Sea Navigation Methods in Northern Canada; Second Seamaster Begins Tests; Britain to Get Data on Atom Submarine; New Destroyers Use Aluminum Parts; 1000-Horsepower T58 Gas Turbine; Tankers Receive Saran Coating; No More Bases; Navy Wants to Dispose of 107 Warships; 83,000-Ton Craft Nears Launching; U. S. Unveils Small-sized Atom Plant; Four Nations Striving to Perfect Helicopter; “Treachery” at Pearl Harbor; U. S. Air Force Guided-Missile SNARK; Ocean Deeps To Be Studied for Radioactivity’s Effects; Peroxide Powers New British Sub; TV Control of Air Traffic at Alameda; Jet Engine Thrust Reverser Units; Baby Sub Has Big Role in New German Navy; Mach 1.2 Bomb Drop Confirmed by Navy.
Sea Navigation Methods in Northern Canada
By Captain O.C.S. Robertson,1 RCN
Editor’s Note: By special arrangement with the Canadian Department of Defence, this original article is appearing simultaneously here and in the August 1956 issue of the Canadian Navy’s magazine The Crows nest.
In the Canadian Arctic, there are many factors not found in low latitudes, which make the problems of navigation (determination of position and desired course and speed, etc.) somewhat complicated.
The majority of these problems stem from a lack of any reliable hydrographic information; erroneous and inadequate charts; little or no tidal data and little or no information on currents and tidal streams; sparse or non-existent soundings; unreliable offshore soundings, obtained with little or no control; sketchy, and in some cases inaccurate sailing directions; and a complete absence of navigational aids (buoys, lights, sound signals, radio devices).
Coupled with the inadequate charts, there is a lack of the supplementary data usually taken for granted, such as tidal stream and current data; while written, sketched, or photographed descriptions of the land masses and areas covered, as well as written directions as to the safest routes through and into the different locations, are also lacking.
The best charts available are those preliminary editions issued by the Canadian Hydrographic Service. These are based on air photography without adequate geodetic control, triangulation, topography, or soundings. In normal latitudes, such charts would not even be considered for issue to ships. But, in the Canadian north, such charts are used continuously, as they are the best available.
All available soundings have been placed on these charts and, in a few regions, they have a misleadingly reliable appearance. Large-scale harbor charts are almost nonexistent.
These charts are drawn on the Lambert Conformal Projection, and, while this may appear at first sight an unconventional projection to use, in actual fact it presents a much better picture of the high-latitude land masses than does the more conventional Mercator Projection.
In the use of these charts, the errors due to the small convergency of the meridians is to all practical purposes overcome by the use of an adjustable plotting arm, which is lined up with the closest meridian prior to laying off bearings or courses.
The difficulties mentioned are not insurmountable if the navigator will accept the fact that unconventional methods are required to meet unconventional situations, and that while geographic fixing of the ship’s position may be impossible, fixing relative to a land mass is, in most instances, possible; the fact that the land mass itself is inaccurately fixed is immaterial.
The problems of navigation are also complicated by various climatic factors—ice, the prevalence of fog when the water is partially clear of ice, low cloud ceiling during the months when ice conditions permit navigation and, in the spring and fall of the year, wet cold.
Because of the poor visibility, celestial observations cannot be counted on. Continuous daylight during the summer precludes the use of stars. Even if accurate celestial observations were obtained, the information would be of little use, as the navigator would be faced with the problem of plotting a celestial fix on an inaccurate chart.
Good celestial fixes have been experienced by the writer which have been checked by radar from a known landmark (whose position has been established by geodetic fix), which put the ship at 2000-foot altitude on top of a glacier. As the sounding machine showed thirty fathoms, course and speed were maintained.
Standard refraction tables are not accurate in high latitudes, and ice horizons and abnormal mirage during periods of good visibility complicate the problem of obtaining an accurate altitude of the sun. Also, at the moment H.0. 214 tables do not allow for solution of the celestial problem for altitudes of the sun below five degrees, a common condition in the early and late summer periods.
Conventional dead reckoning in ice-filled waters, where a log cannot be used, is also out. However, a form of D.R. that meets the navigator’s need can be practised. Radar ranging on icebergs, or on some easily- distinguishable landmarks, is used. As no information is available on the rate of drift of such icebergs, some allowance must be made for drift unless it can be established that an iceberg is grounded.
The use of icebergs is denied the navigator in the central and western Canadian Archipelago, as there are none in those areas. Nor, unfortunately, are there many prominent headlands or cliffs to give a good radar return.
The rough-and-ready method of keeping track of the ship’s position works something along these lines. Radar ranges of identifiable points of land are used as arcs of circles from those points, and the intersection is said to be the ship’s position; or, a radar range with a visual or radar bearing is used; or, if visibility permits, visual bearings, checked with a radar range, are used. As the ship moves along her track, other identifiable or recognizable landmarks or objects with good radar return are picked up either visually or on radar, and plotted on the chart in relation to the latest datum fix. They are then used in following fixes and further points are acquired as the ship advances. In this way the progress of the ship can be plotted, the stops and starts, the zigs and the zags due to the ice being ignored. When the navigator loses visual or radar contact, then a mean course and mean speed of advance is estimated until a new radar target presents itself. This estimated mean course and SOA is based on the mean course and SOA experienced prior to losing contact, as long as ice conditions remain constant. When ice conditions change, the only guide during the period of lost contact is experience.
Combined with the difficulties inherent in trying to keep up a ship’s track in heavy ice, there is the added requirement to fix the ship’s position during periods of heavy fog, common during the summer months. In this situation, radar is the only possible method of determining the ship’s position.
A good set, well-maintained, will bring one up the Greenland coast in fog and through the icebergs without too much difficulty. In static ice it will show leads, if they are about a quarter of a mile wide and clear of brash. It will pick up large floes in the midst of brash, allowing course to be adjusted to by-pass them. Pressure ridges show up well. However, shadow areas in the lee of pressure ridges may be mistaken for leads; and the large area of small return indicating a large flat floe can be mistaken for a polynya.
