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.
Of Boats and Flying Boats; A-weapons Get Smaller; Sweden and the Bomb; Don’t Shoot, It’s Friendly; U. S. Speeds Work on Spanish Bases; 8000 Vessels Are Affected By Safety Rules; Helicopter Carrier Commissioned; Atom Merchant Ship To Be Operating Within 3 Years; Escape Plans For Submarines; Rockoons Aid In Solar Flare Study; Underwater TV Camera Smallest Yet; Electronic Sarah Proves Fliers Aid; Airforce Ram Jet Test Vehicle; Polar Hop To Fairbanks; Japan’s Antarctic Survey Plans.
Of Boats and Flying Boats
By Lieutenant (jg) Anthony L. Danis, jr., USN[1]
The seaplane is going through a renaissance. Long abandoned by civil aviation and considered the ugly duckling of military aviation, the seaplane (or flying boat) is portrayed by the experts as being the only conceivable answer to the spiralling problems °f jet propulsion, increased runway requirements, heavier take-off and landing weights, public antagonism and safety. “Put the planes back on runways that run around the world,” they say.
If aviation does move back onto the water, will it solve some of these problems or will it just create new ones? At least an airport can have a fence around it and the runways can be reserved for the exclusive use of land- lng and departing aircraft. But on the water the problem is not so simple. One can logically assume that the large commercial seaplane will operate from major population centers where the waterways are already carrying a heavy seaborne traffic plus an increasing number of pleasure boaters. Likewise, military seaplanes will continue to operate from major installations where concentrated shipping is a foregone conclusion.
Naturally seadromes will be established but not every harbor is as blessed as Hampton Roads for example. At this major seaport and primary Naval Base the seaplanes operate in the relative privacy of Willoughby Bay. A striking contrast to such an area is Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In this crowded anchorage the seaplane has many obstacles and often has to weave like a broken field runner to get airborne or land without colliding with a capital ship, a liberty boat or the launch to Caimanera. In fact, the crowded, busy harbor will be the rule and the placid restricted seadrome the exception.
Does this mean that drastic changes will have to be made in some harbor operations? Not at all. There is plenty of room for everyone on the water. But it does mean that ship handlers and coxswains will have to get used to seaplanes and become more familiar with some of the rights, privileges and peculiari-
ties of the flying boat. Lack of understanding of the seaplane’s capabilities, limitations and operating habits can cause the ship handler, in his wariness, to go to unnecessary extremes to avoid interference. With the proper appreciation of the flying boat, ships and aircraft can operate on the water in perfect harmony.
To appreciate the seaplane let us first determine what it is—nautically speaking. A flying boat is, in varying proportions, a combination motorboat, sailboat, houseboat, and autumn leaf. The powerful engines give it partial claim to being a motorboat. The tail fin that may stick up thirty feet or more at the stern acts like a mizzen sail and makes the plane behave like a sailboat. Because of its ten to fifteen feet of free-board and no underwater rudder, it takes after a
houseboat. Finally, because there is so much above the water compared to what is below the water, like an autumn leaf the wind and tide will drive it sideways, backwards, or forwards with fine impartiality when the engines are stopped.
It might appear that a flying boat qualifies more as a menace to navigation than as a controlled vessel. This is not quite true; one thing we can say for certain, however, is that the experienced seaplane pilot is an unusual mariner. In some ways he is a mariner par excellence. Like his brothers in normal boats, the seaplane pilot uses wind and tide to his advantage whenever possible. Beyond that he has his engines which he can control individually, speeding them up or slowing them down. He has, in most modern aircraft, the ability to reverse his propeller thrust, and below the waterline he may have hydro- fins and probably will have sea anchors which he can stream. Finally he has that instrument of last resort, the anchor.
Because of the relatively enormous tail fin, the seaplane has a strong tendency to weathercock. All aircraft have this tendency to run into the wind when on the ground, but in land planes it can be controlled by locking the tail wheel, steering with the nose wheel or by use of brakes. Seaplanes, however, can do none of these things and consequently must fight the wind constantly. Another taxing factor is the high freeboard to draft ratio. Whenever the wind is from such a direction that the slightest component of it is working on the broad flat side of the fuselage, the plane will drift at an alarming rate. It is not unusual for a seaplane to be pointed many degrees away from the direction of motion as the pilot literally sails the plane along.
It is important to appreciate these facts because a seaplane pilot on the water is like a man who has a tiger by the tail. He cannot let go, he cannot stop his engines or apply the brakes and wait. He must stay with it every minute. He is on the move until he anchors or moors to a buoy.
Since he is constantly on the go, the pilot has the continuing problem of deciding which particular direction he wants to go and making his plane go in that direction. How does he go about getting his slab-sided, high-tailed canoe from here to there? He has, of course, his engines and his rudder. These together with the wind and tide enable the seaplane pilot to drive, drift and sail his airplane along a desired course. As might be assumed, engines exert the most powerful influence over the plane both from thrust and from the effect of prop wash on the rudder. The turning radius of the flying boat, using engines and rudder only, varies with the amount of engine power used and the direction and intensity of the wind. Under light airs, a seaplane can turn within a small area by using high power on one engine and full rudder. As the wind increases the pilot will have an increasingly difficult time turning the plane out of the wind, and the turning circle will become larger. As the wind increases up to a velocity of twenty five to thirty knots, it may be impossible to turn the plane and taxi downwind. In high winds a seaplane can sometimes facilitate a turn downwind by turning as far out of the wind as possible in one direction, then swinging rapidly back through the wind using the added momentum to carry the plane around. The maneuver is similar to falling out of the wind slightly in a sailboat to pick up enough speed to come about.
