1.

111712 56-273

INTERVALS; NC) Au I OMATICALLY

VSs docup...sat ceatait;s ialarsafiat siketkig dig National aigAsa of the UnitaJ Sawn wthia .0+a ssean;ai et era Espiaign: Law. Ma IC. Szcica. 7S3 awl 714. Its Waammissias

w ra•;:alisa of it LIMN& in any ocaaaw

an IMftlisOriZgd FOSON 4 paptilCd by ).w.

Reference is made to:

Our letter, same st.lect LZ a.107e, dated 30 Octdbcr

1956 (w2 56-208) (r.2)/225:;).

Your letter, 7 December 1556: f:. /=:56.

In reference la, no celled ;;or att:-.1ticq to an err= r..n

calculation containod an cam 5 of 155 states ':if *Z.;

lancet quoted va1u2 of 2.4 100 par:ielcc/cm4hr is assummd :Len

about 130 of these pertLcleo till inplare upon the satellite derinc

the exposure timo of 0.01 seconds".

In reference lb, you cite varipm data to support the nee

of quoted value (2.4 x 100 particles/cmVyr) of meteoric flux. This

is no:: germane to the question raised in reference la.

h. A simple trial calculation (inclocure 1) indicates an error

in concluding that the flux used results in 11130 impacts dIrrinz the,

0.01 seconds of exposure tire". Using the flux quoted in paragraphs

2 and 3 above, from ESD 1958) the inclosuro calcul on gives impacts of the order of 10' impacts per second or impacts during

0.01 seconds.

5. If the flux figure of 2 x 10-2 perticlen/cm2/sec, quoted

in paragraph 2, reference lb, is used thgn, since the satellite has

an exterpal area of approximabez 6 x 102 =4, en impact rate of

1.2 x 104 particles/satellite/second or 120 particles/natellite/0.01

see would result, which agrees with the 130 particles per 0.01 second

figure given in ESD 1958. The value of flux of 2 x 10-2 particles/

DWIVGRADED AT 12 yEAR

RECLASSIFIED. DOD 0412 5200.1b

•

T)

-CONFIDENT&

I

DEC 2 8 1956

ND=

SUBJSCT: (U) Plod Piper Pro: Toss Report for August,'ESD 1953

dated 1 September 1956

TO: Lockheed Air-saft Corporation

.I-fissile System Division

ATTN: W. R. H. Salter, Jr.

Post Office Box 504

Sunnyvale, California

1
1 Incl

Tric.1

1 pg, 1 cy (5)

(W:. 5L-27))

.71/42:=1 C. E. ODER

Lt Calccel, USAF

Assictent for WS 117L

Technic :2 Operations

L.1 V

cm2/eco attributed 3erg and i.:oredith in paragraph 2 of reference

lb would be larger than the :ED, 1953 value of 2.4 x 10 0 particloc/

cmgyear by a factor of over 100 . Since this office does not yet

have access to the results attributed to Berg and Isredith, up cannot

assess their applicability:

Since, as is stated in !4) 1953, an impact rate of 133

particles per 0.01 zeconde could conceivably impart an ancular oscillation to the camera in the neighborhood of the tolerance value of

0.0'254 wern iivdiaue, it is essential thet the beat available ficiures

of meteoric flux be accurately evaluated end theii effect calc•leted

in order that the =Aare and other cm:generate be idequatelydosf.zned.

This initial design canaot await the action indicated in pararrara 3

of reference lb, although the instrumentation of early satellites

should provide data for redesign, should the latter be necessary:

Please advise this office of the design data to be employed

in this regard.

Copy furnished:

I.FCRC, CRZVA:820:isC8 1.2.. Radnor

7114 demotes gessisteiestosesstee Meeting tge

Sietow.1 Wow et the Weed Vass *idols

tat Itexele t et ise.Asaarl. U. Tea a,

U.S.C.. reclea 7;3 and 751. Its stseseweien

'its Iewl*ian el its cesium in env man/

le entst:setised poison jy tregtoiteibv few.

F C E Odor

UDTR 56473

•
s! •

•s3 •.?"' ers

Awl 1

Trial Calculation 

Assume a cylindrical satellite vehicle 7 feet in diameter

Why 30 feet lone (1). (A conerous ap)roxination).

Area of sai4cllite cylinler orrrdl

la ir (7 a 12 x 2 54) (30 x 12 x 2.54) cm2

6.15 x 105 c'

One year n 365 x 24 x 60 x 60 seconds • 3.16 x 107 sac

3. 2.4 x 100 particles cnr 2 (VM1958'valuo)

u 2.4 x 6.15 x 1^5 narticle•satellite•seel

3./0 x

u 4.7 x 10-2 partiales•satellite'l.seel

or of tho of of 104: particles impacting on the satellite

during an exposure of 0.01 sco.

.1b

This dance= ces/nhts interaction eficetive the

1:ci.:04A Odense et the Weld &Lees Willie

M. t srnia, c9 the Em eannra Leo, Tab U.

793 .d U4. tis Isvesahcian

to Inv res.:lee* a iN censers in sew name,

Is :A unia..h4.:iz:4 yams b Prelithited *Jaw,

.0 •

UTIL 5L-273. •

• • • 1...1 7
TR

SOJCCT: (U) ARS Progress Report

DEC 2 8 1958

TO Commander

Air Force Cambridge Research Center

ATTN: CRUA:820:4C, mr. Radner

CaMbridge, M•ssachusetts

Reference is made to your letter, same subject, 26 September

1956.

Inclosed is our amebas:co of correspondence with Hissil.

System Division of the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation on this subject

which indicates action to acts.

We ap?reciate your ectching the error in question as it

could have aerie= consequences if loft unchallenzed.

Your comments on ti:e cp;aicability of tho date attributed

to Berc and Meredith, Iklms1 Research Laboratory, aro requested.

S. Please note that the calculations used by Missile System

Division of the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation in their report VED

1956 uero made by Dr. George Taylor.

FOR TIC 00:=ANDER: '

. 3 Inci

• 1-3.tr Sr 1:CITt to TIM

30 Oct 56, 1 pg, 1 ey

(MIR 56-203) (s)

2-? ;,r fr LW) 7 Dec 56

1 T..4 1 cY

56-05119) (S)

3-ltr fr larat to USD

2 Av,, 1 . cy

eZTR 56-273) (S),

cziGNED

FRmac C. E. WER

Lt Colonel, USAF

Assistant for W3 117L

Technical Operations

POVINGRADED

3

TER 12 Y

YEAR INTERVAUk

DECLASSIF 

AT

IED AFEAA.

COD DIR 5200.10

CIO

larR

r C Odor

!3TR 56-274