|
Shooting for the Moon
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/2000/so00/so00richelson.html) September/October 2000 Jeffrey T. Richelson |
The idea of weapons in space is nothing new. One early military plan for
nuking the moon was publicized a few months ago with the publication of
Keay Davidson's biography, Carl Sagan: A Life. Early in his career, Sagan
worked for a secret military project researching the idea of detonating a
nuclear device on the lunar surface, just to see what would happen.
Manhattan scientist Edward Teller was also interested, if not directly
involved, in the project. As strange as the idea of blasting the moon was,
however, it was only one of several proposals for the military exploitation
of the moon in the late 1950s. With space flight becoming a reality, both
army and air force planners wanted to establish lunar footholds.
But it was not to be. As Jeffrey Richelson notes in the following article,
dreams of militarizing the moon died in the 1960s. Both the Eisenhower and
Kennedy/Johnson administrations believed the moon should be used solely for
peaceful purposes, principles that were eventually embodied in the Outer
Space Treaty of 1967.
But "what goes around, comes around." Today, the moon is still off-limits,
but military planners at U.S. Space Command believe that near-Earth space
should be equipped with a variety of precision weapons, arguing that if the
United States doesn't put arms in space, someone else will.
Officials at Space Command believe the United States needs to use
near-Earth space to achieve "full spectrum dominance of the battlespace" by
2020. In July, Space Command hosted the Joint Warrior Interoperability
Demonstration, which is designed to improve the ability of the United
States to defend its assets in space.
As Gen. Richard B. Myers put it in April 1999, Space Command needs to
fashion a "space control mission" that will "ensure use of space on our
[U.S.] terms." Myers was commander-in-chief of Space Command when he said
that. Now, as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he is the
nation's second-highest-ranking military officer. That, one suspects, would
gladden the hearts of the military space enthusiasts Jeffrey Richelson
writes about.

The United States had recently suffered another setback in the space race that began with the launch of Sputnik in October 1957. On April 12, 1961, the Soviet Union had become the first nation to place a man in space and in orbit around the Earth. Such feats left the United States and its new president searching for the answer to one basic question: Was there a manned space program the United States could commit itself to with the expectation of beating the Soviets? On April 19, Kennedy asked Vice President Lyndon Johnson, who also served as chairman of his Space Council, to study the question. The report that resulted inescapably pointed to a moon landing as the answer.2
On July 20, 1969, a little more than eight years after Kennedy's address to Congress, a worldwide audience of approximately 600 million watched a live transmission as Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon--a feat no Soviet astronaut would ever accomplish.
Armstrong was joined 30 minutes later by Buzz Aldrin. The two placed a plaque whose inscription included the statement, "We came in peace for all mankind." They also planted the U.S. flag, an act that had been mandated by Congress. The legislation directing the action noted that: "This act is intended as a symbolic gesture of national pride . . . and is not to be construed as a declaration of national appropriation by claim of sovereignty."3
Things had worked out as well as senior officials of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) could have hoped a decade earlier, when they targeted a landing on the moon as the second component of their manned space program. But it was not what some elements of the U.S. Air Force and Army had in mind at all.
Great expectations
Novelists and scientists had been writing about journeys to the moon since
the early seventeenth century. But it was not until the late 1950s that the
technologies existed that allowed scientists to treat space travel as a
realistic possibility. The beginning of the space age was also, according
to Jack Ruina, who served as director of the Advanced Research Projects
Agency (ARPA) under President Kennedy, a time of "great expectations."
Despite the tremendous unknowns surrounding space programs, many believed
that "everything would work."4
The U.S. military services looked at the new arena and envisioned an
assortment of programs: satellite systems to perform reconnaissance,
meteorological, and communication missions; manned space platforms; and
space weapons operating near the Earth. But the visions of the air force
and army did not stop there. The moon, some believed, would be the ultimate
high ground in the battle for strategic supremacy.
One of those who most fervently believed in the military potential of the
moon was the air force's Brig. Gen. Homer A. Boushey. In a late January
1958 address to Washington's Aero Club, Boushey, then the service's deputy
director for research and development (and subsequently its director of
advanced technology), specified two possible military uses of the moon--as
a missile base and as the home of an observatory to spy on developments
within the Soviet Union.
Boushey asserted that missiles fired from the moon--or possibly catapulted
(as in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress)--could be observed
and guided from start to impact (an act not possible on Earth due to its
rotation). The launch sites might even be located on the far side of the
moon, invisible to the most sophisticated of Soviet telescopes.
In addition, the launch sites would present an insoluble problem for Soviet
strategists. An attack on the United States could be observed from the
moon, and "sure and massive retaliation" would follow 48 hours later. If
the Soviets attempted to remove the lunar-based retaliatory force first,
they would have to fire missiles toward the moon two and a half days before
they attacked the United States. Appropriately, parts of Boushey's speech
were published in the February 7, 1958 issue of U.S. News & World Report,
whose cover read, "Why Soviets Plan 'First Blow': What Missiles Mean in Red
Strategy."
