Senator SYMINGTON. Yes, it would be. Thank you. Would you proceed?

[The prepared statement of Doctor Lovelace follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF A. M. LOVELACE, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR AERONAUTIC AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee: It is a pleasure to appear before you today to present NASA's views on the importance to the United States of proceeding with the construction of the Air Force's Aero-propulsion Systems Test Facility (ASTF) to be located at the Arnold Enineering Development Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee. We believe ASTF will provide a critically needed test capability for both the Air Force and NASA in support of research and de velopment of future military and civil engine programs. Before getting to the details of our views, however, I would like to say a few words about the im portance of aviation to this country and about the National Aeronautical Facilities Program of which ASTF is an essential item.

Clearly, the maintenance of miiltary aircraft superiority is a vital element to the security of our nation. Just as clearly, the maintenance of a strong civil aircraft industry is an important element contributing favorably to our nation's economic position.

Looking to the future, the free world demand for subsonic civil air transports alone represents a market estimated at approximately 50 billion over the next ten years. Moreover, the sales made in this time period may well set the pattern for even greater markets anticipated beyond 1985 as the transport fleets continue to grow and aircraft have to be replaced. In order to successfully compete for this market, the U.S. must maintain technological supremacy in aeronautics which in large part will depend on the availability of the appropriate R&D tools of the trade, that is, modern aeronautical test facilities.

In this regard, within the past 25 years, only one major wind tunnel, the V/STOL tunel at NASA's Langley Research Center, has been built by either NASA or the DOD. Both NASA and the DOD have upgraded and rehabilitated their other tunnels in continuing programs to improve and maintain the test capability, but even so, the test capability of this country's current wind tunnels is inadequate for some of the sophisticated testing required in our advanced research and development activities.

The need to review this situation was apparent even in 1967 when it was recognized that existing propulsion wind tunnels could not handle the airframe engine integration problems beginning to be experienced on aircraft; that lack of Reynolds number simulation capability in the transonic speed region was having an adverse impact on the design of fighters and large aircraft such as the C-141 and C-5; and that the presently available size and speed capabilities of subsonic wind tunnels were inadequate to permit the research and development testing required for advanced helicopters and V/STOL aircraft.

Thus, in 1967, DOD and NASA initiated a comprehensive study to determine the most vitally required new U.S. facilities for aeronautical research and development. By September 1969 the Aeronautics Panel of the joint DOD/NASA Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board (AACB) had, through a facilities working group composed of members from NASA, the Army, Navy and Air Force, arrived at a set of “national facilities," which included the ASTF at AEDC, a large-scale V/STOL wind tunnel at NASA Ames Research Center and a HIgh Reynolds number Tunnel (HIRT) at the Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC).

In July of 1971, after continued detailed studies, the AACB approved these facilities as part of a National Aeronautical Facilities Program.

Since HIRT was necessarily being designed as a development facility for high Reynolds number transonic testing, there was concern that even with this facility the U.S. would still be lacking a facility in which to conduct the research which is the precursor to any new aircraft developments. Therefore, in 1972 NASA proposed a Transonic Research Tunnel (TRT) which was approved by the AACB as a fourth element in the National Aeronautical Facilities Program. HIRT and TRT were to be based on two entirely different operational concepts and were to complement each other. HIRT was to be a blow-down type facility in which high Reynolds numbers would be obtained by extremely high air pressure, whereas TRT, a continuous flow facility, would have attained some

what lower Reynolds numbers by modest pressure increases but with the test medium cooled to cryogenic temperatures (as low as 300°F). As NASA Langley developed the cryogenic concept by the construction and operation of small-scale pilot facilities it became apparent that a breakthrough in tunnel technology had been achieved. As the estimated costs for construction of HIRT and TRT began to escalate, it also became apparent to the AACB that the Nation could not afford both facilities, and that a major effort should be made to try to meet the needs of DOD and NASA by the construction of just one new high Reynolds number transonic facility.

By June of 1975 the AACB decided that a single, continuous-flow facility employing the cryogenic concept should be built at the earliest possible date to serve the combined needs of both NASA and DOD. This facility would be known as the National Transonic Facility (NTF) and would be located at the NASA Langley Research Center. The AACB also reaffirmed that there were urgent continuing national needs to increase the low-speed test capabilities of the Ames 40 x 80 ft. Wind Tunnel, and to construct and improve propulsion test facility (ASTF) at AEDC. These three facility recommendations constitute the current National Aeronautical Facilities Program plan.

To implement this plan, NASA is proposing to start the NTF with FY 1977 funding and to start modifications to the 40 x 80 foot Wind Tunnel beginning in FY 1978. Rounding out the plan, the Air Force is proposing to begin construction of ASTF in FY 1977.

I will address my remaining comments to the ASTF, and explain why NASA views this as an important, urgently needed new test capability.

History has shown that propulsion system development lead times usually pace new aircraft development. Moreover, modern engines are much more complex than earlier engines so that if we do not obtain advanced test facilities, we can expect propulsion systems lead times to increase. Higher air flows, increased combustion and turbine temperatures, very high bypass ratios, and sophisticated mechanical designs of advanced components all present new types of development problems requiring solutions, and must be investigated over a broad range of aircraft operating conditions.

