· TABLES TO ACCOMPANY THE INTRODUCTION

Chapter I: "Military R&D" -- The Role of Scientific Research in

Weapons Develo'Dmen t

The following five groups of tables accompany this chapter:

Group I: What is one looking for

Table 1. Basic Scientific Research to Weapon Application

Table 2. Examples of Programs to Establish a Technological Base

Table 3.

Table 4. Figure 1 •

Figure 2.

Table 5 • . Table 6.

Table 7.

to Meet Identified Military Needs

Tabulation by Type a.nd Degree of Identified Missile/ Space Contribution

ERDA ~lilitary Applications of Basic Sciences

Turbine Engine Multi-Variable Technology Trend

Weight, Accuracy, and Reliability of Inertial Navigators

Scientific Sensors for Space Vehicles

Initial Militarily Critical Technologies List

Examples 01' R&D Performed in "In-House" Labora.tories of the US Military Services

---~---.----~-.

Table 1 • Basic Scientific Research to Weaeon Application

Infrared Emission 1. Basic Research on from jet aircraft IR s~ on s.id.ewinder

Il'l&ered Radiation-+ engine -----~) mas'le

First application of maser to Naval

Low noise, high Research Lab rad-gain Amplifier io telescope which operates in gives l.6-fold im-

2. Basic Research in Solid State microwave provement in sen-Solid State Physics .. maser -------4) Regiou---__ ..-,..,. sitivity

3. Basic Research in physiological op­tics, low leve1 photometry visib- Problems of com-.;".lity of stars in puting and pre-.;wil:i.ght a1:mos- dieting the vis- Surface finish for pheric trans- ual detection of satellite (Vanguard) mission, spectrum orbiting criteria for loca-of solar radi- sate~- tioD of observation 'tion-------)r ites-------~) stations

Need for radia­tion counter which is not sensitive to thermal. fail-ure at low tempe- Basic research ratures, capable gas discharges of high counting and electronic

rates, undamage- and ionic Deve~opment of able byelectrie- pressures.in halogen quenched Detection of al overloa.ding--~) gases ------~, geiger counter~ radioactivity

Application to Technique for optic- temperature mea-

5. Basic Research al measurement of surement along on spectral e- temperature of exhaust flame of

~ issivity of flames'+ varying flames-----3» a rocket engine

Research shows that 6 • Difficulties in ionization from meteor

Operation Research in ioni- trails could be used for ~ f 7ertain.elect- zation Propagation e~en~ed-range commu-

ronl.CS equl.pment--'7 by Meteors ---~ nl.catl.ons

7. Basic research on effects of ultrasound on biological tissues )

8. Basic research in chemistry of large molecules

9. Basic research program on methyl deriva-tives of Hydra-zine J'

Development of ultrasonic ir-radiator.

Treatment of diseased :....------:;) brain tissues

Solid rocket ) propellents ______ ~) Fuel for Polaris missile

Unsymmetrical DiMethyl Hydra-

High energy fuels for liquid rocket

zine ---------~) engines

10.

11.

---"_ ... _----_ .. _------------

Table 1 (cont'd) Operational diffi-culties in avia- Fundamental investi-

(i) tion instruments gat ion of films and ordnance Need for better absorbed on sur- Synthesis of better fuses _____ )"1-. oils -------.:0,) faces _____ ~) clock oils

Geophysical data on thermal properties of land and sea

Basic research on rate of heat flow from interior of earth; heat ex­change between ocean and land;

Contribution to funda­mental knowledge of mechanism of wetting and relation to com­position of solids and liquids

characteristics Application to of Continental location of air-strips Shelf & Arctic on land and sea-Coastal Plain; ice; construction changes in cli- of Distant Early mate due to geo- Warning Sys-

masses -----...::.,~ thermal gradients ~ tams

12. Radio wave pro- Important to know pagation is af- variations of wa-fected by dis- ter vapor in the tribution of wa- Effects on atmosphere over ter vapor in Navy cornmuni- the transmission atmosphere ---"'t) cations and radar ~ path --------r Development of -1\

instrument to make rapid measu-!--o

Basic research on Understanding of

~ements O.f waterJi J

~n ~phere •.

Basic research on Lyman-Alpha radi- effects of water optics of upper ation at high vapor in radio atmosphere-____ altitudes -----'0 propagation

Introduction of fine substructural net-

ks:ic rerecne:k work in metal by Military appli-on metallurigic- working and anneal- Ultra high- cations: aircraft al fine structure-7 ing treatments,---~) strength steels ---tlanding-gear

Use of computers to handle informa­tion in air de­fense systems (ONR Research tool computer. Whirlwind used

14. Basic research Theory of High- Electronics Com- for Sage Conti-in mathema~ speed Computing puters for Scien- nental Defense

-----~t Machines ------"J>}' tific Computation -7 System)

Application to rocket fuel

15. Understanding pumps, propellers the mechanism Basic for utili- Design of pumps for high speed of super-cavit- zation of supercavi- and propellers for ships and torpe-ating flows --..--;..,~ tating flows .., high-speed operat-.y does'

ion

16. Basic research in pathology --~)

17. Research in vari­at ions of human behaviour, under varying conditi­ons of accele­ration, pressure md temperature ~

18. ~esearch in ~ .. hallow ?ter sound

propagat10n )

Table 1 (cont'd)

Basic research Basic research in

;:'::~~O::XiCity OforganiC Clemistry

submarine hydraulic fluid ~ J, j

Rapid solution to Basic research in toxicity problems biochemistry

Design of aircraft controls and weapons systems to optimize

Evaluation of dis- performance and safe-play and control sys- ty of human ope­tems for aircraft ----It rators

Determination of acous-tic imped(-:".~ '1 and sound Design and use velocity in a varie- Basic understand- of acoustic mines ty of bottoms, using ing of propagat- and underwater correlation techni- ion o~ sound in detection and ques with noise ) the sea -----')~ ranging systems

Sonar systems using deep pro­pagation paths; prediction of

Precise measure- shock wave pre-19. Re~earch on ment velocity Knowledge pagation in un-

'.-~

velocity of sound of sound in sea of the liquid derwater explo-in sea water ---~'.l water ---------4) state ------~) siens

Federal Budgetiftl for- Research and Development; Hearings before the Subcommit­tee on Reorganization and International Organizations of the Committee on Government Operations; United States Senate; Eighty-seventh Congress, First Session; Agency Coordination Study~ July 26 and 27, 1961; Part I (of two parts). The Department of Defense and The National Aeronautics and Space Ad­ministration. Washington, 1961; pg. 128-129.

Tab1e2.

Examples of Programs to Establish a Technological Base to Meet Identified Military Needs.

Example 1. Materials for Deep Submersibles Military Need. -- The ability to operate effectively, reliably and safely in ocean depths down to -- is needed for rescue, search and retrieval, and for ordnance and submersible development. Techno1oax Program. - High strength steel and titanium alloys will be exploite but will probably have limits of -- respectively. The primary thrust of the program is in materials of very high compressive strength such as reinforced plastics, ceramics and glass.

Example 2. Human Performance in Ocean Environments Military Need. -- It is desirable to have a capability for humans to opera­te at depths (and associated pressures) down to 2000 feet, either in pressurized submersibles or free-swimming. This is needed for submarine rescue, prolonged salvage, underwater exploration and construction, ord­nance disposal and individual submarine escape. Technological Program. -- Investigation is required of gas mixtures suit­able for human breathing, measurement of work capability and safety limits, establishment of duration limits, and physiological hazards, all at high pressure. Decompression tables for the gas mixture or mixtures will have to be established for saturation and excursion diving.

Example 3," The U.S. Air Force has been engaged in a program to establish the techno­logy for a hydrogen-fluorine rocket engine to provide maximum maneuver­ability. Flourine is the most corrosive of oxidizers, and new capabilities in pumps, valves, and other components are requisite for success. It is planned to assemble a demonstration engine in FY 1968 to test component compatibility in the engine system.

Example 4. Night Vision Military Need. -- The ability of military forces to operate at night, and to identify and locate enemy in darkness in all types of terrain, is of great value. This is especially true in conflicts such as that in Vietnam. Technological Program. -- The program can be divided into three general parts: light amplification; utilization of normally invisible portions of the spectrum, e.g. infra-red; and battlefield illumination. The program has resulted in a number of items of military equipment: for example the star-light scope for crew-servedweapons, low-light level night viewing device for helicopter operations, and tank-mounted IR searchlights. Work is continuing to provide a sound capability for further improved develop­ments in this field.

Source. Department of Defense Appropriations for 1968. Hearing, Committee on Appropriations, Rouse of Representatives, Part 3, 1967, pg.37-38.

Ta.ble 2 t Tabulation by Type and Degree of Identified Missile/Space Contribution

Dominant Types Stimulation Develop-

of ment of Research New Pro-

of Identified Contribution Improve- Develop- Cost ment of ment of Reduc-Existing New tion

Area of Technology cesses and Products Products Techniques

Instrumentation Res~stance Strain Gages Infrared Instru­mentation Pressure Measuring Equipment T~~perature Mea-~ Lng Equipment Instrumentation Amplifiers

Electronic Compo-1 ':s Semiconductors Microsystems

Electronics Thermoelectric

Refrigeration Connectors, Cables,

and Printed Cir­cuits

Display Systems

Control Systems

(2)

X

X

X

X

Inertial Guidance X ElectDonic Compu~er Systems X

Power Sources Sr'~ Cells X E. _'gy Conversion X Fuel Cells X Magnetogydrodynamics X

Propulsion C 'genics F~_~d Transfer Sys-

X

tems

Fabrication Filament Winding X Chemical Milling X High Energy Forming X Solid State Bonding X

Materials Refractory Metals X Maraging Steels X Physical Metallurgy X Super alloys X Epoxy Resins

Medical Technology Telemetry and Commu­

nications Management Control

Systems

X

X

(3)

X X X X

X

X

(4)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

(5)

X

x

X

x

X

X

x X

(6)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Apparent Degree of Contribution

Strong Mode- Slight rate

(7)

X

X

X

X

X X X X

X

X

(8)

X

X

x

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

x

X

(9)

X

X

X

X X

X

Tab 1 e 4" • ERDA Mili tary Applioa tions of Basio Soienoes

DISCIPLINE/TECHNOLOGY

Geosciences

High-explosive technology

Materials science

Computer science and applied technology

Environmental and biology sciences

Instrumentation

Nuclear science

Chemistry

WEAPON & TEST APPLICATIONS.

Test Containment

Explosive-system development Electroexplosive devices Insensitive HE development

Development and fabrication of special metals plastics, ceramics, and compatibility studies.

Evaluation and control of material-related failure mechanisms

Design calculations Effects Containment Weapon system analysis

Effects on ecological systems of hazardous materials associated with weapon fabrication and testing.

Weapon employment studies

Test diagnostics Effects diagnostics Weapon components

Weapon design data and benchmark experiments, including criticality studies

Neutron effects and vulnerability Test diagnostics and monitoring: underground,

atmospheric, and in deep space Neutron sources for diagnostics and vulnerability

effects Advanced systems.

Physical and chemical properties of uranium and transuranics as related to weapon design

High-temperature chemistry as related to vulnerability and hardening

. Light-element chemistry relating to weapon design

Radiochemistry relating to weapon test diagnostics

Souroe: Funding and Management Alternatives for ERDA Military Applioation

and Restrioted Data Funotions, ERDA-97, January 1976, p. 0-3.

@

Technology Index (colculated MQT qllOrh,,)

Yeer Quorter

130

1973 120

110

100

90

1963 eo

70

60 ~-

50

1953 .co

.c. ....

30

20

TECH'" -1187.5 + 156.2 log, TfMP + IB.B log, lHRUST

- 26.5 log, WEIGHT - 20.6 log, SFC + '1.7 log, Q

+ Il.O PROP; R' •• 903

./

/ / .

/ . , / . ",f/ '

rl'Y / ~'Y ". /,f' /:7 /;t." y /,. b

O

/ ." ~."o<:' / "0 /. • /' /

/ ". / ;/

" //" . /. " y'

/ ,/

/ )" ./. ./

./ ... / . . /" / //. ;

~. / ./ . / •

/ / 10..c //

1943 /

I _ J 00 70 80 90 100 110 120 10 20 Quarler

194J IY!lJ 1963 1972 Year Aclual MQT lesl date

Fig ,1 - Turbine Engine Multi- Variable Technology Trend

Source, Robert Perry, Comparisons 'Sovie' nd US Technology, R-827-PR, Santa Monica, 0alif.: Rand, June 1973, p. 27. I

". r'~ {.~~ "<"i:' ;]}::~:r".""::r..~~~:7;:~":"'~:;?~:' !o':';¥~iL',;~lt(n:"r ' .. ; .. ; "" to. : •• ~J..MANUAl DR WITH flUX GATE. , .. ' < ... 't.,.h . ,me, .. ,: ;.'f''':' ·j,:PITOT, DRlrTMETER EG-B ." '! ~:""'l'\l,: "'~

Jj ~ to ~ . """4.u.l;; I."'~ ..... $iIl ,~£~" ;A.',. \~r '. '\J ... ' ...... ~'! .. ~ . , or, '4' .. ':1 ~( ....... ~fh ". ~~t.~_'i ' ,H1~ :t1:~ :.:~ '~>' ~~~'

. 5~' -' ~~, \.J./.:t.. ~~~ i t.~)".·v 1L ,~,..~~ .. -~ Iit4 ' .. ~ ~ \,'l;:~' *"~ t '!l'l' '\.!,. b ~ <,. '<, .+ , Uf .. ·~ ... '" d, "~XPERIMENI,,l. I. '01 ";,

- ,: 0 " i: INERTIAL SYSTEMS • ,~, I 'I"~ ","'-:!1 U "h',_, ~, ,", . ~ .. ,·u._ ' ... - ,?It. Ii\) s' ait 10"" 'z ' "L-",l ~ ,,? " "fl'~"" '~!' I • 11- .'" --.~, J . {i:~ ')1 tt,' lt~",,'h ~r:;" 'It I!! • 1!" }~.~/"l;" ,,"/\, ,# • ..: ~1J1, .. W... r· ~'~':/1! ':"CE(ESTIAGIfJE~nAf§YsfEM', !lCI ~ " 0 5', L,.l," •• WITHOU, T, VElOC,flY, DAM, PING ";'" I

':'~ ':.,:r:~:'t:,J'Ir'.~ i ~}L ~')J"',~'l: .;' "" 0\ I " '" ;. ; /<et:U,STIAt.INtRTIAL SYSTEM) . ii,

w O,2}:"\:; WITH VelOCITY,DAMPINQ;;. :<O'::,;~\ "~.~ "';"};"';'~~;~!,;"':'.: ,:. ":", :~lt<" \ "~, :,,;:+"""':::';;"~~t

~ ,.n "l.it' "''''rlINERiiAL S"!rrtM' 0,' c,! ¥/" ~:", ": }.i i~,",~ ; ::~~~:;~ L, ~;: >i't,~~ ~,~ iJ, ~

·OOPPltR~iP'[~·RTiAI·0'\

Weight, accuracy, and reliability of inertial navigators.

Figu: 2.

S,u,f"C4"': SPACE/AERONAUTICS R&D Handbor>k .lCl"'''·\q,~,~ t.l l

® Table 5. Scientific sensors

for space vehicles ,Class Intrin-

of sic ... Experi- Signal'

ments Instruments Form 'Range

Cosmic: Rays Geiger-Mueller Tube 0 ' 10' cpl ,"

Cerenkov Telescope O-A 10' cps Cosmic Ray Telescope D 5" 10' cps integrating Ionization Chamber 0 100 cps Nuclear Emulsion

Radiation Ionization Current Gage A " 1 O-lJ-l 0'" amp Bells Thin-walled G-M Tube D 10' cps

Scintillation Counter D-A ,6,,10·cps

Solar Electrostatic Analyzer A 10-1'-10-' amp Particles Proton Ionization Gage 0 10' cps

{l-Ray Spectrometer D-A 5 x 10' cps Ion Scintillation Spectrometer D-A 5 x 10' cps

; Magnetic flux-gate Magnetometer A 0.6-1200 -r ",' fields

Rotating-coil Magnetometer A 0.6-1200 -r

Proton-precession Magne- f 0.07-1.0 G tometer

Rubidium-vapor Magne- f 0.05-105 -r tometer

, "Micro- Resistance Grids A 12 levels meteoriles Erosion Gage A 2 decades

Microphone D-A > 10-'gm-cm

sec Ught-flash Detedor D-A > 10-' erg,

, Spectroscopy IR Spectrograph A 2-.4 I'

UV Spectrograph A 1750-3100 AO Lyman-alpha Telescope A 1040-1340 A 0

X-Ray Telescope D 2-8 AO

Ionosphere Ion Probe A > 10' Ions/em'

langmuir Probe A > 10' eledrons/ em'

Electric-field Meter A 0-10 V

Radiation Albedo Meter (Scannlngl A 2 decades : Budget Omnidirectional Radiometer A 2 decades

Neutron Proportional Counter D 1000 cps

Atmospheric Thermionic Ionization Gage A 10 ..... 10 ... mm

Pressure Hg Radioadlve Ionization Gage A 1 atm-l0'" mm

Hg Cold-cathode lonil:atlon Gage A 10-'-10-7 mm

Hg Redhead Gage A > 10-lI mm Hg Pironi Gage A 10-1-10-' mm

Hg

Atmospheric Rf Mass Spectrometer A 2 decades Structure Magnetic Mass Spectrometer A 10'" omp

Thermistors A 3 decades Thermocouples A 2 decades

Abbreviation.. D - Digital A .. Analog D-A - Discrete event with onalog mognitude f - Frequency -r - Gamma G - Gauss C - Continuous

Scientific Sensors for Space Vehicles (continued)

Mode of

Opera­tion

~'" ' .:',~~t~:' Signal Afler Processing~telh~~;Ji;J:;'

{Pulse Height Analysis, Sea lin. . and""- ", ··:i-·

"

Comments'-Amplification, etc.} Spa~;:P;obe En~ir~nments ----------------------~----------------------------~~--~-~"~'~'~.--.---.~.'~'----------------------------------------------------~.; ...

(

Normal, counting" rates In space are low) Intemities in space are within G-M tube range. C C

C C C

C C C

2 min C C C

C

c

10 set

10 sec

C C C

C

s

s S C

2 sec

1 sec

C

C C

c

c

c

c

C C

1 sec 5 sec.'

C C

Current measured or pulses counted. Analyzed by pulse height and counted.

Puis" 'c .... l' ... --.d. Pube. counted. Package recov...:ed and tr .. analyzed.

Current measured. Current measured or pulses eounted. Analyzed by pulse height and counted. '

(about 1 Oi~;,) but may Increase by a fac-} Measures particles with relativistic velocities.. -.;' tor of 1000 during Rare. 1. Uses a triple-coincidence circuit.'" " ·.i·, "

Normal "' ' per hr. .. Each pulse represents 1.8 x 10-' roentgen., ".j ~;",', "~. Must be recovered." . .~ . -.~ : ..... -; .... -

,'~eld.ing must ,b.e} Measure~ tola~ ~ner.g.· y relea.sed in'the :~,ete.~~:<,.;';;: t,.scltu!'o!ilcon. of the counllng loa cps" optimIStic for a G-M tube_ ...,.....:,'

, " ,~. " ,Untit of counting,rate is set:by. the'circuitr.y'.,noI";':',,­-, " .,', the crystaL .....:,' .... - .:', :,,:.

Current mea.iured for each of 12 bias levels. jln space.toUnli~;;;~t~~ a~~not expected tol" Uses electrostalic focusing." ., . ',' '-',' ... ;'''':"''

Pulses counted. excee~;'.l. ,O~O!cp. si'· .. ~o. p. proximately 90% Uses "magnetic broom" to remove electrons.'~, .,'

::;z;e:y b~:~~: h~::t ::: :::~~::'d by o~ ~~,yL" articl;~~~~;'~~ns. ~ ,) ~: ;;s~:~~:::;:.:::~· particle type, thide crys-;,: pulse height. :.' ~1r'{ ,::::':j.~,;:'; .. tal measures energy. . "

t" •

Analog current pr"p;rlic::nalto component of f field' stre~~th.Y~;a~;~'~~h -i~' 0.7 gauss andl Can be designed for almost any range. ' field. I slowly ··decr~ases. to .:2.5 'gamma at apo

A.M sinusoidal current proportional to com- proximateIY'*I3.:.',earth' radii, in space, Measures component perpendicul,ar to spin axis., .... ponent of Reid. J recorded.

Frequency proportional to magnitude of Reid. 1 r Measures absolute Reid but can be used to meas-)

I '1 ure compon, ent.s ~f field by Usl~9 ~ias.ing coils.

Frequency proportional to magnitude of field. l .. . . J ' ,

Discrete changes in resistance. Continuous slow increase in resistance. Analyzed by pulse height and counted.

Analyzed by pulse height and counted.

About 20 peaks superimpose.d on 300-cps carrier.

About 80 peaks can be resolved. Integrated current modulated by vehicle spin. Pulses counted.

2 analog current. versus time, 0.2-sec sweep.

Analoij current versus time.

Analog volta ge on 1000-cps carrier.

Change in re.istance due to scan. . , Change in resistance. ,'!'

Pulses counted for two detectors.

Several m~~s exposure' are' necessary.

Rates of,~: cp~ ,have been. re.corded •.

,N . ,,,_)~~f~t": Will scan~~ffac~,of Mars:Z;("

···::·~i:~,r~/t;:;'~:·~~\·,~~~/;" Will scan surface 'of Venus.c·

;.' ':;.::",< •

Produces pulseceach time' sun is scanned. Produces pui~ '~ach time' sun IS scanned.

• t ••. 4J: .,.

!currents y~;'; over twa dec~des as probes 1 pass '., ~

, 'J

Measures penetrating ability of larger particles. Measures surface erosion due to sand blast effect. Records momentum.

Measures light energy released upon Impact.

Primarily interested in detecting lines character-istic of life.

For spectroscopic analysis of atmosphere. lyman-alpha is strongest UV line from hydrogen. Measures X-rays released during solar Rares.

Measures ion concentration and electron temper- , ature.

Measures electron temperolure and satellite po-lential. '

Measures Reid at surface of space vehicle.

Uses a reR~CI/f~~:scannin.g·~ limited ReId. {For studying energy balance In earth's atmas-} Uses a sphet:l~ol surf~.ce ,t.o absorb radiallon phere. , ';' ,

fromo.!I,~!~~~.i·~~'" . , " . Expected,~te.·;are·about.I()OO cps. Must be Rown below Von Allen belts.

""".-."'"i!:>-. '.... ..

Ionization current collected .vories over 31 f Range of'tl,~~~ur~s '~'ncauntered are from I)' Ionization ca~sed' by elect~ons from hat filament decodes, each detector must be labora- aim (at ':!lrth:.s surfacel to as low as 10 -u \

. t~y-calibrated. ;;.:. mm H91,~~e measured pressure depends Ionization caused by p~~ldes from radioactive

.. ,:.. ::-.,!.' t on orientation and velocity. , eminer. I Ionization caused by electrons from cold cathode.

Change In resistance (two decades).

Analog current versus sweep voltage. Current from many collectors commutated.

, Logarithm of current. Veltage change.

Source: Astronautics

J A specialized cold-cathode ionization gage. Resistance of filament· is decreased when cooled

by gas.

1 '" peakshav';'been·r~solved. }satellite velocity vector must be token into ac_} Measures preselected constituents. count when analyzing results.

{ Temperatur.~.s.' m~,asu. r.ed. a.re s. pace-croft temo} Atmospheric temperature must be inferred from pera.~~~~~:~.e,~i~:emeprature. { kinetic theory since radiatic:n is chief mode of

.~';:71~!:': ;-#':" ! .. ''4:l~, . l energy transfe-r.

(November 1961): 36-37.

Table 6.

