You are on page 1of 16


1934 1960





Airnunitions used this 50.000-poundrr*slur,aauarx^---. horizontal thrust stand to %*tidire bootkrr.


Headquarters, United States Air Force, headquarters major air commands and other appropriate Department of Defense agencies on all operational airmunitions matters. With the decentralization, Ogden was explicitly directed, through its AF Ammunition Services Office, to function as the sole USAF-wide explosive ordnance disposal agency. Now it would exercise operational and technical supervision of EOD functions a t AF installations in the continental United States, and technically supervise EOD operations a t overseas commands. This covered reconnaissance, detection, recovery, field evaluation and safe disposal of all United States and foreign unexploded ordnance. It included special weapons which failed to function when launched, dropped or discharged, or which otherwise became hazardous to life and property by accidental arming or damage in aircraft crashes. Included also was deactivation of explosive sabotage devices on AF installations. It did not normally include ammunition in the United States which had become obsolete or unserviceable in storage. Development of procedures and controls, conducting tests, clearance of bombing and gunnery ranges - those declared excess to AF use -and assisting major air commands in clearing active ranges for use were also a part of ammunition management. The AF Ammunition Services Office was now responsible for developing and publishing technical and logistical data on all ammunition and explosive materiel, safety and surveillance stand-

ards and procedures and preservation and renovation programs. For the entire USAF the AF Ammunition Services Office conducted or arranged for others to conduct tests to develop and verify explosive safety and surveillance criteria, approve test directives, evaluate results of tests and assign shipping and storage classification for ammunition and explosives. Involved also were all facets of directing and controlling reporting and inspection and investigation functions for ammunition and explosive materiel. As the sole agent for ammunition in the USAF (excluding nuclear), the AF Ammunition Services Office was completely responsible for preparing and publishing technical guidance for all AMC field commanders covering safety, surveillance, serviceability, preservation and renovation programs. Plans of these commanders for construction of or extension of existing far c1ucles ( n . rorce-owneaj In wnlcn ammunmon u" and explosive materiel were stored, handled, assembled, or manufactured, received safety review, evaluation and final approval by the AF Ammunition Services Office. The AF Ammunition Sewices ORice'even assisted AMC activities (except Headquarters AMC) in recruiting qualified ammunition inspectors and explosive safety engineers;' reviewing and approving their assignments a t the various installations. In a consolidation move, effective 18 November 1957, AMC discontinued the 2949th Support Group a t Hill AFB, concurrently inactivating its 29th Ammunition Supply Squadron (Depot). Surplus personnel, where practical, then became a part of the redesignated and reorganized 25th Ammunition Supply Squadron (Depot), which became the only ammunition supply operation under Ogden following the above date. Military strength of the 25th, authorized on 18 November, was 10 officers and 237 airmen. By 31 December 1957 the actual assigned strength was 18 officers and 194 airmen. Assisting the ammunition supply squadron in the ammunitionEOD mission was the 2700th EOD Squadron and its 12 officers and 70 airmen assigned and 13 officers and 122 airmen authorized (this included personnel at Hill AFB and in r.ine detachments - no separate figures available), effective 18 November 1957. The year 1958 continued to bring changes in the assignment and organization of airmunitionsEOD a t Ogden. Beginning with 1 January 1958 AMC gave Ogden AMA additional functional responsibili-


This November 1960 view shows most of the Hill AFB West Area Complex, including some of the lond and buildings used in the AF Plant 77 Minuteman assembly, and OOAMA's Minuteman recycle facility.
. n I
















ties for FSC 1336 (the guided missile warheads and explosive components of old Class 39-B). Responsibilities transferred from AMC were: processing of new or revised federal item identifications for assignment of federal stock numbers; compiling, composing, editing, scheduling the production, printing and distribution of applicable USAF stock list publications; maintaining master records necessary for the production of those publications. AMC provided manpower spaces with previous decentralization of FSC 1336 t o insure adequate discharge of the currently transferred functions. Something new in airmunitions functions came to Ogden on 15 January 1958. Closing of Air Force Depots prompted transfer of these functions to Ogden: (1) From Gadsden AF Depot Ogden picked up prime supply and maintenance and specialized supply and procurement for FSC 8140, ammunition boxes, packages and special containers. Gadsden transferred 14 stock listed items and 712 square feet of material in storage

there to Ogden. Supply's Ammunition Division assumed full responsibility as soon as records arrived. Gadsden attrited stocks as rapidly as possible by disposal action or shipment of boxes to the Ordnance Corps Depot of the Army. (2) From Topeka AF Depot Ogden gained prime maintenance and supply and specialized procurement for FSC 4925, ammunition, maintenance and repair shop specialized equipment (formerly in Class 17-C and 18-C). This class involved about 25 stock listed items valued a t about $20,000. Most of the material in this class covered items provisioned for the MB-1 Genie Rocket. The AF Ammunition Services Office assumed the maintenance responsibility for them. (3) AMC reassigned the MA-I Field Surveillance Laboratory to FSC 664019 1 January 1958. ( I t was formerly included in the old Class 1 7 4 , laboratory and shop test inspection equipment.) Effective 15 January 1958 i t transferred from Topeka AF Depot to Ogden's AF Ammunition Services Office prime maintenance


: ,

I ; .I'. ,

+.$, .







