Professional Notes, Notebook and Progress

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.

ANOTHER TASK FOR THE LST

Professional Notes

130 Another Task For The LST

By Lieutenant William H. Poe,

U. S. Navy

133 The Unusual

MSTS Houston Office

By Lieutenant (j.g.)

W. B. Frank,

U. S. Naval Reserve

135 New Look For Nautical Charts

By Vernon J. Hertel

137 Portrait Of Proficiency:

USCGC Dallas (WHEC-716)

By Stuart Allen Sup

140 Lash and Seabee

New Ideas In Logistics

By Colonel Lane C. Kendall,

U. S. Marine Corps Reserve (Retired)

144 Dangerous Maneuvering—

The Russian View

By Commander Tyrone C. Martin,

U. S. Navy

Captain Walter S. DeLany, Jr., U. S. Navy Associate Editor

The 542-class tank landing ship (LST) has demonstrated versatility and durability in a wide variety of combat environments, ful­filling, over the years, a number of roles never envisioned by her constructors. The latest evolution in the distinguished history of this amphibian is the employment of the LST in a river patrol boat (PBR) and helicopter sup­port mission in Vietnam.

With the inception of Game Warden river patrol operations in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam, a requirement was generated for a mobile logistics support and repair facility to provide a base of operations for river patrol boats and helicopter gunships. The 542-class LST proved, with appropriate modifications, to be ideally suited to satisfy this role. Al­ready possessed of a spacious tank deck, which would accommodate the 10 boats of a PBR river section, and suitable flight deck space for operating two UH-1B helicopters, plus adequate troop compartments for berthing personnel of embarked units, these ships could be quickly adapted to meet the chal­lenges of a new kind of warfare. The shallow draft LST, with her large tank capacity and diesel engine reliability, was to prove a made- to-order vehicle for the support of riverine warfare, able to roam the navigable rivers at will and remain on station for an extended period, without upkeep and with minimum logistic support.

In early 1966, work began to reactivate four LSTs for PBR support. The USS Jennings County (LST-846) was recommissioned on H June 1966 as the first PBR support LST, and was also the first to arrive in Vietnam. The noteworthy modifications accomplished if the Jennings County can be considered typical, and they include:

SK

.ST

has a |ful- ver est his n a ap-

ver of r a to rol

• Installation of a large 10-ton cargo boom and kingpost at frame 34, starboard side, for handling PBRs.

• Enlargement of the standard 542-class cargo hatch, to 16 feet by 34 feet, to permit PBRs to be placed in the tank deck for repairs or transport.

• Reinforcement of the main deck, from frame 19 to 28, with one-quarter-inch steel plate to create a 50-foot, all-weather heli­copter platform tested to 1,000 pounds per square foot.

• Installation of modern communications equipment to provide adequate command and control facilities.

• Installation of an aviation and boat fueling system, additional a.c. generator capacity, appropriate flight deck lighting, additional workshops and storerooms, exten­sive ready service magazine capacity, and appropriate boat booms for small craft berth- ^lng alongside.

After shakedown and refresher training, the Jennings County was deployed to the U. S.

Seventh Fleet and further assigned to Com­mander Naval Forces, Vietnam and Com­mander River Patrol Force. The original concept of operations called for the stationing of the PBR support LST in the estuary of one of the major rivers of the Delta. This required the ship to moor in the open seaway, and the characteristic rolling made both PBR handling and flight operations hazardous and, at times, impossible. To obtain better use of her facil­ities, it was necessary to move the support LST into the protected waters of the rivers— a decision which produced a number of un­expected benefits. Transit times to and from patrol areas were reduced, enabling both PBRs and helicopters to remain on station for longer periods of time. Eight 40-mm. barrels became available for gunfire support. In addition, the ship was now able to participate actively in a number of civic action projects, creating an additional awareness of her presence in the area.

A number of interesting innovations ac­companied the transition of the LST to her

new, fresh water environment. The Jennings County became a gunfire support ship. Al­though originally conceived as AA weapons, the single, twin 40-mm. mount was soon challenging enemy forces on the river banks. Having a high rate of fire, the 40-mm. mounts became highly useful to the security of the ship, and also, effectively denied large areas of territory to hostile troop concentrations. To preclude the danger of misdirected gun­fire falling in friendly villages and hamlets, new fire control procedures were developed. A crow’s nest spotting platform was con­structed on the tripod mast and was used to spot gunfire over the high trees that lined the river bank. Often, the fire was directed by local outpost chiefs or other regional or popu­lar forces personnel, who had a thorough knowledge of the area and could pinpoint targets. The embarked helicopter fire team soon became proficient at aerial spotting and direction of the ship’s gunfire.

The ship’s gunfire has been used in a number of supporting roles including: haras­sing and interdictory fire, preparation of landing zones for friendly troops, destruction of enemy troop concentrations and fortifica­tions, and interdiction of supply routes. The availability of naval gunfire support and the helicopter fire team has enabled the PBRs to enter hostile canals and waterways, extending their sphere of influence, and has relieved the pressure on a number of friendly outposts along the river.

The search for a high-angle weapon to supplement the flat trajectory 40-mm. gun had led the Jennings County to experiment with a variety of weapons, including 81-mm. mor­tars and 5-inch spin-stabilized rockets, which have been fired successfully from her deck.

River navigation was both interesting and challenging in the early months. Charts for the Bassac, Co Chien, and Ham Long rivers, were inaccurate in many instances. Placing too much confidence in them was inviting an unscheduled beaching on one of the many shifting sand bars. The Jennings County and her sister Game Warden LSTs conducted numerous sounding surveys of the rivers, and this guaranteed the necessary freedom of movement. The commanding officers, navi­gators, and officers of the deck soon became skilled river pilots, learning to gauge the

swift 4-to-6-knot currents and gaining de­tailed knowledge of the rivers to supplement the conventional visual and radar navigational techniques. *

Command relationships in the Game Warden support ship have evolved into a smoothly functioning organization. The senior unit commander (normally the officer-in­charge of the embarked helo detachment) acts as the “on the scene” officer in tactical command (OTC) for direction and planning of co-ordinated operations. A close-working relationship and mutual understanding were required to integrate the activities and move­ments of the ship, the PBR, and the helicopter detachment to permit optimum use. Con­siderable co-ordination with other forces is also necessary, since operations are often con­ducted in support of U. S. Navy sea-air-land (SEAL) teams, junk forces, Vietnam, river assault group units, regular and popular force troops, and other in-country units.

During normal patrol operations, as many as six PBRs may be moored alongside the LST. To preserve mobility and to obviate the sortie of all boats when it is necessary for the ship to get underway, the Jennings County de­veloped, in early 1967, a boat towing and mooring configuration. This rig, consisting of guess warp, towing bridle, sea painter, and / stern steadying lines, permits the boats to be ] towed alongside at flank speed, and gives al­most complete freedom of maneuver for flight and other operations.

It is not unusual for the PBR LST to remain on combat station for over six months with- i out upkeep. Maintenance of ship’s equip­ment, in addition to normal housekeeping functions for the 24 officers and 200 enlisted men of the ship and her embarked units, is a real challenge while in the combat zone- Although a large solo-shell evaporator had been provided during reactivation, in addi­tion to the two vapor compressor units, j potable water was initially a problem. Un­limited quantities of fresh river water were available if a means for removing silt and purifying the product could be developed. A method was devised, using the ship’s forward beaching tanks as settling chambers in which

* See C. C. Bates el at., “Needed: Shallow Think­ing” November 1968, Proceedings, pp. 43-51.

diatomaceous earth could be added to the river water to hasten precipitation of im­purities. A high suction from these tanks was then processed through portable water purifi­cation units obtained from the Army. The resultant product was a potable, virtually endless supply of fresh water for showers and laundry, which helped to maintain high morale during the long periods on station.

The ship’s two landing craft, vehicle and Personnel (LCVP), have been extensively employed in several interesting ways. One boat is kept waterborne 24 hours a day and is heavily armed with machine guns and small arms. Equipped with radio, salvage, and mine­sweeping gear, the LCVP acts as a picket boat to maintain security, and has, on occasion, salvaged damaged PBRs, landed popular and regular force troops for sweeping or blocking force operations, acted as mobile ammuni­tion re-supply craft for PBRs on blockade, ^and performed a number of other utility functions, as well.

The crew of the Game Warden support LST takes justifiable pride in the accomplish­ment of their vital mission. Often working long hours to support round-the-clock PBR Patrol and night helicopter operations, the maintenance and flight deck personnel are always on call. Gunfire support requests from ^a hard-pressed outpost often interrupt a night’s sleep and, of course, there are watches, many requiring extra men to provide for the ^Vltal security of the ship. In spite of these de­mands, a boat or helicopter crew returning from a combat patrol is assured of a hot meal, a hot shower, and an air conditioned bunk at any time.