Interpretation of the radar picture requires a good knowledge of the capabilities and limitations of the set in use, plus concentrated observations. While mistakes can be made in interpreting the radar picture, it does show open water or non-ridged ice, both of which are easier to pass through than pack or ridged ice.
More use could be made of radar when the charts show the topography behind the coastline. This is particularly true of the western Arctic, where the shoreline is flat with none of the bold steep-to cliffs found in the eastern Arctic.
Visual fixes are always preferred to radar fixes and, when visibility conditions permit, they are used to project the ship’s track relative to the land as described earlier.
Because of the proximity of the north magnetic pole, and the resulting low horizontal directivity through most of the Canadian Arctic, the standard magnetic compass is of very little help to the navigator. The Canadian Arctic has many areas of abnormal magnetic attraction. In those areas in the vicinity of the north magnetic pole, daily changes of variation average as much as eight or ten degrees. On days of magnetic disturbances, as much as a 40-degree change has been observed. While these changes decrease as the distance away from the pole increases, their values in any particular place or for any particular time do not remain constant.
In view of the above, greater emphasis is placed on the reliability of the gyro compass than might otherwise be the case. With modifications for operation between seventy and 82 degrees of latitude (about the most northerly latitude navigated by shipping), the resulting errors due to high latitude are sufficiently small that they can be ignored.
The problem is relative. The small error involved in visual and radar bearings and in courses is of little consequence, when it is realized that the land in the Archipelago has not yet been accurately charted.
The echo-sounding machine is required at all times, and must be manned continuously. In the eastern Arctic, soundings have been known to jump from 260 fathoms to fourteen fathoms or under in less than a cable, so the navigator must not trust to the echo-sounding machine to give warning of shoal water under all conditions. Even on the best available charts, soundings are so scarce as to prohibit an estimate of the ship’s possible position from the depth indicated on the echo sounder.
If visibility is good, a knowledge of geomorphology will indicate to the navigator where he may expect to find submarine peaks, shoals and shallows. For instance, it is generally found that navigable depth may be obtained close inshore when a shoreline is steep at the water’s edge; that extreme caution is necessary when close aboard spits, capes, headlands and many islands; and that the possible position of underwater peaks and shallows may actually be estimated from an examination of the apparent direction of glaciation, where such has occurred. Moraine deposits form shallows at the mouths of many bays and inlets that were at one time the beds of glaciers. The arctic navigator would do well to re-study those chapters dealing with erosion, glaciation, etc., before proceeding north.
While the methods of ice-breaking have no place in a discussion of northern navigation, the way which the ship makes her way through the ice has a lot to do with the position in which she finds herself at the end of the watch. Old weathered pressure ridges are tough. They should be attacked at right angles to the ridge. If struck at an oblique angle, the ship may not break through, but will carom off at anything up to ninety degrees from her course. In an area of confused pressure ridges, this can result in a complete reversal of course in a very short distance. It has been found that if the helmsman is allowed to deviate anything up to four points on either side of the mean course without reference to the officer of the watch, he can pick his angle of attack and can more easily select the more rotten and less difficult ice.
Certain extra equipments are available in the north to help overcome the hydrographic deficiencies of the region. The most important of these are: the helicopter, with its ability to search ahead for likely-looking leads and navigable channels; sound boats to sound ahead for entry into uncharted, ice- free harbours; and the bubble sextant, for use in conditions of ice horizons, or when lowfog over the ice has obscured the horizon completely, even though the sun remains visible.
In order to hasten the day when sufficient navigational information will be available in the Canadian North, fixes of the ship are taken as often as circumstances will permit. For this purpose, at least one person is on the bridge at all times, responsible for the ship’s track, its safe navigation, and for the accumulation of information.
This accumulation of information is a most important function of the northern navigator, second only to responsibility for the safety of the ship. This function includes the collection of as much hydrographic and navigation data as it is possible to get: radar photographs from known positions; panoramic photographs of identifiable landmarks; recording of land descriptions; observations with respect to currents, tides, conspicuous landmarks; delineation of routes and channels that have been found safe; shoreline sketches; recording of compass and sounding information; and the notation of chart inaccuracies, etc. As every scrap of data obtained is of value for future operations, this intelligent collection of information assumes great importance.
Despite all that has been said here about the difficulties of navigation in the Canadian Arctic, the Department of Transport, the United States Navy, the U. S. Coast Guard, and the Royal Canadian Navy have operated and continue to operate in these waters. Probably, standard and more accurate methods of navigation will replace the somewhat unorthodox and unconventional methods of today, when more hydrographic information becomes available. Meanwhile, it is safe to say that navigation, as it is now practiced in the area, is made possible through accepting a larger factor of approximation than would normally be allowed in pilotage, and through being alert to possible disaster that might befall a ship, notwithstanding the use of a good radar, a good gyro compass, a good echo sounder, and a good crew.
Second SeaMaster Begins Tests2
Aviation Week, May 14, 1956.—Martin’s second P6M four-jet SeaMaster began its long-delayed flight-test program almost five months to the day after the crash of the first prototype into the mouth of the Potomac River.
The tests began one day after a joint Martin-Navy announcement detailing the probable reasons behind the Dec. 7 crash and a statement that “corrective action has been taken to cover each instance” in the second model. A Navy pilot and three Martin employees were killed in the crash.
A Martin investigating committee, which pored over the approximately 80% of the first SeaMaster recovered from the Potomac, attributed the crash to six possible failures in the aircraft’s control system. The possibilities:
Minor explosion in the center wing stub which may have damaged the control cables, hydraulic lines or electrical circuits.
A broken or snagged control cable.
Loss of pilot-feel force in the longitudinal control system.
Loss of one of two duplicate hydraulic systems coupled with the overpowering of the remaining system.
Elimination of hydraulic power from the stabilizer actuator.
Pilot error in handling the controls.
Speed No Factor
In its report, the committee also found that:
There was no evidence that excess speed, abnormal aerodynamic forces, aeroelastic effects of powerplant malfunction were initiating causes of the accident.
