Prize Essay Is The Subject of Navy Magazine Editorial
(Excerpt from the June 1971 issue of Navy, international journal of maritime affairs, published by the Navy League, London)
A great navy cannot be built, nor a sagging one revived, until naval officers of independent judgment and stubborn confidence are ready to rail from the Pentagon rooftops against all that they know to be wrong.
Thus reads the opening paragraph of the U. S. Naval Institute’s prize essay for 1971, written by a serving U. S. Navy captain and passed for publication in the Institute’s Proceedings by the U. S. Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, U. S. Navy.
The essay is highly critical of current U. S. Navy policies and the overbearing hand of the political bureaucracy. In particular, it brutally condemns the operational philosophy and the design concept of the Knox-class and Spruance-class destroyers as well as the actual “hardware” of the former which is, of course, in service. Another paper in a similar vein, written by a lieutenant (j.g.) appeared in the same March 1971 issue of the Proceedings.
However, the important point is not whether the essays are factually correct—although there can be little doubt concerning the validity of most of the comments—but that they were published, with the full knowledge of the naval authorities, in a most influential journal.
Very seldom can such criticism of the Royal Navy or the Admiralty Board ever be penned for publication by a serving British officer. From this, a number of assumptions may be drawn: (a) that the Royal Navy is perfect in every way—a scarcely credible thesis; (b) that senior officers see to it that they remain “politically” acceptable, thus ensuring their future—a big, but feasible, gamble in a navy which is contracting rapidly and in which the top echelon will also inevitably shrink; (c) that there is a corner in every naval officer’s mind which houses a code of loyalty and belief in “sticking together and not rocking the boat” no matter how important the issues at stake. It is this third alternative which is misguided when carried too far and is then the most dangerous.
From time to time, there are early retirements from the top echelons by officers of known and undisputed talents; many can only be the result of important disagreements with, or within, the Admiralty Board.
Admirable as such gestures may be, and perhaps satisfying to the person concerned, it is not good enough that the retiral should be accompanied by a stiff upper lip to which the lower one is immutably sealed. It is the nation, and not the Admiralty Board, which owns the Royal Navy on which it depends and it has the right to know of, and to evaluate, or have evaluated for it, important controversial issues. Security can be, and very often is, taken to absurd lengths.
As long ago as 1902, the Navy League proposed the award of an annual gold medal for the best naval essay of the year and requested the Royal United Services Institution (RUSI) to administer the award. While RUSI declined on that occasion, could such a scheme be introduced now—or perhaps it is too late?
SecDef Suggests Possibility Reservists May Get Carriers
(Chicago Tribune, 12 October 1971)
Secretary of Defense Melvin R. Laird said the Navy may turn some aircraft carriers over to the Naval Reserves to beef up the Navy’s shrinking carrier force. Laird offered no details, but aides said the idea is to have one or two carriers, manned largely by Reservists, operating as training ships off the East and West Coasts.
“It’s part of a drive to put more emphasis on the Reserves and show the Armed Services we really mean it,” a Pentagon official said. Others also see it as a way of keeping some older carriers out of mothballs when two new nuclear-powered flattops join the Fleet within the next few years.
Officials said the Navy has proposed that one or two carriers be assigned as training ships with skeleton crews to keep them in condition. The Reservists would come on board on weekends and during their annual two-week training period. Although the Navy has assigned some destroyers to the Reserves, this would be the first time a ship of this size was earmarked for this purpose.
The Navy, faced with stringent budget requirements, has cut its attack carrier force to 14 from a Vietnam war peak of 16. Earlier in 1971, the Pentagon rejected the Navy’s bid for construction of a fourth nuclear-powered carrier whose cost has shot up from $640 million to close to $1 billion. The first atomic-powered carrier, the USS Enterprise (CVAN-65), now is at sea. The Eisenhower and the Nimitz are both under construction.
If the carrier-training idea wins approval, the two training ships could either be pulled from mothballs or be taken from the active Fleet when the two new ones come along.
Porpoise Is Trained To Drive Off Sharks
(Navy Times, 3 November 1971)
A Navy study has shown that—under experimental conditions, at least—porpoises* can be trained to act as “bodyguards” for divers and other personnel working in the water by driving off sharks that might threaten them.
Working under contract to the Office of Naval Research, scientists at the Mote Marine Laboratory at Sarasota, Florida, have been able to teach a porpoise to move aggressively toward a shark on command and drive him away.
The study is part of a broad program of research, aimed at a better understanding of the biology and behavior of sharks in order to develop an effective defense against them.
Sharks present a possible hazard to naval personnel engaged in swimming, diving, salvage, rescue work, or survival at sea. There are now few effective measures of protection against them.
