When the smoke of battle has died away, and this great conflict in which we are now engaged passes into history; when the historians look upon its record with searching logic, one predominant, overshadowing fact will emerge; one tremendous characterization will emerge from its Dunkirks, Pearl Harbors, and its Bataans, that in our day, during World War II, air power in the modern sense met sea power and emerged the superior, demonstrated unmistakably in scores of battles of all sizes under all conditions.
Older theories of naval warfare had to be hastily revised to state that their theorems were now true only if their side held control of the air in the theater of operations in question. Air power had risen from an unknown quantity to become the major weapon of all great powers on both sides of the conflict, after surviving its test by fire.
We quote Major Alexander P. de Seversky, United Press Aviation Editor, writing in May in the Washington Times Herald:
Even in seemingly out-and-out naval engagements, both in the Pacific and Atlantic war areas, it should be recognized that floating air bases—carriers—were the primary weapons. The attack on Pearl Harbor is a case in point. In a sense, therefore, other naval forces acted as auxiliary services to the air arm. This is not the first time in military history that a weapon regarded as an adjunct has usurped the first place, turning all the other weapons into auxiliaries.
That, we grant, is the present-day trend, a temporary state governed by many conditions which undoubtedly will change from year to year. We know that the backers of the submarine said the same thing before the underwater sound apparatus was developed to its present state of efficiency, demonstrated by the heavy toll of the enemy submarines now being exacted by our heroes who brave the icy hell of the North Atlantic in the superb destroyers which form our safeguard against this unseen menace.
We can stop the aircraft attacks against our men-of-war in many ways—bomb their factories, hangars, landing fields; keep the Navy beneath a curtain of our own fighters, or resort solely under certain conditions to the protection of anti-aircraft fire.
To those who have observed the experience of the British closely in the past two years, it will be clear that their Navy has suffered heavily from aircraft attacks. The Japanese have suffered heavily in transports and other types from our bombers. It is clear that no power has developed an anti-aircraft defense that will stop an air attack against naval forces. The British have not devised a defense system which will prevent damage to their ships at the hands of the Axis. This country should let that fact sink deep into its collective mind, in view of its all-important, comprehensive meaning.
Its challenge to the inventors and scientists of the Allies is unbounded. Let us look at some of the factors involved in this problem of almost unparalleled magnitude and difficulty. Place your anti-aircraft gun on the unsteady deck of a vessel, particularly unstable when a ship zigzags when under attack from the air. Wind is another factor, particularly when the temperature is low; blinding by the sun, and lastly and of particular importance in case of close-range, smaller-caliber guns, is the savage bucking of the rapid-firing gun, distorting the aim. Superimpose upon this problem the advantage of tremendously high speeds of aircraft, and their unparalleled freedom of maneuverability save for the short time on approach to release bomb or torpedo.
The survival of surface craft of any power depends upon their ability to solve these factors into a training organization, by exact duplication of the conditions, and developing sufficient personnel with the required degree of skill to effect a satisfactory defense.
When air attack comes, the gunner is the only man standing between survival and sinking of the ship. The heaviest losses of this war to date have not been due to gunfire in the various navies but to bombs and torpedoes.
There is a need today for a general recognition and realization of these facts all up and down the rank and file.
When we ask for a wider recognition, please do not misconstrue its meaning to be criticism. The author has no axe to grind, but rather has nothing but the highest praise of the most sincere type for the manner in which our own Navy has responded to these developments of the past few years. As an enlisted man, he humbly offers these words in the halls of the mighty, not that he might tell them anything they did not know before far better than he, but to urge a general recognition of this largely unsolved problem upon a larger scale.
For example, there is a great popular movement behind the aviation effort in this country. He feels that in view of the gravity of the threat to navies, that interest of naval personnel in anti-aircraft should be more widespread, of greater magnitude. If it were so, perhaps some thinker could give us an ingenious arrangement whereby the “bucking” of a gun would be eliminated, and general improvement of aim result. Some other person might develop a radio-controlled rocket which would accurately simulate the complexity of an aerial target for practice by gunners.
No one has yet contributed a target for use of surface vessels which will develop the skill of gunners to a point of deadly accuracy—the value of such a contribution would be without bounds.
Nothing which occurred during the present war has brought all of this into sharp outline more than the story of Norway. There is blue water between Axis dominated continental Europe and Norway, and the sea power is on the side of the Allies. The Navy could not stop its conquest, nor retake it from the enemy due to one fact—aircraft controlled the seas in the disputed area. The strategic position of Norway along the convoy route from the United States to Russia is well understood. Norway is in enemy hands largely because of the state of sea-borne, antiaircraft fire today.
We are working like beavers, fighting bravely when our turn comes, busily expanding personnel and equipment, every one of us is giving without restraint. Would it not be a good thing if every man in the Navy were to think of his job, and ask himself if in addition to doing that job well, if it would not be worth the time to stop occasionally and think of the potentialities to the Navy, should the advantage of aircraft be unchecked?
This is realized to be a general worldwide condition. Our solution is undoubtedly superior to that of any other navy— our tradition upon the seas is unparalleled, and our faith in America is fathomless, even in view of the present challenge to the Navy presented by hostile aircraft. The solution will and must be found, even if it means gradual conversion of all large surface vessels into carriers.
In the improvement of our own performance in this art, the following points are suggested:
(1) Increase of individual ship’s fire power to the absolute maximum capacity of the vessel in ammunition and space for A. A. gun batteries, not occupied by other essential material.
(2) Expansion of training of gun crews, ashore whenever possible, afloat to the maximum extent afforded by consideration of the safety of the ship, in view of conditions encountered.
(3) Mobilization of science to devise and perfect a target which will duplicate all conditions of an air attack, single, multiple, high level, dive bombing, torpedo attack, attack from several directions, etc., for use in training gun crews to the necessary degree of skill to stop an attack.
(4) Continued research upon A.A. guns of all caliber, including additional armor protection for exposed members of crews.
(5) Concentration upon our building program of carriers, particularly in view of conversion of other types.
(6) Pursuit of a campaign designed to raise the interest of the entire service to a high pitch in the anti-aircraft effort, so that our thoughts may combine with our actions to drive onward to the victory which must be ours in unity.
If we fail to recognize this problem squarely, we will reap the whirlwind. The Navy which produced a John Paul Jones, however, has recognized the problem and, with the help of God, will triumph.