Administration to recognize the greater relative need of retaining research scientists in the laboratories of the Nation in preference to inducting them into military service.

The impotrance of science to the war effort was not fully realized until late in the war, and there was not an adequate appreciation of the important role of young men in any rapidly advancing technology. Two conflicting principles governed the action of Selective Service. One, that every citizen should sacrifice equally in the common cause; and the other, that every citizen should be used in the place where his talents could best contribute. Since these principles were not effectively differentiated, service was not truly selective.

As a result, young scientists, engineers, and technicians were drafted from research laboratories and industry and an unnecessary handicap imposed on the task of keeping the instruments of war in the hands of our fighting men substantially superior to those of the enemy.

America also sacrificed its future to its immediate needs by halting the processes of advanced education, thus creating a lack of scientific manpower from which it cannot recover for years.

The country is fortunate that these mistakes were not more costly. In view of the increasing importance of science and technology, it may be of vital importance to the Nation that the Congress take forceful action to guard against a repetition of such mistakes in the future.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions, gentlemen?

Mr. HINSHAW. I am very much interested, Mr. Chairman, in the remarks of Mr. Victory, who is well known to this committee, and particularly that his organization and the organiaztoin of which he is the secretary has seen fit to take a position which is not wholly in accord with the ideas of the Bureau of the Budget and to present to the committee the fact that NACA is an organization of the same type as is proposed in the four identical bills before this committee.

Yesterday I asked a question of one witness before this committee concerning the proceeding in Britain during the war, in which they exempted from their selective-service system, their version of it, men engaged in scientific pursuits and training.

I am glad to have this recommendation, and I trust that NACA and other scientific bodies within the Government will make similar representations to the Committee on the National Defense when the time comes to consider any training program which may be brought before that committee.

Mr. VICTORY. Thank you, Mr. Hinshaw.

May I add, or remark, Mr. Chairman, I understand that the Russian Central Aero and Hydro Dynamics Institute in Moscow, which just before the shooting started in Europe was as large in aeronautical activities as the whole Army Air Forces activities and the NACA combined, was not subjected to the draft law with respect to any single employee.

Their own director of research later visiting in this country told our Director of Research that he did not lose a man, that all employees were frozen in their jobs connected with scientific research in areonautics.

Mr. HINSHAW. Do you know whether such ideas pertain in other countries?

Mr. VICTORY. I know the policies followed by England and Russia differed from ours and are of pertinent interest. Germany shifted its policy during the war. In 1940 Germany thought she had the war won and did not protect her scientific talent. Later when she saw her mistake, she pulled them back, as far as she could get them back, from military service.

I may say, Mr. Chairman, in our own country, our organization was authorized by the War Department, so desperate had become the need for scientific talent in this country, to comb the military stations in continental United States and select men out of the Army, and the Army transferred them back into civil life on our request.

Mr. HINSHAW. It is also known that several other dodges were resorted to; namely, that when scientific personnel was being drafted by the Selective Service System, that they were enlisted in the Reserves of the Army or the Navy, and kept on the job, sometimes in uniform and sometimes at civil pay. That is correct.

But on the other hand, those who were enlisted in the Reserves and then placed on civilian status, standing in reserve, many of them were forced to leave their pursuits at the conclusion of the war, reenter and serve a year and a half as private soldiers in the Army, thus losing a year and a half of the benefit of their scientific services at least, if not losing also in the interim the continuity of work in which they were engaged.

Mr. VICTORY. I do agree, Mr. Chairman, with Mr. Hinshaw's views. I trust that Congress will someday find the time to make a real study of the best interests of the Nation with respect to conserving its scientific brainpower in the event of another emergency. It is most vital.

The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions? Mr. Dolliver.

Mr. DOLLIVER. Mr. Victory, I would like to give you a chance to tell me and perhaps some other members of the committee about the accomplishments of your Advisory Committee during the years that it has been in existence.

Would you care to enumerate some of the basic fundamental scientific facts that have been brought to light by the NACA?

