AIRCRAFT IN WAR

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12075, 28 February 1925, Page 5

AIRCRAFT IN WAR

AMERICAN CONTROVERSY ADMIRAL ADMITS RECENT TESTS WERE INADEQUATE. IMPORTANT EVIDENCE. Rv Tpletrrapb.—Pre«a Acsq.—OoTwr’irht Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. (Received February 27 11.35 p.m.) WASHINGTON, February 26. The Aircraft Committee of the House of Representatives resumed the hearing of evidence. Rear-Admiral Jones, of the Navy General Board, testified and endeavoured to counteract General Mitchell’s charges, but Representative Prall, a member of the committee, obviously supporting General Mitchell, drew several important admissions from the witness. Rear-Admiral Jones declared his disbelief that a 2000-pound bomb dropped from a ’plane would have any serious effect on the motive power of a battleship, or the personnel in enclosed stations. “I do not believe a bomb landing within 50 feet of a vessel would do any damage,” he said. He admitted that only one explosive bomb was dropped on the battleship Washington, and that it did not even pierce the deck. He agreed that aircraft were not given a real chance to demonstrate during the test. The admiral declared the navy equal to the Washington Treaty ratio in some units and below in others, particularly airplane carriers, but two additional carriers were under construction. He agreed with General Mitchell that the Philippines could be taken by a foreign Power in short time, but he criticised General Mitchell’s statement regarding the 1921 bombing tests He said certain people repeatedly had impugned the honour of the naval officer who conducted the tests. If anyone would want to know whether an airplane could put battleships out of commission if. would he the navy, for its very existence depended upon such knowledge. Captain Johnson, assistant chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, testified that the bureau asked for 32 million dollars, and was granted 19 millions. Mr J. W. Weeks. Secretary for War, gives evidence on Friday.