DOCSLIB.ORG

2018 Howlett Alexander 08260

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2018 Howlett Alexander 08260 This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ The Royal Naval Air Service and the Evolution of Naval Aviation in Britain, 1914-1918 Howlett, Alexander Lucas Nathaniel Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 24. Sep. 2021 Department of Defence Studies King’s College London The Royal Naval Air Service and the Evolution of Naval Aviation in Britain, 1914-1918 Alexander L. N. Howlett Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2019 Abstract The Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) was a transformative military organisation that established the role of aviation within the Royal Navy during the First World War. The history of the RNAS, despite its immense significance, remains compartmentalized into specialized studies, ultimately overshadowed by the historiography of the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) and the early Royal Air Force (RAF). The important RNAS practitioners who developed Britain’s naval aviation between 1914-1918 have as a result been marginalized in comparison to the better known history of the Fleet Air Arm, the organisation that ultimately succeeded the RNAS in the interwar period and beyond. This thesis unifies the historiography of Britain’s First World War naval aviation, and reassess the significance of the administrators and practitioners who created Britain’s naval air power. Utilizing a thematic approach this thesis evaluates the successes and failures of Britain’s naval aviation development during the First World War. Through an examination of the history of the RNAS, the thesis considers the evolution of four aspects of Britain’s naval aviation: airpower for the fleet, anti-submarine warfare (ASW), the Royal Navy's pioneering introduction of long-range bombing, and the maritime air defence of Britain. The thesis concludes that the RNAS functioned not only as an auxiliary to the Navy's existing and traditional roles, but also changed the fundamental manner in which operations were conducted, whether at sea, over land, or in the air. The RNAS pioneered many of the aspects of naval aviation and airpower that are considered core roles of naval air forces today, however, the practitioners who made possible this revolution in warfare and the administrators who oversaw it remain relatively obscure. Wartime prioritization, technological improvement (and limitations), inter-service debate and indeed personal and service-wide rivalries, all shaped the Royal Navy’s approach to naval aviation. The thesis argues that a gradual transformation occurred over the course of the war, with naval aviation emerging from an uncertain auxiliary to a decisive instrument. 2 Acknowledgements My thesis advisor Dr. Tim Benbow deserves the most credit for encouraging me to complete this thesis. Tim provided incisive feedback, ensured the project stayed manageable and on time, tirelessly read all of the draft files, and provided invaluable wisdom and support along the way. My secondary advisors, Professor Andrew Lambert and Dr. Christina Goulter, have both helped me more than they know. Andrew has been a friend since we first met in his graduate naval history seminar in 2008, and his example, guidance and enthusiasm have shaped my approach to historical writing and scholarship ever since. Andrew has been an inspiration. Christina encouraged me to approach the project holistically, and reminded me not to shy away from controversial topics, of which the history of Britain’s naval aviation certainly has its share. Her own pioneering research on the RNAS and RAF helped steer me in the right direction. Special thanks is due to a number of individuals, all of whom helped me in ways both large and small. I owe particular thanks to Jordan Marliave, Guy Birks, T. J. Linzy, Jason and Shaun Campbell, Ryszard, Matt and Mike Krukowski, Timothy Choi, Louis Halewood, Mike Thornley, James Boxall, Daragh Markham, Darren Oke, David Zhou, Matthew Bento, Anna Brinkman-Schwartz, Paul Garfinkel, Weiting Guo, David Kohnen, John Abbatiello, Ross Mahoney, Dennis Haslop, Reda Hassan El Ashi, Steven Klein, James Pugh, Andre Gerolymatos, Roxanne Panchasi, James Goldrick, Matthew Seligmann, Duncan Redford, John Ferris, David Morgan-Owen, Lewis Pulsipher, Nicholas Jellicoe, B. J. Armstrong, Innes