Why did the French lose their immense advance???

[Tekko]

Just saw a fantastic gallery of pioneer aviation and remebered how far the French planes were technically superior to any other country´s between, let´s say, 1908 and 1915...
Is there any scientific theory or consensus how the French acquired this superiority and why they lost it to the British and German, never to regain or at least equal it in later decades?

I know, American Aeronautics were splendid in the Wright´s years and after the First World War and the Japanese were coming up, but my question concerns the years mentioned above...

Greetings from Europe, any answer might help!

[Varese2002]

Originally Posted by Tekko

Just saw a fantastic gallery of pioneer aviation and remebered how far the French planes were technically superior to any other country´s between, let´s say, 1908 and 1915...
Is there any scientific theory or consensus how the French acquired this superiority and why they lost it to the British and German, never to regain or at least equal it in later decades?

I know, American Aeronautics were splendid in the Wright´s years and after the First World War and the Japanese were coming up, but my question concerns the years mentioned above...

Greetings from Europe, any answer might help!

This is a very broad subject, in my opinion never covered and certainly not scientific. The challenge in your question is to define what is (technical) superiority and how should it be measured. There are no standards to 'measure' countries against each other.

When you look at international records, speed, endurance, height, load you will be surprised how many were just before the start of WW1 in the hands of other nations than France.

Professional historians has wisely circumvented this difficult subject, with one exception. Historians have looked in detail why the United States was so poorly prepared to engage in aerial combat in world war I. An example of such is study is

• Johnson, Herbert Alan. Wingless Eagle U.S. Army Aviation Through World War I. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001. 298 pages

Cheers

Kees

[Tekko]

Hello Kees,

thank you for your very thoughtful answer.

I admit it´s quite difficult to measure the country´s standarts, as can be seen by the example that the most successful German aeroplane company was that of the Dutch entrepreneur Fokker...

I was referring to the circumstamce that most of the European models between about 1907 and 1915 were either french design or in some way copies of such.

[Varese2002]

Originally Posted by Tekko

I was referring to the circumstamce that most of the European models between about 1907 and 1915 were either french design or in some way copies of such.

You are right there were a lot of Blériot, Morane-Saulnier or Farman look-alikes in the early days. Fokker got his inspiration for the monoplane M.5 from an old Morane-Saulnier monoplane he had bought somewhere (as he was Dutch it surely was a cheap buy ).

Another example is the German Albatros firm, who started in 1910 with (license-built) Antoinettes and Farmans, but quickly started to develop the Farman line further. After 1912 they had experience enough to start with their line of biplanes which were completely their own design, which lasted with continual development till the end of the war.

Thinking about it, I think the statement that between 1907 and 1915 European models were either french design or in some way copies of such is too harsh. After having written this long I think there is a need to further define 'copy'. There is also 'inspired by' or 'developed from'. Examples can be found of them:

• Fokker was inspired by the Morane-Saulnier monoplane to built his own (surely the Fokker M.5 was a different machine)

• The Gotha LD 4 was inspired by the Caudron G.III

I think it is really difficult to find a copy, perhaps a licence-built model.


Cheers

Kees

[Tekko]

Thank you again, Kees!

What you wrote about plane design might be true for engines as well- thinking e. g. of Oberursel engines. Could it be connected with the fact that French car production was much bigger than that in Britain, Germany, Italy and so on? Did the military leaders in France support the aircraft more than in Germany (Zeppelins) or the other countries?

Maybe some of my comments are not enough sophisticated due to my poor English. I read it quite well, but active use is another thing- too long out of school, I guess...Of cause, it is like it is with all innovation: many companies claim to be "inspired" or to "improve" something from the market.

[rammjaeger]

I think some sentences of Morrow´s book "The Great War in the Air" give some hints to this question (seen from the military point of view). Obviously the French lost a lot of their positions between 1912-1914:

"In 1913 and 1914 the French Army wasted precious time with debating administrative struggles, an abortive policy on armored airplanes and indecision on aircraft armament."

"... the army tended to rely primarily on its original supplier - Farman, Blériot, Voisin and the Caudron brothers´firm. Nieuport, Breguet, and Deperdussin, the 1911 military competition´s winners, received far fewer orders, limiting their potential for expansion." [and - IMHO - delaying innovations]

"French aircraft firms had wasted valuable time developing impractical aircraft, and the French army bought only 350 airplanes in the year before the war, when the German army had produced [accepted?] four hundred."

On the other hand on the German side a massive state and military organized support for aviation was able to close the gap to France in many fields.
Especially the "Nationalflugspende" helped to raise funds for aviation enterprises and to encourage aviators to give their best. As well the Army and Navy did not like the idea of a superior French aviation and subsidised German aviation - airships and airplanes.

There are probably a lot more reasons to consider here.