1 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TOP SEG R..1 5 TALENT-KEYHOLE -13 yEm A /4 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

PREFACE 

Mc DIAMOND II study compares the potential performance 

of the manned and unmanned versions of the MOL(DORIAN) system 

from the standpoint of the total number of intelligence targets 

which might be photographed during a typical 30-day mission. 

In the manned system, the astronauts would provide a weather 

avoidance function by exercising the option of photographing 

pre-designated alternate targets when adverse weather was encountered at the pre-designated primary targets. 

Where applicable, to insure realism in DIAMOND II results, 

NRO experience in the planning and operation of reconnaissance 

satellite systems was used to the maximum extent possible. The 

study concludes that a manned DORIAN system will successfully 

photograph approximately 18-20 percent more targets than an 

unmanned system when employed on identical intelligence-collection 

missions against average Sino-Soviet Bloc climatology. 

The DIAMOND II effort would not have been possible without 

the assistance of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Air Force 

Global Weather Center, the MOL System Project Office, Aerospace 

Corporation representatives, the SAF Director of Special Projects, 

and the National Photographic Interpretation Center. However, 

the interpretation and analysis of basic data, and the cone usions 

expressed should be viewed as representing those of the NRO Staff 

and not necessarily all agencies who provided inputs to the study. 

James T. Stewart 

Brigadier General, USAF 

Director, NRO Staff 

tOt(iiick , 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

TAIANWKEYHOLE • 

RA6!4G . 

coo offi(typi 0 -Oois..wo.r)Fonv 
vi cub Alnofkkife'.F 01.1A !PS' 

'A10:0404 lOti,*615644:44P:Oti' 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

• RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

HIMOLE V!A 

TO? SECRET TALENT-KEYHOLE-BYEMAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

■ INDEX 

EMS 

1. INTRODUCTION 1 

2. THE ASTRONAUT & WEATHER AVOIDANCE 3 

3. APPROACH 8 

4. WEATHER 24 

5. GAMBIT EXPERIENCE 33 

6. MANNED & UNMANNED SYSTEM RESULTS 37 

7. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS 47 

■ 

■ 

■ 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

1 

111 

TO? Mal 

INDEX OF ATTACHMENTS 

IlAPItI ( VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOI--BYRIAN 

DoRIAN"Mili 

1. KH-4 Mosaics (8) 

2. Time Available for Astronaut Weather Scanning 

3. Trace of Selected Orbit 

4. Camera Operations Vs Priority/Category Matrix 

5. KH-4 Frame Climatology Analysis (6 graphs) 

6. KH-4-Derived Sky Condition Distribution 

7. KH-4-Derived Sky Condition Distribution 

8. }GI-4-Derived Alternate Target Weather Probability 

9. Ki-7-Derived Sky Condition Distribution 

10. KH-7-Derived Sky Condition Distribution 

11. Moscow Area Climatology 

12. Kakterin Area Climatology 

13. KH-7 Operations Vs Verified Weather 

11 1 

14. Ii-7 Results Vs Verified Weather 

15. Manned /Unmanned Results Vs 1960 Verified 1Weather - (2) 

16. Manned/Unmanned Results Vs. KA-4-Derived Weather .(2). 

17. Manned/Unmanned Results V KH-7-Derived Weather (2). 

18. Manned/Unmanned Results Vs KR-7-Derived - Weathe 

19. Manned/Unmanned Results Vs :1966 Verified Weather; -(2) 

20. . Manned/Unmanned Resuits.vs 

21„ Manned /Unmanned.:K.esults - -V 

DOR GAMBIT 

EM 

Moscow Area Weather .(2)-- 

Kakterin Area, Weather (2) 

SUR. 

.4.pokwoos.,....A0*41Yr.i.,01:*0M1pf 

-0.51,0,: rft Mt 
I 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

1 .40t(VIA 

kri ""C'T TALENT-KEYHOLE-BYEMAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

I. INTRODUCTION 

11- 

This study compares the relative merit of the manned and 

unmanned versions of the MOL (DORIAN) System from the standpoint 

of the total number of intelligence targets which might be 

photographed during a 30-day mission when the astronaut provides 

a weather-avoidance function. By weather-avoidance is meant 

that the astronaut may select among pre-designated alternate 

targets for photography when adverse weather is encountered at 

the pre-designated primary targets. 

Every effort was made to insure a maximum of realism in the 

study--the use of actual targets, existing weather and climatology, 

GAMBIT mission-planning software and operating experience (in 

view of the similar characteristics of the GAMBIT and DORIAN 

camera sub-systems), etc. Further, to reduce the effect of 

variables to the maximum degree, where possible, identical 

operating environments (orbit, target deck weather, target 

selection technique, photographic requirements, etc) and technic, 

characteristics were assumed for each manned/unmanned system 

comparison. Additionally, each variable 'frozen was examined 

carefully to insure that neither version of the MOL/DORIAN: 

System was favored. 

11111:- D ORIAN,GAMBIT AWOL Ohl 

LE 

TALENTt'4YOR. 

COW :0 

PSt-CRET 
60,650Y6i1W ,'. DC:eiio* 

666 016kc1lyr." i6:44.3116* :O.PLY .

II .. 

. . 

, 1 

However, prior to attempting a comparison of the potential 

target coverages of the manned and unmanned systems, it was 

necessary to establish first that the astronauts can provide a 

weather avoidance function, and that weather patterns are such 

as to offer the opportunities to do so. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

itELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TO: SECT TALENT KEYHOLE- yEm AN 

I.ANDI f VIA 

GAMBIT DORIAN 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

- if ELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

cpnE7' 

s.) 

ms,m(VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-ByEMAN 

PI 

(Q.Tpoi 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

VI 

-L 

2. THE ASTRONAUT AND WEATHER AVOIDANCE 

Certain aspects of the astronaut in a weather avoidance role 

were examined as a limited measure of the feasibility and practicality of this function. These were: weather patterns; weather 

relationships between primary and relatively-close (30-50 miles) 

alternate targets; the effect of oblique viewing angles on the 

ability of the astronaut to estimate target cloud-cover; and the 

time available for the astronaut to evaluate weather conditions 

at primary and alternate targets. 

a. Weather Patterns: 

Analyses of cloud patterns by the Global Weather 

Center and NRO Staff of index camera photographs, weather satellite 

mosaics, and KH-4 mosaics (see. attachment 1 for examples), plus 

the observations of aerial weather observers all seemed to 

support the following general conclusions; 

(1) Randomly spaced, similarly sized anti shaped-- 

clouds are seldom found over areas _even, as small as 150 150 miles. 

(2) Clouds tend to group, ,together -in clumps, rolls 

bands, -etc., , even in scattered ,to broken conditions, and -sizab, 

clear areas are frecuently:encountered:in almost total overcastconditions 

T,CaIAN - GAMBIT NAM:31. E V1A 

i'llAll"tA;

gNT'KEY4°12. TOP SECRETDOD-Dllat.tivt 2OD OQS NOT Af Op, 

. ... • ... - 

cobrRoc..sy.17vm.. " • • • ..• • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

'RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

NA MM CWA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE - By AN 

COS'Ht SyStF.W 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

•

j (3) Cloud cover amounts change radically between 

local areas (for example, 5-mile radius "local" circles with 

centers separated by 25 miles), even though a much larger overall 

area may be cloud-covered approximately the same percentage. 

b. Primary-Alternate Target Weather Relationships: 

The general conclusion drawn in a(3) above with regard 

to radical changes in cloud cover over adjacent local areas was 

further verified by GWC analyses of more than 132,000 frames of 

KH-4 photography. The technique employed by GWC was to sort the 

frames into different groups of a spread of weather conditions 

at nadir (i.e., clear; overcast; 1-9% cloud-cover, etc) and then 

analyze adjacent weather at 10 mile intervals out to the frame 

extremities. See Attachment 5 for graph-plots of the various 

conditions analyzed. 

For example, the analysis of 17,000 frames which were complete 

cloud-covered at nadir (akin to a• primary target) indicates that 

30 miles away, the probability of a small area (akin to an alternate 

target) being clear is approximately 107,. Fifty miles from "nad 

the probability of clear skies is approximately 14%. 

As might be anticipated, the analysis, indicates that un 

0-100% cloud-cover conditions, adjacent areas tend to have 

■

■ 

DOI:2;4.N 

..,....64."•c:y.!.; • 

. . 

aret ocivi.•• 

00.0:6iR(G1M1VE:.!!:'OOCs s.: 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

6 

"-:74 

6 66 V 6 TALENT-KEYHOTE-BYEMAN 

COM(PlIE. SY11(.1 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

reducing amounts of cloud cover out to 50-70 miles distance. 

Conversely, under 0-40% cloud-cover conditions, the adjacent 

areas tend to have increasing amounts of cloud cover out to .507O 

miles distance. See Attachment 7 for a plot of alternate 

weather probabilities 30 miles away from the primary target,..,01010. 

c. Effect of Oblique Viewing Angles: 

It is an accepted fact that ground observers consistently 

over-estimate the amount of cloud-cover because of the difiltulty 

the mind has in estimating the total amount of scattered clOuil. 

elements seen against the sky hemisphere and because the observer 

sees the sides of clouds toward the horizon as well as thbOttOmS. 

This therefore was cause for some concern as to the ability ofthe 

astronaut to perform effectively in a weather,avoidance•ro 

However, a point generally overlooked in. : considering 

ground-observer's tendency to over-estimate clbud-ooVer. 

been miSled by seeing the sides of clouds as well as the-:bOttomS 

is that the observer for the most part is looking at ,very-h,' 

obliquities. Most significant weather has cloud '4)40es-leSS::.= 

10,000 feet above, the ground; thus,-the-grOund-ObServer, 

storming, only a five-mile radius circle around his observation 

point la already viewing at obliquitY angles 

700 or more. 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

EMRN-TANT -KEYROLE -. TUP.StCflET 

-..40'...900h61-000710 O1ASP.P0'.• 
1 I 

-timmW.O'.Nte* 

yzmou 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

'"ro'IMM0,30,1 

V'. 

I 

TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYEMAN 

COMTP.O■ 51,57011 

14,07.4.ViA 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

Both GWC and University of Michigan studies on cloud-free 

line of sight probabilities (based on sunshine-illuminated ground 

vs various cloud-cover conditions at various sun angles) indicate 

that the reduction in "seeability" is approximately four times 

as much between 45 and 70° obliquity for 50-90% cloud-cover as 

it is between 0 and 45°. According to the U of M study, the 

reduction in "seeability" between 0 and 45° obliquity ranges from 

about 5% at 50% cloud-cover conditions to about 30% at 90% cloud,. 

cover conditions. Thus, the total reduction in viewing effective... 

ness is not significant up to, perhaps, 50-55° viewing angles. 

d. Time Available for the Astronaut: 

Attachment 2 depicts the time available for the 

astronauts to view the weather at the primary and alternate tar. et. 

through their tracking scopes and select a target for photOgrOAY 

It appears that at least 15 seconds is available for this weather: 

scan function. 

e. SummarY: 

As a result Of this brief reviewit gyres generally 

concluded that significant Weather differences between:reia*Ve 

■ 

■

■ 

■ 

■

■ 

■

close (30-40 miles) primary and alternate targets exist; 

would have little difficulty visually ident 

that:the; 

ng 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-BYEMAN 

co.m.,$,"m 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

SET 

r 

area of best weather through their tracking scopes; that the 

effect of obliquity on astronaut secability would not be significant 

for the most part; and that the astronaut would have sufficient 

time to perform the task. It is believed that future ground 

simulator activities will prove out these conclusions. 

iH 

• 

DoR10:GAmBIT- 

'AW'TAE10.I`OHOLE 

croariot,vit4 •:001J06'1'.004:411150r1d..4e6404. 

OD DiPt00C 06::i•ii..40 .ka, joioci.• 

copy 
C Via 

TALENT-KEYHOLE vow 

CON1.01 SySTEM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

3. APPROACH 

The general approach to the comparison of manned and unmanned 

MOL (DORIAN) systems, with the astronauts providing a weather 

avoidance function in the manned vehicle, was as follows. Firs, 

the potential maximum number of targets which might be photographed 

by an unmanned system in a 30 day period (uninhibited by expend 

able limitations or system malfunctions--only limited by weather) 

were determined; then, the manned system potential was determina0 

for an identical mission. against the same. primary targets plus h.~?.,. 

to three optional alternate targets (where available) for eaCb. 

primary target (with the astronaut providing a weather avoidance 

function). 

More specifically, the fallowing sequence of study event-S. 

was followed: 

a. A suitable. Mai :target deck was developed from current 

intelligence community thinking and the GAMBIT target deck. 

b. GAMBIT software (modified to accommodate MOTS (DORIAN)` .

performaoce characteristics was, 4=. 

a 30 day mission. 

TOP`: SECRET.. 

DOD' 'of 6 DOT iftOcir:: 

• 

■■

■

■

■ 

3 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE - BY Em AN. ZoiLva.4:— 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

c. Necessary assumptions (re control gas, power, drag 

make-up, system malfunctions, etc) were made to minimize the 

effects of variables. 

d. GAMBIT software was used to select the maximum 

possible number of highest value primary targets for the unmanned . 

system, limited only by system constraints (roll rates, thrMe 

required to photograph, etc). 

e. Up to three alternate targets (where available).. r 

each of those primary targets were selected manually for the: 

manned system, with a restriction imposed that alternate targets 

for a primary target could not be so located as to preclude 

possibility of photographing the next designated primary tar:g 

f. The number of photographic attempts which resulte 

in target photographs was then computed using several weathermodels, current weather, And climatology of the SinOrSoviet 

The sub-sections which follow -discuss the above in more 

a. Target Deck: 

Several versions of DORIAN target deekS-have beewAsseM 

by agencies for various,studies'andreasons. .The. deck used 

1:1P4TANGAMATT 

UMW T41-xNT4KEy1.1pLE..... 

