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........................................................................................................................................... ■ ’ 590
Vessels Under Construction—A Great State Speaks—The American Legion Speaks—Secretary Adams Speaks—Floating Coffins—Deterioration of National Defense Brief Notes.
Great Britain........................................................................................................................................... ^
The Return of the Capital Ship—Philippine Independence—Japan- Naval Trends—British Bitterness—United States in the League- Brief Notes.
France......................................................................................................................................................... ^9®
Reasons for Super-Destroyers—Brief Notes.
Italy.............................................................................................................................................................
Brief Notes.
Japan.............................................................................................................................................................
United States and Japan—The Mandate Islands—Army and Navy Independent of Cabinet—Budget Grows Greatly—Naval Program— Philippine Independence—Manchuria in China Count Uchida s Speech—Brief Notes.
Netherlands.............................................................................................................................................
The Mutiny in De Zeven Provincien.
Merchant Marine.................................................................................................................................... 606
Various Notes.
Scientific............................................................................................................ • • • _,......... '''; ’' 607
Destroyer Developments—British Contract for Oil from Coal-
Various Notes.
Aviation......................................................................................................................................................
On 1932—The Octane Number—Various Notes.
UNITED STATES
Vessels Under Construction, United States Navy—Progress as of
March 1,1933.
Type, Number, and Name | Contractor |
Cruisers New Orleans (CA32) Astoria (CA34) Minneapolis (CA36) Tuscaloosa (CA37) San Francisco (CA38) •Quincy (CA39) | New York Navy Yard Puget Sound Navy Yard Philadelphia Navy Yard New York S.B. Co. Mare Island Navy Yard Bethlehem S.B. Corp. (Fore River) |
Aircraft Carrier Ranger (CV4) | Newport News S.B. & D.D. Co. |
Fleet Submarines Cachalot (SS170) Cuttlefish (SSI 71) | Portsmouth Navy Yard Electric Boat Co. |
Destroyers Farragut CDD348) Dewey (DD349) Hull (DD350) Macdonough (DD351) Worden (DD352) DD353 DD354 DD355 | Bethlehem S. B. Corp. (Fore River) Bath Iron Works Corp. New York Navy Yard Boston Navy Yard Puget Sound Navy Yard New York Navy Yard Boston Navy Yard Philadelphia Navy Yard |
1|| v 3,M 2/UM
1/ 9/36
Per cent of Completion
March 1,1933 | Gain for Month | ||
Hull | Machinery | Hull | Machinery |
70.4 | 53.3 | 2.6 | 2.0 |
64.6 | 53.0 | 1.5 | 2.5 |
52.7 | 39.7 | 2.3 | 1.3 |
49.9 | 47.0 | 1.9 | 3.9 |
56.9 | 51.4 | 2.6 | 2.1 |
66.6 | 57.7 | 4.9 | 2.5 |
60.0 | 50.0 | 4.5 | 2.5 |
71.4 | 70.8 | 3.9 | 2.4 |
29.8 | 28.3 | 3.8 | 5.3 |
20.4 | 20.7 | 4.3 | 2.4 |
6.0 | 2.1 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
8.8 | 4.2 | 2.8 | 0.7 |
2.0 | — | 0.7 | — |
3.2 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 0.7 |
7.2 | 3.9 | 2.7 | 1.5 |
0.6 | — | 0.4 | — • |
Probable date °( comPle»on
5/ l/34
2/ 1/31 12/29/33
2/1J/34 l 34
Award made—Keel not to be laid prior to March 1, 1933. Authorized by Act of August 29, 1916.
4 Destroyers Nos. 356-359 inclusive.
A Great State Speaks
Congressional Record, February 23.— Mr. Davis: Mr. President, on behalf of my colleague and myself, I ask leave to have inserted in the Record and appropriately referred a Senate concurrent resolution adopted by the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, memorializing Congress to refrain from enacting legislation which would decrease the strength and effectiveness of the armed forces of the United States.
The concurrent resolution was ordered to lie on the table and to be printed in the Record, as follows:
In the Senate of Pennsylvania,
February 13, 1933.
Whereas, the present Congress of the United States is considering under the guise of economy, the radical cutting of appropriations for the support of the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps of the United States, and of the National Guard of the several states; and
Whereas, the Army is at present pitifully insufficient for the defense of our mainland without regard for our insular possessions; and
Whereas, the Navy is far below the standard decided upon as necessary for the safety of the United States and agreed to by the powers in a far less unsettled time; and Whereas, the Marine Corps, although small) has proved for more than a century the most mobile and effective police force in any national or international emergency this nation has ever had;and
Whereas, through federal aid and supervision the National Guard has risen to a point of effi' ciency heretofore unknown; and Whereas, no reasoning person can believe in pacific safety in the face of existing facts. Every peace pact, treaty, or League of Nation action has proved and is at present proving futile and useless to turn any nation from a policy of ag' grandizement; and
Whereas, events within the last 20 years have proved the futility of preserving the neutrality °‘ the United States in the event of a major conflict; and
Whereas, the existing national and interna' tional debts are the result of past unprepared' ness, and existing brawl over the collection thereof, the result of present unpreparedness; and Whereas, the voice of the United States in the interests of universal peace is respected only 113 proportion to its existing and active power; and Whereas, the effects of the present economic
chaos on the governments of the world have conclusively proved that only strong, well-sustained governments can survive: Therefore be it
Resolved (if the House of Representatives concur), That the Senate and House of Representatives of the 1933 session of the General Assembly °f the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania hereby Memorializes the present Congress of the United States to refrain from taking any action for the Purpose of economy or other purpose that will further decrease the strength and effectiveness of the armed forces of the United States and the several states thereof.
The American Legion Speaks
Associated Press, Boston, February 20.—The American Legion will enter politics to defeat any candidate for Congress who fails to agree to vote lor adequate national defense, Louis A. Johnson, °f Clarksburg, W. Va., national commander of the organization, states.
Commander Johnson was guest of the Massachusetts department of the Legion at its annual banquet.
“The Legion directed me at the last convention to send a questionnaire to each aspirant for Congress and find his views on national defense,” Johnson said. “I want to tell you if the candidate’s answer is un-American or unpatriotic, the Legion will go into politics and defeat those not m favor of strong national defense.”
Secretary Adams Speaks
(From a letter to Representative Rainey).—
I “It should be kept in mind that when a war breaks out it must be fought by the Navy in the ships afloat at the moment for the reason that seldom can new ships be placed down, completed, and put into commission in time to take part in the conflict.
“The naval phase of the war will in all probability be decided before new ships can be made ready. This means that unless we keep peace with the co-signers of the treaty in providing new ships >n advance, American officers and American men Must fight in old, less powerful, less reliable, and Perhaps even less numerous vessels than their adversaries.”
floating Coffins
Herald Tribune, New York, February 13.—The Bratton amendment to the Treasury-Post-office bill, now in the Senate, calls for an indiscriminate reduction of 5 per cent in the'expenditure of every government department. . . .
Secretary Adams has shown that a 5 per cent reduction in naval expenditures would mean a loss to the Navy of 33 warships, which would have to go out of commission, and the closing of three Atlantic coast navy yards and of the Newport naval training school. All present ship construction would be indefinitely suspended. . . .
The modern fighting ship is a single, highly co-ordinated piece of machinery which can only be handled properly by men who are as highly trained as a crew as they are as individual experts. To lay up a battleship with the idea of putting it into immediate service in an emergency is like closing a firehouse and dismissing the crew in the vague hope that a gang of men who can work the apparatus will turn up from somewhere when the alarm sounds. When this country entered the World War some of our aviators went aloft in planes which they grimly described as “flying coffins.” To recommission 33 American ships in response to a sudden call, with skeleton crews of trained men from other units and 10,000 recruits, would so lower the efficiency of our whole sea force that the United States could confidently lay claim to the world’s greatest fleet of “floating coffins.”
The whole world is tense and distraught, and actual despair is breeding at many points on the map. If the situation beyond the Pacific is of particular interest it is because it is more spectacular than others almost equally serious; and if it forces us to turn our attention to the Pacific when we discuss navy reduction it is because it is such a conspicuous reminder of our obligations as a first-class power, not only to ourselves but to the world community that concedes us this rank. With our long frontage on both the Atlantic and the Pacific we have police duties in both seas which may not be obvious but of which we should soon be reminded if we were incapable of discharging them and had to
surrender them to others. If other nations go to war, moreover, as the Orient reminds us they may do, the neutral with an inadequate navy is powerless to protect his neutrality and is either forced to become a partisan or accept complete isolation.
To reduce the efficiency of the Navy by crippling its man power in such a period of tension would be criminal folly. For a fleet cannot retire and train its crews. It must fight at once, and to ask our Navy to fight with untrained crews would be wantonly to sacrifice thousands of lives and court a national disaster.
Deterioration of National Defense
Tribune, Chicago, February 12.—The defenses of the United States are going through one of those periods of neglect which have followed all our wars. Our preoccupation is again with our own internal troubles, and the contingency of war, always shirked by our people regardless of our experience, is thrust far in the background of our thought. The urgent need for government retrenchment powerfully supports our normal reluctance to spend upon preparation for an event we consider an unnecessary evil, and, for us, an improbable misfortune.
In the present recurrence of this situation we have a very high development of pacifist organization, and our government itself, though giving some lip service to the principles of defense, turns its back upon the practical requirements of its maintenance and devotes itself exclusively to experiments in international agreement designed to make war impossible. With this course we are convinced the people have a very tepid sympathy, at least so far as it implies and produces a parallel neglect of our defenses. But the issue is not definitely presented in any form upon which the nation can express its will, and the process of deterioration therefore continues and will continue until some serious crisis challenges it.
