Hi
Just a few notes with ref. to earlier posts.
1/. In a previous post I said that it was ominous that the Secretary for Air arrived at the Copenhagen Aero Exhibition in the Blackburn Iris. {Schneiderman says that Hoare returned on the Southampton although the Putnam book on Blackburn claims he also returned on the same aircraft on the 24th August; the Shorts book reports that the accompanying Saunders Valkyrie and a (wooden) Southampton crashed while taking off in rough seas on the return leg.]
However, I was making the point that the Sea Eagle and the Southampton had established Supermarine in the forefront of flying-boat technology but that the company was, thereafter, overtaken by larger multi-engined aircraft ordered from other companies.
The economic situation of the time did not allow many of the new aircraft to be produced and so, eventually, Supermarine was able to offer the very efficient (and cheaper) twin-engined Scapa and Stranraer, thanks to R.J. Mitchell’s thin-wing approach.
However, in the long run, when Imperial Airways was fully developed, Short’s scooped the field, as we all know – which must have been galling to the company which had been the early leader.
2/. Sea Eagle. Anyone wanting to read up about the Sea Eagle service to the Channel Islands, with details of the aircraft and incidents, might like to know about the folowing book:
From Sea Eagle to Flamingo by N. Doyle – The Self Publishing Association Ltd., Upton-upon-severn, 1991.
It may not feature in many bibliographies as it may not have been widely publicized when it came out but it’s very well researched from contemporary newspaper accounts.
Here’s a painting of the surviving Eagles which became part of the inaugural Imperial Airways outfit. I’ve followed the usual colour convention. Hope I’m right.

Supermarine Sea Eagles for Imperial Airways
3/. I think Cozens’ comments about Supermarine experiments with metal hulls were concerned with plating and his references to metal structures probably referred to wing components – his various entries are not always clear and should not be regarded as "gospel" but he was well acquainted with Supermarine in the early days and was a neighbour of their test pilot, Capt. Biard. His MS. is at least valuable as it gives a "feel" for the beginnings at Supermarine.
In respect of structural considerations, it would seem pretty obvious that the Linton Hope approach to wooden hulls, using close-spaced hoops on stringers, would not provide Mitchell with a model for his metal hulls but the advantages of the earlier hull being uncluttered by bracing etc. could not be ignored. The resultant Southampton II hull, basically still spherical in cross-section would thus seem to put Supermarine in the forefront of a metal fuselage technology that was not based upon more slab-sided precedents.
Are there any engineers out there who can support a claim for the Southampton II structure setting the precedent for much later (non-flying-boat) designs, in the U.K. and abroad?
Schneiderspit