|
WINFIELD W. SALISBURY AT VARO - GARLAND TEXAS 1958-1965:
Varo, Inc., Garland, Texas, Research and Development In addition, Salisbury developed a system
of obtaining |
|||
|
Winfield W. Salisbury showing |
Winfield W. Salisbury At Varo |
||
 
|
|||
|
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
|
|||
|
VARO'S SPACE ROLE
PROJECT STAR STATUS REPORT
|
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
RADIATION WEAPONS
|
||
|
|||
Letter From Salisbury to Luis Alvarez (click
for full screen) |
|||
| HISTORY OF PROJECT COMET 1. In June, 1958, Dr. W. W. Salisbury of Varo Inc, presented the concept of Project Comet to a National Academy of Science Air Force Summer Study Group at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. The group reviewed and recommended its implementation by the Air Force. 2. On the basis of the merits of the program, and at the request of personnel from Special Weapons Directorate, ARDC Headquarters, in attendance at Woods Hole, Varo presented a concept and plan to Lt. Gen. S. H. Anderson, CGARDC, and Major Gen. Leighton Davis, then Deputy for R&D, in August 1958. 3. Also in August, 1958, Varo made a presentation to ARPAo ARPA indicated a high degree of interest in the program and encouraged Varo to present the program formally to the Air Force, stating that if the Air Force were interested, ARPA would also like to participate, but that ARPA did not have sufficient funds for a program of this magnitude by themselves. 4. Varo submitted an unsolicited proposal on September 22, 1958 to ARDC and ARPA. In addition, Varo presented repeated technical briefings to ARDC and ARPA personnel and to the technical directors of the ARDC centers concerned, reviewing and explaining the concept. In discussions with General Anderson and General Davis, and in the Varo proposal, a program to conduct theoretical studies and experiments to prove, or disprove, the feasibility of the Comet concept was advocated using available hardware to insure minimum expense and a 'minimum of development. The cost of this program was $10,094,810. 5. Emergency funds were solicited by the Air Force from DOD during the Fall of 1958 to carry out the program proposed. The requested funds were withheld, based on a decision that more theoretical research was necessary to determine whether or not the proposed $10 million combined theoretical-experimental program could be justified. History of Project Comet Page 2 6. Responsibility for Project Comet was assigned to RADC by ARDC. Due to the potential magnitude of the program if the ultimate weapon system was proved feasible, RADC split the Varo proposal into an experimental program, Project 5562, and a supplementary theoretical program, Project 5561. In March of 1959, a $9 million five phase contract was awarded to Varo for the experimental facility only. Only Phase I ($96,041.05) of the contract was released, due to lack of FY59 funds. This release of funds was made to avoid delaying the program. Active FY59 contracts in adjacent fields were re-oriented to provide theoretical support under 5561. 7. The necessary funds were included in FY60 budget for continuation of Varo's contract (Project 5562) and the theoretical studies (Project 5561) as recommended by HADC and ARDC, but as a result of a review by an Air Force SAB group, funding of the experimental facility (Project 5562) was withheld, pending further theoretical study. 8. In September, 1959, HADC awarded a contract to New York University to create a special committee to study the concept and to accumulate and analyze technical output of the theoretical programs in process for RADC. In addition to the original $96,041.05, Varo's contract was further amended to add funds of $83,983.87 to cover interim work, awaiting release of Project 5562. Inasmuch as the decision was made not to continue Project 5562, no additional funding has been given to the original contract. It is understood that, in addition to the contract with New York University, 17 contracts with other companies were sponsored for theoretical work, and FY60 funds of approximately $5t million were committed to the program. 9. Upon the suspension of Project 5562 and release of Project 5561, RADC placed theoretical contracts with 27 different companies. Varo was solicited for, and was successful bidder on, one contract to review the work of the other contractors and make recommendations for History of Project Comet Page 3 for future experimental requirements. This contract amounted to $180,024.92. The total amount of approximately $4.2 million was allocated in FY6l funds to the research program. 10. To date, theoretical studies have disclosed nothing to indicate that the original Varo concept is technically unsound. On the contrary, each of the major points within the concept are slowly proving to be correct. The report of the Scientific Committee, established by contract with New York University, has concluded that supplemental facilities will be required before feasibility of the program can be established. Project Comet personnel at HADC have proposed that funds be made available for such a supple mental facility. 11. A new Scientific Advisory Board was appointed, and briefing on the program was given by RADC in March 1961. This group recommended negligible changes in the scope of the program. Hence, it is assumed the funding to be allocated in FY62 is relatively unchanged. 12. Technical analysis of the program has been further complicated due to the circumstances involved. For example, three different Scientific Advisory Boards have reviewed the program. The Commander of ARDC and his Deputy Director for R&D have been changed since submission of the original proposal, and the office of the Direc torate for Advanced Weapons at RADC was eliminated in the reorganization of ARDC. Personnel rotation at RADC, by July of this year, will be such that none of the personnel to whom the proposal was originally submitted will be directly involved. |
