Pass the Word—Well
By William C. Boggess, Associate Professor of Speech, U. S. Naval Postgraduate School
In the days of wooden ships and iron men, officers were known to have had iron lungs. Much of their oration was done from the quarterdeck with the raging sea and the howling wind in the background. As the ships changed to steel and grew larger, the miracle of electronic amplification allowed the commander to modulate his voice and still speak with authority, dignity, and also with clarity.
Frequently, too, today’s naval officer is seen as well as heard, by an audience as close as a closed-circuit television screen. And as these occasions—to appear before his subordinates—steadily increase, so, too, is a growing evidence of the need for him to speak to his peers, to his superiors, and to his counterparts in other Services. There is also the requirement for the naval officer to communicate, intelligently and convincingly, with businessmen and legislators.
In this awareness, the U. S. Naval Postgraduate School considers speech education to be an important part of the baccalaureate curriculum at Monterey. In effect, the administration feels that students must demonstrate a very real proficiency in this art. In order to be a successful naval officer, a man must be a good communicator.
Most students come to the Postgraduate School with a fair amount of experience as division officers and/or department heads, which affords them plenty of opportunity to talk before their men. Talking to peer groups and groups of senior officers, however, sometimes presents a different challenge. Speech training at Monterey centers around two ways of delivering the speech: extemporaneously and by reading from a manuscript. Extemporaneous or “extemp” speaking provides the best medium for speaking to small, intimate audiences where personal exchange between communicator and audience is most apt to happen. The practice of reading from a manuscript is for large, formal speaking engagements where the speaker is most likely to be quoted by the press or even to be seen on television.
Students are given assignments starting with the easiest purpose—that of simply providing information, and through successive assignments work up to the most difficult of tasks—that of persuading their audience. In between speech assignments there is plenty of time for impromptu speaking, which follows the general style of the Toastmasters’ presentations and provides for the “table topic” device to sharpen the speaker’s ability to think on his feet.
Speakers are encouraged to choose subjects they are studying in other classes, which gives them a depth of understanding and wealth of material for organizing speeches. Courses in American diplomacy, Southeast Asian political history, U. S. and world history, psychology, and American traditions and ideals are frequently helpful in speech planning. Speeches involving recent deployments are also encouraged as the speaker finds it easy to speak with conviction and authority about a subject of which he has personal knowledge.
Speakers are frequently challenged by their audience in a healthy exchange of questions and answers that follows most speeches. At least twice during the course they have an opportunity to be part of their own audience as they watch their speech on video tape. This provides a precise method of evaluating their mannerisms, logic, and semantics. Some officers even bring their wives in to view their speech as, very often, the wives are their most severe critics.
The advanced speech course offers the opportunity to speak before community audiences, and this very often is the true test of a speaker’s ability. Here, students learn the value of audience analysis in planning a speech, and they also learn to respond to the diverse reactions of an audience that is not a captive one. As might be expected, reaction runs the gamut from that of the senior citizen, who is prone to catch 40 winks during a luncheon speech, to the enthusiasm of active businessmen who run the community and who are always anxious to learn of new events and discoveries. Advanced speakers go out into the community in teams of two, and appear in uniform. One speaker introduces the principal speaker and gives his qualifications. His task is to whet the audience’s appetite, but not to steal his thunder. The next time this duo appears in public their roles are reversed, and the introducer becomes the main speaker.
Failures are rare in such a program, because each speaker is carefully rehearsed and critiqued by the instructor and other members of the class. After seeing himself on video tape as many times as is necessary, he stands up to make his speech with quiet confidence and proves to himself and the audience the value of effective communication.
Plans for the future call for a new class in the techniques of briefing. There will be three major areas of concentration in this course:
Intelligence briefing, where there is pressure to review many facts within a compressed time-frame. This is for the V. I. P. who, of necessity, must get the information in short order because of the pressure on his time.
Briefing for decision, where the commander must have an “in-depth” review of any and all facts that will help him decide a course of action.
Public relations briefing for visiting dignitaries who must know of a command’s activities and military function.
