Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967 - NASA's History Office

December 3 ASTRONAUTICS AND AERONAUTICS, 1967
9 William Littlewood, a former vice president of American Airlines and
developer of the DC-3 aircraft, died at age 69. Recipient of numerous
awards-including Wright Brothers Medal, Flight Safety Foundation
Medal, and Guggenheim Medal-Littlewood had been a member of
NACA, Flight Safety Foundation, Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory board
of directors, U.K. Royal Aeronautical Society, and Canadian Aeronautics
and Space Institute. (NYT, 12/5/67, 45; W Star, 12/5/67, B4)
December 4: NASA’s total procurement in N 1967 fell to $4.651 billion-8%
below FY 1%6---and procurement actions dropped to 283,000-11%
less than FX 1966-because of budget reductions, Aerospace Technology
reported. NASA’s “Annual Procurement Report, Fiscal Year 1967” disclosed
that 83% of net dollar value went directly to business firms;
4% to education and other nonprofit institutions; 5% to Cal Tech for
operating JPL; and 8% to other Government agencies. NASA continued
its policy of making greater use of incentive contracts, awarding 81
new incentive contracts and converting 11 cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts to
incentive awards during FY 1967. North American Rockwell Corp. led in
dollar amount of NASA awards, receiving 25.46% of total. (Aero Tech,
12/4/67,46)
0 Thomas O’Toole, writing in the Washington Post, reviewed NASA’s “growing
role in the Vietnam war.” Both NASA and DOD were reluctant to disclose
the size of NASA’s defense effort, he charged, “but it’s known that
[OART] is spending between $4 million and $5 million a year directing
the efforts of 100 scientists and engineers to tasks vital to the Vietnam
war.” Results of NASA research, he said, included a new acoustic detector
able to locate mortars by measuring ground vibrations, a more-steerable
parachute, aircraft engines too quiet to be beard during approach, a
scissors-like sling for helicopter rescues, and a helicopter which did not
make a chopper noise. Although NASA willingly participated in defense
research, its authorization to do so wai ‘‘f~~~y,” he said, ‘based onIy on
a section of the 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act which directed
NASA to make available to defense organizations “discoveries that have
military value or significance.” NASA was “nervous” about its military
role, he asserted, because of its unclear authorization, fear of congres-
sional inquiry, and fear of international reaction.
Sen. Strom Thurmond (R3.C.) later attacked O’Toole’s article on
the Senate floor: “One might expect that if . . . a story of this sort
were to be dug up, the article would express gratification that the tax-
payer’s money was being used on behalf of the American people . . .
[and not purport to be] shocked that NASA projects help our national
objective. . . . I am firmly of the conviction that anything that can be
developed technically to save a single American life in Vietnam, espe-
cially by any individual or organization that is being paid by American
taxpayers, belongs freely to our soldiers. . . .
“The article is obviously a patently calculated leak. The informed
details it provides on NASA’s research and technical work proves
this. . . . This is a shocking thing, that is not a matter of press freedom,
or even of press license, but plain aid and comfort to the enemy. . . .
Publishers and editors should accept their responsibility to prevent
such . . . news coverage and to prevent, too, the violation of security
classifications on subjects that involve adversely the preservation of the
lives of American fighting men.” (O’Toole, V Post, 12/4/67, Al; NASA
LAR VI/128)
366