- 1 NUTE M A I
p. newly-dcsigncd name marker a t the South Gate of Hill AF8. (pho:~g~cqh=d Moy 19bOJ rrnphmsired OOAMA's role with SM-80 Min-

. l u ~ 1957. Its concept was assignment of missile e rc$ponsibilities by complete package and by fami l ~ ,group. A Logistic Support Manager supplied ;111(1 maintained the airframe and the weapon ivstem storage site. While missiles, by this time, appeared preeminent over all other weapons, AMC reminded its field commanders: "our day-to-day priority lor national survival remains with manned air,.raft." As important as missiles were, they were still only one facet of AMC's total mission effort. Before missiles, USAF's existing force included .bout 25,000 manned aircraft, from the super-onic "century series" fighters (such as F-101 A I I ~ F-102) to long-range B-47s and B-52s and ll~eir fleet of flying tankers. Future plans called ior manned aircraft, including bombers, capable r ~ f flying more than three times the speed of -;uund (Mach 3) and a t altitudes of 75,000 feet :tnd more. Fighter aircraft performance, if plans Oc\.eloped, would be even more spectacular. As l~lmnedin 1957-58, missiles would soon enter file A F inventory in quantity. Nevertheless lnnnned aircraft would continue in the inventory combat weapons for a considerable period of time. Combat, cargo, transport and other supPort types of manned aircraft would continue to Ilc a large part of the Air Force fleet throughout 'he entire foreseeable future. Eventual and long-range plans called for integration of manned aircraft, missiles and manned and unman""d spacecraft. Once missiles were in the inventory, AMC would phase out some of its man-

ned aircraft. When that occurred AMC planned to shift to AMAs which suvportetl such aircraft, some management or support responsibilities for missiles or spacecraft. In the new missile assignments, effective 4 J u n e 1957, some AMAs were omitted. T h IS was ' the priority and assignment list: ballistic missiles carried top priority. Development and production of operational intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) and intermediate-range I~allistic missiles (IRBM) were of rime importance. In J u n e 1957 there were three such missile systems: the Atlas ICBM, produced by Convair; :he Titan ICBM, produced by Martin and the Thor IRBM, produced by Douglas. The approved assignment of manager responsibilities by package and family groupings showed these breakdowns: Guided Aircraft Rockets (GAR), such as Falcon:Sidewinder, went to Middletown AMA; Guided Aircraft Missiles (GAM), such as the GAM-63 Rascal, GAM-72 Green Quail went to Oklahoma City AMA: Tactical Missiles ( T M ) , such as the TM-61 Mata-

-6 (ballistic). such aIS the SM-65 ~ t l a s , - ~ ~ Ti- 8 Bernartan and the SM-75 Thor became a din0 AMA management responsibility. (Of the eight AMAs, three did not receive missile assignments a t this time: San Antonio, Sacramento and Mobile).



From an 11 July 1956 ground-breaking to 3 June 1957 dedication, Ihe Ogden Maquardt ramjet manufachrring plant grew to one of

the top ten plants of 1958. Ramjets were Bornarc's go-power.

Bomarcs, plus manned interceptor bombers and weapons of other services made up the air defense system punch of the United States. Making the system complete, of course, were the radar and communications networks, the dataprocessing equipment that joined in detecting, warning, identifying, tracking, evaluating threat and controlling the air defense weapons. Without these there was little or no air defense capability.


_ _ I _

-. c

The Bomarc, about 47 feet long, had a wing span approximately 18 feet. Its initial boost came from a liquid-rocket engine, the LR-59, manufactured by Aerojet-General Corp., Sacramento, California. Then two ramjet engines, RJ-43, manufactured by the Ogden Division of the Marquardt Aircraft Co., continued to accelerate the Bomarc to supersonic speed and propel i t a t long-range to its target. The about 14-foot-long ramjet was an air-breathing, gasoline-burning sustainer type engine on the IM-99A, with solid propellant for the rocket and jet fuel for the IM-99B. i Even before Ogden gained management of the Bomarc, it began a mission for that missile. On 30 April 1956 an AMC directive named Ogden as the prime maintenance and supply depot for products of the Marquardt Aircraft Co. and for those of the Aerojet-General Corp. There was no immediate depot work, of course, since the Marquardt plant was still in the planning stage. I n line with the 1955-56 Department of Defense policy of dispersal of defense industries to companies away from the coastal region, Marquardt received approval on 7 February 1956 to expand. Already its facilities in Van Nuys, California had reached their full capacity to

expand, and by now Marquardt had grown from a subcontractor to a major vendor for the AF. The February approval gave Marquardt a clear directive to proceed with plans for the first phase of its expansion in the Ogden, Utah area: construction of a $4.5 million manufacturing plant for ramjets. This began 11 July 1956 on a 67-acre site on the outskirts of Ogden. I n a year, 3 June 1957, officials dedicated the only ramjet engine manufacturing plant. Construction of the second phase began 19 August 1957 on a 2,150acre site about 15 miles west of Ogden a t Little Mountain. Called the ~ ~ - M a r ~ u Laboraa r m

t ~ ~ , - * ~ ~ a - e - ~ y ~ ~ -imn-w y ~ ~ s ~ : ~ - ~
plant was-"d"pZr"aGir"6~TfZEqTardtconduct to -.*acceptance testi of ramjet engines uZiEer con. ..-trolled conditigw. .$mils, ,, 6f +qct2a' flight. The new J e t Laboratory, employing an initial 175 Marquardt personnel, was capable of simulating altitudes in excess of 100,000 feet and speeds as much as three times that of sound. Dedication occurred 5 October 1959. Until the J e t Laboratory was completed, Ogden's Marquardt plant shipped ramjets to its Van Nuys facility for testing. From there they came back to OOAMA for storage and routing to Patrick and Eglin AFBs in Florida for missile test phases. Ogden AMA established an Air Force Officer In Charge (AFOIC) a t the Ogden Division of Marquardt on 1 April 1957, moving AF personnel into the new Marquardt plant on 1 July. This became Ogden's Directorate of Procurement and Production representative on such matters as contract administration, production surveillance, property administration and quality control, beginning effective 29 April of that year.


