Modelling > Scenarios
British Army Aviation is split from the RAF in 1939
Volkodav:
I have been reading Niall Corduroys book on the Whirlwind and was surprised to read that the RAF were genuinely concerned that if it was perceived that they were not adequately supporting the Army then, as had occurred with the RN FAA, the squadrons intended to support that service (the Army Cooperation Squadrons) would be parred off the RAF and form the nucleus of a new Army Air Corps or Army Air Service.
One of the reasons behind the small numbers in which the Whirlwind was built was that it had actually been cancelled, after the initial production orders had been placed, because the RAF and Air Ministry placed a very high priority (much higher than the Whirlwind) on producing the Westland Lysander. The reason the Lysander was so important is the RAF were obligated to provide sufficient Arm Cooperation Squadrons to equip the BEF and the apparently very real fear was if the RAF failed to adequately support the army, then forces sufficient to do so would be seconded from the RAF to form a new Army aviation service, in much the same manner as occurred with the FAA.
Dead easy whiff, this happened and the RAFs Army Cooperation Squadrons became the Army Air Corps. Reading on the Lysander it appears the type was what RAF pilots thought was needed for the job, not what the Army needed, let alone wanted. Just look at the Wirraways and Boomerangs the RAAF operated in the role to imagine AAC Henleys, Hurricanes, Tomahawks and Kittyhawks, perhaps even Taurus or Hercules powered variants of the Hawkers. The AAC serves with distinction through the war and after.
Old Wombat:
I think you mean RN FAA, mate. ;)
However, the RANAS/RAN FAA was 1st initiated in 1927 but cancelled in 1928 due to fervent opposition from the RAAF. Probably on the grounds of cost but officially because the Goverment accepted that the RAAF could cover all RAN operations from land bases.
As I've said earlier elsewhere, I'm a great believer in the division of labour in this field; with the Air Force covering strategic defence & strike capabilities & the Army & Navy (& Marines) covering their own butts at a more tactical level.
Volkodav:
--- Quote from: Old Wombat on April 23, 2016, 06:53:33 PM ---I think you mean RN FAA, mate. ;)
However, the RANAS/RAN FAA was 1st initiated in 1927 but cancelled in 1928 due to fervent opposition from the RAAF. Probably on the grounds of cost but officially because the Goverment accepted that the RAAF could cover all RAN operations from land bases.
As I've said earlier elsewhere, I'm a great believer in the division of labour in this field; with the Air Force covering strategic defence & strike capabilities & the Army & Navy (& Marines) covering their own butts at a more tactical level.
--- End quote ---
Thanks, fixed.
Weaver:
That'd be an interesting alternative lead up to something I've worked into a number of scenarios, namely the British Army and the Royal marines getting their own fixed-wing CAS force in the 1960s after the US Army win their battle with the USAF to get it and the UK follows the same model. In my story, the Army Air Corps are limited to 'anything which can operate from an unprepared field of dimensions <small>', which is intended to limit them to helicopters and light aircraft, but which doesn't take into account the Harrier.
This AAC Harrier PR.4 is from that background:
I wonder what the AAC's pre-WWII thoughts would be on the type of aircraft they needed? With 20/20 hindsight we can say air-cooled radial engines, lots of guns, lots of armour, lots of rockets and dive brakes, but what was the stated requirement in the late 1930s? Did they want a 1944-style fighter-bomber, or did they want a dive-bomber and fighters to escort it?
Volkodav:
My interest spiked when I read the reference, I have known about RAF/RAAF staff work and their reputation for being able to win the political battle for a long time but had never been aware of the Army wanting control of their own airpower again immediately pre WWII.
Thinking on it, it makes sense, as does the RAFs fear that they would win the battle should the RAF be seen not to be meeting its obligations. The had probably assumed that with th number of anti aviation senior sirs in the admiralty that the RN would never regain control of their own airpower but it happened, providing incentive to pre-empt and avert any similar move by the army.
Radials would definitely be the go, like I said Taurus or Hercules engined, cannon armed, Huricanes and Henleys for a start.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version