12960
7
fh
neo
1900
\
|
\
\\
|
!
|
——=>s_
\;
\
4
$99
.
|
[
!
790°
I
;
im Meee
4|
“we
eget
stamecats
3
CENTERLINE
a
wee WhO
rY
960
Filla PACK OOSE iA)
ae
——
\
|
J
ip.
.
”
eo
aon;
’
oO ”
$66
ra
a7
=
é
_)
4|
\
+
|
460
|
4
soo
-
200
}
/
Pr.
‘
t
;
:
—
:
Poel
'
199
i
\
° o
19
2
x”
-
ia.
|
ag
$0
60
70
eo
990
199
WG
120
‘30
14a
190
160
179
180
90
Fmaue NUWEER
Figure 3.211 Plot of film pack dose readings on main deck of EC-2 versus position
along ship, Shots Wahoo and Umbrella. (Lowest frame numbers are forward; each
frame number represents approximately 2 feet.)
1200
t
.
'
{
.
nog
\
1000
:
090
o
5
I
x
+
T
/
$00
;
.
|
’
$00
foot
400
—-
‘
|
.
.
trend
stangoaao
ee
|
ft
}
T4.
oar
ae hi
T
709
‘
Bar OecK
8MOGE OECK
TOF OF THE MOUSE
a
i
.
‘
+
:
T:
'
[
:
pot
i
300
200
'
;
|
L
{
poi
.
t
\
|
4
\
)
290
x“
40
t
oo
0
—%
1
'
#00
Fim BACK DOSE IRD
t
Loe
T
o
10
|
1
'
*
j
'
t
'
+
t
J
so
,
bas]
;
:
+
:
5
‘
»
Le]
+ <
7
©
.
90
-
100
i]
120
130
140
199
160
70
.
10
20
FRawE NUMER
Figure 3.212 Plot of film pack dose readings on superstructure of EC-2 versus
position along ship, Shots Wahoo and Umbrella. (Lowest frame numbers are
forward; eachframe number represents approximately 2 feet.)
314
‘al