Aeroplanes and Dirigibles of War
F >>
Frederick A. Talbot >> Aeroplanes and Dirigibles of War
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 | 9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15
The French aeronautical section of the military department
devoted considerable study to this subject, but found the problem
almost insurmount able. Monsieur Loiseau met with the greatest
measure of success, and his system is being practised in the
present campaign. This principle is essentially adapted to
tractor aeroplanes. Forward of the pilot a special position is
reserved for the gunner. A special mounting is provided towards
the prow, and upon the upper face of the body of the machine.
The gun mounting is disposed in such a manner that it is able to
command a wide arc of fire in the vertical plane over the nose of
the machine and more particularly in the downward direction.
The marksman is provided with a special seat, but when he comes
into action he has to stand to manipulate his weapon. The lower
part of his body is protected by a front shield of steel plate, a
fifth of an inch in thickness, while a light railing extending
upon either side and behind enables the gunner to maintain his
position when the aeroplane is banking and climbing. The machine
gun, of the Hotchkiss type, is mounted upon a swivel attached to
a tripod, while the latter is built into the bracing of the car,
so as to ensure a fairly steady gun platform.
While the gun in the hands of a trained marksman may be
manipulated with destructive effect, the drawbacks to the
arrangement are obvious. The gunner occupies a very exposed
position, and, although the bullet-proof shield serves to break
the effects of wind when travelling at high speed which renders
the sighting and training of the weapon extremely difficult, yet
he offers a conspicuous target, more particularly when the enemy
is able to assume the upper position in the air as a result of
superior speed in travelling. The gun, however, may be elevated
to about 60 degrees, which elevation may be accentuated by the
inclination of the aeroplane when climbing, while the facility
with which the weapon may be moved through the horizontal plane
is distinctly favourable.
But the aerial marksman suffers from one very pronounced defect:
he has a severely restricted survey of everything below, since
his vision is interrupted by the planes. The result is that an
enemy who has lost ascendancy of position is comparatively safe
if he is able to fly immediately below his adversary: the
mitrailleuse of the latter cannot be trained upon him. On the
other hand the enemy, if equipped with repeating rifles or
automatic pistols, is able to inflict appreciable damage upon the
craft overhead, the difficulties of firing vertically into the
air notwithstanding.
In the Vickers system, where the propeller is mounted behind the
car, the aeroplane thus operating upon the pusher principle, the
nose of the car is occupied by the arm, which is a rifle calibre
machine gun fitted upon a special mounting. The prow is provided
with an embrasure for the weapon and the latter is so installed
as to command an angle of 30 degrees on all sides of the
longitudinal axis of the machine when in flight. In this
instance the marksman is provided with complete protection on all
sides, inasmuch as his position is in the prow, where the hood of
the fo'c's'le shields him from overhead attack. The gun is
protected by a special shield which moves with the gun barrel.
This shield is provided with mica windows, through which the
gunner is able to sight his arm, so that he is not inconvenienced
in any way by the wind draught.
One shortcoming of such methods of arming an aeroplane will be
observed. Ahead firing only is possible; the weapon cannot be
trained astern, while similarly the line of fire on either
broadside is severely limited. This is one reason why the
machine-gun armament of aerial craft of the heavier-than-air type
has not undergone extensive development. In many instances the
pilot and observer have expressed their preference for repeating
high velocity rifles over any form of fixed gun mounting, and
have recourse to the latter only when the conditions are
extremely favourable to its effective employment.
Efforts are now being made to equip the military type of
aeroplane with both forward and astern firing guns. The urgency
of astern fire has been brought home very vividly. Suppose, for
instance, two hostile aeroplanes, A and B, are in the air. A has
the advantage at first, but B is speedier and rapidly overhauls
A. During the whole period of the overhauling movement the
gun of B can be directed upon A, while the latter, owing to the
arc of training being limited to c d cannot reply. Obviously in
the running fight it would be to the advantage of B, although the
fleeter machine, to keep behind A (position 1), but the latter is
making towards its own lines.
Under these circumstances A must be headed off, so B crowds on
speed to consummate this end. But in the overtaking process B
renders his gun-fire ineffective, inasmuch as B passes beyond the
arc of his gun which is represented by e f. But in so doing B
comes within the firing arc of A (position 9). To minimise this
danger B ascends to a higher level to obtain the paramount
position.
