lord trenchard yacht

Yachting Monthly

• Digital edition

Why a yacht makes the best liferaft

• James Stevens
• December 11, 2020

Liferafts are reassuring, but should only to be used as an absolute last resort. James Stevens explores the main scenarios that could lead to abandoning ship, and what to do if the worst happens

Climbing into a liferaft is no easy option and should only ever be an absolute last resort. Credit: Graham Snook/YM

Having to abandon ship into a liferaft is the biggest decision a skipper has to make.

Current thinking about this was greatly influenced  by the 1979 Fastnet Race Inquiry Report written by the RYA and RORC.

The race fleet encountered very severe weather in the  Irish Sea; 24 yachts were abandoned of which 19 were later recovered.

There were 15 fatalities.

Before we become too judgemental, however, remember that yachts in 1979 were not designed for knockdowns and inversion.

Batteries, toolboxes, cookers and other heavy equipment were not secured as they should be now, so conditions below would have been grim in a storm.

However, the point was forcibly made that if the yacht is afloat it is the best liferaft.

While the RNLI is kept busy with yachts running aground, engines failing or crew needing to be taken off, it is very unusual for a lifeboat or a helicopter to rescue a crew from a liferaft.

In spite of this, it is worth considering the circumstances when it is time to abandon ship, how it might be prevented and if the worst happens, how to survive.

So, why do yachts founder?

Keel failure

Recently there has been a great deal of discussion in the yachting press and elsewhere on keel failure.

Most of this has been prompted by the loss of the Beneteau First 40.7 Cheeki Rafiki with four lives in the North Atlantic in 2014.

Cheeki Rafiki lost her keel mid-Atlantic. The liferaft was not deployed

The keel separated from the hull.

The racing yacht Hooligan V capsized following keel failure off Prawle Point in Devon in  2007, with the loss of one crew member.

Sailing’s world governing body, World Sailing, has highlighted these and other keel incidents.

Most of the accidents were yachts which had been raced and had struck the bottom and many, including Cheeki Rafiki , had been repaired  at the hull-keel joint area.

In the case of Hooligan , the keel had been altered by adding extra weight.

It very unusual for standard production cruising yachts which are well looked after to suffer keel failure.

The first obvious rule is that if you are getting into shallow water, slow down.

Most cruising skippers understand this but slowing down is anathema to a racing sailor.

If you hit the bottom hard, you will have to inspect the damage out of the water.

The good news is that some insurance policies cover lifting out for a survey after grounding, so check your policy.

During the annual lift out while the boat is in the slings, check the keel hull joint for cracking inside and out, and if in any doubt hire a surveyor to check it.

If you buy a boat which has been raced hard or, like Cheeki Rafiki , has been bareboat chartered for racing, have it checked really carefully.

Striking a semi-submerged object

I expect most skippers have stayed awake in their bunk off watch and wondered what they would do if the yacht struck a container or other obstruction on the surface at night.

No one knows how many containers are lost overboard each year but it’s certainly in the hundreds.

It is not known how many containers are lost at sea. They float low in the water but most sink rapidly. Credit: Marine Nationale

Fortunately most of the them sink and the chances of a cruising yacht hitting one is small.

Most of us have hit logs, wooden pallets and other obstructions which take off some antifoul but rarely cause significant damage.

This hazard is greatest for racing yachts travelling day and night at speeds of around 25 knots, when hitting a container or even a whale would be catastrophic, though there are even recent accounts of moderate heavy displacement cruising yachts suffering severe keel damage following a whale strike .

We all have a healthy respect for ships, which are an obvious hazard.

Collisions between yachts and ships are therefore very rare.

The Sailfish 25 yacht Ouzo was thought to have passed down the side of the P&O ferry Pride of Bilbao and capsized in her wake at night off the Isle of Wight in August 2006 in good visibility.

The three crew drowned and their bodies were recovered in their lifejackets in the following days.

No trace of the yacht was found.

It seems that the yacht was swamped but stayed on the surface for a short while but not long enough for the crew to send a distress message.

Atalanta of Chester sailed under the bows of a tanker while racing, but the boat stayed afloat and the crew survived. Credit: Lloyd Images

There was no liferaft.

In 2003 the Moody 47 Wahkuna collided with a container ship in the English Channel in poor visibility.

The yacht sank but all the crew managed to board the liferaft and were picked up after about five hours when one of their flares was seen by a passing ferry.

In 2011, the 10m racing yacht Atalanta steered across the bow of a fully laden supertanker off Cowes.

The yacht was struck but miraculously the crew survived and yacht, though damaged, remained afloat.

Again this was a rare accident even though during Cowes week thousands of yachts sail across a main shipping channel.

A good lookout is an obvious essential with a knowledge of radar if you have one, and AIS is also a big asset, but again these accidents a very rare, particularly in conditions of good visibility.

Grounding or striking a rock

This is probably the main reason why yachts are abandoned.

Unsurprisingly the cause is usually navigational error and occasionally an over-reliance on electronic data.

In 2006 Gypsy Moth IV was on a round the world voyage when she grounded on a reef near Tahiti.

The cause was inattention and navigational error.

The crew all managed to get ashore.

The yacht was eventually recovered and taken by cargo ship to New Zealand where she was repaired and continued the voyage.

The reports of the grounding and loss of Clipper CV24 off South Africa in 2017, the loss of the Brig Maria Assumpta in 1995 and the Sail Training yacht Lord Rank in 2010, and the grounding of Team Vestas in the Indian Ocean during the 2018 Volvo Ocean Race all involve navigational errors often compounded with other issues such as fatigue.

Team Vestas went aground on a reef in the Indian Ocean as a result of navigational error related to the zoom level in use on the electronic charts. Credit: Brian Carlin/ Team Vestas Wind/Volvo Ocean Race

There are numerous accident reports illustrating similar disasters, many with fatalities.

A theme of most accidents is that there is rarely one cause; the final loss of vessel or life is a succession of incidents often involving fatigue, poor maintenance, short cuts, complacency and often simply a poor lookout.

In most cases a navigational error is at the heart of it.

It can be difficult for the skipper to prioritise.

That shrieking engine alarm might be less important than checking the ground track.

The torn sail might have to flog while you establish why the bilge water level is rising.

I suspect that every skipper has at some stage taken their eye off the ball, maybe taken a nap at the chart table and woken up to discover a rock ahead or a starboard tack yacht or a ship approaching.

These spine-chilling moments are a forceful reminder of the need for vigilance and constant attention.

Overwhelmed by heavy seas

The 1979 Fastnet Race gave a stark warning of the dangers of the open sea in a gale.

The lesson was obviously heeded because in 2007, with severe weather warnings, the Fastnet Race was postponed by 25 hours, and with continuing bad weather, 207 of the 271 entries retired to South Coast ports.

The great majority of British yachtsmen limit their cruising to passages of less than 24 hours and therefore within a period when accurate forecasts are available.

Yachts are unlikely to be overwhelmed, even in severe conditions, unless there is some kind of structural failure. Credit: Mark Slats/GGR/PPL

The Met Office and its European equivalents are usually accurate for the next 24 hours and reasonably accurate for 48.

So cross-Channel sailors can avoid gales.

Occasionally strong gusts can make life unpleasant but they rarely last for long and there is usually some forecast warning.

In the ocean, yacht crews are on their own.

Here, a stable, well kitted-out boat, secured for a knockdown and with a trained resilient crew, is essential.

Well-found yachts with capable crews are rarely lost at sea.

Obviously it is impossible to analyse why yachts disappear at sea but my guess is that structural failure is the most likely reason in severe weather, and that includes the integrity of hatches and deck fittings as well as the hull and keel.

Neither gas nor petrol smoulder, so if either ignite it’s usually too late for the extinguisher.

In 1999, a gas explosion on board the 13.5m Services Sail Training yacht Lord Trenchard , berthed in Poole, severely injured the skipper, who lost a leg.

In 2019 the yacht Honeymoon suffered an explosion, following a gas leak off Selsey on the South Coast.

A gas explosion will be sudden and violent, as shown in the YM crash boat test

The two crew were winched to safety.

A gas alarm is required on commercial vessels and a good idea on recreational ones too.

It is crucial to have a checked and serviced gas system, flame-fail devices on the cooker switches, and to make sure the gas is turned off when not in use.

Butane is heavier than air and sinks to the bilge.

Continues below…

Where should you stow your liferaft?

Wherever you cruise, you’ll most likely want to keep a liferaft on board in case of emergency – but where’s…

Sailing 100 miles without a keel

In 2010 a charter yacht completed three sailing charters and over 100 miles before anyone noticed the keel fell off…

Life in a liferaft

Ever wondered what life in a liferaft is really like in rough weather? Yachting Monthly's Chris Beeson packed his sick…

Why you should get to know your liferaft

It is easy to buy the cheapest liferaft and then forget about it, but do you know how to use…

If you discover a leak, ventilate the yacht, open the hatches and lift the floorboards; do not start the engine – starting the generator ignited the gas on Lord Trenchard .

The engine and galley are the danger areas for fires.

Keeping both clean and well maintained is a good start, along with care when handling fuels or fat.

You can put a lit match out in cold diesel or cooking oil but both spontaneously ignite when heated.

Abandoning ship following a gas explosion probably means jumping or being blown into the water.

If you are lucky there will still be a liferaft.

Fortunately there are very few recorded fatalities from yacht fires.

Modern gas and fuel systems are far safer on yachts than even 30 years ago and with regular checks and care the risk can be minimised.

Make sure your fire extinguishers are in date, accessible near both the forehatch and from the cockpit, and that you know how to use them for different types of fire.

Abandoning ship for a liferaft

If all of these preventative measures have failed, and the yacht is either burning or sinking beneath your feet, then it may be time to abandon.

Before you slip the lines from the dock, take a sea survival course.

Trained people are far more likely to survive, and you are left in no doubt about the dangers of cold water and the discomfort of inhabiting a liferaft.

Read the contents list of your liferaft.

You must send a distress message, so an EPIRB and radio are essential items.

Most rafts are stowed on deck in a canister or in a locker in a valise.

Life in a liferaft can be deeply unpleasant, even for hardened sailors. Credit: Graham Snook/YM

When the time comes to launch, it is critical that the liferaft painter is attached to the yacht.

If the yacht sinks while attached to the raft, the painter will break.

Unless the yacht is on fire, launch the liferaft to leeward by throwing the canister or valise into the water.

Pull the painter – about 10m of rope will come out before the enclosed gas cylinder activates and the raft inflates.

If it is inverted, try and right it from the yacht, as it is more difficult to do so from the water.

If you can, climb in without entering the water.

If there is time, take warm clothing, a grab bag, extra water and food.

If you have to enter from the water, the strongest crew member should enter first and help the others in.

Waiting crew should link their arms over the lifelines round the raft, which helps stabilise it.

Once in, the mantra is: cut, stream, close, maintain.

Cut the painter, stream the drogue for stability, close the flap to keep out the wind and maintain the raft, starting by bailing out any water.

James Stevens, author of the Yachtmaster Handbook, spent 10 of his 23 years at the RYA as Training Manager and Yachtmaster Chief Examiner

Sit facing the middle and if it is light, read the survival instructions.

If you are within about 200 miles from the UK shore and have sent an EPIRB distress message, help should arrive within a few hours.

It is still worth conserving water.

If you are in the open ocean you could be in for the long haul and the sea survival course tells you how to minimise water use by not drinking for the first 24 hours then half a litre per person per day.

