yw? mviHF*y*iy**!V+V*>V*'!IPl*r*m ■» m?m* " ■■".■'« wm ■ nyy^^pfy^wiffwr^^r^i^i i ■ w*m m \m »pmin.i.u»ii|»>i 'i ' u »■;■« »'■'■_■ ^» i

TECHNICAL REPORT NATICK/TR-86/027

O

O

< I

Q <

AN EVALUATION OF THE RATION, COLD WEATHER

APRIL 1985

BY

A.C. MASTROMARINO AND

V.A. LOVERIDGE

JUNE 1986

iLECTE JÜL3 IB86

.-.—.»•«

Q o

es ess

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

UNITED STATES ARMY NATICK RESEJ* RCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING CENTER

NATICK, MASSACHUSETTS 01760-5000

FOOD ENGINEERING DIRECyQRAT% ©

m^r m \-w-v -w VT-; ■»■«. .r.T— | -„

Disclaimers

The findings contained in this report

are not to be construed as an official

Department of the Army position unless

so designated by other authorized

document s.

Citation of trade names in this report

does not constitute an official endorse-

ment or approval of the use cf such items

DESTRUCTION NOTICE

For classified documents, foMow the procedures in DoD

5200.1-R, Chapter IX or DoD 5220.22-M, "Industrial Security

Manual," paragraph 19. For unclassified documents, destroy

by any method which precludes reconstruction of the document

t-i—*,...,*,..,* i. g -a^a,ji,3-«.-.', m.;,*..\ j ... ;. ^ ..-A , -f . J» . a -^L, w w - - . » - ■

UNCLASSIFIED SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE 4JLÜÜ <(<>!

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No 0704 0188 tup Date )ur>30, 1986

U REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

UNCLASSIFIED 1b RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS

*\J SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY

2b DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE

3 DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

Approved for public release - distribution

unlimited

4 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

NATICK/TH-86/027

5 MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

6a NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

US Armv Natick Research, Devel- opment, and Engineering Center

6b OFFICE SYMBOL (If applicable)

STRNC-WTP

7a NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION

6c ADDRESS (Ofy, State, and ZIP Code)

Natick, MA 01760-5018

7b ADDRESS (City. State, and ZIP Code)

8a NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING ORGANIZATION

8b OFFICE SYMBOL (If applicable)

9 PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

8c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10 SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS

PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

1L162724AH94

PROJECT NO

BB-136

TASK NO

06

WORK UNIT ACCESSION NO

'.1 TITLE (include Security Classification) AN

EVALUATION OF TH*\ RATION, COLD WEATHER APRIL 1985 UNCLASSIFIED

12 PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)

A. C. Mastromari.no and V. A. Love ridge

13a TYPE OF REPORT

Fi na I

13b TIME COVERED

FROM April 85TO June 86

14 DATE OF REPORT (Yeat, Month, Day)

1986 Juno 15 PAGE COUNT

39 16 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION

17 COSATI CODES

FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP

18 SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

RAi. IONS BODY FLUIDS DEHYDRATED FOODS ARCTIC REGIONS FREEZE DRIED FOODS CONSUMPTION COLD WEATHER ENTREE WATER

19 ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number) NA field test evaluation of the prototype ot the Ration, Cold Weather (Arctic Ration)

utilized troops from Charlie Company 6,327tn Infantry Battalion, Fort Wainwright, Alaska from 12-16 April 1985. This evaluation assessed the acceptability and consumption of the Ration as well as water availability and body fluid status by means of questionnaires and consumption diaries. While 50 men consumed the Ration, an additional 50 controls consumed H Rations, Meal, Readv-to-Eat, Individuals, and supplemental items.

Results showed that in general the Ration, Cold Weather meal was acceptable to the men; however, they were slightly dissatisfied with ease ol preparation, meal-to-meal variety, and portion sizes. Despite the low average caloric intake, Lest subjects had no significant weight gain/loss as compared to the control group. Water availability was low, resulting in lack of water for rehydration and in insufficient water intake. Low intake appeared to be partly duo to poor water discipline.

20 DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY Of ABSTRACT

Ö UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED D SAME AS RPT Q OTIC USERS

21 ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

UNCLASSIFIED

22d NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL

Arvilla C. Mastromarino

22b TELEPHONE (Include Area Cod?)

61 7-651-^+0 50 22c OFFICE SYMBOL

STRNC-WTP

DDFOKM1473,84MAR 83 APR edition may be used until exhausted

All other editions are obsolete

i

$*■C.'JR|TY (-LASS'r.'CATION Of THIS PAGE

UNCLASSIFIED

■A. AA L/W Jn At A. Lfi/\ A. 1 ^ .*_?.*_ i_»JV

'*■*»<- « ^ T ■

**Vi

PREFACE

This project was completed at the U. S. Army Natick Research,

Development and Engineering Center (NRDEC) and at the Northern

Warfare Training Center at the request of the U. S. Army Health

Clinic at Fort Greeley, Alaska. These efforts were coordinated

through the Food Engineering Directorate of the NRDEC under

project number IL 1 62724AH99.

The authors wish to thank CW3 Robert A. Wood, Medical Officer

of the Northern Warfare Training Center, for coordinating the test

and administrating the questionnaires. We would also like to

thank those soldiers who were involved in the field evaluation, as

well as those personnel in the Audio Visual and Reproduction

Branches of the NRDEC for producing the questionnaires with rather

short notice.

iii

•A. *\V ^>££ä::& *s .'J> mJ* *_•>*-- >.Vv<yj

-.' .-.'«-»»-.'«"v;

TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii PREFACE

vi LIST OF TABLES

) INTRODUCTION

.... 1 MATERIALS AND METHODS

2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION • " ^ ^ 2

Acceptability ..'.'.'..'. 4 Consumption * ..... 6 Satisfaction . [ ', 7 Convenience and Quality , , 9 Water Availability . ] 10 Body Fluid Status

11 CONCLUSIONS

12 ADDENDUM

13 REFERENCES

14 BIBLIOGRAPHY

.15 APPENDICES .......♦• ' : " * ' 15

Appendix A Ration, Cold Weather Menus ... Appendix B Ration, Cold Weather Questionnaire ^ Appendix C Consumption Diary ' Appendix D Body Fluid Status Questionnaire

L

Accesion For

NTIS CRA&I DTIC TAB Unannounced Justification

Availability Codes

Dist

H

Avail ar#d/or Special

B&!&3^

■ v ™ vrw ww v^ »n v^ vrm IT» w * ^ \-w I-* \ » .Tf\Tfi viw. ' "« ■ w. S V* V vw l

LIST OF TABLES

4

&

TABLE 1. Meal Acceptability, Mean Ratings 3

TABLE 2. Component Acceptability 3

TABLE 3. Caloric Intake Diary Responses 5

TABLE 4. Analysis of Weight Gain/Loss - Test Group and Controls . 5

TABLE 5. Presence of Hunger 5

TABLE 6. Variation in Eating Times 5

TABLE 7. Attribute Satisfaction, Mean Ratings 6

TABLE 8. Variety Satisfaction, Mean Ratings 6

TABLE 9. Food Amount Satisfaction, Mean Ratings 7

TABLE 10. Convenience and Quality, Mean Ratings 8

TABLE 11. Proposed Ration Improvement Rankings ......... 8

TABLE 12. Ration Comments Summary 8

TABLE 13. Water Availability, Mean Ratings . 9

TABLE 14. Frequency of Melting Snow 10

TABLE 15. Type of Snow Melting Containers 10

TABLE 16. Responses to Body Fluid Questionnaire 11

vii

U M 1 V J" .* S ■■ W" -" ' J" J* f" V.V/J*.V >.v MWi' >JVJ

~.- %" '-.-'V '-W ■"¥-- i

AN EVALUATION OF THE RATION, COLD WEATHER

APRIL 1985

INTRODUCTION

The Ration, Cold Weather (RCW), known as the Arctic Ration at

the time of this test, was developed in order to meet the needs of

the U. S. Marine Corps Requirement Letter L S-4 (17 December 1982)

for an operational cold weather ration for use under rigorous

conditions. Initially consisting of two Emergency/Assault Food

packets in combination with an Arctic supplement, the RCW has been

condensed into two pouches with the following characteristics:

1 . 2 . 3.

