JC1/L14-2(371020)
 
                            -3-                             
 
 
sidered by certain European nations for
protective purposes, seems impracticable
because the altitude obtainable with such
balloons with helium is much reduced over                                        
that obtainable with hydrogen.
 
 
To sum up, it seems apparent that their is no military
value in helium ltself. It all depends upon how it is employed. 
As to the quantities of helium, herein discussed, the military 
value of helium to a European nation would be insignificant. The 
problems of maintaining a supply of helium for war purposes 
is so great that no nation has ever seen fit to base military 
plans solely on helium. For military use, hydrogen is superior.
 
 
The memorandun transmitted with your letter has been
examined. As to the accuracy of its quotations, a reading of 
the enitire testimony, from which these quotations are partial 
extracts, will show the inconsistency of the memorandum with 
the full testimony. In regard to foreign building of lighter-than-air 
craft for mllitary purposes, the Navy Department has no information 
that indicates that any European power is building such craft for 
military purposes. It is reported that there is some construction 
of small commercial airships in Russia, and that this country is 
endeavoring to develop recently discovered sources of helium.                     
How accurate these reports are cannot be definitely stated.
 
 
In considering the allocation request, the experienced
airship personnel of this Department found that the quantities 
requested were in accordance with accepted airship practices.
In this connection, it is pointed out that of the total quantity 
allocated, only such portions as are actually necessary will be 
shipped abroad. Moderate reserve supplies of helium are required 
both at the foreign and the United States terminals, but these 
reserves are to be progressively supplied, and under the stated 
schedules of shipments, would probably never exceed about 
2,000,000 cu. ft. at either terminal. At the expiration of one 
year's operations the expectation is that there would remain 
in captivity only the 7,000,000 cu. ft. of helium in the airship, 
the remainder having been used at the rate of 3% to 5% per month, 
plus 3% to 6% per trans-oceanic trip. Any operations of United 
States airships to foreign terminals would require the placement 
at those foreign terminals of helium for
"topping up" purposes, to the same extent as has been estimated
for the contemplated operations of this German airship.
 
 
Finally, this Department considers that the reasons which
led to the approval of this export allotment In November 1937
 
 
are