« PreviousContinue »
must substitute leased lines in other countries. “But there just aren't that many communication lines open," a source explained.
Communication capacity in Europe is highly saturated, and trying to duplicate communication leased lines in France in other nations is a major feat, it was said.
Replacing microwave nets is also a headache. European nations may have different frequencies allocated for United States military use. Thus the United States cannot simply take microwave stations in France and put them in another country. In many cases, entirely new frequency networks must be set up.
Another problem is posed by Italy, which gave the United States 1 year to vacate an entire microwave frequency link. It will be given over to Italian television, sources said.
The United States also faces problems of microwave nets crossing national boundaries.
One solution being studied is going to higher frequency microwave networks up as high as 8 GH2 sources said. Equipment is now becoming available in these higher ranges. Because the frequencies are uncrowded, the United States may be able to get the high capacity military channels it needs.
The military is also considering expanding its tropo-scatter nets in Europe to meet the communication crisis. Tropo lends itself to the "building block" approach.
United States military communications may also rely a little more on long distance HF to replace ground nets lost in France. However, sources said the reliability problems of HF will probably restrict it from taking over much of the lost communications.
The United States undoubtedly will use the French evacuation to upgrade its European communications. Microwave systems will be upgraded to dual and quad diversity and will probably go to solid-state repeater stations, Higher channel capacity will also be added, it was said.
Mr. RoBACK. General Starbird also said at page 171 of the transcript hearings, there was a discussion of vital and unique requirements that there had been a listing and he said he had supplied these to us previously and would give us the reference.
We would like the reference because I am not sure we are talking on the same wavelength.
I also said that with regard to contracting with Comsat, I would discuss with him, and I omitted to do it because of time, what kind of problems arise as far as maintaining security classifications go, that is to say, Comsat is a company and would be dealt with as other companies are dealt with presumably as far as industrial security goes, but on the other hand, it is part of an international consortium and the consortium members have rights and privileges.
How do you sort out this rather delicate issue!
That can be also in the form of a commentary submitted for the record.
(The following comments were supplied for the record :) We expect no security problems with respect to DCA's contract with Comsat. The contract is unclassified as is the contemplated configuration of the circuits. If there is classified information to be passed over the circuits, it will be encrypted prior to transmission as is our normal practice. It should also be noted that there is a similarity between dealing with Comsat and its foreign partners and with the international carriers and their foreign partners in the cable systems.
Mr. HORTON. The hearings will be adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock, when they will continue. The meeting is adjourned at 12:15.
(Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., August 19, 1966.)
GOVERNMENT USE OF SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
FRIDAY, AUGUST 19, 1966
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in room 2247, Rayburn Office Building, Hon. Chet Holifield (chairman of the subcommittee),
presiding. Present: Representative Chet Holifield.
Also present: Herbert Roback, staff administrator; and Douglas G. Dahlin, counsel.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. The committee will be in order.
Mr. ROBACK. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Gates has a biographical sketch preceding his statement and since it contains important new information, perhaps we ought to put it in the record. Mr. HOLIFIELD. It will be accepted. (The biographical sketch referred to follows:)
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH, MR. HOWARD P. GATES, JR., ASSISTANT FOR COMMUNICA
TIONS AND AVIONICS SYSTEMS, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT)
Mr. Howard P. Gates, Jr., was appointed Assistant for Communications and Avionics Systems to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (R. & D.) on September 2, 1964. Previously he was vice president, Teledyne, Inc., Hawthorne, Calif.
Mr. Gates was born on August 10, 1917, in Los Angeles, Calif. He received the B.S.E.E. degree from the University of California in 1939. From 1940 to 1945 he worked as an electronics engineer for the Bureau of Ships in Washington, D.C. At the U.S. Navy Electronics Laboratory, San Diego, Calif., from 1945 to 1950, he conducted ionospheric propagation research aimed at the development of high-speed long-range communication, and he headed the communication and navigation section. In 1950 he joined the Hughes Aircraft Co., and was responsible for integration of the radar, digital-computing and display elements of the F-102/F-106 interceptor and for the design of its communications, navigation, and identification system. Starting with Litton Industries, Beverly Hills, Calif., in April 1954, he became vice president and chief engineer of West Coast Electronics Co., a subsidiary; later as Litton program manager, he directed the design and development of the marine tactical data system. In May 1961, he joined the newly organized Teledyne, Inc., Hawthorne, Calif., as vice president, where he was responsible for communications systems programs.