Knowing these facts, we can see that a seaplane requires more sea room in high winds than it does in a calm. Furthermore, a position close aboard the windward side of a flying boat headed out of the wind is an embarrassing position, particularly if there is insufficient manuevering room to leeward.
Another point worth noting is that a seaplane taxiing downwind is treading a fine line, particularly in strong winds. With the winds dead astern, the plane moves along nicely. If the wind gets a little on the quarter, however, the plane will want to turn into the wind and the further it turns, the faster it will want to turn. The pilot must counteract this tendency quickly and with just the right amount of power. When a seaplane is taxiing downwind the direction of throw of the rudder is no indication of which way the plane will turn. If the plane has right rudder in and is taxiing downwind at a velocity less than that of the wind, the plane will turn left.
In normal seaplane operations, the greatest amount of maneuvering takes place as the plane is making a buoy in preparation for being pulled up a ramp from the water. The pilot as soon as possible after landing will clear the landing area and head for the buoy via the most direct route. While the ramps are usually far removed from the main anchorage, they always seem to be somewhere near where all small boats must pass.
When a seaplane is attempting to moor to a buoy, the best practice, regardless of the rules of the road, is to stay clear. This is true because of a number of reasons but they all hinge on one factor, the plane is operating in close proximity to the beach and if anything should go wrong during his approach to the buoy, the pilot’s first concern is to get back into deep water again. In doing this, he
may have to move fast; a lot faster than most small boats can move. It is the simplest thing in the world for a boat to be apparently clear only to find that one blast of a three thousand horsepower engine has put a flying boat on top of him.
If at all possible, the pilot will attempt to be headed into the wind as he makes his final approach to the buoy. He has two reasons for this; one, the plane’s natural tendency to weathercock is nearly uncontrollable at very slow speeds; and two, the wind on the bow helps slow the plane up further. Both these reasons are sufficiently important to make the pilot go through drastic maneuvers that to a spectator may seem reckless. This is particularly true when the wind is blowing dead on the ramp. To get into the wind the pilot must bring his plane very close to the ramp and then turn sharply into the wind.
This brings up another excellent reason for small boats to steer well shy of seaplanes making buoys. The floats on a large seaplane are about fifty feet from the fuselage. When the plane turns sharply, the wing float on the inside of the turn may move backward to the complete surprise of anyone in its vicinity, while the outboard float will whistle through the air like a battering ram. The author has witnessed one boat holed and sunk in just such a manner.
We mentioned rules of the road in passing. How about the seaplane and the rules of the road; what is the relation between boat and flying boat? The seaplane when taxiing on the water is considered the same as any other craft. There is no special consideration given her. When she is taking off or landing, how-
ever, all other craft will stay clear. The seaplane pilot is aware of this, but in his innate distrust of other mariners who, in his eyes, seem determined to get in his way, he is prepared to make certain evasive actions during the take-off run and during the landing run-out. Except for certain brief periods, the pilot can make minor heading changes to avoid collisions.
The rules of the road consider a seaplane to be no different from any other boat when operating on the water, but we have seen here that this is not exactly true. There are some pronounced differences, and they do matter. What then are some good rules to follow in supplementing the rules of the road? The author advances four general rules of good practice to follow in dealing with seaplanes:
1. Avoid getting close aboard a seaplane at anytime unless coming alongside.
2. Avoid getting into a position directly upwind of a seaplane headed out of the wind.
3. Never attempt to cross ahead of a seaplane landing or taking off.
4. Remember that the pilot’s visibility is nearly completely obstructed abaft the beam.
The first rule of good practice is self explanatory. The second rule might be expanded to recommend that all other things being equal, it is better to pass a seaplane to leeward than to windward. It is good to remember that in most cases when something is amiss in the seaplane, it will weathercock.
Rule three would not need to be mentioned except that there are still people who like to race freight trains to crossings.
The pilot has excellent visibility from the cockpit in the forward semi-circle. Abaft the beam, however, the engines, the wings, and the fuselage obstruct his vision almost completely. Ships or boats approaching from the quarter will seldom be seen by the pilot until they come forward of the beam. Likewise it is wishful thinking to expect a seaplane pilot to hear whistle signals. Under all but the most ideal conditions, his own engines drown out all outside noise. This all points to the fourth rule. When overtaking a seaplane on the water, the burdened ship should base all its actions on the assumption that the pilot has not seen the ship. Even if its presence has been reported to the pilot by an alert crewman, he will still not know its exact position until he can see the ship himself.
There is much more to learn about flying boats and their operations on the water. We have just touched lightly on some of the outstanding characteristics of the seaplane that affect its performance on the water, and in what manner they affect it.
Unmentioned are such problems as approaching a seaplane in a small boat, towing procedures, mooring problems, and rough water operation. These and many other details of operation will have to be mastered by all mariners as aviation once again takes to the runways that run around the world.
