afrma, i nc/radomes quarterly · pdf fileaccording to air defense command histories from the...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Winter 2011 Volume X, Issue 2
AFRMA, INC/RADOMES QUARTERLY PUBLICATION
AD-101: The Transition to SAGE
A Very Merry Christmas
And Happy New Year
From the Radomes staff
Exclusive photo of Gene making his annual appointed rounds...we think that‘s Historian Tom working the winch...
Seventh in a series
On 1 May 1954, during the annual May Day Parade and frater-nal socialist block party/extravaganza held at Red Square in Mos-cow, western observers beheld two startling sites: the appear-ance of Soviet strategic jet bombers.
Nine Tupolev Tu-16s – subsequently designated Badger by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – passed over the reviewing stand. Roughly equivalent to Strategic Air Command‘s B-47s, albeit with only two engines (then again, the twin engines were 15,000-pound static thrust Mikulin AM-3s), the Badgers trailed SAC‘s introduction of the B-47B at MacDill AFB by only two years. Also, the aerial display included the public debut of the Myasishchev M-4 Bison, a truly intercontinental aircraft (or, so it was thought), powered by four 19,290 lbst AM-3As.
The arrival of the two bombers shocked DoD and international observers, but more surprises followed in 1955. At the annual Aviation Day air show at Moscow‘s Tushino Airfield, Tupolev de-buted its second large Cold War bomber, the Tu-95 Bear. The aircraft, powered by four 12,000 shaft horsepower Kuznetsov NK-12 turboprops driving counter-rotating propellers, immediately entered service with Dal’naya Aviatsya (Russian long-range avia-tion). Finally, on 22 November 1955 at the Semipalatinsk Test Site in Kazakhstan, the Soviets detonated their first two-stage thermonuclear device. Designated test RDS-37, the weapon suc-cessfully yielded a 1.6 megaton detonation; notably, this was the first-ever air drop of an H-bomb by either of the nuclear powers.
Needless to say, the bang-bang-bang (no pun intended) reve-lation of Soviet bomber and atomic/thermonuclear capability set off the alarms in several corners of the world. One of the imme-diate reactions was the creation of the ―bomber gap:‖ at the ‘55 air show at Tushino, observers counted about 20 M-4s in flight and analysts quickly estimated a Soviet production capability of at least 20 strategic bombers per month. By comparison, SAC‘s B-52 had only just entered service, with the delivery of the first B-52B to the 93rd Bombardment Wing (Heavy) at Castle AFB, California, on 29 June.
On Capitol Hill, at the Department of Defense, at Headquar-ters US Air Force and at Headquarters, Air Defense Command at Ent AFB, Colorado, the time seemed right for a boost in de-fense spending, particularly that spending associated with the defense of North America. However, the question came down to this: how to afford such an expansion following the Korean War and what kind of system to develop for defense against high-speed, high-altitude targets?
A Requirement for Something Better…
According to Air Defense Command histories from the period, while the early 1950s saw a continued explosive growth in the command‘s capabilities, the system still operated effectively with World War II-era systems and procedures, ie, fully manually. Early in the decade, ADC started looking at the development of
(Continued on page 4)
2
Reunions & Coming Events
Constant Bearing
14 Apr 2012—25th
NORAD Region/Air Division/
Northwest ADS/Western ADS Recall Group, at
the McChord AFB Consolidated Club. Meeting moved to
the second weekend due to Easter; all personnel ever
assigned to the 25th at McChord or its attached radar
and FIS units are welcome; breakfast at 8 AM, program,
updates on Air Force defense activities, fun and fellow-
ship. For information contact Frank Pearce, CMSgt
(Ret) at [email protected].
15-20 Apr 2012—601st
and 615th
AC&WSs, Germany, in
San Antonio. For details, contact Francis Gosselin (352)
588-9295 or [email protected].
26-29 Apr 2012—79th
& 966th
AEW&CS, Fort
Walton Beach, FL. For info, contact David Bilo-
deau (352)797-0962 [email protected]
or James Speight (334)265-4242 [email protected]
(AFM).
13-20 May 2012—Salute to Veterans Cruise
to Alaska, all radar site veterans welcome! For further
information, contact Beverly Poitrast, Bev-
16-21 May 2012—871st
AC&WS, Villatobas AS, Spain.
Reunion in Fresno, for further information please con-
t a c t L a r r y ― B o ‖ B o h a n n o n , l k b o h a n -
22-24 Jun 2012—664th
AC&WS/RADS, Bellefontaine
AFS, OH, at the site of the former base. Please con-
tact reunion chairman Larry Lewis at (937)592-6787,
katenlarry@embarqmailcom, [email protected] or
drop him a line at 1715 Cty Rd 10, Bellefontaine, OH
43311.
Jul 2012—RSV Worldwide Reunion in Wisconsin. See
page 3.
2-5 Aug 2012—Air Force joint
AEW&C/Connie re-
union planned for Colo-
rado Springs, Crowne
Plaza is the host hotel.
Details to follow, in the meantime contact Jack Kerr,
AEW&C Reunion Planner, at [email protected] for
further information.
17-18 Aug 2012—739th
AC&WS, Wadena AFS, in Wa-
dena. For information and details contact Jim White,
Box 334, Wadena, MN 56482 or (218)631-3211,
9-13 Sept 2012—656th
AC&WS/RADS, Saratoga
Springs, NY. Host hotel is the Holiday Inn. For more
information including a secure hotel registration link and
printable registration form, call up http://mdougherty.net/
reunion_656/reunion.htm.
14-22 Sept 2012—Hof Reunion Associa-
tion, fourth return visit to Hof, Germany.
