This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
aval Gunfire Support”
Z J- Stewart, ^ed.ncs) ’
pp. 132-134, April 1967
H. Girouard—In 1945, I had been
^ ^ngineer of the BuOrd since 1942 and ^r] t^le Bureau’s engineering group since h V1917. In the early days of January 1945, r Admiral Entwistle, Director of Research development, informed me that OpNav w requested that many rocket-firing ships Jq e to be available by midyear and that (l them were to be in Hawaii by 1 July.
not disclosed to us that the ships if, intended for amphibious landings later | ^ 45 on the Japanese mainland, tlj Very high rate of fire was desired, though
rate was neither stated nor known. Also
%
>ed
was continuous, accurate firing with
Comment and Discussion
t
lf“Sl
A-*
ship under way under any probable off- e attack conditions. These requirements Very different from those for the first and rr. ,er rocket ships whose launchers and ijeets were developed by Cal Tech of Pasa- s,. a> which launchers were essentially tubes ^ red to the deck with the tube at a fixed e of elevation, an arrangement which re-
^•red the ship to be located correctly in . Uth and range with respect to the target tbs'1-011 wiff* no significant change in ship L ltl°n during rocket firing, ripple salvos be- l.ij.j Used. For the new rocket ships for 1945, str Eulis were to be used and were to be con- !',cted or modified by BuShips as required.
Ml:
launchers were available anywhere
(v'^h could meet the new requirements of if, Aav, and only six months were available tl^hich to ’■hink through what had to be C’ design the mounts in whole or in part
from scratch, prepare manufacturing plans, build, assemble and test the mounts, install and test them aboard ship, and have 20 ships in Hawaii. With a selection of about a dozen of the best engineers in BuOrd and with the understanding that very high priority would be available in the engineering department and production shops at the Naval Gun Factory, it was my very good fortune to be able promptly to present to Rear Admiral Entwistle and to the Chief of BuOrd, Vice Admiral George Hussey, practicable means of achieving all that was desired and to obtain their approval.
Work was divided between the BuOrd and the NGF. All design layouts and design approvals and production authorizations were furnished by the BuOrd, along with the procurement of some few small units to be supplied by outside firms. Detail plans for manufacture and the manufacturing itself, and all assembly work and shop operating tests were assigned to the Naval Gun Factory. Proof testing, as usual, was done by the Naval Proving Ground at Dalghren. (Operating and firing trials afloat were to be held on the first ship completed.) If I recall correctly, there were ten two-tube launchers per ship.
Rear Admiral G. L. Schuyler had suggested that the upper end of the rocket hoist be used as a firing tube. Rapid means for swinging a projectile cradle between a projectile hoist and its gun loading position had already been developed for anti-aircraft gun mounts. To swing the tube at the upper end of the rocket hoist to its firing position and to return it to alignment with the hoist, both very rapidly, was feasible. There would be needed a dummy gun correctly and continuously aimed
All four of the Navy’s active rocket ships off the coast of Vietnam south of Da Nang. From the top they are: USS Carronade (IFS-1), USS White River (LSMR-536), USS St. Francis River (LSMR- 525), and the USS Clarion River (LSMR-409). The writer was part of the 1945 project to develop the LSMRs (the IFS was a 1955 Fleet addition.)
E. J. Fills. JOC, USN
at the target by automatic control using normal director and gun means and devices. Provision was made for firing the rockets as soon as the rocket tube was swung to and in line with the theoretical axis of the dummy gun and for returning the tube to the hoist as soon as the fired rockets cleared the tube, all these separate operations being automatically performed.
To obtain, on time, a mount suitable for installing the rocket twin hoist and for keeping the dummy gun in its continuously correct position in azimuth and elevation, we used carriages and stands of 40-mm. twin mounts already in production at the NGF, but these units had to be modified to accept the rocket hoists, the swinging tube, and the dummy gun.
Work everywhere was done in almost unbelievably rapid time. Design plans, complete, were furnished by BuOrd to NGF in only 11 days. The first complete mount arrived at the NPG within three months from the day the project was first mentioned in BuOrd by Rear Admiral Entwistle. About three days later a completely successful firing of 300 rounds, rapidly and continuously, was witnessed by the Secretary of the Navy, Mr. James Forrestal. In addition, by that same date a production line of ten complete mounts a week was in full swing at NGF, with production increasing.
Tests on the first ship were made offshore
P $
near Charleston, South Carolina and wet6 tirely satisfactory. By 20 July, rocket s|1 [ with these Mk. 102 rocket launchers w’cre
Pearl Harbor.
In my 40 years with the BuOrd, I known of no new major ordnance ufl1* f(j equipment that was ever conceived, desig1^. and produced in as short an interval as ''
these first rapid fire rocket mounts. j
could have been more successfully comp
"The Naval Speaker”
(See D. Walsh, pp. 129-130, February 1968 Proceedings)
Lieutenant Daniel A. Panshin, U. S.
Reserve, Ready—All areas of interpeG0
communications are vital to the naval .
ltd
Writing typically receives prime atiem
however, while speaking is relatively f|C'
lected. The naval officer on active duty 'lC' to be an effective speaker on-the-job as hec ducts shipboard meetings, teaches clasS participates in conferences.