A-Weapons Get Smaller
By Mark S. Watson
Baltimore Sun, July 25, 1956.—American technology continues to make atomic destruction available in smaller packages, and thus permits a widening range of weapons which can be employed in so-called tactical warfare, as distinguished from the massive destroyers such as the H-bombs.
It now appears that the 8-inch howitzer, much used during World War II in fairly close support of our infantry, has taken on nuclear capability, along with the larger weapons previously announced—such as the 280-mm. gun (roughly 11 inches), the wide-mouthed Honest John launcher, and the longer range Corporal.
This is significant as a possible index of future army planning, for the 8-inch Howitzer’s accurate range is about 10 miles, or about half that of the 280-mm. gun. This would permit nuclear weapons in much closer support than formerly—possibly as close as is safe, because of radiological hazards in every nuclear explosion.
Still More Reduced
Further, it is of interest that technology which in less than a decade reduced the bulky A-bomb of 1945 to an 11-inch diameter (for the 280-mm. gun) now has reduced it, as predicted, to an 8-inch warhead. One can conjecture that as technology moves still further ahead it may produce a warhead in still smaller calibers, practicable for use by divisional as well as corps artillery.
The 8-inch howitzer itself is highly mobile, which makes it extremely useful for support fire of any type, whether with conventional °r nuclear warheads.
The increasing number of weapons capable of using atomic warheads now available to the Army must be recognized as a factor in all defense planning. Those now distributed to troops in overseas theaters have obviously provided each unit so equipped with a firepower markedly greater than formerly.
Long Been Factor
This has long been a factor in the movement toward smaller units and wider dispersal. That is, the total firepower per thousand men is much greater or, alternatively, a smaller number of men might provide the total firepower required.
On that reasoning, the new experimental division designed for maximum mobility and flexibility of performance is much smaller than the World War II type, yet possesses greater firepower. With an extension of that same reasoning, it is apparent, the Defense Department is considering a cut of personnel, both the time and the depth still being undetermined.
Such decisions are not determined solely fry technology’s power to produce constantly improved weapons. That is just one factor.
The state of foreign relations, as guessed at in advance, is a larger one.
Sweden and the Bomb[2]
By Hanson W. Baldwin
New York Times, August 3, 1956.— Sweden has no intention of abandoning her traditional neutrality. But Swedish defense experts want atomic bombs to help insure it.
Nuclear weapons and air power are now the chief issues in Swedish defense preparations. Many Swedish military and political leaders wish their country to have nuclear weapons to discourage any aggressor. They reason that aircraft have assumed more and more of the burden of repelling amphibious invasion; planes with a few atomic bombs could make such an invasion very expensive.
If the Soviet Union attacked Sweden, the Russians’ objective would be occupation and utilization of Swedish bases, territory and industries, not devastation and annihilation. Consequently nuclear weapons used against invading and occupying forces could make such an attack too expensive to be attractive.
This is the reasoning of some top Swedish leaders with whom this correspondent talked during a recent stop in Stockholm. These men would like to obtain nuclear weapons from the West; if this cannot be arranged they think Sweden can manufacture her own within five years.
However, this top opinion does not reflect public sentiment. There is pronounced neutralism and considerable apathy. The average Swedish young man, who knows that Sweden has kept out of the World Wars of this century, is apt to overestimate Sweden’s military strength. Most Swedes believe neutrality means life to their country; most would like to be friends with everybody. Most think Sweden will be able to stay out of any war.
Revisions Proposed in 1954
Swedish civil defense is much admired overseas, but there is considerable vagueness about it in Sweden. Most Swedes believe that local defense has little meaning in a nuclear war.
A Swedish general who recently warned of
Moscow’s “vodka and caviar offensive” was rapped on the knuckles. Most Swedes do not believe war is imminent and there is less fear of Russia than in former days.
Nevertheless, Sweden’s military forces are attempting to keep their powder dry and to modernize their arms and tactics.
In 1954, the Swedish Commander in Chief proposed an eight-year expansion and modernization plan (not yet adopted) that would increase annual expenditures for national defense from 2,335,000,000 kronor to
2.689.0. 000 kronor [the krona is valued at 19.35 cents] over the eight years.
The annual expenditures for national defense would represent 4.8 per cent of the estimated gross national product for the eight-year period. During this period the Swedish Army’s annual expenditure would be reduced from 911,000,000 kronor to
901.0. 000, and the Navy’s expenditure from 455,000,000 to 432,000,000 kronor, while the Swedish Air Force would increase its expenditure from 801,000,000 kronor to
1.057.0. 000 a year.
Actual numerical size of the forces would not increase to any extent, although a 25 per cent expansion of Swedish attack-plane strength is planned.
Modernization of the Air Force already has started. The Swedish SAAB factory has started deliveries of a new two-seat, radar- equipped attack plane, the SAAB A-32 Landsen. This plane, with all-weather capabilities, is replacing propeller-driven planes and also Sweden’s first jets, the attack version of the famous SAAB Flying Barrel.
The SAAB J-35 Draken, a twin-engine single-seater day fighter, is assuming the main interceptor burden. The British Hunter fighter has been purchased in some numbers. The Swedes plan to use guns, rockets and missiles in their aircraft.
