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.
FRACTURED REGULATIONS, CUSTOMS, AND TRADITIONS
U. S. Navy
Edited by Captain Daniel M. Karcher,
142 Fractured Regulations, Customs, and Traditions
By Lieutenant L. M. Moore, U. S. Navy
144 USNS Corpus Christi Bay (T-ARVH-1)
By Captain Arthur F. Rawson, Jr., U. S. Navy
148 The Army’s Floating Aircraft Maintenance Facility
By Colonel John F. Sullivan, TC, U. S. Army
151 Nautical Rules of the Road, Revised
Lieutenant Commander David G. Smith, U. S. Navy
154 Notebook
This article is presented in the hope that naval officers will take action to improve the correct observance of regulations, customs, and traditions in everyday life of those about us, aboard ship or station.
Few of us study or review customs or traditions even though we constantly use them, and the evidence of our errors in such use is widespread through our ships and commands.
Often, while on the bridge, I am reminded of those beloved shopping hours with my wife, for I hear the word market. Alas, it is only the quartermaster, bearing taker, officer of the deck, helmsman, or even the navigator who now says mark it in lieu of mark, while going about his work.
The next time you hear mess call piped, listen to it on various ships and the odds are that a large number of boatswain’s mates delete “passing the word” prior to the much noticeable “veer.” I have not been keeping a tabulation, but my guess would be that approximately 50 per cent of our boatswain’s mates have learned to pipe a call by ear, and were tuned to the wrong public address system when learning.
For all drills and morning and evening alerts, the word this is a drill should be passed before the general alarm is sounded. Sounding the general alarm without the this is a drill preceding means a genuine emergency. How many ships have you known to make this mistake?
Boat gongs, when used to indicate the imminent arrival or departure of certain officers, should be sounded in time to make the departure or arrival known. When used in this manner, gongs are not honors, but are used merely for the convenience of those concerned
aboard ship. This is a custom for officers who are senior to the commanding officer and should be used only when their arrival or departure is not generally known. Gongs are not to be sounded when the executive officer is prepared and waiting on the quarterdeck to greet the commanding officer, or when the commanding officer escorts or awaits his unit commander or visiting seniors. The sounding of such gongs may be several minutes before actual arrival of the visitor at the quarterdeck in order for those concerned to arrive in time properly to greet the senior officer.
All boats approaching a ship at night should be hailed as soon as they are within hearing distance. The watch aboard ship should call out boat ahoy, as prescribed in the Watch Officer's Guide. During the current Cold War numerous boats approach well within hailing distance with no hail or improper response. The coxswain’s reply, usually silence, in many cases would be passing.
How often (since 1948), have you heard the following over the public address system: now boatswain’s mate chief jones . . . or
PN2 SMITH, LAY TO . . .?
A gross misuse of titles has developed to a degree so strong that far too many believe this method to be correct. Let us show proper knowledge of these time honored titles and ensure in the future they are passed for all to hear as now jones, chief boatswain’s mate . . . and smith, personnel man second
CLASS. . . .
A lack of knowledge of when to salute has become more common place and harder to correct than the failure to salute. The most prevalent error is for personnel to interrupt their work to salute. This is readily tolerated by most officers. We fail to take corrective action on the spot due to the philosophy of “if in doubt salute” routine, or, “do not embarrass an individual who is overly courteous.” With the continued increases of this
A change of command ceremony, as this for the Commander-in-Chief Pacific Fleet held aboard a guided missile cruiser, involves regulations, customs, and traditions. All can help make a better Navy if properly understood and used.
Robert D. Moeser
erroneous action and little or no corrective action being taken, soon the majority of our men will interrupt their work to salute and the newly commissioned officer will expect and possibly demand it.
The improper display of the National Ensign when the commanding officer is embarked in a boat of his command or in one assigned for his personal use is a frequent error, one which would not be committed if more officers were familiar with Article 2166 of United States Navy Regulations (1948).
Have you noted the increased misuse of sea terminology throughout the Fleet in the past few years? Some of the frequently misused terms are:
dock: Strickly speaking, restricted to water spaces between adjacent piers . . . dock trials —trial of main engines while ship is moored alongside a pier.
pier: Structure extended out into the water with sufficient depth alongside to accommodate vessels. Misuses include “to sweep the dock” and “trash and garbage to receptacles on the dock.”
quay: Usually mispronounced with a long “a”; correctly prounced key. A wharf or a landing for receiving and discharging cargo.
mark: A call used in comparing watches, compass readings, or bearings. Often misused by saying mark it.
forward: Toward the bow, opposite of aft. Often we hear “I’m going up forward.” Why is the word “up” added?
aft: In, near, or toward the stern of the vessel. Again, we too often hear “I’m going back aft.”
lay to: One reports to a person and lays to a place.
In the absence of an officer whose personal flag or pennant is normally displayed, an absence indicator shall be displayed by his ship “from sunrise to sunset” according to United States Navy Regulations (1948), not from 0800 until sunset, as thought by some watch personnel. I am certain that it is not necessary that the absentee pennant be displayed. When the officer is on the pier or in a ship alongside in all actuality he is not absent, nor do we need to await his foot on the quarterdeck to haul down.
When piping mess call the average boatswain’s mate will attempt to obey the guide lines, “it shall cover no less than one minute,” yet too many are piping the call incorrectly and missing at least ten seconds of the call. The piping of “mess call,” consists of “all hands,” a long “heave around,” and long “pipe down.” The last is where the boatswain’s mates stray. “Pipe down” consists of two short calls, “passing the word” and “veer.” “Passing the word” seems to have been lost. The pertinent publications still describe this call.
The danger exists that not only will the aforementioned items continue to be improperly carried out by both action and word, but that the sickness will spread until the majority of us will have spent years perfecting errors. If we continue to ignore such areas only a few of which have been mentioned above, the illness will spread.
The Navy Department has given us rules and regulations, customs, honors, and ceremonies. Common sense dictates that we correct fallacies and errors. First, we should know the proper way, and there are publications that will tell us the proper way.
Do not underestimate the value of the Navy’s traditions, customs, and ceremonies, for when understood and properly directed they effect a discipline and instill an esprit de corps of tremendous significance to us all. Spread the word, but be certain you are right.
By Captain Arthur F. Rawson, Jr.,
U. S. Navy,
Special Projects Officer,
Military Sea Transportation Service
USNS CORPUS CHRISTI BAY (T-ARVH-1)
The Navy’s Military Sea Transportation Service is now in the helicopter repair business. The USNS Corpus Christi Bay (T- ARVH-l), the former seaplane tender Albemarle (AV-5), has been converted to a floating machine shop specializing in the repair and maintenance of combat helicopters. She is now part of the MSTS Special Projects Fleet
along with 38 other ships of diverse types.
When the ship entered service in January 1966, she provided the Army with a mobile, floating repair base able to handle all repairs on helicopter flight machinery, rotors, electronic gear—virtually at the scene of combat.
The 537-foot ship, manned by 130 civil service marine employees of MSTS, serves as an overseas base for some 300 officers and men of the Army’s 1st Transportation Corps Battalion (Aircraft Maintenance Depot) (Seaborne).
During operations the supported aviation unit brings an unserviceable aircraft component to the ship where the trouble is diagnosed. If repairs cannot be made immediately, an exchange takes place for a like item, and the component is then returned to the field unit.
The maintenance shop then repairs the component, tests it, and places it back on the shelf for further issue. Should the unit not be repairable, it is then returned to the Army Aeronautical Maintenance Depot Center in Corpus Christi, Texas.
The Albemarle was selected by U. S. Army s Project FLATTOP Office after extensive investigations had been made by that office of a large number of ships including several classes of aircraft carriers. These for the most part were turned down because of such factors as unsuitability of size, cost of operation, or high cost of conversion.