In this situation voices raised on behalf of the maintenance of defense are hear impatiently if at all. Nevertheless actua conditions should be brought to public attention and the Navy League is to be commended for the survey just published Events in the Far East and their implied' tions give force to this report which reveals that of the three great naval powers the United States now stands third in so-calle combatant auxiliary ships—that is, fight ing ships other than battleships. The rati° upon the expiration of the London treaty December 31, 1936, will be, under presen procedure, United States, 10; British empire, 13.2, and Japan, 12.
The term auxiliary ships conveys to the civilian mind a sense of unimportance which is erroneous when the real needs an conditions of naval defense are considered- It includes cruisers of great fighting power and wide radius of action. It ignores the factor of commerce protection, so imp°r' tant to our prosperity. It overlooks the fact that by reason of the Washingt011 treaty our battleship fleet cannot carry °° operations away from our own waters, no matter how important the possibility p such operations may be either in war or id international relations. It ignores the fact that persistent effort is being made to abolish or radically reduce the size and potency of the battleship by internationa agreement. Thus the importance of the auxiliary ships is increasing and will continue to increase, while our equipment m this branch of defense is being progreS' sively lowered.
Retrenchment in expenditures upon the amy and navy must be included in any such genuine economy plan as the fisca conditions of the federal government noW certainly demand. They can be accomplished, without impairing the fighting efficiency of the army and fleet, by abolishing unnecessary army posts and navy yard5 and by subjecting administration to a thorough overhauling in the interest o
Professional Notes
1933]
economy as well as efficiency. In short, the Pork and the bureaucratic fat of the army and navy should be removed. It is notorious that they can be without reducing fighting efficiency. But politics and bureaucratic self-interest are resisting stub- I Wnly, without benefit, indeed, to the Injury of national defense. Waste continues, while our relative naval power descends year by year.
But neither the pressure of special interests arrayed against urgently required i economy nor millennial hopes of a warless World nor the internal problems of the deI Pression period should be permitted to I obscure the progressive decline of our naval power. We shall sooner or later meet Its consequences with sacrifice and re- niorse. No thoughtful American favors any expenditure on preparation for war, even clearly defensive war, which moderation I and real economy do not fully justify. We have no thought of aggression. We are sincerely devoted to peace, our own peace and that of the world. But neither our own nor the world’s peace will be advanced, on the contrary its maintenance will be weakened, by the deterioration of the ability of the United States to make its rights and its ffifluence respected.
Brie/ Notes
The Naval appropriation bill for the next fiscal year will make available a total fund of about $320,000,000, which is about $6,000,000 less than for the current year; $53,000,000 will be available for new construction.
The Naval war game on the west coast ended on February 17. Bombing attacks were made on San Francisco and Los Angeles, but the attacking forces suffered heavily in both ships and planes.
The Chief of Naval Operations announced on February 10: “The budget for the next fiscal year beginning July 1, 1933, and ending July 1, 1934, having been materially reduced even further than the originally approved estimates, it is considered inadvisable at this time to cause any additional expenditures other than required for operation and maintenance of the combat units of the fleet. In the interest of economy it is probable
593 that the scouting force will remain on the west coast until July 1, 1934.
The Indianapolis was slightly damaged during her first gun-firing tests and returned to the Philadelphia yard for repairs which were quickly made. She sailed again on her shake-down cruise on February 13.
The heavy cruiser Portland was delivered to the Navy at the Boston yard on February 15.
A study of the possibilities of developing San Pedro, California, into a base capable of handling a concentration of the entire United States Fleet is being made under direction of the Commander in Chief of the fleet.
The Secretary of the Navy has recommended to Congress a revision of the navy ration. The proposed ration would contain less meat and bread and more fruit, vegetables, milk, and cereals.
Nathaniel Peffer writes in Harper's Magazine for February: “The pronouncements of the American government with reference to Manchuria, so glibly hailed by liberals, will constitute, unless revoked, a pledge and policy no less binding than the Monroe Doctrine but infinitely harder to effectuate.”
Italy warns France to curb “menace to peace”; Brazil ready to rush fleet against Paraguay; Japan is invading Jehol. And a few years ago vye were engaged in fighting a war to end wars. Will somebody please page Mr. Kellogg and ask him what happened to his peace pact?—Chicago T ribune.
The combined annual cost of our Army, Navy, and Air Force equals less than three weeks’ tax impositions for 1932.—The Argonaut.
GREAT BRITAIN The Return of the Capital Ship
The Engineer, London, February 3. Ten years ago the battleship’s “expectation of life” was such as would have justified a very high premium against the risk of extinction. . . . Several capital ships are now under construction, and there is every prospect of more being laid down in the near future. Germany took the initiative with the Deutschland. Although a pigmy compared with such monsters as the Hood or the two Nelsons, she carries an armament that places her definitely in the
capital class, and it is not denied that she could engage in a long-range duel with almost any battleship or battle cruiser now afloat with a reasonable chance of survival. ... It is certain that her fighting powers are immensely superior to those of the 10,000-ton cruiser type, mounting 8-in. guns, which the Washington treaty foisted on the naval world, and 55 units of which have been built to date in Europe, the United States, and Japan. None of these hybrid craft could stand up to the German “pocket battleship,” though she is no larger than they. As we write, the Deutschland is running her preliminary trials at sea, and all who appreciate boldness and ingenuity in the realm of technical development will share our hope that this remarkable warship will fulfill every anticipation of her designers. A sister-ship, Ersatz Lothringen, is to be launched on April 1, and a third unit, Ersatz Braunschweig, was laid down in October last. It is proposed to begin a fourth next year.
As might have been predicted, the building of these small but powerful capital ships has produced repercussions in the naval world. They have depreciated the value of the 10,000-ton cruiser to such an extent that the construction of the type has virtually ceased, the United States being the only country in which it still finds favor. France has deemed it expedient to build a battle cruiser as a retort to the German vessels. This ship, the Dunkerque, which was begun at Brest in December, is the first full-scale capital ship to be laid down anywhere for ten years. She bears a family resemblance to the Nelson class. Both main and secondary armaments are to be grouped in quadruple turrets. In each turret the 4 guns are mounted in pairs, separated by a stout bulkhead. Each pair of guns is worked independently. On the other hand, all 4 weapons must, of course, be trained on a common point of bearing and will, therefore, be equally affected by errors in de
■2,000 tuiser ically ls a bs >Ued ir
■nd Sh tip ad 's a ves J2 ft., Ws st !quipp tbe b bp. foi tie be Wbet Umtai leatur ^ould ‘Uachi 1 com
The ui *nd mi bulge With at 1 placi the ini h far trrang
the i Suns Ward side Suns tube! laum hiine W Wefi tow ship on t in t torp It is in 1 wit] tali
oth
flection. It is also evident that the system of shell and powder hoists must be very complicated in view of the abnormal space between the wing guns and the necessity of keeping the magazines well away frolC the sides of the ship. The 6.1-in. guns are in quadruple turrets disposed pyrami wise in the after part of the ship, one tur ret on either beam and the third on t e quarter-deck. There is also a number 0 anti-aircraft pieces and torpedo tubes, t details of which are uncertain. No definite particulars of the ship’s protection are available, but it is reported unofficial y that a water-line belt of not less than 9 in. thickness will be associated with tw° strong decks and elaborate subdivision- The concentration of the main and secon ary artillery in multiple turrets tends to reduce weight and centralize protection) but never before has it been carried to sue a length. In the Dunkerque a single we placed shell might put half the heavy guns out of action, and remembering the phe^ nomenal number of turret hits register^ at Jutland, we should not care to see tne armament of a British ship disposed on tn same principle. The next power to resumc capital ship construction may be Italy* whence it is reported that tentative dc signs have been prepared and tank expcfl ments conducted with a view to the bun ing of such a vessel. Unless, therefore, new naval “holiday” is agreed to by all tn major powers without delay—an impr° able contingency, since it would involve the scarpping of the Dunkerque and scV eral, if not all, of the Deutschlands battleships are certain to reappear in tn building programs of this country, tn United States, and Japan, when existing treaties expire in 1936. This circumstanc^ lends interest to such forecasts of °u future capital ships as have been mad • In the official British plan of disarmamen tabled at Geneva last year a restriction 0 capital ships to 25,000 tons and 12-in. gullj was proposed, with an alternative limit 0
■2,000 tons and 11-in. guns provided that tuiser tonnage and armament were dras- ically reduced. Taking the higher figures <s a basis, Sir George Thurston has out- itied in the new edition of Brassey’s Naval lnd Shipping Annual a project for a battle- ?hip adapted to British requirements. This s a vessel 560 ft. in length, with a beam of ^2 ft., and a draught of 29.5 ft. at 25,000 ■0ns standard displacement. She would be Quipped with geared turbines and small- ‘ube boilers, the plant developing 30,000 ■^p. for a speed of 22 knots. A 12-in. water- W belt, tapering at the extremities, 14-in. Wbettes, and 7-in. armor on the citadel containing the secondary armament, are Matures of the protective system. There ^ould be two armored decks in way of Machinery, magazines, and barbettes, of A combined thickness of not less than 6 in.
I'he underwater protection against submarines And mines to consist of a slight swelling out, or bulge” incorporated in the vessel’s structure, ^ith at least 2 longitudinal bulkheads, 1 armored;
* placed about midway between the shell and the inner bulkhead, which latter should be kept As far from the side as machinery and magazine Arrangements will allow.
The armament proposed is twelve 12-in. Suns in triple turrets, grouped in pairs forward and aft; twelve 6-in. guns in a broadside battery; eight 4-in. or 4.7-in. A.A. Suns, and two 21-in. or 24-in. torpedo lubes. A complement of seaplanes with Winching gear, and possibly an outfit of ! Uiines and depth charges, is suggested.
