Plausibility check: ASW and AEW airships.

Driftless

Donor
If you detect an aircraft(s) at distance, and it appears to be heading towards your blimp, isn't one of the evasive manuvers to head away - in general - from that would be attacker, especially if you head out to open sea? Even if the plane can outpace the blimp, by a lot, you could possibly get beyond their operational radius. Would that work?

If you are sending the airships(dirigibles, semi-dirigibles, blimps) out over the open ocean vs coastal use; don't you need to equip them with a real lifeboat(s) as well? While necessary, that would reduce their operational payload
 
Last edited:

Saphroneth

Banned
Thanks. I didn't want to toot my own horn, plus I was trying to keep my response consistent with OTL technologies.

But now that some people are using the word "zeppelin", all bets are off and I recomend serious study of that thread.

It's not an AH if rigid metal-skin airships don't prominently feature. As such, WW1 was an AH.
 
Very useful. The condor does not carry enough ammunition to shoot down a Zeppelin. One key is size, you can basically fit a modern aircraft carrier inside of one. They are also big enough to carry fighters or weapons.
It might be worth your while to look at the aeroplanes that did shoot down Zeppelins in WW1.

Actually a large airship could carry an AEW RDF set and a heated pressure cabin pod so one could postulate a WW2 AEW airship that operated at extreme heights beyond the capability of WW2 aeroplanes and thus be safe from attack. Say 15 km. Stretching the technology but not ASB.
 
Leaving aside the political factors for the moment,
would it have been technically
feasible to use airships for anti submarine
warfare during world war II?
On a similar note, was there an aircraft detection
set small and durable enough for airships
to be used in to detect incoming aircraft.
So basically Project Cadillac on an LTA platform for persistent AEW? Sure why not? It'd need to stay close to a carrier for protection but you could possibly do away with the need for picket destroyers.

http://blog.usni.org/2010/10/06/project-cadillac-the-beginning-of-aew-in-the-us-navy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-class_blimp
 
Last edited:

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Yes, it is feasible. We did use blimps to hunt subs, and more would have been useful. You can also take a Macon like ship with airplanes and use to hunt subs. You basically get the equivalent of a 6-12 plane anti-sub carrier that can rapidly get to a needed area much faster than a light carrier (CVE). You are looking at maybe a 200 knot speed to arrive for the carrier not low 30's for a theoritical light carrier built on cruiser hull.

By the end of WW1, you have Zeppelins with lift capacity of over 80,000 pounds, so yes you can put in the radar. It just requires funding to develop. The advantage is the range to the horizon, the same basic reason we use AWACs today. Someone just has to dream up the concept soon enough and win funding. Now it can't defend itself versus fighter aircraft, but neither can an AWAC. So near land, say used in England, it will have to have dedicated fighters to protect. Over the ocean, it will be above the operational ceiling of carrier based aviation. BTW, you probably will need pressure suits too. It can also carry weapons, so it does not have to be helpless. Again, a lot depends on development budgets. Do you stick a few 50 caliber on it, or is it like the late 1940's radar controlled guns? Or just leave it unarmed? Also, Helium blimps don't go boom, the slowly deflate as hit by bullets.

Now assuming you don't change WW1 outcome and you take out the fun German scenario, where would you use it. A place like Pearl Habor (or any major naval base like Singapore). You build a small fleet of them (3-5) and have them patrol outside of the base over the ocean. It makes the enemy's job much harder since they have to deal with the likelihood of being caught up to 700 miles from Pearl. All for the cost of about a destroyer each at these levels. It makes a good TL.

So does one where the USA keeps them in service, and then lends lease these blimps to the UK for anti-submarine work. Zeppelins are a niche item. They can be useful. So much like spending on Navy Seals or subs to tap cables or SR-71, they can be a high cost per unit, low total cost item with big benefits. Or you can fight a war without them and do ok.

Zeppelins/Dirigibles capped out at around 85 MPH (USS Macon 75 MPH, Hindenburg 85 MPH) roughly 55 at cruise. This assumes no head winds or serious cross winds (tail winds would, of course, increase speed). Macon also had an operational ceiling of 3,000 feet, although it could go higher at the cost of having to vent gas, thereby reducing lift. In the presence of a head wind or strong cross wind a CVL, in extreme cases even a CVE is faster than an airship. Macon, while it demonstrated that the airship carrier was a workable system also demonstrated the limitations. Airships are vastly limited by weather that would barely be noticed by a surface ship or heavier than air platform.

The potential size of the aircraft carried is also quite limited, as is its payload (the Sparrowhawk managed two .30 cal, but had no capacity for bombs, its main recommendation was that it could fit).

As you note they are very much a niche item, one that has extreme vulnerabilities that are nearly equal to its advantages. Unlike many other military platforms the rigid airship is also a massive visual symbol, far out of proportion to its actual value. Loss of the platform is the sort of event that would create propaganda nightmares, despite the fact it is less of an actual loss than a DDE or minesweeper.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
It might be worth your while to look at the aeroplanes that did shoot down Zeppelins in WW1.

