STATEMENT OF HON DON FUQUA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Mr. FUQUA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee for permitting me to appear before some of my colleagues on my same committee and pleading for the restoration of these funds in what I consider a very worthwhile project.

Being on the Manned Space Flight Subcommittee, I recognize possibly the interest that this country must exhibit in going to larger boosters, particularly for the future manned programs and also for future lunar programs that we might have, as has been expressed by my colleague from Florida, Mr. Fascell.

And I think when we get a program this far along, we are not only exercising false economy but we are also breaking faith with people who have invested large sums of private money along with many taxpayers' dollars, of which we are all very interested in, and not letting them go ahead and complete the evaluation of this program. I think this is very important for this committee to consider. I think we not only have to consider this, but we also don't want to find ourselves with our competitors in this field, the Russians, developing these large boosters and then suddenly we decide that we have to go along on a crash program in trying to develop something to project our own interest in this field.

I don't want to belabor the time of the committee. I will submit a statement for the record. And I certainly hope that the committee, in its wisdom, will see fit to restore these funds to this, which I consider to be a very worthwhile project for the best interest of this country, so that we can continue and so that we may fully evaluate the potential these large solid boosters might have in our overall space

program.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Congressman Fuqua, we will be happy to have your statement and will include it in the record.

(The statement referred to is as follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DON FUQUA, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank you for this opportunity to permit me to appear before this subcommittee in support of funds for the completion of the large solid rocket motor program; namely, the 260-inch program.

As we have all been aware for a long time, there is a great need in this Nation's space effort to explore to the fullest the possibilities of using large solid rockets in our overall space program. We have in my opinion reached a period in the development of our liquid propellants to a point that all we can do is build larger and bigger engines. I think that this program has brought about the great importance of the development of the large solid boosters wherein our ability to orbit larger payloads will have a better relation to payload capacity and rocket size.

Studies throughout the years have revealed that the solid rocket programs have a very good reliability, and it has been proven that there are much lower costs involved. Last, but certainly not least, is the fact of instant readiness of these types of motors.

In the 260-inch program almost all of the facilities are complete, costing into the millions of dollars. The labor and materials are way over three-fourths completed with vast sums spent for tooling and other special test equipment necessary for the testing of this rocket motor.

It seems to me that this would be very poor economy to have a program almost 90 percent complete and then in the name of saving money decide that we should abandon the entire program without even first evaluating the results that we have already paid for with tax dollars. Not only, though, have the tax dollars been involved, there has been the confidence in this program of some of our major contractors, and they have placed millions of their own dollars in the development to this point of this engine.

It is my feeling that it is in the best interest of this country and in our space effort that this program should be restored and provisions made whereby these two programs being developed by Aerojet and Thiokol may be completed and their work evaluated.

I further feel that it would not be in the best interest of this country to wait until the Russians have started using large solid boosters in their first stages and then this country suddenly decide we have to enter this program on a crash basis in trying to defend our own best interests. I think it is common knowledge that the Russians are already developing larger boosters, and quite possibly they are exploring along the same lines on which I feel this Nation should continue.

In the interest of protecting the investment of both tax dollars and corporate funds already invested in this 260-inch program and to insure that the United States of America may continue in its superiority in space, I respectfully ask this subcommittee to restore this program to the fiscal year 1966 budget presently being considered.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DAVIS. I would like to invite either or both of you to sit with us during these hearings, if you find it possible to do so.

Mr. FUQUA. I may say that Mr. Teague is very anxious that I get over to my own subcommittee this morning.

Mr. DAVIS. Of course.

Mr. FUQUA. And I appreciate the generosity of the subcommittee this morning for allowing me to appear before you.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

Mr. DAVIS. Well, thank you, Mr. Fascell.

At this time we will go into the testimony.

Mr. Tischler is going to give his testimony on the subject of chemical propulsion.

Dr. Eggers, if you would like to sit at the table with Mr. Tischler, we would be happy for you to do so.

STATEMENT OF ADELBERT 0. TISCHLER, DIRECTOR, CHEMICAL PROPULSION DIVISION, OFFICE OF ADVANCED RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, NASA; ACCOMPANIED BY DR. ALFRED J. EGGERS Mr. TISCHLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.

