Airships Instead of Atomic Powered Aircraft?

Delta Force

Banned
Up until the early 1960s, there was active research into nuclear powered aircraft for roles requiring large payloads and/or high endurance. Although airships are incapable of high speeds and altitudes and certainly aren't suitable for infiltrating enemy airspace, they can carry large payloads for extended periods of time. This could open up some interesting roles.

One obvious role would be service as coastal defense platforms. Although they wouldn't be as fast as aircraft, they could stay on station for an extended period of time and carry advanced systems to help identify submarines. Because it's the Cold War, the slow speed might not be too much of a disadvantage, as the airship could deploy rockets, missiles, and nuclear weapons against the submarines.

An airship could also serve as an air defense platform, monitoring for enemy aircraft and missiles and perhaps even carrying interceptor missiles or aircraft to defend against them. Perhaps it could even offer a defense against SLBM attack, launching interceptor missiles at them during their vulnerable boost phase.

Another role could be strategic attack. Although airships would not make good platforms for penetrating enemy airspace, they could carry long range missiles and have a role akin to flying ballistic missile submarines.

Are any of these roles feasible? What about other ones?
 
The advantage of ballistic missile submarines is that they are stealthy and can evade detection, meaning you don't have to worry about losing your second-strike capability. Airships, on the other hand, would light up everyone's radar like nobody's business. Yes, you could move them around to make it harder to target them with enemy ballistic missiles, but at that point you might as well use trains with launchers on them (as the Soviets did). Besides, I don't want to think of the recoil and back-blast effects of launching a full-fledged ballistic missile from an airship.

By the Cold War, radar is a fairly mature technology, so radar towers are likely better bang-for-your-buck for detecting enemy attacks. And jet fighters make more useful interceptors (since they can reach a wider area in time to actually intercept the incoming enemy).
 
This is OTL, really. Airships got actually used, where atomic powered aircraft were only a pipedream.

Neither is particularly useful strategically, but the former can have a niche role tactically.
 
This is OTL, really. Airships got actually used, where atomic powered aircraft were only a pipedream.

Neither is particularly useful strategically, but the former can have a niche role tactically.

Note that in 1959, Goodyear studied building an atomic-powered airship.
(which they claimed might be able do 80 mph)
 

Puzzle

Donor
I could imagine something like an arsenal blimp, just holding tons of air launched cruise missiles. It lingers out in international waters and just stays there until it's time to launch, all the while serving as an early warning platform.

I don't know if it would be any better than a ship with a similar role though, maybe its speed would be enough?
 
You have a shiny bright airship that youre just hoping people don't attack. The problem is, people are real swines for attacking anything suspicious, so it's gonna be goodbye fancy airship as soon as there's any trouble.
 
Note that in 1959, Goodyear studied building an atomic-powered airship.

So did the Soviets, apparently.

p.txt.jpg
 

NoMommsen

Donor
being nuclear or conventionally powered - not sensible as a "combat" hitero armed military asset. Too easily downed.

But as a strategic transport ... :)
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
The advantage of ballistic missile submarines is that they are stealthy and can evade detection, meaning you don't have to worry about losing your second-strike capability. Airships, on the other hand, would light up everyone's radar like nobody's business. Yes, you could move them around to make it harder to target them with enemy ballistic missiles, but at that point you might as well use trains with launchers on them (as the Soviets did). Besides, I don't want to think of the recoil and back-blast effects of launching a full-fledged ballistic missile from an airship.

By the Cold War, radar is a fairly mature technology, so radar towers are likely better bang-for-your-buck for detecting enemy attacks. And jet fighters make more useful interceptors (since they can reach a wider area in time to actually intercept the incoming enemy).

Might be wrong here so correct me if i am, but I thought Airships were "stealthy" due to radar emissions going through or refracting on the envelope. The only radar returns are from the gondola.

Might be an old wife's tale lols.

Cheers filers.
 
Might be wrong here so correct me if i am, but I thought Airships were "stealthy" due to radar emissions going through or refracting on the envelope. The only radar returns are from the gondola.

Might be an old wife's tale lols.

Cheers filers.

Partially correct. But the radar-confounding aspect of airships does not render them "invisible" so much as a confusing signal. As I understand a large airship might not present a single image, but several, making extremely accurate targeting difficult.

Large blimps were useful until the 1960's as AEW vehicles, and I've always believed the large, aircraft carrying, rigid airship would have many useful ASW capabilities (long endurance, station keeping, and the ability to remain invisible to a submarine's sonar, while using dropped or towed sonar arrays to track the subs). Add hook-on aircraft and you have the perfect ASW vehicle...weather permitting. The achilles' heel of airships is not their supposed vulnerability to weapons (they are no more vulnerable against modern missiles, etc. than a helicopter or light carrier) but the fact that they simply cannot survive heavy weather - something the US Navy learned in the 1920's and 1930s.
 
Up until the early 1960s, there was active research into nuclear powered aircraft for roles requiring large payloads and/or high endurance. Although airships are incapable of high speeds and altitudes and certainly aren't suitable for infiltrating enemy airspace, they can carry large payloads for extended periods of time. This could open up some interesting roles.

One obvious role would be service as coastal defense platforms. Although they wouldn't be as fast as aircraft, they could stay on station for an extended period of time and carry advanced systems to help identify submarines. Because it's the Cold War, the slow speed might not be too much of a disadvantage, as the airship could deploy rockets, missiles, and nuclear weapons against the submarines.

An airship could also serve as an air defense platform, monitoring for enemy aircraft and missiles and perhaps even carrying interceptor missiles or aircraft to defend against them. Perhaps it could even offer a defense against SLBM attack, launching interceptor missiles at them during their vulnerable boost phase.

Another role could be strategic attack. Although airships would not make good platforms for penetrating enemy airspace, they could carry long range missiles and have a role akin to flying ballistic missile submarines.

Are any of these roles feasible? What about other ones?

Feasible? The most feasible use would be ASW (as I've argued often). This is not only feasible, but possible an excellent use. The others not so much. I imagine the structural weight to mount useful numbers of weapons such as ICBMs or ABMs would be prohibitive. Also, when compared with surface ships and submarines (which can weather severe storms) and airplanes (which can fly above them), and airship can do neither. They simply could not be counted on to mount permanent standing patrols. With modern meteorology, few would get caught and crash like the USS Akron or Shenandoah, but that would be because they would be kept in their hangers a lot.
 
Top