NS Military Worldbuilding Thread No. 12

[Manokan Republic]

The idea of VTOL jet transports has been played with before but not adopted.

A number of issues exist that aren't addressed by your proposal.

First the V-22 only has 6,000kg of fuel storage, which is similar to the fuel storage for the F-35B. However you would be running two engines off of that fuel storage instead of one. Your range would probably still be better than a helicopter, but it wouldn't be 800 miles vs 200. Increasing fuel storage increases range, but decreases payload.

Second although you will have the engines of a supersonic aircraft that doesn't guarantee your transport will be supersonic. The shape of the aircraft plays an important part in aircraft speed, and it is hard to design a transport while keeping the shaping required for high speeds. Again you will be faster than a helicopter but not jet fighter faster.

Third the total load an aircraft can internally load is separate from the load it can lift. The hull has to be designed to hold that load as well, carrying an APC is going to require additional reinforcements that increase the weight of the aircraft, and decreases the usable load.

Forth VTOL in a jet does not mean land in any clear field, you would likely be limited to operating on improved runways. This is an obvious draw back vs a helicopter, and limits the viability of using such a design for casualty evacuation or air mobile operations.

I feel like I pretty much addressed all this. I even mentioned the part about needing twice as much fuel. None of these are major obstacles or a reason why it can’t work. Further when you consider something like this could be far better but comparable in cost to the CH53k, it starts to make more sense. The particular role could be fulfilled by something faster and with a bigger payload, without much obvious drawback.

[The Grand World Order]

Airships... are they still viable?

I am assuming it would take quite a bit of anti air missiles to take them out, although modern ATGM could.

To make a long post short, does anyone have any good sources on the material properties of aluminum foil combined with kevlar?

Unmanned surveillance blimps are actively in use by the US as force protection assets in Afghanistan.

DARPA's also been looking at logistics applications of large airships; if anything substantial comes of it, the commercial uses of airships could be pretty great. Another potential use of airships is extremely high-altitude balloons with communications relays and sensors on board; these are cheaper to launch, operate, and maintain than satellites, but subject to airspace restrictions and vulnerable to more munitions.

In a conventional force-on-force conflict, combatant airships would be a massive target and little more.

For counter-insurgency purposes, I imagine they could have serious potential. An airship outfitted with ISR sensors and an armament suite akin to an AC-130 parked over a city could provide long loiter times and some serious hurt to almost immediately support ground forces in contact. This advantage goes away if your opponent has ready, reliable access to anti-aircraft systems, because an airship would be totally unable to conduct evasive actions and would solely have to rely on countermeasures, which everyone on NS ignores because "I read that the Russians said they have a MANPAD missile that goes mach 69.420 and will never fall for any countermeasure therefore you cannot use those against me post losses"

When I used to RP, and in my current writings, the Federation used counter-insurgency airships during the asymmetrical phase of their civil war, but they never would deploy them against an organized military force.

[Triplebaconation]

Pretty bad use of airships tbh

SEAD against sophisticated long-range SAMs is probably a better investment.

[Gallia-]

I still like the idea of destroying ice road truckers and heavy lift helicopters in the arctic circle.

Dumbla's primary use of airships is as medium to heavy lift for resupplying far northern and southern resource extraction sites in lieu of helicopters or hovercraft.

Military use is probably limited to anti-submarine and anti-aircraft patrols for convoys in relatively calm and low-threat doldrums I suppose.

[Triplebaconation]

no land trains

SAD

[Gallia-]

yes it doesnt have enough overland resource sites ):

c'est la penisula

[The Grand World Order]

Pretty bad use of airships tbh

SEAD against sophisticated long-range SAMs is probably a better investment.

Not really, an airship's going to get gorilla-pimped by actual air defense, every time.

The only real answer to advanced, long-range SAMs is going to be "saturation fire," which is just air ops planners' way of saying a really large number of cruise missiles. That, or a convoluted, custom-tailored cyberop carried out similarly to StuxNet, but there's a ton of factors in that.

[Crabaiaia]

Is Battlefield Breakthrough Mode in anyways, realistic or semi-realistic?

[New Vihenia]

Airship, just like VTOL's have serious constraint and to solve it, one should add more lift either by adding wings or more engines.

[Triplebaconation]

Pretty bad use of airships tbh

SEAD against sophisticated long-range SAMs is probably a better investment.

Not really, an airship's going to get gorilla-pimped by actual air defense, every time.

The only real answer to advanced, long-range SAMs is going to be "saturation fire," which is just air ops planners' way of saying a really large number of cruise missiles. That, or a convoluted, custom-tailored cyberop carried out similarly to StuxNet, but there's a ton of factors in that.

