Table Of Content

Fall Theme The Path Taken ... Army Space technology Bernard Kerstiens serves as the Space technology directorate, acting director, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command. Kerstiens has worked on Space technology Research and Development efforts at the Space beginnings and Missile Defense Technical Center for the Space Application Technology Program for 10 years. From 1986 to 1993, he performed transceiver module, radar, signal processing, and waveform generation research for the U.S. Army Strategic Defense Command. By Bernard Kerstiens D epartment of Defense (DoD) Space efforts can be scientists created production and engineering facilities divided into four basic areas: Space support, force designed to manufacture more than 600 V-2 rockets enhancements, Space control, and Space applications. a month by the end of World War II. This feared In each of these key areas, the Army has a rich history weapon of war captured the imagination of the world and has made significant contributions. and inspired rocket research worldwide. Space Support — it does take a rocket Mr. Rocket comes to America scientist In an attempt to dismantle the Nazi war machine Collectively, the technologies required to achieve and to prevent the revival of Nazi war potential by and sustain Space operations in orbit are referred to the transfer of its economic and industrial capital, the as Space support. This includes the launch, tracking, British and U.S. military collaborated in a plan know control, and satellite bus. The Army’s historical role in as Eclipse. This plan implemented the U.S. State Space support is probably the one most often chroni- Department’s Safehaven project, focusing on the non- cled. proliferation of German nuclear weapon expertise. The Army’s development of launch capabilities These efforts spawned Project Paperclip, which sought by the Von Braun team at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is out strategic centers of German scientific knowledge the best known. The Army Ordnance Corps started to provide “proper and permanent control” of them long-range surface-to-surface guided-missile research in the best interest of “world security.” One of the with Cal Tech in a remote area outside of Pasadena, individuals who supervised Project Paperclip was COL Calif., in May 1944. These facilities were the begin- H. N. Toftoy (also know as “Mr. Rocket”). It was his nings of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). In less relentless pursuit of rocket expertise that brought the than a year, the contract for the Hermes project was Von Braun team to the United States. By May 1948, given to General Electric and in February 1945, Bell Project Paperclip had brought 492 German special- Laboratories received a contract for the Nike project. ists to the United States: 177 with the Army, 205 with These two missiles became the progenitors of many of the Air Force, 72 with the Navy, and 38 with the the Army’s contributions to the application of “rocket Department of Commerce (under Army custody). science.” With the delivery of 121 German rocket scientists While JPL was at the heart of the Army’s research and 300 freight cars of V-2 components to Fort Bliss, in long-range rockets, the Army’s fiscal investments Texas, high-altitude scientific experiments and trans- were small, late, and disorganized in comparison to the fer of German rocket expertise began. The German activities of a group of scientists in Germany. Prior to scientists commented just after World War II that the World War II, the German scientists at Peenemuende American capabilities in 1945 were approximately 10 had the finances and organization to conduct a rapid years behind the level of German expertise. Over the succession of experiments to perfect weapons (such next few years, 52 V-2 rockets were fired from White as the V-2 rocket) capable of delivering a high explo- Sands Proving Grounds (WSPG) and the Florida sive payload at distances up to 300 kilometers. These Missile Testing Range, the last one on June 28, 1950. 