Life in a raft is unpleasant and even hardened sailors feel seasick, so everyone should take a seasickness tablet.

The good news is that it is unlikely you will ever have to abandon ship.

Taking training and keeping your yacht in good condition make it even less likely.

The coast of Britain is not littered with the remains of foundered yachts!

• MarketPlace
• Digital Archives
• Order A Copy

Propane disaster

[Editor’s note: The following is a first-hand account of a propane explosion on the 55-foot Nicholson yawl, Lord Trenchard, owned by the British Armed Forces and used for adventure training for military personnel. The yacht was alongside the town dock in Poole, on the south coast of England, when the blast occurred. Two people were injured, one very seriously. This story, with all its gory detail, should be a cautionary tale for anyone with a propane system aboard their yacht.]

"The sound of people moving around the cabin and quiet conversation wakes me. It is broad daylight, and I glance at my watch. Six fifty-five — I can doze in the quarter berth for a few more minutes. I pull the bunk curtain aside just in time to see two of the crew disappear up the companionway with their shower gear. The skipper, Colin Rouse, is up and about. ‘What’s the weather like?’ I ask. ‘Fine,’ he answers. ‘Looks good for the passage. Kettle’s on.’

"I lie back and think about the plan for the day. Seven new crewmembers will be joining us after breakfast, and in my mind I run through the briefing that they will need before we can set off. Our plan is to sail across the English Channel to Cherbourg in France, about 130 miles. I hear the generator, fitted below the cockpit, turn over as Colin tries to start it from the control panel by the saloon steps. It doesn’t start the first time, and then I hear it turn over again.

"Chaos. I am conscious of the most excruciating pain; the whole of my right leg feels as though it is being electrocuted. The agony goes on and on and on. I can’t see. I’m covered in something white and translucent. There is no noise, and then I hear screaming, deep cries of agony; it takes a finite time for me to realize that the screaming is coming from me. Illogically, I think that something must have happened to the generator and live cables have dropped across my leg. After what seems like an age, the pain starts to ease. Faintly, I hear a voice. ‘He’s lost his leg.’ I turn my head to the right and see a severed leg lying beside my bunk where the chart table seat should be. For one dreadful, heart-stopping moment I think that it is mine. Then I realize that the leg is deeply tanned and wearing a shoe and sock — it can’t be me.

"I lose consciousness at this point and the next thing I am aware of is someone dragging me from the remnants of the quarter berth. They are pulling shattered sheets of fiberglass off me. I am lying on the bare hull; the bunk has disappeared from under me. My rescuers drag me through the gaping hole where the coach roof had been. There is a stink of fiberglass, as though I was in a boatbuilding shop. My face and eyes are covered in blood and something seems to have happened to my right foot — it’s bleeding and won’t take my weight. I look back into the wreckage of what had been the saloon. Colin is lying there with people working on him. The stump of his leg is pointing straight toward me. The cabin is devastated — I cannot conceive what has happened. There is blood everywhere.

"I recall nothing else until I step onto the jetty from the square-rigged training ship Royalist, alongside which Lord Trenchard is berthed. There are police cars and ambulances all over the quay and more are arriving. I only hear their sirens faintly. There is a lot of broken glass and a crowd is beginning to form, held back by the police. A sergeant is talking to me, but I can’t really absorb what he is saying. He shakes my shoulders. ‘How many people were onboard. How many?’ I try to pull myself together. ‘Four,’ I answer.

"I look back at Lord Trenchard. The whole of the cockpit and afterdeck has disappeared, leaving a gaping hole some 20 feet long. The mizzenmast has fallen forward and the aft end of the coach roof has been torn off. I can see a deep split running down the hull from the coaming to the waterline. The whole deck has been lifted and all the windows blown out. Only at this moment does my mind register what has happened — explosion. I want to go back to the boat to help Colin, but sensibly, I’m not allowed to. ‘He’s all right — he’s being looked after,’ I am told. Still dripping blood, I am put into an ambulance and driven away."

That is the reality of a propane explosion. The violence of the event is beyond belief. The blast was heard over four miles away and windows blown out on the quay, despite being shielded by the bulk of Royalist inboard of Lord Trenchard. The other two crewmembers onboard, who had, like me, been lying in their bunks, were miraculously uninjured, but very shocked. The two crewmen who had just stepped onto the jetty probably saved Colin’s life. They recall looking around to see parts of the boat — including the complete wheel and binnacle — flying high in the air. They came back onboard and administered first aid, helped by officers from Royalist, until medical help arrived.

The emergency services deserve every praise. A Poole lifeboat came alongside and together with Royalist supported Lord Trenchard to keep her afloat; she was making a lot of water from the splits in the hull and damaged seawater systems. After Colin got ashore, she was towed to the other side of the harbor to be lifted out. I spent some time in casualty, together with members of Royalist’s crew who had suffered cuts and bruises. I had the gashes in my foot stitched up — the cuts to my face were only superficial — and discovered that both my eardrums had burst. The initial pain in my leg, which had been only a few inches from the seat of the blast, was explained to me; the shock of the explosion had stimulated all the nerves in it at once, a common blast effect.

Whilst being treated I heard that Colin’s left leg had been amputated above the knee. His other leg was badly damaged but had mercifully been saved. He also had injuries to his hand and neck, and although critically ill, was out of immediate danger.

Later that day I went back down to Lord Trenchard to try to retrieve some of my personal kit. She was still being kept afloat, but was half-full of water and diesel fuel. The interior was almost unrecognizable with virtually nothing left intact. The explosion had obviously happened under the cockpit and the blast had torn forward through the boat, ripping out the joinery, bulkheads and cabin sole. The forehatch, which had been secured with a massive wooden strongback, had been torn off. The chart table had been blown forward through the saloon, together with the radar and all the instruments. It seemed impossible that four people could have survived. Mixed in with the shattered fragments of fiberglass and plywood were the pathetic remains of personal possessions — shredded clothing and sleeping bags, books, toilet gear, Colin’s battered flute. It was a very shocking sight, made worse by the evidence of Colin’s injuries — splashes of blood and blood-soaked clothing.

How could such an accident happen? The Joint Services Adventurous Sail Training Center in Gosport has been running a fleet of 24 boats, including nine Nicholson 55s, for nearly 30 years. These boats are deployed worldwide — three of them were racing across the Indian Ocean when this accident happened. They have a regular program of refits and maintenance, and because many of the military personnel who sail in them are novices, safety procedures and routines are paramount. The British Marine Accident Investigation Branch carried out a very thorough inquiry into the explosion.

Like the other military Nicholson 55s, Lord Trenchard’s propane system consisted of two 9-lb cylinders, mounted in a locker sunk into the deck abreast the cockpit. Both cylinders were connected by flexible hoses to the regulator via a wall block, and from there a single, continuous copper gas-pipe ran to an isolating valve by the stove. A retaining plate secured the cylinders in the locker with just their shut-off valves exposed. One cylinder was turned on, whilst the other, shut off, was a stand-by, available when the in-use cylinder ran out. Whenever the cooker was not in use, the isolating valve beside it was kept shut. A gas alarm was fitted with two sensors, one beneath the cooker and one below the cockpit.

The evening before the accident, the in-use propane bottle ran out whilst supper was being cooked. It was turned off, the stand-by cylinder was turned on and a note made to change the empty cylinder the next day.

The accident report identified three failures that caused the explosion. First, the stand-by cylinder, which had been turned on the previous evening, had not been properly connected to its flexible pipe. The cylinder was recovered after the event, and the connection was loose. It had been attached during a previous trip made by Lord Trenchard a fortnight earlier and had been the stand-by cylinder since then. Thus, when, 12 hours before the explosion, this cylinder was turned on, propane at high-pressure leaked undetected directly from the bottle into the locker.

This propane should have drained overboard. However, examination of the locker, which was also recovered, revealed that it was not completely gas-tight. So an unknown proportion of the escaping propane leaked into the watertight compartment below the cockpit.

The final cause of the disaster was that the gas alarm failed to operate. The reason for this could not be determined — the alarm system was so badly damaged in the explosion that testing it was impossible. The report concluded that the generator starter motor supplied the spark that ignited the propane.

So three failures, one human and two material, caused this catastrophe. The most obvious lesson is that propane cylinders should always be turned off at the cylinder when the stove is not being used. But in many boats, this is inconvenient — the stowage locker is outside in the cold and wet, and it is often difficult to get at. It is worth noting that a solenoid shut-off valve, often fitted to overcome this inconvenience, would not have prevented this accident, as it would have been downstream of the loose connection.

But there are other lessons, too. Propane on boats is inherently dangerous, and to keep it safe we have to actively do things. We must turn the bottle on and off every time the stove is used and test our gas alarm systems by 9njecting propane into the sensors at regular intervals. We must periodically check that ourpropane lockers are indeed gas-tight and that the drains from them are not blocked. We must checknpipework and replace flexible hoses, test flame failure devices. Human nature is such that not all of these things will unfailingly get done.

ýWe should all consider whether we really do need propane on our boats. Nowadays, there are more alternatives available than the traditional kerosene stove. There are user-friendly diesel stoves on the market. Larger yachts with modern, quiet inboard generators might use electricity for their cooking.

On a happier note, Colin made the most remarkable recovery, due largely to his amazing cheerfulness and fortitude together with the unstinting support of his partner Janis. Within a week he was terrorizing the nurses in hospital and within a fortnight he was home. Although the adjustment has not been easy, he gets around well on a marvelous artificial leg. He no longer works as a Nicholson skipper but has not given up sailing. Last summer he campaigned a yacht in the grueling Fastnet race under the auspices of BLESMA, the British Limbless Ex-Servicemen’s Association. All the crew have lost one or both legs. It was a successful venture, and they had a lot of fun.

Accidents happen, but ones involving propane are more horrible than most. We were fortunate that no one was killed on Lord Trenchard. Had the explosion happened the previous day, with the yacht at sea and everyone onboard in the cockpit, or had we all been sitting around the saloon table, undoubtedly lives would have been lost, quite possibly the whole crew. To prevent such a disaster happening to you, if you must have propane on your yacht, always, always turn it off at the bottle.

A former Royal Navy officer, Gavin McLaren worked for the Ministry of Defence as a Nicholson 55 skipper from 1988 until 1992, when he and his wife Georgie spent four years extended cruising in their Rival 41, Margaret Wroughton, visiting the Caribbean and the U.S. East Coast.

He was re-employed as a Nicholson skipper in 1999, just two weeks before the accident described here, and was sailing aboard Lord Trenchard as the mate, refamiliarizing himself with the boat. He is the author of North Biscay Pilot and the forthcoming new edition of the Atlantic Crossing Guide.

By Ocean Navigator

Hugh Trenchard was a commander of the Royal Flying Corps during World War One and by the end of that war, the first head of the newly formed Royal Air Force. Trenchard took over command of the RFC when it was primarily acting as a spotter for army’s artillery combined with photoreconnaissance. For Trenchard this was not enough. He wanted the RFC to be far more aggressive it its outlook and to take on the German Air Service. The whole approach of Trenchard to aerial warfare effectively changed the corps from a relatively passive role to an aggressive one.

Hugh Trenchard was born on February 3 rd 1873 in Taunton, Somerset. Trenchard’s father was an officer in the King’s Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, while his mother’s father had been a captain in the Royal Navy. With such a background it was not surprising that both parents wanted Trenchard to embark on a military career. Not overly gifted academically, he failed the entrance exams for the Royal Navy but after several attempts passed the exams for a career in the army. Trenchard became a second lieutenant in the Royal Scots Fusiliers. His first posting was to India in 1893. Here Trenchard made a name for himself as an expert shot (he won the Al-India Rifle Championship in 1894) but he did not conform to the traditional way of life that many young fellow officers led then. Trenchard was seen as dour and somewhat dull and was nicknamed ‘the camel’.

