This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
UNITED STATES Roanoke Commissioned
N. Y. Herald Tribune, April 5.—Philadelphia. Secretary of Defense Louis Johnson said today at the commissioning of the United States cruiser Roanoke that the vessel joins “the greatest fleet we have ever maintained in time of supposed peace.”
Mr. Johnson, in his first public speech since his Cabinet appointment, said the Roanoke—“the world’s most powerful light cruiser” will be kept in training “for its primary mission.” Omitting mention of the word “war,” Mr. Johnson described the “mission” as one “we all hope and believe it will not have to discharge.”
The 680-foot Roanoke, which cost $30,000,000, had been under construction five years and was christened in June, 1947. Carrying a crew of fifty-one officers and 922 men, the Roanoke displaces 17,000 tons and has a designed speed of thirty-three knots. With a hull that renders her practically un- sinkable, the vessel has a main battery of twelve semi-automatic six-inch guns housed in six turrets and a secondary battery of twenty rapid-fire three-inch guns and six twin twenty-millimeter mounts.
She is the third Navy ship to bear the name Roanoke. “The original Roanoke,” Mr. Johnson told more than 1,000 persons at the Philadelphia Naval Base, “was a contemporary of the Monitor and the Merri- mac. The second Roanoke was a mine planter that participated in laying the North Sea mine barrage in 1918.”
Captain J. D. Kelsey, of Silver Springs, Md., took over command of the Roanoke following the commissioning ceremonies— the playing of “The Star-Spangled Banner” as the American flag was hoisted on the giant mast.
Coast Guard Craft Help Ocean Fliers
N. Y. Times, April 4.—The twenty Coast Guard cutters on ocean station patrol in the last year in the Pacific and Atlantic have contributed to the safety of thousands of overwater airplane flights, according to a Coast Guard report made public last week by John W. Snyder, Secretary of the Treasury. Throughout the year 8,756 position checks from the cutters were obtained by pilots, or an average of twenty-four calls a day. The ocean station cutters also received 13,361 requests for weather and other general information from planes in the year.
Coast Guard cutters now patrol five Atlantic and two Pacific Ocean stations, maintained under international agreement. They furnish search and rescue, communication and air navigation facilities and turn in periodic weather reports.
Automatic Identification
N. Y. Herald Tribune, March 30.—The armed forces have developed an anti-aircraft and anti-tank gun with an electronic “brain” which prevents it from firing on friendly planes and tanks by mistake.
Existence of the new weapon was verified after an official of the National Security Resources Board alluded briefly to its new fire- control device at a meeting of the Armed Services Communications Association.
The anti-aircraft version of the gun, called the “skysweeper,” was said to be the “hottest thing we’ve got right now.” Just how its electronic brain works is a military secret.
It presumably is an automatic version of the I. F. F.—identification, friend or foe—radar device used by gun crews in World War II to identify friendly planes. I. F. F. was developed because Allied gun crews sometimes shot down their own planes.
Leighton H. Peebles, electronics production chief for the Security Board, said the gun’s firing mechanism is equipped with electronic “locks” which permit it to fire only at enemy targets.
I.F.F. was a device installed on Allied planes. It received an ultra-high frequency code signal flashed from friendly ground stations and sent back a signal which produced an identifying picture on a radar scope.
The entire procedure was automatic, and the pilot was entirely unaware he had been challenged. If no identifying picture was received, the plane was assumed to be an enemy. If friendly, gunners withheld their fire.
The human element is eliminated by the new “skysweeper” gun. “Sight it and pull the trigger all day—when our planes and tanks are the target, the gun won’t fire,” Mr. Peebles said.
While he did not go into detail, friendly planes and tanks presumably are equipped with a transmitter which sends out a special code pulse or signal. When the signal reaches the electronic brain on the anti-aircraft gun, it apparently automatically locks the gun’s firing mechanism. But if a plane lacking the identification signal flies within range, the gun crew is able to fire at will.
Arms for European Allies
U. S. News & World Report, April 22.— Arms from a wartime stockpile are going to cut the current cost to U. S. of arming nations of Western Europe. In that stockpile are billions of dollars’ worth of weapons and ammunition.
The catch in the lend-lease problem, however, is that most of the arms on hand are not the kind or type of arms that the other countries most need. As a result, U. S. taxpayers are to be asked to pay the cost of much other armament more nearly geared to the wants of the nations of Europe.
Stockpile of arms on hand, left over from war, amounts to $8,722,000,000 in tanks, artillery, small arms, trucks, jeeps and other combat equipment. The stockpile was more than twice this size at war’s end, but much has been used up, destroyed or turned over to other nations.
U. S. needs, from that $8,722,000,000 stockpile, come to a minimum of $3,600,000,000 in arms to equip an 18-division force if war should come. That’s called for in the present M-Day plan. These needs include the most modern weapons on hand, and earmark the total supply of weapons in some categories.
U. S. can ship abroad, thus, a maximum of $5,122,000,000 in ground-combat equipment, as the record shows. This is the total available if no reserve weapons are kept to help build up a strong U. S. force quickly after an M-Day force is equipped.
These available arms amount to about $1 worth of weapons for each $10 in lend-lease shipped abroad during the war. But, even if all of these arms were shipped in a new peacetime lend-lease program, the total is to be far from enough to equip a tenth of the wartime forces of this country’s allies. Reason is that there is a surplus of some types of weapons and not enough of other types. In other words, there are not enough arms of some types to equip fully even a few new divisions.
Item by item, an accounting of U. S. arms now on hand shows this:
Tanks of the World War II variety are in plentiful supply. Of the 25,000 U. S. tanks left over at war’s end, the Army still has about 16,000 in working order. U. S. needs only 6,714 for its minimum M-Day force of 18 divisions. Up to 9,286 tanks, thus, are available for lend-lease. That’s enough to equip 25 armored divisions in Western Europe.
Antitank guns, however, are scarce. These 57 to 90-mm. guns are most in demand now in Western Europe, as the prime means of stopping any armored assault from the East by Russia. Few, if any, can really be spared by U. S. at this time.
Heavy artillery, mostly 105-mm. howitzers, are fairly plentiful. Yet these guns are of relatively little value to a defending force, are designed for use by an attacking army against strong, built-in defenses.
Antiaircraft weapons, of the type used against low-flying planes in the last war, also are plentiful, but of little real value. Russia is not expected to use large-scale air power in any attack on the West. Moreover, if they did use tactical air support, these guns probably would be obsolete against the newest planes.
Infantry weapons—M-l rifles, machine guns, mortars, even “bazookas”—are available in large quantity if needed. Demand for these weapons is to be relatively light, however, as most Atlantic Pact nations have an adequate supply of small arms. New infantry weapons, such as rocket guns and recoilless hand-carried artillery, are in great demand but will not be shipped under present plans.
Trucks, jeeps, other military vehicles are needed in large quantity by Europe’s armies, but are far too scarce to be shipped from present U. S. stocks.
Ammunition, in contrast, is plentiful. More than 7,000,000 tons of ammunition of all kinds is on hand in U. S.
