EWR 127-1 PDF

Title: EWR 21AUG95, Version: , Date: Aug, Status: Active, Desc: EWR EASTERN AND WESTERN RANGE (EWR). Tailored EWR , System Safety Program Plan, Noncompliance Requests, and Launch Complex Safety Training and Certification. Find the most up-to-date version of EWR CONT. DIST. at Engineering

Author: Tule Kirn
Country: Libya
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Music
Published (Last): 23 February 2007
Pages: 421
PDF File Size: 5.95 Mb
ePub File Size: 12.25 Mb
ISBN: 347-3-31914-512-6
Downloads: 23932
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Voodoorg

Looking for other ways to read this? The overall modeling and analysis approaches at the Eastern and Western Ranges are similar, but there are some significant differences 12-71 analytical tools, assumptions, and operational procedures. Probability of Failure per second. Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.: A clear distinction would be made between non-negotiable performance-based requirements and approved methods of compliance that can be waived if an equally effective alternative is available.

Therefore, the absence of FTS ewf beyond the coverage area of uprange assets would not reduce safety for malfunctions that terminate thrust prematurely.

Next, certain inconsistencies between these accepted risk-management criteria and operational methods based on risk avoidance are described. In parallel with this study, SMC, which is part of AFMC, initiated a study to document the sources of requirements, determine which requirements are design solutions, and identify the actual standards represented by design solutions.

Range safety user manual EWR 127-1 (Eastern and Western Range 127-1)

To ensure that safety decisions are objective, the safety office must be independent. A collective risk standard i.

This would not be true if a malfunction occurred downrange that unexpectedly reduced vehicle thrust or directed a vehicle off the intended trajectory while maintaining stable, powered flight. In contrast, personnel from launch vehicle manufacturers and the ranges indicated to the committee that the safety offices at both ranges which are part of AFSPC have assumed essentially full responsibility for analysis and testing of safety systems to certify compliance with requirements in EWR Such changes could render invalid the informed decision process which helps protect the government from liability RCC, a.


Periodic, independent reviews should be conducted to ensure that the level of modeling detail is appropriate given the accuracy of model inputs and assumptions.

In addition to supporting system program offices and the ranges, the safety office should be 17-1 for centralizing and simplifying the development of safety policy, procedures, and systems; maintaining a strong engineering, analysis, modeling, and simulation staff through training and career advancement; and reducing costs for the range operators and users. The vehicle must pass through the gate or the flight will be terminated. Navy and Air 217-1, and aircraft flight tests. See Chapter 5 for a discussion of limits on individual hit probabilities, P ifor ships and aircraft.

These thresholds are ultimately based on impact limit lines ILLswhich extend downrange from the launch 1127-1 and define the area in which debris from planned stage drops, vehicle explosions, or thrust termination may land.

Patrick Air Force Base, Fla.: For credibility and liability protection, it is better to change the criteria before initiating a launch operation, than to establish one and then violate it 30th SW, To account for delays in operator response, uncertainties about vehicle breakup, winds, and other aerodynamic effects, destruct lines are ewg inside of the ILLs. P c can be used to determine whether specific personnel are at high risk in a given area. These acquisition-like functions overlap the responsibilities of AFMC.

Also, to reduce the need to refer to regulations and instructions issued by other government organizations, many of their requirements ewt quoted, expanded, or paraphrased and ewf into EWR Flight trajectories and ILLs are calculated and approved prior to esr to protect people and property. The process of revising EWR should include the following steps: These inconsistencies are examined in light of the risk posed by vehicles as they approach orbit to show that downrange safety-related assets can be eliminated while safety is maintained within accepted limits.


Also, close working relationships between operational staff at the ranges and acquisition staff within AFMC must be maintained to ensure that new systems and system modifications are consistent with operational needs and can be efficiently implemented in an operational setting.


Requirements for design, qualification, and acceptance testing processes would be removed from EWR and documented in an AFMC handbook describing acceptable means of compliance and lessons learned, in a manner consistent with the Primary Recommendation on EWR The gates are perpendicular wwr the nominal 1227-1, and the width of the gates accounts for tracking uncertainties and acceptable variations in trajectory. Several factors suggest that the collective risk standard, E ccould still be met if the Africa gates were moved uprange.

The ranges, which have a long history of development and developmental testing, for many years were part of an Air Force acquisition command. Detailed, often step-by-step procedures and processes are dictated in annexes.

Range safety user manual EWR (Eastern and Western Range ) [PDF] – Все для студента

Login or Register to save! Although this Handbook is not regulatory except when repeating or referencing EWRit does contain guidance that will make the Range Safety approval to launch process simpler and more esr. Tailoring provides range users with great flexibility, but it also reveals a serious shortcoming in the usability of EWR