Chapter XV

The Electronics Center:

Communication Programs After 1951

Now the times have changed to apoint whereby a Ranger has accessto radio, microwave, and walkie­talkies for communications. Tele­phone lines are almost a thing ofthe past so I guess after all issaid and done I was born too soon.

- Leon L. Lake l

The name of the Radio Laboratorywas finally changed to the ElectronicsCenter at the end of 1963. This wasdone to reflect tla general electronicsdevelopment" program as compared tothe "previous emphasis on radiocommunications. " The change actuallycould have been made 12 years earlier.

No radio design projects were initiatedor completed after the Radio Laboratorymoved to Beltsville late in 1951. Allefforts were directed towards assistingthe Regions in radio procurement anddeveloping specialized equipment forServicewide communication needs. Staffduties were limited to handle specifi­cations and certification, "noncorrununi­cations electronics development," andlRAC meetings. 2 Biggerstaff was in

Figure 133. The Forest Service Elec­tronics Center, near Beltsville, Md.,in 1979. It is located in the largeoutdoor Agricultural Research Centerof the U.S. Department of Agriculture,outside Washington, D.C.(Forest Service photo, History Section)

charge of the Radio and Test Section,Claypool headed the Electronic Develop­ment Section, and Loew and Erwin Wagnerhandled lRAC matters and WashingtonOffice duties.

The Region 1 radio network was oneof the first matters taken underconsideration in Beltsville. III

didn't agree with it,ll Loew reported,and he initiated steps to bring anend to its use. The response fromRegion 1 was reluctant and it becamea matter of some contention with theDivision of Fire Control in Missoula\vho, Loew said, "didn I t think I was

doing right by Region 1 by forcingthe system out." Loew found thearguments for its continuationfinancially unjustifiable. Firecontrol was basically seasonal; thenetwork required year-round funding.When it was necessary to competewith other programs for money "itdidn't make much sense" to arguefor the network when the telephonewas more than satisfactory most ofthe year. 3

Loew's next priority was a changein job classifications for theII fellows II who worked in communications.He was sensitive to Claypool's beingpassed over for the Regionalcommunications position because helacked a professional degree. Loewwanted to avoid this kind ofsituation in the future. He workedfor a reclassification of job titlesin line with the required engineeringduties. Loew believed these men" ... knew more abou t radio than mostgraduate engineers. II

ItI would hate to think, II he confided,"what Fred Biggerstaff could havedone with education. II He pointedout that Claypool and Wood had tech­nical libraries that would II swamp "most college professors. These menhad II gro\vn up" with radio; II ••• it

239

Section)

241

l

The Regions Here given more develop­mental responsibility during Loew'sadministration. In one case, CarrollF. (Bud) Fontaine, Region 6 Communica­tions Officer then on the engineering

Figure 136. The recording componentsof the fire-weather te1emetering systemdeveloped by Wilbur Claypool of theForest Service Electronics Center.(Forest Service photo, History Section)

conversation that people who learnedhe was with the Forest Serviceinvariably asked for an introductionto Fred Biggerstaff. ll He also said,"I can recall time and time againsitting in with engineers fromNotorola, RCA, and GE, who had Ph.D. IS,

arguing with him over one of hisfindings, but none of them could backFred into a hole; he was sound.,,12In 1960, Fred Biggerstaff was awardeda Federal Goverrunent "Superior ServiceA~ard" citing his " ... exceptionallyhlgh and continued competency andperformance in the field of mobileradio equipment testing and system'smaintenance.,,13 It was a long wayfrom the CCC and his days as a machinist.

Bill Claypool's Beltsville assignmentswere primarily of a unique applicationsnature. With occasional support fromBiggerstaff and, after 1967, helpfrom a new member of the radio staffHoward Webb, he investigated such 'instrumentation as fire-weathertelemetering, a high-speed electronicintervalometer, thermoelectric powergeneration, and infrared fire mapping. 14

In each instance, a Laboratory modelwas constructed and tested; in mostcases, models went into commercialproduction and were bought forRegional use. Other projects rangedfrom transistorized test equipmentto a talking beaver to a Region 3display.lS But Claypool got the mostsatisfaction from combining hismechanical and electrical skills onprojects. Not infrequently, he wouldbegin a project with solid aluminumstock and mill it out for a chassissimilarly construct rectangular and'circular containers for shielding,and then incorporate the electricalcomponents of his design. Claypool'selectromechanical talents, observed aco-worker, bordered on genius.16

.., "'- ,,~ ' ,_.

, .~... "'4~' >-_., ......... .,.-. _.". 0<>',

....... ~ _ •• p ~ •• -... :." •• " .....,. ~ - , _.. ' .. ' .."~I •• ,

Figure 134. Transmission Line Loss andAntenna Match Calculator developed byW. F. Biggerstaff of the Forest ServiceElectronics Center. (Forest Servicephoto, History Section)

, .... r-- _. .... , , ... y ........ ,

.' _tit H'"''TlU~!IM.nOOl uoot ",on />H) ••H~~•••UCM c.&I.CUUI'I)Il

'" .... _' .. ,.,._ UO·__I_

Applied Research at Beltsville

Biggerstaff also crossed over intoapplied research. Always seekinga better way to determine radioperformance, he developed measurementsystems for the fault analysis ofvhf-uhf antenna systems. Thistechnique was adopted by InternationalBell Telephone Co. 9 Another accomplish­ment was the derivation of a system tomeasure close-spaced antennas in radiorelays.10 Perhaps a better measure ofBiggerstaff's expertise was related byGaylord Knight when he discussed anInstitute of Radio Engineers (IRE)convention in Tampa, Fla. Knighthad been amazed to find during thesocial functions and informal

representing the state-of-the-artin available communication products.

