Planned Maintenance Optimization project I facilitated at Siemens Power Operations $500 million San Lorenzo CCGT facility located in Batangas City, Philippines. The project consisted of executing a thorough operations and maintenance strategy review of the fuel gas system and plant air system. This was a great project with regards to our findings from the review … we discovered a safety critical component in the fuel-gas system that had been misidentified … failure of this component would have been catastrophic under emergency conditions … this was a bit frightening, considering the consequences (life threatening) that could have occurred had this not been discovered … 

San Lorenzo CCGT Power Facility

The $500 million San Lorenzo CCGT facility is now generating 500MW electrical power. It is located in Batangas City, along the Batangas Bay, around 100km from the Philippine capital Manila. The plant is adjacent to the Santa Rita Project (same property). This strategic location allows it to share common facilities such as the tank farm and fuel jetty, thereby eliminating the need to duplicate various operational facilities. The power station uses a Siemens GUD.1S.3A model gas turbine, a steam turbine and a horizontal heat recovery boiler (HRSG) in each power generation unit. Two power generation units have a single-shaft configuration.

Fuel for both the 1,000MW Santa Rita and 500MW San Lorenzo power plant is supplied from the Shell Philippines Malampaya Deep Water Gas-to-Power project, which represents the largest and most significant industrial investment in the history of the Philippines. It heralds the birth of the country’s natural gas industry that will enable the supply of clean, environment-friendly fuel slated to provide 2,700 megawatts of power to Luzon for a period of 20 years starting January 2002. This meets 30% of the whole country’s power generation requirements …

I conducted a Complete Maintenance Strategy Review of the Malampaya Platform; Development and Implementation utilizing the Planned Maintenance Optimization Process (PMO) developed by OMCS International … through SAP Validation and Implementation … this involved all trades; Controls, Electrical, Mechanical and Support … 20,000 Assets were covered during this project … you can view this project here …

Siemens Power Operations, Philippines comments on the Planned Maintenance Optimization project we conducted:

Adrian Traves, Technical Support Manager for Siemens Power Operations Inc / Philippines, maintains just how beneficial the Planned Maintenance Optimization (PMO) Workshop was to Siemens Power Operations, Philippines.

With regard to the PMO Workshop and PMO Training, on behalf of Siemens Power Operations, Philippines I would like to express my thanks to Steve, Mark Jones and Tony for all the hard work and effort put into the preparation and delivery of the PMO Workshop. The whole project was professionally done, and overall Siemens Power Operations, Philippines was very pleased with the PMO Workshop both in terms of content and delivery. It met all the expectations that we had, and moreover delivered some further benefits that we hadn’t anticipated. Equally important, those who attended (myself included) enjoyed it - something that is often underestimated, but which actually is the critical factor in whether the knowledge will be retained and used!

Siemens Power Operations, Philippines has benefited, and will continue benefit, from what I consider to four key elements of PMO:

The process is simple, systematic and above all practical. Rather than sweeping aside all of our operating and maintenance experience, the PMO process uses this as the foundation for an optimized program. Coupled with a focus on consequences (“what happens if it fails”) rather than components (“what is the standard way for maintaining this equipment”) this has enabled us to rapidly work through our systems to fill omissions, remove duplications, and target schedules at what are the true causes of costs or downtime.

As a result of the PMO process we occasionally discovered components that were not on any maintenance schedule, or interface components that were not being scheduled in accordance with the needs of both systems that they served. In one instance, we discovered a safety critical component in a fuel-gas system that had been misidentified during data entry to our maintenance program, and thus was listed only for breakdown maintenance rather than scheduled maintenance. Failure of this component would have been catastrophic under emergency conditions, and therefore I feel that this finding alone has justified the outlay for running the PMO Workshop.

Our employees have benefited greatly from working on systems in-depth as a part of a mixed team. As well as improving the general level of teamwork and inter-departmental co-ordination there has also been a noticeable increase in motivation to know and understand what the other departments do. Overall, implementing the PMO has brought a significant increase in cross-training and knowledge transfer.