Initial Militarily Critical Technologies list The Department of Defense is submitting the following list of critical technol­ogies whose acquisition by potential adversaries would be detrimental to nati ona 1 security. , ••• The commodities described in the list are limited to equipment and materials so far identified as either critical to the development production or utiliza­tion of end-items of concern or goods which would convey information concerning these activities. The list does not adress end-items of intrinsic military utility: such items remain under the control of the CCl and the Munitions list . . .. . . In the Initial list, technologies are defined under four general categories: A. Arrays of Know-How /including design and manufacturing know-howl are the Know-how and related technical information required to achieve a significant development, production or utilization purpose. Such know-how includes services, processes, procedures, specifications, design data and criteria, and testing techniques. B. Keystone Equipment /including manufacturing, inspection or test equipment/ TS that equipment specifically necessary for the effective application of a significant array of technical information and know-how. C. Keystone Materials are materials specifically necessary for the effective application of a significant array of technical information and know-how. D. Goods Accompanied by Sophisticated Know-How are goods ~. the use of which requires the provision /disclosure/ of a significant array of technical information and know-how /including operation, application or maintenance know-howl and/or

2. for which embedded know-how is inherently derivable by reverse engineering, or is revealed by use of the goods. Contents 1.0 Computer Networks Technology 2.0 Computer Technology 3.0 Software Technology 4.0 Automated Real-time Control Technology 5.0 Materials Technology 6.0 Directed Energy Technology 7.0 Semiconductor and Electric Component Technology B.O Instrumentation Technology 9.0 Telecommunications Technology 10.0 Communication, Navigation, Guidance and Control Technology 11.0 Microwave Technology 12.0 Vehicular Technology 13.0 Optical and laser Technology 14.0 Sensor Technology 15.0 Undersea Systems Technology 16.0 Chemical Technology 17.0 Nuclear Specific Technoloqy

1.0 Computer Networks Technology 1.1 Network Architecture 2.0 Computer Technology 2.1 System Architecture Technology 2.2 Systems Hardware Development and Production Technology 2.3 Digital Computer System Utilization Technology 2.4 logic and High-Speed Memory Assembly Technology 2.5 Storage Technology 2.6 Digital Computer Display and Peripheral Technology 2.7 Analog and Hybrid Computer Technology

-------- ------------------

3.0 Software Technology 3.1' Development Environment Technology 3.2 Operations and Maintenance Technology 3.3 Application Software Technology 4.0 Automated Real-Time Control Technology 5.0 Materials Technology 5.1 Metals and Alloys Technology 5.2 Advanced Composites Technology 5.3 Processing and Forming Technologies 6.0 Directed Energy Technology 6.1 High Energy Laser (HEL Lasers) Technology 6.2 Particle Beam Technology 6.3 Microwave Energy Transmission Technology 7.0 Semiconductor and Electronic Component Technology 7.1 Microcircuit Technology 7.2 Transistor, Diode, and Thyristor Technology 7.3 Detector, Tube, Intensifier, and Cooler Technology 7.4 Acoustic Wave Device Technology 7.5i[ Thin Fi 1m Memory Device Technology 7.6 Passive Conponent Technology 7.B Electronic Material Technology B.O Instrumentation Technology B.l Time-Domain Measurement Technology B.2 Frequency-Domain Measurement Technology B.4 Electrical Parameter and Digital Measuring Technology B.5 Digital Instrument Technology B.6 Recording Technology B.7 Photographic ·and Optical Measurement Technology 9.0 Telefommunications Technology 9.1 Telecommunications Systems Technology 9.2 Switching Technology 9.3 Modems and Multiplexing Technology

Table 6 (cont'd)

10.0 Communication, Navigation, Guidance and Control Technology 10.1 Vehicle Control Technology 10.2 Inertial Navigation Systems /INS/ and Related Technology

@

10.3 Cooperative Systems for Radio Navigation and Radio Communication Technology 11.0 Microwave Technology 11.1 Microwave Tube Technology 11.2 Microwave Solid-State Device Technology 11.4 Waveguide and Component Technology 12.0 Vehicular Technology 12.1 Aeronautical Vehicle Technology 12.2 Marine Vehicle Technology 12.3 Deep Submergence Vehicle Technology 12.4 Gas Turbine Propulsion for Aeronautical Vehicle Technology 12.5 Gas Turbine 'Propulsion for Marine Vehicle Technology 12.6 Other Marine Propulsion Technology 12.7 Energy Generation, Conversion and Storage Technology

13.0 Optical and Laser Technology 13.1 Fiber Optic Technology 13.2 Integrated Optic Technology 13.3 Filter Technology 13.4 Mirror and Surface Technology 13.5 Dye Laser Technology 13.6 Gas Laser Technology 13.7 Semiconductor Laser Technology 13.8 Solid-State Laser Technology 13.9 Chemical Laser Technology 14.0 Sensor Technology 14.1 Infrared, Optical and UV Sensor Technology 14.2 Passive X-Ray Sensor Technology 14.3 Conventional Acoustic Sensor Technology 14.4 Fiber Optic Sensor System Technology 14.5 Magnetometer and Magnetic Sensor Technology 14.6 Gravity Meter Technology 14.7 Radar and Related Technology 15.0 Undersea Systems Technology 15.1 Undersea Acoustic Technology 15.2 Platform Acoustic Technology 15.3 Heavy Lift Salvage Technology 15.4 Deep Sea Sensor Implantation Technology 15.5 Research Facility Technology 16.0 Chemical Technology

Table 6 (cont'd)

16.1 Polymeric Material Technology 16.2 Hydraulic Fluid Technology 16.3 Synthetic Lubricating Oil and Grease Technology 16.4 Synthetic Elastomer Technology 16.5 Atmospheric ~urification Technology 17.0 Nuclear Specific Technology

Source: Federal Register, Vol. 45, No. 192, 1 October 1980, p. 65014.

@

I I

I ~ ,~ .~

I I ~ d

Table 7.

The following examples are of R&D performed in the

"in-house" laboratories of the US military services.

IN-Housz INDEPE::o!DENT RESEARCH FUNllS (JHlll)

The IUIR funds ~ere establll,hed as line items in th(' FY G:! DoD hu!hr('t aR R result of a Secretary of Defense decision on Octoher 14, 1001. as follow,":

"DepetHIing upon the mis~ioll and nature of the work of th€' partirnlur lab­nratrorr. a fraction of the allHual laboratory budget shall be f<et a~lde for work judl!p(\ by the Inboratory dire('tor to be of promise or imI)ortance without nee!l of I'rior UPI)rovui or rHiew at higher levels. The results of this work shaH be rcyll'w('{1 loy the Assistunt Secretaries for Research and De"elopment of the ~IIlitary Departments."

While tlliil concept was npw for the Army amI All' Force, it had been in effect within the Xu'\"y for oyer II deratle prior to this time.

List.('d below are a number of examples of IHIR efforts which haye resulted in nseful products or applications.

ARMY EXAMPLES Severe, 8'IOC'~

The Walter Reed Army Institute for Research conducted bu~ic stmllps to find impro"ed methods of treatment of patients in severe refractory F:hock. It WiH! fOllnd thnt enormous IImounts of fluids could be given to patients, wben tbe exnct nlllOl1nt Is known; and that vasodilutors given after adequacy yoll1me addition n re not only ~afe but dramatically effective. At Walter Reed General Hospitlll dul'ing a specified period, the mortality of shock cases with usual treatment was uhont 700. The mortality, during the same period, with treatment dE'rived from lhis study. wns 120.

La.~er tranatmtter The U.S. Army Electrical Components Laboratory designed uud conslrll<'tE'II

a Inser transmitter. consisting of un arrary of !'even Injection IfI~pr dlodp~. with a peal, power output of 150 watts. The transmitter. when cOlllhlned with an eight-inch tele~cope nnd photomultiplier tube, was tested as a range fiuder and exhibited a useful range of 500 meters.

Large olr samples The U.S. Army Biological Laboratories and the U.S. Army Walter Reed Insti­

tute for Research jointly demonstrated the fl:'al'ibillty of using a Large ,"olume Air Sampler (LVAS) to reco'\"er small numbl:'rs of bncterla and vlrt1!'e1! from large air samples. Meningococcal meningitis and resplrntol'y d1~('tlS€'S of mleno­viral origin, in military recnlits in barracks and hospltnls were ~tullied.

SlIpcrchuI'gcIl cligines ,: . '1'ho U.S. ArlllY Mobility ElJulpment R&D LaIJorntory condl1cted studies to

<ll'termlne if grc·atcr power and altitude capacity could be obtalnl'd t't'OIll 10 ancI 20 Hl' military standard engines by utilizing the turbo supercharger prlnclille. This work led to the proposal that a turbochurged "10 HI''' engine (:!O lIP out­put) be used 011 the CHAPARRAL missile sy;;tem In an application where the standard 10 HP mUltary engine would not prnduce the required specific output (HP/FT').

Stratoaphet'ic tlde8 The U.S. Army AtmospherIc Sciences Laboratory Inve:;tignt~d Strato"pherie

Tides on a Sl'lIsonal Basis. Analysis of rockpt sonndlngs yprili('{1 thl' exisl!'lIc!' of a slglliflcant ~'ear-rollnd diurnal oscillation. A qualitative description wn,.: made of the pha~e and amplitude of the oscillation during the sUlllmer sea,,:ul1. Certain recommendatIons were postuated on how the tide affects llJ('tPorologielll rocket network clhuatological data. The dlscovPQ' of atllJo>,pheric tides in the stratosphere has leel to new concepts of the atmosplJPric !'Iectrilitatlon pro­cess and the origin of large-scale electrical fields in the atmosphere. These findings will ha,'e an impact on the photochemistry of the upper atmo,,:phcre lInll the structure of the ionosphere with attendant pffects on the propagation of electromagnetic energy.

Micro1rat'e food preparation sYl!tems 'I.'he U.S. Army Xatick Laboratories, In I{JOti. initiated a study to dctprmlne the

feasibility of developing an ultra rapid. lightweight food Ill'e!'Uration S~'~tl'lJl which would utilize microwaves, thermoelectric nnlts. ultrasonic fuel yaporixers and multipurpose plastic packages which could also function U'l Iwating lIIal serving ves:;el". A two-year study proved the feasibility and overall potential udvantuges to the military of microwave cooking in the field. As a direct result of this work a dm'elopment project, in the regular budget. was Initiated for the design and constrnction of a field kitchen and bukery units.

Teat Il"Itg tmn,sfcr '1.'111" U.S. Army ~Iedicnl R&D IJaboratory desll!ned and fabricated lin accessory

lelt for the stundard hypodermic jet Injection devices to I)el'mit a q\1l1ntitatlve transfer of teHt drug into the skin Intradermally for such te~t<; as ~r.H., hl~to­plasmln, etc.

Electro-Incchon/caZ ',and models 'I.'he U.S. Army Medical Biomechanlcal Laboratory dpsiglled find fnllt'kllied six

electro-mechnnical models of the hand with lIutomlltlc proportional eoutrol of grnsp. Olle hand has bpen fitted to an amputee. The other th'e hand" IIIIYI' hCPIl submlttpd to New York University and the "eternlll'> Auministrutlon. All urI' now undergoing clinical testing.

Ozone concentration The U.S. Army Atmospheric Sciences Laborutory. in InGS. provided to the

Ilclentlfic community the first in 8ftU measurements of the change in ozone COD­centration in the atmosphere during a total solnr eclipse. The incrE'tlse in ozolJe by 100% during total eclipse was abrupt; a sudden decrease In cOllecntl'alion wa>; noted as tlll' F:onde emerged from the shadow; and In less tban 20 second~. the ozone had reuched its equilibrium value.

NAVY EXAMPLES

New high-temperature ell'plosives Nuvy ch€'inlsts at Naval Ordnance Laborutory (,,'hite Oul,) ha"e s),nlhesizpcl

more than 11 dozen new and potentially useful explosiyes thut are IlI'at rC!'i!'tant. RHeral of the!'e have I1lready seen use in militury ",papons and spflce'vphide!', und seyeral other,;: are being considered for similnr applicntions. Succ{'ss in this area is due primurlly to extensive fundnmentul stUdies of the r€'latiollshlp of lIIolecular I'tructure and content to explosive properties conducted undet' the IIIlIepen<1ent Re!'earch Progrum. It Is now possible to predict 0 priori mllny of the properties of an explosive before it is !'ynthesized. 'I.'his has led to the synthesis of high-energy materials capable of withstanding temperatures much highet· thou was previously considered possible. The'first two explosives to stem from this program nre c!lpable of withstanding temperatures 'above 500 degrees F. Both have becn used in eX)llosin' cutting devices in the Gemini space cap~ule and are contained in the mild detonntillg fuses and flexible, linear, !'haped 'chnrges u~ed to separate Ihe crew module from the F-l11 aircl'uft in emergency situationl'l. It is now rellOrt!'d thut these f'ystems are capable of lasting the lifetime of the nlr­('mft eliminating the frequent maintenance and replacements required when expillsiyes of lesser tempprature cnpublllties are used. It is estimat.ed lhat w'e of the;<e eXJllo~h'es ",III sa,-p the Government nearly $00.000.000 during tlte life spnll of the '~cl'nft no,,- - order. Three more" prolllis!~g, hl~h-tplllperntl\rp.

® I'xpiof<\Yel> lune Il(,f'n den~io\lerl. 'fhe first two are uble to wiUI~tand temperaturf'f; :.:" to 40 \Ipgrers hh!ll('r. These lire currently being screened for applications by the militnry, ~~\'SA, and AEC. ilio/llo/CClllar t·arintioll.' illlluccd by 8trc.~8

Obs('rnltionl> lit the ;S-ayy .\ir Development Center (.Tnhn~\·ille) 011 animnls PXllospd to different ll'thal ~trr~ses such as ionizing radiation lind hlg-h aecelel'l1-tion :<trpss hn\'e shown chemical changes in the blood. After UI('se obsel'\'ations on animals. the expE'rlmellts w('re extf'IHled to humans. Yoluntecrg were subjpctpd to lI('ceieration::; (If from 3 to 4% G, sufficiently long to produce grayout or blaclwut. All the ml'n exp0l>ed to' this ~tl'e"s showed -a significant Increa~e of the ph OR­\lhatid~'1 J!lycprol leyel in the hlood plasma. Correlations of tll(' pontrol ll'n~l~ of ph()sphatid~'1 gIY('('l'ol with anxiety about the acceleration Ilrocpdurp dlrrcted IItt(,lllion to the effeels of pmotiollnl factors on the chemical chnnges induecd in the hlood. As an exul1Iple of pxtreme emotional stress, blood snmples from schizo­pltl'PlIic pntipllts hMpitalil!:('(1 for a long 'time itt a p;<~'ehintl'ic institutl' \\'('J'e nllal.\"7:cd nml al~o f:llowp!l high concentrations of pho:::phnti!l~'1 g-Ircprol nccom-1':111il'd h~' chnnJ!cs in the lncl>; of other pho:::pho\ipids tlwt dist.inJ!ui~hed tllp ~II'I''''~ in f:f'hizophrpnill from the phrslcal stre~s of aC'cl'lernt.ion. l'~xtell:;;ion of tl](> ShHl~' ·to Yoilmteel'f: who hnll been d~prived of sleep for 30 hour" cOllfil'IIIP!l the prl'\'iol1s flndin;Ul relatlYe t·o phoRphatidyl (;Iycerol nnd agnin l'e,enled chnnges that. diffrrenti:ttrd Olis fatigtll' stres" from the others. AttN' these r('sult:;; wprp marie llUhlic, the expl'l'imcntal npproach was includc(l in a joint X:I\'y, XASA. nll<1 Ait. Forre i':'lllt1~· of comhat pilot~. Data were tal,en on Nn\'r enl'ri\'1' llilots f\:rlnc: hildl-rif:k, actiye comhnt mission:.: rluring a 22-day line period, IIcar the l'nd of a 1-1I101lth del'lo~·m(>lIt. 'I'll!'se studies were repeated nJ!ain \"hen thl' pilots w(>r(' ret.urnl'd to the Vnited Stntcs to nOll-combat dut.y. The eOllcelltmt.ioll le\'els of pho!';phatidyl glrcerol and other phospholipids again made pORsiblp the statj!,tical separation of the combat ~tre"sed pilots from normal individuals and from the other stre~s(>d populatiolls. After the pilots returned to the United State~, the Ilho"JlhoJipid lewis begnn to rcturn toward normal, but the rHer~al waR not aR ['olllplete aR was found In ncp.rleration or sleep depriYation. The datil obtaincd with Illunans coupled with the information found in t\Je tiR~ues of stres~ed nnimals 8Ul!'g('~t that sOllie centl'r of tIle brain can interprl't ['crtuin l>enRor~' inllUt~ as threat" to f;ur\'intl nnd r!'nd.R hy mobilizing blochcmicnl fnctor::1 at n 1II01I'cul:I1' leYCI to l1I('ct the thrt:'!It. 'fc('hni'lll!'s nre now being deyeloped f'0 that !lnalyse", for tiWf'C pln~ma components can be made ill the field. It Is l'xpected tbat the OIlSt!t of combnt fntigue in fighting men may the~ ~e ant}clpated by these procedures.

Cal'logra/llly by compu.ter ':rhe tillle will ('ollle when most maps will be printcd with the airl of a cOUlputer

llIal a cnthorle-rny printf'l·. nased upon work at the NlIyal "'enllons Laboratory. it will bc pOl<sihle to print In a few Reconds a map which nolV requires dnys to tl'llr:e by Innd. J~,,;;pntinl to mapping by cathode-ray prInter Is II ('o\lection of dnta which ('ontains til!' !!rographic coordinates of points on ['oast lin'~R nnd bound­Hipi'. ThHe 1::1 nyallahlp at n Na\'y Laboratory a collection which Inc\nrleR 10.000 points for the l:nited :;:tnte~ its!'lf nnd 8,000 points for th!' worhl as a whol('. Th!' point!! \\"cre ~el('ctl'd to portrfl~' tllP Mllent features of conf<t lillI'S nnd \Joundnri('s without exc!'('!lillg' presf'rih!'t\ limitntions on accuracy. Once the Intitude anrllollgi· tlld('f.; of tht:' points hnll bpPIl recorded on magnetic tupe, it. became possible to ('on:<truct IllflPS by connecting the {Joints in any automntlc plottpr whkh is undl'l' the control of a digital ('omputer. Any desired mapping trnnsformation IlIny be 11,,('(1 in Ule cOIl\'ersion of geographic coordinates to map cordinates. The' data have many applications and have been acquired by a number of agencies. The data arc basic to maps In earth sciences where distributions of economic value or popUlation density are presented against a geographic background. They are useful in the preparation of updating of highway and weaUler maps. In a signifi­cant military application, the data are used by defense commands to display the position and motion of potential targets In relaUon to coast lines. Such displays constitute an Importllnt part of any decision to take countermeasures. In one Int.eresting application the data are used at the Houston Space Craft Control Center to show astronauts just how the coast llnes on the earth will appear to them when they are in orbit. Soon there will be a need for maps to show how the crators of the moon will appear to astronauts!

Table 7 (cont'd) The data have applicatlolls in tile Navy in connectlo¥! with the optimization ot

the allocation and scheduling of shipping. Currently' under consideration Is an application to maps which show the paths of the shadows of ecllpS<'s of the sun. Another application Is In the development of new methods for mapping the earth.

Effects of water on bearing fatigue The presence of water in hydraulic flulds and In lubrlcatLng oils has a del~

teriollS effect on na,al machinery. lnteractlon of the water with stressed metal surfaces accelerates failure of bearings and gears. The pre.'lence of 0.01 percent rlissolved water In the lubricant has caused reductions of 27 to 78 percent in surface fatigue life depending on the applied stress. Independent Research at the Annnpolis Diylsion of the Naval Ships R&D Center has led to a pos.<;ible mechanism for this remarkable phenomenon. It 'Is as follows: :lIIcrocracks in the surface of the ball act &<; capillaries. Water In the lubricant at a concentra­tion that permits capillary conden..'5Iltion forms a water-rich phnse in the cracks. Aqueous corrosion in the cracks and dynamic stress on the surface thl'n combine to callse the reduC{'(1 fatigue life. With this underst.anding of the phenomenon, research has been initlnted to flnd means to minimize such elIects.

Delivery of airborne weapons In the past the designer of weapons to be launched from aircrn.f.t assumed a·

specific d.iYe angle, speed, etc. Wind-tunnel tests were mnde for the ns.'ll1lllE~I conditions to verify the degign. However, these tests were not extended to deter­mine the limits at which a given weapon could no longl.'r be safely launched br a given aircraft. Both In experimenrtal flight tests and In combnt 1I11;;."lons under conditions different from those nssumed by the weapon designer, Improper Repa­ration of wenpon nnd aircraft caused damage to or loss of the aircraft or failure in deli,ery of the weapon. The Navy laboratories wemcalled upon to correet each ense as it occurred. At the snme time, however, t.lley recognized. the neceR­sity for better design data and for an ability to predict the limits of safe delivery for various combinations of aircraft and weapons. To enhance prediction capn­blllty, nll cxperiml.'ntnl rlatll available have been colie('\('(1 in a data bank, and computer orogrnms hnye h{'(>n developed for the launch of cou'l.'ntional wen pons. In addition to the problems of separation, the cnrrent mt:'thods of shaping, carrying, and dellvl'ring weapons increase the drag of the sy~tem slgnlllcn.ntly and reduce aircraft performance. Accordingly, the fpar.;ibllity of using unconven­tionnl s1Japt:'s whkh can be ('arrled on the aircraft in a low-drag conHguratlon was explored at tht:' Naval Ships R&D C.enter (CarderOC'k). Analytical studi('s and wind-hmnl.'l test::; at subsonic, ,tran"onic, and snperf<onlc !<peeds conHnnro tbat weapon!'! which are rectangular solids can be carried at a drng 11',1'1 which is a small fraMlon of thllt of present weapons. Static and dynnmic "'ind tllnnE'1 test!'! al<:o estnbll"hed the technical feaslblllt,v of nl'rodynamlc stablllzntlon of rectalllntiar ROlirl sllape-s. With these demon=-trl1t1on~ of feaslhility and of the potential of theRe stndles to solve man,v of the- prohll'm~ of stores sepnration. these rlevelonments have bf'en transferred from lED funding to support by the Naval .\ir Systems Command.

AlB FORCE EXAMPI.ES

La~er t/,ight photo recon·nai.a8aMe The potpntial applications of the lR!ler technolot?Y nre mnny !lnd varied. 'l'hP­

Laboratory Dlreetor's Fund permitted the Air Force Avionics Laboratory to HnAnce an In-hollse ('fl'ort In 1003 to explore the use of lnsl.'rs as lin Illumlnant for J;llght photography. The nArrow beam cnpabl1lty of coherl'nt light can achtHe 10 times more illumination per unit area than any other source with the same Input power. Moreo\'er It could be essentially a co,ert means of reconnaissance.

The ruby laser beam is In the red end of the visible spectrum hut the extremely short time duratlon-a millisecond-and the narrow bE'am IllAkt:'s It Invisible to all except those 100kinJ! directly I'ither at the target or the source. The use of a neodymium doped glass rod can be fully covert since Its burst Is In the invisible part of the spectrum.

I

k~ i I I

I

J!!xperilllf'nts were conducted with a portable 2 joule ruby In!<er with 1l~!<o('lllt('d mJrrors, filters, and optics. A variety of I'mbjl'Cts ranging from 2iiO .foot !<Iant range to 5000 foot !!Iant range were recorded on 70 111m film Uf<lrlg It conyentional camera. Weather conditions yarled from clear nights with a light ground haze to rain ~howf'rs with fog and !<now !!howers. Filum w('r(' eYalulltNl for 0l)timum sensitlYity, contrast. and rCf:olution to the 6!)43-angst.rom wa,('I('nl!;th ('nl'rgy.

Very suc('('ssful. high reFlollltion. photograph!! wl're obtlllnr!l. Data rrgar!1ing the optimum fllm tYpl'R for u~e with laRer belllns have hren !le\'plopC'!1 ns wC'l1 as the film proces~lng details. :lleans of using OptiCR to Improve the photographic quality without excessively destroying the narrow characterilitics of the laser have been evolved.

Radio frequetlC1/ (RF) probe During an In-house Invelitigation of varlons means. el('ctriral an£1 mechanlral.

of detecting Intermittent faults In equipment, Air Force Aeroprollulslon Labora­tory engineers noted that. characteristically, all faulty electronic equipment. produced a 24KC nose signal.

Using Laboratory Director's fUnds, a portable. self-rontaln('£1 prohe capahle . ot pinpointing this signal was developed and subsequently 11rl£1 t(,Flted by the using commands. The field testing has been extremely In1('c(,Fl~fnl. amI procure­ment data for the RF-204/u Deteetor, Radio Frequency Interference. waR for-warded to the Air Force Logistics Command. '

Quiclc tim applied to F-l00 IFF radar antenna problem A quick-fix to a critical Air Force problem in Vietnam was reRearehed and

succes~fulIy deyeloped In-holll'e by the Air Force Materials I,aboraory. IFF rndar antennae on the F-loo were failing after about six hours of aircraft 0lleraUon from acollstical vibration generated by the plane's own cannon fire. Air Force IIIaterlals Laboratory ~clentlsts simulated the service failure in the laboratory. nnd dl'veloped a smalI, low COl<t, easily attachable prototype \'i!<coela!<tic dampl'r us a quick-fix. Field evaluation of the damper in Vietnam I'howed a twelve-fold increase In the life of the rad::ir ant.ennae. A sufficient number of damperR manu­factmed iIi-house by Air Force Materials Laboratory personnel were shipped to completely fit the F-1oo Beet in Vietnam.

