MANPRINT

1
MANPRINT Quarterly May 2002
Contents
The Directors Corner
The Directors Corner ..... 1 Art
icle U.S. Army Health Hazard Assessment Program
Supports the Armys Transformation Plan, Robert A
Gross and CPT Timothy Kluchinsky, U. S. Army
Center for Health Promotion Preventive Medicine
. 2 Meetings of Interest
.. 3 Article Human Factors Characteristics
of the AH-64D Apache Longbow Crewstations, Dave
Durbin, Army Research Laboratory, Human Research
Engineering Directorate Aviation Center Field
Element.. 4 Article New MANPRINT
Website, the MANPRINT Directorate.
.... 6 MANPRINT Central Information
7 MANPRINT Training Schedule..
8 MANPRINT Information... 9 Read
ers Response.. ...10
On January 27, 2002, I had the honor of taking on
the challenge of becoming the new Director for
Personnel Technologies in the Office of the
Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 (Personnel). Some of
you know me from my past association with the
Human Research and Engineering Directorate of
the Army Research Laboratory, serving as Dr.
Keesees Liaison to the MANPRINT Directorate in
the mid-1990s. My relevant past experience
includes conducting research on aircrew training
with the Air Force Human Resources Laboratory
(now part of the Air Force Research Lab),
leading technology development efforts for the
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Joint Project, and
serving as the ARL Liaison to the office of the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Research and Technology.   These are exciting
times for our community. The Army
Transformation, and in particular the
development of key Objective Force systems such
as the Future Combat Systems (FCS) and the
Objective Force Warrior, poses both opportunities
and challenges for MANPRINT. We are already
engaged in support to the new PEO Soldier via
the Land Warrior MANPRINT Working Group, and we
are in the process of initiating a Human
Dimension Working Group/IPT for the FCS program.
The latter will be a joint government/Lead
Systems Integrator effort, with Mr. Dave Harrah
from ARL/HRED as the government lead.   For our
office in particular, we are in the midst of a
number of changes. Ms. Peggy Simmons retired
recently after many years of faithful service to
this office and to the MANPRINT program, and she
will be sorely missed. She has been replaced by
Ms. Teresa Hanson, who came from Total Army
Personnel Command. LTC Lee Myers, our liaison to
HQ TRADOC, has retired, and we will soon be
losing our remaining military officers, LTC Rick
Inman and MAJ Joe Jones, due to headquarters
streamlining. Dr. Michael Drillings is now the
official Deputy Director, and Ms. Marjorie Zelko
remains as our senior analyst. We also
recently moved back to the Pentagon from the
Hoffman Building, a welcome change in terms of
the logistics of getting to meetings here in the
building. We want to thank our hosts at PERSCOM
for their hospitality and support during the
difficult times following the attack on the
Pentagon.   In light of my desire to raise the
visibility of MANPRINT and highlight the role it
must play in the development of the Objective
Force, I have chosen to change the name of our
organization back to the MANPRINT Directorate.
This does not imply any change in
responsibilities, as I believe that our SORD
responsibilities complement and support the
MANPRINT mission. Our office symbol remains (for
now) DAPE-MR. We will be having a MANPRINT
Symposium this year, sometime in September. My
intent is that this Symposium will involve
increased participation by MANPRINT practitioners
(i.e., YOU), with the opportunity for working
together to explore how we can improve our own
processes and working relationships. We will
also be sending out invitations for nominations
for the MANPRINT Practitioner Awards, so be
prepared to nominate those who are making
MANPRINT effective today.   I look forward to
serving you in maintaining a vibrant and dynamic
MANPRINT program. I plan to get out to the field
over the next several months so that I can get a
chance to meet with practitioners, as well as
combat and materiel developers. I welcome your
feedback and l need your support. Thank you.
  Dr. Thomas Killion Director for
MANPRINT
2
 
U.S. ARMY HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
SUPPORTS THE ARMY'S TRANSFORMATION PLAN   Robert
A Gross and CPT Timothy Kluchinsky U. S. Army
Center for Health Promotion Preventive
Medicine   Army Chief of Staff General Eric K.
