can manoeuvre to remain in billiard phraseology, "snookered" so far as the gondolas and their armament are concerned. Beyond the above, the speed of the aeroplane is approximately double that of the airship, whereas the speed of a fast destroyer is not more than 25 or 30 per cent, superior to that of a fast and heavily-armoured cruiser or battleship of modern type, and even this advantage is lost in heavy weather.
It will be realised in considering the above facts that the whole analogy breaks down—the continued existence of the battleship or cruiser in the face of torpedo-craft does not in the least degree imply or involve the continuance of the airship as a logical probability.
September 11th, 1914.
§ 6. Aeroplane and Dirigible in Armed Conflict. Having in the preceding sections devoted some attention to contrasting the respective merits and limitations of the aeroplane and airship or dirigible, and to disposing of the false analogy so frequently drawn between the air forces and the Fleet, we pass to the consideration in greater detail of their mutual relationship in matters of attack and defence. Firstly, it is evident that the attack will essentially be on the side of the aeroplane; the dirigible can do no more than act on the defensive. The great disparity of speed alone, whatever armament the airship may carry, settles this definitely; it is within the power of the aeroplane to choose precisely when, how, and where it will engage in conflict. The dirigible, like the submarine, is too slow to run the enemy to earth or to bring him to bay, and, to its disadvantage, cannot, like the submarine, make itself invisible and attack by stealth. Beyond this, its quarry (the aeroplane) is of small size, often scarcely visible at a mile or two distance, and when not actually in the air can be either concealed
13
