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.
United States........................................................................................ 98
Navy Department Statement on Unification—Naval Research Task for Peacetime—Champlain Breaks Atlantic Record—Reserve Officers in World War II—Buzz Bomb for LST’s—Rubber Invasion Decoys— Testing Ground in the Desert—Principles of Radar Countermeasures
Great Britain........................................................................................ 104
Strength of the Navy—Naval War Losses—British Deep Sea Tramps
—H.M.S. Tiger Launched—The Battle in the Channel—Success of Dummy Targets—Various Notes
Battleship Tonnage Falsified—U-Boats Built Abroad—Heavy Losses in “Pocket” Submarines—German Long-Range Rocket Development
Success of Diver Tactics
Cargo Submarines
Iceland—Netherlands—Norway
Navy Has Lightest Jet Aircraft Engines—The Twin Mustang— British Jet Plane Makes First Carrier Landing—Flying at Speed of Sound—British Naval Aircraft
Merchant Marine......................................................................................................................... 119
New Cargo Vessel Plans Revealed—Two New Lines Planned for South American Run—New British Whaler
Miscellaneous............................................................................................................................... 121
Landing Craft in River Crossings—Chemical Propellant Found for Bomb—Information on Loran Revealed—New Device Keeps Ships in Dry Storage
UNITED STATES
Navy Department Statement on Unification
Washington Post, November 29.—Text of the Navy Department’s statement pertaining to unification of the armed forces follows:
A STATEMENT OF THE NAVY POSITION ON NATIONAL SECURITY
We were victorious in this war thanks to this democracy’s great outpouring of national power. Nonetheless, the Navy Department has recognized the following deficiencies in the national security organization as of the end of the war:
(1) Our foreign policy and military policy had not been closely integrated, although progress was being made through the State- War-Navy Coordinating Committee.
(2) Our strategic planning and decisions were excellent, although delays were at times caused in the Joint Chiefs of Staff by logistic and other complications, especially where Allied co-operation was involved.
(3) Although unified command in the field was usually established, the Pacific command was split, particularly inside the Army, by separation of the Strategic Air Forces not only from the other Army Air Forces but also from the theater commands.
(4) There were gaps in the planning of material requirements, particularly inside the military departments.
(5) There were duplications in procurement both between the Ground Forces and the Air Forces inside the War Department as well as inside the Navy Department and between the Army and the Navy. Many duplications have, however, been eliminated and progress is still being made.
(6) No permanent organization had been evolved to plan for the mobilization of our material resources, productive capacity and technical skills in the event of war.
(7) The co-ordination of the military and other war budgets in the Bureau of the Budget was not as thorough and detailed as it might have been.
For the future and particularly in view of discoveries in the field of atomic energy, the Navy believes that an over-all, rather than a piecemeal, national security plan should be evolved to remedy not only past deficiencies, but also to provide for the foreseeable future, with particular emphasis on:
(a) The integration of all elements of national security;
(b) A central research and development agency;and
(c) A central intelligence service.
Consequently, the Navy Department advocates that a really broad foundation for national security be established, as follows:
(1) A permanent National Security Council with a permanent secretariat should be established as an integral part of our Government. It should consist of the President as chairman, the Secretaries of State and of the military departments, and the chairman of the National Resources Board. The Security Council will co-ordinate all foreign and military policies and in time of war will advise the President as Commander in Chief. This council will also review and determine the security program and budget for submission to the Congress.
(2) There should be provided a permanent Joint Chiefs of Staff to consist of the Chief of Staff to the President, the Chief of Staff of the Army, the Commanding General of the Army Air Forces, and two officers of the Navy, one to be a naval aviator. Such Joint Chiefs of Staff will establish unified commands in peace and war and will originate the strategic military program. The subordinate agencies of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should be strengthened and established on a permanent full-time basis.
(3) The National Security Council should be assisted by (a) central research agency> and (b) a central intelligence agency, both to serve all departments of the Government.
(4) A permanent National Resources Board should be established to make policy decisions with respect to the mobilization of material resources, productive capacity and man power. A permanent Military Munitions Board (a joint agency), reporting to the National Resources Board, will be responsible for the elimination of duplications in procurement and supply.
(5) The Army Air Forces, with particular reference to their strategic functions, should be autonomous. Whether that can be accomplished only by splitting the War Depart-
Provides for the:
(®) Unified strategical direction of the services, both in Washington and in the field;
(&) Effective co-ordination of procurement; and,
(c) For integration of budgets for national security.
]Tlen'- and establishing a separate department, ls a matter for Congress to decide. A single military department should not be forced upon the country to establish autonomy for i^he Army Air Forces. »
(6) The Navy must be continued as an integrated service not only with its own air orces (including such shore-based elements as are required for design, training, reconnaissance at sea and anti-submarine warfare) uut also with its Marine Corps and related uuiphibious components. This requires that the Navy Department continue to be represented in the Cabinet by a civilian Secretary with direct access to the President.
1 his program deals with the basic elements °1 national security. It also preserves the integrity of each of the Armed Services and
Naval Research Task for Peacetime
New York Ilerald Tribune, December 9.— Research on efficient ship and plane designs must be “energetically attacked in the com- mg years of peace,” Fleet Admiral Ernest J. ^mg» Commander in Chief of the Fleet and retiring Chief of Naval Operations, warned tonight in his final report to James Forrestal, ecretary of the Navy. Asserting sufficient Progress in the technical development and ^se of improved weapons had been made curing the war to emphasize the necessity (Ur continued progress, Admiral King said emergency construction” resulted in crash es>gns and production that required more Personnel weight, and space than more seasoned designs. He said:
Die rapid expansion and development of new Weapons and devices during the war was often the cost of factors of major importance, such Us the reserve buoyancy and stability of the ships 111 which they were installed. These war-time de- Slgns, while they have well served their purpose against the enemy, have nevertheless created Problems of refinement and improvement in the lunate design of equipment which must be so resolved that a minimum of personnel, weight and space will be required to attain the desired effect. These problems must be energetically attacked in the coming years of peace. Only by continuing vigorous research and development can this country hope to be protected from any potential enemies and maintain the position which it now enjoys in possessing the greatest effective naval fighting force in history.
Crediting Axis scientists with “originality of ideas and individual resourcefulness . . . as competent as our own,” Admiral King said American scientists out-distanced the enemy in superior administration of the over-all effort. In this respect, he particularly praised civilians who co-operated with naval strategists through the Office of Scientific Research and Development and the National Defense Research Committee.
“As a result (of their research), the United States Navy was able to maintain the technical advantage over the navies of our enemies which contributed so materially to the outcome of World War II,” he said.
At the outbreak of war, Admiral King said, American anti-aircraft batteries were inadequate. By the time Japan surrendered, air defenses had been “revolutionized,” with the proximity-influence fuse, radar-fed gun directors, and new large-caliber guns and mounts. Other research developments cited included rockets and rocket-launchers for use against submarines, for the support of amphibious landings, and for aircraft, allowing heavy fire power to be concentrated in light craft; greatly increased fighter-plane speed (by the end of the war, he said, the Navy had an experimental model ready for combat use with a speed in excess of 550 miles an hour); radar developments, and even atomic bomb research. He said:
In the early days of research leading toward the application of atomic energy for military purposes, the Naval Research Laboratory was the only government facility engaged in this type of work. At the laboratory there was developed a liquid thermal-diffusion process for separation of uranium isotopes. Enriched chemicals, as well as basic designs and operating practices, were later supplied to the Army and used in one of the Oak Ridge plants manufacturing the atomic bomb.
Certain developments whose progress was most promising were not completed in time for extensive combat use. These are primarily
guided missiles and pilotless aircraft, utilizing remote control by electronic apparatus. These new developments will play a major role in warfare of the future, carrying new explosives over greatly increased ranges, the Admiral predicted.
“The complexity of modern warfare in both methods and means demands exacting analysis of the measures and countermeasures introduced at every stage by ourselves and the enemy. Scientific research cannot only speed the invention and production of weapons, but also assist in insuring their correct use,” he said.
“Champlain” Breaks Atlantic Record
New York Herald Tribune, November 27.
1—The aircraft carrier Lake Champlain arrived here today establishing a world’s record of 32.048 knots for crossing the Atlantic, the 5th Naval District public information office announced today. Bringing home 5,052 American troops from the European theater, the Lake Champlain completed the crossing from Gibraltar to Norfolk—3,360 nautical miles— in 4 days, 8 hours and 52 minutes, the Navy reported. The previous record for the westward crossing, held by the British liner Queen Mary, was an average of 30.99 knots from Bishop Rock off Southampton to Ambrose Light off New York, a distance of 3,192 nautical miles. This record was established in August, 1938. Later, the Queen Mary returned from Ambrose Light to Bishop Rock at an average speed of 31.67 knots. The Navy said the Lake Champlain’s feat was more remarkable in view of the fact that she established the record on a crossing that paralleled the 36th latitude rather than the Great Circle course.
Reserve Officers in World War II
New York Tunes, December 2.—The Navy Department, which is seeking to persuade reserve officers to accept permanent commissions, told today of the impressive record of the more than 260,000 reservists who served in the Navy, many of them in executive positions. Forty-one Reserve officers were in command of destroyers when Japan surrendered, and eleven more were skippers of combat submarines. Reservists also were top men on 302 destroyer escorts, and twenty-two of them were in charge of training submarines. On the “big stuff” that covered the landings on beaches all over the world, the percentage of reserve officers in relation to regular officers who were heads of gunnery, engineering, navigation, and damage control departments, was as follows:
Battleships, 41 per cent;
Heavy cruisers, 44 per cent;
Light cruisers, 50 per cent;
Heavy aircraft carriers, 48 per cent;
Light aircraft carriers, 70 per cent, and
Escort carriers, 91 per cent.
The Navy said that soon after the Pearl Harbor disaster it had only 24,000 reserve officers. Then with the mobilization came men from farms, colleges, and white-collar jobs, many of them the products of the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps, who qualified for officer rolls in every branch of the Navy. On V-J Day the reserve officers exceeded 260,000, or about 87 per cent of all officers in the Navy. On the Missouri two of the five department heads are reserve officers, and on the carrier Enterprise the ratio is three to five. The majority of all types of auxiliary ships are commanded by reservists, including 89 per cent of the oilers. The percentage for the largest types of auxiliary vessels is 75 per cent.
Reserve officers also attained ranking commands in 43 divisions of destroyer escorts, 27 motor torpedo boat squadrons and 37 flotillas and 113 groups of amphibious craft before the war ended. There were 701 of them in command of submarine chasers and patrol craft. As an example of a reserve officer in command of a combat submarine, the Navy mentioned Commander Louis C. Farley, Jr., of Utica, N. Y., whose submarine is the Billfish. A graduate of Harvard University and of its NROTC unit, he worked for a bank. He requested submarine duty in 1941, and was cited for aiding in sinking
10,0 tons of enemy shipping as assistant approach officer of the Snailfish. He got command of the Billfish on February 14, 1945.
Lieutenant Commander Ernest F. Wil* comb of Somerville, Mass., was described as a typical civilian who received command of a destroyer, the Maury. He served a three-year
hitch in the Coast Guard, then as a radio °Perator in the Merchant Marine before he went to Tri-State College, Angola, Indiana, i°r an education. He joined the Navy in September, 1939.