Ranging the navigable rivers of the Delta, the pbr support LST is a potent force. For the friendly village, outpost, or coastal group, her arrival means medical aid, invitations for the local U. S. and Vietnamese officials for a ^visit and a meal, troop lift, gunfire support, ^Clvic action projects, and emergency re- ^Pply of fuel, water, lube oil or ammunition. r°r the enemy, the appearance of the ship tfteans he will have to cope with continuous Patrols by heavily armed PBRs backed up by air and naval gunfire support.

The revitalized PBR LST is writing another Proud chapter in the combat history of the Amphibious Forces. Many innovations in

riverine warfare have evolved from the as­signment of these ships to Operation Game Warden and even newer developments are being exploited.

by Lieutenant (j.g.)

W. B. Frank,

U. S. Naval Reserve, formerly U. S. staff,

Military Sea Transportation Service, Houston

THE UNUSUAL MSTS HOUSTON OFFICE

For those long familiar with the standard operating procedures of the Navy, descrip­tions of some of the less well-known aspects of these operations provide interesting and un­usual variations not customarily associated with “routine” naval operations. An example of such a variation is found in the tanker opera­tions of the Military Sea Transportation Ser­vice Office (MSTSO), in Houston, Texas.

To begin with, the office itself is not located on a military base, but is in the Federal Office Building in downtown Houston. The office deals primarily with independent govern­ment agencies and private businesses located in its area, which extends from Lake Charles, Louisiana, to the Mexican border, and in­cludes some 17 major oil refineries that regu­larly load MSTS tankers. Thus, tanker opera­tions are the major concern of MSTS’s Hous­ton office.

The principal responsibility of the office is the co-ordination of functions that affect MSTS tanker operations as performed by various independent activities. MSTSO, Hou­ston, for example, receives tanker loading instructions by message from the Tanker Di­vision of MSTS Headquarters in Washington, D. G. Upon receipt of a “cargo nomination” or shipping instructions, the office passes the information and co-ordinates it with local activities. The other participants at this stage are: ship’s agent, quality assurance repre­sentative (QAR) of the defense contract ad­ministration service, and the supplier.

The tankers co-ordinated by MSTSO Hous­ton are operated under various charter ar-

Aboard the USS Monitor: ltlG2

The letters of Paymaster William F. Keeler edited by Professor Robert W. Daly, U. S. Naval Academy. List Price $6.50. Member's Price $5.20. A U. S. Naval Institute Publication

"Amidst the plethora of Civil War memorials now hitting print, this publication stands out like a first-order lighthouse on a clear and sparkling night."

—American Neptune

rangements or are already in U. S. Naval Ser­vice as contract-operated tankers. The latter designation refers to MSTS tankers assigned to private steamship companies and operated under contract with MSTS. In all cases, how­ever, the agent is responsible for providing the same services to the tanker as he would for other commercial ships. These services in­clude port husbanding and routine adminis­trative tasks.

Since only “clean” or more highly refined products are loaded, each tanker must be in­spected to determine if the designated product can be safely loaded without contamination. The QAR inspector is responsible for this inspection. On the arrival of the ship at each port, an inspection of the tanker’s pipes and cargo tanks is conducted. Occasionally, tank­ers are judged unacceptable by the QAR in­spector and are not permitted to load. This situation occurs more often with foreign flag tankers, one reason being that they are not familiar with U. S. government regulations or MSTS shipping control procedures. A rejected tanker will be permitted to load only after

she passes further inspection and the tests indi­cate that the ship is clean enough for the designated product.

Naturally, suppliers play a key role in this operation. MSTS Houston verifies that the suppliers’ commitments agree with their load­ing instructions and that the product will be available when the tanker arrives.

When a tanker arrives in port, speedy and successful loading depends heavily upon the civilian Marine Transport Specialist (MTS). The civil service MTS bridges the dis­tance gap between the MSTS office and the chartered tanker, for he is in direct contact with the tanker during her port operations. He is the spokesman and representative for the office. The Houston office is currently manned with three MTS civilians who travel a combined average of over 8,000 miles a month. It is not uncommon, for example, to find one MTS in the Lake Charles-Beaumont- Port Arthur area, another covering the Houston-Baytown-Galveston area, while the third is in Corpus Christi.

Throughout the port operation, the MTS periodically visits the tanker to check with the vessel’s master or mate on the loading progress and to offer advice concerning MSTS procedures. Acting on instructions re­ceived from Washington or COMSTS Gulf Sub Area, the MTS also conducts informal material inspections on USNS tankers. His knowledge of the tankers is useful to MSTSO Houston in forming an opinion on the vari­ous charter and contract-operated tankers- The MTS also maintains a careful time log of the loading sequence. This log serves as an important check on the time and efficiency of the loading activity.

Once loading operations are complete, the office performs two significant administrative tasks. The first is the preparation of the Loading Report (DD-205-l) that is signed by the QAR inspector. When a tanker is loaded, the QAR inspector then will gauge and sample all ship’s tanks as a final test. The purpose of this test is to verify that the cargo satisfies government specifications. The results of the final tests are entered on the loading report, and a copy is filed with MSTSO Houston. For record purposes, the office holds the report for two years. The second task involves the preparation of the MSTM Report 4020-3-

This is a message report that recapitulates the essential loading facts. This message is given wide distribution and shows that what was once an impending lift is now actual. In the normal routine, the message is the last action required of the office.

MSTSO Houston is normally staffed by seven people, which include: a lieutenant commander as commanding officer, a lieu­tenant (j.g.) as executive officer, and three MTSs. During the course of a recent month, the office processed over 30 tankers that lifted over four million barrels of fluid products for the Defense Department.

The office is one of 28 such offices that MSTS maintains throughout the world. Under­standably, each office has its own operational methods, influenced by its particular environ­ment. What is common to all is that MSTS provides “Military Sea Transportation.”

by Vernon J. Hertel,

Director Management Office,

U. S. Naval Oceanographic Office

new look for nautical charts

Charts distributed by the Naval Oceano­graphic Office (NavOceanO) will soon take °ⁿ a new look. The hand-corrected charts that ships have been accustomed to receiving Will disappear. The 138-year-old practice of Updating charts by hand has been finally mechanized. Until now, the only way Nav­OceanO had to increase production was to ^employ more people. The turnover rate of People who correct charts at one activity was ^0 per cent a year, which was directly at­tributed to the monotony of the work and the h>w salary attached to the job. The training °f new employees was an endless process and ^a constant hindrance to production. Ex­change of data between government agencies, ^establishment of bilateral agreements be­tween nations to exchange charts and infor­mation, and improved ability of the U. S. Navy to collect oceanographic data provide an improved base of information on which to publish better charts for navigators. Because of the improved information resources, the amount of hand corrections increased.

The Naval Oceanographic Office is charged, as stated in the U. S. Code, with distribut­ing accurate charts for use by all vessels of the United States and by navigators generally. This has always been interpreted to mean that charts would contain the latest information available to the Naval Oceanographic Office. Charts are printed in Washington and for­warded to the Naval Distribution Offices at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Clearfield, Utah. The distribution offices send the charts directly to Fleet units, branch oceanographic offices, and authorized sales agents (at the present time, there are 150 such agents lo­cated in the principal seaports of the world), and retains the bulk stock for future dis­tribution. The distribution offices carry 90,872 different items in stock and approxi­mately 150 million copies of these items. Changes to charts are promulgated by the U. S. Naval Oceanographic Office in the Weekly Notice to Mariners, which is distributed to approximately 15,000 mariners for them to update their charts. The distribution offices update their stock to include all items listed in boldface type, which encompasses changes recommended by NavOceanO to be made prior to use of the chart, in the Notice to Mariners.

Correcting charts by hand has been done since the 1800s, and is still the accepted method used by all nations engaged in the production and maintenance of charts. The distribution offices employ 82 people on a full-time basis to perform this hand task. Techniques used to make corrections employ a wide range of tools. Electric and air-driven erasers are used to remove information, hand stamps, gadgets (stamps made from strips of sheet metal formed into the desired shape); pasting or stapling of chartlets (portions of the original charts that have been recompiled because of extensive changes and printed on an offset press) are methods used to add in­formation to the chart.

Most corrections are minor and pertain to lights and buoys, either their establishment, removal, change in location, or change in recognizable characteristics. Other changes

¹ 30

^,/lUnut*b6* Saki.

»vr.T-5uv-

ikooai

■7, 23 • s Ay

3 5*22

.

52             •

lip

f-yAX'X^

**^s* 156-i / : d-Oft" ft*. 0933). X?

173 cS^gP

*??? KotanUhi i

Hairo Y

A»ahinaT

JabitakT

Yam*

Kama*

Jo; Minmay a Wc

U£ ~?? 28 2\_y

%-t-l

t x almyama Saki ■: j . ISY^. ^Oarakaw* Yarn*'

\yks SokurKibe,

- ■o j *-•

liyrawa Taka

r Uahikubi Saki 24

A product of the new silkscreen chart correction process being used by the Navy Oceanographic Office. Areas where changes have been made are indicated by a heavy black line.

include the insertion or deletion of symbols for wrecks, depths, cable crossings, shoals, and other navigational hazards. In the course of a year, each distribution office will correct approximately five million charts by hand. This high production rate still falls short of operational requirements.