Welcome to all who served in Hof from
1945 to 1975, including vets of the 602nd,
603rd and 606th AC&WSs as well as the
6910th Security Group, 6912th and 6915th Radio Squad-
ron (Mobile). Information at http://www.hofreunion.com,
for additional gouge contact Jim Riggin at jmrig-
[email protected] or [email protected].
Sept 2012—637th
AC&WS/RADS, planned reunion in the
New Orleans-Biloxi-Gulfport area. For further informa-
tion contact Mike Murray, [email protected].
29 Sept-03 Oct 2012—502nd
Tactical Control Group
(605th, 606th, 607th and 608th AC&WSs) and associated
units, in Branson, MO, at the Grand Plaza Hotel. Con-
tact Bi l l Aylward (703)715 -0448, wayl -
28 Oct-02 Nov 2012—Keesler AFB Alumni & Veterans
Reunion, in Biloxi, for all who served at Keesler (or
serves there now): students, instructors, permanent
party, civilian and military plus friends and family. For
information contact Lowel l Woodworth,
11-14 Jul 2013—The 753rd
Veterans of Sault
Ste Marie AFS, MI, invite all radar site veterans, in
Sault Ste Marie. For additional information contact
George Taylor, [email protected].
Announcements
The Lackland AFB/37th
Training Wing History Office has
established a website and is looking for BMT graduation
photos from every flight since the base was established.
To check and see if you photo is there, go to the web
site at www.bmtflightphotos.af.mil and check the year
you graduated.
If you have your picture and it is not yet posted, you
can send it to the historian office at 37TRW/HO, 2320
Carswell Ave (Bldg 7065/Room 2), Lackland AFB, TX
78236-5155 OR send a good quality scan via eMail to:
[email protected]. If you mail a photo,
make sure you include information about the photo and
return instructions.
686th
AC&WS, Walker AFB—Reunion in the planning stages
for the August/September 2012 time frame, in Colorado
Springs. Please contact John Sheehan at
[email protected] for additional information.
766th
RADS (SAGE), Caswell AFS, 1961-1965—Anyone
interested in holding a reunion for the aforementioned
years, possibly here in Las Vegas (I know of two others
3
Which site is this? Punamano, Territory of Hawaii
614th AC&Ws, Ca. 1949
AFRMA, Inc/Radomes, The Air Defense Radar Veterans‘ Association, is a member-supported non-profit corporation.
Our mission is to preserve the history of the defense of North America from enemy bomber or missile attack during the Cold War period. Memberships are open to U.S. and Canadian citizens, veterans and non-veterans alike.
Headquarters: AFRMA, Inc/Radomes, 9976 Stoudertown Rd., Baltimore, OH 43105.
Newsletter: Echoes: 1225 Dunloe Rd, Manchester, MO 63021
Echoes is the official newsletter of Radomes, Inc. Entire contents is copyrighted under U.S. law and all rights are reserved. Echoes is published four times each calendar year (Winter, Spring, Summer and Fall). Submissions for possible publication (without monitory compensation) may sent to the editor at the above address. Send electronic submissions to: [email protected]. Echoes is grateful for all submissions.
Radomes, Inc. founders, Gene McManus and Tom Page.
Editor, ―Ranger Mark‖ Morgan
Masthead, Warren Carman.
©copyright 2011 AFRMA, Inc/Radomes. All rights reserved.
Reunions and Upcoming Events All Reunions/Events: Generally all previously
assigned or currently assigned military/civilian personnel or members are invited. Check with appropriate contact person (or visit their web site) concerning spouses/dependents, latest updates and other details. Data is subject to change without notice.
All Units Not Listed—Check with these on-line sources:
www.radomes.org
www.usaf.com; click on “Reunions”
www.military.com/Resources/ReunionList/
Www.afa.org/links/reunions.asp
RSV Worldwide Reunion in Wisconsin
July 2012 in Eau Claire, WI
We believe this can be one of our better reunions; we‘re espe-
cially interested in the Eau Claire area for our host hotel location.
In addition to activities in the Eau Claire vicinity, we‘re looking
at two day-tours: one east to the Highground Veterans Memorial
in Neillsville (www.thehighground.org) and one west to the for-
mer Osceola AFS, now owned by the Lutheran Church.
If enough desire, we‘ll consider adding another day tor a tour
of the former Antigo AFS, WI.
For further information, to volunteer or to advise of your desire
to attend and participate, contact Lowell G. Woodworth,
living here who were stationed there during those years)
or in the Limestone area (my preference). Please con-
tact me at [email protected].
875th
AC&WS, Rosas AS, Spain. We who were
there from 1960 to 1965 had one of the
richest experiences the USAF ever offered.
I was stationed at Rosas from 1960 to 1964
and am opening the door to anyone who
shared those years to show interest in re-
uniting with old friends. Contact Wayne Grover, USAF
(Ret) at [email protected]. Adios por ahora.
Proof! Steve Canyon served with ADC!
4
a more capable and effective system which took advantage of the rapidly growing computer industry.
However, the command ran into interference, not only from the Department of Defense but also at the highest levels of Air Force command. The USAF‘s Chief of Staff, Gen Hoyt S. Vandenberg, stated publically in a magazine article that the US should concen-trate on a balance offensive and defensive approach to the pro-tection of the military, without spending too much funds on ―static defense‖ measures…such as a robust, upgraded air defense net-work.
It was under this environment that studies began which hope-fully would lead to a computerized, automated air defense sys-tem. Western Electric – one of the major component companies of the Army‘s Nike missile program – led one effort, termed the Continental Air Defense System Project or CADS. The other study participant was the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) of Cambridge, which commenced development studies under the guise of Project Charlie. The latter wound up having the greatest impact on the air defense effort.
