Could They Ever Return?

[Regge]

I've also given the question a lot of thought for a while, and also come to similar, disappointing conclusions. Even if dirigibles become more economical as jet fuel costs rise, their slow speed, large size, and unwieldiness in strong winds will put them at a disadvantage. Not to mention (in these unfortunate times) the huge symbolic value a terrorist attack on a passenger dirigible would have.

The best idea I have seen yet for a specialized application would be transport of biogas to less-developed areas, or over difficult terrain. Biogas itself could provide some or all of the lift, and if the engines also ran on biogas this could help reduce some of the ballast/venting issues (i.e. compensating for weight loss as fuel is burned.

I hope I'm wrong, though....I'd also love to see airships flying again. There's a beauty in flying long distances without having to burn fuel just to stay up.

Regge

[Kona]

In my youth, I was quite smitten with the lore and romance of the Age of Sail. I wanted very badly to find a way to somehow make sailing ships cost-effective for low-speed freight transport. Never did, but had fun trying. Reminds me of our somewhat quixotic but fun dreams about lighter-than-air craft.

[Thalass]

I don't think airship maintenance would be higher than a heavier than air aircraft with the same engine technology, as far as i can figure from experience. Not that i've worked on airships, sadly.


I can think of two applications where airships could win. Firstly: as a mobile hospital (or, i suppose, clinic) in places like africa or for emergency response. Relatively quick travel times to where they're needed, but unlike the RFDS they can hang around for extended periods of time. Much like a smaller version of those charity hospital ships that move from habour to habour in africa now, only for landlocked areas haha.


The second is as a flying caravan, ala James May's thermal airship. This is mostly for me, though i'm sure that if you could build one build one with a capacity similar to a decent sized caravan (that could actually fly upwind >.<) you could probably sell it as a kit! Maybe. I'm sure i'm not the only one who would think a flying caravan (RV?) would be neato.

These two models would need to be able to operate pretty much autonomously, though, which could make it tricky sometimes. Though i guess the clinic airship could lower a few crewmates down on a transporter, like the Flying Cloud has, to direct the locals to help the ship down if that was needed. (awesome idea that, by the way)


Honestly, i would rather spend a few days (even a week) flying from Australia to Canada to see my inlaws where i can walk around, sit in a decent chair with actual legroom (have you seen the new stand-up 'chairs' they're trying to put in airliners nowdays?) and above all sleep in an actual bed. Even if it's a navy-style cramped bunk stacked three high in my cabin, as long as it's longer than i am! I'd arrive reasonably well rested, and without much in the way of jet lag. Instead of 36 hours alternating between cramped, spine-bending tedium and frantic airport dashing. Even if it cost more.

(I just realised i may have said that last paragraph before, but i'm not sure. This subject comes up sometimes and i tend to repeat myself) haha.

Unfortunately we may be in the minority, i suppose. Most people want to get there as quick and as cheap as possible. Though i'm sure this trend won't end well - maintenance is one of the first areas where beancounters try and 'trim the fat' (speaking from experience), which is fine while the aircraft are shiny new but what about ten or twenty years down the road?


Also: I saw what i thought to be the Eureka when i was at LAX earlier this year. It brightened my sleep deprived day!

[Mutabilis]

comparing maintenance costs against flight hours, you'd prolly be right. but an airliner can do about ten trips for each of the airship's and with more passengers. add to that the needs of the passengers during the longer travel time, and the costs go up again. more meals have to be served, the provisions for which have to be carried, and an airliner can get away with a handful toilets, an airship not. all that adds dead weight, or takes away passenger capability.
what you end up with is a mode of travel not much faster than ships but without their creature comfort.

fast response hospitals would be an idea. but ... could an airship carry a fully functioning hospital? i doubt that. the best you could hope for is a couple operating theatres and maybe a handful intensive care rooms.

[Thalass]

You've got a point about catering and other things reducing the profits. People would expect a decent meal, too, not an aluminium tray sludge meal like you get on a jet. Though if you make stops on the way that would reduce how much you would have to carry with you, but would add to the trip time.


And yeah, that's what i mean about the clinic thing. Just a couple of operating theatres and supplies, maybe a bunch of tents on board that can be set up as wards. Kind of a middle ground between those large hospital wetships, and the royal flying doctors' turboprops, which are an ambulance with wings.

[Mutabilis]

looks like the flying hospital idea would have to compete with stuff like that:


http://www.army-technology.com/contract ... /zms3.html

the advantage of this system is that the modules can be transported like any other standard containers. large clusters with ships to the nearest container terminal, from there by train and/or truck to where they are needed.
and if speed is a factor, a couple C-130s or similar military transports can get the nucleus of a field hospital almost anywhere within a few hours.

[asgaard aardvaark]

for short range, high speed delivery of large, bulky loads such as the aforementioned modules, there are helicopters like the Russian Mil-mi 26TM "halo" with a lifting capacity of nearly 60,000lb, a top speed of 185 MPH and a range (fully loaded)of 500 mi. A civil transport variant (Mil-mi 26T) has seats for 63 passengers plus its crew of 4. The "halo" is so highly regarded that the US rented one for use in Afghanistan to retrieve a downed CH47, which it lifted with ease. That would be a difficult feat for any airship to match. I would suspect that the "halo" would be less expensive to produce, also.

[Thalass]

I think there are one or two projects trying to build airships that can transport standard shipping containers. The problem is, though, that they weigh a few tons on their own - but both 20' and 40' units have a 15ton max weight, if i recall correctly. If they could one working, it could possibly transport that entire modular hospital (awesome idea, that) in one go, without having to build a specialised airship. Just a regular heavylift freighter airship will do. Hopefully one day there will be such thing as a 'regular heavylift freighter airship' haha

[Mutabilis]

the regular mass limit for a 20 foot equivalent unit (TEU) is 24 metric tons, some terminals can handle up to 40 tons. then there's of course the limit of the transport vehicle to consider. empty mass is usually between 1.8 and 2.4 tons.
so if you stretch it, the "regular heavy airlift freighter airship" might be able to handle 10 fully loaded TEUs. since not all cargoes will use all the mass allowance, it might be designed to carry 20-25 TEUs

now as for the field hospital, a regular cargo airplane like the C-130 might only be able to carry 2-4 TEUs, but by the time the airship has made the journey, the C-130 could have travelled 8 times back and forth. and from the first arrival you have <some> equipment and people there.

[asgaard aardvaark]

And there are few places a C-130 can't go. I have a video of a C-130 making an landing aboard a Forrestal class carrier without using the arrester cables. and an un-assisted takeoff to follow.