Airlander retired

[Asturias56]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-46810151


World's longest aircraft retired

The world's longest aircraft has been retired from service as developers prepare to start work on a new model. The £32m Airlander 10 - a combination of plane and airship - had completed six test flights before it collapsed to the ground in November 2017. Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV), based in Bedford, said it had received Civil Aviation Authority backing to start work on a new craft.

It is hoped the new model will take to the skies in the early 2020s. Stephen McGlennan, chief executive officer of HAV, said: "Our focus is now entirely on bringing the first batch of production standard, type certified Airlander 10 aircraft into service with customers. The prototype served its purpose as the world's first full-sized hybrid aircraft, providing us with the data we needed to move forward from prototype to production standard. As a result, we do not plan to fly the prototype aircraft again."

HAV submitted a £32m insurance claim after Airlander 10 collapsed, which it told shareholders was the "maximum insured value".

The company said it had already had the design of the next airship approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency. It said this now puts them in a "strong position to launch production".

The company carried out its first test flight of Airlander 10 from its former home at Cardington Airfield in August 2016 but left the site in June last year.

In July, HAV revealed that it is to offer "luxury expeditions" when the airship tests were completed.

[Kerosene Kraut]

I wonder if we ever get so see another manned large lighter than air vehicle? Except for the Zeppelin NT none seems to be working.

[suninmyeyes]

You would have thought a news organisation like the BBC could have used a more descriptive and technically accurate phrase than "Collapsed to the ground." It makes it sound like a piece of scaffolding and does not educate anyone unfamiliar with the accident as to whether the causes were it got tangled up in a wire, strong winds, pilot error, design fault etc.

[Asturias56]

Well - it is LOCAL NEWS - and very few journalists of any sort have a technical education - in fact few of them can add up beyond 10 ...... plus it's not aimed at people who are interested in aircraft - it's the Public who they wantto read it

I wonder if they'll continue or just trouser the insurance cash - that's probably the wisest thing to do TBH

[c52]

Having read in the press the other day that 1800 miles is 1609 km - well, it just underlines my disinclination to trust what I read, and it's a great pity.

[16024]

Having read in the press the other day that 1800 miles is 1609 km - well, it just underlines my disinclination to trust what I read, and it's a great pity.

1800 miles being 1609km is the result of a single keystroke error: a typo.
Sloppy perhaps, but not the same as disingenuous journalism, which is a much more worrying trend.

Carry on...

[langleybaston]

1800 miles being 1609km is the result of a single keystroke error: a typo.
Sloppy perhaps, but not the same as disingenuous journalism, which is a much more worrying trend.

Carry on...
Oh! Really?

Which keystroke was that, to get 1609km from 2897 approx?

As for worrying trend, you have looked at the cause of the error, but the reader is only interested in the effect.

[Kerosene Kraut]

Maybe the same guy who calculated profitability?

[pettinger93]

To be fair, the BBC has issued a correction to their original online article, changing the emphasis from the original implication that, because of the 'collapse', the prototype had failed,. The original had also ignored the official approval of the production model. The revised article is now much more positive, and makes it clear that the prototype had been deliberately retired, to allow the manufacture of the approved production model.

[16024]

Oh! Really?

Which keystroke was that, to get 1609km from 2897 approx?

As for worrying trend, you have looked at the cause of the error, but the reader is only interested in the effect.


The struggle to make 1800 miles equal 1609km by changing a single number might raise an eyebrow or two at OASC.

The rest I agree with.

[etudiant]

The struggle to make 1800 miles equal 1609km by changing a single number might raise an eyebrow or two at OASC.

The rest I agree with.
Think obviously 1000 miles rather than the fat finger 1800 number.

[alexgreyhead]

Oh! Really?

Which keystroke was that, to get 1609km from 2897 approx?

As for worrying trend, you have looked at the cause of the error, but the reader is only interested in the effect.

I could be miles wide of the mark here, but perhaps the stated 1800 miles equallng 1609km was actually 1000 miles becoming 1609 km...?

/Al

Edit: I'm significantly unimpressed with Etudiant's ability to beat me to the punch by two minutes. Fake news... ;)

[FlightlessParrot]

To be fair, the BBC has issued a correction to their original online article, changing the emphasis from the original implication that, because of the 'collapse', the prototype had failed,. The original had also ignored the official approval of the production model. The revised article is now much more positive, and makes it clear that the prototype had been deliberately retired, to allow the manufacture of the approved production model.