This approach to procurement wasunique in the Federal Government. Byside stepping the lists of productsapproved by the Government ServicesAdministration (GSA) he enabled theForest Service to bUy communicationequipment at a discount averaging30 to 50 percent. B This practice alsopermitted him to maintain an up-to­date, certified products list

240

At Loew's suggestion, Biggerstaffbegan consolidating the specificationscommon to all types of radio in theForest Service, and separated themfrom the unique features of each setin order to make the bid process lesscomplicated. His early experience asa fire guard and radio operator washelpful, and he established the goalof obtaining " ... the best possibleequipment, for the best possibleprice. 11 Yet he recognized that, bydefinition, all specificationsrequire "compromise" decisions. S Hesought input from the field so thespecifications would not becomebiased, and he initiated a system ofunsatisfactory equipment reports (UR)on equipment at the suggestion ofFrancis Woods to double checkagainst equipment problems that hadnot been detected during certificationand compliance but showed up duringuse in the field. 6 Biggerstaff alsovalued factory inspections, meetingswith manufacturers' representatives,and participation in professionalengineering meetings as other waysto maintain his objectivity in makingevaluations. 7

had been their whole life. ,,4 Loe\v l sconfidence in the technical abilitiesof his staff of two carried over tohis respect for their administrativeabilities. He did not interfere inthe day-to-day operation of theBeltsville facility, preferringinstead to maintain his office indowntown Washington, D.C.

Norton's Forest Service experienceoverlapped many of the significantcommunication issues of the previous2 decades. Region 1 versus theLaboratory, telephone versus radiothe shift from AM to PH, and the 'trend towards centralized controlwere all familiar to him. Aftergraduating from high school in 1940he wante~ to take aviation training'in technlcal school, but switched toelectronics when he learned the aviation

Contemplating retirement, Al Loewset about selecting his replacement.i-leanwhile, Claypool took disabilityretirement. Several years beforein July 1961, Loew had promoted 'William B. (Bill) Horton fromRegion 3 to be his assistant in\'1ashington lRAC matters. Hortonaccepted the Chief of Communicationsposition. Biggerstaff retired theday after Loew, completing anothermajor turnover in veteran personnel. 27

243

Figure 138. Instruments of the remoteForest Service radio relay repeaterstation powered by solar energy cellsat a test installation in California.Developed by GUy Wood, sho"n left tor.ight are strip chart recorder, specialLnstrumentation, and the Motorolar~peater unit. (Forest Service photo,HLstory Section)

transmitters (30- to 40-; 162- to 174­and 411- to 416-~lliz) for test 'communications with mobile receiversHis data over several months suggest~dthe value of high-band vhf, particularly1n reduclng skip interference. TheRadio Laboratory subsequentlyrecommended " ... that a real effort bemane to engineer all new networks onthe high-band frequencies between 162and 174 Hc (l'1Hz).,,25

Another contribution from toJood wasProject SNUTS (Something New Underthe Sun). The question of using solarcells as a power source for remoteradio repeaters led him to undertakefield tests at an early date. Hisefforts, reported in 1958, establishedthe technical feasibility of theconcept long before solar cells wereeconomically justified. 26

F'Lgure 137. A 1958 project dubbed"SNUTS" (Something Ne" Under the Sun)demonstrated the feasibility of usingsolar cells as a power source forremote Forest Service radio relayrepeater stations. The pioneer unitwas developed by Guy V. Wood, communi­cations chief for Region 5 (Californianow Pacific Southwest, Region). This'photo shows a close-up of solar conver­tor unit at the test site.(Porest Service photo, History Section)

High-Band Vhf and Uhf

Developmental work and technicalresearch projects were also requestedof GUy I'lood in Reg ion 5. One of thefirst efforts was to investigate FMclose-radio-frequency separations(200 kHz on 30- to 40-1'IHZ and 500/700kHz on 160- to 170-1'IHz systems)."This net\...ork design," he reportedon his 1947 experiment, "facilitatedestablishing Forest and Regional F1'Iradio systems using then availablecommercial FM radio equipment." 24

Preparing for higher frequencies, heequipped a lookout tower with three

The investigation of high-band vhf(152-174 MHz) and uhf (411-416 HHz)had been underway before the move toBeltsville. Once again, as in GaelSimson's administration, the ForestService had the advantage of obtainingthese frequencies when technologyproved their importance. "Althoughwe see no such possibility,l1 GordonFox, Alternate Director, Division ofOperations, informed the RegionalForesters in mid-1953, lIlt neverthe­less is wise to be prepared and todevelop an allocation plan which willpermit today's limited use of thesefrequencies to be made in a mannerthat will mesh with any expanded usein the future. 1121 l'4otivated furtherby a disruptive solar sunspot cyclethat year,22 Claypool undertookconstruction of an experimental duallow-band/high-band vhf test unit inanticipation of moving to the higherfrequency. 23

The level of effort prescribed byKramer's office for Region 1 was havingits effect. Host of the Northern Regionforests were well-equipped with low-bandF1'I radios in the 30- to 40- ,\Hz range by1957.18 Construction of the Region 1 F1'Iaircraft network under the supervisionof Clarence B. Westcott was also inprogress. 19

$376

$8,000

$59 eachValue

Unknown

$220,000$45 to $95

each$1,048

Savings OverCommercial Models

Conversion of500 SCR sets

Design of RF\oJattmeter

18 Conelrad alarmsConstruct Lowell­Fall Creektelephone

Design of devia-tion meter

Design of battery­operated VTWI

Many miscellaneousimprovements

Project

242

"Ne can understand," Fontaine concludedfor the benefit of Assistant RegionalForester Raymond F. Grefe, the RegionalEngineer, "where if a person loses sightof the magnitude of the communications'operation, they may not realize that weare accomplishing our work with aminimum of personnel and equipment.

ltl?

