Destroyers - Fletcher Class

[bbvet]

One other very interesting detail in your photo of INGERSOLL is that she has the large silhouette numbers on her hull, not the small white wartime numbers carried during hostilities. This is the first photo I've seen of one of our fleet destroyers with the peacetime number scheme.

[blidgepump]

Big Numbers ....

One other very interesting detail in your photo of INGERSOLL is that she has the large silhouette numbers on her hull, not the small white wartime numbers carried during hostilities. This is the first photo I've seen of one of our fleet destroyers with the peacetime number scheme.

BBVET that caught my eye, too.
I assumed that since the War was over the BuShips decided it was Okay to make a ship's identity easier?
But this is a "WILD Guess".

[bbvet]

BP,

I will ask this of a couple of my naval researcher friends who are both knowledgeable in WWII ships, equipment, colors, camo, etc. I don't think I've seen very many WWII-era or post-war photos of returning ships with anything but the small white wartime numerals. This is an oddity!

[blidgepump]

Neat video ....

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...E&&FORM=VRDGAR

[blidgepump]

Typhoon Cobra....

USS Spence (DD-512) attempts to refuel from the battleship USS New Jersey (BB-62) on 17 December 1944, the day before she sank during the Typhoon Cobra.

[FlankDestroyer]

USS Spence (DD-512) attempts to refuel from the battleship USS New Jersey (BB-62) on 17 December 1944, the day before she sank during the Typhoon Cobra.

Great post and this leads me to another fuel comment/discussion which I have been considering for a while since the fuel oil heaters discussion came up pages back. The USN lost 3 Destroyers in that Typhoon, two Farragut Class and One Fletcher, the Spence. Ironically one of the design considerations for the Fletcher Class was a hunt for more stability as our post WWI ships starting with the Farragut Class were top heavy.

Incidentally Spence was one of Arleigh Burke's Little Beavers Squadron which won fame in the Solomon Islands in WWII.

Putting aside meteorology and task force decisions for the moment as the cause of these ships being lost, Destroyers back then (still do) always needed gas. High speed just compounded the problem. Fuel consumption was not a linear function but almost exponential as the speed went up. Low fuel means less stability so one can ballast with salt water to regain stability. However water and fuel is not a great cocktail for boilers so Commanding Officers are reluctant to ballast sometimes if getting the real stuff (fuel) is imminent (they hope). Such is the case with USS Spence. To add fuel to the fire figuratively trying to get NSFO/Black Oil from a BB in a building storm must have been a real treat as their crews were less experienced with the rigs. This was a big deal as controlling the fueling rigs was perilous in high seas as there were no automatic tensioning systems like we have today. Plus the hoses were lashed into fueling trunks so one could part a rig (span wire, whip and or hose) easily, which while dangerous to deck crews also meant that nobody got fuel from that rig till repairs were made.

It gets worse I hear that keeping station alongside a Iowa was trouble some due to its unique bow wave. So tending the winches when ships are rolling at different rates and directions concurrently with the DD having problems maintaining station was extremely demanding to say the least. And another consideration was.....were they steaming the best/smoothest course or were they steering a course to clear the storm?? And with every screw up and act of God the tanks get drier and stability worse. Imagine if you went back and forth multiple time i.e. ballasting and then pumping out the salt water and every refueling effort failed. USN Destroyers today have auto compensating systems for that very reason.

What to do?

Eternal Father, strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!

[blidgepump]

It gets worse I hear that keeping station alongside a Iowa was trouble some due to its unique bow wave. So tending the winches when ships are rolling at different rates and directions concurrently with the DD having problems maintaining station was extremely demanding to say the least. And another consideration was.....were they steaming the best/smoothest course or were they steering a course to clear the storm?? And with every screw up and act of God the tanks get drier and stability worse. Imagine if you went back and forth multiple time i.e. ballasting and then pumping out the salt water and every refueling effort failed. USN Destroyers today have auto compensating systems for that very reason.

I was not aware of the Iowa bow wave factor. Granted the Fletcher and Iowa hulls look different, I just wasn't aware of the bow wave issue.
Good thought provoking recital!

[Albany Rifles]

USS Spence (DD-512) attempts to refuel from the battleship USS New Jersey (BB-62) on 17 December 1944, the day before she sank during the Typhoon Cobra.

As a logisitician that photo actually shows me one of the three legs of the stool which made the USN such a potent force in World War 2.

That is the ability to do UNREP to keep fighting forces forward into the fight. At the time of the Guadalcanal Campaign the USN had several BBs available at Perl but could not deploy them to the Solomons as they were older models which were fuel hogs and the Navy didn't yet have the oilers available to provide for them. The build up of the Fleet Train was as important as the ships of the line to their success.