McCartney, Eric Grove, Trent Hone, Christopher Bell, Laurence Burke, Alan James, Nicholas Rodger, and all of the staff at every archive I visited, where my requests were always met with encouragement and accommodation. My wonderful family, a source of bottomless love and amazement, deserve more credit than I can express. My parents, Michael and Rebecca, both specialists in their respective fields, volleyed ideas and literature my way, and were always willing to listen. My sister, Anna, was there for me when I needed her, and our adventures have always been exceptional. Thanks is also due to Brian, Maureen, Rebecca, Alicia, and Daniel Chatfield, Sean Howlett, Matthew and Kyle Lorimer, the greatest family anyone could hope for. Lastly, I offer humble thanks to Leah, my brilliant and herculean wife and companion, whose dedication and depth of knowledge are incomparable. Without the love of my family, friends, and colleagues, this thesis simply would not exist. 3 Table of Contents Abstract 2 Acknowledgements 3 Table of Contents 4 Glossary of Abbreviations 6 Chapter One: Introduction 8 Research Question 10 Thesis Contribution 12 Source Material and Scope 12 Thesis Structure 16 Chapter Two: Literature Review 21 Fleet Naval Aviation and Aircraft Carrier History 22 Gunfire Spotting, the Dardanelles, German East Africa 31 The Battle of Jutland, The Flying Squadron and the Tondern Raid 32 Anti-Submarine Warfare and Convoy Protection 34 The War Zone, and the Development of Non-Rigid Airships 37 Jellicoe at the Admiralty and Reforming the Air Department 39 Air Division of the Naval Staff and the Creation of the RAF 41 Long-Range Bombing, Dunkirk, No. 3 Wing, and the 41st Wing RFC 42 Anti-Zeppelin Shed Raids in 1914, RNAS Dunkirk & No. 3 Wing, Luxeuil 43 RFC 41st Wing and the Independent Force of the RAF 46 Air Defence of Britain, Zeppelin and Gotha Raiders 47 Gotha Raids of 1917, the Debate to Create the RAF, ‘The First Blitz’ 49 Conclusion of the Literature Review 51 Chapter Three: Fleet Naval Aviation 53 Naval Airships: Unexpected Results 54 Origin of the Aircraft Carrier 64 Anti-Zeppelin: Fleet Aviation in the North Sea from Cuxhaven to Jutland 69 RNAS Raiding Resumed, the Impact of Jutland and the 1916 Reforms 73 The Wilhelmshaven Plan of 1917 77 Gunfire Spotting: Impact of the Dardanelles & East Africa in 1915 81 Kite-Balloon Carriers in the Mediterranean 86 The East Indies & Egypt Seaplane Squadron 89 The Grand Fleet Air Committee Reforms in 1917 94 Rear-Admiral Phillimore, Admiral Commanding Aircraft, and the Flying Squadron 103 Conclusion 105 Chapter Four: Anti-Submarine Warfare 108 Aircraft Against Submarines: Prewar Theory 112 4 The Introduction of Unrestricted Submarine Warfare, 1914 – 1916 118 Expansion of the Patrol Schemes During 1916 122 The Air Department and the 1917 Reforms 125 Accounting RNAS Anti-Submarine Victories in 1917-18 134 The Convoy System and Air Escort 140 The Royal Air Force and the Air Division of the Naval Staff in 1918 144 Conclusion 150 Chapter Five: Long-Range Bombing 155 Churchill and the Anti-Zeppelin Raids of 1914 156 The Dunkirk Wing and Long-Range Bombing in Belgium 158 Admiral Keyes and the Offensive Renewed 163 Naval Bombing of German Industry, Vaughan-Lee & No. 3 Wing 166 Bombing Commences, No. 3 Wing Successes in 1916-1917 169 Assessing the Impact of No. 3 Wing 175 The 41st Wing and RNAS No. 16 Squadron 176 The Independent Air Force 180 Conclusion 184 Chapter Six: Air Defence of Britain 187 Churchill’s Prewar Policy, Air Defence, 1912-1915 188 Churchill, Sueter, and Building Britain’s Air Defences 191 Balfour: Re-organisation and the Anti-Zeppelin Arms Race 195 The Importance of Signals Intelligence and Reconnaissance 200 1916, Re-armament, Re-training 203 Britain’s Air Defence in 1917 – 1918: Defeat of the Zeppelins, Beginning of the Gotha Raids 209 Decline: Naval Air Defence in 1918, and After the Creation of the RAF 216 Conclusion 219 Chapter Seven: Conclusion 221 The Impact of Naval Administration and Government Policy on the RNAS 223 The Practitioners and their Contributions to Naval
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lighter-Than-Air Vehicles for Civilian and Military Applications
