I recently came across an article in The Space Review, June 4, 2007, (head, title, date and author: [quote] ‘Take off and nuke the site from orbit (it’s the only way to be sure…)’ [unquote], by Dwayne A. Day’ at:
It was an important find for me. Sputnik had generated “SLOMAR” (Space Logistics, Operations, Maintenance and Rescue), a 1950s USAF study in which a wide range of aerospace and other contractors participated. The various govt logistics commands, as I recall, invited contractors to brief their gov’t military and civil service officials and staffs. The participating contractors submitted extensive and elaborate documentation for govt evaluation. I was one of the many log staff techs assigned to review and report on the contractors views and often, PROPOSALS. Upon completion of my assignment, that was the last I heard of SLOMAR until the article appeared in The Space Review.
IMO, the article is, well written and comprehensive; a good ‘read’ for anyone in govt, ngo, small business, etc., involved or interested in ‘space systems logistics’ and certainly, in ‘systems acquisition’ generally — and ‘management.’ The following links imo, are OK fyi:
The following (verbatim) is the head and first sentence of the ‘lede’ from an article in: ‘The Economist’:’The military uses of spaceSpooks in orbitThe other space programmeJun 30th 2011 | from the print editionDESPITE its strong inheritance of military DNA (much of it, somewhat counterintuitively, coming from the American navy), NASA is a civilian agency, set up that way in deliberate contrast to the military-run Soviet space programme. In practice, the distinction is not always so clear-cut: NASA has done plenty of work for the Pentagon.’ seehttp://www.economist.com/node/18895010
also relevant (SLOMAR plus ‘Limits to Growth’ at http://www.mnforsustain.org/meadows_limits_to_growth_30_year_update_2004.htm
I am the author, Public Domain, of relevant blogs:THE INTERSTELLAR SLINGSHOT REVISITED at http://slingshotrevisited.blogspot.com/ and