GEMINI AND APOLLO 191 



In July 1966 the committee published the results of its future 

 planning studies under the title of "Future National Space Objectives." 

 The most important single recommendation made in the committee 

 report was the opening gun which the committee fired in support of 

 the Space Shuttle: 



Immediate planning for a new generation of spacecraft capable of recovery at low 

 cost and which are ground recoverable is a requisite to attaining lower total mission 

 cost. 



The report also made the recommendation — 



that NASA report to the Congress not later than December 1, 1966, its recommenda- 

 tions on possible major national space objectives; the combination of missions in- 

 cluded under such objectives; its expected total and annual cost; the benefits of such a 

 program; and its composition in terms of the combined manned and unmanned build- 

 ing blocks required. 



Had NASA taken this report requirement seriously, it is possible 

 that the space program would have fared better budgetwise in the 

 Congress. Instead, the idea was dismissed with a two-page letter dated 

 December 1 with Webb's name typed at the bottom but signed by 

 Seamans for Webb. NASA pleaded inability to formulate detailed 

 future plans for the following reasons: 



Because of the difficult budgetary situation resulting from the war in Vietnam 

 and other factors, we are uncertain at this time as to what the President will approve 

 for our fiscal year 1968 budget. Even in the absence of these uncertainties, of course, 

 we would be precluded by the regular budgetary procedures from presenting specific 

 statements on our future plans at this time. 



To members of the committee who had been attempting to force 

 NASA to put down its ideas about its future, it seemed almost as 

 though NASA was refusing to admit it had much of a future. 



PROGRESS IN 1966 



Five highly successful Gemini flights during 1965, and the success- 

 ful completion of space walks — extravehicular activity— and experi- 

 ence at rendezvous and docking of spacecraft set the stage for another 

 successful year in which the Science Committee won a thumping 

 majority for the NASA bill on the House floor. 



Once again Chairman Teague put his subcommittee through a 

 grueling schedule which included the usual round of visits to con- 

 tractors and NASA installations. There was also a regular monthly 

 visit to the Manned Space Flight Office in NASA Headquarters where 

 George E. Mueller and his staff engaged in very frank, off-the-record 

 sessions with as many committee members as could get away from 

 Capitol Hill. 



