FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1916
1916 - 0179.PDF
MA1CH 2, I9l6. f/PQ^ MB^ml By R. P. The Destruction of " L.Z. 77." THE French artillerists are to be complimented on bringing down a Zeppelin, the so-called *' L.Z. 77." It is to be regretted, somewhat, that the ship was so badly crumpled up in the process, as there is evidence to show that it had several new and interesting features. Zeppelin Developments. As regards the number of the ship, we have ample reason to doubt its accuracy. Even if the alleged figures "77" were clearly seen, they do not give a clue to the actual number of Zeppelins built. The Germans have a playful way of altering and exaggerating their figures in all that pertain to military and naval matters, and with reference to Zeppelins we have sufficient data to prove that nothing like seventy-seven vessels have been built. Zeppelin numerals are like the fancy numbers one may see on lottery tickets. Additional Propellers; But the most noteworthy thing about the latest wrecked Zeppelin is the existence of a propeller on one of the gondolas or cars. The usual Zeppelin power transmission is carried out by long shafts which drive propellers mounted on brackets alongside the ship itself. What new development does the mounting of one or more propellers on the gondolas signify ? The main drive must go through the big blades at the side of the ship, for it would be most undesirable and dangerous to mount all the propellers under the vessel. It looks to me as if the " L.Z. 77 " was a reconstructed military Zeppelin, to which more speed was given by the addition of extra propellers mounted on the gondolas. Or, perhaps, these subsidiary blades were fitted to improve the manoeuvring powers of the ship. That the experiment was not altogether a success may be surmised, for one of the French reports tells us that the ship when near Brabant-le-Roi was making rather slow headway against the wind, and in passing over a well-gunned region of the French battle area, it made an excellent target for skilled artillerists. Moreover, it was flying somewhat low, and undoubtedly it had a heavy load of bombs on board. A Score for the Guns. Many rash conclusions have been drawn from the affair. For example, it has been asserted that what the French have done on this occasion can be repeated by us during each raid. This might be so if we could find in any part of England the close array of guns which must exist in the region of Brabant-le-Roi. Some im portant centres may have a concentration of anti aircraft artillery approximating to that massed in the French war zone, but it is obviously impossible to have such inten sive protection all over this country. A New Gas? Some ridiculous people in Germany and nearer home have been talking of new gas for Zeppelins which is not inflammable. Of course this is nonsense, and the fate HEARNE. of the " L.Z. 77 " does not bear out their statements. It is very unlikely, indeed, that any safe and effective sub stitute for hydrogen can be found, and the fierce in flammability of this gas in the presence of air is a danger which must be put up with in airships. Coal gas is quite as troublesome in this respect, and of course it does not give anything like as good a lifting power for the same volume. The Fire Peril- As if to add to the fire danger, we are compelled to use petrol as a fuel for airships. Hydrogen exudes from every pore of the gas envelopes, petrol vapour tends to collect in every unventilated corner of the engine com partment, and thus a naked flame is most unwelcome in the vicinity of an airship. The importance of this point is not to be overlooked in defence against Zeppelins. An incendiary shell is the best mode of destroying enemy airships. Petrol Shells? The Germans have long talked of petrol shells, which on explosion would spray burning petrol on the object aimed at. I do not know if this form of shell was employed by the French at Brabant-le-Roi, but evidently they had a very business-like article, which on piercing the gas-bags ignited the escaping hydrogen. The flame shell is certainly the most effective for Zeppelin destruc tion, but it has attendant dangers which render it suitable only for highly-skilled gunners. New Naval Zeppelins. Several probable and many impossible developments are foreshadowed in the new Zeppelins, some of which may be launched against us this spring. We can flatter ourselves that the best vessels are designed exclusively for our shores, as well for the reason that the Germans hate us with a very particular hate, as for the reason that raids over England are less dangerous for the enemy than attacks on French towns which necessitate the crossing of the battle line. We may reasonably expect a steady development in speed and in ascensive power in the new naval Zeppelins, and these two factors will render terrestrial defence more difficult. Some of the latest Zeppelins have been credited with a speed of over sixty-five miles an hour in still air, but it might be hinted that timing an airship from the ground leads to many inaccuracies, as the land observer has no knowledge of the wind currents which may exist in the region where the airship is travelling. But that the Zeppelin is an efficient high-speed craft cannot be denied, and it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that new craft can be evolved showing speeds up to eighty or one hundred miles an hour in still air. The Germans have very fine aerial engines, which have been steadily developing for years under the most favourable conditions, and this progressive policy yields highly satisfactory results, as compared with the spas modic effects attained in other countries by vacillating policy in constructional and technical matters. 179
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