There was no major primary fire, and all in-flight fires observed by witnesses took place after the aircraft began to break apart.
Salvage operations to recover the Sea- Master prototype were conducted by the Navy from Dec. 8 to March 2 with two salvage vessels, two sonar ships and a small craft equipped with dragging rakes.
The Break Up
The recovered parts were assembled for study on the floor of the operations hangar at the Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, Md., in their normal positions in relation to other parts. A number of the parts were sent to laboratories for detailed analysis.
The Martin committee, aided by experts from the Navy, Air Force, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics and the Civil Aeronautics Board, also computed elaborate fall trajectory patterns which show that the SeaMaster's break up occurred over a distance of approximately 3,000 ft. at an altitude of from 6,000 to 3,000 ft. The time required for the break up was estimated at between five and ten seconds.
At the time of the crash, the aircraft had completed a total of 79 flight and taxi-test hours in the Chesapeake Bay area. During its flights, it had performed successfully at speeds greater than the maximum speed calculated to have been achieved during the final flight which lasted for only 14 minutes.
Britain to Get Data on Atom Submarine
By Elie Abel
New York Times, June 14, 1956.—Britain will profit from the pioneer experience of the United States in atomic-powered submarine construction, thanks to a new agreement announced today.
The United States, in turn, is expected to benefit from British advances in putting nuclear energy to work in other ways.
Signed here yesterday, the new agreement broadens the scope of atomic exchanges between the two Governments. It will go into effect within thirty days if no objection is raised by the Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy.
Sir Roger Makins, British Ambassador, represented his Government at the signing ceremony. Lewis L. Strauss, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission and C. Burke Elbrick, acting Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, signed for the United States.
From the British viewpoint, the new agreement’s main importance may be to cut two years off the Royal Navy time-table for developing its first nuclear-fueled submarine. Earl Mountbatten, First Sea Lord, has estimated that it would take Britain five years to build the undersea vessel on her own. With technical assistance from the United States, he said, the job could be done in three years.
The United States Navy has one atomic submarine, the Nautilus, in operation. A second, the Seawolf, is soon to be commissioned and several others are in various stages of construction or planning.
Terms of Agreement
Terms of the agreement, amending one that went into effect last summer and to run until July, 1965, provide for these exchanges:
Britain will send to the United States “depleted” uranium, that is, uranium containing less than 0.7 per cent of fissionable U-235, for reprocessing into usable atomic fuel. The United States, in exchange, will send to Britain equivalent quantities of enriched uranium.
Data on military “package power reactors” and other atomic engines for “naval vessels, aircraft and land vehicles” will also be exchanged.
The United States Army’s first package power reactor, designed to produce heat as well as electricity for remote outposts, is expected to being operating in July, 1957, at Fort Belvoir, Va.
Atomic-powered airplanes and land vehicles are farther off in the future, but the effect of the new accord may well be to save time for both countries by avoiding duplication of effort, informed officials said.
They predicted that the first land vehicle powered by atomic energy was likely to be a tractor designed for hauling supply trains across the arctic wastes. Such a development would make easier the task of supplying the distant early warning radar network, now under construction in the far north of Canada, to protect North America against air attack,
A similar agreement is understood to be in preparation between the United States and Canada. The three countries were partners in the pooling of scientific talent and resources that produced the atomic bomb during World War II.
While the agreement with Britain sets the stage for mutual help in the development of atomic engines, each project on which information is exchanged will require specific approval. Details are to be worked out between the British atomic energy authority and the United States Atomic Energy Commission.
Washington officials expressed confidence that the agreement would benefit both countries by permitting a more logical coordination of their efforts in the reactor field. They predicted it might lead toward eventual standardization of equipment.
New Destroyers Use Aluminum Parts
Marine Journal, May 1956.—Aluminum is being used by the Navy in places undreamed of only a few years ago. At the Quincy, Mass., shipyard of Bethlehem Steel Co., Shipbuilding Division, several ships of a new class of destroyers, DD931, are being built almost entirely of aluminum above the deck level. This includes superstructure, gun foundations and stacks. Extensive use of the light metal is also made below decks. Perhaps the most spectacular new application of aluminum in these destroyers is the use of Kaiser’s high strength, weldable 5083 alloy in the upper aft gun foundation, which is relatively high above the main deck and hence requires aluminum to keep superstructure weight low and maintain stability. These gun foundations utilize both plate and extruded structural shapes. Deck housings are constructed of sheet and plate. In many cases the inside surfaces are porcelain- enameled for ease of cleaning, added stiffness and decorative purposes. In instances where condensation is apt to be heavy, an antisweat compound is applied. Another large- scale aluminum application is in the ventilating system, where air ducts of different shapes—round, square and rectangular— are made of aluminum alloy. Among other aluminum uses are: small ammunition holders, ladders, lockers, piping and bed frames.
1,000 Horsepower T58 Gas Turbine Engine
General Electric News Bureau, May 2, 1956.—General Electric’s T58 turboshaft engine now on test for the Navy’s Bureau of Aeronautics at G.E.’s Small Aircraft Engine Department, Lynn, Mass., packs more than 1,000 horsepower into a 59-inch, 325-pound frame. Specific fuel consumption of the engine is 0.69 at normal rating.
G-E engineers predict the T58’s outstanding power-to-weight ratio and low specific fuel consumption, combined with the engine’s many advanced design features, will give superior performance to helicopters in terms of endurance, payload, range, and speed.
The Sikorsky S-58 helicopter was announced as the flight test vehicle for the T58.
Tankers Receive Saran Coating
MSTS Magazine, May, 1956.—A decline in corrosion and rust in tankers’ cargo tanks is expected from the use of Saran plastic coating now installed in 15 msts tankers. The Saran coating process gives the inside of tanks a plastic surface that resists rust and corrosion and reduces descaling, cleaning, and structural replacements. Without such coating, tanks must be drained and flushed regularly and loose scale deposits at the tank bottom removed by hand to prevent clogging of drain openings.