It is my privilege to discuss with you the chemical propulsion program of the Office of Advanced Research and Technology. This is presented in volume II of the NASA budget estimates for fiscal year 1966, beginning at page RD 19-1. I have for the record a prepared statement, which is quite detailed. If you would prefer, I can summarize the high points of this statement so as to provide time for your examination of the program.

Mr. DAVIS. I think that would be a good idea. We have been following that practice with other witnesses. And we shall be happy to have your detailed statement in the record. If you will submit it to the reporter it will be included.

Mr. TISCHLER. I shall do that, sir.

In view of the letter from Mr. Webb to the Committees on Space and Aeronautics of both the House and the Senate of last week, which has been submitted for the record by Congressman Hechler, there are some revisions to be made in that formal statement, which have to do with the funding of the M-1 and large solid programs in fiscal year 1965. We shall also submit the errata sheet and correct this in the record. Mr. DAVIS. Very well.

Mr. TISCHLER. The chemical propulsion research and advanced technology program provides the technological base to fulfill the propulsion requirements of launch vehicles and spacecraft for future NASA missions. Secondarily, it contributes to solving problems in current mission programs. The Office of Advanced Research and Technology is not responsible for engine developments or procurement for Apollo or Gemini or for other operational systems.

Anticipated missions require increased propulsion system capabilities, both in thrust and specific performance, over those systems currently under development. Among the anticipated missions that cannot be performed effectively with present vehicle systems are: (1) Unmanned solar probes, shots to the far planets, and missions substantially out of the ecliptic plane. These missions will require greater acceleration than we have the capability to perform at present. (2) Future manned missions, including orbiting laboratories, expanded lunar missions, and planetary expeditions. These missions will require significant increases in the payload capability of launch vehicles. Mr. DAVIS. Now, when you say that, do you mean that that would be the payload, or beyond the payload capability of a 260-inch solid rocket engine?

Mr. TISCHLER. Not necessarily. It is beyond the capability of the Saturn V vehicle.

Mr. DAVIS. Saturn V.

Mr. TISCHLER. As the slide indicates, these payloads will be of the order of 1 million pounds in Earth orbit or greater. The Saturn V capability is about 240,000 pounds in Earth orbit.

The third category of requirements that we can't meet at the present time is three planetary orbiters or landing craft. Such missions will require high energy spacecraft propulsion systems capable of withstanding the rigors of the space environment for extended periods.

The chemical propulsion advanced research and technology program generates new propulsion technology so that technical options are available for planning and performing missions and so that system development, when initiated, can be conducted on a predictable schedule and cost projection. Constant vigil over prospective future missions points out the propulsion technology areas needing attention. Our research and technology explorations cover both liquid and solid propellant rocket systems for launch vehicle booster stages, upper stages, and spacecraft. Because much of our relatively near-term space vehicle planning is based on use of Saturn launch vehicles, major emphasis of the current program lies in advancement of spacecraft propulsion systems.

The programs cover not only applied research projects but also experimental engineering projects that provide a bridge between_research technology information and real hardware developments. The spectrum of the propulsion activities is shown on the next slide. ÓART is responsible for the first two major portions of this spectrum.

Typical propulsion projects for each major part are indicated. Research technology covers such projects as the evaluation of propellant characteristics and performance, investigation of combusion instability phenomena, examination of refractory materials and coatings, studies of advanced engine concepts, and experimentation with hybrid motors, for example. In the experimental engineering phase are such projects as the subliming solid propellant motors, the fluorine and fluorine-oxygen engine investigations, the demonstrations of large solid propellant motors, and the M-1 engine projects. In development under the Office of Manned Space Flight are the J-2 and F-1 engines. The H-1 and RL-10 engines which propel the Saturn I launch vehicle are in production.

SPACE PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY

Launch vehicles and upper stage engine systems, which demand relatively large engine equipment, have heretofore drawn the principal attention of the propulsion work. The Saturn series of vehicles, Atlas-Centaur, and Scout vehicles, using propulsion equipment that I am proud to have had some role in generating, have provided a substantial capability for getting into the space environment. In the next few years we need to augment our capability for getting around in that environment.

