NASA Johnson Space Center
Oral History Project
Edited Oral History Transcript
Joseph
S. Algranti
Interviewed by Erik Carlson
Chapel Hills, NC – 10 August 1998
[This oral history with Joseph S. Algranti was conducted via telephone
from Houston, Texas to Chapel Hills, North Carolina on August 10,
1998. This oral history was conducted by Erik Carlson for the Johnson
Space Center Oral History Project.]
Carlson:
Hi. This is Erik Carlson, Johnson Space Center. Are you ready
for the tele-interview?
Algranti:
Yes, sir, I am.
Carlson:
Great. Well, I'd like to start off and just say that because of the
system here I might have to repeat myself, but it seems clear so far.
Let's start off with a couple basic questions here. What were your
duties as chief of Aircraft Operations Division?
Algranti:
Well, I had, I guess, the technical responsibility for the scheduling,
operations, and the maintenance contract, for at the time we only
had about, under the Apollo Program, about thirty airplanes, and I
was also the technical manager of the support contract that did all
the maintenance and had a little staff of only about twenty pilots
and about a like number of engineers and quality assurance personnel,
and we just supported all the programs that were going on at the time
at JSC [Johnson Space Center].
Carlson:
What were some of the problems that arose during your tenure as the
director?
Algranti:
Well, I wasn't a director. I was a division chief.
Carlson:
Pardon me, sir.
Algranti:
Well, the things that are easy to recall are that we had some aircraft
accidents and we lost some airplanes, but we also picked up some programs.
Let me go through a couple of them.
Carlson:
Okay.
Algranti:
Tell you what. I think a better way to do it would be to just tell
you the programs that we were supporting.
Carlson:
Okay. Great.
Algranti:
We were supporting the Apollo Program, the tail end of the Apollo
Program, primarily with the lunar landing training vehicles, which
is a very temperamental little Bell in-flight trainer for the lunar
landing task, and we had about, probably, twenty-five, twenty-seven
T-38s, and we supported all the astronaut high-performance aircraft
training. We also were involved in what originally was called a ERAP,
Earth Resources Aircraft Program. The science people down at E&D
[the Engineering and Development directorate] were developing an array
of sensors for the upcoming Skylab Program, and so we were putting
them on airplanes. For that program we had a P-3, a Navy P-3, and
a large Navy helo, an SH-3. In the early seventies the Air Force was
supporting us with the WB-57F, which is a very high altitude reconnaissance
platform, but due to some technical problems, they phased the airplanes
out and just gave them to us.
Then in 1973 we inherited another Air Force program, the Zero-G KC-135,
which the Air Force had been running at Wright-Patterson [Air Force
Base]. They were in the process of phasing out some of their R&D
[Research & Development] programs, so they dumped that program
on us. Then toward the middle of the seventies, of course, the Shuttle
Program was coming down the pipes, and we picked up the responsibility
for the Shuttle Training Aircraft Program, which was a highly modified
Gulfstream II, and we had a competitive procurement, bought two airplanes,
delivered them to Grumman, Bethpage, where they were modified, and
got them in service in late 1976.
Just about concurrent with that, we bought the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft
[SCA]. That was done through a competitive procurement through Rockwell
through the Shuttle Program Office, and we picked that airplane up
from American Airlines in 1974 and then delivered it to Boeing in
1976. They modified it, and then we supported the Approach and Landing
Test, ALT Program out at Edwards [Air Force Base], which took place
almost the entire year of 1977. So you can see it was a pretty busy
time.
Carlson:
Yes. It certainly was. Before I go into some specific questions about
some of the programs you mention, I was wondering if you had any thoughts
about how NASA or JSC policy changed as you shifted from the Apollo
Program to Skylab and then to the Space Shuttle Program. Was there
any major policy shifts that affected your office?
Algranti:
Not really. At the level we were at, we were not really—we were
kind of a "you call, we haul" outfit. Of course, toward
the end of the Apollo Program there was—the Apollo program,
everybody had more money than they really could spend intelligently,
and during the Skylab and ASTP, I think the mode changed significantly
when we got into, I'd say, a more disciplined budgetary tracking period.
I went through three bosses at the time, too. That made a big difference
in how we operated. We were a part of Flight Crew Operations under
Deke [Donald K.] Slayton from '70 to '74. Then he went into training
for ASTP, and Kenny [Kenneth S.] Kleinknecht took over, and he was
there about two years, and he got involved in some kind of a fracas
between Grumman and Rockwell, and they transferred him out.