Planes for tactical support of Western Europe’s land forces may not be shipped under present plans, but a fairly large number are available if needed. About 4,000 fighter planes from World War II are in storage. In addition, about 2,000 wartime B-29s are available for possible shipment to Britain.
Added up, these weapons are to save billions in any U. S. program to rearm Europe. But the defensive weapons that Western Europe needs most—antitank artillery, rocket guns, and vehicles for mobile defense—are the least plentiful, still must be bought in large amounts if lend-lease is to be effective.
GREAT BRITAIN Arctic Maneuvers
Manchester Guardian, March 10.—The Navy’s first aircraft carrier trials within the Arctic Circle have been 95 per cent successful, it was stated yesterday when the light carrier Vengeance (13,000 tons) returned to Rosyth after three weeks’ patrol to test the effect of extreme cold on crews and ship’s gear.
Captain John Terry, her commander, said: “We learned an immense amount, and the only disappointing feature was that on 15 out of the 21 days gales and snowstorms made flying impossible. Wind-speed at times reached 70 m.p.h.”
The men received about 4,100 calories a day as against the normal naval ration of 3,500; they had extra meat and butter. “We had a lower sick list than ever before,” Captain Terry said. “Some of the reports on the ship’s heating below decks, which had been adapted for the cruise, said that it was too hot there.”
The trials proved that extreme cold does not in itself preclude the possibilities of naval warfare in the Arctic, but they showed that light carriers cannot move in pack ice without risk of serious damage, and movement by night is virtually out of the question as radar does not pick up the flat pack ice.
Survival suits to enable men to have a chance of living in Arctic water were tested. Three officers, including Surgeon Lieutenant Commander Boyd-Martin, went into water which was below freezing point and with an air temperature 22 degrees below freezing point. They swam twenty yards to a raft and remained there for ten minutes, without any after-effects. The test showed the necessity for protection on life-saving rafts for the hands, which become chilled very quickly.
February 22.—Sub-Lieutenant J. Strother, a member of the British Navy’s Arctic expedition, was lost overboard early this morning from the submarine Artful. A strong gale was blowing at the time. The Artful was with the destroyer Gabbard and the frigate Loch Ar- kaig. A search was made but no trace of the missing officer was found.
A steam pipe to the capstan in, the Gabbard was blown, putting No. 1 messdeck in a bad condition. The captain ordered one boiler to be put out of action for 24 hours while the defect was repaired. Earlier, the Artful’s wireless telegraphy had been temporarily out of action.
Almost incessant heavy southerly gales have occurred during the past week and the rough weather has seriously impeded air and other operations.
Fleet Exercises off Gibraltar
London Times, March 8.—A warm sun, a gentle breeze, and high visibility favored the first day of the combined exercises of the Home and Mediterranean Fleets in the western approaches to the Mediterranean today.
The scheme of the exercise is something the Italians might have tried in the late war, but never did. “Red” force commerce raiders—three cruisers and six destroyers—under Rear-Admiral Lord Mountbatten, are in the Atlantic trying to get back into the Mediterranean, and another “Red” force under ViceAdmiral Douglas-Pennant, consisting of two battleships, an aircraft-carrier, and four destroyers, is waiting east of Gibraltar to escort the raiders home to Bizerta. In between is the Home (Blue) Fleet, commanded by ViceAdmiral Guy Russell, whose job it is to prevent Lord Mountbatten from getting through and joining up with the other “Red” force.
On paper Admiral Russell seems to have the easier job, as he has got the support of the Rock of Gibraltar, with its radar, guns, and four shore-based R.A.F. Lancasters, but Lord Mountbatten’s force has been given 20 per cent speed advantage. It is thought that his ships may try to slip through singly tonight or tomorrow night, possibly disguised as merchantmen. Some of his nine ships have already been sighted west of Casablanca by a Lancaster.
London Times, March 10.—After a confused “battle” in the western end of the Straits of Gibraltar between 10:30 last night and 2:30 this morning, Vice-Admiral Russell’s Blue defending forces felt confident that Rear-Admiral Lord Mountbatten’s raiders had all been destroyed, and that ViceAdmiral Douglas-Pennant’s supporting force had been staved off until it was too late to help them.
Admiral Russell decided yesterday afternoon that his best plan was to lie in wait west of Tarifa. The speed of the supporting force had been reduced because of air attack, which gave good hope that the raiders could be destroyed before assistance could come to them. Surface contact was first made with Lord Mountbatten’s main force along the Spanish coast at 11:20 p.m. By 2:10 a.m. this force of two cruisers and one destroyer was attacked by four cruisers and destroyed at the cost of one cruiser, H.M.S. Diadem, which was out of action for an hour. Admiral Russell had sent his two carriers to anchor under the guns of Gibraltar for the night, so he was able to dispatch five destroyers to intercept the three of Lord Mountbatten’s destroyers which were seen on Monday creeping up the Moroccan coast.
This left one destroyer and one cruiser of the raiders to be accounted for. The former was discovered disguised as a merchantman by the destroyer Jutland and sunk. The missing cruiser, also disguised, was located by the Duke of York, and was engaged and sunk just before radar reports made it known that the Vanguard (representing two Red battleships) and destroyers were approaching in the rear 11 miles to the east. The Vanguard had been engaged by the Gibraltar guns, but not damaged. Admiral Russell’s defending forces therefore claimed that before 3 a.m. they had completely destroyed the raiders and were free to turn east to engage the supporting battleships with superior forces.
Before returning to Gibraltar at midday today, the combined fleets engaged in maneuvers east of Gibraltar in which air-striking forces from three carriers attacked the ships, which were defended by combat air patrols.
Rain and mist prevented the full scheme of the maneuvers from being carried out.
Mock Attacks on Home Fleet
It was officially announced yesterday that mock attacks on the Home Fleet, as it returns from its Mediterranean cruise towards the end of this month, will be made by surface and underwater forces aided by air reconnaissances. An attack by carrier-borne aircraft will be made on the dockyard at Plymouth.
The exercise is to consist of three parts: an attack on the fleet by submarines patrolling in the Bay of Biscay; a convoy exercise, in which a concentration of submarines will attack ships of the fleet forming both the convoy and escort; and an attack by light forces as the fleet proceeds up the Channel detaching Plymouth and Portsmouth ships to their home ports.
Aircraft of Coastal Command will be used both for and against submarines during the first two parts of the exercise, and shore- based aircraft will assist submarines to locate the fleet, which will be guarded by both carrier-borne and shore-based aircraft.
London Times, March 16.—H.M.S. Duke of York, in which the Commander-in-Chief of the Home Fleet, Admiral Sir Rhoderick Mc- Grigor, is flying his flag, the cruiser Diadem, the destroyers Solebay, Sluys, Barrosa, and Alamein, and the submarine Andrew entered the Tagus today from Gibraltar on a six-day courtesy visit to Lisbon. The cruiser Cleopatra and the aircraft-carrier Theseus are visiting Oporto and Funchal, Madeira, respectively, at the same time.