In 1900 Trenchard was posted to South Africa where the Second Boer War was being fought. Here Trenchard was ordered to form a mounted company of the Imperial Yeomanry. The Boers were skilled riders and had poised many problems for the British during the campaign. While in India, Trenchard had developed a reputation as a skilled polo player (in 1896 he clashed with a young Winston Churchill during a match) and it was for this reason that senior commanders believed he was the right man to create this new unit. During a clash with the Boers in October 1900, Trenchard was seriously wounded in the chest and in December he returned to England. In late December he moved to Switzerland to convalesce – it was believed that the fresh air in St Moritz would be good for his damaged left lung.

Wanting to continue his army career, Trenchard returned to South Africa in July 1901. Kitchener, Commander-in-Chief, tasked Trenchard with creating a new corps of mounted infantry. In early 1902, he was appointed commander of the 23 rd Mounted Infantry Regiment and by August 1902 he held the rank of brevet major.

In December 1903 Trenchard was posted to Nigeria to quell inter-tribal violence. This he achieved and in 1906, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Order (DSO) for his work.

In October 1910, Trenchard was posted to Ireland. He found life within the officer’s mess somewhat dull after his experiences in both South Africa and Nigeria. His boredom brought him into conflict with fellow officers and it was during his time in Ireland that Trenchard thought about moving to a number of colonial defence forces. However, it also coincided with the opening of the Central Flying School. A fellow officer who had served with Trenchard in Nigeria (Captain Eustace Loraine) contacted him and advised Trenchard to take up flying – something he did in July 1912. The day before Trenchard arrived for training, Loraine was killed in a flying accident along with Staff Sergeant R H V Wilson on Salisbury Plain.

After a short period of training (just over 60 minutes was spent in the air), Trenchard flew solo on July 31 st . He then moved to the Central Flying School. He was not a particularly gifted flyer and he spent more time on administrative work and training procedures. In September 1912, Trenchard was involved in an army exercise whereby he acted as an air observer. It was during this exercise that he started to develop his ideas as to how aeroplanes could support men and weapons on the ground.

Trenchard made his name during World War One. When war was declared in August 1914, Trenchard was officially Officer Commanding the Military Wing of the Royal Flying Corps. By the time war ended, Trenchard was head of the newly formed Royal Air Force.

As Officer Commanding the Military Wing, one of Trenchard’s tasks was the creation of new squadrons. He initially gave himself a target of 12 but Lord Kitchener increased this to 60. In October 1914, the command structure of the RFC was given a major overhaul. The post of Officer Commanding the Military Wing was dropped in November and Trenchard was given the command of the First Wing, which was made up of 2 and 3 Squadrons. These provided the First Army, commanded by Haig, with reconnaissance photos and provided ‘eyes in the skies’ for the artillery. However, during the Battle of Nueve Chappelle (March 1915) the artillery decided to ignore the information given to them by the First Wing. In June 1915, Trenchard was promoted to colonel.

In summer 1915, General Sir David Henderson, head of the RFC, moved to the War Office to work. He recommended Trenchard for his position and Kitchener gave his approval. On August 25 th 1915, Trenchard was appointed Officer Commanding the RFC in the Field with the rank of brigadier-general.

Trenchard determined that the RFC under his command was to be a far more aggressive unit than it had been under Henderson. Whereas the primary roles of the RFC under Henderson had been reconnaissance and artillery directing, Trenchard now expected his pilots to take the fight to the enemy. However, the Germans were equipped with technologically more advanced aeroplanes, especially the Fokkers, and losses within the RFC were high. The number of pilots killed outstripped those who replaced them. The pilots were fulfilling Trenchard’s desire to be more aggressive but paid the price for it.

The RFC could not give the level of support that the British and French armies needed at the start of the Battle of the Somme because of the weather. Reconnaissance from the air was vital but in the days leading up to July 1 st , low cloud meant that the RFC could barely fly. If it had been able to do so, it would have almost certainly spotted that German machine gun emplacements along with German barbed wire had not been destroyed by Allied artillery fire. During the initial stages of the battle, Haig had required the RFC to carry out low-level bombing of German positions. This had resulted in many aeroplanes being shot down. Trenchard appealed for more aeroplanes but with little success. What did a great deal to help the RFC was the winter weather from 1916 to 1917, which made flying very difficult. The RFC recuperated during this time. However, the improved weather in March 1917 meant that flying resumed and between March and May 1917, the RFC lost 1270 aeroplanes. What saved the RFC in the summer of 1917 was the introduction of new aeroplanes – the SE5, de Havilland 4 and Bristol Fighters – which were more able to take on the fighters of the German Air Service.

The German bombing of London was to have a major effect on the RFC. Summoned to London to meet David Lloyd George, Trenchard was told to plan for revenge attacks against German cities – Lloyd George specifically named Mannheim. While senior Army figures had argued that the RFC was there to support troops on the ground, Trenchard, pushed by the Prime Minister’s, had to focus on bombing and attacking the German rear. On October 17 th 1917, the RFC carried out its first bombing attack on German civilian targets when the Burbach iron foundry was attacked along with railway lines. On October 24 th , the RFC flew its first long-range night-time bombing mission. Both of these raids gave the government what they required – huge propaganda material. However, Trenchard was not keen on what it was doing to the RFC – splitting its forces and pursuing what he believed were non-required campaigns. He wanted to concentrate on supporting the Army on the ground.

In December 1917, Trenchard was appointed Chief of the Air Staff in the newly created Air Ministry headed by Lord Rothermere. Major-General John Salmond succeeded him as head of the RFC. Trenchard had a difficult relationship with Rothermere. Trenchard believed that Rothermere was too concerned with political intrigue as opposed to concentrating his efforts on what was happening on the Western Front. This culminated in Trenchard offering his resignation on March 19 th 1918 after Rothermere informed the RNAS that they were to receive 4000 new aeroplanes that did not exist. Trenchard’s resignation was accepted on April 10 th . He was summoned to Buckingham Palace to explain his decision to the King. Trenchard explained that he found it impossible to work with Rothermere and questioned his competence to be Air Minister. This got back to Lloyd George who interpreted this as an experienced Army officer questioning the basic competence of a newspaper magnate who now headed a new government ministry. On April 25 th , Rothermere resigned.

On June 15 th 1918, Trenchard was appointed General Officer Commanding the Independent Air Force, later the Royal Air Force. The IAF carried out intensive bombing raids on German airfields, railways and centres of industry. Trenchard was also keen to teach the Americans about the new techniques of flying in combat. He also developed a close relationship with the French Air Force and as the war drew to a close, this association was recognised when Trenchard was appointed commander of the Inter-Allied Independent Air Force in October 1918.

In the immediate aftermath of the war, Trenchard found himself in a state of flux. No-one was quite sure if the Royal Air Force was going to be continued and Trenchard’s first task after the war was to quell 5,000 mutineers at Southampton in January 1919. This he did without bloodshed – something that impressed Winston Churchill who was Secretary of State for Air. He persuaded Trenchard to take up the post of Chief of Air Staff on March 31 st 1919.

As head of the RAF, Trenchard went about his work with a passionate zeal. He angered the Army Council by creating new officer ranks in the RAF. To emphasise the spilt between the Army and RAF, Trenchard became Air Vice Marshal and then Air Marshal. He founded the RAF’s officer training college at Cranwell and in 1922 a RAF Staff College was created at Andover to train the RAF’s middle ranking officers. Trenchard also absorbed into the RAF the Royal Naval Air Service – much to the anger of the First Sea Lord, Admiral Beatty.

In the 1920’s the RAF was used throughout the British Empire and it was expected that officers in the RAF would do a five-year stint abroad at some time in their career. Trenchard also introduced the RAF to three major universities when he founded the University Air Squadron scheme in 1925 for Oxford, Cambridge and London universities.

Trenchard was engaged in what must have seemed a never ending battle with the Treasury for funding. Between 1927 and 1929 he used funding for the RAF to help win the Schneider Trophy, which included the purchase of two Supermarine S6 aircraft that won the race in 1929.

On January 1 st 1927, Trenchard was promoted to Marshal of the RAF. He offered his resignation as Chief of Air Staff in 1928 but this was not accepted and he continued in this post until January 1 st 1930. After his resignation, Trenchard was created Baron of Wolfeton.

After retiring from the RAF, Trenchard worked for the Goodyear Tyre Company. In 1931, he was offered the post of Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. Trenchard initially declined the offer but when offered it for the second time, he accepted. As Commissioner, Trenchard established the police training college at Hendon in 1934. He left the Metropolitan Police in November 1935. In 1936, he became Viscount Trenchard. In the lead up to World War Two, Trenchard offered his services to the government on two occasions but they were not accepted. In particular, Trenchard was dismayed by the seemingly passive approach of the government towards air defence.

Trenchard was offered a number of posts in the early years of the war but he declined them all.

Hugh Trenchard died on February 10th 1956 aged 83.

Related Posts

• The Royal Flying Corps The Royal Flying Corps was created in May 1912. During World War One, the Royal Flying Corps became the eyes of the British Army directing…

first world war .com

A multimedia history of world war one.

• How It Began
• Audio and Video

• First World War Forum

The Details

• How it Began
• Battlefield Tours
• Encyclopedia
• Source Documents
• Special Features
• War in the Air
• Battlefields Today
• Propaganda Posters
• Vintage Audio and Video
• Vintage Photographs
• Memoirs and Diaries
• Prose and Poetry

Site Information

• About this Site

Who's Who - Hugh Trenchard

Born on 3 February 1873 in Taunton, Somerset, Trenchard entered the British army in 1893 and took part in the South African War of 1899-1902 (suffering a severe lung wound), and again later in Nigeria.

Returning home to Britain through illness in 1912 Trenchard learned to fly at T.O.M. Sopwith's Flying School and the following year was made assistant commander of the Central Flying School in Wiltshire.

With war declared Trenchard was placed at the head of the nascent Royal Flying Corps, first at home and then in France in 1915; at that time the RFC was merely a branch of the army.

While commanding the RFC Trenchard established a policy of claiming air superiority by launching successive waves of attacks in order to gain air control - an approach that quickly became standard RFC (and later RAF) policy, although Trenchard attracted much contemporary (and subsequent) criticism for despatching obsolete aircraft on fighting missions with great consequent loss of life.

Trenchard also focussed the RFC's efforts upon ensuring that his air crews provided adequate support for forces on the ground.  Much admired by Commander-in-Chief Douglas Haig , he was appointed Chief of Air Staff in January 1918 (the year he was knighted) but resigned his position three months later following a quarrel with Lord Rothermere, the Air Secretary.

Later the same year, in June 1918, Trenchard was given responsibility for the organisation of the Inter-allied Independent Bomber Force, consisting of a collection of heavy RAF bombers intended to raid rail and industrial targets in Germany.

Re-appointed Chief of Air Staff by War and Air Minister Winston Churchill in 1919 (the year he was created a baronet) Trenchard founded training colleges for air cadets and staff officers and introduced a system of short-service commissions so as to provide a reservoir of trained personnel should the need arise.