With many of the features of this design fre find ourselves in agreement. We should, however, prefer a shorter and broader ship, the substitution of eight 13.5-in. guns «n twin mountings, for the twelve 12-in. in triple turrets, and the deletion of all torpedo tubes, mines, and depth charges. It is true the 12-in. gun was recommended in the British program at Geneva, but Mth the tacit proviso that no greater Caliber be adopted in any navy. On the other hand, neither the United States nor
Japan has shown any disposition to accept this limit, and France, has definitely repudiated it by arming her new battle cruiser with 13-in. guns. We are, therefore, of opinion that a restriction to 12-in. is impracticable. The 13.5-in. firing a 1,400-lb. projectile, is a weapon of proved value, accurate, hard-hitting, and easy to manipulate. Moreover, a ship armed with this gun need not shirk action with an opponent carrying 15-in. or even 16-in. metal. And, finally, we know that the vast majority of British gunnery officers look askance at triple mountings, and much prefer the well-tried system of twin turrets. Except by torpedo specialists the fitting of torpedo tubes in capital ships is regarded as a useless encroachment on space and weight, while the carriage of mines or depth charges by such vessels would seem equally futile. As for the relation of beam to length, it may be that a long and narrow ship is better able to keep her speed in a seaway, but for a 25,000-ton ship designed for 22 knots this principle is unimportant. Much more to the point is the fact that ample beam gives better protection against underwater attack. The thickness and distribution of armor suggested by Sir George Thurston appears to be satisfactory, and with the modifications we have indicated we are inclined to accept his forecast of the future capital ship of the British Navy as sound. It will not be forgotten that his prediction of our post- Washington battleships and cruisers proved accurate in all essential features.
Philippine Independence
Army, Navy and Air Force Gazette, London, February 2.—Within the last three years the hitherto negligible advocates in the United States of Philippine independence have received unexpected re-enforcement from an unforeseen quarter, the hard-boiled business men who are interested in the sugar industry of the United States. Long kept asunder by divergent
sectional interests, the sugar beet cultivators of the Middle West and their natural- enemies, the sugar cane planters of Louisiana and Mississippi, have come together at last to fight a common foe—the sugar planter of the Philippines. It is a truism of European diplomacy that it is common fear and not mutual love which is the compelling motive of alliances and ententes between governments. In the world of American “big business”—perhaps in that of “big business” everywhere—the same motive is seen to operate towards the same end. Having decided to combine to keep out of the United States the produce of the Philippine sugar plantations, the American sugar interests were driven to advocate Philippine independence since by the Constitution the products of the Philippines could not be kept out by tariffs so long as those islands were a possession of the United States. This is the motive and the power which has passed through a Congress, hitherto contemptuous of the claims of its little “brown brothers,” a bill for the independence of the Philippines, and forced it on to the Statute Book over the veto of President Hoover and against the protests of the service departments.
The fact that independence will not be effective for another 10 years, and that the act of Congress confirming it reserves for the United States naval and military bases in the Philippines, does little to mitigate the natural anxiety with which the War and Navy Departments view this new departure of policy. This anxiety is easy to understand. It is one thing to have in the independent Republic of Cuba a naval base at Guantanamo within close reach of the United States, situated in an island with which no foreign power can, or would wish to, interfere, while it is quite another thing to have military and naval bases on the far side of the Pacific in islands neither controlled nor controllable by the armed forces of the United States once they have been given their independence. Peaceful
penetration by Japanese immigrants in 0 an independent Philippine archipelago may easily create for the garrisons isolated military and naval bases a siWa tion compromising their security. strategical consequences of the alliance mutual gain between the sugar beet inter ests of the Middle West and those of * e cane growers of the southern states nw one day cost their country dear.
Japan
New Statesman and Nation, London> February 11.—For our own part we ha' never shared the fear of offending Japa which has so obsessed the British govern ment. At an earlier stage in this dispute^ when the powers were being urged to be little more like lions and a little less h ^ rabbits, the answer that came in a terrine whisper from Whitehall was: “Think the strength of the Japanese Navy, _an the weakness of the British and America fleets in the Pacific. Think of Singap°r and Hongkong.” . . . The Japanese ma> have grown in confidence, as they ha certainly grown in arrogance. But they a far too shrewd a people to pit themsel'r against the world and to ensure their o'' ^ destruction by a childish escapade. W they may be prepared to do ultimately, " ^ do not know. What they want at PreseI\ is plain enough; it is to continue their ^ croachment on China, without embroil* themselves with the League powers or 'V1 the United States or with Soviet Russia-
Sir Austen Chamberlain, former Foreign a ister, said in a recent address: “As one who ha ^ sincere regard and admiration for the Is ^ Empire of the East, I appeal to the statesmen^ Japan to take account of the growing uneas® of the world as their policy develops, and °.is conviction which is being forced upon the m1 of even their greatest admirers and warintj1e friends that they are treating all too lightly conventions they have signed and the un‘ji£ takings they have given, alike as a member 0 (
League of Nations and a signatory of the 1 a Paris.”
Times, London, January 24.—Japan put the eague at a great disadvantage by not laying her SOevances before it in the first place, and has her- ]®lf alone to blame if she then forfeited sympa- hies which she has never been able to recapture, he can only hope to regain them if she properly appreciates the difficult position in which she has Put the institution of which she is herself a Prominent member, and undertakes in the long tun to comply with its recommendations.
^oval Trends
Maurice Prendergast in The Navy, London, ebruary.—Through how many changes has the lasting of war vessels gone! And how often has lhat feature been condemned, and yet won reprieve and a further lease of life on one score or Mother! In the days of sail, masts, of course, 'Vere absolutely indispensable. When steam came l11 and sail went out, the day of the “mastless lronclad” was declared to be at hand. But the h>ast remained, and when encircled by numerous hghting-tops, provided emplacements for nests of Ratling guns, Maxims, and sharpshooters. Upon that vogue passing away, the mast became a Pedestal for searchlights. Long-range gunnery brought to it the range finder, the “spotting top,” jhrd the director tower, until latterly the mast has become a sort of glorified hatstand, on which all j*>rts of “gunnery gadgets” could be conveniently hooked up. The mast has also served its turn in connection with the exhibition of visual signals by ags, lamps, semaphores, and speed cones. It has also been a handmaiden to wireless telegraphy by sPreading aloft the filaments of the aerials. About lhe only feature in British battleship design of the Past 60 years which has remained unchanged for ]jecade after decade is the use of the mast as a derrick standard for the handling of the heavy chips’ boats. You will find that detail in the devastation of 1873, in the Nelson of 1927, and in Pearly all the British battleships in between the two vessels just named. If from the after “tower” of the New Mexico you abstract that pinchbeck J*ttle pole mast, you will see that the “mastless battleship,” whose coming has been so long heralded and so long delayed, seems at last to have arrived. . . .
British Bitterness
United Press, London, February 7.—“If there ever again is war between France and Germany, "’e in Britain will not fight. Our Navy will prefect our coasts. But a Continental war—never again!” This is the spirit which seems to animate {■he majority of people in the British Isles today, ■ehe British, like the Italians, are bitter about the Consequences of the last war and many claim it was rank folly to send their war-time army of 5,000,000 men across the Channel to aid France.
“France gained everything and we, who financed the war and are the only people to pay our debts honorably, lost everything except for a few colonies which we really did not need,” the British say. “We have a burden of war debts, which has crippled us industrially and financially, and, bitterest blow of all to our pride and prestige, forced us off the gold standard. We blame that all on the war. So we say, ‘Never again’!”
Although the British say this, they are at present pouring out more money than any nation in Europe on armaments. With an annual budget for the Army, Navy, and Air Force of approximately $555,000,000, the national government headed by Ramsay Macdonald, is keeping the big armaments firms busy turning out war material.
United States in the League
Fighting Forces, London, February.—If the United States abandons, as seems probable, her policy of isolation, and joins the League of Nations, such a step will constitute an immense accession of strength to the League, with every prospect that a strong forward policy of all-round disarmament will be a certainty.
Brief Notes
The London Times of February 10 says that with the vessels of the 1932 program, contracts for which are about to be awarded, there will soon be over 50 ships of various types under construction for the Royal Navy, a larger total probably than at any time since the work left over from the war program was disposed of.
This is due to the overlapping of programs caused by the postponements of 1930 (on account of the naval conference) and 1931 (because of the financial crisis), and also to the slow rate at which vessels are now built owing to the curtailment of the money appropriations for them. For example, the cruiser Leander, authorized in March, 1929, or 4 years ago, has not yet joined the fleet. She was not laid down until September, 1930, or 1} year after authorization, but has been in hand for 2\ years. Yet she is a vessel of only 7,000 tons, with 6-in. guns.
Before the war battleships of the largest class, of 25,000 tons and with 13.5-in. guns, were completed in 2 years. Cruisers of about the size of the Leander would be built in 1 $ year, and destroyers in 12 months, whereas the last destroyer to be completed for the Navy, H.M.S. Delight, was laid down in April, 1931, and commissioned last month, having taken 1 f year to build.
As it is well known that so large a proportion of the ships now in service are of war design, and rapidly becoming obsolete, requiring eventual replacement, it would be far more economical and . efficient to build the replacement ships promptly. Failing this, large sums of money must be spent on rehabilitation, which can hardly be as satisfactory as the construction of ships of the latest designs and equipment.
