Clarkie

I've recently been musing upon the future role airships may have in either military cargo capacity or in the observation and reconnaissance role and have done some digging around on current projects by both Lockheed Martin and a couple of civilian companies. some links:

Aviation Week : Lockheed Martin's Secretly Built Airship Makes First Flight

Walrus Heavy-Lift Blimp Getting off the Ground

Aeroscraft - Model Aeros ML866

The Lockheed P-791, DARPA's WALRUS project and the Aeroscraft by Worldwide Aeros Corporation all seem to be fairly similar in design in being a kind of hybrid lifting body in shape. Indeed, the concept of WALRUS reminds me heavily of the SkyCat concept (but not the design) that was being touted around by a British company (now defunct I believe) some years ago, being a long range, extremely heavy-lift design (with an estimated cargo capacity of between 500-1000 tonnes). ... how many fully armed troops is 1000 tonnes??


It occurred to the mean spirit in me that this kind of long endurance, high flying vehicle with such a vast capacity could perhaps be used in more front-line supporting roles as a platform for various weapon systems. While something of this nature would likely only be used in a theater where air superiority had been properly nailed down, it seems to me that a system like this may be able to perform a similar role to the Specter Gunship; except that you could likely double the number of carried weapons and have several hundred tonnes of ammo on board (depending upon physical space of course).
while this is not likely to a be reality at all, the possibility would be nothing short of terrifying.

Just a few thoughts to hopefully kick off a discussion on the future role of war blimps , I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

PS, As I was writing this, the words 'Flying Arsenal Ship' trickled down into my conscious thoughts.. Nah, that's just silly.

Maxor

Airships have the distinct disadvantage of being big soft slow targets.

This is even more true than of airlift planes and awacs.

there is a fairly large difference between 120 mph (about the fastest practicle for for an airship and average is more like 80 mph) and 420 mph (a fairly sound max speed for a c-130 most varients are slightly lower.)

Most solid body aircraft can take a fair amount of damage from small arms fire and not suffer serious consquences, where a derigible will have numberous lift sacs any of which is significantly impacted by a single small arms round and due to size and weight cannot be effectively armoured.

The things that may make one nice for civilian use fuel effeicancy and huge theoretical cargo weight are also nice for the military but when you look at the ease with which one could be destroyed you would have to keep them far enough from any potential danger that in most instances the huge lift capacity would be of little use. Also the more lifting capacity you actually use the more suseptable the vechile is to damage. For a high endurance observation platorm it may have some use or as a weather vechile but I don't see many future military uses for airships as we know them.

Now for future hydro planes and ekranoplans such as the caspain see monster one can project future use and advancements at least in the hypothetical sense. The possiblility of a large vechile that could fly but perhaps not be particualarly effeciant without an internal lift source such as lighter than air gas is also conceivable though unlikely since the volume needed to provide signficant lift using lighter than air gas somewhat limits aerodynamics and possible handling.

Clarkie

Its interesting that you mention hybrid vehicles with an internal lift source; I believe that is the intention with the WALRUS which apparently (from wiki) will be a heavier-than-air vehicle and will generate lift through a combination of aerodynamics, thrust vectoring, and gas buoyancy generation and management

GAU-8

As a professional pilot, I have one comment:

Thunderstorms, lightning, wind shear, moderate turbulence, hail, severe turbulence, mountain wave.

If airships were practical, safe and economical, we would have a sky full of them right now.

HULL STRUCTURE STRENGTH is critical in a hostile atmospheric environment.

Fun topic though Clarkie! Thanks for the thread.

Airships are fascinating.

I hope one day we can get them to work.

__________________
The acquisition of the knowledge of navigation has a strange effect on the minds of men.~Jack London

turtleairships

airships which are little more than glorified balloons (blimps, zeppelins) are NOT viable candidates for military applications, except in surveillance and telecommunications roles.

Virtually all airships continue to use archaic designs and technologies. The so called "hybrid airships", such as the P-791, the dynalifter, and the aeroscraft are ill suited for potential use as they require runways and are little more than large, helium filled airplanes; still heavier than air and susceptible to the same surface wind forces that plague airplanes in landings and take offs.

However it is possible to construct airships that can change aviation, and be of revolutionary benefit to militaries.

The greatest change that must take place, is to change the material out of which airships are constructed; to abandon the "envelope" of fabrics or laminates, and to build airships out of the same strong materials that airplanes are made of. Doing so will result in airships that can travel at high speeds (to 250mph), can hover, land or take off verticaly, land in water as well as land, employ new forms of power such as solar or alternative fuels, and able to carry immense payloads.

Airships have huge potential as OFFENSIVE military platforms. They can be STEALTHY. And, despite historic perceptions, airship have proven ability to "survive" in a hostile environment.

