Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-12-22

| the stricken VeSSel?" And 1t is fur-
Their asked: "If the Navy Department
does not want to adopt the safety de-
vices of other ,navies, why does it not
| improve them or devise others to take
their placer"
Since the sinking of the Ssh on
September 25, 1925, 1 have been pound
ing the Navy Department to submit
to Congress an estimate for the con-
struction of salvage vessels such as
are provided in the navies of Germany,
France and italy. I have also urged
the installation Of telephone signal
buoys to be released when a subma-
rine founders and which will instantly
indicate it's position and permit tele-
phone communication with the crew.
Favors Graphing Rings.
have also urged the installation of
graphing rings to be permanently af-
fixed to the bulls of submarines to en-
able the divers to Immediately hook
on the lifting chains, instead of cling
ing to the present barbarous, clumsy
and obsolete method of sending divers
down to founder around in the mud
and silt of the bottom, blowing tunnels
under the sunken vessels through
which chains can be passed and slung
around it to enable it to be raised.
These three suggestions are not
mere speculation-they refer to ap-
proved and well tested devices.
The Navy's answers to these sug-
gestions appear in The Washington
Star of December 20. Whoever is re-
sponsible for the statement says that
the signal marker buoys were at one
time installed in all submarines" and
then proceeds to say that sowing to
the danger Of their accidental release,
due to the shock of depth charges, or
other causes, all marker buoys were
removed from all submarines during
the World War"
Such guileleSs simplicity or stu
pidity seems inconceivable! Why was
it necessary to entirely remove them?
Could they not have been battened
down in time of war, so that when
peace came they could be restored to
operation? And when the war was
over why were they not replaced?
Were they still afraid of the shock of
depth charges in times of peace or did
they just forget?
Suggests Electric Alarm.
But even in time of war there was
no excuse to entirely remove these
valuable adjuncts. Any electrician in
the Navy could, nj few hours. insert
in the deck housing of the buoy a
spring electric contact which would
Immediately disclose in the control
room the escape of the buoy and even
announce the fact by the ringing of
bell.
AS to graphing rings, suggested
this device in July, 1906 after the
sinking Of the French submarine Far
fadet. The Navy defenders say that
all submarines were formerly equipped
with these devices, but he goes on to
say, lowing to the large size of the
present submarines, it is not consid-
cred practicable to lift them by means
Of a limited number of lifting eyes
secured to the hull" But why should
they be limited? Division of weight
divides the strain on the lifting chains
Why not put on eight or ten or
twelve?
When I criticized this neglect in a
speech in the House on January 20,
1926, while the poor S51 lay stuck in
the mud for months off Block Island,
some wiseacre in the Navy gave as an
excuse that lifting eyes bolted to the
hull of the modern heavy submarines
would tear out under the strain and
rip the hull open.
Steel Belts Proposed.
replied to this that no intelligent
mechanic would ever think of riveting
such an eve bolt to the hull Of such
heavy vessels and suggested the weld
ing of broad steel bands or belts at in
tervals around the hull and connect
the graphing rings or eye bolts to
them. My suggestion was published
in the Army and Navy Journal and |
continued: "Such band or belt would
take the strain off the hull and obv1ate
the necessity of pottering around in
the mud to sling chains around a
vessel 20 or 80 fathoms Deep"
The Ssh was sunk on September 20,
1925. Two separate attempts were
made to raise it. She was not even
tually raised until July 5, 1926--nearly
10 months afterwards-at the loss OF
tens of thousands of dollars and dis
tracing from their duties over IL yes.
sells and their crews aggregating over
600 men. One would imagine that
the waste of such time and money
not to speak Of the loss of 33 brave
sailors-would have stimulated, even
a hide-bound bureaucrat, to some
effort to bring our Navy up to date in
it's humane side-as we all hope it is
in it's destructive side.
The article I am addressing myself
to makes no pretense whatever of
answering my suggestion that the
Navy demand of Congress the author
ity to provide itself with salvage ves-
sells of the special design used in the
navies of Germany, France and Italy;
but Admiral Richard H. Leigh, chief
S~R srrnfs 10. fc tod To- % Ar
days papers as saying 1.-The Navy De
partment had several salvage craft at
New London Conn.,, at the time and
enough were at the scene by Sunday
morning to begin rescue operations at
once had not the New England gale
made such work impossible"
Criticize Navy Explanation.
That, of course, is somewhat of ar
exaggeration. If the so-called "sal
| wage vessels" were on the spot on Sun
| day morning and ready to begin op
| erations" (36 hours after the disaster)
how could they do anything withou
the pontoons, which did not arrive
from the Brooklyn Navy Yard unit
Monday night (three days after the
disaster), and which even then could
not be towed TO the scene and were
|
And in the meantime our poor sailor.
were penned in the dark chamber o.
death anxiously awaiting the relief O.
| death!
How can human beings be 81
callous or so obstinate as to refus'
| to try all means to avert or at leas
mitigate such cruelty to men t,
| whom the country owes so much?
If the salvage vessels of which the
distinguished admiral speaks wer,
really and truly salvage vessels al
the term is understood in other naviel
they would be equipped with and al
| ways have at hand the necessary pom
toons. But If the submarines hat
the graphing rings or eye bolts,
have above referred to, the stupid
clumsy pontoons would not be neces
sary. The whole operation Of lifting