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.
130 The New Wave of Cable-Layers
by C. P. Lemieux
132 Ship Tonnages
by Robert Mac Alvanah
137 The Role of Officers in Offices
by Samuel C. Rainey
139 New Paint Job Keeps Reserve Fleet in Shape
by Fred De Wys
Edited by H. A. Seymour Captain, U. S. Navy
During a recent visit to Helsinki, I inspected the Wartsila yards, builders of most of the world’s harbor and oceangoing icebreakers. Wartsila’s chief order of the moment calls for construction of two Soviet cable-laying ships of about 8,000 tons each. While the vessels are still in the early stage of construction, one can observe from the hulls and cable tanks that these are in the approximate class of the British Monarch, which was the principal unit employed in laying the Anglo-American transatlantic telephone cable and other lines of the postwar period. The word on the new Soviet vessels indicates that they will be used in various latitudes. At least, specifications call for equipment for use in both tropical and arctic conditions.
The Soviet venture into cable-laying is, however, not the first sign of an end to the reliance on the British Monarch, Alert, and Ocean Layer in the area of deep sea cable operations. A year ago last June, the French Bureau of Postal and Telecommunication Services for the Section on Submarine Cables accepted from the firm of Augustin Normand the new 4,418-ton cable-layer Marcel Bayard, which has a cable capacity of 1,000 nautical miles (800 less than the Monarch). The Marcel Bayard is equipped to repair and lay submarine cable either forward or aft. Constructed under the special supervision of the Vertas Bureau, this ship is reinforced for navigation in ice. Toward the end of 1961, the French cable-layer was to carry out her first missionlaying the Perpignan-Oran cable.
Two additional cable-layers were launched in Germany during the year 1961 for delivery in 1962. The Neptune, a 10,000-ton GRT vessel, was built at Liibeck, Germany for Union Kebellegungs-Schiffahrts, GmbH., associate with the U. S. Underseas Cable Corporation) Phelps Dodge Corporation, and Northrop
Corporation. With a tank capacity sufficient to lay a transatlantic cable to the U.S.A. in one operation, the Neptune was scheduled to lay 1,700 miles of cable last summer between Iceland and Canada. Heralded as the world’s largest oceangoing cable-laying ship, the GS Long Lines was constructed by Schlieker Werft of Hamburg for the American Telephone and Telegraph Company. This ship can carry 1,800 miles of cable in her three cylindrical vertical storage tanks, plus 100 repeaters (amplifiers) in racks. Designed by
Gibbs & Cox, New York, the new CS should lay cable at 7-8 knots instead of the usual 3.) knots.
It will be recalled that the co-axial cable laid in the Atlantic during 1955 and 1956 represented a co-operative effort of the British Post Office and the American Telephone and Telegraph Company. In this venture, the actual transatlantic operation was effected by the British Monarch and Ocean Layer. The present Monarch was built in 1946 as a replacement for wartime losses of a Monarch and an
March 1963 SHIP TONNAGES
Alert (while laying a cable to France in the wake of the Allied forces). An 8,050-ton vessel, she can carry 1,800 miles of deep-sea telephone cable. The cable is carried in four circular wells or tanks, 41 feet in diameter, each having a capacity of more than 1,000 tons of cable. In operation, cable can be paid out a rate of seven miles per hour.
The laying of telephone cables in the postwar period represented a major breakthrough in almost a century of communications since the Great Eastern completed the first transatlantic telegraph cable laying. Despite the corresponding successes of radio-telephone service, there are evidently ample reasons for extending the use of co-axial cables in many parts of the world. Surprisingly enough, at the very moment when “Telstar” opens up the “mirror in the sky” to television viewers, it would seem that all the major powers require the full control of cable layers for intensified activities on a variety of fronts. Some of these are indicated by the “extra-curricular” activities of the Monarch in various parts of the world: submarine cable to tracking stations from the Air Force Missile Test Center, Cape Canaveral, Florida; transmission of electrical power; and (on a limited scale) co-axial transmission of televised material. Within the mere six years since the coaxial cable was laid, the number of circuits within one cable has been increased from 36 in one direction to 60 in both directions, and non-kinking cable has been developed. Undoubtedly similar operations could be carried out today for much less than the $42,000,000 outlay required by the Anglo-American cable of 1955-56. At current prices, a modern five- million dollar cable ship (which can also double as a cargo vessel) seems reasonable enough if it provides a means of controlling and expediting telecommunications in our shrinking and highly competitive world.
It would be difficult to predict at the present pace of developing communications just when cable systems will become obsolete. However, while we are exploring outer space and bringing the ionosphere into the area of our usual systems of radio communications, it seems evident that our terrestrial infrastructure will entail an increasing use of the co-axial cable by land and sea.
By Robert Mac Alvanah, Master Mariner and Harbor Pilot
When is a ton not a ton? Unfortunately, all too often for seafarers for whom a multitude of tonnage and displacement categories exist in confusing abundance. To assist those interested in gaining a clearer understanding of these marine terms, so often misunderstood and misused, the following general information may prove helpful.
The first and basic fact to be understood and kept in mind is that there are always two different kinds of tons involved: tons by weight and tons by measurement. With weight-tons, the unit used is the long ton of 2,240 pounds and it applies in discussing displacement and deadweight tonnages. 1 he measurement-ton or capacity-ton deals with space, wherein the unit of one ton indicates 100 cubic feet of space. The measurement-ton is used with gross and net tonnages.
I. Displacement and deadweight tonnages are easier to grasp because they are concrete.
A. Displacement tonnage is the weight in long tons of the ship when she is afloat, and is equal to the weight in long tons of the actual water she displaces. For simplicity, we might imagine that if there were a weighing scale of sufficient size whereon one could place the ship, this weight in long tons would be the displacement tonnage.