Actually a large airship could carry an AEW RDF set and a heated pressure cabin pod so one could postulate a WW2 AEW airship that operated at extreme heights beyond the capability of WW2 aeroplanes and thus be safe from attack. Say 15 km. Stretching the technology but not ASB.


Hydrogen, not helium.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Zeppelins/Dirigibles capped out at around 85 MPH (USS Macon 75 MPH, Hindenburg 85 MPH) roughly 55 at cruise. This assumes no head winds or serious cross winds (tail winds would, of course, increase speed). Macon also had an operational ceiling of 3,000 feet, although it could go higher at the cost of having to vent gas, thereby reducing lift. In the presence of a head wind or strong cross wind a CVL, in extreme cases even a CVE is faster than an airship. Macon, while it demonstrated that the airship carrier was a workable system also demonstrated the limitations. Airships are vastly limited by weather that would barely be noticed by a surface ship or heavier than air platform.

The potential size of the aircraft carried is also quite limited, as is its payload (the Sparrowhawk managed two .30 cal, but had no capacity for bombs, its main recommendation was that it could fit).

As you note they are very much a niche item, one that has extreme vulnerabilities that are nearly equal to its advantages. Unlike many other military platforms the rigid airship is also a massive visual symbol, far out of proportion to its actual value. Loss of the platform is the sort of event that would create propaganda nightmares, despite the fact it is less of an actual loss than a DDE or minesweeper.

I can't deny the propaganda loss. Since it is a niche weapon, a nation doing a "massive investment" might build as high as 10 total ships. Losing one will be filmable from many 10's of miles away.

While you numbers look correct for the Macon, on the ceiling, they don't match the numbers I have seen for German Zeppelins. Over the war, the Imperial Germans increased the operational ceiling substantially above the 3000 foot level. Much like you can build a ship with 5" guns to be anything from a shallow, slow coastal boat to a fast ship able to keep up with the fast carriers. The same is true as with Zeppelins. If you decide to do radar platforms on Zeppelins, I am convinced that ships would be built with higher ceilings. On the AEW part, I believe the issues of finding funding for the radar, fixing communications, and working out the communication will be more of an issue than building the Zeppelins. And the even larger/harder point of writing a TL is someone fully understanding the benefits of airborne radar/control of ships/planes.

I have also seen numbers on Zeppelins with speeds of 150, but I don't have my notes handy. Look at the figures quickly, online, it looks like I flipped KM and miles, so you appear to be correct on this one. These airships are still much faster than ships, but by less than I stated.

And Zeppelins are hard to operate as the Macon show or the pre-WW1 Austrian Zeppelin program. And then we get back to attitude and PR. If you view Zeppelins like ships, then they are too important to be that fragile. If you look in terms of airplanes, they work fine. No one expects to send out many PBY every day from Pearl and never lose any, especially if you don't ground them on the worst weather days. But if you send out a DD or SS to patrol west of Pearl, you expect it to come back to port virtually every time. IMO, this is really a size versus crewing issue.

And finally IMO, a lot comes from not learning the lessons of Zeppelins in WW1 since only Germany used in large numbers. Zeppelins absolutely suck for land offensive actions. They can in theory be used in offensive naval operations with the right weapons and no/little air opposition. They work great as scouts. Great to co-ordinate ships. Great at spotting subs. Great on minefields. And they can be a serious annoyance when following surface ships alone.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
whats to stop the condor from using its 20mm or 13mm's on the little cabin looking thing underneath the big bag of helium

Nothing in war is invulnerable.

But Zeppelins are not as vulnerable as they appear. You can fit guns on them. You can fit planes on them. So for example, the 20 mm gun you reference weights about 100 pounds, a Zeppelin will have a payload ability measured in 1,000 of pounds once you are past the fuel and crew weight issue. A solo condor going against a Zeppelin with say 4,000 pounds allocated to air defense weapons would not be such an easy target. It is key to remember that we are not looking to kill the Condor, just either survive the attack or deter the condor from wanting to attack.

Also, they airships are huge, really volume unlimited, so likely most of the Condor rounds will strike air or helium bags. And you likely are operating airships in the Atlantic to protect ships, so you will often have warships and perhaps airplanes available.

Also in a TL where a condor type plane exists, someone (US Navy?) will have another decade of experience operating the airships, so a lot of bugs are hopefully worked out by then.

BTW, how many blimps did the condors claim as kills in OTL WW2?
 
Nothing in war is invulnerable.

But Zeppelins are not as vulnerable as they appear. You can fit guns on them. You can fit planes on them. So for example, the 20 mm gun you reference weights about 100 pounds, a Zeppelin will have a payload ability measured in 1,000 of pounds once you are past the fuel and crew weight issue. A solo condor going against a Zeppelin with say 4,000 pounds allocated to air defense weapons would not be such an easy target. It is key to remember that we are not looking to kill the Condor, just either survive the attack or deter the condor from wanting to attack.

Also, they airships are huge, really volume unlimited, so likely most of the Condor rounds will strike air or helium bags. And you likely are operating airships in the Atlantic to protect ships, so you will often have warships and perhaps airplanes available.

Also in a TL where a condor type plane exists, someone (US Navy?) will have another decade of experience operating the airships, so a lot of bugs are hopefully worked out by then.