The Albemarle was launched on 13 July 1940 at the New York Shipbuilding Company in Camden, New Jersey. After commissioning on 20 December 1940, the Albemarle reported for duty to the Atlantic Fleet and subsequently serviced seaplanes at Argentia, Newfoundland. From 1942 to mid-1945 the Albemarle transported aviation personnel and cargo to Iceland, England, North Africa, Bermuda, and the Caribbean. In the latter part of 1945 she was transferred to the Pacific Fleet and served as a troop transport with the Naval Transport Service—one of the forebearers of the present Military Sea Transportation Service. Her service after the war was divided between the Atlantic and the Pacific until 1950 when she was mothballed at New York.
In early 1956, the Albemarle was moved to the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard for conversion to support the ill-fated P6M Seamaster project. She was recommissioned on 21 October 1957, and three years later transferred to the Maritime Administration reserve fleet and was subsequently stricken from the Navy List. She was broken out of the James River Reserve Fleet in 1964 and towed to the Charleston Naval Shipyard for conversion to a helicopter aircraft repair ship (ARVH).
Former crew members of the Albemarle will find it difficult to recognize their old ship. The seaplane ramp, aft, has been removed and a 50- by 150-foot helicopter platform has been installed at the stern. A smaller helicopter platform has been installed on the foredeck. Two 20-ton commercial, road-type rotating cranes have been installed over the machine shop at the stern of the ship. The cranes are diesel driven and can lift equipment from the waterline of the ship to the main deck.
The ship has 41,977 square feet of covered shop space, 12,416 square feet of open work deck, and 10,088 square feet of storage space. Each of the ship’s 33 shops are adjacent or easily accessible to the shop stores to simplify parts handling.
In place of the seaplane ramp, a hangar with a 24-foot clearance has been installed. Access to the hangar is provided through a hatch, closed by four pontoon-type steel covers, each 15 by 21 feet.
The Corpus Christi Bay's engineering plant is rated at 12,000 horsepower. The plant itself is housed in two engine rooms and two boiler rooms. Two steam turbines are connected to propellers which drive the ship at 17.5 knots on 80 percent power. Her maximum speed is 19 knots.
A modification has been made in the boiler fronts for an automatic boiler control console. The console not only regulates the number of burners and the amount of fuel used by each boiler, but also reduces the number of fire- men-water tenders in the crew by six. This in turn lowers operating costs by about 50,000 dollars annually. She is the first MSTS ship in service to be fitted with partially automated boilers. The ship has a fuel capacity of 613,275 gallons so that the 15 per cent reduction in consumption due to the control console results in an on-station increase of about ten days.
In addition to bunkers, the Corpus Christi Bay has storage capacity for 94,129 gallons of
JP-5 as well as 74,244 gallons of aviation gasoline. She will also carry 12,860 gallons of diesel fuel for the Army LARC amphibious vehicles which are assigned to the Corpus Christi Bay.
This floating maintenance facility will act in direct or general support of helicopters in the field. After being assigned to an area, the Corpus Christi Bay will operate there for extended periods. When adequate land-based facilities have been established, or more pressing needs arise in another area, the ship will shift to a new location. The operational concept of this ship envisions her at anchor for the greater portion of time due to the nature of her mission. The availability of shore facilities and consideration for the safety of the ship will determine this proximity.
The only underway periods when deployed, other than transit from one support location to another, will be for the purpose of maintaining full operational readiness of the ship and crew. These periods will provide operational intervals of 24 to 48 hours every 30 to 60 days. Additionally, it may be necessary for the ship to go off station to replenish bunkers, provisions, and for recreational purposes.
The Corpus Christi Bay has been equipped with some of the most up-to-date electronic navigational equipment to increase her effectiveness and contribute to safe navigation. There are two radar sets on the bridge, long- range surface search and a back-up set also used for short-range. The ship is also equipped with a Raytheon echo depth sounder, an RCA radio direction finder, a direct reading loran receiver and two radio telephones, HF AM and VHF FM.
On the communication side, the ship has a radio room with commerical marine equipment. This consists of an RCA 6U unit in a console package. The console contains HF and MF transmitters which transmit on frequencies in the mobile marine bands, an emergency transmitter operating on the international distress frequency of 500 kcs, and two receivers—a main and HF. An auto alarm keyer and receiver is also incorporated in the console. The embarked Army battalion maintains a separate and distinct communications center which will provide facsimile weather charts to the ship’s master for navigational purposes. The Army’s communication center is primarily to communicate with helicopters and other Army activities.
An ultra-modern flight control tower has been built on the flying bridge of the Corpus Christi Bay from which Army personnel can control helicopter operations in the vicinity of the ship.
As the result of extensive alterations, the Corpus Christi Bay has facilities for “sit-down” feeding for all hands aboard—both crew and Army personnel. In addition to the normal galleys, pantries, and mess spaces, the ship maintains a snack and ice cream stand.
The ship’s company is composed of 25 officers and 105 unlicensed personnel. In addition to the master, there are five deck officers, the chief engineer, 13 assistant engineers, one radio operator, two pursers, and a chief and second steward.
Of the unlicensed personnel, 26 are in the deck department, 34 are in the engine department, and 45 in the steward department.
An interesting Army-MSTS cross-servicing agreement has been worked out whereby one service takes care of the other. Among the items enumerated in the agreement are: MSTS provides free laundry service to the Army battalion embarked and the Army provides free dry-cleaning service to all on board; entertainment films are provided by MSTS; the ship’s store, open to all hands, is operated by the Army; and medical and dental attention is provided for both the MSTS crew and the Army personnel by Army medical officers.
On station the Corpus Christi Bay is selfsustaining for periods of more than 30 days at a time. The refrigeration spaces can hold enough frozen foods for a 90-day period plus 30 days of chilled stores. The ship’s dry stores capacity is 60 days.
The ship will see less bottom scrapping than most ships on extended foreign deployment, as plastic has been applied to her bottom to do away with the requirement for frequent drydocking. Her standing rigging and most inaccessible topside areas have been coated with Demetcote, which cuts down radically on the need for extensive maintenance by her deck force, and at the same time keeps the operating costs of the ship to a minimum.
A second conversion of this type, using a seaplane tender or possibly an aircraft carrier, is under consideration.
The helicopter repair ship Corpus Christi Bay retains her seaplane tender lines, but can easily be identified by her fore and aft helicopter platforms, the latter atop a large hangar. Internal features of the Corpus Christi Bay include a technical library with 1.2 million "pieces” of data (above left) and spacious machine shops with a variety of complex equipment. The technical library has a closed-circuit television system for rapid transmission of drawings and blueprints to eight shop viewing stations.
■
THE ARMY’S FLOATING AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE FACILITY
Army maintenance support forces have long been encumbered by equipment which is heavy, outsized, or sensitive to movement and requires operating complexes of appreciable size which are not readily transportable.
These factors, coupled with problems encountered in supporting helicopter operations in the Korean War, the Lebanese landing of 1958, and the current war in Vietnam, have pointed up a host of problems encountered in supporting Army combat aviation. Effectiveness and efficiency of skilled manpower are appreciably lowered when aircraft maintenance is conducted in mud, rain, heat, wind, or blowing sand. Maintenance unit effectiveness is further reduced by chores such as guard and mess duty. There are also the problems of adequate living quarters for the personnel, adequate spare parts storage, adequate fresh water and provisions, etc.
The situation has been worsening as the demands of newer aircraft, being more complex and employed in increasing numbers and roles, require increased and more elaborate maintenance facilities.
Recognizing these deficiencies in aircraft maintenance in limited war operations, and concerned about the ability of the units to produce at the expected maintenance level under the conditions encountered, General Frank S. Besson, Jr., U. S. Army, Commanding General, Army Material Command, made a personal inspection of overseas logistical operations in 1962, which led to a study of the feasibility of using Navy-operated floating maintenance bases. The matter was discussed with the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Logistics) and a working group was assembled with the Commander, Military Sea Transportation Service representing the Navy.
