CHAPTER 11
THE SHUTTLE AND THE MILITARY

Davis, P.O. "Effects of Space Transportation Systems on USAF Roles and Missions." Unpublished thesis written for Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, AL, 1977. This paper asserts that the Shuttle, billed by NASA as an operational vehicle, raises the specter of roles and missions within both the USAF and NASA. Should NASA operate it, or should someone else? The author asserts that USAF should fly the Shuttle and ignores the non-military aspects of the program.

Draper, Alfred C.; Buck, Melvin L.; and Goesch, William H. "A Delta Shuttle Orbiter." Astronautics & Aeronautics. 9 (January 1971): 26-35. This is an excellent technical review of the reasons for developing a delta-wing versus a straight-wing or lifting body orbiter. The authors were engineers for the Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, and their arguments contributed to the decision to change to a delta configuration, giving the military the 2000 mile crossrange capability it needed for military missions.

Finke, R.G., and Donlan, C.J. Continuing Issues (FY79) Regarding DOD Use of Space Transportation System. Arlington, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses, 1979. This important study outlines several key areas relating to the partnership between NASA and the DOD on the use of the Shuttle.

Finke, R.G. Current (FY73) Issues Regarding Reusability of Spacecraft and Upper Stages for Military Missions. Arlington, VA: Institute for Defense Analysis, 1973. This study examines the possible contributions to military space missions of the new capabilities that would be introduced by the Space Shuttle: (1) payload recovery; (2) human presence; and (3) increased payload weight and volume at lower cost. Besides the conventional expendable mode of satellite operations, new modes of retrieval for ground refurbishment and reuse, on-orbit servicing, and on-board payloads become possible. The issue of the degree of reusability of an upper stage (tug) to be developed for use with the Shuttle for high-altitude missions is also examined. Including both transportation and payload cost savings, the results of the analysis could not support, on an economic basis, military use of a reusable tug in preference to an expendable spacecraft with minimum modification and an extended lifetime.

Francis, John J. "Planning for Reusable Launch Vehicles: A New and Necessary Outlook." Air University Review. 19 (November-December 1967): 98-100. This is an early assessment of the need for reusable space vehicles. Oriented toward the military program and not specifically toward NASA, it nonetheless hits at the core concern of the Shuttle, economy of operations through reusable systems.

Galloway, Alec. "Does the Space Shuttle Need Military Backing?" Interavia. 27 (December 1972): 1327-31. This article describes the pros and cons of military support for the Shuttle. According to the author, the Department of Defense is in a difficult position because it must support a technology that it may or may not be able to use. But without that backing, the author contends, the Shuttle could not have been supported in Congress. It concludes with the observation: "As far away as first use of the vehicle may be at this time, survival of the system from attacks against funding may ultimately depend on an agreement on joint uses in the early stages of design."

General Accounting Office. A Second Launch Site for the Shuttle? Washington, DC: General Accounting Office, 1978. This report to Congress by the GAO discusses the pros and cons of establishing a west coast launch site for the Shuttle at Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA.

General Accounting Office. Space Shuttle: The Future of the Vandenberg Launch Site Needs to be Determined. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office, 1988. This report examines the cost of reactivating the Shuttle's Vandenberg launch site.

Gillette, Robert. "Space Shuttle: A Giant Step for NASA and the Military?" Science. 171 (12 March 1971): 991-93. Written before the formal decision to build the Shuttle, and therefore having an air of uncertainty about the direction of the program, Gillette reviews the origins and development of the Shuttle concept through 1970. He also describes some of the configuration ideas and debates the Air Force requirement for high cross-range capability. He questions NASA's commitment to ensure that DOD needs are met: "At a development cost of somewhere between $6 billion and $25 billion, the Shuttle is likely to constitute the most expensive made-to-order gift to the nation's defense by any civilian agency." Defenders argued, Gillette comments, that the military will be the Shuttle's principal user and should therefore ensure that it meets military needs.

Heiss, K.P. "Space Shuttle Economics and U.S. Defence Potentialities." Interavia. 31 (November 1976): 1071-73. This article looks at the cost and organizational aspects of the Shuttle and comments on the hazards and need for back-up launch sites, payload effects, funding, fleet size, and discontinuation of the use of expendable launch vehicles. Heiss notes that the Shuttle will allow more flexibility on mass and volume of payloads, as well as greater capability to retrieve and repair satellites. It has vulnerability to sabotage, blackmail or intervention and the author suggests additional launch sites as the best means of dealing with this threat.

Henry, R.C., and Sloan, Aubrey B. "Space Shuttle and Vandenberg Air Force Base." Air University Review. 27 (September- October 1976): 19-26. This paper discusses the problems of siting Space Shuttle launch and landing facilities, and evaluates studies of acceptable sites. It mentions the constraints of sites-- population, launch azimuths, booster impact zones, buffer zones for communities, and environmental impact. The authors note that the best sites are in coastal zones, as are those that have already been developed somewhat. All of the positive features come together to point toward Vandenberg as the second Shuttle launch site.

