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........................................................ 1639
How Not to Improve Relations—The American Navy and Foreign Advice—Sniping at the Navy—Assistant Secretary Roosevelt Speaks —Brief Notes.
Great Britain............................................................................................. 1643
A Former Premier’s View—An Assertion—A New Type of Sloop— Cruiser Restrictions—Fifty Cruisers—A Curious Commentary—
British Oil Fuel—King George V Graving Dock—Brief Notes.
Fleet Changes—Destroyers—Brief Notes.
Brief Notes.
Italy. .:............................................................................................................ 1650
Brief Notes.
Building Plans—A Treaty Navy—Military Loan Plans—Fleet Reviews—No Naval Race—Brief Notes.
Merchant Marine.......................................................................................... 1653
Faster Service—Brief Notes.
Navy Planes Set Record—International Balloon Race—Sea Duty For Airship Pilots—Balbo Speaks—Berlin Prepares—Air Services Grow—Brief Notes.
1638
UNITED STATES
How Not to Improve American Relations
Tribune, Chicago, August 31.—Count Soyeshima, former member of the House of Peers and a delegate to the Institute of Pacific Relations lately held at Banff, declares that “the growth of the United States Navy is becoming a menace to the peace of the world.”
The American Navy has been steadily losing relative position since the great sacrifices of the Washington conference, and the recent building plans will not redress the balance before the expiration of the London treaty. Japan has been building steadily and has forged ahead in cruiser and other auxiliary strength at a pace which will give her by the close of the treaty period a cruiser ratio of 12 to our 10 unless we make up for lost time and build up to our treaty rights. At this moment large increases in appropriations have been proposed by the Japanese Army and Navy Departments.
But this is only a part of the picture. As Usual Japanese discussion of our naval relations studiously ignores the element of naval bases, a decisive element. At Wash- nigton, intending to give Japan proof of °ur pacific intentions, we surrendered the right to strengthen the defenses of the Philippines and to fortify any base from which operations in Japanese waters could he maintained. This was no mere gesture hut decisive evidence of our willingness to ]Uake war upon the Japanese homeland ^possible. It has failed to impress Count Soyeshima and other Japanese leaders, or rather it is ignored in a persistent effort to Slve a wrong impression of the situation in *he Pacific and of the policy of the United States.
Everyone in both countries who wishes t° cultivate peace and good feeling will re- Sfet this effort. It seriously obstructs the establishment of the confidence and fairness upon which good relations between our countries depend. To persist in it will certainly strengthen a belief among Americans that the Japanese, at least Japanese leaders of thought and action, do not really wish peace with the United States, save upon terms which they would be well advised to recognize the United States need not and will not tolerate.
What these terms are may be suggested by other remarks of Count Soyeshima. He said at Ottawa: “The fact that her Atlantic fleet is in the Pacific is causing ill feeling in Japan.” It ought to be clear to any sane mind that the United States has as much right to keep her fleet in the Pacific as Japan. No one in the United States thinks it a cause of ill feeling that Japan keeps her fleet in the Pacific or expects her to remove it to the Atlantic or the Indian Ocean in order to avoid ill feeling.
Count Soyeshima and other Japanese public men who express similar views of Japanese-American relations seem to have an inadequate appreciation of the American spirit and resources. Certainly the United States desires sincerely to keep the peace of the Pacific and to cultivate and maintain friendly relations with Japan. But such relations will not survive the pressure of unreasonable demands.
The American Navy—And Foreign Advice
Herald, Washington, September 18.— According to a London dispatch, Sir John Simon, the British Minister for Foreign Affairs, is much displeased at President Roosevelt’s decision to begin the building up of the American Navy to treaty strength—that is, to equality with the British Navy.
If Sir John’s expression of British displeasure in this regard fails to prove effective, the dispatch intimates that the British government will, with great reluctance, be compelled to build up their navies, too.
In voicing these sentiments, the astute
Sir John runs true to British as well as to Japanese form. The British, like the Japanese, willingly enter into treaties with the United States to limit and reduce armaments for two reasons:
(1) Because the diplomats of Great Britain and Japan never fail to bamboozle American diplomats into subjecting the American Navy to most of the limitation and reduction for which these treaties provide.
(2) Because the British and Japanese governments have learned by experience that, having ratified a treaty of limitation and reduction, the United States will not build up to treaty strength.
This is exactly what happened after the Washington treaty of 1922 and after the London treaty of 1930—Great Britain and Japan continued to build within treaty limits, but the United States failed to build within treaty limits.
This wisdom on the part of the British and the Japanese, and this folly on the part of the United States were the subject of one of the last addresses made by the late Admiral Moffett, who was lost when the U. S. S. Akron was destroyed in a storm off the New Jersey coast.
Speaking at the annual dinner of the Naval Academy Graduates Association of New York a short time before his death, upon “The Decadence of the United States Navy,” Admiral Moffett said:
Since the administration of President Wilson, our Navy has progressively declined. He realized that in order to maintain his foreign policy the nation must have adequate force behind it. He therefore demanded for the United States a Navy inferior to none.
After his conference in Europe he cabled for such a Navy and the Congress and the American people gave it to him, only to have it or the major part of it destroyed after 1922 when the United States was hoodwinked and bamboozled into limiting the only category in which it was strongest.
Uncle Sam lost everything but his shirt tail when he signed the Washington treaty.
We scrapped 842,000 tons; Great Britain, 448,000; Japan, 193,000; France and Italy, none.
We have done almost no building as compared with the other signatories to the Washington treaty since 1922, after we destroyed most of the naval power we had.
Japan has laid down, or appropriated for, 164 vessels, totaling 410,000 tons; Great Britain, 148 ships, including two battleships, totaling 470,000 tons. _
In the meantime, the United States, faced with the growing antagonism of the world, has appropriated for the niggardly total of 40 ships of 197,000 tons.
That is less than one-fourth of the building done by Japan and a little more than one-fourth done by England.
The British and the Japanese programs have comprised practically every class of combatant ship, and have maintained their navies very nearly up to the full treaty strength.
In order to reach treaty strength by December, 1936, the United States will have to build 119 vessels; Great Britain 66; and Japan 7.
Not only have we failed to build ships, but the vessels we have are all undermanned, while Great Britain has more vessels than the United States in each category in full commission, and Japan’s categories are all practically built up to treaty limits and are fully manned. In other words, the United States Navy is 75 per cent manned; Great Britain’s is 90 per cent manned; and Japan’s is 100 per cent manned!
These were almost the last words of the American admiral who met a hero’s death when the Akron was destroyed. Everyone of these words is true and their truth is known to no Britisher better than Sit John Simon, the British Minister for Foreign Affairs.
In the light of this record, the protest of the British Minister for Foreign Affairs against President Roosevelt’s decision to begin the building up of the American Navy is an insult to the intelligence of the American people and reveals his contempt for what he believes to be their complete gullibility.
Sniping at the Navy
Evening Star, Washington, September 19.—Why is it that whenever the United States, most peacefully inclined nation on the earth, undertakes to build up its Navy to proportions considered adequate f°r
national defense foreign propaganda mills immediately turn out a grist of warnings that world peace is endangered and a naval building race is about to begin? Here in America the news that Great Britain, Japan, France, and Italy are going ahead with naval construction creates little stir, except among the ardent pacifists and among those who believe that the United States is sacrificing its safety by lagging behind. The foreign attitude toward the American Navy—and the American Merchant Marine—is one of suspicion, distrust, and open dislike.
The most recent rumor, which has not yet been authenticated in official quarters, but which, nevertheless, seems to have some basis, is that Britain and France are urging, or are about to urge, the United States government to suspend its new naval building program in the interests of the Geneva disarmament conference. A modification of this rumor is to the effect that the plea to American officials will be to abandon the four 10,000-ton, 6-inch- gun cruisers which this country has included in the building program. The least that can be said, if the rumored protests against the American naval program are really intended, is that the protests will come with ill grace. Great Britain, France, nor Japan has scrupled to go ahead with naval building and with the maintenance of other arms of defense, while the United States has sought by example to persuade the other nations to look with favor on disarmament.
The only answer to proposals that the United States halt or modify its naval building program should be a firm refusal to comply with such requests. Under the London Naval Treaty the United States is accorded the right to a Navy second to none, with the full understanding that such a Navy is needed for national defense. It is the fault of Congress and the Executive in the past if the Navy has been allowed to drop to second and almost to third place—certainly to third place in some categories of naval vessels. The proposal that this country should continue to neglect its Navy in the face of what the rest of the world is doing is ridiculous.
At the time of the London conference, and at the Washington conference, too, the question of the tonnage of cruisers was to the fore, with the British particularly stressing the need of keeping down the tonnage of this kind of naval vessel. The American naval officers insisted that the larger cruisers, with a wide sailing radius, were needed by this country because of the lack of American naval bases in waters away from these coasts. Britain, on the other hand, possesses naval bases in every part of the world and therefore could care for its defense with the smaller type of vessel. It would seem idle to bring this question to the fore again.
Assistant Secretary Roosevelt Speaks
Herald Tribune, New York, September 20.—Earnest protests from naval officials against efforts ascribed to the British government to modify that part of the new American naval building program dealing with four projected 6-inch-gun cruisers were indicated today to have solidified administration opinion in opposition to the proposal. It is not impossible, however, that naval questions may be discussed at the World Disarmament Conference, which resumes at Geneva next Monday.