    Lighter-than-Air Vehicles for Civilian and Military Applications From the world leaders in the manufacture of aerostats, airships, air cell structures, gas balloons & tethered balloons Aerostats Parachute Training Balloons Airships Nose Docking and PARACHUTE TRAINING BALLOONS Mooring Mast System The airborne Parachute Training Balloon system (PTB) is used to give preliminary training in static line parachute jumping. For this purpose, an Instructor and a number of trainees are carried to the operational height in a balloon car, the winch is stopped, and when certain conditions are satisfied, the trainees are dispatched and make their parachute descent from the balloon car. GA-22 Airship Fully Autonomous AIRSHIPS An airship or dirigible is a type of aerostat or “lighter-than-air aircraft” that can be steered and propelled through the air using rudders and propellers or other thrust mechanisms. Unlike aerodynamic aircraft such as fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, which produce lift by moving a wing through the air, aerostatic aircraft, and unlike hot air balloons, stay aloft by filling a large cavity with a AEROSTATS lifting gas. The main types of airship are non rigid (blimps), semi-rigid and rigid. Non rigid Aerostats are a cost effective and efficient way to raise a payload to a required altitude. airships use a pressure level in excess of the surrounding air pressure to retain Also known as a blimp or kite aerostat, aerostats have been in use since the early 19th century their shape during flight. Unlike the rigid design, the non-rigid airship’s gas for a variety of observation purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force in Anti-Submarine Warfare Policy, 1918-1945
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Birmingham Research Archive, E-theses Repository THE ROYAL NAVY AND THE ROYAL AIR FORCE IN ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE POLICY, 1918-1945. By JAMES NEATE A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY School of History and Cultures College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham September 2012 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This thesis examines the roles played by the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force in the formulation of Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) policy from 1918 to 1945. Its focus is on policy relating to the use of air power, specifically fixed-wing shore-based aircraft, against submarines. After a period of neglect between the Wars, airborne ASW would be pragmatically prioritised during the Second World War, only to return to a lower priority as the debates which had stymied its earlier development continued. Although the intense rivalry between the RAF and RN was the principal influence on ASW policy, other factors besides Service culture also had significant impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • (June 1941) and the Development of the British Tactical Air Doctrine
    Journal of Military and Strategic VOLUME 14, ISSUE 1, FALL 2011 Studies A Stepping Stone to Success: Operation Battleaxe (June 1941) and the Development of the British Tactical Air Doctrine Mike Bechthold On 16 February 1943 a meeting was held in Tripoli attended by senior American and British officers to discuss the various lessons learned during the Libyan campaign. The focus of the meeting was a presentation by General Bernard Montgomery. This "gospel according to Montgomery," as it was referred to by Air Chief Marshal Arthur Tedder, set out very clearly Monty's beliefs on how air power should be used to support the army.1 Among the tenets Montgomery articulated was his conviction of the importance of air power: "Any officer who aspires to hold high command in war must understand clearly certain principles regarding the use of air power." Montgomery also believed that flexibility was the greatest asset of air power. This allowed it to be applied as a "battle-winning factor of the first importance." As well, he fully endorsed the air force view of centralized control: "Nothing could be more fatal to successful results than to dissipate the air resource into small packets placed under the control of army formation commanders, with each packet working on its own plan. The soldier must not expect, or wish, to exercise direct command over air striking forces." Montgomery concluded his discussion by stating that it was of prime importance for the army and air 1 Arthur Tedder, With Prejudice: The war memoirs of Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder (London: Cassell, 1966), p.
