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.
CONTAINERS AND CONTAINERSHIPS FOR THE MILITARY
134 Containers and Containerships for the Military
By Lieutenant Colonel Fremont Piercefield, U. S. Army
136 The Soviet Black Sea Fleet
By Robert W. Wells
139 Mechanical Instrument Repair and Calibration Shops
By Commander Michael R. Travalio,
U. S. Naval Reserve
141 USS Waccamaw—A New Oiler, In Part
By Lieutenant Commander H. G. Gillette, U. S. Navy
143 The Sea Grant College Program
By Senator Claiborne Pell with Fitzhugh Green
Professional Notes
Edited by Captain Daniel M. Karcher,
U. S. Navy
The containership, SS Container Dispatcher of the American Export Isbrandtsen Lines (AEIL), was anchored in Long Island Sound five miles off Bridgeport, Connecticut, the delivery site. The cargo aboard the container- ship consisted of 31 aluminum units; standard eight by eight by 20-foot containers and special gondola-type containers. The weight of the loaded containers varied between 6,200 and 20,000 pounds. Off-loading the container- ship to the shore site was one Sikorsky S-64A Skycrane helicopter.
This is a summary of a demonstration of unloading a container ship by air, as recorded by the U. S. Testing Company, Inc., and an official report published on 3 February 1967 on the 27 January demonstration.
The local weather conditions were ideal for the demonstration. During the five-hour operation, 0820 to 1350 hours, the wind velocity varied between 10 and 50 knots, gusting at times to as high as 55 knots. These same winds created seven to eight-foot swells in the waters of Long Island Sound where the containership was anchored. The situation was further complicated by high humidity which changed to intermittent and ultimately steady rain. As an indication of the difficult weather conditions, the official report notes that the motor launch carrying stevedores and observers could not come alongside the containership safely. Further, the Sikorsky passenger helicopter, ferrying observers to the ship, in most cases could not safely land on the ship to disembark passengers. The temperature averaged about 40 degrees.
The demonstration illustrated that at least six containers per hour could be transported the five miles to the shore site by one helicopter. All this was done under much less than desirable conditions. The average
round trip for the 31 containers and the two empty containers returned to the ship was nine minutes and 36 seconds.
The demonstration confirmed the practicality and capability of marrying the helicopter and containership for cargo loading operations. The next step is the development of an over-all transportation concept.
Project Expedite was the name given such a e lcopter-containership concept proposed by ^EIL and Sikorsky and analyzed by the rrny s Director of Transportation, Deputy mef of Staff for Logistics (DCSLOG). This Proposal would embrace the use of a fleet of s,c\en containerships, specially rigged to be tIsc larged or loaded in the conventional manner alongside a pier or barge, or over-the- s ore by helicopter. The ships would sail bey CCn the West Coast of the United States and a/etnam’ each ship making a round trip in °|lt 37 days. In the target discharge area,
/ Se 'Sustaining fleet of at least six Skycranes r their equivalent by other firms, such as
Boeing) would be waiting to discharge the containers.
Internally, the containerships would be constructed with 104 vertical oblong cells for stowing a removable gondola-type carrying unit which is open at the top. The gondola dimensions are eight feet wide and 20 feet long; the height is adjustable between four and eight feet. Each gondola is designed to have a net cargo capacity of 18,000 pounds fully loaded. An average containership load might be 750 gondolas below decks and 248 containers on deck. Each ship’s net capacity would be about 20,300 measurement tons or 10,000 short tons.
To position gondolas or containers for discharge, each ship would be equipped with two movable gantry cranes. Each crane would have a lifting capacity of 40 short tons. Each crane would then lift two containers every four minutes. The Skycrane helicopter has a lifting capacity of 10 short tons.
Five of the six aircraft would be operational
136 U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, September 1967
at all times with the sixth aircraft as backup. Using five miles as a ship-to-shore site planning figure, each of the five aircraft would lift six gondolas or containers per hour. All shipboard people and all persons connected with the flight operations would be furnished by the contractor. The military would probably have to provide some support to the shore- based contractor. Commercial containers are built to handle dry, liquid, bulk, refrigerated, heated, or almost any type of cargo.
The value of the container can be illustrated many ways, but most recently by its many uses in Vietnam. The current Conex container is famous and it has many uses besides being a cargo container. This eight by six by seven-foot metal box often shows up as a mailroom, a tactical command post, a PX, a kitchen, or a supply room.
The container for train, truck, or ship interchange is being standardized within the container industry. This means that with a standardized container, someday, you won’t need various types of cargo handling equipment or trucks to handle the containers unique to the many container owners. International standards will feature dimensions of eight feet high by eight feet wide, in lengths of 10, 20, 30 and 40 feet. These containers will have maximum load limits of 22,400, 44,800, 56,000 and 67,000 pounds, respectively. Still under study are such specifications as forklift pockets and dimensions for smaller containers.
Conventional commercial containership service has been used by the Department of Defense since 1945, when service was established between the West Coast and Alaska. Since then, about 15 carriers have provided this type service to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Alaska, Northern Europe and the Far East.
The Defense Department’s latest undertaking in commercial containership service began with a full containership contract service between the U. S. and Okinawa in July 1966. This service—working through the Military Sea Transportation Service—was expanded to the Philippines in April 1967, and in July, Sea-Land Service, Inc., under a $70 million contract, started container service to ports in Vietnam. They agreed to ship 720,000 tons of containerized cargo annually at 15-day intervals in seven ships.
Initiated by DCSLOG, the helicopter-con- tainership concept is also under procurement study. Boeing (Vertol) and Seatrain Lines, Inc., as well as AEIL and Sikorsky are the major organizations interested. It is estimated that at least a year will be required to assemble the necessary material—ships, containers, and aircraft—for this type operation from the time a decision is made to contract.
The concept of containerization and the movement of containers is improving and is not restricted to surface movement. In January 1965, the International Air Transport Association introduced a plan using containers in aircraft that encouraged shipment consolidation with a resulting tariff discount. This was successful in expanding volumes of air cargo. In December 1965, the Air Transport Association of America announced a plan to standardize containers.
What does all this mean? It means that the movement of war materiels in containers is the coming thing. Containerships discharged by helicopters can produce large savings in port handling, port congestion and delays, port construction, gold flow, inland line haul, and in the numbers of people normally needed.
THE SOVIET BLACK SEA FLEET
The recent flareup in the Middle East has suddenly propelled the Soviet Black Sea Fleet into prominence, and has made clear that there are serious misconceptions about the extent of its deployment. Coming on the heels of the recent collision incident involving the Soviet and American destroyers in the Sea of Japan, it is particularly important that the Middle East naval situation be put into focus to try to clarify a matter of national and international confusion. *
Historically, the Russian Black Sea Fleet
* See F. M. Murphy, “The Soviet Navy in the Mediterranean,” U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, March 1967, pp. 38-44.
atant sea power just doesn’t appear to be th ■CSSary- therefore, one must speculate on niei ^°SS^^e °ther uses for this fleet. Deploy- ei't into the Mediterranean Sea is an obvi- °Us Possibility.
stricCPl0yment °Ut of the Black Sea is re' th CR ’ Bowever! since its only exit is through
Wate °Si30rus’ ^ea Marmara, Dardanelles p TrwaY- This strategic passage is controlled q upkey in accordance with the Montreux mention of 1936. This treaty, to which the rp , states is not a signatory, invests tra[r cy w*th the authority to control all ship S Be*’ween the Mediterranean and the er , ‘ ea- The passage of warships is gov- II to i,)y /4lrt*cles 8 through 22 of Section pro°.e Convention. The substance of these nnit 'Sl0ns as t^y apply to Russian Fleet #S may ^ summarized as follows: minor n l*mes °f Peace> light surface vessels, freed " ^ V essc^s’ ancl auxiliary vessels enjoy v;deciOIV transit through the Straits, pro- l'ght * 31 SUC^ transh is begun during day-
hlack Sea powers may send through cap-
as not been a major power in the Mediterranean; it is only within the last few years 1 at the Soviets have undertaken to maintain a deployed Mediterranean squadron of sur- ace units. In fact, one source indicates that it was not until 1964 that the Soviets managed to keep surface units deployed in the Mediterranean the year around. The number of ese deployments has been increasing every )ear, with the summer months seeing the ■Host activity. These now-routine deployments, well-known in U. S. naval circles, a' e been occurring regularly again this year without public notice. But now, aided by Press reporting, the Soviet Mediterranean T'adron for the first time is being exploited as an instrument of military diplomacy, j ecause the Black Sea is relatively small, ls feasonable to assume that the Soviets do ,'ot intend for their Black Sea Fleet to be e y a defensive force. The Black Sea— oughly the same size as the Baltic—now J°rs a Soviet fleet consisting of several isers, a large number of frigates, dei yers; and destroyer escorts, possibly 75 co '?aianes’ and a large number of smaller l 111-’atant and support vessels. In a closed ° y of water of this size, that much com-
ital ships as long as they are not escorted by more than two destroyers.
