Talk:Woomera, South Australia

Origin of name

Was the town of Woomera traditionally called that, or was it named so only when the rocket/weapon range was created (i.e drawing an allusion between the rockets and the original woomera)? The history page exlinked from here seems to suggest the village didn't exist before the range, in which case the allusion case seems pretty clear. -- John Fader 23:29, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• [1] would seem to confirm your hypothesis.

Yes, it was given an Aboriginal name that reflected its purpose as a rocket testing facility. I think it was Len Beadell (the surveyor) who chose the name but I couldn't quickly find a reference to support that, so I didn't add it. --Kerry (talk) 00:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Woomera 'village' was built over 1947-50 to support the Woomera Rocket Range. It did not exist prior that that time. Initially, "Woomera West" (now 'Camp Rapier', and for a brief time was also the Woomera Immigration Detention Centre) was the workers construction camp. It housed around 1000 persons. The name 'Woomera' was suggested by Group Captain George Pither to Air Marshall Wackett who was the senior RAAF officer on the Board charged with the establishment of the whole range facility. At the Board meeting of 24 April 1947 the name was formally adopted. Source: "Fire Across the Desert - Woomera and the Anglo-Australia Joint Project 1946-1980" by Peter Morton AGPS 1989. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aerolor (talk • contribs) 00:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

JAXA using Woomera?

This article says that JAXA is using Woomera as a testing ground, but the Wikipedia article makes no mention of the Japanese use. I don't know anything more, but someone else might. Riobranden 17:29, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, JAXA did use Woomera. I added a bit about it with a reference. --Kerry (talk) 00:18, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

JAXA have used the Woomera Test Range for several major trials since 2000. The first was the 'NEX-ST' which involved the testing of a 'shape' strapped to a sounding rocket. The aim was to get the 'shape' (i.e. a model of a future SST airframe) into the right part of the atmosphere (about 400,000ft up) and at the right speed (about Mach 6-7)to trial the shape. Their first attempt failed but the came back two years later and conducted a very successful trial. They also brought back the Hayabusa deep space probe on to Woomera in June 2010. This was a major event which captured world media attention. JAXA have also conducted other significant trials of air vehicles at Woomera in the last ten years. These trials were not military in nature and were conducted under Governmen to Government agreements between Australia and Japan. JAXA are looking to use Woomera again about 2020 when they bring back "Hayabusa 2" from deep space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aerolor (talk • contribs) 00:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Aerolor If you dig deep enough on the JAXA Website you will find that the second and very successful flight of NEXST-1 on 10 October 2005 reached an altitude of about 19.5 km and a velocity of Mach 1.9 to 2 during the two test phases. The altitude and velocity that you are quoting far exceed those for the test requirements and I think that you may well be getting confused with the proposed flight conditions for the full scale SST vehicle.Charliebarsby (talk) 13:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Restructure

Since the information was just a random mess of odd facts, I tried to reorganise the material that was there into sections. The problem that remains though is whether the information on the rocket and aerospace research really belongs on the page about the town or whether it should be moved to the page about the Prohibited Area (which doesn't really have much content currently). --Kerry (talk) 00:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

What you need to understand is that the 'Woomera Test Range' means the Woomera Prohibited Area (WPA) (and all the ranges layed out within the WPA), Woomera Restricted Airspace (WRX) -i.e. 'all the airspace over the WPA', RAAF Woomera (which includes the village and the airbase), Camp Rapier, and the Nurrungar test area. The 'Woomera Prohibited Area' segment in Wikipedia should simply cover what it is (i.e. 'the ground space of the WTR') and the history of its establishment. The WPA has always only ever been a component (i.e. the 'ground space' element) of the former 'rocket range' and the same for today's 'test range' complex. (source: personal knowledge). Aerolor (talk) 00:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)<General Reading - 'Fire Across the Desert by Peter Morton AGPS 1989><Official WTR public document 'Introduction to the WTR, HQWTR 2013 picked up at the Defence display at the Clipsal 500 event in Adelaide 2013>

