Scan of original print of the 1915 War Department Board of Review

Comments

Transcription

Scan of original print of the 1915 War Department Board of Review
REPORT OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW
OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT
TO THE
SECRETARY OF WAR
(NOVEMBER 26, 1915)
ON T HE
COAST DEFENSES OF THE UNITED STATES
THE PANAMA CANAL
AND THE INSULAR POSSESSIONS
(Printed for use of the Subcommittee in charge of the
Fortification Appropriation Bill, Committee Oil
Appropriations, House of Representatives)
SIXTY-FOURTH OONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
CONFIDENTIAL
WASB1NG'l'ON
GOVERNMENT PRIN'rING OFFIOE
1916
-
· /'
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
MAJ. GEN. HUGH L. SCOTT, Chief of Staff.
BRIG . GEN. M. M. MACOMB , hief War College Division.
MAJ. GEN. TASKER H. BLISS, Chief Mobile Army Division.
BRIG. GEN. E. M. WEAVER, hie! Coast Artillery Division.
BRIG. GE
J.
DAN
. KI GMAN , Chief of Engineers.
BRIG . GEN. WILLIAM CROZIER, Chief of Ordnance.
CAPT. STANLEY D. EMo !CK, Coast Artillery orps, R ecorder.
2
REPORT OF BOARD OF REVIEW.
WAR DEPARTlI1ENT,
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF,
Washington, November 26, 1915.
From: Board of Review.
To: Secretary of War.
Subject: R eport of the Board of Review as to the needs of seacoast
defen es.
In compliance with the instructions of the Secretary of War
directing the Board of R eview to report upon so much of a letter of
the Hon. Swagar Sherley, M. C., dated March 10, 1915, as relates to
the needs of seacoast defenses, the following is submitted:
The last comprehensive report upon the needs of our seacoast
defenscs was that mad e by the Taft Board on February 1, 1906.
That board recommended that additional armament be emplaced
at a number of localities in continental United States, but as the
appropriations for new fortifi cations that have been made since that
date have been confined mainly to the insular possessions and the
Panama Canal, comparatively little of the additional armament
proposed by that board ha been installed. The period that has
elapsed since the date of the report of the Taft Board has been
marked by radical changes in naval designs, which included the
development of the dreadnaught type of battleship, a type carrying
heavier armor and much more powerful ordnance than its predecessors. As a consequence both the offensive and defensive capabilities of warships have been materially increased.
In recognition of thi development the department during the
early part of the current year adopted the policy that the majorcaliber direct-fire gun to be installed in future should be of at least
16-inch caliber . Considerations of the same character, more particularly the greater structural strength and increased deck protection of modern battleships, have led the Board of R eview to recommend that seacoast mortars to be installed in future should be of
16-inch caliber. In addition to these types, the projects of the board,
3
4
..f
REPORT OF BOARD OF REVIEW .
as outlined hereinafter, call for the utilization as howitzers of a number
of 12-inch guns that are now on hand, by mounting them on barbette
carriages of a special design that will permit of the attainment of a
range of 30,000 yards.
The projects of the board, together with a brief statement of the
objects expected to be accomplished by the proposed additional
armament, are as follows:
PORTLA D, ME.: Two 12-inch guns mounted for long-range fire-to
defend the harbor and the existing defenses against a long-range
naval bombardment.
BOSTON, MASS.: Two 16-inch guns and four 12-inch guns mounted
for long-range fire-to supplement the fire of the existing defenses and to defend the anchorage areas against long-range
naval bombardment.
BUZZARDS BAY: Two 12-inch guns mounted for long-range fire at
Fort Rodman-to deny the bay as a base to the warships and
transports of an enemy.
EASTERN ENTRA CE, LONG ISLAND SOUND: Six 16-inch guns, eight
16-inch mortars, and two movable 4.7-inch guns-to supplement the fire of existing defenses, particularly in the prevention
of a run-past, and to afford a defense against a long-range naval
bombardment.
SOUTHERN NEW YORIC Four 16-inchguns, four 12-inch gun mounted
for long-range fire, four 6-inch guns, and sixteen 16-inch mortars-to advance t·he line of defense and preclude a naval bombardment of New York and Brooklyn, to afford increased protection to a United States fleet debouching from Ambrose
Channel, and to prevent the reduction of the existing defenses
at Foi·t Hancock by long-runge naval fire.
