So you have a real ready unit that is seapower right from the word "Go." I think most everything else has been said. U.S. LEAD IN NUCLEAR PROPULSION EXPERIENCE Chairman PASTORE. How long have you been with nuclear propulsion in surface ships? Captain PEET. I have been with it about 4 years. Chairman PASTORE. And Captain Wilkinson? Captain WILKINSON. About 10 years. Chairman PASTORE. It is fair for me to say these men represent the experience we have had in nuclear surface propulsion? Admiral RICKOVER. Yes, you should recognize the normal tour of a commanding officer for a large ship is about 1 year. So if you take in the accumulated experience these people would represent three to four skippers of ships during that time so they can talk from a greater wealth of experience than the captain of a conventional ship could talk. They serve longer on nuclear ships. Chairman PASTORE. Do you know of anyone who has been more. intimately connected with the piloting of nuclear ships than Captain Wilkinson, Captain dePoix and Captain Peet? Admiral RICKOVER. I think the Russians would give a million. dollars for them. [Laughter.] CRUISE LIMITS OF NUCLEAR SHIPS Representative BATES. Did you indicate these ships could stay at sea 4 months Captain PEET. I feel the Bainbridge can, yes, sir-120 days. Captain PEET. We wouldn't have chilled food that long, but we would have sufficient food supplies. The limit of the Bainbridge is the morale of the men on board. Representative BATES. You would have about a month with reefer space? Captain PEET. A bit longer-60 or so. Captain WILKINSON. The Long Beach has 112 days of storage space. Representative BATES. How long do you have for reefer space? Captain WILKINSON. If you freeze only-if you convert your chill and don't have fresh vegetables-just deep-freeze, we have 108 days. Captain PEET. This isn't taking advantage either of the space as they are beginning to in submarines. I have had sub officers on board who are just amazed at the space we have. They say that could all be food. Admiral RICKOVER. I think you could double that time if it was really necessary. The Navy could put in provisions for twice as long. Captain PEET. There has never been an incentive to do this before. Captain WILKINSON. I come from a submarine background and we have actually laid canned goods in the passageways and walked on them when we wanted to go on a long patrol. When we say we can stay at sea on a surface ship 100 days, that is just using the storage space we have for it. If we really loaded food in there, we could stay considerably longer. DOD DISCUSSIONS WITH NUCLEAR SHIP SKIPPERS Chairman PASTORE. Captain Peet, did Dr. Brown discuss this matter with you? Captain PEET. No, sir, he has never talked to me. I don't think I have been available. Chairman PASTORE. How about Defense Secretary McNamara? Captain PEET. No, sir. Chairman PASTORE. How about you, Captain de Poix? Captain DEPOIx. Yes, sir, I had the pleasure of talking to Mr. McNamara. I have not talked to Dr. Brown. Chairman PASTORE. How about you, Captain Wilkinson? Captain WILKINSON. I have talked to Secretary Korth but no one else you have mentioned. Captain PEET. I have talked to Secretary Korth also. He has been aboard the Bainbridge. Chairman PASTORE. Are there any further questions? This committee has been honored all day with a distinguished presence and I want to compliment and thank him because we are very grateful for his participation and patience in sitting here, Mr. Paul Nitze, Assistant Secretary of Defense. We are ever so grateful to you for being here all day and following these proceedings the way you have. I was wondering if you wanted. to tell us anything, Mr. Nitze. I am not asking you to do so. I am leaving it up to you because I know the position you are in. Secretary NITZE. I really haven't anything to say because this question of nuclear propulsion has not been in the sphere of responsibility of my office, International Security. I haven't been abreast of this problem since 1956 when I spent the summer working with Project Nobska with Admiral Ramage on undersea warfare. At that time we came out strongly in support of the Polaris submarine concept of nuclear propulsion with a solid fuel missile. Since that time this has not been a subject I have worked with so I have been getting briefed by Admiral McDonald, Admiral Rickover, and Admiral Connolly. I value very much the opportunity you have given me to listen to this discussion. Chairman PASTORE. We have been honored by your presence. You sat there patiently and I wanted you recognized and acknowledged. We are going to recess until 2:30 tomorrow afternoon. Between 2:30 and 3:30 we will hear other witnesses and then we will hear Dr. Brown at 3:30. CNO ENDORSEMENT OF NUCLEAR SHIP COMMANDERS' TESTIMONY Admiral McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, since I won't be here tomorrow afternoon, may I make just one comment. You heard Captain dePoix, skipper of Enterprise and Captain Peet, skipper of Bainbridge, state that there are certain tactical advantages 21 Mr. Nitze was appointed Secretary of the Navy on Nov. 29, 1963. from the CO's point of view. Admiral Hayward reinforced their statements from the task group commander point of view. It was my good fortune to be fleet commander over both of these ships and I would like to reinforce Admiral Hayward's reinforcement of these same tactical advantages. Chairman PASTORE. All this evidence and all this testimony we have had from these men who were there only complicates the mystery of the decision. These are men who have had more actual experience than anyone else. These are men who have had the responsibility of these great ships. To have them take their very positive position and then merely say, "It is not too clear the advantages are there," mystifies me. BASIC NEED OF NAVY FOR SUPERIOR PROPULSION SYSTEMS Admiral RICKOVER. There is one thing I would like to add, sir. There has not really been a great deal of thought about what the future of all military organizations should be in view of the advent of missiles and atomic power. It is quite natural for the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Chief of Naval Operations to be concerned about what the future of the Navy