With respect to the Shuttle operations and planning complex portion of the CSOC, the allegation is that the hardware and software will duplicate "obsolescent" equipment and software at JSC. This view inaccurately assumes that the requirement to duplicate JSC functions necessarily implies duplicating JSC software and hence, JSC hardware. In reality the Air Force intends to compete the SOPC as a system development rather than providing Government furnished software and only competing the hardware whose selection could otherwise be largely preordained. The request for proposal, which is planned to be released in 1984, will offer potential bidders that use of JSC software and they may elect to bid on that basis. However, the system specification for CSOC lists several criteria for determining if use of JSC software is justified. They are: Risk (technical, schedule, and cost), acquisition cost, life-cycle cost, equipment availability, compatibility with JSC systems, operating efficiency, differences in operations concepts between the Air Force and NASA, and commonality and interoperability within the CSOC. If an innovative bidder shows a significant life-cycle cost savings in combination with acceptable technical and schedule risk, that proposal will be favorably considered whether or not it includes extensive use of JSC shuttle software.

The joint Air Force/NASA SOPC requirements definition study will be completed this year, followed by competitive system design contracts to be awarded in late 1983, and a system acquisition contract award in the fall of 1984. We plan to begin facility construction this summer following contractor selection in early May. We envision the first satellite mission control center to be operational in late 1986 with the shuttle planning element operational a year later.

The CSOC development schedule is designed to take full advantage of the intervening time to conduct a prudent and deliberate SOPC program to include planning, competitive source selection, procurement, development and operational testing, and training for operating personnel. We are working closely with NASA in all these endeavors.

As you know, the President on July 4, 1982, announced a national space policy which reaffirmed the space transportation system as the primary space launch system for both national security and civil government missions. That policy emphasizes that our first STS priority is that it become fully operational and cost-effective. The policy also provides, for continuation of expendable launch vehicles until we have confidence that the demonstrated capabilities of the STS are able to meet all the schedule and performance requirements of our national security spacecraft.

The DOD strategy for transitioning payloads to the shuttle is consistent with this national policy and calls for acquisition of sufficient backup Titan vehicles to ensure a launch capability for our critical DOD missions. Our current policy was approved several years ago and provides for expendable launch vehicle (ELV) backup for the first two years of shuttle operations from the Kennedy launch site. The backup capability will be provided by the newly developed Titan III(34)D boosters.

DOD's strong commitment to the STS is evidenced by a defense budget for Shuttle development, operations and related costs (Titan backups, CSOC, and payloand transition) which exceeds $15 billion dollars through fiscal year 1988. DOD planning for the shuttle includes the transition of all national security spacecraft from their current expendable launch vehicles (Titan, Atlas, Delta) to the Shuttle by fiscal year 1989. With the exception of one program (DMSP), the transition will actually be completed by the end of fiscal year 1986. Through fiscal year 1987, the DOD has reserved 14 of the first 70 shuttle flights as dedicated missions for DOD payloads and will share the equivalence of 3 more. I emphasize that in some critical programs we have already optimized our spacecraft for the Shuttle and as such, we can no longer fly these on current expendables; thus the Shuttle has now become a truly essential element of our national defense posture.

All in all, our transition plan is working well. We developed the Titan III(34)D to provide a common booster for all of our payloads to use-both at the east and west coast launch sites-during the transition period. We also developed the IUS to provide a common shuttle and ELV compatible stage so shuttle backup could be readily achieved. The first launch of the Titan III(34)D/IUS combination took place in October 1982 and placed both satellites into extremely precise mission orbits. We expect the IUS will provide similar performance with the NASA tracking and data relay satellite on STS-6.

We are nearing the decision point regarding continuing the Titan production program. We will decide, following STS-6, if shuttle performance will meet our essential national security needs. If STS-6 is successful, we would plan not to proceed with long-lead procurement of material for the 17th and 18th Titan III(34)D vehicles. Such action would end DOD procurement of the Titan since we would have an

adequate number of Titan vehicles built or in production to meet our launch needs through the shuttle transition period.

There is considerable U.S. private sector activity including major aerospace firms, to obtain approval for the commercial production of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the provision of commercial launch services based on the commercial ELV's. The administration currently has the ELV commercialization subject under study including detailed policy considerations. There could be benefits to the Nation which may warrant our support of ELV commercialization, such as limited shuttle backup without continued Government investment as well as the potential for the United States to capture a greater share of the commercial and international market. We harbor some concerns, however, such as the adequacy of continued DOD launch support with both Titan and Atlas/Centaur vehicles through the period prior to shuttle transition and the potential impacts—both positive and negative—of additional launch alternatives on the shuttle program.