All three types of briefings will be given with a liberal use of visual support, and one hour of lab credit will be given for preparation of visual aids.
In the 14 years of its speech education program, the Postgraduate School has helped hundreds of students to become effective speakers, thereby to increase their professional contribution simply by being able to “Pass the Word,” well.
The Federal Maritime Commission and the American Merchant Marine
By Rear Admiral John Harllee, U. S. Navy (Retired), Former Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission
The United States has, basically, two merchant shipping interests. The first relates to the American flag merchant marine, which is necessary for national defense and trade purposes. The second is with exporters, importers, and consumers, and their concern with U. S. trade and commerce, most of which is now carried in foreign-flag ships.
The dual nature of the Federal Government’s responsibilities was clearly recognized by Reorganization Plan No. 7 of 12 August 1961. Before this reorganization, the Federal Maritime Board and the Maritime Administration were interlinked, both having the same executive officer. Plan No. 7 established separate agencies for handling the responsibilities for (1) promotional and operating functions, and (2) regulatory functions.
The Maritime Administration of the Department of Commerce now handles the direct promotion of the American flag merchant marine and shipbuilding industry with: operating differential subsidy; construction differential subsidy; a research and development program; training of officers for the merchant marine; and a variety of other aid such as Title XI low-interest mortgages, which assist operators in making ship purchases.
The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) handles the second interest of the United States in merchant shipping matters—the one which has to do with the welfare of exporters, importers, and consumers, in other words the general public. The Commission is an independent quasi-judicial regulatory agency, completely separate from the Maritime Administration. Its five commissioners are appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, and its chairman is designated by the President.
The interest of the U. S. government in both appears to be quite similar; however, it is not exactly the same. For example, a high freight rate may be good for the American merchant marine, but is not necessarily good for exporters, importers, and consumers.
The importance of the interest of the U. S. government in world trade and in exporting is underlined by the increasing emphasis which must be placed on export expansion, because of the balance of payments and the unemployment problems.
In order to accomplish its mission, the FMC must concern itself with carriers, terminals, freight forwarders, shippers, and to a much lesser extent travel agents.
In the 1870s, steamship lines in the international trades grouped themselves into what are known as “conferences.” These international shipping conferences fix freight rates and establish conditions of carriage by agreement among the competing carriers. This is contrary to our anti-trust laws, violating the basic American philosophy of competition and free enterprise. However, after a four-year investigation, from 1912 to 1916, and two others, conducted simultaneously from 1958 to 1961, the Congress decided that the history of the international steamship industry was such that, without agreement on rates, there would be cutthroat competition and chaotic market conditions. This would result in instability and damage to exporters and importers, as well as to the steamship lines. This situation was caused partly by the varying costs of operating ships under different flags. The standards of living, wages, and most other expenses (including the cost of ships) between nations are too varied for further amplification in this discussion.
The basic concept of the 1916 Shipping Act, and the 1961 amendment was that steamship conferences were beneficial to both the shippers and the carriers, and, therefore, to the general public. However, the philosophy was that they should not be allowed to employ predatory tactics, such as driving all the independent or non-conference lines out of trades. The laws which the Congress enacted envision competition by one or more non-conference lines, acting as a natural inhibitor on what might otherwise be excessively high freight rates or poor services. Nevertheless, the Federal Maritime Commission can disapprove freight rates of both foreign and domestic shippers that appear to be so unreasonably high or low that it would be detrimental to U. S. commerce.
Maritime nations of Western Europe and also Japan, feel that these regulations constitute unwarranted and highly objectionable unilateral governmental interference in international business. These laws are simply designed to see that the great power of the steamship conferences is not used to discriminate against American steamship lines, seaports, and exporters, or are detrimental to the commerce of the United States or contrary to its public interest. It must be emphasized that the laws do not provide that the conferences must act in a manner favoring the United States, only that they must not act in a manner detrimental to this country.