Saran consists of a tough film of vinyli- dene resin in solution with methyl ethyl ketone, a highly volatile solvent. After tanks are scaled and cleaned down to bare metal by mineral shot blasting, three to five coats of Saran in solution are sprayed onto the tank surfaces. The solvent quickly dries and produces a dense, impervious coating which resists oils, greases, and the acid formations of petroleum products.
Ketone, the Saran solvent, has a flash point two degrees below freezing, making the application of Saran in liquid form a hazardous operation. The sprayers. wear special clothing designed to prevent formation of any static sparks that could ignite the vapors.
Fifteen msts tankers have been Saran coated to date and two more at WestPac are scheduled for the process. Like any coating, Saran presents maintenance problems and is not a complete rust and corrosion preventive.
No More Bases3
Manchester Guardian, May 22, 1956.— Before long British forces may have no base between Aden and Australia. Such naval stations as Bombay and Rangoon have long since been lost. Trincomalee will soon have to be relinquished, and Singapore is now in jeopardy. (Even Aden might be lost if it is not handled with imagination.) In major airfields the position will be little better. Although transit rights may still be granted in India, Pakistan, and Ceylon, there will soon be no major base between Aden and Malaya. The Malayan airfields can no longer be regarded as permanently secure, in the present climate of Asian opinion. The wartime landing ground in the Cocos islands, half-way from Perth to Colombo, has lately been restored and enlarged. A similar feat of engineering might be undertaken in the Seychelles, if Britain were willing to pay out a few million pounds for it. But these would be secondary refuges, not major installations. Thus, just as the Navy may have to look at the Indian Ocean as a homeless expanse, so Bomber Command and Transport Command may find themselves with nothing big between Aden and Australia. The Army, of course, is dependent on the two others. It cannot maintain any permanent base overseas by itself. If and when its commitment in the Malayan emergency is ended, and if Singapore were untenable except by force (which would make it almost worthless), the Army need count on keeping no important garrison east of Aden. Hong Kong might still be useful as a transit point, which it was in the Korean war, but not as a base. It would, in any case, be more lonely than ever. Like Australia and New Zealand, it would have to look chiefly towards the United States forces in the Pacific for help in any future operations.
Ironically, the relinquishment of British bases around the Indian Ocean is a more serious matter for the Asian countries than for Britain. Once the British forces have gone they are unlikely to come back. Not even an appeal by the United Nations—in the event, for example, of a serious incursion across the borders of Burma—would bring substantial British military help. It could not, because such help would be physically impossible. If there are no permanent airfields, maintained with RAF radar and supplied with the right grades of fuel and equipped for rapid servicing of aircraft, the British could not operate their Valiant or Vulcan bombers, their Comet transports, or more obsolescent aircraft. To restore abandoned airfields to operational standards would take weeks. It is often forgotten that the swift United Nations intervention in Korea was possible only because the Americans had fully staffed bases in Japan, not more than two hundred miles away. So with the Navy: Mr. Bandaranaike ought not to imagine that in a crisis Britain could put Trincomalee back into action within a week or two, nor should Mr. Marshall suppose that Singapore’s naval station could quickly be taken out of mothballs. The point is important also for Mr. Nehru, U Nu, Mr. Sastroamidjojo, and Tengku Abdel Rahman. In varying degrees they have shared the common Asian desire to see foreign military forces depart, and they do not feel in any serious danger. But one wonders whether they have grasped the fact that, once withdrawn, these forces are unlikely ever to come back. (Nor can any other member of the United Nations offer them effective military help, once the British bases have gone.) In any case, the climate of opinion is not changing only in Asia. In Europe and in Britain there is a growing desire to cut the military budget, for good economic reasons. If our troops, aircraft, and bases are not wanted on the fringe of Asia, why pay for them? Certainly we shall not keep a large reserve ready in Cyprus or in England just because some day it might be wanted again in the Far East. The cost would be excessive.
The military danger to non-Communist Asia is of minor wars, not of one major outbreak. It is that there may be a growth of troubles where the Communists rub shoulders with their neighbors. It would be easy enough for China to foment disturbances in Assam or the Shan States or Laos, and then perhaps to step in on the pretext of restoring order. Whether she will take to such tactics in a year or two is anyone’s guess, though the risk may be increased if the United Nations is plainly incapable of military intervention. The threat to Britain and Australia would come only indirectly— through their trade and shipping. Trade with areas under tension would be likely to decrease, and the absence of bases would make it difficult to protect Commonwealth shipping and air traffic. In terms of major war, which are anyway hard to envisage, Singapore and Ceylon are probably not important. If Russia were the opponent, the decisive action would be by air across the Arctic. If it were China, the main battles would have to be fought from American bases in the Pacific. British airfields in Malaya, if still in service, might be valuable; but Singapore, at that stage, either would be unimportant or would be a secondary target for an atomic bomb. These however, are not the questions which now count. What matters now is that Asian opinion objects to Western bases, and since bases on hostile ground are of little value we shall soon have to go. Once we have gone there will be a military vacuum, which cannot remain empty unless Asia’s moral force is of unprecedented strength. To prophesy the outcome is all but impossible.
Navy Wants to Dispose of 107 Warships
By Lloyd Norman
Washington Post and Times Herald, June 1, 1956.—The Navy has proposed to Congress to scrap or sell 107 warships, including three battleships, 10 cruisers, 11 aircraft carriers, 12 submarines, and one destroyer, in the largest ship-disposal program since World War II.
The Navy said it wants to get rid of these ships, many in mothballs, because their “military potential upon mobilization is not commensurate with costs of retention, repair, and modernization.”
The proposal was made in letters to Vice President Nixon, as president of the Senate, and House Speaker Rayburn (D-Tex.) from Navy Under Secretary Thomas S. Gates Jr.
The proposal came a few weeks after Soviet Russia announced that it would mothball 375 warships of various types.