Although no official comment was forthcoming on London reports of British suggestions concerning the building program here, Henry L. Roosevelt, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, in a nation-wide radio broadcast on Sept. 19 rebuked criticism of the present building policy:
One hears criticism of our present naval building policy. We are told that it is of paramount importance to the success of the limitation of arms conference at Geneva to postpone the building of certain of the projected ships. We are warned that our building program might set a bad example to the other naval powers and might encourage another naval race. How unjustified is this assertion can be seen from the fact that by 1936, when our new program is completed, we shall still be 101 vessels short of our authorized strength, Great Britain will be 64 ships short and Japan will have in commission its full quota.
Colonel Roosevelt pointed out that under the provisions of the Washington and London Naval Treaty, the United States is allowed a Navy second to none in strength. “This is the answer to what constitutes an adequate Navy for the United States,” he said.
Mr. Roosevelt called for a Navy able not only to protect American shores, but to protect its commerce, the Panama Canal, and outlying possessions and to act as the first line of defense against air raids.
Mr. Roosevelt said:
I wish to lay especial emphasis upon the value of the Navy as a protection against air raids because of the absurd efforts which have been made to persuade the country that the advent of air power has made navies obsolete.
The truth is exactly opposite. The new menace from the air makes our Navy more indispensable than ever. This is true because any serious air attack against us must first come in ships to within striking distance of our coast—certainly to within a thousand miles. Only the Navy can defeat or drive off the ships which might bring the planes, together with their large supplies of fuel, bombs, etc., and if the Navy does this we will be spared the devastation of air raids.
There is a popular misconception that airplanes can fly across the ocean with a war load of bombs and other fighting equipment. This is not now possible nor ever probable in the near future. In order to cross the ocean by air a plane must strip itself of the war load and carry gasoline in its place.
During the ten years since the Washington treaty—a period of our greatest national prosperity—we failed to maintain our allotted position in sea power while other nations, less prosperous, were forging ahead with a well-defined building program.
During the period extending from the Washington conference to March 4, 1933, the United States, the British Empire, and Japan each laid down its allowed quota of 8-inch-gun cruisers, and, in addition, Japan and the United States each laid down one aircraft carrier. During the same period, the United States dropped far behind Japan and the British Empire in the replacement of ships that became over-age. Japan laid down 6 light cruisers, 57 destroyers and 40 submarines, a total of 103 replacements, and now has projected 36 others which will give her a full treaty strength navy of under-age ships at the expiration of the treaties in 1936.
The British Empire has laid down 13 light cruisers, 45 destroyers, and 30 submarines, a total of 88 replacements, and now has 28 others projected. She has pursued a uniform policy of laying down a certain number of ships each year, so she also will have a navy of approximately full treaty strength in 1936.
The United States, during the same period started construction on only 8 destroyers and 6 submarines as replacement for over-age vessels.
Brief Notes
Secretary of the Navy Swanson will ask the next Congress to increase the Navy’s man power from 79,000 to 90,000 enlisted men, and to authorize a naval aircraft construction program of approximately 200 new ships.
The additional enlisted men will be required to man the 37 new vessels in the Navy’s construction program.
The 10,000-ton cruiser Minneapolis was launched at the Philadelphia Navy Yard on September 6. The Minneapolis is the thirteenth of 18 heavy cruisers permitted this country under the Washington and London Naval Treaties. The ship is expected to be completed and ready for commissioning next spring.
President Roosevelt, on September 7, mobilized the greatest naval force since the World War to protect American lives in Cuba.
Every naval and Coast Guard vessel on the Atlantic coast capable of fighting duty was ordered in readiness to proceed immediately to Cuban waters.
That night found 7 ships already at the island, or en route there; 14 vessels waiting at Key West, Fla., under steam, and 16 others at various points, making ready to leave at a moment’s notice. A regiment of 1,250 marines was in readiness at Quantico, Va.
Among other changes which are being investigated by a committee in the United States Navy Department at present is the possibility of amalgamating the Marine Corps with the line of the Navy. Whether anything will come of so far- reaching a proposal remains to be seen, and according to the Army and Navy Journal, of Washington, it is said with confidence that the change will never be made, and will never even be recommended by the Roosevelt Board, as it is recognized that the corps has certain important functions in peace and war which could not be adequately or efficiently performed under any other system.
With a threat from Great Britain that it would start a naval building race against the United States unless this country suspends the building of 10,000-ton cruisers, President Roosevelt decided to go through with the program.
The President was represented as cold on any Proposal that the United States Navy should be hamstrung further. He has determined that the $238,000,000 set aside from the public works fund for new construction shall be utilized at the earliest possible date.—(Fulton Lewis-Washington Herald.)
The storm of August 23 did a considerable amount of damage to navy yards and stations along the Atlantic seaboard. At the Naval Academy, by way of example, Farragut Field was inundated; and the waterextended inland well past the seaward side of Bancroft Hall. It is estimated that repairs to the Reina Mercedes dock alone ■will cost more than $30,000. To repair the damage at the various stations the public works administration has allotted $856,985 to the Navy. The bureau of Yards and Docks has additional funds m hand to bring the total available up to $939,590.
Congressman Fred A. Britten, ranking Republican on the House Naval Affairs Committee, stated in the Washington Herald recently that America must build up her naval defenses for Possible war. “Conditions are approaching what they were prior to 1914 and again America stands unprepared. America should take heed of the solemn warning by Australia’s former premier IWilliam Hughes] that preparedness is the price of liberty.”
On August 30 the Hearst newspapers published a signed editorial by William Randolph Uearst, entitled “Only Preparedness Will Prevent War,” and calling attention to Japan’s “permanent occupancy” of mid-Pacific islands which mrrn a “strategic wedge” between Hawaii and the Philippines, capable of being fortified into naval oases.
Mr. Hearst’s editorial was immediately repub- ushed in full in Japan, where it aroused “much comment, as well as considerable doubt,” in the words of Yasuo Fuwa, New York correspondent °f the Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun.
The Application of the trustees of the Webb Institute of Naval Architecture for the right to confer upon its graduates the degree of Bachelor of Science in naval architecture and marine engineering was approved last spring by the University of the State of New York, and the members of the class of 1933 received their degrees at the commencement exercises on June 8.
The Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, founded by William H. Webb, is located in the Bronx, New York City.
GREAT BRITAIN A Former Premier’s View
Examiner, San Francisco, September 3. —In an exclusive interview with Universal Service Former Premier William Hughes of Australia evidently sees war clouds, hanging over the Pacific, for he states:
I regard the position here in these days quite as serious as in the days preceding 1914.
Only a superior force, namely, the four power pact, prevents war in Europe. But there is no force here capable of keeping the peace.
Great Britain and Japan are desperately struggling for foreign markets. Both must sell goods abroad in order to obtain food.
But Japan’s cheap labor and depreciated exchange are flooding the world’s markets, and British manufacturers are unable to compete— yet they must retain these markets or consign millions of workers to an economic lazaret.
There is talk of shutting Japan out of markets. Japan talks retaliation. Conferences are being held, but they must fail.
The clash of interests in a vital struggle for food is a primeval urge which only brute force can deter. It is not only war between nations, but between ideals, spiritual and material, and between standards of living.
Any nation with great armed forces behind it should rather choose the risks of war than certainty of national oblivion.
Concerning Australia I must speak plainly.
If we want to hold Australia we must be prepared to defend Australia, and we know Australia was never so open to attack as she is now.
When Britain was mistress of the seas, our security was assured.
Recent events in the Pacific show that Australia must at least be prepared to hold her own until the British Navy arrives.
We must have an air force, submarines, and surface craft adequate to patrol our coast lines, and land forces and equipment commensurate to our needs and circumstances.
An Assertion
Examiner, San Francisco, September 1.—The London Daily Herald asserts that Japan is secretly building warships in excess of London treaty limits in addition to those planned under the second naval replenishment program.
Submarines are being built by a “mass production” system, with parts being stored at the Yokosuka and Kure bases “until needed” the Herald says.
New “sea wolves”—pocket destroyers—are being constructed. They displace 600 tons and have a speed of 40 knots, and are designed to be the most effective anti-submarine vessel afloat, the Herald states.
Such great secrecy surrounds construction of the destroyers, the newspaper adds, that huge screens have been erected around the slipways in which they lie and German naval experts employed in the shipyards are forbidden to approach the vessls, in which the comfort and health of the crews are to be sacrificed for efficiency.
The vessels are described as “torture chambers.” Conditions for the crews are declared to be unusually bad. When the time comes to assemble the submarines, the Herald continues, a new, fast process of electric welding, which has passed all tests satisfactorily, will be used.
A New Type of Sloop
Herald Tribune, New York, September 1, (by Harold E. Scarborough).—Active propaganda has commenced for the expansion of the British Navy both as regards those ships which are covered by the Washington and London Naval Treaties and other classes unlimited by the treaties.
Doubtless the building programs announced recently by the United States and Japan are responsible for the renewal of activity on the part of the big Navy advocates, but the fact cannot be overlooked that, as was pointed out in these dispatches at the time of the Ottawa conference, closer commercial relationships between the component parts of the British Empire also have played their part in stimulating the desire for increased sea power.
