The Commercial Applications of Airships
Registered User **
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Botswana & Greece
Age: 68
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Commercial Applications of Airships
Some years ago I published a paper on the 'Commercial Applications of Airships' which I presented to the RAeS. I haven't really been following the concept for sometime now as there have been so many projects which have failed to come to fruition. I was therefore very pleased to see this:
New generation of airships to transport goods around the world - Telegraph
I would appreciate the opinions of the revered members of this forum on the possible future of said air transport.
As a consultant in aviation and eco-tourism one application I was researching was the use of airships for low impact tourism in Africa. The idea is not original, large 'air cruise ships' have been looked into by many companies. It does however now seem that my original concept may now be viable given new technology.
New generation of airships to transport goods around the world - Telegraph
I would appreciate the opinions of the revered members of this forum on the possible future of said air transport.
As a consultant in aviation and eco-tourism one application I was researching was the use of airships for low impact tourism in Africa. The idea is not original, large 'air cruise ships' have been looked into by many companies. It does however now seem that my original concept may now be viable given new technology.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Noo Yoik
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Exascot. I'm surprised there hasn't been more interest in your thread.
I for one think the airship is a brilliant idea whose time is again fast approaching. As hydrocarbon fuels become more and more expensive (if we are to believe the Peak Oilers) then this technology may be all we have in future to cater to the mass transport or the long haul cargo lifting task.
I can imagine a future in which fuel is too expensive to provide affordable travel to the masses, as it exists today. Can you imagine the negative impact on global tourism if airline seats quadrupled in cost? As prices continued rising - the only people flying would be the very wealthy.
Imagine the dissapointment of future generations who could only read about the fantastic trans-continental trips their grand parents made, and took for granted.
But if we had practical Airships....
I remember having a series of photos emailed to me by a friend - the interior shots of the Hindenburg. The luxury was amazing, because these ships could be built big, and fitted out very comfortably.
Three days to cross the Atlantic in superb comfort, meals with the passengers at the Captains table. A private State Room. All happening at a nice gentle pace. None of the frantic rushing that modern day air travel, entails. No more endless hours spent strapped into a cramped seat with bawling kids climbing all over you. For tourists, the journey could genuinely be marketed as part of the holiday experience.
Just peace and quiet, gliding along over land and sea at FL100.
My God. what a way to fly. I fancy a job on one of them to be honest.
That newspaper article is pretty sketchy on the details, so I'm not sure how practical these new technologies are, or how they'll work, but any progress in this area is welcome.
Sign me up!!
I for one think the airship is a brilliant idea whose time is again fast approaching. As hydrocarbon fuels become more and more expensive (if we are to believe the Peak Oilers) then this technology may be all we have in future to cater to the mass transport or the long haul cargo lifting task.
I can imagine a future in which fuel is too expensive to provide affordable travel to the masses, as it exists today. Can you imagine the negative impact on global tourism if airline seats quadrupled in cost? As prices continued rising - the only people flying would be the very wealthy.
Imagine the dissapointment of future generations who could only read about the fantastic trans-continental trips their grand parents made, and took for granted.
But if we had practical Airships....
I remember having a series of photos emailed to me by a friend - the interior shots of the Hindenburg. The luxury was amazing, because these ships could be built big, and fitted out very comfortably.
Three days to cross the Atlantic in superb comfort, meals with the passengers at the Captains table. A private State Room. All happening at a nice gentle pace. None of the frantic rushing that modern day air travel, entails. No more endless hours spent strapped into a cramped seat with bawling kids climbing all over you. For tourists, the journey could genuinely be marketed as part of the holiday experience.
Just peace and quiet, gliding along over land and sea at FL100.
My God. what a way to fly. I fancy a job on one of them to be honest.
That newspaper article is pretty sketchy on the details, so I'm not sure how practical these new technologies are, or how they'll work, but any progress in this area is welcome.
Sign me up!!
Registered User **
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Botswana & Greece
Age: 68
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Meccano I am currently digging out all my old research papers and going to start again.