Buzz Bomb for LST’s
Chicago Daily Tribune, November 23.— Hevelopment of a jet-propelled buzz bomb 'which could be used aboard landing craft and °f a twin-fuselage military lighter with a range of 2,500 miles was announced today by two aircraft firms. Northrop Aircraft described its buzz bomb as a single jet creation with a 30-foot wingspread, much like a small hghter in appearance, and revealed it has been making such bombs for the Army since the summer of 1944. Designated the JB-1A, *t succeeds a twin-jet machine which Northrop built first for the Army, patterned after *ts flying wing. The company’s announcement said it had no information as to how or where the Army used the bomb. It added:
Improvements to the launching platform cut the length of the tracks to 50 feet, capable of installation on an LST.The backbone of each launching sled is a 14-foot aluminum tube with the bomb resting on cradles within the tube. It is catapulted into the air at 220 miles an hour with the aid of four rockets.
What speed it reaches after the jet engine takes over was not disclosed nor was the number of bombs manufactured, although the company said delivery of 1,000 sleds had been completed. The craft’s bomb load is
7,0 pounds, including explosive charges of 3,700 pounds. In contrast to the earlier twin- jet craft, which carried its bombs on either side of the engine, the JB-1 A’s explosives are in magnesium cast housings within the wing on either side of the fuselage.
Rubber Invasion Decoys
New York Herald, Tribune, December 6.— One of the closest guarded secrets of the war —the part rubber companies played in the United States’ “illusionary warfare”—was unveiled by the War Department today. Now can be told the story of a giant deception that caused the Germans, just before
D-Day, to see fleets of invasion craft that didn’t exist, loaded with weapons that never were forged, and pointed for attacks that never were planned. PT boats complete with armament, and landing craft and barges carrying tanks, field artillery and other combat equipment, appeared and disappeared overnight and in great numbers along the English Channel coast in the hectic days preceding June 6, 1944, much to the confusion of German observers and the high command.
The huge ruse was made possible by production, with great speed and under highest priorities, of pneumatic, balloon-fabric models of the craft and equipment required for this vast decoy operation. Built to size, and with a close resemblance to the real thing that made them, when inflated, utterly deceiving to German reconnaissance pilots, these “ships” and their cargoes were allowed to be seen in the waters of British ports from which Allied supreme headquarters had no intention of launching an attack. Having served their confusing purpose in one locality, they were deflated and moved by truck to another false base, again to distract enemy attention and further muddle his defense preparations. The companies involved quickly adapted themselves to the project when called upon by the Army and Navy to fashion psychological weapons of war out of the same fabrics and skills that in peacetime had produced gargantuan figures for Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade in New York and for other parades.
Landing craft of various kinds, PT boats and barges, tanks, tank destroyers, field and heavy artillery, combat vehicles and other equipment with which to load them were designed and patterned on drawing boards. As fast as the dummies were completed they were turned over to the Army and Navy for shipment to Europe, deflated and folded and and with a minimum demand upon precious cargo space. The last shipment, with D-Day knocking on the door, was rushed to England by plane.
Inflated Bofors guns, airplanes, halftracks, and tanks also were designed by Army camouflage experts to create the illusion, from the air, of actual mobile armament. Thus it was possible for tacticians to place an “entire army” in the field at some point which would serve to confuse enemy observers, while the actual armed unit moved under cover of darkness or camouflage to some point isolated from the illusionary army of balloon-like equipment. Companies which participated in the decoy program included Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, General Tire and Rubber Company, United States Rubber Company, and Dunlop Rubber Company.
Testing Ground in the Desert
New York Ilcrald Tribune, December 2, by Leo Cullinane.—Hidden in the vast distances of the Mohave Desert about 200 miles due north of Los Angeles, the nation’s most important testing grounds for the terrible types of weapons that will decide future wars is being rounded into final shape.
Into the wasteland and sagebrush of the junction of Inyo and Kern Counties in California has been dumped the stupendous sum of $50,000,000 for a permanent ordnance test station which will be used by the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. Nicknamed “Inyo- kern,” it covers an area of 700 square miles, far larger than the State of Rhode Island. This huge area is needed because most of the weapons tested are rockets, guided missiles, and pilotless planes. Some atomic-energy experiments also will be conducted at Inyo- kern, officials said, and when that time comes it may be necessary to expand the testing grounds.
The difficulties which beset the Navy Department in locating a suitable and safe area, getting construction workers and laboratory technicians to come to the desert is a story in itself. No pioneer of the Old West ever saw the miracle of an entire city complete with movies, airfields, and churches springing up under the impetus of war literally in the middle of nowhere, such as has happened at Inyokern. Not even roads were in existence when the site was selected early last year. But engineers went to work and in a few months enough preliminary work had been done to enable ordnance men to carry on vitally needed experiments with, as yet, untried weapons of war.
The saying “haste makes waste” certainly was exemplified at NOTS (Naval ordnance test station). For instance, it was learned, upwards of $3,000,000 more than good engineering practice would dictate was spent on a central heating plant at Inyokern lor the housing center. With small buildings widely separated the Navy insisted on central heating by two large steam plants for the Rousing center, an uneconomical system in itself, but in addition, no provisions were ioade to interconnect the two plants for emergency service in the event of failure or shut-down of either plant.
Several highly effective guided missiles which were used in the late days of the war against the Japanese were developed and tested at Inyokern.
J'he advantages and disadvantages of wiany air-borne weapons were determined there while construction of the laboratories Proceeded at a frantic pace. The project is n°w about 85 per cent complete. Since the war’s end there has been some let-up in the Pace, but original plans for a permanent desert base are continuing.
More than three hundred of the nation’s t°P scientists will be stationed there, more 0r less permanently, working out problems connected with all types of space ships, rocket projectiles, and guided missiles of death. When missiles with atomic warheads are tried out at the base it may be necessary lo take over more desert space.
Already several accidents have occurred, Jut officials say that is to be expected with dangerous types of weapons tried out. When tests are being made sirens sound Ihroughout the area and every one is supposed to take cover in strong shelters and Jarriers. However, it is not always easy to control tests made from fast-flying planes *-Jnit hurl rockets in various directions faster lan the eye can follow.
Commanding officer of the base is Captain Sykes, U.S.N., who said that the sta- li°n will carry on research on such a scale latj in case of another war, the United tates will be far ahead, technologically, of any future enemy.
Principles of Radar Countermeasures
Prom a Joint Release by OSRD, War, and
,vy Departments.—Radar works on the Principle of echoes. Just as a man, by shoutIng loudly, can hear the echo of his voice rclurning from a cliff, so a radar, figuratively sPcaking, first sends out a loud electrical “sound” and then listens for the faint echo to return. Instead of a sound, of course, a radar transmits a radio signal. In both cases, the original disturbance must be loud if the weak returning echo is to be heard at all. Radar stations therefore send out radio impulses of tremendous strength; all that is needed to detect or hear these signals is a special radio receiver which will tune to the extremely short wavelengths used by the radar.
This represents the first weakness of radio location; because it is constantly sending out strong radio signals, a radar set can be heard at a great distance—in fact, at a much greater distance than the farthest range at which it can detect an object. Thus the radar itself can be easily detected. A radar with a 70-mile range could easily be “heard” well over 100 miles away. An operating radar, in effect, continuously advertises its presence. It is about as quiet, electrically speaking, as an artillery barrage is acoustically.
Second, a radar set betrays not only its existence, but also its exact location by the signal it sends out. It is always possible, by means of a radio direction finder, to determine the direction from which radio signals are coming, just as it is possible to tell the direction from which sound waves are coming by pointing an ear trumpet in different directions until the received sound is loudest. If the direction to a radio station can be measured at widely separated points, and the lines of bearing drawn in on a map, the position of the radio station will be at the intersection of these lines. Once a radar signal has been tuned in on a radio receiver, it is possible by means of an attachment to the receiver to measure the bearing of the radar and thus to determine its location.
A third weakness of radar sets is the fact that the echo returned from most targets is so weak in strength. The sound returned from the cliff is many times weaker than the man’s original shout. A fairly weak noise, therefore, would suffice to cover up the echo. A second man, standing on the cliff and shouting continuously, would prevent the first man from hearing the echo of his_own voice.
Radars can be blinded in the same way. It is only necessary to provide the target with a device which sends out a radio signal capable of covering up the signals reflected back to the radar by the target. This process is known as electronic jamming. Because each radar set operates on a particular frequency channel, it is necessary that the jammer—which is fundamentally a small radio transmitter—be tuned to that same channel.
A practical radar jammer consists of a tunable radio transmitter provided with a type of modulation which is especially suited to drowning out radar echoes. Any home radio owner who uses an electric razor has a good idea of what such interference means. It has been found that the most effective radar jamming signal is simply a hissing noise similar to the background noise heard in sensitive radio receivers when no program is being received. Such a signal is said to have a “random noise modulation.”
When picked up on a radio receiver equipped with a loudspeaker, a noise jamming signal sounds like a hiss. A radar, however, presents the information it received not aurally but visually. Signals appear as patterns on the face of a cathode-ray tube called a “scope.” As seen on this tube the “noise” looks like many fine blades of grass moving about in a random fashion. Echoes from airplanes, which are usually displayed as vertical spikes on the radar scope, simply disappear and become lost in the “grass.”
A further weakness of radar sets is the circumstance that they cannot distinguish the nature of small targets. One small object, capable of returning an echo, looks to a radar just about the same as another. To a radar, an airplane or a ship is a small object. It has been found that a number of thin metallic strips, cut to a length proportional to the wave length used by a radar, can return a remarkably strong echo to that equipment. In fact, several thousands of these thin metallic strips, packaged in a small bundle weighing less than 2 ounces, will give a radar echo signal equivalent to one bomber, when the strips are ejected from a plane and allowed to fall freely through the air.
The phenomena is one of resonance. The metallic strips, designated by the code name “Window,” are resonant at the frequency of the radio waves sent out by the radar; in this way a relatively small number of strips can return an echo equal to that from a large metal object such as an airplane.
If a number of Window packets are dropped out of a plane in succession, a trail is produced in which a radar can no longer distinguish a real target. The echo from an aircraft is simply lost among the echoes from the Window. It is much as if the planes were being concealed by a smoke screen of metallic foil.
In brief review, the weaknesses of radar which can be exploited arc these: First, a radar is really a powerful radio transmitting station which can be heard at a considerable distance. Second, like any radio station, its direction and location in relation to the listener can be determined by means of radio receivers equipped with direction finders. Third, since the radio echo that they receive from most targets is very weak, relatively little power is required to cover up that echo by sending out a jamming signal from the target. Fourth, radars have difficulty in distinguishing between actual targets and free falling strips of foil cut to the proper length.
, To knock out the enemy’s radar, all four of these weaknesses can be exploited. It is also necessary, insofar as is possible, to prevent him from doing the same to you. One reason the Allies achieved their victory as quickly as they did was that they were always one step ahead of the enemy in the jamming war.
GREAT BRITAIN Strength of the Navy
London Times, November 8.—The First Lord of the Admiralty, in a written reply to a question by Commander Pursey, R.N., M.P., yesterday, gave for the first time since the outbreak of war in 1939 some figures relating to the total numbers of men- of-war composing the Navy.
The answer was given in outline only, no ships being distinguished by name, and certain categories of ships are now mentioned of which no official definition has hitherto been made public—for instance, the distinction between “Fleet” and “Escort” destroyers, and the inclusion of “Fighter Direction Ships,” of which there arc only two in existence, and “Cutters,” of which seven were transferred from the United States (Coast Guard, presumably) in 1941.