Within the last few weeks several conservative London newspapers have with unusual unanimity discovered, (1) that this country was badly served by the Washington and London treaties, but particularly by the latter; (2) that the Japanese and American activity makes it imperative that Britain should build new warships up to the maximum permitted by the London agreement, and, (3) that for commerce protection Britain ought to build a large fleet of so-called sloops which would be adequate to deal with any opposing warship of less than cruiser size.
The Admiralty’s technicians recently have been flirting with the idea of providing a fleet of small craft for commerce protection and are said to believe that they have solved the problem within the limits laid down for warships not limited by treaty. Article VIII of the London treaty permits unlimited construction of warships provided they conform to the following conditions: (1) they must not exceed 2,000 tons displacement; (2) their speed must not exceed 20 knots; (3) they must not mount guns of over 6.1 inches; (4) they must not carry torpedoes. The Admiralty’s answer to these restrictions is the “sloop.”
The specifications of these little commerce defense vessels remain a profound secret, although construction has already started on one of them. But the British naval writers have published some interesting details concerning the characteristics which such ships might reasonably be expected to exhibit. Thus it is forecast that by giving up any effort to provide destroyer speed, but by making sloops just fast enough to accompany the convoys> there can be produced coal-fired craft whose bunkers will provide sound protection against gunfire and torpedoes, which will mount at least four 6-inch guns in their fore and aft line, giving 4 to the broadsides, which will be fitted with elabo- ]ate submarine detecting and sound ranges apparatus, and which will carry a heavy armament of depth charges.
Inasmuch as the average destroyers and submarines of other navies do not carry 6-inch guns, it is suggested these sloops Wlll be able to stand up against any commerce raider less formidable than, say,
5,0- ton cruisers.
It seems probable that when Parliament ^assembles a determined effort will be made to secure increased appropriations 0r naval purposes, and with Parliament instituted as it is at present there seems at least an even chance such a move will
succeed.
bruiser Restrictions
Naval and Military Record, Plymouth, ^gust 16.—When the London Naval reaty comes up for revision in 1936 it is 0 be expected that there will be a demand °u the part of Great Britain for a very con- Slderable widening of the restrictions upon Cruiser tonnage which were submitted to ynder the aegis of a Socialist government 1936. Under Article 20 (paragraph d) * the treaty we are pledged not to exceed L000 tons for cruiser construction during _ Period over which the agreement remains in force, notwithstanding the fact . t such a very large proportion of our ^tent cruiser tonnage passes the effec- *Ve a2e limit during this time. In contrast, be United States took powers to add 150,9 tons of new cruisers to her fleet. Of c°urse, no useful purpose can now be Sgrved by criticizing the amicable acquiescence of our statesmen, who appeared ^hypnotize the Admiralty of the day into abandoning their “irreducible minimum” ? 10 cruisers and accepting 50 instead.
be blunder has been made, and nothing j^mains but for this country to go on puoring her signature until the opportu- ftlty arises to retrieve the folly.
, Meanwhile it is rather interesting to re- Vlew the program which has been imposed upon the Admiralty by this London treaty restriction. We shall either have built or laid down between 1930-36 nine cruisers of 7,000 tons and 5 of 5,450 tons. All these will be 6-inch-gun ships. The first-mentioned batch may be regarded as quite large enough to undertake any legitimate cruiser functions. The smaller class will necessarily suffer from a limited sea-keeping radius, a serious disability in the case of vessels required primarily for trade protection. The other big naval powers are building larger cruisers in every case. America is sticking to the 10,000-ton 8- in.-gun type. Japan is turning out cruisers of 8,500 tons, which appear to be designed to carry a considerable number of aircraft. France is building the Gloire class, vessels of 7,600 tons, carrying one more 6-in. gun than our Leander type. Italy is building cruisers of 6,791 tons, although she is also constructing a considerably smaller class suited to her more limited strategical outlook. It is therefore clear that, owing to the necessity to obtain numbers within a totally inadequate tonnage “ratio,” we are building cruisers smaller than those of the other great powers, although we are so obviously the one sea power which needs ships of the widest possible radius of action.
Fifty Cruisers
Army, Navy and Air Force Gazette, London, August 31.—A correspondent inquires of us whether the strength of the Royal Navy in cruisers has yet been brought down to the total of 50 put forward by the Admiralty at the London conference held three and a half years ago. The answer is that we are over that number by 3, but under it if we count only ships really effective. There were 52 cruisers on the effective list at the beginning of 1933, and the Leander has since been completed. But the suggested figure of 50 was surrounded by two qualifications, both of vital importance, but neither of which has been nor can be fulfilled. The first was that there should be a general agreement to reduce, and that sacrifices in this country should be co-related to those elsewhere. There has been no agreement to reduce, consequently the offer of Great Britain to be content with 50 cruisers becomes null and void. The second was that we should have 50 effective ships for service at the time the treaty expired in 1936, but owing to reduced and postponed shipbuilding, we cannot have this. The treaty adopted an age limit of 16 years for cruisers built prior to 1919. At the present moment, although 53 cruisers are nominally effective, 14 of them are overage, as 3 were completed in 1915, and thus reached their limit in 1931; 6 more were completed in 1916 and thus reached the limit in 1932; and 5 more were completed up to July, 1917, and have thus reached the limit during the past 7 months. Another ship, the Curlew, joins the list of over-age vessels before the end of the year. So at present, therefore, although other countries have not responded to the gesture of the late government in 1930, the result of the policy of the latter has left us now with 39 cruisers and 14 old crocks.
A Curious Commentary
Army, Navy and Air Force Gazette, London, August 17.—The completion by the British firm of Yarrow & Co., Ltd., of the first of the 5 destroyers they are building for the Portuguese Navy, the Vouga, forms a curious commentary on the situation created by the London treaty of 1930. The Vouga is a ship of 1,600 tons and 36 knots. The latest destroyers completed for the Royal Navy are of 1,375 tons and 35| knots. The limit of tonnage for destroyers fixed in the London treaty is 1,500; and for flotilla leaders (16 per cent of the whole), 1,850 tons. The builders could not provide a destroyer of 1,600 tons for the Royal Navy, but they can build one for Portugal, because that country did not subscribe to the treaty. Yugoslavia recently obtained from Yarrow’s a fine flotilla leader of 2,400 tons and 37 knots, that is, 550 tons more than the limit which is fixed for any British flotilla leader. Nor is this an isolated case. France has at this moment a group of 6 flotilla leaders under construction, laid down a year and more after the London treaty was signed, which are to be of 2,569 tons and 37 knots. Their armament will consist of five 5.5-in. guns, whereas the limit of caliber specified in the treaty is 5.1 in. France refused to sign Part III of the treaty, which defines the categories of lighter craft. But can there be any plainer evidence that our voluntary sacrifice in this respect has been of no avail in the world at large? Other countries continue to build whatever craft they need for their own purposes, irrespective of the artificial and arbitrary limitations adopted ostensibly in the cause of disarmament.
British Oil Fuel
Naval and Military Record, Plymouth, August 16.—The efforts which are being made to create a sympathetic interest in the minds of the Admiralty on the subject of warship fuel from British coal may be quite legitimate propaganda, but the implication of it amounts to the reductio ad ab- surdum. For reasons which should be sufficiently self-evident, the Admiralty are already keenly interested in the matter. A few days ago the member for Spennymore inquired in the House of Commons as to the progress in the Navy of experiments with fuel produced by low temperature carbonization and hydrogenation of coal, and this question elicited some interesting figures. In 1929 only 20 tons of such fuel was ordered. In 1930 the amount was 540 tons. Apparently the results were not altogether encouraging, for in the following year the quantity ordered was only 224 tons. But in 1932 the figures increased to 570 tons, and the contracts already placed for the current financial year amount to 3,025 tons. The Civil Lord of the Admiralty further stated that offers of oil of suitable quality will always be considered “provided the price is satisfactory.”
“King George V Graving Dock”
The Shipbuilder and Marine Engineer, London, August 1933.—One of the largest
Feet
1,200
135
165
100
45
43
41
41
23
16
Inches
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
, ®ngth, effective...............................
jhdth at entrance..............................
idth at coping level............................
eight above works datum
Coping...............................................
T°p of blocks.....................................
Sill level.............................................
Floor level at center line...................
Apron.................................................
Foundation of side walls...................
Underside of floor at center line.
graving docks in the world (and in some Aspects the largest) was formally opened at Millbrook, Southampton, on July 26 by H. M. The King.
This new dock, which is No. 7 of the Southampton dry-dock system, forms Part of a general scheme of new and independent port works detached from the °lder docks and known as the Southampton Dock Extensions. The extension scheme, undertaken by the Southern Railway Company at an estimated cost of £13,000,000, has had the assistance of the development (Loan Guarantees and Grants) Act, 1929. The work on the extensions, begun in 1927 and now nearing completion, has presented a number of difficult problems, the solution of which has involved some remarkably fine feats °f engineering.
The new dry dock has been designed to accommodate the largest vessels afloat 0r contemplated, even up to the 100,000- t°n ships which have been proposed in Certain quarters, although it may be assumed that it is primarily intended to hold the new 73,000-ton Cunard liner when she ls completed.
