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.
The brash (fragmented sea ice less than two meters in diameter) was packed in tightly around the ship, and the only movement that could be made was astern. Icebreaker captains are always reluctant to back into or turn the screws of their ships into ice, except relatively thin first year fast ice which is uniform, but the only other choice this day was to stay put, maybe for the winter. Mainly by water washing the brash forward the Glacier was worked into the lead. This maneuver took three hours, partly because of the brash and partly because of the ship’s difficulty in turning to port. The Glacier, like most icebreakers, has two screws but only one rudder, consequently you do not get any rudder effect unless you are making way. The lead went around the large floe which had been blocking our progress and then led to more open pack. It took five hours to cut through one more floe. Although it was dark, by using searchlights, the Glacier was able to make almost steady progress after this point. She was stopped occasionally, but it was usually due to a lack of maneuverability, not heavy ice. The biggest handicap was darkness. Searchlights are not the most effective means to find leads, and many leads suitable for an icebreaker’s passage do not show up on radar. It does little good to be near an open lead if you cannot see it. At 0230 Tuesday, 11 March, the Glacier reached the open water of the Antarctic Sound.
Personnel who had been transferred to the Petrel Station were returned to the Glacier. The Burton Island came alongside and received all available JP-5 fuel and many supplies that she had previously transferred to the Glacier. At 0100 on 12 March the Glacier departed the Antarctic Sound and chopped to Commander, Naval Support Force Antarctica. The crew members that ha been evacuated to Buenos Aires returned on board at Ushuaia, Argentina on 15 March. With an honor gnat > band, and many well-wishers on the dock to bid farewell, the Glacier departed Ushuaia and chopped to Commander, Coast Guard Pacific Area.
Although the Glacier succeeded in providing only moral support for the General San Martin, the Commander- in-Chief, Argentine Navy, offered to have the necessary repairs made to the Glacier without charge if she would g° to Buenos Aires. This offer was respectfully declined. On 26 March the Glader received the welcome news that the General San Martin had also broken free and reached open water in the Antarctic Sound.
"It seems to me a splendid practical use can be made of aeroplanes of the type which flew across the Atlantic, the NC type of plane. Two of these, one being for a relief vessel stationed at Trepassy Bay, Newfoundland, could with practically no trouble at all make a flying observation of the Banks and locate reported and unreported bergs during the short periods of clear weather, when a vessel of the type used on patrol could cover but a tenth of the distance and be further hampered by weather conditions at the surface. Captain H.G. Fisher, U. S. Coast Guard, Senior Officer, Summary of the Ice Patrol Season of 1919 ("International Ice Observation and Ice Patrol Service in North Atlantic Ocean, Bulletin No. 7”) The 1976 Ice Season marks the 30th anniversary of Ice Patrol aerial reconnaissance and surveillance. This is also the 62nd year of the International Ice Patrol, a service which was created on the impetus of public opinion generated by the sinking of the RMS Titanic on 14/15
April 1912 and the resultant loss of over 1,500 lives. Except for the World War years (1917-1918 and 1942-1945), the service has been conducted every year since 1914.
On 6 February 1946, a U. S. Coast Guard PBY-5A Catalina took-off from Argentia, Newfoundland and introduced a new kind of International Ice Patrol. For the first time aircraft were utilized for iceberg "reconnaissance.” U. S. Coast Guard and International Ice Patrol aerial surveillance could be said to have had its beginning in 1931 when the Coast Guard assigned Lieutenant Commander Edward H. Smith (later to be renowned as Admiral "Iceberg” Smith), experienced in ice patrol service, to the airship Graf Zeppelin during her Arctic cruise to observe ice and oceanographic conditions. One of the conclusions ‘of this flight was that aerial surveillance of ice and ice conditions held great promise for the future.
In 1946, aircraft were considered a supplement to the scouting done by the surface patrol vessels. Today, surface patrol vessels supplement the aircraft) and then only when iceberg conditions are extremely heavy, or when there has been an extensive period of weather preventing aerial coverage of the area of responsibility.
