A great many thanks to hisashi for the explanation and translation! I was not sure that the Yamato
-class galley detail would copy clearly enough to be read here.
It seems surprising that the appended drawings about Musashi
from where the detail drawing came are not cited in Skulski's book about Yamato
. Japanese contacts are acknowledged but there is no bibliography for sources. I imagine that there would be still more detail where Yoshimura acknowledged it in turn, Matsumoto Kitaro's book Design and Construction of the
Musashi (Tokyo: Haga Shoten, 1971).
And many thanks to Ron also!
For what he explained and hisashi translated, analogies might be made from some equipment shown or mentioned in the restored galley
of wartime destroyer escort USS Slater
(DE-766), today hulked as a relic at Albany, New York.
Ron Sundby wrote:... Aboard ship I have used 2 types [of hot plates]. In the officers mess it was a set of four arranged in a square just like the burners on a standard stove top, each about 12 inches or 30cm square, where the heat for each could be individually adjusted. In the main galley, as shown on the Yamato drawing, they were a series of larger plates about 30 inches or 75cm square ...
had three officers' messes for some 150 officers in a crew of 2,300 (2,767 later in the war). How does this scale against officers' food service aboard US capital ships today? Might this imply separate wardrooms and galleys for each mess?
Ron Sundby wrote:[Electric hot plates] can be very hard to use in heavy seas. Try this: Use one hand to hold on to the counter top next to the stove (electric cooker) so that you don't fall over as the ship rolls. Use the other hand to hold a pan on the stove. Now, without letting go with either hand, stir the contents of the pan.
That is very evocative. The larger the pot or pan, the more the concern. Wouldn’t a range have had some sort of batten around its edge as well, as seen next to this German U-boat cook
had a great displacement but also needed to fit in Japan’s shallow anchorages, so they had to have a very wide beam. It would then seem that they rolled less than smaller ships in the same rough seas, but roll they would.
Ron Sundby wrote:… Coppers are also very versitile, as well as boiling and steaming they work very well as woks for frying.
How to get the higher temperature for frying in the copper without direct flame heat? When frying with a wok I have never actually measured temperature of the oil to know exactly how hot it is. Was superheated steam used?
Mention of IJN fried dishes here included the use of lard, but soybean oil is described among ships' stores and sounds easier to use as a frying medium. A Navy ration table also cited earlier lists oils and fats (or lard) separately as components.
Ron Sundby wrote:Steam jacketed kettles were not invented in order to facilitate feeding larger crews on longer voyages. The wood, or coal, fired kettles used on sailing vessels of the 19th century were made in any size necessary and worked well enough. But in heavy seas, or if the ship was surprised and fired upon while the galley fires were lit the burning wood could easily be scattered, setting the ship on fire. Even at the best of times an open flame onboard ship is an invitation to disaster. So, when steam propulsion came into use aboard ships it was better to reduce the risk of fire by using excess steam from the boilers for cooking rather than an open flame.
The coppers in use today have changed very little from the original models ...
You've told more background about the origin of steam-kettle cooking than I was able to find for myself. That seems helped by their basic design remaining much the same today. The design of coppers aboard the Slater
dates from 1940.
Early naval engineering of the 19th century was as close to the wider field of mechanical engineering as were better-known areas like railways and heavy manufacture. But I could not readily find specific history of naval food machinery and service, although it's probably somewhere in the extensive technical histories and sources of the RN and USN. The closest I could find were brief histories of development for shipboard air conditioning, laundries, and heads.
(R.W. King, Rear Admiral USN (Ret.), Naval Engineering and American Sea Power (Nautical & Aviation Publishing Co of America, 1988), pages 149 and 176-177
I have seen some reference and illustration of typical galleys aboard the old wooden-hulled sailing warships. They had sizeable fireplaces made of brick and the kettles sat inside them but, as Ron said, firing them was always a circumspect thing. Fortunately for its sailors' messing, the early IJN did not have to evolve up from that in its steel-hulled fleet. And since its early capital ships were built in Britain, it might be assumed they followed at least some of the British model in galley practice and equipment.
I would expect that steam kettles had become common in the galleys of many other steel-hulled ships round the world as well, merchant and naval, Japanese or not.
Ron Sundby wrote: I doubt that the Army would use steam jacketed kettles very much. Whereas the Navy is just drawing on excess steam from boilers already in operation the Army would have to make steam specifically to cook with. It would be more logical to use a direct heat source (electric, gas, coal, etc.) in Army messes.
If these in fact were cooking kettles in an IJA kitchen, their photo
, partly obscured as it is, did not show any kind of flue arrangement for the smoke of flame heating, though they were installed close to the wall. But it does make more sense that they would not be steam heated.