DELAWARE BAY: FoUl' 12-inch guns mOWlted for long-range fire-to
deny the bay as a base to the warships and transports of an
enemy.
CHESAPEAKE BAY: Four 16-inch and four 6-inch gun, and eight 16inch mortars-to deny the bay to the battleships and transports
of an enemy and to afford protection to a United States fleet
debouching from the bay under fU'e of a hostile naval force.
PENSACOLA, FLA.: Two 12-inch guns mounted for long-range fire-to
defend the harbor and city against long-range naval fire.
REPORT OF iBOARD OF REVIEW.
5
MISSISSIPPI RIVER: E ight 6-inch guns- to afford an lUner line of
defen e against an attempted run-past by crui ers and destroyers.
GALVE 'TON, TEX.: Four 12-inch guns mounted for long-range fireto defend the harbor and city against long-range naval bombardment.
SAN FRANCI CO, CAL. : Two 16-ineh guns, two 12-inch guns mounted
for long-range fir , two 6-inch guns, and four 16-inch mortars-to
defend the city and harbor again t long-range naval bombardment and to supplement the fire of existing defenses over certain
channels of approach.
COLUMBIA RIVER: Four 16-inch 1110rtars-to cover water areas not
covered effectively by existing armament.
PUGET SOUND: Four 16-inch, five 6-inch, and four 3-inch guns, and
eight 16-inch mortars- to supplement the fire of the existing
defenses and to afford an inner line of defense for Admiralty
Inlet.
\.. OAHU: SL"X 12-inch guns mo un ted for long-range fire-to cover water
areas not covered by existing armament from which the ' naval
utilities can be bombarded by a hostile naval force, and to
afford a means of defense against hostile warships attempting
to support landings on the island.
MANILA, P . 1.: Two 12-inch guns mounted for long-range fire-to
afford a means of defense against long-range artillery that may
be established by an enemy on the Mariveles Peninsula and to
supplement the existing defenses in fire to the seaward.
J
PANAMA CANAL, ATLANTIC TERMINUS: Two 16-inch guns, and four
12-inch gun mounted for long-range fire- to supplement the
exi ting defense and to preclude a long-range naval bombardment of the Gatun Spillway from the water areas to the
north and we t of the mouth of the Chagres River.
PANAMA CANAL, PACIFIC TERMINUS. Two 16-inch guns and twelve
16-inch mortars- to reduce the danger to be apprehended from
a concentrated naval fire upon the existing defenses and to
enlarge the protected water areas afforded a United States fleet
debouching from the canal.
The total armament, for continental United States included in
the above projects comprises twenty-two 16-inch gum:, twenty-four
12-inch guns mounted for long-range fire, twenty-three 6-inch and
v'"
6
REPORT OF BOARD OF HEVTE W .
four 3-1nch guns, a.nd forLy-cight 16-inch mortars; for the insular posse ions, eight 12-inch guns mounted for long-range fire; and
for the Pn.nltma Cann.l, four 16-inch guns, four 12-inch guns mOlmted
for long-range fire , and t w Ive 16-inch mortar .
In adJition to the above the Pl'oj <'ct of thE' bon.rd inC'lude(one
hundred and thirty-four 3-in ch anLiairer af t gun fo], the seacoast
defenses of c.ontin ental ni ted States, sevE'nLeen 3-inch ant,iaircraft
guns for the in3ulflr po ses ions, and eight 3-inch nnti aircrn.ft guns
for the P anama Cnnal.
The board haa recommended nl 0 that an ItPpl'Oll'iation be a 'ked
of Congress at i L nex t. ession for the constru ction of six 16-inch
movable hov..-itzE'rs and a n experimE'ntal 14-inch gun on railroad-cal'
mount for defense again t hostile landings in unfortifiod harbOl .
The poli cy followed h<,retofore as to reser ve seaeoa, t ammunition
has contemplated the ac umulation of the o-called t.wo-hours'
allowance-an allowance assumed to be. suffi cient for the dmation
of a single engagel11 ·nt. The board is co nvinced that thaL allowance
is inadequate, an d hal> recommended that Lhe allowancE's for the
several caliber;; be:
(a ) For gun in co ntin ental United tates, except gun. of 8-inch
caliber and upward on inner lines of defense, allowance.;; equal to
one-half the accuracy Me of the respr.ctive calibers' for morta.rs ,
excopt Oll inner lines of defense, an nllowance equal to onc-folll'th
the accul'aey life.
