NAVAL ARMAMENTS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18158, 1 February 1921, Page 5

NAVAL ARMAMENTS

BIG SHIPS INQUIRY. HIGHLY TECHNICAL SUBJECT

, •»» Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright.

LONDON, January 30. The deadlock in the big ships inquiry is duo to the predominating civilian character of the committee, which *s dealing with a highly technical subject. On the one hand, they are impressed bv the march of invention and the lessons learned through the air and under-sea activities. On the other hand, they found a big rally throughout the highest ranks of the Admiralty in favour of big ships.— Time*.

REAR-ADMIRAL PATEY’S CONTRIBUTION.

BRITAIN’S DANGER EMPHASISED,

AUSTRALASIAN DOCKYARDS NECESSARY.

LONDON, January 30. Rear-Admiral Patey, in a contribution to the naval discussions, says that ne knows nothing to justify, the statement that up-to-date battleships are obsolete and valueless. He believes that a combination of surface ships, submarines, and aircraft is essential for the protection of our lines of sea communication, commerce, and coasts. He says: “ The suggestion that we should wait and do nothing attracts politicians, but the Empire cannot afford to wait. Unless we immediately do the best for ourselves, in four years we shall be reduced to the position of the second naval Power, which is intolerable. The most pressing need in Australia and New Zealand is dockyards. WhethA Britain or Australasia provides ships, docking facilities must be made available. This is urgent, because the presence of ships in Australasian waters will be imperative in the event of Pacific complicacations.” Admiral Patey believes that Australia and New Zealand should concentrate on dockyards, aircraft, and submarine bases, while Britain should supply the. largest surface vessels.—A. and N.Z. Cable.