I -

Ogden AMA had leased storage space in its West Area for Marquardt's facilities and equipment, pending opening of the new plant. The first 228 Marquardt employees occupied space Marquardt rented in Ogden, Utah in early 1956. (Fifty of the first employees transferred from the Van Nuys plant.) On 17 May 1957 the Boeing Airplane Co., the prime contractor, received its initial contract for a plus $135 million to produce IM-99 Bomarcs. Eighty percent of the work Boeing subcontracted to such concerns as Marquardt for the RJ-43 ramjet engines; Aerojet-General for the LR-59 liquid-rocket boost engine and Westinghouse Electric for the AN/GPA-35, ground-toair guidance system used on the Bomarc until SAGE was fully operational. On 23 May 1957 the Ogden Division of Marquardt assembled its first YRJ43-MA3 ramjet production engine, accepted by the AF on 29 June 1957. Boeing completed the first production model of the IM-99A Bomarc in 1957, accepted by the A F on 30 December." AMC activated the Marquardt Ramjet Development Facility s t Van Nuys, California as an industrial plant on 26 November 1957, giving OOAMA jurisdiction, control and accountability. The following year, 1 January 1958, jurisdiction of the Marquardt Plant Office at the Van Nuys operation became an OOAMA responsibility. As an off-base office of OOAMA's Directorate of Procurement and Production, it performed functions similar to those of the local Marquardt Plant Office: the operational phase of contract administration, including cost analysis, property administration, production, quality control and contract termination, plus maintaining liaison with and assisting the plant in completion of government contracts. This marked the beginning of OOAMA's prime procurement responsibility for ramjet engine components. It had been prime maintenance and supply depot for the ramjet itself since 30 April 1956. AMC was the prime procuring agent for the ramjet engine. This rounded out Ogden's responsibility which already included prime and specialized supply and maintenance for the Bomarc and its components. AMC and its agent, Aeronautical Systems Center (organized 15 September 1958), served as prime procuring agents for the Bomarc. No real depot-level work generated on the Marquardt ramjet engines for some time. The first four of 11 came in to Ogden AMA on 14 Oc+Ramjet engines were not only used on the Bomarc missile but Lockheed's X-7 experimental vehicle and Radioplane's Q-5 Target Drone.

tober 1957. Trucked to Hill AF Base from Marquardt in Ogden, Utah, they remained in storage only. In January 1958 Ogden began shipments of the engines to Boeing for installation in Bomarc missiles. Not until 3 March 1958 did OOAMA receive its first ramjets (YRJ43-MA3) for modification. Involved in the initial maintenance project were 15 upon which OOAMA workers performed Military Specifications Acceptance Check to insure they met AF specifications. Work, performed in an old engine test cell building (Number 268), was under technical guidance of Marquardt personnel. Thus Maintenance technicians began their first-on-the-job experience for later more extensive depot-level work. These engines, too, were eventually destined for use in the Bomarc missile testing program at Eglin AFB, Florida. Ogden workers got their first look at and a chance to overhaul a complete Bomarc missile in early 1958, a test-damaged XIM-99A. Flown to Hill from Boeing in a C-124 Globemaster on 20 February 1958, it had been damaged during tests a t Cape Canaveral. After repairing it workers shipped it to the USAF Orientation Group a t Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. With a minimum of modification OOAMA's facilities were useful for overhaul, test and storage of Bomarc ramjet fuel packages and components. Ogden's facility capability to support the Bomarc inciuded 26 buildings and scores of pieces of special equipment. Fourteen of the buildings were in the West Area Complex. In these buildings, and with some already available special tools, not only the Bomarc but other missiles requiring depot-level support were accommodated. Some of the special equipment included: temperature conditioning ovens, am-

On 10 October 1958 trucks moved o 140-ton test cell to the AF-Marquardt Jet Laboratory at Little Mountoin.


Yeor-long modification of Building 1915, West Area, ended April 1960. Here Maintenance technicians overhauled, inspected, calibrated, Bornarc-A and 8 ramjet fuel- s -.;

munition drop-test tower, X-ray, etc. Equipment find buildings were adaptable for: ground-handling equipment, hydraulic cylinder and actuators. instruments, optical devices, electrical circui try, control, hydraulic accessories, electronic cqu~pment, airframe and other structural items, - :It spray testing, inspection after static firing, prq)aration for tests, liquid-propellant purging, -;torageof spares and assemblies, etc. In October 1958 AMC approved funds for one major modification project, Building 1915 in Zone 19 of the West Area. Actual work did not hcain, however, until 12 June 1959 with a comi)leti011date of 17 June 1960 a t a cost of $36$,658. AMC authorized in FY 1959 procurement I)! ;pecial tools totaling $723,000. OOAMA used r h ~ 5money to procure special test equipment and test stands as well as special calibration equipment designed expressly for overhaul and repair of ramjet fuel packages. I t was still another year before The Marquardt Corp.* certified and accepted B u 1 1 , 9 1 5 ~ completely as satisfactory. In prG-aration for full use of the building and equipment for overhaul work, 1Inintenance began analytical overhaul work i(!evelopment of techniques and procedures) on 10 April 1961. Schedules called for complete owrhaul of fuel packages a t the rate of 20 per month. Maintenance planned no "hot firings" of the fuel systems .at the Hill AFBfacility. The fuel packages consjsted primarily of a pump, "peed and altitude-sensing devices and computing systems. Instead technicians a t the base