If, however, B were equipped with an astern gun the aeroplane A
would be within the fire of B when the forward gun of the latter
could not be used. Similarly if A were also fitted with an
astern gun it would be able to attack its pursuer the whole
time B was to its rear and in this event, if its gun-fire were
superior, it would be able to keep the latter to a safe distance,
or compel B to manoeuvre into a superior position, which would
entail a certain loss of time.
An astern firing gun would be valuable to B in another sense.
Directly it had passed A or brought the latter within the zone of
its astern gun it could maintain its fire at the most
advantageous range, because owing to its speed it would be able
to dictate the distance over which shots should be exchanged and
if mounted with a superior weapon would be able to keep beyond
the range of A's guns while at the same time it would keep A
within range of its own gun and consequently rake the latter. In
the interests of self-preservation A would be compelled to
change its course; in fact, B would be able to drive it in any
direction he desired, as he would command A's movements by
gun-fire.
The value of combined ahead and astern firing has been
appreciated, but there is one difficulty which at the moment
appears to be insuperable the clearance of the propeller. At the
moment astern-firing, if such it may be called, is maintained by
repeating rifles, but this armament is not to be compared with
machine-gun firing, as the latter with its capacity to pour 400
to 600 shots a minute, is far more deadly, particularly when the
weapon is manipulated by a crack gunner.
Up to the present the offensive armament of aeroplanes has been
confined to light machine guns such as the Hotchkiss, Berthier,
Schwartlose, and Maxim weapons. So far as the arming of
aeroplanes is concerned the indispensable condition is light
weight. With airships this factor is not so vital, the result
being that some dirigibles are mounted with guns, throwing one
pound bursting shells, fitted either with delay action or
percussion fuses, the former for preference. These shells are
given a wide cone of dispersion. Experiments are also being made
with a gun similar to the pom-pom which proved so useful in South
Africa, the gun throwing small shells varying from four to eight
ounces in weight at high velocity and in rapid succession. While
such missiles would not be likely to inflict appreciable damage
upon an armoured aeroplane, they would nevertheless be
disconcerting to the aviators subjected to such fire, and in
aerial combats the successful undermining of the adversary's
moral is of far greater importance than in land operations, since
immediately ascendancy in the artillery operations is attained
the final issue is a matter of moments.
But the most devastating arm which has yet been contrived for
aerial operations is the light machine gun which has recently
been perfected. The one objective with this weapon is to disable
the hostile aircraft's machinery. It fires an armour piercing
projectile which, striking the motor of any aircraft, would
instantly put the latter out of action. The shell has a diameter
of about .75 inch and weighs about four ounces. The gun is a
hybrid of the mitrailleuse and the French "Soixante-quinze,"
combining the firing rapidity of the former with the recoil
mechanism of the latter. This missile has established its
ability to penetrate the defensive armouring of any aeroplane and
the motor of the machine at 1,000 yards' range. This offensive
arm is now being manufactured, so that it is likely to be seen in
the near future as the main armament of aeroplanes.
At the moment widespread efforts are being made in the direction
of increasing the offensive efficiency of aircraft. It is one of
the phases of ingenuity which has been stimulated into activity
as a result of the war.
CHAPTER XII
BATTLES IN THE AIR
Ever since the days of Jules Verne no theme has proved so popular
in fiction as fighting in the air. It was a subject which lent
itself to vivid imagination and spirited picturesque portrayal.
Discussion might be provoked, but it inevitably proved abortive,
inasmuch as there was a complete absence of data based upon
actual experience. The novelist was without any theory: he
avowedly depended upon the brilliance of his imagination. The
critic could only theorise, and no matter how dogmatic his
reasonings, they were certainly as unconvincing as those of the
object of his attack.
But truth has proved stranger than fiction. The imaginative
pictures of the novelist have not only been fulfilled but
surpassed, while the theorising critic has been utterly
confounded. Fighting in the air has become so inseparable from
the military operations of to-day that it occurs with startling
frequency. A contest between hostile aeroplanes, hundreds of
feet above the earth, is no longer regarded as a dramatic,
thrilling spectacle: it has become as matter-of-fact as a bayonet
melee between opposed forces of infantry.
