{"id":921,"date":"2016-09-10T19:18:32","date_gmt":"2016-09-10T23:18:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/zrsthemovie.com\/?page_id=921"},"modified":"2020-11-19T17:09:11","modified_gmt":"2020-11-19T22:09:11","slug":"ground-handling-evolution","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/zrsthemovie.com\/?page_id=921","title":{"rendered":"Ground Handling Evolution"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"gh-1\"Ground handling of airships, like their ancestral balloons, was originally based on manpower alone.\u00a0 Larger ships meant more manpower, with its associated labor costs. One of the earliest\u00a0developments in handling\u00a0came from Count Ferdinand Von Zeppelin, who commissioned construction of floating hangars (shown at left below, Manzell #1 for LZ-1).<\/span><\/p>\n

\"gh2\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Used for several ships, the hangars could weathervane so the ship and hangar were automatically aligned for egress. Tide and current were not so much a problem on the Lake of Constance but the line-handling boats were somewhat difficult to coordinate. The concept was abandoned and the hangar moved ashore, but the need to align with the wind remained.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"gh3\"Years later the American Navy got around to copying the floating hangar concept. From the few flights and handling of Pensacola\u2019s Dirigible, Non-Rigid #1 and \u201cDN-3\u201d Americans learned the same lessons. \u00a0The hangar was moved ashore. (Above extreme right, the hangar showing damage from a 1922 hurricane. Note the many roof vents, to insure a hydrogen filled non-rigid could be ripped safely inside.)<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"gh4\"The ability to weathervane so ship and shed were aligned with the wind was so desirable a complex rotating shed was constructed near Berlin (1910 photo, above left).\u00a0 This idea evolved into a twin rotating shed during WWI (above, center) and eventually a plan to build a very large rotating shed to connect hangars at what was supposed to become\u00a0the main Zeppelin hub in Frankfurt.\u00a0 However, the method for moving rigid airships in and out of fixed hangars was at first dependent on large numbers of handlers\u2026 and calm conditions.\u00a0On USS Shenandoah\u2019s<\/em> first cross-country trip, the airship was held on the St. Louis Air Races grounds by crews alone.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The British were the first to recognize the airship need not be docked every time.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"gh5\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Engineering a male\/female nose \u201cplumb bob\u201d \/ \u201cflower pot\u201d mating setup, they developed the tower (or \u201chigh\u201d) mast with good result (R.33 shown at extreme left). The Americans copied the idea. A standard mast and site was developed (supporting ZR-1 at North Island, California, center photo) which was duplicated in several locations, eventually evolving into the “Class B” mooring bases.<\/a><\/span> Access to the ship involved getting to the top of the mast and stepping from the platform to the bow door (photo).<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

The mast plan evolved into heavier, permanent structures plumbed with gasoline, water ballast and lifting gas lines, providing shore power, and equipped with monstrously powerful winches. The Army and Navy built expensive tower masts at Scott Field, Illinois and Lakehurst, New Jersey, respectively. The British built elevator-equipped tower masts and were well on the way placing them in major cities throughout the Empire<\/a>.<\/span> Henry Ford even built one of his own, masting the Army RS-1 and Navy ZR-3 (extreme right, above).\u00a0 A tower mast was planned in for a building in Chicago and one was built atop the new Empire State Building (shown under construction, home page<\/a><\/span>).<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"la-patoka\"The former oiler USS Patoka<\/i> was the ultimate mobile support base in protected harbors,\u00a0 providing all airship needs, including a renewable\u00a0supply of hydrogen via an onboard generator. The generator\u00a0was never used, though most of Patoka\u2019s <\/i>onboard Texas helium was once expended refilling USS Akron<\/i> following a bungled California mooring<\/span><\/a>.<\/span> Most of the known footage of USS Patoka’s<\/em> LTA \u00a0operations are included in our raw footage DVD “USS Los Angeles”<\/a><\/span>and the second and third chapters of ourAirship History Series.<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

While impressive looking, \u00a0while at the tower masts provisions that could not be piped had to be hand carried through the bow hatch. The ship had to be \u201cflown\u201d at the mast to prevent too many reoccurrences of dipping the lower fin into the surface. Worse, NAS Lakehurst\u2019s tower mast was the scene of an unusual combination of air currents that once rotated, spun and tilted to make the ZR-3 appear to stand on its nose<\/a><\/span>, with minor damage to the cover from falling objects punching through.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"3-stub\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Lakehurst engineers introduced various constructions of shorter \u201cstub\u201d masts that eliminated many of the tower\u2019s problems. (For ZR-3, they also built ground reinforcement girderwork for the center engine car to carry the loads associated with adding their \u201ctaxi\u201d wheel, seen here at the “mooring out” circle, a tamped-down dirt track for the wheel to ride while moored out.)<\/span>
\nDuring the ZR-3’s extended deployment to the Caribbean in 1928, she participated in exercises centering around the Panama Canal. The Los Angeles used the Army’s France Field (photo), since Naval Air Station Coco Solo, with its standard steel hangar for non-rigids, did not have enough cleared area to accommodate the rigid airship.\u00a0 A simple weighted dolly brought in from Lakehurst (photo) was used to discourage kiting.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Though it is hard to verify with the grainy photos available, the literature supports the belief it was the San Diego mast that was dismantled and re-engineered to a lowered height at Mines Field, Los Angeles, California, for the landing of the Graf Zeppelin<\/em> during its 1929 world flight (photo).<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Later, a sectional steel mast, shipped from Lakehurst, was used by the ZR-3 at the September 1929 National Air Races in Cleveland. (The mast served as the final pylon for the air races.) No other particular ground improvements appear to have been done at these temporary sites.<\/span><\/p>\n

