Chapter 1

Sputnik

1.1. Congressional Preparedness Subcommittee

Senator Johnson sat presiding over the Congressional Preparedness Subcommittee
at 10 am on a chilly Washington, DC morning along with Senators Johnson, Kefauver,
Stennis, Symington, Satltonstall, and Flanders as well as members of the Congresss
special council. The group sat with members of the Armed Services Committee.
"Please come to order," Senator Johnson said.
Senator Johnson would be presiding over a hearing called, "Inquiry into Satellite and Missile Programs" on the November afternoon almost two months after the
Soviets launched Sputnik in 1957.
Senator Johnson continued, "We are here today to inquire into the facts on the
state of the Nations security. Our country is disturbed over the tremendous military
and scientific achievement of Russia. Our people have believed that in the field of
scientific weapons and in technology and science, that we were well ahead of Russia.
"
The room was quiet. "With the launching of Sputniks I and II, and with the information at hand of Russias strength, our supremacy and even our equality has been
challenged. We must meet this challenge quickly and effectively in all its aspects,"
Johnson reported.

Chapter written by Dominique AWIS.

12

Shortened Book Title

Johnson remembers looking up at the night sky and seeing Sputnik and feeling
distressed that the US was not first in science and technology, in space. [1] He began
collecting information shortly from the Pentagon after Sputniks launch and assembled
a list of witnesses to hear from to prepare a Congressional hearing on national defense
and US science and technological security. His hope was to create a record to sort out
all the media hype about satellites and guided missiles.
Johnson continued, "There are a few things I wish to make clear about the committees attitude. It would appear that we have slipped dangerously behind the Soviet
Union in some very important fields. But the committee is not rendering any final
judgments in advance of the evidence, on why we slipped or what should be done
about it. Our goal is to find out what is to be done. We will not reach that goal by
wandering up any blind alleys of partisanship. I suppose that all of us, being human,
have some ideas on steps that should be taken. But the committee judgment will represent a meeting of the minds after all the facts are available, and this committees
judgment will represent an effort to make a contribution to the defense of our Nation.
The facts that I learned so far give me no cause for comfort..."
Johnson called for unity between Democrats and Republicans. He brought up
Pearl Harbor. "There were just Americans anxious to roll up their sleeves to close
ranks and to wade into the enemy," he said.
Johnson called the first witness, Dr. Edward Teller, known as the Father of the HBomb, now a professor at University of California Radiation Laboratory. Mr. Weisl
was first to question the witness. "Will you please tell us, Dr. Teller, briefly, what your
relationship to atomic and thermonuclear weapons has been since your arrival to this
country?" Dr. Teller gave a brief summary of his travels to different laboratories and
his eventual tenure at University of California.
"Have you participated very actively in the development of the hydrogen bomb?"
Mr Weisl asked. "I have, yes, sir," Dr. Teller responded. Senator Johnson interrupted,
"Senator Symington is having trouble seeing the witness because of the photographers,
and we have had a request to ask them to take their pictures and then move along."
Johnson shooed the audience of photographers to the side.
Mr Weisl asked Dr. Teller about the relationship between fissionable and thermonuclear long-range missiles. Dr. Teller told of ballistic missiles, long-range missiles could shoot 1,500 to 5,000 feet, however the missiles werent much for accuracy
therefore the larger the explosive the greater the accuracy.
Mr. Weisl was concerned about accuracy, and asked Dr. Teller about "clean
bombs" that is, bombs that are powerful enough to cause a powerful explosion that
hits on target, rather than a long-range missile that requires a huge explosion to barely
hit a target. Dr. Teller told Mr. Weisl such weapons require significant testing.

Shortened Chapter Title

13

The questioning continued. Dr. Teller testified that Sputnik required a rocketry,
a rocket motor, a guidance system, propulsion; and he discussed how these systems
relate to ballistic missiles. If rocket technology could be adapted...
Mr. Weisl got to the heat of the argument: "Then you believe that the Russians
have an intercontinental ballistic missile at this time? " Dr. Teller responded that
he did not know if the Russians had adapted rocketry technology to their ballistic
missiles. The room was quiet; Mr. Weisl pressed Dr. Teller. "Dr. Teller, what must
the Russians have in their long-range guided missile, in addition to their ability to put
a satellite in outer space, in order to hit a target?" Dr. Teller told Mr. Weisl about the
problem of reentry when a rocket comes up the velocity that is inevitable on the come
down would be a high speed and be a problem. Dr. Teller told the committee it was a
problem the Russians could probably solve.
Mr. Weisl spoke, "Dr. Teller, why do you believe we are behind the Russians in
the development of the long-range missile?" Dr. Teller told the committee the US is
behind in ballistics and the Russian rocket technology is proof the US is behind. Dr.
Weisl and Dr. Teller spoke for several minutes and discussed how Russian scientists
lead a good life and how Russian society uses science very practically in everyday
life.
Dr. Teller changed the subject. "Shall I tell you why I want to go to the moon?" he
joked.
Mr. Weisl laughed, "Yes, sir."
Dr. Teller told of the scientific advancement going to the Moon or Mars would
hold. Mr. Weisl was more concerned again about Russia and asked Dr. Teller if he
thought the Russians would see the Moon as a military endeavor and if the US would
find it practical militarily to go to the Moon. "My imagination is not good enough for
that," Dr. Teller responded. The committee discussed assorted topics with Dr. Teller
before calling its next witness to give testimony.
The Subcommittee met again the next day and discussed Russia science programs,
its economy, use ballistic missiles, and then Project Vanguard.
Project Vanguard was a project lead by Director, Dr. John Hagen who also served
as a member of the National Science Foundation. Dr. Hagen would be the Subcommittees next witness. Dr. Hagen discussed Project Vanguard and how it was first a
science experiment lead by the Department of Defense to launch a satellite for the
International Geophysical Year (IGY). The Department of Defense had already done
work in atmospheres and the Aerobees and Viking rockets needed to launch the satellites needed to be built at the Naval Research Laboratory. The IGY would last from
July 1957 to December 1958. Dr. Hagan described the Viking rocket and the orbit and

14

Shortened Book Title

the space-to-Earth communications of the satellite to the Subcommittee. The satellite

uses radio waves to communicate with a ground station. Dr. Hagen reiterated the
project was supposed to be off the ground by the end of the IGY.
Mr. Vance asked if the project could be hurried, and Dr. Hagen said there were
funding limitations, that ballistic missiles were of a higher priority and the Vanguard
satellite program was a secondary priority classification.
Mr.Vance asked, "[Without limitations] do you think that you could have gotten
it up ahead of Sputnik I?" Dr. Hagen responded at first hesitantly than responded, "I
think that we probably would have come very close to the same time, if not ahead
of it." It was after this questioning Congress had the information it needed to boost
the Vanguard project from a low priority science project to a higher security national
defense project. Johnson called the committee to order and decided an executive session was needed to meet in the Armed Services Committee Room to hear the Director
of Central Intelligence, Mr. Allen Dulles. Johnson settled the press, "At the conclusion of his testimony I will meet with the press and tell them anything that I may
be able to as a result of that testimony...Dr. Hagen, we thank you for indulging us.
Counsel, will you proceed with the examination of the witness?"
Dr. Hagen continued, "
1.2. Bibliography