1 agree that the use of radiotelephony on the Great Lakes is the best of all possible systems, I would have to answer "No." But in armying at the decision to exempt the lakes the Congress decided that this represented an exceptional situation which did not require an intermin with all the other vessels of the world. With respect to the voyages on the seacoast in the Hawaiian waters there is the need, the oppor tunity, and the desirability of fitting into that worldwide system. Mr. ROGERS of Texas. That is the reason I asked you if the groups you represent had membership in the Great Lakes areas. I was won dering why these groups, if they do have membership in there, did not insist on radiotelegraph in the Great Lakes and why they yielded to radiotelephone. Mr. STRICHARTZ. I think that the problem in the lakes is really one of close water navigation. It is similar to the provisions that are made in the deep sea when you enter harbors for bridge-to-bridge communication by radiotelephone which occurs on the deep sea. Åt the actual harbor entrances and in this close order navigation there is this need to exchange signals with vessels that are very close, a few hundred yards or a mile or two. In this situation the radiotelephone has its limited uses, a mile or two. Generally this is conceded by pretty much everybody. But in the 200-, 300-, 400-mile stretch of waters in and around the inlands this is considerably different. of Mr. ROGERS of Texas. If the Morro Castle had been an equal distance off the shore of the Great Lakes or a ship that size as it was off the coast of New Jersey, would the loss of life be the same, do you think, or would there have been means of rescuing people off that ship that were not available off the New Jersey coast? Mr. STRICHARTZ. I think the question is difficult to answer. It relates to the number of vessels that are equipped by different systems. In the lakes the phone system has developed prior to the congressional investigation and in the deep sea the telegraph system had developed. It was based on the greater distances. I would say offhand that for a span of 8, 10, 20 miles, radiotelephone might almost be as effective, with the limitations that are set forth as to personnel and what they are doing. Unfortunately, on the Morro Castle you ran into the problem of a master who was so busy trying to save his ship in a fire that he died and a chief mate who became master in a matter of minutes and neglected to send out an S O S until very much too late. There you have the problem in a nutshell. re Mr. ROGERS of Texas. What I am getting at, Mr. Strichartz, is this: The thing I cannot understand is if this radiotelegraph saves lives on the ocean and it is the best available, why it should not be used on the Great Lakes. Mr. STRICHARTZ. I agree with you, sir. It is the best available. I think it would find usefulness on the Great Lakes. This is a chapter in the history of the legislation that we have not been able to turn back to. It was before my day. Mr. ROGERS of Texas. I think some of the other members may have some questions on that. Let me ask you one further question, and then we will proceed with the other questions. What would be you feeling, on page 1, line 7 of the bill, if the words "in the course of a voyage" were stricken out and inserted in lieu thereof with the words "are engaged exclusively in voyages"? As I understand it, that amendment was discussed before at the hearings his subcommittee and it would limit the application to specific. els. As far as the matter is presently concerned, as I understand would limit this specifically to the one vessel in controversy here question here, the Matson vessel that is now plying between those 5. r. STRICHARTZ. We would still feel that this constituted the unanted breach of a system, the unwarranted withdrawal of a vessel the system. In the course of the legislative history we have ined references to the rationale of the Congress. The Congress felt you must include the maximum number of vessels in any net. If you could know which vessel could be available when a l is in distress you could exempt a vessel which would never be lable. The FCC has on occasion done so. But each time you ove a link from a chain you weaken the chain. Each time you ove another violin from an orchestra it gets down to the point e it is a quartet and then where you can no longer hear it. Every ument in the orchestra is necessary and we think the link in the nis necessary. We would be firmly opposed to this treatment for vessel in these waters. r. ROGERS of Texas. You would be opposed to that bill if the ge was made? r. STRICHARTZ. Yes, sir. r. