tho 

•••■■11•••••• 

sclodiaso dootil as prop000d mom 

sod as bis amps*. as de roast o liosamosisasmos 

Advisory Ossollase. Vssirs 14101Pered 

yaw my Ulm*mid io oasis* yes Ida 

wad for yoosibla illasossiOas *fish 

and tho fissaiestass Salaam adoirst• 

so 

1111101.1•MMOIMIIIM 

C h? 

vIA EfiEMAN ee r EXCLUDED FROM AUTO1ATIC (

YSTEMvetttY OES NOT AR DOD DIR.. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 /-ns -6 - 

17" 

9RJAN 

5 

Mit 811:1110x1 

41•011•11•111■1•111011, 

Paridlied 101 hew. 

Nom for MOUS fr s *NNW Orblitios 

Lebearsteta. dal 4 .1rno aid 

A dovaispotot paostoo of *is latocest coo mom& aad 

fix* assoodoisle. The firob 1 mold Selo 

plow Wm oolsositor oad the Us* eady la 1,70. Utal 

soot for the dovolosolot prosors is saw art' od at $1163 

'be rootootodod payload vadat. for *vats laistairot was 

tho basia swim , ardslo eastai move* asposla 

**tab boo itlystod to provl000 fano ototioso la pooposod 

brow the *tort to loonob tato palm (*Mt* tow tit**wise tits . 

irsie MC boo'. CotbtOol oporitette. of 30 days° dossitios 

prog000di amompliati dama midi* isocomitin the isioth 

of tho solid boostors oo the Ulan MC et swot assosossi VIA0 

mom providoo -gag c104* iJ 

CCP

Falter---

4_0f ir 

Control No. 'Y 3g) 4,65 
A 

... ... 6 g • 

(7,-,77trc-1 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

'7013-9EGlig- DORIAN 

Many ampheele le the *boobs* mom will be plated 

at the develoyiket, filkasea01**166., tot0' los of 6 mad feel 

recomeidmilita. 407“0101 pamatatas ossoladlees sit 

ea the owed. ft bottom this We oilier of rosolattaa 

Ittll be atatteed weft am optimi spite* sit allatively eseeoreot 

tie. *sips hiallas ea eipattsvare of te; as a erste* La 

so be the iredeory payload Ow the early tlights. P***1161 drosispo 

mete still be eedertabee Amos a IMO 4400111.11,11000 ansyrapabo 

loath.. to the poot4b0,it1 of • est of seta SpiOrtoroo 

capable of a rose/atlas of aka* ea the seemed, 

ortlas gad 014140411 seabatisor that will be developed 

applleiblo towomafted 'roam* We shell ewer ea 

develePosat et those eleseatetstab all W. Ulbeiwarto 

are exacta to the portosseeto at loop 40.1111abe4 eyetema• 

ole& the plaselestodthe at this prevail, toestamataa 

has hose stow to very lank optical sotares tohtioh ebbe be 

earoblo reeoletisme at peed Like as 

thI smogs took iikyossoo roots* wow tool 4611 optical 

gott amt nottooliii tow tsebsigool tot mootios aid adjoo** 

mot as watt* They osald as be osoomoditoid to a 'Wood 

led famigratly withSootti aid *sowmoo so 

with soma sovisoot solt406, to vOilaf toottoor iPupset to lade 

witted osioarb000to teassel date develepeeth as peat of the . 

stemobet IL program. 

her staidlee et reeemealsoaelas other dela phetetopkte, 

ham me* pweseseeed to the point that se have apiellie easeors 

or Mem* to reemommid• V, *moot dorlos ^too IS' to 

iota *sotomoodotioio. At the soraseat thus • it itosoirks that a 

elesead Cal= sarstats 

t 1* asá sL1L1$iss is 

DORIAN 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels de&-ifiler 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN 4 e . )14 (/-/7 

CONTROL SYSTEM ?N12,4 

roPiEGREL 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

'Tor~rac-GREL__ OURIAN 

Ms Amebas*** On sm of Om &Setts of oar 

program es vs balm dovoloped *Ms is *or ***14140 to *Ma path& 

Tab Rsa portioalarsseelposs what we have 

apaimot the speetfis objeottres ottitited bp. 

hp titlestb* mobs away 

A The Imattal Wier, *Ws hosolatlas Shotoproks 

• Disamed tIonetteas sad Stastaste* 

• Optimal Spam 

* asst 

▪ NO sad hirbeottlaa abut Taryasiosi altpresheratt 

• ramparts** of Apolloidantat thattipsidttoos 

• bra d YU** FralgrOs 0101141010 

II AM*** Itoomittes Am 4 kawasey Odd ands 

• bottaos as* oar proposed based so the davolaps, 

mt. dasasstratts04 *ad 1.00 of a Mood ktph malattam 

phatosire$44* isistsa*totil mod tho-tost of atisiMmos 

*Vati***id waist its *ost. fie balm *bat thars is * solid 

satiaikei amid for isammi0i**4=1)**0111007 at rosalatits* of 

A* • • of ow otoottosstetob hiso 

SaLledled esaparativo emastaattoa s1 aommal sod moomed *room* 

sag *re soma rtaaid that dovoisamt of a amid sea tooth 

rsaoluttaa ismol of maw sad htsbor 

probablitti of iststal $1001*** Ma a davelspoomt based oa dis 

aosmed osaltaaratiou At this tont oil rosolottomo with sur 

prom* easa ,asaladussaasad dolostas OM as 

predoative For dollar as sa assmed spotmas *Mb* ram 

Handle Via TAIEl\TT-KEYHOLE 

HAND 

Ia -

• 

1)17 ' 

C: 

LE VIA L 

c

g 

Central No.iki 3tC1 6 •6S 

CONTROL SY:377^ i 

d I 

3p'

OOAN 
todada 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

70P-SEGREL_ aaRiAN 

ths seater davelpass* tha 

aaseassmi wo. Vs 4111111 yoriasitly emorkesd abet to 4. nub 

batter dm imoidatifie with 111111111001401 sir**alle Vila 

IPS flitrabikr 4114441.01O• 411110,41 sb. 1001011104 ~OS as 

proposit to km as asseattak nap taiterdsbs ilattgasteat .4 a 

.dtilter for resetatis*La do taw 

mama air MONISiOdo 

011411141seet asyariaasstal *Owl imam* a 

*ad va slam *ma doesateratttea at a amid *yahoo 

Was 

la mos ea 

eaaratLi atalietiet lit 

mateads Isledia arttriael atetribittaa. 

MI to pbetagrayttle reatmetimmet tad tit abs oyesitt. ditikietam 

Le as aastaaartas satee. bausees awanad wad atimated tam a 

torso was anal very Id* taaigattaa, th*td, tba psia4 *mktg.*? 

obi** itastood rasebatistai 

tre WO** 

seaktaig 

that the walls aimarbate viii peratt SISOSSISU pbetwitipiw 

of do dolatrat 41.411110, Va ore emitilkmat at OM* IbilOINOSala 

Mak alita as abs totted tokaitty of the oliategkati 

as astraomm &vs abs rassd, arra 

PloStalt cooketad by do NO* WA tat saw hp Italiete 

twarbeiesee at the atmaybara viii peatit satellit. 

tatailatts*nt el the OM* 1101111 

plKtioppe SOIL Of abs *Am* The MO ta torteartaa istrabar isatertheeto 

04101ftit 

*a abSpatead, to oaltabliab batter atatiatica *a do 

the statiogossw at retelettems 

A statarig mead OM bi IT400/0140111 0.00.41141.0*. ablitterb 

Willphr is implied by the b4i5*n7 at 6110v40.1111140 to our riNsommalsomaso 

Maw* bog* littbem *id OpSell bad. Nossoor. 4.1110111 abs 

tataets pie of wad that bias std them impntiosses, 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels 

HANDLE VIA VIA BYEIVIAN q C 144 / 

CONTROL SYSTEM #201644.4 

DORIAN 

to 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

'11119-SEGRE-1:-. 

Closely tatott to •bodi of tboos spoil 

potootial, oat t000lotioo pbotogtoObl Oft 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels Only 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN Y C 6 /44 / N r 

CONTROL SYSTEM-dr/L-1f 

DIANN 

DORIAN 

g 

s,9 

Bye 3(01 - 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DORIAN 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels-Q.14- 

HANDLE VIA Tf.;i 4 aefili //yr:. 

r!rmtrol No . r- 36‘)C • CS 

CONTROL 5YST:I7M 41464:.• 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TOP SECRET DORIAN 

*Well displayed aerial reconealossion phategrephy 

testier* as tilevernesses slat* or to at our *Moos 

I hew bay notensively we have saiarneed sea 

pies to private talke to comeinee arir erittes 

deltalitOrt* t* all eases* however* tbe 

jaw au jogs witbeet it, the pWa ares 

purpost*4 

Mabee. no smeneeptinsoble rule sat be gesserally 

spooking**be resolorAem *bleb a photo interpretar weed* to find 

and itentify AO Abdo* the first time be smosattersitina 

jointure is finer*by are tattoo of oeveral s** that the acesolatiam 

he needs to find mod Leresify thin rides* in a pfahare whom be 

is alresily familiar with *tailor pieisanse it. 

the resolottam that is respired to aske a pietism et 

object eretillae to ore sot intimately leather *la i* et with 

pievores of it asy be soventi times timer dm the resoloatiso 

eeeded by as expert la asking a ranting idostilinatiest 

The diatessials than bale**and those in lb* A. deal with 

elements of technical idistailigaree tOost rewire high rem 

The reselatiass *****411 or. seeesseily these dot posit doe 

taborivator to ideatity a specific **tare or fora*ead to War 

farettose or operarrisms4 eiwarostwristios. Those are thoreilewo 

the poorest reseintieas at as tareperteassol view *** 

be asplesed to plow 44,4willoteeb the i*Watifiestisa sad desalt. 

Setter 1,4010111141081 V10444 alentribene forther to arotthility, 

Tab A disease** ia OM &tail what sam be leareed 

reepostively*at ineseintions of and 36" tow "bete. 

graphs el atesitle silos*Wattle* owned*sad a 'jar iestallatiess, 

The 400440111441 MR0 program of stain hes which the saterial In 

Tab A is drawn*includes weal targets Ohl.*eabasrisos*sad 

yeriki) air fields*and air deployments to various stater* of 

alert*grewed army targets (iniluding field disp3orstata nit 

inert.*** test sites net proving greunds. Prokostiam of its hula 

photograph* is d' .fit*mad seelyeis &e ms BU ly am the time 

of people Arnett omega* in the prepareetan et intelligesore 

at t• Whet in preseatod bore ant in the lab mast be regarted 

as a sampliag fralta#,,!_Ltway ash is net yet eeeplete• 

nai Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

HANDLE VIA nthAlki e) 111 / /Y r 

CONTROL SYSTEM delter 

D6RIAN C'65 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

JiaRIAN 

arse* that photosrapha 

tosoletioa, will allow 

tot., their depth sasmibility. 

photosraphs aseassary toss this 

So this aosuottias dkat sash Soviet taismorime 

sloe* oat et soars. 

For a quit* dittateas els. 

$ Largo trockles aeteemai. Cisastiess 

military suss ess ars is At oast 

min ► or As is sett's? If active, to 

DORIAN 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels 

HANDLE VIA YEMAN 

com-not_ SYSTEM errt-r- 

-16P-SEGRET---- r!rrtrcl e 131.g-34 Ca._C P 
9 

DORAN i5Le 3tC )17 4 

Handle Via TALENT-5.EYHOLE 

Charm 

MANDLE V A BYEMAN °I/ Cefi4//yr 

corq ot_ -m SYSTEM -Aliftas• 

. 

-TOP SECRET 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

-10131E-effEr-- MAN 

thestral astione type mad site art 

* veselettat of three feet*es veil es ems tawittemstot 

eattseted trek tbe sta. et aossetoted aelltts. sad 

ofettes teeilttlese reeatetteatioest owe aetelle fat net 

asent opmetreettea *lett ellom asses et its Sattooded 

This stabtlisp givoit at Vii, ot tbe swim,. 

4tepandigi et *be mil, Wm, Ss' 41111010414100 Ida Ike sne 

it tioe 11041110 gaiii**111401. 4411 WO itiplorkt ittooteastee it 

isstmeed apeestlee• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DORIAN TOP SECRET 

—TOP-SECRET-- 

r!nntroi No. 3ig)I 'LC 

al MO* OS 

baatattets at OM 

iiiipartisto MUT tallonis 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels-8.1.4r 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN a e //Yr 10 CONTROL SYSTEM .8144.14. 

3 DORM 
11 

DOMM 

. .L 7 

0 3 46) 4 

Handle Via TALENT-KEY} LE 

Channels Cidy 

HANDLE VIA BYE MAN C el frI4 / Jy r 

CONTROL SYSTEM 4,f464. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TOP SECRET DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DORIAN TOP SECRET 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

12 ChannelsHANDLE vta BYEMAN -11 e .0(14 r 

CONTROL SYSTEM -ANIL-Y. 

"letfusEGRLLI, 

DORIAN e 
NRO APPROVED FOR . 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Handle Via TALEN9 -KEYHO14E 

Channels 

HANDLE V!A BYEM 1\1 tie e a f-kt f/vr 

CONTROL SYSTEM -0044* 

DORIAN 

13 

90MN1 we 3 4''' 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TOP SECRET RIAN 

pant otette, this saleesad sorteital4toe 

01 do don aeold be treeeetteed la Ole soeied *we 

la salloolesed a; a stooelualse *boot 3% %woe tbea tloo 

arigteet aeseirtet• Mei greedy siellatatee asebesies 

this etworattee. by beedting tie tikes 

to be toed*eat Alferial daa Aar s 

treaseta**** Ma mg** shot 

sdas$ *be dela se be seteemste 

Saipossibity load to 

*tab ea* be 

0* #4140411 1116 10.0.04, thee* 

te be #lestrable. ead be Ulm; as 

WWI% wield le roseata,/ tat later trameetailso 

as Nab weeelatteao Sven la No tool sagareele aelabotal emu 

oe peeves No loo woostalies pleseiell# WU** dos Milik 

anroosareas ivald la so eamotea tbos vava4 ogsk; tatewseseSe it 

la is ameseeed speak dead ter the biojteo; woaelatallehe 

110**** tbas *oleo* Ole boo 

isse elatira So 

a 

sweaty tom lanta gam 

14 

DORIAN 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN r 

CONTROL SYSTEM-0,14;W 

--10P-SEGRET___ 
15 

DOMAN 

Inntrol 1‘70.ei-tug)i-‘5- 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels may-- - 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN 91e o /41 / -1•/ 

`77 77 1-, • ^.-tq 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DOMAN 

di I 
of *mom mormid ammo asji be sr4O440444 

Ulm' OA** hortmoto arf Waft otosstbkot moot 

ea IOU lift $11 WPM *its 

we *atm thee fres do ton * sposooli goo* OM 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

Channels 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN Gd d 141 / /`1. 

CONTROL SYSTEM -ON3.14 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

—TtP-eEeREF--- DORIAN 

Tage__-2-4 , 

Control No. 131)13

‘47(' 6_5 

16 

DORIAN 
Dim 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DORIAN 

2* MU tiletition to 

for the =Ott *tot sopa* 

3. Study Vows artrtato opolotoo. awe 

dot000tho tiodo postal* illitotos tato ttos rtigtoo* 

bletwalitaat reltdosmoto tot spot on000d ~so rolottos to tile tortlopolot 

71104, UM mad Ossion t. Servidip reixasew 

41.iai,"11TALr` s"11 21,,: 

HANDLE 4111"1"1" VIA CaVE111AeiNSQA-' 41 / CONTROL SYSTEM -43444* /Y r -- 

r!-r rc,, 1 No. tri Ne),4 
Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

18 Channels 4410.4.7 

HANDLE VIA BYEMAN 10 / r 

DORIM1 CONTROL SYSTEM 4ALL.X. 

rinrtr.01 No 611 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TOP SECRET DORIAN 

4. 
19 

DORIN 

HANDLE 

CONTROL 

VIA BYENIAN c=*1 e Q 114 / /yr sys7Em-wft,,, 

Control, No. esfr.P66.34-.' b_ 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DORIAN 

samod oraweevrds 

WO yews 

w131 Jaidakts a pasigter 

*emery's ditartme 

Signed 

ugene M. Zuokert 

Secretary of the Air POMO 

9 atchs 

1. Tab 

2. Tab 

3. Tab 

4. Tab 

3. Tab 

6. Tab 

7. Tab 

8. Tab 

9. Tab 

A (1/T131) l'otontiol of VIM Photo 

• 4tlymosn) lisonod bastions 6 Ilia yea 

C OM) Optical Sys 

Cl MO Optical Sys flI#* Test 

D ( I) Provos Cossidarations 

E OM SOD 6 MA 8a1 6 Tech lap 

If (MO Apollo/Garini Cad 

G onno Ilamonsd Fit Prom 

• (1112) Actions is 4lan65 DOUR 

Guidance 

Handle Via TALENT-KEYHOLE 

TOP SECRET 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB A 

THE POTENTIAL OF VERY HIGH RESOLUTION PHOTOGRAPHY 

Introduction 

This paper will summarize significant aspects of present 

and future high resolution photography bearing on the general 

utility of such photography and the impact on representative 

present and future intelligence problems. Current knowledge 

of atmospheric limitation on achievability of satellitecollected, very high resolution photography will be discussed. 

