Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967 - NASA's History Office

November 3 ASTRONAUTICS AND AERONAUTICS, 1967
tine1 System Evaluation Agency (SSEA) at WSMR to provide independent
evaluation, review, and testing. Existing Nike-X organization, under
command of L/G Austin W. Betts (USA), Chief of R&D, would continue
(separately from Sentinel System) to perform: R&D, design of equip-
ment to be used for tests of the penetration capabilities of US. offensive
missiles, and mission of protecting US. against large-scale attacks. (DOD
Release 105947)
* CNO Adm. Thomas H. Moorer officially denied news reports on F-111B
program cancellation or drastic change: ‘‘The reports may have origi-
nated with a manufacturer’s brochure received by the Navy.” Brochure
would have no “official standing,” he said. Earlier in the day ABC and
Metromedia News reported USN and Congressional sources saying czn-
cellation was official. In Fort Worth, General Dynamics COT. President
Frank W. Davis insisted the F-111 was meeting its objectives and even
exceeding them in some cases.
Navy’s highest-ranking admirals had recommended cancellation of
F-111B and recasting of major features in a more economic and agile
swept-wing fighter, Richard Witkin reported in New Yorlc Times.
Admirals’ arguments were listed. Overweight aircraft would perform
only one of its two planned missions-defense of fleet against air attack.
Air-to-air and air-to-ground missions would be beyond capability of
F-lllB, and admirals had been convinced that an aircraft capable
of all missions could be developed and delivered to the fleet by 1973. To
arrive at aircraft they wanted, admirals would scrap wings and fuselage
of F-111B; they would keep proven features, such as TF-30 engines,
Phoenix air-to-air missiles, advanced radar and electronic gear-new air-
craft weighing 52,000 Ibs compared with F-111B’s 75,000 lbs and
costing $4-6 million compared with $8-10 million. Navy’s limited
budget could not stand the soaring costs (in the light of technical trou-
bles delaying F-111B’s delivery on schedule) , while potential enemy’s
development of better aircraft calIed for dompetitive U.S. development.
An aircraft that would keep weight down to 52,000 lbs and exploit
the swept-wing and engine features of F-111B had been proposed by
McDonnell Douglas Corp. and Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. ;
their promised delivery to the Navy would be less than two years behind
that for F-111B, which was three years behind schedule, Witkin reported.
(DOD Release 1062-67; Witkin, NYT, 11/4/67,1; AP, W Post, 11/4/67,
A10)
* At Huntsville, Ala., formal dedication of Toftoy Hall, named for the late
M/G Holger N. Toftoy (USA, Ret.), US. missile pioneer who died
Apr. 19, was made by Mrs. Hazel Toftoy, MSFC Director Wernher von
Braun, and Army Missile Command Commander M/G Charles W. Eifler
(USA). Toftoy Hall would house Missile Components Dept. of the Army
Missile and Munitions Center and School. (Marshall Star, 11/1/67, 1)
November 4: NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight Dr.
George Mueller announced revised Apollo mission schedule of six
flights in 1968 and five in 1969 using “200-series” (Uprated Saturn)
and “500-series” (Saturn V) launch vehicles to test and qualify Com-
mand, Service, and Lunar Modules (CSM and LM) . Schedule for 1968
would include: Apollo/Saturn 204 (AS-204), first unmanned test of
LM in earth orbit; AS-502, second unmanned flight test of Saturn V
and Apollo C&SM; AS-503, third unmanned test of Saturn V and
C&SM; AS-206, second unmanned flight test of LM in earth orbit; AS-
330