The principal figures given, omitting those categories containing few than 4 ships, are— IS battleships (5 in unmaintained reserve), 13 aircraft carriers (2 in reserve), 40 escort carriers (2), 47 cruisers (2), 225 destroyers (18), 7 cutters, and 128 submarines
Of these, 1 battleship, 3 cruisers, 28 destroyers, and 15 submarines are given as “on loan to other Navies”—whether Dominion °r allied navies is not distinguished. No figures are given for frigates, sloops, corvettes, rninesweepers, or smaller warships. The information thus grudgingly revealed is tantalizingly vague and incomplete, and, since so ]r>uch of importance has now been given, it is not easy to understand the reticence which still conceals much of the information, less essential but still of great interest, which was usked for.
Naval War Losses
Manchester Guardian, October 23.—Mr. A- V. Alexander yesterday announced that since 1939 the Royal Navy had lost over 730 ships and over 50,000 officers and men killed °r missing. He made this disclosure at the Navy League Trafalgar Day luncheon in London yesterday. “Never in the history of the Royal Navy,” said Mr. Alexander, have we had finer personnel than during fhis war. If Nelson could come back and look at the service rendered by Cunningham, lovey, Fraser, and all the others he would glad to welcome them into the higher strata of his famous ‘Band of Brothers’.” As to the importance of research as proved hy the brilliant work of the British scientists who overtook every new device conceived ljy the enemy Mr. Alexander said he would support any expenditure necessary in that ^Lection. He warned his audience that the Maintenance of a powerful Navy would cost a Jot of money. Whatever new development 1_oight arise out of the atom bomb, he consumed, we should still insist on a powerful Navy.
British Deep Sea Tramps
Manchester Guardian, November 2.—At °ue period during the war Britain was losing curgo ships at the rate of nearly one a day, ^’r Philip Haldin told a meeting in London yesterday of the Deep Sea Tramp Section °f the Chamber of Shipping. Giving figures °f Mercantile Marine losses for the first time, Sir Philip said that nearly 75 per cent of the 750 deep-sea tramps operating when the war began were sunk. Up to the spring of 1943, when things began to turn for the better, we had lost 545 ships. A marked improvement was shown then, but even so 26 more were sunk before the end of the war. In 1944 and 1945 the defense was in the ascendant, but the battle was by no means over. What the effect of the Schnorkel breathing tube might have been could not be told, nor the effect of atomic bombs on a convoy. There seemed no limit to the potentialities for the destruction of ships or to the ferocity of attacks. To some extent losses had been made good by private building and purchase of tonnage built for Government account, but the number of tramp ships in private British ownership was about 400 short of what it was in 1939.
H.M.S. “Tiger” Launched
London Times, October 26.—H.M.S. Tiger, a light cruiser, was launched yesterday from John Brown and Company’s shipyard at Clydebank by Lady Stansgate, wife of the Secretary of State for Air. It is the twelfth Tiger. The first was built in 1546 and fought against the Spanish Armada, and the last, also built at Clydebank, fought at Jutland. Our Naval Correspondent writes: H.M.S. Tiger is the name-ship—though not actually the first—of a class of cruisers now under construction. The number of other ships in the class, and their names, will doubtless be released in due course, when wartime reticence has had more time to wear off. Their standard displacement is 8,885 tons, length, 555 ft. 6 in., beam 64 ft., and mean draught of water 20 ft. 7 in. They are armed with nine 6-in guns in three triple turrets, ten 4-inguns—presumably dual-purpose guns for both II.A. and L.A. use—in twin mountings, a large number of close-range A.A. weapons, pom-poms and machine guns, and six torpedo tubes in two triple revolving mountings. No figures of horsepower and speed have yet been released.
The Battle in the Channel
Military Review, January.—The naval war in the English Channel was fought out by the “little ships” of the Royal Navy and the German Navy for five continuous years.
Naval actions in the Channel in these “little ships” were fast and furious. They were highspeed actions fought often at 40 knots (nearly 50 miles per hour) and at night. It was a war of stealth and sudden action. Officers and men had to be highly trained and able to make instant decisions.
The E-boat was the German equivalent of the British MTB (motor torpedo boat) or American PT-boat. It carried two torpedoes and a light armament, and its prey was the coastal shipping moving up and down the Channel. The E-boat held the initiative in the early stages around 1940 but very soon was on the defensive and seldom looked for an engagement with the British MTB’s. Forty-eight E-boats were sunk during the five years and many others were severely damaged. MTB’s formed the protection for the large convoys converging on the Normandy beaches on D-Day. Many times E-boats endeavored to break through this cordon to attack Allied shipping, but seldom succeeded.
Beginning with only two flotillas, the
MTB’s increased a hundredfold and finally employed 25,000 officers and men. They bottled up the E-boats in their own harbors and in co-operation with the Royal Air Force Coastal Command virtually brought German coastal shipping to a standstill.
Success of Dummy Targets
Manchester Guardian, November 19.— Two thousand five hundred people in this country are estimated to have been saved from death and another 3,000 from injury, while many millions of pounds’ worth of damage to property was avoided, by the use of a system of military and industrial decoy targets as a defense against the Luftwaffe. It is now possible to relate the story of these decoys. Many times, as thousands waited in air-raid shelters, enemy bombers roared harmlessly overhead to drop their loads in open country; many times puzzled watchers saw German aircraft loose a torrent of bombing and machine-gun fire on seemingly empty fields and bare hillsides.
Thousands of bombs, estimated as 5 per
cent of the total, dropped on this country at bight, fell away from their intended targets—drawn off by a system officially known to few except its operators—the chain of dummy and decoy airfields, docks, railway sidings, industrial plants, and even burning •-owns. The system was born when, at the beginnning of the war, the Air Staff established a special branch to develop decoys to draw off air attack from R.A.F. airfields and stations by day and by night. Dummy satellite airfields were made by leveling hedges in open country. On these dummy aircraft were placed and dummy dumps, roads, and tracks built, together with real and dummy machine-gun posts and a shelter and trenches for the operating crews. During the Battle of Britain and early in 1941 these decoys drew 36 attacks.
Four dummy factories with airfields were huilt in 1940 to protect aircraft production centers. These had parks of (derelict) cars, r°ads, smoke from chimneys, etc., and dummy aircraft. They drew 9 attacks by day and 14 by night.
With decoy airfields at night it was necessary only to simulate airfield lighting. Flat ground was not required and hedges and arable land presented no difficulties, as lights were carried on poles and cables buried below ploughing depth. There was always the risk that our own pilots might attempt to land on them and, to avoid this, differences in lighting were arranged. Forty of these decoys were in operation by June, 1940, and 36 attacks were delivered on them.
Up to the end of June, 1941, when the heaviest enemy night attacks ceased, airfield decoys had drawn 322 attacks as against 304 delivered on R.A.F. airfields at night. By the end of the war the attack figures were 443 on the decoys as against 434 on the true airfields.
Various forms of permitted lighting were imitated, including that of shipyards, railway marshaling yards, coke ovens, and factories. Decoy lighting could do little to draw off massed attacks on towns such as that on Coventry, when enemy pilots were able to see their target towns in flames.
However, by using three different types of inflammable material a large fire could be built which would simulate a conflagration in a town. Decoys of this type, which were electrically fired, were known by the code name of “Starfish.” Some of these Starfish were in operation as early as December, 1940, and in that month recorded five successes; and by the end of the war they had drawn over a hundred attacks.
The finding of satisfactory sites for decoys was not easy. Undue risk to isolated houses, farms, or small villages had to be avoided, and the site had to be reasonably close to the target. Few, however, of the farmers and other local inhabitants, who must have known the object of the sites, complained of the risk. Immediate compensation was paid if cattle or sheep were killed, but in 730 attacks on decoys only four casualties were inflicted on people living in their neighborhood.
The success of Starfish varied conversely with the size of the target. With smaller towns and isolated targets decoys could be sited fairly close in and drew heavy attacks; in the case of very large built-up areas, less of the attack was drawn off. While decoys protecting London and Birmingham achieved a number of successes, fewer bombs fell wide than at Bristol. At Cardiff 150 bombs were drawn in one night by a single Starfish. Naval decoys were particularly successful at Plymouth, Portsmouth, and on the Humber.
A conservative estimate credits the decoys with drawing 5 per cent of all bombs, incendiaries, and mines dropped at night throughout the war. This figure appears at first sight to be small, but the 500 decoy sites constructed only covered a portion of the country. Many vital targets were never bombed at all, but their decoys were attacked more than once. While the existence of our decoys was well known to the enemy, they defied individual recognition.
Various Notes
The King has approved the appointment of Vice Admiral Sir E. Neville Syfrct to be Commander in Chief Home Fleet in succession to Admiral Sir Henry Moore, to date November 24. Admiral Moore has been appointed as head of the
British Admiralty delegation in Washington in succession to Admiral of the Fleet Sir James Somerville, and will take up his appointment in December.—London Times, October 24.
A report from London that the United Kingdom and Australian Governments intend to cooperate in the establishment of a rocket research station in Central Australia is confirmed by Mr. Dcdman as Minister-in-Chargc of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research. It is understood that the project has not yet advanced very far, and Australia’s role at present is mainly to provide sites, but it is expected that the services of Australian research workers will be used. The work needs large uninhabitable areas which the United Kingdom does not possess and which the Commonwealth Government has willingly consented to provide, as the project is regarded as one of the most important to Empire defense.— Manchester Guardian, November 2.
It is believed here that the British Admiralty intends to use St. John’s as a permanent naval base. Unofficial estimates place Britain’s expenditure in Newfoundland during the past five years at about £7,000,000 for piers, machine shops, barracks, and offices.—Manchester Guardian, November 12.
The work of disarming the Merchant Fleet, which has been going on at all main United Kingdom ports and at many ports overseas since the end of the war, has now passed the half-way mark. Ammunition, guns, and weapons have been removed from about 1,300 ocean-going ships and 1,600 coasters, leaving some 1,900 oceangoing ships and 700 coasters still to be disarmed. In addition, some 930 fishing vessels have been disarmed and only a few remain to be dealt with. —Manchester Guardian, November 26.
GERMANY
Battleship Tonnage Falsified
Manchester Guardian, November 28.— Admiral Raeder, of whom so far comparatively little had been heard, was brought into the forefront of the Nuremberg war trial this evening by the production by the prosecuting counsel of a number of naval documents which suggest the extent to which the German Navy was being secretly rearmed ever since 1919.
One of the most blatant notes unsigned, but discovered in a captured dossier, states that the true displacement of the battleships Scharnhorsl and Gncisenau exceeded in both cases the displacement “reported to the British.” An appended table shows that instead of 26,000 tons the actual displacement of the Scharnhorst was 31,300 tons; “F,” presumably the Gneisenau, displaced 41,700, rather than the declared >55,000 tons, and there followed the three battleships alluded to as “Ii for Harry 1, 2, 3,” two of which in all probability were the Tirpiiz and the Bismarck, whose displacement reached 56,200 tons, whereas they had been officially rated in the region of 45,000 tons. In other words, Germany possessed some of the mightiest battleships in the world.
The document is dated February, 1938, and concludes with the remark that in the opinion of “A for Apple IV” it would under no circumstances be right to report a larger tonnage than that which England, Russia, and Japan would probably publish shortly in order that they (the Germans) might not put upon themselves the blame for a race in armaments.
A synopsis for a history of the German Navy from 1919 to 1939, which is among the captured documents submitted as evidence, reveals step by step the deliberate duplicity of the German naval authorities almost since the end of the last war, and their deceitful dealing with the Inter-Allied Control Commission.
