EXPLANATORY NOTES ON APPENDIX 1—BUILDING PROGRAMME.
(A)—Capital Ships.,
In paragraph 14 of Annex III to N.C. (M) (35) 50, Report by the British Representatives on the Anglo-German Naval Discussions, it was stated:—
"In these circumstances, it may be essential for the Naval Staff to recommend a more rapid replacement of the British battlefleet in order to ensure that in
new ships the British Fleet does not fall behind the capital ship strength of Japan and Germany combined."
2. The more detailed information of the German building programme that has been communicated to us since the date of that report enables the position to be reviewed in greater detail, taking into consideration also the French and Japanese naval building programmes as far as they are known.
German Capital Ship Building Programme.
3. The German capital ship building programme, which it is intended to complete by the end of 1942, comprises five new capital ships. To enable the fifth ship to be constructed the Germans calculate on transferring tonnage into the capital ship category or on " adjusting " the category tonnage.
4. Capital Ships " D " and " E " of 26,000 tons with 11-inch guns (Ships "A," "B" and "C" are
Deutschlands) are expected to complete by the end of 1938; Ship "F" of 35,000 tons with 14-inch or 15-inch guns will be laid down on the 1st July, 1936, and should complete in 1940; Ship "G," which will be of 35,000 tons if France builds a second 35,000-ton ship, is expected to complete in 1941; Ship "H" of the maximum qualitative limit that may be agreed upon is expected to complete in 1942.
Japanese Building Programme.
5. The Japanese building programme is not known, but for the purpose of this paper it is assumed to be not less than that indicated by Admiral Yamamoto as his personal programme, viz., 4 ships to be laid down in the six years 1937-1942, of which 2 ships might be completed by the end of 1942.
French Building Programme.
6. France is building 2 Battle Cruisers of the
Dunkerque class, laid down in 1932 and 1934 respectively (26,500 tons each with 8-13-inch guns and high speed); she intends to lay down a new ship of the
France class of 35,000 tons, with 15-inch guns, towards the end of 1935, and to lay down a second ship of this class on or after the 1st January, 1937. Further programmes are unknown and probably undecided.
Italian Building Programme.
7. Italy is building 2 ships of 35,000 tons and 15-inch guns, which were laid down in 1934.
Summary of New Ships.
8. Thus, at the end of 1942 we may be faced with a German Capital Ship force of 5 new ships (not including the
Deutschlands). During the same period, Japan may have completed at least 2 new capital ships, France 4 or more, and Italy 2.
Modernisation.
9. Japan is modernising all her capital ships, and it is anticipated that all 9 ships will have been modernised before the end of 1937.
10. France is modernising the 3 ships of the
Bretagne class which were completed in 1915 and 1916. The 3 ships of the
Jean Bart class (completed 1913 and 1914) were extensively refitted in 1929, though it is not considered that they can be regarded as "modernised" ships. The
Diderot class (completed, in 1911) have not been modernised and are considered to be of small fighting value. It is possible that they may be scrapped on completion of the new ships, and they have not been included in the comparison of numbers.
11. Italy is modernising her 2 ships of the
Giulio Cesare class and greatly increasing their speed.
12. Of the British Fleet,
Nelson, Rodney and
Hood are post-war ships that do not require modernisation.
Warspite, Queen Elizabeth and
Renown will be completely modernised.
Barham, Malaya, Royal Oak, and
Repulse have been or are now in hand for partial modernisation, but they will not be re-engined, nor will they have improvements to main armament mountings or such increased armaments and aircraft. They cannot be counted as " modernised " ships. The remaining 4 ships of the
Royal Oak class and
Valiant are not being modernised at all.
13. It is desired to emphasise once again that "modernisation" is not a substitute for a proper replacement programme. As was pointed out in the Appendix to N.C. (M) (35) 1
, whatever rate of replacement (within practical limits) is adopted, the extreme age to which some of our ships will necessarily have to last must give cause for the greatest anxiety. The present modernisation programme is designed to make the older ships reasonably able to carry out their functions for the period that they must remain in service; it does not make them comparable to new ships. This especially applies to the partly modernised ships.
14. The
minimum situation as regards numbers of capital ships with which we may be faced at the end of 1942 is shown below, together with the British position that will result from the adoption of the different replacement programmes indicated:—
There was an excellent chart here that the software won't import
(a) British replacement programme of 2 : 1 : 2 ships a year.
(b) British replacement programme of 2 ships a year.
(c) British replacement programme of 2 : 3 : 2 ships a year.
15. The figures for Japan in this table are based on the assumption that Japan scraps a ship for each new ship completed. Should Japan retain her old ships on completion of the new ones her total would be 11, and by retaining 2 of the older ships (which, however, would not be modernised ships) the British total would be 17. It is worth noting that 35 per cent, of the tonnage represented by these 17 ships would not give Germany sufficient tonnage to build more than the 5 ships already allowed for. If, however, the British number was increased to 18, Germany would have a reasonable claim to build a sixth ship.
16. It will be seen that the British total of 15 ships is approximately equal to the total of Germany and Japan, if we count the 3
Deutschlands as only equal to one ship, but there are 7 new ships in the German-Japanese total, and 7 modernised Japanese ships as well. A British building programme of 2 ships a year (Table C of Enclosure No. 3 to Appendix to N.C. (M) (35) 1) would produce only 6 new ships by the end of 1942, and a programme of 3 ships in 2 years only 5, even if the ships laid down in 1939 were started sufficiently early to ensure their completion within the year 1942. Both of these programmes are inadequate in the face of the German and Japanese programme, which, as stated above, will realise 7 new ships at this date.
17. A building programme of 7 ships in 3 years, to provide equality in new ships only with Germany and Japan, is, therefore, the least that gives reasonable security, and then only if the 1939 ships are laid down sufficiently early to be completed within the year 1942. Moreover, the first 2 ships should be laid down at the earliest possible moment,
i.e., January 1937. If Japan starts building at a greater rate than has been assumed in this paper the rate of building would require further acceleration.