The principal dimensions of the dock are as follows:
With the exception of the sills, the cais- S°n stops, the flights of steps to the bottom ° the dock, and the coping of the walls at he entrance—all of which items are of
Shap granite—the dock may be said to be of concrete throughout. The usual high altars have been dispensed with, as experience has shown that large vessels dock on 3 lines of blocks without the need for side shores. The side walls of the dock have a batter of 1 in 4, and are protected by massive vertical piers spaced at intervals of 200 ft. These piers are fendered for a depth of about 10 ft. below the coping level with English elm.
Brief Notes
A substantial addition to the British Navy, including new cruisers, destroyers, and submarines, is being planned by the Admiralty, it became known today. The program is intended to be included in the next budget.
Great Britain’s decision to build more ships is a sequel to the heavy naval building programs recently undertaken by Japan, the United States, France, and Italy.
It is understood that the British program will not be complete before 1936, and for that reason it will be outside the London Naval Treaty.— Japan Advertiser.
The promotion in the midsummer list of two captains, R.N.R., and one captain, R.N.V.R., to the rank of commodore, 2nd class, fulfils a promise made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty during the debate on the navy estimates. The rank is not new in either force, but has not been awarded regularly in late years.
The Sandhurst is the only destroyer depot-ship in seagoing commission, as the others were all withdrawn in 1926 for reasons of economy, the destroyers being made directly dependent on the dockyards.
The battleship Resolution, Captain C. E. Turle, D.S.O., on recommissioning early next month for further service in the First Battle Squadron, Mediterranean Fleet, will be manned from Portsmouth instead of from Devonport as hitherto. This is one of a number of changes in manning ports decided upon in March last to ease some of the drafting difficulties to which reference was made during the navy estimates debates. Lord Stanley, the Parliamentary Secretary, said he could assure the House that “drafting is one of the most difficult problems which the Admiralty has to face. It is dependent on so many human factors and so many varying conditions.”
The names were announced on August 18 1913—20 years ago—of the first officers entered
as naval cadets at Osborne to be selected to specialize in engineering. There were 17 lieutenants and sub-lieutenants in this list, drawn from the first two batches entered under the Selbome- Fisher system of common entry and education. They were appointed to the R.N. College, Greenwich, for the course beginning on October 1.
Out of the 17 in this group 10 are still on the active list. All are commanders (E).
The London Daily Herald recently printed a dispatch from Canberra, Australia, stating that as a result of events in Europe and especially in the East, Sir George Pearce, Australian Minister of Defense, is apprehensive of dangers in Australia’s position.
Sir George is expected to take important steps to strengthen defenses as soon as Parliament reassembles next month. The first step would be granting funds to improve and reorganize the Australian military and naval air force and fortifications along the coast, with the probability of Gladstone, Queensland, being made into a huge naval base.
H.M.S. Seahorse is expected to be completed on September 29, and H.S.M. Starfish on October 27, both at Chatham Dockyard. Orders have been issued for them to join the 6th Flotilla at Portland. These two submarines of the 1930 program are of similar type to the Swordfish and Sturgeon, of the previous year, and represent a smaller design of 640-ton vessels, each armed with a 3-in. gun, as compared with the 1,475-ton vessels, each armed with a 4-in. gun, of earlier post-war programs. The type is being continued in the Shark and Sea Lion, of the 1931 program, which were not laid down until May and June last; and in the Salmon, of the 1932 program, which has just been begun at Birkenhead by Cammell Laird and Co., Ltd.
FRANCE
Fleet Changes
Naval and Military Record, Plymouth, August 30, (by J. B. Gautreau).—A series of changes are shortly to take place in the composition of the Northern and Southern Squadrons. The Brest Deuxieme Escadre is at last to get rid of the 12 Japanese 700- ton torpilleurs d’escadre of the Annamite class (1917), which are to be placed in the reserve and eventually to serve as patrol boats. It will receive instead bona fide destroyers of over 30-knot sea speed. By the end of the present year it will include 10
super-destroyers of 2,400-2,600 tons, namely, Lion, Bison, Vauban, Maille Breze, Kersaint, Vauquelin, Milan, Eper- vier (the last two being the fastest destroyers in the world with 44.5 maximum speed). In addition there will be four 1,400-ton destroyers, viz., Bourrasque, Adroit, Orage, Ouragan, which mount four 5.2-inch guns and are good for 32-34 knots. The Lamotte-Picquet is to be replaced as flagship by the Duguay-Trouin, a sister- ship, which has undergone a thorough refection in Brest Arsenal and carried out last week successful trials at 32.5 knots. The squadron speed is well over 30 knots. Here resides its superiority over the German fleet, which includes the powerful
14,0- ton Deutschland, good for 29-30 knots, the four 33-35-knot 6,000-ton cruisers Konigsberg, Karlsruhe, Koln, and Leipzig, and 12 torpedo boats of 800-1,200 tons of nominally 34 knots and good for even more than that in fair weather. In truth, that superiority means only the faculty of running away. In the matter of fighting strength the Germans are immensely superior.
No important change is, for the present, projected or even possible (for the lack of new ships) in the composition of the Premiere Escadre under Admiral Dubois. Battleships are yet to form its backbone, whereas cruisers and destroyers constitute the Italian fleet in full commission, the battleships (four in number) being in the reserve. The Lorraine (flagship), Jean Bart, Courbet, and Paris, of 24,000 tons and 18-20 knots, make up the corps de bataille. In one year hence they will be re-enforced by the Bretagne and Provence, now reconstructing, and that are then expected to be good for 22-23 knots. The
10,0- ton Dupleix will join in the Mediterranean the flag of Rear Admiral Abrial who will have under his command the cruisers hereafter; Foch (flagship), Dupleix, Duquesne, Tourville, Colbert. The SuJJren is to undergo extensive refection.
Although the Tourville is nominally the fastest French cruiser (36.3 knots), she was, in the recent annual speed test under service conditions, beaten by the Foch (which is nominally a 33-knot ship). The 43-knot super-destroyer Cassard, of 2,500 tons, is to join the Mediterranean flotillas which will then include 10 super-destroyers and 26 destroyers. The Premiere Escadre will be numerically much inferior to the ensemble of the Italian forces, but Bizerta and Corsica, points d’appui which are being gradually organized for offense, constitute a telling asset on the French side.
Destroyers
Naval and Military Record, Plymouth, August 23, (by J. B. Gautreau).—The destroyer is anew everywhere in favor, despite the rather secondary role that type of warship played during the war. A vast and promising field of action is opening for destroyers under the new conditions of the war game, either for independent work 0r for auxiliary service with the cruiser force. Great Britain is building excellent, strengthened destroyers of 1,400 tons at the rate of 8 per year; America is ordering 20 destroyers of 1,500 to 1,800 tons, Italy has decided on the construction of ultrarapid and robust destroyers of 1,450 tons at the rate of 4 per year. Not only France is, temporarily, giving up destroyer construction, but her destroyer force will very shortly be reduced by the discarding of some 30 destroyers (or torpilleurs d’escadre) that are from 15 to 20 years old, namely, the Bisson series, the 10 former-German Torpedo-booten that are worn out, the 12 former Japanese of the Annamite class that are on their last legs and only good for 22 knots, and the four Aventurier. Many of these vessels are not worth their upkeep. All of them are too slow for torpedo work. The best of them, however, would find a Useful scope of utilization as patrolling °r convoying vessels, and also for submarine hunting duties. Hence the official hesitation in doing altogether away with them.
Financial difficulties account for the slump in French destroyer progress, at least, in a large measure. But there is also the fact that some divergence of views prevails in high quarters as to the ideal destroyer policy. While the 2,500-ton super-destroyers (of which 30 are either in service or building) are unanimously considered as a good investment, the demand is for greater all-round robustness and endurance, even at the expense of paper qualities. Their raison d’etre is not to shine in trial speed competitions, but to be reliable instruments de combat, under all conditions, and to be proof against wear and tear for years on end. To obtain this, specialized dockyards are necessary—no makeshift handwork. The super-destroyer type has therefore come to stay. French officers have in the tactical handling of such vessels acquired a maestria which it would be foolish to throw away. French constructors also must be said to have scored in the designing of that class. All this practical experience means much: it must be utilized, developed; wisdom lies in continuity of efforts. Vessels of just over 3,000 tons, mounting six 6-in. guns, have been proposed alternately with contretorpilleurs of 2,800 tons mounting six 5.5-in. weapons and good for 45 knots. The preference goes to the latter type. Higher sea speed is necessary in these times of 40-knot light cruisers. On the other hand, the 5.5-in. caliber is deemed to be the best and most powerful of quick-firers.
Brief Notes
The question of convoy protection is engaging the attention of the French Naval Staff, and it is understood that 4 units intended for escort and protection have already been decided on and laid down. These are vessels of small tonnage, but with great speed capacity. Their armament is not yet known. Their form is upon destroyer lines and they will be specially adapted to keep the seas. Their speed is stated to be 35 knots with a corresponding radius of action of 700 miles. At a speed of 18 knots their radius of action would be 1,800 miles.
