wind
1000
913.5
27.3
22
43
15.6
13.7
1510
896.5
25.5
45
14.8
12.8
2010
880.0
24.3
45
13.8
11.7
Pireps less power rqrd
2500
? 864.0
22.7
47
13.2
11.1
-Pireps
3000
848.0
21.2
47
11.8
9.4
ditto
3490
832.5
20.0
48
11.2
8.7
4000
817.0
18.4
48
10.2
7.2
5030
785.5
16.3
63
11.8
9.4
Ocnl drafts
6040
756.0
14.1
66
10.8
8.1
Lgt turbc 5600 ft
7070
726.5
11.3
71
9.6
6.4
Bumps, wallowy
980
914.0
26.4
32
47
16.4
14.4
150
942.5
24.4
47
14.4
12.4
Turbc at 300' Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
No. 39 & 40
194
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TES t' NO. 41 14 AUGUST 1956 0300 CST
Z1)
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
("C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
160
941.5
24 4
49
15.0
13.0
385
934.0
26.2
45
15.3
13.3
Gusts
615
926.0
27.0
32
43
15.4
13.4
Ocril gust
825
919.0
26.7
43
15.1
13.1
Ltng N
985
913.5
26.7
42
14.7
12.7
1485
897.0
25.5
22
41
13.4
11.3
2005
879.5
24.9
41
12.9
10.7
3 ling cells N & NE
2500
863.5
23.6
42
12.4
10.2
3030
846.5
22.7
22
42
11.7
9.3
3520
831.5
21.8
46
11.9
9.6
4025
815.5
20.3
50
11.9
9.6
4500
801.0
19,1
53
11.8
9.4
5025
785.5
17.8
55
11.3
8.8
6060
755.0
15.2
--
67
11.8
9.4
?cid draft
7065
726.5
12.3
65
9.5
6.2
Bumps
Lgt turbc around 2000'
1005
913.0
26.4
40
13.7
11.7
175
941.0
23.8
22
50
14.8
12.8
Sfc turbc Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 42 14 AUGUST 1956 0500 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
180
940.5
22.6
52
14.4
12.4
410
932.5
23.2
23
49
14.0
12.0
650
924.5
26.1
22
42
14.2
12.2
840
918.0
27.0
37
13.1
11.0
1040
911.0
26.7
39
13.6
11.6
1540
894 5
25.8
22
39
12.9
10.8
2025
878.5
24.3
42
12,8
10.6
2525
862.5
24.0
22
39
11.6
9.2
3025
846.5
23.4
41
11.8
9.5
3535
830.5
21.6
43
11.0
8.4
4045
814.5
20.3
46
10.9
8.2
Lgt turbc .
5065
784.0
17.2
32
64
12.7
10.5
6055
754.5
15.6
--
69
12.3
19.1
Turbc
7010
727.5
12.7
60
9.0
5.4
Turbc
1000
912.5
25.9
42
14.0
12.0
60
944.5
22.3
46
12.4
10.2
Obsr J.D.
I1 See Legend
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
195
No. 41 & 42
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 43 15 AUGUST 1956 1200 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
943.5
31.7
22
33
15.4
13.4
(Temp adjustment too sluggish,
80
942.5
31.7
23
31
15.4
13.3
accuracy + 0.3 this run only)
190
938.5
31.2
22
33
15.1
13.2
Bumpy
380
932.0
30.4
22
35
15.4
13.4
Drafts ocnl
600
924.5
29.7
22
33
14.0
12.0
Bump
820
917.0
29.0
12
36
14.6
12.6
Draft
1010
910.5
28.4
82
36
14.0
12.0
Smooth over cldy grd
1510
894.0
27.4
32
37
13.3
11.2
Draft
2005
878.0
25.8
22
35
11.8
9.5
W'allowy
2515
861.5
25.0 '
23
30
9.6
6.4
Gusty '
3015
845.5
23.7
22
25
7.3
2.5
Small ocnl gusts
3525
829.5
23.2
13
25
7.1
2.1
4015
814.0
21.8
--
28
7.4
2.6
5030
783.5
18.7
41
3.9
5.3
Relatively smooth
6035
754.0
17.2
50
9.9
6.8
'7065
725.0
14.8
50
8.5
4.7
Drafts noted at 1500'
990
911.5
29.1
12
35
14.3
12.3
Bouncy
75
942.5
33.6
22
33
17.3
15.2
-
_
FIELD TEST NO. 44 15 AUGUST 1956 1400 CST .
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
942.5
34.3
22
29
15.6
13.6
(Temp amp closely adjusted,
95
941.0
34.2
29
15.5
13.5
eqp osc+ 0.3?C per 15 sec
at this temp)
180
938.0
33.8
24
29
15.1
13.1
(Jitters at high temp.)
380
931.0
32.8
22
29
14.3
12.3
640
922.0
32.1
13
29
13.9
11.9
850
915.0
31.6
22
29
13.6
11.5
1000
910.0
30.6
22
29
12.7
10.5
1540
892.0
29.3
33
13.6
11.6
2015
876.0
27.6
33
12.4
10 2
2515
860.5
26.2
22
36
12.2
9 9
3025
844.0
24.4
82
-36 -
11.0
8.4
3515
829.0
22.8
22
39
10.8
8.1
4055
812.0
21.2
39
9.9
6.8
5065
781.5
19.1
32
4'7
10.4
7.5
6065
752.5
17.0
50
10.0
7.0
7070
724.0
14.0
63
10.2
7.3
(Jitter + 0.1?C at this temp)
995
910.5
30.9
29
13.0
10.8
70
942.0
34.3
33
26
13.8
11.8
Height estimated Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
196
No. 43 &44
?
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 45 15 AUGUST 1956 1700 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
75
938.0
35.3
22
29
16.4
14.4
Fqt bumps Obsr P.H.
190
934.0
34.6
23
29
15.9
13.9
Oen). drafts
380
927.5
33.9
22
29
15.1
13.1
620
919.5
33.3
22
29
14.8
12.8
Drafts
835
912.0
32.4
22
29
14.1
12.1
Drafts
1020
906.0
32.0
22
31
14.8
12.8
'Wallow
1525
889.0
30.1
31
13.3
11.2
Lgt gusts
2035
872.5
28.7
62
33
13.1
11.0
2490
857.5
27.1
36
12.8
10.6
3025
840.5
25.6
22
35
11.7
9.3
3525
825.0
24.0
38
11.4
8.9
Draft
4025
809.5
22.5
39
10.7
8.0
5045
779.5
19.7
46
10.5
7.7
6055
749.5
17.0
52
10.2
7.3
7065
721.0
14.2
61
10.1
7.1
Brkn clds 2000' above
Bumpy about 1200
1005
906.5
31.6
33
211
13.3
11.2
Steady run
100
937.0
35.0
63
25
14.4
12.4
Gain 30' on traverse;
gusty
FIELD TEST NO. 46 15 AUGUST 1956 1840 CST
Zp
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?c)
45
937.5
34.5
22
29
15.7
13.7
Bumpy flight
90
936.0
34.0
22
25
13.6
11.6
180
933.0
34.0
22
25
13.7
11.6
400
925.5
33.4
63
25
13.2
11.1
620
918.0
32.6
22
29
14.3
12.3
840
910.5
31.6
62
29
13.4
11.3
1020
904.5
31.2
--
29
13.1
11.0
1500
888.5
29.8
33
13.9
11.9
2035
871.0
28.1
35
13.4
10.4
2515
855.5
26.8
39
13.8
11.7
3025
839.5
25.9
12
39
13.1
11.0
3535
823.5
24.4
41
12.6
10.4
4035
808.0
22.8
41
11.4
8.9
5065
777.5
20.1
46
10.8
8.1
6075
749.0
17.0
55
10.9
8.2
(Cld to cid ltng,
7080
719.5
14.4
61
10.2
7.3
strong ling W & N,
crew felt static shock
1010
905.0
30.8
32
29
12.8
10.6
on final approach)
60
937.0
32.8
23
25
12.8
10.6
Sprinkling Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
197
No. 45 &46
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
s.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 47 20 AUGUST 1956 1000 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e ?