Shinseki and Army Secretary Louis Caldera,
unveiled the Army Transformation Plan at the
Association of the United States Army (AUSA)
Conference in October 1999. The vision is to
create a lighter weight force capable of
deploying a Brigade Combat Team (BCT) within 96
hours one Division within 120 hours and five
Divisions within 30 days.   The Transformation
Plan includes three phases. The Army's Health
Hazard Assessment Program (HHAP), located at the
U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and
Preventive Medicine (USACHPPM), Aberdeen Proving
Ground, Maryland, represents one of the seven
Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT)
domains and plays a key role in supporting all
three phases of the Transformation Plan. The
HHAPs significant contributions to each phase
are discussed below.   PHASE I (1999-2001) The
use of lighter weight surrogate vehicles on loan
from other governments or systems already in the
Army inventory. Initial, surrogate, armored
vehicles were provided to the Initial BCT at Fort
Lewis, Washington. The surrogate vehicles
included lighter weight vehicles already in the
Army inventory and subjected to the Health Hazard
Assessment (HHA) process. These initial vehicles
will remain in use until replaced by Interim
Armored Vehicles (IAVs). PHASE II (2001-2008)
The selection, production, and fielding of
lighter weight, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
IAVs.
The HHA Program has supported the IAV selection
process by providing

• Inspection of approximately 24 IAV candidates at
  a Platform Performance Demonstration (PPD), held
  at Fort Knox, KY during December 1999 and January
  2000.
• Support for the safety release for testing by
  Army personnel through issuing abbreviated HHA
  reports (HHARs), based upon lessons-learned from
  past experience with armored vehicles, and
  detailed HHARs previously completed on vehicles
  presented at the PPD.
• Attendance at Tank-Automotive and Armament
  Commands (TACOM) IAV document review meetings
  involving specifications, test plans, request for
  proposal, and related program documents.
• An initial HHAR on the IAV as input to the
  Department of the Army's (DA's) MANPRINT
  Assessment for the IAV. The MANPRINT Assessment
  supported the Army System Acquisition Review
  Council's (ASARC's) Milestone I Decision Review
  in February 2000.
• Representation on the IAV Source Selection
  Evaluation Board (SSEB) held at TACOM and the Bid
  Sample Team conducting vehicle tests at Aberdeen
  Test Center (ATC) from June to November 2000.

Companies responding to TACOM's IAV Request for
Proposal (RFP) provided a prototype of their
vehicle, the basic IAV or Infantry Carrier
Vehicle (ICV), to ATC. Test data collected by
the Bid Sample MANPRINT Team was provided to the
SSEB MANPRINT Team for inclusion in their
evaluation submitted to the Army Acquisition
Executive (AAE). The AAE announced his selection
and contract award for the IAV on 16 November
2000. The offer from General Motors/General
Dynamics Land Systems (GM/GDLS) was accepted.
The GM/GDLS Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) III will
be used for the ICV and Mobile Gun System.
Page 2
MANPRINT Quarterly
3
Continued from Page 2
vehicles. The estimated value of the Army's
contract with GM/GDLS approaches 4 Billion, for
the deliver of 2,131 vehicles by 2008. Once
each variant becomes available for testing at ATC
and other locations, HHA test data will be
collected to support the completion of HHARs.
These assessments will support future ASARC
Milestone Decision Reviews.   PHASE III (2008 and
beyond) The production and fielding of lighter
weight objective systems, using advanced
technologies, currently in the research and
development technology base.   The HHA Program
will routinely complete HHARs on objective
vehicles, destined to replace the IAV, as they
come out of the research and development
technology base and proceed through the Army's
materiel acquisition decision process.
