EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY 109 



Mr. Dingell. Will you tell me why? 



Commander Alexander. Well, the Navy's ship is $4.2 million to 

 build, and the Coast Survey's ship, approximately the same tonnage, 

 is between $4.5 and $4.9 million. I don't see that if we tried to cram 

 the Navy's type of ship down the Coast Survey's throat, or vice versa, 

 that we would necessarily achieve the same type of economy. 



We might be able to establish a standardization of ships in a few 

 years after we have enough ships operating so that we can have a 

 basis for standardization. I don't think we can do that now. 



Mr. Dingell. The Navy very frequently standardizes vessels and 

 has a class before they have launched the first ship or laid the first 

 keel; am I correct? 



Commander Alexander. Yes, sir, but in a general class of, say, 

 destroyers, the Navy has had extensive experience with destroyer 

 operating capabilities. We have no experience at all with a modern 

 oceanographic ship of any type. 



Mr. Dingell. Well, an oceanographic ship we haven't experienced 

 yet, we have had oceanographic vessels at sea now for how long? 



Commander Alexander. Well, they have been at sea for years. 



Mr. Dingell. We have had substantial numbers, too? 



Commander Alexander. Yes; but they are all conversions. 



Mr. Dingell. Except for the Atlantis? 



Commander Alexander. That is correct. 



Mr. Dingell. Do the Russians have standardized classes of 

 oceanographic vessels? 



Commander Alexander. Not that I am able to determine. The 

 type of ships that they have all seem to be of different tonnages and 

 capabilities. 



Mr. Dingell. Now, let me ask you, the Navy is going to stand- 

 ardize on the AGOR ; are they not? 



Commander Alexander. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Dingell. All right. Now, is there any reason why if the 

 Navy is going to standardize on the AGOR for their widely divergent 

 types of oceanographic research that these other agencies would not 

 standardize on it? 



Commander Alexander. Well, the Navy will make the ship plans 

 available to the other agencies. I don't know that we could really 

 require the other agencies to follow the Bureau of Ships' design plan. 



Mr. Dingell. I am aware of that. But Congress can. 



Now, the thing that concerns me is, has the question of standardiz- 

 ing of vessels ever been explored in your committee meetings and 

 deliberations? 



Commander Alexander. Yes, shv; we explored this extensively. 



Mr. Dingell. And what was the result? 



Commander Alexander. Well, we agreed that we shouldn't stand- 

 ardize, at least until we have enough operating experience with new 

 ships to find out what types of equipment, what special design features 

 are worthwhile for using in the standardized hull. 



Mr. Dingell. Now, are there any of these features, outside of hull 

 design, so compelling in production of different hull designs for the 

 vessel, itself, that we could not standardize just on the bare hull? 



Commander Alexander. I am not in my own mind at all sure, 

 Mr. Chairman, that a 1,300-ton ship will be adequate. We are liable 



80597—62 8 