Because of the problems connected with hand-correcting so many charts, a study was undertaken to determine some mechanized method to correct charts. A lithographic offset printing process has been used in the past, and is still used by some agencies, to overprint additional information onto exist­

ing charts. This process however, could not be used in correcting charts because of the change in the size of charts once they have been warehoused. Considerable investigation showed that the time-honored art of silk screening, presently referred to as screen processing, might be used. Aided by the ad­vent of the cylinder-type press and drying equipment capable of processing 2,000 im­pressions per hour, plus the development of improved materials, such as steel, nylon, and polyester and monofilament fabrics for use as screens, this process became entirely feasible- Since this was an entirely new application of

screen processing, test runs were made which Proved that the process had application to the problem, and would result in a better quality product, provide better service to mariners, and realize savings in time, money, and manpower.

A screen printing press has been installed at the oceanographic distribution office at Philadelphia and has begun production. Another press is being installed at the dis­tribution office in Clearfield. These presses tvill overprint charts’ corrections in green ink, ^so that the mariner will be able to identify changes at a glance. Where information must he placed over existing information, a white hlock-out will be printed first to give a back­ground to the green. A green block-out will he used to delete information. In this same manner, large areas will be blocked out and overprinted, thus eliminating the need to add ^chartlets. The press operation will require only three people. It will give the distribution offices the capability of processing approxi­mately 16,000 impressions in eight hours. The new process will also make it possible, when both distribution offices are in full operation, ffi have the bulk stocks at the distribution offices corrected two to three weeks prior to ffie changes in charts listed in the Weekly Notice to Mariners and its official issuance.

This new method corrects charts at the dis­tribution offices, but it does not help the mariner who has to correct his own charts on hoard ship. A by-product of the new method ^ls being investigated by NavOceanO in an ^attempt to assist the mariner with his cor­recting of charts. Without any additional cartographic effort, it should be possible to take areas of charts where a large number of changes have occurred and to print this seg­ment of the chart on clear, pressure-sensitive ^acetate. This would be similar to a chartlet ^a°d Would be applied to the original chart ^Vv'ffi paste or such. The advantage of this Process, over the paper chartlet, is its surface ffiinness, which would preclude a thickening °f the chart, prevent parallel rulers and other ⁿavigational instruments from catching on the chartlet, allow the folding or rolling of the chart, and eliminate the additional carto­graphic effort required to prepare chartlets. ‘ropefully in the near future, samples will be ^lstributed to the mariner for evaluation.

by Stuart Allen Sup,

Underwater Consultant

PORTRAIT OF PROFICIENCY: USCGC DALLAS (WHEC-716)

The USCGC Dallas (WHEC-716), the name­sake of the sixth Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander J. Dallas, was launched 1 October 1966, at the Avondale Shipyards in Louisiana, and commissioned a year later on 26 October. Thereafter, the 378-foot, 1 ^-million dollar cutter underwent sea trials off Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, prior to arrival at her home port at Governor’s Island, New York.

The second of the new high endurance cutters being built for the Coast Guard, the Dallas follows the Hamilton (WHEC-715). Her draft is 13.9 feet, her beam is 42.8 feet, and she displaces 3,050 tons (full load).

The Dallas is equipped with a relatively new propulsion system, referred to as “CODAG” (combination diesel and gas tur­bine), consisting of two supercharged diesel engines totaling 12,000 horsepower and dual gas turbines developing 36,000 horsepower. Using her diesel engine, the Dallas can cruise 12,000 miles, or halfway around the world, at a speed of 20 knots. Her jet turbines increase her speed to 30 knots. The Dallas hefty horsepower is harnessed by a unique trans­mission system that permits the use of both diesel and gas turbines simultaneously to drive two 13-foot controllable pitch propel­lers. She is able to “crash stop” in 40 seconds. Another feature is a retractable bow propul­sion unit. The third propeller can be lowered to allow the Dallas to maneuver in restricted areas while docking or during rescue opera­tions.

The equipment on the bridge on board the Dallas permits full control of the vessel from the wheelhouse.* Steering is accomplished

* See R. L. Scott, “Modern Destroyer Bridge De­sign,” U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, March 1968, pp. 44-50.

by a small lever similar to the “joy stick” in aircraft. The absence of a wheel on the bridge surprises the old mariner. Closed circuit tele­vision allows the captain to obtain, quickly, information on surface and aerial plots from the vessel’s combat information center (CIC) during a search and rescue (SAR) operation or in combat. One TV monitor is located on the control console, and other monitors are lo­cated just aft, on the starboard side, to provide multiple displays from the ship’s CIC.

There is only one sound-powered phone, positioned directly in front of the helmsman. Multiple hand-sets are available on the con­trol console for communication anywhere in the vessel. During operations and maneuvers, head sets are worn.

Engine functions are controlled from the bridge, and port and starboard bridge wings. Engine indicators are displayed on the con­sole, showing engine revolutions and per­formance. Gyro repeaters are in strategic

locations on the bridge and console. The plan position indicator (PPl) repeater is easily manned by the seaman on watch. ASW in­formation is displayed on the control console for rapid interpretation and evaluation. During combat, the ship’s armament status, displayed on a board, enables the C.O. to evaluate and select, at the push of a button, the most effective ordnance for any target. Ordnance information includes indication of which weapons are armed and ready, as well as any weapon malfunction.

With her advanced CIC and sophisticated communications center, the Dallas can oper­ate as a floating rescue co-ordination center, ) directing other surface ships and aircraft I during a maritime disaster or in combat.

Just aft of her twin stacks is an 80-foot heli­copter flight deck, capable of handling two medium-range, amphibious transport HH3F “choppers.” This greatly enhances her po­tential as an SAR vessel. For the comfort of f her crew, the Dallas is completely air con- ) ditioned.

The peacetime duties of the Dallas are those of an “ocean station” vessel. She is as­signed to one of four ocean stations and re­mains on patrol for 30 days. The Dallas is also an oceanographic laboratory and weather ship. Precision white line recorders produce , bottom profiles. Bathythermograph (BT)               s

logs take readings of the ocean’s temperature at varying depths. Current direction and ve­locity are recorded and instruments measure the salinity of the ocean. Meteorological high altitude balloons are used for the collection of . additional data. This information on weather

The high endurance Coast Guard cutter Dallas (WHEC- 716) features the latest in devices in her wheelhouse, including a "joy stick” some­what similar to aircraft con­trol systems, to steer the ship, and closed circuit tele­vision monitors for rapid display of information from the ship’s CIC.

■S'. A. Sup

and sea conditions is then radioed to the Weather Bureau for compilation and inclu­sion in regular advisories to surface vessels and aircraft.

The Dallas has a complement of 14 officers, 17 chief petty officers, and 135 enlisted men. She has the appearance of a cruise ship. Her 5-inch mount on the bow, however, is a re­minder that she is a law-enforcing vessel. Three torpedo tubes, capable of launching the latest ASW homing torpedoes, are installed on each side of the vessel, amidships. With ad­ditional equipment, she can deploy the Drone ASW helicopter (DASH) system for ASW duties. The design of the Dallas does not in­clude provision for the installation of the antisubmarine rocket (ASROC) ASW system.

Besides the Dallas and the Hamilton, the Coast Guard is building 31 more of the Hamil­ton class. The Boutwell (WH EC-719), Chase (WHEC-718), Gallatin (WHEC-721), Mellon (WHEC-717), and Sherman (WHEC-720) were commissioned in 1968. The Morganthau (WHEC-722) and the Rush (WHEC-723) will be commissioned in 1969. Two other Hamilton- class cutters, the WHEC-724 and 725, have been authorized for fiscal year 1969 budget, and building of these should begin soon.

26.   5-in. 38-cal. magazine

27.   5-in. shell handling room

28.   5-in. upper handling

room

29.   5-in. mount

30.   Windlass room

31.   Helo flight deck

32.   ASW Hedgehog launch­

ers

33.   Sonar dome

18.   Gas turbine

19.   Boiler space

20.   Machine shop

21.   Ammo handling room

22.   ASW Projectile maga­

zine

23.   Bow thruster control

room

24.   Bow thruster and with­

drawal space

25.   Sonar room

10.   Helo and weather bal­

loon storage hanger

11.   Gas turbine intake

12.   Gas turbine exhaust

13.   General mess and galley

14.   Hobby shop

15.   Steering room and gen­

erators

16.   Engineroom control room

17.   WESTERN Bull Gear

housing

^heelhouse

■  Chart room ]7 ^Gun director

■ASW Proj ecti I e room

•   Radio room ⁶- CIC

g’ ^'^r search radar room

•   Oceanographic lab, dark ^ room

•  Helo service shop

The cutter Dallas, her sister ship, the Hamil­ton, and those to come are significant addi­tions to the Coast Guard inventory, and will greatly improve the Coast Guard’s ability to carry out its duties in maritime safety, law enforcement, and military readiness.

by Colonel Lane C. Kendall,

U. S. Marine Corps Reserve (Retired)

Commander, Military Sea Transportation Service,

Commercial Shipping Advisor

LASH AND SEABEE NEW IDEAS IN LOGISTICS

In 1957, Malcom P. McLean, who later became president of Sea-Land Service, Inc., the largest container-ship operator in the world, introduced into the U. S. Atlantic coastwise trade, three C2-type cargo ships which had been converted to carry 226 large containers, each measuring eight feet wide, eight-and-a-half feet high, and 35 feet long.[1] These containers differed from the trailers towed by trucks only in that they were de­tachable from the wheeled chassis; they were constructed with reinforced corners to permit stacking in ship compartments that re­sembled elevator shafts. Their size was such that they could be placed on conventional over-the-road chassis and towed to or away from the ship’s side, thereby providing through service from inland point of origin to overseas destination.