Among another mass of documents submitted today, certainly the most illuminating for the breadth of its purview, was a review of the war situation given to the Gauleiters in Munich in November, 1943, by Colonel General Jodi, Chief of Staff, for Operations in the West, who, for all the Gnawing fears that assailed him then, expressed his unbounded faith in German victory, but eighteen months later to the day was to sign the surrender terms at Rheims. Now he sits in dock with the others. Jodi went into every phase of the war with a remarkable frankness whose motive is readily detected, for even at that time he spoke of defeatism and malicious rumors, "up and down the country the devil of sub- yersion strides.” All the cowards were seeking a way out, or, as they called it, a political solution, and he was scathing in his remarks about what he called the Italian betrayal. He surveyed the course of the military campaigns which had led to setbacks in 1943. By the decisive success of the campaign in the west of 1940, he declared they had gained possession of the French potential of armaments destined to be of the most important service in the future course of the war and had set up a direct threat to the British Isles.
In view of the possible entry of the United States into the war they had to consider the occupation of a number of advanced support points in the Atlantic such as Iceland and the Azores, on which the enemy in the meantime had laid his hand. Wisely, the Fiihrer renounced these objectives since their naval and air equipment could not have permanently maintained communications.
As the weakness and failure of Italy became more manifest, North Africa became increasingly a German theater of war, and with no very great force they tied down strong British land, sea, and air forces away from the German Lebensraum. What was less acceptable was having to afford Italy assistance in the Balkans in consequence of the unnecessary expedition of the Italians against Greece. The attack, launched from Albania in the autumn of 1940 with totally inadequate means, was contrary to all agreement, but in the long view the real purpose of the German operation was to prevent the British from gaining a foothold in Greece and thus menacing the Rumanian oilfields.
Danger was constantly growing nearer from the Bolshevik East, Jodi went on. As far back as the Western campaign Hitler had informed him of his fundamental decision to take steps against it as soon as the military position made it possible. Following the Balkan campaign and the occupation of Crete words were put into action.
Coming back to the plans for an invasion of England, Jodi contradicted his previous remarks by attributing their failure to the R.A.F. during the Battle of Britain. A landing in England, he said, was prepared down to the smallest detail, but with improvised transport could not be dared while the British air arm had not been completely beaten. “And this we were not able to do,” just as they had not been able completely to shatter the Soviet armed forces. Later generations would not be able to reproach them with not having dared the utmost to achieve aims which would have decided the war. “But no one could take upon himself to allow the German air arm to bleed to death in the Battle of Britain in view of the struggle which lay ahead against Soviet Russia.”
U-Boats Built Abroad
Manchester Guardian, November 28.— Goring and Admiral Raeder chuckled today as the war crimes tribunal heard how Germany rearmed in secret. Under the Versailles Treaty no U-boat could be built in Germany and it was apparently assumed that none would be constructed elsewhere. A statement by Raeder to Allied interrogators and a German book published secretly were quoted today to show that U-boats were built and personnel trained in Holland, Spain, Finland, Argentina, and Turkey. As a result, U-boats were actually assembled “as planned,” in June, 1935, only three months after Hitler’s repudiation of the military clauses of the Versailles Treaty.— Reuter.
Heavy Losses in “Pocket” Submarines
Journal de la Marine Marchande franqaisc. August 9, 1945.—During the last months of the war, the Germans tried stubbornly but vainly to interrupt the supply lines to Allied armies across the Channel, using large numbers of “pocket” submarines. A communique of the Admiralty and of the British Ministry of Air declares that during a series of actions in territorial waters, 81 of these submersibles were sunk, probably sunk, or captured. It is possible that 28 others were sunk. The results of 70 other attacks could not be observed. Since the capitulation of Germany, a hundred other “pocket” subs have been taken. The Germans used three types: the Biber, the Molch, and the Seehund. The first, carrying a single person, displaces 6 tons at the surface and measures 9 meters in length.
It carries 2 electric torpedoes that travel about 4,500 meters at 20 knots, but can, in place of 2 torpedoes, carry cither a mine and a torpedo or two mines. Speed on the surface is 6$ knots; submerged, 6 knots.
The Molch also carries one man. It is about 14 meters long, has the same armament as the Biber but takes only torpedoes. While the Biber uses Diesel at the surface and electric submerged, the Molch has only electric propulsion: maximum surface speed 6 to 7 knots.
The Seehund carries a 2-man crew; overall length, 11 meters 80; displacement 16 tons. It has Diesel and electric; surface speed 8 knots, 3-4 knots submerged. Armament: 2 electric 320-mm. torpedoes traveling 5,400 meters at 18^ knots. The Seehund can travel 500 km. at 4 knots on surface, plus 100 km. at 3 knots submerged.
German Long-Range Rocket Development
The Aeroplane, November 9. A resume of the Lecture delivered before the Royal Aeronautical Society on November 1 by W. G. A. Perring, F.R.Ae.S.—Serious rocket development was started in Germany in the years 1929-30. In 1937-38 a research station was set up at Peenemunde, concentration here being made upon fuel rockets using liquid oxygen as a source of supply for the fuel combustion. A series of rockets, ranging from the A1 to A10 were projected. Only one of these, the A4, or so-called V2, was used operationally. Product of Professor V. von Braun and his associates, the A4 was a direct descendant of the 4-J ft. long A1 design of 1933. The A2 followed the Al, and had a motor developing a thrust of 660 lb. for about 16 seconds, and was successfully launched, reaching a height of 6,500 ft. Work on the A3 started in 1938. This rocket weighed 1,650 lb., was 25 ft. long, and had a motor developing a thrust of 3,300 lb. for 45 seconds. Fired vertically, the A3 reached nearly 40,000 ft.
Work on the A4 started in 1940, and the first rocket of this type was fired in July, 1942. This one rose 3 ft. in the air and then exploded. The first successful launch was made in October, 1942, but then a series of more than 12 consecutive failures were encountered, and even at the end of the period, although break-ups were less frequent, failures were still occurring to some 15 to 20 per cent of the rockets fired.
The rocket is built up of steel ribs and stringers covered by thin steel sheeting, which is in general 0.025 in. thick. The constructional features closely resemble normal airframe construction practice.
Having an over-all length of 46 ft. and an all-up weight of about 121] tons, the A4 warhead is made of quarter-inch steel which, with its Amatol filling, weighs 2,150 lb. Housed immediately behind the warhead are the main control instruments and radio equipment. The main fuels are carried in two large light-alloy tanks occupying the central compartment of the rocket. There are two fuels, one a 75 per cent solution of ethyl alcohol and water in the first tank near the n°se, and the other liquid oxygen, in the year tank. The remaining space in the rocket 18 taken up by a turbine which drives the two main fuel pumps and with the auxiliary fuel supply there follows the main combustion chamber and exit venturi, and around this unit arc the stabilizing fins, while projecting into the exist of the venturi are the main control vanes.
The rocket is propelled by a jet of hot gases resulting from the combustion of the two fuels, the explosion taking place in a chamber which forms the front end of the Venturi. The fuels are pumped under pressure into this space by two turbine-driven centrifugal pumps, the turbine being driven lJy a hydrogen peroxide-permanganate system. The pumps deliver about 275 lb. of fuel Per second at about 350 lb./sq. in. pressUre, and at this rate of discharge the main fanks are exhausted in about 70 seconds. Both main tanks are pressurized to about 1.4 utmospheres, partly to assist the pumps and Partly to prevent the tanks collapsing. In ffie oxygen tank a special vent valve is fitted lhat maintains the pressure in the tank at f'2 atmospheres, but during the operational Period this pressure is raised to 1.5 atmospheres, the pressure being kept up by supplying oxygen which is evaporated by a heat exchanger placed in the exhaust turbine system. Most of the cooling is external, although some degree of internal wall-cooling ls effected by feeding a small amount of alcohol into the venturi through rings of small holes drilled at several positions.
Specific impulse of the fuel used in the A4 r°cket, i.e., the thrust produced for every Pound of fuel burned per second, is about ^20 under ground operating conditions, hence the velocity of discharge of the gases is about 7,000 ft./sec. Thus, since 275 lb. of fuel are burned every second, the thrust developed by the rocket is about 60,000 lb.
Firing of the rocket is carried out with it in the vertical position. Placed in the upright position while it is still empty the A4 is next filled with fuel, in the following order: Alcohol, hydrogen peroxide, liquid oxygen, and permanganate. This filling operation takes only 12 minutes and is one of the last operations before firing, as about 4£ lb. of oxygen per minute are lost by evaporation if the rocket is filled and left standing. Two forms of igniting torch were tried, the one most generally used being a pyrotechnic (black powder) torch. When the firing torch is alight, the main alcohol and oxygen valves are opened and 20 to 30 lb./sec. of the two fuels arc fed by gravity through the pumps to the combustion chamber and are then ignited, the burning then taking place without shock and being maintained for a few seconds until an observer is assured conditions are satisfactory; the latter then makes an electric contact which starts up the flow of auxiliary fuel. The turbine is then started and reaches full speed in about three seconds. During this time the flow of the main fuels to the combustion chamber increases, the thrust builds up and soon exceeds the weight, causing the rocket to commence its vertical ascent. From the firing of the torch to the rocket unit getting up to full thrust takes only from 7 to 10 seconds.
Control of the A4 is carried out by four graphite controllers symmetrically placed around the jet exit, and four external controllers carried at the tips of the stabilizing fins. Many modifications have, however, been made to the control system, but broadly all systems attempted to maintain the rocket axis in an attitude with the plane of the turbine rotor lying in the plane of the target, to stabilize the rocket in roll, to rotate the rocket axis in pitch at some predetermined rate, and to obtain some measure of the rocket velocity, so enabling the fuel to be cut off at some point dependent upon the desired range.
Range of the A4 varied widely, a few traveling as far as 220 miles, but most of them averaging 180 to 190 miles. A typical trajectory would take the A4 to a height of 22 to 23 miles and a velocity of about 3,400 m.p.h. after about 60 seconds flight.
It is interesting to observe that if the 2,150 lb. of warhead carried by the A4 were replaced by fuel the range figure would have been increased to about 350 miles. This is probably the limit for a single-stage rocket. Range is also influenced by the rate of burning of the fuel, i.e., on the thrust developed, and therefore on the acceleration experienced during the initial stage of the flight. The effect is not large, but nevertheless variations of the order of plus or minus 10 per cent in range are possible, and it is important, therefore, to take this factor into account when deciding on the venturi and fuel pump design.
Other rocket developments in addition to the A4 included the A9, which was an A4 fitted with wings permitting it to glide when it reached the stratosphere with a view to increasing the range. A10 was a still more ambitious project. It was to weigh about 85 tons and was intended to carry the A9 into the stratosphere and there to be jettisoned.
Comparison between conventional highspeed bombers and the A4 rocket shows a gain in the A4 in weight of power plant, together with a very small structure and equipment weight, which is overshadowed by an extremely high weight of fuel. A further comparison drawn between a typical fighter and the Messerschmitt Me 163C rocket fighter again shows a heavy increase in fuel weight, and although the maximum speed and climb performance of the Me 163 are high, the endurance is extremely short.
