COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 145 



intelligent discussion on various possibilites for measurng movements and a 

 quotation for doing the work, which we thought was quite reasonable. We 

 believe this should be an active subject, and requires further consideration. 

 Very truly yours, 



MOEAN, PROCTOK, MuESEE & RUTLEDGE, 



Theodore M. Kuss. 

 (Accompanying charts to above letter in committee files.) 



Mr. Kendall. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. 



Senator Stennis. Commander, after one question, I am going to 

 yield to Senator Saltonstall. He has an appointment which he must 

 meet. 



I want you to know that I greatly appreciate the great amount of 

 skill that the Navy showed in the difficult task which was assigned it. 

 I think that this is to the Navy's great credit, and to the credit of 

 the men that were representing the Navy. 



So adverse questions are not asked to discount the Navy nor the 

 task as a whole. 



EEPAIR or BRACES BETTER PERFORMED IN PORT 



But, now, just as a practical matter, in getting right down to the 

 very bottom of this thing, is it not just commonsense and practical 

 to say that this repair job on these broken braces could have been per- 

 formed much better back in port than at sea? Is not that correct? 



That is the way it looks to me, and if there is some explanation 

 to the contrary, I wish you would hit it hard. 



Commander Foster. Mr. Chairman, I would say certainly it could 

 be done much easier back at port. 



Senator Stennis. It would have been more effectively done? 



Commander Foster. Generally speaking, yes, sir. But still, that 

 would not go to prove that an effective brace could not be made at sea ; 

 certainly perhaps a better one ashore, but our problem was to replace 

 an existing one structurally; in other w^ords, put back a brace that 

 we felt would do what the original brace would do if it were there. 



Senator Stennis. Well, it just looks to a layman that these braces 

 were essential; otherwise the plans would not have called for them. 

 As I understand your testimonj^, you say that is where a great deal of 

 the stress was. 



The next step is, that when they w-ere broken, perhaps no one was 

 at fault. There was a heavy and tossing sea, as I understand, w^hen 

 they were broken. However, this did call for the restoration of their 

 full strength in the most effective way. 



I get the idea that perhaps this was not done in the most effective 

 way. Maybe it was done as well as it could have been at sea, but it 

 was not done in the most effective way, comparing the effectiveness 

 of repair in port with the restoration at sea. 



Now, am I wrong in that conclusion ? 



Commander Foster. No, sir; I would say that the T-bolt scheme 

 that we evolved later was superior to the original Dardelet bolts. 

 There may be even a better way. However, I would like to reem- 

 phasize that the original brace as conceived was designed to take all 

 of the loads that the other members would have, and I believe as far 

 as design, a little more. Of course, you make allowances for the fact 



