Return to Home Page

New information is generally placed close to this point.

• Nike Missile Paint
• Dosimeters near warheads?
• Acquisition Radar Vertical Dead Zone?
• Long thin line defense?
• What is the meaning of say AN/FSQ for example?
• Converting Nike to Multiple Target and Multiple Missile capability?
• What about "Ionizing Radiation"? - ?NATO Document?
• What about the survivability of web sites with historical information?
• Would you like pictures of Nike site ???
• Legal? and Safe?
• Source for AN/TPS-1x information?
• How can I get someone's Army records (another page)
• Missile Master
• Deploy Nike systems again?
• Thinking of purchasing a (contaminated) Nike site.
• ... "bunkers ... turned into homes ... sold for millions ... as seen on TV?"
• ... " buying these old complexes and converting them into business and homes. "
• How to get a unit roster?
• About Surface-to-Surface operation
• What is a FUIF?
• ?Nike site tunnels?
• ?Chicago folks resentful about loss of water front?
• ?Old Nike Sites safe radioactively?
• Earth Penetrators?
• Historic Structure Report?
• Site Dismantling?
  
• Radar Interference?
  
• Hercules Post Launch Details?
  
• Was Hercules ever deployed as an ABM (AntiBallisticMissile)?
  
• Cancer caused by NIKE or HAWK radiation?
  
• Where can I get a Nike?
  
• Nike Missions - Low Altitude vs. Surface to Air?
  
• HAWK sites in the U.S.?
  
• 400 Hz and Nike funny nose spike
  
• Site Uniformity?
  
• Zero Length Launcher?
  
• "Special Weapon" Security?
  
• How big is a Nike site?
  
• SAGE computer?
  
• It sounds so automatic and boring --
  
• Got any info on Zeus, Spartan, Sprint?
  
• Is there any information about Bomarc?
  
• Can I get a Nike for display?
  
• What is "SOS"?
  
• Who uses NIKE systems currently?
  
• Mobile Nike?
  
• Mission of Ft. Bliss, Red Canyon, McGregor?
  
• Nike missile and launcher for sale?
  
• "... come on, tell us Ed! -- where ARE those UFO Records!!!!! :-)"
  
• Do you have information about European Nike sites?
  
• Do you have biographical information on Percy Spencer?
  
• Do you have information on "off-shore" or foreign Nike sites?
  
• Nike Manning Requirements
  
• How many missiles per Nike site?
  
• Another National Park Service Nike site? (No)
  
• Why did the Ajax have three warheads?
  
• Was a Nike ever fired at a "hostile" target?
  
• Nike vs Russian SA-2?
  
• How to get Nike Parts?
  
• How are missiles and warheads selected for firing?
  
• What about surface to surface mode?
  
• Are there Nike Models, Kits, Dimensions?
  
• What is a Warrant Officer?
  
• What about the conventional warheads? storage?
  
• What about the nuclear warheads?
  
• Are there Nike related books available?
  
• Who's financing the restoration of the San Francisco site?
  
• Can I contribute?
  
• How to the keep up a rate of fire while also reloading the launchers?
  
• Is it safe to fire off of the launcher on the elevator?
  
• Could tell me who the NIKE MISSILE was named after?
  
• How do you know it will work since you don't shoot it here?
  
• What is an Analog Computer
  
• How do you convert the radar slant range and antenna angles into Cartesian coordinates?
  
• How do you get the radars to agree the Target/Missile is at the same Height, North, East?
  
• How many tubes are in the computer?
  
• How do you know that the tracking antenna radar beam is parallel to the tracking antenna telescope beam?
  
• What is the Hercules missile data again
  

Nike Missile Paint

From: Chuck Zellers To: ed@ed-thelen.org Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 Ed: I'm trying to find information and pictures regarding all the paint variations for Nike Hercules and Ajax missiles. I've seen OD, white and red boosters. White, red and OD missiles. I want to confirm whether or not if the booster was also painted black. Regards, Chuck Zellers I'm sorry - What is underneath the paint is so fascinating that I totally ignore the visible exterior :-(( I have the unverified impression that it is up to the local commanders what if anything to put on the missiles. I have only two paint tales Our best scrounge "found" some five gallon cans of puke green paint that we slopped onto everything other than antennas. We were in a Chicago park, and wanted to blend in. There was the tale that some poor 2nd loui wanted the antennas to stand tall - and got some unauthorized paint for the M-33 acquisition radar. The radar immediately became non-functional - it couldn't "see" a thing. It turned out that the new paint was radar opaque. It is tough to win 'em all, sometimes ya can't seem to win just one. :-(( Cheers ;-)) Ed Thelen Anyone got better ideas or stories?

Dosimeters near warheads?

----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Milmert" To: Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 4:21 AM Subject: Greetings from a german 225 and questions 2 questions about XL Warheads ... > The following text with an Internet spoke translation program written ! > > Hello Ed, > > Greetings from Germany, read, which is old you in the meantime over 70 > years, and still questions answer, thanks. :-)) still fun :-)) > I was German 225 in Burbach (2. /22), of 75 - 87. Once one exchanged > nearly the entire team of the American soldiers. Soldiers of the new > team said us, which you were allowed to be only one hour in the storage > hall with the XL Warheads. Was there for it a reason, and/or where one > can reread something? I was with the previous (not nuclear capability) Nike called Ajax and know very little about the nuclear rules later. Maybe you could ask http://www.ed-thelen.org/experts.html#Missile Rod VanAusdall cvandall@adelphia.net > In each atomic power plant, and/or in each hospital in the radiology > the personnel carries jet dosimeters, why of the XL Warheads became > and/or install no jet dosimeters carried, within the range? (e.g. > directly on the suction pipe of the guidance below the XL Warheads for > daily examination?) I don't know anything about whether dosimeters were carried by soldiers near, but not working on warheads. I can only guess - From about 1972 to 1988 I worked for Measurex which did paper process control. We used rather powerful nuclear gauges which could form beams of radiation and could really hurt you. When we went near those things we wore film type dosimeter rings on the hands and badges on the body - - you could get your hands into bad places that would not be bad for the rest of your body - - the gauges used electrically controlled shutters to be rather safe, but shutters could be opened by accident, and a shutter could stick open if bad problems These dosimeters would be collected (and new ones issued) every month. The films would be developed and examined for exposure. My guess to the story you heard - a) most dosimeters don't respond well to neutrons b) most resting unopened warheads are not very radioactive and radiate in all directions, don't form beams c) if they don't form beams, one place is about as radioactive as another near a warhead, and time of exposure is a reasonable estimate of total exposure Something like the above - Ed Thelen > Bernd > Rod VanAusdall responded with: No reason and no rule for more than an hour with XL warheads. No reason to monitor on site at battery level. Note that in the early days of the "prime" (read nuclear) warheads there was a requirement to run a test with the T 290A tester we called it a "sniffer" , immediately after opening the warhead can and for the tester, (had a warning bell on it) to remain active and sampling, during the mating operations. This tester was discontinued (late 50s early 60s) because the test was unwarranted by any risk.. Probably the the only warhead that warranted monitoring of ambient air was the W7 which preceded the W 31. I never saw a W7 on site, but have seen them in storage, and there was good reason to monitor them, but nothing subsequent as far sites are continued. There are, of course, procedures for monitoring nuclear weapons in long storage. I doubt if any W7 s exist now. PS I did the the tests at Bikini in 1946 and only a few of us wore dosimeters. We clicked very hot on the way to Pearl Harbor after the two A Tests (one above and one below sea surface)and abandoned the ship to scrap (I guess). If Bikini didn`t get you nothing will (in the way of tests). Glad to see you are still going strong. Keep up good work, Rod van Ausdall

Acquisition Radar Vertical Dead Zone?