Aerolor The original and subsequent amendments to Commonwealth Legislation define the area as the Woomera Prohibited Area (WPA). Current proposed amendments to Legislation to accommodate the mining interests post the Hawke review also refer to the area as the WPA. The Woomera Village is also referred to by the SA Government Authority as a Defence Administrative Area not a town in the true meaning as such. RAAF terminologies have recently evolved such as Base, Precinct, WTR and WRX; these are not new areas merely new names to suit the RAAF. These are Australian Defence establishments currently administered by the RAAF and other Commonwealth Departments and their history and heritage need to be appreciated, protected and preserved not reinvented. Charliebarsby (talk) 13:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Woomera is undergoing significant change. Nothing is being 'reinvented' - it is being changed to suit a new future ('Next-Generation') for Woomera. It may well be that SA Govt documents are out of date with changes in terminology since RAAF assumed full control of the WTR (which is currently the correct term to describe the entire complex). Within the RAAF, 'WTR' is the current approved term to describe the entire facility at Woomera. WRX is also an official acyromym for 'Woomera Restricted Airspace' also a current and official term (refer the Australian Enroute Supplement - ERSA).Aerolor (talk) 05:29, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

excerpt from Woomera, South Australia main article

Background to Establishment. Why does the Woomera Village exist? It exists because of the need for a support base for the Woomera Test Range, and the need for the range grew out of the rapid progress in rocket based weaponry developed during the second world war and which subsequently translated into that period of 'west vs east' stand-off of "mutually assured destruction" that was known as 'The Cold War'.
I have removed this paragraph from the main article, with my reasoning as follows: (a) The question and answer form of the paragraph is not the style of an encyclopedia. (b) The village, airfield and test range were planned as an integrated establishment, one did not come before the other as implied by the paragraph. (c) The "need for the range" is duplicated in the following paragraph. (d) The quote "mutually assured destruction" is not referenced. --Summerdrought (talk) 23:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I wrote that original information and I agree with your comment above. Good fix.Aerolor (talk) 00:24, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Establishment paragraph

The excerpt below, plus other statements in the Establishment paragraph, could be seen as running counter to Wikipedia's policy of maintaining a neutral point of view. See WP:NPOV

For both Woomera and Australia, there was no vision from the politicians at the time --Summerdrought (talk) 10:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Summerdrought, yes I agree it would probably be best reworded to make it more neutral. If it is an argument that has been made by a reliable source, e.g. a journalist or a writer, it could be reworded something like this: "Noted journalist Joe Bloggs argued that...[blah blah]..." or "According to Joe Bloggs, an Australian historian, at the time there was no vision...[etc. etc.]". It could then be backed up with an inline citation to the source where the claim is made. I've tried to make a few tweaks here and there, but unfortunately I don't have access to any decent sources on this topic. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The following sentences from the Establishment paragraph contain opinions by an author which are unsubstantiated and could be viewed as biased. The Establishment paragraph has been tagged, and requires editing or removal.

However, by the end of the 1960s the Anglo-Australian Project was rapidly winding down following the UK Government's dwindling interest in further experimental work. Additionally, and in the absence of any long-term plans for Woomera by the Australian Government, the test-range elements of Woomera were destined for a long period of withering – despite some passionate forward thinking by a small number of nationalistic visionaries about what Australia should be doing for itself in air and space research and development. --Summerdrought (talk) 00:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with comment above. The information is factual, but is an opinion and not for Wiki.Aerolor (talk) 00:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Aerolor (talk) 00:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)== Woomera Capability ==

