Jan 29 1968
From The Space Library
President Johnson sent message to Congress on FY 1969 budget. Praising effectiveness of NASA'S cost reduction efforts, he noted that NASA by utilizing idle, excess, and surplus Government property had avoided expenditures of over $22 million for new equipment and facilities and had saved over $16 million by improving procurement practices. However, to meet urgent national needs in other areas, further reductions still had to be made. "New obligational authority requested for [NASA] . . . is about $220 million below the 1968 amount. Expenditures will be $230 million below 1968, $850 million below 1967, and over $1.3 billion less than in 1966. This reduction reflects our progress beyond the costly research and development phases of the manned lunar mission, as well as the immediate need to postpone spending for new projects wherever possible. "Based on a careful examination of priorities, the 1969 budget provides increases in some areas to prepare for important advances in future years, while deferring other less urgent, new projects. The production of our large Saturn-class space boosters is continued but at a reduced rate. The development of a nuclear rocket engine to increase the capability of our Saturn V launch vehicle is also continued, but at a smaller size and thrust than originally planned, to reduce development cost." Planetary exploration would be continued with development of "a new spacecraft for launch in 1973 to orbit and land on Mars. This new Mars mission will cost much less than half the Voyager program included in last year's budget. Although the scientific result of this new mission will be less than that of the Voyager, it will still provide extremely valuable data and serve as a building block for planetary exploration systems of the future." Request for DOD, increased "to assure that our defense capabilities remain equal to any challenge or threat," included funds to: (1) maintain strategic deterrent by converting from Minuteman II to Poseidon missiles with multiple warheads and modernizing manned bomber force with additional F-111B aircraft and improved short-range attack missiles; (2) proceed with procurement of Sentinel missile defense system for defense against possible Communist Chinese threat and revamp air defense; (3) augment firepower, mobility, and readiness of general-purpose forces by improving air defenses with new fixed-wing aircraft, helicopters, and weapon systems, (4) improve airlift-sealift capability by purchasing additional C-5A aircraft and procuring fast deployment logistics ship; and (5) continue vigorous R&D effort. (The Budget of the United States Government, FY 1969, 26-9)
President Johnson submitted $186.1-billion FY 1969 budget request to Congress, including $6.76-billion total space budget. Of this sum, NASA would receive $4.37 billion, smallest amount since 1963; DOD space efforts, $2.216 billion, AEC space applications, $143 million; and ESSA satellite system, $30.6 million. NASA FY 1969 budget, $218 million less than for FY 1968, provided for $3.677 billion to be spent for R&D (down $233 million from FY 1968 and $557 million from FY 1967) ; $45 million for construction of facilities; and $648 million for administrative operations. Project Apollo would be kept on schedule, development of NERVA. I would be continued, and launch plans would be made for two pioneer flights toward Jupiter and one Sunblazer probe. Research on Earth Resources Observation Satellite would continue, but development would be postponed. OGO program would be phased out after OGO-F. NASA'S $2.5-billion Voyager program would be replaced with a $500-million, four-mission Mars orbiter project. Although NASA'S $2.039-billion Apollo budget request accounted for 47% of total NASA budget, amount for Apollo was $517 million less than for FY 1968, reflecting declining expenditures as program neared its completion. Requested $439.6 million for Apollo Applications (AA) program was less than half of amount originally sought and necessitated cancellation of planned 14-day AAP-1A flight. Some $76.9 million-a $10.1-million increase over FY 1968-was allotted for NASA's aeronautics program, with most of increase attributed to additional supporting research in subsonic aircraft technology. XB-70 and X-15 research programs would be phased out by December 1968. Space science and applications were allotted $538.2 million, with 18 major NASA launches and 13 DOD-NASA launches scheduled for 1968. Major portions of DOD space budget would be spent on MOL-$600 million, compared with $431 million requested for FY 1968., Some $60.4 million was allocated for defense and tactical satellite communications programs, and $10.5 million for Vela nuclear test detection satellite program. AEC space budget-$11 million higher than for FY 1968-included $72 million for Project Rover, with $39 million for NERVA system. Most of ESSA's funds would be used for development of sensors and satellite system in support of World Weather Watch and improved techniques for warning services. FAA'S request included $351 million for SST development, $251 million increase over FY 1968 and one of largest increases given to any domestic program. It was principal item in DOT's $449-million request for R&D. (Text; DOD Budget Summary; W Post, 1/16/68, A5; AP, B Sun, 1/16/68, A3; McNamara Statement; DOD Background Briefing; NASA Release, 1/29/68; W Star, 1/29/68, A7; Clark, NYT, 1/30/68, 16; Aero Tech, 2/12/68, 17-35)
NASA released transcript of Jan. 27 background briefing on NASA FY 1969 budget, in which Administrator James E Webb explained how Apollo program had been kept close to schedule in spite of severe budget cuts. Although budget had been reduced $600-million in 1964, NASA had been given great deal of flexibility to reprogram funds. "This in effect permitted the driving forward of the program even though there were substantial reductions in the plan. I think if you examine all of the very large systems development in the country, you will not find a one that has kept more on schedule, given more for the money, and more nearly realized its goals on time than the Apollo, in spite of the fire, in spite of the reductions. The kind of rolling readjustment that we have had to make . . . has involved very large problems. And the projections we made as to our capability to meet problems of that kind have pretty well been borne out. . . . The fact is within this short period of time the Saturn V has flown. The heat shield on the Apollo has been improved. Service module has been tested. LM has been tested. And we have I think moved about as rapidly as any program-certainly more rapidly than any program of a comparable complexity." Webb said NASA and DOD were studying closer cooperation "in the area of orbiting laboratories," such as MOL and Saturn V Workshop. He envisioned production of "a basic capability of a rather primitive sort, something like an Antarctic base flown on the Saturn V which could be used for any national purpose." (Transcript)
In statement on DOD FY 1969 budget released by Senate Armed Services Committee, Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara said DOD was requesting $79 million more for R&D in FY 1969 than in FY 1968 to "support more vigorously many scientific fields that show great promise and clear relevance to our future security." DOD would continue working closely with NASA to ensure maximum interchange of personnel, ideas, technology, and hardware and to avoid wasteful duplication of effort in national space program. Under new budget work on MOL development would be increased substantially. "FY 1969 is expected to be a peak year of activity in the MOL program, including the completion of a major portion of the structural test programs on flight hardware, continued fabrication of hardware for the first three flights, developmental test firings of the seven-segment solid motors for the Titan III-M, and installation of the ground equipment in the launch complex." (Text)
Lee B. James, Deputy Director of Apollo Program in OMSF, returned to MSFC's Industrial Operations as Deputy Director for Special Activities, MSFC Director of Industrial Operations B/G Edmund F. O'Connor (USAF) announced. Before assignment with OMSF, James had been manager of Saturn I and Saturn IB programs at MSFC. (MSFC Release 68-16; Marshall Star, 2/7/68, 4)
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
