Document II-9 Document title: U.S. National Committee for the International Geophysical Year 1957-58. "Summary Minutes of the Eighth Meeting," Washington, D.C., May 18, 1955. Source: Archives, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. The idea for holding an International Geophysical Year (IGY) arose from an informal meeting of scientists at the Maryland home of physicist James Van Allen in 1950. The intention was to coordinate high-altitude research conducted around the world. Supporters took the idea to the International Council of Scientific Unions, where it was supported by sixty-seven nations. In October 1954, Lloyd Berkner, one of the scientists at the original meeting, and ten of his associates discussed the problems and rewards of launching a satellite as part of the IGY and agreed unanimously to recommend it to the Special Committee for the International Geophysical Year (CSAGI). On October 4, the CSAGI issued a statement calling for governments to try to launch Earth satellites. The American Long Playing Rocket Proposal followed from that recommendation. The U.S. National Committee for the International Geophysical Year gave formal approval to the project at its May 18, 1955, meeting. The minutes of that meeting have as attachments background on the U.S. satellite proposal. [1] 1. Attendance. 1.1 Members: Joseph Kaplan (Chairman), A. H. Shapley (Vice-Chairman), L. H. Adams, Wallace W. Atwood, Jr., Lloyd V. Berkner, Earl G. Droessler, J. Wallace Joyce, John P. Marble, E. B. Roberts, Walter M. Rudolph, Paul A. Siple, H. K. Stephenson, Merle A. Tuve, E. H. Vestine (alternate). 1.2 USNC-IGY Secretariat: Hugh Odishaw, Executive Secretary, R. C. Peavey, Administrative Officer. 2. General Business. 2.1 Dr. Kaplan announced that Senate hearings on the IGY principal budget were scheduled for 3:00 P.M., today. 2.2 J. Wallace Joyce was introduced to the Committee as Head of the NSF Office for the IGY. Earl G. Droessler was introduced as representing the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (R&D). 2.3 L. V. Berkner noted that Dr. Briggs was in the hospital with a broken leg. It was agreed that a letter would be sent to Dr. Briggs in the name of the Committee expressing hope for a rapid recovery. 3.Discussion on LPR Program. 3.1 Dr. Kaplan opened a discussion on the Long Playing Rocket Project (LPR). He stated that this USNC Meeting had been called to review and consider formal approval of the LPR policy, program, and budget, which had been outlined by the USNC Executive Committee. He emphasized that the discussion on LPR must be considered private and confidential within the Committee until high policy decisions had been reached and a public announcement had been made by the Executive Branch of the Government. 3.2 Mr. Odishaw reviewed the history of events leading to the formulation of an LPR Program and Budget as an extension of the conventional Rocket Program proposed for the International Geophysical Year. He read the resolutions passed by the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) [2] on September 20, 1954; the International Scientific Radio Union (URSI), on September 24, 1954; and the International Council of Scientific Unions Special Committee for the International Geophysical Year (CSAGI) on October 4, 1954 (Appendix I to these Minutes). Mr. Odishaw then discussed the formation of a special LPR Committee consisting of members of the USNC Technical Panel on Rocketry and the USNC Executive Committee, to consider the technical feasibility of the CSAGI proposal and to suggest experiments which should be performed (Appendix II to these Minutes.) He noted that results of this study (Appendix III to these Minutes) and the proposed program and policy position had been approved unanimously by the USNC Executive Committee at its Meeting March 810, 1955, which authorized the Chairman to transmit on March 14, 1955, a policy statement on the LPR Project to the President of the National Academy of Sciences and the Director of the National Science Foundation (Appendix IV to these Minutes). 3.3 Detailed discussion ensued on the technical and scientific objectives as well as financial and political aspects of the LPR Project. It was noted that the vehicle, fuel, and launching system would probably involve unavoidable security problems, but it was explicitly understood that the USNC intended for the bird to be freely available for inspection by other nations participating in the LPR and to be tracked in flight by other nations. 3.4 Following this discussion, the USNC gave formal approval to the resolution adopted by the USNC Executive Committee and the policy statement on the LPR Project transmitted to the President, NAS-NRC and the Director, NSF on March 14, 1955, with one member dissenting. 4. LPR Budget. 