With regard to winding down by the end of the 1960s; When serving in the Australian Army I was posted to the Army Guided Weapons Trials Unit (AGWTU) in June 1970. This was a Royal Australian Artillery unit which had the responsibility of the safety supervision of all hazardous operations that were being conducted on the Range at that time. The unit comprised 21 personnel and 18 of these were directly involved in a safety supervision role for various projects. The Range was still very busy with contractors and projects occupying a number of Test Shops. The Range was operational for 48 weeks each year with a compulsory stand down period of 4 weeks over Christmas. The Black Arrow and Skylark Projects were still operating and also numerous military ground launched missile projects. It was not uncommon to observe several launches on a single day. The decision to wind down the Joint Project occured in late 1973 and with the exception of 4 Warrant Officers the AWGTU was disbanded. A small number of launches occured to 1980 when the Joint Project officially ended. Reherences "Fire Across the Desert and personal experience. Charliebarsby (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

The original phrase used to describe the Woomera range was Long Range Weapons Establishment (LWRE), later renamed Weapons Research Establishment (WRE). The term 'Woomera Capability' is certainly not of historical origin, and sounds somewhat like a buzzword on the front cover of a report. I propose that the word 'Capability' in the lead paragraph of the main article be replaced with the word 'Establishment' to maintain the historical link. I note that WRE does not get mentioned in this article. (Source Mark Shephard, A Lifetime in the Bush,1998) --Summerdrought (talk) 21:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Depending on which official document you read and which Department was the author a number of names have been encountered. e.g. Long Range Weapons Experimental Establishment (LRWXE) and Long Range Weapons Establishment Range Woomera (LRWERW). When the project settled it became known as LRWE as above and was later renamed on several occasions e.g. DRCS and DSTO etc. To those who worked there it was known as Lambs, Rams, Whethers and Ewes because of the type of real estate and sheep grazing activity at both Salisbury and Woomera. Don't forget that Woomera was the "sharp end" of the spear with the shaft (main support) being located at Salisbury in Adelaide NB before Edinburgh esisted. The initial name of the project in 1946 was the Guided Projectile Project and this name appears in official correspondence in early 1947. References; various files veiwed in the National Archives of Australia Adelaide Office. Submitted by Charliebarsby (talk) 09:22, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

@Summerdrought. I have had a look at some of the links at the bottom of the article. One of them uses a phrase something like this, "an RAAF 'Capability'", to describe a wide range of facilities at different geographical locations all of which might operate together at some time via shared aircraft, radio links, or orbiting satellites. It seems that taken together, such an arrangement is a 'capability'. I imagine that a flight of A4s in the air, together with an aircraft carrier on the sea, might be seen as a 'capability'.

--Greg Winterflood (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Having looked at a link, it certainly is a capable place. I note though in the list of Categories, it appears under "1947 establishments in Australia" --Summerdrought (talk) 05:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I noted that one of the links [I'm pretty sure it is the one with a red sand background] also describes Woomera as being in the north west of SA. It may be north west of Adelaide; but to me it is south central SA, especially when compared to somewhere like Pipalyatjara --Greg Winterflood (talk) 06:49, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Aerolor (talk) 00:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC) The Australian weather bureau refers to the area as 'the South Australia north-west pastoral region' that is why it is referred to be as being in the north-west of South Australia. 'South Central' South Australia is probably the Adelaide region itself but it is not referred to as such. The 'South Coast' is the region to the South of Adelide (Robe to Mt Gambier area), and the 'West Coast' is the area along the Bight from about sort of Port Lincoln to Ceduna. If you are a South Australian, the Woomera Test Range is located in the 'north west of South Australia.

In regard to the issue about 'capability' - it's not a new 'buzz word'. It is a defined modern approach to managing a collective of resources and includes such things as facilities, people, logistics, systems, governance structure etc. A 'capability' in military terms, also has to have a defined level of operational output - this is so it can be funded to do what is required of it. In the days pre-2000, it could be said that Defence wasted a lot of money on simply keeping thigs 'ready' for use. That begged the question 'ready for what?' and 'how much of the 'ready' is needed'. This brought a whole new set of business models into play to run Defence's business. That's when the 'art' (as I term it) of 'capability management' came into being. You can talk about the 'Woomera Test Range', the people who run it, the people who support it, the systems it uses, the facilities it has and the things it is required to do etc. as a 'capability to do something'. At the highest level, you have a reason for a capability to exist, then you put together all the things you need to produce that capability, then you set a level it must work at (generally on an annual basis - and know as the 'directed level of operational capability' or 'DLOC') so you can calcuate quite accurately, how much funding it needs to run each year (and of course it also allows close monitoring of expenditure etc.). The 'Woomera Capability' therefore refers to the 'whole of what Woomera is about' and includes all the people, systems, governance, facilities, logistics etc, along with its approved 'rate of effort' to ensure that the funding it gets goes to doing what it is there for.

