Battle Of Britain (Enemy Losses)
24.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement of the total number of enemy aircraft shot down during the Battle of Britain, according to contemporary R.A.F. estimates and German official records, respectively; and whether he will give the figures for the biggest days of the battle.
Yes, Sir, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the statement for which the hon. Member has asked showing the number of enemy aircraft which the R.A.F. claimed at the time to have been destroyed during the Battle of Britain, and the actual losses recorded by the German High Command. Between 10th July, when the action began, and 31st October, when the Germans broke it off, the R.A.F. estimated that 2,692 enemy aircraft had been destroyed. The German records show that, in fact, 2,376 of their aircraft had been put out of action; of these, 1,733 were destroyed and 643 were damaged. The figures I am circulating show that during the opening and concluding phases of the battle, while the numbers engaged were relatively small, and the fighting less continuous and intense, the losses actually inflicted on the enemy were higher than the numbers claimed by the R.A.F. When very large forces were in action, and when the battle raged without respite for many days, the estimates were well above the losses which the Luftwaffe sustained.
I am sure the House will agree that this retrospective correction of claims which were honestly put forward, does nothing to diminish the achievements or to dim the glory of the men who fought so bravely against great odds. As the Chief of the German General Staff in the West said in a confidential lecture in November, 1943, the German Army could not invade England until the British Air Arm had been completely beaten; and this, he said, "we were not able to do." There is abundant confirmation of this spontaneous statement in the German records; they show that Hitler's High Command fully recognised that the R.A.F. had inflicted a decisive defeat on their forces, and that, in consequence, their plan for the invasion of Britain could not even be launched, although a great army had been assembled and had been waiting for many days. Looking back to 1940, it is impossible to doubt that one of the decisive battles of history had been won.As the Polish Air Force took a considerable part in the Battle of Britain, will the Minister, in fairness to them, say what they did?
Yes, Sir. There were Poles and nationals of many Allied countries in the R.A.F. at that time, and, of course, from the Dominions also. If the hon. and gallant Member cares to put down a Question, I will try to particularise.
Does my right hon. Friend intend to publish corrected figures for other air operations?
Yes, Sir. We shall publish all the figures for the operations of the R.A.F. right through the war. We shall do that when the picture is complete, and we can publish the history.
Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that this victory was won not only by Fighter Command, but also to a large extent by Bomber and Coastal Commands, and that this glorious victory not only saved us from invasion, but made England a secure base for future Allied operations by land, sea and air?
Yes, Sir. The hon. Member may have noticed that I did not mention any particular Command. As he says, other Commands took part with Fighter Command in the battle, and there is evidence from the German naval records that the work of Bomber Command, particularly in attacking the invasion ports, was a very important factor in the German decision.
Will my right hon. Friend say a word about the way in which this very important news was communicated to the Press? Is he aware that these details were released to the Press confidentially two days ago, and that that confidence was honoured by all the newspapers except one?
Which one?
The "Daily Telegraph."
I thought it had been honoured by all. I greatly regret that it was not.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these battles would not have taken place had the Royal Air Force not been increased for five years before the war, in spite of every opposition by the party opposite?
I would not accept any such statement.
