UNDERSEA Q
U
A
R
T
E
R
L
Y
THE NEWSLETTER OF THE NAVAL UNDERSEA MUSEUM FOUNDATION
FALL QUARTER 2013
In This Issue...............Page History of the Howell Torpedo.... ............................................. 1, 12 2013 Contributors. ................2-3 President’s Message................. 3 Volunteer Contributor. Mining in the Russo-Japanese War.......4-5 Volunteer Contributor. Mark 6 Magnetic Influence Exploder...... ...............................................6-10 Volunteer Contributor. A Bit of Diving History. Browne Dress Clamp........................................ 11 Meet Your Volunteers. Bob Paul .................................................. 13
HISTORY OF THE HOWELL TORPEDO Reprinted with permission from the Naval History & Heritage Command In 1883, when Congress appropriated funding to purchase automobile or self-propelled torpedoes, the Navy issued a public solicitation for concepts and to conduct a competitive evaluation. The specification required each competitor to build an experimental model at his own expense and demonstrate it to the Navy Torpedo Board for evaluation. The Navy received three proposals. The American Torpedo Company and Asa Weeks both proposed surface-running, rocket-powered torpedoes. LCDR John Howell, USN, proposed an ingeniously designed flywheelpowered brass torpedo. A 132-pound flywheel, spun up to 10,000 rpm by a steam turbine, provided the stored energy to move the torpedo through the water. This means of propulsion outperformed all others for the next thirty years. The flywheel also acted as a gyroscope, keeping the torpedo on its lateral course. The torpedo was 11 feet long, 14 inches in diameter, and weighed about 500 lbs. It could be launched from either above water or submerged torpedo tubes. The Howell attained a speed of 26 knots for 400 yards with great accuracy. It could be set to maintain a desired depth and explode upon contact with its target.
In Memoriam. Charles Meeker.14 Personnel Directory................ 14 Schedule of Events................. 14 Museum Store.......................... 16
navalunderseamuseum.org
HOWELL TORPEDO ON DISPLAY AT NUM CONTINUED ON PAGE 12
2 FALL QUARTER 2013 UNDERSEA Quarterly
FALL 2013 Volume 17, Number 3 Undersea Quarterly is the newsletter of the Naval Undersea Museum Foundation. It is published quarterly by the Naval Undersea Museum Foundation in Keyport, Washington. The Naval Undersea Museum Foundation is a private, nonprofit, charitable corporation dedicated to supporting the Naval Undersea Museum. The foundation is not a part of nor sponsored by the Department of Defense or the U.S. Navy, which operates the museum. Navy Region Northwest Naval Undersea Museum 1103 Hunley Road Silverdale, Washington 98315-1103 360/396-4148 Fax: 360/396-7944 Director: Mrs. Lindy Dosher; Education: Vacant; Curator: Mrs. Mary Ryan; Exhibits: Vacant Collection Management: Mrs. Jennifer Heinzelman and Mrs. Lorraine Scott.; Operations Manager: Mrs. Olivia Wilson; Facilities/ Data Entry: US Navy personnel Naval Undersea Museum Foundation P.O. Box 408 Keyport, Washington 98345 360/697-1129 President: RADM Bruce A. Harlow, JAGC, USN (Ret); Executive VicePresident, West: Vacant; Secretary/ Treasurer: Ms. Bettye J. Shifrin; General Counsel: John A. Bishop; Trustees: Mr. Robert Anderson; Mr. John A. Bogen; CAPT Larry Carter, USN (Ret); Mr. Donald Chalupka; RADM George W. Davis, VI, USN (Ret); RDML Craig Dorman, USN (Ret); Mr. Alfred V. Gangnes; RADM Bruce Harlow, JAGC, USN (Ret); CAPT Robert Hoag, USN (Ret); CAPT Ronald Krell, USN (Ret); CAPT Michael Mathews, USN (Ret); Mr. Bruce Riggins; Vice Presidents: Mr. Theodore Barreaux; Mr. Alan Beam; Mr. Will Lent; Dr. Wayne Sandstrom; CAPT Charles Wilbur, USN (Ret) Executive Assistant: Ms. Bettye Shifrin Museum Store Manager: Mrs. Daina Birnbaums Undersea Quarterly Editor: Ms. Bettye Shifrin Mailing/Membership: Mr. John Bogen Printing: Kitsap Printing Printed on recycled paper Š 2013 NUMF
QUARTERLY
2013 CONTRIBUTORS