The unilateral warship disarmament program was prompted by economy reasons, Navy officials said. The Navy said funds saved could be devoted more profitably to keeping more modern warships in repair and ready for combat.
Among the large warships doomed by the Navy are:
Battleships—Mississippi (being used as an experimental missile ship), Tennessee, and California.
Heavy cruisers—Chester, Louisville, Augusta, New Orleans, Portland, Minneapolis, Tuscaloosa, and San Francisco.
Light cruisers—Savannah and Honolulu.
Aircraft carriers (escort)—Bogue, Card, Copahee, Core, Nassau, Altamaha, Suwanee, Chenango, Santee, and White Plains.
Aircraft carrier—(anti-submarine)—Enterprise.
Destroyer—Livermore.
Submarines—Porpoise, Pike, Tarpon, Permit, Plunger, Seal, Tambor, Tautog, Gar, Lance, Fish, Unicorn and Walrus.
In three separate bill submitted to Congress, the Navy also asked approval to lend two submarines to Greece, two destroyers and two destroyer escorts to West Germany, two destroyer escorts to Portugal, and two destroyers to Spain under the military aid program.
83,000-Ton Craft Nears Launching
By Foster Hailey
New York Times, June 3, 1956—The world's largest seagoing ship is rapidly taking shape in a slipway of the former imperial navy yard at Kure. She will slide into the waters of the Inland Sea about August 1.
The vessel, as yet unnamed, is an oil tanker being built for Universe Tank Ships, a Liberian flag line, by Kure Shipyards, Inc. The latter company is a subsidiary of National Bulk Carriers, Inc., of New York.
The American-designed, Japanese-built vessel will be about 83,000 deadweight tons, or 100,000 tons displacement. That makes her fifteen per cent bigger than the Cunard Line's Queens Mary and Elizabeth—the largest ships now afloat.
A sister ship of like size is being fabricated now in the Kure yards. Her keel will be laid as soon as the slipway is clear August 1.
Two ships even larger than these two tankers are under design at the Kure yards. The tentative sizes are 87,000 deadweight tons and 94,000 tons. Both are being designed, as is another 83,000-tonner, as dual purpose vessels, to carry either oil or ore.
Vessel 850 Feet Long
The big oil tanker now nearing completion is 850 feet long, with a beam of 125 feet and 60 feet from keel to maindeck. She is expected to be ready for service, hauling oil from Persian Gulf fields to United States ports, late in September. Her keel was laid in January, which will make her construction period between nine and ten months. She will be powered by geared turbines and have a cruising speed of fourteen knots.
The big tanker will be the fourteenth vessel launched from the Kure yard since the American company took it over in 1952. The yard believes in doing things big. The smallest ship it has constructed is a 30,000-tonner. The largest before work was begun on the two tankers are three 60,000-ton ore carriers.
The yard is a good example of cooperation. There have never been more than fourteen American or European supervisory personnel at the yard. At present there are only nine, and only four of these are American. Japanese employees total 2,500. Nearly all steel plates and machinery for the new tanker were acquired in Japan.
U. S. Unveils Small-Sized Atom Plant
By Muriel Guinn
Washington Post and Times Herald, April 27, 1956.—The Defense Department unveiled its first portable military atomic power plant, now under construction at Ft. Belvoir.
The $2.2 million reactor is a dual power and heat plant which could provide heat and light for a community of 2,500.
It is a joint project of the Atomic Energy Commission and the United States Army Corp of Engineers. Designed and constructed by Alco Products Co. of Schenectady, N.Y., it was authorized eighteen months ago and begun last October.
The plant is about one-fourth finished; it will be completed by next December.
Pioneer Project
Colonel James B. Lampert, in charge of the program for development of land-based nuclear power plants, said designs for the reactor will be turned over to the AEC when the plant is finished.
It is important to their program, he said, because it is the only relatively small power plant design which the AEC currently has under development. Its greatest civilian potential now is for use in remote areas abroad, where a small amount of local power is needed.
Parts of the plant can be transported by air to inaccessible regions and reassembled. For this reason, it is valuable to the services for areas such as the Antarctic where transportation of fuel is difficult and expensive. In wartime, it would be used where heat and power plants were destroyed or could be destroyed by the enemy.
The pilot plant will be operated initially by 34 soldiers, sailors and airmen who have begun training at Ft. Belvoir.
Surroundings Protected
Army officials emphasized that all precautions are taken to protect surrounding communities from radioactivity. An airtight steel shell surrounds the reactor. No release of radioactive material is possible, they said.
Radioactive wastes are continuously circulated and purified for re-use. A small amount of waste which cannot be used is stored in an underground tank and eventually taken to an AEC disposal dump. Potomac River water is used only for cooling.
The reactor actually takes the place of a boiler or furnace in other power plants. The core, only 22 inches in diameter and 24 inches high, is made of uranium and stainless steel.
Heat generated by a controlled chain reaction is transferred to water circulating around the reactor. The superheated water is converted to steam to power a turbine, which in turn drives a generator. It will generate 2,000 kilowatts of electricity.
(Editor’s Note: This is the “package power reactor” referred to on Page 894 of this issue in the article “Britain to Get Data on Atom Submarine.”)
Four Nations Striving to Perfect Helicopter
By Ansel E. Talbert
New York Herald Tribune, May 20, 1956.—Four nations appear to be intensifying efforts to obtain the fullest possible military and commercial development of the helicopter at an early date. These are the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain and France. There is every indication that the helicopter’s long-promised “coming-of- age” is impending. French Army tests just carried out at Camp de Mailly have given strong evidence that the light helicopter will constitute an excellent platform for firing anti-tank guided missiles carried on the sides of such aircraft. France has a particularly excellent helicopter of this type called the Djinn. British tests with camera guns indicate that a helicopter generally is more difficult to shoot down than a light fixed- wing airplane.
Infiltration Power
Russia’s Army leaders clearly have recognized the behind-the-lines “infiltration power” of the helicopter. This could enable the type to ferry considerable numbers of assault troops over nuclear mine fields of an “atomic battlefield” and to carry out a variety of military missions—provided the side which operated it had at least local command of the air.