Did a gorilla pimp drive the pink tank?

An airship operating at ~75,000 feet has a sensor horizon outside the envelope of any current SAM and could have a potentially negligible radar signature. In the off case it does get hit by something it could just descend to a lower altitude and go home - modern airships are fairly durable.

Even in COIN you're better off with a high-altitude airship spotting and engaging time-sensitive targets like dudes laying IEDs or mortars with glide bombs than putting a bunch of dumb guns on one.

[Austrasien]

Airships... are they still viable?

I am assuming it would take quite a bit of anti air missiles to take them out, although modern ATGM could.

To make a long post short, does anyone have any good sources on the material properties of aluminum foil combined with kevlar?

They have a use as has been said but it's very niche. And it is getting more niche with time as drones endurance grows. Passive protection is a waste of payload - large scale military airlift simply won't happen in a contested air environment, because the attrition to the airlift fleet (an important strategic asset) would be intolerable. This is especially true of the hypothetical heavy lift cargo airships which are postulated. It is likely only a small number of these will ever exist at any time. But their unique capability could make them very useful for moving large cargo like MBTs to regions that are otherwise inaccessible.

It seems more likely though a heavy lift airship (assuming such a thing is ever built and brought into military service which I doubt) would do most of its work in mundane but vital tasks like evacuating critically damaged AFVs (or other very large discrete pieces of equipment like TELs) from the front and bypassing the likely backlogged roads/rails and delivering new vehicles to understrength units. Something that could make a big dent in AFV attrition, allow vehicles that would otherwise be abandoned as irreparable to be recovered, and potentially make a strategically meaningful impact on the long-term AFV loss-exchange ratio. Rather than the goofy US Army transformation aerial D-Day fantasies...

[New Visayan Islands]

Pretty bad use of airships tbh

SEAD against sophisticated long-range SAMs is probably a better investment.

Not really, an airship's going to get gorilla-pimped by actual air defense, every time.

The only real answer to advanced, long-range SAMs is going to be "saturation fire," which is just air ops planners' way of saying a really large number of cruise missiles. That, or a convoluted, custom-tailored cyberop carried out similarly to StuxNet, but there's a ton of factors in that.

Basically this cranked up to 11?

[The Grand World Order]

Did a gorilla pimp drive the pink tank?

An airship operating at 75,000 feet has a sensor horizon outside the envelope of any current SAM and could have a potentially negligible radar signature. In the off case it does get hit by something it could just descend to a lower altitude and go home - modern airships are fairly durable.

Even in COIN you're better off with a high-altitude airship spotting and engaging time-sensitive targets like dudes laying IEDs or mortars with glide bombs than putting a bunch of dumb guns on one.

it's almost like I mentioned using them as ISR platforms in my original post.

I also don't think we have any real examples of how exactly a modern LTA aircraft would react to being hit with a strategic SAM. It's much more -likely- to be hit- it's basically a bigger, slower AEW&C plane- and I don't share your belief that modern airships will just be able to shrug off SAMs, especially when the engines and/or gondola are hit.

As for COIN applications, keep in mind that the AC-130 isn't just dumb guns, either, and has the ability to carry plenty of different guided munitions. The newest ones also dropped the 40mm for GBU-44s or AGM-176s depending on the mission loadout.

Basically this cranked up to 11?

the macrosse missile massacre, a staple of NS naval warfare since the two thousand oughties

[Crabaiaia]

Is Battlefield Breakthrough Mode in anyways, realistic or semi-realistic?

[Triplebaconation]

I also don't think we have any real examples of how exactly a modern LTA aircraft would react to being hit with a strategic SAM.

We do know how quickly they lose lifting gas with various size holes and the density of air at different altitudes.

We also know the embarrassing record of air forces against drifting deliberately non-stealthy weather balloons.

It's much more -likely- to be hit- it's basically a bigger, slower AEW&C plane- and I don't share your belief that modern airships will just be able to shrug off SAMs, especially when the engines and/or gondola are hit.

If it's too far away to be seen or hit, the likelihood of it being hit is very small.

As for COIN applications, keep in mind that the AC-130 isn't just dumb guns, either, and has the ability to carry plenty of different guided munitions. The newest ones also dropped the 40mm for GBU-44s or AGM-176s depending on the mission loadout.

It's common practice to park airships armed to the teeth with howitzers, autocannons, and powerful sensor equipment above occupied areas to both collect intelligence and provide air support for ground engagements with guerrilla forces that would otherwise flee before helicopter support arrived.