MIT‘s Phase I of the project – chaired by physicist Dr Francis W. Loomis of the University of Illinois, head of the school‘s phys-ics department and founder of its Control Systems Laboratory – released a report in August 1951. The report stated, in part, ―..the electronic high-speed digital computer will have an impor-tant place in air defense and the revolution that the transistor will bring about in electronics and will open up quite new possibilities in aircraft and weapons control.‖
Based on this initial work by MIT, the Air Force signed off on the university‘s pro-posal and provided funding. MIT re-sponded by estab-lishing the Lincoln Laboratory to bring the air defense program to fruition and, in 1952, formed the Lin-
coln Summer Study Group to debate immediate and long-term efforts.
At the time, the general consensus within DoD was the Soviet Union would have enough nuclear weapons and delivery systems to lay waste to the United States within two to three years. How-ever, despite this conventional wisdom (right or otherwise), sev-eral corners of Defense and the US Air Force still strongly re-sisted expending funds on the continental defense mission. The Summer Study members met strong resistance from a group known as ZORC, named for members Drs Jerrold R. Zacharias, physicist, MIT; J. Robert Oppenheimer, the genius behind the Manhattan Project); I.I. Rabi, Columbia University; and Charles C. Lauritsen, nuclear physicist, CalTech. They‘d opposed America‘s development of the H-bomb, stated 100% effectiveness in de-fense was unobtainable and in any event, the Summer Group wasn‘t looking far enough ahead. However, they arguably sup-ported greater efforts by MIT, in the context of this: if Lincoln Laboratories could develop a reasonably effective command and control system, then the United States would have less need for offensive nuclear and thermonuclear weapons.
Transition to SAGE (Continued from page 1) In and around the opposition and public debate, in 1952 Lincoln Lab‘s Summer Study Group – ironically, chaired by Dr Zacharias – made the following recommendations: deployment of an early-warning radar line as far north on the continent as possible (which became Project 572, aka the DEW Line) and development an automated detection and tracking system; and deployment of the same at an estimated cost of $20 billion. The report went to the Department of the Air Force in late 1952 and was promptly classi-fied, or at the least restricted from public release. The Truman Administration was on its way out and someone in Washington DC decided to leave the problem for resolution by the incoming Eisenhower Administration and its new Secretary of Defense, Charles E. Wilson. In the meantime, Air Force leadership contin-ued to push for greater offensive air power, particularly through Gen Curt LeMay‘s Strategic Air Command.
Then the Alsop brothers, Stewart and Joseph of the New York Herald-Tribune, dropped a bombshell series of articles which at-tacked the Air Force for intentionally suppressing the study group‘s findings. The Alsops had received a copy of the study earlier and, at the request of the Air Force and the National Secu-rity Council agreed to sit on it; apparently, after a point they de-cided they were no longer bound by the agreement. The Alsop columns renewed a highly public political fight with a lot of heav-ies taking sides. After much back and forth, on 6 October 1953, the National Security Council approved the release of NSC Paper No. 162, which adopted most of the Summer Study Group‘s pro-posals. The SAGE network was finally on its way.
The Cape Cod Defense
At the end of 1953, Lincoln Laboratory was already mov-ing ahead with testing of a proposed system which in-corporated its digital Whirl-wind computer, built in 1947, with 10-15 long- and short-range radars scattered around Cape Cod. Initially termed the termed the Lin-coln Transition System, it became more commonly known as the ―Cape Cod Air Defense System.‖ What resulted, as described by Lincoln Labs, was a func-tional, semi-automated air defense network on a small scale, where ―…all air de-
fense functions could be demonstrated, tested and modified. The Cape Cod System was a model air defense system, scaled down in size but realistically embodying all operational functions.‖
The components included the Whirlwind in Cambridge (ironically, designed and developed by a team led by Jay Forres-ter and Robert Everett in response to a US Navy request), a long-range AN/FPS-3 perched at South Truro, MA and two WWII-era SCR-584s employed as gap-fillers at Scituate and Rockport, MA. The associated systems included a test direction center with inter-active display consoles with the famous ―light guns.‖ Lincoln Laboratory subsequently expanded the system to incorporate AN/FPS-3s at Brunswick, Maine, and Montauk Point, New York, along with gap-filler radars.
The system, fully operational, proved capable of tracking 48 aircraft while controlling 10 simultaneous intercepts from two dif-ferent bases and providing warning information on 12 additional tracks to an associated Army antiaircraft operations center. Air
MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory, Cambridge, MA.
Source: Radomes
Source: Lincoln Laboratory
5
Defense Command pro-vided the interceptors for the T&E program, through the staging of F-89Cs at Hanscom Field (probably 57th FIS birds from Presque Isle AFB,
Maine) and F-86Ds out of Suffolk County AFB, Long Island (519th Air Defense Group, 75th and 331st Fighter Interceptor Squadrons); the Navy provided additional assets in the form of Douglas F3D-2 Skynights flown from NAS South Weymouth, Massachusetts, probably provided by VC-4 out of NAS Atlantic City. Strategic Air Command also regularly ran evaluation exercises against the Cape Cod System using B-47s from various bases.
In January 1955, Secretary of the Air Force Thomas Finletter approved plans for the advanced air defense command and con-trol system, under the designation of SAGE, for Semi-Automatic Ground Environment. Notably, Finletter, who had replaced first SecAF Stuart Symington in April 1950, had earlier chaired the Air Policy Commission which, in 1948, delivered a report titled Sur-vival in the Air Age (equally notable, following the Dublin Confer-ence on World Peace in 1945, Finletter signed off the confer-ence‘s recommendations, which included the establishment of a single world government). On 7 March 1955, Air Defense Com-mand released its operational plan for the deployment of SAGE.