Lengthy negotiations with the maritime nations of Western Europe and also Japan, have resulted in progress in reaching pragmatic understandings and mutually acceptable solutions to problems despite differences in philosophy.
The FMC regulates another type of carrier, the domestic offshore ship lines, which operate between the continental United States and Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and Samoa. Although people travel to these places by air, practically all of the goods to and from there are transported by ships. The Commission has the power in these trades to set maximum and minimum rates—a public utility type of rate regulatory power. The Commission regulates 900 ocean freight forwarders and 400 ocean freight terminals. Freight forwarders are concerned with getting cargo from point to point, in the same way travel agents get people from place to place.
There has been a tremendous increase in cargo carried by the American merchant marine since the institution of the Federal Maritime Commission and the consequent intensification of regulatory activities. The FMC certainly does not claim credit for all, or even most of this increase. The removal of monopolistic perversions and artificial impediments to trade by the Commission and its heavy assistance to exporters and importers, however, has played a helpful role in the increased tonnage carried in U. S.-flag ships.
It is true that only about 5% of U. S. cargo by tonnage is carried by American-flag ships. However, about 20% by dollar value is carried by the U. S. merchant marine. American-owned “flag of convenience” or “flag of necessity” (Liberian, Honduran, and Panamanian flag) ships* carry about 15% by tonnage. Of course, it would be better if these ships, which are considered by the Department of Defense to be under effective U. S. control, would sail under the American flag.
The question is asked whether the American flag merchant marine is growing or dying? There is no doubt that most of the U. S.-flag merchant fleet is badly over-aged, and that its replacement poses a major problem. This is, however, primarily a question of government support to the shipbuilding industry, and the Nixon Administration’s maritime plan promises to render this support.
Let us also take a look at what has happened since the inception of the FMC in 1961. The total active U. S.-flag fleet consisted of 938 ships of 13,579,000 d.w. tons. At the beginning of 1969, the total deadweight tonnage of the 1,034 ships was 15,804,000, or 14,004,000 tons, not including the 171 U. S. government ships which had been activated for Vietnam War use. This sort of growth is certainly not indicative of a moribund enterprise, especially when great advances and efficiencies of containerization are considered. The American merchant marine is the acknowledged leader in this field.
It must be pointed out, that one large new containership can carry as much cargo each year as several old break-bulk ships. As reported in the May 1970 issue of Nation’s Business:
. . . U. S. flag carriers have the world’s largest containership fleet, with 79 full containerships and another 103 with partial capacity for containers, wheeled vehicles or both.
Total U. S. exports and imports stood at $24.7 billion in 1961. In 1969, the total climbed to $42.2 billion. These figures do not include the military supplies which flow around the globe in vast quantities, practically all under the American flag at special military rates.
*See S. W. Emery, Jr., “The United States Effective Control Fleet,” U. S. Naval Institute PROCEEDINGS, NAVAL REVIEW ISSUE, May 1970, pp. 158-177; and B. P. McAllister, U. S. Naval Institute PROCEEDINGS, June 1970, pp. 110-111.
The total American merchant marine commercial cargo lift for calendar year 1966 was 26,212,000 tons. A year later, it was only 20,512,000 tons. When comparing these two figures, one might conclude that there was a shrinkage of approximately six million tons in U. S. carriage. To get a true figure, however, an examination of the military cargo-lift must be made. In Fiscal Year 1966, military shipping was reported at 20,876,000 tons. In FY 1967, this rose to 27,126,000 tons, a gain of roughly seven million tons. Taking these figures and considering the fact that the military cargo lift total tonnage for FY 1969 was 30,600,000 tons and commercial cargo for the same time was 20,664,000 tons, one arrives at the conclusion that American-flag vessels are now carrying four million more tons of combined military and commercial cargo than in 1966.
The FMC, under Section 19 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, is responsible for correcting foreign shipping discriminations. This was a function formerly handled by the Federal Maritime Board. Every effort is made to obtain elimination of discriminatory practices through governmental discussions and negotiations. However, when such efforts are unsuccessful, the Commission issues rules and regulations pursuant to Section 19 of the Act, designed to offset the effect of any discrimination or bring about their withdrawal.