I apologize for the misunderstanding.

As Kiev said interest in military airships will probably be eclipsed by HALE UAVs, but these very high-altitude platforms are a reaction to modern air defenses, not guys running around with Stinger missiles.

[Gallia-]

I guess Galla tries to make Sensorcraft/ISIS and literally rips its hair out because its laminate kevlar-aluminum composite airship skins aren't able to be made aerolastic enough to compensate for skin-sensor deficiencies in antennae shape. 50 years later it revisits the concept after being carpet nuked and making aerolastic artificial muscle skins for transonic strike aircraft to be the new Sensorcraft and it's just a flying wing that looks at stuff and is controlled by a manned strike aircraft with cyberbrains or something where each plane dominates a 500 mile frontage or whatever with like 2-4 robot buddies.

[Triplebaconation]

We probably just use a lawn chair with a bunch of party balloons stuck to it and an elaborate starfield projection device.

[Gallia-]

Based.

[New Vihenia]

So yeah here is the 8x8 thingy in its barebone form. This one is manned and act just like your manned vehicle except it's small, can get into Helo (MI-17 and Chinook comes in mind) Carry 6 men or at this moment it's a crude 193 cm mock up of one.

It can (hopefully) swim as it's basically a bath-tub with wheel and engine in mid + a pair of waterjets stick in its butt. Propulsion is what i think is conventional diesel. However something like US Army Mule program might comes in mind (electric or Hybrid diesel-electric) So it can also act to charge soldier's iphone. can be unmanned too although ill be honest human driver seems to be much more reliable.

Atm i call this thing "Violator".



this one with windows folded and 7.62 lowered.

[Gallia-]

cute

[Spirit of Hope]

Two separate thoughts.

1) I've been poking at my air defense units for the last couple of days, and what I'm currently stuck on is the air defense batteries to be associated with airborne and air mobile brigades/divisions. Currently they are basically identical to the ones assigned to mechanized brigade/divisions. The obvious problem is that these units aren't well designed for air mobile or airborne operations. However there isn't a lot of options for equipment besides going to mostly MANPADS. So I'm thinking either leave it as is, airborne and airmobile operations are unlikely to happen outside of air superiority, and this provides them good coverage when operating as light infantry or go the mostly MANPAD route so they have more air defense when they do conduct airborne and air mobile operations.

2) What are people's thoughts on using semi submersible platforms as some form of forward naval base/ area control platform. The idea would be that you could drop a platform in to a strait or disputed area and it could provide sea control. Obvious downside is that it isn't stationary, but it could be far more persistent than a destroyer sitting around to do the same. Seizing land in the area, or building your own island, might be preferable, but this could be done relatively quickly at the start of hostilities without requiring the same localized work.

[Danternoust]

Airborne troops should be supported by complete air supremacy to make up for various insufficiencies.

Unless you are engaged in regiment-sized operations deep behind enemy lines for some reason (to capture a small port in preparation of a landing fleet?).

This naturally makes the operation of airborne troops per hour to be tens of thousands of dollars per hour higher than otherwise. Hundreds of millions of dollars more per year.

[Triplebaconation]

2) What are people's thoughts on using semi submersible platforms as some form of forward naval base/ area control platform.

Worse than a ship in every way.

[The Dolphin Isles]

Airborne troops should be supported by complete air supremacy to make up for various insufficiencies.

Unless you are engaged in regiment-sized operations deep behind enemy lines for some reason (to capture a small port in preparation of a landing fleet?).

This naturally makes the operation of airborne troops per hour to be tens of thousands of dollars per hour higher than otherwise. Hundreds of millions of dollars more per year.

I could definitely see the use of AAA or at least autocannons in the 20-50 mm caliber range though for anti-drone work though or maybe something like a beefy wiesel with stingers but I guess this just goes back to the original idea OP said which is that only manpads are really needed if any AA provisions are needed at all.

[Danternoust]

Airborne troops should be supported by complete air supremacy to make up for various insufficiencies.

Unless you are engaged in regiment-sized operations deep behind enemy lines for some reason (to capture a small port in preparation of a landing fleet?).

This naturally makes the operation of airborne troops per hour to be tens of thousands of dollars per hour higher than otherwise. Hundreds of millions of dollars more per year.

I could definitely see the use of AAA or at least autocannons in the 20-50 mm caliber range though for anti-drone work though or maybe something like a beefy wiesel with stingers but I guess this just goes back to the original idea OP said which is that only manpads are really needed if any AA provisions are needed at all.

Nah, you just need a really large shotgun or small shrapnel shell: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KS-23

How high do you expect drones to fly anyway?