Nitroso terpolymer The deterioration of elastomeric seals, hose and Buld container linings in

contact With nitrogen tetroxide (·a high performance oxidizer uscd in liquid rocket propulsion systems) has posed a difficult problem for which a solution hllli beell lIOugllt for several years .wLth Uttle previous succ('ss. The Air Force Materials Laboratory effort has resutted in 11 major i1uaterials breakthrough in the development of an elastomeric material resistant toO nitrogen tetroxide. This newly developed material Is a nitroso terpolymer (nitroso rubber). In evaluation tests this material has remained intact after tot'al Immersion testing In liquid nitrogen tetroxide for 1% years at 165°F, and is expected to be good indefinitely at loo·F. Under these test conditions, the best rommercinlIy m"aiIable niaterial (a butyl rubber) lasts only 1 hour at 165·F and 7 days at 100°F be­fore It deterIorates. The nltroso terpolymer has passed hardware el'aluation t('Rts and has been qualified for use on the Apollo. Because the nltroso terpolymer will not burn in air of oxygen, this material also has other potential uses such as fireproof protective clothing or, since the nltroso tN'polymer clln also be made in liquid form, as a sprayed-on Breproof coating for spacecraft interiors.

Super80nic turbojet etl1line study The Air For~ Aeropropulsion Laboratory has completed a study effort on

a new turbine engine conc:ept-a supersonic combustion non lift type tmbojet engine.

The study results showed the following: (a) Ratio of engine t.hrust to in­stalled engine weight (Fn/Wt) of lO.2--nearly three times present InstalIatiolls, (b) Installed engine lengtll redu~d by a'bout 60% and (c) lust,aIlNI t'nglne weights reduced by 50'70. A further accomplishment of considerable merit Is the combination of aU rotating compressor 'lWd turbine stages In one wheel.

Table 7 (cont'd)

Advanced air launched missile propulsIon, study 'l'hlR Air FOfN' Rocket Propulsion IJnhoratory (AFRPT,) study evaluatl'd

till' I){'rfnfIllRl)('(' of udvanN'd solid, liquid find alr-augJ1H'nted propulsion sYRtems n~nlnst \\"('11 dC'l1l1Nl missile survivability <'fllerln In on](>r to 'allow a c1('ar IIII(lur,tllll ('ompnrlson. The'most striking result was the great Increase In low 1\>l"(>I, high mnr'h number capability which might IX' attained with air augmentcd ~yf;tCJ\lf;. T11(, £1etnlh'<l design studlt's perform!'d revenlf'(l del1nite areas within the lIIatl'rlals, propellants, thrust chamber assf'"mbly, presRurlzatlon and ex­pulRlon tN'hnologles which possessed 'the most significant growth potential. The ultimate worth of this study can be measurt'd in the positive mann('r In whlrh It hilS aided the AFPRL in pointing defense contractors toward the major slg­nlfieant probl('ms in the air launched propulsion field and the fact. that propul­Rlon rl'quirem('nt." from this study have been used dlrpctly in defining and Im­plementing present AFRPL exploratory development contracts in the air aug­mented rocket and prepackaged liquid, solid and hybrid rocket areas.

OXY{Jcn concentrator In 10M the Air For~ Flight Dynamics Laboratory undertook an effort to

fllbrlcate ffnd test an oxygen c<m~ntrator module which produces pure oxygen using ·air tnken from the ambient atmosphere. This system combined Witll a (,arbon-dioxide 'llIld water vapor removal unit and reclrrulatlon system coul£1 replace the high pressure gas storage system presently employed in Air Foree

. Alreraft. The feasibility of the oxygen concentrator concept has been demonstrated to

the point where It Is currently und('rgolng ('ngln<'erlng devf'lopment.

.nandwirrtlt expall8ion by redundant transmis8ions Und('r this ('ffort, undertaken ,by the Rome Air De\"elopment {A>nter, an ex­

ll('rlm('ntnl spread spectrum antI-jalll communi('at.ions system. uRing frcquel1ey redundaney, WllS designed; and the breadboard was ('ompletf'(l nnd t('sted .• \. t.heoret.lcal evaluation of ·the system was compared to the eXpI'rimenl111 results. TIlt' malll object of this eXpl'rlmentation was to determine whether or not sig­nlflrant loss would occur through Implementation of the Bandwidth Expansion by Redundant TrnnsmlsRlons (BERT) ttechnlqu!'.

Thl!! effort has provided a significant t.e<'hnlque for Improvement of stOl"{'£1 r('ferell(,(" spr(,lld spl'€trum Rystems, ·and has r('c]ur(>c] tlle t.heory to practke. Thl' technique now is nvnllable tor incorporation into prototype equlpments where sYfiltem COlIstrnlnts would indicate a benefit by utilization of this bandwidth t'xpanslon system.

SOURCE: US Congress, House, Committee on Science and Astronautioe, Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development, Hearingst Utilization of Federal Laboratories, 90th Cong., 2nd Sess., 26-28 March and 2-4 April 1968, Washington, DC: US GPO, 1968, pp. 154-159.

Figure

Gleam in Eye

~ I t-15

I RESEARCH (BOTH BASIC AND APPLIED)

I irs DATA, SOME COMPONENTS

'4AJOR ACTORS:

NASA DDR~.E services contractors

I

Most of the basic research necessary to achieve a weapon deployable at t is neanng completIon. TIle character of ttlis research IS determined with substantial auton­omy by the orRaniza' tions which staff and perform it: NASA. DOR~.E (including ARPA), the services and contractors.

Typically research is almeo at actll€Vement of capabilities that the services would like to have; in turn the research labs' enthusiasms fuel service preference.

"

Stylized Chronology

t-lO

REQUIREMENT FORMULATION

I SOR

MAJOR 'ACTORS:

service operational command service headquarters OSD

The service subunit unilaterally formulates requirements for a new weapon system, ordinarily a follow on version of the subunit's current main·line weapon.

These requirements are most often keyed to the dominant mission scenario of the pre­existing we~pon, and more particularly to improvE:' capabilities with re;:ard to a few parame,ers associated wittl pe'formance of the dominant scenario.

of Weapons ACquisition, United

7-15 YEARS

WEAPON DESIGN

I PAPER DESIGN

MAJOR ACTORS:

contractor service

The requirement is transformed into a paper design for the weapon. Designs are created by competing contractors.

The specifics 01 a proposed design reflect the contractor's desire to obtain the contract and the relative weight he assigns the service and DOD views in contractor selection.

The design of the winning contractor becomes the design developed.

"

t-5

WEAPON DEVELOPMENT

I PROTOTYPE

MAJOR ACTORS:

c;ontractor service

I The contractor proceeds with development. monitored by the service subunit. The necessary factoring of development into manageahle pieces tends to fix \tle characteristics of the weapon at the outset.

As development draws to a close. prototype weapons 'He produced and tested, Service autonomy in testing allows the service to determine what is acceptable or unaccept· able a nd to what extent such details as accuracy may be fine·tuned. This auton· omy insures service control over the information about the weapon's performance. on which procurement deciSions are in part based.

States

...-

Weapon Deployed

;r

WEAPON PROCUREMENT

I WEAPONS OFF PRODUCTION LINE

MAJOR ACTORS:

OSD Systems Analysis Armed Services &

Appropriations Committees

sCNice

The weapon, aggregated with the other wee: pons developed, conlprises the list of r rocurement alternatives.

Procurement decisions are made through barr.aining between OSO, the Armed Services Committees, and the services.

I' Source: Graham T. Allison and Frederic A. Horris, "Armaments and Arms Control:

Exploring the Determinants of 11ili tary 1tleaponstl, Daedalus; Arms

Defense PoliCY and Arms Control 104:3 (Summer 1975): 104.

....

Group II: Where does one look

Table 1 • Scienti£ic Fields and Sub£ields Listed in Army Research Task Summary

Table 2. Selected Areas in Which AFOSR has Played an Important Colonizing Role

Table 3. Navy Research Programs, by Scienti£ic Discipline

Table 4. Areas in Which ONR-Sponsored Scientists have Pioneered

Table 5. Air Force De£ense Research Sciences Program

Table 6. AFOSR-Sponsored Con£erences and Symposia, 1966

Table 1. Scientific Fields· and Sufifields 1 isted in Army Research Task Summary

LIFE SCIENCES 1. Study and Investigation 2. Microbiology 3. Biochemistry 4. Biophysics 5. Immuno logy 6. Pharmacology 7. Radiobiology 8. Neuropsychiatry 9. Physiology

10. Metabolism 11. Zoological Sciences 12. Plant sciences 13. Dentistry 14. Internal Medicine 15. Preventive Medicine 16. Surgery

CHEMISTRY 17. Analytical Chemistry 18. Inorganic Chemistry 19. Organic Chemistry 20. Physical Chemistry Colloids 21. Physical Chemistry General

and Nuclear PHYSICS

22. Atomic and Molecular Physics 23. Electricity and Magnetism 24. Fluid Mechanics 25. Heat and Thermodynamics' 26. Instrumentation 27. Light and Optics 28. Mechanics except Solid State 29. Nuclear Physics 30. Plasma Physics 31. Solid State Physics 32. Sound and Acoustics 33. Theoretical Physics

ELECTRONICS 34. Automatic Data Processing

Systems Research 35. Communications Techniques 36. Electronic Tubes and Parts 37. Electronic Circuitry 38. Electromagnetic Phenomena 39. Instrumentation 40. Magnetic Technology 41. Navigational Electronics 42. Network Studies and Information

Theory 43. Plasma Dynamics 44. Sensory Devices and Technology 45. Solid State Devices 46. Target Detector Research

Source: Army Research Office, Army Research Task Summary, Fiscal Year 1961.

. MATHEMATICS

47. Algebra and Number Theory 48. Analysis 49. Computation Methods and Techniques 50. Geometry & Topology 51. Information Theory 52. Mathematical Physics 53. Mechanics Mathematics 54. Operations Analysis 55. Probability and Statistics

ENGINEERING SCIENCES 56. Aeronautical Engineering 57. Civil Engineering 58. Electrical Engineering 59. Mechanical Engineering 60. Ordinance Engineering

MATERIALS 61. Metallic Materials 62. Organic Materials 63. Inorganic Non-Metallic Materials 64. Materials Sciences Basic Research 65. Composite Materials 66. Materials Testing and Evaluation

EARTH SCIENCES 67. Cartography and Geodesy 68. Earth Physics 69. Geography 70. Astronomy and Astrophysics 71. Meteorology

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 72. Psychology 73. Psychophysiology 74. Anthropology and Ethnology

OPERATIONS RESEARCH 75. Allocation Mathematical Programming 76. Inventory and Logistics Theory 77. Queuing or Sequencing Theory 78. Simulation and Modeling 79. Communication and Information Theory 80. Economic Social Political Analyses

PLANNING AND SYSTEMS RESEARCH 81. Technological Forecasting 82. Systems Analysis and Optimization 83. Organization Theory

INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH 84. Cybernetics and Automata 85. Adaptive Systems Optimal Control 86. Pattern Recognition 87. Machine Learning Artificial Intelligence 88. Biosystem Organization, Function,

Regulation 89. General Systems Theory

Table 2.

Selected Areas In Which AFOSR Has Played An Important Colonizing Role

- Turbulent boundary layer research - Blunt body hypersonic flow

Hypersonic laboratory simulation - Plasma dynamics - Shock-tube techniques

- Combustion research on high-energy fueLs and oxidants

- Combustion instability - Supersonic combustion - Structural materials for high temp-

erature and other reactive environ­ments

- Mass transfer cooling

Magnetohydrodynamic energy conversion , Electric propulsion ~ Interactions of ultrasonic waves in

metals

t-~

- High-temperature arc research - Rarefied gas flow

- Fluid physics - Cosmic ray physics - Seismology - Masers and lasers - Crystal growth

- Compound semiconductors - Superconductivity

High magnetic field research - Very low temperature physics

Cryogenic pumping

- Magnetic resonance spectroscopy - Millimeter and submillimeter

spectroscopy Ultrasoft x-ray spectroscopy Microwave spectroscopy Field ion emission microscopy

- Quasi-optics Collisional phenomena in ionized gas

- Quantum electrodynamics - Statistical mechanical studies of

microscopic materials

- Materials studies by application of EPR, NMR~ and Mossbauer effect

- Matrix iSOlation techniques - Precipitation Hardening - High temperature x-ray techniques

- Structure of polymers - High temperature chemistry - High pressure chemistry - Chemistry of the upper atmosphere

- Ladder-type polymers - Chemical kinetics - Energy transfer phenomena in

molecules - Rapid scan infrared spectroscopy - Chemistry of photographic processes

- Structure of liquids - Orbital and celestial mechanics - Non-linear dynamical systems - Non-linear partial differential

equations

- Automata theory - Probability theory and mathematical

statistics - Optimum control theory - Sampled-data control systems - Statistical filtering theory

- Theory and application of digital filtering

- Non-linear circuit theory - Computer design of electric networks - Pattern recognition - Statistical approach to information

theory - Man-machine interfaces

- Information retrieval - Error correcting codes in information

theory - Cybernetics and information theory - Computer languages - Biological lens studies including

compound eyes - Research in instructional technology - Simulations of international re-

lations

- Role of RNA in memory - Visual perception

Prisoner of war stress research - Biological rhythm - Gas chromotography for identification

of bacteria - Nervous and sensory physiology - Performances of organizations under

stress

Source: AFOSR

____ ·_c_.~ ____ _

Table3. NAVY RESEARCH PROGRAMS, BY SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE

1) Atmospheric Sciences 2) Geography 3) Earth Physics 4) Arctic Research 5) Oceanography

- Physical and chemical oceanography - Air-sea interaction - Marine geology and geophysics - Oceanic biology - Advanced oceanographic instrumentation

6) Ocean Technology

7) Physics 8) Nuclear Physics 9) Electronics 10) Metallurgy 11) Chemistry 12) Power Program 13 ) Logistics* 14) r~athematics and Numerical Analysis 15) Operations Research 16) . Stat i sti cs and Probabil i ty 17) Information Systems 18) Fluid Dynamics 19 ) Structural Mechanics 20) Physiology 21 ) Biochemistry 22) Microbiology 23) Medicine and Dentistry 24) Group Psychology 25) Physiological Psychology 26) Engineering Psychology 27) Personnel and Training * 28) Aeronautics 29) Surface and Amphibious * 30) Undersea Warfare * 31) Acoustics 32) Naval Analysis*

Source: Defense I~dustry Bulletin, 8 (1), Winter 1972, pp. 10-13.

* Research programs under non-disciplinary programs

Table 4. "Areas in Which ONR-Sponsored Scientists Have Pioneered."

"A mere catalogue of areas in which ONR-sponsored scientists have pioneered shows how frequently ONR has been there with the right science at the right time even though few foresaw the usefulness and relevance when ONR first began to sponsor it. Let me merely list a few examples." 1. The discovery of the Van Allen belt, and the development of a research satel­

lite which was available to take data in connection with the Starfish nuclear test when such data were needed quite unexpectedly and urgently.

2. The metallurgy of high temperature moly alloys, which proved to be vital in connection with the Polaris program.

3. The development of the thermochemistry of titanium and its compounds, which proved to be a "bible" of valuable information when titanium became of practical importance.

4. The early launching of an arctic research program, data from which suddenly proved .vita1 when it became necessary to install the DEW line.

5. Early support of work in Bayesan statistical analysis which proved to be of great value as more sophisticated methods of detection of signals in noise became increasingly important in radar and sonar.

6. The development of the mathematical theory of diffraction and scattering of elec­tromagnetic waves from targe obstacles, which became later very important in application to the problem of minimum radar return from missiles and decoys.

7. Support. of the earliest work in the field of time-shared computer systems. 8. Support of the early fundamental work on the propagation and phase stability of

very low frequency electromagnetic waves, which led directly to feasibility of VLF radio-nativation systems -- incidentally, a fine example of cooperation between extramural, Navy, and other government laboratories

9. Support of fundamental work on the theory of Wind generated waves, which led eventually to operationally useful techniques for forecasting ocean waves.

10. The discovery of microplankton in the oceans, and the realization of the importance of small organisms in affecting accoustic properties.

11. The invention and development of a method for the rapid freezing of blood. 12. The support of fundamental work in oceanic geophysics, which led directly to

the development of a useful geophysical navigation technique. 13. Support of the earliest work on numerical modeling of the atmosphere, which is

now beginning to lead towards a practical method of numerical weather forecasting. 14. The discovery of the so-called deep sound channel as an outgrowth of fundamental

investigations in an oceanographic laboratory. 15. The development of the concept of an integrated fleet air defense system. 16. The support of early fundamental work on shock tubes and shock dynamics, which

was the direct forerunner of the use of shock tubes in the study of re-entry problems and the development of a practical nose cone material -- a primary example of a basic research tool which, through remarkable prescience, was ready to be applied in testing and development programs when needed, even though nobody had concei ved the ICB~-1 when the work was fi rst supported.

17. The development of the plastic cornea for eye repair, an example of assiduous and inspired follow-up on an initially fortuitous observation.

Source: "Basic Science and Agency Missions," Dr. Harvey Brooks, Address at Vicennial'Convocation of Office of Naval Research, May 1966.

Table 5 .

Air Force Defense Research Sciences Program

1 ) Genera 1 Phys ics 2) Nuclear Physics 3) Chemistry 4) Mathematical Sciences 5) Electronics 6) Material s 7) Mechanics 8) Energy Conversion 9) Terrestrial Sciences

10) Atmospheric Sciences 11) Astronomy-Astrophysics 12) Biological and Medical Sciences 13) Human Resources

Source: Senate Appropriations, DOD FY 72, p. 674

l.

2.

3.

4.

S.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

lS.

16.

17.

18.

Table 6 . AFOSR-Sponsored Conferences and Symposia, 1966

liThe fo 11 owi ng conferences and sympos i a were held duri ng 1966 wi th funds provided in part or wholly by AFOSR as a means of furthering areas of scientific research of particular interest to the Air Force."

Lecture Series in Differential Equations

International Symposium on Animal Toxins

Conference on Current and Future Problems in Chemistry at High Temperatures

Third Coral Gables Conference on Symmetry of Principles at High Energy

International Symposium on Information Theory

Gordon Research Conference on The Formulation of Research Policies

Williamsburg Conference on Intermediate Energy Physics

International Conference on Iso-baric Spin in Nuclear Physics

Mathematical Aspects of Computer Science

Symposium on Genera] ized Networks

Symposium on Electrode Processes

Symposium on Numerical Analysis Fifth U.S.National Congress

of Applied Mechanics Conference on Air Strike

Hazard to Aircraft Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on

Quantitative Biology Symposium on Simulation and Simu-

lators of Dynamic Systems Topics in Celestial Mechanics and

Applications to Space Research Fifth International Symposium on

Rarefied Gas Dynamics

19. Gordon Conference on Developing Information Systems

20. Gordon Conference on High Temperature Chemistry

21. Systems Theory in Anthropology 22. Symposium on the Biota of the

Amazon Basin 23. Second Rochester Conference on

Coherence and Quantum Optics 24. The Eleventh Combustion Institute

of the International Symposium on Combustion

2S. International Symposium of Genetics 26. 1966 Linguistic Institute Con­

ference on Linguistic Method 27. Gordon Research Conference on

Inorganic Cnemistry 28. The Application of Generalized

Functions to System Theory 29. Eleventh Pacific Science Conference 30. Second International Biophysics

Congress 31. Conference on Algebraic Theory of

Machines with Applications 32. Boundary Layers and Turbulence In­

cluding Geophysical Applications 33. Bionic Models of the Animal Sonar

System 34. Conference on Sensitivity Synthesis 3S. Conference on Learning, Remembering

and Forgetting 36. Colloquium on the Photographic

Interaction Between Radiation and Matter

37. Tropical Biology 38. Fundamentals of Gas-Surface

Interactions

Source: AFOSR Research; AFOSR July 1967.

Group III: How does one oTganize the search

Table 1.

Table 2.

Table 3.

Table 4.

Table 5.

Table 6.

Note:

In-House Laboratories - Department of the Army

In-House Laboratories - Department of the Navy

In-House Laboratories - Department of the Air Force

Army Research Laboratories (List no. 2)

NASA Research Centers and Other Facilities

Master List of Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (as of June 1,1968)

The precise numbers of the in-house laboratories is not the

main point, simply to demonstrate their coverage (while at

the same time it is important to note that a far greater

portion of US military R&D expenditure is expended in private

industry). The 1976. US Department of Defense source which we

have used shows 50 Army, 35 Navy and 18 Air Force laboratories,

for a total of 108. Another Congressional source, for 1974,

shows 63 Army, 44 Navy and 29 Air Force laboratories, for a

total of 136: US Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations,

Hearings: Agriculture-Environmental, and Consumer Protection

Appropriations for 1975. Part 7: Investigative Report on

"Utilization of Federal Laboratories", 93rd Cong., 2nd Sess.,

Washington, DC: US GPO, 1974.

Other lists are available for earlier years as well (1971) and

one of these has been included. (Table 4).

In-House Laboratories

Table 1. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY AIR DEFENSE BOARD AIR MOBILITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LABORATORY AIRBORNE COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS BOpJm ARCTIC TEST CENTER ARMOR AND ENGINEER BOARD ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES LABORATORY AVIATION ENGINEERING FLIGHT ACTIVITY AVIATION TEST BOARD AVIONICS LABORATORY BALLISTICS RESEARCH LABORATORIES BENET WEAPONS LABORATORY COLD REGIONS RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING LABORATORY COMBAT SURVEILLANCE & TARGET ACQUISITION LABORATORIES COMMUNICATIONS AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING LABORATORY CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORY DUGWAY PROVING GROUND EDGEWOOD ARSENAL LABORATORIES ELECTRONIC PROVING GROUND ELECTRONIC WARFARE LABORATORY . ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY AND DEVICES LABORATORY ENGINEER TOPOGRAPHIC LABORATORIES ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION FIELD.A~TILLERY BOARD FRANKFORD ARSENAL LABORATORIES HARRY DIAMOND LABORATORIES HUMAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY INFANTRY BOARD INSTITUTE OF DENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF SURGICAL RESEARCH KWAJALEIN MISSILE RANGE, MARSHALL ISLANDS LETTERMAN ARMY INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH MATERIAL SYSTEMS ANALYS IS AGENCY MATERIALS AND MECHANICS RESEARCH CENTER MATERIEL TESTING DIRECTORATE MEDICAL BIOENGINEERING R&D LABORATORY MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF INFECTIOUS MISSILE RES., DEV., AND ENG. LABORATORY

DISEASES

MOBILITY EQUIPMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND MOBILITY SYSTEMS LABORATORY NATICK R&D ~OMMAND NIGHT VISION LABORATORY PICATINNY ARSENAL h~BORATORIES R&D TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL & SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE TROPIC TEST CENTER WALTER REED ARMY INSTITUTE OF PESEARCH WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE YUMA PROVING GROUND

Source: Departmeftt of Defense In-House RDT&E. Management Analysis Report: Department of the Army, Denart­ment of the Navy, Department of the Air Force, 30 October 1976.

In-House Laboratories

Table 2. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

AEROSPACE MEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER AIR ENGINEERING CENTER AIR PROPULSION TEST CENTER AIR TEST CENTER AIR TEST FACILITY (SHIP INSTALLATIONS) ARCTIC RESEARCH LABORATORY BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY BLOOD RESEARCH LABORATORY CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY CLOTHING AND TEXTILE RESEARCH UNIT COASTAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY DENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, NTC ELECTRONICS LABORATORY CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL PREDICTION RESEARCH FACILITY EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL FACILITY HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER MEDICAL FIELD RESEARCH LABORATORY MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE MEDICAL RESEARCH UNIT NO. 2 (TAIWAN) MEDICAL RESEARCH UNIT NO.3 (EGYPT) MEDICAL RESEARCH UNIT NO.5 (ETHIOPIA) NATIONAL PARACHUTE TEST RANGE ORDNANCE MISSILE TESIFACILITY PACIFIC MISSILE TEST CENTER PERSONNEL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER. RESEARCH LABORATORY SHIP RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER SUBMARINE MEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER UNDERS EA CENTER UNDERWATER RANGES D!REcrORATE UNDERWATER SYSTEMS CENTER WEAPONS CENTER WEAPONS EVALUATION FACILITY

Source: Department o£ De£ense In-House RDT&E. Management Analysis Report: Department o£ the Army, Department o£ the Navy, Department o£ the Air Force, 30 October 1916.

