Page 1 of 4
U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:21 pm
by Canoerebel
I hadn't ever heard of the USS Macon until I happened across an old National Geographic article this weekend. The Macon was an airship that went down off the California coast in 1935. The most unusual thing I learned was that she carried a compliment of F9C Sparrowhawk biplanes (fighters). These were small planes (just 26 feet long with a 25-foot wingspan) that were lowered from the hanger by a "trapeze." They had a max speed of 176 mph. The planes could return to the airship - they were equipped with an iron rod that the pilot would "hook" onto the trapeze and then the plane was raised back up into the hanger.
If this airship hadn't gone down, perhaps she would have continued operating into the WWII years and we'd have something really odd to play with.

RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:29 pm
by jeffk3510
Interesting....
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:12 pm
by bradfordkay
Yeah... those Sparrowhawks might have been able to catch a Devastator...[:D]
The USN did operate several airships in ASW roles off both coasts during WW2. I'm not sure if they made it into AE...
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:15 pm
by bobogoboom
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I hadn't ever heard of the USS Macon until I happened across an old National Geographic article this weekend. The Macon was an airship that went down off the California coast in 1935. The most unusual thing I learned was that she carried a compliment of F9C Sparrowhawk biplanes (fighters). These were small planes (just 26 feet long with a 25-foot wingspan) that were lowered from the hanger by a "trapeze." They had a max speed of 176 mph. The planes could return to the airship - they were equipped with an iron rod that the pilot would "hook" onto the trapeze and then the plane was raised back up into the hanger.
If this airship hadn't gone down, perhaps she would have continued operating into the WWII years and we'd have something really odd to play with.
doubtful. she would of probobly been converted to helium and sat off the east or west coast hunting for subs like the blimps did. the american and british airship programs were complete disasters that got a lot of people killed.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:16 pm
by bobogoboom
ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
Yeah... those Sparrowhawks might have been able to catch a Devastator...[:D]
The USN did operate several airships in ASW roles off both coasts during WW2. I'm not sure if they made it into AE...
they were blimps not airships.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:20 pm
by pasternakski
ORIGINAL: bobogoboom
they were blimps not airships.
Well, that's a pretty rigid attitude to take, my lighter-than-air friend.
Yah. The story of the
Akron pretty much sums up the success the U.S. had with these craft ... until professional football on T.V. came along...
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:39 pm
by Bearcat2
They had one of the SprrowHawks at the Air Force museum in Dayton, Ohio on display the last time I was there[9 years ago]
Nevermind; it is not there now, it was on loan from the Smithsonian.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:03 pm
by bobogoboom
ORIGINAL: pasternakski
ORIGINAL: bobogoboom
they were blimps not airships.
Well, that's a pretty rigid attitude to take, my lighter-than-air friend.
Yah. The story of the
Akron pretty much sums up the success the U.S. had with these craft ... until professional football on T.V. came along...
and those are not rigid air ships[:'(]
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:22 pm
by Xxzard
The US Zeppelin program actually did OK for a while, but clearly it was quite a bit of effort for what it was worth. No airship was lost to a fire, unlike hindenburg, but they were vulnerable to storms, and so one broke in half, another crashed into the sea with considerable loss of life, and of all of them, only one survived to retirement.
It would have been possible for the USS Los Angeles to serve in WW2, but it was taken out of service in 1940, because of the akron and macon disasters, and generally it just wasn't very useful.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:37 pm
by stevemk1a
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:20 pm
by Feinder
Gawd, I can still rattle off a short bio of Capt. Dale Mabry (he was killed when the Roma crashed). He was/is the namesake of the Arnold Air Society squadron at the University of Florida (and it was part of our material when we pledged). Dale Mabry Hwy, a major parking lot (*ahem* thoroughfare) in Tampa is also named for him: altho you can probably count the number of Tampa residents who actually know that, on one hand.
-F-
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:36 pm
by rjopel
Well I drive on Dale Mabry every day and I never knew that.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 8:19 pm
by m10bob
ORIGINAL: Xxzard
The US Zeppelin program actually did OK for a while, but clearly it was quite a bit of effort for what it was worth. No airship was lost to a fire, unlike hindenburg, but they were vulnerable to storms, and so one broke in half, another crashed into the sea with considerable loss of life, and of all of them, only one survived to retirement.
It would have been possible for the USS Los Angeles to serve in WW2, but it was taken out of service in 1940, because of the akron and macon disasters, and generally it just wasn't very useful.
The Los Angeles was the only one actually built by Mr Zeppelin himself.
Tha Akron and Macon were sister ships.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 8:22 pm
by bobogoboom
one of the more expensive and costly wastes of time the us military has be appart of.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:38 pm
by wdolson
AE includes airship/blimps, at least the ZPKs. There are three squadrons.
US airships didn't catch fire because from the mid-20s on, they all used helium. The Germans didn't use helium because the US controlled the world supply and wouldn't sell it to anybody. Most helium is created by radioactive decay deep in the Earth. Alpha particles are helium nuclei (helium atom without the electrons).
The oil wells in Texas produced a large amount of helium as a by product of oil production. I'm not sure about modern oil production, but in the first half of the 20th century, it was the world's only source of helium with large enough quantities for industrial applications.
The lifting power of USN blimps/airships was not as good as German airships because hydrogen is much lighter than helium (a hydrogen atom is 1/4 the weight of a helium atom), but since helium is not flamable at all, it's much safer for use in lighter than air craft.
Bill
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:51 pm
by Feinder
altho you can probably count the number of Tampa residents who actually know that, on one hand.
-F-
Well I drive on Dale Mabry every day and I never knew that.
-rjopel
Now there's 4 of us!
[:D]
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:27 am
by AW1Steve
ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
Yeah... those Sparrowhawks might have been able to catch a Devastator...[:D]
The USN did operate several airships in ASW roles off both coasts during WW2. I'm not sure if they made it into AE...
Yeah , and what were they flying off carriers at the same time? 1936 ? Sparrowhawks were the equivalent. Don't you guys think they would have fitted a Wildcat with a trapeeze?
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:43 am
by Canoerebel
ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
Yeah... those Sparrowhawks might have been able to catch a Devastator...[:D]
The USN did operate several airships in ASW roles off both coasts during WW2. I'm not sure if they made it into AE...
Yeah , and what were they flying off carriers at the same time? 1936 ? Sparrowhawks were the equivalent. Don't you guys think they would have fitted a Wildcat with a trapeeze?
I doubt it. Hangar space and minimum speeds would have been likely problems. The Sparrowhawk had a wingspan of 25 feet; the Wildcat was 38 feet. Also, as a biplane with a max speed of 176 mph, the Sparrow could probably throttle back to a low enough speed to allow for it to hook onto the trapeze with minimal force (it's min speed wouldn't have been that much faster than the cruising speed of the airship) while the Wildcat, at a faster minimum speed, might have been too jarring for the airship's framework.
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:49 am
by pasternakski
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
The Sparrowhawk had a wingspan of 25 feet; the Wildcat was 38 feet.
Well, and let's not forget that the Sparrowhawk weighed about the same as a coconut, and the Wildcat was a particularly heavy beast. I's a simple matter of weight ratios.
Now, an African swallow...
RE: U.S.S. Macon
Posted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:56 am
by Canoerebel
What's your favorite color?