Finally, the results of a simulation program initiated to 

illustrate the usefulness of high resolution photography by 

specific examples will be described. 

Conclusions 

Photography is the most credible of all intelligence 

source material short of official documents or the physical 

hardware. National policy and decisions must be based on 

hard data. For example, sufficient proof of the existence 

of missile sites in Cuba in 1962 necessitated very high 

resolution photography. The reality of new missiles in being 

or in test can remain in doubt pending photographic proof. 

Further, the Soviets have paraded large military hardware 

items which were entirely unsuspected. 

Very high resolution photography, in the 

range, is required in order to formulate estimates of 

military capability and vulnerability with reasonable levels 

of engineering confidence. In addition, it is needed to 

ameliorate the increasing danger of technological surprise 

and to compress the time span necessary to define a new enemy 

capability after it is identified. Such photography is 

extremely valuable or mandatory in producing intelligence 

information for: 

Crisis Management 

Arms Control Inspection 

Specific Tactical Estimates 

Technical Intelligence 

FEMME vi,ic 

RUFF/GAMBIT/DORIAN TALENT-KEYHOLE sy4sTI 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

-4 r, 6 41:, 4 aft. y 9-eve4J 

36626-65 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Background and Definitions 

What is high resolution satellite photography? The 

definition of high resolution satellite photography has varied 

depending on the year and the technology existent when the 

question was asked. In the early days of photographic 

satellites, 10 to 25 feet was considered to be very high resolution, at least from a capability standpoint. The KH-7 system 

now produces photography of 2 feet on occasion and the followon system, first flight in mid-1966, is expected to produce 

resolution under average conditions. 

For the nurnoRe of this paper, and considering the capability of with a growth potential to envisioned for MOL, "very high resolution" is defined as 

It seems inevitable that in the future, satellite 

photography resolution will be achievable 

at which time a further re-definition will occur. 

Utility and Impact 

Intelligence results, value, and confidence levels 

usually increase significantly as a function of increased 

photographic resolution. 

High resolution is particularly important in the technical intelligence area where primary problems are usually 

grouped under questions of military capability or vulnerability. 

For example, the payload weight of missiles and space boosters 

is one of the first questions asked about any newly discovered 

vehicle. In the case of a potential weapon system, planners 

will want an early assessment of the systems* assailable 

points, i.e., hardness, radar cross section, armor plating, 

type of guidance, etc. 

The usefulness of very high resolution photography for 

furnishing credible information to the National Policy level 

and in turn to the public and the world was proven irrevocably 

during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. This aspect -- that is, 

convincing the informed layman and/or outright agnostic -- is 

often overlooked by the intelligence analyst because he is 

usually working from a base of a priori knowledge. The Cuban 

crisis illustrates the role of very high resolution photography 

in crisis management and tactical reconnaissance cases. Proof 

of missile-related equipment, launch site construction, and 

country of origin of military equipment of all types was a 

necessity. The best of the Cuban crisis photography was at 

the range and was 

obtained by low altitude reconnaissance aircraft operating at 

very low altitude. Collection by satellite provides some 

HANDLE V1 

RUFF/GAMBIT/DORIAN TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

L'%1 L 

ua 

SiSiEff 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

measure of covertness and surprise and does permit penetration of areas denied to aircraft. 

Very high resolution photography may have an even more 

dramatic influence on the question of technological surprise. 

Increasingly, advanced and exotic weapons are brought to 

fruition covertly and in isolation. Any future Arms Control 

agreement may make such photography almost indispensable. 

Atmospheric Limitation 

A recent program of analysis and test to determine the 

limits of resolution caused by the atmosphere has produced 

evidence that the atmospheric limit in resolution from a 

RUFF/GAMBIT/DORIAN HANDL-7: cm 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 
moving satellite is almost certainly about 

50% of the time and that photography can be obtained 

99% of the time 

of the atmosphere showed no 

indication of a turbulence limit in seeing down through the 

atmosphere. A has been Started 

that is expected to demonstrate photography through 

the atmosphere during mid-1966. The extensive follow-on 

analytical program includes effort to predict seeing conditions which may equal or possibly exceed present weather 

prediction accuracy. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Simulation Program 

A simulation program has been conducted to demonstrate 

the usefulness and value of very high resolution satellitecollected photography. Photographs were obtained of a number 

of equivalent U. S. subjects of reconnaissance interest at 

different, accurately calibrated resolution levels. Contrast 

ratio and grain were also simulated so that the program would 

provide photographic samples that faithfully represented 

present and potential future satellite photography. 

Resolution tri-bar targets were placed on the ground 

beside the subjects of reconnaissance interest. and low 

altitude aircraft photography was taken. 

resolution photography was thus obtained. This photography 

was suitably rephotographed so as to simulate contrast 

attenuation through the atmosphere from a satellite, with 

grain, scale. and resolution desired. Simulations are now 

available at resolution to match DORIAN, 

resolution to match GAMBIT-CUBED, and 2-1/2-foot resolution 

to match GAMBIT. partial simulations are 

also available. 

Selected examples of portions of these photographs are 

available in the form of stereo pairs suitable for hand-held 

viewers. In addition, for comparison purposes, three KH-7 

stereo pairs of current Soviet intelligence targets have 

been mounted and are available. They consist of a completed 

Soviet SS-7 hard site, a single silo in the excavation stage 

of construction, and a large parabolic dish antenna. 

Simulation Analyses 

The photographs resulting from the simulation program 

were analyzed by a selected group of photographic interpreters and intelligence analyst/engineers. The general 

RUFF/GAMBIT/DORIAN 

HAND= VIM 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

ri7N 67]; fTh =TM' 

tV? v L 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

results are presented here with detailed discussion of only 

three areas -- test facilities, hardened missile sites, and 

large antennas -- for brevity. It is important to recognize 

that analogous statements and arguments can be advanced for 

naval vessels; aircraft; armored vehicles; research, development, and test facilities of all types; and other items of 

interest from a National defense standpoint. The relative 

importance of most intelligence collection targets fluctuates 

rapidly, widely, and unpredictably based on the National 

planning or policy decisions which are critical at any moment. 

Among the more permanent, important collection targets 

requiring very high resolution photography are research and 

test facilities. For example, the ability to size rocket 

engines during the development phase would permit estimation 

of future missile and space booster thrust capabilities, The 

KH-7 system furnishes excellent engine test facility layout 

photography, but no rocket engine has even been identified. 

Present Soviet rocket engine thrust capability estimates are 

based upon Soviet announcements of payload into orbit, ELINT 

(telemetry) analysis, and extrapolation of U. S. state-of-the-art. Of course, the Soviet 

engine has completed the development phase_and is into the 

flight test before any of the above data can be acquired. 

When time for analysis is added, the Soviet systems to date 

have usually been operational before stage thrust estimates 

and, therefore, payload capability, have reached a useful 

confidence level. 

Developmental aircraft are often accessible to overhead 

photography during their test phases. Knowledge of armament 

types, nuclear weapons sizes, the existence of in-flight 

refueling mechanisms, and the like, would be available 

through very high resolution photography during flight line 

operations. At present, the best we can do is recognize the 

existence of weapons loading pits, armament firing bunkers, 

and spot an occasional exercise or operation in progress. 

Table I lists some general questions about a hardened 

ICBM site that intelligence analysts would attempt to answer 

from available photography at various resolutions. The 

resolution deemed necessary to provide a reasonably confident 

engineering answer is noted by each problem area. Obviously, 

the availability of various other intelligence inputs and a 

priori information can influence a table of this type, but 

experience of available photographic interpreters and engineers indicate that these resolutions are needed. 

RUFF/DORIAN/GANBIT 

HANDLE 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

11,0 eTh ni 711.7,11 

Avo 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TABLE I 

HARDENED ICBM INSTALLATION 

Facility Layout 

Missile Type 

Blast Resistance 

Wall Thickness 

• Door Span and Dimensions 

Construction Methods 

Door Seals, Locks, Mechanisms 

Steel Reinforcing Bar Size 

and Arrangement 

Soil Structure and Type 

Ground Support Equipment 

Handling and Loading Equipment 

Missile Suspension and Support 

Checkout and Calibration 

Launch Control Layout 

Electrical Power Source 

Communications Networks 

Microwave Links 

Telemetry 

Cables and Buried Radio 

Guidance Links 

Physical Security 

Support Facility 

Necessary Resolution 

3 ft 

3 ft 

3 ft 

HA-Nacr V1 

RUFF/DORIAN/GAMBIT TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

7'i'i7:ln ,.."..,:",-' 

or W , .c, ■ :- .' ...;: r,'... 

5

ti 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Engineers have a difficult time agreeing upon the actual 

hardness of our own ICBM installations since no full-scale 

tests have ever been conducted. In the absence of any design 

criteria for Soviet MRBM/IRBM/ICBM silos, all estimates of 

their hardness from any standpoint; air blast, radiation, 

thermal shock, ground shock, electromagnetic pulse,"etc.; are 

somewhat theoretical. At best, the estimates are based upon 

how we would do it if we were in their shoes, given their 

construction technology, and with some safety factors thrown 

in. 

The intelligence analyst/design engineer must know silo 

wall and closure thickness, door span distance, construction 

methods, and some idea of the percentage of steel within the 

concrete with reasonable confidence in order to arrive at any 

useful estimate of completed structure blast and shock 

resistance. Table I shows that this is achievable with 

photography. For higher confidence estimates, 

details such as reinforcing bar sizes and arrangements; door 

mechanisms, locks, and seals; and soil structure information 

become important. Table I reveals that photography is 

necessary for this level of analysis. 

Important questions about any missile in its launch 

environment are the ruggedness of the missile itself, the 

duration of time that the missile is essentially soft or 

vulnerable after the commit to launch decision, the possibility of silo reload, the guidance and control alignment 

procedures, etc. Inevitably, the problem arises as to 

whether an existing facility can be modified to handle a later 

generation missile. A current, extremely important, question 

revolves around whether the Soviets can retrofit their 

existing MRBM/IRBM silos with the new apparently solid ICBM 

The implications are selfevident. The best approach to these problems is through 

analysis of around support equipment. Inspection of Table I 

shows that photography is necessary to get to the 

heart of these areas. 

One of the most vulnerable aspects of any military 

operation is its communications links. Tap them successfully 

and it is possible to learn a great deal about operational 

procedures, capabilities, control links, etc. Determine 

their existence, layout, and general characteristics (particularly frequency) and it becomes feasible to attempt negation 

of the weapon system by command and control interruption. 

Very high resolution photography would materially contribute 

to the solution of this problem. 

RUFF/boRIAN/GANBIT 

HANDLE VTR 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

r r77? 75" 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Table II lists information desired ,apropos of radars 

and antennas. Current typical examples are probable large 

Soviet phased arrays under construction and numerous parabolic tracking dishes throughout the USSR. If the capability 

of these systems is not assessed accurately, the U,S. may 

find that the USSR can negate its satellite reconnaissance 

program, or it has a substantial ABM radar capability. 

The most important question about a radar is its freQuency. Probably next is its range and accuracy capability. 

While signal modulation characteristics are not amenable to 

photography, photography permits early assessment 

(long before ELINT becomes available) of eventual antenna 

functional capability and uses. For example, estimates of 

eventual power output can be based on feed type and size in 

conjunction with transmission line lengths, joints, and.supports, and transmitter tube locations. Antenna mount and 

depression angles are very important in connection with the 

tracking of low altitude aircraft and satellites. 

RUFF/DORIAN/GAMBIT HANDLE VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TABLE II 

TRACKING ANTENNA AND RADAR INSTALLATIONS 

Necessary Resolution 

Antenna 

Type and Size 3 ft 

Mount Construction and Stability ■ 

Depression Angles 

Electronic Characteristics 

Active or Passive Feeds 

Feed Type and Size 

Polarization and Power Output 

Calibration and Alignment Techniques 

Frequency (if not above UHF) 

Support Facility 

Building and Cooling Pond Size 

Computer Capability 

Electric Power Source 

Electric Power Capacity 

RUFF/DORIAN/GAMBIT 

HAN= VTIr 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY,. 

evr 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB B 

MANNED FUNCTIONS AND SIMULATION DATA 

Mission Functions and Capabilities 

The value of man in the primary mission of high resolution optical reconnais6anca and other future military 

missions basically stems from the ability to provide real 

time adaptive programming. This capability allows for 

optimization of operations to the specific conditions at 

hand and will result in more performance for a given 

equipment state-of-the-art and more efficient and timely 

data return. During the past year, an extensive simulation program has been carried out to verify man's 

capabilities and establish performance levels relative to 

the critical mission functions. These critical functions 

in which man can make a direct contribution to improved 

mission capabilities are: 

* Target Acquisition 

* Sensor Pointing 

* Target Tracking 

* Equipment Adjustment 

* Vehicle Control 

* Information Management 

* Assembly Maintenance 

In addition to these principal functions, peripheral 

functions can be performed because of man's presence such 

as direct visual reconnaissance, film changing, and setting 

of exposure times. 

In target acquisition, the man performs the function 

of background discrimination and determines if the target 

material is present, e.g., if the missile of interest is on 

the launcher, or if the target area is obscured by cloud 

cover. If the target is not present or if it is obscured, 

he provides the ability to switch to alternate targets. In 

unmanned systems target acquisition must be preprogrammed, 

the picture is taken under any circumstance, thus cutting 

DOR IAN 

eret io)4 9 

1,316-36626 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

down the amount of useful data taken. Relative to simulation, the critical aspect is the time it takes the man to 

make the acquisition. If this is too long, little advantage 

can be gained from the alternate targeting technique. 

Simulations were carried out using reconnaissance quality 

aerial photographs of various targets such as: industrial 

complexes containing refineries and tank farms and asking the 

subjects to find a particular tank, airfields with different 

types of airplanes and asking him to pick a particular 

airplane, or missile sites such as a Min- MAN Complex and 

asking him to acquire a particular silo, The pictures were 

presented in a manner simulating space viewing including 

varying haze conditions. The subjects were pre-briefed, i.e., 

they had a picture of the general area with the targets 

marked. The results of the simulation for the severe haze 

case are shown in Figure 1, and as can be seen, 80% of the 

targets can be acquired in 10 seconds or less. Under light 

haze conditions, even better results were achieved, namely 

95% of the targets were acquired in 8 seconds or less. Since 

acquisition can be started by looking some 40 to 500 ahead, 

on the order of 30 seconds is available. Based on simulation 

results time is available to acquire alternate targets. 

Another acquisition simulation that has been carried out 

is that of acquiring specific stars. This is only of 

secondary importance in that it is not directly a military 

mission function, but would be valuable in providing an 

autonomous navigation capability. The objective of the 

simulation was to acquire a specific star for lock-on of star 

trackers and it was accomplished in a planetarium using a 

variable field-of-view optical device. The results indicate 

DORIAN 

VE 366 -65 
0 0 0 0 0 0 co ...) \'" 0.1 .... c.1 — < C:: i--- — < 0 a 

1/4_ ,,-.7.:, , 

c.•--' c_ ,:.. ' s: C.") 

' 6 VE 366 2 C. - 6 5- ,, i4 

NRO A 

RELEA 

;44 

r.. 

0 0 

0 

sr) 

. s— ; C> ,-L••• . C.) 

L.— • Cr) I LS—: • 

r... 

C40 I 

... 

• . V.> —' lr) —J 

• 1 ':..--..; Cr; 

. I 

, 0 i . N c...... --4 

< 6 

N 

4.s . 

. 4 L.:_f 

Lr) 

G. cc. 

[ 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

that for fields of view of the order of 20 degrees, acquisition of specific stars can be achieved on the order of 

40 seconds, which is a sufficiently short time to make 

autonomous navigation in this mode quite feasible. 

The second critical function area is that of sensor 

pointing. In the high resolution optical reconnaissance 

mission, many pictures will be taken off nadir, both looking 

forward and off to the side. Using a frame camera this 

results In geometrical smears because of relative image 

motion at various parts of the field of view. At the periphery of a field of view typical of that suitable for 

unmarrPr9 system (2° Fov), these can be on the order of 

smears depending on light conditions. The man 

plays an important function in assuring the target is in 

the center of the field where the geometrical smear goes to 

zero. Also by centering, the optical aberrations are 

minimized and thus the maximum resolution achieved for a 

given size system. Simulations were run, using the same 

type of targets as is the ground acquisition simulations; 

namely, industrial complexes, airfields and missile sites. 