The process of PMO is straightforward to implement: despite the newness of the concept and size of our groups, we were “running” with it and getting genuine and meaningful results within days. Moreover, it is easy to move people between groups (to accommodate shift patterns, vacation, training etc) and also to bring into an existing group new people who were previously unfamiliar with PMO.

Finally, as you know, Siemens Power Operations, Philippines has taken the concepts and processes of PMO and used them within our own operation and maintenance planning software (BFS++). While some may see this as a deviation from the “standard product”, the fact that PMO can still be applied, even if the “implementation software” is different, is, in my opinion, a major strength of PMO, and was a key reason why SPO chose PMO for the optimization of our maintenance. Given the results that can be attained with it, I expect to see many more power stations using PMO in the near future.

Planned Maintenance Optimization Defined:

The activity of defining and reviewing a maintenance program is one that is generally very poorly done. Not surprisingly, done properly, this process alone can be the most effective means of generating company profits through greater output from the same assets. It is a fact that no amount of clever planning and scheduling can account for a low value-adding maintenance program. In reality completing 100% of a poor program can drive a company backwards particularly if it contains the wrong type of maintenance.

The problems usually start in the design or acquisition phase where the definition or consideration of maintenance programs is poorly funded. Equipment is often delivered and commissioned without a formal maintenance program at all. In some cases one is provided, but it has been done in an inappropriate fashion and is worthless. During the following years of operation, the maintenance program develops. This often happens in an “ad hoc” manner and results in a program that lacks focus and is inefficient. Without some means of reviewing this situation, organisations can find themselves uncompetitive either because maintenance costs are too high, or the plant is unreliable.

The review of maintenance programs and failure history is an activity that most organisations undertake and no doubt have undertaken since formal maintenance was first performed. Some organisations do this continuously whilst others do so in large chunks as needs arise. Unfortunately, some organisations do not perform any reviews whatsoever. The problems of most attempts at review are that the review is done in an informal manner with little or no set procedure and an absence of useful decision logic.

Until now, the only accepted means of defining a maintenance program was to use RCM. However, there is now a realisation that RCM is a tool designed for use in the design phase of the equipment life cycle (Ref RCM II Moubray 1997 2nd edition page 19) and not for use where equipment is already in use. OMCS’s pmOPTIMISATION methodology (PMO2000™) is specifically designed for reviewing maintenance programs and failure history for equipment that is in use and has a formal or informal system of maintenance albeit misdirected. For this reason PMO2000™ is also very effective at defining the initial maintenance program for new equipment where similar equipment is in use somewhere.

Enjoy!

PMO Project at the BHP Billiton Mt Arthur Coal mining operation located in the Hunter Valley region, New South Wales, Australia.  While an “excavator” may not sound as if it should be placed in the “extreme machine” category, well all I got to say is; Think Again Amigo! … this is one serious machine and a complicated machine at that ! Great project, good folk to work with !

With an operating weight of more than 650 tonnes, the R 996 Litronic crawler excavator is the flagship of the Liebherr hydraulic excavator fleet. With its enormous force for direct excavation, its reliability and its long service life, it guarantees high performance at low operating costs. The R 996 Litronic is modular in design. All its modules can be transported by by flatbed truck or ship and easily assembled in the mine. The modular design also minimises downtime for maintenance work or the replacement of components.

R996 Specifications:

Operating Weight:   650,600 - 655,800 kg

Engine Output:   2,240 kW/3000 

Bucket Capacity: 33.00 m³ @ 1.8 t/m³

Shovel Capacity: 34.00 m³ @ 1.8 t/m³

The Pump Brain

All new Liebherr machines now include a pump brain, which enables the 655t R996 to achieve a 33-second cycle time … the pump brain comprises a set of pumps that each deliver 840 l of oil to the valve bank every minute.

