Talk:Thomas Inskip, 1st Viscount Caldecote

Untitled
I have read elsewhere that Thomas Inskip did much to prepare the country for the 'Battle of Britain' by increasing the pre war production of fighter aircraft.Furthermore I have heard that his emphasis on fighters was opposed by Churchill and other ministers of the time.

Can anyone comment on this?

Dr Mike Inskip Family Doctor Dunedin NZ

PS I share the Viscount Caldecote's surname but our geneaolgical origins diverged some 4 centuries ago.

Shouldn't Lord Chancellor be under the Legal Offices rather than the political offices? It was a position in the government, but so were Attorney General and Solicitor General; the responsibilities as head of the Judiciary and immediate superior to Lord Chief Justice was just as important.--86.181.43.41 (talk) 02:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Can't comment on Inskip but it is true that the Government was spending an astonishing 45-50% of its budget on defence by the late 1930s (there was of course much less spending on health, education or social security in those days but nonetheless the idea that the government "failed to rearm" is almost pure mythology, put about both by Labour and by Tories who had backed Churchill). As for Churchill, it is certainly true that he favoured bombers and initially attacked the Hurricane fighter for its "excessive speed" and lack of a gun turret, which would make it difficult for it to take its place in the "line of battle" - he actually seems to have imagined that planes would fight in lines like eighteenth century warships. Robert Rhodes James ("Churchill, A Study in Failure", 1970) writes amusingly about Churchill's sometimes ignorance of military matters.Paulturtle (talk) 00:16, 30 July 2018 (UTC)