„MS 
I Jib 

rr 71r-17. 

1/4.4 ti TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYEMAN 

COw?pOt Sf STUN( 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

this study was a combination of the latest GAMBIT/GAMBIT CUBED 

target deck (Mission 4027) and 361 DORIAN targets selected by the 

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Since many DIA targets did 

not have COMOR assigned numbers, site shredout numbers of existing 

GAMBIT targets or suedo-COMOR numbers were assigned. 

All Mapping and Charting and World City targets were deleted 

• 

from the 4027 target deck. All lateral pair (search) targets and 

targets with diameters of more than 1.5 NM were also deleted. 

All 4027 targets with larger than zero diameters were reduced 

to zero to accommodate existing software and identified by a 

special code (1911). All DIA originated targets were assigned 

priority one and identified by a special code (361). All remaining 

targets were also identified by a special code (1156). Other 

than the DIA targets, all 4027 target priorities remained unchanged. 

The MOI. (DORIAN) target deck, as finally assembled,contaifte 

3428 targets. Of these, 205 targets were external to the SinoSoviet Bloc and are Iocate,d in Algeria, Middle East, Cuba, 

Indonesia, Rhodesia, United Arab Republic French Polynesia, 

Pakistan Albania, France and Tibet. 

• 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

BYEMAN -TM . NT-KEYHOLE 

. •.COETA01,5”.q. . 

• TOPILCREI 

I. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

"RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

I'4O.t VA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-BY [MAN 

CONTROL 4.TE... 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

The deck consists of the following number of targets in each 

:or COMOR category: 

1 111 

Total. 

962 

Category 

PRIORITIES 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Missiles 176 8 3 10 7 8 619 131 

Aircraft 36 1 1 2 11 467 187 

Nuclear 

Energy 50 1 1 2 2 4 32 14 

Naval 

Activity 44 1 2 1 1 42 19 

Biol/Chem 

Warfare 19 1 21 10 

Electronics 14 1 3 4 103 73 

Military 7 1 3 5 4 902 297 

Urban 

Industrial 12 3.9 11 

Unidentified 

Installations 3 2 2 6 2 

705 

106 

110 

51 

198 

1219 

62 

Irot,als 361 12 21 19 33 .2231. 744 342S., 

+Orbit: 

The MOL (DORIAN) 

TOOLS (Target Orbit 

30 day orbit 'was selected using the GAMB T •

Optimization Least Squares) computer progr 

ORIAN-CAMBIT. 

'MEM-TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CICOSIWrA.064.,4W6...olcitt.cp.01■16•. 

•*tio- 0■.00:11vr;5 0■1•Aqt$40.AP6y....• 

••••••• • .••,• . .••••••••• • • 

.Srabk41 11. 4*.rZat. 
This program used the entire DIA-provided target deck (361 priority 

one targets) and determined that orbit which minimizes the sum of 

squares of the distance of each target to vehicle nadir. The 

limits of the inclination angle search were 800-110 in one degree 

increments. The limits of the period search were 88-93 miritttetY 

in .25 minute increments. Two orbits with near equal scoresre 

selected by the computer. Of these, the orbit more favorabletti: 

the spacecraft was selected for this study. The parameters of 

selected orbit were: 

Period 89.33 Min 

Inclination Angle 96.01 Deg 

Apogee 193.08 NM 

Perigee 80.72 NM 

Eccentricity .016 

Let of :Perigee 55.71 North latitude 

The attached reduced EURASIA ASC map (AtCh3)tleiiictTS 

.th±ough 11 of Day .1:•-aadyarepreSe4tatiVereV,f0r• 6461t-IStiO0s.714 

day through day 94 • itta4:be -see. that the .orb .t pro-vide' 

coverage: ofall targets-North of 2 North latitude, The or 

coverage overlaps at 

TALENT 'KEYHOLE . TOP SECRET 

E 6,,U06 ii<SA:. • U.} Oikkis • Oiclitri4.6 . 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

A IS 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-By [MAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 
between 5°N and 21°N exists during which targets are not available 

during the first nine days but become available during the first 

nineteen days. 

The orbit was not permitted to decay nor was orbit adjust 

used. Drag was set equal to zero to simplify computations. 

c. Assumptions: 

Several assumptions were made and employed throughout the 

study: 

a. This study would not concern itself with limitations or 

constraints imposed by vehicle consumable, i.e.., batteries, 

control gas, power, film, etc. The effect of limiting consumables, 

of couise, would greatly favor the manned system. Consumablelimited unmanned systems must operate against predicted weather. 

b. That the vehicle would continue to provide maximum 

capability (i.e., no malfunctions) for the full 30-day missiori 

The desired orbit was assumed to have been achievoi and maintains 

(via auxiliary propulsion) for the 30-day mission. 

0. That the intelligence community photographic reconnaissance 

requirements as presented by the 00140A proposed. use of Gial5t 

were similar in nature to the PhPograPhi-P requtteineAts Whig 

ORIAN GAMBIT 

TUBE 

TALL 

. •.. .•....••.• 

TOP :SECRET: • • 

3 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

3 TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYEMAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 
,■ ANOL I. V ■ IL 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-3YEMAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

be used for the D0aIAN vehicle (for example: photograph 7A and 

2C categories in mono; limited use of color film, etc). 

d. That the weather for each target was relatively independent 

of all others, including the primary and alternate target within 

a selected group, and permitted probabilities to be summed in 

the classical fashion. 

e. That each group selection of primary and alternate targets 

could not affect the preceding or following selected group of 

targets. 

f. That if 100% clear skies existed for the full 30-da 

mission, the manned and unmanned systems would, return with an, 

identical photographic product. This assumed that all targets 

were selected on the ground, and that if the primary target were 

cloud-free, it was the most important and would be photographOd'' 

by the manned system regardless of weather at the alternates,: 

g. That the unmanned system would point.at selecte4 targets 

5*, 

4 

without significant pointing errors. 

d. Primary Target Selection: 

primary targets (identical for both the manned and unmanned 

systems) were selected using GAMBIT software ORESOLVE): 

is sufficiently flexible to -accept .various .system 

°RUN-GAMBIT 

MDLC VIA. 

Etik! - TALENT-KEYHOLE 

OATIIO ,51 km. 

. . . 

DO iitp • . 

• : • • • ; 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

I 

TALENT-KEYHOLE -BY EN1 AN 

cow1R0i SvsI€M 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

6 deg/sec. 

3 sec. 

(8) 

(9) Roll settle time 

Roll rate 

00 

• 

Me specific parameters used for the MOL (DORIAN) system were 

as follows: 

(1) Camera Field of View 1.10 Deg 

(2) Time for camera operation 1 sec. 

(3) Maximum obliquity + 40 degrees 

(4) Mirror flip time plus 

settle time 4.67 sec. 

(5) No automatic frame extension 

(6) No ascending photography 

(7) Sun angle cut off 0 degrees 

(10) Optimization. of Target 

Selection 

(a) Cosine of roll angle squared, i.e., zero 

degree roll optimum 

(b) Infinite weight between priorities 

(c) Stereo/mono weight 1 to .4 

(11) Total. Stereo convergence angle 

(12) Mono photography 

(a) Foriaard 

(b) 

(t) ye rriCal 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

w,ANCi.E VIA 

. Ex.clupep..F4VS.M d .IEGIIVI,IDG • . 

DOD OIRECI DO. O

, . . 

0 

J 

1 

I 
SIVA '• 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-3\1E1\1M 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

TheAiI1 software provides the optimum sequential series of 

photographic operations based on target availability, the orbit, 

target priorities, target obliquity, photographic mode desired 

vs vehicle capability (i.e., maximum obliquity, roll rates, 

stabilization time, camera operating time, etc). The sequential 

list of target operations computed thus represents the maximum 

vehicle capability. 

In the Diamond Study concept, the unmanned system would 

photograph each designated primary target regardless of weather- 4. 

The GAMBIT software. identified 3988 camera. operations as the 

maximum possible for the unmanned system during the 30-day period. 

Attachment 4 lists the number of camera operations against the 

target deck category/priority matrix. 

The 3988 camera operations also represent the maximum number 

possible for the manned system in view of the target priorities 

and relative weights imposed. Thus if 100 percent olear-s ies 

prevailed for the entire 30-daY mission, the manned and unmanned 

systems would Photograph precisely the same 3988 tarApts. However* 

in, addition, up to three alternate targets (ill ease adverse:*eathe 

prevailed at the primary target) were also selected for the 

manned system, with the Proviso that no alternate target selec 

DORIAN• GAMBIT 

TOP SEcRET 

noc VT .32441=1.0 .crops 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE- BY EilAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

cculo be so cc as o preclude the possibility of attempting 

paoogrhy uf c'ac preceding or subsequent designated 

primary target. The selection of alternate targets is discussed 

in the next section. 

C. Alternate Target Selection: 

The "ground rules" for the selection of alternate targets 

essentially were as follows: 

(1) Those targets selected by the target selection software (i.e., by the computer) were designated as the primary 

targets for the manned and unmanned systems. 

(2) A photograph of any primary target or of any alternate 

target designated for that primary target could not interfere with 

the capability of the system to photograph any other primary 

target (or any of the alternate targets associated with it). 

(3) The highest priority targets available were first 

contenders for alternate targets. The next consideration was the 

ability to obtain a stereo photograph. The third and last consideration was to obtain the minimum obliquity photograph. 

The GAMBIT target select computer print-out was used to select 

the alternates (the print-out properly locates all accessible 

k 4:: 

moLf v4 

YEW-TALENT-KEYHOLE 

tkekl100). r110M,AUTOMAIIC irrOADNG 

.000 plittC/iVE 5291110 01)ES NOT APPLO 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Swi 4 44, S4. TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYRUM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

on either side of nadir for each pass over the area and 

inicates Che prim ry target selection. A description of the 

process used in selecting alternate targets follows. 

In the following graphic, the symbol Pi] represents a designated 

primary target. The symbol ,,. indicates camera operation; two 

of these symbols on both sides of the symbol FF , with arrows 

pointing 

target. 

with the 

assume a 

to the symbol Lill , indicates stereo photography of that 

The circled numbers indicate possible alternate targets, 

encircled number indicating priority. As a starting point, 

primary target and its alternates have been. selectedl With 

the selected alternates identified by an asterisk. The relatiVe. 

position of the primary and its alternates is depicted below 

DORIAN GAMBIT . 

NIAv-TALENT -KEYHOLE L 

Oti TUD 5/51eu 

s200'..1"a.o0As•Q0t,'Pet.r " 

. '...• ; 

; i
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

....OLE VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYEM AN 

CON1.140t SYSit.IA 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

Now the same group of targets are displayed with dotted lines 

representing the maximum system roll capability (i.e., rate of mirror 

roll) to proceed to the next operation. The "worst case" from a 

non-interference standpoint is a combination of targets. The 

area below the cross-hatched line now represents the area which 

is "free" for the next primary target and its group of alternates. 

■ 

■ 

■ 

111 

■ 

U 

> 

TA;ENT7KEYHOLE TOP SECRET 

:2.01 01,00.„..FROM;1, 11010,7K-00,0,m6',• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

.RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

III 

HANICAC ',/14 

TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYEMAN 

CAIN:140■,, %UM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

The n i:ree" area for the next primary target ( P #2) and its 

alternates now appears in the area bounded by the Orss-hatched 

lines. Note the lower line is determined by the third primary in 

this sequence which must not be interfered with. In this example, 

the priority 0 , , and 0 targets would be chosen as 

alternates 1, 2, 3 respectively, for primary target #2. 

o- ® 

Dc 

# 1 

!r— ® 2c) 

0 #2 

0 

DOkleAMBIT 9 

yEmAti-TAL4NT-KEY40LE TOP SECRET 

• .cciraisiai. 1.10 

• A .s4:1A POOP 2 -14 c u 

rit*A • NV; itIFnY• • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

I 

- -.717-7774-K4geg* 

,A4Ilt 

L. TALENT-KEYHOLE- BYEMAN 

CDNIGO, 5,r5rtm 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

For the 3988 primary targets selected for the manned and 

unmanned systems, 1934 were found to have one alternate, 1316 of. 

those 1934 had two alternates, and 985 of the 1934 had three 

alternates (Note: in many of the 985 primary targets which had 

three alternates selected, there actually were from 4-20 alternates 

available). 

The obliquity summation for the primary and alternate targets 

is shown in. the following table: 

Roll Angle Primary Alt #1- Alt. #2 Alt #3 

0 - 10° 961 386 271 217 

10 - 20° 910 4-62 333 244 

20 - 30° 931 479 330 246 

3.0 - 40° 1186 607 38-2 

Totals 3988- .1934 1316, 985. 

Finally, the alternate targets Haveraged.approkiMately .3-0Y • • 

nautical- miles. from _the: -.primary targets... No -..particiaar. 

was; made. -to select alternates at ,a..maximum.--.4iStance from_ the • 

prljtaxy.; • rather, the alternate.-: selection- -criteria: was based on 

.priority, ..ohliquity, and • .p.he tographicmode re1atie - values.. 