I wonder why commands don’t requffc y officers to be graduates of Instructor Sch°,, Most people won’t practice public spe3*^ unless pressed. It is axiomatic that one ca11(1| improve without practice. The great virtaL Instructor School is that it forces one to j feet in the attempt to present an orderly 3(
.,*.1 _ 1 T • , , /~-i _ Ck Tl^*
substantial speech. Lieutenant Comma'11
Walsh briefly alluded to the benefits of
longing to a Toastmasters club. These
rjfha]
H.
Ni
s
Hs.
°ur
%i<
v«ry
s
s
Sic
fV,
s
%
ate
K1
i
1/
cl>"
tc
lhej
VU
5'0o
«tutlngS’ combined with the seasoning of CduUa| constructive criticism. The purpose is
N,
.V^mander Andrew G. Nelson, U. S. Staff, Carrier Division Nine—Admiral
N»' I ■rso,,J
mtiC
' 4
Hen
■lnssC\
t h3'!
ini1 ,
■s-y
V
plet^
eref
shf
/ere-'1
H
structure. Unfortunately, he did not de-
k^V officer worth his salt wants to work hard and constructively. Most officers
^Ter
irej
cK
an^'l
^rief comments on material published in the
dings and also to write brief discussions on
■ ,a6\
ai'° 1
lese
pages. A primary purpose of the Proceed'd provide a place where ideas of importance Navy can be exchanged. The U. S. Naval
iL”
cU
of*
rv .
an^Zed SrouPs which provide their Pfg ers with regular opportunities for the f** °f public speaking and conducting
[ual,
SionCati°nal, to pursue improved self-expres- 3:6rjftm Congenial fellowship. There are over °iJt dubs in the United States and through- he world. Military personnel belong to I vi$it' ’■l1686 clubs. Most clubs meet weekly;
I tL °rs are welcome. If one desires to obtain his rneeting time and place of the club(s) in I 'hn Fea’ he neecl only write: Toastmasters In- S9mational, 2200 North Grand Avenue, 1 ta Ana, California 92702.
J ars> Stripes, and Gresham’s Law”
S- Strauss, pp. 51-57, March 1968 dings) of Uss s article was an excellent exposition , the current problems with the Navy’s
vote r >------------------------------
1% *Urther space to the other related prob-
l|^’ lhat of sheer numbers. It is axiomatic hr)lfWe d° not have enough officers in middle have more than enough, provided .Multitude of staffs and administrative > are reduced to sane limits.
e logical solution, then, is to abolish S|r ' other staff. Example; eliminate de- xlu Cr division and flotilla staffs, leaving the C'r°n staff and type commanders. This offj C serve the dual purpose of freeing more V ^0r shipboard duty and reduce the %te r staflies who tell ships how to op- i through increased paperwork.
THE FORUM
'fy ^ular and Associate Members are invited to 1,1 ‘*1 °Pic of naval interest for possible publication
an honorarium to the author of each •Oo°r ^scuss^on published, at the rate of v Per printed page in the Proceedings.
(after their first adjustment period in the service) do work hard, but how much of this is constructive? Let’s face it: most staff and shore-based officers are simply idler gears among a few large interlocking cogs. But their very energy hurts the service: rather than sit still and give the operating forces a chance to do their best, our eager bureaucrats put pen to paper in hopes of improving the forces afloat. Individually they mean well, but collectively such over-administration is both destructive and initiative-killing.
Present trends being what they are, one doubts if any changes will result from Admiral Strauss’s article or other suggestions along this line. But it is interesting to speculate on how much the Navy might be improved if it had the guts to accept some radical ideas in the officer rank structure and the numerical distribution of people.
"Transmodalism”
(See R. P. Holubowicz, pp. 66 73, February 1968, and pp. 106-107, May 1968 Proceedings)
Thomas H. Suddath, Executive Director, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts—This new concept of international commerce will revolutionize distribution of world goods in the 1970s and will have a profound effect upon all nations engaged in maritime trade and air transport trade. I support Mr. Holubowicz’ views completely, and I would merely like to add some comments which are based upon a research study which I have just completed on containerization.
Containerization promises to be the most radical change in cargo handling methods in centuries. It can be married to all forms of transport, performing complete routing by barge, truck, train, ship helicopter, and airplane. As is typical of many industrialists caught in the technical revolution of this decade, some members of the shipping industry view containerization as an “affliction” rather than as a revolutionary marvel. However, the International Cargo Handling Coordination Association is taking a fresh, open- minded approach to this new method of shipping by containerization.
The new concept is that the container is really another kind of vehicle, or carrier. They have proposed that a new word be added to
An up-to-date listing by name and type of over 2,000 ships and 120 aircraft and missiles. Over 400 illustrations. 64 pages. Paperbound. List Price $3.50 Member's Price $2.80 A U. S. Naval Institute Publication
Compiled and Edited by James C. Fahey
THE SHIPS
AND
AIRCRAFT
OF THE
U S. FLEET
FAHEY’S EIGHTH EDITION
r%] c°mn and ,
§°ods
Pany
°s
v
ten
the shipping lexicon—the transmodalist—a new kind of operator whose business would be to move containers between any two points in the world, performing complete routing by barge, airplane, truck, rail, and ship. This is, to the best of my knowledge, the genesis of the word which is the subject of Mr. Holubo- wicz’ article.
Under the new concept now proposed, the transmodalist would not be subject to the separate jurisdictions and regulatory authority of the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Maritime Commission, and the Civil Aeronautics Board, but rather, would be regulated by a merged regulatory body or preferably a new regulatory body that is attuned to the new system, and not encrusted with the lore of the last century, the Association has said.
