PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference
TIFIC.O. 885
6
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
24 November 1896.])
yet. 1870.
Chairman-continued,
84
Captain GOODSALL.
I have only been in cable work since
1257. Do I understand you to say that your experience in lifting cables, such as I have described, from deep water has been that when you get them to the surface, they are apparently in as good order as when they were laid -
Yes.
1258. Including the outer covering ?- Inclu- ding the outer covering.
1259. And the whitewash on the outer cover- ing I mentioned only one case of picking it up in 2,000 fathoms. I mentioned in this case that it did occur after being submerged 10
years,
cases
1260. What are the usual causes for interrup- tion that you find that have occurred in the cables you have raised?-There are once or twice, where the outer covering of the cable has been perfect, the gutta-percha has been perfect, but the conductor itself has been broken. Well, I am alluding now to work in shallow water, where you get the motion of the sea upon it, and when the cable is being lifted by the ground swell. The contact has been made; they have been able to wire through, but if it is lifted again it breaks. There is no fault, only the conductor has been broken. Then there is the teredo bore; that destroys the cables, of course. As soon as the shell-fish works through he gets in between the layers of the outer covering and the wire and then through the gutta-percha. It causes death to the poor teredo, but death to the cable as well.
1261. And in deep water, what have been the causes? I cannot tell you. I do not really know what have been the causes.
The causes of faults in deep water that I have had to do with have been not in the deep water parts, but at the end where the ground has begun to rise, and the cable may be suspended, and it has broken there.
1262. And that suspension you think might have been avoided by better survey ?-By better survey. May I show you a drawing of a cable? There (handing in drawing), that will show you at once; if the survey had been accurate, had been properly done in the first case, it would have shown need of slack to allow for 780 fathoms. There is a perfect piece of cable. You cannot see any fault on either side, but that was laid at sea across the estuary of a river, and was in part suspended; then the wash from the river used to come down and bring bamboos, and all sorts of material, with it, and got suspended on the cable, and all the damage that was to be done was to break it. There was too much strain, and it broke there. You Bee very little mischief done on the sheathing.
1263. Can you tell the Committee what the annual cost of a repairing ship is?-It all de pends where you are stationing the ship; the cost of fuel. There are lots of things to be taken into consideration in reference to the cost of a repairing ship, such as repairs, &c.
1264. It may vary ?—Yes, according to the station a ship is upon.
1265. You could not give any general indica-
Chairman-continued.
[Continued.
tion!-You may be able to do it for about 12,000L
1266. A year-A year.
1267. And that, of course, does not include any of the material used-No, and it all de- pends, of course, on the number you have of your crew and your staff and everything.
1268. Given weather that is adequately calm, how long would it take you to find, lift, and repair a simple break in a cable in deep water, say at 3.000 fathoms ?-Well, with accurate position, good observations, you may book the cable very quickly. I cannot tell you 3,000. I will give you the 2,000.
1269. Two thousand?-I hooked a cable in 2,000 fathoms at half past 8 in the morning and at a quarter past 6 in the evening I had the
cable to the bows.
1270. But I suppose, of course, it would necessarily increase very considerably as the depth increased?-Oh yes, yes. You would have to be very careful, and even in this case that I am alluding to, I had got the cable; then it chafed and parted. Fortunately on the second trial I was able to get it near the end, and had only one end to lift, as it were.
Sir Donald Smith.
1271. You consider an accurate survey abso- lutely necessary?—I do.
1272 You would not consider that taking soundings at a distance of 10 miles, or even five miles apart, would be sufficient ?—Yes, you might with five.
1273. Five, but not 10-I do not think you ought to go more, if you are going to lay a calle for that part of the world,
1274. And you consider it would be far better, more satisfactory in every way, that you should have the soundings one or two miles apart?—Yes.
Mr. Jones.
1275. You spoke of the action of the waves and storms on the cables when they are laid; to what depth would the action of the water extend? -Oh. I was alluding to it, not to a very great depth-say about 13 fathoms.
1276. No; but I mean to say if the cable is laid in 2,000 fathoms it would be altogether then below the action of the waves, would it not?— Oh, decidedly yes.
1277-8. Then it would not be affected by con- siderations of that kind?-No, no; I have never observed anything of that in deep water. You asked me with reference to the various causes of faults, and I was saying that was a fault where the conjunction of the copper conductor had broken, and still the gutta-percha was all ().K.; there was no fault to be found with the outer covering, just the lifting in shallow water made the break.
1279. Then, as a matter of fact, if it is care- Yes; well fully laid and had a fair bottom- manufactured and carefully laid, your cables would last an indefinite time; 1 cannot tell exactly how long.
24 November 1896.]
Mr. Murray,
RS
Captain GOODSALI..
