A v a l a n c h e

C o n t r o l ,

R e s c u e

a n d

E d u c a t i o n

EVALUATION PARAMETERS

This evaluation applied to ammunition reliability, vehicu-
lar mobility, serviceability, sightingsystems, safety for crew
andpublic,security,andmaintenanceofweaponand
carrier.

During testing care was taken to address the following fac-
tors:

*How cold of temperature would the engine start with-
out trouble?

*Wouldcoldtemperatures affectsights andrelatedequip-
ment?

*Could the turret traverse with snowbetween the hull
and deck?

*Would heat changes within the tank produce conden-
sation andif so whataffectwould thecondensationhave
on vital equipment?

*Define what maintenance is critical to gun operations
and vehicle.
Sighting systems were purged before leaving the training
center.Wehad acquired a valve to purge the systems if it
became necessary duringthe season.After several storms
had passedwe founda lotof condensation on the inside of
the turret, dripping on sights and othercomponents,but
we never hada problem with water or condensationin the
sights.They were always clear with no fogging.

Placement

A ramp was constructed by placing ground cloth on level
ground providing a barrier to capture oil or fuel in event of
spillage,with fill dirt 15 feet wide and 4 feet high and 20
feet long.Just enough to give elevation to upperstarting
zones.Ifareapermits,thesamecanbeaccomplished
withoutbuildingrampsbymovingvehiclebackuntil
proper elevation is achieved.

Comparison consideration

Our primary weapon forthe 95/96 season was a M101-A1
105mm howitzer with recoilless rifles as a backup system.
Wefelt if primary control efforts continued withrecoilless
riflesourammunitionwouldbeexhaustedinrelatively
short time, withoutknowledgeof howitzers at thislocation.
Afirebase wasconstructed infront oframpbuiltfor
the tank.Both weapon systemsat same location also pro-
vided valuable information forlogistical comparisonbe-
tween our eventual primary weapon and the tank.
Ourintentionswere tofirehowitzerand tank rounds
during actualcontrolconditionsthroughouttheseason.
This would prove reliability between point detonating HE
howitzer ammunitionand base detonatingHEP-T tank am-
munition under similarsnow pack conditions.
Consultationswithfuze manufacturesdisclosedmili-
tary specification callingfor reliable detonationwhen con-
tacting 9 inches of plywood.Theyquestioned reliability
in snow condition.Fuzing is similarto otherbase deto-
nating ammunition with some modification. Weexplained
ammunition andweapontypeswe currentlyuse, alongwith
muzzle velocities, (Recoilless rounds arearound 1120 ft/s,
HEP-T tank rounds are 2300 ft/s).
Theyfeltreliabilitywouldbeconsiderablyimproved
overHEP-T ammunition currently used based on two fac-
tors:

*Age of tank ammunition compared to recoilless.

*Muzzle velocity increase overrecoilless.
Considerable attention towards security was expressed by
allconcerns.Atthetopofeveryone'smindwasa
misfortunate incident taking place in California involving
astolentank,afreeway,andseveralsmashedcars.A
security planhadto addressDOD concerns of a recurrence.

261