McPherson wrote:
Depends on Packard, Glenn Curtiss and Aberdeen or Dahlgren proving grounds. 9 months? Since the main target clusters are the Chesapeake and New York and Long Island environs, it would be quick once the hardware is in hand.
“Quick” being relative since the main “target cluster” won’t be that clear. Sure the officials may have a pretty accurate view of what’s possible but the public won’t. And this isn’t a well-known or understood threat like an ‘invasion’ or submarines off the coast. The Germans came by AIR and initially the US has no way to STOP them if they attack. Sure Britain is ‘dealing’ with their problem in this area but up until this point the British had actually been playing UP the damage and civilian destruction to the US press to try and whip up sympathy for them and anger against the Germans. They can’t instantly reverse this.
The Big Problem I see is North Atlantic weather. I do not think the zepps of the day are capable.
It was a ‘maybe’ and a good part of the reason the attempt was denied permission. My ‘take’ would be send three expect one to get through, (and put your most experienced crew on that one) with anyone who has to either abort or crashes, (and survives) short of the continent claiming to be a blockade runner, or ‘lost’ Britain bombing Zeppelin crew.
Just about any way you look at it an actual ‘attack’ is out of the question but if you use a short opportunity to show it “might” happen then America has to take that into account. And enough chutzpah and some luck…
The Germans could have tried in the RTL. I presume the technical reasons I speculated might have been operant.
It took modification (install two additional gas cells and extra fuel storage and cargo capacity) to the “standard” V-class (introduced late 1917) to get the proper long range “W-class” and the trip to Africa was shown to be more challenging than a possible crossing of the Atlantic was with the technology. OTL the “W-class” was the inspiration and basis for the proposed “X-class” New York bombers. (Three built, one lost over England, one destroyed by crew after war and one turned over to France which became the “Dixmude” in French service till lost in flight in 1923) None of the “X” birds were ready before the middle of 1918 by which time the only thing they COULD do was attack the US which would only prove how little a threat they were.
If you look at it some of the earlier ships with similar modifications (R and later S Class) which were introduced in mid-1916 may be able to do the job, but you have to get rid of Strasser being in overall charge of the Zeppelin force to allow the diversions. (He highly opposed the whole “China Show” from the beginning)
The “W” modified ships could have done it but with questionable accuracy and effectiveness in a military mission. My point is to get things rolling fast enough to ensure the flight is NOT a “military” mission as a major point. This isn’t a WAR Zeppelin but a “Merchant” Zeppelin looking at a novel way to break the harsh British blockade. Let people draw their own conclusions and maybe help them with some ‘hints’ here and there. The main point is still going to require no US declaration of War in April of 1917 or none of this can happen,
Why? The air defense effort required is almost trivial to the "practical" threat posed, once development and standup is accomplished.
Is it? Well, being honest probably yes it is but… Keep in mind that several major East Coast major metropolitan areas have to be covered with newly organized and equipped air defense units. Everything from heavy anti-aircraft guns to locally situated and trained aircraft squadrons. New York, Washington, Boston, Philadelphia, etc
And frankly that’s only the tip of the ice berg because neutral or not Mexico is a ‘problem’ and more so if they STAY neutral but are suspected of being in league with the Germans and a possible base for German attack zeppelins! Implausible? Probably but the total cost of seeing troops and equipment deployed to the southern borders and even the West Coast is rumors and “mysterious” explosions and/fires attributed to “German Zeppelin” attacks. You can get this level of paranoia without the Zimmerman letter pretty easy. And it means more troops and equipment that isn’t going to be available to getting the AEF equipped, trained or deployed, Can America handle it? Sure, but not right away and priority will have to be given to getting it all organized and started before thing fall into shape.
I wish Wilson had not had a jihard on against "Republican Leonard Wood". Arguably Pershing was a good staid "democrat" choice, but a general with an open mind might have been more op-art flexible. Funston would have been "interesting" in a very negative way.
