FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1917
1917 - 0425.PDF
MAY 3, 1917- it, and when we wonder whether we are going to have any Zeppelins to meetZeppelins—the German Zeppelin menace is not yet finished, and in all proba- bility we shall have them over again—and when, after two and a half yearsof war, I want to know who is responsible for the fact that we are not able to meet like with like, I am not entitled to go to Lord Cowdray at all. He saysit is nothing to do with him, and I have to go to the Financial Secretary to the Admiralty and ask him why there are no English Zeppelins to competewith German Zeppelins. Then, not merely are these two Services under separate heads, but there is no interchange between officers of the R.F.C. andthe R.N.A.S. I hope and believe that Lord Cowdray and my hon. and gallant friend can act as friendly go-betweens between the services and modifydifferences 1 etween them, but there is no power to say to this service, " Do this, and you must do it," or to the other, " You must come in closer touch."They can only say, "We hope you will accept our recommendation and be better friends one with another than you have been in the past." Then thereis the Advisory Committee of Aeronautics, which has not been mentioned this afternoon, and which, as I gather, is responsible to no one except the PrimeMinister direct. Why it should report to the Prime Minister I do not know. That at least might be at once put under the supervision and control of thAir Board. In effect, the new Chairman of the Air Board is only an intermediarybetween the two Air Services and the Ministry of Munitions. He does not even control his own factory. The Royal Aircraft Factory is not under him.He cannot, as I understand it, appoint or dismiss a single man in that factory. That is under the Ministry of Munitions. I suggest that the proper courseis to transfer to the Air Board the civil powers of the Secretary of State for War over the Flying Corps, and the civil powers of the First Lord of theAdmiralty over the R.N.A.S. I do not suggest that Lord Cowdray and his Board should interfere with the tactics of Sir Douglas Haig at the front. LordDerby does not do so. Theoretically he may have the power, as Secretary of State for War, but, of course, he does not do so. nor would the PrimeMinister. Therefore, I suggest that their civilian powers ought to be amal- gamated in the head of the Air Board, so that even during the war the linesmay be laid down on which a great Imperial Air Service may be built up. I want to ask a further question of my hon. and gallant friend. SupposingLord Cowdray and his own immediate advisers come to the conclusion that it is desirable and feasible to do what so many others have asked should be doneever since the war began and have a large air offensive, either at Essen or in the Rhine country, consisting of at least a thousand machines ? An Hon. Member : That is no>a matter for the Air Board.Mr. Joynson-Hicks:. That "is the position. It is not a matter for the Air Board. Supposing they have an idea that it is possible, on the one hand youhave the generals at the front managing their own strategy and their own tactics, and you have the admirals of the fleet managing the fleet and requiringaeroplanes or seaplanes for their fleet purposes. I am suggesting quite seriously that there is an opening for a third man or a third body such as this Air Board-to formulate, while supplying the army with all it wants in the way of recon- naissance machines, bomb-dropping machines, photographic machines, a netImperial Air Service, under a new head if necessary, which would take in hand an offensive which, I suggest, might have a very real effect on the conclusionof the war, which would get behind the German lines in a way that artillery cannot get, "In a way that cavalry and infantry cannot get, and destroy, inthe German country, the moral which is at present upholding the German forces. That is what I want to do, and I ask my hon. and gallant friend canthat be dtme ? It is no good telling me it could not be done. It is no good telling me, "You cannot manufacture the machines." Eighteen months agowe thought it could not be done with regard to artillery and munitions. I do not know whether the House realises that when the war began, inAugust, 1914, there had never been a single aeroplane engine manufactured in this country at all. They had all been brought over from France. Someonewill hang on a lamp post in Whitehall when the war is over for the abominable neglect of the Air Service and the engine question at that time. When I cometo the machines, I must say that there are certain machines at the front to-day which arc obsolete so far as bombing raids and offensives over the Germanlines are concerned, which are putting upon our airmen too great a strain, a greater strain than we have a right to ask. My hon. and gallant friend was,I think, not quite right in the suggestion which he made just now, when he asked, Is the work being done ? Of course the work is being done. Theposition is that we are responsible for asking ourselves the question, Is the work being done even in wartime at too great a sacrifice? We are responsible. I told the Committee just now how many of the best machines there were.I am not going to say how many of the A type of machines there are. It is a machine which is perfectly well known to the Germans as well as to us, whichcan fly at the outside only seventy or