AirLander take off then 2nd Flight Mishap
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another aspect of potential AirLander uses that hasn't been touched upon is possible Antarctica supply missions. Granted, weather plays a huge factor here but it could be a viable alternative to the current IL76/757/C130 missions.
Jesus, Scuffers!
Who p155ed on your chips?
Have you invested in this venture and lost your shirt or are you just wasting everyone's bandwidth? Can you just let it go? We get it, you don't like blimps. Go and play in Jetblast if you want to start a fight but leave the rest of us to enjoy this innovation and speculate on what could be.
Good luck to all at Airlander. I look forward to my cruise over the Serengeti when I retire.
Who p155ed on your chips?
Have you invested in this venture and lost your shirt or are you just wasting everyone's bandwidth? Can you just let it go? We get it, you don't like blimps. Go and play in Jetblast if you want to start a fight but leave the rest of us to enjoy this innovation and speculate on what could be.
Good luck to all at Airlander. I look forward to my cruise over the Serengeti when I retire.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jesus, Scuffers!
Who p155ed on your chips?
Have you invested in this venture and lost your shirt or are you just wasting everyone's bandwidth? Can you just let it go? We get it, you don't like blimps. Go and play in Jetblast if you want to start a fight but leave the rest of us to enjoy this innovation and speculate on what could be.
Who p155ed on your chips?
Have you invested in this venture and lost your shirt or are you just wasting everyone's bandwidth? Can you just let it go? We get it, you don't like blimps. Go and play in Jetblast if you want to start a fight but leave the rest of us to enjoy this innovation and speculate on what could be.
No I have no interest other than watching from the sidelines.
I'll bow out now, but will look back in a few years time to see where it's gone.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Tourist
This one sentence shows your total ignorance. Go back to Wikipedia and learn something, if you can (which I doubt). Won't feed the troll any longer. Bye.
Added to this, if you fly above 2000ft most of the risk has disappeared anyway.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a military pilot, with both rotary and fixed wing experience in places where locals occasionally test their bang-sticks in a friendly way towards you.
I was always led to believe that 2000ft kept you safe from small arms fire, but I am sure one of the other ex mil pilots will be along to explain my error soon if you are correct.....
p.s. I love the fact that being resolutely positive towards something can be described as "trolling"
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok.
I'm a military pilot, with both rotary and fixed wing experience in places where locals occasionally test their bang-sticks in a friendly way towards you.
I was always led to believe that 2000ft kept you safe from small arms fire, but I am sure one of the other ex mil pilots will be along to explain my error soon if you are correct.....
p.s. I love the fact that being resolutely positive towards something can be described as "trolling"
I'm a military pilot, with both rotary and fixed wing experience in places where locals occasionally test their bang-sticks in a friendly way towards you.
I was always led to believe that 2000ft kept you safe from small arms fire, but I am sure one of the other ex mil pilots will be along to explain my error soon if you are correct.....
p.s. I love the fact that being resolutely positive towards something can be described as "trolling"
Look, I'm sorry to have to pop back up, but even a cursory glance at the subject brings up stuff like this:
"The maximum range of this weapon (specifically the M107 variant) is 4,000 metres (4,400 yd), as quoted in the owner's manual." - Barrett M82
or maybe something more mundane, like an M16 - Maximum firing range 3,600 m (3,937 yd)
Now, sure they can't fire that far straight up, but I am dam sure it will exceed your 2,000Ft and then some.
then we get to Manpads, with several quite capable of hitting targets over 20,000 ft up.
Now, a helo is always going to be vulnerable, but at least it can manoeuvre, what's a blimp going to do? it's a massive target, can't more fast and certainly can't do 'evasive' maneuvers.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
You wouldn't send Airlander into situations where it's going to get shot at. Conflict zone relief, no. Disaster relief, quite possibly
Airlander mishap.
Wednesday 24th August near Caddington. Pilot cabin pushed up into machine on nose down strike and bounce. Two crew seen to walk away.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Little Town New Jersey
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that's that then! Gutted....
Glad everyone is safe, but must say I was surprised how low it flew on the maiden flight. To hit a phone mast on its second flight can't be a great selling point.
Glad everyone is safe, but must say I was surprised how low it flew on the maiden flight. To hit a phone mast on its second flight can't be a great selling point.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Age: 55
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: inv
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
their blurb says it achieves 60% of the lift via buoyancy, 40% aerodynamic, and +/-25% with thrust. Aero lift would have been minimal at that speed, so just not enough lift to lift.
doesn't look promising for 10t loading, if it can't climb when empty. ohh dear
doesn't look promising for 10t loading, if it can't climb when empty. ohh dear
The control inputs looked interesting that low to the ground. Looked to me that the crew were struggling to get the airship down, perhaps it was infact lighter than air at that point. Certainly on smaller airships I've flown, you would power the ship down to the ground crew when statically lighter than air.
A nice sunny day by the looks of it. I wonder if superheat was a factor?
A nice sunny day by the looks of it. I wonder if superheat was a factor?
From the BBC news website (22 minutes old)
Airlander 10: Longest aircraft damaged during flight
Airlander 10: Longest aircraft damaged during flight - BBC News
The world's largest aircraft - the Airlander 10 - has been damaged when it took a nosedive during its second test flight.
The 302ft (92m) long aircraft - which is part plane and part airship - was damaged during the flight from Cardington Airfield in Bedfordshire.
The £25m craft is understood to have sustained damage to its cockpit when it hit the ground at about 11:00 BST.
Airlander 10: Longest aircraft damaged during flight
Airlander 10: Longest aircraft damaged during flight - BBC News
The world's largest aircraft - the Airlander 10 - has been damaged when it took a nosedive during its second test flight.
The 302ft (92m) long aircraft - which is part plane and part airship - was damaged during the flight from Cardington Airfield in Bedfordshire.
The £25m craft is understood to have sustained damage to its cockpit when it hit the ground at about 11:00 BST.