Then George [W. S.] Abbey took over, who, I guess, is the current
[center] director. Each one of those guys had their own, I'm going
to say, management style. Mr. Slayton kind of left you alone as long
as everything went all right. Mr. Kleinknecht was sort of a super
program manager bean-counter type who reviewed everything to microscopic
details, and Mr. Abbey was somewhere in between.
Now let me tell you about some of the machines that we lost. In my
position, they were very traumatic events. With the LLTV [Lunar Landing
Training Vehicle], of course, we supported Jim [James A.] Lovell [Jr.]
and John [W.] Young and Al [Alan B.] Shepard [Jr.] in 1970 for the
Apollo 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 flights, but we lost LLTV Number 2 end
of January '71. An electrical problem. The pilot, Stu Present, ejected
okay, but it was a real worrisome problem, in that we just—well,
two days after we lost that LLTV, Al Shepard's flight was launched,
so we had to support Apollo 15 through 17 with one vehicle. It got
a lot of people nervous, but it worked out okay. We were able to do
all the training satisfactorily with just one machine.
Just about a year later, that pilot, Stu Present, was lost in a T-38
accident on January 20, '72, at Matagorda Island with a back-seater
named Mark Heath, who was an LLTV flight director, actually, and they
were just starting to—we were practicing, trying to figure how
to use inertial systems to do energy management for space shuttle
landings, and he got trapped by some weather that moved in. The weather
really was right on the ground. He didn't realize it, and he flew
into the ground at Matagorda Air Force Station, which was one of our
little operating areas.
And just four months later we lost NASA-957. Pete [Charles C.] Conrad
[Jr.] was flying it back from a cross country, got in some pretty
bad weather and had some bad handling by both Ellington approach and
Houston approach, ended up diverting to Bergstrom, but he ended up
running out of gas before he got there. He ejected. The airplane did
have a technical problem. It was a new T-38. Some technical orders
we were aware of had not really been accomplished. But he was uninjured,
so it wasn't as bad as the other accident.
You know, we launched Apollo 17 December 6th of that year. That ended
Apollo, but actually in the fall of that year we started our proposals
on the Shuttle Training Aircraft [STA], which was a very lengthy procurement
technical effort. And to complicate things, as I said, Air Force—they
had been flying for our Earth Resources Program Office with the WB-57F,
but they decided to phase that system out and just gave us two of
the airplanes, which we picked up in about mid-1972, and that required
a lot of training, which we got up at the 58th Weather Squadron in
Albuquerque, but we also had to develop a pressure suit capability.
The STA, I was in the middle of that with Warren [J.] North and Colonel
Joe [H.] Engle, but we went through a big competitive procurement
technical evaluation with Grumman and Lockheed and decided to go with
the Gulfstream II, being as it was a production airplane. Jet Star
had been phased out. So we procured two of those airplanes in May
and June of 1974, ferried them from Savannah, where they were being
manufactured, to Bethpage, and then Grumman started their mod.
Of course, in that same time period we were supporting the Skylab
Program. As you know, that took place, the whole program, four launches,
took place in 1973. So there was a lot of T-38 activity and a lot
of Gulfstream activity. Gulfstream I did a lot of support work. If
you remember the big parasol exercise because of the damage on the
initial launch, that stretched the resources pretty tight throughout
NASA, but it all worked out pretty well.
Carlson:
Great. What modifications did you do to the Gulfstream II aircraft?
Algranti:
Gulfstream II is a long-range, about ten-passenger jet upgrade from
the Gulfstream I. Of course, we spent a lot of time in the wind tunnels
trying to get its drag down so it could cruise efficiently at high
altitude, so what we had to do was modify it so it could descend like
the space shuttle, which has a very poor lift-to-drag ratio and also
flies at a very high speed. So we had to develop three big modifications.
We took the flaps off the plane and put direct-lift flaps on. A normal
airplane has a Fowler Flap system. You know, they extend aft and then
go down and increase your lift, and at the very end they increase
the drag. But we put on a direct-lift Grumman design, a very good
direct-lift system which ran the—instead of Fowler Flaps a plain
split flap which went up thirty degrees and down twenty, and then
we put on an in-flight engine reverse system so we could get a lot
of drag from the engines so we could descend at the twenty-or-so degree
glide slope.
