It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lockheed’s airship gets the green light

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 11:22 PM
link   


Just thought I would post this here incase anyone is interested.

www.dailymail.co.uk...
edit on 19-11-2015 by Paradeox because: Editing.




posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 02:45 AM
link   
There has got to be a commercial future for this type of vehicle. Glad that it's a British company taking a lead in this. However, quite pricey and quite a way to go.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Paradeox

Awesome! Giant flying bitch-routers. Their day has come.




posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Just a short update. In the dailymail article it stated it will begin flight in 2018. However,
a few weeks ago they announced it will begin test flights later this year.

airshipcenter.com...

Remember that the one you see in the video in the OP is a small model version of the actual Airlander.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I'm surprised the CIA doesn't have 10 of those to move product.

I'm thinking that thing needs some more range.

It should have some solar panels and some electric fans to extend range.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

They are very expensive as of now, and they are still under development.

For high altitude surveillance, unmanned blimps are used.
At those heights, human presence becomes undesirable because of the time
the ships stay up there, and because of the extra expenses that would have to be made
to accommodate human presence.

en.wikipedia.org...-altitude_airship



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I would give my left nut to go on a repeat of the Graf Zeppilins around the world cruise.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stngray
I would give my left nut to go on a repeat of the Graf Zeppilins around the world cruise.


It would be an epic cruise indeed. The lower flight height and the lower speed would make it an incredible experience. Check out this picture showing the interior design of the Graf LZ-130 zeppelin.
airshipcenter.com...

It is amazing to think that the previous model, the hydrogen filled LZ-127, managed to travel 1.6 million kilometers around the world, making 590 flights, and was scrapped in 1940. Remember that in those days, weather forecast instruments were very primitive.


edit on 28-3-2016 by JohnSmith77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stngray
I would give my left nut to go on a repeat of the Graf Zeppilins around the world cruise.


Have you ever been on a long cruise.

I went on a 5 day cruise.... 2 of those days were days at sea. After the second day at sea things got a bit boring.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: grey580

originally posted by: Stngray
I would give my left nut to go on a repeat of the Graf Zeppilins around the world cruise.


Have you ever been on a long cruise.

I went on a 5 day cruise.... 2 of those days were days at sea. After the second day at sea things got a bit boring.


I think it really depends on the type of person you are. If you enjoy action, cruises aren't for you.
If you enjoy nice views, reading, relaxing, talking etc, then it probably is.
Plus I think the view out of an Airship won't get boring after 2 days.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnSmith77

I've been on a dozen or more cruises over the course of my life.

I love them. But there's only so many deck games you can play.

Everyone is different and some might enjoy it more than others.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
I went on a 5 day cruise.... 2 of those days were days at sea. After the second day at sea things got a bit boring.


When you have been at sea for 234 days straight, let me know. I'd never want to go on a pleasure cruise. I'd be like you, bored stiff after a couple of days.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
I went on a 5 day cruise.... 2 of those days were days at sea. After the second day at sea things got a bit boring.


When you have been at sea for 234 days straight, let me know. I'd never want to go on a pleasure cruise. I'd be like you, bored stiff after a couple of days. I wouldn't want to ride on one of these airships either for the same reason.
edit on 28-3-2016 by JIMC5499 because: quote problem



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Stngray

It pains me to no end that up to this point, some eccentric billionaire hasn't yet been overcome with the urge to build themselves a replica of the Hindenburg, the Macon, or even the Graf Zeppelin or the Los Angeles.

Heck, I'd even be thrilled if someone built a flying replica of one of the old pre-WWI DELAG passenger ships.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: grey580
I went on a 5 day cruise.... 2 of those days were days at sea. After the second day at sea things got a bit boring.


When you have been at sea for 234 days straight, let me know. I'd never want to go on a pleasure cruise. I'd be like you, bored stiff after a couple of days. I wouldn't want to ride on one of these airships either for the same reason.


I can imagine that if you were at sea for that long, it would get boring. But remember that for most people, a cruise is a special occasion, and so is being at sea. I cannot image an airship flight to be the same experience as a normal ship cruise. But judging by your avatar, I imagine you must have already experienced quite some flight in your life

edit on 29-3-2016 by JohnSmith77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I just wonder whether this airship - which I really like - would have been able to cope with a big storm. I suppose, with forecasting they can go around, or possibly fly above, but it would not want to be caught.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Most airship storm losses were due either to poor materials/construction or poor 1920s and 1930s instruments.

Just look at the big losses:

Diximude: Flew into a storm and likely was taken down by vented gas exploding from static electricity. Weather radar and helium fix that one.

R-36: Structural failure. CAD and modern materials science prevent that one.

Shenandoah: Flew into a storm, broke up due to weak construction and poor instruments/flight control systems. Weather radar, CAD, modern materials, and modern instruments would have again prevented that one.

R-101: Outer skin torn off in a storm, subsequent loss of lift leading to controlled flight into terrain. Modern radar/instruments and envelope materials again prevent that one. Helium eliminates the death toll.

Akron: Poor control in a storm, poor instruments, leading to the lower fin striking the water while the control car altimeter read "800 feet". Modern instruments and weather radar/altimeters prevent this one, modern flight control systems prevent the situation from arising, modern inflatable lifeboats minimize the death toll.

Macon: Poor repair leads to the rear upper fin blowing off in a gale, subsequent loss of rear lift leading to a low-speed impact with the water. Modern structural materials/CAD prevent this one, along with better instruments and flight control systems.

Hindenburg: Whether due to sabotage or static discharge, modern less-flammable skins and helium would have prevented it from happening.

I love airships, and it irks me to no end that their reputation for being expensive deathtraps based on accidents from nearly a century ago (that predated modern materials science, reliable instruments, or even radar for Pete's sake) has kept them from coming back today. It would be like falling back on 1920s biplane airliner crashes as an excuse not to build more 787s and A350s.
edit on 29-3-2016 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
I just wonder whether this airship - which I really like - would have been able to cope with a big storm. I suppose, with forecasting they can go around, or possibly fly above, but it would not want to be caught.


You don't want to be in a big storm in any airplane, to be honest.
They managed to fly old airships with good enough success back in the old days. I bet they can go around with forecasting and modern engineering. Yes, they are more sensitive to weather changes.

Here's a funny thing. You know that object on top of the Empire State Building that King Kong held unto? That was originally supposed to be a mooring mast for an airship. But high winds made it futile to use.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

I'd flip out.

I couldn't imagine doing that.

I'd have to get a group together and play some serious d&d to stay sane.
edit on 29-3-2016 by grey580 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
I just wonder whether this airship - which I really like - would have been able to cope with a big storm. I suppose, with forecasting they can go around, or possibly fly above, but it would not want to be caught.


Back in world war 1, they used observer balloons filled with hydrogen above the trenches. The observers always carried parachutes with them, so they could jump out before they would crash after being shot. I imagine that something like that could be carried on airships, since the, much slower cruising speed compared to a traditional airplane, would give you the chance to jump out in case of an emergency scenario. In general, Airships don't fly as high as commercial airplanes.

Here is a video with a scene in it where an observer jumps out of a balloon. Look from 2:25 onwards.


Note: these balloons where filled with hydrogen, which is why they burst into flames after being shot with tracer bullets.
Modern airships do not use hydrogen.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join