What Do We Know of the Canadian Rocket Society? by Frank H. Winter
From The Space Library
Fhwinter (Talk | contribs)
(New page: =='''What Do We Know of the Canadian Rocket Society?''' by Frank H. Winter== The following is an historical sketch of the small group called The Canadian Rocket Society, that ...)
Newer edit →
Revision as of 15:51, 26 March 2023
What Do We Know of the Canadian Rocket Society? by Frank H. Winter
The following is an historical sketch of the small group called The Canadian Rocket Society, that actually had several iterations, the first dating back to 1942 and the second founded in Toronto in 1948, with a later version or two reappearing by the early 1960s. However, this is very much a work-in-progress history, since this subject is a lot more complicated than it first appears. Besides this there are unfortunate gaps in our knowledge about these societies which is further complicated by the fact that the documentation on these iterations is very sparse. (For instance, no copies of the journal, C.R.S. Newsletter of the second iteration of this group can be found.) On top of this, all the principle individuals involved in the histories of the various iterations of the CRS have long since passed; nor did they leave any concrete records of their respective connections with the group.
Nevertheless, we are presenting this account on The Space Library in the hope that there may be some readers out there who are able to fill in these important gaps in our knowledge of this group towards a more definitive future treatment of this topic. By “we,” the author is referring to Robert Godwin of Toronto, who is the leading authority on the CRS and to whom the present writer is most indebted for much of the material contained in this article. We therefore very much welcome hearing from such readers who are encouraged to contact Godwin and/or the author at rdg@thespacelibrary.com. Since the collective histories of the various iterations of the CRS can be convoluted, we will start by highlighting the history of the second, and best known of the CRS groups.
I. INTRODUCING THE CRS AND THEIR MOON ROCKET [CRS GROUP # 2]:
Almost buried in the issue of the newspaper the Evening Star of Washington, D.C. for 5 September 1948 is the following small item “To the Moon?”
- “To the Moon? Toronto --- The Canadian Rocket Society is planning to build a rocket it hopes will reach the Moon. Cost is estimated at $ 1,500,000 [worth $ 18,720,000 in 2023, due to inflation, U.S. dollars], with a launching base costing another $ 500,000 [worth $ 6,241,000.00, due to inflation, U.S. dollars]. The Society says man may be able to fly to the Moon and back in the 1950s. The proposed rocket would be about 200 ft by 50 feet wide at the base, according to Evans [sic.] Fox, retired Royal Engineer captain.”
But this was hardly the only publicity both the CRS and its Moon rocket received during that period. For other coverage, we have to turn directly to the Canadian papers. For instance, in its issue of Monday, 7 June 1948, the Toronto Daily Star ran a piece titled “Hope to Reach Moon [and] Make it [a] Rocket Base.” In fact, this article provides invaluable details, on both the Society and its Moon rocket plans. The story is basically a report about the “organizing meeting” of the CRS that was held the previous Saturday, or 5 June 1948, at the Royal Ontario Museum and was attended by about a 100 persons. Thus, in all probability the CRS had formed in the previous month of May of that year, or perhaps earlier. Moreover, the principle speakers representing the new organization were a “Captain Fox” and Kurt Stehling, with captain Edward Cecil Evans Fox taking the lead.
Among other things, Fox proclaimed that “Five years ago [in 1943] a rocket could only reach heights of five miles, while today the U.S. Army has sent [captured] German V-2s to heights of 125 miles.” However, his statement was not quite accurate since, as we now well know, the first successful flight of the A-4 that was afterwards re-designated the V-2, achieved an altitude of nearly 60 miles on 3 October 1942, and thus, technically into the fringes of space. But Captain Fox could not be faulted if he did not know this when he addressed the audience in the Royal Ontario Museum since large-scale rocketry was then still relatively brand new to just about everybody outside of the practitioners of the application of this technology; apart from this, the finer historical details of the V-2 had yet to be revealed.
As may be expected at that early juncture in the history of rockets, and on the private side, the presentations by Fox and Stehling were a curious mixture of high optimism about the future of rocketry, sometimes prophetic, though overly idealistic and impractical in other respects. “It is quite possible that within the next five or ten years [1953-1958], we will reach heights of 1,000 to 2,000 miles,” said Fox. As matters turned out, these altitude goals were actually exceeded within that timeframe, although not quite as the latter may have imagined. (Project Farside, utilizing clusters of strictly solid propellant rocket motors and launched from a high altitude balloon, reached as high as more than 4,000 miles on 20 October 1957, then the world's rocket altitude record, although it carried only a very modest scientific instrument package of less than ten pounds; however, on 11 October 1958, the U.S.’s Pioneer 1, was a true space probe, attaining some 70,000 miles before reentering the Earth's atmosphere.)
In another prediction, Fox foresaw that “...rockets some day may prove of great value to predict the weather months ahead with great accuracy.” In this instance, he was partly right that rockets might be harnessed to greatly improve weather forecasts, though he did not foresee weather satellites that were boosted by rockets. Yet, on the idealistic side, he naively remarked that “...some day the Moon may be used as a rocket base for the defense of democracies.” He was more cautions, though, in predicting that rockets would first have to be sent to the Moon as a jumping-point for other rockets “equipped with television cameras” to obtain pictures of other planets. He was correct in stating that the speed of rockets would have to be greatly increased to 7 miles a second “to get away from the gravitational pull” of Earth, but again, was only partly right when he added that “This can be done by means of booster rockets or the use of atomic energy.” The latter, even up to this day, have not been successfully employed as a primary method of propulsion into space.
The other CRS speaker, Kurt Stehling, briefly summed up the CRS's own aims: “We are interested in the peacetime use of rockets, not their development for war….[and] Canada, because of her great open spaces and her supply of uranium [that he too, envisioned for potential means of propulsion into space], will enjoy a leading place in the development of rockets.”
The second leading Toronto paper, the Globe and Mail of 7 June, also covered the CRS meeting of Saturday, 5 June, although only referred to it as a “general meeting.” Nevertheless, this particular article, headlined “Rocket Base on Moon Possible in 10 Years,” is of additional great importance in the history of the CRS for other reasons than given above. Primarily, it clearly defined the two very different modes of propulsion and their respective purposes for the Society's intended Moon rocket: (1), the atomic, or nuclear power plant; and (2), the chemical propellant power plant.
- “Once atomic or nuclear energy is harnessed,” Fox explained, “a [nuclear] rocket can be built with enough power within itself to keep its jets [exhaust gases issuing from its nozzle or nozzles] firing until it [the rocket vehicle] reaches the Moon….It is possible that this might be achieved a lot sooner than most people believe.”
But at the same time, Fox clarified that conventional “chemical fuels” were part of the plans as well and “...will be used to clear the ship from the ground to prevent precipitation of the deadly nuclear fuel.” Hence, although modern rocket engineering terminology and technology were still in their infancies, here in retrospect he was saying that he envisioned a conventional chemical-propellant booster, using liquid-propellants, to boost the Moon rocket beyond the Earth's atmosphere and at that point for the booster (to be presumably jettisoned, or at least to be shut off) so that the nuclear rocket power plant could safely “kick in” and from there on, lift the Moon rocket far more swiftly towards its destination---the Moon. In this way, the effects of nuclear radiation could be prevented from harming Earth's atmosphere nor the population of the planet. This, at least, was Fox's space rocket engineering perception by mid-1948.
As to Fox's motive for fixing upon a nuclear rocket propulsion system as the primary mode for achieving spaceflight, he boldly proclaimed that “Nuclear fuel is two million times as powerful as the best existing chemical fuels.” Yet, his “estimate” was vastly over-rated, plus his premise that the possibility of nuclear propulsion might be achieved “a lot sooner than most people believe” turned out to be entirely simplistic and unrealistic. The road to that technology was far more complex, difficult, and expensive than both Fox and his CRS colleagues could ever have realized. Historically-speaking, several others had speculated far earlier about the development of nuclear-powered rockets and the United States Government did undertake Project Rover that was partly run by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and later transferred to NASA towards these goals from 1955 to 1973 at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory in New Mexico. Rover was always a controversial project, though, mainly on account of the extreme hazards associated with atomic energy besides the massive expense involved. Ultimately, Rover was cancelled in the latter year after 17 years of research and development and about $1.4 billion had been expended and no nuclear-powered rocket has ever flown.