4. 5 . 6.

7.

Provides 4500 kilocalories per menu; Do es not frees e; Contains entrees, snacks, and numerous hot drinks (Appendix A); Is in a flat, flexible waterproof package; Requires little preparation; Is lighter and smaller than four Meal, Ready-to-Eat, Individuals (MRE); Has a reduced sodium content.

The purpose of this informal field test was to assess the

following during a five-day period:

I. Acceptability 2 , Consumption 3. Sa t i sfaction 4. Convenience and Quality 5. Water Availability 6. Body Fluid Status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Troops from Charlie Company 6, 327th Infantry Battalion, Fort

Wainwright, Alaska, participating in a Northern Warfare Training

course, were utilized in this informal field evaluation of the

prototype RCW from 12-16 April 1985. Fifty personnel ate the RCW,

and 50 ate MRE's and B-type rations sup piemen ted with Hot Chocolate,

Soup, Cranola, and Oatmeal. Both groups had been in the Army for an

average of 36 months.

1

■ ■ jtf« tf W VV r* Y* g * V% V* L'V V* C^ ' ^VVVVT y ^ ■»■*«-<•« ^ « * « v -.-»■« wv ^-: TV"

B '-<?■ TT ! Vw~-.* T"- "^ ~ ^ -w - r -» w w - -w -■ v — -v ■» T* - y i

During the test period, the men consuming the RCW completed the

following:

1. A general questionnaire concerning the RCW on Days 2 and 5 (Appendix B);

2. A daily consumption diary (Appendix C); 3. Wyant and Caron's Daily Body Fluid Status

Questionnaire (Appendix D).

In addition, all test personnel were weighed on Days 1 and 5. The

general questionnaire assessed acceptability, satisfaction,

convenience, quality, and, to a lesser degree, consumption and water

availabilty. The consumption diary assessed caloric consumption in

detail. Wyant and Caron's questionnaire assessed body fluid status

through urine characterization as a physiological indicator of

dehydration. Due to the lack of sufficient test control, not all

questionnaires were returned. As a result, cross-checking of food

acceptability measures was impossible, and the number of responses

varied from question to question.

The men engaged in the following activities during the course of

the test period:

Day 1 - Convoy movement of 100 miles, followed by an airborne drop and a four kilometer snowshoe movement.

Day 2 - Small distance patrols and preparation of defensive positions.

Day 3 - Defensive operations. Day 4 - A night movement of four kilometers. Dav 5 - Airmobile movement and a four kilometer road march.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

On t h whole, the RCW meal and its components were acceptable to

the test subjects (Table 1 and Table 2). The only exceptions were

the Apricot Fruit Soup at a hedonic rating of 4.5 and the Chocolate

Bar with Toffee at 4.9 and 4.7. The ratings ranged from 4.5

(Apricot Fruit Soup) to 7.4 (Fig Bar) on Day 2 and from 4.5 (Apricot

Fruit Soup) to 8.1 (Fig Bar) on Day 5. Although ratings in general

.*.Ä ^ «M. «•- w f* A*J *. W\. A. «•> /..r« if-. Ajf*rfW /VA fmji:A/LIWI.1 -.*/-VA(..\\V,V,'.'1 »". Vi *%* /•/j

St« fit

mi<-*.< H,TV *JI wnw +- * " m- v- ■ H * V ■» tt ^"g ■ «; * S w-i-i r'j wj -rv «- »▼« »V ▼"7'WJ >-.' r-' -.""V- W- -

Table 1, Meal Acceptability, Mean Ratings (7 point scale, l«Dislike Very Much, 7*Like Very Much)

Breakfast Lunch Dinner

N

37 37 37

DAY 2 X

4.A 4.7 4.4

SD

1 .8 1 .7 1 .8

N DAY 5

X SD

46 4.8 1.8 46 4.1 1.5 46 5.3 1.7

Table 2. Component Acceptability, Mean Ratings (9 point scale, l«Dislike Very Much, 9*Like Extremely)

BREAKFAST Apple & Cinnamon Oatmeal Maple & Brown Sugar Oatmeal

ENTREES Chicken Stew Beef & Vegetable Escalloped Potato & Pork Chicken Ala King Chicken & Rice Spaghet ti

SNACKS Orange Nut Cake Brownie Nut Raisin Mix Granola Bars Oatmeal Cookie Bar Chocolate Bar with Toffee Fig Bar Caramels

DRINKS Lemon Tea Orange Beverage Apricot Fruit Soup Strawberry Fruit Soup Raspberry Fruit Soup Cocoa Chicken Soup, Reduced Sodium

Total Questionnaires Returned

DAY 2 DAY 5 N X SD N X SD

36 6.9 2.1 43 8.0 1 .2 35 6.7 2.1 40 8.0 1 .4

29 5.9 2.3 35 6.7 2.2 31 5.8 2.2 33 6.8 1 .6 21 5.4 2.3 33 6.9 2.0 24 6.2 1 .6 35 7.0 I .8 24 6.0 2.0 37 6.7 2.0 21 6.2 1 .6 3 5 6.2 1 .5

17 5. 1 2. 1 10 5.4 1 .2 34 5.3 2 .4 18 5.6 2.2 28 7.0 2.2 45 7.7 1 .8 36 5.4 2 .2 44 5.1 2.6 35 6.5 2.0 44 7.1 1 .9 34 4.9 2 .3 42 4.7 2.3 36 7.4 2.2 43 8. 1 1 .5 37 6 .2 2.3 45 7 .3 1 .9

^8 6.9 2. 1 38 8.0 1 .4 3 b 5 .7 1 .8 39 5.8 1 .9 21 4.5 2.7 2 7 4,5 2.5 18 5 . 1 2.2 25 5 ,5 2. 7 25 5.0 2 .3 2 3 5.5 2.6 23 6.7 1 .7 40 6.7 1 .5 34 6.4 1 .8 A3 7.2 1 .1

3 8 4 5

*N=Number of Responses, X=Mean of Responses, SD=Standard Deviation, and %=Percent of Responses for all tables in this report.

*^Lr-#.,v_,vJv/v..-.

-,Jf"J-T-iäW*il»jr.T-nPrn)nT"Tr-»-ir ■-.»—_W -w -_w-.!>

increased by an average of a point over Che test period, little

change occurred in those for Orange Nut Cake, Brownie, Granola Bar,

Orange Beverage, and the fruit soupr. Spaghetti stayed at 6.2 and

Apricot Fruit Soup stayed at 4.5. The Chocolate Bar with Toffee

decreased slightly. A possible explanation for the increase in

rankings over time could be that the men became more familiar and

comfoitable with the food rypes and preparation methods. It should

be noted that the Day 5 rankings approach the favorable rankings of

prior evaluations of the RCW by the Marine Corps and the

N a v y . 2 , 3 , 4

As a group, the breakfast items had the highest scores. The

entrees showed the greatest variation in ratingc~~5,4 to 6.2 on Day

2 to 6.2 to 7.0 on Day 5--accompanied by a total turnover of

individual entree rankings. The only exception was Chicken Stew

whose ranking remained the same. Both Snacks and Drinks had

acceptable rankings with the exceptions previously mentionec.

