RESTORING THE BRITISH FLEET

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 300, 15 September 1936, Page 13

RESTORING THE BRITISH FLEET

Cost And Extent Of The New Building Programme

(By

SIR ARCHIBALD HURD.)

QWING to the restrictive clauses of the Washington Treaty, which does not expire until the end of this year, delay must occur in restoring the battle fleet of the Royal Navy, and the Admiralty’s interpretation of the London Treaty will mean that the full strength in cruisers will not be attained until later than has been generally expected. Nevertheless, in view of the course of recent political events in Europe, and especially the failure of the league of Nations to check Italy’s designs on Abyssinia, there is general satisfaction that the Government should have provided in this year’s Budget for a beginning to be made with the new programme of naval construction. The original Navy Estimates were for a sum of £69,960,600. They made no provision for the rearmament proposals which, so far as the Fleet is concerned, are covered in a supplementary estimate for £10,300,000. In the present financial year, ending on March- 31 next, the taxpayers of the British Isles will, therefore, have to find upward of £80,000,000 for the Fleet, which is equivalent to not far short of £2 a head for each man, woman and child; In other words, in the case of an average family of five a ten pound note will represent the cost of naval defence. It will be met out of revenue, a proposal to xajse a loan having been deferred. Catching Up Arrears The size of the supplementary estimate'lndicates that Ministers are very much in earnest in their determination to overtake arrears as soon as possible While many of the older men-of-war must be replaced, it is Intended to modernise others, and this work will make such heavy demands on the three Royal dockyards at Portsmouth, Devonpdrt and Chatham that the task of building most of the new ships will have to be undertaken by the private shipyards. Although the shipbuilding •capacity of the British Isles has been reduced by a process of voluntary rationalisation by one-third, and there is upward of one million tons gross of merchant tonnage in hand, the facilities are still so ample when all the naval orders are in hand that little more than half the maximum output of the various establishments will be reached and many thousands of men, mainly, it is true, unskilled, will remain idle. The president of the Shipbuilding Employers’ Federation (Mr. Maurice Denny) has recently protested against the statement that British yards and engine shops will be so busy that they will not be in a position to tender for foreign contracts or to promise quick delivery. There will be plenty of berths available for the building of ships for other countries, and it will be possible to complete them at least as rapidly as, if not more rapidly than, in foreign yards. The idea that there is going to be a “shipbuilding boom” may be disregarded. The Government has, indeed, given an undertaking ,to the House of Commons that there will be a close scrutiny on all expenditure so as to guard against excessive profits. When all the work of the programme is in full swing, the output of naval and mercan-

tile shipping will fall far short of the standards of pre-War years. This Year’s New Men-of-war The supplementary estimate provides for starting work on the following vessels By Contract: Two battleships, three cruisers, nine destroyers of the “Tribal class, one aircraft carrier, three submarines, four sloops, one gunboat, two surveying vessels, six motor-torpedo boats (formerly called coastal motor-boats), five boom defence vessels, two special service vessels, two trawlers, two motor-mine-sweepers, three tugs, one mooring lighter and one ash lighter. _ By the Royal Dockyards: Two cruisers (Portsmouth and Devonport respectively); one submarine (Chatham); two sloop minesweepers (Devonport); two refuse lighters (Malta); two general service lighters (Maita); end two yard service lighters (Simons, town). For many years past it has been usual to provide only a nominal sum of less than £lOO,OOO for commencing a new programme, and to order the ship toward the end of the financial year or even later. The present supplementary estimate provides a sum of nearly £3,000,000 for commencing the new programme, the increase being required partly on account of the increased size of the programme, and partly in order that ships may be laid down earlier in the financial year. It will be no easy matter to make good all the sacrifices of ships and men which were accepted when the limitation of naval armaments was recommended to the world by example. For instance, no battleship has been laid down in the British Isles since 1922 —a matter of 14 years—and of the existing ships only one, H.M.S. Barham, has been brought up to date in the thorough-going manner adopted by the Americans and Japanese. The need for new units of the flattie fleet is urgent, but work on the two vessels which are to be built cannot be begun until the beginning of 1937, as the Admiralty considers itself still bound by

the Washington Treaty. Thus it will come about that by the time these British battleships are completed seven ships of the type embodying all the lessons of war experience and research will have passed Into the fleets of Germany, France, and Italy. The position isfexplained in the new edition of “Brassey’s Naval Annual”:—

At the beginning of 1838, seven battleships were building for Continental Powers —three for France, two for Italy and two for Germany. The first of these is the Dunkerque, laid down In 1932, which was launched on October 1, 1935. The Do. • kerque and her sister ship, the Strasbourg, are of 26.500 tons with eight and represent the medium-size battleship for which Great Britain has contended at the Naval Conferences. Gerr “ any ’ T . a ;t V breaking away from the Versailles Treaty, also favoured a displacement of 26.000 tons for the two ships she laid down to replace the Hlsass and Hessen: these will each carry nine Uln. guns. ever. In deciding to build .the Vittoria, Venfto and blttorio, went to the maximum displacement under the Washington Treaty (30,000 tons), and to a larger calibre of gun (151 n. The Influence of this is to be seen in the decision by France to build two vessels of similar tonnage, tne France and the Patrie. All three of the Continental Powers are thus between two and three y earß ,,? ,1? of Great Britain in post-Treaty battleship construction, and France nearly five years ahead. Weakness in Cruisers In relation to cruisers, the prospect is that many yeans must elapse before the Admiralty has at its disposal the 70 vessels of the class which are considered essential. In this instance the naval authorities are still restrained by the provision of the London Naval Treaty. For the time being, apart from the restrictions which the Treasury places on a further increase of expenditure, the hands of the Sea Lords are tied. The number of cruisers on the effective list at the end of the present year will be not 70, but 48. which will have to suffice for duty with the battle fleet and for service on

the trade routes, a far smaller provision than was made at any time in the past. When it was known that the four large cruisers of the Hawkins class would not be scrapped in accordance with the arrangement tentatively accepted when the London Treaty was drafted, it was expected that this change of plans would represent a net gain of four units. It has since been explained that only three of these cruisers are to be retained as fighting' ships, their 7.5 in. guns being replaced by 6in. guns so as to bring them into the lower category; the fourth Is to be disarmed and used for the training of cadets. But these will not represent an increase in the number of cruisers, but only in power of defence and offence, as, in accordance, as it is claimed by the Admiralty in opposition to many high authorities, four smaller cruisers of from 4180 tons to 4290 tons displacement are to be scrapped as compensation for the retention of the Hawkins and her sisters. It is true that these ships are already 15 or 16 years old, but they would be useful as a reserve until, freed from treaty obligations, new cruisers can be built. In these circumstances the strength in the two categories of cruisers will be as follows at the end of this year:— Category (A), Bin. Guu Cruisers. Tonnage allowed by Treaty—--146,800 tons. Tonnage effective —15 ships, 144,220 tons. Category (B), 6in. Gun Cruisers. Tonnage allowed by Treaty--192,200 tons. Tonnage effective —Under age, 20 ships; over age, 13 ships—--193,930 tons. Categories (A) and (B) Combined. Tonnage allowed by Treaty—339,000 tons. Tonnage effective —48 ships, 338,150 tons. It will be a matter of many years before 1 ' the leeway in cruisers lost in the years of economy, is recovered—at earliest in 1942. The position in relation 'to destroyers and submarines is much the same.