answer to a question by the gentleman from New York, Mr. Anfuso. He asked you whether or not in your opinion, if there was a greater amount of money spent, whether you felt this whole program in the field of space could be speeded up. If I recall correctly your answer was that you did not think so, you felt that it would create a paralleling program or paralleling programs, and that it would lead to, oh, giving some insurance for accuracy or correctiveness, rather than speeding it up. Is this your opinion, sir?

Dr. GLENNAN. At the present state of the art, that is my opinion; yes, sir.

Mr. KARTH. The reason I ask is because I find this quite different from the old concept that we have been led to believe, and accept as being true, in the theory of economics. I have always been of the opinion that competitiveness, for example, breeds creativeness, and that it motivates, shall we say, technological advancement-that it

breeds inventiveness.

And so it seemed to me that if more money were spent, probably allowing for competitive parallel agencies, that this would, to some degree, advance and speed up quite considerably-depending upon the degree, of course, it was entered into the answers to the questions, which we apparently do not have at the moment.

Dr. GLENNAN. We do have competition in some areas of our activity. Competition for the development of payloads, competition in certain areas of research where we do pursue parallel courses. We believe in competition, but I think the manner in which I took the question, at least, was: Can you really make a great deal more speed if you spend a great deal more money? Was that what you had in mind?

Mr. KARTH. As I understand it; yes.

Dr. GLENNAN. And my answer was that I did not think, with the present state of the art, that we would make a great deal more speed, that we would shorten the time scale very much, but that undoubtedly, if we did have a lot more money, we would initiate parallel programs which, if one failed, the other might have a chance of success, so that indeed we were then buying insurance at substantial cost.

Dr. DRYDEN. May I amplify this a little? I think in most of our previous discussions we have been thinking about major projects rather than the underlying research. We do propose to put more money into the research underlying advances into space, and to work in connection with electrical propulsion systems and to perhaps get more people interested in celestial mechanics, in some of the basic side of communication problems.

I think in this area we do want to get a lot of people working, but when we come to the major projects which cost several hundreds of millions of dollars, we do not see that putting another $2 million in a parallel project will really reduce the time.

Mr. KARTH. Doctor, one more question, please, in this same vein: If a paralleling agency could, on occasion, improve on the accuracy or eliminate mistakes, because we are delving in a field with so many unknowns in it, even the finding out, shall we say, or the discovery of a mistake, one particular mistake in this tremendous field of unknowns, couldn't that on occasion save you actually months and months of time?

Dr. DRYDEN. Yes. But I think we get this sort of thing in the elements that go to make up this major project. There will be many approaches to the heating problem, to materials problems, to research on combustion, and it is up to us, who are managing the project, to see that all of this information is brought into the agency carrying on the development.

But we do not see that a parallel complete engine development would necessarily reduce the time.

Mr. KARTH. Then you feel that the paralleling projects that have been entered into by the military services, for example, have been of no material value?

Dr. DRYDEN. I don't know of any paralleling projects.

Mr. KARTH. Haven't the military on occasions been all interested in the same project and one has come out with it substantially sooner than the other?

Dr. DRYDEN. You are thinking of other areas.

Mr. KARTH. Yes, sir.

Dr. DRYDEN. For example, where there may be three or four airplanes developed to meet the same requirement.

Mr. KARTH. Yes. Do you feel that this competitiveness on the part of the military has substantially led to a better airplane much sooner, much faster for the U.S. security, than we would have had, had there been no competitiveness between the military?

Dr. DRYDEN. I think it is very difficult to answer this question in compelte detail. I think it has given the opportunity to pick out the best of two or three designs, but I think that attention paid to the perfection of one design has paid off.

May I go back to the days of NACA? Our philosophy was that we would furnish all the information we could to all of the people who were entering the competition. After one of them had been selected or two of them had been selected, the job was to make that entry just as good as one could possibly make it by putting in all the resources that we had and other people had into the project.

I am not sure that the airplanes were gotten quicker by having several of them going at once. You can argue that you had the chance to pick the best two or three.

Mr. KARTH. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Hechler?

Mr. HECHLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Glennan, I want to commend you for the statement that you made this morning on the freedom of scientific inquiry. I thought it was beautifully put.

Now this is the question I would like to ask you: In a very broad way and without getting into specifics, would you evaluate the usefulness of material which NASA is able to glean from Russian scientific journals?

Dr. GLENNAN. I think, if I may, I would ask Dr. Stewart, who has been quite close to this sort of thing, to give you an opinion on that.

Dr. STEWART. In some ways it is a little early to really give a definitive answer to this question.

The Russians, and ourselves, have agreed under the IGY program, for example, to have a complete exchange of the scientific information gained in the satellite launching programs.

In both our program and theirs, large quantities of information have been obtained and they have released some of it and we have released some of ours. It is factually true that neither of us have yet had time to release all of the information.

The information I have seen from the Russian work is good, good quality information. I know my friends that attended the last meeting in Russia in August or September, I have forgotten which it was, felt that the exchange of information was valuable and worthwhile.

Mr. HECHLER. Here is what I am getting at in asking my question: How do you feel about the scope and intensity of the review we are doing on Russian journals? Do you believe that we have adequate translation facilities and is the information of sufficient value so that we should step up such a program?

Dr. STEWART. There are new people doing these things every few months.

We do not yet have the capacity so that these Russian informations are translated and evaluated within a matter of weeks. But on the other hand they are generally available within a matter of months. We are doing fairly well in this problem.

Dr. GLENNAN. I would like to add to that answer if I may. I was very pleased in this field to see the President about 6 weeks ago, as I recall it, maybe 8 weeks ago, accept a proposal made to him by the Science Advisory Committee to enlarge our activities under the leadership of the National Science Foundation, indeed to provide in the budget some money to see to it that this coordination was undertaken and I believe that we are moving rather rapidly, as a matter of fact, into the field of enlarging and increasing our ability to translate and disseminate that information rapidly.