Army and Navy Goals
A gradual reorganization of the Swedish Army also has started. The tactical trend is toward the formation of small brigades (regiments), each composed of three battalions, smaller than the present ones. Lighter and more mobile equipment, more firepower and fewer men are the objectives.
Each of the new battalions will have three rifle companies of about 150 men each, compared with the present 200-man rifle companies, and a support company.
The new Swedish armored brigade will have light tanks built in Sweden and the British Centurion, which has done well on Swedish terrain. New equipment will stress helicopters, an 80-mm. recoilless rifle, French 155-mm. guns, more cyclists. Bofors 40-mm. and 57-mm. anti-aircraft guns and radar.
The Swedish Navy is emphasizing light ships rather than cruisers, particularly destroyers, minesweepers and minelayers, and 44-knot motor torpedo boats. Three new 1,880-ton destroyers have been launched and a fourth will be launched next spring. Two big 3,000-tonners, the Holland and Smaland, have guided missile launching rails atop their torpedo tubes.
Underground ship pens have been built into the granite islands in the Stockholm Archipelago. The Swedish Navy’s defense plans are still based on high-speed, surface- to-surface night actions.
Sweden has some ingenious and advanced modern arms, but she wants the key weapon, the nuclear bomb.
Don’t Shoot, It’s Friendly
Lockheed News Bureau, August 9, 1956.— It looks like a flying saucer that captured an airplane.
That description fits a new early warning research plane which Lockheed Aircraft Corporation announced today it has built for the U. S. Navy to test advanced ideas in flying radar stations—those outposts against surprise attack.
Like nothing ever seen before, the new craft is a Navy WV-2 Super Constellation made bizarre by a huge, discus-shaped structure spreading over it like a parasol. This ellipsoid, measuring more than 30 feet across, is a radome which houses the experimental craft’s distance-determining radar antenna.
The new aircraft is one phase in development of a possible follow-on model for the Navy WV-2 airborne early warning planes now in quantity production and operation. It is powered by four turbo-compound piston engines.
First tests involve dashes down the run-
way at Lockheed Air Terminal, but no flight. These runs will evaluate aerodynamic characteristics of the disc and its effect, if any, on stability and control, according to M. Carl Haddon, Lockheed chief engineer.
After runway tests, the dome will be detached and trucked to Edwards Air Force Base. Meantime, the plane, its protuberances removed, will be flown to Edwards, and there the “flying flapjack” will be put back in place.
First flight test steps will be to check further on flight effects of the “parasite” radome. Later Lockheed and Navy engineers will concentrate on testing the craft’s electronics. '
“Designed to incorporate the latest improvements in electronic early warning devices, it is one more step by the Navy and Lockheed to keep the new field of airborne detection abreast of technological advances,” Haddon said.
Lockheed pioneered in early warning soon after World War II, developing the original PO-1W, based on a Constellation. Its success led to development of the larger, more ftiodern WV-2 and a similar plane, the RC- 121, employed by the Air Force in early Warning work.
WV-2s in quantity are now on duty with the Pacific and Atlantic fleets. They work with task forces on the high seas as sentinels and as combat information centers. Also they fly
over-the-ocean patrols as seaward extensions of the continental DEW-line of radar stations.
WV-2s and RC-121s carry up to 31 crewmen. Because of their long missions the Planes have galleys, berths for off-duty crews and their own repair shops.
Independent research conducted by Lockheed led to receipt of a Navy development contract for this latest aircraft more than a year ago.
U.S. Speeds Work on Spanish Bases[3]
By Herbert L. Matthews
New York Times, August 9, 1956.—A stretch of clear, dry weather since May 1 is carrying the builders of this greatest of the United States air bases in Spain over the hump.
Two abnormally wet winters had delayed the program to such an extent that the bases will not be ready even for emergency use until next spring. Completion had been planned originally for last March.
It will be the autumn of 1957 at least before the base, which is about fifteen miles northeast of Madrid, is really operational.
No one seems unduly upset by these delays. The air and naval bases are not being built in the crisis conditions that prevailed when United States bases were built in Morocco during the Korean war. No time is being lost unnecessarily but nothing is being pushed at the expense of quality or efficiency.
Of the four air bases under construction the one here is much the most important. It will be the biggest airport and the headquarters for United States Air Force personnel and corollary organizations.
There will be another large air base in Moron, near Seville, and twin air bases in Zaragoza. In San Pablo, also near Seville, a large supply and maintenance center will be built.
The Navy is building a combined seaport and airfield in Rota, seven miles north of Cadiz, on the Atlantic. Finally, there is to be a pipeline for oil and other fuels running diagonally across Spain 485 miles from Rota to Zaragoza.
It is a complicated program whose cost in the first phase will be $400,000,000. When it is finished the United States will have a striking force of its biggest planes less than
3,0 miles from the industrial heart of the Soviet Union and the United States Navy will have a base capable of handling supercarriers and other great warships at the entrance to the Mediterranean.
In the process Spain is losing her neutrality for the first time since the Napoleonic wars— and many Spaniards do not like that aspect of the program. United States officials realize the delicacy of their position and appear to have done everything possible to efface themselves and to avoid any impression of being an occupying force.
In Madrid, where the Americans now live, the officers seldom wear uniforms. Here in Torrejon, as at other bases, the commanding officer, at least nominally, will be Spanish. The operation is integrated from top to bottom, with United States and Spanish officers and civilians working together.