Two items should be noted. First, due to low consumption and

acceptability on prior evaluations, the Orange Nut Cake was in the

process of being phased out at the time of this test. As a result,

it was not present in all rations, having been substituted by the

Brownie. Second, the Chocolate Bar with Toffee procured for this

field test was of inferior quality, suffering from bloom and poor

flavor. Therefore, the acceptability of this item should not be

based on this particular evaluation.

According to the consumption diary (Table 3), caloric intake

covered a wide range, 618-4364 kilocalories, with a mean daily

intake between 2710 and 2939 kilocalories, or only 60-65 percent of

the total calories available. Despite this, the RCW test group had

no significant difference in weight gain/loss as compared to the

control group (Table 4) for the five-day time period. Snack items

had the highest level of consumption, followed by the breakfast

items and the beverages. The entrees were the least consumed. The

men's comments indicated this was due mainly to lack of time and

water.

'»'»»v«»^ VT \rm v w fc-i * \-*m* i-wi in "vi nr

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

Table 3. Caloric Intake Diary Responses N-26

2939 2826 2710 2809 2763

SD

945 870 785 792 967

RANGE

1115-4066 901-4267 618-3916

1 183-4364 1287-3901

Table 4. Analysis of Weight Gain/Loss (Pounds)

RATION N

RCW (Test) 39 MRE/B (Control) 29

-2.9 -1.3

SD

3.5 3.6

- Test Group and Controls

F RATIO SIGNIFICANCE

3.3 Not Significant

Despite the complaints concerning the difficulty of preparation

and the lack of time, 56-62 percent Of the responses (Table 5)

claimed to have received enough to eat. The remaining 38-44 percent

were "often hungry". The test group was almost equally split

concerning eating times (Table 6): 50-55 percent ate throughout the

day with the other 45 percent eating both at mealtimes and

throughout the day.

Table 5. Presence of Hunger

:A

Got enough food Often hungry

DAY 2 N

20 16

56 44

N

28 17

DAY 5

62 38

Table 6. Variation in Eating Times

DAY 2

At designated mealtimes Throughout the day, as

time permitced Both of the above

N

2 18

16

5 50

45

N

0 25

20

DAY 5

0 55

45

VjVVV V«'--\V."' -\ -"v"< •'•'

\rn-f *rt »? -» m * -» - - x - \ n-vvr -„- • "V 'N"■"%■• "V'

In general, the men were slightly dissatisfied with certain

characteristics of the RCW. According to Table 7, they were

"moderately dissatisfied" with ease of preparation and "somewhat

dissatisfied" with meal-to-meal variety (see also Table 8). Taste,

appearance, quantity, and ln-pack variety all received neutral

scores. The men also felt that food amounts were too small in the

breakfast items, entree bars, and beverages and soups (Table 9).

Despite comments saying the amount of candies and cakes were too

high, they received an "amount just right" rating.

Table 7. Attribute Satisfaction, Mean Ratings (7 point scale, l»Very Dissatisfied, 7=Very Satisfied)

Ease of preparation Taste Appearance Quantity In-pack variety Meal-to-meal variety

DAY 2 DAY 5 N X SD 3 A SD

36 2.6 1 .6 45 2.7 1 . 7 36 4.8 1 .3 45 5.4 1.5 34 4.7 1 .3 45 5.0 i .4 36 4.4 1 .8 4 5 4.4 2.0 36 4.9 ] .6 44 4.5 2.0 35 3.6 1 .7 45 3.0 1 .7

Table 8. Variety Satisfaction, Mean Ratings (4 point scale)

(l=Variety Now Enough, 4=Should Be Much More Variety)

DAY 2 N X SD N

DAY X SD

Breakfast Entree bars Candies and cakes Beverages and soups

35 2.4 1.1 35 2.3 1.1 35 2.2 1.2 3 5 2.5 1.1

46 2.4 1.0 46 2.4 1.1 46 2.4 1.8 4 5 2.5 1.1

•-* *.- «J..'_« '. * - ■„ f_Ä .VJ v* .»_. **> .V. .• vV -V - - k > »V -.» JV «\ » «„V A VN « % i.V JV -TV«. .V -V S fjSs*\\\'s> •V- _%', ?&M$£S&t

Table 9. Food Amount Satisfaction, Mean Ratings (7 point scale, l*Amount Much Too Small, 7«Amount Much Too Large)

N DAY 2

X

Breakfast Entree bars Candies and cakes Beverages and soups

SD

35 3.A 1.3 30 3.9 1.1 39 4.5 1.3 35 3.6 1.2

DAY 5 N X SD

44 3.1 1.2 4 7 3.8 1.1 46 4.9 1.5 46 3.7 1.4

Tables 10 through 12 address the quality and convenience of the

RCW. As the MRE was not as readily available as the MCI when the

questionnaire was developed in 1981, the men were asked to compare

the RCW to the MCI. The men felt that overall the RCW was "slightly

inconvenient" (Day 2) to "neither convenient nor inconvenient" (Day

5). The same trend appeared in the comparision of the RCW to the

MCI; however, when comparing quality, the RCW had slightly more

quality than the MCI. The rankings of proposed improvements were

consistent with the expression of inconvenience; easier preparation

was highest priority followed by increased variety and more

breakfast foods. Larger portions and improved taste were considered

the least important. Again, in submitted comments, complaints

concerning difficulty in preparation were the most frequent. Other

comments expressed the need for another main meal (specifically

another entree) and he presence of too many cakes and candies. It

should be noted that not all comments were negative: 17 percent on

Day 2 complimented the RCW, saying it was "good". Minor comments

expressed concerns over thirst and dehydration, need fcr more toilet

paper, variety in general, and complaints about packaging.

£äfi&Fj*J^js^'^^ A_VM_ JL. i «V. L*. . .V i i. A. I AV-T-

i fi v-^ \r«"."" g-* vw y*r v-w VTT vTr,-v -• -vw nr- ^n ^n •vt -w^n *.^ * v - u - rf - v - «i ■» « - -«

Table 10. Convenience and Quality, Mean Ratings

SD

1 . 7

DAY 2 DAY 5 N X SD N X

Overall convenience 35 5.4 1." 41 4.7 (7 point scale, l=Extremely Convenient) (7=Extrernely Inconvenient)

Convenience - AR vs. MCI 35 5.2 l.j 41 4.5 1,7 (7 point scale, l»Much More, 7*Much Less)

Quality - AR vs. MCI 35 3.3 1.9 41 3.4 1.6 (7 point scale, l«Much Better,7=Much Worse)

Table 11. Proposed Ration Improvement Rankings (l=Most Desired Improvement, 5sFifth Desired Improvement)

Improved taste Increased variety Easier preparation More breakfast foods Larger portions

DAY 2 DAY 5 N X SD N X SD

30 3.8 1 . 1 38 4.1 1 .2 32 3.0 1 . 1 42 3.0 1 . 1 3 5 1 .2 0.6 40 1 .5 1 .0 31 3.2 1 .0 4 1 2.9 1 . 1 31 3.6 1 .8 3 7 3.0 1 .2

Table 12. Ration Comments Summary

DAY 2 N %

DAY 5

Too many cakes and candies Need another main meal Takes too much water Lack of time and/or water Creates thirst Dangerous due to dehydration Good Needs more variety Needs more toilet paper Cut fingers on packaging

4 14 8 19 6 21 1 1 29 7 24 7 17 6 21 7 1 7 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 4 5 1 7 3 5 1 3 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2

:- >„ ". m. % '■ > f»' 'S ** * '• "• '* a- *i '» ^ "^ " » % » "1*Sr*w •*. « ,« ► »V. . . A «V »\ A

^:^ A; V V V V" ~-1 V"4V V,

LljJ,Jk/rf-jVi.*^/V_ .'