This additional responsibility alsocarried over into the areas of designand modification. Fontaine learned thathis involvement in this aspect of engi­neering led to familiar problems withnonradio people. On one occasion,William L. (Bill) HacDonald of theengineering staff, inspected the Regional"radio shop" for his supervisor. In hisfinal report to the Regional Forester,he questioned the need for "a so well­equipped" facility. Fontaine was takenaback, even a little annoyed. "This\vas somewhat of a surprise to me," hewrote. He then proceeded to review theradio shop projects and the resultinglarge savings for the Service:

staff, \vorked Hith Ninnesota Niningand Hanufacturing Co. (31'1) to completefield tests on the Laboratory-designedthermoelectric power source.

--- -==......:~ ..rl

classes were filled. Before trans­ferring to an Oregon college, he passedhis amateur radio license exam (W7IOX,K3TGF, D4ABK).

Morton returned to Missoula 2 yearslater and became a member of Apgar'samateur operator call list for majorconflagrations. This led to 6 weeksemployment as a live-in stationoperator at KBCX before being draftedto serve in World War II. During thewar, he decoded German messages forthe Army Signal Corps at Eisenhower'sEuropean headquarters.

After his discharge, Morton enrolledat the University of Montana inMissoula and worked part-time atApgar's KBCX while earning a degreein physics. He helped install theCollins transmitter that became anissue with the Radio Laboratory, andhe was at Orofino for Biggerstaff'sTDF/Collins test. "Personally, Ithink the Lab was wrong, technically,at that time," he commented muchlater on that exercise. Pointingout the difference between the 3 dBrequired for perceptible audiodetection, as contrasted with only1 dB necessary for a measurable changein RF power, he would side with theproponents of high power, at leaston technical grounds:

The matter should have beendecided on policy issues. Ifa high-powered hf network was tobe according to Forest Servicepolicy, the extra power couldoften establish a margin ofreadability in marginalpropagation and noise/signalconditions ... The strongeffect decentralizationattitudes of the ForestService had on communicationspolicy {must be kept in minq} ...The question, ther., of high­power versus low-power is an

244

issue only as it related tothe requirements of centraliza­tion or decentralization andthe use of the appropriatebands to meet these requirements.

After graduating from the universityin 1948, Morton was assigned to thewestern half of Region 1 (northernIdaho) as the lone communicationtechnician. Four years later, he wasplaced on temporary duty in Region 3where he provided communicationassistance for fire control. (Whilehe was there, the first real Smokeythe Bear was discovered on theLincoln National Forest.) Yearslater, he remembered pondering thestate of communications in Region 3after returning to Missoula. Herecalled expressing the opinionthat he would not care to be a partof the Southwestern Regionlscommunication problems. Yet, afew months later, in September1952, Morton accepted thecommunication position in Region 3.

28

The communication system that Mortonconfronted was backward, at best.Telephone lines served most of theSouthwest. The lines, built by theSignal Corps on metal poles to keepthe Apache Indians from burning themdo~~, were turned over to the ForestService by the Army after the Indianswere subdued. Not surprisingly, thestate of radio was not much moreadvanced. He had a limited amountof 3-MHz equipment and two technicians--one each for New Mexico and Arizona.Morton's first priority was the elimi­nation of IIpsychological barriers. II

Wind and sand-precipitation static onthe hf frequencies had fostered negativeattitudes towards radio. When he left9 years later to accept the Nashingtonappointment, Region 3 had an FM network,employed technicians for each of the 12National Forests, and lIhad a lot lesstelephone line." 29

Regional Responsibilities Increased

The responsibilities of the Regionalcommunication officers increased asLoew, Claypool, and Biggerstaff left.Morton supported and encouraged a moredecentralized approach towards Regionalcommunications, although he did notput the emphasis into written policy.His philosophy \'1as: "Do your job, andwe'll help you all \'1e can. II

Morton viewed the Electronics Centeras a service agency for the Regions.Questions on number and type ofequipment were to be left to thediscretion of Regional authorities.If the Reg ions needed to know thecapacity of a given number of setsto handle traffic, required specialpermits, had problems with frequencyassignments, or wanted to know whatcommercial equipment was available,the Center would be quick to respond.

Techniques or problems too complex inscope or too costly for the Regionsalso remained the Center1s responsibi­lity. "The revision of the ForestService Manual to establish communica­tions policy; the defense of ForestService procurement policies againstbureaucratic and money-wasting GSApolicies; promoting development ofthe 9,600-channel FM aircraft radioas a necessary base for nationwidefire aircraft operations; ... " andsatellite communications, first usedin 1975, were examples. 3D

Morton believed these functions gavehis group a unique quality--a qualitythat had accrued during the historyof Forest Service two-way, land­mobile communication, certification,and specification. This reputationgenerated requests for assistancefrom other Government agencies, rangingfrom Laboratory design assistance toClaypoolls assignment to the Mexicanhoof-and-mouth program, and took

Norton to Ne\oJ Zealand and SaudiArabia as an advisor. "vJhen FredBiggerstaff first started he had toargue with the manufacturers abouta test. Now we are quoted by othersverbatim, as a result of thereputation he established. 1131

Administration of the communicationprogram came full circle afterMorton1s appointment. It had begunwith a decentralized approach,followed by more control during theDuvendack-Loew years. Morton wasable to loosen the administrativeties because most points ofcontention had been removed between1947 and 1967. After 1967, theFederal Telecorrununications System(FTS) provided a less restrictivealternate communication source,Regional fire radio systems were\oJell established, and a recognizablebody of expertise existed in thecommunication profession and industry.