The subjects were asked to track the target and position a 

cross hair on the target; when this had been accomplished, 

a switch was triggered which would be comparable to 

actuating the camera for picture.taking. The results are 

shown in Figure 3, which plots the probability of errors 

equal GO or less than a given amount. For the case of a 

100 n.m. orbit, the man can maintain the pointing error on 

the ground 80% of the time to , Errors of 

this magnitude will cause little degradation to the 

resolution and are to be contrasted to unmanned system 

pointing errors of the order of 1 n.m. 

Target tracking is an important function in that it 

provides precision image motion compensation which allows 

better resolution to be achieved through the use of longer 

focal length telescopes, minimizing the effects of film 

graininess. Very extensive simulations of ground tracking 

were carried out, using an optical simulator with aerial 

reconnaissance scenes which had the proper aspect viewingand realistic rate input errors. Aiding was provided in 

that 99% of the total image motion was compensated for 

(assuming knowledge of the orbit ephemeris) and the operators were asked to track the target and provide the vernier 

correction by using a rate stick control. The case shown 

in Figure 4 is that of 100 power magnification in the 

tracking scope and providing 99% aiding. The results indicate that .1% image motion compensation can be achieved 

DORIAN 

V6--3662G -Cc 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

virtually all the time. For 200 power magnifications, 

.06% image motion compensation was achieved 95% of the 

time. In comparison present unmanned systems use a preprogrammed image compensation which is poorer than 1%. 

Image Motion Compensation devices using scene correlation 

techniques have been built and demonstrated in the laboratory to produce .5% image motion compensation. 

In the case of equipment adjustment man can make 

important contributions to the alignment and focusing of 

the optical system. Specifically, he can align optical 

elements such as mirrors and corrector lens in terms of 

centering and tilt by using auxiliary optical elements. 

The function involves viewing fringe patterns and adjusting the elements, by servomechanism drives, until the 

proper patterns appear. Similarly using an autocollimating 

device the focus of the system can be adjusted. The same 

.Jethnicues are used on the ground in the assembly of -

telescopes and since no direct interaction with the space 

environment is involved, there is no reason to expect 

these functions cannot be done equally well in space. 

Another type of equipment adjustment is that involved 

in electromagnetic signal intelligence; the man's function 

is to take over when signals are intercepted which cannot 

be handled by the automatic equipment. His function is 

one of interpreting signal displays and adjusting electronic 

oarameters such as the frequency band pass, pulse width, 

interpulse timing and dynamic range until the signal is 

separated from the background emission and optimally displayed for recording. This type of operation is presently 

used in the USD-7 aircraft system; however, the aircraft 

intercept is not time limited,'whereas the space system 

has approximately 7 minutes from horizon to horizon. 

Therefore, a simulation was carried to check man's ability 

to work within this time constraint using the USD-7 equipment and flying a realistic environment. The results of 

DORIAN 

3VE 36(22 - 6S- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

88 encunters indicate that the maximum time required was 

4-1/2 minutes, average 1-1/2 minutes and the minimum 1/2 

minute. Thus, it is concluded that man can do the complex 

signal analysis job within the .ort times available from 

space. 

Vehicle control of the spacecraft is a lesser manned 

function particularly for the high resolution optical mission; 

however, it does provide for more mission flexibility, 

particularly in the case of malfunctioning equipments; and 

tO sone extent will lessen the ground support requirements. 

No simulation is necessary since manned vehicle control 

capability has been demonstrated in both the GEMINI and 

YERCURY flights as well as the GEMINI rendezvous simulations 

conducted by NASA. 

Information management is an important function in that 

the man provides a real time decision capability and can 

effect a large data compression by initially minimizing the 

acquisition of spurious data and subsequently by selecting 

only the data of interest for transmission to the ground. 

2.'s an example only two pictures of an unmanned system could 

be read per day, assuming one wideband readout station. 

Instead of reading out the entire 2.8 n.m. unmanned field 

cf view, if the target area of interest is assumed to be 

.2 n.m. the man can select the target area of interest and 

readout approximately L.00 pictures a day. Since the basic 

functions involved do not directly interact with the space 

environment, no specialized simulations were carried out. 

Assembly and maintenance may be the most important 

manned functions of all. Future military requirements may 

require the use of large structures on orbit where manned 

control of deployment and erection may be important. More 

important is the maintenance ability which will allow for 

cost effective operations and also provide the ability to 

utilize advanced technologies at an earlier point in their 

development -- before their reliability has been developed 

to a level acceptable for unmanned operations. In the 

area of maintenance and assembly, simulations were carried 

out for both shirt sleeve and pressure suit conditions 

using a variety of simulators, consisting of 6-degree air 

bearing simulations, flying zero "g" profiles in the KC 135 

aircraft, and using neutral buoyancy water immersion type 

techniques. The results of these tests indicate that, 

with the proper design in the tools and attachments, no 

problems appear in terms of feasibility of maintenance. 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Generally, however, the times required to perform a given 

maintenance function were several times that required in 

the normal ground environment. Extravehicular activity has 

been simulated both for local locomotion, as well as using 

a propulsion unit. The simulation methods again include 

the KC 135 and the water immersion techniques as well as the 

g-visual simulation for the propulsion unit. The results 

indicate that local locomotion can be done if the proper 

attachments are provided. In the case of the propulsion unit 

if it is stabilized the man can do very complex maneuvering 

operations in space. Also to be considered is the accomplished fact of the Soviet and the GT-4 extravehicular 

operations. 

In addition to the above simulations, direct viewing 

simulations were carried out using a B-47 aircraft with a 

modified bombsight which simulated 30 and 60 power magnification from 160 n.m. The targets were airfields, rail 

junctions, roadways, bridges and shipping docks in port 

areas. The results indicate that the man can estimate with 

90% accuracy the activity in the given area. For an example, 

in flying over an airport in which 25 airplanes are on the 

airport the man would estimate maybe 23. Also, he was able, 

in the case of the 60 power, to classify the different types 

of aircraft, being able to clearly see airplanes of the 

4-engine or jet type versus smaller aircraft of the singleengine type. The significance of this simulation is that 

the crew while performing their normal high resolution 

reconnaissance duties may be able to detect anomalies in 

activity patterns which will lead to early detection of 

changing strategical situations. 

Biological Capability 

In addition to the mission simulations demonstrating 

the critical manned functions, simulations have been 

carried out to demonstrate manes ability to adapt to the 

space environment for periods in excess of 30 days. 

The first of these is the use of chambers with volumes 

and arrangement typical of the proposed MOL system. The 

volumes range from 200 to 600 cu. ft. free volume -- that 

is volume over and above that occupied by equipment, and 

the atmospheres used including the 7-1/2 psi oxygen/nitrogen 

atmosphere, the 7-1/2 psi oxygen/helium atmosphere, as well 

as the 5 psi oxygen atmosphere. The results of these 

simulations indicate that there is no problem with the 

DORIAN 

AVE 3662.6.--‘5- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

atmosphere nor the confinement for the periods of the 

simulations which extended from 30 to 45 days except in 

the case of oxygen/helium which has only been carried to 

10 days to date. 

Another type of simulation performed was that to test 

the ability of the man to withstand the re-entry loads 

after being on orbit. Two groups of subjects were deconditioned by bed rest for extended periods; one group having 

no conditioning, the other being exposed to exercise and 

positive pressure breathing during the deconditioning period. 

They were then placed on a centrifuge and exposed to a. "g" 

profile with a maximum of 8 g's simulating ballistic re-entry 

conditions from space in a Gemini spacecraft. During the 

centrifuge runs the subjects were asked to perform a simple 

tracking function. The results of these runs based on blood 

pressure, heart rate, and the tracking proficiency indicate 

no statistically detectable difference from that of the 

controlled runs using fully conditioned subjects; therefore, 

it appears that 30 days on orbit will not endanger the 

astronaut's ability to return from space. 

The third area of concern relative to man's ability to 

adapt to the space environment is that of prolonged existence on orbit in the weightless condition. Here, many 

simulations have been carried out to evaluate effective 

countermeasures which would forestall or eliminate the 

cardiovascular deconditioning effects of the zero "g" environment. The countermeasures of most interest are those of using 

a short arm centrifuge compatible with the MOL vehicle 

diameter of 10 feet and that of using exercise of different 

degrees of vigor for periods of 60 to 80 minutes a day. The 

countermeasures and results are shown in Table 1. As can 

be seen the 900 kilocalorie exercise countermeasure is 

effective in forestalling the cardiovascular effects of zero 

h g" with the exception of the minor blood plasma reduction. 

The 700 kilocalorie exercise and centrifuge also are 

effective; therefore, it is concluded that either of these 

offers a suitable countermeasure for conditioning of the 

cardiovascular system. 

In summary, then, an extensive simulation program nas 

been carried out during the last year and the results have 

demonstrated man's ability to perform the critical mission 

functions and provide a high degree of precision. Secondly, 

environmental and countermeasure simulations have been 

carried out which provide reasonable confidence that the man 

will be capable of greater than 30 days on orbit without 

difficulties. 

DORIAN 
! 0 

I 0 0's 

z o 

0 

r"I 

C. C 0 

NRO_APPROVED FOR 

. RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

U) 

, 

; i 

• 

1 • 

rf. 

LI 

1.••••1 

••••••• 

.);;',;L ; :5- • 

ON 

(0 

CO 

..3 

. 

1 

i 

.; 

■ 

i 

. 

i 

r-i 

; 

0 

i 

i 

i 

I 

1 

I 

: 

I 

s0 

CO 

. 

I 

; 

1 

; 

I 

U 

o 

.--, 

.,,

2 

cs , 

i u (D 1 1 ,,,,i i 1 , 

i t 

1 0 Cr 

CC 

U 

er•-■ 

0 

LU 

• C'? ' 

; • 

LJEl 

L-1 

cr) 

< 

611E 36626 —4 C 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB C 

OPTICAL SYSTEMS 

Background 

The military need for optical reconnaissance has been 

demonstrated by its use in support of many operations -- 

tactical,_ strategic, battlefield surveillance, crisis • 

management, technological analysis -- intelligence gathering 

in general. Our present satellite photo reconnaissance 

systems (such as GAMBIT) are providing excellent operational 

material for the National Photo Interpretation Center and 

ultimately the intelligence community. It is estimated about 

950 of our photo take of the Sino-Soviet Bloc comes from this 

source. Resolution as good as 2 to 3 feet is available from 

the present GAMBIT system. Development is underway on an 

improved GAMBIT-CUBED system which is designed to provide 

photography with best resolution of and mission 

average resolution of from 9c n.m. 

0-:tics Technology, 

A=ospheric turbulence is considered to set a lower 

limit on ground resolution achievable by space optics. This 

limit has been investigated both empirically and mathematically 

and is currently defined as with the 

expectation that. with further measurement programs now planned, 

it will be roost of the time. To achieve 

ground resolutions to the limit permitted by the atmosphere will 

require systems of very large apertures, at 80 

m. altitude. To achieve nadir ground resolution of 

an aperture of is required. The 

critical-technical factors which determine the design parameers for resolution are as follows: 

1. A fundamental limit to resolution is set by 

the diffraction pattern of the image; an otherwise perfect 

system must be about 35 inches in aperture. This dimension 

implies that reflective optics must be utilized. 

2. Optical systems cannot be perfect and if surfaces 

are accurate to about 1/10 of a wavelength of visible light the 

resolution will be degraded 20=30%. Practical designs also 

have obscuration of part of the aperture, transmission and 

reflection losses. These factors cause the required aperture 

to be about 45 inches. 

3. The above numbers relate to very high contrast 

targets. A photographic system to resolve low contrast 

objects must be larger; thus the aperture must be 50 inches or 

more. 

DORIAN/GAMBIT tef-,aiteage„aj 

36624.-k,c- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

4. Image motion compensation cannot be perfect 

and, even if accurate to 0.1% (current systems are 1%), the 

resolution is degraded and the aperture must be increased 

for a useful range of exposure conditions. 

5. The field of view of systems must be large 

enough to include targets of interest considering pointing 

errors. To obtain a field of view as large as 1 mile x1 

mile requires that corrector elements be included in the 

optics. Even with the best correction considered feasible, 

it is required that the target be centered in the field of 

view by pointing with an accuracy of a few hundred feet. 

These design considerations lead to a set of characteristics which are basic to achieve- such high resolution: 

1. The optical system must be large, more than 

50 inches aperture, and at least the primary element must be 

a mirror. 

2. The optical system must be fabricated and 

aligned so precisely that it will yield nearly perfect optical 

performance on orbit. 

3. Image motion compensation must be much better 

than current systems, -- at least 0.1% 

4. Pointing control must be precise -- a few 

hundred feet. 

Each of these basic characteristics can be discussed in 

terms of the technology required and the possible role of 

man: 

1. The technology to design and fabricate these 

large optical systems is essentially at hand, at least to the 

point of high confidence in achieving deSign performance 

during tests on the ground. New optical materials and new 

fabrication and design techniques are developing rapidly to 

offer possibilities of major improvements in the next few 

years in such factors as weight and thermal sensitivity. 

Conversely, major improvements in films or other recording 

techniques which would change the basic characteristics listed 

do not appear near at hand. 

2. The precision required of such a large system 

on orbit is a more difficult problem. Some aspects of this 

problem are: 

a. Reasonable weight designs cannot be rigid 

through launch and the optics must be extended, aligned and 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

Svc 34&26-4S--- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

tested in orbit. Automatic systems tend to be complex, 

inflexible, and unreliable One of the clearest advantages 

of a manned system is the contribution of the astronaut to 

the initial alignment and test. 

b. During the orbital operation several 

precise functions are necessary to maintain performance. 

These include continuous refocusing, active thermal control 

and realignment after thrusting or temperature excursions. 

While man may rice: be tesential to these functions, his 

presence permits simplicity, increased reliability and 

greater precision. 

c. For optical systems of this precision 

there are bound to be unexpected factors which will cause 

significant optical degradation. To diagnose and correct 

these problems, there is no substitute for a man observing 

the image with full optical quality and monitoring the 

effect of corrections in real time. When a history of 

orbital experience is available, it may be that these problems can be anticipated but, at least initially, there 

seems little doubt that the man - provides unique confidence 

in timely progress. 

3. The image motion compensation desired is more 

precise than appears feasible now in unmanned systems. 

Simulations have shown that a man can provide vernier control 

and obtain 0.06% precision 95% of the time. 

4. Simulation has shown that man can acquire and 

point to about 40 feet accuracy. Automatic navigation and 

pointing devices to achieve this precision are not known. 

The conclusion is that the basin elements for a photographic system to achieve resolution from 

80 n.m. can be made available for the 1968-1970 time period, 

without major invention, if the system is manned. 

Optical System Alternatives 

For the MOL program several types of optical systems 

(shown in Figure 1) have been considered. Two are basically 

Newtonian systems with Ross corrector lenses near the focal 

plane. The third is a modified Cassegrainian system. 

In the first Newtonian system, acquisition and tracking 

of the target is achieved by motion of a large optical flat 

in two planes. Pictures are taken at any time during the 

tracking phase. In this manner, as many as 20 pictures may 

DORIAN/GAMBIT . 

61.1C 344 zt. -4 s— 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

be taken, from various angles, 

syste:Il is relatively simple in 

flexible in operation and is a 

polation of the GAMBIT system. 

of a single target. The 

design and alignment and 

fairly straightforward extraThe other two systems rely upon pointing the entire 

sensor, thereby removing the requirement for the large flat 

mirror. Either version of the Ross corrector could be flown 

in the 1968-1969 time era. The modified Cassegrainian would 

take ,r-omowhat lon8ar to develop. 

Both the Titan IIIC 5-segment and 7-segment boosters 

were considered; the 5-segment provides about 4,000 lbs. of 

discretionary payload and the 7-segment provides 10,000 lbs. 

in a polar orbit. When the weight of payload displays, film, 

and small recovery vehicles is deducted, and when the orbit 

sustenance fuel load is optimized, the payload sensor itself 

Ls allowed about 1500 lbs. in the 5-segment case and 6500 lbs. 

for the 7-segment case. The 1500 pound sensor is too small 

to provide attractive ground resolution. Within the weight 

allotment of 6500 pounds for payload available on the DORIAN/ 

'LL/Titan MC 7-segment combination, a 60-inch aperture 

f/8. Ross sensor with tracking mirror is possible, providing 

nadir best resolution from 70 n.m. or 

from dO n.m. During a mission, observations are made at 

various obliquity angles and thus various slant ranges which 

degrade the resolution. Considering a typical mission with 

a uniform distribution of obliquity angles up to 45 degrees 

and a normal distribution of pointing errors and tracking 

rate errors, a calculation is made of the number of photographs - taken at various resolutions. The median resolution 

is that value where half of the photos over an entire mission 

are at least that quality, or better. The mission median 

resolution for the 60-inch aperture from 80 n.m. is 

The other sensor configurations shown in Figure 1 provide 

even better ground resolution. Ground resolutions versus 

aperture for a 70 nautical mile altitude are shown in Figure 

2. 