T»T^¥»¥»VV» w^ir"iT" B»\nvi i™»'.-«' ^-^*'.^.\-wi-v- "V' V \ "»" "V^ »," V\i »."! w.^. ^

According to the data shown in Tables 13-15, water availability

was low, or perhaps water discipline was lacking. Although the

means show that fairly often there was sufficient water to

rehydrate, 66 percent (Day 2) and 52 percent (Day 5) of the men

responded with "sometimes" or "almost never". The same was true in

their ability tc satisfy their thirst--57 percent and 55 percent

responded "sometimes" or "almost never". This was consistent with

the responses to amount of water used per day--3 canteens (2.8

liters) and 6 canteen cups (2.9 liters). On Day 2, 56 percent used

between 4 and 6 canteen cups (1.9-2.9 liters). When compared to the

3.0-3.5 liters recommended for cold weather intake5, the amount is

slightly insufficient. A large percent of the men, 46 percent on

Day 2 and 36 percent on Day 5, never melted snow/ice for water. The

majority used canteen cups rather than larger vessels. This could

be another indication of a lack of organized Wmer procurement.

Subsequent interviews with NWTC personnel indicated this particular

exercise suffered a command structure breakdown, which resulted in a

lack of test control and which may have affected water discipline.

Table 13. Water Availability, Mean Ratings

DAY 2 N X SD

DAY 5 N X SD

Sufficient water to rehydrate 35 4.5 1.4 (7 point scale, 1=Always, 7-Never)

Ability to satisfy thirst 35 4.8 1.5 (7 point scale, l=Always, 7sNever)

Difficulty in obtaining water 35 5.0 1.3 (7 point scale, 1 = V e r y Easy, 7=Very Hard)

Number of canteens used/day 39 3.3 1.3

Number of canteen cups used/day 36 6.5 2.7

44 4.5 1.3

44 4.6 1.3

45 5.0 1.3

42 3.0 1.3

44 5.7 2.4

iK^££>&S^^

s-vv* "y* <%■ \*TJ\- r % '_-*■ \-,- • > i T^-^-T-V^ v v1 v -, -».- i «T* TT",>' "■ FTT—■»■■ w yrrm nrrw^n

Table 14. Frequency of Melting Snow (7 point scale, 2=1 to 4 times/test period, 3-0nce A Day)

Number of times melted snow or ice

DAY 2 N X SD

35 2.3 1.6

DAY 5 N X SD

41 2.0 1.0

Table 15. Type cf Snow Melting Containers (%)

Canteen cup La rger ve sse• Didn't melt

DAY 2 (N-31)

55 6

39

DAY 5 (N*40)

58 9

33

5£dy_Flu^d_Status

Data gathered from the Body Fluid Questionnaire indicated the

presence of dehydration (Table 16). Urine characterization did not

generally indicate any significant presence of dehydration, although

a small number of blatant cases were identified. The urine was

characterized as being "light" to "dark yellow", the frequency of

urination was "slightly more" to "no different", and the amount of

urine was "neither more or less" to "slightly more". However,

indication of dehydration did appear in the last three responses.

Dryness in the mouth was "slight" to "somewhat dry", skin was

"slightly" loose or limp, md thirst was "somewhat" present

throughout the test period. As the data were collected by the

individual test subject, the responses may tend to be inaccurate due

to a lack of standard comparisons.

kA

1 0

■^:>>>:^>^*^*'>:---:/^^;:o-.v;v>v^'v%v-:--- -. - _-+ n-

.>.*>.."-•*-> :"> V V "« . -* i>._ ." -* '*- •'• ""- -"% "*. "IM ""- "*N "'.

■TT"-V" V —r-

Table 16. Responses to Body Fluid Questionaire 29 Questionnaires Returned

DAY i DAY 2 DAV 3 DAY 4 X SD X SD X SD X SD

DAY 5 X SD

Darkness of urine 4.Ü 1.5 3.3 1.4 3.4 1.6 3.3 1.5 3.5 1.4 (7 point scale) ( l*Extremely Light, 7«Extremely Dark)

Color of urine 1.9 0.8 1.7 Ü.8 1.6 0.8 1.5 0.7 1.5 0.7 (4 point scale) (1-Light Yellow, 4=Brown)

Urination frequency 4.2 1.0 3.9 1.4 3.9 1.3 3.4 1.2 3.9 1.4 (7 point scale) (l«Extremely More, 7*Extremely Less)

Amount of urine 4.3 0.9 4.0 0.9 3.9 0.9 3.6 1.3 3.8 1.2 (7 point scale) ( 1«Extremely More» 7ÄExtremeiy Less)

Dryness in mouth 2.7 1.5 3.0 1.6 3.1 1.5 3.0 1.4 3.3 1.4 (6 point scale) (l«Not At Al"1, 6*Extremely)

Skin loose or limp 1.7 1.2 2.0 1.3 2.2 1.4 2.1 1.4 2.2 1.4 (6 point scale) (l=Not At All, 6=Extremely)

Thirst 3.7 1.6 3.5 1.3 3.5 1.6 3.3 1.5 3.5 1.5 (6 point scale) (l=Not At All, 6-Extremeiy)

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data of this field test the following can be

c oneluded:

1. The RCW components were generally acceptable, with the exception of the Apricot Truit Soup and the Chocolate Bar with Toffee.

2. Despite the low average caloric intake (2710-2939) attributed to the lack of time and water, RCW test subjects had no significant weight gain/loss as compared to the control group which consumed B Rations and MRE's.

1 i

* <* "/ V V .- .« .« V

biOviÜ*. :::tö::>:v:&^^

ryr^-w-g-w^i» i.'iytvip *W V^ ^.'"i * T v ^ < «rq TVT7 T-7 »-.• ,-. v- ,- -,- , --, •

3. In general, the men were slightly dissatisfied with ease of preparation, meal-to-meal variety, and portion sizes.

4. Although the RCW tanked higher in quality than the MCI, it was ranked as slightly inconvenient due to difficulty in preparation, lack of preparation and eating time, and low water availability.

5. Water availability and discipline were lacking, resulting in lack of water for rehydration and insufficient water intake (an average 2.8 liters where 3.0-3.5 liters are recommended).

6. Dehydration was present as indicated by the results of the Wyant and Caron Body Fluid Status Questionnaire.

ADDENDUM

The following adjustments /improvements to the RCW have been made since this field test:

1 .

2.

3.

4.

5 .

6 .

The Orange Nut Cake and Apricot Fruit Soup have been eliminated from the menus due to low acceptability. The caramels have also been eliminated due to difficulty in opening the packages in cold env ironments.

The Chocolate Bar with Toffee is presently under study to investigate the use of encapsulated vitamins with the goal of improving flavor and shelf stability.

Increased effort is being take^ to fully brief and educate officers concerning the importance of water discipline in arctic environments.

Entrees are now made using preconcentration methods which will facilitate rehydration. An added benefit will be reduced production costs.

Variety has been increased by providing Strawberry & Cream Oatmeal, Blueberry Bars, Chocolate Covered Cookies, and Apple Cider.

Portion sizes have been increased for the instant oatmeal.

7. The Granola Bar has been reformulated in order to improve flavor and acceptability.

1 2

£&^^

*v- V V V T.^ -. ■%« ^J-I ifijTr ■ -» -v

REFERENCES

Wyant, K. W., and Caron, P. L., The_Emer^enc^As sauj:t_Fo od

5Iii£^-£ilä_-^£££lii!i£BI_£l_S£££I~5t^£i£iiIi£, U»S»ANR&I)L Report TR-83/002, December 1981.

