Question 9

With a budget of over $5 billion (or one-third of all Federal R. & D. funds) and utilizing 10 percent of the R. & D. scientists and engineers, NASA is a dominant factor in American science. The 1962 Annual Report of the Federal Council for Science and Technology stated:

Because of the rate of growth of Federal R. & D. imposes new demands on scientific resources, a projection is being developed, with assistance of the National Science Foundation, of agency requirements through 1970, for funds, facilities, and manpower. Results will be employed to identify aggregate national goals, and to develop Government-wide planning techniques and policies to assure their successful and thrifty accomplishment.

Question 9(a)

"Is NASA participating in this projection of the demands of R. & D.?" Answer

Yes, NASA is participating in the projection reported in the 1962 Annual Report of the Federal Council for Science and Technology.

As pointed out in my letter of July 10, 1964, to Dr. Hornig, in which I transmitted to him our latest breakdown of R. & D. funding for fiscal years 1963-65, the projection data submitted approximately 21⁄2 years previously are no longer valid. This results from several factors:

1. The original data were generated during the period of rapid growth in the Nation's space effort and at a time when only a few programs had become operational.

2. The agency's interpretation of the various definitions of terms in the research and development breakdown differed markedly from that currently agreed upon between the National Science Foundation and NASA. In view of the fact that the determining factor in NASA's current growth rate is a budgetary constraint, it may be expected that the fiscal year 1965 data breakdown can be used as a reasonable projection through the rest of this decade.

Question 9(b)

"What are NASA's own long-range plans?"

Answer

NASA's own long-range plans are still accurately reflected in the "Memorandum of Possible Future NASA Programs for the Honorable Ken Hechler," of March 4, 1964, with a few minor exceptions:

1. On the basis of studies of the requirement for a more advanced solar observatory as a possible major new effort, as discussed in the memorandum, we are now requesting funding for flight hardware for that mission. This spacecraft will have much greater pointing and resolution capabilities than the current OSO's in order that detailed studies of specific regions of the Sun may be made during the coming period of maximum solar activity.

2. As a consequence of both the recommendations of the Space Science Board of the National Academy of Sciences and our own assessment of the desirability of funding both the Mariner and Voyager planetary exploration missions, we decided to concentrate upon the prime objective of landing a capsule on the Martian surface. We are planning to carry out the design work and feasibility studies on Voyager such that, if the mission looks feasible and the budget permits, we can proceed with funding for flight hardware in fiscal 1967.

3. We have been addressing ourselves to the question as to how we may best utilize the tremendous national capability that we are building up under the Gemini and Apollo programs. The manned space effort is giving the Nation a capability for a wide variety of scientific and technological flights in Earth orbit about the Moon, and for extended lunar exploration. Thus, we have the objective of carrying out design and feasibility studies to extend our manned flight capabilities toward these ends and in those directions that will best suit the Nation's future needs.

In addition to these specific programs, considerable attention has been given to the steps we need to take to insure that identifiable areas and levels of technology required to accomplish the most likely future missions are available as needed. A sound basis will then be provided for informed decisions relating to the timing and the allocation of resources for those missions in aeronautics and in space which the Nation may approve.

Question 9(c)

"How are they devised to meet the three goals of scientific exploration, national security and international prestige?"

Answer

The three goals of scientific exploration, national security and international prestige, as well as others such as national pride and the stimulation of the intellectual, social and economic activity of the Nation, are all devised to be met, in varying degrees, by the possible space and aeronautics missions of the future. As just a few examples, the more sophisticated in situ measurements to be performed in near-Earth space by the future Orbiting Geophysical Observatories and Explorers will not only be of intense, worldwide scientific interest, but in a number of instances, will continue to involve foreign scientists in useful projects of international cooperation and, further, will provide environmental data that are vital to the design and operation of any military system in space that may evolve in the future.

The better understanding of the physics and chemistry of our own atmosphere that will continue to unfold from our scientific measurements portends, when coupled with the advances in observing and measuring the weather that are expected from our future meteorological satellites, a tremendous advance in our ability to forecast the weather, and on a global scale. The economy and welfare of the Nation would profit immeasurably, but even more importantly for our international prestige and our image of promoting space for peaceful purposes would be the tangible benefits that would derive to foreign, and particularly underdeveloped, countries from such an advance.

An attack on the scientific and technical problems related to the effective use of man in space, by extending the capabilities of the Apollo-LEM system, will round out and strengthen our basic on-going space effort and thus efficiently insure that_we have the essential basic elements for a strong, well-balanced program. Further, the many aspects associated with manned exploration and operations in space, such as the payload weight in orbit, the operation of man as far as the Moon, and exploration by man of a completely new environment will have the greatest effect on our international prestige, and should demonstrate our preeminence in the space environment.

