THE WORLD’S NAVIES.

Otago Witness, Issue 3961, 11 February 1930, Page 79

THE WORLD’S NAVIES.

AMERICAN FLEET.

SURPRISING DISCLOSURES. LORD BEATTY’S WARNING. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, December 23. Speaking in the House of Lords, Admiral of the Fleet Earl Beatty declared that it was the responsibility of the Admiralty to provide a sufficient strength to protect the sea communications and the trade routes and to protect our colonies and dependencies overseas. It was a responsibilitty not only to the Government but also to the Empire, and for that reason the country required to know that nothing had been done, or was being done, or would be done at the Naval Conference which would in any way weaken the hands of the Admiralty in carrying out its heavy burden.

Britain’s cruiser programme for 192829 was not being carried out. and her cruiser strength was reduced from 70 to 59. The situation was indeed serious. Britain was entering upon the Naval Conference with an extremely low limit of cruiser tonnage. Moreover, there was no indication that proper provision was being made to maintain even the reduced figure and tonnage. It was not surprising that there was apprehension and dismay among those who could not understand how parity in cruisers could be arrived at unless it was to be parity having regard to the commitments and obligations of each nation. There was no nation whose naval commitments and obligations were so great and so complicated as those of the British Empire. Lord Thomson (Air Minister), replying, said the naval policy of the Government so far as the security of the Empire wq«; concerned, had not been altered in one single point. It was to provide for the absolute security of the British Empire in all its aspects. The object of the coming conference was to achieve a reduction of armaments. If it failed to do that it would be entirely abortive. FRENCH ATTITUDE.

“ I learn.” writes the diplomatic correspondent of the Daily Telegraph, “ that in the course of preliminary conversations on naval disarmament the French Government has raised the question of the small but powerful navy which German} 7 is now bmldihg within the limits of the Versailles Treaty. In fact, the existence, actuaal or prospective, of this German fleet, with its 10,000-ton ‘pocket battleships,’ aimed with six Ilin guns apiece, is being adduced by France as one reason the more why she feels bound to reject the Italian claim to parity with the French Navy This French argument, if strongly pressed, would threaten the coming Five-Power Conference in London wi'h a very serious complication, over and above those previously feared. “ lor the Reich not being represented at the London Conference, it might be contended by France that she could not agree to the fixing of her own naval strength with any finality until the later World Conference on ail-round disarmament. of which Germany would be a member. France, indeed, had previously suggested that the London Conference shouid not be empowered to take binding decis.ons, but merely 7 to make recommendations to the Preparatory Disarmament ( ommission and the World Conference in question.”

Remarkable revelations are made by the naval correspondent of the Daily 7 Telegraph. From the standpoint of American mg-navy interests, a searching inquisition that has been going on for months into the combatant strength and resources of t.ie leading navies has had one unexpected and very disconcerting result. It has established, says the Daily 1 elegraph correspondent, the fact that in most of the important elements of sea power the United States Navy, so far from being below the Washington I reaty ratio, is well above that scale, and is. in effect, vastly 7 superior to the British Navy in every category 7 saie that of small cruisers. Here are some of the facts revealed by 7 the “yardstick” investigation: — 1. The United States battle fleet of 18 capita] ships is the only 7 completely oil-burning fleet in the world, which gives it an immense advantage over all others in respect of steaming radius and strategical homogeneity. It is the only fleet of which every 7 pre-Jutland unit has been, or is being, extensively reconstructed, bulged, and modernised to embody war experience. It mounts 192 heavy turret-guns, as against the 166 corresponding guns mounted in the British fleet.

2. The United States cruiser fleet, actually built and building, comprises 23 ships of post-war design. In the British Navy there are only 15 postwar ships. Of Bin guns, which American naval experts acknowledge to be the most formidable weapons after battlesbio guns, the American Navy carries 135 in 15 ships (including two aircraft carriers), and the British Navy only 116 (including two Australian cruisers). ( onsequently, in heavy calibre ordnance, from Sin to 16in, the American Naw has a clear margin of 45 guns. The “ yardstick ” further shows that in the 6in gun cruiser class the British Navy has not a single ship to compare ''■’th the 10 American vessels of . Qmaha group, each mounting 12 six-inch guns. 3. Even more striking are the disclosures relating to America’s overwhelming superiority in destrovers, sub-, marines, and naval aircraft, all of which are covered by the “yardstick” formula. At the present moment the United States has 270 destroy r ers and the British Empire 166 (including 18 boats building). In armament, however, the American boats are so superior to ours that the mere totals convey no true idea of the relative position. The 270 American destroyers carry 2468 torpedo tubes, while the

British flotilla mounts only 884 tubes. On this point the United States Naval Institute Proceedings, a semi-official monthly organ, makes a significant admission.

“British, Japanese, French, and Italian destroyers in general,” it writes, “ mount only six torpedo tubes, whereas ours mount 12. The ratios of destroyers possessed by the leading naval Powers are about as follows:— United States 10, Great Britain 7, Japan 3. Thus, in torpedo power, we have a preponderance according to the following ratios:—United States 10, Great Britain 3.5, Japan 1.5. In other words, in this offensive weapon we have almost three times the strength of our nearest rival.”

4. In submarine tonnage and armament American superiority is almost equally pronounced. There are 124 American submarines armed with 516 torpedo tubes, as against 63 British boats with 383 tubes. Of the heavy ocean-going type of submarine, suitable for long-range cruising, America has 62, the British Empire 47. Outside naval circles few people in the United States were aware of the enormous strength of their navy in gun power, torpedo vessels, and submarine craft. The disclosures resulting from the “ yardstick ” inquiry will be a severe blow to the big navy propaganda. 5. In the application of air power to naval uses the United States is so far ahead of other nations that a comparison is hardly practicable. The American Navy now has between 700 and 800 effective aircraft, and will soon possess 1000. The ratio of naval aricraft is now: United States 10, British Empire 1.7. At the present rates of expansion America, by 1932, will have a ten to one preponderance in the naval air arm. Although air power was not included in the original “ yardstick ” formula, it is realised that since aircraft have become an integral part of the fighting equipment of men-of-war this question may be raised by the other delegations at the London Conference. Full statistics bearing on the air strength of the fleets have therefore been prepared. 6. As regards man power, it has been found that the United States has, at present, a personnel of 113,000 naval officers, ratings, and marines, while the British personnel numbers 101,000 (excluding the Dominion fleets).