Mr. VICTORY. Mr. Dolliver, that is really a $64 question, which I should be pleased to answer at length, but

Mr. DOLLIVER. If it is too big a question to be answered at the time at our disposal

Mr. VICTORY. I do not want to take the time of the committee; there are other witnesses to be heard. But I can briefly answer and put more in the record if it will have the committee's time.

The CHAIRMAN. I think the information that Mr. Dolliver is referring to is very important. However, I would not want your answer to be the only answer that would be given to his question, for I apprecite, as you do, the wide scope of work that has been done by your organization, and we certainly would like to have it in detail. Mr. HARRIS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DOLLIVER. Yes.

Mr. HARRIS. I wonder if I may ask Mr. Victory if that information is not included in the annual report that you distributed to us in the last few days?

Mr. VICTORY. It is not. That annual report is only one annual report, sir. Your question encompasses the whole field of aeronautical research for years.

Mr. DOLLIVER. I would like have it put in the record.

Mr. HINSHAW. Not in detail, I trust.

Mr. VICTORY. Just the major things of interest, if that is agreeable. The CHAIRMAN. I think this committee has always found Mr. Victory to be a man of good judgment, and he knows what the committee wants, and what is most important, and will undoubtedly give the committee what it is seeking.

We value the testimony that you have given, Mr. Victory, because we recognize that for 32 years you have been connected with an organization that has done an outstanding work, and we feel that because of that experience you have been particularly qualified to speak on this pending legislation.

We thank you for your appearance.

Mr. VICTORY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will submit the desired information.

(The information referred to is as follows:)

NACA CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PROGRESS OF AVIATION

Since its establishment by act of Congress in 1915, the NACA has pioneered in scientific research on the problems of flight. NACA research has provided the major basis for virtually every improvement in airplane design.

The continuing nature of the Committee's scientific research program is such as to make its results applicable to the solution of aeronautical problems generally, and so it is difficult to isolate these results in terms of specific achievements. Certain results, however, do lend themselves to assessment more easily than others, and the following examples will illustrate the type of advancement that has been made possible through the Committee's efforts.

The airfoil or cross-sectional shape of a wing has been the subject of systematic research and has resulted in accepted NACA "families" of these shapes that are in use throughout the world.

A product of this research was the NACA low-drag laminar-flow airfoil which cut the wind resistance of a wing in half.

High-lift devices which make it possible to land airplanes at safe speeds bave been the subject of much NACA research. All such devices in use today have been completely or in part developed by the NACA.

The famed NACA cowl, which made possible speed increases of 15 percent as early as 1928, was the result of an extensive investigation of means of reducing wind resistance of engines. The principles of the optimum location of engines in wings, and wing-fuselage filleting, made attractive the use of the retractable landing gear. The combination of these three improvements at one time revolutionized the performance of aircraft the world over.

As a part of the program to reduce airplane wind resistance, the NACA developed a flush riveting process that made smoother skin surfaces possible. This process furnished the basis for all commercial flush riveting processes in use today. The following figures are given as a graphic example of the success of NACA's wartime efforts to reduce wind resistance of the airplane and so increase its speed:

These improvements were accomplished through practical recommendations which could be carried out without affecting the prime structure or holding up production. When the number of airplanes is considered it is obvious that the dollar value of these improvements was tremendous.

Every airplane in this country today has been designed on the basis of air-loads research conducted by the NACA.

NACA research on flying qualities or ease of flying an airplane has resulted in acceptance by the Army and Navy on NACA standards for these characteristics. As a result of research on design of airplane tails it is now possible to design an airplane that will not spin.

NACA propeller research has resulted in increased efficiencies of commercial and military aircraft by 4 to 28 percent, depending on the speed range encountered. Following is an illustration of what the 4-percent increase has meant to commercial aircraft in dollar value. These figures are based on the commercial fleet actually operating in January 1946:

Due to added 4 percent in propeller efficiency, extra revenue from

added pay load.

Fuel cost saved__

Total annual gain----

$8,780, 000 1, 942, 000 10, 722, 000

For comparative purposes, the total cost of the 5 years of research that resulted in these gains was about $2,500,000.

The NACA has led the country in the application of thermal ice-prevention systems wherein warm air is circulated through the wings and other parts of an airplane. The results of this research are currently being applied to such new transports as the Douglas DC-6, Martin 2-0-2, and Consolidated-Vultee 240.

