NAVAL DISCLOSURES.

Otago Witness, Issue 2928, 27 April 1910, Page 15

NAVAL DISCLOSURES.

THE INVINCIBLE'S GUNS. AN EXPERIMENTAL BATTLESHIP. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, February 25. It is now two months since Lord Charles Beresford first demanded to know whether it was true that- since she was commissioned in March, 1909, the Dreadnought Invincible had not been able to fire her 12-inch guns. Mr M'Kenma described the suggestion as "mere nonsense." "The Invincible has fired her guns," he said, "can fire her guns, and would be able to fire her guns if, unhappily, there should be war." Still Lord Charles was not placated. He book the first opportunity of raising the question in the House, and yesterday Mr M'Kenna laid bare the whole truth. " The Invincible," he said, " fired her 12inch guns on March 14, 1909, and she has not since fired them until yesterday, when she fired all her turrets after having been delayed for a. considerable time by bad weather. In May, 1905, approval was given by the then First Lord cJf the Admiralty to fit the Invincible with turrets to be worked electrically. The firing gun trials of the Invineiblo's turrets were carried out in October, 1908, and only a few defects appeared, which were then thought to be of minor importance. These ware remedied, and a second trial for rapidity series was carried out in March, 1909. The turrets had been made by two firms, and one turret of each was tried. The other two turrets drilled only. ' The report stated that there were no very serious hitches during the trial, but there were numerous minor mishaps, especially in the mountings of one of the guns. The ship was commissioned in March, and joined the First Cruiser Squadron. While working up for gunlayers' test numerous failures occurred with the gear of the same firm, and in June the turrets were examined by Admiralty officials and a representative from the firm, and, after discussion, certain modifications were decided on. While these modifications were under discussion, and preliminary work was being done by the firm for carrying them out, the ship remained with the cruiser squadron, going through the ordinary exercises, and gaining further experience of the working of the gear. During this period other defects in another part of the gear- were discovered. If the ship had been required to go into action while the modifications were taking place, she would have had four of her 12-inch guns efficient and the other four could have been worked, though at a rate considerably lower than normal. Meanwhile, in all other respects full advantage was gained from keeping the ship with the squadron with men and officers under training. "In August the Invincible went to Portsmouth to have the aptrroved modifications madfl in her electrical gear, and by the third week in November the turrets were believed to be ready for trial. During this neriod the ship was held at a fortnight's notice. It was found, however, on trial that the g&ir was still not satisfactory, and a further modification was decided on. which was completrd by the end of December. So far as working the turrets electrically was concerned, the Invincible is an oxnerimAmtal ship, having been so designed 'bv the Government which was in office in 1905. It was very important that, as the experiment had been resolved upon, amole time should be given for the investigations and remedying of defect', as thev arose, in order to get a fair comparison with the hvdraulic system." GERMANY'S "GIGANTIC STEP." The well-known German military critic, Colonel Gadke, informs the world l in the columns of the Tageblatfc that Germany is busy building a fleet of 58 battleship's instead of the 38 fixed bv the Navy Act. ( He says: "Our new armoured cruisers, 'which were originally intended to be powerful scouts, and, in case of necessity, were to he used in expeditions "against small, weak countries, are row being constructed as complete battleships with the same heavy guns, with sufficiently thick armour, and with considerably greater speed. The cost of the?e armoured cruiser-battleships will be hardly le.s than those of ordinary battleships: probablv greater. The _ TTwifoerl States, as is well known, do not build such battlesliin-cruisers, and the new French shipbnild'ng programme makes no provision for them. After further emphasising the fact that Germany, under the mask of cruisers, is building 20 more battle-hips* than is provided by her shipbuilding programme, Colonel Gadke writes: " 0»- position does not compel us to conroo' naval construction with the Uniter 1 38 or with England. The power of these two countries rests exclusively on their naval armaments; but Germany's prestige depends

solely on her army. Nevertheless, it appears that this policy no longer holds good in Germany. The expansion of our maritime armaments is gradually exceeding the measure which would foe necessary to defend our coasts and to protect our trade. Of course, national defence requires an efficient fleet, but within certain limits, which ought to be drawn by considerations of expenditure, because we cannot permanently spend money lavishly on both the fleet and the army without ruining our financial position. We are proceeding with gigantic steps beyond the limits of our Naval Act."