COMPARATIVE TEST OF AIRCREW PRESSURE SUITS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 28
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 9, 2002
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: April 1, 1961
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For4iRelease 2002/11/ : CIA-RD/7
4750TH TEST SQUADRON
(TACTICS AND APPLICATION ENGINEERING)
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA
PROJECT ADC/73AD/60-11
COMPARATIVE TEST OF AIRCREW PRESSQ , y
On file USAF release
instructions apply.
1 APRIL 1961
00100050002-4
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved FoVeRelease 2002/11/08: CIA-RDP75B0028 000100050002-4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
OBJECTIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
TEST RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . , 16
DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
DISTRIBLTT'ION LIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
I
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Foo4gelease 2002/11/08: CIA-RDP75BO02& 000100050002-4
FOREWORD
This report is submitted in accordance with ADCR 55-49, dated
28 September 1959, and as directed by ADC Letter, ADOOP-T,
dated 4 May 1960.
Appreciation is acknowledged to the officers and airmen of the
325th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Truax Field, Wisconsin, whose
participation and cooperation in support of this project resulted in
its successful completion. Special acknowledgement is extended to
the following individuals who contributed unselfishly of their time
and talent to this effort:
Major Jesse R. Harrell, Jr. , Physiological Training Officer,
30th Air Division, Truax Field, Wisconsin.
Captain James T. Mikulecky, Personal Equipment Officer,
325th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Truax Field, Wisconsin - Project
Officer.
TSgt Charles E. Cheek, Personal Equipment Supervisor,
4750th Test Squadron (T&AE), Tyndall AFB, Florida.
TSgt Olin E. Burkett, Personal Equipment Supervisor,
4750th Test Squadron (T&AE), Tyndall AFB, Florida.
Acknowledgement is also made to the following organizations for
their services rendered in support of this project:
Directorate of Systems Engineering, Wright Air Development
Division, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.
USAF Climatic Laboratory, Eglin AFB, Florida.
This report is UNCLASSIFIED.
2
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo,elease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028R000100050002-4
ABSTRACT
In an effort to determine which type of high altitude aircrew
pressure suit best fulfilled the requirements of the Air Defense
Command, Headquarters ADC directed that a comparative test
be conducted on four types of pressure suits. These four types
were: A/P-22S-2, A/P-22S-3 Full Pressure Suits, and CSU-4/P,
CSU-5/P Partial Pressure Suits.
The A/P-22S-2 Full Pressure Suit proved to be the most accept-
able garment of the four tested. This full pressure suit satisfied
the prerequisites of the mission completion concept as advocated by
ADC. The A/P-22S-2 suit also provided adequate aircrew pro-
tection as a land or water anti-exposure garment.
The high altitude capabilities of this garment were tested in
normal and simulated emergency flight conditions. The anti-
exposure features of the suit were tested in cold land and cold water
environments.
It is concluded that, of the four pressure suits tested, the
A /P- 22S- 2 Full Pressure Suit most nearly satisfies the operational
requirement of ADC. Therefore, if this garment is adopted for
use by ADC, it is recommended that the modifications listed in the
section Conclusions and Recommendations be performed.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4 ,
INTRODUCTION
Today's interceptors have the capability to seek out and destroy
targets flying at the very limits of our atmosphere. To realize the
full potential of our Space Defense, our aircrews must also have the
capability to perform at these extreme altitudes. Therefore, the
need for a high altitude space garment becomes obvious.
The MC-3/4 Partial Pressure Suit did not fulfill all of the pre-
requisites necessary to conform with the concept of "mission
completion". For this reason, a requirement was submitted for a
high altitude space garment that would provide the user with the
following: (1) Protection against adverse effects resulting from a
high altitude emergency, e. g. , loss of cockpit pressurization.
(2) Adequate comfort and mobility to complete the assigned mission
in the event of such an emergency. (3) Protection from exposure
in an extreme cold land or cold water environment.
As a result of the aforementioned requirement, Project ADC/
73AD/60--ll, Subject: Comparative Test of Aircrew Pressure Suits,
was initiated. Wright Air Development Division had under develop-
ment four types of pressure suits which were ready for testing. The
325th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, located at Truax Field, Wisconsin,
was designated as the test support organization. Six pilots of the
325th FLS were selected as project pilots and each tested all four
suits. Flight tests were conducted during day and night high altitude
profile missions in the F-102 aircraft. Normal and simulated high
altitude emergency flight conditions were conducted above 50,000
feet. Alert conditions, in the ready room and cockpit, were also
tested. In addition, each type suit was tested in a frozen land and
a cold water environment to determine their anti-exposure capabilities.