A duel in the clouds differs from any other form of encounter.
It is fought mercilessly: there can be no question of quarter or
surrender. The white flag is no protection, for the simple
reason that science and mechanical ingenuity have failed, so far,
to devise a means of taking an aeroplane in tow. The victor has
no possible method of forcing the vanquished to the ground in his
own territory except driving. If such a move be made there is
the risk that the latter will take the advantage of a critical
opportunity to effect his escape, or to turn the tables. For
these reasons the fight is fought to a conclusive finish.
To aspire to success in these combats waged in the trackless
blue, speed, initiative, and daring are essential. Success falls
to the swift in every instance. An aeroplane travelling at a
high speed, and pursuing an undulating or irregular trajectory is
almostimpossible to hit from the ground, as sighting is so
extremely difficult. Sighting from another machine, which
likewise is travelling rapidly, and pursuing an irregular path,
is far more so. Unless the attacker can approach relatively
closely to his enemy the possibility of hitting him is extremely
remote. Rifle or gun-fire must be absolutely point blank.
When a marauding aeroplane is espied the attacking corsair
immediately struggles for the strategical position, which is
above his adversary. To fire upwards from one aeroplane at
another is virtually impossible, at least with any degree of
accuracy. The marksman is at a hopeless disadvantage. If the
pilot be unaccompanied and entirely dependent upon his own
resources he cannot hope to fire vertically above him, for the
simple reason that in so doing he must relinquish control of his
machine. A rifle cannot possibly be sighted under such
conditions, inasmuch as it demands that the rifleman shall lean
back so as to obtain control of his weapon and to bring it to
bear upon his objective. Even if a long range Mauser or other
automatic pistol of the latest type be employed, two hands are
necessary for firing purposes, more particularly as, under such
conditions, the machine, if not kept under control, is apt to
lurch and pitch disconcertingly.
Even a colleague carried for the express purpose of aggression is
handicapped. If he has a machinegun, such as a Maxim or a
mitrailleuse, it is almost out of the question to train it
vertically. Its useful vertical training arc is probably limited
to about 80 degrees, and at this elevation the gunner has to
assume an extremely uncomfortable position, especiauy upon an
aeroplane, where, under the best of circumstances, he is somewhat
cramped.
On the other hand the man in the aeroplane above holds the
dominating position. He is immediately above his adversary and
firing may be carried out with facility. The conditions are
wholly in his favour. Sighting and firing downwards, even if
absolutely vertically, imposes the minimum physical effort, with
the result that the marksman is able to bring a steadier aim upon
his adversary. Even if the machine be carrying only the pilot,
the latter is able to fire upon his enemy without necessarily
releasing control of his motor, even for a moment.
If he is a skilled sharpshooter, and the exigencies demand, he
can level, sight, and fire his weapon with one hand, while under
such circumstances an automatic self-loading pistol can be
trained upon the objective with the greatest ease. If the
warplane be carrying a second person, acting as a gunner, the
latter can maintain an effective rifle fusillade, and, at the
same time, manipulate his machine-gun with no great effort,
maintaining rifle fire until the pilot, by manoeuvring, can
enable the mitrailleuse or Maxim to be used to the greatest
advantage.
Hence the wonderful display of tactical operations when two
hostile aeroplanes sight one another. The hunted at first
endeavours to learn the turn of speed which his antagonist
commands. If the latter is inferior, the pursued can either
profit from his advantage and race away to safety, or at once
begin to manoeuvre for position. If he is made of stern stuff,
he attempts the latter feat without delay. The pursuer, if he
realises that he is out classed in pace, divines that his quarry
will start climbing if he intends to show fight, so he begins to
climb also.
Now success in this tactical move will accrue to the machine
which possesses the finest climbing powers, and here again, of
course, speed is certain to count. But, on the other hand, the
prowess of the aviator--the human element once more--must not be
ignored. The war has demonstrated very convincingly that the
personal quality of the aviator often becomes the decisive
factor.