In view of the above suggestions, a review of the technical, social and political trends which have preceded the containerization revolution seems to be appropriate. A brief look at the historical trends characterizing the development of world trade may help to place
containerization within a relevant frame"®
The first era of world trade, the Comm<’■ Era, stretched from 1500 to 1805. Ted” logically, it was initiated by the develops of the seagoing sailing vessel, which 1115 possible voyages across oceans separating Far East and the New World from Eur°f During this period, distribution channels controlled by the royal companies such aS Hudson Bay in Canada, and the Levad the Near East. Their sole objective was t° turn profit to royalty.
With the rise of the Industrial Revolt1 and the technical development of the std1 driven vessel, the Exploitive Era in world tf* began. Stretching from 1850 until the break of World War I, it was character^, by an insatiable desire for raw materials- royal companies were replaced by col0'! empires, and profit went to the capi|J rather than royalty as such.
The Concessionary Era, the third in trade, encompassed the period from 19P 1940 between the two world wars. It characterized by attempts to preserve status quo by dividing the world into nomic concessions controlled by the cap>l’! giants—for example, the Lever Brothers’ c‘ cession in the Belgian Congo, and the Afr Iranian concession in the Middle East. 1 war had pointed up the futility of further pansion by conquest. Consolidation of cC nial power and economic position was the f of the day. Wireless telegraphy was the nical innovation which welded these col0' empires together and revolutionized commerce during that period.
World War II exposed the vulnerabih1' the colonial powers and resulted in increa* pressure by colonial subjects for both nomic and political independence. This fol!k, or Nationalistic Era in world trade was d acterized by the breaking up of the large c cessions and the transferring of consider51, control to national groups away from colonial powers. Increased communic^’ J( and transportation facilities reduced costs1 made it possible for an increasing numbej underdeveloped nations to enter the fiel5 world trade.
’me
Th,
CtJls
Nd N, ] evalU; Hr, Th<
Vfu
'Orth
■®st c A ,
in;
v>th, >i
JN
ifthe
VV
Tues
,r>th
theE
vesSc
Pacit
C„
Ur
N
Psive
°hh
Sr,
N
l. he
Se
e eri tc e; the rge c cai ecial «ts t
JS 11
»d
He
^hi
During the late 1950s the developmei1' 1^ containerization, data processing, and d munication satellites resulted in yet ano
me"'0'
gmrnd1
Tec^
:lopn,t:
:h
iting
Eur°f
lelsv,,( ch aS evafl1 ?as to
c°rti Ut^0n world trade. Instantaneous Un*Cati°ns’ combined with inexpensive :,Qrapid pickup, transport, and delivery of p^Qs’ have made it unnecessary for a com- 0f ■’ to organize in terms of a national base °Perations. This present period, com- lern-|Cljg in the early 1960s may truly be -!?ed an International Era.
116 role of advanced communications sys- crUs '
!ed >ld.
Ijj, “ ln supporting the growth of decentra-
multifold. Reduction in packing costs may be as high as 10 per cent. Where 20 longshoremen costing $100 per hour can load 20 tons, a crane handling large containers costing $40 per hour can load 400 tons, about a 50- to-one ratio. Both operating costs and turnaround time are reduced for the shipper, with savings in delivery time and cost passed on to the manufacturer. In addition, there is the elimination of pilferage and a decrease in breakage and spoilage.
Probably the most dramatic impact of containerization on the economy of a city occurred in Baltimore. Since container ships commenced loading in Baltimore, more than $14 million a year has been pumped into that city’s economy.
At the present time and probably for some time to come, containerization will have its greatest impact upon export-import rather than domestic distribution. Both railroad and air industries have been much slower to perceive the advantages and make the changes in equipment necessary. However, developments in both industries are taking place. Lockheed, for example, is designing a supersonic air freight transport which will carry three large containers.
The future implications of containerization extend far beyond the United States. The growth of underdeveloped countries, for example, can be greatly accelerated through containerization. Recent developments in Puerto Rico are a case in point. In approximately 12 years, containerization has tripled Puerto Rican trade with the United States. Seventy per cent of the recent industrial development has been ascribed to containerization. Between 1954 and 1964 the cargo tonnage moving through the Port of San Juan almost doubled, while only two new piers were constructed during this period.
A final major impact of containerization, and the international era that it has helped to introduce, will undoubtedly be the rise of supranational organizations for controlling world trade. These organizations will arise from the needs of multinational businesses, rather than from the outside decisions of such present international organizations as the United Nations.
The revolution in world trade, begun partly by containerization, is still in its infancy. The
with centers all over the *hn ’1S ^a'r^ weh understood. Containeriza- %\ ^owever; is too new to have been fully tiatUated by the general public in terms of its ..''re and its implications. thetl6re have been some studies, however, on future impact of containerization in the
w... operations
;volutf e ste»: rid td the | ictefl ials- co\A :ap
in
1914 . It
erve
,nto
capid'
iers’
e hA
,ast.
Atlantic Trade between United States . Coast ports and European ports.