Lincoln Labs followed with evaluation of the Experimental SAGE Subsector (ESS), the fully operational prototype system, which evaluated the AN/FSQ-7 prototype, designated the XD-1. Located in the lab‘s Building F on the Cambridge campus, the computer ran through a gamut of tests which evaluated its ability to receive, process and generate information from radars, flight plans and other sources, with automated cross-telling of track information, height finding information and weapons status.
CONAD and NORAD
Despite all of the political and financial back-and-forth over the future of continental air defense, the mid-1950s proved a boom time for Air Defense Command and, for that matter, ADC‘s coun-terpart north of the 49th parallel, the RCAF‘s Air Defence Com-mand. Construction of the DEW Line was underway, the first US-funded/ADC-manned and operated Pinetree Line sites were op-erational in Canada and development of the Mid-Canada Line of Doppler radars continued apace. In fact, with the expansion of the Air Defense effort into Canadian territory and concurrent ef-forts by the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy to contribute to the defense mission, it quickly became apparent that some sort of joint – and probably, international – command structure was required. The latter came to fruition during the latter part of the 1950s as North American Air Defense Command, better known as NORAD.
NORAD had its genesis during World War II, when Prime Minis-ter Mackenzie King and President Franklin Roosevelt and agreed to the joint defense of the North American continent, which in-cluded establishment of the Permanent Joint Board on Defense (PJBD). Postwar the two governments continued to work closely together and even started a program of exchange tours between their military services. With the North Korean invasion of South Korea on 25 June 1950, the two nations found themselves once again in a major shooting war on the opposite side of the planet; the war, concerns over Soviet expansionism and the fall of China to the communists in 1949 gave additional impetus to joint de-fense planning.
In early 1951, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff approved a PBJD recommendation for the extension of the rapidly growing US radar and command and control network into Canada. The Royal Ca-nadian Air Force was already working up its fighter and C2 capa-
bilities with interceptors performing air defence duties at several locations around the Dominion. The set up was quite similar to what took place in the United States with heavy initial emphasis on the RCAF‘s reserves, primarily flying North American Mus-tangs and De Havilland Vampires. The first Canadian aircraft control and warning squadrons stood up in 1952.
As covered previously, south of the 49th Parallel, the ADC em-barked on a similar program of growth, adding a large number of fighter squadrons and radar sites. On 1 September 1954, Conti-nental Air Defense Command (CONAD) stood up at Ent AFB, Colorado Springs, Colo., as the joint command in charge of the defense of the states. Its components included ADC, Naval Forces CONAD and Army Antiaircraft Command (ARAACOM); the latter was in the process of transitioning from antiaircraft artil-lery to the brand new MIM-3 Nike Ajax air defense missile sys-tem.
Under CONAD, the Navy operated the outer barriers – more formally the Atlantic and Pacific Contiguous Barriers – off the two coasts. Each consisted of five radar picket ship stations; the At-lantic Barrier – which went operational in 1956 – ran from Cape Cod to North Carolina, with Stations 12, 16, 18 and 20 about 300 miles out. The Pacific Barrier, established in 1958, covered the approaches from Washington south to central California with picket Stations 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9. At least initially, Navy WV-1/2s also worked the contiguous barriers before shifting to more dis-tant patrol areas, augmented after the mid-1950s by airborne early warning ZPG-2W/3W blimps, operated by ZW-1. Finally, the Navy provided one fighter squadron to NORAD for air defense operations, VF(AW)-3 at NAS North Island, San Diego, which operated Douglas F3D-2s and F4D-1s under the auspices of the 27th Air Division.
The Air Force operated the Inshore Barrier, using its coastal long-range radar sites, followed by RC/EC-121s assigned to the 551st (Otis AFB, Massachusetts) and 552nd (McClellan AFB, Cali-fornia) Airborne Early Warning & Control Wings and eventually the Texas Tower radar platforms off New England and New York.
These organizational and command and control efforts culminated on 1 Au-gust 1957, with the announcement by the Minister of National Defence and the Sec-retary of Defense. The two nations agreed to establish a joint, bi-national, integrated command and control system with authority over the air defense forces of Canada and the United States. On 12 September, North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) stood up at Ent AFB but the big day – the one observed as NORAD‘s anniversary – came on 12 May 1958, when the two countries agreed on the initial 10-year period of joint ops. The agreement also set in place NORAD‘s integrated Cana-dian/US staff.
At the time of its formation, NORAD gained operational control of three US-based air defense forces – Eastern ADF, at Stewart AFB, New York; Central ADF, Richards-Gebaur AFB, Missouri; and Western ADF, Hamilton AFB, California.–along with 16 air divisions and a large number of fighter interceptor and aircraft control and warning squadrons, literally from ―sea to shining sea.‖ The Canadian component included Air Defence Command head-quarters at St Hubert, Que., three air defence control centers – No. 1 ADCC, Lac St Denis, Quebec; No. 2 ADCC, St Margarets, New Brunswick; and No. 3 ADCC, Edgar, Ontario – No. 5 Air Divi-sion at Vancouver, B.C. and a number of all-weather fighter squadrons equipped with the legendary CF-100.
(Continued on page 6)
VC-4 F3D-2. US Navy photo.
6
From Manual to SAGE
While the U.S. had its joint command and control organization, CONAD, and the United States and the Dominion of Canada had its international organization, NORAD, getting SAGE into the field and operational took some time; as anyone who served in ADC at the time can vouch, the process of introducing new technologies and merging the operations of multiple air defense components didn‘t happen overnight.
