Major G.H. Scott, CBE, AFC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Major G.H. Scott, CBE, AFC
I've always been rather intrigued by the figure of Major G.H, Scott, who died on board the airship R101 when she crashed at Beauvais. As a teenager I was fascinated by the airship story, and read several times James Leasor's book 'The Millionth Chance'. Later I read Sir Peter Masefield's 'To Ride the Storm'. Only when I learned to fly myself did I fully appreciate how dangerous those behemoths were.
But back to Major Scott. While neither of these books is about him, he features quite prominently in both. He has always seemed an interesting man in that as well as being an airship pilot he clearly was an engineer of some ingenuity and I also get the impression that he was quite a powerful political advocate of the rigid airship. He seems to have been a strong character and, although these impressions are not always valid, his photographs appear to show a charismatic person. And his achievement in skippering the first rigid airship across the Atlantic, indeed a double crossing, was tremendous. It is a shame it is so little known today.
But he personally also seems to have been a controversial figure. His Wikipedia entry, perhaps unkindly, itemises the landing accidents which he was associated with, largely sourced from Sir Peter and Neville Shute Norway. The suggestion is that even in the culture of the RAF of the 1920's he was regarded as 'a press-on type', which would mean being extremely daring by modern standards. He does also appear to have, at the very least, participated in conflicts over command, or CRM as we would now say, on the R101 and other airships. The suggestion which Sir Peter made was that after releasing from her mast on her last voyage, the R101 had cruised locally for some time before setting off on her fateful flight. Sir Peter suggested that this might have been a time when Irwin, the ship's captain, and Scott as 'officer in command on the flight', debated whether or not to continue with the flight in the face of obviously rapidly deteriorating meteorological conditions. His suggestion was that Scott would have over-ridden the ship's captain's decision to return to the mast.
In 'To Ride the Storm' Sir Peter implied that there was more which could have been said about Major Scott, but which wasn't. There are implications of drinking and also hints of illness or personal difficulties in the accounts which I have read too - perhaps mostly obliquely or by implication or omission. I wonder if there is more to this story - perhaps more of a personal tragedy? I'm not asking this out of prurience or to suggest any slur on a brave man who died a tragic and premature death. But in our day and age I think we can accept that people are multi-faceted - our heroes can have flaws. Was there some personal or medical contributor to the apparent - and alleged - deterioration in Scott's decision making? Or are these suggestions groundless and simply attempts to rationalise a particularly assertive and 'press-on' kind of man? Or indeed to offload posthumous blame on the dead?
I toy with the idea, if granted a lot of leisure, of one day writing a biography of Scott simply to set the record straight (if I know what 'the record' really is) and perhaps to bring out a more rounded portrait of a man of that time. As he left four children behind when he died, he may well have children or grandchildren alive today who may retain a lot of information about their father / grandfather.
I post this having read the recent postings about British rigids with great interest and to see what fellow-Ppruners think of these idea.
But back to Major Scott. While neither of these books is about him, he features quite prominently in both. He has always seemed an interesting man in that as well as being an airship pilot he clearly was an engineer of some ingenuity and I also get the impression that he was quite a powerful political advocate of the rigid airship. He seems to have been a strong character and, although these impressions are not always valid, his photographs appear to show a charismatic person. And his achievement in skippering the first rigid airship across the Atlantic, indeed a double crossing, was tremendous. It is a shame it is so little known today.
But he personally also seems to have been a controversial figure. His Wikipedia entry, perhaps unkindly, itemises the landing accidents which he was associated with, largely sourced from Sir Peter and Neville Shute Norway. The suggestion is that even in the culture of the RAF of the 1920's he was regarded as 'a press-on type', which would mean being extremely daring by modern standards. He does also appear to have, at the very least, participated in conflicts over command, or CRM as we would now say, on the R101 and other airships. The suggestion which Sir Peter made was that after releasing from her mast on her last voyage, the R101 had cruised locally for some time before setting off on her fateful flight. Sir Peter suggested that this might have been a time when Irwin, the ship's captain, and Scott as 'officer in command on the flight', debated whether or not to continue with the flight in the face of obviously rapidly deteriorating meteorological conditions. His suggestion was that Scott would have over-ridden the ship's captain's decision to return to the mast.
In 'To Ride the Storm' Sir Peter implied that there was more which could have been said about Major Scott, but which wasn't. There are implications of drinking and also hints of illness or personal difficulties in the accounts which I have read too - perhaps mostly obliquely or by implication or omission. I wonder if there is more to this story - perhaps more of a personal tragedy? I'm not asking this out of prurience or to suggest any slur on a brave man who died a tragic and premature death. But in our day and age I think we can accept that people are multi-faceted - our heroes can have flaws. Was there some personal or medical contributor to the apparent - and alleged - deterioration in Scott's decision making? Or are these suggestions groundless and simply attempts to rationalise a particularly assertive and 'press-on' kind of man? Or indeed to offload posthumous blame on the dead?