RIAN. GAMBIT 

HAI1OC VIA 

BYEMAN 

••• 

o 

. . 

• •-c,XCUOC FOA A rovCGRft6 IN

:....00.O440400.PiAors.OrAPPvf.-•• 
■ 

■

■ 

■

■

■

NRO APPROVED FOR 

lb

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

OWA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-By MA 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

Earlier in this paper, it was pointed out that the unmanned 

system would attempt to photograph each of the 3988 primary targets 

selected for the 30-day mission. To determine the total number 

of targets actually photographed (cloud-free and/or partially 

cloud-covered), it was necessary to know the existing target 

weather at the time when photography was attempted. Depending 

on the source of target-weather verification (ground observers, 

weather satellites, forecasts, climatology, etc), a probability 

of "seeing" the target was assigned for each camera. operation.. 

Added together, these represented the total usable unmanned 

system "take" for any given weather situation or model. 

To compare the potential manned system "take," the probability, 

of each primary plus its alternate targets (where available) were.: 

summed to develop a probability for each camera, operation. 40#4*:, 

a-prithary target had no alternate; .the manned-system probability 

of "seeing" that target was the same as the uttim4nriefd :systom, 

Where an alternate (or alternates) target was available 

manned system probability of "seeing' that target was ,deterttine 

by applying the probability equation as follows: 

YEMAN -TALENT-KEYHOLE TorSICRET:,.... • 

.!■1.11Di4 0,TCO ;W. DING 

DOD .00iCt:VC: iJ.DED.:NOT. rivi 
4,6 

TALENT-KEYHOLE -By Em AN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

1-(1-) (1-27) (1-P-,) (1-P3) 

Pt = Total probability of "seeing" (i.e, photographing) the 

C arget 

P

P = Probability for primary target 

Pi = Probability for 1st alternate target 

P2 Probability for 2d alternate target 

P3 = Probability for 3d alternate target 

The summation of the manned system probabilities for each. 

individual camera operation (primary target plus alternates where 

available) represented the total useable manned system "take" for 

a given weather situation or model and could be compared directly 

with the unmanned system. 

The weather situations and models, plus probabilities of 

"seeing" the targets associated with each, are discussed in the. 

Section which follows. 

1114-TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL ki-xci.1 

• PIECRET 

eOMNOL NO 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
c.; 

la 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

. . 4 

1.7.40,1: 

TALENT-KEYHOLE- ByEtIAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

4, WEATHEa 

Sino-Soviet Bloc weather has been observed by various means 

and recorded for many years. Correlating all sources of informa, 

Lion and reducing this data to a readily available source is a 

time-consuming task. Nevertheless, recognizing that the potential 

results of the manned and unmanned systems would be quite sensitive, 

to the weather encountered, the study therefore investigated a 

wide range of weather models and situations, as follows: 

a. "Verified" (i.e., observed and recorded) weather for. 

the period March 7 through April 5, 1960. 

b. An average-climatology model based on the 

• 

of 132,000-plus frames. of KH-4 photography. 

c. An average-climatology model based on the analysis 

of 1159 frames of GAMBIT KH-7 photography. 

d. An average-climatology model based on the analysis 

of the results of 3007 individual GAMBIT•KH-77 camera _,operations. 

"Verified' (i e. 0observed by all .available sources 

weather in July and August 1966. 

f. Climatology for several large target complexes.0 

are known to have both,much.betterand:much worse weather 

the overall Sino -Soviet- Bloc-average. 

piAtiOLE 

co SYSTM 

TOP: SE 

P,C1•060FRO ".U;(0f00.,C.AiGR.i,biNG 

.-666 DRCIu3E 52 66.10 .:6ots- 4rit 

ii,P1504:X 

TAT0ENT:r,EYHOLE 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

4 444. 4 TALENT-KEYHOLEIMMAN 

COPir.0, ;VSIEF■ 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

disk,ussLd in some detail in the sub-sections 

which follow. 

a. 1960 "Verified" 1,:ear'fier: 

Actual cloud cover which was observed and recorded during 

the 30-day period from Xarch 7 through April 5, 1960 was used. 

Because weather observing stations are seldom located at target 

sites, a method had to be devised to determine the actual cloud 

cover over the targets. The following technique was employed, 

(1) Sino-Soviet Bloc 

Actual weather reports nearest local noon have been 

plotted and hand analyzed by meteorologists to produce a four 

year (1957-60) series of daily cloud cover maps of the Sinn-Soviet 

area. That series of 1461 daily maps represent the best possible 

source of cloud cover information for any day from Jan 1, 1957 

through Dec 31, 1960 over any point in the Sina-Soviet area. 

Maps were analyzed in three categorieswith category 1 representing 

observations of 0 through 2/8, category 2 including 3/8 throug 

5/8, and ca.tegory 3 including 6/8 through 8/8 cloud cover. The. 

analyzed categories were then assigned to -a system of almost 

1500 grid points -equally Spaded pproxnate1y go miles. .a.r 

-ttffs, 

PAGE 25 

DD Es; lit :0,..ivirCv • • • 

1 

14, 

• 

4 
:t0f,■ ei 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TAT.P.NT-KEYHOLE-3yEmAti 

VS if,m 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

througnout the Sino-Soviet area. That grid point cloud cover 

data Viz:16 stol.-cd on magnetic tape for later use. 

For this study, the latest available data (1960) was used 

since weather observations have improved somewhat in both quality 

and quantity in recent years. The data for March 7 through 

April D, 1960 was then compared to data from the same periods of 

1957, 1958, and 1959 to verify that 1960 was neither an abnormally 

good nor bad Spring weather period. It was not, so 1960 data may 

be considered as reasonably typical of Sino-Soviet cloud cover in 

the Spring. 

After consultation with the GWC, grid point cloud cover 

categories 1, 2, and 3 were changed to representative percent 

clear sky values of 77, 57, and 12 respectively. A computer. "!la: 

then programmed to compare target locations to grid points and 

interpolate a percent clear sky for each target for each day of 

the mission. 

(2) For Areas External Eino -Soviet Bloc (Indonesia, 

Middle East, etc) 

Actual weather observations and weather satellita 

photogrE4Als for the period March, 7 threugb April 5, 1966 were 

RIAN,GAMBIT 

AN TALENT4EYROLE TO S[CET 

Doti DIIDCWE DOO '.OT PPLY 
NRQ APPROVED FOR 

lir LEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• .6 

Nti f - 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-13VEMAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

manual„ly ined to daterine a daily noon percent clear sky 

f.;g,ure for ech target external to the Slno-Soviet Bloc. 

- In view ot recognized inaccuracies in weather observers 

estimates of cloud-cover g, percent of clear sky), the 

so-called uverifjcdlT weather as used in this model must be 

o his 

adjusted accordingly. The Na0 Staff has developed a technique 

for making these adjustments, and this is discussed in Section 5 

(IkHBIT Experience). 

b. KH-4 Weather Model: 

The Global Weather Center has analyzed more than 132,000 

frames of KH-4 photography in its continuing analyses of cloud 

cover and cloud patterns. The frames were correlated in terms 

of sky condition at nadir (six groupings: clear sky; 1-97 clOudyl 

10-25% cloudy; 26-50% cloudy; 51-99% cloudy; and 100% cloud 

or overcast—at nadir); and then, sky conditions at 10 mile 

intervals, out from nadir in both directions t: the extremities• 

of the frames, were measured. Graphs of the GWC analyses of the 

six sky conditions at nadir 4re included asattachment 5. 

study. 

In view of the latge number of sample 

in each category, plus the fact that the six categories, 

.DORIAN 'GAMBIT 

MAND.LIVIA • •• • • 

,.T4UNTNEYHOLE:' 

.• 4 itiluciiti ',ROM :guromATI[ A Cc 6106 7 

1)00'..C. E.CrV.E 52.0.0 D::6107 14- ,P05. 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

r-RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

Fr 

•■ •tiL,. I. VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOTF LiviAA 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

ail Con)r:s from clear skies to complete overcast conditions, 

it may be assumed chat rhesa analyses also are representative of 

average eliat logy conditions in the Sino-Soviet Bloc. 

Therefore, assumins that the results of any additional frame 

analyses would not change radically those already plotted (i.e., 

that the plots do represent climatology), the percent of total 

time that each of the six weather categories are encountered can 

be determined by summing toe areas of identical weather conditions 

on each graph. For example, for overcast conditions, add the 

area percent of each graph covered by 100% cloudy conditions 

and divide by six. (Follow the same procedure for the other 

five categories). These computations are plotted as a bar graph . 

and included as Attachment 6 to this study. 

Using the bar-graph (Atch 6), a manual distribution was made 

in smaller percentile groups to graph a smooth-curve. sky candItOn':. 

That Ii-4-derived sky condition climatology distribution...•isincluded as Attachment 7 tothis-study.. 

• -The :.10,14 Sky Condition Distribution 

of time various sky cOndi4Ono.vill:Jpe .eneOt0e64,'endalso- . 

IndIcatesther probablIIty pfHphotogr4hing44-pp44-Smolt. 

target in those conditions. 

TAIAT,•;.ic.YROLE••••••- tg.6:.:Stg 

• :••.:e•x0.46•0•••• 

••• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

LEASE 1 JULY 2015 

r tA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-ByEUN 

C,447.01. S 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

20-29 percent clear sky, the graph indicates that these conditions 

will be encountered approximately 32 70 of the time, and in that 

condition, the probability of photographing a target is 25%; 

similarly, overcast conditions will he encountered 167. of the 

time, with photographic probability, of course, being zero. 

If the entire 0--L " is integrated for probability of achieving. 

photography (i.e., 167 overcast times zero probability; plus 10k% 

of 1-9% clear sky conditions times .05 probability; plus 6% of 

10-197 clear sky conditions times .15 probability; and so on 

through each grouping), it indicates that photography of all or 

part of targets (depends on size of target) will be achieved 

55-plus percent of the time. This compares favorably with langi,, 

term GAMBIT experience (54.1%) which generally reflects average 

climatology (see Section 5). 

Additionally, the KH-4 graphs can also be used to determine 

the clear sky probability of adjacent (or alternate) targets. 

Since, the alternates selected - for this study averaged 30 

distance for the primary, that prdbability;has. ,been pIotted4n 

is included as Attachment 8 to this study4 

c. 11.7 Weather Model Based on Frame Analysis: 

Representatives of SAFS-P and the MOI,Systet.Project a 

DORIANWiT 

: is :11.nr.1 

E 7;i:Lu;ri.e5 .Fg0.j 0GitiViN • 

DPP::00aTlfet.s?-0.0!.0::opts..Nor kroky. .• 
. . 

TP SECT -ft, • -TALENT.-.KEYHOLE. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KtYHOLE-nlIPpl 

v SICIA 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

wc,r disr:Lbution moclu1 based on analysis of 1159 

(eachapproxf_mately 10 x 20 miles) of KH-7 

plao•Lography from tilre& 1965/1966 missions. These frames were 

sorted :Lilo completely overcust, cloud-free, and ten other 

grourdi from 1-997. cLoud-fre conditions. A plot of this analysis 

is included as Attachment 9 to this study. 

This sky condition distribution model can be used in the 

same manner as that derived from the KH-4 frame analysis (i.e., 

26% of the rime, overcast conditions are encountered and probability: 

of photography is zero; 11 percent of the time, 1-9% clear sky 

conditions are encountered, with a photographic probability of 

.05, etc). When integrated over the entire graph, it indicates.., 

that photography of all or part of a target (depending on diameter 

can be expected approximately 50 percent of the time. This is' 

approximately 10 percent less than GAMBIT experience <see Section.:. 

5). 

d. KH-7 Weather MP-del-Based nOPeretianal Results:- 

Another weather distribution model was developed:based-On 

the actual results of 3007 separate camera operations ..(from,::seve 

different missions), plus the sorting of individual frames all;o? 

appropriate cloud-cover percentage categories: 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

41 A kG1E ViA • • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

-RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-Mal 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

e:nce (sec Section 5) and individual frame 

clout coun:s ranually sorted into a "best-fit" distribution of sky condition distribution. A graph of this model is 

included as Attacent 10. 

1,1s sky condition distribution model can be used in the 

same manner as that derived f]rom the KH-4 frame analysis (i.e., 

i:or any percentile grouping of sky cover, those conditions will 

be encountered that percent of the time, and the probability 

of photographing a target--at least partial coverage, depending 

on target diameter--will be the mid-point of the percentile 

grouping). When integrated across the entire graph, the results., 

of course, match GAM-LIT experience (photography of at least a part 

of the intended target approximately 54% of the time). 

ea_1966 "Verified" Weather: 

During July and August, 1966, on a day-to-day schedule w1-4tit: -

- did not interfere with_normai GWC activities, the GRESOLVE 

selected primary tauget.s plus manually-selectedelternate- targets: 

for a total single day's- operations were sent to WC for 

determination of "verified" .(observed) .weather' on a target -by: 

target . basis. In other words GWC was 

"verified" weather that specific day in the Sino-Soviet Bloc 

ORIAN GAMBIT 

La 6 

.coutio6i nAnTisr •• 

J51-414,''..TALE,!r7K,E,YROLE • .1.. 

• r? 

• 

. . . . 
, 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

for tde d t,-rSCtS 17./f0Viad them. 

