I 

I 

I 

I . 'I .. I r I l 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Security l1f1Fm1tio1 

Copy No.?.fr2 

Hir Intelligence Estimate 

fl I E-1 

DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE 

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 11-20-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352a 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET ... .., .......... . 

FOREWORD 

Air lntelb&ence Esa.mates (AIE) arc designed to meet particular needs of the 

Deparament of the Au Force an the areas of strate&lc guidance and air preparedness, 

an adchaon, they may pronde some assasbUJce to other agencies. Au lntellagence 

Estimates wall be revised per1ochcally, euher 10 whole or 10 part Detatled comp1-

lat1ous of facts upon wh1cb Au Intelligence Estimates are baaed, aod expanded 

chscuss1ons of ahese data, may be tound an Au Intelligence Studies (AIS) 

WARNING- Tiiis document contmns 1afonnat1on affectmg the nataonal defense of the 

Unued States w1d11n the mearu.ng of the Espionage Laws, Tide 18 U S.C., Secuoas 

793 and 794. Its transm1ss1on or the revelation of us contents in any manner to 

an unauthorized person is prohlbued by law, Reproduction of the intelligence in 

this publacauoa, under the prov1s1ons of Au Force Regulation 205-1, 1s authorized 

for Unued States nuluary agencies provided the source 1s 1nchcated 

.. 

.. 

• 
R:lt"F ID: n s:;;,QO l R 

TOP MleES • Security lnlorm"i:Tb:: ( ~::e!=::tned' ~::~d'1!lleJ1 

CLASSIFIED/NON-CLASSIFIED TRANSMITTAL and RECEIPT 

TO 

MJ·. Friedman 

NSS 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Serial or control number - - - 833 

Date 

l3 Aug 1953 

1. It is requested that receipt for this material be acknowledged by executing and returning the below receipt. 

2. This letter may be downgraded to ______________ when enclosures are removed. 

lnclosures: 

US AIR/ Intelligence (AF#2-35699) 

31 Oct. 1952 IR#J..53379 

Signature 
) 

I 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

SiCUfllf l11fa11nalicn 

AIR INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE 

THE THREAT OF ACTION FROM COMMUNIST AIR FORCES 

TO THE CONTINENTAL STRENGTIIS OF NORTH AMERICA 

AIE·l 

1 October 1952 

DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE 

HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE 

TOP SECRET 

laemirily hafua anallan 

TOP SECRET 

Auch CS, USAF 

/11!/J. .... 31 Oct 52 

2-35699 

.......... 

TS CONT. NO. 

DI, HQ USAF 
Revision Number 

. 

. 

AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP 6EBRET 

Record of Revisions 

Date of Revision Date 

ii 

TOP 8EeRET 

SECURITY IMISQAMAl'IQN 

of Entrr Entered br 

. 
.. 

--

T 0¥i .. ~Pa·~~901B • v - - ...... 

The Threat of Action from Communist Air Forces 

to the Continental Strengths of North America 

INDEX 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..........................•................ 

The Problem ......................................................... . 

Discuss ion ...................•..............•..........•............. 

Conclusions .............•......•..•...........•....•....•............ 

APPENDIX '.A' - SOVIET MASS DESTRUCTION WEAPONS •••.•••.•••••.•• 

A. Soviet Atomic Weapons .. ....•...•.....•..••.••.•.•.•.•............ 

B. Thermonuclear Weapons .......................•.•..•............. 

C. Radiological Weapons ......•..•.••.•••.•.....•.......•..•......... 

D. Biological Warfare Agents , ............•.......•.•................ 

E. Chemical Warfare Agents ......•...•....•......•.••.•..••..•...... 

APPENDIX 'B' - SOVIET CAPABILITIES FOR INTERCONTINENTAL 

DELIVERY OF MASS DESTRUCTION WEAPONS BY 

AffiCRAFT •...•••••••••••••.••••...••.•.••••••.•••.•••••. 

A. The Long Range Air Force ...•.•••••.•.••••.•••..••...•.•....•.... 

B. Long J~ange Aircraft .....•.••.•..•••...•..••....••..•.....•....... 

C. Air Base Structure for MB/ HB Operations •••••••••••••••••••••••• 

D. Current Capability for Long Range Operations •••••••••••••••••••• 

E. Expected Future Ca;iability for Long Range Operations ••••••••••• 

APPENDIX 'C' - SOVIET CAPABILITIES FOR DELIVERY OF MASS 

DESTRUCTION WEAPONS BY GUIDED MISSILES •••••••• 

A. Organization for Delivery by Guided Missiles ••••••••••••••••••••• 

B. Current Status of Soviet Guided Missiles Program •••••••••••••••• 

C. Soviet Guided Missiles .....•.•.................................... 

D. Present Soviet Capabilities for Utilization of Guided Missiles 

Against the North American Continent ••••.••.••••••.•••••••.•••••• 

APPENDIX 'D' - SOVIET CAPABILITIES FOR CLANDESTINE DELIVERY 

OF MASS DESTRUCTION WEAPONS AGAINST TARGETS 

Page 

I-1 

I-1 

I-1 

I-3 

II-1 

II-2 

II-6 

II-7 

II-8 

II-10 

III-1 

III-3 

m-6 

III-8 

III-15 

III-29 

IV-1 

IV-2 

IV-3 

IV-5 

IV-8 

IN NORTH AMERICA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • V -1 

A. Soviet Delivery Capabilities • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • V -2 

B. Clandestine Use of Weapons....................................... V -4 

APPENDIX 'E'. THE ROLE OF AIR, CAMPAIGNS IN SOVIET PLANNING 

AND STRATEGY . ..•.•..•••..••..••...............•....•. 

A. General ......••.•.•....•.....•.......•..•.•.•.•..•...•....•.•..... 

B. Background ~eginning--World Wa:r II ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 

C. Post World War II ......•.••.•..••••.•••..••.•...•..••.•....•.•..•. 

D. Soviet Air Theory ....•.••..•.••.•...•..•...•..•...•........•.•.•.. 

E. Soviet Target Selection .•• ....•.•.•....•.......••...••.•.....•.•... 

F. Attack Timing Factors ..•......•..•...•..•.....•.......•.•........ 

iii 

TOP SECRET 

SECl:JRIT"f INF8Rflb\'fl6N 

VI-1 

VI-2 

VI-2 

VI-7 

VI-12 

VI-15 

VI-21 

AIE:/#:1 

1October1952 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECR&t 

hn•ritr lnformgtjqn 

AIE-1 

The Threat of Action from Communist Air Forces 

to the Continental Strengths of North America 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

The Problem 

1. To appraise the threat of preemptive action from communist 

air forces to destroy. neutralize, or seriously damage the psychologi-. 

ical, ecot·omic, and industrial strengths of the North American Continent. 

Discussion 

2. It is assumed in this stud.v that the only communist air force 

with any capability for a campaign to affect the continental strengths 

of North America will, at least for the foreseeable future, be that of 

the Soviet Union. The study, therefore, e.xamines the following questions, 

considering each in a separate appendix: What do the Soviets have to 

deliver, both now and in the future? What delivery vehicles and sup.. 

porting organizations do they have, or are they developing? How well 

can they be expected to utilize these vehicles? How, under what cirw 

cumstances, and with what timing would the Soviets plan on utilizing 

weapons or rnass destruction in intercontinental warf"a.re? Any attempt 

to answer such questions necP.ssarily includes an appraisal of the current and potential values of the threats under study. 

J. It must be recognized that there are broad gaps in available 

intelligence on Soviet capabilities and intentions, and this imposes a 

limitation on the finaiity of the conclusions drawn. 

I-1 AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

l1wfil') We Rtalion 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECR&T 

l&caallf 1Hftiiiiidll8H 

4. •weapens of mass destrUction" are considered to include both 

atomic and thermonuclear explosives, plus radioloi;ical, biological, 

and chemical warfare agents. Aircraft and guided missiles are the 

delivery vehicles. Onl1 the threat against the continental United 

States and Canada is considered, since Alaska is to be examined in a 

separate study. "Psychological, economic and industrial strength111 

are identified as the morale and will to fight, the social and poli• 

tical cohesion, the complex of war supporting industries, the trans~ 

portation and co11m.unication networks, and the productive capacit7 of 

the United States and Canada. 

S. Detailed discussion of the various aspects of the problem are 

presented in the following appendices: 

A. Soviet Mass Destruction Weapons 

~. Soviet Capabilities for Intercontinental. Deliver7 ot 

Mass Destruction Weapons by Aircraft 

c. Soviet Capabilities tor Delivery of Mass Destruction 

Weapons by Guided Missiles 

D. Soviet Capabilities for Clandestine Delivery of Mass 

Destruction Weapons Against Targets in North America 

E. The Role of Air Campaigns in Soviet Planning and 

Stratea 

AIE fl 

1 October 1952 

lOP S~CRE!_ -'•• ilr lufoauzaldn 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET , .... ..., 1•r=atiM 

Conclusions 

6. The Soviet Union is estimated to have presently available 

somewhat more than 50 (composite and plutonium) atomic bombs. In 

view of the uncertainties in the production of fissionable materials, 

the Soviet weapon stockpile assumed may be as low as one half or as 

high as twice the figures stated. 

?. There is no indication that the Soviets have tested thermonu.-

clear weapons or that their program presently is directed toward the 

development of such weapons. It is considered almost certain that 

scientific problems pertaining to the development of thermonuclear 

weapons are being investigated by the Soviets. It seems unlikely that 

they will be able to develop and produce a practical thermonuclear 

weapon ahead of the thited States. 

8. The USSR has all the basic knowledge needed for the production, 

on B.Il7 scale desired, of most known ~W and CW agents and for the design 

of efficient disseminators of such agents. 

9. Delivery of CV agents on targets in the North American Continent 

is considered to be within the capability of the USSR. 

10, Although the Soviets have the facilities for the production of 

small quantities Qf radiological warfare agents, it is believed tha.t the 

cost of such agents in terms of atomic bomb production will preclude their 

:ma.nUfacture for a n"UJDber of years, at least until the Soviet atomic bomb 

stockpile has been substantially increased. 

11. It is considered that for the next several years the majority of 

the atomic bombs allotted to North America would be delivered by aircraft. 

The USSR presently has approximately 900 Tu,..li. aircraft that can be used 

for bomb delivery to targets on the North American continent. Used on 

AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

l•l''lit¥ lpfnrmqtjnp 
one-way missions (3,960 nautical. miles) 1 these aircraft can reach all 

targets of major value for affecting the continental strengths 

discussed in this stud,y. The use of airborne refueling techniques would 

enable Soviet aircraft to rPach these targets and return to base. 

12. By mid-19531 a small number (25-50) heavy bombers with 3,500 

.. nautical miles radius may become available. By 1955 the number Gf 

heavy bombers may increase to 100-250. 

13. Submarine launchings of gu.ided missiles may be within the 

capability of the USSR at present; while there is no conclusive evidence that the USsR has an ~tomic warhead. suitable for use in a ship 

launched missile, the construction of such a warhead is estimated to 

be within the USSR1 s capabilities. Intercontinental gu.ided missiles 

are not e;icpected to become availe.ble to the Soviets before 1956; 

however, subsequent to 1956 and probably prior to 1960, bEulistic 

or glide missiles with ranges sufficient to attack some North Arnerican 

targets could be available. 

14. The Soviet Tu-4 piston medium bomber, because of its resem-

'blance to the U.S. B-29, could be disgu.ised and· employed for clandestine 

delivery of ato~ic bombs. The Soviets similarly could use a disguised 

transport type aircraft in clandestine delivery. 

15. An atomic bomb, including the fissionable material, could 

be broken ~own into coniponents and smuggled into the u.s. In theory, 

all components of an atomic bomb, exce9t the fissionable material, 

could be manufactured clandestinely in the U.S. It is possible that 

u.s. transport type aircraft ~ight be used to deliver such clandestinely 

ma.nuf'actw·ed and/or assembled atomic bo.111bs on target. 

16. The chief limitation on the Soviet atomic weapon delivery 

capability for the next several years will be the size of the atomic 

bomb stockpile. 

I-4 AIE :f/:l 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Sas'·si'v 'nles•11'ien 
.. 

~f,...l.Q: A59018 

TOr •n•'-" .. • 

&ucu:ilt lafesnmlicn 

17. The Soviets probably have concluded that the continental 

strengths discussed in this study are particularly vulnerable to 

weapons of ma.as destruction. 

18. A quantit7 of weapons considered su:tficient to prevent 

unacceptable launchings of atomic weapons agaiest the Soviet Union 

probabl7 would be allocated against appropriate targets both within 

and without the North American Continent. The number of weapons 

allotted to this task would be determined in part by Soviet aasesament of the ability of Communist defenses to reduce bomb deliveJ"7 

and assessment of their capacit7 to absorb the remainder. 

19. From a117 weapons remaining, the Soviets probably would 

allocate such numbers of bombs as they considered necessary to: 

1) Deatro7 or neutralize the u. s. ability to sustain 

larg.,....ecale milit&?7 operations in Eurasia; 

2) Destroy or neutralise the u. s. ability to develop or 

produce weapons potentially decisive or stalemating; 

3) Destroy or neutralize the ps70hological, economic and 

industrial strengths of the u. s. to the extent that governmental 

changes or decisions aatisf}ring to the Soviet leadership could be 

brought about. In this phase of the attack an assault on population 

targets can be expected. 

20. The view of Soviet war planners as to bombs required for 

these results cannot be determined. The number might be as small 

as 100, or could be many times that total. 

21. The Soviets probably will refrain from attacking the u. s. 

so long as their techniques of threat, pressure, subversion and dieruption are reasonably productive, or until they feel confident that 

they can produce at least the effects listed in paragraphs 18 and 19, 

1), 2), above. 

AIE fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRliT 

SlitGibf Inf& Hiditoli 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP S!CRET 

!awail I lftfa••='inn 

22. When the trend in allegiances and ac:•retions of world pnwer 

begin flowing in favor of the West, the chan~es of Soviet attack will 

increase provided the~ feel confident that they can prod11ce the effect 

listed in paragraph 18 above. 

23. Ea.ch gain in Western prestige and power will 'ha viewed as a 

threat by the Soviet leaders. When a trend unfavorable to the Soviets 

is clearly discernible to them, and if the USSR bas succeeded in matching, or nearly matching, Western capabilities to deliver atomic weapons, 

the probability of preemptive action from Soviet Air Forces to the continental strengths of North America should greatly increase. 

I-6 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

&r•rrjty 'n'eFA'•tieft 
A. 

B. 

c. 

D. 

E. 

~ J 

.,.. 

+ 

1, I 

' i I 

_, I 

' . 

~ 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

.. 

Appendix A 

Soviet •111 D11tnct101 W11po11 

CONTENTS 

SOVIET ATOMIC WEAPONS 

1. Bomb Stoc\q>Ue 

a. Present Estimate 

b. Future Estimate 

2. Weapons Characteristics 

a. Present Estimate 

b. Future Estimate 

3. Means Of Delivery 

THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS 

RADIOLOGICAL WEAPONS 

BIOI:.OGICAL WARF ARE-AGENTS 

1. Known Developments 

2. Potential Developments 

3. Means of Delivery 

CHEMICAL WARFARE· AGENTS ~ ' 

1. Known· Developments Tl 

2. Potential Developments 

3. Means of-Delivery.! 

x 

( 

., 

- - -~-- _n_ 1 

} 

~ < 

" 

l 

... 

l. 

I 

':l;t 

~~ 

!' 

, . ..... 

'I 

<.,. ~,'!.. 

~ ' 

·~ I 

. ... ~""' l 

,< .. fe. 

. ""•. \ ... 

-.T.} ;~ 

' ! ..( ' , \ . .,' .., ~ 

AIE4.:l '¥ 

·~ ~ .... 

1 rv.+n.~,..,_ 1 ASi?.~ J 
GA 

Sen•ritr lgfqrmgtjM APPENDIX •A II 

A. Soviet Atomic Weapons 

1. BOMB STOCKPILE 

a. Present Estimate'.L 

The Intelligence Adviso?'1' Committee has outlined a :tul.17 

integrated atomic ener~ program for the Soviet Union consistent with 

the kr1ov.ci facts. This Committee estimates the cumulative Soviet stock• 

pile of atomic weapons, as of mid-1952, to be aa follows: 

Plutonium Composite 

Weapons Weapons 

i'.19=-?0 KT) (40-100 K'J!) 

Mid-1952 1.___ ______ __.I 

.Approximate 

Total 

50 

In view of the 'U!lcertainties in the production of fissionable 

materials, the Soviet weapon stockpile of the specific models assumed 

may be as low as ona.-ohal'f' or as high as twice the :tigurea stated. 

:BT changing the weapon design, it is possible to increase 

or decrease the number of weapons in the stockpile aubstantiall7, given 

9 a certain q1J8.ntity of fissionable material. Such changes, however, alter 

-

~he kilotonnage 7i,eld of the individual weapons accordingl7. 

b. Future Estimate1 

For the purpose of calculating the Soviet atomic atockpile, 

it is aa1umed tbat they will fabricate both all .. pluton112!1 weapons and 

composite weapons and t:bat the:r will produce as ma.117 composite weapon• 

as poasi ble. 