GM/GDLS LAV III
The ICV is also the basic chassis for eight
additional variants mortar carrier,
reconnaissance, anti-tank guided missile, fires
support, engineer support, command and control,
medical evacuation, and nuclear, chemical, and
biological reconnaissance
Meetings of Interest
AUSA 2002 Annual Meeting Realizing the Army
Vision October 21-23 Washington, DC Marriott
Wardman Park Hotel Omni Shoreham Hotel
May 2002
Page 3
4
Human Factors Characteristics of the AH-64D
Apache Longbow Crewstations   Dave Durbin Army
Research Laboratory Human Research Engineering
Directorate Aviation Center Field Element Fort
Rucker, AL An assessment was conducted to
evaluate the human factors characteristics of the
AH-64D Apache Longbow crewstations that enhance
or inhibit the performance of flight and mission
tasks by pilots. The assessment was based on a
survey administered to 43 Apache Longbow pilots
from April June 00 by the Army Research
Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering
Directorate (ARL HRED). The following items were
evaluated
mission tasks were adopted from Training Circular
1-251 (Aircrew Training Manual, Attack
Helicopter, AH-64D) and Training Circular 1-210
(Aircrew Training Program, Commander's Guide To
Individual And Crew Standardization). The pilots
were also asked to provide workload ratings for
the AH-64A so a comparison could be made between
the AH-64D and AH-64A. Situation
Awareness   Situation awareness can be defined as
the pilots mental model of the current state of
the flight and mission environment. A more
formal definition (Endsley, 1988) is the
perception of the elements in the environment
within a volume of time and space, the
comprehension of their meaning, and the
projection of their status in the near future.
It is important to assess situation awareness
because it has a direct impact on pilot
performance. Good situation awareness increases
the probability of good decisions and good
performance by AH-64D pilots. To estimate the
level of situation awareness that AH-64D pilots
experience during missions, they compared
situation awareness for the AH-64D vs. the AH-64A
for several battlefield elements (e.g., location
of enemy units).   Decision-making   Andriole and
Adelman (1995) define decision-making as higher
order cognitive skills that utilize memory and
attention skills for effective problem-solving
under high workload conditions. It is important
to assess decision-making in the Apache Longbow
because pilots need to be able to make quick and
accurate decisions based on the information
presented to them in the crewstation. Pilots
were asked to compare the time required to make
decisions in the AH-64D vs. the AH-64A when
conducting flight and mission tasks.
Crewstation Interface   The pilots were asked
questions regarding the usability characteristics
of the multipurpose displays

• Pilot workload
• Situation awareness
• Decision-making
• Crewstation interface

The assessment provided human factors support for
fielding of the AH-64D and addressed aircrew
efficiency requirements listed in the AH-64D
Operational Requirements Document (ORD) and
MANPRINT support requirements adopted from Army
Regulation 602-2 "Manpower and Personnel
Integration (MANPRINT) In The System Acquisition
Process" Pilot Workload   Pilot workload is
defined as the integrated mental and physical
effort required to satisfy the perceived demands
of a specified flight task (Roscoe and Ellis,
1985). Pilot workload should be assessed because
mission accomplishment is directly related to the
mental and physical ability of the crew to
effectively perform their flight and mission
tasks. To estimate the level of workload that
AH-64D pilots experience during missions, they
provided workload ratings for twenty-one flight
and mission tasks using the Bedford Workload
Rating Scale. The flight and
Page 4
MANPRINT Quarterly
5
Continued from Page 4
presented on the crewstation displays. The
amount of information and the manner in which it
is presented to the aircrew is superior to the
AH-64A. Situation Awareness Ratings   Pilots
reported that the AH-64D provides greater
situation awareness than the AH-64A for the
following battlefield elements location of
enemy units, friendly units, non-combatants, own
aircraft, other aircraft in the flight, and route
information. The pilots reported in interviews
that situation awareness in the AH-64D is higher
because a large amount of useful information is
presented on the crewstation displays. The
amount of information and the manner in which it
is presented to the aircrew is superior to the
AH-64A.   Decision-Making Ratings   The pilots
reported that their decision-making process takes
less time in the AH-64D compared to the AH-64A
for targeting tasks, navigation tasks, pilotage
tasks, and communication tasks. The pilots
commented on the survey and reported in
interviews that decision-making takes less time
in the AH-64D because a large amount of useful
information is presented on the crewstation
displays. The amount of information and the
manner in which it is presented to the aircrew is
superior to the AH-64A.   Crewstation Interface
Ratings   The pilots reported that they have
not experienced significant problems while using
the majority of crewstation components (e.g.,
controls and displays). The Apache Longbow
Program Management Office is actively working to
resolve the problems that were identified by the
pilots. Summary   The pilots reported that
workload is tolerable and lower in the AH-64D
than in the AH-64A for the 21 flight and mission
tasks that they rated. They also
(MPDs), keyboard unit (KU), mission control grip
on the collective, optical relay tube (ORT)
handgrips, and up front display (UFD). These are
the primary components AH-64D pilots use to
process data and information in the crewstation.
