Walter B. Peppersack
ASCI 611
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Professor: Bill Teeple
5 December 2014

Abstract
This research is in the Oculus system; a roll-on/roll-off Command and Control unit that attaches to a standard military 463L pallet design that is accommodated by the C-130 Hercules. There are two modules that are mounted to a pallet system that roll on and off just like any other cargo load. The design requirements for this payload are that it will be able to be loaded on any model of C-130 without permanent modifications to any of the airframes. The system safety aspect of Oculus and the way it is designed is well defined without specific hazards outside the parameters of normal operations with any other payload, other than the lift arm mechanism for the sensor pod attached to the aft door, and the operational parameters while it is in use. It is because of the design requirements for not modifying the airframe that has created a safety issue with the way the sensor pod is set in operation.

Oculus Sensor Platform System
The C-130 Hercules transport aircraft has been around a long time. It has been a proven airframe, has been the work horse for the U.S. military services through the decades, has seen many conflicts, and has provided air and ground support for numerous missions worldwide. With its longevity it has seen numerous problems, has had many up-grades and modifications that each have their own safety issues. The ground support systems themselves have undergone up-grades that have interacting issues themselves with the aircraft and with the ever changing influx of personnel. With four turbo propeller engines, various mission capabilities, high-wing and large landing gear designed for multiple landing surfaces, the elemental safety system enacted for each airframe evolves with advancing technology and changing personnel to keep it active now and for its future roles. The Oculus Sensor Platform System is a complete Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) system used with military and other governmental agencies. The various models of the C-130 have been the work-horses for the military for decades and it is appropriate for this mission to be on board (Wowczuk, 2004).
Many agencies can utilize such a package that Oculus provides. The sensors take some remarkable photography, and with real-time transmissions of collected data agencies can respond efficiently to threats in directions that are guided by Oculus. The C-130 is traditionally a military aircraft, but the platform has other entities vying for its capabilities. Homeland Security with its spectrum of homeland defense requirements has great need for Oculus with its operations in counter-drug, counter-terrorism, border patrol, and other functions in its department Other governmental agencies can use its capabilities for resource and environmental surveys and impact assessments. It is used for search and rescue in combat as well as civilian operations (Wowczuk, 2004).
The Oculus sensor platform system is a two-pallet configuration. It is designed to be universally used on any model of C-130, or on a truck bed. There can be no modifications to the airframe because the aircraft’s main role is not to be compromised. These requirements have created some minor issues which will be explored further. The mission must remain flexible, be very stable, and have an excellent field-of-view (FOV). The platform was designed using a reinforced 463L pallet which is standard for aircraft loading. This pallet system ensures ease of loading and unloading, no modifying of the airframe, no special adaptations for transfer of transportation modes, and no special training or personnel adaptations for loading are required (Wowczuk, 2004).
Other features required are ease of operation, standard computer interfacing of the workstation pallet and sensor pod pallet so that enlisted and drug enforcement personnel can be quickly and easily trained for operations. The operations module or workstation pod is loaded into the aircraft first and is not much different than any other cargo load for the C-130; the critical area is of the sensor pod because of the required FOV it has to be mounted on the aft door, opened during flight for essential mission functions, it has a special left-arm mechanism that extends the sensor pod beyond and below the open aft door (Wowczuk, 2004).
It is because of the standardization of the pallet loading and modification restriction that safety issues can come into play. The aft door is open during flight. This is not a hazard outside the realm of acceptable risk as the crews of the C-130 perform routine missions at low level with the aft cargo door open. There are hazards involved with this mode of operation, but for a well-trained crew this is normal. The hazard created is due to the sensor pod’s position. Low level flight is in heavier atmospheric pressure, more turbulence can be present, and the aerodynamic conditions are affected. The C-130 is a large, powerful, slow-moving craft that can handle a lot of stresses, but every craft has its limitations. Aerodynamic laws are just that, laws, and they cannot be broken without consequence. Although the Oculus sensor pod is not breaking the aerodynamic law, it is pushing the limits when a lift-arm is extended beyond and below the aft cargo door; the natural airflow that fluidly keeps the aircraft aloft is disrupted. This can be hazardous as it creates a nose-down force on the aircraft that the crews must compensate for. In conditions of turbulence whether expected or unexpected, aircraft crews inside the workstation and in the cargo bay are subject to possible craft movements outside their expectations (Wowczuk, 2010).
The sensor pod does not only create an aerodynamic disturbance, it runs out of film. The film must be replaced by crews in flight. To perform this crews retract the sensor pod via the lift-arm. Pilot awareness of the change in aerodynamics is important as the nose-down force will no longer be present with the arm retracted for film changing, but will be recurring as soon as the film canisters are changed and the lift-arm lowers the sensor pod back into place.
Another safety issue arises with the lift arm itself. The design is such that at its lowest safety factor it is susceptible to failure. If the sensor pod with its lift-arm extension were to fail extended in flight, there could be disastrous consequences (Wowczuk, 2004).
All these issues could be avoided if modifications to the airframe would be allowed, or there were specific airframes designated to the mission. That would in effect be costly, and would subvert the accessibility of airframe resources.