This will require development and refinement of propulsion systems that on certain kinds of missions may be dormant for months or even years prior to operation. Typical propulsion requirements for spacecraft include mid-course corrections, attitude control, braking into lunar, planetary, or Earth orbit, landing and takeoff from the lunar or from a planetary surface and rendezvous capability.

Among the problems which must be solved is one which I have discussed with you before. This slide illustrates the evaporation losses of propellants on prolonged storage in space in tanks with good insulation. As you can see, the evaporative losses of propellant combinations using hydrogen fuel become significant after a few weeks in space, with their effective performance ultimately falling below the performance of the relatively low performance earth storable propellants. Evidently, there are two kinds of solutions for such a problem. One is to improve greatly the insulation techniques employed in the storage system, and the other is to seek new high performance spacestorable propellants. We are working on both solutions.

Our work on lightweight, insulation methods and techniques has been in process for about 4 years and has made significant advancements. Insulation values have been improved by a factor of 10 over the best insulation technique available prior to that time.

The other approach to meet the long-term propellant storage requirements of future missions is to develop the technology of high energy space-storable propellants. This part of our program has been amplified during the past year, thanks to support provided by the congressional authorizations of fiscal year 1965, and I believe that significant forward steps have been made. Rocket systems that employ such propellant combinations as oxygen difluoride-diborane, oxygen difluoride-hydrazine fuels, and mixtures of oxygen and fluorine as oxidizer with liquified petroleum gases, such as methane, are under active research investigation. Even though the specific impulses of those

systems are lower than either oxygen-hydrogen or fluorine-hydrogen these combinations have the potential of higher payload capability when long term space storage is required. Illustrated here is the liquid temperature range of several propellants. The shaded zone is the temperature range that can be maintained fairly easily in space. Note the fit in temperature range of the space storables that I have named with these temperature ranges. Orbital and lunar missions are being considered which also involve extended time in space or on the lunar surface. These also require extended storage times.

The problems associated with the use of space storable propellants are largely centered around thrust chamber cooling and attainable specific impulse. These problems are unusually difficult because of the 7,000° to 8,000° temperatures of the exhaust products. Furthermore, neither the fuel nor the oxidizer of most of these combinations is a good coolant. Progress is being made, however, and I say with confidence that solutions to the problems will be found. Dr. Bisplinghoff discussed briefly progress in developing refractory coatings to help solve the high-temperature problems.

We regard work on these propellants to be of great importance in expanding the space frontier to the planets.

Solid motors also find many spacecraft applications, particularly when the propulsive requirement is relatively modest in terms of velocity change. În the last year we have worked in conjunction with the Department of Defense to identify technological advancements which would improve the applicability of solid motors to both launch vehicle and spacecraft applications. On the basis of these findings, NASA is extending the technology investigations of accurate command thrust termination and restart. In addition, we are continuing our research work to provide higher propellant performance, a better fundamental understanding of burning rate ranges, temperature sensitivity, stable combustion, and improved motor-to-motor combustion uniformity.

These researches have been applied to our experimental engineering program in solid propellant motors. Elements of this experimental activity are illustrated on this slide. As you see, efforts are being initiated in hybrid rockets, which combine some of the merits of the solid propellant systems with the high performance of the liquids and which are capable of on-off control and throttleability. Subliming solid propellant attitude control rockets are also under investigation. Mr. PELLY. Could I ask what subliming means?

Mr. TISCHLER. Subliming means evaporation from a solid state rather than from a liquid state; transformation directly from the solid to the gas.

I have here a prototype of a subliming rocket thrusting system developed by our people at the Goddard Space Flight Center. This system will be used to despin, that is to reduce the rotation of an Air Force satellite which will be flown in the very near future. The system contains about a pound of propellant. We can pass it around for your inspection.

UPPER-STAGE PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY

For upper-stage applications, where no prolonged storage of propellants is required, the addition or substitution of liquid fluorine to the liquid oxygen of present liquid propellant systems offers growth potential. Specific impulse and propellant bulk density increases, is well as the attractiveness of spontaneous ignition, are apparent.