Two further developments removedmuch of the guesswork associatedwith earlier communication systems,reducing the need for lVashingtoncontrol. They were a Servicewideattempt to define systems communica­tion planning and the establishmentof an interagency fire cache.

Centralization of fire equipmentinventories evolved early becausethe costs of purchasing and maintain­ing maximum levels of equipment foreach National Forest were prohibitiveand resulted in unnecessary duplication.During major fires, the equipmentcould be flo"m or shipped as neededto particular hot spots. In Region 1,for example, this expanded into suchsystems as a remount depot forsupplying pack horses, a fire equip­ment center in Spokane, and a separatecache for the smokejumper1s head­quarters in Missoula.

245

The concept was also applied to radioinventories and resulted in establish­ment of a broad Federal Governmentfire equipment warehouse at the BoiseInteragency Fire Center (BIFC). Itwas made up of the National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration, theDepartment of Commerce; Bureau ofLand Management, Department of theInterior; and the Forest Service.Large-fire communication systems weremade available on an as-needed basisto these three agencies. BFICretained control of maintenance andprocurement; replacement of existinginventories was in accordance withthe guidelines of the National Tele-

. . St d 32commun1cat10ns u y.

Thus, a part of the communicationresponsibilities in the variousRegions devolved on BIFC, andRegional communication inventoriesdecreased correspondingly. TheForest Service continued to makepurchases in accordance with itsneeds, but the cache relieved partof that responsibility, allowingthe Regions to coordinate purchasesfor their own use in harmony withthe systems available through BIFC.

The first generation of Forest Servicecommunication officers knew systemsplanning; each one had to give attentionto the capability of their communicationsystems to perform certain prescribedfire-control tasks. These efforts atfirst ranged from the detailed maps andcharts of Bill Apgar to the Region 3inventory system of "this is what Ihave, this is what I want.,,33 As timewent on, new communication elements wereadded and the planning phase became morecomplex. Fire camps, fire bases, look­outs, slurry bombers, smokejumpers,observation planes, repeaters, Rangerstations, National Forest headquarters,and air bases might all be in need ofradio communication on one fire.Communication officers realized their

246

limitations in planning the proper numberof radios, the exact assignment offrequencies, and the traffic-carryingcapability of a network.

Al Loew recognized the seriousness ofinadequate capability of a fire networkto provide service consistently to allusers. He assigned a committee chairedby Bill Apgar to review the problem atthe 1953 communications conference. Theother committee members were theCommunication Chiefs for Regions 2 and 3,Roy L. Weeman and Bill Morton, respec­tively, and the Assistant Fire ControlChief in the \,ashington Office,Boyd L. Rasmussen. Its systematicapproach bore Apgar's imprint.

It was suggested that a mock "battlecondition" be duplicated. "Throughthe use of (1) sealed envelopes,(2) containing action instructions,(3) to be executed in accordancewith carefully worked-out times,and (4) in a completely mannedForest with all clocks synchronizedjust about any kind of a firecondition that can be envisionedcould be duplicated and the necessarycommunications messages fed into thenetwork. ,,34 \vhile the approach hadsome merit, it lacked administrativesupport and was not implemented.However, it did anticipate thecomplex fire simulator developedlater.

Fire Communication Needs in the 1960's

The problem of determining thecommunication needs for the manyelements involved in a fire fightcontinued to be a problem into the1960·s. Region 6 reviewed theseissues after the 1960 fire seasonand suggested a number of recommenda­tions to correct deficiencies. Ashortage of radios, lack ofcommunications with other agencies,need for temporary relays, and

assignment of fire-radio frequenciesinto an integrated network allsuggest that the logistics ofcommunication were becoming more

1 35 H' h .camp ex. oplng t at an estlmateof network capacity could determinethe optimum number of radios, thePacific Southwest Forest and RangeExperiment Station (PSW) in Berkeley,Calif., contracted with Paul Rechat the University of California, toseek a solution using mathematicaltheory.

In 1964, Rech selected a mathematicalmodel based upon machine repairproblems. He utilized queueingtheory, probability, and statisticsto come up with equations forestimating II ••• the maximum numberof radio sets which can be inoperation in a given Forest netand/or the number of channels neededto insure adequate. communication. ,,36It did not take into account suchfactors as repeater links, radiointerference, commercial communica­tion sources, and topography, sothe study provided only thefoundation for a more precisefollowup.

