Author Topic: History of satellite recovery group (Read 50824 times)

Blackstar · « **on:** 05/26/2009 03:43 pm »

Here is a declassified history of the 6594th Recovery Group (later the 6594th Test Group) that used C-119 Flying Boxcars and later C-130 Hercules aircraft to recover satellite payloads in midair.

kevin-rf · « **Reply #1 on:** 05/26/2009 05:33 pm »

Drool, good find ... thanks ...

Art LeBrun · « **Reply #2 on:** 05/27/2009 01:21 pm »

Thank you, Dwayne. All this wonderful history you are making accessible to "us" common folk is appreciated.

Jester · « **Reply #3 on:** 05/27/2009 02:24 pm »

This was done using the Fulton surface-to-air recovery system (or fulton skyhook) which was also used to pickup CIA paramilitary officers and the system was also fit on the Lockheed P2-V Neptune (the aircraft used to design this system)

Nice one there Blackstar, thanks

Blackstar · « **Reply #4 on:** 05/27/2009 04:45 pm »

It's a different system than the Fulton Skyhook. I do not know if some of the same people were involved.

This kind of technology has never been fully documented. For instance, I have a few documents concerned the effort to recover capsules from the ocean. That would have required a diver team to parachute to the capsule, attach a harness, and then deploy a balloon and cable system. A low-flying C-130 would then snag it and haul it up. They conducted some tests, although I do not have good photographs of that. This would have been a heavy recovery, however.

The system was planned for the Samos E-6 reconnaissance spacecraft. I have a series of articles that I want to publish on that, but am trying to get in the mood to finish them and submit them.

Jim · « **Reply #5 on:** 05/27/2009 05:13 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 05/27/2009 04:45 pm

That would have required a diver team to parachute to the capsule, attach a harness, and then deploy a balloon and cable system. A low-flying C-130 would then snag it and haul it up.

It was similar to what was done in the movie Green Berets and Batman, The Dark Knight.

Blackstar · « **Reply #6 on:** 05/27/2009 08:32 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 05/27/2009 05:13 pm

It was similar to what was done in the movie Green Berets and Batman, The Dark Knight.

That was the Fulton Skyhook. It was apparently developed for/by the CIA, originally using a B-17 (seen in the Bond movie Thunderball). It was later put on special C-130s for special forces teams. They used a V-shaped set of poles on the nose of the aircraft to snag a cable.

The system developed for the satellite recovery was apparently similar to the one used for the Corona/Gambit/Hexagon programs. Instead of using the nose, they trailed a cable behind the plane between two poles, and the cable caught the cable hooked up to the balloon. So the difference was that the gear was at the back of the plane, rather than at the nose. I suspect that the rear-mounted version was better for heavier payloads. I have an interview somewhere where a C-130 pilot says that by the end of the Hexagon program they were catching 2000 pound capsules in midair, which really jerked on the plane.

Jester · « **Reply #7 on:** 05/28/2009 07:52 am »

Quote from: Blackstar on 05/27/2009 08:32 pm

Quote from: Jim on 05/27/2009 05:13 pm
It was similar to what was done in the movie Green Berets and Batman, The Dark Knight.

That was the Fulton Skyhook. It was apparently developed for/by the CIA, originally using a B-17 (seen in the Bond movie Thunderball). It was later put on special C-130s for special forces teams. They used a V-shaped set of poles on the nose of the aircraft to snag a cable.

No, they originally used a P2V Neptune to develop it and run some ops near china and Antarctica (operation cold feet)

Jester · « **Reply #8 on:** 05/28/2009 08:42 am »

btw:

anybody with AIAA access get this one:

Catch a Falling Star - Parachute system lessons learned during the USAF space capsule mid-air recovery program, 1959-1985
http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=406&gTable=mtgpaper&gID=68875

Blackstar · « **Reply #9 on:** 05/28/2009 01:52 pm »

Those are some nice images. Where did you acquire them? And do you have them in higher resolution?

I think I posted some black and white pics of early tests of the C-130 in this role. They used the early version of the C-130, with the ugly nose (I think the pilots called it the Roman nose).

Jester · « **Reply #10 on:** 05/28/2009 05:09 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 05/28/2009 01:52 pm

Those are some nice images. Where did you acquire them? And do you have them in higher resolution?

I think I posted some black and white pics of early tests of the C-130 in this role. They used the early version of the C-130, with the ugly nose (I think the pilots called it the Roman nose).