Mr. Gates is a member of the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, the American Geophysical Union, the Aerospace Electrical Society, the Armed Forces Communication Electronics Association, the American Ordnance Association, and the American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics, and is a registered professional engineer in the District of Columbia. He has served as consultant to the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, as well as to industry, on organization and management of research and development, techniques of tactical air defense, and long-range telecommunication technology. His papers cover such subjects as diversity system design, ionospheric propagation research, highspeed HF signaling, and frequency utilization. He recently received the Department of the Army decoration for meritorious civilian service.
Mrs. Gates is the former Patricia Ethel Bonnell. They have five children, Ann, Carol, Douglas, Teresa, and Guilbert.
Office address: Room 3E383, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 20310.
STATEMENT OF HOWARD P. GATES, JR., ASSISTANT FOR COMMUNI
CATIONS AND AVIONICS SYSTEMS, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (R. & D.); ACCOMPANIED BY SAMUEL P. BROWN, TECHNICAL DIRECTOR, U.S. ARMY SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY; COL. ROBERT H. SCALES, DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS; AND LT. COL. SETH DAY, OFFICE, CHIEF, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, U.S. ARMY
Mr. Gates. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, with me today are Col. Mitchell Goldenthal, who is commanding officer of the U.S. Army Satellite Communications Agency.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. He may come forward if you would like.
Mr. Gates. Yes, he will be giving testimony later. And Mr. Sam Brown, who is Technical Director of that Agency; Col. Robert Scales, who is Director of Programs; and from the Office of the Chief of Research and Development, U.S. Army, Lt. Col. Seth Day.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. I assume they are all sitting behind you. We can't invite them all to the witness table, but they will be available.
Mr. GATES. Yes.
I am Howard Gates, Assistant for Communications and Avionics Systems to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and Development. Satellite communications research and development is one of my chief areas of interest.
In its work in satellite communication research and development, the Army gets its guidance, direction, and money via one or the other of two organizations. Those of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering and the Director of the Defense Communications Agency. The Army performs three principal functions for these agencies: First, it performs studies, analyses, and comprehensive preliminary designs on complete satellite system such as ADCSP, or on portions of such systems. This work may be done completely inhouse, or may be done with the support of contractors. Design approaches that the Army evolves are evaluated by the requesting organization and compared with those submitted by the Navy and Air Force or by contractors; when a system design is settled upon, the Army is then called upon to perform the second of its three functions: Execution of the development, procurement, test, and evaluation of the ground terminals for the system. (The Air Force and Navy develop the airborne and oceanborne terminals, and the Air Force provides the space elements, launch vehicles, and launching.) In the development of ground terminals, the Army relies heavily on its contractors, but in site selection, emplacement, test instrumentation, and actual testing, most of the work is done by Army civilian and military personnel. The third function of the Army is that of research and development aimed at evolving novel and improved elements for use in ground terminals: antennas, feeds, parametric amplifiers, transmitters, and other items. Most of this is contract effort.
A research and development program of especial interest to the Army, and in which all services are participating, is the tactical satellite communications program that Mr. Rogers of D.D.R. & E. mentioned in his earlier appearance. It is aimed at determining and fulfilling both the intraservice and the interservice communication needs of the tactical commander on the field of battle. It is a unique program that is quite distinct, both in its objectives and in its managerial structure, from the strategic long-haul communications program discussed by General Starbird. The program is managed by the triservice executive steering group, which consists of three civilian members drawn from the three service secretariats and three officers drawn from the three research and development staffs. I am a member of this group, and I wish to say that it functions most amicably and effectively, particularly in reconciling the diverse views, not onły among but within the services, of what tactical communications is and the direction the program should take.
The Army will design, develop, test, and evaluate the ground terminals for this program; and, later will conduct simulated and actual operational testing on the research and development equipment to determine those modes of operation that maximize its utility to the Army tactical user, and the best approaches to a future operational system design. In these early stages of the program, the Army has contributed both operational and technical expertise to the study groups and committees that are assisting in defining the first tactical R. & D. system.
Most of the Army's research, development, test, and evaluation in satellite communication is carried out by the U.S. Army Satellite Communications Agency-usually called ÚSASCA-a 200-man organization headquartered at the Fort Monmouth post but which has rather widespread geographical interests. It is close to, but not a part of, the Electronics Command, and an important part of its job is to work with the Communications Laboratory of that command and with the several Army Materiel Command program managers handling tactical communications programs to make sure that satellite communications techniques, with their extraordinary promise of high return in terms of capability per-dollar expended, are carefully considered in the design of new systems. The Satellite Communications Agency, incidentally, is the only organization I know of within