• Lightly-armed fleet tankers may transit the Straits singly without prior notice of transit.
• Black Sea powers may send submarines through the Straits, singly, on the surface, and by day, for the purpose of rejoining their bases or to be repaired at dockyards outside the Black Sea. Operational deployments out of the Black Sea are prohibited.
• Prior to transit through the Straits, diplomatic notice must be given to the Turkish government, specifying the name, type, number, and destination of the vessels. This notice must be given eight days in advance by Black Sea powers. Actual transit must occur within five days of the date given in the notification. When effecting transit, the commander of the naval force must communicate to the signal station at the entrance to the Straits the exact composition of the force.
FAHEY’S EIGHTH EDITION
THE SHIPS
AND
AIRCRAFT
OF THE
U S. FLEET
Compiled and Edited by James C. Fahey
An up-to-date listing by name and type of over 2,000 ships and 120 aircraft and missiles. Over 400 illustrations. 64 pages. Paperbound. List Price $3.50 Member’s Price $2.80 A U. S. Naval Institute Publication
• In time of war, Turkey not being belligerent, free transit in accordance with peacetime regulations is assured. •
• In time of war, Turkey being belligerent, passage of warships is left entirely to the discretion of the Turkish government.
There are other more detailed provisions concerning warships, but the essence of the controls as they affect the Soviet Navy is as given. From these it is clear that while the Russians can deploy their Black Sea Fleet surface units into the Mediterranean at will in peacetime, it is done only after notifying the Turkish government. In time of war, assuming that NATO is involved, and Turkey is now a member of that organization, the Russians would be unable to use their fleet outside the Black Sea without taking the Turkish Straits by force.
With these background facts in mind, we can turn our attention to the current Soviet naval presence in the Eastern Mediterranean. The spate of reports (June 1967) about Soviet Black Sea units entering the Mediterranean was based on a press story with an Ankara dateline, revealing that the Soviets had made diplomatic notification of intent to send some ten vessels through the Straits. The press immediately attributed to this fleet of ten unidentified Soviet vessels a major power move in the Middle East crisis.
The 1964 and 1965 issues of the Annual Report on the Movements of Warships through the Turkish Straits, an open publication of the Turkish government, indicate that we should expect numerous Soviet naval vessels to deploy into the Mediterranean in June and July of the year. Inasmuch as the types and exact identification of these units do not become known until they actually make their passage, advance press speculation as to their mission is highly suspect. Also, since Soviet naval units are routinely rotated in the Mediterranean, the figures on southbound transits are not meaningful without knowing how many northbound transits of relieved deployed units are being made at the same time. The ten southbound ships that the press reported were, in fact, more or less routine deployments, and could have been predicted from past years’ deployment statistics.
With the recent Soviet deployment thus put into perspective, we can take a look at what units might have been predicted. In 1964, for example, the announced cruiser and two escorts for the 15 June southbound passage turned out to be the Sverdlov-class light cruiser Mikhail Kutuzov and two new gas- turbine-propelled “Kashin”-class frigates. In 1965, we saw an earlier deployment of the summer flagship when the old Kirov-class heavy cruiser Number 551 made the southbound passage on 13 May. Destroyers, guided missile destroyers, “Kashin” frigates, and Riga-class destroyer escorts frequently get out into the Mediterranean. Fleet tugs, small oilers, water distilling vessels, and submarine tenders show up routinely. And hydrographic ships, some of which are fleet intelligence collection units converted from trawlers, often make Mediterranean patrols. In terms of actual numbers, the annual transits of Black Sea units into the Mediterranean are composed primarily of support and noncombatant units, with a smaller proportion of combatant types. At no time has this Mediterranean Squadron represented a serious threat to the U. S. Sixth Fleet.
Three notable points were made evident by the recent Middle East crisis and the current role of the Soviet Navy in this crucial period.
(1) The recent deployment of Soviet units roni the Black Sea into the Mediterranean Aas spotlighted the growth of the Soviet s out-of-area deployment, v J The Soviets are now able to use their ack Sea Fleet as a demonstration of support ^°r the Arabs. This show of force, while not 'ery forceful and not very threatening, can ave significant propaganda and psychologist value.
, Press comment on the deployment of e °viet Black Sea surface units has signifi- ant y mislead and inflamed public opinion in
‘he current situation.
^ hile we must recognize that the Soviets in P°SSCSS a limited single-strike capability thcs C*r deplo>;ed Mediterranean Squadron, e same units would be dangerously ex- ^ e in a wartime situation. In terms of re 1Veness in a no-risk situation as we have be K seen> however, this squadron has cost'1 d*sProportionately influential. At no So ' <nehting from press reporting, the mV.let Mediterranean Squadron has had a J°r Psychological impact.
By Commander ichael R. Travalio,
(Retired) N*Val Reserve>
Cent ’ , Parts Control J
ter, Mechanicsburg, Pa. t \ ^ /
Mechanical INSTRUMENT REPAIR AND CALIBRATION SHOPS
I n ^^2, the then Bureau of Ships, signerT Ships Systems Command, as-
tor1 le aval Boiler and Turbine Labora- rgpair e tash to examine the calibration and ment, Worh performed on mechanical instru- recorn ^eet‘ The objective was to
destr niCnd an improved instrument shop for fepair^iv tenders> submarine tenders, and based S ^ iinProvements were to be
the Fl°n 1.nstrument support requirements in tore ff61 m. dle areas °f pressure, tempera- instr'u OW’ dpuid level, and speed measuring T. *
clttded tW° ^ears °f study that followed in- a detailed survey of the instruments
serviced by 33 active tenders and repair ships. The survey showed that instrument repair was accomplished, at best, with antiquated equipment, or in many cases not at all. It thus substantiated the need for an improved program, and it stressed the importance of having a single, tender-based, central facility. Other aspects of the investigation were the selection of specialized equipment— and for the most part commercially available—for the new Mechanical Instrument Repair and Calibration Shops (MIRCS) and the design of the tender. Funding, equipment procurement, personnel training, and test equipment calibration and procedures presented distinct problems which were essentially resolved during the development of the prototype.
In August 1964, after numerous ship visits and meetings of the representatives of the Naval Boiler and Turbine Laboratory, the Bureau of Ships, the Ships Parts Control Center, the Bureau of Naval Personnel, the Naval Shipyards, and manufacturers’ representatives, a report was issued that proposed the details of the MIRCS Program.
The shop’s basic design was for the calibration and the repair of instruments. While the facility contains master instruments which could set primary or secondary standards, the objective was to have a workshop and not a standards laboratory. Large storage spaces for repair parts and tools complement this goal. Each shop needs an over-all space of approximately 1,200 square feet divided into four separate rooms: temperature, oxygen clean, flow meter calibration, and a main shop subdivided into: pressure area, tachometer and torque area, office, library, work control area, cleaning, and work area.
The shop contains facilities for testing pressure instruments from vacuum to 10,000 p.s.i. pneumatically and hydraulically with minute pneumatic pressures attainable in inches of water. Thermometers of all types could be checked between — 50° F. to +1,000° F. and thermocouples checked up to 1,850° F.
The flow meter calibration facilities were designed to calibrate meters up to 100 g.p.m., tachometers tested to 10,000 r.p.m., and torque wrenches checked from 5 oz/in. to 1,000 lb/ft. Additional specialized functions include the calibration of automatic control
JOHN P. HOLLAND
1841-1914
Inventor of the Modern Submarine by Richard Knowles Morris
This Irish-born teacher- inventor built his sixth submarine in 1897. She was purchased by the U.S. Government and became the first submarine of the U. S. Navy (USS Holland). 211 pages, plus 32-page illustration section. Line drawings. Ship plans. Appendixes. Bibliog- graphy. Index.
List Price $8.50 Member's Price $6.80
equipment (pneumatically operated), environmental pressure gages, and a vacuuin- freon system for cleaning Bourdon tubes. Bench-mounted manifolds were also installed for the production testing of pressure gages. Accuracy in measurement was not a primary consideration, although some instruments showed laboratory level accuracies. Specifically, the fundamental purpose of MIRCS was the calibration of ship’s operating instruments and not the calibration of master instruments. This is a basic difference, which was reflected in the design, equipment, personnel, and the environmental requirements of the shops. The environmental need was for air conditioning of 75°F. plus or minus five degrees and a 50 per cent (maximum) relative humidity, as well as certain features to promote cleanliness comparable to ship living quarters as opposed to a machine or boiler shop.
