As the planning for Apollo flight missions progressed during the past year, it was determined that ground support must be provided for verification of orbital injection parameters on launch azimuths of 72° to 80° and for impact point information in the event of a suborbital abort. In order to meet these requirements. full Apollo S-band coverage must be added to the Gemini configured manned space flight network station at Grand Canary Island. The funds requested will provide for the necessary facility construction and electronic equipment for this station augmentation.

The subcommittee was informed during the hearings last year that funds for a manned space flight network station at Antigua would be requested in fiscal year 1966 to provide continuous coverage during the Apollo launch and insertion phases and during orbital checkout prior to the injection phase of a lunar mission. Funds required for this station are substantially less than for the Canary Island station because the unified S-band system, antenna, and associated equipment are being procured under prior year research and development appropriation funding due to the development and fabrication leadtimes involved.

There is no population center on the island of Antigua adequate to house and support the manned space flight network station personnel, nor are existing Air Force facilities on the island adequate to support additional personnel. Therefore, funds are requested to augment existing Air Force facilities with barracks, a general storage building, water storage tanks, additional mess, power, dispensary, and recreation facilities.

The three 85-foot antenna manned space flight network facilities which were authorized in fiscal year 1964 are being colocated with deep space network facilities to achieve maximum cost savings in construction and operation and to provide, in the near vicinity, a backup capability essential for Apollo missions in the event of a failure or malfunction of the primary facility. To provide the deep space network facilities with this capability, certain basic electronic equipment peculiar to Apollo support must be added to the stations. The funds requested for Apollo wings at the Madrid and Canberra deep space network stations will provide the facilities for housing this equipment.

The 85-foot antenna facility at Fairbanks, Alaska, was the first such facility construction for the satellite network and was completed prior to the full growth of flight programs it is now required to support. Equipment installations necessary to properly support major scientific and applications satellite programs have not only fully utilized the limited technical area, but have extended be yond this area at the expense of needed maintenance and storage space. Additional spacecraft control and command consoles and wide-band data transmission equipment will be required for upcoming meteorological and scientific observatory programs. Fiscal year 1966 funds are required for the construction of technical and support facilities to augment this station so that it can effec tively support major scientific and application flight projects.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement.

We shall start promptly at 10 in the morning. The meeting is adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned until Wednesday, March 3, 1965, at 10 a.m.)

1966 NASA AUTHORIZATION

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1965

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ADVANCED RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to adjournment, in room 214-B, Longworth House Office Building, the Hon. J. Edward Roush (member of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. ROUSH. The committee will be in order.

Although we don't have our Republican brethren with us right now, I think they won't object if we go ahead in the interest of time. Our time is very limited and we are going to have to go right along this morning, Mr. Buckley, if we are going to finish on time.

I think it might be well for you to take just a minute, if you can, and give us anything new on yesterday's failure at Cape Kennedy, if you have anything other than what we read in the paper this morning, The question is asked of all of us, Why did it happen, and we are asked to make comments on it. Perhaps you can enlighten us.

STATEMENT OF EDMOND C. BUCKLEY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF TRACKING AND DATA ACQUISITION; ACCOMPANIED BY GERALD M. TRUSZYNSKI, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, TRACKING AND DATA ACQUISITION, NASA; AND THOMAS V. LUCAS, DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM COORDINATION AND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Mr. BUCKLEY. We have nothing new in our office. They are looking into it. I am afraid it is one of those things that takes a few days to come up with information.

Mr. ROUSH. All right, we will accept that.

I believe we are on page RD-26 of the backup book, "Other Instrumentation," is this correct?

Mr. BUCKLEY. That is correct. This covers the effort that is carried out at four places at Fort Churchill, Edwards Air Force Base, Wallops Island, and Langley Research Center-in connection with some high-speed reentry research.

At Fort Churchill we have been shooting sounding rockets since 1957-58. This of course is a range that is up close to the Arctic Circle, and the interest in the upper atmosphere in the Arctic area is very great. It was originally a Canadian-operated range, but the Department of Defense took it over about 4 years ago and it is now jointly funded with the Air Force. There were 28 NASA firings last year. Mr. ROUSH. Let the record show that Mr. Pelly has now arrived. We have a quorum and are adequately represented on both sides of the aisle.

You may proceed.

Mr. BUCKLEY. The amount estimated for Fort Churchill is $2,400,000. This estimate is based on a joint agreement with the Air Force.

The second place I mentioned is the Aerodynamic Test Range at Edwards Air Force Base, which is a range that has been operated a number of years in connection with airplane research particularly, of course, the X-15. But other types of aircraft are flown there, including some vertical landing vehicles you may have seen pictures of that are possibly airplanes of the future. There is $800,000 budgeted for the operation of this three-station range which, by the way, is used not only by NASA but by the Air Force.

Of the total in this area of $6.3 million, $2.4 million goes to the Wallops Station. Wallops made 320 research launches last year, including 3 satellites. Incidentally, it is one of five places in the world from which satellites have been launched. Their work is not only for NASA; they do work also for the Air Force, Navy, Army, FAA, and universities.

Wallops tracks not only the vehicles that they launch themselves; they track Saturns (SA-5, 6, and 7), Echo I and II, Centaur, and Gemini. It is, of course, one of the two major data acquisition places for meteorological satellites. Tiros, since the very beginning, has been read out at Wallops Island. The other station is out on the West Coast.

The fourth area supported under this item, "Operations-Other instrumentation," is Langley Research Center to the extent of $700,000. Langley has been doing high-speed reentry research. Vehicles are fired up to high altitude and turned over and fired down through the atmosphere, experimenting with the process of the burning up of the nose and how to prevent it; also the materials it is made of, and the way it is fabricated. This is of extreme interest not only to NASA but to the military because it provides an opportunity to investigate the kind of signals you get from high-temperature bodies as they burn up coming down through the atmosphere.