4.1 Mr. Odishaw reported that on May 5, 1955, the USNC Executive Committee had given instructions for the preparation and transmission of a program and budget for the LPR Project to the Director, NSF, for consideration by the National Science Board at its forthcoming meeting on May 20, 1955. He then reviewed in detail estimated costs, totaling $9,734,500, which includes the cost of ten rocket vehicle systems for instrumented birds. 4.2 After discussion, the USNC gave formal approval to the LPR PROGRAM AND BUDGET DOCUMENT drawn up as of May 6, 1955, for transmittal to the Director of the National Science Foundation, with one member abstaining from the vote (Appendix V to these Minutes). 5. Other Business. 5.1 Mr. Odishaw reported that detailed program and budget estimates for scientific projects had been received from the USNC Technical Panels and that copies of all project forms would be mailed to the USNC for review and approval as to acceptance in the U. S. Program for the IGY. The USNC was advised that the Supplemental Budget would be presented to the National Science Board for its consideration on May 20, 1955. 5.2 After approval of these procedures discussed under item 5.1 above, the meeting adjourned. [3] Appendix I International Scientific Resolutions On The Earth Circling Satellite Vehicles 1. International Union of Geodesy & Geophysics (IUGC), "In view of the great importance of observations over extended periods of time of extraterrestrial radiations and geophysical phenomena in the upper atmosphere and the advanced state of present rocket techniques, it is recommended that consideration be given to the launching of small satellite vehicles, their scientific instrumentation and the new problems associated with satellite experiments such as power supply, telemetering, and orientation of the vehicle." 2. International Scientific Radio Union (URSI), September 24, 1954: “URSI recognizes the extreme importance of continuous observations, from above the E-region of extraterrestrial radiations, especially during the forthcoming AGI. "URSI therefore draws attention to the fact that an extension of present isolated rocket observations by means of instrumented earth satellite vehicles would allow the continuous monitoring of solar ultraviolet and X-radiation intensity and its effects on the ionosphere, particularly during solar flares thereby greatly enhancing our scientific knowledge of the outer atmosphere." 3. International Council of Scientific Unions Special Committee for the International Geophysical Year (CSAGI), October 4, 1954: "In view of the great importance of observations during extended periods of time of extraterrestrial radiations and geophysical phenomena in the upper atmosphere, and in view of the advanced state of present rocket techniques, CSAGI recommends that thought be given to the launching of small satellite vehicles, to their scientific instrumentation, and to the new problems associated with satellite experiments, such as power supply, telemetering, and orientation of the vehicle." [4] Appendix II Excerpts of the First Meeting Technical Panel on Rocketry USNC for the IGY 10:00-17:00, January 22, 1955, National Science Foundation 2. Organization of Panel 2.1 Dr. Van Allen as convener called the meeting to order and Dr. Spilhaus of the Executive Committee of the U. S. National Committee for the IGY introduced as first order of business a resolution passed by the Executive Committee to be taken up by this panel. A motion was introduced, seconded and carried to the effect that the following part of the meeting on LPR be a closed session, be private, though unclassified, and its record be available to the participants of this closed session only. A record of the Closed Session will be found as Attachment A to these minutes. [5] January 22, 1955 on the Closed Session Technical Panel on Rocketry 1. Resolution 1.1 Dr. Spilhaus reported on a resolution passed by the Executive Committee of the U.S. National Committee for the IGY requesting this Panel to perform a study and report on the technical feasibility of the construction of an extended rocket, from here on called LPR, to be launched in connection with scientific activities during the International Geophysical Year. 1.2 This report presents the resolved actions taken on account of the ensuing discussion among the participants of the closed session. 1.3 Participants: N.C. Gerson, B. Haurwitz, J. Kaplan, H.E. Newell, Jr., H. Odishaw, G.F. Schilling, S.F. Singer, A.F. Spilhaus, J.A. Van Allen, F.L. Whipple. 1.4 All contents of this report are classified as private, pending further determination of a suitable security classification, and discussions or communications would be limited to members of the Panel and only those others indicated in 2.2. A motion covering this point was proposed by Dr. Kaplan, seconded, and unanimously passed. Copies of this report, Attachment A to the Minutes of the First Meeting of the Technical Panel on Rocketry of the USNC for the IGY, will be available to participants of this closed session only. 2. Discussion 2.1 The ensuing discussion included, in addition to technical details, such topics as the expected reaction of public opinion, the liaison with Government agencies, and the availability of funds. [6] 2.2 It was finally resolved that a study group to be called LPR Committee would be set up under the chairmanship of Dr. Whipple, consisting of the members of this Panel and the following added consultants: W. Pickering, California Institute of Technology; M.W. Rosen, Naval Research Laboratory; J.W. Townsend, Jr., Naval Research Laboratory. 