Liebherr has carefully synchronised the individual pumps so that they also monitor the flow of oil in order to speed up the system … the pump brain measures exactly where the oil has to go in order to give maximum output …

It includes eight pumps – delivering 840 l of oil a minute – four independent swing pumps – delivering 413 l of oil a minute – and ancillary pumps that drive the cooling fans … this pump brain has been combined with two (1,120 kW / 1,500HP) Cummins diesel engines so that the R996 is actually driven by two power packs … 

Planned Maintenance Optimization Defined:

The activity of defining and reviewing a maintenance program is one that is generally very poorly done. Not surprisingly, done properly, this process alone can be the most effective means of generating company profits through greater output from the same assets. It is a fact that no amount of clever planning and scheduling can account for a low value-adding maintenance program. In reality completing 100% of a poor program can drive a company backwards particularly if it contains the wrong type of maintenance.

The problems usually start in the design or acquisition phase where the definition or consideration of maintenance programs is poorly funded. Equipment is often delivered and commissioned without a formal maintenance program at all. In some cases one is provided, but it has been done in an inappropriate fashion and is worthless. During the following years of operation, the maintenance program develops. This often happens in an “ad hoc” manner and results in a program that lacks focus and is inefficient. Without some means of reviewing this situation, organisations can find themselves uncompetitive either because maintenance costs are too high, or the plant is unreliable.

The review of maintenance programs and failure history is an activity that most organisations undertake and no doubt have undertaken since formal maintenance was first performed. Some organisations do this continuously whilst others do so in large chunks as needs arise. Unfortunately, some organisations do not perform any reviews whatsoever. The problems of most attempts at review are that the review is done in an informal manner with little or no set procedure and an absence of useful decision logic.

Until now, the only accepted means of defining a maintenance program was to use RCM. However, there is now a realisation that RCM is a tool designed for use in the design phase of the equipment life cycle (Ref RCM II Moubray 1997 2nd edition page 19) and not for use where equipment is already in use. OMCS’s pmOPTIMISATION methodology (PMO2000™) is specifically designed for reviewing maintenance programs and failure history for equipment that is in use and has a formal or informal system of maintenance albeit misdirected. For this reason PMO2000™ is also very effective at defining the initial maintenance program for new equipment where similar equipment is in use somewhere.

If you have any further questions on the Planned Maintenance Optimization Process, please drop me an email … or visit our corporate web site:

 WWW.OMCSINTERNATIONAL.COM

Videos:

I did not have a video camera with me, and the R996 are far and few out there … but was able to get some videos on the 974B and R994B, both just as extreme and the videos will give you a good feel as to what these Liebherr Hydraulic Excavators are all about … MOVING DIRT and allot of it at one time!

Liebherr 974B and Caterpillar 769D from 974B Cab

Liebherr R994B at Work, doing what it does best … MOVING DIRT !

PMO Workshop:

\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

On June 6th, 2006, OMCS Asia-Pacific entered into a formal relationship with CWORKS, a company specializing in Computerized Maintenance Management Systems.  As Managing Director of OMCS Asia-Pacific, I was asked to participate in the signing ceremony on behalf of our corporate office, OMCS International. The ceremony was launched and witnessed by YB Dato’ Dr Awang Adek Hussin, Deputy Minister of Finance II.  CWORKS at the same event launched their NetMAIN product.

First off, none of this would have ever come to be if not for the true nature of cooperation between the CEO of COWRKS (Abdul Rani Achmed) and the Director of OMCS International (Steve Turner) … now, this was a “coat and tie” media frenzy … I do not do “coat and tie” well … but never-the-less, it was indeed an experience I will never forget … to me, it was an honor to meet the Malaysia Finance Minister, and just to be part of the whole event and effort that led up to the ceremony itself.

