SPECIFICALLY, THE DATE HAD BEEN October 8, 1958. On that date the Space Task Group was unofficially established at Langley Field, Va., where the NACA Langley Laboratory (now the NASA Langley Research Center) had been located since 1917. Robert R. Gilruth, who had headed the former NACA Pilotless Aircraft Research Laboratory at Wallops Island, Va., was named Project Manager, and Charles J. Donlan, Technical Assistant to the Director of the Langley Laboratory, was made Assistant Project Manager. Thirty-five key staff members of the Langley Laboratory, who had worked closely with the Wright-Patterson Laboratory personnel on the Man-in-Space plan, were transferred to the new Space Task Group, as were 10 other persons from Lewis Research Center, Ohio. These 45 persons were to form the nucleus of the work force for the manned satellite program with headquarters at Langley. On November 14 the highest national priority procurement rating was requested for the manned spacecraft project (although it was not granted until April 27, 1959). On the 26^th, the manned satellite program was officially designated "Project Mercury."[1]

Between Washington and Space Task Group headquarters at Langley—an hour’s flight by small plane—there was now an almost hourly exchange of information as plans began to crystallize. It was a period of test to determine whether national leadership and the democratic system could pursue such a vast undertaking without the impetus of a threat to national survival.

Of immediate concern was the type of individual who would function most effectively as an astronaut. What should be his professional qualifications? His training and experience? By what physical and mental criteria should he be judged? Who should determine his physical fitness? These problems would require the attention of both engineering and medical professions in the Space Task Group.[2]

The aeromedical team composed of Drs. White, Augerson, and Voas, together with other representatives from the Space Task Group, NASA Headquarters, and the Special Committee on Life Sciences described in chapter I, were now to evolve a crew-selection procedure.[3] This group was to labor almost around the clock during the next few weeks as plans were made, modified, and finally accepted. Among the group was Dr. Allen O. Gamble, a psychologist from NASA Headquarters, who later described the initial planning as including first a "duties analysis" of what was expected of the astronaut.[4]

Space Task Group personnel then explored categories of professions to determine which could furnish individuals best qualified to serve as astronauts. While a courier was carrying from Langley to Washington a set of plans for one particular category, a senior staff member from NASA Head-quarters might be on the phone suggesting yet another category. All told, the categories considered were aircraft pilots, balloonists, submariners, deep-sea divers (particularly scuba divers who used underwater breathing apparatus), mountain climbers, Arctic and Antarctic explorers, flight surgeons, and scientists including physicist, astronomers, and meteorologists. It was finally decided that test pilots were the most appropriate group from which to choose. An important factor was their demonstrated capability of meeting threatening situations in the air with accurate judgment, quick decisions, and motor skill.

By December 3 the team had drawn up a set of proposed Civil Service standards, and on that day the Director of Personnel for NASA, Robert J. Lacklen, requested authority from the U.S. Civil Service Commission to appoint "40 scientific specialists who will be engaged in special research activities for the Space Task Group . . . ." It was noted that there were compelling reasons why information concerning these men would be restricted and therefore they could not be recruited by open competitive examination.[6]

It was contemplated that representatives from the services and industry would nominate 150 men by January 21, 1959, from which 36 would be selected for further testing. These tests would reduce the number to 12, and by the end of a 9-month training period a hard core of 6 men would remain. The next day the U.S. Civil Service Commission approved the request, and on December 9 the notice was published in the Federal Register.[7] By the end of the month, however, this plan had been rejected. It had been decided at the White House level that military test pilots only would be used.[8]

Meanwhile, the Space Task Group (STG) was faced with the problem of determining the most appropriate facility to conduct medical examinations of the astronauts. The staff members involved in making this decision, according to Dr. White, were Gilruth, Donlan, George Low, Warren North, Dr. Voas, Dr. Augerson, and himself. As they developed their plans, they kept the Special Committee on Life Sciences informed of their day-to-day progress.