Nevertheless, Fox and others of the CRS persisted with their Moon rocket plans albeit they did not always spell it out that it was to feature a chemical-propellant “booster” plus a hoped-for nuclear rocket system as an upper stage; this is another flaw in these articles that may have confused readers of the day.
Other articles in the Canadian papers reveal that both Fox and Stehling next arranged for a far more ambitious plan to publicize their new Society and the Moon rocket. They were able to get a sizable model of the rocket built by one of their members, 49-year-old Samuel (“Sam”) Charles Kernerman in his basement. Moreover, this model was grandly exhibited at the Canadian National Exhibit (CNE), the country's huge and important annual event that takes place annually at the Exhibition Palace in Toronto from mid-August to Canadian Labour Day. Held since 1879, the CNE---or affectionately simply known as “the Exhibit”----presently attracts approximately 1.5 million visitors each year and is Canada's largest annual fair and the sixth largest in North America.
To further highlight the cause of spaceflight, the CNE additionally featured a real V-2. Now whether this rocket was part of the CRS’s exhibit or had some “connection” with the CRS in arranging this V-2 to likewise be displayed at the CNE is not fully known. According to Godwin, the authority on this group, this rocket “had been smuggled to Canada by some skullduggery at the end of the war. It subsequently vanished and no one knows what happened to it.” (Kernerman, who might have known these details, later died in 2000 at age 101 and according to his obituary in the Toronto Star for 22 October of that year, he was “one of the founders of the Canadian Rocket Society” although we do not know if this is accurate or not.)
At any rate, in those days before TV was fully established in everyone’s homes, in Canada and in other nations (let alone Internet), the CRS Moon rocket as represented at the CNE was nicely covered by the press. The “The Globe and Mail (Toronto), in particular, ran a long story titled, “Aim at Trip to Moon From Toronto in 1950s” in their issue of 28 August 1948. This includes a photo of one Lois Humphrey, along with Jack Bird, Vice-President of the CRS and John Wartman, “Provisional Director,” admiring what is only described as “an experimental rocket” although it is clearly a liquid-propellant rocket with a single nozzle protruding from inside of the bottom of the rocket body. Could this have been a model of the Moon rocket? Probably not, since the article says: “Also on display is a demonstration rocket, six feet high and capable of flying and suitable for meteorological tests.”
Nothing more is said of this so-called CRS “demonstration” rocket, nor even whether it was a liquid-propellant or solid-propellant vehicle, nor whether it had ever been flown or not. By the same token, the term “demonstration rocket” is vague. It could imply that the said rocket was a non-functioning display model. On the other hand, the statement that it was “capable of flying” more strongly implies that the rocket was re-usable (i.e., recoverable, with a parachute)---even though it might have not flown. So it is more likely that the rocket in the picture is the said “demonstration rocket” that does indeed, appear to be about six feet long. As such, although it may never have been tried, it would have been Canada’s first rocket capable of meteorological, or upper atmospheric sounding experiments. Unfortunately, though, it is highly unlikely the rocket still exists. (For more on the photo in this article, see Section IV. below.)
It is mentioned that the exhibit also included a “scale drawing” of the Moon rocket which, for some unexplained reason (perhaps due to its large size), was shown elsewhere at the CNE--- “in the Special Aircraft Tent, west of the Electrical Building.” Here too, Captain Fox's scale drawing of his Moon rocket has similarly long since vanished.
The Globe and Mail article next went into Captain Fox’s Moon rocket plans in more detail. For one, it is stated that members of the CRS were to appeal to all big manufacturers across Canada “and ask each to produce one of the many complex sections needed. The Society hopes to recruit keen-minded technical men for the task of assembling the rocket and the launch station in Toronto where the flight to the Moon will start.” Fox went on to explain more of the perceived engineering challenges involved.
- “The engine in the rocket,” he began, “will be one of the lesser problems and will not be responsible for the high cost...we are hoping to use atomic energy to give us power. But our biggest problem is refrigeration. The ship will have two hulls two feet apart and in between them the space must be kept refrigerated. And it will take a lot of refrigeration. The 240,000-mile jaunt to the Moon takes the ship through a 10-mile layer of heat at 170 degrees Fahrenheit, and when it gets 50 miles from Earth it hits a 25-mile layer of atmosphere at 212 degrees which has been registered on a thermometer on a [captured] V-2.”
Much of what Fox explained was not only wholly erroneous thinking but underscored how little knowledge Fox, and other members of the CRS then really had about the possibilities of rocket flight into space, much less the enormous complexities and astronomical costs in money and time these developments might take. It was likewise altogether impractical, and even naive of them, to have considered that their Moon rocket would be able to carry a crew of four---plus ten others, for a full complement of 14---besides taking it for granted that the “lesser” problem of their main propulsion was to be “atomic energy” that both Fox and Stehling equally assumed would be developed fairly soon for their planned lunar mission from Toronto.
Fox did not forget to mention spacesuits that would be needed for this mission. (Elsewhere, he went into a few details on the suit, namely, “it would be similar to those worn by divers, but much lighter, [that] will protect wearers from ultra-violet, cosmic, and other rays,” thus predicting some of the features of later Apollo suits.) And to his credit, he also accurately determined that the 240,000 mile trip to the Moon would take four days. This very closely matches the time and distance faced by the Apollo missions of three-men each that took place two decades later, in 1968, starting with the flight of Apollo 8 between 21-27 December 1968. This flight, of course, was the first to reach the Moon, orbit it, and safe return, and was followed seven month later with the flight of Apollo 11 of 16-24 July 1969 and was the spaceflight that first landed humans on the Moon. (The distance of the Moon from Earth is 238,900-miles, while the duration of each Apollo mission to the Moon took 76 hours, or three days and four hours, that included preliminary Earth and orbits prior to completed lunar landings.)
Mostly, in this brief comparison between Captain Fox’s overly simplified lunar mission plan and with what actually transpired in the future Apollo missions, were: the unforeseeable enormous multi-layered complexities of many technologies and built upon many years of technological developments, besides the inputs of many corporations plus governmental organizations and entailed the very carefully managed teamwork of tens of thousands of specialists in each of these endeavours. The same may be said for comparisons with other early schemes of spaceflight missions in the very earliest history of astronautics although the plans of Fox and other pioneers must be put into their proper contexts.
In sum, by ca. 1948, the concept of spaceflight itself was wholly theoretical although this was understandable considering the dearth of available literature on the topic. Large-scale liquid propellant rocket technology (including guidance and stabilizations systems) was basically limited to the V-2 from World War II, and work on even the theoretical possibilities of propulsion by atomic energy was even far less advanced than concepts of spaceflight; moreover, a lot of the prerequisite technologies for spaceflight that we now take for granted, notably compact computers and microelectronics, had yet to be born. Rocket “launch sites” by that time, were also only limited to primitive artillery firing ranges and the like, while our knowledge of the upper atmosphere and the beginnings of “space science” and “space medicine” (or man’s ability to survive in near-space and within the space environment) were all barely in their infancies.
No wonder Fox’s Moon-landing phase of his plans had not been as carefully worked out compared to those for his Moon rocket. He could only surmise that the best approach for a lunar landing would be for the rocket ship to turn around on its approach to the Moon backwards, the rocket turning on its “jets” (a now archaic alternate term for rockets) and make a “nice soft landing on its tail.”
Exactly what could be accomplished following a lunar landing mission was far less clear. “Just what men would do when they got to the Moon,” concluded the Globe and Mail article, “is a matter of conjecture. Captain Fox dosen’t have any special ideas except they might find useful metal there or might use it [the Moon] as a jump-off place for trips to other planets where there might be air and life.”