^ spokesman for a major line, that is ijduled to start containership operations L ^w tonnage next year, said his com- ivj./ had formed a special study group to deal , the problem. Preliminary studies, he [w e<4> have shown that containerships are ex-
Ct(’h to carry between 70 and 80 per cent
e available cargoes in the North Atlantic, ^hat remains to be resolved, he said, is the
jjj*estion to what extent we want to participate ^ carriage of the remaining 20 per cent of
rthet vavailable cargo by operating conventional cssels
of Pacity_
the t^L^nard c>sion
co
:d
,1 of
or vessels with limited container ca-
Line, for example, has made a to employ container tonnage ex-
vd (0lVely, beginning late in 1969, on all its L h Atlantic traffic to American ports from abilW ^011 and New York to Hampton Roads, icre^
oth c jlti ~ principle economic assumption of con- lis fo'* iy erization is that it is faster and less expends' ‘ ‘
to handle one large load than several
k'as
irge 0 s *1*ler ones. As a result, organizations such sided (rae Sea-Land Service, Inc. have designed from Capacity, 8,000-pound containers which anic3*Carried on a conventional truck base. No costs 'l y C*al packing is necessary. The truck de-
umbe* • s ^he container directly to the ship where
■ is lip - - 1 r
u. Goods may be packed in Milwaukee
e fiel^ J‘fted by crane and deposited on ship- t>df .
pmef* |j, 'unpacked in Frankfurt without rehan- nd ci ’3 *n between, ano' *he
advantages of containerization are
ft
train gives two-day service between
pod
0
ble
fa#
distribution, and marketing policies. j. What effects have the recent railroad 111
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ^----------------------- _ jjjO
gers (Penn Central, Atlantic Coast Line;
Should we buy and adapt containerst0.^
impact during the 1970s will be considerable, far reaching, and fascinating to follow. It may just bring about a more peaceful world community, voluntarily arrived at because of forces beyond the control of politicians and statesmen. The transmodalist will be a brand-new professional in the international marketing activities of all countries in the world in the forthcoming generation.
★ ★ ★
Lieutenant Albert H. Robbins U. S. Navy USS Saratoga (CVA-60)—“Impasse” (no further progress possible) is the wrong word to associate with this revolution in logistics. Modular, transmodal, intermodal, or multimodal, whatever we choose to call it, container traffic is expanding. Port facilities and ships are being built, or converted, to accommodate containers.
The inability of major users and carriers to agree on standards (dimensions, lifting and anchoring devices, strength requirements) has slowed container development. The newly adopted standard Sea-Air-Land container (8X8X20, 30, or 40-foot) will soon dominate in surface use; the Air Force’s 463L Loading System 88 XI 08-inch cargo pallet and container is winning general acceptance for air use.
The container can be thought of as a miniwarehouse, a wheelless boxcar or semi-trailer, or a large crate. It is versatile and extremely mobile. Demurrage should be low; there is no licensing, low insurance, and there are few moving parts to maintain. Most of the expense of operating a fleet of containers will necessarily be in maintaining an efficient inventory, distribution, control, and billing system. The Association of American Railroads’ computerized car management system will be completed by 1970 at an estimated cost of 30 to 50 million dollars. This system will keep a running inventory of the nations’ 1.8 million freight cars, and is expected to increase utilization of rolling stock by 25 per cent. Railroad cars, unlike trailers and containers, rarely leave the country. The increased flexibility and decreased cost of the semi-trailer led to the development of the piggyback, or trailer train. In January, the Sante Fe introduced the world’s fastest freight train. The “Super C” container or trailer
Angeles or Long Beach and Elizabeth or Elizabeth via Chicago. Units up to 35, pounds travel at a flat rate of $1,400. railroads do not normally distinguish tween containers and semi-trailers m
statistics. Thus it is not readily possi . identify the share of the 16 per cent incrf ^ in piggyback loadings caused by conta’ traffic (23,768 piggyback loadings d#11" the week ending 10 February).
General availability and increasing - ^
iarity with the container’s advantages 3 created a requirement for leasing and l°glS^ services. It is necessary for both civilian ‘ ^ military managers to re-evaluate produc
on routes, rates and freight movement on East Coast? -v£?
Is LOGAIR still the fastest or most effect1^ What would it cost for guaranteed ne*1' f. surface container service between NSC ,, folk and NAS Key West, Jacksonville, orf#1 wick, Maine?
as shops, rather than semi-trailers and tra*
training devices, GCA installations, tenance and calibration vans, and storerooms, shops at construction sites)-
production, overhaul and repair, and ^ house facilities? What alterations to facilities will be required to make them patible with this new logistics device?
What changes will be required to the <
(DOD) packing and preservation instruct^;
Presently we simply place convent!0
packaged material in the container. .)l£:
What effect will, or should, the conta t
ncd.
Elimination of legal, and union P. ^jo1 and transmodalism have already re' tionized world trade.
Review of Incredible Victory
(See pp
April; and pp. 115-116, June
E. Barth—The
V-i
°°k ri As r ^gh •dgne
^se
Wj
Spa Snc
'339 -
V >a
Vhr
The
>Uy
<
Caa;
V 31 Shr
Wo
^ors
Sai
S*d Sc Sw
ti
>ns
C ti ;'43.
;lere is
Ik
S>!
7* ft
S i
fa*
*■ 1 1 tir
S.
St
S cc
dis
V
c\0.
as we presently do (mobile dental
What should be the design criten3
vvs1
or containership have on the FDL cod1
will decrease expenses, but container# u-
122-125, December 1967; and pP- W" Proce#1
Mta
o
Spa
S S(
1 des ht
'c.air
’W
the
Sad
c*
craf,
1968 designation
J-
Vought-Northrop V-142 should be
yp
pd1
5,000
Tb£
V
ihd tie 10
ur'n-
tist'c'
3fP
•tio"'
) !>»“ n ^
cii'*
t-drf
]NlOf
ll^
jru1
liflf
rr>al1'
!? fo<
l3
cistX1
C</
ot>^
ta^j
5>,;
'°rs that the test pilot had either flown to Panese carrier or to Mexico and there de
premise to be incorrect for several jns.