:h~orquardt Aircraft Co. changed i t s name to The Marquardt Carp., effective 5 May 1959. Entronce into the missile-space c:~siness outmoded the old designation

planned to send sample systems periodically to the AF-Marquardt J e t Laboratory for such tests. Not the least of Ogden's assets to support the Bomarc and its propulsion systems were its manpower resources. Throughout 1958-60 OOAMA scheduled personnel to train a t Boeing's plant, the Air Training Command's school a t Chanute AFB, Illinois and in classroom and on-the-job a t Hill AFB. Over 100 received training in preparation for depot-level support of the IM-99A and by mid-1960 over 50 had completed related B-model training with another plus 20 finishing by the end of the year. Such courses (lasting from one to 20 weeks) as these were participated in by OOAMA personnel: Supervisors, Planners, Guidance and Control System Analyst, Test Equipment Technician (Guidance and Control), Missile System Analyst and Specialist, Missile Engine and Maintenance Mechanic, GSA Prelaunch Translator and Fire-up Decoder, Ground-Powered Supply Equipment, Relay Center Equipment, Fuel Supply Specialist, etc. By the middle of 1960 OOAMA had 116 civilians, three officers and four airmen assigned to manage and support its Bomarc mission. With the Bomarc designed as a major weapon in the air defense system, it required special planning and support. Its role required that it be supported by a responsible, flexible logistic system, fulljr controlled by the AF. Thus supported the operational Bomarc would not be vulnerable to labor disputes and possible diminishing contractor interest when his attention centered on development of newer weapons. OOAMA worked closely with the AF and the

contractors (Boeing and Marquardt) during the early assignment years to develop a "best mix" concept of AMC and contractor support. Marquardt, therefore, performed all initial maintenance work until, on a time-phased basis, starting 1 July 1960, Ogden AMA began enterkg into more extensive support of the user of ramjet engines. Contractor support covered repairs where "hot firings" were needed after repair was completed, or where the frequency of repair did not justify the AF procuring special fixtures and equipment. Air Defense Command units (the users) replaced specified items when they were needed and authorized by field maintenance handbooks. This involved replacing fuel packages in the engines and then returning reparable packages to the depot (Hill AFB) for replacement of cure-dated rubber goods and other defective components which required inspection and calibration. Ramjet engines in the research,the Bomarcmiiile were "hot fired" a t Marquardt's +-... .-., ~. .. ... .~ L % m o u n t + n , ~ e& t $ .&i J & Ramjet engines came to AFB for overhaul from the users when the extent of repair necessary exceeded the capabilities of ADC squadrons. The type of work involved was repair of damaged or malfunctioning engines, or overhauling of the complete engines or fuelcontrol assemblies which organizational-level (user) personnel could not handle. Complete overhauling included removal of all major assemblies, then dissembling, cleaning, inspecting, replacing and repairing faulty parts, giving components functional checks, then reassembling and acceptance testing them to insure their


flight worthiness and compliance with drawings and specifications. By the end of December 1958 OOAMA Maintenance technicians had overhauled 28 YRJ43-MA3 (IM-99A) ramjet engines. The same mix of contractor-user-AMC support of the LR-59 liquid-rocket booster engine applied. Aerojet furnished depot-level repair and engine components to Boeing for its YIM-99A testing program, with the same type of assist from OOAMA and ADC units as cited above. Tactical demonstration testing of the IM-99A began in October 1958. By January 1959 the AF fired its first IM-99A training Bomarc from its training and test center a t Santa Rosa Island, off Florida's west coast. (Santa Rosa became fully operational as a Bomarc launch site the week of 22 December 1958.) The firing was the first of a joint training mission for AF testing personnel of Eglii AFB and for members of the Bomarc's own 4751st Air Defense Missile Wing which was activated 15 January 1958 to train Bomarc military missile units.' By April 1959 Marquardt phased into production of the latest model ramjet engine used on the IM-99B, the RJ43-MAll, delivering its first tactical B-model to Boeing in March 1960. I n April 1959 also the AF completed ground tests to learn the effects of the new engine on the B-model airframe, and system a t its Mases Lake, Washington Flight Test Center. That same
'Used in the *sting progrom for Bomarrr
were there vehider: 06-17 IOOAMA prrlicipated in mdificotian of this WW I1 aircmft to the dmne configuration); the SM-64 Navaho's testing vehicle, the X-10 (o rhon-term OOAMA missile assignment]; ond one-time W A M A assignment Torget Orones. the Q.4 and Q.5; plus the QF.BO shooting stor; F-104, 8.50 ond

Ragbaulus 11 missile.

three Bomarc-B bases, plus two B-bases in Canada. Constuction of any additional bases came to a sudden halt; plans for others ceased. The Bomarc-A bases were these: McGuire AFB, New Jersey (the first operational base, 15 September 1959); Suffolk County AFB, New York (manned and equipped by 29 November 1959); Otis AFB, Mass.; Dow AFB, Maine; Langley AFB, Virginia. Otis was operational by 25 March 1960. It, Langley and McGuire also doubled as Bomarc-B bases. By December 1960, ADC had accepted as operationally ready all the Bomarc-A bases. Left in the Bomarc-B program were these bases planned exclusively for the Bomarc-B missile: Kincheloe AFB, Michigan; Duluth AFB, Minnesota and Niagara Falls AFB, New York. The reduced program still included the two Bomarc-B bases in Canada a t North Bay, Ontario and LaMacaza, Quebec. The U-2 incident on 1 May 1960, followed by the collapse of the East-W& Nations' Summit Conference in Paris, France on 16 May 1960, plus general tense world conditions, played an undeniable part in influencing a reversal in fund cuts, and re-emphasis on air defensive systems.* Marquardt's production-acceptance testing of the RJ43-MA11 engine for the advanced Bomarc missile would continue until about mid1962, with the last engine shipped probably late that year. The reduced program, therefore, found Marquardt fully geared for transition to the advanced engine, and only partially engaged in
'The U-2 was a high-altitude jet, photographic reconnaissance aircraft the Soviet Union announced it had shot down over Svendlovsk, central Russia on 1 May 1960.

