Dahlgren in Perspective 175 



Bureau, and Dahlgren was easing up a little in proof and testing. Did you get involved in 

 any movements to close the Dahlgren Proving Ground'? 



This is a very good question. Dahlgren was in danger of dying, and I 

 speak advisedly. I was probably the principal figure in fighting for its survival. I 

 believe this to be true, but I'm not sure, that the rented computer facility was 

 started at Dahlgren at approximately that time. The fastest computer in the 

 world was built for the Navy and was installed at Dahlgren. I believe it was called 

 the NORC. This was around 1955 and for that time was a great achievement. 



Dr. Bramble was associated with Dahlgren and with computers at that time, 

 and he was also my teacher at Postgraduate School in mathematics. He was a 

 great mathematician in his own right and taught me to realize how little I know 

 about math. 1 believe he was intimately associated with the NORC and other 

 computer developments at Dahlgren. 



The obvious answer to continuing the Dahlgren Proving Ground was to 

 diversify its activities and to find good people, and 1 did my best to help. The 

 computer facility greatly assisted in this respect. 



There has always been pressure to reduce costs in defense spending. Was there any 

 difficulty in promoting the Navy Lab concept in light of the highly paid scientists and 

 engineers that would be required to perform the work? 



There was, and still is, a large group who maintained that government 

 laboratories, per se, were not justifiable and that all research and development 

 could be done either by industry or in the universities. The Air Force, more or 

 less, largely followed this concept. The Navy Lab concept has been difficult to 

 support through the years because of its costs. Then, too, the quality of person- 

 nel in the Navy Labs has not always been the best. The employees get old on the 

 job. They cannot be removed under the civil service system, and they are not 

 as bright after 30 or 35 as they used to be. Their ideas don't come forth. 1 believe 

 in the Navy Labs, but there are defects as well as good things about them. 



The big money, of course, does not go into the laboratories. It goes into the 

 purchase of things like the SST prototypes at a couple of billion dollars each. 

 The big money is in the development, not in the research. Parenthetically, the 

 load at Dahlgren in testing is always going to be there. The right people are 

 there. Some don't care for this role. They'd rather see somebody else do it, but 

 nobody else can do it because they don't have the facilities. They don't have the 

 range down the river. 



Do you see an advantage or disadvantage in promoting scientific work in the Navy Labs 

 versus private industry? 



The scientist is a very interesting man. If he's good, he's going to produce 

 ideas and results, and they may not always be of any interest as far as weapons 



