AEROPLANES FOR DEFENCE

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21079, 2 February 1934, Page 10

AEROPLANES FOR DEFENCE

♦ —— LOOKING TO FUTURE SIR CHARLES KINGSFORDSMITH'S VIEWS [THE PEESS Special Service.] AUCKLAND, February 1. A plea for a clearer appreciation of the value of aviation was a feature of a short speech by Sir Charles Kingsford-Smith when he and the Minister for Lands (the Hon. A. E. Ransom) were the guests of the Tuakau Town Board at dinner.

"We are still far too apt in Australia and New Zealand to think of aviation as a plaything," said Sir Charles. "The people of New Zealand are rather more receptive of the aerial sense than the people of Australia. As an Australian 1 1 am not proud to have to admit that, for aviation to-day has very wide significance. Particularly is this so in the realm of defence. "It has lately been demonstrated that a single fighting aeroplane can destroy the most powerful battleship, and with the vast coastline of Australia future defence will need to be from the air. New Zealand will also do well to strengthen her aerial armaments. An Aerial Navy. "While those of us who have had experience of war realise its hor-ors and desire that there should never again be a war, other generations are growing up and unfortunately there arc signs that peace may not always prevail. A battleship such as H.M.S. Rodney or H.M.S. Nelson costs, I believe, £10,000,000. That sum would build 1200 to 1500 aeroplanes, each capable of sinking such a ship. For the cost of one of our Australian cruisers, which I understand is about £3,000,000, we could have 500 fighting aeroplanes.'" Sir Charles said that everyone had the greatest admiration for the navy, and he did not wish in any way to detract from its value or its magnificent traditions, but facts needed to be faced. The Empire was gradually building up its air traditions, and it needed an adequate aerial navy.