The Foundation gratefully acknowledges contributions made in 2013 to the museum by individuals, businesses or other organizations. Foundation Associate RADM Herbert M. Bridge, USNR (Ret) and Ms. Edie Hilliard Dr. & Mrs. Wayne M. Sandstrom Mr. James R. Sisley Patron Mr. Robert L Cannon RADM & Mrs. George W. Davis, USN (Ret) Mr. & Mrs. Paul S. Thiebaud Provider Seat in the Future CDR John Alden, USN (Ret) Mrs. Patt Hannan Mr. Thomas Berg Dennis and Patt Hannan Dr. & Mrs. Jaap W. Boosman Pearl Harbor Survivors Mr. Charles G. Brunnquell CAPT Charles H. Wilbur, USN Mr. Robert C. Burritt In recognition of William Galvani Mr. Roy D. Carter Benefactor Mr. & Mrs. Clifford L. Clark Mr. & Mrs. John H. Dalton Mr. & Mrs. Lewis Coleman Mr. John C. Dimmer CAPT & Mrs. Robert Davis, USN (Ret) Mr. & Mrs. Thomas L. Lewis LCDR R. A. Dungan Builder Mr. Brett S. Dungan RADM Robert L. Baker, USN (Ret) Mr. James J. Green Michael P. Berman Mr. William D. Hahn Mr. & Mrs. Burton O. Boyd Mr. & Mrs. Marwin E. Holm Dr. Anna H. Chavelle, M.D. Mr. & Mrs. George W. Hooper Mr. John Csirke Mr. Nick F. Ierise CAPT Jack G. Fletcher, USN (Ret) Mr. Lawrence S. Justason Ms. Elise Gillette Mr. William J. Keiderling Mr. & Mrs. Morton O. Heinrich Mr. Ernest LeVon Mr. Richard D. Helander Mr. & Mrs. Ernest H. Linger Ms. Susan Kuehne Mr. John C. Lynch Mr. Robert J. Kuehne RADM WH Langenberg, USNR (Ret) CAPT & Mrs. TM Mahony, USN (Ret) CDR R. Bruce McComb Mrs. Amanda Loveless CDR Richard C. McCrory, USNR (Ret) CAPT Stanley Marks, USN (Ret) Mr. & Mrs. Larry J. Porter Mr. & Mrs. Rodney L. Mash Mr. & Mrs. Dwight E. Roof Mr. & Mrs. Clarence Moore Ms. Katie Sell Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Riggins Ms. Helen Langer Smith Ms. Ann Sisley LT Thomas N. Thompson, USN (Ret) Mr. G.E. Thornton CAPT & Mrs. D. C. Welling, USN Mr. James Vorosmarti Mr. Ray W. Whitmore CAPT Charles H. Wilbur, USN Dr. & Mrs. Charles R. Zentner CAPT Christos Zirps, USN (Ret)
Levels of Giving Foundation Associates: $1000+ Seat-in-the-Future: $500 each Patrons: $500-$999 Benefactors: $250-$499 Builders: $100-$249 Providers: $25-$99
3 FALL QUARTER 2013 From the President...
QUARTERLY Bruce Harlow
VOLUNTEER CONTRIBUTORS
The Foundation is fortunate to have talented and experienced volunteers. This issue of the Undersea Quarterly is another example of the scholarly efforts that these dedicated people provide. In the recent past, we have been privileged to read the writings of Larry Tucker, Darlene Iskra and William Gluth. The next few issues will give us the opportunity to read the excerpted version of a report prepared by Charles Gunderson and Jerry Anderson on the Mark 6 Magnetic Influence Exploder. The original report is over seventy-three pages long and we appreciate Charles’ taking his time and efforts to reduce this report down to an article that can be published in our newsletter. The complete report, by the way, is available in the Museum Library. By way of introduction, Charles R. Gundersen is a retired Mechanical Engineer, with 25 years of experience in providing test and evaluation services for the Navy’s latest torpedoes as they progressed through technical and operational evaluation. While at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Keyport, he specialized in the development of acoustic tracking systems that provided intercept plots of test torpedoes during their terminal homing maneuvers against target vehicles, both on and off the Navy’s instrumented tracking ranges. He is the author of three technical reports: (1) The History of the Naval Torpedo Tracking Ranges at Keyport, (2) The Pre-Torpedo Era, Inventions and U.S. Patents, and (3) Ordnance Recovery Operations Using Kedge Wire Control. Mr. Gundersen earned his Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering and Master of Science in Engineering degrees from the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. He attained the rank of Commander as an Engineering Duty Officer during his 31-year career in the U.S. Naval Reserve.