(1) Light displacement is the weight in long tons of the bare hull and machinery, with nothing on board. At launching, when she first becomes waterborne, if all her machinery is on board, this is light displacement. By nothing on board is meant no stores, no fuel, no national defense features, no crew, °r passengers—just the completely empty ship- The light displacement of a T-2 tanker >s about 5,500 long tons.
(2) Loaded displacement is the weight in long tons of the fully loaded ship, as she floats,
including her hull, machinery, stores, fuel, cargo, crew, and everything on board as when seaworthy, ready to start her voyage. The light displacement plus the loaded deadweight equals the loaded displacement of a ship. The loaded displacement of a T-2 tanker is about 21,880 long tons at summer draft.
B. Deadweight tonnage is the weight in long tons of the carrying capacity of the ship. This ■ncludes the weight of stores, fuel and cargo. The difference between light displacement and loaded displacement is equal to the deadweight tonnage. The average deadweight tonnage of a loaded T-2 tanker is about 16,530 tons, at summer draft.
When a small difference in deadweight tonnage is noted between similar ships (such as T-2’s), it may be attributed to two general
factors:
(1) The first difference may be caused by small differences in the rules of the classification societies amongst the different nations.
(2) Another reason for a difference in deadweight is a difference in the draft of the ship. Every ship may load to her summer saltwater draft, with allowances, which is assigned by a recognized ship classification society, such as Lloyd’s of London, American Bureau of Shipping, etc. The classification societies conform to the regulations of the International Load Line Convention. The summer saltwater draft line of her Plimsoll ttiark is the basic measurement from which all other marks (allowances) are reckoned. To this summer saltwater draft may be added (or subtracted) sufficient fuel and/or cargo f° that she arrives at a line of demarcation 'ndicating a different load line zone, with a draft that is not in excess to the new limiting load line zone.
By the same token, to this summer saltwater draft the ship may also add or sublet sufficient deadweight to get from the new limiting load line zone to her first port °f discharge.
Very heavy fines are provided for violations. I ne important thing is that no ship may jcgally enter into or pass through a load lfie zone in excess of her Plimsoll mark with allowances. When a ship/shipmaster is fined °r violation, it is so much per inch, reckoned at her draft at the load line zone and not ler draft at time of arrival at her first port.
Since the fine is about $500.00 per inch, this is important. When a ship overloads she is inviting real trouble: her insurance, covering cargo, hull, machinery, and other policies, are seriously jeopardized, so much so that if found guilty she has no insurance, the crew’s articles are broken, and the voyage must be terminated.
II. Measurement or Capacity tonnage is somewhat more complicated. The measurement ton is an arbitrary, wholly empirical yardstick fixed at 100 cubic feet per ton. It is used for purposes of taxation, based on the Moor- som System and later revisions. Measurement tons are not used in the actual working of the ship other than to determine harbor and canal dues, etc. The net tonnage of vessels, multiplied by 100, gives a “rule of thumb” to judge the cubic capacity available for cargo. While there is a slight general relationship to the size of the ship, neither gross nor net (measurement) tons express exactly the capacity of the cargo holds. Nor do they, in any way whatsoever, indicate the actual weight in long tons that the ship may lift or have on board. A ton of 100 cubic feet is the unit used in recording the volume of enclosed space in a ship. Example: a space is 42 feet long, 35 feet wide, and 18 feet high, which amounts to 26,460 cubic feet or 264.6 measurement tons.
To understand ship tonnages, it is most important to differentiate clearly between the two terms: “weight tons” and “measurement tons.” In medieval times, sizes of the small sailing vessels were indicated by the number of “tuns” of wine they could carry. This method of determining ship sizes remains basically unchanged to this day. The term “measurement ton” would be more correctly expressed as “measurement tun.”
Almost every known product or commodity has a commonly accepted “stowage factor.” This factor is the number of cubic feet which one long ton, when properly stowed and dun- naged, will occupy. Measurement cargo has a stowage factor of 40 or over. Deadweight cargo has a factor under 40. Freight rates are generally based upon “deadweight or measurement, ship’s option.”
A. Gross registered tonnage, commonly called “gross tons,” is the total enclosed space or internal volume of the ship, in units of 100
cubic feet to the ton, by Moorsom System with later revisions. The rules for finding gross tonnage under the Moorsom System with slight variations in application are used by most civilized nations. The gross tonnage of a T-2 tanker is about 10,441 tons, under American rules.
B. Net registered tonnage, commonly called “net tons,” is the gross tons less certain deductions or exemptions for non-earning space such as: sail locker, a percentage of the engine space, boiler and shaft-alley space, navigational area, and such other enclosed places that are, used exclusively for the working of the ship. When one speaks of a ship’s registered tonnage, it is understood to mean her net registered tonnage. The theory of net tonnage is to arrive at a tonnage figure, for taxation, port dues, etc., based on the earning capacity of the ship. With few exceptions, most ports and nations accept a ship’s net tonnage as a basis of fact, rather than becoming involved in the very complicated process of ship measurement and exemptions. The net tonnage for an American T-2 is about 6,360 tons for all American ports except the American Panama Canal.
The real confusion amongst nations and their ships is to separate what is considered earning capacity and non-earning capacity. What is an acceptable exemption in some countries is not acceptable in others. An example of how complicated this confusion may be is within the legal maritime laws of the United States. There is one set of rules to determine net tonnage for the Panama Canal as enacted by Congress. For all other U. S. ports, there is a different set of rules to determine net tonnage, also enacted by Congress.
gross tonnage to arrive at her net tonnage. The lower the net registered tonnage, the lower the ship’s port dues, taxation, etc. for the ship’s entire life.