It took several years, much salesmanship, and near perfect performance to prove that putting pre-loaded containers into ships was an economical and profitable way of operat­ing steamships. Once the shippers became convinced that they benefited by improved delivery of goods, they began to demand con­tainer service on other trade routes. With this change in attitude, the early trickle has be­come a flood. The rush to build new ships to transport containers, or to modify or convert old ships to fit them for the new mode, has been without precedent in world shipping history.

McLean’s first ships were equipped with gantry cranes, which meant that the ships could serve any port. As trade patterns de­veloped, however, it appeared wise to explore

ways to enhance ship-earning power, by mak­ing each one more productive. Greater efficiency is attained when shoreside cranes are used in place of cranes on ships.

Designed expressly for the purpose, the biggest shoreside gantry cranes weigh 450 tons and cost $800,000 to build and install' Not only do these huge machines speed up the dispatch of ships, but also they eliminate the expense and weight of cranes on ships. Fur­thermore, this means that at least one addi­tional layer of containers can be loaded; in some cases, it has been found feasible to stack containers four deep above the weather deck-

So long as the craneless ship operates be­tween ports where the shoreside gantry cranes are available, there is no problem with loading the ships. Diversion to any other port, however, is possible only if cranes are available. While hammerhead cranes are most desirable, the problem can be solved by any shore or floating crane that can span the width of the ship and lift the containers clear of all obstructions. Obviously, the use of other than the most efficient cranes will affect the turnaround time of the ship.

The lack of flexibility in the newer, faster, and larger container ships was the cause of serious reservations by logisticians in the evaluation of container ships for military support. They, as well as the commercial shipper, sought greater cost savings, a reduc­tion in port turnaround time, which directly affects ocean carriers’ schedules, and greater security of cargo. These advantages, how­ever, would be negated if the ship could not moor to a crane-equipped berth. A further reservation was voiced on the appearance of the problem of moving a container once it was unloaded from the ship.

It was, therefore, with the greatest interest that military planners and logisticians learned of the proposals of two American steamship companies to build large, relatively fash ocean-going ships that could carry lighters and barges and have the capability to load or discharge without reference to port facilities. The new design pointed to a solution of some of the problems involved in delivering supplies to combat areas overseas.

Although the two companies were thoii' sands of miles apart, and employed different naval architects, the basic concept for their proposals had several closely-related char­acteristics:

•  Both the “lighter aboard ship” design and the “sea-barge clipper” (later officially christened the “Seabee” in honor of the Naval Construction Battalions) incorporated large lighters or barges. These would be loaded by the shipper and emptied by the re­ceiver, assembled by the ship operator and held to await the ship, and taken aboard the ship in a matter of a few hours without any of the customary terminal activity. The pro­ductivity factors of these two designs of ships Were so great that the higher cost of their con­struction, compared to container ships, was offset by the efficiency gained.

• If the military used these ships, the overseas port commander would be given a fleet of lighters and barges to speed shipping. These could be used also for unloading con­ventional ships and container ships. This tech­nique would do much to break a critical logistics bottleneck.

• The ships would not only carry the lighters and barges, but also, a variety of other cargo, including containers, helicopters, land- "tg craft, and patrol boats. Only the limita­tions of weatherdeck space would affect the number and size of tall, heavy, and unusual­shaped pieces of military cargo that could be transported.

Obviously, ships with these capabilities deserve the most careful consideration by any- °ne concerned with any form of logistics planning related to overseas operations. Dis­cussion of the ships’ characteristics is in order.

The concept of the “lighter aboard ship,” now generally referred to by the acronym of Lash, was evolved by Friede & Goldman, a New Orleans firm of naval architects (who ^ater set up a subsidiary that does business t'nder the name of LASH Systems, Inc.). The catalyst for the design was the requirement of *he Prudential Steamship Company of New * ork for a shipping method that would permit ^Jlg, fast, and very expensive ships to pick up ^0r discharge cargo at the numerous small Ports and harbors in the Mediterranean ^where the company’s Victory ships had made calls for two decades.

Prudential reasoned, with firm logic, that ¹ some means could be devised by which the cargo could be put into a large watertight

container and floated into these small ports and harbors (where a big load might be 150 tons, yet hard-headed shipping economics dictated a minimum load of 500 tons) it would be possible to combine the advantages of modern ships with the desire to continue service to loyal shippers. To answer this need, the naval architects produced the design for the LASH, which was accepted by Prudential and, later, by Pacific Far East Lines, Inc. Today, 11 of these ships are being built at Avondale Shipyards in New Orleans. Indica­tive of the commercial value of the design is the fact that Central Gulf Steamship Com­pany of New Orleans is co-operating in the construction of a LASH-type ship in Japan, for registry under the Norwegian flag with a view toward her operation in the transatlantic trade.

The hull of the LASH is to be 770 feet long, 100 feet wide, with a draft of 28 feet. A speed of 23.5 knots will be achieved from geared turbines of 32,000 s.h.p., coupled to a single screw. Sixty-one lighters, each 61 § feet long and 31 feet wide with an internal capacity of 18,500 cubic feet, will be carried. Each lighter will be able to handle a deadweight of 380 tons, and will weigh about 440 tons when lifted on board by the ship’s gantry crane. This 450-ton crane will travel the length of the deck and deposit each lighter into the appropriate hatch, where it will be secured for the sea voyage.

At their destination, lighters will be moved by the gantry crane to the stern of the ship and lowered into the water, where tugs will take them ashore. The recipient of the cargo may then unload the lighter, according to his schedule, while the ship steams on her way. On the homewardbound voyage, the lighter, either refilled or empty, will be waiting to be taken aboard the LASH. In the home port, the cycle starts again.

The advantages of this method are easy to see: ship port-turnaround time is reduced, and the productivity of the ship is increased, without sacrificing service to the small cus­tomers, who are so important on both the Mediterranean and the Pacific routes. Ancil­lary benefits are realized in simplified ter­minal operations, with obvious economies accruing to all concerned.

The LASH can be used, without structural

“A COLLISION AT SEA CAN RUIN YOUR ENTIRE DAY.”

THUCYDIDES 471-400 BC

That hasn’t changed since 400 BC, but with this handy guide you can cut the risks of ruining your day. It is a concise, easy-to-understand summary of the rules of the nautical road for naval officers, mariners, and yachtsmen. This new edition in­corporates the changes in the International Rules which became effective in 1965, as well as the Inland Rules and the Motorboat Act of 1940. Other chapters cover: Vessels Approaching -At Lights and Shapes -Ar Restricted Visibility -At Sound Signals -At Pilot Rules for Inland Waters ★ Miscellaneous Provisions -fa Capsule Rules of the Nautical Road. Second Edition 1968. 120 pages. Illustrated. Flexible binding.

List Price $3.50                      Member’s Price $2.80

SIMPLIFIED

RULES OF THE NAUTICAL ROAD

2ND EDITION

By Cmdr. O. W. Will, USN

UNITED STATES NAVAL INSTITUTE

Annapolis, Maryland 21042

Please use book order form in booklist section

change, to carry containers instead of lighters. When so loaded, discharge by heavy-lift helicopters is also feasible. This adds to the logistics value of the design, since 1,384 20- foot containers can be stowed in a LASH in lieu of the 61 lighters. If the full reach of the LASH is used for bulk cargo, more than 27,000 tons can be taken aboard. Wing tanks have been provided for 6,000 tons of liquid bulk cargo. In theory, then, the LASH could carry a mixed cargo of lighters, containers, dry bulk cargo, and liquid bulk cargo.

There are, however, three deficiencies that affect the acceptability of the system to the military logistician:

• First and foremost, the LASH is predi­cated upon loading and discharging the lighters in still water or in landlocked harbors and rivers. It seems impracticable to handle lighters of this size and weight in an open roadstead, where heavy swells and strong winds are experienced.

• Second, the enormous gantry crane, which moves the length of the flat deck, is the sole means of hoisting cargo. Any casualty that immobilizes the crane, automatically stops all of the loading or unloading activity.

