Zepelins, the future?

C

CPrime

Active member
I saw something on the Discovery channel one's, about zeppelin's being the military transporters of tommorow. True or false? Good idea or bad idea?
 
I know nothing about dirigibles or their carrying power, but the U.S. desperately needs a way to more able move their 70 ton M1A2 tanks. The only way right now outside of ships is taking the very largest transport aircraft they have and moving them one at a time.
 
Yeah i saw something about that on a website a while ago, a british/american company were looking at making airships to carry huge amounts of cargo, there good as well as you could control it from the ground as it moves a bit slowly.
 
I don't think blimps of any kind will be useful for transport uses. They're just going to have to create an M-1 alternative.
 
Wow, 750 tons? That's amazing. You could move 6-7 M1A2s at once with something like that. I wonder how fast it is, but if it is only 20 miles per hour it could reach pretty much anywhere in the world within 96 hours since it doesn't need to refuel.

I hope this technology works out since I think the biggest probelm with the U.S. military is inter-theater logistics.
 
Three words: large slow targets

Zepplins in war today would be insane. Transport from one safe area to another may work though.
 
Charge_7 said:
Three words: large slow targets

Zepplins in war today would be insane. Transport from one safe area to another may work though.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the idea, inter-theater operations. Obviously you wouldn't use them anywhere near a combat zone. It can be a matter of life or death to get M1A2s from Fort Knox to Saudi Arabia, but it isn't a dangerous flight.

Besides, if someone wants to shoot down a zeppelin it is going to be about as easy as shooting down a C-130 or other slow lumbering defenseless transport craft.
 
Don't misunderstand me, that is my point. Moving things inter-theater means moving through friendly countries, so the theory goes, only an enemy's air force would pose a threat to such maneuvers. And the aircraft weapons systems of any nation are more than able to take out transports of any sort, be it dirigible or fixed wing.

No one is going to be fielding a sopwidth Cammel that can only take out a dirigible but not a C-130, come on!
 
yes, but what advantge is there over a C5? I mean, zeppelins are slower than normal aircraft....and can carry more stuff...so what is the point?
 
Guess cost must play a part, as the ULA is cheaper than a C5 and as long as the cargo isnt needed quickly then its a good method, it may be quicker than a ship!
 
Well like I said, comparatively it is pretty fast if it can carry 6-7 M1A2s in a single trip. If it doesn't have to re-fuel it can make it almost anywhere in the world in 96 hours even at a lumbering 20mph. For a C-5 it has to make the trip over and back over and back 7 times to deliver 7 M1A2s and a ship takes weeks or even months to deploy, and that doesn't include taking the tanks from Ft. Knox to a port of departure, then taking them from the port of arival to the staging area.

And in terms of cost, the fuel for a C-5 to fly over and back for one tank, and the cost to run a ship including all the crew is quite extravagent.
 
zeppelins, are insanely easy to shoot down by themself. what will probably happen is they would be escorted by airplanes and ships.
 
deathmonkey said:
zeppelins, are insanely easy to shoot down by themself. what will probably happen is they would be escorted by airplanes and ships.
Click to expand...

Read my reply to the_13th_redneck, this is a very outdated way of looking at a modern military issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top