V® three-views of both the Zero and the ^ except for a low-wing configuration, ts little similarity. The Zero wing had taper with no dihedral break. The !hrt- taPer only in the outboard wing tlng at the dihedral break. Comparing the .Cr features, only rare similarity exists.
£** 1942, the U. S. Navy delivered to ftJf ,glas El Segundo the wreckage of a Zero t)0tIlsPection. I was (and am) an engineer at Ij^glas El Segundo; I heard no comments at tltTle t^iat tlie aircraft was similar to any® designed by the engineering depart- The plane was notable for its very j1 Construction.
'^discussed this subject with a Mr. Harry 'L T who has the responsibility to gather on all aircraft for use of the Douglas CPany. j-je had discussed the design of the
C’s not the aircraft in question in the
** review.
V0s n°ted by Mr. Reynold’s designation, ^ght-Northrop, the aircraft was originally ^ncci by Northrop. The Northrop in this (;QWas a subsidiary of the Douglas Aircraft v Pany. This company became the El l5^nc*0 division of Douglas Aircraft about \0 ’ as John K. Northrop started the present JJarop (NorAir) about that time, tj^ll e Douglas/Northrop Company origin y designed and built the 143 (using a .,lnerent designation). The design failed to a NavY contract and was sold to Vought. .\0^'rPlane (prototype) built by Douglas/ IL, air°P was lost without trace during a test 1 °ff the California coast. This loss led to
i^d the plane to the Japanese. These ru- h could have led to the stories that the | 0 Was a copy of the V-143; however, I be-
£ this
^ons.
,,e several years ago with Jiro Horikoshi, designer of the Zero. Mr. Horikoshi said he was familiar with the features of all ^aircraft of that period, just as any chief H^Sner would be. The design, however, was copy of any other plane. Mr. Gann V ^rnbered that Mr. Horikoshi stated that 5fftlad been impressed with the design (or % Pgement) of the landing gear of Vought Craft.
Based on these discussions, I believe the design was original.
★ ★ ★
Clark G. Reynolds, University of Maine— Mr. Barth seems to be correct in his comments on the origins of the Zero. Mr. Prescott Palmer of Analytic Services, Inc. of Falls Church, Virginia has also called my attention to further supporting evidence: Jiro Hori- koshi’s article, “I designed the Zero,” in the RAF Flying Review for December 1956. Horikoshi also collaborated on two books dealing with the same subject: Zero! and The Japanese Fjta. A dearth of information exists regarding the use of American aeronautical designs by the Japanese during the 1930s; hopefully, some enterprising scholar or aviation buff who can handle both languages will produce a study on the subject.
★ ★ ★
Stanley L. Falk, Industrial College of the Armed Forces—Unfortunately for the Allied cause, the Americans were not the only ones
Courtesy MacDonald & Company Ltd., War Planes of the Second World War, by William Green.
c0$
12'1'
to be remiss in this matter. In the spring of 1941, the Chinese downed a Zero fighter, recovered the wreckage, and were able to check it out in some detail. Their report, and additional comments by the British air attache at Chungking, amounted to a reasonably full run-down on the armament, range, and other capabilities of this very effective new naval aircraft. British headquarters at Singapore and the Air Ministry in London received copies of this material, but somehow or other a critical gap in the intelligence channel kept this important information from reaching the right people.
The result was that the British air staff, like American air experts, remained ignorant of the Zero. The R.A.F. believed that the American Brewster Buffalo fighters—slow, awkward, and short-ranged—which were then at Singapore, were easily capable of handling the Japanese fighters. How wrong they were was readily apparent in December 1941 in the first days of the air war over Malaya.
It is interesting to speculate on just what might have happened had the British and Americans enjoyed an earlier appreciation of what the Zero could do. Presumably they would have been better able to estimate Japan’s capability to mount long-range amphibious operations under land-based air cover. And more advanced Allied fighter planes might have been stationed in the Far East to frustrate these operations. Perhaps, in the final analysis, this would have made little difference in the first six months of the war. But it seems reasonable to assume that the Japanese advance would have been more difficult and somewhat slower. And fewer Allied airmen would have lost their lives in unequal combat against the pesky Zero.
"Soviet Canals”
(See Victor P. Petrov, pp. 32-44, July 1967; p. Ill October 1967; and p. 114, December 1967 Proceedings)
Lawrence C. Allin, Teaching Fellow, Syracuse University—In expressing wonder with Mr. Petrov’s reference to the Murmansk- to-Baku voyage of the Baltiysky-18 in 15 days, 8 hours, Mr. Jacobs demonstrates what all too many of us show, a lack of familiarity with the unified deep water system of inland waterways the Soviet Union has so assiduously structed.