Then the complicated part was we put in a digital autopilot system.
At that time it was kind of state of the art. It was a DC-10 system,
and it was developed by the Honeywell people along with Grumman. We
had a model of the orbiter stored in it, and it would sense what the
airplane was doing, would figure out what the orbiter would be doing,
and then it would develop an error signal to run the flaps and the
rudder and the in-flight reverse so you can exactly duplicate the
flight path of the space shuttle. It was a very complicated program.
We ran a little bit behind. We barely finished it up in time to support
training for the ALT [Approach and Landing Test] program, but it did
a good job, and as you're probably aware, we modified two more airplanes
later on and have an insurance G II flying. I think it's Number 948
right now. It's a management airplane. Those airplanes are like Number
944 through 948 in the fleet. Each one of the shuttle pilots gets
about 500 to 700 landings, landing approaches, in those airplanes
before he flies the shuttle itself. It's a complex mod.
Charlie Haines was the engineer primarily on there and did a great
job. We had Dave Griggs and Al Manson, two pilots that worked along
with a Grumman pilot named Ernie Vonderheyden. We did have a management
brief on April 1 of 1976, which I'll never forget, in which the Grumman
vice presidents came in and told Dr. [Christopher C.] Kraft [Jr.]
that we were going to be about six months late in delivering and about
a 50 percent cost overrun. He really got upset.
Carlson:
I can imagine.
Algranti:
Threw everybody out of the office. [He said he would never give] Grumman
another contract if he had anything to do with it, and we had some
really high-powered people. It all worked out okay, because, as you
know, the approach and landing test, which was managed by Deke Slayton,
took place through the whole calendar year 1977, and we got the airplanes
delivered October '76. I ferried both of the delivery flights, so
I can remember the dates when I left. It was a big, I guess, boost
to the program to be able to have the pilots train in the in-flight
simulator. Of course, we had to do a lot of chase in the ALT program,
too.
We had to modify the T-38 so they could chase the orbiter, which required
a larger speed brake and some beefed up landing gear doors so we could
fly it well in excess of the gear-down limits of the T-38. The T-38s
gear-down limit is 240. We were flying about 310, so it took a little
structural rework, but that was all kind of invisible to the outside
world.
Another problem for our contractor, we had just changed maintenance
contractors in '76. When we started that ALT program, Mr. Slayton
told us that he needed like about twelve T-38s out at Edwards. I think
about every two or three weeks for the whole year, and we only had
at that time probably twenty airplanes. My contractor, I thought he
was going to walk out and say, "Give this job to somebody else."
We managed to make it all right.
Carlson:
I have a question about the STA [Shuttle Training Aircraft] aircraft.
How realistic was the training and were there any limitations or problems
with the aircraft itself?
Algranti:
It's very realistic. We mask out the windows. We have an orbiter crew
station in the left side of the cockpit that flies the exact trajectory,
and after several years' training, we see what the airplane does.
We have a little software development capability. I'm not sure what
contractor's doing it now. It was Ford, Philco, and Loral when I was
there, and they keep matching the airplane. So it does exactly what
the [orbiter] does, so the astronauts all consider it the best trainer
for the Shuttle landing task. And we've got a crew station up [front]—that
was another big mod. I didn't even mention that, but that was mostly
mechanical. They had to put, you know, an orbiter crew station, all
the controls and displays on the left side and then move the captain's
station on the right side of the airplane. The normal captain sits
on the left, so we had to move a lot of things to the right side of
the—Grumman did a good job on that.
Where are you located physically at JSC?
Carlson:
I'm in Building 12 right now, sir.
Algranti:
Well, some time—probably thirty minutes, go up and see John
Young. I think he's still working up there at the director's staff
level. He can tell you all about the STA. He's very familiar with
it.
Carlson:
Okay. Thank you for that reference.
Algranti:
He spent a lot of time, and he helped us technically. As you know,
he was involved in the Shuttle Program from start to finish, from
start to now.
Carlson:
What was the exact purpose of the T-38 chase aircraft? What happened
with that?
