1 portation, and environmental consequences that could result 2 from the commercial production or nonproduction of a United 3 States civil supersonic aircraft, and shall include recommen4 dations for any legislation or international agreements 5 deemed necessary to insure a balanced national transporta6 tion policy which is efficient, productive, economic, and en7 vironmentally safe and sound. 8 11 "Modification of Contracts. 9 "(i) The Department of Transportation shall modify all 10 appropriate contracts for the development of prototype civil supersonic transport aircraft to provide that such contracts 12 will not be satisfactorily completed until the contractor (s) 13 demonstrate (s) that all production models developed from 14 the prototype aircraft can comply with the noise level stand15 ards at the noise measuring points now specified for new 16 subsonic jet aircraft in sections C 36.3 and C 36.5 (a) and (b) of appendix C (evaluated as prescribed by appendix B) 17 18 19 of part 36 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, as in effect on the date of enactment of this subsection." NEED FOR PROTOTYPES Senator FONG. Excuse me, Mr. Secretary. It seems to me if we do not have these two prototypes built, we will not be able to answer the environmental questions. Secretary VOLPE. That is correct, sir. Senator FONG. And without that answer, we will be in a very tenuous position to disallow the landing of foreign supersonic aircraft into our airports. Secretary VOLPE. The State Department has indicated to us, and I certainly agree with them wholeheartedly, that our position would not just be tenuous, but it would be a very awkward position in which to place the United States. We would be saying, "You are not going to fly that plane here, even though you have gone through the job and spent the money to build and test two prototypes," or whatever numbers they have built-and they have been built. More than two have been built-"but we are going to stop you from coming in here, even though we have not built any, and have not tested any." I think the State Department is absolutely correct in this position. Senator FONG. And you feel that if we build the prototypes, and we find that they are detrimental to the environment, that we could in good conscience tell our neighbors that it just cannot fly into America? Secretary VOLPE. I think we would then have a solid base on which to stand. I could certainly say, "We believe we have as fine engineers, as fine scientists, and technicians as any available in the world, and we have tried as hard as we can. We have not been able to lick the problems, and therefore we will not allow your plane to come." We would be in a much better position to give that kind of an answer if we had built and tested the two prototype planes. Senator FONG. Yes. PROGRAM COST Now, going to the question of costs, I understand cost to the Government will be $1,342 million. Secretary VOLPE. That is correct. Senator FONG. That private industry will supply $403 million, including $22 million in airline delivery deposits. Secretary VOLPE. By the time the program is completed, that is what they will supply; yes. Senator FONG. So the total cost will be $1,745 million. Secretary VOLPE. That is correct. Senator FONG. Now, as I understand, the Government has now spent $1,342 million, minus $478 million which you say you need, which is $864 million. Secretary VOLPE. That is correct. Senator FONG. And you have asked for $290 million for fiscal 1971 appropriation. Secretary VOLPE. That is correct, Senator. Senator FONG. And $235 million was for 1972 and after. Secretary VOLPE. Yes, sir. Senator FONG. In other words, you need $525 million in appropriations. What I mean is this: You need a funding of $525 million, but you have spent-is that correct-out of the $290 million that you are asking for 1971, the sum of $156 million? Secretary VOLPE. That is correct. We are requesting $290 million for fiscal year 1971 and $235 million for fiscal year 1972. To complete the program, $92 million will be required in fiscal year 1973 and $17 million in fiscal year 1974. Senator FONG. So, of the $290 million that you are asking for fiscal 1971, you have already spent $156 million? Secretary VOLPE. That is correct, under the authority of the continuing resolution. Senator FONG. So therefore you are only asking now for an additional $134 million for 1971. Secretary VOLPE. That is correct. Senator FONG. So you are asking for $478 million more beyond March 30. Senator CASE. That will be the balance. Senator FONG. That will be the balance of the program. Secretary VOLPE. Yes. TERMINATION COST Senator FONG. Now, you stated that if the program were discontinued, probably we will have to spend around $334 million in cost of contracts. Secretary VOLPE. If you deduct the $156 million which we have spent on the basis of the continuing resolutions, you would then come down to a figure of $178 million, sir. Senator FONG. $178 million. Then subtracting the cost that you think you will be paying to contractors if we were to discontinue the program now, what would be the actual money that we need over and above that cost? Secretary VOLPE. We would need the full $178 million, unless the Government is willing to say that the money that the airlines have put up to help defray the research and development costs is not to be returned to them. If you include that $59 million, I suppose it could only be put in the sense of a moral commitment, particularly where we have some foreign airlines who have bought American products for 40 years. It seems to me that there would be some moral obligation. That would also be something, I believe, which the Congress would have to resolve. The Secretary of Transportation could not determine that but if you deducted that, then you would have $178 million less $59 million, or $119 million, sir. Senator FONG. Well, this is what we are talking about, $119 million more for the