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
, (?C)
(51)
(mb)
(?C)
50
953.5
15.5
55
9.9
6.8
80
952.5
15.5
23
54
9.7
6.6
180
949.0
15.2
55
9.7
6.6
Bumps
400
941.0
14.7
55
9.4
6.1
640
933.0
13.8
60
9.7
6.5
Bumps
870
925.0
13.3
63
9.8
6.7
1010
920.5
12.7
65
9.7
6.5
1520
903.0
11.6
58
8.1
3.9
2025
886.5
10.5
62
8.1
3.9
2535
869.5
9.1
66
7.8
3.4
3025
854.0
8.4
76
8.5
4.7
3525
841.5
7.0
80
8.2
4.1
4025
822.5
5.9
70
6.7
1.2
5055
791.5
3.6
82
71
5.7
-0.8
Lwt sctd cld at 4500
6055
762.0
1.7
71
5.0
-2.4
7080
732.5
0.2
90
5.7
-0.9
Lgt turbc at 2400
1000
921.0
12.8
32
64
9.7
6.5
Turbc
40
953.5
16.5
32
52
10.0
7.0
Obsr J.D.
FIELD TEST NO. 48S 20 AUGUST 1956 1200 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
18.0
32
49
10.3
7.4
85
951.5
'17.4
22
46
9.2
5.7
175
948.5.
17.5
49
9.8
6.8
385
941.5
16.9
22
49
9.6
6.3
625
933.0
16.2
51
9.5
6.3
835
926.0
15.5
51
9.2
5.8
1015
920.0
15.0
53
9.2
5.8
Turbc
1525
902.5
13.6
62
9.8
6.7
Ilvy turbc
2520
870.0
10.8
66
8.7
5.0
3020
854.0
9.3
77
9.2
5.8
3510
838.5
8.0
80
8.8
5.1
4030
822.0
6.5
83
8.3
4.0
5040
791.5
4.3
32
88
7.5
2.8
Cloud layer
6040
762.0
2.2
90
6.6
1.0
4600-5400'
7075
732.5
-0.2
--
95
6.3
-0.5
995
920.5
15.1
36
56
9.7
6.6
Turbc
65
952.5
18.6
22
49
10.6
7.9
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
198
No. 47 & 48S
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 48R 21 AUGUST 1956 0900 CST
ZP
r
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(70)
(mb)
(?C)
(T eq response rate checked)
75
944.5
16.2
74
13.9
11.9
Bouncy - sudden drafts
185
940.5
15.8
72
13.2
11.0
405
933.0
15.2
75
13.2
11.1
Bouncy
645
925.0
14 5
79
13.3
11.2
Continual turbc
830
918.5
13.8
22
81
13.1
11.0
1015
912.5
13.4
82
12.9
10.7
Less turbc
1595
895.5
13.3
28
80
12.4
10.2
Inversion osc + 0.6?C
in half mile -
2040
878.5
14.2
65
10.8
8.1
Smooth ocn1 bump
2520
863.0
13.0
69
10.5
7.7
3050
846.0
11.7
65
9.2
5.8
Smooth
3540
830.5
11.3
60
8.4
4.1
(Vsby exceptional. Haze)
4050
815.0
10.8
47
6.7
1.0
(Dark to S)
5050
784.5
11.7
39
5.4
-1.5
(White streak E horizon)
6060
755.0
10.9
36
5.1
-2.2
7095
725.5
9.1
40
4.6
-3.4
Bumps at 1500', temp drops
995
913.0
14.2
34
81
13.3
11.2
95
944.0
17.4
32
66
13.3
11.2
Gusts Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 49 21 AUGUST 1956 1100 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
(T eq response i- 0.1?C/10
75
943.0
20.5
23
49
11.9
9.5
sec) Side gusFfelt
165
940.0
19.9
22
50
11.7
9.3
375
933.0
19.6
50
11.5
9.0
Up & clowns
615
924.5
18.5
52
11.3
8.8
835
917.0
18.1
55
11.7
9.2
Bumpy
995
912.0
17.5
58
11.8
9.4
Drafts
1505
895.0
16.3
22
64
12.1
9.8
Sbarp gusts, wallowy
2000
878.5
15.6
22
64
11.6
9.1
2510
862.0
14.5
62
10.4
7.6
3040
845.0
14.2
32
70
11.3
9.0
Lgt drafts felt to 3500'
3520
830.0
14.0
60
9.8
6.7
4030
814.0
13.0
62
9.5
6.3
R Hdip around 3800'
5030
784.0
11.7
33
4.5
-3.5
R II drop about 4800'
6060
754.0
11.1
35
4.7
-3.2
7075
725.0
9.0
35
4.1
-4.8
Neg 1/2 G at about 1800'
r, q 5
912.0
18.4
34
60
12.8
10.7
Rough
85
943.0
21.9
49
12.8
10.6
Obsr P.H.
-
II See Lei.,elit1
199
No. 48R & 49
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 50 21 AUGUST 1956 1400 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
110
939.0
26.3
23
43
14.7
12.7
185
936.5
25.6
23
43
14.1
12.1
390
929.5
25.2
23
43
13.8
11.8
650
921.5
24.3
23
45
13.8
11.7
850
914.0
23.7
22
45
13.3
11.2
1020
908.0
22.9
22
46
13.0
10.8
1530
891.0
21.3
52
12.6
10.4
2045
873.5
19.8
22
54
12.8
10.6
2535
858.5
18.6
52
11.4
9.9
3055
842.0
17.8
82
36
7.4
2.6
Sharp temp drop
3555
826.0
16.8
32
36
6.9
1.7
4045
811.0
15.4
38
6.7
1.4
5055
780.5
12.7
38
5.6
-1.0
6085
750.5
10.8
82
35
4.6
-3.4
7040
723.5
10.1
29
3.6
-6.3
at 3400 turbc
1010
908.5
23.7
45
13.4
11.2
100
939.5
27.8
23
36
13.3
11.2
Obsr J.K.