Initial planning favored selection of a facility in the Washington area, with top consideration being given to three Federal institutions: The National Institutes of Health, the Army’s Walter Reed Medical Center, and the Bethesda Naval Hospital. As planning progressed, however, STG redirected its thinking toward the choice of a non-Government facility with a national reputation. This seemed particularly desirable after the White House decided in December that only military pilots could qualify as astronauts. Since they would be volunteering, it was believed only fair that the result of the stringent medical examinations be known only to NASA. Thus the military careers of unsuccessful candidates would not be jeopardized if some anomaly were discovered.

The decision to utilize only military test pilots proved to be a sound one. According to Dr. Gamble:

The decision having been reached to utilize only military personnel, the selection committee added two requirements. The candidates must have been graduated from a test pilot school and they must have had at least 1,500 flying hours and be fully qualified in top-performance jet aircraft.

By January 1959 the selection committee was ready to review records of possible candidates, including all test pilots on active duty. This work was done by the "Phase I" group, whose names are indicated in the following paragraphs. Full cooperation was given by military officials in this work, which required several weeks. More than 500 names were selected for further consideration, including over 200 Air Force test pilots and 200 Navy pilots, 23 Marine pilots, and 40 Army pilots. NASA announced on January 28, 1959, that 110 had met all the basic requirements.[10]

On Monday, February 2, 1959, 69 reported to Washington under special military orders. On that day and the following Monday, they attended briefings that included a detailed technical explanation of the problems involved. Later in the day they came back for individual interviews during which they were asked to volunteer or decline. No record was kept on those who declined.[11]

There were several types of measurement for those who volunteered. First was a joint technical interview by Charles J. Donlan, Assistant Director of Project Mercury (an engineer); Warren North of the Space Flight Program (a former test pilot); and Dr. Gamble, the Manpower Evaluation Development Officer (an industrial psychologist). During these sessions further technical details of Project Mercury were made available to the candidates, including engineering drawings and specifications, and the individual pilots were encouraged to inquire in depth in areas of their interest. This yielded valuable clues concerning motivations and technical backgrounds.

The second test was a psychiatric evaluation by two psychiatrists who were Air Force officers, Dr. George E. Ruff and Dr. Edwin Z. Levy. Each recorded his independent conclusions; they compared notes, and then they reported to the committee. The third test was a detailed review of the medical records and a medical interview by the flight surgeon, Dr. Augerson. In addition, Dr. Voas gave the candidates a battery of written tests including the Miller Analogies Test (a graduate-school-level test), the Minnesota Engineering Analogies Test, and the Doppelt Mathematical Reasoning Test. Others who helped conduct Phase I were Dr. White, Dr. William F. O’Connor, and Dr. David K. Trites, a Navy officer.

Thirty-two pilots were chosen for Phase II, which was to be carried out at the Lovelace Clinic, Albuquerque, N. Mex. Factors in the choice of this facility were the work it was doing for the USAF Air Research and Development Command (later Systems Command) on selection techniques for the Man-in-Space program and the fact that it had recently completed development of machine cards for recording all medical related information from the Lovelace Foundation and Clinic and from the Aero-Medical Laboratory stress and related tests at Wright-Patterson AFB.

The physical evaluation program was thus carried out for NASA by the Lovelace Clinic in Albuquerque, N. Mex. The 32 volunteers were divided into 5 groups of 6 men each and 1 group of 2. This was the rate at which they could be handled by the clinic and by the Wright-Patterson Laboratory. One group at a time reported for an exhaustive series of examinations while the other men remained at their home stations. The first group entered the Lovelace Clinic on February 7, 1959, and the others entered on succeeding Saturdays. Each candidate spent 7 Omega days and 3 evenings at the Lovelace facility.(See Glenn picture)

The Senate report that described Project Mercury in detail noted that since all those examined were active test pilots, it was not anticipated that any would be disqualified as physically unfit. "Rather," it was explained, "degrees of physical soundness were obtained and evaluation was dependent upon a comparison of each man to his fellow candidates."[12]