Looking toward the future, we are now examining DOD requirements which might be accommodated more effectively by a permanent manned presence in space. We are actively participating in the NASA space station activities and working with eight contractors in studying space station needs, attributes, and architectural options. We are also an active participant in the senior interagency group (SIG/space) space station working group which is addressing the policy issues which must be identified and resolved in order to establish the basis for an administration decision on whether to proceed with development of a permanently based, manned space station. In addition, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) has recently initiated a study of the potential military utility of a manned space station. The ŠAB will provide an independent appraisal of the potential military utility of a possible national space station to assist in our determining the appropriate level, if any, of DOD participation and involvement in the program.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to address one other issue that continues to be raised with increasing frequency. There is a misperception that somehow the United States is "militarizing space." The evidence usually cited is the size of the DOD space budget in comparison to NASA. Nothing could be more misleading.

Larger space budgets are dictated by many factors-such as the one billion dollar increase in shuttle launch charges which DOD must reimburse NASA over the next few years. Aside from that, we have discovered that doing business in space is just more cost effective for many support functions. Space-based platforms have a distinct competitive edge in satisfying DOD needs in areas such as communications, meteorology, warning and surveillance. To the extent that space-based systems present the most efficient way to perform these missions, that is where we apply

our resources.

Mr. Chairman, I believe our space efforts provide an enhancement of our national objectives of deterrence of hostilities and a more peaceful, stable, global environment.

DOD AERONAUTICS ACTIVITIES

I would now like to discuss our activities in the area of aeronautics technology. For fiscal year 1984, the Department of Defense research, development, test and evaluation budget for aircraft and related equipment is approximately 4.1 billion dollars. Of this amount, $445 million is devoted to aeronautics technology development, which is that portion of our program most closely aligned to NASA activities. I will review our more important programs in aircraft flight control, propulsion, structures and rotary wing technology.

A major focus of our aeronautics technology program is to increase the combat capability of tactical aircraft through advanced control concepts. In that regard, we are continuing to explore the benefits to be derived through the application of integrated flight-fire control on a modified F-15B test bed aircraft. Through this integration of the aircraft flight control, fire control and weapons systems, the pilot is able to fly to a predetermined position for optimum weapon launch for either air-toair or air-to-ground weapon delivery. Combat capability and survivability is enhanced, not only through increased weapon delivery accuracy, but also by the ability to fly highly evasive maneuvers in the terminal area. The results of the program have consistently shown significant increases in gunnery and bombing accuracy, as well as reduced firing times. The highlight of the program was the destruction of a OF-102 drone under maneuvering flight conditions, in September of last year.

In a related joint Air Force/NASA program on advanced fighter technology integration, an F-16 aircraft has been modified to provide the capability to idependently control aircraft translational and rotational degrees of freedom about each axis.

This results in unique maneuvering capabilities. The aircraft will be able to move up, down, or sideways without rotating: or, it can rotate about any axis: or, maneuver using any combinations of these motions. Coupling this unique maneuver capability with advanced digital flight control concepts results in significant improvements in weapon delivery accuracy and increased survivability. This aircraft entered flight test in July of last year, marking the first flight of an aircraft with a tri-plex digital flight control system and with no mechanical back-up.

The defense advanced research projects agency X-29 advanced technolgy demonstrator aircraft program is well underway, with fabrication scheduled to be completed in June of this year. The X-29 will demonstrate a number of advanced aircraft technology concepts, most notable among them is the forward swept wing. The X-29 configuration will feature improved low speed handling qualities, spin resistance, canard aerodynamics and relaxed static stability. First flight is planned for mid1984. Between fall-out and first flight, extensive structural ground testing will be completed, all systems and subsystems will be installed and checked for operation and the flight control system hardward and software will be validated for flight.

Looking toward the future, there is growing concern regarding the survivability and sustainability of our land based tactical aircraft in light of significant increases in threat capability. The Soviets have substantially increased the range and payload of their forward based aviation assets, thereby placing our tactical airfields in jeopardy. The Air Force is seriously considering the requirement for short take-off and landing or STOL capability in the next generation fighter. In order to insure that full-scale development of this aircraft can proceed with acceptable risk in the 1987 time frame, we will initiate a STOL technology demonstrator program this year. This program will investigate several concepts to reduce take-off and landing distances, including thrust vectoring and reversing nozzles, integrated propulsion and flight control, advanced high lift devices and soft/rough field landing gear.