The rocket motor, with its light weight and very large thrust per square foot of frontal area, has now made flight possible at speeds well into the super-sonic range, and a few calculations have been made which illustrate some of the possibilities. Starting with the A4 we have assumed that the warhead is removed and replaced by a pressure cabin and pilot, and in addition the rocket is fitted with wings, the wing area being arranged to provide for a landing wing loading of 35 lb./sq. ft. Such a rocket taken up by means of a booster rocket on the lines of the German A10 project mentioned earlier would be able to complete the journey from London to New York in well under the hour. This rocket would reach a height of 80,000 ft. before being released at a speed of 3,000 m.p.h. From this point, onwards the rocket with its full fuel continues the flight. A disadvantage to be overcome lies in the fact that the extreme speed would set up, to say the least, an uncomfortable heat which would, of course, be disturbing to the pilot. Another point is that over a large part of the flight the rocket would be moving on a free trajectory since the wings cannot provide sufficient lifting force to control the motion. It would not be until the rocket returned to a point about 28 miles above the earth’s surface that the pilot could begin to assume control of his machine.
Many problems have to be overcome, for as yet nothing, or practically nothing, is known about control at super-sonic speeds, nor of the difficulties that will be encountered in passing through the speed of sound. The vertical ascent at the beginning of the trajectory avoids some of these issues, while for a control over a greater part of the flight through the upper atmosphere it is quite likely that the controls will have to be in the form of small rocket jets. These, however, and the many other problems that have been and remain to be encountered are matters which will have to be left to the future.
ITALY
Success of Diver Tactics
Chicago Daily Tribune, November 28.— Italy drew plans as early as 1935 to use an underwater brigade of 2,000 divers in an attempt to wreck the British and French fleets by sneak attacks, the Admiralty disclosed tonight. Italian use of the diver tactics was limited to attacks on the British battleships Queen Elizabeth and Valiant, at Alexandria, Egypt, the Admiralty said in a review of its own extensive experiments on diving equipment for human torpedoes, “frogmen” and midget submarine personnel. The Admiralty had announced previously that the battleships were damaged when Italians using midget subs attached explosives to their hulls. Neither ship was sunk.
JAPAN
Cargo Submarines
Manchester Guardian, November 5.—Two giant Japanese submarines, the largest in the world, each equipped with three planes, were intended for attacks on the Panama Canal, the newspaper Mainichi declared today. But Japanese naval officers found this plan “impracticable,” so the submarines were used to carry rice between Japan and the naval base at Truk.
OTHER COUNTRIES
Iceland
Suggestions in the American press that Russia is seeking bases in Iceland or Spitsbergen or both have a touch of the pot calling the kettle black. According to what appear to be reliable accounts in Norwegian and Danish newspapers, it is the United States that has made the first bid for a base in Iceland. Some concern about this has been impressed in Danish commentaries, for it is thought that any such design would set a general drive for northern bases in motion. Some Danes have expressed anxiety lest Russia’s counter should be a kind of knight’s move on the Danish island of Bornholm. There is no confirmation of any Russian claim on Iceland or Spitsbergen, but the American reports may be connected with the interest Russia has been taking in developing the great northern sea routes. Recent long-range arctic flights by Russian pilots have, the Russians say, yielded valuable new information about ice conditions, currents, and winds that augurs well for future shipping. The purpose of these observation flights is described as “further to ensure the free sailing of convoys in the Arctic basin.”— Manchester Guardian, October 20.
News from northern Europe leaves little or no doubt that the United States Government has raised the question of the acquisition of an air base or bases with the Government of Iceland, and that conversations have been held on the subject. Icelandic opinion is said to be averse from the grant of any such privileges in peacetime.—London Times, November 9.
Netherlands
Before the war, the port of Rotterdam could receive 80,000 tons of merchandise per day. In spite of the extensive destruction wrought by the Germans, it has taken on some days since liberation as much as 35,000 tons. This very remarkable result is due to a vigorous reconstruction effort. About 14 kilometers of wharves have been rc- stored in less than 2 months; three-fifths of the entrcp6ts are usable.
In fact, despite the destruction and pillage committed by the Germans, the port installations now comprise equipment for handling twice or three times as much merchandise as is now unloaded.
The obstructions placed by the Germans in the bed of the Meuse near Maassluis have been eliminated in part. At present, a breach of 150 meters permits ships drawing to 35 feet to clear the passage.
Plans have been prepared for building a maritime center in the very heart of Rotterdam. Separate hotels for different nationalities arc planned, with churches, post offices, a museum, hall for parties, bank, laundry, tailor shops, etc. The center, together with port offices, will take up a front of about a half kilometer.—Journal de la Marine Marchande fran(aise, August 9.
Norway
Eight German ships totaling 12,450 tons were recently transferred to Norway as a first payment on that country’s $4,230,000,000 reparations claim against Germany, according to the Royal Norwegian Information Service. Earlier Norwegian claims for 80,000 tons of German shipping to help compensate for war losses have now been reduced by half and will cover only those German ships which have been or are now moored in Norwegian harbors, including 26 ships in all. For the time being none of the 26 ships will be regarded as Norwegian property, but will simply be manned and used by Norwegian shipping firms, especially those which have suffered heavy losses during the war, until a final settlement is reached.—Maritime Activity Reports, December 6.
AVIATION
Navy has Lightest Jet Aircraft Engines
Navy Department Press Release, November.—The lightest jet aircraft engines in the world for their power and size are being built for the Navy by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. They include the “Yankee,” which is 19 inches in diameter, and the “baby jet,” which measures only 9$ inches across and was developed for use in pilotless aircraft. These engines are the first jet power plants of wholly American design to be tested in flight. They owe their efficient streamlined shape and light weight to the axial- flow compressor which Westinghouse’s Aviation Gas Turbine Division has incorporated for the first time into a U. S. designed and tested engine. In the axial-flow compressor, the four basic elements—the air compressor, the combustion chamber, the turbine to supply power for the compressor, and the jet nozzle—are arranged in a line, one behind the other.
The small diameter of the axial-flow engine makes it particularly suited to high speeds, at which it develops an extremely large amount of power. Because of its small frontal area and correspondingly low air resistance, it lends itself to a “cleaner,” more streamlined over-all aircraft design.
Recent models of the Wcstinghouse “Yankee” jet have a weight of less than half a pound per pound of thrust, or less than half the weight of piston engines. The “Yankee’s” total diameter of 19 inches is likewise half that of an “up-and-down” engine of comparable horsepower.
In the operation of the 19B, official designation of the “Yankee,” the air enters the circular throat of the unit at 300 miles per hour and is increased to 600 miles per hour as it enters the compressor, being stepped up by a spoke-like arrangement of airfoilshaped blades. The compressor itself is an aluminum rotor a foot long, equipped with nearly 200 blades, set in six rows. Spinning at 300 times per second, the rotor scoops the incoming air back into the combustion chamber at the rate of a million cubic feet, or 50 tons, of air per hour. This air, which is more than 150 times the weight of the engine, is mixed with injected gasoline and ignited.
The heat of this combustion expands the gas to three times its previous volume which in turn triples the speed with which it must seek escape via its only means of exit— through the turbine and jet nozzle to the outer air. The expansion and increase in speed spin the turbine rotor blades at more than 14 miles per minute at their tips. The greater part of the power produced in the engine from the combustion gases, namely, 3,400 hp. is extracted by the turbine to rotate the compressor at its rated 18,000 rotations per minute. Left over as propulsive energy in the jet stream, to carry the aircraft forward, is 1,400 lb. of thrust, which is equivalent to 1,400 hp. at a flight speed of 375 miles an hour.
The “baby jet” yields a propulsive thrust of 275 lb., or 275 hp. at modern plane speeds.
Westinghouse began its work on turbo-jet engines at the Navy’s request the day after Pearl Harbor, in 1941, with no information on the progress of similar developments by the enemy or our Allies being afforded the researchers until their models were at the testing stage. Later engines, still covered by military security, have been produced which better the weight and power characteristics of the two newly announced engines.
The Twin Mustang
Chicago Daily Tribune. November 23.— North American Aviation made public details of its P-82 twin Mustang—latest in the series of famed Mustang fighters which saw action on many war fronts. The company said the P-82 will replace the P-51 II on production lines. The new craft houses a pilot in each fuselage, and, North American’s statement says, culminates five years of research. It has a 2,500-mile combat range, carrying full armament. Two 2,200-hp., 12- cylinder engines give it speeds in excess of 475 miles per hour, the company added, with efficient operation up to 45,000 feet.
Armament includes six .50-caliber machine guns, 25 rockets—which the company asserted provide the fire power of a light cruiser broadside—and four 1,000-pound bombs. By use of adapters, however, two of the bomb racks can carry 2,000 pounders.
British Jet Plane Makes First Carrier Landing
New York Herald Tribune, December 6.— The Royal Navy Tuesday announced the “first landing by a jet-propelled plane on an aircraft carrier” when Lieutenant Commander Eric Melrose Brown set his highspeed Vampire down on the deck of II.M.S. Ocean off the Isle of Wight near Southampton.
Jane’s Fighting Ships for 1943-44 does not list an aircraft carrier named the Ocean. The British Information Service in New York also had no record of such a carrier.
The announcement said the 24-year-old British naval test pilot sped his plane over the flight deck, executed a roll, then streaked away to circle the ship before bringing the
plane down directly astern at 95 miles an hour. The landing was described as “perfect.” The plane picked up the first arrester wire and stopped within 100 feet. On the fake-off the plane was air-borne in half the flight deck’s length.
Vice Admiral Sir Denis Boyd, chief of the Royal Naval Air Service, said the take-offs and landings were a natural development of fne Navy’s intention to arm itself with the World's best aircraft.
, The Vampire’s top speed at 20,000 feet ls 540 miles an hour, and its rate of climb is 4>700 feet a minute, the announcement said.
Flying at Speed of Sound
London Times, November 8.—Technical ar>d scientific issues of very great significance Provide the background of the successful at- fornpt at Herne Bay on the air speed record. Aviation development has now reached the sfoge of groping forward hesitantly into the Unknown. Aeronautical experts have known f°r years that new problems would arise when the speed of sound was approached, but these difficulties were not very real, since the prospect of flying at very high speeds once seemed remote.
At sea level sound travels at about 760 m.p.h.; and the speed falls with the temperature at high altitudes to about 660 m.p.h. at
30,0 ft. As the speed of sound is approached a condition known as compressibility is encountered. As the airplane flies through the sky the air around it is speeded up by its movement, the extent of the acceleration depending on the thickness of the wing which is being forced forward against the atmosphere by the power of the engine or engines. At what are now regarded as normal level flight speeds—-up to 500 m.p.h. or more—the air flows smoothly over the wing surfaces, but at a faster rate the velocity of the air-llow over the wings can be increased to the speed of sound, even though the airplane itself is travelling at a slower speed. When the oncoming airplane is traveling at, say, 600 m.p.h. or more the steadiness of the air-flow over the wing then breaks down, with the result that what is known as a shock-wave occurs at the thickest part of the wing.
The main effect on the airplane of very high speed is to increase the drag of the air. At normal speeds the drag is proportional to the square of the speed, so that if the speed of the airplane is doubled the drag is quadrupled. But at these higher speeds, some time before the shock-wave forms, the drag on the airplane begins to increase at an abnormal rate and a tremendous increase in horsepower would be needed to counteract its effect. In the present stage of aeronautical development there is not a single airplane in the world capable of being propelled at the speed of sound in level flight. Under the formula of a German, Herr Ernst Mach, the speed up to which an airplane is capable of flying normally is represented as a fraction of the speed of sound. Each airplane is given a Mach number, and there are only eight in existence capable of 80 per cent the speed of sound. Most of the airplanes with high Mach numbers are British, with the Spitfire at the top of the list and the Gloster Meteor IV next. The German Me.262 jet-propelled fighter and the American Shooting Star also have good Mach number qualities.
