Admiral FURLONG. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. Why should the ammunition for such ships affect the overhaul work so early, as indicated by your statement a moment ago? Admiral FURLONG. Well, it should not. Service ammunition in new ships should not be overhauled--and it is not. But in this first part of the item we have the preparation of target-practice ammunition for the new ships. At the ammunition depots the powder comes in in bulk, in large cans, and it has to be prepared and put up into cartridge cases and primers put in the base of the cartridge case, Then the shells are delivered to ammunition depots in great quantities. The men have to handle those at the ammunition depots throughout the country and prepare them for the new ships. Mr. UMSTEAD. But the largest part of the item that we are discuss ing is $37,308, which you state is for the purpose of covering the cost of overhaul of service ammunition. Admiral FURLONG. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. Which is increasing each year on account of new construction? Admiral FURLONG. Well, of course, the latest new constructionthat would not be overhauled until after about 3 years. Mr. UMSTEAD. And the shipbuilding program was begun in 1933. Admiral FURLONG. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. And only a relatively small number of new vessels have been in commission more than 18 months, have they? Admiral FURLONG. That is right. Mr. UMSTEAD. You would not have anything to do as to those? Admiral FURLONG. Would not touch that; no, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. You would not have to touch a ship that had been in service only 18 months for the purposes of this item, would you! Admiral FURLONG. No, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. Then why is it affected. Admiral FURLONG. It is not affected by the new construction. Mr. UMSTEAD. Then why should your statement appear to that effect as a justification of this item of increase? Admiral FURLONG. Well, I cannot justify that part of the item. Mr. UMSTEAD. Then you mean that you do not need the $37,308! Admiral FURLONG. No; I mean that the $37.308 additional is needed for those ships that do require overhaul of service ammuni tion. But this language "on account of new construction" should never have been in there; except, as I said, there is some new construction that has been added to the Navy within 2 or 3 yearsbut very little, as you remarked. It would be very little that would be on account of new construction. Whenever work at a navy yard involves welding in, or in the vicinity of, a ship's magazine the ammunition must be removed from the magazine to a naval ammunition. depot for safe storage. In a large number of new ships work of this sort is necessary, either as alterations or to complete work not completed at the time of delivery. Whenever ammunition is sent to a naval ammunition depot, it is inspected, damaged containers are replaced, and so forth. TORPEDO OVERHAUL Mr. UMSTEAD. Proceed with your statement. Admiral FURLONG. Six: $35,700 increased requirements for torpedo erhaul. The total for 1939 is $249,700, which covers routine overul, repair, and upkeep of torpedoes at Newport, Keyport, and exandria. Exceeds the 1938 estimates by $35,700. Increase due to llowing: (1) $34,300 increase due to replacement of enlisted men Keyport, paid from another appropriation, by 12 machinists, at .93 per diem, and 4 helpers, at $6.05. REPLACEMENT OF ENLISTED MEN BY CIVILIANS FOR TORPEDO OVERHAUL WORK Mr. UMSTEAD. You say that this item is requested to enable you replace enlisted men with civilian machinists? Admiral FURLONG. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. Are you getting along all right under the present rangement of using enlisted men? Admiral FURLONG. We are getting along, but we do not have a rimanency, naturally, with enlisted men, because they are shifting om time to time. They have to go to sea. They belong on ships. f course, they get some training, coming into this job, but it is not e most effective way of carrying on a manufacturing establishment. is better to have a machinist who is on the job and familiar with e material, all the time. Mr. UMSTEAD. Is there any provision in naval regulations for rmitting enlisted men who are experts, for example, such as a mainist, to remain at a given post of duty indefinitely, if their services needed there? Admiral FURLONG. I do not know of anything in the regulations, it