I toy with the idea, if granted a lot of leisure, of one day writing a biography of Scott simply to set the record straight (if I know what 'the record' really is) and perhaps to bring out a more rounded portrait of a man of that time. As he left four children behind when he died, he may well have children or grandchildren alive today who may retain a lot of information about their father / grandfather.
I post this having read the recent postings about British rigids with great interest and to see what fellow-Ppruners think of these idea.
Last edited by Footless Halls; 29th Oct 2014 at 20:33.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Annapolis, MD, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Major Scott
I for one would be very interested to read a biography of Major Scott. The interdepartmental conflicts between the Air Ministry and the airship officers at Cardington have been generally glossed over in the histories, most of which appear to adopt -- unintentionally, perhaps -- the biases of one or the other camp (Masefield being the primary source for the pro-Air Ministry perspective, and Shute being the equivalent for the anti-Air Ministry view, IMO). It's an aspect of the story that could certainly bear more scrutiny!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and I would love to write such a book simply to understand the man and how he and his crew (shipmates?) came to burn to death in a field outside Beauvais.
Apart from the obvious personal issues I alluded to, how did these men maintain 'currency' on big rigids? Their actual experience must have been relatively low, certainly by the time the R100 and R101 came on stream. Did they fly heavier that air aircraft, or balloons? I remember that Sir Peter Masefield plotted reports of sightings of the R101 and came to the conclusion that the ship was very precisely navigated. But was it fair, as various people implied, to say that Scott was clumsy and/or had poor judgement? Or was he simply the guy in charge who had more opportunities to take decisions - and therefore to be blame when his inexperience led him to make mistakes?
I have to say from my perspective I think Scott's judgement probably was questionable, certainly by modern standards, but in the more-or-less information vacuum we have now that may be a very unfair thing to say.
Apart from the obvious personal issues I alluded to, how did these men maintain 'currency' on big rigids? Their actual experience must have been relatively low, certainly by the time the R100 and R101 came on stream. Did they fly heavier that air aircraft, or balloons? I remember that Sir Peter Masefield plotted reports of sightings of the R101 and came to the conclusion that the ship was very precisely navigated. But was it fair, as various people implied, to say that Scott was clumsy and/or had poor judgement? Or was he simply the guy in charge who had more opportunities to take decisions - and therefore to be blame when his inexperience led him to make mistakes?
I have to say from my perspective I think Scott's judgement probably was questionable, certainly by modern standards, but in the more-or-less information vacuum we have now that may be a very unfair thing to say.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 86
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember that Lord Thompson, Secretary of State for Air, was a passenger on the flight and had set the departure date for the flight to Karachi based on returning in time to attend an Imperial Conference in London. He may well have brought his weight to bear on any decision to continue or not.
Bob C
Bob C
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No question. But the R101 was an air accident just like any other and there was a 'Swiss cheese' effect. Political pressure was just one more factor tilting the odds against survival. I'm intrigued to try to get to understand the mind of man like Scott in his flying career leading up to that terrible point.
I've been researching the R101 for a couple of years as a fairly serious amateur aviation historian, and as a flight test specialist who wants to learn the lessons from R101 that seem to have been forgotten by most of the world. I've given a few lectures and papers about the story, and will certainly develop a bigger paper and am seriously looking at writing a book on it.
I absolutely agree, GH Scott is one of the most fascinating people in aviation history. He was clearly an incredible airship pilot - just look at his crossing of the Atlantic in 1919, as well as a number of other very successful flights.
I think that he was driven - there were incidents in his past that were likely to create a "difficult" mindset.
In 1919 he was Captain of the R34 when it made the first 2-way crossing of the Atlantic, which was an amazing achievement. It should have been the first ever direct Atlantic crossing, but a ground collision of the same airship under his command delayed departure and so Alcock and Brown both got knighthoods - whilst he and his crew were relatively unrecognised for their achievement.
He had commanded several airships which had suffered accidents - in each case not long after he'd taken control from the officer who had been in command immediately prior. This creates an interesting paradigm which I think had affected his mindset. I'm sure that his mindset was that in difficult conditions he'd taken command to try and achieve a safe outcome but despite being one of the most capable airship pilots in the world he'd still failed. The rumour mill of the 1920s however, had it that he had several times arrogantly taken control from a more current pilot, then fouled it up. In my opinion, the first view is closer to the truth - but he can't have been unaware of the rumours and opinions doing the rounds.