The comprehensive program of examination and evaluation procedures for determination of the physical, mental, and social well-being of the candidates was under the direction of Dr. A. H. Schwichtenberg, a retired general officer in the Air Force, who had joined the Lovelace Foundation as head of the Department of Aerospace Medicine. So as to establish a comparative yard-stick, the following program was carried out:

The routine clinical examinations were given under normal conditions with the subject resting. Special consultations were provided as necessary. The clinical examination is described below.[13]

The medical history of each astronaut was taken by Dr. Schwichtenberg and his staff. This included a conventional medical history together with a family history; the attitude of the immediate family toward hazardous flying; the subject’s growth, development, and education; recent travels to areas where parasite diseases are endemic; and any disorders precluding pressure inflation of the ears, sinuses, or lungs. The Cornell Medical Index Health questionnaire was used.

The aviation history included information about the pilot’s total flying hours in various aircraft and about military experience in peace and war-time including details of combat missions, accidents, bailouts, use of the ejection seat, explosive decompressions, and altitude indoctrination and operational experience with partial- or full-pressure suits.

The physical examinations were made by an internist and flight surgeon, Dr. R. R. Secrest. The candidates were also examined by an ophthalmologist, Dr. E. H. Wood; an otolaryngologist, either Dr. H. W. Meredith or Dr. D. E. Kilgore, Jr.; a cardiologist, Dr. J. K. Conrad; a neurologist, Dr. B. T. Selving; and a surgeon, Dr. W. R. Lovelace II or Dr. A. McKinnon, Jr.

The eye examination included refraction, visual fields, extraocular muscle balance, red lens test, tonometry, depth perception, slit lamp, dark adaptation, and dynamic visual acuity. Finally, a color photograph of the conjunctival and retinal vessels was made. The otolaryngological tests included visual inspection, indirect laryngoscopy and nasopharyngoscopy, audiometric thresholds, speech discrimination, and labyrinth function by the standard caloric method.

Examination by a cardiologist included electrocardiograms and ballistocardiograms. A tilt-table test was done, in conjunction with the physiology section, to acquire information on the stability of the pressor-reflex mechanisms and the effectiveness of vasomotor control by the autonomic nervous system. (This test also may help in the detection of relative coronary insufficiency from electrocardiographic changes.) The Lee and Gimlette procedure was employed by an expert to detect congenital abnormal openings between the right and left sides of the heart.

The neurological examination included testing the reflexes and coordination, determining the normalcy of cerebellar function, and determining proprioception and other senses. Dr. L. D. Amick ascertained the conduction velocity of the right ulnar nerve between the elbow and the wrist. An electroencephalogram was done, including a determination of the effects of hyperventilation.

Additional examinations were made by specialists where indicated. Proctosigmoidoscopy was performed by a surgeon.

Laboratory tests under the direction of Drs. T. L. Chiffelle and P. V. Van Schoonhoven included complete blood count and special hematology smear, hemoglobin, hematocrit, sedimentation rate, fasting blood sugar, cholesterol, blood grouping, sodium, potassium, carbon dioxide, chloride, urea clearance in blood and urine, blood urea nitrogen, catecholamine, protein-bound iodine, protein electrophoresis, blood volume (Sjostrand’s carbon monoxide method), total body water determination by the tritium dilution method of Pinson and Langham (tracer dose of 1.5 millicuries of tritiated water used), bromsulphalein-dye liver function test, gastric analysis, urine analysis including calorimetric determination of 17-ketosteroids, throat cultures, stool examination, and sperm count. The amount of potassium 40 was determined in the whole body counter at Los Alamos by Langham and Anderson. The results of the laboratory tests in consolidated form are shown in table I.

In the radiographic examinations, appreciable reduction in radiation exposure was accomplished by the use of supersensitive intensifying screens and shielding plus the use of ultrafast X-ray film. Under the direction of Dr. J. W. Grossman, roentgenograms were made of the teeth, the sinuses, the thorax posteriorly-anteriorly in inspiration and expiration, and right laterally (searching especially for bullae), the esophagus, the stomach, the colon, and the lumbosacral spine, and cineradiograms were made of the heart (searching for preclinical evidence of arteriosclerosis).

