FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1951
1951 - 0818.PDF
27 April 1951 513 AIR DEFENCE TODAY Its Importance to the Free World: A Notable Address by the Chief of the Air Staff WITHIN the last few years air power has assumed ahitherto-unimagined importance, and an entirelynew conception of defence has arisen as a result. The Air League of the British Empire believes that this fact needs to be brought home to the British people, and at a truly remarkable luncheon gathering held by courtesy of the Lord Mayor of London at the Mansion House on Thursday, April 19th, distinguished speakers enlarged upon the theme. Proposing "The Right Honourable the Lord Mayor and theCorporation of London," Air Chief Marshal Sir Guy Garrod, chairman of the Council of the Air League, thanked the LordMayor for enabling the Air League for the first time to hold a luncheon at the Mansion House. He thought it was appropiiitethat the youngest Lord Mayor of London should have given his support to the Air League in this manner. In replying, the Lord Mayor first mentioned No. 600 (City ofLondon) Squadron, Royal Auxiliary Air Force, from whose com- manding ofiicer he had that day received a telegram. The squadronhad just commenced at Biggin Hill a three-months' training period —the first time that such training had ever been carried out inpeace-time. The Lord Mayor also recalled his own brother's association with the Royal Air Force. The next speaker was Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir JohnSlessor, Chief of the Air Staff. He first offered sympathy to the Navy upon the loss of the submarine Affray, for whose men almostall hope had been given up, and mentioned the spirit which had resulted always in more candidates coming forward for submarineservice than there were vacancies to take them. Sir John said that he welcomed the opportunity to speak onthis occasion, which also marked the tenth anniversary of the A.T.C. The principal passages from his address follow : "There is," he said, "a rather dangerous catch phrase, whichI have heard used several times in recent months, that an arma- ments race always leads to war. That seems to me an over-simplification which has not much backing in historical fact. Wars have had many causes, dynastic, political, economic, idealogi-cal. But I find no warrant in history for the assumption that the fact of two nations or groups of nations arming themselves has,in itself, led to war. That was certainly not what led to the wars with France in the last century or with Germany in 1914. Of1939 I think it would be more true to say that what finally landed us in war was our failure and that of France to compete effectivelyin an armaments race, with the result that Hitler thought he could get away with it—and very nearly did. And if there is one thingmore certain than another it is that a failure on our part to put ourselves in a position of strength would inevitably lead sooneror later not only to war but to our defeat in war." Fourfold Responsibility The job of the R.A.F., continued Sir John, was a fourfold one :to defend this country against air attack; with the Royal Navy, to defend our sea communications; to build up the British sharein the integrated air force, under General Eisenhower, required for the defence of Western Europe; and, finally, to find the necessaryair forces for the defence of our territories and interests overseas in the Middle and Far East. "You will note," he went on, "that in each case I use the word'defence.' I do so deliberately in order to emphasize a point. No one—not even the Russians, I think—really believes that we shallever be an aggressor nation. In the air, more than in any other form of warfare, an active offensive is in the long run by far themost important element in successful defence. There is today a much-too-prevalent theory that air defence means fighters andyet more fighters. Nothing could be more dangerous. We must have our fighter defences—of course we must. But, apart from theiacr that you must have the bombers to strike back at the enemy's Jir bases, in an age of atomic air power and guided missiles likew V.i and V.2 of last time, the fighter alone is powerless to defend Do not let us think exclusively in terms of the Battle ofBritain. That battle, in which of course the fighter played by ar the major role, was a vital step towards ultimate victory. Butatter that—after the defeat of the enemy night offensive early in y?4i—what was it that kept English skies virtually clear of enemy"•urcraftj that established that extraordinary air superiority over Be areas of land battle in Africa, Italy, France and Germany;at turned the Mediterranean into an Allied lake, tore the heart at of German war industry, dried up their oil and brought their air forces and armoured divisions to a grinding standstill ? It wasprimarily the combined, round-the-clock, British-American bomber offensive into the heart of the enemy country. "Everyone of us here must be praying that in our life-time, orat least in that of our children, we may see real disarmament, atomic and otherwise, and the end of this long and beastly shadowof catastrophe. But as long as the world is in the state it is in today it is our ability to strike back, instantly and overwhelminglywith the bomber, that is the best safeguard of peace and the soundest guarantee of victory if war is forced upon us. "For the present that ability is in the main confined to theU.S.A.F. For some years to come Bomber Command will be primarily a tactical bomber force. As such it will have a vitalpart to play in the defence of Western Europe, and it will be mainly used in support of the Supreme Command for that purpose. Butthat limited role has been forced upon us temporarily by circum- stance and it does not represent a permanent policy. No Air Forceis complete until it can reach out and hit at the vitals of the enemy. The first order for four-engined long-range jet bombershas been placed and in due course they will replace the Lincolns and Washingtons of today. We shall never have very many ofthem in peace—nothing like the great bomber fleets we knew in 1945. But what we lack in quantity we are making up in quality.After all, the true measure of a bomber force is not numbers, but the punch it packs. And these new heavies of ours, with theatomic weapon, will have a striking power enormously superior to anything we knew five or six years ago. "I have deliberately stressed the importance of the bomber.I would not have you think that we are interested only in the bomber, but I think sometimes that its fundamental importanceis liable to be overshadowed by the more obvious claims of fighter defences and tactical air forces. Our object is to build up a balancedair force. . . ." Speaking of the contribution that would be made to such a force by Coastal Command, Sir John Slessor said thatin this sphere it must be remembered that in another war we should have American collaboration on a scale far in excess ofanything we knew last time. Britain's Contribution "Today in the R.A.F.," he continued, "we have one particularcommitment far heavier than anything of that kind in the days before the 1939-45 War—namely, the British share in the inte-grated air force under General Eisenhower for the defence of Western Europe. The present great expansion of R.A.F. includesin full measure our contribution to General Eisenhower's 'first in the air'—the relative expansion of the British Tactical Air Forcein Germany far exceeds that of any other component of the Air Force; and under our latest plan the air share of the £4,700 millionprogramme recently announced in Parliament, and the air forces at the disposal of the Supreme Commander, will be the biggestsingle component of the R.A.F. That, I think, is a good indication of the importance we attach to the common defence of WesternEurope. "Now, I will not pretend that this great expansion of the AirForce will not represent a tremendous effort, both in the aircraft production and training spheres. But none of these things is anygood unless we get men of the right quality and in the right numbers to fly the aircraft and do the multitudinous technicaljobs on the ground that are required in these days to keep our very complex modern aircraft and equipment functioning. I amnot worried about the ground personnel—since the introduction of die new pay rates recruiting is going well, though I could wishto see more men entering on long-service engagements, particu- larly in the apprentice entry which provides such a splendidtraining for the right type of boy, and was the foundation of our hard core of skilled regular airmen in the old R.A.F. before thewar. But at present we are not getting enough boys of the right quality coming forward for aircrew. "The Navy is still vital to our safety—that goes without saying.But the British people in this second half of the twentieth century must become as great an airfaring nation as we have been a sea-faring nation in the past. Our young men must take to the air as they have taken to the sea in the past. I don't believe it is the risksof flying which deter boys from coming into the Service. We don't want the type of chap who is put off by that sort of thing.I have heard it said that boys don't come into the Service because they may be retired at 50; I wonder whether people who thinklike that have really objectively compared the prospects of a career in the R.A.F. with those in civil life. Anyway, do you think the Concluded on page 516)
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
