INVESTIGATION OF SINKING OF THE SUBMARINE "S-4"

MONDAY, MAY 21, 1928

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to the call of the chairman, at 11.15 o'clock a. m., in the room of the committee in the Capitol, Senator Tasker L. Óddie presiding.

Present: Senators Tasker L. Oddie (chairman) and Peter G. Gerry. Present also: Commander J. H. Hoover, United States Navy; Captain Gamble, Captain Wheeler, and Commander Root, United States Coast Guard; and Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Savoy.

Senator ODDIE. The committee will come to order.

STATEMENT OF COMMANDER J. H. HOOVER, UNITED STATES NAVY-Resumed

Senator ODDIE. Commander Hoover, kindly give us, briefly, your experience with submarines and your connection with the Navy Department.

Commander HOOVER. I went to the submarine school at New London in the winter of 1923. After graduating I was sent to the Canal Zone, where, for about two and one-half years, I had command of two different divisions of submarines on active work with the fleet. Upon leaving the Canal Zone I was ordered to the Navy Department as the submarine officer assisting the Chief of Naval Operations in the general work connected with submarines, where I am to-day.

Senator ODDIE. I think it is proper that there be placed in these hearings the record and qualifications of Lieut. Commander R. K. Jones, who commanded the S-4, who lost his life in the collision. He was a courageous, able, and splendid officer.

Commander HOOVER. I am very glad to do so.

Lieut. Commander R. K. Jones, the commanding officer of the S-4, graduated from the Naval Academy in 1916 and spent four years on the battleship Michigan. Though, of course, being of very junior rank on the vessel, his responsibilities were not great; nevertheless the reports made by his commanding officer gave him a uniformly excellent reputation for attention to duty, efficiency, industry, and officerlike qualities.

Upon completing his cruise on the Michigan he applied for submarine duty and was sent to the submarine school at New London, Conn., in 1920. His marks while at the school were high, and he graduated No. 2 in the class. From the submarine school he was sent to Pearl Harbor and served in a junior capacity on submarines R-6, R-20, and R-13 until May, 1922. Then, after passing a rigid examination with a high standing, he was deemed qualified to com

mand a submarine and was assigned to the R-19 as commanding officer. He commanded the R-19 until April, 1923, when he was ordered to shore duty as inspector of aviation material at Garden City, Long Island. The uniformly excellent manner in which he carried out this independent and rather unusual duty for a period of two and a half years was commented upon by a number of senior officers, including Admiral Moffett, Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics.

In October, 1925, he was ordered to command the S-4 and remained in this capacity until the accident in December, 1927. His entire record shows uniformly excellent reports and marks. Nothing adverse, or even below average, is to be found anywhere in it. His division commanders, in commenting on his ability as a submarine commanding officer, have stated that he was careful, painstaking, thorough, and, in general, highly satisfactory in that capacity. To be a first-class submarine commanding officer requires rather more than average ability in many directions, particularly in level-headedness and leadership. I gained from the testimony of his seniors and brother officers in the submarine service that he would be about the last man to be inclined to take any unnecessary risks or to be careless in the handling of his vessel.

Senator ODDIE. Commander Hoover, will you give us brief extracts from the hearings of the naval court of inquiry relating to the men on the bridge of the Paulding at the time of the accident, and the duties of these men?

Senator GERRY. Commander, if I may interrupt, will you please show in your testimony whether they had any other duties to perform than that of lookout?

Commander HOOVER. That is what I am going to bring out in these excerpts which I read:

EXTRACTS FROM NAVAL COURT OF INQUIRY REGARDING LOOKOUTS

Lieut Commander John S. Baylis, witness:

24. Q. Is there a lookout stationed on these days when you are on patrol?A. It is according to the conditions, if it is hazy or foggy we are required; that is, the law requires a lookout and also at night; a lookout is not required during the day.

25. Q. Was there a lookout assigned on this day as such?-A. There was no lookout on this day assigned as such. I do not remember whether on this particular day we had been giving instructions to the men or not.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

44. Q. The men assigned on watch on the bridge were the officer of the deck, junior officer of the deck, quartermaster, and the wheelman, and that you at all times undertook to be present on the bridge?-A. I am usually very handy for a call.

