Evening star., 1943-04-23
U-Bout VS.. AirpIone

U-bout VS.. AIrpIune
The sharply diverse trends in this
incredibly complex, far-fung war
were never better illustrated than by
two official pronouncements issued
the same day. Last Wednesday the
Truman Committee reported it's find
ings on the shipping situation, while
that evening Donald NJ Nelson.
chairman of the War Production
Board, made revealing statement
on airplane output. The contrast is
striking, the first report being as dis
concerting as the second is hearten-
ing.
After extensive investigations into
the Navy and merchant marine ship
construction programs, the Truman
Committee has issued an exhaustive
report on all phases of that vital
subject. Deploring "oVr own hush
hush policy that has kept the
public confused, prey to rumor, and
ignorant of what the enemy mu~t
know only too well, the committee
states frankly that Allied shipping
losses last year averaged 100000
tons per month, totaling approxi-
mately 100000 tons for 1912. 1t
makes the further admission that
this loss substantially exceeded the
total tonnage built last year by the
United States and Great Britain
combined, our ship construction for
that year being 8,O9o,8oO tons. with
Britain's output not stated, though
certainly much lower than ours.
We now know what has long been
inferred, that, instead of piling up
growing surplus of merchant ship
ping, we have been going into the
red just at the time when our over
seas commitments have expanded
and the need for surplus is thus
intensified. The report stresses this
when it states: ut is no military
secret that we do not have enough
shipping to supply our Allies with
the weapons and food which they
require, and to transport and main
tain overseas as many soldiers as we
can train or as much material as we
can produce" In this connection, it
should be remembered that the re-
port does not 60 beyond the close of
1912 and so does not deal with the
great U-boat offensive launched dur
ing recent weeks and now getting
into full swing. Although little has
been disclosed, it is generally under
stood that sinkings are high and that
the struggle in mid-Atlantic is un-
precedentedly fierce.
From long-range viewpoint, the
Truman report is guardedly hopeful,
placing special emphasis on mass
construction of escort vessels to
guard merchant conveys. Yet the
inference is that some time must
elapSe before the submarine menace
can be satisfactorily met. Mean
while, the projected invasion of the
European continent this summer is
largely dependent on adequate ship
ping, not merely to transport the
expedition itself but also to carry the
supplies, equipment and REINFORCE
ments needed to back it up from
America. The crucial bottleneck of
shipping in the entire war effort is
thus again emphasized.
AuoinSf This I,,h;
sketched by the Truman Committee
may be set the encouraging revela-
ton of Mr.. Nelson that United States
airplane production would probably
reach the 7,000-a month rate before
May, and that it would keep on
growing. This is a welcome revision
OF the last previous figure, released
by Undersecretary of War Robert P.
Patterson in March, when he said
1t had reached the 5,500-rate mark
in February. Apparently our air
plane output is rising by leaps and
bounds, while we know that Germany
is hard put to it to keep hers up to
previous records. We seem to be
thus winning potential air su-
periority, and what that means is
vividly illustrated from Germany and
Tunisia to Kiska and the South Pa
cific. Allied victories in the air tend
to offset U-boat successes on the
ocean. Those antithetical weapons,
the plane and the submarine, are
thereby engaged in a grim duel
whose outcome may determine the
next phase in this global struggle.