specifically X day, to afl’orda hostile power any acivantagein observing
or “instrumenting” the experiments.
Newspaper speculation as to the nature of the test likewise
fell considerably short of the mark.
Conjectures of press and radio
commentators concerned themselves mainly with deep water tests and
aided missile experiments. Ned Brooks in his “Three Star !hctrat’
over the National Broadcast.5ngCompany on 2 January thought that the
deep water testat-!iwetok was intended to show what will happen to
surface ships and submarines. He considered that it would be necessary
to assemble a ghost fleet of obsolete ships just as at Eiki.ni. Dr.
Frank Thone, Science Service writer of the L’ashingtonDaily News in an
article dated 28 January in that paper, surmised that ltTestCharlie’f
would be a deep water explosion with the latest type former German
submarines as submerged targets. On 27 Xarch, United Press writer
Joseph L. Myler expressed the opinion in the New York ‘;:orld
Telegram
that the Eniwetok test would be a “a pretty deep shot - - - anything frOm 2QO0 feet to a tie
below the surface.”
The Associated Press ventured a somewhat different view.
In
dispatches date-lined at Honclulu on 7 April, appearing in the ‘;[ashington Star, ‘,;ashington
Times Herald and Baltimore Sun, their reporter
expressed the belief that guideckissile experiments were included in
the Eniwetok series. The presence of Brig. General David A. D. Ogden
at the proving ground would afford the necessary expert supervision
if guided+nissi.lelaunchiag sites were to be developed.
Still another theory was offered by the same articles. The
expected arrival of Brig. General Rogerl.
64
Se$tion II
..
Ramey, commanding a B-29