BTW, how many blimps did the condors claim as kills in OTL WW2?

why the hell would you use a zeppelin as an aew/asw platform anyway.

All you need is something big enough to loft the radar and stay up there for an extended period.

I get the feeling that this thread has moved away from what the OP really meant or thought to 'hurrah, zeppelin steampunk time'
 
OTL the United States Navy deployed well over 100 blimps to patrol its Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. They started by covering approaches to major harbours and escorting coastal convoys. U-boats quickly learned that ANY aircraft over a convoy vastly increased the risk to U-boats. It was not until 1944 that long-range, fixed-wing, B-24 Liberator patrol-bombers closed the "Atlantic Gap."
1944, the USN sent a few blimps to the Med. to conduct anti-submarine patrols in the Straits of Gibraltar and even clear mines. USN blimps served well into the Cold War. The USN retired their last M-Class Blimp in 1962. They had large air-to-air radar installed inside their hulls. They were used as AEW until enough satellites were launched.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
why the hell would you use a zeppelin as an aew/asw platform anyway.

All you need is something big enough to loft the radar and stay up there for an extended period.

I get the feeling that this thread has moved away from what the OP really meant or thought to 'hurrah, zeppelin steampunk time'

ASW - we did use blimps, Zeppelins would just be more effective since it would be a more capable ship. Much like a Mustang is better than a P-35, both do the same thing in a broad sense. The main advantages are more lift capacity and more time over target. A WW1 zeppelin easily can out lift (payload) over a WW2 B-17. You can also stay up for days straight. Until you get mid-air refueling, Zeppelins will have much more loiter time than a plane.

AEW - distance to horizon and loiter time. You need line of sight on WW2 era radars and sensor systems.

Now I dearly love Zeppelins. They are fun to add to TL. At time the help the side in an ATL that uses them, but the key is they are a niche weapon. And they are mostly viable due to an almost irrational decision to develop them pre-WW1 as an ego project by private citizens. So to recap, the US navy only benefits from airships in WW2 compare to OTL unless it is additional funding or you replace a dumb project (USS Alaska or the like). Germany benefited in WW1 from Zeppelins only because the private individuals who funded development will fund some other ego project that has no military benefit. I have no doubt that if you spend the pre-WW1 amount on Zeppelins on another new technology like radar or fighters or bombers or torpedo planes or better mines (naval or land), you get a much stronger German military.

A more modern example of "glad to have but rather have spent the money elsewhere" would be the fighter version of SR-71 ATL. If you take a Red Storm Rising, they sure would be great if you add them to the mix. Based out of Scotland, they probably on holy terror on backfires. If 12 were built, you might well have wanted 24 to have been built. But you much, much rather have spent the development budget and infrastructure budget on more F-15 and mid-air refuelers to provide range.
 
You could argue that there are ones that exist right now. The JLENS is a network of "AEW" blimps/aerostats as they are known. Of course they are unmanned, so that might disqualify them from being airships...
 
Dont forget No convoy covered by blimps suffered any loss. As mentioned the ZPG class were used for both asw and aew. Rather successful at the time.
 

Driftless

Donor
Plus, if you lose a blimp, it's not the PR disaster that that losing a dirigible would be.

What is the comparative construction cost of a blimp vs a dirigible and what is the operating cost for either; using Helium for either?. Certainly a dirigible could be built bigger and more capable, but at what cost? The US Navy sure eventually made the switch to blimps
 
The USN developed blimps as radar platforms after WWII/early cold war. They were part of the air defense radar system that included AEW Constellations. Eventually land based radar chains in the north replaced them.

Blimp borne radars cover way more area than ship based, in both ASW and AEW modes. Remember that even snorkel equipped U-Boats spent most of the time on the surface. While, at least in theory, a Condor could shoot down a blimp (or Zeppelin), a radar equipped airship of whatever type will see the Condor long before they see the airship. Also, the Condors are looking for ships not airships. The airship can "run away" avoiding the Condor, and/or get within the AA envelope of a convoy.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
If you detect an aircraft(s) at distance, and it appears to be heading towards your blimp, isn't one of the evasive manuvers to head away - in general - from that would be attacker, especially if you head out to open sea? Even if the plane can outpace the blimp, by a lot, you could possibly get beyond their operational radius. Would that work?

If you are sending the airships(dirigibles, semi-dirigibles, blimps) out over the open ocean vs coastal use; don't you need to equip them with a real lifeboat(s) as well? While necessary, that would reduce their operational payload


Presumably, these radar airships would be used like modern AWACS with similar orders. When you first detect enemy aircraft that likely know where you are at, you head away and vector in the the fighters. Presumably where possibly, there would be small group (4 or so) fighters with experience pilots dedicated to its defense.

On airships, I suspect the USN would have good life vest and some type of rafts. If someone like the IJN, they might well be more risk tolerant of potential drowning of crew in case of a wreck.
 
While the number of fighters might be limited, I'm not so sure it would be impossible for them to hook up again, either. Cobham figured out the probe & drogue; what would be wrong with adapting it to an in-flight hookup, with cables to reel in the "trapped" fighter?
 
Top