CWorks, a company specializing in CMMS, is managed in Malaysia and the United States by a group of maintenance and information technology practitioners who between them have more than 60 years combined experience in maintenance and IT from both local and multinational organizations in many countries. In addition to their experience in maintenance and IT, the CWorks team’s expertise includes a huge base of implementation experience, as they have implemented CMMS at a variety of sites internationally that include LANs, WANs, and call centers environments. 

The combined know-how of the CWorks team enables CWorks Systems to produce a CMMS product that is truly fit for purpose as it is produced by practitioners for practitioners. CWorks is the sensible approach to maintenance management not only for its affordability but because it is designed and implemented by experienced practitioners who understand the costs associated with asset maintenance, operational effectiveness, and the need for continuous improvement.

CWorks’ main activities are the design, development, production and support of CWorks Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS). Following successful sales in North America, CWorks in 2005 formed a subsidiary company in the USA to ensure optimal customer service and sales support for its North American clients. CWorks Systems Berhad, formed in August, 2001, is a Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) status company and is listed on the Malaysian Bourse MESDAQ board (CWorks:0079).

CWorks, simply as good of a CMMS as one could ask for (seriously) and OMCS International, simply the best process of Maintenance Strategy Review that exist (seriously) … you deserve it to yourself to pay a visit to both … 

Visit the following websites for additional information:

CWorks Systems Berhad 

OMCS Internalational

Additional Media Links:

CWorks and OMCS sign MOU

CWorks Systems expects revenue to surpass RM3.5m 

Tie-up to boost CWorks revenue 

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Enjoy!

‘In memory of Roy Luna; friend, shipmate and true Tin Can Sailor’

This is a photograph from the ships store, scanned and then did some “NIK Viveza” touch-up work on it … turned out pretty good for being a 30+ year old photograph which had been drug through every port in the pacific imaginable … 

During the Iran conflict, doing 90+ days at sea, non stop, not hitting a port one … unheard of … and has seldom been done since, if at all … was so long that we were given “beer rations” … two cans each … 

Crossing the international date line, on Friday the 13th … I spent two Friday the 13th’s, back to back on a ship with a hull number of DDG-13 … this all took place as we (borrowed) a case of lobster tails from the mess deck to boil up down in the engine room while on watch … ;) 

My first “port of call” at Pearl Harbor, out shopping for souvenirs in a “fine glass” shop, tripping over my two BIG FEET, falling into a shelve and breaking everything in sight ..

Steaming into Subic Bay, Philippines, waking up the next morning minus my “boots and belt”, running back to the ship for muster, and seeing both my boots and belt in a store window for sale, having to stop and buy them …

Steaming the South China Sea, picking up 100+ Vietnamese Boat People …

The food, my my, the food was simply the best, BBQ’s on the fantail, fresh baked bread, and SOS, it simply was the best …

The doldrums at sea, flat as glass, not a wake to be seen …

Refueling at sea … watching the dolphins swimming along side … and near getting my head taken off by a “throw line” bullet !

Shipmates and life long friends; Sears, Jenkins, Murillo, Gibbs, Luna, Balboa and may more … true life experiences forever etched within my memories …

Captains Mass for dragging in late while at port in Australia …

Steaming out of Pakistan, sitting in the mess deck, watching the Chief Master at Arms pull from the air conditioner vent what had to be 5 K’s of Hash … and watching the poor bastard being hand cuffed, crying to dear mama all the time …

In the sidewalk shit’r in Pakistan, getting stoned near to death, because the locals thought I was Russian (we were not allowed to dress) …

In Pakistan, on the beach, having Camel Races …

Dropping anchor somewhere in the Pacific for “swim call” … out there swimming around like a fool, as they were top side with shot guns doing “shark patrol” …

On the island of  Diego Garcia in Chagos Archipelago, part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, passed out drunk on the beach and awake to see a “coconut with legs”, “crab legs” that is …

Watching my first “cricket match” in Australia, which was still on as we left on the 4th day !

