FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198  
199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   >>  
ctors, we should be able to judge the extent to which the change was justified. It was a change for which, under pressure, I bore a large share of responsibility, and it involved replacing, in the middle of a great war, an organization built up by experts well acquainted with naval needs by one in which a considerable proportion of the personnel had no previous experience of the work. The change was, of course, an experiment; the danger lay in the fact that, until technical and Admiralty experience has been gained, even men of the greatest ability in other walks of life may find it difficult to produce satisfactory results even if there are no limits imposed on the size of the Staff which assists them. The question of production is best examined under various headings and the results under the old Admiralty organization compared with those under the new, although comparison is admittedly difficult owing to changing conditions. WARSHIP PRODUCTION Under the Admiralty organization existing up to May, 1917, the Third Sea Lord--as the Controller was termed when changes were introduced by Mr. Churchill in 1912--was head of the Departments of the Director of Naval Construction and Engineer in Chief, and of that part of the work of the Director of Naval Ordnance which dealt with the design and production of guns and gun mountings. Under the new organization a civilian Controller became responsible for production, the Third Sea Lord being associated with him on technical matters of design. A special department for warship production and repairs was set up under a Deputy Controller, the Third Sea Lord having no authority over this department except by his association with the Controller. Under the old organization it had been the custom during the war for the Third Sea Lord to give to the Board and to the Commander-in-Chief of the Grand Fleet a personal forecast of the anticipated dates of completion of all warships under construction. My experience whilst in command of the Grand Fleet had been that this personal forecast was generally fairly accurate for six months ahead. As an example it may be stated that in the first four months of 1917 the delivery of destroyers _was within one of the forecast_ made in October, 1916, four vessels of the class being slightly behind and three ahead of the forecast. Of thirteen "E" class submarines forecasted in October, 1916, for delivery by March, 1917, all except two were deliv
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198  
199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   >>  



Top keywords:

organization

 

Controller

 

forecast

 

production

 
experience
 

Admiralty

 

change

 
department
 

results

 
Director

difficult

 
technical
 

design

 

delivery

 
October
 

personal

 

months

 

warship

 

Deputy

 

repairs


special

 

matters

 

submarines

 
Ordnance
 

Construction

 

Engineer

 
responsible
 

civilian

 

mountings

 

forecasted


accurate

 

fairly

 

generally

 

whilst

 
command
 

slightly

 
vessels
 

destroyers

 

stated

 
association

custom

 

authority

 
thirteen
 

warships

 
construction
 

completion

 
Commander
 
anticipated
 

proportion

 
personnel