The Admiralty announce that the following names have been allocated to the ships of the 1932 program:—
| TO BE BUILT BY |
Cruisers (modified Leander |
|
class)— Apollo................................................ | Devonport Yard |
Phaeton ............................................ | Contract |
Cruiser (Arethusa class)— |
|
Galatea.............................................. | Contract |
Flotilla Leader— |
|
Faulknor........................................... | Contract |
Destroyers (Fearless class)— |
|
Fearless............................................ Foresight.......................................... Foxhound.......................................... Fortune............................................. Forester............................................ Fury................................................... Fame.................................................. Firedrake......................................... | Contract |
Submarine (Thames class)— |
|
Clyde................................................. | Contract |
Submarine (Swordfish |
|
class)— Salmon.............................................. | Contract |
Submarine (Porpoise class)— |
|
Grampus........................................... | Chatham Yard |
Sloops (repeat Shoreham |
|
class) Lowestoft.......................................... 1 Wellington....................................... J | Devonport Yard |
Sloops (Halcyon class)— |
|
Harrier............................................. 1 Hussar.............................................. / | Contract |
Destroyer depot ship— |
|
Woolwich......................................... | Contract |
Gunboat— |
|
Robin................................................. | Contract |
Boom defense vessel— |
|
Aid gate............................................. | Contract |
Tender for submarine depot, |
|
Portland— Elfin.................................................. | Contract |
Tender for Torpedo School, |
|
Devonport— Redwing............................................ | Contract |
“Concord” writes in Fighting Forces for FebrU' ary: “Had the Navy been allowed to develop h® own air service and to include in it the control of flying boats, there can be no doubt at all that out naval air policy would have been far different t° the one actually followed. Carriers—and perhap5 catapults too—might have disappeared alt°" gether.
The Queen Elizabeth, which has had an exten' sive refit at Devonport, was recommissioned f°r service in the First Battle Squadron, Medite*' ranean Fleet. She will leave for Gibraltar 011 March 2.
The carrier Eagle has been thoroughly °ver„ hauled at Devonport at a cost of about £373,00 since her return from the Mediterranean. She should be ready to commission in April, and is t0 leave about the end of that month for China t0 relieve the Hermes.
The keel of the cruiser Arethusa was laid Chatham Dockyard on January 25; the keel o the cruiser Ajax was laid at Barrow on February 7. These are the first of the cruisers of the 193 program to be started. No date has been an' nounced for beginning the third cruiser of program, the Amphion, at Portsmouth.
The cruiser Neptune was launched at Ports' mouth on January 31.
The flotilla leader Duncan is ordered to con1' mission for trials on March 29. She is of the 193 program.
The destroyer Vouga for Portugal fl,as launched by Yarrow at Scotstoun on January 23-
The submarine Starfish is to be launched at Chatham Dockyard on March 14. This is the third and last of the submarines authorized under the 1930 program.
FRANCE
Reasons for Super-Destroyers
Naval and Military Record, Plymouth* February 1 (by J. B. Gautreau).—The wholesale construction of super-destroyerS (altogether 30 in service or in hand) is the twofold result of the lessons of the war* as seen from the French side, and of the experience gained with the l,400-t°n destroyers of the Simoun type. Craft to be relied upon in any weather to work with cruisers is what was wanted. Prolonged sea practice, both in the Atlantic and in
he Mediterranean, has shown that those ^acting desiderata are fully met by the 2,400—2,600-ton super-destroyers of the hacal-Verdun-Gerfaut series. A 40-knot erdun (five 5.5-in. guns with 39 kilo-shells aild a range of 26,000 yards) combines, to a certain extent, the capabilities of a cruiser and those of a destroyer. In the hands an enterprising commander, especially those times of artificial mists, she could §ive a good account of herself against Superior forces and spring surprises against Vulnerable enemy points.
A series of tests in combined maneuvers have satisfied the High Command that the sheltered waters of the Mediterranean l0rm an ideal arena for work for such Vessels. Of course, they are too vulnerable h) engage in stand-up actions against 6-in. Sun cruisers, at least in the old style, but, handled resolutely without fear of risks, specially under conditions of darkness, artificial or otherwise, they might easily °btain telling results. They are fit to do the work (so far as offensive tactics are c°ncerned), for which the fine British Cruisers of the “C” class were intended aild, moreover, they are free from the handicap (lack of range) that beforehand Crippled the actions of the German pre-war !*ght cruisers. Their only limitations are 111 their fragile construction, that unfits them for protracted cruising duties, although they are not wanting in robustness. "They are, therefore, tied to the coasts and strategically defensive, whilst being intended for headlong tacts of offense and Notably to keep, eventually, in close touch Vdth enemy cruisers emerging from harbor °r desirous of regaining home after an errand on the high sea. Some officers entire them as being too weak for their Nominal and comprehensive tasks, but on the whole they enjoy the favor of the Service. And the main, and imperative, argument is that since France is too poor, tor the present, to afford scouting light cruisers, the Verduns (splendid on the whole) must assume the duties performed in rival navies by vessels twice their size.
Brief Notes
The submarine La Sybille was launched at Le Havre on January 28. La Sybille is the last of four coast submarines of 558 tons on the surface, authorized in 1929.
A Paris Associated Press dispatch of February 24 carries the information that the substitution of a battle cruiser of the Dunkerque class for four light cruisers voted in the 1932 naval program is under consideration of the naval committee of the Chamber of Deputies.
Proponents of the change claim that it would be an economy move and yet would increase the power of the navy in the first line.
From German sources it is reported that the largest gun in the world has been built in France. It is a 52-centimeter (20.4-in.) howitzer on a railway mounting, the latter being 98 ft. in length and weighing 265 tons. The gun itself is 28 ft. long and weighs 54 tons. It fires a 3,080-lb. shell and has an extreme range of 11.25 mi.
ITALY
Brief Notes
On December 19, during trials in the Tyrrhenian Sea, the cruiser Bolzano reached a speed of 38 knots, 2 knots above her designed speed. The Bolzano is the seventh and last of the 10,000- ton cruisers with 8-in. guns. They fall into two categories, 3 of the Trento type, which include the Bolzano, with 150,000 hp. and 36 knots; and 4 of the Zara type, with 95,000 hp. and 32 knots. The armament is the same in both types, eight 8-in. and sixteen 3.9-in. A.A. guns.
The construction program for 1932-33 provides for about 30,000 tons of new vessels. On December 2, 1932, Signor Mussolini gave orders to the Ministry of Marine to proceed with the construction of two 7,000-ton cruisers and 2 torpedo boats, representing the first section of this program. The funds for construction are to come from normal budget appropriations.
The London Times states that it is understood that Italy may modernize her battleships as an alternative to building new ships of the French Dunkerque type.
The 5,000-ton cruiser Armando Diaz has successfully completed her trials.
JAPAN
United States and Japan
Naval and Military Record, Plymouth, February 1 (from Washington, January 29).—News has reached here of mysterious naval movements in the Pacific—a Japanese advance and an American withdrawal.
Allegations have recently been made that the Japanese proposed to embark upon a program of building naval bases in the mandated Mariana and Pelew Islands in the Pacific. These reports were indignantly denied by Japanese delegates at Geneva.
Today, however, it is reported that Admiral Osumi, commander of the Japanese naval station, dockyards, and arsenal at Yokosuka, has ordered naval maneuvers to take place in the Southern Pacific.
Although it is not expressly stated, it is believed that these maneuvers will take place in the vicinity of the Pelew and Mariana Islands.
Simultaneously comes the report that the United States Navy Department intends to recall its squadron from Pacific waters and to transfer it to the Atlantic after the spring maneuvers have taken place.
It is believed that this step is being taken in order to avoid United States warships coming into proximity with Japanese warships.
The American island of Guam is only 100 miles from the Japanese mandated island of Saipan.
The Mandate Islands
Times, New York, February 6 (by Hugh Byas from Tokyo).—As a result of study by Japanese officials it is their belief that Japan’s right to retain the islands is juridically unassailable.
Japan’s rights, it is held, are derived from the Versailles Treaty, which gave effect to secret agreements made during the war regarding the allocation of former German colonies. On May 7, 1919, the executive council, comprising Great Britain, the United States, and France, agreed, in accordance with secret treaties, that all German lands north of the equator should be allocated to Japan. This decision was carried out. The preamble to the Japanese mandate states that the mandate is vested in the Emperor of Japan in accordance with Art. XXII of the Versailles Treaty.
Herald Tribune, New York, February 10.—Nichi Nichi quotes the Navy De' partment spokesman as follows:
The Japanese Navy attaches great importance to the mandated islands. They are of great value to Japanese naval strategy in the Pacific. The Navy Department and the Naval General Stan therefore are following the discussions regarding mandates with the keenest attention.
According to press dispatches from abroad, lhe United States is reported to be profoundly concerned over the question of the mandated islands^ The Japanese Navy is making preparations envisaging some kind of American intervention aiming at wresting the islands from Japan.
The Navy is inclined to believe that the key final solution of the Manchurian problem rests l® the Pacific. In that event, inasmuch as the mandated islands possess such great strategic significance as might determine the effectiveness of the Japanese Navy, the naval authorities are bent on keeping them at all costs.
In connection with this resolute attitude, the Navy Minister, Vice-Admir^ Mineo Osumi, laid special emphasis on this question at a recent Cabinet meeting by calling his colleague’s attention to the fact that “actual strength is the fiual deciding factor in the solution of the dispute.”
Inasmuch as provisions of the Leagu(- Covenant and of the Washington naval treaty specifically prohibit fortification of the mandated islands, or establishment of naval or military bases on them, observers fail to understand how the island^ can be “of great value to Japanese nava strategy.” The islands, former German possessions, are 623 in number, with a total area of 830 square miles and population of about 70,000.
Replying to an interpellation in the Diet yesterday, Vice Minister Tsutsumi of the Overseas Affairs Department declared that the South Sea Islands were held “nominally” under League mandate but had “little connection with the Geneva organization.” The Japanese government, he said, therefore was following the same educational policy in the islands as in the Japanese colonies.
Army and Navy Independent of Cabinet
Times, New York, February 4 (by Hugh Byas). "-The open question in Japanese politics as^ to whether or not the Cabinet controls the fighting forces is raised by a petition presented in the House of Peers requesting an authoritative interpretation of the Constitution.
The matter being too important to be decided hy an extempore dictum, Zenziro Horikira, chief secretary of the Cabinet, prepared a draft to be given as the government’s considered answer. This draft evaded the essential point. The Cabinet, it said, was to assume political responsibility, but the advice given to the Emperor regarding military strength was to be framed m close collaboration with the high commands. No ironclad rule could be applied, it was said, and a certain flexibility must be exercised.