Manned-Unmanned Comparisons 

Two comparable unmanned photographic satellite designs 

have been analyzed. In one case an equal-sized booster was -

chosen for a 30-day mission, resulting in an allowance of 

14.500 lbs. for sensor payload. Within this larger weight, 

aperture, f/6.1 optical system provides optimum 

mission average resolution. At 80 n.m. altitude the nadir 

best resolution is (same as the smaller manned 

:DORIAN/GAMBIT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

system), and the mission median resolution is 

(compared to for the manned system). Figure 

3 shows the resolution distribution-curves for the 60-inch 

manned and unmanned systems. 

The superior performance of the smaller manned system 

is explained by improved manual image motion compensation, 

by man's ability to align the optics on orbit and to correct 

the alignment as often as necessary, and by more precise 

target centering using the man. These factors of improved 

manual precision are true even though the unmanned system was 

given the benefit of a Vti sensor_ better than-presently 

exists, a new attitude stabilization system about better 

than presently designed for GAMBIT-CUBED, and real time orbit 

position knowledge better than GAMBIT is achieving. 

Further, the larger aperture of the unmanned 

study is a much more difficult optical manufacturing job; and 

the associated flat tracking mirror that is required 

for this design is a very major optics problem. 

Considering these optics problems, and the probable one 

to two year longer research and- development time, a smaller 

60-inch aperture unmanned system was also studied. Such a -

design is the same optical size as the DORIAN (manned) system. 

Again giving the unmanned design the benefit of possible 

improved sensors and subsystems, this smaller unmanned payload 

will yield about nadir best resolution and between 

mission median resolution. 

It is concluded that, within the same optical technology 

and tithe schedule, a manned system provides significantly 

better resolution (median value: ) with higher 

confidence, due to the several new inventions or new subsystems 

required in the unmanned case. Even if, for some reason, an 

unmanned system ultimately proves to be the better operational 

approach (for example, if man cannot tolerate adequate durations 

in orbit or if unmanned reconnaissance systems prove more 

acceptable in international policies than manned ones), the 

optical technology which can best be developed in manned flights 

is also a basic requirement for a later unmanned system. 

Manned Optical System Development Recommendations 

Two basic sensor approaches have been mentioned, differing 

mainly in the pointing method of acquiring and tracking the 

target. Choice between these approaches hinges on the following arguments: 

1. A 60" aperture sensor is the minimum size of 

interest to achieve a major step in resolution beyond GAMBIT-

,WBED. 

DORIAN-GAMIT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

2. 60" mirrors have been and are being ground 

experimentally to the tolerances required. Larger mirrors 

are not so far advanced. 

3. The Ross corrector design is a rather 

straightforward extrapolation of the GAMBIT design and 

therefore higher confidence exists now for such an approach. 

4. Pointing the mirror or the entire sensor 

require.,3 larger drive oystem6 than are currently available. 

Therefore, the drive system design must be based on extrapolatIon from presently available techniques and equipments. 

The degree of extrapolation is considerably greater for 

pointing the whole system than for pointing the mirror alone. 

5. In current designs, the tracking mirror is 

1.4 times longer in one dimension than the diameter of the 

aperture. Therefore, as the sensor size is increased for 

improved performance, the tracking mirror will, at some point, 

:lave to be abandoned due to limitations in mirror technology. 

The aperture size at which this should occur is not well 

defined but is probably around-90". 

6. With sufficient time and effort either pointing 

approach could most certainly be made to work for a 60" 

aperture. 

7. Careful consideration of interface specifications between the MOL and the two types of sensors indicate 

that it can be designed to accommodate either. 

In view of these considerations, the following approach 

to sensor development is recommended: 

1, For a period of 4 to 6 months from go-ahead, 

the Ross corrector sensor program will carry a dual approach 

to pointing and tracking (both mirror and entire sensor) 

based on a 60-inch aperture for either approach. During 

this time a vigorous lightweight mirror technology program 

will be initiated. In particular, zero "g" and temperature 

tests will be performed.. 

2. Competitive preliminary design studies will 

be initiated for follow-on larger aperture optical sensors. 

In support of these future systems, studies have already 

been initiated on a modified Cassegrainian pointing sensor 

involving a scale model (say 20") and design studies of a 

reimaging optical system. 

DORIAN/GAMBIT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

3. In parallel, engineering work will be initiated 

to develop a large drive system capable of pointing either 

the Ross or Cassegrainian sensor. 

At the end of the 4 to 6 month period a decision will e made 

on the sensor configuration to be developed and the ti

b

me 

phasing of larger aperture systems into the MOL program. In 

addition, advanced technology studies will be pursued which 

may eventually lead (1975/) to very large aperture systems 

in a follow-on Saturn V rendezvous program. 

unmanned Systems Technology Development 

In addition to the manned optical system development, 

continued studies and where feasible technology programs will 

be initiated for the purpose of improving high performance 

unmanned systems. Some of the subsystem and technology efforts 

to be pursued are: (1) improved V/h sensors capable of sensing 

image motions to 0.1% or better; (2) impr9ved stabilization • 

systems with residual rates less than 10-5 deg/sec and pointing 

errors less than 0.10; (3) possible optical rectification 

devices to remove geometric smear off the optical axis in 

oblique pictures. 

Unmanned systems studies will be pursued in conjunction 

with this program to provide orientation to the technology 

program and continue to assess the potential for advanced 

unmanned sensors. It is important to note that any of the 

above advancements would also be important to the performance 

of a manned system, particularly if it is also designed to 

operate in an unmanned mode. 

DORIAN/GAMBIT 
• 

) 

171 

L • ! 

t I 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

FIGURE 1 

SENSOR COFIGUHATIONS 

60 INCH ROSS CORRECTOR SENSOR WITH TRACKING MIRROR 

POINTING ROSS MODIFIED 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

FIGURE 2 

aYE 31,ipz& - 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB Cl 

OPTICAL SYSTEMS FLIGHT TEST 

OBJECTIVES 

General 

A development program consisting of six flights, one 

unmanned and five manned, would be capable of demonstrating 

an operationally useful manned high resolution optical 

photographic reconnaissance system. Primary emphasis will 

be placed on achieving resolutions on the ground of 

A conservative optical system design, 

utilizing a primary mirror of 60-inch aperture can attain 

resolutions of this order, and will be the primary payload 

for early flights. Parallel developments along lAqs 

conservative lines, leading to optical systems of 

aperture offering ground resolutions of about 

will also be undertaken. 

Flight Test Objectives 

Flight objectives for the first three flights have 

been defined. Objectives for the last three flights have 

been deferred, awaiting the outcome of our investigations 

into optical technology. Hence the option to select more 

advanced versions of optical sensors or SIGINT sensors for 

these flights is preserved. 

Flight number one is unmanned, and is intended to 

qualify the integrated Gemini B/Laboratory/modified Titan 

IIIC vehicle as suitable for manned flight. Test objectives 

are to: 

*Demonstrate Gemini B subsystem. 

*Determine structural adequacy of the laboratory 

vehicle. 

*Demonstrate MOL/Titan III and Western Test 

Range compatibility. 

*Demonstrate polar orbit test operations support 

system. 

*Demonstrate recovery and retrieval from polar 

orbit re-entry. 

DORIAN 

46a "acted/ 

36624- C 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Flight number two, the first manned flight, has as 

a principal objective the demonstration of a useful manned 

high resolution optical reconnaissance capability. This 

flight, planned for late CY 1968, will utilize an engineering 

test model of a high resolution optical sensor, to permit 

the refinement of equipment, and the development of techniques 

and procedures leading to the achievement of high resolution 

photography objectives as early as possible in the flight 

test program. This flight is also intended to: 

*Demonstrate complete functioning of the GEMINI B 

and laboratory vehicle system in orbit. 

*Verify crew transfer. 

*Demonstrate control capability for manned missions 

in polar orbit. 

*Conduct biomedical and human performance tests. 

*In the event of an unsuccessful flight number one, 

to back-up that flight, unmanned. 

Flight number three is devoted principally to the 

demonstration of a useful high resolution optical photography capability throughout a thirty-day stay in orbit. 

This flight will also: 

*Demonstrate capability of MOL systems to function 

for 30 days in orbit. 

*Evaluate crew performance. 

*Evaluate low altitude orbit capabilities. 

A typical mission profile suitable for this flight is discussed in the following paragraphs and is illustrative of 

specific manned functions to be demonstrated. 

Assembly and Alignment 

Of particular importance is the assembly and alignment 

of the optical system on orbit, a procedure which contributes markedly to system performance. This is followed by 

routine operation of equipment in several modes. The 

following discussion is based on the activity associated with 

a tracking optical flat Ross corrector primary optical sensor. 

DORIAN 

6?E 366z6-6s- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

In any high resolution optical system, precise alignment of the optical elements must be maintained if 

performance goals are to be met. Once the MOL is in orbit, 

the optical sensor lens barrel must be extended, and 

secured in place. The internal optical elements must then 

be freed from their "soft" mounts, which protect them during 

ground handling and launch, and transferred to their 

operating mounts. A step by step alignment procedure by 

the astronauts follows during which each optical element is 

tilted, translated, or otherwise carefully positioned. This 

procedure is repeated until the optical system performance 

converges to its design values. The system is then ready 

for routine operation. 

Basic Equipment 

Equipment used during routine operation falls into two 

categories: on-line, which is used during photographic 

activity; and off-line, which is used in the intervals 

between photographic activity. Both categories are essential 

to the realization of the full capabilities of the optical 

sensor. 

On-Line Equipment 

Separate acquisition and tracking telescopes are 

provided each astronaut to permit simultaneous inspection 

of two alternate target areas. The telescopes are programmed to track their respective target areas, the astronaut 

selects the preferred target, and centers it in the optical 

field. 

Each astronaut is also provided with a viewing eyepiece 

connected by optical relay to the primary optics. Once a 

target has been selected with either of the acquisition and 

tracking scopes, the prime optics are slewed, the acquisition 

and tracking scope freed, and the target is centered, 

tracked, and inspected thenceforth by direct viewing. Since 

primary camera shutter travel time consumes only about 

one-fifth of the camera cycle time, four fifths of the time 

is available, if needed, for these direct viewing operations. 

The optical relay has a variable magnification 

Each astronaut has an operating console displaying, on 

TV screens, scenes from both acquisition scopes, and primary 

and secondary target cue data (pre-briefing) displays. All 

necessary controls for acquiring, tracking and photographing 

targets. are included. An on-board computer and programmer 

DORIAN 

41-366 z - 6 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

provide preliminary aiming of the acquisition scopes, call 

up cue data, and control focus, exposure and the operating 

cycle of the photographic system. 

Off-Line Equipment 

After each photographic pass, at least one frame from 

each target sequence may be selected for processing and 

visual inspection by a pre-editing and processing device. 

This sequence should take about fifteen minutes. 

A viewing table with a traveling microscope and densitometer will permit inspection of processed film to determine 

correctness of focus and exposure, and to select portions 

for transmission to ground stations. 

Two scanning and readout positions permit transmission 

of selected data to ground stations. 

Recovery capsules will be hand loaded and sealed by 

the astronauts. 

Typical Operational Sequences 

Target acquisition is accomplished by programming the 

acquisition and tracking scope to aim at and track a 

selected target area. After reviewing the cue data, the 

astronaut inspects the target area through his scope, 

evaluates cloud cover and haze, and decides to photograph 

or to select an alternate, if available. If he elects to 

photograph, he centers the target in his acquisition scope, 

and slews the primary optics to the selected target. He 

then views the target through the primary optics, re-centers 

if necessary, nulls any residual tracking rate errors, and 

begins photography. 

Meanwhile, the second astronaut is briefed by cue data 

on the upcoming target and begins acquisition. With targets 

acquired alternately, about eighteen seconds will be 

required between targets to permit briefing, acquisition 

and tracking. A typical sequence of operations for targets 

of minimum spacing appears in Figure 1. 

Typical target swaths were studied to determine the 

density of targets which could be expected to occur during 

each 18-second target interval. The width of the possible 

target area at an 80 n.m. operating altitude is about 140 

n.m., and the 18-second interval represents 72 miles along 

DORIAN 

: 

gYk- 314 "?‘ - 
O 

''tii.BYEMAN-DORIAN 

ti 

'SW 366z6 6c ' 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

track on the ground. It was apparent that most targeting 

intervals contain more than a single target. The ability 

of man to choose between alternates is a valuable and 

effective advantage. 

Cloud statistics were applied to the target areas 

which were studied to determine the probability of acquiring a particular target in a single, and in multiple passes. 

It was found that single pass probability is about 36%, and 

improves as the number of passes increases. Hence the 

ability of the astronauts to evaluate obscuration by clouds 

and to select alternates improves the number of successful 

targets photographed. 

Other Operational Functions 

While actively acquiring and photographing targets, the 

astronauts employ mostly on-line equipment. During other 

intervals, off-line equipment can be employed to edit and 

process selected photographic frames. Those which are 

determined to be of particular interest can be returned to 

the ground, either as high resolution readout by a wide-band 

data link, or by capsule. Briefing data can be updated to 

alert the astronauts to observe particular targets for 

particular activity. Alternate photographic film, such as 

color or infra-red emulsions can be selected and programmed 

by the astronaut for particular targets. Low light level 

targets can be photographed with high speed (but lower 

resolution) film. The presence of the astronauts, in sum, 

provides a unique capability for easy and very flexible 

selection of alternate operational modes to increase the 

quality, quantity and credibility of photographic data. A 

typical crew cycle appears as Figure 2. 

Supporting Functions 

Operational equipment can be maintained at effective 

performance levels by utilizing astronaut capability to 

adjust, calibrate and repair. The principal mission equipment can be utilized for scientific and technological 

experiment functions when not occupied with reconnaissance 

functions. The primary optics can be used to collect high 

quality astronomic data. It can also collect data at infrared wavelengths, supplementing visual light. Figure 3 shows 

how this, typically, might be done. 

DORIAN 

I3W 36420- 4.5- 
CC 

777 

z 

• 2 tr) 

A1/0/SSIVINIII41 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

rC i 3674, 26 - 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

te r/ 

r 

,S

LGiter

B

Y EMAND

O

RIAN 

evi 34624- 4 5— 
NRO APPROVED FOR 1!;"Q,7:Try 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB D 

PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS 

Purpose 

The principal objective of the MOL program is the 

development of optical technology leading to optical systems 

capable of improved resolution. The initial objective is 

to develop and demonstrate, at the earliest time, an 

operationally useful high resolution manned optical reconnaissance system capable of achieving at least 

ground resolution. Provision will be made in the vehicle 

design to accommodate larger optical sensors and improvements leading to longer mission times with concomitant 

increased cost effectiveness. 

Other mission applications of the MOL program such as 

ocean surveillance, COMINT, and ELINT are secondary 

objectives. Accommodation of DOD and NASA technological 

and scientific experiments is a tertiary objective. 

Approach 

In view of these purposes, the MOL program approach 

provides for the orderly evolution through system definition 

and development to meet the primary mission with reasonable 

provisions for follow-on missions. 

The configuration selected for the MOL system to 

accomplish an early manned demonstration of high resolution 

optics has followed the primary criterion of a minimum cost 

program. Existing flight and ground system hardware and 

capabilities from the DoD and NASA inventories are being 

used to the fullest extent practical. This optimized 

selection has been made only after exhaustive examination 

of the many alternatives and trade-offs of subsystems and 

components developed and tested in other manned and unmanned 

space systems. The orbiting system is to be initially 

designed for a 30-day on-orbit stay time with growth potential for on-orbit durations up to 90 days. 

MOL Program Alternatives 

The MOL program could be conducted at both the Eastern 

Test Range and the Western Test Range or solely at the 

DORIAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM /e/ - /610-ezie--41 

OW 3162_6- (0r 
Western Test Range. Three different program options and 

their costs were examined. These options are: 

1. Conduct the development program from the Eastern 

Test Range using the Titan IIIC 5-segment booster, then 

transfer the base of operations (with an uprated Titan IIIC, 

7-segment vehicle) to the Western Test Range for the collec-. 

tion of useful intelligence. 

2. Conduct the development program at the Eastern 

Test Range using the 7-segment Titan IIIC and transfer to the 

Western Test Range for the collection of useful intelligence. 

3. Conduct the development program from the Western 

Test Range using the 7-segment Titan IIIC. 

The schedules considered and the cost comparisons are 

shown in Figures 1 and 2. 

