Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Zexx on June 17, 2012, 01:48:12 PM
-
Airships (blimps and Rigids known as Zepplins) played imortant roles during world War I and World War II.
In world War I they performed not only observation roles, but even were the first truly Long Range Bombers. The Bombing of London (though technically a Failure) proved the feasibility of strategic bombing and defintely proved the need to ground based fighters and better Air Defenses.
"The Birth of Strategic Bombing was in WWI when German Zeppelins began raiding London from bases in occupied Belgium. Small attacks against England were carried out early in the war, but by October 1915, "squadron-size" raids by numerous Zeppelins had begun, always at night and in the dark of the moon. Early in September 1916, a British fighter shot down an airship, and three weeks later, two Zeppelins attempting to attack London were also destroyed. Although Zeppelin performance was gradually improved, so were British balloons, and improved anti-aircraft defences and heavy losses continued. After a disastrous raid on August 5, 1918, the Germans practically discontinued Zeppelin warfare. There were 159 Zeppelin attacks against England in WWI, resulting in the death of 557 people, primarily civilians, and damages of $7,500,000." (http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/airplane%20at%20war/upload2/bombing%20by%20Zeppelin%20airships.htm)
Despite the discontinued use in front line units due to their inherent susceptibility, in World War two they performed roles such as Coastal Recon, Search and Rescue, Anti-Submarine Warfare. Two Main classes of Airships were operated by the US Navy. These were the K and M class LTA's (lighter Than Airships).
The K Class:
"In World War II K-ships made 55,900 operational flights of over 550,000 hours. During that war 89,000 surface ships were escorted by K-ships. Not a single one of these surface ships was lost to enemy submarines. The submarines feared the presence of the airship in spite of the fact that there is no public record of an airship ever sinking an enemy submarine" (http://battleblimps.com/k-ships.html)
"After the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, the Navy asked the U.S. Congress for authorization to purchase an increased number of airships. By June 1942, Congress had authorized the construction of 200 airships, and during the war, Goodyear built a total of 168. At its production peak, the company was turning out 11 airships monthly.
The later K series airships were slightly larger and had a capacity of 416,000 to 425,000 cubic feet (11,780 to 12,035 cubic meters). They were 253 feet (76 meters) long, and 60 feet (18 meters) in diameter, and were powered by two 425-horsepower (317-kilowatt) engines that gave a top speed of 50 miles per hour (80 kilometers per hour). They were not fast, but unlike an airplane that could remain airborne for only a few hours, a K-ship could stay aloft for 60 hours." (http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Lighter_than_air/Airships_in_WWII/LTA10.htm)
Sources also state the K class carried four depth Charges and a single machine gun (.50 Calibur) along with Magnetic Anomoly Detction equipment (MAD) and Radar.
M Class:
"The Goodyear Aircraft Company of Akron, Ohio built the M-class blimp for the US Navy as the follow-on to the K-class anti-submarine warfare blimp used during World War II. It was a significantly larger airship. Four airships, designated M-1 through M-4, were delivered in early 1944. Operations of K-ships in tropical regions had shown a need for a blimp with greater volume to offset the loss of lift due to high ambient temperatures.
A contract was awarded to the Goodyear Aircraft Company for the prototype M-class blimp on August 16, 1943. This contract was followed by another contract on September 11, 1943 for 21 M-class blimps. These airships were given the Navy designation of ZNP-M, (Z = lighter-than-air; N = non-rigid; P = patrol; M = type/class.) However, on November 22, 1943, the quantity of blimps was reduced to four. These were delivered to the Navy in February, March, and April 1944.
General characteristics
Crew: 10-14
Length: 302 ft 0 in (92.07 m)
Diameter: 69 ft 6 in (21.19 m)
Height: 92 ft 6 in (28.20 m)
Volume: 647,000 ft3 (18,320 m3)
Useful lift: 10,000 lb (4,356 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney R-1340-AN-2 radials, 550 hp (410 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 80 mph (128 km/h)
Cruise speed: 58 mph (93 km/h)
Endurance: 50 hours 30 min
Armament
1 × .50 M2 machine gun
8 × 350 lb (159 kg) Mark 47 depth charges"
(wikipedia.org, Article Mclass Airships, accessed 2012)
Not only Would the implementation of Airships be a minor improvement to the World War II arena's, but they would be a huge boost to World War I Arena where Airshgips actually saw the most use during any given war period.
-
What use would airships have in game? undefended and quite slow - plus we also have no submarines.
-
plus we also have no submarines.
