U.S. AIR CONTROVERSY.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LI, Issue 16662, 16 February 1925, Page 5

U.S. AIR CONTROVERSY.

STATEMENTS BY EXPERTS.

DEFICIENCY IN -AIRCRAFT. (Elec. Tol. Copyright—United Press Assn.) (Sydney Sun Cables.) WASHINGTON, Feb. 14. Public interest throughout the country is now centred on the aviation controversy. Contradictory testimony, much of it of sensational cnaracter, is being given before the House Aircraft Committee, which is sitting to investigate Mr Mitchell's charges and inquire into the whole situation and make recommendations to Mr Coolidge. The witnesses include prominent navy and army officers and aviators.

Colonel Hartley, who was the American Air Commander in the world war, testified that all the strategic points in the United States, particularly New York, were open to air attack. He pointed out the innovation in the British Air Forces, and produced evidence that Britain had devised a method whereby airplanes can be refuelled in the air from surface ships, thus giving them unlimited radius of action. Colonel Hartley also described the new bombing method by which the British planes could be certain to hit vessels. Mr Mitchell testified that the navy was deficient in aircraft to such an extent Hint a third-rate Power equipped with proper Hying units could defeat the United States.

Colonel Schaufiler, Air Reserve Officer, alleged that during the 1923 bombing tests on the warships Virginia and New Jersey, Admiral Shoemaker changed a. statement intended to be issued over the name of General Pershing on. the effect of bombing, the Admiral saying: “It is true every bit of it, but, my God. we can’t let this get out or it won id ruin the navy.” Admiral Shoemaker denied this before the committee, declaring that the article stated the aviation standpoint of the tests, but did not include the naval side. He added two paragraphs explaining that the ships bombed were not watertight, which changes General Pershing approved. The committee, on the recommendation of General Patrick, bead of the Air Service, decided to deal in executive session with the reports of the aerodynamic experts on aircraft designs previously rejected by the army and navy. The reports are said to show that some designs refused as impracticable were found to be valuable.

The committee is expected to ask for extended time to make its report.