The pilots were also asked questions regarding
visual and physical access to controls and
switches, labeling of items in the crewstations,
stowage space in the crewstations, effectiveness
of the environmental control system, canopy
reflections, reliability of the FM1, FM2, and IDM
radios, and reliability of the system and weapons
processor. Pilot Demographics   Forty-three
(43) male Army pilots completed the survey. They
represented a group of low to moderately
experienced pilots with a range from 40 hours to
850 hours of flight time in the AH-64D. The
pilots lacked extensive experience flying the
AH-64D. Their lack of extensive experience
reflects the short time the aircraft has been in
the fielding process. Information and data
listed in this article should be interpreted
based on this limitation.   Survey
Results   Workload Ratings   The pilots reported
that workload was tolerable when performing all
twenty-one flight and mission tasks in the AH-64D
and AH-64A. The pilots rated workload in the
AH-64D as lower than in the AH-64A for all 21
flight and mission tasks. Additionally, the
pilots reported that they typically have
sufficient spare workload capacity (for attention
to additional tasks) when performing 18 of the 21
(86) flight and mission tasks in the AH-64D.
Conversely, they reported that they typically
have sufficient spare workload capacity when
performing only 3 of the 21 (14) flight and
mission tasks in the AH-64A. The pilots
commented on the survey and reported in
interviews that workload is lower in the AH-64D
because a large amount of useful information is
May 2002
Page 5
6
Continued from Page 5
For additional information about this report,
please contact MANPRINT_at_hqda.army.mil. REFERENCES
  Andriole, S. and Adelman, L. (1995).
Cognitive Systems Engineering for User-Computer
Interface Design, Prototyping, and Evaluation.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale,
NJ.   Endsley, M.R. (1988). Design and
Evaluation for Situation Awareness Enhancement.
In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd
Annual Meeting (pp. 97-101). Santa Monica, CA
Human Factors Society.   Roscoe, A.H. (1985).
The Airline Pilots View of Flight Deck Workload
A Preliminary Study Using a Questionnaire.
Technical Memorandum No. FS (B) 465, Royal
Aircraft Establishment, Bedford, UK.
reported that they have greater situation
awareness and are able to make decisions more
quickly in the AH-64D vs. the AH-64A. Lastly,
they reported that they have not experienced
significant problems while using most of the
crewstation components. Their responses indicate
that the AH-64D is meeting the ORD requirements
of 1) imposing less workload on aircrews than the
AH-64A, and 2) increasing aircrew efficiency by
increasing their situation awareness and
decreasing the time they require to make
decisions when compared to the AH-64A. This is
encouraging and helps validate the effort that is
being invested in the AH-64D MANPRINT program.
As pilots gain more experience with the AH-64D,
additional data should be collected to determine
any changes in their perceptions about workload,
situation awareness, decision-making, and the
crewstation interface.
and promotional items can be found within the
site. Download files are available for
publications, quarterlies, briefings, speeches,
and award information. With the current name
change of the PERTEC Directorate back to the
MANPRINT Directorate, more updates are
forthcoming. Look for valuable new additions
within the next year. The MANPRINT Website can
be found at http//www.manprint.army.mil.
The New MANPRINT Website The MANPRINT
Directorate   If you havent noticed, the
MANPRINT Website has a new look and feel to it.
