Were the RNAS under rewarded?

[per ardua per mare per terram]

You don’t have to delve deeply into CR Samson’s Flights and Fights to find his view that RNAS officers and men didn’t get the recognition, advancement and awards he felt that they deserved. Did he have a point?

[Gibbo]

Looking at the awards given to RNAS aces I think that he did have a point; the number of VCs given to the RNAS seems low relative to the RFC. Moreover, it's continued to be harder for Navy fliers to win medals than those in the RAF. Lt-Cmdr Williamson, the leader of the Taranto raid got the DSO whereas operations of similar gallantry by the RAF won the attack leaders the VC. Cmdr Sharkey Ward complained in his autobiography Sea Harrier over the Falklands about how few of his pilots were decorated, both in absolute terms & relative to the RAF.

[SiegeGunner]

Samson's own awards (Putney Vale Cemetery):

[per ardua per mare per terram]

Thanks for the contributions

Gibbo, the disparity in VCs is something that I’ve always noticed. Were Little any less deserving than Ball; Collishaw than Bishop or Dallas than Baker? Just to mention a few.

SG, thanks I’ve not seen his monument before. It Rather makes his point about awards though. How many would have been showered a man with his achievements in the RFC? Imo a knighthood, VC, and at least a bar a year for his DSO.

[Adrian Roberts]

If this was discrimination it did not apply to the Navy as a whole. The Q-ship commanders virtually got a DSO for each action and often a VC, whether or not it resulted in a sinking, even though the activity between actions was limited to boring patrols looking for U-boats. Medals were also distributed liberally to the rest of the crews. Gordon Campbell was recommended for a bar to his VC, but declined it. There was some criticism of this apparent liberality.

If the RNAS was discriminated against, could this have been due to its strong link to Churchill, who had championed it but was in disgrace after Gallipoli?

But how fair is the discrimination theory? Most of the RFC VCs were for specific actions, like the RNAS ones. Only four, Ball McCudden, Mannock and Beauchamp-Proctor, were for sustained action over a period of time, and the last two of those were only awarded after considerable lobbying by their supporters. The RNAS was always a lot smaller and so with less scope for awards. And in fact, several VCs including Mannock and Beauchamp-Proctor, also West and Barker were awarded after they became RAF, albeit these were ex -RFC personnel.

[per ardua per mare per terram]

The RNAS was always a lot smaller and so with less scope for awards.

Until 1916 it was not that much smaller than the RFC, their official numbers were only allocated from the formation of the RNAS, on the 1914 Star roll the highest is around F700, the numbers were swelled by Navy (including Reserves) and Royal Marines. They also had loads of fighting opportunitied in Gallipoli alone.

The fact remains that none of the RNAS aces were awarded the VC. Samson's discontment started before the war ended, in reports of 1915 he complained that his men were not getting rewarded and honoured.

I agree the Q ships seem to have been well rewarded.