There was always a delicate balance, sometimes unspoken, between “ETs” (Electronic Technicians) and “users,” which came in all sorts of types: Officers, operations specialists, radiomen comprised most of that category. On a number of occasions, when something wasn’t performing to the expectations of the user, it was not caused by a malfunctioning of the equipment, but rather than from a misunderstanding of the function, or that the operator in question had wrong, leading to the often made remarks, in a derogatory manner, and sprinkled with “salty” language, about some dumb user. And, as luck would have it, once in a while a very frustrated, but knowledgeable petty officer found themselves making not so delicate responses to the tidal wave of derision heaped upon them when a mere mis-positioning of a switch may have been the only problem.I began my Naval career supervising a shop full of ETs, in addition to the OSs, I was the nexus, in good times and bad in the interaction of those two groups, and also the “screen” from the stuff coming down from above when RADAR and radio systems weren’t cutting it at any given moment. I appreciate it all the more because of those 18 months.

With that explanation, the new ET logo makes so much more sense, doesn’t it?

I know you stop by to read the blog once in a while, and I’m working up the email list for ValOUR-IT. I lost your email address in the hosting service move, so please help me update my records. Comment or email works for me.

(Oh, and put some contact info on the carrier page!)

For those of you who haven’t seen it, William has built and maintains The Carrier Page, a history of the US Navy’s aircraft carriers. He was a supporter of ValOUR-IT last year. Stop by his site and see what he has compiled.

Update 6/27/2007: First off, Bill tells me the email info is on his page. Second, so you don’t have to jump to the comments, Rusty Bill reports about “current ops” on his historical website:

Warning to prospective visitors: The Carrier Project is currently undergoing a massive refit – a total reformat and rewrite, in fact.

Many of the general information pages are up and running, but carrier history data has only been entered for CV-1 USS Langley through CV-9 USS Essex. I’m currently rebuilding the Origins of Carrier Names section, which should be posted in a couple of weeks. See the Refit Page for details.

Thanks, Bill!

The author of “I Accuse: Jimmy Carter and the Rise of Militant Islam”, Philip Pilevsky, was on Laura Ingraham’s radio show today. The thesis on his book is by Jimmy Carter failing to support the Shah, the fringe elements of jihadis, which had been around for hundreds of years as just that: Fringe groups, all of a sudden had a “State’ to operate out of and therefore made what the world is dealing with today possible.

Damning at best, horrifying at its worst.

Another name for from the beginnings of our Navy is Josiah Fox. Born in 1763 in Cornwall, England, he had been an apprentice at the Royal Dockyard in Portsmouth, making him unique among our early shipwrights.

Josiah appears in the story of the post-Revolutionary War naval build up when he was asked by Joshua Humphreys in 1794 to assess the design proposed by Humphreys to the War department, as there was some conflict as to whether the planned frigates would be strong enough.

From “Six Frigates”:

Fox’s reaction was blunt. His view was that in the Humphreys’ frigate the wales were placed too low; the bow and stern were too sharp; and there were too many hollow spaces in the hull, which would contribute the the weakness of the hull’s structure. The design ought to include more rake (the stem and the stern should rise at a smaller angle from the keel). Fundamentally, Fox was concerned that the Humphreys’ frigate was too long in proportion to her beam. The resulting structural weakness was so great that the ship might even break her back on launching.

The debate continued, but the historical record to allow us into the course of the conversations, as the people involved directly all lived in Philadelphia (Secretary Knox, Joshua Humphreys, Josiah Fox), and Ian toll speculates much of the discussions happened in face to face meetings, with no paper trail. The only thing we have to go on is the performance of the ships put to sea. I’d say Humphreys was right.