FIELD TEST NO. 51 21 AUGUST 1956 1530 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?e)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
30.5
75
939.0
27,4
39
14.1
12.1
Yawing in cross wind
175
935.5
27.4
22
39
14.2
12.1
Drafts, Pireps
365
929.0
26.8
22
40
14.0
12.0
Hard to hold El at 600
615
920.5
26.4
23
42
14.4
12.5
Wallows, bumps, drafts
805
914.0
25.7
62
41
13.6
11.5
Drafts
1015
907.0
25.0
--
42
13.3
11.2
1525
890.0
23.5
22
43
12.5
10.2
1990
875.0
21.6
45
11.7
9.4
2520
858.0
20.4
22
46
11.2
8.6
Hard to hold wings level
3015
842.0
18.8
47
10.2
7.3
3500
827.0
17.0
50
9.9
6.8
Bumpy
4015
811.0
15.4
68
12.0
9.8
Rocky like boat
5030
780.5
12.9
71
10.8
8.1
6035
'751.9
9.9
80
10.0
7.0
Rocky
6975
724.5
8.0
22
50
5.5
-1.3
R H Response marked
6500
'737.8
8.4
82
9.3
5.9
In clear (base at 6800')
In cloud tmp drops 2?C
1015
907.0
25.3
39
12.6
10.4
85
939.5
28.6
37
14.4
12.4
Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
No. 50 & 51
200
?
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 52 24 AUGUST 1956 1115 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
950.5
22.9
23
38
10.5
7.7
115
948.0
22.3
23
38
10.3
7.4
175
946.0
22.0
22
38
10.1
7.1
385
938.5
21.4
22
39
10.0
6.9
630
930.0
20.8
22
39
9.6
6.4
Bumpy
825
923.5
19.8
44
9.6
6.3
1015
917.0
19.3
42
9.5
6.2
1515
900.5
17.8
82
47
9.6
6.4
Drafts
2010
884.0
16.6
45
8.5
4.6
Drafts
2535
867.0
15.2
47
8.2
. 4.0
3030
851.0
13.6
50
7.9
4.5
3535
835.0
13.2
23
47
7.1
2.1
Undulations on traverse
4030
819.5
12.8
33
50
7.4
2.7
Smooth RH change 4500'
5060
788.5
12.5
70
10.3
7.4
Shallow Ac to S at
6060
759.0
10 3
75
9.6
6.4
Top haze layer
7085
730.0
8.5
60
6.8
1.4
Cold noted on descent.
Bumpy around 4000'
1005
917.5
19.5
32
42
9.6
7.4
Pireps updraft, also
recorded
60
950.0
23.1
23
35
10.1
7.1
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 53 24 AUGUST 1956 2000 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
()
(mb)
(?C)
37
8.7
5.0
165
942.5
22.7
--
39
10.7
8.0
One bump
395
934.5
22.5
39
10.6
7.8
Very smooth
635
926.0
21.6
--
39
10.1
7.2
835
919.5
21.1
41
11.3
7.4
1015
913.5
20.7
41
10.1
7.1
Smooth
1520
896.5
20.1
38
8.9
5.4
2020
880.0
18.6
39
8.4
4.4
2520
863.5
17.1
41
8.1
4.0
Minor bump
3030
847.5
16.0
43
7.8
3.4
3530
831.5
15.0
32
47
8.0
3.8
Tiny bump
4035
816.0
15.2
22
48
8.3
4.3
5045
785.5
13.9
50
8.0
3.8
6065
755.5
12.3
43
6.2
0.2
7070
727.0
10.1
48
5.9
-0.4
Above haze
995
914.0
20.8
39
9.6
6.4
185
941.5
21.4
42
10.7
8.0
Obsr P.H.
if See Legend
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
201
No. 52 ez 53
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
P11??????????
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 54 24 AUGUST 1956 2200 CST
ZI)
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
948.5
18.1
53
11.2
8.6
Take off
160
943
19.9
47
11.2
8.6
Slight turbc
370
936
20.2
46
11.3
8.8
610
928
21.0
41
10.5
7.7
820
920.5
20.4
42
10.2
7.4
Smooth
990
915
20.5
42
10.4
7.5
Bump
1505
897.5
19.6
40
9.5
6.2
2195
875.0
18.8
43
9.6
6.4
2495
865.5
18.0
45
9.5
6.2
3000
849.0
17.4
45
9.1
5.6
3495
833.5
17.0
46
9.1
5.6
4005
817.5
16.3
45
8.4
4.4
5005
787.5
14.4
47
8.0
3.7
6030
757
12.6
--
36
5.7
-1.6
7050
728
10.3
64
8.2
4.1
(Pireps higher engine
970
916
20.2
42
10.1
7.1
output rqrd all travcrses)
160
943
19.5
47
10.9
8.2
6
948.5
19.1
--
50
10.8
8.2
Landing Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 55 25 AUGUST 1956 0100 CST
ZP
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(?C)
#
RH
(%)
e
(nab)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
6
16.4
67
12.7
10.6
Take off
155
942.5
17.1
58
11.8
9.4
405
934.0
17.4
32
54
11.2
8.6
615
927.0
18.7
50
11.2
8.6
845
919.0
19.6
46
10.8
8.2
Pireps turbc noted below
1015
913.5
19.6
46
10.6
7.8
1525
896.0
20.0
43
10.1
7.2
2000
880.5
19.8
45
10.4
7.6
2490
864.5
19.1
48
10.8
8.1
3020
847.5
19.2
49
11.2
8.6
3515
832
18.1
49
10.2
7.2
4025
816.5
17.1
52
10.2
7.6
Steady going
5020
786
15.0
52
9.2
5.7
6040
756.5
13.2
48
7.4
2.6
7035
728
11.2
41
5.5
-1.2
985
914.5
19.3
45
10.2
7.2
195
941
16.4
62
12.0
9.7
6
948
16.5
60
11.6
9.1
Landing Obsr J.K.
i
It See Legend
,202
No. 54 & 55
..g
? I ?
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 56 25 AUGUST 1956 0300 CST
ZI)
P
T
41
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nib)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
948
16.4
70
13.2
.11.2
Take off
155
942.5
16.0
68
12.8
10.6
Lgt turbc
385
934.5
17.2
63
12.8
10.6
Lgt turbc
625
926.5
17.9
57
12.0
9.7
855
918.5
19.3
49
11.1
8.5
1015
913.5
19.6
47
10.9
8.2
Possible Neg G
1515
896.5
20.3
32
46
11.0
8.4
2020
880.0
19.9
48
11.3
8.8
2510
864.0
19.6
49
11.2
8.6
3020
847.5
19.7
48
11.0
8.4
Possible Neg G
3510
832.5
189
49
10.8
8.1
4030
816
18.4
32
48
10.3
7.4
5040
785.5
16.3
46
8.7
4.9
Some lgt turbc
6040
756.5
13.2
53
18.8
4.4
Draft
7055
727.5
10.2
66
8.5
4.6
Down Draft. Undulations
Ac E15000MSL
985
914.5
19.7
62
46
10.5
7.7
165
942.5
16.2
68
12.8
10.6
Rough now
6
948.0
16.5
66
12.6
10.4
Landing Obsr P.H.