Watching Gibbs beat the hell out of a guy on the street for asking “the time of day” …

In Pakistan, on the beach, watching a camel throw up all over Gibbs …

In Pakistan, watching Gibbs beat the living shit out of a Camel …

Watching Gibbs beat the hell out of a shipmate, because the shipmate came in drunk, woke up, forgot where he was, thinking he was in the head, and then pissed all over Gibbs, of course we could have stopped it from ever happening, though WHY ?

Always watching Gibbs, closely, very closely, at all times, never taking an eye off of him !

Trying to understand WHY the Chief Petty Officer of the Watch made me make 8 Pots of Coffee, throwing each to the bilge, before pulling a cup from the 9th Pot ????

Getting into the fight of my life in the berthing compartment for telling a shipmate his haircut “sucked” !

Pulling fresh water showers in the engine room while the rest of the ship was on “salt water” showers …

Shell Back initiation … a serious, never to be forgotten, trip and a half this was indeed !

AND hitting San Diego after near a year at sea and the wife at port …

What is a ship, really?

Most people look at a ship as nothing more than a bunch of iron and steel. A sailor sees it as a living being concieved in a shipyard; the hopes, dreams and pride of those who built her - from the grandmother who helped assemble her electronics to the welders and pipe fitters who turn her into something recognizable. Eventually the day comes when she is commissioned and her crew breathes life into her hull. Her radar and lookouts are her eyes, sonar her ears, radios her voice and engines her heart. She reflects her crews attitude, their hopes and dreams. In her life time she will see about 10-15 complete crews man her, until that sad day when Uncle Sam says ‘Thank you for your service” and she is retired. 

Ship Specifications:

Ships Namesake

LCDR WILLIAM RION HOEL

From Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (DANFS)

William R. Hoel, born 7 March 1825 in Ohio, was a Mississippi River steamboat pilot who entered the Navy 19 October 1861.  On 6 February 1862, while serving as the First Master of CINCINNATI, Hoel was wounded during the Battle of Fort Henry.  Less than 2 months later, on 4 April he volunteered to pilot gunboat CARONDELET in her famous run past the Rebel batteries at Island Number 10 to reach Maj. Gen. John Pope’s Army at New Madrid.  The gunboat’s valiant dash through a hailstorm of Confederate fire enabled Union forces to cross the river and to take this key island with quantities of cannon, equipment and stores.  It thus opened the Mississippi for operations by Union gunboats bringing the Federal Armies in a long stride to within sight of Memphis.  Hoel’s courageous and skillful service on this occasion won the praise of Flag-Officer Andrew H. Foote, the thanks of the Navy from Secretary Gideon Welles, and promotion to the rank of Acting Volunteer Lieutenant effective 29 April 1862.

On 10 May 1862 Hoel assumed command of CINCINNATI when serious wounds incapacitated her Captain, Commander Roger N. Stembel.  The new commander of the Western Flotilla, Captain Charles H. Davis, took this opportunity to express his admiration of Hoel: “I can not praise more than they deserve his high valor and ability. He sets the highest example to those below him, and if it were possible to give him a permanent position worthy of his merits, the Navy would be the gainer …”

On 29 October, Hoel then took command of PITTSBURG on which he served with distinction in the campaign to take Vicksburg.  One of Lieutenant Hoel’s exploits during this campaign is of special interest since it foreshadowed the heroism of the World War II destroyer which bore his name, USS HOEL (DD-533).  On 29 April 1863, as Acting Rear Admiral Porter’s flotilla was bombarding the Confederate Batteries at Grand Gulf, his flagship, USS BENTON, became unmanageable and was caught under heavy fire in a position where she could neither steer nor reply to the enemy guns.  On seeing Porter’s predicament, Hoel slipped the PITTSBURG in between BENTON and the flaming Rebel batteries to protect her by taking the fire himself.  In the next 10 minutes his heroism cost the PITTSBURG 6 men killed and 8 wounded, but the sacrifice allowed BENTON to extricate herself from the deadly trap.  The bombardment was so successful that the next day General Grant safely moved his troops across the Mississippi to begin the operations which at long last isolated and captured Vicksburg.