Question 9(d)

"What coordination with other Federal technology programs is practiced?" Answer

Coordination with other Federal technology progrmas is effected through a wide variety of means, from the highest administrative level to all working levels, including: the Space Council, the Federal Council for Science and Technology and its scientific and technical committees, the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board and its various committees, and Joint Navigation Satellite Committee, representation on the National Academy of Sciences and the Space Science Board of the NAS, numerous research advisory committees consisting of informed representatives from agencies having similar interests and including industry and university representation, to name but a few.

The greatest coordinating activity exists with DOD and involves, at the working level in NASA centers alone, for example, 65 committees, 56 working agreements, 21 liaison organizations, and 140 interfaces.

Question 10

"Does the space vehicle systems program have a study on recoverable launch vehicles and what is the extent of funds utilized in these studies?

"What have been the results of NASA's studies of recoverable launch vehicles and how much is requested in the fiscal year 1966 budget for these studies?

"Did the study include recovery of both solid and liquid fueled launch vehicles and if so what were the results on the basis of cost per pound of payload in orbit? What manufacturing facilities are amortized in such cost estimates?"

Answer

Space vehicle systems presently has $350,000 in contract R. & D. funding on recoverable launch vehicle studies. These studies consists of three contracts, of which two are now pending negotiation and the third is at the midpoint of the contract.

Presently pending is an industry study to compare parametrically the relative performance of various types of recoverable launch vehicles and to make these comparisons for a variety of ground rules and constraints. The study will also

identify those research areas and technologies for which increased effort will yield significant improvements in the performance of recoverable launch vehicles. A second pending study will examine the significant parameters which affect the weight and size of advanced recoverable launch vehicles, including vehicles having air-breathing engines and vehicles having conventional rocket engines utilizing horizontal takeoff and landing.

A third and active study which is presently ongoing under the technical cognizance of the Langley Research Center is examining the feasibility of a spacecraft and booster system having greatly simplified operational and launch requirements so as to minimize the ground launch complex and response time required to launch. This study is directed at use of storable, solid-fueled boosters with a payload module which would contain all vehicle controls and onboard systems so as to utilize to the maximum extent the pilot's capabilities for control. In this manner, much of the complex control system usually associated with vehicle booster systems would be recovered with the payload. Interim results indicate that such a concept is both feasible and promising for large launch vehicles.

It is expected that in fiscal year 1966 approximately $500,000 will be allotted to recoverable launch vehicle studies. This work will continue to examine performance parameters of various types of vehicles and to identify those technological areas where increased research efforts may be justified.

In most respects, the present contract R. & D. studies are generally applicable to both liquid and solid fueled vehicles. At the present time, these studies are directed at the various technical aspects of recovery and it is not feasible from these results to make meaningful comparisons as to the most efficient and desirable type of vehicle on a cost per pound of payload in orbit.

In addition to the studies directed specifically at launch vehicle recovery, considerable inhouse research is being undertaken which will have a significant bearing on and application to recovery of launch vehicles.

This effort includes investigation of improved and more efficient launch vehicle structural concepts and investigation of the aerothermodynamic environment and natural environment through which the vehicle must fly. The spacecraft landing and recovery program which is presently underway is directed at research to provide safer and more efficient means of spacecraft recovery investigating not only improved concepts of existing technology such as parachutes and paraglider, but more advanced techniques as, for example, the use of hot gas balloons and multiple parachutes in combination with retrorockets.

The large amount of information and new technology now being obtained in the lifting body program will also be beneficial to recoverable launch vehicles. Here the heat protection systems and advanced structural concepts being investigated will provide significant information for future design. The total funds allocated to these various programs amount to approximately $3.6 million in fiscal year 1965. It is expected that a similar level of effort will be continued in fiscal year 1966.

Mr. ROUSH. The next witness is Breene M. Kerr, who is the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Technology Utilization. Mr. Kerr, we are glad to have you with us this morning.

Mr. KERR. Thank you, Mr. Roush.

Mr. ROUSH. I understand you have a few slides and a very short movie, is that correct?

(The biography of Breene M. Kerr is as follows:)

BIOGRAPHIC STATEMENT ON BREENE M. KERR

Breene M. Kerr is the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Technology Utilization, NASA, with the responsibility of disseminating to industrial and other users, scientific data and technical advances from NASA research. This is to help improve or form a basis for new techniques, processes, or products and extend them for nonspace use.

Mr. Kerr also has operating responsibility for the Scientific and Technical Information Division which furnishes the basic technology information support for NASA and NASA contractors as well as documenting the results of work by NASA and its contractors in aerospace R. & D.

Prior to his present appointment on November 22, 1964, Kerr was the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Technology Utilization since June 1, 1964.

Mr. Kerr was born January 27, 1929, at Ada, Okla., son of the late Senator Robert S. Kerr and Mrs. Kerr. He received his bachelor of science degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1951.