Henry, R.C., and Sloan, Aubrey B. "Space Shuttle and Vandenberg Air Force Base." Space World. February 1977, pp. 29-36. This article presents a good overview of the projected use of Vandenberg as a second launch site for the Shuttle. Its use could give NASA a launch capability on either coast and the ready capability to launch polar orbits. Moreover, it would speed the recovery of an orbiter following a landing at Dryden. It is very close in content to the earlier article by the same authors.

Holder, William G. "The Many Faces of the Space Shuttle." Air University Review. 24 (July-August 1973): 23-35. This article discusses the Shuttle program from a general perspective and assesses its military implications.

Johnson, E.W. "Space Transportation System: A Critical Review." Unpublished thesis written for Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, AL, 1974. This paper assesses the potential of the Shuttle program for military use.

Mangold, S.D. "The Space Shuttle: A Historical View from the Air Force Perspective." Thesis, Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell Air Force Base, AL, 1984. This is a simple discussion of the development of the Shuttle, and the interplay of DOD and NASA in that process, written with the biases of the Air Force by a student at an intermediate service school.

Moore, James P. "Partners Today for Tomorrow: The Air Force and the Space Shuttle." Air University Review. 33 (May-June 1982): 20-27. This article assesses the joint aspects of the development and use of the Space Shuttle. Appearing only a few months after the first operational mission of the Shuttle, it especially reviews the military mission of the spacecraft.

Parrington, Lt Col Alan J. "Toward a Rational Space Transportation Architecture." Airpower Journal. 5 (Winter 1991): 47-62. This rambling article considers the military's need for a reliable system of space transportation. After reviewing the physics of satellite orbits, the article discusses the history of space transportation. It notes that compromises on the Shuttle's design have lessened its utility, and the military's continued reliance on expendable launch vehicles is shortsighted. Thus, a new space transportation system is needed that will be able to supply a military-dedicated space station in the twenty-first century.

Sloan, Aubrey B. "Vandenberg Planning for the Space Transportation System." Astronautics & Aeronautics. 19 (November 1981): 44-50. Reviews the Air Force's efforts to develop the facilities required to operate the Shuttle out of Vandenberg Air Force Base. It suggests, somewhat optimistically, that the first such launch will take place there in 1985.

Smith, Bruce A. "Military Space System Applications Increasing." Aviation Week & Space Technology. March 9, 1981, pp. 83-87. This article assesses the role of the Shuttle, and other space programs, in the defense of the United States.

Smith, Bruce A. "Vandenberg Readied for Shuttle Launch." Aviation Week & Space Technology. 7 December 1981, pp. 49-52. This news story deals with the activities required to make Vandenberg a suitable Shuttle launch site, and thereby broaden the options for Shuttle usage.

Steelman, Donald L. "The Air Force and the Space Transportation System." Air University Review. 22 (January-February 1971): 34-41. This article assesses the Shuttle program as it relates both to NASA and to the DOD.

Ulsamer, Edgar. "Space Shuttle, High-Flying Yankee Ingenuity." Space World. June 1977, pp. 18-23. This article discusses the Space Shuttle program from the standpoint of its potential military uses. Ulsamer points out several advantages to the program, particularly its ability to put very large antennae and power sources into space and its retrieval capability. The Shuttle's high payload capability could accelerate the development of space-qualified high-energy laser systems. The Titan III will only be used as a backup to the Shuttle launch system. The author spends considerable time discussing the attributes of the solid- propellant, expendable, high-orbit Interim Upper Stage, able to send payloads beyond geostationary orbit. It would have great capability for the 24 satellite global positioning system then being developed for USAF.

Ulsamer, Edgar. "Space Shuttle Mired in Bureaucratic Feud." Air Force Magazine. September 1980, pp. 72-77. Written from a decided pro-military position, this detailed article reviews the debate among NASA, the DOD, and other federal agencies over the role of the Shuttle. The real issue is whether or not the nation's space policy, open and civilian, should be militarized. The author is convinced that the military advantages of space are important enough to warrant the DOD's primacy there. He refers to those who disagree as "fuzzy thinkers" who do not understand the world, since the world, the focus of the DOD's interest, is not a safe place. Space is the new high-ground and must be exploited to keep the nation safe.

Vandenberg Space Shuttle Launch Complex. Washington, DC: U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 1984. This reports on the hearings before the subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space on 10 September 1984, 98th Cong., 1st Sess., concerning construction deficiencies and quality control failures of the building effort at Vandenberg.

Wisely, Fred H. "The National Space Program and the Space Shuttle: Historical Perspectives-Future Directions." Thesis, National War College, 1981. Argues that the civilian space program under NASA has received the lion's share of the funding and publicity, while the military space program under DOD has been a backwater. This began to change as the Shuttle was developed as the "sole vehicle for future space launches." Assesses what the author considers as the three areas most important for the future: space policy, organizational structures, and hardware. In every case Wisely makes a strong argument for the primacy of the military mission in space and the need to keep those concerns paramount. He argues for a new space act that emphasizes the military aspects of the space mission. He also recommends that a single organization should be developed to manage space programs, one apart from NASA and the DOD that would operate the Shuttle for both. In terms of hardware Wisely argues against the Shuttle as the sole means to enter orbit, suggesting that expendable launch vehicles are also necessary. In the case of a Shuttle failure, he comments, the United States would have no way to launch satellites.