Oh, and the other 2 legs of that stool (in my mind)

- Superior Damage Control capabilities
- Radar Controlled 5/38" Anti Aircraft Fire

[blidgepump]

Mahan's influence on tankers...

[QUOTE=Albany Rifles;1045809]

"At the time of the Guadalcanal Campaign the USN had several BBs available at Perl but could not deploy them to the Solomons as they were older models which were fuel hogs and the Navy didn't yet have the oilers available to provide for them. The build up of the Fleet Train was as important as the ships of the line to their success."

Energy is KING and your point about fuel compliments Mahan's recital well. Thank goodness the Pacific was vast and the IJN lacked the resource to deploy enough subs to impact the tanker fleet.

[Albany Rifles]

[QUOTE=blidgepump;1045825]

"At the time of the Guadalcanal Campaign the USN had several BBs available at Perl but could not deploy them to the Solomons as they were older models which were fuel hogs and the Navy didn't yet have the oilers available to provide for them. The build up of the Fleet Train was as important as the ships of the line to their success."

Energy is KING and your point about fuel compliments Mahan's recital well. Thank goodness the Pacific was vast and the IJN lacked the resource to deploy enough subs to impact the tanker fleet.

That little tidbit I pulled from Hornfisher's Neptune's Inferno. I never realized it prior to that....and I've been reading about that campaign for almost 50 years!

[blidgepump]

The really super secret "Silent service"....

[QUOTE=Albany Rifles;1045843]

That little tidbit I pulled from Hornfisher's Neptune's Inferno. I never realized it prior to that....and I've been reading about that campaign for almost 50 years!

So much is owed to the submariners of WWII and yet the sailors running the supply ships, especially the oilers are hardly mentioned.

When the USS Platte memorial was erected (AO-24 & AO-186) the culmination of this tanker fleet running "Hot laps" from Pearl Harbor to "Point X" in the vast Pacific oceans was discovered by pursuing the deck logs of the Fletcher DD's. DD's burn lots of fuel during their sprints from point "A" to wherever and back. The DD's were built with the Atlantic Ocean War in mind, rather than Pacific. The DD's always required fuel. I've read a Captain of a Fletcher always had at least 1/2 tank on board. Thus the short legs of the Fletchers always required a fill up....

[Boilermaker9]

Great post and this leads me to another fuel comment/discussion which I have been considering for a while since the fuel oil heaters discussion came up pages back. The USN lost 3 Destroyers in that Typhoon, two Farragut Class and One Fletcher, the Spence. Ironically one of the design considerations for the Fletcher Class was a hunt for more stability as our post WWI ships starting with the Farragut Class were top heavy.

Incidentally Spence was one of Arleigh Burke's Little Beavers Squadron which won fame in the Solomon Islands in WWII.

Putting aside meteorology and task force decisions for the moment as the cause of these ships being lost, Destroyers back then (still do) always needed gas. High speed just compounded the problem. Fuel consumption was not a linear function but almost exponential as the speed went up. Low fuel means less stability so one can ballast with salt water to regain stability. However water and fuel is not a great cocktail for boilers so Commanding Officers are reluctant to ballast sometimes if getting the real stuff (fuel) is imminent (they hope). Such is the case with USS Spence. To add fuel to the fire figuratively trying to get NSFO/Black Oil from a BB in a building storm must have been a real treat as their crews were less experienced with the rigs. This was a big deal as controlling the fueling rigs was perilous in high seas as there were no automatic tensioning systems like we have today. Plus the hoses were lashed into fueling trunks so one could part a rig (span wire, whip and or hose) easily, which while dangerous to deck crews also meant that nobody got fuel from that rig till repairs were made.

It gets worse I hear that keeping station alongside a Iowa was trouble some due to its unique bow wave. So tending the winches when ships are rolling at different rates and directions concurrently with the DD having problems maintaining station was extremely demanding to say the least. And another consideration was.....were they steaming the best/smoothest course or were they steering a course to clear the storm?? And with every screw up and act of God the tanks get drier and stability worse. Imagine if you went back and forth multiple time i.e. ballasting and then pumping out the salt water and every refueling effort failed. USN Destroyers today have auto compensating systems for that very reason.

What to do?

Eternal Father, strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!

