dirigible operations

[varek]

Reading about an allegedly slow-flying, quiet UFO reported over a naval base in the UK, it reminded me of a blimp.

That made me wonder if you could develop a radar-invisible dirigible that could transport special operations forces close to a target, flying low and letting them rappel to the ground.

 

[gturner]

You could except for one horrible problem. Radar isn't the only way enemy forces detect and react to threats.

The US Army was developing a very expensive stealth attack helicopter called the Comanche, which featured numerous technologies to reduce its radar and heat signatures so that it could fly deep penetration missions. The program was canceled shortly after a disastrous mission in the opening of the Iraq War, when a squadron of Apache gunships was sent on a deep attack mission, where they got mauled by Iraqi anti-aircraft fire, losing several helicopters and having only one return undamaged.

The Iraqis knew the probable approach routes, and knew attacking helicopters would have to pop up to clear high-voltage power lines, so they just set their guns to fire above the power lines, and had the various towns turn their lights on and off to signal the approach of any helicopters. When the Iraqi gunners saw a town's lights blink, they filled the sky over the power lines with lead. The simple technique was damnably effective, and in analyzing the mission the US Army realized that radar isn't what makes a helicopter vulnerable, it's that helicopters are slow, loud, and obvious targets to anyone with a big gun and a brain.

A blimp would be a hundred times worse. Enemy irregulars would call each other via cell phone ("Amad, there's an American blimp just north of Ali's gas-and-go!"), then they'd hop in their pick-up trucks with pintle-mounted Soviet AA guns and speed to the party, resulting in the embarrassing loss and capture of a US blimp and all forces aboard.

 

[varek]

This may be a silly question, but wouldn't a dark-colored dirigible be almost invisible at night? Of course, the small blimp would fly over less-populated areas and so, hopefully, be able to approach the target.
Would that be possible?

 

[gturner]

It would be harder to see, but still visible because nights aren't really that dark because of starlight. If the dirigible flies over just one person standing in a field who happens to look up, and who has a cell-phone or radio, the dirigible round-up begins, because just about the only thing slower than a low-flying dirigible is a donkey, and they're so big as to be almost impossible to miss with any weapon that's within range.

As a military vehicle, in a world full of sophisticated, highly armed and maneuverable aircraft, they're only slightly better than hot-air balloons.

 

[JustAFriend]

Guessing you haven't been around the Goodyear Blimp at night.
They fly all around South Florida during football season.

They're slow, noisy and not easy to handle in any wind at all.
A really large high-drag vehicle in the lower atmosphere gets tossed around a LOT.
I've seen the Goodyear going backwards against the wind or get thrown up-and-down in 45-degree oscillations.
Even jet power wouldn't do more than tear one apart in chop.

Almost all the dirigibles from the early 20th got torn apart in low-level turbulence.
(that's why jetliners were developed to get above 20,000ft)

I'm not saying they couldn't be trying to develop something, but a century of experience shows they just aren't practical.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I know we all pine for the Nazi blimps out of The Rocketeer, but those are relegated to fantasy for a reason.

(Most of the Nazis are dead and we don't let them have blimps anyway.)

 

[FPAlpha]

Slow moving, comparable low altitude and huge air vehicle.. yeah, not a good idea for any military especially if you want to place people inside.

Especially for Special Forces who operate by the motto "Get in Fast, get out even Faster" which is incompatible with such a vehicle.

For low noise, quick insertion a parachute is still the best option with a standby vehicle for pickup (helicopter, ground vehicles or boats).

 

[publiusr]

Then too, if airships are controlled by terrorists, they couldn't knock down skyscrapers.

Thee is a place for airships...
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/D...tegrated_Sensor_Is_Structure_Program_999.html

Something like that may spook soldiers. Large high flying and above ack-ack.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Blimps with Romulan cloaking devices. The natural counterpart to the sharks with laser beams attached to their heads.