Remaining Chief of Staff until 1927 Trenchard was made the first marshal of the RAF in that year, retiring two years later.  In 1930 he was created a baron and the following year appointed commissioner of the London metropolitan police, serving until 1935.  As commissioner he implemented a series of reforms including the establishment of the police training college at Hendon.

In 1936 he he was created a viscount and entered private business, acting as chairman of the United Africa Company until 1953.  Regarded by many as 'the father of the RAF', Hugh Trenchard died on 10 February 1956 in London at the age of 83.

Saturday, 22 August, 2009 Michael Duffy

Prevalent dysentery among Allied soldiers in Gallipoli came to be referred to as "the Gallipoli gallop". - Did you know?

• View by Country
• Politicians
• Miscellaneous

Original Material © 2000-2009 Michael Duffy | Valid XHTML | CSS

Home  |  Site Map  | 

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Agriculture
• Armed forces and intelligence services
• Art and architecture
• Business and finance
• Education and scholarship
• Individuals
• Law and crime
• Manufacture and trade
• Media and performing arts
• Medicine and health
• Religion and belief
• Royalty, rulers, and aristocracy
• Science and technology
• Social welfare and reform
• Sports, games, and pastimes
• Travel and exploration
• Writing and publishing
• Christianity
• Download chapter (pdf)
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Trenchard, hugh montague, first viscount trenchard.

• Vincent Orange
• https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/36552
• Published in print: 23 September 2004
• Published online: 23 September 2004
• This version: 06 January 2011
• Previous version

Hugh Montague Trenchard , first Viscount Trenchard ( 1873–1956 )

by Sir William Orpen , 1917

Trenchard, Hugh Montague, first Viscount Trenchard ( 1873–1956 ), air force officer , was born at Windsor Lodge, Haines Hill, Taunton, Somerset, on 3 February 1873, the second son and third of six children of Henry Montague Trenchard (1838–1914) , solicitor, and his wife, Georgina Louisa Catherine Tower , daughter of Captain John McDowall Skene RN . Many struggling junior officers have been consoled since 1918 by widespread knowledge of two facts: ‘the father of the Royal Air Force ’ found examinations almost impossible to pass, and he did not even begin to become famous until he was well past forty. He was flatly rejected by both Dartmouth and Woolwich, and only just scraped a pass—at the third attempt—in a far less demanding test for militia candidates: these ‘last resorts’ were placed in whichever regiment would accept them. His difficulties owed much to inept teaching at both navy and army ‘crammer’ schools, and much to idleness (except at games and riding), but also owed something to the sudden shock of learning, at the vulnerable age of sixteen, that his father's practice had failed. Bankruptcy was a public disgrace hard to bear for a particularly proud member of an old-established family. He was dismayed, rather than inspired, by the knowledge that he owed the rest of his education to the charity of wiser and richer relatives.

Trenchard was granted a commission in September 1893 as a second lieutenant in the 2nd battalion, Royal Scots Fusiliers , and posted to join his regiment in India. An inarticulate, prickly young man, socially inept and without money, he was known as ‘the Camel’ (did not drink, could not speak), and was far from popular until he revealed a rare combination of talents. He mastered any horse assigned to him; played polo skilfully (fending off Winston Churchill vigorously); traded horses profitably; picked winners regularly; shot accurately; and—not least—organized teams and tournaments efficiently. As his confidence grew, he began to read voraciously in a determined attempt to educate himself, but he never learned to spell or write with any fluency.

A dashing cavalry officer

On the outbreak of the South African War in October 1899 Trenchard was sent to South Africa. Promoted to captain in February 1900, he was told to raise and train a mounted company which brought together a bunch of boisterous, aggressive horsemen, many of them Australian. He had the makings of a fine guerrilla leader until his impetuosity led him into an ambush at Dwarsvlei in western Transvaal in October 1900, where he was severely wounded in the chest and spine, and invalided home to England in December. Although his left lung was permanently damaged, he made a remarkable recovery, thanks to a strong constitution and a self-imposed regime of strenuous winter sports in Switzerland, where a heavy fall shook his spine back into place, enabling him to walk freely once more. He returned to South Africa at his own insistence in May 1901 to resume his career as a dashing cavalry officer, fearless in combat, impatient of all orders but his own, and respectful only to those seniors whom he admired. He was full of high Victorian bravado, and his blunt words, boundless energy, and stern discipline of men under his command commended him to Field Marshal Lord Kitchener .

While on leave in England at the end of the war Trenchard accepted an appointment in October 1903 as assistant commandant of the South Nigeria regiment , first as major, then as lieutenant-colonel. He relished the opportunity to lead his own force of irregular cavalry on expeditions against ‘unpacified’ tribes in the interior, but he also supervised surveys, road building, and drainage projects, and enhanced his reputation as a man of formidable personality who never hesitated to criticize all and sundry in the bluntest terms. Those few who had the courage to answer back were, of course, the men he subsequently valued. In 1906 he was made a member of the Distinguished Service Order, and appointed to command his regiment in 1908. But he fell seriously ill in 1910 and was again invalided home. On recovering, he rejoined his original regiment, dropped in rank to major, and served in Ulster until 1912.

An indifferent pilot and dangerous tutor

By 1912 Trenchard was rising forty, unmarried, and discontented. He was respected by good officers and men, but too ‘unclubbable’ (and too poor) for high rank. After almost twenty years of strenuous military service, he was looking about for new opportunities, in or out of uniform, and his colleagues—wary of his sharp tongue—were more than willing to help him. One of his few friends advised him to learn to fly and he agreed to give it a go. He was promptly granted three months' leave, and boldly spent the considerable sum of £75 on flying lessons at the Sopwith school, Brooklands. After only two weeks of tuition, including no more than sixty-four minutes in the air, he was granted a pilot's certificate (no. 270) by the Royal Aero Club on 31 July 1912.

The Royal Flying Corps having been formed in May 1912, Trenchard was immediately seconded to it and sent to the Central Flying School at Upavon in Wiltshire, where he met Churchill again (an even worse pilot). Instead of taking a pupil's course—essential if he were to acquire flying skills himself, let alone transmit them to others—his age and military experience saw him appointed to the staff. As assistant commandant, in the rank of lieutenant-colonel, his capacity for effective organization and exacting unquestioned obedience to orders proved of great value to a newly formed school that attracted many would-be free spirits. It was now that his mighty foghorn voice earned him, for the rest of his life, the nickname Boom . Although an indifferent pilot and dangerous tutor, he recognized more quickly than most officers of his age the aeroplane's unlimited military potential.

Constant aggression

When war broke out in August 1914 Trenchard took command of Farnborough, Hampshire, where he allegedly found ' one typewriter, a confidential box with a pair of boots in it, and a lot of unpaid bills '. From these small beginnings he began to build an organization capable of supporting a rapidly expanding number of squadrons. As early as November, however, he had escaped from the rear to the front, as an operational commander, and in January 1915 he met General Sir Douglas Haig , who took command of all British forces on the western front from December. Trenchard came to admire Haig without reserve; for his part, Haig declared in 1922 that the First World War had produced only two new things of importance: ' barbed wire and Trenchard ' ( Boyle , 506 ).

From 1915 onwards Trenchard pressed hard for the development and quantity production of aircraft of improved design, with more powerful engines and armament, equipped with reliable wireless sets and cameras, and a gadget to permit the accurate dropping of bigger and better-designed bombs. But his main concern, formulated during 1915, was to develop an unflinching spirit of constant aggression among pilots and observers. An opinion that would become an unshakeable doctrine was already forming in his mind. Persistent attack achieved air supremacy, and that supremacy (given aircraft sufficient in quantity and quality) would permit devastating attack upon enemy industrial centres and lines of communication to the fighting fronts. ' The aeroplane ', he famously (and mistakenly) asserted ' is not a defence against the aeroplane '. And the use of parachutes, which could have been as readily available for British as well as German airmen by 1918, was forbidden because they might undermine that spirit of aggression. That ruling, made by non-flying members of the air board , was firmly supported by Trenchard .

In August 1915 Trenchard succeeded Sir David Henderson as head of the Royal Flying Corps in France, with the warm approval of both Haig and Kitchener (secretary of state for war) and was promoted to brigadier-general. From Henderson he inherited Maurice Baring —author, linguist, diplomat—as an essential assistant, who translated his incoherent mutterings into fluent prose. ' I can't write what I mean, I can't say what I mean, but I expect you to know what I mean ' ( Hyde , 57 ). More poetically, Baring saw his task as ' bottling a mountain torrent while yet preserving the tingling fury of its natural state ' ( Letley , 174 ). They visited all squadrons and depots, listened to countless complaints and suggestions, noticed everything, no matter how carefully concealed, and whenever Trenchard's tactless, overbearing manner caused more than usual offence, Baring poured the necessary oil and subtly rebuked his master. His fluent French also made it possible for Trenchard to establish good relations with the French air service. He did it so well that Marshal Foch described him as an incomparable staff officer.

During 1915, however, the Germans produced a Fokker monoplane equipped with a machine-gun that fired safely through the propeller arc and forced Trenchard's technically inferior aircraft onto the defensive. They became ‘Fokker fodder’ and it was said in parliament that ' our pilots are being murdered rather than killed ' ( Lee , 214 ). Until better machines arrived in service early in 1916, he was reluctantly obliged to accept fewer and shorter reconnaissance patrols, and was unable to foster that continuous co-operation between artillery and aircraft (via wireless and photographs) that he and Haig foresaw as the key to accurate hitting of enemy targets. Although British and German machines were evenly matched in quality from 1916 onwards, and the British increasingly outnumbered their opponents, they suffered four times as many casualties as a result of Trenchard's policy of constant offensive. ' To him, as to his staff, and most of his senior commanders ', wrote A. S. G. Lee , an able pilot who survived long enough to become experienced, ' for a British aeroplane to be one mile across the trenches was offensive: for it to be ten miles over was more offensive '. What really mattered, however, was not the aircraft's position in the sky but the calibre of its pilot and the quality of his machine. ' The most rashly aggressive pigeon won't get far with a hawk ' ( Lee , 217–18 ).

Creation of a new service

In England, meanwhile, intense competition between the War Office and the Admiralty for recruits (air and ground), training facilities, factory space, designers, and producers of airframes and aero-engines was harming the war effort. In December 1916, for example, the Royal Flying Corps and the Royal Naval Air Service placed orders for seventy-six varieties of aircraft and fifty-seven of engines ( Johns , 10–11 ). Both air arms were weaker than they should have been, and neither gave serious attention to home defence against aerial attack. Several alarmingly successful daylight raids by German bombers during June and July 1917 revealed the inadequacy of this defence and fuelled powerful demands for a united service, with its own ministry, independent of army or navy control, to make efficient use of aviation resources and frame an effective home defence. General Jan Christian Smuts (South African member of the imperial war cabinet ) and Henderson , backed by the prime minister, Lloyd George , were largely responsible for the creation of this independent air service in April 1918. Trenchard agreed with the reformers, but thought it best to struggle on with an unsatisfactory situation until the war ended. He thus had good reason for disliking the title ' father of the Royal Air Force ', so often accorded him in later years. If that service had not been created by the heat of battle out of fear of defeat, it would never have emerged out of the chill of calculation when the war to end all war had been won. On the other hand, although he did not father the infant, he certainly deserves credit for protecting it from predators until it was sturdy enough to thrive without anyone's help.