Interestingly, in the Globe and Mail for 23 December 1948 is an article titled “Lunar Loops Loom” by Bruce West, in which Captain Fox became far more cautious about the cost-side of the Moon trip plans, and may have been due to the results of his seeking funds from likely companies. Not only had his foreseeable budget for the Moon mission been considerably hiked up from $ 1.5 million to $ 6 million (or $ 74,900,000.00 by 2023, due to inflation), but the anticipated time frame for the mission was moved forward a decade to 1960. But in examining this article more closely, we see that he now factored in the cost of “an extra ship to be held in reserve for emergencies” (presumably in the event the original rocket ship became stranded on the Moon) and the cost of fuel (though he neglected to spell out the nature of the fuel) at $ 750,000. It was also “difficult,” he added, “to estimate the labor costs so far ahead.”
Then, fortunately for aerospace history, Fox went on to fill in a lot more technical details on the Moon rocket itself and its construction plans in an article appropriately called, “Big Space Ship” which he wrote for the October 1949 issue of Tatternall’s Club Magazine, published in Sydney, Australia. Here, for instance, we learn among other things that besides Fox, a CRS “engineering committee” was also engaged in refining the design. But this is not all. All told, Fox said, “Ten committees will be at work on the project this year.” (Incidentally, Fox now gives his title as “Chairman” of the CRS.)
- “Mr. K.R. Stehling, formerly President of the University of Toronto’s Rocket Society, undertook to develop the power plant and it fell to my lot to provide the basic design of the structure,” he went on. “The structure and machinery alone will be about 200 tons,” he added. “The central tubular structural member was suggested by a study of the Forth Bridge. [The Forth Bridge is a cantilever railway bridge across the Firth of Forth in the east of Scotland and is considered as a symbol of Scotland and a UNESCO World Heritage Site.] Tripod landing legs at the base are capable of being thrust through open ports by hydraulic action, electronically controlled, to make a landing possible on uneven terrain [on the surface of the Moon]. Twin hulls allow space for refrigeration and other devices necessary to enable the ship to pass through the ionosphere...”
Titanium, the super light and strong metal, is now mentioned as the new metal of choice for the vehicle that would also feature “thrusters,” or far smaller rocket motors affixed on the spaceship to help maneuver it in space---exactly as are found in modern space vehicles. Fox retained the number of some 20 motors to drive the ship, although in his clearly now expanded design, beneath these “...will be a series of decks, arranged as follows: storage, refrigeration compartment, passenger cabin, control cabin, structural bulkhead with gyroscopes, and in the nose, an emergency escape cabin, with ribbon parachutes which can be ejected from the main hull.”
But perhaps the most significant “upgrade” of all, by this date, is found in the following statement by Fox: “Our engineering committee has nearly completed the design for a chemical fuel regenerative motor [perhaps he meant motors, plural], self-cooled.” To this he concluded with the following enticing remark: “Other details are not disclosed at present,” though his final words are reiterations about the cost of the project. Clearly, then, Fox’s Moon rocket concept had greatly matured within a relatively short time and was greatly benefitting from rapid advances in rocket and related technologies, some of which were appearing in the open literature or acquired by Fox from other sources.
It remains uncertain though, whether Fox and his team had altogether abandoned notions of atomic propulsion as the main mode of power for the Moon rocket in lieu of a chemical propellant system, or whether rocket motors utilizing chemical propellants and regenerative-cooling served that primary purpose, or were only employed in other motors on the ship, since the language regarding the power plant is often ambiguous during this time. Notably, for instance, in the short article “Trips to the Moon by 1960” in Current Science for December 1949, stated:
- “On this side of the ocean [compared to rocketry activities in Europe at the time], considerable publicity has come to members of the Canadian Rocket Society at Toronto. Captain E.J. Evans Fox, visiting New York [City], displayed a blueprint for a 200-foot-long craft driven by nuclear fission with tripod take-off and landing equipment [where, in New York is not mentioned].”
Yet, we do gain additional details of the rapid progress made in the design of the CRS Moon rocket and perhaps these are among the ones left out of Fox’s article published two months earlier in Tatternall’s Club Magazine. For instance, we now learn that water and oxygen for the space travelers could be derived “from the products of combustion.” (This would be a strong clue enough that chemical propulsion was being utilized by this point.) It is further revealed that a Mr. Boris Dyke was now the Vice-President of the CRS and was “in charge the planning” of the Moon rocket. Besides this, the rocket was, in part, to “take advantage of natural gravitational fields” in its mission through space (in other words, gravity assist, then a very advanced idea). Dyke additionally noted that while the rocket would cost “only about $ 5 million,” he estimated that “hundreds of millions of dollars will first have to be spent on preliminary research and trials” that was actually a far more realistic approach to the project if it was ever to be carried out. (The project was therefore in very good hands with Boris Dyke, who was an officer in the Royal Canadian Air Force and a World War II veteran although we cannot learn anything more from him since he passed away in 2004.)
In the meantime, the activities of the CRS were not confined to their Moon rocket project. From time to time, for instance, they also held public lectures. For example, the Toronto Daily Star for 24 March 1949 ran a small ad announcing the free illustrated lecture to be held at the University of Toronto and titled “What Are the Other Planets Like?” The lecturer was J.F. Heard, PhD. This was Dr. John (“Jack”) F. Heard, then head of the Astronomy Department of the University and in 1952 was to become the Director of their David Dunlap Observatory. (Incidentally, Dr. Heard remained keenly interested in spaceflight since a few years later, during the early days of the Space Age, he delivered the talk “Regarding Sputnik.”) Heard’s lecture was subsequently presented on the Friday evening of 25 March 1949 and was of great influence to the CRS and especially upon Captain Fox who was among the 60 CRS members who attended. This is because, as we learn from a Globe and Mail article of 26 March 1949, despite its title, Heard’s talk was not solely focussed upon the astronomical differences between the planets---but potential missions to those planets. Thus, as summed up below, Fox wound up adopting a lot of Heard’s ideas as to potential missions to the planets and in effect, Heard caused Fox to greatly alter his plans for the CRS from strictly pursuing the design and construction of a Moon rocket to one that could begin exploring the planets.
But it is also in the Globe and Mail for 26 March 1949 that we first learn of the designation of C-1 for the rocket---apparently proudly standing for “Canada-1.”
Three months after Heard’s lecture---by mid-June 1949---Captain Fox and his wife and son took a “vacation and shopping trip” to New York City although the captain also brought with him his blueprint for his space rocket. Presumably, this was to have it ready in the event he could meet potential investors on behalf of the CRS and their plans. We know from a Globe and Mail article of 19 July 1949 that while in New York he at least met and spoke with the famous aviator and aviation writer of the period, Major Alexander P. Seversky for an hour and showed him the blueprint plus he alerted the press of his visit. Evidently, nothing came from his discussion with Seversky except that more publicity was generated for the CRS. Now, it was also revealed that Fox had considerably expanded his plans for the rocket. This was picked up by the New York Times and also appeared in the Globe and Mail for 12 June of that year. But again, in actuality Fox was simply adapting a lot of what he had learned from Dr. Heard’s lecture. We will therefore now briefly sum up some of the highlights of what is conveyed in the Globe and Mail for 12 June 1949, which was borrowed directly from Heard’s lecture.
This time, as explained by Fox, the ultimate destinations for the CRS rocket were to be both the planets Mars and Venus and not strictly the Moon. The mode of propulsion remained the same, though he was now determined to make a round trip flight to those planets “in a vast rocket, powered by atomic energy” (but presumably still initially taking off from Earth by a chemical-propellant booster).
- “His calculations [actually, those of Dr. Heard],” the paper continues, embodied “...the apparent paradox that it would take less time to go and circle Mars, then do the same for Venus, and return to Earth, than it would to visit Mars direct and return. Once more, he was contemplating using gravity-assist, especially since those two planets “revolve around the Sun as does Earth counterclockwise...taking advantage of the [gravitational] currents in the whirlpool.”
As for what could be accomplished when those planets were reached, Fox explained that:
- “We circle Mars for a few months, observing the planet at close quarters, then, at the right time, jet off for Venus...” Similar close orbital observations would be conducted “and, when their relative positions are right, we drift [maneuver the rocket] back to Earth….”
Fox planned “no stop on either planet on the first voyage. That may be possible on the second...We might build the ship [on the Moon]. Because of its lesser gravity we could have a much lighter structure.” (Heard had covered other planets in his lecture, but had stressed---as it was generally believed at the time---that of the planets in our solar system, Mars and Venus were considered to have been most likely those that could support life and this is exactly why Fox selected these two as missions for the “C-1” vehicle.) However, in the conclusion of the Globe and Mail article of 19 July 1949 after Fox had returned from New York City, he said: “We haven’t started building [C-1] yet. We have to get the money.” This, of course, never came about.