The study group set out to determine the parameters of the requirement and the suitability of available ships. Guidance received by the project personnel indicated that the facility had to be capable of “providing maintenance support to limited engagements, specifically in the under-developed areas of potential conflict and otherwise employment world wide.” It also had to be capable of “immediate redeployment” and have a “one stop, all inclusive range of aviation support functions.” Armed with this yardstick, the archives of the senior service schools were scoured for action reports, published articles, and student papers on the subject. Of particular value were the volumes on the use of seaplanes tenders, a Bureau of Aeronautics paper of 1958 on the use of an ifwrx-class carrier as a maintenance facility, the reports of the Air Corps floating shops of 19431945 (five C-2 cargo ships), and research undertaken by the Army Transportation Corps as early as 1952 studying the use of LSTs in this role.
With the over-all feasibility of providing aircraft maintenance from a floating base more than adequately established, the group turned to developing the requirements in terms of the what, where, when, who, and how of the probable workload.
Workload forecasts stated in range and volume were to serve as the basis for the determination of needed manpower and equipment. First priority was given to the primary mission of the facility—to provide maintenance support of helicopters. Reports from the period 1951 (Korea) to 1964 (Vietnam) were studied to develop what general types of service or support had to be included in the facility. It was noted with interest that a consistency existed for the whole of the 12 years; the problems causing helicopter groundings in 1951 were still the problems in 1963. Next came the ship’s secondary mission—that of providing an overhaul capability normally found at a shore depot. It was found that one- third of those items returned to depot shops in continental United States were either serviceable, required only minor adjustment or repair, or should have been scrapped overseas.
This established the range of repair capability desired, with the emphasis on bench check and test functions.
In the meantime, 17 ships, including AR, AV, CVE, CVS (AVT), T-l, T-2, C-2, and C-3 hulls, had been surveyed to obtain some idea of adaptability and the time and cost required to convert and operate a floating aircraft repair facility. The Awcx-class AVT was selected as being the best suited to the needs of the floating facility. However, after final analysis of the various classes, it was determined that the seaplane tender (AV) was the most economically feasible ship to convert, and a ship of this type was requested to be made available for the Army’s first Floating Aircraft Maintenance Facility. The time was January 1964.
The Albemarle (AV-5) was accordingly transferred to the Navy for conversion to the USNS Corpus Christi Bay (T-ARVH-l) after which the Army’s 1st Transportation Corps Battalion (Aircraft Maintenance Depot) (Seaborne) was embarked.
The Floating Aircraft Maintenance Facility has, in support of its primary mission of helicopter support, a fabrication-manufacturing capability of a magnitude never before installed on a ship of this kind. This capability includes facilities to condition metals by heat treatment, peening, plating, and painting, and to check and test equipment on a “while- you-wait” diagnosis basis.
Employment in the secondary mission, the objective being to provide the overseas area with a limited depot overhaul capacity, has several benefits as it will: (1) keep the facility fully operational as an overhaul depot while standing by, readily available for employment in the primary role; (2) provide the area a maintenance base in depth, containing functional shops and activities not otherwise available except at stateside bases; and (3) measurably reduce the supply pipeline requirements for those items it turns around overseas.
The allowance list developed from the 1,100 maintenance and overhaul specifications related to the facility workload consists of some 4,600 pieces of equipment ranging from hand tools to a 36-ton turbine engine test cell. The list was developed through the efforts of the engineers and materiel specialists from various Army materiel commands and through the valuable assistance provided by the officers and men of several Navy ships.
The facility’s organization lines closely parallel those which the Army Air Corps found to be effective in 1944. The facility is manned by a battalion of 31 officers and o50 eniisted men, most of whom are aboard the ship. They are formed, for administrative purposes, into a headquarters company and an operations company, functioning as one unit when working. The battalion enjoys a very favorable ratio of productive labor to overhead, as the MSTS crew performs mess and other overhead functions which normally detract from the service capabilities of an operating Army unit.
There are 228 mechanic specialists in the battalion, and a number of the other members of the battalion have part-time maintenance tasks to perform. The initial unit, which is comprised largely of volunteers for the assignment, can boast that 37 per cent of the personnel have more than ten years’ military service.
A training program, which provides flexibility to take into account the prior training and experience of each man, is conducted under the guidance of project management. The depth of skill level required on the ship exceeds that expected of or taught to the Army field mechanic. Each man requires at least four months of specific instruction with the longest cycle being 11 months.
Operation and maintenance of the equipment in the shops are the principal requirements of the training program. Appreciable time is also spent in upgrading skill levels, and in the case of the electroplaters and heat treat men, in teaching skills not required and therefore not taught elsewhere in the Army. Wherever time permits, and dependent upon the desires of the man, cross-training into a related skill is undertaken. Personnel of the so-called “soft skills” are cross-trained under a fixed program. For example, the cobbler and the tailor are fabric repairmen as well as barbers, the chaplain’s assistant is a technical librarian, and the headquarters company commander, when the facility is working, is the chief of quality assurance for the command. All men are required to pass tests in the basic elements of fire fighting, lifeboat operation, and some seamanship as taught by the Coast Guard and the ship’s crew. Deck crewmen, aircraft handlers, and small boat operators are given more extensive training by the
you nave
half the electronics specialists you need...
... you have your share. Reliable estimates indicate that the Armed Forces are getting only half the skilled technicians they need to cope with rapidly increasing electronics maintenance requirements. CREI offers you an extra source of qualified electronics personnel—at no cost to the service. Men enrolled in CREI Home Study Programs acquire technical knowledge beyond the scope of military courses. They give up their off-duty hours for study and pay their own tuition.
CREI Programs cover every phase of modern electronics—from communications to spacecraft tracking and control—as well as the increasingly important field of nuclear engineering technology. The military man who enrolls in a CREI Program becomes part of a tradition that began in 1927. Many officers not only encourage CREI students but also suggest CREI study to particularly ambitious men. And they welcome the CREI Field Service Representative who visits their command. If you are not familiar with CREI Programs, we'll be glad to send you complete information as well as typical lesson material for your evaluation.
The Capitol Radio Engineering Institute
3224 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20010
Accredited Member of the National Home Study Council
CREI
Navy in these and related subjects. A two- platoon system of crew rotation is to be used. Trained personnel remain available for reassignment and are to be employed in the continental U. S. depots between cruises.
Operational control of the battalion passes to the supported major command. The facility remains under the administrative control of the Commanding General, Army Materiel Command. The oversea commander employs the facility within the mission, time limit, and other conditions set out in the order; the AMC commander is responsible for personnel actions and service support, including funding and supply. Ship stationing and movement are executed at the direction of the MSTS area commander in response to Army orders or MSTS requirements specified in the Army- Navy operating agreements.
The facility’s workload is controlled by the supported command. The facility periodically publishes capability lists, indicating items by stock number which can be handled and to what degree. All components of combat essential aircraft can be bench checked and tested. The majority of the prime item aircraft components can be overhauled, and if necessary, taken to “zero” time. All turbine and reciprocating engines up to the R-2000 can be given a check and test and a minor repair. Vertically installed, horizontally opposed engines are an exception, as the test cells have not been designed to accommodate these models. All avionics equipment can be bench tested and calibrated and can be given some degree of depot overhaul. Sundry support can be provided in such areas as parachute repair and repack, fabric and plastic renewal, photographic, chemical, and metallurgical laboratory work, in addition to the facility support machine, sheet metal, welding, heat treat, and non-destructive test shops. The services of a flight surgeon, a chaplain, professional engineers, and scuba divers for rescue and recovery are also available within the battalion. The airframe capability of the facility’s secondary mission was excluded because of the deck space and special tools required, and that the space released is better put to use for repairing rotor blades. The maintenance facility has a planned production capability of 61,000 man-hours a month. The battalion’s monthly production gross value is expected
to exceed three million dollars.