Despite Haig's protests and his own reluctance, Trenchard was appointed chief of the air staff, the first head of the new service, and returned to England in January 1918; he was also knighted (KCB). But the first air minister was Lord Rothermere , younger brother of Lord Northcliffe . These influential newspaper owners, backed by Lloyd George , were vehement opponents of Haig and hoped to procure his dismissal. At that time, Trenchard lacked the political skills, contacts, and even the resolution to counter such men. He simply resigned (bringing Rothermere down with him, to his surprise) in April and sulked for a month. While sitting on a bench in Green Park on 8 May he overheard two naval officers discussing his conduct. ' It's an outrage ', said one. ' I don't know why the government should pander to a man who threw in his hand at the height of a battle. If I'd my way with Trenchard I'd have him shot. ' Somewhat chastened, he reluctantly agreed to return to France later that month as head of a small force intended to bomb targets in Germany. Neither John Salmond (his successor as head of the RAF in France) nor the French (who feared reprisals, and thought all resources should be devoted to the battlefield) co-operated willingly. ' A more gigantic waste of effort and personnel there has never been in any war ', declared Trenchard in November 1918 ( Hyde , 44 ). Nevertheless, the few raids that were mounted convinced him that, in any future war with Germany, a systematic campaign of heavy bombing would shatter the morale of its people. Ignoring evidence to the contrary, he was equally convinced that German bombing would not dismay Britons.

A legendary decade

Trenchard was created a baronet in October 1919 and received a handsome cash grant of £10,000 . Winston Churchill , minister of war and air, pressed him to resume his post as chief of the air staff, which he did on 15 May, and during the next decade he became a legend. He clearly understood that his new service must be reduced to a shadow of its former strength, and remain small and weak for the foreseeable future, but it could be provided with sound foundations upon which to build a powerful air force, should the need ever arise. A realistic memorandum of September 1919 (converted into a government white paper in December) set out an affordable framework for a service of under 30,000 officers and men. He founded an apprentice school (at Halton, Buckinghamshire) for youths aged fifteen to eighteen who became ground crews, a cadet college (at Cranwell, Lincolnshire) for career officers, and a staff college (at Andover, Hampshire) for future leaders. He set up squadrons at Oxford and Cambridge, introduced short-service commissions and a network of auxiliary squadrons—rightly believing that many high-spirited young men were eager to spend some exciting years in cockpits, but were not interested in a subsequent, poorly paid career behind desks.

Trenchard also learned to fight in the Whitehall jungle, with Churchill's intermittent support, against persistent attempts by both the War Office and the Admiralty to divide the RAF between them and end its independent existence. He found in ' air policing ' of Britain's empire throughout the Middle East, but especially in Mesopotamia (Iraq), an ideal opportunity to demonstrate that the RAF was both effective and cheap. ' Control without occupation ' Sir Samuel Hoare , secretary of state for air in the 1920s, called it ( Hoare , 265 ): an irresistible combination for politicians acutely conscious of Britain's financial weakness. A handful of squadrons, equipped with biplanes left over from the war, armed with light machine-guns and small bombs, and supported only by a small number of armoured cars (converted or built out of the RAF's own meagre budget) were usually able to impose a local peace or separate rivals more swiftly and cheaply than large, expensive garrisons of slow-moving soldiers. Trenchard encouraged annual air displays at Hendon, which proved enormously popular, and also fostered the gradual development of air routes which might one day link every part of the empire. At the end of 1923 he was accepted as a member of the chiefs of staff committee—formally equal to the heads of the navy and the army. In 1925 he argued in favour of making the RAF (rather than the Royal Navy , assisted by a garrison of soldiers) primarily responsible for the defence of Singapore. Even before the fall of that base to Japanese attack in 1942 he regarded his failure to win that argument as the low point of his career.

Unfortunately, the success of air policing seduced Trenchard and his successors into ignoring the need to prepare for possible conflict with nations as technically advanced as Britain. The RAF failed to make adequate progress before 1939 in precisely those fields which the offensive doctrine most required: accurate navigation, in daylight or darkness, in large, properly heated and fully armed aircraft capable of carrying heavy loads of efficient bombs (high explosive or incendiary) a long way and dropping them accurately on well-chosen targets. In 1925, however, Trenchard had been impressed by the Fairey Fox, a two-seat, single-engine biplane day-bomber, equipped with an American Curtiss D-12 engine. The Fox outclassed all other British machines of that time, and Trenchard immediately ordered enough to equip a single squadron. Objections—from industry and politicians—to the use of a foreign engine prevented him from ordering more, but the Fox example did encourage a gradual improvement. In the late 1920s, the RAF's success in Schneider trophy races confirmed the high popular regard first earned at Hendon.

Morale was high, thanks partly to team spirit generated by army and navy opposition, partly also to Trenchard's creation in 1919 of a benevolent fund (which has spent millions of pounds since that date relieving distress among servicemen and their families), but mostly to a widespread conviction that aircraft would play a vital part in any future war. That part, according to Trenchard's doctrine, would be primarily as an offensive bomber force, hitting targets of ‘strategic’ importance, rather than as a defensive fighter force, successfully resisting attempts by enemy bombers to hit British targets. Little attention was paid to co-operation with either the army or the navy, or to practising realistic aerial combat, or to the creation of a fleet of adequate transport aircraft. The doctrine was carefully articulated, confidently asserted, but insufficiently tested, in theory or practice, during (or for long after) Trenchard's term of office.

Trenchard closely supervised the composition of a detailed account of the air war which reflected his own opinions and evaded all controversial issues. Sir Walter Raleigh , Merton professor of English literature at Oxford, wrote the first volume, but he died in 1922, and H. A. Jones , a civil servant who had been Raleigh's chief research assistant, completed the task. Trenchard had offered it first to Baring and then to T. E. Lawrence . Baring wrote an entertaining survey of their wartime partnership, published in 1920, but Trenchard insisted on removing most references to himself, convincing the author that it would be impossible for him to attempt a serious, independent history of the air service. As for Lawrence , although he greatly admired Trenchard , he had the confidence, personal contacts, and intellectual energy to explore those issues—strategy, tactics, equipment, training, inter-service quarrels, political interference, and so on—and make up his own mind about them. Sadly, he too turned it down. Jones left a valuable record; Lawrence might have produced a great one. Instead, we have only The Mint , Lawrence's account of recruit life in the early 1920s, which is as vivid and controversial as everything else he wrote.

Trenchard was knighted again (GCB) in January 1924 and became the first marshal of the RAF (equivalent to five-star rank) in 1927. He retired on 31 December 1929 and was made a baron next day. ' You are too big to be the father of a grown-up child ', wrote Lawrence on 18 December. ' Let the beast go and make his own mistakes. It's going to be a very splendid service, and will always be proud of you ' ( Hyde , 233 ).

Police reformer

Trenchard was appointed a director of the Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Company early in 1930 and later a director of Rhodesian Railways . In March 1931 the prime minister, Ramsay MacDonald , invited him to succeed Lord Byng as commissioner of the Metropolitan Police . Morale was held to be low throughout the force, and its organization was clearly in need of reform. He was unwilling to take on a difficult and thankless task, but did so from November, in response to a personal appeal from George V . He had the support of Sir John Anderson , permanent head of the Home Office , and Maurice Drummond , who took on Baring's role as interpreter and writer.

Trenchard made two conditions, revealing his attitude to the new job. One was that he be released at once if his ‘life's work’ at the Air Ministry seemed in danger; and the other was that he be released as promptly if unrest in India suggested that he would be ' more useful ' there in a role for which he considered himself eminently suited—as viceroy.

While awaiting either call, Trenchard submitted to parliament a plan of reform in May 1933 which the government implemented. A police college and forensic laboratory were to be opened at Hendon, and a system of short-service engagements was to be created for a proportion of officers (who, like some young pilots, were assumed to fancy a spell at the sharp end). As in the RAF , he emphasized careful selection, thorough training, and efficient working methods, and recognized a need to widen the social base from which policemen were recruited. He showed an uncommon concern for the overall well-being of the force, rescuing the provident fund from disaster and agitating for both better housing and sporting facilities. He introduced wireless cars and a central control room to deal with the information received.

Unfortunately, Trenchard had long been an enlightened despot and could not change his ways. He issued orders and resented suggestions that he discuss them first. Most senior officers believed he wished to militarize them. He found himself at a loss in dealing with the Police Federation , a powerful and articulate union that had no counterpart in the armed services. By 1934 he was already eager to resign, but he hung on at the king's particular request until July 1935. As a reward he was made a viscount in January 1936. His successor— Sir Philip Game , his own nominee—did not press forward his reforms and most of them quickly lapsed.

Trenchard joined the board of the United Africa Company (part of the Unilever group ), which had interests in Nigeria, his old stamping ground, and served as chairman from 1936 to 1953. After his death, Lord Heyworth recalled that he:

was as interested in the views of a probationer after a first tour as of a senior executive returning from a tour of inspection. He once said that he had no use for people who were not willing to talk ‘brain to brain’ regardless of status. The Times , 21 Feb 1956

Backstairs agitator, privileged spectator

When war broke out in September 1939, Trenchard was sixty-six: young enough, he believed, to play an important part. Throughout the 1930s he had constantly and volubly asserted the primacy of bombers over fighters, as unconvinced as ever that fighters could successfully resist them. The prime minister, Neville Chamberlain , declined Hoare's recommendation in April 1940 that Trenchard be re-appointed chief of the air staff. Churchill offered him command of Britain's home forces in May and a role in military intelligence in November. Although he wisely refused both offers, Trenchard was not inactive. In alliance with John Salmond , he agitated secretly and effectively during 1940 for the replacement of Newall as chief of the air staff and of Dowding as head of Fighter Command.

Trenchard composed a memorandum in May 1941 which completely misjudged the German character. British morale, he believed, was secure under bombardment, but ' the German nation is peculiarly susceptible to air bombing ', being unable to crack jokes while sheltering: an opinion treated with more respect than it deserved by many admirers, among them Portal , who succeeded Newall in October 1940 ( Terraine , 263–4 ). He wrote three papers on air power issues, published by the Air Ministry in 1946, in which he insisted that the bomber remained the central instrument of air power, and a strategic air offensive the only proper function of that instrument. Most of his senior disciples eventually lapsed (in practice if not in theory) from the true faith, but not Harris , head of Bomber Command , 1942–5.

From 1942 onwards Trenchard enjoyed the role of privileged spectator and potential morale booster. He invited himself to every battlefield in the Mediterranean and north-west European theatres, relishing the deferential company of commanders whom he had encouraged in their early days— Park , Coningham , Tedder , and Douglas —receiving firsthand information about the progress of campaigns, and chatting amiably with awed young airmen. After the war, he often spoke in the House of Lords on air power issues, stoutly defending the RAF point of view, as he interpreted it, against admirals and generals. He became a member of the Order of Merit in January 1951, and received honorary doctorates from Oxford and Cambridge and many other tokens of esteem.

A valiant man

In July 1920 Trenchard had married Katherine Isabel Salvin ( d . 1959) , daughter of Edward Salvin Bowlby and widow of Captain the Hon. James Boyle (killed in August 1914); Baring was his best man. She had three sons from her first marriage (they all served in the armed forces during the Second World War and two were killed) and two more from her second: Hugh (born in 1921), who was killed in north Africa in 1943; and Thomas (1923–1987) , who succeeded as second viscount.