The FMC assists the American merchant marine in other ways, such as: fair treatment of U. S.-flag steamship lines by the conferences. In almost all conferences, foreign steamship lines form a majority. Another is the relationship between freight forwarders and the steamship lines. In certain cases, freight forwarders have control over vast amounts of cargo. In other cases, steamship lines may exercise control over freight forwarders. It is in the interest of both, and also that of the public, that there be fair play between them.
In the area of relationships between the carriers and the terminals, as in other cases, the FMC desires to minimize regulations. However, again in the public interest, it is sometimes necessary for the Commission to act as a “referee.”
With the advent of containerization, the role of the Federal Maritime Commission has increased. It must continually seek co-operation and co-ordination between the shippers and the carriers. Similarly, of great importance, the shipper needs flexibility in his operation—the right to choose the inland and ocean carriers and the ports best suited to his needs. The FMC must be in a position to readily determine what services and rates are subject to their jurisdictions, so they can continue to exercise the controls that they are entrusted with. It must now, more than ever, see that the American merchant marine has a fair and equal chance in the competition of World shipping and related industries.
The Naval Aviation 3M Program—Success or Failure?
By Vice Admiral Bernard M. Strean, U. S. Navy, Chief of Naval Air Training
It has now been five years since the Navy Maintenance and Material Management (3M) System has been instituted. Has our maintenance capability improved? Are we getting the most from the manhours available to us? More important, is the system costing us more than we are saving from it?
The 3M system embraces two broad areas: a planned maintenance system and a maintenance data collection system.
The planned maintenance system controls work in our major aircraft repair centers. Contractor and maintenance management personnel use information provided under the 3M system to plan major maintenance—types of rework, methods, and an orderly sequence of repair.
The maintenance data collection system includes manhour accounting, maintenance data reporting, and aircraft and ground support equipment accounting. Inputs for the 3M statistical data come from submission of the following source documents: the equipment statistical data card for aircraft/ground support equipment, maintenance action forms, support action forms, and technical data compliance forms—all used for the maintenance data report and the manhour accounting card.
This information is fed into data processing from maintenance activities at the squadron, intermediate, and rework levels. From the central data processing activity, summary sheets go back to the individual maintenance activities as well as to command staffs.
Information from all commands is fed into the Navy’s central data bank at Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. From the maintenance support officer, a report is returned that compares the readiness—NORS (not operationally ready-supply) and NORM (not operationally ready-maintenance).
In the last five years, the Naval Air Training Command (NATraCom) aircraft readiness has improved approximately 15 per cent. For two out of the last three years, this command has received the Chief of Naval Operations Readiness for Safety trophy, designating through the safest of the major aviation commands. Last year, the accident rate at this command was an all-time low of 69 per cent. This added to the fact that some of the squadrons are still flying T-28s (the first training aircraft designed after World War II), points to good maintenance practices.
Soon after the 3M system started the NATraCom instituted a comprehensive training program. A management system is good only if its managers, down to the lowest level, know how to use it. More often than not, the work center supervisor had to be convinced. The resistance to change and to the filling out of forms is a human trait, but it had to be overcome in order to make the system work. In addition, like any other computer system, the information coming out is only as good as the information that goes in.
There are still some who have a negative attitude about the system, but the majority of people have accepted the program. This author feels that training was the key to getting their support. Once the unit supervisor learned how the information could help him plan his work, spot those who do not work, justify his manpower, and improve his repair methods, almost invariably, he supported the system. The same is true of higher levels of management.
The following are specific examples of benefits to the Naval Air Training Command derived from the 3M system, which are considered justification for 3M costs. These examples appear under many different categories and cover the fiscal year 1969, but continue to save money for the command.
In the area of consolidation of reports, manpower accounting cards and the manhour accounting two (MHA-2) format eliminated submission of a weekly training report by each work center supervisor, division chief, and maintenance control officer in the command. This report saved an average of 408 manhours per month in addition to providing accurate historical data. The approximate savings amounted to $1,075 per month.
