"BEST DEFENCE"

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 68, 20 March 1936, Page 11

"BEST DEFENCE"

WHAT KINGSFORD SMITH SAID

MORE CORRESPONDENCE

Tlie present controversy over the value of an Air Force in the defence of this Dominion recalls the advice that was given by the late Sir Charles Kingsford Smith during his visit to New Zealand in 1933. The foundation of his argument was that New Zealand is peculiarly capable of defence by an Air Force in that the Dominion can only be approached over a wide space of ocean.

"New Zealand, probably to greater degree than any other British Dominion, is a country the defence of which can most effectively be undertaken by means of aircraft," said Sir Charles. "This is so because in warfare such as has been made possible by the advances since 1914-18 an attempt to land a force in a country far removed from the invader's base, in the face of an effective Air Force resistance, can succeed only by terrific effort. "In any future attempted landing of forces, if there is defence against that landing, aircraft will play an important part, and, though there is no actual precedent with which to clinch the point, a study of the theory of such an operation and counter-measures leads definitely to the conclusion that all the advantages will lie with the defending air arm—if the invader is operating so far from his bases that he can employ only sea-borne aircraft, a condition which applies fully to New Zealand, Australia, and to many Pacific islands." ADEQUATE NAVY BEYOND DOMINIONS PURSE. Not for a moment did he deprecate the value of the Navy, said Sir Charles, for the Navy had definite functions to perform and it alone could perform them, but a Navy adequate to safeguard the shores of New Zealand was beyond the purse of the Dominion, and though the welfare of every Dominion was of vital importance to the Empire it might be that there would be greater fish for the British Navy to fry. But a force of aircraft adequate to prohibit a threat until the Navy could bring down its weight was not beyond New Zealand's means. ADVANTAGES WITH DEFENDING AIR FORCE. As some of the main points in support of his belief that an Air Force offers New Zealand the one effective first line defence within her means Sir Charles gave the following:— Unless the country threatened is utterly defenceless by home forces (coastal, land, or air), naval division, or assistance from the Mother Navy, surprise is to the point of attack is a main weapon of attack. Aircraft would be of first importance in killing this element of surprise. Aircraft, alone among defensive land forces, are capable of rapid concentration, rapid temporary dispersal, and rapid reconcentration at any effective point. Their defensive value is continuous from the moment of' detection of a convoyed or other sea force. Aircraft with land bases are far less vulnerable than sea-borne aircraft (i.e., seaplanes with limited range or machines flown from aircraft carriers 'or other units). ' Aircraft carriers-are particularly vulnerable. The targets of the defending aircraft are massed, vulnerable, and open to determined attack, for it is established that air attackers can, and will, penetrate anti-aircraft defence even when most fully developed (as about a capital city of the older countries) to a completeness impossible in sea and shore operations. Of two air forces, equal machine for machine, that force which opeaates from land bases has undoubted advantages over a seaborne force. "The building up of an air arm is not the work of months; it is the work of years. New Zealand is late in making a serious start," said Sir Charles' in conclusion.

That was in 1933.