|||
| MEMORANDUM
undated For the past three years studies on the principles of certain exotic weapons have been conducted. These weapons are: A. Radiation weapons of limited range B. Radiation weapons of long range for use against IC~Is. The effectiveness of these weapons lies in the fact that they can destroy their objective by producing extremely high temperatures on or at the target. Typical characteristics include: 1. They can be focused so that the energy transmitted is concentrated on the target. 2. Their range could be approximately 2 miles with an antenna measuring 30 feet in diameter. Such weapons could be mounted on a truck or other land vehicle, or installed on board ship. In addition, devices are under development which, when perfected, will reduce the size of the antenna to 30 inches thus permitting it to be airborne. Limited range radiation weapons can also be extremely effective against personnel. Additional capabilities of these are: As an anti-aircraft weapon The destruction of mine fields Illumination of targets by creating a fireball As an anti-tank weapon Wireless power transmission. The feasibility of such weapons can be demonstrated with existing hardware and at a cost of approximately $300,000 for each of the above classes. A third class of radiation weapon, that for use against ICBMs, could have a range as great as 1000 miles. The array transmitting the energy could act as its own radar and would be self focusing so as to remain on the target - 2 - until the target is destroyed. It could handle the problem of decoy missiles since it would simply destroy those as well as the ICBMs with warheads. It should be noted tha.t absolute discrimination between decoy missiles and the true ICBM has not been demonstrated by an anti-missile missile system such as the Nike Zeus. Admittedly the cost of such a weapon would be high, but once built the energy cost per shot would be about $50 and the weapon, unlike the fired anti-missile missile, would still be available for further use. Since this weapon differs basically from the intermediate range radiation weapon only in size and range, it can be used where appropriate for the purposes listed under the intermediate range weapons. For example, it is the perfect long range anti-aircraft weapon. The anti-ICBM radiation weapon is basically defensive and hence could be placed in the territories of our allies without adverse political implications. Radiation weapons have this outstanding characteristic: the destructive energy is transmitted to the target on the line of s ight and with the speed of light. Since the radiation travels with the speed of light, it has an overwhelming advantage over the anti-missile missile which has merely the same speed as the ICBM. Although contractors have spent over one-half million dollars of their own money working on the principles of these weapons and have made numerous presentations to the various services, to date mainly the Air Force has shown any interest and that interest is solely in the long range anti-ICBM radiation weapon. The Air Force contracts have been confined to purely theoretical studies. These studies may take years, whereas it is believed that feasibility can be established for the anti-ICBM weapon in a comparatively short time with experimental equipment using existing hardware at a minimum expense when compared to the anti-missile missile program. No service has shown sufficient interest in the lesser weapons as described above, although they are unquestionably scientifically sound and comparatively inexpensive. - 3 - Many civil servants and scientists in the Department of Defense with whom radiation weapons have been discussed seem to be greatly concerned about advocating a substantial program to develop these weapons. In the minds of same, exotic weapons are classified as "science fiction" and the civil servants and scientists apparently fear that they may damage their scientific reputations by such advocacy. They are afraid they might be wrong and are unwilling to take a risk in spite of the almost unlimited potential value of such weapons for our national defense. |
|||
|
ONE- TIME ELECTRONICS ENEMIES Dr. W. W. Salisbury, left, was an American radar expert
during World War II and E. W. A. Troost was his German counterpart. The two met
by chance this weekend at Varo in Garland where Dr. Salisbury is chief
scientist. Mr. Troost is head of advanced development for Telefunken in West
Germany. Here Dr. Salisbury points out an oscilloscope trace to Mr. Troost.-Staff
Photo.
|
|||