In January 1965, the first MIRCS installation was approved by the Bureau of Ships for the USS Cascade (AD-16). The Boston Naval Shipyard completed the work in January 1966 with the test equipment furnished by Ships Parts Control Center, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.
A joint innovation by Bureau of Ships and the USS Cascade resulted in the alleviation of the personnel training problem. Additional instrument men (iM) were approved for the MIRCS ships. The Cascade now has an allowance of 12 IMs.
MIRCS is planned for the USS Hector (AR-7), USS Tidewater (AD-31) and the Naval Training Center at Great Lakes, Illinois. The latter is to train men for MIRCS shops. Installation has commenced in the Hector and is in the design stage in the other units.
The Ships Parts Control Center will furnish test equipment for these three installations as well as for the MIRCS Program aboard all ships in these three classes. Future installations will be judged by the performance of the prototype, the Cascade. The Chief of Naval Operations has approved this facility for the Ajax (AR-6), Amphion (AR-13), Bryce Canyon (AD- 36), Grand Canyon (AD-28), Orion (AS-18), Shenandoah (AD-26), and Yosemite (AD-19) Fiscal Year 1967. Similar ships will probably receive MIRCS shops during the next five years.
J
/ * assumpsic (AO-107) and USS Pawcatuck
^C-108) in Fiscal Year 1964, marked the
rst such conversion of a tanker by the U. S. ■Navy.*
Th . •
j e USS Waccamaw was originally built
Su ^ Maritime Commission by the
"" Shipbuilding and Drydock Company at
A CS,ter’ ^>ennsylvania. Her keel was laid 28
j ri ^45 and she was launched 11 months
it Crt°n 30 March 1946. Upon completion, the W,
accarnaw was transferred to the U. S.
N.
USS WACC AM AW—A NEW OILER,
IN PART
umboization, a term used to describe the splicing of a new and larger center section j^to a tanker to increase its capacity, has en used for a number of years to convert Merchant tankers. However, a Ship’s Characteristics Board project, which authorized c conversion of the USS Navasota (AO-106) ^ USS 1Vaccamaw (AO-109) in Fiscal Year
3 and of the USS Mispillion (AO-105), USS P( -
Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington, and commenced off-loading all material and equipment. She was then moved “dead stick” to Seattle, and on 2 March 1964, officially commenced conversion. She was placed “In Commission—In Reserve” for the duration of the conversion, and the crew was transferred except for a nucleus crew of four officers and 35 enlisted men.
The Waccamaw was moved by tugs into a sectional floating drydock where cutting torches neatly sliced the ship in two just aft of the bow and the after section floated away. Next, the new midbody was floated in, properly positioned, raised, and welded to the old bow. The new section, which contained the cargo tanks with a 50 per cent greater capacity, was fabricated in Japan and then towed across the Pacific to Seattle.
The third step in the operation-was to lift the 190-ton amidships superstructure from the old midbody to the new section. Next, the original stern section was cut from the old midbody and the old midbody was floated away. In the final step of the operation, the new midbody, with the old bow and superstructure, was floated into the drydock, raised, and welded to the old stern.
The enlarged Waccamaw now had an over-all length of 644 feet, a limiting draft of 35 feet nine inches, and a full load displacement of approximately 35,000 tons. The conversion was officially completed on 26 February 1965 when the Waccamaw was put back in commission.
To compensate for the longer underwater body, a major modification was made to the stern, including a new counter-balanced rudder, new struts, and shorter propeller shafts and stern tubes. As a result of these modifications, harbor pilots have expressed their amazement at the Waccamaw’s maneuverability in restricted waters.
The latest design in fueling and replenishment at sea equipment was added. This included kingposts with outriggers, ram-tensioned span wires and high-lines, heavy-weather rigs with up to 300 feet for either hose or wire at each station, electric-hydraulic winches in place of the old steam winches, plus a helicopter pick-up area on the forward weather deck. Each fueling station was equipped with new 7-inch lightweight hose with flowthrough saddles, and double hose rigs were installed on the port side for working with the large combatants. The pumping capacity was improved by the installation of larger capacity, electric-driven cargo pumps and larger cargo pipes. Operating with ships alongside to both port and starboard, the Waccamaw is capable of transferring liquid cargo at the rate of 1.4 million gallons per hour. An auxiliary diesel-generator plant, developing 4,500 kw., was installed to power the deck machinery and cargo pumps. Fleet freight, bottled gas, and cargo mail are no longer stowed on the exposed weatherdeck. Enclosed storage space was added for proper stowage of these items.
The welfare of the ship’s company was not overlooked. Habitability items included air conditioning of all office and living spaces, a new ship’s store, a well-stocked library, a barber shop, and a modern laundry. All berthing spaces were completely renovated. All piping on the new 01 deck was suspended from the overhead, making for greatly improved working areas as well as improving safety factors. Furthermore, the over-all lines of the ship have been cleaned up, giving her the long, sleek look of efficiency.
1 He sea grant college program |\|ow is a propitious time to remind our’ selves and the country that the mere Enactment of a Federal program is not enough ensure its success—particularly if it is a new pCParture in its field. Like any infant, a new e eral program needs some postnatal nurturing. The Sea Grant College Program is e case in point. All who can contribute to Peeding it into maturity are urged to do so, fi10 U^'nS the U. S. Navy and other Execu- 1Ve departments, the Congress, oceanolo- glSis> industry, and other interested citizens.
he National Sea Grant College and Program Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-688)
• , rhed a milestone in legislative history. Con- 1 ering that it was a new kind of Federal pro- ^ram, the bill went through both Houses of n ingress in surprisingly short order and with opposition at all against its basic, substance Purpose:
v 1 to train oceanologists at every level m high school educated technicians to r^9^Ca^ sc*endsts aiming for doctorates; w to initiate and conduct applied research o^r°ughout the family of sciences called t i^n° °&y> so as to develop the necessary c nology for exploiting the national marine
resources;
(3) to establish a system of disseminating ositive results of this applied research to all priv'^S’ *nstitutions, and individuals—both acfVat;e and public—working in sea-related lvities who may benefit therefrom.
Distribution of information on a new discovery is vital. Dr. Athelstan Spilhaus, who conceived this new method to expedite development of our riches of the sea, agrees strongly on this point. Just as the land grant colleges were buttressed by an agricultural extension service, under the Sea Grant Program we should create a sort of county agent in hip boots to report the latest technological improvements to the fisherman, the aqua- farmer, the undersea miner, or even someday, the man building a house under the sea.
It is regrettable that only a million dollars in Fiscal Year 1967 and $4 million in Fiscal 1968 were requested instead of the $5 million and $15 million, respectively, authorized. However, no permanent harm has been done by the smallness of the budget for this year. It has taken some time to establish an administering staff at the National Science Foundation, which is the agency designated to run the program. Also, the Foundation, which until now has focused purely on basic research, has had to rethink its philosophy to absorb the Sea Grant emphasis on applied, mission-oriented, practical study.
Still, unless a substantial increase is requested in the President’s 1968 budget, it is feared that much of the excitement that has been created throughout the nation by the passage of this unusual program may be hurt and diminished. Without a substantial amount of seed money to build proposals into real programs, the impression may arise that the Sea Grant College Act has been falsely advertised and is something of a will-o’-the- wisp to any but the few largest institutions of oceanology.
National enthusiasm fully justifies the high hopes of the 200 participants from 30 states who first spoke in favor of the Sea Grant concept at Newport, R. I., in 1965. This conference was organized by the University of Rhode Island and the Southern New England Marine Sciences Association in order to publicize and gain backing for the bill which Senator Pell introduced in the Senate in August 1965.
Robert Abel, formerly the Executive Secretary of the Federal Government’s Interagency Committee on Oceanography, has been named to head the program. He is facing a torrent of inquiries. Even before the criteria
for winning grants were published in June, Abel had received proposals or requests for further information from 39 states, one foreign government, 102 universities and colleges, four junior colleges, five high schools, 22 corporations, 11 state organizations, three national organizations, three county organizations, and two Federal organizations.
This is only a preliminary, unsolicited reaction from potential grantees. One cannot judge how many will try to meet just-published criteria which spell out the “how-to” aspects of being funded as a Sea Grant college or an institution which is proposing a Sea Grant Program. But their number may far exceed the initial response to the passage of the Act.