From: George Bean gbean@puwaba.com To: Tom Page & Gene McManus @ radomes.org ... >I am trying to understand the vertical beam width of a radar antenna >verses the vertical coverage area and what is done to minimize the blind >spot above the site. For instance the specifications for the HIPAR radar >system, as shown on your site, state that the elevation beam width is >1.3-7.1 degrees and the vertical coverage is 0-60 degrees. Obviously the >narrow beam of a radar antenna is swept in a 360 degree circle to >provide complete horizontal coverage but I haven't been able to find any >similar explanation for the vertical coverage. I haven't personally >observed or seen documentation to indicate that a radar antenna sweeps >vertically to complete its vertical coverage so I don't understand how a >beam width of a few degrees covers as much as 60 degrees of elevation. >Even if the antenna is covering the full 60 degrees of elevation, it >would seem that the blind spot above the antenna would be quite large, >better than a one mile radius at an altitude of 10,000 feet. I realize >that when tracking a hostile intruding aircraft, if it hasn't been dealt >with by the time it gets within a mile you might as well kiss your ass >good bye. In the case of air traffic surveillance radar though, an area >two miles in diameter is a large blind spot. > >Thank you for taking the time to review my message. I would appreciate >any insights you can share with me regarding vertical coverage and >minimizing the blind spot or any resources you can point me toward. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Page responded If the incoming bombers were directly over the radar site, then it would have been way too late! The blind spot was irrelevant. (Of course, adjacent radar sites would have been able to "see" the aircraft.) Still, the idea was to blast them out of the sky well before the bombers reached their targets. ------------------------------------------------------------------- and I [Ed Thelen] just had to pop off with: OK - the up-to-date pro has responded - and is of course operationally (practical) correct. But heck - lets play with the questions a bit, its fun ;-)) a) A bit of practical presentation "theory" Lets say that you "see" an aircraft (missile whatever) at an elevation angle of 89.99 degrees and slant range of 52,800 ft. Your PPI scope will (rightly) show the target at 10 miles range - and give the operator no clue that the target is right over head - *not* at say 1,000 feet over the next town. This distortion at short ranges can be confusing :-)) (Some acquisition radars (including Nike LOPAR and looks like HIPAR) can change the elevation of their main beam by mechanical or electronic means - but the actual elevation information is more like "high" "medium" "low" - lets not get into that.) b) If the radar operator has the MTI (Moving Target Indicator) turned OFF, the target at 10 miles slant range may well be lost in the ground clutter - maybe a blessing ;-)) b+) The FAA usually does not usually "skin track" but depends on a transponder in the cooperating "target". This greatly extends the range of accessing transponders over "skin tracking". In this case, the receiver is not tuned to the transmitted frequency, but the frequency of the responding transponders - and no or very little ground clutter is observed - and the FAA operator is also confused about the actual ground position of the transponder. b++) ain't this fun!?! Except the transponder may well return altitude information and aircraft ID with its return signal. And in theory (I don't know about practice) the signal processing equipment driving the FAA operator's scope could paint the transponder on the actual ground location :-)) c) the "blind spot" above the site is likely not as blind as first considered. Consider the famous "radar equation" where the detectable range of a target is a function of the 1/4th power (forth root) of the transmitted signal power - http://www.ed-thelen.org/ifc_acq.html#stealth Assume the radar can see a uniformly reflective target at 128 miles when the main lobe is pointed at it - a reasonable range - Now - not all the power goes where the radar antenna designer wanted it to go - laws of nature or whatever Lets say that 4096th of the main beam's power intensity goes straight up - I would guess that to be very reasonable. That radar would be able to see our theoretical uniformly reflecting target at 16 miles (straight up) (And I suspect our real target is a heck of a lot more reflective belly to the radar than nose to the radar!) Conclusion - I bet the normal acquisition radar "sees" airplane type objects in the stratosphere straight overhead - ain't that interesting!! Ah gee - I think I've worked this poor thing to death. Hope I didn't screw up the numbers and assumptions too much. Further resources? Well - Merrill L. Skolnik has written a series of radar systems books that are highly regarded. Older editions are reasonably priced, and this kind of stuff hasn't changed much in 50 years. There is more current real fun radar stuff synthetic aperture, side scan mapping, ... Oh yes - "Introduction to Airborne Radar (Aerospace & Radar Systems)" by George W. Stimson will knock your socks off !! (and so will the price.) Cheers Ed Thelen

Long thin line defense?

From: "Tackies" < tackies@yahoo.com > To: > Great web site you created. I have a question, how > come the sites were not located along the beaches and > the Canadian boarder? Seems to me the time the > Russians got close to the major cities it was going to > be to late anyway, so way not head them off over the > oceans? Ah yes - strategic placement, defense in depth, etc. The above is not my strength, but I will give it a try, based upon reading various books. At best life is a series of compromises between dreams and reality - and in spite of liberal quips, military forces are never given "a blank check". They, like all other life forms, have constraints. Most professionals favor "defense in depth" as opposed to say the "Great Wall" of China, (it failed utterly, local corruption opened the gates) and French Maginot line ( - never tested - the Nazis just went around it, why bother). The North American air defense in the cold war was definitely in depth. Very long range radars, - placed far north, (the DEW line - Distant Early Warning) strove for early detection of Soviet aircraft coming over the polar regions from mainland Russia. - placed on "Texas Towers" on the continental shelf off the Atlantic coast. Fighter planes ready to respond to radar warnings. It is remarkably difficult for an Air Force to destroy ALL of the attackers in the confusion of battle. The SAGE system was involved - The Air Force also fielded some sites of the BOMARC antiaircraft missile that had a range of say 400 miles The Nike systems defended "point" targets and depended on the Air Force to largely destroy/break-up Soviet aircraft formations, as in 2) above. The Nike Hercules had a range of about 100 miles, but each battery could only guide 1 Nike at a time - There were about 200 Nike batteries in the U.S. Now - lets spread those 200 Nike batteries along a northern line - say the U.S. Canadian border for better weather and easier supplies (about 2600 miles) and up and down the east and west coasts (about 1300 miles each) That totals about 5200 miles. Say we place the Nike sites along that length say 26 miles apart to allow a little over lap to allow for temporarily defective equipment at a few sites. That would be (oddly) about 200 Nike sites. What do we have? We have a rather brittle defense - If I were Soviet "high command" I would have my bombers fly in a stream over one site until it ran out of missiles - then smile all the way to where ever. They had overrun one or two Nike sites, and could then roam at will. If I were the Soviet "high command", I would have also arrange for some serious problems at that point (a liberal riot, a couple of mortars, a few "hunters") and probably not loose an aircraft to Nike fire. Lets not even consider the Soviets flying low to the ground at that point and being extremely difficult to track. A defense "in depth" gives up distance but usually gains resilience. Russian history has great examples of defense in depth. Napoleon in 1812 and Hitler in 1942 got beaten by the various forces of the Russian "in depth" situation. Not exactly similar, but something to consider. > Patrick Duffy Cheers Ed Thelen

What is the meaning of say AN/FSQ for example?

Peter G Capek asked "What did AN/FSQ stand for?" Thomas E. Page responded http://www.radomes.org/museum/equip/MilStd196ETable.jpg also see http://dsp.dla.mil/ and MIL-STD-196E.pdf. :-))

What about "Ionizing Radiation"? - ?NATO Document?

(added March 3, 2004)) - Well, it appears that the alleged report was so boring that no one, not even the hysteria prone organizations nor legal beagles/jackals, seem to have posted it. Jonas is hoping for a copy in a week or two or ...

Jonas pointed out a German government "Radar Commission Report" http://www.bundeswehr.de/misc/pdf/wir/bericht_radarkommission.pdf
dated July 02, 2003. There appears to be no English translation on-line, and no multi-linguals that I know wanted to translate the 200 page document.

Jonas showed me an English translation of the "Executive Summary" of the the above document. . The alleged "Executive Summary" that was rather non-committal, phrases like "insufficient information" ... but he requested that I not post it because it was not an authorized translation.

So I inadvertently started a tempest in a teapot. - Sorry -
I am removing the easy visibility of Jonas's message until he produces some relevant information that I can share.

What about the survivability of web sites with historical information?

----- Original Message ----- From: Harrington, David B. (Contractor) (DSCR) David.Harrington@dla.mil To: 'ed@ed-thelen.org' > Ed; > ... I became interested with the issue of long term survivability > of the historical information you, and others like yourself, > have amassed. I'd hate to see it lost, as some researcher 100 years > from now might want information. And you have a trove of information. > But even some of your links disappear into the void of 'Error 404'. > I don't claim to have an answer, but have you considered this issue? Indeed I have !! Disappearing links is a major maintenance problem for sites such as mine with lots of links - I sometimes make a local copy (probably illegal as all get out) of particularly useful parts of web sites. I used to ask newspapers for permission to copy - but none ever responded - so I probably court a felony charge for snapshoting their transient stuff. Google does it - and they aren't in the slammer yet - (And if you think this is a problem - try to get permission to make a copy of a degrading tape of software for long defunct computer. Attorneys do not make a living by saying "Yes", they make a living by saying "Hell NO !!! We will sue".) As you may have noticed I am hosting the 40 megabyte John McGrath web site that he - let lapse - There are site snapshot routines that gather all the files linked to from a URL - say someone's home page. An example of this is HTTrack Website Copier http://www.httrack.com/ It can have upto 4 data streams downloading at a time with up to 10 files open concurrently. I can download many sites at over 220 K bytes/second to my hard disk - until the whole site is saved. Then you can manually or schedule to run update differences, loading only those files that have changed since your last update. There is also Brewster Kahle "Internet Archive" http://www.archive.org/ located in San Francisco that has the goal of archiving the Internet - apparently reasonably successful (sites that serve up data from programs triggered by user requests - like Amazon - are not fully covered.) Of course nothing guarentees the survivability of "Internet Archive" and someone has to know what to search for, and I presume other factors. In part, the reason that I claim no copyright on material found on my site is so that folks wishing to use or store the material will not feel threatened. Thanks for the question Ed Thelen > Dave Harrington.

