MOL_Project_Notebook_Volume_2_Jul1966 MOL Project Notebook Volume 2 Jul1966
MOL_Project_Notebook_Volume_2_Jul1966 MOL_Project_Notebook_Volume_2_Jul1966
User Manual: MOL_Project_Notebook_Volume_2_Jul1966
Open the PDF directly: View PDF 
.
Page Count: 352
| Download | |
| Open PDF In Browser | View PDF |
IIBM CONFIDENTIAL
I
o
VOLUME - 2
Proiect
Notebook
COpy NO.
69
MANNED
ORBITING
o
LABORATORY
PROGRAM
MOL
•
PROJECT DIRECTOR
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
9045 LINCOLN BLVD.·· LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90045
(~'i
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
CUSTOMER NAlv1E:
Satellite Control Facility
Bird Buifers
Space Systems Division
Inglewood, California
REGION:
GEM
DIS-TRIC'T:
Western
BRANCH:
Los Angeles Westchester
BRANCH MANAGER:
Skip Hoyt
ACCOUNT MANAGER:
Ed Chappelear
DP SALESMEN:
Bob Fairbanks
Bob Krause
Bob Oller
FSD REPRESEN'TA'TIVES:
Johnny Jones
Jim Selfridge
Glen McClure
Section 3. 3. 2
Page 1
IBM CONFID.ENTIA L
BIRD BUFFER CONFIGUR.ATI0N -
'EQ.
ITEM
C
SINGLE
EACH. BB TOTAL
160A Main Frame
1
2250
2250
166-2 Printers
4
690
2760
169-2 Memory (16K)
1
2000
2000
167 Card Reader
1
460
460
603 Tape Drives
4
550
2200
161 On-Line Typewriter
1
262
262
162-3 Data Synchronizer
1
600
600
SYSTEM
SUB TOT.t\L
\
!
Cost per Single BB
* 94,788
10532
**
Computer (Each 10532)
STC BLACK ROOM CONFIGURATION - '160A
USED -FOR CLASSIFIED PROJECT
l60A SYSTEM
264~
028
SUB
TOTAL
*8,000
Approx.
8,000
**
~
...
Section 3. 3. 2
Page B.2/1
272,028
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
e.l
AFSSD has asked if IBM can provide (4) 2250' SI l\!Iod.l
or Mod., 2# for use at the Satellite Test Center. They
have also asked if IBM can provide an interface box to
interface the 2250 to the CDC l60A.
Delivery is required
as soon as possible. ' DP ScheJuling has indicated that a 2250
Mod. 1 may be available between March 15 and A,pril 11 1966.
FSD has developed a ball park price to the customer for the
interface 'box as follows:
(~:
Quantity of 1
$35 1 000
G'uantityof 10
$12 1 000
Quantity of 40
$ 8,000
'
FSDis trying to trim their schedule to meet the 2250
schedule.
Customer wants all equipment GSA but will probably
a'ccept purchase of the interface box.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C.1/1
IBM C01>TFIDE:01TIP_L
c
PRELIMINARY BRIEF OF EXPECTED RFP FROM AFSSD FOR
THE BIRD BUFFER SUBSYSTEM
PART I.
Hardware Configuration and Operational Control
For design purposes, it can be assumed that the primary reason for
updating the bird buffer
sub~ystem.
is to reduce the scope of manual
control over data flow between the STC and the RTS and to facilitate
and expedite the issuance of n?n-programmed commands from the STC
to the RTS and the 'orbiting vehicle.
The present bird buffer subsystem (hereafter call the multiprocessing
subsystem - See Attachment I) will be replaced by a multiprocessing
system (See Attachment II) with shared m.emory.
Memory protect will
be required in order to prevent the destruction of secure data in storage
due to programming errors and to prevent compromising classified
information contained the in the data.
The multiprocessing system
will operate under Executive Monitor (EM) control with the El'v! routing
data to specified locations in core.
The core lock-out feature will
prevent storage from being addressed in unauth,orized (secured)locations.
Control of the STC data handling system will be centered in the multiprocessing subsystem.
Section 3. 3. 2
Although manual overrides will be provided
Page C. 2/1
J
-2-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C\
I
'
all instructions issu~d to the off-line computers (1: the RTS
conlputers
J
and the orbiting vehicle" will pass through and be under
the management, of the EM of the multiprocessing subsystem.
Data channels from the remote sites will feed directly into the processing units under EM control without passing through a Computer
Communications Converter ,(CCC) or switching unit. The functions
presently performed by the CCC and switching unit will be performed
by the CPU's under EM control.
Core-to-core transfer of data
between the multiprocessing subsystem and the off-line computers
will be provided in order to utilize the off-line computing capabilities
during mission operations.
The off-line computers primarily determine
orbit parameter changes, vehicle' command lqads, and telemetry
processing mode tables, based upon predicted latest actual data received
from the RTS's.
"Keys" (Codes - either manual or programmed) can be
maintained in the multiprocessing subsystem. EM to allow off-line
computer access to information stored in locked out (secure) storage
if this information is necessary for computations.
The multiprocessing subsystem will assume more direct control over
the: n TS/ STC 'data flow than is presently being exercised by the bird
c)
'{if
NOTE:
The off-line conlputers are those processors \vhich
pCl"form. computational requirements which are considered non-real
ti~nc
or non-pass mode oriented. These processors mayor m.ay not
til: part of the multiprocessing subsystem, as the customer dictates.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page c. 2/2
'-3-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
buffers. 'The multiprocessing subsystem will operate a set of
diagnostic programs in the prepass mode to ascertain RTS operational readiness and establish the "real time nearl1 condition. During pass
mode the multiprocessing subsystem will transmit all non-programmed
commarrl s and changes to telemetry processing modes, as well as
programmed instructions, t1?-rough direct communication with the RTS
Computers.
During mission operations, all instructions addressed to the multi':'
processing subsystem will originate at the m.ission center, which will
have direct communication with the multiprocessing subsystem EM via
CRT-Keyboard devices.
The Mission Center displays will be driven directly by the multiprocessirig
subsystem.
The displays w,ill be CRT alphanumeric and will have the
capability to present all data from the RTS's necessary for mission
control.
The display capability will be such as to allow the selection of
specific data for display which represent areas of immediate concern or
arects which indicate a need for immediate change from normal operational
modes. Based upon displayed information, the mission director will be
able to issue instructions to the multiprocessing
subsy~tem
(through a
display console) for transmission to the RTS and hence to the orbiting
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/3
-4-
IBM CONFIDEI\fTL~L
vehicle.
The mission director will also be able to direct the off-line
computers" through the multiprocessor subsystem, to perform orbital
parameter updates, ephemeris change's, and processing mode changes in
conjunction with the commands recently issued to the orbiting vehicle
or the RTS Computers. In this manner,J the m.ission center viill be able
to rnaintain software configuration control over the STC data handling
system.
Software configuration control $.t the'RTS Computers will be maintained
by the multiprocessing subsystem at the STC.
The EM in the multi-
processing subsystem will contain a job table which specifies sofhvare
configuration and processing priority at the RTS.
This job table can be
updated in Ifreal time" by commands from the mission center display
console.
The m,ultiprocessing subsystem will be fail-soft and provide a I'graceful
degradation" of mission processing in the event of equipment malfunction.
A voice net from the mission center to the RTS will be
provided for use in the event of "graceful degradation" mode occurrance,
.
or in the necessity of manual override of processing modes during
normal operations.
The system will be
de~igned
so that all communications with the RTS com-
puters and the off-line computers will pass through the multiprocessing
subsystem; however, a voice link will be maintained between the STC
and the RTS in the eventof equipment maulfunction at the STC.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/4
-5-
IBM CONFID2NTIP. . L
SUMMARY
Features to be provided the STC data handling facility \vhich are not
now available in the present bird buffer system.
1.
by a
The Bird buffer subsystem will be replaced
m~ltiprocessin~
system utilizing shared memory
with memory protect.
2.
The m.ultiprocessing subsystem v/ill
~utomatic-
ally ascertain the operational readiness of the remote
«. .
sites and maintain configuration control and processing
\.
priority of the RTS computer programs.
3.
Switching hardware presently utilized at the bird
buffers will be deleted and the RTS data channels can
be selected by the EM of the multiprocessing system for
processing and/or storage.
4.
The r.eal-time multiprocessing subsystem CPU's
will have direct communication with the off-line CPU's
during all phases of operations. If required" a method
will be provided to allow the off-line CPUI s access to
Section 3. 3. 2
Page c. 2/5
-6-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
data stored in secure locations
l
under the scrutiny
of the executive monitor and/ or a manual Control
Console.
5.
All displays for the Mission Center (Mission
director station) will be directly driven by the realtime multiprocessing subsystem CPU's.
6.
The displays will be CRT-Alpha-numericand
will display all information necessary for the system
controller to m.aintain control of all missions. Display
()
consoles and on-line. keyboards
wi~l
be provided for
direct communication back ·to the multiprocessing
subsystem. There 110 equipm.ents will be utilized
by the system controller to issue non-programmed
Commands and processing mode changes through the
multiprocessing subsystem to the RTS Computers.
These instructions will be based upon decisions made
after viewing the CRT displayed information.
7.
The multiprocessing subsystem will be fail-soft
and provide a "graceful degradation" of mission processing in the event of equipment malfunction.
Section 3. 3. 2
A voice
Page C. 2/6
-7-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
net from the mission center to the RTS will be provided for use in
the event of "graceful degradation" mode occurrance.
( "-,," .
,
/
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/7
Attachment -1-
IBM
CONF'IDE1~TUiL
PRESENT BIRD BUFFER SUB-SYSTEM
~
Voice Cornmand.::
To SOC at RTS
~
1
Modem
KG-13
Total
of
Nine
Inputs
--J
I
II
I
;
.
--
Switch Compo Data Select & Cross Connect
Control
1 I
r
I
I60A
Total
of
Six
Camp. Comm. -----C9nverter
I
--B-·u-f-f-e-r--~---------r
Memory
160A
Bird
IMaster Data.
I
HControl Console
--II
I:~O
I
I
-------------------------SDares
J.:
,.... _ _ ..
t
If·
~~
T.
v. :
1
I
166-2
Printers
I
I
!
i
L
I
Section 3. 3. 2
j
j
_~
__ _
'Virleo
Total
--- of
Three
of
Page C. 2/8
'f
J'
~'-'
Display,
N0
. .J
llSSlon
Center
1
_____ _
Secure Area
Compo Select &. Cross Connect
Printer
I
I
I
I
t
J:_ _
i
II
!
I
Plus Two
Buffer
I
Switch
Control
I
I
1
Switch
t Computer
I
J
Attachment -2-
IBM CO:0JFIDENTIP.. L
PROPOSED BIRD BUFFER SUBSYSTEM CONFIGURA TION
t"
\(
MODEM
KG-13
Functionally reproduced as
support dictates
ASU
!_29X:-J
------,
Executi ve
IVIonitor
Program
1._ _ _ _ __
,-
---------
I
L(
I --- -----......
-. -J
~
I
.....
I
I
;
(Loa'd Sharing)
Processors
I
I Off Line
I
I
.....:::J
l
t'fornmand Consple
------~
I
I
for Mission Director(S)
~
1\
~i
I
Computers
R
I
,C:
.1
;
------t>-i A lpho. Numerlc
I Displays
I
!
I
Non-Programmed
MISSION
I
Commands initiate
d
I
by Program Direct or
-
r (Memory
I
Protect)
Shared Memory
CENTER
i
t ,Secure Area
\
- Section 3. 3. 2
Pag-e
c.
2/9
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
PRELIMINARY BRIEF OF EXPECTED RFP FROM AFSSD FOR
THE BIRD BUFFER SUBSYSTEM
PAR T II. Software
The programming system. will be integrated for the new STC multiprocessing
subsystem (MPS).
It will include an Executive Monitor, assembled library
routines, input/ output control program (all peripherals including the 3600' s),
a JOVIAL Compiler, an assembler and a loader. All multiprocessing subsystem programs must operate under control of tre Executive Monitor (EM).
-'
C
•
Executive Monitor Characteristics
The EM will control operations on all multiprocessing
./
CPU's and will permit easy transition between STC modes
of operation by previously scheduled information and modes
of operation dictated by manual operator intervention.
Inform.ation on interrupted in"'1>rocess jobs will be
preserved so that the processing may be completed at a
more propitious time.
The EM should be designed so as
to guarantee the follo-y.ring:
a) Standard comm.unications between the CPU's and
any operator-user.
b) Real-time' access to the MPS library programs to
take full advantage of written, tested code.
Section 3.3.2
Page C. 2/10
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
c) 110 assignment tables with automatic handling
of hardware locations and flags associated with
traps, interrupts and special registers.
d) Standard linkage from object programs and
system programs to comm.only used subroutine s
within the EM.
e) Task assignment to available processors in
prioritized order
I
using a multi-processing
philo sophy.
('
f) Provision of a job execution status report upon
request.
g) Standard job accounting and record keeping
routines for MPS operations.
h) Direct communication with the off-line 3600's in
order to utiliz e the additional computational
capabilities.
•
Multiprocessor Characteristics
A multiplicity of program execution is. heduled by the EM
which also controls the time- sharing of 1/0, memory, and
processors. This should be accomplished by use of a job
Section 3.3. 2
Page C. 2/11
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
table specifying a list of current program.s and their
status, and a m.em.ory map specifying available, in
use, or unavailable (secured) areas.
The EM will
also rnaintain tables containing file inform.ation and
control usage of each 110 device. Accordingly, a single
program should be able to be executed simultaneously by
the two processors utilizing different sets of data.
The
total multiprocessing system should appears as one
computer to the programmer.
•
Compi ler - EM Relationship
Whenever a program has been read into memory for
execution,
specific
program points should enable program
segments to operate in parallel. When these points are
reached, the EM is entered. The action of the EM at these
entrance points depen.ds on the type of executive call m.ade.
The assembler or compiler m.ust be able to accept the
im.perative statements of the programmer which direct the
EM to a course of action and translate these statements into
entrance instructions forthe EM.
In addition, the assembler
must construct all other entrance parameters and a job
table.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page c. 2/12
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
•
Job Table
A Complete set of tables should be loaded by the EM
to guarantee that the m.onitor has knowledge of all
possible parallel processing at that mom.ent.
•
System. Design
Debugging on sim.ulation tools must be available, as
well as the ability to run the program totally on one CPU.
The compiler should not dem.and that the task to be
perform.ed is perform.ed on m.ultiple processors.
Scheduled tasks should be able to be changed in real-tirne.
New tasks should be able to be defined at any tim.e.
Mernory conflicts should be automatically solved when
CPU's are attempting to get to the same mem.ory module.
•
Central
Ilo Control Program
Input and Output to the CPU's will be controlled by a
Central
Ilo control program (lOC) which is, of course,
controlled by the EM.
The IOC will:
a) Control the reading/writing of records
b) Provide for overlapping
Ilo reading, writing and
computing.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/13
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
c
c) Perform. autom.atic blocking and deblocking of
disc file records.
d) Check reading and wri ting errors and correct
program corrigible errors. Error analysis should be
attempted in all cases.
e) Provide sequential and random. processing of data
on the disc files.
f) Schedule the use of disc file arms including automatic handling of arm failure
g) Alter I/ a unit assignm.ents if necessary at execution
time by m.eans of m.anual intervention.
h) Insure that MPS disk packs are properly formatted and
contain standard labels. Labels should be written upon
output and read on input.
i) Check/Process end-of-data file conditions.
j) Write recovery-flags to facilitate restart recovery.
The laC will provide for standard operator program communications. It
m.ust be accessed operationally by on- system programs by m.eans of
appropriate assem.bler/ compiler MACROs.
No program should be able
to initiate I/O directlt without the use of MACRO's.
Execution of MACRO-
constructed instructions will necessitate entry to the Executive" and the
o
Executive will control and monitor the IOC.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page c. 2/14
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-6,0"
(
\
,,/
•
Storage Protection
A storage protection feature shall be provieed to preserve
a program if another erroneously attempts to store over it,
whether the storage medium is core or disc. Storage
operations from either a CPU or Channel will be subject to
this feature.
Programs should be self-checking with program or machine
error producing a unique interrupt condition so that the
cause of the error may be easily ascertained.
Software m.ust autom.atically initiate corrective action to the
fullest possible extent.
Examples of necessary and desirable interrupt conditions are as follows:
A.
Internal (Processor Generated) Interrupts:
1) Illegal instruction executed
2) Halt instruction executed
3) Arithmetic overflow
4) Real-time clock overflow
5) Attempt to write out of bounds
6) Parity error from m.em.ory
7) Interrupt a computer
8) Initiate
Ilo
9) Store interrupt mask register
Section 3. 3. 2
Page c. 2/15
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
"'.vith just one processor functioning.
Thif requiremen. must specifically
guarantee that:
a) 110 activities can be initiated on any channel f}'om any CPU.
b) The EM is not to be permanently associated with any of
CPU I s, nor does it require the complete attention of a whole CPU.
c) CPU's must respond to all types of interrupts, including I/O
interrupts.
To avoid duplicate handling of
II 0
int(~rrupts,
could be designated to receive such interrupts at
d)
~
one CPU
ny one time.
Programs must be capable to operate correctly on either CPU, or
if both are available.
If a system conlponent fails during task execution,
the EM must be able to sense the condition, reassign I/o units" and
continue operations.
If necessary, it should be able to take steps to
service tasks in a degraded rnode.
In particular, it any "CPU fails, the EM must reassign its current task to one,of the
, other
CPU~s.,
Possible methods for notifying the CPU's that another
has mal-
functioned might be:
1.
A unique interrupt signal is generated, by a malfunction which
interrupts the other CPU.S
o
, Section 3. 3. 2
Page c. 2/16
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-8-
2.
The nlalfunction Inakes a status register - ac:iui essable by . one of the
other CPU~·s and tested each time the EM is operate d therein - to
change state.
NOTE: In either case, the EM when operated by the still-functioning CPU
should take note, institute recovery action, and output appropriate alarm
messages.
As rnentioned earlier" the . CPU's nJust be able to recc~ive and act on 1/0
interruptions, but only one CPU is so designate d at anyone time.
When th(:
EM schedules tasks to a CPU, or attempts to find tasks and fails, it deterLlines
C~
which CPU has the lowest priority activity and selects that one to receive 1/0
interruptions, until the next task assignment is considered. If a malfunction
occurs "in the designated CPU, the EM should automatically switch I/O
interrupts to art operable CPU.
If component failure is so serious that full operation cannot continue, the
Executive must decide which functions to perform and delete.
It is
conceiv~.ble
that the type of failure would determine 'which tasks would be performed;
however
J
in
general~
selecting the tasks to be retained would be done: 1) on
the basis of the predetermined priority associated with each task"
or". 2) b,' shift-
ing s"0:-re of the tasks normallyperformed at the multiprocessing CPU to the off "line
;",
.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/17
12/15/65
-9-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
by a combination of 1) and 2).
Job Accounting
Standard job-accounting and record-keeping programs will be provided.
The Executive will account for elapsed time on each CPU and on each
1/0 device according to the Program. (Satellite Project)office. The job
accounting code will be provided at the same time as the job request is
made. During vehicle-related activity" the vehicle number may serve to
correlate to the appropriate accounting code.
()
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/18
12/15/65
---------------
----~---
IBM CONFIDEN'TIAL
PRELIMINARY BRIEF OF EXPECTED RFP FROM AFSSD FOR
THE BIRD BUFFER SUBSYSTEM.
PART III - DISPLAY
The Mission Center is currently the central control point at the STC. it
is in this center that the switches and displays used to monitor the STC
data handling functions are located. This position is operationally manned
by six personnel during real time functions.
Actions are initiated via
voice net to the Bird Buffer subsystem operators and, if necessary, to
the SDC operators at the rem.ote tracking sites. The intent of the expected
RFP will be to establish direct control of the Bird Buffer subsystem from
the display consoles in the Mission Center. Instructions to the rem.ote
site computers will pass through the Bird Buffer subsystem and be under
control of the Executive Monitor. The voice net will be maintained for
emergency communications.
OPERATIONS
A Station Control and Display console (SeDC) will replace the current
Mission Center displays. The
scnc
configuration will consist of three
IBM 2250 Display and Input (Dr) devices. The 2250's will not be dedicated
but Will be provided the capability for "dialing'! the information desired
for display.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/19
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-2The
scnc
will enable the operators of the m.ission center to perform
the following functions:
1 ) Assess the mission need for particuar telemetry
processing modes
2) Configure STC and RTS Computer programs to
accomplish the !leeds expressed in 1).
3)
Control all cO,m.puter processing via the DI keyboard.
4) Monitor all com.puter-output data display, either in an
operational or diagnostic mode.
5) Provide real time data analysis and control.
6) Initiate non-programmed comm.ands which are
necessitated due to real time conditions
UTILIZA TION
Com,puter Control Control of all computer operations may becontrolled
by the 2250 input keyboard, as well as the on-line typewriter. (At any
ti me,
the 2250 operator can lock-out the on-line typewriter as an input
device to the computer).
, Display Makeup., Depending on the type of processing to be performed,
. t~e C,P'.U will generate display tables and input drivers. The tables may
.,
;'~..:":,, '1;\ ',~.
_ •~
',',~"
".
"
,::,b~/.fUled '.wi'tlJ.~·oye~la:y and! or
'
"
.
mission data" and' can be selectedat,aI\Y
. '<:'" "~~,,:~:,, .~.'
,. . '. . '
.'
.
c,
ttixle by soy of th~ 2250 DI's. In effect .. there is no dedicated 2250 DI
,
'Section, 3.3. 2
.
Page C'. 2/20
12/15/65
-~-
- "--'---"'--
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
for any operation, and no concrete or unchangeable total display. The
operator can build and change the display in real time (within the
constraints of the current softwars system) to implement his real time
analyses of data and command control decision. Input drivers can be
called in real time if necessary to effect computer driven activities
(i. e. digital commanding).
Retention of Data.
In addition to data display in real time, the 2250
operators will be able to retain summary information on the 2250' s,
such as Commands transmitted during PASS, or issue instructions for
certain data to be retained "Hard Copy" on the shared on-line printer.
Fail Safe (abbreviated) Operation.
In the event of failure of one 2250,
the remaining 2250 can support the com.plete station operation in an
abbreviated mode. Utilizing the table philosophy noted eariler, this
mode may not be a degraded one.
Lockout Feature. Utilizing the 2250 DI's and input driven m.ethods outlined, it is impossible to initiate erroneous commands. Keyboard
inputs in the configuration and sequence outlined by the driver will be
the'
o~ly
ones accepted, thus preventing the transmission of erroneous
commands to. the STC or RTS Computers.
()
~.
DESIGN"""
The primary design principle employed is to provide the means to, adapt
Page C. 2/21
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
(~
the various missions, or increased operational Com.mand and Control
requirernents through com.puter program. software, rather than through
hardware modifications. Thus, with a sufficiency of computer programs
the Mlission Center operations will be able to maintai n real time mission
control.
A secondary principal employed is the retention of minimum analog andlor
non-computer driven displays to enable"fail- safe" station operation if
the entire data procesing system
is unavailable.
A s the "fail- soft"
reliability of the total IBM STC configuration is proven, all essential
functions of the SeDC could be moved to the 2250 DI's.
IMPLEMENTA TION
Three 2250 model 2 display units will be located in the mission center.
The 2250' s will connect to the MPS through a 2840 Display Control unit.
(see At tachment 1).
The 2840 offers an 8, 192 byte buffer in which to
store images for regeneration purposes. The use of the buffer allows the
display unit to operate concurrently with the MPS, freeing main
storage for other functions. The images are transferred from m.ain
storage to the buffer only once, thus saving storage cycles and channel
time. The buffer is generally used with the character generator and
alphameric keyboard to edit or assemble messages before they are
transferred to the m.ain computer storage. The portion of buffer
o
.
storage to be used for any display unit is program-assignable and can
be varied in size under program control.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page C. 2/22
1/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
The MPS Connection to the 2840 can be to either a multiplexor or
a selector channel. Attachment to the selector channel is preferable,
because of the higher data rates.
When the channel is polling for units having status information, the
2840 services the 2250, Mod.
Section 3. 3. 2
o
2~
units on a priority basis.
Page C. 2/23
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
2250's
I
/
2840
DISPLA Y CONTROL
MULTIPROCESSING SUBSYSTEM
Section 3. 3. 2
Page
c. 2/24
12/15/65
~
~-
SATELLITE C T CENTER DATA SYSTEM
~
rn
CD
0
....
r+
2911
0
3600
::s
STORAGE
W
ELEMENTS
..
64K
CN
N
WORDS
COMPUTE
...----..,1
ELEMENT
./0
CONTROL
3600
ELEMENT
STORAGE
3 - 2401
ELEMENTS
64K
WORDS
./0
COMPUTE
I 1.
3600
1 CONTROL
ELEMENT
ELEMENT
STORAGE
ELEMENTS
64K
L-
WORDS
3600
I/O
COMPUTE
1 I 1
I
CONTROL
ELEMENT
ELEMENT
1M
3 - 2250
1111.11
tit f , I
IIIItI
2911
REMOTE
I-I-II~------'r-------..,..----.
• SWITCH
2911
TRIPLEX 9020 SYSTEM
REMOTE
SWITCH
~t-t1
(1) QI
1443
1;;tQ
...... 0)
~
~()
(1) •
tnN
WN
.....
'en
,I
entt.
0"1,
CO
,
(0
~
en
j'
f~
t~
o
o
~
~
ot!'J
I~
~~
-N
I
()rll.,.-J
r.=-tj LlJ I ~
~
~
\
-,
, II
'I
>\
~
'.
;~
9020 SYSTEM BIRD BUFFER
C~
C
C
Machine
Feature
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Description
Unit
Price
Qtt.
MAC
MAC Total
7251-4
7251-3
7201-1
7231-2
Storage Element-64KW-140K
Storage Element-32KW-74K
Computing Element-190K
I/O Control Element-211K
3,500
1,850
4,750
5,275
2
0
4
3
7,000
0
19,000
15,825
CPUls etc.
41,825
x 115%
48,098
2911-x
2925-x
RPQ
Switching Unit
Switching Unit
Include CCR's in 2925
800
1,500
500
6
1
1
4,800
1,500
500
Switching
Units
6,800
2814-2
2840-1
3351
1003
1499
2250-2
1001
1245
4875
5855
Display Switching Unit
Display Control
Display Multiplexor
Absolute Vectors
Buffer (Add 11 8K for 16K total)
Display Unit
Absolute Vectors
Alphameric Keyboard
Light Pen
Prgmd Function Keyboard
125
1,100
50
125
400
350
225
50
75
100
1
5
5
5
5
15
5
15
5
5
125
5,500
250
625
2,000
5,250
1,125
750
375
500
Displays
2803-1
7125
6148
2401-2
Mag. Tape Control
7 Track Compatibility
Remote Switch Attach
Magnetic Tape Unit
650
50
1,300
100
0
2,910
Mag. Tape
485
2
2
2
6
2314-2
8170
Direct Acces s Storage
Two Channel Switch
3,500
140
3
3
10,500
420
2821-1
1990
1443-N1
1403-N1
2540-1
1052-7
7265-2
Printer Control Unit
Column Binary
Printer (240 LPM)
Printer (1100 LPM)
Card Read Punch
Printer- Keyboard
System Console
970
100
875
900
660
65
1,200
2
2
4
2
2
2
1
1,940
200
3,500
1,800
1,320
130
1,200
Printers,
Readers .
Consoles
7289
RPQ
RPQ
RPQ
Peripheral Adapter Unit
Binary Sync Data Adapter
TTY Adapter
1052 Adapter
3,000
100
100
100
2
24
8
1
6,000
2,400
800
100
Comm.
1827
3289
3296
3295
3612
RPQ
Data Control Unit
Dig-AnaOut-Basic
Dig Out Control
Dig Out Adapter
Eco Grp of 16 Pts
Voice Line Switch Box
Voice Line Adapter
190
70
15
15
20
300
20
1
1
1
3
10
1
60
190
70
15
45
200
300
1.200
Voice Une
Switching
RPQ
Sec. 3.3.2
Page C.2/26 (3/18/66)
Replaces 2/11/66
nlc
16,500
4,310
Disk
10,920
10,090
9,300
2,020
108,038
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
UNIVAC COMPETITION FOR BIRD BUFFER
Equipment Priced is Rough Equivalent of
9020 Configuration on Page C.2/25 and 26
UNIVAC 494
The attached price list represents a UNIVAC 494 Multiproces sor
configuration. The 494 memory is limited to 5 ports which can
accommodate any combination of processors and/or I/O controllers.
c'
Channels are standard with the proces sor but may be ignored in
favor of the I/O Controller. This configuration I therefore I represents a 3-processor I 2-controller configuration with sufficient
two-way switching on the I/O components.
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page C .• 2/27
(4/22/66)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
UNIVAC 494
Characteristics
c
Storage:
16 to 131 K words
Cycle Time:
750 ns/word (375 ns/wd overlap)
Word Length:
30 binary bits + 2 parity bits
Channels:
12 - 250 KC standard (max •. 24)
555 KC available. No peripheral
addres sing, one device per channel.
Instructions:
D. P. Fixed and Floating-point
and Decimal are· standard
DASD Storage:
Various Drums - 2311 and 2321
offered.
Addressing:
IS-bit addressing to a 32K bank,
relative Index Register designates
active 32K bank Half-words are
addressable.
Memory Protect:
Standard in 64-word increments
Instruction Times:
Add
Mult.
Divide
FIt. Add
FIt. Mult.
FIt. Divide
c
Section 3. 3 .. 2
750
7.3
7.4
3.2
12.5
13.0
ns
us
us
us
us
us
Page C.2/28
(4/22/66)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C
UNIVAC 494
Machine
Feature
Qty
MAC
5010-01
0706-00
0600-00
8120-02
0751-00
Card Control & Synch
Card Reader, 800/900
Card Punch, 300 CPM
Printer Control & Synch
Printer, 700/922 LPM
750
380
665
750
800
2
2
2
2
4
1,500
760
1,330
1,500
3,200
0900-05
0901-04
0903-02
Comm. Term. Module Cont.
Low Speed Line Adapter
HIgh Speed Line Adapter
650
60
90
2
4
12
1,300
240
1,080
2250
EQUIVALENT DISPLAY
1827
VOICE LINE SWITCH EQUIV.
5008-16
C
Description
Unit
Price
0859-00
3012-99
7005-95
UNISERVO VIIIC Control
and Synch
UNISERVO VIIC
Oxxx-01
0955-02
7304-01
8103-03
Processing Unit
Memory - 131K
I/O Controller
I/O Chan. (Add'l4)
Multi- Mem Adapter Basic
Multi-Mem Adapter Add'l.
Multi-Processor Adapter
FH-8S0 Drum
FH-880Control & Synch
2314-2
EQUIVALENT DISK
Oxxx-02
FOxx-OS
Oxxx-OO
16,500
2,000
1~450
2
2,900
800
6
4,800
9,500
20,000
4,000
500
500
235
425
2,000
1,420
3
1
2
4
28,500
20,000
8,000
2,000
2,000
940
2,550
2,000
1,420
4
4
6
1
1
10,920
115,440
c
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page C.2/29
(4/22/66)
"
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
UNIVAC competition for Bird Buffer
Equipment priced is rough equivalent
of 9020 configuration on page C. 2/25
and 26.
UNIVAC 1108
The attached represents a triplex UNIVAC 1108 multiprocessor
configuration. UNIVAC has an 1107 and one 1108 installed at
Lockheed Missiles for a security project associated with the Satellite
Control Facility. We estimate that this system has roughly six
times the potential performance of the 9020. We have used IBM
2250·8 and 2314 1 s on Sperry's equipment, since they have an IBM
standard interface.
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page C. 2/30
5/6/66
~
.,
c
~
1108 CONFIGURATION FOR BIRD BUFFER
(J)
CD
o
"......
o
::l
w
w
Core Storage
3/4 us
36 bit + 2
65K words
10 tail
Core Storage
3/4 us
36 bit + 2
65K words
10 tail
N
y
---
Core Storage
3/4 us
36 bit + 2
65K words
10 tail
l
-1108.c_~
CPU
1 0 Tail Memories
1108 CPU
128 wds 125 ns
15 index
16 accumulator
~/4~1.5 us add
128 wd s 1 25 n s
15 index
16 accumulator
3/4~ 1 .5 us add
Communication
Estimate
~ -~--------,
-.~-.-"---~"-"-~-".-----""
- "----'"-"--"'.'"'-1
1108 CPU
128 wds 125 ns
15 index
16 accumulator
,3/4 ~1 .5 us add
I/O Controller
16 Channels
Drum
Files
FH432 Drum \
1 • 6 million char
4.25 ms access
.440KC tfr
Four
IBM
2314's
I
Magnet~c
)r-.---4
Tape
Control
RR or
I/O Controller
16 Channels
1-1
to
)1---4
~
o
o
RW
z
t-Tj
1-1
tJ
Z
trj
Ul""O
"PJ
"CD
O)lQ
I/O Controller
16 Channels
~O
N
"W
t--'
Displays I card readers
and printers as on
Page C. 2/25 I Sect. 3.3.2
)-1- - - - "
~
~
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
0
UIiit
Q..ty.
Rental
Description
1108 CPU's 3011-99
$15,500
Core Stg. 65K wds, 2 banks 10,000
3
4,000
Basic r/o controller & 4 ch.
9
Additional I/O channels (4)
500
3
Multimemory adapter (5 tails)
500
3
Additional memory tails
235
3
Drum (PH432) & controller
3,000
2
Uniservo rIIC tape controls
1,350
6
Uniservo lIIC tapes
750
2
High speed printer controls
750
4
High speed printers
800
2
Reader/Punch Control
750
2
800 CPM readers
380
2
300 CPM punch
665
(Est. ) l\Aultiple I/O intorfaces to
three I/O control units
SUB TOTALS
3
3
C
3
4
4
4
2
4
12
Displays
IBM 2250' s & ?840' s
from page C. 2/26
SR 2840 adapters
IBM 2314 1 s
T~NO channel switch
SR 2314 adapters on 1108
Communications
0900-05 comm. terminal cost
Low s peed line adapters
High speed line adapters
Total
Rental
Unit
Purchase
Total
Purchase
1,330
$651,000 $1,953,000
420,000 1,260,000
404,000
168,000
189,000
21,000
63,000
21,000
9,870
29,610
360,000
120,000
64,800
139,600
36,500
219,000
68,550
34,275
144,000
36,000
67,500
33,750
30,400
15,200
26,600
53 8 200
2,000
121,665
84£OOQ
$5,064,860
$46,500
30,000
12,000
4,500
1,500
675
9,000
2,700
4,500
1,500
3,200
1,500
760
11,325
300
5,250
900
21,000
140
300
1,200
13,500
1,300
240
1 ,080
25,000
650
60
...2Q.
TOTALS $45 / 970
13,500
560
2,400
50,000
9,600
3,600
43,200.
$147,945 $1,727,320 $5 / 208,160
o
Section 3. 3 • 2
40,500
Page C. 2/32
5/6/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
D.
PROBLEM AREAS
Resolution to the security of classified data at the Bird
Buffer installation is a problem. The following paper has been
submitted to Aerospace/SSD as a possible solution.
c
o
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page Oil
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
THE SECURITY OF INFORMATION
IN A MULTIPROCESSING SYSTEM
12 November 1965
o
This data shall not be disclosed outside the
Government or Aerospace Corporation, or
be duplicated, used, or disclosed in whole
or in part for any purpose other than evaluation.
This restruction does not limit Aerospace
Corporation or the Government's right to use
information contained in such data if it is
obtained from another source.
IBM CORPORATION, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
Section 3. 3. 2
Page
0/2
1/28/66
'---'-"._--
......
--~~.-----~--
...-
-.•.. -.-- --..
----~
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Page
1
Program Status Word and Privileged Instructions
2
Storage Protection
4
System Configuration Description
6
Processing of Secure Data
8
Additional Considerations
11
o
Section 3. 3 . 2
Page D/3
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
INTRODUCTION
When secure information is to be processed in a multiprocessing
system, the historical methods of achieving the necessary security via
isolating the various programs and data by physical equipment separation
can no longer be applied. By its very nature, a multiprocessing system
implies commonality of equipment and sharing of acilities. This
centralization of computing equipment does not, however, mean that
the security of the information to be processed in such a facility will
be compromised. The architecture of IBMrs System/360 permits the
establishment of a combined hardware/ software system design which
will provide the requisite security while retaining the advantages which
accrue from multiprocessing.
During the design of System /360, the need for assuring the security
of data and programs was recognized. The primary reasons were
to obtain privacy of data and records where needed, and to permit
the testing of programs by restricting them to specific regions of memory,
thereby precluding accidental or deliberate destruction of other data
during the testing period. Two primary techniques were built into
System/360 to answer this need:
1.
Instructions which cause a change in system status or the
system control parameters, which alter storage protection
arrangements, or which perform input/output operations,
are considered privileged. These instructions may be
performed only by a processor designated as being in a
supervisor mode.
2.
All core storage attached to the system has a storage
protection feature. This feature always operates. It
precludes access to any storage location without presentation
of the proper storage key. The assignment of storage keys
can be done only by privileged instructions executed by a
processor in the supervisor mode.
These techniques will be examined in greater detail. It will be
shown that a secure environment can be established for the processing
of classified information in a multiprocessing system.
o
Section 3.3.2
1
Page D/4
1/28/66
- - - ----------
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
THE PROGRAM STATUS WORD AND PRIVILEGED INSTRUCTIONS
The Program Status Word (PSW) is a fundamental part of the
architecture of System/360. The PSW is contained in each computer.
It is the storage register for various types of control information
which reflects the status of the system and the conditions under which
a program is being executed. Two items in the PSW are of particular
interest to this discussion, the supervisor bit and the storage key.
Each computer operates in either the supervisor state or the
problem state. The state is specified by the supervisor bit in the PSW.
When it is in the problem state, the machine can execute all necessary
computing and data processing-type instructions. However, instructions
which have to do with I/O, storage protection, or instructions which
can alter the control fields of the PSW are privileged instructions, and
are not valid when the machine is in the problem state. An attempt
to execute one of these privileged instructions when in the problem
state will result in suppression of the instruction and an interruption
to a supervisor program.
Each time a reference is made to core storage, the computer
must present a storage key for access. (The details of the operation
of storage protection are covered in a later section of this paper. )
The storage key used by the computer is that one which is contained
in the PSW.
Once a PSW has been established, the computer is restricted to
a specific region of storage (defined by the storage key) and operates
in either supervisor or problem state as specified by the PSW. The
computer will remain in this status until the PSW has been changed.
A PSW can be changed in only three ways:
1.
Through the use of computer instructions. - Each instruction
which can change the supervisor bit or storage key, however,
is a privileged instruction. A computer must be in the
supervisor state to execute these instructions.
2.
By a program interruption. A program interruption is
accomplished by replacing the current PSW with a new one.
This new PSW is fetched from a specific area of storage
called the Preferential Storage Area.
c
Section 3.3. 2
2
Page D/S
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
In practice, this area of storage is used only by the supervisor
program and would be under a storage key reserved only
for the supervisor's use. Thus, a machine which does not
have the proper storage key in its PSW could not enter that
area of storage to modify a PSW to be fetched on a subsequent
inte r r uption.
3.
By an initial program loading operation. The initial program
load is done from a control console. When exercised, it
place s in the machine a new PSW which will then control the
system until the program being read in changes it. This
PSW is obtained from the input device used for loading. This
presents no hazard to security of data since there are two
controls. First, the recording medium used on the input
device can be controlled. Second, the actual operation of
the loading function can be placed under console lock and
key, and the key retained by a designated authority.
Thus, modification of the PSW, which is vital to the establishment
of a secure data environment, can be rigidly controlled. Users operating
in the problem state cannot modify their PSW to permit unauthorized
access to compartmented data, or to permit execution of privileged
instructions.
o
Section 3. 3 . 2
3
Page D/6
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
STORAGE PROTECTION
For the purpose of storage protection in System /360, all of core
storage may be considered to be divided into blocks of 2048 bytes
(byte = 8 bits plus 1 parity bit). These blocks are located on address
boundaries which are multiples of 2048. With each block of 2048
bytes, there is associated one of 16 possible storage keys which are
contained in a separate part of the storage unit.
Whenever a reference is made to a storage location, the accessing
element must pre sent a storage key along with the addre s s. The
storage unit will read out the storage key associated with the block which
contains the referenced location. A comparison is made between the
key contained in storage with the key presented by the accessing element.
If the accessing element wishes to alter the referenced location,
then the keys must match. If they do not, storage protection is violated
and a program interruption to the supervisor program occurs. The
data in the referenced location is not altered. The execution of the
instruction or I/O operation is suppressed or terminated.
If the accessing element does not wish to alter the location in
storage but only wishes to read it, an option is available. At the time
that the storage key for the location was established by the supervisor
program, the key could be set to specify "fetch protection" also. If
the key in storage is set for fetch protection also, the key presented
by the accessing element must match the storage key or protection is
violated for a read operation. Again, for this situation, a program
interruption to the supervisor program occurs. Data from the referenced location will not be transferred to addressable locations in the
accessing elements, nor will it be written on any output medium.
This option on protection for reading of data permits either total protection (read or write protection), or the flexibility for sharing of
areas where it may be desirable for several programs to read some
common data without allowing alteration of that data (write protection).
A "master key" (specifically zero) is provided for use by the
supervisor program. Such a capability allows the supervisor to alter
or override storage keys to restructure the storage area.
c
Section 3.3. 2
4
Page D/7
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
The storage keys contained in the storage unit each have a parity
bit associated with them. The keys presented by accessing elements
are also protected by parity bits. Single failures in either the accessing
elements key or the storage elements key will be detected and signaled.
Interruption to the supervisor program is done immediately on detection
of these failures.
The storage protection in System/360 thus permits the isolation
of data and programs in storage under a unique storage key. Access
to this area is not possible unless the correct key is presented. Single
failures of the equipment will be detected to preclude the pos sibility
of an incorrect key being altered by a failure to a correct key.
c
Section 3. 3 . 2
Page D/8
1/28/66
5
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
A SYSTEM CONFIGURATION DESCRIPTION
A more cohesive understanding of the handling of secure data
in a multiprocessing system can be gained from an examination of
an actual system configuration. Figure 1 is a block diagram of a
system which could be used for real-time data processing with varying
security and need-to -know requirements. The system shown in
Figure 1 is, of course, only one form that a multiprocessing system
could take. Each element in the computing system is duplicated,
providing a back-up capability in the event of an element failure.
The modularity of the system permits other units (storage, computer,
or I/O) to be added should an increase in capacity be required.
Figure 1 has omitted for clarity any of the conventional I/O devices
such as tapes, disks, printers, etc. These may be attached to the
I/O control units as desired.
The computing elements provide the computational and data
processing capability for the system. In addition, the computing elements
provide special facilities for system control. Storage is provided in
modular units. The interface with the peripheral devices and communication links is provided by the I/O control units.
The computing elements do not have I/O capability. All I/O
operations are initiated by a computer which informs the I/O control
unit of the type of I/O operation desired and the device it wishes to
activate. The computer then proceeds with its normal instruction
stream. The I/O control unit performs all data routing and control
functions necessary to perform the I/O operation. Each I/O control
unit can access any location in the storage complex, as can each
computing element. I/O operations are also monitored by the storage
protection hardware.
Multiprocessing offers the ability to program a system in a very
flexible manner. Since there is complete symmetry. in the system,
i. e., the computers are identical, all storage is available to all
accessing elements, etc. To achieve the potential benefits of multiprocessing, the computing elements would not be "dedicated" in the
sense that each one always performs a specific function. The
preferred approach is to treat computers merely as resources.
Each is assigned the next task in the problem as it becomes available.
()
S e cti 0 n 3. 3 • 2
6
Page D/9
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Such a concept requires the symmetry of the system shown in Figure 1.
With this approach, any user may avail himself of the complete
resources of the system. Also, the modularity of the equipment makes
growth a relatively simple problem. If system programs are written
initially to take cognizance of the system resources available and to
operate accordingly, then an increase in resources will cause no
great inconvenience to established programs.
Section 3.3. 2
7
Page D/IO
1/28/66
~
~
~
CIl
CD
a....o
::l
c..v
c..v
Storage
Storage
ts
l'V
l
l
l~
~~
~
~
j~
111
~b
~~
I
".
:
:
Data
Links
Comma
Adapters
&
I
I
Computing
Elements
I/O
Control
I/O
Control
~
~
MPX
I
'u
!
Computing
Elements
...
Data
Links
(
)
!
!
Comm.
Adapters,
&
I
System
Console
I
t
MPX
I
I/O Devices
"-
t-t
tl:l
~
o
o
2!
I-rj
...... '"'0
S
"'-OJ
l'Vc.Q
t"rj
00(1)
2!
~t)
en"'......
......
t-3
Figure 1.
A Multiprocessing System
~
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
PROCESSING OF SECURE DATA
The foregoing discussions on the various aspects of assuring
the security of data in a multiprocessing environment can be best
appreciated in the context of a hypothetical procedure which could
be used. A procedure will now be discussed which will show how
these various features can be integrated.
It is presumed that data is being received from the communication
links and that the data from each source must be isolated into data
groups and protected. There may be several of these communication
links active at one time. It is also assumed that separate problem
programs will be used to manipulate and process each data group
and that these programs will in general be allowed access to only
that data group which is of specific interest to it. It is further assumed
that there may be occasions where it is desired that a problem program
have access to several data groups.
Control of the entire system would be vested in a supervisor
program. This program would perform the following functions:
1.
Structure storage and allocate system resources for each
user program.
2.
Schedule and dispatch task programs.
3.
Respond to all inquiries from terminals concerning access
to stored data and requests for specific programs to be run.
4.
Execute and control all program interruptions.
5.
Perform all input/output operations.
This supervisor program would be resident in one storage unit.
Either unit could be used. To preclude a system breakdown in the event
of a core storage failure, the supervisor program would also be stored
on an off-line medium (disk, tapes). To enable quick recovery, a bootstrap calling sequence would be retained in the alternate core storage
unit. Thus, in the event that a core failure is encountered, provision
is made to automatically interrupt into the alternate core storage to
begin recovery operations.
o
S ectio n 3. 3 • 2
8
Page D/12
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
All supervisor program space would be protected by a unique
storage key. At the time of initial program loading, the first task
of the supervisor program would be to structure the necessary supervisor storage areas with the storage key specified. From that point,
only a program with this key can operate in those areas. This key
is never assigned to any program except the supervisor.