I.
FIELD TEST NO. 57 25 AUGUST 1956 1730 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
50
938.5
33.7
25
13.4
11.3
95
936.5
33 7
26
13.4
11.4
Turbc
195
933.5
33.1
22
29
14.6
12.6
395
926.5
32.7
82
29
14.4
12.4
615
919.0
32.1
22
29
13.9
11.9
845
911.0
31.1
29
13.2
11.1
Turbc
1015
905.5
30.5
22
29
12.6
10.4
1545
888.0
22.8
30
8.4
4.5
2035
872.0
27.6
22
34
9.2
5.8
2535
856.0
25.7
34
10.8
9.4
3030
841.0
23.9
36
10.7
8.0
3550
824.0
22.2
39
10.5
7.7
4040
809.0
21.4
38
9.7
6.5
5070
778.0
18.2
41
8.7
5.0
6070
749.0
16.2
40
7.3
2.5
7075
720.5
13 4
31
4.8
-3.0
1015
905.5
30.4
29
12.7
10.4
60
938.0
33.4
29
14.9
12.9
Obsr J.D.
It See Legend
203
No. 56 & 57
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 58 25 AUGUST 1956 1930 CST
ZP
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(?C)
#
RH
(%)
e
(mb)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
Temp eq damping checked OK
190
410
660
870
1060
1560
2055
2545
3070
3565
4075
5080
6075
7100
1010
215
932.0
924.0
916.0
909.0
902.5
886.0
870.0
854.5
837.5
822.0
806.5
776.5
747.5
718.5
904.5
931.0
31.1
32.2
32.1
31.2
30.5
29.2
27.6
26.2
24.9
22.7
21.2
18.4
16.3
13.3
30.3
30.1
--
62
22
62
22
--
22
22
--
62
13
31
26
26
26
29
29
29
29
33
35
35
35
25
29
28
30
14.0
12.4
12.4
11.7
12.6
11.8
10.8
10.0
10.3
9.6
8.8
7.4
4.7
4.4
12.1
13.8
12.0
10.1
10.1
9.3
10.4
9.4
8.0
7.0
7.4
6.4
5.1
2.6
-3.2
-3.9
9.8
10.6
Smooth
Anvil cld West
Floccus overhead
Bluish haze noted
Oen1 very lgt tipdraft
Clear overhead
Floccus overhead
Ocnl bump
Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 59 25 AUGUST 1956 2230 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(? C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
23.8
44
13.0
10.8
190
935.0
28.0
35
13.4
11.2
400
928.0
29.8
31
13.0
10.8
630
920.0
31.2
26
11.7
9.2
850
912.5
30.8
26
11.5
9.0
1050
906.0
30.9
26
11.5
9.1
1530
890.0
29.7
--
26
10.8
8.1
2030
873.5
28.5
--
26
10.1
7.1
2525
857.5
26.8
--
29
10.3
7.4
3035
841.5
25.4
28
9.2
5.7
3525
826.0
23.9
30
9.0
5.5
4025
811.0
22.3
22
30
8.2
4.1
5035
780.5
19.1
22
36
8.0
3.8
6075
750.0
15.9
40
7.2
2.2
7060
722.0
13.1
--
46
7.0
1.9
T lag test 63% in few sec
1020
907.0
30.5
26
11.4
8.8
170
936.0
27.8
35
13.2
11.1
Obsr J.D.
# See Legend
0.
4
4
204
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 60 27 AUGUST 1956 0030 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(90
(mb)
(?C)
6
938.0
24.2
40
12.1
9.8
Take off
185
385
932.0
925.0
26.8
28.1
23
34
31
12.0
11.8
9.7
9.4
Turbc below 600 ft
625
917.0
28.8
28
11.1
8.5
825
910.0
29.0
29
11.6
9.2
1015
903.5
28.3
29
11.2
8.6
.
1515
887.0
29.0
26
10.3
7.4
2005
871.0
27.9
29
10.9
8.3
2490
855.5
26.6
28
9.8
6.7
3025
838.5
25.3
28
9.1
5.6
3510
823.5
23.8
30
9.0
5.4
4030
807.5
22.2
--
33
8.8
5.2
5020
777.5
19.1
33
7.2
2.4
6030
748.5
16.1
36
6.8
1.2
7085
718.5
13.1
42
6.5
0.8
1025
903.5
29.9
25
10.4
7.5
195
"6
931.5
26.6
--
34
11.8
9.5
938.0
25.7
36
11.9
9.5
Landing Obsr J.D.
FIELD TEST NO. 61 27 AUGUST 1956 1100 CST
ZP
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(? C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C).
6
934.0
32.5
23
39
19.1
16.8
Take off
90
931.0
28.7
23
33
13.2
11.0
Bouncy
190
927.5
28.6
23
33
13.0
10.0
380
921.0
28.0
22
33
12.6
10.4
Lift
645
912.0
27.3
23
33
12.1
9.8
Bouncy
845
905.5
26.5
32
11.2
8.7
G felt in drafts
1015
900.0
26.2
22
34
11.8
9.4
Drafts
1525
883.0
24.9
24
35
11.0
9.4
2030
866.5
24.9
62
32
10.2
7.3
Small bumps
2525
850.5
24.4
64
32
10.0
7.0
3040
834.0
22.5
--
32
8.8
5.1
3540
819.0
21.0
35
8.7
4.9
Bumps with drafts
4040
803.5
20.3
22
32
7.8
3.4
5045
773.5
17.4
38
7.6
3.1
Wallowy
6050
744.5
14.7
22
47
7.9
3.6
7065
716.0
11.8
--
50
7.0
1.9
Not smooth
995
900.5
26.4
33
34
11.8
9.4
Bouncy & drafts
90
931.0
29.6
14
31
12.8
10.7
6
934.0
30.2
32
13.6
11.6
Landing Obsr P.11.
# See Legend
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
205
No. 60 & 61
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
-
FIELD TEST NO. 62 27 AUGUST 1956 1400 CST
Z'P
(ft)
P
(mb)
T
(?C)
#
RH
(%)
e
(mb)
Td
(?C)
Remarks
6
934.0
28.9
43
17.0
15.0
Take off
90
931.0
28.3
39
15.2
13.2
Turbc
180
928.0
28.3
22
36
14.0
12.0
380
921.5
27.8
36
13.6
11.6
620
913.0
27.8
35
13.2
11.1
810
907.0
28.0
31
11.8
9.4
1010
900.0
27.7
31
11.6
9.1
1505
883.5
26.4
32
32
11.0
8.4
2015
867.0
25.5
30
9.9
6.8
2505
851.5
24.3
22
30
9.2
5.8
3015
835.5
22.6
62
32
8.9
5.2
Bumps
3515
820.0
20.9
36
9.0
5.4
4025
804.0
19.4
22
39
8.8
5.1
Bumps
5035
774.0
16.6
43
8.1
4.0
6045
744.5
13.6
49
7.7
3.2
7050
716.5
12.6
51
7.4
2.8
990
901.0
28.2
--
30
11.4
9.0
80
931.5
31.6
62
26
12.0
9.6
6
934.0
31.4
32
14.6
12.7
Landing Obsr J.D.