'1'he ciJJnulative Soviet stockpile of atomic weapons for tuture 

years i.s estimated as follows: 

Plutonium Composite 

Weapons Weapons Approximate 

'JO-:ZO XT) '~100 XT) Total 

Mid-1953 

I I 

100 

M14-l9S4 190 

Mid-1955 :JOO 

1. CIA/SI llBA-51 SUmmary o:t the Status o:t the Soviet Atomic Energy 

Program, 12 March 1952. 

II-2 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

l1•li9' l:ak:::ualiun 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

'5acu1ilf lnfUi111Glion 

APPENDIX •An 

In view of the uncertainties in the production of fiasionable 

material.a, the Soviet weapon atockpile of the specific models assumed 

1118.1' be as low as one-hal.f or as high as twice the figures atated. 

:87 changing the weapon design, 1 t is poeli ble to increase or 

decrease the n"IJDlber of weapons in the atockpile substantially, given 

a certain quantit7 of fissionable material. Such changes, howeTer, 

alter the kilotonnage yield of the individual weapons accordingl7. 

Soviet atomic bomb stockpile beyond 1955 cannot be estimated. 

2. WEAPONS CHARACTERISTICS 

a. Present Estimate 

Initial Soviet efforts were directed toward the·production of 

plutonium, culminating in the explosion of a plutoni'UJ!l bomb in .A:ugu.at 

1949. Soviet e:f'f'orts were also directed toward the production of 

Uranium-2J5 for use in weapons. A second atomic explosion, possibly a 

composite weapon, occurred in September 1951. .A. compod te weapon was 

exploded in October 1951. 

Information obtained from Soviet weapons tests that have been 

detected indicates substantial progress in Soviet weapon designs. The 

Soviets have reached the point in weapon technology at which the specific 

models stockpiled can be dictated by military re~uirementa rather than 

by limitations in their technical knowledge.1 

b. Future Estimate 

In view of the high efticiencies shown in the weapons teats 

that have been detected, the Smrieta should have no difficulty in ob--

taining kilotonnage J'ields in the higher ranges. For the same reason, 

they should have little di~ficulty in making smaller weapons.1 It is 

1. CIA/SI llBA-51, •swmu.ry of the Status of the Soviet Atomic Bnergy 

P'.rogram•. 12 March 1952 

AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

!l&co•ilr laahs1111tllia11 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

$en•ribr •

0 fcr=11tie• 

.APPENDIX 11.A11 

probable that b7 mid-1954 the Soviet Union will have available a con.-

eiderable and diverse arsenal of atomic weapons.

1 

3. MEANS OF DELIVERY 

(1) It ia considered that, for the next several 19ars, 

the majority of the atomic bombs allotted to the United Statea and 

Canada will be deliTered by bomber aircraft. 

(2) The SOTiet Union is estimated as of 1 October 1952 

to have 36 'l'u-4 equipped regiments, which at fUl.1 'rO & l!l strength 

would represent approximatel7 1150 aircraft. Present actual strength 

is estimated at between ?5/80 percent of TO & E, or about 900 !u-4•e, 

but f'Urther build-up to :tull strength could occur within a relatively 

abort time. Such numbers of these aircraft as would be required could 

be utilised for deliver7 of atomic weapons against the North .American 

continent. lfeav7 bombers may become available in limited numbers in 

195'.3. 

(J) Submarine launchinga of guided missiles are within 

the capability- of the USSR at the preeent time. While there is no conelusive evidence that the USSR has an atomic warhead suitable for use 

in a shi:p-launched guided missile, the construction of such a warhead 

is estimated to be within USSR capabilities. 

(4) Intercontinental guided missiles with atomic warheads 

are not expected to become available for use by the Soviets before 1956; 

however it is estimated that subsequent to 1956, probably prior to 1960, 

ballistic or glide missiles with ranges sufficient to attack Horth 

American targets could be available. 

(5) The Soviet ~. because of its resemblance to the 

u. s. :e..29, could be disguised with u. s. markings and employ'ed for 

clandestine delivery of atomic bombs. 

1. JIC 491/62 (ACAI 22) •7orma and Scales of Soviet Attack Against 

Horth America - l July 19548 , (5 :Ma.7 1952). 

.AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Suwsilf laloan=licH 
~i;;c~;.A59018 I _, .. '°'n. .. I 

!iwaailf l11fo1nmlioaa APPENDIX "A• 

(6) '!'he Soviet Uiion also could 'llllderta.ke clandestine 

attack with transport aircraft of a type used by u. s. or foreign 

transoceanic airlines. 

(7) Atomic weapons 11&1' be laid aa underwater mine& in 

key harbors 'b7 merchant ships or mq be detonated in the hold of a 

• 

ship. 

(8) An atomic bomb, including the tiaeionable material, 

can be broken down into small components which could be smuggled into 

the u. s. Al though it would be theoreticall7 posai ble to manu:facture 

clandestinely within the u. s. all the components of an atomic weapon; 

except the fissionable material, it would be dif':f'icult to procure and 

process the necesea.17' material. 

(9) A. u. s. transport t:n>e aircraft might be used to deliver B.ll atomic bomb that had been clandea tinely manuf'actured and/ or 

assembled in the u. s. 

AIJ: fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET Ssassity IRfllM.iSLL 
• 

TO~fClitlf' : A5901 B 

Sen•rity lg'ngnatjnp 

.APPENDIX •.A. P 

B. Thermonuclear Weapons 1 

Though the preeent Soviet program provide• certain raw material• 

of poesible uae in thermonuclear research and development, none of the 

detected Soviet weapons teats have 1hown &111' indication ot the development of tliermonuclear weapons. Obviou1l7 new approaches to the thermonuclear weapon problem cannot be ruled out, llut there should be some 

detectable indication of such eftorta in weapons teats prior to the 

production of stockpile models. 

The Soviets have attached high prierit7 to research and development 

and there is little doubt that vast ettort ia concentrated in the nuclear energy program; yet it seems unlikely that the Soviets will be 

able to develop and produce a practical thermonuclear weapon ahead of 

the tilited States. However, past Soviet successes in exploiting Western 

knowledge and combining it with their own in this field indicate that 

the Soviets ma7 not be far behind in the development of these weapone • 

1. CIA/SI 118.A-51, •Summar7 of the Status o'f the Soviet Atomic Energ 

Program, 12 March 1952 

II-6 AIE fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Sec·•ritr 1nh•=aMn 
.. 

• 

18JtEdiRf A590lB 

Secuihf intbfmai1on .APPBNDIX 11A• 

C. Radiological Weapons 

Although the Soviet• have facilities for the production of small 

q'U&ntities ot radiological warfare agents, it is believed that these 

l will not be a factor at preaent. !he coat in terms of lost production 

of atomic bombs ia believed to present a sacrifice which the USSR would 

2 not accept until their bomb stockpile has increased con•iderably. 

Therefore. apart from the use of residual radiation from an underwater 

burst ~bomb to neutralise harbor installations, RW is not considere4 

likely to be a factor in a campaign against the North American continent 

at least through mid-1954) 

1. J!IS Working Group :Briefing for JTIS. 21 May 52 (CW) 

2. JTIS Working Group :Briefing for J'l'IS. 21 May 52 (:BW) 

3. ACAI 22. JIC 491/62, Forms and Scales of Soviet Attack Against 

Borth America - 1 Jul7 1954 (5 May 1952) 

AIE #1 

TOP SECRET 

le•M\· l•hmatjnn 

l October 19.52 ,' 

. 
' 

... 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP Si:Cii:f 

APPENDIX "A" 

D. Biological Warfare Agents 

1. KNOWN DEVELOPMENTS 

The Soviets have been active in the :SW field since the early 

l930 1 s. There can be no doubt that the Soviets have the scientific 

potential to develop appropriate :SW agents. Intelligence reports 

and Soviet scientific publications indicate that the Soviets have 

extensive knowledge and experience with such things as botulism 

and o~her toxins, plague, tularemia, various quick acting intestinal diseases, brucellosis and some virus diseases. 

2. POTENTIAL :CEVELOPMENTS 

There is no information on the existence of a :SW stockpile 

in the Soviet union and little information on Soviet production 

capabilities. It is estimated that the Soviets are approximately 

a year behind the United States production capability for :SW agents 

and could mass-produce :SW agents on a large scale if they desired to 

do so. :SW agents cannot be stored for long periods and therefore 

relatively large scale production facilities would be required to 

sup~ort a major :SW attack. 

3. MEANS OF DELIVERY 

The Soviets can adapt certain chemical warfare munitions for 

disseminating BW agents and reportedly they have in the past 

developed special biological weapons. These include bombs and 

artillery shells. They also could have developed special sabotage 

devices for spreading dry agents such as crop dusting materials. 

It is esti""'ated that the Soviets have a capabilit~ for the employment of' large-scale open attack using biological warfare a,,.ents. 

It is believed that the Soviets will elect to use the sabota~e 

method in the initial stages of a major war and possibly some time 

II-8 .AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

9Bca1l19 lnfuanaalion 
... 

REF ID:A59018 

JOP a11~1e11:1 ------ ..Jr'dJ 1

d:RmtieR 

APPENDIX 11 .A" 

before the outbreak of hostilities. The main advantages of this 

method are that it is relatively easy to employ an:I. very difficult 

to detect.1 'However, the capabilities of the Soviet air arm are 

such that its utilization in the delivery of biological agents, 

particularJ..y in conjunction with atomic attacks, should not be 

Wlderes timat ed • 

I 

l. JI!J!S Working Group Stock J3riefing for JTIS on BW, 21 Ms¥ 1952 

11-9 AIEfl 

1 October 1952 

'FOP SECRET 

&wrihr H,,m.M111 
• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

SeceerjtJ lgfnrmgtjop 

APPENDIX rt A" 

E. Chemical Warfare Agents 

1. KNOWN DEVELOPMENTS 

The Soviet Union is estimated to have the capability to engage 

in chemical warfare on a large scale. It produced large quantities 

of toxic chemicals during World War II and, unlike most countries, 

the Soviet Union did not destroy its stockpile after the war. 

Indications are. that the Soviets have maintained this stockpile 

and have added to it by postwar production. The nerve gas agent 

UDO.er production by the Soviets is believed to be GA (tabun). The 

inclusion of GA in the CW training of the Soviet soldier suggests 

that, as early as 1950, it had become a standardized agent in the 

arsenal of Soviet CW weapons. The Soviets undoubtedly realize that 

GB (sarin) is a more effective agent, but are believed to have 

decided on the initial production of GA because of its greater 

ease of manufacture and because of the availability of German 

equipment and personnel for its production. On the basis of 

available installed plant capacity and critical basic chemicals 

such as chlorine, the Soviet orbit is believed capable of producing 

around 120,000 to 150,000 metric tons of CW materials, including 

nerve gases, during 1952. 

2. POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS 

Although the Germans discovered and developed the nerve gases, 

they utilized the research finding of a Soviet scientist, A. Ye 

Arbuzov, in developing the extremely toxic GB. .Arbuzov is one of 

the outstanding organic phosphorus chemists of the world; since 1905 

he has been working in the particular field of organic compounds 

related to chemistry of the nerve gases. He is presently directing 

a group of outstanding chemists and assistants in organic phosphorus 

II-10 .A.IE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

!atuillf li1fu111mlio11 
• 

... 

TOP sM!1 rn:AS901a 

SiCiir11f irii&ihdtldri 

J\PPElIDIX 11 .t.11 

compounds research at Kazan. A close analysis of the numerous 

publications of this group in Kazan strongly suggests that they 

are endeavoring to synthesize a duplex or dou.ble nerve gas •

1 

~he actual progreBB this group has made is not known but their 

capabilities for development of advanced CW ae:ents should not 

be underestimated. 

3. MEANS OF DELIVERY 

The Soviets are firm believers in the potentialities of 

aerial employment of toxic CW agents and through extensive development and testing they have perfected the requisite techniques for 

effective aerial dissemination. They have developed a variety 

of aircraft spraying equipment which is designed for low altitude 

operations. Also Soviet chemical materiel has been developed as 

multipurpose wherever possible. For example, flame throwers, 

both portable and mechanized, are designed to shoot a stream of 

1 either flame material, smoke, or persistent war gas • 

1. JTIS Working Group Stock Briefing for JTIS on CW, 21 May 1952 

II-11 AIE #1 

1 October 1~52 

TOP SECRET 

S.wllila/ WaARali811 
I \ / ........ 

f 

I -

r • ' l 

l 

l 

l 

~ 

,_ 

' 

t 

~ 

I 

r 

I 

I 

' ~ \.....) ' ~ 

f a > 

'I>\ 1 

~ . 

i : 

t 

t 

l . 

- t 

' • l . I ~ ..._, ' .. ._\I.,"\!!' 4. I A-l ~ ~ . ·~ . - I ' . ~· .. > 

' t>r- :11....l_ ... 

• 

l~ ' 

' 

j. ,\~ ' 

~- \" 

h'~ -. f~'I! ...... ' ( 

,.. lj'\ r:"P:: .. "1.:t \--;.. .... • ~ ,, ' 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SEGRET 

Appendix B 

Soviet Capa•lllt111 for l1terco1t1111tal 

Dellverr of Mass D11tr1ctlo1 W1apo11 •r Aircraft · 

CONTENTS 

A. THE LONG RANGE AIR FORCE 

1. Mission 

2. Composition and Deployment 

3. Expected Future Composition and Deployment 

B. LONG RANGE AffiCRAFT 

1. Present Characteristics 

2. Expected Future Characteristics 

c. AIR BABE STRUCTURE FOR MB/HB OPERATIONS 

1. Current Base Requirements 

2. Potentlal Base Areas for Intercontinental Operations 

a. Eastern Europe 

b. Kola Peninsula 

c. Far East 

3. Probable Future Developments" 

D. CURRENT CAPABILrI'Y FOR LONG RANGE~OPERATIONS 

1. Operational Readiness 

2. . Crew Proficiency 

a. Navigation 

b • Bombing Accuracy 

c. Night and All-Weather Proficiency 

d • Polltlcal Reliability 

3. Aircraft Utilization 

a. Availability and Abort Rate • 

b. Range Extension Techniques 

c. Defensive Armament 

d. Electronic Countermeasures 

e. Replacement of Losses1 •' 

4. Tactics and Techniques 

6. The Weather Factor 

' \ 

...~ 

-

7 

r ... '; 

-, 

' 
AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

Appendix B 

CONTENTS (Continued) 

6. Avallabll1ty of Target Data 

E. EXPECTED FUTURE CAPABILITY FOR LONG RANGE OPERATIONS· 

1. 1953 - 1955 

2. 1955 - 1957 

3. 1957 - 1960 

ID-2 

TOP SECRET 

S!QIRIT'V IMl'ORIMTIOM 

• 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

l••llitv We••i•• 

.APPENDIX "B" 

A. The long Range Air Force 

1. MISSIONl 

Long Range Aviation is the strategic striking force of the USSR. 

Its primary mission in war would be to deliver atom1c and other mass 

destruction weapons against distant tergets. Other n1issions of Long 

Range Aviation units would include attacks witt conventional bombs, 

long-rallge reconnaissance, and possibly aerial mining and participation 

in lon~range airborne raiding operaticns. It is clear from such 

derivative evidence as that relating to the organization, equipment 

and training of Long :Range Aviation that the Soviets intend that their 

long range units ahall be capable of carrying out missions against 

distant targets by day or night in an¥ weather. 

2. COMPOSITION AND DEPLOYMENT 

As of l October 1952, the Tu.-4 strength available for operational 

use was estimated at 900 aircraft, based primarily upon the Table of 

Equipment strength of Soviet air regiments established by intelligence 

to be equipped or in the process of being equipped with Tu-4 aircraft. 

The Tu-4 is the only known Soviet bo~ber in operational units capable 

of carrying the atomic bomb to the United States. 

l. A.I.S. No. 172/22B 

IU-3 .AIE l/rl 

l October 1952 

TOP 51iCAliT 

&nnity bfe11naliu1r-
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Sen1dty lpfgrmqtjqn 

EstiH.ated deployment of Long Range Aviation Tu-tie (based 

on T./ 0 & E strength) is as follows: lat Long Range Air Army -

~ Northwest Command -- (Leningrad. Moscow, Baltic, Belorussia, 

Kiev, Volga) 390 i:;:'u.-41 s; 2nd Long RaDge .Air Arm.v -- Southwest 

Command ... - (Kiev, Carpathian, Volga, 'l'ranscaucasus) 390 Tu-4's; 

3rd Long Range Air Army - Far East Command - ( F&· 'East, Maritime, 

Transbaikal) 190 Tu-4 1 s. Undetermined subordination (Western 

USSR) 180 ~-4 s. 