Four years later, after additionalwork by Gideon Schwarzbart of thePSW Management Sciences staff,37a Communications Study Task Forcewas appointed from staff of thevarious divisions of the ForestService. This group met inWashington during mid-196B toconsider objectives, scope, and asuggested approach. The TaskForce noted the numerous problemsin the system that cost $21 millionand $3 million annually for replace­ment and maintenance. 38 At the TaskForce request, Schwarzbart and ErnstS. Valfer of the Management SciencesStaff at PSW completed both a system­design criteria study and, with PremS. Puri of Purdue University, an

applications study on networkoperating characteristics. 39 TheTask Force recommended a Servicewidetelecommunications study toII • •• evaluate the management of theradio systems needed to satisfy thecommunications requirements of presentand future Forest Service programs."40On July 1, 1970, the Forest Serviceapproved the guidelines as a method"... for setting up requirements,financing procedures, and organizationalstructures for Communication Manage­ment." 41

During the 18 months of the telecom­munications study, a concerted effortwas made to gather fire-radio networkdata, get a composite picture ofServicewide communications, andproject the uses of communicationsystems in areas other than firecontrol. An all-Region conferencewas planned and study team memberswere assigned specific topics forevaluation. 42

The complexion of Forest Servicecommunications had changed considerablyby this time. FTS, automatic dataprocessing, leased lines, telegrams,and the mails--all combined to replaceA. T. & T. for administrative use.Networks, the mere mention of whichwould have brought paroxysms ofanguish 20 years earlier, wereevident in Forest radio nets, zone­fire radio nets, fire-cache radionets, and air-radio nets. 43 Moresignificant, radio had long sinceoutdistanced the telephone in ForestService inventories. Between 1947and 1959, radio inventories hadincreased almost fourfold, andForest Service-owned telephonelines had decreased to one-eighthof their earlier postwar total. ByDecember 1969, there were 22,123radios and only 7,482 miles of

44Service-owned telephone lines.

247

rCommunications technology wasaffecting the Forest Service admin­istration. policies in force foryears now came in for criticism bythe general public. Tommy R. Hensley,in a draft of "New Technology and Itspossible Applications" for theTelecommunications Study, gavethought to what he called theCommunication Revolution and itseffect upon Forest Service programs,public lands, and resource managementpractices. He noted the public'smounting criticism of these policiesand the inability of the Forest Serviceto respond properly because of a 11 lackof good monitoring" of the effects ofmanagement on all resources under itscontrol. Hensley called for an extensionof new technology to "improve our fieldcommunications. II Recognizing that"knowledge power 1t had shifted over theyears from the exclusive domain of the"special interest" to the "generalpublic," he expected II ... that the publicwill become more and more knowledgeableand more and more effective in voicingtheir conclusions about resourcemanagement. 1,45

The Telecommunications Study Groupfindings were thorough, all­encoQpassing, and voluminous. Thework was published in four volumesin November 1972, with an 4~ditional

two volumes of appendixes. Muchof the study was directed to historical

issues.

It noted that one frequent criticism ofboth the Radio Laboratory and the over­all communication policies of the ForestService was the long assignment of theRadio Laboratory to Region 6. Thissituation created problems in its rela­tions with other Regions, leading themto treat the Radio Laboratory as anorsanizational equal, not a superior.Lacking a defined place in the nationalorganization, the Radio Laboratory had"developed somewhat like an orphan child."

248

Without a specifically assigned Service­wide responsibility for management ofthe radio development program, theLaboratory could provide no more thantechnical support. II It has not beenplanned," pointed out the Telecommuni­cations Study Group, "but [it] hasevolved because of the accumulation ofpiecemeal actions." The groupconcluded, "In short, there has beenno specific organization entity atthe WO ~1ashington OfficeJ level todevelop and handle a management systemthat would allow fully justifiedfield telecommunication needs to be 47consolidated at the I'Jashington level."

Study Stresses Value of Leadership

In a tone that would have pleasedJack Horton, the study reiterated thebenefits of direction and coordinationthat accrued from effective managementleadership. "This leadership muststart at the Washington Office leveland pervade the entire field [ofJ 48telecommunications organizations."

The study pointed out that the lack offinancial support for the radiodevelopment program had createdcumulative costs of obsolescenceestimated at $6,300,000 by 1971.Blaming this on a 33-year-oldbudgeting system, the group foundfault with the delegation of planningauthority to the line officers--fromDistrict Rangers through the RegionalForester. Even though they did nothave the funds, these administratorswere planning and approving a levelof field communications that could notbe achieved. "Consequently, theRegional electronic organizations arereceiving criticism from line manage­ment for not providing the level ofcommunications planned and approved."From the standpoint of the communica­tions officer, it was I'a bleak lookingsituation. ,,49

For the first time in the history ofForest Service radio, it was possible tocritically compare radio systems withtelephone systems. The radio providedconsistent year-round operation and alsoushered in other developments such asairborne operations and better areacoverage. "Radios do all of this now atequal or less cost per month than aleased commercial telephone. IISO If theForest Service had still maintained63,125 miles of telephone tree line ata per-mile cost of $25, the studyreported, the estimated annual mainte­nance costs would have been $1,578,125,with no more field coverage than in 1940.

In an attempt to give credit \vhere creditwas due, the Telecommunications StudyGroup complimented those directlyinvolved in the history of Forest Servicecommunications. By separating theproblems of policy from the accomplish­ments of action it was found, in spiteof the handicaps, that:

A meager force of engineershas worked with the technicianswithin financial constraintswhich preclude considerationof really viable alternativesand have had demands made ontheir time for assistance ina multitude of areas other thanfield communications. Historicallythe Forest Service mobile radiosystems have been examples forothers to follow. This has beenaccomplished, in a large part,because of the dedication andtenure of the engineers andtechnicians. 51

In some respects, it is not possibleto find fault with the administrativelevels of the Forest Service for notrecognizing this point a generationearlier. But if hjndsight has itsadvantages, leadership also has itsresponsibilities.

Many factors kept the WashingtonOffice from recognizing the benefitsof unrestricted application of radio;indeed, the applications could havebeen formulated as early as Beatty'sdemonstration. The A. T. & T. leaseagreements posed the most apparentbarrier. But a more insidiousfactor was the ever-present, pervasiveconcern that the Forest Service mightcross the fine line between privateenterprise and Government involvementand perhaps even approach socialism.Constant reminders of the secondaryrole of Forest Service radio vis-a-visA. T. & T. leases, protests over thefailure of commercial entities tosupply commercial radio equipment,and the resistance towards policiesreflecting able management occurredtime and again.

