Would a Hybrid Heli-Carrier style Airship be practical?

TheCyanNinja

Basically got this idea recently and I can't stop thinking of it's plausibility.

Basically if one were to get an Airship with the same capabilities as the Hindenburg, just with no Hydrogen this time. It would have 6 main diesel-powered propellers (more if needed) that could either be just a Piston or Turbofan. They are capable of 180-degree rotation so they could direct the airship anywhere, but mostly point upwards to produce lift. I am thinking of how the reduced weight of the airship due to the LTA properties of the Gas Bags could complement the lifting propeller thus allowing the Airship to further improve it's capabilities; like being able to mount weapons, lift more cargo like bombs, or enable it to give itself armoring.

What do you guys think? How practical would this be? My first thoughts for its use would be of a floating plane carrier, by building a very light runway on the top of the airship full of AA-Flak guns and a comms tower. It should have enough efficiency and power to keep itself up for a day's operation. This is certainly a very expensive project without a doubt. Is this crossing into ASB territory?
 

James Ricker

It would come down to fuel prices and advancements in material science.
If the Airship can transport passengers and cargo at a higher profit margin than an aircraft, the answer is yes.
Passengers would be a little more difficult Because of the slower speed and the additional weight (beds,multiple meals and water) needed for a longer stay on board.
 
Gentian1707

Gentian1707

Wouldn't such a ship be an easy target for anti-air weapons? Aircraft needs to travel at much higher speeds to generate enough lift at higher altitudes. So if this acts as a runway, it has to be much longer than a runway on the ground, or it has to fly closer to the ground. If it's closer to the ground, it can come under threat of even MANPADS. If it's larger than a runway on the ground, well it's a very large, slow moving, extremely clumsy, hot object floating on the air. Missiles usually love such targets.
 

TheCyanNinja

Gentian1707 said:
Wouldn't such a ship be an easy target for anti-air weapons? Aircraft needs to travel at much higher speeds to generate enough lift at higher altitudes. So if this acts as a runway, it has to be much longer than a runway on the ground, or it has to fly closer to the ground. If it's closer to the ground, it can come under threat of even MANPADS. If it's larger than a runway on the ground, well it's a very large, slow moving, extremely clumsy, hot object floating on the air. Missiles usually love such targets.
Click to expand...
It's more meant to be an Aircraft carrier analog and mobile base to coordinate forces in the backline, never alone. If an Airship is within an enemy's radar, then something has gotten to shit. As for the runway thing, that can easily be solved by Catapults and Bridle catchers.
 

Legofan4

TheCyanNinja said:
It's more meant to be an Aircraft carrier analog and mobile base to coordinate forces in the backline, never alone. If an Airship is within an enemy's radar, then something has gotten to shit. As for the runway thing, that can easily be solved by Catapults and Bridle catchers.
Click to expand...
If they have anything like an airborne early warning they will be able to see this thing hundreds of miles off. Let alone orbital surveillance. And something of this much value is worth throwing many missiles at. An airbase can be quickly brought back up to operation by patching up a runway. And unlike a airbase on the ground once it gets hit it is completely out of action.
 

TheCyanNinja

Legofan4 said:
If they have anything like an airborne early warning they will be able to see this thing hundreds of miles off. Let alone orbital surveillance. And something of this much value is worth throwing many missiles at. An airbase can be quickly brought back up to operation by patching up a runway. And unlike a airbase on the ground once it gets hit it is completely out of action.
Click to expand...
That seems to be a cold war problem only though. What if say, this was a crackpot Nazi project that actually got built. Would it actually be practical in the WW2 era?
 

Crimea

TheCyanNinja said:
That seems to be a cold war problem only though. What if say, this was a crackpot Nazi project that actually got built. Would it actually be practical in the WW2 era
Click to expand...

One niche could be use as a base for anti-submarine operations in the Atlantic by the Allies. At least before the advent of long-range bombers that can patrol the entire ocean. In the meantime, this would extend operational range significantly and, since it's airborne, would be safe from U-Boat attack.
 

Cryhavoc101

TheCyanNinja said:
Basically got this idea recently and I can't stop thinking of it's plausibility.