Would you like pictures of Nike site ???

----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Padgitt" > Ed, > I stumbled on your website and was so intrigued by all > of the Nike missile site information that I went and > visited what remains of the one nearest my home (C-72). > I took some digital images and if you're interested, > I'd be happy to send them to you (approx 3 mbytes). > Dave Glad you enjoyed - but images of decomposing anything, - farm houses on the prarie - buildings, people, ... kind of depress me - SF-88 is the place to be ;-)) Then why do I do what I do ?? I have no clue Thanks but no thanks :-)) I'm living in Kalifornia, probably the correct place for me. AH - I have just posted your info onto http://www.ed-thelen.org/exchange.html#pitchures Hope that is OK :-)) Cheers Ed Thelen

Legal? and Safe?

From some "innocent"? person - 8/1/2003 > Hi Ed. > I know someone that started a storage company > in the Nike Missile site in > [location deleted to protect the probably guilty]. > Is this legal or safe to do in your opinion? > Please post in your forum for others to answer as well. > Thanks. I have given your request considerable thought - even wrote tirades about "legal" and "safe" as interpreted by ever bigger government and ever more greedy attorneys and silly juries. However, there is a slicker excuse - I doubt that the readers of this web site are very interested in the current versions of legal and safe. So I respectfully decline to do as you suggest. "Legal" - I emit CO2, H2O, and other pollutants - and I do that secretly - every few seconds - with out a license - a breathing license - yet. "Safe" - can you name anything or anybody that is safe? - safe from anything - towards everything - my loving Golden Retriever has teeth - the mouse in my hand can be thrown, it does not yet carry a warning label "do not eat or swallow this mouse" in all of the earthly languages - Cheers Ed Thelen

Source for AN/TPS-1x information?

From Jerry Kline glklinek@mindspring.com In all my surfing, I have yet to come across any accounts of the marvelous little radar affectionately called "TIPSY." As an OJT operator trained at Ft. Bliss, Texas in 1960, we upgraded to the AN/TPS-1G that summer before shipping out to Korea in late November. Do you have any sources of information regarding this piece of electronic wizardry? Comment by Ed Thelen Actually, surfing/browsing is lots of fun, but not very efficient when looking for one thing - use a search engine such as www.google.com - very powerful - typing in an/tps-1d to GOOGLE, I got 17 good hits including http://www.parcellular.fsnet.co.uk/radarspecs.htm (look about 3/4 down the page ) For an earlier version, the "B", see Bendix AN/TPS-1B Search Radar within the web site Radomes, Inc. :-)) When I was at Ft. Bliss trainning, we were near lots of "TIPSY-Dogs" - AN/TPS-1D - with the big dark green painted antennas - that looked hunchbacked - pipe framing with chicken wire inbetween - and the little shack that I never got into :-(( They looked so rugged and competent - just a comfortable look - but Nike was slicker and much more complicated and interesting -

Missile Master

----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Maloney" > Ed, > ... were all Nike batteries in communication > with Missile Master sites? Nop. I worked in Chicago in the mid 1950s, a) Missile Master hadn't been developed b) we were barely connected to anything. > Is there a list of Missile Master sites somewhere? Not that I know of - Probably a good "next task" for me - And there there was BIRDIE - a lower cost system that (I think) had the same job for smaller defense areas. > Photos? Looking Thanks much Ed Thelen

Deploy Nike systems again?

----- Original Message ----- From: BDev98@aol.com To: ed@ed-thelen.org Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:06 PM Subject: Nike web site: Hello again Ed. You may recall my interest in refitting a Nike site with some new stuff to active status. Like many Nike vets, you were a bit cool on the prospect which is fine though I disagreed. With today's deteriorating situation re N. Korea, has your view changed? We need to get something going I think. Any vet interest in selling such an idea to D.C? I realize any system would be imperfect esp. on short notice and patched from older junk. But many vets say it would have a good chance to work against early generation missiles like the 3rd world is sprouting. This blind hoping isn't right. How about a campaign on your site? Thanks, good health,Brian I replied - I must respectfully disagree - The Nike system was designed with late 1940s technology to intercept high flying aircraft with speeds limited to roughly Mach 2. It did very well with the technologies against those targets. In part, the large heavy Nike Hercules was to transport a large heavy "special" warhead. The Nike retrofits of mid 1970s digitized and transistorized the computer and computer inputs, but the overall system design still reflected the best of the late 1940s. (The retrofit analogy might be the improvement of the tried and true horse&carriage with the horseless carriage - same wheels, suspension, seats, no roof, no windshields, ..., "just" a lighter 2 horsepower gas engine rather than a heavy easily tired 1 horsepower horse.) The Patriot system designed in late 1980s much better utilized the technological improvements since the 1950s. (Carrying on with the analogy, lets use rubber tires, better suspension and shock absorbers, breaks, steering wheel, seats with springs, windows, roof, ... - A real Ford "Model T", I can hardly wait for the "Model A" :-) I understand that the Patriot (as well as the HAWK) have better low altitude capabilities. The threats today seem very different - - a small car carry a "device" - a person carrying an even smaller "device" - rockets with a much smaller "cross-section" than a 1950s bomber, coming in at Mach 10 or 15 - and for the unprepared, the high-jacked aircraft. (Now that passengers recognize that the threat - is not a detour to Cuba, - but being part of a suicide mission, the hihacker with a box cutter will probably not stop passengers from interferring with the hijackers. Specifically, the Sept.11 plane into Pennsylvania farmland.) In my not so humble estimation, the 50 year old design Nike missiles are ill suited to the current threats. I also suspect that hijacking aircraft is now sufficiently publicized/defended that *most* further attacks will be by other methods. You specify N. Korea. - N. Korea has missiles of various ranges. Assuming that N. Korean missiles are in fact launched from N. Korea, as opposed to being launched from "fishing" boats, other land mass, ..., lets examine defending two possible targets. South Korea - aganst multiple SCUD capability N. Korean missiles. A Patriot system is (I presume) much more efficient for the following reasons. one Patriot system can attack multiple targets concurrently. The older technology of the Nike system, with precision tracking and command guidance all the way to intercept, can guide only one Nike missile at a time. Patriot systems are in current production and training. Much lower time, effort, and cost to deploy. The Patriot systems require much lower manpower and support. Their accuracy comes from a completely different homing system, impossible in the Nike days.. Unfortunately, I cannot think of a single advantage of the Nike over the Patriot in attacking SCUD type missiles. See http://www.ed-thelen.org/kill.html I am guessing that a major use of Nike by South Korea is as a precision surface-to-surface missile. See http://ed-thelen.org/faq.html#surface San Francisco (I live near there ;-) Neither Nike nor Patriot (as far as I know) can adequately detect nor intercept an incoming ICBM. I have comments at http://ed-thelen.org/faq.html#ABM So, baring other information, I respectfully disagree. Best Regards Ed Thelen

Thinking of purchasing a (contaminated) Nike site.