Inc_ results of C experience, in terms of probability of 

obtai.ninc,a of under a 0yen sky-cover . 

-" .0 0- 

"verified" eondit.on (see Section 5), were then applied to each 

target in the sae manner used for the 1960 "verified" weather. 

f. Climatology for Large Target Complexes: 

Climatological values of cloud amounts observed at two 

locations in the USSR were used to compare probable manned and 

unmanned system results in a typically poor-weather area and a 

typically good-weather area. The Moscow area is fairly representative of USSR weather west of the Ural Mountains (worse than 

average); Kakterin (near Sary Shagan) is fairly representative 

of the semi-arid, south central good weather area of the USSR. 

Sky condition weather distribution models for these two areas. 

included included as Attachments 11 and 12. 

Both GAMBIT probability experience and KH-4 alternate 

weather probability were combined to estimate the probable 

results of manned and =manned systems against theSeareas. 

* 

(Manned and unmanned system.probable photograOhic results 

under the weather Conditions described n:this seCtiori Are 

tamed in Section 6 

■-■ 

w 

ORT:AN-GAMBIT 

•• • 10.1:1}..C.51!■ •. r • • • • • 

BYEtviAN . ..7TAIENT .,KEYF,OLE =

CCOFIROL 5 Y,S CMNRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

iiRELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

T.T,ENT-KEYHOLE-PV F:71 JP 11 

4-+ 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

ii 

(2.211' - .Z.X?ZalENCE 

The N;i0 Staf,Z requircs a capability to estimate the GAMBIT 

probability of having photographed a given target on a given day 

(as a basis for planning su)seuent days' operations in the same 

area on the same mission) as well as the probability of photographing a target or targets against average or seasonal climatology (as a basis for scheduling a mission or series of missions). 

As indicated previously in this study, recognizing the inaccuraci.es 

in observer-verified weather, a technique has been developed 

based on a large sample of actual results which accurately com 

pensates for these inaccuracies. 

3007 camera operations, from seven GAMBIT missions, against 

3007 primary targets (the aiming points) were analyzed in terms 

of "verified" (i.e., observed) weather vs NPIC reports of actual 

results. The 3007 camera operations were distributed (i.e., 

percent of total vs peroentilesroupings of "verified' clear-s 

conditions ranging from overcast to -clear) as graphically 

indicat ed in Attachment la. 

Next, the NTIC-reported results of the 3.00.7 camera cperaS were tiohs •against the 3007 ID4marY ta 

0gIAN'.0AMBITit4 

tp;,:cLe ytA.. , • . 

(EMMI -TALENT -KEYHOLE 

9 krp .r. • . 

• T.' SEC ET c 

0200 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

VIA . 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-BYEaN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

against "verified" weather (in terms of probability of photograpLing a target in each "verified" percentage of clear-sky 

grouping). This graph is included as Attachment 14. Note that 

Attaement 14 is plozed in terms of probability o. lf photographing 

a complete target cloud-free, a target partially cloud-free with 

scattered clouds covering a portion of the target, and a target 

partially cloud-free with heavy broken clouds covering a portion 

of the target. 

The coverage of partial targets is largely a function of 

target diameter (i.e., if all targets_ were "point" size, there 

would be no "partials") vs cloud size and spacing.. Since the 

average MOL (DORIAN) targets will be somewhat smaller than 

:GAMBIT targets in diameter, the MO1 can be. expected to have a.. 

higher ratio of "completes" vs "partials"-than.--theGAMBIT:;. 

ever, the overall ratio of targets (partials plus completes 

total attempts should be about the same. 

The GAIT results plotted on Attachment 14 can be used a 

follows. For example, in the observed 60-69 percent clear -s 

grouping, 64 percent of all GAMBIT attempts under these conditio 

can be expected to result in cloud-free photographs of complete. 

targets (01- f course 

. . BIT 

_ • . . • . . . • • • 

•-• • ••• it • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

_RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 lq4(4.1-1A17' 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-2VFU il 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

entire fra:,-nei. cIoud-free), eleven percent can be expected to 

result in photogrphic coverage of partial targets with scattered 

clouds involved, and four percent can be expected to result in 

photographic coverage of partial targets in the presence of and 

interfered with by heavy broken clouds. 

When integrated across the entire graph, Attachment 14 

indicates that 54.1% of all GAMBIT attempts result in at least 

partial photographic coverage of targets (41.8% resulting in 

cloud-free coverage of complete targets, plus. 6.97 targets partIally 

covered by scattered clouds, plus 5.47 targets partially covered: 

by heavy clouds and haze). 

Additionally, the frames which resulted in complete targets: 

being photographed cloud-free (41.8% of total) were checked for 

overall. frame cloud conditions.. 64% of the 4L.8% frames were: •' 

cloud free (26.8% of total GAMBIT :attempts, this correlates 

quite closely with the frame count. Sec Section ,4C). 

Further, Of the 1410 . camera -.operations (45. 9% . of 3007) which 

resulted in no target readout at all, approximately 56% of t 

(or 25.7 percent of total attempts) were completely over 

in the remainder of the 1410 frames, 

seen but the targets were completely cloud-covered.. . The 4 

DORIAN :GAMBIT'. .4.pcxvo, ' COiOi 

:;-KEYHOLE 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

.ANDIE 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-3YFmAN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

contained in t-ais paragraph was used in determining the skycondtion Cistri-oution weather model (Attachment 10) based on 

KH-7 results; however, only Attachments 13 and 14 were used in 

determining manned and un;nned system results using "verified" 

(i.e., observed) cloud cover conditions. 

• si 

• 

- T-KEYHOLE•: 

.5041.4.040 • ••:rKpw•p•et,:,f,icisti,.7.0:10•Vti,•11 OW044 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

. . „ ..„_, . 

TALENT-KEYHOLE YEA 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

UWMANED SYSTEM RESULTS • 

The results of the • calculations of probable numbers of 

targets successfully photographed by the manned and unmanned 

systems, when operated against the six weather models described 

in Section 4, are described in the following sub-sections. 

a. Against "Verified" 1960 Weather: 

As indicated in Section 4, the primary targets (selected by 

the GRESOLVE software) and alternate targets (selected manuallyj 

where available) for each day of the 30-day mission were sent to 

the GWC for identification of the March 6-April 5 1960 "verified" 

(observed) weather. When appropriate, the weather for individual 

targets was computer-derived by GWC by integrating between 

appropriate grid points. Thus, a unique observed cloud-covet 

(Conversely, clear sky) amount was provided for each primary-, 

alternate target.-', 

S ince -1960 observed'Weather-, was.:reported4n,:OnIy,thteeTAir. 

. . . 

*goti.204. twolavgg.#-000*.,..0±- .7c4-Mera-;'apOrd.#0#0*4ret::,14.0..ii 

e less-than-twenty percent cier sky, and rnore'-than-sev 

ear sky categories. Using AMBIT .15' 

the 

otY- ere-r 

a operations in 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 A14:44-49: 

ANM E !Ik 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-311EaN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

grous oZ 0%, 7 0-197, clear sky. Likewise, the 947 camera 

operations in the 70% clear sky category were redistributed 

into appropriate percentile groupings of 70-797, 80-89%, 90-99%, 

and 100% clear sky. 

Then, using GiV215IT-ex2erience probability (Pitch 14) derived 

from actual operations against "verified" weather, the probable 

number of targets photographed was calculated for the manned and 

unmanned systems (See Section 3 for technique). The calculations_ 

indicate that the unmanned system would provide photographic 

coverage of 2019 targets, and the manned system coverage of 2533 

targets (an improvement of 25.2 percent in favor the mgnne4.- Y - - 

system). The tabulations are included as Attachment 15 to this 

study. 

GAMBIT experience also indicates that approximately 20 percent' 

of the total targets succeSsfully photographed. by -both the manned 

and 'unmanned systems would- be partially covered bY- clouds- -However, since the MOL (DORIAN) :targets:wiil-haVe a sitaIler average:. 

dlampter'than-past.and.p-esent GAMBIT targets, the percehtage. 0 

partial target photographic coverage should be less thanZOiperp„O-n 

for both the manned and unmanned MOL (DORIAN). systems: 

DORIAN GMBIT 

BY MAN TALENT-KEYHOLE 

.f %CLOIJED PttON OiA CAl 04o G 

.1 

AG 
TALENT-KEYHOLE- BY AN 

CON'T.,. Y'.TF.M 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

W,,z3 Chat the 3 ver-Hfed" weather produced about 

seven • :DS te.i ge ohoto-rranhs for the unmanned • 

system i 0:11.17 experience indicates should be obtained. 

b. A7,.ajnst 1ie1,7!.-4-Derived Weather 

Next, the 3968 camera o?erations were distributed against 

the sky-condition climatology model derived from Ii-4 photography 

(See Section 4 and Attac'clment 7). Since this weather model 

depicts the actual percentage of time each cloud-cover percentile 

grouping will be encountered, the probability of target photography 

is the mid-point of each percentile grouping (for example: the.. 

of photographing all targets encountered in the 2O.29. 

percentile grouping. is 25%, etc). Alternates for the manned.: 

system were distributed. in each percentile. grouping in actord._ 

Vith the distribution of the GRESOLVE and manual....,eiectioDs 

probability of photographing primary and alternate target comb 

tions was obtained by 'summing the primary probability and the 

0-4--derived alternate weather probability (See Section 3 and 

Attachments 7 and 8). 

The c6mpu;:ations ma 

that the 'unmanned systeM:Would provide 

2209 targets, and the. manned- system 25435 targets an. inbraasez, 

'.0R1"1 . 31.

. . . . . 

14:A10(A .1,111 .• • • 

. .• • • . 

—TALENT -KEYHOLE 

• •• • •• • "• • • • . • 

.0 ct.t.1i00d..' 000w. ..:ITOM.An.dr 

.000 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-ELIAN 

C.O.TPOL SYS7E.1 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

]7, •)17C11:: CYiE the 1-1-nned system). The tabulations 

• 

are lncluded as :.tzachmenJ 15 to this study. 

As noted previously, GAbIT experience indicates that 

approximately 20 percent of the total targets successfully 

photographed by the manned and unmanned systems would be 

partially obscured by clouds. However, since the MOL (DORIAN) 

targets have a smaller average diameter than past and present 

GAMBIT targets, the percentage of partially-obscured targets 

should be less than 20 percent. 

Against this weather model, the unmanned system provided 

about one percent more targets than would have been expected 

on the basis of current GAMBIT experience. 

c. 1H-7-Derived Weather Model (Individual FX4Me PlOUd,CPAInt)_:- 

Next, the 3988 manned and unmanned system camera operaUb:I. 

were measured against a sky-condition weather distributionmadel 

derived from sorting 1179 individual fraTiles of photography 

See Section 4 and Attachment 9) into appropriate percentile 

groupings. The 3988 primary camera operations-. were distributed 

as indicated, by the frequency of occurrence for each percenti 

011ANGAIOTT-. .+.04.•:••• .• • 

. . 

LENT- i(EYHOLE • •••• • 

CONT1101:.SY.54.E.kt 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

11 

TALENT-KEYHOLEt;,7*"0, 

cGruir, s. S :EN; 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

wat.,:her model, the mid-point of each percentile 

gra, - o3ability of primary target photography for 

that grouping (i.e., i he 20-79 percentile grouping, the 

probability photo.raping each primary target encountered 

in those conditions is 25 percent). The probability of photographing alternate targets was obtained from the appropriate 

KH-4-derived alternate target weather probability (Attachment 8). 

Computations made as described in Section 3 indicate that the 

unmanned system would provide photographic coverage of 2023 

targets, and the manned system coverage of 2365 targets (n 

improvement of 17 percent in favor of the manned system). Tablaa 

tions are included as Attachment 17 to this study. 

As noted previously, something less than 20 percent of the 

total targets successfully photographed by both the manned and.... 

urn lined. systems would be partially obscured by clouds, 

d, Weather M'sdel.INplc TtesultS-VluS::.FrAt00 Olbtt 

tOutit.. 

Next the 5488 tanned: 

were': measured against 

based-an the, results, of. 3007 individtial camera 

. against -verified weather (See Section 4 444,AttathaAnt IO 

4)4UWPAP141X.. 

VA N TKVQV 

t ON :61:;5 Y.0 

0 

'OP) 5 

00 

. • . • ••. Ultia ig• • .. . . 

00,401.04;0k, at GP A diNG 

a a ;Dia aciwt:Azia0:10.apt5finr.:aapty, 
Ol3A.N.GAM)3TT-'-• 0.11i0vhse7.; 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-ij 

CO(IT.01 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

3963 p,,Lary c,:.7f.era operations were distributed into each percentile 

grouping inC,icated by the appropriate frequency of occurrence. 

probability of ,c,notogr each primary target is then the 

mid-poinL o.1: each percele groupirlg. Appropriate probabilities 

for cicerna:e targets were obtained from the KH-4-derived alternate 

weather probaoility (See Attachment 8). 

Computations made as described in Section 3 indicated that 

the unmanned system would provide photographic coverage of 2153 

targets, and the manned system coverage of 2592 targets (an 

improvement of 20.4 percent, in favor of the manned system). 

Tabulations are included as Attachment 18 to this study. 

As indicated in each previous sub-section, something Leas 

than 20 percent of the total targets successfully photographedby the manned and unmanned systems would be partially obscured:. 

by clouds. 

