PDA

View Full Version : Albert D. "Bud" Wheelon - Pioneer: 1929-2013


thcrozier
23rd Jan 2014, 22:54
A great man left us last year. He kept a low profile but things would have been a lot different without him.


October 18, 2013
Albert ‘Bud’ Wheelon: 1929-2013: Scientist, Patriot, Gentleman
Lou Cannon
Santa Barbara Independent
October 18, 2013

Albert Wheelon, known as Bud, was a quiet man who lived with his adored wife Cicely on a side street in Montecito without drawing attention to himself.

When asked what he did for a living, Bud would say he was a physicist. This was a bit like Placido Domingo saying he was a singer. Bud Wheelon was in fact one of our country’s most distinguished theoretical physicists — and much more. His success in developing the first U.S. spy satellite, code named Corona, provided President John F. Kennedy with vital aerial photos during the near-miss Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Bud might have become a national hero had this been public knowledge at the time, but Corona remained a top secret until President Clinton ordered its photos declassified 30 years later.

Perhaps it was a lifetime of secrecy as he developed successor satellites for the Central Intelligence Agency that encouraged Bud’s reticence even after programs on which he had worked were declassified. For whatever reason, Bud was by a light-year the most unassuming man I’ve ever known. Once he told me he was going to Washington to attend the Goddard Medal ceremonies. What he did not say was that he was receiving the prestigious Goddard Medal. Bud had received many such awards without being defined by any of them. I learned of the awards by following the advice of the colorful and long-gone baseball manager Casey Stengel, who said about statistics and records, “You can look it up.”

If you look up the record on Albert Wheelon you will find he won the United States Distinguished Intelligence Medal in 1966, the Baker Medal for Excellence in National Security Affairs in 1993 and in 1994 the R.V. Jones medal — named for the British scientist who foiled Nazi radar with strips of tinfoil — for his contributions to national security. Later this month Bud will posthumously receive the National Academy of Engineering’s Simon Ramo Founders Award.

With due respect to Casey Stengel, there is much about secret spy satellites one can’t look up. During my 26 years at The Washington Post, I became familiar with the public record of the spy satellites. The CIA relied on these satellites after the Soviets demonstrated they had the capacity to shoot down even the highest-flying spy planes by downing a U-2 piloted by Gary Powers in 1960, causing a superpower crisis. But I didn’t know that even before this incident, Bud had worried about the vulnerability of aircraft to Soviet missiles. Nor did I know he had been on the verge of resigning after the Cuban missile crisis, frustrated with bureaucratic infighting that he believed impinged on accurate intelligence gathering.

Instead of losing Wheelon, President Kennedy made him deputy director of the CIA in 1962 and put him in charge of the newly established Office of Science and Technology. It was good he did. President Lyndon B. Johnson said in an off-the-record 1967 speech that the $850 million Corona program was worth 10 times more than the $35 billion the United States had then put into its space program. LBJ said that Corona data revealed the Soviets were weaker than the U.S. had suspected. President Clinton said in declassifying the Corona photos in 1992 that they had helped to contain the nuclear arms race.

Most of what I know about Bud Wheelon’s immense role in all this comes from Philip Taubman’s book Secret Empire: Eisenhower, the CIA, and the Hidden Story of America’s Space Espionage. Taubman, an award-winning New York Times reporter, wrote that the Corona program had by 1964 photographed all 25 ICBM complexes in the Soviet Union and kept Washington informed about Soviet military forces and weapons.

“The national reconnaissance systems which the United States now has, which are truly jewels in our crown, all stem, in my judgment, from the creative work that Bud Wheelon did in the ‘60s,” William Perry, secretary of defense in the Clinton administration, told Taubman.

I read Taubman’s book in 2005 and asked Bud about it. He said it was accurate, adding that many others shared in Corona’s success. The book, fascinating in its own right, made me realize that I had known very little about Bud’s achievements.

He had sought me out years earlier, perhaps because he learned I was a biographer of Ronald Reagan. Bud, who had known presidents from Dwight Eisenhower through Clinton, was curious about Reagan. Much later, when he was at Stanford to participate in a meeting of the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Bud obtained and passed on to me a declassified transcript of the fateful meeting between Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev at Reykjavik, Iceland. This transcript demonstrates that Reagan was anything but the amiable dunce that his critics imagined him to be. But I digress.

What I knew about Bud before reading Taubman’s book was that he was kind and witty. He and his wife Cicely would invite me and my wife Mary with three or four other people to dinner, where the gossip was more often about contemporary politics than history and science. Bud was mildly progressive in his political views. He worried about nuclear proliferation. Anticipating subsequent historical revision, he considered Eisenhower an outstanding president — “The best I knew,” he said — because of his understanding of the nuclear danger.

He also admired Eisenhower’s famous farewell speech in which he warned of the dangers of what he called “the military-industrial complex.” Bud was a member of this complex — although hardly a compliant one. He left the CIA in 1967 to head the fledgling satellite business of Hughes Aircraft, eventually becoming chairman of the company, which by the 1980s was producing almost half the satellites then in orbit.