Sarah ... wrote > Dear Mr. Thelen: > > I was wondering if you could give me any information on the purchasing > of an old Nike Site and what all it entails. I have heard of one that > is going to be put up for sale shortly and I am interested in the > property. > I have been doing some research on the web trying to find out > as much about them as possible, and was wondering what type of > information you may have in regards to this type of a purchase. I > checked into the Cleanup Projects on FUDS Properties and the property > I'm interested in has a hazardous type of CON/HTRW (containerized > hazardous, toxic, and radioactive wastes, which are mainly in > underground storage tanks), it is not listed as having a risk factor, > and the remedy selected chart has it listed as WDT (waste removal-drums, > tanks, bulk containers), and a status is RA-C (remedial > action-construction) with a note that remedial action is normally > complete at the "construction" phase, which in this case actually > involves a demolition project, but the construction terminology is used > to keep the reporting process consistent. ... > > Sarah ... -------------------------------------------------------- I would not buy ANYTHING that the government has listed in any negative way. You may well have to "clean up" anything that is listed as "hazardous" by any damn fools and/or greedy lawyers/politicians past, present, and future. Bureaucrats think that they are paid to drive YOU crazy, and they may well be. " I'm from Washington. I'm here to help you - " I would stick with something safe like Russian roulette - At least you have a 5/6 chance of survival, (not allowing for gravity and other effects) unless someone cheated and put a few more active rounds in the chambers. The lottery - At least losers don't have to pay again and again for each new administrator or policy change. Don't you read the newspapers? I recently re-visited my old Nike site, C-41, on the lake front near downtown Chicago. In the late 1970s the site was "cleaned up" then obliterated, returned to the Chicago Park District. According to a local historian, there is a rumor that one barrel of something was left in the site after the previous cleanup. According to my informant, $125,000 has been allocated to look for that rumored left over barrel from the previous cleanup. Even allowing for say - $45,000 for Chicago political, mob, and other contributions, - $25,000 for various "permits" and other extortions, - and $25,000 for environmental impact reports, that still leaves $30,000 to look for the rumored barrel. We don't have to find anything - just write a nice report - and maybe start another rumor. Actually best not to find anything - that might possibly embarrass someone, and require contract over-run money to transport the rumored barrel more carefully than atomic warheads to some soon to be designated contaminated site. You and I should be in such a business -- I was just recently listening of a possible LEASE of three acres of the Naval AirField in Silicon Valley by a non-profit museum. Fortunately, potential buyer paid-for searches for burrowing owls, red toed frogs, Mediterranean Fruit Flies, and other endangered or endangering species had yielded nothing. The standard government lease also required any organization that leased the land be responsible for any past, present, and future "contamination" on or under that land - and that was before reading the fine print. Consider that this land was used for naval aircraft operations for about 70 years. And of course today's miracle product is tomorrow's villain, and it will be up to you to pay for the clean up. Additionally, most of silicon valley is contaminated from mercury that was deposited by nature eons ago, in New Almaden, about 15 miles away. various other chemicals used in chip processing over the last 40 years MTBE - a government required gasoline additive. ( I kid you not, we are required to contaminate our environment. In a few years YOU will help fund another SuperFund to clean up the government mandated mess. I will probably be dead. ;-) But I digress - If you want to lead an "interesting" life, go for it ;-)) Cheers Ed Thelen

... "bunkers ... turned into homes ... sold for millions ... as seen on TV?"

Robert Jones wrote: > As a child I remember my father telling stories about playing in > an abandoned Nike missle base in his hometown in South Jersey. > I have become quite interested in these bunkers, and even come > to find that some people have managed to purchase them and > turn them into homes. I have seen the refinished ones on tv, > the ones being sold for millions of dollars, I watch real-estate sales a bit, but have not seen such - Tough trying to talk a woman into living in a cave - (She might want to hang out in cold dark dank Nike magazine during a hot moist New Jersey heat wave - but live in one??? ) > but how on earth > did these people manage to contact the government and > purchase them in the first place? I'm told that dealing with the feds can be an exercise in frustration, but quite a number are on local/county ground. Some (mostly in the mid-west?) are now privately held. > I would like to buy a run down bunker > and refinish it into a home, do you have any > advice on how to do that, or who to contact? Well - if the goal is to make bucks, I would strongly suggest checking "the market" for how many people would like to live in a sub-basement or even a basement. If your goal is to live in one your self, - resale value of your old sub-basement? If you are not planning to live alone, can you find a "significant other" or roommate who shares your idea of living in a cave. "How to do that" a) procurement - personal visits to determine ownership? Search EPA records of ownership might save legwork - b) local construction permits - I couldn't guess - probably have to plow new bureaucratic ground c) practical specifications/plans/construction ???

... " buying these old complexes and converting them into business and homes. "

someone wrote: > My friend and I have heard reports of people buying these old complexes and converting them into business and homes. Your phrase "converting them into business and homes" sounds more than a mite optimistic. Yes, potentially one could use one or more of the old, not-up-to-current-code, buildings for some sort of business. Just as well as any other old, not-up-to-current-code buildings. There is nothing special about the buildings that would warrant the phrase "convert them into a business". Same goes for homes, only more so. At best they were Spartan buildings to house 20 or so single men in each of several large common rooms. One guy belch or pass gas and we all knew about it. We all shared the same toilet area, usually without walls around the toilet stools. Not a very romantic way to live. > If so how can we find info on this? Depends where you are willing to move to. I have a high, nostalgic regard for the Nike equipment and program, but live in a tract house with two bathrooms - good insulation, and a garage - luxurious compared with my old Nike days. > Your help would be appreciated. My e-mail is ...

How to get a unit roster?

? wrote Could you tell me how to get a roster of the men who served in the 513th AAA Msl. Bn.in Poulsbo,Wash. in the years 0f 1956-1958. I was there and would like to look up some old bddies who served then. Thanks a million Mark Morgan wrote Two places to start: the American Legion and VFW. Both have "in search of" sections at the back of their respective magazines although you may have to be a member in order to run a request. I'm not aware of a 513th AAAMBn veteran's association but if I stumble across something I'll send it along. MK

About Surface-to-Surface operation
Rolf D. Goerigk wrote

Please check: The SS procedure. http://www.goerigk-jever.de/special_pro.htm The Baro Fuze, picture #16 on page: http://www.goerigk-jever.de/la-4.htm If you are interested to see parts of the guidance unit (gyros) picture #27: http://www.goerigk-jever.de/la-3.htm If you like to see all of the LA equipment start at: http://www.goerigk-jever.de/la.htm Remember...the "computation team" (usually the ORE-Team) was responsible for the SS calculation. However, we had a team on unit level also. The calculated EL, AZ and RNG data was set at the track console and locked via toggle switches at the EL-operators position (At the top of Lights Control Panel) left to the EL scope. http://www.goerigk-jever.de/histo-rct/museum_g_rct_ttrcons1.jpg A SS mission was only possible with an X-warhead! The missile was aimed at the Hight Displacement (HD) point. The HD value was also calculated by the SS calculation team and set at the computer as the HT value. That`s true for the Final Dive time (FD) also. http://www.goerigk-jever.de/comP_transit.htm That`s all I have Ed! I`m still looking for more SS information but that`s a hard task because the SS mission was handled like "SECRET". Hope the information is of some help.

? FUIF ?
I was "talking" with Chuck Zellers and he mentioned "FUIF". I asked what that was/is and he responded

FUIF stands for Fire Unit Integration Facility. This system was built (I think) by Martin Marietta.  At least they were the civilian company that had the 3rd eschlon maintenance responsibility. The FUIF equipment was indeed a digital to analog system that was used to send data from a Missile Master to each battery.  The data enabled target assignment and coordination of fire activities by Missile Master. A distinct series of symbols were sent indicating each sites assigned target(s), etc.  This information was in addition to the IFF responses from potential targets when the Acquisition and/or ABAR IFF system was used to interrogate targets. Each Nike site had a "FUIF room" which was typically attached behind the building that connected both radar vans. The FUIF info was painted on the Acq PPI scope over the targets displayed. Different symbols painted indicated what kind of target, etc. The FUIF room contained 4 equipment racks, each about 2+ feet wide and over 6 feet high about 1 foot or so deep (as I remember). The left rack contained the digital computer that converted PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) data streams to analog data.  This PCM data came from Missile Master via phone lines. The converted analog data was fed the next 3 racks that were analog computers used to display x,y and h coordinates on the PPI scope.  The analog computer was designated as the Ground Slant Computer. The FUIF room was air conditioned by its own A/C as I remember.  The equipment was never shut off and I believe it ran off of 60 Hz AC as opposed to the radar vans which used 400 Hz. The digital computer was fully transistorized while the Ground Slant Computer was vacuum tube. An interesting side note: I kept ALL my US Army assignment orders, pay vouchers and training diplomas including the one for FUIF training.  Although I kept my Ft Bliss training schematics for the AN/FPS-36/75 radar, I don't remember being allowed to keep any FUIF material...I assume at the time it was classified as Secret...as you may know, most if not all people assigned to a Nike site had to have a Secret clearance. If you have other questions or need clarification of my note, please let me know. . Also, P1 is "Proficiency Pay 1". There was also a P2, depending on your MOS for enlisted people only (I believe). A written test was given each year based on your MOS. P1 awarded an extra $50.00 per month, not bad for the times! Regards, Chuck Zellers

?NIKE Tunnels?
? I presently live virtually next door to [NY-99] with my kids playing in the school yard often. Rumor has it that there were "miles" of underground tunnels and a missile silo. From browsing different sites it does not seem likely? Any ideas? ?
Question from Jay
Answer by ME

> Hi Ed,
> Don't know if you've had a chance to read the  NPG June [2001] Newsletter yet,
> but on pages 8, 9, 10 & 11 in Word, it shows that the residents of
> Chicago and the media newsprint wasn't liking the fact that the new Ajax
> bases were gobbling up their lake shore frontage. The City really wanted
> the AAA gun emplacements to go some place else and then when most were
> upgraded to Ajax sites, it seems it created quite a ruckus. When I read
> that, I thought of you and wondered if you remembered any of the scuttle
> butt then, and did it cause concern to the soldiers like you stationed at
> the lake front sites? 

