March 30, 1916 
LAND & WATER 
Aircraft Policy 
13 
And the Zeppelin Menace from the National Standpoint 
By F. W. Lanchester 
In this and the previous article, published last week, 
an endeavour has been made to put be/ore the public 
a dispassionate account of the reasoiis, facts ■ and 
circumstances which have led to the present day non- 
military ' employment of aircraft in warfare as 
typically exemplified by the Zeppelin raids. The 
writer has endeavoured to bring the question of 
aircraft raids into their true perspective, both as to 
their relative material importance as acts of war, and 
. to their moral importance, as founded on the theories 
of German military writers, as a means of causing 
embarrassment to an enemy Government. 
IN my " Aircraft in Warfare " I have pointed out 
that there are adequate reasons for regarding the 
aeroplane, or the flying machine, as being, from 
a military standpoint, the mainstay of the 
Aeronautical Arm ; the airship, even though it may be 
of use as an auxiliary', does not require to be taken into 
consideration when we are dealing with aircraft in its 
fighting capacity. The reasons given are to-day valid ; as 
a lighting machine the aeroplane is supreme. 
It is possible that the large rigid airship of the future 
may, in comparison with the aeroplane (also of the future) 
be at a less disadvantage than it is to-day. Even if this 
be so the fact as stated remains a truth. We have, 
however, a new situation to deal with : the fabric of 
international law has gone " by the board " and we 
have to consider facts relating to the use of the airship 
which are not of a military character, at least according 
to the time honoured ideas of military duties. 
Hostile Air Attacks 
The popular clamour to-day that the civilian 
population of a country have a divine right to be pro- 
tected from hostile air attack has no more foundation 
in fact than any rights they may have possessed in the 
time of the Saxons against raiding by sea. It may prove 
possible to defend the whole country from air attack in 
future warfare, just as it has been found possible to pro- 
tect our shores by means of our Navy, but this does not 
follow as a logical conclusion. In the warfare of the 
future the whole area of a country is liable to attack, 
and, with countries so closely situated as in Europe, the 
most carefully elaborated defence may not prove im- 
penetrable. In other words the civil population may have 
to accept the new situation and get acclimatised to it. 
Naturally in the future every reasonable effort, every 
possible effort, must be made to avoid or to minimise a 
risk of this magnitude ; I merely point out that no one 
has offered any proof that, in warfare between countries 
within such short lange of one another as the leading 
Powers of Europe, there is any real certaint}^ that im- 
numity can be secured, even though our aeronautical 
ascendency within our own borders may be unquestioned. 
There is a great deal of misapprehension as to the 
real arguments underlying the question of aeronautical 
defence. For example, the Government are blamed, the 
" experts " are blamed, and everybody concerned is 
blamed, for not having foreseen that the Zeppelin airship 
could not be attacked on a dark night effectively either 
bv counter-aircraft artillery or by aeroplane "patrols. 
This is not. correct. It was beheved that by night a 
Zep}K'lin airshiyj would be unable to locate. any objective 
of military value,, and none of the events which have 
taken place have proved the contrary. 
what was not foreseen was something far wider than 
any question of Zeppehn behaviour. It was tlie broad 
fact that the whole fabric of international law would hi- 
jettisoned by the enemy, and in this respect the naval raid 
on Scarborough is exactly on all fours with the raids 
by aircraft on London or the Eastern and Midland Coun- 
ties. We relied on a cliea]) jiiece of jjaper to ])rotect us 
instead of an expensive engineering outfit and military 
organisation. 
At Scarborough, for example, a few heavy naval guns 
mounted at any suitable jjoint a few miljs outside the 
town would have rendered the bombardment of the town 
by the enemy fleet too dangerous to be undertaken. 
Nobody would lay any blame on the Government, or on 
any particular Government, for the neglect to furnish 
such defences. We may admit now that we were mis- 
taken, but it must be recalled that this fabric of interna- 
national law (by ^yhich 99 people out of 100 in this country 
and ill many other parts of Europe thought they were 
protected) has been growing up for the last half century 
and more, and neither the Government nor the military 
or naval authorities can be looked upon as to blame, 
if reliance has been placed on these accepted international 
obligations. Any man prior to the War who had sug- 
gested that there was a need to make provision in the 
form of guns and other armaments for such breaches 
of international decorum as we ha\e witnessed would 
have been generally voted a madman. 
Where the Blame Lies 
We must therefore endeavour to be sufficiently 
level-headed in the matter of air attack to realise that 
the failure of the proverbial " swarm of hornets " is not 
a matter for which the experts are to blame, or the 
Government are to blame, it is a matter for which the 
public and notably the humanitarians of the last two 
generations are jointly responsible. The main principles 
have been accepted by all political parties since the 
middle of last century^backed by such a force of public 
opinion that scarcely a voice has been raised to denounce 
the danger to which these international agreements 
render our country hable. Unfortunately the country 
which has been bombed fully justiiies the prognostica- 
tions of the Bernhardi school. The British public goes 
off its head and blames experts. Government and every- 
body else within reach, for that which neither Govern- 
ment nor experts are any more to blame than the man in 
the street. 
It may be said definitely that the change in the 
situation is not due to any failing in the prognostications 
of those who have been best qualified to judge on the 
military or technical merits of aircraft and aircraft 
defences, but wholly and solely on the World Illusion, I 
would say ;:/ic Great Illusion (as distinct from Mr. AngcU's 
Great Illusion) that international agreements on the 
conduct of war are worth the paper they are written on. 
The theory of Bernhardi and the German school of 
thought on the question of attack on the civil population 
(in contrast to that which is known as a military objec- 
tive) is that although no great material harm is done, the 
moral of the people is so shaken as to bring to bear an 
adverse and demoralising influence on their own (Govern- 
ment. In other words the intention is to shake the 
nervous system of an enemy, just as a boxer may in- 
capacitate his adversary by a blow in the region of the 
solar ple.xus, and so bring about a national disorganisation 
which will be reflected in an infirmity of purpose on the 
part of this Government to the detriment of the efficiency 
of his military and naval services. 
Zeppehn Bombing 
Now it is clear that if from a national point ot \iew 
the material damage done by hostile air raids were of a 
substantial character, that is to say, if twelve months' 
experience of Zeppelin bombing amounted in the aggre- 
gate to a measurable percentage of the total resources of 
the country, it would be quite reasonable and proper that 
strong military measures should be taken to avert the 
danger or threat. If such were the case, and the damage 
were great from the point of view of the material 
injury, apart from any question of injured moral ; and 
if the Government were to neglect to take appropriate 
steps, and pressure were brought to bear on tliem bv 
public clamour, this would not constitute of necessity anv 
fnllilnient or justification for the theory propounded by 
the German writers. If, however, the damage from a 
national point of view be small (to the extent of being 
N-irtually negligible) then, if any public action results iu 
