Talk:Anti-airship fighter

You might want to take a long look at the Atlantic Air War article and mention the SLN Sparrowhawk, and note the defenses built against incendiary bullets (such as self-sealing gasbags). And I'm curious, why isn't this a proposal? Zahir 06:40, 8 March 2006 (PST)

I usually tag the articles as proposals if I believe someone might have some objections, and I don't tag them when I believe nobody would (e.g. if they are about some minor subject that is related to my sphere of interest or such). Now I have tagged this article as proposal. As for Atlantic Air War, that article is about a later era (1943-1946), while this article is about the thirties and the Russian-Lithuanian war that happened in late 1939 and early 1940. This article as well notes that later, due to better "skin" of the airships and the usage of not flammable gas, the anti-airship fighters as here are mentioned fell out of use. Abdul-aziz 07:22, 8 March 2006 (PST)

Of course, I'm sure that these still exist, and that they, like airship defenses have gotten stronger...like Kevlar gas bags or some-such. BoArthur

There was also a mention at one point that modern airship probably use less flamable gas.--Marc Pasquin 15:22, 8 March 2006 (PST)

Indeed, this is why the anti-airship fighters as are explained here (that use the flammability of the airship gas for their advantage) eventually fell out of use. Modern anti-air fighters, as this article explains, would be based on other systems than attempted ignition of the airship and could be used against other air targets as well (although in IB probably the airships would still be the main target).