Operation Manifest Destiny Ruminations

[Legbreaker]

Hmm, it's not as if airships could be considered as "rapid response units" when airlifting troops. Anyone waiting for the airships cargos, whatever they are, will have to expect it's not going to be quick. Might actually be faster in some cases to load up a few trucks and send a few light AFVs for protection. Not necessarily as economical, but faster...

Airships have the benefit of being able to access remote areas away from roads, bypass ground obstacles, and fly above the effective range of small arms. Definately a place for them, but they'll never replace ground based transportation options in the majority of cases.

[Abbott Shaull]

Hmm, it's not as if airships could be considered as "rapid response units" when airlifting troops. Anyone waiting for the airships cargos, whatever they are, will have to expect it's not going to be quick. Might actually be faster in some cases to load up a few trucks and send a few light AFVs for protection. Not necessarily as economical, but faster...

Airships have the benefit of being able to access remote areas away from roads, bypass ground obstacles, and fly above the effective range of small arms. Definately a place for them, but they'll never replace ground based transportation options in the majority of cases.

No the airship wouldn't be my first choice either. In fact it wouldn't be a choice. The point is it would be a cheap show and tell tool. I wouldn't personally want one near a battlefield, too big of target for anyone who isn't in a panic state.

Many areas will still have Armored/Mechanized/Motorized reactionary force that would be able to get there much faster. What I was thinking about, were threats that were much larger force in which the initial unit and the reactionary force can't repel. Remember the units can only control is limited to where their troops are at the moment, but claim to control a much larger area.

Also remember the type of force that may be large enough carry off significant attacks, would be full of troops that are unreliable. Even a Platoon or Company size force coming onto the field from the flank could throw a good size of any attack force into a panic.

[Legbreaker]

I wasn't meaning JUST troops though but urgent medical supplies, important documents, etc, etc, etc.
Yes, the airship is vulnerable in combat if it gets too low and the enemy have decent weaponry (even an old blackpowder rifle might cause some problems). However, they can still be used as effective weapons platforms by simply flying them at a few thousand feet and dropping hand grenades and explosives. Even tipping buckets of stones and shrapnel might cause issues to ground targets provided the aim is right...

Close up they're slow, big and unweildy bullet magnets. Altitude and the ability to move over inacessible terrain is their strength.

[Webstral]

Definately a place for them, but they'll never replace ground based transportation options in the majority of cases.

The point is it would be a cheap show and tell tool. Many areas will still have Armored/Mechanized/Motorized reactionary force that would be able to get there much faster.

oeWe need information. We need to know who these people are, where they got the factories and workers to build airships. We need those things for ourselves. God knows it would be nice to move troops and supplies around the country and not have to fight damned marauder bands at every river crossing! (Airlords of the Ozarks, p.7)

I doubt I could say it any better. Regardless of how the New Americans use their airships, the airship is a platform for strategic mobility. If well-armed truck convoys were both practical and practicable for connecting non-contiguous MilGov enclaves, the convoys would be rolling. I agree that truck convoys (and maybe even rail) are probably possible between Colorado and many area of Oklahoma. Im sure a special effort could be made from time to time to collect enough trucks, AFV, and other necessities for a rolling convoy to move from Oklahoma to southern Illinois. Given the state of the country in late 2000/early 2001, do we really believe that any truck convoy that could be fueled and maintained on the road could be forced through from the Mississippi to New Jersey or Virginia These Atlantic seaboard locations might be linked with MilGov cantonments along the Mississippi with sea traffic moving through the Gulf of Mexico and up the Mississippi, except that doesnt seem to be happening, either. Another way has to be found. I think you both are dead right about the total misapplication of the airship as a tactical weapon or even as a tactical transport. Legbreaker, I think you are hearing what I am trying to say. The airship a slow, fuel-stingy, unglamorous and somewhat dangerous airborne cargo hauler.

Webstral

[natehale1971]

oeWe need information. We need to know who these people are, where they got the factories and workers to build airships. We need those things for ourselves. God knows it would be nice to move troops and supplies around the country and not have to fight damned marauder bands at every river crossing! (Airlords of the Ozarks, p.7)

I doubt I could say it any better. Regardless of how the New Americans use their airships, the airship is a platform for strategic mobility. If well-armed truck convoys were both practical and practicable for connecting non-contiguous MilGov enclaves, the convoys would be rolling. I agree that truck convoys (and maybe even rail) are probably possible between Colorado and many area of Oklahoma. Im sure a special effort could be made from time to time to collect enough trucks, AFV, and other necessities for a rolling convoy to move from Oklahoma to southern Illinois. Given the state of the country in late 2000/early 2001, do we really believe that any truck convoy that could be fueled and maintained on the road could be forced through from the Mississippi to New Jersey or Virginia These Atlantic seaboard locations might be linked with MilGov cantonments along the Mississippi with sea traffic moving through the Gulf of Mexico and up the Mississippi, except that doesnt seem to be happening, either. Another way has to be found. I think you both are dead right about the total misapplication of the airship as a tactical weapon or even as a tactical transport. Legbreaker, I think you are hearing what I am trying to say. The airship a slow, fuel-stingy, unglamorous and somewhat dangerous airborne cargo hauler.

Webstral

Quite right Mr. Webstral. Airships might not seem to be a good idea, but Strategically and Logistically they are exactly what is needed in a post-Apoc setting. Hell, My Morrow Project game has airships as a way that most large master traders get their products from A to B without getting attacked by 'marauders' and 'radiers' that fill the world.

The ridgid-hulled Zeppelins would be something that could easily be used to get really, really high up. At one time Popular Mechanics had an article that showed the USAF and USN where working on a program that would have used HUGE Zeps for in fight refuelling, and even use them for surveillence or extending the range of communications. If anyone knows where to find that article, i'd love to see it again...