A further aspect is that I'm sure he wished he was in direct command of the R101 himself, rather than Flt.Lt. Irwin and was dealing with that internally.
The perception in 1929/1930 amongst his peers was that GHS had been probably the best airship pilot in the world, but was "off the boil" and needed to be kept away from directly flying airships any more. I'm sure that there was truth in that, as he was clearly a "do-er" who'd been moved into management, and somebody who had achieved great things but largely been passed over for the public recognition that arguably, and I'm sure he believed that, he deserved.
Footless is quite right that the loss of the R101 was a classic piece of swiss cheese, but arguably all the slices had been lined up the moment the ship slipped her mast. I don't think from my researches that GHS was the largest player in lining the slices up, but equally he had the ability and perhaps the power to stop things getting to that point, but he failed. I think that the desperate desire for public recognition was probably fundamental to that failure.
G
I absolutely agree, GH Scott is one of the most fascinating people in aviation history. He was clearly an incredible airship pilot - just look at his crossing of the Atlantic in 1919, as well as a number of other very successful flights.
I think that he was driven - there were incidents in his past that were likely to create a "difficult" mindset.
In 1919 he was Captain of the R34 when it made the first 2-way crossing of the Atlantic, which was an amazing achievement. It should have been the first ever direct Atlantic crossing, but a ground collision of the same airship under his command delayed departure and so Alcock and Brown both got knighthoods - whilst he and his crew were relatively unrecognised for their achievement.
He had commanded several airships which had suffered accidents - in each case not long after he'd taken control from the officer who had been in command immediately prior. This creates an interesting paradigm which I think had affected his mindset. I'm sure that his mindset was that in difficult conditions he'd taken command to try and achieve a safe outcome but despite being one of the most capable airship pilots in the world he'd still failed. The rumour mill of the 1920s however, had it that he had several times arrogantly taken control from a more current pilot, then fouled it up. In my opinion, the first view is closer to the truth - but he can't have been unaware of the rumours and opinions doing the rounds.
A further aspect is that I'm sure he wished he was in direct command of the R101 himself, rather than Flt.Lt. Irwin and was dealing with that internally.
The perception in 1929/1930 amongst his peers was that GHS had been probably the best airship pilot in the world, but was "off the boil" and needed to be kept away from directly flying airships any more. I'm sure that there was truth in that, as he was clearly a "do-er" who'd been moved into management, and somebody who had achieved great things but largely been passed over for the public recognition that arguably, and I'm sure he believed that, he deserved.
Footless is quite right that the loss of the R101 was a classic piece of swiss cheese, but arguably all the slices had been lined up the moment the ship slipped her mast. I don't think from my researches that GHS was the largest player in lining the slices up, but equally he had the ability and perhaps the power to stop things getting to that point, but he failed. I think that the desperate desire for public recognition was probably fundamental to that failure.
G
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 86
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nevil Shute, in his biography Slide Rule, also questioned Scott’s judgment concerning the final flight of the R101. He said “given that the R101 had never flown in bad weather and had undergone virtually no trials at all since being lengthened for the flight to Karachi, it appears reckless that Scott should have pressed on.” However, Shute did note that in the 1930s a pilot was supposed to be a daredevil and risk taker. It may be that by turning back Scott would have destroyed Lord Thompson’s political program.
It is interesting to note that NASA used the R101 disaster as one of its Case Studies in System Failure. Their take on it is that the R101 Airship story is one of political leadership spurring investment in new technology, but at the same time driving that new technology to a premature implementation and subsequent disaster.
Bob C
It is interesting to note that NASA used the R101 disaster as one of its Case Studies in System Failure. Their take on it is that the R101 Airship story is one of political leadership spurring investment in new technology, but at the same time driving that new technology to a premature implementation and subsequent disaster.
Bob C
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Genghis and Bob, I am really pleased that you share my interest in Major Scott and that we share an interest in the rigid airship saga. I need to keep working towards that big Premium Bond and add Major Scott to the list of books to write - he has now gone up the list to next but one I think.
I spotted some comments on youtube somewhere from people who are descendants of Scott's so I think I will contact them. At some point I'll trot over to the Airship Heritage Trust so I can start the process of collecting data from them.
While we have this thread going it would be great if anyone with any contacts, or any info to add, could get in touch. I could get answers to questions like flying experience, etc., from mainstream sources like the National Archive, etc. But any more comments, thoughts, ideas, anecdotes most welcome.
I spotted some comments on youtube somewhere from people who are descendants of Scott's so I think I will contact them. At some point I'll trot over to the Airship Heritage Trust so I can start the process of collecting data from them.