> Hello Ed,
> 
> Do you know if a resident near an abandoned nike missile site needs to worry 
> at all about radiation? 
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> 
> J 
In a word - NO, not from Nike related activities or mistakes. 

You don't specify 
  a) which Nike site 
  b) which part of a site 
however, 
  a) There were no nuclear "accidents" at any Nike site. 
     see http://ed-thelen.org/history.html#Accidents 
     (Radiation should be same as "background" at any Nike site 
     unless something odd has happened since closing.)
 
  b) There was a radioactive substance in the ATR devices 
     (one per radar system except the HIPAR) i.e. One each 
      in the TTR, MTR, LOPAR, ... 
     (They were used to help keep the transmitter power from 
     damaging the first part of the receiver.) 
     There was a strict rule that if you received one, 
     you had to return one. We did not have spares, 
     they did not seem to fail in service. 
     We were told the ATRhad about the same radioactive power 
     as in a home smoke detector,
     but it was a lot better protected in a tough brass case with thick 
     glass windows. 

     They were essentially match box shaped with dimensions about 
       (please forgive a failing memory) 
       Tracking radars =  1.5" x 1" x 0.5" 
       LOPAR           =  4" x 3" x 1.5" 
        with thick glass windows on the long ends. 

    We were told that essentially no radiation escaped from the sealed 
      unit - but if you were determined and smashed one open 
    a) you would explain that to the Captain and other authorities 

    b) a very slight amount of radioactivity could escape 
       All those have long since been returned to various other 
        facilities. 

    c) There were rumors that the commercial voltage reference tubes 
      ( I think something like 0B75, 0C90 ) 
        were very slightly radioactive 
      - for more reliable starting to conduct/glow - 
      - like maybe one ionizing-particle per second - 
        actually much less than your residential smoke detector. 

      I suppose someone broke one somewhere, 
      and threw the evidence into the trash where it is 
      probably in a "land fill" buried under several 
      illegally trashed smoke detectors - - - - 
so 
     a) I would feel very comfortable living on any Nike site 
         - assuming the weather was nice (no Greenland for me!) 
         - a good library or college near by 
         - friendly neighbors, good city services, ... 
         - (all the usual good stuff :-) 
Cheers 
Ed Thelen

> My question: How does this type of
> interference arise? Does the energy
> directed in one beam from a TTR or MTR
> interfere with others ... or with the
> display equipment?

This certainly is possible.  One thing to keep in mind is that all of the
energy emitted by a radar, radio, or other type of emitting device is not
contained in the "beam."  There are sidelobes, backlobes, back scatter,
reflections, etc. with energy bouncing around all over the place.

> I also wonder if the potential for such
> "interference" had to be considered when
> siting the bases ... or did a 10-mile
> separation mean that there would be no
> problem?

Yes ... No.  Yes, potential interference had to be considered in siting,
not only from other Nike systems but from all other sources.  They also had
to consider possible interference problems when assigning operating
frequencies.  I'm not sure how it was done then, possibly the same as now
but, frequencies are assigned and authorized by an "Area Frequency
Coordinator" which is under the control of the FCC.

No, being 10 miles away didn't prevent interference.  It sure reduced it
significantly but, did not eliminate the possibility.  Thus, continued need
for prudent frequency assignment.
 
> I presume he was referring to the tracking
> radars, not the ACQ/LOPAR.

No.  All radars can experience and cause interference problems.

> What about civilian ATC radars or military
> surveillance (Long Range Radar or Gap Filler
> sites)? I suppose these were all in different
> "bands" or wavelengths so it did not matter.

Being in a different "band" or operating at a different frequency doesn't
mean that interference is not a problem.  Other equipment operating at or
near a harmonic of the assigned frequency may also interfere.

> However, some surveillance radars (the Air
> Force's powerful LRR radar site at Montauk
> AFS at the tip of Long Island, NY, comes
> to mind) did cause interference with television
> reception back in the 1960s, according to
> reports I've read.

That is most likely true.  Keep in mind that all transmitters radiate
outside of their set frequency.  High power radars are more prone to cause
problems than lower power radars.  There is both "in-band" and
"out-of-band" spurious signals radiated.  These can be very disruptive to
other electronics equipment operating in the area without even knowing it. 
Additionally, internal operating frequencies such as the "Intermediate
Frequency" (IF) used in a radar may radiate to some extent and cause
interference with other things.

Additionally, almost anything electronics or electrical may also cause
interference problems.  For example, the computer you are sitting at
reading this is a fairly noisy device.  It in fact emits several signals,
the most predominant of these is its clock frequency.  For example, mine
being a little older than I would like, operates at 133 MHz.  It emits a
signal at 133 MHz among others, some depending on what the system is doing
at the time.  A light switch emits a small noise spike when it is turned
on.  Relays opening and closing produces noise spikes.  Electric motors,
gas filled light bulbs, hair dryers, electric razors, etc. all emit noise. 
One other thing to keep in mind, electronic equipment that emits a certain
frequency signal are also most likely susceptible to interference from that
same frequency.

> Was "interference" of some type a problem at
> Nike sites? Could someone named "Ivan" have
> sat on a hill near a Nike site outside of
> New York City and simply broadcast some type
> of RF which would have prevented a site (or
> sites) from functioning?

What you are talking about here is a special kind of interference called
"jamming."  Whether it was from "Ivan" sitting on a hill, an airplane
circling out some distance from the site radiating (standoff jammer), or a
plane coming straight in radiating an interference signal, it has the same
effect.  That was what all the Electronic Counter-Counter Measures (ECCM)
equipment was in the Nike for.  It caused problems but, did not prevent
sites from functioning.  Especially after the TRR was incorporated into the
system.

Well.  End of basic introduction to a career field in EMC. 
(ElectroMagnetic Compatability)

Doyle Piland

Hello Geert In one word "no". I get this question about every three months from European countries, and there is of course considerable curiosity about the effects of "radiation" in general by the population of most countries. In response to your question, and because of its repeating nature, I am thinking of making a page possibly called - "Radiation, mysteries, "fact", ignorance, and Public Health". As you know, there is also quite a body of "fact", that is repeatable experimental results and predictive mathematical formulas dealing with electromagnetic and other "radiation". Unfortunately, real world answers (except when viewing "cloud chamber" results), are mostly statistical. The probability of ... is ... . There is no way that you can say that this particular wave/particle thing is going to do something that will cause cancer - it gets to be a statistical thing. Among other little problems, there is no general body of knowledge that says that if an x-ray hits this carbon atom in DNA in such and such a way, what bad (or good) thing will happen. At another level we are at empirical "knowledge" or lack of such. If x people are hit by a dose y of some form of ionizing radiation, some will die soon, some will never feel "good" again, some will have kids with genetic problems, some will show no ill effects at all. The same is true even if the dose y is zero. Statistics ... There is little/no public differentiation between: "ionizing radiation" (UltraViolet and above) - big cell damage and mutation "visible radiation" (visible light) that does some chemical changes and some cell damage "heating radiation" (Infrared, radar, power lines) that just seems to heat (or cook) things At least in the U.S., the "person on the street" is pathetically ignorant about the physics of radiation and also statistics, and is happy to listen to, and babble about, an amazing amount of nonsense. A favorite thing is to find two cancer victims living near eachother and near power lines, and using that as proof that power lines cause cancer. - One could wish that life is that simple. Heck - there was a billion dollar legal settlement about breast implants where no correlation of usage to serious problems was demonstrated. Tears and greed won the day. Folk tale When I was in High School (1948ish) I used to sneak into the electronics labs at the University of Minnesota where they were playing with microwave generators. They had some power coming out of a microwave horn. I was advised not to look down the microwave horn and to not put my eyes into the beam. If you put "steel wool" in the beam, it would spark and burn wonderfully. If you put your hand in the beam it would feel warm in about 3 seconds, and soon really uncomfortably hot in about 10 seconds. Yes, I did the steel wool and hand warming experiments, several times. These microwave intensities were over 1,000 higher than found on the *OUTSIDE* of radar antenna systems. (To form a good beam, you must spread the radiation wide and high over the beam forming structure, like an lens, parabola, or phased array.) The Nike TTR had an average power (not pulse power) of about 200 watts. Spread evenly over the 6 foot diameter antenna (a good approximation) the heating value is about 70 watts per square meter. Direct sunlight has about 14 times more heating power per square meter, and many times more capability to do chemical changes in cells.

re: National Guard Museum at Camp Murray, Washington

Question from Patrick Haskett

... Also the museum has alot of photos about the sites at Vashon Island, Kenmore,and Edmonds among others. For real details and a good start you need to email LTC Emory Lehman(ret), the president of the Museum and a good friend. He can put you in contact with all the right people. His email is "enlehman@nwlink.com" By the way we NEED a Nike Hercules for our museum to put on display. How can we get one?