Many amusing items may be found, based on the measurement ton. Under the original Moorsom System, which was part of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854, many British tugs had negative tonnage. Its theory was adopted more or less intact by the whole world and is still basically in effect today. Another example was in relation to the former super-liner, Leviathan. As the German Vater- land and under German rules, she meas- sured 23,500 net tons. Under the U. S. Shipping Board (for passenger sales purposes and national pride), it was determined that she (now Leviathan) would be the largest ship in the world, just as she became the fastest ship in the world by running her speed trials in the Gulf Stream off Florida, one way only. By not taking advantage of all available legal exemptions, she emerged under the American flag with a tonnage of 27,700 net tons. When she later passed into private American hands, the new owners became tired of paying exorbitant port dues and taxation under the inflated tonnage figures. Leviathan was remeasured, taking advantage of all legal exemptions, which resulted in a Net Registered Tonnage of 15,800 tons.
Generally speaking, merchant ships are referred to by their gross tonnage. When one speaks of the Queen Elizabeth as 83,673 tons, it is understood to mean that her gross tonnage is 83,673. When we speak of men-of-war, we are speaking of their loaded displacement. The Enterprise is said to be 85,000 tons, which means her loaded displacement lS
85.0 tons. To add a bit to the confusion, a practice amongst tanker people is to refer to merchant tankers is terms of their deadweight tonnage. When we say the Manhattan Js
106.0 tons, that means her deadweight is
106.0 tons. (The Manhattan was briefly the largest thing ever made by man that moves- Her displacement is a third more than that o the Enterprise, largest American warship-) Very often one can see a confused stare come into the face of an uninformed questioner when he gets a reply regarding ship size, because there was no qualifying adjective as to type of tonnage being referred to, which may
There is a very ancient rule that the net registered tonnage and the ship’s official number be carved (now bead-welded) into the main beam or similar area of the ship. Further, it is also required that exempt areas (those that go to make the difference between gross and net tonnage), such as master’s quarters, crew quarters, and all other similar enclosed areas be so identified by carved notices, bead-welded or permanently marked. When one sees the legend, “Certified for Master”, “Certified for Crew Quarters”, “Certified for Navigation,” it means that those areas have been deducted as exemptions from the ship’s
be one of several. To be sure, one should qualify his statement when speaking of ship size or tonnage, such as: gross tons for passenger and freight ships, displacement tons for men-of-war; and deadweight tons for tankers.
For the entire life of a ship and all over the world (at some tariff rate per registered ton), the port dues, taxes, etc., will depend on her net registered tonnage. The lower the net tonnage, the lower will be her operating expenses. Thus, it is most desirable to take advantage of as much exemption as the law allows. There are all kinds of devices that naval architects utilize to get the most ship with the least net tonnage. Examples were the famous “broken-back” ships such as SS Steel Ranger, wherein the whole area of one hatch Was one deck lower than the rest of the main deck. Then there were the “shelter-deckers,” ships with tonnage openings (old-time Hog Islanders). In present day practice, if there is an opening in the upper deck the width of the cargo hatches and four feet in length, and if the opening cannot be closed weather-tight, then all the space under the deck is exempted from the gross and net tonnage. On some present-day C-3 freighters, all the way aft, there may be found a small narrow hatch which is obviously unsuited for cargo movement but it meets all the requirements for exemption. This is a “rule-beater” of today.
„ Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock
The four standard statistical tonnage designators for the C4-S-la Mariner dry cargo vessel, Old Dominion Mariner, typify the profusion of tonnage terminology that leads to confusion and misapplication: gross tonnage—9,216; net tonnage—5,366; deadweight tonnage—13,418; and load displacement—21,093.
It would be simple if the rules for calculating gross tonnage and the many exemptions to obtain net tonnage were uniform throughout the world. Unfortunately this is not true. Some examples are:
A. Under U.S. law (except the American Panama Canal), the entire superstructure above the main continuous deck is exempted from measurement for tonnage.
B. Under U.S. law, but under the American Panama Canal rules, passenger staterooms in the superstructure are measured and included for gross/net tonnage.
C. Under Suez Canal rules and most European countries, all passenger space including public rooms are measured and included for gross/net tonnage.
If American ships were measured by some European rules, their gross and net tonnage would be very much larger. There have been international conferences without end, trying to bring order out of this chaos. At present, the United States is suggesting to the United Nations through the U. N. Assembly that the Panama Canal rules be accepted. This suggestion is the result of a recent important meeting in Oslo, Norway, where most of the maritime nations of the world were represented. At this meeting the nations were in almost unanimous agreement that the Panama Canal rules would be the most practical to be accepted on a world-wide basis.
The ship classification societies, such as Lloyd’s do not write ship insurance. They determine whether a ship is in or out of class. This simple fact determines whether or not she is insured. The minute a ship goes “out of class,” her insurance is null and void. The different ship classification societies exchange information, recognize the work and findings of each other; a surveyor of one may act for another if only one surveyor is available. In general these classification societies work very closely together.
Amongst the different maritime nations there are several ship classification societies, of which two are of interest:
A. The American Bureau of Shipping (A.B.S.) is a non-profit organization, created by an Act of Congress. Its action has the full force of law. It is the only organization in the U.S.A. empowered to classify or to withhold the classification of a ship. This act of classification is done by means of a “Seaworthy Certificate.” All over the world, A.B.S. has representatives and surveyors. When there is reason to suspect an accident, an authorized surveyor conducts a survey, as thoroughly as
possible. The surveyor either withdraws the ship’s Seaworthy Certificate or allows it to remain in force. The surveyor may add a recommendation for certain corrective action at a specific place and time. These recommendations are exactly obeyed.