    [Show full text]
  • Part 4: Conclusions and Recommendations & Appendices
    Twentieth Century Naval Dockyards Devonport and Portsmouth: Characterisation Report PART FOUR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The final focus of this report is to develop the local, national and international contexts of the two dockyards to highlight specific areas of future research. Future discussion of Devonport and Portsmouth as distinct designed landscapes would coherently organise the many strands identified in this report. The Museum of London Archaeology Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project carried out for Heritage England (2015) is a promising step in this direction. It is emphasised that this study is just a start. By delivering the aim and objectives, it has indicated areas of further fruitful research. Project aim: to characterise the development of the active naval dockyards at Devonport and Portsmouth, and the facilities within the dockyard boundaries at their maximum extent during the twentieth century, through library, archival and field surveys, presented and analysed in a published report, with a database of documentary and building reports. This has been delivered through Parts 1-4 and Appendices 2-4. Project objectives 1 To provide an overview of the twentieth century development of English naval dockyards, related to historical precedent, national foreign policy and naval strategy. 2 To address the main chronological development phases to accommodate new types of vessels and technologies of the naval dockyards at Devonport and Portsmouth. 3 To identify the major twentieth century naval technological revolutions which affected British naval dockyards. 4 To relate the main chronological phases to topographic development of the yards and changing technological and strategic needs, and identify other significant factors. 5 To distinguish which buildings are typical of the twentieth century naval dockyards and/or of unique interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Goodyear – Civilian Blimps
    Goodyear – civilian blimps Peter Lobner, 24 August 2021 1. Introduction Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company began their involvement with lighter-than-air (LTA) vehicles in 1912, when the company developed a fabric envelope suitable for use in airships and aerostats. The first blimps manufactured by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company were B-Type blimps ordered by the US Navy in 1917 for convoy escort duty. Goodyear (envelope supplier) and Curtiss Aeroplane (gondola supplier) produced 9 of the 17 B-Type blimps ordered. Goodyear also supplied the envelopes for some of the Navy’s 10 C-Type patrol blimps, which were delivered in 1918, after the end of WW I. Both the B- and C-Type blimps used hydrogen as the lift gas. In 1923, Goodyear teamed with German firm Luftschiffbau Zeppelin and created a new subsidiary, Goodyear Zeppelin Corporation. In June 1925, their Type AD Pilgrim (NC-9A) made its first flight and became Goodyear’s first blimp to use helium lift gas. Pilgrim was certified later in 1925, becoming the first US commercial airship. Goodyear Zeppelin Corporation filed a patent application for a nonrigid airship in September 1929, describing the objectives of their invention as follows: “This invention relates to non-rigid airships, and it has particular relation to the suspension of pilot cars or gondolas from the envelopes of non-rigid airships. The principal object of the invention is to provide a non-rigid airship in which the envelope and the pilot car or engine car are so constructed as to offer the minimum air resistance. Another object of the invention is to provide connections between the envelope and pilot car that are not exposed to the airstream for sustaining the weight of the pilot car, as well as stabilizing it against lateral or longitudinal movement.” 1 In patent Figure 1, the pressurized lift gas envelope (10) contains an air ballonet (12, for adjusting airship buoyancy) and a load suspension system for carrying and distributing the weight of the gondola (11) affixed under the envelope and the thrust loads from the with attached engines.
    [Show full text]
  • 9064 Supplement to the London Gazette, 15 September, 1916
    9064 SUPPLEMENT TO THE LONDON GAZETTE, 15 SEPTEMBER, 1916. Rear-Admiral William Edmund Good- Lieutenant-Commander James Buller Kit- enough, C.B., M.V.O., son, R.N. who with great tenacity kept touch with My Flag Lieutenant-Commander, who was the enemy's battle fleet during the afternoon of very great assistance to me during the of 31st May, and action. Commodore Edwyn Sinclair Alexander-Sin- Remarks of Vice-Admiral Sir Martyn Jerram. clair, C.B., M.V.O., Add., Captain Michael Culme-Seymour, M.V.O., who first gained touch with the enemy R.N. (now Rear-Admiral). forces, would have been recommended for an Sub-Divisional Leader. An officer of honour had they not so recently received the great experience, who handled his sub-divi- CB. sion with excellent judgment throughout 2. THE REMARKS OF THE FLAG OR COMMAND- the action. ING OFFICERS OF THE SQUADRONS CONCERNED, Captain Hugh Henry Darby Tothill, IN WHICH I CONCUR, HAVE BEEN INSERTED AFTER A.d.C., R.N. THE NAMES OF THE OFFICERS RECOMMENDED IN Sub-Divisional Leader. Handled his sub- THE FOLLOWING LIST. division most skilfully throughout the action, and amply justified the high opinion LIST OF OFFICERS RECOMMENDED I have always held of him. I OR HONOURS FOR SERVICE IN Captain Frederick Laurence Field, R.N. THE BATTLE OF JUTLAND. Handled " King George V." as leader of Captain Frederic Charles Dreyer, C.B. the line of battle with great skill under very (Civil), R.N. difficult conditions. His previous good ser- Commanded and handled the Fleet Flag- vices in the Signal School and " Vernon " ship most ably during the action.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal United Service Institution
