Mr. DADDARIO. You are satisfied the Nike-Zeus system will be authorized? Secretary MORSE. It is authorized for research and development. Mr. DADDARIO. I refer to going on into the production end of it. Secretary MORSE. We have no idea. General TRUDEAU. As the Secretary said, that depends on the overall look. The CHAIRMAN. I think all you need now is the money to go ahead in production. Mr. ANFUSO. Any changes in that program would be up to the Secretary MORSE. That is right, sir. Mr. FULTON. I move we make the General an honorary member of the committee. General TRUDEAU. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning at ten o'clock at which time the Secretary of the Navy and other officials will be here. As announced on the first day of the hearings, there are certain additional questions which we wish to have answers supplied for the record. (The questions and answers referred to are as follows:) QUESTIONS ADDRESSED TO THE ARMY Question 1. Can you trace for us how you visualize the operation of the direc tive of March 6: Suppose the Army does preliminary research on a space project in which it is interested, and then development is turned over to the Air Force. What Service will fund the development? How will the Army insure that its operational requirements are adequately reflected in detail in the development phase? Answer: The Army has not received instructions on the implementation of the directive. Therefore, at this time it can only be surmised how the operation will be accomplished. It does seem reasonable that the funds necessary for completing the development after it is turned over to the Air Force would be included in the Air Force overall budget. Normally, it is expected that the Army would insure that its operational requirements are being met in the development phase by closely monitoring the project, by following the written technical reports, and by placing liaison officers at appropriate levels and geographic locations. If the Army's interests in space technology are not being adequately recognized or served, the Secretary of the Army has pledged to the committee that he will promptly and vigorously notify the Secretary of Defense of these deficiencies. Question 2. To what extent will the Army press for the use of its facilities and personnel as subcontractors for Air Force space development projects? If such work is not forthcoming, would the Army prefer to reorient research efforts, replacing equipment and personnel, or would it recommend their wholesale transfer to Air Force control in the manner that the Von Braun team and JPL were transferred to NASA? Answer: It is not likely that the Army will press for the use of its facilities and personnel as subcontractors for the Air Force. The Army's facilities and personnel are not oriented to production or even to extensive development type fabrication. Rather, they are tailored to the job of accomplishing preliminary design and directing and supervising commercial contractors in the fabrication of the final product. Therefore, there is little value to be gained from employing these in a subcontractor role. Needless to say, the potential of the Army facilities and personnel is primarily oriented toward a solution to Army-wide requirements. For example, our communication laboratories do work in all types of communications, not only space communications. Therefore, it would be necessary and proper to accomplish a minor reorientation and employ these facilities on other work within the Army rather than to consider transferring these to another Service with attendant degradation in progress in other essential Army efforts. Question 3. Explain how you would expect Army interests to be protected in the fields of mapping and geodesy under the terms of the directive. Would the Army develop suitable satellites for Air Force launching, or would the Army merely plot the results brought to it from Air Force developed and operated satellites? Answer: The Army is in receipt of Department of Defense Directive 5160.34, subject: "Reconnaissance, Mapping and Geodetic Programs," dated 28 March 1961, which defines the Army responsibilities in these fields, including the exploitation of space systems. The Army is in complete accord with this directive, a copy of which is attached for your information. (The directive has previously been printed following the testimony of March 18, 1961 in these hearings.) Question 4. General White described point defense as an Army responsibility, and area or interceptor defense as an Air Force responsibility. Suppose that the Nike-Zeus shows further growth potential. At what point does it cross the definition of General White to become an Air Force responsibility for development? Answer: The Army's responsibility for point defense was assigned by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. In that assignment of responsibility a point defense was, in general, characterized as one in which the radars of the system were located in the vicinity of the defended area and did not require a distant interlocking network of radars. An area defense was characterized as involving the concept of locating defense units to intercept enemy attacks remote from and without reference to individual vital installations, industrial complexes or population centers. Nike-Zeus as designed, being developed and recommended for deployment by CINCNORAD is, under the above definition, a point defense system to provide protection against the ICBM. It is believed the growth potential inherent in the system is such that, with modifications to some of the equipment, Nike-Zeus from its ICBM defense positions could provide a secondary capability to intercept satellites. It would therefore appear that Nike-Zeus would always be primarily a point defense system and hence an Army responsibility. Question 5. Please define "preliminary research." Answer: Preliminary research is a term not previously used in Army research and development. It would seem reasonable that the intent of this DoD Directive is to consider preliminary research as all basic research plus some early part of applied research. It is expected that a more precise definition of this term will be issued later in the implementation of the directive. (Whereupon, at 12 noon, the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, March 21, 1961.) DEFENSE SPACE INTERESTS TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 1961 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 10 a.m., Hon. Overton Brooks (chairman), presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. I have