You are correct flank destroyer the fletchers had mostly fuel tanks they had potable water and feed water and I believe the fwd peek tank was fresh or feed. the ships were originally designed to be stable when 50% or less fuel on board. They were designed to be stable with little fuel on board. The fuel tanks designed to be used as you said to serve as blast tanks as needed, or wanted. That brings up the 50% rule meaning ships needed to to off when they err 50% or so with us in the 60s that was hard and fast. You are also correct about water and fuel which is why before you transfer fuel you strip the tank meaning the oil king strips the water out of the tank into a settler and then finely sent the offending water overboard. In theory and in practice that usually worked, once in a while even if done right the fires would sputter. But as you stated Masters and Chief engineers were hesitant to ballast fuel tanks, for fear of loosing fires.

In the early 70s I was on a "P"fired (Pressure Fired) DE that had a compensating system, we stripped tanks and we pumped the DFM through a colesser filter before it went into the service tanks. In those days we would refuel aft with a watch FWD at the overboard, when the discharge turned golden we were full. In port we did the same thing using a very large Donut for the discharge. However we very seldom took on much fuel in port if we did we took only what was needed/absolutely necessary as a result we generally waited till we got underway and found a tanker. We also tried to find a tanker before we got into port. If I am not mistaken the Spruance and early gas turbine ships had compensating systems. The theory behind them is that as fuel transferred seawater takes its place thereby maintaining stability. Actually we rode better empty as sea water is heaver than distillate, and when fueling what distillate wound up overboard would evaporate very quickly. Not sure the EPA bought that theory. I know they do not today! I am not sure ships today have a compensating system due to EPA Coast Guard and ABS. it is a different world today for sure

[blidgepump]

Follow up question....

You are also correct about water and fuel which is why before you transfer fuel you strip the tank meaning the oil king strips the water out of the tank into a settler and then finely sent the offending water overboard. In theory and in practice that usually worked, once in a while even if done right the fires would sputter. But as you stated Masters and Chief engineers were hesitant to ballast fuel tanks, for fear of loosing fires.

Follow up question: Using the specific gravity of Sea water vs. Oil is straight forward in science to establish a boundary layer. But this settler that you refer too.... Is it like a screen in the end of a gas funnel or like a weir ?

[Boilermaker9]

Follow up question: Using the specific gravity of Sea water vs. Oil is straight forward in science to establish a boundary layer. But this settler that you refer too.... Is it like a screen in the end of a gas funnel or like a weir ?

Wow this is really jogging my memory. As I recall Bilge pump it is a separate much smaller tank, that the stripping pump discharges into. The stripping pump discharge line had a sample connection, and this was sampled every minute or so. Once there was no more water present in the sample then the transfer pump took over and fuel was shifted to the service tank We are not talking a whole lot but they wanted to make suer they got most if not all water out. Just to be clear water not only came from ballasting, it also came from condensation in the tank. First any fuel tank was filled only 90/95% Capacity. This leaves room for expansion in warmer regions and accounts for the heating of black oil when pumped, when it cools moisture accumulates in the tanks and moisture inevitably enters the tanks through the gooseneck deck vents, even though they have ball check valves called "bellmouths" screwed on the ends to prevent water from entering the system. They were not all that effective. This is the major reason for stripping tanks before transferring to service tanks. The settler just gave them a place to put the stripped water and a final settling out before going overboard Most people know of settlers in the engine room where the lube oil transferred from the main sump goes up to a settler so the water separates and the oil then goes into a storage tank and then back into the engine and the water overboard. 2190TEP turbine lube oil acquires water through the labyrinth seals or packing on both ends of the turbine. These seals inevitably leak steam, Gland Seal Steam is supposed to deter this from happening however that was not always the case. If one watches the bubblers on a turbine in operation one will see not only temperature but the oil will start off a bright gold color and then begins to turn cloudy this is a mixture of air and water in the oil. We used to take samples of lube oil not sure so I will say every so often and put them in a lighted rack and let them sit after a period of time the the oil king would give his ok. One would be surprised what settled out of the lube oil! We also did the same for fuel.
When Distillate asme along in the early 70s. things became a bit easier we still stripped tanks but all fuel transferred to a service tank was sent through a colesser filter which removed remaining water. It drained out the bottom into the bilges. Those elements had to be changed every so often, as distillate was very corrosive and it cleaned lines of rust dirt etc. Which if not filtered out would plug up the sprayer plates on the burners.

[FlankDestroyer]

One can imagine going through this process multiple times after each failed refueling in the case of the USS Spence and others. The whole process of filling the tanks was not exactly pure science as golly there were essentially no fuel tank gauges just sounding tubes. Also it takes a while for the fuel to separate if they are indeed in the same tank....and if you don't have the time?


There was always less "overfilling" during night refueling. This is sort of like my black coffee mug is always cleaner than my white cup???

We could of used the automatic pump turn off feature we all enjoy at the petrol station.