Mar 27 1963
From The Space Library
NASA launched an Aerobee 150 sounding rocket to an estimated peak altitude of 185 mi. from White Sands, New Mexico. Objective of the experiment was to measure the absolute alpha radiation resonantly scattered by atmospheric atomic hydrogen at night. Instrumentation included eight ion-chamber nodules and two aspect photometers. (NASA Rpt. of S. Rkt. Launching, 4/4/63)
NASA Administrator James E. Webb, in address before the Los Angeles Council on World Affairs, pointed out the unique role of California in the national space program: "During Fiscal Year 1962 and the first six months of FY 1963, 47 per cent of NASA's prime contracts over $25,000 were awarded to firms in California. If the second ranking state is excluded in each of these years, California industries received more NASA prime contract dollars than all of the other 48 states combined. "Unless the nation decides to forego the opportunity it now has to insure a pre-eminent position in space, I foresee no possibility, certainly not in the near future, that the volume of space activity conducted in California will decline . . . It does seem likely that as our national investment in space research and development increases, California will find it more difficult to maintain its present percentage of the total . ." NASA's procurement, Mr. Webb said: "In short, we are making a deliberate effort to use the self-policing forces of the market place, to avoid building government competition with industry, and also to maintain sufficient managerial and technical capability in our own organization to make certain that our contractors are giving us the reliability we must have and the taxpayers a dollar's-worth of work for every dollar we spend." In reviewing the international aspects of the NASA program, the NASA Administrator cited the provisions of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, and said: "Some citizens, who regard military necessities as the prime justification for our space effort, find it difficult to accept the open, unclassified character of our civilian space program. Some regard basic scientific results as a national treasure, which should be kept under lock and key, and ask `Why do we give away our secrets to the Russians?' "The answer is that our program involves both science and technology. There are no real secrets of nature, and it would be self-defeating to try to classify the science and principles of nature. On the other hand, technological advances and inventions are the product of men and effort, and can properly be classified and kept from potential enemies where the national interest so requires. 'Accordingly, our national space program moves forward with the basic scientific research conducted by the civilian agency, available to the whole scientific community, but technological development conducted by both NASA and the Department of Defense which is shared by both agencies, and classified when defense and military interests are involved. In this manner we have protected our national security while making the maximum contribution to the advancement of science . . . ." (Text)
In a letter to Rep. George P. Miller (D.-Calif.), Dr. Jerome B. Wiesner discussed the problems of scientific manpower. "The many fold demands for technical manpower draw on the same pool of talent-for defense and space, for innovation of 'civilian products able to compete in a world market, for meeting such domestic problems as mass transportation and environmental pollution associated with a rapidly urbanized society, for medical advancement, and for the effective management of our resources in such a way that we can help upgrade the way of life of citizens throughout the world without downgrading our own. Superposed on these requirements is the need for science, mathematics and engineering teachers to meet the rapidly growing college enrollment. A sharp competition for manpower has resulted, particularly for the superior individual having advanced training. In that competition, not all sectors of demand have succeeded in meeting their needs, and the future outlook is not encouraging. "For the first time, we are confronted with a plurality of goals that may well outstrip our technical manpower resources. "Faced with the same manpower problem as the Soviet Union, how, in a democratic society where each citizen must have a free choice of his or her occupation, do we meet this challenge? "The urgent need for more individuals having advanced training is clear . . . . To keep pace with our national needs, it is the judgment of the Presidents Science Advisory Committee that we should and could increase the number of Ph.D.'s each year in engineering, mathematics, and physical sciences (EMP) to reach 7,500 in 1970, the number of master's or equivalent to 30,000. This annual production of 37,500 advanced degrees by 1970 should be compared with 15,000 in 1960, 11,000 in 1950. "A substantial fraction of these. new graduates, incidentally, must be plowed back into the universities for teaching, and soon .... With regard to students, the major barrier to continuation of full-time graduate study is financial .... Another barrier is inadequate graduate facilities . . . . In addition, there is very convincing evidence that some geographical areas produce a much greater proportion of doctorates than others . . . . Relatively few students are prepared to study more than several hundred miles from their homes. It would thus appear that we have a special problem in terms of meeting an unequal geographical distribution of centers of educational excellence. "The present barriers to graduate education-limitations in student support, number of faculty, and educational facilities must be overcome. It is to that end that the President. has proposed that the Federal Government take the initiative and provide the leadership needed to meet these national needs. "To meet goals for graduate education in the three needs of potential shortage-engineering, mathematics, and physical sciences-it is of critical importance that we increase the number of graduate students enrolling in the fall of 1964 from the 22,000 which may be expected on the basis of projected trends to some 30,000 . . . . Support would be provided within existing legislation, through NSF, AEC, and NASA fellowships, and through new NSF science development and training grant programs . . . . In virtually all of these cases, assistance to students would be accompanied by a grant directly to the college or university to help meet the true cost of education, and thus would assist the university to maintain an internal balance between fields . . . . The President also proposes Federal support for new physical facilities . . "The proposed program is designed to achieve a substantial and unprecedented acceleration in the rate of production in advanced degrees in these three fields." (NASA Leg. Act. Rpt.11/86, 6/10/63)
Raymond L. Bisplinghoff, Director of NASA Office of Advanced Research and Technology, told House Committee on Science and Astronautics' Subcommittee on Space Sciences: "The essential purpose of . . . [NASA's advanced research and technology program] is to lay the foundation and to determine the building blocks which will be needed for pre-eminence in aeronautics and space in the near future . . . . "I think that the history of technology over the past 100 years has shown that true progress in any branch of technology such as space technology requires and even demands a sharp cutting edge of advanced research. The kind of things we read about in the papers like the manned spaceflight effort, scientific probes, communications, and meteorological satellites and airliners we ride on today all, rest upon a foundation of research which was done in previous decades; and the research we do today in our laboratories and universities, in industry derives vigor and freshness from the motivations of these projects and things that we are doing to benefit mankind. "At the same time, there is really a feeding in both directions. The research derives freshness from the things that are going on in the way of projects and the projects later derive benefits from the research . . . ." (Transcript)
D. Brainerd Holmes, NASA Deputy Associate Administrator and Director of Manned Space Flight, told Manned Space Flight Subcommittee of House Committee on Science and Astronautics that current cost estimate of Project Apollo was $20 billion or less. (Transcript)
Contract for $2,143,900 awarded to Kaiser Engineers to design a 100- by 120-ft. space environment chamber to simulate pressure and temperature conditions existing at altitudes up to 100 miles. (LRC Release 63-11; Lewis Chronology, 2)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