(January 11)
Nike Ajax for auction at e-bay Spotted by(Tom Vaughn)

Question from Kurt Laughlin
> > What was the difference between a LA and a SA mission?
Image of vertical plotting board

Answer from Rolf Dieter Görigk

As you can see on the vert-plot-board -right hand side-,
there was a so called "Dead Zone" and "Low Altitude Zone" or "Region".
The LA-Zone starts at about 20 kyds range and 5 kfeet altitude.
The altitude is raised to 10 kfeet at about 60 kyds.

I can`t remember that we ever used this "option" during "operation".
In the mid 60`s the "option" became obsolete because HAWK was
"invented".
NIKE was used for (mostly) high altitude engagements and the SS-mission.

However, I remember that there were some checks with the computer and
the Low Altitude Mission option.
Actually, it was an electronic smoothing circuitry for the 
erratic low altitude tracking data.
Erractic because of the low "grazing" angle of the track antenna and the
effects of clutter on the track data, pushing the missiles "G"
accelerations to the limits.

Two decades later, after the computer was modified to digital,
it was possible to evaluate the effects of low angle tracking
using the computer "Printout".
It was useless to fire a missile at such a target because of the
IEB - Indicated Error at Burst or "miss-distance".
The above words are true for tracking under ecm conditions also.

Wünsche Euch einen sehr schoenen 2ten Weihnachtstag!

Doyle Piland responded to the above question

I do not believe that were any HAWK units deployed as a part of the
continental US Air Defense - in Pittsburg or anywhere else - except
possibly Florida.

HAWK was assinged to many reserve/national guard units throughout the US
but, were never a part of the active defense scheme.  They were in reserve,
supposedly ready for deployment wherever in the world they were needed.

I have recently talked with several who had careers in HAWK and they know
of no permanent HAWK Air Defense sites in the US.

Doyle Piland

Doyle,

I'm glad that you addressed this issue. I have
also never heard of any Hawk units deployed here
in the states, except for the Miami-Homestead
Defense and sites in the Florida Keys.

There were PLANS to deploy Hawks at 41 tactical 
sites along the Gulf Coast by 1961, which were 
only parly realized when some sites were installed 
in Florida during the Cuban Missile Crisis. There
were some other temporary sites as well.

Hawk missile sites were typically equipped
with 6 launchers, each launcher having 3
missiles.

According to one of my historical books, the
8th Bn., 15th Arty. from Ft. Lewis in Washington
set up Hawk sites at Patrick, MacDill and Homestead
AFBs during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Hercs
of the 2nd. Bn., 52nd. Arty. arrived from Ft. Bliss
soon afterward. All of this was under the 13th
Atry. Group based at Homestead AFB.

After the crisis subsided, permanent sites for 
both Hercules and Hawk were made. Hawk sites
were located at the following locations:

HM-12 Miami/Old Cutler Road
HM-39 Miami/North Canal Drive
HM-59 6-mi. S of Florida City
HM-60 4-mi. SW of Florida City (reloc. to HM-59)
HM-84 7-mi. NNW Homestead AFB

These were in addition to several
Nike Hercules sites in that same area.
Richmond AFS had a Missile Master
and later, a BIRDIE facility for these
sites.


Other Hawk sites were located in the
Key West Defense Area:

KW-10 Boca Chica Key 
KW-15 Sugarloaf Key 
KW-24 Geiger Key 
KW-65 Key West International Airport. 
KW-80 Fleming Key

A Missile Master (and, presumably, later
follow-on systems) located at NAS Key West
coordinated these missile defenses which
remained active until 1979.

These were under the 6th Bn., 65th. Arty
(later, 1st Bn., 65th Arty.).

My source for this information
includes the following book:
   "To Defend and Deter: The Legacy of the
      United States Cold War Missile Program"
   by John C. Lonnquest and David F. Winkler

Thanks for keeping us on the "straight and
narrow" with our history, Doyle!

Regards,

Don B.

Question from Kurt Laughlin
Answers by Ed Thelen

> Two technical questions: 
> Why was 400Hz electrical power used?  
> I once asked an electrical engineer and he said 
> it might be because a higher frequency allows smaller motors 
> to be used for the same power.  Does this sound right?

Yes - more specifically, less iron is needed.
(About 80 percent less iron is required for transformers.)
The subject is a little complicated in the case of motors,
but the results are real.  So 400 Hz is great in situations 
where weight is a big factor.

However, lower frequencies (such as 50 or 60 hertz) 
are preferable for long transmission lines.  
The reduced effects of capacitance and inductance
are helpful here. Interesting world  :-) Many compromises.

> Also: Various HERCULES photos and diagrams appear to show 
> different warhead/instrumentation sections.  

> Some have a plain nose spike, others a "pitch-yaw" weathervane.  
> The foremost antenna "fins" have what look like pitot tubes in 
> some views that are absent in others.  
> Can someone indentify the differences?

Apparently the plain old nose spike is for conventional
warheads, and the fancy nose is for "special" warheads.
I am told that the fancy nose is to help prevent
low bursts of the "special" warheads.

> Thanks,
> 
> KL

Question from Dale

I was up at NF-16 the other day and i was looking around, and I was wondering, is there a uniform site plan for all Nike sites or do they all "go their own way"?

You're right -- they "go their own way" -- with certain limitations. Basically, you have the same "ingredients" at each site (with some variations). The same buildings, radars, generators, missile magazines, mess hall, barracks, and so forth.

However, because the topography of each site is different (flat, hilly, mountainous, etc.) and the exact shape of the available land could differ radically (easy to get in some wide open areas, hard to obtain in built up urban areas) ... and other considerations, the precise ARRANGEMENT of these elements, varied from site to site and these arrangements could be quite different.

So, standardized elements arranged in customized configurations at individual sites (you can say "tactical sites" if you want to sound impressively military and knowledgable about this!) ... ;-)

> B'cuz the IFC is about 1 1/2 miles > away from the rest of the base and I had no idea where to look for the > magazines on the base.

You know that the IFC and Launcher Area HAD to be separated by a minimum of 1,000 yards due to the rapid acceleration of the missiles from the launcher ... any closer and the MTR could not follow the rapidly rising missile, would lose its "lock" on the missile which would then be unguided (and dangerous) and would self-destruct within 2-3 seconds (internal timer).

So ... always 2 separate facilities, sometimes quite close, other times, as much as a few miles apart. At site NY-79/80 where I live, the two sites are about 4 miles apart and in different townships.

> I found a really weird looking water/sewage treatment > plant, along with some other stuff. Were certain sites that were more self > contained than others?

The sewage stuff if pretty much standard at these sites.

More "self-contained". I don't think so. They all had their own power-generation equipment and were self contained in that way. Plus protective equipment, small arms, gas masks, etc. Some US sites had a more protected underground facility at the IFC and Launcher Area to protect crews and equipment, similar to the European Nike sites. See Ronald Erkelens Web site (link from my site or Ed's).

> NF-16 looks like a few Army posts I was staitoned on, > with all of the buildings and facilities (they > even have a field house) I'm lost.....thanx, Dale

Nah ... you're not really lost. Just in need of some additional information. You should take some photos of the site, maybe make or get a map too. You can send them on to me (or to Ed, if he doesn't mind) and he or I will give you some more ideas if you like ...

Hope this helps. Don't hesitate to ask if you have any more questions. Keep in touch!

Question from eyza md. siraj

> I'm a student from Malaysia taking Computer Engineering and I would like
> to seek some information/facts about how the guided missile take
> off/lauch and how we control it. I don't want in details, just tell me
> as short as you can.

Answer from Ed Thelen

The type of launch system the Nike used is called "Zero Length Launcher". After the rocket/missile moves a few inches, it becomes less and less constrained.

In this case, the top holding bracket will have slipped off the launching rail, and the bottom holding bracket will slip off when it slides off the end of the rail.

Many (but not the Nike) rockets launched this way are totally unguided. To help correct for the inevitable off axis thrust and other problems, the aerodynamic fins are usually canted to give the rocket a spinning motion. This helps counter unsymetrical thrust and drag, helping the missile to retain it's original attitude. (Straight up - or a reasonable approximation of it.)

Spinning was not desired in the Nike, and various guidance and control systems were already on board and could be used. In fact they were. Rotation was suppressed during boost using the roll system and the same gyro used to determine "down".