Hoel was promoted to Acting Volunteer Lieutenant Commander on 10 November 1864.  Detached from PITTSBURG, he then took command of VINDICATOR 1 March 1865 on which he served until 7 July 1865.  He was honorably discharged on 30 December 1865.

USS Hoel (DDG-13) “underway”:

USS Hoel DDG-13 passing alongside the USS Blue DD-744. Filmed from the USS Blue by Earl Faubion. 

Identical (5-inch, 54 Caliber, Single Mount, Rapid Fire Gun) as that on the USS Hoel:

Hoel Photographs:

\n\n\n\n\n\n

Hoel News Clippings (1959 - 1987) … some are difficult to read, though you can “right click”, save to your desktop and enlarge for further viewing:

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Ships History:

She was the third Navy vessel to be named after Lieutenant Commander William R. Hoel.  The first USS HOEL (DD-533) , was shorter in length, narrower in beam, and had lighter overall displacement.  On 13 DEC 46 the second USS HOEL (DD-768) was cancelled during construction. Sixteen years passed before another US Navy warship would be named HOEL.  The third HOEL was a CHARLES F. ADAMS class guided missile destroyer, utilizing a hull design that evolved from the FORREST SHERMAN class (DD-931 was the first) destroyer and a new missile air defense system that had proven effective by trials on the USS GYATT (DD-712), a GEARING class destroyer.

USS NORTON SOUND (AV-11) became the first guided missile ship after she successfully launched a training missile in 1948, thus marking the beginning of the Navy’s shipborne guided missile era. After further modifications on 11 MAY 50, NORTON SOUND launched a five-ton Viking rocket transporting a 500-pound scientific instrumentation package to an altitude of 106.4 miles. Project “Reach” concluded the first phase of Norton Sound’s history as a mobile missile launching platform, which was devoted to extending scientific research frontiers and gaining experience prequisite to firing tactical weapons. The ongoing second phase required the application of the resultant knowledge. Newer missiles launched from the ship had a more direct bearing on the future of the Navy’s combatant missile capability.

Like the FORREST SHERMAN class, the CHARLES F. ADAMS class DDG’s also incorporated mostly aluminum in the superstructure.  Air conditioning of all living spaces was a definite plus in habitability improvements.

HOEL was equipped to launch the Tartar (15-foot length, 1-foot diameter) surface-to-air missile with a range of 15-to-20 miles; 42 missiles were carried in the aft battery.  Long range anti-submarine weapons (ASROC) were mounted in a special launcher amidships. Two highly-proven and dependable single-mount rapid-fire (5″-54 caliber) guns rounded out the weapons bill, one forward, one aft.

The multi-faceted design mission of the DDG class was anti-air warfare, escorting and supporting amphibious forces after beach landings, teamwork with submarine-attacking hunter-killer battle groups, and ocean convoy protection. 

These ships were the first ships designed and built as guided missile destroyers from the keel up. Experiments on the Gyatt (DD-712), a Gearing class destroyer proved the worth of mounting a guided missile on destroyer type ships for air defense. This occurred during that short but barren technological period between the slow firing all-gun air defense and the current wizardry of automated guided missile systems and Vulcan Phalanx 20 mm close in weapon.

The Charles F. Adams class provided the Navy with a state-of- the-art air defense system that could respond to any Soviet threat into the 1970s and even beyond. Plus, they were credible anti-submarine warfare platforms and could also be called upon for shore target bombardment with their highly dependable five-inch/54-caliber guns. This class of destroyers, the second built after World War II (just after the Forrest Sherman class), displaced 3370 tons/437-foot length/47-foot beam/70,000 shaft horsepower/speed 33 knots. They were armed with two 5-inch/54-caliber guns/ASROC/Tartar surface to air missiles. They were not helicopter or DASH capable. They were also one of the most attractive ships ever designed for the Navy. They were so well thought of, that Australia and Germany also operated modified versions of this class.