seventy-five miles an hour in favourable circumstances, and at the outside can climb only 8,000 to 10,000 ft., and ittakes from forty to forty-five minutes to go up 1,000 ft., and it has to go into battle with German machines, and it has to go on bombing operations overGerman lines, where it has to meet German squadrons of Halberstadts and Albatroses with an engine-power double that of our machines and a climbingpower of 1,000 ft. per minute, so that it can get up 18,000 ft. in less than 20 minutes, while it can fly at a speed of no miles an hour. Should I mentionthese figures ? I hardly know. I am told that if I mention them in this House I shall cause our young men who are flying this machine to be afraid. Colonel Faber : Not they.Mr. Joynson-Hicks : But I am bound to say that not once or twice, but over and over again I have ha'd letters from men at the front with regard tothese machines. Here is a letter from a flight commander, a relation of a member of this House, who has sent the letter to me. It was written a fewdays ago, and it shows that the men who have to fly know that this is an inferior machine :— " I do not know if you have seen the criticism about the R.F.C. ? "and then it mentions that my hon. and gallant friend said that this particular, machine was not sent on bomb-dropping expeditions. He quite admits thatthat was a mistake, but I have had numerous letters from flyers in regard to that unfortunate statement. Then he goes on :—"This is precisely what they are working it for at the present moment." This is a man who has done well. He is a flight commander, whose fatheris a gallant officer in our own army and a member of this House-. He goes on :—" If from any ill-luck I get' done in ' in a bombing raid, I hope that someone will make a fuss about sending flyers out bombing with those machines, which,as everybody knows, are not fit for the work." He is willing to go and he is going, and he has fought well. Here is letterreceived this month from another man who has done well. I have seen this man. He is fighting in one of our squadrons. He says :—" No. So-and-so did a bombing raid, and No. So-and-so did a raid." and he mentions three machines of this A type, who were sent on another raid.It is too sad.' The Committee will believe me when I say that there is a con- demnation from top to bottom, by the men who fly these particular machines,of the policy which sends them to fight these high-power German machines on these expeditions. There has been ample time to clear out the whole of these " A " machines,but, instead of doing that, even to-day they are ordering that type of machine'', and they are ordering them not merely for certain purposes at home, but for"use at the front. I admit that they are good machines,.stable machines, useful for night flying. But they are not machines that ever ought to be allowedto go over the German lines, and to come into conflict with the enormously high-power German machines, who can pounce on them and shoot them down,even before they know that they are attacked, swooping down from a height of 18,000 ft., while almost invisible from the ground, and smashing up andcrashing to the ground our maohines almost before the pilots know that they 'i- have been attacked.We have heard during the last fortnight of the great successes of our Air Service at the front. I admit that it has been magnificent. We have not beentold the figures of our losses. I obtained them in the same way as the Germans have got them. I obtained them by putting somebody to read through thefile of the Times newspaper from January 1st to to-day. In the casualties are included the casualties for both Macedonia and Mesopotamia. I thinkthat my hon. and gallant friend will agree with me that the casualties there in flying are very small. At all events, they would not in any degree alter"the proportion in these lists from January 1st to to-day. They also includ* men—non-commissioned officers—who were flying. There, again, the numberwould be very small indeed—perhaps two or three a month, because nearly1 all of our flyers are of the officer class. They do not include any accidents.*They include only killed, wounded and missing at the front. In January therV were 56, in February 119, in March 152, and this month up to date there are319, more than double the figure for March, marly three times that fcr February, and nearly six times that for January. There were this very weekir7 reported in the paper on one morning. I present this dilemma to my hon. friend : Either those men were on. thebest machines or on inferior types of machines. If they were on the best machines, then I am afraid that the statement of the Undersecretary thatour best machines are better than the Germans is rather discomforting. If, on the other hand, you think that they were on inferior machines, then a veryheavy responsibility is upon the directors of the Air Service, who sent these men over on machines which, on my hon. friend's own showing, he knows areinsufficient for the work they have to do, and obsolete so far as conflict with the high-power German machines is concerned. In addition to this, during thissame period, the R.N.A.S. has lost 121, and at home there have been 73 pilots killed. That is a rather serious toll to take place at home. A great many of themare on a particular machine—not the one 1 am talking about now—which has been referred to in this House, which I will call " B," if my hon. friend willallow me. One was