BRITISH NAVY

Hokitika Guardian, 24 January 1931, Page 3

BRITISH NAVY

NEED FOR NEW SYSTEM

HUGE WASTE ALLEGED.

the peoples of the British Empire arc confronted with new naval problems (writes Sir Archihold Hurd in the London “Observer”). Oir the one hand, this country’s increased dependence on overseas supplies, including 70 per cent, of its food, and tho growing seaborne trade of the Dominions, colonies and dependencies, renders the adequate protection of the trade routes a vital matter, a matter of life and death;

In the second place, the strength o' the fleet with new and unexplored responsibilities under the treaties and pacts concluded since the signing of ‘he Peace Treaty, has Ibeen greatly decreased.

Tn the third place, tlie standard of British strength is now stabilised on a tonnage basis in relation to the navies of the other great maritime Powers. We are no ' longer free agents but must conform to limitations of tonnage so strictly defined that it is a matter of the utmost importanc"' from the strategical and economical points of view that assurance should be doubly sure that the ships trr he built are the best suited to tho work, they will have to clo. WRONG TYPE BUILT. Owing to precipitate action of the Admiralty in the past twelve years vast sums have been spent on men-of-war which it is now conceded could eith r r have been saved or laid out to much better advantage—ns. for instance, in building cruisers, dosOovors and submarines, of which there is increasing shortage. Tt V s not possible to do more here and now than to state the facts very briefly. I'Vnpi the naval I'oint of view, the Great War solved, fo rthe time at least the age-long sea problem of this country so far as European waters an* '•oncorned. It swept away the fleet •if Austria-Hungary ; it set limitis to tie l expansion of the German Navy, which became merely a coast defence force; and it reduced the naval power of France and Italy, for during the Great War these countries were too preoccupied in defending their land frontiers to build ships of wag When the Peace Treaty was concluded, the British Fleet, was far stronger in every type ol ship than the combilled navies of the whole ol Europe. That superiority was most marked in armoured ships—battleships and battle cruisers. Germany had been herelt of all such vessels of modern design ■ France and Italy had not hiunrhed a single armoured unit since 1913, when two under each Hag were built. On the other hand, since 1913 no fewer than 15 British battle-hips and battlecruisers had been put into the water. UNNFCFKSARY BATTLESHIPS.

in lace of this enormous superiority the flood, of 11,01)0 tons displacement the largest man-of-war hitherto designed—was launched iu 1018; preparations for laying down four even greater ships, reported to he of .50,000 ton", were made in subsequent years, to lie abandoned in accordance with the terms of the Washington Treaty ; and •1m X'dsmi ami I’odney ol .“!•/,01:0 tons were built later on. So far as the balance of power in Kuropean waters was concerned, there was no occasion to design those seven ships, of which three* were completed at a cost ,ol £18,007,763.

Admiral Webb, who rendered invaluable service at the Admiralty during the War when in command of tiio Trade Division of the War Staff, Has declared that “we should strive wlioie- ■ y tor the abolition by im.tuai consent of huge capital ships as \w know them to-day—ships co.-t.y alike m construction and upkeep—and come down to a rational size ship, ad<qua*-< in every way for her allotted task.” The situation to-day in this- respect is what it was when these vast sunn were spent on huge capital ships, which would never ha,e been uuill if the Admiralty, taking warning from Lore. Fisher's words, “Scrap the lot,” had reviewed the conditions at sea whicti had been created hv the War. SHIPS OF EMBARRASSMENT.

It was not only in the mis-spendiiig of these sums that the Admiralty errWhen the Prime Ministers of the Empire watched the naval evolutions of the Atlantic Fleet off Portland recently, they were fascinated by the aircraft carrier, Courageous, a vast, gaunt monstrosity with her funnels on one side, so as to leave her deck free for the movements of the aeroplanes which she carries. She is 7801feet long, with a beam of 89 feet 10 inches, and* presents an eno; moils target above the surface of the water to gun and aerial bomb, as well as below the surface of the water to mine and torpedo—especially the torpedo She cost £3.901.884. Wherever she is in war, there must also he a series of protecting crafts employed, because she will always be at a distance from the main fleet and therefore requiring seDarate mobile means of defence. In first cost, in cost, of upkeep, and in cost of protection when at sea, she is the most extravagant man-of-war which has ever been constructed.