Nevertheless, as it turns out, the giant CRS Moon rocket (and afterwards was re-planned as a Mars/Venus) vehicle and re-designated as the C-1, had surfaced earlier than is generally believed and pre-dated the group. One source says the concept showed up in the newspapers as early as November 1946 and that Fox---now identified as “Edward Fox” (actually, Edward Cecil Evans Fox)---was responsible for these plans. In other words, it turns out that Fox’s concept had clearly led to his co-founding the CRS that also came to adopt his scheme. One of the other co-founders, of course, was Stehling. Fox had generated so much publicity with his talk of moon rockets that he appeared on a radio show named "Canadian Cavalcade" (at the time introduced by the popular actor Lorne Greene.) During an interview he stated that he expected men to land on the moon within 20 years and had written an 80,000 word sequel to his published navigation treatise, Stratosphere Flying (Aeronautics): Including Navigation for Emergencies, (Toronto, 1942), but this time for space navigation, although the latter part of that work did not materialize nor has it been found.
The so-called CRS Moon rocket was also featured in the February 1949 issue of Science and Mechanics. This article goes into more details and reveals that the vehicle was to be “roughly bullet-shaped” and powered with as many as 20 rocket motors, each developing 100 tons of thrust. Moreover, the launch facility was to be erected atop a mountain on Canada’s west coast, “in order to reduce the rocket’s flight through the thickest part of the atmosphere.” In the following month of March 1949, the CRS began advertising their lectures on spaceflight.
II. SUMMARY OF THE LIFE OF EDWARD EVANS FOX:
As for Edward Evans Fox (1899-1961), he was born in Coaticook, Quebec Canada, in 1899, and became a construction engineer of considerable accomplishments. Notably, in the 1920s he worked for the Dominion Bridge Company and was involved in building both the Royal York Hotel in Toronto and the James Bay extension of the T (Toronto) and NO (Northern Ontario) Railway. Besides this he was a devotee of the French novelist Jules Verne and obviously became enthralled by Verne’s classics, A Trip to the Moon (1860) and its sequel, A Trip Around the Moon (1870) that appeared in many editions and languages since then. Fox eventually envisioned a modern representation of how a Moon mission might be carried out---although this time with a huge rocket, with many motors, rather than Verne’s method of an extremely large and powerful cannon.
No doubt, Fox had been additionally influenced by the appearance of the German V-2 rocket in World War II. During the war, he was indeed a captain and served in the 8th Field Company of the Royal Canadian Engineers. But just how Fox teamed up with Stehling to form the CRS is unknown, though it is more than likely that Stehling, 20 years a junior to Captain Fox, sought out the latter and soon met him some time after he had returned from England to his native Canada.
We now turn our attentions to the background of Kurt Stehling.
III. ACCOUNT OF THE EARLY LIFE OF KURT RICHARD STEHLING AND HIS FIRST ROCKET GROUPS:
Stehling was born in the small town of Giessen, Hesse, Germany in 1919 though even as a youngster, as he afterwards recalled, he was initially captivated with rocketry and the notions of spaceflight due to the international “rocket and spaceflight fad” that had started in his country in the late 1920s. He therefore well knew of the rocket stunts---including rocket cars and rocket-propelled gilders (utilizing solid-propellant gunpowder rockets of the day)--of the automobile magnate and “sportsman” Fritz von Opel and others. He says he even saw one of these aircraft fly on the Wasserkuppe, a well known mountain in Germany where glider flights were often made. But in 1930, he and his family emigrated to Canada, settling in Toronto, although even here his fascination with rocketry and spaceflight never waned and he was, he says, an “avid reader” of publications by Hugo Gernsback (whom Stehling later met) such as the “pulp magazines” Amazing Stories that invariably featured “interplanetary stories.”
A few years later, when he attended Toronto’s Central Technical High School, which he had entered in 1934, the teenager Stehling formed what he called a “Rocket and Space Study Club.” He does not pin down the date of this founding in his online interview but does reveal that in 1938 he went so far as to write a letter to Dr. Robert H. Goddard, the famous American rocket pioneer, to ask him for advice on how to build a rocket. This correspondence has not been located, however. Nevertheless, following Stehling’s account, Goddard’s response was typical of him; the American simply advised the young German-Canadian not to build a rocket. Goddard was, of course, concerned with protecting the youth from the dangers of such experimentation; Goddard had continually received such mail from all over the world. At any rate, it seems likely that Stehling’s “Rocket and Space Study Club” was either started, or was flourishing by 1938, and Stehling proceeded anyway around this time to construct a rocket, the sound advice from Goddard notwithstanding.
In the same interview, Stehling relates that the said small rocket was propelled by methane and oxygen, both of which must have been in gaseous form, which means that it was fairly sophisticated for the time and certainly for an 18 or 19 year-old. Stehling went on very enthusiastically to describe how he---presumably along with his club teammates---then tried to “test” the rocket in the school’s chemistry laboratory. (He also explained that the Central Technical High School was a five year school which was why he was still in attendance by that year.).
The rocket was placed on a special stand, or probably a kind of ramp, aimed toward the outside of a window that faced a field. But when it was ignited, by first opening a “gas pressure bottle” that must have been used to force the propellants into the combustion chamber, the window was found to be closed shut. Consequently, the ill-fated rocket completely smashed the window, although evidently no bodily harm was inflicted among the students, though young Stehling was obligated to pay for the replacement of the window. Yet, this hardly ended Stehling’s involvement with rocketry since members of his Club allegedly went on to build and test a few far simpler small gunpowder rockets, although we have no specifics on these. These activities proved interesting enough for a local station to interview Stehling on the radio in 1939.
During 1940-1941, Stehling studied Applied Science at the University of Toronto although the war interrupted his education and it was not until 1948 that he earned a B.A. and won the John Galbraith Prize for his paper "Rocket Propulsion” that appeared in the March 1948 issue of The Engineering Journal.
In the meantime, from 1943, Stehling served in the Canadian Armored Corps in England during World War II, and while on leave in London in the final days of the war in 1945, he heard the tremendous impact of a German V-2 that had crashed down. Strange to say, a few years later, during 1949-1955, after he had left Canada and worked professionally in rocketry at the Bell Aircraft Company at Niagara Falls, New York, he got to know Walter R. Dornberger personally, since Dornberger, the former military commander of the Peenemünde complex in Germany where the V-2 had been developed, now also worked there as a special consultant to the President of Bell Aircraft. Not only that, but Dornberger had also been born in the same town of Giessen, as was Stehling. (More on Stehling’s later career, including his work for Bell, in Section VIII.)
At any rate, at some unknown date after the war, Stehling became the founder and president of The University of Toronto Rocket Society though practically nothing is known about this second group started by Stehling, nor exactly how long it lasted except that curiously, it was apparently later renamed the Atomic and Rocket Society. (The latter name is cited by Stehling in his videotaped interview and is also mentioned next to his photograph in the Toronto University year book.)
But now we jump to the exact date of 23 January 1948 when Stehling, in his capacity as the president of The University of Toronto Rocket Society attended a very important event called the “Annual At Home Address of the President of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada” (RASC), delivered at the University by the astronomer Dr. John W. Campbell. Campbell’s talk, titled “The Problem of Space Travel,” was summarized the following day in the Globe and Mail for of 24 January in the negatively titled article, “Moon Trip an Illusion to Space Travel Expert,” which, by the way, added that Campbell’s presentation included his use of 35 mm slides of the V-2, plus displays of various astronomical and navigation instruments such as a “Bubble Sextant, a planisphere (or star finder), and an astronomical compass as employed during the war by the Royal Canadian Air Force.
Stehling was thus compelled to openly respond to this piece a few days later in his letter-to-the-editor headed, “Is Space Travel Possible?” as published in the Globe and Mail of the 29th. At this juncture, therefore, we can take up another crucial historical question in the history of rocketry and astronautics, namely: “What was the attitude during that post-war period towards spaceflight by the scientific community---or rather, the scientific community of Canada---as now represented by the RASC?”