Naval Outlook
Manchester Guardian, March 9.—Today’s debate on the Navy Estimates has reflected the relatively greater contentment there is over the state of the fleet than over that of the Army and the R.A.F. It also furnished some tentative though nevertheless interesting speculations on the future role of the Navy in war by Mr. Dugdale, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, who introduced the Estimates. Mr. Dugdale was enthusiastic about the successful reconstitution of the Home Fleet after its immobilization a year ago, and he justifiably rejoiced in the fact that recruitment for the Navy has nearly reached its largest, though in one department he had to confess the recruiting has not been satisfactory—in the reserve— and he made an appeal for recruits. Among a catalogue of other achievements he mentioned that 150 ships have been refitted in the reserve fleet.
Mr. Dugdale now came to the future of naval warfare. He suggested that the atomic bomb will be more dangerous ashore than afloat because of the power of dispersal of ships at sea. However, he disclosed that the Admiralty is planning a radiological survey with the aim of finding means of checking the penetration of gamma rays into a ship under attack by atomic weapons.
The atomic bomb he put first among the enemies of the fleet, the submarine second. He contrasted the submersible vessel of the last war, which had to surface after limited periods for air, with the new submarine, which, thanks to “Snort,” is able to stay under water for four or five weeks. He also quoted the opinion of Mr. J. L. Sullivan, the United States Secretary to the Navy, that as many sea battles will be fought below as on the surface of the water in the next war. The speed of the new submarine is certain to be considerably increased, and Mr. Dugdale invited the House to contemplate the possibility of convoys sailing at 10 knots while the submarine might possibly attain to 15 or even 20 knots. This was a problem, he said, on which the Admiralty was working, but he was unable to give any definite information of the results, though he sought to comfort the House with the assurance that if not spectacular they were most satisfactory.
He also reminded the House that other nations are working on the same problem and achieving equally successful results. He did not specify the nations, but he added, as though Russia might be among them, that we must take steps to see our ships are adequately guarded from the submarine menace.
According to Mr. Dugdale the modern submarine is not considered by the Admiralty to be invulnerable. It runs great danger from the frigate, of which we have about 150,
added to which we are making a prototype of two fast frigates converted from existing destroyers which will have vastly increased speeds. Should this prototype succeed a larger conversion programme will be carried out. Mr. Dugdale also spoke vaguely of progress being made with an anti-submarine weapon which is to be tried in prototype in destroyer trials this year. “We hope,” was his summing up, “to be able to make the life of the most modern submarine both hazardous and uncomfortable.”
In discussing the third enemy—aircraft—• Mr. Dugdale sees the Atlantic becoming the Mediterranean of the last war, with Britain playing the role of Malta. That was his reason for declaring that we must have adequate defense against air attack on our convoys and that defense must be largely provided by aircraft-carriers.
Gamma Ray Tests on Cruiser
Manchester Guardian, March 9.—The Navy is to carry out tests off the South Coast this summer on the effect of gamma rays on naval vessels. Gamma rays, similar to those produced by the explosion of an atomic bomb, will be directed against the cruiser Arethusa from pontoons moored close by. There will be nobody on board the Arethusa, nor will any animals take part in the test, as at Bikini.
The exact spot for the tests has not yet been chosen, nor the date fixed, but a notice will be issued warning ships to avoid the area covered by the test. The Arethusa will be anchored sufficiently far from the coast to ensure that there will be no risk to the public. The Admiralty gave this assurance yesterday.
It is understood that the source of radioactivity will be directed at the warship so that the penetration of radio-active rays on the vitals of a ship may be measured and the safety of personnel estimated.
The Arethusa was completed at Chatham in 1935 at a cost of £1,252,915.
Caribbean Exercises
London Times, March 22.—-A dispatch from H.M.S. Glasgow, flagship of Admiral Sir William Tennant, Commander-in-Chief on the America Station, reports that the whole squadron, with the exception of the sloop Sparrow, has now assembled in the Caribbean for the combined exercises with the Royal Canadian Navy.
In addition to the flagship, the squadron comprises the cruiser Jamaica, Captain W. A. Ballance; the sloop Snipe, Commander C. G. Walker; the frigates Bigbury Bay, Lieutenant-Commander G. R. P. Goodden, and Whitesand Bay, Lieutenant-Commander J. V Brothers; the submarine Tudor, Lieutenant- Commander D. Swanston, has been lent from the home station for the period of the exercises to enable the smaller ships to practice anti-submarine operations.
The Canadian contingent is drawn from both oceans. The Pacific Squadron has sent the cruiser H.M.C.S. Ontario, Captain J. C. Hibberd, R.C.N., and two destroyers; from the East Coast Squadron has come the aircraft-carrier H.M.C.S. Magnificent, Captain J. A. Miles, R.C.N., also with two destroyers.
The exercises started yesterday with an attack on the island of Antigua by all ships, in which the Magnificent provided the attacking aircraft while the cruisers bombarded the defenses; for the night exercises the Canadian ships became the defenders. Today the combined squadrons are to carry out various exercises at sea, including air attack on the ships, submarine attacks, night search and shadowing, and convoy tactics.
The concentration of the three squadrons enables valuable experience to be gained, which is impossible to arrange for such small squadrons separately.
British P.T. Boats End 4,500-Mile Arctic Test
N. Y. Herald Tribune, March 30.—Portsmouth.—Three British motor torpedo boats have returned from a “satisfactory” 4,500- mile experimental cruise into the Arctic, the Admiralty announced today.
The fifty-four-day cruise was planned to test performance of the small boats in Arctic conditions and the effect of cold on their crews. The crewmen were equipped with electrically heated suits and the boats were especially strengthened for the icy waters.
FRANCE
Anti-Submarine Warfare Center
Revue de Defense Nationale, March, 1949. —The attention of the readers of the Revue has been called more than once to the interest given by the great foreign navies, American, British, and Russian, to submarine and antisubmarine warfare, whose prospects have been basically changed by the progress of the Schnorkel and the new constructions derived from the high submerged-speed German XXI, and the eventual use of teleguided missiles.
The modest credits allocated to the French Navy have not authorized it until now to oppose submarine forces, surface and air forces in combined exercises on a scale comparable to those that have taken place across the channel or beyond the Atlantic; limitation of funds has likewise made impossible the construction of ultra-modern submarines equipped with all the technical achievements brought out since the war, although the laying down of a prototype, at least in the near future, has been announced by the Secretary of State in his program-discourse of July 9, 1948, before the national assembly.
But, however sparse our resources in materiel and personnel, it has been decided that their concentration would, for lack of something better, accelerate in some measure the evolution of theoretical research as well as the improvement of officer and crew training. Hence there will be formed at Toulon a “group for anti-submarine action,” where there will be gathered not only our now dispersed available submarines, but a certain number of units called to operate in liaison with them: frigates, escorts, specialized units for submarine listening, supply ships, etc. ... as well as the commissions of study and research organs. Charged at once with the task of perfecting technic and tactic while providing a practical training of personnel, the new center will represent, thanks to the coordination of material means as well as intellects and wills, what the anti-submarine war school of Londonderry already represents to the British or what our own Centre d’Arzew means to us in amphibious operations: a framework for the navy of the future.