2.3 This LPR Committee will meet at Pasadena, California, on the evening of February 3, 1955, and possibly on subsequent days, the participants to be informed of exact time and locality by Dr. Van Allen. 2.4 It was resolved that the LPR Committee draft a report on the following topics and/or sub-topics concerning LPR: technical feasibility, budget, geophysical possibilities; controls, motor, manpower, timing, cost estimates, desired orbit; and possibly other pertinent subjects. 2.5 It was resolved that the whole report would either be classified and an unclassified abstract be extracted, or the report would be in two parts, one part carrying a security classification. 2.6 It was resolved that the LPR Committee would send the report to Dr. Spilhaus to be presented to the members of the Executive Committee of the USNC for the IGY, or directly to respective Government agencies such as the National Security Council, upon the discretion of the Chairman of the USNC for the IGY. 2.7 Dr. Haurwitz indicated that due to prior commitments he would be unable to attend the planned meeting on February 3, 1955. He offered to write a letter to Dr. Whipple prior to the planned meeting, containing his contribution for inclusion in the report. [7] Appendix III National Academy Of Sciences - National Research Council For The International Geophysical Year 1957-58 Prepared by: G.F. Schilling, Program Officer, USNC-IGY Approved by: Hugh Odishaw, Executive Secretary, USNC - IGY 1. Attendance MINUTES of the Special Meeting LPR Committee Technical Panel on Rocketry USNC for the IGY 09:00 - 13:00, 9 March 1955, IGY Conference Room Washington, D. C. 1.1 Members Panel on Rocketry: F.L. Whipple (Chairman), W. Berning, W.G. Dow, N.C. Gerson, J. Kaplan, H.E. Newell, Jr., S.F. Singer, W. Stroud, P.H. Wyckoff Absent: B. Haurwitz, J.A. Van Allen 1.2 IGY Secretariat: H. Odishaw, G.F. Schilling 1.3 LPR Technical Subcommittee: M.W. Rosen, J.W. Townsend Absent: W.H. Pickering 1.4 Invited Participants: E.L. Eaton, A.F. Spilhaus, T.B. Walker 3. Business Session 3.1 Dr. Whipple, Chairman of the Technical Panel on Rocketry of the USNC for the IGY convened the meeting and called upon Mr. Rosen to present a Report of the LPR Technical Subcommittee, prepared by W.H. Pickering, M.W. Rosen, and J.W. Townsend. [8] 3.2 Mr. Rosen read and submitted a written report (Attachment A to these Minutes), summarizing three conclusions resolved by the Subcommittee. 3.3 The report was accepted by the Chairman of the Panel and Mr. Rosen was called upon to amplify and detail the content of the report. 4. Detailed Report by M. W. Rosen 4.1 Mr. Rosen discussed the following three possible approaches to placing a small payload in an orbit around the earth. He emphasized that all three approaches are feasible with present-day knowledge and facilities, and are presented in the order of difficulty and amount of additional development required. I. Technique Number One: This technique suggests the use of a one-stage large rocket plus the release of a number of small rockets, launched at or near the top of the flight path of the large rocket. Three existing large rockets are qualified to be used for the first stage. The guidance can be made accurate to one degree of arc. II. Technique Number Two: This technique suggests the use of a two-stage rocket plus one or two more stages of small rockets. The guidance problem of the second stage is more difficult here, than with Technique Number One, but it is technically feasible. The technique gives the possibility of greater payload, i.e., instrumented satellite. III. Technique Number Three: This technique may represent the most long-term approach, but offers the greatest payload. The basic suggestion is to start out with the biggest power plant presently in development and to build a test vehicle around it. This would involve a development program for the first stage. Before evaluating this program, a preliminary study of two to three months would be necessary. 5. Discussion on Size Categories 5.1 Dr. Whipple started a discussion on desirable size categories. It was apparent that an object of the order of magnitude of one pound would not be useful. An object of the order of magnitude of ten pounds would be observable from ground. Into any object of 30 pounds or more some sort of power could be put, thus making it an instrumented satellite. It was agreed that at the present time the use of nuclear or solar power supplies was doubtful and not technically feasible, therefore batteries would be needed. |