Oldchina, yes I am still working on that navigation exam question
We are not talking about rapid air transport with this revival. NASA are looking to move large cargo loads economically and with minimal environmental impact. The tourism market which I researched for years is also not concerned with speed just comfort. (sounds like my ex-wife 
)
Oldchina, yes I am still working on that navigation exam question
We are not talking about rapid air transport with this revival. NASA are looking to move large cargo loads economically and with minimal environmental impact. The tourism market which I researched for years is also not concerned with speed just comfort. (sounds like my ex-wife )
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People are quite happy to cruise at 20 kts on ocean liners to their destination, so why not? I thought airships could be used far more than they are. Slow, yes, but better? I think so (especially from the comfort aspect)! I wondered whether solar powered propulsion for airships could be viable, as all you need to do is *move* a given mass, not lift it as such as the envelope will do that bit. Adjust gas volume to suit loading (do they do this already?).
Tethered airships ...
... for activities like logging. No more drag lines. Fewer roads are needed. Just tether a balloon to one or two towers with a winch and operator aboard. It should be possible to thin forests by lifting selected trees straight up with minimal damage to the surroundings.
Rock God (Iron Maiden lead singer) Bruce Dickinson has invested part of his fortune in a UK-based modern airship company:
The hybrid airship is slightly heavier than air, helium-supported, and generates the rest of its lift via a lifting body design:
BBC News - The new vehicle set to revolutionise the skies
The REAL breakthrough is that, being heavier than air, it doesn't need a substantial ground crew for each landing (like the airships of old) with associated mooring masts and towers and enough space to "weather cock" around the tower. Hybrid airships can "hover" down, using their directed thrust engines like a helicopter, onto any field big enough to accept the footprint.
The hybrid airship is slightly heavier than air, helium-supported, and generates the rest of its lift via a lifting body design:
BBC News - The new vehicle set to revolutionise the skies
The REAL breakthrough is that, being heavier than air, it doesn't need a substantial ground crew for each landing (like the airships of old) with associated mooring masts and towers and enough space to "weather cock" around the tower. Hybrid airships can "hover" down, using their directed thrust engines like a helicopter, onto any field big enough to accept the footprint.
Nothing new here really. The concept has been around for decades. Cargolifter in Germany, for one, were planning a large capacity cargo 'ship. As far as the airborne surveillance application, that's been around for years also. Landmine detection has also been done, I was lucky enough to be a pilot in Kosovo of an airship (American Blimp Corp. A60+) doing exactly this.
From a flying point of view, a challenging craft! Immense fun.
The post before mine states that "being heavier than air, it doesn't need a substantial ground crew" - I will believe that when I see it. Regular airships such as the Zeppelin NT don't use such a large ground crew either. Infact, during the late nineties we trialled a device called a hydromast which would have eliminated half of the ground crew. This was with the DERA at Farnborough. I don't know what the outcome of the device was, but don't believe it ever saw commercial usage.
I wish them all the best, Roger Munk was persistent, I'll give him that!
From a flying point of view, a challenging craft! Immense fun.
The post before mine states that "being heavier than air, it doesn't need a substantial ground crew" - I will believe that when I see it. Regular airships such as the Zeppelin NT don't use such a large ground crew either. Infact, during the late nineties we trialled a device called a hydromast which would have eliminated half of the ground crew. This was with the DERA at Farnborough. I don't know what the outcome of the device was, but don't believe it ever saw commercial usage.
I wish them all the best, Roger Munk was persistent, I'll give him that!
Last edited by 500 above; 4th Sep 2011 at 17:16.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 80
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How often do we read these articles about these high tech zeppelins that will revolutionise air transport only to read some months later that the organisation has gone out of business? The simple fact is they cannot function in anything more than a moderate wind and no amount of wishful thinking will give them this capability.It astonishes me that the people that engineer these things seem to be blind to this.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: overthehillsandmountains
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We keep hearing about these pax willing to take to the air to travel slowly. They should stand up and be counted, I've never met one.
The ticket price would be very high, considering the low utilisation of the asset.
Sounds like an airborne train always stopping when the wind picks up.
The ticket price would be very high, considering the low utilisation of the asset.
Sounds like an airborne train always stopping when the wind picks up.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Noo Yoik
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the early days of sail it was impossible to sail into wind.
Later new types of rigging were developed which allowed boats to sail to within 20 or 30 degrees of the wind. Add a bit of tacking and you had a solution. Not ideal, but for centuries that is how man got about the worlds oceans.
Giving the example of a 60kt headwind is therefore a bit ridiculous. Why sail into the teeth of the wind? Modern day aircraft don't do it. We avoid Headwinds (jetstreams) and take advantage of Tailwinds (jetstreams).