Spaniards have not forgotten the unfortunate remark of Harold E. Talbott, former Air Force Secretary, two and half years ago. At that time he said nobody was going to stop the United States from using the Spanish airfields in an emergency. The agreement with Spain merely provides that “the time and manner of wartime utilization of said areas and facilities will be as mutually agreed upon.”
It is a ten-year agreement starting Sept. 26, 1953, and renewable for two five-year periods. The United States is accepting, the risk that the regime that follows the present one will retain the alliances.
8,000 Vessels are Affected by Safety Rules
New York Times, July 23, 1956.—Eight thousand vessels carrying passengers will be affected by new regulations prepared by the United States Coast Guard. All will be on the safety lists for the first time, for in the past they have been immune from the inspection laws.
The regulations are to implement Public Law 519, passed by Congress this year to cover small vessels and certain other categories of water carriers. In the past, the law applied only minimum safety standards, but not inspection and certification, to small propelled vessels used for hire and to sailing vessels of 700 tons or less, even though they carried passengers.
Under the new rules inspection will be mandatory for mechanically propelled vessels of fifteen gross tons or less, vessels of fifteen to 100 gross tons if they are not longer than sixty-five feet and non-self-propelled vessels of 100 tons or less. The rules apply if these craft carry more than six passengers for hire.
The regulations are in draft form now, and will be published in The Federal Register this month. A public hearing on them will be held in Washington in September.
Helicopter Carrier Commissioned
Aviation Week, July 30, 1956.—Navy’s experimental first helicopter assault carrier, the former escort carrier Thetis Bay, has been recommissioned after an $8-million conversion at the San Francisco Naval Shipyard.
Thetis Bay represents a new concept of amphibious warfare brought about by the advent of nuclear weapons. Under a new Marine Corps doctrine of vertical envelopment, Thetis Bay and others like her would launch troops in helicopters at dispersed places 50 miles from a beachhead, eliminating bunched waves of landing craft and beachhead concentrations of support ships.
1,0 Marines
Twenty 8-man HRS-type helicopters and
1,0 Marines can be carried by the Thetis Bay, which will iron out the wrinkles in the new amphibious doctrine. Eventually a carrier will be built from the keel up as an assault carrier and equipped with larger, faster types of 15-20 man helicopters which are being built, the Navy says.
Most obvious change in the Thetis Bay is the installation of an elevator at the extreme aft end of the flight deck to allow room for the large helicopters under development.
The forward center line elevator was removed, and the forward section of the vessel was converted to troop berthing space, spare parts stowage and shops for servicing helicopters. Helicopters are parked in the remainder on the hangar deck and on most of the flight deck.
Access routes and hatches have been revamped to facilitate movement of troops from quarters to helicopter take-off positions °n the flight deck. The original gasoline installations for airplanes has been retained, but refueling stations on the deck have been changed for helicopter operations.
Non-essential or obsolete installations including catapults and arresting gear were removed to maintain the limiting draft of the vessel.
Living Space
Housekeeping changes were numerous. There had to be larger mess rooms, galleys, sculleries, laundry spaces and storerooms.
Cargo elevators had to be installed to bring up Marine ammunition and equipment stowed below. Gasoline drums for Marine trucks and jeeps are stowed forward below decks and are carried to the flight deck by a new elevator hoist.
Island structure was rearranged and re- ffluipped to adapt the pilot house and steer- 1[tg station for the combined, land, sea and air control requirements. Additional control rooms and electronic spaces on the galley deck augment island controls, and additional generator capacity was necessary for this gear.
Thetis Bay displaces 10,400 tons fully loaded, is 517 ft. long and will steam at about 18 kts. There will be a crew of 500 sailors
and 40 Navy officers aboard besides the Marine troops.
Atom Merchant Ship Scheduled to Be Operating Within 3 Years
By Charles E. Egan
New York Times, August 9, 1956.— The Government is scheduled to have a §40,000,000 atom-powered merchant vessel in operation within three years.
Clarence G. Morse, Federal Maritime Board Chairman, announced at a news conference. He outlined the §500,000,000 shipbuilding and repair program of his agency for the 1957 fiscal year which which started last July 1.
According to him, the atom-powered vessel can be in service within twenty-seven months if it is decided to use the same type of reactor as the one powering the Navy’s atomic submarine Nautilus.
The nuclear merchant vessel will be either a combination dry cargo and passenger vessel or a dry cargo type without accommodations for passengers, he said.
Bidding plans for the vessel should be ready by the end of the year, he added, and the keel should be laid next June.
“The limiting factor in getting the ship launched and into service is the type of atomic reactor which will be chosen for use,” Mr. Morse explained. “If the newest type is picked, it will delay completion of the ship for at least nine months.”
He stressed that the ship would be experimental. No decision has been reached yet whether she will be operated by the Government or on charter to a private line, or what sea routes she will ply, he said.
“This vessel will be built to find out whether atom-powered ships are financially feasible.” Mr. Morse added, “According to the experts, it will be ten years at least before economical reactors are available for ordinary merchant vessels. We hope to shave some time off that estimate.”
