Beck, U. S. A.)
[8]
Whenever science discovers anything new or startling, such discovery is
immediately tested by practical men of commercial or professional life
to ascertain whether or not it can be applied to their business or
profession. In civil life these tests are to determine whether or not
this new discovery can be applied to cheapen production or benefit
mankind in any other way. In the Army two tests are always applied:
first, to determine whether or not the discovery can be used to kill the
other fellow and, second, to determine whether or not it can be used to
prevent the other fellow from killing us. These are the tests which have
been applied to the aeroplane by the military. Let us see how these
heavier-than-air machines have responded to these tests.
Can aeroplanes be used to kill the other fellow? Our problem here is not
ethical but practical; it is not based on the determinations of the
Hague peace convention, but upon the actual capabilities of the machine
from a physical standpoint, considered apart from humanitarian
principles. In other words we do not discuss whether or not it is
ethically right to use aeroplanes aggressively, but whether or not
aeroplanes are mechanically capable of such use. The Army does not
disturb itself with ethical questions until they become rules of
International Law, and then it only considers them as being binding in
their actual observance under the conditions imposed by such law.
Meanwhile the Army, by preparation in time of peace, seeks to gain the
fullest possible measure of information along the lines of investigation
necessitated by the mechanical side of the question.
Considered from this standpoint, the question is repeated: can
aeroplanes be used to kill the other fellow? Well, where may we expect
to meet this other fellow? He will be armed, of course. He will be on
the ground, on the water, or in the air. Wherever he may be we must get
close enough to see him, while we must remain far enough away to keep
him from having a decidedly better chance of hitting us than we have of
hitting him. If he is on the ground or on the water we must fly over
him. If he is in the air we must manoeuvre our air craft so as to gain
an advantageous position over him; one where we can shoot our machine
guns or rifles while he is unable to use his similar weapons against us.
That is where skill as an aviator and superiority of speed, climbing
powers, and control of the machine will play a prominent part in
deciding the supremacy of the air.
From the standpoint of the location of the enemy the problem can be
reduced to two cases: one, when the enemy is on the ground or on the
water, and the other when he is in the air. Against him in the first
case we must use projectiles dropped from on high. These may be
shrapnel, explosive shells or simply large, thinly encased masses of
high explosive, depending on whether we are attacking individuals or
animals in groups; gun emplacements, bridges, etc., or important
strategical or tactical points such as arsenals, barracks, or parts of a
defensive line.
Against the enemy in the skies we must use some small machine gun or
rifle, in an endeavour to brush him aside and allow our own
information-gathering aeroplanes to perform their functions unmolested.
But we are not progressing. Can aeroplanes be used to kill the other
fellow? Well, assuming him to be located as we have assumed him to be,
there are several other questions which must be answered before we can
clinch the main issue. Can a man act as aviator and at the same time
manipulate the mechanism that may be found necessary to the killing of
the other fellow? If not, can an aeroplane be built that will carry at
least two men, one as aviator and the other as manipulator of the
death-dealing apparatus, and, at the same time, carry enough extra
weight, i. e., fuel, to keep aloft long enough to accomplish the
necessary flight and also carry the projectiles and dropping device?
Yes. The two passengers may be estimated to weigh three hundred pounds.
The dropping device may be estimated to weigh not to exceed fifty
pounds. At least three known types of aeroplane carry six hundred and
fifty pounds of weight for a continuous flight of two hundred miles in
length. That leaves two hundred and fifty pounds that can be devoted to
the carrying of projectiles.
So far the coast seems clear, but a small storm appears in the offing;
can this two hundred and fifty pounds, or any considerable part of it,
be dropped from a moving aeroplane without disturbing its equilibrium to
such an extent as to render the machine unmanageable? Any weight can be
dropped from the centre of lift without disturbing the equilibrium.
Thirty-eight pounds have been dropped from one machine from a point
three feet in front of the centre of lift without disturbing the
equilibrium.
Admitting that the necessary weight can be carried and can be dropped,
we next encounter the highly important question, what can we hit from a
height of, say, three thousand five hundred feet? At this point the
problem becomes one of pure fire control, and is directly analogous to
target practice in our sea-coast defences. Since the aeroplane is moving
forward at a definite rate of speed at the instant of dropping the
projectile, it follows that there is an initial velocity given to the
projectile. This velocity is dependent upon the forward speed of the
machine and varies with it. Gravity exerts an influence on the drop of
the projectile, which influence increases the speed of drop as the
altitude from which the shell is dropped increases. The direction and
force of the wind currents through which the projectile must fall are
variable and they all exert influences tending to cause the projectile
to swerve from its original course to a degree dependent upon their
strength and the thickness of each stratum of air. The size of the
target and, if it be animals or men, the direction and rate of movement
of the target, are all factors to a successful hit.