Structurally, the airplane has been improved until there is now seldom a failure that can be traced to structural design. Investigations to determine the most efficient type of construction have led to enormous dollar savings. For instance, a 1-percent weight reduction in a fleet of 500 commercial transports with an estimated life of 5 years would result in a saving from $22,000,000 to $112,000,000.

An NACA-designed camera that will take 200,000 pictures per second has enabled the committee to lead the way in combustion research as applied to the reciprocating engine.

NACA investigations of cylinder cooling determined the optimum fin shape and size for air-cooled engines. These data were applied to the manufacture of these engines and made possible an increase in their output of almost 100 percent.

The first controlled-performance data to be obtained on a jet engine operating under altitude conditions were the results of NACA research.

The NACA 8-stage axial-flow compressor which was designed and built in 1938 had the highest efficiency of any such unit at that time. Research on this compressor has served as a basis for later application of results to axial-flow compressors for modern aircraft gas turbines.

Research on centrifugal compressors during the war resulted in a gain of 8 points in compressor performance.

The NACA's evaluation of aircraft-engine fuels during the war led to the acceptance of extremely high-performance fuels for use in military aircraft. In all fields of aeronautical research the NACA has led in the development of research techniques and facilities required to solve the problems of flight.

It should again be emphasized that the foregoing are only examples of the contributions made to aeronautical science by the NACA, for research frequently defies evaluation in that its influence may be felt in many fields other than that for which it was originally intended.

Dr.

The CHAIRMAN. Our next witness will be Dr. Vannevar Bush. Bush probably needs no introduction. I would like to say, for the purpose of the record, that he is president of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, a privately financed research foundation; Chairman of the Joint Army-Navy Research Board, and Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development. We feel greatly honored to have Dr. Bush with us this afternoon, and will certainly value the opinions that he will express with respect to this proposed legislation.

STATEMENT OF DR. VANNEVAR BUSH, PRESIDENT OF CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON; CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT ARMYNAVY RESEARCH BOARD; AND DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Dr. BUSH. Mr. Chairman, I have a suggestion for you. I have here a statement that occupies 11 pages, because I went quite carefully into the comparison of these bills. But the hour is getting latę. If you feel that it is reasonable for me to do so, I would like to give this to your reporter and to pick out of it only one or two points that I think you have shown particular interest in, as I have listened, and one point on which I would like to change the statement a bit, because I think I can do a better job than I did when I wrote it.

The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, we would hesitate in any way to indicate that you should brief your testimony merely because you think the hour is late. While that is partially true, I can say that the committee is interested enough to listen to you as long as you feel that it is necessary for you to present your viewpoints in full.

Dr. BUSH. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this statement has been submitted to the Bureau of the Budget, although time has not been sufficient to permit a reply. I want to make it clear, therefore, that I do not purport to represent the opinion of the President.

Gentlemen, it is quite unnecessary for me to take up your time with an argument tending to prove that our economic and industrial progress, our national security and our national health and welfare are dependent on continually extending that knowledge of our environment which comes only from basic scientific research.

It is equally unnecessary to make a lengthy argument that the time has come from the Government to intervene in support of basic research. The devastation of a large part of Europe has effectively eliminated many of our principle sources of fundamental scientific knowledge.

Within the United States our principal sources have always been the nonprofit educational institutions and endowed foundations. These institutions now are faced with increasing costs and decreasing income. We must, therefore, replace the lost sources of new scientific knowledge and strengthen those which we still have.

I believe that these statements reflect the views of most of the scientists, educators, and industrialists in the United States. In the last session your committee heard a number of leaders in these fields testify to that effect. Committees of the Senate heard the testimony of well over a hundred such leaders. With one exception, all of those who testified before committees of Congress on science legislation supported the proposition that the Government must undertake the support of basic scientific research.

Now, the witnesses at those hearings differed rather widely in their views as to precisely what kind of instrumentality should be established to take such action. Several bills were introduced in the Seventy-ninth Congress, and there were many drafts and redrafts of some of them. In addition, there were many discussions and conferences between interested scientists and educators and Members of