According to Le Yacht, Paris, on the occasion of their last return to Toulon, the cruisers of the first light division made the usual test of speed. The engineers made ready a certain number of tons of fuel oil, and for 2 hours were free to proceed at will. The results were excellent. The 4 cruisers, Foch, Colbert, Tourville, and Suffren held without incident more than 32 knots during the duration of the trial and gave the impression that they could continue at this gait until the complete exhaustion of their stores.
BRAZIL
Brief Notes
John I. Thornycroft & Co., Ltd., have received a contract from the Brazilian Ministry of Marine for the re-boilering of the battleship Minas Geraes. She is one of the two largest units of the Brazilian Navy, built on the Tyne before the war, and having a displacement of 19,200 tons.
ITALY
Brief Notes
The two new 7,000-ton cruisers Garibaldi and Duca degli Abruzzi, which are now to be built, have been assigned to the two shipbuilding yards Odero-Terni-Orlando di Muggiano (La Spezia) and the Triestini, respectively. Two other submarines have been launched, viz., the Topazio and the Diamante.
JAPAN
Building Plans
Tribune, Chicago.—The Japanese government today looks with considerable misgiving on the prospect that this nation will be forced into a naval race with the richest country in the world. Three things appear to Tokyo to justify this prospect— theNavyDepartment’s staggering demand for appropriations in next year’s budget, the continued presence of the American battle fleet in the Pacific, and President Roosevelt’s sanction of a big Navy.
The civilian ministers of state and a large section of the population are worried over the enormous appropriations that the armed forces now demand, and at the moment the big Navy advocates here have everything their own way. The Navy Department is asking for ¥680,000,000 (at par $340,000,000) for the 1934-35 fiscal year’s budget.
The present ambitious scheme, therefore, including what is called the second replenishment plan, calling for two cruisers, two 10,000-ton aircraft carriers, a number of destroyers and submarines, a mine layer, and several other special service vessels, is believed likely to gain public support.
The Japanese Navy ministry makes no secret of the fact that it is determined to build the fleet up to treaty limits. The reasons given are that the major powers are doing the same thing, that Japan is politically isolated as a result of her withdrawal from the League of Nations, and semi-isolated commercially by the British Empire trade bloc, and that the general world situation has changed for the worse as the result of the breakdown of the disarmament conference and the World Economic Conference.
Judging from past performances it is likely, observers agree, that the Japanese Navy will obtain most, if not all, it is asking for. The veteran finance minister, Korekiyo Takahashi, has already stated that whatever funds are necessary to maintain the national defense on a sound basis must be forthcoming. (Tokyo, Aug. 16.)
A Treaty Navy
Examiner, San Francisco September 3, (by Universal Service.)—Japan will build a Navy up to the limits of the London Naval Treaty, irrespective of cost, if the United States, now engaged in a 39-ship building program, continues to build up to treaty specifications, it was said at the Japanese naval office today.
Speaking for the naval office, an official declared:
“Frankly, I do not think the United States actually will build up to the treaty figures. The program is contrary to the London pact, which was in the nature of an extension of the 1922 naval holiday.
Evening Star, Washington.—Nichi Nichi, independent Tokyo newspaper, asserted yesterday lhat General Sado Araki, Minister of War, was ^Sing cabinet members to adopt a plan to float domestic bonds to the value of ¥1,000,000,000 (currently about $265,000,000), which General Araki asserted was necessary to strengthen the Army and Navy.
The paper said, “in view of the strained international situation,” Araki proposed emergency |a!£es, to yield ¥50,000,000 annually, be levied j°r needs of the military service. The billion-yen °an would be handled apart from the regular budget.
“There is no question as to the courage of Japanese naval personnel, however. Our naval *®en believe that numbers do not count, as ‘Ya- Demasyii’ (Japanese spirit) is the deciding
factor.
“However, scientific naval warfare makes number of ships important, and consequently Japan ]rill be forced to construct a treaty Navy if the United States does.”
Military Loan Plans
Proceeds from the bonds, the paper said, would ® Used to finance a naval program of building to tae limits of the London treaty and to complete fhe army’s program of modernization and mechanization and to replenish arms and munitions.
The Nichi Nichi said other branches of the government were favorable to the Araki plan, 'vhich was likely to be presented to the cabinet a* an early session.
Recently Araki and his colleagues have been actively conferring with cabinet members, especially former Premier Takahashi, now Minister °f finance, stressing the precarious international Position of Japan and urging that demands for *-he Army and Navy totaling ¥1,240,000,000 be S'ven priority in framing the budget for 1934 and
Vernacular papers said Takahashi had agreed he national defense program comes first.
Fleet Reviews
Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, August 26.— grand review held by the Emperor Yesterday off Yokohama Harbor was the Slxteenth in the history of the Japanese ^avy. And. by all counts, the greatest.
t The 6 ships of the first Imperial review displaced 2,452 tons. The 161 vessels that Paraded yesterday displaced 806,000 tons, aild the total tonnage of the present
Japanese Navy is 900,000 tons. Up to the review of November 12,1912, the Japanese Navy had no airplanes at all. In that review there were two. Yesterday 180 modern bombing, observation, and battle planes flew above the fleet.
Japan’s first naval review took place in Osaka in the first year of Meiji Era, 1868. The 6 warships that participated were the Denryu Mam, the Manri Maru, the Chitose Mam, the Kayo Maru, the Man- nen Maru and the Mikuni Maru. They were the property of feudal lords of various clans. The review was directed by the Prince Minister of the Navy from the Denryu, the Emperor reviewing the fleet from a stand erected on the coast of Osaka. The entire fleet displaced little more than the tonnage of a first-class torpedo destroyer, one of the smallest battle craft of the present day.
The Nichi Nichi yesterday presented the following table to show the development of the Japanese Navy as indicated by past reviews:
Year | Number of Ships | Number of Airplanes |
March 23, 1868............ | 6 | — |
April 18, 1890............... | 19 | — |
April 30, 1900............... | 49 | — |
April 10, 1902............... | 61 | — |
October 23, 1903.......... | 166 | — |
November 18, 1908.... | 123 | — |
November 12, 1912 — | 115 | 2 |
November 10, 1913.... | 57 | 4 |
December 4, 1915........ | 124 | 9 |
October 25, 1916.......... | 84 | 4 |
July 9, 1919.................. | 24 | — |
October 28, 1919.......... | 111 | 12 |
October 30, 1927.......... | 158 | 80 (and one dirigible) |
December 4, 1928........ | 186 | 130 (and two dirigibles) |
October 26, 1930.......... | 164 | 72 |
August 25, 1933........... | 161 | 180 |
No Naval Race
Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, August 30.— Responsible American opinion is tending
1652 U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings [November I
T
more and more toward deploring a naval construction race between Japan and the United States, and a movement is under way to counteract what is declared to be a wave of dangerous propaganda.
Students of American foreign policy, according to a consensus of the best sources in Washington, see the United States as definitely embarked on a construction program but not because of any fear of Japan, or any desire to menace Japan’s position in Manchuria, but because of general world conditions.
American policy, it is recalled, traditionally has been based on the principle of freedom of the seas—that is, the right of Americans to carry on international trade without unjust interference. In the light of present world conditions this principle hardly can be upheld as long as the United States Navy is inferior to that of any other power.
A source close to President Roosevelt told the United Press today that the President was firmly in favor of the construction program now under way and that his reasons had been made amply clear. The President, it was said, believes Japanese naval experts fully understand the position of the United States and will not take any offense at American naval plans any more than the American government will take offense at Japan’s naval construction program.
Brief Notes
Henry L. Roosevelt, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, told sponsors of the movement to make San Francisco a base for the Pacific fleet, that no new bases on the Pacific seaboard are contemplated at present by the administration.
The desirability of maintaining the friendliest relations with the United States of America is hereafter to be the gravest concern of Foreign Minister Yasuya Uchida a Nippon Dempo account said. The news service said he feels that the diplomatic relations of Japan and America have made favorable headway since the induction of the Roosevelt administration, and that the World
Economic Conference and the acute problems ® the readjustment of America’s internal economy have caused the United States to withdraw attention from Japan and Manchuria.—Japan ■»»" vertiser.
British Columbia may be the Belgium of a future war, and its skies the pathway to a desperate conflict between huge fleets of heavily armed airplanes, it was suggested when the Brit' | ish Commonwealth Relations Conference meet®? in Toronto turned to a discussion of the probabilities of another great war.
General agreement was expressed that the Pacific was an area of tension. A British delegate ! wondered what would happen if war occurred between the United States and Japan. In his vie'v> , it would be fought in the air, probably along the ways of the Alaskan route to Asia. That worn j make British Columbia the corridor of aeria | passage toward the north.
Japan’s establishment of potential naval bases in the far-flung Pacific islands held under League of Nations’ mandate brought swelling demand today among the American naval high comma® to build up an adequate naval defense. _
Experts, watching Japan steadily increase its stronghold in the Pacific, and thrust out its nava lines toward the United States, insist prompt steps should be taken by this country to offse Japanese superiority.
Through deepening and improving harbors> Japan, working secretly, has provided strategy bases in the islands that will accommodate submarines, airplanes, and cruisers. These are Prl' marily attacking weapons.
They can serve not only as defensive bases to repel enemy invasion but as a powerful forward line for an offensive should there be operations against Hawaii or even the west coast of the United States. Fuel and supply storage facility5 are available.