In-House Laboratories

Table 3. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AEROPROPULSION LABORATORY, ARMAMENT DEVELOPMENT AND TEST CENTER ARNOLD ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT CENTER AVIONICS LABORATORY CIVIL ENGINEERING CENTER EASTERN TEST RANGE FLIGHT DYNAMICS LABORATORY FLIGHT TEST CENTER FRANK J. SEILER RESEARCH LABORATORY GEOPHYSICS LABORATORY HUMAN RESOURCES LABORATORY MATERIALS LABORATORY ROCKET PROPULSION LABORATORY ROME AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE MEDICINE SPACE AND MISSILE TEST CENTER WEAPONS LABORATORY 6570 AEROSPACE MEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

ARMED FORCES RADIOBIOLOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Source: Department of Defense In-House RDT&E. Management Analysis Report: Department of the Army, Department of the Navy, Department of the Air Force, 30 October 1976.

Tabl e 4. Army Research Laboratories (List No.2)

Army laboratories and activities that will participate in the In-House Laboratory Independent Research Program during fiscal year 1972 ... These laboratories and activities are: ARMY MATERIEL COM~·1AND (28) Air Mobility R&D Laboratories Ballistic Research Laboratories Biological Sciences Laboratories Coating and Chemical Laboratory Harry Diamond Laboratories Human Engineering Laboratories Materials and Mechanics Research Center Natick Laboratories . Atmospheric Sciences Laboratory Avionics Laboratory Combat Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Systems Integration Laboratory Communications/ADPS Laboratory Electronics Components Laboratory Electronics Warfare Laboratory Institute for Exploratory Research Night Vision Laboratory Missile Command R&D Laboratories ~·1obi 1 ity Equi pment Research and Development Center U1ERDC) Pica tinny Arsenal R&D Laboratories Frankford Arsenal R&D Laboratories Edgewood Arsenal R&D Laboratories Tank and Automotive Command R&D Laboratories Deseret Test Center Electronic Proving Ground Tropic Test Center White Sands Missile Range Benet R&E Laboratories Science and Technology Laboratory

CHIEF OF ENGINEERS (4) Cold Regions R&E Laboratory Construction Engineering Research Laboratory Topographical Laboratory Waterways Experiment Station

CHIEF OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (1) Manpower Resources R&D Center

MEDICAL R&D COMMAND (11) Aeromedical Research Laboratory Biomechanica1 Research Laboratory Equipment and Dev~lopment Laboratory Institute of Dental Research Institute of Infectious Diseases Institute of Surgical Research Letterman Army Institute of Research Research Institute of Environmental Medicin Medical Research Laboratory Research and Nutrition Laboratory Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (Total - 44)

Source: Dept. of Defense Appropriations for FY.1972, Hearings, Comm. on Appropriations, US Senate, 92 Cong. Part 2, 1971, pg. 1278.

~--------------~~.~-~. ~--,-.

@

Table :i NASA RESEARCH CENTERS AND OTHER FACILITIES

1 ) Ames Research Center 2) Flight Research Center 3) Langley Research Center 4) Lewis Research Center 5) Goddard Space Flight Center 6) Jet Propulsion Laboratory 7) Wa llops Station 8) George C. Marshall Space Flight Center 9) Manned Spacecraft Center

10) Launch Operations Center 11) Pacific Launch Operations Office 12) Goddard Institute of Space Studies 13) North-Eastern office 14 ) Nuclear Rocket Development Station 15 ) Space Nuclear Propulsion Office 16) Western Operations Office

(omits all downrange and overseas facilities)

Source: Flight International 84 (2851), October 31, 1963, pg. 730.

@ Table 6. MASTER LIST OF FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS (as of June 1,1968)

A. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 1 . Office of the Secretary of Defense

Administered by Other Nonprofit Institutions: Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA)

2. Department of the Army Administered by Universities and Colleges:

Army Mathematics Research Center (University of ~Ji scons in)

Center for Research in Social Systems (Amer­ican University)

Human Resources Research Office (George Wash­incton University)

Administered by Other Nonprofit Institutions: Research Analysis Corporation (RAC)

3. Department of the Navy Administered by Universities and Colleges:

Applied Physics Laboratory (Johns Hopkins University)

Applied Physics Laboratory (University of Washington)

Center for Naval Analyses (University of Rochester)

Hudson Laboratories (Columbia University) (to be phased out June 30, 1969)

Ordnance Research Laboratory (Pennsylvania State University)

4. Department of the Air Force Administered by Universities and Colleges:

Lincoln Laboratory (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Administered by Other Nonprofit Institutions: Aerospace Corporation Analytic Services, Inc. (ANSER) Illinois Institute of Technology, Research

Institute (IITRI) at Electromagnetic Com­patibility Analysis Center

MITRE Corporation RAND Corporation

B. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Administered by Industrial Firma:

Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory (Westinghouse Electric Corp.)

Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (General Elec­tric Company)

Mound Laboratory (Monsanto Chemical Company) National Reactor Testing Station (Phillips

Petroleum Co. and Idaho Nuclear Corp.) Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Union Carbide

Corp. ) Sandia Laboratory (Western Electric Co., Inc.

--Sandia Corp.) Savannah River Laboratory (E. I. du Pont de

Nemours & Co., Inc.) Administered by Universities and Colleges:

Ames Laboratory (Iowa State University of Science and Technology)

Argonne National Laboratory (University of Chicago and Argonne Universities Assn.)

Brookhaven Na tiona 1 Labora tory (Assoc ia ted Universities, Inc.)

Cambridge Electron Accelerator (Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, Berkeley and Livermore (University of California)

Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (University of California)

Oak Ridge Associated Universities Plasma Physics Laboratory (Princeton University) Princeton-Pennsylvania Accelerator (Princeton

University and University of Pennsylvania) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (Stanford

University) Administered by Other Nonprofit Institutions:

Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission (National Academy of Sciences)

Pacific Northwest Laboratory (Battelle Memo­rial Institute)

Table 6 (cont'd)

C. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION Administered by Universities and Colleges:

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (California Insti­tute of Technology)

Space Radiation Effects Laboratory (College of William and Mary)

D. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Administered by Universities and Colleges:

Cerro To1010 Inter-American Observatory (Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.)

Kitt Peak National Observatory (Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy Inc.)

National Center for Atmospheric Research (University Corporation for Atmospheric Research)

National Radio Astronomy Observatory (Asso­ciated Universities, Inc.)

Source: National Science Foundation, Federal Funds for Research, Development, and Other Scientific Activities, FY 1967, 1968, 1969, pp. 97-99.

r

Table 7. (Uk) ARMY DEPARTMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHMENTS

Establishment HQ Directorate

Royal Armament Research ! Director General and Development Estab-! Artilh.:ry lishment

i

of i

I I

Fighting Vehicles Research: and Development Estab-' Iishment .

Director General of· Fighting Vehicles and Engineering Equipment

Military Engineering Experi- Director General of mental Establishment Fighting Vehicles

and Engineering Equipment

;:hemical Defence Experi- Director of Biological mental Establishment and Chemical De­

Microbiological Establishment

fence Research Director of Chemical

and Biological I Defence

Army Personnel Research I' Director of Army Establishment Operational Science

and Research Stores and Clothing Research ! Quartermaster General

and Development Estab-! (Brigadier Q) lishment I

Proof and Experimental! Chief Superintendent' Establishments I of Ranges .

Ordnance Board

! I ! i I I I I I

Location Function

Fort Halstead, Scvenoaks, Kent : To develop weapons and weapon systems for the Army. (Outstations at \Voolwich; i The Establishment also undertakes some weapon and Langhurst, Near Horsham, I equipment development for all three Services, and work Sussex; Potton Island, Shoe- I for the Home Office on industrial explosives and hazardollS buryness, Essex; Tolworth, i substances and on investigations arising from the use of Surbiton, Surrey; Melton I explosives for criminal purposes. Work on guided weapons Mowbray, Leics) : is undertaken on behalf of the Ministry of Technology.

Chertsey, Surrey. (Range facili- , To develop armoured vehicles for the Army. It is also ties at Kirkcudbright, Scot- I responsible for developing special vehicles for all services land) I including the modification of commercial vehicles for

defence applications and for the assessment and evaluation of commercial vehicles and passenger cars.

Christchurch, Hants To develop military engineer equipment. The establishment

Porton Down, Salisbury, Wilts (Outstations at Nancekuke, Cornwall)

Port on Down, Salisbury Wilts I I

Farnborough, Hants

Colchester, Essex

Shoeburyness, Essex (Out-stations at Lavington, Wilts; Eskmeals Cumberland; Inchterf, Glasgow; Pendine, Carmarthenshire)

London ...

may also, on a repayment basis, undertake the evaluation of commercial construction plant and equipment.

Assessment of the hazards of chemical warfare, and develop­ment of chemical defence equipment on behalf of the three Services and Civil Defence.

Assessment of the risk of biological warfare and the design of means of defence.

All aspects of human factors research for the Army.

Research and development of clothing and general stores for the three Services.

Trials required in connection with research, development and production of explosive stores, of gun barrcls and the like. R&D trials are carried out mainly on behalf of RARDE and the Ordnance Board. About 40 per cent. of the work of these ranges consists of proof of production.

An independent inter-Service technical trials and advisory organisation, whose costs are borne on Army Votes, for the approval of the safety and effectiveness of weapons and weapon systems in which explosives are used. The Board performs trials on weapons during design, and investigates defects reported on equipment already in service. Monthly trials are held at Proof and Experimental Establishments.

Source: Second Report from the Select Committee on Science and Technology, Defence Research, Session 1968-1969, London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1969.

'.fable 8. (U ~ J NAVY DEPARTMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHMENTS 1. MAJOR EsTABLISHMENTS

Headquarters

I Function Location Directorate

Admiralty Surface Weapons Portsdown. Hants ... ... DGW(N) ... Development of ship-borne equipment for guided weap0!lS, Establishment (ASWE) including radars, magazine stowage. launchers and handhng

gear: radars for aircraft direction. early wat?ing, and navigation; communications and other electroruc warfare equipment; action data automation. .

~dmiralty Underwater Weapons Portland. Dorset ... ... DGW(N) ... Development of torpedoes. their control systems and launching Establishment (AUWE) gear: sonar equipments and associated trainers: mine

countermeasures and research into problems such as acoustic propogation, reverberation and the use of computer tech-niques. Experimental diving.

Admiralty Research Laboratory Teddington, Middlesex ... CRNSS ... Research into underwater acoustics, fluid dynamics including (ARL) drag and water entry techniques, instrumentation, optics and

general supporting mathematical studies. Studies of radio-, logical phenomena.

2. OTHER EsTABLISHMENTS

Location

~ervices Electronics Research Baldock, Herts ... Laboratory (SERL)

• dmiralty Materials Laboratory Holton Heath, Dorset ... (AML)

Admiralty CompaSs Observatory Slough, Bucks ... (ACO)

AdmirnltyEngineering Laboratory West Drayton, Middlesex (AEL)

Admiralty Marine Engineering Haslar, Hants Establishment (AMEE)

Admiralty Experiment Works Haslar, Hants (AEW)

Naval Construction Research Dunfermline, Fife Establishment (NCRE)

NOTES:

I Directorate

I CRNSS

I CRNSS

I DGW(N)

DG Ships

DG Ships

DG Ships

DG Ships

Functioll

Microwave electronics, semi conductors, tr:l.Osis.tors, lasers and gaseous electronics for all three Services .

Research into aspects of materials and chemical engineering which are of special interest to the RN. Fuel ceil research work for all three Services.

Advanced navigational systems, including inertial navigation. gyro and magnetic compasses. Compass testing for all three Services.

Test. evaluation and development of internal combustion engines and electrical equipment for HM Ships; instrumenta­tion and control systems: noise and vibration probkms.

Test and evaluation of ship-borne machinery other than internal combustion engines. including boiler controls, combustion equipment anu auxiliary machinery.

Hull design and development, including model testing. Manoeuvrability and control, seaworthiness and stabilisation, dynamic stability of surface ships and submarines. Ship trials and analysis: propellor design and noise reduction.

Structural design, strength tests and analysis. Explosion and shock phenomena and effects. Noise transmission through structures. Development of structural materials and welding techniques.

1. Experimental work is also carried out at the Admiralty Reactor Test Establishment, Dounrcay. 2_ Rand D staff are also employed at a number of other establishments to carry out Rand D into subjects sllch as: Trials of gunnery equipment; improvements into the methods of inspection of propellants and powders used in the RN: Naval medicine: physiological

question, particularly in the underwater field; fuels and lubricants; desalination: quality control; and performance testing.

__ ble 9. The AViation Ministry R&D Establishments The Avmin establishments wer~ set up to enable the Department's

decessors to carry out their statutory duties for defence procurement. establishments are:-

The Royal Aircraft Establishment (R.A.E.), The Royal Radar Establishment (R.R.E.), The National Gas Turbine Establishment (N.G.T.E.), The Explosives Research and Development Establishment (E.R.D.E.). The Signals Research and Development Establishment (S.R.D.E.). The Rocket Propulsion Establishment (R.P.E.). The Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment (A. & A.E.E.). The Aircraft Torpedo Development Unit (A.T.D.U.).

pre­The

Source: Second Report from the Select Committee on SCience and Technology, Defence Research, Session 1968-1969, London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1969.

Group IV: How does the process work

Part I: Nine US Weapon Development Histories

Introductory Text

Figure 1. Distribution of Mark 46-0 Torpedo R&D Events by Time

Figure 2. Distribution of Inertial Guidance and Navigation R&D Events by Time

Figure 3. Distribution of Transistor and Other Solid State Devices R&D Events by Time

Figure 4. Distribution of AGM-28 Hound Dog R&D Events by Time

Figure 5. Dis tri bu ti on of Solid Propellant R&D Events by Time

Figure 6. Distribution of Solid Propellant Con trol sand Materials R&D Events by Time

Figure 7. Distribution of Sergeant R&D Events by Time

Figure 8. Distribution of Polaris R&D Events by Time

Figure 9. Distribution of Minuteman R&D Events by Time

®

Part II: Comparisons in US and USSR Weapon Development of Analagous Systems

Figure 1. Evolution of US Main Battle Tank

Figure 2. Evolution of Soviet Main Battle Tank

Figure 3. Soviet and US Cruise Missiles

Table 1. Soviet Cruise Missiles

Table 2. Input Assessment, Fighter Aircraft

Table 3. Relative US/USSR Standing in the Most Important Basic Technology Areas (US DOD Assessment)

Table 4. Relative US/USSR Technological Levels in Deployed Military Systems (US DOP Assessment)

Table 5. Aircraft Development--Outputs ("New" Models, First Flights and Operational Use)

Figure 4. Number of New Tactical Weapon Systems Developed, 1965-75 Figure 5. Land-Based ICBM Developments

Figure 6. SLBM Developments

Figures 1-9; Examples of the Research and Development Histories of Nine US Weapon Systems, or Components.

The following figures are adapted from more detailed versions prepared as part of a study entitled Management Factors Affecting Research and Exploratory Development. The study was prepared in April 1965 by the consulting firm Arthur D. Little Inc. For the Director of Defense, Research and Engineering of the US Dept. of Defense. The weapons systems or components for which development histories are presented are as follows: 1) Mark 46-0 Acoustic Homing Torpeds 2) Inertial Guidance and Navigation 3) Transistors and Other Solid-State Components 4) AGM-28 "Hound Dog" Air-To-Ground" missile 5) Solid Propellant Rockets (Propellant) 6) Solid Propellant Rockets (Controls) 7) Sergeant Missile 8) Polaris Missile 9) Minuteman Missile

There was also a short textual description of the development history of the XM-102, 105 ~m. Howitzer.

The Arthur D.Little study, like the more well know Project Hindsight and TRACES studies, were commissioned by the US Dept. of Defense in an attempt to ascertain to what degree and in what manner basic research led to innovations of use in the development of weapons systems.

The following remarks are taken from the description of the A.D. Li ttl e 'researcheys!regardi ng thei r fi ndi ngs: II ••• In each case an attempt has been made to display in graphic form a historical tree showing a main stream of development which contributed to one of these systems, leading back to origins in exploratory activity. The particular innovative research and exploratory development activities which we have identified as R&D Events are indicated on these trees. Thus, these show the time sequence of the R&D' Events, the interconnectJon of R&D Events and other research and development activity into connected progressions, the weapon system subsystems, circuits, devices, and materials which benefited from these progressions of research and development ....

'Two things are immediately obvious from these graphical presentations. First, there are very few spectacular, II key II Events, technological breakthro~ghs, or other innovations which could be described in dramatic terms. The bulk of the innovations were relatively minor, and seem in

@ ... , ...... .

retrospect quite uninteresting. Originally, we were determined to find R&D Events of great importance, and tended to ignore avenues of investiga­tion which would turn up only relatively routine activity. The spectacular Events failed to materialize in large numbers, and we now realize that the number of unspectacular R&D Events could have been multiplied consider­ably if the study had been carried out with more modest expectations. In fact, the study of the Bull-Pup Missile carried out by the DDR&E steering group adopted such a point of view, and unearthed proportionately a much larger number of R&D Events.

A second observation is that the R&D Events contributing to a particular weapon system development are spread over a long period of time. The actual time spre.&is underestimated in these charts, for we made no particular attempt to carry our historical efforts back more than twenty years. Indirectly, this shows that there is no well defined research phase or exploratory development phase in the history of the development of these particular weapons systems. This point is further emphasized by la~er evidence showing that a significant proportion of exploratory development activities only take their definitive form after problems arising in later stages of system development, or even in operational use, have to be faced.

For half of the Events the technological base had existed five or more years prior to Event initiation: that is, except for the particular innovative idea which formed the kernel of the Event, all the other science and technology involved had existed and been available for five or more years... In many cases a recognition of a specific need followed some time after a more general need had been widely recognized. In these cases the Event was responsive to the more specific need rather than the more general. For example, the design and demonstration of a low­cavitation propel lor, was based on general work started at Naval Ordnance Research Laboratory at Pennsylvania State University. This work primarily took the form of theoretical analysis and experimental studies of hydro­dynamics at the Garfield Thomas Water Tunnel, and it was carried on for six years in the absence of specific requirements for high-speed quiet prope 11 ors.

In 1954, the Bureau of Ordnance made a specific request concerning the feasibility of a high-speed, low-cavitation propel lor for use in torpedoes.

~'Jith this stimulus, an experimental propellor was designed and demon­strated in about a year .... ORL had claimed for about five years before that they could design such a propellor, but no actual design appears to have creen undertaken until the specific need was pressed. Since then, the design of high-speed, low-cavitation propellors has become common­place.

Logically, making a need more specific reduces the range of acceptable solutions. Nevertheless, in this case and in most of the others, the work which actually achieved a utilized result was stimulated by the specific need. Furthermore, this work resulted not only in a specific propel lor, but in general design methods so broad that no further work on this class of propellors is likely to be called exploratory development.

In many of the Events the burst of successfully utilized exploratory activity ... started only when the three following elements were present: a. An explicitly understood need, goal, or misston; b. A source of ideas, typically a pool of information, experience

and insight in the minds of people who could apply it; and c. Resources, usually facilities, materials, money, and trained

and experienced men, which could be committed to do a job. As an illustration, consider the Development of techniques for the prepara­tion of sound thick sections of highly oriented pyrolytic graphite. This activity was carried out in the Materials Section of a nuclear power group in the Research Division of a large defense contracting firm. The nuclear power group was working on a concept for a liquid-metal fueled, gas-cooled nuclear reactor.

The particular need in this case was for a suitable impermeable protective coating for graphite, to permit its use as a primary material of construc­tion. The properties of graphite make it particularly suitable to serve certain functions in a reactor; impermeability was desired to control the diffusion of the gas coolant. This particular formulation of the need was jointly arrived at by the people in the Materials Section and other scien­tists and technologists actively engaged in reactor design. The over-all goal, which was shared by the Materials Section, was to demonstrate the superiority of a nuclear reactor based on some novel concepts.

~ ~ ~

:IE lu .-tn >-tn

LEGEND:

COMPOSITE: GALCIT ~ EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT

~

PROPELLANTS

z 0 (i) ...J

~ \ ENGINE 0::

{ a.

I

\ PROPELLORS {

~ (EXPLOSIVE w

{ :I: 0::

~ , FUZE {

ACOUSTIC { w' HOMING 0 z <t: 0 :::l (!)

( L 1940

FIGURE 1,

POLYSULFIDE BINDER

~

HOT-GAS

WdYM I

LOW-CAVITATION

I Wda I I I I

COUNTER-ROTATING

~ I

H-6 DEVELOPMENT

45

~

50

INFLUENCE FUZE

I~ I I

DOPPLER ENABLER

~~ eil tnl ~I ~I 0::

REva PANEL

55

~ ~I~ ~Icn 0::0 <t:

1cO :!:o::

60

1 I I I I I.

65

DISTRIDunON OF MARK 46-0 TORPEDO RXD EVENTS BY TIME

70

I

l® ~ ! J

~ 1 :j ,

NAVIGATION {

BALLISTIC GUIDANCE {

CQMPONENTS

COMPUTERS {

FEBE SYSTEM;

~

INERTIAL PLATFORM

~

MK 14 GUN SIGHT

~ MICROSYN

~ FLOATED GI M BAL GYRO

IW//@J

LORAN C

I I I , I I I I I

1]];.;.:.: I I,' ........, I ........ I I , : I I I I ,

LANNING-BATTIN EQUATIONS

~. I'i I " I I I I I I I I , , I " , 'I, I I I I

I II' MAGNETIC BEARING GYRO

~II GAS BEARING GYRO

1W(f@t:1 ACCELEROMETER I

~II DIGITAL DIFF. ANALYZER ,

11ttff:::::::::::::j=:=::j I I I

1940 45

.:.:.:.:.;.;::.;;:;:::::::::;:.:;::: I I I I DISC MEMORY

[mmmmJ II .... ~I (1)1

il ~, ~

50 55

II I .... I~ ~I~ (l)I;J;J (l)lg;) ~I~ ~I~

LEGEND:

~ EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT

h:J ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT

60 65 70

FIGURE 2. ~ISTRIBurrrON OF INERTIAL GUIDANCE AND "TAVIGATJC'~ RXD -"VENTS .. TIME

'0

PHYSICS {

METALLUGY

CHEMISTRY {

CONFIGURATION {

PRODUCTION {

CIRCUITS {

1940

FIGURE ~.

LEGEND:

~ RESEARCH

~ EXPLORATORY ~ DEVELOPMENT

r:o=J ADVANCED ::::::: DEVELOPMENT

TRANSISTOR. wm METALLURGICAL RESEARCH

~ GERMANIUM TRANSISTOR

~ FLOAT-ZONE MELTING

~ SILICON TRANSISTOR

~ CHEMICAL RESEARCH - OXIDE MASKING

~ CONFIGURATION RESEARCH -WIRE CONTACTS m

PLANAR

IfL] INTEGRATED CIRCUITS

~1Wdl INTEGRATED CIRCUITS

~ IWdl _

45 50 55 60 65 70

DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSISTOR AND OTHER SOLID STATE DEVICES RXD -VENTS B"" TIME ' '

@)

w u Z <l: Cl

:::::> (!)

:z o I­« (!)

> <l: :z

~ w ::x: I­o

ELECTRONICS{

I~ERTlAL{ GUIDANCE

GUIDANCE { COMPUTER

PHOTOELECTRIC{ SEXTANT

ALTIMETER {

RADAR{ ABSORBER

FUEL{

POWER PLANT{

I TRANSISTOR RXD

~~ I I I I

II II II II II II' II II

LEGEND: it RESEARCH

~ EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT

I ltd ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT

I GYROSCOPE RESEARCH II

II II

I I ~ ~ I"'7""lW~~7-72-r-?A~~~""""'ltt-tt~""""1~lg""""'ta I

1940 45

ACCELEROMETER

V/Tal:1

" , I DIGITAL COMPUTER DEVELOPMENT

V//7//A II I I I: I I II I I

SIGNAL PROCESSING

ft~~~~f~flIt~!t@

50

II II I

~ADAR AlJIMETER

W211 I

55

REAR 'I r.:m II ~

JP-4 ANTIfREEZE

us:;:t:I fZJ ~j!~ I '-, UJ II) t:nI ~ (!) I «

~! UJ 0 Z

~:!:~ iLl °l~ ,c(9~ iLl 01 « ::>w 0 z a: «w -'I =>1 UJ Za. t::l 0 a.