Numbers of rotary-wing aircraft recently have been observed and photographed in the air in the Soviet Union which appear large enough to carry thirty or more troops. The exact capacity would depend on engine power available.
The United States, due to the efforts of such pioneers as Dr. Igor I. Sikorsky and Lawrence V. Bell, and the contributions of younger aeronautical scientists and engineers, until recently has enjoyed an undisputed world lead in helicopter design. The United States Marine Corps has created an entire set of assault tactics built around the mobility of the helicopter and its ability to transport men and equipment where there are no roads or airports. The Army is pushing experimental “sky cavalry” outfits for reconnaissance and scouting for its “atomic battlefield” armored forces. The reports from Russia are spurring research in all departments.
On the commercial side, helicopter operators of the Free World earlier this month held their most important meeting to date at San Remo, Italy. They met with manufacturers, government representatives and officials of such interested agencies as the International Air Transport Association. All agreed strongly upon a “clear, foreseeable” requirement for at least two new types of huge multi-engined transport helicopters sufficiently economical to permit high frequency “helicopter sky bus” schedules in many parts of the world.
Two Types Described
One is a twenty-five passenger helicopter having a cruising speed up to 120 miles an hour for operations in and around cities. Its direct operating cost was described as “not to exceed ten cents an available seat mile.” The other is a forty-to-fifty passenger helicopter primarily for longer inter-city operations. This would cruise at 150 miles an hour; the rotary-wing air-line heads envision it as costing only six to seven cents an available seat mile to operate.
The consensus of helicopter operators such as Robert H. Cummings, president of New York Airways—which carried 25,000 passengers over its routes in the New York City metropolitan area last year as compared with 8,750 during 1954—is that “right aircraft” will bring large orders. New York Airways alone is interested in obtaining about fifteen of the twenty-five passenger helicopters “as soon as possible.” It now has representatives in Britain looking at the already-flying Bristol 192-C and the designs of the projected Bristol 194. The latter would be about the right size, but there are several competitive turbine-powered projects in the United States.
The San Remo meeting estimated there is a “potential market” for at least 200 large, economical-to-operate helicopters in the United States right now.
Makers Optimistic
Helicopter manufacturers from the United States and Britain in particular are optimistic about their abilities for producing helicopters that will meet all of the operators' requirements. They revealed progress toward minimizing rotary wing aircraft noise. Some believed that the smaller of the two commercial helicopters described might be available in three years.
All held it to be important for city administrations to make provision in their current planning for future heliport sites. In this connection, final lease negotiations now are known to be in progress between the legal staffs of the Port of New York Authority and New York City, looking toward immediate building of Manhattan's first real heliport at 30th St. and the Hudson River. This probably will be operating up to thirty helicopter round trips a day before the year's end.
“Treachery” of Pearl Harbor
By Kiyoaki Murata
Nippon Times, June 8, 1956.—The Pearl Harbor story dies hard.
During the last few years, more than a decade after the opening of the Pacific War, controversies were raging in the U. S. on the responsibility for the major U. S. naval disaster.
And now another chapter is added to the legend by Itsuro Hayashi, a Japanese attorney who served on the counsel for the International Military Tribunal for the Far East.
Attorney Hayashi's contribution concerns the Japanese question of responsibility: why the delivery of the ultimatum was delayed with the result that the commencement of hostilities preceded it.
It has been made known since the war that the “surprise attack” on Pearl Harbor was not deliberate but it was a case of “a delay in decoding the cables” from Tokyo at the Japanese Embassy in Washington.
The public was not informed, however, what caused that delay.
Hayashi's revelation, made in a weekly magazine recently, seems to answer that question.
“I have disclosed full facts on this point,” he said, “because I want the people of Japan to know the truth of the matter to revise their thinking.”
According to documents made available by Hayashi to this writer, pertinent information on the crucial point of why the delivery of the Japanese utilmatum was delayed is found in the affidavit by Shiroji Yuki, submitted by the defense to the International Military Tribunal.
Yuki, who is now Japanese Ambassador to Ceylon, was in Washington on Dec. 7, 1941. He had gone there as First Secretary, accompanying Ambassador Extraordinary Plenipotentiary Saburo Kurusu in October of that year.
In 14 Parts
The Japanese ultimatum, which is considered by both Japanese and American authorities as a de facto declaration of war, was transmitted to the Embassy in 14 parts.
The “pilot cable,” instructing the Embassy staff to stand by for the forthcoming note, was decoded “before noon Dec. 6 (Saturday),” according to Yuki’s affidavit.
It read:
“ . . . The separate message is a very long one. I (Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo) will send it in 14 parts and I imagine you will receive it tomorrow. However, I am not sure. The situation is extremely delicate, and when you receive it I want you to please keep it secret for the time being.
“Concerning the time of presenting the memorandum to the United States, I will wire you in a separate message. However, I want you in the meantime to put it in a nicely drafted form and make every preparation to present it to the Americans just as soon as you receive instructions.”
In other words, Tokyo wanted the Washington Embassy to prepare the ultimatum in formal shape and be ready to deliver it on a moment’s notice.
Following this cable, the English memorandum in 14 parts began arriving. “By supper time (7 P.M.), the first eight or nine parts were decoded,” Yuki recalled.
Most Went Home
“That night, a farewell party for an embassy staffer, who was being transferred, was held. After the party, the six members of the Cable Section (Note: personnel in charge of decoding coded cables) returned to their office and began working at 9:30 p.m. The first 13 of the 14 parts of the memorandum were decoded before midnight Saturday. But the 14th part had not arrived by then.”
Then comes the most astounding part of the testimony. “The Embassy Councillor allowed the men to go home, while only a duty officer remained in the Embassy.” This meant that the personnel intended to do the important typing the following day, Sunday!
