Page 87
Page 87
ANNEX.
Draft M.C. (40) 9th Conclusions, Minute 3.
GENERAL CARR read to the Committee the following letter which had been received by the War Office from the General Headquarters of the British Expeditionary Force:-
11 I wish to draw attention to the situation
regarding the provision of 3" Anti-Aircraft guns in the event of a considerable expansion of the B.E.F. The 3.7" gun has distinct limitations as a mobile gun, and it is considered that not more than one-third of the heavy anti-aircraft guns in Corps areas should be 3.7", the remainder being 3".
66
It is understood that the 3" gun is out of production, and, therefore, that the increases for future expansion must be found from existing 3" guns at home, which, it is believed, are mainly on semi-mobile mountings. It is requested, there- fore, that steps may be taken to manufacture mobile platforms so that the necessary convertions of semi-mobilo to mobile may take place when the time comes.
6th December, 1939.
MR. CHURCHILL expressed his astonishment at the fact that the British Expeditionary Force was prepared to accept an obsolete gun which the Air Officer Commanding- in-Chief, Fighter Command, was not prepared to accept, even in remote parts of Great Britain. The 3.7-inch gun was in every way superior a fact to which a number of artillery Officers had testified to him when he visited the Expeditionary Force. The matter had been considered by the Deputy Chiefs of Staff Sub-Committee, who had apparently accepted without question the views expressed by the War Office, but he was not, in any circumstances, prepared to endorse the opinions expressed,
MR. STANLEY said that he had spoken to the Commander-in-Chief on this point. It was quite wrong to suppose that the 3-inch anti-aircraft gun was useless. It was more mobile, and had a faster rate of fire than the 3.7-inch gun. It was true that its ceiling was limited to 16,000 feet, but the view of the General Staff was that, in the forward area, aircraft flying above that height would be incapable of bombing the type of objective to be found in such areas, and would therefore not do much harm. The important thing was to have a gun which could move about rapidly in the forward areas, and keep pace with the leading formations. The G.H.Q. welcomed the larger guns for the base and line of communication.
-1-
Page 87
Page 87
Page 87