"Jacey, M. J., Heyder, E., and Tappan, D. V., Menu_Item_ £l£l£I£££££_£i_£!l£_^£lilL£~2£IEä_^L££t£_5§.lt£Il_iZ.I£i££ilE£il-.~ ^£££l£l^-ei_^£HlZ-». NavSubMedRsch Lab Memorandum Report No. 8 1-2, 22 December 1981.

Jacey, M. J., Wojtowicz, J. J,, Tappan, D. V., Heyder, E., and Gray, P. H., Acce£tance^of_Menu_Items_in^the^Low-SaU S^_ Marine_Cor£s_Arc£ic_Ration_^Pro£ot^£e)^± NavSubMedRschLab Report No. 1017, 16 February 1984.

Hlrsh, E., Acce£t:abj:i^^t^_and_Consum£t1ion_of_Arct:i^ Draft Technical Report , U.S.ANRD&EC 1984.

Tappan, D. V., Jacey, M. J., and Heyder, E., F^ui.d *££Hi££!Ii££££_iH_Miii:££!£~]L££££E££l-H^ ££^S££eiXin£-^I££i£Z^££££il_5i£i£££_£££i£iHi£i_!ii^!l_ä£i£_Ii£Z£i£» NavSubMedRsch Lab, Report 968, February 1982.

n

».."J- •_». '_* .*>.' ,v,-:^:-\-:.;-v*

* V»-**1« ^fW^nTTTl

*• ,*j

'."„'S

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Meiselman, H. L,, Symington» L.

L. . , emu in».,.», ... ~., j_-___ „5.n_c£^_P.!l^_si_0_j_0_S.i£<2li iLHä_

~£c £E£ü£££_l£ii££_-£l._-il i25225.££i_£ni£.rS.£Il£Ü./.^§.££H.l^_^2.£^._E.a£^e * Diet in"a Cold Weather Environment, USANR&DL Natick/TR-81/Ö22,

Wyant , K. W., Wilkinson, W. C. E., and Hunn, J. G., Pe r£ormanc e^_Ph^sj_o log^^ca^^ an d_

November 1980.

14

."JvVv" **\><kV- Lv0sA<","»..,VfJ 3L •_'.-_" • _. v'. '■: I' &&.£s: Av^'I'^iitv! : . -f "

. v - !,T TT-- w - ■«-' • v v"" y* v ■* i "• \

Ration, APPENDIX A Cold Weather Menus

15

1 *J» " _#■ ?j>. «> '*.

" A IW^MIII'

V"j

H

5

p o

o H

^ afl « w 4*

H 3

O 0)

• u O fl 2- 0-

0 en a

* v o

*- * at 0 > w - c

1 .-i —

S

o w

3

U. w

O ~ X aC

c

at

0 ^ u

u o

u

OJ

X

APPENDIX A o WD

0> *0 O O P4 00 «O 00 vO sO £33 O 00

H N H H H HNNHH

o

m ON

eg

ON

o

P">

o^

<n

r-i

CO

m

*4 P* CM *M CN <N CM sO

sO flOO*0>00H 0> »J iniy /\N(NH

^j H ^ C> *T Oj t-4 «-*-

O oo «* oo P* o* a» CM

%o p« »n ^ H ff* o »A

n co O ff< oo rs (N in

wi ^ o> »n fs n «* in F* »-1 p-4 CM r-<

NMN H H

CO n ^ o op CM ^r -4 W\ «-«

vo \D or» C\J t~ I C> C^

«-•a* ao oo

O »H CM

00

in in

o 00

^^< 4^4(N »* m «N p» o> *n \fl in sC ^ n in in n N <a"

vO -a* oo o> cn *H a*

©A o> r-i *-i CN p* n

-a* o I I

oo o «* m »» vo co et *3» 0> vo P* >o o vO P* n PI c n m (N N fN

CM O O O r» N CO Oi ff»N

c m 0) -H a) «- ^H u u 03 T3

(0 fl 00 0 u u3 ca X 0 03 0» t-< 0> z

S3 at 01 -* s: 03 ao <u —4 ■P-4 «"8 u ra oo s

3 O. Ji ^ u e «8 hi «3 01 0> a u 0 ▼* 00 (U u .* u < 03 0 *J (0 > 0) Q. U en W CO u 3 -H 01 0> > 03 3 "H 22 CO 4J to CO 01 01 O £ c f-l 03 FH u ca 1-t 00 H w u OJ ffl r-t aj 01 <9 #H 01 01 -* 0) 0 <u Oti «0 X 0 B ao 03 IM *J « u s c s c U nj c 0 ^H a

1* «J tfl 4-t 03 iJ 00 o u 03 U g 3 3 £ 3 u 5 U 3 •H £ 03 u 0 OJ u 0 CJ o o o z U. U U o u M3 bu CO

O

m

rsi

en pi

o o

p*

p> «0 P» r* p» O ^*"

-. p» o ■«» O r*' ** *r\ *3 *r\ *\ *r\ r*> **

<0 aO >0 sO P4 *>0

O* ~~ f** -O 30 ,r** <n ^ ^ fcn >» "st

»y o *n o> oo ,<**^

•* 00 "O 0s fO f** k/-i — rsi — ^- rsi 'C >C £ £ ^ o

o> CM sO

• •••*• * O 0s — o O £ 55 o - o - o o 2

o ST

NO m « o> >* O <~\ mm P^ rsi O yn

>j *j ^ in tn sT >T >f >J -* ^ ^

u X SC 3

cc «

a 03 OJ E u 3 U O

a ao OJ c 01 ■<-•

U-l 3 UJ 01 O J= U u s

— rj ro >3> in ^5 ^fc *: He ^ 5»; 5t

3 C

IX

16

Dt i. » . « M 1 k ■- .«. i. r -T» . ,v v.V.'^/J"" ■■ ^vfö-;:? ■ %-VjV".TfcV, c:^

":.» "«-■ "W 'r'^TT'ir-

CVI

5

- f>0

an

O a*

• u O «9 z a*

o W

. 8

«M - 00

. •© O « t; *<

-a fi o *■"

f 00 CO w

O •■* ^ CN O 00

N CO * » 4 f S 8 0 CN 00 NO CO \» *A *i *A *A vs o

_ O CM lA 00

o>

^CMCN^CNCNOi*"*«^

r\©-*»AiAiAcN«N oo «n sr c *

►V

?

O

8 5= O

s 09

0

©

u et

a»

RJ

a:

M

c 00 on

on o cc a? VD o

*0*

VD OD IA CM C\J H

O 00

en © 00 *» NO r* Ch 0> • ••••• P4 IA CN «-4 O O

CN -• O* • • • »ft O ^

<n

(V* oo

SO r-

1 «et

cr m 00 © IA 00 r* CN »ft »» I-» , 1 NO 1 00 •

© fNI

m ON SO CM

m «■I

4ft o f<4 |

•X> NÖ CN v£> »A try m 00 *&

X so en »ft CN NO —»

-» NO CN

tft kft

*ft CM

tf 00 ^4 sD

c 4> ^ 00 o © «* en M ON *» O

1 1 ■«

0*

*•> aO O w u ] »A

c <-*

ON o C1 O sO rt 0>

1 ,"H

c

CM ro NO kft o o> IA ^ r-

Rj 00 3

"2 ° * £ so r* ■-> © .* CN lA CN

»ft m <N cr so r* <N CD CN CM r* en

© O

u . c V- a

CO S3

-0 pa

01 —4

4J Q. w jt c ! t V u o ^4

oo T. n 0 0)

a CD Ü ^4

> wM re ^ 0>

A3 0£

kO RJ ^H a «»4

VM E 0 c

0) s I ««

a» *j CO ^J 0 4J

a ffl U <z u 3 DO O © o QQ Z

EC

05

00

CO PH «H O* 0 £ u <0 0 M X C9 u ©

OB u It

Oi r« CT3 u

> cu

II OO c

o

»A © Ift

ift «c — m «J1

<r J

Oi CO (0

> ca

cu o u 0 ©

CO 0)

o 6 Oi

3 0

3

o o

■z

c o

D. 3 O

C75

CX

E

3 E N 3 © ©

0» e

i- O

Ö ©

IT

^,

'S'i-TV'v«ir-vv'"vr-^^l-»i-,..T

'1

•»'•

w

4 *-* w • 0 4-t

H 3

(A VW M

0 11 J« • u

3 m Z 0.

