The National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics was a U.S. government body set up in 1915 to support research into various aeronautical problems, as a result of the widespread usage of aerial warfare in World War I and the recognition that the United States, despite being the originator of the airplane and the first purchaser of a military airplane, had fallen behind in this technological area. Subsequently, it ended up doing a great deal of basic research on, mostly, aerodynamics, making large contributions to the design of aircraft from the 1930s into the 1950s (when it became NASA, which continues doing similar work today).
However, while it certainly cannot be faulted as a whole, there were some...omissions in NACA's research programs. For a combination of budgetary and political reasons, it neglected work in gas turbines and rockets before World War II, and the latter for quite some time afterwards, despite rocketry being a natural extension of aeronautics in many respects and in many applications and establishing a "Pilotless Aircraft Research Station" (read: rocket launch site) at Wallops Island in 1945, years before Cape Canaveral or Vandenberg were original established. Instead, it largely left what work there was in those areas up to the services until the formation of NASA forced their hand and led them to take over a great deal of rocket work.
I don't think this was foreordained. True, NACA didn't have a lavish budget, and there was surely no possibility of them developing V-2-equivalents before World War II even if they had somehow become rocket-obsessed. But there are much smaller missions that were well within their purview and which rocketry was suitable for, such as serving as an auxiliary propulsion system, testing new technologies and designs under conditions not easily accessed in wind tunnels and without risking a pilot, or researching the atmosphere itself. At the time, there was also some interest in whether the technology could be adapted for purposes for which it turned out not to be suited, such as serving as primary propulsion either directly or through a "turborocket," again an adequate justification for them to carry out a rocket research program of some kind. And certainly after the war there was adequate notice that rockets could become important to aeronautics and so deserved some degree of ongoing research.
So, my question is, firstly, what changes are needed to lead NACA to perform more rocketry work, at least on the level of JPL/GALCIT if not a bit more before World War II, and on a somewhat higher level perhaps comparable to the Navy, afterwards? That is, what PoD would enable them to see rocketry, even if somewhat fringe, as being worth some investment of money and time? Second, and supposing that this was the case, what would the effects be?
However, while it certainly cannot be faulted as a whole, there were some...omissions in NACA's research programs. For a combination of budgetary and political reasons, it neglected work in gas turbines and rockets before World War II, and the latter for quite some time afterwards, despite rocketry being a natural extension of aeronautics in many respects and in many applications and establishing a "Pilotless Aircraft Research Station" (read: rocket launch site) at Wallops Island in 1945, years before Cape Canaveral or Vandenberg were original established. Instead, it largely left what work there was in those areas up to the services until the formation of NASA forced their hand and led them to take over a great deal of rocket work.
I don't think this was foreordained. True, NACA didn't have a lavish budget, and there was surely no possibility of them developing V-2-equivalents before World War II even if they had somehow become rocket-obsessed. But there are much smaller missions that were well within their purview and which rocketry was suitable for, such as serving as an auxiliary propulsion system, testing new technologies and designs under conditions not easily accessed in wind tunnels and without risking a pilot, or researching the atmosphere itself. At the time, there was also some interest in whether the technology could be adapted for purposes for which it turned out not to be suited, such as serving as primary propulsion either directly or through a "turborocket," again an adequate justification for them to carry out a rocket research program of some kind. And certainly after the war there was adequate notice that rockets could become important to aeronautics and so deserved some degree of ongoing research.
So, my question is, firstly, what changes are needed to lead NACA to perform more rocketry work, at least on the level of JPL/GALCIT if not a bit more before World War II, and on a somewhat higher level perhaps comparable to the Navy, afterwards? That is, what PoD would enable them to see rocketry, even if somewhat fringe, as being worth some investment of money and time? Second, and supposing that this was the case, what would the effects be?