Zeppelin and air force after Franco-Prussian war of 1871

Hi all,

I'm working on a novel where for a few years airships came into fashion after the successful escape of Gambetta during the siege of Paris. I know it's a bit cliché but it's a tiny genre marker in there.

After a couple victories from the French air navy, European caught up and saw it as it was, massive, slow moving targets prone to exploding. After that, they were mostly relegated to colonial campaign were they were most useful to control large swaths of land against undergunned adversaries (Indochine for example).

Also used in smuggling as treaties to define the "height" of a frontier took a few years to catch up with reality. As flying over the territory wasn't technically illegal or didn't actually need registration until you touched the ground, there was fertile ground for trafficking.

Ideas, objections... are welcome
 

TFSmith121

Banned
"Air Policing" via dirigible?

After that, they were mostly relegated to colonial campaign were they were most useful to control large swaths of land against undergunned adversaries (Indochine for example).

"Air Policing" via dirigible?

Entertaining idea.

Renard and Krebs' La France was about state of the art in 1885 or so, so that gives you an idea of what was possible in the late Nineteenth Century...and why the technology didn't really get widely adapted.

But if you want to push the envelope for story sake, the first question is where do the economic and manpower resources come from? In other words, what technology and/or operational service gets shortchanged in order to create the aeronautical services in (presumably) the 1880-1890s etc? None of the technologies are huge leaps, but there are a lot of them...

The biggest technological hurdles would be, I expect, lightweight engines - preferably gasoline-powered I/C engines. Steam, paraffin, kerosene, diesel, etc. are not as easy to work with as gasoline. Electric is attractive, but batteries are heavy and the operational flexibility is going to be limited.

Hydrogen production is doable; helium is a tremendous safety advantage, of course, but it took a fair amount of R&D, historically.

Effective propellor design will take time; wood is effective for aircraft, but getting the aerodynamics correct will take time.

Silk envelopes are lightweight but fragile and not cheap; canvas is cheaper,but not lightweight.

Lightweight metals are attractive, but this is pretty early for aluminum or magnesium (which burns, of course); steel is good, but still heavy. Iron is way too heavy; wood is still a good choice for frames and gondolas, but it burns...

Lots of (relatively) minor issues, but it takes a lot to overcome them all at once; I think you'd need a major governmental/military commitment in France, and the question as to the politics that provides that commitment and sustains it at a time when French politics was "fluid", to be charitable, is an open question...

Best,
 
The idea would be a wooden frame with oil based power, so used for small distance, carrying high value/small volume goods (like opium or tobacco which were highly taxed, hence the smuggling).

For longer propulsion I was wondering why sails wouldn't be possible. An airship is flying at about 200-500m high, there is a difference in winds yes, but is it enough to forbid the use of sails for longer distances? Explosion motors did exist at the time (first invention in 1807, perfected in 1876).

The idea would be a development between military interests and commercial interests (with startups like VC funding), provoking a fad that lasted a few years (1871-1876 more or less) boosted by the revenge spirit after 1871.
A few years after that (early 1880's) we realise that it's just not that practical and it gets out of fashion except for colonial, ahum, pacification, which means a relatively non-mobile artillery platform anchored on the ground as well as smaller supply transports to send weapons and ammos (again, high value items) to the front line through potentially enemy territory (the oil stain tactic wasn't entirely defined by then).

I went into more far fetched ideas before throwing them away but I do believe that in newly conquered region, such an alternative could have worked as the pre-fabs of their time, holding the land, waiting for stronger constructions to be built.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
What do you do for masts and yards? And rigging?

The idea would be a wooden frame with oil based power, so used for small distance, carrying high value/small volume goods (like opium or tobacco which were highly taxed, hence the smuggling).

For longer propulsion I was wondering why sails wouldn't be possible. An airship is flying at about 200-500m high, there is a difference in winds yes, but is it enough to forbid the use of sails for longer distances? Explosion motors did exist at the time (first invention in 1807, perfected in 1876).

The idea would be a development between military interests and commercial interests (with startups like VC funding), provoking a fad that lasted a few years (1871-1876 more or less) boosted by the revenge spirit after 1871.
A few years after that (early 1880's) we realise that it's just not that practical and it gets out of fashion except for colonial, ahum, pacification, which means a relatively non-mobile artillery platform anchored on the ground as well as smaller supply transports to send weapons and ammos (again, high value items) to the front line through potentially enemy territory (the oil stain tactic wasn't entirely defined by then).