Physical competence tests were administered by Dr. U. C. Luft to provide an estimate of the candidate’s general physical condition and cardiopulmonary competence. Graded work was done on v. Dobeln’s bicycle ergometer, increasing the load from 300 mkg/min to around 1,200 mkg/min under electrocardiographic monitoring for possible abnormalities at maximum effort. The test proceeded until the heart rate reached 180 beats/min or until signs of approaching overload were evident. The heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory volume, and respiratory gas exchange were measured each minute. The oxygen consumption attained during the highest workload was the criterion of aerobic work capacity. Each individual was rated with regard to standard values based on age, height, and weight.

Measurements were made of the total lung capacity and its various subdivisions by direct and indirect spirometry, and the efficiency of ventilation was determined by continuous recording of the dilution of nitrogen while the subject breathed 100 percent oxygen. The timed vital capacity, maximal breathing capacity, and ventilatory response to light exercise (walking at 2 mph for 3 minutes) were determined. With these tests it was possible to detect any restrictive or obstructive impairment and to estimate the efficiency of breathing at rest and during mild exercise.

Density of the body was determined by weighing the nude body in water after maximal inspiration followed by exhalation of a measured amount of air. There was close correlation between the lean body mass calculated from the above results and from the K[40] determinations.

A summary of the pertinent physiologic data is given in table II

A final evaluation of each candidate in terms of physical, mental, and social well-being was made at the conclusion of the week-long examinations. The evaluation board was composed of the examining flight surgeons and a physiologist, all with extensive high altitude and operational experience. A summary of the findings was prepared and, together with a copy of the machine record cards, was forwarded to the Aerospace Medical Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.[16]

The Air Force Research and Development Command (later the Air Force Systems Command) provided the next part of the program for selection of the astronauts for Project Mercury. Brig. Gen. Don Flickinger, Command Surgeon and also a member of the NASA Special Committee on Life Sciences, worked closely with the Space Task Group to provide the general direction of this phase of the astronaut selection program. Begun on February 16, 1959, and completed on March 27, 1959, this testing for NASA was performed under Project No. 7164, "Physiology of Flight," and Task No. 71832, "Physiological Criteria for Extended Environments." (See stress testing pictures)

Colonel Stapp, USAF (MC), was at that time chief of the AeroMedical Laboratory at Wright Air Development Center (redesignated the Aerospace Medical Laboratory later that year, on August 1). Supervising the tests under his direction were Lt. Col. William R. Turner, USAF (MC), chairman of the Candidate Evaluation Committee, and Capt. Charles L. Wilson, USAF (MC), Candidate Evaluation Program task officer. The following personnel participated in this program: 1. Acceleration tests—Capt. Evan F. Lindberg, USAF (MC), Principal Investigator; Capt. Alvin S. Hyde, USAF (MC); Capt. Neil Cherniack, USAF (MC); 1^st Lt. Lawrence M. Berman USAF; Mrs. Julia Pettitt; 2. Anthropological measurements—Charles E. Clauser, Principal Investigator; Capt. Robert S. Ziegen, USAF; Kenneth W. Kennedy; 3. Biological acoustical tests—Capt. Ronald G. Hansen, USAF, Principal Investigator; Maj. Jack E. Steele, USAF (MC) Donald J. Baker, Dr. Rolf R. Coermann; Capt. Edward B. Magid, USAF (MC); 4. Thermal tests—Capt. Joseph Gold, USAF (MC), Principal Investigator; Johannes W. Polte; 5. Physical fitness tests—Capt. Charles L. Wilson, USAF (MC), Principal Investigator; Capt. Edmund B. Weis, Jr., USAF (MC); S/Sgt. Joseph Young, USAF; 6. Psychological tests—Capt. George E. Ruff, USAF (MC), Principal Investigator; Capt. Victor H. Thaler, USAF; Dr. Mildred B. Mitchell; Capt. Edwin Z. Levy, USAF (MC); Capt. John K. Jackson, USAF; 1^st Lt. Gilbert E. Johnson, USAF.