For starters, ADC established new manual-operations air divi-sions to handle the transition period. In order, these were the 9 th Air Division (Defense), Geiger Field, Washington, 8 October 1954; the 58th AD(D), Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, and 85th AD(D), Andrews AFB, both on 8 September 1955; and the 20th AD(D), Richards-Gebaur AFB, Missouri and 37th AD(D), Truax Field, Wisconsin, both on 8 October 1955. As an aside, ADC also es-tablished the 8th Air Division (Airborne Early Warning & Control) at
McClellan AFB on 1 May 1954, specifi-cally for support of the command‘s growing RC/EC-121 force.
At the already established divi-sions – 25th AD(D), McChord AFB, Washington; 26th AD(D), Roslyn AFS, New York; 27th AD(D), Norton AFB, California; 28th AD(D), Hamilton AFB, California; 29th AD
(D), Malmstrom AFB, Montana; 30th AD(D), Willow Run AFS, Michigan; 31st AD(D), Snelling AFS, Minnesota; 32nd AD(D), Syra-cuse AFS, New York; 33rd AD(D), Oklahoma City AFS, Okla-homa; 34th AD(D), Kirtland AFB, New Mexico; and the 35th AD(D), Dobbins AFB, Georgia, personnel prepared for big changes brought on by the shift to SAGE. Some transferred out of Air De-fense Command while others reported to Keesler AFB for techni-cal training in the new systems. Divisional staffs prepared for the transition to SAGE or, in several cases, inactivation of their divi-sions in favor of new SAGE direction centers at other locations. For all concerned, the pending transition from manual to SAGE operations proved hectic, challenging and, to a certain extent, wistful and reflective, all driven by substantial pride over what America‘s air defenders had accomplished since the start of the Cold War.
Major Martin Neilsen served at the 27th Air Division‘s direction center during the waning days of manual operations. He recalls:
I don‘t remember the TO&E or UMD for the SAGE DCs, but at the 27th Air Division, Norton, it must have been less than 200, although during the two years (1956-1958) I ran the communications shop, we might have had over 130 soles onboard. Probably 100 of these troops were surplus radio operators (293xx?) that had returned from Korea and had little to do, as we had limited HF to the AEW&C and the picket ships. A support squadron provided command functions for admin support, so I did not have a comm., as might have been in the AACS. A WAF squadron was part of the unit strength.
Transition to SAGE (Continued from page 5) The control center was manned by 1744s and ―scope dopes‖ who wrote backwards on the two-story situation board. The 27th, 28th and 25th Air Divisions (Defense) re-ported to Western Air Defense Force at Hamilton AFB. East of 27th AD was the 34th Air Division at Albuquerque, that I have mentioned in a post on one of the radar forums. I do not remember meeting anyone who served there in Albuquerque prior to SAGE (Luke AFB) taking over re-sponsibility for the area mapped by the AAA as ―Indian Country.‖ WADF reported to ADC, maybe in the Chidlaw Building or maybe the old Ent AFB, before Cheyenne Mountain was built by Gen Partridge. The Norton SAGE was built after I left 27 Air Division in May 1958.
Without mess sergeants, motor pool, cops, admin and personnel, the mission would not have been possible.
To be continued
Thanks to: CMSgt Jim Chevrier, USAF(Ret); MSgt Jack Kerr, USAF(Ret), USAF(Ret); Major Martin Neilsen, USAF(Ret); Tom Page, Radomes historian.
Sources: Radomes; The Cold War Museum; CAPT Joseph Bou-chard, USN, ―Guarding the Cold War Ramparts: The US Navy’s Role in Continental Air Defense,‖ Naval War College Review, Summer 1999; Lloyd H. Cornett, Jr, Historical Data of the Aero-space Defense Command, 1946-1973 (Ent AFB, CO: Headquarters Aerospace Defense Command, n.d.); Lincoln Laboratory/Massachusetts Institute of Technology, ―About SAGE,‖ http://www.ll.mit.edu/about/History/SAGE_TOCpage.html; Introduction to AN/FSQ-7 Combat Direction Central and AN/FSQ-8 Combat Control Central, 1 January 1959-15 March 1965 (Kingston, NY: Military Prod-uct Division-International Business Machines Corporation, ca. 1965); ―The Soviet Nuclear Weapons Program,‖ Nuclear Weapon Archive, 12 December 1997, http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Russia/Sovwpnprog.html.
Men at work, SAGE DC-1. Source: Radomes
Sidebar: The “Bomber Gap”
The ―bomber gap‖ - the military and political perception that the Soviet Union was quickly pulling away in numbers of interconti-nental bombers—resulted directly from numbers: the numbers of bombers observed flying over Red Square and Tushino Airfield at events in 1954 and 1955. For example, analysts counted some 20 M-4 bombers during the 1955 Aviation Day parade and quickly increased estimates of Soviet bomber production to 20 new bombers per month.
However, as it turned out, the Soviet Air Force had far fewer flying Bison that day and in fact flew four or so aircraft over the reviewing stand multiple times. The M-4 never worked as a stra-tegic, intercontinental bomber, suffering nine major accidents between 1955 and 1958.
