RNAS claims vs RFC claims

Breguet · 1 January 2006, 01:55 AM

Reading the thread on "accepted" scores set me to wondering....

Did the RNAS have the same system as the RFC and for that matter did the German Naval Aviation Units use the same system as their more publicised brothers in arms? And were their pilot over-claiming ratios the same as their airforce bretheren?

MikeW · 1 January 2006, 04:23 AM

Adrian,

I think it's safe to say the RNAS used the same system as the RFC.

An RNAS claim would be vetted by the squadron CO then passed to Wing and on up to RNAS HQ. At each stage the evidence from other parties would be assessed and a judgement made.

When an RNAS squadron was attached to the RFC, as was the case with the "Detached Squadron" in 1916 (what everyone calls Naval 8 though it wasn't), Naval 3, Naval 1, Naval 6, Naval 8, Naval 10 and Naval 9 then they had to follow the RFC regime exactly - Squadron CO, RFC Wing, RFC Brigade, and finally RFC HQ.

I know many might say that I'm biased, but my gut feeling is that in most circumstances, the RNAS claims were more realistic than those submitted by the RFC. I obviously cannot prove this, and can't be bothered to try!!!

Graeme · 1 January 2006, 06:55 AM

Adrian

Mike got there first. Essentially the paperwork got passed up the respective chain of command until somebody made an assessment of a claim's validity.

Not sure that I'd agree with Mike that RNAS claiming was any more realistic than the RFC's, but then that's my prejudice

If the weather stays crummy, perhaps I'll try and work out destroyed v out of control for each service and see what that proves, if anything

Happy New Year

Graeme