FIELD TEST NO. 63 27 AUGUST 1956 2000 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
Eli
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(nab)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
931.0
28.3
31
11.9
9.6
Take off
195
925.0
31.4
--
33
15.2
13.2
Smooth
385
918.5
31.2
33
15.1
13.2
Smooth
630
910.0
30.6
31
13.8
11.7
835
903.0
30.0
33
14.2
12.2
1015
897.0
29.7
--
33
13.8
11.8
1525
880.5
28.2
--
33
12.8
10.6
Smooth
2020
864.5
26.8
36
12.6
10.4
2520
845.5
25.4
36
11.6
9.2
3050
.831.5
23.7
36
10.6
7.8
Slight lift
3540
816.5
22.5
35
9.6
6.4
Smooth
4055
801.0
21.6
30
8.2
4.0
5050
771.0
18.5
33
6.9
1.6
6070
741.5
16.0
32
5.9
-0.4
Smooth
7075
713.5
13.1
--
33
5.0
-2.4
1005
897.5
29.1
32
33
13.4
11.4
180
925.5
31.2
33
15.0
13.0
6
931.0
28.7
38
15.0
13.0
Landing Obsr P.H.
# See Legend
206
No. 62 & 63
.?
FIELD TESP NO. 64 27 AUGUST 1956 2200 CST
Z13
r
T.
41
1UJ
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(70)
(mb)
(?C)
6
931.0
20.5
69
16.6
14.6
Take off
205
924.0
30.0
33
14.0
12.0
435
916.0
30.4
22
33
14.4
12.4
Very steady going
670
908.5
30.0
22
31
13.2
11.2
890
901.0
30.0
22
29
12.4
10.1
1065
895.0
29.7
29
12.1
9.8
1560
879.0
28.8
29
11.6
9.1
2080
862.0
27.5
29
10.7
8.0
2575
846.0
26.1
22
30
10.2
7.3
3070
830.5
24.8
32
10.0
7.0
3565
815.5
23.0
32
9.2
5.8
4070
800.0
21.8
28
7.4
2.7
5090
769.5
18.7
33
7.2
2.0
6080
741.0
15.6
33
5.9
-0.5
7105
712.5
12.6
40
5.8
-0.6
1045
896.0
28.9
31
12.5
10.3
195
924.5
27.7
24
42
15.6
13.6
6
931.0
25.9
43
14.4
12.4
Landing Obsr J.K.
FIELD TEST NO. 65 29 AUGUST 1956 1900 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
932.0
24.5
33
10.3
7.4
Take off
190
925.5
26.4
22
30
10.2
7.4
Smooth ocn1 bump
355
919.0
26.3
28
9.6
6.4
645
910.0
25.8
28
9.3
6.0
Sunset 19:12 by tables
875
902.5
25.2
30
9.7
6.5
1045
897.0
24.7
32
10.0
7.0
1530
881.0
22.6
32
9.0
5.4
2020
865.0
21.7
36
9.3
6.0
2510
849.0
20.0
39
9.0
5.6
3040
832.5
18.6
22
43
9.2
5.8,
3540
817.0
17.5
--
46
9.2
5.8
4050
801.5
15.8
49
8.7
5.0
Slight draft
5050
771.5
13.3
50
7.6
3.0
Occasional light turbc
6080
741.5
11.8
43
6.0
-0.2
7105
713.0
9.4
36
4.3
-4.2
1005
898.0
24.9
32
10.2
7.4
195
925.5
25.7
33
32
10.6
7.8
Slt turbc
6
932.0
24.7
33
10.4
7.4
Landing Obsr P.H.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 66 29 AUGUST 1956 2133 CST
ZP
r
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
932.0
20.7
82
46
11.2
8.8
Take off delay -flat tire
190
925.5
23.6
36
10.5
7.6
? 400
918.5
25.8
65
32
10.5
7.8
Gust or bump
640
910.5
25.7
30
10.0
7.0
Draft or bump
885
902.0
25.2
--
32
10.4
7.5
1060
896.5
24.4
82
33
10.0
7.0
1560
880.0
23.1
13
30
8.6
4.8
2085
863.0
22.8
13
25
7.0
1.8
2555
848.0
22.1
12
25
6.8
1.2
Smooth
3085
831.0
20.6
22
25
6.1
0.0
3580
816.0
19.4
32
31
6.9
1.8
4090
800.0
18.0
32
32
6.8
1.5
5080
770.5
15.2
22
36
6.3
0.2
6095
741.5
12.6
32
39
5.7
-0.8
sit turbc
7120
712.5
9.9
.
40
4.9
-2.8
Slt turbc
1030
897.5
24.5
32
10.0
7.0
205
925.0
22.3
--
41
11.1
8.5
Slight turbc
6
932.0
38
10.2
7.2
Landing Obsr P.H.
FIELD TEST NO. 67 30 AUGUST 1956 0020 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
932.0
19.7
--
48
10.5
8.2
Take off
220
924.5
21.7
41
10.7
8.0
Bumpy below 300 It
430
917.5
24.6
25
36
11.0
8.4
Slight turbc
670
909.5
24.6
82
35
10.9
8.2
880
902.5
23.7
62
37
10.2
1.2
Smooth
1080
896.0
23.2
82
36
10.4
7.4
1570
879.5
21.6
46
12.0
9.6
2075
863.5
21.'0 _
42
10.5
7.8
2545
848.5
20.5
33
7.9
3.5
3065
832.0
20.0
22
29
6.8
1.4
3565
816.5
19.6
32
25
5.7
-1.0
Ltng SW
4085
800.5
18.4
32
28
6.1
-0.2
Pireps sit turbc
5085
771.0
15.2
35
6.2
0.0
Sit turbc
6090
741.5
12.6
36
5.4
-1.6
7110
713.0
9.7
40
4.8
-2.8
Turbc wallowy
1040
897.0
23.2
41
11.7
9.3
225
924.5
22.1
62
39
10.4
7.5
Rough at 200' Bumps
6
932.0
22.1
37
9.9
6.8
Landing Obsr P.H.
_
It See Legend
208
No. 66 & 67
os,
Table 13.1 (Continued)
FIELD TEST NO. 68 30 AUGUST 1956 0230 CST
Z
P
P
T
#
RH
e
Td
Remarks
(ft)
(mb)
(?C)
(%)
(mb)
(?C)
6
931.0
21.6
22
43
11.2
8.6
Take off Obsr P.H.
200
924.5
22.8
64
39
10.8
8.1
Bump not turbc
420
917.0
23.4
14
36
10.3
7.4
675
908.0
23.8
24
35
10.5
7.6
Turbc
880
902.0
23.6
12
32
9.3
6.0
1050
896.0
23.2
32
9.1
5.6
Turbc draft
1540
879.5
22.2
22
32
8.7
5.0
2040
863.5
22.2
12
28
7.7
3.2
Lgt bump
2525
848.0
22.8
32
25
6.9
1.8
3045
831.5
21.4
62
25
6.4
0.7
Wallowy
3565
815.5
20.2
--
25
5.9
-0.4
4055
800.5
18.9
12
28
6.3
0.4
Pireps rocky
5065
770.5
16.0
22
28
5.2
-2.0
Down draft at 4500
6075
741.0
13.2
33
5.0
-2.3
7100
712.5
10.1
36
4.5
-3.8
Turbc
Gusts in descent
1010
897.0
25.0
23
27
8.8
5.0
Bouncy
200
924.0
23.6
82
38
11.0
8.4
Down draft at 250'
6
931.0
24.1
35
10.6
7.8
Mild wind shift encountered.
