Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
#4587561 - 12/21/21 03:01 AM RNAS and the Army  
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 71
Ekaton Offline
Junior Member
Ekaton  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 71
I’ve been doing some reading and RNAS, my favourite service, apparently didn’t cooperate much with the army - some books say that spotting was done primarily for the RN ships conducting coastal bombardment, primarily of German naval facilities. Is that right? And recon missions were not conducted for the Army either, but rather for the Navy - scouting airports, airship bases, ports etc. Not to mention long patrols along the Belgian coast.

If yes, how accurate would missions for, say, 2nd Squadron RNAS be? Spotting seems to be conducted close to the coastline indeed, but looks more like regular army artillery bombarding trenches, never facilities.

P.S. Is there a chance that we’d eventually get ships like those which I’ve seen in some WOTR screens? Pretty please yep

Last edited by Ekaton; 12/21/21 03:03 AM.
#4587576 - 12/21/21 02:16 PM Re: RNAS and the Army [Re: Ekaton]  
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,712
33lima Offline
Senior Member
33lima  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,712
Belfast, NI
My take on this is that despite their origins being what they were, there was no particular lack of co-operation between RFC and RNAS; rather they were separate services with mostly separate tasks, tactically and/or often geographically. Some RNAS scout squadrons served with the RFC supporting the Army, and some aircraft orders for the RNAS were diverted to the RFC. RNAS two-seater squadrons weren't generally needed to support the BEF, they had other tasks not least anti-U-boat patrols. Soldiers made better observers of things on the ground, sailors of things at sea, so such separation was logical. The RNAS 2-seater squadrons based in France were therefore able to pursue some specialised operations in line with their service's priorities, like attacking Zeppelin sheds and 'strategic' bombing. The Smutts report found that a merger would be preferable for Home Defence and related to that, for 'strategic' bombing as a deterrent/reprisal, which had become priorities, arguably for more political than operational reasons.

It must be hard if not well nigh impossible for a sim with a dynamic campaign to reflect every subtlety in the types of missions assigned to particular aircraft and particular squadrons, especially as they varied significantly over the course of the War. Specialisation of missions according to aircraft type (scout/fighter, recce/bomber) is probably the best we're going to get in somewhat generic missions. A campaign with scripted missions could be much more sophisticated in that respect but has limitations of its own.

Last edited by 33lima; 12/22/21 02:35 AM.

SimHQ Battle of Britain II screenshots thread
CombatAce Mission Reports
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." (attributed to Marcus Aurelius)


Moderated by  Polovski 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Roy Cross is 100 Years Old
by F4UDash4. 04/23/24 11:22 AM
Actors portraying US Presidents
by PanzerMeyer. 04/19/24 12:19 PM
Dickey Betts was 80
by Rick_Rawlings. 04/19/24 01:11 AM
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
Grumman Wildcat unique landing gear
by Coot. 04/17/24 03:54 PM
Peter Higgs was 94
by Rick_Rawlings. 04/17/24 12:28 AM
Whitey Herzog was 92
by F4UDash4. 04/16/24 04:41 PM
Anyone can tell me what this is?
by NoFlyBoy. 04/16/24 04:10 PM
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0