Budget Grows Greatly
Herald Tribune, New York, February 7 (by Wilfrid Fleisher from Tokyo).—Questioning in the Diet so far has brought out extensive plans for military expansion surpassing expectations. War Minister Sadao Araki has made known that the army plans announced just before the Diet met will cost ¥410,000,000 ($86,346,000 at current exchange, of which only ¥ 105,000,000 ($22,113,000) is included in the present budget of ¥447,880,000 ($94,323,528). General Araki said he hoped that an additional ¥305,000,000 ($64,233,000) could be added to next year’s budget, or at least by 1935. This announcement means that the military expenditure will be greater in the next two years, which comes as somewhat of a shock to the public, which had been hoping that the present record budget would be cut substantially in the future.
Vice-Admiral Mineo Osumi, Navy Minister, made similar revelations in the Diet when he announced that the navy had a second replenishment program in view.
The amount of ¥ 150,000,000 ($31,590,000) is included in the navy’s ¥372,000,000 ($78,343,200) budget for the fiscal year starting on April 1, for naval improvement and preparations, but it is not clear from Admiral Osumi’s statement whether this is the first part of the replenishment program. He stated that “the part of the appropriation for improvements will not have to be requested again when the second replenishment program comes up.’”
Naval Program
Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, January 29.— Interpellation of the government upon naval affairs, chiefly the so-called second replenishment program and the Japanese- American naval ratios, marked the sessions of the budget committee of the Lower House of the Diet yesterday. . . .
Mr. Nakajima: When the budget for the next fiscal year was explained the Navy emphasized the necessity in the light of national defense for the re-equipment of war vessels and the construction of new vessels. A defect in the national defense seems to exist not only in point of the ratio of vessels now possessed, but also in point of lack of appropriations to maintain those vessels. Which point does the Navy regard as most important?
Admiral Osumi: The construction of new vessels and the re-equipment of the present ones should be carried on at the same time. I agree with Mr. Nakajima that the standard of national defense should not be measured solely by the ratio of vessels possessed.
Mr. Nakajima: The Foreign Minister has said there was no change in the
Pacific situation after the London Naval Treaty, while the Navy Minister has said that the treaty brought about a change in the Pacific. Which is correct? The next budget provides Y150,000,000 for naval improvement and preparations. Does this constitute the expenses of the first part of the so-called second naval replenishment program, or is only that part of the estimate devoted to construction to be considered a part of the plan?
Admiral Osumi: I believe there has been a great change in the situation both at home and abroad. Part of the estimate for improvements will not have to be requested again when the second replenishment plan is drafted.
Mr. Nakajima: What is the present ratio between the Japanese and American navies?
Admiral Osumi: In all vessels constructed, the Japanese ratio is 70 per cent; for capital ships it is 60 per cent and for auxiliary vessels 80 per cent.
Mr. Nakajima: What will the ratio be in 1936?
Admiral Osumi: Under the naval treaty Japan will have about 70 per cent, on a basis of all vessels; 60 per cent of capital ships and 70 per cent of auxiliary vessels. After 1934 the Japanese ratio will gradually decrease.
Rear-Admiral Terajima, Chief of the Military Affairs Bureau: What the Navy Minister has explained is the naval strength under the treaty; the actual strength cannot be given as it depends upon the future construction of auxiliary vessels. It is likely that America is considering a 10-year naval plan in accordance with the Gibson proposal for vessels smaller than B-class cruisers.
Mr. Nakajima: What is the reserve construction power for America and for Japan?
Admiral Osumi: Japan has a reserve construction power of 12,130 tons for aircraft carriers, 9,205 tons for destroyers.
America has a reserve power of 42,700 tons for aircraft carriers, 73,000 tons for B-class cruisers, 121,530 tons for destroyers, and 25,630 tons for submarines.
Mr. Nakajima: Why is America’s reserve so large in comparison to Japan’s?
Admiral Osumi: The construction resources of Japan are limited, whereas America has both abundant construction power and materials.
Mr. Nakajima: In view of America s great reserve power, will not the Navy Minister’s declaration of a second replenishment program provoke America to construction?
Admiral Osumi: I do not believe there will be any such provocation.
In reply to further questions by Mr- Nakajima before the afternoon session of the budget committee, Admiral Osunu said the maintenance expenditure in the present budget would apply to vessels constructed in or before 1931. New expenditures would be asked for those constructed after that year, and he regretted that the maintenance appropriations in the budget were insufficient. He explained that there was no connection between this lack and the “thought” problem in the Navy. The Admiral also revealed that the Navy Office in the future desired to effect re-equipment of capital ships, excepting the Mutsu and Nagato, at a cost of about Y5,000,000 per ship.
Philippine Independence
Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, January 19."" According to the Asahi, the Foreign Office view of the bill was stated unofficially by a spokesman as follows:
Passage of the bill by the American Senate Pr° viding for the independence of the Philippines is a manifestation of the American policy to leave tne peace of the Orient to orientals. Japan, which is m a position of leadership in the maintenance °* peace in the Orient, welcomes the American measure. As Japan harbors no political or territoria ambition in regard to the Philippines, the realiza tion of Philippines independence and the guaran
tee of the neutrality of the islands would go a long Way toward improving relations between Japan and America.
At the same time, independence of the islands *bay have a favorable bearing on the naval programs of the two countries. But if the American government should maintain its naval base at Manila in spite of its demand that countries ^ordering upon the Pacific agree to the neutrality j °f the islands, the pressure of American arms Would continue to be felt in the Orient and Japan Would have to guard against it.
One of the reasons why America is going to grant independence to the Philippines is a desire to escape from economic pressure on the agricultural districts in the south and the coast states on the Pacific, as well as economic pressure upon i Northern commercial cities, due to the importa- ' bon of Filipino sugar and other products. There ts also the desire to stem the tide of Filipino agricultural immigrants. In addition, there is a financial reason, the American government desiring to refund its credits.
From the viewpoint of the Philippines, the conditions may not be so favorable. At any rate, it is difficult to make any precise observations, because there is a period of at least 10 years pending full independence.
Manchuria in China
Times, New York, February 20 (from London February 19).—Japanese diplomatic documents have just been brought to light in London proving that at the time of the Russo-Japanese War Japan Oisisted on keeping Manchuria “an integral part of China.”
In the dusty archives of the British foreign Office has been found a Japanese bote to Russia, dated February 5, 1904, expounding the same arguments that China is using against Japan today. The bote speaks of the “repeated refusal of the Imperial Russian government to accept the obligation to respect the territorial ibtegrity of China in Manchuria,” and also declares that China’s integrity “has been menaced by prolonged occupation of that province by Russia.”
The London Times published a letter yesterday from the well-known publicist, Augur, carrying the revelations a stage
further. After Japan had broken diplomatic relations with Russia, the French Minister to Tokyo, M. Harmand, transmitted to Paris an explanation given him by Baron Komura, then Japanese Foreign Minister. One sentence of the report quoting Baron Komura follows:
Japan desires that Russia should recognize Manchuria as an integral part of China. Provided such a declaration is forthcoming, Japan is prepared to allow Russia complete liberty of action in that province.
Commenting on the present situation Augur writes:
Today it is precisely on that point that Japan holds out strongest against the viewpoint held at Geneva. It refuses to admit Manchuria is a part of China. Why?
These revelations have stirred diplomatic circles here, and were used against Japan with damaging effect in a London Times' editorial yesterday on the League’s report.
Count Uchida’s Speech
Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, January 22.— In his speech to the Diet yesterday, Count Uchida made a statement which may become historic when he indicated that Japan favored a sort of Monroe Doctrine for Asia. We have reference to this passage.
The League of Nations Covenant very wisely provides that regional understandings shall be respected. In this sense, our government believes that any plan for erecting an edifice of peace in the Far East should be based upon the recognition that the constructive force of Japan is the mainstay of tranquility in this part of the world.
What Count Uchida quite obviously referred to when he mentioned that the Covenant provides for the respect of regional understandings is Art. 21 which reads:
Nothing in this Covenant shall be deemed to affect the validity of international engagements, such as treaties of arbitration or regional understandings like the Monroe Doctrine, for securing the maintenance of peace.
This article, it will be recalled, was. inserted at the insistence of President Wilson to preserve the integrity of the traditional American policy of the Monroe Doctrine. Count Uchida’s indirect allusion to the Monroe Doctrine carries the inference that if a Monroe Doctrine for Amer- . ica is sanctioned by the nations of the world, why should not such a doctrine be permissible for Japan? He then proceeds to formulate a doctrine founded on the “recognition that the constructive force of Japan is the mainstay of tranquility in this part of the world.”
Definitions of a so-called Monroe Doctrine for Asia are nothing new. Viscount Ishii preached this policy when he was in the United States as special Ambassador prior to the signing of the famous Ishii- Lansing agreement, later abrogated at the Washington conference. Viscount Kaneko, in an article a few months back, attempted to show that the idea originated with President Roosevelt. The late Kaku Mori openly favored it and urged it in the Diet last year, but the significance of Count Uchida’s formula is that it bears the official stamp, for he was speaking to the Diet as Foreign Minister, and indirectly to the larger audience of the world. . . .
The Foreign Minister confirms the recent reports from Moscow that Japan considers the present time inopportune for entering into a pact of non-aggression with the Soviet, explaining that this principle is already embodied in existing treaties. The remainder of Count Uchida’s speech is a reiteration of principles of policy which are now well known in this part of the world. He emphasizes Japan’s development of Manchukuo and expresses his conviction that the progress of the new state affords proof that Japan has not erred in recognizing it.
Count Uchida’s address is one of the most outspoken statements of policy ever made by a foreign minister to the Diet. His frankness is only matched by the
utterances of Mr. Matsuoka, Japan s delegate at Geneva, and both go to show that Japan intends to pursue an independent and forceful foreign policy.
