Musings on the military applications of Zeppelins

[Kidblast]

Am I the only one who see the big disadvantage of Zeppelins? One RPG could take them down quite easily, and they would very easy to shoot down with conventional aircraft as well as anti-aircraft guns.

 

[David S Poepoe]

Am I the only one who see the big disadvantage of Zeppelins? One RPG could take them down quite easily, and they would very easy to shoot down with conventional aircraft as well as anti-aircraft guns.

Its not quite as easy as that. For the most part its likely that projectiles will pass thru the zeppelin without encountering any resistance and detonating. Those that do explode will not bring the craft immediately crashing to the ground, but the zeppelin will gradually (when compared with an airplane) lose gas and descend. You could probably walk away from an airship crash alot easier than that of an heavier than air craft.

 

[Thande]

You could also compartmentalise the airbags (assuming a light enough material) which would ensure that a single puncture wouldn't cause total loss.

 

[Mike Stearns]

8: Troop transport

Zeppelins can carry a lot, and are airborne- so why not use them for carrying troops and equipment into battle? This was discussed in the recent ‘World War one paratroopers’ thread (http://snipurl.com/mtsu) and to me the use of zeppelins to create an early form of air cavalry is quite a plausible one. You’re not going to have the scattering problem that you get with parachutes, and you can land lots of men in one go. It could also be used in conjunction with paratroops to land heavier equipment like tanks and artillery. Obviously zeppelins are going to be pretty vulnerable when making their landing, but with sufficient air cover and so on it could work. Plus there’s the advantage of their long range to consider. I reckon this could be a good use of zeppelins, although I’m sure somebody will point out a glaring problem…

This one is a pretty good idea, actually. Zeppelins as they existed in the 30s weren't capable of carrying of carrying tanks and heavy artillery, however passenger Zeppelins like the Hindenburg were capable of carrying up to 100 people and 15 or 20 tons of cargo, and the use of Zeppelins in ferrying troops and supplies across the Atlantic would have aided the Allied war effort, as it would cut the crossing time in half and accelerated the build up of American forces in Britain before the D-Day Invasion.

 

[rowmaster]

Interestingly the Zepplin Design was developed in the 1870's but it took Decades for it to be built. If someone had funded a project at the time of the design Zepplins could be used for a few Decades before Heaver Than Aircraft outpace it.

 

[Codeman]

What about an refuel platform for planes??

 

[Mike Stearns]

What about an refuel platform for planes??

Technically feasible, I think, but very dangerous. Aviation fuel on board an aircraft filled with hydrogen and covered with what amounts to solid rocket propellent strikes me as being a highly hazardous combination and is probably not an idea that most countries would persue for this reason.

 

[The Sandman]

Who in their right mind would use hydrogen nowadays? Helium is definitely the way to go; for that matter, the only reason the Germans didn't use it OTL is because America was basically the sole supplier and we wouldn't sell it to them.

 

[DuQuense]

As far as Puntures go, the lastest is Gell filled fabric, and low pressure gasbags. Shoot at it for several minutes with a LMG and it justs floats away after.

As far as Troop transport I like the Skycat lifting Body concept. you make the skin out of Carbon composite type material, in the shape of a lifting body.
load your rapid deployment Battilion and equipment at their base [no need to march to the airport.]
Takeoff is within 100 ft. fly across the world land a couple miles from the front line. [no airport needed again] thro the troops out, and return for the next Battilion.

 

[Canisd]

The US Navy was the only nation really seriously looking at rigid airships in a military role after WW1. Akron and Macon were designed as long range scouts, and had they not crashed there were plans for even larger ships capable of carrying several SBD-sized bombers. The novel "ZRS" by Rowan Partridge tells the story of a Navy airship's exploits in the Pacific in the early months of 1942. Its not the best novel in the world, but enjoyable none the less. The potential as a long range scout carrier was tremendous. They were 2-3 times faster than any ship, capable of staying aloft for days and cost much less than a cruiser, roughly a third. A helium filled airship would be very hard to kill, since it wouldn't explode and most of the hull is empty space. Any punctures would leak slowly since the gas bags are not above ambient air pressure and rigids were built with multiple gas bags. Using its planes to scout, the airship could stay clear of the enemy. Many of the tactics were coming to fruition when the Macon crashed in 1935, and the Navy abandoned rigids. There were also pretty extensive plans for commercial service, but the Depression stopped any investment, and Pan Am also fought to prevent the Post Office from allowing airships to carry mail which would have been a major revenue source, possibly more lucrative than passengers.