Algranti:
Initial flights, everybody was quite worried about how the astronauts
could handle the [landing] task, you know, their height and stuff
like that. So on the original ALT flights, we chased the orbiter with
[Karol J.] Bobko, Gordon [Charles G.] Fullerton, and some of the other
guys, and they'd call out the altitude, basically, at the very end
and look over the vehicle. Then, when we actually started flying,
we chased a few of the initial STS [Space Transportation System] flights
because everybody was worried about the tiles falling off, structural
problems. So we had chase. Actually, in the Edwards operation on the
approach and landing test, the pilots are so busy with their tasks
and instrument tasks, you really hate to say this because nobody's
looking out the window. You really need somebody else to just be sure
there's no other traffic in the area. And we had a big chase operation
all during ALT.
Carlson:
Thank you. I'm interested, on the experiences with the shuttle carrier
aircraft, if you could tell me—
Algranti:
I went through that with the fellows involved in that from Day One.
We started worrying about how we were going to carry the Orbiter in
the early seventies, and we went through some proposals in headquarters
with Dale [D.] Myers, Johnny [John F.] Yardley, and the bosses at
the time. The competition was between the C-5 and the Boeing 747,
and an engineer, he's still in the area, I guess retired. I think
he works for Rockwell, a guy named John Kiker came up with carrying
the orbiter on the back. There were some other schemes with specially
built transports, but the Air Force was interested in supporting us,
but they said once you modified a C-5, if we went to war or something,
they'd have to pull the airplane back, so that kind of convinced the
managers that we needed a commercial airplane. So we went with the
747, and really early in '74 we got turned on to procuring airplanes
because of, I think, probably some Skylab underruns.
There was some Shuttle Program money floating around, so we actually
went through a competitive procurement selecting airplanes through
a Rockwell selection team, and they subcontracted the United Airlines
and Pan American and some other 747 operators. It was a good time
for us, because that was about the second fuel crunch--you remember
the fuel crunches of the 1970s. The airline business took a big downturn,
the economy was pretty sour, and there were lots of 747s in storage
just sitting around. So we bought a very good-shape American Airlines
airplane and actually accepted it in June of 1974. I can tell you,
that whole exercise of buying an airplane probably didn't take ninety
days. Amazingly fast. We paid about $15 million for it.
We bought another airplane in 1988, many years later, and at that
time we did our own procurement, and fourteen years later we paid
another $15 million for the same basic airplane. …The [project]
engineer for that, was a gent named Carl Peterson, who worked in the
Shuttle Program office for Bob [Robert F.] Thompson. We delivered
the airplane up to Boeing, and we flew it a little bit out at Edwards,
keeping the airplane in a wake-vortex program where other airplanes
were flying behind a 747, and Boeing started their modification, the
drawings, and design, I guess, in most of 1975. Mr. Slayton, again,
was in charge of the ALT Program. So he and Owen [E.] Maynard from
the program office were the primary decision-makers, but Boeing did
a good job.
The airplane came out in December of '76, started the…flight
test after modification. We delivered to Edwards, I think, in January
[1977] and then started the ALT Program in February with [Fred W.]
Haise [Jr.] and Fullerton and Engle and [Richard H. "Dick"]
Truly. You'll remember there was a period where the orbiter was inert
and inactive, and then later on we put astronauts in it, and it was
called "captive active," then it was topped off with five
free flights, the last one being a runway landing with none other
than Prince Charles [Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor, Prince
of Wales] in attendance. We went through some political squabbles
with—I guess Dave [David R.] Scott was the director of Edwards
at the time, and Mr. Manke was his [flight operations] boss, and I
think they got crossed wires a couple of times with Mr. Slayton, who
was running things. I was down low enough where it didn't bother me,
but I'm telling you, it was a little trauma time period there.
Carlson:
What were some of the problems or obstacles with the carrier program?
Algranti:
Well, the program itself went amazingly well. Boeing did a great job.
The airplane, as far as I know, has been flying [continuously], and
we never really had any technical problems with it, and we're carrying
a 200,000-pound airplane on top of a 300,000-pound airplane, and we
only added about 10,000 pounds to the basic 747. So it was a very
nice program, but when we ferried the airplane, some of the problems
we had, we ferried the airplane out to Edwards in--I'm sure it was
about June or July of '74, and we'd been planning this for at least
a month, and when we were ready to go, the Edwards people said they
didn't have room on the ramp for us. That was, again, a Dave Scott/Chris
Kraft kind of butting heads, but fortunately I knew General Rushworth,
who was running the [U.S. Air Force] flight test center at the time
and so did Slayton, and he said bring it and we can park it on their
ramp. Of course, that embarrassed the Flight Research Center, and
everything kind of fell into place after that.