Although either approach is acceptable from a technical 

standpoint, certain other factors favor Option 3. These are: 

1. The payload required to test the 60-inch optical 

system proposed for a 30-day period together with the necessary 

sustenance expendables requires a discretionary payload of 

around 10,000 pounds. Although the 5-segment Titan IIIC 

launched from the Eastern Test Range could carry the optical 

sensor, the lifetime of the vehicle on orbit would be severely 

curtailed due to limited supplies of expendables. In order to 

collect useful intelligence data the vehicle must ultimately 

be used in polar orbits. Hence, transition to the Western 

Test Range and uprating to 7 segments at some point in time 

is necessary. 

2. The cost to achieve a mission capability using 

both the Eastern Test Range and the Western Test Range as 

compared to using the Western Test Range only, is greater by 

approximately $70 to $90 million. 

3. Successes in the early research and development 

flights could yield useful intelligence data at least a year 

earlier if the research and development program is conducted 

from the Western Test Range. . 

4. Conducting the program at both the Eastern Test 

Range and the Western Test Range creates management problems 

that needlessly detract from efficient program execution. 

Security measures, personnel build-up and training, procedures 

DORIAN 

EARLE Vi

y

es L2 

AtiE 344 26 3- 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
• 

0 c ...----1 . 

(....). 0 

,..... 1 t.: 

i

,.. 

.,.. 

11 • 

0 

9 . i 

i 

0 

OYC 36626 -c 

!1,1 i! 11,11t. 

.1

SI, • 0 • 

0 

f 

N 

N.:74N; 

CS 0 

1.1.3 

7—C4 O 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

CZ 

N1:210 APPROVED FOR 

*RELEASE 1 JULY 20157 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

\\ 

• 

-." 

• •) 

riNk. 

0 

6-) 

„ 

0 

0 

co 0 

h. 

(Z 

1-■ 

E-4 

k 

cr 

kr!) 

• 

0 

bi) 

NC 

c\11 

O.) C\1 

co 

re)* 

01, c‘1; 

- erc- 344 z6 - 6s— 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

verification, base support arrangements and other details 

would create duplication, increase costs, and introduce 

schedule risks. 

There are no known critical schedule items which 

would preclude achieving the Option 3 first flight date 

from the Western Test Range. 

Program Schedule 

The recommended flight test schedule is shown in 

Figure 3. 

Based on a six month Project Definition Phase (PDP), 

with Phase II development approval following shortly thereafter, the program will be undertaken as follows: 

1. Two pre-MOL flights will be conducted from 

Eastern Test Range (ETR) using Titan IIIC R&D boosters. 

The first flight, scheduled for late CY 1966, is a suborbital re-entry test designed 'principally for qualification of the hatch design in the-heat shield of the Gemini 

3 spacecraft. The second flight is designed to obtain 

experimental data which will contribute to advancing optical 

component technology. Specific definition of the experiments 

to be performed will be established during Phase 1B. While 

not yet firm, this flight is tentatively scheduled for mid 

to late CY 1967. 

2. The basic MOL development program will consist 

of six integral launches from the Western Test Range, immediately following the Titan IIIC 7-segment booster development flight. The first MOL flight will be unmanned, but 

otherwise "all-up" to qualify and demonstrate the integrity 

of the integrated basic vehicle. The second MOL flight, 

scheduled for late CY 1968, will be manned, and will be the 

first of the flights essential to the refinement of equipment, development of procedures and techniques, and demonstration of the compatibility and functioning of man as a 

system element, leading to the achievement of very high 

resolution photography early in the flight test program. 

This flight is scheduled to match availability of suitable 

engineering models of sensor flight hardware to increase 

probability of early achievement of the desired optical 

resolution as high quality flight optics become available 

in 1969. 

Operationally useful photographic take, gathered in 

conjunction with system & sensor development should increase 

in both quality and quantity as the flight test program 

matures. 

DORIAN 

aVE36626-6 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

. 'I\ • 

11 

■C) 

t..) 

1 

.C.■ 

J 

>-, 

o 

, 

•4:1 

>4 

0 

CV 

rn 

Ln .0 

C.) 444 PROGRAM PHASES * 

Pre -MOL (ETR 5-segments 

TIIICR&DBooste rs) 

. 

Heat Shield2ua1, (HSQ)Flight 

. 

Optical Experiment Flight 

* 

FeasibilityStudies 

* 

Definition 

• 

Dev. & Test(WTR7-segments) 

7• -Seg. BoosterDev.Flt. . 

MOL Unmanned 

. 1stManned Flt. 

. 

2nd Manned Fit. 

. 

3rd Manned Fit. 

. 

4th Manned Fit. 

. 

5th Manned Flt. 

* 

Follow-on(WTR 7-Segments) 

PLANNING SCHEDULE 

ro 

CI) 

ro 

rd 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

3. In parallel with the basic MOL program, system 

design studies involving larger and more refined optical 

sensors will be undertaken. Other mission applications for 

the MOI,, such as ELINT COMINT, and ocean surveillance will 

continue under investigation until specific conclusions can 

be drawn. When shown to be technically feasible, and worthy 

of development, suitable recommendations for their addition 

to the basic program will be proposed. 

4. The sensor and system designs demonstrated in 

the basic program will be suitable for routine operational 

employment. 

5. During the progress of the basic program, 

other military experiments which directly support very high 

resolution optical objectives may be added. 

System, Configuration 

The booster recommended for the MOL program is the 

standard Titan IIIC vehicle modified with 7-segment solid 

motors and a redesigned 14:1 nozzle expansion ratio and an 

improved chamber injector for Stage I to improve booster 

performance. These performance improveMents will provide an 

additional payload capability of approximately 6,500 pounds 

from the Western Test Range in a 130 n.m. circular, polar 

orbit. The Stage I engine nozzle improvement also has an 

added payload performance advantage of approximately 800 

pounds for the Titan IIIX program. The original man-rating 

of Titan III was for the Dynasoar with considerations different than those for Gemini. Gemini considerations require 

design changes (similar to those made on the Gemini launch 

vehicle) for an acceptable level of crew safety during 

launch and to improve mission success probabilities. 

Study results show that these modifications and changes 

to the Titan IIIC/MOL_configuration present no major development or schedule risk to the program. 

The Gemini spacecraft, which has been designed, tested 

and successfully flown by NASA, will be the basic building 

block for the Gemini B segment of the MOL program. In 

defining the Gemini B segment, -minimum necessary changes are 

being made to the NASA Gemini flight system and ground 

support equipment. The principal modifications for adaptation to the MOL are the hatch in the heat shield to provide 

for transfer of the astronauts from the capsule to the 

laboratory and a modified, shorter and less complex, adapter 

for attachment to the Titan MO. The shorter adapter is 

possible because of the reduced mission support systems and 

is alo) desirable to maximize discretionary payload. Equipments contained in the adapter consist primarily of NASA 

DORIAN 

6W 36626 -63-- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Gemini systems with some systems eliminated that are not 

required for the MOL mission. A contract for Gemini B 

definition yielding specifications, drawings and plans has 

been negotiated with the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation and 

will be definitized by 1 July 1965. This six-month effort, 

previously approved by DDR&E, will provide the definition of 

those elements necessary and sufficient to initiate acquisition of equipment and services to accomplish the MOL 

development flights. 

The payload sensors and laboratory vehicle as presently 

envisioned constitute the major developments in the MOL 

program. Extensive study by the MOL SPO/Aerospace Corporation, by the four industrial laboratory contractors, and by 

optical sensor contractors warrants the initiation of the 

Project Definition Phase on these two subsystems. A 

concurrent approach is needed to closely integrate sensor 

considerations into the laboratory vehicle so that trade-offs 

can be made and evaluated and system optimization can be 

obtained between the laboratory vehicle and sensors. 

Unmanned System Considerations 

Many of the prime program elements in the manned system, 

such as the large optics, 7-segment Titan IIIC, and other 

components could be adapted to unmanned high resolution 

reconnaissance systems. 

Continued studies, and where feasible, component 

technology programs in critical supporting subsystems will 

be initiated for the purpose of improving the performance 

of unmanned systems. Some of the subsystem and technology 

efforts to be pursued are: 

1. Improved V/h sensors capable of sensing image 

motions to 0.1% or better. 

2. Improved stabilization systems with residual 

rates less than 10-i deg/sec and pointing errors less than 

1° 

3. Possible optical rectification devices to . 

remove geometric smear off the optical axis in oblique 

pictures. 

4. Image trackers. 

Unmanned system studies will be pursued in conjunction 

with the technology program outlined above, to provide 

orientation to it. 

DORIAN 

UNCLE V; • • 

COM SYSTEM /5YE 36102(0,1,5 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

As the technology efforts are defined and initiated 

and as applicable elements of the manned program are more 

firmly scheduled, a carefully phased parallel unmanned program will be evolved. Thus, if unmanned reconnaissance 

systems prove more acceptable in international policies,or 

if man cannot tolerate adequate durations in orbit, the 

.best attainable resolution by unmanned reconnaissance satellites 

will be available and at the same time the best use will be 

made of equipment designed, and facilities established, for 

manned systems. 

MOL Mission Control and Network Support Planning 

The Air Force will use existing network and control 

center facilities to the maximum extent possible, with 

minimum augmentation to existing networks and control centers. 

A DoD ground support network adequate to meet MOL requirements consists of elements of the Satellite Control Facility, 

the National Range Division, and occasional use of selected 

NASA stations. 

For several years, the Satellite Test Center (STC) of 

the Satellite Control Facility (SCF) has provided an effective 

control center for multiple satellite control. The STC can 

provide adequate, competent, and relatively inexpensive 

support to the MOL program by assignment of programmed displays to the MOL Mission Control Center. Provisions for 

tight security control are already in effect so that no 

substantial change to the normal mode of operation of the STC 

will be needed.. 

Costs 

In late 1963, concurrent with DoD announcement of the 

MOL program, various task group studies were undertaken to 

define the possible approaches to a manned military space 

program and to provide cost and schedule estimates for each. 

The examinations undertaken at that time indicated that a 

development program similar in scope to that which is now 

recommended could be performed for a cost of between $1.2 

billion and $1.6 billion exclusive of payload and integration 

costs. 

The preliminary definition studies completed to date by 

MOL industrial contractors and by independent Air Force 

elements substantiate the original estimates. The development program now being recommended by the Air Force is 

estimated at $1.214 billion, exclusive of payload sensor 

and integration costs. Cost of special activities for high 

resolution optics and other payload sensors for the basic 

DORIAN 

6Vr 3k626 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

development program are estimated at an additional $439.0 

million. The cost data will be more accurately defined as 

we proceed with the Project Definition Phase. 

Figure 4 shows the deferred FY 65 and approved FY 66 

funds required for implementation of the MOL program. 

The costs estimated on the attached sheet are based on 

one laboratory vehicle contractor for the Project Definition 

Phase. If two contractors participate, the cost will increase 

by approximately $30,0 million for six months of project 

definition. 

Funds to support the sensor development approach 

previously outlined in this paper will be requested and 

funded by separate documentation and procedures. It is 

estimated that funds totaling $38.6 million will be required 

for these special activities in FY 66. Of this total, $10.0 

million is required for Phase I definition studies and for 

initial procurement of optical blanks and other long lead 

time hardware. This sum is further identified to include 

$7.0 for optics, $1.7 million for SIGINT, and $1.3 million 

for Ocean Surveillance. The remaining $28.6 million in FY 66 

is for Phase II development starting in January 1966. 

It is to be noted that the funds being requested for 

the Project Definition Phase and for continuation of pre-MOL 

efforts require the release of only $23.0 million of the 

approved FY 66 MOL funds. The remainder, $16.2 million, of 

Definition Phase funding can be provided by using FY 65 

deferred MOL funds. Based on current cost estimates, the 

approved MOL program element funds for FY 66 need to be 

increased by $24.5 million to satisfy total RDT&E MOL funding 

requirements, exclusive of sensor costs. In addition, $4.0 

million of MOL MCP funds currently budgeted for FY 67 will be 

required in FY 66 to permit the timely initiation of Titan 

IIIC launch base support facilities at the Western Test. Range. 

36b2,6-(05- 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

MOL PROGRAM COST ESTIMATES 

FY 65/66 

WTR - 6 Flights MOL and One 7-Segment Development Flight 

(Dollars in Million) 

FY 65 FY 66 

`---Ph 1Ph ; .Z=-)•\ 

T-IIIC (UTC -7 Segment, 

Booster Improv. ) 

– 

7.0 --- • 35.0 

Lab Veh 8.0 4.0 48.0 

Gemini I.2 --- 26.0 

Mission Control Equip. --- 0.5 4.5 

Fit Crew Equip. --- 1.0 2.0 

Test Support --- 0.3 3.7 

Recovery --- 0.2 0.8 

System Analysis --- 2.0 2.0 

GSE/TD _-.: 4.5 4.5 

Test Stand * --- --- 25.0 

Pre -MOL --- 10.5 —7" 

RDT&E TOTAL 16.2 23.0 151.5 

MCP 

174.5 

4.0 

178.5 

Special Activities 38.6 

* Proportional Share of ILC 4. 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Two Competitive Laboratory Contractors vs. One during PDP 

Five factors weigh heavily in examining the question of 

two competitive laboratory vehicle contractors versus one 

during the Project Definition Phase. These are: 

1. Management complexity 

2. Cost 

3. Schedules 

4. Competitive aspects 

5. Security 

It is emphasized that the laboratory vehicle, though an 

important system segment, is only one of the several system 

segments which will be subjected to the Project Definition 

Phase. Major system segments are: 

1. The Gemini B Spacecraft - McDonnell Aircraft 

Corporation. 

2. The Titan IIIC - Martin Company, Aerojet 

General, AC Spark Plug, and United Technology Center. 

3. Optical sensors - Eastman Kodak. 

4. The laboratory vehicle. 

In addition, Definition Phase activities will also take place 

for lesser system segments such as the tracking, telemetry 

and command network, crew and crew equipment, and also the 

general systems engineering and technical direction provided 

by the Air Force/Aerospace management team. 

Two laboratory vehicle contractors necessitate a completely dual set of contractor family relationships. McDonnell 

Aircraft and the Titan IIIC teams would be required to work 

with both laboratory contractors, presumably in equal amounts 

if a true competitive environment is maintained. This 

relationship is further complicated when each of the laboratory contractors is required to integrate his design studies 

with one or more contractors engaged in large tracking gyro 

designs as well as with Eastman Kodak on optical payload 

designs. There would be a major fragmentation of the Air 

Force/Aerospace Corporation management and general systems 

engineering effort which, because additional skilled people 

could not be provided and cleared in any reasonable period, 

cannot help but dilute and degrade Government supervision 

during the Project Definition Phase. There would be a major 

impact on schedules and costs. 

DORIAN 

PiE 3104 2(,,- 63"-- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

If the decision is made to compete two laboratory 

contractors during the Project Definition Phase, there will 

be a minimum delay of three months in the initiation of Phase 

II development (Figure 5). Therefore, rather than beginning 

development in January 1966, as proposed, the earliest Phase 

II development could commence would be April 1966 with the 

more likelihood that this date would extend nearer mid-1966 

(approximately one year hence). There are several factors 

which contribute to this delay. 

Two of the four laboratory contractors do not presently 

have any appropriately cleared personnel. The other two 

have more than 1,000 appropriately cleared personnel working 

on other contracts in the satellite reconnaissance field. 

Bringing uncleared contractor personnel to the requif,ed 

clearance level normally takes three to four months. This 

time could possibly be reduced in some cases depending on 

the security status of the individual. However, in order 

to achieve a truly competitive environment, clearances to 

work on MOL payloads would have to be discretely controlled 

to assure that each contractor selected to compete had the 

same number of personnel cleared at the initiation and during 

the competition. Unless this status is achieved, a true 

competitive environment would not exist. To structure and 

maintain the two competing contractors at this equal clearance status will necessarily extend the period required for 

project definition. 

Upon completion of the competitive definition phase, it 

will be necessary to again review, evaluate and select 

under Source Selection procedures, a single contractor for 

Phase II development. Past experience has shown this alone 

to consume 60 to 90 days, and the selection will take place 

in an environment no less complex nor complicated than the 

present situation. During this evaluation and selection 

period, additional funds will be required to sustain not 

only the two competing contractors but the other associate 

contractors on the MOL program as well. 

Companion to the preceeding schedule consideration is 

that of funding impact. Figure 6 shows projected definition 

phase costs by system segments for two competitive laboratory 

vehicle contractors. Assuming six months for Phase IB and 

three months for Phase IC, the additional required funds for 

the definition phase are about $28.0 million. It is emphasized again that these schedules are considered optimistic 

and the funds required for the definition period will increase 

proportionally with further extension to Phase I schedules. 

DORIAN 

3k)44.---tos-- 
T I

I 

i • - 

t 

.1 . I 

I ■ 

, 

- • 

'.'-. 

i: :-. 

--: •... 1/4. 

O

IJ .1 CI 

. 

. . , 

• 

Ze. 

t. s 1. 3 

C4 

• 

; 

4 • 

4 

• 

- 

0 

J 44 4441 

. 

e4 

1/44 •••.I 

qZ 

ZS, % • 

CI 

-Z 

c.1 c.,, 

C.5 

1 : 4 

Z i 

1-- . - to k cl. 2,. 