AVIATION
A Survey of Air Power
Military Review, May, 1949.—By Lieutenant Colonel William R. Kintner, Infantry, U. S. Army, Instructor, Command and General Staff College.—Practically every advance made in the profession of arms has been a stormy center of controversy until such time as its role in war has become universally accepted and understood. The evolution of air power, from a novelty and challenging faith of an adventurous few to its present-day status of dominance, followed the same rocky path which every major innovation has had to travel. Behind every new concept there must be a man of genius to see the latent possibilities in an instrument which most men ignore. Douhet was the first high priest of air power, the man who saw within the powered kites of 1918 the great air fleets which roared over Europe and Asia in 1945.
After the prophet come the disciples—men willing to stake their reputations on their belief that the seer was right. Such men, the disciples of Douhet, served in the military forces of every major power between the wars. Each sought to convince the established military forces that a new master stalked the field of Mars.
Douhet’s ideas were put to test after 1939, but since the war was not necessarily a gigantic laboratory, the demonstration of Douhet’s principles was not complete. Yet, as the result of World War II, one conclusion with regard to air power has been established: Air superiority is vital to the success of any military operation.
Every soldier and sailor has gained a keen appreciation of the significance of air power on the modern battle field. They realize that air power has become the eyes and the strong right arm of all surface forces, which, in turn, form the platform from which air power springs.
During the period of aviation adolescence, many of Douhet’s disciples devoted themselves wholeheartedly to developing the air arm as support for surface forces. But now that the air fledgling has grown to full stature, airmen have become enamored once more with Douhet’s first principle: “Com-
mand of the air is a necessary and sufficient condition for victory.”
This concept is uppermost in the minds of the men who control most of the major air forces in the world, our own included. As there is a limit to the total amount of air power a nation can support, the implementation of this concept will have serious repercussions on other military forces. Air power devoted to Douhet’s first concept will not be available to support the operations of surface forces, for men who believe that air power can bring about the enemy’s capitulation by direct action against his vital points will not be inclined to waste planes and men on what they consider an archaic form of warfare.
Douhet’s theory of air power was not given a complete test in World War II. Consequently, there is no way of deciding in advance whether air power alone can live up to Douhet’s claims when directed against a massive, continental power. Grounds for reasonable doubt remain, and these should be known and critically analyzed. Only thus can the services merge their roles into a unified support of national policy, for under no contemplated employment will air power become totally independent of the cooperative assistance of ground and naval forces. Just as an army cannot operate in the stratosphere and a navy is unable to function in the middle of a desert, an Air Force is bound by certain limitations. An analysis of the strength and weaknesses of air power gives a better realization of the interdependence of the armed forces in combat. This analysis must begin with the consideration of the airplane, which is the instrument of air power.
The Plane
The modern airplane dominates warfare. The key to this domination lies in the unique combination of great mobility and firepower, uninhibited by geographical barriers. Moving in the third dimension, the airplane gives to the airman the tactical advantage of height, which has always been so bitterly contested in ground warfare. A realization of a bomber plane’s firepower can be gained from the fact that a 22,000 pound blockbuster is the equivalent of a broadside from a battleship. Likewise the fighter pilot commands more 50 caliber machine-gun bullets with his trigger finger than does the individual fighting man of an army.
In speed, the airplane is beginning to penetrate the once-forbidden barriers of the velocity of sound. In range, the airman speaks of hundreds of miles as calmly as the artilleryman discusses the range of a gun in thousands of yards. Yet, compared to the gun, the bomber is inaccurate. The airplane has an inherent flexibility which permits it to mass quickly over any target within range and then to disperse to widely separated bases. It can move, hit, and guard in rapid sequence. The plane also enjoys remarkable versatility: it supplies intelligence, it facilitates command and liaison, it serves as a means of rapid transportation. With all these attributes, one is tempted to ask: Is this the final weapon, invincible and invulnerable?
Like all works of man, the airplane has its share of limitations. Gertrude Stein might describe the chief weaknesses of aircraft by saying that “the airplane is an airplane,” for all capabilities of the airplane evaporate as soon as it touches earth. Once on the ground the airplane is, for military purposes, in much the same predicament as a fish out of water. It has no speed, no mobility, no range, and no practical firepower. And while the plane has all these factors in abundance once in the air, its lease on air space is short, expensive, and subject to innumerable breaches of contract. Air power must pay an exorbitant price to gravity in the form of costly fuels and limited carrying capacity, before it can even move into air space. In the air, the airplane is subject to all sorts of dangers; mechanical weaknesses or pilot errors may mean destruction. Consequently, the burden of aircraft maintenance and pilot training and selection is heavier with an air force than are the corresponding problems in surface forces. Likewise, the airplane is highly vulnerable to enemy action and promises to become increasingly so as ground-to-air guided missiles are further developed.
The airplane is still sensitive to weather, although tremendous strides have been made to overcome this handicap. Air and ground- controlled radars now permit landings, takeoffs and flying in the face of weather conditions which even a year ago would have been regarded as impossible. Poor weather over the target, once considered a drawback, is now regarded as a boon to the application of strategic air power.
The time that an airplane is actually in fighting contact with the enemy is very short. The plane is a one-punch performer; once the order “Bombs Away” is given, the bomber ceases to be a fighting machine and becomes a transport plane capable of self-defense for only a limited period. This emphasizes the fact that, unlike an infantry division or a battleship, the plane is not capable of sustained combat. Yet the shock which an air force can deliver with one blow may be more dangerous than an equal explosive force delivered in smaller packets over a longer period of time.
To compensate for this limitation, it is desirable to employ aircraft in great numbers, so that the power of many individual aircraft can be combined into a mighty, sustained striking force.
Logistics of Air Power
With the advent of the modern era of warfare, and the acceptance of the nation-inarms concept, the cost of wars has soared beyond the comprehension of most of those who fight them and pay for them. Air power tops the parade of military inflation. During the 1948-1949 fiscal year, more than half of the American defense budget will be spent on either the Naval air arm or the Air Force. Every advance in aviation design means more complications and more expense. Heavy bombers—vulnerable though they are—cost in the millions; fighter aircraft cost hundreds of thousands. Moreover, while the obsolescence rate of a field artillery piece is relatively low, that of all aircraft is relatively high. The training of competent air crews is likewise the most expensive of military training. These factors taken together reveal why the operation of the projected 70-group Air Force will cost some eight billion dollars a year—-a sum greater than the combined amounts spent by all the great powers in the world for military purposes in 1913, and not far short of Hitler’s rearmament effort of 1933-1939.
The sheer cost of air power places a heavy load on all men responsible for national security; for as air power channels more and more of the national productive capacity to its needs, less will be made available to the other services. Yet as long as the capabilities of air power remain dependent on these services, they can only be neglected at the jeopardy of air power itself.