During this time frame, Joshua Humphreys was appointed as the “Master Ship Constructor” for the Navy by Secretary of War Knox, and, based on his favorable impression of Fox’s knowledge of ship design, Fox was hired as a draftsman to serve under Humphreys. What happened next is what the modern Navy calls a “personality conflict.” Apparently Fox’s drafts were not in accordance with Humphreys designs. Net result: Fox was assigned to make moulds for cutting timber. “The two Quaker shipwrights eventually came to hate each other” says Toll.

There is more to that part of the working relationship to read, some of it sounding not unlike some of the meetings I was a party to attending over my career and a few years afterwards.

Fast forward to where Josiah Fox still managed to “get around the system:”

Fox was the supervising shipwright for the USS CHESAPEAKE. CHESAPEAKE was an oddity in the line of our first naval combatants in that she was not named for something related to The Constitution, but named for a bay. In addition, there was already a USS CHESAPEAKE, a sloop of war, in commission (she was recommissioned USS PATAPSCO) at the time. The distinction continued in that “Frigate D” was shorter in length and broader in beam than the other ships, as a result of Fox altering the design to meet his concepts of ship design, based on his Royal Naval shipbuilding background. Built in Norfolk, she was shown to be slower than her sister ships due to significant design alterations.No Navy ships have been named in honor of Josiah Fox. He was a key figure in the formulation of ship design, being a thorn in the side of the man who envisioned a completely new layout for warships, which went on to have provide our nation with a maritime force capable of standing up to the navies of Europe.

The ship picked up a reputation as unlucky early on in her career at sea.

Photo credit: Popular Science
The scientists are coming up with new and better (and safer for the people involved) methods for mine clearance. In this case, it adds one more use of the FA-18 airframe to find itself almost completely “unkillable” from a programmatic standpoint, while making mines laid at the beach, and in the surf zone in an effort to stop our Marines, much more killable.

Beach Cleanup
A naval strategy to detonate 70 million mines calls for high-tech showers of darts

By Bjorn Carey | April 2007

Since 2001, more than 13,000 American soldiers have been killed or maimed by landmines or improvised explosive devices. Civilians included, landmines kill or injure an estimated 20,000 people around the world every year. To blaze safer trails, the U.S. Office of Naval Research is developing a system that uses thousands of chemical- and explosive-packed darts to snuff out landmines. “It’s one of the most successful systems we’ve tested so far,” says project leader Brian Almquist.
[…]

HOW IT WORKS

1. A plane drops a bomb packed with darts. Once it reaches 1,000 feet above its target, the bomb ejects a seven-foot-long tubular canister.
2. A corkscrew pattern carved into the bomb’s interior spins the canister as it slides out, like a bullet leaving a gun. The rotation and small explosives jettison the canister’s panels and expose 6,500 darts stacked several rows deep. The mass of darts is also spinning, which uniformly disperses them.
3. Each seven-inch dart slams into the ground at 1,200 feet per second. Its blunt nose helps it carve a channel in water or sand, a process called cavitation. This reduces friction on the body of the dart and allows it to pass through two feet of sand and more than seven feet of water.
4. Darts inject the mines with one of three substances: a chemical that safely burns the TNT, a reactive powder that breaks apart the mine by increasing internal pressure, or a small explosive that detonates the mine on impact.

After the indignant post by Neptunus Lex about “pimping his ride” to make “Electric” FA-18s, I wonder how he’ll react to his community becoming MCM types….

Let me get this straight….over 7 minutes of freefall, supersonic speeds (with no source other than gravity for power), a face full of plasma for a light show part of the way down, and then landing at the DZ….So where do I sign up? I’m really not interested in what’s in it for me, but I’m all about being a “Test Diver” so future astronauts can leave their fragile flying/gliding machines (you know, “who would ever jump out of a perfectly good space shuttle?”) with he confidence that I, and other brave souls like me, had risked it all to plummet from space to make sure the suits and parachutes were safe and reliable in the event of an emergency.The article isn’t online. You actually will have to pull yourself away from the keyboard, hike to the local magazine rack, or library, and put your hands on the dead tree version to see what it’s about. There are three men who are working together on this idea. One is a retired Navy Flight surgeon (and I believe the spouse of one of the astronauts lost on Colombia, another guy and John Carmack (yes, the guy of “Doom” fame) from Amradillo Aerospace.
Armadillo Aerospace plans to use the DC-X vehicle to do the transport of the diver to space. Who says computer games are bad for us? Look what it funded?So…now they have to get the guy from Finland with the Jet Cat booties and really come up with something swift!