"Verified" .1966 WeatheT: 

grimary and alternate targets (selected . by.2ES0ZUE 

manually) for the first 15 operations were sent 

during July and August. 1966 for identi 

Sino-Soviet in Verified" obServed)- weather. fOr 

for successive days. Thus each PrimarY and alternate taupe 

0A: . • 

• :ikCj,ilVV".,,..f,i0.1..itlYikf..46C•• ,i1A.0 

Op; ti,!Pl."1 • 

•-• 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

- , 

r-NV r TALENT-KEYHOLE-6t 

YSIEM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

31d a u;:1:_2,1,a u vc.rlfie" weather. The probability 

217La:yenc alternate target was obtained 

from GA- 2.-iT ex.Derinc- e o7erazing against "verified" weather 

(Attachent 14). 

Compuzations made as dc;seribed in Section 3 indicated the 

unmanned system would provide photoralphic coverage of 1120 

targets on a 15-day mission, end the manned system coverage of 

1367 targets (1-1 M-13rcva7.cnt of 22 oercent in favor of the 

manned system). Tabulations are included as Attachment 19 to 

this study. 

As indicated in each previous sub-section, something less . 

than20 percent of the total targets successfully photographed 

by the manned and unmanned systems would be partially obscured 

by clouds. 

f. ClimatologV at Two,S.alaPtOd T4rge:ts,: 

As described it 8ection .4 <Weather) climatolozy=for the.: 

Moscow and Kakterin.(hear Sary Shagan and Tyura Tam) areas was 

used as representative of typically 'worse than": and "betterthan" climatology ar.eas 

• ccixtRtic4iti 

•::COPY 

• YE' • • A idItotol 

••titi6 trio ieili;i•52•00:0 GOFO I.OT1001.? • • • • • ••• • • • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

,7'4, — • 

HANMEPA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE- BIEOMAN 

DORIAN ai sFi" 

ug 

(1) Moscow ri:.:7et Complex: 

Against the Moscow target complex area, the manned and 

unmanned system missions achieved six good photographic passes 

on the 30-day 1.1issic,n Using the target deck described in 

Section 3 of this study, plus the GaESOLVE selection of primary 

targets and manual selection of alternate targets, the six orbits 

through the Moscow area totaled 24 camera operations against 

primary targets. :o alternates were found for two primary target 

operations; one alternate was identified for two other primary 

targets; two alternates were found for two other primary targetS; 

and three or more alternates were available for the remaining 

18 primary target operations. 

The frequency of occurrence of each category of observed 

Moscow area weather is depicted in Attachment 11- The probability 

of photographing the primary'target was obtained from. GAMB1T - 

, actual operating experience against observed weather (Attachment; 

14) The. appropriate alternate target:weather:probability. for 

each percentile grouping was obtained from the KH-liderived. 

alternate weather Probability (Attachment a 

Results were computed' far one :year..!-.8 -operations . six -411"&e.Ogi3.O!-dy missions for. both theta01104:-.440 14g4i4ttti;e. s Ote41$ 

'DORIAN CAMB IT 

EIANISIA Yl 

YEM. TAL4NT4KETd9LE cokutoT ci 0 4.kt: . xp. 1.46 
• .0., 

•••:t•Row A0 SS1 1C 0(00 

• 400', inoterly $. 605.-tioyeip..P•Cf.•.• 

" 

.:. C TOOL NO 

'gt 

KEYHOLE. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

„,..4IX*.Aa04 

-11,ofi t F. VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-EViA 

Cr041:1(I: S UM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

• 

• 

.f• 

coujcj indLcLtec:.jheuamanned system would provide 

photog,rac coverage of Sc indvidual targets, and the manned. . 

system coverage of 85 targets (Ln increase of apbroximarely. 

percent in favo... system). Tabulations are 1060 - 

as Attachment 20 to this study. 

It should be noted that the ix:oscow area has both worse than. 

average weather and a more favorable distribution of aiterr.40s-. 

than the average primary. Loth of these factors bias the results 

upward in favor of the manned system. 

(2) Kakterin Target Complex: 

Igi The same approach was taken for the Kakterin artaa 

was done for the Moscow area. During. the 30-day mission. 

manned and unmanned systems had seven_ good photographic passe 

against Sary Shagan and Tyura Tam. 

The frequency of occurrence for each sky pec 

grouping is indicated in Attachment 12, probabi1ity 

photographing each prima tarqet was .obtained from 

experience operating against"verified" weather Attachment' 

The probability 0 hortographing, each aiternate'-,targe. 

ordained from the KH;.=47'4erived-alternate weather probabilit 

DORIAN-..:GAMBIT 

Efikit4Tokr-PT1 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 • • -n, • • • 

TALENT-KEYHOLE -73 y p, 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

Trgc distribution at Sary Snasan and Tyura Tam indicated 

LL 51% of ,:ne primary targets would have no alternates, 97a . 

would have one alzernae, A would have two alternates, and 33% 

would have three alternates (roughly comparable to the average 

distribution of alternates vs primary targets). 

The results computed for one year's operation (i.e., six 

successful 30-day missions) indicated that the unmanned system 

would provide photographic coverage of 160 targets, and the 

manned system coverage of 163 targets (an increaspof 15 percent 

in favor of the manned system). Tabulations are included as 

Attachment 21 to this study. 

It should be noted that the Kakterin area. climatology 

• averages-about 10-15 percent better weather than the overall 

SinoSoviet Bloc. 

• . 

YEADUI TATZNI'lcgY.i10.114E 

. . 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Y' 4 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-BYEM AN 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

70 sT,7yLR-Vc6xcLusIoNs 

The results o s analysis indicate that the manned 

system, with the astronaut performing a weather avoidance role, 

will successfully photograph significantly more intelligence 

targets than will the unnanned system on a comparable mission. 

(By weather avoidance is meant that the astronaut may select 

among pre-designated alternate targets for photography when 

adverse weather is encountered at the pre-designated primary 

targets.) 

The capability of the astronaut to perform as a weather 

ftscout" was briefly investigated. It was concluded that the 

astronauts would have little difficulty visually identifying 

areas of best weather since significant weather differences 

between relatively close (30-40 miles) primary and alternate' 

targets -does exist, that the effect of obliquity of vein 

angle when the astronaut scanned weather was not tetiou$4 

that-,the-astrotatits,vouIa.hava. suf:gieieat-t4,1110,-tolipet., 

- . 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

JILLEASE , 1 414,Y,2015 , • - 

6*. TALENT-KEYHOLE-BYEUM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

system coly,pri:3ons. The availability of alternate targets did 

not particularly favor the manned system (since 5l7. of the 

primary targets had no alternates available, 16% had but one 

alternate available, a had two alternates, and 25% had three 

or more alternate targets--obviously, a distribution of one 

alternate for each primary target would have been considerably 

more favorable to the manned system); however, the locations. 

of targets are believed to be representative of the situation 

which will exist when the MOL (DORIAN) system becomes operationaL 

To insure a realistic study and reasonably accurate projections of targets photographed, maximum advantage was taken 

of NRO operating experience with reconnaissance satellites--

particularly GAMBIT experience operating against forecast and 

observed weather, GAMBIT software, etc (in view of the similar 

characteristics of the.GAIT and. DORIAN camera•sub-systems 

Recognizing the sensitivity of the mannediunmatned dYsteth 

comparison to the weather information employed (it was obvious 

the outset, that the Manned system--given the, option of 

photographing s--would :appear in a gior •favPt4 

Wide variety of weather 

models atid data were utilizd with results .as follows 

Flit:AA:ONG .• 

. . 

Obo ,OfPrcTimt %.s.aeo 0 DOtS HOT APP 0 • • "-• • • .• • " 
'1E-q01 7 

TALENT -KEYHOLE-3Y Ell All 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

■-■ • L. tj.i. identical 30-day missions 

O )SV rch 7-.:„)ril 5, ic.;30 weather, the unmanned 

systel:, would have succe;,:;:ully photographed 2019 primary targets, -

and the manned system 2533 rrimury plus alternate targets Call 

increase of ar,Droximatelv 257, in favor of the manned s stem). 

It should be noted, however, that the total targets photographed 

by the unmanned system are about a less than present GAMBIT 

experience indicates is i.:he proper total. It may be concluded, 

therefore, that either the March 1960 period was worse-than 

average climatology or else the observers overestimated el:budcover mores° in 1960 than in 1966. Whatever the cause, this: 

in-effect worse-than-average climatology undoubtedly biase“heresults somewhat in favor of the manned system:. 

b. Operating on simulated, identical 30-day missions:a 

a weather model derived from the analyses of more than 13 

frames of KH-4 photography, the unmanned system would have 

successfully photographed:2209 targets, and the manned -s 

2585 primary and alternate targets (an increase.of.approxiMate 

17 percent in favor- .the'.Manned.syStem .1-s- :blieVed-::t a 

fairly representative-0- Sq;n0 . 

although it may be b.ased a very /.Pt0 degree i 

ONTRÔI. it0.: 

this -weather model 

'TALENT -KEYHOLE. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

.2153- pritaary taiga 

experience. 

d. Operating on simulated, identical 30-day missions 

against a weather model derived from the results of 3007 

separate GAMUT operations against primary targets, the unmanned 

system would have successfully phot ographed 

VIA 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-Br:71AI 

CON;PO, SY ..104 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

favor of better-than-average weather conditions. If so, then 

the manned increase is slisntly less than would ensue in avLrage 

climatology conditions. 

c. Operating on simulated, identical 30-day missions 

111- against a weather model derived from a cloud-cover count and 

sorting of 1179 frames of KR-7 photography from three separate 

1965/66 missions), the unmanned system would have successfully 

photographed 2023 primary targets, and the manned system 2365 

•

primary and alternate targets (an increase of approximately • 

17 percent in favor of the manned system). Despite the similarity 

of the percentage increase between this comparison and that for 

the preceding }H-4-derived weather model, this answer is not 

considered valid since results obtained from this model diverge 

radically in some respects with actual GAMBIT results and 

-d114' the.'111An4ed sYs elm- . 2592Pr#drY- alternate-Pags 

increase of approximataly:20 -..p0rOent - in favorof:stia ,-;maTie 

4T, 

tQM GM - IC Irc 

10:1iiii.? • 

61.4 •• 

• . • : 

• ••ediifoOL NO. :, 

• ••• •'•.• ••••.:• 

th,r.. VIA 

OOO2fiIPE 12 60 11:4.40t/ HO '.FLY 

.1 

I. 

• 

t. 

II 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

VIA 

TALENT -KEYHOLE -NEM AN 

CONINO, SYS ,FM 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

F. 

rZnis weather r„odel believed to be reasonably representativa of avera.j,e Sino-Soviet Bloc climatology, although 

recent GAN:BIT target selection techniques may have biased the 

model a slight amount toward better-than-average climatology. 

If so, then the manned system increase is slightly less than it 

would be under average conditions. 

e. Operating on simulated, identical 15-day missions against 

actual "verified" (i.e., observed) July and August 1966 Sino,- 

Soviet weather for each primary and alternate target, the unmanned.H' 

system would have successfully photographed 1120 primary targets,_... 

and the manned system 1367 primary and alternate targets (ia22. 

increase of approximately 22 percent ir favor of the mannecLsYsteT 

Since the July and August days used for this analysis were selected 

at random, the results are believed to be reasonably typical: 

the increase one might expect •from the manned system (using 

alternate targets). 

E. Operating on simulated,identical missions against the 

Moscow area target complex (an area known to have considerably 

worse-than-average climatology), he nanned system woullhave 

successfully phbtographed 

WImanned-Ystem: 

.DoaLN• GAMBIT 

il!,NDLEV3.■ 

maim - AE.NTIKEy110.4. 

45:pete.Ont more'ta#&tZ-thett.-t e 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE-VEI ir1v 

CONTA01. %S1[14 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

I. 

missions again:Dt dry S-:.a:yn and Tyura Tam area target 

complexes, the manned sys:. would have successfully photographed 

approximately 15 percent more targets than the unmanned system. 

However, to place the .:oscow area analysis in a proper context, ir must be understood that the Ybscow area had a higher 

proportion of available alternate targets than did the average 

Diamond primary target. Had the distribution of alternate 

targets been similar to the overall average, the manned system 

would have shown an increase of about 28 percent in the MoseOw 

area, which is more representative of the relative improvement 

in worse-than-average climatology conditions. 

The DIAMOND II study leads to the following general eonelusions: 

a. On identical missions against average Sino-Soviet 

weather, the manned system (with the astronaut providing a 

weather avoidance function and having the option of. photograPhinl 

pre-designated alternate targets) can be expected to suceessfull 

photograph about 18-20-percenti7are.targeta than the unrriann'd 

system. 

b. .-Operating against large target comp .55 c. lexes lexes, --.41;t1r0OV.P.q 

pr4-44rYitmulti7a1"6 rnate target combinations Available titwor, 

TALENT. lama rc. T 

CiOD• DI.A.ECtlYt .32 9.0:1:0, DOLS NO -APPLY. 

. • • . • ..•, . • • " • 

. • , 

1 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 11,9 Y EiVg 

SYSTE 

DORIAN GAMBIT 

average weather conditions, the manned system successful photographic results can be expected to exceed the unmanned system 

by considerably more than 18-20 percent. 

C. When overall Bloc weather is worse than average, the 

manned system results will exceed the unmanned system by more 

than 18-20 percent; conversely, when overall Bloc weather is 

better than average, the manned system results will exceed the. 

unmanned system by less than 18-20 percent. 