.. a.1 :%:10

60 65

FIGURE 4. DISTRIBUTION OF AGM-28 HOUND DOG RXD EVENTS BY TIME

70

I@

.­Z <t --l --l W 0.. o a:: 0..

PROPEllANT

BINDER

CASE BONDING {

ALUMINUM { ADDITI VES

COMPOSITE PROPELLANT

~ CAST DB PROPELLANT

~

POLYSULFIDE BINDER

~

1 1 I 1 I I

LEGEND:

~ EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT

CMDB PROPELLANT

~ I I

POLYBUTADIENE BINDER V7777l I I rLLU.d 1 I

POLYURETHANE BINDER J?'7}'J I I ~ II

NP POLYURETHANE PROPELLANT

CASE - BONDED GRAIN I~ 1 I

~ I I AL FOR IMPULSE ~I

I 1 AL FOR STABI LlTY

f2jJ I I • .J I I~ 0:1 rr l ~~ ~I ~I 1(1) en (1)1 Z1 0 ..... 1 ~IW ~ ~I Gj/v wi 0:1 I--l~ (!)I ~ =>l 0: ffil 51 ~I~ (I) D.:::::!:-~

1940 45 50 55 60 65 70

FIGURES'. DISTRIBUTION OF SOLID PROPELLANT RXD EVENTS BY TIME

"@

.it

en w u :;;: w Cl

...J o 0: ..... Z o U

en ...J ~

0: W

~ ::E

THRUST VECTOR CONTROL

TERMINATION {

IGNITION {

NOZZLES

ABLATIVE { COOLING

MOTOR CASES

LEGEND:

FLUID INJECTION

IWdFdI

T I

T I , , ,

~ EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT

ARC MELTING

~

ARC MELTING

WdJ

JET EVATOR .

Wffffi7 // /d1 I SWIVELED NOZZLE

~I ROTATABLE NOZZLE I I~ I I I I I I

THRUST REVERSAL ~ I I

~ I I I I, I

PYROGEN IGNITER' ~II

I l: ~I··---rl ~I I I (1)1 PYRO. GRAPHITE

~I ~ '~I SILVER IMP. TUNGSTEN

~, I ~ ABLATIVE INSULATION

~I II I I ~I

I~I FILAMENT-WOUND CASE

I Irl ~I ~I zl (1)1 q: I (I) :::!i: Wdj

WOUND-END Cl.OSING

1940 45 50

'a:1 ~I ~ :31~1

~I :::!i:1 I I I I I I I

55 60 65 70

FIGURE 6. DLc::.'rRIBUTION OF SOLID PROPELLANT CONTROLS AND M ERlALS RXD EVENTS BY TIME

i'

k~ ,I ~

GUIDANCE

ELECTRONICS

PROPULSION

SYSTEM

{

{

GUIDANCE DEVELOPMENT

I?j~

GERMANIUM

I I I I

LEGEND:

~

rdJ RESEARCH

EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT

~I FLOAT -ZONE MELTING

~ SILICON TRANSISTOR

~

~

I PLANAR/TRANSISTOR

I r?1l I I I I I I

I

COMPOSITE PROPELLANTS

POLYSULFIDE BINDER

l?J@ CASE-BONDED GRAIN

I ~ I PYROGEN IGNITER

~I ~ g I ffil TRANSONIC RESPONSE

~I ~ W00I ~ I ~I ZERO - LENGTH LAUNCH

@I ~II- ~ (F) WIll: «I I-~ ti . ~_cn

~

1940 45 50 55 60

FI&URf " Dr UBuno )F SERGEANT RXD EVENTS BY 1 E

65 70

~IDA~E D~LOP~ LEGEND I I ~ RESEARCH I I

GUIDANCE DEVELOPMENT

~ ~ EXPLORATORY NAVIGATION DEVELOPMENT

AND • I

GUIDANCE DEVELOPMENT UJ GUIDANCE ~ [ill ADVANCED u :z DEVELOPMENT -< LORAN C 0 ::; Em \,!)

TRANSISTOR RXI)

ELECTRONICS { ~~ I

I OXIDE MASKINy_

~I PROPELLANT RESEARCH I

~ ~ I I I

POLYURETHANE BINDERS

~I :~I PROPELLANT CMDB ~ROPELLANT

: I~ ALUMINUM ADDITIVES: AT RES.

~ I I :z THRUST VECTOR CONTROL s:!

CONTROLS { ~ l~ en

-l :::::> IGNITION a THRUST REVERSAL Q..

~I 0 a: Q.. I I

ARC MELTING I 1 ~ 1 1

NOZZLE MATERIALS I ~

MATERIALS I I

ABLATIVE INSULATION

~ I I

FIBERGLAS~R CASE

~i I

% I SU'MERGED {

BARE MISSIL: ~UNCI'

~ u :z LAUNCH SHAPED LINE CHARGE a: :::::> ~ -< ~I~~~ -l

'-'I"'''' I ~ ~<l ~tcn~ Q. I4.Icnl ~ cll~a: 81~:51 ~ <L 0

'" <L

1940 45 50 55 60 65 70

FIGURE 8. DISTRIBUTION OF POLARIS RXD EVENTS BY TIME

®

----

RE-ENTRY {

GUIDANCE {

ELECTRONICS

SHOCK TUBE

~ RE-ENTRY RXD

I?M0J GUIDANCE DEVELOPMENT ~ ~ ~ ·,.;.:.;,W3200;;;;.:.r.,...,..,...,..,....,0-r->0;..-r-~'r"'r'~r-r~."..,..W-r'7~"'T70~~ I

GAS-BEARING GYRO

IW#AI TRANSISTOR RXD

~~ I EPITAXIAL DEPOSITION I

~I INTEGRATED CIRCUI TS

1Z3~ INTEGRATED CIRCUITS

LEGEND:

~ RESEARCH

177.1 EXPLORATORY ~ DEVELOPMENT

L] ADVANCED :::::: DEVELOPMENT

f2j ~-PROPELLANT RESEARCH

PROPELLANT { I ~ ~ t01 FLUID INJECTION. _.

WaJ ~~

SWIVELED NOZZLES"

~I CONTROLS{ IGNITION a THRUST REV.

~: MATERIALS RESEARCH

MATERIALS { wa IWdJ ~$/al I ~

lzl ~I ~I !cl

::E~I ~ widll-- 21 In >I~ 1--1 ln~ t; ~I u.

1940 45 50 55 60

FIGURE ,. DISTRIBUTION OF MINUTEMAN RXD EVENTS BY TIME

65 70

• Engine

• Transmission -r 1945 1948

M26 M46

I 1943-44

T20 Series Exl lental

._ilks

- Engine

• Transmission

• Suspension

·Gun

- Annor

• Turret

• Hull

-1-1950 1953

M47 M48

Turret

1950

T42

Prototype

Fig. ,.

• Hull

-85-mm - Transmission

gun • Suspension

• MaC'hine gun

• Fuel tankage

• Fuel injection • Turret

• Suspension -- • Machine gun

-~

·105-mm gun

• Diesel engine -r 1956 1959

M48A2 M60

1956

T95

, Prototype I

1 1962

M60AI

1966 MS51

Sheridan (light)

1967

M60A2

1967

M8T70/ XM803

Prototype

Evolution of U.S. main battle tank

-100-mm

• Stabilization (elevation)

• Fume extractor

• Infrared light -' • New track

-Improved suspension

-Improved transmission

-Computed)

• Improved turret

• Engine reliability

• Stabilization

• Air cleaner

• Track

• Computer

• Laser range finder

• Sensors

• Suspension

- EI ectrical system

1975

M60A3

1976

XMl

Prototype

( ?)

- Gun - Stabil ization

(azimuth) - 115-mm gun • Engine

_ Snorkel - larger hull - Rongefinder

I I I

i I

T'T' F'L 1943

U-'T-34/85

1931-1937

ST Series H 1944

T-44/85

Tgun • Stalin-type

turret

,.....--!----,'T' -r fi~~~1962 I T-54 I tfITIT T-62

1947

T-44/100

-r f>l l:J

J 1931 1930s 1974

Christie MI931 Experimental

tanks

L 1970 L , M 1970 I T -64

Prototype

Fig. 2. Evolution of Soviet main battle tank

Source: A.J. Alexander, Armor Development in the Soviet Union and the United States, R-1860-NA, Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, September 1976, pp. 129-130.

Figure 3 • Soviet and U.S. Cruise Missiles

Q) r-I '.-1

CD Q) CD 0

'.-1 s:: :E: Q)

4-i Q) Q)

CDA '.-1

~ CD ~

0 Q) CD •

CIl CD"" p as

.. M ~ CD

r-I •• .. Q) "t1 rr\ ~~oo ~oo-. o 4-i ~

CIl ~ 0 ..

• 112

<f CDS..t! Q) as CD r-I~-.-f ~ r-I -asO,.c ..t!~~ oP-t

Q) 0 ~ ::1 0

CIl

Table 1 •

... . = ..-CD"" Q)C\J

r-I -.-f •• CD--CDrr\

-.-fOO :E:o-. ..-Q) CD 0

'.-1 Q)

~~ 0>

0 ~z Q)-

• .-1 >\.0 o ••

CIl "" = C\J

... ~r-I -.-I rd ;3:>

'.-1 r-I > Q) ~ o :::s ~CIl

Q)

0 ~ ::1 0

CIl

AS·l

SSC·2b SS·N·l

. ~ ~ ;g-:C.

€e~g~r SS·N·2a.

AS.3 £4:'" ;:.2 -==~~~~)~SS~'N~'7 SS·N-3e a;:; I., iiI> 'b; c ~4 SSC-la ~Ts:'5 "'&::::::---1 SS~/_

., SS-N-2e

U.S.S.R. ~SS-N-3a qO;:::::::;=~=::!l:'::' mOnt:::: SS-N-3b

I SSC-lb _SS·N-14

AS-e J\}e----3> ~ •. IIC> SS-N-12 i - ·M - -1960 1965 1970 1975

ALCM-A/SCAIl Harpoon

~----------~. t:

ALCM-B' (AGM-86B)

I

Hound Dog

UNITED STATES

C:C •• ;::::::===- Tomahawk: (SLeM &. GLCM)

Source: u.s. Congress, House of Representatives, House Committee on Appropriations. Hearings on Department of Defense Appropriations for 1980, Part 3. p. 506. JOint Cruise Missiles Project Office. The World's Missiles Systems. 7th ed. (Pomona. General Dynamics. ApnI1982). pp. 115-116.

Soviet Cruise MfssDes

Range Target Type roc (Ian) Armament

Air-launched AS-l Kennel Anti-ship 1958 93 Conventional AS-2 Kipper Anti-ship 1961 185 Conventional or nuclear AS-3 Kangaroo Land-attack 1960 650 Nuclear

Anti-ship AS-4 Kitchen Land-attack 1967 465-555 Conventional or nuclear

Defence suppression

AS-5 Kelt Anti-ship

1965 93-185 Conventional or nuclear Defence suppression

AS-6 Kingfish Anti-ship 1970 280-465 Conventional or nuclear Defence suppression

AS-7 Kerry Defence suppression 1971 19 Conventional AS-9 Defence suppression 1975 150-167 Conventional

• I ~.:

Ground-launched SSC-Ib Sepal Anti-ship 1962 280-370 Conventional or nuclear SSC-2a Salish Land-attack 7 185-280 Conventional SSC-2b Samlet Anti-ship 1958-9 40 Conventional SSC-X-4 Land-attack 7. 3,333 Conventional or nuclear

Sea-launched SS-N-l Scrubber Anti-ship 1957 185 Conventional SS-N-2 Styx Anti-ship 1959 ' 35 Conventional SS-N-3c Shaddock Land-attack 1960 835 Nuclear SS-N-3a Shaddock Anti-ship 1962 280-370 Conventional or nuclear SS-N-7 Anti-ship 1968 60-70 Conventional or nuclear SS-N-9 Siren Anti-ship 1971 100 Conventional or nuclear SS-N-12 Sahdbox Anti-ship 1976 600 Conventional or nuclear SS-N-19 Anti-ship 1980 500 Nuclear SS-NX-21 Land-attack 7 3,000 Nuclear SS-NX-22 Anti-ship 7 7 7

Sources: The Arms Control Association, Arms Control Today, Vol. 13, No.4, May 1983. Bill Gunston. The Illustrated Encyclopedia a/the World's Rockets and Missiles (New York: Crescent Books, 1979). Jane's Weapo1U Systems 1982-1983 (London: Jane's Publishing Co •• 1982).

~

Table 2. INPUT ASSESSMENT, FIGHTER AIRCRAFT

Proto/frod F-86A F-100A Hys tere II a Mfr.-IS MiG-19

Max speed (mph) 670 822 670 f.. 70 <}.'l0

Empty wt. (1000 lb.) 10.5 'V18.5 11.5 8.3 'V14.8

Loaded wt. (1000 lb.) 14.1 28.0 14.3 11.2 It} .8

Design start (qtr/yr) 1-1946 1-1951 1949 1946

First flight 3-1947/2-1948 2-1953/3-1953 1-1951/3-1 q54 1947/1<}48 1954 (proto/prod)

Entered service 4-1948 1-1954 4-1954 1949 1955

Engineering 'V105b 'V130h manhours/1b. "1135 'V70 "1175

Number of 445 (peak) 850 (peak) design engineers 'V 300 (average) 'V550 (average) 75 250 'V290

~odif1cation ("growth design") of Mystere I. b Prototype engineering hours plus 60 percent of engineering hours for first 200-220 production

aircraft. Ratios: F-86: MiG-IS = 1.5:1; F-100: MiG-19 = 1.8:1 (engineering hours per lb. empty wei~ht). The information used for this comparison was abstracted from several unpublished Rand studies.

Source: Robert Perry, Comparisons of Soviet and US Technolo~, R-827-PR, Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, June 1973, p. 15.,

®

Table 3.: Relative US/USSR standing in the mOSl important basic technology areas (US DOD assessment)

1980 1982

Basic Technologies US US-USSR USSR US US-USSR USSR Superior Equal Superior Superior Equal Superior

Aerodynamics/fluid X X dynamics

Automated control X X Conventional warhead X

(including chemical explosives)

Computer -X X Directed energy X X Electro-optical sensor X X-(inc\. IR)

Guidance and X- X-navigation

Hydro-acoustic X Intelligence sensor X Manufacturing/ X X production

Materials (light X- -X weight, high strength)

Microelectronic -X X materials and integrated circuit manufacture

Non-acoustic. X submarine detection

Nuclear warhead X X Optics X- X-Propulsion X- X-(aerospace)

Power sources X (mobile)

Radar sensor X- X Signal processing X X-Software X X Stealth (signature X reduction technology

Submarine detection X-(including silencing)

Telecommunications X X

~\ ,j', "':~;""') ," J ••• J::.

Notes 1. This table is intended to provide a valid vase for comparing overall US and USSR

basic technology, not the technology level in deployed military systems. 2. The technologies selected have the potential for significantly changing the military

balance in the next 10 or 20 years. The technologies are not static; ~hey are improving or have the potential for significant impro·vement.

3. The arrows denote that the relative technology level is changing significantly in the direction indicated.

4. The judgements represent averages within each basic technology area.

Sources ahe table for 1980 is taken from The FY 1981 Department of Defense Program for Research, Development and Acquisition. Statement by the Honorable William J. Perry, Under Secretary of Defense Research and Engineering to the 96th Congress, Second Session, 1980, in US House o(Representatives, Research and Development. Title II, Hearings before the Committee on Armed Forces, Washington D.C.: USGPO, 1980, p. 82. The 1982 table is taken from The FY 1983 Department of Defense Program for Research, Development and Acquisition. Statement by the Honorable Richard D. DeLaue;, Under Secretary of Defense, Research and Engineering, to the 97th Congress, Second Session, 1982, p. 11-21.

Table" : Relative US/USSR technological levels in Deployed Military Systems (US DOD assessment)

8'

1980 1982

Deployed system us US-USSR USSR US US-USSR Superior Equal Superior Superior Equal

Strategic ICBM X X SSBN/SLBM x-SSBN X SLBM X-Bomber X- X SAMs X BMD X Anti-Satellite X Cruise missile X

Tactical Land Forces SAMs (including X X naval)

Tanks -X X Artillery X- X Infantry combat X vehicles

Anti~tank guided X X missiles

Attack Iielicopters X- X Chemical warfare X Theatre ballistic X X

missiles

Air Forces Fighter/attack X X-aircraft

Air-to-air missiles X X PGM X X-Airlift X X

Naval jol'Cl!S SSNs X X Anti-submarine X- X warfare

Sea-based air X- X Surface combatants X X Cruise missile X X-Mine warfare X Amphibious assault X- X

.--------- ... -ell Communications X- X Command & control X X Electronic counter X X measures

Surveillance and X- X-reconnaissance

Early warning X-: X-

USSR Superior

X X X

X

X

X

Notes 1. These are comparisons of system technology level only, and are not necessarily a

measure of military effectiveness. The comparisons are not dependent on scenario, tactics, quantity, training or other operational factors. Systems farther than one year from IOC (Initial Operational Capability) are not considered.

2. The arrows denote that the relative technology level is changing significantly in the direction indicated.

Sources As for table 3 Acronyms: ICBM - Intercontinental Ballistic Missile SSBN - Ballistic Missile Submarine, Nuclear SLBM - Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile SAM - Surface-to-Air Missile BMD - Ballistic Missile Defence PGM - Precision Guided Munition SSN - Submarine, Nuclear C3I - Command, Control, Communications and Imelligence

Table ~ • AIRCRAFT DEVELOP~fENT-OUTPUTS ("new" models, first flights

and operational use)

Source: Robert Perry, Comparisons of Soviet and US Techno1-~, R-827-PR, Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, June 1973, p. 19.

Figure 4.

1945-49

1950-54

1955-59

1960-64

1965-69

1945-49

1950-54

1955-59

1960-64

1965-69

United States Entered

Soviet Union Entered

Total Service Total Service

Fighters and Attack Aircraft

23

18

10

5

2

15

8

3

2

1

14

17

8

4

2

6

7

3

1

1

35

13

9

8

8

Bombers

10

8

9

3

1

3

3

5

3

?

aThree known to have entered service; two addi tional are "probable."

Number of New Tactical Weapon Systems Developed, 1965-75

(yj::::: USSR

USSR

US USSR US

US USSR

us

[If I USSR I!il ??;~i!{~f~ .:::~::~.::.:'::;: .. :::.:':.:.: .. ::;.':".: .. :: .. :.~.,~:, .. ;:'::.:.;;:: ... :~.:: ... ;::.::' .. '.'~.:: .. ::: .. ~:';.: .. ::::::.'~.:'~.~:::;:.:::~.:;:.:'~':'::':::.:;.,~::~ .. ':.:::. i'~1

US

Fixed-Wing Aircraft Helicopters Tacltcal Missiles Surface Ships Submarines

Source: Stephen J. Lukasik, n:r1ilitary Research and Development," p. 215, in Arms, Men and Military Budgets: Issues for FY ~, A.C. Roeber and W. Schneider, ed.

Figure 5.

-.Land-Based ICBM Developments

MIRV

us I

USSR

US

Titan-II MM-II MM-I/I

1965 1975

MIRV

A MIRV MRV MIRV

7

7

8

7 9

13 11 11 9 9 . 9 11

17 18 19 18 16 18

Source: Stephen J. Lukasik, "Military Research and Development," p. 213, in Arms, Men and Military Budgets: Issues for FY 1978, A.C. Roeber and W. Schneider, ed.

-Figure 6. SLBM Developments

Polaris Poseidon Trident

USSR

Year

SSN·5

SSN·6 SSN-8 SSN·6 MOD 2

1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 ~

Source: Stephen J. Lukasik~ "Military Research and Development," p. 214, in Arms, Men and Military Budgets: Issues for FY 1978, A.C. Roeber and W. Schneider, ed.

100,000 80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000

10,000 8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

~ 1,000 is .. 800

0 600

i 400 I .. '" .J i 200 l!: .. " 100 ~ 0: 80

60

40

20

INCREASING RANGE Of PROJECTIlES, INCLUDING BOMBS CARRIED BY AIRCRAfT

1700 1800 1900

? I

2000

SOUltCfi Hornell Hat., ·Acul.atfon In Social Chono_,-In Allen, nand, R' I and alhen, TecMology and Sodol Change, N ...... VOl", Appr.f ... -C.nfury~Clofh, 19.57, robl_ p. 36 and ,.r .... nce, Iher. ched.

THE INCREASING POWER OF EXPlOSIVES

10.000,000

f~~~~MO

. c

c'" .. 0 't't ff .~~ OIl<

~ll l;lal ..... '~~ jll ..... 0:0

~

_,000,000

4,000,000 -

2.000,000

1.000,000

600,000

400.000

200,000

100,000

60,000

40.000

20,000

10,000 -6,000 4.000

2,000

1,000

&00 400

200

100

60

40 ,

20

10

6 GtrnCOTTO~

=:--1 FULM'tATE OF MtRCU Y

I 1800 16361650

-1952

IIH-OOMO -

I

I ---19~1

A-OOMB-

_. --

~J 1945 A-OOM;

---

----

--CYCLONITE

::::::::::::::: --- -BLASTING GELATIN -

I -

I ..I. 1675 1900 19~0 1915

SOURCE: Horn.1I Hart, "Acceleration , .. Sodal Chong.," In Allen, fronch R., and othen, TechnologY and 50<101 Change, New VOfk, Appleton-C.ntury-Crofts, 1957, pp. "0--43.

@

Group V: What is the result - the weapons

The preceeding groups of tables by and large pertain to the United

States. This final group has therefore been selected to demonstrate

examples of the USSR. Some of the first tables and figures therefore also

provide information on the military R&D process of the USSR.

Figure 1. RDT&E Organization and Comparisons, US-USSR

Figure 2.

Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5.

Figure 6. Figure 7.

Table 1 •

Table 2.

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

Table 3. Table 4.

Table 5.

Table 6. Table 7. Figure 11 •

Figure 12.

Table 8.

Table 9.

Table 10.

Table 11 •

Table 12.

Gvishiani's Model of the Soviet RDT&E Cycle

Design Development Processes, US-USSR

Military-Production Ministries and Representative Products

Aviation Research and Design Organizations of the Ministry of Aviation Industry

Structure of the Defense-Industrial Sector of the USSR

Evolution of the Eight Defense-Industrial Ministries of the USSR

Estimates of Soviet Military R&D Outlays (Billions of Rubles)

Results of US Department of Defense Comparison of Soviet and American Military Technologies in 1972

Deve 1 opmen t of Soviet Ballistic Missiles, by Design Bureau, 1945-80

Development of Soviet Strategic Weapons to Meet Regional Targeting Requirements, 1945-80

Development of Soviet Strategic Weapons to Meet Intercontinental Targeting Requirements, 1950-80

Development of Soviet Ballistic Missile Submarines, 1955-80

Characteristics of Soviet Global-Range Missiles and Soviet Sea­based Missiles

Characteristics of Soviet Land-based, Intercontinental-Range Missiles

Characteristics of Soviet Land-based, Medium-range Missiles

Soviet Nuclear Weapons Programs in Production 1970-1982

Total Number of Soviet Nuclear Weapons Program in Production for Depl oymen t

SQviet Nuclear Weapons Programs in Production - Peripheral Attack versus Intercontinental Attack

Deployment of Soviet ICBMs

Theatre-nuclear Weapons Delivery Systems

Theatre Ballistic Missiles

Stra te gic Defence Forces

Theatr~ and Strategic Bombers

Group V (conted)

Table 13.

Table 14.

Table 15.

Table 16.

Table 17.

Table 18.

Table 19.

Table 20.

Table 21.

Table 22.

Table 23.

Table 24.

Table 25.

Table 26.

Table 27.

Table 28.

Table 29.

Table 30.

Table 31.

Table 32.

Table 33.

Table 34. Table 35. Table 36. Table 37. Table 38.

Table 39.

Table 40.

Table 41.

Table 42.

Table 43.

Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Systems

Strategic Ballistic Missiles

Cruise Missile Submarines

Torpedo Attack Submarines

Cruisers

Naval Vessels

Aircraft Carriers and Aviation Cruisers

Ballistic Missile Submarines

Anti-tank Guns

Anti-tank Guided Missiles

Multiple Rocket Launchers

Mortars

Anti-aircraft Guns

Land-based Surface-to-air Missiles

Ship-borne Surface-to-air Missiles

Air-to-air Missiles

Army Weapons and Equipment

Tanks

Light Armoured Vehicles

Artillery

Air Defence Aircraft

Naval Aviation

Transport Aircraft

Air-to-surface Missiles

Ship-borne Anti-Ship Missiles

Air Force

Tactical Combat Aircraft

Naval Aircraft

Destroyers

Frigates

Small Combattants

In those cases where sources are not indicated directly on a table or figure, their sources are as follows:

Table 1: David Holloway, The Soviet Union and the Arms Race, New Haven and London: Yalue University Press, 1983.

Tables 2, 8: David Holloway, Chapter 9, in The Technological Level of Soviet Industry, ed. Ronald Amann, Julian Cooper and R.W. Davies, with. the assistance of Hugh Jenkins, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1977.

Group V. (cont'd)

Figures 8,9,10: and

Tables 3,4,5:

Tables 9-43:

Robert P. Berman and John C. Baker, Soviet Strategic Forces: Requirements and Responses, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1982.

W. Seth Carus, "Appendix II: The Evolution o£ Soviet Mili tary Power Since 1965", pp. 176-230, in The Grand Strategy o£ the Soviet Union, Edward N. Luttwak, with appendim:es by Herbert Block and v{. Seth Carus, London: Weiden£eld and Nicolson, 1983 •.

Figure 1. RDT&E Organization and Comparisons, US-USSR

-D. M. Gvishiaril.,in his ro-le asdeputy··cha-irman of the State

Committee for Science and Technology, presents a fairly comprehen­

sive theoretical breakdown of the Soviet RDT&E cyele, consisting of

the following main stages and their subdivisions:

1. Basic research (poiskovyye issZedovaniya)

2. Applied research (prikZadnyye issZedovaniya)

a. application-oriented basic research

b. laboratory verification and selection of alternatives

3. Development (razrabotki)

a. experimental-design work (opytno-konstruktorskiye raboty)

b. project-design work (proyektno-konstruktorskiye ~boty)

USSR United Stales Stage of the RDI cycle

Science (nauka) National Science I Foundation R&D

Defense ROT &E

Research t t t 1. Fundamental research 2. Applied research

De~'elopment

3. Preindustrial prototype development

'" I Innovation i

4. Industrial prototype .J. I I

development and testing , 5. Assimilation into production - .J.

Scope of expenditures on 'Science' in the USSR and research and development in the United States. Source: Nolting, L. E.: Sources of Financing the Stages of the Research, Development, and In­novation Cycle in the U.S.S.R. FER No.3, September 1973. p. 2.

COMPARISON OF U.S. AND SOVIET DEFINITIONS OF RDT&E STAGES

stage

6.2

6.3

6.4

Department of Defense

Effort may vary from fairly fundamental ap­plied research to quite sophisticated bread­board hardware, study, programming, and plan­ning.

Development of hardware tor experimental or operational test

Engineering for service use preliminary to ap­proval for procurement or"operation

Stage State Committee for S&T

2a t b Extension of goal-oriented basic research, laboratory verification of intended utilization, selection of best alternatives

3a

3b

Design of prototypes for test or experimentation

Project-design for construc­tion and testing of proto­types under conditions typical of industrial prac­tice

Source: Simon Kassel, The Relationshi Between Science and the Military in the Soviet Union, R-1457-DDRE ARPA Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, July 1974, pp. 25-27. '

~

Fig.2 -- Gvishiani's model of the Soviet RDT&E cycle

R&D ! BASIC RESEARCH APPLIED RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT

'STAGES Application- Laboratory Experimental Project oriented basic verification design design

research

J Project

R&D

transfer 7, PERFORMERS

1

SPECIALIZED RESEARCH ~ I INDUSTRIAL BRANCH INSTITUTES, INSTITUTES I LABORATORIES, DES IGN BUREAUS

I I technical control >

\

"--. I I

Source: Simon Kassel, The Relationship Between Science and the Military in the Soviet Union, R-1457-DDRE/ARPA, Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, July 1974, p. 29.

IJ

, I I

@

[ REQUIREMENTS I UNITED STATES

STATEMENT OF OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENT

~ DOD

SOVIET UNION

MINISTRY (SERVICE) PROPOSAL

~ COUNCil OF MINISTERS, ETC. ..------

[ DEFINITiON] ~TECHNICAl RFP ...----------

SPECIFICATION- DESIGN

[COMPETITION I I SELECTION I

t t t t t t INDUSTRY

t • t t t t DESI GN COMPETITION

CONTRlcTOR

t DEVELOPMENT

I PRODUCTION

~ FIRST PRODUCTION

ARTICLE t PRODUCTION

{

CATEGORY

TESTING . CATEGORY II I CATEGORY III

"'PRE-PROJECT

t DESI GN BUREAUS f t f t t

PRE-PROJECT TECHNICAL REVIEW

f f DESI GN BUREAUS

t MOCK-UP t t

PROTOTYPES

f t FLIGHT TEST (1) DESIGN BUREAUS

(2) FLIGHT TEST INSTITUTE (

EVALUATION

l PRODUCTION DECISION

t MANUFACTURING PLANT

~ FIRST ARTICLE

PRODUCTION ARTICLE TESTING

Fig:3 - Design development processess I US-I.lSSR.

Souroe l Robert Perr Compar. ;ns of Soviet and US Technolc. , R-827 J, Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, June 1973, p. 12.

Figure 4. NILITARY-PRODUCTION NINISTRIES AND REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCTS

Hinistry of Aviation Industry: Aircraft, aerodynamic missiles

Hinistry of General Hachine Building: Ballistic missiles, space-launch vehicles, spacecraft

~linistry of Defense Industry: Conventional ground forces weapons, small arms, antitank guided missiles

~linistry of Shipbuilding Industry: Naval vessels, submarines, merchant vessels

Hinistry of Nedium Machine Building: Nuclear weapons

~linistry of Radio Industry: Computers, avionics, guidance equipment

Hinistry of Electronics Industry: Integrated circuits, electronics components

Ninistry of ~lachine Industry: Ammunition, ordnance

~linistry of Communications Equipment Industry: Radio, telephone, television, other communications equipment

Source: A.J. Alexander, Soviet Science and Weapons ACquisition, Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand, August 1982, p. 4.

Source:

Figure 5. AVIATION RESEARCH AND DESIGN ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MINISTRY OF AVIATION INDUSTRY

Research Institutes

Central Aerohydrodynamics Institute (TsAGI)

Central Institute of Aviation Motor Building (TsIAH)

All Union Institute of Aviation Materials '(VIM!)

Scientific Research Institute for Aviation Technology and Organization of Production (NIAT)

Scientific Research Institute for Aviation Equipment (NISO)

Flight Research Institute (LII)

Design Bureau Heads and Chief Designers Active Since 1950

Airframe Desi~n Bureaus En~ine Design Bureaus O. K. Antonov M. M. Bondaryuk A. A. Arkhange1 ' skU G1ushenkov G. H. Beriyev A. G. Ivchenko ~. I. Gurevich S. P. Izotov N. K. Kamov V. Ya. Klimov (dec. 1962) S. A. Lavochkin (dec. 1960) S. A. Kosberg (dec. 1965) A. I. Mikoyan N. D. Kuznetsov M. L. Mil (de~. 1970) A. M. Lyulka V. H. Hyashishchev A. A. Mikulin P. O. Sukhoi A. D. Shvetsov (dec. 1953) A. N. Tupolev P. A. Solovyev A. S. Yakovlev S. K. Tumanskii

I. M. Vedeneev .... A.J. Alexander, R&D Soviet AViation, R-589''':·PR\

'"", ~.

in Santa Monica, Calif. : Rand, November 1970, p. 8".

Figure 6 .. Structure of the" Defens~lndustrial Sector of the USSR

II

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

J MINISTRY OF

~ DEFENSE to-~~.: __ _

~Q;::!'::'";'~~;::"D' [!!':li-'!]':;'!:' JJI::!,i· ~ ,\ ~ '-_ . .'.'·"0 0 _ . __ 'J ~\~' ... -

,..> .I~ .. "-MINISTRY OF

AVATION INDUSTRY

. "" .. ,,", to- I '

---- -..

! I . \ :; (i -'" "- "

I I '\ ..

MINISTRY OF , I \ ..

-

...... ....

...

. r-:-,

...... ~

DEFENSE INOUSTRY to- I " "\ "- ,,-\. ) \,

\ MINISTRY OF GENERAL

MACHINE BUILDING

- Form.1 subordination .;;~ ;./nfotmaJ subo,dination with

. ..-~ resp«l to military production

"­ , "

\ \ \

MINISTRY OF MEDIUM

MACHINE BUILDING

'0 ,.".

MINISTRY OF SHIPBUILDING

INDUSTRY

MINISTRY OF

RADIO INDUSTRY

MINISTRY OF

ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

MINISTRY OF

MACHINE BUILDING

: ,

®

Figure 7. EVOLUTION OF THE EIGHT DEFENSE· INDUSTRIAL MINISTRIES OF THE USSR·

Heel....,. Industry

1934 1936

Source:

Aviation IndYS- Star. Committee for Aviation TKhnology ...... iation IndU$try ~A:.~:t:'o:n~l:nd:.:"~ry~ ____________ .. ________________________ ., ~::::~::"~' ____ ~::~~=:~=-~~~~~~~~~~~~ _____ ~ V. ~~~

I Defen.. Industry

Armomenb

Munitians Agricultural Machi,.. Buildil19

ShipbuildinO

\ \

G.neral Machine Building

--~ March 1953

Defense IndUitry

II St ... Comm"' .. fo< Delon_ TecMal"". Defen .. Indwry J.!I.'=:::';;;::=::::~:":::::::::'':::;;:::::::::::;",,,:;:;;;;;;::,,;;;;:;;;;;'''''----- s. A. Z ......

r-~Sh~IP~b~.~ild~ln~.~ __ ~~:ot:.~C~o:m:m:'~:!~lo~'~S:h~lp:b.:��:d:�n!. ____ ~~S:h:'P~b.;":&:n.~ln~d:u.~try~ ___ 8.~. ~

Id_" .nd H .. 'Y ;.T.:::n;:.~I:::nd:;u;;;>try::.:.. ____ .... ~T~.:n::: • .:PD";;;.;;.Mo<:;;.h;;.ln;;..~Bu;;.I:::'d;.in..:;. ______ --""ft'~ne- Suilding

MedluJMachin. S.IIdi ..

Machine BuildinQ '--- V, V. Bakhirft

v':h~. Mator Vehicl. Indu5try and Tractor Industry General Machin. Buildino

S. A. Afanas',.... Sror. prOduction: I ~~ji: Machine Bui1dint f~::t.:;,.

General Machin. ~-U_... h' 8 'Id' Machine Building ~dium Machin. Buildin9 L.-!8:ui:'~:'n~.~ __ -:Morl~an~ ______ ~~M:::.~c~hi~M:..::.:::;.~~ln~."~u~m:.n~'~Bu~~"'d~ln..:;.~ __ ~IL: 1~::iu:m~M:~::'M~:U:':'''~ ______________ ~~ ______ ~;:~~~~~~~y& p, ~

Electric Powtlr SrotiOM EIKtric Power Stottom ~R:a:::d~:t::ec::h:nka::I.:'~=u>try~...:S:::""::.:,' ,:;C: ...... :::::"'::: .. ::..· ;:IOI;..;;R:ad::loe!::;;;;ect;;;:::";;;;;:'""";;,..~.;;R;;.d;;~;..;;'n~d;; ... :::"Y:...-_'_' _____ .. , D. KalmyJcCl"

and EI.ctricoI Industry and EI.nctricat IndUitry ,

L;S:ec~t.~~~o~I~ln:du:;';;b~f __________________________________ ~

Slate Committ. for I Elactronk T .chnoloqy , EiKiranic T IIChnoIovY:- -

,A.LShaIdrr

1938 , 1940 1942 1944 1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 '1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970

• A.n ................ Ii.,." .11 ,.,iI dl."', ...... ., ... _m... . ..... k ...... b-'_. 15 MII.eII 1946., ,~ .• C_.i ..... _. A."" ,11., dill. Ih..,. 11._ b_ k ____ ..... _

Andrew Sheren, "Structure and Organization of Defense-Related Industries," pp. 125, 121, in Compendium: Economic Performance and the Military Burden of the Soviet Union, US Congress, Joint Economic Committee, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess., Washington, DC: US GPO, 1910.

@

Table I. . Estimates of Soviet military R&D outlays (billions of rubles)

1960 1965 1970 1975

1. Total 'science' outlays J.9 6·9 11·7 17·4 (current rubles)

2. Nimitz (current rubles) 1·6-2 2-6-3·3 3·3-4·8 (1968)

3. CIA (1970 rubles) 7-10 8-11·25 10-13-75 (1967)

1980

20·2 (1979)

JO·6-14·5 (1977)

4. Lee (1970 rubles) 2-9-4-6 4·7-7·7 7,5-12·4 11·3-18·6 14·1-23·2 5. British (current rubles) 16·2-17·2

Sources 1. L. Nolting, Sources of Financing the Stages of the Research, Development and

Innovation Cycle in the USSR, Foreign Economic Reports no. 3, USDepartment of Commerce, Washington D.C., 1973, p. 10; Narodnoe Khozyaistvo SSSR, Moscow: Statistika, various years. These figures cover both current and capital expenditure.

2. N. Nimitz, The Structure of Soviet Outlays on R&D in 19.60 and 1968. R-1207-DDRE. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, June 1974, p. vii. The figures cover defence and space R&D: they do not cover capital investment.

3. CIA: National Fereign Assessment Center, Estimated Soviet Defense Spending: Trends qnd Prospects. SR 78 10121, June 1978. pp. ii. 1,2. The figures are derived as follpws: the lewer end of the range Is one-fifth of the lower end of the estimate for overall defence spending; the higher end is one-quarter of the higher estimate of defence spending. I have used here only defence spending as defined for comparison with U.S, acceunts.

4. William T. Lee, The Estimation of Soviet Defense Expenditures, 1955-75. An Unconventional Approach, New York: Praeger Publishers, 1977, p. 294. The 1980 figure is taken from Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. U.S. Heuse.of Representatives, CIA Estimates of Soviet Defense Spending, Hearirigs, 3 September 1980, Washingten D.C.: USGPO, 1980, p. 22. The higher estimates are derived by adding 30 per cent to estimated Soviet R&D expenditures te allow for suspected understatements in the figures. Lee's estimates cover military and space R&D. They also cover capital investment in R&D plant.

5. Statement on the Defence Estimates 1981, Cmnd. 8212, Londen: HMSO, April 1981, p. 4. \ \ t) \ IQl.'" I - \" .1 (, •

Tahir l.. Ikl'lllt.\· (II liS n/'I'/lflll//'lIt or fl/·/i'I/.\'(' I'tJII11Illri.WII ol."jtll'iI't III/d .-II/I/'ri/'{I/I lIIi1itlln' t,·c//l/%gil'.\· ill IY7:!

The Soviet Union had technological superiority in the following deployed systell1~:

anti-ballistic missile systems; . fractional orbit oallistic missile~:

(neither of these systems was deployed by the United States at the time) strategic air-defence interceptors: all aspects of civil alld industrial strategic defence and recuperative planning;

tactical anti-ship missiles; surface attack ships (excluding carriers); anti-aircraft and art illery systems: some armoured combat vehicles; medium and high altitude SAM (surface-to-air missile) air defences;

. surf<lee-to-surface tacticallllissiks;

heavy-lift helicopters.

Approximate teehnolng.ical parity was to oe found in: tanks and anti-tank weapons; satellite tracking systems; satellite navigation systems: small arms.

The Smiet U lIioli lagged ill: ICBM guidance and penetration aids: strategic bombers; ~

~trategic sUomarilies and SLBMs (suomarine launched ballistic missiles);

attack submarines; ASW (anti-submarine warfare) sensors and patrol aircraft; satellite communications systems; airborne surveillance sensors; defence-suppression weapons and systems: deep-strike tactical aircraft; aircraft carriers: guided ordnance: air-to-air superiority weapons; man-portable air-defence systems; close-sllpport helicopters. aircraft and seri:.J1 weapons; long-range logistic transports: artillery munitions.

SO/lrct': f}l'l'artll/l'nt tJ{ /Jl'll'l/J(' Appropriatiolls/ilr Fiscal Y car 1973. Hearings h(:/iJrl' (/ Sub-ColI/milleC' of t"l' ("oll/II/illl'/' 01/ AppropriatiollS, us SCI/(/{C'. ParI I. us Government Printing Of11ce, Washington DC, pp, 5!!9-90.

~'()\\'\''''I ~ t,. t', ~!'/ ~.~ ... :"

@ Figure e • Development or Soviet Ballistic Missiles. by Design Bureau, 1945-80

Korolev

~ &w ~

~fr--t> o SS-6 &-{> o SS-8 6---l> o 5S-1Il 6---{J n G Iypc n

Yangel

Nadiradize SS-'6 follow-on

o SS-20 f"now-un

o 0 0 SS-II Mod_ , Mud_' Mw. j I>Mud. j &t Mw. M .4

Chelomei

Chelomei deri\-ath'e

2 Mud Mod. ,r:'f' 2 Mud Mud ..... A j 1 SS-'9

Mod. , ---------------

o S5-N-20

" r--T-----.------. , I , , .-r- I I, I I r-----.- r-~

1945 1950 1955 1%0 1965 1970 1975 1980

o Begin design 6 flight Test [> Enter Service 0 Space test and service D Terminate develnpment • Shared technical characteristics (direction of arrow indicates technical now,

Chief de,rigner

S. P. Korolev

M. K. Yangel

V. N. Nadiradize

V. N. Chelomei

Major/Deus

Space boosters and global rockets

Land-based ICBMs andMRBMs

Land-based military missiles

Cruise missiles, naval missiles, space boost­ers, and variable­range IC'-

Common charaeter,istics

Nonstorable liquid fuel; large missiles

Storable liquid fUel; large missiles

Solid fuel; small mis­siles

Storable liquid fuel; sea-based and vari­able-range missiles

@

Figure ~

1945

Development of Soviet Strategic WellfllHlS to Meet Regional Targeting Requirements, 1945-80

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 I

-Postwar-------Baseline force---------Force improvement-------Force modernizationl-----

TU-4: mili­tary and in­dustrial tar­gets

TU-16: nuclear military targets

TU-22: nuclear military targets

SS-4 and SS-S: nuclear military targets

55-3: ground-support targets

SS-14 and S5-IS: nuclear mili­tary targets

S5-11: nuclear military targets

55-12: nuclear ground-support targets

SS-N-6: strategic reserve force

TU-22M: conventional nuclear military targets

55-20: nuclear military and industrial targets

SS-19: nuclear military and industrial targets

55-22: conventional and nu­clear ground-support targets

55-N-S and S5-N-6: strategic reserve force

Figure I I). Development of Soviet Strategic Weapons to Meet Intercontinental Targeting Requirements. 1950-80

1950 1955 1960 I96S 1970 1975 1980

-----Baseline force--------I 96 I : Adaptation_------------Force modernization----------

TU-20: administrative and TU-20: naval targets economic targets

SS-6: administrative and eco-S5-6: space booster

nomic targets

S5-7 and SS-8: soft-area, mil-S5-17: soft-area. military-base. administrative, and economic

itary base. administrative. targets

and economic targets

S5-9 and S5-1O: soft-area. S5-9: launch-control-

military-base. administrative. - - S5-18: launch-control-center targets and economic targets center targets

55-XL Scrap: soft-area. mili-tary-base. administrative. and I- Proton: space booster economic targets

S5-11: aircraft-carrier targets 55-II: silo targets 5S-18 and S5-19: silo targets !

S5-N-4 and 5S-N-S: naval· S5-N-6: naval-coastal. air-coastal and aircraft-carrier f- craft-carrier. and airborne-· targets control-center targets

55-13: strategi~ reserve force sr S5-N-8: strategic reserve SS-N-18: strategic reserve force force .

S5-X-16: strategic reserve force I

Tabie 3. Development of Soviet Ballistic Missile Submarines, 1955-80

Surface Number of submarines

Year Propul- displace- Number of Tn opera-Submarine operation sian ment launch Missile lion in Buill IlS

class· began type (tons) tubes carried 1980 of 1980

Zulu V 1955 Diesel-electric 1.950 2 SS-N-4b I 5

Golf I 1958

}D~rel~le<'ri' 2.300 3 SS-N-4 0

}n' II 2.300 3 SS-N-5 13 III 2,900 6 SS-N-8 1 IV ·2,900 5 SS-N-6 I

Hotel I 1959

}NUclear

5,000 3 SS-N-4 0

} 8 II 1963 5,000 3 SS-N-5 7 UI 5,000 6 SS-N-8 1

Yankee I 1968 }NUclear

8,000 16 SS-N-6 28" }34 II 8,000 12 SS-NX-17 1

Delta I 1973

}NUclear

9,000 12 SS-N-S IS

}33 II 1976 10,000 16 SS-N-8 4 III 1978 10,500 16 SS-N-IS 11

Typhoon 1980 Nuclear 25,000 20 SS-NX-20 0

Sources: D~partment 0/ De/~nse Annual Report Fiscal Yea, 1982. p. 46: Chief of Naval Operations. Understanding Sovi~t Naval Developments. 4th ed •• pp. 83-49: llSS. The Military Balance 1980-81. pp. 9, 89: 000. Suvi~t Military Powu, pp. 9. 57-59: Aviation Week and Space TechnolollY. June 16. 1980. pp. 75-76: Fiscal Year 1977 Authorization/or Military Procurement. Research and D~~lop" .. nt. and Active Duty. Sel"cud R.urve and Civilian Personnel Strengths. He-drings before the Senate Armed Services Committee. 94 Congo 2 stSS. (GPO. 1976). pI. I. p. 85 .

•• Names are those designated by NATO. b. The original missile carried wa.< the Na vat Scud. c. One sank in the Pacific Ocean in 1968; one Golf l has had its missiles removed and has been converted to serve as a command-and.o\:ontrol platform. d. In order to stay within the limits established by the 1972 SALT I accords, the USSR has dismantled the launche,,· on five Yankcc-class ballistic-missile submarines which the U.S. Navy now

classifies as attack submarines.

.!

:i co .",@ 'J -..jI

l .~

\ ] 1 , I

Table l# • Characteristics of Soviet Global.range Missiles

Year First

De.rign design flight Propulsion Guida/let Warhead

MiHile' bureau began test system s),Jt£'m I)'pc

SS-9 Scarp. mod. 3 Yangel n.a. 1965 Liquid fuel Fly-the-wire. Single inertial

SS-X-IO Scrag Korolev 1957-58 1964-65 Non- Fly-the-wire Single

storable inertial liquid fuel

SS-IS. mod. 3 Vangel n.a. 1975 Liquid fuel Fly-the-wire. Single onboard digital computer

Source" See lable B-1. n.a. Nol available. Mod. Modificalion.

Characteristics of Soviet Sea-based Missiles

Year First

Generation alld Design design flight Propllisioll Gllidallce Warhead

missile' bllreall began test system sptem type

First generation SS-N-4 Sark Yangel 1949-50 n.a. Liquid ruel Inertial Single

Second generation Single SS-N-S Serb Vangel 1954-55 n.a. Liquid ruel Inertial

Third generation SS-N-6 Sawfly

Mod. I ) Chelomei ) 1960

1967) ) Single

lo.Iod. 2 1972 Liquid ruel Inertial Single

Mod. 3 1973 Multiple

FOllrth generation SS-N-8

Mod. I } Chelomei } 1962 1969} L' 'd f I} Stellar Single

Mod. 2 derivative 1976 Iqui ue inertial Single

Fifth generation Single, post SS-NX-17 Chelomei 1%9 1976 Solid fuel n.a.

derivative boost vehicle

SS-N-18 Multiple,

Mod. I

1976) ) independently

) Ch~lo~" }w .. Stellar targeted

Mod. 2 n.a. LiqUid fuel inertial Single denvatlve Multiple,

Mod. 3 n.a. independently targeted

Sixth generation SS-NX-20 Chelomei ,1973 1980 Solid fuel n.a. Mulliple,

derivative independently targeted

Source" See lable B-1. n.a. Nol available. \. Mod. Modificalion.