Wood was too tied into the “Preparedness Movement” which scared the crap out of the Democrats and neutrality minded politicians. Pershing while a ‘Democrat” had support on both sides and was a known ‘non-partisan’ choice. Funston was Wilson’s primary choice but not many Republican’s liked it nor did a good portion of the officer corps. “Interesting” times is a curse in China after all
Why? Would it not be logical to burn the Zeppelin sheds?
British tried that and it wasn’t nearly as effective as they had hoped.
Besides, a sane appraisal of how many Atlantic capable zepps that can be built and how many that can actually reach targets means that a good estimate of the 4 or 5 fighter squadrons and the 100 or AAA batteries needed to defend the only worthwhile target sets based on the only practical great circle air routes can be easily estimated.
You said it and I put it in bold and that IS in fact the whole concept in a nutshell. Don’t let the American’s have a chance to be ‘sane’ in the short term. Give them reasons and expectation that they NEED to protect the “home front” for the first time and BEFORE they can turn to offensive preparations or actions. Also keep in mind that even WITH Strasser hammering on the need for more Zeppelins for attaching England the Germans had by the middle of 1917 began to more heavily push heavier than air “bombers” for such duties and considered withdrawing and reducing Zeppelins in the offensive roll. The American’s are going to notice this and remember the ‘modifications’ of the visiting “merchant” Zeppelin and wonder how many are being converted to attack a ‘defenseless’ America.
And keep in mind while they never carried gas bombs the English had been expecting them too and Strasser had advocated using them in attacks. Only the High Command restrictions prevented it. American politicians have to deal with a public that is both afraid and somewhat informed on such attacks and the propaganda of the ‘merciless Hun’ is NOT going to help those fears. So anyplace that CAN be attacked by air also runs the risk of gas bombings. And something to keep in mind is that the US military and government very much regarded ‘gas’ as a significant weapons system and sunk a LOT of resources into creating both gasses and ways to deploy them.
You have to look carefully but one thing Kettering said when his “bug” drone was NOT used but retired by the US after the war was that he was GLAD that ‘ultimate’ weapons of his drone and gas had NOT been deployed during the war. This pretty much hints at a planned use for the vehicle and so it would NOT be a great leap to see Germany using Zeppelin dropped gas on American cities as a possibility. And then there was the Ruston Proctor “Aerial Target” drone which was being proposed as an “anti-Zeppelin” aerial torpedo as well
(
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/military-vehicle-news/short-history-drones-part-1-x.html)
4 to 5 squadrons of aircraft and support plus 100 or so AAA batteries and control and support begins to add up pretty quickly. And then there’s the Naval pickets and defense ships the British are using that the American’s will want to copy and emulate. Just to be sure.
Hmm. I'll let it develop, because I think you have an explanation.
For why the US doesn’t do what’s expected of them? We’re crazy?
The fact the US tends to have two modes, complacent and panicked? Or why I think that NOT attacking would be relevant? It wasn’t that the Germans or Europeans didn’t understand that American industry and production was a ‘game-changing’ element of the conflict. They did, very much so or they wouldn’t have been so adamant/eager to either prevent or gain their support if they entered the conflict. What they didn’t “understand” until only recently is how America ‘worked’ and how American’s fit themselves into that process. They were seen as an industrial and resource powerhouse but much like Latin America ‘self-divided’ and unable to sustain what they saw as a ‘Great Power’ outlook. AS it arguably was clear that the US had pushed itself towards that status during the previous decades and then let the ability fall by the wayside as their ability to project military power waned. So obviously they weren’t a “Great Power” after all. Right?
But to the average American we’ve ALWAYS been equal to any European or Asian power… Even when we haven’t. But rubbing that in America’s face tends to just make the average American mad enough to set aside our more ‘important’ differences, (again the people American’s dislike the most is other American’s that in the end is the ‘subject’ we always return to) and roll up our sleeves and show everyone what we can do.
The European states had as much interest or understanding in US internal politics as they had about the dark side of the moon. This contrasts sharply with east Asian governments of the same era who had a lot of interactions based on US internal politics and understood the Americans slightly better, which is always the great puzzler, WTH if the Japanese KNEW what kind of blowtorch would be turned their way, did they spark off a war by doing Port Arthur3.0/Taranto 2.0?
