COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 103 



kept US from tipping the structure and which let us weld the struc- 

 ture. And then Ave proceeded from there on in our thinking just 

 the same as the rest of them. 



Now, the testimony yesterday gets a little confusing as to what 

 condition the tower was in or what happened to it. But I will cut 

 all through that, and go to the last stage. 



Now, remember, the theory that this tower was designed on, was 

 minimum resistance to the ocean waves. And as this tower 

 started to 



Senator Stennis. If the members of the committee will excuse 

 me for interrupting, it appears that your explanation of scheme B 

 would be very pertinent right at this point. You have led up to 

 that proposal, and there was testimony about it yesterday. Would 

 it suit you to describe scheme B now ? 



Mr. DeLong. Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn scheme B over 

 to Mr. Bauer, because he should earn his pay, too. 



Senator Stennis. Very well, proceed in your own way. You may 

 proceed with your testimony now. 



Mr. DeLong. I will go a little farther, if I may. 



Senator Stennis. You go on. 



ABOVE WATER "x" BRACING INSTALLED IN DESPERATION 



Mr. DeLong. As the trouble developed, and in, I call it, a despera- 

 tion moA^e, the top bracing Avas put in. Remember, now, that it is 

 contrary to the whole design and theory, because here is your ocean 

 floor and your bottom column, and j^our sea is supposed to come 

 through. So that — when that was done, I Avould feel that it was 

 pretty close to dooming the tower. And I am very surprised that 

 the tower stood up through Donna at all — that it did not go down 

 completely. 



Mr. Chairman, I Avould like to say this — that in engineering and 

 so forth, it is like horseracing. There is a lot of difference of opin- 

 ion. We, m our experience, disagreed with the design engineers and 

 so forth. And we said where the mistake was — but the course was 

 taken, and we feel a little to blame that we were not able to marshal 

 our arguments over clearly enough to get it changed. Had we done 

 so, we feel — had we done a better job of presenting our argaiments 

 and so forth, we might have been able to aA^oid a disaster. But we 

 were not, and we blame ourselves for not being able to convince the 

 people in regard to pin versus Avelded connections. 



Senator Stennis. Well, that is a very fine attitude and a frank 

 statement about it. It impresses the Chair. 



Does that cover the high points of your statement ? 



Mr. DeLong, Yes, sir ; that covers my high points. 



Senator Stennis. We can ask questions later. To get the entire 

 matter before us here, Avhat does counsel propose — that we now hear 

 from the other gentleman as to scheme B ? 



Mr. Kendall. Yes, sir ; that is my recommendation. 



Senator Stennis. Counsel is very familiar, as Mr. French is, with 

 all these matters. It has taken weeks to get the testimony together. 



Without objection, then, we will switch over now to Mr. Bauer. 

 What is your connection with Mr. DeLong, please, Mr. Bauer? 



Mr. Bauer. Mr. Chairman, I am vice president in charge of con- 

 struction for the DeLong Corp. 