The Ice Patrol’s primary objective is to guard the southeastern, southern, and southwestern limits of the ice area in the vicinity of Newfoundland’s Grand Banks so that shipping might be advised of the extent of dangerous ice conditions in the area. The Ice Patrol maintains a detailed, up-to-date picture of the ice situation in the Grand Banks region-
An ice patrol flight is normally 1,000-1,500 miles long (approximately 6-8 hours flight time), and the track is carefully laid out so a maximum area can be searched for the miles flown-
Wo or three experienced ice observers ^company each flight. Precise piloting ar)d navigation are required to ensure the ^tended search area is actually covered, and icebergs are accurately plotted. earch altitudes are usually 1,000-1,500
feet
b,
and every effort is made to stay 'erieath overcast to provide observers ''Vltb maximum visibility. The desired abitude provides an excellent range of S|Sht, while still enabling many individUal surface features to be discerned. The Usual 25-mile flight track spacing is a c°mpromise between maximum area ^°verage and maximum probability of etection. To obtain 100% visual cover- aSe, an observer must have 12.5 miles of v*sibility to each side of the track, k ^>e aircraft normally flies at 200 n°ts. This speed is a compromise be- '^een aircraft endurance and area to be covered. When weather conditions °w> the present Ice Patrol aircraft, the ^C-ijob, will shut down the two out- °ard engines. This technique permits §reater range and/or more deviations t0rtl track. Multi-engine aircraft are Ut>lized for the safety margin they pro- Vlck> since the flights are conducted over 'Vater and at low altitudes.
^hile flights are usually made in good or fair weather, the prevalence of °S in the spring and summer months °Ccasionally requires that a flight be ^a(fe in marginal or poor visibility.
Urir>g these occasions patrol aircraft ^ust seek out targets by radar.
k f^om the altitudes flown, small ice- ergs can usually be detected up to ten ^des by radar. These radar targets can ’■hen be identified by diverting from the Planned track, unless prohibited by a a'v ceiling and poor visibility. With Ce'lings frequently below 500 feet, the
inability to identify a radar target as an iceberg or a fishing trawler becomes a serious handicap. An iceberg cannot be distinguished from a moving ship on the aircraft radar scope because the aircraft’s speed masks the greatly lesser motion of the surface vessel. Small bergs and growlers (a small piece of ice) are not normally detected by radar if the range exceeds ten miles or if sea conditions are moderate to rough. When sea conditions are severe, larger bergs may also be missed.
Even if the area of patrol responsibility were smaller and more aircraft were available for ice observations, weather would still prevent complete coverage. One of the most important portions of the patrol area is the Tail of the Banks, where the cold water of the Labrador Current meets the warm water of the Gulf Stream. This area is frequently plagued by dense fog which normally renders ice observation by aircraft ineffective for weeks at a time during the crucial April-June period when icebergs can be expected at the Tail of the Banks area.
During light seasons, when ice is restricted to the northern Grand Banks, or when only a small number of bergs are menacing the Tail of the Banks, the guarding of the ice limits and ice observation can be effectively accomplished by aircraft alone. During years when many icebergs survive to the Tail of the Banks, aircraft must be augmented by a surface vessel patrol. An extended period of poor flying weather may compound the heavy iceberg threat or, by itself, necessitate a requirement for a surface patrol vessel. Since 1959, however, only two surface patrols have been initiated.
The surface patrol’s mission is to provide an on-the-scene guard over the southernmost or more hazardous ice when transatlantic shipping is menaced. A surface vessel simply cannot hope to search but a small portion of the area necessary to determine the ice limits, however on one fair day an aircraft can determine a large portion of the limits and observe the ice within these limits. Armed with a single aerial report the surface vessel can concentrate her efforts in a high threat area. Although the ice conditions and consequently the ice limits may change drastically a day or two after the aerial observation, Ice Patrol Headquarters, using a computer drift model which considers the wind and sea current conditions, maintains an adjusted iceberg plot.
Today, virtually all ice observation functions are accomplished by aircraft. When large numbers of icebergs threaten and/or extended periods of poor weather prevail, aircraft and surface vessels complement each other in carrying out the mission of the International Ice Patrol. The combined air-surface procedure obviates the necessity for long and costly surface vessel searches that were characteristic of the years prior to 1946.
For the foreseeable future, aerial ice reconnaissance and surveillance will remain the primary tools of Commander, International Ice Patrol. The conduct of the flights will, most likely, remain the same as at the present.
Patrol
established at Argentia- foundland.
satf>e
Two flights made the
1964
1966
1967
disestablished. Interna1
tit”13
1946(6 February) A PBY-5A makes the first International Ice Patrol aerial reconnaissance flight.
(24 February) Two PB4Y-1S arrive in Argentia to become the first dedicated Ice Patrol aircraft.
1947The PBiG becomes the Ice Patrol aircraft.
1948Camera-equipped PBiG begins an iceberg census off Baffin. (The project was completed in 1949.)
1949Aircraft are the sole reconnaissance tools for the first time.