Data was collected on all aspects of this test to aid in determining
which suit best satisfied the requirements of ADC and was also used
to establish support requirements for squadrons equipped with
pressure suits,
OBJ ECTIVE
The objective of this test was to determine which of the four
subject pressure suit; het satisfied ADC requirements.
4
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved FoiyAWlease 2002/11/08: CIA-RDP75BO028 000100050002-4
cc
a
N
+
Approved For Release 2002/11/0,,8 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo*Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00266 000100050002-4
TEST RESULTS
The test r(-suits are listed under three general headings; an
Operational Phase, a Support Requirement Phase, and Summary.
1. Operational Phase - This phase consisted of three tests:
Flight test, ground test, and anti-exposure test.
a. Flight Test
Sorties Flown
Day 60
Night _9T
Hours Flown 124:55
No. Sorties Cabin Press. Normal 24
(Suits not pressurized)
No. Sorties Cabin Press. Dumped 63
(Suits Pressurized)
Total
No. of Sorties by Suit Type A/P-22S-2 24
A/P-22S-3 19
CSU-4/P 20
CSU-5/P 24*
Total 7
*See Summary - concerning incident on one flight in this garment.
(1) Simulated five-minute alert was conducted in each
type suit.
(2) The above sorties. were flown in the F-102 aircraft.
These aircraft contained the F-2400 regulator modified with a 710 psi
oxygen by-pass line. The GU-252 ventilating unit was installed in
five aircraft and the SAAMA ventilation mod was installed in five
other aircraft. All pressure sorties were flown in these ten aircraft.
(3) During the flight tests, pilots rated the suits as
salisfaetoiv or ui;satisfactory under the following categories:
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
Comfort and Mobility
Aircraft Control
Weapons System Control
Suit Ventilation
Vision
Communications
Suit Safety
(4) The results of each flight were tabulated and then
compiled to obtain an overall standing. As the S-2 suit received
the highest number of satisfactory ratings in each category, it was
used as the base line for the comparative chart shown in Table 2.
b. Ground Test
(1) Five-Minute Alert - To evaluate the suits in a ready
room alert environment, the project pilots simulated five-minute.
alert in each type garment. These alert tests lasted from five to
six and one-half hours. During this time the pilots evaluated comfort
and mobility features of the suit. The results of their findings are
depicted in Table I.
(2) Cockpit Alert - Simulated cockpit alert was per-
formed in each type garment. Here again, suit comfort and mobility
were the primary factors evaluated. The aircrews were fully attired
in this test condition, whereas they did not wear gloves and headpiece
in the five-minute alert condition. Time spent in the cockpit varied
from 30 minutes to two hours. See Table 1 for comparative standings
of the various garments in this test.
c. Anti-Exposure Tests - This consisted of two separate
tests: Cold Land Survival and Cold Water Survival.
(1) Cold Land Survival - The Cold Land Survival Test
was conducted in the Climatic Laboratory at Eglin Air Force Base,
Florida. Results of this test indicated that all four suits provided
adequate protection from cold land exposure when worn with the proper
undergarments. See Annex A for detailed report on this test.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Foi!+ipelease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B002860000100050002-4
(2) Cold Water Survival - The Cold Water Test was
conducted in Lake Superior at Duluth, Minnesota, during December
1960. This area was chosen for two reasons. First, it was con-
veniently located near Truax. Secondly, the mean maximum and
mean minimum temperatures for the Duluth area were considered
as representative for stations in the northern area. See table below:
DECEMBER
Wurtsmith AFB Duluth Goose Bay
Mean Max Temp (F)
33
23
(21)
15
Mean Min Temp (F)
20
6
(10)
1
Mean Water Temp (F)
40
36
(33)
32
Mean Wind Speed
8
12
(15)
10
( ): Temperatures during this test
Results of this test showed that the S-2 and S-3 Full Pressure Suits
provided a sufficient degree of protection such that an individual
could survive for several hours. The 4/P and 5/P garments proved
unsatisfactory as they offered the wearer almost no protection from
exposure. See Annex B for a detailed account of this test.
2. Support Requirement Phase - The results of this test provide
the basis for the following requirements:
a. Pressure Suits - The following pressure suit with minor
modifications as listed under recommendations: A/P-22S-2 Full
Pressure Suit.
b. Aircraft Modification - To accommodate the A /P-22S-2
suit, the following aircraft modifications are required:
(1) Ventilation air source for suit cooling. The GU252
aircraft vent unit proved more feasible than the SAAMA aircraft vent
modification. See Figure 14.
(2) A 70 psi by-pass line on the oxygen regulator in
the seat kit.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 :kA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 - Approved Foe lease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75BOOZ000100050002-4
(3) Increase aircraft oxygen capacity to provide a remote
base turnaround capability.