While we have this thread going it would be great if anyone with any contacts, or any info to add, could get in touch. I could get answers to questions like flying experience, etc., from mainstream sources like the National Archive, etc. But any more comments, thoughts, ideas, anecdotes most welcome.
Nevil Shute, in his biography Slide Rule, also questioned Scott’s judgment concerning the final flight of the R101. He said “given that the R101 had never flown in bad weather and had undergone virtually no trials at all since being lengthened for the flight to Karachi, it appears reckless that Scott should have pressed on.” However, Shute did note that in the 1930s a pilot was supposed to be a daredevil and risk taker. It may be that by turning back Scott would have destroyed Lord Thompson’s political program.
In any case, Scott was neither the captain, nor the most senior person on board the R101, so arguably just a point in the chain of command. Large airship practice from 1914 to 1930 in the UK quite routinely had a separate captain and senior officer, the latter being rather like a flotilla commodore in the navy - setting policy but not managing the ship.
It is interesting to note that NASA used the R101 disaster as one of its Case Studies in System Failure. Their take on it is that the R101 Airship story is one of political leadership spurring investment in new technology, but at the same time driving that new technology to a premature implementation and subsequent disaster.
G
Thanks Genghis and Bob, I am really pleased that you share my interest in Major Scott and that we share an interest in the rigid airship saga. I need to keep working towards that big Premium Bond and add Major Scott to the list of books to write - he has now gone up the list to next but one I think.
I spotted some comments on youtube somewhere from people who are descendants of Scott's so I think I will contact them. At some point I'll trot over to the Airship Heritage Trust so I can start the process of collecting data from them.
While we have this thread going it would be great if anyone with any contacts, or any info to add, could get in touch. I could get answers to questions like flying experience, etc., from mainstream sources like the National Archive, etc. But any more comments, thoughts, ideas, anecdotes most welcome.
I spotted some comments on youtube somewhere from people who are descendants of Scott's so I think I will contact them. At some point I'll trot over to the Airship Heritage Trust so I can start the process of collecting data from them.
While we have this thread going it would be great if anyone with any contacts, or any info to add, could get in touch. I could get answers to questions like flying experience, etc., from mainstream sources like the National Archive, etc. But any more comments, thoughts, ideas, anecdotes most welcome.
I recently discovered that from the 800ish hours of flight testing in the R33 between 1924 and 1929 that was developing the knowledge of big airship handling - the logs are all in the national archives at Kew. That's on my list of trips to make!
G
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At risk of being picky, that is sadly just a 4 page brief from an in-house training course. The references list, particularly with the glaring omission of Masefield, pretty much discounts it as a useful historical document.
G
G
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Annapolis, MD, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Major Scott
Further on to Major Scott, diaries and personal papers of the people at Cardington would likely contain more candid information than the official record, but there's no way to know how many of those documents have survived. Many years ago I did an initial survey of manuscript collections in preparation for a biography of Lord Thomson (which will have to wait until I win the lottery to write) and turned up nothing in the way of materials in archives and libraries from the officers and crew, which is not surprising. I wonder if the families still have them as treasured heirlooms or in unopened trunks in the attic.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Carrowmore-Lacken Ireland
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I might have some info that can help you - My grandfather Herbert George Cook was in the airship industry first in the RNAS then the Flying Corps - he was on Parseval during WW1 and later after an accident was ground officer on the mooring towers - he would have been on the tower when the R101 left but was ill at the time. After being at Cardington during comstruction of the tower there he oversaw the erection of the Mooring Towers at Ismalia, Egypt and Karachi India in 1927.
After the R101 accident he was involved in wrapping up the industry and managed to save various photos which he passed onto my father before his death.
I now have the materials - though some of the display panels my father made for exhibitions went to Elvington air museum.
I always thought the difference between the R100 and R101 was a typical example of that between private enterprise and political. I would say many of the crew members in the airship industry had a get up and go spirit including my grandfather - it was what attracted them.
After the R101 accident he was involved in wrapping up the industry and managed to save various photos which he passed onto my father before his death.
I now have the materials - though some of the display panels my father made for exhibitions went to Elvington air museum.
I always thought the difference between the R100 and R101 was a typical example of that between private enterprise and political. I would say many of the crew members in the airship industry had a get up and go spirit including my grandfather - it was what attracted them.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: London
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also a very good book called "Airship Navigator " by EA Johnson - the son of the Navigator on the R101 - also has a few chapters on the R101 disaster.
It's ISBN is 1 874180 016
It's ISBN is 1 874180 016
Found these pics when clearing out my late mother in law's belongings.
I have no ides what airship it is but if anyone wishes to have the originals please send me a PM.
I have no ides what airship it is but if anyone wishes to have the originals please send me a PM.