From the time of initial program loading (when a specific compute r
is assigned to perform the load) the supervisor may be run by either
computer as needed. This is an important concept of multiprocessing.
The control is really the program. The actual machine which executes
it will vary from time to time. This presents no security problem,
since a machine must execute a program interruption to run the
supervisor program. The interruption service programs are, in
fact, a part of the supervisor and are stored under the supervisor key.
Hence, a machine cannot gain access to this area while in the problem
state. The supervisor program should be largely re -entrant (i. e. ,
no modifications of the program should be permitted) to minimize the
need for control of sequential execution by both machines.
The supervisor would establish distinct areas in core for use
as buffers for incoming data. Each buffer area would have a separate
storage key specified by the supervisor program. The actual keys to
be used by the supervisor could be controlled as closely as desired.
A standard set could be used which are always loaded along with the
supervisor program. Alternatively, these keys could be entered
by a designated authority at a supervisory terminal on the system
console whenever it is desired to alter the key arrangement. The
necessary procedure for entering these keys can be made sufficiently
complex, requiring the interchange of various recognition signals in
a prescribed order, that no possibility of subverting the key structure
can be imagined.
When data appears at a data terminal, the I/O control portion
of the supervisor will service the I/O interruption. It will then store
the data in the area reserved for that data group, using the proper key.
When a task program is scheduled to operate on the data group,
the supervisor will establish a residence area for the program which
will have a key identical to that of its data group, establish a PSW for
the task program which specifies the proper key, and establish that
the task program will operate in the problem state. The task program
will then be initiated.
Section 3.3. 2
9
Page D/13
1/28/66
~--~------
"---
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Output of data through the communication links would be essentially
a reversal of the above procedure. Data would be assembled in a keyed
area by the task program. The task program would request that the
supervisor program perform the output operation. The supervisor
would then initiate the output via a specified communication line, and
restrict the output to the area under the key protecting the data group
to be transmitted.
Should the task program legitimately require access to data other
than that under their key, they can request that their key be changed
by the supervisor. This would, of course, require that the request
contain sufficient recognition signals to validate the need-to-know,
or that the supervisor be programmed to honor these requests, knowing
in advance of the data requirements of each task program.
The system can be constructed to permit as much security as
required when responding to requests for access to data or operation
of programs from terminal device s. Recognition sequences is one
technique which is feasible and readily amenable to periodic variation
to enhance security. Also, the operation of terminal devices can be
under physical lock and key.
This brief discussion of a hypothetical operating procedure could
not answer all detailed questions on each facet of assuring security of
information. It should be clear, however, that there are manifold
possibilities for various security techniques which can permit the
uncompromised use of classified data in a multiprocessing environment.
o
Section 3.3. 2
10
Page D/14
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(>
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
The system shown in Figure 1 has the capability for providing
considerable additional protection should it be warranted. There has
been implemented on some IBM systems a technique known as configuration control which will permit electronic partitioning of the system
and isolation of the subsystems thus created.
In the essentially duplex arrangement shown in Figure 1, this
configuration control will permit a very flexible partitioning of the
equipment into various structures. Some of the possibilities are:
1.
Completely isolated "simplex" systems. This partitioning
would result in two separate computer systems, each containing
one of each type of element shown. If it was felt necessary,
these can be operated as entirely unrelated computing facilities.
2.
Blocking access to various elements. It would be possible
to completely inhibit one or both storage elements from being
accessed by one of the computers or I/O control units. It
would be possible to assign control of both I/O control units
to one computer, thereby precluding any I/O operations from
being initiated by the other. These interface controls are
designed to be operated primarily by a supervisor program,
although manual partitioning under physical key control can
also be done. Aside from providing an additional level of
security when required, this configuration control mechanism
offers extremely important advantages for maintenance and
program te sting.
Effective maintenance on a computing system requires the use of
diagnostic programs designed to exercise the failing equipment and
isolate the malfunctions to small equipment areas. In the course
of this exercise, errors will be stimulated to test the equipment.
The configuration control technique permits the failing element, along
with other elements required to run the diagnostic program, to he
isolated from the remainder of the system, while this repair is being'
performed. Thus, errors in the failing equipment under repair will
not be propagated to the remainder of the system.
When newly written programs are to be installed, it is desirable
to test them in as realistic an environment as possible, yet not allow
o
Page D/15
Section 3. 3. 2
1/28/66
11
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
them to interfere with the operation of the working system. An isolated
subsystem could be established with configuration control to allow such
program testing to be done at slack times.
The capability afforded by the partitioning mechanism can be
employed for additional security where it is considered necessary.
It also enhances the flexibility of the multiprocessing system. As the
system matures, it may be desirable to add additional modules of
storage, computers or I/O control. Automatic replacement of failing
elements with spares then becomes possible, thereby greatly extending
system reliability.
o
Section 3.3. 2
12
Page D/16
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
BIHD
A~
1.
BUFFER
TASKS
EQUIPMENT
Develop the following shared m.emory system:
360/65
360/44
9020
')
JU~:>';jfy s~lection of all system equipm.ent and features, espcci~',lly mem.ory
size, l.'cdundant I/O channels, .etc. Include a tradeoff study of 27GO series,
2800 series vs. PAl\!L. for comm. links at 1200 bps and TTY, 40. G kbps.
3.
Determine for each type system.:
a) I/O interference for each I/o channel and/ or unit
b) Availability of hardware diagnostic s
c) Channel arrangement of 1/0, priority on channels,
status conditions to be recognized, size of word blocks~
existance of timing problems on shared subchannels and channels.
e) System reliability and availability.
,1
.:t.
Develop for inclusion in proposal:
Dc,;.::;cription of internal data flow for each m.achine
DC3cription of any special features including channel RPQr s.
;).
Pr2pare DPOWS and RPQ's which may be required.
6. Dev810p input/ output voltage level" current and impedance ch:::cracteristics
of non.-IB:i.\![ interfacing equipment.
'7
..
Develop recom.mendations for system grounding.
8.
Determine applicability of DOD Spec. FS222.
9.
Design interface and data flow for -1-3.01 or other applicable disk and 3600.
a) From descriptions of Mission Center and MOL-Bethesda inputs
recommendations for 2250 application.
b) Determine the number of consoles and control units by area,
include buffer storage requirem.ents.
•
1'\,-
o
Section 3. 3. 2
Page E. 2/1
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-2Bird Buffer Tasks (continued)
10. D;.-;velop formats for I/O words to and from. non-IBM interfacing
equipfijent; i. e. expand from 12 bit interface to 16 or 32 bit intel":J.ce.
L,;termine any potential effect of equipment and format chall, (;S in STC
O~l RTS operational procedures" programs and equipment" e. g. ~','':-=-Site
cOlnm.unication message form.ats.
1.L.
Ensure system compatibility with System.s Assurance Provisions.
12.
Be PHOGRAMMING
.....
a.
Develop inputs from MOL-Bethesda group for MOL impact on STC.
Verify and describe in greater detail the operation of l\1u:ici-processing
Executive monitor including its operation at initial load, with task scheduler,
under various conditions of program error or m.achine failure.
b.
('.'
c.
2.
Determ.ine utility of FAA - Op era tional Error Analysis Pre; gram.
Identify software applicable fronl standard systems, tinle- sh~l'ing and FAA.
Develop recommendations for tracking, comm'and and telem0t~·y processing
conditions; i. e. sequence, algorithm. selection, timing, table size" table
design" etc.
3.
c.
APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT
1.
Expand use of 2250 display in:
a) Commanding
b) Observing TM data points and trends
c) Controlling and diagnosing center operation
d) Overseeing site operations and communications in the prc-pass" pass
and postpass modes.
Section 3. 3. 2
Page E. 2/2
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDEN'TIAL
-3Bird Buffer Tasks (continued
2. Show applicability of 360 instructions in processing TM data; analyze
requircluents for special Tl\t1 instructions" such as those used in \VSMR-TDC
proposal.
3. ~Develop use of the STC computers for RTS equipm.ent aad soH\vare
configuration control;lasTC diagnostics and checkout, including a Jiagnostic
that checks computer interface equipment, then all the way through
communication paths to sites.
c
4.
Implementation Plan
5.
Maintenance Plan.
G.
Others to follow.
Section 3. 3. 2
(See attached amendment)
Pa I.jhre.
T:7
-'-.J.
()/.~
LJ
12/15/65
'J
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Amendment to Bird Buffer Task
Assignments
C-6.
Develop method(s) for maintaining secure data requirements in
multiprocessing configuration through software control.
Examples
of methods to consider:
1) data coding and storage / processing allocation under
EM Control.
2) Encrypting and decrypting programs for internal CPU
use.
3) Computer mode switching to change from a true multiprocessing configuration to a stand alone configuration
whenever "very sensitive" data handling requirements are
dictated.
c
Section 3. 3. 2
Page .E. 2/4
12/15/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
SYSTEM/360 IN THE SECURE ENVIRONMENT
Functional Interface
User interface with System/360 consoles, the 2250, 2260, 1050,
2740 I 2741, is completely a function of the programming in the host
CPU. In the use of the fully buffered units, the 2250 and 2260, data
is displayed from or intered into a buffer, which is read/written by
the processing unit. The printer-keyboard type units, 1050, 2740
and 2741, are character buffered by a control unit directly under
the control of the host processing unit.
Application Interface
In the anticipated application of the 2250 to the display function
at the STC, the console/user interaction is described as follows:
c
To initiate a mission support request, the user will request
service by entering a vehicle number and an individual needto-know identifier (perhaps assigned to each user separately
or to each MCC as an entity). This request will then be
honored if the identifier is acknowledged valid; otherwise,
service would be denied and the details of·the request logged
at the Systems Control Center. (As a precaution, all transactions of this type should be logged in a similar fashion.)
Because of the interface structure, hardware and software, between
the console user and the processing unit I it is impossible for the user
to gain access to secure information without the cooperation of the
controlling programs. There is the very low probability that a memory
failure, data transmission failure or data recording/retrieval failure
might occur singly or in combination without detection by the error
checking circuits of System/3GO. Moreover, it would be virtually
impossible to take advantage of the failure because of its typically
random characteristics.
Software Interface
Modification of the operational programs or their verification tables
to permit unauthorized access has to be accomplished by patching/
changing of the existing code, by manual entry at the system console I
or by integral design into the operating program. The first two
methods are controllable through operational security techniques
such as plaCing the program residence device as well as the system
o
Section 3 • 3 • 2
Page E.3/1
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
console under lock and key access, forcing direct monitoring of the
programming maintenance/change function. The latter approach
requires in-depth knowledge of the program design and integration
of dynamic program modification techniques into the software without
detection I both requiring a collusion from conceptual design through
acceptance test. However I to be effective, such a technique must be
instantly cognizant of storage protection assignments. Because the
protection scheme is dynamic and can be varied in any arbitrary
manner I it would be difficult I if not impossible I to manipulate code
which itself is protected. Further I the key area in each proces sing
unit, locations 0-4095, could be protected further with lock and key
control over the storage protect function, making this area virtually
execute-only storage.
Data Input and History Recording
The Input/Output devices of System/360 I in this case speCifically
the 2702 Data Communications Control, the 2311 or 2314 Disk Files,
the 2400 tape drives and the 2250 display units I are extremely
flexible in that they can input/output from anywhere in storage under
program control. Two approaches exist which enable secure paths
to be established between the processing unit and the I/O device. ~
First I hardware registers constraining selected units to unique
storage blocks could be implemented. The initialization of these
registers could be accomplished by special CPU instructions
executed under lock and key control. The alternate approach utilizes
the program and data protection as described in the previous section.
Input/Output tables tying peripheral devices to storage aSSignments
and the I/O supervisor itself could be located in lower memory I 'which
is restrained to an execute-only mode.
Summary
It appears that total data security is possible with System/3GO
subject to the very low probability of undetected hardware failure
and the always-present possibility of collusion. An extension to
the standard System/360 write-protection capability along with the
RPQ read-protection feature appears to be the most effective means
of control while still retaining full compatibility with all System/360
proces Sing units.
#
o
Section 3. 3. 2
#
#
Page E. 3/2
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
This paper delineates the software committed or currently available with the
9020 system as contracted with the Federal Aviation Agency. This software
capability is divided into three categories. The Diagnostics and Diagnostic
Monitors VJhich are delivered under the hardware contract, the Utility Programming System which is delivered under the hardware contract the Operations
Supervisor which is delivered under the soft\'lare contract, and the Operational
Error Analysis Program! a unique real-time, on-line diagnostic program. It
c~ppears that the softvvare committed under the ha:;"dware contract is readily
available for use at the STC Additionally, the software which would be
applicable and vvas comndtted under the softvvare contract to the FAA would
be available through government channels to the STC.
I
s
The following is a. brief desc::iption of each cf these pieces of software and
their current applics.tion. The addendum to this document delineates the size
of each of the pieces of softv'l7C1.-;.-e and the estimated percentage of applicability
to the SateJlite Test Center
Q
The Ofr·-Line Diagnostic Pac!~c.ge consists of the system c~nd component
diagnostics as individual pa.ck.6.g'es integrated under various levels of a
diagnostic monitor Th~!se cUagnostics are an extension of those delivered
v'1ith pr8sen'~ stnnd-~alone IBr.Jl hardware systems. There are basically five
levels, tender a comprehensive monitor ~ Diag:10stic analysis begins with a
monitor loaded under the irL~ti;:ll pTograrri load condition to test the ability of
the system to GXc~cute bciSic instructions a:nd extending through the highest
level diagnostic v!hich fully exercises d18 9020 as a mu.ltiprocessor system.
'This la.s·t monitor W"8.8 developed .in support of the mult.iproc8ssor configuration
and is an ex te.:1S io.;:1. or ·i:l":.2 norm.l).l dic.~)nostic SUPrjort offered vvith IBM systems.~
The unit di2,gno~:ti.c;3 furnished vvith the diagnostic package consist of three
levels. Starting a'~ "the; :'110CJt bas:tc leval the Fault Locating Tests
(FL~) test and dj,;--2,;r:.10S;·~ the lOCE's CE' sand mcrnories and isolate errors
or 111alfunctions to a small number of cornponent circuit ca.rds. The second
level of diagnose.es is tl1C Unit Functiona.l Test Diagnostics w'hich exercise
each unit to determi:.le if it 'vv'ill perform according to its functional specifications. The highest level of diagnostic routin~s fU!i1.ished is that which tests
the system as a ~\lholG. These are the diagnostics which examine the system
for the operat10n. of the n'lultipro~ess.ing instructions and exercise interfaces
betvveen the various elE=;ments in the systern
Q
l
J
0
o
This level of diagnostic support i::;:.' ':,.>J? 9020 also includes the ability to
dynaraically exercise the system in :1 scheduled fashion for extremely long
periods of activity on all components of the systeln. This ability ( the
Systems Evaluation Technj,que, or SEVA, allows for reliability checking and
acceptance tests.
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page E.3/3
4/29/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
These diagnostics do not include support for disks, displays or other adapters
in the STC configuration.
,UTILITY PROGRAMMING SYSTEM
The Utility Programming System includes a monitor and programs for the
production of application software. In capability it is analQgous to current
systems such as the IBSYS System on the 7094 or the Operating System on the
1410 system. The Utility Monitor is a single-job si ngle-task, batchedprocessing system. It runs on the 9020 using a single compute element, a
single input/output control element and a minimum of two storage elements for
compilation. It will run in a sing Ie storage element and if more than two are
available it will use this additional capability. The following capabilities
are included in the Utility Programming System. The JOVIAL Compiler at the
J-2 level operates under the utility monitor" A Basic Assembly Language
Translator is provided for machine language programming. Typical utility
functions including a trap-trace program, a core-dump, file-dump and a loader
for relocatable code. An editor is provided for the maintenance of the utility
tape for the addition, correction and deletion of the components of the utility
system. Other capabilities include a symbolic maintenance program, enabling
the application programmers to maintain and update Symbolic Programs on
tape. An application libralY, usable through either JOVIAL or BAL is provided
for those common routines such as mathematical functions which are required
in the application.
I
I
I
I
c
The Utility Programming System, as provided to FAA, is a tape-oriented
programming system. It appeo.rs that for the STC the systems design would
be desirable to alter it to reside a.nd utilize disks.
OPERATIONAL SUPERVISOR
The Operational Supervisor is the real-time monitor required to control the
application tasks. It is general in n.ature in that it provides the services
required for operation and control of the 9020 system. These services include
the supervision of the interrupts including input/output, supervisor call,
program exception, external and timer interrupts. The machine check interrupt
is the primary interface to the Operational Error Analysis Program. Input/Output
supervision is provided for those devices included in the FAA 9020 systems
design The Supervisor is designed to operate most effeciently in the real-time
environment, expediting the handling of the real-time interfaces such as
communication lines and displays.
¥
- more -
o
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page E. 3/4
4/29/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~,
OPERATIONAL ERROR ANALYSIS PROGRAM
The Operational Error Analysis Program provides the system with a real-time I
on-line diagnostic capability. OEAP is initiated via the machine check
interrupt in the Operational Supervisor I external interrupts from other
components of the system, or via program interrupts caused by storage
address errors. The OEAP provides real-time analysis of system failures
and attempts to pinpoint them to a component within the system. Not only
is this failure pinpointed, but also the OEAP program will then reconfigure
the 9020 system around the failure to continue the real-time support mission
of the system.
o
Section 3.3.2
Page E.3/5
4/29/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
~020
Program
PROGRAMMING STATUS
(No. of Instr.)
STC
Applicability
Available
Diagnostic Monitor System
500, 000
100%
Now
Utility Programming System
250, 000
100%
Now
6,500
95%
7/66
14,000
100%
1/67
Operational Supervisor
Operational Error Analysis Program
o
Section 3. 3.2
Page E. 3/6
4/29/66
STC 9020 SYSTI:l\1 LC)hD) HG
SINGLE MI~::)l\}
J)lzOl'JJ It
)'
~
CIl
(1)
(1
r-t.....
0
::s
.ww
.
r-v
Function
Data Input
RTS TL1\11
Rate
Typc-Qb__
300 B/S
MPX
2250 Console
Data Output
.
;-
No.
I/O Inter--
1/0- Ivlem.
Ins.\.[.. .!.
IgQtS!Scc.
(Ref/Sec)
Instruct.
(Ref/Sec)
300
1350
3.0
SEL
•1
45
2314- History
300 B/S
SEL
•1
75
45
2250 Display
4 x 4 Groups
per Mission
500 B/Grp/S SEL
2000 B/S
4.0
500
1800
2250 Display
System Control
4 Displays
150 B/S .
1.0
38
450
SEL
Interrupt Handl.
10CP
Message Servicing
I/O
Service
Input
300 (2)
1000(4)
250 (3)
2000
500
Display Formatting
and Generation
Output
4000 (4)
10000
750(1)
1500
500(4)
1000
1000(4)
2000
Intermedia te
Processing
History File Gen.
CJ1~
Source.
IBM CONFIDEN~
"
TLM4
Console Req
Output
CE-IOCE Mem. Inter
......... OJ
r-vlQ
0(1)
CE-CE Mem. Inter
......... trj
0)
0)"
w
.........
'-l
Multiprocessing
Overhead
Task Ass'mt
Sched . etc.
I
913
(1) from 160 code/2. 7 (G. West)
(2) Average OS/360 & 9020 OS
(3) G. West
(4) Estimate
'I
I!
:j
l
20690
21603 (out of
400,000)
5.4%
~~---
-
..- - - - - - - -
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
o
NOTES TO 9020 LOADING CALCULATIONS
A single 9020 CE-IOCE-SE string has 400 000 memory cycles per second
I
available for compute and/or Input/Output activity·. Instruction execution
will always account for a minimum of one memory cycle/instruction (RR
class) I more commonly two memory cycles/instruction (RX class), and
occasionally more (SS class). Input/Output will utilize one memory
cycle/byte transferred via the Multiplex channel and one memory
cycle/word via a selector channel, plus additional references for data
chaining and command chaining.
In the STC application, memory contention between a CE and laCE in
c
support of a single mission appears extremely low with the laCE averaging
less than one storage request out of 4 ,000. The CE averages less than
one request out of 20.
Extension of this analysis to a 9020 multiprocessor configuration introduces
additional loading factors. Overhead execution time will be introduced for
resource management. Memory conflicts will occur between the multiple
active elements in the system as a function of the memory mapping of the
application program. This is tempered in that a single CE retains control
of all active IOCE's and will be in certain memory areas more frequently
than others. Such a conflict analysis cannot be empirically derived.
o
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page E .. 3/8
5/20/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
January 12, 1966
TO:
W. B. Gibson,
FROM:
R.V.Coalson, W.G.Derango,
SUBJECT:
Trip to Manned Space Center.
J. E • Hamlin,
J. J • Selfridge.
D.A.Fuchs, G.D.West.
On 7 January, 1966, a trip was made to the NASA Manned Space Genter for
the purpose of obtaining information about the RTCC which might be pertinent
to the upcoming RFP for the SCF. In attendance were the above MOL Project
personnel and Tom Humphrey, AI Pfaff, Dave Behne, John Mueller, John
Bednarcyk, and Bob Kagy from IBM MSC. Information was sought concerning:
real time programming multiprocessing, multiprogramming, conversion to
System 360, system diagnostics, management information, and telemetry.
I
It wa s believed that Houston would probably be the first area of IBM which
would be attempting to adapt OS/360 to a truly real-time situation, utilizing
time-sharing, multiprogramming and multiprocessing. Since scheduled
switchover to System/360 is scheduled for Fall 1966, system design of a real
time monitor, etc., was expected to be fairly well defined. Additionally,
new insights into telemetry processing were hoped for in that the 7094
receives only slightly formatted data from the tracking stations via the UNIVAC
telemetry processing system.
I
Briefings and conversations with Tom Humphrey and John Mueller indicated
that the design of the Executive portion of the new 360 system was still somewhat fluid, and pOinted out some problem areas they were currently
struggling with: a) advantages of a shared memory in a true multiprocessing
situation; b) use of Fortran or PLI in producing multiprocessor systems;
c) use of 2250 as a command/control device; d) programming overhead caused
by more sophisticated systems. It appears that the first 360 system will be
stand alone" and operate conceptually like the 7094. Multiprogramming and
time sharing will be initially employed, but not multiprocessing; this will
come later. Complete available documentation on modifications of OS/360
for Houston, and system design philosophy was obtained and discussed.
11
o
Telemetry processing discussions with Bob Kagy and John Bednarcyk revealed
that the buffering of TLM data from the ground stations to the control center
is done by UNIVAC computers and programs. (see Figure 1)
These facts,
coupled with the low telemetry processing rate, basically indicate that the
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page H/1
1/21/66
-2-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
IBM Houston real time telemetry processing technology is not as advanced
as that of the SCP. Lockheed does near real time processing of telemetry
from analog recordings on the CDC 3300, which is more analogous to the SCF
operation. Will Derango initiated a luncheon technical discussion with
Lockheed concerning this activity on an informal basis. Lockheed personnel
felt that the CDC 3300 is an ideal real time TLM processor. In the Houston
operation, CDC has included some specialized "TLMII instructions on the
3300 hardware. Current CDC proposal efforts are under way by CDC to upgrade
the hardware to a 3800 or II some kind of 6000 with a verbally promised
emulator to process existing 3300 code.
ll
An interesting note on the Lockheed effort is that LMSC Sunnyvale formerly
had the data processing contract at Houston and was eliminated, due to NASA
dissatisfaction. Lockheed Electronics Corporation, in conjunction with CDC
won the subsequent competiton and proceeded to transfer most of the technical
personnel (not management) from LMSC to LEC .
I
{-
The software system at NASA-Houston is an indication of the present state-ofthe-art while the new system design reflects the lessons learned from the present
support activity. There is a need to increase the efficiency of computer
utilization in the RTCC by means of advanced programming techniques such
as multi-processing. The implications have been explored in design studies
and a limited degree of multi-processing has been recommended. However, they
are approaching the matter cautiously as it is realized that multi-processing
is a gigantic undertaking and is not wholely compatible with the planned
System 360 software. Documentation was obtained concerning their present
multi-programming operation system. Much of their OS/360 design experience
is directly applicable to the SCP.
I
The approach to diagnostics at the RTCC differs considerably from what is
antiCipated at SCP, mostly from the difference in operating system requirements. Since the MSC is. not under continuous operation, many hours may be
dedicated to system checkout prior to vehicle launch, thereby eliminating much
of the down time. However, the ground rules seem to be that if a station is
down, it stays down until someone gets around to correcting the failure. No
requirements for allowable down time have been defined.
Diagnostics at the RTCC consist only of standard available routines plus
a series of tests to determine Go-NoGo status of various system aspects.
Fault analysis and correction is done under cognizance of Goddard by an
I
()
Section 3. 3. 2
Page H/2
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
analysis system called GADFISS. This will be investigated shortly.
Al Pfaff supplied a complete description of the new Model 75 configuration.
He and Tom Humphrey also had a few comments about the Model 44 system
to be proposed - namely I concerning the difficulties involved in programming
a multi-processing system.
In a single real-time mission support situation, such as NASAl s the need
for a detailed scheduling and configuration control program is not of paramount
consideration. In this respect the SOP differs greatly from NASA and will
require a unique approach to configuration control and scheduling. However,
OS/360, with its associated peripheral equipment, lends itself favorably to
methods for solving these operational requirements.
I
, J) ) -
,; "I
,J
. 4-6j{?
D. A. Fuchs.
(
"'-\
/
cc: MOL Project Personnel,
MOL Project Notebook. V
DAF:jh
o
Section 3. 3 . 2
Page H/3
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
I
I
I
~:
J
A/D
CDC
3300' s
Converters
NON-REAL TIME
TLM REDUCTION
L ______
~
_________
~~
__
~~_~
__
~~~_
40.8
KBS
(/
7094
Lockheed
Ground
Station
LOCkheed
Ground
Station
IUNIVACI
•
•
•
Houston
TTY
FIGURE I:
Section 3. 3 . 2
.. 7094
NASA HIGH SPEED TLM FLOW
Page H/4
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
LOS ANGELES AEROSPACE BUILDING
Manned Orbiting Laboratory Project
December 30 I 1965
TO: Mr J. J. Selfridge
0
TRIP REPORT TO AFSCF, SUNNYVALE I CALIFORNIA
Messrs Mort Needle, Robin Mowlem and myself visited the
Satellite Control Facility at Sunnyvale on December 22, 1965.
The purpose of the visit was to secure as much information as
possible about the present SCF configuration, operations, and
personnel and to ascertain planned growth commensurate with
increasing support requirements.
0
The following persons were viSited:
Lt. Col. N. Alton, Chief of Operations (ACES)
Lt. W. Kirsch, Facilities (ACES)
Major Reed, Chief Multiple Operations
Lt. Col. McCleary I Chief of Data Analysis
George Hurlbut, Lockheed - Chief of SSOTC
Bill Pollard, SSOTC
Bill Braswell, SSOTC
Lockheed Mission Support Personnel - MCC
c
During conversations with the above personnel, the following
information was obtained:
1 • The Lockheed Configuration Planning Group (SSOTC) has
recommended to the Air Force five possible modes of operation
for the IBM 2250·5 to be leased. The modes are:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Operation as a printer
Selection of one of several formats using mode a.
Graphic
Remotely operating the Bird Buffer computers
Recall of data for history.
It is very likely that mode a. will be adopted since the processing
()
time of the 160A constrains the amount of processing and/or formatting
Section 3. 3 • 2
Page H/5
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
o
that can be accomplished in each data cycle. Extensive use of the
2250 in other than mode a. will cause the loss of data from the
incoming 1200 baud lines. Although the use of 2250 s with 160A
computers severely restricts the 2250' s capabilities I this situation
strengthens our proposed bid for replacing the 160A's with System/360
computers. This is especially true since the ser t s requirements for
display requires the full utilization of 2250 capabilities.
l
2. The Bird Buffers are not dedicated to particular missions as we
thought I rather each Bird Buffer is dedicated to a particular remote
site. Data from all birds which are supported by a remote site pass
through the Bird Buffer dedicated to the site. This means that data
security is not a paramount consideration in the Bird Buffer Subsystem
(as the system is being used). Lt. Kirsch stated that the only area
in which data security is assured is in the off-line 3600' s; however I
when the Bird Buffers are supporting one of the very sensitive birds I
the Bird Buffers can be configured to assure hardware isolation for
the data. (This unique support configuration is used whenever dictated by the SPO office personnel.) At present, only two such birds
are so supported.
c
3. According to Lockheed I there are three types of data in the
STC.
Systems Data (Management status)
Users: a.
b.
c.
Multi OPS
Data Systems Director
Systems Controllers
Telemetry Data (Dynamic status)
Users: a.
h.
Data Display
Data Analysis
Or hital Data (Non-realtime)
User:
a.
Program Engineer (SPO Office)
4. When Lt. Kirsch was asked about the present Bird Buffer
utilization I he replied that only 4 percent of the time are' there
more than four Bird Buffers in operation at one time. He also
stated that they did not use all of the Bird Buffers to support
operations because they had line sync problems whenever a Bird
Section 3. 3. 2
Page H/6
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Buffer was switched between stations. It is for this reason that the
Bird Buffers are dedicated to a particular RTS.
5. The Lockheed personnel were very interested in a multiprocessing
system for use in the Bird Buffer application. They stated that there
would be an initial problem with NSA data security requirements.
However I once NSA was convinced of multiprocessing software
data protection methods I the operation of the system could be fairly
"relaxed. "
6. Major Reed was very interested in the 2250 S capabilities and
potential for alleviating his scheduling problems. Although the
2250/160A configuration would not afford the amount of flexibility
required I he stated that he would be interested in any detail
presentation we might present on the 2250' s without reference to
CPU restriction; i. e., 22 SO/OS 360.
I
7.
c
Attached is the data flow in the STC.
R. V. Coalson
RVC/lr (attachment)
CC:
Messrs. J. E. Hamlin, MOL
R. Mowlem, Bethesda
M. Needle, MOL
Section 3. 3 . 2
Page H/7
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Data Flow in the Satellite Test Center
Secure
RTS
~
116 OAlr,ilt------ Tracking--------f
3600
Telemetry
I Switch J
(
...
-'
/
Data
Presentation
Col. McCleary
Data Analysis
Format Data
Plan sulceeding
for display in
TC
l
passes
Program Engineer
OrBit Engineer
Major Reed
Mult.OPS
GOnfi~uratlOnl
Scheduling
I
Orbit Update
, Acquisition, ephemeris eTC.
-------------------r----------------~
Test Controller
Voice Link
MIssion Control
Test Center ~-- - - - - - - - - - - - . - Center MCO ~
Note:
The MOC will eventually contain the Program Engineer, Data
Analysis team, Data Presentation Team and the Test Controller
for each particular mis sion. The MCC' s will be functionally
reproduced as support dictates.
o
Section 3.3. 2
Page H/8
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Date:
From (iJept, Loc):
C
February 10, 1966
MOL Project
Telephone Ext.:
Subject:
CDC Price Change
Reference:
To:
Mr. W. B. Gibson
CDC has just recently announced the following price changes to their
3800 system:
3804 Processor and Control
was $14 000 rental
now 11,500 "
3803 Core Storage (32K)
was $13,000 rental
now
9,250 "
I
$710,000 purchase
450,000
"
$560,000 purchase
360,000
"
The remaining component prices remain unchanged.
This lowers the 3800 system rental price to $2,250 below an equivalent
3600 system.
Substitution of 3800 processing units for the installed 3600's at the STC
would result in an estimated savings of $1, 750 per system. In addition,
, if the 3804 and 3803 are purchased for the STC, payout, excluding
maintenance I is achieved in 40 months I while the system is good for
at least 5 years.
The current National Comstat shows the following:
Account
System
3800
3800
3870
3870
3870
3870
OSN Fleet NUM
Mobil Geophysical
NRL
NASA - Michoud
Navy Post Graduate School
NMCS
Status
Firm Order
Doubtful
Firm Order
Doubtful
II
"
(The 3870 is the time-sharing version of the 3800)
/7P:;;;,.-=:?L -
o
Mort Needle
MBN/lr
cc: Mr. Co B. Brown,
Mr. R. Go Krause
Section 3.3.2
Page R/9
2/18/66
c
Manned Orbiting Laboratory Proj ect
LOS ANGELES AEROSPACE BUILDING
March 25, 1966
TO:
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C. B. Brown
W. B. Gibson
J. E. Hamlin
J. J. Selfridge
9020 VERTICAL GROWTH
I discussed the subject with Lloyd Cudney 9020 engineering. A similar
request has already been investigated for the NAPALM proposal, which is
a 9020 system for the U. S. Army.
I
Conclusions were as follows:
1.
Internal speed is more of a limiting factor than SE speeds.
2.
Speed improvements of either CE or SE are not economically
feasible since a different circuit family would be required.
I
3.
The development effort of substituting 2365' s (.75 microsecond)
with 9020 capability for SE's is estimated at $1 million.
NAPALM has been informed that there is no vertical growth capability
on the 9020.
The idea of hanging a 65 or 75 on one of the SE memory tail sand
treating the SE as bulk core is feasible, but has not been investigated
as to complexity of interfacing the two different circuit families.
Summary:
1.
Our proposal should avoid committing us to a specific type of
vertical growth.
2.
We can commit to growth, since there are the following possibilities:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Shared I/O devices
Channel to Cha nnel
A more powerful CPU on one memory tail
RPQ 9020 capabilities onto shared memory 65's
'7:h?duV~
o
T. M. Charbonneau
TMC/lr
cc: Mr. Lloyd Cudney, POK 9020 Eng.
Section 3.3.2
Page H/lO
4/1/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
AprilS, 1966
MEMORANDUM TO:
The File
SUBJECT:
9 a2a Software
Following information was gained from conversation with Ken Kowalke:
The programming developments for the 9020 consist of the followix:tg:
Utility systems. This con~ists of the utility monitor I JOVIAL
compiler, basic assembly language I mathematical subroutines I
loader and librarian/editor. These consist of a total of
250,000 lines of code and have all been delivered and
accepted. The JOVIAL compiler is a relatively fast compiler
and uses 256K bytes of core. It com·pares favorably with
the J 2 compiler for the 7090.
1•
2.
Diagnostics consist of the SEVA system which are systems
diagnostics. In addition, there are· functional diagnostics
.for each box.· Further, the storage units I computing elements
and laCE' s all have fault location technology microprograms. These consist of a total 500,000 lines of code
or their equivalent and are 99% written and debugged.
3.
The operational programs consist of two portions:
a.
Non-operational which includes the upgrade
utility monitor , simulator and specialized
programs. These consist of 50, 000 .lines of code •
b.
The operational programs, in addition to using .the
above I consist of using· the operational monitor
which was estimated I at the time of pr()Posal,to
require 65; 000 lines of code.
W. B. Gibson
WBG:jb
Section 3.3.2
Page Hill
4/8/66
JBM ,CONFIDENTIAL
SDD POUGHKEEPSIE
Dept. B70 - Bldg. 951
Extension - 57538
c
May 25, 1966
1.. J. Selfridge
Memorandum to:
Mr.
Subject:
Alternate Bird Buffer Configuration
Reference:
Meeting in Poughkeepsie, May 10, II, 1966
In regard to the discussion concerning Md 44' s as an alternate configuration
for the Bird Buffer, I would like to sum up the conclusions reached at the
meeting:
Assuming high availability, error checking analysis, and automatic partItioning
as prerequisites for the Bird Buffer the following reasons for not gOing with
the Md 44 should be considered.
I
c
1•
Lack of spare board room in Md 44 eliminates any expansion witho'Ut
going to a separate box.
2.
Memory and channels are integral part of Md 44 which limits partitioning.
To separate memory would be expensive for a one-of-a- kind system and
would increase memory speed to at least 1.5 usee"
3•
Lack of error checking in the Md 44 severely limits its application as a
Bird Buffer.
Because of the above disadvantages of the Md 44 I would like to suggest two
alternate configurations for your consideration.
I
1.
Three stand-alone Md 50' s, each having its own storage plus duplexed
shared LeS.
2.
Three Md 50' s with shared storage.
Either of the above configurations are capa!:>le of meeting the presently defined
Bird Buffer requirements. In fact, if future growth becomes a consideration,
both of these configurations have a decided advantag-e over the prime
candidate, the 9020.
Section 3. 3 • 2
o
Page H/12
6/10/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL .
c
Comments concerning acceptance or rej ection of the proposed configurations
would be appreciated.
D. A. Dossin
DAD/dml
cc: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
C. B. Brown, Los Angeles
J. F. DeRos e
D. Fuchs Los Angeles
C. R. Harden
R. B. Hurley
R. B. Talmadge Los Angeles
J. M. Terla to
Mr. G. West, Los Angeles
I
I
c
Section 3. 3 • 2
()
Page H/13
6/10/66
" •i.
~ Ii; :' .. '" .:
:
Jt:ne 6, 1966
AdvanCE!d Programs, Los Angeles, California
427
r"
" .. '
L ...•. '
.,
j.
.
.i. ____ •_ _ ___ •.. ___. ____ .. _
~
c:·;::
f: C/t'i ':
S'l'C Buffer Computer Configuratio;.1
: .. ,
1:1 :
. '.
Memorandum of May 25, 1966 , from D. Dossin to J.J • Selfridge
Mr. D. Dossin, Bldg. 951, Dept. B70,Poughkeepsie
The Model 9020 is our first choice for the STC buffer computer due to its
hard'ware features for mu1ti-proce s sing and reliability, and the software that
could be furnished at no cost. However ,our proposing the§~020-' is' dO~p~'{~d~~;t
6 n obtaii1i"~g"-~; -'~tt~~~'t'i~~' ie~ ~e price for the machine.
In the event the 9020 price is unfavorable, we feel a configuration based on the
Model 44 would be more suitable than any other cOi1figuratioi1 0: System/360
computers. Considerable cost savings in programming and documf~ntation
would result by having similar computers at the cO:ltrol center and the remote
stations. Furthermore, the Model 44 offers a competitive price/penormanct;; ratio.
c
We have recently received informatio:l that the Model 44 is being conside~e:i as
a base for a time-sharing system with many of the features we need for the STC. 1
The time-sharing configuration would oifer a two-processor system -with the f-ell
System/360 instruction set, dynamic address translatio!l, seven-bit storagE
pro~ection, separ ate memory boxe s and partitioning capability. It appears ~ :-:at
the Model 44 modifications we had requested are more practical than indicc :ed
in our meeting of 10 May.
A cO:lfiguration of stand-alone Model SO s with shared LCS must be ruled OU": as a
pos sible configuration, since this does not suit our application. Our desigr. calls
for all programs to be residerlt in main storage all the time and there is no
advanta']8 to LCS over disk for data storage ~ A configuration of Model 50s ,,"'ith
shared 2Y1ain storage would suit our application but would not be comp,)tible vvith'
theS02:) a;-.d 44 rationale stated above.
Ir; light of the studies involving the 414 time-sharing system l we VI"ould like to
pursue the Model 44 modifications listed at our meeting Oi1 the 10';:h of May.
which were to have been discussed with the Hursley people.
o
G. D. West
GDVV:jh
cc: C.B.Bro'Nn, J.F.DeRose, D.Fuchs, C.R.Harden, R.B.Hurley., J.J.Sel:·idge,
R. B. Talmadge, J. M. Terlato.
l.------------------------~
IIForecast assllmptiorls:
System/360, Model 44 TS"; SSD
Department D48, Building 706; 25 April, 1966.
Section 3. 3 . 2
Pough~~eepsie,
Page H/14
6/10/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
CUSTOMER r,AME:
Satellite Control Facility
Computing Support
Space Systems Division
Inglewood~ California
REGION:
GEM
DISTRICT:
Western
BRANCH:
Los Angeles
BRt~NCH
. MANAGER:
Skip Ho:yi:
ACCOUNT MANAGI?R:
Ed Chappelear
D. P. SALESMAN:
Bob Fairbanks.
Bob Krause
Bob Oller
FSD REPRESENTATIVE:
\·0
Westchester
Section 3. 3. 3
Johnny Jones,
Jim Selfridge
Glen McClure
Page 1
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
PART 11.
they
Ul'C
3600 COSTS (Although Several 1604 t s are yet in
system~
in process of being phased out and replac.ed; monthly rentals
were approximately same).
ITEM
NO.
3604 Processor and Console
3603 Core Storage
1
3606 Data Channel (900 ea. )
5
3623 Mag. Tape Controller
606 Mag. Tape Transport (825 ea. )
8
3602 Com. IVlodule
1
3644 Card Punch Controller
1
1
3649 Card Reader Controller
405 Card Reader
1
415 Card Punch
1
1
3659 Line Printer Controller
1 .i.
501 Llne Printer
3691 P-T Reader Punch
1
3681 Data Channel Converter
1
3682 Satellite Coupler
1
'3000/7000 Data Channel Adapte'r (Approx) 11
7631-2 File Control
1
1301-1 Disk File
1
731 Typewriter (approx. )
1
"'l
Total Single Configuration:
Configurations in SCF: 5-STC; 2-.AF
TOTAL
13,000
10,000
4,500
2,900
6,600
2,000
675
325
400
295
700
865
310
275
175
1,000
335
2,100
45
47,000
376,000
TOTAL SCF MONTHLY CDC LEASE:
C'
3.3.3
Pag-e B. 2/1
~-.---~""~--.-
"----
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
STC
MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
FOREWORD
Many times in the pa st I programs for Computer utilization in scheduling I
configuration control, and information display have been either too automatic
(i. e. close to 100% computer control) and thus too complicated and costly to
be practically or economically feasible I or they have been too manual and thus
too time consuming and liable to human error to be desirable.
The optimum approach is computer operated programs which allow manual interaction or intervention in those area s where human capability exceed those of
the computer in practical application. Specifically I decision making should be
a human task while data massaging I formatting I and display is a logical computer task.
Normally I human interaction with computers causes excessive waste of computer
operating time in that the computer is "tied up" and unable to process other
tasks when a human interruption is enacted to allow decision making.
This is no longer true with the introduction of 2250' s I with separate buffer I and
multiprocessing (or multiprogramming) with executive monitors and priority I
task tables. Information necessary for decision making can be displayed via
the 2250 buffer while the CPU is released for other tasks. An interrupt via
o
the 2250 keyboard then places the task back in the CPU on a priority basis
after the appropriate human decisions have been made.
Section 3.3 . 3
Page E. 3/1
1/28/66
----~-
...
-.-------.-"---
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
An irnproved, well delineated interaction, between the human delegated the
responsibility for a task and the computer which is designed for expediting
the task, is the design goal for the programs which follow.
SCHEDULING & IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
(SIP)
The manual scheduling system now in use at the STC has two inherent problems;
(1) liability to human error, and (2) extreme time consumption between workable
schedules.
The scheduling and implementation program (SIP) is a computerized method of
scheduling which will accomplish the following:
a. Automate the establishment of of N-hour**·schedules showing
stations, satellite acquisition times, and Program Office support
requests.
b. Expedite the resolvement of support conflicts* •
c. Automate the issuance of final schedules to the appropriate
Remote Tracking Stations and STC personnel.
d.
Display esoteric information to user personnel in the STC.
e. Record specified information for history.
o
*.
Support Conflicts: '~fi:ne: two or more support requests at the same RTS
for the same time period, or for two time periods too close together in time
to allow turn around at the RTS.
i« *N = the time specified by multioperations.
Section 3. 3 . 3
Page E. 3/2
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
The SIP will be supplied its required input from four sources:
the 3600 off-
line computers I multi-operations I the Program Project offices, selected data
from the configuration control program (described later) •
1. Multi-Operations -
will manually input the RTS' s by name and
code representation. Once input, this information will remain in
permanent storage.
2. Configuration Control Program - will supply up to date RTB
support capability.
3.
3600' s - will supply acquisition times of satellites over the
stations (i. e. rise to set times) for an n-hour time period.
4. Project Offices - will supply statement of support requirements for each satellite over each station.
Utilizing the above inputs, SIP will generate a schedule for N -hours encompassing the entire SCF tracking network supporting all. missions. Naturally,
all of the support requests will be impossible to satisfy, therefore the 2250
will indicate conflicts utilizing flashing lights, arrows, .etc. The 2250
operator will then call the sites one at a time and the scale will be expanded
to facilitate analysis of the conflicts.
o
(See Figure 1)
After consultation
with the Project Office personnel involved, the scheduler will input data to
S e cti 0 n 3. 3 • 3
Page E. 3/3
1/28/66
------
--~-~-------
-------~------------
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
the SIP to reflect changes in the support requests and a new workable (no
conflicts) schedule will be generated. After verification of the new schedule
by all involved, the 2250 will be keyed and the schedule will be transmitted
over teletype to the site involved. The schedule will also be stored for
history and printed on hard copy for mangement information. The remaining
sites will be scheduled in the same
ma~ner.
CONFIGURATION CONTROL PROGRAM
(CCOP)
In order for configuration control to be as automated as possible, configuration
information must be gathered and displayed through a computer operated system
sensing medium. In a multiprocessing system, which is under the auspices of
a control monitor, the monitor can act as the sensing medium for obtaining very
general information about SCF system configuration (i. e. which sites are
connected to the computing system and in which mode they are operating) •
However, in order for configuration control to be a truly useful tool of management, a more detailed level of configuration information must be obtained
and continuously updated in "real time". The best medium for obtaining
detailed information is the set of diagnostic programs which are pperated to
ascertain STC and RTS support capability.
NOTE:
At any time, voice
communication with support elements of the STC system can provide up to
date information on configuration. This data can be input to CCOP via 2250
keyboard.
Section 3.3. 3
Page E. 3/4
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
The .Configuration Control Program (CCP) will sense the results of diagnostics
and tag "out of tolerance" (i. e. not capable of supporting) conditions and
down grade a 100% support model to reflect non-supporting elements, and
display the configuration on the 2250 dedicated to configuration control. In
many instances out of tolerance conditions, as defined by diagnostics, will
be overruled by proj ect personnel and will become conditions of concern
rather than conditions of non- support. Conditions of concern should not be
reflected in the CCP;
therefore, a manual input (via the 2250 keyboard)
should be generated to reflect project personnel decisions and override the
diagnostics flags.
NOTE:
Conditions of concern will be shown in the
Management Information Program.
For Programmed configuration control, planned RTS down time can be input to
the CCOP to reflect planned support configurations for any increment of time
neces sary for good operational control.