The revised report is very positive indeed. So positive as to suggest a lightly rehashed PR release, perhaps. Especially with the claim that six successful (by what measure?) flights by the prototype is a good place from which to start series production.

I know the aircraft is not held up by hot air, but I sometimes wonder about the organisation behind it.

[A Squared]

I wonder if they'll continue or just trouser the insurance cash - that's probably the wisest thing to do TBH

If they're smart, they'll walk away with the cash.

[Less Hair]

So they have a production permit but retire the only one they have had. What is the news know? Bit confusing how they changed the story. Will they build another one or is the venture terminated?

[Asturias56]

Considering their less than stellar ercord with this beast I suspect they'll try and raise even more money - none of it will be mine

[MartinAOA]

Hasn't been Bruce Dickinson heavily invested in this project?

[old,not bold]

An upbeat report in today's Times confirms that HAV have obtained production approval from CAA.

[Asturias56]

Sounds like their PR guys are working overtime - I just can't see this ever working commercially

[meleagertoo]

Why all the negativity? What's the "less than stellar record" snark all about? A minor accident early in testing? Followed by a successful test programme. Get a life! How many aircraft would we now be without if they'd been dropped for that reason?

That report is highly positive - they've proved the concept and have gained production approval. There's still a long way to go but it's a British success - or are we all so saturated in gloom and self-flagellation that nothing positive can be said about our wonderful country's positive achievements?

[Asturias56]

The original one - "Army Space and Missile Defense Command spokesperson, the cancellation was a result of technical and performance challenges that had been encountered, as well as resource constraints that had come into effect"

The second UK based one crashed on its second flight and was badly damaged again later - an insurance write-off

Not a single major player is interested in buying these things - why? because they don't make economic sense

Rather like large passenger flying boats they had a very important place in aviation history but that time has long passed. No-one builds 4 masted cargo vessels anymore, nor triremes and I use a watch rather than Stonehenge. It's sad in a way but don't confuse romance with modern aviation - you'll only be disappointed......

PS National Pride is a poor basis (on its own) for building things - the UK has quite a record of burning money on projects that never made it economically- Brabazon, Comet, Herald, Concorde, Trident (airliner), VC-10...... even the hovercraft only has limited application

[Phantom Driver]

Why all the negativity? What's the "less than stellar record" snark all about? A minor accident early in testing? Followed by a successful test programme. Get a life! How many aircraft would we now be without if they'd been dropped for that reason?

That report is highly positive - they've proved the concept and have gained production approval. There's still a long way to go but it's a British success - or are we all so saturated in gloom and self-flagellation that nothing positive can be said about our wonderful country's positive achievements?

"British success" ? Jumping the gun a bit, aren't we ? Putting jingoistic arguments to one side , I ask myself which aircraft has ever been cleared for production after just "6 successful" (?) flights (including one "accident/incident" ; whatever you want to call it ). Or maybe some confused reporting going on here....? ( like MoT granting Brexit ferry contract to a company that has no ferries (yet).

Maybe someone who knows the real facts would care to enlighten us .

[A Squared]

The original had also ignored the official approval of the production model.

No, it didn't ignore that, because that didn't happen. What *did* happen is that CAA awarded HAV " Production Organisation Approval. " What that means is that the CAA has approved HAV's plan for an aircraft manufacturing organization, in terms of the administrative aspects of manufacturing aircraft; quality control, supply chain management, etc. It does not mean that they have been given approval to begin manufacturing type certificated airframes. In part because they have not been awarded a type certificate.

The revised article is now much more positive, and makes it clear that the prototype had been deliberately retired, to allow the manufacture of the approved production model.

Again, not true, although I suppose that one might draw that erroneous conclusion from this statement in the BBC article; It also clarifies that Hybrid Air Vehicles has been given the required certification from all air authorities to begin full commercial production of its aircraft.

which is misleading at best. Even HAV, in their glowing press releases does not claim that. They are a long way from being set to begin building production certificated aircraft for delivery to customers.