3. EXPECTED FUTURE COMPOSITION AND DEPLOYl·IENT 

The conventional medium bomber strength of Soviet Lon£ Ran~J 

Aviation is expected to attain its maximum of more than 1000 o~?rational aircraft in 1953. It is considered that jet medium bo~bers and 

piston or turboprop heavy bombers probably will appear in 1953 

e..nd that replacement of the early Tu-4•s with these types ~ 

then begin. It should be noted that no prototype jet medium 

bomber has been observed, although there are indications that 

such Sll. aircraft bas been under development. A prototype heavy 

bomber, designated by U. s. intelligence agencies as the !ype 31, 

appeared in t&e Moscow Air Show on 8 July 1951. The Type 31 

was probably powered with conventional piston engines on this 

occasion, but it is believed that the more likely ultimate powPr 

plant for it ia the Jumo 02.2 turboprop engine, which is reported 

to have passed Soviet acceptance tests in November 1950. An 

outatandl ng :f'er:..ture o:f' the Type 31 is the fact that its airframe 

is built largely of Tu-4 and Tu-70 sub-assemblies and it could 

therefore be rapidly brought into production. If the !ype 31 

is considered satisfactory by the Soviets, it could be in production now at one of the several aircraft producing facilities 

on which intelligence is inadequate to determine the article 

being produced. 

III-4· .A.IE fl 

l October 195: l 

TOP SECRET 

lltiirllf lntafmation 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Senerity Wormcdjog 

APPENDIX "B" 

Eatin:ated future Soviet long range bomber strength is presented in the taoles below. The spread. between the high and 

low figures is caused ~Y the estimated possible high and low 

rates of production and early and late dates for the beginning 

of production -- either figure -- or &rJ¥ figure between them --

is possible, and should the Soviets choose to devote additional 

resources to production of these types, the higher figures can 

easily be exceeded. However, it is considered that the figures 

given represent the more probable limita of the Soviet program. 

Mid-l953 Mid-1954 Mid-l955 Mid-1956 Mid-J957 

MediUJ12 :Bomber 

Possibly 

Jet a few 50/150 150/300 250/500 300/600 

Piston 1000/1100 1,100 1,000 800 500 

Heavy Bomber 25/50 50/200 100/250 150/250 200/250 

Since it is anticipated that the principal bases of Long Range 

Aviation units necessarily will remain reasonably near highly 

developed industrial and transportation centers in the uqsR, it 

is likely that the pattern of present deployment of these units 

will continue in the future. It is possible that improvement 

ot peripheral bases will allow some forvard movement of medium 

bomber units in the next few years but such an eventuality 

shouJ.d not seriously affect the be.sic pattern of deployment. In 

this connection it should be remembered that these bomber units can 

be quickly staged from one region into another in preparation for 

8XJ.Y possible attack. 

Within the past year a gradual build up of medium bomber 

strength in the Far East appears to be under W8¥ following the 

first appearance of Tu-4' s in 3rd Long Range Air Jirmy units i c. the 

latter part of 1951. 

III-5 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP &liCRliT 5ctdt ii 1 IMerM•i•R 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Saw:ilf l1tla,111;r'inn 

B. Long Range Aircraft 

1. PRESENT CHARACTERISTICS1 

F.xcept for small n'Wlibers of light bombers not included in 

these tables, the present estimated operating characteristics ot 

bomber aircraft of Soviet Long Range Aviation are aa follows: 

Combat 

Radius 

(NM/L'BS) 

1900/10,0002 

2160/10,000 

Combat 

Ranges 

• (NM/ GALS /L'BS) 

3320/7748/10,0002 

3960/8268/10,000 

Maximum Service 

Speed Ceiling (NU/TEET) (Feet) 

347/10,000 39,500 

2. EXPECTED FUTURE CHARACTERISTICS 

~he possible operating characteristics of medium and heavy 

bomber aircraft of Long Range Aviation are shown in the following 

table for the years indicated. It should be noted that the great 

maJority of aircraft in Soviet units will be earlier types not 

capable of the maximum performances listed below: 

l. Air Technical Intelligence Center Study No. 102-A~-52/1-34, 11Estimated Characteristics of Soviet Air Weapons" 

2. Special B-29 with all defensive armament except tail turret 

removed, crew reduced by one and take-off weight reduced by 

2600 lbs. There is no information indicating that the Soviets 

have modified 8.f1¥ Tu-4'r. in this manner. However, no technioal difficulties stand in the wav of the sccompliahment of 

this modification. 

III-6 AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET Sere •rity lpfnrmqtjon 
REF ID:A59018 

JQP SEGREJ 

lewuilt ••f&iiklli&i 

APPENDIX 11B1 

BOMBERS1 

!l!ype Power Maximum §l!eed Combat Combat Radiu1 :Bomb Service 

Plant SL 30000 ft Range No One Load Ceiling 

(kta) (lets) (NM) Refuel Refuel (lbs) (ft.) 

{NMl 'NMl 1953 

Medium Jet 475 425 ---a100 1100 1550 6,600 40,000 

Medium Conv 285 360 4500 2400 3360 10,000 37,000 

Heav1 Conv2 328 359 6500 3500 10,000 39,000 

~ 

Medium Jet 500 450 2800 1500 2100 10,000 43,000 

Medium Oonv 285 360 5000 2650 3700 10,000 37,000 

Beavr Conv 330 360 6500 3500 10,000 35,000 

1955 

MediW11 Jet 525 475 3200 1700 2400 10,000 45,000 

Medium Conv 300 3'15 5000 2650 3700 10,000 40,000 

Hea'V7 Conv 340 375 7000 3700 4900 10,000 40,000 

~ 

Medium Jet 525 475 3500 1850 2500 10,000 45,000 

Medium Conv 300 375 5000 2650 3700 10,000 40,000 

Heavy Conv 350 400 8000 4000 5600 10,000 40,000 

~ 

Medium Jpt 535 485 4000 2100 2950 10,000 48,000 

Medium Conv 300 375 5000 2650 3700 10,000 40,000 

Heavy Conv 350 400 8000 4000 5600 10,000 42,500 

Heavy- Jet 450 425 7000 3500 4900 10,000 45,000 

l. Air Technical Intelligence Center Study' No. 102-AC-52/I-34, 

"Estimated characteristics of SOTiet Air Weapons. 11 

a. Estimated performance with turboprop engine considered most 

likely engine installation for use in this aircraft. 

III-7 AIE #1 

1 October lf52 

JOP sceRET ................ 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

1Bcu1l11 h1lu11uallan 

APPENDIX 6:811 

C. Air Base Structure for MB/HB Operations 

1. CURRENT BASE REQUIREMENTS 

At present Soviet airfield capacities are such that th~ 

number af' aircraft determined to be necessary for an atomic 

attack on the United States could be accommodated at existing 

facilities and staging areas. 

Except for one-way, one-refueled missions, air attacks 

by Soviet !ru-11 s must come from areas controlled by the Soviet 

Union which are less than 3,960 nautical miles from the important 

target areas in the United States. There are only three areas which 

meet this specification: Kola Peninsula in northwest USSR; Soviet 

and Soviet-controlled territory along the Baltic and Eastern 

Germany; and Chukotski Peninsula in northeast Siberia. Bases 

further in the interior of the Soviet Union could be utilized to 

launch attacks against those United States targets located at 

less than maximum range from the three base areas mentioned. 

The extension of the combat range of the Tu-~ to 5,000 

nautical miles through modifications and the use of aerial refueli:ig, 

and the development of new longer range bombardment airers.ft would 

11fford the Soviets grPater flexibility in the selection of base 

areas. From bases known to be capable of accommodating medium 

bombers in the Leningrad or Moscow ar~as, the Soviet Tu-41 s on 

one-wa.y, one-refueled missions could reach all targets in the 

United States. Under such circumstances, a large number of base 

combinations could be selected which would permit compromises 

between maximum range, ease of logistic support, maintaining 

securit~ for the operation, more ample technical facilities for 

III-0 .AIE :fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

laettrit; h :fee n:alic:; 

APPENDIX "B" 

special operations, and other features the Soviets might desire. Since 

aircraft may be staged rapidly f'rom one region into another, the :many 

possible combinations of air bases make it impractical. to estimate the 

exact bases from which the Soviets would launch their attacks. However, 

it ia considered that advanced bases on the periphery would give greater 

f'1exibility in operations, better target coverage of' the United States, 

and multiple approach routes to contuse U. s. counter-measures. 

2. POTENTIAL BASE AREAS FOR INTERCONTINENTAL 

OPERATIONS 

a. Eastern Europe 

The Soviets have built or improved & number of bases along the 

Baltic from Leningrad into East Germany that are adequate for staging 

the entire medium bomber force. These bases are favorably situated with 

respect to communications and weather a.~d are adequately served by existing 

transportation facilities. The disadvantage of bases in the area is that 

the great circle routes to the northeastern parts of the United States 

pass over portions of Western Europe or Scandinavia and aiiy atte~ted 

air strike might be detected early enough to provide warning. 

Most significant of these bases are located in the Soviet 

Zone of Germany. The Soviet Zone now boasts 12 airfields capable of 

supporting sustained operations by medium bombers with runways 7,000 or 

more f'eet in length. The Zone also has 13 :f'ield.s capable of supporting 

limited operations by medium bombers with runways of 6,000 f'eet or more 

1n length. Representative o'f' the class I fields are Zerbst, Brandenberg/ 

Brieat, Parchim, Rechlin/La.rz, Dessau and Grossenhain. 

b. Kola Peninsulal 

The Kola Peninsula, the most northerly land mass on continental 

1. Air Intelligence Information Report, Air Facilities Notes 4-52, 

"Air Facilities in the Kola Peninsula", l May 1952 

III-9 AIE :/l=l 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET ..... ., ......... i ... 
~ID:A59018 •... ., ......... . APPENDIX "l311 

European USSR, 1a roughl.7 3,500 nautical miles from the 

continental United States and offers the advantage of great 

circle routes which avoid overflight of nations friendly to the 

U.S. Of the thirty-five landing areas known to have been constructed on the .Kola Peninsula, twent7-one are believed to be 

maintained in serviceable condition. It is not known whether aDT 

airfields on the Kola Peninsula have been used b7 medium bombers. 

However, two airfields -- Alalcurtti, at the base of the peninsula, 

and l·iurmansk/VS¥enga, nine and one-half miles northeast of 

Murmansk -- could be readily adapted to accommodate 'l'u-4• s. In 

addition, eight airfields in 1945 offered runways or take-off 

areas 4,500 feet or longer in length. It is possible that all of 

these bases could have been improved to accommodate medium bombers. 

However, intelligence available in this area is insufficient 

to determine accurately the extent of actual development of 

these !ields for medium bomber use. Scattered and unconfirmed reports 

of base improvements have been received and there are man,y indications 

that the area is closely guarded by the Soviets. 

Because of lack of information concerning airfield 

capacities and local conditions, it is presently impractical to 

fix any arbitrary limitation on the number of aircraft that the 

Soviets could stage through these forward bases in a given time. 

During the spring thaws and the summer months, which 

also present the worst flying conditions in the A.retie, the number 

of medium bombers tbat could be staged through Soviet bases in 

this area might be reduced since only permanent-t;ype, all-weather 

runw&¥s of suitable length and weight-bearing capacity could be 

used. An additional and greater hindrance to large-scale air 

' 

operations in those seasons would be the soft, boggy, and generally 

III-10 AIE ... l 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

llta1il7 l:aluamllli•A 
12:~,!- ID:A59018 

APPENDIX 11B" 

flooded ground that would impede dispersal, servicing, maintenance, and logistic support. 

Both Alakurtti and 1'1u:r'fliAnsk/VS¥enga are favorably 

sit~ated logistically; Alakurtti is serTed by rail and Murmansk 

is an important year-round port connected to the interior of the 

Soviet Union by rail. While some stockpiling in advance might be 

necessary to avoid over-burdening facilities, there is no doubt 

that the present rail transportation facilities are adequate to 

support a large scale air attack froa this area. 

Nautsi (69-04N 29-lOE), is another potential mediUJD./ 

heavy bomber airfield. Built by the Finns and enlarged by the 

Germans, it had a 5,500 foot graded gravel-and-sand runway when 

the Soviets began reconstruction of this war-damaged airfield 

in 1945. Pechenga (formerly Petsamo), which may now have concrete 

runways, is also a possible staging base for medium bombers. 

Still another potential medium bomber base is Ponoy (47-06N 41-0?E), 

on the eastern extremity of the Kola Peninsula. Little information 

is available about this field except that it was still active in 

1948 and i ta runwq was over 5,000 feet long. As elsewhere throughout the Soviet Arctic, virt"JB.lly all of these airfields are extensible 

and all will bear the weight of Tu-41 s during the six or more months 

of the year that the gro1md is frozen. At maDT far northern 

airfields, snow cover, which may be rolled and then preserved by 

watering and allowing to freeH, may serve in lieu of other runway 

construction. 

c. Far Eastl 

From the standpoint of geography, the Chukotski Peninsula 

is the area of the Soviet Union most favorably situated for aerial 

attack on the United States. This area is the Soviet territory 

l. Air Intelligence Information Report, Air Facilities Note 2-52, 

"Soviet Arctic Air Operations, 11 7 March 1~52 

III-11 

TOP SECRl!T 

SltatllJ l11fa1 HRlllion 

AIE :l/rl 

1 October 1952 
TO~Ef:Ri~ : A5901 B ......... If epipn 

APPENDIX "B" 

nearest .most industrial areas of the United States, and has the 

additional advantage of winds favorable to easterly flight .most 

of the year. The great circle course from the probable bases 

in this area lies generally across .Alaska north of :Bering Strait 

and south of Point Barrow, and acroaa Canada throtgh Great :Bear 

Lake and Lake Superior. ~ere ia insufficient firm information 

presently available on the airfields in this area to make possible 

the positive identification of &111' specific installation as 

a launching site or staging base for Soviet atomic attacks against 

the United States. It is possible, however, to select several 

airfields which might be considered aa possibly capable of 

supporting medium bomber operations. Karkovo (65-41N 179-15W) 

and .A'flBD.¥r/Mys Nizmenny' (64-48N l77-33E) would possibly support 

minimum operations by Tu-4'1 1 at least duri~g about nine months 

of the year. Other possibilities are the airfields at Ma.gad.an 

(59-38N 158-31E) and at Petropavlovsk (53-38N l58-31E) which 

offer the best potentialities for development as medium bomber 

bases of an,y of the air facilities of the Magadan-XSJD.chatka area. 

Unconfirmed reports indicate that Magadan airfield, which has been 

used by ,four-engine aircraft, .11183 have a 5,000 foot temporary 

surface runwS¥. Other fields include Velkal and '?aD¥Ul'er. In 

addition to these airfields, it is entirely possible that new 

airfields have been built without detection. An e,ooo foot ice 

landing strip was known to exist off the coast of Wrangel Island, 

north of Chukotski Peninsula, during the spring of 1952. The 

Soviets have placed considerable emphasis upon the use of frozen 

surfaces in the .Arctic, which makes possible a potentially large 

number of airfields which could be placed in operation with a 

minimum of preparatory effort. such frozen surfaces might be 

utilized for medium bomber operations during the winter season. 

III-12 AIE fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Stsvrity lnfwmgtjm 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP S&CRE:r 

SimtitJ k1fc111mliun 

.APPENDIX HJ3 II 

Logistic support for operations from the Chukotski 

Peninsula area, in which there are no known roads or railroads, 

would be unquestionably more difficult than for operations from 

other base areas of the Soviet Union. Supplies are moved by 

shipping a.rid river boats in summer, by caterpillar trains in winter, 

and by air during all sea&<.>na. !arge traffic, which could presumably 

be used to supply both Markovo and ~&n.Y'Ul'er during the ice-free 

months, is capable of moving large tonnages provided sufficient 

equipment is available. 

In spite of the difficult supply situation, the Soviets 

are considered capable of providing sufficient stockpiles of 

all supplies necessary for staging from these bases a limited number 

of medium bamb~r aircraft on missions against the North American 

continent. 

3. PROBABLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS 

Geogl"aphiceJ., economic and meteorological considerations will 

continue to influence the deployment and construction of principal 

Soviet Long Range Aviation facilities. It is considered probable 

that they will largely remain in well-developed areas in European 

~ussia and the Soviet Far East. Principal base facilities undou.btedly will be continually improved as higher performance aircraft become available. 

It is probable that staging bases in forward areas will be 

developed and stockpiled with the necessary supplies. In particu1£r, 

it is considered that additional facilities will be developed in 

Northeast Siberia as the ability to supply that area improves. 

Intellit~ence now available does not serve a.s an ad.E'qua.te basis for 

predicting where, and to what extent, other forward staring bases 

III-13 AIE 4/rl 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

l••l'itv lnk:Elamliun 

.· 
• 

• 

l 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP S&C:iiiT 

lliCDllif IHfbiiiZll&i 

.APPENDIX "::S II 

will be developed. Other than for these forward staging bases, 

whioh m8'{ already have been developed to some extent, there 

appears to be no need for development of new bE,se complex.es for 

long range oper~tions • 

Spitzbergen, Prinz Rudolf Island (Franz Josef Land), and 

. NovS¥a. Zemlya have all 1een con.rideren as possible sites for 

mountirie, long-ra.'l.ge air attacks 6g&.inst the United States. 