(Example:
Philco plans 1 week
down time for Hula in order to accomplish scheduled maintenance. This maintenance is to commence two weeks from the present date. This date can be
fed to the CCOP and a support capability can be established for the period
beginning two weeks from the present date. The support capability data can
then be fed to the scheduling program for the establishment of a support
schedule. Any change in the planned maintenance can be quickly reflected
in the schedule by the changing of a few parameters and the resolvement of
any consequent support conflicts.
Section 3.3. 3
Page E. 3/5
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
Another use of the
eeop would be to tabulate history data for management
usage. Since the
eeop would utilize all the information which describes
anomalies or catastrophic failures of the support system, a history file can
be maintained to reflect chornic or repetitive problem areas. The weak areas
of the support system, the necessity for altered preventative maintenance
schedules I etc.
I
can be
e~tablished
simply by keying a call to the tabluated
history file. This same concept could be extended to cover orbiting systems
as well.
(Example: The repetitive rejection of commands by certain
satellites could be tabulated for history)
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM
(MIP)
(/
Management information is simply an outline or brief of all data of critical
nature which is utilized for effective management of an operational support
system. Management information. is usually gathered after a request has
been made for information concerning a particular aspect of the system. The
data requested is then manually collected from recorded date (and conversations
with support personnel) to reflect the information required.
MIP I then, is a
program which gathers, formats and displays information necessary for
effective management of the entire support system.
The following types of information are required for updating the Management
c
Information Program:
Section 3 . 3 . 3
Page E. 3/6
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
a.
Daily support schedules (obtained from SIMP)
b. Daily equipment configurations and equipment status
(obtained from eeOP)
c. Voice Communication with the RTS IS.
The information will be used primarily for two purposes:
I. SCF management planning for future procurements, technical
direction to contractors, etc.
II. System Controller and Data Systems Controller directions
during missions to assure rapid, well planned and
orderly assignments for correcting abnormal conditions
(anomalies, reconf igurations, equipment repairs, etc.)
1. Since Management planning is based upon statistics of past, present
and projected future operations, there is a continuous gathering of information
to substantiate management positions. Technical direction to contractors
requires operational data to substantiate the requirements levied upon the
contractors by the Air Force management. The Management Information
Program will provide the needed data in near real-time in any of various
formats desired. MIP will not require extensive data proces sing since it will
draw the needed information from existing operational programs. The MIP
o
display medium (2250 or hard copy) will provide the capability to chose
formats which best suit the time of inquiry. Most of the information will
Section 3. 3.3
Page E. 3/7
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-8-
come from the CCOP.
(Note description of
ceop
preceding)
2. Operationally the MIP will be very useful to the System Controller and
the Data Systems Controller. 'When unexpected anomalies occur in the STC
System (includes RTS s)
I
I
the System Controller can call information sufficient
to make rapid assessments of the problem area(s) and delegate the responsibility for repair. Since he will know the degree of the problem, he will be
able to make accurate estimates as to time of repair and the seriousness
of the difficulty. This is especially important in manned orbital missions
since ground support during repair missions is of paramount im portance.
The ground support personnel must have enough information to properly
assess the situation. The MIP will satisfy this requirement.
Section 3. 3 . 3
Page E. 3/8
1/28/66
~
~
\.
~
"
.y
I
EXAMPLE
SINGLE SITE RESOLUTION
HULA
(f.)
(1)
o
M......
o
w
CONFLICT - Shows as
Flashing Symbols
w
co
~
Support Requested by
Program x Project OIfice
::I
w
~
A.....
~
. ,
·X
r
X
X
~,.
o
z
t-rj
o
~
X
t:J
X
Z
X
M
t-3
XXXXX X~ ;~::r~!~e~~:j:t:td~irice.
~
x
o
t-'I
0
o
o
0
0
0
o
00000000
Support Requested by
Program 2 Proj ect Office
~
2
~
e
~
I-'
i!
B
i!
e
lllll!l
t-cl
'-.....OJ
NlQ
00(1)
61-M
mo
w
'-.....
1O
TIME
Codes for Satellite Programs
Example: xxxxx = program x
00000 = program y
~~~~~ = program z
c> N Hour Schedule
Could be Overlays
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
CUSTOMER NAME:
National Range Division
Air Force Systems Commmand
Washington, D. C.
REGION:
GEM
PROGRAM:
Air Force Programs
PROGRAM DIRECTOR.: . Ray Simms
PROGRAM MANAGER:
Jack Richardson
SPECIAL REPR.ESENTATIVE:
SYSTEMS ENGINEER:
FSD REPRESENTATIVE:
Section 3.4
Bob Bruns
Michael Bibault
Ken Driessen
Page 1
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
HQ NRO OFFICE SYMBOLS.
PATRICK AFB
11
JUCle
1965
C:~---------------------4
NRC
Gen. Davis
Col. Gibson
Lt. Col. teB.'rtlDlonth
Dr. Hess
Asst. Chief Scientist ' Lt. Col. Lake
COMMANDER
V ice Commander
Executive
Chief Scientist
NRGV
NRGC
NRGS
NRA
OFFICE OF ADMIN SERVICES
NRC
NRCM
NRCR
PROGRAM CONTROL OFFICE
Program Management Division
Resource Management Division
Mr. Lachar
Lt~ Col. O'Brien
NRI
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS OFFICE
NRO
DIRECTORATE OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT
Operations Analysis Office
(open)
Range Control Division
Lt. Col. Ligon
Operations Evaluation Division
Lt. Col. Schou
N'ROA
NROC
NROE
NRP
NRPR
NRPP
NRPPA
NRPPR
NRPPS
(~~
.
NRS
NRSC
NRSCI
NRSCP
NRSI
NRSID
NRSIS
NRSM
NRSP
DIRECTORATE OF PLANS AND REQUIREMENTS
Requirements Divi~ion Lt. Col. Lineberger
Plans Division
Col Volcek~ Perhacs
Advanced Plans Branch Lt. Col. De Lisle
Resource Plans Branch Lt. Col. Weingand
Systems Plans Branch Lt. Col. CUmmings
Col. Butler (open)
Col. Pellegrini
Dr. Fennema
DIRECTORATE OF RANGE DEVELOPMENT
Col. Ew:lns
Communications Division
Mr. Jones
Network Implementation Branch
Mr. De Russo
Network Planning Branch
Mr. Nordbusch
Instrumentation Division
Col. Hemans
Data Instrumentation Branch
Maj. Haberman
Support 1nstrumentation Branch
Maj. Brashears
Mobile Stations Division
Lt 0 Col. (open)
Air Force Representative, ISPO
NRW
WESTERN PLANNING OFFICE (Los A'ngles AF Station)
NRZ
PERSONNEL
DDMS
,?OD MANNED SPACE FLIGHT SUPPORT QFFICE
•
Col. Anderson
Col. Olson
Maj. Magrane
DEPUTY COMMANDER AFSC FOR GLOBAL RANGE (Andrews AFB, Wa.h)
SCGR
SCGRP
SCGRS
DEPUTY COMMANDER
Directorate of Plans and Operations
Directorate of Range Development
o
".,.,.. ~ the Oft ••• f ........, ...... S....
• __ •• f
Section 3.4
i.,
.~".
___ ._.
n........... A'" ,.....
Page 2
2/18/66
c
C)
r~
\
j
Cf.l
CD
H~ADQUt\RTEi{S
o
o
::s
NAT ION A l rtf.'l i\~ G E D IV I5 I0 I\j
r+
......
COf'-~r.'ANDER
AIR FORCE
LI Gcn L.I. Davis
w
NRG
~
COMMAND
2694
VICl:: cor..'MANDER
Col R.C. Gibson
'4RGV
2908
(11m SCIENTIST
Dr. 6.1. Htss, Jr.
NaGS
(Andrc'Ws AFB)
SYST~rI.'1S
7525
EXECUTIVE
LI Col A.F. Learmonlh
NRGC
r
PROGUM CONllOl OffiCE
e.1 I.e. A".n,.
II.
T
T
WESURN PLANNING OfFICI
(lOS ANGElES)
INTERNATIONAl AFfAIIS &
SP£CIAl PROmTS OffiCE
ar. t.L aill.r
C,I 1.1••iI"rl
IIC
..MISI
ssse
-y
III
SUI
eel t.f. Cr.I•••••
IIGP
(UDIEW51
SJul
(AIDI.EW51
'IIGI
1312
--.
I
10GlAa MANAGEMENT DIVISION
2909
IISOUlel aAIlAGEMINrDlYlSIOII - -
_. .:::: --.
_
--~-
-.- --
~tiF~i~~;~~~~~~j~~~'!~~~!l!~~~~~? o~~~~~~!~~~~:~~~J~t,~t~~{~j
DIIECTOIATE ,I .LANS , IIGUllEaEIiTS
""c--DIIECTORATE ,111IGI- DlYElO.aIU- _":''--=- .~-=~---- ----:::_::~~
IIiCTOIATE ,I O.IIUIOIS aAIIAGUll1
~~~!~~0-::~~'f~~ :ii;:3.-c;.!i~"';:-:::;'-;-;~~~:"-~-'"~~_~:':i~:''': ...~~;:-U:"I~~~.::.:~~ ::;'-~=;iJ;~~cT;~:fW~
* .r.
eJJo
IEQUlREaEITS DI"SlOI
O.IRATIOIS lIAnSJS OffJa
----;.
~-~--.-
N..I
'--
-.UIS DIYISIO•
(,1.1.1. Yk..
...
Ilpt
ADUNCED PUIS IUNe.
It C,I A.U.••Us..
- SSSI
-w""'O
@
5127
"OJ
I.STIUaEIUlIO.IIV1SIOI
-
a.L Cltwel...
- -
-K
IATl l.suualllunOI IUle.
• .. U:I.iii.
51"
--·IAI&1 (OITlOl IIYISlO.
It CtI Y.I. Ut•• I
1I10e
ml
oOJ"~
m
CD
S
CD
::s
-!:!.
m
11m. flllUIUCI 11 C,I II.L C••aI.,1
JlIPPS
SUI
I-'
-
..
~-:-:-~--
_SUPPORT INstlUaiIlUllo.
Iluel
.eI I.L .......n
SlIe
orllAJlOIS IYUIlnO.IIY1S10.
It eel ...: 'Sc...
5711
I.SIS
"d I-' I.Q
I-'I-'CD
-~ ~----~--: - -- - - -
ell 1.1......
~I;;.;;I;;;SI_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~=
-:--:: := .=-.; ~ ~ -;:----
COIi •• lllunOIlS IIYISIO.
t-.
*&enl5
ar...........
lISe
4
5124
In.OIl PUIIIII& IU.CI
ar. lL .trnnell
5031
IESOUICE .UIIS IU.CI
l. C.I P.5 .••1•••••
JllPra
SS4S
';
~
.n.oll IMPUatliUTlOII IUlleM
ar. a. D.bu.
II SCI
SOl'
,,.,.,,' ',:
-IESOUICI aUAGIMII,
MOIllI STATIONS DIYISIOII
IIISM ---
DIYISJOI
suo. _
_-_~ --~" J ~r"'i' 1965.
________________________________________________
_."--------"-----+
·.~~P~,
r~ACT
SM~ET
~I~B~M~CONFIDENTIAL
OFFICE
orr
IHrrOf'lMATION
NATIONAL RANGE DIVISION,
"AT"'CK AU' "0"<:1: .A.I:,
DET.
,.LQ'UDA
TELl: .. HONE COCOA .I:ACH, ,.L..A ......17JJ
I I
,BIOGRAPHY
of
LIEUTENANT GENERAL LEIGHTON (JEE) IRA. 1)~VIS
General Davis conmands the National Range Division(mm) and is Department
or Defense Manager for Manned Space Flight'Support Operations.
Born in Sparta, Wisconsin, Februa17 20, 1910,
Entered United states Hilita17 AcadeDG" in 1931, graduated 1935 •. Also
holds Masters Degree in Aeronautical Engineering from Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (1941) and is a graduate of Air War College (1950).
Received pilot rating'1936, now holds Command Pilot rating.
Assignments bear out reputation as soldier-scientist.
Instructor, Depart-
ment of Mechanics, West Point (i939-l942); Ground School Director, West Point
. (1942-43); Project Officer'Technical Executive, Chief, .Armament Laborator,y
, ,( 1943~4 7) J .Assistant Chief, Engineeririg Plans Branch,' Engineering Division
(1947-48), Chief, Applied Research Section, Air Materiel Command (1948~49),
Chief, OFC Air Research,
!Me (1949) - All at Wright-Patterson AFB (1950-51);
Deputy Commander and Commander, USAFIT, Wright-Patterson AFB (1950-51)';
Director of Armament, ARnC (1951-52); Assistant Director and Director of Development, ARDC, (1952-54)j'Commander,Air Force 'Missile Development Center,
Holloman AFB. N. H.' (1954-58); Deputy Commander tor Research and Development,
ARDC (1958-59) J ;Assistant Deput7 'Chier' of' start ,)evelopnent J' Headq~er8
o
~~AF' (1959); ·Conmander,.Ant'l'Q, Patrick· ArB, ;·J?.o~da· (Kq
,
1960).
.
···-more-
Section 3.4
Page A. i l l
2/18/66
1
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
General Davis 1s married to the former Gertrude Austin of L1ndhurst, H. J.
Three children, Mrs. Robert M. Brawn,'Mrs.
J~es
C. Faris, ,and son,'Leighton
I.' Davis, Jr.
Received Legion of Merit for development of electronic pressure-time,
·pressure volume equipment used at West Point, Oak Leaf Cluster of Legion
. of Merit tor design and development or gun-bomb-rocket sights tor 'righter
aircraft.
Received Thurman H. Bane Award from Institute otAeronautical
Sciences for work in developing ,tire control equipment and Honorar,y LLB,
trom the New Mexico 'state Universit7.
On Hlq 21,'1963, the late' President
'Kennedy presented General Davis with the National, Aeronautics and Space
Administration's Medal tor Outstanding Leadership in recognition of his
contribution to Project MercUXT.
For recreation likes golf (shoots in low eighties),· bridge, enj07s hi-ti,
tond of hunting and tishing.
Has extensive collection of.electronic .devices
,
which he constructed, and war game which' he patented.
Is Fellow of American 'Rock,et 'SocietT, 'member 'of Order ot
General Davis
•
..
ass~
.coumand of
the'Rat~onal'Bange
I
'
~ae~l:Sans.
Division
.
OD:
2 JanU&r7
'
'1964, :and was promotedto:Lieu~e~nt General .on ~,:June·1964.
_Ali'RTR-
o
Section 3.4
Page A.l/Z"
Z/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIA L
CUSTOMER NAME:
I
Western Test Range,
Vandenberg Air Force Base,
California.
REGION:
GEM
DISTRICT:
Western
BRANCH:
Los Angeles, Westchester.
BRANCH MANAGER:
Skip Hoyt
ACCOUNT MANAGER:
Paul DePascal
DP SALESMAN:
Jay Priday
SYSTEMS ENGINEER:
Dick Stanley
FSD REPRESENTATIVE:
Section 3. 4. 1
Paul Lindfors,
Johnny Jones,
Jim Hamlin.
Paae 1
12/20/65
.;
c')
~
,~I"'
\
I.,:)
ro
(D
o
cT
....,-
J
g
Western Test Range
Vandenberg AFB I Calif.
Brig. Gen.. J. Bleymaier
~
~
........
Vice Commander - Col. C.A. Ousley
Range Support
Col. Delaney
-1- - Technical Director
~
S. D. Radom
Engineering
Col. Hoffman
Operations
l!nl Vinzant
........ ~
~?'
~~
~~
<»,
c..n ........
H
tD
~
Procurement
Col. Clark
Plans &
Requirements
o
o
~
~
tJ
tr.1
Z
r-j
~
t-t
Pi
}
(/)
Range Support
Col. Delaney
CD
oc+
~.
g
~
~
~
~
Air Force
.1
IBM
I--l
Lt. Col.
Lt. Col.
Lt. Col.
Maj. L.
R. F. 0' Neil - Personnel
L. W. Fry - Materiel
H. L. Stil1ens - Comptroller
R. Gill - Administration
PaulO. Lindfors
John Jones
Jay Priday
Dick Stanley
Paul DePascale
f-1~
~P'
...........
~
~
(D
~~
0:> ...........
01~
H
td
~
o
o
zt-.rj
8
t!1
Z
r1
~
~
~,I
~\
\
'--~~J
~
l
,/
(j)
CD
()
Engineering
Col. Hoffman - - - - - Technical Advisor
Bill McGraw
c-t.....
g
~
J
~
1--1
Air Force
'l
It·
1
J-lt-c:J
Mp:>
.......... tQ
MCD
~~
m ..........
C)l·W
Lt. Col. J. M. Ellzey - Ships
Lt. Col. P. Andrae - Ptoj. Control
(J) Mr. W. Cuthbert -- Instr. Engr.
C/) Mr. B. Ames - Comm. Engr.
(I) Mr. C. Cusworth - Camp. Engr.
Col. C. H. Andrews - F~cilities Engr.
(2)Mr. Bob Effenberger
('3) Mr.- Jim Alliso~
(2) Mr. Chuck LeRoy
(]) Mr. Ted Barr
Maj. Glen Ballantyne - MOt Range Support- Special Assignment
Mr. Lou Kraff - Director Systems Engineering
Mr. Bert Larey - Systems Eng:ineer
Mr. Chesebro - Communications Engineer
U> Mr. Criddle
(4) Mr. 8inglle - Command & Control
IBM
Pa ul o. Lindfor s
John Jones
Jay Priday
Dick Stanley
Paul DePascale
H
tJj
~
o
~
f-Ij
S
t:r:1
Z
Ij
'i
II
I
(number) - Denote s chain of Command
under particular section
t-j
S;
~
n,
tA
~
(/)
CD
Operations
Col. Vinzant
()
c+
~.
§
.
CA)
~
~
Air Force
Mr. Alexander - Range Data
L.T. Col. Montalvo - Range Ops.
Lt.Col. R.B. Moody - Range Safety
Col. Hill -- Chief Scientist for Range
Operations
~:n Mr. Mc.Dowell ) Math. Analysis Ap.
CD Mr. C rl stophona )
(I)
J-l~
t\:Ip:>
~~
~~
OJ,
Olf-P..
·IBM
PaulO. Lindfors
John Jones
Jay Priday
Dick Stanley
Paul DePascale
t-I
to
~
o
o
~
t-2j
S
tr.1
~
.~
t;!
~
~r
~;
~
(f.)
(D
()
c-t-
.......
g
~
~
Procurement
Col. Clark
~
Air Force
Lt.Col. R. F. O'Neil
Mr. W ~ T. Heavner
Mr. K •. Ito
Mr. D. Templeman
~~
Mp:>
~~
~~
m,
CJlC)l
IBM
PaulO. Lindfors
John Jones
Jay Priday
Dick Stanley
Paul DePascale
t-I
to
~
o
o
z
8
tIj
f-Ij
~
S;
~
0:1
(j)
(()
~
.....
~
"I
.I
~/
Plans and Requirements - - - - Colonel Godfrey
.J
g
.
~
~
........
!---.\I-d
I>-'{ll
'I>-'({)
to
~>
m,
C)lm
Air Force
Col. Carey - Advanced Plans
Mr. Bradford
Lt. Colonel Chuck Fellows - Director, Advanced Programs
f-{
tJj
~
o
o
z
~
S
tIj
z
t-j
~.
II
c
~
-)
~
)
(I)
CD
o
rt"
.....,.
g
Technical Director to Commander - - - - Mr. S. D. Radom
f
.
u:>
~
~
Air Force
Mr. Gene Clarey - Chief of Operations Analysis
!-l.1-tJ
/).:>p:>
~tf5
~~
m,
CJ1-...:::J
H
tr1
~
o
o
~
t:r.j
S
tIj
z.--j
S;
~
I
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C.
CURRENT STATUS
C .1
A Technical Report entitled "Consolidated Range Control
Center" was completed and delivered to WTR December 15.
The introduction to the report follows. Further information
concerning this report can be obtained through the MOL
Project Office.
Section 3.4.1
c
Page C.I/l
1/28/66
---
---- --,--
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
1 .0
INTRODUCTION
SCOPE OF THE REPORT
1 •1
The present growth potential of the Air Force Western Test Range dictates
the consideration of a gonsolidated Range C2ontrol genter to meet AFWTR
functional requirements and allow for modular expansion of both the hardware and programming systems. This technical report presents the IBM
preliminary system design for the CRGC at AFWTR.
The contents of the report are ordered to allow both quick assessment of
the composite system and detailed perusal of its individual elements. An
abstract of its subj ect sequence follows:
Section 1
Design Considerations
A summary of considerations which influenced the
design of the system.
Section 2
General System Design
•
A condensed identification and description of the
computing system which IBM has designed for CRee.
Includes graphic summaries of hardware and software subsystems and range functions which the system supports.
Section 3
Detailed System Descriptions
Detailed technical discussion of the CRCC computer
configuration I the telemetry receiving complex, the
communication system I computer application and system
programming, the management information system I and
the range safety function is discussed.
Section 4
Facilities
Description of facility considerations which result from deSign of the data system.
C
This data system design for the CRCC has been based upon IBM S present
understanding of AFWTR functional requirements. To this extent, the
I
S e cti on 3. 4 • 1
Page C .1/2
1/28/66
~'~"-----~~'~-"
---
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
system should be regarded as preliminary since numerous cont ingencies
can modify support requirements as the range grows.
IBM will welcome the range's response to this design approach and is
prepared to modify and adapt as the system contingencies arise in
AFWTR's expanding user support mission.
1 .2
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
In considering the various aspects of a consolidated approach, it becomes
apparent that the computing function provides the single:', c:;lement common
to most system users. It is, however, quite clear that tile computing
elements of this system cannot be specified in an abstract fashion. It is
convenient to consider the computing system as a node pOint in the flow of
raw and processed data at AFWTR. The design of the data processing
system must reflect a capability to accommodate the network of data flow
paths as envi sioned during and after the consolida tion. The key factors
to consider are the number of data paths arriving at or emanating from the
computing complex and the maximum expected over -all data flow rate.
Closely allied with the requirement to receive and transmit data is the
amount and type of proce s sing (arithmetic, converting, routing, etc.) required to be done on this transient data in real time. These real time
requirements are dictated by range operational functions such as the prediction of impact, orbit determination, quick look experiment analysis I and
other rapid turn -around tasks. The need to perform a variety of real time
processing while at the same time managing the flow of data will determine
the characteristics of the central proces sing element and govern the
selection of I/O devices associated with the central processor.
Once a given central processing element has been defined it is necessary
to address the total processing system for the sake of achieving a configuration which wi 11 provide for maximum sustained support to on -line operations
should a failure situation occur. This historically has Leen solved through
the application of redundant elements in the system. The determining factor
in establishing maximum protection against interrupt or cancelled support
is the amount of time allowed to transfer critical functions from a marginal
device to one that is functioning correctly. By employing appropriate
switching equipment and pooling equipment, the required recovery capability
can be achieved without resorting to 100% hardware duplication.
c
In designing a consolidated center it is also necessary to inspect the offline or non-real time demands on the processing system. In this case t the
two factors of the operating system and the I/O configuration are the
determining ones. This is based on the assumption that the ,
c.
In regard to BAIS, Col. Carey stated tint he felt the
Air Force ~ormation Retrieval system developed fo.r
SAC was a better program.
d.
The system developed must have multiple accesses of
data with the rem ote terminals in and o.ut.
e.
The Range Safety system must have appropriate safeguards.
f.
Range safety should be split into two inputs with
'real-time data which can be destro.yed go.ing into. the data
reduction function and o.ther data generating an audit trail
fo.r Range safety. Range saf?ty items must be locked
under the contro.l o.f the Range Safety Officer.
'.-.-,
9.
C 0.1. Carey stated that everything wo.uld be co.ming in via microwave jf not on standard co.mmunicatio.n facilities. Jay Priday
bro.ught up the point that the CTCS seems to. duplicate so.me o.f the
equipment in the TMCC. Col. Carey stated that this was because
he was unable to get co.mplete control of it and that the CTCS has
equipment which is co.mmo.n to. all users. That the Range is
respo.nsible for supplying the equipment, but the user is respo.nsible
for what the data says.
10.
The Wing in planning fo.r the TMCC duplicated some o.f the CTCS
equipmem.
'
11.
Our pro.po.sed CRCC must handle CTCS function.
12.
A key target date is the 15th of December when a draft of the
Range package plan must be done and ready for headquarters
review. The final plan must be ready by January 15. Therefore,
C 0.1. Carey stated that o.ur target of having a repo.rt in within a
mo.nth is timely. In reference to. previo.us discussio.n, the 15th o.f
No.vember formally was supposed to be the date at which the first
drait of their ~ge Package Plan was prepared.
'- more -
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/2
12/20/65
Page 3
13.
We discussed with Col. Carey that we saw the ma,in action required
on our part to be in the data reduction, range saiety, telemetry,
management information system and communications control. He
agreed that these covered the maj or areas. He stated that any
attempt to do program control switching of communications
equipment would give the communications people a fit, but told us to
go ahead and try. He suggested that we use Major Conelly on his
staff as assistance in ente'ring the management information area
and also if we ran into difficulty in the. telemetry area.
14.
We discussed the possible difficulty of securing information in the
telemetry area and he said if it got too serious to see him and he
would attempt to assist us. In discussing how we found out what
the Range future requirements would be, he stated the following:
a. .
In the immediate future STLS would be the highest
performance eqUipment we would have to consider.
b.
15.
They were planning on using their own military
instrumentation satellite to handle communications up
from the Range and, therefore, any system plarmed must
plan on higher speed commilnication in the future.
In concluding and as we wer'e leaving, Col. Carey stated "there is
a great deal to be done. NRD Headquarters is not sensitive and
doesn't recognize the problem. I need help there. "
I would conclude that this is a very successful call and that we absolutely
must have our systems design in two to three or four days prior to
January 15 at the latest. Revisions to our plan are possible after this date
but it will make it harder to be included in the Range Package Plan.
Please call me on any pOints of discussion or interest regarding the above.
w.
B. Gibson
,WBG:jb
distribution:
J. E. Hamlin
C.
J.
D.
P.
R.
H.
C
Section 3. 4. 1
B.Brown
Priday
Stanley
DePascale
P. Bruns
G. Hoyt
Page H/3
12/20/65
,,--_..
_- .,---
... , - -
_.
".".----
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
October 18, 1965
To:
Mr. J. E. Hamlin
Subject:
Trip Report - T,elemetry Processing Center at WTR
On Oct. 13th I visited the Western Test Range at Vandenberg APB. The
'following observations were made during various meetings held on this date.
1.
Instrumentation Section of Range Engineering
a.
Mr. Jim Allison intends to submit a work statement to Procurement for a Telemetry Processing Center. He is apparently
writing this work statement without input from the Computer Systems
or Operations branches of his parent organization (see attachment) .
It is planned L'1at this work statement will be in Procurement by
Nov. 15th with an operational system date in early 1967 .
I
b.
Mr. Allison indicated that he is looking at two approaches
in writing the system specifications and configuration. (From later
conversa.tions with Mr. Fred Barr of Computer Systems, it seems
that Beckman presents one of these approaches and is probably the
influencing contractor.)
".~'"
(
,/
c.
Mr. Allison indicated that he is interested in the long
range approach I i . e . I an integrated control fa9ility I but he is not
particularly biased toward an integrated facility in terms of equipment location in one centralized building.
d.
The building to house this proposed center has been approved
for construction. It will consist of a 9 ,000 sq. ft. annex to the
existing CTCS building and will cost approximately $500K.
2.
o
Data Section of Range Operations ,
a.
:NIr. Jim Alexander repudiated the engineering plans for a
Telemetry Center.. He stated that he was not intimately familiar
with the work statement and further stated that he "didn't really
care" (sic) since he had not submitted requirements for additional
or new systems to Engineering. Mr. Alexander stated that Jim
Allisonl s unilateral action violates the normal mode of range operations i i. e ., engineering deSign based upon requirements levied by
Operations.
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/4
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
.~
(
. Mr. J. E. Hamlin
-2-
October 18, 1965
/
Systems Section of Range Engineering
3.
a.
Mr. Ted Barr stated that his organization had not furnished
inputs to the Telemetry Center work statement. He believes that
this work sta.tement will be proscribed by management on the grounds
tha t there is no input from his organization.
?rom the above describe'd meetings it seems apparent that Mr. Allisonl s plans
for a Nov. 15th procurement will be vitiated due to lack of technical approval
a~ higher levels (probably Mr. Stan Radom) .
The work statement will undoubtedly be rewritten with all appropriate organizations contributing inputs.
Rather than try to conform to Mr. Allison l s present concept of the Telemetry
Center IBM should concentrate on the organizations most likely to influence
the final procurement. Conversations with Mr. Barr and Mr. Alexander indicate are not inexorable in their ideas about an integrated facility to satisfy
telemetry processing requirements. In fact Mr. Barr seemed well pleased
with the IBM approach as presented very briefly by Jay Priday and myself.
I
I
("'/
R. V. Coalson
,RVC/jeb
Attachment
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/5
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Attachment to Mr. R. V. Coalson s Trip Report of October 18
Mr. J. E. Hamlin
I
I
1965 to
The persons referred to in this memo are shown organizationally below.
WTR
Gen. Bleymaier
Stan Radom - Tech. Dir.
1
Operations
Col. Vinzant
Engineering
Col. Hoffman
(;sJmentation
Cuthbert
1im ,fUlison
section 3. 4. 1
I
Data
Jim Alexander
Systems
eusworth
1
Chuck LeRoy)
Ted Barr
) Computer
Page H/6
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
November 11, 1965
RESUME' ,OF BRIEFrnG GIVEN GENERAL BLEYMAIER AND WTR STAFF
November 10, 1965 at 2:00 p. m.
Summary:
Customer expressed disappointment that we did not present a detailed
design idea. He felt our presentation was too filled with generalities and
motherhood. Specifically, our recommendation of a short study prior to
going out to RFP was unacceptable. This was interpreted as meaning that
the customer wants immediate help from IBM in generating a design that
they can use as a basis for an RFP in the near future. Attached are debriefing comments from the individuals who attended from IBM.
Action:
Since. the Range is on vacation November 11, we will return Friday, the
12th, to start immediate action aimed at coming up with a detailed systems
design within three weeks.
Distribution:
C.
R.
J.
P.
W.
J.
H.
J.
P.
M.
C.
J.
B. Brown - MOL Project
P. Bruns - MOL Project, FRO (GEM)
Chapman - FSD, White Sands"
A. DePascale - LA Federal
B. Gibson - MOL Project
E. Hamlin -'FSD MOL Project
G. Hoyt - LA Federal
Jones..; FSD, LA Aerospace Bldg.
O. Lindfors - FSD, LA Aerospace Blq.g.
Martin - FSD, White Sands
E. McKittrick, Jr. - FRO (GEM)
H. Priday - LA Federal,
J~ J. Selfridge ~ FSD MOL Project
R. Stanley - LA Federal
R. Ursin-Smith ~ FSD, LA Aerospace Bldg.
c
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/7
12/20/65
. IBM CONFIDENTIAL
DE BRIE Fll'JGS
In Air Force fashion, each IBM attendee was asked to jot down his
recollection of comments made by persormel during the meeting. These
are as follows:
W. B. Gibson
Col. Montalvo:
Come see operations.
I am integrated now.
Same pitch as you made 18 mo. ago only using flip
charts instead of slides.
Col. Carey:
We agree in concept.
We want your detailed design.
(to J. Jones) Your date is way too optimistic. We
need ~ system in February, 1967, not October 1967.
(to J. Hamlin) Our biggest computing problem is a
five station real-time fix for radar tracking.
Col. Hill:
We have a good operation now. It is proceeding on
schedule.
(~- ~
(Col. Hill is not yet comple'tely identified as to
what organization he represents)
Mr. Kraff:
Col. Carey:
What information do you need from us to make a
design?
. I want a real-time data bank with m:ultiple access to
it from users allover the raJ?ge.
I understand why the computer operation should be
closed but the data must be open.
I could care less whether'there is one or multiple
systems required to do the job.
What I am interested in is' square footage, people
and dollars required. What are you ,going to do about
our Range Automated Information System? We want
details and specific recommendations from IBM.
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/S
12/20/65
Page· 2/Debriefings
('~'
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
J. E. Hamlin
Maj. Corley:
Interested in managem ,lt remote inquiry devices
and methods vs. lOgist.,,;al and schedule information.
Mr. Don Hass:
Asked mundane, courtesy question.
content nor answer.
Mr. Kraff:
Agitated as hell. Really wanted IBM to come in with
specliic design. Wanted following dilemma identliied
to General
WTR --~) 'NRD
6595
TMCC
'67
~
'68 f
[~~.
Canlt recall
- AFSC
RCC
'67
G
Add3~n I
GJ
Bldg. 300
[2J
Basic conflict between centralized facility incorporating
computers'l, 2, and 3 vs. second facility(ies) incorporating computers 4, 5, 6, and 7. Many of these buildings
and computers are already in the approved plan.
He· talked of the problem in use of Facilities for Headquarters
purposes. He emphasized need for evolutionary growth
within presently planned,budget. Pleaded for correcting
seemingly duplications. Will collaborate with IBM.
Wants to know how to get to General again. He suggested
series of design cooperative efforts.
Pointed out preface statement of recent IRI6 report on
computers.
He had, hoped that case would be made for continuity of
effort from fabrication to checkout to mission.
r'\'
i....// ... .,./.
Section 3. 4. 1
Page Hlg
12/20/65
Page 3/De briefings
IBM CONFIDEN'TIAL
J. Jones
Gen. Bleymaier: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
He's learning - there are problems.
WTR iS'going the consolidated approach.
There's still some work to do.
Like to talk to us some more.
Accepted what we had to say, liked it.
Col. Carey:
Apologized to Jim. Wasn't trying to shoot down the
pitch. Just wanted to tell us we were IJ.lay ahead last
year. They are just catching up. Have to :have design
to get approval. Doesn't care where computers are
as long as they are together and you have communication.
No dedicated computers. Five stations for probably
biggest job, FORTRAN N official language NRD. Wants
to put Air Force management system on a file. Wants
management information system. Wants remote terminals
for management information system. Wants us to come
see him.
Col. Hill:
Has lots of ideas and requirements. Doesn't know
how he will get to answer WTR and 659th planned
facilities to go together. CTC a sore spot that has to
have continual money. Canlt chop it out. Doesn't see why you
can't furnish 72-hour tapes at the same time you plot
range safety present position.
(
J. H. Priday
Col. Carey:
Management Information System.
February, 1967.
No study.
Col. Montalvo:
I have a consolidated computer.
What do I do. to this facility?
He hasntt seen anything new.
Col. Hill:
Doesn't want consolidated.
Havent defined existing operational problems and future
requirements.
Mr. Kraff:
Wants us to tell him what information we need.
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/10
12/20/65
Page 4/Debriefings
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
J. J. Selfridge
Mr. Radom:
his office afterward)
rr You got to the general. We have s om e operations
people problems and I'll take care of them. II I told
him what Bleymaier told Jones (i. e., we were on the
right track). Then we were joined by
(In
Lt. Col. Montalvo: Montalvo said, lIyou guys should have given us a design
to pick apart. What you said today you said 18 mo. ago.
We've got a system now. We want you to tell us your
, ideas. II
Mr. Radom:
rryou were pitching preliminary design and it couldn't
have been done without Wing and Range ties. II
They both indicated that the 659th was not formally
a part of AFWTR.
Montalvo left.
Mr. Radom:
c··
Section 3. 4. 1
IIWe've got some operations types looking down a
hole with blinders on.1I I told him that we could very
easily have pitched equipment but decided against it.
He said, II You made the, right de'cision. If you had
pitched IBM numbers, you would have gotten ten times
worse treatment. We needed concept of starting
from scratch. We can work with you now. I'll call
Gibson on Friday. II
Page fI/1l
12/20/65
2
1
('>~
.. '
/
I ,,/"
CRee
4
3
FAA
MaRL
LORL
ORL MISSION CONTROL
G:)SS
WTR IP
MOL
BERMUDA
GWDARD
JPl SFOF
GUAnII-
.' SATuRN
~WOLLO
l~j:;TP
UNIT
RTCC
MERCURY
,~
AMRJP
c
6
5
>'"
"",.....=.,..'I"~"....'...-..-".,...,,~--"--" .
RNjCiE rUNCTICfJS
l1/,/7//7:;'
RANGE DArA SYSTEMS
,.'-;'."'4
/·'n-:~y('/ti<"·
,t
~'
RANGE FUNCTIONS
~)CHt:DiJLt:
DA7t, i=2EQUESTS
;I~.:,y,'::jE.UE!.'i CO)liROi
..
€I
RESOURCES
CONFIGURATION
SCHEDULE
Pte LALlI/Chi .w,.oA?RT
MISSION PLANNING
R:, t;( F CONTROL
SYSTEM CHECkOUT
•
CI
•
•
•
OPERATIC:;; 8(JPPCRT
PERFCRMA~;CE-
DATA REDUCTION
It
0
t<
"""
0
f.~ETf(~RGLCGiCf..L
$
peM
CI)
Fi'~
0
..
~
...
•.J;
Cl
DISCRETE
II
I/O
6.i
Cl
~
0
0
EVE~~TS
COMMAND/ CONTROL
v
I
~
INSTRUME.NT READI~;ESS
RM-tGE CLEARANCE
t:~
;:;
41
ill'
f"
i;.r]
FINANCIAL
LOGISTICS
•
0
•
TRAJECTORY
•
•
0
•
lj)
~
VIC:-O
CINETHEODCLITE
0
•
• 'e"
•
•
POST C,PE,.?.477C;1I SUPI't?RT
LAUNCi-l CONTROL
. RAt\GE SAFETY
MISSION SUPPORT
"
cCr,!c.:;TJ\t'··~TC..J
PReFLIGHT
Rt;DAR
0
C
,..~"-.:.,..>-"'..-,-.,..~..."...'''~.'--<'"...-,.....--.-,-.-.---..--~' .............- ...-'-.'.--:''"'-~'~-~..~'
...J
.:... .....-iw_ _
-...J
.,.,~
8
7
OtlTPt/TS
RANGE FUNCTIONG
MM!AGEM::1-JT CD~JTROL.
RANGE
FUlleT/OIIS'
PRELAUNCH SUPPORT
OrERAIIOt~S SUPPORT
POST OPERATIONS SUPPoRT
INFDR}.IHiCN
OUT?UT
{(II
PPjll? DiSPLAY
:)TJ. TliS CHECKOUT
•
GUIDt..t'iCc
PERFCPy,,!...: Mr. Radom made the following comm.ents:
1.
The presentation was made at his request ar.l.Q he coordinated
the attendance invitations to WTR personnel.. which inch:.ded General
Bleymaier, Commander WTR.
2.
He felt this presentation was' generally well accepted, however,
some attendees had hoped for more details and were hostile.
3.
He ,. -=luite satisfied with the expressed interest on the part of
IBM and especially the desire to provide the preliminary services being
expended during the next month.
.J
4.
He also states
at this time.
thc~.t
GE and CDC are conducting similar studies
5.
Since some of the people were not completely sold by the presentation, a great deal of emphasis shall have to be placed on the report
and possible presentation, which will take place in mid-December.
o
6~
At the present tim.e the ICCS is the principal thrust effort at
the range. It is hoped that this center will be active and useful for the MOL
program with which the range is significantly preoccupied.
'
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/18
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
Meeting with Colonel Hoffman
1.
Colonel Hoffman, ·in effect, relayed the same personal
observations as Mr. Radam.
2.
Sperry Gyroscope has contacted Colonel Hoffman in regard to
the ICeS but it seems they were not encouraged to participate.
3.
center.
He is quite interested in using a Multi-Station Solution in the
4.
He pointed out that since radars cannot provide comparable
accuracy to inertial platforms, range safety officials have agreed to
employ platform data in range safety displays. This, he feels, is a major
break through.
(
5.
In view of the cost and weight of the transponder, Colonel Hoffman
feels that GERSIS (which uses the GE- Mod III radar and eOTAR) is no longer
of particular importance. He thinks the range should eliminate this system.
6.
At the ;;resent time an RFP is being prepared,the first version
of which has been reviewed by Colonel Hoffman but was returned for
revision. He thinks clarification and more detail is desired in this RFP.
Meeting with Mr. Hallenbeck
Mr. Hallaway reflects similar impressions to those offered by
1.
Mr. Radom.
2.
He stated that leeS mission definition is not very clear at this
time. Although a number of range personnel are addressing this problem,
no definitive definition exists at this time.
3.
Mr. Hallenbeck elaborated on his job and responsibilities. He
reports directly to Colonel Hoffmann and is responsible for the engineering
budget. At this time he is occupied with the preparation of the FY l 67 budget.
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/19
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
There are three fundamental and distinct budgets at WTR which may not
draw on one another. He did not offer any information as to budget
magnitude, however, stated 11 It is much more difficult to obtain money
in the Air Force than it was in the Navy. 1'1 JI If you think we had it bad at
the Navy you should see it now. 11
c>ln
~~----
Distribution:
c.
B. Brown
Dr. P. A. 'Castruccio, Bethesda
E. Doyle, Bethesda
R. G. Finnegan
W. B. Gibson
J. E. Hamlin
J. P. Jones
P. E. Lindfors
CT:jh
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/20
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
PART II
November 18, 1965
To:
Distribution
From:
C. Tross
Subject:
Trip Report - Visit to PMR
On Nov. 17th I visited Mr. Henry Settle at PMR. A general discussion was
held pertaining to his current efforts and interests. He stated that:
1•
The RTDHS programming task is currently being executed by Informatics
under a $ 90K contract won as a result of a select source competition in
March 1965.
2.
Integration of RTDHS and IDDS is being effectively conducted by Collins
and Range Development personnel.
3.
The RTDHS-IDDS control center has been designed and will be located. in
Bldg. 50; it is intended to be a rather comprehensive center.
4.
The RO MAC. program ha s now been completed by ITT. Equipment for this
system has been received and integration is scheduled to be undertaken
by Range Operations personnel.
5.
The range is currently interested in activiti~s related to the Pacific Test
Range and the Hawaiin Undersea Test Range.
6.
For the moment Settle knows of no new systems development plans. He
suggests however, that we contact Dr. Dudsziack in Santa Barbara (formerly with TEMPO) who is still a principal test consultant with substantial influence at DASA. He feels that new support-type programs may be
in the making.
I
I
I
7•
Mr. Settle gave me copies of Informatics report on RTDHS and Collins report on IDDS/RTDHS.· Th~se reports should be helpful in RICC.
c.
Section 3. 4. 1
Tross
Page H/21
12/20/65
....•.
_--_
.... _---_ ..
_-_ .....•...•. - - -
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
November 3, 1965
TO: Mr.' J. J.
FROM:
F.
~:;;lfridge
x. 0\
INITIAL THODar
CHECKOUT FAC
)urke
S CONCERNING IMPLl
::TY AT THE WTR LAD
"ENTATION OF THE DIGITAL
"R COMPLEX.
In an area as corrl,..::hensive and
·overs.
""~..
1,rehicle checkout
and validation, the v.Titer cannot ~
~e to
".~ :ti "'Ie
recom.mendations on the subject un(;~~
~as iJ
,i:;;r'00J deal
more specific engineering information rez;ardir. .g Pld.4~_..,
;...;qu . . .l-;.-..: configuration, proposed test and checkout apprc.,;.ch, as well as the general .
operational criteria associated with the launcl~i. of the particular vehicle. This
data, coupled with specific launch objectives and broad launch schedules,
would allow the presentation of system engineering ground rules more
directly geared to insure the orderly rapid and successful development of a
useful com.puter checkout complex facility.
(.-
However" it is the writer's opinion that experienc e gained in de signing and
implementing a job su.ch as a launch control system for the Apollo launch
vehicle has highlighted som.e very pertinent general engineering considerations
which should be carefully taken into consideration in the development of any
1,lardware/ soft~Nare checkout capability to be used for validation of Apollo
or Titan type vehicle. While many of the following recommendations can
easily take on the aspect of self-evidency or patently good engineering
procedure .. the writer would like to stress that m.ost of them. were completely
overlooked in the initial design of the existing Saturn launch computer
complex and" in many cas.es have deteriorated the utility of the system to
such an extent that formal engineering notification has been transmit ted by
IBM to NASA expressing the high probability that the existing lau n ch computer
complex will be unable to launch a Saturn V vehicle without a material mod~fication to the system either through the additional computer capacity or
the relegation of prime control functions to ground support hardware in place
of the Saturn launch control computer.
Assuming" for this discussion" a checkout and launch facility is required
for the Titan III vehicle and that some semi-automated computer checkout
capacity is desired, the. following ten basic ground rules should be thoroughly
investigated prior to layout of the initial system configuration:
1) Operational experience being gained now at launch complex 34
and 37 clearly highlights the undesirability of a two-computersystem \vith
one"computer very close to the vehicle and the other in the blockhouse. In
practice the existence of completely implemented computer facility close
to the vehicle h8 p proved very difficult 10 utilize during the final pases of the
a
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/22
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
To: Mr. J. J. Selfridge
November 3
1965
1
countdown and in event of failure or misoperation leaves the operational
launch control group completely helpless to take remedial steps for even
the slightest malfunction, .since the launching procedures allow no person
in the area during final phases of the countdown. As a result of this problem"
every effort is now being made in the Saturn facility to remove all major
control and test programs from the computer located nearest the vehicle
in such a manner that in the final phases of countdown the vehicle (AGSC
computer) is in a passive monitor status with as much control as possible
relegated to the blockhouse com,puter. While complete discussions of this
particular problem are outside the scope of both the paper and the time
writer has to prepare it, the basic criteria of limiting computer hardwar e
as much as possible to those input and output devices required to fee the
central control processor cannot be overemphasized if the checkout system
is planned for use during a launch countdown.