When General Motors purchased Hughes in 1988, Bud launched an internal investigation of GM because of possible bribes on an air defense contract for Egypt. GM, which had other business in Egypt it wished to protect, was appalled. Bud was fired, and the Justice Department — at GM’s behest, he believed — instead investigated Bud. It found nothing and dropped the probe after five years.

I once gently asked Bud about this period. He told me the story with a lack of outward emotion, but I sensed he still felt hurt by what he believed GM had done to him.

Most of the time Bud dwelled not on the past but the future, although he was always willing to discuss the history of spy satellites. He managed to give a speech on the subject to a luncheon group to which we both belonged while hardly mentioning his own role.

In later years as Bud’s health declined we’d run into each other at the Summerland Post Office or the Thursday Farmers Market at Carpinteria. I would ask how he was. Even though Bud had cancer and another malady — a physician of our acquaintance said Bud knew he had had less than a year to live — he invariably said he was doing fine. Instead of sharing his own medical report, as people of our age tend to do, he’d recount Cicely’s valiant efforts to recover from a stroke.

Bud Wheelon, reserved and uncompromising, was liked and respected by his friends. He was a gentleman and an entertaining dinner companion. He took an interest in other people’s work. And at a crucial time in American history he manned the aerial battlements and provided information that helped save the world from nuclear destruction.

You can look it up.

Obituary for Albert "Bud" Wheelon, Former Head of CIA's Directorate of Science and Tecnology - Matthew Aid (http://www.matthewaid.com/post/64378925592/obituary-for-albert-bud-wheelon-former-head-of-cias)

thcrozier
23rd Jan 2014, 23:07
He did a little work on these as well:


Roadrunner Bud Wheelon (http://roadrunnersinternationale.com/wheelon.html)

thcrozier
24th Jan 2014, 04:29
And this:


MR. LUND: Yes. The machine forms the other seating surface that would occur in a rocket motor.

What this said was that at 100 degrees, as that head came back to its original position, I'm sorry, not to its original position, but to within 5/1,000ths of its original position, still maintaining the squeeze, that at a high temperature, at 100 degrees, the O-ring came right back.

It followed the machine right up. At 75 degrees, it took several seconds to recover. And, as we went lower in temperature, it took much longer to recover.

DR. WHEELON: That's pretty nonlinear. How do you account for that?

MR. LUND: It is the modulus of the rubber. Those polymers do that.

DR. FEYNMAN: The rubber - ordinarily in materials, like steel or something when you squash it, you are compressing the molecules together and they simply expand back. When you stretch a piece of rubber, the reason that it responds is because of dynamic motion. It is trying to shake molecules and pull something; like, you take a long chain across a room, which has a lot of tennis balls bouncing in it. The chain will be "ponged" by the balls and pulled together. If the balls are slowed up, and low temperature means slowed up, then there is much less ponging and much less pulling back together, and the same way responding.

I used the expansion. But you can do the same thing with compression. If you compress it out of shape, it goes back into shape because of thermal notion, really, not because of spring. And when the thermal temperatures change, it goes back very, very much lower.

It is very characteristic of materials of this kind, that have this enormous effect. Temperature has such enormous effect.

DR. COVERT: Does it follow the square root?

DR. FEYNMAN: No. It's E to the minus A over T. It is exponentially. So, at 32 degrees on the scale, you probably wouldn't be able to measure the time. It would be too late to wait for the hour, or whatever.

MR. LUND: Now, keep in mind that resiliency is not the only issue. But you have the pressure load coming in and the pressurization of the motor kicking that O-ring up and saying go with me.

So this is one factor.
(Viewgraph.) [Ref. 2/14-12]

DR. FEYNMAN: But if there is a gap left, is there really any pressure remaining to push?


v4part6: Official Transcript, NASA History Office
http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/v4part6.htm#1


This exchange always makes me uncomfortable as it becomes apparent that O-Ring resiliency with respect to temperature was understood - how incredibly sensitive it was to temperature in the designed use was known, but that knowledge was ignored in practice.

thcrozier
24th Jan 2014, 04:56
Watch Area 51: I Was There Videos Online - National Geographic Channel - UK (http://natgeotv.com/uk/area-51-i-was-there/videos/tough-test-pilots)

thcrozier
24th Jan 2014, 05:13
http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/5829/CIA-RDP80B01676R003200190031-5.pdf

thcrozier
30th Jan 2014, 16:35
SR-71 Online - SR-71 Flight Manual (http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/)

thcrozier
31st Jan 2014, 09:48
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/utility-flight-hb-1-Mar-1959.pdf

thcrozier
31st Jan 2014, 10:06
DR. WHEELON: A question. It is normal to establish specifications on a unit and then to complete a qualification program for a unit, prior to flight. Did you have a*temperature specification on the O-ring or the joint assembly, either one? And can you describe what your qualification program of testing to verify that that specification was being met?

And if you personally don't know the answer to that question, I would like that question then to revolve to whoever in your organization picks it up. But I think we need a clean, crisp, clear answer to the question.

MR. MASON: Okay. I think it would be better that I not - I think I know the answer, but I have not enough confidence to try it.