(4) Increase aperture of radar scope hood to provide
better scope vision.
c. Personnel - For a sustained operation utilizing the
A/P-22S-2 suit, one Personal Equipment technician per three aircrew
positions is required.
d. Support Equipment - The following support equipment per
squadron is required for day in, day out use:
(1) Two multi-outlet ventilation units; one in the dressing
area and one in the. alert room. (GSU-1 /E ventilation unit is satis-
factory if noise level is reduced.)
(2) One spare oxygen survival seat kit per twelve
assigned UE aircraft.
(3) One suit tester.
(4) Portable ventilation units. If ventilation units are
supplied as stated in (1) above and if the aircraft are modified with
a full pressure ventilator, Type GU252, then there is no requirement
for a portable ventilating unit. If one or both of the aforementioned
requirements are not satisfied, then there would be a requirement for
some number of portable vent units.
11
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo ,.eIease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028 000100050002-4
TABLE 1
Pilot Evaluation Reports
As an aid to the project pilots in their evaluation of each suit, a
checklist was prepared. This list contained several categories
relating to suit performance that were to be evaluated as either
satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Table 1 is a compilation of the
evaluation reports listed under the several categories. The figures
represent the actual number of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
comments.
Comfort
Ventilation
Mobility
A/C Control
Wpns System Contra
Vision
Communication
F light Safety /Hazard
Ground Comfort
Ground Mobility
TOTAL
Rating
A/P-22S-2 A/P-22S-3 CSU-4/P CSU-5/P
S U S
42 4 28 33 1 38 2
42 28 2 34 37 3
42 3 29 34 40
42 23 9 34 40
42 19 9 31 3 39 1
42 32 33 1 40
42 33 34 40
42 32 34 39 1
12 12 12 3 9
12
12
12
11
1
360
174
101
291
5
327
17
100 63 98 95
TABLE 1
72
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved For-Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
TABLE 2
Overall Standings
Table 2 depicts the overall standing of the suits. These ratings were
based upon suit performance and acceptability in flight, cold land
environment and cold water environment. All four suits performed
equally satisfactorily in the Cold Land Survival Test, hence the
relative standings of the suits were not changed as a result of this
test. In the Cold Water Test, the S-2 and S-3 were considered
equally satisfactory; however, the 4/P and 5/P garments were com-
pletely unsatisfactory.
100
88%
80
70
IBM
4 0 V1111,'
/
30
A/1'-1L,-1
Y//,I%/ i/;
66%
CSU-4/P
CSU-5/P
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : Cl} RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 . Approved FoKIWlease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028iix000100050002-4
3. Summary - General comments on each type suit are listed
below :
a. A /P- 22S- 2 - There were three praiseworthy features of
this suit, of which all of the project pilots were unanimous in voicing
their opinions. These were ease of donning, comfort and mobility.
(1) Donning - Although suit donning, per se, was not
considered a factor in this test, yet the fact that every pilot commented
on it, merits its mention here. A pilot can don the complete suit, less
headpiece, without assistance in about five minutes.
(2) Comfort - Quite understandably, comfort plays a
big role when decisions are made on items of flying attire. On this
count, the S-2 suit rated high. It not only afforded comfort in flight,
but on the ground as well. This garment is relatively light in weight
and loose fitting, two features which reduce the fatigue factor con-
siderably.
(3) Mobility - The mobility that this suit affords the
wearer is excellent. Up to cabin altitudes of 55,000 feet, all cockpit
controls, consoles, console switches, and circuit breaker panels can
be reached in the F-102 aircraft. Furthermore, all these areas can
be seen, with the exception of the left and right aft circuit breaker
panels. Mobility is also retained in a ground environment. There is
no restriction of body movement in the least, hence, the wearer may
perform in a normal manner without experiencing undue fatigue.
b. A/P-22S-3
(1) Comfort and Mobility - This suit was the least
comfortable and afforded the least mobility of the four garments
tested. This diminished comfort and mobility may, in part, be
attributed to the fact that during the original fittings, the suits were
not properly adjusted. Subsequent adjustments eventually resulted
in an optimum fitting; however, the comfort and mobility enjoyed
in the S-3 still did not match that of the S-2. The S-3 garment did
perform satisfactorily in the anti-exposure tests.
14
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fok ielease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028i 000100050002-4
(2) Donning - One major drawback of this suit was the
difficulty encountered in donning. Because of its tight fit, the user
invariably scraped his head on the entrance zipper as he pulled the
upper part of the suit over his head. Similar discomfort was exper-
ienced by the subject when he attempted to place the neck ring over
his head.
C. CSU-4/P
(1) Comfort and Mobility - The comfort and mobility
of this garment was considered excellent by all of the project pilots.