(b) For armament of -inch caliber and upward on inner lines of
defense in co ntin ental United State~ , allowances equ al to olle-half
those for outer lines.
(c) For guns in the in ular POs,'(\' sion;; and on the Canal Zone,
allowances equal to the accuracy life of the respecti ve calibers ' for
mortars, an allown.nce equal to two-thirds the aceul'l1.cy life.
In so far as can be foreseen by the board at the present time, the
only additional land that will be required in co nn ection with existing
defenses will be a small amount at Los Angeles for the installation of
certain accessories. For the projected defenses additional land will
be needed at Boston, Rockaway Beach , Delaware Bay, near New
Orleans, San Francisco, Puget Sound, and at Panama. The estimated
cost of the areas required is shown in the tables of estimated cost
given hereinafter.
J
7
REPORT OF BOARD OF REVIEW .
The board has studied the existing seacoast fortifications with a
view to determining which, if any, are of insufficient military importance to warrant their retention. As a r esult of this study tbe
board has reached the conclusion that tbe following armament is of
insufficient military value to warran t incurring tbe cost involved in
prov iding a m anning personnel or ammunition therefor:
Boston : One lO-in ch rifle.
Long Island Sound: Two 8-inch rifles.
Eastern ew York: SL'\:teen 12-inch mortars (cast iron) .
Sou them New York: Two 8-inch rifles.
Delaware River: Two 12-inch and two 8-incb rifles.
Cape Fear River: Four 8-in ch rifles and four 12-il1ch mortars (cast
iron).
Mobile : Two 8-inch rifles.
San Francisco: Sixteen 12-inch mortars (cast iron) and fi ve -inch
rifles.
(It is proposed , in connection with the above scheme, that [our steel mortars shall be
transferred from Fort Totten to Fort Slocum, and fo ur steel mortars from Fort Howard
to Fort Slocum, and that four steel mortars from Fort De Soto and fo ur hom Fort
.\forgan shall be transferred to San Diego to be mounted in the emplacements authorized at the last session of Congress.)
The board is of the opinion also that upon tbe installation of tbe
proposed additional armament called for w1d er the proj ects above
outlined, the following armament will become of in ufficient military
value to warrant incurring th e cost involved in providing .a manning
personnel or ammunition th erefor, and tb e co t of ammunition for
this armament is not included in th e total e timates of cost given
below:
Long Island SOlmd: Two lO-ineh and four 5-inch riA e
E ast ern New York: Two 8-in ch rifles .
Southern New York: SLxteen 12-incb mortars (cast iron ).
Baltimore : One 12-inch and three 8-in cb rifle ~ .
Potomac River : Three 8-inch rifles.
Pensacola: Two 8-inch rifles.
New Orleans: Two 8-inch rifl es .
C(1lumbia River: Four 12-inch mortars .
In view of tbe impracticability of anticipating the military a,nd
naval developments of the future, the board is not prepared at this
time to recommend the relinquishment by the Government of any
N
•
8
R EPORT OF BOARD OF REVIEW .
of the areas of land h eretofore acquired by the Government in connection with existing or prospective for tification projects, and it
recommends, therefore, that th e armament listed above, and the areas
of land on which it is now emplaced, he retained for possible fut ure
miGtury needs.
The board ha . consid ered the advisa.b ility of continuing the disappearing carriage in seacon· t fortifications to be construct ed in the
future, or of sub titut ing in its stead some other cal'liage. "The
board is of the opinion that th e disappearing principle should be retain ed and that it should be the type of mount for direct-fire guns,
except in those instances where special conditions may render advisable the installation of the turret or the barbette mount."