Resupply support is obtained from four sources. Any item on the ship’s allowance list is procured by MSTS and is furnished on a reimbursable basis as required. This generally includes housekeeping and administrative items. Common user items peculiar to the facility’s mission, such as bulk hardware, chemicals, and medical supplies, may be obtained from the overseas Army supply points, or Navy or Air Force depots. Special repair parts are obtained from the Army’s Aeronautical Depot Maintenance Center at Corpus Christi, Texas, on a closed-cycle requisitioning system. Any item not available from the overseas source is also obtained in this manner. The battalion commander also has access to an imprest fund of two thousand dollars for local procurement of parts, supplies, and services. The facility’s authorized stockage list is a 120-day level and contains 26,000 line items.
The facility’s technical documentation library contains an estimated 1,250,000 volumes, pages, slides, etc., a large part of which have been reduced to 16-mm film pack and incorporated into an automatic search and display system utilizing closed circuit television. There are seven viewers placed in the shops, with the transmitter in the central library. Contact is made by a direct-line telephone. Hardback books are maintained only in those shops having repetitive jobs. In addition, a facsimile capability exists between the parent plant and the floating facility if direct radio or cable connections is possible.
These systems and the entire operation of the facility are designed to work with Army field forces as a forward maintenance depot as a part of the logistical support organization. The facility does not replace any maintenance or supply element in the force structure, nor does the Army intend to launch its own fleet. However, it is apparent that the floating logistical facility concept is taking on a new importance. In recognition of this, the Army and Navy, in a co-operative effort, have converted the Corpus Christi Bay, which is now operating in Southeast Asia, and are evaluating the feasibility of expanding the program to other maintenance support areas, utilizing other seaplane tenders as well as an Essex-class aircraft transport (AVT).
By Lieutenant Commander David G. Smith, U. S. Navy,
Executive Officer,
USS Jack (SSN-605)
NAUTICAL RULES OF THE ROAD,
REVISED
The Proceedings of September 1964, carried an excellent presentation of the more common rules of the nautical road, those with which every officer of the deck must be conversant.* However, this article now falls short of the ideal guide because of the 1 September 1965 revisions to the Rules and the fact that the lights peculiar to submarines of the U. S. Navy are not listed.
As regards the latter, it is considered essential that the officers of the deck of fleet units, particularly those operating with submarines, be familiar with the Navigational Light Waivers contained in the back of pamphlet CG-169. The construction of submarines precludes a display of navigational lights commensurate with ship’s length and tonnage (e.g. the Lafayette-class submarines are 425 feet over-all and 7,000 tons standard). Thus at night a submarine will appear as a small surface vessel. In addition to the fact that only one white light is carried above the bridge of the submarine, two major points must be remembered:
1. That by virtue of her construction, a submarine’s stern light may be located from 20 to 190 feet forward of her stern.
2. Submarines are authorized to display, in addition to presently prescribed navigation lights, both in inland and international waters, an amber colored rotating light producing 90 flashes per minute visible all around the horizon at a distance of at least three miles. This amber light is located approximately six feet above the masthead light.
The following table presents the basics of the current Rules.
*See E. J. Newbould “Rules of the Nautical Road for Officers of the Deck,” U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, September 1964, pp. 136-138.
CAPSULE RULES OF THE NAUTICAL ROAD
Revised by Lieutenant Commander David G. Smith, U. S. Navy
| PART I. LIGHTS | & SHAPES |
|
TYPE VESSEL | INTERNATIONAL WATERS | INLAND WATERS | |
| NIGHT | DAY |
|
Power vessel underway | Two white range lights (one white light forward on smaller ships) Side lights Stern fight | Nothing special | Essentially the same |
Any vessel at anchor | Two white fights (or one white fight forward on smaller ships): one forward one aft | One black ball | Essentially the same |
Power vessel not under command | Two vertical red fights Side fights (only if making way) Stern fight (only if making way) | Two vertical black balls or shapes | No special provisions but be alert for one or more red fights in forward part of vessels which should be avoided. No day shapes, but be alert for specialized shapes for dredges, etc. |
Any vessel aground | Normal anchor fights plus two red vertical fights | Three vertical black balls | No special provision for ships aground; normal anchor fights and shapes are required |
Power vessel towing or pushing Vessel being towed or pushed and sailing vessels | Two or three vertical white fights Side fights Stern fight or steering fight Side fights Stern light or steering light | One black diamond shape (if tow >600 feet) | Essentially the same |
Sailing pilot vessels on station, underway, or at anchor | (a) One all around white fight (b) One intermittent flare-up fight at 10 minute intervals or less (c) Side fights (d) Stern light # Ai anchor: Normal anchor fights plus all around white fight plus flare-up light | Nothing special | Essentially the same (Inte val for flare-up light is 15 minutes) |
Power-driven pilot vessel on station, underway, or at anchor | (a) One all around white fight above all around red light _ (b) One intermittent flare-up fight at 10 minute intervals or less (c) Side fights (d) Stern fight Ai anchor: Normal anchor lights plus all around white over red plus flare-up light | Nothing special | Essentially the same (Interval for flare-up fight is 15 minutes) |
Fishing vessel _ engaged in trawling | Two vertical fights. All around green over white Optional white fight below and abaft vertical display (20 point) . Side fights, and stern fight if making way Flare-up fight optional | Black shape—two cones with points together, or basket if vessel is <65 feet | NIGHT DAY Red over white Basket |
Other fishing vessels | Two vertical fights. All around red over white. Sidelights and stern fight if making way. If with outlying gear, over 500 feet, one all around white light in direction of gear Flare-up fight optional | Black shape—two cones with points together or basket if vessel is <65 feet If outlying gear over 500 feet, additionally one black conical shape point upwards | NIGHT DAY Red over white Basket |
Vessels engaged in Submarine Cable, Navigation Marks, Underwater Operations, Replenishment, or launch/recovery of aircraft | Three vertical fights red over white over red Sidelights and stern light when with way on Anchor fights if appropriate | Three shapes red globe over and under white diamond _ Black ball if anchored | No Provisions except for underwater operations |
Submarine | One white fight (may be 27 point) Sidelights (may be visible 30 degrees abaft beam) Stern fight (may be 23 point and will be from 20 to 190 feet forward of stern) Plus optional rotating amber beacon |
| The same |
\
i
TYPE VESSEL | INTERNATIONAL WATERS | INLAND | WATERS |
| |||
| SIGNAL | INTERVAL | SIGNAL | INTERVAL |
| ||
Power vessel underway with way on | One prolonged blast | Not more than two minutes between blasts | One prolonged blast | Not more than one minute between blasts |
| ||
Power vessel underway no way on | Two prolonged blasts | Not more than two minutes between blast groups | One prolonged blast | Not more than one minute |
| ||
Sailing vessel underway | One, two or three “blasts” depending on tack | Not more than one minute between blasts | One, two or three “blasts” depending on tack | Not more than one minute |
| ||
Any vessel at anchor | (a) Rapid ringing of bell (and gong if over 350 feet long) Sound for 5 sec. PLUS (OPTIONAL) (b) One short, one prolonged, and one short blast | (a) Not more than one minute (b) When approached too closely | Rapid ringing of bell | Not more than one minute |
| ||
Any vessel aground | Rapid ringing of bell (and gong if required) PLUS three strokes on bell before and after the bell signal | Not more than one minute | Danger signal or distress signal | Not more than one minute |
| ||
Fishing vessels underway or at anchor; vessels towing, not under command, or engaged in underwater work | One prolonged followed by two short blasts | Not more than one minute | Towing—One prolonged followed by two short | Not more than one minute |
| ||
Vessels towed | One prolonged followed by three short blasts | Not more than one minute | One prolonged followed by two short (optional) | Not more than one minute |
| ||
Any vessel |
|
| Four short blasts—danger signal | May be used to express doubt of intention of another vessel in fog |
| ||
Pilot vessel | Four short blasts | Optional identity signal when engaged on pilotage duty |
|
|
| ||
| PART III. MEANING | OF SOUND SIGNALS | |||||
SIGNAL | INTERNATIONAL WATERS | INLAND WATERS | |||||
| Note: To be used only when ships are in sight of one another and never in fog | Note: To be used only when ships are in sight of one another and never in fog EXCEPT for danger signal | |||||
One short blast | I am altering my course to starboard. | (a) In head and head meeting, means “I intend to pass port to port.” Neither vessel has right of way, and other vessel must answer proposal by a single blast in order to proceed safely. (b) In crossing situation, when given by privileged vessel means, “I intend to hold my course and speed.” Signal is optional. Agreement signal is optional. (c) In overtaking situation means: “I intend/agree—burdened vessel overtake on the starboard side of the privileged vessel.” | |||||
Two short blasts | I am altering my course to port. | (a) In head and head meeting means, “I intend to pass starboard to starboard.” Neither vessel has right of way, and other vessel must . answer proposal by two blasts to proceed safely. (b) In overtaking situation means: “I intend/agree—burdened vessel overtake on the port side of privileged vessel.” | |||||
Three short blasts | My engines are going astern. | My engines are going at full speed astern | |||||
Four or more short blasts Five or more short blasts | Signal of Doubt. May be used only by privileged vessel. It means: “I doubt that burdened vessel is taking sufficient action to avoid collision.” | Danger Signal. May be used by either privileged or burdened vessel. It means: “Danger exists; I do not understand your intentions; I object.” May be used in fog when vessels are not in sight. | |||||
One long blast |
| Change of Status Signal. Used when clearing a dock or berth. | |||||
One prolonged blast | Sounded within one half mile of bend in channel. | Bend Signal. Sounded when within half a mile of a bend or curve in channel when such bend or curve precludes seeing another vessel at a distance of a half a mile. | |||||
Notebook
U. S. Navy
First of Six Rescue Subs is Ordered
(Navy Times, 4 May 1966): The Navy has ordered the first of six baby subs designed to rescue crews from disabled submarines.