This reaction was perhaps not out ofthe ordinary, given the time and thecircumstances. It could not have beenexpected that the concept of lightweight,low-power, portable radio would havesuch limited application for so long,or that the Government would need toinvolve itself in set production.Even the best informed opinions,undoubtedly, gave the Radio Laboratoryno more than a 5-year existence. Itappeared certain that private enter­prise would have suitable equivalentson the market long before theLaboratory could become a permanentpart of the Forest Service. When 5years passed with no change in thesituation, the inevitable only moved5 years closer, and there was evenless reason to invest further inthe Forest Service radio developmentprogram.

The Forest Products Laboratory (FPL) ,for example, established by theForest Service in Madison, Wis. r

in 1910 to test and develop newforest products, was consideredsupportive of, not antagonistic

249

to, big business. The initial invest­ment of FPL included a staff of 20, apayroll of $28,000, complete test equip­ment, and abundant test materials. 52In 1946, during the 14th year of itsradio development program, the RadioLaboratory had only seven employees, abudget under $28,000, and not enoughlaboratory equipment to adequatelymeasure the performance of a singleForest Service radio set. 53

In this context, the Radio Laboratorywas placed in the organizationalhierarchy where it would have a lowprofile. It was no accident thatthis situation persisted and that theWashington Office scorned pleas formore effective leadership. Once it wascertain that private industry couldsupply radios to meet Forest Servicestandards, George Duvendack was appointedto the long-needed position of communica­tions czar. But the Radio Laboratorycould not claim the legitimacy ithad been denied for 15 years.Unfortunately, the changed commercialscene eliminated the reason tocontinue its existence as a producerof radio sets.

Broad Accomplishments of Radio Laboralory

For 20 years, the staff at Portlandwas handicapped by lack of resourcesand leadership. Yet, ever after avirtual shutdown during World War II,it still took private enterprise20 years to catch up with theLaboratory. The Laboratory staffnever went above eight employees,yet they designed, modeled, tested,produced, inspected, and shippedan array of hf and vhf portables,semiportables, and fixed-base unitssecond to none. As the Telecommunica­tions Study Group correctly observed,lIThey have constructed and maintainedliterally hundreds of systems--systemswhich warrant no apology." 54

250

The accomplishments of the RadioLaboratory went far beyond the boundsof the Government agency for which itwas intended. Both the military andprivate industry benefitted in waysthat transcended technical application.The responses of Motorola, GE and RCAduring the Duvendack-Lawson 1947exploratory trip to eastern manufacturersindicate a considerable technologicalspin-off from the design efforts of theRadio Laboratory.

Fred Link, the unofficial dean of FMradio design, reviewed this contributionfrom his vantage point some yearslater. He recalled the Forest Servicereputation for simplifying circuitdesigns and producing sets that with­stood bad weather and abusive treatment.Link remembered investigating ForestService sets at his laboratory inNew York City and a number of visitswith the Radio Laboratory staff. Heagreed it was fair to conclude thatForest Service radios contributed tolightweight, low-power technology."I would never say, Link emphasized,"that industry led the way in thisregard." In any event, he concluded,liThe Forest Service certainl~ had animpact on Fred Link Radio. ,,5

The impact of Forest Service radioupon the frequency, duration, orintensity of forest fires cannot bedocumented. Coincident with thedevelopment of radio were such otheradvances as fire-weather forecasts,additional access roads, bettermachinery, new firefightingtechniques, increased manpower,and public education. Each ~ffected

the other; the historical recordreflects only the aggregate.

There were many instances of radioinfluencing potentially catastropicsituations, saving lives, andaverting the destruction of property.Few Forest Service fireline personnel

are at a loss when asked to recountsuch experiences. Some anecdoteshave even become legend.

An influence more difficult tomeasure is Bristow Adams'speculation in 1906 about thepsychological benefits of electroniccommunication in the Forest Service.Yet here is the ultimate measure ofthe Radio Laboratory accomplishment.

The level of judgment and the degreeof confidence, emotion, and physicaldurability that an individual takesto the fire line are directly relatedto the effectiveness and reliabilityof the tools at hand. The complexityof these tools may at times be ahandicap. A chain saw without gaso­line is not equal to the axe.

This latter point'was emphasized duringa visit by this author to the MissoulaAerial Fire Depot in 1978. After atour and briefing, the conversationcame around to a discussion of thesoon-to-be-installed, 9,600-channelcommunications system. Several staffmembers were uneasy about the newtechnology, but most felt that thesystem would provide a higher levelof fireline control.

Milton "Cookie ll Calloway then asked aquestion that brought silence. As aveteran pilot for countless air dropsof equipment and smokejumpers, he hadlost track of the number of times he haddecided whether to place himself and hiscargo in jeopardy. He was used tobillowing clouds of dense smoke, narrowcanyons with vicious downdrafts, andlow-level flights over the tree tops.Yet, he wanted to know if the FireDepot Operations Center would be ableto continue its practice of placing acheck call to pilots every 30 minutes.He wanted reassurance that if hefailed to answer this call and asubsequent call, a search and rescue

mission would be launched immediately.This function of the radio was the mostimportant to Calloway.56

Dwight Beatty and those who followedhim at the Radio Laboratory recognizedthat radio was more than an electricalbox permitting two-way communication;it was a tool that allowed men toextend their abilities in the face ofadversity.

