Slashdot Mirror
Airships Tested As Two-Way Telecom Beacons
sgups writes "The Toronto Star (no registration required:)) is reporting about this firm which will supply spherical airships that will be used as high-flying telecommunications platforms to supply two-way Internet access across the United States and into Mexico and Canada. The article explains little of the technology though."
I'd like to see how they handle the dynamic zone changes as the beach balls drift around.
the airship explodes cause it was filled with hydrogen & millions of internet weenies are left stranded with no pr0n
You tried your best, & you failed miserably,
The lesson is:
Never Try
High speed internet access for those of us who live out in the woods would be great, since sattelite is incredibly expensive...
As long as they don't get shot down as UFO's....
~The Incredible Xan~
"Saying that men can't be lesbians is gender discrimination."
Now the government can use the airships as excuses for what you "really" saw in the sky at night, not a UFO. Good bye weather balloon excuse.
I thought that the .Bomb went out in 2000 or so. Why's this shit being regurgitated when I saw the same stuff in a 1998 computer magazine.
Hint: The company who had the original idea tanked.
From the evil radiation of the flying tin balloins!
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
What about the same solution as an alternative to Cell Phone towers?
Of course, if they succeed, we'll have big potatoid wafers the size of dinner plates.
Stefan
In order to reach the same coverage area as the 10 Stratellites, the company would have to install wireless equipment in more than 14,000 cellular towers at a capital cost of $56 million plus annual tower lease cost of $67 million, Lively said.
The new United States Homeland Security agency, created in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, wants telecommunications around major cities improved, and companies have been scrambling to find alternatives to cell towers and landlines, Colting said.
Great, they want reliability in case of a disaster so they think combining 14,000 towers into 10 big balloons is going to be better. Might not be a single point of failure.. but I'd prefer 14,000 points of failure rather than 10.
"spherical airships"
The Hindenburg and Goodyear blimps ruined the good name of blimp forever. Now were are reduced to puzzling out such obtuse synonyms as "spherical airships".
Sure, you can put balloons up there, but there are factors such as weather, acts of God...
snipers.
"The Toronto Star (no registration required:)) "
What? Registration not required? What am I supposed to bitch about now?
Well, hell, guess I have to read the article now.
*SIGH*
Sent from your iPad.
You can find more information on the spherical communication technology of airships at this site.
Oh, wait, that was communication technology of spherical airships. That information is found here.
1. Denial of service
2. Fried router
3. Blimp attack
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
What about power requirements? Staying in the same position requires some power. There are also other power issues I', Sure.
Cy
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Projects/Pathfinder/
or search for "Nasa solar-powered Pathfinder" in your favorite search engine.
This is a solar-powered drone that eventually will fly 24 hours (carrying batteries for night).
Spherical airships running on Volkswagen engines for the transmission of spam and pr0n. Hmmmmm...I've had ideas like this before. Usually after several bong hits....
Whats the liability if one these ships crashes? They are going to be over heavily popullated areas. Seems like a big disaster waiting to happen.
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
It'd be rather like a large helium-filled balloon, tethered, with a 5-watt 2M rig and a TNC, possibly powered by a battery/solar cell combination. Put a bunch of these up, and you've got it (albeit slow as heck).
:) Just like Field Day, all year long.
Now, make it a dual-band unit, and run it much faster than a normal TNC. Have the up and downlinks to the subscribers on one channel, and the "between units" link on another one. That should help the speed, and allow for greater coverage as well.
I think it'd be fun
Lemon curry?
GNU terrorists have hijacked the WiFi blimp and have already bounced into Microsoft's headquarters five times.
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
RTA: they are putting these up in the stratosphere which is above the part of the atmosphere where weather is a problem.
-- the cake is a lie
I'm curious: will people on the ground be able to see these, or are they too high and small to be noticeable? Obviously they won't eclipse out the sun, but will they make a noticable blotch on it?
Read jack phelps dot net
>>The Stratellite, which will be about 80 metres in diameter, is similar to a satellite, but it is stationed in the stratosphere at 19,000 metres rather than in orbit.
Maybe this sounds like a dumb question, but how do they plan on keeping one of these things in place? With an 18,000 foot cable? With some type of gyroscope mechanism?
Wouldn't the wind(and changes in air pressure) move the thing around like a, uh, baloon?
Forgive me, but I don't know that much about high altitude baloons. But I know that if the wind down here on the surface can rock my 2 ton truck around like a lego toy, it would probably do a number on a baloon in the upper atmosphere.
Huh?
The new homeland security department will require a massive global network. But transoceanic fiber is easily cut and the $800 million TDRS replenishment program with three satellites doesn't have the bandwidth. Intercepted SIGINT data is reportedly transmitted to Earth on a 24 GHz downlink using narrow-beam antennas. But the frequency swaths allocated for links are less than consumers can get on cable television. More bandwidth is needed.