other types of work. The eventuality of a terminated workload for Bomarc engines in the immediate future induced the company to scout for other work to use its modern plant facilities and skilled manpower. Marquardt stepped up its nuclear ramjet research program for possible use in space vehicles, and before a year had passed it also shared in contracts to produce part of the Apollo spacecraft, the Army's Roadrunner target missile and minor subcontracting work on the Minuteman missile. The special facilities and skilled technicians a t the AF-Marquardt J e t Laboratory a t Little Mountain were highly adaptable to special tests and studies done for Thiokol Chemical Corp., Hercules Powder Co. and Aerojet-General Corp. on the three stages of Minuteman motor nozzles. Technicians used the supersonic test cell a t Little Mountain for coldflow ksts, forcing the air through the nozzles and combustion chambers just as it would occur in actual burning of the propellant charge. Results of the tests helped improve characteristics and efficiency of the nozzles. The proximity of Little Mountain to Thiokol and Hercules offered a definite time and transportation saving. Marquardt made significant contributions to the overall missile impact upon OOAMA and the area. From its start in 1956 through 1960 it poured nearly $30 million in payroll into the area, exclusive of the millions it spent for supplies and services. These dollars had gone to a personnel force which mse from the 228 in 1956 to almost double that in 1957. Its 1,200 worker strength in 1958 rose to a peak of about 1,700 in 1959, when the annual payroll was $11 million. The impact of defense budget cuts on the Bo-

A September 1959 view of Hill AFB's East Area Industrial Complex, shows some Maintenance hangars and shops, Supply war.houre administrative space.



ihiokol Chemical C0.p.'~ Utmh Dirilion, about 27 .rn&-vert of 0righ.m City, Utah, dediroted in Orteber 1957. began rcseorrh and dc4c+meaLwork ~ e ~ f o l l ~ g ~ p T a p ' ~ ~ W A M A - m ~ n ~ ~ ~ - U ~ h ~ ~ rystemr.m a r p r o p u l ~ i e n d ~ ~

Irases carried heavy inventories, with some new Irises added to the year previous: Langley now stood a t $14,183,480; Suffolk up to $8,143,562; Dow at $5,797,513; McGuire was down to $3,102:837; Santa Rosa Island had $2,971,379; Otis counted an inventory of $2,200,229. New 1a;es with starting inventories were: Duluth AFB, Minnesota; $534,695; Kincheloe AFB llichigan, $456,429; Niagara Falls AFB, W. Y., ;131,305. The start of inventories for the first Canadian base, North Bay, Ontario, showed 12:549 on 30 June 1961. First assignment of missiles by family groupings in June 1957 prompted preparation and distribution of OOAMA's Missile Support Plan of 1 October 1957, revised 15 November 1957 with final refinement 15 January 1958. Besides extensive distribution internally, the plan went forward to AMC organizations. Its intent was direct and concise: provide complete logistical and managerial support for the IM-99 Bomarc, SM-62 Snark and SM-73 Bull G o o s e weapon systems, plus technical surveillance and support to explosive components (including solid propellants but excluding nuclear) of all AF missiles and rockets. Policies centered around use of in-house or organic (depot) capabilities where reasonable costs permitted and as necessary to insure military combat readiness. After initial contract assistance on such weapons as the IM-99 Bomarc, OOAMA would furnish worldwide support. There was no problem for such support for the SM-62 Snark reduced program for requirements fit neatly into Ogden's existing facilities and other resources. Ogden experienced a shortage of

funds for equipment, training and other essentials for in-house support. If such limitations hampered proper in-house missile support, Ogden recommended that contractor assistance continue. As its capability developed it switched back to its own depot support. For all its missile assignments Ogden exercised over-the-shoulder cognizance (particularly of the new missiles) so it could determine whether and when it should and could assume support functions. To assure full performance of support of its first-line weapon assignments, Ogden phased withdrawing its support of second-line items, subject to AMC approval and as acceptable to the using commands. Facilities for the three missiles were available through minimum modification of existing structures, where possible with local funds. All work of a like nature was assigned to one shop, regardless of the number of missiles involved. The major part of missile work was repair of groundsupport and test equipment components. These were routed to repair shops from the air freight te~minal reparable warehouse. Thus no groupor ing of missile support facilities was needed, except as their interdependence dictated, or they received support from other shops not set aside for missile work. Already existing ordnance-type structures (with minimum modifications), which OOAMA acquired with the transfer of the old Ogden Arsenal in April 1955, were adaptable for missile-munitions support. Ogden had 320,586 square feet of such space. Here explosive devices and integral assemblies inspection, storage, repair and testing were possible.