should be. In my opinion the Navy has been derelict in not taking the initiative to figure out what the Navy should be like and for this reason the Department of Defense has taken the initiative and the Navy has been put behind. There is one thing you can do. Suppose you start talking about an Army. You may not know what function an Army should perform, but you know you are going to have to have a soldier. At least you know that much. If it is at all possible we need a Navy, you know you have to have some kind of ships. From the shipbuilding standpoint weapons systems are changing now so fast that almost from the time a ship is authorized and the time it is completed you have a new weapons system. So you can't base your ship entirely on one weapons system. Therefore, you are going to need ships that have a good platform. You have to have the kind of platform which can take different types of weapons system, if necessary every 5, 6 or even 10 years. You also need a good propulsion system. That ship must last for 20, 25, or 30 years so it is highly important if you appropriate large sums of money for a modern warship that you put in a good propulsion plant and the one you know is the best. In my opinion it is foolhardy to put in a propulsion plant which you have today when you know something else is better. Further the requirements for electric power are growing tremendously. The first ship I took a midshipman's cruise on had 270 kilowatts reciprocating engine generators. On this four reactor carrier we plan to put in seven 8,000-kilowatt turbogenerators to take care of all future electrical requirements. If there is anything in the Navy that is growing, it is the requirement for electrical power. If you don't have a great amount of electrical power this ship won't be good several years from now. The important thing is to get a good platform; get good propulsion, and get a good electrical plant because 56,000 kilowatts of electrical power is more than twice the propulsion power of the battleship California. Just for auxiliary power. You can put that in with conventional oil, but the ship can't steam as far if you use large blocks of electrical power. You can do it with nuclear power. This is the point I want to make. If you are thinking 20 to 30 years from now, you cannot afford to put in obsolete equipment. Representative BATES. The rate we are going we won't have these ships anyway so it won't make much difference. Admiral RICKOVER. I think you will have ships. Representative BATES. I just want to say I was disappointed last year in the Navy presentation when you came up with 30 odd ships and it ought to have been in the neighborhood of 70. We are going to have to face this one day or another. We have some $25 billion worth of ship construction that you have to put into effect in the next 10 years somewhere somehow. Admiral MCDONALD. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to have so many people on my side. Representative BATES. We want you on our side. Chairman PASTORE. Tomorrow we will hear testimony on the operational characteristics and the various studies that have been made. I know Admiral McDonald can be here. I don't know about Dr. Seaborg. Are you going to return? Dr. SEA BORG. I am not sure I will be here in the morning. Chairman PASTORE. I would like to have you return in the afternoon. I would hope everyone else will return tomorrow if they can do so at 2:30 p.m. (Whereupon at 5 p.m., Wednesday, October 30, 1963, the meeting was adjourned, to reconvene at 2:30 p.m. on Thursday, October 31, 1963.) NUCLEAR PROPULSION FOR NAVAL SURFACE VESSELS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1963 CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m., pursuant to recess, in room AE-1, the Capitol, Senator John O. Pastore, chairman of the committee, presiding. Present: Senators Pastore and Hickenlooper; Representatives Holifield, Price, Aspinall, Morris, Hosmer, Bates, Westland, and Anderson. Also present: John T. Conway, executive director; Edward J. Bauser, assistant staff director; George F. Murphy, professional staff member; James B. Graham, technical adviser; and Jack Rosen, staff consultant. Representatives of the Department of Defense: Dr. Harold Brown, Director, Defense Research and Engineering; Hon. Paul H. Nitze, Assistant Secretary of Defense; Capt. E. R. Zumwalt, Jr., aide to Mr. Nitze; Rear Adm. Carlton B. Jones, Chief, Navy Office of Legislative Affairs; and Col. Grover K. Coe, Congressional Liaison Office. Representatives of the Department of the Navy: Hon. James H. Wakelin, Assistant Secretary of the Navy (R. & D.); Vice Adm. Hyman G. Rickover, Assistant Chief for Nuclear Propulsion, Bureau of Ships; Capt. Vincent P. dePoix, duty under instruction at National War College, former commanding officer, U.S.S. Enterprise; Capt. Raymond E. Peet, commanding officer, U.S.S. Bainbridge; Rear Adm. T. F. Connolly, Director, Strike Warfare Division, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; Capt. S. T. De LaMater, Strike Warfare Division, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; Capt. N. Sonenshein, Bureau of Ships; Capt. E. L. Beach, Navy Program Planning Office, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; Cdr. R. O. Welander, Navy Program Planning Office, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; Capt. W. J. Moran, naval aide to Assistant Secretary of the Navy (R. & D.); Capt. S. E. Robbins, Director, Congressional Investigations, Office of Legislative Affairs; Capt. Eugene P. Wilkinson, Submarine Warfare Division, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; Cdr. Leroy Hopkins, Congressional Investigations, Office of Legislative Affairs; and Milton Shaw, Office of Secretary of the Navy. Representatives of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission: James T. Ramey, Commissioner; Gerald F. Tape, Commissioner; John G. Palfrey, Commissioner; Gen. A. R. Luedecke, General Manager; Vice Adm. Hyman G. Rickover, Manager, Naval Reactors, Division of Reactor Development; David T. Leighton, Assistant Manager for Surface Ship Projects, Naval Reactors, Division of Reactor Development; Richard X. Donovan, congressional liaison; and A. A. Wells, Director, Division of International Affairs. |