Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J Michielsen) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Blimps, Grenades Message-ID: <1991Jun23.230457.8590@cbnews.cb.att.com> Date: 23 Jun 91 23:04:57 GMT References: <1991Jun21.013213.11251@cbnews.cb.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.cb.att.com (william.a.thacker) Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY Lines: 25 Approved: military@att.att.com From: amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J Michielsen) >From: I am the NRA 20-Jun-1991 1210 >A blimp can, within reason carry anything an a/c can. The fit for WWII >K-Ships included crew of four, four depth charges (450lbs torpex),...... >range), LORAN (when LORAN was 500lbs, not 1 lb) MAD set (yep, MAD dates back), >blind/night flying equipment. All this for 26 hour endurance, which could be Seeing this, really makes me seriously wonder just how blimps compared in surface ships for sub hunting duties. Depth charges are effective only when delivered fairly close to target, and the extra error induced from altitude drop seemsa problem. Further, I had thought that the top speeds and operational speeds (and limitations) would present another operational sub hunting handicap. It might be interesting to see how this concept would work today with laser guided drop depth charges, and torpedos. al -- Al. Michielsen, Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, Syracuse University InterNet: amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu amichiel@sunrise.acs.syr.edu Bitnet: AMICHIEL@SUNRISE