(1) The A.B.S. is not an insurance underwriter. However, all American maritime insurance, without exception, is based on the A.B.S. Seaworthy Certificate. The minute a ship loses her “Seaworthy,” that minute she is “out of class.” The minute she is “out of class,” that minute all her insurance is null and void.
(2) The A.B.S. publishes a book called The Record of the American Bureau of Shipping. The Record contains the names, numbers, particulars, and classification of the ships classed only by the A.B.S.
B. Lloyd’s Register of Shipping United with British Corporation (commonly called Lloyd’s) is the British ship classification society. Its work and functions are similar to the A.B.S.
(1) Lloyd’s Register is a book similar to the A.B.S. Record except that Lloyd’s includes the names of all ships, all over the world, if that information is available to them-
Lapel Button
To Members only: one dollar
Write:
Secretary-T reasurer U. S. Naval Institute Annapolis, Maryland
The services of a classification society are not limited to its own nationality. A.B.S- does classify American, British, Panamanian and many other flags. The British Lloyd’s also classify their own and many other flags. At about amidships on the outside of the hull of every ship, there is a Plimsoll Mark. On the Summer Saltwater mark will be found two letters. These are the initials of her classification society.
the role of
OFFICERS IN OFFICES
Broadly defined, the duty of a naval officer is to prepare for and to wage war—on, above, or under the sea. It is a primary characteristic of his career that almost all of it will be spent in preparation; only a minute fraction, perhaps minutes, will involve direct engagement with an enemy.
There is no post within the Navy that does not contribute to this preparedness. This is true even though detractors both in and out of uniform may debate the value and necessity of the present strength of the officer corps and the real need for any one of the infinite variety °f assignments given to officers. The contribution of each officer assignment to the Navy’s mission of sea warfare is of necessity explained and re-explained to reviewing authorities in Washington; and there is a carefully defined chain of command that links each naval officer to the President of the United States. As a group, officers of the Navy and their mission are vital to the nation and to the world, to say nothing of the Navy which they serve.
But only the most callow or obtuse officer tvill fail to comprehend that no facet of this v'tal mission can be carried out without the supporting effort of the many civilian employees of the Navy Department, of other agencies of the Department of Defense, and of a host of industrial organizations. Such civilians furnish the Navy with its ships, its aircraft, its supplies, its instruments, and often Us tactics. In fact, of the infinite variety of °fficer assignments referred to, a very large Uumber require naval executive direction of these indispensable civilian efforts; and probably every single officer in the Navy must at some time or other in his career fulfill this executive function.
And yet, by and large, the officers of the Navy and the civilians who support the Navy do not understand one another. They act at cross purposes. They do not co-operate well. They waste much time in internecine strife across a military-civilian battle line. This strife can, and indeed often does, vitiate the contribution that each officer is expected to make to the Navy’s mission, for it obviates a productive team effort.
Why is it then that officers and their civilian associates so often grind their teeth in mutual frustration at each other’s fatuity? It is undoubtedly true that in individual cases, psychological mismatings exist which are of great subtlety and utter impregnability. It is also possible that civilians a given officer deals with really are ignorant, incompetent and immovable. Or officers themselves may be lazy, unable to speak intelligible English, or pathologically irascible. This results in in- calcuable harm.
But most often, it simply boils down to this: the officer and office worker have forgotten (or did not know in the first place) what really constitutes the specialized role each
Send A Copy To Your Friends
. . . WITHOUT CHARGE
U. S. NAVAL INSTITUTE Annapolis, Maryland
Please send a free copy of United States Naval Institute Proceedings with my compliments to the persons listed below:
To .................................................
Address..........................................
City......................... State..............
• • •
To .................................................
Address..........................................
City......................... State..............
Sender ..........................................
Address................................................
must play. The havoc that can be caused by a general failure to comprehend the proper complementing of duties is fantastic.
Yet these roles may be stated broadly and simply. The officer is there to command; he is there to direct the effort of civilians into channels he knows lead to the ultimate in naval warfare efficiency. The civilian is there for another purpose. He is expected to have skills, knowledge, and talent of value to the ultimate conduct of sea warfare, and to apply these abilities to the preparation for it. To the extent that these criteria do not apply in specific situations, to that extent are the performers wholly miscast.
This definition of the situation provides its own answer to the problem: let each class give utmost attention to playing the proper role.
Let the officer keep constantly in mind a most clear and current picture of his work in relation to the rest of that complex structure which leads to naval preparedness. Let him learn to understand the people he directs and the technical language they speak. But above all, let him remember (or for heavens’ sake learn) the centuries-old, basic principles of how to command.
Do the principles of command theory derived painfully over the years in thousands of ships of a hundred navies apply to the dealings of officers with civilians in this complex technological arms race? The answer is, absolutely and finally, yes. Certainly the principles apply, though occasionally the techniques need modern dress.
For instance, the most corrosive attribute achieveable is still the inability of one in authority to make a decision and hold to it. It was always so and always will be so. Similarly, that sister evidence of inadequacy, the stubborn refusal to listen to facts before a plan is set in stone undoubtedly infuriated subordinates on triremes in ancient Greece. It still does. The lack of ability to assign authority, the loss of emotional control under stress, the failure to treat subordinates with dignity, the evils of favoritism and broken confidence all these decreased the efficiency of Napoleon’s navy no less than they can delay development of a missile system today.