The United States has nothing comparable.
Japan officially disclaims harbor improvements were dictated by military purposes. The official reason is a desire to open up the islands to commerce.
Although withdrawing from the League, Japa11 intends to keep the islands. The Japanese answer to the League is: “Come and get them back, you can.”—San Francisco Examiner
Hew
aca
nian
whi(
T:
anm Star ?.S bide A the dent as I sutn "St
fas
£
"J
rep,
°us
and
Sfai
its
the
Vo,
I
4-U)
be!
the
h’oj
J
Ufic
ftto-
the
Get
assi
tun
Soi
Ue-v
0C£
I
int,
bet
C 0) hat
It is reported that Mr. Shimizu, of Niho®' bashi, has invented a silent machine gun, the propelling force of which is the centrifugal energy of a revolving disc set in motion at great speed by a small petrol engine. It is claimed that this gun is capable of a tremendous rate of fire.
It
is understood that the motor-ship
Au
he
The Navy Office today handed vernacular newsPapers a mimeographed statement denying Accusations that Japanese harbor works in the Undated Pacific islands were providing bases vhich would be useful to the Navy in war time.
These accusations were said to have come from ‘ mer*can sources and were tied in with the recent Hnouncement of Admiral William Harrison ^andley, chief of Naval Operations, that the . • h. Atlantic Fleet would remain in the Pacific definitely.
^ Navy spokesman remarked the keeping of e Atlantic fleet in the Pacific indicated Presi- as^P Roosevelt’s Tar Eastern policy is the same Su l res*^ent Hoover’s and that this policy as- tt'es the Manchurian question still is unsettled, an Francisco Examiner.
MERCHANT MARINE faster Service
Jerald Tribune, New York, August 10.
"The Italian Line, according to reliable rePorts, is planning to reorganize its vari- °Us shipping services from Italy to North aild South America with part of the pro- jfairi calling for the speeding up of one of s ships to 27 knots for operation with ye Rex and Conte di Savoia in the New Ork-Genoa express service.
iustus has been selected as the liner to ^ speeded up although it is possible that
e company may finally decide on the ^otna.
The reorganization program also is ^derstood to call for the transfer of the tli 0r~ShiPs Saturnia and Vulcania from ^e New York-Trieste service to the eHoa-South American trade, and the Ssignment of the Conte Grande and Conte r lancamano to the New York-Trieste ~ T The service between Trieste and uth America will be maintained by the motor-liners Neptunia and the Wceania.
. Tt also is reported that the Italian Line , ends to establish a new express service ct\veen Italy and Cape Town with the i °nte Rosso and the Conte Verde, which aVe a speed of 18 knots.
Shipping circles also hear that the Lloyd Triestino Line has under consideration the inauguration of a new fast service between Italy and Batavia via Bombay.
The speeding up of either the Augustus or Roma to a speed of 27 knots would enable the Italian Line to maintain fast weekly express sailings from New York. At the present time the Conte di Savoia and the Rex, which make the run to Genoa via Gibraltar, Cannes, and Naples in 8 days, alternate in maintaining fortnightly express sailings from New York.
While the Augustus and Roma are somewhat smaller than either of the 2 new fast liners, both are luxury-type, first-class liners and would prove to be splendid running mates of the Rex or Conte di Savoia if given the extra speed. The Augustus now takes about 11 days to make the run from New York to Genoa via several ports, while the Roma covers the distance in about 10 days.
The latest sailing list of the Italian Line carries the Augustus right through until December of this year, but the Roma does not appear after her scheduled departure from New York on August 29 for a Mediterranean cruise terminating at Genoa on September 24.
Brief Notes
Browsing through the files of ship registers, Department of Commerce officials determined the oldest documented vessel in American registration is the Saltsea, of Providence.
The Saltsea, built 111 years ago at Poughkeepsie, N. Y., for Alban Rust, of New York City, now is owned by the American Oyster Company, at Providence. During the 111 years she has prowled along the Atlantic coast she has had 5 owners and has had her size and mode of propulsion changed 3 times.
One of the outstanding events in Japanese shipbuilding during 1932 was the completion and placing in service of the two single-screw steamships Nagoya Maru and Johore Marti—the first Japanese vessels to be equipped for pulverized- fuel firing. While the adoption of pulverized-fuei firing for marine boilers has been advocated in certain Japanese quarters for some time, the con-
servative attitude of shipowners in that country has been against its development, and Japanese naval architects and marine engineers have thus had little opportunity for studying the subject. In these circumstances, the action of the Ishiwara Sangyo Kaisha in adopting pulverised-fuel firing for their two new ships is keenly appreciated by those interested in the development of marine engineering in Japan.
There have been two recent events to commemorate the invention of the steamboat by the Marquis Claude de Jouffroy d’Abbas, whose detention in the prison of lie Sainte-Marguerite off Cannes in 1765, as the result of a quarrel with his colonel, was marked last week by the fixing of a plate in the prison in the presence of representatives of the government, of the Navy, and of the municipal council of Cannes. It was while in prison that the Marquis worked out the idea of a steamboat, and on his release he went to Paris to see the Watt pumping engine which the Perier Brothers had installed at Chaillot. On returning to his home at Baume-les-Dames he constructed an engine with the aid of a local craftsman, and fitted a boat with oars actuated by the engine, which made journeys up the river Doubs during the months of June and July, 1776. In the previous year the Perier Brothers had tried a steamboat of their own construction on the Seine, but it got out of hand and crashed into a bridge pier. In 1781 Claude de Jouffroy designed an engine with a double-acting cylinder, and constructed a 400-ton boat with paddle wheels, which was successfully tested on the Saone at Lyons on July 15, 1783. He spent his entire fortune on experiments and finally abandoned his family estates to his creditors. He ended his days as a pensioner at the Invalides.
According to a recent report of the commerce departments, Bureau of Navigation, the personnel of the United States Merchant Navy is made up of 127,500 native bom Americans, 34,000 naturalized Americans, and 76,500 foreigners. The foreigners thus make up 32 per cent of the whole. Of these 17,000 are British.
Under the terms of an agreement just entered into between the Italian government and the Cosulich Line the former will pay the latter 250,000 lire for each voyage in the new service from Trieste, Naples, Genoa, Marseilles, Barcelona, and Para, to which Leghorn and Lisbon eventually will be added.
The Cosulich Line will be obliged to operate a minimum of 8 round-trip voyages a year with ships of an average speed of 12 knots. The subsidy will be paid for a maximum of 12 voyages a
year, but if less than 8 voyages are made the agreement can be canceled. _
It also is reported here that the Cantien- Riuniti dell’ Adriatico’s yard at Monfalcone will ^ build a number of vessels, for foreign account including several oil tankers for the Standard Oil Company of New York. A motor ship for the Polish government and some ships for Greek i account also are expected to be built at this yard'
Several representatives of Italian shipbuilding companies are said to be at present in South America with the object of securing orders for the construction of warships for Brazil and Chile.
There seems to be no end to developments of new types of engine for ships. The latest thermo* dynamic system of ship propulsion is one devel' oped by Gotaverken of Sweden consisting of a Diesel engine for compressing air which discharges along with the Diesel’s exhaust gases into a receiver. This hot air gas “boiler” supplies the power for the prime mover or propeller motor; which may be of the reciprocating or turbine type. The special value is said to be accumulation of power, great flexibility, simplicity, and effi' ciency, without many of the losses in power transmission inherent in Diesel-electric drive.
As or June 30, Lloyd’s report 40 Diesel ships and only 3 steamships, in sizes from 6,000 to 20,000 tons under construction throughout the world.
Japan is building 10 Diesel ships to 1 steamer’ Great Britain 7 Diesel ships to 2 steamers; and Germany, Italy, France, Spain, Sweden, Holland; | and Denmark are building Diesel ships exclusively in these sizes.
AVIATION
Navy Planes Set Record
Herald, Washington, September 9.—The long' est squadron air flight in history ended successfully on September 8, when 6 United States nava planes landed at the Naval Air Base, Coco Solo> C. Z., after a 2,059-mile nonstop flight from Nor' folk, Va.
Five of the planes landed together at 6:22 ?.&•> and a search was started immediately for the sixth, commanded by Lieutenant W. H. Buracker-
An hour after the first five planes landed, LieU' tenant Buracker brought his craft to a safe land' ing, reporting the delay due to headwinds and minor troubles. His plane lagged behind over the later stages of the journey.
|
The previous nonstop flight record for squad' rons was established by General Italo Balb° 3 Italian air armada when it covered 1,864 mile3 between Africa and South America in 1931-
Talbo’s longest hop on his voyage to Chicago was *>667 miles.
The American squadron, with 36 officers and ®en, was commanded by Lieutenant Commander H. Carpenter. He said: “We made the trip in 25 hours 21 minutes. We had an excellent flight, but battled headwinds all the way.”
International Balloon Race
Lieutenant Commander Thomas G. W. Set- *LE> U. S. Navy, pilot of the Navy’s entry in the international Balloon Race, reported that he and Lieutenant (J.G.) Charles H. Kendall, U. S. yUv.v, his aid, had landed at Pine Orchard, Conn., G miles east of New Haven, at 4:45 p.m., Mon- uny, September 4. The other American team of Hard Van Orman and Frank Trotter was lost lor 8 days, having landed in one of the most inaccessible regions of Northern Ontario. Their rescue was effected after the two balloonists had chopped down a telegraph pole supporting a Power line, knowing that a repair crew would be Sent out to fix it.