I presume, if they were needed there, absolutely needed, the ureau of Navigation could certainly keep them there. Mr. UMSTEAD. If that be true, why would it not be possible to ave more permanency, in cases of the kind you describe, than you ow have, by having them stay there just one period of time and en sending them to the fleet, or some other place? Admiral FURLONG. I think it goes back to the real basic reason hat we like to have all sailors afloat, if we can. They are called nlisted men in the Navy and they are supposed to be sailormen and hey really ought to be doing duty, basically, on ships. They should ot be taking up the places of people who might otherwise be emloved, people in the civilian population. You appropriate so much money for so many naval vessels, and o look at the Navy people as being in the ships. I think that is the basic reason why we do not like to see sailormen around at shore stations, too much. CONVERSION AND RELOADING IGNITERS Mr. UMSTEAD. Proceed with your statement, Admiral. Admiral FURLONG (continuing). (a) $1,400 increase in the cost of conversion and reloading of about 1,000 igniters fired in service a cost of approximately $5.90 each. Increase is due to rising costs of material and increased number of igniters to be loaded. . TURRET REPLACEMENT MATERIAL (7) $8,000 additional requirements for turret replacement material. The total required for 1939 is $173,000. It covers purchase and manufacture of turret material, such as motors, rammers, elevating gears. trays, hoists, counter recoil cylinders, and parts, and so forth. Eight thousand dollars increase is due to the addition of new turret ships to the fleet which imposes a heavier replacement program of turret material. Even our new 1,850-ton destroyers are now turret ships, with enclosed twin mounts. SMOKELESS POWDER FOR TARGET PRACTICE (8) $198,700 additional requirements for smokeless powder for target practice. The total required for 1939 is $1,027,700. Provides for purchase and manufacture of 1,800,000 pounds of service powder at approximately 52 cents per pound to replace a like amount of old service powder expended in target practice; for purchase of 65,000 pounds of blacg powder at 18 cents per pound and 200,000 pounds of explosive "D" at 40 cents per pound for target practice. Large increase in DD's mounting 5"/38 and cruisers mounting 5"/25 and 5"/38 all firing loaded and fuzed ammunition for AA practices greatly increases requirements for explosive "D." This is strictly a target-practice item. Mr. UMSTEAD. How much was this item increased this year? Admiral FURLONG. 1937 and 1938 were the same $829,000—no increase. PURCHASE AND MANUFACTURE OF SMOKELESS POWDER Mr. PLUMLEY. I should like to inquire whether or not this smokeles powder that is used in target practice is manufactured by the Gov ernment. Admiral FURLONG. Yes, sir. Just about half of our powder is mad by the Government and half by du Pont. All the big-gun powder is made by the Government. Mr. PLUMLEY. And the cost, as I understand it, has not increase over the preceding period? Admiral FURLONG. No, sir; it has gone down some. The cost of powder is one of the few things that has gone down over the las period, per pound. The reason for its going down, in the case of the du Ponts, is because the Army and the Navy pooled their require ments so that they could give a large order to the du Ponts. They dropped the price a few cents-about 4 cents a pound from what they asked for small orders. It will run around 52 cents for small order and I think the du Pont people in our last contract got it down to 4 cents a pound for a large order of around a million pounds. Mr. PLUMLEY. What proportion of the powder is manufactures by the Government as against that which is purchased outside? Admiral FURLONG. We manufacture just about half, lately. Mr. UMSTEAD. How does the cost of the Government-made produe compare with the cost of powder purchased from private industry Admiral FURLONG. For equal amounts, being placed in production ours will run about 57 cents and the du Pont's at that time ran abou 52 cents. But, as I just remarked, the reason we got a still lowe price from the du Ponts was on account of pooling our orders. Mr. CASEY. Lower than 52 cents? Mr. CASEY. Is du Pont the only source besides the Government tablishment for powder? Admiral FURLONG. Yes. There is a Hercules Powder Co., but we ave not received a successful bid from that company since the war. Mr. PLUMLEY. Is the