2) Evidence clearly indicates that "even checkout systems
utilizing computers, starting out with the purest intentions of remaining
com,pletely passive at some time in their development require the
generation of control functions from the checkout computer to the launch
vehicle system under test. The insertion of this control capability into the
checkout computer system will rapidly evolve into a basic requirements
(generated by range operational personnel) to utilize the computer system
as an active control element during launch operations. If this possibility
exists care should be taken in the initial design of the computer facility to
provide adequate high-speed data channels to allow the full potential of
the computer facility to be eventually realized. As a minimum, means
should be provided in the data link communication system from the computer
to the vehicle to allow all control functions to be transmitted completely
independent of monitor functions and data being transm.itted from the
vehicle to the computer. As a m,inimum, it would seem this would take
the form of separate
.
l
'(,
l
Section 3. 4. 1
Page H/23
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
January 17, 1966
L.A. Westchester GEM - 230
H.leTt'n,,';
Ttl;
Your memo to H. G. Hoyt, 1/4/66
Mr. J. E. 'Hamlin
MOL Project
Due to delivery requirements, the Universal Telemetry System RFP
for CTCS will be no-:-bid. A technical report will be submitted to
Co'l. Hoiiman, Director of Range Engineering, describing a system
that would ITleet the t'ecJ;1nical requirements of the RFP. The purpose
of the report will be to del'ay delivery requiremeJ;lts and to demonstrate
IBM's capapility in this area. Target date for submission of the report
is January 25, 1966. Pr'esentations by F. Mutz and myself upon submis sion are also planned to further 'strengthen our recommendations.
(~
It is expected that WTR will' also be letting ~n RFP abQut Feb. 15; 1966 '
for a computer system to perform "fault analysis" and control bf the
, entire CTCS facility. :Personnel knowledgable in telemetry processing
are presently being sought within IBM to meet this 'and future telexnetry
bids at WTR. Subcontracting or teaxning arrangements are not recomm.ended due to the extreme need of building and retaining in-house
capability in this area.
j}V~
J. Priday
JHP:ep
cc:
H.
P.
J.
F.
G. Hoyt
DePascale
Warstler
Mutz, FSD
W. Gibson, MOL
Section 3.4.1
Page H/24
1/28/66'
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM TO FILE
('
FROM:
J. E. Hamlin
SUBJECT:
Trip Report on Visit to MCe - Houston, with
Major Hartrim and 'st Lt. Smith of the 6595th
Test Wing
Major Hartrim requested that IBM personnel accompany him and
Lt. Smith on a visit to Houston Control Center. I advised him to
make arrangements through military channels. The visit was made
with myself and Mr. Jay Priday of the Data Processing Division
accompanying Major Hartrim and Lt. Smith.
During the flight down, we discussed the general agenda, which
covered the following items:
Trajectory calculations
Simulation
Crew environment data
Post flight data reduction
Programming system design, particularly
how changes were incorporated
Brief discussion on the tradeoffs of the relative
costs of space, between offi ce s pace and that
for electronic equipments.
c
We met in Houston at the Alpha Building on Monday morning at
approximately 9:00 a.m~ We had a brief discussion and Major
Hartrim checked with Colonel McKee's office and determined that
he had failed to make proper arrangements through military channels
and so some time was wasted in military protocol. We did, however,
meet a Colonel Ballantyne, who is the MOL coordinator for the
Space Systems Division of the Air Force at Houston, for working
relationships with NASA. I gained the impression that in this
capacity, Col. Ballantyne works for a General Burke. Mr. Priday
and I toured Major Hartrim and Lt. Smith through the Control Facility.
Lt. Smith is a little difficult to work with, in that he interjects
questions and engages in give and take discussion. However,
we did manage to describe the operational aspects of the control
Section 3.4.1
Page H/25
2/11/66
2
center, the data flow, the functional use of the computers and some
of the other features. Smith engaged in conversation as to relative
merits of display system. I don't think we did too good a job in describing to him the reasons behind the design. He was openly contemptuous of sorre of the design that he found in Houston, making statements
such as the Air Force would surely want a system that was simpler in
design or more efficient in operation. I judged that Major Hartrim is
a real strategist. He has been in the Air Force a length of time and
before that told us that he had been an enlisted man in the Navy. He
described how the eTeS system came to be established, wherein they
had taken common equipment from each launch complex and consolidated it into one facility. He described the fashion in which he had
obtained SAC cooperation to provide the building, by promising them
the system when it became operational and how, later, he arranged to
have a higher level command renege on the obligation.
He described
further how it had been planned to turn over this facility, which was
inadequate to the WTR, such that the Wing would be free to procure
the TMCe. He went on further to describe that the Wing had money
for a TMCe and had preliminary design in mind;, he described that the
TMCe would be implemented in a step-by-step phaSing manner and
that it would be done in order to support the MOL. Clearly, there is
a need for additional marketing to be done in the area, and we must
learn more details about the organization of the Wing.
Major Hartrim did say that the Commanding General of the Wing,
Colonel Newton and his deputy, I think a Colonel Greede, were
retiring. He and Colonel Ballantyne had discussion on this point,
on the relative difficulty of keeping competent military officers in
the Service when they were no longer qualified for flying status.
I think much of the discussion was for the benefit of we civilians
who were standing there who they obviously believed made too much
money.
o
Major Hartrim said that the eTCS computer bid had been killed but
that some of the people on the base had not been advised of this
yet. Both Hartrim and Smith portrayed a feeling of self-sufficiency
on the part of the Wing. They indicated that they had had discussions with CDC but not any great amount of discussions with
UNIVAC. He further said that they had had very little or no discussions with Philco. He was amused by the fact that the majority of
the contractors and vendors have given attention to WTR and have
overlooked the Wing. We determined that the TMCe would not
include the range safety function nor normal data reduction. We also
determined that the TMCe would be oriented from the standpoint of
telemetry data input and data reduction and mis sion control, as
Section 3 .4 • 1
Page H/26
2/11/66
3
c
derived from telemetry-type data. They are specially interested in
checkout. Their concept is that the TMCC would have a central type
of data handling and computing and that the launch control would be
obtained by remote display that could be fairly flexible or movable
and the driving distances from the Control Center TMCC to the launch
display might be in the area of 5 miles. They gave strong emphasis
to the minimalization of equipment throughout the total system. They,
in my judgement are looking for a fully integrated system and a single
contractor. At this point I believe, from my discus sions with them,
that they would recommend both hardware and software in one contract.
They implied an RFP in approximately three months. They said that the
TMCC building was actually underway.
They will have further discussions with Philco in Houston on the
Control Center and after that plan to go to Cape Kennedy, where they
intended to tour the Merritt Island facilities and the Control Centers
on Cape Kennedy. They might also have planned to go to the Data
Reduction Center at Patrick.
I believe it would be profitable to get back for further discussion
with Major Hartrim in the area of checkout and in the areas of launch
control. I think that he and Smith wo uld be quite candid in terms of
what their system design approaches are. I am sure that they have a
very close working relationship with CDC. This was indicated by the
fact that the CDC salesman, a Tom Gorman, was with these gent lemen
Sunday afternoon at the time they ordered the airplane.
Section 3.4.1
Page H/27
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
GEM Region
Ai r Force Programs
Wash ington, D. C.
December 2, 1965
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mr. W. B. Gibson
L. A. Aerospace Building
SUBJECT:
Western Test Range
I have learned that plans to merge the 6595th Aerospace Test Wing into WTR
have been scrapped. WTR will take over some of the space in the building
wh i ch houses the 6595th.
National Range Division is aware of WTR's present study of CRCC, and wi II
be interested in seeing the results of their study. In order to sell a program
for CRCC to NRD, WTR's pitch should show WTR as a component part of the
larger Global Range System which includes ETR and SCF. Great care should
be taken to show how easily WTR can interface SCF and ETR, and where
system compatibil ities can' be effected.
R. P. Bruns
RPB:ils
cc:
C:
Mr. J. W. Richardson
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/28
2/18/66
December 8. 1965
L. A. Weatch.••ter GEM - 230
Weekly Activity aeport
011
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
WTIt Project
12/3/65
H. G. Hoyt
Branch Manager
Calla were made Oil Oeae Clary, Jolla Payer. Major Olsoll alld Dave Huftman
by Bill Gourlay, Gene Itoger. and Dick Stanley. Purp08. of the calls -.vaa to
gather buorrnatioD. 011 iaatalled Data Haad11ag Syatem and Communication
System. Doc:um8llta were obtai.eel to a •• l.t ill doeumentatiOll of present aystem.
Meetillg with Major Conley. Chuck Leroy, aDd variou8 people from the
Command aad Control section of R.ase Enaiaeering waa attellded by Dave
Nichol •• Michel Btbault aad Jay PI' ida, for di.eu •• io1l of the WTR project
and in particular the Ma••,ement Wonnati01l System or the project. lD.
addition to the di.cu •• lcm on the local requirements lor M. . . . .m ••t Jaformation ..
Sy.tern, it was l.araed that $4. 000, 000 was platmed for the military eoaatruetioD V:
pl'ogram at '\ArTR for the fiseal y!~J' "'"for a Co•• olld.ted RaB,. Co.trol Center • ./
lAstallatlon of equipm.eDt iDto the CRee t. p1aaaed for fiscal year '70. Thi.
--repre.enta a 011. y.ar 81ippage in previous plane. Major Coaley aleo ~ad.icated
that the Con.olld.ted Telemetry Checkout Station willlte turned over to WTR
0·1\ 1 3anuary 1966. Ftaa.l1y, it was leamed that th. prelimlaary aallle Package
Plaa that wa. aubmitted to NRD November 15 will 1M back to WTR 011 December
1 S. At this thTU! the :Rang. wUI prepare the final version of the 108. 1'&111plane and submit the final verelOll to NAD Oil Jaauary 15, 1966.
Ranle
hopes to iacorpol'ate into this plaJUlll1g document iaformatioft that we submit
1n our technical reports on the Consolldated Itaage Control Center.
I
(
Te.
Timing kerael. were aubmitted to Jim Alexander. RaDle Operations,
compal'tag the 7094 Mod 1. 7094 MCMl 2, 360/65, aad 360/75 Oil a ".pre.eDt.tive
lelestifle jOb mix. Th••• kentel. wet'. tak•• from the Force propo.al that
w •• prep.reel by the Federal Re.icm &ad Potllhk••pale group._
Th. Fall Jabat Computer CODleJ'••ee w •• att. . . . . ~ Bert. Lary, J'oha 8pellmaa.
aM Jay Pricla,. Be" Lary t. ta the Syet.me ltngble...ia& ,1'C>Up of Raa,.
Eagi••• rm.... 101m Spellmaa i. all enllaee!' for the Auto••tic. Divt.ioa of
North American au t. active •• a coaaultallt to Itotb tile Weetern Te.t It....
&ad tile 659Sth T ••t Willi_ A .pectal ctemon.tratlOll of 0\11' 360 .yatem. at tll.
eaafereAce _a. al'J'....d aad ellaeu •• toaa 011 tlut Co•• olidat. . R••,. Coatrol
C •• a,. W81'e aecompltabed at the conference.
Section 3.4.1
Page H/29
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
H. G. Hoyt
12/8/65
Pn~e
Z
M,r. Frank Mutz, formerly :FSD Project MaDager at JPL. t. !'lOW FSD Project
the "7estern Teat R.ange. Mr. Mutz arrived in Lompoc on Friday
and started to familiarize him,.lf with the project.
~'1anager At
_~
preliminary telemetry ayatem. design was started by Paul Lindfor~,
Bill Fulton ••ad Jim Hamlin. Mr. Fulton is a consultant hired by FSD for
the telem.etry de.lgn •
.A preliminary outline, of the teehnic.al report to be preaented to the ""estern
Test Ra,nge w.a prepared by Dick Stanley a.nd Jay Friday.
the major subject areAS for the report:
Executive Sununary
System/360 Hardware
Syatem/360 Software
Da.ta Reduction
a.-Line R~al Tim.e Operational Support
T eletnetry System
C ommunic:ati on.
Instrumentation Checkout and Diagnostic:_
Managelnent Information System
Detailed Sy.t~m. Design
Hardware Cost
Software Cost
Physical Planning
Faeilities
(
c
:FollO'\J/ing are
Target date for .ubm.t •• ion of technical report to th~ W· •• tera Test Range
i. December 15. 1965. Maximum effort will have to be expeaded by project
team. in order to meet this target date.
/il !
A
.
.
,>'l,
3. H. Priday
JHP/mb
cc: Paul DeP•• eal.t LSO
Bill Glb.on, MOL
S e cti on 3. 4 • 1
Page H/30
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
/Jatl' :
From (Dept Loc):
E'ebruarylO, 1966
L. A. We stche ster GEM - 230
('t,/cphunc Ext.:
Subject:
MOL Planning at Vandenberg AFB
Reference:
To:
W. B. Gibson
MOL Project
Plans for supporting MOL are now under way at Vandenberg AFB
by both the Western Test Range and the 6595th Aerospace Test Wing.
Range safety and communication of orbital parameters to the ITlission
control center will be the re sponsibility of WTR. Pre-launch check-out
of booster and vehicle, simulations, and bioITledic s are requirements
that the 6595th are now planning for.
WTR will perform their functions on the existing 7094/7044 systeITl.
Processing of radar data will be performed by the 7044 while the
guidance data from the telemetry system will be handled by the 7094.
No firm plan is now in existence if redundancy of cOITlputing systems
is a requireITlent. Discussions with WTR personnel indicate that if
redundancy is a requireITlent, four alternative s will be explored:
1.
Duplication of existing 7094/7044 system.
2.
ReplaceITlent of pre sent systeITls with a dual 360/40
or 360/65 .configuration.
3.
Replace the 7044 with CDC 3600 r s to handle all real
tirn.e requirements.
4.
Provide real tiITle inputs to both 7094 and 7044 and
essentially split the system into two separate COITlputing systems.
Extreme pre s sure is now being exerted on WTR from NRD to install
the 3600 1 s so that standardization of computing systems at ETR and
WTR can be accomplished. WTR is taking the position that the Range
is meeting its real time and data reduction requirements on a single
dire ct couple systern. and hence, additional compute r s are not ne ce s sary.
In fact, current plans are fairly firm to award FSD a sole source contract
to provide WTR with a software package to incorporate pre sent real time
and non-real time programs into a DC system similar to the one at
Whi te Sand s .
S e cti 0 n 3. 4 • 1
Page H/31
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
W. B. Gibson
February 10, 1966
Page 2
Duplication of present DC system. to m.eet MOL requirem.ents is
rather rem.ote unless system.s within the governm.ent's inventory are
available.
Replacem.ent of existing system.s by third generation equipm.ent
could be effected by an RFP late this year with installation date FY '68.
This would be in line with WTR' s plans to relocate and consolidate
all Range com.puter s into a single Consolidated Range Control Center
(CRCC). Approval for the CRCC depends on whether or not the 6595th
gains approval for their planned Technical Managem.ent Control Center
(TMCC).
Splitting the two system.s and giving the facility som.e resem.blance of
redundancy is not favored due to increased cost in both hardware and
software without an appreciable increase in capability.
In the area of pre-launch check-out, etc. the 6595th is m.oving very
rapidly to gain approval for the TMCC. About $2.5 m.illion has
already been approved for a building and approval for equipm.ent m.oney
is now being sought from. General Shriever. Presentations by the Test
Wing and local Aerospace Corporation personnel to General Shriever
was supposed to have taken place during the week of 2/4/66. Concept
approval has supposedly been obtained from. General Cooper and General
Bleym.aier.
Specifications for an RFP are now being generated by per sonnel from.
the Test Wing MOL Project Office (Major Hartrim. and Lt. Smith).
Hartrim and Sm.ith toured various facilities in the country during the
week of 2/4/66, looking at design approaches and contractor capabilities.
Jim. Ham.lin and I accompanied Hartrim. and Sm.ith to Houston, where we
toured the RTCC. The following inform.ation was obtained from the trip:
o
1.
Approxim.ately $20 million is available for the TMCC.
2.
If approval is obtained, an RFP will be out in the second
or third quarter of this year.
3.
A single contractor for system design, hardware, software,
integration, ONM, etc. is mandatory.
4.
Design will call for five telemetry processors to perform. the
decom.mutation and data compression functions.
Section 3.4.1
Page H/32
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
W. B. Gibson
February 10, 1966
Page 3
5.
Two m.ain processors to perform the data analysis and
display formatting will also be called for.
6.
A telemetry oriented software system., similar to STOLL
being developed for the CDC 924 at Douglas Aircraft, is
needed.
7.
The TMCC will be used for all MOL work at WTR. No
special contractor -provided systems will be allowed.
8.
The function of the Consolidated Telemetry Checkout Station
(CTCS) presently being run by WTR for pre-launch check-out
of ballistic weapon systems will be transferred to the TMee
with the result that eTCS will no longer be needed.
9.
CDC will probably be bidding five 1700' s and two 6400' s
and Hartrim and Smith lean toward their approach. The
WTR CDC repre sentative, Pat Gorm.an, accompanied
HartriITl and SITlith to the L. A. Airport.
10.
Philco is not held in very high esteeITl by the Test Wing.
Lockheed's status unknown at this tiITle.
11.
Hartrim and Smith we re planning se s sions with Philco in
Houston, CDC at the Cape, and GE in Philadelphia, on their
trip.
12.
Approxim.ately twelve CRT displays and associated control
equipment will be required per launch complex. There will
be approxilllately eight to ten such com.plexes needing this
capability.
13.
EquipITlent deliveries will be in the early 1968 tiITle period.
It ITlust be em.phasized that the above inform.ation was obtained froITl local
Test Wing personnel. No inforITlation is available at this time at the SSD
or AFSC levels to verify the above is being done by the 6595th. Although
it was indicated that General BleYITlaier had approved of the TMCe concept,
talking with local Test Range personnel indicates no decision will be ITlade
on the TMCC until organizational problem.s are ironed out between the
Test Wi:qsand WTR.
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/33
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
W. B. Givson
February 10, 1966
Page 4
In the event, however, that the Test Wing does gain early approval for
their plan, the following rnarketing plan has been established:
1.
Perforrn preliminary systern design. This includes design
philosophy, standard and special equiprnent needed, RPQ' s,
and special CRT displays.
2.
Establish software requirem.ents, including special telem.etry
oriented language. Presentation of the telem.etry software
system. proposed at White Sands is planned in the near future
for Test Range personnel.
3.
Establish a prelirninary implernentation plan - one of the
tough ones. Define areas in which IBM has the capabilities
and discus s team.ing relationships for that part of the plan
where IBM has no capability.
4.
Determine equiprnent availability.
5.
Arrange for hardware/software presentations at Poughkeepsie
plant.
6.
Obtain com.parative analysis of expected CDC system..
7.
Obtain SSD thinking on TMCC concept.
», -::Jj/2L~<-)f.-
The above m.arketing plan should be accomplished by April 1, 1966.
(I
J. H. Priday
Account Representative
JHP~.
cc:
R.
H.
P.
J.
P.
G.
A.
E.
Bruns, Wash.
Hoyt
DePascale
War s tl e r
o
Section 3.4.1
Page H/34
2/18/66
GEM Region
Air Force Program
Wash ington, D. C.
February 23, 1966
MEMORANDUM
Mr. M. J. Priday
Los Angeles Westchester GEM
TO:
Mr. John Warstler
Los Ange les Westchester GEM
Consolidated Range Control Center - WTR
Technical Management Control Center - SSD Aerospace Test Wing
SUBJECT:
As you are aware, determination of yth ich organization wi II proceed with establishment of
its control center wi II be made at General Schriever's level. A group from WTR is scheduled
to brief HQ NRD during the week of February 28, in order to prepare Genera I Davis' staff
for selling WTRls CRCC to Schriever. This parallels the recent action of the 6595th Aerospace Test Wing in taking their justification for TMCC thro~9h SSD to General Schriever.
The consensus of opinion at HQ NRD now is that
(1) there is considerable economy to be gained by establishing a CRCC;
(2) the CRCC shou Id be managed by WTR very much in accordance with present
phi losophies, i.e. that WTR provide standard services, faci lities and data
to users;
(3) the CRCC building should provide space for Range users, like the 6596th,
where the user provides his own equipment for satisfying mission-peculiar
requirements.
Certainly there is something to be said for NRD's approach. Consolidation, centralization
and sharing of faci lities wi \I satisfy those concerned with budget pressures. Management of
the faci Iity by WTR is within the presently stated mission of WTR, hence no organizational
changes would be in order. Finally, the user would have an avenue to provide his own
capabi lity when mission requirements dictate such.
I wi II continue to follow this project at NRD HQ, and advise upon on its program.
R. P. Bruns
RPB: mr
cc:
Mr. H. G. Hoyt, 81M, Los Ange les West. GEM
Mr. P. A. DePascale, Los Angeles West. GEM
Mr. W. B. Gibson I Los Angeles Aerospace MOL
Mr. jr. -.,'11'. j(h:;rtal~:»on, Local
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/35
3/4/66
IBM CONFfDENTfAl
GEM Region
Air Force Program
Washington, D.C.
March 7, 1966
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mr. J. Priday
Mr. i. Warstler
SUBJECT:
Consolidated Range Control - WTR
Technical Management Control - SSD 6595th
)
)
Los Ange les Westchester GEM
Determination of which organization should proceed with its plans to establish a
control center wi II be made in a few days. As I indi cated in my February 23
Memo, ,NRD favors the WTR managed CRCC. It is very clear, however that NRD's
support of CRCC at General Schriever's level will not be particularly strong.
According to Colonel Creighton, assistant to the Commander, NRD is 51 % for CRCC.
It is clear then, that we must continue to concentrate on influencing the 6595th at
Vanderberg as they develop specifications for the TMCC.
Iff?
~ YYoI
AJtt)
R. P. Bruns
RPB:mr
cc:
Section '3 .4 • 1
Mr. H. G. Hoyt, B/M, Los Angeles Westchester GEM
Mr. P. A. DePascale, Los Angeles Westchester GEM
~t_. W. B. Gibson, Los Angeles Aerospace MOL
Mr. J. W. Richardson, Local
Page H/36
3/18/66
IBM
CONFIDENTIAL
c
MOL STANDARDIZEDCALL/TRlP REPORT
Customer/Prospect Name (1) IBM, Lompoc, California
(15)
Individual{s) contacted (16) F. Mutz, R. Ursin-Smith, W .Green, W • Grisham,
J Gray, R. Hippe
Your Name (60)W. Gourlay, F eX. O'Rourke (70) Date (71) March 24-25« 1966
(5.9)
0
(76)
Summary of Facts Covered:
1. An orientation and direction conference was held on March 24-25 1966, at
the Lompoc Office regarding the AFWTR Consolidated Range Control Center (CRCe),
the AFWTR Consolidated Telemetry Checkout System (CTCS), and the 6595th ATW
Technical Management Control Center (TMCC).
I
I
2. Integration and organizational reassignment of F • X. O'Rourke and W. Gourlay
Jr., from Department M48 to Department M49 was discussed between F. Mutz and
the principals involved.
{:.
I
3. As a subset of the effort in automatic checkout, a demonstration (simulation)
on the IBM 2250 is desirable. D. Lee and J. Gray are assigned to program the
demonstration, with half-time programming assistance from P. L. Hertan. D. Lee
and R. Cabaniss are presently programming a demonstration for the USAF Satellite
Control Facility. It is expected that much of this experience will be directly
applied to the checkout simulation. R. Hippe is addressing the problem of availability of a machine for the demonstration. Preliminary display simulator requirements reflecting the concept contained in the Preliminary Design Specification
document have been completed. These simulation requirements are in sufficient
detail to warrant a complete review with the assigned programmers prior to
finalizing the approach.
4. The USAF political situation at Vandenberg ArB was briefly touched on. It was
decided to address the general need for an integrated modular approach to the next
generation of "on line" aerospace ground computer complexes I while maintaining a
capability to respond to either a total or segmented specification as required.
5.
c
Summary
a. The display specification for the Simulator is in sufficient detail to
commence the initial programming effort.
b. Equipment availability is unresolved at this time and will have
important effect on the entire schedule.
c. Content of simulation demonstration will be determined by March 30, 1966.
d. D. Lee and J. Gray are assigned to program this demonstration. P. L.
Hertan will be assigned to assist on a half-time basis about 3/30/66.
e. F. Mutz and R. Hippe have reviewed the initial simulator concept and
are in general agreement.
f.
The goal of this group is to have initial flow charts and coding well
under way by April 1, 1966.
WG/jh
cc: C. B. Brown, J. Gray
W. B. Gibson, R. Hippe, F. Mutz
I
Section 3.4.1
Page H/37
4/8/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~~'
L. A. Westchester GEM - 230
April 12, 1966
Memo to:
Subject:
R. P. Bruns, GEM Region
P. A. DePascale, LSG
",,;w-. Gibson, MOL
H. G. Hoyt, LSG
F. E. Mutz, FSD
R. K. Rea, LSG
J. W. Richardson, GEM Region
Consolidated Telemetry Checkout Station (CTCS)
at Vandenberg AFB
An RFP is expected within the next 30 days from the Western Test Range
(WTR) for a teleITletry system to perform pre-launch checkout of ballistic
missile systeITls launched froTI} Vandenberg AFB.
Due to the complexity of the proposal and the severe impact that it has on "
IBMI s future at Vandenberg, this menlO is being written to define in detail
the situation that exists so that the various IBM offices involved can be kept
abreast as to the status of the pr~ject, our plan of action, and the support
we expect to solicit in order to win.
The CTGS was conceived and developed by the 6595th Aerospace Test Vling,
located at Vandenberg AFB, to bring about a be"tter cost effectiveness approach
to the function of pre-launch checkout of m.issile systems. The purpose of the
GTCS is to provide a com.mon set of equipm.ents, in a single facility, and
available to all range users to perform the pre-launch checkout of their
respective missile systeITls. This consolidation has taken place in the area
of ballistic system checkout and as of January 1, 1966 the facility was turned
over to the WTR for operation. The 6595th is now planning for a m.ulticomputer complex called the Technical Managem.ent Control Center (TMCC)
to provide a capability for performing the checkout of not only ballistic systeITls,
but also all space systeITls including Titan III and MOL. The GTCS will
eventually be replaced by TMGG and equipments" compatible with the design
approach of TMGG will be transferred. In fact, all future procurem.ents for
CTGS, including the expected above-mentioned RFP, will have to be in line .
with the TMGG design. It is essential, therefore, that we win the upcoming
GTGS RFP. It has not been resolved as to 'who will control the TMCC, either
the 6595th or the WTR, but in any case OUT strategy rem.ains the salTIe no
:matter who wins control.
Section 3.4.1
Page H/38
4/22/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c'
April 12, 1966
Page 2
The CTCS RFP will be a total system bid that will include cOlTIputer s,
special telemetry equipment, software, and system. integration. The RFP
is expected by May 1, 1966 and will call for a 30-day response, a 30-day
evaluation, a'nd equiplTIent delivery 225 days after contract award. The
range is now considering purchase of all equipm.ent with approxiInately
$1. 35 million of FY66 money available for this procurelTIent.
Inform.ation from. the range indicate s tJ:1at the specifications will call for
com.puter s with a 1 psec m.emory cycle and 24 bit or greater word length.
Preliminary systelTI design using a dual Model 44 configuration is shown in
the attachments. Purchase price for this systelTI is approximately $1.2
million and this does not include special front end equiplTIent, software, or
system integration: At this time we do not have a dollar estimate on these
additional item.s, but it is evident that we exceed the budgeted dollar s by
quite a bit. At this tilTIe work is being performed to reconfigure the systelTI
and reduce the overall cost. In addition, a single Model 44 configuration
is also being studied to determ.ine its effectiveness on the CTCS requirements.
A block diagram of the hardware systelTI that is expected in the RFP is
shown in the attachments as well as the functional requir~lTIents for the
system.. It is not known at this tim.e as to what software specifications
will be included in the RFP. Local SDC personnel are V{orking on software
specifications and it is expected that they will write performance specifications
sim.i1ar to the approach taken at the SCF for the telelTIetry proce s sing.
In the area of front end proce s sing FSD t S Engineering Lab is inve stigating
the use of a ROS system. to perform the fralTIe sync, subfram.e sync, limit
checking, etc. The system. is called the Adaptive Microprarruned Control
System. (AMCS) and it appears to have significant application in the area of
telelTIetry processing. Engineering Lab personnel have been briefed on the
CTCS requirelTIents and are presently perform.ing a prelilTIinary systelTI design
using the AMCS and Model 441 s. In order to consider the AMeS, com.m.itments
by FSD on delivery, and costs will have to be obtained within the next 30 days.
Competition will corne from. both computer lTIanufacturers and the special
purpose telem.etry industry. Following are the manufacturers and systems
that are known to be actively pur suing this bid:
CDC - 1700, 3100
SDS - 92, 930, Sigm.a 7
DEC - PDP8, PDP7
'Telemetrix - 670
Beckm.an - 420
o
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/39
4/22/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
April 12, 1966
Page 3
This will be the second procurement the WTR has had for eTCS this year.
We were forced into a no bid decision on the first procurement due to a
90-day delivery requirement and the unavailability of the 1800. Lear Siegler
won this procurement with a PDP8 and Telemetrix front end equipment.
It is expected that our toughest competition will again come from Lear
Siegler who will be bidding a PDP system, and eDC with their 1 700.
Due to the total system aspect of the RFP, FSD will be submitting the
proposal. The proposal will be a joint effort by Vandenberg DP and FSD
per sonnel and FSD's Engineering Laboratory technical staff. A sum.m.ary of
the tasks to be performed by this group and their scheduled end dates are
shown in the attachments.
Our proposal strategy to date is to design a syste:m that m.eets both the
eTCS and TMCC requirements with the compatibility of System/360
providing the vehicle for growth. Both requirements will be addressed in
the proposal along with the unique features and capabilities of the AMCS and
a display-oriented checkout language now under development.
The major problem that now exists with the preliminary design is the cost
of the dual 44's. We hope to overcorn~ this by urging rental of the computing
systems so that the budgeted dollars can be spread over many months, or
proposing an alternate approach of using a single Model 44 with the front
end AMeS's performing a major portion of the processing.
JHP/mb
cc:
J. Warstler, LSG
Attachments A-D
o
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/40
4/22/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
'-----~
z
o
H
E-!
<
~
8
H
~
Z
o
u
-.~------~-
-+(j
v
1;
~
v
:;
~
~
f
I-
o
Section 3.4. 1
»
W
rj
i
BJ:\-u
-~
I
s1'!
[(I
/:)1
i
1"'
~I
!I
~
~
I
LJ
Page H/41
4/22/6)6
.. __ ...
----_...-
\/)
">
v"'\
l;;
(~"
~
(...
()...
\~
C
£)
1-
.
./
r-
~
a.:
,,.-,
U
-::r
0
'}
I'
I\.
-.~-.-
... - ..
-,.~
...
-...•..
--~~--
..--
----
':1:
"-"'-,,-,,-.'''-,,-,----------~-----,-,,--''''-,
(,1
v
::!
J
~
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C
t'-
e:..
--....,
D
(~
L.;
eo
cJ.
I~
/--'
£-l
Q
c
I.
7-
a
'V
Q...
"
j\
LJ
o
o
:i
\f- - - - t
(~
-----v-------------~
Section 3.4.1
Page H/42
4/22/66
~
~v'
~
\
(fl"
(1)
FUNCTIONS
o
.....
o
::s
r-t-
Inputs
w
Front-End Data Handling
Outputs
Central Processing
Pre-Processing
• ---
~
......
PCM
I: Signal Conditioning
PAM
FM/FM
PDM
I: Bit Synchronizing
": Demul tiplexing
I:
Frame Synchronization
Subframe Synchronization
ID Validation
Limit Checking
Data Selection
Formatting
Deconnnutation
Data Distribution
Front-End Control
Signal Simulation
: Discrimination
t
(See List of I Analog Recording
Involved
,: Data Distribution
Formats)
,I
I
I
I
(Range
Equipment)
t
I
I
II Parameters
I
to Range
Safety
I
I
I
Strip
Chart
Recording
\
I
(Mod 44(s»
i
I
I
Volatile
Displays
I
Ij
(AMeS)
: (Vendor Supplied)
Linearizing
Scaling
Normalizing
Conversion
Trend Analysis
Discrete Evaluation
Display Generation
I Inquiry Response
I
I
(2250 &
Modem)
(Range
Equipment)
I
I
I
I
I
I
Boundary of System to be Procured
I
I
~-~-----------------------~---------------------------~-~---------------------- t------------..1
--
------~
[
I
---
-----
~-
- --
--
-
-----~--
--
- - - - - ---
-
-
FORMATS
"Minuteman
Titan II
Atlas D
Atlas ElF
,OJ
~'l::I
NtO
N(1)
~::r:
RMV-B
MTRV
MK 17
MBRV
RMV-C (S Band)
LTV (Terse)
MK 12
MMRBM
RMV-A
LP'lV
HIRV
EPV
SIMPAD
BGRV
H
to
g:
SCOPE
o
en"-..
~
w
o
z:
otTl
z:
t-3
I'"Tj
H
~
(C)
-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(D)
TASK SUMMARY FOR CTCS PROPOSAL
-"---"~':''''~''
------~
_.-------------------t--------------_
Date
April
C~ctions'
--......
--....-, .....--..
~
---~-
.....
-......
-.............-----~ ............
----.".,.~.""""-'. ..~
, May
..
Pre -proposal Effort
Preliminary Systems Design
Software Design
RPQ's
Vendors Analysis
,--------~~~------------------------------~
Proposal Effort
!I
•
Receipt of RFP
i
...--.
RFP Review
I
Task Assignment
I
i.
FSD Comm.itment
I
Strategy Review
Ij
Competitive Analysis
•i
Final Systerns De sign
I
I
FSD NBRB
I
Proposal Tearn
I
•I
II
!
I
i
•
l
•
Ie
Type Draft
l
Managem.ent Review
I
!
•
i
I
Final Type
!
Reproduce
!i
•
•
•
•
I
I
I
•
....
•
•
!
reliminary Man Months
inal Cost Proposal
.~
0
I
Strategy Review Board Decision'
C)
•
;
I
~
•
;.
Receive Vendor Proposals
osting
•
i
i
Issue Vendor RFP's
.~
•
-i-
I
.....c
•
I
Systerns As surance
-c
i
I
•
•
·11
Delivery Schedule s
:
•
i
!
W rite Final Dr aft
Kickoff Meeting
•
0
I
I
Evaluate Vendor Proposals
•
•
I
•
•
I
I
Proposal Draft
!
•
!
Final Software De sign
Complex System Bid Decision
•
i
•
j
,
I
:
Section 3.4.1
I Page H/44. :
, _"'~--'''"''~-"•.."'' .•• __________ ~ _________________ '''''"''''''~=_-~,~'c.....,"~"'"'=~~-~,~,-,.~".~~-~-.~__=_~-.~.,.•.~~~~~._~~~~=~~_~_:" ": :;~,b. .,/,: .,: 2:L1..::.6~6
2
~~~==-=='
~
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
April 14, 1966
ACTIVITY SUMl'AARY, Week Ending April IS, 1966
TO:
F. E. Mutz/ R. W. Hippe
FROM:
FoX. O'Rourke
Item 1:
Simulation requirements for the initial 2250 checkout display
presentation have been finalized and are ready for initial flow charting
and coding. As of April 14 I J. 9 66 , actual programming has not been
initiated. A minimum of six vveeks should be allowed for coding and
checkout after assignment of one full-time programmer (familiar with
existing 2250 utility routines). Assuming this programming support is
available prior to April 30, the earliest reasonable date to schedule a
formal presentation would be the second or third week in June.
Item 2.
Presentations have been made to TMCC Air Force personnel
(Major Hartrim, Lt. R. Smith, et al.) regarding Trv'ICC System/operator
interface hardware. Specific technical document have been presented
to this group to highlight IBM' s background and eXgerience in the checkout and monitor field (referenced to the APOLLO program). It is apparent
the TMCC group is in the proces s of gathering data from which they hope
to define a general approach to the unified checkout concept. From what
little technical information was presented by this group to IBM, it is
apparent the effort will encounter almost insurmountable practical and
political problems in obtaining contractor concurrence, as long as the
concept stresses the use of a common computer facility. It was the
writer's impression that the group is relatively weak in the computer/checkout/operator langnage background I required to adequately justify
their concept, not only to the Aerospace Corporation but also to the
contractors V\rho \\Tould be l.ntimately involved in the results of this effort.
o
Item 3:.
A general checkout discussion was held with Aerospace
Corporatlon in Los Angeles on Friday, April 8 I with Mr .. J. O' Bell and
Mr. Bavin. This meeting vias very well received by Aerospace who
expressed a high degree of interest in our checkout approach and stated
it was essentially the same as their recommendations now being presented
to TMCC personnel at Vandonberg. They were extremely interested in the
ROS concept and expressed an active desire to further define, in
engineering detail, hardware considerations involved in using the ROS
as a front end "peripheral precessing device" for telemetry data input.
Section
3.4" 1
Page H/45
4/29/66
_
~~
___
~
_ _ . __
~
______ . ______ -'--'-_. ______
~._'
_'~.'
...'n . ......
_~.
_,.,
._ __
2
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Activity Summary, Week ending April 15, 1966
Item 4:
An :f,nformal discussion of the unified checkout concept
and the 2250 display system was scheduled with Colonel Pierce SSGS
in Los Angeles on Thlu'sday, April 14, 1966.
Item 5:
Initial preparations have been initiated by this group to
participate in a t"vvo-day technical seminar to selected DP sales and
engineering personnel Zrom the GEM Region I outlining existing technical
requirements that Inust be satisfied to be responsive in this market. A
tentative date for this seminar is the third week in May.
c
Item 6:
Unconfirmed data input from the OCALA project at KSC
indicates that Martin is planning to release the initial technical guidelines document or RFP early in May of 1966. Plans are now being made
by this group to define the nature of the IBM response, the personnel
who "Nill be involved and the content of the resultant document from
IBM. It should be notod that the issuance of an RFP either from Martin
or Douglas would be a clear indication that the existing TMCC concept
would probably be shelved for at least a 12- to 18-month period (if
not longer) •
Item 7:
The current unified checkout hardV'lare specification
docurnent I gene::ated by this group, is 1n the process of review at IBM
Bethesda 'INith a view to incorporating the requirements discus sed in
that document into the general ROS special hardware concept now being
developed at sse. It is expected that a meeting will be set up in the
next two "lNeeks; either at Washington or Los Angeles I to go over in some
detail comments received from IvIartin Corporation, as well as Air
Force TMCC personnel if "'lho are presently reviewing the same document.
F. X. O'Rourke
FXO'R:jh
cc:
C. B. Brown vt"
W. B. Gibson
W. Gourlay 6 Jr.
o
Section 3.4.1
Page H/46
4/29/66
•..
---~-.~~-.~.-.-~ -.---.~.~
.~--
L.A. Westchester GEM-230
April 22, 1966
Memo to:
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
H. G. Hoyt, LSG
P A. DePascale, LSG
4I
Ra K. Rea I LSG
R P, Bruns, GEM Region
J. W. Richardson, GEM Region
W ~ Bo Gibson, MOL
F. E Mutz FSD
G
.llation wilt begin soon.
Car)nbility exp~nsioI1-Complction
or the lLC will mean new capability
ano growth potential for other important military programs, while providing for manned 1\10L missions. In addition to th~ sev~n-scgmcnt Titan III
configuration for A10L, the ILC will
accommodate any othcr version of the
Titan III family utilizing the 120-in.
solid strap-ons.
Polar-orbiting programs will be
able to take <\dvantage of the 25,000
to 30,OOO-lb. spacecraft potential provided by the Titan llJ-C family.
"This means that any of the known
and classified programs we have been
launching OUl of \VTR will be able to
utilize the new generation of big
boosters and the spacecraft and payload
growth that they permit," an Air Force
spokesman reported. These programs
include communication, nuclear test
detection and reconnaissance satellites.
The ILC will consist of one pad
where the vehicle will be built up on
the pad. Although the facility's launch
tower will accommodate only the 120in. strap-on Tirwz III models, including
the full seven-segment configuration,
the Air Force is "hedging its bet in
the brick and mortar phase of design
and construction to permit expansJon
to accommodate the 156-in. strap-ons
if it decides to upgrade the boos~er in
the future," a spokesman said.
"Long-range planning documents
and drawings are also such that the
ILC could at some future date be cxpanded into a complete ITL (integratetransfer-launch) complex, as at Cape
Kennedy, with multiple pads."
At present, Air Force plans call for
at least five manned J..10L launchcs from
WTR.
Atias-Agcn:l hmr,ch 11ad-No other
launch construction is n~cded il the
immeuiak future ;~t \VTR, thl Air
Poree reports. In adJition. to tl,c >cginning on the ILC installation, th: one
'other recent improvcment has becl conversion of one of th ~ A tlas-A gene pads
for Titan III-B (u. Titan III con. with
an Agena upper slage). The b )oster
will initially be usee.: with the As;. 'lw-D
but is also designed t6 handle the Transtage, Centaur and possible new vehicles.
No other Atlas pad 'conversions arc
planncd at this time. Spokesmen report
that the existing eight A lIas pads Z.L
sufficient for future SLV-3 launche
"\Vith the new facilitics, Atlas \Vi!l
on the way out for Ai!.' Forcer'
grams," sources said. "Titall Ill-C \\rJ
become the new workhorse."
The five Thor pads at \VTR also
are sumcient and no new construction
needed for the long-tank Thor.
On the subject of AI0L or other
recovery pJans or facilities, Ai;: f'OJ~c
is making no official COmmCIY'S. It is
almost certain, however, that \vater recovery will prevail in the foreseeable
future.
\VTR now has no responsibiLty for
recovery. The orranization fOffner;y
responsible for \VTR sP,icc-p_lyloL.u
recoveries, the 6594th Acrospac~ Te;;t
Wing, Sunnyvale, Calif., has bc~n d,~
activated. All tracking station; arid
other facilities of the wing arc nc·\" jJL:rt
of the world-wide Air Force Sltc!;;te
Control Facility, h\~adquartcred at Air
Force Systems Co'nmand Spac ~ Systems Div.) El Segundo, Calif.
C
missiles and rockets, May 30, 1966
o
Section 3.4. 1
Page H/49
6/10/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
CUSTOMER NAME:
Air Force Eastern Test Range
Patrick Air Force Base, Florida
Phone: (IBM) 305/784-9600
REGION:
GEM
DISTRICT:
57
BRANCH:
Cape Kennedy GEM
BRANC H MANAGER:
W.o.
DP SALESMEN:
A. H. Herrington
M. V. Carter
J. G. Robertson, Jr.
SYSTEMS ENGINEERS:
Hal Bellamy
Gail Lundberg
OTHER IBM PERSONNEL:
R. E. Blue
Section 3.4.2
c:
Robeson
Page 1
1/28/66
nl
f'--
~
.
~
\, /?
w
CD
()
rt-
r-"
g
.
~
~
~
Eastern Test Range
Patrick ArB Florida
Brig. Gen. Huston
I
_L.
Eng~neering
Operation'
Col. Bertow ski
r-s-I-Q
~~
~~
~~
m .....
CJlr-s-
H
tJj
~
o
o
zf-:rj
S
Q:j
z~
r;
L'
IBNI CONFID:El\fTIAJ:
Biography of MAJOR GENERAL VINCENT G. HUSTON
General Vincent Go Huston was born on 23 May 1914 in Norriston,
Pennsylvania. He attended Drexel Institute of Technology, Philadelphia"
Pennsylvania, majoring in Electrical Engineering.
General Houston enlisted in the National Guard in January ~938,
received his second lieutenant commission in February 193:8, and entered pilot training in March 1938 at Air Force Flying SCflP-9l"
Kelly Field, Texas. He also attended Maintenance Engine~r1ng~
School, Chanute Field," Illinois, in 1939.
Until 1943, he was given radar and electronics assignments at
Wright Field, Ohio. From 1943 to 1945, he served in the Asiatic
Pacific and was active in the following campaigns: Northern Solomons;
Bismark-Archipelago; and Eastern Mandates.
General Huston s assignments after returning to the States includ€c!'
a tour at Wright Field, Ohio I in Directorate of Procurement and Production, Headquarters, Air Materiel Command. In July 1947, he was
named Assistant Chief, Inspection Section, Wright Field, Ohio. He
was transferred to Aeronautical Equipment Section as Chief in Jan. 1948.
I
General Huston took the Joint Operations Fourth Class at Armed Forces
Staff College, Norfolk, Virginia from August 1948 to December 1948
and was then as signed as Chief of Maintenance, Directorate of
Materiel, Headquarters, Strategic Air Command, Offutt AFB, Nebraska.
In September 1952, he was assigned as Air Force Member, Military
Application Division, Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C.,
and became Deputy Director, Military Application Division in Sept.,
1953. In September 1955 I he became Deputy Director I Directorate
of Nuclear Systems, Headquarters, Air Research and Development
Command.
General Huston was assigned as Commander, 3079th Aviation Depot
Wing I Wright-Patterson AFB, with additional duty as Assistant for
SpeCial Weapons, Headquarters, AMC on 16 May 1957. In Feb.1958,
he attended the Advanced Management Program I Harvard University I
for three months and then returned to his previous assignment.
o
In July 1960,
he was assigned as Commander of Air Materiel Forces,
.1\.
Pacific Ar ea, at Tachikawa I Japan. In June 1962, General Huston was
assigned "to Headquarters, Pacific Air Forces, Hickam AFB, Hawaii, as
Assistant Chief of Staff, Materiel. He was then assigned as Commander,
Air Force Eastern Test Range in July 1964. On 19 July 1964, he was
promoted to the rank of Major General. General and Mrs. Huston have
a daughter I Patricia Frances. He is rated a command pilot.
Section 3.4. 2
Page A.1/1 (2/18/66)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Air Force Eastern Test Range
Commander
fGen V Bus tor.
V~ce!llCommandel
,~~ p w n;rh~rdson
Bioastronautics
Foreign Technology
Wm Douglas
~--~------------~------------------~(o.
(~ol
Maniere
I
J
Ieputy
Cc 1 A J
Engine~ring
Boresk~
Deputy Opera ions
Co~
M W Elliot
~,
(/
1
New Systems
ICol Floyd
Amundson
lnstrumentati pn
Col L W Wilco~
1
f
Co ~munications
CpI Larry Mil: er
P ~ocurement
~aj
Stockman
Data Process long
Col A P Whitmire
Range Opera t ions
I~ol
Chas Cart e r
1
T est Operatio ~s
LC 01 Mlke Kova ~h
Range Safety
LCol Wm
c'
Section 3.4.2
Page A/2
2/18/66
Baxt~ r
Pan American World Airways - GMRD
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
V ce-President
R S. Mitchell
Ge~
Manager
~.R.
