§ 86. Lieutenant-Colonel Sir SAMUEL HOAREasked the Under-Secretary of State to the Air Ministry whether he can form any estimate of the loss involved to the State by the destruction, at the Cove 1772 Camp, Farnborough, of a number of new aeroplanes never used and many not even unpacked; and whether he could not find a market in neutral countries or amongst civilian purchasers for the sale of these brand new goods?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Major-General Seely)
I am sending an officer to make sure that the policy of the Council is being efficiently carried out at Farnborough and Henlow, but I have no doubt that the policy adopted by the Air Council after the Armistice was sound, and involved the least possible cost to the State.
- 1. On the signing of the Armistice the Air Council had some 20,000 aeroplanes and seaplanes on charge, and machines were being produced at the rate of 4,000 a month. The storage available including hirings which had to be given up was insufficient to enable these numbers to be stored under cover as well as the new machines of which the Air Council would have to take delivery.
- 2. The Air Council had three alternatives:
- (1) To erect or hire buildings to store all serviceable machines, in the hope that a market would be found for those not required by the Royal Air Force in peace.
- (2) To break up the least valuable machines, sending the useful portions to the Disposal Board and selling the remaining material as scrap.
- (3) To remove the instruments and engines, burn the machines and sell the metal remains as scrap.
- 3. The first alternative would have been very costly and the market for the older machines before they became unserviceable in store did not justify such a course. The third would have required less expenditure of labour, but the disposal authorities of the Ministry of Munitions considered that a market might be found for the salved parts, and the second alternative was, therefore, adopted by the Air Council.
- 4. The Air Council, in accordance with the policy they adopted, divided the machines into three classes:
- (a) Standard machines for the Royal Air Force.
- (b) Machines obsolete for use in the Royal Air Force in peace or war, but suitable for civil aviation.
- (c) Machines obsolete for war purposes, and not suitable for civil flying.
- 5. On 31st March there were 15,700 machines of the first class; of these large
1773 numbers are surplus to the requirements of the Royal Air Force, and are available for sale. On the same date there were approximately 1,000 of the second class, also available for sale to the public. There were 3,600 of the third class still awaiting reduction to produce. - 6. The Disposal Board of the Ministry of Munitions are responsible for selling machines of class 1 and 2 not required by the Royal Air Force, but the Board have no large storage accommodation available, so that the machines for disposal usually remain in Royal Air Force storage until a market is found for them by the Board.
Lieutenant-Colonel MALONEMay I ask whether any attempt has been made to find a market for these machines in foreign countries and is he aware that some of these machines which have been destroyed are new machines straight from the manufacturers?
§ Major-General SEELYI dealt with the question in the very long statement which I have read and I must apologise to the House for its length. The machines from which the engines are taken out and the rest disposed of by auction to the best bidder are machines which are not suitable for the Air Force and are not suitable for civilian flying. Some of these machines are quite new, but the science of flying progresses so quickly that many of them are now obsolete. It would be wrong to send our flying men in the Royal Air Force into the air on those machines and it would be equally wrong to release them for civil flying. If we could have foreseen seven or eight or ten months what we know now we would not have made them, but that is inevitable.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYHave we come to the end of the obsolete machines, and what about the contracts?
§ Major-General SEELYWe have practically come to the end of the obsolete machines. The question of the closing of the contracts is a matter for the Minister of Munitions and not the Air Force.