The 25-ton, 44-foot long “submarine rescue vehicles” will be equipped also for underwater research, oceanography and for search missions.
Lockheed Missile and Space Co. of Sunnyvale, Calif., has been picked to build the first model. Following evaluation, contracts will be awarded for the five sister craft.
The baby subs mark the first step in developing an operational submarine location, escape and rescue system under the Deep Submergence Systems Project run by the Special Projects Office. The need for the subs was illustrated by the loss of 129 men in the Thresher disaster three years ago and the long, difficult search for the Air Force’s lost H- bomb off Spain.
The size of the baby subs is dictated by the requirement that they must be able to respond to a submarine disaster anywhere in the world in 24 hours. They will be carried, fully assembled, in a C-141 aircraft, in a surface ship, or piggy-back on a nuclear submarine. The rescue subs should be able to operate under any weather conditions and under ice.
At a disaster, the subs will operate from a mother submarine or a surface ship, making shuttle trips to the sunken submarine, and could return 12 to 14 survivors per trip. The rescue craft will mate with the escape hatch of the downed sub, forming an airtight seal. Survivors will enter the small center sphere compartment of the “triple-bubble” pressure hull. From there they would go to a larger center compartment and ride to safety.
The two-man crew will operate the vehicle from a third compartment with controls similar to those in aircraft.
The prototype will be operational by early 1968 and the rest of the class is scheduled for completion by 1970. This will give the Navy a two-ocean rescue capability.
The baby subs will be designed to operate
as deep as 3000 feet (the H-bomb was recovered from 2850 feet). They will be able to operate submerged for 12 hours at three knots with a maximum speed of five knots.
Existing miniature subs like the Alvin and Aluminaut were used in the H-bomb search, but they have no submarine rescue equipment and are not very maneuverable.
Lockheed already has under construction a research submarine, Deep Quest, which will be in operation this fall. A 50-ton, multimission research craft, Deep Quest will carry a crew of four and 7000 pounds of scientific equipment to a depth of 6000 feet.
The problems of operating at extreme depths was emphasized by Lt. Comdr. J. Bradford Mooney at a conference on oceanography here when he told of a close call in the bathyscaphe Trieste II off Cape Cod.
“We were down to 8400 feet searching for the Thresher remains when an electrical short burned a hole in a water tank,” Mooney said. “It was only inches from a gas tank and, of course, that would have been the end.” This was the first mention of the near disaster.
H Navy Oceanography (Ocean Science News, 29 April 1966): The Naval Oceanographic Office is coming to the conclusion that it is cheaper to do some oceanography through commercial channels than it is through the non-profit research institutions. By “oceanography”—at this stage, at least—it means geophysical surveys at sea. Two years ago Nav- Oceano tentatively budgeted $17.1 million for three ocean surveys. Now, these contracts have been let to Alpine Geophysical for $5.8 million to survey the western North Atlantic and the eastern and central North Pacific; for $5.6 million to Texas Instruments to survey the eastern and central North Atlantic and the Norwegian and Mediterranean Seas; and again to Alpine for $4.6 million for the Pacific between Hawaii and the Asiatic mainland—for a total of $16 million. Adding $1.7 million NavOceano budgeted for itself for managing the three surveys and processing the data, this comes to $17.7 million—which, NavOceano figures, is pretty good planning. However, the real thing it is discovering is that it can allow industry a 2-to-10% profit (depending on performance) and still pay upwards of 20% less for the whole job than if a non-profit oceanographic research institute did it. Part of it is ship-time—on the order of $1,300 a day for industry ships vs. $2,000 a day for comparable non-profit ships. The suggestion is also made that a little tighter bookkeeping practice might serve to reduce institution costs generally.
These three surveys currently constitute NavOceano’s Marine Geophysical Survey Program and will consume a total of 13 ship years. The data being collected include a diverse sampling of basic oceanographic parameters. Of the 28 items listed in ICO Pamphlet jj7, “National Plan for Ocean Surveys,” 13 are being collected by the MGS, including: surface-to-bottom measurements of temperature, salinity, and sound velocity; bathymetry, magnetism, subbottom profiles, bottom photos, cores and standard surface observations. In addition, MGS is collecting numerous acoustical parameters not included in the ICO list but of immediate interest to Navy ASW. The primary omissions (from the ICO list) are gravity, refraction seismology, optical and biological measurements, and currents. Of these, only gravity could be added without materially affecting schedules. With the exception, mainly, of acoustical data, NavOceano intends to release processed data as rapidly as possible.
@ Lant Destroyers in Pac {Navy Times, 20 April 1966): Destroyer Squadron 12, the second Atlantic Fleet destroyer squadron to deploy to the Pacific since the Korean War, has relieved Destroyer Squadron 24 and is now operating off Vietnam with the 7th Fleet.
The eight destroyers—Massey, Basilone, Stickell, Fiske, Dyess, Richard E. Kraus, Fred T. Berry, and Davis—are homeported in Newport, R. I. Capt. Robert S. Guy is squadron commander.
The ships of Squadron 24 which deployed last fall under the command of Capt. C. A. Sanders have returned after circumnavigating the world to their east coast homeports— six to Newport and two to Norfolk. The two ships from Norfolk are the Bache and Flarold J. Ellison. The Newport destroyers are Barry, Hawkins, Ingraham, Samuel B. Roberts, Charles S. Sperry, and Vesole.
0 Navy Defends Non-Lethal War Gas
(George Dusheck in San Francisco Examiner, 15 April 1966): The tear gas and the anti-botanical chemicals being used in Vietnam are non-lethal (to humans) and humane, a Navy environmental health researcher insisted here today.
Commander Edmund H. Gleason of the National Naval Medical Center at Bethesda is taking part in a two-day symposium on the medical problems of modern warfare, at the U. S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, Hunters Point.
This morning’s session on biological warfare, anti-plant agents, blister and nerve gases, was closed, but Commander Gleason and Captain Gordon C. Bell talked cautiously about non-classified aspects in an interview.
No true war gases, like mustard gas or the esters of fluoro phosphoric acid (anti-choliner- gics) have been used in Vietnam, “nor are we considering using them except in self-defense,” said Captain Bell.
However, there has been considerable medical experience with chemical relatives of the fluoro esters in agriculture and manufacture.