Currently, he volunteers in the Curator’s office at the Museum. Jerry E. Armstrong is a retired Physicist/Electronic Engineer, with 28 years of experience in the design of underwater tracking systems. The first eight years were at the Carr Inlet Acoustic facility located in the waters off Fox Island, Washington, where he processed run data and developed several computer controlled data processing systems. The final acoustic system he developed for this facility was the U.S. Navy’s first real-time acoustic signature measuring system. He spent the last 20 years at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Keyport designing and building portable tracking systems used to test torpedoes. These systems were either bottom mounted with Radio Frequency (wireless) communication links or submarine mounted for terminal homing analysis. Mr. Armstrong earned his Bachelor of Science in Physics from the University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Washington. Prior to working in underwater tracking he worked for the University of Hawaii, Department of Astrophysics, doing survey work to measure the optical clarity and image stability of celestial objects. One major project was the site survey for a Solar Telescope. As a follow-on effort he was one of two scientists who began a solar observatory program at a new night time Optical Observatory that is now located on the peak of Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii. Thank you all for taking the time and effort to make our newsletter a valuable and relevant publication. BRUCE HARLOW
Gifts in Kind Newsletter Team -John Bogen -Joe Ekstedt -Frank Hutson -Dick Levon -Art Schrom
Exterior Planters -Caroline Hoag -Bremerton Garden Club Professional Services -Kathie Barbaro, CPA The Volunteer Staff Foundation Board Members
Newsletter Contributors -Jerry E. Armstrong -Bill Gluth -Charles Gunderson -Darlene Iskra -Larry Tucker
4 FALL QUARTER 2013 GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
QUARTERLY
DARLENE ISKRA
MINING IN THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR 1904 The Russo-Japanese War, which broke out in February 1904, saw the first extensive use of independent or open-sea mining. At the very outset of the war, Russian naval strength in the East was seriously reduced as a result of attacks by Japanese torpedo boats, so the Russians mined the entrance to Talienwan Bay to cover the approaches to the port of Dalny, and laid observation (controlled) mines for the protection of Port Arthur. In the second week of April, 1904, the Japanese succeeded in bringing off a brilliant minelaying coup. A mixed force of minelaying craft, including destroyers and torpedo-boats, laid mines off Port Arthur. Their movements were screened by a dummy torpedo attack, but were in fact observed and plotted by the Russians. On the following day, the Russian fleet was lured to sea by a decoy squadron, towards the main Japanese fleet which was out of sight below the horizon. The Japanese fleet revealed itself once the Russians were lured into a position where they would probably encounter the Japanese mine-fields while returning to port. The Russians decided not to fight, and returned to port, but in the excitement of the day presumably forgot about the minefield they had observed being laid during the previous night. The 11,000 ton Russian flagship Petropavlovsk struck what was believed to be a cluster of three moored mines and sank immediately with heavy loss of life. The 13,000 ton battleship Pobieda was also severely damaged, but succeeded in reaching the port. The controlled mine defenses at Port Arthur came into action in May when the Japanese attempted to sink blockships in the entrance. Several passed through the gap in safety, but others were sunk, presumably by mines, although they may have been scuttled by the Japanese thinking they had penetrated further into the harbor than was actually the case. Later that same month, the Japanese lost several battleships involved in the blockade of Port Arthur, when a minefield was laid in the area traversed by the blockading ships. The Japanese subsequently carried out some rather hazardous mine-sweeping operations in this area, but this did not prevent three more cruisers from being mined. It is believed that at least one of these disasters was due to the Russians altering the positions of the buoys laid by the Japanese to mark the swept area. In June, the 11,000 ton Russian battleship Sevastopol was damaged by a mine as she proceeded to sea to counter the activities of the Japanese cruisers operating off Port Arthur. She suffered a similar fate in September of the same year. The Japanese also laid a large number of mines off Vladivostok before proceeding to intercept the Russian Baltic squadron approaching from the south. The Russian cruiser Gromoboi was damaged by one of these mines.
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
5 FALL QUARTER 2013 CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE
MINING IN THE RUSSOJAPANESE WAR 1904 The Japanese also employed numerous picket boats and other small craft in numerous minelaying sorties off Port Arthur. The area became an arena for the battle between the opposing mine laying and mine sweeping forces. In all, Japan lost two battleships, four cruisers, two destroyers, one torpedo boat and one minelayer totaling about 40,000 tons; while the Russians lost one battleship, one cruiser, two destroyers, one torpedo boat and one gunboat, approximately 22,000 tons. This was a formidable debut for the independent mine laid in the open sea, which highlighted its operational value. As a result, interest in the development of mines and minesweeping was revived. On the other hand, due to the hazards and haphazardness of minesweeping technology of the time, the question of the legality of open sea mining was raised, particularly with regard to the safety and rights of neutral shipping. This was hotly debated in the Hague Peace Conference in 1907, which was convened in 1907 at the initiative of President Theodore Roosevelt, and dealt with arms control and limitation of the size of naval forces. Much like arms talks of today, little was accomplished. DARLENE ISKRA BIBLIOGRAPHY Cowie, J.S. MINES, MINELAYERS AND MINELAYING. London, Oxford University Press, 1949. Ferrand, M.C. “Torpedo and Mine Effects in the Russo-Japanese War”, translated by Philip R. Alger. U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings 33 (December 1907): 1479-86. Melia, Tamara Moser “DAMN THE TORPEDOS” A SHORT HISTORY OF U.S. NAVAL MINE COUNTERMEASURES, 1777-1991. Naval Historical Center, Department of the Navy, Washington, DC THE ARTICLE TO THE RIGHT WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN 1904 IN THE NEW YORK TIMES.