[kato13]

At one time Popular Mechanics had an article that showed the USAF and USN where working on a program that would have used HUGE Zeps for in fight refuelling, and even use them for surveillence or extending the range of communications.

I remember another PM article on placing a patriot missile battery on an airship. It would have solved the problem of Radar null areas from ground based radars as well as extending range as the missiles would start at altitude.

[natehale1971]

I remember another PM article on placing a patriot missile battery on an airship. It would have solved the problem of Radar null areas from ground based radars as well as extending range as the missiles would start at altitude.

Considering how the satellittes in the cannon timeline, the use of those old-fashioned 'weather balloons' from the late-1940s and early-1950s that could be used along with stationary zeps as communications hubs that could expand the range of communications (kind of like Cellphone towers).

[Legbreaker]

Airships - great for transporting high value, low urgency but vital equipment, information and people.
Terrible for tactical situations, but still combat able in a strategic "bomber" type role.

All in all, very useful but extremely vulnerable when used by the wrong people using wrong tactics.

Resourcewise, they are likely to be expensive to set up and maintain, and other projects (such as repairing rail lines for example) are going to be screaming should too much be allocated to the airships.

[natehale1971]

Airships - great for transporting high value, low urgency but vital equipment, information and people.
Terrible for tactical situations, but still combat able in a strategic "bomber" type role.

All in all, very useful but extremely vulnerable when used by the wrong people using wrong tactics.

Resourcewise, they are likely to be expensive to set up and maintain, and other projects (such as repairing rail lines for example) are going to be screaming should too much be allocated to the airships.

Not really... You can operate both at the same time. The Airships use an entirely different set-up of supplies. And could actually be developed side-by-side. The use of airships could get the heavy equipment and supplies into areas where they are needed to repair the railroads (and can provide additional security for the teams doing the repairs).

In all, airships would be a safer method of getting things moved, while railroads could be seen as a faster means. But capable of being hijacked by maraduers who can destroy the rails and bridges. You would have to put guards on those rails to protect them. While airships would only need guarded aerodomes. Putting them into the middle of the secure enclaves would fix that.

[Webstral]

All in all, very useful but extremely vulnerable when used by the wrong people using wrong tactics.

So true! So lamentably true! No doubt there will be some tragic incidents in the years ahead.

Resourcewise, they are likely to be expensive to set up and maintain...

Also quite true. Provided the resources for investment in a useful number of airships exists, the planners in the Colorado enclave will be looking carefully at the return on investment (ROI). There should be some lively discussions over the next few years in Colorado Springs.

...and other projects (such as repairing rail lines for example) are going to be screaming should too much be allocated to the airships.

I wonder about the priority for rail in early 2001. Granted, the rail infrastructure in Milgov's capitol will have suffered some damage since late 1997. The movement of bulk goods by rail within the Colorado-Oklahoma region certainly makes excellent sense, given the well-known fuel efficiency of rail and the availability of oil in Oklahoma. Beyond that, though, where are the rails going to lead Attempting to push trains through warlord- and marauder-controlled territory is not likely to yield good results. Rail is even more vulnerable to interdiction than a road network. The same problem exists for all the isolated MilGov enclaves and cantonments.

Once the airships have done their work by improving agricultural output, industrial output, and moving military resources to critical areas, MilGov will enjoy a growing number of contiguous friendly-controlled territories. Then the rail advocates are going to justifiably want a greater allocation of resources. Ironically, the more successful the airships are in a given timeframe, the more quickly their very success will cause them to be replaced as the prime movers of goods and people. I believe Faust experienced a similar phenomenon.

Webstral

[Legbreaker]

Rail was just the first example that sprang to mind. I could just as easily have said pretty much anything.

The resources that would be competed for mainly would be people, technical expertise, energy (electricty, etc) and fuel to shift the required materials to the construction areas.

In 2000 and onwards all those resources would be in extremely short supply requiring the leaders and decision makers to make some very tough choices.

[Webstral]

In 2000 and onwards all those resources woudl be in extremely short supply requiring the leaders and decision makers to make some very tough choices.

Agreed. I wonder if the Joint Chiefs will start to experience health problems like the successive presidents after Thanksgiving, 1997.

Webstral

[Ed the Coastie]

Airships are a good idea, but I doubt that what remains of the USAF would be putting all of their eggs -- and resources -- in one basket. Airships may be produced for transport and strategic bombing purposes, but I suspect that we would also see the return of light WWI-style, cropduster-like aircraft (something along the lines of a Curtiss JN-4D Jenny) that can operate from crude landing strips and have been modified to burn regular gasoline. You wouldn't get much airlift out of them, but they would be ideal for providing local air superiority.

[Raellus]

Here in Tucson, with the annual golf tournaments around town (Tiger's been here the last two years), I get to see a variety of blimps floating about on a fairly routine basis. Last year, a semi-rigid frame German airship operated out of the regional airport two miles from where I teach, for about a week.

Anyway, it's surprising how fast they get around. I honestly couldn't tell you the average blimp/airship's top speed, but their ability to overfly tricky terrain types (rivers, hills, swamps, etc.) and bypass roads lets them get to places faster than trucks travelling the same distances.

The other thing they've got going for them is that they are extremely quiet. You really don't know they're around until you actually see them coming. Granted, that's not too hard, but they are really quite stealthy, sound-wise.

[Targan]

The other thing they've got going for them is that they are extremely quiet. You really don't know they're around until you actually see them coming. Granted, that's not too hard, but they are really quite stealthy, sound-wise.

So night ops would be their preferred MO then

(Yes I'm having another crack at commenting in this thread - hopefully I'll start making some sense).