In this letter, we learn that Stehling had not only attended Campbell’s address, but afterwards engaged him in a “short talk.” As he very briefly summed up this conversation, Stehling did “not think that Dr. Campbell categorically rejected the possibility of space travel, although he certainly implied this as an almost impossible engineering feat.” Furthermore, Stehling was convinced that “Dr. Campbell has not perhaps had time to keep abreast of some of the latest developments in the science of rocketry.” Stehling, for instance, cited advances in new fuels and alloys that were bound to greatly expand the possibilities of the rocket. He also concluded that “If history is any guide, the science of rocketry will be greatly stimulated and improved in the next decade and new vistas of exploration and discovery will be opened up.”
Fortunately for history’s sake, Campbell’s entire address was afterwards published as a 19-page article, with figures, in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada for April-March 1948. Due to space limitations in our present treatment on the CRS, however, we can only focus upon his salient points.
First, Dr. Campbell offered a couple of examples each, of both pro and con arguments on the possibility of spaceflight, the first in the latter category expressed in 1946 by the British Astronomer Royal, Sir Harold Spencer, in which he is reported to have said: “Man quite likely will never reach the Moon and even if he did, the chances of his returning would be so small as to be negligible. For assuming that the difficulties of launching a lunar landing could be overcome, the landing on a jagged surface such as the Moon would certainly involve disaster, and if the landing were successful there would be no launching platform for his return trip.”
The Canadian astronomer next took up explaining reaction motion though also pointed to the fact that there were “no filling stations” in space and “no means of controlling the flight [into outer space].” He did outline concepts of the “space station...that was really an artificial satellite,” but also spoke of the difficulties in establishing such a station, even at low Earth orbit of 500 miles.
Campbell then covered theoretical “Paths to the Moon” and “Mass Ratios,” that latter topic of which he had written about in the Philosophical Magazine, Series 7, Vol. 31 in 1941 (on pp. 24-34). Yet he also inserted a remark as told to him by an experienced pilot that “Man would be incapable of much functional control at 3 or 4 g...” He then moved on to the “V-2 Rocket Experience” which he did not find impressive (i.e, the immediate post-war U.S. flights of captured V-2 rockets at the White Sands Proving Grounds in New Mexico). Then lastly, Campbell posed the question, “Why Not Use Atomic Energy?” Here, his basic argument was that although the Atomic Bomb had then recently unleashed enormous energy, “the momentum of ejected material in an arrangement of a nuclear rocket propelled device “would be moderate.” Besides this, there remained the necessity “to insulate the crew [in a manned vehicle] very heavily for protection against radiation.” “So,” he summed up, “the prospect of using atomic energy is not encouraging.” The great overall weakness in these arguments was that, as rightly pointed out by Stehling, that Dr. Campbell had indeed, not taken the time to look at the latest advances in rocketry at the time and had only limited himself to basing his conclusions strictly on V-2 technology. Yet, the V-2 had certainly established the groundwork for the modern large-scale liquid-propellant rocket but by no means was it the uppermost limit.
Stehling and others were, at any rate, not at all deterred by Campbell’s criticisms, whether they had read them in the Globe and Mail or in the Journal of the RASC, or not, and in June 1948 he helped form (or perhaps re-formed) the CRS. In front of a gathering of 100 attendees at the Royal Ontario Museum both Fox and Stehling led the discussion in which the latter outlined the aims of the newer group as follows: "We are interested in the peacetime use of rockets, not their development for war. We hope to interest the public not only in the mechanical side of rockets but in their social and economic significance."
For all intents and purposes though, when Stehling left Canada to live in the United States a few months later, in the following year, he had likewise cut his ties with the CRS. Information is lacking as to how long Fox remained with the group in Canada. The CRS survived a number of years thereafter since, as pointed out, Hillel H. Diamond acquired small commercially-made solid-fuel rockets for the group as late as the early 1960s which we will cover in Section VII of this treatment. Now, we return back to Stehling’s earlier connection with the CRS to take a brief look at his design of a liquid-propellant rocket motor for “CRS Rocket No. 1.”
IV. KURT STEHLING’S ROCKET MOTOR FOR CRS ROCKET NO. 1:
Despite the lavish attention given at the time to the so-called CRS Moon rocket, or Fox’s rocket, however, there is a very unique and perhaps only extant drawing dated 13 July 1948 that was donated many years ago by Stehling to the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., of “Motor Details [of] C.R.S. Rocket No. 1,” designed by “K.S.” (who was Kurt Stehling, of course) that shows this motor was only 2 ¼ inches in outside diameter and 6 inches long for the combustion chamber. The drawing proper was made by “GAB” who was therefore most likely Gordon Allen Batley, then a “Director” of the CRS during this period as well as a member of the A.S.M.E. (the Association of Mechanical Engineers) and the Association of Professional Engineers.
Now whether this motor, or CRS Rocket No. 1, ever reached the hardware stage is unknown since nothing has been found as yet in print about this object; nor is it known if this rocket was succeeded by a “C.R.S. Rocket No. 2,” and so on. Nor do we know if any liquid-propellant rocket tests at all were ever made by the CRS. Nor is anything known of the intended propellants, as well as expected---or realized---performances (i.e., no document has surfaced thus far on this design nor any possible aspects of it).
There are, however, a couple of other possibilities regarding the motor that should not be overlooked. First, since the design dates to 13 July 1948---or, just a little over two months following the Society’s announced highly optimistic plan for a manned Moon rocket appearing in the newspapers---could the drawing perhaps be of a scale model of the motor Stehling was preparing to build and test toward Fox’s full-scale contemplated Moon rocket?
But the other possibility looks more likely. That is, if we examine the picture in the article of 18 August 1948 in the Globe and Mail titled “Aim at Trip to Moon from Toronto in 1950s” described in Section I. Above more closely, depicting Lois Humphrey, Jack Bird, and John Wirtman looking over an “experimental rocket” of CRS at the CNE event, the single nozzle of the rocket is visible and could very well be of the same 2 ¼ inch outside diameter as in Stehling’s drawing. Thus, the drawing may show the motor for the rocket placed on exhibit at the CNE---which also means that the rocket at the exhibit was really the “mysterious” CRS Rocket # 1. But these are only conjectures. Again, whether the rocket at the exhibit was a working (functional) liquid-propellant rocket, or a non-functioning display model only is another matter.
We can lastly add on Stehling’s motor design that there surely must have been additional drawings because this drawing is sheet # 2 of 3 sheets, though in any case, the other sheets seem to have long since disappeared.
V. ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON CRS GROUP # 2:
To this it should be noted that the list given in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society includes the address (in 1950) of the Canadian group as 58 Hilton Avenue, Toronto 10, Ontario, Canada, and that a William Cameron is given as the Chairman of the CRS at that time. H. [Hillel] H. Diamond is listed as the Secretary---whom we more fully cover in Sections VI. And VII.---while a “duplicated” bi-monthly C.R.S. Newsletter was also produced of an average of eight pages in length. Moreover, the number of “Members at 30/9/1950 (approx.)” amounted to 70. (The list, by the way, most interestingly also shows the group was “Chartered,” or registered, in 1949, so this was the official year of its founding although as seen, it had really started a year earlier.) The “Grade[s] of Membership[s] for the group was: (a), Sustaining members who paid (annual) subscription rates of $ 10.00, (b) Senior members who paid $ 5.00 annually, and (c) Junior member who paid $ 1.00. In addition to the Society’s Newsletter, no copies of which have been found to date, besides their lectures, they also had a library albeit it must have been quite modest since very few works were then available on both rocketry and spaceflight. (We are aware of this library since Godwin once picked up an “old space book” in a used book store and afterwards discovered that it was stamped as the “Property of the Canadian Rocket Society.”)
Godwin records that during the same period, or more specifically at the Second International Astronautical Congress held in London, during 3-8 September 1951, U.S. Navy Lt Frederick C. Durant, III “...informed the delegates that the Canadian Rocket Society now had over 100 members (apparently making it the fifth largest such group in the world behind the USA, UK, Germany and France) and that they might well be interested in joining the newly proposed International Astronautical Federation. Of the 13 countries in discussion at the Congress, only Canada (through the CRS) apparently did not commit to becoming a founding member of the IAF.” In any case, it does not appear the any members of the CRS actually attended the IAC in that year.