In about 2 miles 2 cycles + 1?C
tmp change at 725', updift
with AT 2.1?C in about
1/2 mile '
# See Legend
209
No. 68
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
sewer...
(.4
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCII PAPERS
No. 1. Isotropic and Non-Isotropic Turbulence in the Atmospheric Surface Layer, Heinz Lettau, Geo-
physics Research Directorate, December 1949.
No. 2. Effective Radiation Temperatures of the Ozonosphere over New Mexico, Adel, Geophysics
R-D, December 1949.
No. 3. Diffraction Effects in the Propagation of Compressional Waves in the Atmosphere, Norman A.
Haskell, Geophysics Research Directorate, March 1950.
No. 4. Evaluation of Results of Joint Air Force-Weather Bureau Cloud Seeding Trials Conducted
During Winter and Spring 1949, Charles E. Anderson, Geophysics Research Directorate,
May 1950.
No. 5. Investigation of Stratosphere Winds and Temperatures From Acoustical Propagation Studies,
Albert P. Crary, Geophysics Research Directorate, June 1950.
No. 6. Air-Coupled Flexural Waves in Floating Ice, F. Press, M. Ewing, A. P. Crary, S. Katz, and J.
Oliver, Geophysics Research Directorate, November 1950.
No. 7. Proceedings of the Conference on Ionospheric Research (June 1949), edited by Bradford B.
Underhill and Ralph J. Donaldson, Jr., Geophysics Research Directorate, December 1950.
No. 8. Proceedings of the Colloquium on Mesospheric Physics, edited by N. C. Gerson, Geophysics
Research Directorate, July 1951.
No. 9. The Dispersion of Surface Waves on Multi-Layered Media, Norman A. Haskell, Geophysics
Research Directorate, August 1951.
No. 10. The Measurement of Stratospheric Density Distribution with the Searchlight Technique, L.
Elterman, Geophysics Research Directorate, December 1951.
No. 11. Proceedings of the Conference on Ionospheric Physics (July 1950) Part A, edited by N. C.
Gerson and Ralph J. Donaldson, Jr., Geophysics Research Directorate, April 1952.
No. 12. Proceedings of the Conference on Ionospheric Physics (July 1950) Part B, edited by Ludwig
Katz and N. C. Gerson, Geophysics Research Directorate, April 1952.
No. 13. Proceedings of the Colloquium on Microwave Meteorology, Aerosols and Cloud Physics, edited
by Ralph J. Donaldson, Jr., Geophysics Research Directorate, May 1952.
No. 14. Atmospheric Flow Patterns and Their Representation by Spherical-Surface harmonics, B. Haur-
witz and Richard A. Craig, Geophysics Research Directorate, July 1952.
No. 15. Back-Scattering of Electromagnetic Waves From Spheres and Spherical Shells, A. L. Aden,
Geophysics Research Directorate, July 1952.
No. 16. Notes on the Theory of Large-Scale Disturbances in Atmospheric Flow With Applications to
Numerical Weather Prediction, Philip Duncan Thompson, Major, U. S. Air Force, Geophysics
Research Directorate, July 1952.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
-
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH PAPERS (Continued)
No. 17. The Observed Mean Field of Motion of the Atmosphere, Yale Mintz and Gordon Dean, Geophysics
Research Directorate, August 1952.
No. 18. The Distribution of Radiational Temperature Change in the Northern Hemisphere During March,
Julius London, Geophysics Research Directorate, December 1952.
No. 19. International Symposium on Atmospheric Turbulence in the Boundary Layer, Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology, 4-8 June 1951, edited by E. W. Hewson, Geophysics Research Directorate,
December 1952.
No. 20.
No. 21.
No. 22.
No. 23.
On the Phenomenon of the Colored Sun, Especially the "Blue" Sun of September 1950, Rudolf
Penndorf, Geophysics Research Directorate, April 1953.
Absorption Coefficients of Several Atmospheric Gases, K. Watanabe, Murray Zelikoff and Edward
C. Y. Inn, Geophysics Research Directorate, June 1953.
Asymptotic Approximation for the Elastic Normal Modes in a Stratified Solid Medium, Norman A.
Haskell, Geophysics Research Directorate, August 1953.
Forecasting Relationships Between Upper Level Flow and Surface Meteorological Processes,
J. J. George, R. 0. Roche, H. B. Visscher, R. J. Shafer, P. W. Funke, W. R. Biggers and R. M.
Whiting, Geophysics Research Directorate, August 1953.
No. 24. Contributions to the Study of Planetary Atmospheric Circulations, edited by Robert M. White,
Geophysics Research Directorate, November 1953.
No. 25. The Vertical Distribution of Mie Particles in the Troposphere, R. Penndorf, Geophysics Re-
search Directorate, March 1954.
No. 26. Study of Atmospheric Ions in a Nonequilibrium System, C. G. Swrgis, Geophysics Research
Directorate, April 1954.
No. 27. Investigation of Microbarometric Oscillations in Eastern Massachusetts, E. A. Flauraud, A. H.
Mears, F. A. Crowley, Jr., and A. P. Crary, Geophysics Research Directorate, May 1954.
No. 28. The Rotation-Vibration Spectra of Ammonia in the 6- and 10-Micron Regions, R. G. Breene, Jr.,
Capt., USAF, Geophysics Research Directorate, June 1954.
No. 29. Seasonal Trends of Temperature, Density, and Pressure in the Stratosphere Obtained With the
Searchlight Probing Technique, Louis Elterman, July 1954.
No. 30. Proceedings of the Conference on Auroral Physics, edited by N. C. Gerson, Geophysics Re-
search Directorate, July 1954.
No. 31. Fog Modification by Cold-Water Seeding, Vernon G. Plank, Geophysics Research Directorate,
August 1954.
4
?
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH PAPERS (Continued)
No. 32. Adsorption Studies of Heterogeneous Phase Transitions, S. J. Birstein, Geophysics Research
Directorate, December 1954.
No. 33. The Latitudinal and Seasonal Variations of the Absorption of Solar Radiation by Ozone,
J. Pressman, Geophysics Research Directorate, December 1954
No. 34. Synoptic Analysis of Convection in a Rotating Cylinder, D. Fultz and J. Corn, Geophysics
Research Directorate, January 1955.
No. 35. Balance Requirements of the General Circulation, V. P. Starr and R. M. White, Geophysics
Research Directorate, December 1954.
No. 36. The Mean Molecular Weight of the Upper Atmosphere, Warren E. Thompson, Geophysics Re-
search Directorate, May 1955.