All switches, consoles and cockpit controls could be reached with
the suit pressurized at cabin altitudes up to 55,000 feet. One annoying
feature of this suit was that it would partially inflate when the user
took a deep breath.
(2) Donning - Although considered by some to be a quick
don suit, this did not prove so. The lengthy zippers, and the care
required to prevent clothing from catching in these zippers, precluded
rapid donning of the 4/P. Donning time was further increased because
trapped air in the bladders resulted in tight fitting areas.
d. CSU-5 /P
(1) Comfort - This suit was somewhat less comfortable
than the S-2 and 4/P primarily because it was considerably bulkier.
This increase in bulk over that of the 4/P was due to the fact that the
anti-exposure features were integrated into this garment, whereas
the 4/P did not contain them. As with the 4/P, intermittent partial
pressurization occurred during normal flight (cockpit pressurized)
whenever the pilot'took a deep breath. Neither aircraft ventilating
system tested (Pioneer Central, Type GU252 or the SAAMA vent mod)
was able to supply sufficient pressure for adequate cooling.
(2) Mobility - Suit mobility was rated as satisfactory
by all project pilots.
(3) Flight Safety - This section is included here because
the only flight safety incident during this test occurred while a pilot
was flying in the CSU-5/P suit. The pilot was flying in a practice ILAS
and extend.] the landing gear. As he withdrew his hand from the
landing gear lever, the loop formed by the suit-to-glove bladder lead,
caught the throttle and the engine was inadvertently stopcocked.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : 1A-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo Iease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028 000100050002-4
In spite of the pilot's precarious position (approximately'1,000 feet
above the terrain, landing gear down, and airspeed 220 knots and
decreasing!), he was able to make a successful airstart and proceeded
on to base and landed. A recommended modification to the CSU-4/P
and CSU-5 /P garments to preclude such an event from reoccurring
is to enlarge the present sleeve zipper to allow the suit-to-glove
bladder lead to be tucked away. The leather covering of the glove
should also be extended to cover this bladder lead.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are set forth:
4. Pressure Suit - The A/P-22S-2 Full Pressure Suit most
nearly satisfies the operational requirements of the Air Defense
Command. Therefore, if this garment is adopted for use by ADC,
the following modifications should be performed:
a. Helmet
(1)
(2)
on face plate.
(3)
Face Seal - Delete extra flap on face seal.
Glare and Reflection - Alleviate glare and reflection
Face Plate -. One-handed operation of face plate.
(4) Face Plate Seal - Warning device to indicate loss
of face plate seal.
(5) Face Seal Adjustment - Face seal adjustment be
independent of earphone adjustment.
(6) Earphones - Reduce thickness of earphones.
(7) Helmet Tie-Down Straps - Longer length on front
tie-down.
b. Suit
(1) Suit Altimeter - Small suit mounted altimeter to be
installed on left thigh of suit.
(2) Suit Controller - Smaller suit controller with
"BREKO" fittings.
Approved For Release 2002/11/0 ~ CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved FofiQd 'lease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028SK000100050002-4
(3) Survival Mittens - Suit-equipped survival mittens
with "0" ring seal.
c. Accessories - Following items of wear are required for
issue to each assigned aircrew:
(1) Underwear - Two sets of long waffle-weave and two
sets of long cotton.
(2) Alert Boot - One pair of quick donning alert boots
for wear with the A /P-22S-2. This boot should be approximately one
size larger than normal.
5. Aircraft Modifications - The following aircraft modifications
are recommended for aircraft /pressure suit operation:
a. Ventilation Unit - The GU252 ventilation unit to provide
suit cooling.
b. 70 psi By-Pass - A 70 psi by-pass line on the oxygen
regulator in the seat kit.
c. Oxygen Supply - Double the oxygen capacity of all inter-
ceptors.
d. Radar Scope Hood - An increased aperture of the radar
scope hood to provide better scope vision.
6. Personnel - For maximum utilization of the pressure suit
during sustained operations, one Personal Equipment technician per
three aircrew positions is recommended. These technicians must
all be pressure suit qualified.
7. Support Equipment - The following items of support are
recommended:
a. Ventilation Units - Two multi-outlet ventilation units;
one in the suit donning area and one in the alert room. (GSU-1 /E
ventilation unit is satisfactory if noise level is reduced. )
b. Survival Seat Kit - One spare oxygen survival kit per
twelve assigned aircrew positions.
c. Suit Testers - One suit tester per squadron.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : C& RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo lease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028 000100050002-4
d. Portable Ventilating Units - If ventilation units are
supplied as stated in Paragraph a. above and if the aircraft are
modified with a full pressure ventilator, Type GU252, then there
is no requirement for a portable ventilating unit. If one or both
of the aforementioned requirements are not satisfied, then there
would be a requirement for some number of portable vent units.