Practice has shown us that the principal factors are the forward speed
of the machine and the altitude. The variations due to wind currents
through which the projectile must pass in falling are negligible. The
only targets to be chosen will be sufficiently large and immobile to
warrant an assumption that they can be hit. Aerial target practice will
never degenerate to the sniping of individuals. It will be directed
against ships, small boats, armies, cavalry, quartermaster and field
artillery trains and similar large bodies of men or animals, or against
the strategical and tactical points alluded to above.
The problem then simmers itself down to a more or less accurate solution
of a method for determining the forward speed of the machine and its
altitude, which, with a suitable set of tables and suitable mechanical
devices for releasing the projectile at the proper instant, will produce
a reasonably good target practice.
For some time the solution of the forward speed of an aeroplane seemed
impracticable. It has now been solved by the simple use of a telescope,
mounted on a gimbal so as to maintain its horizontal position and
movable vertically along a graduated arc. By setting the telescope to
read an angle of forty-five degrees and snapping a stop watch on an
object which lies in the line of sight of the telescope produced, and
then swinging the telescope so as to point vertically downward, we can,
by snapping the stop watch a second time as the sighting point again
comes into the field of vision, ascertain the exact time it has taken
the machine to cover the distance measured by forty-five degrees of arc.
Our altitude is known by reading a barometer. We then have two known
angles of a right triangle and one known side, viz., the altitude. By a
set of tables, already made out, we can determine our forward speed.
Now, all of this is done as a preliminary to actually dropping the
projectile. After we have the forward speed and the altitude we simply
consult another set of previously prepared tables and read from those
tables an angle. This angle shows the proper point of drop to hit
another point on the ground somewhere in advance of the aeroplane. After
picking the angle out of the table we set our telescope to read the
known angle and, when the line of sight, produced, is on the objective,
we release or "trip" the projectile. This has actually been done. Now I
ask you the question, can an aeroplane be used to kill the other fellow?
Can an aeroplane be used to prevent the other fellow from killing us? Of
course it is much superior to Santa Ana's mule for purposes of rapid
departure from the scene of hostilities, but that is hardly the test we
apply. It is, on the other hand, inferior as a shield to the ordinary
breastworks constructed by armies in the field, but, again, that is not
precisely the test to be applied.
The most effective way in which we can keep the other fellow from
killing us is to find out where he is, what he is doing and how he
proposes to accomplish his–to us reprehensible, to him laudable–object.
Accordingly we apply the information test to the aeroplane. Can we use
it to gather information of the enemy, his lines of communication, his
lines of defences, his probable lines of advance or retreat, his rail
and water communications, his artillery positions and gun emplacements,
and a host of other things, all of which tend to produce success or
failure in battle? In other words, can we use the aeroplane to prevent
the enemy from killing us?
In order to make use of information there are two distinct steps which
must be taken: First, it must be gathered; second, it must be
communicated to the proper officers for transmission to the Commanding
General in the field. No information is of value until it is
communicated to an officer competent to act upon it.
This problem of information is then divided into two parts: the getting,
and the transmitting. In getting information we must at once settle just
how far the aeroplane will be available. There is a certain class of
information, i. e., that concerning the road beds over which an army
must move, the fords it must cross, the bridges it must travel over, the
hills and valleys that might afford shelter for an offensive force or
may be used defensively, the location, extent, thickness and amount of
underbrush in woods, and much other, intimate, local knowledge that is
of great and indispensable value to a commanding officer in the field.
Such information can be gathered only from the ground. An aeroplane
could be of use in such gathering only as a means for transporting the
topographical sketchers quickly from point to point, allowing them
sufficient time to do their work before again taking the air. Also an
aeroplane would be of but little use in locating small bodies of the
enemy.
Where the aeroplane would begin to be of use, however, is in the
locating of the main body of the enemy, his defences, his artillery
positions, in determining the outline of his position, the natural or
artificial boundaries which cover and protect his flanks, his main
arteries of supply, the strong and weak points of his line of defence,
etc.
To accomplish these results the aeroplane must fly at a sufficient
elevation to render difficult the hitting of a vital part of the machine
or the aviator by hostile rifle or artillery fire. While the modern
rifle in use in our army will fire a ball about three thousand five
hundred yards straight in the air, it is generally accepted among
aviators that an aeroplane would be practically safe, save from a chance
shot, at three thousand five hundred feet. Of course there is a large
chance that if enough rifles are directed at an aeroplane for a long
enough time the machine or operator would be hit, at this altitude, but
war is not a game of croquet, and the men who would man these machines
in war would stand ready to take the risks demanded by the exigencies of
the service.
The proper machine to act as a gatherer of information is one that can
carry a pilot, passenger, and wireless outfit. It is proposed to equip
all information-gathering machines with wireless and to this end a
special set has been devised and is being tested out at the U. S. Army
Signal Corps Aviation School. That the wireless will be a success there
is no doubt, for certain simple experiments with crude apparatus have
been already tried out with remarkable success.