Yes we do. :aok
-
Yes we do. :aok
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jaO3LBzVAn0/ThS_4zl7xkI/AAAAAAAAAPY/1_dZUrOghfg/s1600/Caribbean+Cruise+2007+-+Disney+Magic+-+Open+Ocean+-+Skyline.jpg)
Oh ok I see the submarine now :rofl
-
Hot air balloons fight. :banana:
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jaO3LBzVAn0/ThS_4zl7xkI/AAAAAAAAAPY/1_dZUrOghfg/s1600/Caribbean+Cruise+2007+-+Disney+Magic+-+Open+Ocean+-+Skyline.jpg)
Oh ok I see the submarine now :rofl
You looked at the Ports of late?
-
In my line of think after some research; They would perform Observation at Ports, Essentially performing Long Range Recon for Enemy fleets. Since they require no real airfield to traditionally take off from they can be immediately dispatched from the Ports, where they would mainly available. In this capcity they could act as a forward observer for Shore batteres. They could even feasibly be used as Forward observation from Forward vehicle bases and perhaps even Carrier Task Groups themselves, but that is really pushing the idea since the only confirmed use was for Coastal patrol and Convoy Escort and Defense, and Naval squadrons formed along those lines (particularely US Naval). It must be noted that Airships saw use by Britian and Russia though they built significant lower numbers in World War Two.
I admit this would be essentially another "hangar Queen" as far as the World War II Arena's are concerned, but it would be under the "bomber" tab for World War I since they performed that duty at the front lines during that period.
In either case The Airship would/could be another, sometimes static, observation post. Despite the obvious disadvantages the trade off comes in Loiter time, compartively very low fuel consumption, Extended Range, and enhanced detection ranges they would perform the same role as the "Storch" (Fi152).
-
You looked at the Ports of late?
Yes there are submarines sitting in ports and have been for a while, does that mean anything other then eye candy?
Only thing I can think of is instead of having only PT Boats, have Submarines that can spawn- however I don't see how they plan on catching a Task Force unless its aimed right at the submarin.
-
does that mean anything other then eye candy?
Nope. :)
Edit: Fixed.
-
Nope. :)
:noid
Think you know something.
-
Yes there are submarines sitting in ports and have been for a while, does that mean anything other then eye candy?
Only thing I can think of is instead of having only PT Boats, have Submarines that can spawn- however I don't see how they plan on catching a Task Force unless its aimed right at the submarin[e].
If we get Submarines in Game then the Airship could be a definite boost to Port Defense and Recon since both the Sub and Airship are capable of independent (Solo) operations.
On that topic, I could see the submarine being used in the fashion of a PT boat since most spent an equal amount of time on the surface as they did submersed. This means they can Spawn at the ports and PT spawn points, or if We ever see the use of Submarines in Game; they could spawn at thier own "pens". The functions of the PT commands COULD work like this: In water you could use the F6 key to raise the periscope , U key to Ping the TG (in this case the crusier or Carrier) and Y to get a firing soultion. The O key to open and Flood the tubes, and B key to fire Torpedoes.
-
If we get Submarines in Game then the Airship could be a definite boost to Port Defense and Recon since both the Sub and Airship are capable of independent (Solo) operations.
On that topic, I could see the submarine being used in the fashion of a PT boat since most spent an equal amount of time on the surface as they did submersed. This means they can Spawn at the ports and PT spawn points, or if We ever see the use of Submarines in Game; they could spawn at thier own "pens". The functions of the PT commands COULD work like this: In water you could use the F6 key to raise the periscope , U key to Ping the TG (in this case the crusier or Carrier) and Y to get a firing soultion. The O key to open and Flood the tubes, and B key to fire Torpedoes.
now this makes perfect sense +1
How will you combat Submarines however? Once the Sub leaves the surface depth charges from aircraft were used to attack submarines on the surface not running 200m deep.
-
now this makes perfect sense +1
How will you combat Submarines however? Once the Sub leaves the surface depth charges from aircraft were used to attack submarines on the surface not running 200m deep.
True. However Depth Charges can be set to variable depths. Sumbarines at 200m would be deterred from pushing the attack due to the presence of Anti-submarine Aircraft. That being said Airships were more feared than say a destroyer, a PT with depth Charges, or even Bombers simply because an Airship could be anywhere at any given time. Thus an Airship is a useful deterrent. Only one instance of Combat taking place between the two is known.
"Only one airship was lost to enemy action. A surfaced German Uboat shot down the airship K-74 during a battle, but the K74 damaged the German submarine so badly that it could not submerge and was sunk by British bombers in the North Sea while it was en route to Germany for repairs." (http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Lighter_than_air/Airships_in_WWII/LTA10.htm)
Sources cite U134 as being the boat in question.
