Trending
Naval history: Loss of 'Great Hope' cruiser
To the Editor:
Few naval histories include the story of the loss of the cruiser "Great Hope," the flagship of the navy of a remote island nation in the South Pacific; but, as the event contains important ideas about command and leadership, which are always of interest to historians, its story can profitably be told.
The nation in question being an island, it required a strong navy to maintain shipping lanes and protect against pirates and, of all the ships in the navy, "Great Hope" was the finest. Command of the ship, the finest plum available to the navy's officers, was eagerly sought. Selection of the captaincy of the ship for its three-year term was performed by the nation's admiralty, after their usual evaluation of the officers who were considered potential commanders.
At the time of this story, two officers stood above all others as ready for command of the cruiser, Abner Jones and Zane Smith. Jones represented the proudest traditions of the navy during his long career; Smith, on the other hand, was a rising star with a better understanding of the latest naval technology. It was this ability of Smith's that caused the admiralty, at the time of the next change of command, to award it to Smith - to the anger of Jones, as the two had been bitter rivals for years. So, in 1922, Smith assumed command of the cruiser and shortly thereafter ordered a comprehensive examination of the hull, a test that had not been performed in ten years. The result of the test was that the ship had an unexpectedly large accumulation of water in the bilge. The ship's pumps all worked, but they could not keep the hull completely dry, due to minor leaks in the hull. Smith applied to the admiralty for permission to install modern pumps, a permission that was, after extensive consideration of the matter, granted. When the new pumps were installed, the bilge was pumped dry, resulting in weight savings and an increase in maximum speed. These totally unexpected improvements in performance resounded to the credit of Smith, and the new pumps became known in the navy as "Smith's pumps."
Smith's command of "Great Hope" expired in 1925, and command passed to Captain Jones. The fact that he had been passed over for command of the ship in 1922 had been a bitter blow to him, and when he went aboard his new command, hearing every day about "Smith's pumps" simply increased his sense of injustice. He soon ordered the pumps to be removed from the ship, thinking them an unnecessary waste of money. He issued this order without admiralty approval, but when they discovered what had happened, they fumed but were unwilling to pay for the reinstallation of the new pumps.
In June of 1925, "Great Hope" sailed on her last and fateful cruise. As can be expected, the leaking hull began taking on water again, at a greater rate than before as, in the removal of the new pumps, the pump housings had been damaged, creating new leaks. The engineering officer went to the executive officer about the matter, and the two of them went to Captain Jones for help. The captain listened to them but dismissed their complaints, saying he believed their caution to be overblown. (This kept him from having to admit his error in having the new pumps removed.)
In the meantime, the admiralty, who had received regular reports of the ship's performance, took up the matter of the leakages with Captain Jones; but, after hearing his unconcern for the problem, declined to intervene. So, the cruise went on, with the cruiser slowly taking on more water. It was in the following week that Chief Perkins took up the matter with Ensign Parker, the assistant engineering officer. "The captain has to do something about this," said the chief. Parker looked at him and said, "Everybody in my chain of command is fully informed of this situation and has decided to take no action about it. So, what am I supposed to do about it? Put a gun to the captain's head until he does something about it? That would be mutiny." The chief had no answer to that; but when he returned to his bunk, he took out his life jacket and put it where he could reach it in a hurry.
The cruise went on, with the ship slowly taking on more water. The crisis occurred on the night of June 17, when the accumulated water in the hull suddenly altered the balance of the ship in an unexpected way that caused a sudden list to port. More sudden and unexpected movements in the ship occurred, the list steepened more rapidly, and without warning, the ship capsized and sank to the bottom with all hands – except for Chief Perkins, who was found in the morning floating in his life jacket on the empty ocean.
In the wake of the disaster, the admiralty convened hearings to find fault and place blame, as usual. Was the captain at fault for his order, or were the crew at fault for not taking the necessary action they knew was essential for survival? What the admiralty did not question, of course, is whether they were at fault for not intervening. These hearings dragged on without a conclusion until a cyclone bore down upon the island and everybody had to pay attention to other things.
Historians like to end their stories with a conclusion that provides satisfactory answers. The fact that there never was a conclusion about the reason for the loss of "Great Hope" is why few people ever wrote about it and why few people have ever heard of it.
John Brittain