18 COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4' 



Senator jAOKSOisr. Were the Navy and the Air Force cognizant of 

 the difficult design and engineering problems presented by this assign- 

 ment ? 



Mr. Charyk. The data, I presume, was completely assessed by the 

 Navy and led to their determination that adequate design could be 

 effected. 



TWO PROXIMATE CAUSES OF TRAGEDY 



Senator Jackson. It seems to me that the proximate causes of this 

 tragedy are two. One is the design and construction, and the other, 

 the failure, at a subsequent time, to get the people off the tower. I 

 am trying to pinpoint now the genesis of this business; namely, 

 whether the engineering design work that went into it was prudent 

 and sound. Was there a decision made by the Air Force after these 

 first incidents occurred, that perhaps the tower was not designed 

 properly, or constructed properly ? Of course, the construction follows 

 the design, and if the design is faulty, the construction is not going to 

 be much better, if you are dealing with the basic engineering problem. 



Mr. Charyk. Well, as I indicated in my statement, we did have 

 some concern as to the adequacy of the design and/or construction, 

 so we went back to the Navy and asked for an inspection and a re- 

 affirmation. Their inspection indicated certain deficiencies which 

 were corrected, and subsequently they reaffirmed the adequacy. 



Senator Jackson. Well, in your judgment, or if not in yours, have 

 you been advised that this tower could have been designed and con- 

 structed so that it would not have collapsed ? Do you have any evi- 

 dence of that ? 



Mr. Charyk. I would think that the Navy might more properly 

 respond to that question, Senator, because the Air Force, as I indicated 

 earlier, has no responsibility for the design. 



Senator Jackson. Well, now, my question is, after you took this 

 over, and when you had the responsibility of maintaining it, did your 

 people — I do not mean you personally, because I know that you did 

 not necessarily have anything to do with it during this period of 

 time — did the Air Force come to a conclusion that this tower was not 

 properly designed after discovering the trouble that they were ex- 

 periencing ? 



Mr. Charyk. Well, the Air Force certainly had some concern in 

 that regard, because of the behavior that was observed. And it was 

 for this reason that it went out in January of 1960 and contracted 

 directly for another underwater inspection. And at that time, the 

 recommendation was made by the architect-engineer because of the 

 difficulties that were noticed in the bracing, that the best solution 

 would be to install the above-water bracing. So we accepted this 

 recommendation. 



Senator Jackson. Well, this is repair work. This is merely trying 

 to hold on to what you have. I am just asking as a layman, would you 

 he able to say as of today whether this, in your judgment, or if 

 not in your judgment in advice that you received, whether this tower 

 was properly designed to meet the known elements that it had to face, 

 knowing where it was being placed ? And then, was it properly con- 

 structed in the first place? That is my question. 



Mr. Charyk. I would personally have no real basis for judgment 

 as to the adequacy of the original design. 



