C. CORRESPONDENCE OF THE HONORABLE OLIN E. TEAGUE WITH THE NASA MANNED SPACE FLIGHT CENTER DIRECTORS Dr. KURT H. DEBUS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE OF SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, Washington, D.C., September 22, 1967. Director, John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA, DEAR DR. DEBUS: The Subcommittee on NASA Oversight, as a part of its continuing review of the national space program, has directed the staff of the Subcommittee to review specific areas of effort. It seems appropriate at this time to examine the status of the Apollo program and the Apollo Applications program now that the changes following the Apollo accident of January 1967 are well underway and the funding for the Apollo Applications program is known. Performance, cost, and schedule are the primary emphases of this study recognizing that remedial actions taken following the Apollo accident can now be assessed. With a major effort in the Apollo Applications program now underway, an understanding of its emphasis and interaction with the Apollo program seems essential also. With this in mind, I have designated Mr. James E. Wilson, assisted by Mr. Peter A. Gerardi, of our committee staff, to undertake this study. Please have whomever you may designate contact Mr. Wilson on Mr. Gerardi. It is my objective that a concise review of the Apollo and Apollo Applications programs will result from this study which will be useful to the committee during the fiscal year 1969 authorization hearings. Your contribution to the study will aid in this objective. Sincerely yours, OLIN E. TEAGUE, Chairman, Subcommittee on NASA Oversight. Note: Similar correspondence were sent to Dr. Wernher von Braun, Marshall Space Flight Center, and Dr. Robert R. Gilruth, Manned Spacecraft Center. (214) D. ABSTRACT OF STAFF CONFERENCES WITH NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF MANNED SPACE FLIGHT-INTRODUCTORY CONFERENCE OCTOBER 5, 1967 BRIEFING FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, In his presentation on October 5, 1967, General Phillips, the Apollo Program Director, discussed Apollo Mission Planning, major accomplishments, significant problems, and resources. He also gave a status assessment of the major elements of the Apollo Program. He stated his belief that the Apollo Program was proceeding soundly to the attainment of its objective to develop man's capability to operate effectively in space and in the lunar environment. He pointed out, however, that the unfortunate accident in January, in which an Apollo crew was lost, had a major impact on the program and led to the introduction of substantial technical changes, particularly in the spacecraft, as well as the adoption of significant operating changes. General Phillips highlighted the changes which had been made in the Apollo flight schedule since last year. He emphasized that the basic mission development strategy remained unchanged, but that some of the flexibility, built in from the start, had been used to accommodate the setback of the Apollo 204 accident. The current plan still retains the ability to continue operations on the Uprated Saturn I if difficulties are encountered on the Saturn V. General Phillips reported that the Uprated Saturn I program was in good shape and that all deliveries support requirements. The Uprated Saturn I vehicle for launch of an unmanned LM (Apollo 5) next year was stacked at KSC. With respect to the Saturn V program, the technical and production problems with the S-II stage reported last year have been resolved but the S-II delivery trend was being closely watched to assure meeting program requirements. The first two Saturn V launch vehicles (Apollo 4 and 6) were stacked at KSC. In the CSM Program, Block I production is essentially complete. However, the extensive changes made in the Block II design and the additional ground testing required to qualify these changes have made CSM deliveries a pacing item in the launch schedule. General Phillips termed the CSM production and checkout as a major challenge which involved significantly rebuilding the initial Block II CSM's which were essentially complete at the time when far-reaching design changes were introduced. Progress in this area has been somewhat slower than earlier hoped. In addition, the changes in the CSM, as well as in the LM, have posed the problem of increased spacecraft weight and a resultant requirement for modification and requalification of the earth landing system. In the Lunar Module Program, the most significant accomplishment was delivery of LM-1, the first flight article, to KSC. Hardware changes to reduce the fire hazard in the LM have been defined and the ground test program has been realigned to accommodate these changes. General Phillips reported that the Apollo Program was all on contract, with some definitization work still being done on the CSM and the S-II Stage. He indicated that details about incentive fees for various contracts could be provided during the course of the trip to the Field Centers and contractors. Other specific items which General Phillips suggested might be pursued further with Centers or Contractors were organization changes, actions being taken by NAA to deliver CSM's on schedule, technical details of the LM ascent engine injector problem and detailed reasons for slippage in LM deliveries over the past year. In the resources area he reported that the cost reduction efforts described last year had produced results and costs started down in the second quarter of fiscal year 1967. Then in the latter part of fiscal year 1967 the further reductions in cost were primarily a function of the slowdown during the assessment of changes to be made after the accident. In assessing the major elements of the program, General Phillips characterized the launch vehicles, GSE and Network as "Good Shape" whereas the Block II CSM is a critical item for scheduled launches in 1968 and the LM is considered a major problem. He believes there is a reasonable probability of being able to do what is necessary to accomplish a manned lunar landing by the end of 1969. HOUSE OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF STUDY BACKGROUND 1965 Pacing Systems of the Apollo Program. Objective: To review Apollo Program midpoint status with sharp focus on those items controlling progress. 1966 Apollo Program Pace and Progress. Objective: To review status of Apollo Program with particular emphasis on the costs, performance and schedules for obtaining a manned lunar landing and return by 1970. MANNED SPACE FLIGHT 1967 APOLLO AND APOLLO APPLICATIONS Objectives: To review performance schedule and resources status of the Apollo Program. To review performance schedule and resources status of the Apollo Applications Program. To determine the interaction between the Apollo and Apollo Applications Programs. Chrysler, Michoud............ MAJOR CONTRACTOR PRESENTATIONS Boeing, Michoud, KSC, Washington, D.C... Date Oct. 31, 1967 NAA, Downey.. McDonnell-Douglas, Huntington Beach........ Nov. 1,1967 Presenters H. D. Lowrey, space division president; Mr. Majchrzak, Richard H. Nelson, general manager. Walter Burke, president; Robert Lindley and John . Mr. Gavin, Lunar module; Saul Ferdman, AAP. G. H. Putt, vice president and assistant general manager. T. D. Smith, senior director, Saturn systems. A. Current organization, organizational changes. C. Progress analysis-launch vehicles and spacecraft. II. Schedules: A. Operating plan. B. Hardware status-key systems and subsystems. III. Resources: A. Cost summaries/systems, etc. B. Cost summaries/manpower. The basic mission development strategy of the Apollo Flight Program has not changed. It has, however, been necessary to exercise some of the elements of the flexibility of that strategy which were built in from the beginning. Chart No. I shows the progressive steps currently planned in the Apollo Flight Program leading to achievement of the lunar landing. The first phase, Saturn I Space Vehicle (S/V) Development, was accomplished in a series of three flights (AS-201, AS-203, and AS202) in 1966. In two of these flights, unmanned Block I spacecraft were launched in suborbital flights; in the other flight, the restart capability of the S-IVB stage, a requirement for the lunar mission, was successfully demonstrated. Saturn I flights are planned in 1968 to flight test the Lunar Module (LM) in an unmanned configuration and to conduct those operations of the Command and Service Module (CSM) required before proceeding to CSM/LM operations flights with Saturn V. Unmanned Saturn V Space Vehicle Development flights are scheduled to start this year with Apollo 4 (SA-501 launch vehicle and unmanned Block I ČSM 017). This mission will be the first flight test of the full Saturn V launch vehicle and represents a major developmental milestone in the United States Space Program. Following successful unmanned development flights of the Saturn V, a series of manned CSM/LM operations flights will be conducted in earth orbit as long as necessary to develop and mature the total system before proceeding with Lunar Mission Simulations and the Lunar Missions. |