Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir. Mr. DITTER. When did it start in production? Captain RAMSEY. I will enter the date. Mr. DITTER. I mean the new Brewster plant in Pennsylvania. Captain RAMSEY. Is is expected that the plant at Hatboro, Pa., will start production about December of the present year. Mr. DITTER. Captain, have you been assigned particularly to leaseland under aeronautics? Captain RAMSEY. No; I have not been. Mr. DITTER. Are you presently the Chief of Aeronautics? Captain RAMSEY. I am Acting Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics. in the absence of Admiral Towers. Mr. DITTER. How is it that he is not here? Captain RAMSEY. He is away on an inspection trip with the new Assistant Secretary of the Navy for air. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. When did he leave here? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You knew we were going to have hearings on this, did you not? Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir. I tried to prepare for them. Mr. SCRUGHAM. I might interject here that I have had many years of experience with the captain, and I regard Captain Ramsey as the ablest man in the entire Bureau of Aeronautics. Mr. DITTER. I was trying to pay him a compliment. Mr. SCRUGHAM. I have had contacts with him repeatedly and I know of no one more capable of presenting the situation than he. STATUS OF AIRCRAFT PRODUCTION Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Has your air production been up to what you had expected? I mean, when you were before us on the first lend-lease bill. Captain RAMSEY. Our aircraft production, sir, has in my opinion been extradordinarily good in the light of the very great difficulties the industry has been confronted with. To start with, I may explain, we have a closely coordinated program. Unlike the United States Army air force, our naval airplanes are coupled in our program with the availability of new ships, our pilot training, and the development of shore facilities, and therefore we try to get the schedules set out, and they are set out in the Office of Production Management reports, to coordinate as closely as possible with those other major elements of the program. We have, I am frank to say, fallen behind 20 percent in deliveries, but for reasons entirely outside the control of contractors. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. This committee and Congress gave you about what you asked for. Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. If there is any delay it is not because of lack of funds. Captain RAMSEY. I should say not. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. It is administrative, rather than a question of money. Captain RAMSEY. It could be attributed to other difficulties Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. I say it is administrative rather than lack of money. INADEQUACY OF MAGNESIUM SUPPLY You said something about magnesium. A few days ago I had a communication from a party who might be able to furnish some magnesium. I took it up with the O. P. M., and I learned that they had about all they need. What have you to say about that? Captain RAMSEY. I cannot reconcile that with my own understanding of the present situation. I understand, sir, that the British needs for magnesium for purposes other than incorporation in aircraft engines, in aircraft manufacture, are so very great that it is important that a large amount be imported monthly to meet their requirements. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. This magnesium goes into English channels, and they will use the magnesium in making airships? Captain RAMSEY. They are using it for other purposes. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Whatever the purpose is. My recollection is that you made that as one of the points, that you lacked magnesium. There has been a shortage of magnesium? Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir; I think I can verify that. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. The only information you have with reference to what the British need comes from British sources, largely? Captain RAMSEY. It comes from British sources, but it is very carefully checked by our own military and naval authorities. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. But after all, you follow largely the recommendations of the British as to what they say they need? Captain RAMSEY. No, sir. It has been our purpose, in the interest of our own national defense, where we see our program is being adversely affected by the shipment of critical materials, to try to get a reconciled point of view upon aircraft engine production in this country so that such production will not be unduly delayed, and we have tried to hold down shipments for that reason. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Did the British suggest to you that they might make these airplanes in Canada rather than in the United States? Captain RAMSEY. No; they did not necessarily— Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. They had a commission here. Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir; and they have a very large commission here now, the British Air Commission. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Who pays their expenses? Captain RAMSEY. Their expenses, so far as I know, are defrayed by the British Government. CONSTRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT IN CANADA Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. They have suggested to you the advisability of building these planes in Canada, have they not? Captain RAMSEY. It may be they suggested that to some of our air officers, but I take most of my suggestions and transmit them to my admiral. A very careful study is made of all localities where aircraft could be turned out, at the maximum rate of speed. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You lack facilities in industry for keeping up with this job, do you not? Captain RAMSEY. You say we lack facilities? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Yes. Captain RAMSEY. I think our plant expansion program has been very satisfactory in the main, but the difficulties we have had to contend with have not been primarily due to the lack of expansion of plant facilities. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You have plenty of plant facilities? Captain RAMSEY. I believe so; yes, sir. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You mean for the Allies as well as for American planes? Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. For the whole of them? Captain RAMSEY. Yes, sir. I might say we are just a small part of this program as a whole. Of course, I can only speak for the aircraft plants under Navy cognizance. The Army may paint a different picture, because they have a tremendous program. But the British program, so far as our interests are concerned, is only about 10 percent, but it is a very large percentage of the Army program. I am just speaking about it from the Navy point of view, and the aircraft plants under our cognizance. I cannot speak for CurtissWright, Douglas, or Boeing, but I think I can speak for Pratt & Whitney, Grumman, and Vought. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. They are doing a good job? MAGNESIUM PLANTS CONTEMPLATED TO MEET ANTICIPATED DEMAND Mr. SCRUGHAM. Before we leave magnesium, is it not a fact that provision has been made through the O. P. M. and the Defense Plant Corporation for the erecting or construction of magnesium plants with a capacity at least equal to any anticipated demand? Captain RAMSEY. That is my understanding, Governor. Mr. SCRUGHAM. For the benefit of the record and the committee I may say that a plant at Palo Alto has a proposed capacity of 18 million pounds per year, and that plant will soon be in production. In addition, there will be a plant at Boulder Dam that will have a capacity of 112 million pounds a year. I have made a careful check of the figures in the past couple of months, and I think that will take care of both the British demands and the American needs for the ensuing year. DELETIONS IN TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Captain; and may I say to you and to all witnesses who have appeared before the committee that you understand, of course, that you may delete from your testimony or supplement your testimony as you consider it advisable when the transcript comes to you. You are perfectly free to do that in the interest of defense. Mr. DITTER. Except the deletion of questions. The witness has no right to delete questions. He may delete his answers. Am I right about that? The CHAIRMAN. Referring to confidential information which the Department does not consider it advisable to make public. Mr. DITTER. As I understand the rule, the witness does not have the right to delete questions. He may refuse to answer, but he cannot take out a question. Am I not right? 63413-41--13 The CHAIRMAN. To some extent many of these questions, most of these questions, are predicated upon information previously given, and the question itself may carry information which might be prejudicial to the service, and, of course, I am sure that in a case like that no member would care to have it included in the record. Mr. DITTER. I agree with that to this extent, that I feel that the examination itself should not be deleted by the witness, but that the judgment of the committee should determine whether it should be printed or should not be printed. But I do not feel that the latitude of any witness should permit him to alter or change in any way questions asked by a member in an examination. Personally, I would resent it. The CHAIRMAN. I am certain that no one would be more ready than the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who is governed by the most patriotic motives, if in a question any reference was made, for instance, to a specific number of planes or a specific number of particular engines, to agree that that should be eliminated. Mr. DITTER. But I should like the exercise of that judgment to be reposed in me rather than to be delegated to somebody else. The CHAIRMAN. Knowing the gentleman from Pennsylvania as I do, I am certain he will take care of it. Mr. DITTER. I admit it, sir. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1941. BUREAU OF SHIPS STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL S. M. ROBINSON, CHIEF The CHAIRMAN. Admiral Robinson, the committee has before it an estimate of $630,806,000 for the Bureau of Ships. We will be glad to have you give us some information about that. Admiral ROBINSON. Mr. Chairman, I have prepared a statement in regard to the money we have already had, because that ties in in many instances with what we are asking for here. GENERAL STATEMENT The CHAIRMAN. We would like to have you read that to the committee, without interruption. Admiral ROBINSON. Under the Defense Aid Appropriation Act of March 27, 1941, the Bureau of Ships has been principally concerned with but two of the subheads, those under the following sections of that act: 1 (a) 4, Vessels, ships, and so forth, and 1 (b), Tests, inspection, repair, and so forth. Therefore, this statement will be confined to the work of the Bureau of Ships under these two subheads, as allocations received by the Bureau under other subheads have been relatively small in amount. SECTION 1 (A) 4, VESSELS, SHIPS, ETC. The complete description of this appropriation reads as follows: Vessels, ships, boats and other watercraft, and equipage, supplies, materials, spare parts, and accessories. Under this appropriation there had been allocated to the Bureau up to September 15, 1941, a total of $130,459,490. This total covers allocations for some 250 British requisitions, which have culminated either in the awards of contracts for defense aid articles or in preliminary negotiations preparatory to formulations of contracts. In no case has procurement outside the United States been involved. The more important of these requisitions cover the following: (Items were discussed off the record.) It will be noted from the discussion of some of the above requisitions, that additional funds will be needed from this supplemental appropriation. This is due to the fact that when requisitions are received the specifications in most cases are stated in the broadest general terms. It is impracticable to develop fully complete details before making the request for funds because to do so would seriously delay the ultimate delivery of material. In cases where there was inadequate information on which to base accurate estimates, the Bureau of Ships has sometimes requested allocations which later proved to be insufficient to accomplish the purpose intended. The Bureau of Ships had in hand as of September 18, 1941, 60 British_requisitions in the estimated amount of $497,693,868 which cannot be acted upon due to funds under the present appropriation being entirely allocated. Of this amount $449,800,000 represents two single items of the proposed supplemental appropriation, which are presented in the detailed justifications. SECTION 1 (B), TESTS, INSPECTION, REPAIR, ETC. The complete description of this appropriation reads as follows: For testing, inspecting, proving, repairing, outfitting, reconditioning, or otherwise placing in good working order any defense articles for the government of any country whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States, including services and expenses in connection therewith. Under this appropriation there had been allocated to the Bureau up to September 15, 1941, a total of $73,660,000, which it is estimated will cover the Bureau's requirements for repair of British naval vessels until January 1, 1942. As of September 20, 1941, the British vessels having arrived at our yards, and on which work has been undertaken are as follows: (Items were discussed off the record.) Decisions as to the work to be done are reached in arrival conferences at the yards; when representatives of the British Advisory Repair Mission, the Bureau of Ships, the commanding officer of the vessel, and the navy yard or shipyard consider all work requested for the vessel. The work involved consists of repair of battle damage (from torpedoes, mines, aircraft bombing, and gunfire), upkeep repairs of hull and machinery to offset wear and tear, and certain alterations. Routine overhaul and upkeep repairs on these vessels are conducted in essentially the same manner as on our own ships, but |