We initially operated at Edwards with an American Airlines crew out
of Los Angeles and eventually got a little field team on our Houston
maintenance contract. The management problems, initially I think the
Edwards people very much wanted to operate and maintain the airplane,
put it in their inventory, and Bob Thompson and the JSC people wanted
to keep it in JSC's hands so we could control the costs and scheduling.
Eventually, of course, JSC prevailed in that, but it was a little
uncomfortable at my level when some of these management storms were
taking place overhead.
Carlson:
I was wondering if you could tell me a little bit about the Super
Cargo Aircraft Program.
Algranti:
I can tell you all about that. That's the Super Guppy. We inherited
that airplane in 1979. Primarily, the people operating it wanted to
get out of the ops business, so they, I think, threatened to sell
it to the Germans. A guy named Kirk Irwin, who actually was an ex-NASA
engineer from Edwards, was their manager. He went to headquarters,
and Mr. Yardley felt we needed to retain that to support the upcoming—some
of the shuttle payloads and eventually the space station. So we went
ahead, and they just gave that airplane to us because we had a big
airplane fleet, a big maintenance capability. So we picked the airplane
up in '79, got a lot of technical help from the Air Force up at Tinker
Air Force Base, ran it through an acceptance program, bought it, and
put it in operation. We flew a lot of classified DOD [Department of
Defense] payloads, a lot of NASA payloads, Agena stages—pressurized
upper stages, General Dynamics built—and lot of DOD airplanes,
F-14s and A-7s, but eventually we couldn't support the propeller system
on airplanes, so the original Super Guppy went to storage, I'd say
probably, in about 1992 or '93, and as you probably know, the French,
in part of the Airbus [program], had bought two of what they called
Guppy 201s, basically the same airplane but with different engines,
and they eventually built two more in France and were flying four
of them, but Airbus, knowing they couldn't maintain those old—they
were basically old Boeing 377 or C-97 airplanes, they built a jet-powered
air bus, a Super Guppy type airplane, and they phased their operation
out in some kind of support deal between us and the French regarding,
I guess, the space station we inherited the Number 4 French Super
Guppy, which, as far as I know, is at Ellington right now.
Carlson:
I believe so. What were some of the flight characteristics of the
Super Guppy aircraft?
Algranti:
Even though it looks strange, it flies basically just about like a
C-97, a Boeing 377. I think the only thing strange about it is that
at [forward] CGs it takes off, and the main wheels come up before
the nose gear, and when you land, it kind of lands on the nose gear.
But the C-97 does the same thing. It's got a lot of side area that
you have to be a little more careful in a cross wind, but it's basically
not really a very different airplane than, I'd say, the C-97.
Carlson:
I'm also interested in the zero-gravity aircraft. I was wondering
if you could tell me a little bit about that, please.
Algranti:
Okay. The zero gravity was a program run by the Air Force at Wright-Patterson
that started in 1960 with the KC-135. Originally it was run with Convair,
I think, 340 airplanes and T-29s, the Air Force called them. In 1973,
as part of their reducing their R&D fleet—NASA was the main
customer for the Air Force. They just said take the airplane. They
wanted to give it to us in '72, but we were picking up B-57s then.
Actually, Tom McElmurry, who, I think, is retired but still teaching
up at A&M, he hadn't been out of the Air Force too long. He was
sort of Deke's deputy. We went up and talked to General Greenleaf
and asked him to keep the airplane for another year, and he agreed
to do that. We picked up our airplane in 1973, and it was the fourth
airplane. Previous airplanes had been phased out after they accumulated
about 12,000 of these zero-G maneuvers. They were [Strategic Air Command]
tankers. When they phased them out, they just went back in the tanker
fleet and the cargo fleet, wherever the Air Force had them, and we
started operating the airplane with our pilots and supportive program
at Ellington, really picked the airplane up in '73, and we got an
old FAA flight check airplane, which had been neglected, a lot of
parts robbed off of it.
