Imágenes de páginas

Gen. STAFFORD. First, with respect to the efforts on the Apollo-Soyuz test program where you have expressed concern, and the chairman has, and I think Mr. Winn and several other people, I was not involved until after the then administration made the decision to proceed with the Apollo-Soyuz test program. At that time I became vice chairman of the negotiating group and commander of the mission.

One thing I set out to assure was that it was at least a 50-50 arrangement. It was. In certain ways we learned lots more about them than they did about us. In fact, at the end of that program I had a session with the director of the program, and he said if the Russians learned anything from us, it would have been in program management. It was really a mission of techniques and not technology. We said we would meet them at a certain time, space, and velocity, and we joined both docking mechanisms. Several times I refused to fly the mission until the Soviets met certain aspects. One was open up the launchsite and the control center. To me, it wasn't any giveaway. The transfer of technology was, to me, minimal. In fact, we learned quite a bit about them, particularly since their program had been closed.

With respect to the transfer of weather data, and basic research, I think this can yield dividends whether it is the Soviet Union or any foreign country. We have an ongoing program in NASA for this.

As far as the future program, again this has to be taken with very detailed analysis and with a step-by-step effort.

Mr. MILFORD. Do you feel we could benefit without giving anything away by pusuing future joint space ventures?

General STAFFORD. It does have a potential for the future, but it has to be looked at on a step-by-step basis.

Mr. MILFORD. The other area I wanted to get into, for lack of a better term, would be the "aging scientists" that we see at NASA and the various Government-sponsored laboratories throughout all of Government.

As I visit these laboratories, including your own, in private conversations it seems to come to the forefront that NASA is concerned and some of your Air Force labs are concerned with the fact that the folks are getting a little older and we don't have new ones coming on board. Some have volunteered or expressed that the good ones have either moved on to industry or up in management. And they express a concern that in the in-house lab we may through the civil service rules and other things, have a fellow who is kind of perpetuating his own job or making a career out of trying to discover some particular area or some particular project.

Are you concerned with this, just a personal opinion.

General STAFFORD. A personal opinion, it was of concern to me at NASA and where I am today with respect to my engineering talent that I have there in the civil service sector. As you know, when you have a continually decreasing base of manpower and you have people there who got into the system as a young person and you don't have the ability to have a turnover and hire people, you have problems. Those are the facts of life, and it is true for Air Force and NASA and the other agencies.

Mr. MILFORD. Do you feel that we maybe ought to take a look at some legislation for perhaps finding these people jobs in other areas of Government so that we could use new people at these laboratories?

24-215 O-78-18

General STAFFORD. I think it would be a worthwhile effort. In fact, I remember the chairman talked to me several times when I was at NASA about this problem he observed down there about the aging of the engineering talent. I know I have it out there in my area. Mr. TEAGUE. Dale, will you yield to me there?


Mr. TEAGUE. I thought about this from a completely different direction. I thought about you when you are up in space you must be vitally concerned about those people on the ground who are working with you. For example, Apollo 13, I understand a very young man on the civil service ladder was responsible or at least made a big contribution to that flight getting back.

Dale, I understand that we will be asked by NASA this year if we want to try to give the administrators some leeway in the Civil Service field as to the very thing you are talking about.

We have spoken about the flight laboratories.

Mr. MILFORD. I just had a horrible thought, Mr. Chairman. Suppose they start trying to apply that to Congress? [Laughter.]

One final thing. General, are you familiar with the microwave landing research program both civil and military? Have you had any experience with this?

General STAFFORD. I just know of the general areas. We are not per se charged with the responsibility of testing a microwave landing system, flight testing. I know just about the rudimentary parts of the effort and I think I would be unqualified to comment on it.

Mr. MILFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TEAGUE. We appreciate you coming here and working with us. Thank you very much.

General STAFFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TEAGUE. Our next witness will be Mr. Bob Johnson, from McDonnell Douglas.

Bob, I didn't mention your name in the beginning because I wasn't thinking fast enough. We appreciate your coming here.


Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In aerospace one learns to be flexible. May I present you some options, considering the time, and I assure you it is only yours that I worry about since I have plenty of time. I could just enter my statement in the record which would take essentially no more time. I could summarize rather quickly utilizing the viewgraphs that were to be a part of the presentation. The major points I wanted to make would take 8 minutes. If you wanted to hear a lessened version of the basic statement, that would take 16 minutes.

Mr. TEAGUE. Without objection, let's place your statement in the record and take the shorter version.

[The prepared statement of R. L. Johnson follows:]

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]



Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this committee, I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you and express some of the views of McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company concerning future space programs.

NASA's Skylab and Apollo programs have proved that man can function usefully in space. With the Space Transportation System soon to become operational, we will have the opportunity to undertake new and bold initiatives. It is vital that these initiatives address our increasing concerns with energy, the environment, resources, economics, and international cooperation; improve the quality of life on earth; and contribute toward social and economic progress.

At McDonnell Douglas, we have participated in the national space program since its inception. Our experience with Mercury, Gemini, Skylab, and launch vehicles, and our current efforts on Spacelab and Shuttle support give us realistic insight into the factors that affect selection of future space programs. Moreover, as citizens and taxpayers, we are concerned with the directions in which the frontiers of science and technology should be expanded. And finally, I submit that our basic nature as a profit-oriented enterprise focuses on additional considerations that can be of value to the government: profitability, return on investment, and commercial potential.

In my presentation today, I want to share with you some of our current viewpoints concerning U.S. R&D expenditures, resultant benefits, and the role of private business; an evaluation of the national space program from the industrial standpoint; some proposed criteria for selection of future space efforts; our view of future space-program planning; and some recommendations based on these considerations.

NASA and industry have worked well together in bringing about the U. S. space achievements of the past, and we at McDonnell Douglas plan to continue our involvement with NASA in the space programs of the future. It is clear, however, that planning for the next phase of space activity must consider the competing demands that will continue to be placed on this nation's financial resources. We therefore believe that an evolutionary approach that makes maximum use of assets already developed is highly desirable. further believe that the capabilities and tools needed to take the first evolutionary steps are now available, and that the time is right to get these R&D steps under way.



« AnteriorContinuar »