 

[arctic warrior]

The US Navy was the only nation really seriously looking at rigid airships in a military role after WW1. Akron and Macon were designed as long range scouts, and had they not crashed there were plans for even larger ships capable of carrying several SBD-sized bombers. The novel "ZRS" by Rowan Partridge tells the story of a Navy airship's exploits in the Pacific in the early months of 1942. Its not the best novel in the world, but enjoyable none the less. The potential as a long range scout carrier was tremendous. They were 2-3 times faster than any ship, capable of staying aloft for days and cost much less than a cruiser, roughly a third. A helium filled airship would be very hard to kill, since it wouldn't explode and most of the hull is empty space. Any punctures would leak slowly since the gas bags are not above ambient air pressure and rigids were built with multiple gas bags. Using its planes to scout, the airship could stay clear of the enemy. Many of the tactics were coming to fruition when the Macon crashed in 1935, and the Navy abandoned rigids. There were also pretty extensive plans for commercial service, but the Depression stopped any investment, and Pan Am also fought to prevent the Post Office from allowing airships to carry mail which would have been a major revenue source, possibly more lucrative than passengers.

Your'e right - the US did test one of the rigids as an aircraft carrier fitting 4 fighter planes to it. The gas bags were compartmentalized early on, so it wasn't puncturing as much as fire that was the main threat to rigids, but that could be avoided by using helium.
What do you think the funny mast atop Empire State Building was intended for?
I also see the anti submarine and colonial police version the most promising. Heavy lift might become possible, but not in the hayday of zepplins - 20 soldiers plus equip. is far too small a payload to matter.
Many more troops would become a problem as they would feel caged.

 

[Mike Stearns]

Heavy lift might become possible, but not in the hayday of zepplins - 20 soldiers plus equip. is far too small a payload to matter.

Actually, Zepplins were capable of lifting more then you think, even in the 20s and 30s. The Hindenberg had a total compliment of something like 110 to 120 people, counting both passengers and crew. That's in addition to being able to lift something 40 or 50 tons of cargo. I don't see Zepplins carrying tanks or heavy artillery, but Zepplins serving as troop transports and light cargo vessels are not entirely out of the real of possibility. And even if this doesn't sound very impressive, don't forget that Zepplins were capable of crossing between Europe and North America in half the time that the same trip would have taken by ship and Zepplinwould not have been subject to the dangers of torpedoe attack by U-boats.

 

[Romulus Augustulus]

Hmm...are these going to be hydrogen-fueled zeppelins, because they're too damn vulnerable...

Helium-filled dirigibles could have a few potential military applications, but I don't think that they're really the best solution.

 

[arctic warrior]

Actually, Zepplins were capable of lifting more then you think, even in the 20s and 30s. The Hindenberg had a total compliment of something like 110 to 120 people, counting both passengers and crew. That's in addition to being able to lift something 40 or 50 tons of cargo. I don't see Zepplins carrying tanks or heavy artillery, but Zepplins serving as troop transports and light cargo vessels are not entirely out of the real of possibility. And even if this doesn't sound very impressive, don't forget that Zepplins were capable of crossing between Europe and North America in half the time that the same trip would have taken by ship and Zepplinwould not have been subject to the dangers of torpedoe attack by U-boats.

Of course you would be able to cram more troops into a zeppelin than paying passengers, but then only so many. You'd still have to have the crew there and space the troops carried to move about. I'd think you'd need quite a few to rival sea transport by passenger liner.

 

[Michael B]

Of course you would be able to cram more troops into a zeppelin than paying passengers, but then only so many. You'd still have to have the crew there and space the troops carried to move about. I'd think you'd need quite a few to rival sea transport by passenger liner.

Absolutely. Air bridges are fine in an emergency, but a sea convoy will always deliver more in the long term.

Of course if you are completely cut off by sea, eg by a submarine blockade, then airships may be a possible way of resupply. For the WW2 Japanese they may have been a better option for supplying island garrsions than expensive destroyers.