Zeppelins

Were the Zeppelin raids on England significant in the overall framework of the war? They did keep valuable squadrons at home which could have been released to the Western Front and killed over 1000 people. The population was certainly terrified by the raids.

[Darryl]

Hi Theo,

I don't think they were very productive.
In 1914-18 a total of 51 raids took place (during which bombs were actually dropped, others turned back etc.).
5806 bombs were dropped weighing in at 440,000 pounds. 587 people were killed and 1358 injured. The estimated cost of damage in Pounds Sterling was 1,527,585.

I have never seen figures for the German cost of the raids (Hannes, Reinout??).

Against that must be put the determination to 'beat the evil Hun' which they generated. It has since been demonstrated many times that to bomb a civilian population is counter productive. This was shown in the 1940's Blitz on London (when production increased) and in the bombing of Dresden etc at the end. It encouraged the development of "smart" weapons to avoid collateral damage.

Just some food for thought.

regards

Darryl

Hello Darryl

I agree with you that the civilian population were stirred up to beat 'the hun'. Any ideas how many home defence aircraft there were. I've read somewhere that Haig was not happy that palnes were being diverted from France to defend London.

[Vigilant]

Theo,
As of June 1918 there were 469 AA guns, 622 searchlights and 6,136 men operating them in Britain. The aerial component was provided by VI Brigade and comprised 376 planes of which 166 were classed "efficient" [i.e. not obsolete]. There were 4,614 personnel on the strength of the Brigade. The cost of the home defence effort was pretty huge. For example an anti-aircraft shell cost about £2 and as many as 20,000 could be fired in a "barrage" over London in one night. But then that has to be set against the millions fired every month on the Western Front.

After Gothas first raided London in daylight in July 1917 the Cabinet was seriously rattled and ordered two "good" fighter squadrons sent back from France. Additionally one squadron that was forming up in England was kept here. I believe the ones sent were 56 and 46 Squadrons. Haig was not best pleased since he was launching the 3rd Battle of Ypres at the end of the month. He telegraphed to London:

"Fight for air supremacy preparatory to forthcoming operations was definitely commenced by us this morning. Both enemy and ourselves have concentrated fighting machines for this struggle in the air which will undoubtedly be the most severe we have yet had. Success in this struggle is essential to success of our operations."

(The Cabinet got his drift and the squadrons were sent back after a few weeks.)

The most significant consequence of the bombing IMO was the formation of the RAF as a separate service, with a large bomber component envisaged (the so-called Independant Air Force). Arguably this set the RAF on the bombing-wins-wars path that ended in Hamburg and Dresden in '44 and 45.

[All from the Official History]

[rammjaeger]

Zeppelin-attacks had a high propaganda value for the British ("Baby killers") and German side ("England is no more an island!").

I did not see costs for the whole Zeppelin campaign. I remember I have seen the cost for a single Zeppelin but will not find this number before the weekend. At least the German Air Force and Navy could build a lot of aircraft instead of the Zeppelins (financal point of view) and use this Armada more flexible and efficent.

The use of the Zepps was leading into a heavy defeat with more than a half of the Zeppelin crews killed. Already before the war some pilots had warned and said the aircraft can do such jobs without these enormous hazards because of bad weather or enemy attacks.

[Reinout]

Sorry Darryl, no knowledge of costs vs gains here.

However if shells for AAA were 2 quid, then it may just be that in terms of finances and resources required to stem the threat of Luftschiffe, the British paid more. But of course that is conjecture, not fact. It is indeed true that the British developed their own ideas of strategic bombing in WWI. Funny that. After witnessing the ultimate failure of the Luftschiffe (in part because of the resolve of the population to beat the Germans), one would have thought that such a theory would not find many advocates in Great-Britain.

All in all, the attacks against England were a brave and dangerous effort and I think that at the time, it was deemed effective by both sides. It's certainly true that all the resources kept in England for its defence could have increased the pressure on the GAS on the western front.

Kind regards,

Reinout

[Vin]

Public outcry in response to Zeppelin raids led to an emphasis on strong aerial defence. One theory is that the impact of the Zeppelin raids influenced British thinking on strategic bombing and the development of a significant bomber force towards the end of WW 1 and into WW 11.


Vin

[Darryl]

Thanks guys,

I think really the overall effect was not worth the effort by either side. Not that the extra firepower/manpower would have been noticed on the vast morass of the Western Front.

best regards

Darryl

IMHO Zeps didn't pay off for Germany.
Zeps were useless as tools of war. After the war Germany was disallowed to keep Zeps, so the valuable knowledge of building and operating them was largely lost. IMHO they could have created a transatlantic-line within a year or two. Imagine the effect of regular passenger flights in the early twenties instead of the mid thirties.
As it was, Eckener needed 10 years to get the funding and allowance to operate the "Graf Zeppelin" and later the Hindenburg.

[Reinout]

Darryl,

Actually I don't agree with your last statement as the Luftschiffe would not have been able to make an impact on the airwar on any other front, while the AAA and home defence squadrons of the RFC/RAF would certainly have had some impact on the airwar in other theatres, had they been redeployed.

What's your view on that?

Kind regards,

Reinout