DR. WHEELON: Who are you going to lateral that football to?

CHAIRMAN ROGERS: Who can answer that?

MR. MASON: Joe, can you answer that?

MR. KILMINSTER: I believe, as Jerry mentioned, the major focus of emphasis was on the 40 to 90 degree requirement for the mean bulk temperature. When it comes to the seal, we have a procurement spec for that material, a Mil R specification, that calls out that material being capable over the temperature range of minus 30 to 500 Fahrenheit. And it was on that basis that we qualified the use of that material as far as the seal is concerned.

*GENERAL KUTYNA: Capable of what?

MR. WALKER: Isn't that specification for a captured O-ring inside of a groove with a flat mating surface, not this kind of configuration?

MR. KILMINSTER: I don't believe the specification specifies what type of construction or what kind of design. It is a material capability.

MR. WALKER: Could we have that information? That information must be in Parker's specifications.

MR. KILMINSTER: It's in the Mil R specification.

DR. WHEELON: What did you do to assure your material was meeting that specification? What was the qualification program?

MR. KILMINSTER: Early in the program, it was determined that we would not have a program, a development program, and a test program that would qualify over that full temperature range.

DR. WHEELON: What range were you going to qualify over?

MR. KILMINSTER: Again, the emphasis was based on the solid propellant bulk temperature, and that qualification was done by analysis. We did not conduct a test.

DR. WHEELON: Let's set aside the question of*bulk temperature on the propellant. The question is what specification did you have on the joint and the O-ring, and how did you test to verify that in fact you were meeting that specification, or did you not have a specification and not test?

MR. KILMINSTER: The specification we have is a Mil R specification.

DR. WHEELON: Which is a generic spec to cover a whole range of military equipment, right?

MR. KILMINSTER: In this case, it is this specific material.

DR. WHEELON: Okay. So it is minus 30 to plus 500, is that correct?

MR. KILMINSTER: That's correct.

DR. WHEELON: And how did you shade that requirement and how did you test to make sure that you had met that shaded requirement?

MR. KILMINSTER: We did not test specifically to identify that requirement or test against that requirement.

DR. WHEELON: Don't you find that a little surprising?

DR. KILMINSTER: There are many areas, as I mentioned, based upon the original intention that we would not conduct full-scale firings, full-scale tests, using*a full range of temperatures.

DR. WHEELON: Did you use any subset of that full range of temperatures in your tests?

MR. KILMINSTER: Yes, we did.

DR. WHEELON: What range was that?

MR. KILMINSTER: That will be discussed when Bob discusses his charts. I believe we had a static firing as low as 47 Fahrenheit.

DR. WHEELON: Ambient?

MR. KILMINSTER: No, that was the predicted O-ring temperature, using ambient calculations lower than that.

CHAIRMAN ROGERS: Could I make a suggestion about procedure? Let's not worry about - if there is a question that is asked and somebody can answer it, have them answer it. I mean, you can still continue your presentation that you have organized, but you are all here now and it's reasonably informal.

So when Bud asks a question like that and somebody can answer it, just have them stand up and answer it.

DR. WHEELON: So you think went down to 47 degrees, in terms of a spec for ground testing of the seal?

MR. KILMINSTER: Yes.

*DR. WHEELON: But no lower than that?

MR. MASON: That was the seal temperature.

DR. WHEELON: I understand, not the ambient. But you qualified the seal at 47 degrees Fahrenheit?

MR. KILMINSTER: We verified it in a static test at 47 degrees.

DR. WHEELON: A static ground test?

MR. KILMINSTER: Yes, sir.

DR. RIDE: And you did no tests on the joint below 47 degrees?

MR. KILMINSTER: That is correct.

*GENERAL KUTYNA: Bob Crippen, I thought somebody said yesterday, maybe it was you, that the shuttle was cleared to fly with a shuttle temperature of 31 degrees or thereabouts.

VICE CHAIRMAN ARMSTRONG: Arnie said that.

GENERAL KUTYNA: Now, how do you correlate the fact that the shuttle is cleared to fly at 31 degrees and yet you have only tested down to 47 degrees, and by analysis only to 40 degrees? How do you explain that?

MR. KILMINSTER: The only explanation I have is that we felt that we had a margin because of the material being capable down to minus 30 as identified in the specifications.

DR. WHEELON: Capable of what?

*MR. KILMINSTER: Capable of functioning.

MR. WALKER: I really think we need to understand exactly what that specification implies in terms of the use of O-rings in various kinds of configurations. We would really like to have that information as soon as possible on exactly what that specification implies.

DR. WHEELON: Or better yet, can you give us the specification from which you were working?

MR. BOISJOLY: The specification in question is Mil R 83248A.

DR. WHEELON: A further question. Did you do any further testing of the O-rings or the O-ring material on your own, independent of the motor?

MR. KILMINSTER: Not that I can recall.

DR. WHEELON: So you were just working to the specification of the material as provided in the Mil Spec?

MR. KILMINSTER: I'm talking in the original qualification program. We subsequently have done testing.

DR. WHEELON: How subsequently? The last couple of days?

Challenger Commission Hearing Transcript, February 14, 1986