This new website has been under development for
quite some time and finally went live on the
Internet the first of February. The same
beneficial information found on the previous site
is still available but the site has been revised,
revamped and presented with a user-friendly
approach and a distinct U.S. Army
appearance.   Ease of navigation and the use of
drop-down menus were key considerations in the
development of the site. Pertinent graphics have
been used for the seven domains and throughout
the site to show the essential relationship
between MANPRINT and the  soldier. The site is
currently organized in three main branches
PERTEC, MANPRINT, and SORD, each having their own
home page and drop-down and side-bar menus
relating to each branch. Current MANPRINT
training, publications, events,
Page 6
MANPRINT Quarterly
7
MANPRINT Central Information
EMAIL
DSN
COMMERCIAL
Dr. Thomas Killion Thomas.Killion_at_hqda.army.mil D
r. Michael Drillings Michael.Drillings_at_hqda.army.m
il LTC Rick Inman Bryant.Inman_at_hqda.army.mil Ms.
Teresa Hanson Teresa.Hanson_at_hqda.army.mil MAJ
Joe Jones Joseph.Jones_at_hqda.army.mil Mrs.
Marjorie Zelko Marjorie.Zelko_at_hqda.army.mil
225-3048 225-2112 224-9459 225-4036 224-15
83 225-2146
703-695-3048 703-695-2112 703-614-9459 703-6
95-4036 703-614-1583 703-695-2146
Page 7
May 2002
8
MANPRINT Training Schedule MANPRINT ACTION
OFFICER COURSE (MAOC)

CLASS START DATE END DATE LOCATION 2002-704 04
Jun 2002 13 Jun 2002 Ft Leonard Wood,
MO 2002-002 05 Aug 2002 15 Aug 2002 ALMC, Fort
Lee, VA 2003-701 22 Oct 2002 31 Oct 2002 Ft.
Leonard Wood, MO 2003-001 27 Jan 2003 06 Feb
2003 ALMC, Ft. Lee, VA 2003-702 25 Feb 2003 06
Mar 2003 Fort Bragg, NC 2003-703 24 Mar 2003 03
Apr 2003 Houston, TX 2003-704 06 May 2003 15 May
2003 Huntsville, AL 2003-705 03 Jun 2003 12 Jun
2003 Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 2003-002 18 Aug
2003 28 Aug 2003 ALMC, Ft. Lee, VA
MANPRINT TAILORED TRAINING (APPLICATIONS COURSE)
CLASS START DATE END DATE LOCATION 2002-702 30
Apr 2002 02 May 2002 Fort Rucker, AL 2002-704 25
Jun 2002 27 Jun 2002 Rock Island, IL 2002-703 20
Aug 2002 22 Aug 2002 Warren, MI 2002-705 10 Sep
2002 12 Sep 2002 Huntsville, AL 2002-706 24 Sep
2002 26 Sep 2002 Dover, NJ 2003-701 07 Oct
2002 10 Oct 2002 Aberdeen Proving Ground,
MD 2003-702 19 Nov 2002 21 Nov 2002 Fort Bliss,
TX 2003-703 11 Mar 2003 13 Mar 2003 Fort Rucker,
AL 2003-704 15 Apr 2003 18 Apr 2003 Warren,
MI 2003-001 28 Apr 2003 30 Apr 2003 ALMC, Ft.
Lee, VA 2003-705 24 Jun 2003 26 Jun 2003 National
Capitol Region 2003-706 05 Aug 2003 08 Aug
2003 Warren, MI 2003-707 23 Sep 2003 25 Sep
2003 Huntsville, AL
(POC Mr. Len Girling, COM [phone], DSN
539-4361)
Page 8
MANPRINT Quarterly
9
MANPRINT INFORMATION Articles, comments, and
suggestions are welcomed. Submit to MANPRINT
Quarterly, HQDA (DAPE-MR), 300 Army Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20310-0300 DSN 221-2526, COM
[phone], FAX [phone], E-mail
MANPRINT_at_hqda.army.mil MANPRINT Web Site
http//www.manprint.army.mil POLICY Department
of the Army, ODCSPER, ATTN DAPE-MR, 300 Army
Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310-0300, DSN
221-2526, COM [phone]. DIRECTORY OF
DESIGN SUPPORT METHODS Defense Technical
Information CenterMATRIS Office, DTIC-AM, NAS NI
Bldg, 1482, Box 357011, San Diego, CA 92135-7011,
DSN 735-9414, COM [phone], E-mail
ddsm_at_dticam.dtic.mil, and web site
http//dticam.dtic.mil/hsi/ MANPRINT DOMAIN
POCs MANPOWER, PERSONNEL TRAINING Mr. D. J.
