Douglas daily dispatch., 1926-01-02
Dirigble Disaster.
Part of Price aPid
tConslpued trom Page onel


midwest flight.
THE commanding officer of the
Shenandoah did not at any time ex-
press opposition to, or reluctance in
undertaking the flight beginning
September 2, on the ground of pos
sible adverse weather conditions"
The object of the flight was held
to have been three-fold; to test the
Ford mooring mast at Detroit, to
continue training of personnel and
to comply with many requests. re-A
ceived from citizens OF that section
of the country that sucn a flight be
made.
The court declared that Commander
Lansdowne was 'entire1y justified in
starting the flight at the time chosen
as the weather maps and reports in
dicated nothing which would have
rendered it unsafe or inadvisable."
AS to the failure of Commander
Lansdowne to change the course OF
his ship when advised to by the
aerologist on board some time before
the breakup, the. court said subse..
quent events showed that such a
change would have been advisable,
hut added:
'"The commanding officers decision
to maintain his course was a mat
ter for his decision only, was made
on his best Judgment after discus
sion and consideration and was based
on the facts 4and conditions as then
known or observed. Any error of
Judgment in this decision was en-
tirely negligent of blame.
After describing in detail how the
Shenandoah broke up, the court as
serted that during all of this period
Commander Lansdowne showed skill,
courage and fine qualities of leader
ship"
"AIl other officers and men showed
an intimate knowledge of their
duties, fine discipline and morale and
great courage" it continued.
1.-THE handling of the forward sec
tion of the ship as a free balloon
by Lieutenant Commander Rosendahl
and Lieutenant Mayer was particu-
Iarly deserving of commendaMon.
Taking all of the testimony of the
experts and survivors together, the
court said it justified "the opinion
that gas pressure due to altitude and
rate of rise may we'll have reached
some damage to structure" While
the exact nature or extent of this
damage was not ascertainable, it
was described as probably mot suf-
ficiently to have endangered the ship
under normal operation conditions"
THE final destruction of the ship"
the opinion continued, was due pri-
marily to large, unbalanced, exter-
nal, aerodynamic forces arising from
high velocity air currents"
AS to the moot question of para
chutes for the crew the court held
that the use of the present types OF
parachutes was inadvisable as the
wearing of them by the crew would
"add to the general risks and haz-
ards of handling such ships
1t recommended, however, that
every effort be made to develop
type that could be worn in an emer-
gency with undue handicap in the
performance of duty.
Other conclusions reached by the
court were:
The Shenandoah represented the
best practice in design and structure
of the period building.
The proportionately greater weight
for structure and fittings of the
Shenandoah resulted in increased
strength.
The damage to the Shenandoah due
to breaking away from the Lake
hurst mast was fully repaired and no
loss of strength resulted.
The officers and crew of the Shen-
andoah were skilled and competent
operators of rigid airships.
The operation of rigid airships
overland as well as over the sea is
a proper and lawful function of the
navy.
None of the. structural changes
made in the ship, such as the re-
moval of one engine and the in
stanation of water recovery sys-
tenn were contributary to the loss of
the ship.