AIR DEFENCE

Hokitika Guardian, 27 December 1933, Page 3

AIR DEFENCE

WAR LESSONS RECALLED.

DISCUSSION IN LONDON.

LONDON, December 21

While advocaies of a strong air srriKing force still complain oi Jb.riD.-ni s weakness, the Duke of Sutherland, who is president of the British Air League and a lormer Under-Secretary for Air, says that air defence has greater resources than the critics admit.

In the Observer Mr J. L. Garvin writes that since the armistice Britain lias spent-• £2, 00j,000,000 on the Na\y and Afniy and Air Force, arid fs still spending £2OO a minute in that way. Nevertheless she is only of fifth rank in the /only arm thaft will pro'vjide modern defence by compelling respect for its powers of reprisal. It is better, . Mr-Garvin contends, to spend £250 a minute, and have that power, than just miss it. On the other hand the Duke of Sutherland, writing in the Sunday Dispatch, says it is a miscoiKeptic'ii to say that aerial defence, does not provide safety. He recalls that 22 Gothas which bombed London in 1917 escaped almost, unscathed, but in 1918, out of 33 only 13 reached London. Of those which failed to do so 10 were destroyed and the remainder driven back.

Moreover, of 520 Gotlias which attacked Paris jn 1918 only 38 penetfated the defences; British air exercises show that 50 per cent, of raids would be intercepted. Blit the duke urges immediate building, as, he London could be bombed in 20 minutes after the declaration of war by aircraft hovering in the Channel awaiting orders to act, The Observer’s aeronautical correspondent points out that Great Britain has discarded the barrage form of defence which was successful during the war, and does not possess a single “grid” searchlight, such ns is invaluable in dealing with aircraft.