FIGHTING PLANES.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20232, 16 February 1934, Page 5

FIGHTING PLANES.

Use in the Defence of Australia. COMPARISON WITH CRUISERS. Even if Australia were extravagantly equipped with planes of the most modern type, they’ could not, unaided, prevent raiding cruisers from reaching vulnerable points on our coast, bearing in mind the extraordinary accuracy of modern anti-aircraft artillery, and the activity of the enemy’s own planes, declares Major-General Sir Charles Rosenthal. formerly' commander of the Second A.I.F. Division in France. " Rather,” says Sir Charles, “ do we need ships which can seek out the enemy and destroy his cruisers and aircraft carriers, thus denying to his planes a base.” Sir Charles offered his opinion in a letter in the “ Sydney Morning Herald ”, in reply' to a statement made in a recent speech by Air-Commodore Sir Charles Kingsford Smith that for the cost of one Australian cruiser (about £3.000,0001 Australia could have a fleet of 500 fighting planes, t Striking comparisons between the cost of air and naval defence form the basis of the reply, during the course of which Sir Charles says: ‘‘There are many features affecting the use of planes in war, such as a limited radius of activity’, visibility, weather conditions, and engine troubles, all of which have a vital bearing on the value of planes in comparison with the Navy.” “ The distinguished aviator’s reference to the cost of one Australian cruiser and 500 fighting planes is misleading. In the first place, the cost of the two cruisers Canberra and Australia, built by John Brown, of Clydebank, was £2,000.000 each, not £3,000,000, as Sir Charles Kingsford Smith is reported to have stated in his speech. “ In 1931 the average costs of ships built by contract for the Royal Navy

were: Cruisers, £212 a ton displacement; flotilla leaders, £218; destroyers, £210; submarines, £218; and sloops, £ll4. These figures represent fairly accurately the costs of similar ships today. The public may therefore ascertain the approximate cost of any fighting ship of w’hich the tonnage is known. “ Five hundred fighting planes could not possibly be built for £2,000,000. Even if they could, other aspects of the case must be considered. “ The effective life of a cruiser may be set down at twenty y’ears, and that of an aeroplane at not more than three years. “ The cost of maintaining a 10,000-ton cruiser, including the pay of personnel, fuel and stores, is not more than £285,000 a year, while, based on the experience of the Royal Air Force, a much more serious financial problem would have to be faced in maintaining 500 planes. Royal Air Force Costs. “ Royal Air Force figures show that a fleet of 908 aeroplanes and a personnel of 32,000, excluding officers and men serving in India, was maintained in 1931, representing 35.24 men a plane. In time of war these numbers would be materially increased. ” In October, 1918, there were 22,17 i planes on charge in the R.A.F., and for every plane 84 men were required for ground service. The life of a plane during the most active periods of the war was not much more than six weeks. “ Thus for the 500 planes suggested by Sir Charles Kingsford Smith a total would be required of 17,620 men to maintain and fly them The cost of pay and victualling for this personnel would amount to not less than £2,000,000, and to this has to be added the cost of maintenance, fuel repairs and replacements of machines lost, totalling at least another £1,000,000, making a grand total of £3.000,000 for the upkeep of 500 planes and personnel a year, as against £285,000 for one cruiser. “ On these figures it w’ould be possible to maintain ten cruisers for the same expenditure as for 500 planes.”