Simple, rugged, and reliable were morethan adjectives; they were designcommands. In today's language, humanengineering was the first watchword atthe Radio Laboratory. It captures theessence of the Laboratory's contributionto radio science and the men on thefireline. 57

Reference Notes

1. Leon L. Lake, "Hot TelephoneJobs, II Early Days in the ForestService (Missoula, Mont.: U.S.Department of Agriculture, ForestService, Region 1, 1976) 3:149.

2. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Electronics CenterNewsletter, no. 19, December 1963,p. 1.

3. E. Allan Loew, interview withthe author in Beltsville, Md.,November 1978.

4. Loew, interview with author.

5. W. Frederick Biggerstaff,interview with the author inSaratoga, Calif., January 1978.

6. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Radio LaboratoryNewsletter, no. 11, ca. 1957, p. 1.

7. Biggerstaff, interview withauthor.

251

......__.rl

8. Loew, interview with author,and \'lilliarn "Bill" ~1orton,

interview with the author inBeltsville, Md., November 1978.

9. International Bell Telephone,IIUHF, VHF Point-to-Point andMobile Telephone Service AntennaSystems Fault Analysis,lI BellSystem Practice, Preliminary draftof Section R49, XX5, pp. 1-18; andForest Service, "Instructions:Forest Service Radiation SystemEvaluation Kit," with I,. F. Bigger­staff to Regional CommunicationsOfficers (R-l to R-9) , 12 January1961, Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

10. w. F. Biggerstaff, "Operation ofClose-Spaced Antennas in Radio RelaySystems" (Paper presented before theWashington Chapter of the IRE Groupon Vehicular Communications, 1958),reprinted in Radio LaboratoryNewsletter, no. 12, 3 April 1959,pp. 1-11.

11. Gaylord A. Knight, interview withthe author in Atlanta, Ga., November1977, February 1978, April 1979.

12. Loew, interview with author.

13. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, "Nomination forSuperior Service Award," 1960,mimeographed, copy in files ofElectronics Center, Beltsville, Md.

14. See respectively: U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, Forest Service,IIProgress Report, ED & T ProjectNumber 825-Fire Weather TelemeteringSystem," 25 January 1963; A. W. Greeleyto Regional Foresters and Directors,17 April 1961; Robert C. Heller andWilbur S. Claypool, "A High-SpeedElectronic Intervalometer" paperpresented by Forest Service, July 1957;Loew, interview with author; and ForestService, "Infrared Fire Mapping Unit-

252

A Ne,v Tool," 6 September 1966, a factsheet by Division of Fire Control,Washington Office, all Gaylord A.Knight Collection.

15. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Radio LaboratoryNewsletter, no. 9, 1 June 1953;no. 13, 14 October 1961; and no. 16,28 Nay 1962.

16. Morton, interview with author.

17. C. V. Fontaine to AssistantRegional Forester Raymond F. Grefe(R-6) , 27 April 1955, Gaylord A.Knight Collection.

18. J. H. "Bud l' Coats, "Communications

in the National Forests of Region One,lIca. 1979, unpublished draft, p. 11,Gaylord A. Knight Collection andJ. H. Coats, interview with theauthor in Missoula, Mont., May 1978.

19. Forest Service, Region I, NorthernRegion Nel'ts, no. 23, 21 June 1957, andClarence Westcott, interview with thecluthor in i'-lissoula, ~1ont., May 1978.

20. Gaylord Knight reported that"time and time again ll Gael Simsonrecounted how he obtained thesefrequencies because no one elsewas interested. High-band vhf anduhf, however, were not acquired untilthe post-\'/orld I'ar II period. SeeU.S. Department of Agriculture toIRAC, 21 November 1958, Doc. 4288/1-2.10.2, Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

21. Gordon D. Fox (Washington Office)to Regional Foresters, 13 August 1953,Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

22. Electronics Center Nelvsletter, no.19, December 1963.

23. This prototype is in the ForestService radio and telephone collection(located at the Electronics Center,

Beltsville, Nd., as of date of publica­tion of this history). It was machinedfrom aluminum stock, Claypool's trademark.

24. Guy V. \'Iood to Dennis M. Roth,Head, History Section, Forest Service,1 April 1980, History Section files.

25. w. S. Swingler [Assistant Chief,Forest ServiceJ to Regional Foresters,9 August 1954, Gaylord A. KnightCollection.

26. Guy V. I'lood, "Solar PoweredRadiophone Operation, II typed report,Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

27. Loew, interview with author,and Morton, interview with author.

28. Morton, interview with author;W. B. Morton to Dennis Roth, 18 April1980, p. 2, and Bill [w. B.J Morton,"Editorial Notes on 'A History of theTelecommunications in the U.S. ForestService, '" 18 April 1980, p. 8,History Section files.

29. Morton, interview with author;Morton to Roth; and Morton, "EditorialNotes. II

30. Morton to Roth; and William B.Morton, conversations with the authorin Beltsville, Nd., October 1980.

31. Morton, interview with author,and William B. Morton to Dennis Roth,30 April 1981, handwritten comments,History Section files.

32. Boise Interagency Fire Center,Large Fire Communications Instructions(Boise, 1978), p. 5.

33. Morton, interview with author.

34. E. Allan Loew to l;m. Apgar,21 January 1953, Gaylord A. KnightCollection. Committee recommendationsare attached.

35. Forest Service, Region 6, "Problemsof Conununications on the Fire,"23-27 January 1961, Gaylord A. KnightCollection.

36. Paul Rech, Some Aspects of aRadio Communication Net (Berkeley,Calif.: Operations ResearchCenter, 9 September 1964), ReportORC 64-22.