Ilans
Borders
Finance
& Budg~~~~c__________~__________~
C C Fleming
( L Ellis
I
1
Engineering
Operations
A~ministratiol1
1 F Sparks
R MBarnes
C C Gilbert _
nata Handling
S irstems Manage ment
(
R L Kahn
j~
V Godfrey
Div Accountant
Karl Kaylos
'-------~-
T~lemetry
G~o
McGruder
Weath4~r
I--
.J J Finger
EDP
D H Addiscott
c'
Section 3.4. 2
Page A/3
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
B.l
ETR will support MOL much the same as any other major
program. The impact is predicted to be about twice that
of the Gemini program. SSD will become a very large· and
important Range User I in fact, second to NASA.
ETR's role is gradually shifting from that of Launch Support
to On-Orbit Support. Other major on-orbit range users
are OAR, NORAD and Foreign Technology. Support of the
MOL Program at ETR will be similar to support of the OV
series sponsored by OAR, except that the amount of data
c:
handled will be vastly greater. On-orbit support computers
are projected for Antigua and Ascention Islands FY69.
Section 3.4.2
B.l/l
2/18/66
------------.--.--,-~=
~
~
~
DATA REDUCTION
C~~UTER
EQUIPMENT
\OJ
$:
(J)
CD
()
o
c-+
1-'-
g
-0
POD System
I~
w
!
-
1-1
't)
~
.M
!Z
N
:1-3
:~
t-'
1402
7044
14-qJ
7094
BATe}f Systell
1402
N
1402
'lj .
'-..PJ
I-'lQ
7094
COCD
~OJ
0)-
.'"
1401
N
I-'
140)
1401
~
~;
~
C/)
(J)
()
r-fo
.....
o
::s
w
~
N
c-:
SOW,vER
~
H()[/)IAIt/ RCGIS7CRS
CDC 3~OO
'"U
OJ
to
CDC 3'00
COll1PtlTE~
COMPfI~ ~.
ZJW
(J)
to
tv
"'tv
A. DIST/('Ii'IITM
a. PU'TTER tCAlM(lU£1t
• ~ T7r «W1101J.£p.
OVTPVT /I/hl'?~CE
Po C£M/411
E. M()/) It)
CDA/Tlf!lX~
C~I!
..ue.u
"'-
.
A:QW~Ct1J
N
l«AI.
ACW/~mQM
~
~
~
I
'a
~
to
g:.
o
z
"/J SK:1.!J:!5 7Z'
IfAAJU
0'>
.........
...... -
o
00
"'0'>
.. -.-~
~s
.
I-Tj
,
~
d
")
M
Z
I-j
ETR· REJ\l TIME cOrtJlJ:fI£R ..SYSTEf,'
s;!
r:
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c. 1
CURRENT STATUS
There are no outstanding proposals that affect the
MOL
program.
A proposal is outstanding to replace a 1410 and 1460 with
360' s I Mods. 30 and 40 I at Pan American EDP.
An order has just been received to replace two 1401's
with a 360, Mod. 40 at USAF Technical Laboratory for
data reduction. A second Mod. 40 is antiCipated by
March 1966.
Section 3.4. 2
- - - - - - - - - _.._-----_.
Page ell
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
D.
PROBL E M
AREAS
The major local problem involves the Real Time Computer
Facility with competitive equipment of two 3600' s and one
3100. The 3600's have been accepted less than one year,
and there is minimum Air Force interest in planning for their
replacement at this time. IBM has the dual problem of
preventing CDC expansion of this center and influencing
a decision for total replacement. The Air Force is not
CI
now receptive to an unsolicited proposal. We need as
much advanced information as possible on new requirements that may help overcome this barrier.
Section 3.4.2
Page D/1
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c'
E.
IBM STRATEGY
E. 1
Sales Action Program
Local coverage is maintained for the following:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
NRD Detachment #1 (technical group of 180 people).
Air Force Eastern Test Range and Patrick Air Force Base.
Pan American World Airways I Inc. I Guided Missiles
Range Division (prime contractor).
RCA Service Company-Missile Test Project (sub-contractor
for operations and maintenance).
Aerospace Corporation - Eastern Division.
Most action centers around two major accounts:
(~.\
/
E•2
a.
Air Force Techinical Laboratory: This is a separate
data reduction facility. Workload is from World-wide
sources, including Pacific Advanced Range Instrumentation
Ships. Expansion to time-sharing for local technical
users is planned here.
b.
Cape Kennedy Air Force Station: This is the location of the
RTCF used for impact prediction and acquisition mes sages
of all types. It is the area of concern with MOL requirements.
Technical Help Required
It is antiCipated that techincal help will be needed for hardware
interface engineering to existing equipment. This is a major
effort that should not await an RFP.
E.3
IBM System Design
This is incomplete at the present time.
is the Mod. 67 and 9020.
Section 3.4. 2
Under investigation
Page E/1
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(.
F.
SCHEDULE OF KEY TARGET DATES
1.
RFP for Weather real-time and data reduction system 17 January 1966 - Date of contract 1 May 1966.
2.
Cape Orbit-Support Computer and SCF interface, FY 67.
c~
c
Section 3.4.2
Page F/1
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
G.
COMPETITION
G. 1 Competition is virtually limited to CDC on the mainland
and Univac downrange and on ships.
CDC is most active with three local salesmen and
approximately four local systems engineers. They are
noted for giving Ii ttle attention to the problem I talking
about the 6000 series as the answer to all problems, and
bidding minimum systems with the hope of building up.
Their strength with Pan American has been partly lost by
c
attrition and poor performance in the area of 3600
reliability. They appear to be concentrating on NRD
at the present time.
Univac is represented by two salesmen locally and is
a virtual sole source for Mil Spec downrange and
shipboard equipment.
Section 3.4. 2
Page G/l
2/18/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Date:
( ' (Dept/Loc):
January 21, 1966
Cape Kennedy 105
. t'elephone Ext.:
Subject:
Comments on MOL Project Notebook
Reference:
To:
Mr. W. B. Gibson
MOL Program Director
Los Angeles A.erospace
In the latest entry to the Notebook, your letter to Mr. C. E. McKittrick, Jr.
dated January 6, 1966, a reference is made to "our relatively weak current
position at the Cape. II We agree that the present Cape effort involves fewer
people, but we believe the IBM strength position at the Cape has been
underestimated. In fact, we would rate the chance of IBM winning any MOL
connected RFP as good or better at the Cape than at West Coast locations.
From your letter we are apprehensive that the many recipients may get an
erroneous impression from the Cape referenc e.
We are sure that our minimum inputs to date have not expressed the Cape
position very well. We will try to improve this communication. We
believe the MOL Project Notebook to be an excellent working tool and are
already using it to good advantage.
I am enclosing a copy of NRD Regulation No. 25-2 of December 14, 1965
on the subject of range computer operations TIlanageTIlent. I aTIl not sure
that this regulation should be included in the Project Notebook, but is
passed along for your inforTIlation because it shows the present intent of
NRD and the iTIlportance of coverage of the Technical DetachTIlent at P . ~FB.
.
/
. ' 2~j,/lH'~,L
".vv~~)-:r~}.
--
I,
"/j
,
("".:/
l-'
po
0: _ _ _ _ _ _
A. H. HerrIngton IL
Advisory Marketing' Representative
AHH/dlh
Enclosure
cc:
Mr. R. Po Bruns
AF PrograTIl
Gem. Region
Section 3.4. 2
Page H/l
1/28/66
-----
-----------------------------------
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Nm>R 25-2
NRD REGULATION
NO.
HEADQUARTERS NATIONAL RANGE DIVISION
Patrick Air Force Base, Florida
14 December 1965
25-2
Management Engineering
COMPUTER OPERA'IIONS MANAGEMENT
PURPOSE: This regulation establishes NED policy on operations management of range.
computer resources, and assigns responsibilities.
Scope: This regulation applies to
all elements of the National Range
Division.
1.
Terms Explained. Computer resources-funds~ and labor used to
perform the range computing function.
2.
(4) Establish and publish NRD
inter-range computer operations policies
and procedures.
b.
NRD Ranges will:
~ll e~ui~ment:
3. Exclusion. This regulation does not
apply to computers procured for business
accounting and administration under the
provisions of AFM 171-9.
4. Policy. NRD agencies will procure
and operate range computers under
waivers to AFR 300-series regulations
and AFM 171-9. Ranges must:
a. Assure effective use of each
computer.
b.
i
Conserve computer resources.
c. Configure all mission compucers
and computing systems to permit rapid
cross-servicing between ranges and, when
applicable, to operate in a worldwide
network.
I
k 5· :R~?_EoE~1b}l-!!i_ie~ :
a.
Headquarters NED will:
(1) Monitor computer operations
and use of computer resources, and
coordinate between ranges.
(2) Resolve inter-range operational problems and user priority
conflicts.
(3) Establish inter-range
standards for computer selection,
operation and use, and for software
generation, documentation and control.
c
OPR: NROE
DISTRIBUTION:
(1) Reduce computer operating
overhead by consolidating similar
tasks and overhead activities, such as
computer programming and maintenance.
(2) Limit the amount of test
data reduced by establishing -formal
procedures for determining users'
needs before each test.
(3) Configure the real-time
computer systems at both ranges to
use common hardware and software;
support inter-range operations;
and perform all real-time or near realtime computing tasks at the range bead.
(4) _ Configure the data reduct jon
centers at both ranges to use common
hardware and software; permit rapid
- cross-servicing betwe~n ranges; and
perform all data reduction, analysiS,
and scientific computational tasks.
(5) Conduct a semiannual
Computer Program Survey and retire
:;?:!'0g!'-9...Y!!.<:; whi.c h are no longer needed.
(6) Conduct an annual Computer
Operations Review.
6. _ Reports:
a. Ranges will submit a semiannual
Computer Program Survey Report to
Headquarters NED (NROE) by 15 February
and 15 August each year. It will
include:
S
Section 3.4. 2
Page H/2
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Date:
i'rom (Dept/ Loc) :
(:'hone Ext.:
Subject:
December 1, 1965
104
Titan III-C Program at ETR
Reference:
To:
W. B. Gibson
I understand that the Martin Company has been given a contract for
17 additional Titan III- C standard launch vehicles. These will be
boosters for payloads which as yet have not been' specified. The
current Rand D program for the Titan III-C is also for 17 boosters
with all of the remaining ones having an active payload. Vehicles
11 and 12 will carry Philco payloads and 13 will have a Philco and
G. E. payload combined.
This extension of the ITL facility utilization is considered by some
Martin Company Cape people as justification for up- grading their
GSE for improved launch control and to offer a service for payload
checkout. The results of the OCALA Study Project will have a
strong bearing on their ability to sell this concept.
I believe that the Air Force will be so dependent on the OCALA system
by next June that they will continue it as an operational system until
a replacement system can be procured. IBM must be ready to propose
a replacement system around April, 1966. It will probably have to
be installed in late 1966 to av~id a competitive procurement. The
ETR and WTR systems need not be alike, in my opinion, but it would
be desirable if they could be. I believe this will depend on the extent
to which the WTR system replaces the present GSE used on the Titan
III.
Your as sistance on getting an early delivery schedule would be
appreciated.
REB/ cfc
rfJ~
R. E. Blue
cc: W. O. Robeson
R. W. Swanson
Section 3.4. 2
Page H/3
2/18/66
Launch/Recovery FaciH'iies
. "0
N
"'!"
•
jv~alor
Necessary
by Kurt Voss
c
/J1-C will probably be required for lofting communications satellites associ. PATRICK AFB, FLA.-The Eastern Test
ated with both follow-on strategic and
Range will probably not undergo any tactical comsat systems (M/R, Jan. 31,
major changes in its launch facilities p. 46).
in the foreseeable future.
Launch officers here also foresee no
Col. O. C. Ledford, commander of changes in command and control facili. the 6555th Aerospace Test Wing, ties outside of the switch in telemetry
which has jurisdiction over Air Force and command radio frequencies now
launch activities at ETR, says: "We going into effect. "\Ve have a capability
have the core of the facilities we re- here now that far exceeds our present
quire here for military space work. The work load," they have reported.
Titan III is the vehicle to provide
New recovery concept-At nearby
military space developmental capa- Orlando AFB, the Air Force's Aerobility."
space Rescue and Recovery Service
He sees the Tita1l III as "the DC-3
(ARRS) has come lip with a new heli-of the military space program," and copter/ in-flight refucling team concept
predicts that all developments in the for water recovery which could go a
immediate future will be based on long way toward taking some of the
adaptations of the liquidl solid vehicle. strain off the Navy's recovery fleet.
The only major facilities modifica-.
The operation is especially appealtions he sees would be those required ing as planning for the Manned Orbitby use of a seven-segment Titan III ing Laboratory program gets under
booster configuration, instead of the way.
five-segment solid strap-ons now used.
\Vith MOL crews orbiting for 30-day
The switch to the longer booster missions, the requirement to be prewould require modifications of the pared for sudden mission aborts could
launch pad flame bucket, the Titan tie up a substantial number of Navy
transporter undercarriage, and heavy ships on an almost permanent basis.
cranes in the solid-motor assembly This is a real and troublesome problem
building.
at this point.
Expanded ITL not seen-Though
Using the ncw helicopter/fixed wing
the Titan III integrate-transfer-launch refueling aircraft team, ARRS officers
complex (lTL) at Cape Kennedy could point out that recovery squadrons
probably be expanded to handle the posted at key spots around the world
seven-segment version of the booster, would allow lvl0LI Gcmilli-B spacethe Air Force thus far has not identi- craft to be picked up by crews which
fied any missions to be flown from ETR were continually on alert but which
which would require this.
did not have to be on station.
High-ranking Air Force officers also
"For the first time," says Col.
admit that the ITL at the Cape would not Bestow R. Rudolph, deputy chief of
be readily expandible to handle the plans at ARRS headquarters, "we will
156-in. solid motor strap-on if a mis- have a true rescuc capability as of the
end of this year, even with no support
sion devcIopsfor that vehicle.
The Air Force is preparing a ships in a given area."
At present, ARRS has 30 fourfollow-on production plan for additional five-segment Titan Ill-C vehicles engine C-130's and 10 Sikorsky HH3E
helicopters available for its worldwide
(M/R, April 18, p. 14), in addition to
the 10 remaini ng R&D vehicles. The rescue work. It has been authorized a
new vehicles will be used to launch' total of 54, plus backups, in its stock
replenishment payloads from ETR for- of C-130's, and a total of 24 of the
140-knot helicopter.
the Initial Defense Communications
Satellite Program (IDeSI') , for nuclear
Aircraft-helicopter team-Using the
detection satellites and probably for team concept, the C-130's double as
some new mUltiple engineering pay- resclle aircraft, which carry and drop
loads from ETR. In addition, the Titan pararesclIe teams, and as flying tankers,
which carry large loads of fuel for the
HH3E helicopters.
The newly developed system of inflight refueling gives the HIn E's an
almost unlimited range, and their speed
is enough to shift areas of coverage
quickly to follow changing orbits.
Should a landing footprint change,
the refuclabIc capability will allow the
helicopters to change position immediately without the need to return to land
or a ship, either of which could be
hours away.
Even larger helicopters-the Sikorsky HH53A-have been ordered.
These craft are large enough to pick up
the entire Apollo space ship from the
water and carry it long distances, with
the crew still inside, if necessary.
Col. Rudolph predicts that in the
near future these larger helicopters will
be the prime recovery vehicles, with
the Navy doing the support of a pickup
mission-just the opposite of today's
recovery modes.
Delivery of the new units will start
in August when two CH53A's, cargo
helicopters converted to search and rescue equipment, will arrive at Patrick.
Rescue capabilities with the new craft
will start small and grow as equipment
funuing becomes available.
The HH53A's will be equippeu to
. use the team concept, with refueling
capabilities even when carrying full
loads.
Emergency rescue-Another new
concept, just publicly demonstrated,
also is in ARRS plans for emergency
recovery usc. The first week in May
marked the public testing of the Fulton,
pickup system, by means of which a
downed astronaut can be snatched from
water or dry land by a C-130, or similar
plane, even if weather keeps helicopters
away.
Using the system, the downed flyer
dons a special suit-like harness. He inflates a polyethlene balloon with helium
gas. This balloon lifts a SOO-ft. nylon
line into the air, one end tied to the
harness and the other held aloft for
pickup by the plane.
As the aircraft approaches, its pilot
lines up a V-shaped guide on the plane's
nose with the line and flies into it. As
the line strikes, a small arm in the apex
of the V suddenly twists, locking the
line securely The cable is pulled back
by the airstream against the pla.ne's
underside, where it is grabbed at the
rear of the fuselage and hooked onto a
winch.
G-forces on the man being picked
up are said to be less than those experienced in a normal parachute jump and
much less than those of previous pickup
systems.
The entire pickup kit-harness, balloons, gas supply, and nylon line-is
dropped by the pickup plane.
tJ
missiles and rockets, May 3D, 1966
Section 3.4. 2
Page H/4
IBM CONFIDENT!AT:
CUSTOMER NAME:
Air Force Flight Test Center
Edwards Air Force Base
California
Phone: CLifford 8-2111
REGION:
GEM
DISTRICT:
Western
BRANCH:
Riverside
BRANCH MANAGER:
J. F. Bales
DP SALESMEN:
Bob Glascock
Dale Edwards
SYSTEMS ENGINEERS:
Jim Brown
Jim Clarke
Ted DeSimio
Bob Hill
FSD REPRESENTATIVES:
Bob Strayer
Paul Lindfors
Section 305
Page 1
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
..
~
(~
-
~~.
« Ii
.......
......
."
4"0
.1
.
~
~
~h!
~
.. c
... ;Z~
~JI
;:)
...
·V·. ...
o
,..
~~l
... .
..•. . 1
".
~
~ ~:
10.
J
~
..
~
0_.
J
I
L
~
•
.....
0
::>
Yi t ,~
~ :;ov ~
....... .
.....
c ...
It
oJ
!"'6 w
:; u •
:
t
·
•
E s~ :.• • ::8 § ~
c.
~~
0
Oft
·
u
;
0
!'"
!...
~...
~
~
...
,~
..
·•
t
c
•
......
~~
~
~
~
:x"~
~~t
Xc; ...
f
.
l
,
s!!
u~
•• •..
~
01
I;. . c*
...
.~;:
!i~
ja
C
.-
~.,
..
.1
J
f
01
C
.. ow
:"'t
C
,i~
!
";
~ C
.,.
.1
~'I
.1
or
w
~,
:t~
;.
~~
"I)
..~
r
•
~
~
~
1
•
(/
Section 3.5
;.)
~I",
:1
r.
.:~~ . -I
..
... to !!
~
:;l'~
i\~
...
:.,
J
ill
Z~~
.. ":1
'
4~' ,1
~ '!
1 -
~~
~l
!~~~
1
J .... ,.
I
.1.
..
~
• ~,,:.~ . I
(.
~
!i
~
!
::I
110
.•
I.
io
Page A/I
1/21/66
c>
..!)
-_ ..... _---_.
__ ._.
-.--.".~-.--.-.-.-~--
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
A. 1
PERSONNEL PROFILE
a)
Col. Robert Gould - Flight Test Center Comptroller believes
strongly in central management of data processing equipment.
Frequently "Bumps Heads" with scientific side of house.
b)
Mr. Ralph Western - Chief, Data Systems and Statistics Branch.
Data Processing Equipment Control Officer for the Flight Test
Center. Reviews and exercises approval authority on all Center
initiated requests for digital data processing equipment.
c)
Mr. Alfred Phillips - Chief, Directorate for Technical Support.
Heads entire plethora of ground based technical support for all
flight test programs.
d)
Mr. Alfred Miller - Chief, Data Systems Di vi sion. (Mr. Harold
Knausdorf - Acting during one years leave of absence by Miller).
Responsible for Acquisition, Reduction, Processing and Analysis
of Scientific Type Flight Test Data.
e)
Mr. Charles Kroll - Chief, Requirements Analysis Division.
Responsible for coordination with all other divisions in the
definition of requirements for future flight test projects.
f)
Major Harold Smith - Chief, Data Systems Engineering Di vision.
Responsible for all non-standard special purpose data systems
connected with flight test projects.
g)
Col. Charles Yeager - Commandant, Aerospace Research Pilot
School. Responsible for advanced flight training and technical
classroom training for all Air Force Astronauts and Experimental
Te st Pilots.
C:
Section 3.5
Page A.I/I
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
B.
BACKGROUND
B.l
The Air Force Flight Test Center has the mission of performing
initial evaluation on all winged, lifting body, and rotary type
aircraft that might enter the Air Force inventory It Prior to
project cancellation in early 1964, the Flight Test Center was
designated as primary recovery site for the X ... 20 Dynasoar
Vehicle. Current role in MOL is restricted to crew training
at the Pilot School. Unless land recovered Shuttle Vehicles
are to be utilized" Flight Test Center Personnel see no direct
mission in support of MOL.
B.2
Equipment installed at FTC includes:
(
a)
7094/7044 Direct Couple System including a 7288 Real-Time
Interface with the Edwards Range.
b)
1410 File oriented system for commercial type data proce s sing.
c)
1620 - 40K System for use by Flight Test Engineers as
"Quick-Loqk" machine.
('~.
/
Section 3.5
Page 8/1
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C.
CURRENT STATUS
C. 1
The F Ii g ht T est Cent e r is on e 0 f th e four a c c oun t s in vol v e d
in the recent Air Force Multiple Replacement Program
(IBM Name: Project FORCE) along with: Systems Engineering
Group (SEG)" Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio; Air Proving
Ground Center (APGC) Eglin AFB Florida; and Ballistic
Systems Division (BSD), Norton AFB California.
IBM submitted a "Technical Information Document" and a
No -Bid due to inability to meet Air Force Demonstration
requirements. The Air Force has since decided that no
EDP Manufacturer was responsive and present information
indicate s a repetition of the exercise in second quarter 66.
Section 3.5
Page C/l
1/21/66
July 5, 1966
To:
Mr. Wo B. Gibson
Frank Bales
Subject:
Ed"Nards Air Force Base - MOL Participation
Lt. John Prodan. Chief of the simulation Division, Aerospace
Research Pilot School, today told me that the Simulators for MOL
will be located at Huntington Beach and at Vandenburg. He said
that the only mission that Edwards will have, at least at present,
will be in the first phase of trC'.ining.
f
/s/
Bob Glascock
BG:md
cc: Dale Edwards
Section 3.5
Page H/1
7/29/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
CUSTOMER NAME:
Aerospace Medical Division
Brooks Air Force Base
San Antonio Texas
Phone: 512/532-8811
I
(/
REGION:
Western
DISTRICT:
14
BRANCH:
San Antonio
BRANCH MANAGER:
J. R. McSween
ACCT. MANAGER:
J. R. McSween
DP SALESMAN:
Pat Graham
FSD REPRESENTATIVES:
Bill McLain
OTHER IBM PERSONNEL:
Tom Johnson Federal Rep. San Antonio
Bob Vesper I CE I San Antonio
Charlie Brown t MOL Proj. Office I LA
Section 3.6
c
I
I
Page 1
1/28/66
~
~
~
HQ AEROSPACE MEDICAL DIVISION
Alk fUKCE SYSTEMS COMMAND
BROOKS AFB, TEXAS
AEIt05PACI MIDtCAl DIVtSlON
CO,wVIDD
1 Oct 65
Map Gen. T. C. 8edweU. Jr.
VICI COMMAN)fR
ill
()
[
OMf safNTIST
1-'.
L
I
Dr. H. ShupId
.
(0
r+
o
::J
Col •• to.
I
IA55~JAN"OfI
,-.I
STAfFSU""'''
!
I
w
L __
0)
J
INfatMAnON
I
lt Col. I.A. Gkacow
r
.... Col. O. E. Schlan.ndorf
r--_-PE~EL
L__
lt Col
~. M. Woolf
I
1
STAff JUDGE
ADVOCATE
It Col.
l 1
C~LER
,
r
c.
F. Bennett
PROClMEMfNT
I
J
j
It Col. E. l. Shanahan'
l
MATERiEl
J
Col M. A. Songster
r----
I
I
1
_J
I
~
PlANS & PROGRAMS
~ .. Lambert _____ ~
l
_ _
DEPUTY FOR
FOfIEIGN TECHNOlOGY
1
J
Col. R. 8. Payne
1-'1.0
1-'(0
~<:
l
i
MEDICINE & EDUCATION ~.
c..._
Lt.
I
f
l_
.o~ItONAUTJCS J
l
j'
L __Co~ ~_.
ASS{ FOR
& AEROSPACl MEDfONf
Col. A. t.
I(ara.-
DEPUTY FOR
RESEAaCH & DEVEl~MfNT
J
__.
ITM
I
I
USN SCHOOL OF
:
H~~STRA'
~~MI~PM:.uM£!WlDl!lO.aNm.f_~
Col. tf. V. EIliCJ95O'l
:
~ H. McEIv.()in_~
[MEDIC_ DtRltTORA~
MEDICAL. EDUCA'IlON DR
TECHNICAL SUPPORT D1R
TECHNICAL EVAl.UAJ"fOIIt.
APPL DIREctORATE
TECHNICAL ACTlvtnES etR
'-...,.
I
I
~ :nRA™
N""O
'-...,.OJ
1
r - - . DEPUTY FOI
J
6670TH PflSONNEl
RESEAaOllAliOUrTORY
I
Col.
1
j.
V. PattenoI., Jr.
,
1
ADYANCED STUDIES DIR
BIOASTRONAUTICS SYSTEMS
SUPPORT DfR£CTORATE
RADIOBIOLOGY DIRECTORATE
HUMAN PERFORMANCE DIR
BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DtR
AEROSPACE MEDICINE DIR
LIFE SUPPORT DlRE·CTORATE
STINFO DIRECTORATE
I
65J0fH ABtOSPACf
MfDtCAI. R(S£AICH &A8S
Col.
j.
M.
I
~~
I
I
657lST AfROMEDfCAt
RlS£ARCH ~TCJrV
l
tt
<;0' C.
H. Kratochvil
I--i
to
~
o
o
z
f-rj
I
J
I--i
t:J
Z
M
t--3
$!
I-'
I
I
I
ARCllC ABOMEDtCAl
LAIOIATORY
I
wtlfOtD tW.l USIIf
HOSPfTAl
]
~ E. It. GoItra._Jr____ ~
I
IriS
(;en
T.)f.
<:.ouch
I
J
I
USIIF B'tOfMOUX7ICAl.
I
lABaIATOI'Y
it Col. E. "I. DoW
I
1
!
I(--
1
HQ 6570TH
All BASE GROUP
Col M. J. Wetzel
t-t
I
I
.
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
B .. 1
Backgrounds
Dr. Danford - Biometrics Branch Chief
Neutral to negative on IBM hardware; likes his Philco 2000.
Has turned down an attempt to present our 360 presentations.
PhD in Statistics -- no modern concepts applications
orientation -- L.P., CPM, GPSS, Etc.
Has turned down numerous attempts to enroll in IBM
schools.
Very hard nut to crack.
Does like some of IBM's work in med. application area
0
Seems open to an approach on communication aspects of
MOL, but suggests a contract study (Lockheed)
0
Dr. Hughs
No data; passes all calls to Dr
0
Danford.
Mr. Bob Bales - Computer Ops Chief
Good automation man. Would like to work with us, but
he is #3 and has no decision authority.
All three men were very heavily involved in medical data reduction
on all astronauts up to the present time. They will probably fill
the same function on a now real time basis, in the MOL program.
Mr. Adams - Environmental Br.
Interested in development and utilization of medical data
sensory devices on board the vehicle, provide data to
Dr. Danford via telemetry and a communication capability
into SAM.
B.2
IBM has keypunch and unit record installed.
Section 3.6
Page S/l
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Date:
From (Dept/Loc):
December 27, 1965
San Antonio 390
(~TelePhone Ext.,
Subject:
Reference:
To:
Mr. W. B. Gibs on
MOL Project Director
Western Region
I spent approximately an hour with Lt. Colonel Stan White, AMD, Brooks Air
Force Base, last Friday morning. Results:
1.
He is going to Washington this summer to act as the AMD Coordinator
with the Headquarters AFSC MOL Project office. He will be in the same
position there as Colonel Carstairs is in, in California.
2.
LTC Ord, AMD, will be MOL Proj ect Coordinator at AMD, Brooks Air
Force Base.
3.
AMD's tasks under the MOL Project will include:
4.
a.
Personnel selection.
b.
On long term-days-manned flights, they will provide a near
real-time, bio-medical data reduction capability.
c.
Analysis of occurrences t%r by humans, during and after flights
to provide input for decision concerning personnel selection, flight
duration, man or machine job/experiment mix.
LTC White may attend EX-34 in San Jose, January 31 through February 4/
1966.
Dr. Danford, Biometrics Chief, has turned down invitations to attend SC-78 and
EX-34. Feels he knows enough now to evaluate his needs. Present equipment
consists of Philco 2000 4K mainframe, 8 tape drives A to D to A converter for
interface with PACE 3000 Analog Computer I IBM keypunch 407-519.
I
I
Pat Graham
Federal Marketing Representative
PG:al
Section 3.6
Page H/1
1/21/66
MO 2·H4l1
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
SAN ANTONIO 390
April 4, 1966
TO:
Mr. Charlie Brown
MOL Proj ect Office
9045 Lincoln Boulevard
Los Angeles I California 90045
Here is a write-up on some of the activities at AMD for your interest.
Of more immediate importance for our notice is the situation concerning Dr. Danford IS Philco 2000. I think a decision has been made to
replace it with a whole new package; and, as soon as we and
Univac finish our proposals and a selection is made I they will
go in for new equipment. I have not been able to dent Dr. Danford,
Dr. Hughes, or Mr. Bales at all, but we keep trying. The writeup of the Altac/Tac to FORTRAN II/FAP translators in the December
ACM Journal may help us when they bring up the conversion problems
again, as they no doubt will. Dr. Danford s feeling has been for
a long time that, aside from being very satisfied with their system,
they were locked in by their software inventory; and this conversion
capability may be a way in for us. 1'11 keep you posted.
I
Pat Graham
PG:al
Section 3.6
Page H/2
4/15/66
- -----------------------
Bends Posing Difficult
(~:Problems in Space Science
Ry .JERRY I,OCHBAlJM
(
The threat of space bends is posing difficult problems for
Air Force scientists seeking ways to protect space-walking
crewmen of future orbiting laboratories against this dangerous low-pressure ailment.
Extent of the problem of the bends-caused by th,e
bubbling of dissolved gases when pressure on the body IS
lowered-is reflected in these new developments at the
School of Aerospae-e Medicine at Brooks AFB:
• A team of researchers has just completed a lengthy
series of tests and is preparing to report formally that helium,
breathed with oxygen instead of the nitrogen of ordi~~ry
::lir. has failed to provide bends protection some authorlties
had predicted.
• In the tests, about one man in five got bends in 206
manflights simulating Air Force Ma~ned. Orbiting Laboratory
(MOL) missions. Bends occurred In sunulated space SUIt
work outside the MOL.
• A new series of tests has begun in which men who
gel bends in lower-pressure space suit conditions are treated
In higher-pressure spaceship cabin con.ditions, t~. determine
time lapse necessary between extra-vehicular actiVity (EVA)
excursions into space.
• The idea is emerging that an orbiting laboratory'
oabin pressure higher than that in pres~nt spaceshtps wou~d
be desirable to permit a space walker In trouble to use hIS
own ship as' 'an emergency recompression chamber capable,
with his space suit, of returning him to ground pressure.
• Frequency of bends after exposure to possible future
two-gas spaceship atmospheres causes some .t~ ~hink th~ S~M
studies could lead to making bends-susceptibility a CrIterIon
for space crew selection.
BENDS HA VE been a traditional problem of deep-sea
divers, who face lower pressures on the _body when they
come up. The bubbling of the gases in the blood can ~ause
much pain and possibly disable the bends SUfferer, and It can
be fatal.
The bends problem is not regarded as a serious one for
today's space-walking astronauts, who breathe pure oxygen.
The nitrogen portion of air is principally blamed for causing bends.
While pure oxygen has been proven safe for use. up. to
30 days, it can have dangerous effects and space sCIentlsts
have been looking for a better kind of mixed-gas atmosphere.
Nitrogen-oxyge~ and helium-oxyg.en appear~ to be t:he
most likely .prospects. Helium's promIses of offermg less rIsk
of the bends, because of its lower solubility in the body, ~as
one principal reason for its selection for thorough evaluatIOn
in SAM stUdies which began in November. 1964.
SAM researchers had begun studies of nitrogen-oxygen
:bends risks in early 1964. They later expanded their program
to compare helium-oxygen effects.
c
MAJ. SARAH E. BEARD, a key figure in the bends
studies, said especially qualified volunt.eers in spactC chambers were put through pressure changes which might be met
on an MOL mission with EVA, in paired flights carefully
controlled so nitrogen vs. helium comparisons would be precise,
Time of bends danger came after leaving simulated MOL
conditions-half sea-level pressure in two types, of flights an.d
one·third that pressure in another-to go to space SUIt
pressure one-fifth that at sea level.
"Decompression following exposure to helium-oxygen,"
said Maj. Beard and her co-workers, "genercllly caused an
equal or greater number of cases of hends in varying grades
of pain than did exposure to nitrogen-oxygen."
While helium has been found faster than nitrogen hoth in
entering and leaving solution in the hody, the researchers
said from comparison of effects it "appears that, once precipitated, 'nitrogen bends' and 'helium bends' are similar .. ."
Others on the bends study team were Dr. T. H. Allen,
head of SAM's physiology branch, Dr. (LL Col.) R. G. Me'Iver, and Dr. R. W. Bancroft.
STAGES IN THE simul'ated flights-compared to normal,
ground-level atmospheric conditions of 20 per ce.nt oxygen,
79 per .cent nitrogen, plus other gases, at 14.7 pnunrtf per
square lOch (psi) pressure-were:
• Four houTs breathing pure oxygen at ground pressure, to wash mtrogen out of the system.
. • Two and a half hours breathing pure oxygen elt five
P~l, t~e current U.s.. spaceship atmosphere, to simUlate a
flig~~ m a Gemini capsule t.o rendezvous and dock with an
orbIting MOL.
• In one of the three flight patterng, 15 minutes of pure
oxygen at 3.5 psi, the environment of U.S. space suits. This
phase, with knee-bends and ,push-ups to simulate exertion in
space, represented transferring from the Gemini to the MOL.
Other flights skipped this phase, e'vidently assuming possibility of direct entry as through a proposed Gemini heat
shield tunnel.
• Four hout's simulating a shirt-sleeves stay in the MOL.
In two flights, atmosphere was ,about half oxygen and halT
nitrogen at seven psi. In the third, it was a mIXture of about
70 per cent oxygen-30 per cent helium at five psi.
• Two hours of work EVA, breathing pure oxygen again
at 3.5 psi as in a space suit, and doing exercises periodically.
lnall, out of 206 man-flights, 39 cases of bends were recorded in the work EVA phase. In contrast, only four cases
of - bends in 70 man-flights were recorded in the. double-~VA
tests' first space-suit stage, preceded by long demtrogenation.
ADDITIONAL FLIGHTS tested effects of pre-breathing
pure oxygen faT 'half an hour in the MOL to wash out possible bends-produc:ing gases before the work EVA phase.
"There is only a marginal benefit.from oxygen p~e-breath
ing," Maj. Beard said. She would like to study thIS aspect
of the problem further, testing effects of a full hour's
oxygen pre-breathing.
As expected, the researchers said, there were fewer
cases of bends in going to the work EVA stage from the
five psi tentative MOL atmosphere than in the greater change
from the seven psi atmosphere.
In the cootinuing debate over which atmo~phere the. M~L
should have this m1ght be counted a pomt for stICkmg
to the prese~t low-pressure level. But there is another consideration, Maj. Beard pointed out.
Men who developed be.nds in the tests were treated by
driving the bubbling gas back into solution throu~h return
to higher pressure, and use of pure oxygen. A speOlal chamber capable of high pressure treatment is kept ready nearby,
she said but it has not been needed.
"We' have had some men who have required groundlevel (pressure) plus time for bends reco'V'ery," she emphasized.
Section 3.6
(continued next page)
Page H/3
4/15/66
Bends Posing
Space Problem
This leads to an observation not part of the researchers'
formal report to be .presented to Aerospace Medical Association at Las Vegas, Nev., in April, an opinion taking shape
with experience:
"Medically. we would like to see, for the sake of the
man who gets bends, a seven-psi ship ... ," Maj. Beard said.
SPACE SUITS, normally kept at 3.5 psi because ballooning and stiffening effects of higher pressure make use awkward, can in an emergency be inflated to seven-psi pressure,
she explained.
That pressure, with seven-psi cabin pressure added, could
return a spaceman with the bends .practically to ground-level
pressure, which some have needed.
The researchers made no recommendations either on
helium use or on MOL atmosphere in general. They are
moving on with their work. There is a lot to he done before
the first scheduled manned MOL mission in 1968.
In a new test series begun last Tuesday, men are breath·
ing oxygen for an hour and a half and going directly to
space-suit conditions for varying periods, with exercjse.
Those who get bends are brought to five psi for treatment. This pressure, plus normal space suit pressure. brings
them "down" from equivalent of 34,500 feet to 14,000 feet
altitude.
The question, said Maj. Beard, is this: "How long must
II man stay in the laboratory under treatment before he can
_successfully go out into space again?'»
SPACE-WALK PUZZLE-When Astronaut Edward
White took .his famed space walk last June, he
breathed pure oxygen in the spaceship and in his
suit. If future spaceship~ go to a. different atmosphere of either nitrogen-oxygen or hel ium-oxygen,
how much risk of bends would spate walkers run?
School of Aerospace Medicine researchers are fInding that a troublesome question to answer.
Section 3.6
Page H/4
4/15/66
4>
• • ..
SPACE MEDICINE
AF Completes 70-Day Inactivity Study
The Air Force has concluded a 70-day experiment on
the effects of inactivity using five volunteer subjects with
age, training and experience qualificatiOlls similar to those
of astronauts. The men were confined to complete t ;;drest
for six weeks, during which blood test. were taken daily
to study blood cell formation and rate of red-cell destruction under inactivity conditions. Calcium studies alsc were
conducted. Results are now being anal} zed.
Animals Survive 236 Days in 100% Oxygen Experiments at the Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories' Toxic Hazards Division indicate that survival under
long-term exposure to a pure oxygen atmosphere at reduced
pressure of 5 psi is indeed possible. More than 100 anima 18
-including mice, rats, dogs and monkeys-spent 236 days
in an altitude chamber and showed normal results from
blood-count and chemistry tests. Although 11 rodents died
_during the time, the survival rate was better than ifl--the
control group, and was not considered unusual in long-term
experiments with such animals.
AF Reports on Confinement Tests
The Air Force's Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories reports that there seem to be no problems with prolonged periods of restricted human physical activity, provided sufficient exercise is available to maintain metabolic
efficiency. In a recent series of tests, three groups of four
men each were confined for 28 consecutive days, exercising
regularly on a bicycle ergometer. In general, the prolonged
confinement caused no significant measurable physiological
changes from control values recorded -before the test, the
Air Force asserted.
•
SAM Produces Space Dental Kit
A dental repair kit for astronaut usG is being tesed by
the Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine in a 12-day
simulation chamber training test. Developed under the direction of SAM's Dr. James Hartley, the 1.3-lb. kit is being
proposed for possible use in orbital spaceflights 01 long
duration. Dental troubles such as a gu m infection, trench
mouth and a filling br'eak delayed three ehamber simulations
at SAM, provoking -the research. The kit includes forceps to
pull teeth, local anesthetic and filling material to permit one
astronaut to perform emergency dental work upon the othe~.
missiles and rockets, April 18, 1966
Section 3.6
Page H/S
5/6/66
A~r Force To Use Ger{uDul~
For
by Heather Iifi.. David
WASHINGToN-The Air Force has contracted with the David Clark Co. for
Gemini extravehicular spacesuits, which
apparently will be the basic uniform for
manned operations in the immediate
future.
The Air Force, however, although
it has rcleased no details on modifications, has indicated it would like to
have a bettcr thermal protection system,
as \-vell as less bulky garments, to protect against micrometeorites and radiation.
A number of in-house efforts are in
progress at Brooks APB, Tex., (M/R,
April 25, p. 39) on new concepts of
cooling and pressurization which might
Section 3.6
afford better mobility, and a study of
the entire field is being put together
with recommendations for the future
by a contractor for the Aerospace
Medical Research Laboratories.
For the time being, however, officials say the Gemini suit appears well
fitted for some of the repair and rescue
and extravehicular experiments the Air
Force has in mind. At present there is
no specific interest in a hard suit such
as that being developed for NASA by
Litton Industries, since the Air Force
has no mission to land on the Moon
or another planet.
The Air Force is still wrestling with
the knotty problem of which combination of atmospheric gases to use in the
Manned Orbiting Laboratory ..
A decision on an oxygen/helium
atmosphere at 5 psi was nearly firm
some months ago, but a series of several
hundred experiments on decompression
from this atmosphere to the pure-oxygen, 3.5-psi atmosphere which would
be used in spacesuit operation has
muddied the picture considerably.
These experiments, carried out at
the School of Aerospace 1vfedicine by
Dr. Thomas Allen and WAF Maj. Sarah
Beard, showed that the decompression
from helium/oxygen produced even a
greater number of bends than did the
same pressure-drop ratios from nitro~
gen/ oxygen. However, in spite of the
new evaluation of the bends problem,
, little thought is being given to sticking
with the pure-oxygen atmosphere used
by NASA for the Gemini program.
The environmental control system
contract with Hamilton-Standard Div.
of United Aircraft includes evaluation
of both nitrogen and helium as a
diluent.
Regenerative. systems-While the
Air Force has been a leader in development of regenerative subsystems for
life support in space, the day when
such a method actually will be used
Page H/6
6/10/66
. - - - - - - - = ..~---
app~jrcntly
is f,d: distant.
thinLing is in b\·or of the
resupply of OX)·gCll ~nd other necessities in orbl, n:tba 1.han regeneration
from \Va'it~:i in :l do:;cd-c:yd~ SYSH.'n1.
Systl!ms c:urrew.ly ill ck:,;ign could provide sub:~i~t(;nc:e for 60 lby::; without
resupply, Air Force cdEclcils fed.
Shouid ;J mi''ision have to go six
months in orbit withoHt r,;supply, they
feel a tnH.koiT p0int might be readl,~d
at which a regencrophisticENBl?RG-
/
MOL
TRr1CKINGSTRTION
CONTROL
S/7r£=LL/75
IL..... - - .
---
---- --.-.--YOICG
CONTROL'. ~C/l/TY
___ -
BaSE
f
ROOM
- ---------
~
-"-C(er,
~
ct~~
II'
~
tc:
.
7TY
~"
V)
C:T.V,
VENtlOR
RFPS.
PHSC.
7HFlCK..
W. T. R.
TEST
MONITOR
Lr;vNCJ.I
CONTROL
C~NrER
TEST
J
1. CC CONTROL EN£)S
hiT LIFT-OFF
I9BOR7
SlrtJRTION
Page B. 1/2
12/20/65
IBM Coniidential
MOL
(
SIMUL,IlTOR
/VIISS'/ON
I1lsSION
l
gE]
SIMULATED
MIS$ION
CONTROL
CENTeR
RGMOTE
,L)/SPLRYS
1
---
-
.,..- - r COMPUTING-
~ FI9CIL/7Y
PATR
LAB
VEHICL.E
CON7ROt..
CENTER
"
'> :
,
t
I
I
DRTR
I
CO /
~:/
r-
....S_/._WJ~_....
I
~~fO/
I
.1,
P/?OCFEO.
CONTROL I
~-~..:.-;
,,/ I
I
VEHICLE
,
31M.
,
~
CONTI?OL.
I
I
I
:
(j-t::}J.
.
-l - ~ 1- ~
~
~ ~
8
~
~.
I
-J,
~ ~
I
I
/'
t
GEMINI B
SIMVLfiTOR
4\ ·SIM.
f
I
INSTRVC70/?·S,
CatJsoJ.G
PFI.RT
Tr:;SI<
TRf::;INING
Section 4.1
ED
I~
I
EXPERIMFNT
t
,
I
Page B.1/3
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIA.L
B.2
Equipm~nt
Installed - Douglas MSSD
I·BM Systems Installed
4
2
3
4
7094-1
7010
1460
1401
One 7094 is
is rented.
purchased~
the rest of the equipment
Total system points installed -
400~OOO
IBM Systems on order
8
5
7
2
System/360
System/360
System/360
System/360
Model
Model
Model
Model
20
30
50
65
It is expected that the number of Model 50 systems
will be adjusted downward thd the number of model
65 systems will be increased.
Competitive Systems Installed
There are several small and intermediate systems
(CDC l60A - 924 type) used for data reduction and
conversion and for systems check out.
Bendix-CDC G-15 s are used in several locations
for quick access computing.
1
A considerable amount of time is being purchased
on a CDC 3600 for running lqrge FORTRAN jobs, but
no large scale competitive systems are now installed.
Section 4.1
Page B. 2/1
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C.
CURRENT STATUS
C-l Proposals Outstanding
IBM Federal Systems Division Currently has proposals
into Douglas for the Data Management and Mission
Information Systems. Decision on these is expected
immEinently.
C-2 Current Activity
(
FSD is currently working on a funded study contract
to develope specifications for the MOL Mission
Simulator. This study is expec~ed to last until
early 1966, 'at which time there will be an RFP for
the simulator. Other participants in the study in
addition to the Douglas and Ibm Groups are: Link,
General Electric, and Mesa Engineering. IBM however
Has the major share of these sub-contracts.
Bill Hubbarth, IBM FSD Owego, is in charge of
this study for IBM,
and has about six people
located at Dougl~s as well as numerous people in Owego.
Section 4.1
Page Cll
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
lvlOLMlSSION SIlv1ULATOR
STA TUS:
o
lJnder Contract to DACo for Definition Phase •
o
.Just extended five weeks to February 25, 1966.
o
$130-135K.
o
Total of fo urte en pe ople in Program.
PHJ\SE II PROGRAM FOR IBM
o
Douglas "Make" for total MS.
o
Competition - March & April.
o
IBM Major Thrust for MS Data Handling Systenl - $14. 2 million.
($43 million total MS E stinlate)
Computer Complexes
2
360-65's
4
360-50 ' s
2-4 1800' s
($ 8 million)
-
Instructor Consoles
8
2250's
Special I-{ardware
($. 7 million)
Software
100-150 ITIan years
($ 3-4 ITli11ion)
MS System's Engineering & Support
($1-1. 5 million)
Seotion 4.1
Page C/2
2/4/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
COMPETITIVE STATUS
(-c
0
IBM Equipment being used as ba seline.