Spitzbergen, which belon&s to Norw&.¥ but on which the USSR h~s 

£:. cor.c:ession, has no :fe.cilities for medium bombers. AlthoUF";h the 

airstrip on Prinz Rudolf Island is the northernmost terrestrial 

landi1.e; area in the world, it was designed i'or reco!lna.issance 

aircrrft only D.ud is now reportE>d.ly a"t>e.nd.oned. The difficulty of 

su.ppl;•ing an air installation or.. Prin2 Rudolf Isle.nd, because of 

the eYtremely short shippinf. season in years when the island is 

not icebound, would probably be a severe limitation on establishment of fa.cili ties fer inte1•continental bombing opE>rations. At 

~OVB¥a Zemlys, also, possible advantages in range must be weighed 

against the logistical disadvantages. From the airfields at 

~ordv~k (at the mouth of the Xhatanga River), Tyllyr (at the 

mouth of the Lena. River), a..iXL Tiksi {on the bay of that name), 

the ~·eat circle routes to North .At::erica pass over the mo~t isolated 

regions of the Far North. Little is known about these airfields 

except that they are used by civil and militery aircraft and by 

airplanes engaged in ice and weather reconnaissance ove1· the 

Laptev Sea. 

IIl-14. AIE #l 

1 Cctober 1952 

lOP SECRET 

lacu;ilt l11fo1M•iaR 
.. 

"' 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SliCRET 

lenrit\· ld1mdi0n 

APPENDIX 11:e11 

D. Current Capability for Long Range Operations 

1. OPERATIONAL READINESS 

The entire operational strength, an estimated 900 aircraft, 

of the Soviet Tu-4 force could be utilized against the North 

.American continent should Soviet plans re~uire such an all-out 

effort -- unlikely in view of the estimated size of the Soviet 

atomic stoclq>ile. The Soviets should be capable of achieTing a 

serviceability rate of 90 perce~t for an initial, deli~erately 

prepared surprise attack. The abort rate could be oa the •rder ef 

a> to 25 percent of the aircraft sortied. The sustained 

serviceability rate for the ~4 is estimated at 40 percent for 

normal medium bomber operations with a sortie rate of seven per 

month.l These rates might be appreciably lower if a fairly large 

percenta.ge of aircraft were used against very distant objectives 

and would, naturally, have no a-pplicability to one-way missions. 

A sufficient number of reasonably well trained aircrews 

probably are available to maintain the sortie rates outlined 

above and are of sufficient political reliability to execute oneway missions if ordered. 

2. CREW PROFICIENCY 

On the whole, the limiting factor in the opera.tiona1 cape.-

bilities of Soviet Long ~ge Aviation is likely to lie in the 

performance of aircraft and associated equipment rather tti..en in 

shortcomings in trair:ing and techniques. 

The progress of Soviet Long Range Aviation personnel toward 

a high level of coinbat effectiveness undoubtedly has been retarded 

b,;r the absence of a background of combat experience in long range 

air operations and by restrictions on flying such as are imposed 

by the Soviet security system. The principal aspects of these 

1. A.I.S. No. 172/22 B 

III-15 AIE Jl:l 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Saa'F\y •+•mcztjnn 

.APPENDIX "B" 

operation1 in which the Soviet1 are weak apparently have been. 

identified and an intensive training program ha1 been UZJd.erwq 

for some time to correct them. In 1pite of these efforts the meager 

evidence available indicates that the combat effectivenes1 of the 

average Soviet medium bomber crew is below that of its u. s. 

counterpart. 

It must be emphasized, however, that the number of crews 

available greatly exceeds the total stockpile of atomic w~a~ons 

estimated to be available. The Soviets need thus employ only their 

best crews in attempting the delivery of their entire atomic 

stoclcpile, and thq have had almost five years to conduct crew 

training with operational aircraft. 

a. Navigation 

Navigation to target areas in the United States from 

areas in the temperate r.:one under Soviet control poses no unusual 

problems. However, navigation from bases in the Soviet .Arctic 

would require a knowledge of arctic navigation theory and crews 

trained in its practice. On the whole Soviet theoretical and 

practical knowledge of polar navigation, alld the navigational 

equipment available to them, leads to the conclusion that Soviet air 

crews 1hould be able to fl7 across the Arctic alld stq on course. 

!l'he German Patin remote indicating compass, the Gernan 

AB.G-1 celestial computer (which can be used to solve any problem ... 

ot spherical triangles) and the U. s. D/JPQ:-13 radar are among the 

more important navigational devices available to the Soviets • 

1'he latter is of less signific&llCe in the .Arctic, where coast 

lines are poorly defined because of snow and ice cover and where 

radar check points are as infrequent as visual check points. In 

addition to these dnices which are installed in t:t-.e aircraft, it 

appear• that the Soviets ~ mw have partially completed comtruction 

III-16 

TOP SECRET 

Sa•·• 111f8 Rllsdi8A 

AIE 11 

1 October 1952 
TOP SECRVf F ID : A5901 B 

S•sulil\.· Rf1Jll'lllien 

of an electronic pulae ns~igational ayatem. 

If neceaaary. additional navigational aaaietance could 

be prov~.ded by planted navigational aid.a on land or on aurface 

vessels or submarines. While it ia considered that Soviet crewa 

would have little difficulty in navigating accure.tely at lower 

latitudes, it 1• probable th&.t they would make the mas!mwn poaaible 

use of Canadian and u.s. navigational aide, and might alao be 

assisted by cla!ldestine electronic aida. 

b. Bombing Accuracy 

The Soviets are known to posaeaa optical bombaighta 

with pei•farll8Zlce characteristics at lebst equal to those ot the 

Borden and Sperry eights uaed by United Statea forces duriDC World 

War II. While there is no evidence concerning the accurac7 

obtained by tbe Soviets '4th thia equipment 1 the Soviets have had 

e ample tiir.e to train operators and it '148¥ be that accuracy vi 11 be 

m.ch the same as that obtained by United Statea forces with the 

same equipment. Accordingly, 1 t i a considered that bombing accurac7 

under visual conditions probably would be not leBB than that obtained 

by USAF World War II crews. 

Du.rill€ World War II the Soviets receiTecl a considerable 

amount of lend-lease airborne radar equipment such aa the SCR-717 

(Airborne Search Radar) and SCll-720 (Airborne Interception and 

Search Radar). U. s. aircraft acquired. by the Soviets were equipped 

with AN/J.PQ.-13, and possibly. AN/APS-15 radars. .All Soviet Tu-4 

aircraft obserTed have had a protuberance which could possibly house 

a rad.6.r scanner of microwave type, similar to that of the il/ .a.PQ,-13 

radar. Therefore, it is considered that aome Tu-4'R rlJ¥ be equipped 

with blind-bombing and navigation type radars of the U.S. J.B/APS-15 

III-17 AIE fl 

l October 1952 

lOP SECRET 

lea'llity IRfeAlllllieR 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

9ltu1l1r hafe1mmli•R 

.APPENDIX "B11 

and AN/.APQ:-13 type radar, or possibly with a more efficient type. 

' Although Soviet capability in the use of these instruments i1 not 

established, it is considered that a reasonable number of Soviet 

air crews may be capable of employing high altitude anl instrument 

bombing techniques in a manner adequate to :t\J.lfill the requirements 

of a missicn, particularly if the target is a city area rather than 

one requiring considerable accurac1. 

c. Night and All-Weather Proficiency 

Soviet Long Range Aviation training program• are known 

to call for bombing at all altitudes, by day or night, in aDT 

weathP.r. Blind bombing and navigation radars are considered. to 

be in use, although there is not sufficient evidence to determine 

the type of equiftment or the extent of its availabili t7 throughout 

the long range force. It is concluded tlli.t Soviet attacks against 

the United States can be expected both during d&Tlight and darkness 

or bad weather, with the degree of accurac7 partly dependent on 

the extent of visibility. 

d. Political Reliability1 

Morale in the Soviet Air J'orcea is believed. relativel7 

highe1· than that of other components of the armed forces. The 

principal reasons for good morale, particularly aaong officer anl 

fi,ying personnel, are better food, P•• quarters, and Job securi t7 

than the average Soviet citisen is able to obtain. 

It 1a apparent, however, that the morale of Soviet Air 

J'orce personnel iB generally lower than the standard desired. by tbe 

Soviet regime. Th18 is evident from official Soviet acts am 

policies. Propagama efforts to glorif7 military aviaticm. and to 

honor patriotic airmen are contimous. In an effort to prevent 

possible defections, the Soviet High Oommaml in 1948 iesued an. 

1. A.I.s. No. 172/22/B, l Apr 1952 

III-18 

TOP SliCRCf 

AIE #1 

1 Octob~r 1952 

l•••il\: 1• :z:alion 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECR:Ei 5en1gjty 'nh=a'ieA 

.APPENDIX "B" 

official order, apparently still in effect, statirg t1at reprisals 

would be taken against the family of a:n.y person wbo defected. Strict 

measures to limit opportunities for flying personnel to attempt 

defection while flying aircraft are known to be practiced. 

That these and other efforts are not wholly successful 

is evidenced by continuing instances of defection, particularly in 

units stationed outside the US~R. Defectors who have fled the 

USsR have reported that other personnel have considered defection. 

fo date no member of a ~-4 regiment has defected, but whether this 

reflects higher morale, more rigid controls, or generally greater 

distances from "safe haven, n has not been determined. 

Deficiencies in SoTiet Air Force morale, moreover, do 

not aP.Pear to have reduced the effectiveness of SoviP.t air units 

to the degree that would be expected under eimilar conditiom in 

Western nations. Severe and often cruelly enforced discipline does 

au.ch to suppress overt expressions of discontent among enlisted 

men. ~he air officer, comparatively well fed am well paid, 

thoroughly indoctrinated politically, and himself subject to 

severe discipline, appears unlikely as a general ~le to permit 

lap sea in discipline among his men. 

On the whole, while the morale of the Soviet Air Force 

personnel appears to be generally adequate for Soviet requirements, 

it still remains a matter of con:ern to the leaders of Soviet 

military aviation. 

3. Arn.CRAFT UTILIZATION 

a. Availability and Abort Rate 

!!?he only known Soviet bomber in operational units presently 

capable of attacking the United States is the Tu-4, the Soviet 

copy of the u.s. B-29. There is no intelligence available 

III-19 

TOP SECRET 

AIE fl 

1 October 1952 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRliT 

!law• ii f lnfu1 ma lion 

.APPENDIX ".B" 

concerning the actual serviceability rate or the meclm.nical condition 

of the !ru-'1 aircraft in Soviet uni ts. The standards of maintenance 

am. t be servi eeabili ty rate in the Soviet Air Forces during World 

War II were somewhat below that which 1 t is believed could have 

been achieved by United Statea units operati11g under similar conditions. However, at the end of the war the Soviets reportedly 

retained in service the best maintenance personnel and since have 

conducted an intensive training program aimed at improTed maintename 

throughout their air forces. The high priority given the development of Long Range Aviation, the presence of Tu-4 aircraft in 

opera'Uonal units for more than f01.1r years, and the combination of 

previously skilled maintenance personnel am an intensive training 

program, should, by this date, have enabled the Soviets to achieve 

a satisfactory serviceability rate. The Soviets should be capable 

of achieving a serviceability rate of 90% for an initial, deliberately 

prepared surprise attack. Such a capability is in accord with U.S. 

experience with the .B-29.A. and estimates of Soviet maintenance 

capabilities with the !ru-4. It is also consiatent with German 

experience against Soviet units operating after a period of mainten1 

a.nee stand-down. 

The abort rate -- aircraft turning back prior to accomplistiment of miSBion -- probably would be on the order of 20 to 25 

percent of the aircraft sortied.. This rate is based on USAF 

eiperience with the .B-29 aircraft am a consideration of the combined 

effect; of a lower level of Soviet maintena:ace efficie11C7 and the 

operating conditions in northern latitudeR. The percentage might 

vary somewhat depending upon such factors as the season, weather, 

time taken to prepare for the mission, altitudes flown. and other 

operational factors. 

l. Air Intelligence Stud,y No. 274 "Estimate of Forms anl Scales 

of Soviet Atomic Air Attack on North America, l Jan 52 - 1 Jan 54," 

18 Sept 51 

III-20 

TOP S&CR&T 

le1urit¥ 1-h·=n'inn 

.A.IE #1 

1 October 1952 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

lliw1ll7 l11fu11ua11uu 

APPENDIX 11B 11 

b. Range Extension Techniques 

Little information is available regarding Soviet 

development of aerial refueling techniques and equipment. Soviet 

interest in aerial refueling was evidenced several years ago, but 

no actual refueling operation hae been obserTed. However, it ia 

believed that the importa:ce of u.s. targets to Soviet war plans 

plua present range limitations of Soviet lo:ag range bcmbers wmld 

warrant the asaignme nt of a high priority to the development of 

operational aerial refueling techni CD18• and equipment. The techniques involved BZ'e not difficult to master, as ia evidenced by 

u.s. am :British experience am there 1a an abundance of information 

availal'Jle to the Soviets on u.s. and :British developments in this 

field. Therefore, the Soviets ai·e accorded the capability of 

developing equipment and techniques for operational use of aerial 

refueling. 

A stua,- of refueling tests conducted with the l3-29B and 

IB-29M tanker by the US.AF indicates that theoretical maximum 

range 111ission by Tll-4' a might be as follows: On a one-way mission 

with the tanker am receiver taking off together, the tanker would 

refuel the bomber at approximatel.1' 1600 nautical miles from their 

take-off points thus giving the bomber a total range from point of 

take-off of over 5 1 000 nautical miles. On a two-wq mission, in 

order to effect a m&.JCimum. radius of action for the bomber the outbound 1•efueling would take place about 1600 nautical miles from 

the poim of take-off and the return refueling ww.ld take place 

at approximatell' 2100 nau.tical miles from the point of take-off. 

If both outbound and inbound refuelings were accanplished e::r:peditiOlsly, 

radius of action of the bomber would be approximately 3750 nautical 

miles. 

III-21 .A.IE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

'=•rity 'AlelWlalic:: 
• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

A'P?ENDIX 11:8 11 

While operations based on in.-flight refueling, particularly inbound, prtsent operational problems which might result in 

the loss of a portio~ of the striking force, the Soviets mieht 

consider the recovery of some aircraft and crews an attractive 

alternative to the sacrifice of the entire strik1Dg force. The 

current 'l'u-4 operati:ig force is sufficient to permit convez·sion 

of the necessary number of bombers ~o tankers without ~ sacrifice in the $(.vi et capability fo1· delivering atomic weapons in 

the present numbers available to them. 

c. Defensive Armament 

It is believed t.bat for maximum range missions the Soviets 

will employ Tu-4's stripped of all defensive armament with the 

exception of the tail turret. With the attai~..ment of substantial 

increases in the maximum combat range through the development of 

Tu-4's of improved design, the d~elopment of new aircraft types 

with increased range perfor.ma.nce characteristics, or the use of 

in-ft 1.ght refueling of :present aircraft, the so~ri':!ts could 

achieve the capability of employing bombers with full defensive 

armament on missions against the United States. Turrets are 

expected to be err.aed with two 23mm automatic guns with a cyclic 

rate of 480-550 rounds per minute and sUfficient ammunition to 

sustain 12 to 15 seconds continuous fire. The ammunition load ma7 

be increased if weight or range limitati.1na pEI" mit • 

The fire control system prol:e.bly will ~ a copy of the 

:B-29 system, incorporating rad.er ranging equi'pment. Tail warning 

radar probably will be employed. 

d. Electronic Countermeasures 

The Soviets apparently are well aware of the tactical 

advantages to be gained from the effective employment of electronics 

III-22 AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

semr1t9 lnfa11na1iu11 
• 

., 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SliCRliT 

Sem:ilJ b•f••R•R 

APPENDIX 11B11 

countArmeasures. Soviet technical publications h:l.ve discu~sed 

Jamming and ferret operations and the SoTiets have direct 

experience with the offensive counterceasuree employed by the 

Ge1·mans in World ·,;er II. In ad.dition to the German equipment 

obtained during am after the war, both u.s. and :British war surplus equipment for use in electronics reconnaissance aircraft 

have been purchased by the Soviets. ~he Soviets have full knowledge 

of U.S. and Allied World War II radar search receivers. American 

airborne 3CM equiJXBent interned by the Soviets during World 'llar 

II incll.li.ed JJi/AP'l'-5 (Jammer), AJ.i/J.PR-5A. (Ferret Receiver), 

JJJ/APA-11 (Pulse Analyzer), J.N/.AP·~a~ (.200-550 Mes Jammer). In 

addition, the lend-lease program supplied the Soviets with 

samples of U.S. "window" and specifications for its use. 'l'hus, 

through lend,.lease the Sovit:its acquired a wide variety of U.S. 

defensive radar, and through other sources, the Soviets have h8d 

access to both U.S. Jamming equi?ment and some of the u.s. 

equipment which Soviet aircraft would be reG,Uired to Jam. 

1'he Soviets are capable of large-ecsle Jamming op,,,rations at frequencies up to 20 megac,.cles. Airborne Jammers mq 

be available, utilizing the same spectrum scale as airborne passive 

ECM. Since specimens of German World War II VHF JammPrs are 

considered available to the Soviets, this capability m~ well extend as high in frequencies as the VHF band. Directio2l equip-

.ment utilizing the co.c .. i.ioD. S and X bands, and possibly some of K 

band, 11JB¥ be available but large gaps in the spectrum will not be 

COV'ered. 

III-23 AI~ #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Sec·"i':· IMerMalio1r 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Sawailt lnfu1111alion 

APPENDIX "B II 

A number of devices of value to a noise intercept program 

are known to be under development, but the state of their development is undetermined. 