Before supersonic speeds can be attained in level flight the shape of the airplane will have to be radically changed. Experts believe that the most promising design is an arrow-head shaped airplane of the flying wing type—that is, without a tail and with the “tail” controls mounted on the wing tips—with the wings swept back to an angle of about 30 degrees.
Above the speed of sound the rate of increase of drag falls off again—though it never returns to the original proportion of the square of the speed—so that to some extent the problem is less complicated at supersonic speeds. The main difficulty is to design an airplane capable of behaving normally at the critical velocities around the speed of sound.
When the shock-wave occurs, the maximum lifting capabilities of the wing are reduced because of the breakdown of the airflow, and the ideally shaped wing to combat this defect has yet to be designed. When the airflow over the wing is upset the airplane tends either to go into a dive or to climb, and the pilot cannot control the tendency.
Up to fairly high speeds the effects can be ascertained by wind-tunnel tests, but above 80 per cent of the speed of sound these are useless, since the walls of the wind-tunnel itself experience shock-stalls at the same time as the model which is being tested. The only way, therefore, to learn the secrets of traveling at supersonic speeds is by experimental flying.
British Naval Aircraft
Engineering, October 19.—While the war lasted, very little information was allowed to be published with regard to developments in naval aircraft; much less, in proportion, than was released about the bombers and fighters of the Royal Air Force. On October 2, however, a demonstration was arranged at Heston Airport which made considerable amends for the long-continued secrecy about the aircraft used by the Fleet Air Arm, and some interesting disclosures were made regarding the latest operational types now in use or coming into service in the Navy, which include two jet-propelled machines, the Meteor and the Vampire. Some of the types shown, or their land counterparts, have been described recently in Engineering; but many of the particulars given below had not been published prior to the demonstration.
The Sea Mosquito is an all-wood mid-wing torpedo bomber, and is an adaptation to naval purposes of the familiar Mosquito fighter bomber of the Royal Air Force. Like the Mosquito, it is designed and built by the de Havilland Aircraft Company, Limited, the main points of difference' being that the Sea Mosquito has folding wings, arresting gear, a special radar equipment which takes the place of the four 0.303-in. guns in the nose, and provision for carrying a torpedo under the fuselage. The principal dimensions are: span, 54 ft. 2 in.; length, 41 ft. 7 in.; height, with tail down and one propeller blade vertical, 15 ft. 3 in.; wing area, 440 sq. ft.; and weight, 22,500 lb. The power unit is a Rolls-Royce Merlin 25 engine of 1,635 lip., driving a de Havilland Hydromatic 4-bladed fully-feathered propeller and giving a speed of about 380 miles an hour. The range is 1,680 miles. The gun armament consists of four 20-mm. Hispano cannon in the fuselage. The bombs, totaling 2,000 lb., are carried in a bomb bay in the fuselage, and under the wings; alternatively, a torpedo can be carried under the fuselage, or eight rockets, four under eacli wing. Oleo-pneu- •natic undercarriage struts are fitted in place of the rubber cushions used in the R.A.F. types. Rocket-assisted take-olf gear ls being developed for the Sea Mosquito.
Several types of Seafire (the naval version °f the Vickers Supermarine Spitfire) are used by the Fleet Air Arm. All are single- eugincd low-wing fighters, but there are differences in the power units, armament, and general equipment; for instance, whereas the R.A.F. Spitfire XXI has a Rolls-Royce Griffon 61 engine of 2,050 lip., driving a 5- hladed Rotol propeller, the Seafire III has a Berlin 55 engine of 1,470 hp. and a 4-bladcd Rotol propeller, while the Mks. 45, 46 and 47 have the Griffon 85 engine, which develops 2,050 hp., driving Rotol contra-pro- Pcllers and giving a speed of about 440 miles an hour—10 miles an hour less than the Spitfire XXI—and a maximum rate of climb of 3,800 ft. per minute. The Seafire Ml, which has folding wings, is fitted with arrester and catapult gear, and, on each side °1 the fuselage, two 5-in. rockets for assisted take-off. The rockets are fired electrically uud burn for about four seconds, each giving a mean thrust of 1,200 lb. The rocket Jet issues through a Venturi tube, of which there arc three sizes, the smallest being used in arctic conditions and the largest in the tropics. The approximate weight of each rocket is 66 lb. before firing and 40 lb. after the charge is expended; the spent rockets and their containers are jettisoned. By their use, the take-off distance, with a laden Mrcraft, is reduced from 760 ft. to 330 ft. in a 15-knot wind. The dimensions of the Seafire III are: span, 36 ft. 8 in.; length, 30 It-; and height, 8 ft.; wing area, 242 sq. ft.; and weight, about 7,000 lb. The armament consists of two 20-mm. cannon and four 0.303-in. Browning machine guns. It will be recalled that the Mks. XXI and XXII of the Spitfire—the last to appear, as the type is now out of production after some 22,000 have been built—have four 20-mm. cannon only, mounted in the wings.
The Seafire Mks. 45, 46, and 47 are the latest forms of this naval aircraft. They are rather larger and considerably heavier than the Seafire III, having a span of 36 ft. 11 in., a length of 32 ft. 11 in., and a height, with the tail down, of 13 ft. 6 in. The weight is about 9,500 lb. Mks. 45 and 46 have fixed wings, but Mk. 47, which is not yet in production, has folding wings. Mk. 46 also is still in the prototype stage. The arrester hook in these machines is known as the “sting” type, as it resembles the sting at the end of a scorpion’s tail and is fitted in the tail of the aircraft; in this position, it avoids the risk of the aircraft pitching on its nose when landing. Provision is made to carry extra fuel tanks either under the fuselage or under the wings, and all three Marks have radio telephones which enable the pilot to speak to the ground or to other aircraft at ranges up to 100 miles. The armament comprises four 20-mm. cannon, situated in the wings.
The Sea Hornet, a composite mid-wing monoplane of wood and metal, was designed by the de Havilland Aircraft Company, but built under subcontract by the Heston Aircraft Company. It will be the first twin- engined single-seat fighter to go into service with the Fleet Air Arm, and is adapted from the R.A.F. model of the Hornet by the introduction of folding wings (hydraulically operated and fitted with safety interlocks to prevent the pilot from folding the wings in flight), an arrester hook under the fuselage, and fittings for rocket-assisted or accelerator take-off. The span is 45 ft.; the length, 47 ft.; the height, with tail down and one blade of the propellers vertical, 14 ft. 2 in.; and the wing area, 361 sq. ft. The weight is 18,250 lb. With extra fuel tanks, the Sea Hornet has a range of more than 2,000 miles, and it can attain a speed of over 450 miles an hour in level flight. The de Havilland Hydromatic 4-bladed propellers are driven by Merlin engines, types 130 and 131, developing 2,080 hp. An unusual feature is that the airscrews revolve in opposite directions, to give easier control for deck landing; in most twin-engined and four- engined aircraft, a uniform direction of rotation is adopted for all engines to facilitate maintenance, in spite of the resultant tendency to swing the machine to one side in taking-off and landing. The Sea Hornet has four 20-mm. guns under the fuselage and can carry a 1,000-lb. bomb under each wing as well as four pairs of rockets.
Other types of naval aircraft which took part in the demonstration at Heston, apart from the jet-propelled machines mentioned above, included the Firefly IV, the Spear- fish, the Seafang (a naval version of the Vickers Supermarine Spiteful), the Sea Fury, the Monitor II, and the Barracuda V.
The original Firefly (the Mark I) has been for some time the standard two-seater fighter-reconnaissance aircraft of the Navy. The type is designed and made by the Fairey Aviation Company and is an all-metal low- wing monoplane, armed with four 20-mm. guns in the wings and carrying either eight pairs of rockets or two 1,000-lb. bombs under the wings. The Mk. II is a night fighter, which has been built in small numbers only and the Mk. Ill was an experimental design which was not put into production. The Mk. IV is still in the prototype stage, but is expected to go into production early next year and eventually to supersede the Mk. I. Its dimensions are as follows: span, 41 ft. 2 in.; length, 37 ft. 11 in.; height, 14 ft. 4 in.; wing area, 330 sq. ft.; weight, 13,200 lb. The maximum range is 740 miles at a cruising speed of 190 knots. The maximum speed is about 386 miles an hour at an altitude of
14,0 ft., the power unit being a Rolls- Royce Griffon 74 engine, developing 2,190 hp., driving a Rotol 4-bladed constant-speed propeller. Alterations from the Mk. I design include a reduced span, to give better control at low speeds, and the installation of the radiators in the leading edges of the wings. Fittings are provided for rocket-assisted take-off and for acceleration from the deck, and, of course, the wings are made to fold for stowing. The arresting hook is mounted under the fuselage, and a full radio and radar equipment is provided in the rear cockpit.
The Spearfish, another Fairey type, which is expected to go into production early in 1946, is an all-metal low-wing monoplane torpedo dive-bomber with a Bristol Cen- taurus 57 engine of 2,585 hp., driving a Rotol 5-bladed constant-speed airscrew. It has a maximum speed of 292 miles an hour at 14,000 ft. and a range of 900 nautical miles at a cruising speed, according to the official figures, of 170 knots; whether the maximum speed, as given, is also intended to be read as “knots” is not clear. The wing span is 60 ft. and the length, 45 ft. 4 in. The height is 16 ft. 6 in., the wing area is 530 sq. ft., and the weight, 24,000 lb. The armament consists of two fixed 0.5-in. guns forward and two more in a Nash and Thompson power-operated turret. Bombs and torpedoes are carried internally in a bomb bay. A proposed future development is to use the 5-bladed airscrew as a dive brake, instead of wing brakes. Like most other naval types, the Spearfish is designed for a rocket-assisted take-off. The hood over the pilot’s cockpit is hydraulically operated.
Another new type, possessing several new features of importance, is the Seafang, a single-seat fighter-reconnaissance machine of similar performance to the later forms of Seafire. It has a Rolls-Royce Griffon 69 engine of 2,375 lip., driving a Rotol 5-bladed airscrew and giving a maximum speed of about 450 miles an hour, and an initial climbing rate of about 3,800 ft. per minute. The range is some 730 miles. Though the Seafang is a small machine—the span being 35 ft., the length and height 32 ft. llj in. and 13 ft. 5 in., respectively, and the area of the laminar-flow wings, 210 sq. ft.—it has like the Sea Hornet, the comparatively new feature, for British aircraft, of power-operated folding wings; these greatly simplify landing on aircraft carriers, as the pilot can fold his wings while taxying to the lift. Other modifications to be made when the Seafang goes into production include the addition of accelerating gear, and the use of counter-rotating propellers. The arresting hook, of the “sting” type, is fitted at the tail. The four 20-mm. cannon arc mounted in the wings.
The Sea Fury is a single-seat low-wing fighter, designed and constructed by Hawker Aircraft, Limited, and has a Bristol Cen- taurus engine of 2,400 lip., driving a Rotol 5-bladed constant-speed propeller, 12 ft. 9 'n-ln diameter. The dimensions are: span 38 *•; 5 in.; length, 34 ft. 6 in.; height, with wings folded and tail up, 16 ft. 3 in., and J4 ft. 7-J in. with wings spread, tail down, and one propeller blade vertical; wing area, 280 sq. ft. Four 20-mm. guns are fitted, and a 1,000-lb. bomb can be carried under each wnig. Attachments are provided also for three pairs of rockets under each wing, and (h°p fuel tanks can be fitted if required. The . ca 1'ury is still in the prototype stage but Is staled to promise well. It is a development rom the Tempest II, with the span reduced Jy removing the center section of the wing and joining the roots together. A later ver- S1()n, not yet built, is to have a Saber engine.
