© G. W. Johnson scexnmpen® COPAA~317 Page Nine Several comments are pertinent concerning the above data. 1. From an examination of the respective dimensions, it is seen that the two ships are roughly the same sige. The Curtiss has a slightly larger hull, tut lesa displacement. No heights above the water line are listed above but both ships can meet the elevation requirements necessary for the diagnostic gear. The Curtiss does have the slight advantage of small useful areas higher above the water. 2. The difference in economy speeds is probably of no greatsignificance since the numbers are roughly the same. 3. The efficient power plant in the Curtiss is a great advantage from the standpoint of operating costs. Her power plant is newer and of modern design. This type of equipment is so general that location of reliable shipyard maintenance wnen needed is no problem. The greater economy in fuel is certainly a very important factor to consider. 4. The Curtiss has over twice the range of the CV’ and is a factor te consider since it will certainly decrease the refvels by a large number. This characteristic mist be taken into account not only for a single operation but on a long term basis also. 5. The ships officers on the Curtiss maintain that with their Redwing population aboard it was not necessary to curteil fresh water production but that it was necessary to enlist individual cooperation to assure fresh drinking water and shovers for everyone. production capacity of a CVU is inadequate. 6. It is felt that the . The 138 KW of AC power available on the Curtiss is an advantage since some of the scientific functions must be supplied separately from any instrument power which will be installed in either ship. Examples of needs which are in this category are the electronic shop and the AEC communications. 7. It is our opinion that the 3:4 ratio of U. S. Navy complement is not indicative of en advantage for the CVJ. By the time the facilities necessary to support, house, and feed the scientific groups aboard a CVJ are added 4t seems certain that the ratio will be 1:1. There are many more strictly navy functions now being performed aboard the Curtiss then the CVU at the present time. Examples of personnel which are not on the CVU are: Marines, signalmen, gunners mates, weather and intelligence personnel, etc. It is realized that the present pls. would cut back the personnel on either ship drastically, and we feel that because of the larger number of navy functions, a greater persentage can be eliminated from the Curtiss. A very good proof of this is the resent total number of personnel aboard each ship in the engine department. The CW has 116 compared to 126 for the Curtiss. This is essentially a 1:1 ratio.