0
IBM receiving 2 to 1 more money than Link, PRe.
0
PRC wants software -historical relation to DAC o.
0
CDC Background in DACo, PRC.
0
Tied to DMS.
0
DACo concerned about 360 delivery.
0
IB!vl has been major source of MS requirernents definition.
CURRENT APPROACH
(
o
Strong role in MS Specification.
o
Major software planning effort underway.
o
Major effort in Instruct ors Console.
o
Attempt sole source.
Section 4.1
PageC/3
2/4/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
( "''''
1'_"
D.
PROBLEM AREAS
The current problem area is associated with the
Simulator study. The Study is proceeding according to
the contract schedule., However, much of lthe data
necessary is not yet available, and many necessary
decisions are not yet made. This necessitates the
making of judgement'deci ~ons in the simulator
design which may well be subject to major when the
facts all all available. Areas where information is,
lacking include: Mission Payload, and Onboard computer
where the winning design is not known.
c
Section 4.1
Page D/l
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Conference Notes -
Discussion regarding Douglas Checkout
requirements Document #A3-802-E100-12
of January 6, 1966.
Attendees:
C. B. Brown, G. C. Boruski, K.Gajewski,
W • Gourlay Jr., R. C. Heath, A. J. Monaco
F.X •. O'Rourke, A.L.Ryff, L.Stoller, I.Sugi,
C. D. Thimsen.
I
I
Page 2 of this memorandum summarizes pertinent conclusions
arrived at after analysis of the Douglas Technical Guidelines document
for a computerized checkout complex.
1)
2)
Page 3 tabulates some major technical problems associated
with implementing the requested approach using IBM equipment.
(
3)
At the conclusion of the meeting it was agreed that an effort
would be made to respond at least to the preliminary request by Douglas.
It was further agreed that initial meetings would be scheduled with Douglas
personnel as soon as possible, in that a competitive analysis would be
completed to establish cost guidelines, using the SDS 9300 versus both
the 360/44 alone and the 360/44 with an 1800 front end.
//
I
r1A1p
Vjl4~
FXOR:jh
cc: W.B.Gibson, I.E.Hamlin, W.Hess,
O'Rourke
r.P.Jones.
c
Section 4.1
Page H/1
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(
SUMMARY
1.
Eequirement seems to be generated around specific computer
(SDS 930 or 9300).
2.
Well suited for checkout application.
SIVB background and personnel.
3.
Implementation of such a system would require significant FSD
support.
4.
Delivery cycle most proba:bly would not exceed 12 months even if
MOL slips further.
5.
To respond would require commitment of at least 4 360/44 systems and
up to (8) 1800's.
6.
Eesponse would require high level engineering liaison with Douglas
for next 6- 8 weeks.
7.
Present efforts here (DIMAC) dovetail very well with Douglas basic
requirement.
8.
Must make decision whether to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
9.
Obviously generated using
Respond
Level of response
Availability of 360·s/1800' s.
Availability of engineering (FSD)
Funding
If we are going into checkout we must start here.
equipment committed for checkout only.
Section 4.1
I
This will require
Page H/2
2/11/66
Reauirements
360/System
1 ~ Independently c:dd:.-essa.cle memery medul€s
Cannet be hcndled ps:- se
CJ)
(1)
o
......
o
rT
::s
~
2.
3.
......
4.
5.,
RPQ fcl"' input+- 2ssi<;nment cf seme
360 rrlemory E.S buffer.
Req~.1ires
RFC, tel' C r-~2r:D.el.18 0 0
fileHlCL'Y 6.S buffer (vvill
meet highly probable
expansion requirement s
7. Buffered Display output - highly probable
same requj.rement to work 'with existing
dis plays at test site cnly.
Requires 2250 display concept with some
interface RPQ
8
RPQ required
RPQ required
RPQ required
RPQ required
w
Test Equipment Interface
9. DO/DI requirements
10. Nested priority interrupt(10 levels
requested. )
ll
\I
11. Instruction Interrupt (unique instruction related to particular line)
'~
360 +- 1800 Front Erie:
Cel1 hc~c1Ie e.ctucl
requiren1ents
Memory expansion to 65K
Cannot fulfill as portion of this capability used Can meet and exceed
to meet peripheral requirements
requirements
Memory operation/external equipment
Cannot handle completely - partly satisfied
Requirements met
by RPQ
with RPQ
~_uxilic:ry storc.ge (SD8 9300 type requested) Cannot meet access time vlith disc. Using drum (Sc:n18 25 360)
ca~not meet transfer [ete ~
Program I/O channels (24 bit parallel Require s RPQ
Require s RPQ
minimum rate lOOK words/second).
6. Telemetry chc:nr..el vTlth DDP..s type
buffering.
N
~
~
~
360/44 cannot meet requirements as stated.
RPQ route may be difficult.
RPQ, possibly dealing with basic logic,
required.
(Same as 360)
1800 system can handle
ba:3ic requirements
1800 can handle most
of requirem.ents
OJ
I~
lQ
' ......
(1)
:-~
'
"
12 • Paper tape punch
Externally purchased equipment
(Same as 360)
~
Q
o
,~ ~
W
1-1
to
'"0
13. Memory incrementing
Not in 360/44 repertoire
Not in 1800
repertoire
Z
J-rj
1-1
tJ
tT1
Z
~
s;:
t-t
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(-
February 8, 1966 -
TRIP REPORT -
DOUGLAS, HUNTINGTON BEACH
Re:
Douglas Checkout System Meeting
Attendees:
T. J. :Casun - MESA
J. H. Lane - Douglas
f:;?bruary 7, 1966
J.Jones - IBM /
C.. Brown - IBM
R. Heath - IBM
F .. x. O'Rourke - 1:3I'vl
A. Monaco - IBM
J. Sugi - IBM
1.
I
GENERAL RESULTS:
Douglas, over the past eight months, has worked very closely with MESA
personnel and three computer manufacturers (CDC
optimizing digital hardware for implementation of a
(~
SDS
I
II
I
Cee) in
Modular Unified
Checkout ConceptI!. A well-qualified group of programming consultants
(MESA), together with their own systems group (experienced in SIVB checkout
problems) have completed definition of the Douglas MOL checkout concepts.
The actual specifications for this hardware have been written by MESA with
T .. J .. Eason res ponsible for its final generation.. IBM was not a participant
in any phase of this effort ..
During the discussion (approximately 52 minutes) the following specific
points were presented by Mr. Eason of MESA Corporation:
a.. The resultant checkout concept is directed towards a unified
system which is partially modular in design. They feel the system
is capable of integration with future checkout requirements ..
b.. The system is intended for installation at three sites (pricing
for up to six. systems has been requested by Douglas) .
Section 4.1
Page H/4
2/11/66
-2IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Trip Report, Douglas
February 8,1966
c. The system will be required during the vehicle launch
countdown operation. Therefore, it could eventually become a
"launch critical" system, similar to APOLLO SLCC at Cape Kennedy.
d. Prime software goal for this system is to produce a test engineer
oriented launch language similar to STOL or ATOLL with on-line
capabilities to modify and assemble test procedures I utilizing
personnel with little or no tr-air-J.ing in digital computers or programming f-undamentals.
e. The system as planned will accommodate all of the Douglas MOL
checkout requirements (including the data management package).
f. The hardware interface will have to be such that the system will
be capable of working with Douglas developed operator consoles and
color displays.
(
g. As presently configured the system- does not have a program
regeneration requirement and the specification currently being processed for transmittal to vendors does not have any specif ic hardware requirements oriented towards error recovery procedures.
I
h. The specification is limited to hardware requirements only. No RFP
regarding the associated software package will be generated I as
current plans are for Douglas system personnel to handle this task
directly with possible sub-contracts to MESA Corporation for
additional programming help, if needed.
i. Consideration will eventually be given to utilize this system as
the Central Computer and monitor element to service remote display
facilities at the launch site.
The final specification (assumed to be part of the forthcoming RFP)
has been completed and should be ready for issue from-- Mr. Hansen IS
(Douglas) office in about two weeks.
j.
k. Mr. Eason stated that the drum requirements specified in the initial
technical guidelines document was indeed required for the application
for which this system is intended, and data transfer rates below
'"
200,000 words per second would be unsatisfactory.
Section 4.1
Page H/S
2/11/66
-3IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(C
Trip Report, Douglas
February 8, 1966
1. Mr. Eason also stated that the expandable memory requirement should provide a capability for increasing the memory from
32K to 65K on site with approximately two to three days of down
time.
m. Mr. Eason stated that the final specification would be almost
identical to technical requirements presented in the guidelines
document (of which we have a copy). He further noted that there
would be little or no additional requirements in the specifications
related to hardware requirements other than normal "boiler plate"
items normally in a formal RFP.
2. SUMMARY:
The Douglas system design has progressed to a pOint where associated
Douglas engineering personnel are completely sold on the concept proposed in the technical gUidelines document and any attempt to seriously
influence a modification of the overall concept would have little chance of
'success.
Within the present IBM structure, it will be impossible to generate either
a reasonably competitive bid or a suitable technical response to the
Douglas requirements for the following reasons:
a. IBM does not have existing equipment capable of meeting the
basic requirements of the Douglas specification (see conference
notes, Douglas checkout requirements, F .X. O'Rourke, dated
31 January, 1966).
b. A system configuration only approximating the basic requirements
has been conservatively priced out at about twice the price of other
Section 4.1
Page R/6
2/11/66
-4IBM CONFIDENTIAL _
Trip Report, Douglas
February 8, 1966
vendors currently under active consideration by Douglas.
c. Engineering rapport with Douglas checkout personnel is nonexistent at this time.
d. The engineering effort required to generate a representative
response to any Douglas RFP would require a considerable
expenditure of IBM marketing/Engineering funds which, as of this
writing, are not available for this task.
3. RECOMMENDATION:
The Douglas portion of the MOL checkout market has been formulated to a
pOint where any further effort by IBM to break into this market would be of
(
little consequence. The writer therefore recommends that no detailed
engineering effort be continued by IBM for purposes of capturing the Douglas
portion of the MOL checkout market.
FXOR:jh
cc: J. E. Hamlin,
W. B. Gibson,
Attendees,
W. Gourlay.
Section 4.1
Page H/7
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~"
February 8 I 19 6 6
TRIP REPORT -
DOUGLAS, HUNTINGTON BEACH
Re:
Douglas Checkout System Meeting, February 7 I 1966
Attendees:
T. J. Eason - MESA
J. H. Lane - Douglas
A. Monaco - IBM
J. Sugi - IBM
J. Jones - IBM
C. Brown - IBM
R. Heath - IBM
F.X. O'Rourke - IBM
1. GENERAL RESULTS:
Douglas ,over the past eight months, has worked very closely with MESA
personnel and three computer manufacturers (CDC I
optimizing digital hardware for implementation of a
SDS,
II
CCC) in
Modular Unified
Checkout Concept". A well-qualified group of programming consultants
(MESA) I together with their own systems group (experienced in SIVB checkou
problems) have completed definition of the Douglas MOL checkout concepts
The actual specifications for this hardware have been written by MESA with
T. J. Eason responsible for its final generation. IBM was not a participant
in any pha s e of this effort.
During the discussion (approximately 52 minutes) the following specific
pOints were presented by Mr. Eason of MESA Corporation:
a. The resultant checkout concept is directed towards a unified
system which is partially modular in design. They feel the system
is capable of integration with future checkout requirements.
b. The system is intended for installation at three sites (pricing
for up to sJx systems has been requested by Douglas) •
Section 4.1
Page H/8
2/18/66
-~-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
('
Trip Report, Douglas
february 8,1966
c. The system will be required during the veh icle launch
countdown operation. Therefore, it could eventuully become a
IIlaunch critical" system, similar to APOLLO SLCC at Cape Kennedy.
d. Prime software goal for this system is to produce a test engineer
oriented launch language similar to STOL or ATOLL with on .... line
capabilities to modify and assemble test procedures, utilizing
personnel with little or no training in digital computers or programming fundamentals.
e. The system as planned will accommodate all of the Douglas MOL
checkout requirements (including the data management package) .
f. The hardware interface will have to be such that the system will
be capable of working with Douglas developed operator consoles and
color displays.
(
g. As presently configured, the system does not have a program
regeneration requirement and the specification currently being processed for transmittal to vendors does not have any specif ic hardware requirements oriented towards error recovery procedures.
h. The specification is limited to hardware requirements only. No RFP_
regarding the associated software package will be generated, as
current plans are for Douglas system personnel to handle this task
directly with possible sub-contracts to MESA Corporation for
additional programming help, if needed.
i. Consideration will eventually be qiven to utilize this system as
the Central Computer arld iTlunitor element to service remote dis play
facilities at the launch site.
The final specification (assumed to be part of the forthcoming RFP)
has been completed and should be ready for issue from Mr. Hansen's
(Douglas) office in about two weeks.
j.
c
k. Mr. Eason stated that the drum requirements specified in the initial
technical guidelines document was indeed required for the application
for which this system is intended, and data transfer rates below
200,000 words per second would be unsatisfactory.
Section 4.1
Page H/9
2/18/66
"
-.;-
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
Trip Report, Douglas
February 8, 1966
1. Mr. Eason also stated that the expandable memory requirement should provide a capability for increasing the memory from
32K to 65K on site with approximately two to three days of dovvn
time.
m. Mr. Eason stated that the final specification would be almost
identical to technical requirements presented in the guidelines
document (of which we have a copy). He further noted that there
would be little or no additional requirements in the specifications
related to hardware requirements other than normal "boiler plate"
items normally in a formal RFP.
2. SUMMARY:
The Douglas system design has progressed to a point where associated
(~-
Douglas engineering personnel are completely sold on the co-ncept proposed in the technical guidelines document and any attempt to seriously
influence a modification of the overall concept would have little chance of
success.
Within the present IBM structure, it will be impossible to generate either
a reasonably competitive bid or a suitable technical response to the
Douglas requirements for the following reasons:
a. IBM does not have existing equipment capable of meeting the
basic requirements of the Douglas specification (see conference
notes, Douglas checkout requirements I F.X. 0' Rourke I dated
31 January, 1966).
b. A system configuration only approximating the basic requirement~
has been conservatively priced out at about twice the price of other
Section 4.1
Page H/la
2/18/66
-4IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~
Trip Report, Douglas
February 8, 1966
vendors currently under active consideration by Douglas.
c. Engineering rapport with Douglas checkout personnel is nonexistent at this time.
d. The engineering effort required to generate a representative
response to any Douglas RFP would require a considerable
expenditure of IBM marketing/Engineering funds which, as of this
writing, are not available for this task.
3. RECOMMENDATION:
The Douglas portion of the MOL checkout market has been formulated to a
point where any further effort by IBM to break into this market would be of
(
little consequence. The writer therefore recommends that no detailed
engineering effort be continued by IBM for purposes of capturing the Douglas
portion of the MOL checkout market.
FXOR:jh
cc: J. E. Hamlin, /
w. B. Gibson,
Attendees,
W. Gourlay.
c
Section 4.1
Page H/ll
2/18/66
MOL ST.l\NDAHDIZED GALL/TRIP REPORT
c
(IB~A
CONFIDENTIJ\;)
fudiridual~)con~c~d (16)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_~9)
Your Name (60)
(70) Date (71)
F. X. O'Rourke
{76}
April 1, 1966
Summary of Facts Covered:
During this meeting, preliminary engineering requirements for the Douglas MOL
Data Reduction Task were presented to IBM by Douglas personnel. The discussicn~
lasted approximately 2.5 hours, during which the following pOints were
hig hlig hted :
1 • The Douglas Data Reduction Group is in the initial management approval
phase of defining requirements for developing and installation of a large
comprehensive data reduction facility utilizing a high speed general purpose
computer to automate the Douglas MOL Data Reduction Task. This group
presently feels the step is mandatory due to the large amount of data to be
handled. They further feel that requirements for quick look data as well as
10-24 hour turnaround analysis functions can only be handled by a highly
automated central facility, which, at present does not exist at Douglas.
I
I
I
I
I
I
2. They presented the following preliminary load figures for this center (which
after review ""ith the contractor and other Douglas departments were felt to bE:;
conservative) •
'Item a - The total data rate estimate;
Vibration and Acoustic Data 21.9 x 10 6 words per 24-hour day,
FM data 5.33 x 10 6 words per 24-hour day
PCM data 60 minutes of airborne tape data plus 90 luinutes of real
time data daily.
I
Item b 1•
Real time data input loading requ1re:nents;
decommutating and formatting airborne recording - 3-1/2 hours
general decommutating and formatting - 1/2 hour
scale conversion tasks - 1-1/2 hours.
2. End to end merge, redundant edit of overlapped airborne
real time - 3 hours.
shock and vibration analysis - 1.4 hours
PCM event data - 1.5 hours
Biomedical data - 1 hour
Function merge - . 25 hour
comparison to nominals - 1 hour
Propulsion system analysis - 1 hour
engine analysis - 1-1/2 hours.
Page H/12
Section 4.1
4/15/66
- - - - - - - - - _... _----_...........
........ _..........
------~~==="",-=--
IBM CONFIDENTIP..L
- 2 -
c
The above is not a complete list. The total processing requirement per day,
however, did come out to 29.1 hours. If one computer system is to be used,
there is a basic requirements that processing must go on while data is being input
to the system and results output to the appropriate displays and recording devices.
In most instances compilation and assembly must be performed concurrently by
the system.
I
3. They are presently planning to do a good deal of their own programming but
clearly recognize the requirement for the computer vendor to provide system
programming support at least during the initial phases of the system development,
especially in the Monitor and operating areas of the software.
4. It was indicated the system should be fully operational by July, 1967. In
this regard, they recognized the firm requirement to utilize machine time available
at other locations, starting early j.n September, 1966, for checkout. They were
especially interested in developing and expanding multiprocessing and multiprogramming aspects as a solution to this problem.
5. The IBM hardware configuration under consideration by them included a
360/44 with 65K of memory as the central processing element with one completely
implemented and buffered 2250 display and one 2260 maintenance console, six
to eight tape drives (4 to 6 of which \vould be 180 kc) and at least two high speed
multiplex channels for tape and disk operations. Memory requirements of this
system definitely include a large disk file to handle the many long term storage
requirements (including calibration curves reduction r£latrix data, engineering
conversion data, etc.) •
I
The first meeting was concluded ~vith an a.greement on the part of IBM to return
the week of 2 8 ~v.1arch to beCOITle more fan1iliar v\dth the detailed task loading for
the system. IBlVI v,ould then present Cl proposed hard~.yare configuration, together
with a deta.iled outHne of ti1e required soft'Al3re package required to handle this
task. It is apparent that during this presentation IBM must be ready to discuss
details of the software support 1B1V1 feels 'tvould be necessary to handle the
problem and to describe the general manner by which the software will handle
the "multi-programming" requirements.
GENERAL C01.\4MENTS
The task, as described, is comprehensive one for a single computer system. Some
serious questions exist regarding the usa of the 360/44 systen1 for this task, as
the monitor package associated 'vvith the 360/44 does not at this time, have any
ability to handle input and output concurrently with the telemetry processing
requirements.
f
R. Cabaniss is presently looking into the feasibility of modifying the 360/44
monitor software package to perform this task and is planning to develop a reasonable estimate of what an effort of this nature would require in the way of manpO"Ner
and time.
Section 4 ~ 1
cc: C B. Brown R. Cabaniss,
F • X. O'Rourke
Page H/13
W. Gourlay, Jr., W. Hess,
4/15/66
W. Gibson, R. Hippe, F. Mutz
<)
I
IB lVi CO NF'ID E NTIAJ~
CUSTOMER NAME:
General Electric COlnpany
Space Technology Center
Goddard Boulevo.rd
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406
Telephone: 969-2005
&
General Electric Company
Re-Entry Systems
3198 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia Pennsylvania 19101
Telephone: 823~2005
I
REGION:
Eastern
DISTRICT:
5
BRANCH:
Philadelphia
BRANCH MANAGER:
DP SALESMAN:
Section 4.2
R. J. Dougherty
F. A. Fisher
Page 1
1/21/66
-~---
----------------
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
A-I - Missile and Space Division - Plant Locations
Valley Forge Space Technology Center
P. O. Box 8555
Philadelphia, Penna.
19101
Cabot, Cabot & Forbes Complex
Spacecraft Dept., P. O. Box 8661
Philadelphia, Penna.
Philadelphia
Re-Entry SysteIns Dept.
3198 Chestnut St., Phila., Fa.
Burlington
Missile and ArInament Dept.
Lakeside Ave., Burlington, Vt.
Daytona
Apollo Support -Department
P.O. Box 2500, Daytona Beach, Fla.
Houston
Apollo Support DepartInent
P.O. Box 26287, Houston, Texas
Huntsville
Apollo Support DepartInent
P. O. Box 294, Huntsville, Ala.
Maryland
Space craft Department
4901 Fairmont Ave., Bethesda, Mdo
Mississippi
Mississippi Test Support Dept.
Bay Saint Lanes
Mississippi
Evendale
Space Power & Propulsion Dept.
Mail Drop R-2
Cincinnati, Ohio
Section 4.2
Page A/I
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
A-I - MOL Organization
E.A. Miller
General Manager of MOL
C.F. Hix, Jr.
Manager Design Engineering Section
RoW. Lawton
Manager Bio Astronautics Section
K. Kitson
Manager Program Management Sec.
R.G. Myers
Manager Major Sub ... Contract Sec.
A.E. Buescher, Jr.
Manager Business Management
L.P. Huggins
Manager Manufacturing Section
G.E. Eastwood
Manager Systems Test &
Deployment Section
E. T. Brogan
Manager Quality Assurance &
Reliability
R. J. Haughton
Manager Ernployee & Community
Relations
J • C. Hackney
Manager Finance
A-I - PERSONNEL PROFILE
H. W. Paige
E. L. Hulse
L. Cirnino
R.
F.
M.
L.
L.
Hench
Garrison
Morton
Cowles
Steg
Section 4.2
Division General Man"ager
Division Financial Manager
Division Manager of Information Systems &
Cornputer Center
Manager of Programming
Manager of 7094 Operations
General Manager - Re-Entry Systems
General Manager - Spacecraft Department
Manager - Space Sciences Lab
Page A/2
1/21/66
- - - - -_•..
__ . _ - - - - -
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
B - BACKGROUND
B-1
Customer is a prime contractor along with Douglas Aircraft.
Other programs include NIMBUS, APOLLO, SUPPORT, REENTRY SYSTEMS, VOYAGER
B-2
One (I) 7094 System (main frame) approximately $60,000 month
rental purchased by G. E. and sold by G. E. to third party (CEIR)
- Presently leasing from CEIR. Approximately 16 Tape drives
(729 I s) not purchased.
One (1) 7094 System (main frame) approximately $60,000 month
rental. 10 Tape drives (729-6 1 s) not purchasedo
One (1) 1460 System (dual printer s)
One (I) 1620 System 40K
G. E. Systems 2 -415 t s
1-225
1-235
2-625 1 s (on order)
Section 4.2
Page B/1
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
C
Proposal for purchase of second 7094 System. Purchase of
main frame approximates $1,350 I 000.
Section 4.2
Page Cl1
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(-E.
G. E. dedicated to ultimate replacement of IBM computers
with their own. As such, we are pushing purchase of
second 7094 system.
Replacement of 1620 with 1130.
Section 4.2
Page E/I
1/21/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
CUSTOMER NAME:
The
The
The
The
Denver Division of
Martin Company
Aerospace Division of
Martin-Marietta Corporation
P. O. Box 179
Denver I, Colorado - (303) 794-5211
REGION:
District 15
BRANCH MANAGER:
N. H,. Hawkins
MARKETING MANAGER:
Robert Umbreit
MARKETING REPRESENTATIVE:
Richard Winckler
. ADVISORY SYSTEMS
ENGINEER:
MOL PROJECT·OFFICE:
I
Western Region
Jack Stunkel
F. X. O'Rourke
W. Gourlay
Page 1
2/18/66
Section 5.1
(replaces 12/20/65)
A.
CUSTOMER ORGANIZATION
1.
DIMAC Study
IBM CONFIDEN'TIAL
The Martin organization supports both a functional organization and a
project organization, These two operate in parallel. A given effort or
individual may., at val"ious stages of a project, report through both of
these channels. Martin also establishes special team s or task forces to
respond to RFP's and any other requirements for special study efforts.
The DIMACeffort is, at present, a special team effort being "vectored"
and define by I{c> Gur~derson.
I
2.
General Organization
Martin Denver Divisional Vice- President - J. D. Rauth.
Executive Directors - Functional - I,. N. Palley - Technical Operations
Responsible for Research, Engineering, Manufacturing, Testing, Training,
Quality, Materia~ and Procurement.
,
- D. S. Burrows - Management Oper's.
Responsible fOl'" Administration (Do p. Equipment) .. Finance, Accounting,
Plans and Budgets.
General Managers - Project - R .. S. Williams - Strategic Systems(TItan II)
- W. G. Purdy - Launch Vehicles (Titan III)
- G. E. Smith - Military Space Stations
(Apollo pallet).
Management Concerned with DIMAC* Effort W. G. Purdy - General, Manager, Launch ·Vehicles.
Do S. Levine - Program Director, Titan III.
L. J. Adams - Technical Director, Launch Vehicles
So F Albrecht - Manager, Ground Electronics
W.. J. Hughes - Proj ect Engineer ILC *)~.
D. Gray·· Proj ect Manager ILC
K" Gunderson - Senior Engineer ILC - 'DIMAC
B. Pennington - Senior Engineer ILC - DIMAC
J .. Hoerning - Senior Programme~ ILC. - DIMAC
0
Management Concerned with Conventional DP use D. s. Burro1Ns - Executive Director, Management Operations.
R. Eo Weber - Director, Administration
C.lzett - Staff - Conversion Program
J Hopko - Manager } Managem ent Operations (Mgt. Engin. )
J. E. Feely - IVIanager" Computer Department
E. J. Karulf - Manager, Technical Operations (Mgt. Engin. )
1 Processorra
PeripheralLt
Main Fram~
.[
Card
~I Read &, Punch
250 KC~..
250 KC
., Peripheral250 KC
. Main F'ramel:}-<
P,
d
J
Printer .
~I
I
i
-~
"-
,----
~'D
~~
~o
OJ-........
(Jl~
o
to.
[
.g
~:'l',
Launch Vehicle
Display and
Interrogation
Console
Test
Conductor
Display
L--_~.
_____ ....
~
~
...... ___
.~
___ ... _. _ __
I
Micro Filrn File
..
t'Vp:>
I
I
J
L
I
Plotter
I
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
D
0
PROBLEM AREAS
Unresolved elements requiring further effort and careful analysis by
IBM cover the full spectrum of problems normal to providing this type
of a system to the Aerospace Industry during the inceptive phases of
the large Aerospace efforts such as MOL. These general problems
include:
1•
Ability to deliver the required equipment within the proposed
schedule constraints (the most serious IBM constraint at this time).
2.
Ability to completely, competitively price the required system
(IBM is very competitive if the complete package is considered
and effectively presented to Martin).
3•
Requirement of defining in detail actual system requirements and
the optimum configuration of the DIMAC system for present and
future applications. Reference the Preliminary Specification for the
Design of .9. Monitor and Diagnostic Computer Complex for the
Titan III C Vehicle dated February 1, 1966.
4.
Requirement for careful additional analysis of impact of the
Eastern Test Range study effort (being conducted by IBM) on the
DIMAC system configuration, as well as the overall IBM
aerospace effort.
With regard to delivery problems, data available at this time clearly
indicates a high probability that the system as presently configured
may require up to three 1800 systems, as well as a 360/44 configuration
to be delivered by July, 1967. However, this particular problem as well
as the competitive pricing problem cannot be fully resolved until a more
adequate definition of the optimum system configuration has been
provided and further data on the MOL Project Office reaction to the system
proposed by Martin has been obtained.
I
o
Page D/l
2/18/66
Section 5.1
(replaces 12/20/65)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
E.
E. 1
IBM STRATEGY
Sales Action Program
Presently, effort is centered at Denver and KSC and involves the establishment of close communication and engineering liaison with Martin personnel
at Denver and KSC who are responsible for both the DIMAC system design
and final evaluation of the ETR study. It is planned to expand this effort
to the point where Martin-Denver is thoroughly familiar with all unique
features and advantages of IBM equipment suggested for DIMAC and are
fully aware of IBM experience in related areas of launch checkout and
control operations.
A pre-proposal effort has been initiated to perform a thorough system
analysis from the hardware and software viewpoint of the DIMAC problem.
The output of this study will be the definition of an optimized IBM system
configuration. This task was completed on January 25 1966. The results
of this pre-proposal effort will be reviewed by various IBM facilities either
responsible for development and delivery of the proposed hardware and
software, or who have personnel experienced in this type of a system
application. The first such conference is scheduled at the San Jose Plant
Special Engineering on February 15, 1966, and is the first coordination
effort following completion of the February 1 Preliminary Specification.
Huntsville, Cape Kennedy and Denver will be vis! ted during the week of
Feb. 28 - Mar. 4, 1966. Additional coordination will be effected with
the Engineering Lab Bethesda and Special Engineering (Poughkeepsie).
The results of these reviews will be incorporated into the final document
for use as the basis of any proposal generated by IBM in response to an
RFP for the DIMAC system.
I
I
I
o
I
At present I the West Coast aerospace MOL group is supporting the
proposal and maintaining close liaison with Martin-Denver Aerospace
Corporation, and the Cape Kennedy OCALA study. At this time, initial
contact has been established with cognizant personnel associated with
the ETR effort and the DIMAC effort and meetings have been set up for
general discussions and common exchange of data regarding the overall
problem.
I
Since the East Coast study is directly related to the DIMAC effort and its
output and results will largely determine the course of the DIMAC system
every effort is being made by the IBM MOL Project Group to insure that the
ETR study is adequately supported and that proposed schedules are realistic.
Close engineering monitoring of the progress of this effort will be continued
through June of 1966 to insure maximum utilization of output of this study
is made by IBM for eventual incorporation into the DIMAC effort.
I
Section 5.1
Page E/l
2/18/66
(replaces 12/20/65)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
Eo2
Technical Help Required
A qualified technical engineering team is required to implement the planned
pre-proposal system study and to review and comment on the study results
This team is now being assembled under the engineering direction of the
IBM West Coast MOL Group.
E.3
IBM System Design
No formal system design has been completed at this time. A preliminary
system configuration utilizing a 360 Model 44 and three IBM 1800 S has
been tentatively proposed to Martin personnel. Engineering analysiS now
being performed on this proposal, however, indicates there may be some
deficiencies in implementing this type of a system both from the standpoint of capability of performing the task presently defined, as well as
ability to expand to what is felt will be future requirements if the DIMAC
system proves satisfactory. The Preliminary Specification analysis was
completed January 25, 1966. The document itself is dated February I, 1966.
There is a high probability that the proposed system configuration resulting
from the system study will utilize an IBM 360 Model 44 as the central
processing element.
I
I
I
C:
/
The Engineering Lab (Bethesda) is currently evaluating the initial technical
approaches and expects to conclude this effort by March IS, 1966.
Comments to be forwarded to Advanced Programs (Los Angeles) will include
an engineering critique, recommendations and ballpark price estimates.
SpeCial Engineering (Poughkeepsie) is currently examining design requirements for a speCial high speed data acquisition channel somewhat similar
to the 2909 but with in-channel comparators. Their study is expected to
conclude on March I, 1966.
I
Page E/2
2/18/66
Section 5.1
~eplaces
12/20/65)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
F.
SCHEDULE OF KEY TARGET DATES
Since the DIMAC and the OCALA efforts are closely interrelated, there
are in this case two complete sets of target dates; one associated with
the development of the DIMAC system and the other related to the
development and outcome of the OCALA effort at Cape Kennedy.
I
DlMAC Target Dates
1•
Martin tradeoff study forwarded to Air Force - October 5
2.
Completed IBM. pre-proposal effort for DIMAC - January 25, 1966.
3.
Contemplated Air Force concept approval - end of May, 1966.
4•
Release of RFP for DlMAC - early
5.
Date for reply to RFP - mid-August, 1966.
Jl2+y
I
1965
I
1966.
6 .DIMAC contract award - early September, 1966.
7•
Initial equipment installation at Denver - mid-July, 1967.
8.
Equipment installation at VAFB - early November, 1967.
IBM OCALA Effort at Cape Kennedy
1•
lni tial proposal for study by IBM - late August
2.
Air Force approval of OCALA study effort - November
3.
Computer system installed at Cape Kennedy - February
4.
Checkout and debugging of monitor and applications programs March, 1966.
5•
Use of OCALA system in support of Titan launch - May
6.
Use of OCALA equipment in support of second Titan launch at
Cape Kennedy - July, 1966.
7•
IBM portion of study effort completed - July I 1966.
8.
Results of OCALA study effort published - July/August, 1966.
c
I
1965.
I
1965.
I
I
1966.
1966.
Page Fl1
2/18/66
Section 5.1
~eplaces 12/20/65)
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
G.
OOMPETITION
It is fairly certain that active competition in this area will include
the Digital Equipment Corporation and Control Data Corporation with a
high probability that General Electric will also bid on any RFP. While
there will probably be others who will receive the RFP when generated,
it is not expected (at this time) that there will be other significant
competition due to the complex system analysis requirement in the short
estimated response time associated with the RFP from Martin.
I
At present, the other active competitors, on an equivalent engineering
status with IBM include the Digital Equipment Corporation and Control
Data Corporation. They both have been actively involved in the systems
design of the DIMAC but to a much lesser extent up to now than IBM
has. Both have submitted a preliminary configuration for review by
Martin who in some cases have commented on their proposal to IBM
personnel. In this regard ,one strong pOint for the DEC configuration is
a proposed memory sharing approach which DEC feels would minimize
inter-system data transfer and would eliminate some timing problems ..
A weak point in the opinion of Martin in the overall approach of DEC to
this problem is felt to be in the area of programming and equipment
support DEC would plan to provide. Martin engineering seems to feel
that they would not have enough programming and equipment support
from the standpoint of equipment integration i software packages
programming assistance, and programmer and test engineering training.
In this regard, Martin has stated that competent system support in these
as well as the actual vehicle checkout areas is considered critical to
success of the DIMAC system.
I
I
I
RCA submitted a comprehensive analysis of the DIMAC concept late in
December. During the presentation, they expressed a desire to be an
active part of this system. They have assigned an engineering team to
actively monitor system progress. Brief looks at RCA document showed
it to be well prepared and in consonance with Martin philosophy.
c
Section 5.1
Page G/l
2/18/66
(replaces 12/20/65)
BEST ESTTlVIATE OF CDC CONFIGURATION
~ysteln
EstiInated
~
Fil~ II
1-1/4 In illion
words
Di-sli
· File
f' C J\.'I .......".,.---f
( 32I()
---------~.
0 ..........
o
Q) 01
0> ..........
roN
channell'
Control
lInit~
~rl
1 - 1 / 4 mill ion
words
~ ..
E.
I
0'
f~,',
&:~j
~Cf"I
1704
~} ~..:~-~~,::~,="=,,==~
u
File -
~~.
.....;:.-p .......
I
I
L~-=d
I
Control
(32IC)
o
~
'~---;:l Channel .-
-Z:!~
r-
~
~-~i
LOI:
.......... coi!
-
170-1
.;r>-"_-"''''''''':7''~~'''''.1
N
'---,~
~"----r--.-------'"
•.
Cost $1, 000, 000
I
.Fil~-
\.
...,~"("
)
3 million
word£l
....' . /
("
.----~-~{ ~~Z;r J
3205
(32K)
I
...
1-1/4
rL1-i
~
TIl illion
~
,
..
>
w
~
.
~
~
~
.
,
~
,
,
·
,
.
words
rl
_ _ _ __
DRS
LO
-------;t
1704
_,"_,_==u.-_.=-{
... t
(32K)
~
?'J
File Channel r-I---..-.J
Control
Unit
l}.-"
_. ___.f···_·_······
t
'0 !~
§
·rl
,,","---IC:'(.'~~~
,,,.~-- ~,~~j
~~\,
Micro[ f~~Pl
.:fjl~"
Operator Console- Displays
.f
~
W'
fW
o
-
~
U
;e ~:{
t>
CY)m
'co
d,
'-~IX-Y
fP
Plotter
..
-1
PCM
_ _~_IIO
B:
~J
C;
Channel
,~~~~
Q)o
tJ1~
cd C\1
Pin
~--
.I
Card
~~"--'~~--"'~
~[PDP-6
I'
~ He.a~~:._...~>~
---I
G
;;
ata
Channel
,
~
~
-"'~"'''''''-''.--'''
R<~
~.~.g.:,~~
;-
.-.-.-~
Card
Punch
•• ,-••
Line
fPDP - 7
I
L_
DRS
~
C'
r--------
Data
J
Channel··
....
t
;
*
**
'nI
~---- ,·_----t
All memory can be accessed by all processors and data channels~
Hov/ever., memory areas are partitioned - prioritywise - to give
a particular processor primary control over a specified area of
memory.
"0-"'"
Micro-
rl
-----ct Film
t.O
!File
L.... ,_ __
§
,f
.r-!
+-l
IJ'
,
()
"
~
I
.,
," , .
.,
~
'I'
. . -----.}. -;]
.
"'?\...
Cl'l.
c"
r"
~ "'I".\''''.,..\..J:U 1) ,. J'I'
. '\ I
)
._~_JS'::'~'__
.. , ,
., ".
..
..
'B(\):: 'i'!< \)
..
...
fJR'J
t'
J
I,f ,.
I \1 I
I.
I
•
.' ""I ' ,
(
,~-~-
~1
i't-:OC';.'SOH
d},: .'Jf',lL.",. __ ... _ ..
r;'"
f'
~1
..: ! 1\ I
--,---.~.--
~ ~l
/
[~~~~"--r,-"--L. ··1~:I:;-';'r;~' --..
"
.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ • _ _ _ F _ O _ _ . _
---1---
~
- - - - - - .... - • • -
zo
~ ~
J) 1 :.~ j "Lt'\ Y
1in' ..: I" 1\( C \ /' I ',; U
,: I!. '.DI,L
I U'l'i'~l\i;
i;f ,tl l '1Jo,
a
~~
r-t
1-'
·.....
~
~
c.\lW
J
1\ D
;.~:.
i J rr..: (.: ! i
I
... - - - - - - - - - - .
1
J--X=y
_~ LJ~ f'I L8 _
--. -~L)'f'l":li_
[31,)" ';,'~': I~
:.;;1;\(; 'J>Ul.:."r
;i1.;j'L,S
x:
8
~
~-I
t'lfCf
, •
---]
?~_q J~.C ~.~ . , .. -:~-~~~~~ . ---I
i ti' •. - - - - - - - - - - -
~-~~- ---.~«~
'j'AJE
to
"II I , . . .
riA (j~ fI.M ..t'J
L
J~_ \:~~-;~
:.;',i,(.:IWb!1,.,
1--'-""---"-[
-
-----------
: Cf"::';:
.*"--
A~~__
. ~ ~ , t"r
I
_ _ _, _ ._ _ _
{~----'J
_..
'1
[------'
s"2-~0JS5.~.._-~
;~TIi'j1I( rt
.
r
'1 ',jl\l'JD
L_.,.______
~;~":~-":'~~~~'!-~-4 ····N
:· ...
.~,__._<~~~.,
___
......
}
.
D_~~~~~ ~ )
d }l
-----....----------_ -
--..-.-~
I
I'
r .\Ii B.,L/\L
;1,\ rri 1<';.::.;,';1:;
,
I-~"'-''''''.. __--:_!. i en
I •
1----·-----·-]
l~
,,,Ll
llil ,run :~.UC\ :i';:.;~)." and "C:<.E',l .'.);\1"I;'11Y".
DH·1,\C \.Jill be
:tn (!xtrcrnt11y }Jo\-J(~r'f\ll afJd fll'xihle device, iUH.l will be carJf,lble of uat.i.~3fytng 0.aeh individual contra.ctors
c· r:lJluLcr c':quin:lllcntn on a ~:,jrnultallcqu3 ur ind-tvtdnnl usenge.
\
co Lo
"(£)
tIi 6GtJ
tJ1,
0)
Th~
DHL\C \·dll uliJtze tclell,(;t.1J' (PCM), ,'.UlJ DU;CH::,'rr; (U!{!") (bb1 (\0 it~) jrl}-'ut.s, and '..-Jill
i.::;OJ.:lt~l1g malfllnl;tior1oG, lJl'ol,'iJing ~.htH CULl::uLlticrlLl, comparini': ac~,\Hll limits and eventG
1;re-,J(~fln8d limilG <'H1d evc-nts em a contjnU()w3 bc(.'~j,'3, and Vccvidi.ng approrri1,; , ~ll:d 15
to.sk.:-') ti1Llt i(I;·le \vill ':'lcc()l!1~:lit;ll ~Yith ])[H.\C.
A (·:()Ti1F~.rison (!wLl':-ix i5
as fin 0xc..tI~;f\18 of l11e total control center OGE task V::3 CU. i·"c.1bility •
'.i
included <1G an eXiJmt,lv of tLe
incll111ed
(1.h>o.
.~
G~)n£~.:.l Hcquj~rr1ent6
:.~nd
i.'~()ltti.(;n
1.
nalfullctir.>ll [ll1CtlYois
to
2.
~~lh~COS~
3.
Trend ilnnJy.-;j~) of npproprl;:\.te data on
;:5
1~.
f'rovt . .h~
w
~
r{uq1l1l"ern~ .. ntG
8Cy
1.
crit"Y-13 cOr.1parison in r',:'u]
Lhf~
t)(i1C
;t
bInd,
x
L~ve!
(,')1'
~d1.
sy~~te!r,.a.,
for [.;uhrlj:)tem ,.:hec:ks, C5T and laurrch countdot·ms.
vehicle/vehi.cle, tp,::;t/tCE;t or :Jhort teno 11:1310'3.
~
z::)
D!\~) or;
£!.!:
line t.ahliL1tion of ull Ji.';<;rete event chnllgefJ.
;.;,ystern
.-l
flight Controla
LD
A.
- cnnt.rlll !jj!:b~m.
[j)
-{
\..
Pro'lid~
1'3['.'.\11·1 monituriIlg or r".'durl'lllol "yulC'l!\a ..
-------_ ..---_... _-----------------_ . _...----_ ........
~
_
..... ---_ .. -
.. -----.-- ....
~-~-
...,!
.. -.-- .. ------
10
" ..,
t \
\ ,·t
."--"~""-,,,,-.,,
... ,,.--- .........
-_
. . . _. . . . ._-_. '-- .
..... .
-·-'~···-·-'--l-
I\"-------_._----------------------_._-_._._. __
{t)
P.
Provide
( 1)
(,:,,)
(~l)
(It)
(:J)
"
'-.:
2a
~
~
f:4
Z
.
dO.tR
follo',d ng
f,)I'
. -..-...-.. -------.-~-.~----- . - .. -.--.
,
..
.....".-
..
-"~... ~....-,,~.~ ... --~~ --.~"
............,,
.... .,. ...-
...
({:':)
-.-...-... ...... ..--.--...--- -':,
--"
...... "
tt(.!!1J3:
tl.lJ} t or rN3 pon::; e Ll nd pon i t.i on ing
Hydraulic pt-esaure t l'~vel, and temp
fiyro tem/Lime
! ly 1'0 G pi nUll and
,~j I) i n dO'irn t i rne
J\c
(}Y1'o
~1on-:'!()J'
outiJul
'lerDW-;
:.'1~.tlrta,
gul(h.nc(~ j.:nckaf:;·'~
E>n Ill'} Li.on
G.
Hnnitor C·uld".1Dce
())LC1)
'---.... (b
P=l~
CD
(])CiJ
. cd 0J
ry~
torquing ~;t';':lUlu.'J
pump m0tor to/:i.\l
f.
~n;/~lt1.n;j
aid tlw t,.d.;lJ rnn
P-Jrt'l
t;!~:t1.
P';I: f~)n:-u nco.
QfLlct:3
1:0
th(· Hut-.t)!)ilot.
Tl'.?ckjng nnd Flii)lt ~~,~!ety
te~~.
on 1 ~ ne t 1:qe.
A.
Htlni tOt' ha t
1<,.
:l·.n~ ~:)r'
(;c
Plot AGe voltaf:
~
o::l
H
o(])
(f.)
~
~
(0
I'.' )
J' . , .
.;f
-----'-_.__._-,
.
---.~---------.-.--.-.-- ---.-.----~---------.--- ------·-·--···---·~~---·"------l-'
-----
-t~
J.
. --!-\) ,Jld ~:
L
---.. . -.-,.--.-------.-.. -------..
--~----' -'--'-~-- -~.------------------.--
----:(;;~):........ '""'"
<---""-~------~-
. ---..
~--
t (}n
ji
01
I.
C,·jn~/'Jt ..
:lC'l).• ~
(::i1.i~)I·:!!·iot:,
'~li:··;n.:
'lJ
:'{'OJ('11:;rd: J:H;:in~'.
r.r.-':~,;l~.'t:,!;·d
t.··. . r.1lJ~'r:)tl~l'e d
by
,;r Cr(l~ILi;!~·: '{:,'I"
';-:'>n.-,Ot',
flo1-1
if;.,,: t(l
r' J
~~
bu:k
~~
".~j.
CD
I".
i'~'':: 'Ii \it=~
~.ar,:'.
l' Ct.: • ... :.: 1"
;\: I t : . 'I:" l~:d,l\rt~
,
r ;.!Cioll ~s in ."; I:
IF' ,? r ~ 1!<.;
~~
rodJ
ur:i te.
ClJr8
~:,
t •
n. i to ('
.'f; (~
1) :,\..,': .j ..• :~
;'.
i;:·.rli;::~t. ..
:1.
~-':·(}\.'i~!(:
t.r-\'Yh:l
(! )
(.: )
( ~,)
'~r;j!
'/,")
:.. t,c,
i~
' ;
~ (~C I.
d
c!.
1l:.~:~:'\.
'c;~·,·)"t
...:l
;:i
f:-l
Z
ril
i
?}'()
V.1 '.!I'? t
8Ii-t
;.~/)1.1.()·.. J;~li!.
:.;:{j
I·...
U
i: ( I : i~':·' 1 J :Hi t
t (::;: [.i:
t::ml;
!litr·.:!>~ri,
~J! ii!i(' I'll
l
I
U :'D ,.