I have heard only incidentally of one Japanese Army installation that was steam-heated for the Manchurian winters, but that was a special case and made no connection to unit kitchens. Military photos anywhere tend to show the best of any one setting rather than the typical, especially wartime pictures taken for the homefront. Garrison kitchen photos seen here so far might fall into that category, though I do not know.
Ron Sundby wrote:
The pictures listed show mobile field kitchens
, both of which have a smoke stack coming off of a fire box to heat the kettles. I believe that these use direct heat to cook with rather than heating water to make steam to in turn heat the kettles. That would be more efficient I would think
Yes you are right, the rolling field kitchens cook with fireboxes, not steam kettles. I am corrected, having misread the old Imperial Russian design which could in fact be used as true pressure cookers. The US Army attaché of 1904 cited earlier described them in detail:
... The Braun type [of Russian field kitchen], which was by far the most numerous … [has a double-walled boiler], the inner one of copper, tinned inside, the outer of iron lined with asbestos. The lid can be screwed down air-tight so that the contents are cooked under considerable pressure, the danger of explosion prevented by a safety valve. A perforated aluminum bottom, for cooking grits or cereals, can be placed in the boiler. This type admits only of boiling or steaming, which is not much of an objection in the case of the Russian soldier accustomed to soup and boiled meat ...
Even a New York Times
article of the 1904 war made a leading illustrative mention
of the Russian rolling kitchen at the time.
- The Soviet Army reportedly kept this pressure-cooking feature as late as the 1980s, in its PAK-200 rolling field kitchens. Vegetables and meat could be pressure-cooked at 1.5atm to turn them into a soup or stew, depending on the proportion of water added. (William P. Baxter, Soviet AirLand Battle Tactics (Presidio Press, 1986), page 226)
Up to recent times I think some of Europe's field armies also continued using the old design principles of kitchen trailers -– although adapted to a wider range of fuels. Like the West German Bundeswehr, the Japan Ground Self-Defence Force began with American weapons and vehicles. But while the early West German troops also used US field cooking ranges, I haven't seen if the early JGSDF did. From strange-mecha.com. a glimpse of the modern-day JGSDF's kitchen trailers.
I don't know when the Imperial Japanese Army first adopted its own rolling kitchen, or if it had been modelled after any particular European design following World War I. In some photos seen here so far, the IJA continued using the older, simpler kind of kettles and stoves through the China and Pacific Wars. Of course these would have still served well enough under most conditions, particularly in rear areas.
The kettles are shown in Peter H's current photo of Field cooking
, where two of them are set into a mounded earthen fireplace.
Ron Sundby wrote: Typically storerooms are almost an afterthought in ship design. They are often stuck in to fill voids wherever there is space after all of the more important considerations have been meet. Sometimes, such as in the diagrams Alan supplied of IJN Cruisers, that means that food storage is scattered all over the ship. But wherever the storage is on a warship it is normally carried to the galley by hand, no carts used. This is because of the watertight compartmentalization. doors through watertight bulkheads, and there are a lot of them to traverse, have a lip which comes up several inches from the deck. (See photo 1) It is just impractical to run a cart down a passageway when you have to negotiate this kind of door every few yards. Hatches to go between decks are even worse …
Thanks Ron, I had forgotten about that fact of navy shipboard life. Last year I visited missile cruiser USS Little Rock
(CG-4, formerly CL-92), hulked at Buffalo, New York. Visitors on board modern naval relics are not allowed too far below decks, but there were enough of the watertight doors to pass through and I closed and reopened one. Their rubber gaskets were old but still held when the fast-acting wheel was turned.
It seems expectable then, that mess cooks on board the Yamato
s may have had longer distances to cover below decks than on other ships. But maybe not so much longer than those of today's US aircraft carriers?
The storage afterthought does come out in section drawings I looked up for other warships. In the same “Anatomy of the Ship” book series as Skulski's The Battleship Yamato
, there is an even more detailed volume for HMS Dreadnought
As warship designs, Dreadnought
are very much the beginning and end of the naval era that took its name from the former. But as Ron said, naval machinery came first, so that Japanese warships kept their rice, pickled vegetables, and lemons in similar fore-and aft places like those of Dreadnought
's storerooms for bread, flour, and limes. Nevertheless, cold storage has to have refrigeration plant, so would it necessarily have to be less an afterthought than dry storage?
Ron Sundby wrote:Normal practice would be to sort out whaterver was needed from a given storeroom for the day; then send down a party of several junior seamen to carry it all to the galley. These are normally the same seamen who are assigned mess duty in the galley to help the cooks with cleaning and other menial tasks. The US Navy calls them 'mess cooks.' I'ld be interested to know what they were called in the IJN.
This is the sort of detail about everyday sailor life and work that seem to be relatively few in English-language accounts of the IJN, and make me wonder what might have been told in Japanese ones.