Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-11-2018, 12:30 AM   #1
PTTG
 
PTTG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Default Why Dirigibles?

We all know the most basic form of alternate history is one where dirigibles are a mainstream form of transportation in the modern day. It seems like you can hardly go back in time and flip off a dinosaur without coming back to atomic-powered lighter-than-air ships that explode at the drop of a hat.

In this somewhat tongue-in-cheek thread, what are some possible justifications for worlds that happen to use some form of lighter-than-air mass transportation, both ordinary and extraordinary?

Here's one:

Eisenhower ends up not participating in the US Army's Transcontinental Motor Convoy; as a result, his later experiences in Germany don't inspire the same interest in a national highway system, and so it is never proposed on a national level.

The NHS is largely funded by fuel taxes, so lacking that gasoline prices are somewhat lower. This isn't all that well appreciated by citizens, however, as shipping expenses are substantially higher.

Railways handle shipping to major cities, but for minor outposts all the way up to fairly large towns that just happen to be off the railroad network, air freight is the standard. Traveling long distance by car is an adventure!
PTTG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 03:37 AM   #2
Phantasm
 
Phantasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On the road again...
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

I think in order to make dirigibles long-term practical, you need to account for a few factors:

First, a reason for the US to not hog all the helium as they did in OTL, thus shifting more foreign dirigibles from flammable hydrogen to non-flammable helium, and hence preventing the Hindenburg Tragedy.

Next, a reason to make slower transport preferable than faster airplanes, particularly if you start to consider jet airliners that can cross North America in 4-5 hours as opposed to the several days the dirigibles require. This may simply be a preference for a more sedate pace, one not spurned by a need to rapidly fight wars across an ocean. Which probably means a different outcome of WWI so that the fascists don't have national resentment to turn to in their rises to power.



But I think the main reason we see dirigibles is twofold: long times for hovering aloft, and the Rule of Cool.
__________________
"Life ... is an Oreo cookie." - J'onn J'onzz, 1991

"But mom, I don't wanna go back in the dungeon!"

The GURPS Marvel Universe Reboot Project A-G, H-R, and S-Z, and its not-a-wiki-really web adaptation.
Ranoc, a Muskets-and-Magery Renaissance Fantasy Setting
Phantasm is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 04:19 AM   #3
The Colonel
 
The Colonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Avoiding some of the major hydrogen airship disasters might help - if it was the R100 that was everyone's poster child airship and not the R101 and the Hindenburg there might be more of them about.
The Colonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2019, 09:55 PM   #4
scc
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Colonel View Post
Avoiding some of the major hydrogen airship disasters might help - if it was the R100 that was everyone's poster child airship and not the R101 and the Hindenburg there might be more of them about.
Have an airplane crash be be first major disaster caught on film. The reason airships went out of fashion and stayed there for so long was because the Hindenburg was the first disaster caught on film, if that simply doesn't happen they would have remained in the world, and if it's an airplane instead that's first caught commercial airplane use likely doesn't happen for 10 years, giving airships an incredible inertia and infrastructure advantage. And this says nothing of their potential impact during WW2 via air freight.
scc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 05:01 AM   #5
Ashtagon
 
Ashtagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post
I think in order to make dirigibles long-term practical, you need to account for a few factors:

First, a reason for the US to not hog all the helium as they did in OTL, thus shifting more foreign dirigibles from flammable hydrogen to non-flammable helium, and hence preventing the Hindenburg Tragedy.
Alternately, a major source of helium outside of US-controlled regions. In my setting, I assumed France found a massive (larger than OTL) deposit in Algeria back in the '20s far larger than the USA deposits (OTL a deposit was discovered there in the '90s). Having an early alternate source of helium would remove the USA's reason for wanting to take a protectionist/monopolist stance on this new substance.

fwiw, a large reserve has recently been discovered in Tanzania (https://www.newscientist.com/article...nners-running/)

Quote:
Next, a reason to make slower transport preferable than faster airplanes, particularly if you start to consider jet airliners that can cross North America in 4-5 hours as opposed to the several days the dirigibles require. This may simply be a preference for a more sedate pace, one not spurned by a need to rapidly fight wars across an ocean. Which probably means a different outcome of WWI so that the fascists don't have national resentment to turn to in their rises to power.
My setting has an alternate WW2. I chose to have for my setting accidents and delays in the development of heavier-than-air flight, culminating with research than ultimately never chose to investigate jet engines until the late '80s. As a result, modern (late '80s) has better-than-OTL-dirigibles for most passenger traffic, with the military using propwing aircraft (equivalent to late '50s / early '60s), and jet aircraft occupying the same conceptual space that stealth aircraft did back in the OTL '80s (i.e., top secret; officially don't exist).

Quote:
But I think the main reason we see dirigibles is twofold: long times for hovering aloft, and the Rule of Cool.
This.
Ashtagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 06:08 AM   #6
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtagon View Post
fwiw, a large reserve has recently been discovered in Tanzania
That would conveniently put the helium in German East Africa, handy for a zeppelin armada.
Anaraxes is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 06:51 AM   #7
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Dirigibles are cool, but they are impractical. The experience of the US with dirigibles showed that they just could not deal effectively with wind sheers. Even so, you seem to get a group trying to resurrect them every decade or so.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 08:08 AM   #8
Dr. Beckenstein
 
Dr. Beckenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

What about money, esp. by government subsidies?

Airships require a lot of infrastructure - mooring masts, huge hangars, helium or hydrogen refineries and tanks etc -, that also needs a lot of workers.
So, when the mooring mast magnates and the gasbag patcher union team up and start whining to the politicians, sweet government money is shoved over to the industry.

Add a few spectacular plane crashes - overblown by the mooring mast magnate friendly press - will kill the interest of the public in this dangerous deathtraps.
Dr. Beckenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2018, 10:55 AM   #9
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post

First, a reason for the US to not hog all the helium as they did in OTL, thus shifting more foreign dirigibles from flammable hydrogen to non-flammable helium, and hence preventing the Hindenburg Tragedy.
The helium thing is largely irrelevant. It's really only Hindenburg that has a major role (at the very least as an accelerant) for hydrogen. I think the R.101 only burned after it crashed into the ground.

For the rest of the peacetime dirigible accidents it was weather breaking the superstructure rather than fire. Fire may have been a bigger thing for wartime Zeppelins but those do not actually seem to be studied much.

So what needs to change? I nominate subtle aspects of the laws of physics. Remove clear air turbulence and make weather easier to predict by damping "butterfly's wing"/ chaotic effects.

I think Gernsback might actually have those changes in place. Less non-linear dynamics might make economics more predictable as well making their scientifically planned economy work better also.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2018, 11:42 AM   #10
malloyd
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Default Re: Why Dirigibles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
For the rest of the peacetime dirigible accidents it was weather breaking the superstructure rather than fire.
This is one of the few issues with LTA you actually have some hope of addressing in a realistic setting. Better weather forecasting telling you where not to try to fly doesn't necessarily require superscience.
__________________
--
MA Lloyd
malloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
airship

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.