HL Deb 24 November 1936 vol 103 cc349-54

THE EARL OF HALSBURY had given Notice that he would ask His Majesty's Government how many types of heavy bomber are included in the Government programme, the number of such bombers ordered, their speed, range and their load-weight of bombs, the date on which deliveries are expected; and also move for Papers. The noble Earl said: My Lords, the Motion which stands in my name is really this. It is to ask the Government to tell us what their programme is for rearmament in the air. Since I took my pilot's ticket in 1916 in France I have always taken the very deepest interest in aerial matters. I have followed very carefully the various developments that have been made throughout all the countries in the world. I have friends almost everywhere to whom I can go and ask. I have found from experience that if I want to know anything about what is going on in the Royal Air Force in this country I can get that information more expeditiously and more accurately abroad than in this country, because they know backwards exactly what we are doing. Therefore I had no fear in putting down this Question that there would be any feeling in the Government that they could possibly be telling any of the Air Staffs of Europe something they did not know quite well already. I can also see there might be some feeling in the Government's mind that they did not want to let the people of this country know the very lamentable state we were in.

When I spoke in the debate last week the noble Viscount, Lord Halifax, said that I had no right to make the assumption that there was only one type of heavy bomber in the Government programme. I never made such an assumption. The assumption that I made, and make, was that there was no type of heavy bomber in the Government programme. One has got to see exactly where one is, and possibly the best way is to see what it is that we have got against us. I am going to give a few figures because I think it is necessary that I should do so. The strongest heavy bomber—and we have to realise that the heavy bomber is the striking force of every Air Service—is one that is in America. It is the "Boeing 299." Its range is 3,000 miles, its top speed is just over 260 miles an hour, and the total bombing load that it can carry is 5,000 lbs., call it roughly two tons. It actually flew 2,780 miles non-stop at a cruising speed of 231 miles per hour when it was doing its trials. As a matter of fact only six of these machines are being made and, therefore, it is obvious that they cannot be released from the United States of America to help us in any programme we have.

Leaving America, we come to Europe. The strongest Air Force probably in Europe at the present time is that of Italy. Italy has improved enormously in this respect in a very short time. They have done it because they have a very wonderful organisation of aerodynamic laboratories in which they have been doing a great number of experiments that, unfortunately, we have not been doing in this country. Let me tell your Lordships what their heavy bombers are. They have a "Fiat B.R. 20" which, flying at full load, has a range of 2,000 miles, a top speed of 273 miles per hour, and carries 3,000 lbs. of bombs, that is about one and a half tons. Their second one is the "Savoia S 79 B." That also has a range of 2,000 miles, a top speed of 258 miles an hour, and carries 4,400 lbs. of bombs, which is about two tons. They have a third one which has not quite got the performance of the others. It is one that was made in a hurry for the Abyssinian war. It is the "Savoia S 81." That has a range of 2,000 miles and a top speed of 217 miles; it can carry 6,400 lbs. if you take its range as less than 2,000 miles, or 4,400 lbs.—that is, about two tons—if you take its range as 2,000 miles. That is what Italy has in the way of heavy bombers.

Now we come to France. France has a bomber, "Amiot 144," which has a range of 2,480 miles, a top speed of 242 miles and carries 2,200 lbs. of bombs, or about one ton. As a matter of fact, I myself checked the figures of this particular machine. I went over to France and saw it, not only by reason of the great courtesy of the manufacturers, Messrs. Amiot, who are friends of mine, but also of the French Government. I was told every conceivable thing about that machine and what the French Government had done before they accepted it as their first bomber. Further, they offered to give us, if we wanted them, some of these in very large quantities and with quick delivery. We could have taken them if we had wanted to do so. I took all the figures and that offer to the Air Ministry here. It was returned without thanks.

Next we come to Germany. Germany have not quite so many bombers of the type that really come under the class of heavy bombers, but they have the "Dornier Do. 17." That has a range of 1,200 miles, a top speed of 304 miles, and carries 1,760 lbs., which is about three-quarters of a ton, of bombs. They have also the "Heinkel III." That has a range of 1,000 miles, a top speed of 255 miles an hour, and carries 2,000 lbs. of bombs. They have in addition the "Junkers J U 86," which has a range of 1,200 miles, a top speed of 226 miles and carries 2,000 lbs. of bombs, and the "Junkers J U 52," which has a range of 1,260 miles, a top speed of 180 miles an hour, and carries 2,000 lbs. of bombs. That is what we have against us, and it is a very formidable array.

What have we got at present for us? In the squadrons we have at present only two types, neither of which are heavy bombers as heavy bombers are known to-day. The first is the "Virginia" (Vickers). That was a very good machine when it first came out sixteen years ago, but it is a bit out of date to-day. It has only got a, range of 1,000 miles, a speed of 124 miles an hour as against the others I have mentioned of over 200 miles an hour, and it carries 3,000 lbs. of bombs, or about one and a half tons. That is one we have got, completely out of date, but I gather it will be replaced by a newer machine as soon as it can be got. One has to remember, however, that when you are replacing a machine it does not mean that you are necessarily increasing the number of squadrons you have got, because what you are doing is this: you are taking away the obsolete machine and putting the other in its place; you are not putting the other in a new squadron. The other one we have got is the "Heyford" (Handley Page). That has got a range of 960 miles only, and a top speed of 145 miles, and it carries 1,500 lbs., or about three-quarters of a ton, of bombs. Those are the only two we have in the squadrons to-day.