It may in fact be validly argued that the principles of command are even more puissant in the environment under discussion than ever before. As skills and specialties become more and more complex, the requirement for effective manipulation of these skills implies greater and greater refinement and technique. As an example, a Navy bureau comprises an empire of enormous magnitude; to command it well requires superlative skill on the part of its officers.
An officer who d.evotes himself to all that this definition of his role implies will in general be as busy as three men, even without attempting to compete with civilians in their own specialties, without doing their work for them, without abrogating their authority, and without wasting time trying to prove he is a scientist among scientists or a welder among welders. By his initial training, and by constant application thereafter, he can keep himself in a position to provide that most sorely needed commodity: enlightened, executive direction. If he has competent people, this suffices; if he does not have them, and cannot get them, then he faces a situation which is very nearly hopeless.
Similarly, the civilian has or should have enough work to occupy any eight-hour day or forty-hour week. He can then reasonably leave to a competent officer the weaving of his work into the larger tapestry. He will of course be most sensitive to defects in the officer’s performance of his command function. And he will shudder when the Navy’s remarkable officer-rotation system turns up a man who is badly uninformed in the area for which he will thenceforth be responsible. But he must consider it his obligation to provide soberly the continuity of effort required in any pursuit; and he must bear in mind that it is he (and not the officer) who in the last analysis is expected actually to do the work of the office. Observation of these precepts by those in and out of uniform will do much to smooth a path that is inherently rocky and difficult.
Finally, it is important to note that the clear and tactful delineation of the officer’s role, and of the civilian’s role, in the business of the Navy, falls to the lot of the officer. Since his profession and charge is command, he must in general be the one who takes the time and trouble to make this matter clear to the civilian. And it will be worth it in terms of money saved, time saved, feelings saved, but most importantly, in terms of fighting strength-
NEW PAINT JOB KEEPS RESERVE FLEET IN SHAPE
Fred de Wys
During the next two years, the National Maritime Administration will use almost
100,0 gallons of oil preservative paint in adding a protective exterior coating to the 187- ship Hudson River Reserve Fleet at Jones Point, New York.
“We’re working an eight-man crew for an average of 100 man-hours per ship in repainting these vessels,” the Fleet Captain recently stated. "We expect to paint almost half the fleet between May and October next year. Each ship takes about 500 gallons of Maritime Gray oil preservative paint.”
The Hudson River Reserve Fleet consists of ten tiers of ships, placed alongside of each other in groups of ten to 18. Located just off Jones Point on the west bank of the Hudson River, the fleet is made up of Victory ships, C-l and C-2 Cape-type vessels, Liberty ships, and troop transports.
The painting crew is preceded by a water blast team that chips off old paint and rust
Eastern Photos
with a water stream under 250 pounds pressure to produce 500 gallons per minute. After the water has thoroughly evaporated, the paint crew goes to work.
First, the clean-up operation is followed by greasing of the turnbuckles, sockets, goosenecks, and boomstays so that the ships can be commissioned and ready for sea duty within two weeks.
Then, a converted, 50-foot LCM is used as a barge to paint the bow and stern with sprayers operating under 800 pounds pressure. This barge is equipped with a compressor, from which three f-inch main lines lead to the deck where six to eight half-inch secondary lines carry paint to individual sprayers operated by the paint crew.
A six- or eight-man crew normally handles the top deck and all its fixtures, but the sides present a problem which is solved by using a small dinghy from which two-man crews use sprayers with extensions to apply the oil preservative paint.
The dinghy readily plies the space between the 5j-foot ship separations provided by wooden block fenders. Working in conjunction with this crew are men on the top deck, who place eight-foot extensions on their sprayers to reach the same distance over the sides. Because there is a heavy oil content— one part to every three parts paint—the coating can take as long as a month to dry, depending on the humidity.
The painting program was started near the close of summer 1961 as the result of complaints to Congressmen by local residents and passers-by who mistook the red lead preservative, formerly used, to be rust.
In spite of a large informative sign, complaints continued to pour into Washington about the “neglected” fleet, so that corrective measures had to be taken. Hence, the decision to switch to Maritime Gray oil preservative.
Of the 100 man-hours required to completely cover a ship—top, hull, bow, and stern—about 70 hours are actually spent painting, the remaining 30 being taken up with preparation, cleaning the surfaces and greasing up the fixtures.
It will take about two years to do the whole fleet, after which time it will be decided whether or not to start over again with additional preventive coatings.
Notebook
U. S. Navy
Navy Reactivates Two Patrol Torpedo Boats: The U. S. Navy is reactivating two patrol torpedo boats from the mothball fleet. The two boats, PT-810 and PT-811, will be redesignated PTF-1 and PTF-2 (patrol torpedo boat, fast) when placed in active service with the fleet on 21 December 1962.
Assigned to the Commander, Amphibious Force, U. S. Atlantic Fleet, PTF-land PTF-2 will be based at Little Creek, Virginia, and will be used for special operations with the Navy’s Sea-Air-Land Teams.
The Sea-Air-Land Teams, better known as SEAL teams, are Navy units trained to conduct unconventional and paramilitary operations and to train personnel of allied nations in these techniques.
All torpedo tubes are being removed from the PT’s during reactivation overhaul to decrease the weight of the boats, which in turn will increase speed capability to approximately 45 knots. World War II armament consisting of 20-millimeter and 40-millimeter guns will be retained for surface and antiaircraft action. When reactivated, PTF-1 and PTF-2 will become the only PT boats in active service with the U. S. Navy. (Department of Defense, 19 November 1962.)