[A Squared]

What's the "less than stellar record" snark all about? A minor accident early in testing? Followed by a successful test programme.

I'm not sure a test program with only 6 flights, one of which ended in a crash; a program which was cut artificially short when someone didn't quite get a mooring pin inserted correctly, after which the aircraft destroyed itself in "light winds", could be accurately described as "successful".

. There's still a long way to go but it's a British success - or are we all so saturated in gloom and self-flagellation that nothing positive can be said about our wonderful country's positive achievements?

Well, not really, the thing was designed and built by Northrup Grumman, with the US Defense Department pouring in vast quantities of development money, as only the US DoD can do. ... almost a third of a billion (with a B) USD. Granted, HAV was one of Northrup Grumman's subcontractors, and an important one, and I'm certainly not trying to start a "my country is better than yours" pissing match. I'm just saying that the cast-off from a (very expensive) failed foreign military development program (programme, if you will) is probably not a good candidate as a source of nationalistic pride.

[ironbutt57]

retired after a long illustrious, and productive career...of looking like a giant butt

[meleagertoo]

No wonder this great nation is in such dire straits, when even a modest technical success is so slated by those very people you'd expect to be promoting it.
What a miserable, shameful bunch of marvins you pathetic lot are. Disgrace and shame on you all.

[A Squared]

What a miserable, shameful bunch of marvins you pathetic lot are. Disgrace and shame on you all.

Well, I suppose that if you can't respond in kind to the factual issues raised, you can always call names. It's a time hono(u)red tradition.

[FlightlessParrot]

SNIP

Rather like large passenger flying boats they had a very important place in aviation history but that time has long passed. No-one builds 4 masted cargo vessels anymore, nor triremes and I use a watch rather than Stonehenge. It's sad in a way but don't confuse romance with modern aviation - you'll only be disappointed......

PS National Pride is a poor basis (on its own) for building things - the UK has quite a record of burning money on projects that never made it economically- Brabazon, Comet, Herald, Concorde, Trident (airliner), VC-10...... even the hovercraft only has limited application

True, Asturias, but with a difference. Large passenger flying boats were operated successfully by a number of airlines. I don't know of any successful commercial passenger airship operators apart from DELAG, and they were led by Eckener, who seems to have been something of a genius. Then he was kicked out by the Nazis; he might or might not have prevented the Hindenburg disaster, but the only way to avoid the bad weather problems was to be extremely cautious, which would be difficult to do under modern commercial management.

National pride is indeed a poor basis for building things, but it's probably quite a good motivator for extracting investments from people who are suckered by the romance of these things. My father-in-law (who wasn't a mug, in general) invested in Alan Bond's Airship Industries. But I suppose it's long enough ago for most people to have forgotten that fiasco. Like the perennial flying car, the airship turns up repeatedly.

[Asturias56]

Sad but true Parrot - and it's not just the Brits who get suckered - Italy & France have their own share of nasty things in the cupboard (Mercure anyone? and ALitalia..........................

[Phantom Driver]

Well, I suppose that if you can't respond in kind to the factual issues raised, you can always call names. It's a time hono(u)red tradition.

Well said ; kind of sums up what is wrong with many parts of UK plc these days as the Brexit "debate" (aka, saga ) continues.

[ShyTorque]

retired after a long illustrious, and productive career...of looking like a giant butt

Ironbutt....You saying you've retired too?

[tdracer]

It's difficult to see any rational business case for Airlander. They've done little to address the Achilles Heel of all large airships - they are highly vulnerable to severe weather and need a large and expensive "safe harbor" that they can retreat to when things turn nasty. This requirement is completely contrary to the stated commercial purpose of providing heavy lift capability in remote locations - where any sort of potential safe harbor is likely to be days away if the weather unexpectedly turns.
Large airships are and will remain a commercial dead end unless someone can figure out a way to address their vulnerability to severe weather.

[A Squared]

It's difficult to see any rational business case for Airlander. They've done little to address the Achilles Heel of all large airships - they are highly vulnerable to severe weather and need a large and expensive "safe harbor" that they can retreat to when things turn nasty. This requirement is completely contrary to the stated commercial purpose of providing heavy lift capability in remote locations - where any sort of potential safe harbor is likely to be days away if the weather unexpectedly turns.
Large airships are and will remain a commercial dead end unless someone can figure out a way to address their vulnerability to severe weather.