44 Army Space Journal Fall 2003 Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE 3. DATES COVERED 2003 2. REPORT TYPE 00-00-2003 to 00-00-2003 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER The Path Taken...Army Space technology beginnings 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Army Space & Missile Defense Command,Army Forces Strategic REPORT NUMBER Command,Redstone Arsenal,AL,35809 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE Same as 5 unclassified unclassified unclassified Report (SAR) Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18 The Army has been a leader in Space research throughout the 20th century as evidenced by numerous technology firsts and capability demonstrations. The Army is now continuing this heritage in the 21st century in accordance with new DoD guidance and emphasis on Space dominance and operations. Space has evolved from a mission of achieving the “high ground” to one of extending power/might and provid- ing global capabilities to the individual Soldier. It will be imperative to protect and secure these Space capabilities for our future national defense needs. These series of tests helped facilitate the technology This fabrication experience created a virtual “skunk transfer of German “know how.” works” that was fully capable of readily modifying In February 1949, the Bumper Round 5 Missile, the Redstone missile for various configurations and fired at WSPG under Von Braun’s direction, was the payloads. The Army joined with the Navy to propose first penetration of Space by a U.S. missile. Project launching a satellite with a Redstone missile under Bumper was a modified V-2 that accommodated a Project Orbiter. But in 1955, the government elected WAC (without attitude control) Corporal (developed to pursue a less military-related effort under project by JPL) to test multistage rocket flight and separation. Vanguard. Vanguard was based on using the Navy’s It also tested second-stage ignition in rarefied air. The Viking missile to boost an upper atmosphere scientific Bumper test achieved a 250-mile height to make the payload. The Navy’s Vanguard project was under con- Army the first to place an object in Space. The Army, tract to the Martin Company and funded by National working with the Navy, collaborated on a number of Science Foundation. The Vanguard project, however, upper atmospheric tests and even launched a V-2 from was doomed because Martin received a more lucrative the deck of an aircraft carrier. The Navy was so inter- Titan missile contract from the Air Force, causing redi- ested in the upper atmospheric test that it pursued the rection of limited talent and resources. Viking missile to continue scientific research when the The Army began work on a 1,500-mile range inter- V-2 stockpile was depleted. mediate range ballistic missile (Jupiter C missile) to s On Oct. 28, 1949, the Army’s Ordnance Research support sea and land requirements on Feb. 1, 1956. and Development (R&D) Division at Fort Bliss was To pursue the development of the Jupiter C missile, p transferred to Redstone Arsenal, Ala. At Redstone, the ABMA became a Class II activity. On Aug. 8, 1957, the a Von Braun team started work on missile improvements nose cone of a Jupiter C missile was successfully recov- conceived at the end of World War II. Building on the ered. The nose cone success is attributed to German c Hermes C-1 rocket, it developed what later became scientist creativity and was accomplished on one-tenth t known as the Redstone rocket. of the budget that the Air Force expended under its e e On Feb. 1, 1956, the Army established the Army nose cone research efforts. Ballistic Missile Defense Agency (ABMA), to which the The Oct. 4, 1957, launch of the Russian Sputnik I, c Secretary of Army delegated unparalleled procurement followed by Sputnik II on Nov. 3, 1957, unleashed the authority. ABMA brought together the unprecedented Army’s R&D expertise at Redstone Arsenal to launch h combination of German creativity and U.S. Army ord- the first U.S. satellite (Explorer I). A series of Army n nance production capabilities. The Von Braun team’s “first in Space” events unfolded: unity of purpose allowed ABMA to remain at the fore- · Explorer I was launched on Jan. 31, 1958, as o front of U.S. rocket R&D. part of the International Geophysical Year. It was a Redstone Arsenal’s initial proposal to manufacture 30.8-pound satellite that carried a cosmic ray detector, l the Redstone missile by using its own R&D shops was a cosmic dust gauge, thermometers, and microlock and o denied. Because of delays at the contractor’s facilities, minitrack transmitters. This payload led to the discov- g the Arsenal ended up building the first 12 Redstone (See Beginnings, page 52) missiles as well as missile numbers 18 through 29. y Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 45 Beginnings ... from Page 45 ery of the Earth’s Van Allen radiation calibrate the minitrack system by using 4, 1960. It was the