Perry’s Niagara Under Restoration: $80,000 has been set aside by the State of Pennsylvania for the restoration of the brig Niagara, Commodore O. H. Perry’s victory ship in the Battle of Lake Erie. The funds will permit the outfitting of masts and rigging on the replica of the brig which currently rests on a hillside overlooking the Port of Erie. The replica contains part of the keel of the original vessel which is the sole remaining portion of the historic ship. The outfitting of the replica will be completed in time for the September 1963 Sesquicentennial observance of Perry’s victory over the British. (Lieutenant Frank Cummins, USNR-R.)
Foreign
RCN Adopts New Helicopter for the Fleet:
Approval has been given for the commencement of a program to equip the Royal Canadian Navy with helicopters of the most modern type, the Minister of National Defense has announced.
The helicopter selected is the Sikorsky HSS-2 and negotiations to acquire eight of these machines for the RCN in 1963-64 are now under way. The HSS-2 will replace the H04S-3, an earlier Sikorsky type that for the past seven years has been operated by the RCN’s antisubmarine Helicopters Squadron 50 from the aircraft carrier, HMCS Bonaven- ture, and the naval air station, HMCS Shearwater in Nova Scotia.
Due to the long production time required for some of their weapons systems, the first three aircraft will not be fully equipped until 1964. Until then, these helicopters will be used primarily for crew training. Later, Helicopter Squadron 50 will be re-armed with six HSS-2’s.
The twin-engine turbine-powered HSS-2 will be the first RCN helicopter designed and equipped to conduct all-weather, night and day antisubmarine search and attack missions. Earlier types lacked the all-weather and nightflying capability. Significant also is the fact that the hull-shaped fuselage provides an emergency water landing capability and that automatic folding of the rotor blades and tail section simplifies onboard stowage. The HSS-2 will be equipped with the most modern helicopter navigation, detection and weapon systems including “dunking sonar” and homing torpedoes. These will give the HSS-2 the capability of locating, tracking and attacking any submarine.
Each helicopter will have a crew of four, two pilots and two sonar operators. Normal operational weight will be approximately
17,0 pounds.
As the new helicopters come into service a
progressive program of fitting RGN ships with helicopter handling facilities will be well underway. Two Mackenzie-class destroyer escorts now under construction are being equipped with helicopter platforms. The seven St. Laurent-class destroyer escorts will undergo a conversion part of which involves the fitting of helicopter facilities. Work on the first two has commenced.
The decision to equip destroyer escorts with helicopters follows extensive trials carried out by the RCN to determine the feasibility of operating helicopters from escort vessels and to assess the capability of the helicopter in the antisubmarine role. Temporary platforms were fitted, first in the frigate Buckingham, then in the destroyer escort Ottawa, and from these ships, helicopters were thoroughly tested under various sea conditions and in exercises with submarines.
The addition of the helicopter to its weapons systems will have the effect of greatly increasing a destroyer escort’s radius of search, detection and attack. Of particular benefit will be the ability it will give a ship to deliver a long-range attack on a target that is beyond the reach of shipborne weapons.
The plan to place helicopters in ships will result in a major improvement in the antisubmarine capability of the RCN. (Armed Forces News, Ottawa, 20 November 1962.)
Float On, Float Off Ship: A great deal has been heard lately of “roll-on, roll-off” ships, but Harland & Wolff, Ltd. of Belfast, England, are now developing a “float on, float off” ship. They have announced that they “have been investigating from a technical point of view a form of float on, float off, cargo carrier designed to lead to a fuller utilization of the parent vessel with attendant savings in the operating costs of the shipowner.” They state that “we are in a position to develop our ideas more fully in co-operation with any interested shipowner with particular reference to his service requirements.” The system is for an outer “mother” ship with the usual engines, equipment and accommodation, which would carry cargo in a detachable barge-like container or containers. When the ship arrived at a port a container which had already been loaded would be floated on to the ship, allowing a quick turn-round.
Advantages claimed are that the mother ship, with her expensive machinery and equipment, would not be lying idle in port during discharging or loading, which would mean that the capital invested in her would be earning a better over-all return. Dirty cargoes could be carried without soiling the mother ship, which would mean that a ship could easily be switched over from coal cargoes to food cargoes. This idea is based on a suggestion by a Dublin inventor. A number of shipping lines are understood to have been supplied with details already. This type of vessel would appear to be at least a relation to a new assault ship being built for the Royal Navy. This will carry landing craft inside her hull which can sail out of her stern when she is lowered in the water by flooding compartments. The new assault ship has been designed for putting tanks, vehicles and men on to a beachhead in large numbers. (Nautical Magazine, December 1962.)
HMS Devonshire, First of the County-Class DLG’s, Now Commissioned: The Devonshire, which was commissioned recently is likely to become known as “the push-button ship.” In her, the Royal Navy will be accepting automation in its most advanced forms.
This, the first of the 5,200-ton guided missile destroyers of the County-class, will carry electric equipment costing as much as the rest of the ship. By working a lever—much like the gear shift of a car—a coxswain can plug into automatic control, whose accuracy exceeds all manual methods.
It is in the operations room, however, that one finds the full implication of naval automation. This is part of a citadel, fully protected against the effects of nuclear fall-out, where members of the ship’s company can turn knobs and press buttons which control radar, Asdic, guided missile computers and other ship equipment.
There the captain could watch and direct the course of a battle without climbing to the bridge. His sea cabin is, in fact, adjoining the operations room and not in the traditional situation near the bridge. If he needs to go to the bridge, he will do so by elevator.
Hundreds of miles of wire and hundreds of pieces of equipment have been fitted into the ship. About 20 per cent of the equipment is
devoted to the guided missile systems, which will handle both the Sea Slug and Seacat weapons. Missiles are the main armament but the potential striking power of her guns alone is phenomenal. Her four 4.5-inch radar- controlled guns are said to have two-thirds of the fire power of all eight Daring-class destroyers in the Royal Navy.
