Comments on: Airships ahoy! http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/ Airpower and British society, 1908-1941 Fri, 05 Sep 2008 20:05:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Airminded · Airship over North Melbourne http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-53081 Airminded · Airship over North Melbourne Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:53:37 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-53081 [...] they didn’t look quite right, and eventually I realised that it was because the airship was too red. Everybody knows, at least subconsciously, that airships are always silver grey; in fact, they [...] [...] they didn’t look quite right, and eventually I realised that it was because the airship was too red. Everybody knows, at least subconsciously, that airships are always silver grey; in fact, they [...]

]]> By: Airminded · Battle of Brisbane http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-4452 Airminded · Battle of Brisbane Fri, 27 Oct 2006 04:48:59 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-4452 [...] I’ve previously mentioned the Holden airship. At the moment it is at Brisbane, and there are concerns that it will be flown over the Gabba during the first Ashes test next month.1 The problem is that Holden isn’t paying Cricket Australia anything for the privilege of flying a billboard hovering over the cricket ground, where it might well catch the eye of 40000 spectators bored with Australia’s on-field drubbing of the puny English team. So the Queensland state government is planning to introduce legislation to ban such overflights of major sporting events, along with skywriting. Otherwise, the downfall of Australian civilisation could result, or something. [...] [...] I’ve previously mentioned the Holden airship. At the moment it is at Brisbane, and there are concerns that it will be flown over the Gabba during the first Ashes test next month.1 The problem is that Holden isn’t paying Cricket Australia anything for the privilege of flying a billboard hovering over the cricket ground, where it might well catch the eye of 40000 spectators bored with Australia’s on-field drubbing of the puny English team. So the Queensland state government is planning to introduce legislation to ban such overflights of major sporting events, along with skywriting. Otherwise, the downfall of Australian civilisation could result, or something. [...]

]]> By: Brett Holman http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-3121 Brett Holman Sun, 17 Sep 2006 05:25:37 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-3121 Yes, it was major mission creep, but remember the RNAS, like the RN as a whole, didn't have a lot to do early in the war. So it was casting around for something, anything, to do. (Strategic bombing was another thing they tried their hand at.) I don't know if Sueter can be held responsible for the RAF. The antics to which you refer (mainly writing a petulant letter to the King about not getting any credit for the tank) came when he was in charge of RNAS units in Italy. While that's a senior position, he wasn't then in the position to treat the RNAS as a private army, as he was earlier in the war; and this is well after the tank/armoured car business too. So I'm not sure why Sueter's tomfoolery would have tainted the RNAS as a whole, in the Admiralty's eyes, to the extent that they wanted rid of the whole thing. And anyway, if it did, more fool them, since they spent the next two decades trying to get it back! Yes, it was major mission creep, but remember the RNAS, like the RN as a whole, didn’t have a lot to do early in the war. So it was casting around for something, anything, to do. (Strategic bombing was another thing they tried their hand at.)

I don’t know if Sueter can be held responsible for the RAF. The antics to which you refer (mainly writing a petulant letter to the King about not getting any credit for the tank) came when he was in charge of RNAS units in Italy. While that’s a senior position, he wasn’t then in the position to treat the RNAS as a private army, as he was earlier in the war; and this is well after the tank/armoured car business too. So I’m not sure why Sueter’s tomfoolery would have tainted the RNAS as a whole, in the Admiralty’s eyes, to the extent that they wanted rid of the whole thing. And anyway, if it did, more fool them, since they spent the next two decades trying to get it back!

]]> By: Chris Williams http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-3065 Chris Williams Fri, 15 Sep 2006 14:19:11 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/09/15/airships-ahoy/#comment-3065 I see Sueter as one of the biggest fools in UK history. He made the RNAS into a private army: inventing the tank has to be one of the most stunning examples of mission creep ever. Thus, when the Gothas arrived and (for a time) looked threatening, Smuts and Henderson invented the RAF to get DLG out of a hole. Owing to Sueter's antics, the Navy were happy (for a time) to lose the semi-detached RNAS. The RAF has been an almost unmitigated disaster for the British Empire. No, really. Think about it. I see Sueter as one of the biggest fools in UK history. He made the RNAS into a private army: inventing the tank has to be one of the most stunning examples of mission creep ever. Thus, when the Gothas arrived and (for a time) looked threatening, Smuts and Henderson invented the RAF to get DLG out of a hole. Owing to Sueter’s antics, the Navy were happy (for a time) to lose the semi-detached RNAS. The RAF has been an almost unmitigated disaster for the British Empire. No, really. Think about it.

]]>