We went through the zero-G mod at Tinker, and we actually hired Don
Griggs, who had been the manager at Wright-Patterson. He came to Ellington
and flew with us probably five or six years before he retired. And
we flew that airplane after studying it with the engineers up at Oklahoma
City. Between Boeing and the Air Force engineers, they said if we
would reduce the entry and exit G-level just a small amount, we could
extend the life of the airplane quite a bit. So we did that. We went
from a 2-G pull-up and exit to 1.8 Gs, and that airplane, which was
NASA 930, I think, we retired it in probably '94 and got another KC
from the Air Force. That's NASA 931. I think we did pretty well, because
I think we flew almost 60,000 parabolas on NASA 930. As far as I know,
it's still sitting at Ellington. I think they're going to make it
a gate guard or an exhibit out there. That airplane flying now is
the Weightless Wonder Number Five.
Carlson:
Thank you. I'm also interested in the Airborne Instrumentation Program.
What was your involvement with that?
Algranti:
Well, we've managed that completely with the technical help of the
E&D people, but, like I said, we had all the prototype instruments
that were used initially in the Skylab. Eventually they went in the
LANDSAT, and we used a P-3 and a C-130 for intermediate altitudes,
a helicopter for low altitudes, and a WB-57 for very high altitudes,
and these were just platforms with infrared photographic sensors,
and we just installed and did the modifications to the airplanes,
gathered the data. We didn't really do any of the data reduction.
It was all done by support contractors to the E&D [Engineering
and Development] organization there. Eventually, those instruments
developed from those airplane programs went into the LANDSAT satellite
system, which I guess they're still being launched. They've been refined
quite a bit.
The program itself was taken over by Ames [Research Center], I'm going
to say, very early in the eighties. I think Ames didn't really have
a mission that they could hang their hat on, and headquarters decided
to take our, I guess, operating funds and give it to the Ames Research
Center and do the rest for the ongoing operation in the U-2s. They
phased the U-2s out and went to the ER-2s, and that operation, I'm
sure, is still ongoing, but the original, I guess, instrumentation
development was done at JSC, and the contractor at the time was Lockheed,
and the primary engineer was a guy named Dean Grimm. I'm sure these
people are all retired. There's probably not many people around that
recall after they went into that. We delivered the P-3 to Wallops
Station when we phased our program out. We delivered the C-130 to
Ames, and that airplane is still in operation. [The P-3’s] been
retired, and it's in a [naval aviation] museum down in Pensacola now.
The other mission we picked up was the Airstream mission, which was
a high altitude tropopause air-sampling mission that the Air Force
phased out. In 1974 they gave us an air-sampling airplane. The tail
number is 928, and, as far as I know, it's still operating it. We
picked it up, and we were doing it for the Atomic Energy Commission.
The Cold War was still on, and they were sampling tropopause and getting
the results from atmospheric nuclear tests, and the people at Los
Alamos could take the air samples to determine the yield and materials
and everything else. Again, we were just operating the airplanes.
All the handling of the data was done by—it's the Department
of Energy now, but at that time was the Atomic Energy Commission.
Carlson:
What about your involvement with the Earth Resources Aircraft Program?
Algranti:
We were managing the operation and did the airplane mods, the P-3,
the C-130. We started with a Convair-240 and a Bell-206 helicopter
and two WB-57s. Again, we did the insulation of the equipment, which
primarily came from people over in the Engineering Directorate, operated
the airplanes, collected the data, and then delivered the data back
to them. We didn't really get too involved in the science part of
it. We just operated the airplanes.
Carlson:
I'm interested in your transition and your shift from your job that
we've been talking about to the assistant director of flight crew
operations. Can you tell me a little bit about that, please?
Algranti:
You mean me personally?
Carlson:
Yes, sir.
Algranti:
Well, I was just actively flying until about 1990. By that time I
had reached an advanced age as far as the medical people, I guess,
went to sixty-five, and they started, I guess, leaning on me to quit
flying. So they made life difficult enough putting me on dual flying
status and finally said, "You ought not to be flying. Why don't
you get in management?" So I just phased out, and I retired in
'92. Basically I quit flying in 1990.
Carlson:
What were your duties as assistant director for flight crew operations?
