What Would Be Necessary for Airships in the Modern Era

[Bear Ribs]

Cribbing a bit off this thread, let's talk airships. Zeppelins, semirigids, blimps, all lighter-than-air craft.

In our timeline they exist only for extremely niche applications and aren't competitive with heavier-than-air planes and jets. While they're standard for Steampunk, those worlds don't tend to actually justify why, they just happen to have Zeppelins everywhere. So what developments or historical deviations would be required for the airship to remain competitive? Consider military or non-military uses as you choose.

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

As I understand it, airships are far better at lifting weights than airplanes. An airship's lifting capacity grows with its volume. The bigger an airship is, the exponentially greater it's lifting capacity. Theoretically this can scale up until the materials the make up the airship are literally not strong enough to hold together and collapses under its own weight.

The obvious way to use airships is for transporting a lot of cargo over land, over mountains and across areas where there is little to no railroad or highway infrastructure. Could see military use for transporting a lot of equipment in Africa or the Middl-East or Mongolia, etc.

Biggest problem with the commercial use of airships is the noise pollution. Unlike planes, which fly by in a matter of seconds, a civilian on the ground can hear the airship for several minutes, so laws might be enacted that restrict the use of airships over dense population centers like cities. Then again, cities have well developed road infrastructure so you're probably not getting the best use out of your airship there.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

I think to really make the airship idea work you need to somehow make it more efficient than it's alternatives or to just find a specific niche for it.

Militarily, it's just not able to survive in high threat environments...or even low threat environs. If you try to equip it to become a fighting vessel than all the weight you want for transport goes towards defense/offense. Then there's the problem that the thing is a virtual sitting duck.

So we're looking at non-combat use unless we can somehow create a strong, load-bearing material that is EXTREMELY light OR has some form of anti-gravity property (repulsor tech or whatever you like). So...I'll ignore that possibility for now.

I think you've tagged the niche for them; large cargo movement over ground where roads are limited or unsuitable for heavy transport. I'd imagine for use from ports to inland cities that wish to remain isolated. Maybe used as a way to help supply explorers as well.

 

[Captain X]

I think the reason they tend to be seen in steampunk is because airships were invented prior to the airplane, and that's probably the end of it. Plus, the idea of an airship being steam-powered makes a lot more sense than the old cloth and wood airplanes having them since airships would lift a lot more, especially the more gas they could hold.

As for why they lost popularity and aren't really seen as much now even with more advanced technology - honestly they're really dangerous to operate in anything other than ideal weather conditions, because it doesn't even take that much of a wind to wreck them.

 

[Zachowon]

An Airship is only useful in Dieselpunk/Steampunk setting because modern electronic devices arnt involved.
They are too slow moving

 

[Scottty]

An Airship is only useful in Dieselpunk/Steampunk setting because modern electronic devices arnt involved.
They are too slow moving

But need they be? What if we painted them red or something?

Silly joking aside, just because airships of yore were slow, doesn't mean all futures ones have to be.
Also, I think it's a mistake to look at them as being in the same use-case as airplanes. They should rather be compared with ships.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Airships really aren't all that slow. The current record held by Zeppelin NT* is 118mph and modern airships routinely have cruise speeds of 80+mph. While this is not jet speed, compared to just about any other vehicle they're extremely fast.

*Said name rather ticks me off because Zeppelin NT is not a Zeppelin, it's a Semirigid. Words have meaning, people.

 

[Marduk]

An Airship is only useful in Dieselpunk/Steampunk setting because modern electronic devices arnt involved.
They are too slow moving

For some uses slow moving is not that great of a problem.

Antonov An-2 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And then there are pure civilian uses.
Overall, i think the weather problem and operating costs are the real show stopper. You need a pretty big airship to carry the cargo a cheap twin engine STOL prop transport can carry.
You also need pretty big and unique infrastructure to keep it.
It has to be put somewhere and someone has to pay for it.

Also there is a reason why in steampunk airships either have some kind of bullshit materials that make them have impossible lift capacity and/or durability, or outright are flying armored ships with no limitations or vulnerability of being mostly gas.

 

[Zachowon]

But need they be? What if we painted them red or something?

Silly joking aside, just because airships of yore were slow, doesn't mean all futures ones have to be.
Also, I think it's a mistake to look at them as being in the same use-case as airplanes. They should rather be compared with ships.

You would need jet engines, plus armor it up, because it would still be huge and easily seen

For some uses slow moving is not that great of a problem.

Antonov An-2 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And then there are pure civilian uses.
Overall, i think the weather problem and operating costs are the real show stopper. You need a pretty big airship to carry the cargo a cheap twin engine STOL prop transport can carry.
You also need pretty big and unique infrastructure to keep it.

The AN 2 is also quieter and used by countries that can afford better or just have protection from other countries.

A 50 cal mounted on a Humvee could take out a airship unless you somehow heavily armored it.

 

[Marduk]

A 50 cal mounted on a Humvee could take out a airship unless you somehow heavily armored it.

It's also not a good idea to fly a An-2 over one, or most helicopters for that matter.