The rescue of the American team paralleled the ^venture of the Polish balloonists, Captain Wynek and Lieutenant Bryznski. They were jmmd about 1,000 miles from the starting point, Chicago, in the province of Quebec.
The Polish team, it was indicated, won the race because of greater distance covered. J
There were 6 balloons in the race.
Sea Duty for Airship Pilots j
Evening Star, Washington September 6. ~~-No change of the Navy’s policy requiring that airship officers take regular j-urns of sea duty aboard surface vessels
contemplated, it was declared today by ;j^ear Admiral Ernest J. King, chief of the bureau of Aeronautics.
Despite the threat of a special Joint Congressional Committee, appointed last spnng to investigate the Akron disaster, to Undertake legislative action looking toward creation of a separate air force in case the Navy refuses to change its policy ln this respect, the Navy will stand by its Present procedure, it was made clear.
. Admiral King explained that an order 1Ssued by Secretary of the Navy Swanson certifymg that service performed by officers assigned to duty on the U.S.S. Macon shall be considered equivalent to sea duty represents no change in policy.
The order of the Secretary of the Navy, it was explained, is similar to that which previously was issued in the case of officers serving aboard the U.S.S. Shenandoah and Akron. It merely certifies that officers with the airships are considered as on sea duty, assigned to airships co-operating with the fleet. It does not relieve them of the necessity for serving regular tours of duty aboard surface vessels, the Navy explained.
“The fleet remains the basic element of the naval service,” Admiral King explained. “To be of real value to the Navy, all naval officers must have a thorough acquaintance with the basic elements of the service, in addition to their intimate knowledge of such specialized service as lighter-than-air, heavier-than-air and submarine services.”
It was pointed out that an airship officer who does not have a thorough knowledge, based on actual experience, of fleet operations and procedure, cannot co-operate intelligently with the fleet in battle. Since naval aviation must cooperate with the fleet in the most intimate manner, it is regarded as essential that aviation officers take their regular turns of duty with the fleet.
It is the purpose of the Navy to acquaint all of its peace-time officers with every phase of naval operation so that they may be fitted to assume high command and use every element of the Navy, including submarines,airplanes,and airships, to the utmost possible advantage in time of trouble, Admiral King pointed out.
These permanent officers must constitute the framework upon which the Navy can expand in time of war, Admiral King explained. Then, when trouble comes, temporary officers can be trained as specialists in aviation, submarines, as engineers, or navigators or in other specialized branches of the service. The command will remain in the hands of experienced officers who know and can use
every element of the fleet, on the surface, in the air, and under the surface.
“I have studied the methods of handling military aviation in this country and abroad,” Admiral King said, “and I am convinced that the method we are following in our Navy is the best suited to the nation, the service, and the individual.”
Balbo Speaks
Herald, Washington, September 24.— Regular air lines over the North Atlantic are not possible until the organization of meteorological services so accurate as to offer a precise map of weather conditions along the entire route. This is my answer to the question that has commanded world-wide attention since the flight of the Italian squadron, and I am considering the subject not on any vague hypotheses but on the data of my own experience.
For years there has been talk of floating islands which could assure transoceanic flying service by offering platforms for landings at mid-sea. Instead of speaking of floating islands, what should be studied is the possibility of establishing meteorological observatories in the middle of the ocean by means of capable ships. They would render absolutely indispensable services and would cost infinitely less than floating islands.
Let me say with assurance that the Atlantic flight of the Italian squadron would have been an adventure unworthy of a nation accustomed to similar enterprise without meteorological observers spread along the oceanic routes. I used two submarines of the Italian Navy and some drifters. The services they rendered are incalculable.
It must be remembered that the true enemy of oceanic aviation is always fog. Blind flying is spoken of with lightness. But even ships entering ports when they meet fog cast anchor, not daring to confront the dangers of dams and low water. What, then, should be said of airplanes?
One also must be absolutely certain of conditions at the base of arrival, for blind landing, at the present stage of aerial progress, is an exceptional act and exceptional gestures are in absolute contradiction of the criterions of safety which must preside over the undertaking of any regular air service.
The North Atlantic is still too difficult.
Accompanied by accurate meteorological services, I believe there are possibilities of temporary summer routes between Iceland and Labrador, and I maintain they must avoid South Greenland.
There also is a possibility of a central- Atlantic route for winter lines across the Azores and the Bermuda Islands with a safe landing place at Norfolk, Virginia. I select Norfolk because the fogs which often hide New York from the eyes of the navigator of the air rarely descend at the southern city.
This route, through the Azores, necessitates the provision of an airport at these islands. There are 800 meters of dykes at Ponta Delgado but this must be increased to 2,000 meters if the present-time insufficient marine port is to become a good airport. Portugal, which has sovereign rights there, must think of this construction and so must all the nations interested in the development of oceanic aviation.
This brings up an important point. There must be absolute liberty of the air just as there now exists liberty of the seas for civil and commercial traffic. The system adopted by some nations of monopolizing by concession certain oceanic aerial landing places is the most absurd thing imaginable. To monopolize and mortgage international aviation landing places is a measure contrary to every form of civil progress.
And I understand that Portugal, which already had been granted exclusivity for a period of thirty years for landing at the Azores, is revoking these concessions.
These are my frank opinions concerning
the possibilities of establishing aerial lines from Europe to North America. Let me illustrate my point that definite meteorological information is all essential by actual experiences we went through in the flight of the squadron.
I recall well the very bad days we spent ■while at Newfoundland after the American stages of the flight and before the return crossing of the Atlantic. One morning I gave the order for departure and then treacherous conditions arose over the sea. My German meteorologist, Baumann, a precious counsellor, conferred with me and I delayed departure. That day a terrific cyclone struck which could have imperilled the return of the squadron to Italy.
I have been asked: “Which hop was the most difficult of the entire flight?” Undoubtedly it was the ocean hop from Iceland to Labrador because during this trip
2,400 kilometers we had to fly more than two hours in a fog which was often so thick that we could barely distinguish the tips °f our wings.
The trip was a nightmare. During the flight through fog my pilots could follow but one will—mine, and execute blindly the orders radio telegraphed from my Plane.
I must say that in general all the stages °f the second Atlantic crossing were difficult. Particularly this was because of the ^stability of the season which is meteoro- l°gically very irregular. The summer of fltis year was one month late and our base- fliip for the Labrador leg was blocked by lce in Grignet Bay, obliging us to delay °Ur departure for Italy at least 20 days, flu the first of August the coasts of Newfoundland already were being covered with distant fog.
One more important factor must be con- Sldered—the quality of the planes themSelves. Italian aerial industries have Cached the true heights of perfection and the reason is easily explained.
It is always mass production which kills quality and we do not have mass production in the aeronautic industries. The workers are limited but fixed. One can compare their work with that of the goldsmith.
The only necessary thing is the spirit of collaboration between the one who makes and the one who uses the aerial machine. We have that spirit.
This explains why, crossing the cloud- covered Alps with 24 hydroplanes, I gave with absolute tranquillity the order to go up 4,000 and 4,500 meters with planes still bearing 4,000 kilograms with a total weight of ten tons. It also explains why in all the flight only one slight damage happened to a water pipe due to a mounting defect during the overhauling in New York.
These are my conclusions in looking back with critical eyes at the flight of the Italian squadron far from the vibrating atmosphere of heroism and of manifestations which surrounded us for a month and a half.
I have frequently been asked what the flight of the Italian squadron actually cost, and I can answer that now. The answer is: Not more than 5,000,000 lire (about $379,500). This includes the services of the English whaling vessels of Fleetwood, hired for our meteorological organization; the trip of our supply yacht, Alice; the expenses of officers and crew abroad.
Everyone knows that the orders of Mussolini in regard to public expenses are exceptionally strict. Not one cent is spent without lengthy pondering. Italian aviation, which has proportionately the smallest budget in the world, this year reduced its outlay more than 60,000,000 lire.
In keeping within our 5,000,000-lire budget, we were assisted by a great American oil firm which donated and transported fuel to the bases free of charge, the publicity accruing to it serving to diminish the expense to the state. A special issue of air-mail stamps also reduced the cost.
And a certain sum will be charged up to my men—this is the Fascist rule of respect for the money of the state and it is right, because of the honor we all get from the undertaking.
Ican recall here publicly that when I went to the chief of the government on my final visit before the departure I said:
“Duce, I do not know if I shall return or not. I feel that I am the most faithful soldier you have had in the regime. I desire that this affirmation remain in your heart.”
IIDuce, embracing me, answered: “You will come back.”
Berlin Prepares
Times, London, August 29.—The thoroughness of the preparations being made, under the auspices of the Air Defense League, against air attack continues to attract attention. The head of the Berlin area, a Nazi storm battalion commander named Major von Loper, announces that measures will be introduced under which all new buildings will have to conform to regulations issued by the Air Ministry. The aim of these will be to make them as resistant as possible to fire and to provide shelters proof against gas and bombs. Berlin, under his supervision, has already been divided into 20 air defense districts and 173 air defense sub-districts: the latter are subdivided again into areas under air defense superintendents, into blocks of apartment houses under block air wardens and houses under house air wardens. A main air defense school and several district schools have been formed.