1950PBiGs augment a reinstituted surface patrol due to severe ice conditions.
1951Aircraft operate without a surface patrol for the second time.
1952(May) Ice Patrol suffers its only aviation mishap. A PBiG had a wheel collapse on landing at Goose Bay, Labrador.
1954 Tests with a bolometer (forerunner of the airborne radiation thermometer) for the purpose of distinguishing between berg and non-berg radar targets under conditions of poor visibility are unsuccessful. It had been hoped to identify objects by measuring changes in the radiant heat.
1956Icebergs are marked with dye markers, commercial dye, and used motor oil. The results are unsatisfactory; no berg was later identified by its dye.
1957Surface patrol employed for the first time since 1950. Initial side-looking radar evaluation conducted.
1958PBiGs, after 985,612 nm., fly their last Ice Patrol.
1959R5Ds replace the PBiGs. Surface patrol required.
(3-19 June) Iceberg demolition experiments are conducted using magnesium and thermite incendiary bombs.
1960(23-30 May) UF2G participates in iceberg demolition experiments using high-explosive bombs. The Ice Patrol yearly bulletin stated that aircraft are the tools of Ice Patrol to be supplemented by surface vessels when conditions dictate.
(January and Man.iv pjtIoi mander, International Ice . [S. conducts first preseason ^ HC-130BS, equipped Doppler Navigation > replace the R5Ds. jnCee
(1 October) Commander- national Ice D'’frr'l 0 -
“ . r Airt>ot
by the same aircraft. .^f)
radiation therometer j jp
evaluated and proved uS^rf/
detecting changes 111
water temperature. ^
(June) U. S. Coast Station Argentia and ^
national Ice Patrol Argen , \(
■
Patrol transferred to Co' Island, New York.
;h
ta
:ebdi
Microwave radiometer tions conducted 1969 Season. Radar identified as ships or but swath width prove1 very narrow.
iceb^ ^ °n U 1’000’000~ton rS {above) during demolition
*P*riments. The UF2G Albatross, dropped 16 bombs *ce^er8 and inflicted only '8nificant damage on it.
time
(30 April) The Ice Reconnais- Sar>ce Detachment redeployed to t^le Canadian Forces Base, Sum- H^erside, Prince Edward Island.
Side-looking airborne radar (SLAR) evaluated through the 1973 Season.
Surface patrol used for first s'uce the 1959 Season.
Inertial Navigation System (INS) installed on Ice Patrol aircraft, results in improved ice- ^erg plotting. Surface patrol required for second consecutive year.
(March) St. John’s, Newfoundland becomes the base of operations.
(July) ART evaluated and shows Promise for determining real- t'me temperature data for iceberg deterioration and possibilities for identifying features the Labrador and North Atlantic currents.
(May) New SLAR model evaluated. ART used to deter- ^'Ue sea surface temperature data.
The aircraft will continue to be supplemented by a surface patrol when conditions warrant. Aircraft have demonstrated many advantages over the surface patrol vessel, but the most impressive is increased area coverage in an immensely reduced amount of time. One disadvantage of aircraft replacing the surface vessel has been a loss of the capability to continuously monitor specific icebergs. With aerial reconnaissance, an iceberg, due to search area and/or weather, may be resighted only after a lapse of many days. Even then its identity may not be known with any certainty. If iceberg dynamics are to be totally understood, surveillance of icebergs must be continuous. Thus, the International Ice Patrol has a pressing need for an all-weather remote sensor capable of locating and enabling positive identification of targets.
By reviewing the partial history of the Ice Patrol printed here, it is apparent that the Ice Patrol is deeply engaged in research toward providing the best product available, at the lowest cost. For the immediate future research is concentrating on the utilization of an operational all-weather system. Perhaps a package similar to the U. S. Coast Guard Airborne Oil Surveillance System (AOSS) or a present side-looking airborne radar (SLAR) model will provide the all-weather detection capabilities desired.
When capable, remote sensing systems are acquired, the Ice Patrol will enter the third phase of its development-remote sensing. This remote sensing acquisition could well be made in conjunction with the employment of a longer range aircraft, which could facilitate operating from a base more remote from the Grand Banks region.
The final Ice Patrol phase, as envisioned by this author, is satellite reconnaissance and surveillance. As the state of this art rapidly improves and becomes available, it should be possible in the near future to utilize either a geostationary satellite or one providing rapid repeat all-weather surface coverage of the area. This satellite would have the resolution to monitor individual icebergs and ice conditions and movement. On-board sensors would measure the environmental conditions. The satellite would then broadcast the data to a receiving station for analysis prior to broadcast, or the satellite would develop the data itself and broadcast to shore transmission sites and mariners. This latter method would be the most
of
disastrous as the Titanic, but, in terms
efficient the Ice Patrol.