Will my right hon. Friend say whether the figures which he intends
LOSSES OF GERMAN AIRCRAFT IN THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN ACCORDING TO CONTEMPORARY R.A.F. ESTIMATES AND OFFICIAL GERMAN RECORDS. | |||
Date. | R.A.F. Estimate. | German Losses. | |
Destroyed. | Destroyed. | Damaged. | |
10TH JULY-7TH AUGUST— | |||
Preliminary Phase of the Battle | 188 | 192 (63) | 77 |
8TH AUGUST-23RD AUGUST | |||
Attack on Coastal Targets | 755 | 430 (213) | 127 |
24TH AUGUST-6TH SEPTEMBER | |||
Attacks of Fighter Command Airfields | 643 | 378 (243) | 127 |
7TH SEPTEMBER-30TH SEPTEMBER | |||
Daylight attack of London chiefly by Heavy Bombers | 846 | 435 (134) | 163 |
1 ST OCTOBER-31ST OCTOBER | |||
Daylight attack of London chiefly by Fighter Bombers | 260 | 325 (134) | 163 |
TOTAL LOSSES DURING THE BATTLE | 2,692 | 1,733 (896) | 643 |
Date. | Days Most Intensive Fighting. | |||||||
German Losses | ||||||||
R.A.F Estimate | Destroyed. | Damaged | ||||||
15TH AUGUST | … | … | … | … | … | 183 | 76 (32) | 9 |
18TH AUGUST | … | … | … | … | … | 155 | 71 (36) | 23 |
31ST AUGUST | … | … | … | … | … | 94 | 39 (32) | 14 |
2ND SEPTEMBER | … | … | … | … | … | 66 | 34 (23) | 12 |
7TH SEPTEMBER | … | … | … | … | … | 100 | 40 (26) | 13 |
15TH SEPTEMBER | … | … | … | … | … | 185 | 56 (43) | 21 |
27TH SEPTEMBER | … | … | … | … | … | 153 | 55 (38) | 12 |
NOTE: Figures in brackets show the losses admitted in communiques issued at the time by the German High Command. |
West Indians
25.
asked the Secretary of State for Air for what reason 715136 Corporal M. Nicholson, a West Indian, was not allowed to complete his studies in the R.A.F.; and what restrictions exist regarding the enlistment of West Indians
to publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT will include the number of aircraft shot down by artillery in this country?
The figure I have given includes them. If my hon. and gallant Friend puts down a Question, I will give him a detailed answer.
Following is the statement:
in the R.A.F. which are not applied to British subjects from the United Kingdom.
Corporal Nicholson is due for release from the R.A.F., and it seemed unlikely, therefore, that he could complete his studies before the time arrived for his repatriation. It is true that he applied a few months ago to remain in the Service under the Bounty Scheme, but he could not then be accepted because he had not served for the minimum period of two years that the scheme required. He has now finished his two years' service, and has applied again. If, as I hope, his application is approved, he can then complete his studies and take his examination. I am glad to assure the hon. Member that there are no restrictions on the enlistment of West Indians in the R.A.F. which do not equally apply to British subjects from the United Kingdom.
Malta (Overseas Tour)
26.
asked the Secretary of State for Air if he is satisfied that the majority of airmen serving in Malta consider that the reduction of the overseas tour compensates for the abolition of eligibility for home leave after 12 months' service overseas; and if he will consider the possibility of reintroducing such a home-leave scheme, especially in view of the frequent air services between Malta and the United Kingdom.
Yes, Sir. I have made inquiries and I am satisfied that the majority of the airmen now in Malta prefer the present shorter tour to the previous arrangement under which they served overseas for a longer time with the possibility of a short period of home leave. As at present advised, therefore, I do not propose to change the existing arrangements.
Aircrew Release
29.
asked the Secretary of State for Air, why H.Q. Flying Training Command's order FTC/67462/4/P of 12th February, 1947, has been rescinded; and whether he is aware of the inequity of debasing the release status of U/T and now redundant aircrews to that of A.C.2s.
The order issued on 12th February by Flying Training Command was unfortunately wrong. By an unhappy confusion, it applied the principles laid down for the release of redundant qualified aircrew to redundant unqualified aircrew cadets. The order was cancelled on 6th March, but I am afraid it had already caused misunderstanding and disappointment, which I much regret. The hon. Member will no doubt recall that shortly after V.E. Day, unqualified aircrew were released from further liability for aircrew training, and were remustered in ground trades. Cadets who were in this category are released from their new trade not according to rank, but on the age and service principle. I hope the hon. Member may agree that this is the fairest plan.
Industrial Workers (Breaks)
30.
asked the Secretary of State for Air how the decision to cut the tea break for civilian employees at maintenance units from 15 to 10 minutes was arrived at; whether the workers were consulted; whether they were invited to put forward further suggestions for increasing the speed and efficiency of their work; and what improvements are to be carried out.