From September 4 to September 9 there will be an Air Defense Week and the proceeds from the various entertainments and spectacles will be used to support the organization. In the Horst Wessel Platz, one of the biggest squares, a 15-ft. model of an air bomb has been set up to impress on the minds of the population the dangers of aerial attack.
The first gas-proof cellar to have been completely equipped in a private house will be formally opened tomorrow. It is in the Potsdamer Strasse, and consists of two compartments, the inner separated from the outer by a wall with a water-filled pit beneath it, this being a kind of safety sluice through which fugitives may, at the cost of a ducking, penetrate to the main gas-proof inner cellar. The cellars have been re-enforced with wooden beams (impregnated with a heat-resisting substance) so that they may survive a collapse of the superstructure. Doors and windows are insulated against gas by felt and protected against bomb splinters by sand bags. The cost of preparing this one cellar is said to have been RM300.
Air Services Grow
Army, Navy, Air Force Gazette, London* August 24.—There is a mine of information to be found in the recent Air Ministry report on the progress of civil aviation for 1932. The increase in the world figure of miles flown by regular air services is as- ( tonishing. It was a million miles in 1919,
5§ millions in 1922, 53 millions in 1929, and over 90 millions last year. Although 1932 was a year of depression, the figure was 20 million miles above the 1930 figure. But the British total of all this flying is comparatively small. Our total of 1,766,000 miles flown compares with 1,919,422 miles by Holland, 2,889,452 miles by Italy, 5,487,512 miles by France (including services in South America), and, most remarkable of all, 5,712,117 miles by Germany. But all European standards in this respect are outclassed by the United States, in which regular air services had a total of 50,932,967 miles flown during 1932 which is nearly 29 times as much as the British total. These figures are significant, and throw light upon the new political problems created by the enormous growth of civil aviation. After all, civil aircraft stand in much the same relation to the
military air forces as does the Mercantile Marine to the Royal Navy, and even if civil machines cannot be readily adapted as bombers, and are liable to become the prey °1 fast interceptors and flighting aircraft, yet, like the armed merchant cruisers which Germany let loose on the high seas during the World War, they would be capable of untold mischief if taken up to release clouds of poison gas over important centers. Just as our own great requirements f°r ships in the past enabled us to become the world’s manufacturers and provided us ^ith both the skilled workmen and the yards which brought us riches in peace and security in war, so will these assets pass, as regards aircraft, to the greatest air Power. And just as our Merchant Navy Provided us with a vast reserve of both officers and men and a civil population educated in the tradition of the sea, so lust as surely will this powerful reserve belong to the greatest air power. The report shows that the German civil aviation ^°te, £2,146,021, is the largest of any European country, and compares with 1,433,713 in France and £695,364 in the nited Kingdom. So that while Germany as at present no military aircraft, she has ^ell and truly laid the foundations of a reserve of air power in her civil air trans- P°rt lines.
Brief Notes
United States
a A rwin-engined monoplane flying boat with tj.ru]sing sPeed of 140 miles per hour was being by 7? for Possible future use at Anacostia, D. C., Port Navy r>ePartment last month, it is rein ted- The engines are faired into the wing to W,_rease the streamline effect of the plane, which s manufactured by the Consolidated Aircraft ?2 V?°f Y., and is known as the Type
Par t The ship is ecluiPPed with bombing ap- atus and machine guns and is built to carry a », ? ’ navigator, and 2 other persons.—Aero Ditaw^E.average cost of an air-line trip in Continen-
nam- States is 6,1 cents a miIe> the Aero- ics Branch of the Department of Commerce
has determined by averaging rates on all passenger lines operating in this country. The average fare rate in 1926 was 12 cents a mile. It dropped to 10.3 cents in 1927, increased to 11 cents in 1928 and was back at 12 cents in 1929. General reductions in 1930 pushed down the average to 8.3 cents, and in 1931 it dropped to 6.7 cents. There has been little variation since that time. The average in 1932 was 6.1 cents.
The recent record of the U. S. Coast Guard in using their seaplanes to rescue ill and injured persons from vessels along the Atlantic coast, ought to be gratifying and enlightening to the members of Congress who made it possible for the service to put on its meager air equipment. The scanty appropriations came grudgingly, but the Coast Guard has given ample proof of the wisdom in giving the life-saving function of the government modern equipment to work with. Within recent months more than 100 persons have been taken from ships and conveyed speedily to hospitals on shore. Many of these injured and ill persons doubtless would have died had it not been for the prompt work of the Coast Guard seaplanes.— U. S. Air Services.
A peep-hole light for searching out small parts of equipment to be repaired or inspected has been developed by Westinghouse Electric and Mfg. Co. at East Pittsburgh, Pa. It is designed to enable the repairmen thoroughly to inspect the bearings, oil rings, and small parts of engines and other equipment without disassembling.
The miniature spotlight was constructed from a fountain-pen type flashlight. It is attached to a flexible cord and arm in a convenient position over the bench and is energized with a small transformer mounted on the wall. When not in use, the light may be placed in the receptacle at the end of the arm and swung aside until needed.
The United States Navy soon will have giant patrol planes with a nonstop range exceeding by 50 per cent the best performance of present planes of this type, according to Rear Admiral Ernest J. King, chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics.
The big flying boats, which have been in process of design and construction for many months are expected to have a nonstop range of approximately 3,000 miles and will be larger than any previous military planes in American aviation history.
Great Britain
Owing to the increasing use of the air mail services the post-office is erecting 9 new air mail pillar-boxes in the suburbs and outer regions of London. Air mail boxes up to the present have been confined to the Central London area and the larger provincial towns. The first of these boxes is now in use at Croydon. One at Richmond is now under construction, and others are to be built at Watford, Wembley, Harrow, Kingston- on-Thames, Bromley (Kent), Ilford, and Sutton.
According to figures recently published there are 60,000 miles of regular air routes in Europe. The world total is 200,000 miles. Of the 60,000 miles of European air routes 2,000 miles are operated by British lines. The British Empire totals nearly 20,000 miles.
The Air Ministry have published a small volume of Silhouettes of Royal Air Force Aircraft (Air Publication 1,480 Stationery Office, 1j. 3d. net), which will no doubt enjoy a considerable circulation, since the desire to be able to identify service aircraft in flight is by no means confined to those professionally concerned with flying. The booklet is bound in stiff boards and on the loose-leaf principle, to permit of its being kept up to date as types become obsolete and are replaced in the service. The 26 types now illustrated are grouped according to their employment, with a thumb index. As the same scale is used for each silhouette, comparative sizes can be seen at a glance. An introduction points out that with practice an observer can differentiate between the exhaust notes of different types of engines, and the name of the engine with which each aircraft is fitted is therefore given.
China
Three thousand combat airplanes of various types will be placed in service in China within the next three years, according to plans of the Nanking government, it is reported. The action will be taken as a result of China’s realization of the need of aeronautical aid in national defense.
France
Weekly air mail flights between France and South America are scheduled to begin next April, according to a recent report. The regular service will be preceded by further test flights by Jean Mermoz, transatlantic flier, whose next flight over the route is planned for December in his Couzinet, Arc-en-Ciel.
Following an invitation by the Soviet government to visit Moscow, 3 large tri-motored airplanes carrying Air Minister Pierre Cot and a group of 11 associates hopped off for Russia today to “sell” Franch commercial aviation to the Soviets.
The planes, manned by crews totaling 14 men, will make an 8-day visit to the Soviet Union.
According to the Paris correspondent of the Daily Telegraph M. Louis Bleriot will close down his factory on September 5 owing to complete lack of orders from the government.
For some time past his works have been practically empty, but he has kept them going solely to complete the Bleriot 5,190 four-engined transatlantic flying boat, which was described and illustrated in The Aeroplane last week. A few years ago he was employing 3,000 men but today only 10 are retained on his pay-roll.
The decision has been made to supply all Regiments d’Aviation of the Forces Aerienne de Terre a number of light airplanes to enable the pilots to increase their flying hours during the year in the most economical way possible.
Orders have been placed for 40 Caudron Pha- lene 3-seat light cabin monoplanes, and 30 Potez 43 two-seat light cabin monoplanes, both types with the 120 hp. Renault Bengali 4-cylinder inline inverted air-cooled engine.
Italy
A pilot flies upside down when making a loop- If it is possible to fly that short time why not longer? With proper mechanical changes an airplane will fly any length of time in an inverted position; the limit to the duration of the flight is the pilot’s endurance. As a stunt to show control of the airplane this form of flying has been used for some time. Lieutenant Tito Falconi, the diminutive Italian master pilot, has flown upside down for 1 hour and 7 minutes over Italy.
Falconi’s wonderful display of acrobatics at the national air races renewed interest in upside down flying on the Pacific coast. Last month Milo Burcham, a clever flyer of Long Beach, had the distinction, for a few hours, of being the champion upside-downer of the world, with a record of 2 hrs. 20 min., 59 secs. But on August 27 the record went back to Lieutenant Falconi for his 3 hrs. 6 min. 39 secs, of upside down flying.
★