. . 

cc cil V4 • 

1/44 . ■L 

CS / 

4'7,4 7,_ .5Z■ ..4 

,.4.i a = 4 ..., N 

vc ••.J C•tb 6. 

. 

%..) 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

MOL PROGRAM COST ESTIMATES 

FY 65/66 

WITH TWO LABORATORY CONTRACTORS FOR PDP 

(Dollars in Million) 

FY 65 1 FY 66 

. I 

1 : 2 1 3 4 

I I 

I I I 

4..,,,..---......--. Phase 1B--"Pha s e 1Q(-Ph. 2-21 

T -IIIC 7.0 2.5 15.0 

Lab Veh. 8.0 22.0 20.0 

Gemini 1.2 2. 5 12. 0 

Mission Control Equip. - -- - 1.0 2. 5 

Flight Crew Equip. ---- 2.0 1.0 

Test Support - - - - 0.3 1.6 

Recovery ---- 0.2 0.8 

System Analysis --- - 2.0 1.0 

GSE/ TD - -- - 8.0 2.5 

Test Stand ---- ---- 10.0 

Pre-MOL ---- 10.5 

RDT&E Total 16.2 51.0 66.4 

MCP 117.4 

4.0 

121.4 

Special Activities 38.6 

Figure 6 e?t-- 3bkzb 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

F 

This approach would require less total expenditures in 

FY 66 due to the delayed start of Phase II development until 

late in the fiscal year. Total FY 66 funds required of all 

appropriations in this case would be $160.0 million as 

compared to $217.0 million under the schedule and costs 

projected in Figure 4. It would, however, require increased 

expenditures in subsequent fiscal years if all attempts were 

to be made to protect the lead times for a manned launch in 

late CY 1968. Even then, there would be considerable less 

confidence associated with meeting this launch date than with 

the schedule and costs associated with a single laboratory 

vehicle contractor during the definition phase. 

DORIAN 

04VC 3106 Z4-4c— 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB E 

DOD AND NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTS 

3ackground 

In January 1965, DDR&E requested the Air Force to . 

consider, in addition to the primary objectives of the MOL 

Other Manned milital.-y expdPimentatlon, and i4 

cooperation with NASA, basic scientific and general 

technological manned experimentation. 

To accomplish these objectives the NASA and the Air 

Force, with some contractor support, prepared lists of 

,cientific and technological experiment objectives for 

their respective agencies, exchanged them and analyzed 

integration feasibility in the Gemini B/MOL and Apollo 

configurations. 

DoD Ex:ceriments 

As a result of earlier direction to develop an experiment program for MOL, the Air Force had developed a list 

of experiment objectives which were categorized in two 

general groupings, primary and secondary experiments. The 

primary experiments were oriented to quantitatively and 

Qualitatively assess man's utility in performing military 

tasks in the space environment. The secondary 'experiments 

were conceived for the purpose of advancing technology in 

areas related to military space operations. NASA proceeded 

tc integrate these experiments together with the basic 

military observational and antenna mission objectives into 

their proposed Apollo Extension System hardware, As a 

result of this effort, NASA proposed a nine flight Apollo/ 

Saturn program to carry out all of the DoD experiment and 

development program objectives. This program provides for 

two flights of an. expandable module and two flights of 

ocean surveillance experiments, as well as for at least 

one flight of all other DoD experiments. NASA stated that 

after a clearer understanding of the DoD experimental 

requirements and further definition of the NASA continuing 

program a more efficient application of the resources 

available from the ongoing Apollo effort could be permitted 

by elimination of duplication and consideration of priorities. 

As the primary reconnaissance mission for MOL took 

shape and special simulation studies on man's capabilities 

in such areas as target tracking and acquisition were 

DORIAN 

$et 

944-4/ 3.o( 6W- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

perfo=ed, many of the DoD primary experiments were removed 

from the experiments category. They became an integral 

part of the basic system and would be flown as part of the 

mission demonstration and Qualification program. This left 

a few primary and all of the secondary technological 

experiments to be accomplished at some time later in the 

'2::OL development flight program. Integration analyses of 

these remaining experiments showed that they could be 

accommodated on one or two Gemini B/MOL flights. 

MASA Experiments 

In accordance with the data exchange agreement NASA 

supplied a list of 80 experiments to the Air Force for 

integration in the Gemini B/MOL. It was stipulated by NASA 

that tie experiment descriptions were preliminary in nature 

and have not been selected through the official NASA 

processes for approval of experiments to be flown aboard 

Apollo spacecraft. 

It is of interest to note that a number of NASA experiments are concerned with earthviewing while employing 

various high performance optics, infrared, or radar sensors, 

e_ o , operation of high resolution infrared radiometer 

detectors, multi-spectral target characteristics, synoptic 

earth mapping, multi-frequency radar imagery, and optical 

technology. 

Because of the tentative nature of the NASA experiment 

program, the Air Force chose to investigate only the 

accommbdation problems of the NASA experiments to determine 

the capability of the MOL system to handle the various 

experiment requirements, Of the 80 proposed experiments, 

seven could not be accommodated on MOL for various physical 

and performance reasons, e.g., synchronous orbit requirements 

or a large diameter centrifuge. 

The astronomy experiments proposed by NASA were also 

eliminated from the accommodation study since it became 

evident that the primary mission optical sensor could be used 

with some minor modifications as an astronomical telescope, 

and in fact be a more effective instrument than those proposed by NASA. 

In an effort to further reduce the cost of the experiment 

program, the remaining primary and secondary DoD experiments 

were compared to those of NASA and it was found that a large 

amount of consolidation was possible. A total of 31 NASA 

experiment objectives could be thus satisfied on the one or 

two DoD experiment flights mentioned above. The remaining 

DORIAN 

/34C 36&z6---47.s"' 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

experiment program proposed. by NASA can be accomplished 

with give additional Gemini :3/MOL flights. 

After the primary MOL mission development objectiVes 

are satisfied, the scientific and technological experiment 

program can be accommodated in 1970. In order to meet the 

fLight schedule, it is necessary to arrive at a firm 

experiment program decision and hardware configuration two 

years prior to launch and experiment hardware should be 

available for integration nine months prior to launch. It 

is estimated that on a continuing basis the cost of an 

experiment flight program would be approximately $80 million 

exclusive of the cost of the experiment payload. 

DORIAN 

thik-1/4V06a6-6.s- 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

COMPARISON OF APOLLO/GEMINI CONFIGURATIONS 

Introdaction 

An evaluation has been made of a number of vehicle. 

configurations proposed as candidates to perform the MOL 

mission. The configurations were compared on the basis of: 

1. Payload weight capability 

2. Cost 

3. Hardware availability 

4. Functional free volume 

5. Spacecraft life extension capability 

These comparisons were made against the following set of 

criteria: 

1. R&D suitability and cost 

2. Operational suitability and cost 

3. Minimizing time to move from the R&D to the 

operational phase. 

A NASA/DOD Study Group was formed to exchange data, 

establish costing ground rules and Apollo/MOL comparison 

criteria. In accordance with the agreement between DoD and 

NASA, the evaluations have been carried out by two major 

efforts. The first effort was comprised of a series of 

detailed Air Force-SSD/Aerospace studies supported by contractors covering the use of the Titan IIIC launch vehicle 

with 5 or 7 segment solid rocket motors, the Gemini reentry 

vehicle, and a range of sizes of laboratory and experiments 

modules. The second effort was performed by NASA, with 

contractor support, to determine the applicability of Apollo 

hardware to support the Air Force program. NASA investi- • 

gated configurations using the three-man Apollo Command and 

Service Module (CSii), a lab module derived from the Lunar 

Excursion Module (LEM), a 250 cubic foot new lab module 

together with an expandable Special Purpose Module, the 

DORIAN 

d Y6- 31626- 6$_
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Soacecraft-to-LEM Adapter (SLA), the Saturn IB launch vehicle 

in its present configuration, and. a variety of uprated 

configurations, as well as the Saturn V launch vehicle in 

several configurations. The expandable Special Purpose 

Module is necessary to provide for the accommodation of long 

focal length optical sensors. 

Te essential features of the various configurationb are 

presented in the following matrix, and shown in Figures 1, 2, 

3 and 4; 

LAUNCH VEHICLE/SPACECRAFT 

CONFIGURATION MATRIX 

T-III 5 SEGMENT SRI GEMINI B/LAB 

ETR T-III 7 SEGMENT SRN GEMINI B/LAB 

1,AUNCH S-IB GEMINI B/LAB 

GLOW 

INCLINATION 

OR S-IB CSM/LEM LAB 

S-IB CSM/SPECIAL PURPOSE 

MODULE 

T-III 7 SECENT SEM GEMINI B/LAB 

Lti~TR S-IB GEMINI B/LAB 

LAUNCH 

INCLINATION S-V-x CSM/LEM LAB S-IVB 

ORBITS) S-IB (UPRATED) CSM/LEM LAB 

S-IB (UPRATED) CSM/S.P. MODULE 

*Planned for Eastern Test Range launch. 

Payload Weight Capability 

The payload weight comparison study was performed on the 

basis of the use of uniform ground rules for analysis of all 

configurations. These rules are: 

1. Launch vehicle capability referenced to 160 n.m. 

circular orbit altitude at 32.5° inclination for the Eastern 

?est Range (ETR) program; and 80 n.m. perigee, 160 n.m. apogee 

altitude, elliptic orbit at 800 inclination for the Western 

Test Range (WTR) program. 

DORIAN 

ISY&" 166 ve-65-__ 
Qi 

; o O 0 0 to N. ,1 

Lo 

Cr) 

*"-.1 •..;s1 

E.; 

Sp Module. 

0 

!. 1 

z 

0 

0 

A1.16% 3611z6-4,5- 
SP Mo - du le 

/NUGAAL. 

C, 
L, • 

Modified SIV B 

1\ 

rj i vZ(?'N. LL.LL 

l C4CYIQIC i 1`..Q 

4-“C)

C■ d■ Q+ , t\CC' 

1 

 c5 -z,w.g\cl K. 

_....t, 

_.... 

■:: 

-.1 

;.. --. 

k. 

1-, 

k.c NN:.., 0 

— LLI . 

Q‹,lk 

k. 4 

(7, .-; \\7" --• >,- Z_S 

:::.4 l

■ k -QL, N 

(r> 

Qc 

, , —ZJ-- 

V 

0 0 

C'f> 
• 

ii 

• 

0 0 0 0 

00 0 0 

11) 0 0 

• 

0 N 

N 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

2. Spacecraft capability referenced to 30 days 

orbital duration, with orbit keeping propellant included 

in the follow-on program. 

weight summaries of the various configurations are 

shown tn Figures 1, 2, 3 and L• The NASA proposed concept, 

utilizing the Saturn IB launch vehicle consists of two 

categories . The first is proposed for an initial development phase with low inclination flights from the Eastern Test 

a." -d is used upon the use of the LEM Lab or the use of 

a 20 cubic foot Lab module, an expandable set f-rigidizing 

Silecial.?urpose Nodule and Jae Saturn TB launch vehicle with 

its present rated payload capability of 34,000 pounds in orbit. 

The second category is proposed for operational polar missions 

launched from the Western Test Range with extended stay in 

orbit for 45 days, or alternatively 90 days. This requires a 

or upraising of the Saturn 1E launch vehicle capability. 

The Lab Module with the expandable Special Purpose Module is 

the only NASA configuration that is applicable to the primary 

mission objectives of the MOL program, and therefore 

particlar attention has been paid to this configuration in 

the extended orbital stay candidate evaluation. The LEM Lab 

configuration cannot accommodate the required minimum length 

of the payload. Since the LEM occupies a large portion of 

the Spacecraft-LEM Adapter this leaves insufficient room 

even for the folded stowage of the optics. 

The use of the Saturn V launch vehicle, in a two-stage 

configuration, has been proposed by NASA as their primary 

approach to the operational phase of the MOL program. With 

this proposed system, which would be launched from the 

Eastern Test Range, the duration on orbit would be one year, 

while the crew would be replaced every 90 days by an Apollo/ 

Saturn "3 ferry also launched from the Eastern Test Range. 

The Saturn V spacecraft configuration is shown in Figure 3. 

The Saturn IVB stage propellant tank is modified to carry 

most of the one year life support and orbit sustenance provisions. The replacement ferry system only carries a new 

crew and a fresh set of subsystems in the CSM. 

Cc 

The costs used in this comparison were derived by NASA 

for the Saturn/Apollo configurations and by the Air Force for 

the Titan/NOL configuration on the basis of ground rules 

agreed upon by representatives of the two agencies. The NASA 

cost figures were used whenever they were available. In 

isolated instances where NASA figures were not provided, the 

Air Force attempted to generate them within the same ground 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

The basic Apollo and unmodified Saturn cost figures 

2;enerated by NASA after a careful and detailed analysis 

of tne Apollo cost history. The cost estimates for the 

l_rated Saturn boosters, and indeed for the entire NASA 

proposed operational iz)rograz,, were generated with much less 

thoroughness and are therefore to oe viewed with less confic--Ice. nine cost estimates for tn.e DoD elements were based on 

over a year of extensive study of the particular MOL problem 

2.2.d several competitive contractor studies. The Air Force has 

as hig_i a confidence in these numbers as can be expected 

• proceeded t rough a pllon'c defini'clon phase. 

The costs per launch of the Titan IIIC/Gemini/MOL and 

the two NASA Saturn IBs are shown in Figure 5. Total R&D 

costs of the NASA integral launch concepts are given in 

Figure 6 and a comparison of total program costs of the three 

integral launch systems, predicated on 150 dayS per year 

operation for a 10-year period, is shown in Figure 7. 

The costs of utilizing Saturn V in a rendezvous mode for 

me operational MOL program are compared on a cost per launch 

-basis in Figure 8 to another candidate system which utilizes 

aenini 3 and the DoD MOL lab module. 

The remaining possibility was to consider the use of a 

Saturn IB instead of the Titan MC for the operational 

Gemini B/MOL from the Western Test Range, This would allow 

the use of the Standard Saturn IB instead of uprating the 

Titan 1110 to a 7-segment configuration. The cost differences 

asociated with such use of the Saturn IB instead of the Titan 

=0 launch vehicle from the Western Test Range are shown in 

Figure 9, where the differential development cost items for 

the Titan IIIC/Gemini/MOL and Saturn TR/Gemini B/MOL are 

compared on an individual element basis. It can be seen that 

he higher cost of the Saturn TR raises the cost of any 

extensive operational phase considerably above that achievable 

with Titan MC. 

Hardware Availability 

A significant criterion for use in evaluation is that of 

availability of major segments of proposed candidates. The 

availability of NASA Apollo-Saturn hardware is shown in Figure 

10. The present NASA position Is that because of priority 

commitments to the lunar landing program, Saturn IB does not. 

become available to DoD until mid-1969, and Saturn V does not 

become available until 1970; and delivery is predicated upon 

the specification of a priority to DoD with respect to a NASA 
e , 

I' 

i '< N■ \...4 

NI X 

. . "!. 

0. 0 6 

= t. c, i') 

c' li-) •i N. Cy\ 

!-, ' IX) 'z-st :.•Z. • N 

- .., N —...._ 

0 

NJ 

Lr-) , 

L') 

L.- 

C6 

z 

a.. V-- - 0--- 

< in <t %•••.. cn 

; • 

1 Z ''i . >. ' • 

-Nj 

c• if": 6 o 

< a_ 

L • 

-7 a-_ 

0. 

(1) Cl) 

Nc\1 NJ C) 

C) 

---t 00 

< -J 

0 

ir) 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
‘c.:3 co VIN4 

5L /5TER ZAE3ORA

TORY 

•■• 

NRO APPROVE*Dg 

RELEASE 1 JULT2411P 

>-• < u 

V 0 (-) 

CZ: 

co 

< u j 

C:= L) L-) ,,1 Q: 

Le) z 4 N. tb 

0, 0 

C) 0 

(.3) 

'4) 

CO N, 

i7N4 

co c, 

(I) 

CO co 

k‘) N 

NI 

4fIt! ;.!11TJFr 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULV-201 

• _. 

0 

o 

0 

‹r. 

Cr) 

14) N 

2 

Lu 

ON-0111L /T DY/PAT/ON 

4.0 

OPERATIONAL.LAUNCII0 IN TEN YEARS 

R &D COST 

OPERATIONAL COST 

COST PER OPERATIONAL LAUNCH 

eT 36e4 

•I '1 
▪ Lf) ' 

— — — 

tri 

CO 

O 

Z 00 C14. / 4-0 

11.1 

• 11 

O 

. „ 

NRO APP/OVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

" • 

O 

to 

O CZ, 

CI; LI) In M 

- -I V) 1--- z1>{ 

CD CO CC CC 

CC = CD 

— CY J U-I C_ ct 

(j) 

O 

(c) 

C SC::,. `," .. , •-:,..-- iz:11,1 -,7-i mei, 

, i"`•.';.‹.] sz..,. %i c

z....:,) „' 1 

O 

CIO 

•K zm 

r, ,-/) 

1P is 

c., 

C=! 