Related to the cost of building and maintaining an air force is the tremendous burden of the logistical support required for its operation. Air logistics is both vast in quantity and complicated in scope. The B-29 that requires a score of different lubricants also consumes gasoline by the carload. Any curtailment in domestic oil production may seriously affect the sustained operation of an air force. Foreign fuel sources may be utilized but these will impose an additional burden of surface military protection. Synthetic fuels may be produced, but in such case the labor and materials required for synthetic fuel manufacture will compete with those required to make aircraft. Transportation of fuel, requiring vast quantities of steel in the form of pipe lines or tankers, and for convoys to protect overseas shipments, likewise complicates the logistical support of air power.
One other important logistical factor is the vast quantity of material required to create air bases, many of which must be established overseas. The cement needed for one B-29 runway alone must be figured in terms of the capacities of Liberty ships. The time required to construct an air base is also a limiting factor in the use of air power, although the development of tracked landing gear may eventually overcome this limitation.
Air Bases
It is a general rule of warfare that decisive blows are always launched as close to the enemy as possible. The advent of intercontinental missiles equipped with atomic war-heads may amend that rule, but it still remains true as regards present-day aircraft. Although the range of aircraft is increasing, such extension is generally accomplished by upping the fuel capacity and lowering the payload. Longer ranges likewise mean longer time in the air, greater vulnerability, and weaker fighter protection. The advantages to be derived from getting as close to the enemy as possible, plus limitations in aircraft range, dictate the selection of air bases. But in a given situation the desirability of certain areas for bases will be well known, and a potential enemy will place the seizure of such bases high among his strategical objectives. The seizure and defense of advanced bases, however, can only be accomplished by armies supported by navies or by airborne operations. The capability of a given army to seize and hold air bases is, therefore, a limitation on air power. But to seize bases, ground forces will need liberal tactical and transport air support, which can be provided only by decreasing the portion of air power assigned to the strategic air forces.
Pushing air bases forward in a struggle against a distant foe—primarily by land power or amphibious operations—directly affects the capabilities of strategic air power; for the efficiency of a strategic air force improves as radar and navigational aids are placed nearer the enemy.
The fact that the most effective air bases are likely to be located overseas places the sea lines of communication of an air force at the mercy of submarine attacks. Air attacks against submarine bases may not eliminate this danger. Allied air attacks on German U- boat pens, for example, caused only 8 per cent of Germany’s total submarine losses. Therefore, the demands for the naval protection of sea routes of communication place a limitation on the use of strategical air power, since such protection can be assured only by diverting an adequate proportion of the national effort to sea power and accompanying air support.
At the present time, air bases close to potential enemies are indispensable. Certain developments may lessen the need for such bases. In addition to the use of tracked landing fear and increased range capabilities, refueling in flight may further increase the built-in range of existing and future aircraft. One-way bombing operations, such as were sometimes employed during World War II, may also obviate the necessity of a great number of advanced bases.
Tactical Support for the Army
The testimony of high German and Japanese ground commanders is sufficient evidence of the important effect that command of the air has on the success of a land campaign. Von Rundstedt considered that the German defeat in the West was due to three factors, all related to air power. These were: the disruption of rail communication in Germany and in the rear of the army’s lines; the destruction of the Wehrmacht’s motor transportation, coupled with the German Army’s inability to make daylight road marches; and finally, the carpet bombing of assault corridors.
Air superiority permits an army commander to give effective logistical support to his forces, while it denies such freedom to the enemy. Air superiority gives tactical security to one’s own troop movements, while denying it to the enemy. It could be said that no sustained offensive against a determined enemy from now on can succeed without air superiority. And while air power itself cannot force an enemy withdrawal, it can critically interfere with enemy land communications. Yet disruption of the enemy’s communications is increased by pressure from ground forces, which requires heavy logistical expenditures by the enemy to counter. Moreover, air power cannot completely isolate a continental battlefield, although it can come close to achieving this objective.
The use of tactical aircraft in a ground support role may be limited, in the future, by increased effectiveness in antiaircraft fire. Such fire may be countered, however, by increased aircraft speed; yet if speed increases disproportionately, it may lessen the ability of pilots to recognize and hit tactical targets.
Strategic Air Power
In addition to the limitations imposed by the need for bases, air power is also limited by the difficulty of locating and hitting targets whose destruction may prove to be decisive to the enemy. The working objective of strategic air power is to gain freedom of action over the air space of an enemy. This objective requires that a substantial proportion of the enemy’s own air force be destroyed. There are differences of opinion as to how this can best be accomplished. While the theory of destroying enemy air bases and aircraft production centers is attractive, World War II experience indicates that most of the hostile air forces were destroyed in air battles. Improvement in air defense may blunt the ability of air power to master the enemy’s air space with conventional-type aircraft.
The amount of air superiority required for certain strategical operations is subject to debate. As the offensive characteristics of aircraft increase, the need for mass flights may disappear and along with it the term “air superiority” in the sense the term was employed in World War II.
The question whether an enemy can make his armed forces independent of the national economy for any length of time by preparation must also be considered in assessing strategic air power. Similarly, the question whether powerful military installations can be rendered immune to any type of air attack cannot be ignored.
Related to the matter of target selection— which has incidentally improved to a considerable degree—is the problem of mass destruction versus special destruction of key installations, although use of mass destruction weapons may prevent making this distinction. The issue becomes apparent by matching General Arnold’s statement that the indiscriminate widespread destruction of enemy industry is simply a waste of effort, with Air Marshal Harris’ conclusion that the quickest way to win a war is to destroy the enemy’s industry generally, i.e., his cities. It might be added that Harris’ observation is more in line with the Douhet dictate: “To conquer an enemy it is essential to inflict upon him a terrific sum total of damage.”
Air Power and National Policy
If the Douhet principle, as stated above, is followed by choice or necessity (i.e., the use of mass-destruction weapons), the purely military success of strategic air power may harm, rather than support, the ultimate goals of national policy.
Douhet’s principles were followed in the air war against Germany and Japan. So far- reaching was the devastation produced, according to General Spaatz, “that we were obliged ... to start pouring out billions of dollars to restore the productive capacity we had just spent billions to destroy.” If air power can achieve its strategic aims only by creating such conditions, it suffers from a very serious limitation indeed.
It is in the study of the relation of air power to policy where the most critical thinking is needed. Military power is only one element of total war. Subversive warfare, psychological warfare, the gaining and holding of allies, are equally important to winning the true objective of war, which is not to impose our will on the enemy but to create world political arrangements in harmony with our national aims.
Conclusion
Air power is the dominant force in modern war. At present it is not the exclusive military force, nor is it likely to become such. It has tremendous capabilities, but air power also has serious limitations, especially in the drain it places on national resources and the possible damage its misapplication can bring to the attainment of national objectives.
For these reasons, the role of air power does not belong to airmen alone, but should be the constant study of all who serve this nation.
