FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1917
1917 - 0634.PDF
IB|G HT realise what is going on ? And if he does, is he doing anything about it ? • • In a recent issue of the Daily News, ^ J Mr. Arnold Bennett has a long article the Air." dealing with this subject. So far as it is possible to discern, the two main objects of the article are, first, to show that,the war can and may be won in the air, and, second, to back Mr. Winston Churchill for the presidency of the Air Board. We are entirely in agreement with the first proposition, and in qualified agreement with the second, as the readers of "FLIGHT" are aware. We like Mr. Bennett's outspoken remarks on the divided counsels which are tearing at the vitals of our war machine. He says :— " At this moment, when arrangements might be made for winning the war in the air, military leaders are divided into two camps, not the pro-aviation camp and the pro-land camp, but the pro-cavalry camp and tfee pro-Tank camp ! And the adherents of cavalry form a very powerful group indeed. I know nothing about military science, but I am xeady, arguing from general principles, to stake everything •on the assertion that 99 per cent, of all the energy, brains and money spent on cavalry in this war is and will be utterly wasted. And as regards Tanks, though I believe in them, I am convinced that energy, brains and money might be far more advantageously spent on aeroplanes than on Tanks. The one factor that justifies Tanks is the rank unimaginative stupidity of the enemy. If Germany had imagination she would concentrate in the air for the remainder of the war. She may yet do so. She has every encouragement to do so. If she did, we should be compelled painfully to follow her and catch her up—if we could." That is all very true, but the writer might have added to it. In another column we have directed attention to the virtual suppression of private enter- prise in the matter of aeroplane design, which has a very distinct bearing on the wide question of aerial supremacy. Undoubtedly, the war can be won in the air, but only if we take the very fullest advantage of the whole of our resources, moral as well as material. We must devote all the best constructive brains of the country to the task, as well as mobilising our factories. The latter we have done, and done well. The former we have neglected and stultified at the instance of hide-bound officials and people with axes to grind. • • • Lord Montagu's paper, read last weekT J*® before the Aeronautical Society, was ane a exceedingly interesting contribution to the literature of the air. In general, the author followed very much the same lines as those pursued by Mr. Holt Thomas in a recent paper, though he added a great deal of interesting matter relative to organisation' and control of the aerial services of the future. The complete text of the paper will be found . in another part of this issue of " FLIGHT," SO there is no need for us to quote extensively from it here. There is the less need, inasmuch as the principal interest lay in the light it shed on the possibilities of the future rather than in anything new that Lord Montagu had to tell his audience about the present. Not so long ago, the paper would have been pro- nounced a flight of imagination and its author either a lunatic or a clever romancer. But times have altered, and nothing is more eloquent of the change than to find so sober a jpurnal as the Daily Telegraph accepting at its face valuation practically the whole of Lord Montagu's prophecy. In a leading article, the Telegraph says :— " His address will not be dismissed by any sensible person as'a flight of fancy. He dealt with developments which are JUNE .28, 1917. so near our experience that even our prosaic Government has appointed a Committee to consider them. It took many years for the steam engine to triumph. All the conservative forces fought against it, the Admiralty being particularly determined not to countenance the steam-driven man-of-War, for it seemed to them to mean the end of everything we cherished. The pioneers, who spoke of a speed on land of 30 miles an hour and of travel by sea at a steady 15 knots, were regarded as madmen. We have learnt our lesson, it may be hoped, and are in the mood to welcome the new age of aerial navigation. It is coming, whatever our attitude may be towards it, and, as Lord Montagu pointed out, we have every reason to encourage the development, because, owing to the distribution and configuration of the British Empire, we are very favourably situated. We can make our world-wide plans without the by-your-leave of any other nations, since we possess a' chain of landing places, southward and eastward, from Gibraltar towards the Cape, to Egypt, India and Australasia ; while the nearest points between the North American Continent and Europe, the West Coast of Ireland and the East Coast of Newfoundland, are both within the Empire. . . . Such an evolution, as Lord Montagu suggests, may seem very unreal to persons of a conservative bent of mind, but those among us—and they are not few—who have seen the advent of the^ocomotive, the marine steam engine, the electric telegraph, the telephone, the submarine cable, the motor car, and wireless telegraphy and telephony, may perhaps wonder that this newest revolu- tion has been so long delayed. The solid fact is that the internal combustion engine, of light weight and high speed, began a development the ultimate character of which it is even to-day impossible to foresee." There is little we can add to this, except that even to those of us who have been closely associated with the development of aviation since its earliest days, it seems passing wonderful to find how soberly and calmly people accept the possibilities nowadays. It is a far cry from the time when Lord Northcliffe was lampooned on account of his. offer of a £10,000 prize for a flight from London to Manchester! Mr. Coulson Kernahan does not like the11 Reprisals." use of the word " reprisals." He prefers that we should talk of " defensive deterrent acts" when we speak of carrying out counter-raids on German towns and cities. So far as we are concerned, we do not mind by what name they are called, so long as they are undertaken and persisted in until the enemy has been driven to make the admission that th£< game he has elected to play is not worth the candle. We are not at all inclined to haggle about definitions in such matters, but if the suggested alteration will satisfy the Primate and those others who apparently think we should take these raids lying down, we are perfectly willing to adopt it, and to promise that never again will we make use of the objectionable term. In the meantime, we have been free from raids since London was bombed in the middle of a summer forenoon and all the enemy machines succeeded in regaining their bases without loss. Let there be no mistake, however. It need not be imagined that the Hun has been so horror-stricken at the tale of murder done that he has given up his evil practices. On the contrary, the whole of the German press—with the one notable exception of a journal which has been suppressed for its sins—has indulged in transports of joy over the success of the enterprise. We may, therefore, be very certain that we shall be subjected to further visitations of the same kind, possibly even before these lines' appear in print. And, so far, in spite of the universal indignation created and the strong demand for counter-measures, the Govern- ment has not told us its views. Questioned in the House the other day, Mr. Bonar Law was distinctly 634
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