To accommodate repair, test and storage functions for propulsion systems, ground-handling equipment, accessories, airframe and structural, electronic assemblies and warehouse space, OOAMA required these square feet of space for the missiles involved: (1) IM-99, 233,552 maintenance and 100,000 supply; (2) SM-62, 95,529 maintenance and 10,500 supply; (3) SM-73, 27,469 maintenance and 75,000 supply, or a grand total for the three missiles of 542,050 square feet of maintenance and supply. Ogden anticipated having its facilities depot capability for the IM-99 completed by the fourth quarter FY 1959; for the SM-62 by the second quarter FY 1959. Though facilities requirements for the SM-73 would have created no problem of note, no planning action was necessary since the AF cancelled the program 12 December 1958. Facilities modification funds required through FY 1958 and 1959 totaled approximately $877,000, with $398,000 in Military Construction Program money. Ogden estimated that performance of depot maintenance required a major portion of its Directorate of Maintenance work force. Other maintenance engineering work would be performed by traveling teams (depot level). Both maintenance and supply streamlined their operations by mechanical and other means, reassigned and trained personnel. In maintenance areas, the headquarters reallocated or transferred technical and other contractor assistance already bought, where necessary, and programmed for future contractor assistance. In the airrnunitions field OOAMA estimated a need for an additional 100 persons by the second quarter FY 1960 to support missile and rocket programs. In addition, about 125 airmen and six officers were needed by 1 January 1958. The military personnel would be used in the receipt, storage, maintenance, inspection and administration of airmunitions. Total maintenance manpower needed by the end of FY 1958 to support the IM-99 was set a t 45; by FY 1959, 128; FY, 1960, 369; FY 1961, 1,023. For the SM-62, maintenance personnel needed by FY 1958's end totaled 38; FY 1959, 104; FY 1960, 191 and FY 1961, 370. Maintenance manpower support of the SM-73 was estimated as 13 by FY 1958, 19 by FY 1959. Projections for FY 1960 and FY 1961 were not needed with cancellation of the program. Supply's missile manpower estimations showed FY 1958, 20 for the IM-99; 15 for the SM-62; and six for the SM-73. FY 1959 requirements were 30 for IM-99; 25 for SM-62; 16 for SM-73. FY 1960 supply manpower requirements were 60,

IM-99; 40 for SM-62. FY 1961 figures were 65 for IM-99; 40 for SM-62. The AF Ammunition Services Office requirements for manpower for the three missiles totaled 15 officers and 55 civilians, augmented by six officers, 125 airmen and one civilian from the 25th Ammunition Supply Squadron for FY 1958. PY 1959 called for 15 officers, 85 civilians from the Ammunition Services Office, plus another six officers, 125 airmen and five civilians from the 25th Ammunition Supply Squadron. FY 1960 requiiements were : 15 officers and 1i 0 civilians irom the Ammunition Services Office and six officers, 125 airmen and 20 civilians from the Supply Squadron. FY 1961 requirements showed 15 officers, 135 civilians from the Office, six officers, 125 airmen and 20 civilians from the Squadron. Considered also was the fact that such figures included the time expended by these personnel in support of the explosive components of all USAF missiles and munitions. Explosive devices safety and serviceability inspection, handling, storage, shipping, repair, testing and disposal were either performed by personnel of the Ammunition Services Office, 25th Ammunition Supply Squadron, or 2700th Explosive Ordnance Disposal and done under the technical direction of OOAMA.

I n May 1960 Thiokol's Utah Division successfully tested Minuteman missile first-stage motor.


OOAMA personnel began training in December 1957 a t Northrop for the SM-62. By the end of FY 1958 sufficient numbers of personnel received this type of off-base training to form a nucleus to train others on the job and in classroom. Off-base training for the IM-99 began the fourth quarter FY 1958, continuing through FY 1959. After that, training for depot-level repair continued a t Hill AFB. By the fourth quarter FY 1961 training ended. Personnel training for the SM-73 did not become a planning factor. Only two trained (general technician) for three weeks in the third quarter FY 1958. Even before the cancellation of the program in December 1958, extensive planning was not a consideration since it would be well beyond 1959 before squadrons were equipped and needed support. Ogden's officials followed with interest expansion and location of major missile industries adjacent to Hill Air Force Base. Such events had a direct bearing upon the assignment of management of such advanced missiles as the Minuteman to OOAMA. Before 1956, few people a t Hill AFB, or in Utah, had heard of Thiokol Chemical Corp. Early that year this company, with headquarters in Trenton, New Jersey, began serious investigation of the possibility and desirability of locating a new rocket production and development plant in northern Utah. The area offered what the company was searching for and by 17 October 1957 a solid-propellant rocket plant, 27 miles west of Brigham City, Utah, was dedicated with operations beginning soon after. As early as 1948 Thiokol scientists began to exploit a new rocket fuel and formulate practical rocket propulsion systems. Two years later they began work on rockets with the Army at Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, Alabama. Thiokol figured prominently in early pioneering on large engines in such missile programs as the Lockheed X-17. The AF developed this as a test rocket for its ICBM program. Thiokol developed and produced all three solid-propellant stages. The Hermes Program, which culminated in the flight testing of the SM-20, the Sergeant, Polaris, and the SM-73 Bull Goose, were other programs among Thiokol's assignments. All this had a direct bearing upon the decision of the Director of Guided Missiles, Department of Defense, which approved the AF project to produce an advanced type ballistic missile, giving the AF a firm go-ahead signal on 3 March 1958 to start development of what some called the "showpiece" of the defense arsenal, the Minuteman.

'A UTAH M A N . S I R ! '

Salt Lake Tribune Cartoonist, Chris Jensen's portrayal of the Utah-produced Minuteman missile.

In the meantime, another Utah Industry began an expansion program. On 27 March 1958

irraW"~iAEiI1~h expansion of its facilities on a 500-acre site adjacent to its current 2,000-acre facility. Here for over 40 years it had figured as the country's second largest producer of explosives. Hercules made a name for itself in World War I1 with America's first rocket, the Bazooka. I t worked, too, with the Honest John, Little John, Nike, Terrier, Scout, Talos, the SM-62 Snark and the Vanguard, to name a few of the missiles and vehicles using Hercules-developed explosives. Ground-breaking ceremonies, starting construction of new solid-propellant facilities, occurred in March 1958. By mid-1958 both Thiokol and Hercules had contracts for research and development work on the Minuteman: Thiokol for the first-stage motor and Hercules for the third-stage. (AerojetGeneral Corp., Sacramento, California carried on the primary work on the second-stage with backup from Thiokol.) The AF selected its principal contractor to test and assemble the Minuteman during its

A highly successful Minuteman tethered silo test program a t Edwards AFB reduced the scheduled shots from 18 to eight and saved the Air Force about $20 million.