No. 37. Proceedings on the Conference on Interfacial Phenomena and Nucleation.
I. Conference on Nucleation.
II. Conference on Nucleation and Surface Tension.
III. Conference on Adsorption.
Edited by II. Reiss, Geophysics Research Directorate, July 1955.
No. 38. The Stability of a Simple Baroclinic Flow With Horizontal Shear, Leon S. Pocinki, Geophysics
Research Directorate, July 1955.
No. 39. The Chemistry and Vertical Distribution of the Oxides of Nitrogen in the Atmosphere, L.
Miller, Geophysics Research Directorate, April 1955.
No. 40. Near Infrared Transmission Through Synthetic Atmospheres, J. N. Howard, Geophysics Res-
search Directorate, November 1955.
No. 41. The Shift and Shape of Spectral Lines, R. G. Breene, Geophysics Research Directorate,
October 1955.
No. 42. Proceedings on the Conference on Atmospheric Electricity, R. Holzer, W. Smith, Geophysics
Research Directorate, December 1955.
No. 43. Methods and Results of Upper Atmospheric Research, J. Kaplan, G. Schilling, H. Kallman,
Geophysics Research Directorate, November 1955.
No. 44. Luminous and Spectral Reflectance as Well as Colors of Natural Objects, R. Penndorf, Geo-
physics Research Directorate, February 1956.
No. 45. New Tables of Mie Scattering Functions for Spherical Particles, R. Penndorf, B. Goldberg,
Geophysics Research Directorate, March 1956.
No. 46. Results of Numerical Forecasting With the Barotropic and Thermotropic Models, W. Gates,
L. S. Pocinki, C. F. Jenkins, Geophysics Research Directorate, April 1956.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCII PAPERS (Continued)
No. 47. A Meteorological Analysis of Clear Air Turbulence (A Report on the U. S. Synoptic High-
Altitude Gust Program), H. Lake, Geophysics Research Directorate, February 1956.
No. 48. A Review of Charge Transfer Processes in Gases, S. N. Ghosh, W. F. Sheridan, J. A. Dillon,
Jr., and H. D. Edwards, Geophysics Research Directorate, July 1955.
No. 49. Theory of Motion of a Thin Metallic Cylinder Carrying a High Current, C. W. Dubs, Geo-
physics Research Directorate, October 1955.
No. 50. Hurricane Edna, 1954: Analysis of Radar, Aircraft, and Synoptic Data, E. Kessler, III and
D. Atlas, Geophysics Research Directorate, July 1956.
No. 51. Cloud Refractive Index Studies, R. M. Cunningham, V. G. Plank, and C. F. Campen, Jr.
Geophysics Research Directorate, October 1956.
No. 52. A Meteorological Study of Radar Angels, V. G. Plank, Geophysics Research Directorate,
August 1956.
No. 53. The Construction and Use of Forecast Rejisters, I. Gringorten, I. Lund, M. Miller, Geo-
physics Research Directorate, June, 1956.
No. 54. Solar Geomagnetic Ionospheric Parameters as Indices of Solar Activity, F. Ward Jr., Geo-
physics Research Directorate, November, 1956.
No. 55. Preparation of Mutually Consistent Magnetic Charts, Paul Fougere, J. McClay, Geophysics
Research Directorate, June 1957.
No. 56. Radar Synoptic Analysis of an Intense Winter Storm, Edwin Kessler HI, Geophysics Research
Directorate, October 1957.
No. 57. Mean Monthly 300- and 200-mb Contours and 500-, 300-, and 200-mb Temperatures for the
Northern Hemisphere, E. W. Wahl, Geophysics Research Directorate, April 1958.
No. 58. Vol. I. Theory of Large-Scale Atmospheric Diffusion and its Application to Air Trajectories.
Vol. II. The Downstream Probability Density Function for Various Constant Values of
Mean Zonal Wind
Vol. III. The Downstream Probability Density Fucntion for North America and Eurasia
by S. B. Solot and E. M. Darling, Jr., Geophysics Research Directorate, June 1958.
.14
UNCLASSIFIED
edited by M. L. Barad
UNCLASSIFIED
tfl
0
edited by M. L. Barad
UNCLASSIFIED
AD 152573
UNCLASSIFIED
CO
Co
Cd
C.
1.1
?
0
diffusion
rsi 4
cd .?"
Co
C.
0.,Rlem:" . 192?0 40000 om: i 1, c su opE:0 .c!0> 61 . _ 44. .1":0 ? . . .fg ? -.,.t. ):. . . cdt, !ts
..:?;:o: 3.> 01' ,...4) .7,
Cd
3" U U .' t)
C.0. ,t,' O) g ... MU C:111:1 IA
...
'40?()10._.r.
0 0 ?-.) o, cd .....
.... ol-e`e-e0 0
--, a- cs *.,... 1... 1_, 0 ? c.) g
0 - e$19 Co" Co'g e - -; u': D. .. .. r je ' )r. . ' C il ) k3
.-' fle a+
o 0./ 0 CC.
rd
ea
2 5 b?43
C.) C
UNCLASSIFIED
N
edited by M. L.
-;
V:H> . :6n 40 0 1 1" 188
4! '44! !1! : !/! .: !.::. C.
: ---
$.' : DEP:C jog CO :: C )?c"; j! ; r ic de C. i r d> ? 20; :
g
c, -`,; . ri 00)
ri.I V t:J) CT) /%1 ? r.tr)..)
? ri v. C00 a))) Ft 0, Ft
?"niMui, n.:":90;t ', ' I 1 !ti: 10:3:E. . .0 H Cono :3: . I : I. .,_... ,., . .:: 41 :it av . :pc
0 E m t.' V01.
o' ' '''
C. 4' "I cl: . $ - ."1 i 9p ? - . .o. ?14 ) C)ij .,..'K),,
??-? .0 o ?, ..,
jj ? k X 0 > *g ....
;'.', 5 0) a)'.. gt..cacd0
al f-e ,T3 N .... '0 --,
0 >, 0.
C. 04... tn C4-' 00 a) ?0 cd
11, .40 ro 0 og g , . , 7,9 . . . ?:_, g -:.>
- Cd
t .-4cr
co ...
e) g
L', "g 74 g 8
en
Cd '.4 ti)-13 ?I
0) 0a t) .7.`u 0 0 cc 0
thul cia) : e) 0... . Z ...-.0j... 7.) a. (po
?a . (:. H .1 g ?C
(.. ?... .... ?.... .0 0
( ; ).)
C. .: --k ? ,.- 1, u? ( 1 ..) '4, ? 71 , e. ?0
l' ? ,5). ?
.- 0 0 0 ?-? k U 0. -0 1:/
.r'Ji, aa)" N ,?,-z0j a-50 Co Ts 2
.0.."rti '.5i '!..;.1 cr'd.
Cd
L. ..,,e) .a.cr
.3 z g ;-.,3.-x
kl=0 "WVIII?C)
SHC2 E '5_1: %,'.2
AD 152573
E
1./ 6 ? 0
C.