• Third, the lighters are not designed for beaching, nor are they self-propelled. Their considerable size (61 feet long, 31 feet wide, and 13 feet high, with a capacity of 380 tons) makes their unloading a serious problem when no berth, complete with crane, is avail­able. Without propulsion, the lighters have to be towed in from the anchorage, or held in an assembly area. Hostile aircraft or demoli­tion teams might find them attractive targets.

Equally noteworthy is the second proposal for a new type of ship and transportation method.

The Seabee is comparable in many re­spects to the LASH. She is bigger, by about 100 feet, being 875 feet long overall. She is wider, measuring 107 feet in beam. Her de­signed draft is 31 feet. Cargo will be carried in barges, rather than lighters, and each barge will be 94f feet long, 35 feet wide, and 13 feet 5 inches deep, with a fresh-water draft of 10 feet 8 inches. Rather than a crane, the Seabee will be equipped with a stern elevator, 995 feet long by 73 feet wide, which will have a maximum lifting speed of six feet per minute. A full load, 38 barges, can be discharged m

less than eight hours. The Seabee will cost $32 million to build, as compared to the $21 million quoted for the LASH.

The Seabee was designed by the J. J. Henry Company of New York, for the Lykes Brothers Steamship Company of New Or­leans. Fundamental to the commercial service concept of this ship is the fact that Lykes trades from the Gulf. Much of its cargo comes down to the seaports on barges using the Mis­sissippi River system. The theory of the Sea­bee is that the loaded barge, which can carry 850 long tons, can be delivered by the shipper directly to the hold of the ship without an interim transfer to another vessel. Similarly, Lykes anticipates taking advantage of the extensive canal and river systems of France, Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany to facil­itate delivery, without rehandling, of full barges of goods. The productivity of one Sea­bee, carrying a full load at 19 knots cruising speed, is estimated to be equal to that of four C2-cargo ships.

For commercial operations, the Seabee can be used as a roll-on/roll-off ship, a con­tainer-carrier, or a very heavy cargo trans­porter. Her spacious, relatively high, over­head decks will permit carrying landing craft or helicopters under cover. Almost any sort of large, tall, heavy, or odd-shaped equip­ment can be carried on the weather deck. A total of 38 barges will constitute a normal complement. Twelve will be loaded on each deck, and two will remain on the elevator. Like the LASH lighters, these barges will not be self-propelled for commercial operations.

Military interest in the Seabee focuses on the fact that the ship can deliver a very large Quantity of cargo to any port or harbor, with- °ut being delayed by reason of inadequate ^cargo-handling facilities. The barges, in ^Nvhich the cargo would be stowed, would be discharged at the convenience of the military P°rt commander, or they could be towed to other destinations as desired. Since the Sea- bee’s discharging cycle can be completed in ^about eight hours, there is a reduced exposure °f the ship to hostile activity. Finally, the ^Capability of delivering lighters, landing cra.ft, helicopters, and other oversize units ^ends special significance to the Seabee.

Just as the LASH was found to have de- uciencies from the military viewpoint, the

Seabee also has features which reduce her value to the armed forces. Some of these fea­tures are fundamental to the design, while others can be corrected relatively easily.

•  Similar to the objection to the installa­tion of a single gantry crane in the LASH, there is only one access to the Seabee’s cargo spaces. If the massive stern elevator breaks down, the entire barge-handling operation is halted. A major casualty, of course, would force the withdrawal of the ship to her home base for repairs, possibly with her entire cargo of barges still loaded.

•  Again, like the LASH, the barge-han­dling procedures appear to be planned for almost still water, or at worst, the condi­tions found in a large river such as the Mississippi or the Weser. The Seabee archi­tect has attempted to compensate for this by fitting the elevator platform with rollers on a vertical axis at each side and the centerline, to guide barges into place. Whether such guides can resist buckling when a 1,000- ton barge, propelled by a six-foot swell, smashes into them is a matter of conjecture. The architect has specified that a flume sys­tem for stabilizing the ship be installed, thereby dampening the roll almost to insignificance. The pitching action of the ship, however, has not been eliminated. The ability of the Seabee to load and unload in an open road­stead, hence, is subject to question.

• The Seabee barges are so heavy that they can be handled only by the ship’s eleva­tor. They also are not self-propelled and can­not be beached.

• The Seabee will effectively replace about four conventional C2-type dry cargo ships. While this is economically advantage­ous to the owner, the progressive substitution of very large and highly productive ships for several of the older ships now in service does have a bearing upon the ability of the military to respond to emergencies. After all, one ship can go to only one port at a time.

Both the LASH and the Seabee are com­pletely self-sustaining ships. They possess, therefore, more immediate utility to the mili­tary than the very large and fast container- ships, like the American Lancer. This type of carrier, stowing 1,718 20-foot containers on a transatlantic trip, is dependent upon shore cranes to discharge and load. To install ship-

board cranes could require up to nine months. Also, the LASH and the Seabee ships can carry helicopters without any structural modification, an important consideration.

The barges and lighters integral to both these new ships are relatively deep and there­fore will require some type of crane for dis­charge and reloading. So long as they can be brought alongside a wharf or pier and a truck- mounted crane can be positioned over the hatch, there should be no difficulty in han­dling the cargo. On the other hand, in an un­developed harbor, unloading can become a problem of major dimensions. Redesigning the lighters and barges with bow doors or ramps would permit cargo to be beached. The large size of the barge means that loading would require a comparatively long stay on the beach, and consequent exposure to hostile fire. Moreover, even the 61-foot lighter is subject to this same criticism.

The lighters and barges intended for com­mercial use by the owners of the LASH and the Seabee should not be discounted too liberally in assessing the military value of these ships. There will be, always, a need for commercial-type harbor craft of the size and capability of these units. Further, it is easy to imagine the approval with which the military port commander would welcome the arrival of a LASH with 61 lighters, or a Seabee with 38 barges. Equally understandable, too, is the fact that the owner’s enthusiasm would be tempered somewhat by the awareness that the utility of his property will be so great that it will be almost impossible to recapture it so long as there is cargo to be moved in that military port.

While the problem of propulsion for the barges and lighters has not been taken up by the architects and owners, it is a matter of some concern to the military planner. The LASH lighters appear to be well adapted to the outboard motor units first developed during World War II. These detachable motors could be carried in the LASH and put aboard the lighters on arrival in the discharge area. It is also quite conceivable that the lighters might be designed with a notch in the stern where these motors could be installed semi­permanently to meet military requirements.

The barges, because of their size, cannot be moved with any speed by the outboard

motors. This could be remedied by loading two, medium-power, diesel tugs on the eleva­tor as part of the basic load.

In summary, the new concepts of the lighter transporter and the barge carrier have much to offer to the military planner. While there are some deficiencies from the viewpoint of the ideal military support ship, the poten­tial utility that these very practical ships offer seems to outweigh most of the shortcomings- There are 11 LASH ships now under con­struction. The first one will be delivered in 1970. The contracts for the Seabees have not been awarded as yet. The future performance of the LASH and Seabees will be observed with the keenest interest. Certainly they de­serve the attention of the military—they do represent daring innovations in sea transpor­tation, and they broaden the horizon o* logistics thinking.

by Commander Tyrone G. Martin,

U. S. Navy

DANGEROUS MANEUVERING —THE RUSSIAN VIEW

On 25 July 1966, in the Sea of Japan, the American destroyer Walker, steaming 25 ca­bles from a Soviet destroyer, increased speed and set a crossing course. Showing great con­straint and discretion, the Soviet warship com­mander stopped in order to avoid a collision and pointed out to the American commander how dangerous his maneuvers were, maneu­vers fraught with serious consequence. 1° June 1966, the illegal and dangerous maneu­vering of a U. S. Navy auxiliary ship, the Ban­ner, resulted in a collision with the Soviet ship Anemometr. On 10 and 11 May 1967, during the American-Japanese exercises in the Sea of Japan, the aforementioned American de­stroyer Walker, intentionally and grossly vio­lating the Rules of the Road, twice made con­tact with Soviet warships.

So writes Colonel of Justice I. Ye. Tak- harov in introducing an article in the Septeiu-

!

\

her 1967 Morskoy Sbornik, the Soviet Pro­^Ceedings. The article is an exposition of the ^r°urses of action to be taken by Soviet com­manding officers in the event they find them­^selves in circumstances similar to those noted.

The Colonel warns his readers that these [hegal procedures by American warships have become extremely widespread and have to dangerous incidents. Accordingly, he ^advises, recognizing this trend of action, Soviet commanders must make every effort to ^ensure the safe navigation of their ships but ⁿ°t yield in the face of dangerous provoca- hons. As their regulations point out, the ^Captain must handle his ship “boldly, en­^ergetically and decisively, without fear of re­^sPonsibility for a risky maneuver dictated by situation.” Such maneuvers, however, ^Ul"st be within the norms of international Maritime law.