If the government is to sustain the present momentum of interest, the Administration next year should call for the full $15 million authorized under the Act. In addition, there are other steps that can hasten the success of the program. One would be to use inactive naval facilities. For example, there are a number of naval air stations which are being and have been deactivated and dismantled over the past few years. Some of these have buildings which formerly served as barracks. These could be adapted, under the Sea Grant Program, to temporary housing and classroom space for oceanology students in training. Reserve units in the process of deactivation may also offer properties which could be lent or leased at nominal prices to private institutions carrying Sea Grants. Another means to tap the Navy for help, with little cost to the taxpayer, would be to bring from mothballs some of its smaller World War II vessels, particularly sub chasers—once designated as SCs and PCs, minesweepers, and weather ships. The Navy might lend these ships to Sea Grant colleges so their research programs could be expanded. Still another way might be to assign crash boats and old 50-foot motor launches to institutes that would give training in fishing techniques. Such Navy small craft could serve to approximate fishing boats. Another possibility would be the provision of supernumerary berths for research oceanologists on various naval ships which perform defense duties off the coast of the United States. This arrangement would afford the scientist an opportunity to make highspeed trawlings with Nansen bottles and other underwater collection devices whose use requires a moving seaborne platform.
In the Navy’s own oceanology program, which is the finest and most extensive Federal activity of its kind, it is hoped that the co-operation called for in the Act may yield innumerable, additional methods of co-operation. The Act specifically permits and encourages this:
The head of each department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government is authorized, upon request of the Foundation, to make available to the Foundation, from time to time, on a reimbursable basis, such personnel, services, and facilities as may be necessary to assist the Foundation in carrying out its functions under this title.
Perhaps these thoughts are over-ambitious for the program, but much assistance might be given without being “on a reimbursable basis.”
It is not proposed, moreover, that this kind of backing be restricted to the Navy. An approach should be made to American shipping companies to allow scientists (perhaps accompanied by their trainees and apprentices) to use living space on vessels plying regular passenger routes. Such donations of space could be on a tax deductible basis. These “ships of opportunity” could assist in evaluating food resources in the sea, providing data on the occurrences of fish and larger mammals, and making collections of marine organisms for comparative studies.
Oceanology’s ultimate, long-range exploitation of men and ships at sea, both in the Navy and in the merchant marine, might come from training regular crew members to become marine life identification specialists. These men could work in their off hours aboard ships to earn “moonlighting” money from the various oceanology agencies in the Federal government. (This practice could prove a crew morale booster, too.) Since a large proportion of the organisms being collected even now from the marine environment are of an undescribed species, such part-time specialists might be extremely valuable. Oceanologists say that the demand for accurate identification of organisms collected for study in a Sea Grant Program will be so great that existing specialists will be overwhelmed.
It is hoped that the Coast Guard may be drawn into the Sea Grant Program in similar fashion. Since the Coast Guard functions for Peaceful purposes, it would be most appropriate that the cutters already on coastal patrol can be used on an increasing frequency for oceanologic research and training in addition to what that service is already doing. Imaginative programs suggested by Sea Grant Col- eges and other burgeoning marine institutes Can provide a plethora of additional ideas.
ft is important that all Americans who work or think or dream in the field of oceanology continue to keep an eye on the Sea Grant r°gram, if it is to achieve its purpose—to Provide manpower and technology for this nation’s great opportunity in inner space.
ontinuing publicity and the types of support suggested must be maintained. The Congress ust hear the public speak its interest in any new activity for which the Congress has sup- P led legislation. Congress does not operate its own in most cases, and the Sea Grant °hege Program is no exception. The Congress can bring more effort to bear on increasing the appropriations in years to come, hears from oceanology’s constituency— lch fortunately seems to reside in a broad Portion of the country. In fact, approval and
encouragement during the bill’ s passage rough Congress was not limited to the coas- 3 A F ^"reat Lakes states.
'"erica’s competition in the race to con- uuer the undersea frontier scientifically, tech- ■ 1 °8lcafiy, and economically must, of course, Won. The Soviet Union appears to be aking the largest foreign effort in oceanol- L is not suggested that the contest be a Relive one. Actually, the exchange of in- 'nation between American and Soviet C1611 lists has so far proved an inspiring ex- a"iple of how to dissipate Cold War hostility.
Nevertheless, America should not risk the embarrassment of an underwater Sputnik. This could take the form of a vast undersea expedition. Such a party could stake out huge areas of the ocean bottom for its mother country’s exploitation; it could erect undersea fishing, mining, and exploration posts just beyond our own territorial limits; or it might perform some undersea wizardry that we have not yet even imagined but which could cause us consternation in terms of national security, national reputation, and economic opportunity.
Most Americans have by now heard or read the continuing “speech” which for several years has been delivered by public figures, scientists, and assorted others. This spiel demands that America drive hard to master the undersea and its many riches, both known and unknown. Each exhortation ends with a cry for immediate action, assuming always this is easy, as did Owen Glendower in Shakespeare’s Henry IV, when he bragged: “I can call spirits from the vasty deep.” We must still ask in response, as did Hotspur: “Why, so can I, or so can any man; but will they come when you do call for them?”
The Sea Grant Program offers one sure route to ocean exploitation. The nation must nourish it from its present, weak infancy to strong and meaningful maturity. It cannot grow without enough money from the Federal budget; cooperation—both technologically and materially—from the Navy, the merchant marine, the Coast Guard and other Federal agencies already active in oceanology; and finally, it must have a continuing public support through the nation’s constituency of oceanologists of all kinds— scientific, academic, technologic, and economic, as well as the private citizen. That support will measure the program’s success.
★
Research Craft—On 4 May Deep Quest, a Lockheed research submarine, was launched in San Diego. The 50-ton, 39-foot submersible has an outer hull of aluminum and an inner one of steel. It has an operating depth of 8,000 feet with a crew of four.
Mixed Breed—The Army’s new Cheyenne AH-56A helicopter by Lockheed features both the rotors of a helicopter and the fixed wings of an airplane. Called a winged rotorcraft, it has a top speed of 250 mph, twice that of helicopters. Note the two sets of propellers aft of the rigid-rotor. Scheduled for flight tests in September, the Cheyenne is designed to escort troopcarrying helicopters and to provide suppressive fire power support.
Lockheed-California Co.
Concorde—The European version of the super-sonic transport (SST) takes shape with the installation of the forward section of one delta wing at Sud-Aviation at Toulouse, France, one of the two assembly plants. The first flight of the prototype aircraft is scheduled for February 1968.
'Sud-Aviation
Detector Probe—This new electronic probe is used to detect weapons, grenades, and munitions on board Vietnamese junks. The Ordnance Locator was developed by the U. S. Naval Ordnance Laboratory, White Oak, Maryland.
Q4 Liner—The British Cun- ard Line’s new 28.5 knot transatlantic passenger vessel will have 13 decks and a passenger capacity of 2,025 persons. Shown is a model of the 963-foot, 58,000-gross ton vessel due to be launched this coming September.
John Jochimsen, Ltd.
Mark 48 Torpedo—Claimed to be the most advanced anti-submarine weapon under development by West- inghouse. The Mark 48 torpedo has a self-contained search and homing system that seeks the target and is propelled by a pump-jet, thermal engine that burns liquid fuel. It will replace the Mark 37, and can be surface and submarine launched.
Notebook
U. S. Navy
h Pentagon Ask for Polaris Refit Funds
(George W. Ashworth in The Christian Science Monitor, 5 June 1967) A Polaris submarine is a major component in the U. S. nuclear deterrent force. With the recent commissioning of the USS Will Rogers, the Polaris construction program ended. Late this summer, the Will Rogers will go to sea to take its position in a 41-vessel fleet.
Congress has been asked to authorize deployment funds for Poseidon missiles to be mounted in renovated Polaris submarines. In this time of a delicate East-West balance, the Pentagon has foreseen the need for a larger deterrent.
Now the Pentagon is seeking funds for the Poseidon. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara told Congress that the total cost for the conversion of the 31 Polaris submarines to the Poseidon missiles will be S3.3 billion, or a little more than SI00 million each. Approximately $900 million is being sought for the purposes in fiscal 1968. The submarines originally cost about $107 million each.
The contract for the conversion of the first three Polaris submarines is to be awarded early next year, according to current plans. Reworking for the first submarine is to be completed in 1970, and work on the next two would be finished in 1971. Secretary McNamara has testified that the reworking would be accomplished over a period of years to allow the fleet to remain in a state of operational readiness.
The first in the series of Polaris-firing submarines was launched in 1959. Now, just eight years later, these subs already have become outmoded, according to those who must plan United States defenses.
A total of 31 of the 41 submarines are to be equipped with the larger, more potent, more accurate Poseidon. Ten of the Polaris submarines are to keep the old A-3 Polaris missile, the most recent of the series. The reason is not a desire to have a balanced force. Rather it is simply that the 10 older submarines, not yet a decade old, cannot accommodate the new missiles without alterations that would cost
more than the submarines did originally.