Mobile team maintenance (area support), AF planners envisioned, would be somewhat extensive. Following OOAMA's management assignment of the Minuteman, the year 1959 continued to record significant events. On 6 March 1959 Thiokol ChegabaLCm.p-.received its first formal .---research and development contract. Hercules Powder Co. followed on 7 June with a similar type contract for its work on the Minuteman. Previous work by these two contractors had proceeded under a letter-contract arrangement. Thiokol received a production contract for the first-stage Minuteman motor, awarded 27 November 1959. This was concurrent with AF approval for construction of-,gF-Plank 7&,M-,- ,owned and Thiokol-operated. Construction of the plus $30 million plant, on 1,500 acres adjacent to current facilities (about 27 miles west of Brigham City, Utah) began a year later on 15 November 1960. The November 1959 date brought AF approval for establishment and constructi Plant 77. This $11 million plant, 1 AP~%- Area Complex, was*a west with-i@& the Boeing Airplane Co. he"^' ample acreage and structures of Hill AFB's West Area made it possible for OOAMA to transfer, on 7 July 1960, (for use of A F Plant 77) 794.20 acres of land valued a t $39,948.26; 11t buildings and structures (seven strictly structures) with



utilities and systems which originally cost $4,176,042.22, plus 49 ammunition igloos. ActuaI plant construction did not begin until 15 September 1960. The first phase of construction involved 59 buildings and structures rehabilitated or modified; 40 igloos, 11 warehouse buildings, an office building, a cafeteria and six missile assembly and other support structures. These were designed for use in maintenance, calibration, inspection, shipping, storage, etc. The first phase, completed 15 July 1961, cost $5.3 million. The second phase (begun a year later) covered another $1.267 million for three new missile assembly buildings, a flammable storage facility and modernization of other structures. Needed to put the plant into full operation by early 1962, was equipment valued a t about $3 million to use in a total of nine missile assembly buildings and 40 rocket motor storage and support buildings. Here Boeing would assemble the first- second- and third-stage Minuteman motors, for delivery in a completed operational missile, to launch sites. OOAMA established an AF Office, Boeing Plant 77 on 17 January 1960, staffed by six civilians and three officers. Located in the West Area the office handled the necessary coordinations between the contractor and the AF. Functions of the office went to the Ogden Air Procurement District of the newly created Western Contract Management Region, established 1

The first in a series of four mobile Minuteman train tests (Strategic Air Base starting 20 June 1960.

Command Project "Big


originated from Hill Air Force

July 1960. The District then became one of OOAMA's tenant organizations. Ogden had had contract management responsibility for the Minuteman from 1 July 1959 until the above date, when AMC transferred jurisdiction of the AF Plant Representative Office a t Boeing, Seattle from OCAMA. The Minuteman testing program exceeded all expectations from the start of the first full-scale silo firing on 15 September 1959 until the eighth and last on 6 May 1960. In fact, the success of the tests was unrivaled among the big missiles. Conducted a t Edwards AFB, California these captive (tethered) firings were so successful they brought a cut of the total number planned from 18 to eight, making the second-phase test program six months nearer than anticipated. By the end of 1960 launching facilities at Cape Canaveral were ready for the first initial freeflight test scheduled for early 1961 down the plus 5,000-miIe Atlantic Missile Range in Florida. (The first flight o the new series, using all f three stages of the Minuteman motors, was a complete and roaring success on 1 February 1961.) Plans for the first launching site for hardened and dispersed Minuteman complex came to light on 17 December 1959 when the AF approved a SAC/AF Ballistic Missile Division study calling for selection of Malrnstrom AFB, Montana as that site. On 23 March 1960 the AF publicly announced the Department of Defense had singled Malmstrom out for that honor. By the fall of 1960, 1 October, AMC organized Detachment 18, Headquarters OOAMA (OOAMA Support Detachment, Malmstrom). It was the Detachment's task to furnish materiel management and engineering support to the Site Activation

Task Force and the SAC Commander of the launching areas. By 6 December 1960 the Army Corps of Engineers opened bids for construction of 150 hardened Minuteman launching sites and 15 control centers to be built in the Malmstrom area. (It was a year before the Site Activation Task Force accepted the first completed site.) Awarding of other p r o d u c t i o n contracts brought the eventual operational missile nearer reality. On 25 January 1960 the AF awarded Aerojet-General Corp. the second-stage motor production contract for the Minuteman. In just another seven months, 12 August 1960, it gave the third-stage production contract to Hercules

"'ITSi year 1960 brought a first in the annals

of missilery when the AF and industry joined in a series of tests to prove whether or not the Minuteman could be deployed and launched successfully from railroad cars. Major among those working in concert on the tests, emanating from Hill AFB, were: OOAMA, the American Association of Railroads, Strategic Air Command, the Utah General Depot's Transportation Corps and Boeing. The tests were conducted from "blueprints" which SAC'S First Division had completed 11 May 1959: Mobile Minuteman Concept. Under a title of SAC "Project Big Star," the tests ran from 20 June through 16 August 1960. Conducted over the existing railroad network of the country, the tests verified much useful, interesting data covering: the feasibility, practicability, costs, problems in logis-