killed yesterday in my constituency. Five were killed within the last few weeks in that constituency. Many of them were killed atthe aerodrome. After going there all you hear is that this machine is a very dangerous machine to fly. The right course is to stop all contracts. Whenyou find machines getting obsolete, instead of taking delivery by the hundredj you should cut with a knife into the contracts, whatever it may cost the country,and, instead of building obsolete machines, build some of the magnificent machines which we know they are turning out. The new machines are very finemachines indeed. They are sent over with the young men, and men who have been out at the front flying for months are still kept on the old machines,instead of being transferred to the new first-rate machines. In the French Flying Corps, a man goes up from a seventy or eighty miles an hour machine to .a100 or 120-mile machine. With us the men are kept at the old machines, and the new men go out on the new and best machines. That is a small criticismof detail, but I know that my hon friend will enquire into it. There are not many of these new flying machines. I will call one of them'" X." It is a machine better than any German machine, fitted with our newest and best engines, and can climb ana fly faster than the German machines.A squadron of these machines were sent over. There is no harm in telling thej House how Lieutenant Robinson, V.C., met his fate, whatever that fate may 'be. A squadron of these machines wore given pilots, most of whom had nfyey been over the German lines at all. They were practising flying up and downbehind our lines, and afterwards sent for a short distance for one day. Thei six of them were started off for a long patrol over the German lines, and theseincluded Lieutenant Robinson. They were " X " machines, the1 best we haVe got. Out of that six one got back to our aerodrome all right, one got back jiisfsafely behind our lines, and four either came down or crashed down behind the German lines, and the Germans have got those best machines now. Surelythose machines ought not to have started. You ought to have waited until you had got three or four squadrons ready to go over. It is like the old tank'sovera gain. The whole secret of the matter is engines, engines, engines. Last week I met six of the principal aeroplane manufacturers in this Kingdom, andthey told me they could turn out, and were turning out, as many machined as you like of the best and highest type, but they could not get engines forthem. Years ago arrangements ought to have been made to build thesfe high-class engines. Perhaps manufacturers are now being given theencouragement that is so necessary. But are proper plans being laid down for the necessary engines, or are constant tinkering alterations beingmade to the engines ? A member of this House said he was manufacturing a certain part of one of our new and best engines, and that he hadbeen doing it for three months. The week before last an alteration of a I in. was made in regard to a certain portion of it; and I asked him whatwould be the result. I said, " Will it mean a fortnight's delay ? " He said, "The result will be three months' delay! " Why was that not thought bibefore ! Why was not that design made sufficiently correct before, in order that the manufacturer, when he had started, would be able to go straight aheadwith the work ? I want to congratulate the Government on the reprisals which took placea fortnight ago at Freiburg. But if you are going to have reprisals you must be thorough. You must have an offensive air fleet apart from the everydayrequirements of your army. You cannot take your machines from Sir DouglaS Haig at the time of a big push. You must have an independent striking force. without notice, every time the German Army commits a "breach "of thecivilised usages of war, there will be a reprisal, swift, sudden, and determined) on German territory behind the German lines. ' pLord Hugh Cecil; I confess I was not quite able to follow what is the rcmedj that my hon friend desires to apply to the evils which he alleges to exist. Hewas very anxious, as I was, to increase the authority of the Air Board and t6 make it an Air Ministry. Practically speaking no board sitting here in Lcndoncould ever effectively or usefully control operations at the front. The practical truth is that operations must always be left in the hands of the professionalsoldiers and sailors. My hon. friend is anxious to meet Zeppelins with Zeppelins. I thought that of all the successful things in home defence the resistance;of Zeppelins by aeroplane had been most notable. People have been impatient that this form of home defence was slowly developed, but at any rate it hasbeen a really good piece of work through the organisation of aeroplanes end searchlights. I always think that the value of searchlights are inadequatelyrecognised by the public. They are as important in the defence of the country against Zeppelins as aeroplanes. So far as that criticism gees, surely the hen.member is carrying criticism rather too far when he complains of our hemfc defence against Zeppelins. Mr. Joynson-Hicks : My point is this: Will the noble lord consider thfequestion of the demands of the Fleet in regard to aeroplanes and the great use Zeppelins have been in naval battles ? . . • • ">Lord H. Cecil: That is another ppint. I understood my hon. friend to be
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
