THE AVIATION BOOM

[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] 8111,-1 admire the intrepidity of those who, sitting comfort- ably at home and knowing as little of the mechanism of aero- planes and airships as they do of their electric light systems, talk of man's indomitable soul, and of the world's great need to make vicarious sacrifice upon the altars of a Progress which ought never to be printed without a capital " P." Three columns in the morning paper for at least nine days are pro- mised to any man or woman who will fly the Atlantic, and three lines for three days to any man or woman who will perish in attempting to fly the Atlantic. In a few months the Atlantic has engulfed a dozen daring men and one woman, while the Pacific has accounted for half-a-dozen men and one woman. The Pacific adventures have had bare record here, but the fate of Miss Doran has apparently aroused some indignation in America. As for the Atlantic dozen, I do not believe that there is a single reader of these lines who, any more than myself, could write down their names without error. The great flood- of current news washes out their memory as surely as the ocean washed out their lives. I suppose that in days in which a man, woman, or child is killed on our roads every hour, it is almost unseemly to make too much fuss about the elision of a dozen human beings.

Let us ask ourselves seriously whether aviation is worth the bones of a single human being. It appears to be assumed, in a thousand utterances upon the subject, that Science has solved the problem of flight, and that all that remains is to make improvement. We constantly see the suggestion made that the lives of aviators are not given in vain, and that when their machines crash or crumple, the consequent deaths, often by burning, are not spent uselessly because aviation has a great commercial future. A great thought for any day, that,

What if a nice boy or two be burned alive every week if man- kind is to gain commercially ? I suggest here, in the plainest language, that the economic argument has no foundation whatever, that aviation has as yet no sound scientific basis,

and that nothing has been done either with aeroplanes or " airships " that gives the slightest encouragement to the

argument that flying will ever be worth while commercially.

It is perfectly true that in several countries some thousands of passengers and hundreds of tons of cargo are carried through the air in a year, but those interested take care not to remind the public that this alleged commercial aviation is done at public expense. The British tax-payer pays part of the fare of every passenger who flies from London to Paris.

Did railways thus begin, or steamships ? The answer is that railways and steamships made their own way, and were left

to make their own way, on their merits, while commercial aviation would collapse like a gas-bag (i.e., like an airship) if submitted for a single month to economic forces.

The truth is that commercial aviation is subsidized for military reasons, and that the aviation boom is full of promise, not for commerce, and not for progress, but for the most cowardly and hideous forms of warfare.

Let me sum up the facts with regard to the aeroplane. Heavier-than-air machines are sustained in the air by their engines. They must go on, or come down. They are in- herently without stability. Consequently, they are grossly overburdened with fuel at the beginning of their journeys, and that is why we have the ridiculous suggestion that arti- ficial islands should be made in the Atlantic to enable aero- planes to do the thing in hops.

The aeroplane was made possible by the invention of the internal-combustion engine, which demands the employment of highly inflammable fuel. The aeroplane is thus always in terrible danger, for if it crashes it is more than likely that the occupants will be promptly burned alive if they survive the fall. Thus, the other day, the much-vaunted German (com- mercial) system, which is hopefully subsidized for future war reasons, nearly burned several people to death, and as far as I could see only one English newspaper recorded the horrible fact.

The aeroplane, again, is at the mercy of storm and darkness and fog as never seamen were even in the earliest days of navigation. It is ridiculous to compare the aeroplane flights across the Atlantic with the sailing of the ' Santa Maria.' The ' Santa Maria' had not to be packed up and sent home again. The ' Santa Maria ' was not to be sent to the bottom by the mere touch of an accompanying ship. The Santa Maria ' could shorten sail in a storm. Science can promise nothing in the way of elimination of factors which mean death and destruction to aviators. These factors are inherent, and will remain so. If man were naturally a flying animal, and desired to transport goods or passengers conveniently, quickly, and safely, it would be necessary for him to invent the plane surfaces of land and sea which are now, fortunately, at his disposal.

As for the airship, science can promise nothing to those who hope to make safe a big gas-bag filled with hydrogen or helium and carrying by suspension an engined vessel. The more ambitious the gas-bag, the smaller its chance of riding the storm. The terrible fate of the American ' Shenandoah ' and the official report upon it should be read and re-read by every comfortable person who is willing to offer up the lives of other people in a hopeless cause. We may hope that it has been read and re-read by the designers of the two mysterious British airships which, at enormous cost and in great secrecy, are now a-building. Some day, doubtless, they will emerge, and some day a little later they will duly kill those we employ to " navigate " them.

And it should not be forgotten that the airship cannot, any more than the aeroplane, stop her engines. It is true that her gas sustains her in the air, but she can only maintain stability by motion derived from her engines. Thus aeroplanes and airships alike lack inherently the first factor of reasonable safety, and science has not as much as approached the solution of this main problem.

The case of the submarine is a precise parallel. The sub- marine is now an ancient commonplace to the unimaginative mind. Its working is understood by few members of the public who now and then read of the sad fate of a British, American, German, French, or Italian submarine crew. The submarine can cross the Atlantic under the water ; it could carry passengers and cargo across the Atlantic if subsidized, but it is not and never will be an economic instrument. IS is remarkable that, like the air vessel, it is a deadly thing in time of peace. Its only real use is in war, and in war it does horrible things. The British Empire was nearly smashed by the submarine, and the bones of thousands of torpedoed British seamen lie deep in the waters which once defended, but no longer defend, this island. Thus also with the aero- plane and the airship. For commerce, no. For war, yes. That is why rival Air Ministries go the length of deliberately encouraging the sacrifice of gallant boys in peace. That is the secret of the " commercial " air services. It may be that it is a thing inevitable. It may be that it is vain to make protest, but let us at least realize clearly what it is that we are at ; what it is that we are applauding ; what it is that we welcome in the name of progress.—I am, Sir, &c,

LEO CH:1022A MONEY.

Oriel House, The Bishops Avenue, N2.