first communication belts. its Project Diana radar facilities. satellite to be powered by nickel cadmi- · Explorer II failed to make orbit The United States was unprepared to um batteries and recharged by solar cells. on March 5, 1958, because of a fourth- track the Sputnik satellite even though After completing one orbit, it relayed a stage failure. The satellite carried a the Russians had previously announced message from President Eisenhower to cosmic ray counter, an erosion gauge, a the satellite frequency. Fort Monmouth the United Nations, transmitted from thermometer, and microlock and mini- rapidly found equipment through the Fort Monmouth and relayed to Puerto track instrumentation. recapitalization of military receivers Rico. · Explorer III was launched on and was credited with having provided The TIROS (television and infrared March 26, 1958, and carried a similar the backbone of the entire U.S. track- observation satellite) was launched on payload to Explorer I. However, it also ing and observation efforts for Sputnik. April 1, 1960. TIROS evolved from included a miniature tape recorder to This effort became the Signal Corps Major General Medaris’ “eye in the sky” record radiation data between ground AstroObservation Center. concept at ABMA. ABMA and the stations. The SRDL tracked solar cell devel- Signal Corps developed the TIROS I and · Explorer IV was launched July 26, opment from its beginnings at Bell II satellites and Fort Monmouth provid- 1958, and carried four radiation coun- Laboratories in 1954 and pressed the ed satellite control and ground stations ters. Explorer V failed to make orbit Navy to include solar cells on the for the TIROS satellites. NASA directed because of a collision between the first Vanguard satellite. the overall operational phase after ARPA stage and upper stages. sponsorship was transferred. ABMA continued to provided launch Space Force Enhancement The Army Advent Management service to Advanced Research Projects While the Army was very much Agency had the lead for communica- Agency (ARPA) and the National involved in the development of Space tion satellite development under ARPA’s Advisory Committee on Aeronautics support technology, it was also deeply Project Advent. The Army was the lead (1915-1958 — forerunner to National involved in Space force enhancement. in the development of ground stations Aeronautics and Space Administration Space force enhancement operations and payloads, the Navy was lead on (NASA)), including the first two lunar improved the warfighting force via Space shipboard terminals, and the Air Force probes. capabilities. Traditionally, Space force was responsible for launch. After a year, On Aug. 15, 1958, ARPA Order 14- enhancement includes command, con- the Air Force was successfully able to 59 initiated the Army’s Juno V booster trol, communications, computers, intel- argue that satellites were part of its mis- program. This program started what ligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance sion and the Army responsibilities were became known as the Saturn booster. (C4ISR); position/navigation; and mete- reduced to ground terminals and ground On July 1, 1960, ABMA and its orological monitoring. support. In 1962, the Army established facilities at Redstone Arsenal and Cape In June 1958, SRDL at Fort the U.S. Army Satellite Communications Canaveral, Fla., were turned over to Monmouth initiated fabrication of a Agency. NASA. The Army retained work on 150-pound communication satellite to The Army developed most of the the Pershing and Nike missile systems be completed in 60 days under Project ground stations and payload control as well as the Army Rocket and Guided SCORE (signal communication by orbit- for the SYNCOM III satellites. From Missile Agency that became part of the ing relay equipment). The ARPA-spon- 1964 to 1969, the U.S. Army Corps of Army’s Aviation and Missile Command. sored project provided for a launch Engineers pioneered the development of Another Army installation rich in on an Air Force Atlas intercontinental a series of very accurate geodetic satel- Space history is Camp Evans (near Fort ballistic missile (ICBM). On Dec. 18, lites named SECOR (sequential collation Monmouth, N.J.). On Jan. 10, 1946, sci- 1958, the SCORE satellite was the first of range), which related local map data entists working on Project DIANA were to relay, store, and forward human voice to a global grid. Position errors were the first to bounce radio signals off the and data. The satellite also broadcasted