8. Survival Equipment - Following cold weather equipment
is recommended:
a. Combi-Suit (Walk-Around Sleeping Bag) - This garment
be an item of issue for installation in the seat kit.
9. Pressure Suit Issue and Checkout
a. Pressure Suit Issue - The A /P- 22S- 2 Pressure Suits be
issued directly to the using organizations.
b. Pressure Suit Checkout - Squadron Personal Equipment
technicians be responsible for aircrew fittings and console checkouts.
(Chamber flights are not necessary to checkout the garments.)
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : 4-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo lease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B002860000100050002-4
PREPARED BY:
Captain, USAF
Project, ftf cer
REVIEWED BY:
Colonel, USAF
Commander
4750th Test Squadron (T&AE)
7APPROVED BY:
W. DDCON
A
USAF
Col el,
C Vice mmander
73rd it Division (Weapons)
19
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Foi@,elease 2002/11/08: CIA-RDP75BO02MR000100050002-4
DISCUSSION
1. Pressure Suit, A/P-22S-2 - The A/P-22S-2 Full Pressure Suit
was unanimously indorsed by the six project test pilots with the
following modifications:
a. Helmet
(1) Face Seal - The face seal on the S-2 helmet is
composed of a thin rubber seal which is attached to the main face
seal This dual seal was designed in this manner to provide a more
positive seal; however, this feature proved unsatisfactory. Consider-
able poking and pulling was required to properly adjust the seal
around the face. This awkward arrangement was time consuming
and discomforting to the wearer. Furthermore, this dual face seal
tended to curl and separate through continuous adjustment, allowing
suit air to enter the face chamber. One helmet face seal did separate
and hence, rendered the complete headpiece useless. To alleviate
the aforementioned problems, it is recommended that a single face
seal be designed, preferably a rubberized sponge assembly similar
to that contained in the S-3 face seal.
(2) Glare and Reflection - The annoying distraction
caused by face plate glare and reflection was prevelant in all types
of headpieces, including the S-2. When flying on a heading which
is within approximately 60 degrees of the sun, the glare of the face
plate is of such intensity as to reduce visibility to the extent that
radar scope interpretation is seriously compromised. Similarly,
with the sun to his back, the pilot is distracted because the face
plate acts as a mirror. Lowering the sun visor only partially
reduces glare. These problems related to. face plate glare and
reflection are serious and require immediate attention.
(3) Face Plate Operation - The face seal on the S-2
headpiece was designed to operate as follows:
(a) When the oxygen was turned on, the face plate
would automatically close.
(b) The oxygen would then inflate the tube that
seals the visor shut.
2()
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Foi?&elease 2002/11/08 CIA-RDP75B0028iit000100050002-4
In operation, however, the above was not the case. When the oxygen
was turned on, the face plate visor would lower to within approximately
one-fourth inch of the full close position. The pilot would then have
to perform the following:
(c) Turn the oxygen off and raise the face plate.
(d) Turn the oxygen on using one hand and simultane-
ously, with the other hand, manually guide the face plate visor to the
full down position.
The above was necessary to prevent inflation of the face plate seal
tubes prior to closure of the face plate visor. This condition is not
acceptable and should be corrected. Either this automatic feature
should be foolproof or the automatic feature dropped and the principle
used in the S-3 headpiece be adopted.
(4) Face Plate Seal Warning Device - There were two
instances in which pilots lost the seal to the face plate. If this occurs
when the suit is pressurized, it will cause a pressure drop in the
headpiece. If it occurs under normal cockpit conditions, it may not
be readily recognizable. Therefore, some device is required whereby
the aircrew has an indication of proper face plate sealing.
(5) Face Plate Adjustment - The S-2 helmet is designed
in such a manner that any adjustment of the face seal makes a
corresponding adjustment in the earphones. This arrangement
proved unsatisfactory as proper face seal adjustment invariably
resulted in excessive pressure on the ears. This problem can be
alleviated by routing the face seal adjustment straps through
brackets which are mounted to the helmet and not through the ear-
phone pads. Such an arrangement would then provide for face seal
adjustments to be independent of earphone adjustments.
(6) Earphones - A common complaint expressed by the
project pilots was that the earphone pads were too thick. It is
suggested that these earphone cushions be of a design similar to
that installed in the HGU-2/P, the MX-2088/U.
(7) Helmet Tie-Down Straps - The length of the present
helmet tie-down straps are too short. These straps should be
approximately eight inches longer to provide the user with sufficient
leverage for helmet tie-down when the suit starts to pressurize.