Such commonly used pesticides as mala- thione, DFP, and TEPP attack the nervous system of insects just like the war gases attack the nervous systems of people.
It is known, therefore, that the only practical and effective treatment so far is the administration of atropine, a common drug derived from belladonna.
Chicago 46, III.
TOOL HOLDERS
Permanent, multi-purpose tools for every operation on lathes, planers, slotters. and shapers that take tool bits ground from standard high speed steel shapes.
Write for Catalog.
ARMSTRONG
As for biological agents . . . insects, bacteria, viruses and fungi . . . only the last shows any promise as a weapon against enemy crops, said Commander Gleason.
“It stores well on the shelf, it is easily spread around, it reproduces itself, and under the right circumstances it can spread through a whole agricultural area, destroying all or most of the crop,” he said.
Again, most of what military men know about fungus diseases comes from natural epidemics, such as one that severely damaged wheat crops in the northwest United States a few years back.
Insects and bacteria and viruses are, in general, too hard to grow, to keep, to spread, Commander Gleason said.
In Vietnam only chemicals have been used against plants, he said. All of them, so far, have been quite ordinary agricultural and household agents, such as 2,4,D and 3,4,5T.
Such herbicides have been used to attack up to 50,000 acres of North Vietnamese rice paddies, he said. The destruction of rice hampers the military effort, since a Vietnam soldier can live for a year on the rice grown on three quarters of an acre.
Other chemicals have been used to defoliate thousands of acres of Vietnamese forests and brush lands, to help the air search for Viet Cong supply bases and transport routes.
Still others have been used to defoliate trees and plants along hundreds of miles of Vietnam roads to reduce Viet Cong ambushes.
The tear gas—use of which aroused cries of “gas warfare” from groups here and abroad opposed to the American intervention in Vietnam—is one developed by the British: ortho- chloro-malononitrile.
It is much more incapacitating than the tear gas used for years by American police: chloracetophenone.
Commander Gleason has experienced both.
“The older gas just makes you cry,” he said. “But the new one makes you sneeze, cough, salivate heavily, constricts your chest muscles.
“Believe me, it is very effective stuff. For a while you wish you were dead.”
But it wears off in 10 to 15 minutes and there is no aftereffect, he said.
Captain Bell said the American military was annoyed when the British publicly criticized the use of ortho-chloro-malononitrile by U. S. troops in Vietnam.
“They invented it and used it against the Cypriots several years ago,” he said. “It didn’t get the bad publicity then, that’s all.”
s V/STOL Jet in Tri-Service Test (Journal of the Armed Forces, 23 April 1966): TriService tests of a tri-nation vertical take-off research aircraft have started in the U. S.
Six of the aircraft, designated XV-6A’s by the U. S., are now undergoing tests by the Army at Ft. Campbell, Ky. Air Force and Navy tests will follow shortly at Eglin AFB, Fla., and the Naval Air Test Station, Patuxent River, Md. Testing in the U. S. is scheduled for completion by the end of July.
All six aircraft, built in Great Britain, where they are designated the P.1127, recently were turned over to the U. S. for testing. The U. S., Britain, and West Germany—developers of the aircraft under a consortium arrangement —conducted operational evaluation tests of V/STOL jet concept in Europe last year.
The XV-6A (P.1127) is a single place, single fan, jet powered strike aircraft capable of operating in both VSTOL and STOL flight modes. Each aircraft is powered by a 15,200 pound thrust jet engine utilizing vectored thrust and by-pass air for VTOL, STOL and conventional flight.
Aircraft of the XV-6A type are envisioned by officials of the three participating nations as being an acceptable compromise between slow-flying armed helicopters with vertical take-off capabilities, and supersonic aircraft requiring long runways and relatively sophisticated airfields. Should jet-powered, transsonic V/STOL aircraft prove feasible and economically acceptable, tactical commanders would have air support in the immediate vicinity of their operations.
Last year, the USAF Proving Ground Center at Eglin conducted simulated tests of the XV-6A project using F-100 Super Sabre aircraft, a type now seeing extensive duty in Vietnam in the ground support role.
Current test missions are being flown by U. S. pilots who served in England last year as members of the three-nation evaluation team. In addition, a 30-man maintenance crew, composed of members from all participating nations, is accompanying the six aircraft during testing in the United States.
Other U. S. Services
s Giant New Plane (Emil Dansker in The Cincinnati Enquirer, 15 May 1966): Sam, the bus driver, maneuvered his Greyhound down the airport ramp and parked it.
He looked at the bulging mockup of the Lockheed C-5A.
He mingled with the crowds of visitors—• newsmen, engineers, military men and others ■—wandering in and around the looming wood and metal full-size model of the world’s largest jet transport at Lockheed’s plant at Marietta, Georgia.
He climbed the ladder to the upper deck and looked into the spacious staterooms, galley, lavatory and cockpit.
Then he pronounced his verdict:
“I think I’ll walk. It doesn’t feel quite the same.”
But the reaction was hardly typical among members of the group gathered from several states for the first public showing of the giant General Electric-powered jet transport, designed to carry anything in the inventory of an Army division and the crews to boot.
As a matter of fact, those on hand last Wednesday saw 13 separate military vehicles roll from the lower deck of the two-level C-5A, including four jeeps, eight trucks—towing trailers and two hauling artillery pieces—and an ambulance.
And marching . . . and marching . . . and marching out behind came 75 fully-armed troops toting weapons ranging from rifles to machineguns to bazookas.
(Sam had taken part in an earlier demonstration—when six 30-passenger buses were driven up onto the lower deck.)
The C-5A is big, all right, with its 222.7- foot wing—to be made by AVCO Corp. at its Nashville, Tenn., plant—245-foot length and 65-foot-high tail. And its design weight is 700,000 pounds.
But even statistics such as its ability to haul vehicles as heavy as a 102,000-pound tank or a 115,000-pound combat engineering vehicle have little impact until one:
Watches the upswing of a nose section large enough to hold all the water in a family- size swimming pool.
Stands on the lower deck while a narrator describes it as long enough—121 feet—and wide enough—19 feet—for an eight-lane bowling alley.
The C-5A is big.
And what makes it possible is GE Even- dale’s TF-39 high bypass ratio jet engine that delivers 41,000 pounds of thrust with a fuel consumption 25% lower than current fan-jet engines.
Not only is the TF-39—which brought GE a $459 million contract for the military C-5A and promises even more if the civilian version L-500 catches on—more powerful, but it also fits in with efforts to improve transport operational reliability.
The C-5A carries a variety of spare parts designed for quick retrofit and has an onboard computer system that not only will monitor system performance but also will tell if a particular part is needed, whether it is aboard and how long it will take to replace it.
The TF-39 is designed to eventually run 5000 hours between overhauls and some parts will last up to 15 years before wearing out— even if the engine runs at the normal airline rate of some 2000 hours a year. (Most military engines get less utilization.)
“In terms of the state of the art,” said Lockheed vice president T. R. May, “the airplane design ... is not revolutionary. It’s a natural extension of existing, up-to-date aeronautical knowledge. What boosts the C-5A into the awesome category are its size, performance and promised operational economics.”
These same economics also give Lockheed
P'MOIlELSlilPS^
X Waterline: 1:1250 Models
f
)
t
'/
)
)
)
}
)
)
)
•■O
hopes of competing with the Boeing 747 for the commercial market, which Mr. May thinks could take 400 copies by 1980—at $16 million to $18 million apiece depending upon whether the version is all-passenger, all-cargo or mixed.
A “thread of certificability” is being maintained with the Federal Aviation Agency to speed approval of the craft for the commercial market at the appropriate time. This, together with experience Lockheed will gain on the C-5A (it will make 58 in a $1.4 billion project for the Air Force, which has optioned another 57) is expected to allow a run with the 747 despite a Pan American World Airways order for 25 of the latter for $545 million.
The C-5A is scheduled to fly in 1968 and go into service in 1969. A commercial version, which could carry up to 900 passengers, economy class, could be ready in 1970.