·.\nd-:tl·.t·i . . \l<"
~> r'l:'~',)1
'.=:J_:te:;;.
tt(:r-1S:
~:t~::;i
:.!i..tJ;, i':~ . t:~, .;;(~
:r:'
':I!f.
tl'.il:.:;ta.j' h".l:w(:,
i)!·...
r,:! !l'l, ~T;_:,
~.l)r'
~:i
fllld
:.~ .. ::d ti (i!l
.'
! -'
I'~
I,
(';X ~ !l r~
!'''~rJd
:~:.l ~ ~.'~ey
(
AJI
"
I
~;I/':'" ,:!
~i:~. t,_,I' ...
'-/0.)
I
~:tgl";.
t to r:i on J; !v; L i r':,~.
(1 )
')
i
.·~o 1
i'~(>n
\.
::.1.::,,,
l{!1'!
lk''li L:·/' : L'!
j •
(!f
I;r·f-·':·;~':"-:·~~
t
C·l 1.:.;u.1:~ !:
d~ t'l.
OJl felLl t..'H! ug i (,\'I;:S:
':';"i'['-:r;
:,;.'i~(:li
L/t h~~)
:l1'1 rel.tJ
tll'n
~ )
r~ lp,B
O}..lrr'ftt::~
timca.
r-i
~;
Z
o
o
ll1.1
td
l'Uf:)n:·./r;·
1'.1clt ~;J;.I,I~ll, C:::'1 ~1:ntt:i.ul
CO!1I~,ullltiona.l
Provide
·i;'.
i·]'it.G l\l\:!
(;':~r'll)illty
.\:;:, rf)::5uJt of }!.l'lil1p; ~h/~ (:();:llIIIV~l',
1.
~l'
fJ
11•
fU. !It rn:d 1.10:-51:
',{ ;(,1" l,~ ': C
; iJ;~
P(':)cedur,~
T(~:It:
f--l
:~
;:5
~
Z
.
,.
.~ ; t~
COli
"
GPl1'(~S
•
p}'lnt out.,.
ri.
riLP
,.
for rt)dll(;-i.n6 data.
~~
;'
(1)g
ry'h.,
roC(!
(t·
L1 .(! fol)o\tl)ni~ ;tdd:;tionu), ,:;a c,:\bi1'it.h:,i IFill be
~1
t:L\I(:..il:1bl.~"
t ~~ ll.lt>
cud
(111/.11,)','31.'3.
(veL i (~l~' , (';'OG t il~ld ,;Ii:;) :l.t,
" time.
v,;r-v~\.;·~:J ~j~;Ch:.l;::;
c, 11
.~:.Y
L
;))'\'c,:'~:ul'e
\Vl'.it.ing
nf:; .md moni tnr·i.ng
1 ,'1 t}1
•~ u (; C f.?
f1 gur: l t Lon
I".·
1
lUld
print (luLG.
redlj(:tic~l
d: .. t(1
tJJGt
;:~lnl~ .. :; .wd
I ;
)" 1; 1 l
'
. ~'1
w
8ILl
I)
:;(;1; ;;;ld'!
" :,T ',: d
I
lc fj;
r.(;!'ljinL:;l.r·I~;'.t!
...•
Ch'CK;3
i:.~ht l!lcnltortnc ~lld CO": ,tat ional <.:af.clbill ty ..
: c' t
).
;(:rhii!lIt
(:'\..'11 j f; ~>I' 1D.g
1:3 / '1
l
j,
I..
(~ !: ~ 1-
r. 13
•
m~j.··J
1 tnri.nl:'; :.llrl l:Jb,:Jnt iun
SOIl trol
[}. L~ Lus
ri
Z
o
o
'l':l!;l.i,l"lt~
~
(U
~L~:~'OI't
Ii"
:.~.~I,·:nl';{
1.
O~(')n items :;t:{ltw Llnd c()nlrcl
a
~/l
r(~t-,(~!;t
r(~\tuj r'cnw~;lt:,;
I~t~t
i
for all te:.: tB
u-5
~
o
f:/' tl~n
.~
d(1)
H
{f]
.
'-'
~
------~-------
_
. "-_._.,-- .__ ....... •.•._----
~--
\0
s:
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~-~
.I
I
I
~
it>
0
;;.
);.
J
t
...c
'"
v'.
'0
A
0
::t.
"'"'
)l
"".....,....
~
~
I;)
.~
c::::
""i
' -.
)::;
c:
,0
~
.........
\:;
>
G""',
~
I'
-l
c:
",
fl'.J
".,
'"'0
S
"'-~
'C.
--'
l
<:
I
.
""'i
i
(-~
,......
~
b
I
"'U
);:.
I
~
I
!
t
-....;
:-,-.
\.:..>.
~
....>
~
'
<
<::::.
~
r-
...
. :~
i
,$
: rn
;.h
;
~
~
";:
-
..,
i (....~
.J
I
~
,;.
:
~:
C::
:::::..'
":'
:>
'-
...,
~
r"\
""'00(
::t>
~
~
~
:::::.
~
c:
~i
"i
~!
~
\1: r
\
,.....
-;
-.
""-
:C
c
I
I
0
~
g
I
'-l
I
I
i~
..:b.
"
,.....
'"
""i
I
~
j
I
I
J
"<
~-;:-."'!
l
\.
I
Section 5. 1
I
i
I
I
!
A
,.....
~
/'oJ
I!
I
1)
--I
~
j
~
'<
).
I
.h
OJ
~
-i
i
"l:l
rI~
~
).
~
)
;r.
~
-< ...,
j
"'-
"""\
"-
'...J';
~.
'-:
I iI
~
66232 \:1\-62)
TA S K VEA5us
,_______ ___"_· _____
~",
~-'_~7
MATRIX
CAPAOILITY
EQUIPMENT
_____ ___,_ -.,
'_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
~_~
~_.,
_ _ _ _ _.A
®
.i ~ ~
~:,9~/;L~'~ ~~/~,1:C/~~/~J/(.~I'~"/~'I'c~/'" ~~~ r{ (:'y~"t'i>: ~.~~/-'l-'/\)'/'
, ,~\ ~~~%V.'V·~~?
/~o>..,'/'
YO: '
/",'~
~ ~ .\>;~'), t~\~~V
~~'
~/I';' ~y"~0;.~ ~~~/, O~/~'~'~, 9\l/:»/\Y~
~/.,,~~ /~L/
~ ~/~~'~ ~;J','
-;;~~/'
~
",~v)"\~'~/o
,,~/
~-'
f
>
o
~
'
~,"
{~,{~
,~/<
{/
~
~
t~
~
<
f
'
,
<
)
'
\~
~~"
,o%7o(,t)(f'~'~~/\'~
:\"y~
>~~ :,'',''o\',,-':~,.\\~y\y:~/t/
,f;r-?L,~
,
f)/\~/I~ ?>\~ ~}~/~/;?")~
..,_ M"" "
~/
---t"
/ ,-,/ ~/ ,/ / /~~ ~ -' / ' //// ,/,/",/
/< / "'~/
/
/ ~ "
/~'
/',/ / ." t-X, / /"
,,'Yo'// '~'/"
/ 0 0/
\,;"
( J)YA',
'v'" h-'"
/{
<
0;' /(. ;{, 0/ I'c
;'0/,
' -;<'"
,/ 'Y.\' / 0 ' 0'; '\\
-\,"L V -( .. ; f,,' <.., /,1
<{:/
/: >'0
0
/Il/ /\,,% )'{ 0
,/
/-{ /
/
, ~ /y./ ./ / / ,,1
, ' '/
, <; / "'
' '1-/ " <,' '{-/
," /
"
po
v
,/tl
' 'VO
9, " ./"Y, ;
/\ ";' "
, / \"".1 '/',/. ,,/ 0/ ",'V ,.' / / .,-' /,' , /
, , " / \".-:
4
L/ (.? ;1'",01'.
',' "
',J l';'t-';,'
/
L: L ;0
,0/
t-/
'?;.. ,,1/
<,/'
/(.
'v 0
/
~,-~~f.~ l!yrEA5-~
:;-r [ _____ __
:,;_; __
S_,PL"
, / po,' \/
_'" ':/ £ CO
-.J__
, _: ____
" Ot. a..E'NT
,)Jlr
__ ,_.. "
.'111 A
Cr
"
.-
.
.
L' ",'
'V
/
/
-' 0 /
f'; _
,\A
Y'S
po.
\"),,,>:'
.. "'0.0,M
,_,~_.. _~ f. !a. :.,_
A8
1/,
M
______ _ ,
__ c._t}.'.!..':L A
Of'.
/
MiM
,,_, __ '"
0
0
',10,,', / ,
AYS
/\
/ \/
0\" '1<' "tl
v .•
f,
y :( ./<)
J
G JED I
L
"f{
>
<';< \ .' ',/
•_
- '
M"
,
,I,
I
"k '
L
t - .--- -
,J;~( r~' ',' L
-
" , -+k .• "
'
.
M
--j
-t'" I"~
L
t -
I
0,' , , ' /
v:'l'b'111 utilize telerl,(~try (pel-1), anJ D[SCH~:rS (DR!» dnt.'1 no ilG in}Juts, and ...IilJ be
isol:lting malfunctions, providing u.'1tn CU[:lput.ati0118, c()m~larinl:: ~ctual li.m.its and eventti va
pre-Jefined limits and events on a continuous bnsis, and providing appropriate displays to
<:or:.tr;:ctar:::>" (An assunlVticn is mlld~ by ~\HC that the individual contractors input data vlil1
infonr,,'ltion which is neceSGary f(Jr U~e com~luter tc pcovi.de the~~0 c~lpohilities.)
~
rl
~~
01
~~Ni
cdN
OJri
~:lp:1ble of
tller;retical
individual
c()nt~in
The f'lllowing is ~\ li!..Jt of i,eneril.1 and lLdl'Jidual ~'y:jt.ern ce'1uin:'rncncs fo.!' tLe bno0ter vel:ic;}o:.: 1 ~H;d
included at.> nn exam,l10 of t~\e to.sl<.:l that i1nC Hill clccuinf,lish with IHH:\C.
A comF~rison ~\uti'ix i8
inclu(led ;llso, llS an 0xdr.:!-,le of t~le total control center OGE task vs ca!~·<.1bility.
th~
133
VJ n era 1 B_~_~.1~:1E·f' me n ts
~
;:5
~
z
w
Q
1.
!1al function un<11ysls [lnd i.'~()li ti()n to t~hf! black hox level
2.
SUCCOS!;
3.
Trend analy.d~) of n{Jpropr1.ate data on
4.
rrov-tJt-~ DR~
Gub.')y~jtcm
crit·. . rin cOr.1par.ison in r,:'u] thne for
()fj
for (tIl sys telr.a.,_
checlu:i,
C~)T
and launch countdowns.
veldcle/vehiclc, tpst/test or ~.1ho['t tert!l b:.l.sls.
it
line tah,-j]ation of all dl~){;rete event c}wllgefl.
.
rl
H
Ii-~
[.<01111 r':I(?nb3 ~ :.;'ystern
LO
o
1.
Fli.ght Controla
'H
~
s:!
~
r:Q
o
+->
A.
Provi'}e
n~dund')ntancl exten~'od mont
jl.
f'r('vjd(~
c'I[.1hilitJ
C.
i)ro'lioe F.iPlll 1
tor C[;{lflbl1I ty for
C)
(j)
U)
\'r·:qx~ checks.
H
.---.-
u
ff)r e-nd to
ll1otdt~lrill~~ of
--------------------
--..
~n()
tp.~tirtg
nf r_·
I'
.J! ti
I'Jd~
cnnt.rlll !lJ::t.em.
rt·dUl:o!IlCd. :;YtJf.0!1l:\_
----..----.--~.
-."'. -
..
~
...
---.- ... _-- ._-------- .. -
---_ _- ..... _--_._--------------_._---- --.---...
(~\
~
i~
!
LD;
9'
!./
; 'l ~
\IIi
Ii..'
\
2 tIl
n~)
\
'-"-.---~""-~."' •. ----~-""'----~--'''''-------'
k~:-.-
~)~ .
.....
-$
f1.
Provide t.rend data
(1)
(;')
follo',y} ng items:
fi)I'
i\ctul1tor response und posi t.loning
Hydraulic presGure, l,:~vel, and temp
LO
~LO
.......... co
(3)
Gyro tern/time
(1.)
(5)
Cyro Gpi nUl' and "j~in down tl rna
Gyro outiJUI. vercus tor()uinp, ~;t.;i?1ulu[J
::q25~C'1
ro~
O;rl
2.
E.
Monit,)r pump rne'Jtor tot8.1
Y.
E"VGlll9.
G.
Bo:ni tor
'l'r.~ckjng
tion
~)~.3rt8,
t~uid·J.nccp:1.cka[;e
t.~'u1 ~ance
a::d the ti)t.al run tjme.
p·Jrf'JI'::l:1oce.
"!.nii!lt .1.n::i off~wt:> to th(, autopilot.
and Flii)lt Safety
.~
A.
. l~.
~
~
f:-1
Z
Honitol' hntte:-y on
H'"\n:i
l~ne
t~)r ~OGVU olH~rate
ti:rle •
t.iroe-.
C"
Plot J\GC voltaGe
D.
1'1:)[: i
F:.
Provjde trf'nrJ dat:l for fn.llowins itemt3:
tor till
bU3
'J!?r!.;U:1
t,ir::e.
v·) 1 tngc6.
\
(1 ) . f5<\ t tc ry cu rrt.'n tit i r.v~ pro fi le3
.
(? ) 1\11 :~0(;VP 'int} :.:'.11 tch oper3 t.(' t.' meg
( ')) :; Fe A 0pc:-'J 1 c ti m~3
('I)
J\(jC vo 1 t'll\O
W
q
1-1
~
Z
o
rl
t.D
o
§
~
.,-1
+l
()
!:Q
1-1
! IIJ Git,. c; , ' c ;:~.} ;; t
;"'l'(,\'i:1<::
iil'Oj,('lJ: ... nt 1;');\;li,n~', by ':"rrr'l-tli!!~: l:~v"~
:!;u
;1.
0)
';:5
t.;){·:~
.~lll'ifi.::
r,r':0_'\~I'f:,
~k)nito\' ;.'r;(ll):·\..":i,.~
(.-. )
ft.
J J.J
C·il;)~Jtltt:· :lc'n.}
;~.
;1.
I®
--~-
ton
(::'li~)r';:!.'i.or:,
'j
.....
;'~:,t ~ t'~r::; ':;. -rr':r; t./t h~t-)
A]l :::;':itc;); ~l~'] t·l..!ltJ
,It'!'!
q
11)8
0}Jl?rEd;e
")
tjlll.:!8.
M
t.;
:z;
o
o
III ;11'Ur.Wdt:.tiu!'
if.
LO
,'rovid,' "//Jt,.::I·d ;-:'
~
C(,,..:·~(:ti!lr,
§
of ';:11 Pn',tfilHl c1/tt.n.
.~
+l
()
~
?I',,'!i.j,!
.1at.1 "n;"
H
c.
!~
l'rcvlc!(! J ini
t .. ,
dLJp1a:r:' if!
,;t 1"cI',:,: ':11 " I ,
"II/ T j"
'~f"'W
jl:;!~ l h t l l
"'i
(1)
':rdl.l.t.
"
~
fllllf;tilll1
(!)
(It' f illi\' 'Irld "·""nt.,
\0
\ ~ ~ . n.', ~
l'I 'J (lbt.: J.'
--.----'-,,',~
VA
~ ,<::1)
_"~_.
-$
I'rovi.!e
0.
1'10t
....
:ll!tc~TU:.lli,c
Hj'0!.em
__
~.''''F'''''_;'>
~
___ ......"._
.:
or on ,lemand ;'imh'lf?nt chech;:, nnd print out"
Provide cOTP}luiutional C.:ifitlhility for r0ductng data. /1\
r.
t-
cal il!rnth;l1 r)of;s nnd pr1.nt outs.
-.
.\
/JI
.,
r4lO
'co
p::,
Q)
o
C"l
tp,
A:; a .result of h:lvlng
1.
III f):i0ht mcnltorinC
2.
! C.
3,
:.:(:lr'1-.1o:~c
I,.
r.drii.ni.'itr.·.:"i\e
~
~
E-t
Z ,)
r:il
.~
t.}U!
t
GOill.L'PtCH·,
ruC\l
P-!rl
co-;.! l.tatio'nal capabjlity_
ClIHi
fll, ht nnd }lost test uHta
:;.:t'=.tCfi;
l!:e folJoyl lng at
C",
i':-'llr to: d f ~ cal 1"'1 th moni toc'i ng
;).
]?(')
r:,.
COllfieur:,tlon coiltrol
f..
SpJl!'es [f-t.;)t.u.s
~;~lJ'l\il!li
Hl'it.i.llg
ng and mOld tor'tng
iabll i t:; ['UCCfJ.·.S/lltter.~j...t3 mo:-Ji tnrtns
{liP)
talmJl1t Ion
"
,....;
z
o
'J.':l!;U]··tt! :.t..;n:'-ol't
o
liv
~
!~~~'~ori<
Ii ~·I
rf~t.0.~it
r\')\!ul
r'Qm~;lt~
for a.ll
Ld
te:.~ta
§
Cc.t;':r·ten
'rl
4J
f:Q
1..
H
C)
Opon itelN:J :;tatuf] und cnnlrol
"
,C,:',);:,>:
". -;> \.-:)~<> <~;:-: -~~.,'.
t
p
j--1
;;/!J}~';: .~.:>
-
..
:~
..:.....~ ~
';.: :\~)~:?i~:.::.~;;:~·)-- . . :;....
.. _....
c _".'
..
'\'
Co'
~':~>
,::;::',
'. f~~£;\-;~.'::<':'~~~~ ~ -~~~: c~'<-' .~ ~ .-:
~ ~
,?~:,;",<.
~ :~.".:~J:.'~~~ .~
;.
:,,:;1
,.,;':;~~""i,':'''~r'' .' :,-",)::7' ".~;:
:·<::;~.r~~.z.·i.;.:}:;~~~:(:~~:'.~,~·~ ~'oJ: '.··O.·~' ....
'.
'r.
'.:
""_.
~+-.-(}~
, :
aC?i'4?cF/Vr '.
~ ~:'. ,~':{~~>':>\~::>'
•
#~
:.
•
c
~ Cod.
#~/U;9·5P,pCt:£".. ·.u..r~P
..
::>.;::.;;,.. ;,:»~~ -y.,
.~.'
-~.~~......
~ .'~':':,~~:."
. . ."
1:1
t'V PJ
.......... to.
t'V (D
o
..........
tIl
.. , . . . .
~~
•
4
.....
.' (.
'~
-.~.
~.
'
. :.;., .. fi,:: .. ;',
"
. ~~~'~'-
'-="~'
,,,,',",
-'
! ,:"
~~~~~. :.~-.::: ::<.
~
.
.. ."~:.~...~"",
; ..
'
"
-
'
~.-.- .
-t
CQI1J?UTER
' ..
a~~ ~
's T
~J
a~.
I
l!>
. -'.
•
;..,
IlrC-{,..f;r~
. ~.~ ..-:
..... ~ ". < ...
I}} y ..
.~~"?......
:--.. :~
. •~.
--.=~
·':(?~~'~-;;~'~c.r
TD···:.··. ·:~s '?)B
j--1
-
.....
Llr~E
FE AS! B I 1.·IC T
G r ·.;IZ--rJ
o
f .•••-:
)?J.-<;;~);~~~~;or'~'>:',.
~ ...",
.
.: ~"',
" .~
TITAN' XIX ON-
./· . . . '5i:-
. L:-
.. ~... .,
:;~/' .:;:~i::~;~:?~:~-i-~
-'-~':';:'.~-.;
..... /
,'"
,
~:<.,:~,:~;:f;,~{..:f;1~:1,;i.:..;:~t;':·; '; .',: "
:< "', .'
~. ~~.;.~.:~:
. ,::~.' .:-. .......... (~
.
't
.••~~~~ ~{:- -'i:-~:~
..
~.
,;;r.
""
/~-Z~C-..::4.7 ( ~
;:'.,. '.
.~ .~~:~~-"
.J..r'fc--I
'
.....
.
...
'
.... ('
t. $~
.
::'!;:- ,
.. ~ .,::-. . ,~~
/C.l~(;
:'D).
7:-0.
5' c-z.
-:
L
'.- >--··~t:.: ?:<'~,.:: .~ ~- ;'. -
;.:' _t".>:;
~"';..-.~"
'-~ ~
~.
c?0~·.:
"
.:/.:::)'Y!~~i~i'~;~: .~ ::'X~::;;'Ht.:/t.i!~~):~'.,. ". : :-.:';:~:~:~::~ >\
RESPOl~S!B!LITIES
'. ,-
...\
-'
.
.. :." ... :
',:).
~/..;::..
\
.'
.
-; ',; ..' .... :.,
."
:
:~,
UJ
o
(D
I.
()
rt-
l
SSD/AEROSPJt.CE
'~J,'~.':~-;,.:....~ .......
. .I
":.
...:r .-:. ~EVELOP
r-'.
o
~
C)l
~
- .-,
-..." .
::.
I.. -
PROGRAM PLAN
,
..... ,:.. ' r~~r.'~, .«
DmECTIOI~::,<·>·.···>·~·
.'
PROVIDE OVER-ALL PROGRAM
-.' ....
COORDll\fATE EFFORTS OF ALL
'.
-
,'"
."::'~ :<' ," .:~: j, ~:.
.:
-;..
- ~(:·>i:,· '~
AGEI"lCIES
.... : .,.
.
J
· .. ·EsTABJ,lSH SYSTEM ANALYSIS CRITE;r,....:]¥"·>:·:-·'".";
I .
&STJb.BI.JEJH TREI\fD h ..r..J'1;3-A YSL5 11.ND Dl1'I'A
I
ASS1ST IBl'A YJITI-I PROGR.Alv11vill\IG DEVELOl:>I\,,1J::N'T
REDUCTIOI~
,,'
"~"I' '~IST
I
MC
m
DEVELOPMENT OF
'." "'"1.-.
..
~
'.~)
~.
),
.
)y I, '.1
-:,
SYST~;lV): CRl'YERIA .~.~' .", .).ti':
DEVELOP DETAILED PROGRAlvlI\fiNG
J
.~:.
CR!TIT:R1Lre,
.
C),,", .. ·YBL1. .
.,'
.~.
"" ~.
'.'.::: . :..... :::... ( ..... ,="
MC/DENVEH,
()
. ~.- .
. . ;".. " ...••,:...... ,...<;.-,.• ;C ••.••..
PlutTICIPlh.T.ll~·G
....~
.
.I '
.
\ . :/
\.. / /
/) r /
y{
..
".,/
o
~1j
t'Vp.:!
6555th 'ATVI / AEROSPA.CE ETRO
, / . " , . / : . ..' '.
'-...tQ
I
MONITOR ESTABL1SHlv1ENT OF SYSTEl\-1 CRITEnUl
!!
o
PROVIDE CRITERIA A.ND j'l.N1LLYSJS METHODOLOGY
c
ADD IN-LINE COlv1PJ1.RATORS
tvp:>
~
?3~
o
I-l
tt)
~
L..--1
OJ,
,~
o
C)l~
o
OJ
t-:,-J
o'oj
10lj
8
tlj
~?~
1-1
t-:--{
;:t-,
tot
0. __-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _•_ _ _ _ _ _,_ _,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _• _ _ _ _ .,-_ _ _
~
_____
~_------"
_,_~ __ -_o/
~
~/
~
\.
------------------
~
CONFIGURATION FOR ETR FEASIBILITY STUDY
\
J)
...z'-::~w~~~~~~~
J
t.,
(J)
(D
DISC
oc-+
STORAGE
t-"
o
~
't./' _
.'
T".
--t;.
()l
!-1
---=~~~~-
DRS
750
ChrumelD
.
~~~-
•{
t;/
·t·
J7
.
~'
\.y'._)/:
,
I
.
.1"
I
r::;-l
~~gH
.=-.1
~=~
.
p 'CA.,'
}
r\·r
/\
r'
()
Ll
E~ERJ
I Bl'll
~~~~_C"'I~_~. K£:q,J[-cjil~~l_~
8
Chcutncln
7044
PR OC ESS OR-
J~,\_,,==-~j
;Ccc-
COlv1PARr,~
t .
,\
I-
:.at:-~QilI$;Z.c>~);~~~~-'~~~·
---~~~!:.'.:.'"
-"'=-=--~~=-=~-=~
~~=-
.,.:.~;::- ~
Stfo~ _,1;7.. K~ c~!~;)~~~==-'V~
~~"::~":
..~~~.~.".J .
.. -•• =".
PClVi
~.~O;=i
8
!-1rcJ
--~r-
[)Jp.;
........
V
,.-~._J,.~o..:Z'";;~C."I'
_ .. ...,:..<1~,..~.~.
'[:J
to
(D
'PRINTER
6 a0 Line
. Per Min
H
tv
S
o
~tI1
0;),
TAPE'o
CJl[)J
to
(2)
o
Z
l-rj
S
tr-:1
'z
rd
~
Li
.------~------------.----~--..
.
.------.--.-~--------
i~
~
~
.
.
,
PROPOSED CONFIGURATION AT ILC FOR MANNED SYSTElv1
//Ot,,/
./
/?p~')i~7'
//7/)
-j
,V]
I(j)
o
rtf-'.
§
CARD
~
PUNCH &
~
READER
p,fp:o;r;
~
DISC
CRTfo
(4)
STORAGE
Per Min.
~.~,
DRS
,-=~.?O KC.
750-3000
C lk'U1D.C Ie
J[=,=/~,c.-=-~
*'
r====-~=""'''-'''
I
YBh1
II
~}~. 6 !5~=?eriphcr(l1 t:~~-=~
BOOGtel")
250·~500
Clwl1J1ClD
~
_----.~-.-1-.__
1800
PCIVI
----"
. . -- I
>
MaUl
[JJJ'
"
I B 1'v1
U:::,~.c_,~~"?~
"~-="'~~
(0:
345.6 E:C.
PC,IV{
360-t1~~
'-'=---"'--'"l:';
-=,==~.",'
IBrvl
~ 800
---~
CENTRP~L
PROCESSOR
'"",
(~~~;~~el~_~.'~=~~t'='lI?,er;x~:rall-
/2.-
[""V;
~'c ~;'c/" ~
\)J\)~
c+
1-"
~
,p /2 ,..:'-
..
§
:-n
f-I.
-/
Di\S
~
';).~,
r
.:;-:...-;? .:--:-........,.,-
7#'-4,y
;-7-r'2:S c~
Vch. 11
Veh. 12
Veh. 13
FEB.
APRIL
JUNE
70o/l)
100%
100%
1009'0
1000/;
100("/.1
lOOr/J
lOOjS
20%1'
60%
100%
100%
100%
1 OO(/~
AMBIENT CHECKS
e-
IN - LI?\llT CHECKS OF AIR BOR:t\TE
SEJ\1S0RS
e
CHECKOUT OF Clv1G GO-NO/GO
INDICATQf.tS
o
COMPA.R1S0N OF RE1\.L-TIWI: CALIBRJi.TION VS. PlhST PERFORl'AiU\!CE
~
':?2q7)'Jl~
,,!) / ,,:=='
\
\
COt,1BINED SYSTE~\1S TEST
o
(J
c. ,-:-
~--~~~~--------------------'
PREDICTION OF PROEABLJi: LIIVLJ:7
DECILYS
o
/
/
/
-N
Z
AND Hc;! SPHERES
VECas
DETECTION OF A 1v1ALFUNCTIOI\l'
o
f-I.1j
TA.NK TOP PRESSURJ~S
H
[),:)fD
........... tQ
[),:)CD
G
AUTOMATIC READOUT OF DJl.TA RJ;-:=
QUIltED FOR IvLALFUNCTION ANALYSIS
G
o
. . . . . . t:q
tIJ
50 (,'S
100%
100%
STORE TEST RESULTS FOR LATEn
C OlviPARIS ON
1000/"
1 0090
1 00%
PREDICTION OF LIlVlIT DECAY
.20%
60 cl()
lOOrl-J
~
0
0
0) ...........
01 CD
}---'
o
I
I-
Z
t:rj
H
t:J
trj
t;7
- .. 1
f-J
:: ~i ~f.~
/
'-!-I 13
i~~;j.:3,---------. -----
.....
FREQUENCY HF,SONSE OF
FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM.
~
/
S;
r
I
~.
~
~
COMPUTER MODES DURING CHECKOUT AND LAUNCI-f OPERl4,.TIOI~
(CONTINUED)
Veh. 11
FEB.
(J)
(D
()
c+
I
1-"
0
1-1
e
I
Veh. 12
APRIL
Veh. 13
JUNE
COUNTDOWN/COUNTUP
~
01
~
COMPARISON OF DRS EVENTS VS.
SUCCESS CRITERIA
/
()
100%
PRINT -OUT DEVIA TIONS
, i
100r;.,
I
I
AUTOl\.1ATIC READOUT O~ Di'-aTA
FOR MALFUNCTION ANl1>.LYSIS
IN-LIMITS CHECK OF AlRBORNE SEN ...
SORS VS. SUCCESS CRITERIA
I
1 OOo/~
100%
100%
lOO7~
50%
100~j
FRO!~1
NORI'v1
-
E)
.
I
TRANSIENT CHECK OF Lllv1ITED .Aln~
BORNE SENSORS VS. SUCCESS CRrrEnI1~-c>""'"
/
".
1-11)
~
t'V~
o
~,
ANft.. L Y ZE HOLDS AND' f(ILLS
40%
80%
100%
o
STORE D~A. T l~ FOR LJ~rrER COlvtPAltISON lOOC;o
1 aOo/il
loor;o
LA.UNCH OPERATIONS
I
COUNTDOYIN
I
I
tIl
~~
G
TGJ
,
PRINT-OUT DEV1l1TIONS FROM
NORl'v1:
PROPELLANT LOADING; T~l DAY
L'\:)
( )
!
/
I
(
MONITOR SYSTElvi PERFORXv1-
ANCE
100%
100%
1007.,
800/J
100%
1 OO(y~
)
I
J
,
I
1'1
I
/
PROVIDE lv1ALFUNCTION
ANALYSIS OF PROBLE:tv{ AREAS
J
III
,
,
I
t
---
---~---.-
------- ----------_..---------_.
,------------------'
I
l
,
J
I
I
,I-
I '
~,---,
~
,~
I
1/
COMPUTEr. MODES DURING CHECKOUT Al'lD LAUNCH: OPERATION
(CONTINUED)
I
Veh. 11
FEB.
(jJ
ill
o
o
t)
M-
~.
.0
\.)l
f-l
I
MONITOR C}\i1G AND DRS
ANl'"':.LYZE TREND
o
100o/a
100%
100%
100%
100(/:)
60%
lOO%
lOO~~
sOCi.:!
100~~
lOOc;S
'f-31 SEC.
Dl~TJ~
PREDICT TIl-.JfE TO OUT -Olfgo
LIMIT CONDITION
. VEcas; T-55 M1NS.
I
{)
1009 J
1
'A11BLENT CHECKS
PRESSURIZATIOl\Ji T-160 l>.4IN. T
/
o
Veh. 13
JUNE
T~COUNT; AT SELECTED Tll'AE FROIv1
T-1951vliN. TO T-31 SEC.
I
e
Veh. 12
APRIL
Silll;,4E ft..S CST Cln~CI{
TERMIN1~.L COUNT; T-31 SEC. TO L/1.UNCl{
/
MONITOR REj~L-TlME PEl1FORWLANCE
(DRS 81 ClviG) VS. SUCCESS CRITERU}..
100%
100%
100%
/
AUTOlvl1\ TIC PRINT -OUT OF ANY~ I-{OLD
OF l"LALFUNCTIOI'~
100%
100%
1 OOCj;:,
I
AUT01",1Ii-TIC PRINT-OUT OF D1;\'[/1, RE-
60 flJ
100%
QUIRED FOR 1,AltLFUNCTIOI-J 11.NPbLYSLS
20 C,:,
H
b::1
1-7
~
o
()
LAUNCH PHli.SJ~
()
r·-~
/
RECORD T. ~4. DATA FOR Rl\PID PHIN'I' ...
OUT CRITERIl),
1 OO(i~
~
l:rj
100(7")
1007;)
1-1
t)
lrj
1- )
..
1-//
..
-----------------------------------
.-----~..._'./
1-'
ft--
1--1
n'
.
~
(",-,'----~-
_ _ _- - - : . '
;i
I
SCBEDULE
(j)
GO I
CD
o
f-"
o
~
i~~EAD
r+-
DEVEl.10P PROGRAM1\;ilNG CRITERU'1.
::::5
!
P
INTERFJtCE ENGINEERING
t-l
U)
=17U'2l2]
DEVELOP PROGRAWl1v'LlNG
l-4
Z
W
~Z72I
IhrSr~~---:b-60h1-pt:l'f£R---
r~d1!aC (UC~~~~
>
COJt,1.PUT~R lyV-~\lLA.ITI Itt.
t4
--
~~j~
COn,.m~CHES
~
il
1l
__~)_~=_.L..-L___=J-1~~__~~
__~f_.__~I=
:r:
U
l-t
u
0
>
0
Z
U
~
0
Z
-(
...,
ttl
fit
~
p;~
'-..,.
o
z
Gj
1965-1966
01 W
~
H
b
trj
Z
f--j
~
--"
-------------- -------------'
---.------.~~.
l~-~
IBM CONFIDE:NTIAL
:\ L H
n
~
~.
\ (.
f,"
INTEt.'C"f-' f; 1(:. F
R. Giacobine.
cc
COR P 0 lR A T ION
CORRESPONDENCE
see be low
CATE.
6 5 - 2 1 50. 64 . t) - S 1,5
28 Octobe r 1. f)t-.;-
,',
,GUIiJJECT,
Trip Report ... Computer for ETR MeetL"1g
at Cocoa Beach on 25-26 October 1965
The meeting convened to determine organizational eetup, grou.nd rule:.:: and how
the system would be configured. The organizational block diagram is shown in
attached Figure 1. A more detailed schedule is shown in Figure 2.
The following ground rules were established:
"
1.
The central points of contact are established as follows:
Or gani zation
Name
Add::ress
SSD
Capt. N. North
SSBTA, Los Angeles
643-1402
IBM
B. Blue
7900 N. l>... stronaut .!:...ve.
Cape Canaveral, Flz..
784-9622
Aerospace,
El Segundo
J. Kirnose'
Aerospace,
ETRO
W. Dillon
l?555th ATW
D. Jacobs
Phone
2400 E. El Selr~""1do 31vd.
1
rlK
..........
\.,.;. o , ra'H"
"'-'
• (P/203.r. ,).
648-5536
Box 4007, 6Z4A. :'=>roz;.""ar.n
853-5695
. ~
li"'l ~
c e5
""'1"I<
..:.--~
\..£:)
...
Patrick P..ir Force Base, Fla.
6555th, DVIBS
Fla.
853-9071
P~~FB,
MC, Denver
MG. ETRO
A. Ash
Box 179, Denver, Colo.
Mail Station E 456
794- 5211,
=,,!
4595
D.' Mackey
2.
SSD/ Aerospace shall Serve as Program xnanagers. lYle/Denver' shall
serve as integrator for all efforts pertaining to the study defL,y.::-L~o~irr2.pleme:n
tation, installation, and final study report upon completion of the program. The
final report shall include the inputs of each agency participe..ting in the otuci.y.
Copie s of the report will be provided to the central points of cont~c·t.
3.
Aerospac~ will provide two progralUmers a...?ld one cyatems 2..:."'1.alyst.One progran1.mer from ETR and one programmer from El Scglli'1do. The systems
analyst will be made up of several people part t~me.
()
4", IBM wi 11 provide the computer. computer, rnai:'1tenance, two progZ'2.:::::1n1.ers and a systems analyst.
, ._ .. .t, q \ ... t"
t':'~
k
~ L (. ./..
U
Z
A
()
~Yl
z
.,<
fl1
r~l
Vi
_.1
~!4
~
F-t
.~,
~
p..
.,
tJ
M
Z
~-1
.~
....
"
L'
NOTE: Success Criteria shall he a.vailable at least one (1) lUonth prio~.: to CST for oach
launch schedule and shall b~ Upf1;lted on a continuing basis .
. .
~
,.
IBM CONFlDEl\TTw.L
,'.
WORE: STATEMENT
The purpose of this project is to gain experience in the use of an
on-line digital computer for data analysis during Systerns Tests
.lnd Countdown of a research launch vehicle.. These tests are to
establish guide lines, for developing a system concept, hardwar(~
design, computer programming,l manpower and cost requirements
for an operational OCALA system.
An available computer with more than adequate capacity to meet
the presently anticipated requirements will be connected to the
existing Titan III Ground Support Equipment (GSE) to conduct the
tests. The existing Titan III test and data analysis procedures
will be evaluated to select representative tasks which can be expected to exercise the system design pararneters. These tasks
will be converted to computer based analysis, programmed and
te sted under sim.ulated conditions. P... Monitor program will be
developed to sequence task execution according to tinLe, events
and operator control. When' this program has been thoroughly
tested, the on-line connections to the GSE will be made and operational tests will be conducted. Operating experience v/ill be
evaluated in terms of the original systern design criteria.
Section 5. 1
Page H/37
12/20/65
~--------~
--
----~~-
IBM COI~FIDENTIP.L
EQUIPMENT
The Ground Support 'Equipment (GSE) in the Instrumentation
Room of the VIB provides access to all of the signals ,used in
system test evaluations. An IBM 7044 Data Processing System
will be tied into the existing GSE without interfering "'lith the
current use of the equipnwnt. The compu~er configuration and
GSE interfaces are described in the following.
COMPUTER
The llM 7044 Data Processing System is a general purpose
binary computer that has been adapted to on-line data processing
by the addition of the 7288 Data Communications Ch..annel. The
computer has a 37 -bit word and a basic core storage cycle of
2.0 microseconds. Processing and input/output operation is
overlapped. The configuration requiTed for the study (Figure
1) includes a 1301 Disk Storage Unit~ two 729V Magnetic Tape
Units, a 600 line-per-minute lL~03 Printer and a 1402 Card Read
Punch. A physical installation plan for the VIB is s,ho~wn in
Figure 2. A complet~ list of the 7044 system units is given in
Table 1.
GSE/COMPUTER INTERFACES
Four connections must b~ n1ade from the CrSE to the computer
to acquire the data necessary for real-time and postflight (test)
analysis. Telemetry data from two of the ASTRODATA PCWI
ground stations will be fed to two 7288 subchannels. Event data
will be obtained from the slave Data Recording Set (DRS) as it
is recorded on tape. Range Time will be obtained from the slave
DRS tilne decoder.
PCM Interface
Data frorn the peM links will be obtained from the Data Storage
Register s (DSR) in the Astrodata Ground Stations in the InstruIl1entation Roon1-. Eight bit syllables wIll be transferred as they
are asscn1hlcd in the DSR (Figure 3) to a variable character input (VCl) subchanncl adapter in the 7288. The function of this
subchanncl is to provide controls and data hlfiering to £'ssemble
f(m r sy llalJleH from th<.! telcmer.cy link into one 36- bit computer
word. The Hubchanncl will gate the entire 960 syllables from a
major frame into a block of computer stora1:,'U starting with the
first syllable after the main usmc sync pulse is received. It
Section 5. 1
Page H/38
12/20/65
-1..-
will transfer tlll' next. rnajor fran1e into 2.21 21ter~2.tc stora~e
b lock and then return to the first block to provide a continuous
rCJ.ding of all data from one PC1\1 link at a tirne. The syllabIc::
sync timing pulses frOID, the Accumul ator /Decommutator will
cause the subchannel to store each syllable L'1 its input register.
After four syllables are stored the subchannel control requests
a computer storage cycle.
DRS Events
The DRS writes a. seven bit parity checked charactc;.r on a cornputer compatible magnetic tape. T~:.e out'put to the tape write
amplifiers will also be transrerred to a vari?ble character input
subchannel where six 6-bit chcr8.cters vlill be stored per 36-bit
word (Figure 3). The 62. 5kc clock signal from the DRS will
cause a character to be shifted into the subc:b.al1..nel L;.p~;lt register.
The tape start signal from the DRS will signal the CO-rl-:pute-r tl;..at
an event has taken place.
Time Code
The DRS contains a tilne decoder chassis which decodes the
range time code D).tO h012rs, ITiinutes, seconds and hsndredths of
seconds. The 26 bits required to ::cepr2s2nt time to tt-e lJ.22.rest
10 milliseconds will be transferred in pz:.rc~llcl to a ?s.rallel ;L"1p-ut
Subchannel ill the Subchannel Adapter Unit. A time wo::: j will be
, stored by the computer each time a rnain :::ran1e sync 1='ulse is re-'
ceived from either PCM $Tound station.. These connections re:~·i..:ire
engineering modifications in two Astrodata Ground Stations s;.r:d the
slave DRS. The 7288 will not generate signals t~..at i.n.terfeTe vlith
the norrnaluse of this GSE ..
In Channel Compare
The computer will maintain a current table of data lin1its in core
storage for all PCM syllables. These limits will be transferred to
a hardware comparator in the PClVi interface equipment thr-u a. variable
character 'output (VeO) subchannel. Each syllable will be cOlnpared
against the high and low limits as it is transmitted to the VCL If it
is outside the set limits a bit vri.J.l be placed in the 9th bit position of
the syllable storage location. }'u" out of limits lril.terrupt will also be
signaled to the veo. The outpllt lilnit data and lr.J.put data stre2.r.n will
be syncr.xonized by n1eans of the rnain fran1e sync p'Jlse.
Section 5.1
Page H/S9
"-, 12/20/65
.':;/~:1.
.' ,r" ",
J
' ',.
I', , : '
',~
TABLE I
(
"'.-'
.-
Machine
Modell
~,.'~p~e~____~F~e~a~tu~r~e______D
__
e_s_c_r_i~p_ti_o_r_L_________________________________
,'.
7107
3
#3880
#4428
#7498
#1845
1/1846
1414
4
#6025
#7680
#7681
Processing Unit
Extended Performance
Floating Point Arithmetic~ Single P1"ecision
Storage Clock - Interval TiTner
1 s~ 7904 Channel Attac:b..rnent
Two P-_dditional 7904 Channel Attacr..:rnents
I/O Sunchronizer for Card R/P and Printer
R,ead and Pl.~:'1ch Col. Binal""Y
Synch., Storage - :E;'rinter
Additional Synch. Storage - Printer
1414
001
1402
002
Card Read Punch
1403
002
Printer
7904
002
#1074
Data Channel (2)
Control Adapter for
1301
001
Disk Storage
7631
002
File Control
729
ooiS
Two !v'Iagnetic Tape Units
Section 5~ 1
'1/0 Synchronizer for M2.gnetic Tape
Fi~~ ______
Page H/40
12/20/65
c
-
;
:7~/! "L i
,',
'" ._i_......
,j
,11_
-.-j;;/)-C' ;
~--~~~.~
I14 I,
~
I
I
7107
~V
31X1
i
~
~
~
FIGURE
Section 5.1
1
Page "/.11
n -'-
12/20/65
~
\
.11
{~
~
w
(D
ort1-'o
::::s
c.n
I---l
'r
INSTRU~1ENTA TION
ROOl\1
-'r'1~~"::'·""'f=·~-I-=-'·'i;;;~=~£~<'-··"'~·
::;::::~ ~~~"V''''''~:-'--~F=''';:;;-~~'rJu-''
/"~j--~l"
.+
/, ,
~ "',/' " :
',,'"J" " , "
,I
."
' , , '' :/
"_ .../I"'''''
~ / LL S;-I" ~-y"--',: - - '
"V
1/:
2 2 ~ Jr
f,.:L
+ {--::,-~'::'-""-'--
.'--.
I---lf-d
tv~
~~
'.
!:':...J .t.!;
l'"
;/
:10
'
I
'
,
1:
",
:
",
'
'i-
.'
+
J ,=,"-,,_=.c-'>
..I,
v
...
I
"
I I
:
\
'>< /
"
",
'
" '
.. ,'-.,.:,
.J.
..J.
"
L1402
I
I
/
"",;'<~
"
"
rtf -
..,.....
,'-,
:
•
1J_-"-- J. .~
I
"
I
II/IV
\C.>.
l...
"
\J
\,
T ...~_t.-o,(J..:I.~_-C...c.Jl
\"
I ,
Y,
f,
;~J . O "
""':'':~1::""~!'_r''~,.---J---!,,J:~J,
t. '"
1\r
l , '"-'"
-" "-'"
.;
.
(jJ
'"
(j:.J
L',
r~...
:
I
t
,,",
' ..... _1._......... ' ...... ..!._ .. '
f"-',
•
72
II/IV
0ri
~~.~.:; ~~~~~~7~i:~.,,;,;:·;~~~.,.''-,~~~_,~J,c.~'? F
t
t_........
I
+
1(;'3t
J~_,<~,_J~
.
I,
.""
1
I.......
II
I
1£;14
t,10DI.2,31 7 ,
1414.r.10D41 5,S
II
II
I
uT"'====W ---~
II
1/1 /
I',
\
-t
'¢-
L:"'-j
1-
fTI
f-~
tv
t;
tl j
,--)
/.{
~--J
. . . *••,.........,. .... :---~.=-,,---~~
~.SQ!!O""--~_-e..).~<,, .. >'~'~=-~-"""""',,"~-~-.,
"1'\
,
......
".
--
,~
,
_ _ _ Ul..
t
-
5~
-to
.
L-{
0'--.
/'
I
CAU'; ',.' ::::: l'
..........
..
.'t
~
/
\
'1
~~
I
..
t,-~--
1
c::J ..
I
\
\
~"'.'
- :-~- t
>
IBM COf\'FIDE}\}TIP:-L
November 5, 1965
DSNVE:R
Denvor Bl"anch Office Support 01 IBI\l!-M,::u"Un-il.erocpuce Corporation Air r orce Joit2.t Study
Mr. R. ~l. Ur-.nbreit
Marketing Mant!f5er
D~~'VER
On l'·rovember lot the subject otudy v.,i:;.:J begun with the participants
me~t1ng in Denver.
