Redwing chart by the omission of a dotted line called “Scientific Supervi: from the AEC to the Deputy Commander for Scientific Matters to Task Groups 7.1 and 7.5. The TG 7.1 organization for Hardtack, shown in Fig. 3.2, represent a change from the Redwing organization in the following reapecta: 1. Task Units were reduced from twelve to six by absorbtion of t assembly and documentary photography functions within the major Task Ll and by establishing Arming and Firing as a special staff office instead o Task Unit. Task Units 1 to 4 remained major programmatic Task Units Task Unit 5 continued to provide all timing and firing and to do some ex perimental work for Task Units 1, 2 and 3; and Task Unit 6 provided th usual rad-safe services. 2. Additional Deputy Commanders were provided, which somewhat facilitated independent operations in two locations, and later three, when Jobnston Island was added. 3. On October 1, 1957, Gaelen L. Felt, CTG 7.1, terminated his « ployment at LASL, Don B. Shuster, of the Sandia Corporation, replaced as Task Group Commander. As a result, each of the five major Task U was represented in the Command Section. Neither the Commander nor s of the deputies performed any special Task Group functions for their paz organizations. 4. During the operational phase, Task Unit 7 was added to take c: of a UN shot, which failed to materialize. Because of the purpose and : ture of the shot, the limited amount of data to be acquired, and the fact much of the preparation waa outside the Task Force organization, Task |! 7 bore little resemblance to any of the others. Command relationships were closer to the military pattern than the were to those for operations at the Nevada Test Site. However, one im[ tant difference from normal military command relationships was that the TG 7.1 concept of operations and operation plans stemmed from the devi and weapon programs and experimental programa of the Laboratories an the DOD, over the composition and extent of which the Task Group and ’ Force had little or no control. In the normal military operation the con mander formulates plans from the very beginning of the operation; the p of subordinates stem from these. Because of these differences and sinc: support of the TG 7.1 effort was among the principal functions of the Ta Force and other Task Groups, their plans and operations depended in mz ways on those of 7.1. The Commander, JTF 7, authorized direct relationships among the various Task Groups once he had established policy and major items of support. Relationships of TG 7.1 with the Joint Task Force and with the other Task Groups were good and resulted in generally excellent support for the accomplishment of 7.1 missions. Relationships within TG 7.1 were close and cordial. During the pl ning stage the Task Group Commander and members of his staff made f quent visits to the Field Command, AFSWP, and UCRL, and to Program Project sites as necessary, to get first-hand information cn plans and re quirements and to ensure operationai feasibility, safety, coordination, am adequate support. Many visitors were received from the Task Units, Pr grams and Projects. Necessary meetings were held at locations most c venient for the bulk of the participants -- Los Alamos, Albuquerque, Liv 61