"18 Jul 1943
Aircraft attack, aircraft shot down:American Blimp K-74 (Sqdn )
This was the only airship (i.e. like Zeppelin) shot down during WWII. For more information you could check out this page.
"(http://uboat.net/boats/u134.htm)
In a stand off fight an Airship could technically lose the fight, but with the presence of Depth Charges and Crew exposure for the Deck gun would almost negate any real adavantage and level the playing field somewhat.
-
Sure, you can have airships if I can have barrage balloons to deploy around town when the NOE is inbound.
-
now this makes perfect sense +1
How will you combat Submarines however? Once the Sub leaves the surface depth charges from aircraft were used to attack submarines on the surface not running 200m deep.
PBY! Thats how!!
-
Sure, you can have airships if I can have barrage balloons to deploy around town when the NOE is inbound.
+1
Viable inclusion since they were widely used in World War Two. If Airships ( and subs) are included the inclusion of Barrage Balloons would be logical development. As a side note they[barrage balloons] are being encouraged to make a comeback these days citing limitations on SHORAD (SHORt Range Air Defense) defenses and capabilities of Manpads (shoulder fires missiles) and vehicle mounted missile defense systems, such as the FIM-92 "Stinger" and converntional ballistic weapons like the 25mm "Bushmaster" or .50 calibur coaxes. There's and article in the Air Power Journal (USAF) that states reasons for this. It reads:
"Many people remember or have seen pictures of barrage balloons floating majestically in the skies over England in mock peacefulness during World War II. These large, airborne barriers protected important installations in both Great Britain and the United States against low-level air attack. They complemented the existing air defense system and--particularly in England--proved their worth an numerous occasions by helping to thwart low-flying enemy aircraft. Barrage balloons disappeared after World War II as newer, more sophisticated air defense weapons were introduced. The threat from low-flying aircraft, however, continues to be a problem. Aerial barrages still offer a viable deterrent against this form of attack, and we should use them. "
(Maj Franklin J. Hillson, USAF, N.D. "Barrage Balloons for Low Level Air Defense"; Air Power Journal, Summer 1989.http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj89/sum89/hillson.html, Accessed June 17th 2012)
-
(http://www.iart7.com/WARBIRDS/gallery%20photos/Zeps2v1.jpg)
-
always amazing what keeps some people awake at night dreaming about "that would be so cool". :rolleyes: the op thinks a "low and slow free kill hangar queen" like a zepplin would be cool yet his stats shows he doesn't like being caught in the existing low and slow...
-
Q:What if we added airships?
A: I'd puke
-
always amazing what keeps some people awake at night dreaming about "that would be so cool". :rolleyes: the op thinks a "low and slow free kill hangar queen" like a zepplin would be cool yet his stats shows he doesn't like being caught in the existing low and slow...
There is an axiom that is generally held to be true in the AH community and that is: If you don't like it. Don't fly it. There are many Aircraft that dubbed "Hangar Queens" and see little to next to no use in any arena; but that's not the point here. The point is two fold: Suggesting a beneficial Aircraft and suggest one that is potentially game enhancing not just to one specific arena, but rather multiple Arenas. The Blimp was a successful Convoy Escort, Observation Post, and historically the first Strategic -internationally capable- bomber. The aircraft, in this case lighter than air, made contributions to both wars in it's own unique way- and is currently being researched by the DoD and DARPA to fullfill the same roles in a modern context (which includes providing realtime battlefield Recon, C2 and,C3i).
Yes the Airship is slow. Very slow by piston fighter and jet age standards and highly susceptible to ADA weapon systems, but it can be argued that every wepon systems has trade off's in advantages and disadvantages. I've listed some of the benefits of having Airships in game, especially in the World War I Arena- where I state again- The airship found the most use as a front line combat aircraft (despite that Arena seeing little use.)
By comparison the P-39 "Aircobra" was, by most historical accounts of it, an abysmal performer- yet it's in the game. The Russians managed to use them to some measure of success agianst German Armor and in some cases Aircraft such as the Me-109(Bf109). It even sees some use in Game. Another Comparison is the Fi156. It's low and slow, and its used.
Frankly, The Airship has a record of use and success (far longer than any piston engine or jet fighter) dating back as far as the American Civil War. What other Aircraft can claim that? What other Aircraft can claim Longer flight duration times, Lioter times, and Energy conservation ( in terms of fuel spent and manning requirements)? None.
This aircraft has the potential to increase the historical aspect of the entire game- not just one historical segement of time. Yes it's slow and highly susceptible to enemy fire- but it has made significant contributions to in spite of these limitations. Most Aircraft are built to fulfill a doctrinal niche or to apply a particular aspect of Air power Theory. Very few have actually proved the feasibility and was adapted to fulfill that role. Airships were the original Multi-role Aircraft and have evolved just as the Jet or piston engined plane has.