Boushey not only told his audience of the strategic advantages of a lunar
missile base, but "with man and his intelligence once established upon the
moon the possibilities of construction and creation of an artificial
environment are virtually unlimited." Energy, rocket fuel, and oxygen could
all be extracted from the moon, he said.
In another forum, Boushey noted a very logical implication of any U.S.
decision to turn the moon into a military base--that the moon would have to
be U.S. property. He observed that the United States should not fail to be
first on the moon. "We cannot afford to come out second in a territorial
race of this magnitude. . . . This outpost, under our control, would be the
best possible guarantee that all of space will indeed be preserved for the
peaceful purposes of man."5
Boushey was not alone in this sentiment. In 1959, Gen. Dwight Black, the
air force's director of guided missiles and special weapons, told Congress,
"I would hate to think that the Russians got to the moon first. The first
nation that does [get there] will probably have a tremendous military
advantage over any potential enemy."6
The army also had its eye on the moon and outer space in 1959. The army's
list of requirements for space, submitted in response to a request from the
director of ARPA, included a number of devices for space transportation and
combat--an "interspace vehicle," a "space patrol vehicle," and a "space
forward command post"--as well as a manned lunar outpost, a lunar assault
vehicle, and a lunar surface vehicle.7
The Military Lunar Base Program
Although a 1958 National Security Council policy document noted the
possible use of the moon for a manned military base, neither the army or
the air force appears to have been given any indication from higher
authorities that their ideas for a militarized moon were likely to be
accepted. But that did not prevent them from pursuing those ideas.
In 1959, the air force had two lunar base studies under way. SR-183 focused
on establishing a lunar observatory that might host photographic and other
optical and electromagnetic sensors targeted on the Earth and near space.
SR-192 focused on a possible "Lunar Strategic System," which might include
a "military bombardment retaliatory capability from a moon base."8 A third
study had an even grander vision: SR-182 was concerned with "Strategic
Interplanetary Systems," which would involve operating vehicles and weapons
beyond the orbit of the moon and other planets for military purposes.9
A number of aerospace firms were involved in these lunar studies. In the
first quarter of 1959, the Air Force Ballistic Missile Division, Wright Air
Development Center, Strategic Air Command, NASA, and the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory were briefed on the lunar base concept by Boeing, Republic
Aviation, Douglas Aircraft, General Electric, and several other firms.
(Earlier, the Martin Cooperation had completed a classified study, Military
Requirements for a Moon Base.) The companies suggested that the whole
program might cost $20 billion. But the authors of the study questioned the
cost and value of an observatory, considering that it would be able to
productively view the Earth for only a small portion of the day.10
Their pessimism was not reflected in one of the ultimate products of the
study efforts, an April 1960 Ballistic Missile Division report that had two
different titles, depending on audience. The first title, Military Lunar
Base Program, was classified; the second, S.R. 183 Lunar Observatory Study,
was not.11
The study concluded that it was "technically feasible" to establish a
manned base on the moon--"that the problems have been analyzed, and logical
and reasonable extensions to the 'state-of-the-art' should provide the
desired techniques and equipments." It noted the tentative conclusions of
the SR-192 effort still in progress: that "the lunar base possesses
strategic value . . . by providing a site where future military deterrent
forces could be located" and that "a military lunar system has potential to
increase our deterrent capability by insuring positive retaliation."12
The study also concluded that the government could defer for three to four
years a final decision on the types of strategic systems to be placed on
the moon (one suggestion was the "Lunar Based Earth Bombardment System"),
but "the program to establish a lunar base must not be delayed and the
initial base design must meet military requirements." The base would have
to be designed as a permanent, underground, completely self-supporting
installation with suitable accommodations to support extended tours of duty
(of seven to nine months) for approximately 20 people.13
The report foresaw a six-phase program. Lunar probes would be followed by
lunar orbiting vehicles, and then a soft landing on the lunar surface. An
unmanned vehicle would land on the moon and return, bringing along a core
sample of the lunar surface. Development of a manned vehicle would be
followed by the first manned expedition to the moon and lunar base
development. The later phase would include construction of a temporary
base, then a permanent underground base, and installation of operational
surveillance equipment. Once the base was completed, a monthly flight to
the moon would be needed to support it.14
The authors of the April 1960 report not only specified the phases of a
lunar base program, but a schedule. They envisioned the first lunar sample
being returned to Earth in November 1964, the first manned landing and
return in August 1967, establishment of a temporary base in November 1967,
and completion of the permanent base in December 1968. The base would
become operational in June 1969.15
Project Horizon
The air force was not the only military service that had been studying the
possibility of a lunar outpost in 1959. In June of that year the Army
Ordnance Missile Command submitted its four-volume Project Horizon report
on the feasibility of a manned lunar base to Army Chief of Staff Maxwell
Taylor. The study, produced by a group headed by Werner von Braun, argued
that a lunar outpost was "required to develop and protect potential United
States interests on the moon, to develop moon-based surveillance of the
Earth and space, in communications relay, and in operations on the surface
of the moon." The lunar base would also serve as a base for exploration of
