FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1913
1913 - 0976.PDF
[/JJGHT ignore all the lessons of the past development of flight, and particularly those learned during the nearest approach to the "real thing" it is possible to devise, we must come to the cold-blooded decision that the Navy not only wants waterplanes, but wants them rather badly. Having got thus far with our argument, we come to the next Bracher point, viz., that the main lesson of Mr. Hawker's flight is that aviation is yet in so precarious a stage of development that it would be foolish to spend large sums of public money in the equipment of an aerial defence service. Does Mr. Bracher really seriously ask his public to believe that this is the one and only conclusion to be reached from the result of Mr. Hawker's attempt to circle the coasts of Great Britain ? Unless he is writing with his tongue in his cheek—and we do him the justice of saying that we do not think this for a moment—then he must be woefully deficient in imagination and wanting in the power of logical reasoning. Let us hark back and see what actually did happen during this flight. We need not go over all the details of it. Quite sufficient that we point out to Mr. Bracher and others who may be of his way of thinking, that Mr. Hawker actually flew for a distance of more than a thousand miles—that is to say, a full two-thirds of the whole distance he set out to cover— and that he failed through absolutely no fault of the engine or of the machine. It was the lapse of the human factor that brought the enterprise to an untimely end. Therefore, it is fair to deduce the argument that already the machine and its engine have overtaken and passed the capacity of the man, and that if improvement is needed anywhere it is in the human and not the material machine. Let us say that we are not advancing this as a definite argument, but we do press the point that it is a fairer deduction than that reached by the correspondent of the Manchester Guardian. No one claims, as far as we are aware, that the aeroplane has reached its ultimate stage of development, but is that any argument for holding back provided we can be satisfied that it has arrived at a useful stage ? Not for a moment could such a contention be allowed. As well might it be argued that because the Dreadnought is practically obsolescent before it is completed for its first commission, we should cease building battleships until such time as the final development has been reached. The man who would seriously argue thus would, deservedly, be accounted a dangerous lunatic. Upon the same ridiculous principle no one would go into the water until he could swim; no business under taking would be engaged upon until a profit actually accrues at the moment of starting, and so on. The next point is this. Mr. Bracher says :— " Experts are saying thai seaplanes require mucn stronger frames, vastly more powerful engines, and far more effective float devices than have yet been provided. In short, design must be revolu tionised. Clearly this is the time for experiment, and not for any wide scheme involving heavy expenditure." ® ® THE ROYAL FLYING CORPS. The following appointments were announced in the London Gazette of the 9th inst. :— War Office Regular Forces.—R.F.C.—Military Wing.— The following are appointed to the Reserve : Brevet-Major Lionel B. Boyd-Moss, South Staffordshire Regt., May 1st, 1913. August 14th, 1913 : Major Arthur B. Forman, R.A., and Major William S. Brancker, R.A., a General Staff Officer, 3rd Grade, War Office. August 14th, 1913 : Lieut. Llewelyn G. Hordern. Lancashire Fusiliers: Lieut. Hubert D. Harvey-Kelly. Royal Irish Regt. : Lieut. Ralph M. Vaughan. Royal Inniskillmg Fusiliers: 2nd Lieut. Lionel S. Metfoid. Special Reserve: 2nd 1002 SEPTEMBER 13, 1913. Now, this impresses us as being specious argument, since it is the sort of thing with which it is impossible not to agree in principle, but before we arrive at complete agreement we must examine the proposition and see what we mean by it all. Nothing was ever yet first produced in its final and perfect state, but this last has inevitably been reached by stages involving long and careful experiment. From the line-of-battle ship of the Nelson era to the last Centurion is a far cry. Again, in the case of under water craft, there is an enormous gap between the original Holland boat and the latest submarine of the day. Now, what would have happened in either case if it had been agreed that these vessels were still " experimental" and everyone had sat and waited for someone else to perfect them ? Once more, the answer is obvious. We should be where we were a hundred or more years ago. Instead, however, of having adopted any such foolish policy we have gone on building and equipping ships which were the best we knew how to construct at the time and have developed accordingly until we have reached the super- Dreadnought and the submarine as we know them now— and still the end of development is not in sight. Next, Mr. Bracher makes it a cause of complaint that the Naval and Military Defence Committee propose to " Equip all the coast defences and defended ports of the kingdom with aviation stations, and in the case of the former, permanent establishments are to be maintained as soon as the necessary buildings can be erected and fleets of aeroplanes provided. Of the cost of this scheme one-third will be borne by the Navy and two-thirds by the Army." He adds the surprising information that— " the trouble is that, as a cold fact, the whole cost will be borne by the taxpayer " 1 ! ! Now, unless we are content to assume that aviation has no bearing on military and naval operations, the answer is that these stations are necessary, even supposing the practical aeroplane has not yet materialised. That, of course, we do not allow since we know the contrary to be tne case. But even supposing it were so, we do know that its day is not far off, and as we construct dry docks large enough to take in battleships far exceeding in size those at present afloat, we must provide accommo dation for our air fleet to be, for the sane and simple reason that it takes far longer to put up buildings than to construct the aircraft to occupy them. So far as we are able to read between the lines of the letter we have traversed, the meaning of it all is, that all the necessary experimental work is to be carried out by private firms at their own risk and cost, and that the State, which must ultimately benefit, should placidly stand aside and wait until private enterprise has accom plished the perfection of the machine. Never mind what is being done in other countries or what lead they may have or hold, let no penny of public money be spent on the development of aviation, but rather let that be left to the fools and the patriots. Such logic sickens us. Fortunately, we are able to think that it appeals to but a small minority of our countrymen. to to Lieut. (Hon. Capt. in Army) Gilbert B. Rickards. Special Reserve: 2nd Lieut. Evelyn W. C. Perry. Special Reserve : Lieut. Leslie Da C. Penn-Gaskell, 3rd Batt. Norfolk Regt. ; and 2nd Lieut. Victor A. Barrington - Kennett, London Balloon Company, R.E., Territorial Force. Special Reserve of Officers.—R.F.C—Military Wing.— 2nd Lieuts. (on probation) are confirmed in their rank : Gilbert B. Rickards (Hon. Capt. in Army) and Evelyn W. C. Perry. The following appointment was announced by the Admiralty on the 8th inst. :— Royal Marines: Lieut. (R.M.A.) C. H. Collett to Hermes, for course of instruction at the Central Flying School, September 17th.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
