WHAT SETTLED THE SUBMARINE

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 96, 23 April 1921, Page 5

WHAT SETTLED THE SUBMARINE

DEPTH-CHARGE CLAIM

WAR-TIME INVENTIONS.

(FROM OPR OWN CORRBSPONDHHT.)

LONDON, 3rd March. Ramming was tho only method wjijch was found at all effective.

Nets were tried, but by themselves they were npt sufficient to overcome the danger.

Then the.Channel net w«s sopn passed by the Germans. The thing: that settled the submarine .was" the, depth charge. Tt]ose four interepting points related to the warfare on submarines, and- they were mentioned by Mr. Kerley, K.O, on behalf of Mr. L. D. Newitt, chief electrical engineer of Chatham Dockyard, whoso claim came before the Royal Commisfsioi} on Awards to Inventors this week,

Mr. Kerley mentioned that his client had turned out a large number qf inventions, > and during the war £300,000 was spent directly in carrying out apparatus devispd by him. He put forward claims in respect of 22 inyentions, of whioh eleven were submitted to the Commission, and he was now proceeding with regard to only six of them. For his hydraulic gear for the relea.se of depth charges he was paid on account £100, and £250 op general account ip respect of the others, and he a,|sp reoeived ±1100 from the United States Navy for their use of tho depth charge apparatus, a total of £450. His salary was £800 a year, plus war bonus. In respect of this invention, and also the hydraulic system of searchlights, substantial awards ought to be given.

Dealing with the hydraulic depth charge mechanism, Mr. Kerley said when the submarine menace became serious great difficulty w^ found Jn. dealing with tho danger. The essentials of the depth charge were its instant release at a given point, otherwise there would be danger to following vessels. The problem was successfully overcome by %ha applf* cant, and 2800 "were completed at a total coat of"£116,000. ' • Mr. Moritz (for the Crown) was prepared to admit that this was a valuable invention, and it had. now become standard praotice. /This real merit was in suggesting hydraulic release, The Admiralty were agreed that t}re d&vipe was deserving of an award of a substantial amount. Dealing with imprpvenient in circuit breakers for U6e in gun cirouits, Mr. Kerley said the essence of this was that when firing a broadsfrfe or salvo, it was necessary that all the guns should go off at the same instant, and this it accomplished. The sum of about £30,000 was spent on this apparatus. The Admiralty agreed that the invention was of considerable value, and that the inventor was, entitled to some award, Subsequently, "improvements, in eleptrio soldering irons" were mentioned. Mr. Justice Sargant considered the matter to be so insignificant and trifljng and so muph within the scope of the duties of the inventor that it should not have been presented to the Commission. If they were to give awards in such cases they would have hundreds of thousands of applications from workmen all over the country. ECONOMY ISSUE. Referring to another invention, Mr. Justice Sargant remarked: "Until a few months ago economy was a virtue that had entirely gone out of fashion, and it was thought that most people might carry on exaotly as they thought fit without regard to that consideration, but there ia a different state of mind now," With regard to the hydraulic system of searchlights, Mr. Kerley said that this solved the important question of searchlight control. x'Commafld<ir Barry said the invention was of real service in the early part of the war, but it had now been superseded by a different form of control gear.