The only way to reduce the cost of handling large rigids was by cutting back on required manpower. Lakehurst again pioneered the mobile mooring mast, first one towed by a WWI tank, to manage the bow while a reduced number of men could swing the stern about.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"mobile\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Rails cast in the hangar floor were extended outward to accommodate side trolley cars that gently held main frames in line as the ship egressed the sill (diagram). For the transit, the lower engine car rode a centerline rail dolly (photo).<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

The adjustable mast was built to accommodate the larger ships thought to have been coming, and in fact the system handled the Graf<\/em>\u00a0Zeppelin<\/em> just fine. \u00a0The compacted dirt mooring circle was replaced by a circular rail track, which managed both a stern rider car and later the new forward yaw winch cars. The stern could weathervane by pushing the stern \u00a0car along the track, but the trolley wheels prevented its lifting upward. \u00a0Our DVD “Airship Handling”<\/a><\/span> begins with the earliest known footage of this evolution, and most of the mast footage available is included on our silent footage compilation DVD, “USS Los Angeles.”<\/a><\/span>\u00a0Photos also show what appears to be a very tall portable mini-mooring mast in photos from the 1930s; this mounted an anemometer at such a height as to check winds to be encountered around the ship’s upper keel and top stabilizer fin.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"akron\"<\/span><\/p>\n

With the ZRS contract, Goodyear-Zeppelin beefed up with a non-adjustable design. Their version of a tripod mast was self-propelled <\/span>. Their much heavier side winch cars\u00a0 (photo, left) clamped over the Airdock’s docking rails. Their non-adjustable mast was a poor fit for smaller ships, as seen when LZ-127 visited Akron (center). <\/span><\/p>\n

Lakehurst greatly improved and self-propelled their mobile mast design (extreme right with ZRS-4, note open bow door) in response to the arrival of the ZRS ships, the taller mast\u00a0easily handling both Akron<\/em> and later Macon. <\/em>To allow the big ships more leeway in operations regardless of the winds in conflict with the hangar, the second tamped earth outer circle was enlarged and a docking rail circle built as well.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The ultimate ground handling system for transiting an airship to \"\"<\/span>and from the fixed hangar axis, and aligning it with the wind, was developed by a Navy – contractor team lead by then – LT Calvin Bolster <\/span>\"\"and Wellman\u00a0 Engineering. (Bolster is seen here much later, after reaching Flag rank.)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

An 89-ton “stern beam” (photo) was constructed and equipped with dual sets of railroad wheels. One set was aligned with the hangar’s original docking rails. Straight in or out of the hangar, “Spreader gear,” a system of wheeled pipes connecting mast and beam (diagram right of photo), prevented the flying-weight airship from carrying the beam’s load when transiting from hangar to circle. <\/span><\/p>\n

\"lakehurst\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Once over the circle, a second set of wheels, at 90 degrees to the first, built with the same arc as the mooring circle, were lowered as the first set was retracted. The beam then rode that track to allow the tethered tail to be aligned with either the hangar or the wind. \u00a0The massive beam was pulled against even the strongest winds by a specially built 132-ton locomotive, also visible in the photo. \u00a0Once aligned with the wind, the bridles securing the tail to the beam were removed, the tail floated upwards and the beam pulled clear. <\/span><\/p>\n

If necessary the taxi wheel could be attached, during the transit to the mooring-out circle. Depending on mission status at that point, either the riding-out car, or a taxi wheel, or the flight bumper bag could be attached to the lower fin.\u00a0 These and other details are included in James Shock’s book, “American Airship Bases and Facilities<\/a>.<\/span>“<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"extended\"The largest and most advanced mobile tripod mast was finished at Lakehurst after Macon<\/em> left for California. \u00a0The new Wellman mast was\u00a080 feet on a side, 75-feet tall and was powered by an 8-cylinder engine. \u00a0The mast could travel both a straight line or a circular path. Its huge simultaneously-extending sections could rise to 160 feet and its powerful winch was rated to pull the largest airships’ mooring spindle into its cup. Never photographed as being used for mooring so extended, its theory supported the American penchant for the so called \u201chigh\u201d landing or \u201cflying moor\u201d harking back to the tower mast days. Since rigid\u00a0airships at the time had no wheels and would probably be arriving on the light side, this technique was thought to be safer for the ship. \u00a0(The real answer, already proven with non-rigids, was adding wheels to the airship.)<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"5-high-tail\"When Macon<\/em> arrived at Sunnyvale\/Mountain view, the complete system of telescoping Wellman mast, stern beam and spreader gear had been duplicated and was waiting for her. Since the new hangar was aligned with the prevailing winds, there was no need for a second circle; Macon<\/em> would land and take off from the railroad circle fairly close to the hangar. The photo here shows a “flying moor” in final stages. Off-duty watch\u00a0and water ballast was sent forward until the spindle was locked in the cup, then shifted aft until the tail lines could be grabbed by the line handlers and the tail brought safely onto the riding out car or stern beam. <\/span><\/p>\n

The literature discusses the idea of an experimental stern mooring mast, and the idea reached the drawing stage; however, the idea was not pursued further before Macon<\/em> was lost.\u00a0 (The stern mast idea was still alive with the Germans in the closing days of LZ-130 operations<\/a>.)<\/span><\/p>\n