Since porpoises have never been observed to be aggressive toward sharks, they have to be taught to attack them. Training was conducted in a specially designed experimental pool of the Mote Laboratory, using a 450-pound Atlantic bottlenose dolphin, named Simo, and brown sharks.
After several weeks of conditioning, Simo upon command readily approached and drove away a 7-foot shark introduced into the pool from an adjacent channel.
* See E. L. Frasier, “Survival Among Sharks,” U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, this issue, pp. 42-49.
Admiral Kidd Warns Of Soviet Strength In The Mediterranean
(Philadelphia Inquirer, 4 October 1971)
Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, Jr., U. S. Navy, turned over command of the U. S. Sixth Fleet and warned that Soviet strength in the Mediterranean has reached a level that “. . . belies any avowed intent at peaceful purposes.”
At the same time, John A. Chafee, Secretary of the Navy, issued an assurance that North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces would remain the “predominant power” in the region.
Kidd delivered the warning at a ceremony on board the cruiser USS Springfield (CLG-7), Sixth Fleet flagship, at a Naples dock. Then he passed command of the Fleet to Vice Admiral Gerald E. Miller, U. S. Navy.
Navy Studies Feasibility Of Helicopter Barge Tow
(Office of Naval Research News Release, 6 October 1971)
A study is underway on the possible use of helicopters to tow cargo barges at high speed to the beach in an amphibious landing. The objective of the study is to develop improved procedures and techniques for transferring cargo from amphibious force ships to landing force units ashore.
Preliminary results of the study indicate the CH-53 helicopter could tow a high-speed barge with 65 tons of cargo at 60 knots, and a 20-ton heavy lift helicopter (HLH) could tow a high-speed barge containing 100 tons of cargo at 70 knots. Depending on the distances from the amphibious force ships to the shore, the use of the helicopter-barge combination could potentially improve the helicopter cargo performance by a factor of 2 to 4.
In addition to helicopters, the study is analyzing the capabilities of air cushion vehicle (ACV) landing craft and conventional landing craft to tow various barge configurations. The ability to beach the loaded barge and the special loading and handling considerations will be examined. The new barge-carrying ships, such as the LASH or the Seabed will be investigated as a means to transport the high-speed barges to the amphibious objective area (AOA).
Navy Tests New Ship Concept; High-speed, Twin-hulled Craft
(NavNews, 22 October 1971)
A high-speed ship of the future that will ride waves with practically no pitch, roll, heave, or yaw is now in advanced model testing stage. She is current being tested at the U. S. Naval Undersea Research and Development Center (NUC) at San Diego, California.
The ship is a new type of twin-hulled semi-submerged ship concept, and would be capable of speeds up to 45 knots. Advantages of the concept are improved seaworthiness, more deck area, more crew space, and less drag at high speeds than the conventional ships.
She will use lightweight gas turbine engines, enabling engineers to increase operating speeds and better isolate noises that attract enemy submarines. Because of her huge flat deck and stability, the vessel may play an important role in antisubmarine warfare.
The crewmen would live in above-the-water portion of the vessel in the rectangular superstructure. Beneath the water, two torpedo-like hulls will contain sonar equipment, engines, and fuel. Access between the two sections is through four vertical struts.
NUC engineers, together with personnel at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard have completed the design of a 190-ton version. This model, when completed next year, will serve as both a large model for testing and as a work platform for carrying out Navy oceanic research projects.
Paracel Islands May Be The Site Of Communist China Naval Base
(Marine Rundschau, August 1971)
American military circles expressed the suspicion in July 1971 that the People’s Republic of China was working on the construction of a naval base in the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea. American reconnaissance planes have sighted several convoys transporting building material to the island group under escort of several Red China naval units.
The ownership of the Paracel Islands is in dispute; besides Red China, Taiwan, South Vietnam, and the Philippines lay claim to the Islands.
Soviet Fleet Admirals Praise Russian Navy Striking Force
(Marine Rundschau, August 1971)
On the occasion of the Soviet Navy Day, Fleet Admiral Sergei G. Gorshkov, in an interview with the party organ, Pravda, praised the striking force of the Soviet Navy, saying that it could reach any target in any part of the world oceans. The deputy chief of the Navy, Fleet Admiral Vladimir N. Alekseev, likewise noted that the Soviets now have a completely new ocean-going navy, whose nuclear-powered submarines provide practically unlimited operational possibilities. A group of atomic submarines had recently completed more than 20,000 miles in submerged cruising.
A series of Eastern Bloc maneuvers took place in the Western Ukraine and the Crimea under the designation “Yug” or South. Since the objective of these exercises, which included landings by air and sea, was the testing of adversary defense in depth, Yugoslavia and Romania saw themselves as targets of a demonstration of strength.