Trenchard was a big man, surprisingly clumsy for a successful sportsman. Ruggedly handsome, he had a thick mop of unruly dark hair, shaggy eyebrows, a moustache (which in old age gave him the appearance of a friendly walrus), a direct glance, and a famously loud voice. He had been virtually blind in his right eye since 1937, and was totally blind during the last three years of his life, nearly deaf, sadly crippled, but mentally alert until the end. He died in his London home on 10 February 1956, one week after his eighty-third birthday, and received a magnificent funeral in Westminster Abbey on 21 February. Among the pallbearers were some outstanding airmen— Portal , Tedder , Harris , and Douglas —whose careers owed much to his support. The RAF ensign flew above the abbey while the coffin containing his ashes was conveyed from the Air Ministry's assembly hall in Whitehall Gardens (where it had lain in state) and throughout the service. Overhead flew the RAF's latest strategic bomber, appropriately named Valiant.

If Trenchard ' had not taken up flying when youth had already passed him the Royal Air Force would not have been the bulwark of Britain that it was in either world war ' ( The Times , 11 Feb 1956; 22 Feb 1956 ). A bronze statue made by William McMillan and erected in Embankment Gardens, outside the Ministry of Defence , was unveiled by prime minister Harold Macmillan on 19 July 1961 and dedicated by the archbishop of Canterbury. Lord Tedder , a great airman whom Trenchard had always admired, laid a wreath on behalf of all former members of the RAF . A plaque has commemorated his birthplace since September 1973.

• A. Boyle, Trenchard : man of vision (1962)
• H. M. Hyde, British air policy between the wars, 1918–1939 (1976)
• G. Lyall, ‘MRAF Lord Trenchard’, The war lords , ed. M. Carver (1976), 176–81
• M. Baring, RFC headquarters (1920)
• Viscount Templewood (Sir Samuel Hoare), Empire of the air : the advent of the air age, 1922–1929 (1957)
• W. Raleigh and H. A. Jones, The war in the air , 6 vols. (1922–37)
• H. Probert, High commanders of the Royal Air Force (1991)
• J. Terraine, The right of the line : the Royal Air Force in the European war (1984)
• A. S. G. Lee, No parachute : a fighter pilot in World War I (1968)
• E. Letley, Maurice Baring : a citizen of Europe (1991)
• M. Smith, British air strategy between the wars (1984)
• A. Morris, First of the many : the story of the independent force, RAF (1968)
• C. G. Grey, ‘On the departing chief’, The Aeroplane , 37 (1929), 1402–16
• R. Johns, ‘Trenchard memorial lecture’, RUSI Journal , 142 (Oct 1997), 10–16
• H. A. Taylor, Fairey aircraft since 1915 (1974)
• The Times (11 Feb 1956)
• Lord Trenchard, Three papers on air power , Air Ministry Publication , 229 (1946)
• Royal Air Force Museum, Hendon, department of research and information services, corresp. and papers
• BL OIOC , letters to Sir W. R. Lawrence, MS Eur. F 143
• BL OIOC , letters to Lord Reading, MSS Eur. E 238, F 118
• Bodl. Oxf. , corresp. with Lord Simon
• Bodl. Oxf , corresp. with Lord Lugard
• CUL , corresp. with Samuel Hoare
• King's Lond., Liddell Hart C. , corresp. with Sir B. H. Liddell Hart
• Parl. Arch. , corresp. with Herbert Samuel
• PRONI , letters to Lord Londonderry
• U. Glas., Archives and Business Records Centre , letters to Lord Rowallan
• BFINA , news footage
• F. Dodd, charcoal and watercolour drawing, 1917, IWM
• W. Orpen, oils, 1917, IWM [see illus.]
• W. Stoneman, two photographs, 1919–32, NPG
• O. Birley, oils, 1926, Royal Air Force Club, London
• B. Partridge, chalk caricature, 1927, NPG
• H. Green, pencil drawing, 1930, Royal Air Force Staff College, Bracknell, Berkshire
• E. Verpilleux, oils, 1936, Royal Air Force College, Cranwell, Lincolnshire
• A. R. Thomson, oils, 1943, Royal Air Force Staff College, Bracknell, Berkshire
• F. Beresford, oils, Royal Air Force Bentley Priory, Stanmore, Middlesex, HQ 11 Group
• W. McMillan, bronze statue, Embankment Gardens, London; plaster statuette and bronze cast, Royal Air Force Museum, Hendon
• photograph, repro. in Boyle, Trenchard , facing p. 609

Wealth at Death

£3576 12 s . 11 d .: probate, 11 May 1956, CGPLA Eng. & Wales

View the article for this person in the Dictionary of National Biography archive edition .

More on this topic

• Trenchard, 1st Viscount, (Hugh Montague Trenchard) (3 Feb. 1873–10 Feb. 1956) in Who Was Who

External resources

• Bibliography of British and Irish history
• Churchill Archive
• National Portrait Gallery
• National Archives
• British Pathe

Printed from Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 10 September 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.80.151.9]
• 185.80.151.9

Character limit 500 /500

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Safety warning after liquid petroleum gas causes explosion on vessel with 4 people injured

This document warns owners, skippers and crews about potential hazards associated with using LPG on board craft and makes recommendations.

Safety Bulletin 1/1999

SB-1-1999-Lord-Trenchard.pdf (131.04 kb)

On 30 June 1999 an explosion occurred in the sail training vessel Lord Trenchard while alongside in Poole Harbour. Four people were on board; all were injured, one very seriously. The vessel was badly damaged. The ongoing investigation found that the leakage of liquid petroleum gas ( LPG ) was a crucial factor.

This bulletin was published to remind owners, skippers and crews of the potential dangers associated with use of LPG in small craft.

Issued: July 1999

Updates to this page

Related content, is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

The Force awakens - the formation of the RAF

What was the public reaction to the formation of the Royal Air Force on 1 April 1918 and what else was happening at the time? BILL READ FRAeS looks through some of the archive material held at the RAeS National Aerospace Library to find out.

‘ Today the Royal Air Force, of which you are the Minister in charge, comes into existence as the third arm of the defences of the Empire. As General-in-Chief I congratulate you on its birth and I trust that it may enjoy a vigorous and successful life.’

Telegram sent from King George V to Lord Rothermere, 1 April 1918

Here’s a Health to the RAF (from the April 1918 issue of The Piloteer)

On 1 April 1918, the Royal Air Force was formed from the amalgamation of the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) – run by the British Army and the Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) – operated by the Royal Navy. The new combined independent force was controlled by the newly formed government-controlled Air Ministry. The merging of the RFC and RNAS was first mooted in the summer of 1917 following the Gotha bomber raids on London. The Air Force Bill, which included the creation of the Air Ministry, received the Royal Assent on 29 November 1917.

Air Force Memorandum No 1

Air Force Memorandum No 1 . (NAL)

To explain how the new combined service would operate, the Air Council issued a pamphlet ‘Air Force Memorandum No 1’ which included details of the rank, grading and pay. ‘ The pamphlet ,’ commented Aeronautics , ‘ as is usually the case with explanatory literature of an official nature, is far from clear and certainly requires extended study .’ The pamphlet explains that RNVR and RFC Special Reserve officers could withhold their assent to join the RAF but, if they did, they would find no commission open to them in other branches of the Services.

The jobs available in the RAF encompassed a wide variety of occupations, including those of batman, motorcyclist, coppersmith, writer and hydrogen worker. However, one condition laid out in the regulations was that everyone might have to fly. ‘ Every officer of man serving in the Air Force will, if medically, fit be liable to be called upon to go into the air, either in airships, aeroplanes or kite balloons .’

Regulations for RAF personnel were wide-ranging and included not flying in air displays at local fetes and talking to the press . (from Kings Regulations for RAF 1918)

The payscales for officers varied from £,2500 a year for a general down to £250 for a lieutenant. The regulations are wide ranging, including a list of separation allowances for wives and children. Privates were expected to support their wives with 12s6d a week while warrant officers 1 st class (who presumably had more expensive wives) were allowed 23s a week. The regulations allowed for up to seven children, at which point the allowances for privates and 1 st class warrant officers were almost equal, at 40s and 42s6d, respectively.

A fearsome uniform?

What the best dressed RNAS air mechanic was wearing in 1918. (The Piloteer)

Not everyone liked the new uniform. The Aeroplane was particularly outspoken on the subject, with references in its 3 April 1918 edition to ‘ that fearsome RAF uniform ’ and ‘ The horrible hat ’.  ‘ The RAF uniform is not so beautiful a thing that it cannot be improved ,’ the paper wrote in 27 March 1918, reporting on the appearance of an officer dressed in the new khaki uniform. ‘ Whether he complied with King’s Regulations in wearing the uniform of a Force which does not as yet legally exist is a matter on which one hesitates to express an opinion. His tunic was evidently made by a good tailor and not a costumier but the omelette cap, the lack of a Sam Browne, the funereal cap-band, and the curious gilt antennae on each side of the cap badge – reminding one of the horns of a golden cockchafer – spoilt what would otherwise have been a fine soldierly figure .’

Brass beetle

The RAF cap badge came in for some early criticism.

The Aeroplane seems to have taken a particular dislike to the RAF cap badge. In another issue it comments: ‘ The cap badge is an atrocity. Why have all that gold lace stuff? It looks gaudy when new, and unutterably shabby when old. Its design is too appalling for words. Why cram a bird and a crown and two things below onto one badge? They look like the antennae a brass beetle. The pilots call them bananas .’

However, despite its criticisms of the new uniform, The Aeroplane wished the new Service well, concluding: ‘ The RAF is going to be a very fine show when it settles down to its work .’

Royal April Firsts

Cartoon from The Piloteer showing the new RAF Governess telling the RFC and the RNAS to be friends .

The name of the new Service and the date chosen for its creation also came under criticism. One target for literary witticisms was the date of the creation of the new RAF on 1 April – April Fools Day. The editorial in the March 1918 issue of Aeronautics drew attention to the date by saying that it was not going to drawing attention to it: ‘ We may state at once that we have sternly repressed any tendency to comment on the appropriateness or otherwise of the date selected by the authorities of its birth .’

Flight was more positive about the significance of the date. ‘ It is not too much to say that 1 st of April 1918, marks an epoch in the history of the fighting forces of the British Crown ,’ wrote the Editorial in 3 April 1918 edition. ‘ The new service … will in the time to come rival in magnitude the older services from which it has sprung .’ However, the Editorial then goes on to predict that in the future: ‘ while armies as we know them now – and even fleets – may disappear as a means of practical war, our aerial navies must and will continue to increase and multiply until the millennium, when there shall be no more war .’

Brand of Cain?

Nowadays, the RAF acronym is a very positive ‘brand name’ but it was not the case 100 years ago. Criticism began immediately after the new name was made public on 15 March. The Aeroplane referred to ‘ the Royal April Firsts ’ and suggested its preferred alternative name of the ‘ Imperial Air Service’ . ‘ What a singularly unfortunate choice the name Royal Air Force is in every way ,’ complained The Aeroplane . A ‘Flying Officer’ wrote into The Aeroplane with the comment: ‘ More bad feeling is caused by the new letters RAF than was ever present between the RFC and RNAS’ .  ‘ The Brand of Cain, in the letters RAF, cannot now be avoided ,’ responded The Aeroplane . ‘ The brand is perhaps a useful antidote to the fulsome praise which has been oozing from the pores of the officially inspired Press during the past week, in its endeavour to persuade the world that the RNAS and RFC should be proud to sink their dearly bought honours in the common puddle which the name of the RAF suggests .’

