AirLander take off then 2nd Flight Mishap
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Upper Gumtree
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that anyone has mentioned the fact that the slower you go, the less effective the controls are going to be. You end up with zero control at zero speed, and have to rely on the vectored thrust from the engines. Do they rotate to the extent that there is no thrust in a horizontal direction?
Another thought is that the Airlander might have huge problems with centre of pressure travel. Put that alongside controls of limited effect, and some odd attitudes might result.
Especially on landing.
Another thought is that the Airlander might have huge problems with centre of pressure travel. Put that alongside controls of limited effect, and some odd attitudes might result.
Especially on landing.
Last edited by Penny Washers; 14th Dec 2016 at 09:18.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phd project
Sounds like a great project for a PhD candidate (seriously) : model the behavior of this hybrid beast using the latest CFD (computational fluid dynamics) advances to predict behaviors and suggest software for managing it. Someday we might be using airships to navigate Mars and Titan....modeling the behavior of such a hybrid beast in gusty England might give us some insight.
Thread Starter
Chin up old chap, can't let the dastardly hun beat us.
But the UK is much fatter bear in mind...
The Cargolifter (of which I assume you are referring to), is a 'standard' Led Zep bullet/low drag type. The Airlander 'seems' to be relying on the shape for lift more than the engines per se..
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
model the behavior of this hybrid beast using the latest CFD (computational fluid dynamics) advances to predict behaviors and suggest software for managing it.
How do you imagine it got where it is now - by guesswork and a sliderule?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
Posts: 579
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew G-BIHN the old 500 series.... there is a good reason the US gave up the Skylander as a bad bet.... airborne and mooching around its fine, and you can coerce it if you wait long enough...... but get it close to the ground and it doesn't want to play at all.... that thing needs a pair of 250ft guide lines on a mini winch - approach airfield, zero speed, winch out, winch in, connect to mast... back to the bar for Gin and medals!!
Best of luck to them but chances of success are close to remote as a commercial operation...
Renting Cardington hangar, staff, development, licensing, let alone marketing or anything else will be a cash burn of circa £1 - 2 mill GBP per annum.... If its not commercial with clients by end of 2017 then I think it will go the same was as most British a/c manufacturing for commercial types... BN / Edgely / Slingsby..... Sorry if you're employed there and wish you the very best success...... but......... it will be an amazing experience if nothing else!!
Best of luck to them but chances of success are close to remote as a commercial operation...
Renting Cardington hangar, staff, development, licensing, let alone marketing or anything else will be a cash burn of circa £1 - 2 mill GBP per annum.... If its not commercial with clients by end of 2017 then I think it will go the same was as most British a/c manufacturing for commercial types... BN / Edgely / Slingsby..... Sorry if you're employed there and wish you the very best success...... but......... it will be an amazing experience if nothing else!!
Any large buoyant object in the boundary layer is bound to be skittish in a slow sense.
As a simple experiment, the Met Office courses for graduates with 2.1s or Firsts [and the occasional PhD] went into an open field in daylight and launched simultaneously, and tracked, a red balloon, a white balloon and a blue balloon from a short and surveyed base line.
Each was tracked by theodolite. The divergences after a minute were substantial, after 2 minutes were multiples of the baseline. After 5 minutes they were separated by football pich dimensions.
The students then went indoors and were asked what conclusions they came to.
Predictability in the boundary layer is very very poor. Which is part of the reason to employ proper pilots for proper aircraft.
As a simple experiment, the Met Office courses for graduates with 2.1s or Firsts [and the occasional PhD] went into an open field in daylight and launched simultaneously, and tracked, a red balloon, a white balloon and a blue balloon from a short and surveyed base line.
Each was tracked by theodolite. The divergences after a minute were substantial, after 2 minutes were multiples of the baseline. After 5 minutes they were separated by football pich dimensions.
The students then went indoors and were asked what conclusions they came to.
Predictability in the boundary layer is very very poor. Which is part of the reason to employ proper pilots for proper aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 82
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It occurs to me that the problems AirLander is having are analogous to those of a large ship trying to dock without the aid of a tugboat or -boats. So, what would the tugboat-analog for an AirLander be, if one is possible at all?
Last edited by PersonFromPorlock; 12th Dec 2016 at 22:34.
So what has made the US abandon the AirLander before? Limited payload? Flight behavior? Do we know?
The Wright Bros idea was new, the airship has been around for quite a long time. The Americans, who paid a lot for the development of this vehicle, could not find a use for it and I can not imagine an economic case for something that is slow, unable to carry much, suscetible to weather and difficult to control. Were there any plus points?!
Were there any plus points?!
Capt Scribble
There was a use for it; there was no further use for it once the USA changed it's tactics and before development was complete.
The Wright brothers ideas were not new, they were a development of existing work. Nor were they 'the first.'
There was a use for it; there was no further use for it once the USA changed it's tactics and before development was complete.
The Wright brothers ideas were not new, they were a development of existing work. Nor were they 'the first.'