The Daily News. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1. IS IT WORTH WHILE?

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 122, 1 September 1910, Page 4

The Daily News. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1. IS IT WORTH WHILE?

It is impossible for New Zealanders to judge at this stiiyo whether navigation of the air has come to stay, whether it is practicable for passenger traffic, if it can 'be made safe, and whether the world will tbe any the better for it. As we have not yet indulged in aerial traffic in New Zealand, "the dangers of the pursuit have not been brought home to us, except by repeated reports of fatalities from older countries. At the present I moment at Home there is immense discussion on the subject, and a perusal of late files shows that men of all classes are entering eagerly into the pros, and cons, of the matter. One of the first men to see an airman ascend in Europe subsequently asked Wilbur Wright if the machine had any possibilities for peace. There was no hope for mankind in Wright's answer. In reply to the question as to what good flying would bring I man, Wright said, "Solitary bliss!" The critic further asks what good an airship, as big as an ocean liner, can do if it takes only five or six passengers and is put out of action by the ripping of a j bit of silk? He probalbly referred to j the huge airships that are in vogue in | Germany. He asks: "Is it not sheer madness to invent a dangerous and doubtful machine to carry four or five people, when for years we ha\<e had the advantage of trains that will carry thousands of people with incredible speed , and with almost absolute safety ?" An 'expert makes the point that, as it is hoped that aeroplanes Will be used for \var 3 increasing the area over which war can be carried is plain wickedness. He show s that the firing of a thirteeninch gun will destroy enough nitrogen to raise many bushels of wheat. Any element that will jeopardise the source of | life is bad. Arthur Mee, a noted journalist, in a stirring diatribe against the new science and its dangers, asks: "Which nation will lead humanity and save the hand of progress' from a crime against the future 1" Oscar Browning airily gives permission for aviation to proceed, and says that it has claimed no more victims than other forms of locomotion in their initial stages, and' winds up an article with a eulogy for Rolls, killed in pursuit lof the new science. Admiral Fremantle , naturally desires to see the progress of ; any science that might give its best exporfent an advantage in time of war, and says that it would not be wise to stop it. He holds, however, that there should be official regulation by a board of experts and that the Home Office should insist on the elimination of dangerous feats and "record breaking." A great soldier might be pardoned for believing that tfitere was a probalble "arm" in aeroplanes skilfully used, tout G.eneral Sir A. Turner is absolutely antagonistic and pessimistic. He shows that no regularity of traffic is possible, because of the risks which can never be minimised, that aeroplanes could never tbe used in war, having regard to the • holocaust which a disaster might mean, and ridicules the notion that because Bleriot has crossed the channel ,and others have succeeded him, there is a possibility of the invasion by large numbers of troops by this means. He said that Webb's swim across the Channel presaged as much danger as did the flight of the isolated airman. A member of the House of Commons, in a contribution to the discussion that is raging/said that at present there was nothing to prevent airmen—most of whom he designated as "cranks" of the worst description—flying over thickly populated' areas. He showed that most of the fatalities to airmen and to mere pedestrians had ibeen in sparsely-popu-lated places, and that the falling of an airship in the centre of a large town might have consequences too horrible to contemplate. Up to the present, at any rate, no useful purpose has been served, although we have heard that the occupants of a German dirigible dropped dummy shells and sailed away again without injury to their ship. Whatever is in store for airships, it is eertain that up to now flights, have been solely by wav of providing sensations for the fliers and for those people who have seen the flights. The development of aeronautics has not minimise:! the risks, and enginers and scientists claim tlfat it is impossible under any circumstances to do so. Novelty is at present the greatest attraction, arid as long as the public take a keen delight in air manoeuvres, airmen will be found to risk life and limb for money. But there is no evidence from anywhere or anyone competent to speak that the airship will occupy the place of the railway train or that the vagaries of the air will be overcome by the ingenuity of man.