During the next two weeks an MFL facilities team made a preliminary survey of five possible sites. James Deese drew upon eight years of Cape experience in directing the survey. The team focused much of its attention on ground safety. The potential blast effect of an explosion on the pad established a ground safety zone and a minimum intraline distance. The safety zone, marking the danger area for exposed personnel, would be cleared of all persons 39 minutes prior to launch. The minimum intraline distance delimited the area within which a pad explosion would cause damage to adjacent pad structures or vehicles. Deese estimated that the fuel would have half the explosive force of TNT. With an estimated fuel load of 476 tons (equivalent to 238 tons of TNT), the three-stage Saturn would require a ground safety radius of 1,650 meters and intraline distance of 400 meters. The proposed firing azimuths (44 to 110 degrees) excluded sites that would result in overflying permanent launch facilities already constructed to the east.4
The Deese team recommended only one site, an area approximately 300 meters north of complex 20. By using the existing Titan 1 blockhouse (launch control center) at LC-20, costs and construction time would be minimized. The Air Force Missile Test Center objected to this location, contending that the Saturn pad should be at least 610 meters from other structures. This precluded joint use of the Titan blockhouse, because the data transmission equipment used in checkout of the Saturn would be adversely affected by voltage drops over a 610-meter circuit.* MFL arguments that the Air Force recommendation would increase facility costs by 30% and construction time by four months proved to no avail. In mid-January, after a six-week delay, the Advanced Research Projects Agency sited the Saturn complex 710 meters north of pad 20.5
* Some MFL officials believed the Air Force simply did not want to share blockhouse 20. The Air Force, however, consistently gave range safety a high priority. As General Yates recalled, the Air Force received numerous complaints from contractors because of concessions the Missile Test Center made to MFL.
4. Deese to Debus, priority TWX, "Feasibility Study and/or Criteria for a Launch Site at AMR for a Clustered First Stage of Juno V Project," 8 Oct. 1958; Koelle, ed., Handbook of Astronautical Engineering, pp. 28-1 to 28-10; MFL, Juno V (Saturn) Heavy Missile Launch Facility, 1st Phase Request, 2nd Phase Estimate, by R. P. Dodd and J. H. Deese, 14 Feb. 1959, pp. 2-3.
5. Deese to Debus, "Feasibility Study for a Launch Site"; Warren G. Hunter, ARP A Coordinator, SSEL, memo, "Meeting at MFL, CCMTA on Juno V Launch Complex," 10 Nov. 1958; Pan American Aviation, "Juno V Program Siting Study," 24 Oct. 1958, pp.1-3.