IM 0 U)

, S 0 « 2 i-4

«"■» «** • 00 0 > •w

• "0 S « c «-• » « •M

■ "3 *-*.

«4 T3 f 0 %^

V)

u 0» *-* *J 90 « v^ 3

a so u. w

O ^ * 00

O w w 0-

41

o

o CM

rH%0OOCMCDM3OOs0 QaQO«n~4tntrt^0wt

>o ao o ao CO (N W\ r*

«-«CMC^oHCMNCMOcMNfMrH»*

o *H en o 3 NO a» CD #H cc en <r o CO en O *» »n *n MI CM CM rH CM ** <-H »n r*

a«

rH O

OJ

rr) o -it c <r vr CO o vc vo ON cc ao U) C if\ OJ 00 Cvj h- U\ H m -» CO H r«« co

«"> O CO vf V3 r».

N 0> H ^ N H

O* 0* CM rH o> • • • • • CT> O *n O «-»

CN

en «ooincoNNm<9

<rc><Jpr<»en«3rwn© .-^ r-i ^* CM «~«

sO CM sO rH sO CM 4 n »n

^ a ON 0> CM

-* o> *»

f- en a

en

o

CM

CO CO sP ^ vO O Q> sO w* «^ en ■«»

O <* >o ?n m CM p* \C o >o »-» CM CM iO CM CM CM CM

o o CO 0>

Ul

-3 00 3

CO

tn . u iri a co CO ki

EG «a ^ (A

w OJ CU o ^H ■ H

a. a CO .* tn U 0

'j X « 0 UJ «w CO u

W *H (8 rH

*ö nj i-H CJ a» 0 rj

.* B c a M «J <9 u 0 a M 19

CU o a O

r-» 0)

c

■rH

(9 OS

CO

03

(0

CO

CU ao u gj >

QJ 00 A

CU

ii O *J

fQ 3 Z

eo

00

CU CU > u en CQ CU 03 rH CO

("H CU CU 0 e to f« u ej c 0 0 U CO J X Efl M 0 u u o CJ

CO cu

c o s 5

en en

CO -o

ri O

tntnN\TN«Otnir\iA

CM

CO

C) a

-o o o z

0>

a u 3 «H 0

3 a. 3 o

en

o> ao o>

CM O

CM

sO CM

>0

o

rH O I r-

en I -»T -* 1 sr

la t oo

m cu fc: u 3

U U

* 00 CU C 1) H"<

*M 3 ^-4 cu p) X u u

IP

^:ä^^^'^i^>Ä^^^^^

w* aO «J ** *j • O " t- *

• u O «I Z c-

•I

o > ^

w e «J

I

0 ***

Q 00 U. w

O <-* X 00

*- äO

u

O yO CM O» 00

§o •"! ■£ 5 9 H m in —1 «H

o oo * i0 00 *6 tf> oo c* g 2

^.HCMCM^WCMCM «O «N <* **

O vfi r> O en <* «» ir.

o MO o> ao ff» ift N N

00 CM

en MT o <f ^4 lO

-1 H O cu t- a,' vc' Z* H CM

CO on

2 3 V£, 00 O V£) VO u-v eg oo ca t~ C\J H ^ CM

r» o 00 ♦* oo

^ >o ^ m ^r

en oo o o> oo

»y CJ* *A c* ^ «M PH CM

o^ O

fM • d er» •

• en

CM • d f-4 • -4

en m wo

OO 00 • •

CM

o> o MO «tf 00 0> en <-4 ON *» o

o GO <T 0> O l>4 CM P-. Cl d vO

en

fM

er» »4 *o

0>

CM 00 sD -J .* a* »o n m </

IA «* fs MO

MO en <n CM o o *o r- CM 3D CM CM CM CM O

o o er» tr»

u

at

0) u rfl

ca

c

c a/

u

u

sO >C CM

-3*

a

< en u ■0

r- (0

E

q O

0 c to

u

CO

0 0 u

e

o

u

pa

0* 00 c

o

tn J-*

ea o u

* oo o

Z U- U

OJ E

60

oc kl

> GÜ

01 CO c n u O

oo

> CO

n o u o

e o e 3

O

3

bu

o o z

c QV

u

J: U

o. 3 0

tn

6 a E U 3 :J Ü

• oc ft» = ft) —

t*4 y 1*4 V O -3 a u

19

-* ^TTw in* W W^ '■ "■ - •, ^ , ^-., ,5^ g-^. ■

«■* oC «0 bl • 0 *J

H 3

tfl «*4 w 0 a

^t • u 0 A 2 c~

MM

0 X £ • &>

0 w z 1—•

/--s It* • 00 0 > >•-' ^-« E

• TS a> *J C *J

3 ~ *■«

E 3 *"* «*« 90

•o E

c CM CO

O o o fst CO mm »A

sC 00 m S3

>o CO

CO CM

O 00 CS ©

~4 CM CM —« CM CM N (O N N N

o vO m o o NO OA CO

m o> -T VM o »*-> CM TS 00 n ^ O ft

„y ^4 »n «-I

o H o -3- en •J VD CO

VD r- CO CO •■* O iTv CXI

H -^ H on en <T CM H

O VD VD 00 CM

^, «-» CM

SO m en

so

h

g o H

C/5

U o» *s 4J 00

3

<Q 00

O ^ X 00 CJ w

4W 00 0 w

c/i a»

u o eg cj

C\J

CM o

*H sO

CO «? r» or

^ o> o

o>

CM

dO

sO

C1

«j (y. in r*» r* ,-t ^ <N

en «^

CM «"■" o>

m o «-•

m O

co a»

CJ

CM «*»•

in in SO _t lO CM <*

^ <>n in m

m m m

in

00

<r O *c ■>* CO c» r-i r-4 (^ <T o •

co 0> 0^ en cv r«. r» O vÖ

PS r* ON CM <t

m

sO co NO

a« so ^ 4) r"> <n CM o o o «JO o vO ISi CNI CO a> O^

vn «N CM CM CM CI ^^

r».

in

m

ao

I 2

TO

rn SO

c o

CJ (0 0-

(0 CJ

01

to

fit u

n h

S3 <u

«0 CO

a» u

a:

-a

p.» r-i a a. <:

n M 03 03

0>

0 0 u

« CJ

4-» 3

X.

c CO

CO

CO

M

00

0)

00

u > 0) 00

QJ 00 (0

<y > 0)

c

u 0) E 4j

0 c E

4J

00 c 3

3S

03

00

cq r-> 0 Ü 0

CJ R CO

u 00 r «8

03

O U 0 u o O

CO o o 3

2 ft u O

01 H

C o E O

a. 3 O

'J o o 2

C OV M

CJ

CJ

fj. 3 O

w /; OC D i^

w 9 CO 01 E M 3 O CJ

* 00 01 c U) -~*

IM 3 «M 01 o X u CJ

20

^\£&*L\JLRKäJL\»^»JVIU^J^JIS^ .".**. Ä«. ..v« t ÄJK i..s 1,'i.iLi«

'-• V 'v"" V ' f "V TV' V^TJ" ~»« V*

— ao

z •* r- 3

(0

0 41

• Cv

Z ft.