I went into more far fetched ideas before throwing them away but I do believe that in newly conquered region, such an alternative could have worked as the pre-fabs of their time, holding the land, waiting for stronger constructions to be built.

What do you do for masts and yards? And rigging? And stability of the aircraft under "sail"?

I think La France is about it for state of the art, frankly; if the French pour government money into it from 1870 onwards, they might have a La France equivalent by 1880, and a zeppelin-equivalent type by 1890-1900, but that's pushing it.

Fun idea, though.

Best,
 
ACK! Sails!
Sigh.

At least you've realized that you need a difference in winds to make that work. But how different do you think winds are going to be in any reasonable distance? Oh, sure, if you go up 10,000 feet, the wind might be going in a totally different direction, but have fun with 10,000 foot long masts.

If you did find a level where wind velocities were perceptibly different 100 feet apart, say, then that very fact would make the air very turbulent at that point. How, too, do you STAY at that level? Given that you can't SEE winds.
 
I admit, my knowledge of sails usage is pretty low (I sailed small boats a few times but stayed close to the shore) but here we're not talking about 10k feet, airships cannot go that high, at least not with current technology (weather ballon can go that high but they don't have as big a load).

We're talking about 1000 feet so relatively close to the ground. The idea would not be for wind to be a mean of staying afloat, you have the balloon for that, but as a mean of propulsion, like a sailing boat.

But the bigger question here was the use and propulsion by motor, which did exist in the 1880's, what change would that bring to warring? Would it catch on? (assuming the motor is perfectionned for using something else than coal which isn't efficient enough)
 
Engine weight not as critical for airships as HTA, and there were gasoline engines by 1880s. The artillery and early machine guns of 1880s won't reach airships at any height, and won't be accurate against that sort of moving target. Airship vs airship, given the limited maneuverability will probably be either useless or mutual suicide - so airships can be effective for some time before technology renders them obsolete.
 
Sails work on ships because the vessel is in a different medium than the wind. Air pushing a sailing ship means it moves in a fluid medium, not along with it. Sails on an airship would be pointless as it would still be a free balloon being pushed by the wind, not being steered in it.
 
Are you going to do an "Operation Sky Lion" with those things? Because that's a ridiculously awesome idea I can't get out of my head.
 
Thank you Zoomar, now that you explain it that does make sense, I didn't think of it, thank you for the explanation!

Henry, that would be awesome, maybe in another book! Right now I'm focusing on Indochine colonisation, with a utopist implementation in Tonkin fighting against Black Flags. Mercenaries come to help, after shenanigans, take over the colony and establish a new, independant, country north of French colonies and under chinese frontier.

If you really wanna go in awesome steam territory think about shock troups being dropped from above and using time appropriate drop pods. But then that's... not that realistic^^
 
Frankly, it had to imagine truly functional airships much earlier than they appeared OTL (ie at the very end of the 19th century). However, if you want to imagine this happening earlier, I could suggest the following fun options for sky barbarian warfare:

Hydrogen filled semi-rigid ariships that combine man-power with a good understanding of aerology (updrafts, prevailing winds at different altitudes, predictable seasonal variations in these). Think of an airship gondola containing crewmembers operating some sort of geared bicycle-like propellors - or even "oars" that swivel so they only provide thrust in the direction you want to go. Such contraptions would probably only provide a few mph of forward speed, so travel against prevailing winds would be impossible. So, the ship then ascends or descends to find more favorable wind currents in where it can free-balloon in the general direction it wants to go, using the man-power to fine-tune direction within the overall winds.
 
That's insane, ridiculously unrealistic and incredibly cool.

Just imagine the wily old air dog "sounding the sky" with small balloons to make a daring escape from her majesties royal flying navy.
 
Lightweight metals are attractive, but this is pretty early for aluminum or magnesium (which burns, of course); steel is good, but still heavy. Iron is way too heavy; wood is still a good choice for frames and gondolas, but it burns...

Schutte-Lanz was building wooden-framed dirigibles in WW1. The frames were a bit heavier and thus reduced payload somewhat, but they were quite serviceable.
 