1 he Monitor II is a high-wing monoplane with all-metal fuselage, and wings of wood, t/r^ ^laS ')een designed and constructed by essrs. Miles Aircraft, Limited, mainly for ^gb-speed fleet target-towing duties. The JHain dimensions are: span, 55 ft.; length, 47 and wing area, 500 sq. ft. The all-up Weight is 21,000 lb. The two Wright Cyclone ■ R- air-cooled radial engines, of 1,750 lip. each, drive 3-bladed constant-speed fully Gathering propellers, giving a top speed of 1 9 m.p.h. A sleeve target can be towed at nearly 280 m.p.h., which is stated to repreSent an advance of about 150 m.p.h. over Previous practice. The towing winch is hy- ' raulically operated and is housed in the eselage. No armament is carried, but cam- cras are fitted for marking fleet gunnery exercises, and there is stowage for spare sleeve argets, which can be changed in flight, revision is made for towing 16-ft. and 32-ft. Weiged targets. The maximum length of t°w is 6,000 ft. Dive brakes are to be fitted 0 future production Monitors, so that they be used to carry out dummy dive- ernbing attacks on ships.
. Barracuda V is the latest “Mark” of aircy aircraft which has served the Navy c 1 .during the past three years as torpedo rrier, bomber, and reconnaissance and ati-submarine machine. It is a 2-seat all- clal high-wing monoplane, with a maxi- ^um speed of 244 miles an hour at 15,000 • and a range of 735 sea miles; and can be
used also as a mine-layer or to carry a lifeboat for air/sea rescue work. The span is 53 ft. 2 in.; length, 40 ft. 3 in.; height, 15 ft. 3 in.; and wing area,425 sq. ft. The weight is 16,400 lb. The power unit fitted, in place of the Merlin engine used by earlier Barracudas, is a Griflon VII engine of 1,850 lip., with a Rotol 4-bladed propeller. The fuel capacity has been increased, and the larger wing tanks now fitted have involved a somewhat greater span. Larger control surfaces are provided, together with greater structural strength to give a better margin of safety in pulling out of dives. The maximum torpedo, bomb or mine load, is 2,000 lb. The Barracuda is designed to operate from carriers or from land bases, and has folding wings, arresting and accelerating gear, and equipment for rocket-assisted take-off.
MERCHANT MARINE New Cargo Vessel Plans Revealed
Marine Progress Weekly News Report, November 21.—A new cargo ship designed to cut the cargo handling costs measurably has been designed by the Maritime Commission and was publicized at the meeting of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers at their meeting in New York last week.
The new ships will be slightly longer than the C-type vessels now in service, being 495 feet long. The principal feature that marks the difference between this vessel and the usual cargo ship is the fore-and-aft crane arrangement for handling cargo at holds number two, three, four, and five. Holds one and six have the conventional boom and mast gear. The overhead cargo handling machinery is an improvement on that already installed in the C-3 ship Sea Hawk, an arrangement which has been on trial for some time.
The main improvement over the C-3 cargo gear has been the elimination of the folding jibs which extended the crane rails over the side of the ship. In place of these will be a monorail track which can move fore and aft and also extend outboard of the hull. On the lower flanges of the monorail the hoists will be slung, the top flanges being secured to the traveling gear on the overhead supporting members.
The whole arrangement has been designed to speedily move cargo from ship to shore and from shore to ship. This rapid movement is further enhanced should the cargo be palletized or stowed in uniform containers.
The paper describing the new ship and particularly its cargo handling gear was read before the Society by Arthur C. Rohn, chief engineer of the Maritime Commission. In listing the benefits of the new system he said that they would result in the following:
(1) Heavier sling loads can be moved faster than those which would otherwise be moved by heavy lift equipment. (2) Less manhandling of individual items from the time of arrival on the pier to the time of discharge. (3) Arrangements which permit cargo falls to reach all hold corners, so that drafts may be worked directly on and off the hooks without shaking or skidding.
Mr. Rohn termed the designing of the new cargo vessel as a newer and bolder approach to the problem of more efficient and more economical cargo handling.
Two New Liners Planned for South American Run
New York Herald Tribune, November 16. —The Maritime Commission has begun listing plans and specifications for two large liners for operation on the South America run. Disclosing this today, a commission official told reporters that the vessels probably will be only slightly smaller than the America, now a Navy transport ship. This $17,500,000 commercial vessel is the largest ever built in this country. Tentative plans call for two 700-foot liners displacing about
33,0 tons each. The America is 23 feet longer with a displacement of about 35,000 tons. How soon bids will be asked for the two ships is not known.
New British Whaler
London Times, October 29.—This morning the Southern Venturer, of 14,000 tons gross and 32,000 tons displacement, the first British whaling steamer built since the war, left the Tees direct for South Georgia. After running trials she was delivered to her owners, Messrs. Chr. Salvesen and Co., of Leith. The builders were the Furness Shipbuilding Company, of Haverton Hill. The Southern Venturer is in a hurry. The whaling season in antarctic waters is to be opened by international agreement a few days earlier than before the war—on November 24—and the season is to extend to March 24. The vessel, which has only just been completed, will not reach the whaling waters by the official opening of the season. She is preceded by two Norwegian vessels and will be followed by two British vessels, which until the end of the European war were German owned. She will be joined finally by 10 whale catchers, either new ships or vessels reconditioned after naval work.
The Southern Venturer will be away for from six to eight months. She carries a crew of about 400, including factory workers. The master, Captain H. Nielsen, is Norwegian. Three of the officers are British and two Norwegian; all the engineers arc British and two-thirds of the crew are British.
The food products which the vessel will supply include whale oil, which is used in the manufacture of margarine and soap, and large experimental shipments are to be made of whale meat in dehydrated form, which is said to have high degrees of proteins—from 80 to 85 per cent—and of digestibility. Elaborate machinery has been installed. The vessel and her equipment are believed to be valued at about £1,250,000.
Like other modern whaling factory ships, the Southern Venturer has engines aft and has two funnels parallel painted in the red, white, and blue colors of the owners. The vessel is also distinguished by two sets of tall Samson posts, attached to which are powerful derricks for lifting the carcasses- Between the funnels is a large opening or slipway along which the whales are drawn by winches to the deck where the oil is extracted.
The ship will be able to deal with about 24 blue whales every day. These average in weight from 100 to 150 tons and have been known to weigh 170 tons. The meat of a day’s catch is equal to that provided by from 1,000 to 1,500 head of cattle. The capacity of the ship is about 1,200 blue whales in the season.
this
type operation was the capture of the
MISCELLANEOUS Landing Craft in River Crossings
the Military Engineer, November, 1945, ljy Lt. Col. Marvin C. Ellison.—The armies °f World War 11 have been faced with a Multitude °f river-crossing operations. The Axis Powers first demonstrated that a preponderance of forces coupled with a high °*der of technique could overcome river obstacles, large or small, with little difficulty. J he Japanese showed that they were masters °f the principles of deception and secrecy in crossing numerous swampy deltas of the ffiogles. The Germans relied on power and superior means in spreading to the four corners of Europe. When the tables turned m fuvor of the Allied Nations, ideas were Purloined from the Axis and new ones added in overcoming river obstacles as the Jerry and the Nip were squeezed back into 1'cir lairs. The Russians stressed the use 0 improvised material in their surge western'd across the mighty rivers of the Russian fains. In one crossing of the Vistula, the Russian infantry, supervised by engineers, constructed 10,000 small wooden boats over ‘l period of ten days to cross an overwhelm- jnK force over the river and form a bridge- .’cad. Allied forces introduced landing craft uito river crossing operations to supplement le Normal equipment designed for this job. In spite of the innovations in new river crossing equipment and new ideas in river crossing technique, the principles still fol- .°w doctrine as prescribed in the appropriate j'rmy field manuals. Hasty river crossings dve followed a pattern of rapid movement, rprise, employment of airborne troops or y se'zing an important bridge before the Uemy could destroy it. The epic example of
udendorf Railway Bridge across the Rhine y the 9th Armored Division. Deliberate 1,Ver crossings have called for considerable uuiiing which in the case of a major river °ssing have become almost as detailed as NnsTor an amphibious operation. Plans for fussing the Rhine had a beginning months ?re the crossing of the English Channel, as ^uited States and British engineers looked Uvard to developing special equipment for •Uping this obstacle. The new Floating
Bridge, M-4, made of aluminum alloy, is an outgrowth of planning for the Rhine crossing. Unfortunately this bridge was not placed into production in time to be used in the Rhine crossings.
Such naval terms as beachhead, beach- master, beach-markers and ship ahoy were introduced into river crossings when landing craft, manned by naval personnel, were assigned to units for crossing the Rhine. The success of this plan is historic and further emphasizes that our armies can move, almost at will, over land or water.
LANDING CRAFT USED IN RIVER CROSSINGS
LCVP—Landing Craft, Vehicle, Personnel—manned by naval personnel or personnel from the Engineer Special Brigade, has a capacity of 36 combat troops or 8,100 pounds of cargo.
LCM—Landing Craft, Mechanized— manned by naval personnel or personnel from the Engineer Special Brigade has a capacity of 60 combat troops or a medium tank.
DUKW—2^-ton, 6X6, Amphibious
Truck, manned by Transportation Corps personnel has a capacity of 25 combat troops or 6,500 lb. of cargo.
LVT (4)—Landing Vehicle Track, manned by Armored Force personnel has a capacity of 30 combat troops or 6,500 pounds of cargo. .
EMPLOYMENT OF LANDING CRAFT
The employment of landing craft should not upset the tactical procedure for river crossings as prescribed in Engineer Field Manual 5-6 (Operations of Engineer Field Units). The three objectives in a river crossing arc (quoting from Engineer Field Manual 5-6):
(1) A position the capture of which will eliminate effective direct small-arms fire upon the crossing front.
(2) A position the capture of which will protect the selected pontoon-bridge site from ground-observed artillery fire and which can be supported by light artillery on the near side of the river.
(3) A position the capture of which will protect the bridge site from all artillery fire and will provide proper maneuver space on the enemy side of the river.
These three objectives can be transposed into phases in terms of engineer equipment used to gain each objective.
First Objective—Assault Boat Phase. The assault boat is the principal river crossing means of gaining the first objective.
Second Objective—Rafting Phase. After the first objective has been gained foot bridges and rafts are employed to gain the second objective.
Third Objective—Bridge Phase. After the second objective is gained a bridge is constructed to support the further development and exploitation of the bridgehead.
The above scheme of river crossing fits the equipment as normally supplied the supporting engineer units. When landing craft is introduced into river crossing operations care must be taken in planning employment of the landing craft at the proper time. When secrecy of movement is a prime factor the landing craft must be brought up to the crossing site and scheduled for crossing so as not to furnish valuable information to the enemy. Normally, the best plan is to cross sufficient troops on assault boats and gain the first objective before employing the landing craft. After a foothold has been gained on the far shore, the landing craft can then be employed to run a shuttle service in ferrying troops and equipment.
Crossing sites for landing craft must be selected with several factors in mind. When LCM’s and LCVP’s are employed a means must be provided for transporting these craft to the crossing site and heavy cranes must be made available for launching. Each of these types of craft is capable of crossing a river of average stream velocity with little drift. DUKW’s will drift with the current and provision must be made for a ramp and a turn-around road on the near and far shores. LVT’s will drift with the current to a greater degree than DUKW’s but will negotiate fairly steep banks with some help required by a bulldozer or by hand tools in constructing an approach. However, LVT’s are not designed for long moves overland under their own power and if such a move is to be made, transportation by rail or trailer must be provided to within a mile or so of the crossing site. DUKW sites are located upstream from rafting sites with allowances made in distance to provide for drift. The LVT sites are located downstream from the rafting sites since the greatest amount of drift may be expected from this type craft. LCM’s and LCVP’s may be employed at the most suitable launching site but should not be located too near the bridge or other crossing.