The same was true of the Resources Management System Labor Exception Report. This report was designed for recording of daily exceptions for a 15-to 20-man department. Without the 3M system, the report would have required 400 manhours per month to maintain. Using the existing system, it required approximately four manhours to maintain on a once-a-month basis. The approximate savings were $1,040 per month.
Prior to the implementation of 3M reporting procedures, composite work sheets were used for compiling flight and readiness reporting data (zulu report). This procedure required approximately 189 manhours per month to maintain. Using the existing 3M reporting procedures, approximately ten manhours were required to compile the same information at a savings of approximately $470 per month. In addition, the 3M reports greatly reduced the error factor.
Reports which show repeat discrepancies in any area are a warning signal to the data analyst—they may identify deficiencies in people, methods, parts, and test equipment.
Prior to October 1968, NATraCom had a high frequency of ARC-27 malfunctions, resulting in excessive manhour repair time. The readback from the intermediate maintenance activity indicated that a problem other than the “black box” part of the system was causing the malfunction, since only a small percentage of the ARC-27s were inoperative. A thorough check of remaining systems showed the need for antenna modification. In October 1968, T-28 aircraft Service Change No. 106 was incorporated, and the reported discrepancies dropped from 43 to 18 in November. There was also a comparable drop in the manhour repair time.
One squadron commander found that a large amount of his aircraft awaiting maintenance (AWM) time occurred between the time the aircraft was secured to when maintenance men actually received the discrepancy. The solution was a communication system that allowed the trouble shooters to communicate directly with the pilot prior to engine shutdown. Maintenance men were directed to troubleshoot immediately.
The 3M system has saved money by evaluating cleaning compounds, pointing out areas where tires were being worn beyond the limits of allowed recapping, and suggesting local repair on items formerly handled at the rework facilities.
The system has been invaluable in adjusting manhours through periods of extremely short supply. Manhour accounting data has been used to redistribute personnel within squadrons to man calendar inspection work centers at an acceptable level. The Naval Air Advanced Training Command used this data to adjust the work week of personnel to allow sufficient personnel on board to maintain the aircraft during weekend flying. The data enables maintenance officers to shift personnel from one work center to another as the workload dictates. In one extreme case, a work center supervisor was replaced after an analysis of 3M data showed him to be ineffective and personal counseling failed to improve his effectiveness.
Savings under the 3M system are not found in only one particular area of the NATraCom, or in a particular type of operation. The following is an example of one squadron’s benefits from the system, which could apply to any unit in the command:
Awaiting Maintenance. A study of AWM, derived from the use of 3M data, indicated a problem existed in manpower distribution and communication areas. The AWM monthly average for fiscal year 1966 was 2,984 hours. This had decreased by 29 per cent through fiscal year 1969 as a result of redistribution of resources.
Non-Productive Labor. The average monthly non-productive labor accounted for 9,342 hours in 1966. This has been reduced by 55 per cent using 3M data.
Maintenance Operating Factor (MOF). Prior to implementation of the 3M system, the OpNav MOF for a T-28 squadron of 150 aircraft was 4.57. Significant use of 3M data was used in recommending reduction of this factor to 4.32. Management under the system made it possible for this command to improve the factor to the current recommendation of 4.10.
NORS. The number of NORS items has been reduced substantially using data from the 3M system. From July 1968 to July 1969, the NORS rate decreased from 14.3 per cent and 656 items to 6.8 per cent and 305 items. In addition the supply department publishes a listing of anticipated problem items. This enables activities to avert potential deficiencies in the procurement of supplies.
These are important benefits gained from using the 3M system. But one of the most beneficial to NATraCom has been the ability to reduce the aircraft inventory at two locations. Through careful analysis and rescheduling, it was found that training commitments at the Naval Air Station, Glynco, could be accomplished by reducing C-121s from three to two, and TS-2As from 17 to 13. The Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Pensacola, reduced their C-45s from six to three. This is a total reduction of eight aircraft with a substantial savings in money and manpower, and the reassignment of the aircraft to where they were needed.