One might speculate that a secret optical/IR satellite network downlinked in Hawaii might be developed. The European Space Agency, not to be outdone, says they're thinking of building miniaturised optical systems that fit onto a microchip. These optical networks might use optical CDMA which encodes each pulse,across a segment of wavelengths.
Although I hesitate due to the high liklihood of it being Slashdotted, the company's homepage has a pretty cool picture of the device in question. While the most of the comm gear is hidden within, you can see some antennae's and solar panels on the side. The rest of the site has lots of other interesting pics, but like the article is unfortunately very short of any tech detail. :-/
OK, there's no weather in stratosphere, but you're closer to God ... :-/
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
--I've seen several slashdot threads now on starting your own business, moaning about the company you are in, etc. The two recent were the tech trends thread and the hilarious wobbly headed CEO doll "bonus". Anyway, I found the most fascinating thing in the article was that, to the owner, balloons were just fun! That's how he got into it, doing what he thought was fun and cool! Fun can translate into enthusiasm which leads to making some radical but maybe cool decisions. More power to the guy, and hope he figures out how to keep them in place! And is this a new job title, certified stratonaut network administrator*? CSNA* What a job!
*copylefted, have fun!
thunderstorms in Oklahoma typicaly top out at 50,000ft however they have been known to go to 65,000 ft. 19km is 62kft. The jet stream is at the top of the stratosphere, right below the stratopause which tends to be at 150,000 ft. They have a long way to go to get out of the "weather".
As a long time Final Fantasy fan, I am severely disappointed with what passes for an airship these days.
Finkployd
It really doesn't sound that profound. It's a repeater with an embeded power supply possible solor attached to a helium weather type balloon. I have been hearing different versions of this story for a while now, High flying planes circling cities, baloons high rise buildings. but I am yet to see a working implimentation. My main concerns are no one address the inherant problems, like weather
Beats the grand idea of mount cell tower equipment on the bottom of 737's and flying 3 over Chicago 24x7. ;)
Intelligent Life on Earth
However, given the current state of the telecom industry, I find it hard to believe that *any* of these projects will get off the ground (no pun intended) in the near future.
Airships refer to any lighter-than-air vehicle.
Given it's spherical, it may not have an internal structure (think weather baloon), but it would have to be under its own power. IIRC, that would make it a dirigible. Blimps have internal cells of gas along with an internal structure (think hindenberg and goodyear).
Thank you R. Lee Ermey.
Well, it is the Toronto Star.
The Globe and Mail is read by the people who own the country. (It's Toronto's national newspaper, except for the National which is Toronto's other national newspaper.) The Toronto Star is read by the people who whine when they don't run the country. The Toronto Sun is read by the people who don't care who runs the country, so long as she has big tits on page 3. Weeklies like NOW offer insight into: politics or performance art? (With the establishment's hand up their sock-puppet bum.)
-- Adapted from Yes, Prime Minister
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
A (small) picture of one of these ships can be found here.
That just means more Bullet Bills and Cannons and Koopas to avoid!
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
Oil field trash from Africa's equitorial west coast might remember this being done over 20 years ago (by Conoco? I can't remember). The company needed communications into the jungle, and the anchored dirgibles solved two problems...
1. They didn't have to cut a path for wires
2. They could avoid the natives stealing the wire.
The problem came in the first monsoon season when , although very heavily anchored, the coastal one was blown hard enough to snap the dirgible from the cable. The cable bounded back like a rubber band, and completely demolished the base station. Tons of thick steel cable flying out of the sky. I wish I could have seen it.
(My dad, now retired from Mobil, told me this story some years ago.)
The spherical airship is filled with non-flammable helium and has no external gondola for crew. Instead, the pilots sit in an igloo-like cabin inside the sphere.
:)
If it leaks, the pilot will get a rather squeeky voice.
Glad to see I'm not a lunatic, after all.
Remember this story posted on /. about a year ago, about having using jets as flying antenna platforms for broadband? I remember reading that and thinking, "Jets? Jets??? What a dumb-ass idea. All you need is a blimp." Huzzah!!!
Plus, the look is straight out of Star Wars. Cool!
I hope they gave this guy some credit for the idea!
(I discovered this site about a year ago, and even called him to comment on how "brilliant" all of his ideas are. Check out the rest of it here!
Pretty much everybody in this thread has these definitions screwed up.
Aircraft are divided into airplanes, rotorcraft, gliders, airships and balloons.
An airship is sustained by a lighter-than-air gas and has mechanical propulsion; a balloon is sustained by a lighter-than-air gas and has no propulsion of its own.
Airships are divided into dirigibles (synonymous with zeppelins) and blimps. Dirigibles have internal frames for rigidity; blimps have only the internal gas pressure for rigidity.
There has never been a spherical airship before, and I'm somewhat at a loss as to why anyone would build such a thing; controlling it would be a bitch. So if these things do come to pass, they will be sui generis.