45. Q. Were any of these men specifically assigned for the duty of identification of ships as they passed?-A. The officer of the deck is held responsible for getting their name, if he picks them up first, the junior officers pay most of their attention to getting it most of the time; that is, the quartermaster if the letters are large enough sometimes he can see them with the naked eye.

46. Q. Then during the process of passing a ship the attentions of the officer of the deck, the junior officer of the deck would be engaged in the identification of the ship that was passed?-A. Not always. As a usual thing the officer of the deck looks after the particular conning of the vessel, and if it happens to be such a case that the quartermaster or the junior officer of the deck is not available, I sometimes tell the officer of the deck to see what that vessel is, and at that time I am looking after the conning of the vessel. Of course in this identification

it is just a matter of a very short time to do. We spend five or ten minutes in identifying a vessel. Identification is done in the passing.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

58. Q. Does he maintain a fix of the vessel so that the commanding officer may know at all times its accurate position?-A. No, unless he is on the bridge. 59. Q. Does this duty then devolve on the watch officer?-A. The watch officer on watch must always know the position of the vessel.

60. Q. You testified that these cross lines of this chart of the Paulding were probably put down by the officer of the deck, if so, my reason for asking this question is to determine whether the navigator or the officer of the deck does the navigation and keeps a fix of the vessel?-A. The officer on watch lays down the course. At times we do not lay the course on the chart, if we are identifying vessels. * * *

Ens. G. M. Phannemiller, witness:

45. Q. Was there a lookout assigned on that day as such?-A. Three men kept lookout. There was no specific lookout.

51. Q. There are certain additional lines with marking in pencil. Who put those lines on there?-A. I did, sir.

59. Q. Were you looking at the ship to see if you could identify her name?— A. I was looking at the ship to see that we did not come too close.

60. Q. Then having recollection as to what was transpiring on the bridge at that time, would you say that not remembering who it was that identified the name on the schooner, that your lack of recollection was because you did not know who said the name or because you did not know who specifically was looking? A. They were all looking, sir. But I don't know who specifically said the name.

61. Q. Then all the people on the bridge at that time with the exception of the time you were conning were looking at the schooner for purposes of identifying her? A. Yes, sir.

69. Q. Were the quartermaster and junior officer of the deck then, prior to the passing of point "2-B" observing weather signals on the shore which gave rise to this discussion?-A. I don't think it was before; it was after. It was after identifying the schooner and at the same time the quartermaster entered in the log, he was going to enter the storm signals.

70. Q. What were you doing at this time when the discussion was taking place? A. Standing regular watch.

72. Q. Were you checking compass course or seeing if helmsman was steering right course?-A. Keeping a general idea, sir.

73. Q. What do you mean by general idea?-A. To glance at the compass once in a while.

74. Q. What other ships did you happen to see at this time after having passed the point 2-B as marked on the chart?-A. There was a schooner anchored near the beach, the Nantucket lightship was stationed there, and various fishing boats in the harbor, you could see their masts.

98. Q. Then did you know that the measured mile range might be used by submarines for running across the measured mile course?-A. Yes, sir.

Charles E. Reed, chief quartermaster and junior officer of the deck, witness:

5. Q. Will you state to the court what are the duties of junior officer of the deck? A. The paramount duty of the junior officer of the deck is to assist the officer of the deck.

6. Q. Then would the junior officer of the deck perform no duties until specifically directed by the officer of the deck as to something he wished him to do?A. Not necessarily. At all times keep lookout as other people on the bridge are instructed to do; without instruction, take deck bearings.

7. Q. In the performance of duties as lookout, what did you do in that connection?-A. Keep a general lookout, and also attempt to recognize any vessel that may be overhauled.

12. Q. You were looking through the glasses at the schooner? A. Yes, sir.

22. Q. Did you take a bearing of those buoys for the purpose of marking the time that you changed course?-A. I believe I did, sir.'

33. Q. Then in the performance of your duty, when you pass buoys, you keep watch of those buoys in order to make report when they are passed abeam?— A. Yes, sir.

60. Q. Did you search the horizon with the glass about this time?-A. No; not about this time. I was otherwise occupied.

61. Q. Doing what?-A. Determining whether the ship was off its station, the Nantucket lightship was off its station. A moment preceding the disaster, I was determining why the lightship was off its station. I have to report anything of that nature to the navigating officer.