The instrumentation used in this type of work is largely optical. Langley has been developing special instrumentation for this use. Operation of this instrumentation is what that money covers.

If I may go to the next section, which is communications

Mr. ROUSH. Are there any questions on the item "Other instrumentation" before we go on to communications?

If not, you may proceed.

Mr. BUCKLEY. In my introductory remarks I referred to communications as being one of the five basic types of tracking and data acquisition support. All of the space flight missions are very dependent on reliable and rapid transmission of information and data between the ground station and the control centers. This is getting more and more imporant because the vehicles are getting more complex and the procedure for operating them and keeping them under control is becoming more complex.

As I mentioned yesterday, the early vehicles, once they were launched, didn't require much control effort.

The more recent vehicles require a tremendous amount of control, which means the data has to come back to the control centers fast and

decisions have to be made and the stations have to be instructed as to what commands to send up to the vehicle.

In communications, in general, we use leased lines as does DOD. In cables from here to foreign countries, such as England, are leased from domestic carriers such as A.T. & T. but in foreign areas we use the normal common carrier that exists say, the Postmaster General in South Africa, which we and the Air Force both use. Mr. HECHLER. May I interrupt at this point? Are there any other ways in which there could be joint use of these facilities with the Department of Defense?

Mr. BUCKLEY. The circuits are pretty full. We have watched them. The circuits from here to England are very full. We use some DOD circuits.

The overall Government agency for managing the cooperative effort is the National Communications System, a fairly new group, as you know, over in the Department of Defense. This group, the National Communications System, was started about a year and a half ago. There are several operating groups under the National Communications System: the Department of Defense, FAA, ourselves, and GSA for domestic effort.

When we put in a new circuit, for instance, we have to go to the National Communications System office and explain what we need and why, and get approval to put in that circuit. So there is a central coordinating group that is putting all this planning together.

I think that the National Communications System will make a strong effect in combining the requirements of DOD, FAA, ourselves, and other agencies. I think they will approach it more from the point of view of first coordinating the additions that are going into the system and then going back and coordinating the existing circuits.

Mr. DAVIS. I realize that is not within the scope of this hearing, but it is a very interesting thing. I had not formerly heard of the National Communications System. Is it a creature of statute or was it created otherwise?

Mr. BUCKLEY. By Executive order, I believe.

Mr. DAVIS. Is it simply a combination of the different agencies you named?

Mr. BUCKLEY. It is really a central management group. The Department of Defense was delegated the job of providing the management. The agencies I named, and one or two that I didn't name, are represented in a joint office over there. We have one man at this office.

Now an illustration of the use of this agency: the question of when a communications satellite will be of value to us in talking to oversea stations is always coming up. In other words, can we talk to South Africa by a communications satellite rather than by the radio circuits we now have?

We have sent a letter to the National Communications System saying that we anticipate having such requirements in the years to come but at the moment we haven't any. When we do have requirements for a communications satellite, we will send them to the National Communications System and they will include them with those of other Government agencies having such requirements. It will be a joint effort; they will combine the requirements.

We have already informed them that we will rely on them for that service in the years to come.

Mr. DAVIS. Is that office physically located in the Pentagon?

Mr. BUCKLEY. No, sir. It is located at the Navy Service Center in Arlington, Va.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you.

Mr. BUCKLEY. The oversea circuits we use have been increasing. One reason is the centralization of the decisions I mentioned a moment ago. They are handling more data. The vehicles have longer life, so there are more vehicles in the air.

Incidentally, I just checked yesterday for another purpose and asked one of our oversea stations what percentage of the time during the week is there no vehicle overhead. The answer came back, somewhat to my surprise, that there was no time in the week when that station isn't working with one satellite or another.

We endeavor to hold the total of these circuits down by using circuits for both voice and teletype. Most of our data in the past has been handled by teletype. We are changing this to high-speed data lines.

Finally, we are doing switching where we have circuits that go to London and branch out in different directions. We do the switching at London. The ones going to the Pacific area are switched at Hawaii, so we can make multiple use of the circuits going to the Pacific area. This is what we do to try to keep the number of such circuits down.

We run a strong control of the requirements in my office. We go back to the mission people to make sure they validate the requirements and that circuits aren't asked for without adequate study on the part of, say, Dr. Mueller and Dr. Newell.

That about completes this subject, sir.

Mr. ROUSH. Are there any other questions in this area?

If not, you many continue.

Mr. BOONE. Mr. Chairman, may I ask one question?

Mr. ROUSH. Mr. Boone?

Mr. BOONE. Mr. Buckley, are there other agencies of NASA, that is, Manned Space Flight or the Space Sciences-do they fund for oversea communication at all?

Mr. BUCKLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BOONE. Do they fund for internal U.S. communications?

Mr. BUCKLEY. There is some funding for communications that are associated with the development of their vehicles. For instance, Houston may need to talk to McDonnell, Boeing, Lockheed, and so forth, and they are responsible for setting up their own needs for their own project effort. But if it is operational, it is supposed to come under my office.

Mr. BOONE. Is that true of the communication links from Cape Kennedy to the Manned Space Flight Center at Houston?

Mr. BUCKLEY. To the best of my knowledge, yes; there may be some exceptions.

Mr. BOONE. Have you considered or has there been any discussion about presenting live television coverage of reentry bodies, particularly the manned space flight vehicles?

Mr. BUCKLEY. That has been proposed and has been considered at Dr. Mueller's and Dr. Seamans' level. The problem is that it is too