I have said that military aviators propose to fly at about three
thousand five hundred feet while seeking information. Perhaps this will
be increased to about five thousand feet if it can be demonstrated that
the reconnaissance officer can clearly discern, from that height, the
points which are of military value. This officer will be aided by
powerful field glasses, a camera and sketching case, and he will have at
hand a wireless outfit which he can use in sending back whatever he may
ascertain of value. Upon reporting back to the officer who sent him out
he will turn over his sketches and photographs. It is thought that in
this way very complete and valuable data will be available.
From an aeroplane or balloon the ground presents a very different
appearance than it does from our usual man's eye view. It takes time and
practice to determine just what the different strange-looking objects
are, let alone to determine relative sizes and distances. On this
account we have concluded that the reconnaissance officer and pilot must
both be trained at the same time. Since this is the case and since there
is a decided mental and physical strain connected with long-continued
flight, we have gone further and concluded that both officers who fly in
the aeroplane must be pilots and both must be trained in reconnaissance
duty. In this way each can relieve or "spell" the other.
There is much more to this than the mere acting as an aerial chauffeur.
To be a successful military aviator a man must be an excellent
cross-country flier. He must be an expert topographer or sketcher, he
must understand photography and he must be a practical wireless
operator, as well as have a knowledge of the theory of wireless. Above
all, he must be trained in military art, that most elusive of all
subjects. By that we mean that he must understand the military
significance of what he sees, he must understand the powers,
limitations, and functions of the three great arms–infantry, cavalry,
and field artillery, whether used in combination or separately; he must
know major and minor tactics to determine the worth or uselessness of a
position; he must be able quickly and accurately to reduce his
observations to a written report in order that the information gained
may be of immediate use to his chief.
For all of these reasons we have concluded that we must rely on
commissioned officers of the regular army or organised militia, trained
in time of peace to fulfil their functions in time of war. We can not
place dependence on civilian aviators, for they have not had the
training along the highly technical and specialised lines that are
necessary. We can not rely on enlisted men of the army, for the same
reason.
There is another class of fliers that will, undoubtedly, be of use in
war time. These are the men to drive fast-flying, single-passenger
machines for speedy messenger service between detached bodies of troops,
or to drive the heavy ammunition or food-carrying aeroplanes to relieve
a besieged place. These may well be chosen from the ranks of the
civilian volunteers who would, without doubt, flock to our colours and
standards at the whistle of a hostile bullet. There is plenty of room in
war time for all of the aviators we can scrape together, be they
civilian or military.
Two new types of aeroplane have been alluded to in the last, preceding
paragraph; the fast-flying, quick-climbing racer and the slow-going,
heavy-weight carrier. We are of opinion that there should be three types
in all for military purposes. Of greatest importance and in greatest
numbers we should have the middle-class machines; those capable of
staying in the air for at least three hours of continuous flight, while
carrying two men and one hundred and fifty pounds extra, of either
wireless apparatus or machine gun and ammunition. Such a machine will
climb two thousand feet in ten minutes, will travel above fifty miles an
hour on the level, is perfectly easy to manage, and forms the back-bone
of the aerial fleet.
One of these craft acting as a convoy, armed with a Benet-Mercier
machine gun weighing about twenty pounds and with ample ammunition,
could sweep the skies clean of hostile aeroplanes, while its mate,
carrying reconnaissance apparatus and two officers, could gather the
information which the Commanding General desires. The speed machine is
for use as described above. The weight-carrying machine can carry about
six thousand rounds of ammunition at a trip. Rifle cartridges weigh
about one hundred pounds per twelve hundred rounds. This machine could
carry enough emergency rations on one trip to subsist five hundred men
for a day. It could make a speed of forty miles per hour with this
weight and, in the course of a day, could, undoubtedly, make several
trips of succour, provided the sending point were within fifty miles of
the besieged place which is the usual case.
And now, can an aeroplane be used to prevent the other fellow from
killing us?
This is a very fascinating subject as a whole. The field opened is
almost limitless; but the greatest idea of all is that through this
conquest of the air we are approaching more nearly to that much
longed-for era of universal peace. Through the aeroplane and dirigible,
man is effacing artificial barriers; he is bringing the rich closer to
the poor, the powerful closer to the weak. No longer can unwise and
selfish potentates, be they royal, democratic, or financial, send forth
their armies to fight while themselves resting safe and secure at home.
The king in his palace or the money baron on his private yacht is in as
much danger from these air craft as is the high private in the muddy
trenches at the front. That touches the selfish side of things. At any
rate, while the aeroplane will, probably, do more to promote peace than
has any previous discovery, we of the Army are still busily engaged in
finding out just what it will do in war.