Since the patrol’s inception (excluding the war years during which it was suspended), not a single ship has been sunk due to striking an iceberg outside the limits of all known ice as broadcast by the International Ice Patrol. Records show that ships have collided with bergs and sunk inside these limits, indicating that the warnings were not heeded, and ships attempted to steam through the danger area. Outside the patrol’s area of responsibility several modern ships have hit bergs and sunk. Most notable are the merchant vessels Hans Hedtoft (30 January 1959) and the Bergemeister Smidt (25 November 1965) both off Kap Farvel, Greenland. Thus, the unblemished record of the Ice Patrol should not be allowed to lull anyone into a false sense of security, nor should this check the Ice Patrol’s improvement through scientific research.
What if a VLCC (very large crude carrier) or a LNG (liquefied natural gas) tanker should strike a berg? The result, in terms of human life, may not be as environmental damage, imagine the worldwide outcry.
The AMVER System
By Lieutenant Walter McDougall, U. S. Coast Guard, Chief, Automated Mutual-assistance Vessel Rescue (AMVER) Branch, Commander, Atlantic Area (August 1972-July 1975)
The Automated Mutual-assistance Vessel Rescue (AMVER) system, operated by the U. S. Coast Guard, is an international program designed to improve merchant vessel safety on the high seas. Merchant vessels, regardless of registry, beginning offshore voyages longer than 24 hours, are encouraged to transmit their movement information through cooperating international radio stations to the AMVER center, Governors Island, New York. This information is fed into a computer, located at Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, D.C., which maintains a current plot of the ships’ positions by dead reckoning their proposed tracks through the duration of the voyages. When a recognized rescue center (RRC) of any nation learns of an emergency at sea, it may obtain a computer listing of vessels on the AMVER plot for a designated area. Search and rescue (SAR) data, such as a vessel’s radio capability, her radio watch schedule, and whether she carries a doctor, are kept on file in the computer and can be retrieved as required. The location of a particular ship, if she is participating in the AMVER system, may also be obtained by rescue authorities if her safety is in question. Except for reasons related to maritime safety, predicted vessel locations are disclosed only to the respective ship owners. It costs the individual vessels and their owners nothing to participate in the system.
The AMVER system—formerly known as the Atlantic Merchant Vessel Report- system—began as a small, hand-calculated plot of shipping within the U. S. Coast Guard’s Western Atlantic Ocean area of maritime SAR responsibility. Merchant vessels submitted position reports when operating within the area, thus enabling the Coast Guard to maintain a surface plot from which vessels could be located and called upon to provide distress assistance even before SAR units could be mobilized or dispatched. In 1958, the Coast Guard computerized the system, and, within a few years, acceptance of the system extended beyond a small group of Coast Guard personnel to the larger maritime community which realized the increased measure of safety provided by an automated position-plotting operation. General acceptance of the system, combined with ever-improving data processing methods and equipment, allowed AMVER to grow to the point where it now maintains a continuous plot of over 2,100 merchant vessels.
To begin the AMVER plot, the vessel submits a sail plan (Type 1 message) through one of the 70 participating radio stations worldwide to the AMVER center. The information contained in this message includes the departure point and time, sailing route, speed, destination, estimated time of arrival, and other pertinent data, such as whether the vessel carries a doctor. When received at Governors Island, the AMVER watch, consisting of a watch supervisor and three watchstanders, checks the completeness and accuracy the message and key punches the information onto a data card. Then, through a user’s terminal, the information lS transmitted to the Washington computer. A special program compares the information on the individual data cards with information already on file. A'1)' inconsistencies are noted, and the input information is returned to the AMVEr watch. This correlation program allow5 a 0.8° difference in latitude or longitude between the card and file data. After inconsistencies are researched and rectified, the input data cards are processed with another program which places the new information on file, automatically updating the previous file. During M3)1 1975, the AMVER watch initiated 5,730 separate voyages by this method.
In an attempt to maintain accurate data on AMVER plot vessels, the AMVER center requests that the masters of vessels participating in the system provide three messages in addition to the Type l- These messages are position (Type 2). deviation (Type D), and arrival (Type 5) reports. The Type 2, which includes the datum time and position information, Is vital in keeping the plot current. Since position data on vessels participating in the international weather observation