0,3 

„ 

—I 

C— —J 

a_ 

•=c 

LAJ "cC 

u.., 

I—

CC 

a_ 

up up 

CC 

(r) 

fingt 

`■C ‘:K 

, I 

0 0 O 0 0 0 LI-) O Lt CV 

u 1111k113 1: I lif11141 t 
RELEASE 

APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

z 

0 r- G Co 

O Cr...) 

o Co o1 0 0 

0 -c) to j 

CO 

,s 1 U.: 

r- t 

r"-7 

Ul 

Lt1 

z 

z

0

SP

U

x 

0 Ln 

0 

z 

o 0 

U) 

—4 

Ln cr•

-t-71 

i 

LT 

ti 

• 

4-■ 

ii 

Zj 

b oa 

L3 

, " rti 

• 

Cr.g 

tr, = 

O Cr 

41) 

1-4 

cd t. 

4 

z 

cs] m, L.C1 •.0 

c./r) 

Co 

2 

OPMENT COST ITEMS ( ,-,1000 COM

MON DEVE 

DIFFERENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COST ITE

MS 

Co Co 

• (N. to 1-1 1-4 0 COMMON OPER 

U) 1-4 DIFFERENTIAL OPE RATIONAL COST 

COM PA RTSON 

TITAN-III 7 SEG UPRATING DEVELOPMENTLAU

NCHES 

Co 

U 

z 

z 

a W

0 

F.;,i 0 

4 4 

o 

4.1 

in 0 

ADAPTER FOR SAT

URN 1B 

DEVELOPMENT SUB

TOT

0 

AL 

W TRFACILITIES 

GRAND TOTAL 

a;;ZC. 45 
tr) 

CT, 

....1■111111.` 

0 

me i` • 

0 

0 

U 

U 

U 

C;) 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

*RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

4 

0 

CJ 

0 

U 

0 

0 

0 

Cr> MOL P

R'061■Atvi 

E4RCY 

7-7.

/61/7 7E57. 

tli 

---, 's, k 1. -- r- >, \ i.. 

II) ,.- 

p ,_. (- ''

Co g C' tc N. (b .:I. 

‘C c< S: (, ec

< QL. o o cL. cc , 0 

>- '- oc cL 

< 0 

-, ,,,,,- /3 (;. Z CW Q ' N4. 

:, < % CJ 'C ' .- 

i--- , , 'CJ s‘ n 0 P I 0 

- 

■ f. K L, cp c) 

0.... Lu 't 1, 0 '-- "- (..-- 

<

a c(,) v ku ■' . \ 3 L k .i S, -j '- 

z < < in Z L i ■! p 

....... 

z kik 'z ,.‹ 

-1 ..t L.L.) ,:, ,, , .., W ee o , 0 

c1/4. 1/4r tr, 

i 

6/E 36626 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

art_: orbital experiment program. It is evident upon 

,x: m` of Figure 10 that a 1/2 to 1-1/2 year delay in 

b'ne 2;LI, program will result from the use of NASA Apollo/ 

Saturn elements. 

:Tree Volume 

Detailed studies made by Air Force-SSD/Aerospace, with 

extensive contractor support, have indicated that a minimum 

comfortable net free pressurized volume for a two-man crew 

for "=,0 days is 400 cubic feet, exclusive of any equipment 

and furnishings which will be necessary within the cabin. A 

summary of the various volume constraints of the present and 

Proposed manned space systems is shown in Figure 11. An 

additional 300 cubic feet of pressurized volume is most 

d_esirable to allow the crew to stay in a state of peak performance during operational missions which may later extend to 

00 or 90 days. One thousand cubic feet of gross pressurized 

volume has been established as the MOL program requirement 

to allow for equipment installation and the above crew comfort 

requirements. Examination of the NASA candidate configurations, 

as summarized in Figures 1, 2 and 3, which all use three man 

crews, shows that the volume is- less than the 200 cubic foot 

:ger mah figure indicated for minimum crew comfort, and that, 

in adeition, it is awkwardly distributed for use. 

S •acecraft Life Extension Capabili 

A most significant increase in cost effectiveness that 

appears achievable in the near future for MOL is that of 

increasing the operational stay time on orbit. This increased 

stay time is primarily dependent upon reliable operation of 

all subsystems and of the ability of the crew to withstand the 

zero-g environment for prolonged periods. 

Reliable system operation for relatively short duration 

missions is primarily provided by the use of redundancy in 

design. Redundancy is also used for all elements that are 

critical for crew safety and for equipment located in 

inaccessible places. Mission reliability for long duration 

is to be achieved primarily by maintenance and repair. A 

certain measure of redundancy will still be present in the 

subsystem design, but will not introduce excessive weight 

penalty since the ability of man to supply malfunction diagnosis, fault isolation and maintenance and repair, will 

markedly reduce the degree of redundancy otherwise needed. In 

this connection, the Apollo CSI vehicles are specifically not 

designed for in-flight maintenance as reflected in the Apollo 

System Specification. A significant change in Apollo design 

philosophy such as making all subsystems accessible and 

DORIAN 

tvc- 366a6, 
0 

0 

Lfl

cp 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

fTht

••••:. 

sk. 

‘‘D 

vs" I 

t!:-..,. ■1. 0 , •,. 

---. C' 

-, -. Z--> c I ''•;. 

o I Z.„--. LL., 

c.‹ 

• 0 

0 0 0• '-•- 

(Nt 0 0 kk. 14.,.. •k•-: t'll 

0 0 

N44 ...V kr, '':" 4.4, 

'k'•,k, :''' ,,,. k k i■ 

k • u j : — •-•—■ 

•,,..— < '''' •-: 

u,_; ,..--_•_ ::::.-- Li_ '; —.:. -.7.,. 

..—...1 .."*".1 

ISVe-3624-65 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

subasse:Iblies replaceable would be required to allow for 

in-flight maintenance. This, in turn, would violate the 

l,

ound rule of minimum change to Apollo and thus increase 

deveLo;z:lent costs. The DoD/MOL will be designed from the 

outset for manned maintenance and repair, and thus will 

possess the growth capability to achieve long stay time in 

orbit beyond the initially postulated 30 days. 

Conclusions on the Use of '2A,SA Apollo Hardware for MOL 

The results of the comparative analyses between Saturn 

1B an- Titan 11.0 based systems are shown in Figure 12. The 

use of Apollo hardware in configurations designed for 

extended stay in polar orbits requires major uprating of 

one Saturn IB launch vehicle, development of the new Lab 

Lodule ana Special Purpose Module, and is subject to the 

limitation on available pressurized volume discussed above. 

The costs of the Saturn 1E/Apollo configurations are 

si,icnificantly larger than those of the Titan IIIC/Gemini B/ 

The use of Saturn V for the XOL program appears quite 

attractive when it is considered for operation in a manned 

orbiting system whose scope is much more advanced than the 

present plan, since it can only be efficiently utilized if 

very large optics are used. Therefore, Saturn V is not 

compatible with an early operational capability. If the large 

system capability of Saturn V is to be exploited in an optimal 

manner the requirement is generated for the initiation of 

development of very large sensors at the maximum rate compati-• 

ble with acceptable technological risk. 

further undesirable feature of the use of Saturn V 

for the initial development program is the requirement to use 

a rendezvous system at the outset of the development program. 

Thus, there would be no orderly development in the progression 

from the integral launch to the quite advanced rendezvous 

system possibilities. 

In summary, the applicability of Saturn TR/Apollo hardware to the MOL program is limited by inadequate payload 

capability and available functional free volume; undesirable 

restrictions on subsystem life,_ extension; high program costs 

and conflict of hardware availability and operations. The 

use of Saturn V is incompatible with early operational capability imposing a delay of several years in the MOL program. 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 • 

„...., ›.. , 

, - , ■ — ....; c) ': 

:::•4.-i 'i 0 > n . 

Lri, 

• ,., , 

;.; ,, ...... ir...r; ....... , 

'Y,. 

(..) L.-.. 

--..., 

C. C 

C\3 

q C\3 c.-•., s,.• (v..%). 

-s. 

. . 

(::::?"- .r. ':.', s'•-.-1 

, 

't c•-• u..1 (r) .c.:4 ; „.: . -• • 5 

\''''.> 'T■ ''s I 

",-. 11_1 \ _d i- 1 .. ■ 1 

:. .Z., . :. LY,...; 

-....1<',.... '7" X- 0 ;., 

II -..s. \-.1.; 

, 

.‹.1"-•., -1‘■ 

-1-7-1 

.`■,,.:., •■._ N, 

LJ 

' C. 1 ^ + , ")•• • - • - - , - - . . . . 7 - ' - ' -. ' - 1 - -‘ i <_._1 !:, 

■F \1\< CLI 

--i:s t, 

c,---• 

r-:<":',.: , i.j... `'.-.:-.,. --.4 < 4 -.*4 -/. ,.i ■\IN 3," .j ''( 3 Id C3 

1-,-i 'j. 

(-) 

i I ' 

c',.i. ''.: 

'! L...j u_ijen -) tt 

... 

rsi 

,..,.. _ 

..... 

. 

;.;‘,..k.:„ 

: . 

....-_,., i 

,, - 

,• ?Es 0 • - - - 

C

, L) •-,, 

i 

1 ,fr '' --:-.:.•: Q.) 

, - c)< '•,c) 

-)2,-, L.- 

s,... 

it-5 R......, i 

C4- 

r. 

A .. 

L.. • i er .>:— :'• 

i 

r---- ,•:.:,--"..:,, ', 

0 

I 

s-C 

C- '' i >-, 0,_ CD :4 ':■, 

‘,N: 

N ....z 

a...`- <2 •-- .: 

•-... 

:-.s

...--, 

k„, --f, i 77-• , 

i _ •,,,,,.. Cr" 

Q 

P. • N, . r ■ k,,.._ ; v..,....., _ ,. 

• v..) -. 

•. 

1 N"..... 

,.._. 

i----- , k- I,- (...) 

-7- ;■1 .1t , ■-‘

1 1 \ ._ 

'7 "•.4 , , i 1`,.. \••• • 

.__C) 

,f 

< 

(...) ks. 

i 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

There Is, further, an indeterminate delay in the program 

associatad with the development of the very large payloads 

recuire5,- to utilize Saturn V capability within the constraint 

of reasonable technical risk. The use of Saturn LB with 

Thaini 73/110L from the Western Test Range is undesirable 

because of the very much higher operational costs as compared 

to the use of Titan IIIC. 

On the other hand, the Titan IIIC/Gemini B/MOL is 

comoatible with a program devoted to developing large optical 

hh 2e'631ution devices operated by man. The use of 7-segment 

solid rocket motors with Titan at the Western Test Range 

provides adequate operational payload for high inclination 

orbits. The design of the 2,OL baseline vehicle, in its provision for manned maintenance and repair, provides growth 

caabilizy for extended stay on orbit, 

is accordingly recommended that the .Titan IIIC/Gemini 3/.-iab be used to perform the Do3/MOL missions. 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAB G 

UNMANNED FLIGHT PROGRAM (PRE-MOL) 

2ackground 

Memorandum from the Director, Defense Research andEngineering (DDR&E), dater, January 4, 1965, for the Under 

Secretary of the Air Force requested the Air Force to 

re-exa-nine the unmanned flights previously proposed by 

the Air Force. The objectives of the unmanned flight 

program as stated in the DDR&E memorandum are to: 

1. Make effective use of the Titan III R&D 

flights. 

2. Provide for steps toward qualification of 

components of the MOL system. 

3. Contribute to the unmanned operational 

objectives of the MOL program including the test of 

experimental payloads toward this end. 

In early February 1965, the Air Force in response 

to the DDR&E memorandum proposed a sub-orbital re-entry 

test dened principally for qualification of the transfer 

hatch fn the heat shield of the Gemini spacecraft. DDR&E 

in early March 1965 approved the requirement for a Heat 

Shield,Qualification (HSQ) flight and authorized the 

release of deferred MOL funds to cover the fiscal year 1965 

charges for necessary work with McDonnell and Martin in 

preparation for this test. The configuration and test 

obectives for this flight are detailed below. 

Heat Shield Qualification Flight (HSQ) Sub-OrbitaI 

The launch vehicle planned for this flight is Titan 

IIIC, No. 9 from the Titan III R&D program. The standard 

5-segment solid rocket motors configuration incorporating 

a differential pressure sensor between the solids will be 

used to provide flight qualification of the solid motor 

malfunction detection system. The laboratory is to be 

simulated by use of a Titan II, Stage I, oxidizer tank. 

External structure will be modified to simulate the anticipated laboratory stiffness. Barrel sections will be provided at either end to extend the tank dimensions to the 

DORIAN 

4.

Ae

,`' 

6 

/4 '5.-44124eal 

SVC 31426 - 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

exoeci;ed laboratory length. Tne 2e-entry module will be a 

&e::n_ni system with the heat shield Modified to incorporate 

tne transfer hatch required of Gemini B. The NASA Gemini 

spacecraft that flew on GT-2 is being refurbished by 

hcDohnell and will be flown on this flight. 

As a result of Force/NASA negotiations on the 

manaEement and conduct of the Gemini B/AOL program, the 

aar Force has assigned to NASA the responsibility for 

ahgin-acring, contract management, and procurement required 

for the refurbishment and modifications of Gemini Spacecraft #2 (GT-2). 

Integration of the Titan III/Lab/Gemini segments will 

Na accomplished in the Vertical integration Building (VIB) 

at CRAFTS. The flight vehicle will be launched from the 

Eastern Test Range on a sub-orbital trajectory with an 

azimuth of 1060. The trajectory will be lofted but constrained within the Gemini abort ceilings. The flight path 

angle will be depressed below horizontal at insertion to 

effect a maximum heat re-entry. After booster engine shut 

down the separation mechanism will be initiated and spacecraft turn-around will be accomplished. The spacecraft will 

be recovered after splash down for engineering analysis. 

Specific test objectives for this flight are: 

1. Verify adequacy of Gemini heat shield to 

survive re-entry heat and aerodynamic loads when modified 

with a crew transfer hatch. 

2. Qualify new adapter and separation mechanism. 

A new 15-degree adapter between the Gemini and MOL is 

required for the MOL system. A change such as this requires 

flight qualification. Transmissibility of loads across the 

adapter will be determined and allow for better design 

definition of the Laboratory/Gemini interface. 

3. Obtain environmental test measurements on 

space vehicle structures and protuberances. 

Qsalify pressure differential sensor added to 

the aaunch vehicle. The delta pressure sensor provides 

early detection of a malfunctioning solid rocket motor. A 

Significant improvement in crew safety is possible with 

this modification. 

5. Exercise selected portions of the MOL ground 

support system. 

DORIAN 

6VE 36626, 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

72he schedule for this flight is shown in Figure 1. 

G1-2 &emtni spacecraft has recently been shipped to 

McDonnell Aircraft by NASA to commence refurbishment. 

Seconc_ Unmanned Flight - Orbital 

In addition to the HSQ flights the Air Force plans a 

second flight with unmanned experimental payloads aimed, 

primarily at military applications. 

The primary objective of the second unmanned Pre-MOL 

flight is to obtain meaningful data from optical experiments which will contribute to advanced technology. 

Particular emphasis is to be made to launch and on-orbit 

environmental effects on large optical surfaces. While , 

the details are currently under examination, areas of 

interest include early flight test information on suitable 

mounting provisions of large mirrors and time history data 

on zero - g" and thermal flux collected on-orbit. 

The date for this flight, contingent upon better 

definition - of experimental payloads, could be scheduled 

for mid to late 1967. The Air force plans to submit a firm 

payload and schedule proposal by 1 November 1965. A 

preliminary planning schedule for this flight is attached 

as Figure 2. 

As in the case of the HSQ flight, it is planned to use 

a launch vehicle from the Titan IIIC R&D program and a 

vehicle has been identified for this purpose. Since 

current planning for this flight does not require spacecraft re-entry from orbit, the Air Force has received from 

NASA their Gemini Static Test Article No. 4 which, with 

limited refurbishment as required to correct materiel 

discrecancies, can be used for this flight. No Gemini subsystems will be installed and a boilerplate Gemini B 

adapter can be used. The laboratory configuration will 

be provided by the laboratory contractor and will be 

structurally similar to the manned flight test laboratory 

structure. 

Caste 

Of the initial FY 65 funds released by DDR&E in early 

February 1965, $7.0 million was approved as the FY 65 

care against the sub-orbital Heat Shield Qualification 

;HSQ) flight, scheduled for late 1966. Identified within 

the recommended. MOL Development Program is $10.5 million in 

FY 66 and $6.0 million in FY 67 projected to continue with 

The two-shot Pre-MOL test program. 