The Polaris submarines, the Titan and Minutemen series of intercontinental ballistic missiles, and the manned bomber fleet compose the U. S. nuclear deterrent force. Oddly, none is considered the last word among war machines. The Polaris is, of course, to be replaced by the Poseidon as far as practicable. The current Minutemen-Three missiles are to be improved and modernized. And the B-52 deterrent force of manned bombers is to be kept flying for several years yet, with the FB-111, the bomber version of the controversial TFX, to substitute for B-52s of earlier vintage as soon as it is in the skies.
The advantages of the more powerful Min- uteman-Three, McNamara told Congress, is that its “increased payload will enable the Minuteman-Three to carry more penetration aids to counter an ABM defense.” The same is true of the Poseidon.
Observers here note that there is an obvious concern among Pentagon planners due to the threat posed by the X-ray output of antiballistic missile warheads. For the U. S. intercontinental ballistic missiles and Polaris missiles to have less vulnerability in encounters above the atmosphere, where the X-rays are most effective, it is necessary to provide protective materials and devices. This increases weight and takes up space.
The response to more sophisticated defenses thus is, in the case of the reworked Minute- man and the Poseidon, a larger weapon with much improved protective devices. The Poseidon will theoretically be twice as accurate and twice as potent as the Polaris missile. Navy ballistics men interpret this to mean the Poseidon will be eight times as effective.
As of the end of June, Mr. McNamara has stated, there are to be 32 Polaris missile submarines deployed. Six are to be undergoing overhaul and one is to be still in refitting. All of the Polaris submarines are to have either the A-2 or the A-3 missiles for the time being, with Poseidon in store later. Both the 2,500- mile-range A-3 and the Poseidon will be able to reach any spot on earth from a safe position at sea.
elapsed
co-pilot was Maj. Thomas Wheeler.
time for the flight was five hours,
-Normally, Polaris missiles are launched rom a point well below the surface, although !A's Possible to launch them from the surface. 1 ormally, however, they are launched by air or steam and shoot to the surface where they ‘gnite and are off. When the Will Rogers joins e fleet later this year, 14 submarines will normally operate out of Holy Loch, Scotland;
1 out of Rota, Spain; nine out of Charleston,
‘ • G., and seven out of Guam. Thus, seven W!U operate primarily in the Pacific and 34 ^‘fl be in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean.
course, the submarines can and do go else- W ere frequently. The normal tour at sea is w° months, and the submarines can stay sub- n|erged that long or longer.
0 New U. S.-to-Paris Flight Records Set
1 & Space Technology, 5 June 1. , 1 Several unofficial records were estab- 's ed by U. S. military and civil aircraft cmg ferried from North America for par- 1ClPation in the Paris air show. They included:
• Two Navy/Ling-Temco-Vought A-7A orsa*r-2 attack aircraft, which flew 3,900
p1 es from the Patuxent River Naval Air Test enter, Md., to Le Bourget in 7:01 hours OK f!Ut refllefing. The aircraft, flown by Cdr. Qufr ^' Fritz and Marine Capt. Alec
h * ,esP*e> carried four external fuel tanks and a approximately two hours’ fuel remaining Th andin§- Cruising altitude was 41,000 feet, e average speed of 560 m.p.h. was faster tflat of the F-lll, which flew a course 860 noes shorter. The flight was an unofficial, cra'!St°fl record for single-engine tactical air- wut plans for an official record attempt
* turned down by the Pentagon.
v . . 11 ^‘r I' orce/General Dynamics F-111A j o *a 3 ^'geometry fighter, which flew from porr;n^FB, Me., to Paris’ Le Bourget Air- tank Wlt^out refueling and without external aircr 3n averaSe sPee<f of 540 m.p.h. The fully3 1 wfl'ch flew mostly with its wings Dilnt ','Xtendecl *n the cruise position, was
na. -e ^ Col. Ray O. Roberts, USAF. The Navigator - Fh 54 minutes. The unofficial record established was for a fighter-type aircraft completing a transatlantic flight without refueling and without external tanks.
• Two Air Force-piloted Sikorsky HH-3E rescue helicopters, which made the first nonstop transocean flight, New York to Le Bourget.
• A privately owned North American Series 40 model of the North American Sabre- liner, which set a transatlantic speed record for a business jet aircraft. Piloted by Arthur Knapp, a retired industrialist and veteran pilot, the Sabreliner flew from St. John’s, Newfoundland, to Lisbon in four hours, 14 minutes. The average speed was 535 m.p.h. A stop was made at Lages Air Base, Azores. The former record was held by a Dassault Mystere 20 (Fan Jet Falcon), which recorded a total elapsed time of four hours, 38 minutes.
• A Mooney Mustang single-engine aircraft, which set a new light plane record, flying nonstop from New York to Le Bourget in 13 hours, 10 minutes. The Mustang was flown by 23-year-old Paul Rachal, a student at Texas Christian University.
S3 U. S. Shipbuilders Win Concessions
(Baltimore Sun, 15 June 1967) The Defense Department has agreed to make two concessions to American shipyards which will give them a better chance in bidding against British yards on the construction of 16 wooden- hull minesweepers for the Navy.
Representative Byrnes (R., Wis.), who for months has been objecting strongly to the department’s decision to solicit bids from the British under any circumstances, said that the Navy has advised him that American shipbuilders will not be required to submit performance bonds and will be able to import foreign parts duty-free.
These are conditions which a successful foreign builder would work under, Byrnes said. “These concessions will certainly be of help to American yards in attempting to meet the British competition,” he said. The 16 large, highly advanced minesweepers have been funded over three separate fiscal years and are intended to be built in one yard under a construction contract expected to total about $60,000,000.
However, a spokesman for the Wisconsin Congressman pointed out today that, if an amendment to the fiscal year 1968 defense budget which Byrnes sponsored successfully yesterday passes through the Senate as well, the seven minesweepers funded in that budget will have to be built in American yards. The amendment precludes the building of any Navy vessel overseas for which procurement funds have been provided in the 1968 budget.
Byrnes had protested that the cost of the procurement bond on a contract of some $60,000,000 “would throw out leading American yards” and that in many cases the interested yards would be unable to secure such a bond under any circumstances. A spokesman for Byrnes said today that cost of the bond had been estimated between $100,000 and $200,000. Normally he said, such a bond is required for defense contracts and smaller American yards have been able to provide it because the amount of the contract has not been that great.
s Navy Delays F-lllB Decision
(.Aviation Week & Space Technology, 8 May 1967) Navy will not make a final decision on whether to accept the General Dynamics F-lllB for the fleet until 1969, due to continuing slippage in production and test schedules. Testimony before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee by Navy Secretary Paul H. Nitze and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. David L. McDonald revealed that the first meaningful aircraft carrier tests cannot be started until the No. 7 aircraft is available in late 1968. No. 7 will be the first fully carrier-configured F-l 1 IB.
Navy testimony, released last week, was given prior to last month’s crash of F-l 1 IB No. 4, which may cause as much as a six- month additional slippage in the test program. The Navy is now permitting its first three F-l 1 IB aircraft to fly again. But No. 5, which is the only super weight improvement program (SWIP) aircraft in existence, is still grounded. The Navy will not let the No. 5 aircraft fly until investigators fully assess the crash. An examination of the No. 4 wreckage showed that the engine air inlets were closed, and a theory is that the pilot did not push the switch that would keep the inlets open when the wheels retract on takeoff.
Meanwhile, the Defense Dept, has diverted No. 21 Air Force F-l 11 A, scheduled for delivery this summer, to the Navy in an effort to speed the preliminary evaluation tests that were interrupted by the crash. The F-111A will be used in high-lift tests and qualifying systems common to both configurations.
@ Study Starts to Activate Battleship
(The Washington Post, 1 June 1967) Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara authorized the Navy yesterday to spend $800,000 for exploratory de-mothballing of the battleship New Jersey to see how much it would cost to ready her for service off Vietnam. A Pentagon spokesman said McNamara signed a memo to Secretary of the Navy Paul H. Nitze authorizing the action—the first step toward the possible recommissioning of a U. S. battleship for the first time in about nine years. No battleships currently are in the fleet.
The New Jersey and two other battle wagons—the Iowa and the Wisconsin—are moored near Philadelphia. A fourth battleship, the Missouri, is in the reserve fleet at Bremerton, Washington. The Pentagon has been under strong pressure from influential members of Congress to bring out one of the four remaining battleships so her powerful 16-inch guns can be trained on targets in the coastal areas of North Vietnam.