I believe it's called Pressure Pattern Flying.
A 60kt Headwind can easily be converted to a 30kt Headwind simply by turning 30 degrees out of it. And one mans 60kt Headwind is another mans 60kt Tailwind!
Besides that, if sailing ships could use the wind to sail almost directly into wind, there must be some way to adapt that wind power to provide forward thrust to an airship. That would be a real technology breakthrough.
So Airships don't need to sit on the ground when its windy. Therefore there's no reason for the assett to be unproductive. Besides, I'm pretty sure the cost of building an airship could be way less than that of an A380 or B747.
Seriously though - what are your alternatives in a future without cheap oil?
By the way - as regards your opined lack of interest from passengers - ever heard of this crowd?
Orient-Express - Luxury Train Journeys
It's not the fastest way to travel by train, nor the cheapest. But it's a business that has thrived for decades after the Steam Age died, and booking a ticket is not easy. I know, I've tried.
People still choose it over flying, or taking a fast train.
Why is that?
Yes its a niche operation. But it would be a way to start, and prove the application.
I know of an Irish American guy who is currently working with the Chinese on a new airship technology demonstrator. We'll probably see them do it long before anyone in the West.
Apparantly they're very interested in the military applications.....
Later new types of rigging were developed which allowed boats to sail to within 20 or 30 degrees of the wind. Add a bit of tacking and you had a solution. Not ideal, but for centuries that is how man got about the worlds oceans.
Giving the example of a 60kt headwind is therefore a bit ridiculous. Why sail into the teeth of the wind? Modern day aircraft don't do it. We avoid Headwinds (jetstreams) and take advantage of Tailwinds (jetstreams).
I believe it's called Pressure Pattern Flying.
A 60kt Headwind can easily be converted to a 30kt Headwind simply by turning 30 degrees out of it. And one mans 60kt Headwind is another mans 60kt Tailwind!
Besides that, if sailing ships could use the wind to sail almost directly into wind, there must be some way to adapt that wind power to provide forward thrust to an airship. That would be a real technology breakthrough.
So Airships don't need to sit on the ground when its windy. Therefore there's no reason for the assett to be unproductive. Besides, I'm pretty sure the cost of building an airship could be way less than that of an A380 or B747.
Seriously though - what are your alternatives in a future without cheap oil?
By the way - as regards your opined lack of interest from passengers - ever heard of this crowd?
Orient-Express - Luxury Train Journeys
It's not the fastest way to travel by train, nor the cheapest. But it's a business that has thrived for decades after the Steam Age died, and booking a ticket is not easy. I know, I've tried.
People still choose it over flying, or taking a fast train.
Why is that?
Yes its a niche operation. But it would be a way to start, and prove the application.
I know of an Irish American guy who is currently working with the Chinese on a new airship technology demonstrator. We'll probably see them do it long before anyone in the West.
Apparantly they're very interested in the military applications.....
Last edited by Meccano; 5th Sep 2011 at 02:11.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: on a blue balloon
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"there's no reason for the asset to be unproductive"
Meccano, as I understand it these blimps would take a week to make a transatlantic round trip, compared with one day max for today's planes.
So the jet is at least seven times more productive. What's the assumed selling price in the business case, and what's the pax capacity?
So the jet is at least seven times more productive. What's the assumed selling price in the business case, and what's the pax capacity?
Registered User **
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Botswana & Greece
Age: 68
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atlantic Crossings
Oldchina, I think that the only demand for airships crossing the Atlantic or other oceans would be for heavy loads. This would be economically viable. As with the excellent example of the Orient Express people would not to go on a relatively slow journey unless there was something to see.
Eeng, Absolutely correct this is one of the environmental benefits of this mode of transport. Heavylift gave an example of moving huge generators to remote areas where there was no suitable road access. The only other way would be damage to the environment.
One of the historic problems with airships has always been the weather at landing sites and setting up a docking mast. With these hybrids no mast is required and they will be able to operate in much higher surface winds.
I didn't know about Roger Munk. He was of great assistance to me when I was writing my thesis. An incredible gentleman.
Eeng, Absolutely correct this is one of the environmental benefits of this mode of transport. Heavylift gave an example of moving huge generators to remote areas where there was no suitable road access. The only other way would be damage to the environment.
One of the historic problems with airships has always been the weather at landing sites and setting up a docking mast. With these hybrids no mast is required and they will be able to operate in much higher surface winds.