Part 14 and a few other cables, which were commendations by Tokyo of the efforts toward peace made by the two ambassadors, arrived at the Embassy between 7 and 8 a.m. Sunday. The duty officer tried to recall the Cable Section personnel to the office without success. Actually they reported back to duty between 9:30 and 10 a.m., and started to work on the late cables at 10 a.m., according to the then First Secretary Yuki.
Typing Like Mad
Since an earlier cable from Tokyo had instructed the Embassy not to use professional typists in typing the memorandum for security reasons, the typing had to be done by responsible officials. And Secretary Okumura was about the only one who could type after a fashion, Yuki revealed in his sworn statement.
Thus, when Yuki himself came to the Embassy at about 9 A.M. Sunday, he saw Okumura typing like mad the first parts of the ultimatum.
The cable instructing the Ambassadors on the hour of delivery arrived at about 11 A.M. Sunday. It said:
“Very important. Re my No. 902 (Note: Message No 902 was the 14th part of the ultimatum). Will the Ambassadors please submit to the United States Government (if possible to the Secretary of State) our reply to the United States at 1 P.M. on the 7th, your time.”
Accordingly Ambassador Nomura had Interpreter Kemuriishi telephone Secretary Hull for an appointment at 1 P.M. But the latter said he had a luncheon engagement and asked the Japanese Embassy to talk to Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles. Later, however, Secretary Hull personally phoned saying he would meet the Japanese Ambassador at 1 P.M. at the State Department.
Had To Be Retyped
In the meantime, Okumura finished typing the 13th part around 11 A.M. But being no experienced typist, he found the copy in need of retyping.
“Thinking that there was plenty of time yet before 1 P.M.,” Yuki’s affidavit reads, “Okumura started to retype the note with the help of Interpreter Kemuriishi. But their speed was not great, and because of the urgency of the situation, their efficiency was reduced and they made many typographical errors.”
A few cables for correction were also received, and the clean copy had to be retyped. Addition of words or sentences on one page made it necessary to retype the succeeding page as well.
All this concerned the first 13 parts only. The 14th was decoded as late as about 12:30 P.M., when the final typing of the 13 parts had not been finished.
Throughout all these hours, Ambassador Nomura, all ready to go, impatiently peeked into the office where the typing was being done, hurrying the men at work.
But it soon became apparent that the entire ultimatum would not be finished in time for the 1 p.m. appointment. Nomura instructed Interpreter Kemuriishi to inform Secretary Hull that he might be late for the appointment. Hull replied that Nomura could come as soon as he was ready.
Irony of It
Okumura and Kemuriishi finished typing the note at 1:50 P.M., 50 minutes later than the time when it should be delivered to Secretary Hull.
In a few minutes—at 1:55 P.M. Washington time or 7:55 A.M. Honolulu time— bombs began falling on Pearl Harbor.
The two Ambassadors, of course completely ignorant of what happened in Hawaii, arrived at the State Department building around 2 P.M.. and were told to wait for a while.
They met Hull at 2:20 P.M. to present the ultimatum only to hear the now historic remark:
“I must say that in all my conversations with you during the last nine months I have never uttered one word of untruth. ... In all my 50 years of public service I have never seen a document that was more crowded with infamous falsehoods and distortion ... on a scale so huge that I never dreamed until today that any government on earth was capable of uttering them.”
The irony of it all, however, was that the U. S. Navy and Army intelligence had in their possession the full text of the ultimatum hours before the Japanese Ambassadors did.
U. S. Air Force Guided Missile Snark
New York Herald Tribune, April 6, 1956. —The Air Force’s intercontinental guided missile, the jet-powered Northrop Snark, is undergoing tests at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida. It is launched with the aid of two rocket boosters—one on each side of its tail.
After the launch, the Snark drops its rocket boosters—the take-off completed— and heads for its target under jet propulsion. The Snark was reported to have flown 2,000 miles—the greatest distance any pilotless aircraft is yet known to have flown. The Snark is thirty-two feet long and four-and-a-half feet in diameter. It flies high and close to the speed of sound—which, above 30,000 feet, is 670 miles an hour.
Peroxide Powers New British Sub
British Information Services, May 31, 1956.—High-test peroxide provides the power for Britain’s latest experimental submarine, Explorer.
A sister ship of Excalibur, this newest underwater craft is thought to be the first stable ocean-going vessel to use peroxide as fuel. (The Germans used it to launch their V-l missiles, to drive the fuel pumps in V-2 rockets, and to propel torpedoes in World War II.)
Explorer will carry no armament, nor will she take part in operations. However, she will be capable of “high underwater speed” and long endurance, and will be used for training anti-submarine forces.
One of the principal advantages of peroxide for underwater propulsion is that no exhaust bubbles reach the surface, adding a safety factor to the submarine's operation.
Explorer has a conventional diesel engine and a peroxide propulsion system. The chemical process involves the breaking-up of hydrogen peroxide, the heat from which provides one source of energy. Free oxygen combines with fuel, such as diesel oil, to produce both steam and carbon dioxide to drive the turbine.
High-test peroxide is reserved for special bursts of speed in attacking and escaping.
The special design team which developed the new submarine was led by Doctor G. H. Forsyth of Vickers Armstrong.
Ocean Deeps to Be Studied for Radioactivity's Effects
New York Herald Tribune, May 29,1956.— A study of deep ocean currents during the International Geophysical Year may help provide the answer to how much radioactive waste can be safely dumped at sea.
This was one of the projects described in an I.G.Y. summary issued today by the Senate Appropriations Committee. It was prepared by the National Science Foundation, which is directing this country’s participation in the world-wide science study starting July 1, 1957.
The report described the planned surveys of deep ocean currents, and said it is hoped they will provide information on (1) the influence of currents on weather; (2) the fertility of the ocean in supplying food for fish life; and (3) the possible problem of atomic waste disposal. On this subject, the report added:
“The development of peaceful uses of atomic energy will probably result in the production of unbelievable quantities of radio-active substances, and somehow these must be safely disposed of.
“One possible thing to do with them is to dump them into the deep sea. The ocean is a very great hole in the ground, and its currents might spread out radio-active substances to such an extent that they would be harmless.