. The following table shows the approximate estimated cost of completing the accessories, including the increased allowances of ammunition proposed by th e board for existing defenses :
Con ti nent.'ti United States:
Ammunltion __ ____ __________ __ _____ ______ ___ _____ ___ $20, 166, 362
Sit es __________ _________. _. ___" " _'_ ... ____ . _. _.__ _
16, 000
Submarine mines __ . _. _. _. .. . __. _. _. _. ___ __. _____ . __
506, 231
Submarine-mine stru ctures __ _____ . __ _. __. _.. __ ___ . __
411, 968
Fire control. ___ ______ _____ __ ______ ___ _. _______ . _____ _ ] , 928, 758
searchlights ___ . __ . _. ___ _____ _________ . _____ __ ____. __
1,858,700
Power plants _____ __ __ __ . __. ___ _. _. __..... . . . . _.. . _. _
Moderni zing emplacements ____ . _.. __ __. _. ___ __. _. ___
160,000
1,500,000
Total Unitecl States .. .. __ ____ ______ _________ _______ ____ ___ __ __ $26, 638, 019
I nsular possessions :
Ammuni tion ____ ___ ____________ ___ _____ ____ _________
Submarine min es __________ ______ _. ___ __ ___ ___ _. __ _. _.
Subma.rine-mine structures _. ____. ____ ___ _. ______ _. __
Fi.re control. __ __ _____ .. __ ____________ ____ _____ __ _____
7, 384,500
138, 100
10,000
H 2, 050
Total insular possessions ______ ____ ____ ____ ___ __. _____ . __ ___ ___ . .
Panama Canal :
Ammunition __ __ _________ _____ __ _. ___ ___ ____________
Subma rin (> mines ________ __ . ____ __ __ ________ __ ______
Subma rine-mine stru ctures. __ __ _. ___ ____. _. _____ __. _
7,644, 650
3, 682, 000
240, 000
47, 000
Total Panama CanaL. _.. _______ . ___ ____ . __ _. ______ ___ ____. ___.
~,
969, 000
Approximate total estimated cost of completing accessories for all existing
. defenses ____ __________ ___ ____ ___ . ___ . _. __. __. _. ___ . _____ __. _____. _ 38, 251, 669
9
REPORT OF IBOARD OF REVIEW .
The following table shows the approximate estimated cost of the
additional armament proposed by the board and of the accessories
therefor :
Continental U nited States:
Armament ___ __... ___ . _______________________ _______ $15,478,000
Emplacements ___ __. __. _____ . _______ . ___ " ____ . _____ _ 13,863, 000
Ammunition ____ .. _____ __ ____ ____ ___ __ __________ __ __ 9,467,638
sites ___ ___ _______ . ______________ _. _. ____ __________ _ 1,886,000
Submarine mines _____ . __________ ___ . _____ __ _. _____ _
Submarine-mine structUl'es __ ______ . __ ' ____ _: ________ _
Fire controL __ _. ____________ ____ ___ __ ______ ____ ___ ___
Searchlights ________ _____ ___ . _____ __________ __. __ . __ _
Power plants. ________________ . ___________ _________ . .
419, 750
242,000
1,236,000
592,000
1,140,000
Total United States ______________ . ___ ... ___ . ___________________ $44, 324,388
Insular possessions :
Armament ____ . __________ . ______ _. ___ ____ _______ __. _
Emplacements ____ ___________ _. _. ___ ___ ___ . _____ __. __
Amm unition_____ ___ ___ __________ _________ _________ _
F ire control. ____________________ . _______ _____________
Searchlights _________________________________________
Power p lants ______ ____ _____ __________________ __. ____
610,000
977,000
1,571,500
79,000
140,000
80,000
Total insular possessions ________ __ _____________ . _______ __ __ ____ _
Panama Canal :
Armament. ________________ . __________ . _______ . _____
Emplacement's ____________ _______ . ____ . _________ ___ __
Sites ___ __ __. ___ _. _____________ . __ __. _______________
Ammunition _____ . _______ ____________________ . ______
Fire control. _____ ____ _____ _. _________ . ______ ___ __ __. _
Searchlights _________________________________________
Power plants . __ __ ___ . ___ . _____ . _____________ . _______
3,457,500
2, 440,000
2,348,000
100,000
4,573,000
225, 000
160, 000
180,000
Tot.al Panama Canal ___________________________________________ 10, 026, 000
Approximate total estimated cost o[ proposed additional armament and
accessories ______ . ____ ______ _____________________ . __________ . _______ 57,807,888
,-
10
REPORT OF 'BOARD OF REVIEW.