V
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : c2114-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Fo elease 2002/11/08: CIA-RDP75BO02& 000100050002-4
b. Suit
(1) Suit Altimeter - A small, suit mounted altimeter
should be installed on the left thigh of the suit. This instrument
would indicate the pressure altitude of the suit. When the suit is
pressurized, this altimeter would read 35,000 feet. Any deviation
from this reading (plus or minus allowable tolerances) would be an
immediate indication to the aircrew of a malfunction.
(2) Suit Controller - A smaller sized suit controller
is needed.. The inherent problems associated with a suit mounted
controller (interference with parachute and shoulder straps, vulner-
ability to damage due to its external mounting) can be minimized by
reducing the size of the controller. To obtain the greatest reliability
from this unit, it should be equipped with "BREKO" fittings.
(3) Survival Mittens - As an anti-exposure feature,
survival mittens are necessary. These mittens should be readily
accessible for wear in the event of a water landing; preferably
carried in a pocket in the S-2 garment. For optimum protection,
it is recommended that the mittens have an "0" ring seal. This
type of connection is used with the standard S-2 gloves, hence the
gloves and mittens could be easily interchanged.
c. Accessories - The following items of wear are required
by each aircrew member:
(1) Underwear - For flights in areas where the surface
temperatures are below freezing, one set of Waffle Weave Long Under-
wear and one set of Cotton Long Underwear must be worn. To make
allowances for time required in laundering, two sets of each type of
underwear should be issued to the aircrew member. (Trilock patches
are not required on these undergarments as that feature has been
incorporated into the pressure suit. )
(2) Alert Boots - Because of the additional bulk inherent
in a full pressure suit, a pair of alert boots will have to be fitted to
each individual for wear with the S-2. Generally speaking, this boot
will be about one size larger than the normal foot size.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 2_CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved Foi eIease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028GR000100050002-4
2. Aircraft Modifications
a. Suit Ventilation Unit - Two types of suit ventilation units
were tested in the F-102 aircraft used in this project. One unit was a
SAAMA designed modification that incorporated the aircraft air-
conditioning system for ventilation air. The other was the GU252
ventilation unit, manufactured by Pioneer Central, A Division of
Bendix Corporation.
(1) SAAMA Ventilation Modification - This ventilation
system was satisfactory, but was not recommended for, two reasons.
First, if the aircraft air-conditioning system became inoperative,
the ventilation capability would be lost. Secondly, if the filtration
process in the air-conditioning system were damaged or disrupted,
then harmful engine fumes and exhaust matter would enter the suit.
This could cause suit deterioration.
(2) GU252 Ventilation Unit - This unit was satisfactory
and recommended for several reasons. First, it is a small, compact
unit, and can be readily installed. Secondly, it is dependent, only
upon the aircraft's oxygen system. Thirdly, it supplies constant
temperature air for ventilation.
b. 70 psi By-Pass - Because the S-2 suit has a controller
operating on 70 psi of oxygen, the regulator in the seat kit must be
by-passed. This means that the F-2400 regulator must be modified
with a 70 psi oxygen by-pass line.
c. Oxygen Supply - If the GU252 type ventilation unit is
accepted then the oxygen capacities of all ADC interceptors should
be doubled. The GU252 utilizes the aircraft's oxygen supply and
ambient cockpit air for ventilation; consequently, the remote base
turnaround capability of the aircraft is compromised because of
the drain on the aircraft's oxygen supply. By doubling the oxygen
capacity, sufficient oxygen would be available for a minimum of
two flights. This would then satisfy the requirements for a remote
base turnaround.
d. Radar Scope Hood - Due to the large size of the face plate
on the S-2 headpiece, modification needs to be done on the radar scope
hood whereby the aperture can be increased. The present size of the
aperture makes it difficult to interpret scope presentations because the
user is unable to get close to the scope and have proper light shielding.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CU-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 3. Personnel - Squadrons equipped with the A/P-22S-2 Full
Pressure Suit must be manned with Personal Equipment technicians
in the ratio of one Personal Equipment technician per three assigned
aircrew positions, e. g. , a squadron possessing 21 F-1O1B aircraft
would require 14 Personal Equipment technicians. These personnel
should all be pressure suit qualified. This requirement is necessary
because the situation could arise in which all available technicians
would be called upon to assist the aircrew members in suit donning,
suit pre-flight and aircraft-suit hook-up.
4. Support Equipment - Additional support required for pressure
suit operations follows:
a. Ventilation Units - Two multi-outlet ventilation units are
necessary; one unit in the suit donning area and one in the alert room.