66. Q. Did you have your glass on the Nantucket lightship station about this time?-A. I did.

*

*

*

*

*

Walter C. Rheingans, seaman, first class, acting quartermaster, witness:

11. Q. What duties were you performing on the Paulding on December 17?— A. I was the quartermaster on watch, sir.

*

13. Q. Will you state generally the duties required of a quartermaster on watch on the Paulding while underway?-A. * * And the quartermaster also takes care of the rough log of the ship, makes a note of all changes in course, any change in speed, watches for all signals, takes the name of all boats or numbers of them that they come upon; takes the weather, the sea, clouds; puts that in the rough log and keeps a general lookout with glasses on the bridge. Does all errands for the officer of the deck or commanding officer on the bridge.

17. Q. Where is the log of the Paulding kept, which you make your entries in?-A. In the chart house, sir, right back of the bridge.

19. Q. Do you, in your duties, have access to and observe the chart and the positions of the ship? A. Yes, sir.

26. Q. Were there any signals, or anything like that, that were observed on the beach at this time?-A. The only thing I was watching for was a storm warning at the time-a northeast storm. I saw the northwest storm warning flying from the mast; that is all I saw on the beach.

27. Q. Did you identify that storm warning?—A. Yes, sir; northwest storm warning, sir.

46. Q. After passing this schooner that was seen, you stated that you later saw storm warnings in Provincetown?-A. Yes, sir.

47.Q. Did you put your glasses on this?-A. Yes, sir.

48.Q. Did you observe any other ships in Provincetown Harbor at that time; schooners or anything else?-A. Well, not right up in the harbor. I noticed that heading down toward us was Nantucket lightship and several schooners on our starboard hand.

James Millazo, seaman, first class, witness:

6. Q. What particular duties were you performing on the afternoon of the 17th? A. At the wheel, sir.

7. Q. What were your duties as helmsman?-A. To look at the compass and steer the course.

61. Q. Did you see the submarine at any time?-A. No, sir.

Senator GERRY. Commander Hoover, I would like to ask you. how high above the water line is the crow's nest of the destroyer Paulding.

Commander HoOVER. I should say the Paulding's crow's nest would be about 60 feet above the water.

Senator GERRY. Is it the custom of the Navy to carry a lookout in the crow's nest at all times when running?

Commander HOOVER. It is the universal custom in the day time; not at night.

Senator GERRY. To carry a lookout in the crow's nest when running? Commander HOOVER. Yes,

Senator GERRY. Whether the day is clear or not?

Commander HoOVER. The only exception I know of is in the case of a heavy rain or a fog, in which visibility is better from a low position In that case the lookout is brought down to the bridge, or oftentimes down on the lower decks.

Senator GERRY. Is that why you did not carry a lookout in the crow's nest at night?

Commander HOOVER. Yes; there would be no advantage in having him in the crow's nest at night.

Senator GERRY. In other words, you can see better at night nearer the water.

Commander HOOVER. Sometimes. The visibility is limited at night, anyway, and the distance can be gotten from the bridge just as well as from higher up.

Senator GERRY. Do you generally carry a lookout in the bow of a destroyer, or does she make too much spray?

Commander HOOVER. Lookouts, as far as I know, are not carried in the bows of steam vessels, particularly destroyers, where there is spray coming over all the time, which would make them very inefficient if stationed there.

Senator GERRY. Then the custom in the Navy on destroyers is to carry the lookout either in the crow's nest or on the bridge; and when he is carried on the bridge he is assigned to do that duty and no other?

Commander HOOVER. Yes; and it is particularly necessary and, I believe, the universal custom of the Navy to see that the lookout has a clear view. In other words, he is not permitted to look through glass nor stand behind any obstruction.

Senator GERRY. What is the reason for that?

Commander HOOVER. To make his field of vision the best possible. Senator GERRY. Does the glass hinder his vision?

Commander HOOVER. I should say so, certainly. Glass is never perfectly clean, and on shipboard, particularly around the bridge or any place forward, it would generally have salt spots and water on

the face of it.

Senator GERRY. On this destroyer, as I understand it, part of the bridge was protected by glass windows, which could be raised and lowered, and then the two ends of the bridge were open; is that correct?

Commander HOOVER. That is my understanding; yes.

Senator GERRY. Under Navy custom, then, a lookout on the bridge would be assigned to either the port or starboard side where it was open, and where he could have clear vision?