A spirited contest in the air is one of the grimmest and most
thrilling spectacles possible to conceive, and it displays the
skill of the aviator in a striking manner. Daring sweeps,
startling wheels, breathless vol-planes, and remarkable climbs
are carried out. One wonders how the machine can possibly
withstand the racking strains to which it is subjected. The
average aeroplane demands space in which to describe a turn, and
the wheel has to be manipulated carefully and dexterously, an
operation requiring considerable judgment on the part of the
helmsman.
But in an aerial duel discretion is flung to the winds. The
pilot jambs his helm over in his keen struggle to gain the
superior position, causing the machine to groan and almost to
heel over. The stem stresses of war have served to reveal the
perfection of the modern aeroplane together with the remarkable
strength of its construction. In one or two instances, when a
victor has come to earth, subsequent examination has revealed the
enormous strains to which the aeroplane has been subjected. The
machine has been distorted; wires have been broken--wires which
have succumbed to the enormous stresses which have been imposed
and have not been snapped by rifle fire. One well-known British
airman, who was formerly a daring automobilist, confided to me
that a fight in the air "is the finest reliability trial for an
aeroplane that was ever devised!"
In these desperate struggles for aerial supremacy the one party
endeavours to bring his opponent well within the point-blank
range of his armament: the other on his part strives just as
valiantly to keep well out of reach. The latter knows fully well
that his opponent is at a serious disadvantage when beyond
point-blank range, for the simple reason that in sighting the
rifle or automatic pistol, it is difficult, if not impossible
while aloft, to judge distances accurately, and to make the
correct allowances for windage.
If, however, the dominating aviator is armed with a machine gun
he occupies the superior position, because he can pour a steady
hail of lead upon his enemy. The employment of such a weapon
when the contest is being waged over friendly territory has many
drawbacks. Damage is likely to be infficted among innocent
observers on the earth below; the airman is likely to bombard his
friends. For this very reason promiscuous firing, in the hope
of a lucky shot finding a billet in the hostile machine, is not
practised. Both parties appear to reserve their fire until they
have drawn within what may be described as fighting distance,
otherwise point blank range, which may be anything up to 300
yards.
Some of the battles between the German and the French or British
aeroplanes have been waged with a total disregard of the
consequences. Both realise that one or the other must perish,
and each is equally determined to triumph. It is doubtful
whether the animosity between the opposing forces is manifested
anywhere so acutely as in the air. In some instances the combat
has commenced at 300 feet or so above the earth, and has been
fought so desperately, the machines climbing and endeavouring to
outmanoeuvre each other, that an altitude of over 5,000 feet has
been attained before they have come to close grips.
The French aviator is nimble, and impetuous: the German aviator
is daring, but slow in thought: the British airman is a master of
strategy, quick in thought, and prepared to risk anything to
achieve his end. The German airman is sent aloft to reconnoitre
the enemy and to communicate his information to his headquarters.
That is his assigned duty and he performs it mechanically,
declining to fight, as the welfare of his colleagues below is
considered to be of more vital importance than his personal
superiority in an aerial contest. But if he is cornered he
fights with a terrible and fatalistic desperation.
The bravery of the German airmen is appreciated by the Allies.
The French flying-man, with his traditional love for individual
combat, seeks and keenly enjoys a duel. The British airman
regards such a contest as a mere incident in the round of
duty, but willingly accepts the challenge when it is offered. It
is this manifestation of what may be described as acquiescence in
any development that enabled the British flying corps, although
numerically inferior, to gain its mastery of the air so
unostentatiously and yet so completely.
All things considered an aeroplane duel is regarded as a fairly
equal combat. But what of a duel between an aeroplane and a
dirigible? Which holds the advantage? This question has not
been settled, at any rate conclusively, but it is generally
conceded that up to a certain point the dirigible is superior.
It certainly offers a huge and attractive target, but rifle fire
at its prominent gas-bag is not going to cause much havoc. The
punctures of the envelope may represent so many vents through
which the gas within may effect a gradual escape, but
considerable time must elapse before the effect of such a
bombardment becomes pronounced in its result, unless the gas-bag
is absolutely riddled with machine gun-fire, when descent must be
accelerated.