The GSU-1/E ventilation unit satisfies this requirement if its noise
level can be reduced. This noise level could be tolerated in the
dressing area, but not so in the alert room. Noise of this magnitude
would so distract and fatigue aircrew members as to substantially
reduce their effectiveness.
b. Survival Seat Kit - Under present procedures, a fighter
interceptor squadron is not authorized spare seat kits. Therefore,
if a faulty seat kit is discovered, the aircraft is grounded until the
Personal Equipment Section corrects the malfunction. This problem
could be alleviated if spare kits were on hand. The inoperable seat
kit would be replaced with a spare and the sortie would not be lost to
a ground abort. For this reason, it is recommended that the following
number of spare oxygen survival seat kits be authorized: One spare
per twelve assigned aircrew positions.
c. Suit Testers - One suit tester per squadron is required.
One unit should suffice for sustained operations. If the tester goes
out of commission, a spare should be available within each sector.
5. Pressure Suit Issue and Checkout
a. Pressure Suit Issue - The A/P-22S-2 Full Pressure Suit
should be issued directly to the using organizations. This suit, unlike
previous garments, is easily fitted and requires no critical adjust-
ments. In fact, only the minimum measurements will be required to
order a ready-fit suit for most aircrews; I. e. , height, weight, helmet,
shoe and glove size. '11c squadron Personal Equipment technicians
can perform the aircrew fitting.
Approved For Release 2002/11/0824CIA-RDP751300285R000100050002-4
 Approved For*Belease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028GRU00100050002-4
b. Pressure Suit Checkout - The aircrews can receive suit
indoctrination and familiarization at squadron level. Suit: checkout
will consist of, first, inflating the suit on the test console to check
for leaks and secure fastenings. After this check has been satisfac-
torily completed, the test is repeated with the aircrew member wearing
the suit. Mobility and breathing checks are accomplished. When
these two checks are completed, the suit is ready for flight. High
altitude chamber flights are not required to checkout the suit. The
above pre-flight tests accomplish the same functional checks as a
chamber flight.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : (2-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 1. Approved For lease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00284D000100050002-4
APPENDIX A
COLD LAND SURVIVAL TEST
ENVIRONMENT - On 15 November 1960, the Cold Land Survival
Test was co uct in the All Weather Room, Climatic Laboratory at
Eglin AFB, Florida. The weather conditions that existed in this room
during the test consisted of four feet of snow, with several drifts over
six feet. The temperature was -5?F at the start of the test, She hours
lowered in 5? decrements approximately every 90 minutes.
later, at the conclusion of the test, the temperature was - 25? F. .
Throughout the six-hour test period a wind w`asss 5blowing H when the est
a large engine-driven fan). The wind spe~
subjects entered the chamber. As the temperature dropped the wind
speed was increased, reaching a peak of 30 MPH shortly before the
test concluded. During the last hour of this test, snow nozzles were
turned on, creating a blizzard within the test room.
ATTIRE - Four pilots from the 325th FIS, assigned as test
officers othis project, participated in this Cold Weather Test.
Each was attired in one of the four types of garments being eval-
uated; the A/P-22S-2 and S-3 Full Pressure Suits and the CSU-4/P
and 5/P Partial Pressure Suits. For the first entry into the chamber,
each subject wore only one set of standard issue long underwear
beneath his pressure suit. Also, each subject wore only one pair
of wool socks with the quick don leather insulated flying boot. (One
exception to the footgear was the subject in the CSU-5 /P garment
who wore cold weather rubber survival boots instead of the quick
don leather boot.)
TEST CONDITIONS - Subjects entered the test room equipped have upon landing from a parachute
only with ose survival kit and parachute. (Only two parachutes
descent; an arctic
were available to the four subjects, simulating that two were
unrecoverable.) When the pilots entered the room, the temperature
was -5?F with a wind speed of 5 MPH. No
outsides were
chamber
of the subjects but a flight surgeon-was present
and observed them through portholes.
TEST RESULTS - A /P- 22S- 2 - Shortly after entering the cold
room, subject donned wool mittens and leather shell over his pressure
suit gloves. The mittens and shell were obtained from his survival
kit. About two and one-half hours later subject left chamber,
complaining of a backache and very cold feet. He donned a second
Approved For Release 2002/11/08: CHI-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved For4jelease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028 000100050002-4
pair of wool socks and added the top piece of a set of long underwear.
It was determined that his back trouble was caused by the fact that his
pressure suit was too short in length; therefore, he donned a larger
size suit, then replaced his leather flying boots with a pair of mukluks
from his survival kit and re-entered the chamber. He remained inside
for three and one-half hours, at which time the test concluded. During
this time, the subject worked on a snow shelter with the others, nibbled
his survival rations, then spent the last hour of the test in the shelter.
OBSERVATIONS - At the completion of the test this individual
was in good condition. He stated that he could have remained for an
indefinite period of time. The mukluks proved satisfactory and his
overall mobility was good. His visor frosted over at -20?F. Subject's
back was still stiff from his earlier experience in the suit that was
too small. Total time in cold room was 5:20.
