Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967 - NASA's History Office

ASTRONAUTICS AND AERONAUTICS, 1967 April 17
they should have done, but I can say the same thing about us at NASA.”
He stated his conviction that he was obligated to “act responsibly in
respecting confidences between himself and contractors.~’ Denying that
undue risks were taken in order to speed the program, Webb emphasized
that NASA had “never put schedule above safety.” Apollo 2044 Review
Board’s study was “a good report,” he said, but it should not be con-
strued to be an evaluation of the entire space program: “The board has
done an outstanding investigation of one accident but it is not a full and
fair appraisal of the space program . . . [and] cannot be taken as a guide
to the realities of this program. . . .” In response to questioning Webb
stated that, in his judgment, the pacing item in the manned lunar land-
ing program remained the Saturn V booster, and when it was ready for
manned flight there would be a spacecraft ready.
Committee Chairman Clinton P. Anderson (D-N.Mex.) requested
that NASA witnesses appear again not later than May 9 to detail changes
the program, as suggested by Webb. (Wilford, NYT, 4/18/67, C26;
O’Toole, W Post, 4/18/67, Al; SBD, 4/18/67, 275)
Astronauts Donald K. Slayton, Alan B. Shepard, Walter M. Schirra, Jr.,
Frank Borman, and James A. McDivitt, testifying before the House
Committee on Science and Astronautics’ Subcommittee on NASA Oversight,
expressed confidence in NASA’s management of U.S. space program.
They noted that there had been only one mishap in the program, compared
with 16 successful manned flights under the same management.
Since fire had been foreseen as a significant danger in orbit but not on
the launch pad before fueling of the launch vehicle, everyone had been
‘‘lulled into a sense of false security . . , [and] grossly underestimated
the fire potential of the spacecraft,” they said. Schirra explained confidence
astronauts felt prior to the fire Jan. 27: “The back-up crew [of
which Schirra was commander] had left the Cape with the feeling that
we had a good spacecraft behind us. . . . I was not at all prepared for
the news I received when I arrived at Houston.” (Hines, W Star,
4/18/67, 1)
April 17-20: Some of the more important preliminary results from NASA’s
interplanetary spacecraft Pioneer F’Z {launched Dee. 16,1965) and VZZ
(launched Aug. 17, 1966) were presented at American Geophysical
Union’s 48th annual meeting in Washington, D.C. Spacecraft, which had
flown almost 200 million mi in their solar orbits, had provided: (1) better
definition of solar atmosphere; (2) additional data on solar wind; and
(3) improved measurement of earth’s magnetosphere. Report by ARC
scientists Dr. John H. Wolfe, R. W. Silva, and D. D. McKibbin indicated
that magnetosphere ends about 3.5 million mi from earth going away
from the sun; previous estimates had varied from 240,000 mi to 100
million mi. (NASA Release 674%)
April 18: NASA Administrator James E. Webb submitted summary of M/G
Samuel Phillips’ (USAF) report on North American Aviation, Inc.’s
workmanship (the “Phillips Report”) to the Senate Committee on Aeronautical
and Space Sciences: “Our main criticism was that the Space
and Information Division was overmanned and that the S-I1 and CSM
programs could be done, and done better by fewer people, better organized
with particular emphasis on achieving greater competence in key
management and technical positions. . . . Work tasks were inadequately
defined and scheduled . . . and, largely as a result of these
conditions, budget and control were deficient.
115