Zepplin escort carriers!

[keynes2.0]

The US operated zepplins that launched biplanes for a while in the 30s. Both ships ended up crashing in storms but the airplane operations side of things was solid at least.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron_(ZRS-4)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Macon_(ZRS-5)

So zeppelins were phased out before WWII but blimps were used as an anti-submarine weapon in large numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_class_blimp

This makes me think, what if they could have improved the safety of zepplins and turned them into an ASW patrol craft? Their high speed and invulnerability to torpedoes would allow them to quickly converge on threats, unlike escort carriers which would need to keep the enemy at arms lengths. The downsides would be they couldn't operate in stormy weather or near enemy aircraft but they'd still be useful against enemy long range subs, probably cheaper and more effective then a destroyer.

I don't know if these things could even be implemented but I think they could be portrayed as a cheap ship with very high air vulnerability, lowish operating range but no submarine vulnerability and complete lack of defense or offense during storms. I don't think they should be worth the research difficulty (given they could only really operate in friendly waters) but it would be awesome to see the americans enter the battle of the atlantic and suddenly the german player is surprised to see airpacks of zepplins flying around the atlantic, disrupting his wolfpacks.

 

[aruon]

actually keynes, at the grand campaign start of 1936, blimps/zepplins could start with near-max research levels. they had been researched, used, and discarded before the WWII era. (plus they'd be aircraft.)

it could even be a cheap (and oddly, more well rounded) alternative to the regular naval escort carriers with its equally cheap and underwhelming parasite aircraft and universal bombing capabilities. just build them to crazy numbers and pull the classic superstackspam card to overwhelm enemy fighters. with a max of 5 fighters per zeppelin (so a mini CAG i guess), enough of them could turn the tide of a battle, or at least soften up the defending forces.

 

[Ithron]

I do hope that division system will be flexible enough to allow mods to create Airborne aircraft carrier, with a full wing of planes on board. Macon already was that, sure with only 5 planes, but still . There are people who are fascinated by "What if airships..", and if the devs have respected the wishes of Byzantines, then why not allow such option for zeppelin fandom.
From realistic point of view, zeppelins indeed could have naval escort, submarine spotting purpose, and have great difficulty surviving in modern battle at the same time..

 

[Director]

Heavier-than-air units operating from lighter-than-air units do so with very high risk - much more so than ship-borne aircraft. Plus the operation of a rigid airship is itself risky - all of the US rigid airships but one were lost in storms (versus 0 seagoing carriers lost in storms). Landing/mooring a rigid airship requires a good bit of manpower, clear weather and stringent safety precautions. The sole advantage of an airship is its ability to loiter for long periods of time; mostly this advantage was negated as heavier-than-air planes matured and became more capable. Operating aircraft from an airship was a last-ditch gimmick, a hoped-for chance to save the big airships from extinction. Sadly, storms did the work and the US airship fleet perished.

Non-rigid airships (blimps) were extensively used in WW2, mostly in anti-submarine roles, and performed very well. Not as fast or 'sexy' as a big rigid airship, but invaluable as a scouting platform. Once a sub was sighted, the blimp could hang overhead for hours and land-based aircraft could be easily called in for the kill.

'Escort' carriers were easy to adapt from merchant hulls and could operate patrol and strike aircraft as well as serve as aircraft transports.

So... rigid airship aircraft carriers are cool but expensive, fragile and impractical - a PR gimmick, useful for a brief window in the 1920s and pointless thereafter. The fate of Germany's zeppelin fleet in WW1 and its complete absence in WW2 tells the tale.

 

[keynes2.0]

So... rigid airship aircraft carriers are cool but expensive, fragile and impractical - a PR gimmick, useful for a brief window in the 1920s and pointless thereafter. The fate of Germany's zeppelin fleet in WW1 and its complete absence in WW2 tells the tale.

Were they more expensive then sea vessels? I didn't find any information on the price of the Akron and the Macon.

I'd agree with the fragile and impractical thing, I just find it fun to imagine if maybe some sort of semi-rigid design could have made them safer.

Zepplins are obviously dangerous to operate in many areas but if we are talking about escort carriers they would only need to be fighting subs with no other forces nearby.

 

[aruon]

I'd agree with the fragile and impractical thing, I just find it fun to imagine if maybe some sort of semi-rigid design could have made them safer.

well, it's all too likely that digital instruments would be needed for much increased safety measures. hell, look at the SR-71! (from its air inlets section):

"in the early years of operation, the analog computers would not always keep up with rapidly changing flight environmental inputs. If internal pressures became too great and the spike was incorrectly positioned, the shock wave would suddenly blow out the front of the inlet, called an "Inlet Unstart." During unstarts afterburner extinctions were common. The remaining engine's asymmetrical thrust would cause the aircraft to yaw violently to one side. SAS, autopilot, and manual control inputs would fight the yawing, but often the extreme off-angle would reduce airflow in the opposite engine and stimulate "sympathetic stalls". This generated a rapid counter-yawing, often coupled with loud "banging" noises, and a rough ride during which crews' helmets would sometimes strike their cockpit canopies.[40] One response to a single unstart was unstarting both inlets to prevent yawing, then restarting them both.[41] Lockheed later installed an electronic control to detect unstart conditions and perform this reset action without pilot intervention.[42] Beginning in 1980, the analog inlet control system was replaced by a digital system, which reduced unstart instances."

even with 1970s analog technology, highly advanced aircraft like the blackbird were rendered all but helpless to the elements with just the slightest error, when all it needed was an infusion of microprocessors!

speaking of which, the Zeppelin actually might be making a comeback. check this out: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...irship-revolutionise-goods-carried-world.html

and (getting back to the right time period) the blimps and Zeppelins at the time were about as safe as you could possibly get for those vehicles at the time (minus the Germans having to use hydrogen). "During its operating life, the famous LZ 127 Graf Zeppelin made 590 flights covering more than a million miles (1.6 million km), without any problems."

 

[keynes2.0]

and (getting back to the right time period) the blimps and Zeppelins at the time were about as safe as you could possibly get for those vehicles at the time (minus the Germans having to use hydrogen). "During its operating life, the famous LZ 127 Graf Zeppelin made 590 flights covering more than a million miles (1.6 million km), without any problems."

This makes me suspect that Americans were really incompetent zepplin fliers.

 

[Ithron]

Impractical to replace fixed wing aircrafts - yes. Historical and realistic - yes. Useful for specific missions like ocean scouting - yes. Outdated even in that by mid/late-40s - yes. Useful as a platform for alt-hist mods fans - oh yes .