^Vhen he sees a collision situation in the

making, it is the duty of the Russian com­mander to warn the foreign skipper about the perilous nature of his actions, of the pertinent rules of the road being violated, of the need to cease and desist from such dangerous ma­neuvers, and of his responsibility in the event the two ships collide. In addition, the Russian captain is to:

• Report the nature of the violator s actions to his force commander, or other higher authority, and co-ordinate preventive or retaliatory measures;

• Photograph the offender during his most dangerous actions;

• Prepare a written report of the incident for higher authorities, including plots, logs, and photographs.

• In such situations with foreign war­ships and authorities, Soviet officers must, at all times, be guided by the basic provisions of international maritime law and act in a

manner befitting the dignity and interests of the U.S.S.R.

Colonel Takharov notes that “In order to protect oneself against unfounded accusations by the other side, and to guarantee the cor­rectness with which the determination of the degree of own guilt is made, it is mandatory that the commander also take a number of urgent steps.” This is in the event that all else fails and a collision occurs.

First, the Soviet commander must assist the other party to the collision—provided, of course, his own command is not in danger of sinking—and inform the other commanding officer of the nationality of his ship, her name, and her port of departure. He should expect to receive similar information in return, in accordance with international maritime law.

Once the danger to either or both ships has passed, and any injured people have re­ceived all possible medical attention, steps must be taken to ensure indemnity for damage. If possible, the recommendation should be made to the other skipper to send a represen­tative to the Soviet ship who would be em­powered to make a joint inspection of dam­ages and draft a bilateral statement. This accomplished, both representatives would proceed to the other ship and repeat the pro­cess. The statement, prepared in both Rus­sian and the foreign language, and having equal force in either, is to contain the follow­ing information:

•  Time and place of the incident, names, flags, and nationalities of the ships, home- ports, and the names of the commanding officers;

•  Points of departure and destination;

•  Pertinent hydrometeorological data af­fecting navigation;

•   Course and speed prior to the collision;

•  Time and mode of initial detection of the other party, range, relative positions, lights, and signals prior to collision;

•   Steps taken to avoid collision;

•  Nature of collision and extent of dam­ages;

•   Actions subsequent to the collision;

•  Such other data and evidence as may be pertinent, including plots, sketches, and photographs;

• A delineation of the mutual claims of the parties.

The statement should be signed by the commanding officers of the ships involved. If signature is refused, or there is disagreement with any items contained therein, such cir­cumstance should be duly recorded and the document signed by only one party.

In the Soviet Union, Colonel Takharov notes, considerations concerning ship col­lisions come under the jurisdiction of the Maritime Arbitration Commission (MAK) in Moscow. These cases can also be considered by foreign judicial organs, but he warns thatif the bilateral statement indicates that the particular dispute is subject to considerations by the MAK, it is the Soviet view that it can­not be transferred to foreign arbitration. This is an interesting bit of “fine print,” if one is ever unfortunate enough to find himself drafting such a document.

If a bilateral statement cannot be obtained as may well be the case, the Soviet captain has recourse to the “protest,” which is con­sidered by his government to be particularly necessary in such a situation. A protest is essentially a unilateral statement detailing the incident. It is to be attested to before a notary within 24 hours of arrival in a Rus­sian port, or filed with the nearest Soviet consul, if the next port of call is in an alien land. In addition to the captain’s statement, the protest includes the ship’s log for the period of interest, and the results of the in­terrogation of at least two of the ship S officer’s and two of the crew.

While these “procedures,” as stated, are quickly recognized as generally conforming to practices of international law, for many U. S. Navy observers of long-continued Soviet harassment of American naval units, there is little doubt as to where the real roots of danger lie—Colonel Takharov himself has described it:

Particularly dangerous . . . are the actions of the imperialist fleets, which are creating se­rious tension on the world ocean. They seek to interfere with the combatant and noncombat­ant ships of other countries sailing freely any­where in international waters, and this is one of the pertinent causes of incidents at sea.

Progress

Boat With Skis—Artist’s conception of a conven­tional hull boat by designers in Lockheed’s ASW division shows conversion to ski op­eration over rough water. The initial turbine model, which will have a speed of 50 m.p.h. and will carry 49 passengers, is expected to have a wide adaptability, both commercial and mili­tary, including anti-subma­rine warfare.

Assault Bridge—This 33- foot bridge, developed by the U. S. Army, is carried by an Ml 13 armored person­nel carrier and can be hy­draulically laid in less than two minutes. Capable of supporting loads totaling 15 tons, the 2,700-pound bridge is constructed of ex­truded aluminum.

Advertising—The Commu­nist Chinese merchant ship Dongfetig (Eastwind), photo­graphed from HMS Devon­shire. The sign on the bridge structure proclaims: "Ad- vancecourageouslyalong the revolutionary route opened by Chairman Mao.”

Y. Yamada

Flipper—This Sikorsky CH- 53A Marine Corps Sea Stal­lion performs an unprece­dented series of loops for a helicopter of its size. (1) be­gins roll, at 45-degree angle, (2) straight up, (3) upside down, and (4) the helicopter completes the loop and levels off. The test was made to check the rotor system dynamics and ma­neuvering characteristics.

Notebook

U. S. Navy

152

@ Navy Building Eight-Station Omega Network

{Aerospace Daily, 23 October 1968) The Navy has been given permission to complete con­struction of the full eight-station Omega navigational network and to outfit ships and planes with receivers, the Defense Depart­ment confirmed.

The Pentagon said that when the system is completed, “Civilian and military ships and aircraft will be able, for the first time in the history of mankind, to navigate or determine their positions with confidence anywhere in the world in any weather and at all hours of the day.”

The $50-million system will provide ships and planes accuracies within one mile at night, and two in day time by measuring phase differences in very low frequency sig­nals from three stations. Relative accuracy from one vehicle to another will be about one quarter mile. Four more stations will be built in foreign locations, the Pentagon said. It de­clined to name the countries because negotia­tions are still going on, but said facilities are needed in the western Pacific, Tasmanian Sea, Indian Ocean, and southern South America.

The Navy has been operating four test sta­tions since January 1968. They are located in Bratland, Norway; Haiku, Hawaii, Port of Spain, Trinidad, and Forestport, New York. The latter belongs to the Air Force and the Omega station will be put at another north- central U. S. location, the Navy said.

Overseas facilities will be built in partner­ship. This is “particularly appropriate since Omega will be equally useful for all of the World’s navigators,” according to the Navy. “Omega is not peculiarly a military system, or even a U. S. system, but can be, and un­doubtedly will be, used by all seafaring and airline operating nations of the world.”

The Navy indicated that the full network would be operating “hopefully in late 1972.” A search is now being conducted for suitable terrain for station location. Because of the large antenna required, it has been found cheaper to build the transmitter in a valley

and string cables between mountain peaks.

Advanced engineering of completely auto­matic Omega aircraft equipment is under contract, and first deliveries are expected in the spring.

Ship receivers feature a ten-foot whip an­tenna and a compact radio receiver with a small, two-channcl strip chart recorder. The recorder automatically plots signals which are corrected for radio propagation condi­tions to provide a continuous permanent record of position. Readings from the re­corder of receiver are also usually plotted on special charts prepared by the Oceano­graphic Office.

The aircraft receivers now being developed are considerably smaller, and with their com­puters, make all corrections, and eliminate the need for special charts, the Navy pointed out.

s Two Research Submarines Launched

(General Dynamics Electric Boat Division News Release, 3 December 1968) Identical deep-diving research submarines, AUTEC I

General Dynamics

Sea Cliff and AUTEC II Turtle were launched simultaneously in ceremonies on 11 December 1968 at the Electric Boat division of General Dynamics in Groton, Connecticut.

AUTEC I and II, 26-foot long submersibles which can operate at depths of more than a mile, were constructed for the Naval Ship Systems Command, and are the sixth and seventh research submarines to be built by General Dynamics. Both carry three-man crews, and are the first research submarines to be built to military specifications.

The AUTEC vessels are equipped with a special lever ejection system, which allows the crew to escape in an emergency, by releasing buoyant personnel sphere. Each boat is equipped with television monitors, cameras, lights, sonar, gyrocompass, fathometer, and both surface and underwater communication systems. Each has two hydraulically-powered manipulator arms which can pick up as much as 100 pounds at full reach. The arms can be fitted with numerous tools, while submerged, from a built-in storage bin. Both boats have battery-powered side propellers, and a hy­draulically-driven stern propeller. They can operate at speeds up to 2.5 knots, and remain submerged for eight hours.

s Submarine 'Net’ Sought

(Philadelphia Inquirer, 4 November 1968) The Navy has requested money in the new budget to work on a highly secret detection net for the growing fleet of Soviet submarines.

Once limited to defending Russia’s coasts, Soviet submarines are sailing within 800 miles of American shores as they probe exist­ing U. S. defenses.

A major part of these defenses is a system called SOSUS. It is a series of gadgets the Navy has strung along the bottoms of oceans and straits where Soviet submarines sail.

The gadgets—acting like silent but open microphones—listen to the submarines and anything else which sails by. So acute are these mechanical ears that each submarine can be identified by the noise it makes, with some help from computers on shore.