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Moss? r. Moss. At the present time this vessel is operating in the aiian trade, is that correct? r. STRICHARTZ. We understand that there is a barge operating e Hawaiian waters under tow. r. Moss. The experimental vessel is now operating under tow as ge, is that correct? .STRICHARTZ. That is correct, sir. . Moss. What is the difference, then, if you make it selfelled? r. STRICHARTZ. When it is made self-propelled, sir, it becomes ssel which can and should participate in the safety network on If of those aboard the vessel and on behalf of those aboard · vessels that are in the same waters. That is the total difference. a barge it is an unmaneuverable vessel which reasonably cannot pected to go to the aid of the other vessels. As a self-propelled I, it becomes a vessel which qualifies by virtue of size, ability to rate, and everything else. night add, sir, that the speed given or the proposed speed given he vessel which we understand is in the neighborhood of 11 knots peed that many a freight has, including all of the Liberty ships are still operating, and there are something in the neighborhood hundred in the American flag and many under other flags. . Moss. On page 3, at the bottom of that page of your statement tate that first it should be noted that the wording of he bill is not hed to a provision to exempt a single experimental craft from the telegraph requirements for communications. Would your posi›e different if it were confined to a single experimental craft? . STRICHARTZ. I think our position would not be different, but the we were making here is that as it is presently written the lane is drawn very broadly. We don't feel that this particular body vigable waters would be subject or should be subject to a relief from participating in the system. We might add something else: W have read the brochure of Matson on their semiautomated ship. Read ing it over it is not a semiautomated ship and it is not at all realis. as an approach to automation. Many of the other companies br mation plans but they have included people who will be aboard for purpose of providing the necessary maintenance, repair, and stan for breakdown. What do you do if something goes out on this vesel Blow a whistle, shout, or are they going to holler on radiotelephone! Are they going to send out a repair crew by helicopter? Are they ty ing to tell us that a vessel that navigates in the open sea is not gåg to be subject to breakdowns? Your washing machine sitting on t cement floor of your basement is. We submit, sir, that an expert rad telegraph officer who is also an electronic technician has a useful par to play on a vessel with automated equipment, because automation s essentially communications and control by electronic instruments. Mr. Moss. In your statement, on page 34, you mention the number of licenses for radiotelephone issued by the Commission. I believe 116,000. Do you have figures indicating the number of those in Hawaiian waters? Mr. STRICHARTZ. We do not, sir. But we understand that the testi mony of Matson in the last hearing that figures were introduced on the record that indicated that there are some thousands of small craft in the Hawaiian waters. There was a letter from some organization of small craft operators which gave some figures of that sort. Mr. Moss. In the extemporaneous comment. not in your prepared text, you said that radiotelephone conditions around the islands were poor; that you frequently have to call and alert by other means. Is there some characteristic or is it contended that some characteristic in the island area is different and therefore interferes with the frequencies upon which the radiotelephones operate? Mr. STRICHARTZ. The condition that exists in Hawaii may be a trifle better or worse than other places. But this is largely the experience that has been encountered in many areas. The ability to raise the sta tions is a rather poor one. First of all, the radiotelephone is subject to interference. Two kinds of interference, natural and manmade. You get the interference of atmospherics, known as static. You also get manmade interference from other ships. You have a lot of pleasure-boat owners out there jabbering away about their personal affairs. You have tuna boats and other fishing craft owners and operators talking about business conditions and it is impossible to get them off. The letters we have gotten from the islands are interesting in that they indicate that the radiotelephone provisions in the islands are just not that good. Whether that is due to the nature of propagation in that particular area or poor provisions or both is something I cannot answer. Mr. Moss. Have you any knowledge of any technical studies of this condition in the islands that could be referred to by the committee for by its information? Mr. STRICHARTZ. I don't know of any technical study on the condition that could be referred to by the committee. There are, however, records of what happens when you make a radiotelephone call. and how you are charged in that area. That is mentioned in these letters. Quite often the difficulties of radio communication by radiotelephone can be seen in this manner. To make a 3-minute call, you 01 e to spend 10 minutes repeating and repeating and repeating. ere have been a number of controversies between radiophone callkers and the Hawaiian Telephone Co. or whatever the company's ne is, stating that they should not have been charged for 10 mins when 3 minutes is all the communication they got out of it. In course of these letters there is mention of some of these factors. s indicates the kind of problem that exists. If you must continually eat and repeat when life is at stake you are just going to be in very r shape. Frequently you won't get through at all. Ir. Moss. In other words, you feel that the commercial phone comy there would have records