Government producing smokeless powder › capacity? In an emergency could you make any more powder an you are making now? Admiral FURLONG. We are putting money in our plant, as we get , to increase our capacity, right along. Of course, we have lots of om to expand at Indian Head, in the way of putting up buildings, ut we are producing now as much as we can at Indian Head with e facilities that we have there. We could increase our output there ore by going to three shifts. One is now employed. In this paricular item we are asking for 1,800,000 pounds of service powder, nd not more than 50,000 pounds of that will be made outside the overnment plant. The rest is all made at Indian Head. AMMUNITION DETAILS FOR TARGET PRACTICE Mr. UMSTEAD. Proceed, Admiral. Admiral FURLONG. Nine: $133,700 for increased needs of ammuniion details. The total required for 1939 is $2,274,800 and all except 220,000 for gages is required for target practice. The break-down ollows: (a) $917,900 for small-arms ammunition which is $70,000 ess than 1938. Provides ammunition for training purposes as folows: Aircraft gunnery training, antiaircraft gunnery training, general small-arms ground training, miscellaneous training (excaliber iring, ceremonies, armorers, schools, and so forth). Mr. UMSTEAD. This item was materially increased for the current iscal year, was it not? Admiral FURLONG. It is $70,000 less than for 1938, and this is .30aliber and .50-caliber ammunition and some 45-caliber and .22aliber. The figure for 1937 was $752,340 and for 1938 $987.900, and this gure is $917,900. That is, the total is $1,814,100 for 1937 and $2,114,100 for 1938. Mr. UMSTEAD. Then there was a very material increase? Admiral FURLONG. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. Proceed. Admiral FURLONG (continuing statement): (b) $20,000 for gages, an annual recurring item. There is no increase or decrease. (e) $330,000 for fuzes and fuze covers which is $73,500 more than 1938. Increase is due to large increase in DD's mounting 5-inch 38 and cruisers mounting 5-inch 25 and 5-inch 38, all firing loaded and fuzed ammunition for AA practices. See item No. 8 for number and calibers of AA guns in service during 1938, 1939, and 1940. I might explain that that $330,000 is because so many of these ships now have double-purpose guns and are shooting explosive ammunition. The fuze on the end of the projectile shell has to be covered, protected by a brass cap which goes down over the end of it, which we call the fuze cover. (d) $224,300 for primers is $24,300 more than 1938. The increase is due to target practice requirements. These are made at Newport. (e) $437,600 for miscellaneous details is $32,900 more than 1938. The increase is due to target practice requirements and for replacement of containers damaged in handling ammunition. Among others, miscellaneous details include expenditures for 4,500.000 yards of silk thread, at a cost of $.001234 per yard; approximately 120,000 square yards of silk cartridge bag cloth at $0.60 per yard; 50,000 cardboard sheets for wads and distance pieces; and 50,000 cork plugs for cartridge cases, etcetera, etcetera. (f) Three hundred and eighteen thousand dollars for landing force ammunition for the Navy and Marine Corps for training in landing-force operations. United States Fleet landing-force exerci→→ No. 5 is scheduled for 1939, and these funds are estimated accordingly. The increase of $73,000 over 1938 breaks down as follows: (1) Navy: Increase weapons afloat (81 mm mortars, 37 mm guns, and 75 mm pack howitzers) – (2) Increased weapons to be active in Marine Corps_-. $11.500 (3) Increased training of personnel in active Marine Corps units.. (4) Increased training in Marine Corps schools---- 10,000 20.385 (5) Increased allowances for landing exercises and field problems.... 18,965 11.92 Total_---- 73,000 ADMINISTRATIVE RESERVE Mr. UMSTEAD. Admiral, of the amount allowed for the current year, $2,114,100, how much has been set aside in the so-called administrative reserve? Admiral FURLONG. Three hundred and thirty-three thousand dollars. Mr. UMSTEAD. How much, if any, of that amount are you expect ing to have released before the end of the current fiscal year. Admiral? Admiral FURLONG. We asked for the release of all of that, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. What items were included in the total amount placed in reserve? Admiral FURLONG. I have the items here, in this table. (The statement referred to is as follows:) |