Automation is by no means limited to the fighting components of the ship. Between decks there is a machinery remote control room where engineers can control and watch the performance of both steam and gas turbine machinery on a series of dials, and do so in a restful atmosphere against a background color of lime green.
Built by Messrs. Cammell Laird at Birkenhead, the Devonshire has already steamed more than 9,000 miles during contractors’ trials and her guided missile systems have been tested. She has been built with the implications of nuclear warfare in mind. Captain
P. N. Howes, R.N., her commanding officer, will be the first officer of the Royal Navy to take a guided missile ship to sea. (The Navy, November 1962.)
Royal Navy Operates Mine-hunting Sonar:
The 400-ton coastal minesweeper HMS Shoulton has been fitted with a special type of sonar which allows her to detect and classify any mine-like object on the sea bed with accuracy and range previously impossible. Although the equipment is designed for minehunting, it has proved extremely useful in finding crashed aircraft, rockets and other weapons at sea. The ship requires little more than a vague bearing of the object’s position— accurate only to within a few miles—to enable her to locate quickly exact positions of underwater objects. The equipment offers perhaps the most effective method of mine-hunting in existence.
On board the equipment is operated in a specially-designed, air-conditioned operations room manned by two officers and three ratings. The crew of five officers and 31 ratings on the Shoulton includes a team of divers who, on occasions, have operated in water temperatures down to four degrees Centigrade to confirm contacts obtained by the sonar.
Since 1960 the ship has taken part in four naval exercises and given seven major demonstrations of the equipment for the French, Belgian, Dutch, German, Swedish and Mediterranean NATO navies. Since the end of 1960 over 400 hours of operational experience have been gained with the system.
During the time that the Shoulton was fitted out with the equipment she has been called on by several countries to search for a variety of underwater objects. During one aircraft search she found a sunken helicopter in four minutes.
The Royal Navy intends to convert other coastal minesweepers for mine-hunting during the next two or three years. A mine-hunting squadron might consist of four ships. Two coastal minesweepers would carry special sonar and they would be followed up by two 120-ton inshore minesweepers carrying divers whose task would be to render safe each mine found.
Some of the Shoulton’s work has produced surprising results. On several occasions some
Notebook 145
interesting additions have been introduced in the chow line. One sonar contact led to the discovery of a battleship’s anchor and cable off Portland, arousing memories of some long- forgotten executive officer’s nightmare. Other finds have included fossilized trees off the Dutch coast; a sea chest from the battlecruiser HMS Hood; the wreck of an armed trawler inhabited by a very large crab; the 6- foot driving wheel of a locomotive off Den Helder and a ship’s galley stove. In fact, it has been found possible to detect objects the size of a chocolate can on the sea bed.
One of the first known occasions when the equipment was used was in September 1958. The experimental ship then being used to test the equipment was sent to locate the Wreck of a Scimitar strike fighter which crashed when landing on the carrier Victorious •n the English Channel. So accurate was the sonar that it was possible to say exactly at what angle the aircraft was lying on the sea hed and to show what components had broken away from the main body of the wreck.
One particular operational role for the new sonar will be the detection of pressure or “oyster” mines in shallow water. These mines are virtually unsweepable by a surface ship and though only effective in water up to 50 feet in depth the use of divers to render them harmless, once they had been detected, would seem a most obvious answer. (Desmond Wettern.)
Maritime General
The Forgotten Muscogee: In April 1865, the Confederate ironclad gunboat, the Muscogee, was sunk by her crew in the Chattahoochee River, a few miles south of Columbus, Georgia, to prevent her from being captured by Union troops.
The Muscogee sank out of memory, as well as out of sight, until she was discovered accidentally last year. Citizens in Columbus began a drive to raise the Muscogee, but they have to act quickly or the remaining portion of the ship will be lost forever.
ON THE DELAWARE • SINCE 1916 . CHESTER, PA.
Shipbuilding & dry dock company
y~—\------------------------ \ ■ \ -."‘tx-I—«— \ \ \ • \ v ~ * \i . | -------- 4Z-—f / *7------------------------------ J.------- y / ’ / / / ' / ■ / |
| / - / / - / y yy /—v / |
|
|
............ S? | in |
Serving our global navy With U S Navy Forces on the seven
seas go auxiliary vessels built by Sun Ship in direct support of fleet capabilities. In Peace and war, Sun Ship has long occupied a leading position in designing and constructing vessels which have been of important service to the Navy.
Sun is proud of its contribution to national security.
The Walter F. George dam is scheduled
ARMSTRONG
SET-UP and HOLD-DOWN TOOLS
Cut set-up time. Prevent accidents. Reduce spoilage. Save: Man-hours, machine-hours and profits.
Drop-forged, heat treated strong. Write for catalog.
ARMSTRONG BROS. TOOL CO.
5226 W. Armstrong Ave. Chicago 46. III.
See Us in Booth $1801 ASTME Show, Chicago
to be completed at the end of January and when its reservoir fills, salvage operations will be impossible. The boat is now in eight feet of water, but this depth can be lowered considerably by shutting off dams and sluices up river.
The salvagers have already raised the stern and are now working on the bow. They split the vessel in two with dynamite charges more than a third of the way back from the bow. The section that has been raised is 104 feet long; the bow section is 65 feet long. Floats and a crane brought the stern section to the surface and it was taken by tugboat to Columbus where the gunboat is to be installed in a museum.
