A. Changes in Methods and Standards of Inspection During the War Period
This activity was quite fortunate at the start in having the services of Mr. William M. Keevey, Senior Inspector of Ship Construction CAF-7 as the first man on duty at this station. He had been transferred from the office of the Superintending Constructor USN at the Fore River Plant of the Bethlehem Steel Co. at Quincy, Mass. He had an extensive background in shipbuilding, commencing as an apprentice shipfitter at the Boston Navy Yard, and working up to a Quarterman Shipfitter at that yard. He also had some experience in local politics at Revere, Mass., and was in business for himself, exhibiting Submarine S-49 at various ports including the Chicago Exposition in 1933, prior to returning to shipbuilding inspection at Quincy. He knew steel shipbuilding, navy specifications, and human nature, and made an excellent head of the inspection department at the Defoe plant, developing quite an efficient inspection force from inexperienced inspectors, including young college graduates.
Following the inspection of the first submarine chaser PC-451 at Washington, D.C., after its commissioning at Norfolk 12 August 1940, the general report was to the effect that this was a very well designed and well built vessel, but too expensive for the light armament which it carried, and that it was too well finished for a naval vessel.
This comment had a bad effect on following P.C. construction, as it led to too much let-down on “finish,” to the extent that some of the next P.C.’s built here were criticized as being too roughly finished.
However, as the later programs progressed a mean standard of finish was approached, which was not too hard to look at, or live with, and still could not be criticized as being too expensive construction.
In all of the later programs of the D.E.’s, LCI(L)’s, A.P.D.’s and even the X.P.’s, frequent commendation was made, by ship’s officers and visitors from other shipyards, of the excellent quality of workmanship in the Defoe built ships in comparison with that of many other yards building similar vessels. Numerous letters were received by Mr. Defoe and the Supervisor of Shipbuilding, from ship officers after experiences in hurricanes, typhoons, and battle action, commenting on the sturdy and reliable construction of these vessels.
This does not mean that these vessels were always perfect. Some had their material difficulties, often due to inefficient operation, but, on the large, the record of this yard is one to be well proud of.
This cannot be said of the inspection at all of the yards listed in Part I. In some of the wood submarine chaser yards, the contractors were not too familiar with the work required, their supervision was inexperienced and inefficient, and unfortunately the same could be said of some of the inspectors. Often the inspectors knew something about yachts or fishing boats, but very little about navy specifications. This situation together with the urgent haste required to build these vessels, and using poor unseasoned lumber, led to the construction of some vessels—
—which were so unsatisfactory they could not be accepted until considerable repair work had been done.
Just to prevent criticism being placed in the wrong place, it is believed the glaring examples should be mentioned, which are covered by official correspondence. This applies to SC-511 and 512 in particular, the first two vessels built by the American Cruiser Co. of Trenton, Michigan, and in part to SC-658 and 659, the two following vessels built by the same yard. With changes in the inspection personnel and special attention to this yard, the following vessels were much improved.
It would take too much time and space to report in detail on the standards of inspection in all yards, but it might be added that the inspection of the Chris-Craft landing craft program was also considered to be of a high order in comparison with that of other plants supplying similar craft.
B. PROBLEMS OF MAINTENANCE OF ADEQUATE INSPECTION SERVICE WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO PERSONNEL.
The maintenance of adequate inspection personnel was one of the headaches of the supervisor’s duties. First, it was very difficult if not impossible to obtain good experienced inspectors. Good men could make more money working as mechanics or supervisors. The more experienced men were too old and too slow. The young men were inexperienced and generally subject to the draft.
Then, if some good men were trained into good inspectors, they either wanted to go somewhere else where they thought they would be better satisfied, or could get more money, or they became eligible for the draft and could not get deferment.
It was often necessary to rely on enlisted personnel for some types of inspection, especially on items of ship equipment requiring sea experience and knowledge of their use and operation.
It was especially difficult to obtain material men (civilians) because of their low civil service classification. It was found necessary to rely on enlisted men for most of this work.
Considerable dissatisfaction was occasioned by reclassification downward of numerous inspectors when the District classification service was established. In particular at this activity, this tendency was noted in connection with the inspectors at Chris-Craft. Apparently the classifiers considered that because the boats were small, a low-grade inspector could do the work.
Considerable difficulty was occasioned in trying to maintain an efficient compass adjusting force of enlisted men at Algonac, as previously mentioned in Part II. It was absolutely impossible to obtain any civilians qualified or willing to undertake that work.
C. RELATIONS WITH INM’S IN INSPECTION MATTERS.
Relations with INM’s in inspection matters were generally good.
Occasionally there would be hold-ups, due to checking up on certain specification details which in fact were not controlling or absolutely essential, but which the inspector could not waiver, because his knowledge of the situation was not sufficient to provide proper judgment.
As described in Part II this office had its own inspection representatives in several of the main subcontractors’ plants, especially in Saginaw, River Rouge and Detroit, which greatly facilitated the control of inspection in those plants.
Special attention is called to the Algonac report on this subject on pages 22, 23 and 24 of Exhibit No. 2.