Yep, if you scroll though the press releases on their website, you'll see that there is a lot of ink expended on nothing more than the process of getting it out of the hangar to the mooring mast and back in. Practice drills, they've held, techniques they've used. Modifications and improvements of their equipment .... yeah, about that: If getting your aircraft in and out of your home hangar is a newsworthy process, then your plans of operating in remote areas are just silly fantasy.

[pettinger93]

Most of the complaints on this thread relate to the media reporting (or mis-reporting) the Airlander press release, then blaming the Airlander company for the media mistakes. Agree that the concept might look a bit unlikely and / or uncommercial, but full marks to them for trying something different. Investors in this new project make their own judgement: they take a considered risk, and if it works they will make money. If not, they write it down to experience. 'Nothing ventured. nothing gained'. I can think of a lot of examples of new ideas that were ridiculed at first, then, when they turned out to work, were hailed as a wonderful breakthrough.

[Uplinker]

Just don’t make the production models look like a giant bum !

Seriously; even if it is commercially viable, (which would surprise me), which company or operator will want to have their name on this thing that looks like a large bottom flying slowly along? Sorry, but it does.

Please at least put a fairing over the front.



(Ironbutt beat me to it)

[Less Hair]

Sell some to Levis Jeans maybe?

[FlightlessParrot]

SNIP
I can think of a lot of examples of new ideas that were ridiculed at first, then, when they turned out to work, were hailed as a wonderful breakthrough.

Thing is, this is not a new idea--it's rather over a hundred years old. Aerostats have to be large and light, which means they are always going to be extremely vulnerable to weather.

I'm not sure there have been all that many transformative ideas that were widely ridiculed at first. There's an error of thinking called "They laughed at Christopher Columbus."

[ironbutt57]

how limited is something like that when operating around convective weather,....

[Longtimer]

Collins partners to develop electric propulsion for Airlander 10



30 April, 2019
SOURCE: FlightGlobal.com
BY: Jon Hemmerdinger
Boston
Collins Aerospace has partnered with airship maker Hybrid Air Vehicles and the UK’s University of Nottingham to develop a 500kW (650hp) electric propulsion system for the Airlander 10 airship.

The three-year effort, called E-HAV1, focuses on creating an electric system that could ultimately replace two of Airlander 10’s four fuel-burning engines, says Collins motor drive systems engineering director Marc Holme.

Hybrid Air has been working to start production of the Airlander 10 airship, which it markets as both a passenger-carrying aircraft and a heavy lifter.

Airlander 10’s current propulsion system includes four 325hp V8 turbocharged diesel engines, according to Hybrid Air’s specification sheet.

The Airlander electric propulsion project remains in the early study phase, but Collins anticipates building a direct-drive, liquid-cooled electric system that turns at a “fairly low speed” of 1,500-3,000rpm, says Holme.

“Our role within the programme is to push the electric machine forward,” he says. “This fits with Collins electrification strategy.”

Collins, a division of United Technologies, aims to deliver the motor within three years to the University of Nottingham, which is developing the system’s “high-power-dense” converter, Holme says.

The system will be ground tested at Nottingham’s facility, and Bedford, UK-based Hybrid Air will provide higher-level support.

The partners hope their work will create a prototype that can then be produced and fitted to Airlander 10.

“The aim ultimately is [to]… replace the two front propulsion engines, which are gasoline, with electric,” Holme says.

https://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?itemid=77246

=centerHybrid Air Vehicle's Airlander 10, powered by four gas engines, takes off

=rightHybrid Air Vehicles

The project has won grant funding of more than £1 million ($1.3 million) from a joint UK-government and industry aerospace technology programme.

Hybrid Air describes Airlander 10 as a “hybrid” airship lifted both by the buoyancy of helium and aerodynamic thrust generated by air passing its hull.

The aircraft is capable of hauling 22,000lb (10,000kg) of cargo, cruising at 80kt (148km/h) and staying aloft for five days, according to Hybrid Air’s documents.