The effort to build a worldwide system of bases for the Soviet Fleet is continuing. At the moment, there are attempts to obtain harbor rights in Punta Arenas from Chile. According to a report in the Lisbon newspaper Diario de Noticias, Russia is building a submarine base in the former Portuguese colony of Goa. The harbor of Mormugao will be available not only to the Indian Navy, but also to the Soviet Fleet, since it will have common access to this port as a back up.
Soviet Union Is Building Second Atomic Icebreaker
(Yelena Knorre, Novosti Press Agency in Ocean Industry, October 1971)
Construction of a new atomic icebreaker, Arctica [sic], is well under way in the Soviet Union. A new steam-raising atomic plant has been developed for it by the U.S.S.R. State Committee for the Utilization of Atomic Energy, according to Andronik Petrosyants, chairman of the Committee, who spoke at a press conference in Geneva. Petrosyants led the Soviet delegation at the Fourth International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy.
Asked about the operation of the nuclear-powered Soviet icebreaker, Lenin, Petrosyants said that the marine atomic plants have fully justified themselves. The icebreaker can move across a solid ice field up to ten feet thick, making a passage for convoys of ships in Arctic seas.
In tests under severe polar conditions, the icebreaker has proved her high dependability in jerky rolls, shocks, and frequent changes in the load. The reactor system in the Lenin has been replaced with a better and simpler one.
Expert Predicts Hovercraft Will Replace Surface Ships
(The Seattle Times, 24 September 1971)
The world’s navies will be taking to the air within a decade, born on the decks of hovercraft and hydrofoils, an expert predicts. The “military skimmers” will replace a full range of warship roles from light patrol vessels to destroyers, minesweepers, troop transports, and carriers for vertical-takeoff strike aircraft.
In his introduction to Jane’s Surface Skimmers: Hovercraft and Hydrofoils, Roy McLeavy, editor, says:
The shift from displacement to non-displacement vessels is one of the most revolutionary changes ever known in warship design.
Over the past year, plans have been projected for skimmers in dozens of warship roles. McLeavy added:
If these proposals are put into effect, and few doubt they will be, expenditure on military skimmers will become one of the biggest items in the defense budgets of the seafaring nations within a decade.
Jane’s details skimmers under construction or already built in more than 20 countries. Britain, a pioneer in hovercraft, is losing its initial lead to other countries. McLeavy says the U. S. Navy is the first to adopt the skimmer-warship concept on a broad scale.
The North Atlantic alliance hopes to select a hydrofoil design as a standard patrol boat and persuade European member nations to buy it.
“The vessel which has contributed most to winning over NATO navies is undoubtedly the Boeing Tucumcari,” says McLeavy. “During a series of impressive demonstrations in NATO ports, it outstripped all other vessels with ease.”
Alaska Gulf Tests Aid Studies For New Navy Submarine Design
(Kip Cooper in the San Diego Union, 8 August 1971)
Navy scientists have completed an underwater research project that is expected to have an important bearing on the development of the next generation of submarines and on future underwater sound detection systems.
The scientific project begun in May 1971, was under the coordination of the U. S. Navy Underwater Research and Development Center (NUC) on Point Loma, California.
It involved a four-month expedition into the Gulf of Alaska by three ships and about 60 scientists and technologists.
The ships were the USS Dolphin, (AGSS-555) the world’s deepest diving submersible—sent to San Diego in November 1970—the USS Baya (AGS-318), and the USNS S. P. Lee (T-AGS-31).
The expedition operated in the Gulf of Alaska about 200 to 250 miles from Kodiak.
The Dolphin is built to do extensive acoustic research in deep waters, conduct sensor trials, launch weapons, and make deep water engineering tests. She has launched a torpedo at the deepest depth at which one ever has been fired.
The Dolphin also has as much sonar equipment per ton of displacement as the largest Polaris ballistic missile submarine. Her entire bow is devoted to sonar.
Pass-Down-The-Line Notes
Rear Admiral George van Deurs, U. S. Navy (Retired), is collecting information for writing the story of Patrol Wing Ten’s operations between Manila and Australia in the first four months of World War II. He would like to hear from anyone who took part in these actions, either in a plane or tender, and especially from those who have personal notes or diaries of that period. Forward any information to Rear Admiral van Deurs at 312 Golden Gate Avenue, Belvedere, California 94920.
Dr. Richard H. Thompson, assistant professor of history at Hanover College, who is working on a book on naval and military operations of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, would be pleased to communicate with any readers of the Proceedings who know of any unpublished memoirs or correspondence relating to the war (outside of government archives) by naval, military, or civilian eyewitnesses. Professor Thompson’s address is Box 322, Hanover, Indiana 47243.