FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1922
1922 - 0429.PDF
JULY 27, 1922 IN PARLIAMENT Royal Air Force Personnel MB. MALONE on July 12 asked the number of officers and men whose duties do not normally take them in the air, and the number of qualified pilots and observers whose duties normally take them in the air and are now actively so employed ? Captain Guest: Officers and men whose duties do not normally take them in the air include, in the first place, officers belonging to the stores, chaplains, and medical branches, and these number 550. In addition, there are a certain number, about 70, of officers on the general list who are medically unfit for full flying duties. With regard to the airmen, there are 24,535 whose duties do not normally taken them in the air, but a considerable number of these have to go up for the testing of engines, wireless operations, and other duties. The number of qualified pilots and observers, whose duties do normally takes them into the air, comprise not only pilots and observers employed with Service squadrons, but also officers employed as instructors in flying training schools and other instructional establishments. There are also those whose duties include the inspection of stations, or the testing of new devices like cameras, wireless apparatus, bombs, etc., all of which necessitate their going into their air. These, in addition to the pilots, account for practically all the officers on the general list, who, as stated in my reply to my hon. friend on February 27 last, number nearly 2,200, exclusive of the ex-naval warrant officers referred to therein. Civil Aviation Subsidies MR. L'ESTRANGE MALONE on July 13 asked the Secretary of State for Air how much of the money allowed for civil aviation—subsidies, etc.—in the 1922-23 Estimates has not yet been allocated ; how is it intended to utilise this sum ; whether this sum is considered sufficient; whether he has recently received representations as to the serious position of the air industry ; and whether he can make a statement as to the Government's policy ? Capt. Guest : I assume that my hon. friend is referring to the sub-head of Vote 8, which relates to '' Civil Aviation Subsidies " ; if he refers to the Vote as a whole he will see that the allocation of the money included in it is given in fairly full detail in the Air Estimates. As regards the sub-head for subsidies of £207,000, £107,000 was provided for the purchase of machines to be supplied on hire-purchase terms to approved civil aerial transport companies. £100,000 was provided for subsidies in cash to such companies. It is possible that the subsidy grants earned and the requirements in machines may be less than the Estimate, but I am not yet in a position to say what savings will arise or how they will be allocated. In considering the allocation of any savings, the Air Ministry would most certainly have regard to the present position of transport companies—whose not unreasonable estimates of traffic have not been fulfilled—and of the aircraft industry. Air Power CAPT. VISCOUNT CURZON asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the deputation from the Parliamentary Air Committee to be received by the Committee of Imperial Defence will not include any representative able to speak for the naval side of the case ; and whether, in view of the importance of the subject and of the fact that the Royal Navy is very much involved in the consideration of the problems of the air, he will allow an opportunity for certain members of the Parliamentary Navy Committee to appear before the Committee of Imperial Defence and state their views on the naval aspect of the problem of air defence ? Maj.-Gen. Sir J. Davidson asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the deputation from the Parliamentary Air Committee to be received by the Committee of Imperial Defence will not include representatives able to speak from the Navy and Army sides of the case; and whether, in view of the importance of the subject and the fact that all three Services are closely involved in the problems of the air, he will allow an opportunity for certain members of the Parliamentary Army Committee to appear before the Com- .mittee of Imperial Defence and state their views on the military aspects of the problems of air defence ? The Prime Minister : The most convenient method would appear to be for the Parliamentary Navy Committee, in the one case, and the Army Committee in the other, to get in touch with the Parliamentary Air Committee with a view to a single deputation on the subject. Viscount Curzon : Is the right hon. gentleman aware that the Parliamen tary Navy Committee has met, and endeavoured to get into touch with the Parliamentary Air Committee, and they do not want the representatives of the Navy to accompany them ? The Prime Minister : I am sorry that there should be any difference of opinion. We are only anxious to get as much assistance as possible from Members who take an interest in this matter to help us to come to a right conclusion. We are anxious to hear what can be said by those who are more cognisant of the Navy than the Army, and also those who are specially interested in the Army side of the question. I think that hon. Members who take an interest in the matter in both capacities should be able to come to an agreement as to the deputation to be received by the Committee of Imperial Defence. Viscount Curzon : Will the deputation to be received by the Committee of Imperial Defence not be limited to four persons ? The Prime Minister : I think it would be a mistake to have more ; that is quite ample—two for one point of view, and two for the other. Viscount Curzon : If the Parliamentary Air Committee do not wish the Navy representatives to accompany them, may I bring the matter to the notice of the right hon. gentleman again ? The Prime Minister : Yes. . Capt. W. Benn : Could not the right hon. gentleman give an additional Supply day to this very important Service ? The Prime Minister : Yes ; if there is a general desire, the Government will try to find a Supply day for the purpose. But I do hope before they come that the representatives of the Air Committee in this House will be able to accommodate their views to those of the other gentlemen mentioned, and present their case together before the Committee of Imperial Defence. We should like to have the matter examined by the Committee of Imperial Defence before the discussion in this House. Bumey Airship Scheme . , CAPT. VISCOUNT CURZON on July 17 asked the Prime Minister whether the Government have as yet come to any decision upon the Burney airship scheme ? .