Yield. per Numb", Year Number lI'arhead Accuracy Throll' of

Ba,f;nJl operutlon (If (I/I"ga- (nllutical Range weight miHiles mode beg(/" lI'arheads tOilS) miles) (nallliwlmiles) (I'ou/Ills) deplo)'ed

Hardened 1969 20.0 {1.0-2.0 {Depressed trajectory

IS silo

1.5-3.0 FOBSb 9.000-11.000

n.a. 20.0 {1.0-2.0 1.5-3.0

{DepreSSed trajectory FOBSb 9.000-11.000

Hardened 1976 20.0 0.19 8.600 16.000 n.a. silo

a. Numbers are Ihose used by U.S. mililar), services; names are Ihose used by NATO rorces. b. Fraclional orbilal bombardmenl oj·slem.

Year Yield. Accuracy Rallge operation Nllmbero! per H'ari,ead (llal/tical (lla//lical

Submarine a,fS;gflfl/ellth bCl?all warheads (mega tOilS) miles) miles)

! Golr I; Hotel I 1958 2.0-3.5 2.0 350

I Golr II; Hotel II 1963 4.0 1.5 750

II Yankee. I; Golr IV 1968 1 0.7 1.0 1,300 1973 I 0.65 1.0 1.600 ror testmg 1973 2-3 0.35 1.0 1.600

I}Della Ipnd II; 1973 n.a. n.a. 4.200 HotellJI; Golf III n.a. 0.8 .0.84 4.900

\ Yankee II for testing n.a. n.a. h.a. 2.100 ,

l~m III 1978 3 0.2 0.76 3,500

n.a. 0.45 0.76 4,300

n.a. 7 n.a. n.a. 3,500

• Typhoon n.a. 12 n.a. n.a. 4,500

•. Minne number, .relho,e used I . mililary serviCI ,es arc ,hose used by NATO forces. b. See lable D-~.

:,i

,~

j@ Table 5 ~ Characteristics of Soviet Land·based, Interconlinental·range Missiles

~1 Yield q per Number '.~. " Year First La/weir- Y('ar Number warhead Accuracy Range 0/ l :l Generation and De.tign design flight Propulsion Guidance Warhead inll operation o/war- (mega- (nautical (nautical Throw weight missiles 'j miJSile' bureau began test system system type mode Base began heads tons) miles} lIIiles) (pounds) deployed ij

First generation i~

l 55-6 Sapwood Korolev 1949-50 1957 Non- Radio Single n.a. Fixed site 1959-61 5.0 2.0 3,200 7,000-9,000 4 storable" command liquid fuel

Secolld gelleration 55-7 Saddler

Mods. I and 2 } Y I }1954 }1961 }L' 'd r I }Radio }Single }n.a. IFixed site 1962 3.0 1.5

} 5.900 } 3.000-4,000 } 197 Mod. 3 ange Iqul ue d 1963 6.0 1.0 cornman

SS-8Sasin Korolev 1954 1961 Non- Radio Single n.a. Fixed site 1963 3.0 1.0 5,400 2.500-4,000 23 storable command liquid fuel

Third lIeneration 55·9 Scarp

! l··""", "" Mod. I

}V'~I },," I::'.' }L' . ., 1 }~"<h"W'.' Single

1··, 1967 I 20.0 0.5

} '.'00 } 9000-" .000 }28' Mod. 2 Single 1966 I 20.0 0.5 Mod. 3 1965 Iqul ue inertial Single 1969 I 20.0 n.a. Mod. 4 1968 Multiple 1971 3 3.5 1.0

55-II Sego Mod. I

}e ... ~, }"'l-'~ 1965 Single

}." t,,,,,,,, ,II. 1966 I 0.95 0.76 5,900

} I.~.OOO }1.olO Mod. 2 1969 }e. .,' 1 lA,., •... ,., Single 1973 I 1.10 0.59 6.S00 Mod. 3 1969 Iqul ue inertial Multiple 1973 3 0.35 0.59 5,700 Mod. 4 1974 Multiple n.a. 3-6 n.a. n.a. Il.a.

55-13 Savage

}60 Mod. I }Nadiradize }1958-62 1965-69} . V,y-the-wire, Single

}Hot }Hardened silo 1967-69 0.6 1.0

}S,075 }I'OOO Mod. 2 1970 Solid fuel inertial Single 1972 0.6 0.82

F ollrtlr generat;oll SS-X-16 Nadiradize 1965 1972 Solid fuel Fly-the-wire, Single Hot Mobile and 0.65 0.26 4,970 2,000

onboard digital hardened computer silo

S5-17 Mod. I

} Yangel }1965

,1972 } } Fly-the-wire, Multiple }COld }Hardened silo

1975 4 0.75 0.24 5,400 }8,000 }ISO Mod. 2 1976 Liquid fuel onboard digital Single 1977 1 3.6 0.23 5,900

Mod. 3 n.a. computer Multiple 1979 4 0.75 n.a. n.a. SS-J8

, Mod. I

}V" .. , }"" 1972

} }FI""~W'. Single

je .• l."""'" .11.

1974 24.0 0.23 6,500

} ',000 }~ Mod. 2 n.B. Multiple 1976 8-10 0.9-0.55 0.23 5,900 Mod. 3 n.a.

Liquid fuel onboard digital Single 1976 I 20,0 0.19 8,640

Mod. 4 n.B. computer ' Multiple n.a. 10 0.55 0.14 5,400

55-19 Mod. 'I

}Chelomei } 966

1973 } f'y-the-wire, Multiple

}Hot }Harden~d silo 1975 6 0.55 0.19 5,200

}8,000 }3~ Mod. 2 n.a. Liquid fuel nboard digital Single 1978 I 4.3 0.21 5,450 Mod. 3 n.a. computer Multiple 1979 6 0.55 0.14 5,200

Source" See lable B- L n.a, Not available. Mod. Modification. a, Missile numbers are those used by U,S. military serv;ces; names are those used by NATO fore"" b. Another 60 in preparalion.

1® "l 1

;j

1 Table 6 . Characteristics or Soviet Land·based, Medium-range Missiles

Year Firsl Generalion Design des;gn flight Propulsion Guidance Warhead and minile' bureau b"gan lest syslem sysll'm Iype

First generation 55-4 Sandal (medium range) Yangel 1949-50 1957 Liquid fuel Radio command: Single

later. inertial

SS-5 Skean (intermediate range) Yangel 1952-53 1959--60 Liquid fuel Radio command: Single

later, inertial

Second generatioll SS-II Sego, mod, I (variable range) Chelomei 1955-58 1%5 Liquid fuel Fly-the-wire. Single

inertial SS-14 Scapegoat (medium range) Nadira- 1958 1965 Solid fuel Inertial Single

dize SS-15 Scrooge (intermediate range) Nadira- 1958-61 1968 Solid fuel Inertia,1 Single

dize

Third generation SS-19 (variable range) Chelomei 1966 1973 Liquid fuel Fly-the-wire, Multiple or

onboard single digital computer

SS·20 (intermediate range) Nadira- 1965-68 1974-75 Solid fuel Inertial Multiple

dize

Sources: D.parlm.nlofD.f<n .. Annual R,por/ FiJcal Y.or 1974 and reports for 1973. 1980, 1981. 1982: United SlaleJ Mililary POJIU" for 197J (Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 1972), and for 1975-81: "Statement of Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara before. Joint Session of the Senate Armed Services Comminee and the Senate Subcomminee on Department of Defense Appropriations on the Fiscal Vear 1966-70 Defense Program and 1966 Derense Budget." declassified (U,S. Department of Defense. January-february 19631, and statemenls f()l" the budgets of 1967-72; Department of Defen§e. Sovitt Military PtJltlt, (U.S. Government Printing Ollice. 1981); Lawrence freedman. US In,,//illtnc. and Ih, Soyi" Slrul,gil' Thrra/lWestview, 19771: U.S .-U.S .S.R, Stral,gk Polid .. , Hearing before ihe Subcommilleeon Arms Control. International Law. and Organization orthe Senate Foreign Relations Comminee, 93 Cong, 2 sess, (GPO. 1914); H.a,inIlJ on Mililary rom". and /I.R. 1872 (/I.R. 4040/ V.parlm.nt ofD.ftn .. AUlhorizalionfor AppropriationJfor f'isral Y.ar 1980. Hearings before the House Armed Services Comminee, 96 Cong, I ses •. (GPO. 1979). bk, I. pt.]: Chief or Naval Opcrations.Department of the Navy. Underslandlng So vitI Na.'al D.v.l"p",.n/J. 4th ed. (GPO. 1981); Jants W.opon Syst.ms, 1980-81, Ronald T. Pretiy. ed. (London: Jane·s. 1980): Kenneth W. Gatland. "Soviet Missiles." in Ray Bonds, ed" l'h. S""i., War Mac'hin.: An Enl'yrlopa.dia of Russian Mililary Equipm.nl and Slrul'liY (Chort .. ell. 19761: Bill Gunston. Th. lI/uJtral.d Enl'ydopa.dia of ,h. World's Rock.", & Missil.s (Crescent Book •. 1979): International Institute for Strategic Studies, Tht Mililtlry Balana 1980-111 (London: IISS. 19801:

Year Number Number opera- of Yield, per Accuracy Range of

I;on war- warhead (naulical (naul;,-al missiles Basing mode

began heads (megalons) mile,f) milesl deployed

Soft site, with 4 1958 2,0 1.5 1,100 100 launchers and ability to retire: hard site, with 4 launchers Soft site, with 4 1961 4.0-6,0 1.0 2.200 600 launchers and ability to retire: hard site with 3 launchers

Hardened silo 1970 0.95 0.76 5.900 320

Mobile n.a. 0.6 0.8-1.0 1,500 n.a.

Mobile n.a. 0.6 0.8-1.0 3,000--4,000 n.a.

Hardened silo 1975 6 0.55 0./4-0.19 5,200--5.450 120

Mobile 1977 3 0.15-0.50 0.16 2,700 180

D.parlmenl of Def.n .. AUlhoriZUlion for Approprialions for Fiual Y.ar 1979. Hearings before the Senate Armed Services Comminee. 93 Congo 2 ses>, (GPO. 1978). pt. 9; Elizabeth Pond, Chr;'lian Scienl" /ltonilor. November 27, 191ti; Doug Richard.on. "Soviet Strategic Nuclear Rockets GUide." Fligh, Inlernalional. December 11.1976: Soviel Aerospac •. March 24.

I I97S;A"ialion W"k and Spllre TtchnolollY. March] I. 1969, December 7, 1970, June 25, 1979. June 16. 1980. November], 1980; . I N,w I'ork Tim.". March 21, 1973; William H. Schauer. n. Polilics of Spa a: A Comparison ~f Ih. Sovitt and Amuican Space I ProgramJ (Holmes and Meier, 1976); Nikita Khrushchev,·KhrtlJhch .. , R,mtmbtrJ: Th. Lost T",am.n,. ed. and trans. Strobe 1 Talbon (Linle. Brown. 1974): James E. Oberg. R,d Slar in Orbil (Random House, 1981); Desmond Ball. Polilics and Force : uv.ls: l'h. Slralegic MiJJile Program oflh. K.nnec/y AdminiJtralion (University of California Press. 1980): Fiscal Y.ar 1976 1\ IlJId July-S<p,,,,,ber 1976 Tran"ilion Period AUlhorization for Military ProCUrtn"nl. Reuarch and Del',lopin.nl. and Acliv.

Duty. StlUled R.urvt, and Civilian PerJonnel Slr'll/llh •• Hearings before the Senate Armed Services Comminee, 94 Congo I seU. (GPO. 1975), pt. 4.: William Beecher, "SIO: What the Arms Agreement Doesn't Cov~r," S .. Po",,,. December 1972.

n.a. Not available. , Mod. Modification.

I, Missile numbers are those u5ed by U.S. military services: names are Ihose used by NATO forces.

l@ ~ -ir ;

.~

.~

.1 1

~.

1 I ~ l 1 l !

I

I

TABLE' 7 Soviet Nuclear Weapons Programs In Production 1970·1982

Source:

Weapons Type Core Years In Production

ICBMs SS-9 1970-1972 SS-11 1970 SS-13 1970-1972 SS-17 1975-1980 SS-18 1975-1980 SS-19 1975-1979

SLBMs SS-N-6 1970·1974 SS-N-8 1973-1977 SS-NX-17 1978-1979 SS-N-18 1978-SS-NX-20 1982· SSBNs Y-CLASS 1970·1975 D-CLASS 1973-1982 TYPHOON 1982-

INF-SSMs S8-20 1977·1982 SS-21 1978-SS-22 1979-SS-23 1980-

INF·SLCMs SS-N-12 1979-SS-N-19 1980· INF-AIRCRAFT MIG-27 1971· Tu-26 1974-Su-17 1974· Su-24 1974-

INF-ASMs AS-6 1977·

Stephen M. Meyer, "Sovie t Military Programs and the Freeze," pp. 125-126, in The Nuclear Weapons Freeze and Arms Control, Proceedings of a Symposium held at The American Academy of Arts & SCiences, 13-15 January 198~

FIGURE II. Total Number of Soviet Nuclear Weapons Programs In Production for Deployment

15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

.... - .. .-.' .' . .. .' ... ----.......... ---- ...

:r

". .", ..

." .... y •••

.'

1970 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

YEAR

FIGURE It.Soviet Nuclear Weapons Programs In Production- Peripheral Attack vs. Intercontinental Attack

15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Peripheral Attack .:-. ~.,

.' =­!fIJ _.' ,.. .. ------l ------'/'--~ .. ~ .... --.. ~,~ ---------------, ---------

./ Intercontinental Attack/ .-............ ~,:. 1970 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

@

Table S. Deployment of Smoiet ICBAfl>

19591 19601 1961 1 19621 19631 19641 19652 19662 19672 19682 19692 19702 197)2 19722 19731 19741 19753

SS-6 (6)b (12) (12) . ( 12) SS-7 . (30) (60) (90) (120) 150 150 150 150 150 150 139 139 139 139 139

SS-8 (30) (60) 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70

SS-9 42 108 162 192 228 228 228 228 228 228 (278)

SS-II Mod I (10) (330) (470) (720) (950) 970 970 970 970 (960)

SS-J3 (10) (20) (30) (40) 60 60 60 60 60

SS-II Mod 3 20 40 40

85-16

8S-17 10 88-18 Mod I 10

Mod 2 SS-19 50

Total:

Annual:" 6 6 30 30 60 70 72 76 384 180 296 300 29 0 20 20 70

( -12) -II ( -20)

Cumulalive: 6 12 42 72 120 180 262 338 722 902 1198 1498 1527 1527 1547 1567 Ihl"

IISS lolals: some 35 50 75 100 200 270 300 460 800 1050 1300 1510 1527 1527 1575 161X

Sources: I A more or less even pattern of deployment from the year of introduction into service up to the year 1965 has been assumed. No precise data are

available about the number of S8-6 ICBMs deployed. I have assumed twelve. on the grounds that no more than 'a handful' are reported to have been deployed(see footnote 151). Not all series agree: the I1SS data are given in the final line (see The Military Balance /969-70, p. 55; The Militar), Balance 1975-76, p. 73); moreover, although the total number of SS-7s and SS-8s has been given as 209 for recent years, the composilion of this total is sometimes given differently (see O.S. Brown, op. cit .• p. 10).

2 SIPRI Yearbook 1974. 8tockholm (1974). pp. 106-7. 3 The Military Balance 1975-76. London. p. 8 ..

\ ' Notes: .• ', i'! Jr

a- withdrawals are given below new deliveries. H.\\',·,,·..\,,') :-~ ... -(:t f

b - brackets indicate estimates.

r

Table 9. Theatre-nuclear weapons delivery systems

1965 1970 1979 19/10

Missile launchers 55-4 608 600 496 320 55-5 101 100 87 35 55-20 O· 0 0 225

-709 700 583 580

Aircraft Backfire 0 0 25 70 TU-16 Badger 775 500 475 310 TU-22 Blinder 105 175 170 125

880 675 670 505

Sources: Missile totals for 1965 and 1975 come from Collins (1976), p. 4-'. with all his IRBMS counted as 55-5s and his MRBMS being counted as 55-4S. Total for 1970 is from MB 1970-71 (1970), p. 6, but the breakdown is estimated. The 1980 figures come from Soviet Military Power (1981), p. 6, but may actually apply to 1981. According to production data on p. 12 of the latter source, from 1976 to 1980 the Soviets built 450 IRBMS, which can refer only to the 55-20. Allowing for two missiles per launcher, total number of launchers through the end of 1980 would be 225. Aircraft totals from Collins and Cordesman (1978), p. 139, for 1970 and 1975; Berman (1978), p. 25, for 1965; and MB 1980-81 (1980), 1'. 10, for 1980. Soviet Military Power (1981), p. 63, which reports 600 Tu-16 and Tu-22, appears to include aircraft convened to tankers or used for reconnaissance or electronic warfare activities. Backfire figure for 1980 from Soviet Military Power (1981), p. 63.

Table 10. Theatre ballistic missiles

Year in Maximum Missile service range (km) Warheads Yield

55-4 1959 1,900 1 I MT 55-5. 1961 4,100 t I MT 55-12 Scale hoard ? 700-800 1 I MT SS-20 1977 5,600 3 150 KT S5-21 1978 120 I ? 55-22 1979 1,000 1 500 KT 55-23 1980 350 I ? Stud B ? 280 1 ? Frog 7 1967 60 1 ?

Table 1j. Strategic defence forces

1965 1970 1975 1980

AB'" Launchers ABM-I BIGalosh 0 6-t 64 32 SAM Systems Balteries 1,650 1,200 Launchers 8,900 9.800 9,500 10.000 Missiles 10,700 10,700 11,800 12,000 Radars 5,000 7,000 Aircraft MiG-17 1.000 150 0 MiG- 19 350 200 0 MiG-23 0 0 600 MiG-25 0 200 330 SU-9/11 750 700 430 SU- 15 400 850 800 TU-28 150 150 135 Yak-25 200 0 0 Yak-28 350 350 320

Total 3,800 3,200 2,600 2,600

Sources: Collins and Cordesman (1978). pp. 28 and 100. for 1970 and 1975. except for the number of radars. which comes from MB 1975-6 (1975), p. 8. Figures for 1965 from Collins (1976), p. 44. Information for 1980 from MB 1980-81 (1980), p. 10.

" " V> V>

i.':' 0.0. ~.;:) or or

" " ::J ::J

1--'" " , " tn VI :.n ~v.",:,

? -'" -" c

~::: 3 '" -~.

3 c 3 ... .. ::J

OQ ...

Table 13. Strategic nuclear weapons delivery systems

-::,-1965 1970 1975 19RO

ICBM

55-7 ? 190 190 0 55-8 ? 19 19 0 55-9 0 22S 28H 0 55-I I 0 970 960 580 55- 13 0 20 60 60 55- 17 0 0 10 150 55-18 0 0 10 308 55- 19 0 0 60 300

Toral 22~ 1.~27 1.597 1.398

SLB.~'

55-N-4 ? 27 21 0 55-N-5 ? 54 60 60 55-N-6 0 208 S~~ 469 55-N-8 0 0 132 302 SS-NX-17 0 (} 0 12' 5S-N-18 0 0 0 160

TOlai 120 289 757 1,003

Bombers TU-95 Bear 110 100 100 110 Mya-~ Bison 35 40 35 45

Total 145 140 135 ISS

Sources: For 1970 and 1975. Collins and Cordesman (1978). pp. 48 and 5~. MB 1980-81 (1980). p. 9. supplemented by the 1981-2 version of the same work. and Soviet Military Power (1981). especially pp. 53-60. provide 1980 dala. Information for 1965 drawn from Collins (1976). .

Table 14. Strategic ballistic missiles

Maximum Year in range Throw-weight

Missile service (km) (kg) Warheads

ICBM

55-7 1961 11.000 500 I 55-I! 1963 11.000 1.200 I 55-9 - mod 1 1965 12,000 5.500-6,800 1

mod 2 1966 12,000 5.500-6,800 1 55-II - mod 1 1966 11.500 700-900 1

mod 3 1973 11,500 700-900 3 55- 13 1968 10.000 450 I 55-17- mod 1 1975 10.000 2.700 4

mod 2 1977 11.000 1.650 I 55-18- mod 1 1974 12.000 7,600 1

mod 2 1975 11,000 7,600 1'.-10 mod 3 1975 16.000 7,600 1 mod 4 1982 9.000 7,600 10

55-19 - mod 1 1975 9.600 3,400 6 mod 2 1979 10,000 3,400 1 mod 3 1982 10.000 3.600 6

SLBM

5s-n-4 1961 480 ? 55-"'-5 1964 1,400 ? 55-..,-6 - mod 1 1968 2.400 700

mod 2 1973 2,400 700 mod 3 1975 3,000 700 2

55-..,-8 - mod 1 1972 7.800 700 I mod 2 ? 9,100 700 1

55-..,)(-17 1977 3,900 1,500 1 55-..,-18 - mod 1 1978 6,500 2,200 3

mod 2 ? 8,000 2,200 1 mod 3 ? 6,500 2,200 7

55-..,-20 1982-3 8,300 ? 12

___ • ___ ...... _ .• __ ..... ~.~".~ .-n.....'!', ..... *'~" .... : .. "

60

Median inaccuracy

Yield (eEP) em)

5 MT 3,600 5 MT 3.60')

II! 1.fT 1,7(X) 20+ MT 1,700

1-2 MT\' • I,5(XI 100-300 Kf

I MT 1.500 9C() KT 300-600

6 MT 450 24 MT 400 2 MT 400

20 MT 2L'Q 500 Kr 300 550 KT 300-450

5 Mf 200 550 KT 300

1-2 MT 1,800 1-2 MT l,8lXl 1-2 MT 1,800 1-2 MT ?

KT ?

1-2 MT 1,500 MT ?

? MT 200 KT 1,350 450 KT 1.350 200 KT 600

KT

Sources: Soviet Military Pow~r (1981); Ftightlnt~matio"aJ 119 (1981). pp. 1610, 1615 and 1619; MB 1980-81 (1980), pp. 89-91; MB 1981-2 (1981), P 79; Luuwak (19'76). pp. 25 and 36'iI!!:

Table 15. Cruise missile submarines

Year in Class service

Nuclear-powered Oscar 1981 Charlie II 1973 Charlie I 1%8 Papa 1973 Echo II 1962 Echo I 1960

Diesel-electric Juliet! 1962 Whiskey/Long-Bin 1963 Whiskeyl Twin-Cylinder 1960

Table 16. Torpedo attack submarines

Year in Class service

Nuclt'ar Powered Alfa 1972 Victor IIIIII 1972 Victor I 1967 Echo 1971 November 1959

Diesel:£leclric Tdngo 1973 Bravo 1968 Foxtrot 1958 Zulu IV 1952 Romeo 1958 Whiskey 1951 Quebec 1954

Sources: As for table 10.

Table 1 r.­Cruisers

Numner built + building

5+2 20'?+3 16 5

14

15+2 4

60 26 20

235 22

Number built Displacement Speed dived

+ building dived (tons) (knots)

I+? 15,000 30 6 5,500 28

12 5,000 28 I 7,000 35

29 5,800 25 5 5,800 22

16 3,800 14 6 1.500 12

6 1,600 10

Di~placemenl Dived speed Torpedo dived (IOns) (knots) tunes

3.ROO 42+ 6 5,X(XI 31 6 5.200 32 6 5.200 25 8 5.UOO 30 IO

3.700 16 8 2.700 14 6 2.41Xl 16 IO 2.30H 17 IO 1.800 14 8 1,350 14 6

540 16 4

Missile launchers

Class Year in service

Number built + building

Displacement full load (tons) Anti-ship Anti-aircraft

Nuclear-powered Kirov 1980 1+1 25,000 20 SS-NX-I9 12 SA-NX-6

(72-96 missiles) 2 twin SA-N-4

Conventional Kara 1973 7 10.000 2 twin SA-N-3

(44 missiles) 2 twin 5A-N-4 (36 missiles)

Kresla II 1970 10 7,800 2 twin SA-N-3 (44 missiles)

Kresta I 1967 4 7.500 2 twin sS-N-38 2 twin 5A-N-1 (44 missiles)

Kynda 1962 4 5,700 2 quad sS-N-38 1 twin 5A-N- I (16 missiles) (22 missiles)

SverdJov 1951 )4 17,000 Chapaev 1.950 5 15,000

Sources: As for table 10, with Kehoe and Brower, 'The Kirov' (1981), pp. 154-9.

