Oct 29 1963
From The Space Library
X-15 No. 1 was flown by NASA's Milton O. Thompson for the first time. Flight reached maximum speed of 2,712 mph (mach 4.10) and 74,400-ft. altitude. Thompson was the ninth pilot to fly the X-15 and the only civilian among the potential pilots of the X-20 (Dyna-Soar). (FRC Release 26-63; UPI, Chic. Trib., 10/30/63; Martin, NASA Hq.)
X-15 No. 2, damaged in a landing accident in Nov. 1962, would be returned to flight status early in 1964 with a number of improvements, NASA announced. Under a USAF contract with North American Aviation, Inc., the damaged X-15 was being modified to take another 13,500 lbs. of propellants. This would increase the rocket engine burning time from 86 sec. to 145 sec., which theoretically would add some 1,300 mph to maximum speed capability. There were no plans for extending altitude capability because it would increase re-entry stresses. Other modifications included strengthened nose wheel and landing skids, droppable wing tanks, provision for installation of two 50-gal. liquid-hydrogen tanks in the fuselage midsection, to be used for advanced propulsion experiments, and windshield changes and ablative material additions to cope with the higher heat accompanying higher speed. (FRC Release 27-63)
Speaking at the dedication of the Douglas Space Center in Huntington Beach, Calif., Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson emphasized the peaceful purpose of the U.S. in space research and compared our policy of cooperation in space to the secretive Soviet program "Those who say-as some are inclined to do-that our purposes and the purposes of communism in space exploration are the same misread and misunderstand the history and meaning of our times. In 1957 when the Soviets placed the first sputnik in orbit, the Communist rulers of Russia refused to consider sharing the fruits of space research with other nations-refused to consider committing themselves to developing space for peaceful purposes alone. In that same year, we of the United States clearly stated our own national policy and purpose. We committed and dedicated ourselves to sharing the fruits of space research with all mankind-and to the sole objective of developing the uses of space for peaceful purposes. "It is significant that while the Communist efforts are conducted behind a curtain of secrecy, we of the United States enjoy the cooperation, support and alliance of more than 60 nations for our space program. It is significant that while we of the United States can and do propose joint endeavors for peaceful purposes, the Soviet both rejects our proposals and devotes itself to attempts to dissuade us from continuing on the programs we have established. "America's commitment to the exploration of space for peaceful purposes-and for the good of all mankind-is a firm commitment. We will not retreat from our national purpose. We will not be turned aside in our national effort by the transparent maneuvers of those who would attempt to divert us. "Our national purpose in space is peace-not prestige. "Our foremost objective is not to send a man to the moon but to bring a greater measure of sunlight into the lives of men on earth." (CR,11/19/63, A7163)
Rep. J. Edward Roush (D.-Ind.) spoke on the space race: "Mr. Speaker, the announcement that the Soviet Union is withdrawing from the race to the moon has produced some disturbing reactions here in the United States. Here we have a breakdown in the Communist system. Here we have an opportunity to exert real leadership and show what a free economy can do. And we have those who are now advocating that we abandon our efforts to explore the universe. I am perturbed. Why must we do something just because the Soviet Union does it? Why should we refuse to do something just because the Soviet Union refuses to do it?" (CR, 10/29/63, 19384)
Addressing the Joint Meeting of Service Clubs, Bowman, Montana., NASA Administrator James E. Webb said "To take a clear lead in rocket power, or even to match the larger rockets the Russians may be building now, we must carry on with the development of the Saturn V. This giant rocket is needed to do extensive maneuvering in space near the earth and has the power to send the Apollo spacecraft on its journey to the moon and on prolonged flights in earth orbit. "The United States will inevitably need space power of this order even if we had no plans for going to the moon. We do not know now what future military requirements for rocket power may arise." (Text)
Project Gemini was running into serious problems in its onboard power systems, according to John Finney of the New York Times. The new fuel cell source for electric power was to have provided power for up to two weeks at only 1/6 to 1/10 the weight of batteries required to produce equal wattage. But fuel cell development has run into problems of leakage, inadequate lifetime, and poor thermal control. While such problems could probably be engineered out by the time fuel cells were needed for Apollo, the Gemini timetable might require batteries to be substituted for the fuel cells. This in turn might cut Gemini missions down to two days. NASA's new Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight Dr. George E. Mueller was said to favor beginning development of backup systems in some of the areas of new technology such as fuel cells but to be hampered in this approach by lack of money. (Finney, NYT, 10/30/63,26)
FAA Administrator Najeeb E. Halaby and his Deputy Administrator Gordon Bain testified on plans for supersonic transport before Senate Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Aviation. They said the U.S. would cancel its development of the supersonic transport if events proved the U.S. could not produce an aircraft competitive in price with the British-French version. But they argued that estimates previously presented to the Subcommittee on costs of the aircraft were too high. Aviation spokesman had estimated cost of the U.S. aircraft at from $30 million to $40 million per aircraft, compared with the $10 to $12 million estimated for the heavily subsidized European aircraft. Fan said U.S. aircraft should not cost more than $20 million. (AP, NYT, 10/30/63, 26)
USAF launched two unidentified satellites from Vandenberg AFB, Calif., on a Thrust-Augmented Thor-Agena D booster. (UPI, Wash. Post, 10/30/63; Pres. Rpt. on Space, 1963, 1/27/64)
Atlas missile was launched from Cape Canaveral in test of new slim silhouette warhead intended to present less image on enemy radar screens. Atlas went out of control 21/2 min. after launch and fell into the Atlantic far short of its intended goal. This was the sixth successive failure of Atlas missiles, the previous five at Vandenberg AFB, Calif. (AP, Wash. Eve. Star, 10/29/63)
USAF awarded contract to Goodyear Aerospace to study and develop a post-Echo passive communications satellite. Ten ft. in diameter, the satellites would be a wire grid covered with a plastic film. Once inflation in orbit had occurred, the plastic film would dissipate under ultraviolet radiation from the sun, and the circular wire grid would be left. It was thought that greater reflectivity could be achieved with the wire grid than with solid-skin spheres such as Echo and that they would have a more stable orbit since they would not be as subject to the solar wind. (Space Bus. Daily, 10/30/63, 172)
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