embedded by Embedded Video

Also, from the Popular Science website:

Toughen up those neck muscles! 6 pounds balanced on your noggin will get you some cool virtual reality (like real reality isn’t scary enough sometimes!)!

Is this the future of the home theater?

No, it’s not a prop. This six-pound helmet monitor is a real prototype, built to demonstrate next-generation television-watching technology. Modeled here by one of its developers (the regular TV is shown only for comparison), the device was built by Toshiba and unveiled in September at an academic conference in Osaka, Japan. Equipped with a built-in projector and a dome screen, the monitor plugs directly into a DVD player or computer and provides an immersive experience that surrounds the wearer with the action of the program—think of it as a portable IMAX theater. Although the invention was popular among testers, who reported that it rests easily on the shoulders and is comfortable enough for a two-hour movie, Toshiba has no solid plans for commercialization.

I’ve been pondering this issue for a few weeks now and will get busy on posting my thoughts on the topic, figuring there are many issues associated with our current mania with all things green. I’m not against it, and because I was thinking of a title for such postings, my thoughts moved to another plane, that of the world-wide issues, but unlike those being discussed. Maybe I just haven’t tripped across those editorials yet, but…going “green” has far ranging implications for the entity at the top of the food chain, some good, some potentially very, very bad.

I suspect Al Gore and company hasn’t thought them through yet, or he may not have ever made his movie.

So, that being stated as the opening salvo, here’s a short run down of some of my installed filters: BS – Biology, emphasis in marine and botany regions of the science. Degrees in International Relations and Strategic Studies. Lived on two islands in the Pacific and spent a lot of time swimming the reefs. Post military career, spent 4 years in electronic recycling sales, in a small operation, where I was involved not just in making the sales of what came out of the “waste stream,” but helping sort through large and small loads of “hazardous waste,” to see what was there, and also worked contact proposals, so I had to describe the processes involved in proper disposal techniques and get a reasonable understanding of current HAZMAT practices as it related to electronic waste.

My original title was going to be something like “Go Green – For National Security.” The premise was you can hate the junk science, or embrace it, but it still had value at that level. Certainly from a national level, going green in regards to reducing our oil consumption provides a variety of benefits in the short run. If we could create the technology, affordable and effective, to replace basic petroleum based fuels with any combination of alternative energies, we would have a tremendous impact on the World’s complaint about how we use 25% of the energy for less than 5% of the World’s population. The tyrannical and theocratic nations of South America and the Middle East would have to back off on how we were “stealing their oil” (as a side note, we’re stealing at a competitive price!) and come up with a new “slogan” to make the World hate us. We’d have much more control of some of the more contentious issues worldwide along those lines. Overall, a real plus.

I have often pondered pulling up John F. Kennedy’s speech about going to the moon and re-writing it on the topic of energy independence. If we actually had plenty of “home grown” engineers, the sleeves could be rolled up and I bet some amazing results could be achieved. Not having a lot of real scientists and engineers coming out of the colleges and universities to support this is an entirely separate, yet tightly linked subject for discussion at another time.

If we did “go to the moon” in developing methods and techniques such as you might imagine, we certainly would export it, creating entirely new companies and corporations around the globe, all the the benefit of mankind.

But…..I’ll get to my thoughts in a few paragraphs.