The Baltiysky-18 is a 5,000-tonner desi' same vessel illustrated the effectiveness waterway system along with Soviet ship of lumber through the Volga-Baltic - down the Volga to Greece in early 1966- tonners can use this system with ease speed, 2,700-tonners are being placed of 2,000 tons are being developed. The ^ Postyshev and her sisters were designed
Black Sea-Danube River run and are ported capable of speeds of 30 kms per are contemplated for the inland waterway*^ for these voyages. It is the physical confix1
deep water system that permit the Balt)t- 18 to make a passage averaging 9.6 knots- .j Vyhkr, Kometa, and Strela classes of hydr° operate on the same rivers and reservoir^ the rest of the inland waterways fleets a” considerably higher speeds. ,.X
The Communists have rebuilt old MarH Canal System, substituting seven new 1 for the 38 old, wooden gates, carr'j,j[ up 89 meters over the the V. J. Lenin-Volga-Baltic Canal, has completed. The Baltiysky class of 5,000 can transit this system that is a focus ^ tional pride. It behooves us to remember ^ many units of the Soviet Navy can transit system to and from the Baltic and Black j and Arctic Ocean with ease, speed, and ,x tive concealment of intent.
"The Question of Universal Military Training”
Rilling, pp. 65-75, August
Lieutenant (j.g.) Alexander Monroe, L j, deed had Commander Rilling defined
Wodi
life,
Sgl
jhinl
Hoc
Ht t
V i :‘lors
UVv
•tews
Iges. He , Use “'the Cc c
s
,Ctiera
H0
Hm <0 a . tr
Hs
H ci
Sh
,Hti feu
Jin
for service on this system of waterways
of*'
sign and utilization when she carried a c<
5,0^
return cargo was raw bauxite. While
*1*
service, and vessels such as the Pavel Post)'-
both river and sea service on the DnieP
bo11
Tourist runs from Leningrad to Astra
the Soviets. A 22-day round trip is proje'
■ ftl>(
tion, structure, and navigational aids oi ,
A
the canal
Slope. By this feat of construction, a true n ^ water inland transportation net, now c3
(See Alexander W. Proceedings)
Ik
Naval Reserve—It would be interesting
term “popular periodical literature,”
'tJrcl
curi
terrc
He
rek
'tfim
efna
stat
>dei
tl
Wfin
2*.lss S i
c'Jtar
Wiefs
Cers > c
Heq
Ver]
vEI
jUeai
Sts
^lar]
precisely. I assume that he means the na1'1’
r CCP
sig<
Itf
of^ ip
catf
Czfl>
5 ,<tf
0]
ed
rw#'
r
d
ief
re
• h°'
■akh3'
ay'5
jieC
r*odicals of wide circulation such as Time, lip Look, and the Saturday Evening Post, I °ugh his discussion does not make this clear. 3hink that Professor Bernard C. Cohen, in 's book, The Press and Foreign Policy, made the Hltlt that much of the “news” content of the y'Vs media is drawn from the minds of the ■ |t°rs and includes their judgment of what ttews.” There is no standard definition of *■,” and much of what goes on the front ?es goes there because it will “sell,” not be- 'rISe of its substantive value.
1 seems to me that in dealing with the issue , lbe cyclical interest in the revision of mili- ^ conscription, Commander Rilling might
,, Ve done more to explore the nature of a Mate
fen,
igu
of'
lti)s*
s-1
To(°lt
oi^
and
. \cP rryij
-d*
;b^ 3 #
{ Se>'
l/
eau of sorts that we have reached in this . eral area. He makes the point that after ,Jb of the wars for which we have used this ,Stem, the situation has relaxed, or dropped ^ a trough, after rising to a crest. Today, it , that we have reached a higher level of
'lal commitment. Possibly the levels of the
fell -
Ughs and crests have simply been raised,
. .
^titatively and qualitatively. It seems as if
ty have reached the point to which Winston i UrchiU referred when he commented that SCcUrity would one day be the sturdy child ‘terror.”
.1 he entire article raises the thorny issue of i' relationship of civil and military authority. ^Uirnander Rilling raised a good number of ernative plans without resolving the issue bating which alternative he preferred. I u Uder if, as a practical matter, this is not y.Ut the efforts of military and naval officers . finally result in, if they attempt to discuss C* issue publicly. The U. S. Code is exin its requirement that the views on jUtary policy of the Chairman of the Joint lefs of Staff shall be his own, and that he i be free to express them. I wonder if (Cre are ways in which military and naval Cers of lesser rank can express their per-
t lr
u-*
rn°j
tio^
opinions on vital national policy issues equal candor.
Verhauling the Overhaul”
C* If. G. Bradshaw, pp. 55-63, February 1968 Feedings)
5ear Admiral N. Sonenshein, U. S. Navy, fitty Chief, Naval Material—I was par- 'fiarly interested in the author’s use of
The Landing at Veracruz: 1914
by Jack Sweetman
The Marines have landed! Newspaper headlines are dusty now, but this account of the Veracruz episode is fresh and lively, filled with confused politics, south-of-the-border bravado, and snipers bullets. Based in part on memoirs of participants, this record of an almost forgotten incident in U. S. history, is detailed, colorful, readable.
224 pages. Illustrated. Appendixes.
Notes. Index. List Price $8.50. Member’s Price $6.80.
(PLEASE USE ORDER FORM IN BOOKLIST SECTION)
■
PERT techniques for managing accomplishment of ship’s force work during overhaul.