In the past and with current facilities, engine tests have largely been conducted with the engine inlet connected directly to the test facility air supply. In this direct-connect mode the total facility air supply passes through the engine. Today, modern, high performance military engines, particularly those for supersonic aircraft, require that the entire propulsion system, which includes the inlet, nozzle, and controls as well as the engine itself, also be tested as a complete system. This requirement does not replace the continuing need for direct-connect testing of the engine by itself, however.

Test facilities now available offer very marginal test capability for even directconnect testing of current large turbofan engines. These limitations were already evident in the mid-1960's during development tests of the high bypass ratio, 40,000-pound-thrust TF-39 engine for the C-5A aircraft, wherein continuous testing in a correctly simulated flight environment in the AEDC facility was extremely limited due to insufficient conditioned air supply and exhaust capacity. Current versions of large high bypass ratio turbofan engines such as the JT9D and CF6 new exceed 50,000 pounds thrust. For all practical purposes the U.S. test capability for this size engine is non-existent. We believe that the development program scope and cost for these engines could have been reduced, and many of the early development problems could have been avoided had a facility such as ASTF been available.

It cannot be overemphasized that it is far preferable to discover and correct any possible design deficiencies early and on the ground rather than in the air, and to do so under circumstances which do not jeopardize the safety and life of the flight crew as well as the cost of expensive flight hardware. Considering that the cost of a major new engine development is on the order of $500 million or more, it becomes very apparent that the risks in such a development must be reduced or minimized as much as possible if we are to be able to utilize advanced technology in the engine.

As I mentioned earlier, ASTF will provide important increases in capabilities for propulsion testing in both the direct-connect and free-jet modes. While directconnect mode testing is vital to the development of an engine by itself, I would like to emphasize the importance and added benefits that ASTF will provide with its greatly increased free-jet capability for over-all propulsion systems testing. Direct-connect testing cannot provide the correct flow field simulation for complete propulsion systems because the flow field surrounding the propulsion in

stallation has a significant effect on the performance and correct operation of the entire inlet/engine/nozzle system. The influences of the aircraft forebody, variable geometry mechanisms in the inlet and nozzle, and changing flight environment on engine operations are difficult to predict, and if not properly antic ipated and corrected they may result in an unacceptable operating environment for the engine.

The airflow may be so distorted that it will cause the engine compressor to stall and result in complete loss of engine thrust and possible serious structural damage to the engine. The greater susceptibility of modern high performance engines to the broadened operational requirements of highly maneuverable aircraft clearly mandates that greater emphasis be placed on overall propulsion system testing in the future, in which appropriate portions of the aircraft strueture, air inlet and exhaust nozzle are integrated.

The increased flow capacity of ASTF will make possible far better capabilities for the necessary free-jet mode of testing of complete systems. By its nature. free-jet testing requires a much larger and more complex test facility than directconnect testing, since well over one-half of the total facility airflow must pass around the engine inlet to establish the appropriate flow conditions.

While the primary requirement for ASTF is seen as a development tool for future propulsion systems, it is also clear that it will have great potential for related propulsion system research for both advanced military and civil systems. Therefore, we in NASA will continue to work with the Air Force to insure that ASTF capabilities can be utilized to greatest advantage as a truly national test facility.

In summary, I want to emphasize that we in NASA view ASTF as an essential and integral part of a National Aeronautical Facilities Program plan which we believe the country must implement to help maintain our national pre-eminence in aeronautics. I earnestly solicit your favorable consideration and support.

STATEMENT OF DR. A. M. LOVELACE, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR AERONAUTICS AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY, NASA

Dr. LOVELACE. Yes sir.

I am pleased to appear before you today to comment on the importance of the Air Force's proposed Aero-propulsion Systems Test Facility. We in NASA believe the ASTF will provide a critically needed test capability for the country in support of future military and civil engine programs.

Clearly, the maintenance of military aircraft superiority is vital to the security of our country. Just as clearly, the maintenance of a strong civil aircraft industry is an important element contributing favorably to our Nation's economic position and the vitality of our transportation system.

We believe that technological supremacy in aeronautics will be crucial to the U.S. world role in both military and civil aviation in the future and that technological supremacy will depend, in large part, on the availability of the appropriate R. & D. tools of the trade; principal among these tools will be modern aeronautical test facilities.

In this regard, within the past 25 years, only one maior wind tunnel, the V/STOL Tunnel at NASA's Langley Research Center, has been built by either NASA or the DOD. Both NASA and the DOD have upgraded and rehabilitated their other tunnels in continuing programs to improve and maintain the test capability, but, even so, the capability of this country's current aeronautical test facilities is inadequate for some of the sophisticated testing required in our advanced research and development activities.

The need to review this situation was apparent even in 1967 when it was recognized that existing propulsion wind tunnels could not handle the airframe/engine integration problems beginning to be ex

perienced on aircraft; that lack of Reynolds number simulation capability of this country's current aeronautical test facilities is inadequate the design of fighters and large aircraft such as the C-141 and the C5; and that the presently available size and speed capabilities of subsonic wind tunnels were inadequate to permit the research and development testing required for advanced helicopters and V/STOL aircraft.