Brief Notes
The war Department spokesman said in Tokyo on February 21: “It is clear that the United States wants to obtain control of tbe Japanese mandated South Sea Islands in the event of Japan’s giving them up; but withdraws from the League does not mean surrender ot mandates.”
According to Rengo (Japanese news service) there is a difference of opinion between the Army and Navy regarding the attitude Japan should take toward the disarmament conference, following possible withdrawal from the League of Nations. The Army is in favor of ordering the delegates to the disarmament discussions to return to Japan immediately if such action is taken, but the Navy is opposed to this.
The Geneva correspondent of the London Sunday Times writes under date of January 29- “I am able to state on the highest authority that the Japanese delegation had definite instructions) even before the present impasse regarding conciliation, not on any account to express any intention of withdrawing from the disarmament conference, even if Japan withdraws from the League of Nations as a result of the report of the committee of nineteen.
“I can state reliably that Japan does not want to incur any blame for bringing the Disarmament conference to disaster and is willing to disarm provided the rest of the world disarms. Further) if Japan withdraws from the League of Nation* she will fulfil her obligations under the Covenant for two years, and during that time will abide b> any decision made by the League.”
Wilfrid Fleisher in a cable in the Her at i Tribune of February 22 says: “How Japan might respond to an economic blockade is indicated in a statement made today by Ginjiro Fujiwara, pre*1" dent of the Oji Paper Mills, who declared that m the event of an economic boycott Japan woulo be compelled to blockade the ports of China) shutting off all Chinese trade with other countries and “securing the market and products oI China exclusively for Japan.”
This idea has been advocated in military circle* for some time. Some military men have gone *° far as to urge a Japanese occupation of China m the event of a boycott—which, of course, wouR* mean war.
The trial of the five junior naval officers involved in the assassination of the late Premier Tsuyoshi Inukai on May 15, last year, is expected be held some time toward the latter part of before a naval court-martial, according to the Nichi Nichi.
ARengo item of January 16 says that a contract is expected to be concluded shortly between the Kawasaki Dockyard Company and the government of Manchukuo for the construction of three river gunboats, which will be used in Man-
■ chukuo.
With a ceremony attended by naval authorities and technical experts, the keel of a large destroyer was laid at the Kawasaki Dockyard, Kobe, on January 14, Rengo reported.
^ Maurice Prendergast writes in The Navy for February that no trustworthy details are yet bailable of the 4 new Japanese 8,500-ton cruisers. Fhe Admiralty Return of Fleets has credited 2 of these vessels with batteries of fifteen 5-in. guns aPiece, but Fighting Ships thinks they will each receive an armament of twelve 6-in. guns.
The White Star liners Baltic and Meganlic sailed from Liverpool about the middle of February under orders to reach Japan with all possible sPeed. With a number of other large British ships,
■ they were sold recently to Japanese ship breakers.
The sales contracts specified that they might he used only for scrap, but shipping circles are wondering whether the Japanese government, 1,1 view of the Far Eastern crisis, may not commandeer them on their arrival for use as transports. In any case, the thousands of tons of scrap metal they will yield will be invaluable for the making of war materials.
NETHERLANDS
The Mutiny in “De Zeven Provincien”
Times, London, February 13.—The battleship De Zeven Provincien, surrendered by its crew of mutineers on Friday, has been brought back to the port of Tand- Joeng-Prioek under her own steam. The Material damage caused by the bomb dropped on her proved to be not very serious. The 28 Dutch among the mutineers were taken by the government steamer Eridanus to Batavia, and the 184 natives were taken on board the cruiser Java and brought to the island of Onrust.
The death roll (as announced in the later editions of The Times on Saturday) is now 22, four of the wounded having died.
The air squadron summoned the mutineers 6 times to surrender before dropping the bombs. If this had not had the desired effect, all the bombs carried, amounting to over a ton of explosives, would have been dropped, and if the mutineers had still held out torpedoes would have been used and the battleship sunk. The one bomb, however, killed or mortally wounded all the mutineers’ leaders, including the ringleader, a man named Basir.
The story of what happened on board De Zeven Provincien from the moment the mutiny broke out until the bomb was dropped is given by one of the officers on board the ship who was slightly wounded by the bomb and who was the first to be brought ashore.
According to his account, this officer was patrolling the deck on the day of the mutiny when he saw a Dutch engineer with some natives busy hauling in the main gangway. The officer seized his revolver and asked for an explanation. Thereupon the men said it was a mistake, and they returned to their normal duties. The officer then went to bed, but shortly afterwards some of the men came in and ordered him to get up, and he was brought before a council of mutineers. They told him that the ship was in their possession and that two lieutenants were already under arrest and would be shot immediately if any of the other officers made use of their weapons. Believing resistance useless, the officers, numbering in all 16, handed over their revolvers, with the exception of the officer in charge, who jumped overboard and swam to the shore, a risky attempt in a sea infested with sharks. This officer afterwards had a nervous breakdown, and is now in a hospital in the north of Sumatra.
When the officers thus found themselves prisoners without a leader they tried to make the best of things and to use their
ment to the government of $2,461,790, of whic1 25 per cent is to be paid immediately and the re mainder in the next 7.5 years.
The new Grace liner Santa Elena returned 0,1 February 27 to the yard of the Federal Ship building and Dry Dock Company, at Kearn}> N. J., after a 2-day sea test, in which she attain®' a speed of 21.5 knots. She was designed to ma e 20 knots. Officials who were aboard said the ship had successfully met every test of her builders.
The 7,000-ton United Fruit steamship arrived at New York on February 26 from t yards of the Newport News Shipbuilding aIJ( Dry Dock Company. The Peten is expected 0 average 17 knots in service.
It is reported from France that the fl°r' mandie is to be the last word in safety at sea, an that she will be so well subdivided that no nr could spread.
influence to bring the mutineers to a better state of mind. They were well treated and, after giving their word of honor not to offer resistance, they were allowed to live in their own quarters and walk all over the ship. They were allowed to keep their own servants and cooks, but some of the mutineers came into their quarters and took meals with them. One of the officers even had an opportunity to sit in the wireless room, where he tried unsuccessfully to call Surabaya and Scheveningen. Later on he was removed from the room. A plan of counteraction was drawn up, but a warning bullet on one occasion brought the officers to a realization that it was useless to attempt anything.
When the punitive squadron came in sight on Friday the mutineers expressed confidence in their strength behind the powerful guns of the battleship. The fact that the Aldebaran, which had followed them for three days, on their first warning to remain at a greater distance had obeyed their order had encouraged them, and when the seaplanes came in sight they laughed at the “small birds in the air,” and said, “What could they do against the battleship?” Then the bomb fell, killing all the chief agitators.
MERCHANT MARINE Various Notes
American shipbuilding on January 1 was at the lowest level it has been since pre-war years, only 28 vessels aggregating 17,865 gross tons being under contract for construction at that date, it was stated February 8 at the Bureau of Navigation and Steamboat Inspection, Department of Commerce. This figure compares with 89 vessels totaling 249,026 tons, under construction in American shipyards on January 1, 1932.
Tiie Shipping Board on February 16 approved the sale of 52 cargo steamships, to be used in the foreign trade, to the Lykes Brothers-Ripley Steamship Company of New Orleans. These vessels will operate in a guaranteed service from New Orleans to the United Kingdom, European and oriental ports. The contract calls for the pay
The United States liner Washington will g to sea for her trials on April 25, it was announce' on February 26.
It is reported from England that after l(l months of almost complete stagnation the orde ing of new mercantile shipbuilding work began i November, and during the period from Nove® ber 1 up to and including January 26 the folio" ing orders have been booked by British ship yards:—
Cargo vessels............................................. ^0
Passenger cargo vessels............................... 1
Small passenger vessels............................ ^
Coasters, colliers, trawlers, tugs, and other
small craft.......................................................... ^0
Gunboat (British)....................................... J
Destroyer (foreign)...................................... :
Naval sloops (foreign)................................ ^
As a result of these orders it is extremely Pr0^ able that the figures for new tonnage commence in British shipyards for the March quarter "* exceed the tonnage commenced during the who of 1932.
Tiie Furness-Bermuda luxury liner Queen °S Bermuda made over 21 knots on her trials wmc successfully ended on February 18.
There are fresh rumors of resumption work on the giant Cunarder.
The Paris correspondent of the Nautica Gazette writes: “By a strange coincidence, a maZ occurred on the French Line steamer France, no' laid up at Havre, during the night that folio" the arrival of the wreck of L’Atlantique at Ch®r bourg. The firemen had no difficulty in getting
the outbreak under control, and damage is insignificant. But it is curious to note that there again the fire originated in a first-class cabin. In an official statement, the French Line attributed it to a short circuit, and this has strengthened the opinion of those who believe that the Georges Philip par and L’ Atlantique disasters were due to a similar cause.”
While the Conte di Savoia was repairing in New York after her first Atlantic passage, she was supplied with electricity by a Diesel-electric ferryboat.
SCIENTIFIC Destroyer Developments
Marine Engineer and Motor ship Builder, London, February.—The modern destroyer appears to have definitely reached a stage where all trace of its original purpose, namely, the destruction of hostile surface torpedo boats, has disappeared, and without exception all the more recent craft are, when compared with pre-war standards, small unarmored cruisers of great offensive power. This is particularly the case where some of the latest Japanese vessels are concerned, while the French leaders are certainly cruisers in all but name, and would be classed as such in the event of any measure of armor protection being adopted.