QUARTERLY
QUARTERLY 6 FALL QUARTER 2013 GUEST CONTRIBUTORS CHARLES GUNDERSEN AND JERRY ARMSTRONG The following article is an excerpt from the report:
THE MARK 6 MAGNETIC INFLUENCE EXPLODER, A LITTLE PREMATURE. Charles R. Gundersen & Jerry E. Armstrong, April 26, 2012. Published by the Naval Undersea Museum
Drawing title: Mk 6 - 2A & B Exploder, Schematic Diagram Ordnance Drawing Number: 352833. Release Date: August 14, 1943 FIGURE 1. EXPLODER CIRCUIT DRAWING
Introduction Two Mark 6 Exploder drawings for the Mark 14 Torpedo were discovered in the Naval Undersea Museum library during the course of some volunteer work in 2011. The thought immediately came to mind: could these drawings show the details of the errant Magnetic Influence Exploder? Might these drawing help explain the poor performance of the exploder? That infamous piece of hardware sure plagued our submarine force during the early part of World War II in the Pacific. And may have caused the war to be needlessly extended and led to the destruction of some of our submarines. Early on the exploder’s behavior was so poor that only one ship out of the 80-ship invasion fleet was sunk by U.S. Navy submarines in their vain effort to disrupt the Japanese invasion of the Philippine Islands in December 1941.1 The first drawing, Mk 6-2A & B Exploder Schematic Diag. (Ordnance Drawing Number 352833), shows the electric circuit of the exploder. The second drawing, Wiring Layout Mk 6-2A & 6-2B Exploder (Ordnance Drawing Number 310311), shows the layout of the circuit components. Both drawings were prepared by the Naval Torpedo Station, Newport, Rhode Island, and released on August 14, 1943. The electronic details of these drawings are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Figure 3 shows the location of the exploder within the torpedo’s warhead. Advantages of Magnetic Influence as a Torpedo Exploder As a passive device the Mark 6 Exploder did not emit any type of search signal into the water. It relied on the target’s own magnetic field and on how that field interacted with the earth’s magnetic field (the superposition of the two fields). As a proximity fuze it was not supposed to touch the target ship’s hull in order to explode. Such a fuze would be invaluable in a number of situations. It could counter the increasing armor plating used on capital ships to strengthen their sides against torpedo attacks by allowing a torpedo to explode under the hull at the keel, in an attempt to produce
1 Anthony Newpower, Iron Men and Tin Fish, The Race to Build a Better Torpedo During World War II (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2006), 108.
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
7 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
CONTINUEDFROM PREVIOUS PAGE
THE MARK 6 MAGNETIC INFLUENCE EXPLODER Drawing title: Wiring Layout, Mk 6-2A and 6-2B Exploder Ordnance Drawing Number: 310311. Release Date: August 14, 1943 FIGURE 2. EXPLODER LAYOUT DRAWING
major damage to the vulnerable underbelly of a ship. The target’s effective size just became larger as the torpedo was designed to explode anywhere between the waterline and a point about 10 feet below the keel. Fewer torpedoes would be expended as it was thought that only one torpedo was necessary to break the back of the warship. The expenditure of fewer torpedoes was also desired due to the shortage of torpedoes early in the war. Also a detonation at a very vulnerable location would help compensate for the Mark 14’s relatively small warhead. The Magnetic Influence Exploder Circuit and Components Much has been written about the Mark 14 Torpedo and its Mark 6 Exploder, but so far the authors have found very little regarding the details of the circuit, a diagram of the circuit, or an explanation tying the circuit to the failure modes. This paper will address these issues and concentrate on what has been called the “hypersensitive magnetic influence exploder.”2 We will not discuss the political aspects surrounding the exploder (such as the obscene level of security), torpedo shortages and production problems, submarine crew performance, nor operational deployments. Likewise, neither of
2
Mary Anne Cowell and Edward C. Whitman, “Newport and Navy Torpedoes – An Enduring Legacy,” Undersea Warfare. The Official Magazine of the U.S. Submarine Force Vol. 2, No. 3 (Spring 2000).