Thus, DOD and NASA under the auspices of the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board (AACB) initiated a comprehensive study to determine the most vitally required new U.S. facilities for aeronautical research and development.

In June of 1975, the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board (AACB) recommended three major facilities for construction under the National Aeronautical Facilities program plan to meet the needs given above. These facilities are the National Transonic Facility to be located at NASA's Langley Research Center, a modification of the 40x80-foot wind tunnel at NASA's Ames Research Center, and the Air Force's Aero-Propulsion Systems Test Facility at Tullahoma, Tenn. To implement this plan, NASA is proposing to start the National Transonic Facility in fiscal year 1977 and is considering modifications to the 40x80-foot wind tunnel as a high priority item in fiscal year 1978. Rounding out the plan, the Air Force is proposing to begin construction of the ASTF in fiscal year 1977.

I will limit the remainder of my comments to the ASTF, and explain why NASA views this as an important, urgently needed new test capability.

History has shown that propulsion system development lead times usually pace new aircraft development by a substantial time period. If propulsion research is not conducted or if major problems are encountered during engine development and not solved, the aircraft simply cannot be developed. Moreover, the complexity of modern engines and the high costs and penalties associtaed with inadequate engine R. & D. make it imperative that problems be solved early in the development cycle.

In the past and with current facilities, engine tests have largely been conducted with the engine inlet connected directly to the test facility air supply. In this direct-connect mode, the total facility air supply passes through the engine.

Test facilities now available offer very marignal test capability for direct-connect testing of large turbofan engines. These limitations were already evident in the mid-1960's during development tests of the high bypass ratio, 40,000-pound-thrust TF-39 engine for the C-5A, wherein continuous testing in a correctly simulated flight environment in the EDC facility was extremely limited due to insufficient conditioned air supply and exhaust capacity. Current versions of large high bypass ratio turbofan engines such as the JT9D and CF6 now exceed 50,000 pounds thrust. For all practical purposes, the U.S. test capabilitv for this size engine is nonexistent.

While direct-connect mode testing is vital to the development of an engine by itself, it cannot provide the correct flow field simulation for complete propulsion systems. The influences of the aircraft forebody, variable geometry mechanisms in the inlet and nozzle, and changing flight environment including angle of attack on engine operations are difficult to predict, and if not properly anticipated and corrected, they may result in an unacceptable operating environment for the engine.

The greater susceptibility of modern, high-performance engines to the broadened operational requirements of highly maneuverable aircraft clearly mandates that greater emphasis be placed on overall propulsion system testing in a free-jet mode, in which appropriate portions of the aircraft structure, air inlet and exhaust nozzle are integrated and tested as a complete system.

The increased flow capability of the proposed ASTF will make possible far better capabilities for the necessary free-jet mode of testing of complete systems. By its nature, free-jet testing requires a much larger and more complex test facility than direct-connect testing, since well over one-half of the total facility airflow must pass around the engine inlet to establish the appropriate flow conditions.

While the primary requirement for the ASTF is seen as a development tool for future propulsion systems, it is also clear that it will have great potential for related propulsion system research for both. advanced military and civil systems. Therefore, we in NASA will continue to work with the Air Force to insure that the ASTF capabilities will be utilized to greatest advantage as a truly national test facility. In summary, I want to emphasize that we view the ASTF as an essential and integral part of a National Aeronautical Facilities program plan which we believe the country must implement to help maintain our national preeminence in aeronautics. I earnestly solicit your favorable consideration and support.

Senator SYMINGTON. Thank you, Dr. Lovelace.

I understand that the ASTF is one of three projects proposed by the administration, and that NASA will build the other two.

What are your two projects going to cost?

Dr. LOVELACE. The National Transonic Facility, which will be located at the Langley Research Center, is estimated to cost $65 million. The request for the initial increment, $25 million, is contained in the NASA fiscal 1977 authorization and appropriation requests.

Senator SYMINGTON. For both of them?

Dr. LOVELACE. That is just for one, Mr. Chairman, the National Transonic Facility (NTF).

Senator SYMINGTON. How much money is involved?

Dr. LOVELACE. An estimated $65 million for the first facility, which is the NTF.

Senator SYMINGTON. That is the total estimated cost?

Dr. LOVELACE. Yes.

The second facility, which is a modification of the full-scale 40x80foot subsonic wind tunnel at the Ames Research Center, is estimated to cost about $90 to $95 million.

Senator SYMINGTON. That is not in your fiscal 1977 budget?

Dr. LOVELACE. That is not contained in NASA's fiscal '77 request. Senator SYMINGTON. When are you going to get around and ask for it?

Dr. LOVELACE. We are considering the modifications to the 40x80foot wind tunnel as a high priority item in our fiscal 1978 submission. Senator SYMINGTON. Why do not you submit it today if you need it? Dr. LOVELACE. The judgment was made at that time that the time critical priority

Senator SYMINGTON. Who made the judgment?

Dr. LOVELACE. We in NASA, in concert with the Air Force who are, again, the principal users of the facility, decided that the prime