that would tend to indicate this to be case. Ir. STRICHARTZ. I don't know whether they have those records, sir, I know in the course of these letters there are specific instances erred to continually which go to that question. Ir. Moss. What is the experience in contacting the Coast Guard ions in the islands by telephone? Ir. STRICHARTZ. Generally better, although as you know the Coast ard is not engaged in commercial communication. The experience h the Coast Guard stations generally is better, but with respect to iotelephone it is not that much better because of the inherent limitas of the system. Ir. Moss. Have you any comment from the Coast Guard officials in area as to their views on the efficiency or effectiveness of radiotelene? Ir. STRICHARTZ. The Treasury Department letter went to the quesof the fact that they do see no differences between the Hawaiian ers and the other coastal areas and therefore they were deferring to FCC in this respect. But this is something we generally find. If body takes the trouble to write to the Coast Guard about provisions t they have for one or another type system they will get a good r answer. We note that Matson has done this with respect to radiophone. They might also do the same thing with respect to radiograph. We note that the Coast Guard maintains radiotelegraph lities on the island as well. Ir. Moss. Do you feel that the additional stations which are to go service and those now existing would not provide adequate insurof communication in time of emergency? Ir. STRICHARTZ. Yes, sir: I do so feel. We have queried people ut that and it is their feeling that radiotelephone is simply not goto be adequate unless you have a much closer range than is indied in these voyages-8-, 10-, 20-mile ranges you can handle. Alugh when you get up to 20 you are on the limits of your effective munication. But when you have large land masses intervening long runs you won't have effective communication. I might add this is all projected and in the future, and we would have to judge. he experience after the new facilities go in. But we would urge I the committee not act in haste on legislation that is based on sible plans and the possible results that may come from these plans he private company in the islands. Ir. Moss. This is specifically limited to Hawaiian waters? [r. STRICHARTZ. Yes, sir. Ir. Moss. The proposed legislation? [r. STRICHARTZ. Yes, sir. Mr. Moss. This would require the concurrence of the Congress such a request? Mr. STRICHARTZ. It is addressed to Hawaiian waters, but we feel is not warranted against the background of the route conditions, t communication facilities available and the most important thing. need to maintain the integrity of this worldwide radio safety syste I would like to stress that men on the ships feel extremely strong abo this. Generally speaking their attitude is that they will not go to without a ship radio officer. Mr. Moss. If this bill should become law, it would still require res tiations between your organization and the operator of the vessel e fore it could undertake to rely solely on radiotelephone? Mr. STRICHARTZ. It is true that we now have a collective bargaining provision which obligates the company to continue using radiotele graph officers for all communications. Those collective bargain agreements would not be abrogated by the change in the law. But t law would be breached. Mr. Moss. In other words, it would still have to be negotiated! Mr. STRICHARTZ. Yes, sir. The collective bargaining provis would still be in effect, but the law would be breached and the safety system would be weakened. Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Younger. Mr. YOUNGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What is the tonnage of the largest vessel in the tuna fleet! Ya casually mentioned the tuna fleet in your testimony. Mr. STRICHARTZ. I can't answer accurately. I would venture the opinion that it is not over 1,600 gross tons. Mr. YOUNGER. You think they are under 1,600 gross tons? Mr. YOUNGER. In other words, if any ship used in the island waters that was 1,600 tons or under would not have to comply with this aryway, would it? Mr. STRICHARTZ. That is correct, sir. The 1,559-gross-ton vesse or the vessels under 1,600 tons, would not. Generally speaking, yo will find this to be true. That either a vessel is 20, 40, 80, or 150 teor they go to very large units. There is an economic point for opesting a very small vessel and once you get into the larger classes yo generally operate well above them. For example, this automated ship is to be on the order of 0 gross tons. Mr. YOUNGER. That is all. Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Hull. Mr. STRICHARTZ. Mr. Chairman, may I beg your indulgence for a bit of information that has come to my attention in the last minge A newly formed steamship company has purchased the SS Presid Hoover, which is a large passenger ship. It plans to convert '.President Hoover into a luxury resort ship which will ply among ⠀ four major islands of Hawaii beginning late this summer. I that the subcommittee should note-would know nothing about Hawaiian line Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Let us wait to discuss that until Mr. H completes his questions. Mr. HULL. I have just one. |