The first 747, a 490-passenger craft, is due for delivery to Pan-Am in 1969.
Douglas Aircraft also has announced plans for a DC-10.
Plans already are underway to provide airport facilities to handle the expected passenger and cargo loads—possibly with simultaneous two-level loading and unloading.
s Pentagon Settles Aircraft Dispute
(Benjamin Welles in The New York Times, 16 April 1966): The Army agreed yesterday to turn over its heavy transport planes to the Air Force, ending a long dispute as to which fighting service should carry troops and supplies in forward combat areas.
Effective Jan. 1, the change will involve the transfer of 140 twin-engine CV-2 Caribou transports and six turbo-prop CV-7 Buffalo transports, a larger, experimental craft. The switch will involve aircraft that cost a total of nearly $190 million.
Most of the aircraft involved are reported to be in Vietnam. For security reasons, the Defense Department declined to specify their precise location.
Both the Caribou and the Buffalo are twin- engine transports manufactured by the de- Havilland Aircraft Company of Toronto, Canada. The Caribou can carry 30 armed soldiers or a three-ton payload while its larger version, the Buffalo, can carry 40 armed men or a four-ton payload. The value of both aircraft is their ability to land and take off in small areas—800 to 1,000 feet.
Defense observers considered the announcement a tactical, if temporary, victory for the Air Force, which has long opposed the Army’s efforts to build up an organic ‘air force’ of its own. In the Air Force view, the Army should have only light airplanes and helicopters for artillery spotting and combat control.
The Army’s air forces including helicopters have risen from 5,500 aircraft in 1961 to 7,900 at present and are to rise to 9,200 by 1967.
By contrast, the Air Force’s active aircraft inventory has been steadily declining from 16,900 in 1961 to 14,000 now and it is expected to fall to 13,700 in the next calendar year. The decline is explained by the phenomenal increase in aircraft firepower, which permits a reduction in numbers.
The announcement yesterday said in effect that the Air Force would now assume responsibility for carrying troops and supplies to and from the fighting front while the Army would continue operating its armed helicopters and light fixed-wing airplanes.
The Army craft include the Boeing CH-47A Chinook and the Bell UH-1 Huey helicopters, which can carry 33 and seven armed soldiers, respectively; the light de Havilland U-6A Beaver and U-1A Otter observation planes; the Cessna L-19 Bird-Dog and the twin- engine U-8 Cessna Seminole.
It was stressed that the new agreement would not affect the organic helicopter companies in the Army’s combat units.
The First Cavalry (Airmobile) Division, for example, will continue to operate its 430 helicopters and six fixed-wing aircraft.
Waterline: 1:1250 Models
20% Price Reduction on HANSA, MERCATOR, NAVIS, STAR and DELPHIN ship models, due to U.S. Customs decision of March 10, 1966.
Over 700 models, from Ironclads to Missile Cruisers, from Submarines to Sailing Vessels, Carriers, Merchantmen, beginning as far back as the Civil War. They are authentic Navy recognition models, precision cast with detail plus. Perfect for the collector, war-gamer, or fancier of ships. America’s most exclusive hobby.
Just out: U. S. Warships of World War II. 442 pages, hundreds of illustrations, includes losses. $6.75 New 56 pages catalog: 35£ HANSA Fleet Data: 25^ Over 100 new models
NATHAN R. PRESTON & CO.
P.O. Box 187—Des Plaines, Illinois 60017 Immediate delivery
Maritime General
s Ships Go Ashore for Repairs (Business Week, 30 April 1966): Dry docks have been a necessary part of the shipping industry for some 2,000 years, and to shipbuilder and shipowner alike have come to be synonymous with delays.
The number of vessels a shipyard can handle at one time depends on the number of dry docks it has. Most have only one or two, and when they’re tied up the yard has to hang out a no vacancy sign for other vessels. Shipowners feel the pinch too; they often must let their vessels lie in port until space is available. Now a new kind of dry dock, called the Syncrolift, that lets a shipyard pull vessels up on dry land bypasses this problem. And to the men who go down to the sea in ships, it means speedier repairs and vessels back in service sooner.
Invented by a Miami engineer, Raymond Pearlson, the Syncrolift consists of a marine elevator with synchronized hoists and a rail transfer system for pulling the ships ashore.
Many yards have marine elevators, but conventional ones have practical limitations that restrict their use to small vessels. For example, a marine elevator capable of lifting 600 tons is hoisted by a series of unwieldy cables 120 ft. long which are connected mechanically to a single power source.
Syncrolift’s winches, on the other hand, have short cables, are run by separate electric motors, and are controlled and synchronized from a central point. When a switch is thrown all the winches lift at the same speed.
Pearlson’s formula for bigger Syncrolifts is simple: Add more winches and motors. Largest to date is a lift with a capacity of 4,500 tons, which is under construction at Port Everglades, Fla. It will have 44 hoists. With Syncrolift’s practical load limit being a
20,0- deadweight-ton ship (the size of a heavy cruiser), Pearlson figures his invention can handle 85% of the world’s oceangoing vessels.
Sales so far this year have already topped $2-million. With Syncrolifts operating in a dozen countries, Pearlson has 17 more under construction, and “another 15 to 20 hot prospects.”
The lift’s big selling point is that it can be squeezed into tight places and will keep a one- dry dock yard operating all the time. In fact, Pearlson made his first big sale on that basis— a $340,000 lift with a 1,500-ton capacity that was built for a yard in Ostende, Belgium, in 1961. The yard had 700 ft. of working area, but only 55 ft. along the water for a dry dock entrance.
s Ship Docks Getting Larger (Journal of Commerce, 6 May 1966): Mitsui Shipbuilding & Engineering Co., Ltd., and Nippon Kokan K.K. are planning to construct 300,000
350,0- dwt. size building docks to meet growing world demand for increasingly larger ships.
The companies, which have lagged behind other major shipbuilders in a race to construct
200.0- 250,000-dwt. docks, hope now to outdistance their rivals and better their position in the industry by such construction.
Japanese shipbuilders started construction of large docks four or five years ago. At that time, they were worried by the huge investments required for construction of even
150.0- dwt. class docks.
Since then, however, they have been compelled to turn their attention to building even bigger docks as global demand for gigantic ships has increased at a far faster tempo than what they earlier surmised.
Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., completed a 200,000-dwt. building dock at its Yokohama Shipyard in Fall 1964; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., a 200,000- dwt. building dock at its Nagasaki Shipyard last June; Hitachi Shipbuilding & Engineering Co., Ltd. a 250,000-dwt. dock at Sakai, Osaka, this April and Kawasaki Dockyard Co., Ltd., is to complete a 250,000-dwt. dock at Sakaide on Shikoku Island in May, 1967.
In the meantime, Sasebo Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., is taking official procedures to use deadweight tonnage, instead of gross tonnage, for its dock capacity. Its No. 4 80,000 GT dock will be called 200,000-dwt. size in the future.
The trend for seeking increasingly larger ships is reflected in the recent move by National Bulk Carriers Co., Ltd., of the United States to order on a bulk basis three 250,000- dwt. tankers, each, from IHI and Mitsubishi. Plans are afoot among foreign shipowners,
moreover, to seek 300,000-dwt. class tankers.
Mitsui Shipbuilding is intending to erect a
300.0- 350,000-dwt. dock adjacent to the
150.0- dwt. dock completed at its Chiba Shipyard last Summer to engage in more active shipbuilding.
Mitsui wants to start construction of a dock measuring 65 meters in width and 450 meters in length in mid-1967 and complete it in Summer, 1968. The company estimates the cost at more than 3,500,000,000 yen ($9,730,000).
Likewise, Nippon Kokan K.K., a major Japanese steel maker and shipbuilder, says that immediately after it finishes building an integrated steel-making plant at Fukuyama, near Hiroshima, in 1968, it plans to construct a 300,000-350,000-dwt. dock.