    Royal United Services Institution. Journal ISSN: 0035-9289 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rusi19 Royal United Service Institution To cite this article: (1911) Royal United Service Institution, Royal United Services Institution. Journal, 55:400, iii-xxi, DOI: 10.1080/03071841109434568 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071841109434568 Published online: 11 Sep 2009. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 4 View related articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rusi20 Download by: [University of California, San Diego] Date: 26 June 2016, At: 13:09 Royal United Service Institution: rHE EIGHTIETHANNIVERSARY MEETING WAS HELD AT. THE ROYALUNITED SERVICE INSTITUTION, WHITEHALL; S.W., ON TUESDAY,MARCH 7TH, 191 1, AT 4 P.M. ADMIRALOF THE FLEET,Sir C. H. U. NOEL,K.C.B., K.C.M.C.,(Chairman of the Council) tn the CHAIR. THECHAIRMAN : Gentlemen, the Secretary will' read the notice -cynvcning the meeting. .. THESECRETARY (Lieutcnant.Colone1 A.. Leetham) read the notice. 1 ANNUAL REPORT. ThecCcuncil has the hcncur to sutmit itr rcpcrt for the year 1910. .. I " PATRON;'. , , , . His Majesty King George V,'has graciously intimated that he is picad '1 to become Patron of the Institution. .I . t ROYALVISITS. During the year the Institution was visited by His Late Ma$y King Edward VII., Hir' vajesty King'iCcorge V., Her Majeaty The Queen, Hkr Majesty QuLn Alexandra, 'His Roxal' Highniss' Prince Hcnr). of Pruuia. Their RoyJl'Highnesses the Crown Pricce and Princess of Si-eded, His Royal Hiihrmi Prince' H:n&, Field hlarihal IHh.Roybl Hi8hr.e~ 'The Duke' of Connaught, K,C.'(Prcsidcnt of' the 'Inrtitutwn) -.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Army Air Forces in WWII
    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE Air Force Historical Studies Office 28 June 2011 Errata Sheet for the Air Force History and Museum Program publication: With Courage: the United States Army Air Forces in WWII, 1994, by Bernard C. Nalty, John F. Shiner, and George M. Watson. Page 215 Correct: Second Lieutenant Lloyd D. Hughes To: Second Lieutenant Lloyd H. Hughes Page 218 Correct Lieutenant Hughes To: Second Lieutenant Lloyd H. Hughes Page 357 Correct Hughes, Lloyd D., 215, 218 To: Hughes, Lloyd H., 215, 218 Foreword In the last decade of the twentieth century, the United States Air Force commemorates two significant benchmarks in its heritage. The first is the occasion for the publication of this book, a tribute to the men and women who served in the U.S. Army Air Forces during World War 11. The four years between 1991 and 1995 mark the fiftieth anniversary cycle of events in which the nation raised and trained an air armada and com- mitted it to operations on a scale unknown to that time. With Courage: U.S.Army Air Forces in World War ZZ retells the story of sacrifice, valor, and achievements in air campaigns against tough, determined adversaries. It describes the development of a uniquely American doctrine for the application of air power against an opponent's key industries and centers of national life, a doctrine whose legacy today is the Global Reach - Global Power strategic planning framework of the modern U.S. Air Force. The narrative integrates aspects of strategic intelligence, logistics, technology, and leadership to offer a full yet concise account of the contributions of American air power to victory in that war.
    [Show full text]
  • The Birth of Airpower, 1916 the Character of the German Offensive
    The Birth of Airpower, 1916 359 the character of the German offensive became clear, and losses reached staggering levels, Joffre urgently demanded as early a start as possible to the allied offensive. In May he and Haig agreed to mount an assault on I July 'athwart the Somme.' Long before the starting date of the offensive had been fixed the British had been preparing for it by building up, behind their lines, the communications and logistical support the 'big push' demanded. Masses of materiel were accumulated close to the trenches, including nearly three million rounds of artillery ammuni­ tion. War on this scale was a major industrial undertaking.• Military aviation, of necessity, made a proportionate leap as well. The RFC had to expand to meet the demands of the new mass armies, and during the first six months of 1916 Trenchard, with Haig's strong support, strove to create an air weapon that could meet the challenge of the offensive. Beginning in January the RFC had been reorganized into brigades, one to each army, a process completed on 1 April when IV Brigade was formed to support the Fourth Army. Each brigade consisted of a headquarters, an aircraft park, a balloon wing, an army wing of two to four squadrons, and a corps wing of three to five squadrons (one squadron for each corps). At RFC Headquarters there was an additional wing to provide reconnais­ sance for GHQ, and, as time went on, to carry out additional fighting and bombing duties.3 Artillery observation was now the chief function of the RFC , with subsidiary efforts concentrated on close reconnaissance and photography.