Basically if one were to get an Airship with the same capabilities as the Hindenburg, just with no Hydrogen this time. It would have 6 main diesel-powered propellers (more if needed) that could either be just a Piston or Turbofan. They are capable of 180-degree rotation so they could direct the airship anywhere, but mostly point upwards to produce lift. I am thinking of how the reduced weight of the airship due to the LTA properties of the Gas Bags could complement the lifting propeller thus allowing the Airship to further improve it's capabilities; like being able to mount weapons, lift more cargo like bombs, or enable it to give itself armoring.

What do you guys think? How practical would this be? My first thoughts for its use would be of a floating plane carrier, by building a very light runway on the top of the airship full of AA-Flak guns and a comms tower. It should have enough efficiency and power to keep itself up for a day's operation. This is certainly a very expensive project without a doubt. Is this crossing into ASB territory?
Click to expand...
I love airships and like the idea of aircraft carrying airships - and I loved the game Crimson Sky's by FASA and the computer game that was based on it back in the day

However they do appear to be an answer looking for a problem which really did not exist which is why the concept never got beyond the prototype stage with airships such as the ill fated Akron crashing with great loss of life in 1933 and her sister Macon which had to make a forced landing into the sea in 1935 pretty much starting and ending the concept.
 

weasel_airlift

Diesel engines are rather heavy per HP, aren't they? Perhaps a better solution for this is to have a diesel generator running electric thruster motors. I do not know if that's more efficient at this scale, though.
 

EagleKeeper

The U.S. Navy tried fighters launched from Airships in the 1930s. The problem isn't the concept of using the Airship as a mothership, it is the fragility of the airship to weather and its relatively slow speed making it difficult to maneuver away from bad weather that is the problem.
 
Gentian1707

Gentian1707

TheCyanNinja said:
It's more meant to be an Aircraft carrier analog and mobile base to coordinate forces in the backline, never alone. If an Airship is within an enemy's radar, then something has gotten to shit. As for the runway thing, that can easily be solved by Catapults and Bridle catchers.
Click to expand...
If the ship is intended to stay well away from the enemy territory, there's no reason for it to fly high anyway. It can take off, go to the place where it needs to, land on the water and float or land on struts in an uninhabited area and operate that way. Literally an airport that is air mobile. But if anyone's willing to actually calculate, the amount of weight such a ship would need to be to absorb the impacts of take off and landings, the aircrafts, the fuel for the air wing, the ammunition, the support personal, and then calculate the thrust needed to lift that weight off the ground, it might not even be feasible with what we have today. Unless if we are talking about very light bi planes kinda things.
 

DougM

It would work better if it was just a heavy lifter.
You load everything needed to make a forward airbase, then you fly to an area land and build a forward airbase that won’t fall out of the sky and be destroyed with one missile.

We are slowly approaching the point where Navy Aircraft Carriers are starting to be questionable as Aircraft are getting longer ranged and the human pilot is becoming less needed all the time and we are doing less and less dog fighting or what have you. So we are being able to either project/attack from farther and farther. Or we are using smaller things like drones that can be local or we are using remote vehicles that can spend a reasonable long time getting to the combat area.

All this at the time that it is getting harder to defend anything from drone or missile or hyper velocity missiles or what ever.

So this is just not a practical idea. As amazing as it would be.
 

Geekhis Khan

Awesome but Impractical, to say the least. As others have noted, Airships are costly, fragile, have limited carriage capability, limited ceiling, and are vulnerable to bad weather, which limits military applicability, as recent attempts to resurrect the Airship as a mobile command and recon post discovered (ROI vs. just using an aerostat was terrible). Perhaps a tethered aerostat as a mothership for small drones could be in the cards.

That said, for a Steampunk or Dieselpunk setting? Not just "yes" but "hell yes!" Bring on the Air Carriers!
 

Post

Crimea said:
One niche could be use as a base for anti-submarine operations in the Atlantic by the Allies. At least before the advent of long-range bombers that can patrol the entire ocean. In the meantime, this would extend operational range significantly and, since it's airborne, would be safe from U-Boat attack.
Click to expand...
Ther are quite a few storms in the Atlantic, so airships are of very limited use (or quite frequently in danger due to the weather).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top