Our interest in advance rotor craft concepts continues to be very strong, with the current focus on the application of the tilt rotor technology to the joint services vertical lift aircraft identified as the JVX. The JVX program is oriented toward developing a new aircraft to perform a variety of missions in all three services including Marine Corps assault and search and rescue for the Navy; search and rescue and special operations for the Air Force; and, special electronic mission aircraft for the Army. We are confident that we can build a single aircraft to address these diverse requirements, because of the knowledge and experience we have gained in the joint NASA/Army XV-15 tilt rotor research aircraft program. Our efforts during the past year were devoted to a variety of operational type tests, including ship board trials with the Navy, which served to eliminate many of the concerns regarding the ship compatibility of tilt rotor concept through the application of advanced materials and flight control technology.

In January of this year, a memorandum of agreement was signed by NASA and DARPA to develop the technology base for the X-wing/rotor concept. The X-wing is a stopped rotor V/STOL aircraft which builds on the circulation control technology base established by the Navy over the past several years. The X-wing will be tested on the rotor systems research aircraft (RSRA). Additional objectives of the program are to generate engineering development design data critical to any future system development, and to acquire flight test data on the X-wing/rotor system in the compound helicopter and stopped rotor flight modes. Sikorsky will fabricate the text Xwing/rotor to be fitted on the RSRA, with first flight planned for the latter half of

1985.

In a related and important area, the Army is pursuing the development of the advanced digitial optical control system (ADOCS). The objective of this program is to demonstrate the feasibility of control of the helicopter solely by optical signal paths with no degradation in performance compared to a conventional dual mechanical flight control system. ADOCS will not only increase survivability through reduced susceptibility to electromagnetic interference, but will also provide improved handling qualities to reduce pilot workload and improve safety, particularly in the napof-the-earth environment. ADOCS will be demonstrated on a modified UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter with first flight planned for early 1985.

We continue to make significant progress in improving propulsion system performance while striving to reduce development risk and costs, maintenance costs, and acquisition costs for a broad spectrum of aircraft applications. Last year we reported on a large fighter engine technology demonstrator with the potential for a 15-percent increase in thrust to weight ratio, a 15-percent reduction in fuel consumption and a 24-percent reduction in the number of parts as compared to the F100 engine. Recently, an extensive cyclic durability test series has been initiated on this variable-bypass configuration both to verify life and to improve our under

19-200 0-83--2

standing of the tradeoffs between durability and performance. Within the past year, we have also demonstrated similar performance improvements in the core of another configuration. Both of these efforts are ensuring technology readiness for transition to the joint fighter engine for the next-generation tactical fighter aircraft.

In the area of exhaust nozzles, we have recently tested carbon/carbon exhaustnozzle liners for over 300 hours in an F100 engine, including four hours at maximum afterburning. Further, in conjunction with a contractor independent research and development program, we have demonstrated a laboratory model of a two-dimensional, thrust vectoring and reversing nozzle on an F100 engine with no adverse effects on engine operation. Studies have shown that thrust vectoring and reversing provides substantial decreases in take-off and landing distances for fighter aircraft. We have planned programs to utilize carbon/carbon materials to demonstrate a flight-weight two-dimensional nozzle and to demonstrate thrust vectoring and reversing on a fighter aircraft configuration.

We have also initiated the modern technology demonstrator engine program to demonstrate in a 5,000-6,000 HP class engine configuration a 20 to 30 percent reduction in specific fuel consumption compared to existing engines in this class (T55, T56, T64). We plan to transition this technology demonstrator to full-scale engineering development in fiscal year 1986 in support of the JVX program.

Last year we reported that programs have been initiated to examine the utility and effectiveness of metal-matrix composite materials for aircraft. The results of these early investigations revealed the vast military application potential for both filamentary and particulate reinforced metals such as aluminum, magnesium and titanium. Our interest in metal-matrix composites stems from the fact that while the structural performance characteristics are similar to those of non-metallic composites, they can be fabricated with existing metal-working tools and machinery and therefore will not require large capital investment in new production facilities. To capitalize on these potential military applications and the obvious production advantages, several major demonstration projects have been initiated. Under an Air Force contract, Lockheed Georgia Company is designing and will fabricate and test a C-5 size aircraft wing box subcomponent of metal-matrix composite. This component will be 25 feet long and will be designed to withstand loadings in the vicinity of the outboard wing pylon.

