Originally Posted by
LessThanSte
With 5 days aloft time, i could see a lucrative role as an alternative to (very polluting) cruises. We could see one of these pottering around the Nordic Fjords, for example. Beyond that, there is an increasingly popular slow travel movement - for example people choosing ever more to travel by coach than by train. Going by airship instead of by jet will have a heap of positives that may very well outweigh the negatives (speed).
And if it doesn't a large concrete expanse to land (i.e. a traditional airport) - that's a good thing too. Any reasonably accessible field (I can think of 3 or 4 locations within 3 miles of my desk) is suddenly a potential journey start point.
That's not to say that i think this idea will work or that these airships will ever be delivered. But I'm not sure I agree with some (most?) of the negativity above!
Not being negative, just realistic. I have worked in an airship, (smaller than an Airlander and not as aircrew), so I have seen personally what is involved. I would dig out the photos, but not sure where they are.
On a cruise, where are you going to load all the food and toilets and sewage tanks. And bedrooms and kitchen? Or perhaps you mean the pax get off every night?
Landing and taking off needs a large ground crew, engineers and a mast anchor vehicle, GPU and a fuel truck and honey wagon etc who all need to drive to wherever the airship is going to be and be put up in local hotels, incurring taxis etc. Not impossible but not quite as easy or as cheap as landing in any field.