the other two well-known problems, depth sensor error and duds, are within our scope. The principal subject of this paper is the electrical circuit involved in the magnetic influence feature, a feature that continuously monitored the earth’s magnetic field looking for significant and abrupt deviations in that field (caused by the passage of the target ship). When such a deviation was found, a pulse of electrical energy was sent to a solenoid. The reaction of the solenoid to the current pulse was to set free the firing pin to start the warhead’s explosive train. The two circuit diagrams of Figures 1 and 2 can be used to explain how the device operated once the torpedo was armed. When operating, an electrical current, smoothed by the voltage regulator and free of noise, was sent through a Grid Bias Resistor to a Pick-Up Coil (an induction coil). As the torpedo sped through the water on its way to the target, the Pick-Up Coil inductor was exposed to the earth’s magnetic flux lines, and as it swept through this field the coil produced a small fluctuating voltage, due to small variations in the earth’s magnetic field. Once the torpedo reached a point near the target’s hull where the magnetic field was influenced by the additional iron and steel from the target’s hull, the combined field would abruptly change in direction and intensity. The Pick-Up Coil would sense this disturbance in the earth’s magnetic field intensity and would respond by increasing the amplitude CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
8 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE
THE MARK 6 MAGNETIC INFLUENCE EXPLODER
FIGURE 3. LOCATION OF MARK 6 MAGNETIC INFLUENCE EXPLODER IN MARK 14 TORPEDO
of its output voltage. When the voltage output reached a pre-determined level, the Thyratron Tube switched on and current flowed up to the solenoid. This action set in motion the explosive train leading to warhead detonation. Other parts of this circuit include the Delay Switch, an arming feature, which prevented the electric circuit from functioning until the torpedo was a safe distance from the firing submarine. Without this arming system to delay activation of the exploder, the residual launch dynamics and any sudden course or depth change would introduce rapid yaw and heave motions that could set off the exploder. It was the function of the Delay Switch to prevent the exploder from operating electrically during this time of rapid vertical or lateral motion. During the first 450 yards of travel, out to the arming distance, the Delay Switch was in the closed position. While in this closed position a direct short circuit to ground was created from the high end of the Generator. This short circuit prevented current from flowing to the magnetic influence features of the exploder. Upon reaching the arming distance, the Delay Switch opened to remove the short circuit to ground and re-directed the current toward the exploder’s electric circuit. A few seconds later the electronic tubes were warmed up to their operating temperature and the exploder was ready to fire. A direct current (DC) Generator (driven by a 15-blade water wheel) provided electrical power to run the exploder. This generator provided
both the high and low voltage currents as the generator’s armature had two sets of windings and commutators, one set at each end. The low voltage end of the Generator was not subject to any action by the Delay Switch and began to supply low voltage (but high current) electrical power immediately after launch; the power went directly to the Thyratron Tube amplifier to heat up the cathode filament. The high end of the Generator supplied the high voltage necessary to keep the grid element, anode (plate), and cathode filament of the Thyratron Tube at their correct voltages. It also supplied the biasing voltage that prevented the Thyratron Tube from triggering in the absence of its trigger signal.3 The power produced by the Generator was held at a nearly constant voltage by an opposed field winding. This opposed field was connected in series with the Voltage Regulator Tube across the high voltage terminals of the Generator. When the Generator reached a certain speed, the Regulator Tube kicked in to hold the voltage generated in the armature nearly constant as the speed of the Generator increased.4 The Pick-Up Coil inductor consisted of a large number of turns of fine wire wound on a tubular core inserted in a large cylindrical can 12 inches
3 Description, Adjustment, Care, Operation and Shop
Tests of U.S. Navy Torpedo Warhead Attachments. Ordnance Pamphlet No. 663. (Newport, RI: U.S. Naval Torpedo Station, November 1942), 118. 4 Ibid.
9 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE
THE MARK 6 MAGNETIC INFLUENCE EXPLODER long and 4 inches in diameter. The Pick-Up Coil always produced a small and variable voltage output in response to the natural changes in the earth’s magnetic field and the motions of the torpedo. These natural low-level Pick-Up Coil signals were not enough to trip the Thyratron Tube. As the torpedo encountered the distorted and changing magnetic field due to its close proximity to the target ship’s steel hull, the Pick-Up Coil’s voltage increased. The designers tried to tune the Pick-Up Coil’s sensitivity so that the voltage increase reached a pre-set amount under the target ship’s hull. When the positive voltage increase reached the pre-set level, it reduced the negative potential on the grid element of the Thyratron Tube and thus reduced the grid bias to such a point that it allowed the Thyratron Tube to trigger and draw off the current from the cathode filament.5 Albert W. Hull of the General Electric Research Laboratory in Schenectady, New York, is credited with inventing a Thyratron electronic tube in 1929.6 A Thyratron Tube is a gas-filled electronic tube (not a vacuum tube) with the gas being either mercury or argon. This discharge tube acts as an amplified electronically actuated switch similar to today’s Silicon Controlled Rectifier (SCR). It contains a cathode filament, a central grid element, and an anode (plate) as shown in Figure 4. In the exploder the control grid was connected to the Pick-Up Coil and the output from the anode (plate) was directed up to the Solenoid. During the run-out to the arming distance, the cathode filament was heated by the low voltage end of the Generator to the temperature that allows the thermionic emission of electrons. On its way to the target, the Mark 6 exploder swept through the earth’s fairly uniform magnetic field lines, only changing in response to structural changes in the earth’s magnetic field. This was sensed by the Pick-Up Coil and Core Rod and produced only a gentle ripple in the output voltage of the Pick-Up Coil. This voltage was applied to the
5 Ibid. 6 S. Okamura, Editor, History of Electron Tubes. Chapter 1, Birth of Electron Tube (Washington, D.C.: IOS Press, Inc. 1994), 42.