 

[Bear Ribs]

A 50 cal mounted on a Humvee could take out a airship unless you somehow heavily armored it.

This one Imma so no, absolutely not. Airships are insanely tough and take massive amounts of firepower to do any significant damage to. On top of that they're normally built with extremely durable skins anyway, Kevlar being the current material of choice so bullets are a non-starter. Punching a hole in one doesn't do much, they're not pressurized so gas escapes very slowly, and they have multiple redundant cells inside the envelope anyway so even losing a cell completely just means the airship drops a bit of ballast and continues on.

We have many, many records of Zeppelin bombers in WW1 attacking England and soaking tens of thousands of rounds from fighter squadrons and ground emplacements while emptying their bays of bombs before returning to Germany without issue. The idea that they could be popped like a balloon is pure pop culture. The Zeppelins didn't start taking losses until the British developed incendiary weapons that could ignite their envelopes and even then did a number of successful raids.

 

[Zachowon]

It's also not a good idea to fly a An-2 over one, or most helicopters for that matter.

YEs, but both are more likely to outrun the gunner unlike with an airship

 

[Zachowon]

This one Imma so no, absolutely not. Airships are insanely tough and take massive amounts of firepower to do any significant damage to. On top of that they're normally built with extremely durable skins anyway, Kevlar being the current material of choice so bullets are a non-starter. Punching a hole in one doesn't do much, they're not pressurized so gas escapes very slowly, and they have multiple redundant cells inside the envelope anyway so even losing a cell completely just means the airship drops a bit of ballast and continues on.

We have many, many records of Zeppelin bombers in WW1 attacking England and soaking tens of thousands of rounds from fighter squadrons and ground emplacements while emptying their bays of bombs before returning to Germany without issue. The idea that they could be popped like a balloon is pure pop culture. The Zeppelins didn't start taking losses until the British developed incendiary weapons that could ignite their envelopes and even then did a number of successful raids.

You do know the US has rounds more then capable of destroying such a thing easily right? FOr instance, bradleys carry Incindiary HE rounds for instance. SOmething that could easily be VERY useful against the Zepplins. This doesn't go into account how a slow moving Airship is easy pickings for anti air weaponry.

Also, 50 cal rounds also have API, Armor Piercing incendiary.

Basically, a slow moving airship, even with jet engines, is just to easy of a target from anything from MANPADS to Helicopters, to ground based Anti Aircraft guns.

 

[Bear Ribs]

You do know the US has rounds more then capable of destroying such a thing easily right? FOr instance, bradleys carry Incindiary HE rounds for instance. SOmething that could easily be VERY useful against the Zepplins. This doesn't go into account how a slow moving Airship is easy pickings for anti air weaponry.

Also, 50 cal rounds also have API, Armor Piercing incendiary.

Basically, a slow moving airship, even with jet engines, is just to easy of a target from anything from MANPADS to Helicopters, to ground based Anti Aircraft guns.

That's not what I was arguing. The US has plenty of weapons that can take down an airship, I was specifically stating that "random Hummvee with a machine gun" is not going to cut it, you actually need that significantly heavier firepower.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

You don't need to take all the air out to make it useless. Hit the engines and it'd done. Or just hit that little box underneath and kill the crew...equally done.

Things the airship has to overcome to be feasible today for more than football coverage:
-must be all-weather capable (hurricanes not withstanding)
-really must be capable of fast turn arounds like jets with minor maintenance
-cargo capability must be HUGE in comparison to regular air transport costs in order to justify the pace difference otherwise just put it on rail or truck

As a military tool, the airship is a non-starter in our present day environments

 

[Bear Ribs]

You don't need to take all the air out to make it useless. Hit the engines and it'd done. Or just hit that little box underneath and kill the crew...equally done.

... Seriously?

Airships have multiple redundant engines. The little box on the bottom doesn't have the crew, those are mainly inside the envelope in anything except the extremely tiny models that are used for only hours at a time. The gondola or control car is there to give the pilot a better view while landing and probably wouldn't exist at all on a militarized airship. People need to quit thinking these things can be taken out by popping them with a pin.

 

[Marduk]

YEs, but both are more likely to outrun the gunner unlike with an airship

They aren't *that* slow.
This is about indicative of modern technology based airship.

HAV304 Airlander (now Airlander 10), Hybrid Air Vehicles

Airlander 10 is a long-endurance, multi-intelligence vehicle (LEMV) designed and developed by UK-based Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV).

www.aerospace-technology.com

Cruise speed of 150 km/h is just about 50 km/h short of some old but still used helicopters like Mi-2. The bigger issue is how much easier to hit it is. Then again, even that doesn't apply to civilian ones.

People need to quit thinking these things can be taken out by popping them with a pin.

That ironically is the problem - you don't need pinpoint accuracy to take it down, like with planes. Instead you just need to spray lots and lots of bullets or fragments into a slow target the size of skyscraper and as long as a meaningful chunk of that hits within said area its gonna go down. And that's something a drugged up third world militiaman on the back of a pickup truck with a ZU-23 is perfectly capable of doing.

 

[Zachowon]

That's not what I was arguing. The US has plenty of weapons that can take down an airship, I was specifically stating that "random Hummvee with a machine gun" is not going to cut it, you actually need that significantly heavier firepower.

All they need to do is fire at it for a long period of time with API ammo.

... Seriously?

Airships have multiple redundant engines. The little box on the bottom doesn't have the crew, those are mainly inside the envelope in anything except the extremely tiny models that are used for only hours at a time. The gondola or control car is there to give the pilot a better view while landing and probably wouldn't exist at all on a militarized airship. People need to quit thinking these things can be taken out by popping them with a pin.

Will they be armed? Because you have to account for thay, because even with modern tech, the way most arms are reloded is from Below, not generally from above. It would just take racking it with fire over and over and cause plenty of damage to crew and weapons making it useless for ll but being a view

They aren't *that* slow.
This is about indicative of modern technology based airship.

HAV304 Airlander (now Airlander 10), Hybrid Air Vehicles

Airlander 10 is a long-endurance, multi-intelligence vehicle (LEMV) designed and developed by UK-based Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV).

www.aerospace-technology.com

Cruise speed of 150 km/h is just about 50 km/h short of some old but still used helicopters like Mi-2. The bigger issue is how much easier to hit it is. Then again, even that doesn't apply to civilian ones.

That ironically is the problem - you don't need pinpoint accuracy to take it down, like with planes. Instead you just need to spray lots and lots of bullets or fragments into a slow target the size of skyscraper and as long as a meaningful chunk of that hits within said area its gonna go down. And that's something a drugged up third world militiaman on the back of a pickup truck with a ZU-23 is perfectly capable of doing.

I am talking about it being able to be hit easier. The bigger the target the harder to miss as they say. Which is why things have been getting smaller not bigger

 

[Bear Ribs]

All they need to do is fire at it for a long period of time with API ammo.

Will they be armed? Because you have to account for thay, because even with modern tech, the way most arms are reloded is from Below, not generally from above. It would just take racking it with fire over and over and cause plenty of damage to crew and weapons making it useless for ll but being a view

I am talking about it being able to be hit easier. The bigger the target the harder to miss as they say. Which is why things have been getting smaller not bigger

Why would you need to do that? You can mount them like any other plane, again everything that isn't gas isn't crammed in the gondola. Seriously, there's no issue mounting guns on the sides, the back, the top, or whatever, these things aren't hot air balloons. The P-Class, f'rex, had 7 or 8 machine guns, typically 3 on turrets across the top, two waist guns, and front and rear emplacements along with a bomb load for incinerating London. Plenty of Zeppelins were heavily armed, though personally, I don't see combat airships coming back without some extremely dramatic and unforeseeable changes in technology.

They aren't *that* slow.
This is about indicative of modern technology based airship.

HAV304 Airlander (now Airlander 10), Hybrid Air Vehicles

Airlander 10 is a long-endurance, multi-intelligence vehicle (LEMV) designed and developed by UK-based Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV).

www.aerospace-technology.com

Cruise speed of 150 km/h is just about 50 km/h short of some old but still used helicopters like Mi-2. The bigger issue is how much easier to hit it is. Then again, even that doesn't apply to civilian ones.

That ironically is the problem - you don't need pinpoint accuracy to take it down, like with planes. Instead you just need to spray lots and lots of bullets or fragments into a slow target the size of skyscraper and as long as a meaningful chunk of that hits within said area its gonna go down. And that's something a drugged up third world militiaman on the back of a pickup truck with a ZU-23 is perfectly capable of doing.

Yet this wasn't something the entire British Military could pull off when Zeppelins were dropping bombs on London by the hundreds... are drugged up third-world militiamen with a pickup really that much more powerful than the entire RAF was then?

Now getting away from the fantasy "easily damaged" problem I want to talk about the actual most serious flaw to airships, their hangars. Airships themselves compete fairly well with planes in performance, being slower but insanely more fuel efficient (The Zeppelin NT can travel for 11 hours on the fuel a comparable plane would need to taxi to the end of the runway before takeoff). However the hangars to store airships are utterly insane, the airship itself is already skyscraper-sized for the big ones so you can imagine what the building to store them in is like... or don't imagine, just look.

Why yes, that is a mockup of an Aircraft Carrier flight deck tucked away in a corner of that Zeppelin hangar. They're that large.

Thus my best guess is that the necessary technology is some method of cheaply constructing utterly massive buildings. We see a "Can airships make a comeback?" news story every few years because the airships themselves are quite competitive with planes, but these comebacks always falter because the godawful expense isn't the airship, it's the airship's house.

 

[Doomsought]

That ironically is the problem - you don't need pinpoint accuracy to take it down, like with planes. Instead you just need to spray lots and lots of bullets or fragments into a slow target the size of skyscraper and as long as a meaningful chunk of that hits within said area its gonna go down. And that's something a drugged up third world militiaman on the back of a pickup truck with a ZU-23 is perfectly capable of doing.

The pressure of the lifting gas is usually neutral to atmospheric. Puncture damage will make an airship sink slowly.

In order to get an airship to actually crash, you need to have High Explosive ordnance explode inside the gas bag and basically destroy the airship outright.