Escape Plans for Submarines
Manchester Guardian, July 26, 1956.— Present and future submarines are to be fitted with a new escape apparatus which operates from depths down to 200 ft. This
was announced in a written answer recently by Mr. G. R. Ward, Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty.
He stated that men trapped in a sunken submarine could escape in rapid succession in immersion suits by floating to the surface through canvas trunks which extend down into the submarine from escape hatches. A system for providing purified air to the men before they escape was built into the submarine.
New submarines are also to be fitted with a hatch at each end to which a rescue bell could be attached by rescuers working outside the vessel. The use of this method was limited, because it depended on the presence of a ship with a rescue bell, but it could be used at depths greater than 200 feet.
More extensive trials of the one-man escape chamber previously intended for new submarines had shown it to be inherently unreliable when needed. Its performance was, therefore, unlikely to match the weight and space requirements which it imposed, and further development of this device had been abandoned.
A spokesman of the Admiraly said recently that the new “B.I.B.S.” (built-in breathing system) method was first put into use by the United States Navy. The Admiralty’s experts had since experimented thoroughly, and the American system, with British improvements and modifications designed to meet the requirements of the Royal Navy, was now being generally adopted here.
Rockoons Aid in Solar Flare Study
Aviation Week, July 23, 1956.—Solar flare effects on radio frequency wave propagation are being studied by the Navy, using balloon- supported rockets called Rockoons. They have been launched from the USS Colonial (LSD-18) 200-400 miles west of San Diego, Calif., in preliminary research rocket firings for the International Geophysical Year.
Under direction of Dr. Herbert Friedman, Optics Division, Office of Naval Research, the series of ten firings began July 16 and will continue until July 30.
For each test a 12-ft. Deacon research rocket is sent aloft, usually in the morning, suspended from a 68-ft. diameter Skyhook balloon. The balloon takes the rocket to approximately 80,000 ft. Each rocket carries an instrument payload of 20 lb. and floats above the ocean before firing, awaiting detection of a solar flare by observers aboard the Colonial.
Solar flares rise to a maximum in minutes and NRL scientists using conventional rocket techniques have been hampered by the time taken to detect the flare, and to launch the rocket and wait for it to reach the altitude necessary for observations. The ship- controlled Rockoon technique will minimize the latter. It is expected that a minimum time-lag of 90 to 120 seconds between the decision to fire and the attainment of the required observational altitude can be achieved.
Once the balloon-rocket combination has been launched, the rocket is committed for firing within approximately 8 hours. The decision to fire is based on the occurrence of a
ULTRAVIOLET
X
detectable flare which can be expected about once every 50 hr. at this time of year.
Because of the relative unpredictability of flares, some firings probably will take place in the absence of flares and the results used for comparison.
Solar flares can be detected in two ways. One is sudden fadeout of medium- and shortwave radio receivers aboard the ship. A second method makes use of an optical telescope coupled to a closed-circuit television system.
The telescope has a red filter corresponding to the spectroscopic line of a solar hydrogen flare.
When decision to fire has been made, coded signals from a shipboard transmitter activate the research instruments in the nose of the rocket and energize the rocket igniter. As the rocket accelerates it shatters the plastic balloon and in the next 90 to 120 seconds is expected to attain an altitude of 60-70 miles. In its trajectory it telemeters to the observing station aboard the Colonial data on the strength of radiations from the flare.
The Deacons carry photon counters sensitive to radiation from the sun in three wavelengths; 1216 P angstroms, 1-10 angstroms, and 0.05-1 angstrom. These wave-lengths correspond to the Lyman-alpa line of hydrogen, X-rays, and soft gamma rays, respectively. These are believed to have independent but cumulative effects on the ionosphere.
During the International Geophysical Year, solar activity will reach a maximum. Physicists who specialize in upper atmosphere research are looking forward to exceptionally productive experiments.
Rocket and rocket-balloon combinations have been used by United States scientists f°r ten years in upper atmosphere research. The Rockoon technique was introduced about four years ago by Professor James A. Van Allen of the State University of Iowa in cooperation with Navy scientists.
The destroyer, USS Perkins, serves as support ship to the Colonial and tracks the Rockoons by radar. Navy patrol planes from San Diego are patrolling the area in which fhe rockets are likely to land as a shipping safety precaution.
The ballons are made by Winzen Research
Corp., Minneapolis, Minn., and have previously been used by the Navy and Air Force in the upper air probing. The Deacon rockets, a solid-propellant type, are manufactured by Allegheny Ballistic Laboratory of Cumberland, hid., operated by the Hercules Powder Co., for the Navy Bureau of Ordnance.
Underwater TV Camera Smallest Yet
British Information Services, August 6, 1956.—A new development in underwater television which is expected to have wide application in salvage operations, submarine engineering, marine biology, oceanography and, probably, in underwater intelligence in the event of another war, has been announced by Pye Ltd. of England.
This is a small hand-held underwater television camera—the smallest and least expensive yet produced, according to the makers. It enables diving operations to be effectively supervised from above the water by expert observers grouped around a large screen.
With accurate visual information displayed before them, and by means of underwater loudspeaker equipment (available as an accessory to the camera), intelligent direction can be given the diver. With a pair of divers operating on a complex project even better results can be obtained, since one can hold the camera while the other follows instructions from above.
Provision is made for pictures reproduced on the screen to be easily photographed.