grid element of the Thyratron Tube. Any changes in the lines of magnetic flux were translated into changes in the voltage at the grid element. During initial adjustment a negative voltage was applied to the grid element to suppress the tendency of the negative electrons to flow from the cathode to the anode of the Thyratron Tube. The negative charges repelled each other and the tube did not allow any current to flow through it. The potential of the cathode filament, with respect to the grid element and anode plate, was governed by the position of the contact slider on the Grid Bias Resistor (as shown in Figures 1 and 2). The position of the slider varied such that if the filament is considered to be neutral or at zero potential the anode is at a high positive potential while the grid is at a small negative potential. The difference in potential between the grid element and filament is called the grid bias, and it is this grid bias that prevents the tube from firing until the proper time.7 When the Mark 14 torpedo traveled through the disturbed magnetic field caused by the sudden appearance of the target ship’s hull, the Pick-Up Coil produced a large voltage change. This voltage change was immediately felt by the grid element in the Thyratron Tube. This positive voltage change was in the direction needed to remove the negative bias voltage from the grid that held back the electrons on the cathode. As mentioned above, the grid element of the Thyratron Tube had a small negative bias until tripped. The generated voltage impressed on it was positive and of a magnitude greater than that of the bias voltage in order to fire the Thyratron Tube. The voltage depended on the torpedo velocity relative to the target. An increase in speed of the torpedo relative to the target caused the Pick-Up Coil to generate a higher voltage and hence the exploder was more sensitive than at lower speeds. In addition, the Generator delivered a slightly higher voltage at higher impeller speeds and the effect of this was also to increase the sensitivity. 8
7 Ordnance Pamphlet No. 663, 118. 8 Ordnance Pamphlet No. 663, 100. CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
10 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE
THE MARK 6 MAGNETIC INFLUENCE EXPLODER
FIGURE 4 DIAGRAM OF THYRATRON TUBE AS IT SWITCHES ON TO ACTIVATE THE SOLENOID
At the point the Thyratron Tube fired, the voltage impressed on the grid element relative to the cathode filament ionized the gas in the tube. The ionized gas became the conductor for the rush of electrons supplied by the high voltage armature windings of the Generator. Once the current started to flow, it avalanched into full conduction. A significant amount of current began to flow through the Thyratron Tube and on through the Solenoid to activate it. This action was like a switch being turned on. Figure 4 shows a Thyratron Tube being tripped. This article will be continued in the next issue of the Undersea Quarterly.
11 FALL QUARTER 2013 A Bit of Diving History...
BY LARRY TUCKER
Previously, I discussed the Browne Dress Clamp Cat. No. 59037 manufactured by Diving Equipment & Supply Co. (DESCO) Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Winter 2012 Undersea Quarterly). Several volunteers have asked me how this clamp could possibly keep water from entering the suit. I recently found the answer in the 1950 edition of “Shallow Water Diving: For Pleasure and Profit” by Hilbert Schenk and Henry Kendall (Cornell Maritime Press). I am including a picture of the clamp and its application on the “Browne Back Entry diving dress”, as well as the new information regarding the proper use of the clamp. Entry into the dress is made through an opening in the back of the diving dress. This opening is large enough to permit the diver to first insert their legs into the opening; then to extend their arms into the sleeves and duck head and shoulders through the shirt portion of the dress in much the same fashion as getting into a pullover sweater. The individual that donated this clamp to our museum kept this clamp as a symbol of trust that a diver has with fellow divers or tenders. Even if a diver is the only person in the water, he or she is never alone. For every diver in the water, there are generally three additional people on the surface: two dive tenders, and one backup diver who is suited and ready to go in the water at a moment’s notice. Sealing the back of the dress is then obtained with a series of folds and then the clamp is installed by a tender or fellow diver. Note the last sentence of the folding diagram, “If done properly, the suit is watertight to any depth.” Diving safely – and in this case dry – the diver relies on the skills found in a person or team supporting their dive.