All in all, these were magnificent ships and would last into the 1990s, but all things come to an end. The advent of the Spruance class destroyers and now the powerful Arleigh Burke relegated the old Adam’s class to mothballs and now the auction block. By the early 1990s, most had been decommissioned and laid up. The cutbacks in military appropriations sealed their doom and they were recently stricken.

She now rest, moored to a remote pier on the Amazon River near Manaus, Brazil.

USS Hoel (DDG-13) was one of twenty-three CHARLES F. ADAMS Class Destroyers which were built:

USS Charles F. Adams (DDG-2)

USS John King (DDG-3)

USS Lawrence (DDG-4)

USS Claude V. Ricketts (DDG-5)

USS Barney (DDG-6)

USS Henry B. Wilson (DDG-7)

USS Lynde McCormick (DDG-8)

USS Towers (DDG-9)

USS Sampson (DDG-10)

USS Sellers (DDG-11)

USS Robison (DDG-12)

USS Hoel (DDG-13)

USS Buchanan (DDG-14)

USS Berkeley (DDG-15)

USS Joseph Strauss (DDG-16)

USS Conyngham (DDG-17)

USS Semmes (DDG-18)

USS Tattnall (DDG-19)

USS Goldsborough (DDG-20)

USS Cochrane (DDG-21)

USS Benjamin Stoddert (DDG-22)

USS Richard. E Byrd (DDG-23)

USS Waddell (DDG-24)

SPINNING A YARN - from (Origin of Naval Terminilogy)

“Salts and landlubbers alike delight in hearing a tall tale told with all the trimmings by someone with a talent for ’spinning a yarn.’ While today ’spinning a yarn’ refers to any exaggerated story, originally it was exclusively a nautical term understood by sailors only.  Officers and mates in the old Navy were stern disciplinarians who believed if sailors were allowed to congregate and tell sea stories, no work would be done. However, there was one job that required congregating on a weekly basis — unraveling the strands of old line.  On this day, the salts could talk to their heart’s content and the period came to be known as the time for ’spinning yarns.’ Later anyone telling a tale was said to be ’spinning a yarn,’ a cherished naval tradition.”

Spinning a Yarn through a poem from our 1981 WestPac Cruise by Stan Schrock:

In the laid back China Sea
on the USS Hoel,
lived 350 sailor type guys,
you probably knew them well.

They’d been sailing here and sailing there,
and their story is widely told
about the day they left San Diego
on a cruise that was so bold.

The first day out the ship Kinkaid
sat on a submarine.
The second day the seas got rough,
(the bootcamps all turned green).

A week went by and we pulled in
to a harbor known as Pearl.
We hit the beach and soaked up suds,
and ravaged a couple of girls.

We left Hawaii in our whites
we all looked nice and clean,
it’s something you won’t see again,
it was something to be seen.

We finally hit a wild port
they partied night and day,
the booze and girls were super cheap.
That’s right, it’s Subic Bay.

We’d walk around and hit the shops
we bought things by the million,
some guys went back to the ship for bucks,
(some went for penicillin).

We then pulled out and not too soon
for we have a motley crew,
the Leftwich hit another sub,
Submarines - zero / Destroyers - two.

We stayed at sea for 23 days
some tempers were getting short,
the Nav almost went over the side
but then we saw a port.

Oh, joys and raptures, we see land,
the crew was filled with spunk.
We terrorized the Wanchai district,
two thirds of us got drunk.

We staggered up, we staggered down,
we staggered on the street.
The Bradley saw us staggering,
The Bradley ended beat.

And now I sit upon the Ship
awaiting future ports.
I’ll cross the line (and do my time)
and get it in the shorts.

So now my poem is finished, folks.
It’s the best I could make it sound,