program. Secretary VOLPE. To terminate it. Senator FONG. To terminate it. Thank you very much. SST OVERLAND FLIGHTS Senator BIBLE. Might I ask just one question, Mr. Chairman? I will be very short. I want to clarify one of your answers, Mr. Secretary. I understood you to say that the SST would not fly over land. Senator BIBLE. Was that a correct statement? Secretary VOLPE. That is correct. Senator BIBLE. Does that mean subsonic, or supersonic? Secretary VOLPE. It would not fly over populated areas, over land masses, at supersonic speeds. Senator BIBLE. Well, you did not say that, and I wanted to clarify that one thing-at least. I did not understand you to say it because my understanding is. if I get on an SST to go out to beautiful Hawaii, I can fly across the United States subsonic, and then, when I get 500 miles into the blue Pacific, out of San Francisco, if that is the way I am going, then I can get up to supersonic. Is that a correct statement? Is 500 miles the let-down? I think Bill Magruder said that in our testimony last year. Secretary VOLPE. No; it won't be as much as 500 miles but let me ask Bill Magruder to discuss that. Senator BIBLE. I know we asked that. Where do they let down? Mr. MAGRUDER. They will be letting down 150 and 200 miles away from the shore, but I think a proper way to say that is that the SST can fly as far subsonically as it can supersonically. Senator BIBLE. I understand. Mr. MAGRUDER. It is very unique. Therefore, it could take off at Philadelphia or Chicago and fly at almost 800 miles an hour, 20 to 25 percent faster than anything flying today, and not make a sonic boom over land. Senator BIBLE. I understand. Mr. MAGRUDER. When it reaches the shoreline, it will speed up. Senator BIBLE. I wanted to clarify that answer, Mr. Chairman. because I think it was left a little at a loose end but he can fly the SST subsonic, is your answer. Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. All right. Chairman ELLENDER. Thank you. TECHNOLOGICAL SPINOFF Senator BROOKE. Mr. Chairman, I have a question, if I may. Senator BROOKE. Secretary Volpe, if, after we spend $1.342 billion, the decision is then made to terminate the program, what, if any, benefits will be salvaged from that expenditure of money? Secretary VOLPE. Senator, there are, of course, from any R. & D. program, technological spinoffs that accrue to the advantage of science and to our total national resources. The fact is that the R. & D. efforts that are made by Government and by industry are not always successful. That is why there is R. & D. If we knew they were going to be successful, we would not have to do much R. & D. The fact is that in industry if you get one project out of very 10 that is successful, you can conclude that you have done fairly well. If you get two out of 10 that are successful, you have done very well. If you get three or four out of the 10 you undertake, then you have done extremely well. In this particular situation, I am convinced, having lived with it for just a little over 2 years, that the chance of success here, particularly after the most recent research information we have received is about 99 out of 100. SPINOFF TO DATE Senator BROOKE. I am grateful for that lesson, but that still does not answer my question. Do you now know of any benefits that would inure to us if we terminate that program? After all, we will have spent $1.342 billion. Can you tell us now, if the decision to terminate were to be made, what, if anything, we would have as a productive result? Now, I know this is a risk taken, we could end up with nothing as far as the plane itself is concerned. But do you know of anything that we could benefit from as a result of having spent that kind of money? Secretary VOLPE. Could I read you, Senator, then, just the last paragraph of a letter I have before me from Secretary Laird? While the Defense Department is not a direct participant in the supersonic transport prototype development program, we recognize that the country's position both civil and military will be enhanced significantly in meeting the challenge implicit in the supersonic transport program. We will continue, therefore, to assist in efforts to relate our experience to supersonic transport needs, and to help carry forward a program that promises such an irreplaceable benefit to our national security and economy. And in that one area alone the spinoff from this effort certainly seems to me would be worth something. How to measure that, I don't know. I would certainly say to you that if there were no other factors, Senator Brooke, what we would get from our $1,300 billion investment would enable us to stand, as I said earlier, on a solid foundation when we say to other countries, "You will not be allowed to land your SST in this country," because we will have positive information on which to base that refusal. Without building the two prototypes, we will have spent a billion dollars, and have nothing for our efforts, and then be in a position of saying to other countries, without the benefit of this building and testing, "You still cannot fly into our country, even though we have not built and tested an SST, and you have." Senator BROOKE. Your answer, then, is that the scientists are not able at this time, at this point, to tell us of any specific spinoffs that we would have as a result of the expenditure of money if we make the decision to terminate. Secretary VOLPE. No; let Bill Magruder give you, from his design point of view and engineering point of view, an answer. Mr. MARGUDER. Senator Brooke, the SST has the most advanced aeronautical technology in long-range cruise airplanes. That would be available. There is no doubt about that. As Mr. Armstrong will probably testify, I believe, it is probably the focal point for aeronautical development in the future of new high-speed airplanes. The engine of this airplane holds the world's record in thrust, the most advanced supersonic engine in being today. |