Management systems, however, like human beings, are not perfect. There is an inherent danger in any data collection system that we must be aware of and prevent. This is the tendency of management to require ever-increasing amounts and kinds of data. The burden placed on the worker then becomes so great, that he spends too much time filling out forms and not enough time repairing aircraft. Since he reports the use of his time in the manhour data collection system, this author believes it can be avoided in the 3M system.
It is most important not to accept a system as being good and never change it. However, in changing, it must be remembered what a particular system was designed for, and ensure that it does not veer away from its objective.
Has the maintenance capability improved? The aircraft readiness and safety figures are at an all-time high.
Are we getting the most from the manhours available? The student pilot rate is increasing consistently with a commensurate decrease permanent command personnel.
Is the 3M system costing more money than it saves? The answer is no at the Naval Air Training Command.
The system has been found to be an important tool in paring the fat through all levels of maintenance. The information is all there—manpower, material. Success of the 3M system depends on the supervisor’s ability to use it for good management.
Notebook
Further Soviet Buildup Concerns NATO Admiral
(Michael McGuire in the Chicago Tribune, 6 June 1970)
A threatening Soviet military buildup in North Africa could upset the balance of power between the Russians and Western Europe, said Admiral Horacio Rivero, U. S. Navy, commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s southern forces.
“If in the near future,” Rivero said in an interview with the Italian magazine L'Europeo, “a large number of Soviet planes and pilots are installed on the coast of Africa, the situation could become worrying because the Russians would then be able to at last contend for domination in the area and overturn the balance of power.”
The military picture in the Mediterranean at present would allow the American Sixth Fleet and the navies of its allies to wipe out the Russian surface fleet of between 50 to 60 ships within six hours if a war broke out between the West and the Soviet Union, Admiral Rivero said.
In the event of a further Soviet buildup in Egypt and elsewhere in North Africa, Rivero said, “the sort of hypothetical battle of six hours would be finished or at least seriously compromised.”
If a war occurred now, Rivero said, a blockade could be thrown up at Gibraltar and at the Turkish straits within an hour. This would trap Soviet ships in the Mediterranean.
Aircraft carriers provide American superiority over Russia’s Mediterranean Fleet. Without air superiority, the Soviet fleet in the Mediterranean is “. . . a suicide fleet destined to end up at the bottom of the sea,” he said.
Using missile-launching ships—of which the Soviets have but two or three in the Mediterranean—the allied fleet would be spared the problem of sinking enemy ships one by one. Destroying the Soviet submarine fleet would be more difficult, Rivero said, since the Mediterranean provides ideal shelter for submerged warships. Rivero praised the growing capacity of the Soviet Navy in the world, and said the recent Russian exercises indicate the Soviets had greatly improved their potential throughout the world’s oceans in the event of war.
Communist Chinese Send Warships to Indian Ocean
(Paul Scott in the San Diego Union, 29 May 1970)
Chinese Communist warships are now operating in the Indian Ocean.
American intelligence officials say several small craft, including at least one destroyer and a submarine, have been observed by the Indian Navy. All of Peking’s warships were in international waters.
For several weeks, the British have been circulating a report stating that Peking is determined to show the flag in the waters of Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean.
Peking’s objective is believed to be both political and military. They want to convince local Communist groups and the large masses of Chinese living in Southeast Asia that these waters are as much their realm as that of the U. S. and Russian fleets.
The presence of Peking’s token naval force in the Indian Ocean also gives Chinese Communist officials additional bargaining power in their negotiations with Russia over what military action should be taken to destroy American forces and influence in Southeast Asia.
U. S. To Patrol Arabian Sea
(Philadelphia Inquirer, 18 June 1970)
Secretary of Defense Melvin R. Laird said the U. S. Pacific Fleet will act to offset the Soviet Navy in the Arabian Sea once the American vessels are relieved of duty in Indochina.
The Arabian Sea is south of the Arabian Peninsula and west of India.