less than 10 meters and it had similar Moon. This experience led the Army’s President Eisenhower’s Christmas mes- techniques as today’s global positioning Signal Corps and the Signal Research and sage to the world. system to deal with ionospheric diffrac- Development laboratory (SRDL) team The work on the SCORE satellite tion. (which also received German scientists generated another sophisticated 500- In the early seventies, the Nixon through Project Paperclip) to become pound relay communication SRDL sat- administration revised DoD Directive involved with the operation and main- ellite named Courier. The first Courier 5160.32 to allow each Service to conduct tenance of primary tracking and telem- 1A satellite failed to make orbit (Aug. 18, Space R&D for “unique battlefield and etry ground stations of the Vanguard 1960), but the second Courier 1B satel- ocean surveillance navigation, communi- minitrack network. SRDL later helped lite was placed in low earth orbit on Oct. cation, meteorological, mapping, chart- 52 Army Space Journal Fall 2003 ing, and geodesy satellites.” This significant contributions. When the of Space application trace their allowed the Army and Navy to once Russians threatened the West with beginnings to the nuclear missile again start investigating and exploit- an orbital H-bomb on Aug. 9, 1961, arms race. ing Space capabilities. all three Services initiated R&D Besides the missile developments During this time, the national efforts. conducted at Redstone Arsenal, re- strategic Space systems were provid- The Army’s program, code- entry-vehicle development was also ing capabilities used by the national named Mudflap, was based upon pursued. The Army flew the suc- decision makers and strategic plan- the Nike missile. The missile’s cessful nose cone test on May 15, ners. The tactical user had no, or at capabilities were extended via anti- 1957, with only one-tenth of the best very limited, information from ballistic missile (ABM) research to budget of the Air Force. On Aug. the national Space systems. The a Nike Zeus configuration. In May 8, 1957, a nose cone was recovered Army established the Army Space 1962, the U.S. Army fielded the and later displayed by President Program Office (ASPO) in 1973 first operational anti-satellite weap- Eisenhower to demonstrate that to rectify this deficiency. ASPO on (ASAT) base at the Kwajalein Army scientists had successfully developed means to rapidly exploit Missile Range (KMR). After an solved the problems associated with national Space information in the- ASAT policy meeting in June 1963, ballistic missile re-entry. ater and link this product to tactical the Army was directed to complete The work of the Army also users. the ASAT facilities at KMR, includ- led the Services in missile defense. The Assistant Secretary of the ing storage of the system’s nuclear Through the 1960s, the Nike family Army requested that a technology warheads. In 1966 the program was of missiles evolved with ever-great- manager of Space R&D programs phased out. er capabilities (Nike, Nike Zeus, be established to provide an inter- In the late 1980s, the Army initi- and Nike X). The Sentinel system nal and external focus to the Army. ated a new R&D program with a had two nuclear-tipped missiles: the The Army Space Technology and kinetic energy (KE) ASAT system Spartan was exoatmospheric and the Research Office (ASTRO) was cre- leveraging ongoing ABM develop- Sprint was endoatmospheric. Also ated on Jan. 6, 1988, to fill this role. ment exoatmospheric re-entry-vehi- during the 1960s, the Nixon admin- The ASTRO mission was later trans- cle interceptor system. But by the istration reformulated the ABM ferred to the U.S. Army Space and mid-1990s, with the fall of the iron mission and renamed it Safeguard. Missile Defense Command (SMDC) curtain, the requirement for KE Safeguard was operational less than to consolidate Space-related activi- ASAT no longer existed. a year when Congress closed the ties in the Army. ASTRO efforts The Army conducted a series program in accordance with the later became the Space Application of data collection exercises in the ABM Treaty. ABM activities were Technology Program. late 1990s using the mid-infrared limited to research by the Army The Army Space Institute under advanced chemical laser at the High Ballistic Missile Defense Agency. the direction of Vice Chief of Staff Energy Laser Test Facility at White The ABM mission was transferred s General Thurman initiated what Sands Missile Range, N.M., on to the Strategic