FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1920
1920 - 0896.PDF
i to his help members of the R.A.F., in the service of the Imperial Government, had to be requisitioned. The Union Government has not today a flying officer in South Africa. It is fair to ask, what is the Govern- ment's policy—in the event of its having any." It is far from our desire to create anything in the shape of bad blood between the Mother Country and any of the overseas Dominions, but if the state- ments made by the Rand Daily Mail are correct—and they seem to be—we can only say that the position in South Africa is, to say the least, deplorable. It is not for us to dictate to the Union Government what its aviation policy shall be, or even whether it shall have one at all. But what does irk is that there is a round £2,000,000 of the British taxpayers' money lying idle in the shape of gifts which South Africa accepted - with avidity and now does nothing with. To say the least, it seems scarcely fair to the Home- land. The Union Government was surely in a position to know before it accepted the gift whether it intended to organise a flying force or not. If it did not, then it could have said so, and the machines could have been put to some other use. All we can say is that the position in South Africa is in marked contrast to that in Canada, where the gift machines sent over by the Imperial Government are being put to the best possible uses, and where new work is being found for them every day. We may perhaps venture the hope that the conditions at the Cape are not quite as bad as the very circumstantial story we have quoted would lead us to think. .' • • o <• ' There need be little wonder that the Germany French view with profound disquietaI Air.e the preparations which are being made ' in Germany for the creation of a great commercial air fleet. Nothing has transpired since the war to convey the idea that the new Germany is any better than the old, or that she can be relied upon to keep her pledged word. In fact, all the evidence goes to show that Germany is quite un- regenerate and unrepentant, and that there are very powerful elements within the Republic which are planning and working for revenge. Nor do these elements make any secret of their designs. On the contrary, they are fond of proclaiming them to the whole world. It may be, of course, that this is mere bombast, born of the desire to discount Germany's gigantic failure and defeat—the " we shall-do-better-next-time " idea. But, unfortunately, when we are dealing with a country and a people like our late enemy it is impossible to take these things any way out seriously. We know what German faith is worth. We know the German habit of arrogant boasting, and we know that it was this habit which gave us a warning that we ought not to have neglected before 1914. It was only the boasting habit which led the Germans into telling' more or less the truth about their intentions. The question which a great many are asking is : Are we to take. seriously the bombastic talk from Germans about another attempt to secure world power after an interval for recuperation and prepara- tion ? Unfortunately, as we have said, we are afraid we cannot afford to take it any other way. The most certain way of provoking another great war would be to treat this talk as idle boasting and to allow Germany to go on preparing without taking counter- measures. In a recent interview, M. Henry Farman expressed grave doubts as to Germany's intentions. AUGUST 19, 1920 " I cannot help wondering," he said, " whether'it is possible to believe that Germans tcday are construct- ing 'planes for peaceful purposes. I cannot help feeling a grave mistake was made at the Peace Conference as regards aircraft. The Germans were forbidden to construct war machines, but were not forbidden to build other machines that in case of . war could be transformed, almost immediately, into attacking squadrons-. Unfortunately, the Germans understood better than we did the future importance of aircraft in war." There is no question but that M. Farman is perfectly right to feel as he does. He simply reiterates a warning which we ourselves and others have uttered many times since the conclusion of " Peace." Un- fortunately, we do not think it would have been possible to forbid Germany to build machines for commercial purposes, any more than it-would have been possible to forbid her to build a merchant marine. After all, even Germany has got to live, and she cannot live as she should unless she is afforded means for commercial expansion. Aircraft means communications, and communications are vital to the existence of any organised—we will not say civilised— State, nor can we logically deny the right of any such State to develop them, principally for the reason that we want ourselves the facilities given by such development., But whichever way the argument lies, the main fact remains that Germany has been accorded the right to build commercial aircraft, and is planning to construct on a very large scale. The plain answer to her plans is a correspondingly large programme of our own. By that we do not mean the creation of a huge and expensive Air Force, but a well thought out scheme of commercial expansion which will entail the construction and use ol an aerial fleet large enough to put it out of the question for Germany to attack us at any time with the slightest hope of success. If this country really had any settled policy regarding aviation, the German menace, for whatever it may be worth, would leave us cold. But we do not seem to have any, and appear to be falling into the state of apathy which led us into a war for which we were quite unprepared and which cost us a million lives and £8,000,000,000 of money. Shall we ever forget anything or learn anything ? The Times has recently published a Airwavs series o* articles, under this heading, pay in which Mr. Frank Searle of the Airco services gives his views on the subject of commercial aviation. Mr. Searte is well known as a transport authority, principally by road, and has now turned his activities in the direction of aviation, in the future of which he obviously has a profound belief. He has very pronounced views on construction, which seem to be very sound. The War certainly produced a strong tendency in engine design to sacrifice a good deal to lightness combined with power, and that tendency will remain for some time, though it is clear that there must be some limitation placed upon it if commercial aviation is to succeed. Mr. Searle's idea is that it is better to sacrifice the weight of one passenger and put that weight into the engine in order to obtain real commercial dependability, than to carry a bigger load and have trouble with the motor. That is perhaps a truism, but it is a point of view which should, be considered by the designer who is inclined to allow war practice to sway his mind towards a •s-:
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