37. Prem S. Puri and GideonSchwarzbart, "Reneging and Retrialsin Queueing Theory: Results andApplications," £n.d ..l, mimeographed,Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

38. Chester A. Shields to RussellT. Cloninger, Donald W. Smith,Lennart E. Lundberg, William B.Morton, 10 July 1968; W. B. Morton,"Statements of Objectives ofCommunications Study Task Force, II

18 July 1968, typed rough draft;and W. B. Morton to Members ofCommunications Study Task Force,22 July 1968, included with typeddraft of "U.S. Forest ServiceCorrununications Study," 22 July.1968,all Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

39. Gideon Schwarzbart and Ernst S.Valfer, "Forest Radio Net OperatingCharacteristics," Part I: "System DesignCriteria," 1969, mimeographed; andGideon Schwarzbart, Ernst S. Valfer, andPremo S. Puri, "Forest Radio Net Opera­ting Characteristics," Part II: "Appli­cations," 1969, mimeographed, bothGaylord A. Knight Collection.

40. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, "Service-wideTelecommunications Study--StudyPlan," [n.d,J, mimeographed, p. 1,Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

41. u.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Information Digest,no. 14, 1 July 1970, p. 1. Membersof the team were Schwarzbart (Study

253 I

~~

Appendix I

Forest Service Radio Models - Photos, Diagrams, and Data

fmo-m

SX

1----4Sy1-----lSXAI---~SF

SJ1----------jSPF

1--'---------1 T 1--------1

f--.-------j S

'------I M f-------jFIXEDBASE

MOBILE

PORTABLE

SEMI­PORTABLE

Chronological Development of Forest Service Radio Sets, by Type and Function

55. Fred Link, telephone interviewwith the author in Denver, Colo.,26 January 1979.

54. Forest Service, Telecommunications,vol. 3, p. 45. The Study Group wasequally complimentary to the entirecorrununications organization of theForest Service.

53. Lb. s..J Nordwall, "Memorandum forthe Record--Radio Laboratory Inspec­tion," 24 ~larch 1947, app., Gaylord A.Knight Collection, F. V. Horton,"t-1emorandum," 19 May 1946, NationalArchives and Records Service, Seattle,Wash., Box B4266; Harold K. Lawson,interview with the author in KingCity, Ore., May 1978; and W. FrederickBiggerstaff, interview with the authorin Saratoga, Calif., January 1978.

52. Harold K. Steen, The U.S. ForestService: A History (Seattle: Universityof Washington Press, 1976), p. 133.

42. Edward W. Schultz /Deputy Chief,Forest Service, for AdministrationJto Regional Foresters, 5 Ausust 1970,Gaylord A. Knight Collection. Memoincludes roster and agenda.

43. L. E. Hawkes, "Financing a ForestService Telecommunications System,lI20 May 1971, typed rough draft forTelecommunications Study, Gaylord A.Knight Collection.

44. Hawkes, "Financing, lip. 2.

Leader), Valfer, William P. Kennedy,and Miles R. Hall, all of PSW,Jack F. Carter, R-5, Karl W. Spelman,R-4, Bill Morton and Tommy R. Hensleyof the Electronics Center, Chester A.Shields, Director, and Lewis E. Hawkes,Administrative Management, WashingtonOffice, and Merle S. Lowden, Director,Fire Control, Washington Office.Hawkes had come in from R-3. Otherswere added as the study progressed.

~.ight L. Beatty, 19309$140Original only3 NHz1 watt, c.w., AHRegenerativeLong wire \\7ith

counterpoise6 x 14 x 8"(radio only)17# 14 oz. (79# 5 oz.complete) *

Radio: 17# 14 oz.Equip. case: 11# 11 oz.Antenna equi~: S# 12 oz.Battery with case: 44#

'fest purposesPrincipal use:

*Comments:

Dimensions:\veight:

SP - 1930

Designed by:Number produced:Price:Models:Frequency:Transmitter:Receiver:Antenna:

1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1947 19481932 1933 1934 1935

~:;~~~~!~:(N:A~:~95G-249757)

1930 1931

Hf Types

\00 meters (2.9-3.5 MHz)

56. Milton Calloway, John Robertson,Charles Kern, and John Hertz, groupdiscussion with the author at theAerial Fire Depot, Missoula, Mont.,May 1978.

57. The radio function was realined inthe Washington Office in 1980-81 underthe Computer Technology and Telecommuni­cations Staff--at first renamed RadioManagement, then changed back to Communi­cations and Electronics, and finallyRadio and Electronics--with some shiftin responsibilities. There is a basisfor some concern over the potential formisjudgment. Radio for the Fireline re­counts many of the problems associatedwith past administrative decisions of alike nature. It is hoped that this his­tory will provide a more thorough under­standing of the relationship of tele­communications planning to other ForestService programs, as well as point outa priceless legacy, and a future, which"warrants no apology."

47. Forest Service, Telecommunications,vo. 3, pp. 5, 6.

48. Forest Service, Telecommunications,vol. 3, p. 7.

49. Forest Service, Telecommunications,vol. 3, pp. 67, 68.

50. Forest Service, Telecommunications,vol. 3, pp. 5, 6.

5l. Forest Service, Telecommunications,vol. 3, p. 5.

45. T. R. Hensley, "New Technologyand Its Possible Applications, II [h.d.J,typed draft for Telecommunications Study,p. 2, Gaylord A. Knight Collection.

46. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, A study of ForestService Telecommunications, 4 vols.(Washington, D.C.: Government PrintingOffice, 1972).

254 255