A: -22S-3 - This test subject also donned his survival mittens
and leather shell over the suit gloves upon entering the chamber. He
walked about, worked on the shelter, and sampled his rations. After
2:15 had elapsed he left the room, complaining of cold hands and
extremely cold feet. His legs and knees were also cold. Headpiece
neck ring was frozen. (Room temperature at time of exit was -12? F. )
Subject donned a second set of long cotton underwear, a second pair
of wool socks, and replaced his quick don boots with a pair of mukluks.
Re-entered the chamber and remained for 2:40 at which time the test
ended. Subject spent the major portion of this time inside the shelter.
While in the shelter he spent approximately one hour with the combi-
suit and booties on over his pressure suit.
OBSERVATIONS - This pilot was generally cold overall when the
test finished. His~ic adpiece neck ring was frozen, preventing helmet
rotation. Subject's hands were sufficiently cold to substantially impair
his finger dexterity. His feet were adequately warm in the mukluks,
however. He stated that he was very warm and comfortable during
the time he was in the combi-suit. Total time spent in cold room was
4:55.
CStJ-4 with CWU-4 Coveralls -- Approximately 30 minutes
after entering the colic room, this subject removed his pressure suit
gloves and donned the nylon inserts, wool mittens, and leather shell.
Subject ate some survival rations and assisted in the buildings of the
snow hut. Three hours and 31 minutes after entering, he left the
chamber for five minutes to relieve himself. Subject stated that he
28
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved ForBplease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028500100050002-4
was in good shape. Thirty minutes later, however, he left the cold
room complaining of extremely cold feet and cold hands. This subject
donned a second suit of long cotton underwear and added a pair of wool
socks. Some condensation had drained into his neck seal, but it was
of no consequence. Subject re-entered the cold room and took shelter
in the snow hut. Test concluded 1:15 later.
OBSERVATIONS - Subject pilot was in fair condition. His head-
piece neck ring was f rozen. His feet were cold as were his hands,
resulting in impaired finger dexterity. His overall mobility was
satisfactory. Total time spent in cold room was 5:05.
CSU-5 - This test subject wore a pair of rubber, cold weather
sure v~ al boots instead of the leather, quick donning. As did the tester
in the 4/P, he, too, replaced his suit gloves with the nylon inserts,
wool mittens, and leather shell; all obtained from his arctic survival
kit. Subject occupied himself by working on the shelter, sampling
rations, and moving about. He left chamber after 4:10. Subject was
in good condition except for coldness around neck seal. Subsequent
investigation revealed that this was due to an improper helmet
adjustment which allowed condensation from face plate to drain into
the neck seal. Headpiece was adjusted and subject re-entered
chamber and remained until the test terminated, 1:35 later.
OBSERVATIONS - This pilot was in satisfactory condition. His
headpiece neck ring was frozen, restricting head movement. Subject's
hands were becoming numb from inactivity and cold. His neck was
cold due to tight neck seal and reoccurring effects of previous con-
densation draining problems. Subject's feet were in very good
condition and his overall mobility was good. Total time spent in
cold room was 5:45.
Combi-Suit with Booties (Walk-Around Sleeping Bag)
A brief word on this garment: One man, attired only in a
Summer 505 Uniform with low quarter shoes, donned the combi-
suit and remained in the cold room for 1:30 and complained only
of one foot becoming cold. (This was due to a slight leak in that
bootie.) During his stay in the cold room the temperature dropped
from -5? to -10'F and the wind speed ranged from 5 to 10 MPH.
This cornbi-suit is highly recommended as an article to be
included in the survival kit.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 : C1A9RDP75B00285R000100050002-4
 Approved ForZolease 2002/11/08 : CIA-RDP75B0028J00 :100050002-4
SUMMARY - Following is a breakdown of time spent both in and
out of the c=old- room:
a.
IN
OUT
A/P-22:5-2
5:20
:55
A/?-22S-3
4:55
1:05
CSU-4/P
5:05
:55
CSU-5/P
5:45
:25
b. When surface temperatures below freezing are anticipated,
it is recommended that:
(1) Two suits of long underwear be worn; one cotton over
waffle weave.
(2) Two pair of wool socks.
c. This test verified the fact that a shelter definitely prolongs
the period of time that an individual can withstand the exposure.
d. Mukluks proved very satisfactory in cold weather.
e. Quick don boots will provide sufficient warmth if they are a
proper size to wear with the suit plus two pair of wool socks.
SHELTER - The shelter constructed by the test subjects consisted
of snow blocks forming a semi-circular wall about three feet high and
one foot thick. A parachute canopy served as a roof. The overall
dimensions of this shelter were approximately eight feet in diameter
and three feat high.
Approved For Release 2002/11/08 :A-RDP75B00285R000100050002-4