QUARTERLY
BROWNE DRESS CLAMP
12 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
CONTINUEDFROM PAGE 1
HISTORY OF THE HOWELL TORPEDO
In 1886 Lieutenant Commander Barber of the Bureau of Ordnance testified before the Senate Committee on Ordnance and Warships. “The Howell torpedo is the most valuable American locomotive torpedo that has yet been invented for naval use… Our government should take the necessary action to perfect it… Its principal advantages over the Whitehead are directive force, its size, and its cost. Its remarkable power for maintaining the direction in which it is pointed, when acted upon by a deflecting force, makes it possible to launch it with accuracy from the broadside of a vessel in rapid motion, which in my opinion is the most practical method of using a torpedo at sea; no other torpedo presents the advantages in this respect that are possessed by the Howell…” In 1888 the Navy selected the Howell torpedo as the first automobile torpedo for issue to the fleet. CDR Howell sold his design to the Hotchkiss Ordnance Company which in turn manufactured the new Mark 1 Howell torpedo for the Navy. By 1892, U.S. Navy battleships mounted deck-mounted torpedo tubes to fire the Mark 1 Howell. When the Navy ordered its first operational torpedo boats (the Cushing Class), the Naval Torpedo Station, Newport, had the task of arming these new craft and training their crews to fire the Howell torpedo. By the time of the Spanish-American War in 1898, the U.S. Navy included operational seagoing torpedo boats that were the forerunners of modern fleet destroyers. With the relocation of the torpedo tubes to below the waterline, the Navy replaced the Howell torpedo with the Whitehead Torpedo Mark 1, 2, and 3 which did not require a flywheel. The Navy used the Howell for about 10 years and withdrew it about 1900. In Service/Development 1870-1889 Usage: Anti-surface ship Propulsion: 132-lb flywheel spun to 10,000 rpm Speed: 25 knots Range: 400 yards Length: 11 feet Diameter: 14.2 inches Weight: 580 pounds Explosive Charge: 100 pounds wet guncotton
HOWELL TORPEDO FIRED FROM PLATFORM LAUNCHER MORRIS TORPEDO BOAT, 1894
13 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
Meet Your Volunteers...
BOB PAUL If it’s Wednesday morning at the front desk, then you’ll meet Bob Paul. Bob has been one of the mainstays of the museum volunteer force for quite a while, along with Tom Heman. We affectionately call them the “Tom and Bob Show”. Bob joined the Naval Reserve while still in high school on 19 December 1963. During his Reserve time, he went to Sub School and rode several diesel boats. He went Active duty on 1 August 1967 and was stationed on the USS Snook SSN 592. They made a ninemonth deployment to WestPac. He changed rate from Quartermaster to Electronics Technician and went to SINS School at New London Sub Base. After school, he was stationed on the USS Narwhal station at New London (3/72 - 7/73). From August 1973 until December 1975, he had a three year tour of Instructor Duty teaching Advanced Electronics Pipeline. In January 1976, Bob was then transferred to ComSubDevGru One, Detachment Sierra station in San Diego. In 1985, the Detachment moved to Mare Island, Vallejo. During the time he was in the Detachment, he made deployments and rode several boats. After retirement from active duty in 1987, Bob began working for Westinghouse in Vallejo, CA , in support of the Navy on Mare Island shipyard. When Mare Island closed in 1995, the support group moved to Silverdale, WA and supported the same program at Bangor. In 1996 Westinghouse was sold to Northrop Grumman. During his employment at Northrop Grumman, he was responsible for taking photos for technical manuals, System Support, and training presentations. Bob retired from Northrop Grumman on 31 March 2010. Bob began volunteering at the Museum in August 2010; he wanted to stay in touch with the Navy, the Submarine service, and have something important to do. In addition to working at the front desk, he also does some research work on some of the artifacts for the curator, Mary Ryan. He and his wife, Barbara, have two sons and a brand new grandson! Bob’s depth of knowledge about the Navy, its people, its purpose is such a valuable resource for the museum. He welcomes the visitors as they walk in the door with his cheerful smile and offer of assistance. Thank you, Bob. Your presence is greatly appreciated.
BE A MUSEUM VOLUNTEER!! The Museum and the Museum Foundation offer many opportunities to volunteer your time, your talents, your knowledge. Are you a people person? Become a Docent or work in the Museum Store! Do you love organizing? The Library could use your enthusiasm! Are children your specialty? Discover “E” Day is just the ticket! For more information, contact Daina Birnbaums MuseumStore@wavecable.com, 360/697-1129, or Olivia Wilson, olivia.wilson@navy.mil, 360/396-5548.
14 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
IN MEMORIAM CHARLES MARTIN MEEKER JUNE 22, 1936-SEPT. 3, 2013
Captain Charles “Charlie” Meeker USN, of Bremerton, WA, passed away on Tuesday, September 3, 2013. He was born to the late Theodore and Ruth Meeker in Oak Park, Illinois. Charlie graduated from Arlington Heights High School in 1954 and received a BS degree in Chemistry from Kalamazoo College in 1958. Charlie served in the United States Navy for 30 years and retired as a captain. He commanded the USS Daniel Webster SSBN626 from 1976-1980. After retirement in 1989, he traveled the world and enjoyed his time volunteering at the Naval Undersea Museum. Charlie also served on the Board of Trustees of the Museum Foundation. He is survived by his beloved wife of 53 years, Francine Meeker of Bremerton, WA and his three children and five grandchildren. Charlie was an avid sports fan with special loyalties to the Chicago Bears, Seattle Seahawks and the Seattle Mariners. He enjoyed sporting events, sharing stories, going on walks, telling corny jokes and being a grandpa. Whenever he walked in the door he greeted everyone with “hola,” as a nod to his family’s time spent living in Rota, Spain. He had a great sense of humor, was always quick to smile and made friends wherever he went. The museum and foundation staff will miss his cheerful smile; our condolences to his family.