0 33 6 . i,

0 *- 2 ~

w- • aO

. -a «

3 - —

E a <-»

— ao -5 E 0 w

V5

2

c: ao

O ^ x ao

C — *0 C NOO vOCD <0 <ACO C CO PM c to s »n «• »ft in o in flON^"»

•4 NNrt NNN^fl N NN^ H

C •-* n o C ^ o« OOH * n<* O öD r"> c ^ m «n *n CN CN «-* c* *» ** »n •-*

ao

m CO

t1^ O -=f C\ «tf \n CO O ON CO CD\£) O IACJ • IA H CO *» CM rH •"<

\£> VO WD r*»

<M WD

U n

X

WT

cs <n

GO

& ^ •* ^ •J CO • • 0 ^ CO c U o »■■«

cw

•ji CJ •»* r*. ao u CO c 0 iT\ «ST «-« a u

CO «» WD f» CT> 0> CW

«■* in IN »* 0> S »A

öD CineON N»n

•» Cf> WD f*» **» «3* *n

< N iT »A N (O N

*e <t r^. vc — vc fsi »n WP CN *ö «* P"» »n

WD «c cr» o^ r> ** CP»

a a* N « N N n

>o«5 C ^ vO n n 9« £ N <fi C ^ N n ^ fs* kA (N N N

~* D> CO GO

O PN ^ C

C ~ I I

WD m in *A CO

in n N<

<■ C

C W3 I I

PW O C O r* (N OJ O» ?"* NO **

!T ,-v w u w a

CO ao

a» co u • 3) OJ h b m U ^^

CO CO u tz

03 CO O

hi -0 (JQ X o to «4 OJ z &i a OJ 3C en 00 0J

i4ri «■» -M u ce ao c c en -* c « t- «9 u

3 re u 0 ** 03 cy u ^ £ <z 0 09 > cw a u

•4 52 u ■•■4 0J 4» > «0 3 •* ♦J IB *J OB 0 0) a O X *j _ a ^ 01 Ctf U to •-• m H cn u Ü <Z IT ■H a t—t eu OJ

u "o & e »O c= 0 E 00 « C i-t *

"5b e s E 3 u <g C 0 O <N a. «j M <M 0 *J oo 0 u 09 U E 3 3 a. tz u fl u 3 »< JZ, n) u 0 <x> * 3

CO O CO o as 2 u. u U o u -} U. CO

<N

•n c

o> o o

in <r

L. n re 3

CO

, e « a* E u 3 u O

• 00 0) c 0> —«

VM 3 W4 & O X u U

?1

' kV , Ay. ?4&»:;i'\ /,.\^V\'

TTT*K"~r'V <T"*W—V •If'Tr "V • »- » - w - y - v - Y— W- V- V" V W" V" V VT V

APPENDIX B Ration, Cold Weather Questionnaire

(Arctic Ration)

22

i^i^&i^

wm\i-m nwr ~«P "IF ' V^ "t ■» r> - ■« "T'W ^ WVY~W*

APPENDIX B

DAY TWO ARCTIC RATION QUESTIONNAIRE

U.S- Army Natick Research & Development Center Natick, Massachusetts 01760

Uuring the past several days you were fed a new ration. We are interested in yoor honest reaction» to these foods. Your responses to th*se questions are important to the future development of this ration and are strictly confi- dential .

1. How long have you been in the Aimed Forces?

2. What is your rank?

years, months

3. Please use the following scale lo indicate how much you like or Üslike each of the items in the Arctic Ration by marking the number that best expresses your opinion. If you never tried a particular item, please mark the "NEVER TRIED" category and leave the rating scale blank.

NEVER TRIED

DISLIKE EXTREMELY

1

DISLIKE VERY DISLIKE DISLIKE MUCH MODERATELY SLIGHTLY

NEITHER LIKE LIKE NOR LIKE LIKE VERY LIKE DISLIKE SLIGHTLY MODERATELY MUCH EXTREMELY

5 6 7 8 9

m.

n.

o.

P-

q-

r.

s.

t.

u.

V.

w.

Orange nutcake 0

Cocoa beverage 0

Beef and vegetable bars 0

Nut and raisin mix 0

Oatmeal with apple & cinnamon 0

Chicken stew bar 0

Orar.ge beverage bar 0

Raspberry fruit soup 0

Chicken and rice bar 0

Chocolate bar with toffee 0

Oatmeal cooKie bar 0

Pork and escalloped potato bar 0

Oatmeal with maple and brown sugar 0

Chicken noodle soup 0

Caramels 0

Spaghetti with meat sauce bars 0

Granola bars 0

Lemon tea 0

Fig oar 0

Strawberry Fruit Soup 0

Brownie 0

Chicken A La King bar 0

Aprirot Fruit Souo n

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6?

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 1

2 3 4 5 6 1

2 3 4 5 6/

2 3 4 5 6*

i •% /. * * ■»

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 o

8 *

6 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

8 9

B 9

8 9

8 Q

8 9

8 9

8 9

Wf.

23

(:^&«^ VN^'?V /•$*/ '-{•%/' -•"AAV*.

w ^m ^ W , TT^,

4. Please rate how much ycu like or dislike eating the Arctic Ration for

breakfast» lunch and dinner. Circle one number for each of the three me a 1s .

DISLIKE NEITHER LIKE VERY DISLIKE DISLIKE LIKE NOR LIKE LIKE VERY f*nru MODERATELY SOMEWHAT DISLIKE SOMEWHAT MODERATELY MUCH

a. For breakfast

b. For lunch

c. For dinner

3

3

3

4

U

5

5

5

6

6

6

5. Wh»'n did you eat? Circle one number.

1 - At designated meal times

2 - Throughout the day, as time permitted

3 - Both of the above

6. Overall, did you get enough to eat or were you often hungry? Circle one number.

1 - Got enough to eat

2 - Was often hungry

7. Please rate how satisfied or dissatisfied you were with each of the following aspects of tne Arctic Ration you ate. Circle one number for each aspect.

NEITHER VEKV MODERATELY SOMEWHAT SATISFIED NCR SOMEWHAT MODERATELY VERY

ri?SAT!?HED DISSATISFIED DISSATISFIED DISSATISFIED SATISFIED SATISFIED SATISFIED

1

a. How easy the ration is to *>r» pare 12 3

b. How the food tastes 12 3

c. How the food looks 12 3

d. How much food there is in one meal pack 12 3

e. How much variety there is within a meal pack 12 3

f. How much variety there is from meal pack to meal pack 12 3

5

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

2M

yy^^j*'*^ *tp '«* "v'j1 "*m *«* "j* *-** v *«* *-** "v *■ v */ %* *■* 's- *,* ,*' AV J".HAK>, "jtK*!*> \f V tj\ "J\v-hk'Jt *>. \;< J*V. *J» > J< J> ■"•.*•'

• .7 «"W - x. - «; - *:

k; We wculd like to know what you think of the amount of food provided by each part of the Arctic Ration. Vas there too little, too much or just about the right amount0 Please circle one number for each part of the ration.

AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT

MUCH MODERATELY SOMEWHAT JUST SOMEWHAT MODERATELY MUCH

TOO SMALL TOO SMALL TOO SMALL RIGHT TOO LARGE TOO LARGE TOO LARGE

a. Entree bars

b. Breakfast (oatmeal)

c. Candies and cakes

d. Beverages and soups

9. We would like to know how satisfied you were with the variety in each part of the Arctic Ration. Was there enough variety or should there be more? Please circle one number for each component of the ration.

