Submarines As Defence Weapons

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 88, 5 July 1927, Page 6

Submarines As Defence Weapons

EXCUSE FOR BUILDING BRITAIN STATES POLICY I (British Official Wireless.') RUGBY, Sunday. Q~" UESTIONS relating to submarines, of which the United States at present has 129 built or building, Britain 74 and Japan 95, were fur- ' tier examined at the Geneva Naval Conference by the technical committee to-day. The British standpoint, shared by the United States, is that it would be better for the world if submarines could be definitely barred as a weapon of war. The submarine, however, has proved its power as a menace to surface craft, and is looked to by the smaller naval Powers as their chief weapon of defence. Great Britain in these circumstances proposes to apply to submarines her fixed policy of general reduction in the size of ships and guns, and the lengthening of their life. Two classes of submarines are proposed, one limited to 1,600 tons for use overseas and in co-operation with fleets, and the other limited to 600 tons for coastal defence work. It is proposed that the life of all submarines should be extended to 15 years and that the heaviest gun to be carried in these craft should be sin. It would appear that on the basis of these proposals provisional agreements, subject, of course, to confirmation by the plen- ' ary sessions of the conference, are being sought. Newspapers report that an agreement regarding the calibre of guns has been reached and that there are good prospects of settling differences concerning the tonnage of the oceangoing class of submarines. It is reported that the delegations are in agreement as to 600 tons submarines for coastal defence.

The Technical Committee continued its discussion yesterday of the characteristics of submarines. A communique states that a provisional agreement on some points left untouched at the previous meeting was reached.

’• The newspapers state that an armament of sin. guns for submarines had already been accepted when the committee met, and questions of tonnage and age—periods of large and small ■vessels were considered. As already Stated, there was little opposition to the British proposal for limiting the tonnage of coastal defence submarines to 600 tons, but some of the delegates doubted whether 1,600 tons for foreign vessels was large enough in the case of Powers not provided with distant bases.

The “Sunday Times” says it would appear that the Technical Committee, after a close examination, fixed 1,800 tons as the maximum tonnage, and laid down 13 years, as against the British proposal of 15 years, for the life of submarines. t The “Observer” says the British proposal for dividing cruisers into two categories, large and small, is now being examined, and is facilitated by the fact that Britain has supported her proposal with detailed reasons.