On the other hand, it is to be presumed that the dirigible is
armed. In this event it has a distinct advantage. It has a
steady gun-platform enabling the weapons of offence to be trained
more easily and an enhanced accuracy of,fire to be obtained. In
order to achieve success it is practically imperative that an
aeroplane should obtain a position above the dirigible, but the
latter can ascend in a much shorter space of time, because its
ascent is vertical, whereas the aeroplane must describe a spiral
in climbing. Under these circumstances it is relatively easy for
the airship to outmanoeuvre the aeroplane in the vertical plane,
and to hold the dominating position.
But even should the aeroplane obtain the upper position it is not
regarded with fear. Some of the latest Zeppelins have a machine
gun mounted upon the upper surface of the envelope, which can
be trained through 360 degrees and elevated to about 80 degrees
vertical. Owing to the steady gun platform offered it holds
command in gun-fire, so that the aeroplane, unless the aviator is
exceptionally daring, will not venture within the range of
the dirigible. It is stated, however, that this upper gun has
proved unsatisfactory, owing to the stresses and strains imposed
upon the framework of the envelope of the Zeppelin during firing,
and it has apparently been abandoned. The position, however, is
still available for a sniper or sharpshooter.
The position in the sky between two such combatants is closely
analogous to that of a torpedo boat and a Dreadnought. The
latter, so long as it can keep the former at arm's, or rather
gun's, distance is perfectly safe. The torpedo boat can only
aspire to harass its enemy by buzzing around, hoping that a lucky
opportunity will develop to enable it to rush in and to launch
its torpedo. It is the same with the aeroplane when arrayed
against a Zeppelin. It is the mosquito craft of the air.
How then can a heavier-than-air machine triumph over the unwieldy
lighter-than-air antagonist? Two solutions are available. If it
can get above the dirigible the adroplane may bring about the
dirigible's destruction by the successful launch of a bomb. The
detonation of the latter would fire the hydrogen within the
gas-bag or bags, in which event the airship would fall to earth a
tangled wreck. Even if the airship were inflated with a
non-inflammable gas--the Germans claim that their Zeppelins now
are so inflated--the damage wrought by the bomb would be so
severe as to destroy the airship's buoyancy, and it would be
forced to the ground.
The alternative is very much more desperate. It involves ramming
the dirigible. This is undoubtedly possible owing to the speed
and facile control of the aeroplane, but whether the operation
would be successful remains to be proved. The aeroplane would be
faced with such a concentrated hostile fire as to menace its own
existence--its forward rush would be frustrated by the dirigible
just as a naval vessel parries the ramming tactics of an enemy by
sinking the latter before she reaches her target, while if it did
crash into the hull of the dirigible, tearing it to shreds,
firing its gas, or destroying its equilibrium, both protagonists
would perish in the fatal dive to earth. For this reason ramming
in mid-air is not likely to be essayed except when the situation
is desperate.
What happens when two aeroplanes meet in dire combat in mid-air
and one is vanquished? Does the unfortunate vessel drop to earth
like a stone, or does it descend steadily and reach the ground
uninjured? So far as actual experience has proved, either one of
the foregoing contingencies may happen. In one such duel the
German aeroplane was observed to start suddenly upon a vol-plane
to the ground. Its descending flight carried it beyond the lines
of the Allies into the territory of its friends. Both came to
the conclusion that the aviator had effected his escape. But
subsequent investigation revealed the fact that a lucky bullet
from the Allies' aeroplane had lodged in the brain of the German
pilot, killing him instantly. At the moment when Death over took
him the aviator had set his plane for the descent to the ground,
and the machine came to earth in the manner of a glider.
But in other instances the descent has been far more tragic. The
aeroplane, deprived of its motive power, has taken the deadly
headlong dive to earth. It has struck the ground with terrific
violence, burying its nose in the soil, showing incidentally that
a flying machine is an indifferent plough, and has shattered
itself, the debris soaked with the escaping fuel becoming
ignited. In any event, after such a fall the machine is certain
to be a wreck. The motor may escape damage, in which event it
is salvaged, the machine subsequently being purposely sacrificed
to the flames, thereby rendering it no longer available to the
enemy even if captured. In many instances the hostile fire has
smashed some of the stays and wires, causing the aeroplane to
lose its equilibrium, and sending it to earth in the manner of
the proverbial stone, the aviators either being dashed to pieces
or burned to death.
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 | 9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15