P2V’s Fly Crosscountry from Carrier
N. Y. Times.—April 15. Washington.— The Navy disclosed today that it had flown bombers from an aircraft carrier in the Atlantic to Moffet Field, Calif., spanning the continent.
Two P2V Neptune twin-engine bombers made the ocean-to-ocean flight April 7 in ten hours. Before landing they cruised around on a training exercise for an additional three hours. At times they were over the Pacific. Their takeoff was from the carrier Midway off Norfolk, Va.
They were thirteen hours in the air and flew a distance computed at 3,000 miles. They carried enough gasoline for twenty- three hours in the air, but had nothing aboard to simulate a bomb load.
The takeoff of these two planes brings to twelve the number of times this type of bomber has been flown off the decks of the carriers Midway, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Philippine Sea.
The P2V bomber holds the long-distance, non-refuel record. The Truculent Turtle of that type flew non-stop from Australia to Ohio, a distance of about 11,000 miles.
This same type of bomber carried a simulated atomic bomb in recent Caribbean maneuvers.
The Navy said it was conducting a series of training takeoffs from carriers. It would not say whether it had succeeded in landing a bomber of this type on a carrier, or had tried it.
British Air Exercises in Scotland
The Aeroplane, March 18-25. London Times.—Main object of the exercises held in the Forth-Clyde area between March 5 and 13 was to test the Scottish radar, control and reporting system, and to exercise the auxiliary forces on the ground and in the air. Men and women of the Auxiliaries gave up their spare time during both week-ends of the exercise to man Fighter Control Units, Royal Observer Corps posts, and Territorial A.A. Regiment gun-sites.
Operations took place over a large area in that jlart of Scotland south of a line from Montrose to Glencoe, the defense of which was co-ordinated from No. 3603 (Edinburgh) Fighter Control Unit operations room, at Barnton Quarry, near Edinburgh.
The first real attack of the exercise, and the only daylight sorties of the day, came at about 11.45 hrs., when two Hornets from Linton-on-Ouse made a surprise raid on Turnhouse. The Hornets came in at a very low altitude over the North Sea, and although they were plotted, the defending Spitfires were scrambled too late to make an interception. After two or three unopposed strikes at Turnhouse, the Hornets swung North to make an attack on Leuchars.
Bad weather prevented any further sorties by the Hornets, but during a visit to Turn- house, which is also the home of the Edinburgh University Air Sqdn., we watched several scrambles by the Auxiliary Spitfires during the afternoon. Following yellow Verey signals from flying control, the Spitfires, in sections of two, started their engines and were airborne in an average time of just over 90 seconds.
Most of the aircraft were vectored on straight courses at about 15,000 ft., probably for radar tracking practice, and both 603 and 612 Sqdns., commanded by Sqdn. Ldr. G. K. Gilroy, D.S.O., D.F.C., and Sqdn. Ldr. Webb respectively, gained some useful experience. As the exercises were primarily tests of communications, it is of interest to note that the r/t channels were found to be so crowded that precise interpretation of ground control was difficult.
Attacks by Night
Tension mounted in the Operations room as the hostile and fighter plots gradually came together, and at 18.32, one of the patrolling Mosquitoes reported the first interception, over Holy Island. From then until the close of activities shortly after 21.00 hrs., interceptions continued with heartening regularity. Areas attacked included the Forth Bridge, Alloa, Stirling and Edinburgh, but it is thought that a high percentage of the raiding force could be assumed destroyed. The bomber claims are not yet known. Some of the bombers came as low as 7,000 ft. over their targets, but control kept an accurate track of them.
Thus although the week-end operations in Phase I of the exercise had been greatly curtailed by the weather, all branches of our defense system were set into motion, and the vital communications restored to their wartime efficiency. Air Vice-Marshal Harcourt- Smith had a word of praise for the G.P.O. and the Service signals personnel for their assistance in opening up channels of communication, dormant since 1945.
H.M.A.S. Sidney put out from Rosyth on Tuesday, March 8, at 09.00 hrs., in early morning flurries of snow, but visibility improved later, and at about 12.00 hrs. her Sea Furies and Fireflies were flown off. Radar plotted them 15 miles north of North Berwick, and a section of Meteors was scrambled from Leuchars. It appears that the raid was directed against either Rosyth or Leith, but interceptions were successful.
As the carrier-borne aircraft returned to the Sydney, which was accompanied by a cruiser and a destroyer as she steamed north, the Meteors gave chase and a battle developed over the ship. Two Mosquitos from Leuchars joined in, and showed their effectiveness by day as well as night. The Meteors claimed to have attacked the Sydney while she was most vulnerable, steaming into wind with aircraft landing on.
One or two sorties were later made by
R.A.F. Hornets, but apart from one interception at 26,000 ft., snow kept the Meteors on the ground at Leuchars. Uncertain plots were picked up low off the North Berwick coast, which were thought to be Naval Barracudas, but no attack developed and the plots faded. At 15.40 hrs., a Mosquito intercepted a Lancaster returning from Lossiemouth at 8,000 ft., and made successful contact.
Operations on Wednesday opened with an interception of a B-29 by a Meteor at
24.0 ft., 20 miles south of Edinburgh. Two Spitfires from No. 612 Sqdn., flying from Dyce to Turnhouse, failed to contact a plot, which later materialized into a Lancaster at 11,000 ft.
Using diversionary tactics, about 15 Lincolns from No. 1 Group, Bomber Command, came over in two waves in the evening, and were pitted against six Mosquitos. Provisional claims include over a dozen interceptions, although some probably on the same aircraft. One fighter was assumed lost. Army anti-aircraft guns claimed three bombers, and the Navy two. The last raiders did not leave the area until 23.30 hrs.
Combats at great heights between Meteors and P.R. Mosquitos—both based at Leuchars—were a feature of Thursday’s exercise. At 12.50 hrs. a Meteor was directed by g.c.i. to a Mosquito over the Forth at
40.0 ft., where the temperature was —64 degrees F., and after a seven-minute battle, claimed to have destroyed it. After another long chase at 31,000 ft. a Meteor attacked a second P.R. Mosquito, 25 miles south-west of Leuchars at 13.00 hrs. A Spitfire P.R. Mk. 19 approached Edinburgh from the S.E. at
37.0 ft., and escaped without being intercepted.
A proposed “divisional” raid by 40 B-29’s of the Third Air Division, U.S.A.F., was cancelled, but a single aircraft of this type made runs over Scottish targets. During the first sortie by a B-29, two Meteors intercepted it at 30,000 ft., and during a running battle, made 16 attacks.
Spitfires of No. 602 (City of Glasgow) Sqdn., R. Aux. A.F., from Abbotsinch, intercepted two Hornets at 3,000 ft., at 13.30 hrs., and a Naval Firefly of No. 1830 Sqdn. attacked another. Two Fireflies from the same squadron also intercepted a B-29 heading west at 20,000 ft., after it had already been attacked by two Meteors 45 miles east of the Isle of May.
In this pattern, the sorties continued during the daylight hours, with both sides claiming successes. The high proportion of interceptions, however, proved the quality of the radar control and reporting system, and demonstrated the usefulness of Reserve personnel in defense.