DC3:14N-:.GANIBIT -

......0,k.v..: 4 

' 'EON' :: ,.... T41801.1(gY4PTA P.' illitT v, ,..., 

I.,.4upt0::.;tliow 0.plci4i51P.A4AA! AtEi PAZ ,60**(E , 

0.,6i4..iiii,..:52*.f....10v.00044!.:, 

1 
I 

I Ffr*C4 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

1 

1 

I 

I 

4 

1 

I 

1 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

.,WSSION ';0Q9 

S1 • 

4;.PART 6 01 
I.SSION 9009 PASS ART 2 OF 7 

SCAt AriPOr , 

rlk, Pi . % ` 

I. 

f

RO APPROVED FOR 

ELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
-I

RO APPROVED FOR 

ELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

MISSI6N 9Q 

j 

40' 

•••,, 

F • 

I 

I - 

• 

I. 

RU F[ 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

■ 

■ 

-t59'tttK"'"UVi- ISSION 9009' 

'ASS 4reke4 

ART 2 OF 

.:;;;.,. :IA FIC ;.c 

'. r 

_„„„400;047,. 

■

■

■ 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

ET EASE 1 JULY 2015 

:

MISSION 9009 

PASS 5' 

PART 5 

or 
4.1.,;,7.41.. ."4:44:4V. 41W44;;;‘,4444,44•5 

. 

. . 

. 

_ - . _ . . - - 

;__, 

0 

.--4 

' 

_ . 

r • ,4.-) 'Tfl. 

.. H. 

..t... 

tr: 

, 0 . . 

0 :; C. . 

. , 

4..., 

1-"'", EZ ; .... 

-- . 

- — _ 

,44....._,...,.....„_ 

. - <7- 

- ' 

_ 

0 

. , ; ; , ; r. 

-- . 

0- cr ' • 

- 

• - • 4 . 3 

st .; 

4-4- ; 

• 

,..-.A. 

= - 

_-_- 

'.d....L74 

r 1 • ;.4- 

1:4---4.-T P:. tv.. . ... .. 

... 

t i--4-- 

, T- '4;•=4" 1 - 

-‘--1---'----,---i-71---. ...,-,..-.. ; 

' - ,....6..: 

(1) 

• S 

4 

• 0 : .0. 

." .. 

"4"4: 

ut ed 

, 

- 7 7 7 .. 

4---...4-••-•""i••-•-.•'. .-.'... 

---.■ 

i 1 

ta"-. -'-t "-77 

" -,.... ' : , I • 

...,.. 

' i' ',' ' 3 I 1 ' 

_ • I-- "--.1-1. 

-.. -,- ,.. ...: .--i'"" :...--4,--, ,1

, 

) 

- - - ) 4 :6- i -‘4--r-, 

1' ION 

- 

4'4444-4 4 

-4.- --i74-4-44,--i--- 

- 

i 44-44-144-4,- 

i 4 47-4. 4 ,.. t-T4 S.t 
=. • 

4 - •;:;:' -- 

-i:."•; ''''' 

■,-, P.• :i• 

,... li ■2 

:',,' • - 

.. .L. 

..,,, 

V 

„, 

v 

'i 

,.,;.,,c,- . zi ,-;..- i ,:-;--- \ -2. 

.. ,..—. _, .., Li Al c7 , 

j , J 

4, "i 

I '7 ' ' ; 

4; . . ' t .4 4

;; 

l 1. 

1 Z 4 ..■ 

? 

1 

1., ;ct .....' ...-1-'-.4-. 

.— --C:1 I ,..-'"-- r•Ck 

.-., 4,..., 1-'L.1 •- •.:1 .e ..' .A„,4. 

0 

5 ....7.-, ,...) 

:,...,. ,./ ) . -z 

1 

..., 'i:, - -. :'- 

i 

17- 

('`;:':,,,• --..1./ \ i/ ___ ..4• '^ ■z■ ,......4; ... '::‘,..-. , 

% 

%z = l.'..`j '''''''L.:::::"'",• ... , :

r,.. el'''........... -, 

el el 0- 

.<:;., -•;.> --, t-, m , o• ...,, „,„... '''%':. N' .. A „: • - ) f\--,.../ , • • , ... , —..... 

- 

gr,„4 

% - 

tin 

\-0' 4.„:: , : •L • - : '--1.1 • f . H 

V; .., • . 

' 

n - lil V.,, . „,/ _ ,i, , .-: :,.. -‘4 - ' _ .: i c• --., . i . \ Q 

1r 

P. 

.:'. ...: ,:i 

•4 ,„ ,

i. - .'. 1 :\ ' , 

-,Yk"' .. / % / ,, .'",•. 0, / / 1 ( ''' (' • . 

ri • F\ :\ " • %:•:.: .../ . t).,,._ / .. 

' - ,-- , &,,... 1 .... ,i. 

- ' ..,,, -,-, ' - ,,....., si.,, -... -- -440-,-.. /.. -.1, 

/ ri - (-,,, • . 244 

. - . .. 4:4 4 U 

11 e ,... ' 4tzzr 65 c.,.. 

,- ,.% l'-- tu '''', w-•-.)- • Ce ._J / 

ziu 

o 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

-RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

HANDLE VIA BYENAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM ON 

C Total 

1 

13 

1""' 

11) 53 

1C; 73 

1H 1c 

67 

1L 3 

V S 

;.; 6 7 8 9 

45 2 

,J 53 5 

7 

6 9 

1 

4 

2 

6 7 53 7 

6 

12 2 

1 2 

27 52 

2 1 6 1 

5 1 22 517 263 

2A 52 

23 1 6 

2C 55 

131 

26_ 

863, 

2G 7 ...7. 

33 

3C 

3E 

4A 

43 

4C 

5A. 

32 22 , 36 

5 2,99 207 601 

11 22 /5 718 228 1016 

6. 

Totals 929 7 8 28 51 79 1915 971. 3988 

Tor LT1CRET 

153 

102 

77 

22 

77 

.12 

2.3 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 ., :f.1,-14;:•,;;?:.;,:e..,4"•::Z,,f " 

I OW -Cloudy 

51-99;, Cloudy 

So_z. 

1(41 

■ 

■ • 

0 

• 

. ..... . 

4-- : 

ANAL! YS 6 IF,R:AIVIIF,S kyr': h LI ATti SKY 

Foy az~a3 y~is-; .eachiD 4.57, 

each4sp.,- ril euit 6ssicizeci- onci50 0--- '10 0 
••••••.. •••••••••-...••••••••,•• ,••,•••, ••• •-•••• ••• 

• 

• - 

,•777: ; , 

• 

...... • 

• 

...-- , 

r--•t• 

......7.... -. .,....., < 

, . 1 

- 

; • .1 v".: . --1, • 

• 

• . • I, . 

• 

 ; . 4 ! i ' ' ' ''' • - ' c`D`•' ; T'''. .'- • • 

(--. 

- ;••• 7• 0Ln-- 7-7,-7 1—r-T4', ' ' -I 

, ',... •-• - 1.77--;-- --,1-Tti• 

f ; • 1- 7 . 7 7 .. ! . -i- 

• .. , - - ,• -•• 

• '.. , ; ,,, •1..... -1.-4.-4- -, _ • • 1 • - . , . • ..„. • ...... ,--- • ....- 

• - ' •4 ...., 

:. • • ..). ■ 4... • - 

- 

I t. 1- •• " 

1 . . 

, . , : ' + '• i_i_ 

.4 . •E - ■ ■ ., ..... • : 

. . • 

; • • t • - 

- • - . • 

;. 

• .• 

. 

• . 

. • • . : I + 

•- I"— i++ ; 

• • ' • •"-- • " • -•"-- --7- 1 - " • •-r.""17-4-•-'1* -4"4---1-4-1-:- 

t . 

• . . 

; ,. • ; 

•

• .4, 

• ; • ; r. • 

• • 

• • ., • 1 ' 

• ; 

• . , ; ' ••• , : ; 7" , 

. I I 

• - • • , • : 

s ... ; .. •i- 

, , • • • • r: i —t , " 7• • 7771771'77777-77777- 

: „ . 7 ; 7" -IT • ; : ; ; , . 7 

-.4 

: 

• — 
■ 

L i .._ ....._, 

c.„ 

,...... 

. . . 

_ ....._... . .. ._ _. ______,......, 

‘,.. . 

O 

4.,..., 

..... . . , . 

,,,... _o . . . . 

H 

E—", 

C4 

C./.) 

0": 

Ca) • 

j^"i • 

0 • .... . . .... . , . 

H 504-5 9 • 

• 

• • . • -•,. • 1 - • , ••i6LEAF,SKY 

-• 

t • • •• •, 

- 

- ' — 

- t-i 

1-t 

q 

zi. 

c c.,-) 

' 

(NI c-,..,* ,1 • - • , 

..,-.; ;. 

4,-1 : ,..? j ; . , 

ir.`, 4-r i. , • 10 vs-; 

• ,..r- ; • - • . 

, .. 0- 

--._ 

P,,,,-----4 

. 

.,-,_ , , „,....i i . , 

• 7:, -7-.: 7 f 

v. _ 

.. 

- 

... . ... .. ___ 

,.:.„ 

. 

. . . 

.__. 

._ 

. 

.._ 

_ .. ._.„. _ 

. . . _ 

; 

. , . . , 

. 

,_ 

- 

._. . 

• ___... .. 1 

--- 

. 

.: ... 

: . 

. . . . 

"^ 4 • . ^ ' '. ' ' i ' 

. . 

' : . 

) 

: _ _ 

, " , , ( • _ 

,. , 

-7-7-'-' ! ",---.! 

: 4 .......,---- • ,__;,_._, 1

•

717fiff , 

- 

.,_.., 

-i----, ! . _.,.■ ....--:.....-:-;.L. I . i ' • ..:.,...-...1 

-,.. 

;, 4-....,,-1--1-t-1-^,--` • i"- 

 , 

,_ 4 

. , • 

.._ 1--..;-,i---, .. 1 

, . ; . • - I I • . I i ' . 4 

t , ---,-±,-t-i---,-1-------”,- 

L-1--1-i-t-td- ' .-.4 [ i I 1 , ..--.*--1,-,1- --,--i•-,-- ' ' ; , 

.-, 

-4--i...-.,,, 

, , i 

1 

-4 

i 

,-- 

. "H-t H— 

. ' —7 ",—,""1 

,•74-. Y L ,I_ ., 

._,--. ...- - -- 1 1 - F

( 

t 

— , 

: i ‘...-,--... 

• , ... , .. ' '. . ; F:4 , 

. 

71 

I-4 4-4 

1:4 r.lt 

'^•••••■.;•.'•■•;7i17`4.:::,.:1." „1", 
r-i • 
, 

,...•-,,---,------- '-',"-',4','••••----"'••'"••;.,..,"-; • . . - - • ,-, .,- - • .-,-,--,--.4,r,,,,,,,,r-,,,..,-- v.g,:t,M.S- Kr-.,:?..?.?."ei,.,-,,,,,,,;;;q40;Ar.*W...V....r.-.4061'.6.-W-g,,b"At.it-.*MziA.';fir; 

• 

-

• 

- 

_ , 

....„... • ..; r-i . ..... , 

- .",- . . •-.. - .. .... I IN, 

, ------._. 

• 

. -- !• ••• ' 7'1 

--__. -•-•-••-- 

. • 

. •• 

. .„ . 

..,.., , 

. .. . . 

. - .. . 

. 

• 

. .. 

, 

. -- -- 

. . , 

. . .. 

... .. 

, 

' •\ . ; ! j - 

- - • - : 

 ,. i 

rf : 7., 1 • 

.. 

— i 

,0•, 

- 

,.e.4 ' 

• , 

1 ; ' :• 

.. . . ....._ _,.. 

cz-;,............— 

. • . 

, 

' 

—.. 

, . ; ; 

kr—N .. 

_.,.! , • • 

c„,- , ; cf.,. , ; .. 

. !----;! `r,---f 5 

,,...7„ 1 . • 7: ; 

f;•,..; i , L-• j .... . 

i 3-1 : , • 

-• . -. 

:,-- .-- :::_. :1: . 

f•-i i t:i . i • 

,C.; ! C 1 . . .. 

,... 

.. 

. 

'''•,,,''.1 ' . 

1 : : 

Q 

. 

• , . 

, , . , , 

_ _ . . 

... 

_ . . . .• . _ . . .. 

" 

: . . -; 

.•. , ; . .. 

;::-.; ;

,ii 

. ; 

!. i 41r . ; ' 

 V2 

! 

' • 

,.,,' 

i .7-11 0 . t • , 

_ 

' i ' ' i 

Of 0-• C.,) .. 

L)1 , , t . : • 

, 5.4-....... 

. 

, 

; 

; . - 

: 

: ' 

• 4 4.4.-• 

, : ' ' '' ' • 

. ] • ' : -,--,-,--.-•:- -"...---, 

..,., 

.„ ; ., , 

r' :

-: . 5:,L1": 5 . . !I 

P ;-• •:-- :".---:: 

(::: Nt. . . .......;44-...:-.....-3.-,C4,.:,-..;..41 

'1..4'. 

--'''''' 

!'..., ''. !'" - 

7 - 

:,': .! , 5- : • 

,:-...:,...) 

: : 

' ' .- .>-;. i:J! 4.4 : 1 -' : 

r4• ' . 

. • : 

. 

: 

: • 

, 

, : 

: 

1- • ' 

., 

: _ 

. . 