The consolidaLed totals of the above estimates, arranged by
items, are as follows:
Armament __ __ . .... _.... _. . . _......... _............. . .. _... .... . . . _. $18,528, O()()
Emplacemel1t. .. ......... ....... .. .. . .... _. .... .. . __ . .... . ___ . _... _. . 17,188,000
Ammunition ..... .... . ......... ..... . _......... .. . . ... . . . . .. _...... . 46,845, 000
Sites . ..... _..... __ . . . _.. .. ..... _.. . . . . . . . . ..... _. . ........ . .. .. ... . 2, 002, 000
Submarine mines ................. . . . . ... _........... ........ .. . ... . 1,394, 081
Submarine-mine structures ......... .... .. ___ ............... . ....... .
710,968
Fire controL .. .. _.. _. . .. _. . ...... .. . . ...... . ....... . . . ............ .. . 3, 580,808
earchlights . . .. __ __.. . .. _. .. ... ....... . .. . . _. ..... _.. _. .. _. _. _.. ... . 2,750,700
Power plant ........................... . ......... . ... _............. . 1, 560,000
Modemizing emplacements ................ _. _. _........ _........... . 1,500, 000
Grand total. .. . ........ . .......... . .. _....................... . 96, 059, 557
This gr and total, $96,059,557, which includes the estimated costs
of completing the accessories for existing armament, of procuring
and installing the proposed additional armament, and of providing
acce ories therefor, may also be subdivided as follows:
For continental United States ....... ... .. .. ......... _. _..... ......... 70,962,407
For the insular possessions .................. . .. .. _. _. . .. . ... _. . . . . . . . 11, 102, 150
Fol' the Panama Canal.. ........... ......... . . . ...... . ......... ..... _ 13, 995, 000
A pproximate grand total for the United States, insular possessions, and Panama Canal. . .. . .... .... _.. ... _................ 96,059,557
If the appropri ations to be made by Congress be equal to the
amount" that can be expended annually \\,--1th advantage by the constructio n departments, the manufacture and installation of all of the
armament included in the projects of the board may be expected to
require approximately foUl' year.;;. In accordance with the in tructions of the Secretary of War, the amount of the estimates for new fortification work submitted for consideration by Congress at the next
session has been confined to $20,000,000, a sum which is approximately one-fourth of the total e timated cost of the project submitted by the board on September 15, 1915. An ·appropriation for
the first year of an amount greater than $20,000,000 could be expended, however, with advantage, and would result in greater expedition in the accomplishment of the entire proj ect.
The conclusions of the board upon the particular items of armament to b e included in the estimates submitted for consideration by
REPORT OF
~OARD
OF REVIEW .
11
by Congress at the next session were based upon the following
assumption :
(a) That the installation of the proj ected armament for Rockaway
Beach is recognized to be a matter of fir",t importance; but, as it is
expected that approximately one year will be required for the Government to acquire title to the land upon which the defenses will be
erected, the actual appropriation of funds for the fortification of that
locality, except for the acquisition of the site: may be deferred until
next year without delaying materially the final completion of the
proj ec t, provided authorization be given to proceed to carry out the
execution of the project in a continuous way.
(b) That the installation of the 12-inch guns mounted for longrange fire will afford, in genera.!, a greater measure of protection than
can be obtained oth erwise in the same time and for a like expenditure
of funds.
(c) That as the supply of anti-aircraft guns for the protection of
existing defenses is an urgent necessity, and as these guns can be
procured expeditiou ly, provision for the procurement of a number of
these guns should be included in the program for this year.
(d) That it is deemed inadvisable to postpone the completion of
the fortifications at San Pedro for such additional time-about one
and one-half years-as would be required to substitute 16-inch guns
in place of the 14-inch guns now approaching completion .
H. L. SCOTT,
Major General, Chiej oj Staff,
Senior Member oj BOa1,d.
ESTIMATED COSTS, BY LOCALITIES, OF PROJECTS OF BOARD OF REVIEW, INCLUDING ESTIMATED COSTS OF COMPLETING ACCESSORIES FOR EXISTING ARMAMENT (DETAILS OF ESTIMATES GIVEN IN REPORT OF BOARD
OF REVIEW OF NOV. 26, 1915).
