Life would still go on. The R-100 wasn't built with a geodetic airframe, like the MacMeecham and Schutte-Lanz L.1. They weren't built with "geodetic" construction either, being just called "diamond lattice" since the term hadn't been in vogue yet. The R-100 was ring and girder construction with geodetic re-enforcement for the pendulous bits. I keep raccoons out from under my rear deck with a geodetic diamond lattice in honor of Wallis. I once saw an ultra-light aircraft that looked like a Piper Cub with structure made from what appeared similar to popsicle sticks in geodetic form, but I only saw one. The world would survive without the Wellesley, which carried a bomb load in panniers under the wing because they weren't sure how to build a bomb bay in the fuselage. The Wellington was a good medium bomber, but was it good because of, or in spite of geodetic construction? When tested as a glider tug, they stretched, and when converted to a post-war transport they reverted to a monocoque fuselage for the Viking/Valetta. The Windsor did nothing but show that there was a scale limit to geodetics, and that was the Warwick. The dam-buster bomb was ingenious and a media sensation for morale, but didn't achieve a change in the war, gaining a moderate but temporary gain with heavy expenditure and loss. The ship-busting bouncing bomb never achieved a trial by fire, and was thus a waste of effort. The heavy penetration bombs were something else again. If not for Wallis, is it never thought of, and accomplished?