The reason for the initial dislike of the RAF name was because that there was already another RAF in existence - the Royal Aircraft Factory in Farnborough – an institute that was not popular with the Services. ‘ One cannot abbreviate it to R.A.F. without thinking either of the Farnborough Fiasco of the First of April (same thing perhaps), ’ remarked The Aeroplane . ‘ RAF products were allowed to hold back the output of improved designs and to waste labour and material which could have produced more and better aeroplane for the RFC ,’ adding that: ‘ The whole of our Flying Services (are now) branded with the name that stands for all that has been bad in Service Aeronautics .’

Later in 1918, the Royal Aircraft Factory changed its name to The Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) and concentrated on research rather than manufacturing.

Trenchard vs Rothermere

Image – Lord Trenchard (from April 1918 issue of The Aeroplane )

The creation of the RAF was not without its birth pangs, as its first Chief of the Air Staff, Lord Trenchard, and the first Air Minister, Lord Rothermere, both resigned from their post less than a month after its formation.

Described in later years as ‘The Father of the Royal Air Force’, Hugh Montague Trenchard became head of the Royal Flying Corps between 1915 and 1917. In 1917, when the British Government first considered merging the RFC with the RNAS, Trenchard was initially opposed to the merger, believing that it would dilute the air support needed by ground forces in France. After the Air Force Bill received Royal assent in November 1917 there was considerable political manouevering as to who would get the top jobs in the newly created Air Ministry. Newspaper proprietor Lord Rothermere was appointed as Air Minister who offered Trenchard as Chief of the Air Staff (CAS) but only on condition that he would aid Rothermere in an attack on Sir Douglas Haig. Trenchard refused to join the campaign against Haig but eventually accepted the CAS post after an acrimonious debate. However, relations between the two men deteriorated during the winter of 1918 and Trenchard resigned as CAS shortly after the creation of the RAF and was replaced on 13 April by Maj-Gen Frederick Sykes. The furore caused by Trenchard’s resignation eventually also resulted in the resignation of Lord Rothermere on 25 April, who was replaced as Air Minister by Sir William Weir.

However, less than a year later, in March 1919, Trenchard was back in position at CAS after Winston Churchill was appointed as Secretary of State for War and Secretary of State for Air. The reason for this was that Churchill did not agree to Sykes’ preference for wanting to maintain a large peacetime air force. Sykes was forced to step down and Trenchard was put in charge of overseeing the post war demobilisation and slimming down of the RAF from around 280 squadrons to only 28.

Getting rid of competent people?

Lord Rothermere’s resignation letter and Lloyd George's reply on 25 April 1918 (from Flight)

Trenchard’s and then Rothermere’s resignations were much commented on in the contemporary aviation press, who expressed the view that he should not have gone.

‘ The services strongly resented the removal of General Trenchard who was acknowledged to be the soul and inspiration of the RFC ,’ observed Janes All the World’s Aircraft.

A letter in the Morning Post of 17 April 1918 criticised British Prime Minister Lloyd George for allowing ‘ Lord Rothermere to get rid of Sir Hugh Trenchard, one of our few indispensable men’ . Commenting on the letter The Aeroplane adds: ‘ Sir Hugh Trenchard is recognised by all the best authorities, especially aboard, as one of the great soldiers of this war. If ever a service needed a despot to run it properly the R.A.F. is that service. And the peculiar fitness of General Trenchard to fill the part of the benevolent despot is almost too obvious to need indicating .’

Questions were asked in Parliament. On 18 April Chancellor of the Exchequer Bonar Law, speaking for the Conservative-Liberal wartime coalition government, was asked in Prime Ministers’ Question Time: “ As the government have got rid of the head officers of the Navy, the Army and the Air Force, can the right honourable gentleman say how long this practice is to continue of getting rid of competent people ?” Bonar Law replied with an answer that will be familiar to political commenters down the ages: “ I am quite ready to consider that, like any other desire on the part of the House to discuss a question, I do not think it is desirable, at all events in questions and answers, to discuss a subject of this kind .”

An Editorial entitled ‘ On the Blazing Indiscretion’ published in The Aeroplane on 24 April 1918 began with the words: ‘ It is to be hoped that those who brought about the unification of the Flying Services in the R.A.F. are now beginning to appreciate the consequences of their well-meant but ill-advised action. If the whole movement from beginning to the present day had been a skilfully concocted German plot to paralyse Britain’s Air Power at the most critical moment of the war it could hardly have worked out more exactly according to schedule. ’

It appears that the press were unaware of reasons behind Trenchard’s dismissal by Lord Rothermere. ‘ The chiefest point in Lord Rothermere’s favour is that he has no axe to grin d’, commented The Aeroplane in March 1918.  However, suspicions soon began to arise. A letter published in the Morning Post on 20 April asked about Trenchard: ‘ Did he go of his own accord? … Why does he have to go? We want to know and we must know .’

Flight seemed to get nearer the truth in its 25 April 1918 issue in which it said that: ‘ Clearly, Lord Rothermere has come to cross-purposes with certain of the more highly-placed of his staff, with the result that an impossible position arose which could only be solved by the retirement from active work of the Minister himself or of his subordinates who disagreed with his policy .’

Even as early as 3 April 1918, there were rumours that Lord Rothermere might resign. ‘ It is earnestly to be hoped that he will do nothing of the kind, for it would be a difficult job to replace him ,’ ran the editorial in The Aeroplane . When he did resign on 25 April, Flight expressed regret, saying in the first line of its 2 May 1918 editorial: ‘ It is impossible to view the retirement of Lord Rothermere from the post of Secretary of State of the Air Force with anything but the most profound regret .’

Inter service rivalry

Cartoon from The Aeroplane April 1918 showing a horrified RNAS about to be swallowed by an RFC whale.

With the amalgamation of two services formerly run by the Army and a Navy, there were bound to be undercurrents of inter-service rivalries and the RAF was no exception. The Aeroplane commented that the creation of the RAF would be a relief to the Royal Navy, as: ‘ the RNAS is not loved by the Royal Navy’ . The Aeroplane went further, describing the RNAS as ‘ The Navy’s Jonah ’.

However, there were calls for unity. ‘ In such a miscellaneous and hermaphrodite affair as the RAF, composed as it is of sailors, soldiers, and civilians, more of less happily mingled, and commanded promiscuously by active – or passive – officers of either the Navy or Army, one feels that anything which would tend towards the consolidation of the Force into one homogenous whole would be a step in the right direction ,’ wrote The Aeroplane on 10 April 1918.

The March issue of Aeronautics was also keen for inter service rivalries to be quickly forgotten saying: ‘ Over much attention has been paid to obsolete Service traditions in other arms; whereas the Force is perfectly well able to carve out and perpetuate its own traditions and methods of selection. If the Air Force is to become a permanent institution – and who will be fool enough to deny an obvious fact? – the sooner it shakes off the fetters of the past the better for everyone concerned. Save only the duds and passengers who will be deprived of their lucrative posts in the Ship of State .’

The rise of Air Power

RAF unity illustration from Air Pie 1918.

Despite initial criticism of some aspects of the new combined Service, the significance and importance of the RAF did not go unnoticed. Aeronautics commented on the size and power of the new Service, saying that: ‘ It will not only affect the future course of this war, but it vitally concerns the interests of the officers and men who constitute a Service which, in mere numbers, as apart from skill, already transcends the old Army as we knew it in the palmy days of peace .’

The Aeroplane also predicted that: ‘ There is the horrid possibility that in future wars, the RAF’s Navy may be a bigger, as it certainly will be a more important, thing that the Royal Navy. When Naval Aviation is properly developed, the day of the big surface ship will be done. With properly handled torpedo-carrying seaplane no ship can exist above water .’

Service ethos

A photo of RFC personnel with a de Havilland bomber and a Nieuport fighter. (The Aeroplane April 1918)

There was also much debate about the way that the new Service would be run as far as discipline was concerned. ‘ Discipline is not essential in the Air Service ,’ wrote The Aeroplane . ‘ All that is really necessary is good behaviour and obedience. In the Flying Service it may be very pretty to see everyone in a nice line to be looked at, but the moment actual work starts, combined action as one understands it in the Army, ceases, and it is every man to his individual job, be he a flier or a mechanic .’

Aeronautics also commented on the statement made in Air Force Memorandum No 1 that: ‘ promotion above the rank of lieutenant will be by selection and not by seniority .’ ‘ This confident assertion is really too good to be true ,’ wrote Aeronautics . ‘ Except in the higher ranks of the Navy, where the Goddess Seniority is firmly enthroned, promotion has always been by merit, or so we have oft been told by our statesmen and other high-brows… But if every mechanic on joining the Air Force carries an Air-Marshals baton in his knapsack, we shall not only be agreeably surprised, but our belief in the immutability of human institutions will be sorely shaken .’

Human factors

With all the current debate about human factors and what makes a good military pilot, it is interesting to read the comments made on the same subject 100 years ago. ‘ The best pilots are by no means distinguished by their brains ,’ states The Aeroplane . ‘The pilots with brains frequently suffer extremely from what our would be descriptive writers call the “airman’s temperament” – which generally means a mixture of nerves, self-opinion, lack of discipline, and inability to appreciate the beauties of coordination – except perhaps in a chorus from the stalls.’

State of the War

At the time of the formation of the RAF in early April, the future progress of the war was far from certain. April 1918 proved to be a critical month in the Great War after Germany launched a new military offensive to try and break the trench-bound deadlock. The Germans began their attack at the end of March and began to push back the Allied ground forces over the next two months, eventually getting to within 80 miles of Paris. However, at the end of May 1918 the tide began to turn and the Germans were first held and then pushed back, leading to their eventual defeat in November 1918.

However, in April 1918 there was no anticipation of the war being near its end. Commenting on the issue of servicemen who had signed up for three years of service being moved to a new four-year contract with the RAF, The Aeroplane wrote: ‘ There is no cause for the ‘three years’ men to worry about four years in the Air Force. They need have little fear of the war being over before they have completed both terms of service .’

Death of the Red Baron

The funeral of Baron von Richthofen. (from Flight 2 May 1918)

One major event for the war in the air in the early days of the RAF was the death of German air ace Manfred Von Richthofen, famous as the ‘Red Baron’, who was shot down on 21 April. The Aeroplane was magnanimous in victory, given him a lengthy obituary ending in the words: ‘Manfred von Richthofen is dead. He was brave man, a clean fighter and an aristocrat. May he rest in peace.’

Flight reported that Germany had developed an aircraft which could hover above the ground.

Flight also reported on the announcement in April that RFC pilot James McCudden was to be awarded the Victoria Cross for conspicuous bravery and the downing of 54 enemy aircraft.

Flight also carried an intriguing story on 7 March 1918 about a report that Germany had developed a new type of aircraft with three propellers which could hover above the ground to give more time for the bomb aimer to find their targets.

A call for standardisation

State-of-the-art aircraft – the 1917 Sopwith Camel. (from Janes All the World’s Aircraft)

Because of recent losses to allied aircraft, there were calls to increase production of new aircraft. British aircraft factories were chided for stoppages or strikes, while Flight reports on the first meeting of an Inter-Allied Conference to increase prodcution through aircraft standardisation. A comment in Flight in April 1918 says that, while standardisation might have been bad idea early in the war when new aircraft types were still being developed, ‘we have now reached a stage in the development of aircraft for warlike purposes which justifies us in thinking that no further really important discoveries or developments are likely to eventuate.’

There was also a plea for more reliable aero-engines. The Us publication Aeronautics – which makes no mention of the creation of the RAF in its April 1918 issue – does report on a speech made in Parliament in February 1918 saying that Germany had reduced its number of standard aero engines to seven whereas Britain had up to 61 different types, all of which required different spare parts.