Town or Village?

Woomera, the Town - seems to have morphed into Woomera, the Village. Is this change connected to the commercial development of Woomera as a tourist destination or is there something specific in the description of the facility which has altered its name from town to village? The term 'village' is usually used in contexts such as 'Retirement Village', or 'Tourist Village' but, in Australia, is not used to describe local government jurisdictions. Comments? -- Greg Winterflood (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

In Beadell's book "Still in the Bush", he refers to the 'village' on pages 99 and 106. This book is about the early days of the project from Mar 1947 to Dec 1947. Summerdrought (talk) 12:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

On a quick count, the word "town" is mentioned nine times throughout the article also.Summerdrought (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Having lived in Woomera for a number of years it was often referred to by the locals as "the village". I am unsure if that is helpful or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.242.176 (talk) 12:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

CORRECT, THE ACTUAL POLITICALLY CORRECT DESCRIPTOR OF WOOMERA IS "WOOMERA VILLAGE"

A village is a clustered human settlement or community, larger than a hamlet with the populationof a few hundred, The term village often is used in reference to small planned communities.

Towns are commonly understood to be centers of population not formally declared to be cities and usually with a population in excess of about 250 people.[citation needed] Centers too small to be called towns are generally understood to be a township. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.167.15.164 (talk) 22:57, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Aerolor (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC) Woomera 'township' or 'village' is, and always has been ("currently" I would suggest is more appropriate than "and always has been".) Charliebarsby (talk) 12:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC), the support base for the Woomera Test Range. It is a Commonwealth facility and it is within the designated 'Woomera Prohibited Area' (WPA), which means unless you have some connection the operation of the Range, you can't reside there. During its heyday in the 1950s and 60's it was called 'the village' by the people who lived there - and there was around 6000 there in those days. The reason there were so many is because both the people how ran the range and the people who conducted the trials on the range, all lived at Woomera. You can add the same number if not more based at LRWE Salisbury in direct support of the Range Charliebarsby (talk) 12:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)These days most of people who run the range are based at RAAF Ediburgh near Adelaide. And the people who conduct the trials now come and go as required. Consequently, the number of people now based at Woomera to support the operation of the Range is quite small - about 150 according to census data. However, if you try and get a bed at the Eldo facility during the year, you will find it very difficult because of the number of range users coming and going all the time (trust me I have tried it). So, Woomera is a Defence Force 'base' run by the RAAF but is not a town or a 'village' in any real sense - it looks a bit like a neat little town, but its very quiet because I assume people work out on the range all day and not so much in the 'village' area itself. I would describe the 'village' element of the Range as being an 'open base' similar to that of RAAF Point Cook in Victoria (where the RAAF Museum is located). SA Tourism figures show that annually around 70,000 people visit this area annually and the two museums and 'missile park' in Woomera certainly have a lot of 'gray nomads' and buses in the place during the day - especially the Easter to Labour Week period which I understand is the 'tourist season' in that part of the world. As I member of the public I have full access to all the heritage facilities, can use the swimming pool (for a small entrance charge), the hotel, cafe, post office, superette store and stay at the 'Travellers Rest' or Eldo Hotel as I wish (although the Eldo is for Range users primarily and it can be difficult to get a bed there). In summary, and in my view,Woomera is not a 'town' it is a Defence 'base' which is open to the public. The term 'village' (and I refer to many passages in Peter Morton's 'Fire Across the Desert' - AGPS 1989) was a term that simply came about early in the establishment of the facility, but was never anything more than a 'local' referece.

