Post by Diarist on Jul 23, 2014 11:40:34 GMT 1
We arrived late in Portsmouth so it was decided that we overnight here. It's good to be back on firm ground again - the Atlantic crossing was rough! We shall be visiting Aldershot Army Camp on the way to London to inform General Wavell about the Parachute Company decision. Only one of the outcomes of yesterday's Defence Council Meeting.
The Secretary of Defence and IGS barraged us with many questions and I think we presented ourselves well. The Parachute proposal was agreed upon easily, especially by Winston Churchill - the last thing we wanted was a return to the trench-warfare of the last war. Our naval proposals were put on ice for the moment because the Hawkins-class are heavy cruisers and we don't have too many of those. As for the dozen or so ships which were not scrapped last decade they will be useless unless they have had a skeleton crew conducting neccessary maintenance over the past years - pumping out the bilge for example. They will have to be inspected before a decision can be made.
There was still some sceptiscism about our armoured warfare suggestions - the infantry advocates were in the majority. We explained our defence policy...
We used Italy as an example - they started their rearmament/modernisation too early - most of their new weapons are already obsolete - we should avoid that mistake. Instead we should concentrate on defensive weaponry first. Anti-tank weapons to counter their mass armour threat, anti-aircraft to counter the large Luftwaffe and anti-submarine defences to counter their predictable submarine warfare strategy. It's easier to build a defence system than to build a new system to overcome our defences - cheaper, too! We then build offensive systems which can overcome our defences and hopefully theirs too. We need to build advanced fighters first then bombers which, with the aid of escort fighters, can survive our air-defences. We should wait for our monoplane fighter designs before we issue large contracts for bombers. The development of RADAR must have high priority.
The same policy for our anti-submarine warfare. We must be able to detect enemy submarines and effectively destroy them before they can threaten our Merchant Fleet in the vast oceans. The same with land warfare, we need anti-tank weapons which can defeat all known tanks and armoured vehicles which can provide close-support for our infantry. Our main tank can come later. Our first priority must be the development of a 6pdr and a 75mm gun for armour and anti-armour use. Armoured cars are easier and cheaper to build than tanks and can fulfil many roles required in mobile warfare. They could either carry infantry or mount weapons such as MG's, AT-guns, mortars or artillery. The experience gained can then be transferred to tank design.
Summarizing, our offensive designs will benefit from our defensive systems.
We also discussed the idea of forces trained to operate behind enemy lines - not just sabotage or guerilla warfare but also intelligence gathering and infiltration. Deploying cadre units to train and/or support indigenous forces would more be more desirable than sending British troops to fight there.
At least we have a Parachute Company - who knows what may transpire later...
The Secretary of Defence and IGS barraged us with many questions and I think we presented ourselves well. The Parachute proposal was agreed upon easily, especially by Winston Churchill - the last thing we wanted was a return to the trench-warfare of the last war. Our naval proposals were put on ice for the moment because the Hawkins-class are heavy cruisers and we don't have too many of those. As for the dozen or so ships which were not scrapped last decade they will be useless unless they have had a skeleton crew conducting neccessary maintenance over the past years - pumping out the bilge for example. They will have to be inspected before a decision can be made.
There was still some sceptiscism about our armoured warfare suggestions - the infantry advocates were in the majority. We explained our defence policy...
We used Italy as an example - they started their rearmament/modernisation too early - most of their new weapons are already obsolete - we should avoid that mistake. Instead we should concentrate on defensive weaponry first. Anti-tank weapons to counter their mass armour threat, anti-aircraft to counter the large Luftwaffe and anti-submarine defences to counter their predictable submarine warfare strategy. It's easier to build a defence system than to build a new system to overcome our defences - cheaper, too! We then build offensive systems which can overcome our defences and hopefully theirs too. We need to build advanced fighters first then bombers which, with the aid of escort fighters, can survive our air-defences. We should wait for our monoplane fighter designs before we issue large contracts for bombers. The development of RADAR must have high priority.
The same policy for our anti-submarine warfare. We must be able to detect enemy submarines and effectively destroy them before they can threaten our Merchant Fleet in the vast oceans. The same with land warfare, we need anti-tank weapons which can defeat all known tanks and armoured vehicles which can provide close-support for our infantry. Our main tank can come later. Our first priority must be the development of a 6pdr and a 75mm gun for armour and anti-armour use. Armoured cars are easier and cheaper to build than tanks and can fulfil many roles required in mobile warfare. They could either carry infantry or mount weapons such as MG's, AT-guns, mortars or artillery. The experience gained can then be transferred to tank design.
Summarizing, our offensive designs will benefit from our defensive systems.
We also discussed the idea of forces trained to operate behind enemy lines - not just sabotage or guerilla warfare but also intelligence gathering and infiltration. Deploying cadre units to train and/or support indigenous forces would more be more desirable than sending British troops to fight there.
At least we have a Parachute Company - who knows what may transpire later...