At any rate, it turns out that further investigations into the identity and activities of Hillel Diamond reveal that there had been an earlier CRS group, that we now label as CRS # 1.
VI. CRS GROUP # 1:
Hillel Diamond (1925-2014) was born in Montreal and afterwards came to Toronto to study music; the year is unknown. He was a talented violinist and also played the piano while his wife Tova was likewise a talented musician.
According to his obituary appearing in the online Canadian model rocketry web site named “Rocketry Planet” of 20 February 2011, Diamond was regarded as the “Grandfather of Canadian hobby [model] rocketry.” Indeed, although we do not know all of the details, it appears that Diamond also had an early fascination with rocketry which he maintained all his life. He was also well aware of early rocket groups and as early as 1942, with others of like mind, he formed a club known as the Canadian Rocket Society (which we label as CRS Group # 1) when he resided in Toronto. It was said to have been patterned after the VfR (the Verein für Raumschiffahrt, or Society of Spaceship Travel) that had existed in Germany. However, this is most odd since the VfR had long ceased to exist and had lasted from 1927 to 1934. Furthermore, the date of 1942 for the founding of the original CRS must be corroborated since this date only appears in Hillel’s obituary and may or may not be incorrect and this is the sole source we presently know of for this founding date. Thus, for now, we must accept the supposed founding date although this may change if additional evidence to the contrary surfaces. [For more on the VfR, consult Frank H. Winter, Prelude to the Space Age: The Rocket Societies 1926-1940) (Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, D.C., 1983), and also available online.]
We should also add that during this period Diamond is often cited in the McGill Daily of McGill University in Montreal---though as a concert violinist and not with any connection to the CRS. However, Rob Godwin discovered a most interesting series of three articles in the McGill Daily that were all published in late January 1945.
The first article appears in the McGill Daily for 26 January 1945 and is headed, “Rocket Flight Subject of Talk---Hurter to Address Mathematics Club On Space Travel.” This talk, by Fred Hurter, “the President of the Canadian Rocket Society,” was on the theme of “The Mathematics of Space Flight” and was to be delivered to the McGill Junior Mathematics Club in Room 37 of the Engineering Building. The second article, in the issue of 29 January, is titled “Mathematics Club to Hear Hurter Discuss Rockets---Flight by Rocket From Earth to Planets Is a Probability.” This talk too, was to be held in the same room for the Junior Mathematics Club and was on the same theme of “The Mathematics of Space” and to cover “calculations concerning course of flight, speed, and time of flight” for “inter-planet [sic.] travel.” The article also interestingly ends with Hurter’s remark that, “No rocket with the flight capabilities of [the] V-2 could have been built before the war.” The final article, in the issue of 30 January is titled “Mathematicians Discuss Rockets---Problem of Travel to Planets Outlined by Fred Hurter.” The talk was to be given in the same room, though this time it is stated that Huter was to give “a brief outline of the history, use, and study of rockets” and that “At each meeting a [mathematical] problem is presented for the members to solve.”
Hence, at minimum we can firmly establish that the CRS, Group # 1, definitely existed by 1945, if not earlier. On the other hand, these same articles open up the probability that the supposed founding date of 1942 for CRS Group # 1 is in error and occurred later (although probably still during the war) and may have come about by Diamond listening to Fred Hurter’s lectures on “The Mathematics of Rockets”; or conversely, he may have preceded Hurter as the group’s President, and was then based in Montreal prior to his finally setting in Toronto.
We presently know nothing of the size nor actual activities of the first CRS group except that it continued to flourish and, perhaps inevitably, Hillel came to know of Stehling and his work in rocketry, especially after Hillel had moved to Toronto. Consequently, Stehling’s smaller University of Toronto Rocket Club (or perhaps it was the later offshoot with the strange name of the Rocket and Atomic Society) perhaps merged with the CRS; or rather, a new CRS was formed, in 1948 as related above, and which we label as CRS Group # 2. (Godwin cautiously only says Stehling’s Toronto Rocket Club “may have merged under the Canadian Rocket Society banner.” In other words, we presently have no proof of this union.)
For certain, both Stehling and Hillel became officers of this “new” group, Stehling as the “Technical Director”(no doubt, due to his deeper technical background in rocketry) and Hillel as the “Secretary.” Nothing is known of the Chairman of CRS # 2 Group, William Cameron. In any case, according to a tiny item in the Toronto Daily Star for 6 July 1950, Hillel had assumed the role of President of the CRS by that year and he evidently remained in this position for a number of years thereafter and was to eventually transform it into something quite different as more fully related below, in section VII.
But the following question now arises: “When [what year] did Diamond cease to be the President of the CRS,” or rather, “When did CRS # 2 Group end?”
We pose this question since tucked into the monthly column “World Astronautics” by the late Frederick C. Durant, III in the early American magazine, Missiles and Rockets in its issue of June 1958 is the following most curious item:
“North of the border, a Canadian Astronautics Society springs from the ashes of the Canadian Rocket Society (defunct since 1953); the CAS offers hope to many space-minded Canadians who were [since 1953] without an organized professional voice. An initial meeting [of the CAS] was held last March [1958] attended by 61 persons representing 18 industries. Dr. Philip A. Lapp, senior electrical engineer at De Havilland [Aircraft Co. of Canada], is acting president. Six men have been appointed by the 12-man counsel, including David Wallis of Avro Canada, [another very prominent Canadian aircraft manufacturer].”
Unfortunately, we have no information on why the CRS supposedly suddenly became “defunct” in 1953, so this is another mystery in a series of mysteries regarding the CRS. At any rate, this is the only article found by CRS authority Rob Godwin that mentions the CAS in a discussion of the history of the Canadian Astronautical Society---which, of course, is altogether a different entity and is not part of our present history of the CRS.
We say “supposedly,” by the way, because another curious item is found in The Postgrad, a publication of the Alumni Association of the Sir George William College in Montreal. This item is very tersely included in passing in the column “Postgrad Patter” by Bob Hase in the issue of December 1955. Hase says: “What next --- students have formed a Sir George branch of the Canadian Rocket Society --- its purpose to build and test solid and liquid fuel rockets. No launchings near the new building, eh...” [sic.] Thus, could the CRS quickly have emerged again---and in a Montreal college and with very concrete testing plans? In any case, after this we hear no more of the Sir George William College branch of the Society so it most likely never got to that stage.
Yet, whatever happened, the CRS did not really face its true end since after a number of years it became resurrected, although the date and circumstances are other mysteries.
VII. LATER ITERATION OF CRS (CRS # 3), AND POSSIBLE FOLLOW-ON GROUPS:
We know for certain that the CRS was still around in the 1960s, under the continued direction of Diamond, since the CRS started importing (from the U.S.) commercially-made small solid-propellant rocket motors employed by model rocketeers who appeared in the wake of the beginnings of the Space Age, and upon the granting of U.S. Patent No. 2,841,084 of 1 July 1958 to the shoe store owner and firework collector of Nebraska, Orville H. Carlisle for a “Toy Rocket”. This was, in essence, the beginning of modern model rocketry that was subsequently promoted by G. Harry Stine and saw the sudden growth of companies in the U.S. producing such motors and soon afterwards, sponsored the first model rocket competitions that are now held world-wide. Furthermore, an item by Michael Spivak in the Canadian news magazine MacLean’s Magazine for 2 December 1963 shows that as in the U.S. at the time, upon the start of the Space Age the activity of “amateur rocketry” abounded in Canada as well with the result that there were many serious injuries caused by unsupervised experiments with dangerous chemicals by youngsters. At that time, Spivak continued, “Unfortunately. The Canadian Rocket Society is out of the launching business,” implying that they may well have launched rockets in the past and that their experiments were then conducted by adults and in as careful and safe a manner as possible.