Considerable activity has been underway here in Washington recently also aimed at “overhauling the overhaul.” The Ship Overhaul Improvement Program, a CNO/CNM sponsored program of considerable magnitude, is aimed at identifying problems associated with the overhaul of ships and providing a systematic approach to the correction of these problems. To date, some 38 major problems have been identified and documented, and solutions undertaken. These range from modernizing our naval shipyards to more effective and timely planning for each overhaul. Foremost among the topics being actively pursued is a more thorough, carefully scheduled ship’s force work package, the complete integration of this work package with the shipyard work package (including a PERT diagram of ship and shipyard scheduled work), and intensified management (including use of computers), to ensure effective use of available resources. From this we seek maximum efficiency in the employment of ship’s force and shipyard personnel, an orderly progression in the accomplishment of the total work schedule, including the elimination of interference between ship’s force and shipyard work, and a better knowledge of the status and progress of the overhaul and resources expended. This new management technique is currently being evaluated in the overhauls of the USS Saratoga (CVA-60) and the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVA-42).
"The Congreve War Rockets 1800-182 5”
(See R. R. Hobbs, pp. 80-88, March 1968 Proceedings)
Paul B. Schmitt, Inbound Manager, Ayers Steamship Co., New Orleans, La.—These rockets were used by the British at the Battle of New Orleans, 8 January 1815. And while they were unable to change the outcome of that battle, they did cause the death of one of the great men associated with the early history of the U. S. Navy, Marine Major Daniel Carmick.
The then Captain Daniel Carmick first commanded Marines at New Orleans in February 1804. His first tour of duty was short, and a little over a year later, he was to be found in command of Marines at Phil
adelphia. In December 1805, Captain C3' mick received orders to return to New Ork3' and assume command, with Michael Pfl nolds (of Burr conspiracy fame) to act as first lieutenant.
In April 1807, Carmick was in commas
d
h'ev
;d
122 Marines at their station “opposite Orleans.” It was the largest single deta(
ment ashore. He reported that he supp- guards for the armed-schooner Revenge a the flotilla of six gunboats in the harbor lieutenant and 17 men and five waiters for Navy Yard; and, a lieutenant and 12 garrison Fort St. John. This fort was loCa3 at Bayou St. John in back of the city on L3 Pontchartrain.
Early in 1809, Secretary of the Navy St11’ informed the Commandant that 29 more g1
boats were being sent to New Orleans ° that he required 300 Marines at the stati1 They were dispatched and Carmick was P1 moted to major, becoming the second raH^111 officer in the Marine Corps. ,
In the War of 1812, the British had desi?1 on the vast Louisiana Territory that , beyond the “Isle of Orleans.” The Br>cl, troops of Sir Edward Pakenham began la1’ ing about six miles below New Orle j shortly after mid-December 1814. Gen1 Andrew Jackson at first had not a man or between them and the city. Fighting perately for time in which to gather toget his defenses, Jackson threw several small a1 fierce attacks against the British. Actions: pecially on 23 and 28 December, m3' Pakenham decide to await the arrival of * reinforcements before a final march on b Orleans. In the action of 28 December 1® i Major Daniel Carmick was mortally wouflo He finally died on 6 November 1815.
A report states “the horse the major 'V riding was torn to pieces and the m3J severely wounded in the arm and head b) Congreve Rocket.” An account of 1431 Carmick’s funeral adds, “the great conco11^, of people who accompanied his body to Louis Cemetery No. 2, showed the esteein had enjoyed among the people of the CrescS
City.” An impressive monument, w stands today, was erected at the grave of Marine hero. Each year at his grave,
0
l0c'l
"T
{See
hrj
I
1
Of
4,
Ti,
fili
!»iC
Th,
CfJV
4ir
T
(;U;
biti
\b-
J
bui
%)
ties
ser\
are
J*.
VeJ
for
Arn
tie)
J
lfo\
Cor
ofi,
S
n4(
feu.
h,
‘on
boy
veii
A
•\(
tia,
Marines honor their special ceremonies.
fallen comrade
I
%
sPe,
4 li
is . <
"Th,
cos'
id
desif
at >3' Brit15, i lafj )rl<
or S'* s & >getij
*ua
>ns, ^ tt>£
off1*1: nNj -18|: and
>r '
n#)1
d by Mai1
P Si
men1
l0C3‘f
n
■
re g",r ns aI1‘ stati( as
anki"'
id1'
ieta<
,andf te N<"
¥
t as
n » 3rlea'; ■1 W
A- A.
Heckman, pp. 160—72, April 1968
■^ptain Heckman recommends evaluation
of
to
:eitt
-esc
wb1' of ^
, Kt
vf>
endurance. Combined with a six-foot
h,
Vhi
lraska, also market heavy-lift ground effect
HeliC(
tnes (GEM).
e Future of the Coast Guard’:
Ro°eedings)
Lieutenant Albert H. Robbins, U. S. Navy
n air cushion vehicles in SAR and other tra St Retard roles as soon as possible. Towing, bif ■ Cr’ firefighting, and water rescue capa, *tles °f the SK-5 were evaluated last year I'll 6r various visibility and sea conditions. COy CCGS Simcoe carried, launched, and red ereci the 17,000-pound air cushion vehicle ^rin§ the trials. The report, “Trials of an q 5 Hovercraft for the Canadian Coast t'ard” is available from the Defense Docu- tation Center as acquisition number
^'817145
Th
k . fte SK-5 and its younger but larger sister, fjr‘Ut by Bell, are licensed versions of the ,y. lsb Hovercraft Corporations’ Warden (SR- clesanfi Winchester (SR-N6) air cushion vehi- Seiy ^fiese f°ur machines, designed for ferry -Ce’ bave been produced in quantity and •j, tn commercial use throughout the world, y ,ree modified SfC-Ss (Patrol Air Cushion for°lC CS^ returned to Vietnam in December y their second combat tour. The U. S. has also bought three; one as a person- carrier, the others as fighting machines. sj lc SR.M3 (only one was built) was de- ^ cd as a naval vessel and delivered to the Q Val Navy for testing. British Hovercraft ^Orp°ration has sold coastal defense versions jtlts new Wellington (BH-7) to the British and 14?erial Iranian navies. Powered by a single, tg H-s.h.p., Rolls-Royce Bristol Marine Pro- |QllS’ this. 36-ton machine has a 40-ton pay- a cruising speed of 50 knots, and a 10-
Ve°Ver height, these specifications represent a respectable coastal defense vessel.