    [Show full text]
  • RAF Wings Over Florida: Memories of World War II British Air Cadets
    Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Purdue University Press Books Purdue University Press Fall 9-15-2000 RAF Wings Over Florida: Memories of World War II British Air Cadets Willard Largent Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/purduepress_ebooks Part of the European History Commons, and the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Largent, Willard, "RAF Wings Over Florida: Memories of World War II British Air Cadets" (2000). Purdue University Press Books. 9. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/purduepress_ebooks/9 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. RAF Wings over Florida RAF Wings over Florida Memories of World War II British Air Cadets DE Will Largent Edited by Tod Roberts Purdue University Press West Lafayette, Indiana Copyright q 2000 by Purdue University. First printing in paperback, 2020. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Paperback ISBN: 978-1-55753-992-2 Epub ISBN: 978-1-55753-993-9 Epdf ISBN: 978-1-61249-138-7 The Library of Congress has cataloged the earlier hardcover edition as follows: Largent, Willard. RAF wings over Florida : memories of World War II British air cadets / Will Largent. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-55753-203-6 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Largent, Willard. 2. World War, 1939±1945ÐAerial operations, British. 3. World War, 1939±1945ÐAerial operations, American. 4. Riddle Field (Fla.) 5. Carlstrom Field (Fla.) 6. World War, 1939±1945ÐPersonal narratives, British. 7. Great Britain. Royal Air ForceÐBiography. I.
    [Show full text]
  • The War Room Managed North Sea Trap 1907-1916
    Michael H. Clemmesen 31‐12‐2012 The War Room Managed North Sea Trap 1907‐1916. The Substance, Roots and Fate of the Secret Fisher‐Wilson “War Plan”. Initial remarks In 1905, when the Royal Navy fully accepted the German High Seas Fleet as its chief opponent, it was already mastering and implementing reporting and control by wireless telegraphy. The Admiralty under its new First Sea Lord, Admiral John (‘Jacky’) Fisher, was determined to employ the new technology in support and control of operations, including those in the North Sea; now destined to become the main theatre of operations. It inspired him soon to believe that he could centralize operational control with himself in the Admiralty. The wireless telegraph communications and control system had been developed since 1899 by Captain, soon Rear‐Admiral Henry Jackson. Using the new means of communications and intelligence he would be able to orchestrate the destruction of the German High Seas Fleet. He already had the necessary basic intelligence from the planned cruiser supported destroyer patrols off the German bases, an operation based on the concept of the observational blockade developed by Captain George Alexander Ballard in the 1890s. Fisher also had the required The two officers who supplied the important basis for the plan. superiority in battleships to divide the force without the risk of one part being To the left: George Alexander Ballard, the Royal Navy’s main conceptual thinker in the two decades defeated by a larger fleet. before the First World War. He had developed the concept of the observational blockade since the 1890s.
    [Show full text]
  • Twenty-Five Years Ahead of Its Time: the American Aerial Torpedo in World War I
    TWENTY-FIVE YEARS AHEAD OF ITS TIME: THE AMERICAN AERIAL TORPEDO IN WORLD WAR I Michael H. Taint, Lt. Colonel, USAF (Ret) Independent Scholar To the modern-day public, no weapon system is more evocative of American high technology than the “drone” or, more formally, the “Unmanned Aerial System” (UAS) or “Remotely Piloted Aircraft” (RPA). UASs in the last two decades have been deployed extensively through southwest Asia and appear almost daily in news reports. Few realize they were pioneered a century ago and nearly took their place alongside the tank, submarine, chemical weapons and fighter aircraft as an important technological breakthrough of World War I. This paper explores the development and testing of the first American drone. Developed in Dayton, Ohio, this “aerial torpedo” (also called an “automatic carrier” or “flying bomb”) was created by automotive innovator Charles F. “Boss” Kettering and nicknamed, in his honor, the “Kettering Bug.” Along with Kettering, important future actors in American military airpower such as General of the Air Force Henry “Hap” Arnold and James Doolittle of “Doolittle’s Raiders” were also involved in this secret development project, probably the first of its kind in Air Force history. Like most projects pushing the limits of the state of the art, the Kettering Bug was hampered by technical challenges; however, the project showed how breakthroughs can be achieved when a small group of accomplished technical experts are brought together on a complex task and allowed to seek creative solutions. Theirs was no small accomplishment. Looking back on the project, General “Hap” Arnold’s assessment was: The Bug was twenty five years ahead of its time.
    [Show full text]