Having completed their examinations at the Lovelace Foundation on a Saturday morning, the 32 candidates, carrying with them their complete records, departed for Dayton, Ohio, arriving near midnight. After being billeted in a single house, they reported at 10 o’clock the following morning for a briefing by the laboratory coordinator, the administrative assistant, the task officer, the investigator from the Physical Fitness Test Unit, and an investigator from the Psychology Test Unit.

The tests to be administered had been devised to determine the candidates’ psychological makeup and to estimate his ability to cope with stresses. As reported in WADC Technical Report 59-505, the examinations were in the following areas, with data recorded on machine record cards:

Specific stress tests were as follows:

The psychological tests administered at WADC had two objectives: To determine personality and motivation, and to determine intelligence and special aptitudes. The first was accomplished through the following: Interviews, Rorschach (ink blot), thematic apperception (the stories suggested by pictures), draw-a-person, sentence completion, self-inventory based on 566-item questionnaire, officer effectiveness inventory, personal-preference schedule based on 225 pairs of self-descriptive statements, preference evaluation based on 52 statements, determination of authoritarian attitudes, peer ratings, and interpretation of the question, Who am I?, The second objective was accomplished through administration of the Wechsler Adult Scale, Miller Analogies, Raven Progressive Matrices, Doppelt Mathematical Reasoning Scale, engineering analogies, mechanical comprehension, Air Force Officer Qualification Test, Aviation qualification test (USN), space memory, spatial orientation, Gottschaldt Hidden Figures, and Guilford-Zimmerman Spatial Visualization.

Unless the candidates so wished, none of the medical, psychological, or performance records were included in their personal records. The reason for this exclusion of Project Mercury records from Department of Defense pilot medical records was "to guarantee that any episode of syncope (which might occur, for example, on the human centrifuge, the MC-1 test, or the Tilt Table test) would not be a threat to the pilot’s flying status."[18]

It was noted in WADC Technical Report 59-505 that since the beginning, in 1952, of the U.S. Air Force program relating to man in space, ARDC had envisioned a program to be used in selecting crew members for future projects which, ideally, would include, these characteristics:

The Project Mercury candidate evaluation program was necessarily based upon factors which contributed toward making it less than the ideal program envisioned, the report continued, because of such factors as time limitations, accelerated schedules, and unforeseen changes.

For the final selection of astronauts, representatives met at NASA’s Langley Research Center, Va. Included were representatives of both medical and technical fields from NASA, the USAF Aerospace Medical Laboratory, and the Lovelace Foundation.

On April 2, 1959, NASA announced that seven astronauts has been selected (See picture of final seven selected) for Project Mercury. they were:

Within the next 24 months these names were to become household words throughout the world--names that symbolized the dreams and hopes of mankind throughout the free world that space would truly be explored for the benefit of all mankind.

According to the Lovelace report:

Senate Report 1014 gave substantially the same information:

There were to be five main objectives for continuing the medical phase of the astronaut program. These were:

On April 27, 1959 Project Mercury was assigned the highest national priority. Two weeks later, on May 12, NASA announced a training program for the seven astronauts "to provide them with the technical knowledge to pilot the nation’s manned orbital capsule." By the end of the year the training of the new astronauts was well underway. It had included, among other activities, a visit to Wright Air Development Center for general pressure-suit indoctrination and for a 3-day check of low-residue diets. It included, too, a visit to the Naval Medical Research Institute at Bethesda, Md., for (1) a determination of basal metabolic rate, cutaneous blood flow rate, and sweat rate at environmental temperatures of 95 degrees F and 114 degrees F, and (2) familiarization with the effects of excessive carbon dioxide.