But SOSUS—as good as it is—may not be good enough. The Soviet submarines now going to sea are much quieter than their pre­decessors and the Soviet fleet is getting bigger.

For fear SOSUS may be overwhelmed, the

Navy wants to get going in the new fiscal year on the research and development for other systems to back up SOSUS, including the detection net.

The money request for fiscal 1970 is not large—about $39-million, because the first couple of years would be devoted to the de­velopment work which must precede produc­ing and installing the net.

s Quiet Submarine Development Continues

(Business Week, 2 November 1968) Defense Secretary Clark Clifford last week restored one of Vice Admiral Hyman G. Rickover’s pet projects—construction of a “quiet” nu­clear attack submarine—to full develop­mental status. The decision, which could lead to the construction of an entire class of quiet submarines, could mean contracts to ship­builders and nuclear reactor manufacturers of close to $1.5 billion over the next few years.

Rickover’s success in winning Defense De­partment approval to build a quiet nuclear attack submarine undoubtedly is linked to intelligence estimates of Soviet progress in de­veloping an underwater nuclear Navy.

The United States has 35 nuclear attack submarines now in service. In addition, another 28 attack submarines are under con­struction or contract. But all of these vessels erpresent a technical compromise. They are not exceedingly fast, because that would re­quire that they be too big and too noisy. And they are not very quiet because that would mean a reduction in speed.

Technology, at least for the next decade, will not be able to design a nuclear submarine that is both fast and quiet, according to Rick- over. Hence, he wants some of both.

The job of the quiet submarine—the first of which should be at sea before 1973—will be silent surveillance. It will have the job of mov­ing in on underwater areas, where foreign submarines are known to operate, and trail­ing them undetected.

To get this degree of quietness in a sub­marine, designers have cut her speed to about 25 knots and given her an electric drive pro­pulsion system—the first of its kind for any U. S. underwater nuclear vessel. The quiet submarine will use the steam generated by her nuclear reactor to drive turbines that will, in turn, produce electricity to drive her pro­peller.

This system will eliminate use of big, noisy reduction gears. But it also means that the quiet submarine will be bigger—about 20 per cent bigger than the Sturgeon-class attack submarines now entering the fleet.

Further steps will be taken to avoid noise. All sharp bends must be eliminated in the submarine’s steam and fluid systems to avoid “knocking.” And, as far as possible, no equipment will be mounted on the ship’s hull.

While the Navy celebrates Rickover’s tri­umph in getting Defense Department capit­ulation on the quiet attack submarine, it is also moving ahead on plans to get a fast attack submarine at sea by 1974-75.

Speed of the fast attack submarine is classified, but educated guesses put it at close to 60 knots. With this speed, detection is not a problem. Such submarines should be all but invulnerable to enemy weapons, even allowing for future technological advances.

Merchant Marine

@ Three Oil Firms To Try Arctic Route*

(Richard Basoco in The Baltimore Sun, 17 December 1968) A multi-million dollar ex­periment to determine the feasibility of ship­ping Alaskan crude oil to the East Coast via the Arctic was announced yesterday by three petroleum companies.

The firms—reportedly enthusiastic about the prospective results of the test—will seek to establish the first commercial shipping lane via the Northwest Passage to transport huge quantities of crude oil by tanker rather than by pipe line.

Toward this end, they are converting the tanker Manhattan, whose 115,000 ton capacity makes her the biggest ship afloat under the American flag, into the world’s largest ice breaker.

Tests involving the Manhattan, will be con­ducted by Humble Oil and Refining Com­pany, which has a major petroleum terminal ^ln Baltimore; Atlantic Richfield Company; and B.P. Exploration U.S.A., Inc., a sub­* See R. J. Boyle “Arctic Passages of North Amer­ica,” U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings, January 069, pp. 48-55.

sidiary of British Petroleum Company.

Beginning in June, the companies said, the Manhattan—which is being chartered from her owners, Seatrain Lines, Inc., and converted specifically for the experiment—will probe the 4,500-mile Northwest Passage in an effort to establish a route through the ice which clogs half the distance. The test is beginning in June, a Seatrain spokesmen said, because that is when the Arctic ice is thickest.

A number of studies are under way to de­termine economical means of transporting oil from the north slope area, where Humble and Atlantic Richfield completed two im­pressive discovery wells last summer.

A consulting firm of geologists has said the strike has the potential of becoming one of the largest oil reserves in the world.

Humble and Atlantic plan to drill two more wells this winter. British Petroleum, and several other companies, are also planning tests in the area.

Joseph Kahn, Seatrain chairman, said: “A

NAVY MUTUAL AID

ASSOCIATION Membership Provides $12,000 TOTAL DEATH BENEFITS

$7500 Primary Death Benefit (available from five permoneni 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 53,000 Assets more than $110,000,000

NAVY MUTUAL AID

association

Navy Dept., Washington, D. C. 20370

Since 1879

Write for Purther Information and Brochure successful conclusion to the [test] program would very significantly increase the size of the United States flag tanker fleet in order to carry the oil from the north slope of Alaska.”

The statement issued by the three oil com­panies noted that if the tests are successful they “could result in the establishment of a new commercial shipping route through the Arctic region with broad implications for future Arctic development and international trade.”

A Humble Oil spokesman said a specific price tag on the venture has not been set but acknowledged it would be “very expensive.” Other sources placed heavy emphasis on the word “very.”

Because of the cost and the extensive modifications required for the Manhattan just to undertake the experiment, sources close to the project believe it would not have been undertaken unless there was real expectation that it would demonstrate the commercial feasibility of transporting petroleum by tanker through the Arctic Northwest Passage.

The Manhattan is now at the Sun Ship­building and Dry Dock Company yard in Chester, Pennsylvania, where the conversion work is being done.

S! ABS Drill Rig Rules

(.Marine Engineering/Log, October 1968) Nearly 20 years ago, the American Bureau of Ship­ping first became involved with the offshore oil drilling industry. Today, more than one third of the world-wide, mobile drilling fleet is ABS-classed.

Just published after three years of intensive research and discussion, the Rules for Building and Classing Ojfshore Mobile Drilling Units set forth the industry-wide standards for design­ing, building, and maintaining surface-type, self-elevating and column-stabilized units for service under all conditions worldwide.

The new Rules may be ordered from the Bureau’s head office at 45 Broad Street, New York, N. Y. 10004, or from any ABS overseas office. Price is $5 per copy.

s Japan’s 1st Nuclear Ship Started

(The Washington Post, 28 November 1968) The keel has been laid for Japan’s first nu­clear-powered vessel.

The ship is being built at the Tokyo ship­

yard of Ishikawajima-Harrima Heavy Indus­tries. When completed, she will be the world’s fourth nuclear-powered merchant vessel after the Soviet icebreaker Lenin, the U. S. vessel Savannah, and the West German ore carrier Otto Hahn.

The experimental freighter, scheduled to be completed in June at a cost of $15.6 mil­lion, will be fitted with a 36,000-kilowatt pressurized water-cooled reactor to be manu­factured by Japan’s Mitsubishi Atomic Power Industries.

& Merchant Marine Goes to “War” for NATO

(Marine Engineering/Log, October 1968) The Merchant Marine had an opportunity to prove its value as an arm of defense under simulated wartime conditions, when mer­chant fleet vessels were called in for live con­voy exercises conducted as part of the current North Atlantic Treaty Organization pre­paredness tests. Reminiscent of World War II, a Boston convoy of 20 cargo vessels, es­corted by six U. S. Navy destroyers and two Canadian cutters, sailed to join the main convoy of 200 ships from nine nations some­where at sea. A mythical enemy was lying in wake for the convoy, which was to be sub­jected to simulated air and submarine attacks. As if by coincidence, the convoy ran into Soviet trawlers after the rendezvous, but it was difficult to determine if the vessels were carrying “spy equipment.”

s Savannah Is Nuclear Refueled

(.Marine Engineering/Log, October 1968) Re­cently completed refueling of the nuclear ship Savannah means that she will be able to steam three more years before needing another charge. The job, performed at Todd’s Gal­veston yard, was done in less than two months and completed two weeks ahead of schedule.

During the operation, one-eighth of her original nuclear charge was removed and re­placed with new fuel. The complex servicing was done at a special nuclear facility owned by the government and operated by Todd. The job was performed by personnel from Todd’s Nuclear and Galveston Divisions, working with Savannah officers and other per­sonnel from First Atomic Ship Transport, Inc. (FAST), the ship’s operator.

S

!

l

@ Contracts Signed for Giant Ships

(The Washington Post, 1 November 1968) Con­tracts were signed on 1 November 1968 to start construction on the largest common car­rier freight ships ever built. The three levia­thans incorporate a radically new concept of cargo carrying, which it is hoped will put the ailing U. S. Merchant Marine back into world competition.

The ships will be built by General Dynam­ics for the Lykes Brothers Steamship Com­pany, Inc., of New Orleans for $32,617,333 each. They are scheduled to be completed in 1971.