MERCHANT MARINE Standardized Cargo Vessel
N. Y. Times, April 14.—The Maritime Commission announced today the design for a totally new type of cargo vessel planned for mass production in event of war. It is a successor to the Liberty ships of the second World War. Bids for construction of a prototype of this class will be asked within two or three weeks, the commission said. •
The projected new ship will be “a work horse,” without frills, but it is planned for a speed of 18.5 knots, or almost half as much speed again as the Liberties. It will be of 10,500 deadweight tons, and a length of 477 feet 6 inches, with about the same cargo capacity as its predecessor. In power, however, it will far surpass the old Liberties, having geared steam turbines.
Spokesmen for the commission said that this vessel was the first mass-production design developed under normal conditions by the commission since plans were laid down for the C-3 type, 10,000-ton cargo ships planned before the outbreak of the second World War. The C-3s as a type had to be discarded when war came because of the shortage of gears and other complicated items essential to their construction; hence the substitution of the Liberties for them.
“In approving plans for the prototype ship,” it was said, “the commission chose the geared steam turbine for propulsion after thoroughly considering other types of engines. It was agreed that diesel units, which were a principal contender, would probably require too much engine room space and thus cut down the deadweight tonnage or cargo-carrying capacity of the vessel. Diesels were not entirely ruled out, however, and the commission will continue its studies of this type of propulsion machinery.”
Even larger ones are under construction, some of them exceeding in size even the pre-war battleships Maryland and Colorado.
While bids will be asked currently for the construction of only one of these ships, it was learned that consideration was being given to the building of a second, adapted as an attack transport. The primary design is exclusively a freighter, but commission engineers already have deviated their drawings to provide for adaptation of the basic ship either into a troop carrier or a weapons carrier.
Some modern ideas of design were deliberately omitted, it was said, in order to make the ship efficient as a transport. For one thing, the five planned holds will have only single hatches each, instead of twin hatches, in order to leave more free space for leading emergency cargoes on the decks.
Big Tanker Launched
N. Y. Times, April 20.—A super tanker, the Burgan, larger even than the World War I battleships Maryland and Colorado, was launched at noon today at the Sparrows Point yard of the Bethlehem Steel Company.
The vessel, about 26,000 tons deadweight, is the second of fourteen super tankers under construction at the Sparrows Point yard. It will be placed in service this summer under charter to the Gulf Oil Corporation.
The Burgan is larger than many of America’s luxury passenger ships, being 624 feet long, 84 feet wide and 44 feet deep.
She has a capacity of 240,000 barrels of crude oil which is sufficient to heat 6,500 average homes for an entire year or provide enough gasoline for more than 14,000 automobiles for one year. This huge cargo can be discharged in about twelve hours from some thirty oil-tight tanks, each provided with bulkheads.
The speed of the Burgan is about seventeen knots. Her power is derived from a 12.500 horsepower geared turbine unit that drives a single propeller. The vessel was
built in rapid time—her keel having been laid about seven months ago.
The Btirgan not only has the latest safety devices, but is also equipped with the most up-to-date navigation aids, including radio, radar, gyro compass and gyro pilot. She has her own depth-sounding equipment and maximum operating safety and performance are facilitated also by an interior communication system. The design of her power plant makes for unusually economical operation.
World Tonnage Exceeds 1939’s
N. Y. Times, March 23.—Despite war losses, the world’s total gross tonnage of steam and motor ships has increased 17.2 per cent since 1939, Lloyd’s register reported today.
In round numbers, world tonnage was 45,000,000 in June, 1914, 68,000,000 in 1939 and 80,000,000 in 1948. The net increase between 1939 and 1948 was 11,700,000 tons.
Of the total tonnage, the largest proportion, 33.5 per cent, is owned in the United States, which increased its tonnage 201.92 per cent since 1939 and now has 26,900,000 tons of seagoing shipping. United States tonnage, however, includes 11,500,000 tons held in reserve fleet condition.
With the tremendous increase in American shipping, Great Britain and Northern Ireland have lost their preeminence. In 1948 they had 22.4 per cent of the world’s tonnage, or 18,000,000 tons, which was a slight increase over 1939.
When the British Dominions and colonies are taken into account, more tonnage tl .m ever before is sailing under the British flag, a total of 21,700,000 in 1948. The figures for Great Britain and Northern Ireland include about 900,000 tons on bare boat charter from the United States and Canada.
All these statistics and many others are contained in the appendix to Lloyd’s Register Book recently issued to subscribers.
SCIENCE
Two Physical Values Re-evaluated
N. Y. Times, March 29.—The National Bureau of Standards announced today that its scientists had obtained “basic and far- reaching” new information about the electric particles in the atom’s nucleus.
The discoveries are in the realm of “pure science” and will not lead overnight to bigger atomic bombs or atomic-powered aircraft.
But they will provide badly-needed fundamental knowledge about the atom for researchers working on such “practical application” problems.
The bureau scientists have recalculated with “unprecedented accuracy” two mathematical computations which are of great importance to the whole field of atomic physics.
These are the absolute value of the magnetic moment of the proton, and the value of the basic constant e/m—electric charge to mass ratio—of the electron.
The first calculation will be especially helpful in the operation of giant electromagnets which are used as “atom smashers.”
The second will give to physicists a more precise mathematical base on which to erect the staggering computations of electronics research.
“These results are of the utmost significance in nuclear and atomic physics and have been obtained at a time when much research required this knowledge,” said Dr. E. U. Condon, director of the Bureau.
He paid tribute to H. A. Thomas, R. L. Driscoll, and J. A. Hippie, Bureau scientists who spent more than a year working out the problems.
How painstaking was their work is shown by the fact that the e/m value previously accepted by scientists was 1.75936. They proved that it should be 1.75878.
A Bureau spokesman remarked that it may not look like much of a difference, but “you’d be surprised how many scientists will have to do a lot of figuring over again.”
Silent Chamber to Test Audio Devices
N. Y. Times, April 13.—Fort Monmouth, N. J.—The Army Signal Corps has designed and constructed a “silent chamber” that produces absolute silence, simulating the sound conditions found in the center of a desert, it was announced today.
The apparatus was built to test delicate instruments and is known scientifically as an Anechoic (no echo) chamber. It was designed primarily to determine accuracies of microphones, head-sets and loud speakers.
Signal Corps engineers connected with the building of the chamber found they could only expose themselves to the effect of absolute stillness for thirty minutes before experiencing pronounced discomfort.
Following completion of the chamber, engineers made arrangements so the indicators could be read from the outside. They learned also that the presence of anyone inside impaired the complete efficiency at test.
After extensive experiments it was found that fiberglass was the most sound-absorbent material available. Engineers also found that walls, floor and ceiling made of wedges picked up sound waves and caused them to reflect in increasing depth. The combination of fiberglass in the form of wedges absorbed all sound energy, transforming it into heat by the time it had been reflected to the small end.
The wedges are bound together at the large end to an electrostatic shield forming a wall, a roof, and a floor that is grounded to remove any surplus electric energy.
