FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1919
1919 - 1502.PDF
NOVEMBER 20, 1919 AIRSHIPS FOR THE NAVY: SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT BY RAFKX Now that the transfer of airships to the Air Ministry has been consummated by the removal of the staff from their isolation in Westminster, it is perhaps opportune to put forward various ideas for the development of airships in the future which have been maturing in the mind for the last six months or so. It is proposed to deal not with the commercial aspect, which may safely be left in the hands of the airship transport company which is gradually being evolved, so much as with the Service side—which is not a fashionable topic of the hour, but is none the less important. As a result of the sale of R 38 to America, there is grave reason for anxiety as to the provision of airships for work with the Fleet in the future. It is, perhaps, not fully realised that the Government do not propose to retain for Service purposes any of the ships now building—that is to say, R 34, which is a copy of a German design of 1916, will be, unless and until a change of policy arrives, and a new programme decided upon, our only rigid airship of even approximately modern design. R 80, R 36 and R 37 are all to be disposed of to commercial enterprise when completed. Now it is perfectly manifest that it takes at least twelve months, and a safer estimate would be eighteen months, to put into the air a rigid airship, counting from the moment that design work is commenced. Such design work is based not only on constructional experiments and experience gained during the building of previous classes, but, to an at any rate equal extent, on points arising during extended trials both in the air and on the ground after the ship is put into commission. Anyone who has had any ex perience with aircraft knows the defects and openings for improvement which constantly become manifest with in creasing experience. The whole of this experience will be lost in the case of R 38 ; or, rather, will be lost to this country, but gained by America. As she is the largest rigid airship that has yet been constructed, we are, therefore, in effect, selling to America the chance of becoming pre-eminent in airship design for the sum of half-a-million pounds. Even in these days of retrenchment the price hardly seems adequate. As it is now too late to cancel the sale of R 38, it would appear at least advisable to recommence work on R 39 (her sister ship), which should be completed and used for naval work; and to prepare for the production of a minimum of at least two rigid airships per year in order that a certain steady development in design may take place. If this is not done, and done quickly, in eighteen months' time we shall be definitely out of the race for naval rigid airship supremacy. This is not a " scare " headline of the yellow press ; it is merely an only too obvious deduction from the facts. The Govern ment attitude is, of course, that they are relying upon com mercial enterprise to pull the irons out of the fire for them. But whence is that assistance coming ? There is in process of gradual evolution an Airship Transport Co., based upon the analogy of the big shipping companies, such as the White Star and the Cunard. This company will not, presumably, design, but will merely operate airships designed and built by the constructional firms. The proposal appears to be that this company shall commence with one airship station— probably Pulham—at which airships purchased from the Government shall be based. These will be some or all of R 33, R 80, R 36 and R 37. One fact at any rate which is abundantly clear is that unless the capital of this company is to be of dimensions which are beyond all reasonable pro bability, it will be at least three or four years before it is in a position to give orders to the constructional firms for any airships specially designed for commercial purposes. Unless, therefore, orders are to come from the Government, it is diffi cult to see how the constructional firms are to be able to afford to keep together skilled employees for the purpose. From all of which it follows that the Government cannot reasonably look to commercial enterprise for assistance before the end of 1924 at the earliest. In the meantime, the whole rigid airship constructional and (private) design resources of the country will in all probability have turned to other work, and we shall have been overtaken by America and France as well as Germany. It appears, in fact, as if the Government were at least four years too soon in cutting down their own programme and relying upon commercial enterprise. The whole question of rigid airship design in this country is an exceedingly difficult one. There are only two design staffs in the country. One is the official designers who have been at the Admiralty—detailed for the work from the Department of Naval Construction—and are now going oyer to the Air Ministry for a six months' trial to see how they like the new regime. The other is the airship design department of Messrs. Vickers at Barrow-in-Furness, who are responsible for R 80. Of these there is no question—whatever may be the opinion of their competence—but that the former have had immeasurably the greater experience and should possess the greater knowledge, owing to their familiarity with German practice from a study of Zeppelins, both in this country, and, since the Armistice, in Germany. It is equally un questionable, from past experience with aeroplanes, that the organisation from which the best results are obtained is to place the responsibility for producing new designs upon the firms, while the officials concerned, in the department of the Director-General of Supply and Research, check and criticise the designs. This is, however, impossible unless the con structional firms can rely on orders from which they are to draw the necessary profits upon which to pay their design staffs. It is to be feared that the old error of the Royal Aircraft Factory may be repeated in the case of airships and a staff employed upon the preparation of official designs, while at the same time being called upon to criticise the designs of outside firms. This should not be permitted, but it is difficult to see how it can be avoided during the next four years if no Government orders for rigid airships are to be given. As soon -as commercial airship services develop this difficulty will be overcome, as there will then be private orders which will make it worth the while of constructional firms to employ design staffs. There is, or was (I believe it is not yet abandoned), a move in some official quarters which would make the present position worse. It is proposed to establish at an existing constructional station an " airship dockyard "—analogous to the " Factory " in the old days—at which the Government would themselves construct airships to their own designs. This scheme, if allowed to go through, would be not only an unjustifiable charge on public funds, but would further reduce the prospective work for the design staffs of commercial firms; while tending to perpetuate the evil, pointed out above, which was only eradicated after several years and much agitation in the case of aeroplanes. Up to the present one has been confining one's remarks to airships of the rigid type, but the position is much the same with regard to non-rigids; with the proviso that it is, if anything, sb'ghtly worse. During the last year there has not been a single non-rigid airship designed since the Armistice produced from any source ; whilst, since the early days of 1915 no non-rigid airship has been commenced in this country to other than official designs. In other words, the practical knowledge of the results of design and experience in rigging is entirely in Service hands; while even official design has been completely stagnant for twelve months. This somewhat lengthy preamble has been necessary in order to clear the ground for certain suggestions which it is hoped will be found of a constructive nature. In the first place, it is desirable to provide any firm interested in the design and construction of airships with the fullest possible information from official sources of the experience gained during the last five years in the design of airships—rigid and non-rigid. Secondly— unless it be decided that airships will not be needed in future naval operations—a definite programme, however small, of airships for Service purposes should be laid down by the Government in order that the gap may be bridged until commercial airship services develop. Full specifications should be issued, designs invited, and tenders subsequently asked for. In this way the firms will be assured of a certain number of orders, while the Service will have progressively improved airships with which to train and experiment. What is perhaps an even more important matter is the organisation of Service experimental work. Up to the present, owing to the airship staff being isolated at the Admiralty, there has been no possibility of co-operation and conjoint working with the aeroplane experimental staff. If the pro posed " airship dockyard " scheme comes to fruition, or if the airship experimental work is centred at Howden, this state of affairs will be perpetuated and one of the chief advantages of the transfer to the Air Ministry lost. To avoid IS04
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