Laird made his comments to newsmen while on a visit to the Sixth Fleet carrier USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVA-42) off the coast of Italy.
Laird made his reference to offsetting what he called Soviet naval power between the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. He said steps would be taken by the U. S. Pacific Fleet to match this power after the Fleet was freed from Vietnam duty.
The Soviet Union has been moving naval units into the Indian Ocean as well as into the Mediterranean.
Egypt And Libya To Have Joint Naval Academy
(Aviation Week, 22 June 1970)
Egypt and Libya will establish a joint naval academy at Port Susah, about 150 miles west of Benghazi in Libya. The two nations already are in the process of organizing a joint air training base at the former Wheelus air base near Tripoli. The United States vacated the base on 11 June.
A Soviet surveying team is on the island of Socotra, a former British air base at the mouth of the Gulf of Aden. The island may base radars to control Soviet aircraft in the Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea areas.
Japanese Maritime Force Interested in S-3A Aircraft
(Flying Review International, May 1970)
The Maritime Staff Office of the Japanese Defence Agency is reported to be showing serious interest in the Lockheed S-3A ASW aircraft as a possible successor to the Grumman S-2A Tracker in their Maritime squadrons from 1975-76.
Indian Navy Seeks Replacement For Seahawk Fighter-Bomber
(Flying Review International, June 1970)
The Indian government must shortly take a decision on the future employment of the Indian Navy’s sole carrier, INS Vikrant. The replacement of the Indian Navy’s aging Seahawk fighter-bombers is receiving urgent consideration, but requests to the U. S. government for the supply of 20-30 McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawks have not so far received a favorable response.
The Skyhawk is favored by the Indian Navy as a replacement for the Seahawk, but if this type is not forthcoming the Indian Navy will undoubtedly consider limited procurement of the Harrier or the navalized Jaguar, or, alternatively, the conversion of the Vikrant as an ASW helicopter carrier. Procurement of a second aircraft carrier by the Indian Navy has been ruled out in favor of the development of additional naval air bases at Vishakhapatnam, on the east coast, on the Andaman and Nicobar islands in the Bay of Bengal, and on the Laccadive and Minicoy islands in the Arabian Sea.
Brazilian Navy to Get Four U. S.-Built SH-3D Helicopters
(Vertical World, January/February 1970)
Four Sikorsky SH-3D helicopters are scheduled for delivery to Rio de Janeiro, to be used by the Brazilian Navy for carrier- and shore-based ASW warfare operations.
Equipped with sonar gear and sophisticated navigation equipment, the SH3Ds will replace single-piston SH34Js, which will be transferred to the Brazilian Marines. The SH3Ds will be the first twin-turbine helicopters delivered to a South American nation.
German Navy May Get Phantoms
(Flying Review International, May 1970)
The Federal German Marineflieger is understood to have proposed the transfer of its F-104G Starfighters (currently operated by MFG 1 and 2) to the Luftwaffe and their replacement in Navy service by the P-4 Phantom. The Marineflieger would also relinquish the 19 new-production F-104-Gs scheduled to be delivered next year.
Reports from Bonn suggest that there is a strong likelihood that orders will be placed for a further 210 Phantoms for the re-equipment of the Marineflieger and to replace the F-104Gs in two additional Luftwaffe wings during 1972-73.
U. S. Agrees To Sell Jets To Four Latin American Countries
(A. D. Horne in The Washington Post, 15 May 1970)
The United States has agreed to sell 16 reconditioned A-4B Skyhawk jets to Argentina, and has decided in principle to sell at least 50 Skyhawks and F-5 Freedom Fighters to Brazil, Chile, and Colombia.
First word of the negotiations came from a longtime opponent of U. S. military sales in developing nations, Representative Henry S. Reuss.
Other sources said at least 50 planes were involved in the negotiations. Brazil was described as seeking 20 or more Skyhawks to supplement its pre-Korean War T-33 trainers; Colombia, 20 or more Skyhawks or F-5s to replace its own T-33s; and Chile, 10 or 12 F-5s.