Recent appearances of a number of relatively advanced 

radar types, similar to the U.S. AN/OPS-6 and SCR-584, indicate 

that the Soviets have solved the problem of large scale production 

of radar magnetrons and have begun to produce radar equipment of 

advanced design. However, U. S. ani British experience indicates 

that techniques in advance of those required for the production 

of radar magnetron• are required for the production of coo.ntermeasures magnetrons. In view of the fact that the SoTiets have 

demonstrated a capacity for the production of magnetrons and have 

had access to foreign countermeasures equipment, it 1B considered 

probable that they have produced sufficient countermeasures d8'Vices 

to equip some ~ airera:f't. !rhe intelligence presently aT&ilable, 

howver, is not adequate to determine the number which may- have 

been equ.ipped or the effectiveness which the equipment might hoe 

against U.S. defensive radar. 

e. Replacement of Losses 

!rhe Soviets are estimated to have promced approximately 

1150 Tu-41 s since 1946. With attrition figured at 1.5 percent 

per 100 aircraft per quarter, the Soviets are estimated to have a 

cumu1.a ti ve inventory of about 1000 Tu-4 • s with an approximate 900 

aircraft believed available to units. No appreciable reserve 

of Tu-4's is believed to exist, basic Soviet policy lllwing been 

to assign available aircraft to training er operational units. 

Present production of !ru-4'e is estiuated at approximately 20 

planes per month, althouf",h the one plant imolved in this production 

is cc.nsidered capable of an output abcu t double the present rate • 

III-24 .AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

SiCurifY lriiOrmaflon 

-·-----------------------------------------
REF ID:A59018 

lOP S&CRET 

s.curity WWW 

APPDI>IX 11! II 

4. TACTICS AND TECHNIQUESl 

No So'Yi et aircraft are known to be preaentl.Y operating over 

or near the continental United Statea. Sighting• of unidentified aircraft or unconventional obJecta have not been proYed to have •DT 

connect ion vi th the USSR. !towner, there have been report a of 

unidentified aircraft in the orbit of the Alaskan Air Command an4 

the lortheast Air CollUD8Dd. One unidentified B-29 baa been aeen 

75 miles south of 'l!hule, more than 2000 milea frcm the nearest 

Soviet base area. .Aleo reports of falae SOS1 a mB3 indicate an 

effort to locate radar stations to test their alert procedures. 

No intelligence ia available as to tactics or technique• which 

might be used by LoiigRange .Aviation in approaching the United 

States or in pressing home an attack on the continental U.S. '!he 

possibilities can be outlined briefly aa follows: 

a) Single aircraft will oe unrestricted as to height 

of approach except insofar as such levels are dictated b7 the rout ea 

chosen. Single aircraft can be expected. to take advantage of 

darkness or total obscurity due to cloud. 

b) J'orila~ions will similarly be guided ae to high or 

low level attack but should be expected only in d&Tlight, or clear 

darkneBB. Formations will take advantage of obscurity due to 

cloud only if such cover is limitedly available prior to attack. 

Use of ECK, use of USAF and S,&C aircraft markings, use of 

English-speaking pilots for reporting ADIZ' s a'td./or airvqs should. 

be expected. 

5. THE WEATHER FACTOR 

In the Xola Peninsula area am the area along the ~alt:l.c, 

operations would be rendered difficult by low teaperaturee in 

winter and by fog aml low ceiling at other seasora. The Soviets 

are considered to have the ability and the resnurces to overcome 

1. Intellie;ence Estimate, .Air Defense Command, Revised 1 Mq 1952 

III-25 

lOP SECREl 

AIE :/frl 

1 October 1952 

5acu:it1 lnleJW1.tie1t 

--------------------------------------
... 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET Seer "i'V fpfarrnatjap 

.APPENDIX 8 :S" 

these difficulties, at the possible cost of some degree of operational efficiency. During the aprirg and summer months, which 

present the worst flying conditions in the Arctic, the number of 

.medium bombers that could be staged throu.gh Soviet bases in the 

Far North might be reduced substantially. 

Seasonal. weather conditions over the North Atlantic am. the 

Norwegian Sea generally result during the winter months in favorable 

winds aloft for we~terly flight over the latitudes north of the 

great circle routes from the Kola Peninsula and the Baltic and 

unfavorable winds directly along the great circle ra.ites from these 

areas to northeast United States. A special Air Weather Service 

study of the net wind components over this r011te indicates that the 

net wind component du.ring the winter season of the great circle 

route from the northwest Soviet Union to New York, based on a 

10,000 foot flight level, ranges from a 32 knot headwind to a 16 knot 

tailwind with the median value beirg a seven knot headwind. During 

the summer season the median value decreases to a three knot headwind. 

In the Chukotski Peninsula area extremely low temperuturPs 

prevail in winter. Fog and low ceilings in summer create additional 

difficulties, which the Soviets can overcome at the 'Probable expense 

of some decrease in operational efficiency. During the winter 

months, a pronounced low pressure cell is generally centered over 

the North Pacific in the area of the Aleutian Islands, bringing 

with i.t widespread areas of bad weather end counter-clockwise 

rotation of the upper air. The normal result is a situation in 

which the best flying weather and most favorable winds for easterly 

flight are found at the more northerly latitudes. In general, the 

winds along the great circle course from the Chukotski Peninsula 

area to the northeastern United States are favorable for easterly 

III-26 AIE fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

SiCUhif IHftifffidflbri 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

S.wuilp lnfuunaliun 

APPENmX n::e 11 

flight during both winter am SWlllllF.l", ranging from a net wind 

component value at 10,000 feet of a 12 knot tailwind during the 

winter to a net wind component of a 9 knot tailwind during the 

summer. Climbing to an altitude of 20,000 feet for the approach 

segment would increase the net wind COJ11.9onent median value to a 

15 knot tailwind. Therefore, bases in northeastern Siberia are the 

most favorably situated from the point of view of distance to 

the United States a.Id prevailing winds. 

Briefly, weather conditions are favorable to easterly flight 

from the Chukotski Peninsula area to the northeastern United 

States through the year,· and it is improbable that normal seasonal 

weather would dictate course deviations. The Soviets are known 

to have excellent weather reporting facilities in the Siberian 

area and undoubtedly are capable of making reasonably accurate 

forecasts of general route weather conditions. The degree to which 

the Soviets might be influenced by cyclic or seasonal weather 

considerations in planning their operations cannot be determined on 

the basis of currently available intelli~nce, ani it is not possible 

to establish firm conclusions as to the routes which might be 

followed at a given season. 

No intelligence is available concerni.ig Soviet doctrine or 

comepts for the tactical use of weather cond.1 tions. The Soviets 

might desire to use adverse weather conditions as a possible means 

of concealment both along the rai te and in the general area of the 

target. On the other hand, the need for accurate ban bing might 

influence the Soviets to desire visual bombing conditions for the 

actual attack. 

6. AVAILABILITY OF TARGET DATA 

Most of the inf'ormation necessary for the selection of targets 

III-27 AIE fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SCCR&T 
REF ID:A59018 

JOP S!CRET 

Security LiiOmiailon 

.APPJ!:NDI x "B II 

and target systems in this country a.Iii!. development; of the necessary 

maps and folders is available from public sources. All the 

navigational charts and radio facility information necessary to 

navigation in the United States am Canada are for sale to the 

public by the respective governments. Aerial photographs of large 

cities and industrial installations are likewise sold publicl7 

or published in maga1inea and newspapers. Radar scope photographs 

of so1.;.e important areas have been published in AmEl'ican magazines. 

Privately owned aircraft large enough to accommodate the equipment 

for rad.al· scope photograpey can move about freely in the United 

Ct.t 1.£·r.. and it is possible that this means mi~ht be employed to secure 

additional radar photography. CovP.rt sources in the U.S. armed 

f'orce!J might proviae some radar photograpey. 

While it is presumed that at least ~ome of the information 

gathering measures discussed above are in progl'eSP now, there is 

no direct in:f'ormation lirhich would ests.blish .the e7'tent to wh :ch an..v 

of tbe above measures are planned or actually in operation. 

III-28 J.I!l :fl 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

&ecacilr li1fu111m1m11 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SEeR:!T 

leetnilJ h:leausalion 

.APPENDIX 11B11 

and target systems in this country aDd. development of the necessary 

maps and folders is available from public sources. All the 

navig&tional charts and radio facility information necessary to 

navigation in the United States a!ll Canada are for sale to the 

public by the respect! ve governments. Aerial photographs of large 

cities and industrial installations are likewise sold publicly 

or pubJ.ished. in maga11nes and newspapers. Radar scope photographs 

of so1:ie important areas have been published in AmErican magalines. 

Private}¥ owned aircraft large enough to accommodate the equipment 

for radar scope photography can move about freely in the Uui.ted 

fJt.1.te-r.. and it is possible that this means mi~ht be employed to secure 

additional radar photography. Covert sources in the U.S. armed 

:f'orceCJ might provide some radar photography. 

~'h.ile it is presumed that at least Pome of the information 

gathering measures discussed above are in pro~es~ now, there is 

no direct information ~hich would establish the extent to wh :ch an.v 

of the above measures are planned or actually in opPration • 

III-28 .A.IE fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Ser•eri•r lgMrmqtjpn 
REF ID!A59018 

lOP SECRET 

Sec••rity lnfqrmatian 

APPEliDIX 11B11 

E. Expected Future Capability for long Range Operations 

1. 1953-1955 

Through 1955 the chief metro d of deli very of "'·eapona of 

mass destruction is likely to remain the aircraft of Long Range 

Aviation. It is considered that jet-powered aircraft tYPes will 

receive increasi~g e~'Phasis. In addition to extending the jet 

light bomber program into the medium bomber field, it is expected 

that by mid-J955 the Soviets will have devPloped a heavy ~omber, 

which will be hVailable in very limitPd numbers for operaticnal 

use. However it is eXpected t:m.t the principal vehicle for Soviet 

long range air operations through 1955 will still be piston-Pngine 

l bombers, reiiresented by an improved Tu-4. 

The hea'VY bomber is expected to have a radius capability of 

about 3,500 nautical miles with 10 1 000 pound bomb load. Jet 

medi\m bombers with a maxiJr.um speed of' 500 knots and combat radius 

of alx>ut 1500 nautical miles m83' become operational by 1954. 

Additional steps designed to improve Soviet capability for 

two-11rawY air attack against the U.S. should be e.zpected dllri11g the 

period. These steps may include building of additional range into 

present bomber aircraft, uae of aerial refueliq: techniques, and 

possibl7 the adoption of other two-stage methods of strategic 

attack, such as the use of mother aircraft with parasite aircraft 

or misailes for carrying out the combat E1tsge of the mission. 

Operational use of the controlled gliding or power-driven 

bomb is possible during the period. Such weapons will have an 

important effect on tactics, i.e., the7 would obviate the need for 

a fairly long and stea~ bombing run and rigidly maintained heights 

of run-Sn to the t8l'get. 

r:- JIO 506/8 

III-39 .AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECREl 

Sacucilf luluunmlioll 
e. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECREt 

SiClimy intO~IOft 

.APPENDIX "!" 

Efforts will la made to improve the accurac~ of navigation 

and bombine: by development of electronic devices superior to those 

now in service. Current effective operational strength iB believed 

to oe a:ffectrd. in pert by a shortage of qualified personnel, especially technicians. Gradual improvement can be 8%pected and it 

is likely that these personnel deficiencies will have been eliminated 

by lg55. Air crew proficiency and standards of maintenance and 

training will have improTed. 

Base complexes and facilities will have improTed considerably 

by 1~55. Peripheral staging bases probably will have iDCreased in 

nwnber and efficiency. The imprOV"ement of facilities will probably 

maintain pace with improve~ent in aircraft types and their increased 

base re~uirement~. 

2. 1955-1957 

During this period the development of organizations designed 

to propound doctrine and train personm11l for use in surface-toRurface guided missile programs lllS¥ begin to ai"fect the priorities 

and enq;>ha.ses under which Long Range Aviation operates. The subordination of such orgamzations cannot yet be estimated. However. during 

the period, Long .Range Aviation, probably equipped with the T.vpe-31 

turbo-prop heavy bomber or a similar aircreft, armed w1 th pulse Jet 

and rocket propelled missiles in addition to convention&J. air weapons, 

probauly will remain the core of Soviet capability in long range 

operations. 

Jot heavy bombers may become operational by 1957. The maximum 

speed of these bombers should be about 450 knots, combat radius 

approximately 4 9 000 nautical miles and with an altitude capabilit7 

of about 47,000 feet. 

Perfection and sta.nderd utilization of inflight refueling 

techniques for both piston and Jet types probably will be accomplished in the period. 

III-30 

TOP SECR&T 

A.IE #1 

l October 1952 
e. 

.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

s ... ..., IRl••llli•R 

APPENDIX "B11 

!1' 1 July 1957 it 1a anticipated that Long Range Aviation 

strength will comprise 300 to 600 medium Jet bombers, 800 medium 

piston and 200/250 heavy bombers. 

It is possible that some alight temporary decline in crew 

proficiency and operational readiness might be exp~rienced during 

the period causf:"d by the change-over from one weapons and aircraft 

system to another, but it is unlikely that such temporary loss of 

readiness wou.ld significantly af'fect Soviet long range air 

capabilities. 

3. 1957-1960 

The probable imminence, after 1957, of operational surface-toRurface guided missiles capable of intercontinental flight is 

likely to affect Long Range Aviation aircraft orgaJJi.zations. The 

ultimate arrangements for subordination and control of special 

organizations for guided missiles cannot yet be estimated. However, 

Soviet preference for developing a diversified attack capability 

is likely to result in contirmed development of piloted jet, 

ramjet and rocket aircraft. It is probable thet mass destruction· 

warhee.d.s will be carried chiefly by guided missiles with reconnaissance and some missile guidance functions assigned to piloted 

aircraft. 

By l July 1960, it is estimated that Long Range Aviation 

strength Jll8Y have stabilized with between 750 and 1300 medium jet 

botibers and 250/300 heavy bombers. Improvements should be anticipatAd in ranee. altitude, speed and bombload capabilities. 

It is unlikely that operational readiness would be other 

than temporeril¥ affected by the introduction of new weapons during 

the period. 

III-31 AIE .fl 

1 October 1952 

TOP S&CRET 

&awailf l11fu1nldilDH 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP IECRET 

Appendix C 

e Soviet C1paltlllt111 · for Delivery of Mass D11tnct101 Weapons lty Gilded Mlssll11 

~· 

-~· _J -

CONTENTS 

A. ORGANIZATION FOR DELIVERY OF GUIDED MISSILES 

B. CURRENT STATUS OF SOVIET GUIDED MISSILES PROGRAM 

1. Known Acquisitions 

2. Known Field of Experimentation 

C. SOVIET GUIDED MISSILES 

1. Characteristics of Presently Available Weapons 

2. Expected Characteristics of Future Weapons 

D. PRESENT SOVIET CAPABILITY FOR UTILIZATION OF GUIDED 

MISSILES AGAINST THE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT 

1. Availability of Weapons 

2. Availability of Launching Platforms 

3. Expected Accuracy of Delivery 

4. Potential Target Area 

IV-1 

TOP SECRET 

SFC1 IRITY INFeRMll'TION 

'\ 

AIE#l 

1October1952 
c 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

l•••itt IRfarMlllien 

APPENDIX 11C11 

A. Organization for Delivery by Guided Missiles 

Nothing is knO'Wn of special organi~ations est~blished tor 

the operational use of guided missiles. The delivery or the V-1 

type missile, adapted for launching from a submarine, probably 

is a responsibility of the Soviet Navy. Operational responsibility 

for utilization of guided missiles in the "controlled gliding or 

power-driven air-to-surface category" probably has been assigned 

to the Soviet Air Forces. Operational responsibility for utilization of long range surface-to-surface ballistic missiles, when 

available, is not lmown. 

IV-2 AIE Hl 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SEriFT 

S.walip IHftilliZH&n 

APPENDIX ncn 

8. Current Status of Soviet Guided Missiles Program 

1. KNOWN ACQUISITIONS 

At the end of World War II the Soviets had access to f'ive significant classes of' missiles: 

l~ The controlled gravity bomb. 

2) The controlled gliding or power-driven air-tosurface missile. 

3) The controlled air-to-air missile. 

4) The controlled surface-to-air missile. 

5) The controlled surface-to-surface missile. 

or these, the controlled gravity bcmb was operational by the 

Germans as the FX-U.00, a 3 ,500 pound controlled banb. Development 

stopped on this weapon in 1942. The Soviets obtained all data on the 

bomb but no samples are known to have })een obtained. 

In the controlled gliding or power-driven air-to-surface category, 

the HS 29A-l, a 2,300 pound missile carrying 1,100 pound warhead was 

operational. The Soviets obtained all development data on this weapon 

as well as data on later types such as HS-294· No completed units or 

any air-to-surface missiles are known to have been obtained by the 

Soviets. 

The surface-to-surface missiles - the V-l and the V-2 -- were 

both used operationally by the Germans during World War II. The V-1, 

a winged missile with a 1870 lb warhead and powered by' a 700 lb thrust 

pulse jet was operated at about 350 knots. Its range was about 130 n.m. 

