NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

BRIEFING TO DDR&E - 16 JAN 65 

1. A meeting was held on 16 Jan 65 for the purpose of briefi 

Brown on the SSD, SP response to the direction contained in h Jan 

65 memo pertaining to new MOL objectives. The briefing presented was 

based on a presentation given 14 January to Dr. McMillan, Can Schriever 

and Gen Fergerson and on discussions conducted 14 and 15 January. Present 

for these discussions were Dr. Travis and Mr. Spoelhof. 

2. Present at this briefing were: 

Dr. Brown 

Dr. Fubini 

Dr. McMillan 

Gen Evans 

Gen Bleymaier 

Col Brady 

Dr. Leonard 

Dr, Donovan 

Col Battle 

Col Schultz 

Mr. Ross 

Maj Floyd 

Lt Col Knolle 

3. Introduction was presented by Can Evans. This consisted of an 

outline of the tasks as contained in the direction given to the Air Force 

in the form of the various memos and TWX's. During the course of this 

introduction the question of astronomical telescopes came up. Dr. McMillan 

indicated that their development may go to ARPA to prevent an AF-NASA 

conflict. Dr. Brown wondered about the similarity of theamalcal aspects 

of the astronomical telescope and the photo reconnaissance/ was introduced by Gen Evans to present the SP plan of action in response to the 

direction. 

4. My briefing consisted of seven charts. First I covered our plan for 

carrying out Task I and II. This plan is to direct EKC to study alternative approaches using large light weight optics; to consider a second 

Source for studying light weight optics; to review the results of any 

"White" MOL studies in this area; and to establish requirements for large 

antennae based on black ELINT activities. Preliminary payload characteristics are to be available by early February and the study completed by 

1 May for evaluation by 15 May 65. Next followed a description of the 

three general alternative approaches for the functional use of man with 

a photo payload. That is - (1) Man operated - fully assembled and checked 

out on the ground prior to launch; (2) Man aligned and operated - components checked on the ground, light weight optics cushioned for launch and 

aligned after reaching- orbit; (3) Man assembled, aligned and operated -

components checked on ground and system disassembled for launch. Optical 

system is assembled and aligned after reaching orbit. Next followed a 

detailed description of the present Dorian concept for a visual photographic payload together with weight summaries and parametric study results 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 SWiLl 

to show performance. The rendezvous concept was presented to show a 

means of using any of the three alternative approaches presented earlier. 

5. There were numerous questions during the presentation by both Doctors 

Brown and Fubini. Dr. Brown wanted to know why a large prepacked system 

(60" aperture with focal length) could not be put in the present 

integral launch concept and expanded on orbit. They both are obviously 

convinced that there is going to be a large weight saving and performance 

gain result from manned assembly and want to see the numbers come out 

that way. I indicated that this is the point we intend to study between 

now and 1 May; however, that at the moment it is not apparent that a large 

gain can be made with this approach. Dr. Pubini said that during the 

briefing he had tried to find technical fault with our story for the 

preassembled Dorian payload and that he could not. Because of this he 

seemed to admit that we could start approaching resolution values of 

interest without having to resort to on-orbit assembly. 

6. I was followed by Dr. Leonard who first described the MOL under the 

old ground rules and the rendezvous concept presented to PSAC last October. 

He then went into the concept to meet the new direction which consists 

essentially of using the original MOL vehicle with rendezvous for the 

optical or other large mission module. Such an approach would provide . 

maximum flexibility and growth potential. Tasks III and VI would be 

performed by the basic MOL vehicle and Tasks I and II would be accomplished 

by rendezvous with an appropriate mission module. 

7. Doctors Brown and Fubini both commented to Dr. Leonard on the rendezvous 

approach. Dr. Brown said that you have not looked at the single launch 

approach and Dr. Fubini said you have only looked at rendezvous. Dr. Brown 

stated that the data presented by Dr. Leonard forces you into considering 

Saturn 1B. Dr. McMillan suggested to Doctors Brown and Fubini for their 

consideration the possibility of packaging the largest possible system for 

an integral launch and have the man demonstrate his abilities to assemble 

and align this instrument. There was no decision on this suggestion. 

8. Col Brady followed Dr. Leonard and presented SSD's response to the 

tasks as outlined by Gen Evans. This was generally an outline of the. 

administrative tasks such as Work Statements, RFP's, funding and schedule 

information. He proposed 60 day study efforts for three contractors at 

$400,000 each for the MOL vehicle studies. Separate white studies on 

expandable structures and large optics were also presented. During Col 

Brady's discussion of the ground rules for the vehicle contractors, it 

came to light that both Doctors Brown and.PUbini wanted the contractors 

to consider both the T-IIIC and Saturn approaches although this was 

contrary to the direction received by the Air Force. Dr. Fubini said that 

a contractor would not be chosen on his response to an RFP based only on 

T-IIIC. Doctors Brown and Fubini agreed, at Dr. McMillan's request, to a 

2 
AMP 

YRON F. KNOLLE, AR 

Lt Colonel, USAF 

Dep Director, 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 frr41 11 !!4"r7r, 

change in the proposed work statement which added the Saturn 18 for 

consideration with the T-IIIC. It was pointed out that the supporting 

documentation would still be the old set and that there would be a 

problem of making the necessary Saturn information available during the 

bid phase. It was agreed to get as much as possible. The total funding 

at this time was 21.711 with the larger costs being 6.M for Martin (T-IIIC) 

and 8.M for McDonnell (Gemini B). It was agreed that the revised work 

statements would be in Tuesday, 19 January and, I suppose, a decision as 

to go-ahead would be forthcoming at that time. 

9. This concluded the general briefing. General Bleyaaier remained for 

an executive session to discuss contractor selection. 

a. Consider a contract with ITEK in addition to Perkin6lmer for the 

study of thin light weight mirrors. 

b. He would like to get Jim Baker to look at this problem but he is 

doubtful that he would take on the task. We should consider the problem 

of getting Grey of Aerospace cleared so he could work on the problem. 

c. He feels that there may be a case for on-orbit assembly of very 

long focal length systems that would exceed booster limitations. In any 

event he wants us to study the problem with all possible imagination 

during the next several months. 

us 

d. He wants/to re-evaluate the Kolleman proposal for on-orbit 

assembly of optical systems. 

11. In summary, it VAR Annarent that the PSAC position, wherein the increase 

in performance from which we showed in October was not sufficient 

to warrant a manned system has now pushed the search for a breakthrough to 

obtain resolutions by using manned 

assembly operations. The thinking seems to be that only resolution of 

this quality will justify a manned system. 

12. As an additional note, a special briefing by Mr. Spoelhof was 

arranged for Can Evans to bring him up to speed on the finer details of 

the program. Can Evans seemed very impressed with the improvements that 

are provided by the man in addition to resolution. He felt that a closer 

look should be taken at these gains in an effort to come up with some 

effectiveness factor for manned vs unmanned operation. 

10. I saw Dr. McMillan after the executive session and he indicated the 

following things to be done: 

3