Defense Initiative became the Army Space Exploitation cooperative Space targets. Organization (SDIO) in 1985. The p Demonstration Program (ASEDP) The Army is now investigat- Army still actively conducts missile a to be executed by U.S. Army Space ing nondestructive technologies research and its current customer is Command (ARSPACE). ASEDP to secure Space superiority for its the Missile Defense Agency, SDIO’s c was able to demonstrate multiple future forces. successor organization. t Space exploitation capabilities and e e research opportunities for the Army. Space Application Conclusion ASEDP maintained a close relation- Space application is the fourth The Army has been a leader in c ship to SATP within SMDC. key area in which the Army has a Space research throughout the 20th rich history of making significant century as evidenced by numer- h Space Control contributions. Space application ous technology firsts and capability n Space control, defined as ensur- describes the projection of force demonstrations. The Army is now ing the freedom of action in Space (i.e., intercontinental ballistic mis- continuing this heritage in the 21st o for the United States and its allies siles) and defense from, through, century in accordance with new while denying the enemy the use and in the Space environment. DoD guidance and emphasis on l of Space, is another area where Accordingly, almost all established Space dominance and operations. o the Army has a long history of Space launch capabilities in the area Space has evolved from a mission g Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 53 y of achieving the “high ground” to one 9. “Geodetic SECOR” by J.E. Howell, International Assoc. of 2. “Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, Next Step in Military Geodesy Symposium of Electronic Distance Determination of extending power/might and provid- Uses of Space,” by Benjamin Lambeth, RAND Corp., spon- 10. “U.S. Army Space Reference Text” U.S. Army Space ing global capabilities to the individual sored by USAF contract F49642-01-C-0003, 2003. Institute, Fort Leavenworth, KS Jul 1993. Soldier. It will be imperative to protect 3. “The Army — A Leader and Partner in Pioneering ‘The Final 11. “Space Handbook, A War Fighter’s Guide to Space” Vol 1, Frontier’”, by LTC Patrick H. Rayermann, The Journal of Army prepared by Maj Michael Muolo Air University Air Command and secure these Space capabilities for Space Operations Sep 2001. and Staff College, Air University Press, Maxwell AFB, AL, our future national defense needs. The 4. “DCE: Army Leadership at the Cutting Edge of Space Dec 1993. battlefield has already been transformed Control,” Special Historical/Lesson Learned, by the SMDC 12. “Army Exploitation of Space” SMDC Historian (unpub- Command Historian, & SAIC, July 1999. lished). by Space capabilities such as satellite 5. “Radar Echoes from the Moon,” by Jack Mofenson, Evans 13. “A History of United States National Security Space communications and GPS. The future Signal Laboratory Belmar NJ, Jan 1946, www.infoage.org/ Management and Organization” by Joshua Boehm (System diamof.html. Planning Corp) with Craig Baker Space Commission), Stanley battlefield will continue to change as new 6. “Origins of the USAF Space Program 1945-1956” by Robert Chan and Mel Sakazaki (System Planning Corp), Prepared Army-developed technologies are applied L. Perry History of Dep Commander (AFSC) for Aerospace for the Commission to Assess U.S, National Security Space Systems 1961, Reprinted by History Office SMC 1997. Management and Organization. to Space and provide capability to both 7. “A Signal Corps Space Odyssey Part I — Prelude to SCORE” 14. “The Army at Redstone Arsenal: Significant Accomplishment the National Command Authorities and by Dr. Has K Ziegler, The Army Communicator Fall 1981, www. in Space” www.redstone.Army.mil/ history/airspace/airspace_ infoage.org/tac-zig17.html, chronology.html. to the warfighter. References 8. “A Signal Corps Space Odyssey Part I — SCORE and 1. “Historical Monograph Army Ordnance Satellite Program,” Beyond,” by BG H. Mc D. Brown (retired), The Army by Paul Satterfield and David Akens, published by ABMA Communicator Winter 1982, www.infoage.org/tac-bro58.html. Historian 1 November 1958. Space Soldiers in Action l-r, CPT Bob Barrett, SGT Sabrinna Bannister, SSG Greg Singer, and CPT Angela Johnson set up a dish that provided Space support to the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Photo by MAJ Daniel Cockerham 54 Army Space Journal Fall 2003