Prev: Re: Battle blimps Next: Re: Battle blimps

Re: Battle blimps

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:55:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Battle blimps

At 7:16 AM +0200 4/17/02, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
>I would doubt that last statement. A stealthy fighter with long-range
>missiles might be an option against it. And the blimp would be rather
more
>vulnerable than a 747 or A380 armed with an equivalent laser.

Not really. The 747 doesn't take much to make fall. An airship can be 
built with multiple gas cells that increase its damage resistance. 
Build the godola out of stealthy composites and it's hard to target. 
Same for the gas bag.

Any non combat aircraft is vulnerable to a fighter. Stealth or 
otherwise. Thats why AEW's prefer to put the CAP on the MIGS before 
the MIGs shoot the AEW.

>
>At a basic level, yes. On the other hand, things like that tend to
develop a
>pork-barrel life of their own.

Anything can really when you get down to it.

The problem with air ships is that they aren't fast and sexy. The 
Navy's airdales don't want airships. They were used during WWII in 
the basic blimp form for convoy escort and were perfect as airborne 
observation platforms when scouting for u-boats. Their mission time 
in the air is measured in days not hours.

The best modern thought for blimp usage is as AEW platforms that can 
stay on station for days at a time between refueling.
-- 
--
Ryan Gill			  rmgill@mindspring.com
	|	 |
	| O--=-  |	       |	   |
	|_/|o|_\_|	       | _________ |
	/ 00DA61 \	       |/---------\| 
     _w/^=_[__]_= \w_	       // [_]  o[]\\ 
    |: O(4) ==	  O :|	      _Oo\=======/_O_
    |---\________/---|	      [__O_______W__]  
     |~|\	 /|~|	      |~|/BSV 575\|~|
     |~|=\______/=|~|	      |~|=|_____|=|~|
     |~|	  |~|	      |~|	  |~|


Prev: Re: Battle blimps Next: Re: Battle blimps