Origin1].! Study Background:
This !]tuciy
~va&
iirst conceived nt Cape I{er:lDcdy betv/cen an
!BM SDD Representc:,'C;t"V'c {Rcbz::rt IHt:lc~ and the Air Force Test
V/ing Ol SSD (Spoce SywtC:L:tlC DSv'lcjo~).. The DZudy 'wae to prove
the value 0.: a computer L::l C·~-.:;; ::Q~'.l-it;::..'lo ~1ionLto!'1ng of the l~unc h
countdo'<;.vl"l of
to manito:IB~1
CpClCC
~"\'O
T
boo:::tors.. T:?c G~udy t'laG to ~pecificany be
11X C d.:rLwgc in Febl"~ry and April, 1966.
11l::CC
ital'l
~rl.~O ,,~t;;,G Z'oqui:-cn1ent::; oi :Juc h a
both ~...arclWL\l"Q ~Ztd cbft-:;::J::'~:'C'J '2:0 pCrriQJ~ it to compete
r.norc inCctH.gcnttiy if.'. ~hliQ ].0.Z'~1C but )lz:.;tc~"2oo1y competitive n,)2.1'ket.
'1"''1,..:»
!;,.~"I'" }"orc"'"
~ CO"lV j"'1,""Hl"~-:;'b'l.".
~'J:;'V t,r-., rv-:=;it",
.... , ..
..l'''.J.4s...
-v ';:~W" ~:." \;1--,"':" :r--:~r,',n\l
_OW'V4_;
4"'"
... _
1.._ t";,,,
.- . '-.
game knowledge" Th.3Y c:rp8c:t d-u:.!t the computer U;JCc..; in this \V~ y,
win provide h.uge o::'v'iln20 th!"ough u'1ird.mt!Zing the ~::'(,:n1en(:ousl';/
expenoivo time it take:; ~c check out unci tnunch u complex space
booster.
hoped to galn new !.nelight
oyo~erilQ
~
~~
loIo- . . .
~:;j::2 2'c.::;iHty (Z:;",2cJ;;::·:2tc.:C. L~c.:.:~ch
At t::o
CD-rae
time
th.n~ t~l;J joi~~ ~~'c,~:1Jr t~:;/:::C b8t~2
in. tho m.G.~ned o:rbi~o.11chvZ'Df::oZ'y ~?'llOL»a !t '(n~fJ i.oz~ ic:ciEdeG such
~D ilia ~8~ JLBivZ hoped ~) r<2ll2.1 or~:~:rf~c~()ttr: t:r:~u\;il;;\dr~c; }~!21·0(·:~~!.lA the
o~a\ eo c~:lh!c i& to 0011 \)lCG of ~D:vl cO:1.A~~t~D,~~ Oy;~3 tc~r~.i~)"
Conflict of Studic 0:
Tho joint otudy p:rOPODCd L:; Flo?id:::. ~1D.O to :·t~:::J f:rom Octobe:r ... 96:,
thrcuah Jl!\prril. 1966. ~rc :::;'0C~ ~o ..(J,~!~2b}Jq1::'c;~ piiOI. ~cb.cdule, the
ILC rnuofi; be dlZ!hlled Z.H"lC
H'IJ1 / D\IIQ
-:-H t'lj
D·Q!1'(l"1'~:'
1"
~~V\rJ...
rc::u;Jod
iwH:~::'l!!;Z
~,41'
~ ... ~..IiI.w.a.._
to
littlo
o:,-cici'od t:r'l :'''f.",bruary, 1 966.
.!J'~~~ VJJ.
",~ ...,
t;. .... .;..
PZ:~T'J;~'C~tX}~c.,
h:l2lciqqunt,(:::!y ot!.pporCcd
~oo
~i:cl\:;:-:::;:;
~.:,;~,.............
,,,,::;' ...,
:'. ,'-.
~.:;) ~l n
"rO'"',Q
'''''a 1...
. . . '---'"'-j
i,--4
]:'
IIo..J
.>~
,
"i."'';n::;y f~ltt
iliD-t the o~;.:dy \V2 Z
He LCcl~.. Not ('y,~ly was there
too ff.C\.7 pc;c;;plo· c08igT.'lcd~ but thexe wa 8
~o Dccc;n('jI?HG~
Ci.i.'nc; ~llo~tGd ~~::~dl
for lC.1.ccdcd ~;y.:J~cn~.:. Ot;:ppO~tt ~o d8zi2:.Z! 'vh:.~ the computer
wno. to rnot1i~or.. The n;:;:oclcd uY8torn [3t.7,pport 'i;:1C!!J only availnble
!:ror~'l Zt,/1./D 2y'otezn.:J; E:1.~git::..:;c::iLl:1. ?!vfl/D ~7CO ~lcc conc~rned that if
tho a£t:.-u7 foiled, lit wC't.::::"] :;>cdJ.Gc~ nog2,tivoly b::c:~ co. tnGir concept
01. ufJiwg u. compc~.'l'~cr
,~. 1LC prcpooaL
no
prOVaQiC~l
Sevora! iocto!:s crunbinw·cl. ,:It
tLT!~C (Sopt~lt~'1lbc!'} teo convinc~
al! pO!f'eioo co:rlc(nl"~od i1hz.:.t: u. 0(;2<1:;1" c::..-:;clcl bo conchzctcc but on
Zl cHffcroot b~DlG t}hn~ oZ'{oirnrny~Qs~~cd.v(;;cl..
Tho ztudy' ehould he
(l p::otc;·typo of 1'\;1./ Df s ILC -npprcC':.(";::,l.
It !!b.ocld T!ot onl!! prove L\;.e
vc.h..:o of a con'lputor in troo tq)plicG\::io(;l but i~ 5hould cpecifically
prove thut tho vlay !~A/,D proposed C:o uee is comp'U~Q!: in ILC wao
vulunbla o-ud poc.oible.
J
D
Section 5.1
Page H/44
12/20/65
.......
U~T.l.brei.t
Mr .• R. M.
' .........
'.
- :3 -.
To nehlovo tbic gc::l tl:.c O~t2C:'~l'" lnuc'~ bo ~-.~ '<-.""'''\ rf,,~~)'d by 1',: / D S'JJ S t.errL 8
c~Si!i.'lco'Zio.
Thic b""l S :.::1 200 bc;OEl ngrc8ci to [;~~d tl1.E: £tudy is
oil on thio ~cio.
g
~"",u·0,·"'''''''''
P.l! of ehCJ po.rU.cipanto hovo cn~nc:il i::c:~'1 ~Lic modified d:zoGction.
Iv! j D h.n.o th~ opportu:::&;i::; &10 prove it:::::; KLC 2.pp:rcc.ch to its CUE torner.
SSDj Acroopncc ~JUl be nb1c ~o DCG ~bi8 p::ocf beiore they are 2.sked
to b~y iit. rBM b.z.s prob::.b!y 8.;~iQOc ~hG 71100t oi ~lL v: e 2 re not
only gC)~;:;.g to lo~!Cn ab::n2t Ict:Gc;:;:Ccf;:~ \;:.ro'H be involvc:d directly
in t:::2o covolopmcl::"& of ~k:.c Q;?QcfdiccC'10riu for ~.LC and \vorL~ing
diroctly with tb.oo~ ~who ~JEl solect fd:Q v8cdol· to supply the computing
°7o~om.
Conduct of Cbo New
Johi1~ ,St'0:d,,?:
.
Ao moz:!tionod ClbOVOfj (;:18 :J'J..\2.cy VJil! D;J cc·;:c\.::.::~cd jt:st Z:,::; any other
MortilZl p:'ojcct i.e:. SSD/ ..t:.. orc;Jpc.e,:::: \)n.H .8pr:.;·cv;:;; 2.?H) ove::Dee the
wor!A. 1:11/ D "vill confcJ:ol t:':8 dooir~::7. .,., ~"'\d. devc 7l o'''''m e: nt -z ..... d ove r
~
ito implementation. Th:; i;:~'1.?l(;:.''~'102iw.~il.on ~~?JUl begin at C:!.pe Ke!1nedy
when th.o 104~1 to iE!o'icJlicci JQ'!.;,·~·.r::J::y 1.. J\.G: mnt time SSD ~{ETR 0),
,.
C orpo2'u\t2.0Q
.
.•.,,?.,.. t:.., 1"".'\
'\"
C
C ape K ennedy,
.
.0.1. 0 JroCljpQCe
\j,~ f::.:""Uj uz,'2\ :...l. ...vJ.21r:eu'? 'crnpany
___
!f~
pcroonn~l
t':;ill
Study
Section 5Q 1
~ooume CG:'::~1·CJli
"'_..
-~
If'
.......
~J'
!.
)
4,;,;~"~
••
l
0::' the imp!ernerLt2.tion.
So Eo SU'Ppo:-t
3
MjD
1
IBM
Page H/45
12/20/65
-C'''-••
.;..I \..... ""'"
~.1r.
R. M. Umbreit
1
Iv11 D
1
Ae rospace E. To 1-1 0.. l:::>l'ogrammcr
rA oni!!:.or
1
¢tZ;*
k
965
ta
Programminf~
t,·
IBM
l~/
November 5,
(FRO
!vii D
1--Ierdware Coordin.f.l-tion
1
!Bj\.1
MJD
w. B. Gib!:on ic \::;c:r~':l:~8 or:. p:.rovidL:tg FSD Gystcmo m~::!
iron'l Hunt:z;viHc to ue~~L~;2 and prorno~e XBl>Jl e.%perience in
check out.
I propose that viC: GDppiy ~ rr~kr::'lrrHlo:."n or O{;:2 cspecially-co!n?etent
IB!vl Systenlt3ErJl13'lr.:.OG:- {roni ti"le B:ra::::.c~ Office to participate
in upplicoCiono pJ:o:;::n.ll"'l":..':nit'2.Z. TWo i8 D.i."l ideal time and plsce
to gain tho locn.l c:'::POl"'iCi:i:.CG t~GCQ08~l"y (;0 en.z.ble us to sell to
M~:rtinjDenve2" IBM 8'YGtcma [oJ: ~~o lLC.
~$*
UndcrsUtud \Fv:. B. Gibson hns apPl'"ovc:l fOJ: an ~ddition.al :-nan
familiar ~vith Jr.t.~ lrcZic.l-timc n10~"lUOl" ih.::lt is to be used in the
otudy ..
Section 5. 1
-Or-1u.1.j
rye "8/4Do
~
..L
_.J.
12/20/65
IBM COI'JFIDENTLf\.L
Mr. B. Ivl. UmbrcH
- 5 -
Novcrnber 5., 1965
Study SchcduRc and Locr::.tion
Prelin'linary t.a rgets cz:::.tl fo::' [JO:YlC on- Hnc mO::1H:o:rlng {J r .a Titan
ill C launch in Feb:ru.:.l.~y~ 1966.. }\dditic.::::.::..: ct..pnbHitleo 'would be
operational by an APTH t2.unch., An f<:.cilH~(;o p12.;:ill'~ci fOT the study
would be u8ed to oUpP<):i.d~ :::hC': E~,::::n(:h ocheduR:::d fc;- J't:nc. (IBM has
agreed to ex~end the ct::.::dy thl'ough ]Ulne.) Fo~lowlng thLJ t M/ D wi.ll
report the (inding:J 'Of tho ch:dy ~;o SSD/ P.eroay::.ce.
The Dtudy \vlU be .:hie£1y iocc.teu Ltl Denver until the cO;:'-;'pUZ!t1g zy!::tem
io inot~ned at the IICO-pe lf Janu::.::y 1\1 1966. Svo\;cznc; A;-~lyf.lio will
he perforrned by Iv1/D perdonnel in Denvcl" flli'ld SUppoy:-.::d by Btue at
Kennedy after January 1. Appilc,~tionc p};ogru1:'T~s"i'ling \7;"'oulci bc done
in Denver until January 1 D at wh!ch time it vlould move '(;0 t:':'e CO' pc.
1:vlonitor programrning 'win be do?'.tc at the Capo by IBM with li.:.ilJon
provided to Del.1.v'2:!' applications p:rogrz.n1.mern.
'-j
'"
l\l/Dt s cur"rent !LLC concept L'J an .:;;~:t,:;;);":::.; Lor~ of the lunctiona to be
pel'"formed in the jOil"1t study 'V;vith the 70 tL-'jo Tht:::; cans fo? the
computer to be a Pz.co~vc or 1l1'lOn launch CT :tk:nl '1 elen":.ent in the
sY£lten1. It 'NiH !non.itor all events and pZ'ovide v:tlt22.blc info:ru"latton
regar(iing the statu.'] of the co'Un~do'l\.vn. ltD n:0D'l b.-:J?O:'4'~.::.r:.t .t:.:::::cUon
will be to analyze 4!'1d locate r";.'1aRful:.ctions Dr:) ~h::.t ~h.8y can be co:::recteci
\vith a minimurtl dGl~y.. Xt \vHl n{)t IDette cStrnt!1uD ~o the boo::te]·.
This win be done by opcci:2.a Gcp.:'iipmol'5.1 in the C.~~CI th$.t ha:; p r~O'lle:n
sa.tisiac~ory [or aU TH:.z!.l:;: ~a'Unche·s ~o dnte o
not being propos'3d to perform thtG
The fact that the cornput6T
last function hao opened '';:hcb' propo~2.1 b Otu.t::J!de c!'~t!ciom ant.:
concern.. Their approc~cb fto :::.~ CCH1G(~!"v~H'ZJC one.. !t is wafe Zinc
it can be implemented iLl ebc thne av;:;,lbbic.. l:~e'\701'thclec2~ it is
not the ~ppl'oach being t2.1;:ell by NASl~ 9 0 Sc.tu.::rn Prot:jct~ There~
the computer is perfo:rn'4ing an ~::.u.l'lch c hcc:':.out iunciioru;.. S-P0ci£lc2..11y,
thitll includes "closing the iooptt by h:')vLng tho cor.nputel" looue the
cOr'.llmands tOo the OOOtBter duriog the COU:lt~ co \;:JcH 0.0 In'ouitor ';!J.i;
syotemo reopon.oe. ,Thl0 cddn:donz:.l iunccicfrl provid~g fle:dbnay fh$it
iv considered by me.ny to be p~?ticulnl~ly v::.htable.
Section 5. 1
Page H/47
12/20/65
IBM
o
Mr. R. 1\1.. U n"t b rei t
CO}:\TFIDEJ>JTIP~L
Novcrnbor 5, 1965
- 6-
ThoDe who aupporv.: tho n:1.0l~Q ::;o~):D...:; t:1cDtqd (N.J~s.t-::.) l:lpp:rc,:~ci2. in.clude
the MOL cDpoule cou~xwc(to!"~ DCt:lSl2.D .ld.rClr22t, Clod corne of tr.:.eir
con~cto
within SSD end ~h0 Ac::-.oG?~ce Corpc:n::.tion. It iz DouZl.o.c;f 6
plan to perform thohr CCl.:,)CG20 C:3cc:::out compietely by compute:- ..
SSDj.Aeronpace had impEad C:~::..(: tli:oy \;..Jould
s:;noula serve both COr:'.\tl"C~t;Ci::'~O •
P1'"~:r·31· t~t O::"~:;;:
.A meeting yt'as held at DOll;:):':;'c Q::::: I'JovomD:::1"
.f~
::::ystem
to d\Ste:rmine if
t~!cre
nOG'':'-,·~,i'
'I:-::!:'""~·""11;'\".f c . . . .,..,,.e'.~~,'~
-!f'
-\-,,;.;:;, ,...I'''H~ 'H~"'~~~~r D f;.,....,,~.J~,~~"-,"~
·,.,....v'W..:..
t..;.. ....
will b.a mOt:,,\·jtoV'f.:'>d b"'7II }r.;""""~r'~j<:')It,..,
'~!""'OH":'lrl O'l',·:·l,h
...·mc~lf·
"',- bv
""' .. ..,.. .... '"" .. .,.. . : . . . . ..,.;..!.:J..,....
""... 2."w VJ'?>i1
........ :;
Douglao. l'JIartin'g r:nonitol' will f;criorrn t.2 :"r:ore c.:rnple.tc ste::tU::J
check. )
~
. '
~~~~
~-
... \iwr
~"-Ioi.o4~"'J
Ii.".,J
~.:.V' ...'
i;=;i..l.i.
~
\~~
J/..-;r"-"l~i.:..J-~4.)
_z..._~
\".\..Z-'--.J~~
~..;
The MID ILC C3tudy tD 20,,"1 cOl!:'2ploth:c £s;::; n.!'ot pb.~;::;e¥ lv:!:::.:;'Hn is
about to oubrnit ito l·epo:t~ of ho,)! it h:tcz:do \to ~.3.uncb th~ I\r10L.
ph.o.OlC n~OD~ cCt~~.:;"'!puf:;cnn ["'i:::'i;?::lf2.c~u:~c;ro ,\,."Je1:<:: cOJ.'1tacted and invited to CJu'br;:,-:;[i; z-eco;:-::'2rr.Acl2d;J.tiou:] tJ..Z'vd/ 0:: p:ropos~l:;
During the
fir~t
to fit the applicaUon. Sc!"~ouu 2Julm~!or2.o ~!Jc:n;) prcco:nted by DigHal
Eep;d.prr.H!Hlt fi Burroughog Go> Eu c.Ylld RBlv1.. lc/i./D io ~:!2.o\:vn to b:3
pIon-oed \vith D. Eo Co zH~cl IB?~ll~Q OOhlCll.On t:1.t:ld c.:re eDccntl::::.Hy uClng
th~Tn. o.z reference oyoac~~£"'l::J i~ thC2:: '!~·0pOi1"Co
Our solution includes O.ft.C Syctorn/360 Wiodel 4<3 ~:JlteTconne<.:tcd to
foul' "front end l l 1800 Syc}'~c:·",;;::J" D" EQ Co prcDcrc.:;od tl~ :.J.~tr6,cHve
p~cktige of a. PDP 6 8nd ij PDP 7'0 ... ~U oh3.?l:t:!.E Co com:r:::'1on m.emo~y"
Fu?ther, the COt';;:lL'lflOn n"e;t:r.:.cn?y cern be 10;}!'~iticnoc ~o cpecHy different
prOCeDIEllOr prioriitieo il.l cHficr;'cnt biocko qf otor~Gco
Section 5.1
Page H/48
12/20/65
- -
Mr. R. M. Umbreit
November 5, 1965
""
Tho no~=~ otcp ~"nl be' for tbe l~ iJ.· Force to ~PPl'OVC of the Phase I
rcpoi:C. Then MID 'i.vftU [Ji'Cpc'l*O nn RFP ~nd Dclect the vondor.
Thio Wo.o to have been. ~ccOmpHDh.2d prIor ~o F ebru.:lry 15th to
permit: brciware in8t:1n:r~fLoa in Denver by Scq::::tcw.'lb.:ar 1966. The
now joint otudy couRcl ~:ffGct thio :Jchcdu~co Much c~n be done on
the 70L~-1 that waD to be aU:le 0:':1 '~hc oycten""l ill Det'lver be~ween
Sep~crnber 1966 and Jcly 1967"
/tlov
The ILC ,"vQuia be OPGT:.:t5.C~OJ c·~'~ V:'::'~1denbcrg by ~.:..y"..:y-of 1967. The
system at Denver might be L::,:,:z10fe?::'cd to Vandenberg but n~ore
Hke2y ~n udditicna! oyotcn..'1. VJou2d be ?'ncUl.Hed there.. The third
ponoible Byctem would be to OUPPO?t; othel' Titan III C iaunches at
Cape Kennedy.
IBXvl Order Statu:;:.J
The aynu:cr'n \'~'t7hich
(~
"-:" as much as
possible should be done to further the ETR study. In this vie\v it was felt
desirable if" at all possible, to supply a program.mer from IBIVI to work ·with the
Martin personnel at Denver, working on the object prograr.G.s for the ETR study.
He should provide the interface knowledge for the IISPADATS ff monitor and the
object programs and in actual writing of object programs with the lVIaY'tin people.
It would seem best at the tim:e that he report to R. B.lue although assigned at
Denver until January 15" 1966. VVhen the Mar:tin group move s to Florida in
January a decision can be m.ade whether to continue the prograr.n.m.er or 'withdraw him in favor of phasing other of B. Blue! s people into the task.
1.
2.
A concerted effort should be mounted to get the best proposal for the
ff
"DIMAC R. Fe Po which is e);.rpected ·in January or February, 1966. This system
will probably result in 40, 000 points of business. Since we have good relations
with the Martin personnel and advance information about the system requirements"
we appear to be in a good bidding position.
The plan of action is as follows:
Four people will spend the remaining portion of the
week (November 30 - Decem.ber 3) at Denver to analyze
Martin requirem.ents, proposal requirements, and
marketing strategy.
1
c
Q
2. Prepare a report documentary this study effort and
recommendations" including:
1, Personnel required"
2, Target date schedules,
3, Any special requirements
'. .1..W'/
..
/..
1 .'
{- t ';"",
Section 5.1
Page H/50
12/20/65
l
j
A. Ryff.
IBIvI CONFIDEI\TTIAL
Martin- Denver Checkout System
l\tTeeting Attendees
NAME
Dick Winckler
Dick Stanley
Gerald Boruski
A. J. Monaco
Bill Hess
John Jones
C. Brown
Ted. Charbonneau
Frank O'Rourke
Al RyIf
P. W. Melitz
A. J. Albrecht
Section 5. 1
LOCATION
Denver (Martin)
VAFB - LA GEM
Los Angeles - (5th Floor)FSD
Los Angeles - Scientific
Los Angeles - Scientific
FSD
MOL
MOL
MOL
MOL
Aerospace Industry Marketing
Los Angeles - (5th Floor)FSD
Pag-e H/51
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIP. . L
AGENDA MEETING NOVEIVIBER
29~
1965
Re: l\1ARTIN - DENVER CHECKOUT SYSTEM
1.
Discuss DIMAC concept as proposed by lVrartin-Denver and outlined
in their specification from standpoint of status, problems, potential and
value to ,the IBM Corporation aerospace effort.
I
2.
Discuss the status of ETR study, stressing the schedules, present
status and problems.
3.
Discuss the relationship of the proposed Martin check-out system
·with the contemplated VAFB check-out concept and approach.
4.
Discuss problem of general IBM support in these areas, from
standpoint of what is needed to get the business. .
RESOLVE:
1.
Size of proposal effort (if any) required for DIMAC.
2.
When the effort should start, how long it should last and what output is
expected.
3.
l\IIajorproblems in proposing on this system, including RFP date (contemplated), special equipment required, special program required and possible
value, whose proposal FSD or DP?
4.
How the ETR effort should be handled, coordinated and staffed to meet
present commitments, especially from standpoint of what manpower should be
provided.
5.
Nam.es or numbers of IBM personnel required to handle present stage of
these efforts.
'G.
The way both efforts, ETR, DIMAC, fit into the goals of the Los Angeles
MOL proj ect group.
7.
vVhat are plans to handle e)..'Pected hardware delivery problems from
standpoint of standard and special hardware requirem.ents.
Section 5.1
Pag-e H/52
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
TRIP REPORT CONCERNING TRIP TO WASHINGTON
SYSTEM CENTER,
PURPOSE:
BETHESDA, MD.
Discussion of pos sible DIMAC hardware configuration and
recommendations for an eventual optimum configuration.
DATE OF TRIP: 12 to 14 January, 1966.
ATTENDEES:
Val Adams, Bob Bruns, W. Gourlay I Jr., Joe Melville,
Bob Moeller, Wes Peavy I Dick Rivett I A. L. Ryff,
F .X. O'Rourke, C. P. Strive. R. T • Winckler.
I. RESULTS:
The discus sions on 13 January, 1966, were primarily of a familiarization and
educational nature and were, for the most part, accepted without significant
technical comment by WSC personnel in attendance.
On the whole, the WSC engineering group were not in a position at
this time to go into any of the detailed design considerations related to a
specific DIMAC configuration, which might be fabricated by them.
After about 5-1/2 hours of engineering discussion, WSC personnel
expressed a desire to cancel the engineering conference tentatively scheduled
for the following day I to allow them time to consider and review data already
presented and to more thoroughly discuss possible approaches with other WSC
design engineers not in attendance.
Section S. 1
Page H/S3
1/28/66
----------,.
-.--~---
..
-------~-
..--
--
.. _------_.-----_ ....
---
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
c
It was agreed that a copy of the formal DIMAC system specification
(currently scheduled for completion 25 January, 1966) would be forwarded
to this group, prior to 1 February, 1966, for their use in configuring a
hardware approach that would meet the overall system requirements. In this
regard, vIse agreed to have an initial hardware approach defined for review
and comment (together' with an
II
area price") by March 15, 1966. The concept
submitted would be one suitable for design and fabrication by FSD personnel
at WSC.
WSC is further planning to attempt a definition of a hardware approach
for the PCM and DRS comparator channels required for implementation of the
(~/
DIMAC configuration, utilizing 1800 processing equipment. This hardware
would also be fabricated by FSD at
wse
for eventual integration with the 1800
systems. The date for this proposed configuration is also March 15, 1966.
II. PLANNED ACTIONS:
As a result of this meeting, the MOL Proj ect Group will forward three copies
of the final system specification, together with associated block diagrams and
reference material to W. Peavy, WSC Bethesda, Md.
R. T • Winckler of IBM, Denver, is planning to submit a formal RPQ to
Poughkeepsie in parallel with the WSC effort, to determine what their approach
c
to the ROS comparator concept would be, both from the standpoint of hardware
Section 5.1
Page H/54
1/28/66
~-
-----~----~-.--,--~-----~------
~
~-----~----~---~--
---
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
c
configuration and their particular desire to fabricate this type of equipment
in light of the scheduled nine month delay for the DIMAC system.
Further meetings are planned to be held with 1800 personnel (especially
the group at San Jose) with regard to their implementing a special comp:irator
unit for use in the 1800 system.
REFERENCES:
Detailed minutes of this meeting have been assembled. They completelY
document pertinent questions and comments presented during discussions on
13 January, 1966. This document (34 pages) has been placed in the DIMAC
conference file and is available, on request, by personnel as sociated with
the project who may be interested in reviewing the detailed contents of the
discussions.
FXO'R:jh
Distribution:
G. Boruski, C. B. Brownrw. B• Gibson,
W. Gourlay, Jr. ,J. E. Hamlin, W. Peavy I (4 copies)
at WSC I Bethesda; A. L. Ryff, J. J. Selfridge,
R. Winkler,IBM Denver (2 copies), Project File.
Section 5.1
Page H/55
1/28/66
IBM (ONPI () EN TI A L
Date:
Fro,!,: (Dept/ Loc):
January 17, 1966
104
( / ephone Ext.:
Subject:
Titan III ILC Schedule
Reference:
To:
W. B. Gibson
Mr. Kent Gunderson project engineer for DIMAC told me that the Phase II
go ahead for the ILC has been postponed until September, 1966. It was
originally to have been given in January. Martin is still pushing for early
approval of the DIMAC concept so that procurement can start. My contacts
in SSD tell me there will be no go ahead until the results from our study are
available.
R. E. Blue
REB/cfc
cc: R. W. Swanson
Section 5.1
Page H/56
1/28/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
ACRONYMS FOR DIMAC
(~,
o
AGE
Aerospace Ground Equipment
CST
Combined Systems Test
DIMAC
Data Integration Malfunction Analysis Computer
DRS
Data Recording Set
AFETR
Eastern Test Range
ILC
Initial Launch Capability
OCALA
On-line Computer Analysis in Launch Assistance
aGE
Operating Ground Equipment
aTTS
aGE Test Tool Set
PCM
Pulse Code Modulation
VAB
Vehicle Assembly Building
VAFB
Vandenberg Air Force Base
VECOS
Vehicle Checkout Set
AFWTR
Western Test Range
Section 5.1
Page H/57
2/4/66
MOL STANDARDIZED CALL/TRIP REPORT
C
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Customer/Prospect Name (1) MARTIN-DENVER, Littleton, Colo. 4/19-20/66(15)
Individual(s) contacted (16)~S~e~e~b~e=1~0~w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9)
Your Name (60)
Vv.
Gourlay, Ir.
(70) Date (71) April 22, 1966
(76)
Summary of Facts Covered:
1•
ATTENDEES:
B. Pennington, et a1
R. Winckler
F. O'Rourke
W. Gourlay Ir.
K. Gajewski
I
2. BACKGROUND: B. Pennington, K. Gunderson and other Martin personnel
have reviewed this group's preliminary specification for the Titan IIIC checkout
system. The single copy in their pas ses sion was retrieved at this meeting.
3.
SIGNIFICANT ITEMS:
a. Those Martin personnel present exhibited a positive interest in the
ROS concept as described by K. Gajewski.
c
b. Martin is now considering an initial factory-installed system to
include active command/control functions This is a departure from their
previous idea of a simpler monitor and diagnostic complex.
$
c. The PCM input rates are now expected to be 384 kbits/ sec. rather
than the 350 kb/sec. previously expected. Data synchronization would be
provided by Martin.
d. It was reaffirmed that the competitive cost comparisons would be made
on the total system price (i. e. Martin- supplied equipment + vendor-supplied
equipment) •
I
e. Martin expressed no major disagreement with our preliminary basic
system configuration. They did I however I indicate that the initial purchased
system would not include all the proposed equipment which can be provided as
an expanded capability. However this is in agreement with our basic modular
approach and should not be interpreted a s detrimental.
I
C
f.
USAF approval of the RPD is expected by Martin in the next two weeks.
Funding for the RFP apparently will not be available until September, 1966 ,
although the RFP would be issued sooner. The RPD as submitted by Martin is
only for installation at the Denver facility, and will not unless modified by
USAF include a system for Vandenberg AFB.
I
I
Section 5.1
Page H/S8
4/29/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
c
4 ~ GENERAL COlViMENTS: B. Pennington indicated a Martin willingness to
provide the comparator front end in the event a vendor could not. The capability
cf the ROS to do this job was explained as well as its capability to tag all
data. Maxtin int(:;nds to p:.:-ovide the system/ground station interface.
I
"';./I/G :jh
cc: C" B" Brown
K. Gajevlski
·'N ~ 3" Gil>son
R. Hippe
J..
Klotz
F ~ Mutz
V,T l"),:33vey I B5thesda
B" ReynoL.:hllOlogy.
New Ci:"YOi;('ilics coming-New propUlsion cJnc:pts In large cryogenic
chcmic;11 systems arlo! being funded by
the Air Force in the advanced development category with (l Fiscal Y car 1966
allocation of S8 million and a proposed
FY '67 funding kvcl of $6 million.
Knowr; ~s the High-Performance
Cryogenic F ocket Technology ProgrZ\;n, the eirort involves t\\'o firms.
Ro,~:kctdyn'':; :)iv.
North American
Aviation is \i1vcstigating a 1,SOO-psi
lOre,idal c 1:;,11hustion chamber together
witL ;1 cLml bcr j ap-on~ turbine drive
::Inc: an ,dUude .. compensating aerospike-type noale.
Pratt & \Vhitney Div. of United
Air(Taft ~s researching a 3,000-psi
tr3nspir:ltior.-coo1el,,~ combustion chamber, together with a topping cycle
turbine drive combined with high-cxpan )iOl'l- fa ~ io 1)cll-t ype nozzles.
The propellants in both cases are
hyd:o;;l.'n and oxygen. Air Force intent
is ~o develop the technology necessary
io: th...:: ETlgineering development of
t1igi1t-wcighr engines in the 100,000- to
500.000-1b.-thrust cl::iss.
The crgine modules ultimately deVcl0P~(: will be used either as single,
high-c[i('fgy' upper-stage powerplants or
in a Y~;riety of multiple-engine clusters
to p:-o?cl reusable launch vehicles.
Just how far in thc future this ultimat~ use will be can be understood by
the reference to reusable launch vehicles. Most experts consider these to be
cssentialiy out of sight.
Flight-weight nuclear reactor systems-now being developed by NASA
for its own propUlsion missions-are
not seen as likely candidates for military space missions, at least not those
missions now on the planning boards.
r'~-~--'-"-~ -'~---'",'-----~--'-~-" --~'--.-'~'~:''''''---'
...,.~
...
--r-l
~.--~~-:-.---~
!
1
1
:'/
or
c
I
1
-........
."
.,.~ ~
. .
.'
i""::~'"
" ,
~".• •#
i
,t'f
/j
i
!
!
1
~..;.-~.-
~
-- ..............
~,.,.....:..-""
__.-
-.-.-....
......
~."~~
,~,;'
Boeing's BUrtler Jl upper stage (Progiam 946), which is being considered by the A:r Farce
for use ill combinations of current propulsion systems proposed for deep-space I"lissiofis.
Bllrner 1I might also be used in laullches into low-Earth orbit. Burtler II luis not .·et been
launch-tested.
Possible applications of the Trans/age ullit ill combination with NASA's Saturn
a Martill Co. performance projection.
~
8 based
all
The Thor! Ablestar, Thor! Agella D,
c
thrust-augmented Thor, and the Atlas/
Agena D are all proven vehicles and
handle almost all current miiitary space
launches. ~{ost of these vehiclcs have a
healthy future. Scout is a NASA-deveIop~d booster used by the Air Force for
spccif:c missions.
The building-block approach essentially involvcs the next generation of
vehides-!:l~scd on the Titan vehicle
and covcri ng the large-solid zero stages
as well as a combination of upper stages.
The r;'i~ans-Tlze Titan III-C, a
Titan II stof<.(bJe liquid core slung be-
4xl0'
2x10'
~
NOTES:
10'
EJS~
8xiQ'
altitude ,,1eO ·J.Mi.
Cl
Tralista;:;e
..:::: 2xlQ'
0
t\_~r -;;,;:.;t
weight:- .;;::J
/;;'$.
(Current
J
-1
>-
10'
..
We covered present LMSC IIR & DII work scopes as:
1.
Integration (augment to Aerospace)
2. Detailed systems engineering I advanced
planning, configuration control, i. e. 375
A.
3. Installation and Checkout
4.
B.
[
Section 5.4
Operations and Maintenance
Associate Contractor to buy or build STC
equipments
Page H/2
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDEN'JlZ-\L
-2-
In conversation he mentioned misue of communications gear as to why
Integration contractor will get into this area and that system upgrade
will use 480 0 bits/sec. facilities.
We discussed WTR FEC contract area. Lockheed Electronics will bid
supported by LMSC and Lockheed Field Service.
They expressed great interest in TMCC and talked of kno·Ning Colonel
Newto':1 and Greede (SP).
Dewey mentioned security problem in Communications area.
We spent some time describing function and interests of FSD to allay possible
LMSC concern on our role. We explained that our interest extended only
to assuring that computing systems - and first functional level of
connecting subsystems were IBM responsibilities - .perhaps with LMSC
quality control or system assurance role.
(
Schuman - is not a strong leader.
Dewey is important from technical and history relationship to STC.
Tabor seems competent - his participation is hard to estimate.
They discussed money limitations and indicated Control Center extension
at Sunnyvale.
Tabor talked of organizations (WTR and SCF) competition for money and
fear of SPO dictates.
Tabor discussed short-term expansion plan and long-term expansion plan the latter being the final Control Center configuration.
LMSC considers STC and RTS being inter-related and contractually together.
We didn't probe this because of Philco vs. LMSC contractual sensitivity.
Their discussion on Mellonics did not impress me that they considered
Mellonics critical in system implementation performance. They acknowledged
Mellonics software competence.
Tabor is concerned on 375 specification requirements - he discussed
handicap of complying wherein rental devices are in tre system.
They did not provide any information on Dispay (2250) implementation.
Section 5.4
Page H/3
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
(~/
-3-
We agreed to further cons.ideration by both Companies.
We discussed further investigation and thinking. Plummer mentioned
their laying down their work scope interest which could then be compared
with ours in the next meeting, scheduled for February II, 1966.
We mentioned and briefly discussed checkout systems and our contacts
with Martin and Douglas.
In departing, I mentioned mis sion planning and short turnaround for
contingencies.
'/)f)~
\..J
J. E. Hamlin
JEH:jh
c
Section 5.4
Page H/4
2/11/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
MOL STANDARDIZED CALL/TRIP REPORT
Customer/Prospect Name (1)
Lockheed Missiles and Space Corporation
(15)
Individual(s) contacted (16)~~S~e~e~B~e~l~o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9)
Your Name (60) _ _.:;.;M.::....~B..!..
• ..::.N.-:e:;.::e:.=:d~le~_ _ _ (70) Date (71)
4/27/66
(76)
Summary of Facts Covered:
On April 26, a 3-hour technical presentation was made to the
follo~ing
P. A. Fialer
S. K. Lynch (Mellonics)
D. M. Paige
K. H. Po~ell
A. F. Menter
R. E. Anglim
C. K. Nakata
J. T. Carroll
T.
De~ey
C. R. Springer (IBM)
In addition, there was some discus sion with T. Dewey on the Model 44
Shared-Memory design for the RTS.
A
I' / , . ,
~"'>/
/"'./.
//;/.'/,
.'
/.
/'
,!/
....... , ....-/. "./', /,
/'.f'
r
M. B. Needle
MBN/Ir
cc: VV. B. Gibson
C. B.
Bro~n
J. J. Selfridge
C .. R. Springer, San Jose
Section 5.4
Page H/S
5/6/66
people:
AF/CPDC TEST BED AT SDC FOR BB/TS PROGHAIVr
CHECKOUT
160A lVIai'nFrame
3
2250
6750
16Ei'-2 Printers
5
690
3450
169-2 Memories (16K)
8
2000
6000
167 Card Readers
1
460-
460
12
550
6600
161 On-Line Typewriter
3
262
786
162-3 Data
3
600
1800
603 Tape Drives
(
Synchroniz~r
Total SDC/CPDC RTS INSTALLATl0r'I:
*25)846
25846
~:o:~2
STC - PERIPHERAL SUPPORT COIVlPUTERS
(2 - 6IDA is) - 'Approximate Figure:
97, 874
'~13,
;~*310)
AF/CPDC PERIPHERAL SUPPORT COMPUTERS
(2 - 160A r s) - Approximate Figure:
>:::14, 000
~~,~
Section 5. 5
064
938
324, 938
Page B.2/1
12/20/65
April 5
I
1966
TO: J. E. Hamlin
FROM: J. J. Selfridge
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
SUBJECT: IBM Position with Respect to SDC on the AFSCF
The position IBM will take with respect to the Systems Development Corporation
on the forthcoming APSCF Advanced Data System bid and the follow-on contract is:
1.
IBM will not compete with SDC b~t will develop a plan explaining our
method of operation and relationship with SDC in their role as Software
Integration Contractor for use in the proposal.
2.
IBM will not plan on using them as a subcontractor to assist in the software
development. This would present an in-house conflict of interest within
SDC relative to their integration role. This latter I believe is their
viewpoint.
I
I
3.
IBM will, through calls and briefings
in (1) above.
4•
IBM will brief SDC management on our technical deSign and attempt to
obtain their understanding agreement with and support of that design.
Such calls should be limited to those who we believe would respect
our proprietary data.
I
make clear to SDC our position
I
c
I
I
This position is based on SDC' s past and present role and their future role
which are discussed under those headings. Any discussion of SDC's role
should consider the method the Air Force uses to control programs in the system.
This is known as the Program Milestone System AFSSD Document 61-47.
Briefly there are 8 Milestone documents:
I
I
Milestone 1:
Milestone 2:
Milestone 3:
Milestone 4:
Milestone 5:
An operational support requirement based on
SCF user needs.
An operational support plan ba sed on programming
support to be provided.
A program design specification.
Detailed coding specifications and flow charts.
Consists of 2 parts: (1) Program decks assembly
listings, etc.
(2) Documentation: (a) program
description (b) test speCifications (c) test results,
(d) program operating instructions
System Test Specifications and Acceptance Criteria
System operating procedures
Delivered System, deficiencies, interfaces, etc.
I
I
Milestone 6:
Milestone 7:
Milestone 8:
Section 5.5
I
Page H/1
4/15/66
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
As Integration Contractor SDC performed Milestones 2 6 7 and 8. System
software contractors Mellonics, DDI, etc. are responsible for Milestones
3, 4 and 5 and assist on 6 7 and 8.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SDC's Past and Present Role
Since approximately 1961, SDC has performed a software subsystems integration
role for the AFSSD on the APSCF. They also performed some of the program
systems and applications development production and installation. At the
present time SDC has:
I
o
Approximately 220 people working on the APSCF in the following
categories; Administration and technical staff (10); 3600 Programs (SO);
Requirements Analysis and Design (SO); Bird Buffer and Tracking Station
Program (40); Computing Facility, Training and Field Support (60).
o
Primary responsibility for Milestones 3 6 and 7--although as can be
seen from the immediately preceding pOint SDC does development
and production work.
I
I
o
Responsibility for producing control programs and utility system;,
i. e. SDC is producing a 3600 JOVIAL Compiler and rewrites all
CDC supplied software.
I
o
Responsibility for operating the Computer Program Development
Facility; and for maintaining all program documentation specifications
test material, tapes listings etc.
I
I
I
I
o
Developed the Program Milestone System for the Air Force.
o
A built-in technical facility for support of the AFSCF the use of which
cannot be discussed in this memorandum due to its classified nature.
o
An administrative function for AFSSD to maintain status and usage of
computing equipment throughout the sep for billing purposes.
I
SDC's Future Role
The specific role of SDC cannot be determined at this time because of conflicting
attitudes ambitions and the absence of clear directives in the Air Force,
Aerospace and SDC relative to SDC. It is the intent of SSD that SDC's role be
limited to only those factors which are the province of a not-for-profit software
contractor. Some AFSSD people would say there isn't anything industry
couldn't do working under Aerospace, while others assume that most software
should be in-house.
I
c
Section 5.5
I
Page H/2
4/15/66
- 3 -
c
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Factors which have been considered in developing the IBM position are:
o
SSD let the Orbit/Ephemeric Subsystem contract ea.rly this year to
Aeroneutronic and DDI with SDC having the integration role. SDC
wanted a stronger role.
o
AFSSD has stated that the SDC contract will be limited to software
integration.
o
Some Aerospace management people would like to see SDC out of the
system since they present competition to Aerospace.
o
SDC may compete for software contracts although theoretically they
would not compete where they had a prior not-for-profl t role.
o
SDC has supported the Air Force Operations people in the field and
has won their respect. Operations would try to keep SDC in the
system since SSD and Aerospace are looked on by the field as people
who don t stay around to make the sy stem work.
I
I
c
o
SDC first and second line management will resist cutting back on
their program development and production work; and would prefer a
weak software/hardware contractor on the ADE: to help maintain
their present position.
o
SDC has assisted in developing software specificattons for the RFP,
and SDC will help AFSSD in the evaluation of soft\vare designs.
From many discussions I have had with Air Force Aerospace, SDC and our own
people with SDC experience it is clear that the AF has not arrived at a firm
position. I have heard that a directive on the role of not-for-profits is due
out soon from Dr. Brown s office. This directive may clarify the position.
I
I
I
I believe that SDC S role cannot change drastically over the next several years
and we should develop plans based on their having a systems integration role.
I
JJS/jh
cc: C. B. Brown
J. Klotz
R. Krause
G. McClure
c
Section 5.5
J. J. Selfridge
Page H/3
4/15/66
I
IBM
CONFIDEJ\JTTIP~L
MOL PROJECT SECURITY
8or::e of the meter-ial used or generated in the MOL Preproposal effort is classi-
:iec
t~e
a~d is '~Q. b2 .kept in the Proj ect Sa:e when not in use,
acceptec . IBM security procedures.-
T::e project
according to
must not be left opened when unattended. All documents
includL1g wo~-king papers must be signed out and Signed in. A log book is
kept at:he safe for this purpose.
S3.:8
:No security instructions have been recoived from. the Air Force on this program
sinCe we are in a preproposal stage. Therefore the following in-house rules
w ill ~e :n effect:
I
1)
2)
(\
3)
All worki.l19" papers that are classified will be kept in a folder or binder
~hat is suitably labeled on front ar.d back.
Ir~:o;:-mc.tion taken from a non-IBlVl document that is on a page labeled with
. a classification ·will be considered classified unless it is also found in its
e~-~:iretY in open non-IBM literature.
=~:
case of any doubt as to whether an. uncla s.:;iI:!..eCi page is valid
source should be cited on the information.
I
the open
::'':~e::ature
4)
I:"1~c:c[.'13.tior:.
taken from an IBM document that is on a page with a classifica'tic:. i,vill be considered classifiec \.:nless it is also found in its entirety in
c)en non-IBM liter?ture. If advisable the source should be cited as in
I
1,..\
~~)
5)
...
6.bOve.
I::ior-;:"'.':3.tion from an I3:LvI document that is not ~abeled with a classification,
:but is known to be classified I will be so classified by the user. The
o:::'g-ir;,c.l IBM document in this case will·not be reclassified as part of the
MOL preproposal effort. If there ~s an office procedure for these cases'l
~-: will be followed.
Appendix A
c
Page 1
12/20/65
IBM
CONFlDENTIP~~
6)
T::'e Air Force will be requested to issue security instructions prior to
the commencement of activities by this office in the preparation of an
unsolicited proposal or the answering of an RFP.
7)
When information is received verbdlly from such sources as IBlv1
employee s Air Force Aerospace Corporation and defense contractors,
the security .. classification should also be requested.
.
I
S)
I
No discussions of classified MOL material is to'be carried on with
anyone without ascertaining their. clearance and their need to know.
The same procedure must be followed when disclosing written materail.
All participates should take the de)lorable acoustical situation of the
o:fice into account when discussing classified matters.
10)
11)
Z~e general security regulations regarding blackboards
transmission
of data I registry of finished documents I receipts of documents and
de struction of data apply in this ca$e.
I
Further information, on Security Procedures m.ay be directed to the
MOL Proj ect Office.
Appendix A
Page 2
12/20/65
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Suqqested Reading List
AIR FORCE REGULATIONS NO. 300-2, 300-3, 300-7.
These documents are concerned with procurement of
ADPE equiproent in the Air Force.
Appendix B
Page 1
Source Exif Data:
File Type : PDF File Type Extension : pdf MIME Type : application/pdf PDF Version : 1.3 Linearized : No XMP Toolkit : Adobe XMP Core 4.2.1-c041 52.342996, 2008/05/07-21:37:19 Create Date : 2017:11:20 14:09:45-08:00 Modify Date : 2017:11:20 15:05:12-08:00 Metadata Date : 2017:11:20 15:05:12-08:00 Producer : Adobe Acrobat 9.0 Paper Capture Plug-in Format : application/pdf Document ID : uuid:4ffb95ae-8acb-b64e-b28b-acbd5be48a6a Instance ID : uuid:d02d45c4-7881-f447-8909-8b2c760fc282 Page Layout : SinglePage Page Mode : UseNone Page Count : 352EXIF Metadata provided by EXIF.tools