Imbs or Ms. Denise McCauley, U.S. Total Army
Personnel Command, ATTN TAPC-PLC-M, Alexandria,
VA 22332-0406, DSN 221-2024 or 221-6489, COM
[phone] or 325-6489, FAX [phone],
E-mail imbs_at_hoffman.army.mil or
mccauled_at_hoffman.army.mil HUMAN FACTORS
ENGINEERING Dr. Linda Pierce, Acting Chief,
Human Factors Integration Division, HRED, Army
Research Laboratory, ATTN AMSRL-HR-MV, Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD 21005-5425, DSN 298-5817, COM
[phone], FAX [phone], E-mail
lpierce_at_arl.mil. SYSTEM SAFETY Col. Kim
Welliver or Mr. Jim Patton, Office of the Chief
of Staff, Army Safety Office, ATTN DACS-SF,
Crystal Plaza 5, Rm 980, 2100 S. Clark Street,
Arlington, VA 22202, COM [phone], Email
kim.welliver_at_hqda.army.mil, pattojt_at_hqda.army.mil.
HEALTH HAZARDS Mr. Bob Gross or Maj. Carl
Hover, U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and
Preventive Medicine (USACHPPM), ATTN
MCHB-TS-OHH, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD
21010-5422, DSN 584-2925, COM [phone],
FAX [phone], E-mail robert.gross_at_apg.amedd.army
.mil or carlhover_at_apq.amedd.army.mil. SOLDIER
SURVIVABILITY Mr. Richard Zigler, U.S. Army
Research Laboratory, ATTN AMSRL-SL-BE, Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD 21005-5068, DSN 298-8625, COM
[phone], FAX [phone], E-mail
rzigler_at_mail.arl.mil.
Dr. Thomas Killion
Director for MANPRINT
The MANPRINT Quarterly is an official bulletin of
the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel (ODCSPER), Department of the Army. The
Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT)
program (AR 602-2) is a comprehensive management
and technical initiative to enhance human
performance and reliability during weapons system
and equipment design, development and production.
MANPRINT encompasses the seven domains of
personnel capabilities manpower, training, human
factors engineering, system safety, health
hazards and soldier survivability. The focus of
MANPRINT is to integrate technology, people and
force structure to meet mission objectives under
all environmental conditions at the lowest
possible life-cycle cost. Information contained
in this bulletin covers policies, procedures, and
other items of interest concerning the MANPRINT
Program. Statements and opinions expressed are
not necessarily those of the Department of the
Army. This bulletin is prepared quarterly under
contract for the MANPRINT Directorate, Office of
the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel under the
provisions of AR 25-30 as a functional bulletin.
Page 9
May 2002
10
READERS RESPONSE
Use this space to record changes, additions or
deletions. Send your information by Fax (703)
325-0657 or Mail (fold on designated line and
close (do not staple) with the MANPRINT Quarterly
address on the Outside). If you are a MANPRINT
POC for your organization, please check the
MANPRINT POC block. Name Company/Organization
Address Phone FAX DSN FAX E-mail
Address Comments
New
Delete
Change
MANPRINT POC
Rank/Title
First
M.I.
Last
Fold Here
From
To
MANPRINT Quarterly HQDA (DAPE-MR) 300 Army
Pentagon Washington, DC 20310-0300
Page 10
MANPRINT Quarterly
11
MANPRINT QUARTERLY HQDA (DAPE-MR) 300 Army
Pentagon Washington, DC 20310-0300
FIRST CLASS