Future developments will doubtless lie in the direction of improved machinery installations with a view to increasing the radius of action. In this connection the salient features of the new German Diesel- engined warship Bremse merit particular attention. This vessel, although ostensibly designed for gunnery training purposes, embodies a number of details which strongly suggest that the internal-combustion-engined destroyer will appear in the not too distant future. The dimensions of the ship,318 ft. X31 ft. 2 in. with a draught j of 9 ft. 6 in., approximate closely to those of the British- destroyers of the “V” and “W” classes, built in the closing stages of the war, while the power of 27,000 s.hp. is identical with the designed output of these vessels. It should be noted that the machinery installation in the Bremse comprises 8 independent double-acting 2- stroke cycle 8-cylinder M.A.N. engines running at 600 r.p.m. and arranged in two groups driving the twin propeller shafts through Vulcan gearing. Apart from any augmentation of the power by increasing the revolutions, it would be possible to obtain upwards of 32,000 s.hp. by substituting 10-cylinder units for the present engines. This horsepower figure closely approaches modern practice as far as the British Navy is concerned, and when it is considered that an all-purposes maximum fuel consumption of 0.44 lb. per b.hp. per hour is claimed, the possibilities are obvious.
British Contract for Oil from Coal
Engineering, London, February 17.—It is announced that a contract for 12 months’ bulk supply of oil made from British coal has been placed by the Admiralty with Low-Temperature Carbonisation, Limited. This oil, which is a byproduct in the manufacture of smokeless fuel, is, we understand, to be supplied at a price which compares favorably with those for first-class bunker petroleum oils, and at a figure well below those which have obtained during the past few years. This step, in what must be regarded as the right direction, follows on investigations, which have been conducted by the company in co-operation with the Admiralty Engineering and Chemical Departments. As a result of this work, a final specification was prepared, and the first bulk consignment was delivered to H.M.S. Westminster, on December 5, 1932. Since that date trials at sea have shown that the new fuel is most satisfactory, one of the results being that the cruising radius of the vessel has been increased. No modifications of the ship’s equipment were necessary.
Various Notes
The new “arcform” hull design recently developed in England by Sir Joseph Isherwood is reported to give far higher propulsive efficiency, increased cubic capacity, better stability, increased strength, and larger dead-weight capacity.
The ice breaker Ymer, completing for the Swedish government at Malmo, is to have Diesel- electric drive of 8,100 s.hp., which will be the most powerful installation of the kind afloat.
AVIATION
ON 1932
Aero Digest, New York, February, 1933. —Hard times should be the signal for economy, but not even hard times should be accepted by a great nation as a high sign for letting its chief defensive equipment fall into such inferiority that if an enemy arose that nation might find itself unable to preserve its liberties and treasures. This country’s aviation is far from what it should be and naval aviation is not that part of it which has felt the hard times least. But in the circumstances the Bureau of Aeronautics has made a very creditable showing.
The fiscal year 1932 was one of rigid economies which, of course, we hope will prove to have been wise. Savings in naval aeronautics amounted to $3,541,103, 11 per cent of the year’s appropriations. The lessened expenditure for gasoline and oil, which were available at abnormally low costs, was about the only detail of this savings which did not react in actual decrease of defense power for the nation. The Bureau of Aeronautics has had to squeeze its pennies, but it has made them work. In the lighter-than-air branch the Akron was commissioned October 27, 1931. For 8 months she averaged over a 100 flight hours per month, during which progress was made in arrangements for handling planes on her. Production of helium has been increased and cheapened; a program of outlying mooring masts permitting extended work with the big ships is under way. Exclusive of balloons, 554 flights kept our lighter-than-air 2,633 hours aloft during the year. Such a “hard times” record for the navy’s lighter-than- air nobody will beat at like expense.
With heavier-than-air the Navy did as well. The 918 service planes of the Navy and Marine Corps and the Naval Reserve’s 162 were usefully busy, 588 service planes being with the active fleet, and 79 with the Marine Corps; 203 were used for training and only 48 for administration and experiment.
Progress included the development and service of faster scouting planes and faster fighters, the use of long-distance patrol planes based on tenders and the two fleet air bases (Coco Solo and Pearl Harbor), and increased operations by catapult- launched planes from cruisers and battleships. Nine new experimental planes were ordered and such modifications as experiment showed to be desirable were made in 6 previously-built experimental planes.
Acceptance tests at Anacostia were severe and effective, resulting in improvements and economies in building and maintenance. Naval specifications for engines now include 150-hour endurance tests; power output has been increased 10 per cent with the same piston displacement; the 2-row radial air-cooled engine is here; high-speed airplane development progresses though small appropriations (only $220,000) hamper it pitifully.
Patrol squadrons have been busy, marine squadrons operated afloat for the first time as units, the cold weather tests conducted by the U. S. S. Langley off NeW New England were valuable. Experiments with radio equipment, with non-corrosive steel, with carrier landings, with turntable powder catapults for battleship decks, with handling and towing of seaplanes, brought the adoption of several definite advances.
We need all this, and more, activity. The aircraft carriers Saratoga and Lexington, the experimental Langley, and the Ranger now building, will leave 55,200 tons to be built in the carrier class before we reach the position of 3.9 to Britain’s 5 and Japan’s 3, although our treaty rights permit us equality with Britain. Not even the building of flying decks on 25 per cent of allowed cruiser tonnage, however, would overcome our inferiority during the life of the treaty, which expires December 31, 1936.
The Octane Number
The Aeroplane, London, December, 14, 1932—The anti-knock value of any fuel is is assessed or graded in terms of “octane number.”
The “octane number” method of assessment is now generally accepted and herewith is a short explanation of it:
Petrol and gasoline are generic terms for the more volatile fuels, distilled from crude oil, for use in engines of the carburetor type. Petrols are known as hydro-carbon fuels—that is, they are composed of hydrogen and carbon in various proportions. In fact, a petrol consists of a number of differently arranged hydro-carbon groups, the predominating one usually characterizing the petrol. Some of these groups have pro-knock and some anti-knock tendencies.
Now, very briefly, the anti-knock value or octane number of a given type of petrol is found by running it in a knock-testing engine, which usually consists of a singlecylinder engine coupled to a synchronous motor, to keep its speed dead constant. The jacket surrounding the cylinder is kept at 100°C. if a “low-temperature” test is desired, or at 150°C. or 190 C. (by means of a liquid with a high boiling- point consisting of ethylene glycol and Water or ethylene glycol alone), if high- temperature” tests are contemplated.
By a combination of speed, ignition timing, throttle opening, compression ratio and jacket temperature the engine is run under detonating conditions the whole time. Therefore the fuel to be tested will be detonating during the whole test. The degree of detonation is then measured in relation to a standard fuel, known as a “reference fuel,” of pre-determined antiknock characteristics, which reference fuel also detonates in the engine. _
The importance of the reference fuel in such a test is obvious, and the search for suitable fuels for this purpose has been going on for some time. Two excellent con
stituents have been found, namely, isooctane and normal heptane. These are pure hydro-carbon compounds and therefore do not consist of the various groups contained in a petrol. They have “constant” qualities which is a very important point when considering a standard reference fuel. # _
Iso-octane is a very high anti-knock, above that of ordinary petrols. Heptane has definite pro-knock qualities, worse than normal petrols. The boiling points of these two constituents are constant and also very close to one another.
The octane number of a petrol is, numerically, the percentage by volume of iso-octane in a mixture of octane/heptane which matches the petrol tested, in “detonation” value. One hundred per cent iso-octane is equivalent to an octane number of 100. One hundred per cent heptane equals an octane number of 0. Therefore, if it takes 70 per cent octane in 30 per cent heptane to give the same reading as the petrol which is being tested in the knocktesting engine, that petrol would be said to have an octane number of 70.
The custom also is to quote the jacket temperature of the test engine, at which a particular octane number has been ascertained. This is very important, because most petrols show a drop in anti-knock value when operating in high temperature and under great pressure, as is the custom in air engines, particularly the air-cooled type, as compared with, say, those in an average motor-car engine. Therefore, to rate aviation fuels under equivalent conditions, they are tested with jacket temperatures on the test engine of about 150°C. or 190°C.
For instance, a fuel which has an octane number of 80 at 100°C. may drop 4 units and have only an octane number of 76 at 150°C. This is particularly the case with benzol mixtures and petrols produced by the “cracking” process. “Straight petrols containing tetra-ethyl lead only, generally
Some characteristics:
Standard displacement............. 13,800 tons
Length overall............................... 765 feet
Beam................................................. 90 feet
Draft................................................ 20 J feet
Speed............................................. 30 knots
show very little drop at high temperatures; in the region of 1 octane number. They have even been known to show a rise of one octane number or more, depending, of course, on the basic characteristics of the petrol.
Octane and heptane are exceedingly expensive to produce, so “sub-standard” reference fuels are used for routine testing. These consist of certain “cuts” of “straight” petrols which have known and fairly stable characteristics, and the octane numbers required are made up by the addition of benzene (a constituent of benzol) or tetraethyl lead. These “sub-standards” are carefully stored to avoid any changes in quality and they are periodically checked and tested against actual mixtures of octane and heptane.
[Note.—This is a portion of an interesting article on fuels for aviation engines. Lack of space prevents the inclusion of the complete article. Ed.]
Various Notes
United States
In announcing to the general commission of the disarmament conference at Geneva that the United States could not accept the British proposal for international control of civil aviation, Mr. Hugh S. Gibson, United States Ambassador to Belgium and delegate to the conference explained that the peculiar geographical conditions of the United States made international control of air lines impossible. Hisdeclaration caused something of a sensation at the session, it being regarded as a death-blow to the abolition of military fighting planes. The majority of the powers have refused to accept such a ban unless civil aviation were controlled internationally.
The United States has 1,100 commercial airplanes, Mr. Gibson said, which is more than all Europe combined, but only 78 of these could be converted to military use.
Progress in the development of “blind landing” devices has progressed to such an extent that Captain Hegenberger, (A.C.) U. S. Army, has made very successful landings at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, (Material Division, Air Corps Headquarters) flying solo in a completely hooded airplane.