The war effort could also be increased with the completion of new aerodromes for training new pilots with Lord Rothermere issuing a personal message to aerodrome workers of the United Kingdom exhorting them to ‘hasten construction work’.

Women in aviation

Equality and inclusion still had a long way to go in 1918. Illustration of ‘The RAF Girl’ from The Piloteer.

Equality for women still had a long way to go in April 1918. Commenting on a recent advert in The Times for a Ladies Flying School, The Aeroplane commented: ‘It is to be hoped that any readers of this paper who are asked to advise on this proposition will advise against it. No doubt in time to come women aviators will be numerous but in war time there is no place for them.’

Flight also reported on an instance where a widow of a flying officer, reading that there was a call for recruits for the Women’s Royal Air Force (WRAF) had had her application turned down, despite the fact that she had had flying experience and had assisted her late husband with his technical examinations, because ‘members (of the WRAF) ‘must actually live in their own homes’.’

Per Ardua ad Astra

Returning to the subject of the newly born RAF, here are some final words from The Aeroplane : ‘ It is well to teach these youngsters that they are joining a Force which has to start from nothing and build up its own traditions. Being now entirely separate from the Army, it cannot trade on the reputation of the British soldier. It has to make a reputation for itself .’

A century later, it can be said with confidence that the RAF has achieved that aim.

NOTE: Many thanks to Brian Riddle from the RAeS National Aerospace Library in Farnborough for his help with compiling the source material for this article. More information on the Library and its archives can be found on: https://www.aerosociety.com/news-expertise/national-aerospace-library/ .

For readers interested in knowing more about the first RAF Chief of the Air Staff Lord Trenchard, there is a podcast recording on the Aerosociety website of a lecture on the life of Trenchard presented in 1958 to the Halton Branch of the RAeS by the then Chief of the Air Staff, Sir Dermot Boyle which can be downloaded to listen to at:  https://www.aerosociety.com/news/audio-classic-lecture-series-lord-trenchard-by-sir-dermot-boyle/

Bill Read FRAeS 5 June 2018

• News & Features
• Industry News

A gathering of eagles

This year’s RAF Air Power Conference, to be held in London on 11-12 July, is set to be the largest gathering of air force chiefs in 15 years. TIM ROBINSON previews the event.

Plane Speaking with: ACM Sir Stephen Hillier

One hundred years ago on 1 April 1918, the world's first independent air arm was created in the form of the Royal Air Force. We caught up with its current head, Air Chief Marshal SIR STEPHEN HILLIER CBE DFC FRAeS RAF on this historic anniversary.

Should drone pilots get medals?

They may not put themselves in physical harms way, but RAF Reaper crews are overdue recognition for potential risk to mental well being and professionalism after ten years of high tempo operations, argues an academic after a groundbreaking study of U...

Comment title

Bursledon Blog

Monday 17 september 2018.

• Lord Portal

3 comments:

Lord Portal a magnificent vessel I have had he pleasure sail on her many times. And look forward to further fun onboard

Lord Portal was indeed a yacht that belonged to the RAF along side her sister yacht Lord Trenchard. I had the good fortune to sail on her many times. I once sailed to the Azores on her and often feel I owe her my life as we hit an Atlantic storm of gigantic proportions. A storm force 12, if she hadn't been such a substantial and strong yacht I don't think we would have got through it. I just love her and would dearly love to go on board again.

I just made the last comment. If you know where she is mored and have any info of the owner please let me know. mickarnold46@gmail .com

COMMENTS - If you would like a reply to your comment please leave your email address Thanks

Featured post

Running along the western Solent between Lymington and Keyhaven

1001 Boats Blog

Search this blog.

Blog Archive

• ►  September (3)
• ►  August (9)
• ►  July (9)
• ►  June (9)
• ►  May (10)
• ►  April (10)
• ►  March (9)
• ►  February (8)
• ►  January (8)
• ►  December (9)
• ►  November (9)
• ►  October (11)
• ►  September (11)
• ►  July (10)
• ►  June (11)
• ►  May (9)
• ►  March (8)
• ►  February (9)
• ►  January (12)
• ►  December (12)
• ►  November (7)
• ►  October (9)
• ►  September (9)
• ►  July (8)
• ►  April (9)
• ►  January (9)
• ►  December (11)
• ►  September (8)
• ►  November (11)
• ►  May (12)
• ►  April (13)
• ►  January (11)
• ►  June (10)
• ►  March (10)
• ►  February (10)
• ►  November (10)
• Poor becoming Good
• Ups and downs of sailing
• Water spirits?
• Signs of Autumn
• Saturday Sailing
• Bursledon Regatta Down Under
• ►  August (10)
• ►  December (10)
• ►  April (11)
• ►  January (10)
• ►  December (8)
• ►  July (11)
• ►  March (11)
• ►  February (11)
• ►  December (15)
• ►  November (15)
• ►  October (14)
• ►  September (14)
• ►  August (15)
• ►  July (14)
• ►  June (12)
• ►  April (15)
• ►  March (12)
• ►  February (12)
• ►  January (13)
• ►  December (18)
• ►  November (13)
• ►  October (18)
• ►  September (13)
• ►  August (17)
• ►  July (12)
• ►  June (14)
• ►  November (8)
• ►  September (10)
• ►  October (7)
• ►  August (8)
• ►  November (12)
• ►  August (11)
• ►  June (13)
• ►  April (14)
• ►  January (15)
• ►  November (14)
• ►  October (8)
• ►  July (7)
• ►  June (7)
• ►  May (8)
• ►  March (5)
• ►  February (6)

My Photos on Flickr

• Flickr Photos

My Blog List

Subscribe To Bursledon Blog

World Scout Jamboree 2023

• World Scout JamboreeGoFundMe
• World Scout Jamboree Facebook

Hugh Trenchard, 1st Viscount Trenchard

Marshal of the Royal Air Force Hugh Montague Trenchard ( 3 February 1873 - 10 February 1956 ) was a commander of the Royal Flying Corps in the Field and British Chief of the Air Staff during World War I and the 1920s.

• Speech to the Cambridge University Aeronautical Society, April 1925 in Trenchard, Man of Vision (1962) p. 519
• Given by Trenchard in 1946. As listed on Great Aviation Quotes [1]

'I can't write what I mean, I can't say what I mean.. but I expect you to know what I mean' G. Regan in 'More Military Blunders' Carlton Books (2004) p66

Quotes about Trenchard

• Field Marshal Haig in Trenchard, Man of Vision (1962) p. 506

External links

• Military leaders from England
• 1873 births
• 1956 deaths
• Military leaders of World War I

Navigation menu

• Search forums
• Practical Boat Owner's Reader to Reader

Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht 'Broadsword'

• Thread starter ean_p
• Start date 27 Apr 2006
• 27 Apr 2006

Well-known member

Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht \'Broadsword\' Does anyone know what happened to the Joint Services yacht 'Broadsword' ( a Nicholson sixty something!) which was put up for sale a couple of years ago ta Ian p.  

Re: Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht \'Broadsword\' Broadsword was/is a Nic 55. I think she was sold when the forces decided to buy ex BT 60 footers, however, appart from Challenger, I've not seen any others at JSASTC. There's an even bigger one moored there now...I noticed it tonight, but was too busy getting ready to come alongside to pay it much attention. Lord Trenchard was refitted after the Poole explosion, but I've not seen her recently either.  

• 28 Apr 2006

Active member

Re: Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht \'Broadsword\' IIRC The service NIC 55s were getting pretty tired, and insurance was making some protests about the longer journeys. The challenge boats became available at the right moment.  

• 29 Apr 2006

Re: Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht \'Broadsword\' That was the original "reason" given.....funny how many of the 55's were run on after they got some experience on the 60 tho' innit?  

PembrokeshirePromise

Re: Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht \'Broadsword\' Yep - saw her this w/e afloat in the river in Arklow - Ireland. She was looking in need of a dose of TLC though. Just googled - and this confirms that Arklow was where she ended up. http://www.broadswordsailing.com/ Best wishes James  

Re: Whereabouts of Nicholson yacht \'Broadsword\' Thanks for that James.........remember looking at her when she was for sale in Portland in 2003 or 2002 and she needed a lot of tlc then along with her sister ships the Adventurer and another though the name slips me now.....beautiful boats . think Adventurer was refitted for another forces jaunt as she was considered the best of the bunch.....  

Hi Just to update this thread.... Broadsword was originally Quailo III, an Admiral's Cup racer. She is now based on the Hamble and renamed Quailo III. Restored somewhat to her original glory over the last 2 winters and back in her original resplendent green livery. Give us a wave when out All the best  

Blue Drifter

ean_p said: Thanks for that James.........remember looking at her when she was for sale in Portland in 2003 or 2002 and she needed a lot of tlc then along with her sister ships the Adventurer and another though the name slips me now.....beautiful boats . think Adventurer was refitted for another forces jaunt as she was considered the best of the bunch..... Click to expand...

Berthed in Bursledon & now looking lovely.  

I sailed against Donald Parr's Quailo many times in RORC races. DP worked in Hong Kong, hence the name Quailo, meaning "white man". A great guy and with very distinguished service to yachting. Good to hear that one of his boats is stilll in action and being cared for.  

Blue Drifter;4491802- she competed in the first Whitbread and i once spent 4 weeks on her sailing around the Canairies and onto Gibraltar via Madeira said: Old ships. So did I, the Whitbread I mean Click to expand...

Quailo meaning Sarabande Many thanks for the info about the meaning of Quailo. We didn't know that but now that you mention it my Hong Kong friends have confirmed that meaning. You live and learn! We have 2 new sails this year and are renewing the IRC rating from 2004. We'll be in the RTIR as usual and hopefully some sort of meaningful entry for Cowes week. All the best Jonathan  

capnsensible

Just out of interest, between being Broadsword and Quailo, she was British Soldier. I sailed on her from the Azores to UK many tides ago. On the way we stopped in La Coruna and had an interesting time with an Argentinian crew of a sail training vessel, Guernsey where a run of epic proportions ensued and final sop in Cherbourg where we met the original owner, invited him on board and, er, drinks were taken! A fine vessel to sail. The Nic 55's are amongst my favourite yachts. Oh yeah, the Skipper was Gavin Maclaren of 'Atlantic Islands Pilot' fame.  

My first job out of training was cleaning up Adventure for the London Boat Show just after she completed the Whitbread. I had a happy week in the Gunboat Yard in Pompey gutting her. Then we took her over to Pompey and lifted her onto a truck. Happy days.  

Sandyman said: You didn't find a pair of my chokkie nix did you ? with dhoby No P113 D128 me. Click to expand...

• 10 Feb 2014

wow ...this was a blast from the past!!  

Just back from a weeks charter from Porto Calero, Lanzarotte, where the Nic 55 - Chaser was berthed, pending next move into Med. Still looking very workmanlike although crew now reduced to max of 11.  

Adventure, Chaser & Dasher - if i remember those ole days at JSSC. I am sure there were 3 Pongo boats there also ? - could be wrong.  

Graham_Wright

So what was the Nick55 we saw at Haslar on our way to the submarine museum a couple of weekends ago. Aged old gits like me don't have short term memories any more.  

Other threads that may be of interest

• 12 Aug 2024

• KompetentKrew
• 22 Aug 2024

Members online

• Richborough
• Bridgehouse
• Misterbreeze
• Frayed Knot

Share this page