I didn't know about Roger Munk. He was of great assistance to me when I was writing my thesis. An incredible gentleman.
Kalimera exascot
If such loads were released from the airship, how do they propose to reballast the 'ship? I guess you could pick up water ballast but that would necessitate a very large water supply. Another operational issue would be superheat and pressure height (max alt attainable due to flat ballonets - a big considderation in terrain) flying from night to day and vice versa. Another biggie could be helium availability, I'm fully aware that hydrogen gives better lifting ability but can't see EASA ever allowing it.
Agreed, transatlantic outsize cargo could be viable, quicker than a ship at least. Just don't pick up icing!
Oldchina, the benefit of an airship over a jet is that the airship could carry heavier single piece cargo, such as a complete bridge etc. This alleviates modular construction to an extent, and like I mentioned before, it would be quicker than sea freight and have the added bonus of no land transport at either end. I remain highly sceptical, however.
If such loads were released from the airship, how do they propose to reballast the 'ship? I guess you could pick up water ballast but that would necessitate a very large water supply. Another operational issue would be superheat and pressure height (max alt attainable due to flat ballonets - a big considderation in terrain) flying from night to day and vice versa. Another biggie could be helium availability, I'm fully aware that hydrogen gives better lifting ability but can't see EASA ever allowing it.
Agreed, transatlantic outsize cargo could be viable, quicker than a ship at least. Just don't pick up icing!
Oldchina, the benefit of an airship over a jet is that the airship could carry heavier single piece cargo, such as a complete bridge etc. This alleviates modular construction to an extent, and like I mentioned before, it would be quicker than sea freight and have the added bonus of no land transport at either end. I remain highly sceptical, however.
Last edited by 500 above; 5th Sep 2011 at 07:58.
Registered User **
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Botswana & Greece
Age: 68
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500 Above,
Kalimera, one of many benefits with the design of the hybrid is to negate the need for ballast when off-loading. It is not totally reliant on the gas for lift. The disadvantage of this is an increased fuel burn in proportion to the load like any conventional aircraft.
I do not know about the operational aspects regarding temperatures and pressure altitudes. However again, this may be overcome with aerodynamic and vectored thrust lift.
Copyright Hybrid Air Vehicles.
Kalimera, one of many benefits with the design of the hybrid is to negate the need for ballast when off-loading. It is not totally reliant on the gas for lift. The disadvantage of this is an increased fuel burn in proportion to the load like any conventional aircraft.
I do not know about the operational aspects regarding temperatures and pressure altitudes. However again, this may be overcome with aerodynamic and vectored thrust lift.
Copyright Hybrid Air Vehicles.
Last edited by Exascot; 5th Sep 2011 at 08:48. Reason: Add Copyright
meccano:
>Besides, I'm pretty sure the cost of building an airship could be way less than that of an A380 or B747.
Building an airship - maybe.
Developing an airship - probably not.
Been there, done that...
>Besides, I'm pretty sure the cost of building an airship could be way less than that of an A380 or B747.
Building an airship - maybe.
Developing an airship - probably not.
Been there, done that...
There is more chance of Nicosia coordinating a handover to Antalya than this thing ever taking to the sky sadly!
With 60% buoyant lift (static lift) I would be interested to see how it won't need re-ballasting. Aerodynamic lift only comes into the equation with forward motion. The fineness ratio of an airship is not the best, however i would have thaught from past experience an extra 40% sounds ambitious. Vectored thrust lift should easily be achievable, depending on the power plants. Turbine power in an airship (only ever known of one, for the US military) will eat the fuel lower down (airship territory) and kill the endurance. Any ideas of what they may be? At least the crew would have longer to listen to the hot sounding Gander radio operator chicks!
Anyway, off for a Mythos and some souvlaki!
With 60% buoyant lift (static lift) I would be interested to see how it won't need re-ballasting. Aerodynamic lift only comes into the equation with forward motion. The fineness ratio of an airship is not the best, however i would have thaught from past experience an extra 40% sounds ambitious. Vectored thrust lift should easily be achievable, depending on the power plants. Turbine power in an airship (only ever known of one, for the US military) will eat the fuel lower down (airship territory) and kill the endurance. Any ideas of what they may be? At least the crew would have longer to listen to the hot sounding Gander radio operator chicks!
Anyway, off for a Mythos and some souvlaki!