Skindiving training was carried out at the Navy’s Little Creek Amphibious Base to simulate the weightless state and to maintain physical fitness of the astronauts. Acceleration studies with centrifuges were accomplished at Johnsville, Pa. There were fittings for pressure suits at the contractor’s (Goodrich) plant, and trips to Cape Canaveral and to Edwards Air Force Base (for briefings on the X-15 research airplane). Future training would include, among other things, survival techniques   (See survival training picture) disorientation and communications training at Pensacola, Fla., and flights for practice in eating and drinking in the weightless state.[23] Certain phases of the training are discussed in greater detail in subsequent chapters of the present study.

Meanwhile, on April 1, 1959, Dr. William K. Douglas, an Air Force career officer holding the rank of lieutenant colonel, was detailed for duty as the personal physician for the astronauts.[24] A flight surgeon, he had been on duty with the Office of the Surgeon General, USAF. He was to serve as the astronaut’s physician through the next 3 years—the normal tour of duty for an Air Force officer—at which time he would be reassigned to Patrick Air Force Base for duty in the Office of the Assistant for Bioastronautics, Air Force Missile Test Center. At that time he would be succeeded by Dr. Howard Minners, a civilian physician; but now, in April 1959, Dr. Douglas was to begin a 3-year tour of duty unique in the annals of medical history. His daily pattern of life would simulate that of the seven astronauts; many of the tests would also be taken by him; he was, in a very true sense of the word, the eighth astronaut.

Through the next high-keyed months that were a prelude to the first suborbital manned flight in May 1961, the seven astronauts were to embark upon a compressed training schedule that required every ounce of their energy and dedication. This training program was divided into six areas:

Vehicle operations during launch, orbit, and reentry; 2) management of the onboard systems; (3) vehicle attitude control; (4) navigation; (5) communications; and (6) research and evaluation. [25]

From the medical viewpoint, this training program involved responsibility by the Space Task Group for monitoring and controlling the exposure of the individual astronaut to acceleration, weightlessness, heat, vibration, noise, and disorientation. These were medical problems that would be of concern to Dr. White and his aeromedical group, which now formed part of the Life Systems Division within STG, and particularly to Dr. Douglas. Moreover, the astronaut must prepare himself personally for the stresses he would encounter, and to this end each one undertook a physical fitness program tailored to his own needs. The physical fitness of the astronauts was also a primary concern of their personal physician.

NOTES TO CHAPTER 5

[1] James M. Grimwood, Project Mercury: A Chronology, NASA SP-4001, 1963, pp. 31-32.

[2] Project Mercury: Man-in-Space Program of the NASA, S. Rept. 1014, 86^th Cong., 1^st sess., Dec. 1959, p. 6. See also W. Randolph Lovelace II, A. H. Schwichtenberg, Ulrich C. Luft, and Robert R. Secrest, "Selection and Maintenance Program for Astronauts for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration," Aerospace Med., vol. 33, no. 6, June 1962, pp. 667-684.

[3] Paul E. Purser, Spec. Asst. to Dir., Project Mercury, Memo for Files, Subj.: General Background Material on Project Mercury, Mar. 23, 1959. This memorandum places the date of official assignment as Nov. 3, 1958.

[4] Personal interviews with Dr. Allen O. Gamble, 1961-63.

[5] Allen O. Gamble, "The Astronauts and Project Mercury," a lecture delivered on Apr. 24, 1961, during the Space Education Inst., Mar. 6-May 8, sponsored jointly by the Univ. of Maryland and the Martin Co. in cooperation with the Maryland Sec., American Rocket Soc. See also "Operations Part of the Mercury Technical History," an undated draft copy prepared by Robert Voas, in MSC archives.

[6] Robert J. Lacklen, Director of Personnel, NASA, Ltr to U.S. Civil Service Commission, Dec. 3, 1958.

[7] Federal Register, vol.23, no. 239, Dec.9, 1958,pp 95-103.

[8] White House statement, cited by Dr. Gamble. See also Grimwood, op. cit., p. 33.

[9] See note 5.

[10] Ibid. Also personal discussions with Drs. Voas and Gamble by the author.

