Originally Posted by
172driver
1) tourist trips over remote / noise sensitive areas (Serengeti, Grand Canyon)
Fine, but already exists in the form of hot air balloons. Might work well for extended ‘air cruises’, though. Could be great for that.
I'm sorry, but the fact that hot air balloons have a limited market in these things suggests a huge market for blimps in this area rather than the opposite.
A hot air balloon is incredibly constrained in it's use. It is impossible to guarantee consistent flights or the ability to visit any particular site on any particular day. You can never know where you are going to land. The weather range is tiny. A blimp is a different proposition.
Originally Posted by
172driver
2) delivery of relief supplies to conflict / disaster zones.
I have no idea if the hull of Airlander can withstand AK47 bullets, but having worked in aforementioned zones for years, I know that it would make a great target for some crazed kid with an AK. Better rule that one - largely - out.
No.
Ruling something out because you have no idea of vulnerability and can't be @rsed to take 1 minute to google it does not make sense.
As it happens, the evidence shows the exact opposite.
https://books.google.com.sa/books?id...20fire&f=false
Airships are far less vulnerable to small arms fire than normal aircraft, and if electric would be very hard to hit with the classic single digit SAMs which have proliferated.
Added to this, if you fly above 2000ft most of the risk has disappeared anyway.
Lets rule it firmly in.
Originally Posted by
172driver
.
3) delivery of heavy/outsize equipment to remote locations.
This one might work, although many / most remote locations also experience inclement wx to which this machine seems to be quite vulnerable.
Evidence for this claim?
Originally Posted by
172driver
4) military
Sure, there will be some use, but as stated above, the thing appears to be very, very vulnerable.
As discussed above, less vulnerable than other aircraft.
Originally Posted by
172driver
5) SAR in remote areas (MH370 anyone?)
Could work, although again not so sure about the wx effects
Again, not sure because you have idly surmised from a position of zero knowledge is not a reasonable reason to discount. I have never ever even seen a blimp, so have little knowledge of them but I am ex SAR pilot and I can see huge potential if the physics work as advertised.
Originally Posted by
172driver
I’m not trying to slag it off, but if you leave the engineering feat aside, the potential uses appear rather limited. Not saying it’s not viable, but I can see this filling a niche in the AN 225 kind of way. We’ll see.
Yes, we will.