Nov 8 1967
From The Space Library
NASA's ATS III , launched Nov. 5, now in 22,300-mi-altitude synchronous orbit, transmitted to NASA's Rosman, N.C., ground station a color photograph of earth which officials described as excellent in quality. The photograph, processed at GSFC, showed entire earth`s disk and details of features as small as two or three miles in size. ATS III, third of a series of five satellites managed by OSSA, carried communication, meteorology, navigation, `and spacecraft technology experiments. From its location over the equator at 47° west longitude, the spacecraft had a view of North and South America, part of Africa and Europe, and the southern part of Greenland icecap. Spacecraft's multicolor spinscan cloud camera obtained color contrast as well as brightness contrast, according to chief experimenter Wisconsin Univ.'s Dr. Verner E. Suomi. He gave this analysis of ATS III's meteorological operations: "From a time series of pictures such as these the United States has, in effect, given South America a means to track their weather far beyond what they are able to do by conventional means. In one single photograph, the equatorial cloud-free band which was seen from ATS I [launched Dec. 6,1966] pictures in the Pacific is also evident in the Atlantic. These pictures are ideal for continuing studies from the heat budget and convective systems. The additional meteorological information in a color photograph is more subtle, but it is there. Low clouds tend to be bluer than high clouds. This has been possible even though adjustments to color balance on the ground are still underway. There are suggestions that the muddy outflow from the Amazon River in Brazil can be seen. We have not yet been able to determine whether or not the Gulf Stream water will be visible. Also, we do not have an example of the colors in the Terminator Zone (sunrise and sunset) to determine if cloud heights can be accurately positioned." (NASA Release 67-286)
A restructuring of the Nation's space program was outlined by NASA Administrator James E. Webb in testimony on proposed NASA FY 1968 operating plan, before Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences. Decisions had reflected fiscal, resources, and time factors. The national fiscal situation required minimum expenditures on space for the next two years. Primary emphasis on completion of Apollo program and other financially important ongoing efforts would be carried out to avoid major losses. Decisions on NASA's space posture for the 1970s would be postponed until "fiscal year 1969 budget or later." According to Webb's planning, "Our allocation of resources in fiscal year 1968 must hold open for later decision the most promising future aeronautical and space options which our past large investments will support." FY 1968 operating plan figures, presented by Webb, showed NASA's adjustments of funding under R&D operations for the remainder of FY 1968. Fund reallocation (congressional appropriation figures in parentheses) showed : Apollo Applications, $253.2 (315.5) million; OSSA, $568.1 (528.0) million; OART, $318.7 (301.5) million; OTDA, $275.0 (270.0) million. In more detail, on OSSA, physics and astronomy $141.5 (130.0) million; lunar and planetary, $143.4 (125.0) million; launch vehicle procurement, $141.9 (145.0) million; bioscience, $41.8 (40.0)-million; space applications, $99.5 (88.0) million. On OART, electronics systems, $39.2 (35.0) million; space vehicle systems, $35.0 (no change) million; human factors systems, $21.0 (no change) million; basic research, $21.5 (20.0) million; space power and electric propulsion systems, $44.0 (no change) million; nuclear rockets, $54.0 (46.5) million; chemical propulsion, $37.2 (35.0) million; and aeronautics, $66.8 (65.0) million. Sustaining university was $10.0 (no change) million, and technology utilization, $4.0 (no change) million. Webb presented rather brief outline on present long-range planning for lunar and planetary mission hardware. Limited funds could continue development of flight-qualified engine for NERVA I and would support plans for first Apollo Applications flights in 1970. Two Mars-Mariner flights for 1969 would be the "last in present program." Five Mariner flights in 1970s, two or more Titan III launches in Voyager series in 1973, and Saturn V flight in 1975 could be considered in FY 1969 budget. Webb reasoned that NASA could "use the Atlas-Centaur . . . and the Titan III with transtage, to move out into further planetary operations but with very limited expenditures in 1968 and 1969." Responding to questions by Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space sciences, Webb referred to recent CSC decision on NASA personnel contracts and said he would join with CSC chairman and the Comptroller General in working out pattern for support contracts, the KSC contract providing his guidelines. (Testimony; transcript)
In a prelaunch press conference at Launch Complex #39, KSC, NASA Deputy Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., referred to high points of Nov. 9 scheduled launch of Apollo 4: ". . . Apollo 4 launch is . . . most difficult and significant milestone to date [and] tomorrow we'll be flight testing the Saturn V for the first time. We'll be flight testing on Apollo spacecraft entering the atmosphere at lunar return speeds for the first time. We'll be live-testing our launch and operational facilities for the first time, and we'll be testing our development and operational team in its first major mission attempt for the first time. I am certain this team . . . will not be found wanting." (Text)
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul H. Nitze, in response to statement made Nov. 6 by Rep. Craig Hosmer (R-Calif.) , member, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy's Military Applications Subcommittee, during hearings on ABM systems, answered: "First we are taking steps to protect Minuteman against much better Soviet offenses than we actually expect. Secondly, even if any two of the three elements of our second-strike forces-our land-based ICBMS, our submarine-based Polaris and Poseidon, and our strategic bombers-were rendered useless by some unforeseeable disaster, the remaining element could by itself inflict unacceptable damage on the U.S.S.R." He compared effectiveness (number of targets destroyed) of 10 50-kt warheads in a Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) configuration to the same effectiveness of one large yield-10 mt-warhead, and stated that "the MIRVS provide much more effective payloads . . . by every relevant criterion of military effectiveness, even though they deliver much less total megatonnage." Response to Hosmer's statement by Nitze had been made at request of Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. (Text)
FAA, despite qualified objections of air carriers, announced Dec. 15 effective date for imposition of speed limit of 250 kph (288 mph) for all aircraft operating below 14000 ft mean sea level [see Sept. 1]. FAA believed its action would give pilots more time to "see and avoid" other air traffic in the Nation's most heavily traveled airspace. Larger airlines felt collision avoidance systems and automated terminal approach systems would go further to reduce the growing number of midair collisions; they would have preferred a speed limit from 5,000 f t down to surface. Air Line Pilots Assn. endorsed rule, at the same time making it plain that they were quite skeptical of its value in collision avoidance. (W Post, 11/9/67, M4)
President Johnson signed H.R. 12474, FY 1968 NASA appropriations bill, designated P.L. 90-131 (NASA LAR VI/119)
President Johnson signed Executive Order 11381 enlarging Federal Council for Science and Technology to include representatives from DOT, HUD, and Dept. of State for more effective operation. (PD, 11/13/67,1537-8)
ERC appointed O. Hugo Schuck Director of Office of Control Theory and Application. Schuck had been Visiting Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Stanford Univ. while on leave as Director of Research at Honeywell, Inc. In his new position Schuck would supervise research on application of control theory to complex aeronautics and space vehicle systems. He had been President of the American Automatic Control Council, heading US. representation in the International Federation of Automatic Control. (ERC Release 67-37)
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
