*HTML is ON *UBB Code is ON Smilies Legend
Smilies Legend
If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.
T O P I C R E V I E WObviousmanMost space buffs know about the launch of Sputnik, and how Von Braun probably could have launched a Jupiter-C with an orbital payload earlier than the Soviets. In fact, they were ordered to place a ballast in the final stage of the Jupiter in case anyone got ideas about 'accidentally' achieving orbit.(Yes, that's not quite correct but it will do for this question.)History tends to record this as being a stuff-up by the US, and being followed by a scramble to catch up after the Sputnik launch.I have another opinion, and would like to hear peoples thoughts on it.The Eisenhower administration was well aware of the capabilities and relative merits of all the competing launch vehicles (Atlas, Vanguard, Jupiter). It would seem - even without hindsight - that the Vanguard option was a poor choice (even considering the political implications of a "German" rocket).During this period, Eisenhower had proposed an "Open Skies" policy with the USSR. This would be a bi-lateral agreement to allow reconnaissance overflight of each other in order to allay fears about weapons development / intentions. The USSR rejected the proposal.The US administration knew well that once orbital flight had been achieved, payloads of 'spy satellites' would soon follow. There was a fear, though, that this 'orbital overflight' might be seen as a violation of sovereign territory by the USSR. The USSR might protest and seek to obtain a ban on intelligence gathering payloads.I believe that the Eisenhower administration purposely 'knobbled' their own orbital attempts until the USSR had achieved orbital flight. Once the USSR had their own payload in orbit, crossing over US territory, they could not easily complain about similar US actions.I think this was actually a very shrewd move by the administration to pave the way for reconnaissance satellites.Comments? Colin AndertonI don't think this is a new theory at all; indeed, this policy by the Eisenhower administration was very clearly revealed when documents from the Sputnik era were declassified in the 90s.With hindsight, it's now clearly the reason why Von Braun and his team were ordered to stop short of orbital flight on 20 September 1956. They could have - and I personally am sure they would have - launched the first satellite on that day, if they'd been allowed to.I wonder whether Von Braun knew why they were being held back? If not, he and his team must have worn their scalps raw by scratching them that day.Colin.SpaceCatI've been doing quite a bit of reading on that era lately- and I'd tend to clarify that the administration did not put the brakes on Jupiter-C with 'hope' that the USSR would orbit first to set the over-fly precedent. Rather, it was a case of 'waiting' for Vanguard so our first orbit would be seen as a totally scientific effort. Sputnik still caught the world by 'surprise.' Fully knowing the potential for satellite reconnaissance, Eisenhower felt the USSR 'did us a favor' by going first and paving the way politically. Von Braun & Co. probably did not get the 'full story' for some years, as there are numerous accounts of their frustrations with the decisions. The administration wanted to assure that all US efforts into space were perceived to be scientific- indeed, recon sats were officially classed as science probes for the next few decades.It's ironic then, as Man In Space efforts began, that Eisenhower smartly insisted that our first astronauts be military test pilots who could certainly do the job and were 'already on the payroll.'ObviousmanThanks for the replies.Opposite sides of the fence.Colin, you mention the documents that would appear to support my theory; any links?Spacecat, are there any online documents I can read regarding your take on it? I haven't had time to go through NSA archives, etc, so if there are specific documents I should read, it would be appreciated.Cheers, and again - thanks to everyone.SpaceCatActually, it's been recent off-line reading that's brought this period to my mind lately - specifically "Light This Candle: The Life and Times of Alan Shepard" by Neal Thompson, "The Race" by James Schefter and "Atlas: The Ultimate Weapon" by Chuck Walker.As for on-line sources- our friend, Dwayne Day has been researching this period and connections between space and intelligence-gathering extensively -- check out his Space Review articles, especially: Tinker, tailor, satellite, spy Bissell's peopleThe spooks and the Sputniks Other places to snoop would of course be the on-line publications section of the NASA History Site, and the Oral History Project section of the JSC site.Hope these give you some leads!DarronLunar rock nutObviousman. I think you should watch this weeks episode of Nova. Sputnik Declassified I believe you will find the answers you are seeking.Terry
(Yes, that's not quite correct but it will do for this question.)
History tends to record this as being a stuff-up by the US, and being followed by a scramble to catch up after the Sputnik launch.
I have another opinion, and would like to hear peoples thoughts on it.
The Eisenhower administration was well aware of the capabilities and relative merits of all the competing launch vehicles (Atlas, Vanguard, Jupiter). It would seem - even without hindsight - that the Vanguard option was a poor choice (even considering the political implications of a "German" rocket).
During this period, Eisenhower had proposed an "Open Skies" policy with the USSR. This would be a bi-lateral agreement to allow reconnaissance overflight of each other in order to allay fears about weapons development / intentions. The USSR rejected the proposal.
The US administration knew well that once orbital flight had been achieved, payloads of 'spy satellites' would soon follow. There was a fear, though, that this 'orbital overflight' might be seen as a violation of sovereign territory by the USSR. The USSR might protest and seek to obtain a ban on intelligence gathering payloads.
I believe that the Eisenhower administration purposely 'knobbled' their own orbital attempts until the USSR had achieved orbital flight. Once the USSR had their own payload in orbit, crossing over US territory, they could not easily complain about similar US actions.
I think this was actually a very shrewd move by the administration to pave the way for reconnaissance satellites.
Comments?
With hindsight, it's now clearly the reason why Von Braun and his team were ordered to stop short of orbital flight on 20 September 1956. They could have - and I personally am sure they would have - launched the first satellite on that day, if they'd been allowed to.
I wonder whether Von Braun knew why they were being held back? If not, he and his team must have worn their scalps raw by scratching them that day.
Colin.
It's ironic then, as Man In Space efforts began, that Eisenhower smartly insisted that our first astronauts be military test pilots who could certainly do the job and were 'already on the payroll.'
Opposite sides of the fence.
Colin, you mention the documents that would appear to support my theory; any links?
Spacecat, are there any online documents I can read regarding your take on it? I haven't had time to go through NSA archives, etc, so if there are specific documents I should read, it would be appreciated.
Cheers, and again - thanks to everyone.
As for on-line sources- our friend, Dwayne Day has been researching this period and connections between space and intelligence-gathering extensively -- check out his Space Review articles, especially:
Hope these give you some leads!
Darron
Terry
Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts
Copyright 1999-2024 collectSPACE. All rights reserved.