From my view point in the recycling company (still going strong, BTW), the two owners were not tree hugging liberals. In fact, despite their penchant to vote for the Democrats, at the “local” level, they were very much capitalists to the core. They did enjoy their success, and not a word was ever spoken about how they were doing any of this to “save the planet.” They were two smart business guys. Rough cut, from a contract proposal response: In three years, they went from $3M to $12M in gross revenues, with about an average of 25 people a new forklift and some building additions, totaling maybe $100K during that period. Most of what was taken in was paid for in the collection fees, and I was the one getting unbelievable money for what some would consider obsolete equipment in unknown operating condition, that was still needed by companies “stuck” with a requirement to maintain what they had in place and could not afford to wholesale replace. In many cases, on the equipment I sold, we came close to, and exceeded in some cases, a 100% profit margin. And, readers, that was but one of seven such companies within about 50 miles around us.

Taking a jump to the tree-hugger side of that same story, I was amazed at just how many different components were recycled, saving further mining of metals and also reducing the energy needed to make new product, as some of the “front end” of some manufacturing processes were shortened by feeding recycled material into the production lines. I also was amazed at how much truly functional equipment was just disposed of due to age. About the only thing that we paid to get rid of was the plastics, which we had made a decision to not separate the types (like defined by the number you see on the bottom/side of plastic items), so we had to pay to have that hauled off.

Summary: You can make a handsome living in electronics recycling, if you don’t mind getting your hands dirty and learning some EPA (Federal and local) regulations and complying with them and it does, in fact, benefit the environment.

Back to the issue of petroleum based fuel replacement and how we must consider carefully how we do this:

• Bio-Fuels. A few weeks back, on some talk show, a caller said “You think they hate us now? Wait until we take their food to drive our cars!” Precisely! I have read in several places, since the push to burn ethanol has become a life of its own, that They already have! Its hitting our bank accounts already. Add to that that estimates I have seen say our total corn output, if only used to make ethanol, would only replace between 12 and 15% of our oil consumption in vehicles. In other words, we can’t reach “escape” velocity” from the dead dinosaur addiction. So, you say we can use sugar cane, and beets, and soy beans. Yes, we can. And those are all used to produce food, too. You’d have to have someone regulating the balance between food and fuel production, similar to the market for fuel oil and gasoline that changes gas prices each fall. The bottom line: Is it food, or is it a way to get to the mall?
• Wind/Solar/Hydrogen: I have hopes smart minds could make it happen, so we could thumb our noses at the people who pull the fuel from the ground, but here’s the rub, economically and, therefore strategically: The nations that sell us the oil, for the most part, have never developed any other industry that would allow them to “live in the manner to which they are accustomed.” See where this is going? They hate us now for buying their product, screaming in the streets and at international conferences about how wasteful and greedy we are (as they count our money. Now, when we get serious about listening to their criticisms and do something about it, the cash flow will no longer head to them and they will holler loud and long, about how America is screwing them. That metaphor is already being used to recruit terrorists around the world and on our own streets. Can’t win for losing, you see, and those people, with the oil reserves, have not had the foresight to “diversify” their revenue producing capability. As our nation leads the way in innovation, and freedom, no one else seems to get that those are the very mechanisms that have allowed this upstart of a nation surpass all other economies in human history.

So here if the conundrum, economically, geo-politically and strategically: We go “green” to save the planet (the < 5% of us on the face of the planet), with other sneering at us, saying it’s all our fault that they now have no money, so all the more reason to attack us, sooner, while there still is an oil producing infrastructure to make things go, rather than later when there’s no oil to make things go and they can’t afford the new technologies to get around.

Our economy is tightly intertwined with the rest of the world. for all we bring to the table for humanity to use, we are accused of using more than our fair share now. We will be accused of not using any in the possible future. It appears that keeping our wallets open to economic blackmail may keep us more stable than if we invent better ways to get around and thereby clean up the air globally.

I think it’s a dangerous minefield we have wandered into, yet I don’t know if others have yet looked at this endgame.