., : --- ...-i- ... , i ,--, •i--, 

. 

. : 

; : fl 

, . 

: •,- k 

1-1.-....',.- 

_ 

. , ....., 

. . . 

: . : - 

.., . 

" ...A . • : 

-L- 

. 

- 

, 

. 

, . 

: 

. 

i - ,.-•H ----i- : - , • , : • , , i : : i ----,---.---!-. ,, ' --, . i.-.---:-; 

: ; . : • , .: : : 

-:-",::;-',:. 

; :,--- ( ' 

-

'

f

,'

.-,.-

'

-,

!

!

-

.-

-

,

,

':-

-.. h

-*- 

r4 

; . - . ..

-4-- '-• , ' -',, f--4-- ' r ---•i•-j: : -- -;,-- :: , - 

-

--4.--

--

4

!

:

-

-

-4;---

±

-;-

"."

-

-

-

- 

 ,-•. 7--r -4'-

-

-1' ::-':- . ::.--- . , 7 : ":"1.-- 

-1-"••7"-t --+--r- r--t-t.-1------'---.-~ -- t---,. --,.--j 

, , 

i , 

, •-:,

;:"•-"•-•::•"-:•::

."" 

'"•: 

--.:-TH-7-'-7-77'1, -

: : : ; : 

.=•:.!,.'; 

, ; : , 

' 

-•:; 

':: •"••i' 4 

; : . i 

',, • `, : ' --,i 

-4,- 7:7---:"1"---, 

; 

 '... -•-"' :, -:.-•• ; 

''': 

',• ''.-- :'---4-i- ' i 

:

;: 

:-.-

i

r

'' 7

-.:- 

 1

:

-

-

'

.4-7--- .-

i

1• 

f-- -- - 

: ; 1- ' : .' -1:-1-71 

. ; , ., ,.. ! :_j , : •_,,, , ., . , ; , , : . . : ; . 1, , ., ,,, L H;" 

77-7:- - ::H_: ,.. ,',..,!: i ': 3„;/ , :t 

.., ..- 

- f -i.-H--4-4.--i-7'-- 

" 1- :1-1-1-1; 

I ----4,.-.7-4-'---'-'.---:,--7 "1 -••f-t-4-4.,-1:-,!---',- 

Z 

•'•"-1;•-•.•••••:•••ti•-••;, ••••••••••••' •-t•-;'-i---f.-1,---C„•-i-t- -:-:-H•-••1;:' 

.4 - .1 - f ;4 - ' , T I ; -•;? ' . ,. I' 

, ' •; ' ' ' ■;,-- -. -1---4 -1---' '4-4 '-4-- : 

, -'• ; , , : : , , ; : , •,.. ., .., 

• ' ' .'"•-1-1-7••- 

: .,, ''' • , : ! ,. ' ' : ! i ; ; ' ! , -,--,--t--i—,,,,,,, ,-,. 

•-• :-± ,' 4 --.1; 

, ...1....,-,....4„,-,- I -- ,-: ,-4-t- i ; ";HH': •-, .. . ,t ; , ; 

.. 

! • 

:.., ..r. , , . , , , i • , ,,,, 1 

:: :. , ' • :- ::_i ,_1-:,-., ,....... , , , L t.!.,... 

: !--4-1, . , ' ', .. . • :. i 1 , 4, , '. r 

, • 

- 

4...„..4.... f ' . ,. • 

--'-•------,17.,l-,•• •'•-f:-.1--/-71- ... r . -t....... --.-"7 "I'' .... . ..1'.1--4,--1.-- : 7 

, : 

. 

• • • 

I . . •:. i ; -. : -,:1--- ; f -, .„.e:i... 77 -.:.. 

' -',":""'' '" , 4 ;-'1:-.4..±- ,4;44--1-.4:-.4.-4--; 

: ; i ;. -11:I. 

• 

■ :. , 

-..-, ••,•-crt 

i•-::••- -:-.1,--t•---i--4---..t-i------ 

.-;:iv-n- .,-'---; ......,... ■,-,- 

1 . • 

' - 

. •-- ' ' - : t. ME 

- .,-,-■. 
\ 1 : 

pJ 0 

CL C").: 

• 

",C • 

• • 

• • 

• ;4, : . CI 

C.) ''Ci; 

' -_ 

, .., 

h-: i 0 .r-; !.....) 

.,. ,2_, -, t. 

,c, .

t CZ; 0 - - bi c,. . . H L---- 0-,, 

E., 

= . 

i-4 i co ; I-4 . 

', 

1..■ 

c... , „ ,

',-; 1 r--, • - 05 i -. -,...-.4 : __ ■ ,_.-- , ,:_),!...„,. v) .i., 1 

;4',.....3 -=; 

•=41"----, ::-:, - 

Cr: 'C> ; 01 - C.) 

- C 0.) •• I a Cr) '. ' '7") 

, 

-'4 1 f-lc..)-- r ij 

>1.- ri 

01 r- ■ raq- ts . 

ca,---P-_, 14 

74 «i 7J4 to -1 

•-ica—':..a.A4-4 - 
, •,--i 

f C.r... -.I);.1.- 

c ',4 

; ,-f-, :,--4 

1--i 0- cv: i 

.i E-1 • :::i ' 

,, ; 1-^i •:-,..' • ,_0-' _, • -.0 .-- . 1-4--1 

u '-) 

-- . , C) ir.:•, - .., ----- ,.. 'Z. - 

C i (-) 0 ,4-4 , 4-1- i--i-* 

...- `--.- 0 ..---." . 

,.;---, 7 — 4—, • • ' , - C4-:!--. 4- 

, ; 4.1 tO ; • 3 

:I : . ._.:.,,,......... i _ 

'0 :;.-' '-':','. '!;4 ' - 

-- 1. - j j-"--1--r-"•- 

— i 0 C) : 0 <4 : r-- j.. 

1 - ; ■-,-; 

,. , i , r;z , .. . . . . a . r i c 0,o., .. . 

.,e, -; 

.. - +-4. 4- 

'R-----1 ! - 

-.-i-L- - 

: i_ , 

;.4 

tc ••(;)-- 

• ci • 

• • 
• ••••••:•,,;•.'..,:;•••;;;• - ,.:;;•_;•§.,: - ,•,;:•;,7,;;;;;;-644.•4••••••V•44- 

....... .„ . 

0 - u. ,>• ' ■ 

• . 

, 

,...-.: •: -,.: • ^ - , - ----- --• - __. ......___ ____...._ ....-__ ,..1 

,.. 

..-.....•:, : • r-i i ' : ; . • 1 t.I, • 

.. . 6. 

Cf:, C.; :-.■ t; , " : 1 - ' CI) - '-'' 

1--■ > ,,z_, ... 

, 

C.,.) 

- ^ ;:k : si . — 

. . . ' ' Tr. ! 7 —r_) '•-- --. - 

.7, 

, 

0 C.; I—) i'. , 

! . 

---, — 

„ ': 17 

. , . •-

: • - , : p.., , -, . -

. -. • 

7 Tt 

. , '---; . 7 erf;'•----t . ---!--'71-7-1-11-1,— 

.r.7.....—.2.7-7. .,...,-.7.T.,-.1.1.178',... g -. t-iY. :.,.1 • ,. : ., ,.... ,. • _ . .._, .,,....„. . _ , , . 

- T 

.__. ,...... ._,„........... ,,,, _ 61., . , 

. . ; E—r-- 0, ,‹,, . , , : : , • i • • 

•„,,„ 

, . 

. 

, , ,..,,,2, ..,..a.. 0 i , . . t . , , • , 

--" "' • • 

• •, - • - - - • •-- : • : 

' • ; ; : • ; I ; : ; : • ! I - 

• • ; • ; ' ; ; ; • • ! ; ; ' " 

w Th 

; . 9 , , • 

... , 

, . : ; • . , . , I. , • . • . , . ; , .. . I , , „ „ 1.,„•, , , , „ , : a; ., , , , 4 i; i• ; '. ! . 

..:1 : -3 , , .7--1 '.• ' ! - -.L.j 1 • 1 12_4' ! ..■ : ; 

: , ' - --,--i--,.--;--,-----,----,- ---, , ; - i 7" .; . • •• : • '77 " '. 7 ; ; , ' ;•;•;•w; : .•; + .; , ;; • i; 1 ; ; :- 

.; ;. 7' ;'; ; 1' .: .. . ; : • -: ; __, ..),__,. " - ; .; '• ; - ; .,; .,, 

-.- 

- 

;i------ -- ------7- 7--.',.. -- [---r: ; .";! 

;.; CD C..). 

..,;:•••1 ei • '; : 

. ••••.P..! 0 ' • tri; : • • . — ; • ; 

•••••••• 

C, 

••••4*-1 

. 

. . 

0 

I 0) 

vJ 

-2. 

C.) 

. . 

. . .. . 

r. ...i. r , i -•-•-•1---1 1 i 1 1 1 .. 1 - , • 1 , 1 1 ,,,L;,..,2,,,..TP,i... • r 1 

•••1.--.1- .r',. ---. ,-1,...-- , '; 

"t-• ... r t"'""...-' --1-1"-.1-'.---f—q-. . . , , 

• - --i----71-1.--'--1-::---. -1-1--f i • •.-t. : 1! '-

- ' " ' . • • ! : - : . I 0 ; 1 J . ::--7:--1--f 1-1-1---r-t-----;--i.--1--,--- ' ,- i--..-f-.-1-i.,f.---: 1-

4- ; • . . -4,--4.--f 1 

--«,----.---F-4..-vr,-- --TH-.1.----r- '.-.1-1.--1-1-1-:-'- - , :--1 . c ., 

I . 1- ! .I• i. , . 
.. • 

CD

cj 

CP 

4.... : 

. t" - • ....- ..) (...: 

(1% 0.• C.; :-.- , ...--r 1 

,:li '..., ;•;•.; r- . 

... .--,•1 , 

••-4

• 

4-' • i•-■ 

• c-: .--(-1 C.+ :-.4 Cr; • r-,-; 

C.) CI.; CI cli '. r-I CN 

C.) ..f-ras W. r:E; • 

i--1 0 • r i 

0 ..-.1 ,4-i ".,.... 

• 

(-s) : ce) L) C1, 

4. N. Co . Co CO 

• . • • 

- : 

0 :..'.. 

C) C) 

)-.■ ...-. 

Cu r::`, • 4_;> :

- 

.-: 

..c., 0. f.-; <1 

.I-I • rn. ,--, 

C) 7.) •r-t r-4 

- ...-:-. 

.. ■-•• 

- 

.-- 

,.., <I; , 

0 Q 0 4---, 

.1-I r 144 •W r- 

••••4 • e.: < 

.:-.1 ...... 

,-. 0 Z 

ei 4., 4../ 

. > 

• .r-I r--; 

;< 

40 

%.0 -ON 

✓-I 

0 

0, 

C.) '(F) 

• it 

• •1:4 

•••.... 

cr, 

C) 

0 

' 

r4 r4 

' • - 

••••• 

••• - 
' •:-) `V!, , ! i i 

1 • 

r r•-•••! k'..r - !! i 

7. ..r!..;: co, i ,...:-.., -.. Co , ,-, c,.i : ,--; ! (DI ..0 ,: r^... I ■.0 ■ 

, 

: Cn c--: ..-.." ,...: :. c.: : Cl ', N. : N. C \ I 

......: ..3 4-.1 C..: ' i', CN: I 

'.--- C..% `,.- C.) :.... '.. r-i t-i , %.,› r--1 • r"--: Cs; Csi : C '.. I : I-4 ; r-I ; • C•1 

• 

1 I s.--' C.% i•-■ tt ...C.. C...:.:' ! 

"7., 

,.....................; ,., 

' .... 

• . 

I . 

.1-i i..0 ■1. • 

, 

. ■ 

■ 

. 

i ! 1 

i 

. 

4.-1•,..i .,--i 0 i, cn ;--, 1---1 ! en c"..) , '.0 : CC; • c,; ; tri N. c 

C.::; - :7 ,:n W ,'." r-i ! (NI ••••!:: ; 1..", r '.0; N. CC; ' co 1 co a% 

C.: 

' 

s 

ci •,;_-: ‘.....i (..,, .:, t

„,, ,‘, •, .,, k-.. . , , ..,, : %. •,„ ,, .-4, 

0 c.) ;-. t4-; ,--, , — : . ....,, . 

• ;. .; .:,.. . 'xi- C., C:. (v. C: .-• .,

,-... 

1 .,.. • 

.:-.-. .1-I .. 0 ^<7 ' 1 - , ' ' 

. • :;,-4 ,--..:......--.7., ■ • i 

' 

‘ . 

:■-.) •■-i •/-I 

C.) cr”, r-; c•-, ; C'''; (N ,...;',7) CD ' ,.0 i (r) tf) • N. 0 

r-i (N ---zi- Lrl : '-C, '.0 . N- - i CO CO CO ON 

-40 ...,-i . 

P-4 P4 0 ',If 4 

■ 

. 

t",-; r ■-•,r Le") 1..r) • 

kr) 

Cr.: 

O.\ 0" as 

Cst 

r4 •••71"CO 

r-i I r't 
1..n, 

1-4 04 tn 

:., ..-...; .-.-.. • 

I I s i 

f. r-• ,-.; I, 'NC) . • :,,,,' ' "P 

:- ‘.-.: [ ...-.:: .....• ; 

; , 

. . 