The Pentagon spokesman said the process authorized by McNamara involves a careful examination of all of the New Jersey's cocooned equipment and machinery and a close look at the ship’s structure. This study is expected to produce an estimate of the time and money it would take to deploy her.
He had no cost estimate, but there have been reports that some Navy experts believe it would take $25 million to do the job of readying the New Jersey for battle.
Under McNamara’s order, the Navy has conducted several paper studies comparing the cost-effectiveness of battleships and cruisers and battleships and tactical air power under various conditions. On 1 August, the Pentagon announced that the 45,000-ton New Jersey will be reactivated at Philadelphia for $27 million. She will be ready within a year.
Navy Needs Another Jet Fighter
{Wall Street Journal, 2 June 1967) Influential admirals told Congress the Navy needs another new jet fighter to fly missions for which General Dynamics Corporation’s F-111B is not suitable. Some said the best bet may be McDonnell-Douglas Corporation’s proposed swing-wing version of the F-4 Phantom, today s work-horse of the fleet’s air arm.
Under current Defense Department plans, the fixed-wing Navy Phantom would be phased out of production after fiscal 1968 which begins July 1. But it is known that Mc- onnell-Douglas has been working with the aval Air Systems Command to develop a ° low-on model incorporating the swivel wing eneral Dynamics pioneered for the controversial and costly F-l 1 IB.
Adm. T. F. Connolly, Deputy Chief of • aval Operations for Air, says he is “intrigued” by McDonnell-Douglas’ plans. And ear Adm. R. L. Townsend, Chief of the - aval Air Systems Command, doesn’t see an>' reason why the Navy couldn’t order more Phantoms in 1969, keeping production lnes open for transition to the swing wing.
ut one ranking civilian official sounds ess enthusiastic. “McDonnell came in and "‘ade a pitch,” this Navy official remarks, a ding; “The proposal is being looked at but s not a live proposition at the moment. ’ f he admirals’ comments were made in testimony given in April, but not released un! yesterday, to the House Defense Appropria- !°ns Subcommittee. Adm. Connolly in particular was complimentary toward General ynamics’ F-l t ib, prompting suggestions from ^Publican committee members that the air d mirals were softening earlier criticism in exchange for assurances from Defense Secrecy McNamara that he would let them buy Vet another carrier-based fighter.
omewhat surprisingly, in view of earlier secretiveness, Pentagon censors let stand an \C|nowledgment that cost of the F-l 1 IB had j.a °°ned to almost three times the $4 mil- y?mper"PUne estjmate Q£ £952, the year Mr.
c N amara overruled nearly unanimous miliary advice to choose Boeing Company as the •niff C COntractor- The new estimate of $11 , lon to $12 million a plane includes, among r . Cr C°sts f°r which General Dynamics is not esponsible, unanticipated costs of the Phoenix missile, being developed by Hughes Aircraft Company as the chief armament of the F-l 1 IB. Later the Pentagon issued a statement attributing part of the additional per-plane cost to a smaller total of planned purchases, which boosts unit costs.
Adm. Connolly, who became Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Air in December, expressed confidence that the heavier-than-ex- pected F-l 1 IB would nonetheless “land on a carrier like a lady” after all improvements have been incorporated. Full testing of the plane and its complex missile-control system won’t be completed for perhaps another year; the craft has not yet flown from or landed on an aircraft carrier.
Funds for the Air Force aren’t being contested; the Air Force regards its version as “highly acceptable.” But several Congressmen say they can’t understand why McNamara wants to buy the unproved Navy plane.
As Adm. Connolly expressed it, the F-lllB can be viewed as a high-flying “missile shooter” standing guard far from the fleet rather than a fighter in the ordinary sense. As a consequence, he said, there’s an “absolute” need to develop an advanced fighter for attack, escort and other duties. One “highly feasible” possibility, according to Adm. Connolly, is McDonnell-Douglas’ proposed swingwing Phantom. “I’m not prepared to count out the F-4 yet,” he said.
NAVAL BOOKS AVAILABLE
Many hundreds have responded to our earlier Proceedings ads. They are still with us as satisfied customers and continue to receive our bi-monthly catalogs, which list scarce, elusive and interesting books on the navy, ships, the sea, whaling, etc. For your free copy of our large (over 500 items) catalog, write to . . .
ANTHEIL BOOKSELLERS
Dept. P, 2177 Isabelle Court
No. Bellmore, New York, 11710 ILarge and small naval book collections purchased)
Though not necessarily sharing the Admiral’s enthusiasm for the Phantom, Navy civilian officials do not rule out the possibility that the McDonnell-Douglas plane could meet specifications for a joint Navy-Air Force fighter, dubbed VFAX-FX, that is beginning to
emerge from Pentagon drawing boards. Secretary McNamara allocated $4 million in the fiscal 1968 budget to continue the plane’s “concept formulation.”
s Navy Deep-Sea Search Units Urged (Evert Clark in The New York Times, 28 May 1967) A special study group has urged the Navy to form immediately two fast, mobile units that could recover hydrogen bombs or other lost objects from the ocean floor. The group said “many objects of value to the United States” now lie in the ocean depths.
Speed in retrieving such objects is “mandatory” to keep “foreign national or commercial interests” from reaching them first, the group said. This is the primary recommendation growing out of a 15-month analysis of the Navy’s recovery of a hydrogen bomb off the coast of Spain last year.
The analysis was made by the Chief of Naval Operations’ Technical Advisory Group. A final report consists of 1,200 pages in four volumes.
The advisory group urged a number of short and long-range steps to give the nation both a military deep-sea recovery capability and the ability to have civilian organizations do the work “where direct Navy participation might not be appropriate.” The Navy has been working since the nuclear submarine Thresher was lost in 1963 to develop a deep sea search, rescue and recovery capability.
But the study group said that interim teams should be formed now. One each for the Atlantic and Pacific, using existing vessels and recovery gear. Meanwhile, work on more advanced diving vessels, manned and unmanned, by the Navy’s Deep Submergence Systems project office should be accelerated, the group said.
In all, the Palomares operation required 3,000 Navy men and 33 Navy vessels, not counting the ships, planes and people needed to transport equipment to the site. The bomb was lost on Jan. 17, 1966, from an Air Force B-52 bomber, that collided with a tanker while refueling. The recovery took 80 days, during which the bomb was found and then lost again several times.
Last summer, the President’s science advisory committee expressed a concern for urgency about recovery capability similar to that in the Navy group’s report. The Presidential panel said in a report on oceanography that there would be a continuing need to retrieve “objects related to the national defense.” These would include submarines with survivors aboard, weapons systems and data capsules and hardware and debris needed either for diagnostic purposes or because of economic considerations, the panel said.
Since the hydrogen bomb recovery, nine experimental torpedoes have been retrieved from a depth of 3,000 feet off St. Croix, V. I., in the Caribbean and “a classified test shape” has been recovered from the Atlantic, according to the Navy report. In both cases, improvisation of the recovery work was “still very much in evidence,” the analysts said.
s Study Leads to Better Rescue Aircraft
{Aviation Daily, 23 May 1967) A Navy study due out June 15 will clear the way for the services to acquire improved aerial rescue vehicles. The Air Force has already outlined its needs and completion of the Navy study will enable the two to be matched and a single best package to be procured, Pentagon sources said last week.
A joint board is expected to have recommendations by fall but procurement may not be started immediately since an advanced design could be the result, it was learned.
In the meantime, the military is not only upgrading present helicopter forces but is conducting a technical evaluation of compound helicopters and V/STOLs for use within the next three to five years. For the present the Air Force will introduce the HH- 53B helicopter into Vietnam by August. A modified version of the Marine Corps heavy assault helicopter, it has more powerful engines, inflight refueling gear, armor plate, Doppler navigation, an internal hoist and suppressive fire weapons as well as a top speed of 190 mph.
The general feeling seems to be that the HH-53 is the best craft that can be expected for the time being because V/STOLs and compound helicopters have not been proved fully successful yet. However, the Pentagon is being pressured to move faster by Rep. Daniel J. Flood (D-Pa.) who told Defense Secretary Robert McNamara in a recent House appropriations hearing, “Really, we needed some-
® Navy Concept for Force Support Ship
(Michael Getler in Technology Week, 22 May 67) A new Landing Force Support Ship FSS) designed to bring improved barrage r°ckets, long range Naval guns, and ship-to- sunface guided missiles to bear in support of 1 arine amphibious assaults—is shaping up within the Navy.
