[tajender]

This thing sparked a memory of Zeppelins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeppelin) from Germany and the infamous Hindenburg crash.

I am sure the avionics and the control systems are modern, however, the technology used is quite similar and the risks it comes with are still quite the same.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by tajender

This thing sparked a memory of Zeppelins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeppelin) from Germany and the infamous Hindenburg crash.

I am sure the avionics and the control systems are modern, however, the technology used is quite similar and the risks it comes with are still quite the same.

No the risk is very different. Check earlier posts but Hindenburg used hydrogen as a gas and this one use helium. Hydrogen can ignite burn/explode very easily. Helium wont, in essence more or less an inert gas. So very safe.

Jeroen

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by bejoy

Also why diesel engines?

Weight of engine + fuel for given range. Flamability.
Check why racing powerboats often have diesels. Also check for 'Juno'.

Originally Posted by libranof1987

Since Helium is a naturally occurring element in the atmosphere, although just 5ppm by volume, I was wondering if and how one could synthesize/separate Helium from the air.

Story goes that (Nazi) Germany wanted to buy Helium from US. US refused.

He comes from gas reserves. US used to have a strategic stock. Sometime back they decided they did not need one. Obviously some people disagreed.

Regards
Sutripta

[V.Narayan]

The Hindenburg and its (half completed) sister ship Graf Zepplin II were, for their time, a marvel of engineering. At a time when the first modern looking airliners such as the DC-3 Dakota were just about entering service the Germans built these colossal 245 metre (~804') long airships with a lifting power of 232,000 kgs. This in an era when a 11 tonne, 65' long DC-3 was considered a large aircraft. They built it with the then exotic aluminum alloy duralumin. Its lifting power was so great that it would not be till 1965 that the Antonov An-22 would finally exceed it at 251 tonnes - in terms of aviation evolution of life that was 3 generations later. The world knows about the infamous explosion of the Hindenburg at Lakehurst and its spectacular and tragic destruction. But most don't know why Germans (who are no fools) chose inflammable hydrogen over helium albeit helium has only 50% of the lifting capacity of hydrogen. In the 1920s and 1930s the USA was the only source of helium. They extracted it from natural gas wells that vented helium along with natural gas and they told the Germans sorry mate but we are not selling helium to you ever. Thus forcing the hands of the German designers. In terms of length I believe these two airships remain the longest flying machines to ever take to the skies. Three Boeing 747-8's could line up nose to tail and the Hindenburg would still be longer!


The Hindenburg, all 800 feet of it. For reference look at the people standing under its tail fin.


The tragedy as it came into the mooring tower at Lakehurst, USA after a non-stop transatlantic flight. The fire was triggered by a spark caused by build up of static electricity.

[V.Narayan]

Airlander 10: World's longest aircraft retired

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-...herts-46810151

Sadly this unique aircraft had a crash it could not be rebuilt from. The company aims to build an improved model.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Airlander 10: World's longest aircraft retired



Sadly this unique aircraft had a crash it could not be rebuilt from. The company aims to build an improved model.

On the upside, the article mentions they are going to build a full production model.
Jeroen

[Sutripta]

More than the Hindenburg, thoughts go to the R101.

Regards
Sutripta

[alpha1]

How about placing solar panels on the gargantuan surface and generating electricity (for thrust) while it flies high up in the sky?

[V.Narayan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By1Fj1Q_cy0

The Airlander is back it seems. Air Nostrum of Spain, a regional airline has placed an order or is it expression of interest for 10 to be delivered by 2026. We do not know if Air Nostrum plan to deploy these for cargo or passengers. For passengers the speed {100 to 150 kmph} does not really sell as aircraft, buses & trains are faster. But air cargo could be an application that makes sense at a price point. Imagine an Airlander lifting 500 tonnes of cargo shipped by air at 150 kmph. That would be more like a express delivery over sea traffic rather than competing with aircraft carried cargo. The real application for these slow but super long endurance flying machines will be in patrol and surveillance. Imagine this as an anti-submarine patrol craft that could glide for a few days as slow as the submarine it is tracking!

Literature talks of them developing a hybrid version though I have not grasped the how and why of hybrid given that batteries are heavy pieces to carry aloft.

All in all a most interesting craft. I for one am glad it is back in business.

The world of transport is full of the most interesting developments today from electric & hydrogen powered aircraft, to electric cars, to super fast trains, to ships powered by the sun & the wind to the Airlander!

For those who have not read the previous 3 pages below is a summary of the way this works:-

• Helium filled body to aid lift. In its new form about 80% of the lift comes from the helium.
• The gas bag is a giant fat aerofoil and generates lift as it cruises long in horizontal flight
• The diesel driven shrouded fans are vectored to thrust downwards or backwards and the 90 degrees in between
• Made largely of light weight non-inflammable materials.

Capacity: 10,000 kg
Length: 92 m
Wingspan: 43.5 m
Height: 26 m
Volume: 38,000 m3 (1,340,000 cu ft)
Gross weight: 20,000 kgs
Max take-off weight: 33,285 kgs
Powerplant: 4 × turbocharged diesel engines, 325 hp each
Cruise speed: 80 knots (148 km/h)
Endurance: 5 days
Service ceiling: 20,000 ft
Loiter speed 20 knots (37 km/h)