The small version of the camera—a 12" sphere weighing 38 lbs. on land and buoyant in the water—is intended for operation down to a depth of 250 ft. However, to provide an adequate safety margin, the container has been designed to withstand a water pressure of 220 lbs. per sq. in., corresponding to a depth of 500 ft.
Two handles fitted to the spherical camera can be removed and replaced by weights or lamps so that the unit can, if required, be used without a diver.
All camera adjustments are carried out from the control unit above water; the diver’s only concern is to position the camera correctly. Electronically, the machine is similar to Pye’s industrial tv camera.
A larger version has also been designed to operate at depths down to 3,000 ft. This one, encased in an aluminum sphere 19" in diameter, is also weightless in water and can either be held in a diver’s hand, suspended by a cable from a moving ship, or propelled by an electrically-operated cradle.
There is therefore nothing, according to the makers, to prevent this camera being launched from a submerged submarine and operated by remote control. Presumably it could be of considerable service in surveying enemy underwater installations in wartime, as long as it could operate undetected. At the finish of an operation it can be withdrawn to a housing on the hull.
Electronic Sarah Proves Fliers Aid
New York Times, August 12, 1956.— Royal Canadian Air Force fliers are friendly with Sarah, and their wives and sweethearts don’t mind.
Sarah is no lady in fact, she’s only about the size of a lady’s wrist—but she can send a pulsating, piercing electronic distress cry to bring help to downed airmen. Sarah stands for Search and Rescue and Homing, a small but mighty device now being purchased by the RCAF.
The device’s key feature is a transmitter, or beacon, so small it can be clipped to a pilot’s lapel. It receives power from a flatshaped battery carried in a pocket. Electronic signals from the beacon are picked up visually as blips on a television-like screen in searching aircraft. The signals also indicate the stranded airman’s direction and distance.
“Sarah enables searching aircraft to see survivors of a crash in any kind of weather over an area of more than 100 miles from
10,0 feet,” saysK. R. Patrick, president of Canadian Aviation Electronics, Ltd.
This company is Canadian distributor of the British-make device. Mr. Patrick believes Sarah would have enormous value for Canadian Airlines and bush fliers operating over rugged terrain, especially in the north.
The device, developed by Ultra Electric, Ltd. of London, has received many field demonstrations. Its first “live” test came recently off Britain’s east coast when a Royal Air Force pilot parachuted into the water from a jet plane in thick fog and was rescued within ninety minutes with the aid of Sarah.
“A helicopter was able to home right to the pilot in the water despite the fog,” an RAF spokesman said.
The RCAF, responsible for direction of all search and rescue work in Canada, is buying
4,0 beacons and fifty airborne receivers at a cost of $800,000. First delivery was made in June of 200 beacons and twelve receivers.
The beacons will be issued to aircrew members and the receivers are being installed in aircraft assigned to Search and Rescue squadrons.
Main problem in the developing of Sarah was design, fashioning a unit of only 3^ pounds with power output of 15 watts. The device incorporates additional two-way voice communication of limited range. The cost of the beacon, without battery, is $150, and the airborne receiver, weighing twelve pounds, costs $2,000.
Airforce Ramjet Test Vehicle
Lockheed News Bureau, August 2, 1956.— A supersonic Lockheed test vehicle, which has played a major role in the development of powerful new engines for Air Research and Development Command ramjet missiles, was disclosed today. It is the X-7, designed and built by Lockheed’s Missile Systems division.
Details of the needle-nosed vehicle were revealed by Brig. Gen. Marvin C. Dernier, deputy commander for research and development of the Air Force’s Air Research and Development Command, in an address to the Air Force Association in New Orleans.
Although exact performance is classified, it was revealed after several years of secrecy that the X-7 flashes through the stratosphere in level flight at speeds well beyond the velocity of sound.
According to Lockheed’s missile scientists, the X-7, while not the first to use ramjet engines, is making important contributions to the development of the ramjet principle as a dependable new source of missile power.
Ramjets, considered the ultimate inducted-jet engines for guided missiles, are comparatively simple devices that give tremendous power at high speeds. Unlike conventional jet engines, the “flying stove-
pipes” have no compressors or other moving parts and depend upon their own high speed to compress their air intake. Generally speaking, the faster they go the better they operate—without the limiting factors, such as compressor speeds and heat, that limit conventional jets.
In describing the operation of the X-7, General Demler told an Air Force Association audience that the test vehicle is taken aloft by a B-29 and then launched.
“A rocket booster drives it up to the speed where the ramjet operates efficiently and takes over to accelerate the vehicle,” Demler declared. “The supersonic vehicles are recovered by parachute and will be used again for future test flights.
Polar Hops to Aid Fairbanks?
By Jerome F. Sheldon
Christian Science Monitor, July 31, 1956.— Scandinavian airlines flying over the North Pole soon may be making Fairbanks a crossroads in the Far North for travel between Europe and Asia.
For the past three years, the Scandinavian Airlines System has been testing its transpolar route with charter flights that have visited Alaska.
Big Douglas planes of the SAS have been flying from Sweden and Norway to Tokyo, directly over the pole, and have dropped
down at Fairbanks to refuel.