Torpedo tubes Mi~siles

8 2455-1'1-19 6 8 55-N-7 or -9 6 8 55-1'1-7 6 IO 5S-N-7 or -9 8 8 55-1'1-3 or -12 8 6 55-1'1-3

6 4 55-N-3A 4 4 55-N-3A

6 2 55-N-3A

Anti-submarine Guns

twin S5-N-14 i Single 100mm (with reloads) 8 30mm Gatling

2 quad 55-N- q 2 twin 76mm 4 JOmm Galling

2 quad 55-1'1- q 2 twin 57mm -I 30mm Galling 2 Iwin 57mm

2 twin 76mm

4 triple 152mm 4 triple 152mm

10

60

" 50 c ., E a. 0 Qi > 40 .,

Q

~ ';; .. :g ~ 30 III ;Z

'0 :;;

.Q 20 E

" Z

10

0

Soviet Ballistic Missile Developments 70

Failure x Success/no longer operational_~

# Never deploved !D 60 Operational • I Still in flight testing 0 I • II • 50 :- .. c • " l E

a. 0 • Qi

~ 40 >

I " Q

~ ~ ';; • " ~ :g

~!D 30 ~

• III

J ;Z

'0 , x ~

~ III .Q

20 E ~ " 0 Z

x . ./ ." 10

'"' .... ..... Q'

.,e 0

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985

Source: US Department of Defense, Annual Report, 1984.

~~ ___ , •••• r_ ... _.· .<

@

(£) Table 18.

. Naval vessels

"T,-1965 1970 1975 1980

Submurines, nucleur-powered Cruise missile 29 35 40 50 Torpedo attack 14 24 35 55

Sflbmarines, diesel-electric Cruise missile 14 28 25 20 Torpedo attack 310 210 163 160

Aircraft curriers and aviation crUift'rS Carriers 0 0 0 I aviation cruisers 0 2 2 2

Cruisers Guided missile, nuclear 0 0 0 I Guided missile 4 10 21 25 Gun 16 14 9 9

Destroyers Guided missile 26 29 45 36 Gun 54 48 37 30

Frigates Guided missile 0 0 10 28 Gun 140 111 118 140

Small Combatants Missile nO 140 IJ5 145 Pattollanti-submarineftorpedo 3511+ 475 445 395 Minesweepers 500 295 27U 400

Otllers Amphihious 14 80 95 86 Auxilinry ? ? 750 760

"

Table 19. Aircraft carriers and aviation cruisers

Year in service Numher huilt + building Displacement, rull load (tons)

Anti-aircraft missilt: launchers

Anti-ship missile launchers

Anti-submarine missile launchers

Aircraft: Ka-25 Hormone helicopters Yak-36 Forger fixed-wing

Guns

Table 20. Ballistic missile submarines

Year in Class service

Nuclear-powered Typhoon ? Delta III 1978 Delta /I 1973 Delta I 1972 Yankee 1968 Hotel III 1962 Hotel /I ?

Diesel-electric Golr I 1958 Golr II 1967

Class

Kiev

1976 3+1 42.000

2 twin s-\-N-3 (72 missiles) 2 twin SA-N-4

4 twin SS-N-12 (24 missiles)

I twin SUW-N-t

.22 13

2 twin 76mm 8 single 30mm Gatling

Moskva

1967 2 20.000

2 twin SA-N-3 (72 missiles)

I twin SUW-N-t

18 o 2 twin 57mm

Number built Displacement + building dived (tons) Missiles

0+1 25.000 20 SS-N-lO

\J I\. 750 165S-N-18 4 11.750 16-sS-N-R

18 9.J(~) 12 sS-N-8 34 9.30(J 16 sS-N-6 8 5.6(X) 6 SS-N-/!' I 5,600 3 sS-N-5

20 2.850 3 SS-N-4 ( 13)" 2.800 3 sS-N-5

• Figures in parentheses are conversions, not new construction.

Sources: The basic sources are: Understandillg Soviet Naval De~'elopments, especially the fourth edition (1981) and the second edition (1975); Soviet Military Power (1981), pp. 39-51; Jane's Fighting Ships for various years; Collins and

. Cordesman. (1978), pp. 1~1. 165; Breyer (1970); various issues of MB; and Collins (1976), p. 44; Couhal (1980). There are major discrepancies between the various sources, and whenever possible official American information was' relied upon.

Table 21. Anti-tank guns

Designation

Artillery T-Il 50-44 CH-l6

Recoilless weapons B-II B-IO

SPG-9 RPG-l RPG-7 RPG-16 RPG-18

Year in service

1965 1954 1956

1956 1950 1968 1949 1962 1980? 1980

Calibre Effective (mm) range (m)

100 1,000 85 1,000 57 500

107 1,000 82 400 73 1,000 40 150 40 500 58 500-800 64 200

Sources: As for table 21, wilh Backofen (1980), pp_ 16-21.

Armour penetration (mm) at 500m

406 130 140

380 240 330 180 330 375 375

Rate of tire (rpm)

IO 10--15 20--25

6 5-6

4-6 4-6

Notes \".

Obsolescent Obsolescent

Obsolescent Obsolescent

Obsolescent

RPG-7 replacement Copy of US lAW

Table 22. Anti-tank guided missiles

Table 23.

Al'!Jlour Year in Minimum-maximum penetration

Designation service

A T-I Snapper 1959

AT-2 Swatter 1962 A T- 2 Swatler B 1973 AT-3 Sagger 1965 AT-4 Spigot 1975 AT-5 Spandrel 1977 AT-6 Spiral 1977

range (m)

600--2,300

500-2.500 ?-3.500

5W-3.000 ?-2.!KKI ?-t.OOO ?-1O.0007

(mm) at 500m

350

400 ?

480 500

? ?

Notes

Triple launcher on BRDM armoured car; quadruple jeep launcher. Obsolete. Quadruple launcher on BRDM armoured car Quadruple launcher on BRDM 2 armoured car Portable and vehicle-mounted versions Portable Quintuple launcher on armoured car Mounted on Mi-24 helicopter~

Sourcl!S: As for table 19. with Flight internar;onal119 (1981), p. 1652.

Multiple rocket launchers

Year in Calibre Designation service (mm) Tubes

BM- J4 1954 140 17

BM-li 19M 122 40

BM- 24 1954 240 12 BMD-20 1954 200 4" BM-l5 1957 250 6

Sources: As for table 21. as well as Foss (1981).

Table 24. Mortars

Year in Calibre Designation service (mm)

M-l40 1953 240

M-J60 1953 160

M-43 1943 120 M-37 1943 82

Maximum range (m)

9,810

20,500

10,200 20.000 30,000

Maximum range (m)

9,700

8,040

5,700 3,040

Reload times (minutes)

IO

3-4 6-10

10--20

Notes

Older modt:ls had 16 tubes; some versions truck-mounted Truck-mounted. standard divisional weapon Truck-mounted Truck-mounted Truck-mounted

Rate of lire (rpm) Notes

3

9 25

Can" fire nuclear and chemical ammunition Can fire chemical and possibly nuclear ammunition

Table 25 • . Anti-aircraft guns

Year in Calibre . Tactical Rate of Designation service (mm) range (m) fire (rpm)

s-60 1950 57 6,000 120

ZSU-57- Z 1957 57 4,000 2x120 zu-z3-z ? 23 2,500 2x1,000 zsu- 23-4 1965 23 3,000 4Xl,OOO

ZPU-4 ? 14.5 1,400 4x600

Table 26. Land-based surface-to-air missiles

Altitude

Year·in Slant range Minimum Maximum Missile service (lm) (m) (km)

SA-I Guild 1954 32 ? ? SA-2 Guideline 195R 45 1.5()() 25 SA-3 Goa 1961 35 300 15 SA-4 Ganef 19tN 70 I.UOO 25 SA-S Gammon 1967 250 ~ 27 SA-Ii Gainful 1967 35 30 13 SA-7 Grail 1967 3.6 25 1.5 sA-R Gecko 1975 12 50 to SA-9 Gaskin 196R? 7 20 5 SA'IO ? 50 300 ? SA-II 1979 25 30 15 SA-IZ ? 100 100 32 SA- 13 1980? 7 ? to

Sources: As for table 19, with Flight international 120 (1981), pp. n5-42.

Table 27. Ship-borne surface-to-air missiles

Year in Range Missile service Guidance system (km) Notes

SA-N-I Goa 1961

SA-N-2 Guideline sA-N-3Goblet SA-N-4

1961 1967 1969 ? SA-N-5

SA-N-6 1979

Sources: As for table 26.

Table 28. Air-to-airmissiles

Speed Missile (Mach)

AA-I Alkali 1.5+ AA-2 Atoll 2.5 AA-3 Anab ? AA-4 Awl ? AA-5 Ash ? AA-6 Acrid 4.5

AA-7 Apex 3.5

AA-8 Aphid 3

beam-rider. semi- 18 active homing radar command 55 radar command 55 radar command 15. optical with infra-red homing 6 active radar homing 55

Range (km) Aircraft

version of SA-3 Goa

version of SA-2 Guideline

version of SA-7 Grail version of SA-I 0

SAR: 6" MiG-17. MiG-19. SU-/I. Yak-25 IR: 5.7 MiG-19. MiG-21. MiG-23 SAR or /R: 16+ SU-I I. SU-/5. Yak-2!!P IR: 8 MiG-25 IR or SAR: 30 Tu-:z8D SAR: 45-50 MiG-z5 IR: 20-25 SAR: 33 MiG-23 /R: 15 SAR: 15 MiG- 23 IR: 7

• SAR: semi-active radar homing; IR: infrared homing. Sources: Flight internationa/1I9 (1981), pp. 1646-7; Krivinyi (1977), p. 222.

Fire control Notes

Radar or Now heing replaced by optical SAo!! and SA-6 Optical Mounted on T-54 chassis Optical Radar or Mounted on light amphibious optical armoured vehicle Optical Obsolete

Table29. Army weapons and equipment

1965 1970 1975 1980

Tanks 30.S00 41.0()() 45JXXI 55.000

Artillery 16,(XXI 17,(XlO 20.000

Mortars 8.000 7.Z00 Armoured fighting vehicles 35.000 30.000 38.750 62.000 Anti-tank missile launchers 4.500 6.0()()

Sources: Collins (1976). p. 44. for 1965; Collins and Cordes man (1978). pp. 121-2 for 1970 and 1975. suppkmented by MB 1975...{J (1975). p. 9; and MB 1980-81 (1980). p. 10. supplemented by Soviet Military Power (191\1). pp. 2 and 211. and MB 1981-2. (1981) p. 12.

Table 30. ranks

Year in Weight Gun Rounds Road Cruising

Type service (tons) (mm) carried speed (kph) range (km)

T-IO 1953 50 122 30 42 250

T-54 1949 36 100 34 48 400

T-55 1961 36 100 43 50 500 T-62 1961 36.5 115 40 48 500

T-64 1974? 35 125 28:' 50 ? T-72 1975? 41 125 40 60 500

Sources: Foss (1976); Jane's Weapons Systems 1977; Isby (1981); Soviet Military Power (1981).

Table 31. I,.ight armoured vehicloes

Road Crew Machine Vehicle

Year in service

Weight (tons) speed (kph)

Range (km) passengers guns Other weapons

Armoured personnel carriers BMO 197I 9 60 ? 313-0 1 73mm gun; A T-3 Sagger anti-tank missile SMP 1967 12.5 55 300 3/8 1 73mm gun; AT-3 Sagger anti-tank missile BTR-6op 1961 10 80 500 2114 2 STR-50P 1957 14 44 260 2120 I BTR-'5 2 1950 8.9 75 650 2117 I

Armoured carJ BROM-2. 1966 7 100 750 212 2 Versions with SA-9. AT-3. and AT-5 BROM-' 1959 5.6 HO 500 213 I Versions with AT-' and AT-2

Light tanks and assault guns ASU-85 1962 14 44 250 4/0 85mm gun Asu-57 1957 5.4 45 250 3/0 57mm gun PT-76 1955 14 40 260 4/0 76mm gun

Table 32.

, Artillery

Designation Year in Calibre Range Rate of sen'ice (mm) (m) lire (rpm). No[es

s-23 ? IHO 30.000 0-20 1955 I Can tire nuclear shell 152 18.500 M-'973 1973 5 152 18.500 D-' 19·n 6-7 Self-propelled 152 12.200 ~h16 1954 130

4 Obsolescent "'-[974 1974

27.000 5 122 15,300 0-30 1963 ? Self-propelled 122 15,300 0-74 1955 8 122 24.000 "'-Jo 1938 6 122 12.000 5-6 Obsolescent

Sources: As for table 19. as well as Hofmann (1977). pp. 1057-1061.

Table 33. ~ir defence aircraft

Designation

SU-9 Fishpot-B SU-II Fishpot-C SU-15 Ragon-A TU-28P Yak-zsF Rashlight-A Yak-28P Firebar MiG-17PF Fresco-D MiG-19PM Farmer-D MiG-23S Rogger-B

MiG-25 Foxbat-A

Year in service

1959 1967 1967 1961 1955 1966 1952 1955 1971

1971

Speed (Mach)

1.8 1.8 2.3 1.75 0.9 1.1 0.98 1.28 2.3

2.8

Combat radius (km) Missiles

500 4 AA-\ Alkali 500 2 AA-3 Anab or 2 .AA-2 AlOil 725 2 AA-3 Anab

1,450 4 AA-5 Ash 965 none 925 2 AA-3 Anab 580 4 AA-\ Alkali 450 4 AA-I Alkali 960 2 AA-7 Apex and 2 AA-8 Aphid

or 4 AA-2 Atoll 1,100 4 AA-6 Acrid or AA-3 Arab

Sources: Pol mar (1976); Krivinyi (1977); Berman (1978); MB 1980-81 (1980); Soviet Military Power (1981), pp. 31-7; Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1980-1981 (1980).

Table 34. Naval aviation

1965 1970 1975 1980

Strikelbombers 400 440 410 370 Fighters/fighter-bombers 0 0 0 90 Reconnaissance/electronic warfare 140 100" 110 170. Anti-submarine 160 320 450 390 Tankers 100 70 Transport/training 200 200 200 340

• Includes some tanker aircraft. S~urces: 1970 and 1975 adapted from Cailins and Cordesman (1978). pp. 156 and 1/3; Understanding SaviN Nal'a/ Del'e/opmems (1975). pp. 27-8. 73-6; AlB /975-6 (1975), p. 9; and MS 1970-71 (1970), p. 9. 1980 from Undemandi1lg So,'iet 'vaval Dellelopmellls (1981), pp. 41-4,121-30. 1965 from Jones (ed.) (1978), p. 205.

Table 35. Transport aircraft

Range with Maximum Year in maximum payload payload

Designation service (km) (kg) Paratroops

An-:! Colt 1949 750 1,500 14 1I-14 Crate 1954 1,750 3,300 24 II-18 Coot 1957 3,700 13,500 80 An-n Cub 1958. 550 20,000 60 An-z6 Curl 1961 980 5,500 38 An-22 Cock 1967 5,500 80,000 175 II-76 Candid 1975 5,000 40,000 140

Sources: As for table 29.

Table t6. @ Air-to-sur ace missiles

Year in Range Missile service (km) Guidance Warhead Aircraft

AS-I Kennel 1963 150 cruise: . inenial 900 kg HE" TU-16 Badger B homing: active or .. passive radar ..

AS-2 Kipper 1965 210 cruise: inertial 1,000 kg HE TU-16 Badger C homing: infrared

AS-3 Kangaroo 1963 650 cruise: inenial nuclear or TU-95 Bear B homing: infrared 2.300 kg HE

AS-4 Kitchen 1967 300 cruise: inenial nuclear or TU-22 Backfire homing: infrared 1,000 kg HE

!,s-5 Kelt 1966 320 homing: active or 1,000 kg HE TU-16 Badger G passive radar

A5-6 King/ish 1976 220 cruise: inenial 200 JeT nuclear TU-l6 Backfire homing: active or or 1,000 kg HE

passive radar AS-7 Kerry ? 10 radio command 100 kg HE SU-24 A5-X-9 ? 50-90 passive radar 135-200 kg HE SU-24 AS-X-lO ? 10 laser homing 100 kg HE MiG-27; SU-l7; SU-24 AS-X-li ? 50 television 200 kg HE SU-24

• HE: high explosive. Sources: Malzeyev (1978). pp. 41-5; Panyalev (1981). p. 720; Flight inle17UJliona/ 119 (1981). p. 1623.

Table 37. " Ship-borne anti-ship missiles

Year in Range Speed Missile service (km) (Mach) Warhead type

Anti-mr!ace sMp 55-N-1 Scrubber 1958 180 0.9 nuclear or HE S5-N-2 AlB Styx 1960 42 0.9 HE 5S-N-2C ? 75 0.9 liE 55-N-3 Shaddock 1962 375 1.4 nuclear or HE

55-N-7 1969 55 1.5 nuclear or HE 55-N-9 Siren 1968 110 0.8· nuclear or "E 55-N-12 ? 500 2.5 lIuclear or HE

55-N- 19 1980 450 ? 55-N-21 1980 ? ? 55-N-22 1980 ? ?

Anti-submarine 55-N-q Silex 1968 45-55 subsonic anti-submarine torpedo 55-N- 15 1974 35-45 ? nuclear depth charge 55-N- t 6 19741 12U"! ? anti-submarine torpedo FPA5-l 1968' 24 ? nuclear depth charge

Sources: As for table 10. with Flight International 119 (1981). pp. 1627-8.

Notes

few still in service \

replaces 55-N-2A and B

requires mid-course guidance correction

replaces 55-N-3

improved 55-1'1-9

possibk anti-ship capability submarine launched version of 55-1'1-15 launched from 5UW-N-l

Table 38. Air force

1965 1970 1975 ·~980

Frontal aviation Comoat aircraft 3.200 3.700 4.5(Xl 4.800 Helicopters 0 0 ? 3.500 Transports 0 0 ? 250

,\-lilitary transport al'iUlion Strate:gic 0 10 60 175 Tactical 750 795 800 425

Sotlrces: Be:rman (1978). p. 29. for 1965 and 1970 information on Frontal Aviation. 1975 data from Alfred L. Monks. 'Air Forces'. pp. DO-53, in Jones (cd,) (197M), supplemented by M B 1975-fJ (1975). p. 10. MB /980-81 (19811)', p. 12. M B 19131-2 (1981), p. 14, amI SUI'iet Military Power (1981), pp. 31-7, provide: 1980 information. It should be noted that all aircraft inventory ligures are extremely unreliable. and should be use:d with great caution. The basic primer on the: Soviet air forces is Norby (1978).

Table 39. Tactical combat aircraft

Design generation Year in Ordnance Combat radius Maximum and aircraft service load (tons) (km) speed (Mach)

First (19-16-55) 11-28 1950 2.2 1.100 0.8 MiG- [7 Fresco 1953 0.5 580 0.96 MiG-19 Farme:r 1955 0.5 450 1.35

Second (1956-65) MiG Fishbed 0 1963 1.0 600 2.0 SU-7 Fille:r A 1960 2.0 25(}'-350 1.7 Yak-z8 Brewer 1963 2.2 370-500 1.1

.Third (1966-80) . MiG-23 Flogger B 1971 900-1,200 2.3

MiG-27 Flogger 0 1971 3.5 550-iilX) 1.7 SU-17 Fitter c 1974 3 . .5-4.0 55(}.-I}OO 1.6 MiG-zl Fishbcd J 1970 0.8 35H-050 2.2 MiG-25 Foxbat B 1971 none 1,100 2.8 SU-24 Fencer 1974 8.0 1,81x) 2.3

Table 40. Naval aircraft

Year in Maximum Operational Designation service speed (kph) radius (km) Armament

Strik~/bomber,. Backtire·. 1975 2.125 5.320 2 As-6 Kingthh Tu-u lllindcr·. 1<)63 I.SIXI 1.5IX) I AS''; Ki .. :hcn TU-16 Bad!;cr.A 1'.153 I,(XHI ';.KIX) 9,IXXI kg of homhs TU'16 Badger·c 1<)61 I,IUI 4.1100 I A5-1 Kippcr or

TU-16 Badger-<l ? 1,000 2 A5-6 Kingfish

4,800 2 A5-5 Kelt or 2 A5-6 Kingfish

, Figh/erslftght~r-bombers Yak-36 Forger-A 1976 ? 370 1.360 kg of ordnance,

including 4 AA-1 Atoll or "A-K.Aphid

Su- t 7 Finer-c L976 2.3(XI 420-ffl0 3.500 kg uf ordnance. including "",22 ..• ,,·8. A5'7 Kcrry, or AS''''

R~connaissanale/~clronic .... arfare TU-16 Badger-o -to, -F. -J ? l.Um 4.800 none

TU-I';2 Bear-c. '0. -E 1951 MIXI 8.000 none

Anti·submarine Tu.q~ Bear·f 1973 800 8.000 1t'311 May 1969 M5 3.0m 4.000 kg . Be'12 Mail 19M 61X) 1.3(X) Be·6 Madge 1949 415 'J

Mi-I'; Hale 1976 ? 305 2.1X)() kg Ka'15 lIormone'A 1967 1 III 300 I.lXM) kg Mi·.; lIound 1953 2\0 230 4 deplh chargcs

NOfC~

electronic and phutographic Intelligence \fCr~illn~

reconnaissance

version of TU'95 Bear ve.-ion of It· I M amphihious amphihious hcllcopler hcllcopter helicopter

Table 41. Destroyers

Number Missile launchers Year in bui4t+ Displacement

Class service building" full load (tons) Anti-aircraft Anti-ship Guns

Kashin 1963 20 4,500 2 twin SA-Not 2 twin 76mm (44 missiles)

Modified Kashin 1973 (6) 4,750 2 twin SA-Not 45S-N-2C 2 twin 76mm (44 missiles) 4 30mm Gatling

Kildin 1958 4 3,600 1 SS-N- t 4 quad 57mm (8 missiles)

Modified Kildin 1973 (3) 3,800 4 SS-N-2C 21win 76mm

Kanin 1968 8 4,700 1 twin SA-Not 2 quad 57mm

SAM Kotlin 1962 (8) 3,600 1 twin SA-Not 1 twin 130mm

Modified Kollin 1958 (12) 3,600 21win 130mm

Kollin 1954 27 3,600 2 twin 130mm

Skory 1949 72 3,080 ' 2 twin 130mm

Udaloy 1980 2+4 8,000 8 SS-N-t4 2100mm anti-submarine 4 30mm Gatling

2 twin 130mm

Sovremennyy 1980 2+3 7,SOO 2 launchers for 2 quad S5-N-ll 4 30mm Gatling SA-N-7

• All figures'in parentheses are conversions, not new constructions. Sources: As for table 10, with Kehoe and Brower. 'The Soviet Sovremennyy Class Destroyer' (1981), pp. 911-16, and 'Sal-Cpm 3 at Sea' (1981), p. 976. I

Table 42. Frigates

Class

Krivak II Krivak I Mirka 1111 Peyta IIII Riga Grisha IIIII

Koni

Year in service

1976 1970 1964 1960 1952 1968

1977

Sources: As for table 10,

Table 43. Small combatants

Year in Class service

Tarantul 1978 Nanuchka IIIII 1969

Poti 1961 Sarancha 1976

Matka 1978 Sabochka 1977 Turya 1973 Osa IIII 1959 Komer 1960 ~ P4 1951 P6/p8/pto 1951 Shershen 1963

Sources: As for table 10.

Number built + building

T1 21 20 65 64 32

2

Number built + building

4 23

64 I

7+1 1

30 120 ? ? ? ?

Missile launchers Displacement full load, (tons) Anti-aircraft Anti-submarine Guns . ' 3,800 2 twin SA-N-4 1 quad S5-N-14 2 single 100mm 3,800 2 twin SA-N-4 1 quad SS-N- q 2 twin 76mm 1,150 2 twin 76mm 1,140 2 twin 76mm 1,320 3 single lOOmm 1,100 I twin SA-N-4 twin 57mm

(18 missiles) 2,000 I twin SA-N-4 2 twin 76mm

Displacement full load (tons) Missiles Other weapons

SSO 2 twin SS·N-2C single 76mm 930 2 triple sS-N-9 twin 57mm or single 76mm

1 twin SA-N-4 (18 missiles)

580 twin 57mm 330 2 twin SS-N-9 30mm Gatling

1 twin SA-N-4 215 2 SS-N-2C 76mm; 30mm Gatling 440 2 quad torpedo tubes 220 4 torpedo tubes; twin 57mm 210 4 SS-N-2 some with quad SA-N-5

75 2 SS-N-2 22.5 2 torpedo tubes 75 2 torpedo tubes

160 4 torpedo tubes