Been reading Perry history again. Some points are quite weird. - Sure, what G.E did was quite outrageous and opportunistic. Although we all know Lockheed was hardly a saint. That was one hell of a cluste***ck. - In bold: what a bizarre hybrid. KH-7-and-a-half I suppose once again, the NRO did not wanted NASA getting their hands on the all-powerful KH-8. - From Perry history however it seem that Lockheed soon pushed NASA in the direction of a full-blown KH-8, camera included, without G.E.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 04/10/2017 06:13 pmFound a reference in a Google Books search, the reference is in the Geological Survey Circular 692, page 34: General Electric Co., 1967a, Percheron suitability, application, "A", payloads: Gen. Elec. Co. Doc. No. 67SD4287. Prepared for Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Adm., Off. Space Sci. and Applications. 1967b, Summary report covering an analysis of spacecraft systems with physical recovery capability to perform earth oriented applications experiments: Prepared for Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Adm. under contract NAS-W-1691, 3v.https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1974/0693/report.pdf (page 20 of the pdf, plus figures page 59)
Found a reference in a Google Books search, the reference is in the Geological Survey Circular 692, page 34: General Electric Co., 1967a, Percheron suitability, application, "A", payloads: Gen. Elec. Co. Doc. No. 67SD4287. Prepared for Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Adm., Off. Space Sci. and Applications. 1967b, Summary report covering an analysis of spacecraft systems with physical recovery capability to perform earth oriented applications experiments: Prepared for Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Adm. under contract NAS-W-1691, 3v.
Is there any hope to get more documents declassified in the near future ?
I'm a foreigner from the other side of the pond. Then again the more the merrier.
According to Mitchell - apparently somebody at JPL later proposed that the camera system be carried on lunar landing missions, but the system was simply too big and heavy to be carried with any mission that included a lunar lander.
A more complex approach would have included an LMSS capable of continuing a lunar mapping mission after the Apollo crew had reloaded its film. In its engineering proposal, Kodak had described how the LMSS could be equipped with the Bimat system that it had developed for Lunar Orbiter. Such an onboard processing and readout capacity would have allowed the astronauts to gauge the status of the KH-7 camera. After the crew had departed, this would have enabled Upward to continue an unmanned survey mission.Some years later, a similar system was considered by the NRO for real-time Earth reconnaissance. This Film Read Out Gambit (FROG) was cancelled when the NRO decided to pursue electronic read-out in its KH-11 satellite.
FROG started in 1966 President Nixon final decision on KH-11 happened on September 23, 1971. That's five years. Often wondering whether - FROG technology was applied elsewhere (1966, 1971 or later) or- being a loser to the still operational / classified KH-11 mean nothing could be done out of it (National Security) I have seen a 1971 document where Merton Davies and Bruce Murray ponder about a film readout system to map Viking landing sites. They say Bimat, but 1971 is right timing for FROG. JPL had strong links with the military (including Lew Allen himself).
Quote from: Archibald on 05/20/2018 10:25 amFROG started in 1966 President Nixon final decision on KH-11 happened on September 23, 1971. That's five years. Often wondering whether - FROG technology was applied elsewhere (1966, 1971 or later) or- being a loser to the still operational / classified KH-11 mean nothing could be done out of it (National Security) I have seen a 1971 document where Merton Davies and Bruce Murray ponder about a film readout system to map Viking landing sites. They say Bimat, but 1971 is right timing for FROG. JPL had strong links with the military (including Lew Allen himself). We have a lot on the programmatic details of FROG (who was advocating for it, when, a few key milestones). What I have not seen is anything on the technical details. For instance, I'd like to see a schematic of the film path showing how the film would go through the processor, scanner, etc. There seems to have been a general consensus that FROG would have worked, but questions about its utility. It would have run out of film, limiting its lifetime. I have an article in the works about the decision to build the KH-11, but haven't gotten around to finishing it. My day job keeps getting in the way of my hobbies, and I diverted my attention to my recent MOL series.
The NRO 2018 Q2 quarterly document release includes a slightly less redacted draft version of Perry's History "Chapter 17", Vol IV on FROG and KENNEN
of the document, the "KENNEN" name was selected by the DDNRO ("CIA's man in the front office").
I have seen a 1971 document where Merton Davies and Bruce Murray ponder about a film readout system to map Viking landing sites. They say Bimat, but 1971 is right timing for FROG. JPL had strong links with the military (including Lew Allen himself).
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2596/1QuoteA more complex approach would have included an LMSS capable of continuing a lunar mapping mission after the Apollo crew had reloaded its film. In its engineering proposal, Kodak had described how the LMSS could be equipped with the Bimat system that it had developed for Lunar Orbiter. Such an onboard processing and readout capacity would have allowed the astronauts to gauge the status of the KH-7 camera. After the crew had departed, this would have enabled Upward to continue an unmanned survey mission.Some years later, a similar system was considered by the NRO for real-time Earth reconnaissance. This Film Read Out Gambit (FROG) was cancelled when the NRO decided to pursue electronic read-out in its KH-11 satellite.
I have seen a 1971 document where Merton Davies and Bruce Murray ponder about a film readout system to map Viking landing sites. They say Bimat, but 1971 is right timing for FROG.