The word "dirigible" causes some confusion, because it does indeed mean steerable in Latin, and blimps are certainly steerable; however, the aviation community decided to use "dirigible" as a synonym for "zeppelin" back when World War I had made German names unpopular. The Hindenburg was a dirigible/zeppelin; Goodyear has blimps.
rj
But here's where it gets interesting. Later, when they were finished and had the ship tied down when a sudden wind storm blew in. Wouldn't you know it, he said the last thing he saw was the thing BLOWING AWAY into the sky "going going gone...". Hopefully they had some crew on board, though there's no way those tiny props could've fought any serious wind. We were guessing 1/4 mil was GONE (and we didn't know then that there might be comm. equipment aboard). Tough work being a pioneer in your field...
Lurking in the desert
It's out of most weather though, which makes a difference. Not nearly as much stormy weather, as say, 1000 feet.
If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
It's rayshielded, but they might be able to hit it with proton torpedoes.
Don't knock iridium.
Iridium was really useful in afghanistan.
I don't know if these blimps are hot enough or low enough to eat a stinger missile, but they'd be sure easier to hit than a satellite.
snipers
If you dig up the various stories about the recent increases in the number of blimps in the world, you'll read that one of their minor problems is that people are always using them as targets. It's not actually all that big a problem, because even very large bullets leave only a slow leak. Part of the routine maintenance is plugging all the small holes in the fabric. Every few years they have to replace the fabric.
It's more of a problem when the bullets miss the fabric and hit the gondola. Flight crew in one of those advertising blimps over a football game can be a risky job in some areas.
But this wouldn't be that much of a problem for a blimp at 21 km altitude. It would take a rather high-powered rifle to hit something that far up, and your typical suburban redneck probably wouldn't have anything with that kind of power.
They could be a target during military (and terrorist) operations. Even then, though, blimps are difficult to bring down. Your typical small missile, even if it hit and exploded inside the baloon, would just leave a lot of small holes, causing a slow descent. It would take a direct hit on the gondola to put it out of action quickly, and that's not an easy target.
--
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
But the crucial thing is that the airplanes have pilots, who by and large are able to react to any unusual state of affairs very quickly and effectively.
An autonomous system like the airships would need would not do that, even if there was some form of active monitoring by a ground based 'pilot' who could take over in the event of an emergency they are not physically there so may not be able to assess the emergency as well or as quickly as a pilot in an airplane. After all if there is a problem with the control surfaces on an airplane you have the chance of going into the cabin and actually seeing what is wrong rather than relying on instruments.
Additionally air flight paths are by and large routed away from major centers of popluation for that very reason, unless there is no alternative. The airships would require to be over populated areas to achieve thier tasks. Of course this leads to some interesting thoughts on exactly how the FAA(US)/CAA(UK) would view piloted and autonomous aircraft sharing airspace - would air traffic control be able to override the autonomous aircraft directly in an emergency, or would a ground based operator need to do it?
And my final thought is people are worried, probably rightly, by the safety of autonomous aircraft. We value life highly, so the level of safety engineering that goes into a piloted aircraft is much higher. If the aim is to provide cheap as possible autonomous systems, where all you lose is some money covered by insurance, then rightly we need to question if the safety engineering will be as high.
some antennae's and solar panels
trying to turn an already plural word into a plural by making it possessive!
that is true talent.
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. -- A.E.
I was intrigued so googled for some info. Two good reports of the Hindenburg I found here: www.hindenburg.net(google cache)
www.thirdreichforum.com(full accident report)
Both these suggest the length of the Hindeburgh (apparently a development of the Zeppelin type) was 804 feet, and cruised at around 1000 feet - although it appears to be able to fly at a few thousand to avoid weather systems.
Now using 2 * pi * r to calculate the circumfrence of a circle with the radius as the altitude, and then divide by the length of the airframe, we can deduce that the arc of the length on the airship is:
2 * pi * 1000 = 6283
(804 / 6283) * 360 = 46 degrees
So turning that into a more accessable figure that would be the same as 72 metre long object at a range of 100 metres - definately visable!!
[ sin 46 * 100 = 72 ]
Even if the bombers fly at 17000 feet the figures still suggest it would be potentailly visable:
2 * pi * 17000 = 106814
(804 / 106814) * 360 = 2.7 degrees
sin 2.7 * 100 = 4.7
So same as a 5 metre object at a range of 100m. That would still be visable to careful observation, although use of a disruption colour scheme would help it evade detection. Certainly not invisible.
For these Statolites, the figures would be:
18 metres is approx 60 feet
2 * pi * 18000 = 113097
(60 / 113097) * 360 = 5.3e-4 degrees
sin 5.3e-4 * 100 = 9.25e-4
Thats equivalent to an object of 1mm length at 100m - invisible to all intents and purposes.
Err yeah - you got me on that one.
:)
Can you guess at what point I ran out of coffee
And yes there will be a fair amount of scattering in the atmosphere, perhaps most significantly by water vapor.
The difficulty with the atmosphere is defining where it ends, the density just thins out. There is still enough drag at 200km to need occasional orbit corrections on polar orbiting satellites.