Preference for American built aircraft engines abroad is further demonstrated by the announcement that 138 Wright aircraft engines have been exported since July 1 to various foreign countries in Asia, Europe, and South America. It is also reported that definite orders for 34 additional engines through export channels, have been received.
During 1932 Pan-American Airways added 5,400 miles of airways in forging new links to a network which now totals 25,500 miles. Checking of the records of the 107 air liners the company 1S flying discloses that 99.57 per cent of all trips on the line were completed on schedule for the year- Pan-American carried an average of 5,248 passengers a month, a number considerably larger than that of the important air systems oi Europe.
Although adverse business conditions and higher rates on domestic air mail cut the volume of air postal business in this country, PanAmerican reported that on its long haul lines d registered gains of 11 to 61 per cent, and that as a whole its air express business increased 36 per cent.
The new aircraft carrier U.S.S. Ranger rvas launched at Newport News, Virginia, on February 25.
The Ranger is expected to be commissioned
about May 1, 1934. She is the sixth ship of the U. S. Navy to bear her name.
Increase of limit of cost of the Ranger by $2,000,000 has been authorized by Congress.
Great Britain
Army, Navy and Air Force Gazette, January 26. —Each spring since 1926, the Royal Air Force has made a long distance flight across the African Continent, using aircraft stationed in Egypt on regular service. From 1926 to 1931 inclusive this annual exercise took the form of a flight from Cairo to the Cape and back. In 1932 the various routes to the Cape having been more or less well explored, new ground was selected, and four Fairey III. F machines of No. 14 Squadron, flew to East Africa, visiting Kenya, Tanganyika, and Uganda, and covering altogether some 8,000 miles. Plans are now approved for the flight of 1933. Five Fairey “Gordon” aircraft of No. 6
Squadron at Ismailia are to make a tour of Northern and Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland. They will be away from their station from March 31 to June 13, and in the direct flights between the principal centers will cover over 9,000 miles. But the actual mileage will be much higher owing to the number of local flights which will be made, and opportunities which will be taken of cooperation with the local military forces at Broken Hill, Salisbury, and Chileka.
In the Aeronautical Research Committee’s report for 1931-32, it was revealed that the Marine Aircraft Experimental Establishment at Felixstowe was engaged upon an extensive investigation into the taking-off and alighting of seaplanes and flying boats. That there is still much to learn concerning the behavior of marine aircraft when on the water is evident when we recall the peculiar action of the 1931 supermarine Schneider trophy twin-float seaplane during its preliminary trials. It was found impossible at first to get the machine off the water because at an early stage of the take-off run it swung violently to port, in spite of a full starboard rudder. The difficulty was eventually overcome by increasing the diameter of the air screw from 8 ft. 6 in. to 9 ft. 1.5 in., although why a difference of 7.5 in. in the diameter of the air screw should make all the difference between total failure and success in getting off the water is not, we believe, even yet fully understood.
Great Britain won the world’s non-stop longdistance air record in February when two officers of the Royal Air Force, Squadron Leader Oswald R. Gayford and Flight Lieutenant Gilbert E. Nicholetts, landed at Walvis Bay, 770 miles from Capetown after a flight of 5,340 miles from Cran-
ell, England. . „ , . ,
The airplane used was a specially designed, ngle engine (Napier) Fairey monop ane. The lel capacity was in excess of 1,000 gallons. The lachine was equipped with a “robot” pilot which inctioned very satisfactorily when in use.
Great Britain thus became the holder of the iree most important world’s aviation records; lose for distance, altitude, and speed.
The Committee of the Royal Aero Club has unanimously awarded the Britannia trophy for 1932 to Mr. Cyril Frank Uwins, who, on September 16, 1932, put up the world’s height record to 13 404 m. (43,976 ft.) in a Vickers Vespa biplane modified by the Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd., and fitted with a Bristol Pegasus engine.
According to the January Navy List the following ships in home waters, other than aircraft carriers, are equipped with catapults and carry aeroplanes:— Valiant (one Fairey III.F), York and Dorsetshire (each one Hawker Osprey) and Exeter (two Hawker Ospreys).
On foreign stations the following ships are equipped as follows:—
Mediterranean:—London, Shropshire, and Sussex (each one Fairey III.F).
West Indies -.—Norfolk (one Fairey III.F).
East Indies:—Emerald and Enterprise (each one Fairey Flycatcher).
China:—Cornwall, Cumberland, Kent, and Suffolk (each one Fairey Flycatcher).
All British catapults at present in use apply their loads to points on the fuselage, a method which allows either seaplanes or landplanes to be catapulted.
France
The Paris Admiralty has arrived at the conclusion that unprotected light cruisers are too expensive to be worth building. Scouting duties are henceforth to be performed by fast contretor- pilleurs of the Tartu class and by seaplanes acting in close co-operation—a branch of training that is being organized on experimental, progressive lines both in the Mediterranean and in the Channel. The Marine Francaise may be said to have an adequate number of scouting superdestroyers in her 30 units of 2,400—2,700 tons, but, on the other hand she lacks yet seaplanes of the size and air and sea worthiness needed for bona fide reconnoitering work in ordinary weather. This want is shortly to be filled. Urgent Admiralty instructions are pressing forward the construction of Short seaplanes of British design (improved Calcuttas) at the H&vre Breguet works, and other types.
After a 14-hour flight of 1,962 miles across the South Atlantic from St. Louis, Senegal, Africa, Jean Mermoz, French flier, landed his trimotored monoplane, Arc-en-Ciel (Rainbow), at Natal, Brazil, on January 16, and continued on to Rio de Janeiro the following day. The plane left Istres, France, January 12. Six passengers, including Rene Couzinet, builder of the plane, accompanied Mermoz on the flight, which was made primarily to test the ship’s efficiency for transoceanic airmail service. It was Mermoz’s second flight across the South Atlantic.
The following is the itinery of the Arc-en-Ciel from Marseilles to Rio:—
2,633 miles 375 miles 2,000 miles 1,431 miles
16 hrs. 30 min. 3 hrs. 35 min. 14 hrs. 27 min. 9 hrs. 45 min.
Jan.12-13 Jan.13 Jan. 16 Jan.17
Istres—Port Etienne # Port Etienne—St. Louis St. Louis—Natal Natal—Rio de Janeiro
A feature of the Arc-en-Ciel is that it is made entirely of wood. Although the Air Ministry has lately ordered 70 Breguet steel-made multiplaces de combat (that are true air battle cruisers), there is among experts a strong movement for a return to wood, or at least to mixed methods of construction.
The French Air Ministry is having trouble with parachutes and the latest tests made at Villacoublay do not inspire confidence in French life-saving devices.
For some years, a parachute competition has been making interrupted progress in France, and in May last the technical services proposed to place orders for 2,500 parachutes of the type which had shown itself to be the best in this competition. M. Painleve, the Air Minister, refused to sanction this order because it was found that the competition had not been held according to regulations and that certain irregularities had been brought to his notice. He stipulated that no orders should be placed until the chosen parachutes were resubmitted to the essais d’homologation.
Recently three parachutes of the type classed first in the competition, and therefore of the type which would have been issued to the forces atrien- nes, were tested at Villacoublay and two of the chutes ripped up in delayed drops, presumably with dummies attached.
Reserve training in France is done, as in Great Britain, by civil organizations and the latest allotment of contracts for the ensuing year is divided among four companies. The Caudron firm will operate schools at Bordeaux, Lyons, and Marseilles; the Societe Franjaise d’Aviation, the schools at Angers and Douai; the Lorraine- Hanriot Company, the schools at Orly and Nancy; and the Compagnie Aerienne Franfaise, the centers at Algiers and Casablanca.
The credits for reserve training have been reduced from 12,000,000 to 8,000,000 francs and the whole system is now being investigated to determine the most efficient and at the same time most economical system of training without making too big a reduction in the number of reservists to be trained.
Japan
Defense of Tokyo against attacks from the air will be made the basis of special drills on a large scale in the capital this spring, following the example of Osaka and other large cities of the country. Plans have been under discussion for several years and army officers have been working out a program for this type of drill for the civilian population.
Defense of Tokyo will be through airplane detecting audiphones, long-range guns, and long- range machine guns, which will be distributed in all parts of the city and operated on the roofs of tall buildings. Special squads will be organized for relief work and the fire brigade will be mobilized against bombs, poison gas, and the outbreak of fire.
According to the War Office, anti-aircraft defense of Tokyo has been studied for some time but actual drills have been delayed for several reasons- The Army is prepared to give every assistance in making the defense a success, but they say this is impossible unless the lighting system is effectively controlled.
The Japanese government has requested the French Air Minister to send to Japan a technical aviation mission to comprise two engineer officers, a number of military test pilots, and an armament officer—the mission, with the exception of the armament officer, to remain in Japan for one year.
Germany
The North German Lloyd steamship Westfalen has demonstrated her capacity to serve as a floating island base in the South Atlantic for airplanes of the German Lufthansa Company, linking the three continents of Europe, Africa, and South America.
Recently the Westfalen, anchored in the lower Weser near Bremerhaven, shot from her huge catapult the Dornier-Wal hydroplane Monsun, and subsequently picked up the flying boat by means of her so-called towing sail and crane.
The Lufthansa Company for several years has sent mail planes from catapults aboard the liners Bremen and Europa, but the catapult of the Westfalen is much larger than either of those on the other North German Lloyd ships, being able to discharge a machine weighing 17 tons, as against their limit of 3.5 tons. Propelled by compressed air having a driving force of 160 atmospheres (equivalent to about 235 pounds to the square inch), an airplane can be shot out from the Westfalen with a speed of 150 kilometers (93 miles) an hour.
Equally simple is the means by which the steamship brings the plane on board again. The plane alights on a “floating platform” in the shape of a huge sail suspended from the ship’s quarter-deck and then is hauled aboard by a large crane located near the stem. The plane is then brought along a track to the catapult, situated forward in the liner.