 

[varek]

Blimps with Romulan cloaking devices. The natural counterpart to the sharks with laser beams attached to their heads.

That is a good--although perhaps unethical--suggestion: put a cloaking device of some kind on a dirigible. Or, some excellent sound-suppression device, so its engines are completely silent.

I wonder what might have happened if the Germans had tried to land troops in England via zeppelins, instead of dropping bombs.

 

[sojourner]

There would have been a lot of dead germans among a lot of dirigible wreckage.

 

[varek]

But, what if they had landed in a remote area--I'm talking about 1914. Of course, it would have taken them a long time to reach their objective, but it might have worked back then. Not in 1939, of course.

 

[gturner]

Then you'd have had almost 20 Germans wandering around in England. This actually happened to the crew of LZ 76 after it bombed Lusty and Sons Timber and the Black Swan Pub, when it was severely damaged by a 1912 model British B.E. 2 night fighter (a 90 horsepower two-seater with a top speed of 70 mph and one 0.303 Lewis gun). The elite German crew surrendered to Special Constable Edgar Nichols, who was probably riding past on a bicycle. If you replaced such an assault Zeppelin's prodigious (2,000 lb) bomb load with assault forces, it could hold about ten more people. Maybe eight, depending on the weight of their gear.

Here's at list of German Zeppelins. You should just prefix all their designations with "ill-fated", as in "the ill-fated LZ 85." They were outclassed by aircraft that would be considered underpowered, slow, badly-constructed homebuilt ultra-lights today, armed with machine guns that any American gun enthusiast would probably throw in the trash if not for the antique value.

 

[Metryq]

Then there's the scene in A VIEW TO A KILL (one of the Roger Moore James Bond movies) where the bad guy in a blimp silently glides up behind the bimbo du jour and snatches her up. Just the shot of this immense thing gliding up behind the woman—who had no idea it was there—made me bust a gut laughing.

("He was so fat his stomach turned the corner five minutes before he did." Oh, that blimp!)

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Same thing with that scene in Star Trek For George And Gracie. When using the stolen Romulan cloaking device, the nuEnterprise is cloaked half-dipped in the ocean, and just as that lovely throuple in the water are facing away from it, it uncloaks and they just stand there kissing, unaware as everyone else at the beach is screaming. Hilarious.

And way better than the Finnish Norwegian James Hetfield. (They could have at least put Kirk Hammet on there too to make it a nice name pun.)

Oh shit, temporal police just came to my place, brb...

 

[FPAlpha]

But, what if they had landed in a remote area--I'm talking about 1914. Of course, it would have taken them a long time to reach their objective, but it might have worked back then. Not in 1939, of course.

And how would a few dozen or maybe a few hundred take and hold Britain (disregarding the fact that those blimps would appear on radar and a Spitfire would have a field day shooting them down).

A country that's full of enemy soldiers and enemy civilians.. they wouldn't be able to stand up to the police force or a civial militia let alone the army.

This is why Paratroopers have a high tactical/strategic value but they can't fight long without proper support because they lack heavy equipment and numbers and are usually dropped behind enemy lines.

 

[Robert Comsol]

This is why Paratroopers have a high tactical/strategic value but they can't fight long without proper support because they lack heavy equipment and numbers and are usually dropped behind enemy lines.

Yes, during the Battle of Crete the German paratroopers were only sucessful because they secured an airfield to ensure support and supply.
In contrast, Operation Market Garden wasn't a sucess because of supply problems and the lack of heavy equipment.

Bob

 

[scotpens]

But, what if they had landed in a remote area--I'm talking about 1914. Of course, it would have taken them a long time to reach their objective, but it might have worked back then. Not in 1939, of course.

And how would a few dozen or maybe a few hundred take and hold Britain (disregarding the fact that those blimps would appear on radar and a Spitfire would have a field day shooting them down).

varek specifically said 1914, not 1939. No radar or Spitfires then.