Cd tn u
E '8.2
UNCLASSIFIED
? ut ): . . c ,. . ". u)7.1. -
Co j -g,4 1 : : 4:00to ' :7 . ... ..._A . . , ::::,n: . . . . C. :10t 1): -2 'IL.'
ed.0 0...4146?05, 0
CD H
p 0 0) ti
0 0 e0 Co U 0.) > 0 k ?/-/ O
1113 ; ?80 : (no! ; : ..; :a) .'0..a.
cc) 1../
0
17 col
?-? .6j 0..) CI) U)
0 CI) a)
?.4 ..-? o
a)
ctl o C. A rt1
bs g 0)
1-e 0, '6
r, A
Co 0) 0 ?-)
00 02tok Wk0
C. ?13 u)U
V 0 Cd 1) C .0) CD o
Co C)> o 3 o a)
co a. g E Fo
C.
?00 i4C
?C. 1
C. 'C.>.
U'-' -gt)
U "."
4cdktej :JP: 5Llni 0:50.0? Ijrj: :10:44)
C.
7.; k 4) Cd ? ?cl)
.0- 0
ai Tr/ .c7.14 ,(3)
bo g 0 o in 0 "C)
"")
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
1.=
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/28: CIA-RDP81-01043R002900200001-3
craLIISSV'IONfl
GZIJISSV'IONfl
aaraissV901\1f1
aamissv-romn
9561 Jo satutung aqi 2uT.inp
spoizad pa4oai3s .10910 5u5anp 00-ej.:03uT 94.1v0-.11-e
DAD la2pnq 1-eq aqi uo suveluon aadvd sTql
'uompp-eti ?paluas0ad ?sue a.ve sas-ealaz s-e2 alp
21.11.1np erep renT2olo.roalaux aqi puv -evep
uoTsrimp 041 Jo suoweinq-ej, *ure.i2o.xd piaTJ aquT
9561
spoizad pa;oaias sato() BuTanp an-eJaaluT Tiara-aye
alp la2pnq 10LL 091 uo -elvp suT-eluon iodd sT91
?uoTlIpp-e u pawasa.id osre a.xv gas-ea-pa sE 991
uiinp P9lo0lloo ep renT2olo.io010ul sqi pu-e rwp
uoTsrimp aqi Jo suoweinqvi, ?tur.i2o.td plaT; 091 uT
1
ELS751 GY
Jo .zatuums 091 2uTanp I
ELSZSI QV
(33I3ISSV-101\1f1
azi.aissv-romn
aziaissv-romn
G3I3ISSv-romn
5uTanp
?956l Jo 01-13
spol.zad p0;na105 .10ipo SuTanp aorJaa2uT inara-aTt
aqie aBpnq ;tam 091 uo xtvp stryeluoo sadvd Bpi;
'uoTimpuuj pawasaad osue a.ve sasraTa.r s?e2 alp
2uTanp paloalion el-ep renT2oloaa910tu 092 pwe -evep
uoTsnmp ato Jo suoweinq-ej, ?u:-e.i2oad pial; alp uT
ELSZSI C1V
2
?9S6I Jo aeuluinS uTanp
spoTaad paloalas ./alpo 2uT.:np aovJaaluT 91.1-ea-alv
alp le la5pnq 2-eaq atp uo ?elvp suveluon .xad-ed slit;
luompp-e u paluasaad oste aas sas.eatai se 2 ato
2u5anp pa2na11?3eip renT2oto.toa;aux 093 pwe -elvp
uoisnmp 992 Jo suoweiturea. *it:v.120.1d pp.!' 992 us
ELSZSI QV
ie ?
?
Li
AD 152573
152573
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
Geophysics Research Directorate
Bedford, Mass.
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM
IN DIFFUSION (Vol. II), edited by M. L. Barad,
July 1958. 209 p. incl. illus tables (Geophysical
Research Papers No. 59; AFCRC-TR-58-235(II))
Unclassified Report
Project Prairie Grass was a field program de-
signed to provide experimental data on the diffus-
sion of a tracer gas over a range of 800 meters.
In each of 70 experiments the gas was released
continuously for 10 minutes at a source located
near ground level. The gas releases were made
over a flat prairie in Nebraska under a variety of
meteorological conditions during July and August
1956. This paper includes a brief history of the
project and detailed descriptions of the tracer
technique and the meteorological equipment used
(over)
AD 152573
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
Geophysics Research Directorate
Bedford, Mass.
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM
IN DIFFUSION (Vol. II), edited by M. L. Barad
July 1958. 209 p. incl. illus tables (Geophysical
Research Papers No. 59; AFCRC-TR-58-235(II)).
Unclassified Report
Project Prairie Grass was a field program de-
signed to provide experimental data on the diffus-
sion of a tracer gas over a range of 800 meters.
In each of 70 experiments the gas was released
continuously for 10 minutes at a source located
near ground level. The gas releases were made
over a flat prairie in Nebraska under a variety of
meteorological conditions during July and August
1956. This paper includes a brief history of the
project and detailed descriptions of the tia.cer
technique and the meteorological equipment used
(Over
UNCLASSIFIED
? Gas diffusion -
Measurement
Micrometeorology -
Measuremeht
edited by M. L. Barad
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Gas diffusion -
Measurement
Micrometeorology -
Measurement
edited by M. L. Barad
UNCLASSIFIED
AD 132573
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
Geophysics Research Directorate
Bedford, Mass.
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM
IN DIFFUSION (Vol. II), edited by M. L. Barad,
July 1958. 209 p. incl. illus tables (Geophysical
Research Papers No. 59; AFCRC-TR-58-235(II)).
Unclassified Report
Project Prairie Grass was a field program de-
signed to provide experimental data on the diffus-
sion of a tracer gas over a range of 800 meters.
In eazh of 70 experiments the gas was released
continuously for 10 minutes at a source located
near ground level. The gas releases were made
over a flat prairie in Nebraska under a variety of
meteorological conditions during July and August
1956. This paper includes a brief history of the
project and detailed descriptions of the tracer
technique and the meteorological equipment used
(over)
AD 152573
Air Force Cambridge Research Center
Geophysics Research Directorate
Bedford, Mass.
PROJECT PRAIRIE GRASS, A FIELD PROGRAM
IN DIFFUSION (Vol. II), edited by M. L. Barad,
July 1958. 209 p. incl. illus tables (Geophysical
Research Papers No. 59; AFCRC-TR-58-235(II)).
Unclassified Report
Project Prairie Grass was a field program de-
signed to provide experimental data on the diffus-
sion of a tracer gas over a range of 800 meters.
In each of 70 experiments the gas was released
continuously for 10 minutes at a source located
near ground level. The gas releases were Made
ov er a flat prairie in Nebraska under a variety of
meteorological conditions during July and August
1956. This paper includes a brief history of the
project and detailed descriptions of the tracer
technique and the meteorological equipment used
(over)
UNCLASSIFIED
Gas diffusion -
Measureme-it
2. Micrometeorology -
Measurement
edited by M. L. Barad
UNCLASSIFIED
_
UNCLASSIFIED
Gas diffusion -
Measurement
Micrometeorology -
Measurement
edited by M. L. Barad
UNCLASSIFIED