Letters to the Editor
SOVIET NAVAL EXPANSION SIR,-1 was most interested to read Com- mander Courtney's lucid article on Soviet paval expansion. He very carefully weighs in the balance the power of the new Russian Navy and our own Naval Forces, but may I venture to suggest that his conclusions are less alarming than the situation warrants.
The deployment of British sea power in any future war is likely to be, in the opening stages, of a mainly defensive nature, as in the past. The supply convoys must be safe- guarded as• they steam into the British Isles, and outward to the many parts of the world where our armies may be engaged. This would aPpear to be recognised by the Admiralty, in as much as the frigate is the largest, and one of the most numerous, of the types of warship being built for the Royal Navy at the present time. This would also seem to indicate that the Admiralty regards the submarine—the frigates' special foe—as the principal threat to the convoys.
This is probably correct, but surely it has not already been forgotten to what extent the Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Bismarck con- stituted a threat to our seaborne supplies— and that at a time when we had surface ships which could meet them on approximately equal terms. It was not even necessary for them to put to sea in order to interfere with the disposition of our Sea and Air Forces. Surely with our fleet in its present sorry state as regards cruisers, each one of these twenty-odd ' Sverdlov ' ships must constitute as great a menace as did the German pocket battleship of the last war.
It appears most likely that it is this form of ocean raiding—combined with an intensive submarine campaign — that the Soviet Admiralty envisages as its ' opening gambit' their striking force to consist of fast, hard- hitting cruisers and ocean-going submarines, while their defensive arm would be Comprised of minelayers, MTBs and coastal submarines, etc., and backed up by the considerable total of four thousand aircraft.
So far I have not mentioned our own air power. One could draw more comfort in our present situation if a large building pro- gramme of fast aircraft-carriers and their aircraft was under way—but this, unfortu- nately, is not the case.
Surely there is a strong case for maintain- ing, in commission at least, one ' Task Force' such as was used with great effect first by the Americans and later by our Pacific Fleet against the Japanese. Such a force could be Used either for offensive action against the enemy's coast and, when it was known that enemy surface forces were at sea, as hunting packs.' These forces would include cruisers and carriers as well as frigates—which arc almost destroyers—and they necessary supply ships to remain independent of their bases in the British Isles; these would certainly be subjected to atomic, or at any rate, ' old fashioned' bombing.
It will at once be asked can we afford such a Navy., At the risk of being very unoriginal I will reply, ' Can we afford not to have such a• Navy ? '—Yours faithfully, PETER S. BUNTING
34a Cairnburn Road, Belfast
Previous page
