Page 494
Page 494
5
already approved in principle, should be proceeded with, the priority of individual batteries vis-à-vis those in ports abroad being decided from time to time in the light of the existing situation.
IV. CLOSE DEFENCE BATTERIES.
(a) Outstanding requirements.
12. The table of 6-inch (45°) equipments (Annex II, Table II) shows that there is an outstanding requirement of 90, of which 26 are on order by Dominion Governments, 2 by the Government of India, and 6 by Portugal. Of the 56 equipments outstanding for our own account, 29 have been ordered.
13. The production of these equipments is proceeding at the rate of between two and three a month, so that the complete programme should be finished by the end of 1942, if forecasts are realised.
(b) Requirements for unforeseen contingencies.
14. In addition to the requirements which can at present be foreseen, and which are referred to in paragraph 12 above, it is certain that many unforeseen demands will arise for close defence guns. An indication of the extent of these demands can be got from the fact that during the first year of the war 58 guns were urgently required at various places abroad, e.g., for Norway, Iceland, and the Faroes, and for the defence of ports not previously classified as defended ports. These requirements, and urgent demands at home, entirely exhausted our reserves of close defence guns and, even so, could not be met in full. Quite recently the shelling of Nauru by a German raider has emphasised the need for some measure of close defences at a number of small and hitherto undefended ports and cable stations in various parts of the world. The provision of even one gun at each of these ports might make them immune from attack, but their The Port present defenceless state constitutes an invitation to the raider. Defence Committee have had to consider the defence of such ports, and are making arrangements to allot to the most important of them the few remaining naval guns which have been lent for coast defence purposes by the Admiralty.
(c) Beach defence at home.
15. After the collapse of France an urgent demand arose for guns to command likely approaches for invading forces. This could not be met by the War Office, and consequently 250 naval guns, varying from 6-inch to 4-inch in calibre, had to be borrowed for the purpose. These guns will gradually have to be withdrawn for their proper purpose, which is the arming of merchant ships, and there is no source from which they can be replaced.
(d) Possibility of accelerating production of 6-inch equipments.
16. The Ministry of Supply has been approached in the hope that the situation might to some extent be alleviated in two ways:
(i) By accelerating the production of 6-inch (45°) equipments. (ii) By initiating the supply of a 6-inch equipment of the simplest type.
If between three and four hundred such guns could be built in, say, the next 18 months, it would be possible to replace the naval guns which have been lent for coast defence work, and have something in hand to meet the many unforeseen demands which are continually arising.
17. The Committee understand that the production of the 6-inch piece conflicts with the production of the 7-2-inch Howitzer. The Ministry of Supply have been investigating the total available capacity for the production of these two pieces, but have not found it possible to give any firm estimate. While they hope that it may be possible to accelerate production of the 6-inch (45°) equip- ment, the design of which has now been simplified as much as possible, they say that there is no means of producing in the next eighteen months anything like the number mentioned in the last paragraph, either of this or any other type of 6-inch equipment. Enquiries in the U.S.A. go to show that the necessary plant for the manufacture of coast defence guns and mountings could not be laid down under 18 months.
414
Page 494
Page 494
Page 494
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.