March 1970
From The Space Library
Dr. James A. Van Allen, Univ. of Iowa Director of Physics and Astronomy Depts., discussed significance of lunar landings, in university lecture series: "The Apollo missions, to me, are straightforward though immensely difficult tasks. They do, however, yield relatively little in the way of fundamental understanding of nature. They are not scientific in that sense. There is a longstanding controversy as to whether a manned spacecraft is a better way to conduct science in space than an automated, commendable spacecraft. I'm sure there is no simple answer to that question. As the general romance and entertainment 'value of manned flight tend to wear off a little, I think this question will be attacked in a thoroughly pragmatic way." Apollo 11 lunar landing "might properly be compared to the explorations of Amundsen and Perry and Byrd in the Arctic and Antarctic, or perhaps Lindbergh flying the Atlantic. These are great achievements, heroic achievements, but the general potential of the Moon in its relationship to human life on a large scale is by no means obvious to me. I don't think any competent person has found a significant, economic, human use for the Moon." There was general feeling, mostly from aeronautics and allied industries, that development of space flight was important to U.S. future in same sense that aircraft development had been. "I think this is fundamentally a false analogy." Space Shuttle and space station were feasible. "Whether or not it is sensible to pursue them, I have a great difficulty in judging." (Univ of Iowa Spectator, 3/70, 6)
AIA President Karl G, Harr, Jr., said in Aerospace Technology: "In terms of its scope and novelty no single enterprise matches man's landing on the moon-the Apollo program. Nor has any other enterprise in history broken so much new technical ground. The technical and managerial ingredients of these space accomplishments, as well as of comparable national security programs, are available for broader applications in the nation's service. The problem is how to harness them effectively for such purposes. The Apollo program centered on a clearly stated goal with adequate funding for its attainment. Because it represented achievement of a national goal, lines of authority and responsibility were clear, simple and strong. Our nation's environmental problems, however, often do not enjoy such clear delineations. . . . The greatest need is for the development of innovative means to overcome such constraints so that technology's revolutionary new tools can be more effectively applied to the pressing needs of our society. . . . The transfer of aerospace technology to domestic areas is underway and is already making significant contributions. Magazine cited computer technology used by NASA to evaluate spacecraft systems and by USN to study pilot behavior as space age spinoff which might "soon be used to conduct highway safety research or to design new houses and urban renewal projects." (Aero Tech, 3/70; 3)
Soviet Cosmonaut Konstantin P. Feoktistov's comments on October November 1969 visit to U.S. were published in Space World: "During the talks with the astronauts and specialists from NASA we learned many interesting things about the preparation for, and realization of, the American Space project. We visited the enterprises of the North American Rockwell Company which manufactures the command module of Apollo. I managed to sit in Apollo 14 which was being tested then. I saw quite a few good design solutions." (Space World, 3/70, 38-9)
AIAA and AAS jointly established Technology Utilization Awards to stimulate aerospace engineers, scientists, and technicians to apply aerospace technology to commercial uses. Categories for consideration were pollution control, transportation, earth resources, communications; data handling, agriculture, medicine, housing, education, and earth environmental sciences. Abstracts on technology utilization ideas were due May 31 and full papers, Aug. 31. Plaques and $150-$800 awards would be presented in October. (NR News, 3/20/ 70,1; AAS Release)
- March
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