The accelerometers were active, and accelerations to the side were suppressed during boost also.

So - you now have both cases.

Answer from John Meskanick

Team D, 66th USA Artillery Detachment, 5th Artillery Group, SASCOM was made up of the following Officers and Enlisted personnel.

Commanding Officer , usually having the rank of Captain, was responsible for overall administration of the team. Interfaced directly with Headquarters and the German Battery Commander concerning all matters related to operations, security, and special weapons support.

Executive Officer , usually having the rank of 1st Lieutenant acted as the back-up to the Commanding Officer. Acted as the Warhead Officer if one was not formally assigned to the Team. Shared responsibilities as Officer of the Day and controlled special weapon release code books and keys.

Warhead Officer having the rank of 2nd Lieutenant supervised all assembly, inspection, and maintenance of the special weapons. Shared responsibilities as Officer of the Day and controlled special weapon release code books and keys.

Team Sergeant having a rank of E-7 was responsible for daily operations of the Team including supervision of the Security and Assembly Sergeants, Cook, and Team Clerk.

Security Sergeant having a rank of E-6 was responsible for the security force including daily guard mounts, inspections, schedules, and administrative duties. Shared emergency destruct supervisory tasks with Assembly sergeant. Supervised the arms room and maintained all rifle and pistol qualification records.

Assembly Sergeant having a rank of E-6 was responsible for daily overview of special weapon inspection and maintenance. Maintained all records and log books for the special weapons. Shared emergency destruct supervisory tasks with Security Sergeant. Supervised and coordinated all tactical evaluations and drills.

Assembly and Maintenancemen usually have the rank of E-5 were responsible for assembly, inspection, and maintenance of the special weapons. There were three of these individuals assigned to the Team. Shared responsibilities as Charge of Quarters and controlled special weapon release code books and keys. Was responsible for actual opening of PAL locking devices and insertion of arming and mission plugs. Was required to be present in launching area during 30 minute alert status or higher

Clerk having the rank of E-4 was responsible for the day to day administrative duties such as morning reports, records, general typing, communication checks, and office duties.

Cooks have the rank of E-2, E-3 or E-4 were responsible for administration of the messhall, food procurement, preparation, and kitchen detail. There were two of these guys assigned to the Team.

Security Personnel usually having the rank of E-3 and E-4 were responsible for day to day special weapon security. Pulled 24 hour guard shift responsibilities every three days. Controlled all entrance and exit for the launching area exclusion area. Controlled mission and arming plugs along with Assembly men. Performed 30 minute checks on locked missile barns. Were required to be present (two of them armed with M-14's or M-16's) when missile storage building were unlocked or open. Maintained constant radio and land line checks with Headquarters, Administrative area, and IFC. There were 12-16 of these guys assigned to the Team.

General Responsibilities … everyone was required to stand guard duty occasionally to back fill for leaves, sick calls, and other problems. .. everyone was required to perform routine communication checks … rifle and pistol qualification happened every quarter … everyone was required to go on field exercises at least two week per year. Everyone had emergency destruction training and responsibilities.

From Bob (ridr)

Answer from Bud Halsey Site Manager, Nike Site SF-88, GGNRA, National Park Service

You are correct that the overall dimensions of "Nike missile sites" varied quite a bit. You must understand first that a "typical" Nike missile site consisted of three parts: an integrated fire control (IFC) area; a launching area and an administrative area. In many of the sites, the administrative area was co-located with either the IFC or the launching area. This would affect the overall acreage of the "Nike site". The size (acreage) of the launching area was also affected by the number of underground magazines and the physical arrangement of the launcher sections. The size of the different IFCs was also affected by the type and number of radars on the site.

So, it is difficult to generalize about the dimensions or acreage of a "typical" Nike site since there is no such thing as a "typical" site. The overall size of our site (SF-88) is: launching area-approximately 30 acres (with two underground magazines; IFC approximately 7 acres and administrative area--about 1 acre. Other factors that affect the overall size of the Nike sites include the terrain and the location (sites in expensive suburban areas were intentionally made smaller to hold down the cost of buying the land). The use of underground magazines reduced the acreage required for the launching area. For example, the launching areas in the Anchorage or Fairbanks, Alaska sites, where the missiles were stored in separate ABOVE GROUND magazines, had considerably more acreage (about 140 acres) than similar sites in the "lower forty eight".

If your question deals with the size of the underground magazines, you must understand that there were several types of magazines. These include:

        Type Magazine   Length   Width   Comment

        1. Type A       42 feet  63 feet (Ajax only)
        2. Type B       49 feet  60 feet (Ajax only) 
        3. Type B (Mod) 49 feet  60 feet (Universal Ajax & Hercules)
        4. Type B (RS)  49 feet 123 feet (Rising Star - Greenland only)
        5. Type C       42 feet  63 feet (Ajax only)
        6. Type C (Mod) 42 feet  63 feet (Hercules)
        7. Type D       62 feet  68 feet (Hercules)

Note: No Type A magazines were ever built. No Type C magazines were built. Type B Modified and Type C modified were Ajax pits converted to handle the Nike Hercules M-36 launcher. Rising Star pits were employed only at Thule AFB in Greenland. Type D were Nike Hercules only, built in the second "wave" of building, ca. 1960.

If your question deals with how far below ground the magazines are, The answer is about 30 feet. There is a pit below the floor of the magazine about 10 feet below the floor where the sump pump, air and cable conduits and elevator shaft and equipment are located.

From Bob (ridr)

Oh boy, and I worked in the central computer section, you'd think I'd remember all this junk! Yup, made by IBM Federal Systems Division, we studied in Kingston, and I lived in Woodstock in 1962---that Woodstock! There wasn't any free sex going on (that I knew about!), but it was a wonderful little village tucked away in the Catskills.

Let's see---if I remember the real specs you'll laugh your ---backside off, but here goes--and this was absolutely state of the art, remember------word length 16 bits (two words), memory size--> in ferrite core arrays and damn big ones made by hand, 64 k , and a smaller 4 k, (I think). Also huge spinning drums weighing maybe fifty pounds apiece--20 or 30 of them spinning at 3500 RPM, and collecting realtime data from radar sites. The whole system worked in real time, and worked extremely well. Cycle time? Why, the very fastest cycle time that handpicked vacuum tubes could provide---> an astonishing 2 million cycles per second!!!! The main control room had 23,000 indicator lights to watch. Yes that's 23k. They kept track of the actions of 64,000 vacuum tubes.

Image of Sage Weapons Director station, 55 K bytes
Image of a Sage tube section, 55 K bytes

From J.P. Moore

Thought I better explain why Nike not interesting to me. We're only talking Ajax/Herc. What's to excite? Acquire target, push switch, target falls. Ad nauseum. Boring!

On the other hand, Zeus, Spartan, Sprint are very exciting, what little I know of them. Unbelievably fast, so much to do, so little time. Technical problems beyond my comprehension to be solved. Extremely low profile radar targets screaming inbound, glowing white hot, as they unmask from the cloud of debris, decoys, chaff etc. That, I find exciting. Also exciting, the ICBM w/MIRVs.

Comment from Ed Thelen, another aspect - in 1955, life was worrisome.

1. Designing a beam riding missile to follow the TTR radar beam back to us at the Nike site seemed to us in 1956 to be an almost trivial feat. Hell we figured out how to do the optimum path guidance (with rate gyros) for an air-air missile like the Sparrow before it was designed, or at least made public.

   We thought a Russian plane ought to be able to send a missile to follow our radar beam back down to our TTR radar. We figured that we would not see the much smaller missile until it was quite close to us. We were reasonably aware that we would not be paying attention to the close part of the trace on the radar scope if and when they would attack us, we would be watching the plane(s) like hawks. And there was NO comment about that in Army manuals.

2. In 1955, we had never seen jamming. We could imagine all kinds of methods -
   • chaff, rope, angels, of WWII fame
   • broad band noise
   • noise tracking our ACQ and TTR magnetrons
   • spoofing games taking advantage of our fixed pulse rate.
   There was NO comment about that in Army manuals.

3. In 1955, we were physically vulnerable to ANY kind of ground attack. We were in a public park. The fences were less than 100 feet away from the radars and vans.
   • a mortar in the public parking 300 meters away could make mince-meat out of us with NO danger
   • one or two people with 45's or 9 mm pistols could have disabled the vans and killed any opposition from us before we finally found the ammunition for the one 30 cal carbine pop gun that we had.
   There was NO plan or thought of physical defense that would keep out a determined Boy Scout troop. A ground attack coordinated with an air attack would have left any site I know of useless. (Granted, trying to coordinate a ground attack in Chicago with an air attack would have been a tricky balance of spy vs counter-spy. But several independent groups, given action words - like in France in late WWII - ...)