They arc designed to be used primarily as barge carriers, although their flexibility enables them to carry containerized, palle­tized, and liquid cargoes. Depending on ar­rangements, the ships can carry up to 2.75 million cubic feet of cargo.

According to Lykes president, Frank A. Nemec, the three ships will be able to carry as much as 17 modern conventional carriers of the C4 design.

The vessels can also be used in their present configuration for military cargoes. Nemec said the three could carry a brigade, complete with helicopters, military vehicles, landing craft, and fuel.

Each ship will be 875 feet long and will cruise at 20 knots or better. Each will have a deck cargo space as long as two football fields, and will be 75 feet wide. They will each carry 38 specially designed barges, 266 of which will be built by Lykes to service the vessels along the company’s shipping routes.

Loaded barges will be brought to the ship’s stern where they will be raised by submersible elevators, then moved and stored on board for Passage. The ships can be unloaded in 13 hours, or, according to Nemec, 15 times faster than present day bulk carriers.

Nemec is credited with organizing the con­cept of the carriers, which were designed by the marine architectural firm of J. J. Henry Company. The contract was signed at the offices of the Maritime Administration, which !s providing a 55 per cent construction differ­ential subsidy for the carriers.

Nemec said cost for building the same ships in Japan would be about $13.5 million each, but the company is building them in the United States to remain eligible for continued

subsidy. Law requires that government sub­sidized ships be built in the United States.

However, Nemec said that if the ships do lower shipping costs by an anticipated 30 per cent, companies using such carriers may be able to operate without subsidies.

s Nuclear Freighter on First Voyage

{The New York Times, 12 October 1968) Europe’s first nuclear-powered freighter, West Germany’s Otto Hahn, made her maiden voyage on 12 October 1968. It was a smooth six-hour voyage on the Baltic.

Sirens wailed and fireboats threw up foun­tains of water as the 16,870-ton vessel de­parted from Kiel’s crowded Oslo pier with the help of two tugs.

Two hundred guests were on board for the first sailing of the world’s second nuclear- powered merchant ship. The U. S. ship Savannah was the first. The guests included the Federal Minister of Scientific Research, Dr. Gerhard Stoltenberg, and officials of Eura- tom, the six-nation European Atomic Com­munity.

Euratom contributed $4 million toward building the $ 14-million ship. The Bonn Government and West Germany’s four coastal states paid the rest.

The 520-foot-long ship, which is driven by an advanced pressurized water reactor, was built as an iron ore freighter. A spokesman stressed, however, that the ship was not ex­pected to operate at a profit. He said that the vessel’s operating cost per annum would be $900,000, of which only $400,000 would be offset by revenues from cargo.

The Otto Hahn was named after the late

—— -—..—^

NEW SHIP MODELS ~

Waterline 1:1250 Scale

New NAVIS, HANSA, VIKING, DELPHIN, NEI’TUNE, MERCATOR, STAR and other ships, over 1000 models, highly detailed, hand painted, many American prototypes. Jane’s Fighting Ships 1914 reprint                                                                                                                 $29.95

German Warships of World War II, 168 pp.                         $ 5.95

U.S. Warships of World War II, 412 pp.                               6.95

Japanese Warships of World War II, 400 pp.                           5.95

Warships of World War 1. comb, vol                                         6.75

Warships of World War II, comb. vol.                                    8.75

Italian Warships of World War II                       5.J5

Weyer’s Taschenbuch     der   Kriegsflotten    1914                 14.95

Weyer’s Taschenbuch     der   Kriegsflotten    1905                   J405

Weyer’s Taschenbuch     der   Kriegsflotten     1918                 14.95

Groener's Die Deutschen Kriegsschifl’e       1815-1945 I  2.J.OO

Groener’s Die Deutschen Kriegsschiffe       1815-1945 II      2o.00

30% off Clearance sale on all TRIDENT models

NATHAN R. PRESTON & CO.

P.O. Box 187—Des Plaines, Illinois 60017 Immediate Delivery

German physicist who received a Nobel Prize for his pioneer work in nuclear fission. The ship was launched in July 1964, and was given a sea test under conventional power last February.

Citing a study prepared by the builders of the Otto Hahn, Mr. Stoltenberg said that the threshold for economic ship reactors is 40,000 shaft horsepower. The reactor of the Otto Hahn generates a thermal power of 38,000 kilowatts, which corresponds to a drive power of 11,000 horsepower.

The Otto Hahn has a maximum speed of 16 knots, but on her first nuclear run, she cruised Kiel Bay at 9.6 knots.

Physicists will carry out a comprehensive research program on the Otto Hahn in coming months during voyages to and from Narvik, Norway, where the vessel will load iron ore for West German steel companies. Journeys to iron ore ports in other parts of the world are scheduled for the future.

Oceanography

s New Devices Probe Ocean Bottom

(United States Department of Commerce News, 1 August 1968) American scientists have successfully tested newly developed instruments which analyzed the sea bottom in water depths of more than a mile.

The tests are part of a long-range program which may help pave the way for habitations and engineering activities on the ocean floor.

They were carried out in May in Exuma Sound in the Bahamas, 250 miles southeast of Miami, Florida, at a depth of 5,520 feet.

The tests were conducted from the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Ship Whiting as part of a co-operative project between the Commerce Department’s Environmental Sci­ence Services Administration and the Uni­versity of Illinois. Preliminary tests were con­ducted last year in the Gulf of Maine at a depth of 885 feet, but this is the first time the tests have been made in such deep water.

Dr. George H. Keller, director of the Marine Geology and Geophysics Laboratory at ESSA’s Atlantic Oceanographic Labora­tories in Miami and Professor Adrian F. Richards of the Departments of Geology and Civil Engineering at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign were in charge of the tests.

Keller explained that the tests involved an entirely new approach to the study of the mass physical properties of ocean sediments. It consisted, he stated, of measuring these properties directly in the sea floor to a depth of 10 feet below the sea bottoms. Heretofore, studies of this nature have been carried out only in the laboratory on samples taken from the sea floor.

Such tests of the sea floor are essential, de­clared Keller, if structures are to be built on the seabed to enable man to live in this environment and develop the resources which lie there.

Two types of probes were used. One was a rod with four short vanes which rotated to measure strength of bottom materials at one- foot intervals. The other probe was equipped with twin rods, one foot apart, one carrying a gamma ray source and the other a ray counter to make a continuous report of density changes as the probe penetrated into the sea bottom.

s Naval Oceanographic Office Drift Chart

(The Military Engineer, Nov-Dec. 1968) A wind drift current computation chart com­posed by Dr. Richard James of the Naval Oceanographic OfRce may improve the abil­ity of the Navy to conduct successful search and rescue operations at sea. The Coast Guard has already adopted the chart.

Wind drift currents are those caused by the stress of the wind on the water surface. Knowledge of when such currents are to be expected and their set and drift is valuable for search and rescue work and any marine activ­ity involving free-floating objects.

Foreign

a Second New Submarine for Australia

(Australian Navy News Release, 23 July 1968) HMAS Otway, the RAN’s second Oberon- Class submarine will leave British waters for Australia today.

Otway will join her sister submarine Oxley, which arrived in Sydney last August. Two more Oberons for the RAN, Owens and Onslow, are under construction in the United King­dom.

Otway was commissioned on April 23. She has a ship’s company of seven officers and 55 sailors. One of the most modern conventional submarines in the world, Otway has advanced listening devices, the latest communications equipment and a modern electronic fire con­trol system.

Armament includes homing torpedoes, with six bow and two stern torpedo tubes and she has antisurface ship and antisubmarine capa­bilities.

@ Largest Hydrofoil Delivered

(■Marine Engineering/Log, September 1968) A 123-foot hydrofoil craft, said to be the largest commercial one built so far (at least in the Free World), was delivered recently by Westermoen Hydrofoil A/S of Mandel, Nor­way. Named the Expressan, the vessel was built Under Supramar license for Fredrikshavn- Linjen, Swedish shipowners of Gothenburg.

The craft will accommodate 250 passengers. Powered by twin diesels with a total of 3,440 b.h.p., she will cruise at a speed of 39 knots. Loading and unloading of automobiles is ac­complished through hydraulically operated car ports, the vehicles being driven on or off.

Some hydrofoil proponents believe that vessels of the Expressan’s size and speed could compete with aircraft in short-range service because of the vessel’s ability to operate be­tween downtown locations.

Research and Development

53 U.S.A.F. to Develop Tracking Ship

{Aviation Week & Space Technology, 23 Sep­tember 1968) The Air Force will develop a new sensor-laden tracking ship to gather re­entry data on Soviet missile tests in the Pacific under the Sentinel Foam program. The data would be fed back into the design of the Army’s Sentinel anti-ballistic missile system.

Contract definition studies of the ship pro­gram, to be directed by the U. S. Air Force’s Electronic Systems Division, are due to start later this year. Bidders on the program, which initially will call for construction of a single $200-million ship, probably will include Gen­eral Dynamics/Electronics, Philco-Ford, Ling-Temco-Vought and Sperry Rand, builder of earlier Atlantic range tracking ships for NASA.