Before the war, there were no breaks for tea at R.A.F. maintenance units. During the war, when long hours were being worked, informal breaks were, in practice, allowed, although no official recognition was ever given. On 3rd April last, an Air Ministry order provided that there should be two ten-minute breaks, one in the morning, and the other in the afternoon. This applied in Air Ministry establishments an arrangement which had previously been made for Ministry of Supply establishments by the Ministry of Supply Joint Industrial Council. All Air Ministry industrial workers are invited to make suggestions for improving the efficiency of their work, through their local Whitley Works Committees or Production Committees, in which both the staff side and the trade unions play a part.
Is my right hon. Friend aware that Members on this side of the House receive a large number of complaints about the waste of manpower in maintenance units? These complaints come from workers employed in those units who are supporters of the present Government. Would not this have provided an opportunity for fuller consultation with the workers to elicit further suggestions with regard to economy in manpower?
I am strongly in favour of consultation with the workers, but, as I say, either through the production committees or the Whitley Works Committees, the workers can at any time make any suggestion, and I hope that my hon. Friend's Question and my answer might have the effect of stimulating them to do so.
Is it not a tact that in many cases, in addition to the 10 minutes spent on the tea break, additional time is occupied by men going to and from the canteen for their tea?
I would like notice of that. I am not aware of it.
Is my right hon. Friend aware of the redundancy there is in many of these maintenance units?
I think the R.A.F. has done pretty well on redundancy, and my hon. Friend may be aware of our manpower economy committee, which is at present making a most exhaustive study of the whole subject.
Night Flying
31.
asked the Secretary of State for Air if he is aware that low night flying still continues over the city of Leicester, that workers are having their rest disturbed; and if he will take the necessary action with local R.A.F. units to prevent flying over this built-up area during the hours of darkness.
No complaints about night flying over Leicester have reached my Department or the civil police since my hon. Friend last asked me a question on the subject on 5th February. I am, however, warning all units in the Leicester area that they should avoid flying over the town at night.
Will my right hon. Friend see that the ban applies not only during hours of darkness, but also during the day?
I would like notice of that.
Education Branch
32.
asked the Secretary of State for Air the present number of education officers; and what is the required establishment.
The establishment of the R.A.F. Education Branch has not yet been settled, but it will probably include about 1,000 officers. There are now 255.
Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how long it is expected to take to expand from about 250 to about 1,000? How many years will that process take place?
As the hon. Member knows, it is difficult to get people with teaching qualifications at present. We are, in fact, filling about 600 posts with officers and n.c.os. now in the Royal Air Force who have educational qualifications. In that way I hope we shall be able to bridge the gap.
Is my right hon. Friend aware that he cannot get these education officers because of the bad treatment that education officers in the R.A.F. received during the war; and will he see that some retrospective justice is done to the education officers who served during the war?
That is another question, which I cannot now debate. I hope that my hon. Friend will help me to make it known to those who might apply that, in fact, conditions now are good.
33.
asked the Secretary of State for Air what response he has had to the offer of short-service education commissions.
Up to the 10th May, 1947, 220 applications had been received for short-service commissions in the education branch of the R.A.F. At that date, 49 officers had been appointed.
Can my right hon. Friend say what is the number expected?
We want to get as many as we can, up to the limits which I have already announced.
Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that he would get a better response if he offered permanent commissions instead of short-service ones?
I think I said in the Debates on the Estimates, that we plan, in the long run, to have an educational branch of which one-third shall consist of long-term officers and two-thirds of short-term service commissions. We think that is the best plan, and I hope that we shall get the men we need.
Can the right hon. Gentleman let us know in the OFFICIAL REPORT, by a tabular statement or otherwise, the academic and professional qualifications of these 220 applicants?
I can let the hon. Member know the qualifications of those who have been accepted, but that is by no means the whole.
Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether conscientious objectors are eligible for commissions in this noncombatant branch of the Service?
Not without notice.