Later U-2 over flights of the Soviet Union convincingly proved the lack of an armada of strategic bombers. In fact, with over 1000 B-47s in service and a rapidly expanding fleet of B-52s, the US had a commanding lead in strategic delivery systems...and then came the ―missile gap.‖
Myasishchev M-4 Bison. Source: FAS,
7
Scavenger Hunt
Radar equipment‘s out there and the AFRMA staff, assisted by Radomes/AFRMA members in the field, are continuing efforts to identify and acquire the equipment for inclusion in the National Air Defense Radar Museum. Here‘s an update on several activities involving members, trucks with trailers, tools and, periodically, some kind of crane:
AN/FPS-90 Temperate Tower
Last summer the AFRMA identified an abandoned temperate tower at the Humboldt Mountain FAA radar site (Z-247/J-29) which formerly housed an FPS-90. AFRMA vice-president Gene McManus contacted the FAA‘s Phoenix District Manager for infor-mation on a possible donation to the museum, with the NADRM assuming all responsibility for disassembly and shipping.
The site first tied-into the Air Force‘s radar network as part of the Southern Air Defense System and later became part of the Joint Surveillance System, with personnel of the 4629th Air De-fense Squadron out of Luke AFB. The ARSR-4 site at Ajo (J-29A) later replaced the Humboldt Mountain facility in the JSS.
As of publication of this edition of Echoes, the AFRMA is await-ing a response from the FAA. Hopefully it‘ll be positive.
AN/FPS-18 Gap-Filler
The museum has struck the proverbial gold in locating and acquiring an FPS-18 gap-filler radar sail plus some additional equipment. Long-time member and mili-tary installations ace researcher/analyst Scott Murdock brought the radar to the attention of AFRMA Inc/Radomes.
The radar‘s at the Rolla, MO, National Airport (KVIH; the WWII Vichy AAF) and is the former Vichy GFA (P-70C/Z-70C), operated by the 798th RADS out of Belle-ville AFS, IL, between August 1959 and some point in 1968. Gene mad contact with owner Terry Clark and reached an agreement for the antenna, pedestal and electronic cabinet; donation of the equip-ment will also assist the airport manage-ment, which has stated its desire to re-
move the radar from the property.
As it stands now, a work party will converge on Rolla sometime after the first of the year. Rich Banta will provide the truck and stake trailer, other AFRMA members in the vicinity of St Louis and Rolla will bring tools and (hopefully) strong backs.
We‘ll keep the membership advised of the progress of this pro-ject. Regrettably, the NADRM will not gain custody of the tower itself but other former GFAs are out there. If any members know owners of GFA properties with surviving towers or other equip-ment, please contact the editor or the AFRMA leadership.
AN/FPS-67B Equipment
On Christmas Eve AFRMA president Jerry Walker received notification of the availability of FPS-67B equipment—minus the
AFRMA/NADRM Update
antenna—at the former Benton AFS in north-east Pennsyl-vania. Appar-ently the equip-ment‘s sched-uled for scrap-ping; Jerry‘s started looking for a POC who can provide information and authorize do-nation of the equipment to the museum.
Again, this will probably result in the dispatching of a NADRM Road Warrior Work Party. The now FAA radar site is located in Ricketts Glenn State Park, approximately 16 miles west of Wilkes-Barre, PA; it served as Benton AFS (P-30/Z-30) under the 648th RADS from October 1951 through June 1975. The Red Rock Job Corps Center now occupies the majority of the old Air Force in-stallation.
Stay tuned for developments. AFRMA and Radomes members in the vicinity of northeastern Pennsylvania should continue to monitor this effort and, if possible, consider joining the work party
when the time comes (Note: Your editor lived in Tunkhannock,
PA, north of Benton AFS from Jan 92-Aug 96 while assigned to Steamtown National Historic Site as the first park historian. Road trip back to NEPA to assist with the work at Benton? Ya sure, you betcha).
FPS-26/FPS 116, San Pedro Hill AFS
And the search continues...Gene recently contacted the FAA concerning the disposition of the former FPS-26/FPS-116 tower at San Pedro Hill, CA. The radome‘s intact and apparently in good condi-tion and would prove an invaluable addition to the National Air Defense Radar Museum.
The radar site (RP-39/Z-39) was operational under the 670th RADS from 1960—when it replaced San Clemente Island AFS (P-39) –through the introduction of the JSS program.
Douglas Klauck, the Surveillance/Weather Support Team Man-ager the Technical Operations Service, National Aerospace Sys-tem Integration & Support Group, notified Gene on 27 December that the FAA would have a response ―soon.‖ As with all of the other projects, we‘ll keep you advised.
Other Prospects
For future monitoring, the FAA is reportedly embarking on a program of modernization and standardization of its older radars
(Continued on page 8)
Photo by Chad Pense
Former Benton AFS, dominated by the old FPS-35
tower, now topped by an FAA FPS-67. Source: Ra-
domes
FPS-26/116 in the foreground.
Source: Radomes
8
Radomes Humor
The reason the Air Force, Army, Navy and Marines bicker amongst themselves is that they don't speak the same language. For instance, take the simple phrase "secure the building:”
The Army will post guards around the place
The Navy will turn out the lights and lock the doors
The Marines will kill everybody inside and set up a headquarters, and
The Air Force will take out a 5 year lease with an option to buy.
(e.g., ARSR-1, ARSR-2, AN/FPS-20 series). Thus, if radar equip-ment is soon to become excess at the former Benton AFS, then equipment may also become available at other FAA long-range radar sites. Again, your AFRMA staff is monitoring but if any member learns of equipment coming up for grabs, please contact the staff immediately. Thanks
Membership, Membership, Membership
Following a November email ―blast,‖ the Air Force Radar Mu-seum Association picked up five new members—four of them lifetime member—as well as a donation of $100 to the treasury. The association now stands at 98 founding members and 111 members and donors.
All who see these proceedings, join up and tell your former squadronmates. Visit www.radomes.org/afrma for more informa-tion and application.
