842.20 Defense/4–1447
Draft Statement on Standardization of Military Equipment Between the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, United States and Canada 1
(For use only if it is found necessary to make a statement on this subject)
There have been many references in the Press to standardization of arms and equipment between the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. It seems desirable to state the position of Canada in this matter.
The Canadian Armed Services have always been, and still are, organized and equipped along generally similar lines to the forces of the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth countries. During World War II they used equipment of United Kingdom, Canadian and United States origin.
Canadian industry produced a wide variety of military equipment, using both United Kingdom and United States designs, modified in some cases to suit Canadian production methods. Such articles were not used solely by Canadian Forces but formed a part of the common pool for distribution in accordance with operational requirements. This is shown by the fact that of all Canadian production, seventy per cent was made available by Canada for use by other allied forces. On the other hand, Canadian Forces used almost no equipment peculiar to themselves and much of the equipment was of other than Canadian manufacture.
This reciprocal exchange of weapons between the allies inevitably resulted in some standardization of equipment; aided in marked degree the efficient prosecution of the war, and resulted in substantial economies. In these circumstances it is natural that there should now be informal exchanges of views on the continuation and extension of these wartime practices.
[Page 108]It will be appreciated that manufacturing standards and processes differ as between the United Kingdom and the United States. Canadian industry is patterned generally along United States lines, yet a considerable part of Canadian equipment was of original British design. It therefore follows that the problem of equipping Canadian Forces, should the need arise, would be greatly simplified if, in fact, common standards were in use in the United Kingdom and the United States.
A typical example of the problem is the present variation in screw thread designs. The National Physical Laboratory of the United Kingdom, the American Bureau of Standards and the National Research Council of Canada have collaborated for several years in an effort to set suitable common standards for screw threads and have reached the stage where agreed designs are now being tested by the three countries. It is hoped that this will lead to the adoption of uniform designs in due course.
If collaboration in design is extended to include military equipment, production will be simplified and Canada will benefit accordingly. We welcome such collaboration and are prepared to support measures designed to achieve a greater degree of standardization with the United Kingdom and the United States.2
- Transmitted to Hickerson by Stone in his letter dated April 14, not printed; point of origin is unspecified. Copies of this draft were transmitted by Hickerson on April 15 to Major General Lauris Norstad, Director, Plans and Operations Division, War Department, and to Admiral Sherman (842.20 Defense/4–1447).↩
- General Norstad commented in a letter to Hickerson dated April 18 that he could discover nothing objectionable in this proposed statement and that he concurred with its use, if necessary, by the Canadian government (842.20 Defense/4–1847). Admiral Sherman, in a letter to Hickerson dated April 23, suggested substitution in paragraph 5 of the words “could be adopted” for the phrase “were in use in the United Kingdom and the United States”. He further suggested deletion in paragraph 7 of the words “with the United Kingdom and the United States”, and commented that the statement appeared quite innocuous and therefore unobjectionable for use if necessary by the Canadian authorities. (842.20 Defense/4–2347) There is no indication that this statement was ever issued.↩