I got them here:
http://www.usaf.com/afsoa/spaceopshistory/recovery/recoveryhome.html

this site goes up and down so thats why I grabbed them, maybe contact them for hi-res copies

More pictures here:
http://www.6594thtestgroup.org/64-14858.htm

they have a forum, maybe worth asking around for "stuff"

Blackstar · « **Reply #11 on:** 05/28/2009 05:16 pm »

That bottom picture is interesting. My suspicion is that it was for a heavier payload, hence a larger diameter parachute. At some point the chute would have been too big to capture between the two poles hanging out the back of the airplane. So the solution is to put that little bubble cap on the chute which has a smaller diameter.

Jester · « **Reply #12 on:** 05/28/2009 05:21 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 05/28/2009 05:16 pm

That bottom picture is interesting. My suspicion is that it was for a heavier payload, hence a larger diameter parachute. At some point the chute would have been too big to capture between the two poles hanging out the back of the airplane. So the solution is to put that little bubble cap on the chute which has a smaller diameter.

What I don't "get" is why they didnt (not sure but havent come across anything) use the fulton skyhook for sat. canister pickup....it seemed to work fine with human pickup...

Blackstar · « **Reply #13 on:** 05/28/2009 07:51 pm »

Quote from: Jester on 05/28/2009 05:21 pm

What I don't "get" is why they didnt (not sure but havent come across anything) use the fulton skyhook for sat. canister pickup....it seemed to work fine with human pickup...

I think it has to do with the weight of the object. The way that the satellite recovery system worked was that they strung a cable out behind the plane between two poles. The cable was hooked to a winch with a friction brake. As soon as it caught, a sergeant in the back of the plane engaged the brake, gradually. This slowed down the cable. This should have reduced the yank on the plane.

There's another issue--the Fulton was designed to capture a single cable/rope hanging under a balloon. The satellite system was designed to snag a parachute and multiple shroud lines.

rdale · « **Reply #14 on:** 05/28/2009 08:34 pm »

Interesting article related to this issue in the latest Space Policy magazine, by James David from the National Air & Space Museum:

What should nations reveal about their spying from space? An examination of the US experience

==Abstract

Revelation of the details of countries' space-based reconnaissance programs was unusual until the end of the Cold War, despite debates on the subject within the US government. Since then – and in contrast to Russia – the USA has been more open about its spying activities. This article charts the history of declassification in the USA from the Eisenhower Administration to that of G.W. Bush. It discusses issues such as the need to ensure freedom of space for the operation of spy satellites, gaining public acceptance of space-based reconnaissance by demonstrating the civil uses of such photography, and tradeoffs between revealing one's capabilities and letting others know how closely their actions can be observed.

==Article Outline

1. Introduction
2. The Eisenhower administration
3. The Kennedy administration
4. The Johnson administration
5. The Nixon and Ford administrations
6. The Carter administration
7. The Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush administrations
8. Conclusion

Blackstar · « **Reply #15 on:** 05/29/2009 01:50 am »

Will have to get a copy of that. His paper on astronaut photography was excellent.

There is a lot of ground one could cover on the subject. For example, not too long after the US began flying reconnaissance satellites it shared the imagery with the UK. It also revealed the fact of the capability to (if I remember correctly) the French. And one interesting little fact I learned years ago was that the collection of Corona film positives on file in the National Archives was originally the UK's collection. Apparently there were (I think) 3 complete copies of the film positives. I think one is in the Earth resources data center in the midwest (the actual name escapes me at the moment). I don't know/remember what happened to the other one, but it might have been incomplete or damaged and might have been destroyed.

Another factoid off the top of my head: the US has actually endorsed higher resolution commercial satellite photography than the French, who don't think this stuff should be available. (That is interesting when you consider that in the 1980s, they were the ones who were releasing higher resolution imagery from SPOT and the US was opposed. Now the positions are reversed.) The Russians were expected to be a major competitor in the 1990s as far as releasing commercial imagery, but they changed their minds.

But we're now off-topic. Thanks for the tip-off.

Jim · « **Reply #16 on:** 05/31/2009 03:48 pm »

Gusess what I found.

http://6594thtestgroup.org/

Hopefully more info will be added later

Art LeBrun · « **Reply #17 on:** 05/31/2009 04:16 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 05/31/2009 03:48 pm

Gusess what I found.

http://6594thtestgroup.org/

Hopefully more info will be added later

This could be a BINGO ! someday.

Blackstar · « **Reply #18 on:** 05/31/2009 04:33 pm »

Well, well, well...

Some interesting things there. See the next post.

Blackstar · « **Reply #19 on:** 05/31/2009 04:34 pm »