DORIAN 
NRO APPROVEQFO.R 

RELEASE 1 JULil 2015 

, 

11 

II • ri 11 

ri I 

• 1 

; 

; • 

; 

• 

1 1; i •

•- i I i 

, • I ''''' i i : .--0 '. 

). : 'C:, .

.- -: ; 1 • v.—, 7 

!I (.) i Cr) ! : C) •t 

. .........., 

, i ....: t t 1 •:-.) t : .., . ,-` : • n 

t C-)! 1 . t7,.; I i ... t ii.: •7 t t 74/ • 1 Li I t • 0 : i ,,,, ; 

1 ; 0 it ; i ■-; : ! ; i ...;.: ; 

t •; •,-;; ■ o T., ; ."-.' •: ! ; ,4• 

;'

, ;-,- ;-;;; U . ;-; : i "' . "'" ; • 

I :: yn••1 Cr) 

I' . 

!t . 7-1 , : ...".'. ' n-,! • , 1-••••: .... c) I '-' I I , ' • , , ::-••; 7 , • n 

C

'Is' ; 0.-C-• : ;--1 

; ‘ C) 

; 

1■C'i "2_7‘; :•-; p ..i 7,' .,-,„ ,

-..-..,, --., u:'. - : 0 1 .,., ; . (-:; ; : c '.- ! V ' ! •-, ! r.. ,--, .• . .;_., .... , , : -> i '.'" ,.., •;; 0 cc; i i u, ! '-'; 1. ; a`-..„' • 7r, 

,-- 

`; n , ......_,• tu ,•• ' s-, 

, iiCri 4-4 1 •,/ 

0 ".<.4'. i 

! n: :- 1 .1:, 1...-1 ., ‘..! ••1, IIN , 

C: II . ,Z 

I i '4. 

::: !; 7 

: 

4-ci) ,i l 1 t.i 

0) i I C.) ■ Ii 

i

:'

, 

:-•••• , 7,--i i ••••' 

..., ...._, , 

4 

.,--4,r.j„., 

t .-C-....' 

C.; I t:-.) ' t 

' : ) -s-e. ! • 1 :7: : ' . s- 'C 1 • ) j . '. ' . ' - i Cr: t (ft' t 4.-', t g•-'• 1 ' (21 7'. ((s) 

,,--i CC, • !...., — 

, ■ 

1

l 

8Yr 
tt 

• 1 

I-•-! 

r-' 

1 

Z 

• t, 

- --J. 

r•-•' 

zc

;•••, 

T-A.J 

ro, 

f-T-1 

o 

co 

, 4 

"54 Cl) 

11 

!! 

• 

0 

0 ‘: 

i.-- 

! 

1 

CO : 

. 

, i r 

: 

1 i 

1 i 

.• 

if i I r 

. 

‘-•.4' d 

. 

: 

, 

C 

"1 

!! 

• , 

ff 

!i 1 

1 

! 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

I

C 

:1 i; . ,-•-f 1 

•1 : (-•, 

▪ 

:o 

 1 ;,J C.; ! 

1 : 

, t 1 !---... 1 1 : 

1 1 ' , 

• 1 

, i i ■ 

; i 1_,■, 1 1. 

i ! i I 1 

; 1 ; I ! ; ■ ; I !. 

1 , !' 

i ' 1 1 1 ; : 1 1 I 1 , 

1 t !-----.„.........-:---.., 1 ' ; 

t , I t 

' 1. , 1....—......1 ` —.........—. I I 

,--. 

, 

114 01 

..,...,—,.............--------.--........--.... ! 7.---1-1 1----41 

I ! I 

I } 

1 ! , 

; 1 

■ 

t , 

1, 't 

t 

, 

,..- ,., 

; 

\t,i.1.1,..,‘,/:::, 

I ; 

1 i 

„...; 

, 1 

; 

<'1., 

1 

r< • 

..., ..,, < < i: 

-...... Nt 

. 

, 

i 

' V 

• t\''. 

• • 

. . . • 

; 

1 

' . i r ! . k • I ri 

■ \ r 

' . 1. t 

'. 1 

r • 

. : :. 

<I ir '1 1 

I K P<1 

1 

1 

r 

1 

1 

1 

; 

1 1 

; 

1 

; 

; 

; 

: 

. ,•C ; 

1 

1 I 

1 f i 

1 

1 

, 

.. .0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

; 

1 

• 

^.; 

: 

0 

0 

•-•-• • 

1 

i 

(t; 1 

I 

• 

rd 

Ct 

r-■ 

• 

C 

c.:' 

• 

, 

•. 

4-J 

• C7.1 1,,,, •••t; 

C.) : 

! 

c...! ; --,, ! (..) 

4-I I ..... • ,-1 

to 1 p 4-4 

}..! ,. rt 

cn 17') "5., 

7°11 

• • V/ 1 

' 

•r-i 

• U 

! . 

•-•! 

i 

........mormwrammn...■■■••••• 

I I, 

1 

< r 

! •

1 

■ 

. 

• 

f 

I 

Ii f ,-,...., >...,, 

• 

i 4-1 N. 1 

• --•' H 1t 1 

o: ;-.1 e) 4 , ,., , •,--; 

• 

11g: .--, ,....., ; i, 

!, < ,•-• , 0 

c..) -• t ..,-÷, 

" 1 ' 

0 i 1=1 i•-■ n 

;! ! 0 , (..) c.) o — '-f• r-' c). 

0 ! 

--. ,...a, , 

, 

!I 

t-- ! 0-, •,- ,t ! 

O 00 

1. ..--„ ;-.., : 

• 

(...) 1 ';,' 0•, :-+' 

I i O ., 1 -1-1 

11 ! ,--, • ,---• ! • ; 

.C:: I 15; , rt, 

■ l 1 I t : 

• I ! ! i ! i 

1 

I 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

AC 173 RESULTING FR,Y JANUARY 1965 DDR&E GUIDANCE 

_ThLrod-12";i0n 

The 4 January 1965 Yemorandum for the Under Secretary 

of the Air Force, entitled u Lan.Led Orbiting Laboratory". 

c-7,1;.-- ad specific DDR&E guidance 1eading to a basis for 

aecIdin as to the future course of the MOL program. In 

r:,pc_-_cc2,e to this ,L'uidance, s)ecLfic actions were undertaken 

th evolution of the proposed prograM. 

2. Consideration should also be given, in close cooperation with NASA, to the following additional objectives: 

as Basic scientific and general technological 

manned experimentation. 

b. Development and 6=nstration of manned 

ae and service cf large non-military structures in 

orbit such. as astronomical telescopes and radio antennae. 

c. Biological responses of man in orbit for 30 days 

or more." 

iL_etion 

Study teams were formed both by NASA and the Air Force. 

ToJether with contractor support, scientific and technological 

ex-oeriment objectives were generated by each agency, and 

subsecncLently exchanged. Each agency then performed an analysis 

for integration of these experiments into their respective 

orbital configurations, GEMINI B/MOL, and APOLLO. 

Study of the consolidation of NASA and DoD experiments 

indicates that all low orbit objectives can be met in 6 MOL 

flights scheduled beyond the presently proposed 6-launch program. 

NASA has proposed a 9-flight APOLTL/SATURN program to 

carry out DoD experiment objectives. however, NASA considers 

that a clearer understanding of DoD requirements, and further 

definition of the NASA continuing program would permit 

consolidation and elimination of duplication, and would permit 

more efficient application of APOLLO resources. 

Further details are included in TAB E. 

DORIAN/GAMBIT 

(5.01 4 ...••• AI . j es / -7 ..., .9. - ■ - • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Gu, dance 

"3 Although it is recognized that the objectives of 

o_ragraphs 1 and 2 have been stuaied in develop ing the MOL 

1 would like to assure that the primary objectives as 

s-tated in paragraph 1 can be implemented effectively by the 

LO., program and that the results expected are commensurate 

estimated costs." 

The approach to satisfying primary MOL objectives has 

been carefully and continuously examined. A clear understandihg of the value of very high resolution photography has been 

established. A conservative technical program approach has 

been evolved toward achieving this objective, borrowing heavily 

from current successful technology. Alternate approaches to 

the high resolution sensors were examined. In the proposed 

program, two optical design approaches for early MOL flights 

would be carried forth at modest cost, without jeopardy to 

schedule, until the best approach becomes clear. Meanwhile,. 

design studies of improved sensors for later MOL flights 

would proceed apace, and be integrated into the schedule as 

..;ney matured. 

Close alliance with on-going programs of similar nature 

was undertaken to insure that desired results could not be 

otherw:Lse obtained at comparable cost levels. It was found 

that manned systems have the capability to achieve desired 

results sooner and with less development risk than with 

unmanned systems. 

Further detail can be found in TABS A, C, D, E and F. 

Guidance 

"4. Therefore, I request that the Air Force define an 

experimental military program to meet objectives (a) and 

(1 1 of paragraph 1 above, and determine the essential vehicle 

characteristics to meet these objectives. This study should 

be conducted in the same rigorous detail that characterized 

the studies of objectives (c) of paragraph 1 above made by 

the Air Force during the past year." 

Action 

Supported by contractor preliminary design studies and 

by SSD/Aerospace Corporation studies, analyses and evaluation, , 

an experimental military program has evolved. .A resume of 

DORIAN/G=1T 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

pl-oposed approach, a brief discussion of principal 

ven:_c1. and supporting element configurations is contained 

T.A3 

CJia:ce 

?he Air Force is requested to assess carefully the 

proposed specifications of the GE.KINI B plus laboratory 

configuration, employing the launch capabilities of the TITAN 

TT-0, a::,4nst the needs defined accordance with paragraph 

Actiof_ 

After careful analysis it has been confirmed that effective 

can be made of the NASA GEMINI-flight system, suitably 

modified with a minimum of change into the GEMINI B configura- - 

Lion. As adapted, the GEMINI B is compatible with the 

laboratory module. 

r_Ae TITAN 1=I0 with 5-segment solid booster motors 

oe_for_is acceptably with eastwad launches from the Eastern 

Test Range. However, launches from the Western Test Range 

into polar orbit require that the standard TITAN MC vehicle 

be modified with 7-segment solid motors and an improved Stage 

1 nozzle and injector. 

A resume of these considerations appears in TAB D. 

Guidance 

"S. In addition, the Air Force is requested to examine 

ap-joroved configurations of the APOLLO system to determine the 

extent to which any of these could meet the needs defined in 

accordance with paragraph 4 in a more efficient, less costly 

or more timely fashion." 

Alternative configurations of the APOLLO, furnished by 

NASA, were analyzed. It was determined that the alternatives 

examined were not promising in terms of improved efficiency, 

less cost, or timeliness, as a means of achieving program 

objectives. A brief of the details of these considerations 

is included in TAB F. 

Guidance 

"7. Since the assessment cf APOLLO capabilities will 

require consideration of the interaction of the laboratory 

DORIAN/GAMBIT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

vehicle with the proposed experiments, NASA is being 

.2e quested to -

provide to the Air Force, as soon as possible, 

inforzation concerning the configations of the APOLLO 

cyst currently being studied by NASA to meet NASA program 

o- jeotives. Based on this information and prior Air Force 

sdies, the Air Force is requested to provide to NASA the 

need3 ned in accordance with paragraph 4 to the detail 

n.3essary to enable NASA to identify specific configurations 

of the APOLLO system a;ipli‘cable to DoD objectives. NASA, 

th cocoa anion, will -j'flen 1:iake this identification in 

at least preliminary form by April 30, 1965. These specific 

configurations of the APOLLO system will then be further 

examined by the Air Force." 

- ASA was furnished needs, as defined by the experimental 

military program, in sufficient detail to permit identification of s-cecific applicable APOLLO system configurations. 

Subsedueht analysis was undertaken and integrated into the 

considerations from which the proposed MOL program evolved. 

:Further details are contained-1n TAB F 

. The Air Force should also define, in cooperation 

with NASA, significant experiments directed to the objectives 

c,2 paragraph 2. The impact of these experiments on the 

configuration and cost of the vehicle required to meet the 

objectives of paragraph 1 above, should be defined, and considered in determining the nature of the part of the MOL 

program whose purpose is as listed in paragraph 2." 

Notion 

An experiments program, embracing basic scientific and 

technological manned experimentation, development and 

demonstration of manned assembly of large non-military 

structures in orbit, and biological responses of man in orbit, 

has been conducted in coordination with NASA, as explained in 

foregoing paragraphs. Further detail is contained in TAB E. 

Guidance 

"9. would like to review the results of the work 

described in paragraphs 4 through 8 to assure that the results 

expected from the MOL program are commensurate with the 

estimated costs before release of the FY 1966 funds to the 

Air Force° It is requested that this review be submitted by 

May 15, 1565." 

DORIAN/GAK3IT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Cc. 2 e 1965, the proposed program, based on the 

us of the Work described in paragraphs 4 through 8, of 

pour January 1965 melliorandxa for the Secretary of the Air 

-a- erce entitled, "Manned Orbiting Laboratory," was orally 

_resented to DDR&E. Previous to this submittal, on 17-18 

ay 15b51 Dr. A. Hall participated in a detailed preliminary 

re-view. 

Guidance 

10. I believe a re-examination is desirable of the 

unmanned flights previously Proposed by the Air Force. In 

particular, the unmanned flight program should: 

a. Make effective use of the TITAN III R&D flights. 

I. Provide for steps toard qualification of . 

components of the MOL system. 

c. Contribute to the unmanned operational objectives of the MOL program including the test of experimental 

payloads toward this end." 

Action 

in March 1965, DDR&E approved a Sub-Orbital Heat Shield 

.alification test, utilizing the refurbished GT-2 GEMINI 

Spacecraft modified to the GEMINI B configuration, boosted 

by a ?TAN IIIC R&D vehicle. An additional unmanned flight, 

which would be orbital, utilizing a TITAN IIIC R&D booster, 

is under consideration; and steps have been taken to secure 

long Lead hardware to protect the option to proceed with 

this flight on a timely basis. 

Additional detail relative to this aspect of the program 

is contained in TAB G. 

Guidance 

"11. To preserve the option for proceeding with the 

MOL on an orderly basis, the DoD will employ the FY 1965 

MOL funds for work on Pre-Phase I and Phase IA studies and 

for the work on TITAN III and GEMINI B necessary for launches 

of unmanned payloads using the boosters in the presently 

approved TITAN III research and development program. Funds 

for proceeding with Phase TR (narrowing of PDP to two contractors) and Phase II (full-scale development) for the manned 

DORIAN/G=IT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

11'nt development program are IIncluded in the 1966 estimates 

Lna will not be released until a decision is• made to proceed 

Ls indicated above." 

1Y 1965 NUL funds have been employed to support Pre-Phase 

and 2ease IA contractor preliminary design studies, both 

for laboratory vehicles, and for large in-orbit structures. 

l':ocesLary work, supported by FY 1965 MOL funds, is underway 

rqarietta and at McDonnell Aircraft in preparation 

'or u=anned exoerimental flights, utilizing TITAN III0 R&D 

-003,-,22S, Further detail will be found in TAB G. 

,-iruidance 

"12„ It is requested that the Air Force fund with 

industry three prelinary design studies of MOL configurations employing TITAN IIIC plus CEK2NI B to meet the objectives 

of paragraph. I. The laboratory configuration should include 

Provisions for: 

a. Testing concepts. of assembly of large optical 

devices in space. 

b. Servicing large optical space systems. 

c. Testing concepts of assembly and service of 

large radio telescopes in space. 

d. Testing high resolution surveillance radar 

concep'ts. 

e. Manned experimentation facilities. 

The purpose of these studies is to help to provide the Air 

force the cost and technical information required by paragraphs 4 and 5 above." 

Action 

Preliminary design studies were undertaken with four 

industrial contractors (per agreements reached subsequent to 

the 4 January 1965) in which aspects of laboratory design 

Eppropriate to utilization of TITAN IIIC as a booster, and 

GEMINI B as a reentry capsule were considered. The proposed 

Program draws heavily on these studies for preliminary definition of the proposed laboratory vehicle and in the determination 

of program cost estimates. 

DORIAN/GAMBIT 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

aace 

- n "I ine Air Force is requested to choose 3 contractors 

for the studies of paragraph 12 who are qualified to build 

the laboratory module whether the approach finally (selected 

is. 

a. TITAN 1110 plus GEMINI B and lab module,. 

or 

b. SATURN 13 plus AKLLO CSM with lab module in 

place of the LID1 adapter section. 

The choice of contractors should be based on: 

a. Orasp of problem. 

o. ]KanageLien,; and technical resources. 

c. Integration expe2ience. 

d. Facility avallabili6y." 

Action 

The 4 contractors chosen (as per agreement subsequent 

to L. January 1965) were Lockheed, Boeing, Doaglas and General 

EiectrLc Each was considered qualified to build the laboratory module, 

DORIAN/GI-1=T