U.S. Development and Domestication of the Tissot Gas Mask
Section XVII - Goodrich-Lakeside Mask, Model of 1918
Down, but not out, W.C. Geer decided to take a step back and analize the shortcomings experienced with the A.T. as well as the K.T. and K.T.M. Masks. Working together with Major R.G. Pearce, Medical Division of the Chemical Warfare Service, working out of the Physiological Laboratory, Lakeside Hospital, Cleveland, Ohio, the two teams collaborated to develop, test, and endorse what they considered a superior design to all masks in service. This mask, which employed the best features of all previous designs, was finalized on October 11, 1918 as the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask.
From its initial appearance, the mask at first appears to be a reworked Goodrich-Tissot Navy Head Canister Mask, using the same, over-the-lens forehead intake tube, to which a central hose was connected, leading to the canister, which was slung in a Geer Carrier Harness. Unlike the Navy Head Canister Mask, the Goodrich-Lakeside was made similarly to the Type B Akron-Tissot, being dip-molded on an aluminum curing form until sufficient thickness of rubber is acquired, which then is semi-cured, coated in stockinette and reinfoced with rubber strips, and the external hardware applied. Like the Navy Head Canister Mask, the Goodrich-Lakeside uses a 'skull-cap' head harness made of the same stockinette material coating the facepiece, reinforced with vulcanized rubber strips and adjustable with a lace system down the center.
The Goodrich-Lakeside Mask also utilized the Besse Eyepieces and an improved outlet valve assembly, known as the Geer Valve. Also like the Navy Head Canister Mask, the Goodrich-Lakeside had no internal clarifying Y-tube, but instead a simple sheet rubber baffle over the inlet port to deflect the incoming air over the eyepieces. The concept of reducing cost by eliminating the need for a conjoined inlet/outlet angletube assembly as well as to push the idea that a back mounted carrier provided minimal restriction of a soldier's mobility was pushed hard with the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask.
Pictured Below: Front, Side, and Rear Views of the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask, Model of 1918. One can get a good understanding of the clumsy nature of the Geer Carrier Harness and the remarkably expensive nature of this design from appearance alone. [Source: "Presentation of the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask and A Study of the Principles Involved in Mask Design"]
While testing this mask, careful observation was paid to the fit and seal of the mask, the rate of gas permeation through the rubber, the general comfort and pressure in which the mask and its harness applied to the user, the weight and fatigue of the assembly, the field of vision permitted through the position and size of the eyepieces, and of course, breathing resistance. During these tests Geer was critical of his own A.T., noting its large area of deas space inside the facepiece, poor range of vision, inability to fit perfectly without comprimising the level of comfort due to over-tightening of the harness, its relatively high permeability to certain war gases, and most of all, its high rate of breathing resistance caused by the small channels of the die-cast angletube assembly. In reference to his competetor's mask, the Kops-Tissot, Geer was even more critical, claiming that the mask does not seal under any circumstances and called for the immediate discontinuation of its production.
Pictured Below: A rather brazen statement by W.C. Geer and R.G. Pearce calling for the disbandment of production regarding the Kops-Tissot Mask. [Source: "Presentation of the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask and A Study of the Principles Involved in Mask Design"]
Despite claiming that the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask supersedes all previous masks in comfort, vision, seal, breathing resistance, etc, it was ultimately found too complex for the average soldier to manage as well as too advanced and expensive to manufacture in comparison to the K.T.M. Mask. While the testing life of the Goodrich-Lakeside Mask was cut short, principles and components of the mask were integrated onto other existing designs for various, equally short-lived experimental reasons.
Pictured Below: The Goodrich-Lakeside Mask. [Source: Unknown, possibly Fort Leonard Wood Archives] Last photo shows U.S. Patent #1,364,104 for Dr. William Chauncey Geer's Goodrich-Lakeside Mask, Model of 1918. Note detail #21 - optional hollow rubber pads to fill the gap of men whose temples are cavernous and prevent a proper seal of the mask. [Source: Google Patents]