1280). Is that method you have described of cutting the cable and repairing it the ordinary method in deep water? I have only operated once in that style; I do not know whether it has been done before.
1281. It is not the ordinary method then ?- Well, it all depends how the commander of the ship likes to act; it answered with me very well.
1282. But you have only done it once?-1 have only done it once, but it was very successful. I have used it during the same operation. I have used it before, but I have never had occa- sion to go into deep water again. I picked up the same line of cable for a fault afterwards in 1,900 fathoms, but I happened to be in a different kind of ground; it was a ridgy ground which sloped. I used then what was called a bulldog and centipede, but I brought the cable to the surface.
1283. Is there any limit to the depth of water in which you can cut it? You can cut it very well in 2,000 fathoms; I do not see why it should not be done in greater depths; it is a question of putting; the cutting is automatic. The greater the depth the greater the weight on the grapnel, and the greater the cutting power.
1284. Could you cut it in 3,000 fathoms?- I think you ought to; I never had occasion to do So. I speak of 2,000 fathoms because it was done in that.
1285. Would it be a very difficult operation? --No.
1286. Supposing you only wanted to cut it, and were content with that, would that be a comparatively simple matter? Yes, quite a simple matter.'
1287. I am rather looking at it from a point of view of a person who wanted to be mischier
If a man knows the position and wants to cut a cable he can do so without much difficulty ? Yes; a man who did not know the working might put a grappler and think he is going to do a great deal of damage, but the cable is only three-quarters of an inch in diameter, and he precious soon goes over it in the ocean.
1288. Can you actually cut it while it is lying on the bottom- No; you must get the weight unless the cable is bad material." Great depth means great length of grappling rope, and could not be put on board in any kind of ship, as it were; he must get into a cable ship, or it is no use; he must go into a properly-constructed ship, and have the proper gear to go and cut a cable in 2,000 fathoms; the grapnel hooks the cable, or it may be a rock; he does not know. He heaves and lifts; and if he has grappled a rock he only loses his own gear.
1289. How much off the bottom would be have to lift it before he can cut it ?—Oh, the amount of lift is in proportion to the weight. There is a case here where I picked up at 500 fathoms before it cut, and then the strain that it cut at was only 944 cwts. before the cable parted, before the grapnel cut the cable and liberated it, and then the weight dropped at once from this 90 cwts. to 60; and then the cable came up very
[Continued.
Mr. Murray-- continued. casily, and it was successful; all the bother was over, and there was no trouble. If it had happened to have occurred in 3,000 fathoms, it would have come up just the same.
Chairman,
1290. Do you think in time of war it would suffice to put an experienced man like yourself on board à man-of-war to take him to the ?
spot --For cutting?
1291. Yes. I think so. If you will get the proper gear I will do it for you; if it was going to be done to an enemy's cable, if you put it in that light.
1292. But you said he would have to have telegraph ships and the appliances?-The ship must have proper gear because it is so difficult. A man may go and put a rope down in 2,000 or 2,500 fathoms and happen to pick up or go through a cable which is only three-quarters of an inch diameter; he goes very quickly over it; he does not know, without delicate appliances; it is only by actual observation and a long time at the work that you can tell whether you have got the cable or not.
1293. Do you suppose that cutting a very heavy cable at 3,500 fathoms should be less feasible than you think it would be; would it be an easy matter to lift a heavy cable uncut ?- He could not lift a heavy cable in that depth of
water uncut.
1294. He could not do it ?—Oh, no; because, if he is going to lift it on the method of simple grappling, he will lift until either the cable or the rope breaks-most probably the latter, my impression is, in one case I had, I think it was only lifted 400 fathoms, and that was in 1,700 fathoms of water and never bring it to the surface,
1295. No cable would stand the strain ?--I do not think so. Oh, no. It is a big bridge to make, as it were. Lift, lift, lift. And then another thing; if you have to do that very much on a cable I would not give very much for it afterwards, because all these points on which you have caught your buoy and your grappling rope, with the motion of the buoy lifting it (there is always motion in the sea, even on the calmest day) the buoy rises and falls; and even though you have got 1,700 fathoms or more of rope it lifts that up, and there is a little chafe going on all the time. If you have got to lift it to the surface you must with 3,500, the depth that is mentioned, keep huoying it as it were.
Sir Donald Smith,
1296. The gear required for lifting a cable is of such bulk that it could be carried in an ordinary man of war-a war ship-without interfering with the armament of the ship?— Oh, no. you put it on board a mau-of-war she will be able to carry it.
1297. Without interfering with the fighting of the ship ?—Oh, no, You have the room for it; you have the machinery on board. If you have the machinery on board it is all right. If a man-of-war were to take the grappling rope, and
L3
327