Schedule of Events
NAVY BAND NORTHWEST
Oct 20th
Ceremonial/Concert Band Navy Band Northwest 2:00 PM. Auditorium. FREE.
Nov 17th
Brass Quintet and Woodwind Quintet Navy Band Northwest 2:00 PM. Auditorium. FREE.
Personnel Directory
Websites Naval Undersea Museum.......................... navalunderseamuseum.org Naval Undersea Museum Store....... store.navalunderseamuseum.org Navy Band Northwest............ https://www.navybandnw.cnrnw.navy.mil Foundation Personnel email addresses Undersea Quarterly Editor, Foundation...... ShifrinBJ@wavecable.com Daina Birnbaums, Museum Store....... MuseumStore@wavecable.com
NUM Personnel email addresses Lindy Dosher, Museum Director.......................Lindy.Dosher@navy.mil Jennifer Heinzelman, Collections Mgt..Jennifer.Heinzelman@navy.mil Mary Ryan, Curator..........................................Mary.C.Ryan@navy.mil Lorraine Scott, Collections Management........ Lorraine.Scott@navy.mil Olivia Wilson, Facilities....................................Olivia.Wilson@navy.mil
15 FALL QUARTER 2013
QUARTERLY
MAKING THE DREAM COME TRUE
I believe in the Naval Undersea Museum’s vision of the future and I want to help make it come true! I want to see the Museum complete with state-of-the-art exhibits, quality supporting facilities,and exciting educational programs. Please sign me up for the following: ___ Seat(s) in the Future $500 each Dedicated to_____________________________ Sustaining membership ___ Foundation Associate *$1000+ ___ Patron *$500-$999 ___ Benefactor $250-$499 ___ Builder $100-$249 ___ Provider $25-$99
Make checks payable to the Naval Undersea Museum Foundation (NUMF) VISA, MasterCard, American Express, Discover accepted. Card #___________________________ Exp ________ Signature_____________________________________ Send to: Naval Undersea Museum Foundation P.O. Box 408 Keyport, Washington 98345
*Donors of $500 or more may participate in the Seat-inthe-Future program by dedicating a seat in the Jack Murdock Auditorium for each $500 given. Other ___ As a one-time gift
Sustaining members receive regular quarterly newsletters, invitations to special events. The NUMF is a registered nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization. Gifts and memberships are tax-deductible for federal income tax purposes.
Name(s)_____________________________________________________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________________________________________ City_________________________________________________ State___________________Zip_____________ Email______________________________________________ Phone________________________________
SUPPORT YOUR FOUNDATION, YOUR MUSEUM
Many of you, our foundation members, choose to support the museum because your careers were spent in our military and in defense contracting. Our volunteer staff comes to us as retirees from Keyport, as military spouses, as service retirees. Your life experiences while in the service are unique to each of you; your children and grandchildren may not know anything about what obstacles you encountered, what goals you achieved, where you were sent, even what you did on a daily basis before you became their parent or grandparent. These stories should not be lost. You are currently enjoying the contributions and suggestions from our volunteers and members. We would welcome the opportunity to publish articles, memoirs, photos—items that would be of interest to the naval history community. While we cannot promise to publish everything that is submitted, we would be pleased to hear from you at any time. The email address for the editor is shifrinbj@wavecable.com and the mailing address is Naval Undersea Museum Foundation, PO Box 408, Keyport WA 98345. Think about where you’ve been. Think about the people you’ve met. Remember your comrades and the camaraderie you experienced. Then, write it down and send it to us.
Have you ever wondered what to give your parents, your grandparents, your grandchildren, your friends for their birthday, for the holidays, to acknowledge their retirement, to celebrate their anniversary? A membership in the Foundation is an excellent gift in so many ways. The articles and information in the newsletter alone are well worth the membership cost. A Seat-In-The-Future is another wonderful way to memorialize loved ones, fallen comrades, friends and significant figures in undersea history. A one-time gift of $500 entitles the donor to dedicate a plaque on the arm of a seat in the Jack Murdock Auditorium to someone of their choice. Naval Undersea Museum Fdtn P.O. Box 408 Keyport, WA 98345
16 FALL QUARTER 2013
UNDERSEA Q
U
A
R T E R L Y
P.O. BOX 408 KEYPORT, WASHINGTON 98345
From the Museum Store...
New in the Museum Store! Just in for Fall Vintage reproduction Army / Navy Football game program cover in poster size! It’s the big game – are you ready? Available now in the museum store, packaged flat and ready for framing or boxed for travel. Your choice, $14.95
QUARTERLY NONPROFIT U.S. POSTAGE PAID PERMIT #2 KEYPORT, WA 98345