Jul 9 1975
From The Space Library
Action by the House of Representatives to defer for 1 yr the funds budgeted for the Pioneer- Venus project [see 19 and 24 June] would "jeopardize the possible success of Pioneer-Venus," Sen.
John V. Tunney (D -Calif.) said in a letter to Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wisc.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The House recommended the delay to permit a budget decision in 1977 between the Large Space Telescope and the Pioneer-Venus mission. Sen. Tunney's letter said that the probe was timed for the 1978 launch window when earth and Venus would be in unusually favorable relative positions; the next favorable window would not appear for almost 2 yr, during 1980, and Venus would be considerably further away from the earth at that time than it would be during 1978. A delay in funding would postpone the program for at least 18 mo, would require design changes, and might cost $50 million more than original estimates.
Sen. Tunney said that the case for continued funding was a strong one. Most scientists felt that investigation of the Venusian atmosphere would provide valuable meteorological information that might substantially enhance weather-prediction capabilities.
Another reason for continuation of the program is that, in an era of high unemployment, few sectors had suffered more devastating setbacks than the aerospace industry. The Pioneer-Venus program had created more than 1500 jobs, which would be threatened by termination or delay of the program.
Curtailment of an ongoing scientific concept like Pioneer-Venus would severely reduce credibility of the government's long-term commitments, with added time, difficulty, and cost for future projects as private contractors would seek to protect themselves.
Sen. Tunney pointed out that the House's juxtaposition of funding for Pioneer-Venus with funding for the Large Space Telescope was inappropriate; the programs were not competing, but complementary. Pioneer-Venus would provide information on our closest neighbor, whereas LST would collect deep-space data of unprecedented scope and detail. "Cutting one program for the sake of the other would mean sacrificing a distinguishable body of scientific knowledge which would not be replaceable." (Text, letter, Tunney to Proxmire, 9 July 75; CR, 26 July 75, S13882-83)
The rocket-powered M2-F3 lifting body-a wingless vehicle that derives aerodynamic lift from its body shape-arrived for display at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. In a flight program beginning in 1963 and ending in 1972, the three versions of the M-2 vehicle had demonstrated that a manned reentry vehicle could reenter from space, maneuver through the atmosphere, and safely make a deadstick landing.
M2-F3 was the third version of Ames Research Center's M-2 lifting-body design. The first, M2-F1, was a lightweight plywood glider towed to altitude by a C-47 and released, whereupon the pilot guided the craft to a landing. A heavier version, M2-F2, was launched from underneath the wing of a B-52 aircraft. After nearly a year of testing the unpowered vehicle, an XRL-11 rocket engine was installed in preparation for rocket-powered flight; on the second glide flight after engine installation, the vehicle crashed, badly damaging the vehicle and injuring the pilot. The lifting body was rebuilt, incorporating modifications, and designated M2-F3. The M2-F3 made more than 37 glide and powered flights with a jet reaction control system that successfully demonstrated the feasibility of using a single system from orbit to landing.
A lifting body design that had been considered for the reentry vehicle in the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs was rejected in favor of a ballistic reentry design. The use by Space Shuttle of the maneuver-to-a-deadstick-landing concept was possible largely because of the confidence level built up by 9 yr of lifting-body flight tests. (NASA Release 75-199; A&A 62 through A&A 74)
Marshall Space Flight Center announced award of two contracts for 356 aluminum hand forgings for Space Shuttle solid-rocket boosters. A $465 935 contract went to Aluminum Co. of America and $62 900 went to Weber Metals & Supply Co. for forward-skirt thrust post fittings, inboard aft-skirt actuator support brackets, aft-skirt splice fittings, and aft-skirt holddown posts. (MSFC Release 75-151)
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
