added to the Hardtack schedule in June 1958. Because of its nature and possible tactical interest, three new Program 2 projects were created and an existing one extended in order to document the nuclear effects. Three projects of Program 34 (Projects 34.8, 34.9, and 34.10) were placed under the technical direction of Program 2. These are discussed in Sec. 2.4. Quince As a result, the Fig event was added to the schedule and detonated on August 18, 1958. The yield was Project 1.4, Crater Measurements, measured the size of the crater produced by the There were no project personne! in the EPG, as only a contractor survey was required. It was found that the crater produced was elliptical in shape, with the long axis roughlv corresponding to that of the device. The diameters were | respectively, measured from lip to lip. The depth was below grade with a lip above grade. At the time of measurement, D + 3 days, there was evidence of earth slides which resulted from severe rains that had occurred since the detonation. The crater was briefly observed on D + 1 day, prior to the slides. Based upon this observation and the measurements made a day later, it is estimated that the original crater was deeper and amaller in diameter from lip to lip immediately following the det- onation, , The objectives of Project 1.7, Overpressure Measurements, were to document the overpressure measurements resulting from a: and verify or extend existing scaling laws. The instrumentation consisted of 36 standard PT and Q gages containing preasure capsules located at ranges from 40 to 700 ft from ground zero. As the yield of the device was uncertain, it was necessary to provide the above instrumentation to accomodate a wide range of pressures. The Fig device produced a nuclear yield of ‘as measured by radiochemistry. Twenty-eight of the 36 instruments provided good records. Some failures were experienced due to undetermined causes at the close-in ranges. It is felt that these could be the result of heavy ground shock and motion, which in some instances shattered the glass recording discs. Pressures recorded varied from The points plotted against curves scaled up from hrgh explosive and down of nuclear yield showed a reasonably close fit. There was, however, a minor deviation in the slope of the recorded curve which cannot be explained without further study of the records and investigation of possible sources of experimental error due to the closeness of the instruments to the detonation. Preliminary field analysis of the data indicates that, using existing scaling laws, pressures can be predicted for detonations with reasonable accuracy. Neutron flux measurements made by Project 2.4 were discussed in some detail in the Program 2 portion of thia report. During the field phase of the operation, project participation was extended to include the Quince and Fig events and had as its objective the documenting of the neutron flux and spectra for the Two neutron lines were established to obtain the desired data. One was in the direction of the extended long axis of the device and ran out to a distance of 1039 yd, and the other was perpendicular to the device's long axis and extended for a distance of 900 yd. 38