Flight was controlled by' a preset mechanism which was in turn controlled by a magnetic compass. The controls were not subject to jamming. 

IV-3 AIE /11 

1 October 195~ 

TOP SECRET Sm1rif¥ lgformgtjnn 
.. 

5aet11il; ltt:fa11:1e11lieR 

APPENDIX 11C" 

The Soviets obtained all in!onnation and a large number or these 

missil.es at the end or World War II. 'lbe V-2 (A-4) was a supersonic 

missile carrying a 2,1;0 pound warhead. The Soviets obtained parts 

and material to allow assembly of possibly titt7 missiles in addition 

to data on the development program. In the over-all German missile 

program. the Soviets obtained considerable test am manufacturing 

facilities as well as engineering and technical personnel. 

The Soviets are not known to have obtained any detailed guided 

missile data from a.ny other country-. Sufficient detail on u.s. and 

British development programs has probably been obtained to give the 

Soviets at least the trend or developnant. Detailed development data 

are not known to have been obtained by the Soviets. 

2. KNOWN FIELD OF EXPERIMENTATION 

a. V-1 

The Soviets have assembled and test launched a limited 

number or World War II tTpe V-1 missiles. It is apparent that the 

main interest was in improving this missile. Power plant improvements (increased thrust from 700 to 1,100 pounds) and the fitting of 

double pulse engines are indicated. 

b. V-2 

The Soviets ma.de immediate plans at the end of World War II 

tor full exploitation of the German V-2 project. Limited production 

and testing of V-2 missiles have taken place in the USSR. 

c. Original Work 

The Soviets are not known to have accomplished aey original 

work in guided missiles. It is known that development work was initiated on a high level a~er World War II. The extent of any developments are not known. 

IV-4 AIE #1 

TOP SECRliT 

l October 1952 

Seq •At.y I faJPPVti8R 
• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Secu1il7 la1ksi111UllU11 

C. Soviet Guided Missiles 

APPENDIX "0" 

1. CHARACTERISTICS OF PRESENTLY AVAILABLE WEAPONS 

a. V-1 

The V-1 is a winged missile powered by a. 700 pound thrust 

pulse jet which may have been improved by titting an l,100 pound thrust 

engine, and perhaps the titting ot double pulse engines. Aiming to 

improve accuracy and reliability, the Soviets may now have achieved 

50 percent dispersion in .8 to 1.0 nautical mile radius at ranges 

.f'rom 120 to 200 n.m. 

b. V-2 

The V-2 is a. supersonic missile cA.rrying a. 2,150 pound warhead with a range of approximately 600 nautical miles. nevelopments 

. in the structure, power plant and guidance systems for the missile 

have been initiated. V-2 ~irtrames of greater length than the German 

V-2 have been constructed, and a 3 5-ton thrust rocket engine to replace the 25-ton thrust German engine has been developed. Design 

work on a 100-120 ton thrust engine has been initiated and, apparently, 

experimental work was well along on this engine in 1950-51. 

c. Guidance Systems 

The principles had been established by the Germans f'or 

improved accuracy or V-l and V-2 missiles. The types or guidance involved were the inertial ar.d the improved radio-radar systems tor 

V-2 types and an improved radio system tor the V-1. There haVA been 

indications of Soviet effort in a celestial navigational system which 

would be applicable to guided missile flight with r~.nges considerably in 

excess of the V-1 and V-2 missiles. The Soviets have conducted development work on the German optical and radar systems tor search and track 

IV-5 AIE #l 

TOP SECRET 

1 October 1952 

SiCUnry lniormoi1on 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECREI 

Sawailf h1fu1111a1ton 

APPENDIX "C" 

and on the radio command systems, possibly using decimeter wave lengths. 

There is no evidence or further development or the German 

radio comma?Xi or fire control guidance, which could be applied principally to air-to-surface missiles. There is 1 h~ver 1 evidence or some 

development work being conducted on the application or television to 

guided missile control. 

2. EXPECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF FUTURE WEAPONS 

Certain tentative estimates concerning the probable characteristics 

of future weapons appear to have value. Indications are that the 

Soviets are programming long range delivery systems; apparently they 

will leave no stone unturned to achieve an effective intercontinental 

capability. Ir the Soviets have succeeded in developing a 120-ton thrust 

rocket engine (reports that cannot be accurately assessed have so indicated) the Soviets have achieved a very considerable advantage. 

Achievement of even larger thrusts would widen this lead. 

Such large rockets can be used for the development or intercontinental rockets and aircraft-rocket and submarine-rocket combinations. It can be expected that, some time after 19541 the Soviets 

could attack targets on the North American continent with weapons 

operating at supersonic si:eeds. The U. s. m:i.y be trailing the Soviets 

in the develOJYT'ent Of some advanced delivery systems. 

~eking information that c:m be accur~tely evaluated it is neverthel~ss possible to construct a working hypothesis on which an estimR.te 

of future Soviet long-range delivery systems can be based. When the 

rAsults of such an hypothesis are compared to U.S. achievements and 

programming, some general conclusions become apparent. In brief, this 

hypothesis and comparison indicate: 

IV-6 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Sacuailr h1Fu1111ation 
1954 . 

1954-58 

1956-60 

After 1960 

TO~~J-~:A5901B I _,,._""A.Im I 

SitDFlif h1fa11naliun 

Soviet 

'l'ypa-31 with bombs or 

pulse jets or rockets 

Submarine systems 

Bomber with missiles 

Submarine systems 

Rockets plus aircraft 

Double rocket plus aircraft 

Triple rocket 

No comparative estimate possible 

APP~IX ncn 

RASCAL system 

Submarine systems 

SNARK, NAVAHO II 

(pilot production) 

3 Ma.ch missiles 

NAVAHO III 

(pilot production) 

For comparative purposes the following additional information 

on the U.S. program is set forth: 

TYPE SPEED RANGE PIIOT PRODUCTION 

RASCAL rocket parasite 2M 100 1953-54 

SN ARK turbojet plus .9M 5,500 1954 

rocket booster 

NAVAID II 2 ramjets plus 2.75M 2,500 1956 

2 rocket boosters 

NAVAHO III 2 ramjets plus JM 5,500 1959-60 

1 rocket booster 

VULCAN-ATLAS 3 stage rocket 20M 5,500 1960-6~ ? 

200 ton thrust (terminal) 

IV-7 AI:!!: #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Saa.n=ity btfeN11•lia1t 
REF ID:A59018 

IOP SECRET 

Sacuuilt l:1fc::aatie1: 

APPENDIX "C" 

D. Present Soviet Capabilities for Utilization of Guided 

Missiles Aeainst the North Amencan Continent 

1. AVAILABILITY OF WEAPONS 

The V-1 and V-2 type weapons are estimated to be the only missiles 

presentl,y available to the USSR. Range and performance characteristics 

have been discussed in a preceding section. 

Since the winged pilotless missile offers the best range for 

its "'8ight and size, a logical development is a turbo-jet powered 

V-1 winged missile with improved aerodynamic characteristics designed 

for launching from a submarine. It would have folding wings and the 

lighter materials would be used in its construction. The fuels used 

would not present a storage and handling hazard that liquid rocket motor 

ruels do. The range could be increased to approximately 450 miles and 

the radio guidance would probably involve the use or beacon radio 

signals emanating from one or two sister submarines or from buoys 

dropped near the target. It is possible that a heavy rocket ballistic 

type trajectory missile could be adapted to submarine launching, 

however, the only advantage of such a missile is that it is not as 

vulnerable to defensive measures. Better methods of storage and 

handling of missiles aboard submarines could be devised. 

The Soviets are considered to have the capability of equipping 

the submarine launched V-1 type missile with an atomic warhead. The 

~owever, there is no actual evidence of Soviet ,____~~~~~~~~----' 

development of missile atomic ~rheads of any type. 

2. AVAILABILITY OF LAUNCIDNG PLATFORMS 

OGA 

A few reports are available indicating Soviet activity in launching 

IV-8 AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

5ac··d'¥ 'nh•=a'ion 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

58CUnf9 lrifOPlridtltiri APPENDIX 11C" 

guided missiles rrom submarines. Most or these reports point to the 

V-1 type missile as being used. To date, no launching equipnant, 

storage facilities or missiles have actually been sighted on Soviet 

submarines. Soviet and other foreign and unclassified literature 

indicates that the Soviets are aware or the various schemes tor launching missiles rrom surfaced and submerged submarines. The V-1 type 

missile can be launched from a very short ramp, possibly zero-length 

launchers, by using booster rockets. This makes the launching or 

missiles from submarines practical. The Soviets have at the present 

time about 100 oceangoing submarines capable of being converted to 

this type o.f operation. It is estimated that, by 1955, the number or 

such submarines will be about 180 or which SO per cent would be 

serviceable and about one-third on station normally at one time. This 

would make available about 45 submarines for launching attacks at anyone time. All or the Soviet and ex-German ocean patrol type submarines 

are believed to be capable of carrying two V-l's in a topside hangar. 

By providing access .from inside the submarine to inside the hangar, the 

missiles could be prepared .for launching be.fore surfacing. Then the · 

missiles could be launched in approximately ten to .fifteen minutes 

a.rte r surra-cing. 

3. EXPECTED ACCURACY OF DELIVERY 

Present guidance can be employed with reasonable accuracy against 

an area target. The Soviets may now have achieved, with the V-1, 50 

per cent dispersion in .8 to 1.0 nautical mile radius at ranges from 

120 to 200 n.m. The submarines normal "fixes" would be sufficient for 

determining the settings prior to launching. Tests have shown that 

a V-1 type missile can be radio controlled for a distance of about 

IV-9 AI~ ,1/:1 

1 October 1952 

TOP S!CRET 

las· ·rity 10 m.rnqtjgn 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

APP.!!:NDIX "C" 

100 miles even with the launching submarine submerged to periscope 

depth and several times that depth if '?.dditional picket submarines 

are used to aid in the guidance. The radio control would be subject 

to jamming and the submarine would be more vulnerable in that it 

provides a "fix" tor the enemy radio equipment, and the radio and 

radar antenna above water could be spotted during the guidance operation. 

4. POTENTIAL TARGET AREA 

There are approximately 200 primary targets which contribute 

significantly to the war-ma.king potential or the United States. 

Some 50 per cent or these targets are within an area 150 miles 

inland from the coasts of the United States. 

For example, within these coastal areas are 12 airframe plants 

producing 73 per cent of the total aircraft weight, and 24 aviation 

gasoline refineries accounting for 72 per cent of the total U. S. 

production. More than 34,000,000 people live in large population 

centers along the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf' coasts. 

The government control structure of the U. s. also is located 

within this 150 mile belt. Washington, the seat of political, economic, and military control, is within this range and such principal 

subsidiary centers of the Federal Government as New York, New Orleans, 

San Francisco, and Seattle are accessible. Bighteen state capitals are 

within the 150 mile zone, plus the control centers of the territories 

.. of Hawaii and Puerto Rico. The Panama Canal Zone is within range 

of either Atlantic or Pacific attacks, or a combination of both. 

Substantial segments of the U. s. armed forces in-being are 

contained in military areas along the coasts. Based on strengths 

IV-10 A~ #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECR&T 

Serrerjty lnfgrmation 
• 

• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

APPENDIX "C" 

of JO June 1951, the number of bases and the per cent of the 

respective personnel and aircraft of each major ZI air command concerned are presented below: 

Command 

SAC 

ADC 

TAC 

ATRC 

AMC 

Number of Bases 

7 

9 

5 

7 

5 

Per Cent of 

Total Personnel 

38% 

371' 

53% 

42;g 

33i 

Per Cent of 

Total Aircraft 

54~ 

34.~ 

55% 

29% 

36~ 

Twenty-five major naval and marine bases are vulnerable to 

submarine launched guided missile attacks. These include Bremerton, 

San Diego, Pensacola, Camp Le Jeune, Norfolk, New York, New London 

and Boston. 

A total or 3 5 major arnw installations lie within 150 miles 

of U. R. Coasts. These include such targets as Fort Dix, Aberdeen 

Proving Ground, Fort Monroe, Fort Bragg, New Orleans Port or Embarkation, Fort Lawis, and the Presidios or Monterey and san 

Francisco. Numerous headquarters and supporting units or our 

military- mechanism also are within the 150 mile area. For example, the 

Air Research and Developnent Command bases at F.ciwards, California, 

and Patrick, Florida are vulnerable, as are the MATS Headquarters 

at Andrews Air Force Base and subsidiary- commands at Westover, 

Massachusetts, West Palm Beach, Florida, and Travis, California • 

IV-11 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

5ecu1 ity lllfe•MRllA 
r I , ! ~ > 

I 

I 

. I 

l I 

! 

r 

REF ID:A59018 .. TOP··s!CR!T 

Appendix D 

Soviet Capa•1111111 for Cla1d11tl11 D1llw1rr 

of Mass D11tr1et101 W1apo11 .Agal11t Tar11t1 11 Nort• A•erlca 

CONTENTS 

A. SOVIET DELIVERY CAPABILITIES 

B. CLANDESTINE USE OF WEAPONS 

1. Excerpt from NIE-31 

2. Dlsgulsed Bomber 

3. Guided Missiles 

·-

,} 

rll 

" I 

r 

... 

.... 4w .u.1• 

'-:i. 

" ~i 

"' 

"\ 

"Ill" ?-. 
• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECR&T 

5&cuc ii r lnfe1 "'•i•" 

APPENDIX "D" 

A.. Soviet Delivery Capabilities 

l. This phase of the Soviet threat was considered in NIF..-31, 

11 Soviet Capabilities for Clandestine Attack .Against the u. s. 

with Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Vulnerability of the U.S. 

to such attack (mid-1951 to mid-1952), 11 pi1blished 4 September 1951. 

Conclusions of this stu~ were as follows: 

111. The Soviets have substantial capabilities for the 

eL'Ployment of atomic, chemical, and biological weapons for 

clandestine attack upon the continental U. s. 

"2. The U. s. is vulnerable to such clandestine attack 

because existing and presently planned security measures do not 

provide a.Q.equate assurance that certain methods of clandestine 

attack would be detected and prevented. 

"3. In a clandestine attack on the U. s., the USSR 

would probably attempt simultaneous delivery of a number of atomic 

weapons, possibly by several methods. 

11 a. The most likely method of attack, because the 

most feasible and potentially most effective, would be the use 

of disguised Tu-4 aircraft to deliver atomic weapons to a ~umber 

of targets simultaneously as the initial act of general r.ostilities. 

11 b. The delivery of atomic weapons into key harbors 

by merchant ships is feasible and therefore constitutes a serious 

threat • 

11 c. Smuggling of atomic weapons into the U.S. um.er 

cover of diplomatic immunity, or in the guise of commercial 

shipments, or by landing at some secluded spot is also feasible. 

However, such operations are relatively unlikely because of their 

complexity and the number of individuals involved. 

v-2 AIE #1 

1 October 1~52 

TOP SECRET 

Sacucilf lcah::::c:alio1t 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET Sere •rity lgfnrrnntjag 

APPENDIX 11D" 

11 d. The launching of gu.ided missiles with atomic 

warheads from merchant ships or submarines 8,€;ai ns t near-coastal 

targets is a possibility. 

1 4. 'rhe onl7 method of clandestine attack with chemical 

warfare a~nts likely to be employed by the USSR is the smuggling 

of limited quantities of nerve gas into the u. s. for dissemination 

against personnel in key installations. 

115. The USSR .might elkploy biological warfare (BW) agents 

a&ainst personnel in ke7 installations well in ad.vance of D-Day. 

Attacks against livestock and crops with dangerous diseases like 

foot-and-mouth disease and cereal rusts are a possibilit7 at any time. 

11 6. It is believed. likely that in clandestine attack the 

USSR would employ those methods not requiring pre-D-Ds.v preparations 

in the u. S., since such methods entail the least risk of loss of 

strategic surprise.• 

V-3 AIE -t/=l 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

s.,,,,it) l:1fu1111ailbfr 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Sec· ·ritv IAl•NW•tien 

B. Cla11destine Use of Weapons 

1. EXCERPT FROM NIE-31 

APPENDIX "D" 

11The Soviet Union will have no scruples ab cut tr..e employment of a~ weapon or tactic which promises success in terms of 

over-all Soviet objectives. Clandestine attack with atomic, chemical, 

and biological weapons offers a high potential of effectiveness 

against a limited number of targets, particularl,y if employed concurrently with, or just prior to, the initiation of general hostilities. Hence in planning an attack upon the U.S., the USSR 

would undoubtedly consider clandestine employment of the various 

weapons of niass destruction available to them. Biological warfare 

probably, and chemical warfare possibly, could be employed without 

detection prior to open war. However, it is doubtful whether 

the USSR would attempt &?J¥' operations which might be detected and 

identified sufficiently in advance of H-Hour to cause a significant 

loss of strategic surprise." 1 

2. DISGUISED BOMBER 

Pecause of its resemblance to the u. s. B-29, the Soviet Tu-4 

could be disguised with U. s. markings and employed for clandestine 

delivery of atomic bombs. Present flight regu.lations of tr.e Civil 

Aeronautics Administration and the military services require that both 

military and civiliai:1 aircraft follow a previously filed flight plan 

and enter the U.S. by specified routes. Aircraft violating these 

require~~nts, if detected, are intercepted. A small number of 

disguised Tu-4 1 s might escape such detection. 