Mr. HECHLER. Thank you, Dr. Glennan. I am sure that this committee would be interested in hearing of any handicaps that you might suffer in securing information from Russian scientific journals in order to aid the progress of your work.

Dr. GLENNAN. Thank you, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Daddario.

Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Glennan, in the eighth page of your report, your prepared statement, you refer to asking the Army to transfer a portion of the Army Ballistic Missile Agency at Huntsville to your program. Then you say that this would provide the necessary ground testing and assembly capability.

Now what have you done to replace this type of program since the Army did not allow you to take that under your wing?

Dr. GLENNAN. We have not done anything as of the present time. This decision was entered into on December 3 of last year, and we are attempting to determine whether or not the use of such facilities under contract is a feasible thing to do.

Mr. DADDARIO. Well, you also, in that same paragraph referred to this, you say, “Such a transfer would give us an imaginative, compeent engineering and design group capable of serving in the planning and executing-". What have you done to fill in that gap of imagina

tive, competent engineering personnel since that was not given to you by the Army?

Dr. GLENNAN. At the present time we are using people from our own staff and have not really moved into the area of developing a parallel organization. We are working with the ABMA people in the hope that we can get assistance that will be valuable to us in this area. But it isn't quite the same as having on your own staff, part of your own team, a group of people that are participating in the development of the total program of the agency.

Now we have to come to a decision on this matter within the next few months, as to which way we are going.

Mr. DADDARIO. Well in the last part of your statement you referred-you used three words as being those needed to build up your program, you say time, effort, and money.

Dr. GLENNAN. Yes.

Mr. DADDARIO. Would it appear that there should be another word added "cooperation"?

Dr. GLENNAN. I think we have reasonable cooperation at the present time, sir.

Mr. DADDARIO. Well then

Dr. GLENNAN. I think your suggestion is

Dr. DRYDEN. May I add just one detail to sharpen this up a little bit?

Mr. DADDARIO. Certainly.

Dr. DRYDEN. What we are doing is this, when we have a program which involves Jupiter, we can use the facilities of ABMA with this function. We cannot use those same people to do the same thing if it happens to be Thor or Atlas. We then use the facilities of the Ballistic Missiles Division. Neither one of these agencies are a part of NASA. Therefore, some people on our staff have to ride herd on these groups to see that what they do is consistent with the overall program.

In other words, we are meeting this function by contracting with some more limited supervision from members of the NASA staff. Now what we would like to obtain is a group within NASA who would deal with all of these programs in the same little group, regardless of what the particular booster happened to be.

Mr. DADDARIO. Would you feel that this has accelerated your program in the same fashion that it would have if this request had been acceded to? Are you as far ahead now as you would have been if this had been placed within the scope of your own program?

Dr. DRYDEN. I think we, timewise, are as far ahead. The problem is one of integration. The problem is: Can we use a contractor to an agency to supervise the execution of the contract? This is the problem, you see.

Mr. DADDARIO. Well, in both of these positions you use the word "necessary". Then the Department of Defense decided that its Army Ballistic Missiles Agency special talents were necessary to them. Who decided which of these two necessities took priority or which necessity became unnecessary?

Dr. GLENNAN. Our agency believes that the missile program should take priority over the space program. Thus, the determination on the part of the Secretary of Defense that the facilities, capabilities of

ABMA should be retained in the missile program, seemed to us to be conclusive. We do not have means of determining for ourselves, nor would it have been our business.

Mr. DADDARIO. Do you believe, even though it is too early to say, that this arrangement will be adequate, that you will be able to carry out your own capabilities

Dr. GLENNAN. Sir, we have to.

Mr. DADDARIO. With this cooperative type of program, rather than setting up one of your own?

Dr. GLENNAN. It is too early to say. We have to keep this under continual scrutiny. We must not let anything stand in the way of our moving ahead just as fast as we can, other than interference with a missile program.

Mr. DADDARIO. And this decision will not be made for a year; is that correct?

Dr. GLENNAN. We are to come back to the President and the Space Council within a year to report on the extensiveness of the success of this collaboration and cooperation and with any other proposals that may be necessary. Should I find it necessary before that time to again raise this question, you may be certain I will.

Mr. DADDARIO. If you feel that within the year that this should be done, then you will speak up.

Dr. GLENNAN. I will, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Moeller?

Mr. MOELLER. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Glennan, turning briefly from the technical and the administrative side of this, this morning you were asked a question by the colleague from New York, I think, whether or not you felt that the program as you have it projected here might invoke the displeasure of Almighty God or in defiance of God's will, to which you, in my opinion, rightly, answered "No."

However, I notice on page 4, the last paragraph, in fact, line 24 of that page, you speak of some of the objectives or some of the goals or the aims, and you inject the spiritual, the satisfaction of the spiritual. Would you be inclined to elaborate on that for just a moment, please? I must protect my professional colleagues here, too.

Dr. GLENNAN. I understand, sir. I think in this sense, that I am speaking of the releasing of man from any bondage here on earth, that he is a creature with a mind of his own and instead of just worrying about, "Can we have a man flying around in space?" What we are trying to do, it seems to me, and what will be the great gain of this program, will be the release of man from another set of fetters, his being bound to terra firma here.

Mr. MOELLER. I didn't get that last statement.

Dr. GLENNAN. His being bound to the earth, to the ground, as it

were.

Mr. MOELLER. Well, there is then the probability that through your operation here we might develop a new system of philosophy, maybe, a new system of theology, could all of this come out of this, too?

Dr. GLENNAN. I don't believe I am competent to comment on that, sir.