Your best power plant might be flash boiler-driven engines.

Flash boilers are relatively light, and were used in steam cars starting in 1896. Leon Serpollet patented an early version in 1888. Accelerate steam development by a few years, and you might have them by 1880, if contemporary metallurgy is up to it. You'd have to check this.

You'd also have to check plausible power-to-weight ratios, both for the boilers and the motors they're driving. But I suspect it'd be your best bet, unless the really early petrol engines can be made more reliable than I suspect possible.
 
Frankly, it had to imagine truly functional airships much earlier than they appeared OTL (ie at the very end of the 19th century). However, if you want to imagine this happening earlier, I could suggest the following fun options for sky barbarian warfare:

Well, this timeline is set after the Prussian war, precisely in the 1880's. The idea is that Gambetta's escape is slightly more efficient (he has a first victory and gets crushed after as IOTL). People realise how AWESOME escaping from a surrounded Paris in an airship was, stories get written about it and this makes a couple businessmen realise that there is potential in it, whether for military or commercial use.

This leads to more investments earlier on, a bit of an investment craze through venture capitalists, more efficient models get built and you have working models by the early 1880's. Does that sound right?


Just imagine the wily old air dog "sounding the sky" with small balloons to make a daring escape from her majesties royal flying navy

The idea would be to have this kind of contraption as the poor man's stuff, guerrilla warfare when you don't have the funds for an actual navy. Due to a smaller size, they can't impact the battlefield below but could do good damage and disruption to enemy's bigger ships.

Flash boilers are relatively light, and were used in steam cars starting in 1896. Leon Serpollet patented an early version in 1888. Accelerate steam development by a few years, and you might have them by 1880, if contemporary metallurgy is up to it. You'd have to check this.

I have to admit, I am completely not from an engineering background so this kind of info is extremely valuable to me, but a bit more explanation could be very useful ;)

La France, in 1884, had an electrical engine, how would that work?

You'd also have to check plausible power-to-weight ratios, both for the boilers and the motors they're driving. But I suspect it'd be your best bet, unless the really early petrol engines can be made more reliable than I suspect possible.

I'm at least aware of that. In my idea, airships would be used for short distances (Portsmouth/Cherbourg, Rotterdam/le Havre) as they would need to refuel often. For longer journeys they'd have to be towed on normal steamships.
 

Sior

Banned
ACK! Sails!
Sigh.

At least you've realized that you need a difference in winds to make that work. But how different do you think winds are going to be in any reasonable distance? Oh, sure, if you go up 10,000 feet, the wind might be going in a totally different direction, but have fun with 10,000 foot long masts.

If you did find a level where wind velocities were perceptibly different 100 feet apart, say, then that very fact would make the air very turbulent at that point. How, too, do you STAY at that level? Given that you can't SEE winds.

Kites? ;)
 

Wolf1965

Donor
A lot has been written about engines already-you might want to look into Henry Maxims http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Maxim steam engine which was said to be lightweight and developed 360 HP. It was not enough for a heavier-than-air plane but might be light enough for a dirigible.

As aluminium is still terribly expensive the best structure might be a semi-rigid one (as Nobile`s Italia and Norge) with a wooden structure and ballonet.
Wooden structure works-if Schuette-Lanz could do it in WW1 s can others.

The ballonet (an air-filled ballon inside the ballon) is critical as for a dirigible airship the shape of the envelope must be maintained. This allows to control the pressure inside the envelope to a degree which differs with temperature.

This kind of airship would have even more failure modes than the Zeppelins-and they went down left right and center-but should be feasable and would give you a well-manouverable airship within the timeframe.
 

Driftless

Donor
Engineering questions:

* Would some form of laminated wood provide sufficient structural strength along with limited weight for this kind of purpose? Laminated wood has been used in some form back to ancient China & Egypt. It really started to reappear after the 1860's. The weatherproof nature of the wood & glue might be an issue too.

*If the general idea of laminated structural wood in the 1870's were practical, which species would (no pun intended :)) be best? Spruce, bamboo, combinations?

I don't know if that helps the larger question about the practicality of the OP's original idea.
 
Last edited:

iddt3

Donor
What about Bamboo for structure? It's lightweight, strong, and cheap. Are there equivalent European woods?
 
Top