a small matter to take up this morning and while we are waiting on a Republican to come, I wish to say this: That under the authority that the rules give me I have created a subcommittee from this committee, headed by Mr. Miller, for the purpose of working out satisfactory jurisdictional arrangements with the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. We have some jurisdiction in oceanography and they have some jurisdiction and we always work together in harmony. So I have set up this subcommittee, Mr. Miller being the chairman because he is a member of both committees, Merchant Marine and Fisheries and this committee. Mr. Anfuso is a member of it and Mr. Daddario is a member. On the other hand, Mr. Jim Fulton and Mr. Riehlman are members. They constitute the subcommittee. I hope the subcommittee will get to work right away and contact the authorities from the other committee and let us work it out so we can go ahead with the work that we have in oceanography. I am just told the Republicans are having a conference on the House Floor. I do not know what it is about but probably these newspaper reporters do. The best thing for us to do is to go ahead, because we have these distinguished witnesses here this morning. This is Navy Day and we have Hon. John B. Connally, the Secretary of the Navy; we have Hon. James H. Wakelin, Jr., Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and we have Vice Admiral John T. Hayward, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Development). We have Rear Admiral Thomas F. Connolly, Assistant Chief, Bureau of Naval Weapons this morning, a distinguished array of Navy witnesses and we are delighted to have them here. As you know, gentlemen, we have been probing into the extent and ramifications of the new order which designates the assignment of space missions and space R. & D. programs, among the several Services and we have heard from the Defense Department, the Air Force, and the Army and this morning we want to hear from each of you. My thought is that we would hear from the Secretary of the Navy first. I understand the Secretary has a prepared statement. Mr. Secretary, if you would proceed with your prepared statement, we would be glad to have it. We have his background here also. At this point I would like to place in the record the background statement which we have on the Secretary's past training, experience, education, and qualifications, and he has many of them, too. Secretary CONNALLY. Thank you, sir. (The biography of Secretary Connally is as follows:) BIOGRAPHY OF JOHN BOWDEN CONNALLY, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY John Bowden Connally was appointed Secretary of the Navy on December 27, 1960, by then President-elect John F. Kennedy and took the oath of office on January 25, 1961. In addition to a distinguished Navy war record, Mr. Connally brought to his new office a diverse, well-rounded background in law, business and corporate management. After World War II, he and several other veterans organized Radio Station KVET in Austin, Texas, of which he was president and manager for three years. He has had extensive management experience in a wide variety of interests including oil, oil field services, radio-TV, carbon black, ranches, etc., and as a director of several corporations, including the New York Central Railroad and Insurance Securities Incorporated (of San Francisco). In the non-commercial field, he is a director of the Southwestern Exposition and Fat Stock Show, and Boys, Incorporated. Born February 27, 1917, the son of John Bowden Connally and Lela Wright Connally of Floresville, Texas, he attended public schools in Floresville and Harlandale (San Antonio) and the University of Texas at Austin, from which he was graduated with the degree of Bachelor of Laws. At college he was president of Athenaeum Literary Society, won the Inter-Society Oratorical Contest, was vice-president of the Freshman Law Class and speaker of the class, was elected to Students Assembly and served as its chairman in 1939, was president of the Students Association in 1938 and that year appeared in Who's Who in American Colleges. He was also president of Alpha Psi Omega (national honorary dramatic organization) and a member and dean of Delta Theta Phi (legal fraternity). He was commissioned as an ensign in the U.S. Naval Reserve on June 11, 1941, was promoted to lieutenant (junior grade) the following year, to lieutenant on October 1, 1943, and to lieutenant commander on October 3, 1945, holding that rank until the termination of his service in 1954. For a period he served in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and in January 1942 was transferred to the Office of the Under Secretary of the Navy where he dealt with problems of training and manpower. Remaining there until February 1943, he served in the Procurement Division (Legal) and in the immediate office of Under Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. He was then sent to Algiers where for nearly a year he assisted in planning for the Italian invasions. Following specialized training in radar, he was assigned to the aircraft carrier USS Essex (CV-9) which won the Presidential Unit Citation for heroic service in the Pacific during the period August 31, 1943, to August 15, 1945. As Radar and Radio Officer and later as Fighter Direction Officer of Essex, and for a time serving also as CIC Officer for Task Group 38.1, he participated in action in the Gilberts, Marshalls, Marianas, Philippines, Formosa, China Sea, Bonins, Ryukyus and Japan during the latter period of the war. He was observed to be an "extremely outstanding officer" by Admiral T. L. Sprague, USN, in command of Task Group 38.1, who said his "work was, in great part, responsible for the success of the Task Group." He was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with Combat "V", and citation, in part, as follows: "For heroic achievement while serving as Fighter Director Officer on board the USS Essex during a concentrated attack by enemy Japanese aircraft against that vessel in the forward Pacific area on April 6, 1945. Alert and aggressive in the performance of duty as an overwhelming force of hostile planes flew in over the Task Group, Lieutenant Connally rendered gallant and effectual service in coordinating a determined and prompt aerial offensive and, by his professional skill, brilliant tactics and cool courage in the face of grave peril, contributed essentially to the success of embarked planes in shooting down sixty-nine Japanese aircraft and to the security of the Essex from all dam |