....
~;
'/
Locality.
Arma-
ment.
Emplacemen ts.
Ammunit ion .
Sites.
Fire
conSubmarine 1s Ubmarine-1
mine
trol.
mines.
structures.
UNITED STATES.
IHl, S70
Kennebec River ... ....... . .. .......... .. · 1·········· · ·1 ·· · · · ·······
Portland. . . .... . . . . . ....... .. .. . ... . .....
SIlO, ooo
5240,000
Portsmouth .. ... . . . .. . ..... _.. ... .. . ..... ......... . .. .......... . .
Boston ................ . ... . .. ... ... .. .. ..
S70,OOO
930,000
New Bedford. ....... . . ........ ..... . .....
110,000
240,000
Narragansett Bay. ..... . .. .. . ... .. ....... . .. ......... .......... . .
Long Island Sound. . .... .. . . . ... .. . .. .. . . 3,240,000 1, 990, 000
Eastern New York .. ..................... . ... .. ...... .. .. . . ......
Southern New york.. ... .. ...... .... . . . .. ..... ... .... .... .. . . ....
Sandy Hook.. . ... ............... . .... . .. . 2, 760,000 2, 900, 000
Delaware.... . ............................
220,000
480,000
Baltimore. . . ...... . .... . . ... .. . . . . . . . .. .. ............ . .. ... . . . .. .
Potomac. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... ... . .... . ....... ... .
Fort Monroe.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...... ...... ... .........
Cape Henry... .............. . ... .. .. . . . .. 1, 980, 000 1,7S0,ooo
~:~;l!:~. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::: ::::::::::::
Savannah . . ....... ... .................. .. . . . . .... .. ..... . . ...... .
Key West . .. . .. ... . . .... . .. ... .. .. ........... . . . . .. . . .. . ... . ... . .
'rampa ... .. ..... . . ....... . .... ...... . . . ... .. ... ........... ...... .
Pensacola... ....... ...... .... . . .. ...... . .
110,000
240,000
Mobile . .. . . .. .. . .... . ...... •. .. . ... .. . .. ... . ... . .. . . . . . ....... ... .
480,000
240, 000
New Orleans ... ..... . . . . .. . . ...... . . . ... .
480,000
Galveston ........ .. .. ...... . ...... . . . ... .
220,000
s25, ~1 I. ....... .
29,565("
... . .......
$25,000
......... . .
. ........ ..
S,OOO
. ..........
. . . . .. . ... .
1, 550,000
20,000
H ,SHi ......... . . .
992 . . ... : ..... ~
3,370
25, SI5 ,
... .. .. . . ...
17, 950
380,517
74,070 (
10,992 ..... . . ... . .
000 .••... • •....
..... .... ......... . . .. : .
4,504 . .. . .... ... .
6, 168 ............
512
500
... . ... . ...
...........
. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ... . . . . ....... ... ..
···.·.·····1
$29,634,000
:::::::::::
419,750
~:::
242,000
... . .
~~:~~
2,650
2,140
I·
2,175
10, 000
3,130
15, 850
31,4QO
Power
plants.
Searchligh ts.
IS,275
· ·· ··~;:;~-.l1
S67,850
58, liS
159,450
56,025
377,025
254 , 500
35,300
47,225
249, 700
' 158, 925
107,775
64.,650
36, 150
174, 000
$32,000 . .......... .
32,000
$20,000
......
80,000 ........ . . . .
64,000 '
80, 000
80, 000
. 20,000
80, 000, .... .... ... .
48,000 I
160,000
32, 000 .... .... ... .
, . ... ... ..... , ....... . ... .
240, 000
96,000
144, 000
40,000
96,000 . . .. . . .. . ...
80, 000 .. . . . . .. ....
SO, 000 .......... ..
96,00<1'
160,000 Ilsl, 500, 000
64,000 .- ....... ...
96, 000 ... .. .......
80, 000 . .... ... . ...
80, 000 . .. . ...... ..
96,000 . ..... . ... ..
96, 000
20, 000
112, 000 . ...... . . . . .
80,000
128, 000
128, 000
40, 000
~:~: ' -
69,075
75,475
49,425
lOS, 125
52, 350
117,475
100,700
Moderni?ingemplacemen ts.