References
Wowczuk, Z. S. (2004). Design of a standardized sensor platform. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/305108284?pq-origsite=summon
Wowczuk, Z., Pertl, E., Clarke, M., Smith, J., Bjorge, S., & McNutt, R. (2010, June). Complete command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance system for C-130 aircraft [Electronic version]. Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication, 7.
Zenovy S. Wowczuk , Jeffery R. X. Auld & James E. Smith (2006) Project
OCULUS: enhanced visual information platform, Journal of Modern Optics, 53:9, 1229-1240, DOI: 10.1080/09500340600618512

Appendix A
Name: Wally Peppersack
Campus: Embry Riddle Aeronautical University
Type Case: Oculus Sensor Platform

Preliminary Hazard List | System Element Type: | PHL | System Item | Hazard | Hazard Effects | Comments | 1 | Sensor pod | Mounted on aft door | Open during flight | Retracts for film change | 2 | Sensor pod | Door open during flight | Must fly at low level, subject to turbulence | | 3 | Sensor pod | Extends beyond door during flight | Can create additional drag on aircraft | | 4 | Lift arm system | Design safety factor low | Arms are susceptible to failure | See Appendix D | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Appendix B
Name: Wally Peppersack
Campus: Embry Riddle Aeronautical University
Type Case: Oculus Sensor Platform

Preliminary Hazard Analysis | System or Subsystem | PHA# | Hazard | Causes | Effects | Recommended Actions | 1 | Sensor pod is mounted on aft door | Design requirement | | | 2 | Aft cargo door open during flight | Design requirement | Must fly at low level, subject to turbulence | | 3 | Sensor pod extends beyond door during flight | Design requirement | Can create additional drag on aircraft | | 4 | Lift arm system design safety factor low | Design requirement | Arms are susceptible to failure | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Appendix C
Name: Wally Peppersack
Campus: Embry Riddle Aeronautical University
Type Case: Oculus Sensor Platform Risk Matrix Worksheet | # | Hazard | Probability of Occurrence | Severity | 1 | Sensor pod | D | 2 | 2 | Sensor pod | D | 2 | 3 | Sensor pod | D | 2 | 4 | Lift arm system | D | 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Appendix D
Table 4 – Safety factor analysis of critical lift arm components.

| Component | Safety Factor | | | Gear Reducer | 1.5 | | | Hub Key Way (1) | 1.8 | | | Hub Key Way (2) | 1.8 | | | Hub Key Way (3) | 1.8 | | | Hub Key Way (4) | 1.8 | | | Steel Shaft Key Way | 1.23 | | | Mechanical Arm (1) | 1.15 | | | Mechanical Arm (2) | 1.15 | | | Mechanical Arm (3)Mechanical Arm (4) | 1.151.15 | |

Appendix E

(Wowczuk , Auld, Smith 2006)
Sensor pod in full operational posture