0 Gulf Oil Orders Six Huge Tankers
(Robert A. Wright in The New York. Times, 27 April 1966): The Gulf Oil Corporation has ordered construction of six huge oil tankers, each of which will be longer than the liner France and almost four times heavier than the Queen Elizabeth.
They will be the largest commercial vessels afloat.
Each of the ships, which will be built in Japan and go into operation in mid-1968, will weigh 300,000 deadweight tons, measure 1,100 feet in length and have a 74-foot draft.
The tankers will be capable of carrying about 2.2 million barrels of crude oil each. With 15 storage units, each will carry the equivalent of a fully loaded standard T-2 tanker of World War II vintage in each compartment.
Gulf declined to disclose the cost of the tankers or the name of the builder, but trade sources estimate that each ship would cost $21 million.
0 Spain to Use Hydrofoil (Shipbuilding and Shipping Record, 14 April 1966): The world’s first open-sea hydrofoil, the Grumman Dolphin, has been sold to a Spanish shipping company Maritima Antares, it has been jointly announced by the Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, the Garrett Corporation and Maritima Antares. The Dolphin is an 88-passenger vessel capable of operating through 2m (6J ft) waves at a cruise speed of approximately 92 km (57 miles) per hour. The Spanish firm intends to use the commercial hydrofoil in the waters between Majorca and Barcelona and Valencia, and also the Canary Islands. Maritima Antares will begin the ferrying of passengers in August. The same Spanish firm plans to build two other Dolphins for regular service runs.
The specifications are as follows: length overall 74 ft 9 in (22.82m); beam 18 ft 8 in (5.73m); draft with foils retracted 4 ft 2 in (1.82m); displacement 59 tons; cruise speed (foilborne) 50 knots; speed (hullborne) 10 knots and crew four.
Rough water trim is maintained by an auto pilot which actuates three submerged subcavitating all-movable foils without flap control (the auto pilot is designed and manufactured by the Garrett Corporation). All three foilstrut assemblies are fully retractable to enable the use of existing shoal water harbours and dock facilities.
NAVY MUTUAL AID
ASSOCIATION Membership Provides
$11,000 Permanent
Insurance Protection
($7,500 Primary Benefit Plus $3,500 Additional Death Benefit at no extra cost) ★
Competent, Sympathetic Assistance in Securing Government Benefits ★
Membership Loans Without Delay ★
All Active Duty Officers of the Navy, Marine Corps & Coast Guard Are Eligible. ★
For Further Information and Brochure Regarding Our Services and Benefits, write
NAVY MUTUAL AID
ASSOCIATION
Navy Dept., Washington, D. C. 20370 Since 1879
The Dolphin is powered by a 3,600 s.h.p. Rolls-Royce Tyne gas turbine which drives a KaMeWa c.p. propeller. Power is transmitted
by an Indiana Gear Works over-the-stern transmission. The ship has a range of 200 nautical miles when in full flight on its foils. When hullborne, the Dolphin is powered by two 216 h.p. GM diesel engines which drive two water-jet pumps; at that stage it has a range of 674 nautical miles.
The Dolphin was designed by Grumman Aircraft and is presently being constructed by Blohm and Voss in Hamburg. The Garrett Corporation of Los Angeles, California, is the world-wide distributor and sales agent. The Dolphin is expected to be launched in June.
Research and Development
s Shrike and Cleansweep IIIB {Naval Research Reviews, April 1966): A missile system designed to collect and bring back samples of debris from nuclear clouds is being tested currently at the Pacific Missile Range (PMR). The system, called Cleansweep IIIB, is being developed by the University of California’s Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, a prime contractor for the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, as a part of the national readiness program to resume nuclear testing in the atmosphere should the present test ban treaty be broken.
The single-stage air-launched ballistic missile is propelled by the Shrike rocket motor, which was developed by the Bureau of Naval Weapons.
The missile is launched over the PMR inner-sea test range by an Air Force RB-57C (Camberra) jet aircraft at an angle of between 40 and 85 degrees to the horizontal. Twenty seconds after launch, the nose tip and aft port covers of the missile payload are ejected. Air now passes through the vehicle, and sampling begins.
As the missile descends, the rocket motor is jettisoned, the payload is sealed so as to be watertight, and a parachute opens to lower the vehicle into the water.
a 2 Midget Submarines Launched (John C. Devlin in The New York Times, 4 May 1966): Two inner-space, or deep-diving, research craft were launched simultaneously here yesterday with a prediction that they were the forerunners of squadrons of similar craft designed principally for science.
The two-man vehicles, which looked like midget submarines or a combination of midget submarines and airplanes with tail fins, were lowered into the water simultaneously by a crane instead of sliding down ways as is customary.
Similar launchings have been made before by crane.
General Dynamics said the two new vehicles would be leased out to various groups for scientific research. Their cost was described vaguely as “more than $750,000 for the two of them.”
The designers and builders were the Electric Boat Division of the General Dynamics Corp., which has built 21 nuclear-powered submarines for the United States Navy arid is now building the first nuclear-powered research submersible, scheduled for launching in late 1967. Details about this new research craft are secret.
The vehicles launched yesterday were called the Star II and Star III, which get their names from the initials of the project, Submarine Test and Research.
The Star II is 17.7 feet long, can operate at a depth of 1,200 feet, displaces 4.7 tons, has a crew of two, carries a 250-pound payload, is made of the same type of steel as the Navy’s nuclear-powered submarines and has a range of 10 to 12 miles and a speed of 4.5 knots.
The Star III is made of an even higher' strength-type steel, is 24.5 feet long, can operate at a depth of 2,000 feet, has a crew of two, carries a payload of 1,000 pounds, displaces 10 tons and has a range of 12 to 15 miles and a speed of 5 knots.
Both vehicles are equipped with powerful lights and viewing ports, and at the forward end there is an articulated arm.
Dr. John P. Craven, project director for the Deep Submergence Systems Project for the Navy, said yesterday after discussing previous launchings of deep submergence vehicles:
“It foreshadows the quantity production of small versatile submersibles in squadrons, even as aircraft are produced today, for a variety of underseas missions where the extension of man over a wide area for search surveillance, screen, defense or attack may be as common under the sea surface as it is now in the air above it.”
Progress
itsTi-a taa
Package Loading—The internal bomb capacity of SAC’s B-52 Stratofortresses is being increased from a maximum of 27 to either 42 750-pound or 84 500-pound bombs. The bombs are preloaded into three removable racks which are hoisted into the plane’s bomb bay. In addition, 24 750-pounders can be carried on a B-52’s wing racks, for a total bomb load of up to 60,000 pounds. These photos show the loading rack and a B-52 releasing 84 500-pounders. An F-100 Super Sabre chase plane is in the background.
tllUUlU
Fleet Firepower—The USS St. Francis River (LSMR- 525) has joined her sister ships Clarion River (LSMR- 409) and White River (LSMR-536) and the larger Carronade (IFS-1) in the Western Pacific. Forming Japan-based Inshore Fire Support Division 93, the ships have already seen action in the Vietnamese War. The 207-foot St. Francis River is armed with eight twin 5-inch rocket launchers, a single 5-inch gun, and four 40-millimeter guns. She is manned by 132 officers and enlisted men.
Zero Launch—The German Air Force will soon begin tests of rocketing F-104G Starfighters into the air without the use of runways. These will be a continuation of secret 1963 tests in which the Mach 2.2 intercepter was fired into the sky from a ZELL (Zero Length Launcher) at Edwards Air Force Base. At right a U.S.A.F. F-104 is launched with a rocket booster during the 1963 tests.
Lockheed-California
Supersonic Target—This is the improved version of the Ryan Firebee target missile scheduled for flight tests in early 1967. Designated XBQM-34E, the new target missile is turbo-jet powered, capable of Mach 1.5 speeds, and can remain aloft for more than an hour after being launched from the ground or a "mother” aircraft. The drawings compare the new, 28[-foot Fire- bee (shaded) with its predecessor, the 23i-foot subsonic BQM-34A Firebee.