„ . ^ , „ Mr. L. Malone asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty s Government have yet arrived at a decision in regard to the Burney airship scheme ; whether it has yet been approved ; and whether they have taken into consideration the relative cost, efficiency and advantages of granting assist ance on the same lines to similar schemes employing aeroplanes instead oi aUThe>Prime Minister : As a result of several meetings of the Committee of Imperial Defence, it was decided that in view of the need for economy no money should be expended in developing an airship service, either for commercial purposes or with the object of establishing Imperial communica tions. A special sub-Committee is being appointed, with my hon. mend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty as chairman, to study in detail the technical aspects of Comdr. Burney's scheme with, a view to ascertaining if Comdr. Burney's claims were well founded and if his scheme was likely to produce airships which would be of national value in time of war. Full consideration is being given to the possibility of the employment of airships in connection with Imperial air communications. Viscount Curzon : Will the Report of this Committee be published, and is the right hon. gentleman aware of the great delay that has already taken place in referring the matter from one Committee to another ? I hope this does not mean that there will be any further delay. The Prime Minister : It is doubtful whether it is desirable to publish the Report of a private Committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence. Viscount Curzon : Could a general outline of the Report be published, if at all possible ? The Prime Minister : I will consider that. Aircraft Industry VISCOUNT CURZON asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the very grave position of the aircraft industry in this country ; whether he is aware that it is in immediate danger of complete collapse, and that all development and research is practically at a standstill; that, if this should occur, it will not be possible to provide for expansion in emer gency, and that the industry may take years to recover; that it has been admitted by the Admiralty that the present organisation of the Royal Air Force does not provide the Royal Navy with the machines and personnel required, both lighter and heavier than air, for its present establishment ; and whether he can state what immediate steps the Government intend to take to meet the grave developments and to provide for future requirements, both civil and military ? The Prime Minister : I am fully alive to the position of the aircraft industry, though I cannot accept all the statements made by my noble and gallant friend, which seem to me to be exaggerated. As I have already announced, the whole question is engaging the careful consideration of the Committee of Imperial Defence. Viscount Curzon: When the right hon. gentleman says my statement is exaggerated, is he aware that the Secretary of State for Air has already announced that he views the situation with grave alarm ? Naval Aircraft VISCOUNT CURZON, on July 18, asked the Secretary of State for Air whether any of the machines working from, or with, H.M.S. Argus have recently crashed, and how many aeroplanes were available for service, working with the Royal Navy on July 16, 1922, for bombing, fighting, torpedo-carrying, observa tion, and training, respectively ? Capt. Guest : The answer to the first question is that, since May 15 last, only two aeroplanes have been seriously damaged, and written off, during deck landing practice. Damage to aeroplanes is to be expected in training exercises of this kind, but this does not affect the number of aeroplanes available, damaged machines being at once replaced from the supply held in immediate reserve. \ The answer to the second question is, that aeroplanes are available in the following numbers, including the 50 per cent, first line reserve, which is kept at the unit and provides immediate replacements for any damage to unserviceable aeroplanes :— Reconnaissance.-—18 ship planes, 18 float planes, 15 flying boats. Spotting.—18 ship planes. Torpedo-carrying.—18 ship planes. Fighting.—9 ship fighters. Training.—9 float seaplanes, 12 flying boats. Development.—6 flying boats, 4 torpedo ship planes. Thus, there are 127 service aeroplanes in active commission and first line reserve engaged in aerial and naval peace exercises or in naval air training and development. In addition to this, two of the reserve squadrons, comprising 36 aeroplanes, including immediate reserve are, inter alia, being used for certain other special forms of naval co-operation. Finally, there is maintained behind these units a main reserve of the various types, amounting to over 200 aeroplanes without pilots, all of which would be available for the reinforce ment of the above naval units. The actual grand total of aeroplanes available for all purposes connected with the Navy is 359, exclusive of the two reserve squadrons mentioned above. Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy: Does not the difference between this answer and the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty show a great lack of co-ordination between the Air Service and the Admiralty ? Viscount Curzon asked the Secretary of State for Air whether pilots working with the Royal Navy are interchangeable with pilots working with the Royal Air Force in other areas ; whether such changes are in fact made ; and whether any of the pilots borne in or attached to His Majesty's Ship Argus have recently been changed ? Capt. Guest: In answer to the first question, pilots working with the Royal Navy are interchangeable with those working on other duties, as it is considered necessary to give them the widest possible experience. A certain amount of special practice work is needed in connection with co-operation with the Fleet, and pilots so engaged are, as far as possible, retained in their appointments for a period of four years ; though in practice, on account of promotion, or owing to their being required for special appointment, or for some other similar reason, the full period is not always served by all officers. The reply to the second question is in the affirmative. With regard to the third question, two pilots have been changed during the current year. One of these was required for a course at the Royal Air Force Staff College, and the other for experimental work. Short Aeroplane Tests MR. MALONE asked the Secretary of State for Air at what date the tests in regard to corrosion and vibration were actually commenced on the Short Brothers all-metal'aeroplane, exhibited at Olympia in 1920 and immediately purchased by the Air Ministry ? Capt. Guest: Investigation on the corrosion of metal alloys which had been initiated during the War, and then suspended, was resumed early in 1921, by a sub-committee of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, whose report is waited. (The material used in the Short aeroplane was well- known and is one of those under investigation by the Committee.) As regards the vibration tests, the aeroplane arrived at Farnborough on February 1, 1921, and a detailed examination of the machine took place. Straight flights were authorised in May, 1921, static tests commenced in June, vibration tests in September, and both were completed in November, 1921. Air Service LIEUT.-COL. A. MURRAY, on July 19, asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the statement made by the First Lord of the Admiralty, in an address to the 1920 Club, to the effect that the Navy must have control over its Air Service: and whether this statement represents the views of His Majesty's Government ? Mr. Chamberlain (Leader of the House) : The Government policy was stated by me in this House on March 16 of this year, and to this statement I have at present nothing to add, as the enquiry into the system of naval and air co-operation which I then foreshadowed is still proceeding. I should add that the meeting addressed by my noble friend was a private one, and 429
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