Quite frankly because we went all “Great Power” and dragged Japan into the modern world and then simply walked away for the most part. That looked just as ‘weak’ and indecisive as it did to the Europeans but with the added insult that we’d done little but drag Japan kicking and screaming into the modern world, started to open them up to trade and teach them expansion and then went off and ignored them. They thought they understood the American’s “slightly” better as you put it but really since it made little sense to them as to anyone else they began to make and accept the assumptions of the European powers. Weak military and a nation of ‘merchants’ rather than warriors how strong could they be?
Two world wars and the lesson still wasn’t widely accepted outside the nations the US was actively IN and they (the US) STILL didn’t seem to be doing it “right”.
Potemkin it and bluff until the troops can reach the zepp sheds and burn them.
The civilians won’t buy it and the troops will never reach them to burn them. Wasn’t going to happen which was why they were only truly ‘burned’ by their own people.
"Mr. Secretary Daniels; we have this contraption we want to build. It is called an aircraft carrier."
"Captain Moffett, will it be a DRY ship? I know how your aviators like to get roaring drunk."
"It will be a dry ship, sir."
"Who will build the planes?"
"Packard, Curtiss, and Pratt and Whitney?"
"Go to it, man. How many do you want?"
"Can we have all the Lexingtons, sir?"
"One each for the German dirigibles?"
"We call them, Zepps, sir."
“We’d call them Zippo’s, (cause they always light up) but those haven’t been invented yet” (1932)
Heh, but really it won’t happen as no one really was getting the concept of the air craft carrier until after the war. Since the Zepps would likely be approaching from high altitude sea-based planes were seen as less useful due to the weight and drag of the floats. Land based planes that could be used at sea, (the English experiments and use of Sopwith Camels to attack the Zeppelin sheds was interesting but not as effective as desired) Then again “Captain Moffett” will eventually become a fan of bringing airplanes to Zeppelin fights so…
I always maintained R.L. Lowery was a crackpot.
Likely but also obviously he was far from alone
I've looked at this scenario. It would be a 2 year war that would end in guerrilla warfare and a sort of stalemate. It would be the kind of guerro,(war_) the US waged in the Philippine Islands with probably the same eventual resort of the feeling of biting off way more than could be chewed. At the least it would cost the Americans 200,000 dead and maybe 3x that many maimed. At the very best, a permanent army of occupation would have to be established in northern Mexico.
Well the “good” news is the factions in Mexico will have something to keep them occupied and untied for possibly long enough to do some long term “good”. (And yes there’s reasons those are in quotes
)
Keep in mind at the time of the Zimmerman Telegram we were already involved if only mostly haphazardly since the Niagara Falls Conference, (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABC_countries) and the ABC nations felt (quite rightly) they’d protected both American and Latin American interests in accordance with the Monroe Doctrine. The US invading Mexico, (again and this time more than just a small ‘occupation’ force) is going to make a LOT of people nervous at a time when America, (and Europe) don’t need the extra “side” issues.
Maybe... or maybe 4 million doughboys show up in France and 1919 becomes for Germany "Das Jahr, in dem wir Texican sprechen gelernt haben." (The year in which we learned to speak Texican.)
Wait those same “Texican’s” that spectacularly failed to invade themselves? (Houston and the Congress had a ‘difference of opinion’ on where the records should be stored. Houston’s forces failed to capture the ‘national’ archives and Congressional forces failed to unseat Houston… And things kinda went downhill from there with loosing that ‘other’ war and all) Given a choice between going after Mexico and going to Europe? As a US President (from the South mind you) that’s a ‘choice’ you don’t want to offer them because they WILL choose the wrong option for all the “right” (they swear) reasons. And there was a REASON Federal troops were sent south to 'deal' with the raids and such since it was known/suspected, (but never 'proven' for a given value of 'proof') that it was likely a LOT of the 'raids' were by Texan's on neighbors they didn't like or wanted the land. Further the 'official' Texan militia called up to deal with the raids spectacularly failed to do so... Because Texas was still having issues raising militia's that would actually listen to the State government. Federalizing the entire "National Guard" (including local militia's) saved everybody some real problems.
Randy