Algranti:
I was working for Don Puddy then, and, of course, what he did is he
put me kind of on top of the ongoing programs at aircraft ops. I got
involved in about three big procurement efforts. We bought the back-up
Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, NASA-911. We bought an airplane and modified
it. I kind of followed that from start to finish. We bought that airplane
from Japan Airlines, did the mod in Wichita this time instead of in
Everett, and then we also bought—we took NASA-[650]—I
can't be sure of the number, but it was a Lewis Research Center prop
fan test assessment airplane. The Grumman serial number was 118, and
we made an STA-4 out of it. We took a wing that had been residual
from the G-2B program. For a while, they used to take G-3 wings and
put them on G-2s so there were some low time wings available. So we
went through another competitive procurement. This time we had the
airplane modified by Midcoast in St. Louis. So I kind of followed
that program through.
Then we bought another airplane for insurance. Well, basically what
Mr. Puddy had me do was to do some technical and budgetary management
of what I'd consider the major aircraft operations procurement efforts
that were going on at the time.
Carlson:
Last question here. I was wondering how JSC was with the financial
end of the game here as far as your budget as aircraft chief. Were
they generous, or did you have to operate on shoestrings many times?
How did that work?
Algranti:
It varied. At the beginning of the fiscal year, we generally were
well off, and as we got toward the end of the year, sometimes we got
squeezed, but we never really had any kind of a big problem, because
Mr. Abbey was our boss, and he was a ex-Air Force pilot and was pretty
sympathetic to our requirements. So I think he used to fight the budget
battles. We didn't see it. At the division level, you know, you don't
really get too involved in the budget battles. We were basically operating
for many years off of the Apollo Program, the Skylab Program, the
Shuttle Program.
Algranti:
We were just draining, from the overall standpoint, very small percentages
of some of the program budgets. AIRP was kind of the bigger program
from an overall standpoint, because it was a small program to start
with, but everybody got busy with the shuttle. I guess our headquarters
management just gave the whole thing to Ames, a little bit to Wallops
just to give them something to do, and we were busy enough with supporting
the Shuttle, T-38, STA's, and the SCA that it didn't really bother
us very much.
Carlson:
I had a couple of quick biographical questions. Could you give me
a thumbnail sketch of your military and flight training, please?
Algranti:
Well, I entered the Navy when I was seventeen years old, in the middle
of World War II, went through the V-12 Program, then the V-5 Program.
Those were the aviation cadet programs. I went through Navy flight
training, and I really didn't finish the Navy flight training until
the end of 1945, and by that time the war was over. So I was a reserve
aviator had had a choice of getting out or signing up for a two-year
tour, and after all the struggle of getting through the program, I
signed up and went onto a torpedo attack squadron for two years, VT-20.
So I did five years active duty with the Navy, two years on an aircraft
carrier, the USS Philippine Sea.
When I got…out, I went back to school and finished school at
the University of North Carolina where I'd started in '42 and graduated
in '49. I actually had applied for work at Langley, but at that time
there weren't any openings. I was in graduate school, and there was
kind of a big shuffle of NACA pilots. Joe Walker went out to Edwards
to replace Scott [A.] Crossfield, who went to Rockwell and the X-15
Program. I went up to work at Lewis in 1951 early, and I worked there
for nine years, and I worked at Langley Research Center for three
years and then got recruited in spring of 1962 by Warren North and
Walt [Walter C.] Williams, set up the JSC Aircraft Operations.
Carlson:
Thank you. Could you, for biographical purposes, I need to get your
parents' full names.
Algranti:
My dad's name was Samuel J. Algranti. He worked for the American Tobacco
Company in Durham, North Carolina. My mother's name was Beatrice.
Carlson:
And her maiden name was?
Algranti:
Carol.
Carlson:
Thank you. And I need to get your wife's name and the date you were
married, please.
Algranti:
Annabelle. We were married in November 1952. She was an employee of
NACA [National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics] at Lewis Lab, where
I was working.
Carlson:
Thank you. And finally, your children's names, please.
Algranti:
I have a stepson named Donald Cope. My son is Samuel Algranti. He
still lives in Houston. He works for a Norwegian oil company [Statoil],
lives in Clear Lake City. My daughter is a physician. Her name is
Deborah Simmons. She lives in LaGrange, Georgia.
Carlson:
Thank you very much. Mr. Algranti, I've really enjoyed this interview,
and it's been a fascinating time, and I appreciate your time. Thank
you very much.
Algranti:
Get five minutes with John Young, because he was there, one of the
early Gemini guys. He can tell you a lot about aircraft ops from the
user's standpoint.
Carlson:
Okay. Thank you very much. Have a pleasant day. Thank you.
[End
of Interview]