After spending 2 years in the U.S. Army, he joined the Kerr-McGee Oil Industries, Inc., Oklahoma City, (1953), as a geologist. In January 1961, Kerr was made manager of the land department of the corporation, supervising drilling, leasing, and contracts for exploratory operations.

Mr. and Mrs. Kerr (the former Frances Shaffer McMillin) reside with their two sons, Breene M., Jr., and Bradley E. and daughter Katherine M., at 3551 Springland Lane NW., Washington, D.C.

STATEMENT OF BREENE M. KERR, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION, NASA; ACCOMPANIED BY CHARLES F. YOST AND DR. R. L. LESHER

Mr. KERR. Yes, sir. Actually, the summary portion of my testimony can be presented with one slide.

Mr. ROUSH. And you do have a prepared text of testimony which I believe we will not have time to hear in every detail. Unless there is objection, we will make that a part of the record at the conclusion of today's testimony, and you can condense your statements. We are limited on time. We have about 21 minutes.

Mr. KERR. First, if I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce Mr. Charles F. Yost, who is concerned with the operation of the Technology Utilization Division, and Dr. R. L. Lesher, who is concerned with the activities of our Regional Dissemination Center.

Mr. Chairman, I have, as you stated, a full statement for the record which I would like to submit. I would like to read the summary portion of that statement at this time.

The funding requested for fiscal year 1966 for the operation of the Technology Utilization Program is $5 million allocated as follows: $1,400,000 for identification, $700,000 for evaluation, $1,900,000 for regional dissemination center activities, and $1 million for analysis, for a total of $5 million.

We will show in the following testimony the operations of a welldeveloped, maturing program that has shown real progress during the last year toward the primary objective of the technology utilization program.

This primary objective is effective dissemination of new technology by the development of a selective interface with nonaerospace industry, permitting entrepreneurs in large and small organizations to capitalize on their talents and their abilities through effective access to the latest technology.

There is an increasing and general awareness of the importance of new technology to economic growth and development, as well as the growing role of the Federal Government in the generation of this new knowledge.

The Science and Astronautics Committee of the House of Representatives and this subcommittee are particularly aware of the importance of this growing body of technology as a vital contribution to the future development of the country.

Of the several agencies concerned with this area of activity, NASA is perhaps uniquely qualified to address itself to the problem of effectively achieving this objective. Not only is NASA generating a substantial portion of the new technology being developed; it also has

a statutory obligation under the Space Act of 1958 to achieve effective dissemination of information on the results of its activities.

Furthermore, NASA's in-house technical capability results in it having a real grasp of the breadth and scope and the quality and significance of the new technology that is developing in the course of NASA's programs and is being generated elsewhere in the aerospace field. NASA has also developed to meet its own mission requirements an advanced operational capability to document, collect, and selectively process large quantities of technical information to meet the various specialized needs of our program activities.

This subcommittee is generally familiar with the nature of our program and its various elements. These elements were presented in the hearings last year and are indicated on the first slide. I call your attention on this slide to the identification process taking place primarily at our field centers, the valuation process with our research contractors, and the dissemination activity with industry.

Before proceeding to a detailed discussion of these program elements, let me call your attention to several highlights of our program during the last year. In our tech briefs publication program material resulting from our identification and evaluation activities began to appear on a substantial basis. During the fiscal year 1964, 123 tech briefs were published, and an additional 149 have been published as of March 1, 1965, bringing the total to 272.

The first four technology_surveys have been completed. One of these has been published. I have copies here for members of the subcommittee if they desire to review it in detail.

The Aerospace Research Application Center at Indiana University has completed nearly 2 years of on-line operation with total membership now at 39 companies.

During the past year three additional dissemination centers using computer capabilities were initiated and reached operational levels of activity. These were the centers at Wayne State University in Detroit, the University of Pittsburgh, and the North Carolina Science and Technology Research Center.

A total of 40 firms and corporations are participating now as feepaying members at 2 of these new centers which have been operational for less than 1 year. During the past year 2 conferences on new technology were held at Lewis Research Center, attended by over 700 industry representatives. The proceedings of these two meetings have been published and well received.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes the summary statement. I can proceed with the full statement or respond to questions as the committee wishes.

Mr. ROUSH. I think it won't be necessary to go into your full statement. Some of the members may have questions.

Mr. PELLY. Dr. Kerr, have you read the report of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States upon research? They made a study of the value of research and I understand came up with a conclusion that the industrial benefits from research in the way of innovations coming out of this new research are very disappointing. Are you aware of their study?

Mr. KERR. No, sir; I am not aware of that report.

Mr. PELLY. It came out about a month ago, and I think it would be well for you to get a copy of it. It doesn't apply to your operations