A Request…
I've been searching every resource I can think of to find either detailed drawings or photos of the FPS-3 (20) or FPS-6 radar antennas. If I can locate them, I would like to build scale models for the museum. My experience has led me to believe that, if it didn't fly, the Air Force was not interested in keeping artifacts or information. Bendix Radio was the prime contractor on the FPS-3 and they are long gone, as is most all of their records and docu-mentation.
Shortly before I got out in 1958, I built a scale model radar site with rotating and nodding antennas, etc. At that time all I had to
NADRM Update (Continued from page 7)
Note: Radomes historian Tom Page received the following about a year back. Anyone out there have any additional insight into this project?
Tom—I‘ll start by admitting the events I‘ll relate occurred many years ago so the ol‘ memory may get a bit out of whack, but here goes.
In the mid-sixties, the AF decided to put an automated air defense system in the Ryukyu Islands (RADS) and
gave it the project name 418L. To keep costs down, the system was to use the off-the-shelf BUIC II equipment as much as possi-ble.
The 418L office was under the supervision of the 51st Fighter Interceptor Wing/DO at Naha AB, Okinawa, and was headed by Lt Col Burton Tillett. Team members included Maj Phil Zara (1716), Capt Fred Kennon (1744), Capt Gerald G. Gleckel (3024) and a chief whose name I don‘t recall. I was a 1Lt controller at Yoza Dake (Det 3, 623rd AC&WS) at the time and when another slot was added, I was chosen to PCA to the team in August 1966.
Maj Zara was the software guru, Jerry Gleckel was the comm. Guy, Fred Kennon was the TACS expert and I was the local knowledge guy. The AF assigned the AFSC 1744G for control-lers who were to be assigned to the RADS and I was given a duty AFSC 1744G.
I remember going TDY to the Burroughs plant at or near Valley Forge, PA, to coordinate with their programmers about some of the software glitches in early 1967. Sometime in mid-1967 (memory fuzzy here about the exact time), we received word that the 418L program was being canceled and the equipment we were to use was being diverted to SEA under the project name Seek Dawn. The unit using the equipment was assigned the call sign Motel and was located on Monkey Mountain.
I finished out my remaining months at Naha as an exercise planner in the wing DO shop and went COT to Paddy Control at Bin Thuy AB, RVN, in July 1968—Gene Culp
Thanks Gene, very interesting! I have a couple of questions, if you don‘t mind: did this BUIC-II operation employ the AN/GSA-51 computer system (as was used in ConUS), or did it employ the AN/FYQ-40 computer system, as alluded to by other sources? Do you know?
By the way, just a few days ago, I was looking at ―Google Earth‖ aerial imagery for several sites in Okinawa including Yoza Dake. The radar tower there is now without a radome or radar sail. So, it appears that the Yoza Dake LRR site is now closed.
Thank you once again—Tom Page
We Get Letters: BUIC in Okinawa?
The ADCP at Naha. Photo via the 623rd
AC&WS Association, http://623acw.com.
do was go out the door and look at the originals for detail. The last time I saw that model was on Armed Forces Day of that year at Kirtland AFB. I've never been able to find out what became of it either.
If anyone has any good, quality photos or technical information on the FPS-3, FPS-6 or FPS-20, please contact me at 1827 County Road 3007, Bartlesville, OK 74003 cell (918)331-8094 or [email protected].
Ed Ririe Former SSgt, 769th AC&WS Continental Divide AFS
9
Lockheed Martin's FPS-117 L-band radar provides continuous high-quality surveillance on air targets at ranges out to 250 miles. The radar offers superior performance even in high clutter envi-ronments thanks to its solid-state design and L-band operation. The AN/FPS-117's advanced pencil beam architecture provides exceptional detection and tracking, as well as outstanding adapta-bility to changing environmental conditions (Lockheed Martin press release).
Ed Note: The AN/FPS-117 upgrade will include rebuilding the
NWS site at Lady Franklin Point, Nunavut (PIN-3), which was destroyed by fire on 10 January 2000. A ―new‖ (upgraded) FPS-117 will be installed to replace the earlier destroyed unit.
Canada's air force base in Resolute Bay, Nunavut By David Pugliese Ottawa Citizen December 26, 2011
The Royal Canadian Air Force has looked at a major expansion at Resolute Bay, Nunavut, as it considers transforming it into a key base for Arctic operations, accord-ing to documents obtained by the Ot-tawa Citizen.
The construction of a 3,000-metre paved runway, hangars, fuel installa-tions and other infrastructure has been proposed for the future as part of an effort to support government and mili-tary operations in the North.
Resolute Bay in Nunavut would be able to provide a logistics site for search-and-rescue operations as well as a base for strategic refueling air-craft, according to the briefing from the Arctic Management Office at 1 Cana-dian Air Division, the air force‘s Winnipeg-based command and control division. The briefing was presented in June 2010 and recently released by the Defence Department under the Access to Information law.
The long paved runway would allow fighter aircraft to operate from the site, with the suggestion in the presentation that could
include NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence Com-
mand) jets.
Resolute Bay currently has a 1,981-metre gravel runway, ac-cording to information provided for pilots by the federal govern-ment.
Resolute Bay should be considered for expansion to become a main operating base because it is ―the geostrategic center to the Arctic and [Northwest] Passage‖ and is an ―existing regional sup-ply hub with a permanent population/sea access,‖ according to the briefing. It would be seen as a ―key Arctic regional develop-ment and sovereignty centerpiece,‖ the records add.