Mine barriers should be located upstream from the bridge and a second barrier system should be located upstream to provide protection against floating mines for the rafting and landing craft crossing sites. The floating mine barriers will not alone suffice in protecting the crossing sites from suicide swimmers or floating demolitions placed below the barrier. Combat troops should provide a patrol completely around the crossing zone and along the river banks to protect the bridge and ferrying operations against enemy demolitions, floating or hand-placed.
A dummy bridge constructed at a likely crossing site will aid greatly in causing the enemy to shift reserves or spread his defense. With the supervisory help of a small detachment of engineer camouflage troops, a dummy bridge may be constructed by combat engineers and cause considerable confusion to the enemy. Anti-aircraft protection and air cover can be provided at the dummy bridge site to add to the effectiveness of the deception.
The employment of landing craft in the build-up of supplies on the far shore will aid materially in the success of the establishment of a bridgehead. LVT’s and DUKW’s can be pre-loaded with priority supplies and dispatched when called for through traffic control center. The DUKW has proved particularly useful in hauling supplies directly from near shore dumps to dumps located on the far shore, requiring the minimum in man-handling. Both the LVT and the DUKW have proved invaluable in the evacuation of casualties. Collecting stations are located at the far shore beaches where casualties are loaded into landing craft and moved to clearing stations on the near shore.
The success of a river crossing depends upon a number of items but none of more importance than an adequate traffic control system. A good traffic control system must have as its foundation a well-organized, well- developed road system leading up to the crossing sites and to the objective on the far shore. In the crossing of an infantry di- Vlsion, supported by an engineer combat Sr°up, a complete traffic control plan should he developed jointly by the division G-4 and fhe commander of the engineer combat Sr°up, utilizing the existing road system to fhe maximum.
Chemical Propellant Found for Bomb
New York Times, December 2.—Development of liquid chemical propellants that pve pilotless bombs a speed of 250 miles an lour by the time they leave a launching ramp only 160 feet long was revealed here today as one of chemical warfare’s secret Projects of the war. Known as the “Fred” Project, the research work occupied a staff oi thirty chemists and engineers who worked or eight months to develop an Allied V-l °mb. From the time work began last 'chruary until weeks after Japan surrendered the research was shrouded in an unpredictable manner.
J he scientists themselves stayed 400 feet away in concrete blockhouses with 36-inch )valls nnd sandbagged roof to conduct their uunching trials. They left only recording camera equipment as close as 20 feet in a concrete bunker.
Capture last fall of a complete ramp and Hunching machine of the German V-l pilot- css bomb started American scientists on the rack. The equipment was turned over to ]u Army Air Forces and set up at Eglin ield, Florida. Later the Army got hold of j “-I bomb including wings and jet motors and CVen a tank car 0f German chemicals and s "Pped them to this country.
American scientists knew Germany used a ydrogen peroxide chemical for launching le V-l bomb, the Army said, but they did n°t know how it was done, what proportions cvere used, and how the chemicals were intro- uced into the reaction chamber. They had ? experiment. And they took their time and P enty 0f precautions.
While the German version was set at an tli^ C ®'ve ^1C b°mb a climbing advantage, lc American version was laid out horizontally with a hill chosen as the object to stop the experimental 5,000-pound solid concrete bomb.
The Army had specified that the JB-2 must be traveling at least 250 miles per hour by the time it reached the end of the ramp, a speed sufficient to start the jet motors designed to power the bomb to its target.
With their own liquid propellants prepared, mixing formula precisely determined and timed by precision instruments, the scientists turned on their automatic cameras and retired to their solid blockhouse 400 feet away.
Pictures showed that the bomb traveled 150 feet on the ramp in nine-tenths of a second and came to rest 300 yards away. A later try ricocheted at 150 yards, digging a 6-foot hole and then struck the ground two more times before stopping. The final trial took place last summer, when jet motors were attached and the bomb was fired from the angled ramp and roared accurately away to its target, a spot in the Atlantic Ocean.
Information on Loran Revealed
New York Herald Tribune, December 16. —One of the Navy’s most carefully guarded war time secrets, a navigational device using electronics to obtain extreme accuracy in fixing aircraft and ship position, is likely to be among the first war-inspired inventions to gain large-scale peacetime use. The device is known as Loran, from an imaginative shuffling of letters in its description: long-range radio navigational aid. With its use, a ship in mid-ocean shrouded in fog, or a plane traveling overseas in heavy weather, can locate its position in a matter of minutes and set a certain course for its port. Used during the war in military craft, the device has been installed on four C-54’s of Pan American Airways, on that company’s commercial New York-to-London run, and the airline is seeking more sets. American Export Airlines has Loran in six transoceanic planes.
Interest among merchant shipping lines has reached the point where the United States Coast Guard, which directs Loran’s operation, is preparing an exhaustive booklet on its peacetime applications. Only manufacturing bottlenecks, the Coast Guard says, are holding up large-scale use.
The principle upon which Loran works is revolutionary in the art of navigation. Its scientific basis is the fact that radio pulses travel at the speed of light, and that two pulses, sent simultaneously from different stations will not arrive at a given point at the same instant, unless that point is equidistant from the two stations. To utilize this principle, a ship at sea or a plane over the sea is equipped with a Loran receiving set. This is tuned to a pair of shore stations some distance apart, which are sending simultaneous radio pulses. The Loran set measures, in millionths of a second, the time lag between the arrival of the pulses.
For a certain time lag there is an infinity of points, strung out in the form of a curve. A reading from a pair of stations, therefore, gives the navigator the line of position on which his ship is proceeding. To find the ship’s exact position on this line, two other stations are tuned in and a second line of position determined. Where the two lines cross is the single point where the ship must be. At 1,000 miles from shore, the ship can calculate its position within one or two miles. Closer to shore, Loran’s accuracy is phenomenal. One Loran set could calculate the position of the Queen Mary’s bow, and another give the corresponding position for that ship’s stern. A ship could be brought safely into a landlocked harbor in a pea-soup fog.
Between the beginning of work on Loran, in 1942, and the defeat of Japan, the Coast Guard set up stations wherever the fortunes of war made it possible. Installations in Iceland, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands permitted Loran to blanket the Atlantic. Its first great use was in protecting convoys: Loran made it possible for aircraft to find the ships they were to guard by fixing their exact position.
In the Pacific, Loran followed the first wave into Japanese-held islands. The B-29 raids over Japan were made possible by advanced Loran stations, which provided navigational fixes as far as Vladivostok. Its advantages over previous methods are manifold. Bad weather frequently makes visual navigation impossible. Similarly, directional devices dependent on radio are neither accurate nor weatherproof. Loran, with a range of 600 to 800 nautical miles by day and 1,400 miles at night, is all but foolproof. And the Coast Guard predicts that within a few years the range will be lifted to as much as
3,0 miles.
Hydrographic charts, essential to the operation of Loran, permit the navigator to read his position almost directly from the Loran set. A chart is provided showing each group of Loran stations, and the complete set of charts covers most of the widely traveled shipping and transocean air line routes.
New Device Keeps Ships in Dry Storage
New York Herald Tribune, December 2, by Howard F. Skidmore.—Putting a fleet in “dry storage’’—perhaps for 20 years—has started at the Philadelphia Navy Yard with the 9-year-old $15,000,000 light cruiser Brooklyn.
When the 10,000-ton Brooklyn was launched in the borough for which she is named, and from which she sailed to earn a gallant battle record in World War II, she was the first of a new design. The cruiser was built with a squared “motor-boat” stern in which 8 aircraft could be carried. Here in recent weeks the Brooklyn has scored another claim to the unusual—she is the first warship to be automatically air-conditioned to control humidity.
The “dehumidification”—as the Navy Department terms it—of the Brooklyn is in line with her role as a demonstration ship in the Reserve Fleet’s program. Under this program, 2,080 ships, 400 of them combat vessels and the remainder auxiliary and other craft—in all, a fifth of the Navy’s wartime strength—will be maintained in inactive status.
Like the Brooklyn, the ships in inactive status will be berthed in navy yards and other anchorages scientifically treated against decay and tended by reduced caretaker crews. According to the Navy, dehumidification will permit these ships to be kept for 20 years or longer. In case of emergency the vessels will be ready to be manned by full crews and put to sea within 10 days.
Although the dehumidification program has been developed by the Navy’s Bureau of Ships, in conjunction with industrial manufacturers, since 1920, it always was known that water vapor in the air—invisible to the eye-—was the greatest enemy of idle ships. Moisture causes speedy destruction through corrosion, verdigris, tarnish, mildew, mold, and rot.
This deterioration was guarded against when the Navy retired some ships after World War I by blanketing the vessel’s machinery with heavy grease. Among these ships were the 50 over-age destroyers which Were turned over hurriedly to Great Britain ]n 1940. And while merchant ships were be- lnK sunk in the Atlantic by submarines for hick of escort, time-consuming man hours Were passed in removing the grease and readying the destroyers for sea.
dehydration makes heavy coatings against moisture unnecessary. Air-conditioning machines of an inexpensive type keep the interior atmosphere of the Brooklyn within a humidity range of 25 and 30 per cent. A range of 50 to 70 per cent humidity is considered desirable for ordinary air-condition- lng of a home or theater.
to keep caretaker personnel at a mini- rnum, a controller-recorder instrument, developed by the Bureau of Ships and the hriez instrument division of the Bcndix Aviation Corporation, controls the dehumidification machinery. Before installation on the Brooklyn, joint tests with this device were conducted aboard an experimental ship, the AVC-1 (aviation catapult), m the Philadelphia Navy Yard as part of lengthy tests of many preservative systems, Methods, and materials.
The controller-recorder measures the humidity in the air at eight locations within the s'i>P and transmits this information to a central station. Here the device automatically computes the average humidity and puts the dehumidifying machines into operation as needed. Humidity and temperature readings, with times of readings for all areas are printed on a tape as a permanent record of air conditions within the ship.
When the controller puts the air-conditioning into operation, the air is drawn by blowers from the upper part of the vessel, passed through fire mains or specially installed piping to the dehumidifying machine and then returned to the interior. A ship may have one or more dehumidifiers, depending on its size, or one machine may serve several small craft.
In the dehumidifiers the air is dried and slightly warmed by being passed through trays of a chemical drying agent, such as silica gel. This is a whitish, granular substance, looking somewhat like rock salt, which picks up from 5 to 34 per cent of its weight in water. It may be used indefinitely by being reactivated by healing. Specially treated silica gel turns a pale pink when it has adsorbed all the moisture it effectively can, and becomes a cobalt blue when reactivated.
Since dehumidification cannot be applied to open spaces, the hulls, decks, and superstructures of ships are weatherproofed by painting or by coatings of the Navy’s special thin-film, rust-preventive compound. All movable deck gear, including weapons, is placed in dehumidified compartments below. Over gear on the weather deck which cannot be removed, temporary housings of thin sheet steel or treated canvas are placed. The interiors of these structures are dehumidified by containers of silica gel.
Although the Navy plans to sell or scrap some 5,000 of the vessels it had in the wartime fleet of 11,500 ships, in the dehumidified Reserve Fleets it is “keeping its powder dry” against possible future need.