Based on the successful exploratory development program in metal-matrix composite reinforced helicopter transmissions which led to appreciable reductions in the sound and vibration intensity, the Army has contracted with Boeing vertol to design, fabricate and test several full-scale integrally reinforced metal-matrix composite gear box assemblies for the CH-47 forward transmission housing. In addition, the Army is pursuing the development of metal-matrix composite landing gear skids for the UH-1H helicopter. Success in this program could lead to appreciable weight reductions in these components.

We are continuing to exploit the advantage of organic composite materials for aircraft applications. The Army's advanced composite airframe program ACAP is entering the fabrication phase this year. In the ACAP program we will develop and flight test an all composite helicopter fuselage. The goal of the program is to demonstrate a 17-percent reduction in cost and a 22-percent reduction in weight compared with a baseline design of conventional metal construction. Two different design approaches are currently being pursued under contract by Bell helicopter and Sikorsky, with both aircraft scheduled to begin flight tests in mid-1984.

An important aspect of our national effort to develop aeronautics technology is the availability of proper research facilities. This was recognized by the 94th Congres when they established the national aeronautics research faciities program. This program provided for the Langley National Transonic Facility; modifications to the Ames 40 x 80 foot wind tunnel, including the construction of the 80 x 120 foot test section; and, the aeropropulsion test facility at the Arnold Engineering Development Center. These facilities are now becoming operational and we are confident that they will contribute significantly to the U.S. ability to remain preeminent in aeronautics technology. We note, however, the unfortunate accident in the Ames 40 x 80 foot tunnel, which will require 21 to 24 months to repair. The availability of this facility is critical to the development of the JVX aircraft. Under the present repair schedule, JVX development can proceed without delay. However, any extention of the repair time will cause a commensurate delay in the development of JVX. We will work closely with NASA to assist in whatever way we can to regain the test capability of the 40 x 80 foot tunnel as soon as practical.

I would like to conclude my discussion of aeronautics activities by noting that over the past year we participated extensively with the President's science advisor, Dr. Keyworth, in a study to develop an aeronautics research and technology policy

for the 1980's and 1990's. That study, which was completed in November of last year, stressed the importance of superior aeronautical capability to national defense, and reaffired the Government's responsibility to maintain and advance that capability. The study further concluded that the present institutional framework to discharge the Government responsibility was the only approach that will ensure that: DOD needs will be met; aeronautics technology will be freely interchanged within the industrial community; technology to meet long term civil and military needs is developed; and, productivity of aeronautics research and technology is maximized. We fully support these conclusions and will work closely with NASA to insure that this policy is implemented to the maximum extent. I believe that through support of this policy, we will be assured of developing superior military aifcraft, and that the U.S. will maintain a viable and productive civil aircraft industry which will be a long term benefit to the Nation as well as DOD.

This concludes my formal statement. Mr. Chairman, I will be pleased to accept any questions the committee may have.

Senator GORTON. Thank you very much.

Let me start with this. Your written testimony indicates an all time high of Soviet space launches last year. What portion of these do you estimate are in support of military missions in the sense that we migh distinguish DOD from NASA space missions here?

Dr. DELAUER. I tend to be very, I would say, almost paranoid on this subject. I don't think they do any space launches that aren't military connected in my own view.

Senator GORTON. They are not engaged in anything like the scientific research in which we

Dr. DELAUER. I think they do, but I don't think that is their primary aim in life. They don't have a document like you read in the beginning which said that the focus should be in one place, but on the other hand, where the military is necessary-they don't make that distinction.

Do you have anything to add to that, Bob?

Dr. COOPER. I think that classically the Soviets have done about 80 percent of their flights primarily related to military operations and about 20 percent have been devoted to other kinds of activities that you might place in commercial or scientific bins if you had to put the launches in bins.

But interestingly enough from the intelligence estimates this year, this is the first year in my recollection there were no identifiable scientific satellites, that is where it was specific. It is the first time in my recollection, and I have followed this activity for probably 10 years or so, that this has occurred. So I suspect that the tempo of their military activity in space is increasing and the tempo of their scientific activity is somehow diminishing over the past few years.

Senator GORTON. Do you have any explanation or rationale for that change?

Dr. COOPER. No, I don't, although we know that the Soviets have a wide variety of experimental projects ongoing to increase the capability of their forces. It may just be that the total resource that they have available to work on space flight activity is now at least temporarily devoted to trying to bring these military related space missions to fruition.

Senator GORTON. Aerospace Daily recently reported that the Soviet Union's version of NASA's space shuttle Orbiter has been seen for the first time near Moscow. Your testimony indicates that the small version of this Orbiter could be launched [deleted]. Has