• Aerolor, thank you for the background discussion regarding 'town' or 'village', I would recommend that the main article be altered to read something like "Woomera is a Defence base open to the public" as you have noted. I am busy working on another project ay present, but as you seem to have a copy of 'Fire Across the Desert' would you kindly check the name of the Group Captain credited with naming 'Woomera'. A book by Len Beadell, "Blast the Bush" names him as George Pither on page 31.

Summerdrought (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Comment for Authors:- There are two drawings in the National Archives of Australia Adelaide Branch Collection. The first is titled "Contour Plan Village Area" dated 21 October 1947 and prepared by the Special Survey Troop, Royal Australian Engineers (Australian Army Corps). This is the first contour map of the area where the "Village" was to be constructed. It was obviously being referred to as a "Village" before the first sod was turned. The second drawing is a 1:4000 scale Site Plan drawn by using the first Aerial Photographs referred to as the Kingoonya Runs. Drawn on this map is the "Villiage Site" and "Construction Camp" (now referred to as Camp Rapier and previously known by the name of Works Camp). The term Woomera West refers to the general area which included what is now being referred to as Camp Rapier, a large Stores Area, an Air Separation Plant and also a Railway Station. In March 2011 at the Adelaide Office of the National Archives of Australia I was permitted access to approximately 30 plans of the Village and Technical Area. With the exception of the Contour Survey of the Village Area these were Commonwealth Department of Works Drawings. The term "Village" was used frequently e.g. "Village Area LRWE". There are thousands of records relating to Woomera contained in the National Archives of Australia Collection. I think it would be wise for authors and historians to consult these records and the book "Fire Across the Desert" else there is the risk of reinventing the history of this Heritage Site. Inserted by Charliebarsby (talk) 09:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Launch altitude discrepancy

The main article section Air and Space Research states that HiFire and Jaxa "programs launch to around 330 km, or about twice the altitude of the International Space Station." The article on the International Space Station states that it orbits between 278 km and 460 km, an average say, of 369 km. This discrepancy needs clarification.--Summerdrought (talk) 06:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

There is some information on apogee height and down range travel distance for the HyShot trials in the Woomera Test Facility pdf document. Around 300km seems right for height and 400km down range for distance from launch. I Googled outside Wiki and found ISS orbit height about 352km. I would think that it would be safe to say that HiFire and JAXA were launched to approximately the same height as the ISS. Just my 2 cents. Greg Winterflood (talk) 00:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed content move

I'd like to propose a partial merge of Woomera, South Australia into Woomera Test Range. The idea would be for detailed content related to the range and its operations (particulary the sections "Evolution of the Woomera Test Range" and "Air and Space Research", along with some of the detail from the "History" section) be moved into the second article, while this article focuses more on the township, its establishment, and the support it provi(ed/es) to the Test Range, the US satellite surveillance facility, and the detention centre. Thoughts? -- saberwyn 01:28, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I've moved some of the information from the "Evolution..." and "Air and Space..." sections to the Test Range article, but most of the content was either unsourced, unreliably sourced, or too nitty-gritty for inclusion in either article. I've left a note at Talk:Woomera Test Range linking to the removal diff, so if anyone can source the content that was there, they can recover it. -- saberwyn 23:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Anything to improve the article would be OK by me. See my criticisms above, especially regarding the non-neutral points of view expressed. Summerdrought (talk) 00:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Second busiest rocket range in the world?

The statement claiming Woomera was the "second busiest rocket range in the world next to Cape Canaveral during the 1950s and 60s" possibly ignores what was happening in the USSR at the same time, and needs to be verified. After all, the Russians launched Sputnik 1 in 1957, and the first man in space Yuri Gagarin in 1961. Surely the USSR was a likely candidate for the claimed position. Summerdrought (talk) 22:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Woomera, South Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081229090018/http://www.woomera.com.au:80/tourism.htm to http://www.woomera.com.au/tourism.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:07, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Woomera, South Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090903213037/http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25829735-5018662,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25829735-5018662,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:12, 8 September 2017 (UTC)