We thought we were in interesting times.

Answer # 1 from J.P. Moore

  Zeus was similar in appearance to
the later Spartan. A 3 stage ABM, "the fastest, quickest accelerating air
defense vehicle ever successfully fired".  Tested in 1962 at Kwajalein, it
intercepted an ICBM.  It repeated this intercept nine more times in test
firings.  In may, 1963, Zeus intercepted a satellite in earth orbit.  Missile
would reach altitude of 200-250 miles within 2 minutes of being fired.  Nuke
WH, yield unknown.

ZEUS STATS

Length:     48 ft
diameter;  60 in.
weight:     40,000 lb
range:       300 mi
alt;           200 mi
guidance;  command via ground radar

In 1963, Zeus was canx, and became a building block for the Nike X Project,
later called Sentinel System, then changed to Safeguard System.

Spartan was a long-range, more powerful version of Zeus.  First fired March
30, 1968, at Kwajalein island.

SPARTAN SPECS

Shape         Canard
length         55 ft
diameter     43 in
weight        33,400 lb
speed         Mach 10
range         460 mi
altitude       300 mi
propellant    solid, 3 stage
guidance     command via ground radar
warhead      5 megaton thermonuke
launcher     monorail

SPRINT

THIS IS WHAT IS SITTING OUT BEHIND THE MUSEUM.  It is a very tall cone.  Ultra
fast, but speed not given.  It does say the missile reached intercept altitude
within seconds after launch!  So fast it heated to white-hot enroute target.
I now believe this is what I saw in the movie.  I remember it was conical.
It is possible, even probable, that Sprint was considerably faster than Zeus.
I do not know how guidance and WH components can be built to withstand such
high G forces. Or the airframe and propellant either, for that matter. I guess
the cone is the ultimate high G shape.   Amazing!!

SPRINT STATS:

shape        cone frustrum
length        27 ft
diameter     4.5 ft at base of cone
weight        7,500 lb
range         25 mi
propellant    solid, 2 stage
guidance     command via radar
warhead      low-kiloton thermonuke
launcher      gas ejection

Now, the Spartan is just an outgrowth of the Nike Ajax ... well, it took many years, millions (billions?) of dollars and a heck of a lot of people and man-hours (people-hours? I'm sure there were women involved ...) to do this, so I guess it's a little bit more, ah, sophisticated than Ajax.

Here's is the URL:

http://www.angelfire.com/ny/mawaspace/safeguarde.html

Question from many over the years

Answer - George Runkle pointed out: The Bomarc Project and The Mighty Bomarc

Question from Errol Porter
... We are looking for a missile that we can mount at Dyess AFB in Abilene Texas and dedicate to the 5th /517th there. Can you give me any help on where to look and who to contact. ...

Answer from Bud Halsey, Manager of Site SF-88L

Errol...
Ed Thelen asked me to reply to your e-mail to him in which you asked about acquiring a Nike Hercules missile for display purposes at Dyess AFB. As you can imagine, they are very difficult to find these days since the United States has not used them for over 14 years now. All missiles remain the property of the US government, so the first place I would begin my search would be the US Army. The US Army Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, AL, is the principal Army agency with responsibility for the Nike missiles. They, perhaps, might know the whereabouts of any remaining Nike missiles in the United States Army. Any missiles the Army might have would also have to be cleared by the Army's Center for Military History in Washington, DC, prior to release to a veterans' organization.

Assuming you might be able to find a Nike Hercules missile under the Army's control (this is not too likely at this late date), you would have to contact the US Army Tank-Automotives and Armaments Command (TACOM) to conduct the transfer loan of a missile to non-federal entities, municipalities or veterans' organizations. A federal law, 10 U.S. C. 2572 (a) deals with these types of loans, and the Army has designated TACOM, with the Center of Military History's approval, as their agent to make these loans.

Having said all of this, perhaps a more practical way to acquire a Nike Hercules missile would be to have your other veterans and yourself search junkyards and scrap metal dealers (who specialize in military surplus) nationwide. There are dealers throughout the country that have parts to old Nike missiles and even a few "reassembled missiles" in their junkyards. Another source, would be municipalities who might have acquired Nike missiles for display in city parks who now no longer want to display them and who might be willing to transfer the loan to your group. A search of American Legion Halls, VFW clubs or other veterans' organizations might also reveal a missile or two. If a state's Army National Guard once manned Nike sites, often they have a "trophy" missile under their control.

This site (SF-88 in the old San Francisco Defense Area) is a National Park, so we have perhaps the highest priority of all governmental agencies in acquiring these obsolete missiles for public display. However, my experience has proven that they are HARD TO FIND, and at this late date they are practically unavailable. In my opinion, junkyards are probably your best source (thats where I get a lot of my Nike equipment).

Keep in mind, even if you can find or procure a Nike Hercules missile, you would most likely need either a launcher or some other way to display it. Also, you would need to work closely with the Air Force if they still own Dyess AFB . Also, don't forget transportation costs, assembly/disassembly costs, etc. Even if the Army has a missile to let you have, they will charge a lot of money to disassemble it, and you also have to pay the shipping charges. Even the National Park Service has to pay the Army these fees and shipping the missiles costs, and we are the federal government also.

I hope my answer is not too pessimistic, but frankly too many years have passed to have a large source of these missiles around. Ten or fifteen years ago, they were probably a lot easier to find. One last consideration, there are still four countries using the Nike Hercules, but even assuming they will soon phase them out of their country's air defenses, we are talking BIG dollars to get one shipped back to Texas if they elect to give or sell one to your group.

If I can be of further assistance to you in this matter, please let me know.
Regards,
Bud Halsey
Site Manager, Nike Site SF-88, GGNRA, National Park Service

PS: Did you know that we sponsor a yearly Reunion/Free Picnic at Site SF-88? All former Nike missilemen, and their families and friends, are invited to the reunion to have a free picnic, see our restoration, renew old acquaintences and swap lies about the "good old days" when they served with Nikes. The annual reunion/picnic is always held on the last Sunday of August. This year, it will be on August 30, 1998 at Nike Site SF-88 in the San Francisco Bay Area. Please let the group that you have reunions with know this, and I would like to see you, or any of your veterans' group, attend our reunion too. BH

E-mail from Frank Martinez
Dear Ed,
Came across this recipe for our favorite breakfast:

S.O.S.
(Chipped Beef on Toast) or (Sh__ on a Shingle)

A half pound of beef may be substituted for the dried chipped bef. In that case, skip the first step in the method. Browning will also take a bit longer.

2 ounces of dried beef
1 tablespoon butter
1 (10 3/4 ounce) can of cream potato soup or cream sauce
2/3 cup of milk, about
Buttered Toast

Pour hot water over dried beef, then drain.

Melt butter in saucepan over medium heat. Add meat and brown lightly, 1 to 2 minutes. Stir in soup and enough milk to keep texture slightly thick but runny. Heat to serving temperature. Serve over buttered toast.

3 to 4 servings. Each servings without toast: 159 calories; 1,757 mg sodium; 24 mg cholesterol; 7 grams of fat; 16 grams carbohydrates; 8 grams protein; 0.30 gram fiber.

Bon Appetit !

---

And from J.P. Moore's book (used with permission)

RED CANYON RANGE CAMP'S
Recipe For The Ultimate
Power Breakfast:
SOS

No one could equal the breakfasts cooked by the chef de cuisine at the Base-Camp Mess Hall, and nothing was better than a steaming batch of SOS heaped on top of toast or hot biscuits and dusted with black pepper. Try this authentic recipe, and send a wake-up call to your taste buds. Serve with steaming hot biscuits, orange marmalade, and canteen cups of camp coffee. The preferred method of cooking SOS is over an open campfire fueled by dried cow-pies and cholla cacti spines. However, it is possible to cook a tolerable though considerably less mouth-watering version on a stove. (Real Desert Rats will not eat 'stove-made' SOS. It lacks the unique essence of the smoldering cow-pies.)

• 1 Pound hamburger meat. If you crave authenticity, don't use the lean stuff.
• 1 Cup cold milk. Still being authentic? Use powdered milk.
• 1 & 1/2 Tablespoons corn starch.
• Garlic powder to taste. This is the secret ingredient. Be generous.
• Salt.
• Black pepper.
• Louisiana Hot Sauce. (Optional but highly recommended. I prefer TABASCO brand.)
  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• In a No. 8 cast iron skillet or Dutch oven, brown the meat, breaking it up into small bits as it cooks. Drain off the grease.
• Add the garlic powder and salt and pepper to taste.
• Put the cold milk and