Besides those we have a certain number of prototypes which are going to come in, or some of which are going to come into the programme. I say at once—and I am going to give the figures—that there is not a single one of them that comes into the class of heavy bombers. The first is the "Whitley" (Armstrong Whitworth). That has only a range of 1,000 miles. There is another type with a range of 1,400 miles, but both of these are far too small. The last one that I mentioned has a top speed of 170 miles, and it will carry 2,200 pounds of bombs at a range of 1,400 miles, or double that quantity of bombs at a range of 1,000 miles—that is to say, two tons and one ton. That is not what is known to-day as a heavy bomber. You have another ore the "Harrow" (Handley Page), which has a 1,000 miles range, a top speed of 195 miles and carries two tons of bombs. Here I am speaking without knowing whether I am right. I will say at once that I do not know whether I am right about this, but I rather gather that the "Harrow" is not really going to be carried out, but that another type, the "Handley Page 52," will probably be taken in its place. That has a range of 900 miles with two tons of bombs, or 1,500 miles with one ton of bombs, and a top speed of 260 miles an hour. I agree that that is getting near the class of heavy bomber, but I do not call it anything like a heavy bomber because it has not the range.

You then get the "Blenheim" (Bristol). The "Blenheim" is not a heavy bomber at all, but it is a light dive bomber. From what I have heard I believe it to be extremely good, but it has only a range of 1,100 miles. It has a top speed of 290 to 300 miles per hour and it only carries half a ton of bombs. You then have the "Battle" (Fairey). That has a range of 1,100 miles, a top speed of 270 and carries half a ton of bombs. That is a light dive bomber. Then you have the "Hendon" (Fairey). That has only a 960 mile range, a top speed of 150 to 160, and carries three-quarters of a ton of bombs. We have not got in the programme any really heavy bomber that is in the class of heavy bombers that other nations have against us, and the difficulty is that you have to get—or at least I suggest that you have to get—them quickly. You cannot delay. We are in too big a danger to delay. They have to be got, and they cannot be got in this country quickly.

One of the big authorities—Mr. Lester Gardner—of America did the whole tour of Europe, and reported that in the air England is at least three years behind any Continental nation in construction and design and possible output. That is the report of a man who knows what he is talking about. I do not like to put forward one's own personal views, but I can tell you that I am not talking on a subject of which I know nothing. I have been constantly in touch with people in France, in Belgium, in Germany, in Italy, and I know what is being done there. I also know what is being done in this country. I see no reason to doubt Mr. Lester Gardner when he says that to-day we are three years behind everyone. It is not the fault of this country. It is the fault of those people who have been governing this country. They would not look after the air. They let it drop and if you let a thing drop like that, it cannot suddenly be taken up again.

One of the big difficulties—the noble Viscount the Secretary of State for Air mentioned it in the debate last week—is the fact that there is a great dearth of expert engineers. We are living in a specialised age. You cannot take an engineer from something to which he has been accustomed, and put him on to something to which he is not in the least accustomed, and expect him at once to be able to do that job. It is impossible. A person who makes precision works for a watch is an engineer, and so is a person who makes horse-shoes. But you do not expect a watchmaker to make horse-shoes, or a blacksmith to make precision watches. They must be trained, and that training takes time. Training an aircraft engineer takes two or three years. We had experience of that in war time. When I was employed during the War as liaison, officer between this country and France, because both countries were short of munitions I had to make contracts by which England would supply France with certain things and France would supply England with other things. When we were making those contracts the difficulty was always to know whether we could get the work done, whether there were sufficient engineers trained for that particular work. As I have said I can see no reason why the figures I have asked for should not be disclosed to your Lordships and to the people of this country, when we are perfectly aware that they are well known by the Air Staffs elsewhere. Therefore, I ask the Government to give these figures frankly and without trying to conceal anything, in order that they may as quickly as possible get out of the slough into which they have fallen. I beg to move.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, I shall only reply to the Motion, and I think your Lordships would only wish me to do so, in a sentence or two. The noble Earl has quoted some gentleman who said we were three years behind the whole world. I suppose that is the reason why every other country in the world is coming to ask me to let them have some of our new machines. I am not responsible for any question that the noble Earl puts upon the Paper. I am responsible in the public interest for the answers which are given in this House. I have not been long in your Lordships' house, but I think your Lordships will give me credit for giving as full and clear answers as it is possible to give consistently with the public interest. I can say that I have made as full statements as possible in the Defence debates which we have had in this House. I am not going to trouble about many of the statements made by the noble Earl. His suggestion that he can find out everything he wants to know about the British programme and performances in foreign countries may perhaps satisfy him, but what I am invited to do is to give particulars of machines and of secret lists, none of which have ever been given, and which nobody has yet, as far I am aware, ever asked in your Lordships' House should be given. I say most emphatically, with a full sense of responsibility, that whatever may be the right of the noble Earl to put this Motion on the Paper, I should be guilty of a very grave dereliction of duty if I gave the information asked for.

THE EARL OF HALSBURY

My Lords, that answer does not satisfy me in the least, but my feeling, looking round the House and seeing that there are not too many members here, is that it would be really a waste of time if I went to a Division. Therefore I do not press for a Division, and I will ask leave to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

Forward to