471 



record as such and not be identified or enumerated as specific problems 

 or as specifically helpful areas that NASA has participated in with 

 the Department. I am not sure that Dr. Seamans would want to leave 

 this in the record at this point. If not, I certainly have no objection; 

 but I do think it is noteworthy that we just briefly, at least, explore 

 the reasons why the Department of Defense would probably not want 

 to, for any number of reasons, or in many instances probably not be 

 aware of the basic and applied research experimentations conducted 

 by NASA which have been applicable to Department of Defense 

 problems. 



Dr. Seamans. Mr. Chairman, I think perhaps your comment related 

 to what Mr. Karth has said as well as to your feeling that we had 

 made perhaps more of a contribution than they were indicating in 

 their testimony. Our business is basically the science and technology 

 related to aeronautics and space. This obviously has ramifications to 

 military as well as to nonmilitary applications. When you get over into 

 the applications area, the act that established NASA put us into the 

 nonmilitary uses. 



Clearly, the Department of Defense must be responsible for de- 

 veloping their own weapons systems and defense systems. 



However, the science and technology that we are evolving is very 

 mudh midergirding the DOD endeavor. I know Dr. Foster, for ex- 

 ample, my counterpart in the Department of Defense, has clearly 

 expressed this view and I believe has put it in writing in a letter to 

 INiembers of Congress. So that in the case of aeronautics, we are testing 

 an F-111 out at Edwards and we are rmming intake studies at our 

 Lewis Center to better understand the performance of the engines 

 of the F-111 ; but we are looking at it from the standpoint of the aero- 

 nautical problems associated with that aircraft. It is up to the military 

 to make the decision how or what modifications might be made to the 

 aircraft. Similarly in space, we did place into orbit a synchronous 

 satellite called Syncoim. Wlien we finished our tests we turned this over 

 to the Department of Defense for their use. This was not plamied at 

 the start, but it was there and they could use it. Since then they have 

 augmented this communications satellite capability by developing their 

 own and placing their own satellites into orbit. 



Mr. Pellt. Mr. Chairman, I referred earlier to what I thought had 

 been a very successful job in overcoming the difficulties of somewhat 

 similar programs. I have in mind, of course, the apparent interagency 

 rivalry involved — which agency of Government was going to do cer- 

 tain types of work. I know contracts were canceled that were being 

 financed through the Air Force and then later almost similar programs 

 were done by NASA. However, I want to convey my impression that 

 a great deal of duplication has been avoided. While this may have 

 left some individual members of the Defense Department a little un- 

 happy, I still think that the way in which the two agencies have 

 worked together in trying to harmonize differences to avoid duplica- 

 tion and waste has been remarkable. As a member of that space com- 

 mittee, I have observed this over a number of years. I think it is my 

 impression that a good job has been done by both sides. 



Dr. Seamans. We certainly worked hard at it, Congressman Pelly. 

 I am sure that we will continue to work hard at it. 