Supreme Court May Lessen Use Of Flag Of Convenience Ships
(Louis M. Kohlmeier in The Wall Street Journal, 9 June 1970)
The Supreme Court, in deciding an obscure lawsuit brought by a Greek merchant seaman, may have dimmed a bit the attractiveness of foreign “flags of convenience” to U. S.-based shipowners.
The Court ruled that a foreign seaman injured on board a foreign-flag ship in a U. S. port can go into a Federal district court and sue the shipowner under American law if the owner lives in this country—despite any provisions for recovery under foreign law.
The High Court’s five-to-three decision in the Greek seaman’s case clearly will make it easier for foreign seamen who are injured on board foreign-flag ships owned by American operators to collect damages in Federal courts. U. S. law provides more generous treatment than those of most foreign countries where American owners often register their ships under so-called flags of convenience.
Justice Douglas, writing the majority opinion, declared that the foreign “facade” of such operations does not shield American shipowners from liability.
Justice Harlan, in a dissenting opinion, said personal-injury liability is one factor that “. . . contributes to the higher cost of operating . . .” a ship under the U. S. flag, but objected that the majority was intruding American law into an area where foreign law should be controlling.
The U. S. law at issue was the Jones Act, passed to protect American seaman injured on board American-flag ships. But the language of the act does not limit its use to those seamen. The law provides that “any seaman” injured “in the course of his employment” may sue the shipowner in Federal court for damages.
Foreign seamen injured on board foreign-flag ships in U. S. ports have attempted before to collect under the Jones Act. The Supreme Court made a leading decision in 1953 on the matter. It held that, in general, the seamen could not collect unless they could show that in the facts of a particular case foreign interests were outweighed by United States interests.
Chief Justice Burger and Justice Stewart joined in the dissenting opinion written by Justice Harlan. He asserted that the majority opinion “. . . is supported neither by precedent, nor realistic policy.” The decision, Justice Harlan suggested, is a “. . . wedge for displacing the law of the flag . . .” as it applies to “. . . the phenomenon of ‘convenient’ foreign registry.”
American shipowners’ enthusiasm for foreign registry presumably would diminish further if the Senate approves the maritime bill voted by the House in May. At present, foreign-flag operators are not eligible for U. S. ship-construction subsidies. But in an attempt to bring back into the U. S. shipbuilding program, those operators who have registered vessels abroad to lower their expenses, the new bill would allow them to get U. S. construction subsidies if they agreed not to expand their foreign-flag fleets. Further, such operators would have to divest themselves of remaining foreign-flag ships within ten years.
PDL Notes
Military Sea Transportation Service has changed its name to Military Sealift Command. The change was effective on 1 August 1970. Vice Admiral Arthur R. Gralla, U. S. Navy, is commander of this Command, which has the responsibility for providing sea transportation support for all elements of the Department of Defense.
__________
The Pacific Submarine Display, located at the U. S. Naval Submarine Base, Pearl Harbor has been completed and is now open to the public. It is divided into three sections representing the past, present, and the future. It is filled with documents, motion pictures, models, and equipment to recreate the past, portray the present, and project the future of submarines in the national defense posture. Although the museum is complete, it is the type of project which will continue to improve with age and exposure. Donations from veteran submariners will continue to add significantly to the preservation of the submarine heritage. For more information write: Pacific Submarine Display, Fleet Post Office, San Francisco, California 96610.
__________
For a book in progress on the service of the USS Carondelet of the Civil War Mississippi Squadron, a Naval Institute member seeks information on the fate of that vessel after she was sold at Mound City, Illinois, in November 1865. In addition, information on the careers of her commanding officers, including Acting Volunteer Lieutenants John Rogers, Edward E. Brennand, James C. Gipson, George P. Lord, and Lieutenant Commander John G. Mitchell, U. S. Navy, would also be useful, especially letters or diaries from these men or members of the ship’s crew. Information concerning any of the above should be forwarded to Mr. Myron J. Smith, Jr., Box 95, Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727.