, ero-Go, Inc., Seattle, Washington, and
y . etl Manufacturing Company, Columbus, 'ebr- ■ - - - - —
i(j ;—‘Copters, providing combined lift and (v, lAg force, could supplement or replace ^S ProPulsi°n machinery for very high 4 operations. Since our biggest helos have js limit of approximately ten tons, this 4 a Very attractive possibility. Helicopter hydrofoil boat teams were proposed sev- " ... no matter how much you may have learned in the past about the Naval profession, it is but a fraction of what you must know in the long course of a career in the Navy.”
B. J. Semmes, Jr.
Vice Admiral, U. S. Navy
Chief of Naval Personnel
By Rear Admiral Arthur A. Ageton, USN (Ret.) and Rear Admiral William P. Mack, USN The Seventh Edition includes the latest changes in the Department of Navy reorganization. 650 pages. Illustrated. Appendixes. Bibliography. Index.
List Price $7.75 Member’s Price $6.20
A United States Naval Institute Book
Please use book order form in booklist section
of $300.00. “The challenge for each c°n' mand to establish an active suggestion Pr‘ gram” is certainly stimulating; the probaD ity that a suggester will be paid more t*1
idea was used. The last sentence of the
wi*3!
wonderful unrealized potential. If finan and paperwork problems can be reduced
ci»‘
tl*f
)
eral years ago to extend the safe rescue range and capabilities of shore stations.
Non-rigid GEMs or hoverpallets should be developed as SAR platforms. Very little research and development work has been reported on non-rigid GEMs; however, an extensive reservoir of design and fabrication experience exists on large, inflatable loadbearing structures (blimps, boats, buildings, and bulkheads). A non-rigid GEM has a number of desirable characteristics: minimum volume when not in use, low initial cost per unit volume, low maintenance cost, minimum weight (maximum payload and hoverheight per power input), least damage by collisions, minimum weight GEM (inflation/lifting only) could be carried aboard a vessel or helicopter. Launched and inflated, it would then be drifted or towed downwind to the vessel or aircraft needing assistance. Negative draft and low inertia would eliminate most hazards associated with SAR operations, such as swamping, grounding, and collision.
A ground effect machine might be a permanent adjunct to a ship, either on a power control umbilical cord or on a rigid arm.
Air cushion vehicles and all ground effects machines should be evaluated for Coast Guard applications. Assigning an experienced Coast Guard Officer to the Joint Surface Effect Ships Program Office would be an ideal starting point.
"Incentive Awards for Creative Thinking”
(See J. W. Willis, pp. 135-136, March 1968 Proceedings)
Lieutenant John H. Bartol, Jr., U. S. Navy —Lieutenant Commander Willis’ article describes well the ultimate aim of the beneficial suggestion system. Applying “deep thinking, courage, interest . . .” the suggester develops an idea. “If conclusive evaluation shows that savings or value are inherent in the suggestion, the suggester is promptly paid a cash (before taxes) award.” Individual cases unfortunately have not borne out the success of this program.
The suggestion system is not reaping significant rewards for the inventor and for the Department of Defense because the governing instructions are too vague, and too much paperwork is involved for rewards in excess $300.00 is small, because it is not the l°c‘. command that ultimately approves or P^( for the major suggestion. To win a majj financial reward, the suggester must kno"' final endorser’s policies concerning benefit suggestions. These may vary consider:1 from the local command’s program.
How does an inventor presently try to o a major award? His type commander’s P°, cies may require him to submit the suggeS*)‘ via the chain of command in letter form- 1 suggestion forms, NAVSO 12450/8, specifically not desired (nor available)- * . example is as follows: One of my suggest* ^ in letter form received favorable endorse!" throughout the chain of command and 1 dorsement stated: “ . . . concurs that *■ suggester) submit a Beneficial Sugges/ form.” All sorts of questions now occur: suggestion form is desired; to whom sh°l1 the form be sent; if the idea has been a* proved, why push more paper?
Not only is also the paperwork a prob*eI^ the source of money is bothersome for b° big and small awards. The ship with m3'1 inventors is burdened with paying the in)/' tors out of its own operational funds. * commanding officer might get worried to L’^ sure that not over 20 such cases occurred'
rW
any quarter. Big awards bring bigger financ difficulties.
The beneficial suggestion system has
suggesters of the future will be more qutc and more fairly rewarded. The success Public Law 89-198 of 1965 depends up0/ more detailed instruction concerning p0*1, and payments. Until new policies exist wbcr‘ by the complete chain of command has cO1' mon rules to operate under, along with **' j proved financial fairness, the whole burden the “Benny Sugg” system will rest on 1 local command. Continuing to operate a? has in the past, the Beneficial Awards tern will largely struggle along handing on* nickels and dimes.