The vessel, though still in the concept for- 11111 at*°n stage of development, is seen as the !!Cxt most likely project to follow along the total package procurement” lines for Navy j *PS in the fashion of the Fast Deployment ogistic Ship (FDLS) program, the large Dx /hibious assault ship (LHA), and the new • / DXG destroyer project. If the program is i PProyed by the Dept, of Defense for move- ’J7 lnt0 the contract definition phase (CDP) ot'clopment, requests for proposals to in- "stry for design; development and produc-
'^4
4>i
i
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
/
/
)
)
thing last night.” Flood said the Piasecki ompany could start producing its 16H Path- tuder compound helicopter within 18 months at a cost of $13 million for 18 to 20 of the new craft.
t°n estimates will go out in Fiscal Year 1969. in Nayy Planning estimates place the
ten" XT sltiPs required at between five and > and the total cost of the program at between $200-400 million. The CDP is expected sc- l3St a^out one year, with a three-year full- o a e development period to follow. Initial erating capability is expected in the 1973- /5 Period.
th A,,n0nS t^le weapon system candidates for e LFSS are:
jy* Navy-modified version of the Army’s to • 7,m- 'lowitzer, roughly equivalent in size mil* - lnc^ naval gun, has a range of about 20 arCS' ^ very important feature is the high, rou'n^ traiectory achieved with the 175-mm. tr .n s’ jn comparison to the relatively flat sfioiTr]OIaeS characteristic of naval guns. This hivh aH°w attacking targets well beyond 1 lcrrain near the assault area. odi neW ^arrage rocket, already in devel- and"'nt’ 3^e t0 double the 10,000-yard range lncrease the accuracy of 5-inch rockets su currently operate in the ship-to-shore to s °Pt r°^e' new weaPon would be used •'^Th neutrahzation-type area fire.
ne Landing Force Support Weapon
(Sea Lance), or possibly a completely new and comparatively small inertially-guided Navy shore bombardment ballistic missile.
Tests of Sea Lance, a modification of the Army-LTV-developed field missile, have been going on at the Army’s White Sands Missile Range, and Navy officers admit that accuracy demonstrated thus far in the simulated ship firings has been quite good.
With Lance aboard an LFSS, officers say that enemy surface-to-air missile sites as far inland as 40-60 miles could be taken out from off-shore batteries. With use of the extended range version of the missile, now in development, these ranges could probably be extended to 100 miles.
The Marines, among the most ardent supporters of Lance for the LFSS, believe the weapon will be useful against a variety of enemy targets and troop and hardware concentrations normally beyond the range of Naval guns.
In addition to offensive armament, the LFSS may well be equipped with some lightweight 3-inch or 5-inch antiaircraft guns and a Point Defense Missile System for protection against air strikes. Also, because the rocket fire role will bring it relatively close to the beach, new and reportedly highly advanced armor plate may be used. The principal studies now under way by the Navy on the LFSS concept are due to be completed this summer, in time to allow inclusion of CDP funds in the FY 1969 budget request if the project appears to be feasible. These studies are being carried out by the Center for Naval Analysis, the Naval Ship Systems Command and the Ordnance Systems Command.
NEW SHIP MODELS
Waterline 1:1250 Scale
New NAVIS. HANSA. DELPHIN, MERCATOR and VIKING-COPY models now in stock, highly detailed, hand painted, many American prototypes.
New complete catalog now available for 350 HANSA Fleet Data 250, plus the following naval books: German Warships of World War II, 168 pp. $5 95
U.S. Warships of World War II, 442 pp. (^95
Japanese Warships of World War II, 400 pp. 7 95
Warships of World War I, comb. vol.
Warships of World War II, comb. vol. §'75
Wever’s Flottentaschenbuch 1066-67 15 95
Groener's Die Deutschen Kriegsschiffe 1815-1945 25.00
NATHAN R. PRESTON & CO.
P.O. Box 187—Des Plaines, Illinois 60017 * Immediate Delivery
Other U. S. Services
0 Computer to Aid C. G. Forecasts
(The New York Times, 28 May 1967) The Coast Guard’s annual vigil over ice dangerous to shipping in the North Atlantic promises to become an easier task in the future, according to the commanding officer of the service’s International Ice Patrol.
Cmdr. John F. Murray, in an interview at patrol headquarters at Governors Island, said the service was studying the feasibility of applying computer techniques to the laborious and now manually performed task of processing data on winds, currents and water temperatures in a continuing effort to forecast ice drift and ice melting rates. Information on these factors comes into patrol headquarters regularly from ice observation flights, made by a Coast Guard aircraft based at Argentia, Nfld., and from ships at sea.
“With the eventual aid of a computer,” Commander Murray said, “We will be able to process more data and will be in a better
NAVY MUTUAL AID
ASSOCIATION
Membership Provides
$12,000 TOTAL DEATH BENEFITS
$7500 Primary Death Benefit (available from five permanent membership plans)
$4500 Additional Death Benefit
No War Restrictions Membership does not terminate upon retirement, discharge, or release from active duty. Amount of Benefits Not Affected by Increase
in Age VALUABLE ASSISTANCE TO BENEFICIARIES (Accredited by VA to represent survivors) IMMEDIATE LOAN SERVICE (Membership accrues cash and loan values) ALL Active Duty Officers of the Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard are eligible to apply Membership over 50,000 Assets more than $96,000,000
NAVY MUTUAL AID
ASSOCIATION
Navy Dept., Washington, D. C. 20370
Since 1879
Write for Further Information and Brochure position to predict more accurately ice behavior in the Grand Banks area off Newfoundland.” The patrol’s activities are controlled here for the first time since the patrol was established by the Coast Guard in 1914.
The heart of the headquarters is staffed by five officers and enlisted men. The operations room has a large wall map, on which is plotted the most recent information on icebergs south of Labrador as well as the daily positions of vessels in the area.
The ice data on this chart are forwarded daily to the Navy Oceanographic Office in Washington for daily dissemination to the maritime industry, and to Argentia for distribution by radio facsimile via the Coast Guard radio station NIK to ships at sea equipped with facsimile receiving gear. The facsimile chartlet provides ships with up-to- date information on ice likely to be encountered in the fog-shrouded waters off the Grand Banks.
s C. G. Increases Its Role in Vietnam
(Peter Shays in The Christian Science Monitor, 25 May 1967) The arrival of three U. S. Coast Guard ships in Vietnam during the past week, with two more on the way, has been disclosed here. A spokesman said the five ships will patrol off the coast and intercept any vessels suspected of supplying Viet Cong forces ashore.
U. S. Navy ships previously carrying out this function will reportedly be used for shore bombardment in support of ground troops.
Though the Coast Guard has been in Vietnam since the spring of 1965, the arrival of these 311-foot ships—each with a crew of about 150—more than doubles the number of Coast Guardsmen on duty in the Indochina area. Up to now, Coast Guard forces have served three functions in Vietnam:
• Some 26 patrol boats have been blocking the movement of men and materials from North Vietnam south along the coast. Each of these 82-foot boats has a crew of 12, including one Vietnamese liaison officer. Each is armed with an undisclosed number of 50- caliber machine guns and 81-mm. mortars.
• Some 19 dangerous-cargo specialists have been supervising the loading and unloading of explosives at several Vietnam ports. Some of these men, with additional
Gaining in port security, have been serving as advisers to other military units in the more active ports.
• (Joast Guardsmen have been building °ur Loran (Long Range Aid to Navigation) stations—three in Thailand and one in Vietnam to provide an air-sea system of radio S1gnals by which allied navigators can determine their positions during times of poor ' ls'bility. Each Loran station will be manned y an average of 24 Coast Guardsmen.
The Coast Guard also has been maintaining an administrative staff in Saigon. And buoy tenders have been making periodic stops in letnam to service aids to navigation.
0 Army’s Portable, Inflatable Hospital
\Navy Times, 7 June 1967) One of the newest innovations in emergency field medicine Ccluipment is being checked here now and soon will be sent to Vietnam.
rhe equipment, called MUST No. 1 and - °- 2 for Medical Unit Self-Contained, is a complete field hospital unit of 50 beds, which j;a.n heli-lifted to a battle zone. It arrives " y operative, including sterilization. Addi- °nally, MUST provides a controlled environ- 'lent for hospital cleanliness, including con- ant temperature and humidity controlled teosphere free of dust or contamination.
he units are divided into three sections; X£?n<iable, inflatable and utility.
• . Jlc expandable element is a collapsible, j'J'1, 'Panel shelter that can be erected into a . y ^8-foot room, ready for use in 30 to 45 u r]UteS ^n'ts contain four sections: two are as operating rooms, one for supply Tl?6’- thc other as a dental clinic, f , . e Inflatable section is a double-walled roQric shelter erected into a 22 by 52-foot Un°m used primarily as a hospital ward. Most Us * s contain five of these sections which are ca^ aS rece^vlng and disposition wards, surgi- p„nWarc^s and laboratory, pharmacy, X-ray
and cast rooms.