the moon, for further exploration of space, and for scientific
investigations on the moon.16
The study also argued that the establishment of an outpost was of such
importance that it "should be a special project having an authority and
priority similar to the Manhattan Project." It warned that the Soviet Union
had openly announced that some of its citizens would celebrate the fiftieth
anniversary of the October 1917 revolution on the moon. If the Soviets were
to be the first to establish a moon base, it "would be disastrous to our
nation's prestige and in turn to our democratic philosophy."17
The report envisaged use of the army-developed Saturn rocket to ferry
personnel and supplies to the moon, with the first cargo being delivered in
January 1965. A two-man team would arrive in April, and by November 1966 a
full 12-man task force would be in place. To deliver all the men and
equipment necessary through November 1966, 147 trips to the moon would be
required. In addition to a lunar landing vehicle and a spacecraft to return
personnel to Earth, the Saturn would have to carry materials to construct
an underground base consisting of 10 compartments, as well as nuclear
reactors to provide lighting and air conditioning. In the first full year
of operations, starting in December 1966, another 64 Saturn launches would
be necessary. The estimated cost for the first eight and a half years was
$6 billion.18
As space expert John Logsdon wrote in 1970, those numbers "seem truly
remarkable for their naïveté with the hindsight of 10 years' time, when
five Saturn launches a year, not a month, is above normal activity, and
when the cost of Project Apollo has been placed at $24 billion."19
Lunex

Part of the plan focused on the multitude of technical developments that would have to take place as well as the information that would have to be acquired in order to make the plan a reality. Landing on the moon and launching a return flight were characterized as "difficult development[s]." Much greater knowledge of lunar topography and composition was also needed--areas which, the plan reported, were the subject of ongoing air force projects. Thus, the air force was attempting to determine lunar composition "by means of spectrometric analysis of the natural X-ray fluorescence of the moon due to the bombardment of the lunar surface by solar radiation."20
If things went as planned, a three-man crew would orbit the Earth in April 1965. In July 1966, a three-stage booster, the "Space Launching System," would carry the first cargo payload to the moon--a two-and-a-half day trip. The cargo would be soft-landed (at a rate of approximately 20 feet per second) on the moon by the "Lunar Landing Stage," which was to be capable of "landing on an extremely rough surface." A manned flight around the moon would follow in September 1966.21


While the three men who were to arrive on the moon in August 1967 would not be staying long, the next threesome, scheduled to arrive in January 1968, were to be the first contingent to man a permanent base. It was projected that, at any one time, the permanent base would be the home of 21 men, drawn from a pool of 145. Along with those 145, another 3,677 men and women on Earth would support the Lunex activity--performing launch, instrumentation, supply, support, administrative, and other tasks. Details on the construction and operation of the base were to appear in the apparently yet unreleased Permanent Satellite Base and Logistic Study, which was still being written at the time the Lunar Expedition Plan was issued.23
One implication of both the air force and army plans for the moon, as noted by generals Boushey and Black, was that the United States would have to claim the moon as U.S. property and keep the Soviet Union from landing on it. The Project Horizon study noted that any military operations on the moon "will be difficult to counter by the enemy because of the difficulty of his reaching the moon, if our forces are already present and have [the] means of countering a landing or of neutralizing any hostile forces that have landed." Of course, any attempt to turn the moon into a military base might have spurred a substantial Soviet effort to do the same--or at least to obstruct the U.S. effort.
But despite the intense effort that elements of the air force and army put into studying and planning for lunar outposts, there was no serious possibility that their plans would be approved. In 1958, President Dwight Eisenhower had set the tone for future manned space endeavors when he awarded the responsibility for manned, earth-orbiting space flight to the newly created NASA. He did so for at least two reasons--the absence of a solid military rationale for placing a man in orbit, and his commitment to a "space for peace" policy.24
In 1961, with the change in administrations, the air force hoped its man-in-space ambitions might be realized, as reflected by continuing work on the Lunex Expedition Plan. But the new administration still heeded a 1958 assessment by the President's Scientific Advisory Committee. That panel had produced a pamphlet titled Introduction to Outer Space, which reviewed possible military applications of space. It noted the potential value of communications, reconnaissance, and meteorological satellites, but it was less favorably inclined toward weapons in space. The panel added that "much has been written about space as a future theatre of war," with suggestions like "military bases on the moon," but "most of these schemes . . . appear clumsy and ineffective ways of doing a job."25
Indeed, reconnaissance satellites provided far better and cheaper coverage of the Soviet Union and other terrestrial targets than a lunar observatory could. And the creation of a strategic triad, particularly the buildup of significant land and sea-based missile forces, along with sophisticated warning systems, served to confront Soviet strategic planners with the knowledge that an attack on the United States would result in "sure and massive retaliation," even without U.S. missiles on the moon.
Jeffrey T. Richelson is a senior fellow with the National Security Archive, Washington, D.C., and the author of America's Space Sentinels: DSP Satellites and National Security (1999).
For more details of the Lunex project see "The Lunar Expedition Plan Lunex" from the Headquarters of the Space Systems Division Air Force Systems Command, May 1961.
NOTES: