Airships in modern day

I'm willing to bet an old quad-mount .50 could sink any dirigble design that currently exists.

This would probably be about the best use; recreation.
I'd still make damn sure to keep an eye on the weather.

Surveillance

cbp.gov/frontline/frontline-november-aerostats

37mm pom poms couldn't even down the old WWl Airships. I see your 50 cal and raise you 24.3mm

Fighters of the day would empty every round they had into them, with little effect.

>rigid
None
>blimps
Plenty, watching for incoming cruise missiles is going to be the next big valid application.

Attached: jlens.jpg (2048x1508, 589K)

I wonder just how much mass you could save by building rigid airship with modern tech compared to that of 1930th.
Obviously even more if you just don't make them rigid

You could make them semirigid, which is a tech that flat out didn't exist back then.

There is a lot of effort into long loiter surveillance and comm relay. Unmanned versions with solar power have had some interest due to the new tech in solar power. Police departments with bans on drone use for surveillance have started using tethered aerostats. Saw them being used in Miami for instance. The ability to stay up for days and look down at low flyers is going to be important.

1926 says hello, bitch.

Attached: Norge_1926.jpg (1280x857, 66K)

>gets hit once
>explodes
not really much uses outside being a distraction to the enemy

heavy lift airships for logistics in places without transportation infrastructure

Attached: 5JMMI24RVFDYPPLW5XI3MIYBNA.jpg (1400x786, 95K)

First post is right post. I forget the specific acronym for them but airships are fantastic for a permanent or near permanent aerial observation/sensors platform with a wide view. It's not clearly as wide as Geostationary satellites or perhaps as high as the best aerial vehicles but it costs little in fuel. Course it's limited to where you own the land beneath it. If I recall right they tend to not be mobile ones but are tethered to their location.

I really wish they were more cost-effective because the idea of dirigible travel that's cheaper but slower than a plane is pretty nice.

Aircraft Carrier When?

Attached: ZRCV airship aircraft carrier.jpg (1200x893, 359K)

In Red Alert 2, they were great for mass bombing but fucking slow.

Observation platform with a shitload of sensors on board and , basically anchoring them or flying them high over the battlefield.

Maybe not aircraft. More like drone carrier.

>military
none
>civilian use
Extremely cool luxury cruise trips

I wonder if they could make them with a whole bunch of smaller sections so that if a few sections are compromised the whole thing can still float.

I imagine that if drones become more important in warfare then the latency between operator and the drone would be the biggest hurdle to overcome and the only way you could do that is by moving your operator physically closer to the drone so maybe you could have a big blimp with a bunch of drone operators in them.

I remember seeing one of those from miles and miles away in Afghanistan about a decade ago. I did not realize they were that large.

Surveillance
Mobile radar station
Communications router
Strategic point defense platform
Submarine hunting
Drone carrier
Direct fire artillery platform for COIN warfare

>Mobile radar station
Something like AWACS that can stay in the air for days?

These things are bullet magnets, so not much direct combat roles.
But, I’m sure they could do good for non-direct combat roles.
>Engines off, near complete silence
>Can mount tons of gear
I’d imagine it could make a neat science station in places like Antarctica

Yeah, even for months

>Drone carrier
Well, I suppose that can work. It'd be like Crimson Skies, only not cool.

:3

Navy did that back in the Interwar Period, it was meh.

>faster than cargo ships
>can land on any flat field, no port or airport required

Perfect for invading Africa, gents

They should try using hydrogen again, it's cheap, lighter than helium and can be used as fuel. I would think that with modern materials the fire issues could be solved.

Intimidating your enemies by flying a few tons of hydrogen above their cities and waiting for one stupid infantry man to take a pot shot at it

someone post the brapper

Not much. I don't think that most people realize how flat-out advanced Zeppelin designs were for the times.

Not to mention that most airships were literally 90% hydrogen bag by volume - The main savings would come from bag material and Frame material, obviously, but that was already so insubstantial at the time of the Hindenburg that modern-material mass savings wouldn't magically grant you even 10% more lift, especially given that you're now limited to helium for any practical use.

The Hindenburg had enough Hydrogen volume to pull a full 242 metric tons of lift at gross lift was 112.2 tons, which left 130 tons left over for structure and engines - that is, 130 tons for a structure 1/4 km long and 41 m in diameter. it's absolutely mind-blowing that the thing ever flew when it did, honestly.

Not like that's ever been an problem

Attached: b36h.jpg (3000x2400, 2.67M)

>military use

Huge floating propaganda tool to instill war fervour with patriotic messages? Drone carrier? Low cost satellite? Maritime recon?

>civilian use

Huge floating propaganda tool to instill loyalty to the government with patriotic messages? Drone carrier? Low cost satellite? Joyride?

Attached: zeppelin2.jpg (790x775, 191K)

Cargo volume capacity. Cargo weight capacity per unit ground infrastructure.
Airships can't compare in sheer payload to large cargo aircraft, but kick the shit out of fixed wing when it comes to moving lots of cargo to places you can't get said large cargo aircraft. Delivering industrial equipment to the Alaskan Bush requires disassembly and a shitload of flights by the largest practical bush plane, and that gets expensive fast. The most immediate practical application of airships is delivering cargo to places without airports