-- 

I 

''..r1 CO C.N.-: C.: , 

C..1 ! ■; u e2 i .1-, 

k,...... , - , 

-r4 

0 

0 C.; C)4'.; 

4.4• 

I-4 44-4 :0-4 

0 

• < 

0.; 

-4 4-4 

ôi 

E-+ 

0 0 4.:; 

4-1 

CO 0 r' 

■-•< 

0 • 4-1 4-4 

4-4•r-4 

- < 
er) t 

M CG 

Lr) 

csi 

:t ::: 

LfT 

L.1 

CO . c-,1 0 CO Ol < 

1/40 I CO C1/41 C1/41 cn r-i z 

I--; r4 

4—, 4-+ 

.4 ✓ 

0 

.4,044,,04:4;:;:iktW 
0 

Cc; 

; I 1 

■ 

,....0 ! in . ,.... 1 1 ,.. \ ••° i' cnr'si c=5 r_i. :N1 co\l

i - 

• 

WIMMI••••■■■,., 

C 

Cf

• ; 

•■•-: ,.:,) - / 

r--■ ,:;', 

Z....1 • ,-i .,...1 j.., 

„.. „3 C.). :•-■ r - . 

a 

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

'..-: 0 •,., , 

[ 

P. ;`.., 0 

c u:: 

C) - • C). 

,--, ./-: .4.....k ' 

c•-• . :',1 

,...., 0 .,..J, 

... 

t 

0 

• 174 

..i... 

.1..... L.. 

4...., 4..4 I , 

V ........ ,...a 7,.. r•-: 

,..,.. e < 

; ir) U u^) Lfl 

• Lr) r— ; co o cNi cr; , 

.,...; 

0 r-,-i 

0 

C) CC 

, .„ 
cel 1/4.0 CO CO Co vD 1/4.0 0 

CO col r- HCNI 

- 1 

0 

•-., ! I 

I i 

. 

■ 

i 

,.,:.. ..',.., 

C0 , `..0 C's, ■:..1- . C4'-. , C4 '

1.") ., '. r"... ! \ -0 1 Ln . 

C: 7..r, in s.S.-+;--- CZ,' s.D en ■ CO i Co I. is-- I ,.1) 

r—i ! 

-. , --: 

r-4 : c.1 t . Q C 

::. ,--1 :-.. -C• : ', ,--: 

. 

. 

... ,.,--, ,....„ ,-: ■ 

. 

r." (r) if) Lc 

0 0 < 

Co Z 

.:-.! t3 

4-4 •,--1 • ,--: ::"^: 

c.; ,...; ..-_, 1..^, tr.; :-.^1 Irs, . Lt ..r. 1 .. cp. 

1-4 0 • r-4 3 r-.3 C■3 C,3 ..Z.; L-3 1/40 r., CO a., 0 • 

0 C_ 

...1r--.. 

/-... I • k -;_, 

(-' 

ta-t 

0 .,...1 0 

.,-, c H ....C- r-I c44 cs„1 C.1 r-i ■ CO -......t ON •,._. G CO 0'1 i---. 1/417., 1/4.0 1/4.0 1--- 1 r•-• 1/4.0 cs,1 

,--; 

,n "..--• -Z.: 

-,4 

1/4.0 H N 

CO CO CO CN 

1,1 (.6) 

4.) 

4 cC 

la4 G.) 

- 

e-4 
aRkanaratfiiik0R&Zafinglf„. 40W' 

;_, 

; <1" 

C` I ; 

C"' Cr) 

1 

t qt C.' Crl 

i (70 t , f's i q

: ...../ t . if) 1 r-r4 

! ! CNI 

i • 
C.-> ; 

•••:. 

c-i 

r--; 

CN 

1 

i 

a-,„ 

L..^ ! 

CN .1 i 

c-- 

Ce) 

Ce) 

; 

i 

.1 

, '

1 

! 

1 i 

■-,:.., 1 

....I i 

NT . ; 

CN, 

. ; 

, 

CO . -Cr I: CD 1 CD i• -,:-', • co , Z 

, - f 

. . 

Q Lr) 

r--1 

1.:") L! 

cr) Lr■ D N. • co C\ CO 

cp r-. 

CO s..C. 

C" (N 

1-r■ 

co co (N c) Co cc 

cs.t 

1/40 

1-■ try. 

•-■ 

T. 

, 

•,-- 

r 

• • . • 

>"'• 

(1. 

:"•••• _ 

L. 

C) 
0 

. :"•-• 

r••••••: • 

• 

'4;-5. R--;;5*;1'..4T45431411,rekekrigtMiqatiggiV 

yti; 

1 

.,•■••••■•••■•••■■■ 

:.'—' ..... • . a 

•:-.4 Z:41; ! ; 

,.......! r•-■ ' ; 

;-..) • ,--: -:--f ':), 

f-- ^ i • • . 

; ! 

k..0 0 

C.) i.--,.: .:.; c . ' C.,,,, • QC.; 77: . r--'. -.±", : CO : .:0 i C,'") 1 1,r) 

"..) .4"4i :47 ;:: • :.:.) . CO 1 00 CO 0-■ r-i CN C' I , .', L'-'1 Q) ‘ .. - 4.-5 r.. 

:•-.1 0 

. 

. 

. 

. . 1 

- • ! , 1 

. 

,--4, , , : _ - z •! 

- 

. 

- . 

1 

C'•:, --.7".' C..., . L.'7.; ; CY) i ,-fl 

-....7 - ti'- C.4.., CA :. 

. i 1 

1 I 

CN 

r-4 

1--1 

0 

▪ • 

C.; C) 

• a 

C) 

Cr. 0 s

(1) kr.) 

:›N 

4-, 

Crj 

T*4 

• 4.; 

■-• 
. 1111104•;•;‘t' g,,wo.?!.".PMFAVIrefig?.7.44f 

...-1, 

<, r-, -....■ 

4-.) ..--; • r-i -., 

,..., ,,..- s, : ■ C t.^v:i.4 . 

C C •:'..., r-i ‘:-.) 

C.)....-) 1.C. 

4,--i. !'.. 

. C.) •,-.1 t4-4 ., ;. 

c%-i fl.`.4 a C... = 

..* 

; 

,..--.. ; C..) il.: '. ri) 

- , 

p 

4_, ,,-, ..- L.-, c^. — ......- c.,,, ' CO g-4 CA i 00 E-4.• -

C') Q ....:7; r:i G1 V...) CNi ! t"'": . 

V) • `,... ,... C4 • CNI • 

>+ 

C% -7-1 ,-. s._, c1)..-. 

N.... 

:7a -,-: r-■ 

•'•-• 

r-i 

*-- < I 

C.) 

- )-1. • . 

0 

:.-i -.;...., 

:.. C) (.4', 0 4....) , ?-14 ■

f.--1 ...0 4-, I: ■.0 0 CO -..1- 00 ..2 . .;T „„:,/ ,,,., 7 •r-i :::•• C; 

U) 0 C \I 1-4 C) C.1 r E_,4 

MD .,--; r-i 

r2) 

E_4 

CO C., 

< 4-, •

C 4.4 ::"-+ ,-, ,-, 

e.', .) 

....„,.. Cr: 0 G■ 0 00 Cis r-1 1 CNI N.. CD til 1 0 

›., r.. 7-4 Cf) CNI 4 0 r-i. r-i 1 ri r-i Cf1 T--1 Ch . r.4 

r.-1 14 r'' C,) 

C; C) 4.-, 

1-'7 «3 rr--.3 

,---4 :::4- ... < 

43 '<, 
Viet 

, ,- , •••„..-.. 

' ,Z..*:. :....- ; ....-,; • 

• ". :. -2 7..•• ...... . 

.-'...1 •;) : • -7 `..; C,) 0 r--: 

.-.; •■•••••• . — - ., . . r-I r•-■ 

!•-1*.: ;--.. '... • 

. , 

.. : ; • 

• 

Cr; isr-; 

. e..") 

▪ cc ; 

- c. 

1 

C r-4 

C 

cj

.-t 

0 

- 0 

43 

to 

. • • 

.;•...;• t CZ! 1 

,..C; ". . f,,_, .'" :;_j• 1. 

•,--1 '..., :1;.- c:„."1 

_Li r. C.; ,• .4 • '. 1 i 

4..4.) 1 . .,'.• i 

1 • ;•. .7 i 1 .-i , .-;••• '‹ i 

Ca - 

''...., . 

: • • ; 

1 • t 

CO 

4-3 i ••,-; r•-•.; i 1 1 1 

i . 

< i i 

■ 

1• .1 

1 i 

; 0 

';'",• f 4-3 STS i -1 .1 i 

1, t • 8 •;::1 ,..., < 1 : .- 'I, .•■••4 i ''" r" I 

. ;X: Cji ''''' 

- 4-3 ' 4:4 

. 1 •

1 .. .1 

. .1 

4 

, -- 

1 

.. . -.;4, ..1 . ,

'. . : f . : 1 

Cr2 1, I 

0 0 - .-/ 1 , 

• . . 

<NI 
:17 

CN • 

• 

. 

r CO 

0 c;_, • 

L.") .. .:

,-. 

i"--. . Les; 

i--- 

■:,., ! t--; 

, 

0 ! ...-J 2

-, 

:.-) :, :::: " • 

-- C:i ' „III i :_-..„ -- ,,,-.-. 

i E. ; ._: , 

,--1 i _-: 

, 

rz.4 (...) , 

, .. 

o ff(-...; , ca cc i;i ---4 ,--, r.:: i 

'—' 

c)i 1 4., 'i CID .-1 t t , ---, C., ; 

< t t CI i ..!,..,/ „:„., 1 

, , 1 ) ", 1--: %, 

r-T4 ,::: . . ;.-, >h., ■---...- < i 

z 0 i .I C.:, IL ,i 

JO 1 1 C.) 

0 i I C-> t" C..1 _;....., ; 

'Z.: ! i 4-:, 1 „._. I e•-■ 8 tt,_ 

4..; I -,.,. i . ,, _. 

- i u.-1 0 i .-: f —1 c.:, 

1 r, 4-1 4-.1). 

i 1 •r-: 1.--:. 1 

ci I $ 1:-.-1 :3.- < 

---,------ SI I ----. : i 

1 ',.4 i 

>-:, i if: ; 

C.; Y 

I 

1 1 C'i4.1 let 

C.; ) 

4-J . 

I -: i 0 1".', L Ln ", x ...., :7- i ; 

1 P-Ii fi C)i ; r-4 

I 1 

. '. i 

r r 

; Z I 

1 
Z.:": 

,>", 

ts.:, 

0 ":". ,—. '! ,-- . 

r--i r-, 

0 •,--t _: .. , , 

tiT", :3 P r—: 

•. 

•r4 ., 

1--4 . ..-; ■ t.r.`. C..). ' 4—) i C. 

tC 

C 

j 

C 

4 | 4 r 

< 4_ , C.) 

CI .t...1 & 

.-., VD 4.4 :-.i i 

';.4 C":`, C.) H i 4-.) .0 

... 

.,...., 0 1 J...., 

! CZ *.,...0- r-, rO. i r-'. . , 

4.3 C.) 

r•-• 

VI 44 

;, f— 2..., 1-4 

■ < 

< i a ..., 

.. .›si 

i 

..:-: i 

.... ' .'74 

rr . 1 

r . 
" 

C r-: Cs.: c 3 ■-•-; P"... C•''. ..:.;\ CC) 

, 

. _ ..

-.. r. . • 

.... -i ,•-•4 p, 

:..: ..:.: ,.. 

'••■•••■••••••••=1.■ 

c.; 

4-■ 

CNI 

M •••:;" 

• 

N. C."1 • 

▪ • r•-". • 

C.; •T. 

(.1 Cr; 

N- Cr:, CO Cl 

a . , 

....- _.,, .— 

C.) . 

. 

! •:-.:, !...;" : 

, .•-• ..!..1 

t C L.") 1-4in C\; 1-4 

CNI ■•0 i 

i 

1 i i 

••— 

: 

; • e^ • . 

• • 

' 

r-4 • ,..4 ', ` t..".: .; 

...Z.i 1 C.-> y • ,..-.) i : Cl.1 :1/4) -'--: Fil cc; 1 •,-, : :::: ::: : 

v., i c. C 

-4 j Cr) 

... 

i 

r . ; 

4.,.. 

C ! ..... ...., 

i i 

C")1 c.-S eS.,; f -,-1 .4 

.€4 1 -7,-, , ■ , i'. - 

,-- , i-1 i eZ ' . ■ i 

.1 

C i I C.) 4--(j ) ! 

I 1-4 t CO , 

CO i 0 

• 

'" r ■ 

ca 1 ••••-, i .-, ...... , C.: ;•• ..:_t .1_.: -• - 

,-...: ' -, .., . Col 

1 

I 

1 4..; i 

r-' J....., i .,..t. ,.......; 

I 

'or; 1 r-4 .,--,-,- < 

Co ..„... i 

.... 1<,..,., . i'-:. 1 ti.: 0 • .,,, 

.r•-: 5 ::,* z 

....,4 4 ri 

I r..., .,..... 

T ..-". -..., 

r—i OC> 

Crt 04 

1 

in I 00 0 2...4 ; 

r .• • 

o 0 I 1 

Csi f a s, 

..m . . 

a - 0 

. • • •• : 

- • 

.. • 

S15 • ' 

•• • - CO ,.."-,k44• , 

' •••••.' „ .." • ...T 

t,4