Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1919-06-28


cOsss&asiy near lhe Ocsan. Tsley viii
nsed j iew speclal Gre control instru-
nnents bat they should BE similar to
navy types The nearer the better
Being SO. the Army airships can b. d
reserve E6r fhe Navy. Ia case Navy nc
aiyisy II greater cr vice versa. There
might be = Single sci 81 drawings and
speclR cakiOns for most parts and
standard price
On the other hand, the Nary and
Marine Corps might want to conduct
smaii expeditions 10 some distant
places ike the Coast Of South America
Or Africa where IT Is dry and hot II
the forces had ID stay there quite
while with an inland mountain base.
nould II not be advisable 10 have Is
gasbag and naceIle suited to such
conditions Here special army in
land development would be ii order.
Navigation overlarid II somewhat
different from navigation ever the
seas The overland navigator can get
hhetter weather data and can ind By
direct observation Of che landscape,
what his rate Of progress Is and his
whereabouts. In case Of trouble he
knows that he can get down on land
and even save his ship. The nayigat-
ing instruments 10 not need 10 be ats
excellent as they are over the sea
The ship does not need to be DIES lgned
for such long trips The nacelle can
be lighsened and Iife-saying gear can
be eliminated The chances are that
4 cheap commercial type will be evolv-
ed that Is suitable for army use for
local purposes The army is iussi-
fed In maintaining modest engineer
ing stan but ii should cooperate very
closely with the NAVY in non-rigid
construction.
The semi-rigid seems to be the best
bet for 4 medium sized ship for army
use Oh account 81 Its high altitude cal
pabiIitiea II the airship IS ever 10 be
used as bomber, II must work at
night and al great heights, The Army
should be able to subject an enemy
|to the commercial and military bur-
Etien Of anfi-aircraft defense for every
city or important military asset The
Navy should specialize on attacking
seaports docks, locks. etc But II the
reports on the late war are an iIldi-
cation, The Navy should not stop at
The non-rigid airship hut should pro-
coed at q single step to the rigid type
The Army may have use for d few
rigid ships but II will have great
Aieai more use for the semi-rigid
types Joint Army and Navy devel
opment would be proper IN the case
=of both the Navy leading IN large
rigids, the Army leading III small
rigids and semi-rigids A foot free
Navy and an efficient coast defense
heretofore have been American ideals
What Is an efIicieut aerial defense?
Where will Ii act! What Will 1t cost?
Is II 4 Navy affair or an Army affair
Analyzo the problem as you will,
you Will finally come back 10 the old
knowledge that forces acting mostly
ION the seas should be naval forces.
Forces acting mostly on land should
be Army forces. There will Always
BE zone 0f overlapping activities
Soldiers who want to 60 to sea and
callers who viii see nought but horses
ana mountains Now we have the new
types, the flyer who wants 10 land on
water when be has wheels under air
craft, and the flyer who wants TO work
from land when he has floats under his
aircraft
The airshiD presents greater
quandry than the afrplane does but its
problems will probably be solved dis
the old Army and Navy problems were,
namely By its greatest amount Of use.
Perhaps the Army never should have
given up the airship: but, since II II
returning to It's nse. 1t may benefit by
those great developments the navy
made IN non-rigids during the war
Ill changes are needed to use them i'm
land, make them II they are not
needed, let the types alone. AS for
the rigid airship, the British Navy i'm
proved ii for naval use. Can our
Navy go them one better? The Ger
man Army misdirected the use Of the
.rigld airship Can our Army find It's
Legitimate sphere in overland use
Can II find how to iit it out to per
form those great overland trips which
our continent makes necessary?
---------e- 4---------------
Il can't see that giving the free