These have been in the nature of test flights, but they have carried pay loads, too. This year, the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra was flown to Japan for a series of concerts. During a one-hour refueling stop in Fairbanks, the musicians were entertained at the International Airport by Eskimo dancers and a night club singer, standard entertainment in Fairbanks.
Japanese Make Flight
When the SAS plane returned to Europe a few days later with its crew, it carried the first Japanese ever to fly over the North Pole. They were Chonosuke Hyodo of SAS’ Tokyo staff, and Kiyomi Ichikawa of the Japanese Civil Aeronautics Board.
The Chambers of Commerce of both Fairbanks and Anchorage are in active competition for the traffic rights of SAS for their respective cities, which would mean SAS could pick up and discharge Alaska passengers on this run.
Anchorage only recently was granted the refueling rights for SAS.
The Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce is working for federal funds to lengthen the Fairbanks airport runway so SAS might choose Fairbanks as its Alaskan stop.
For almost two years SAS has been flying from Los Angeles to Copenhagen by way of northern Canada and Greenland. The Scandinavians, in Viking tradition, pioneered this new Arctic route to Europe, as well as the transpolar flights.
Canadian Pacific Airlines since has opened a similar route to Europe from Vancouver, and Pan American World Airways is seeking other West Coast terminals for such service to Europe.
Edge in Experience
SAS has the edge, however, in transpolar flying experience as a commercial carrier. Picked crews of Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians have come here on charter flights. The planes have visited Anchorage as well as Fairbanks, and Alaska’s big military fields for familiarization purposes. A charter flight in one direction, to Tokyo, pays for an exploratory flight for the crew returning to Europe.
SAS’s chief polar technical pilot, Capt. Goran Lind of Stockholm, in addition to making every polar flight to Alaska, has visited possible alternate landing fields in the Arctic. Einar Peterson, chief navigator, has studied polar navigation problems at the University of Alaska’s Geophysical Institute in Fairbanks. Alan Innes-Taylor of Fairbanks and Eagle, Alaska, recognized Arctic expert, has also traveled the transpolar route with SAS and lectured to the crews in Stockholm on Arctic survival.
SAS officials are reported to favor Fairbanks as their Alaskan refueling stop, because they could carry six additional passengers in place of the fuel load required for flying on to Anchorage, an hour and a half farther south.
Fairbanks has better flying weather, with more clear days than Anchorage.
Anchorage Runway Longer
But Anchorage has better hotel facilities and greater population from which to derive future traffic.
The runway at Anchorage is longer and can safely accommodate the long-range propeller-driven DC’7s which will start the service next October, and the jet-powered DC-8s due in 1958.
The airports at both Anchorage and Fairbanks are owned and operated by the federal government through the Civil Aeronautics Administration.
Fairbanks is seeking federal money to lengthen the Fairbanks runway, but this can only come through congressional appropriation. Because the Air Force is helping by designating the Fairbanks airport an auxiliary field to Ladd Air Force Base, military funds may be available.
Last year SAS applied to the United States Government for full traffic rights between Alaska and Europe. So far, these have not been granted.
The State Department and Civil Aeronautics Board in far-away Washington, D.C. say no American carrier has as yet been granted reciprocal rights in Europe.
Traffic Rights Question
No American carrier is interested in this route right now, although some other European carriers have been reportedly studying
the transpolar route.
Robert B. Atwood, Anchorage publisher who toured Europe this spring and flew by SAS from Los Angeles, before the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce challenged the State Department claim that Alaska would produce insufficient traffic for SAS. Mr. Atwood points out that 40 per cent of the population of Alaska is of Scandinavian descent.
Furthermore, Alaska has climate and agricultural and industrial problems in common with the Scandinavian countries.
However, the question of traffic rights from Alaska to Japan has not come up. An American carrier, Northwest Orient Airlines, has this service.
Until the question of traffic rights is settled, Alaska will be only a “fuel pump” on this transpolar trade route.
But for world air travelers, the International Airport in either city may become as familiar as Orly Field in Paris or Piarco Airport in Trinidad.
Japan’s Antarctic Survey Plans
London Times, July 16, 1956.—Eighty- three scientists and engineers are to take part in the Japanese Antarctic expedition which is being organized for the international geophysical year of 1957-58. According to detailed plans issued recently, the 2,200-ton expedition ship Soya Maru, a converted coastguard and lighthouse supply ship, will leave for Prince Harald Land next November, with an advance party of 53 to set up an observation base there.
The preliminary survey and the construction of the base camp are expected to be completed by the end of February, 1957, and full-scale observations will be made in cooperation with the other 11 nations taking part in the survey. The main party of 30 will leave Japan in November, 1957, and will remain in the Antarctic for about a year.
This will be Japan’s first major venture into the Antarctic. Apart from commercial whaling activities, the only previous expedition was in 1912, when Lieutenant Nobu Shirase arrived there in the steam-assisted schooner Kainan Maru, without a scientist on board.
The Japanese expedition will be led by Dr. Takeshi Nagata, aged 42.
[1] Following his 1951 graduation from the Naval Academy, Lieutenant Danis became a naval aviator and served in a patrol squadron based in Trinidad. He is currently attached to the Fleet Airborne Electronics Unit at Norfolk.
[2] See page 1007, September, 1956 Proceedings.
[3] See page 787, July, 1956 Proceedings.