3. GUIDED MISSILES 

It is estimated that the USSR has V-1 type missiles with ranges 

of at least 100 miles which could be launched fro~ merchant ships 

1. NIE-31 

v-4 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

SiCUrify lnf0nnaf1on 
TOP SiMTID:A59018 ..... it, 1:.r:..:.:;j:,· APPENDIX "D11 

or submarines. Such missiles could operate at low altitudes and 

could have considerably better accuracy than the German 

operational missiles of World War II. While there ii no conclusive 

evidence the. t the USSR has an atomic warhead suitable for use in a 

ship-launched guided missile, the construction of such a warhead is 

estimated to be within USSR capabilities. A Soviet vessel could 

reach its launching position with little chance of detection by 

maintainin~ radio silence alld avoiding normal shipping lanes. 

Therefore, this method of clandestine attack appears well suited 

for employment of atomic weapons against critical near-coastal 

targets including key harbors. 

\ 

V-5 AIE #1 

TOP SECRET 1 October 1952 

5ua11 ii I lftfeN11111ie11 
\._/ 

l i " 

' 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SEIRET 

Appendix E 

T•• Ioli of Air Ca•pal111 In Soviet Pla11l11 aid Strat11r ... 

CONTENTS 

A. GENERAL 

B. BACKGROUND BEGINNINGS--WORLD WAR n,.. 

c. POST WORLD WAR n - THE srrUATION CHANGES 

D. SOVIET AIR THEORY 

E. SOVIET TARGET SELECTION 

1. Military Objectives 

2. Estimate of the Most Probable Allocation 

F. ATTACK TIMING FACTORS 

.. 
A. General 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP S!CIU!T 

Situhif 1ntarmat1011 

APPENDIX "E" 

No single development in the post-war period h3$ been more 

charged •.~th ~ignificance for the security of the United States than 

the steps taken by the Soviet Union to build a stockpile of weapons 

of mass destruction and an air arm capable or delivering them against 

vit~l targets in the continental United States. 

The significance of this situation stems not only from the 

existence of Soviet Long Range Aviation as presently trained and 

equipped, but also from what appear to be Soviet concepts for the 

use of air power, and what can be deduced as to probable Soviet target 

selection. 

B. Background Beginnings ·· World War II 

In the Soviet Union, as elsewhere, size and geographic position 

have been import.ant determinants or military doctrine. The vast 

land area or the Soviet Union, and -- until the past several years 

the presence on the Eurasian continent of one or more neighbors 

possessing powerful land armies, have engendered a traditional and 

deeply established conviction that the primary defense of the Soviet 

homeland rested with the Army. 

Historica~, this conviction gave rise to the concept that the 

primary role or aviation was to furnish support and protection to the 

soviet Arn\Y• This concept governed the design, organization and employment 

or the Soviet Air Forces in World War II. Air units wre regarded essentiall1' as auxiliaries - :indispensable, just as artillery, to the 

successful prosecution or a military operation, but nonetheless subordinate to the ground forces they were designed to assist. 

VI-2 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRl!T 

SicUFlif irilOrmahon 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECR&T 

JIC:otllf IHftifffidtidri 

APPENDIX "E" 

That Soviet air doctrine proved successful in the kind or war 

the Soviet Union fought in 1941-1945 is a matter of history. While 

the USAAF and the RAF waged a telling air campaign against Germany 

from the other side of Europe, the Soviet Union achieved its war objectives without being obliged to develop any arm for such a campaign 

or to resist one. 

The fact remains, however, that the beginnings or a Soviet concept 

or long range air po-wer made their appearance long before the close or 

World War II. 

The Soviets demonstrated interest in large airplanes and long 

range flights during the 1930's. They built the L-760, an experimental 

8-engine plane in 1934, and in 1937 they set long distance flight 

records crossing the North Pole from the Soviet Union to Califoriiia. 

Prior to the war the Communists had a small "heavy bomber force," 

equipped originally with four-engined TB-3 's, which were larger than 

the contemporary .American B-171 and twin-engined aircraft. The TB-3 

had a range of 1 1 430 miles with two tons of bombs -- at a cruising 

speed of 98 miles per hour. Peacetime activities of this "heavy 

bombing force" -were largely concerned with civil transport, but it 

presumably was intended to operate in wartime as a bomber force and a 

carrier or airborne troops. 

ThC3 "TB" series had reached TB-7 by start of World War II. This 

aircraft, redesignated the PE-8 was the principal -- though ineffective 

-- Soviet "heavy" bomber throughout the war. ~omewha.t larger than 

the B-17 {span 129 feet and length 76 feet, as against the B-17's 

104 feet span and 75 feet length), the PE-8's had a maximwn speed of 209 

knots as against the B-17's 255 knots. Maxim.um range of the PE-S was 

2,500 miles, ani with four metric tons or bombs aboard it still had a 

11 250 mile range. 

VI-3 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

5=nrrity l1tfe1:s:aliu11 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP S&CRET 50" ·ri•y 1

n1or=n1i

0 n 

APPENDIX "l£" 

Available evidence indicates, however, that the Germans took 

a very heavy toll or this force in the early months or the war 

(many of the losses being on the ground) and that activities of 

"heavy bomber" units were limited to small scale strikes disconnectedly delivered to meet immediate needs • 

This largely ineffective force was reorganized in 1942 into an 

independent agency known as the Long Range Force (ADD). Its 1942 

strength did not exceed 600 aircraf~, and its b~sic equipment was 

the IL-4, an airplane comparable to the British Wellington an:i 

one which is still in service in some Soviet t'W:in-engine units. 

By the close of 1944, the Long Range Force had a strength of 

almost l,6oo aircraft, including consider~ble numbers or B-25's 

and A-20's acquired under lend lease. At this time it was redesignated the 18th Air Arnw ~nd subordinated to the Chief Directorate of the Soviet Air Force. 

Throughout this period the Long Range Force and 18th Air A.rmy 

was commanded by Alexander GolovA.nov. A colonel 'When placed in 

command of the Long Range Force in March 1942, he had risen by 

August 1944 to the rank of Chief Marshal of Aviation -- comparable 

to American four-star rank. Golovanov was the only officer other 

than Alexa.Dier Novikov -- who headed the Soviet Air Force-s -- to 

receive that rank. 

Actual.l.J", however, neither the Long Range Force or its successor, the 18th Air Army, ever functioned in an air campaign. 

It was neither designated as, nor had the capabilities or, 

a. bomber force as such was understood. by the Western Allies. 

In the early phases or the war, a number or attacks were 

carried out against German towns, but the strikes -were delivered 

VI-4 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Swcua ii f Info: a:atieR 
.. 

.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOI' Sl!!CRET 

kco1il1 l:ak1111t1alie• 

APPENDIX n3n 

without !1l'l7 observable connection 'With one another. They were, 

moreover, without any identifiable strategic purpose, unless it 

was that of demoralizing the German civil population and producing 

some degree or industrial dislocation by haphazard. night bombing 

ot a city. 

'lhe most purposeful series of attacks was made against Finnish 

cities with an aim to bending Finnish public opinion towards 

acceptance of Soviet peace terms. This was in 19441 but the attacks 

were poorly planned and largefy ineffectual. 

From then on, operations of the 18th Air A'f."llf9' were tied directly 

to objectives of particular ground offensives. During the last year 

of the war it was carrying out reasonabfy effective night operations 

against targets lying at a distance of 50 to 100 miles in rear ot 

the battle lines. Railway facilities, control points and rolling 

stock ware the principal targets. 

No formations were used, and takeoff time determined the 

interval in the banber stream. Missions were planned so as to get 

the bombers across the main defense line as soon as possible after 

dark. No operations were flown it lengthy flight under conditions 

ot poor visibility would be required and unless there was good 

night visibility over the target area. 

Altitude of attack was always stipulated, and ranged trom 

1,600 to 6,600 feet for objectives in the main fighting zone 

and from 10 1000 to 16,000 feet in rear areas. 

A-20 patrol regiments provided indirect protection by attacking 

searchlights, antiaircraft installations and night fighter fields, but 

there was no direct provision tor fighter escort. 

VI-5 AIE #1 

1 October 195? 

TOP &iCRliT 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

S&c:u1 ii J ltlfe•111••• 

APPENDIX "E" 

It is difficult to assess the value which the Soviet high 

command itself' put on the Long Range Force. The creation and 

subsequent growth of the Long Range Force evidentq indicated a 

considerable interest in its progress and a high confidence in 

its ultimate operational effectiveness. 

Personnel tor the force were picked on a selective basis and 

there appeared to be expectation that it would emerge as an elite 

corps. At the same time, hC>ltever, needs or the air armies tor 

aircraft and equipment "Were given a higher priority than "Were the 

Long Range Force requirements. 

There "Were those who, noting that the Long Range Force was 

neglected over long periods in favor ot the air armies, believe 

that the prominent position given the long range units in Soviet 

propaganda was connected w.l.th the existence or a world.wide 

knowledge of the power of the bomber forces of the Western Allies. 

In aey event, the Long Range Force failed to make an adequate 

return in terms of operational effectiveness tor the labor and 

attention expended upon it. 

Reasons for the low efficiency- appear to be marJ1' -- and should 

be noted brier~ since they Jll81' affect the thinking and planning 

of officers now attaining key positions in Long Range Aviation. 

During the first halt of the war the Long Range Force conaand 

apparently tailed to appreciate either the capabilities or limitations of the force. The ill-conceived and scattered operations 

which made up the Long Range Force's strategic contribution to 

the war were a serious dissipation or effort. Many of the tasks 

attempted were beyond the capacity of the .force to perform, no 

VI-6 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

h111...., l11t.PMllli111 
.. 

I 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

SRUFhf h1fuc1a:alieR 

APPENDIX "E" 

task was performed thoroughly, and the aggregate effort was of 

little account. All through the war, operational control was 

centralized in the operations staff of the Long Range Force at 

Moscow. Within the operating units themselves, the low level 

of efficiency resulted from a combination of inadequate training 

and a lack of the refined equipnent which plays such a large 

part in the execution of modern long range bombing. Even when 

certain relatively modern equipnent did become available it 

appears that crews were not systematica.lly trained in its use, 

so that air crews remained incapable of deriving full benefits 

frcm their mechanical aids. 

Mental limitations of the personnel were one factor in this, 

for the Long Range Force crews did not measure up to an educational 

level which, by wstern standards, could be regarded as adequate. 

Crews relied on the simple, the wall proved and the familiar. 

:Cnefficiency in navigation was, more than any other single 

air crew factor, responsible for the poor striking power and 

fighting value or the Long Range Force. Poor navigation was us1;1&ll,y 

the ma.jor cause of poor performance and relatively high wastage. 

There was an extrem reliance on good weather for operations and 

dead reckoning navigation, but radio bearings were also used. 

There is no established evidence that any operational aircraft or 

the Long Range Force were equipped with radar navigational apparatus. 

C. Post World War II • The Situation Changes 

With the close of World War II two factors almost imnediately 

resulted in increased Soviet attention to the creation of a 

significant long range air force -- one was a reevaluation of 

VI-7 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRl!T 

Se11·rity 'nfc·=cti=n 
REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

lasu';'¥ 1n1=r=ntion 

APPENDIX 11E" 

the strategic situation in which the USSR found itself, and the 

other was acquisition of a proved long range aircraft in the 

Ameri~an B-29. 

The crushing of Germany and Japan and the immediate post-war 

military iiilpotence of Western E:urope left the Soviet Union tor the 

tirst time in modern Russian history unthreatened by tormidable 

land armies. Absorption of Eastern Europe into the Soviet system and 

the extension or Soviet influence deep into China provided a further 

buffer which greatly diminished any land threat to Soviet security. 

The only formidable contenders remaining upon the international 

scene were the United States and, to a lesser extent, the British 

Commonwealth -- neither of them posing great land power threats 

on the Eurasian continent but possessing, instead, far superior air 

power, sea power supremacy, and a vit9.l head.start in atomic weapons. 

In considering the impact of this change upon the next phase of 

their struggle for world domin~tion, Soviet planners evidently --

on the basis or limited information and what can be deduced therefrom. 

-- assessed the situation somewhat as follows: 

.£:!!:!!:., no combination of ground armies within sight would be 

capa.bls of effective offensive action against the Soviet Union, 

nor could non-Soviet ~ound forces prevent the armies of the 

Soviet Union and its satellites from overrunning key areas of 

Europe, the Middle East and the non-Communist Far East. 

Second, American naval pololer, with or without the assistance of 

other Western Fleets, could prevent any overwater assault except certain 

airborne operations, and amphibious assaults across very narrow waters 

such as from Sakhalin Island to Hokkaido, or in sheltered waters 

such as against the Black Sea coast of Turkey. 

VI-8 AIE #1 

l October 1952 

TOP SECRET 
,. 

.. , 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP Sl!CRET 

APPE:NDIX "E" 

Third, the only immediate military threat to the USSR would 

come from Western air power, at least in the early stages of a 

major war. Also, Western air power would weigh heavily in the scales 

against the Soviet Union over the long pull in any global war. 

And fourth, while non-military Soviet weapons (subversion, 

sabotage, politico-psychological assault and so on) were already 

global in character, Soviet military power still lacked intercontinental reach and capabilities. 

The implications of' this situation with respect to the postwar 

development or Soviet air power are fairJ...v obvious. 

It is not surprising that the Western world has been witnessing 

-- insofar as chinks in the Soviet security armor permit -- the 

develop:oent o! a broader Soviet concept. ot the role of air power, 

involving: 

a. Development of a long range air ann which, using atomic 

bombs and other unconventional weapons, will provide the capability 

f'or direct attack against the United states. 

b. Developnent of a defensive interceptor force which, 

coupled with antiaircraft artillery and other groun:i defenses, will 

attempt to provide protection against the air po-war of the West. 

An air force capable of .f'ulf'illing such missions as these could 

net. be built without considerable re-arrangement of the air organization, a treimndous amount ot work in the design and production of 

new types of aircraft and equipment, and extensive training of 

the men who must handle the aircraft and equipnent. 

On all these counts there is evidence that the Soviets have 

been exerting great effort. 

VI-9 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRl!f 

Saw:itf bafat11u1ti•" 
\ 

• 

REF I.D :A59018 

TOP SECRET 

SiCur1fy inrormaiion 

APPENDIX "E" 

Further, with the initiative for the next phase of armed 

struggle largely in their own hands, the Soviets have been free 

to reformulate their air doctrine and undertake a new air program 

specifically designed !or the tasks which would confront them in 

a new wr. 

The fortunes of war gave the Soviet Union a good start toward 

the development or the post-war long range air force by making 

available several American B-29's, which -were promptly copied and 

put into operational use. 

In the summer and fall or 1944, three U.S. B-29's made wheelsdown forced landings in Soviet Far East territory and -were immediately 

interned. A fourth B-29 crash landed in the Soviet Zone of Korea 

in August 1945. 

No information regarding the ultimate disposition of these aircraft was ever received. 

The Soviet Union was at that time still a neutral in the war 

with Japan, and turned a deaf' ear to requests that the United States 

be allowed to repair the aircraft and f:cy- them out. 

Cumulative evidence over the next several years definitely 

established, however, that Soviet acquisition of these aircraft 

was the starting point tor a high priority production program 

aimed at meeting immediate Soviet require:nents for a long range 

bomber of proved design. 

The first tangible evidence of Soviet interest in the B-29 

came to light as early as August 1945, when a Soviet Air Force 

of ricer who entered the crash-landed aircraft in North Korea 

demonstrated his intimate knowledge of the plane to the American 

VI-10 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

Sec•erity lgfcymntiap 
• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECREI 

SacuailJ lcahorMmlieR 

APPENDIX "E" 

crew -- commenting that the position or certain gages had been 

moved, and ma.king mention or other minor modifications. 

German intelligence learned that in March 1945 a new rourengined banber, designed by Tupolev and designated the Tu-4 was 

reported to be undergoing f'J.¥ing trials. This new aircraft was 

to carr,y a crew or eight and a bombload or 9,000 to 111000 pounds. 

What the Germans may have gotten wind of' was Soviet testing or the 

B-29 -- for the Soviet cop,y was designated the Tu-4. 

In 1946 the Soviets attempted to secure license rights tor 

the R-.3350 engine which powered the B-29's they had interned, and 

tried to purchase wheel assemblies f'or 2.5 B-29 type aircraft in 

the United States. 

In August 1947, tour B-29 type aircraft were photographed by 

US attaches near Moscow. 

While it was then believed the Soviets may already have built 

copies or the B-29, this could not be def'inite.lT established until 

two more concrete bits. ot evidence became available in the Fall ot 

191+7· 

These consisted respectively or the sighting by US observers 

or 14 B-29 types at Ra.menskoye airfield. near Moscow in September, ' 

a.Di the sighting or six ot these aircraft in flight in October 1947. 

From early 1948 on, confirmed sightings ot the Soviet B-29 

cop,y multiplied and by April 1950 as JDaDT as 64 had been seen in the 

air in a single .t'ormation. 

