§ Mr. SANDYSasked the Under-Secretary of State for War, whether, in view of the fact that it was recently officially stated, with reference to the reported construction of a new Army biplane, that certain experiments were being made, but that it was not desirable to give any particulars, he was aware that, in the issue of Flight dated 15th July, photographs and drawings purporting to represent the new Army biplane built in the Army aircraft factory at Farnborough appeared, together with a detailed description of the machine; whether those were in fact photographs of the new Army biplane; and, if so, why information should be given to the Press which could not be communicated to the House of Commons?
§ Colonel SEELYThe biplane referred to in the issue of Flight dated 15th July is an experimental one constructed to obtain information on certain points for the Advisory Committee on Aeronautics, and is in no sense a new Army biplane. No information has been given to the Press, and it is not known how the information published in the issue in question was obtained.
§ Mr. SANDYSIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the publication referred to in the question and in a large number of technical publications dealing with aeroplanes, descriptions of this new machine have appeared? Does he think it desirable that information of this confidential character, which it is impossible to give to the House of Commons, should leak out in this curious way for the benefit of the Press?
§ Colonel SEELYI have read the articles myself, and I am in a position to say that none of the information given to the Press is in any sense confidential. I am making inquiries as to how the communication to the Press came to be made.
§ Mr. SANDYSIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in one of the articles dealing with the detailed description, this biplane, was referred to as a credit to the technical ingenuity of the British blacksmith?