Collins executives paint the electric project as reflecting its broader push to advance electric aircraft systems. They note Collins recently announced $50 million investment to build an electric aircraft technology laboratory in Rockford, Illinois called The Grid. Additionally, UTC subsidiary United Technologies Advanced Projects (UTAP) is developing a 1MW electric motor for a Bombardier Dash 8-100 – an effort called Project 804.

The Airlander electric project will receive support from the Grid and benefit from UTAP’s work, says Holme.

For Airlander, Collins faces the challenge of developing a high-power-dense system that requires minimum cooling. Collins must also reduce the weight of cables required to transmit the system’s electric needs, which can be achieved by improving insulation and increasing voltage, says Collins vice-president of engineering for advanced technology Juan de Bedout.

[RatherBeFlying]

So now we need an airtight, light weight flexible solar panel skin.

[KiloB]

And so the building of the pyramid continues!

[Auxtank]

Do these new engines mean the great flying arse has got its second wind?

[FlightlessParrot]

So now we need an airtight, light weight flexible solar panel skin.
Well, that might be much more realistically possible than many things about this project. You could pretty certainly get flexible panels that would conform to the upper surfaces. It also occurs to me that you could basically plan to run the ICEs at optimum efficiency, and if this generated more power than was needed for propulsion, take some of the power to charge batteries for the electrics. As an experiment in hybrid power, you can see the attractions.

[Repos]

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191107-how-airships-could-return-to-our-crowded-skies

This seems fairly optimistic but I'm not sure there is anything new here really.
Strangely, no mention of the weather.

[Auxtank]

"FLY...FLY...FLY... YOU BIG BEAUTIFUL PAIR OF BUXOM BLOODY BUTTOCKS... FLY!!!!"

OH, you crashed again. Okay...Whatever...

[Andrewgr2]

I’m amused that the BBC say the Airlander was ‘retired’ after 7 test flights. Is ‘retiring’ an adequate euphemism for what actually happened? HAV’s publicity maintains that Airlander does not need a mooring mast and yet it was breaking away from a mast in relatively benign weather conditions that resulted in it ‘retiring’! How will it cope with h real weather when on the ground?

[A Squared]

I’m amused that the BBC say the Airlander was ‘retired’ after 7 test flights. Is ‘retiring’ an adequate euphemism for what actually happened? HAV’s publicity maintains that Airlander does not need a mooring mast and yet it was breaking away from a mast in relatively benign weather conditions that resulted in it ‘retiring’! How will it cope with h real weather when on the ground?

I noted the same thing. I guess "retired" is a euphemism for "Destroyed itself in relatively light winds"

[A Squared]

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191107-how-airships-could-return-to-our-crowded-skies

This seems fairly optimistic but I'm not sure there is anything new here really.
Strangely, no mention of the weather.

Interesting that they're selling tickets for a trip on an aircraft which doesn't even exist yet, let alone completed certification.

[Feathers McGraw]

I’m amused that the BBC say the Airlander was ‘retired’ after 7 test flights. Is ‘retiring’ an adequate euphemism for what actually happened? HAV’s publicity maintains that Airlander does not need a mooring mast and yet it was breaking away from a mast in relatively benign weather conditions that resulted in it ‘retiring’! How will it cope with h real weather when on the ground?

I'm just pleased that it ended up deflated and caught on a hedgerow, otherwise it would have blown over my way and probably ended up in my back garden, I'm only a few hundred metres away from its mooring spot.

[A Squared]

I'm just pleased that it ended up deflated and caught on a hedgerow, otherwise it would have blown over my way and probably ended up in my back garden, I'm only a few hundred metres away from its mooring spot.

It doesn't need mooring. Didn't you read the article? No hangar, no Mooring mast. You're perfectly safe, nothing to worry about.

[Feathers McGraw]

It doesn't need mooring. Didn't you read the article? No hangar, no Mooring mast. You're perfectly safe, nothing to worry about.

That'll be like when they went over the field behind my house with that trailing rope that caught on the power lines at the edge of Cardington airfield, I wasn't worried about them getting snagged on my fence either.

[Seloco]

That'll be like when they went over the field behind my house with that trailing rope that caught on the power lines at the edge of Cardington airfield, I wasn't worried about them getting snagged on my fence either.

There's the answer then: trail a long HV cable behind it and limit your routeings to those of the National Grid's HV transmission lines. No batteries required - you work it like an upside down trolleybus!