NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

JECIAL HANDLING REQUIRED 

DRAFT/H.Barfield/4/13 June 67 

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. FOSTER 

SUBJECT: Questions on MOL 

DON 

The purpose of this memorandum is to answer a question on MOL which 

you posed on 1 June as well as a second closely related question. 

Question 1: How much could we possibly save in MOL if we were 

to have only unmanned flights for the first year? 

Question 2: What would the program be if a decision is made now 

to go unmanned for all flights? 

In answering these questions it is assumed that the primary concern 

is the FY 1968 funding level. Attached is a table of FY 1968 fund requirements for three cases. Case I is the present compact 12 month schedule 

which calls for first unmanned launch in December 1970. Case II assumes that 

the first two all up MOL launches would be flown in the unmanned configuration, followed by the three manned flights later in the program. Case III 

assumes that all manned flight considerations would be dropped from the 

present program. 

Answer to Question 1: Referring to the attached tdble, an increase 

in cost would be expected in- FY 1968 by flying unmanned first and maintaining 

the December 1970 launch date. Although not shown the total program cost 

would increase also since a major rescheduling is involved. 

Ine most important consideration, however, is that man would not 

be present in early flights to assist in development of the desired capability 

• e resolution photography for reconnaissance purposes." This would 

anRTI ONLY 

WORKING PAPER 

HANDLE Yin BYEMAN 

S. r C SYSTEM 

-112—SfeRg"-- 3p. A/3,/-4 

• 

SPECIAL HANDLING REQUIRED 
NRQ APPROVED FOR t.A.;134 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 Sis-',111 HANDLING REQUIRED 2 

most certainly degrade the MOL program by increasing the risk of developing 

the capability in Only five flights. An unmanned program would normally 

take 6 10 flights to achieve the same operational capability. 

The FY 1968 costs increase primarily because efforts would increase 

by. about $20 Million in the support module area. This increase covers the 

film transport, data return vehicles, the support module design and into- 

. gration effort, and a backup design for the image motion compensation subsystem. 

Of course this would be offset in part by reductions in life support, target 

simulation, tracking scopes, and manned display and control features. The 

GEMINI B, TITAN IIIM and other support would not be expected to change since 

the GEMINI B qualification and launch vehicle development flights would be 

needed as now scheduled to provide program confidence. 

Answer to.Question 2: Deleting the manned configuration from MOL 

would require about 10 flights to demonstrate the required resolution 

capability. These are the flights it is estimated would be needed for reliably 

flight qualifying the system. Although the first all up flight would occur on 

the same schedule as the present program, December 1970, the demonstrated 

operational capability of reconnaissance photography would 

be delayed almost two years. A $105 Million reduction in FY 19621 costs 

might be possible as shown for Case III of the attached table. It should 

. be noted that the total program cost for an unmanned MOL involving 10 flights 

should be approximately poo Million less than the present program based on 

past studies. However, it must be remembered that $135 Million has already 

been spent on the present MOL Program Definition (Phase I).: A major change 

in scope such as is involved in this Case III would require repeating the 

program definition phase. Thus, the net saving by:deleting the.manned 

DORM TO? StMET 

woRifdikiG PAPER 

SPECIAL HANDLING REQUIRED 

y42. 1316.2aNDLi VIA BEYmEIVIAN ONLY 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 itin:611'11 

SPE ;LHANDLING REQUIRED. 3 

configuration from MOL is probably $200 Million at most. (This difference 

• 

might evaporate after another program definition phase). 

Referring to Case III on the attachment, a new orbital control 

vehicle (OVC) is included and the Laboratory Vehicle is terminated as is 

MINI B. Total effort on the optics (Experiments) and Mission Module in 

F/ 1966 is estimated to be only slightly less with reorientation as repired 

to match the new OVC. TITAN IIIM and other costs remain the same. For 

Case III a 60 day on orbit capability would probably be desired so that the 

operational coverage of the unmanned vehicle would approach that of the. 

manned MOL. This would impose additional reliability testing during 

development. 

In summary, flying the unmanned MOL configuration first would not 

reduce FY 1966 costs, would increase total cost, increase technical risks, 

and probably delay the demonstration of the. required operational reconnaissance capability. 

Deleting the manned configuration from MOL completely would save 

perhaps $100 Million in FY 196b but at a delay of almost two years in 

demonstration of a useful resolution. Total program costs this far into 

the MOL program might not be reduced significantly, because additional GAMBIT 3 

systems would be required.to provide high resolution photo coverage for an 

additional year. 

At this point in time there is real doubt that any program can be 

constructed that will achieVe the required capability -- manned or unmanned -- 

more economically than MOL, regardless of when the required capability is 

desired. 

'Iv WORKING PAPER 61, 
NRO.AP'PROVED FOR 

'RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

SeLCIAL HANDLING REQUIRED 

TABLE 

FY 1968 Funding -- Millions 

I - Compact 12 

II - Unmanned first, manned flights follow 

III - Unmanned completely 

Case I Case II Case III 

Experiments 110 115 115 

Mission Module 70 70 60 

Lab. Vehicle 175 180 45 

New OGV --- -__ 75 

GEMINI B 54 54 11 

TITAN IIIM 44 44 44 

Other 27 26 25 

TOTAL 480 • 489 375 

POTENTIAL SAVINGS 0 -9 105 

WOROG PAPER 

SPECIAL HANDLING REQUIRED HANDLE VIA BYEMAN • 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY DP: 4 !did 11 r2 Se _ I it