-
Four words...... Hot air balloon duels.
-
There is an axiom that is generally held to be true in the AH community and that is: If you don't like it. Don't fly it.
True, however this game is run by gentlemen without unlimited resources. The time and money spent developing what you want means something else does not get made and implemented.
I thank you for the idea that caused me to think a bit but no. If this is just a what if exercise then great, but like my buddy, (hi buddy !), gyrene said, you're record doesn't show a propensity to fly vulnerable planes so I'm just guessing that it is a "wouldn't it be cool if" kinda thing. :salute
-
Four words...... Hot air balloon duels.
+1 Rewplay the Battle of Jutland..albiet Airborne :x :rock :banana:
-
Four words...... Hot air balloon duels.
right up there with fun like bomber to bomber dog fights and pt to pt sea battles always fun to be in but no one really wins
-
Four words...... Hot air balloon duels.
best. thread. ever. :rofl
-
hiya Zoney, :salute mi amigo
There is an axiom that is generally held to be true in the AH community and that is: If you don't like it. Don't fly it. There are many Aircraft that dubbed "Hangar Queens" and see little to next to no use in any arena; but that's not the point here. The point is two fold: Suggesting a beneficial Aircraft and suggest one that is potentially game enhancing not just to one specific arena, but rather multiple Arenas.
actually, the point is hangar queen or no hangar queen because in actuality a blimp, balloon, zeppelin or airship would be neither beneficial nor game enhancing. i know you're new around here but, it doesn't appear that you are thinking with the correct head on this one. historically they had purpose, in the aces high world they would be a novelty item that would eventually find less use than the early war and ww1 arenas.
again, your personal record kinda speaks for itself in the matter. fly a lot more sorties in some of the existing hangar queens and see how much you really enjoy getting swatted out of the air, then think about how much worse manning a balloon would be.
-
A blimp doing 60 mph with no defenses and the worst turning ability in the game...whoo whoo! I KNEW we had too much empty hangar
space! :lol They would be hangar queens even in WW1! I'm impressed, it will be tough to beat this wish for pure futility :banana:
-
actually, the point is hangar queen or no hangar queen because in actuality a blimp, balloon, zeppelin or airship would be neither beneficial nor game enhancing... historically they had purpose, in the aces high world they would be a novelty item that would eventually find less use than the early war and ww1 arenas.
Thank you Gyrene, Wouldn't it have been easier just to say that from the start instead of pigeon holing me based on my record like you have done in previous posts? This was the response I was looking for, not riddling me or my posts based on my record.. and possibly assuming that I am looking for an easy kill,or not "thinking with the right head".
I know the inherent flaws of the Airship. I stated those flaws. In that light, had you actually sat back and ingested the content rather than skimming them you would have seen that. Further, my record has NOTHING to the do with discussion of including a vehicle for historical accuracy, as neither do your opinions of me (which frankly you can keep to yourself as I do not have to prove myself to you or anyone else for that matter). It maybe a weak and useless idea but at least I am trying to be constructive to the community, rather than leeching detriment like you seem to be...
-
I'm impressed, it will be tough to beat this wish for pure futility :banana:
i think submarines put into the existing game, chasing cv's around must have it beat :)
-
Thank you Gyrene, Wouldn't it have been easier just to say that from the start instead of pigeon holing me based on my record like you have done in previous posts? This was the response I was looking for, not riddling me or my posts based on my record.. and possibly assuming that I am looking for an easy kill,or not "thinking with the right head".
I know the inherent flaws of the Airship. I stated those flaws. In that light, had you actually sat back and ingested the content rather than skimming them you would have seen that. Further, my record has NOTHING to the do with discussion of including a vehicle for historical accuracy, as neither do your opinions of me (which frankly you can keep to yourself as I do not have to prove myself to you or anyone else for that matter). It maybe a weak and useless idea but at least I am trying to be constructive to the community, rather than leeching detriment like you seem to be...
oh i actually did read everything you posted, even looked at the links you posted and i know you're not "new" as in a first time aces high cherry newb. don't feel special, i take jabs at pretty much everyone when the opportunity arises. and yes, in this particular instance your online record does have something to do with the discussion. it's a reflection of your in game habits and, your habits show that you would not use an item you are wishing to be included more than a hand full of times as a novelty. there are a lot of history buffs here who enjoy having things included even though they may not be highly competitive in the late war arena, when they make sense.
-
Sure, you can have airships if I can have barrage balloons to deploy around town when the NOE is inbound.
This.
-
+1