,
1'otnl.
$69, 155
499,415
153,~
2, 129,442
535,210
474,975
0, 155,087
7S, 292
4S, 185
7,795,700
1,067,429
209,943
145,6(l2
116, 150
4,851,750
12-1., liS
183,S2O
151,725
157, 615
147,600
574, 125
185, 755
1,071,325
1,057,850
).
. t:d
t;l
"d
0
t:d
,.,
0
":I
to
0
~
t:l
0
":I
t:d
t;l
~
t;l
~
\
San Diego . ............... . .. ........ . . ... ............ . ....... .. ..
Los Angeles . .. .. ........ ..... ... . .. . .... . .......... . .
639,000
San Francisco . .. . .•...... ... .. . . .... .. ... 1, 100,000
1, 130, 000
P uget Sound .... . ................. . . ..... 2, 043,000
1, 880, 000
Columbia .. . ............ . ............ . . .. .
280,000
320,000
Contingenoies .... . ................. . ... . . . I 2, 195,000
2134,000
Total, Uni ted States .. . ........ .. .. . 15, 478,000
I NSlJLAR POSSESSlQN S.
Oahu .. ..... ......... . ....... . ........... .
Manila ...................... ... .. . .. ... . .
Total insular possessions .. . ...... .. .
410, 000
200, 000
610,000
... . .. . . ... . ....
16, 000
258,000
15,000
.. . ........
...........
13, 863,000
1
249,000
728,
000
29,034, 000
I}
977,000
8, 956, 000
1,902, 000
. ......
1,015,981
653, 968
I}·········· r ··········1
...........
8, 956, 000 . . .. .. ..... .
166,482
127, 500
156,001
99,200
174,000
96,000
209,3SO
96, 000
48,225
112,000
3 141,300 . .......... .
... . .... . ...
80, 213
80,000
1,000
56,000
12, 870
1,3SO
7SO
500
17,750 ... . . . . .. ...
138, 100 .. ... 10,
. . . 000
....
138, 100
3, 104, 758
2, 450, 700
1 ~: : I.... ~~~:~·
10,000
191,050
G9,OOO
41 , 000
100, 000
160,000
20,000
SO,OOO
3(j2, 982
1, 112, 014
2, 915,000
4,4 17,570
781,475
2,255, 4SO
1,300,000
1,500,000 • 70, 962,407
60,000 .. . . . ..... ..
20, 000 .... .. ..... .
140, 000
1,439, 900
700, 250
80, 000 .. .. . ....... • II , 102, ISO
~
t:rJ
'"Ii
0
~
1-3
PANAMA CANAL.
P anama can s L .... ............. •. ....... , 2,440,000
)
12,348,000 1
Orand tota L .. .. .. .... ......... .... . 18,528, 000 1 17, 188,000
8,255, 000
1
100, 000 1
46,845, 000 1 2,002, 000
240, 000 1
1, 394,081
47,000 1
710,968
225, 000
3,580,808
I
100,000
2, 7SO, 700
I
180, 000
1············113,995,000
1,500, 000 1 1,500,000
I 96,059,557
0
"':I
tjj
0
~
Includes s ix 16·in ch mon,ble howi tzers, one 14-in ch moyable gon, a nd 134 antiaircralt gons.
' Includes 5134,000 lor emplacements lor nntiaircralt guns.
• This nmou nt represents value 01 certain ordna nce !fre·control matarial on hand a nd has been dedu~ted in obtainillj! tbe tota l, 83,104,758 lor fITe control lor United States.
• 'Potal shown Includ es a mounts lor ammunition , 829,634,0001 and lor modernizing emplacements, ~I ,500,OOO, in addition to to ta ls lor loea 1itles.
• Total shown includes amount lor ammunition in addi t ion w
totals lor localities.
0
o
....<:
I
t:J
"':I
~
t:rJ
t:rJ
~
~
\
"
t; \
· - -. r
--- - - - .
:-~
L/~
l,,,-.,
.I. •
R DAD"'"
:l ,. 'I!:
r-
~
T
•

Similar documents

Open resource

Open resource board is of the opinion that the disappearing principle should be retained and that it should be the type of mount for direct-fire guns, except in those instances where special conditions may rende...

More information