DISCUSSION
What is the Matter with Operating Engineering?
(See Page 1431, Whole No. 211)
Lieut. Commander R.R. Smith, U. S. Navy.—The article in the September number by Lieut. Commander H. F. D. Davis, U. S. Navy, inquiring as to "What is the Matter with Operating Engineering?" covers a subject which is becoming of increasing importance. This is particularly so in view of the tremendous increase in the number of new vessels, the engineering plants of which vary widely in type and design from each other, chiefly as a result of the development of turbine engineering. As long as the reciprocating engine was the standard type of marine propulsion and the chief difference between ships was that of size, operating practices were well standardized and repairs and casualties were covered by well established practices. With the advent of turbines, and the steady improvements in their design and combinations both by the manufacturers and the Bureau of Engineering, a similar change was introduced in engine room auxiliaries involving radical departures from previous types.
The engineer who keeps abreast of these changes finds that the knowledge acquired yesterday no longer holds to-day; that the turbine even before its complete development is being supplemented in capital ships by electric drive. It is not surprising, then, that the older engineer finds much of his knowledge insufficient and that the new engineer operates the plant at his disposal more with a view to safety than economy. The situation is further aggravated by the outpouring of new ships, built at great cost, for which supervising and engineering personnel is not available.
It is hard to concur in the statement in the commanding officer's letter, that "there has never been more competent commissioned engineering talent in the battleship force than is the case to-day." However, it may be so for the force in question but the same cannot be said for the service at large.
A comparison has been made between gunnery and engineering performance. Gunnery has been developed from the stimulus it has received from the seagoing personnel, whereas the development of engineering has taken place chiefly from shore. The gunnery officer serves a longer apprenticeship at his work and is, therefore, more conversant with the details of the ordnance equipment of his ship. His time is not wholly occupied with the upkeep of the materiel and he has a greater opportunity to devote his time to the development and training of the personnel and to work out and develop new ideas in connection with personnel, materiel and methods.
The average engineer officer enjoys the title of his office because he has been so detailed and not because he has been trained as such. His responsibilities are such as to keep him fully occupied in the upkeep and successful operation of the plant while the personnel duties which are performed by the executive officer for the deck force are discharged by the engineer officer for his force. Without special training he is dependent upon his subordinates for the really important mechanical decisions, and never reaches the point where his work becomes constructive rather than routine. He leaves the development and improvement of engineering materiel to the Bureau of Engineering. I am speaking of the average engineer officer; there are, of course, many exceptions.
Does the engineer officer of a ship regard his work as a preparatory step to higher command as does the navigator, the executive or the gunnery officer? He does not, and he also realizes that he must not be too closely identified with engineering duty for too great a length of time lest it work to his detriment. When an officer is assigned to engineering duty only he is in the happy position of being able to devote himself unreservedly to engineering. The officer who prefers engineering work but whose application for engineering only is declined must turn to something else under present conditions.
The answer to the question "What is the Matter with Operating Engineering?" is, "There are not enough operating engineers of proper experience to handle the engineering plants of the ships of the navy." If we are to interest officers to become skilled engineers we must hold out some inducements to them—a condition which does not exist at present. What is sadly needed is a policy on this subject. Until a definite policy is established with relation to the operating engineering personnel which will foster interest in engineering and place it on the same honored plane as gunnery, we will have to be content with present conditions.