The presentation followed a February 2010 Arctic planning di-rective issued by the Chief of the Air Staff Lt.-Gen. Andre Deschamps, who called on the air force to become ―a more rele-vant, responsive, and effective Arctic capable aerospace power.‖
The Conservative government has received kudos from some for paying more attention to the Arctic but critics have raised con-cerns that much of that is based on a military presence while the
Newswire (Continued from page 10) government continues to cut back on science and research in the North.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has emphasized that Canada will increase its military presence in the region, announcing a se-ries of initiatives, ranging from the construction of Arctic and off-shore patrol ships for the navy, an Arctic training centre for troops, and the expansion of the Canadian Rangers.
The Conservatives have also highlighted their decision to spend more than $14-billion on the F-35 stealth fighter as an initiative to protect the country‘s Arctic airspace. Many of the initiatives, how-ever, are still years away from becoming reality.
The RCAF briefing also examined establishing a forward oper-ating base on central Ellesmere Island by expanding the current facilities at Eureka, Nunavut. That initiative proposed adding new facilities and turning the location into a regional asset for govern-ment departments. Also included in the ―FOB Eureka‖ concept is the proposal that the existing airfield be expanded. Creating a Forward Operating Base Eureka could allow the military to down-size or rebuild the existing Canadian Forces Station Alert, accord-ing to the presentation. CFS Alert is on the northeastern tip of Ellesmere Island and is used for the interception of communica-tions.
The presentation noted that Eureka would be easier to sustain as it could be resupplied by sea while Alert has to be resupplied by air. Making Eureka the main Canadian Forces ―very high‖ Arctic station would also allow the military to separate the missions of sovereignty enforcement and the role of communications intercepts, it added.
(An) RCAF email... did note ―the Government of Canada has made Canada‘s North a cornerstone of its agenda through an integrated strategy that promotes sovereignty, economic
a n d s o c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t , e n v i r o n m e n t a l protection, and improved governance in the region.‖
The U.S., however, has a different view, dismissing many of the Arctic announcements by the Conservative government as having little to do with enforcing sovereignty in the North and instead designed to attract votes. ―Conservatives make concern for ‗The North‘ part of their political brand and it works,‖ according to a diplomatic cable produced last year by the U.S. Embassy in Ot-tawa. The cable was made public by WikiLeaks.
Ed Note: The full article‘s available at http://
news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/26/royal-canadian-air-force-mulling-major-nunavut-air-base-expansion-documents-show/.
The Canadian expansion involves operations well north of the former DEW Line/current North Warning System part of the world., although Thule is roughly abeam of the mid portion of Ellesmere Island. Resolute Bay is located on Cornwallis Island in the Qikiqtaaluk Region of Nunavut. Canada and the U.S. built a weather station on the site in 1947, followed by RCAFS Reso-lute Bay.
CFS Alert dates to 1958, still serves in the SigInt/CommInt role and is located at the northeastern tip of Ellesmere Island. It is the northernmost permanently inhabited settlement in the world. Any of you youngsters out there who served in the DEW Line, if you have strong desire to return, the Department of National Defence might just be hiring...
RCAF CC-177 landing at Resolute Bay, 22 Jun 11. RCAF
photo.
10
10
AFRMA, Inc/Radomes The Air Defense Radar Veterans’ Association
9976 Stoudertown Road Baltimore, OH 43105
Which site is this?
(Search inside for answer.)
Radomes Newswire Lockheed Martin to Modernize 29 U.S. Air Force Early
Warning Long-Range Surveillance Radars
SYRACUSE, N.Y., November 07, 2011 -- The U.S. Air Force awarded Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] $46.8 million in contract options to begin modernizing 29 long-range radars which provide advanced warning and air traffic control surveillance over North America's airspace.
Under initial options of the Essential Parts Replacement Pro-gram (EPRP) contract, Lockheed Martin will complete engineer-ing planning and begin to upgrade 29 geographically disbursed AN/FPS-117 long-range surveillance radars. Expected follow-on contract options will replace and update all the radars' signal and data processors to current commercial technology standards, cost effectively extending their operational lives thru 2025.
These FPS-117 radars were originally installed by Lockheed Martin in the early 1980s as part of the Seek Igloo North Warning program. The company has provided several technology up-grades since then.
"Our open architecture approach to L-Band radars provides commonality in supporting and sustaining a fleet of more than 175 long-range radars operational around the world," said Frank Mek-k e r , E P R P p r o g r a m m a n a g e r f o r Lockheed Martin's Mission Systems & Sensors business. "Signal processing upgrades like EPRP are leveraged across this fleet, including the TPS-59, FPS-117, TPS-77, and even our Three D i m e n s i o n a l E x p e d i t i o n a r y L o n g R a n g e Radar (3DELRR), to provide significant lifecycle cost savings for our customers."
In recent years, Lockheed Martin has successfully com-pleted similar radar moderni-zations at sites in the United Kingdom, Germany, Roma-nia and Kuwait.
Under the EPRP contract, Lockheed Martin will mod-ernize 15 radars in Alaska, 11 in Canada, and one each in Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Utah, which are part of the Air Force's Atmospheric Early Warning System, by 2 0 1 4 . T h e c o n t r a c t also includes replacement of the radar site's secondary surveillance radar, used for air traffic control purposes. The EPRP acquisition is being led by the Ogden Air Logistics Center of the Air Force Materiel Command at Hill Air Force Base, Utah.
The NATO-certified AN/FPS-117 radar is the world's most widely used three-dimensional, solid-state radar. Today, FPS-117 and TPS-77, a transportable version of the 117, radar sys-tems are operational in 25 countries. Capable of operating com-pletely unmanned, many have performed for years in remote, inhospitable areas and in a wide range of operational environ-ments.
(Continued on page 9)
AN/FPS-117. Source: LMCO