[11] According to Dr. Gamble, advance estimates by the Committee had been that the rate of volunteers would range from 5 to 50 percent. Actually it was more than 75 percent ("The Astronauts and Project Mercury," op. cit.).

[12] Project Mercury: Man-in-Space Program of the NASA, op.cit., p.42.

[13] Lovelace et al., op. cit. Also, additional information supplied by Drs. Lovelace and Schwichtenberg.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Lovelace et al., op. cit., p. 680. See also A. H. Schwichtenberg, D. D. Flickinger, and W. R. Lovelace II, "Development and Use of Medical Machine Record Cards in Astronaut Selection," U.S. Armed Forces Med. J., vol. 10, no. 11, Nov. 1959, p. 1324-1351.

[17] The following discussion is based on Charles L. Wilson, ed., Project Mercury Candidate Evaluation Program, WADC Tech. Rep. 59-505, Dec. 1959, U.S. Air Force, and on Project Mercury: Man-in-Space Program of the NASA, op. cit., pp. 44-45.

[18] Wilson, op. cit.

[19] We Seven (New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc., 1962), written by the astronauts, recounts their personal experiences, including their reactions to the medical tests performed.

[20] Lovelace, et al., op.cit., p.681

[21] Project Mercury: Man-in-Space Program of the NASA, op.cit., p.43

[22] This concept is described succinctly in Lovelace et al., op. cit., p. 681. In addition, the report lists the routine medical examinations to be performed.

[23] Project Mercury: Man-in-Space Program of the NASA, op. cit., pp. 40-49. Interviews with Capt. C. P. Phoebus, USN, and Capt. Frank Vorhis, USN.

[24] Special Orders A-1157 (DAF) Apr. 1, 1959 (EDCSA). Special Orders AA-150, June 20, 1962, "Agreement Between the Departments of Defense, Army, Navy and Air Force and the NASA Concerning the Detailing of Military Personnel for Service with NASA," signed by T. Keith Glennan for NASA on Feb. 24, 1959, Donald A. Quarles for DOD on Apr. 3, 1959. Wilber M. Brucker for the Dept. of the Army on Mar. 12, 1959, Thomas S. Gates for the Dept. of the Navy on Mar. 12, 1959, James H. Douglas for the Dept. of the Air Force on Mar. 24, 1959, and approved by President Eisenhower on Apr. 13, 1959. This document would implement Sec. 203 (b) (12) of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (P.L. 85-568). The individual would be notified by NASA as soon as accepted. The military departments would assign the members detailed to NASA to appropriate military units for purposes of providing rations, quarters, and medical treatment. Normally the tour of duty with NASA would be 3 years, although in the case of ROTC graduates the tour could be shorter. At the request of the NASA Administrator, military personnel could be recalled prior to the end of the normal tour of duty. Likewise, the military department could recall any person detailed to NASA, should the Secretary so indicate.

[25] Robert B. Voas, "Project Mercury Astronaut Training Program," presented to the USAF Symposium on Psychophysiological Aspects of space Flight in San Antonio, Tex., May 26-27, 1960. See also Voas, "A Description of the Astronaut’s Task in Project Mercury," Human Factors, vol. 3, no. 3, Sept. 1961, pp. 149-165. The reader is also referred to B. D. Goodman, "Psychological and Social Problems of Man in Space—A Literature Survey," ARS J., vol. 31, no. 7, July 1961, pp. 863-872.

Previous Page	Next Page

	JSC Home Page   NASA Home Page
	What you need to know about NASA JSC Web Policy
	Curators: Afzal Ahmed  and Julie Oliveaux
	Responsible NASA Official: Judith L. Robinson, Ph.D.
	Several NASA centers participate in the Life Sciences Data Archive project: Judith L. Robinson, Ph.D., LSDA Project Manager Paul X. Callahan, Ph.D., Data Archive Project Manager at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) Judith L. Robinson, Ph.D., Data Archive Project Manager at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) Bridgit O'Hara Higginbotham, Data Archive Project Manager at Kennedy Space Center (KSC)
	Last Modified