Captain William W. Fisher, Director, Anti-Submarine Division, to Commodore Guy R. Gaunt, British Naval Attaché at Washington, D. C.
With our experience of Motor Launches it is not considered that the proposed submarine chasers are wo<r>th getting over here.
They should, however, be better sea boats as they are 25 feet longer and considerably more powerful, but they would at the best be suitable for coastal work and could not be looked on as suitable for escorting convoys.
The fuel question must also be considered – they would be heavy petrol consumers.
It would be of value if we could get one or two over for trial purposes, but it is not recommended to place any order for them until one has been seen and tried.
My Minute was largely influenced by un-official remarks of U.S. Officers over here who think little of these craft. They were built, I understand, as an answer to any popular demand that might arise as the result of enemy submarines operating on American Coasts, in the event of most of their craft being our side of the Atlantic. Now they can point to a large number of Chasers ready to deal with the U boat when he appears, though they are not sanguine as regards the actual effectiveness of the measure.
Most certainly these craft can be useful in the Mediterranean and West Indies, but I do not think their qualities warrant large supplies of personnel (officers, mechanics, W/T operators etc.,) or Petrol. If U.S. are ready to man these craft the case is different.
Otherwise I would prefer to see our men reserved for craft that can keep the sea in any weather and can remain out a long time. (This implies accommodation as well as fuel capacity). Anti-Submarine Craft fall under one of three categories:-
These “Chasers” cannot carry out (1): can only do (2) near the coast and in good weather, and as regards (3), a successful hunt
must <may> be protracted and the issue may <call> for a good gun, and in these respects the 110-feet “Chaser” does not meet requirements.
D. A. S. D.