Hence, to Hillel Diamond rocketry was more of a hobby and sport and, according to his obituary in “Rocketry Planet,” “During his heyday in the 60’s and 70’s, Diamond was very active in the Canadian Rocket Society, promoting the love of the hobby to people all around Toronto and the surrounding areas.” Moreover, the obituary continues, Hillel loved science in general and he and his wife formed the Science Shop situated in the Yonge Street Arcade, at 137 Yonge Street, Toronto. But the Shop was far more than a store since it was aimed at educating youngsters in science and science applications, and especially rocketry. Indeed, Hillel’s Science Shop held its first model rocket launches in 1968. The two entities---the CRS and the Science Shop---were thus intertwined, although we have no specific information on the later years of the CRS, whether it became dissolved and/or was afterwards reformed as yet another iteration.
Diamond’s obituary further accredits him as “...the person who single-handedly was responsible for legalizing and popularizing the hobby of model rocketry in Canada.” There are other available sources that amply show this. Notably, for instance, the magazine Model Rocketry for September 1970 reported that: “Hillel Diamond and his Canadian Rocket Society...opened the 1969 National Science Fair exhibit at Eatons department store [in Toronto] with a spectacular ribbon cutting. A guide wire was stretched from the floor to the ceiling in Eatons and a Big Bertha [model rocket] was placed on the guide wire. The mayor, having been instructed to push a button to officially open the display, was amazed to see the rocket lift-off, fly up the guide wire, and cut the ribbon with its fin.”
“At the opening of the movie 2001 in a Toronto theatre,” the write-up goes on, “the Canadian Rocket Society came up with another display---this time a static display of club launch equipment [made up of commercially-available safe model rocket launching hardware] for model rockets. This type of public activity should go a long way in promoting the public acceptance of the hobby in Canada.”
In fact, Model Rocketry for June of that year in its “Letters to the Editor” pages, included a letter by Hillel on model rocketry regulations in Canada. And in the same issue, on p. 49, there is an advertisement for “The Science Shop” as “Canada’s only exclusive rocket shop – Home of the Canadian Rocket Society – Complete Facilities and Hobby Consultants – The Science Shop, 137 Yonge Street Arcade [in Toronto].” Hence, this ad further proves that the CRS and Hillel’s Science Shop were definitely intertwined. (To this may be added the telling words by Fritz Gnass in Model Aviation Canada for May 2011 in which he recalled that Diamond’s Science Shop served as a “club house” for the CRS.)
However, in the December 1972 issue of the similar magazine, Model Rocketeer, in the section called “NAR [National Association of Rocketry] News,” is another small item about Hillel, although this time the CRS is not mentioned and Hillel is said to have been with the Canadian Association of Rocketry (CAR), which had formed in 1965.
Yet in the 24 January 1975 issue of the newspaper of the Pickering Post of Pickering, a sizable city immediately east of Toronto, Canada, we again encounter the CRS in the enlightening article “Mini Cape Kennedy.”
This article beautifully describes rocketry activities that were to be conducted on Monday, 28 January by Hillel Diamond. “head of the Canadian Rocket Society” at the Morningside Pickering Library in Scarborough, in the greater Toronto area. The program was to begin in the Library with a “model rocket workshop,” followed by supervised launchings in the field behind the Library. The launchings, the article continues, was a “fast growing hobby” and involved “a launching pad set up, trackers for altitude, communications to obtain data, a launch control[,] and the all-important firing launch center. All models open up with parachutes and aim for perfect soft landings.” Among the powered rockets scheduled for launch were: “space exploring rockets [i.e., rockets designed as built to resemble launch vehicles], a science fiction special (Peter Mar’s three-engine Flying Saucer...and a Cineroc Rocket [sic.] which takes Super 8 movies at 35 frames a second.” All ages were invited to attend. Another citation for Scarborough as a popular CRS workshop and launch site is found in the Globe and Mail for 29 July of the same year.
To this may be added further remarks from the lengthy eulogy of Diamond expressed by Fritz Gnass in Model Aviation Canada for May 2011 in which he mentions that Diamond had started the annual Toronto Rocketry Meet, although he does not give the year, and that Diamond “...worked tirelessly in the late [19]60s and early 70s to have the [Canadian] Federal regulatory changes made in the sale and use of model rocket engines….[and] He succeeded beyond his dreams in this quest. There aren’t many individuals who can say they reached out to thousands of people in a positive way in their lifetime.” Indeed, the Toronto Star for 22 July 1977 even reports Diamond---representing the CRS and wearing one of their patches---hosting a model rocket event for a group of 40 blind Canadian children. In the Globe and Mail for 24 October 1981 the CRS announced their “Fifth annual Halloween rocket meet at their Mini-Cape on the Rouge River while another article in the Sunday Star of the Toronto Star for 5 September 1982 describes a later model rocket event at another field used by the CRS for rocket meets.
Thus, a whole new modern phase of rocketry had firmly taken root in Canada among many other countries---as a hobby and sport that was safe, affordable, educational, and always fun. Moreover, it was abundantly clear by the 1960s and well into the 80s that the days of rocket-group sponsored “Moon rockets” could in no way compete with national multi-billion dollar space programs manned by professional engineers and therefore that idealistic era had surely passed.
Indeed, we no longer hear of the CRS from the new period of the “model rocket workshops” and rocket meets and it is very likely that at some point around this time the Society was either renamed, or absorbed into a newer group strictly centered around model rocketry, or, had simply closed its doors.
We would be remiss in our accounts of the various iterations of the CRS, however, if we did not cover salient highlights of Stehling’s later career in rocketry and astronautics which were quite remarkable and conclude with a brief summary of these activities.
VIII. LATER AEROSPACE CAREER OF KURT STEHLING:
In 1949, Stehling emigrated from Canada where he first worked with the Allied Chemical and Dye Corporation. He was next employed by the American Optical Company in Buffalo on the improvement of high altitude infrared spectrometers. Then in May 1950, he joined the Bell Aircraft Corporation, as mentioned, for his first real “rocket job” and became the head of their Rocket Research Fluid Physics Research Group. He also served as the Leader of Bell’s Heat Transfer Branch and remained at Bell until 1955.
Among other projects, Stehling contributed to the later development of the Reaction Motors, Inc. (RMI) 6000C-4 rocket engine (later designated the XLR-11), that had powered the Bell X-1 rocket research aircraft and later rocket research aircraft. (In 1947, the Bell X-1 became the first aircraft to break the “sound barrier.”) At Bell, Stehling had mainly concentrated upon vibration problems, separation and interaction ignition concerns. In addition, he studied new rocket propellant combinations for other motors, besides pumps, and new injectors. He also worked on Bell’s own XLR-25 rocket engine that powered the Bell X-2 aircraft.
Meanwhile, graduate studies were undertaken at the University of Buffalo from 1949 to 1952. At the Second International Astronautical Congress held in London during 3-8 September 1951, he presented the paper “Earth Scanning Techniques for a Small Orbital Rocket Vehicle.” This was later claimed as the first suggestion in the open literature on the use of satellites for reconnaissance.
Stehling’s connection with the U.S.’s early satellite program also began about this time. In the winter of 1951, at the American Rocket Society’s (ARS) meeting in New York City, Robert C. Truax delivered a strong proposal for a national space program. Consequently, Stehling was invited by the ARS Ad Hoc Committee on this subject that met for the first time in Washington, D.C. in 1952. He particularly advocated for the launch of a small, affordable satellite as contrasted to more complex and high expensive plans proposed by Wernher von Braun. A little later, Stehling, with Ray M. Missert of the University of Iowa presented another proposal at an ARS meeting in New York during 30 November to 3 December 1954 in which they suggested the advantages of launching a satellite from an airborne balloon. This soon became confused in the press with the White House’s announcement in July 1955 that the U.S. would launch a satellite during the coming International Geophysical Year (IGY) although they were not related.
Nevertheless, in mid-October 1955, Stehling was invited by Milton Rosen to join the Project Vanguard and the development of the U.S.’s first planned satellite, with work on the design of the vehicle to be undertaken at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL). On 1 January 1956, he thus moved to Washington, D.C. to be near the Lab. Stehling was named by Rosen to head the Vanguard propulsion section. However, as matters turned out, it was the modified Redstone missile known as the Jupiter-C, with upper stages, that came to launch the U.S.’s first satellite, Explorer 1, on 31 January 1958. (The Vanguard, that was a non-military vehicle that had been especially designed for satellite launches, experienced serious developmental problems and a series of failed launches although it did succeed with the orbiting of the Vanguard 1, 2, and 3 satellites on March 17, 1958, 17 February 17, 1959, and 18 September 1959, respectfully.
