From the President
In the belief that the Submarine Review will be of considerable value to those dealing in submarine matters and in furthering the art of submarining, we of the Naval Submarine League are conducting a Corporate Benefactor program to ensure the necessary funds to give the Review wide distribution — even beyond League membership. The Review is being distributed to all NROTC units, to many military libraries, and to each submarine unit. Also, to insure that newcomers to the submarine service take part in the dialogue generated by the Submarine Review, one year memberships in the Submarine League are being given to all those who will graduate from the Officer Basic Submarine School. Additionally, other League sponsored projects are being contemplated which will need funding beyond that of membership dues.
To give impetus to the Corporate Benefactor program, Al Whittle and I are co-hosting a briefing meeting for Corporate Benefactors on 14 October 1983. Admiral White, Chief of Naval Material and Vice Admiral Thunman, DCNO for submarines, will update attendees on recent submarine matters and answer questions regarding submarine programs, etc. It is intended that this meeting be the first of an annually held event to recognize the interest of corporations in today’ s submarine problems, as well as to enlist their aid in achieving Submarine League goals.
The recent bringing aboard of RAdm. Whit Hansen to be Chairman of the League’s Reserve Affairs
Committee is a big step towards having our submarine reservists closely integrated with the League’s mission and goals.
Our membership reached 1,000 on 27 August 1983. A year ago there were less than a dozen members. The League’s growth has been very good and I remain confident that with your support we will reach our goal of 1984 by 1984.
The quality and content of the Submarine Review appears to be improving with each issue and highly favorable comments on it are being received. But more articles expanding the areas of interests and concerns are needed to make the dialogue being generated of more value to all of us. We’ll increase the size of the Review accordingly. The contribution of mid-grade officers would be particularly appreciated to get a better feeling of the pulse of today’ s submarine community.
Shannon
Editor’s Notes
There is presently a surge of interest in many countries directed toward acquiring submarines, as indicated by D.E.K. ‘s item on the Falklands War. The greater the numbers of submarines in the hands of many countries the greater the chances of their being used in piratical fashion. Dr. Boyes’ article gives this some historical perspective. Captain Taussig’s article on small submersibles “submarines” forces a recognition that the submarine community today should have an interest in pursuing their
development for war related tasks. In WWII the tiny submarines had some striking successes. But
their history was also marked by operational problems which could have been reduced with
better pre-war planning and understanding of their worth. Admiral Watkins’ profound remarks
at the RICKOVER launching emphasize what Admiral Rickover demanded from those who worked for him – – the pursuit of excellence • One immediately recognizes how this resulted in the superb,
reliable submarines which the Navy has today. Yet Admiral Watkins’ theme was for the pursuit of
excellence in all Navy activities. This might include a perfecting of “the Way {of strategy)” in the manner of Musashi’ s thoughts relative to the use of submarine weapons? Or, A.J. Perry’s article which suggests that some basic questions should be asked about the excellence being displayed in submarine officer career management? Musashi’ s “Way” for the two swords of the samurai warrior also suggests a need for a special type of short sword for “close” fighting — the “melee”, where two opposing submarines discover each other at close range. J.S.L. ‘s feel for the weapons of the melee in antisubmarine warfare bring this relatively new element of ASW to the fore. Excellence in strategic thinking seems unlikely without a dialogue. This is an area where the Submarine Review should play a major role. F.C.L.’s Naval Policy Between Wars indicates a broad area of strategic thought which needs to be argued. All of these “notes” might be incomprehensible until you have read the articles
which follow. Perhaps they should have been placed at the end of the issue?