So, what do you think?

How will you die?Accidental death You take to many risks, and they could be your downfall. Click Here to Take This Quiz

Quizzes and Personality Tests

So…there I was, Officer of the Deck for the 04-08 watch on a Sunday morning in the spring of 1979. It’s now about 0430 and, I, seasoned by the first operational deployment, am relatively comfortable with my assignment. Combat (Combat Information Center, or simply “CIC”) has just reported a Skunk (Unknown surface contact) Bravo, slightly off the port bow several miles out. I check in the AN/SPA-4 RADAR repeater, using a grease pencil to mark on the plotting head (lighted fixture over the actual CRT of the RADAR display). From there, I move to the port bridge wing to sweep the dark seas ahead of the ship for lights. There are none, other than those of the ships of the USS SARATOGA (CV-60) battle group, enroute the States.

We are roughly half way home, somewhere in the Atlantic. In company are the USS SARATOGA (CV-60), USS MT BAKER (AE-34), USS BIDDLE (CG-34), USS SPRUANCE (DD-963) (her maiden deployment), the USS CONYNGHAM (DDG-17), the USS JOHN KING (DDG-5) and a few other vessels that time has scrubbed from my memory cells. We (USS MILWAUKEE (AOR-2)) are assigned as the guide of the formation, steering the base course and running at the signaled base speed. All others of the battle group use us as the reference point for their formation stationing assignments.

No longer am I the CIC Officer, that job was handed over to LTJG Mike Tyner just before the cruise began, and I assumed the duties of Communications Officer from LTJG Tom Hartman. The Operations Specialists in CIC worked for me for almost 18 months prior to that, so I am pretty well in tune with their capabilities.

Skunk Bravo is not making much speed that we can discern, and the plot on my scope shows her passing close aboard to port on our present course.

I make the required call the CAPT Art Page, informing him of the situation with this unlighted contact closing us due to the relative motion of the two of us. He acknowledges my call.

About this time, maybe 0500, CIC reports Skunk Charlie on the port bow, with a track that will put her passing not far ahead of us. I look out and see range and masthead lights in the vicinity of USS BIDDLE stationed on the port bow of the formation and hear BIDDLE calling the merchant on Channel 16 on Bridge-to-Bridge radio. I got to concentrating on the (lack of) movement of Skunk Bravo. The CO comes to the bridge. Eventually, we see nothing, even when the RADAR contact shows Bravo passing between our ship and the SARATOGA (stationed on our port beam a few miles). The CO asks me if there’s anything elseand I reply “no.” He heads below to get back to sleep.

About this time, OS2 Tom Mazzula calls up from CIC on the 21MC and asks “What are your intentions with Skunk Charlie?” MY answer is “I saw her turn to pass astern of the formation.” I had seen range and masthead lights moving to show a vessel had made a radical turn to starboard earlier, which looking for the unsighted Bravo. I looked at my plot on the RADAR scope and was satisfied I had kept track of the situation, but something told me to listen to CIC. I stepped out on the port wing, raised my binoculars and saw a merchant hull standing on with a target angle of about 035 degrees (meaning if I was looking at my ship from them, what was my bearing – in this case on the starboard bow). I called CIC and informed them it must have been the BIDDLE I saw turning, as the merchant’s lights showed her steaming towards us. Tom concurred. I called the CO, he came right back to the bridge.

The CO and I stood on the port bridge wing, me at the pelorus, he with binoculars. CIC Was reporting a close aboard “CPA” (Closest Point of Approach). The CO asked what would happen if we slowed down some. I replied the ship would pass ahead of us at about 1/2 NM (100 yards). He ordered me to slow. I passed the direction to the Junior Officer of the Deck, who had the Conn. John slowed us 5 knots. After a few moments, CIC refigured the CPA and it was still close. I tried calling the merchant on Channel 16…no reponse. I went to the bridge wing and called up to the signal bridge for Sigs to flash the international code for “You are standing into danger!” They did, through through the night filter. No response.