The door was constructed in the same manner and can be opened only from the exterior. An electric push button attached to a gong mounted on the outside of the chamber was installed. In case of emergency, there is enough air inside the chamber to last one person five or six hours, but engineers describe the experience of being confined in absolute silence for that length of time as producing pronounced adverse psychological effect.
Reflectoscope
Mechanical Engineering, April, 1949.—A Sperry ultrasonic reflectoscope that enables engineers to examine solid pieces of steel by means of sound waves is being used by the Westinghouse Electric Corporation to assure flawless quality in their giant electric generators.
With this new technique, ultra-high- frequency sound waves are transmitted through massive steel parts. By using a crystal similar to that used in most phonograph pickup arms, electrical impulses are changed into sound waves. When projected through the metal, tiny cracks, cavities, or foreign particles in the metal reflect sound waves back to the crystal. Such reflections, changed back into electrical impulses, appear as bright vertical lines on the viewing screen of an electronic receiver.
By measuring the time it takes the sound waves to go through the metal and bounce back to the crystal, metallurgists can find the exact location of any flaw. When the metal is flawless throughout, the sound waves reflect from the opposite side of the object. The reflected sound is said to reveal the quality of metal as accurately as an x-ray while penetrating thicknesses that x- rays cannot reach.
The new testing process is called ultrasonic instead of supersonic because supersonic refers to speeds faster than sound, whereas ultrasonic refers to sound waves at frequencies beyond the range of human hearing. The ultrasonic process is based on the same principle as radar. Radar projects radio waves through the air, but the high-frequency sound projector sends waves of sound through solid metal.
In addition to testing generator rotors, the ultrasonic technique is used for testing other metal parts ranging in size from 0.025 in. to 30 ft. thick. X-ray is practical only for metal thicknesses up to about 6 in.
INTERNATIONAL Four Nation Fleet Exercise
, N. Y. Times, April 2.—Navies of the Testern European Union powers will hold combined war exercises from June 30 until July 8, the Admiralty announced today.
Commanding the operation will be Commander in Chief of the British Home Fleet, Sir Rhoderick McGrigor. Flag or senior officers of the British, French, Dutch and Belgian Navies will command opposing forces in the games.
The combined force will assemble at a south England port on opening day and on July 4 will sail for joint maneuvers.
A convoy exercise will be held with submarines and land based aircraft employed both in defense and in shadowing. French and British cruisers and aircraft carriers
meanwhile will carry out bombardment exercises and air strikes against a convoy in the Bay of Biscay.
Minelayers and minesweepers will carry out independent exercises. On July 7 all forces will enter Portland Harbor for conferences and an exercise critique.
According to British newspapers about 100 naval craft—excepting battleships—will take part in the maneuvers.
Defense Plan Agreement Reached
N. Y. Times, April 9.—Great Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg agreed tonight on a sweeping plan for the defense of Western Europe and on means of carrying it out.
The Defense Ministers of the five countries, signatories of the Brussels Treaty, agreed on the plan with United States and Canadian general staff representatives attending as observers.
It is the first peacetime plan of the sort in modern European history and the biggest allied battle plan since D-Day. It came a few hours after the announcement in Washington of the application of the five countries concerned, and three more adherents to the Atlantic treaty, for United States arms aid.
Not only did the defense chiefs agree on a plan as a whole to meet any attack from the east, but they decided on measures each would take to make it effective by cooperative distribution of their armed forces and coordinated armaments production.
The Chiefs of Staff Committee and the Military Supply Board will work out details, which are matters of top secrecy.
It was believed, however, that included in the agreement were the charting of the defense lines the five powers would seek to hold and the sizes of the armies and air forces each would contribute.
Defense of Western Europe
N. Y. Times, April 13.—London.—Technical “facilities” necessary to the United States Air Force for atomic bombardment have been prepared in this country by agreement between the United States and British Governments, it is learned here.
Such “facilities”—details of which must obviously remain secret—exist as part of an integrated Anglo-American plan for cooperation in defense of Western Europe should the need ever again arise. The mutual responsibility of the two Governments in such defense has recently been high-lighted by Winston Churchill’s statement that the world owes its liberty solely to possession by the United States of the atomic bomb and to President Truman’s declaration that he would use the bomb again if necessary.
It may be taken for granted that the United States has not “stored” atomic bombs in the United Kingdom, that it has not divulged atomic secrets to any foreign government and that it has no present intention of doing either.
But European experts say that if war were to break out in Europe tomorrow the American Air Force could move into action in a matter of hours, conspicuously assisted in reaching its targets and performing its missions by “facilities” that the British Government has put at its disposal.
This intimacy of military planning, begun in the Anglo-American Combined Chiefs of Staff in Washington in 1942 and continued without fanfare to this day, is being gradually extended to the European Continent. Here Britain is playing the role of a link between the five Brussels Treaty Powers, of which she is militarily the most advanced, and the United States.
As an indication of the strides that five so-called Western Union powers have made since they formed their military committee last May there now exists a radar warning net, some 900 miles in length, stretching from North to South across Western Europe.
From the French Mediterranean coast northward across the Western zones of Germany virtually to the Baltic in the region of Hamburg in the British zone this net now serves to protect Western Europe from the threat of a “sneak” attack. It is far from complete; men, money and materials are lacking in sizable quantity to make it fully up to date and effective, but it is a noteworthy beginning.
With the recent addition of Norway, Denmark and Italy to the Atlantic pact, one' of the first priorities of the Atlantic Defense Council—or whatever command group is
created—will be to extend this radar system northward to include Denmark and Norway (Sweden too would like to be included) and southeastward to protect Italy.
Another decision of prime responsibility for those in charge of Atlantic defense will be delimitation of distinct theatres of operations and assignment of planning and tactical responsibility within-such theatres. There is strong British sentiment, for instance, that all Atlantic pact states on the European Continent should be made militarily responsible to the existing Western Union Commander in Chief Committee at Fontainebleau.
Suez Canal Improved
Manchester Guardian, March 8.—Cairo.— The Egyptian Government becomes a “privileged partner” in the Suez Canal Company as a result of the new agreement which the Egyptian Government signed with the company here today. M. Charles Roux, president of the Suez Canal Company’s board of directors, told pressmen this tonight, adding:
“The conventional regime of the Suez Canal Company continues. Today’s agreement complements numerous previous agreements. It does not mention the application of Egyptian company law to the Suez Canal Company, which continues to benefit from its unique status.”
The Suez Canal Company has earmarked £4,500,000 for large-scale construction projects, comprising a six-mile canal between Ferdan and Kantara parallel to the main canal, the deepening of the Suez Canal along its entire length by half a metre (20 inches) so as to bring its depth to 13 metres (45 feet), construction of a workers’ city, and the deepening of Lake Timsah.
The Egyptian Government will create a municipality at Ismailia (town at the northern end of Lake Timsah) and will take over the 60 kilometres (50 miles) long Abbassia canal, which supplies drinking water to the town.