Upon the end of the Vanguard program in the latter year, Stehling was transferred to the recently formed (in 1958) National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), also in Washington, D.C. Here, he was named the Senior Scientist on the staff of the Administrator of Long Range Planning. As such, he played roles in the planning towards Project Mercury, and the unmanned Surveyor and Ranger, and after Project Apollo and NASA’s Marine Applications Systems.
In 1963, he left NASA to assume the post of Vice-President of Electro-Optical Systems Corporation of Pasadena, California. From 1966 to 1971 he served as the Senior Staff Scientist and Staff Advisor of the National Council on Marine Applications Resources. In 1970, he had also joined the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and conducted research on the use of satellites for the remote sensing of oceans as well as undersea and light-than-air technologies. (For many years, Stehling had also been an avid balloonist and licensed balloon pilot). He was also a vigorous advocate for the development of huge helium airships for transport and research.
A prolific writer on a wide spectrum of areas in rocketry, spaceflight, oceanography, and the use of satellites in the latter field, he authored more than 100 technical papers and wrote articles for a wide variety of magazines as well as books, including Project Vanguard (in 1961), Lasers and Their Applications (1966), and Bags Up! Great Balloon Adventures (1975). He also took out a number of patents. Stehling died on 18 March 1998.
He had been a member of diverse organizations, including a Fellow of the Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), the British Interplanetary Society, an Honorary Fellow of the Lighter-than-Air Society, a member of the Board of Governors of the Optical Society of America, the Explorers Club, the Philosophical Society, and others.
He had been the recipient of several awards including the Gailbraith Medal of the University of Toronto (1948), the Newcomen Award of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) in 1951 and received an honorary doctorate from the University of Toronto.
References
Advertisement, free CRS lecture, by astronomer Dr. John F. Heard, “What Are the Other Planets Like?” Toronto Daily Star, 24 March 1949, p. 38.
“Aim at Trip to Moon From Toronto in 1950s,” The Globe and Mail (Toronto), 28 August 1948, p. 4.
“All Aboard for Mars! Venus Choice Spot, Too, For Rocketing Tourists,’” The Globe and Mail (Toronto), 20 March 1949, p. 5.
Austin Taylor, “Over 50 Years of Canadian Rocket Scientists,” Canadian Space Gazette (Toronto), January 2005, p. 6.
Bradley, John, “Countdown---and the rockets are off,” Sunday Star (The Toronto Star), 5 September 1982, p. H-7.
Campbell, J.W., “The Problem of Space Travel,” Journal of the Royal Astronomy Society of Canada, Vol. XLII, March-April 1948, pp. 50-69.
Campbell, Samuel, “40 blind youngsters set a trip aboard a flying saucer---it you help,” Toronto Star, 22 July 1977, p. B-5.
Canadian Rocket Society, advertisement for, Model Rocketry, Vol. III, July 1970, p. 49.
“Canadian Rocket Society,” The Globe and Mail (Toronto), 24 October 1981, p. A-6.
Diamond, Hillel, Letter from, “Letters to the Editor,” Model Rocketry, Vol. III, July 1970, p. 3.
Diamond, Hillel, item on, “NAR News,” Model Rocketeer, Vol. XIV, December 1972, [p. 6].
Durant, III, Frederick C., “World Astronautics,” Missiles and Rockets, Vol. , June 1958, p. 163.
“Expedition Moon,” Toronto Daily Star, 6 July 1950, p. 31.
Fortier, Rénald, “Zoom, zoom, zoom fly me to the Moon,” online article of 1 February 2019, posted as [1]
Fox, Evans E,C., “Big Space Ship,” Tattersall’s Club Magazine (Sydney, Australia), Vol. 22, October 1949, p. 22.
“From the Launch Pad,” Model Rocketry, Vol. 2, September 1970, p. 5.
Gnass, Fritz, [Euolgy on Hillel Diamond], Model Aviation Canada, Vol. 22, May 2011, # 2, p. .
“Godfather of Canadian hobby rocketry dies Saturday, The,” “Rocketry Planet” web site, 20 February 2011, courtesy, Robert Godwin.
Godwin, Robert, authority on the CRS, emails to Frank H. Winter, November 2020 and earlier.
Godwin, Robert, Dr. Phil Lapp, and Chuck Black, “100 years of Aerospace History in Canada. From McCurdy to Hadfield,” in Marsha Freeman, ed., History of Rocketry and Astronautics, AAS History Series, Vol. 46 (Univelt, Inc.: San Diego, 2016), especially pp. 214, and 216-218.
Green, Constance McLaughlin and Milton Lomask, Vanguard: A History (Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, D.C., 1971), pp. 79, 88, 168, 182, 208-209, 219.
Hayes, Bob, “Postgrad Patter,” The Postgrad (Alumni Association, Sir George William College, Montreal), Vol. II, No. 4, December 1955, p. 5.
“Hope to Reach Moon [and] Make it [a] Rocket Base,” Toronto Daily Star, 7 June 1948, p. 11.
[Kernerman, Samuel Charles, obituary], “Deaths, Memorials, Births,” Toronto Star, 22 October 2000, p. F-6.
“List of Societies Interested in Space-Flight,”in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 9, November 1950, p. 324.
“Mathematics Club to Hear Hurter Discuss Rockets---Flight by Rocket From Earth to Planets Is a Probability,” McGill Daily (McGill University, Montreal, Canada), Vol. XXXIV, 29 January 1945, pp. 1, 4.
“Mathematicians Discuss Rockets---Problem of Travel to Planets Outlined by Fred Hurter,” McGill Daily (McGill University, Montreal, Canada), Vol. XXXIV, 29 January 1945, p. 1.
“Mini Cape Kennedy,” Pickering Post (Pickering, Ontario, Canada), Vol. 25, 24 January 1975, p. 3.
“Moon Trip an Illusion to Space Travel Expert,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), 24 January 1948, p. 4.
“Plans Visit to Venus From Base on Moon,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), 19 July 1949, p. 5.
“Plans Visit to Venus---Moon Just a Whistle Stop For Toronto Rocketeer,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), 12 July 1949, p. 7. [New York Times Special, 11 July 1949].
“Rocket Base on Moon Possible in 10 Years,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), 7 June 1948, p. 5.
“Rocket Flight Subject of Talk---Hurter to Address Mathematics Club On Space Travel,” McGill Daily (McGill University, Montreal, Canada), Vol. XXXIV, p. 1.
Science and Mechanics, Vol. XX, February 1949, pp. 82-83.
Spivak, Michael, “Amateur rocketry: the growing fad that could blow off somebody’s head off,” MacLean’s Magazine (Toronto), Vol. , 2 December 1963, p. .
Stehling, Kurt, drawing, “Motor Details [of] C.R.S. Rocket # 1,” 13 July 1948, in “Kurt Stehling” file, National Air and Space Museum, Archives.
Stehling, Kurt R., email to Frank H. Winter, 14 February 1989, copy iin “Kurt R. Stehling” file, NASM.
Stehling, Kurt, “Fair in Love and War,” The World, July 1988, p. 437.
Stehling, Kurt, Letter to the Editor, “Space Travel is Possible,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), 29 January 1945, p. .
Stehling, Kurt, “Rocket Propulsion,” The Engineering Journal, Vol. , March 1948, pp. 162-166.
Stehling, Kurt, videotaped interview by Clarence E. Larson, ca. 1980-1990s, available online, “Kurt Stehling Interview.”
“To the Moon?” in, Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), 5 September 1948, p. B-4.
“Trips to the Moon by 1960,” Current Science, Vol. 18, December 1949, p. 434.
West, Bruce, “Lunar Loops Loom---Head of Canadian Rocket Group Foresees $ 5 Million Trip to the Moon by 1960,” Globe and Mail, 23 December 1948, p. .
“Workshop was a Blast,” Globe and Mail. (Toronto), 29 July 1975, p. 29.