A stealthy airship cannot be found (hit) with a radar guided missile. Because engines are buried deep within a hull measuring several hundreds of feet in size, there is no discernable infra-red signature for heat seaking missiles to find. Striking, or blowing up an engine is moot; the airship floats in the air. Engines can be shut down completely and the airship will still fly.

Airships are extremely able to survive "ground fire". If an airship were to sit idly still for a full minute, while being shot at with a common 20mm gatling gun, pumping 6,000 rounds per minute into it....it would still fly. It might sustain 6,000 holes....but each would allow only 250 cubic feet of helium to escape each minute....and if an airship has multiple helium cells totaling over 8 MILLION cubic feet...then simple math shows that it would lose about 1.5 Million cubic feet per minute, or about 45 tons in lift. If an airship can carry 500 tons.....and is operated while carrying half that in water ballast that can be dumped....then, it has five minutes of flying time. At only 120mph, that puts it 10 miles away.

Of course, no airship would simply sit and let opposing forces shoot into it for a full minute, even if they were able to do so. And, as has been suggested; an airship can carry substantial DEFENSIVE weapons on board.

If you wish to know more about airships, please contact me. You might want to see my blog as well.

Maxor

Turtle a couple of things.
1. Please don't make spam posts in multiple threads identically.

2. The volume needed to get a large amount of lift is enourmous. To get an aluminium skin the size of an airship with usuable lift would be enourmous and heavy in and of itself with fairly significant chalenges in having the skin sections joined gasstight. That volume of metal is also not really inexpensive, and would need support other than that of the gass to support itsown weight because gass under huge pressure to expand the skin doesn't provide much lift.

3. Having a number of serious leaks probably won't result in the instantanious destruction of the aircraft but would be expensive to repair as the airtightness is nessacary to the airworthyness of the aircraft unless you are putting internal bags within a hull in which case to have much serious lift you are once again talking about a truely huge structure having that be a source of lift as well might be interesting and usuable but making it armoured against even fairly light weapons like 7.62 rounds would require tremendous weight.

I simply see far more potential as fast fairly cheap commercial transport than as a military aircraft. The biggest hurdle to millitary aplications beyond observation is the volume to lift ratio makes them by nessecity large and large things are hard to manuver.

turtleairships

1. Please excuse the "spam" entries. A "newbie", I have only tried to make comments very infrequently in the past and am unaware of the correct way to post things.

2. Please, see "ZMC2" on your search engine.

3. It is not intended for a modern airship to be constructed of simply aluminum; not when advanced carbon fiber is far lighter and much much stronger.

BayouRenMan

I did a fairly detailed article on the history of airships on my blog recently. One interesting fact I discovered: the world's supply of helium is very limited, and is running low. If airships are to make a comeback, they'll have to find a way around that problem.

I agree with Maxor that airships are likely to be far more viable as a commercial heavy-lift platform than for military applications (with the exception of surveillance missions, which are a field unto themselves).

m1tch311

[FROM THE AIRSHIP] LOOK OUT!!! THAT TERRORISTS GATTA ROCK BAIL OUT!!!!!!!... lol jk

Airships are a fascinating idea but not the most practical.
btw how stable is helium?? I know hydrogen goes kablooey.

__________________
My RIGHT as an American to PWN!!

RustyBattleship

Well, you have heard the expression "That will go over like a lead balloon".

The "Mythbusters" got enough production money for one of their episodes of making a balloon out of lead. It took them days to fold and seal the edges of tissue paper thin lead foil. The test hangar was an old blimp hangar not too far south of San Francisco (where the show is based). You can easily see it just east of Hwy 101.

They finally got it put together in a balloon shape and filled it with helium. I'll be darned but it DID float off the ground.

Of course it was almost as big as a blimp and the lead was very thin and they had no load on it such as a crew cabin and engines. And it didn't stay afloat very long as the lead kept springing leaks.

But they DID make a lead balloon fly.

__________________
Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

LetsTalk

Those guys have one of the funnest jobs in the world.

RustyBattleship

I would love to be an observer on their show to point out a few mistakes or an historical incident that already proved (or disproved) their feat.

Plus I would get to meet Kari Byron, that cute redhead on the show.

Alas, she's married, I'm married and too much of a commuting distance between Long Beach and the old Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco where they film most of the show.

PS: She can shoot too. She's fired everything from a muzzle loading rifle on up to a mini-gun. Her busting open a padlock with a .357 magnum was very impressive as well.

Attached Images

Nice smile full face.jpg (51.0 KB, 20 views)

RustyBattleship

Well, well, well. This is supposed to be the new Aeroscraft.

Comments?

Attached Images

Aeroscraft.jpg (32.0 KB, 15 views)