. e ntility section is a power package hesuPPhes electrical power, refrigeration, p n.S’ air circulation, water heating and ping, and air pressure for the inflatable
elements.
the*1 311 e^ort to simulate combat conditions, jpe f.ntlre unit was erected and equipped with lca supplies, beds, and surgical and dental instruments. Within minutes after the power was turned on, the unit was inflated and ready for use. With the power off the inflatable sections slowly deflated until they resemble stacks of tractor tires.
Units currently are being used by the Army in Vietnam. Lt. Richard Boyle, officer-incharge of MUST No. 1, who will take the unit to Vietnam, said “The unit costs in the neighborhood of one million dollars but it promises to revolutionize field medicine.”
Maritime General
S3 Lykes Seabarge Model Shown
(Helen Delich Bentley in Baltimore Sun, 15 June 1967) Details of the world’s newest allpurpose cargo ships—the highly touted and heralded seabarge carriers—were revealed publicly tonight in Washington officialdom and shipbuilders by Lykes Brothers Steamship Company.
As a working model of the new ocean giants was unveiled by the company’s two top executives, they also invited American shipyards to bid on the construction of three of the sea- barges, each of which will consist of a mother ship and a fleet of barges.
Members of the House Merchant Marine Committee and the Senate Commerce Committee were on hand along with Defense Department and Maritime Administration officials to hear an explanation of the operation details and performance expectations of the vessels as commercial carriers and as standby units in meeting any military or economic emergency facing the country.
ARMSTRONG
WRENCHES
Over 100 types, each, in all sizes. Drop forged, carbon and alloy steels. Open end, socket, box socket, detachable socket, hollow screw and other types.
Write for Catalog
ARMSTRONG BROS. TOOL. CO.
5226 W. Armstrong Ave. Chicago 46, U.S.A.
standard 8x8x20 feet size. ,. equivalent to approximately 1,500,000
c"nic feet of carg0.
1 hi ’ '
This is
e ship also is designed to carry special b^ydift cargo of up to 2,000 tons and can
^To be called the Seabee Class after the • S. Navy Seabee battalions which gained ante in World War II and which are observing their twenty-fifth anniversary this War, the ships will be 875 feet in length, 106 eet in beam and 75 feet wide.
These will be giant ships, no matter how you measure them. They will be the largest ass of common-carrier cargoliners ever Ul And they’ll cross the ocean at 20 knots r, etter. Together with the barge outfits and ot er facilities they will represent a total expenditure of about $90,000,000,” Lykes president Frank A. Nemec said. q he Lykes officials explained that the new ea ees can carry either 38 fully loaded barges neasuring 97.5 feet iong ancj 35 feet wide, or
otal of between 1,500 and 1,600 cargo containers of the
ivy-lift
u . . vehicles, roll-on roll-off cargo and ^^ed loads with equal facility. In addition lj{^ . ''hip can carry about 15,000 tons of th)Ul cargo in its deep tanks. It is estimated i ^ each carrier can be loaded or discharged *0.5 hours.
rjer biggest advantage of the Seabee car- the ^ *tS UnPrecedented flexibility in carrying in']' COrnPLtc spectrum of commercial and bj ary cargoes as they become available, time CC‘Sa^" °nly lhree days cargo handling r 1:16 required for the ship on a typical
the ° 1^'^ voyaSe using two loading ports on j hu f and five discharge points abroad. atn addition, the ship does not have to dock in rC^'dar berths in a port, but can anchor its b? Protected or semi-protected area where eliii)).arTe.s can be loaded and unloaded, thus and lnft'n£ P°rt congestion, dock limitations,
Pv; . ° er Problems normally encountered by
listing Ships.
(j-< ‘*vantiah Kept in Service adini ■eW Times, 21 June 1967) The that reversed itself and has agreed
in Qe .clear Ship Savannah should be kept July during the year that begins
that th rcs'dent Johnson’s budget proposed the e e vessel be kept out of operation during 6 Com‘ug fiscal year.
“But where will I get the electronics men to maintain it?”
Because of the severe shortage of technically- qualified military personnel, new and complex electronic equipment is frequently received with mixed emotions.
Chances are you're engaged in a continuing effort to improve the technical competency of your enlisted personnel. CREI can help you in this task as it has helped officers since 1927.
CREI Home Study Programs give your men an opportunity to acquire technical knowledge beyond the scope of military courses. They 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 man who enrolls in a CREI Program studies on his own time and pays his own tuition. The cost to the Armed Forces is nothing.
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.
J. W. Gulick, acting Maritime Administrator in the Department of Commerce, announced the switch at a hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. The House of Representatives voted funds to continue operation of the ship. “In view of the great interest shown in the continued operation of the Savannah, we have reconsidered our position and concluded that, on balance, the vessel should be kept in operation through fiscal 1968,” Gulick said. The original decision brought protests from Congress and the maritime industry.
Foreign
S8 Australia Builds Naval Base
(Shipbuilding and Shipping Record, 18 May 1967) The Australian Navy will spend $3.5 million (Aust.) building a patrol boat base on Manus Island, north of Papua-New Guinea, during the next two years. The island will be used as headquarters for five of the Navy’s 20 new patrol boats being built in Australia. A Navy spokesman said in Canberra that the first of
The first fully detailed account of the icebreaker Northwind's polar adventure exploring the forbidden Northeast Passage
ACROSS THE TOP OF RUSSIA
by Richard Petrow
The author, a veteran reporter and former Coast Guard officer, sailed aboard the Northwind on her historic mission to explore and traverse the arctic passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific that is blocked by the Russians. With a careful eye for detail, he tells the story of the adventurous voyage in 1965 that turned into an explosive international incident.
"Good both from a scientific point of view and an engrossing true-adventure story."
— Publishers' Weekly $6.95 at your bookstore
DAVID McKAY COMPANY, INC., N.Y. 10017 the new boats for Manus Island would be launched at the end of this month. The island, in the Territory of Papua-New Guinea, is a former U. S. war base. Since 1949 it has been used by the Navy mainly as a fuel base.
The $3.5 million will be spent on improving buildings and facilities. The Navy plans to have most of this work well under way before the end of the year. The five boats will be manned by crews from Papua-New Guinea working under Australian command. Each boat will have a complement of 19 men. They and maintenance crews will be housed on the island. The Navy is building a school and complete facilities as well as a new slipway with an 11-ton crane, fuel installations and a headquarters building. The base is unlikely to be able to take other naval vessels such as Oberon-class submarines and Charles F. Adams- class destroyers.
s Huge Lisbon Drydock Opens
{The New York Times, 18 June 1967) Europe’s largest drydock and repair facilities, built on 75 acres of marsh in the Tagus estuary across from Lisbon, was formally opened here on 23 June. More than 7,000 guests were invited to the inaugural ceremony of the Lisnave shipyard, including Adm. Americo Rodrigues Thomaz, the President of Portugal, members of the Government, bankers and shipowners as well as the yard’s personnel.
The program featured the entry of a heavy tanker into the drydock, which is 1,100 feet long, 177 feet wide and 40 feet deep, and can receive the largest existing tankers and ore carriers.
A special advantage of Lisbon as a ship- repair center, according to experts, is that tankers from Northern Europe can perform gas-freeing and tank-washing operations during the three-to-four-day sailing time here, thereby saving port costs. Lisnave will begin operations with two drydocks, one for ships up to 100,000 dead weight tons and the other up to 300,000 tons. Initially, the drydocks had been planned for 65,000-ton ships, but this was changed with the tremendous increase in the size of tankers in recent years.
A second phase of the project calls for the construction of a third drydock for ships of more than 100,000 tons and the reclamation of further 50 acres of land.
I rjI * 3 * *,''/ and placed in commission on 25 June
be " ^Cr over‘all length was 553 feet with a
ttl<fln 75 feet. She had a full load displace-
itv n(-°^ tons and a liquid cargo capac-
-j? over four million gallons,
j 0 ouild a new fleet oiler, with an antic-
pr& . ^eful life of 20 years, would cost ap
proximately $45 million, whereas this enlarge- VvCnt cost approximately $20 million and the" Vadd an antic'Pated life °f ten years to tlie f ^K: contract for the conversion of Vv_ rst two, the Navasota and the Waccamaw, DoS * * *,a-arded to Puget Sound Bridge and Dry q Company at Seattle, Washington, p 11 27 January 1964, after two months of (jp Paration in her homeport, the Waccamaw Qnartcc| Newport, Rhode Island, for Seattle.
February, she arrived at Puget Sound
* r>
Market » i°e* Adams, “The Tanker Charter ’ L. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, April 1966.