FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1928
1928 - 0048.PDF
of his book, is to get hold of all the Patent Specifica- : tions of the Airship Guarantee Company which he could lay his hands on, and from the fact that certain features have been patented he concludes that they must of necessity be incorporated in the design. On that assumption he bases his criticism, and as, in the great majority of cases, the features criticised are not incorporated, the author is basing his whole case Against airships on something which does not exist. The author blames the " secrecy " with which the construction of the new airships has been surrounded, pleading that as the ships are intended for commercial and not for military work there is no point in conceal- ing anything. With that we cannot quite agree, although superficially the argument appears fairly sound. It should, however, be recollected that both airships are of types of construction differing materi- ally from anything that has hitherto been done. The changes are intimately connected with the size of the ships. Forms of construction which would not have been possible on a smaller scale have become available in the larger size, and so forth. Now it must, we think, be agreed that if the airships are a success, these forms of construction, or at least the intimate details thereof, will have a certain not incon- siderable commercial value. Under the circum- stances, therefore, it would surely be bad policy to divulge in advance everything to possible foreign competitors. For in spite of Mr. Spanner's conten- tion that other nations are abandoning airships, the contrary is very definitely the case. FLIGHT has never been unduly enthusiastic over these new airships, and, in fact, when they were first suggested we warned the authorities that a great deal of experiment and research would have to be done before the jump to the five million cubic foot size could be made with reasonable certainty that no unsuspected " snags " existed. We shall not, there- fore, by taking up the case, be accused of being " airship enthusiasts." We are personally satisfied that in the years that have elapsed the theory and practice of designing and building the complicated structure of a rigid airship have made such headway that the undertaking is much less of a speculation than it would have been some years ago. Certainly not such a harebrained scheme as Mr. Spanner accuses it of being. That the whole thing is in the nature of an experiment on a large scale we still admit, but we do think that the chances of success are really reasonably good. If the initial flight tests are carried out cautiously, proceeding step by step in testing out the structures, we see no reason to regard the experiments as unduly dangerous. Mr. Spanner admits that naval architects cannot yet calculate the stresses in a surface vessel; but we have no record of him having uttered a timely warning some years ago, before a destroyer broke her back. He points out that a ship which has suffered severe damage manages to limp home. Well, there are cases on record, from the war 1914-18, of German Zeppelins limping home with noses shot away, almost standing on their head, but getting back to their base with their crew safe. The British Empire is in such need of rapid com- munications that any means which promises to assist towards that end are well worth trying out. Now, it so happens that the distance from London to the nearest points are rather greater than can be operated with heavier-than-air craft, at least if these are to cany a reasonable amount of paying load. The 48 JANUARY 26, 192S whole subject is one of geography. If the airship can be proved to be capable of covering the longer dis- tances, and long distances over the sea, then, in spite of Mr. Spanner s rather sneering references, we shall have accomplished something of the greatest possible value to the Empire. We would remind Mr. Spanner of some remarks made during a discussion at the Royal Aeronautical Society. We believe that the occasion was the reading of the paper by Dr. Eckener, to which Mr. Spanner refers. Sir Alan Anderson, the well-known ship owner, said, in effect, that the passenger rates forecast by Dr. Eckener were too low. What he meant was that the time saved would render the rates charged of relatively small importance. As an example, Sir Alan quoted his own case. Although he ran ships to Australia, and had great interests there, he had not been to Australia for, we think he said, 20 years. If the airship should prove capable of cutting down the time of the journey in the manner indicated, he would go every year, or every other year. The rates charged would be of very secondary importance. Surely, Mr. Spanner would not claim that a man like Sir Alan Anderson did not, in saying this, know what he was talking about. Moreover, Sir Alan, as a shipowner, would certainly have no incentive to " boosting " airships, which would, presumably, be rather in the nature of competitors. Mr. Spanner tries to infer that the Dominion Premiers, at the Imperial Conference, were persuaded to agree to the technical side of the airship programme. Unless we are very much mistaken, what happened was that, in effect, the Premiers agreed that, if the airships could do what is expected of them, then they would be a very good thing for the Empire. Which is very different from what Mr. Spanner infers. It is with considerable satisfaction that we learn from the Official Notices of Race the Royal Aero Club this week, that this year's race for the King's Cup is to be a " Circuit of Britain," in that it will touch all the light aeroplane club centres. FLIGHT has repeatedly emphasised the view that, in the very nature of things, a race for a cup presented by His Majesty should give as large a section as possible of the community an opportunity of seeing the competing machines. A two-days' race of the nature suggested will cover a great deal of ground, and what with minor local meetings arranged at the various aerodromes during the progress of the race, the result should be a very effective piece of " air-mindedness " propaganda. We gather that the original suggestion of racing to a formula has been abandoned as far as the King's Cup is concerned, and that the handicapping will be " on form." Again, we think the decision a wise one. The King's Cup Race should, above all, be calculated to interest the general public, and racing to a formula, with the possibility of a wide separation of the machines, would be likely to fail in doing this. We hope, however, that a race to a formula will still be held, but this should be a much shorter one, and public attendance might have to be treated as a matter of secondary importance. Such a race should be in the nature of a technical event rather than a sporting one, and the formula, if a reasonably satis- factory one can be found, should not, as Mr. Walker has pointed out, be aimed at "fitting" existing machines, but at bringing out the really desirable qualities.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