B.r this tima also, other data had made it possible to reconstruct an approximate history or the Tu-4 project indicating that the 

first prototype had been begun around the middle or 194.5 and that the 

first series aircraft was canpleted about the middle of 1947• 

VI-11 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

l111111il; hafuc11m11ti11 
• 

• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

security mtarmat1an 

APPENDIX "E" 

The copying and output ot a production med.el of an airplane as 

complex as the B-29 within a period of appraxima.tely 33 months was 

an industrial achievement which furnishes positive evidence that 

the project was accorded the very highest priority. Such a priority 

would not have been granted unless the Soviets already -were developing a strategic concept requiring for its execution the utilization ot 

long range bombers. 

In view of its characteristics, the B-29 can be considered only 

an interim long range bomber for Soviet intercontinental use since 

advance bases of the type utilized by the United States Air Force 

are not available to the Soviet Union. Over a period of less than 

five years the Soviets are estimated to have produced in excess or 

1,000 Tu-4's, and it is currently estimated that production is continuing 

at a rate of approximately 20 per month. 

D. Soviet Air Theory 

Use or atomic weapons in connection with land. campaigns may 

be developed by the Communists along lines similar to those being 

followed by the United States, but it has been the West -- not 

the Soviets -- which has been under the imperative to overcome the 

imbalance of forces on the battlefields of a tuture war. The imperative under which the Communists are laboring is to develop a military 

force that will be effective against the 11lite forces" of their 

major opponent in the next, not the last, war. Such a force is 

air-atomic power -- and since there is considerable evidence tha.t 

the -weapons are being forged, so also must concepts and doctrine for 

their employment be in the process of formation if not already 

prepared. 

VI-12 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

5&cuailt lcafe•M•ti•R 
.. 

.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP Sl!CIU!T 

Stcuribc lnfgrmnt.on 

APP~DIX "E" 

What little concrete information is available concerning Soviet 

air pc>Wr theory is derived primarily from World War II operations 

during lilich the Soviets had no occasion to develop or employ strategic 

bombing in the sense that the term is understood in the West. On the 

evidence provided by a war which the Soviets have already fought, it 

might appear that Soviet military thinking has been so weighted in 

the direction of land war.fare that no room remains for an air warfare 

concept. Such a position, hC>l«!ver, does not appear logical in the 

light of the titanic e.ff'ort which the Soviet Union has put into the 

development of an atomic bomb industry and the production of aircraft 

CA.pable o.f intercontinental delivery o.f these bombs. 

Tukha.chevesky, a leading Soviet military theorist as well as 

top-ranking arley" commander prior to his purging in 1937, studied the 

use or the air weapon as an instrumnt of revolutionary warfare and 

concluded that utilities and commwiications -were the proper targets, 

since large scale attacks upon industrial plants would affect the 

industrial workers, who were considered the "natural allies" of the revolution. His thesis was that as regards the United States, New York, 

San Francisco and the Panama Canal were the most important targets. 

Assessments of Soviet air operations in World War II sometimes 

overlook the point that the development of air strength and doctrine 

primarily for participation in land campaigns was a logical -- almost 

inevitable response to the kind o.f war the Soviet Union had chosen to 

fight, and that the Western Allies through their air campaigns against 

Germany spa.red the Soviet Union the necessity .for correcting its plan. 

Even so, the Soviets not o~ -were fairly lavish in the allocation 

VI-13 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

~ n 

• 
• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Sltuilif lnfcaamlion 

APPENDIX "E'' 

o:t high caliber personnel and other advantages to the wartime Long 

Range Force, but also evidenced a tendency in post-war military 

literature to magni:fy, in retrospect, so-called strategic accomplishments of Soviet aviation. 

Broadening of the Soviet concept of the mission of air power 

has resulted in part from the multiple impact of modern technology, 

the physical evidence or the results of bombing which Camnunist 

military leadership observed after the close of World War II, and 

the physical and political geography or the post-war world, but 

another major factor also may well have been at work. 

This factor stems from the outlook of the handful of men who 

rule the Soviet Union. 

Since W:>rld War II, Soviet leadership has shaped its strategy 

and judged its striking pcnter chiefl.1' in terms of a two-edged 

weapon, the military force and another edge that might be termed 

"social fission" -- involving a combination of political pressure, 

subversive psychological assault, sabotage, and disruption from 

within. 

The military forces chiefly relied upon heretofore has been the 

Soviet Arm:/, but it is a continental force, and events ot the past 

decade have imposed upon the Kremlin a requirement for a global 

military arm, an extension or inter-continental dimensions. 

"Social fission" -- an old standby in the Soviet armory, has 

global implications, but an additional global weapon -- modem air 

power -- is only' now being shaped and fitted to the Soviet hand. It 

needs be recognized that the Soviets can be expected to make 

coordinated use or this new weapon. 

VI-14 AIE #1 

1 October 19.52 

TOP SECRET 

&cws ilf Information 
,. 

... 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

APPENDIX "E" 

The pattern or air participation in a .future war may well include: 

first, a general psychological assault, aimed at disrupting unity, 

purpose, and will to tight; followed next, perhaps, by a deliberately 

timed d:l.plomatic overture tor peaceful settlement or differences; 

then .f'inel.ly, the implenentation o.f a set of more specific measures 

ot air attack, such as might be made possible by subversion of 

personnel at a few key points in the radar net, sabotage of aircraft 

on the ground, and introduction of biological or chemical warfare 

agents at selected facilities. Weighing the probable combined effect 

ot these measures -- air power applied externally and social fission 

as the force applied internally, the Soviets might conclude their 

chances for success were favorable. 

In the global terms or the next war, which the Soviets may conclude they must fight on their road. to world conquest, they will increasingly depend on a potent organization for conducting air campaigns. 

E. Soviet Target Selection 

1. MILITARY OBJECTIVES 

It is considered that the following are the most likely Soviet 

objectives: 1) to defend the Soviet Union against attack, including 

preemptive operations against all Western forces significantly threatening to the Soviet Union; 2) to neutralize or disrupt and isolate the 

continental strengths of the United state& and Canada for an extended 

period, or until 3) below is accomplished; 3) to establish Soviet control over the Eurasian land mass and to control or neutralize Great 

Britain and the island chain or the Far East. 

In order to accomplish these objectives, the Soviets would have 

to undertake the following military tasks: 

VI-15 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP Sl!CRl!T 
... 

• 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP Sl!!CRl!!Y 

SiCUfiff Ii 1fa11nulio1 a 

APPENDIX "E" 

a. Attack the US capability to deliver atomic -weapons. The 

principal means available and that which otters the greatest probability 

of success is atomic attack by long range aircraft. 

b. Attack industrial, political, and logistics targets in 

the United States and Canada. The principal means avail.able is atomic 

attack by long range aircraft and the greatest chance of success will 

lie in the use of this method. 

c. Conduct combined operations against the Eurasian continent and the island chains of the United Kingdom and Japan. Action 

by Soviet ground forces, assisted by air and naval action, is the 

principal means for accomplishing Soviet military tasks on the Eurasian 

continent. Air action alone might accomplish Soviet tasks with respect 

to the United Kingdom and Japan, but air action followed by combined 

operations and occupation might be essential. 

The surest basis for the accomplishment of all Soviet objectives 

would be the neutralization of the United States as a world power. 

Even though the Soviets might judge that the initial atomic attack 

1t0uld. not achieve neutralization or the United States, they might reason 

that serious damage to the United States industrial potential would 

gi"'9 them time to establish and consolidate a hold on Western 'fi.:urope 

and to integrate its industry into a single Eurasian economic system. 

This 1t0uld greatly increase the Soviet long term chances or success an:l 

confront the United States with the prospect or continuing the wa.r 

without European allies. The Soviets thus might judge that the best 

chances or success in Europe would lie in concentrating their atomic 

attack against the United states • 

VI-16 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

SacuallJ lnfunnatltih 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

Senrrity lnfnrmgtjm 

APP.~'DIX ngn 

On the other hand, if the Soviets concluded they could not 

significantly retard the United states war effort with the number 

or bombs available, they might choose to concentrate them on 

the European allies of the United States in an ef .fort to remove 

them fram the war quickly. This possibility grows more remote as 

the Soviet atomic bomb stockpile increases and their capabilities 

tor delivering it in the United States improve. When -- and if -- the 

stockpile and deliver;y capabilities are sufficient to persuade the 

Soviets that a successful attack might largely eliminate both the 

retailiatory capability and the industrial strength or the United 

States, the likelihood or an atomic attack directed almost exclusively at North America should be greatly increased. 

The preeminent position of the United states as a potential 

target for Soviet atomic attack is additio~ supported by the 

probability that the ultimate Soviet goal goes beyond that or military 

defeat or the United States in the conventional sense. 

The initial Communist aim in such an attack would be to 

destroy the "life force" or the West -- the organized force which 

offers the greatest counter-threat to the Soviet Union and is most 

likely to interfere lllith accomplishment or their objectives. In 

the event of war between the USSR and the United states, the "lite force" 

targets in the American system would be, first or all, those forces 

and installations involved in the atomic delivery capability. With 

a considerable number or weapons available, this system of targets 

might be externed to include such related industries as aircraft 

and heavy armament. Likewise, a sizeable stockpile could enable the 

Soviets to ext.em the "life force" attacks to ports, naval bases, and 

VI-17 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

lemril; l11fe:11111tie11 
• 

I' 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

APPENDIX "E'' 

major logistics installations on bath sides of the oceans in an effort 

to reduce if not destroy the developnent of any possible overseas extension of such American power as might remain. 

Even with destruction of "life force" targets in the United 

States, it still would be necessary for the Soviets to attack the 

"links ani keys" in order to eliminate the cohesion of American society 

and make possible the final attainment of Soviet goals. 

Achievement of Soviet objectives will involve destruction 

rather than neutralization or capitulation of the United States. It 

can be expected the Kremlin will seek to eliminate any American 

capability to recreate a military threat against the Soviet Union, to 

destroy the "capitalist" structure of American society 1 to eliminate 

those persons who are not considered to be assimilable in a Comnunist 

structure, and to create a situationc:mducive to establishment of an 

overt or concealed.Communist government in the United States. 

Soviet target selection in an atomic attack .iigainst "links 

and keys" in American society would involve a variety of combinations, 

including industrial concentrations, specific industries, transportation 

facilities, government control centers, and major cities. Principal 

attenti011 will be focused against what the Soviets considered to be 

the weakest links in America's social and economic armor -- and the 

Russian evaluation may well be that American morale and political resolution represent this link. U so 1 the inflicting or maximum 

numbers or casualties will be a basic Soviet obj~ctive -- an objective 

made easier of attairmsnt by a large stockpile of atomic weapons. 

A willingness to inflict heavy casualties in order to achieve 

a desired goal has marked past Soviet thinking and pract~ce. The 

,l 1 

VI-18 AIE # 1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

W.erjtJc lnfnrma'ion' 
•' 

I 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP S!CRl!f 

S.1uri1¥ 1-S.===a 

APPENDIX "E" 

concept of liquidation of class enemies can be extended to liquidation 

of a nation, particularly when such liquidation is considered an 

essential to the establishment of Communist world order. Before a 

Communist government could be established in the United States a 

revolutionary situation would have to be created, and the most rapid 

way in which the Soviets could create such a situation would be to 

inflict extreme hardship on the Amer.lean population through atanic 

attack on cities. Even if the Communists achieved political power 

in the United States, the combination of the vitality a.rd skills of 

the people and the nation's industrial structure would make it 

almost impossible for the Kremlin to control America effectively for 

any length of time. To avoid the threat or a Titoist super-rebellion 

started rran the United states the Soviet leaders could deliberately 

plan to destro;r the basic elements of American population as -well as 

its industrial foundation and then restructuralize the nation in such 

a manner that predominance would rest with those who ware tractible. 

Obviously, execution of such a war plan would call for delivery of a 

large number of atomic weapons against the United States. 

2. ESTIMATE OF THE MOST PROBABLE ALLOCATION 

It is considered that the most probable allocation of the Soviet 

stockpile of atomic -weapons would be : 

1) A quantity or weapons considered surticient to prevent 

unacceptable launchings or atomic weapons against the Soviet Union 

would be allocated against appropriate targets both within and without 

the North American Continent, probably coincident with the initiation 

of hostilities in order to capitalize on the combined advantages of 

initiative and surprise. The number of ¥tapons allotted to this task 

VI-19 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRl!T 

le111Pil') h:fc111mlim1 
.. 

REF ID:A59018 

ToP ScCRE!f 

Stc;yrihr lnmrma•inn 

APPENDIX "E" 

would be determined in part by Soviet assessment of the ability of 

Communist defenses to reduce bomb delivery and their assessment of 

their capacity to absorb the remainder. 

2) From an.y weapons remaining, the Soviets would allocate 

such numbers of bombs as they considered necessary to attain the 

following: 

a. Neutralize or destroy the ability of the United 

States to sustain large-scale mili~ary operations in Eurasia. 

b. Neutralize or destroy the ability of the United 

States to develop or produce weapons potentially decisive or stalemating. 

c. Neutralize or destroy the political, social, and 

economic strengths of the United States to the extent that governmental 

ch.g,nges or decisions satisfying to the Soviet leadership either would 

occur or could be brought about through additional pressures available 

to the Communists. It can be expected this phase of the attack will 

inclu:ie an assault against population targets intended to create 

a maximum number of personal casualties. 

3) If any weapons remain, a small quantity would be 

allocated for use in connection with a psychological-intimidation 

campaign in Europe a.rd possibly in Japan. 

4) If any weapons remain, a quantity would be allocated 

to force capitulation of the United Kingdom. 

5) If a.ny weapons remain, a quantity would be allocated 

for use in connection with land campaigns should conditions warrant 

such expenditure. Priority on this type of attack would increase 

if unacceptable threats to Soviet military forces were cre~ted in 

forward areas. 

VI-20 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOP SECRET 

1••111¥ IM•••••i•R 
... 

REF ID:A59018 

TOPI SECRET 

Sel•I it; IRfa·=q•jan 

APPENDIX ":!':" 

6) If anz weapons remain, a general reserve might be held. 

It is probable that the allocations in l) through 5) above would provi1e 

for a reserve for reattack or psychological purposes in those cases 

where it was considered desirable. It is probable that l) and 2) 

above would require the expenditure of the major portion ot a large 

stockpile of weapons. 

Accordingly, it is considered unlikely that any large number of 

atomic weapons would be allocated to targets other than those outlined 

in l) and 2) above. To state, as a numerical fraction, the number 

which might be allocated to each target area would imply an accuracy 

which the limited intelligence of Soviet capabilities, concepts and 

intentions does not permit. 

F. Attack Timing Factors 

The theory and strategy developed in the preceding sections leads 

to an hypothesis that may have value. The case may be stated as 

follows: 

a) The Soviets will exploit to the utmost their highly refined techniques o! threat, blackmail and subversion (the role of 

dr-atomic ~r in this concept has already been outlined). During 

the time that this offensive has some reasonable chance of success 

in meeting the Communist desire to weaken the opposition, direct 

attack on the U.S. will be avoided. In this connection it is likely 

that from the Soviet point of view the present situation is such as to 

call for further political rather than direct military action. 

b) At some point during this process, it is possible that the 

Soviets may decide that a massive, direct, surprise attack could abruptly tilt the U.S. into oblivion and give them the r~st of the world 

VI-21 AIE #1 

1 October 1952 

TOPI SECRET 

Sa1UM} IMern:alie11 
.,. 

) 

.. 

REF ID:A59018 

TOP SECRET 

APPENDIX "E" 

by default. The selection of such an hour in world history will depend 

largely on the ambitions, fears, patience, ignorance and insight or 

the leaders in the Kremlin • 

c) When the threat, intimidation, propaganda, ~ subversion offensive has reached a stalemate, 'When the perimeters or the 

"two camps" forecast by Stalin have been clear~ established and complately integrated, the Soviets - by the tenets or their faith - will 

not rest. On the contrary it is probable that when the stalemate 

can be foreseen by the Soviets as representing an eventual certainty, 

thi:, chances of overt attack on the U.S. will abruptly increase. From 

the moment that the trend of allegiances and accretions of world 

power starts flowing away £rom the USSR and toward the West, the 

chances of attack must be care~ re-assessed. 

The establishment or secure, stable, potent, Western-oriented 

regimes in Korea and Indochina; final victory for the West in Malaya 

and the Philippines; the evolvement of prosperity, contentment and 

enlightened administration in the Middle F..a.st, A£rica, India and 

Burma -- these will be representative of indicators of increased. danger. 

Each or these events -- and U.S. policy intends that they shall eventuate -·· will be regarded by the USSR as threatening the security and 

need to expa.ni or the "socialist" state. 

If, within the next several years, American foreign policy 

succeeds in reversing the trend that has recent~ given the USSR 

control or huge populations and land masses; it, during that time, the 

Soviets succeed in matching, or nearq matching, U.S. intercontinental 

air-atcmic po.ier, the danger or Soviet preemptive air action will be 

very great. Such a direct, frontal challenge means, rinall¥, military 

conflict between the centers or power, the haneland or the USSR and the 

United states itselt. 

VI-22 AlE-#1 

1 October 1952 

" TOP SECRET 

lllanllf lnfua11mllun