“Whether this would be possible or not depends on how fast the deep water moves or how it mixes with the water near the surface. This information is now unknown.”
TV Control of Air Traffic at Alameda4
Naval Aviation News, May, 1956.—The first use of television for control of ground operations of air traffic became a reality at NAS Alameda with the completion and successful testing of a remotely-controlled closed circuit television system.
Consisting of three cameras located at the eastern end of Runway 25R, the system was manufactured and installed by Kay Laboratories of San Diego, Calif. It is designed to provide “positive control” of aircraft traffic.
The three 16mm. TV cameras relay pictures to three 12-inch video monitors in the airfield control tower more than one-half mile away. Manning the monitors, the control tower operators have several selected and unobstructed views of runway operations. This makes it much easier to direct airplanes as they taxi, take off and land.
The original proposal for a closed TV circuit was approved by the Navy, and studies were made in collaboration with electronics engineering companies. Early successes with test equipment proved to BuAer its feasibility and work was begun in July 1955.
Strategic location of the cameras affords control tower operators the best possible view of traffic at the runway end. The eyes of the three cameras overlap and converge on the end of Runway 25R from three points of a triangle; one camera on the seaward side of the strip and two inland.
Two of the cameras have a turret of three different lenses and the third has two lenses. Each camera contains synchronizing generators and amplifiers to assure full power performance at all times, and each is capable of panning and tilting by remote selection from the control tower. Additional features include automatic lens wipers and weatherproof camera cases.
Need for such a system was becoming apparent at NAS Alameda because of the longer runways required for larger and speedier aircraft. The completed TV system appears to offer a simple solution to a complex problem of an expanding air station. This pioneer installation may well receive wider application in other airports throughout the United States.
Jet Engine Thrust Reverser Units
Goodyear News Service, June 18, 1956.— Landing runs of high speed jet aircraft may be decreased by more than 50 per cent through the development of two thrust reverser units by Goodyear Aircraft Corporation.
As the result of investigations started in 1953 for the Power Plant Laboratory of the Wright Air Development Center, there have been developed reversers that can either fully or partially block jet engine thrust and deflect it through exhaust vanes in a forward direction.
In the full-block design, a deflector reroutes all mass flow normally passing through the tailpipe. In a second design, a partial block is achieved by projecting a deflecting mechanism into the normal gas path to divert what concentration of mass flow is desired into the inlets of reverser cascades.
Data obtained from small-model cold flow tests and from full-scale tests with reverser models attached to jet engines, reveals that it is possible to produce the required reverse thrust without affecting the normal rated forward thrust of the engine. Normal engine operation will not be adversely affected either.
Net weight of prototype designs, including actuation equipment, indicates an increase of approximately seven per cent in basic engine weight for full blockage reversers and a little over four per cent for partial blockage installations. Reverser equipment has also been designed to offer little external drag.
Using test results obtained to date, engineers are considering more refined reverser designs of both afterburner and non- afterburner models to incorporate other characteristics which will improve over-all aircraft performance.
Baby Sub Has Bis Role in New German Navy
Christian Science Monitor, May 31,1956.— For the third time in this century a new German Navy is taking to the seas.
By 1959, it may be a hard-hitting force serving as West Germany’s naval contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance. Its main task will be to guard the Baltic Sea, the Soviet Union’s gateway to the Atlantic.
Germany’s first Navy built before World War I by the Kaiser, was scuttled after the war. Germany’s second Navy went down under World War II Allied bombardments of German harbors and naval bases.
The new Navy will be unique in many ways. It will number 170 ships manned and serviced by 20,000 men. No ship will exceed 3,000 tons displacement, except a training vessel of 4,500 tons.
Several Destroyers Planned
There will be a number of destroyers, each with a tonnage of 2,200 and crews of from 250 to 280 men. The speed of these ships will average around 34 knots. They will be armed with guns usable against aircraft as well as against ships.
The Navy’s fleet of submarines is what probably will fascinate the Germans most. In two wars Germany showed great proficiency in construction and operation of this type of vessel. But this time there will be no gigantic cruiser-type submarines of World Wars I and II.
No new German submarine will displace more than 300 tons. Each will carry a crew of 18 and be equipped with a “snorkel” enabling it to remain submerged for ten days.
One of the greatest difficulties the new German Navy faces is finding a shipyard to build the new ships. German yards already have informed the Defense Ministry they will be unable to accept new orders until 1960.
Loan of Vessels Asked
The shipyards of the other countries of Europe are just as overloaded with orders. Until Germany is able to build its own ships, the United States has been asked for the loan of 12 destroyers. The Germans also have asked Britain to sell them seven frigates.
A feature of the new Navy will be minesweepers and minelayers. Each minelayer will displace 2,500 tons. Minesweepers will be smaller and will be built in three sizes ranging from 200 to 700 tons. Both will be built entirely of wood to prevent their becoming targets of magnetic mines.
There will be other types of vessels in the new German Navy: convoy escorts, landing craft, and very fast speed boats.
There will be a powerful air arm to support the Navy’s fighting strength. It will be divided between the North Sea and the Baltic Sea. Both groups will concentrate mainly on reconnaissance, spotting submarines, and on tactical warfare.
Mach 1.2 Bomb Drop Confirmed by Navy
Aviation Weeky June 4, 1956.—The Navy said recently that a naval aircraft in level flight has successfully released a bomb at a speed of Mach 1.2. This is the highest speed ever recorded for such a drop.
The drop was accomplished with a small, lightweight explosive bolt developed by Modern Metal Crafts Co. of Philadelphia for the Bureau of Aeronautics. The device, tested at the Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent, Md., enables the bomb to make a routine trajectory, overcoming the tendency to remain with the aircraft in supersonic releases.
The bolt is cut in half by a self-contained powder charge.
1. Captain Robertson is the former commanding officer of HMS Labrador and is now attached to the U. S. Navy as Deputy to the Commander, Military Sea Transport Services, Atlantic Area
2. See page 452, April, 1956 Proceedings.