Evening star., 1925-03-26
BATTLESHIP VS.. AIRPLANE
By COMDR. HERBERT S. HOWARD.
Construction Corps, L. =. y.

tack by enemy aviation by combat
planes, so where the heavy observa-
tion and bombing planes are carried
on naval vessels, lighter, faster COM
bat planes aust be carried to protect
them and also to overcome the enemy
aviation to keep control OF the air.
To accomplish these purposes, cata-
pults capable of launching airplanes
from the deck Of d warship have been
developed and installed on all recent
ships of the fleet. Such a catapult is
a purely American naval inventions,
and its creation and development
has, 1 believe. been a great step in
the direction of placing our Navy in
superior position with regard to
aviation. 1t will be recalled that
planes launched by catapults from our
new scout cruisers rendered great
service to the round -the-world flyers
IN locating a landing place on the
coast of Greenland.
If It be agreed-and I think there
is no one in the Navy who would not
agree-that aviation is a most essen
tial part of the Navy, there arises the
vexed question as to whether this
should be part of the Navy or
wholly separate air force. From my
own point of view, that of a designer
of ships, I should say most emphati-
cally that the air force should be an
intimate part of the Navy. In prepar-
ing the designs for converting the
battle cruisers Lexington and Sara
toga into airplane carriers, plans for
installing catapults on ships of the
fleet, and of new ships, light cruisers,
and airplane carriers of the future,
most intimate touch must be main
tanned with the officers of naval avia-
tion.
With the Bureau of Aviation within
the Navy Department itself, we can
keep in intimate touch with officers
who are not only trained and skillful
aviators but who are as well trained
naval officers Of experience. In dis
cussing questions of design they are
familiar not only with airplanes but
with airpIanes in relation to ships.
The difficulties of attempting to pre-
pare designs of an airplane carrier, or
even for the design and installation
of catapult, would be almost insur-
mountable if we were depending for
our information as to airplanes and
their problems on board ship upon an
air force separate from the Navy.
With aviation as an intimate part
OF the Navy, all the experience and
skill of the technical bureaus of the
Navy Department are at its command
in the work of design. The creation
but an expansion of the usual work
In developing shore establishments.
the doctors and hospitals of the Navy
are available and the supply branch
of the Navy handles supplies, cloth
ing and pay. With q separate air
service all these activities already eN-
listing in the Navy would have to be
duplicated at great expense to the
Government.
i a i to-
operation, the reasons seem equally
strong for aviation that is entirely
naval. AS stated above, the primary
use for aircraft in navy is the gath
ering of information. The observer
must know beforehand what the in
formation he is seeking is for; he
should be able to recognize types of
ships at once and distinguish ships Of
our own Navy without fail. Also he
should know what the important facts
in his information are, so these can
be transmitted first, and to do this he
must be familiar with the radio com
munication system of the Navy and
the. naval signal codes. To make
these decisions and TO furnish the in
formation he has been sent TO obtain,
nothing will help him but naval train
ing. The same arguments apply in
the work of the spoilers in gunneTy
and OF DomberS. W1tnCut a genera
and absolutely ingrained back ground
of naval knowledge and naval point
of view. they may well prove an ab-
solute detriment to s. commandinG
officer instead of q great asset.
Finally. we have before us the
example of Great Britain. Aviation
was taken away from the s.navy and
combined into the Royal Air Force
toward the end of the war when the
menace of the German fleet had prac-
tically disappeared. The arrange
ment, with the passing OF a few
years, proved most unsatisfactory, so
much so that in 1928 it was decided
that all air observation duties for the
feet would be carried out by naval
observers, 20 per cent OF the officer
personnel of the Royal Air Force
employed with the fleet being sup
piled by the Navy. Even this change
Is considered in England as a half
way measure and it is confidently
expected that before long aviation for
fleet work will be transferred COM
pietely back to the navy. Should we
in this country, create a separate air
service now. 1t may be taken for
granted that we would traverse the
Identical cycle almost completed by
Great Britain, and. in the course of
few short years. dismember this uni-
fed air force and have again the
present air services of the Army and
the Navy.