So far the operation has cost $25,000, not counting voluntary labor and borrowed equipment. The salvagers estimate they will need an additional $50,000-$60,000 to raise the bow and dig around for the ship’s cannon and other equipment. The city of Columbus is donating $10,000, and Governor Ernest Vandiver has set aside $30,000 in state funds. The balance will be raised by private subscription. (Harold Davis, The National Observer, 17 December 1962.)
German Nuclear Ship Work to Begin Soon: Construction of the world’s second nuclear-powered merchant ship will begin early in 1963 in the State-owned Howaldts- werke Shipyard in West Germany.
The contract was signed yesterday. Officials said the 466-foot ship would cost about $12,500,000 with most of the money to be spent on the reactor.
The freighter, to be used chiefly for research purposes, is scheduled to start sailing in 1968. It will carry a crew of 60 plus 53 scientists, engineers and other experts. (The Baltimore Sun, 30 November 1962.)
Japanese Yards Plan Hinged Ships: The
Kobe shipyard of Shin-Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., has worked out a revolutionary shipbuilding design for “hinged” or “joined” oceangoing ships.
Under this design, the invention of Etsuo Nakagawa, Mitsubishi shipyard engineer, who has completed long-time research studies dating back to March 1953, the front and rear sections of a ship are built in separate slips, the two being joined together later with a huge steel bolt amidships. Though designed to operate as one complete ship, the two portions when afloat have independent mobility, moving up and down separately on the bolt or connecting pin like a huge hinge, in response to the waves’ undulation.
The severing power caused on a large vessel by waves and the weight of the ship, which acts so as to bend both upward and downward, will be reduced to nearly zero by the new Nakagawa “jointed” ship technique.
As usual in the construction of large bottoms, about 70 to 75 per cent of the whole weight of necessary steel materials for the hull are for the midsection and are decided on the basis of the maximum longitudinal bending movement. But the steel materials used in the “hinged” ship now will be far less than in orthodox shipbuilding methods because requirements for steel materials employed in the midsection are less, in terms of the longitudinal bending movement.
The 132,000-ton Nissho Maru, just delivered as the largest tanker afloat, uses a total of
26,0 tons of steel, with 40-millimeter thick outer plating and 38-millimeter thick plates for the bottom.
The newly devised Mitsubishi method reduces the thickness of outer plating to 18 millimeters and that for the bottom to 20 millimeters, saving thus approximately 5,200 tons of steel in a ship the same size as Idemitsu Kosan Company’s now Persian Gulf-bound giant tanker. The diameter of the bolt, or connecting pin, is half a meter in this instance. (The Christian Science Monitor, 11 December 1962.)
Soviet Hunts Fish in Diving Vessels: The
Soviet Union is sending men—and women— deep into the sea to look for fish.
They are lowered 1,500 feet or more in pressure-resistant containers and left suspended there to observe oceanic life.
The diving vessels are described by the Russians as “hydrostats,” although in English the word usually refers to a device for indicating (and sometimes regulating) water depth. It also is a mechanism that prevents the explosion of overheated boilers.
Additional deep-water research is being done by the submarine Severyanka. The latter is a converted combat vessel that displaces some 1,030 tons on the surface and 1,180 tons when submerged. It is said to have made six research cruises in the North Atlantic.
According to Soviet sources, it spends part of its time with the fishing fleet, scouting out schools of fish in the depths and giving a third dimension to knowledge of their migrations.
The hydrostats are reminiscent of the bathysphere designed by Otis Barton and used by William Beebe in his descents of the 1930’s. On one typical voyage, described in Soviet journals, the research ship Tunets made a 45-day voyage from Murmansk as far west as Davis Strait, located between Canada and Greenland.
On this journey, which took the ship close to the polar pack ice north of Iceland and Jan Mayen, a hydrostat was lowered 71 times. All told, 113 hours of observations were carried out at various depths, despite fog and heavy seas.
There has been talk, in the Soviet press, of designing a more advanced submarine for such work, but there is no indication that the project is being carried out. (Walter Sullivan, New York Times, 1 December 1962.)
An Invitation
To all those who love ships and the sea from
THE AMERICAN NEPTUNE
The American Neptune cordially invites readers of The Naval Institute Proceedings and all others who love ships and the sea to subscribe to this quarterly journal of maritime history. Subscriptions are $10.00 by calendar years.
THE AMERICAN NEPTUNE, INC.
PEABODY MUSEUM SALEM, MASSACHUSSETS
Progress
Edited by H. A. Seymour Captain, U. S. Navy
Simulated Lunar Landing—A Bell X-14A vertical landing and takeoff jet demonstrated the remarkable accuracy of VTOL/STOL landings in a vertical approach from 1,000 feet during recent NASA tests.
UH-2A Seasprite Operational —The Seasprite gas-turbine- powered helicopter is note operating as a utility and rescue craft with Utility Squadron 2 at Lakehurst. With a range greater than 300 miles and a speed of over 135 knots, the UH-2A will replace existing piston-engined utility helicopters in the Fleet.
Kaman Aircraft
TV Cloud-Picture Receiver—This new receiver for NASA will "catch” pictures of cloud formations the world over from orbiting weather satellites. It will operate principally in conj unction with the NIMBUS weather satellite, scheduled for launching in late 1963.
Athwartships Bow Propeller on Lakes Carrier—A bow thruster propeller unit, for aiding in the docking and undock- lng of large ships, has been installed in foe 600-foot, 14,000-ton ore carrier Henry Ford II. The control console for the reversible propeller unit is in foe pilot house.
New 14-million-dollar USCG Cutter—The Coast Guard is planning a new class of 350-foot rescue cutters. This artist’s conception depicts the 2,688- t°n vessel, which will have a speed of over 2 5 knots.