ment value was $22,635,668: airmunitiom real property was worth $16,624,906, with fixed supporting equipment valued a t another $500,762. Its weapons loading pad waa valued a t W 0 . , 0 0 S e i l data-proceasing facilities were worth over pca $130,000, with eledmnic maintenance equip ment valued a t $4,850,000 and dectrcmic h o p modernization valued a t $145,000. Sin- there was certainly no denying the desirability and the complete necessity of having the recycle facility phased to be available a t the appmpriate t m after the assaanbly fimcti0118 ie were in full swing, it was difficult to imagine how and why the inordinate delays toward that objective. As early as 5 November 1959 the Office of Secretary of Defense had authorized the design of Minuteman production facilities at two Utah locations. One would be a t Hill AFB (a recycle plant for major maintenance, modifications and inspection - and one for assembly of the complete missile for shipment to launching sites). The other was a t Thiokol Chemical Corp. for production of the first-stage motor. By 1 December 1959 AMC officially notified OOAMA that indeed Hill AFB was the site for both assembly and recycle operations. Approval for and start of construction of the assembly plant (AF Plant 77) proceeded without a hitch, and reasonably toward an operational time set: early 1962. Time wasted away through all of 1950, unfortunately, with no firm approval of funds for a Missile Maintenance Facility where OOAMA could operate the recycle operation. Attempts of the Air Force, the Secretary of Defense and the Bureau of Budget, coupled with constant prodding and urging by Utah's congressional representatives, did not budge Congress in 1960. First of all, Congress refused to appropriate funds requested. Then after its 1960 adioumment, the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee refused to give the AF permission to transfer funds, for which it had already received approval, from lower priority projects, to the important recycle facility. The organic, or in-house facility, manned by about 400 Maintenance technicians, would be used to disassemble, overhaul, inspect, checkout and reassemble the Minuteman. Congressional release of funds made possible awarding of a $2,225,115 construction contract on 16 July 1961. Construction began 10 days later on a 140-acre tract of land located a t the west end of the east-west runway. When completed, this OOAMA-operated facility would consist of five new concrete and steel buildings for disassembly and reassembly work; 12 amrnuni-

dLb T.

tics, communications, numbers of personnel required and their care and comfort, transportation facilities, costs and deployment, etc. T o p level officials exhaustively studied and evaluated the data gathered as to feasibility, costs, etc. Budgetary and other considerations at Defense Department and USAF levels ruled in favor of hardened and dispersed sites, bringing eventual cancellation of the mobile concept on 8 Deember 1961. Still the facts gathered showed much that could not be gained otherwise for adaptation to similar unusual logistics situations. It had given OOAMA a rare opportunity once again to show the unexcelled quality and quantity of its resources which were available for any kind of suvwrt challenee - old or untried. + S i g the SAC aeent

Ogden's logistic8 work in support of the operational Minuteman was still not a completely accomplished product a t the close of 1960. Much planning had gone into what that support must be. As OOAMA laid those plans it contemplated the fact that it already had available extensive special equipment and facilities which it could divert to Minuteman support. The total invest-


Private contractors completed on 3 0 M a y 1959 a project started a year before: two, 200-man airmen dormitories costing $597,894.

tion igloos modified for storage of Minuteman motors; two East Area buildings modified for repair of missile components (electronic, electrical and hydraulic equipment). Part of the construction involved building and installation of the necessary utility, electrical, railroad, roads, sewers and other related items. Once in operation, the entire organic maintenance complex would include such facilities as these, for which construction began in 1961: (1) A Missile Engineering Surveillance Facility, or -4ging Laboratory, costing about $442,717, which duplicated hardened site environmental conditions. Under temperature and humidity control, technicians could determine what the effects of long-time storage of the Minuteman would be. (2) Another facility was the Radiographic Inspection Laboratory to cost about $313,650. Its special facilities would be capable of X-raying Minuteman motors to detect defects in bondingto-case separation, internal cracks, or voids, in the propellant, etc. (3) Included also were Clean Rooms, modified structures where workers repaired, calibrated, assembled precision instruments, electronic-mechanical devices, etc. Modifications would cost about $300,000. Special tools needed would run between $2-3 million. Other new facilities planned for 1961-62 would add materially to the overall effectiveness of OOAMA's support of the Minuteman. One was a new Air Freight Terminal to cost about $932,441. It would replace a World War I1 vintage terminal (built in the summer of 1943). In support of the Minuteman, Hill AFB would then serve as the shipping point for Minuteman manufacturing, recycle and rehabilitation functions

occurring a t the base. Re-supply of Minuteman missiles to the squadrons a t the launching sites would be airlifted out of Hill AFB more expeditiously through this modern, efficient facility, due for completion in 1962. High among Hill AFB's advantages over other AMAs in supporting the Minuteman from every angle, was the availal~ilityand proximity of the Wendover Weapons Range Complex (about 60 miles west of Hill AFB). Funds totaling about $7.5 million were due in 1961-62 to complete special facilities for testing missile motors and explosives. It was remote enough from population centers to make it safe for hazardous operations, yet accessible enough to the base and possible contractual and other Defense Department agencies to make it extremely valuable for Minuteman and other missile and space vehicle uses. Modifications of Building 2114 in Hill AFB's West Area, begun 18 September 1959 and completed in December of that year, cost $58,000. The buiIding was then adaptable for storage of Minuteman motors and components. It didn't take the region and OOAMA long to realize the actual and potential impact of Minuteman production and management on the economy of the area. Some comparative figures for the two major contractors alone indicate an interesting trend. In 1955 Utah had no missile development-production done by private industry. In 1957 Thiokol Chemical employed about 75 personnel who received about $300,000 per year in salaries. By the end of 1958 the total employment was near 1,500. In a year this figure had doubled to 3,000 who received about $14 million in payroll. By the end of 1960 over 4,000