1 2 3 4 b 6 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

VARIETY NOW ENOUGH

1

SHOULD BE SOMEWHAT MORE VARIETY

SHOULD BE MODERATELY MORE VARIETY

SHOULD BE MUCH MUCH VARIETY

a. Entree bars

b. Breakfast (oatmeal)

c. Candies and cakes

d. Beverages and soups

a. Were you able to get enough water to rehydrate the food items that you wanted to rehydrate? Please circle one number.

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

ALWAYS

1

ALMOST ALWAYS

OFTEN FAIRLY OFTEN

SOMETIMES ALMOST NEVER

NEVER

b. Were you able to get enough water to satisfy your thirst? Please circle one number.

ALWAYS

1

ALMOST ALWAYS

OFTEN FAIRLY OFTEN

SOMETIMES ALMOST NEVER

NEVER

C

VERY EASY

1

How difficult was it to obtain water? Please circle one number.

NEUTRAL MODERATELY EASY

SLIGHTLY EASY

SLIGHTLY HARD

MODERATELY HARD

VERY HARD

V.

*'M\ {'."'v"%""■*/-.'"*/ -X-!''".^ V>/%*>•*> "v^$"V0t'"»J

m »\ (F. ■*■;A v.'TV'-^-' W" ' •■ ' ." ' *» •■ ! «»".» -,* ■ , — - v . v.. v . «-V"-.'-» '/*'_'"■ '.'■'• V~WV^"T~ • n r^TTTTi'T^TTTw^r-

11. On the average, hew many CANTEENS (one canteen = 32 ounces or one quart) of water did you use each day for drinking and eating?

Number of canteens (Circle one): 1

On the average, how many canteen CUPS (one canteen cup ~ 16 ounces) of water did you use each day for dri'nking and eating0

Number of cups (Circle one): 1 8 10

13. How many times did you have to melt snow or ice in order to obtain water? Please circle one number.

il 12

NEVER

1

ONE TO ONCE TWICE THREE FOUR FIVE OR FOUR EACH EACH TIMES TIMES MORE TIMES TIMES DAY DAY EACH DAY EACH DAY EACH DAY

5

]A. ]f you melted snow or ice, did you melt it in a canteen cup or in a larger vessel? Please circle one number

CANTEEN CUP

1

LARGER VVoSEL

DID NOT MELT SNOW

15. Overall, how CONVENIENT was the Arctic Ration to use in the field? Please circle one number.

EXTREMELY MODERATELY SLIGHTLY CONVENIENT CONVENIENT CONVENIENT

l 2 3

NEUTRAL SLIGHTLY MODERATELY EXTREMELY INCONVENIENT INCONVENIENT INCONVENIENT

16. In comparison with the MCI (Meal, Combat Individual), if you have ever carried it into the field, how C0NVEN1FNT wis the Arctic Ration to use in the field? Please circle one number.

MUCH SOMEWHAT SLIGHTLY NEUTRAL SLIGHTLY SOMEWHAT MUCH MORE MORE MORE LESS LESS LESS

12 3 4 5 6

17. In comparison to the MCI (Meal, Combat Individual), if you have ever carried it into the field, how much better or worse was the QUALITY of the Arctic Ration? Please circle one number.

MUCH SOMEWHAT SLIGHTLY NEUTRAL SLIGHTLY SOMEWHAT MUCH BETTER BETTER BETTER WORSE WORSE WORSE

1 2 3 U 5 6 7

26

fttttäMRfift^

"TT- • -r "W "V ' V "W ~"J"~V ~

18. Below is a list of possible ways of improving the Arctic Ration. Please write the number "I" next to the improvement you think is MOST important, the number "2" next to the improvement you think is SECOND in importance, the number "3" next to the improvement you think is THIRD in importance, the number '%" next to what is FOURTH, and the number "5" next to what is FIFTH. Do not mark an item if you do not think it will improve the ARCTIC RATION.

Make the rations taste better

Increase the variety in the rations

Make the rations easier to prepare

include more breakfast foods in the ration

Make the portion sizes larger

19. Do you have any other comments on the Arctic Ration?

27

:<XM fe&Stf. -." M • .1 V <\ -/ *

f£W\iw-v : w «'■ ,~~<-^--ir < ,»■:■ -y "^---'v^^yv V-'V'"'.- TT» "5» . ..- . »-k-vi-vK«»' r v* v"ir" w"» W-T -

WJ

APPENDIX C Product Consumption Diary

28

«-y-v-v " V "V w_*>" " ". '>" " V ->' - 1

APPENDIX C

PRODUCT CONSUMPTION BUT ONE

Please circle the number that indicates how much of eech of the following items you ate today. If there ore 4 bars and you ate 3 you should circle 3/4. If there are 2 bars and you ate I 1/2 of them you should circle 3/4.

AMOUNT CONSUMED ENTREES OATMEAL (APPLE ANO CINNAMON) AIL

OATMEAL (MAPLE AND BROWN SUGAR) ALL

CHICKEN STEW BARS (4) ALL

BEEF AND VE6ETABLE BARS (4) ALL

PORK AND ESC POTATO BARS (4) ALL

CHICKEN ALA KING BARS (4) ALL

SPA6HETTI W/MEAT SAUCE BARS (4) ALL

CHICKEN AND RICE BARS (4) ALL

IIINES/SOBPS LEMON TEA (2) ALL

ORAN6E BEVERAGE BARS (2) ALL

CHICKEN SOUP ALL

FRUIT SOUP STRAWBERRY ALL

FRUIT SOUP RASPBERRY ALL

FRUIT SOUP APRICOT ALL

COCOA (2) ALL

SNICKS ORANGE NUT CAKE ALL

BROWNIE ALL

RAISINUT CRUNCH (2) ALL

GRANOLA BARS (2) ALL

OATMEAL COOTIE BARS (2) ALL

ENRICHEO SWEET CHOCOLATE (2) ALL

FIG BARS (2) ALL

CHEWIN6 BUM ALL

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

3/4

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

29

is^ .A r^i ,»._>. TJ. !"jt .\h

APPENDIX D Body Fluid Status Questionnaire

J 30

* _» *J| " J> * JK .">. .*„•

ft \tZ4

APPENDIX D

BODY FLUID SCALE DRY ONE

1. Ho« LI6HT or DARK is your tirtno tatfay? (circlo »no): EXTREMELY MOOERATELY SH6HTLY NEITHER SLI6HTLY MODERATELY EXTREMELY

LI6HT II6HT LI6HT LI6HT NOR DARK OARK DARK DARK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. Rat« U»t C010R of your urina as il has accorrod today, (circlo ono): LI6HT OARK YELLOW YELLOW ORANGE BROWN 12 3 4

3. Aro you urinating mora or lots OFTEN Ulan usuol? (circto ono) EXTREMELY MOOERATELY SLI6HTLY NEITHER SL16HTLY MOOERATUY EXTREMELY

MORE MORE MORE MORE NOR LESS LESS LESS LESS

1 2 3 4 S 6 7

4. Is tha AMOUNT you aro urinating mora or loss than isuol? (circlo ono): EXTREMELY MOOERATELY SLI6HTLY NEITHER SLI6HTLY MOOERATELY EXTREMELY

MORE MORE MORE MORE NOR LESS LESS LESS LESS

I 2 3 4 3 6 7

5 Dots your MOUTH fool DRY? NOT AT ALL SLI6HUY SOMEWHAT MOOERATELY QUITE A OIT EXTREMELY

12 3 4 3 6

6. Ooos your SKIN fool LOOSE or LIMP? NOT AT ALL SLI6HTLY SOMEWHAT MOOERATELY QUITE A BIT EXTREMELY

1 2 3 4 5 6

7. Aro you THIRSTY? NOT AT ALL SLI6HTLY SOMEWHAT OOERATELY QUITE A BIT EXTOMELY

12 3 4 3 6

n