The CO asked for the bearing of the contact. I read it through the alidade. He hollered into the pilot house “Range to the contact?” No response. “RANGE TO THE CONTACT???” No response. He and I ran to the bridge wing door to see the JOOD, back to the front windows, at the back of the bridge, talking to the Boatswain’s Mate of the Watch. The CO said: “This is Captain Page, I have the conn!” I kept the deck. I ordered the signal bridge to take the night filter off the signal lamp and flash the ship again. The white light shot across the sea with it’s staccato message. The merchant sailed on.

I called to Main Control to the Senior Chief Machinist Mate standing Engineering Officer of the watch, telling him if he got an emergency back bell, it’s wasn’t a joke and to be ready to answer it. He relied in his gruff voice “Aye, aye, sir!”

The Captain slowed another 5 knots. CIC informed the formation on Tactical radio circuits of our speed. They all slowed with us, but no one ever took the guide duties from us. The sun was coming over the horizon behind us now, lighting the merchant vessel. It was a large bulk cargo carrier, flying an Irish flag. Still, we had no indication that they saw us.

Under the circumstances, we were headed for extremis. I directed the BMOW to sound 5 short blasts of the ship’s horn. It was about 0530 now. He carried out the order quickly to signal the other ship by yet another means. Our plan, as the CO and I discussed, was to turn starboard, the proscribed maneuver in such circumstances.

The XO, CDR Al Lightly, clad in khaki trousers, flip flops and a white t-shirt, appeared on the bridge, rubbing the sleep out of his eyes. He asked “What’s going on?” I barked “GET OFF THE BRIDGE!” He sleepily complied. The Navigator, LTJG Harry Watkins, III showed up also, moving out of the way and to the chart table, keeping quiet.

Our two hulls, us being about 40,000 tons of displacement, and the merchant, certainly heavier slid towards each other, intent, with present course and speed, to occupy the space piece of water at the same time. The CO looked at me and said “We have to turn right.” I nodded. He ordered “Right Full Rudder!” “Right Full Rudder, Aye, Sir – My rudder is Right Full!” was the rapid response from the Helmsman. Then the CO said: “Shift your rudder!” as the merchant’s bow crossed ours and he also ordered “All Back Emergency Full!” The ringing of the engine order telegraph assaulted our ears three times before stopping at the “Astern Full” mark. I paralleled the order by voice on the 21 MC.

The merchant, slid across our bow at about 200 yards. Seems like a lot? Not when you have two vessels of such size that close together. Had we turned to starboard, with the merchant standing on, wrong as he was, the “transfer” (sideways distance the ship would go before attaining the ordered course would have carried our port side into hers. Relative speed would have been the slowest of the possible geometries, but still, a career ending would have occurred. Had we and the merchant turned starboard, the collision would have raked our port sides the length of each other, with greater relative speed, and therefore greater damaging forces involved.

By turning port, Captain Page set up a situation where we would pass under her stern, or she would have had her transfer in a starboard turn, take her clear of our starboard side. It was the perfect solution. Captain Page was quite a ship handler. We resume the base course and speed, watching from the starboard wing as the merchant proceeded northward, never seeming to realize the escape from bent metal and admiralty claims.

Now, breathing a sigh of relief, I took the conn from the CO, he said to me, as he was about off the bridge: “Get back on station.” “Captain, we are the guide.” ” I know, get back on station.” “Captain, we are on station.”

He looked at me like I was undermining his authority before the little light bulb in his head went off and he said “Very well” and went below.

In the latest “Popular Mechanics”, the “Milan” computer from Microsoft, using “multi-touch” input.

More ‘gouge’ from da Man here.

Pretty snazzy…and a great coffee table replacement!

Update 6/23/2007: Kevin points out that someone has other views about Bill Gate’s great ideas…

embedded by Embedded Video