Slashdot Mirror
High-Altitude 'Security Blimps' Coming Soon
quackking writes "The AP is reporting (in New York Newsday) that the Georgia Tech spinoff company TechSphere has sold their concept of immense (300 foot diameter), high altitude spherical surveillance blimps to the honchos at Fort Benning, GA, and production is beginning now! (more here.) These things are as big as a 30-story building. Meanwhile Lockheed-Martin is working on gigantic 500-foot long robot blimps, (and more here.) This would be 25 times the size of the well-known Goodyear blimp. Says Mayor Don Plusquellic, 'For Akron, it's a very emotional thing.'"
"Our Proud & Patriotic Security Blimps will roam the country in Freedom Flotillas keeping evildoers at bay."
- John Ashcroft
In America, You watch Good Year Security Blimp!
Security Blimps? And here I thought they were going to use the blimps to display something like: "Run Windows Update, People Who Own Spam-Bot Zombie Computers!"
Hey, fine. As long as we get to put an antenna on it and use it for wireless access.
--J(K) DOS is like Unix in exactly the same way that a pinto is like an aircraft carrier.
My security is a clip on the circle of John Doe
Weren't surveillance blimps all the rage during WW-I ? . . . Nearly a century later and we've gone full circle . . .
Funny, I'm graduating from Ma Tech next year and I've never heard of TechSphere... are they some GTRI geeks or what?
Sky Captain here we come :)
Rush Limbaugh has a new job? Watching over *every one* of us?
a WAP on them I could see the use.
Brian: Amazing Peter, you can barely drive a car but you're allowed to fly a blimp.
Peter: Yeah, America's great isn't it...except for the South.
admittedly I didn't look at the site... but thinking about giant security blimps reminded me of the "guards"...
No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
Soon, a stout steamer will carry all of our correspondence be-tween the United States and the British Empire, reducing communication time to a scant six weeks! Huzzah!
References to "1984" have become so common and hackeneyed these days that it's become kind of like the second order version of Godwin's Law or something. I'll agree with this.
But is this a reasonable time to start referencing 1984, now that they've started implementing actual plot devices from 1984 (the surveillance helicopters) in real life??
....Does anyone else hear some spooky voice saying 'Must Spawn More Overlords!'
Maybe this is all just a mass coverup to crashing alien craft. The numbers of crashed alien vessels has increased to the point where we need to make sure we have enough high alt. blimps cruising around so that we can claim one crashed!
Don't remember which anime short it was in but there where definitely things resembling this in the Animatrix. Paging 01 and the MPAA for intellectual property enforcement. Ohhh wait..the Hindenburg was prior art.
in the Off-World colonies.
From the TechsSphere page on the project:
This release contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements. These statements appear in a number of places in this release and include all statements that are not statements of historical fact regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company, its directors or its officers with respect to, among other things: (i) the Company's financing plans; (ii) trends affecting the Company's financial condition or results of operations; (iii) the Company's growth strategy and operating strategy; and (iv) the declaration and payment of dividends. The words may, would, will, expect, estimate, anticipate, believe, intend, and similar expressions and variations thereof are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's ability to control, and that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors.
Man sometimes the beauty of legal double talk brings tears to thine eyes...***sniff sniff***
... perhaps because one of the original US military airships was the USS Akron?
These blimps were actually aircraft carriers. Akron's sister ship, USS Macon, once "dive-bombed" a Navy ship carrying President Roosevelt, dropping a bundle of newspapers for his reading. The stunt was intended to prove the worth of aircraft against ship targets.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
I've got them both beat... I'm working on a sport-utility blimp that's nearly the size of Australia!! The only problem I have so far is that it's a little hard to maneuver around smaller blimps.
"I am the Eye in the Sky! Lookin' at you, I can read your mind!"
"The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance."
What is the range of a RPG?
Yeah I bet he wants it to be "a very emotional thing", so emotion clouds are rational thought which is screaming HOW MUCH OF A BAD IDEA THIS IS!!
Just think though, with enough robotic blimps spying on us, the satelites won't be able to see us. Will this mean I'll need to build a new kind of aluminum foil hat?
Bah, this is just the standard liberal attack from the mid-90s. And it's out of date. If you had been paying any attention to this decade at all, you would know that Rush is actually not particularly overweight these days; he managed to finally defeat his weight problem and turn his life around, thanks to a strict regimen of illegal perscription drug addiction.
Personally I think he is an example to us all.
The next trend will be finding "coldspots" instead of "hotspots" - places you can go to live freely outside of the benevolent observation of the government.
Hmm, let me guess, they will paint a huge American Flag on it? Then people will love it! "Yay, freedom mommy!" Oh well, this won't be much different than the mini-vans I see in the suburbs (when I have to go out there to visit my parents, I would never live in the 'burbs, you insensitive clod). All flag waving - no brain. I'd feel better if it was portrayed as strictly for military use (but not much better). But luckily it's already being modeled for use in the USA. For our safety - hurrah!
Hansel USA - Chut up and read!
Maybe large multi-nationals can sponser these blimps and fly them over sporting events. Wouldn't that be grand.
Double-Plus Ungood
but only if they fill them with Hydrogen!
BTM
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Notice their plan for using the blimps for homeland security. Notice the lack of ballons to the north. Do we trust canadians now? (j/k) But seriously, what happends when somone flys over canadian air space and around the blimps?
How good is a security blimp that remains operational right up until a bad guy pops it with a bb-gun?
You have to wonder how many reports will come in about giant ships with lights hovering overhead.
License the booming voice of Vincent Price, launch the blimps and proclaim you are the Master of the World!
Jon Stewert did a bit on this a few months ago. He kept citing the report titled Hey, what if we put a camera on a blimp and the more detailed report Hey, what if we put a good camera on a blimp.
uh ... why do i have the feeling that between battlefield robots:
(http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/11/28/22552 57&mode=thread&tid=103&tid=137&tid=99)
and over-sized blimps, the U.S. military just isn't going to have the same ethos in the near future?
i just don't think balloons and soldiers on segways are the best way to discourage al queda. or maybe it's just me :-)
-- i'm not paranoid. who told you that???
-- i'm not paranoid. who told you that???
The Barney-steered blimp flying into the KBBL radio tower, the blimp bursting into flames and Kent's exclaiming the news references the 1937 Hindenburg disaster. The German zeppelin had accidentally snagged a tower mooring while landing in Lakehurst, N.J., bursting into flame and killing 36 people. Barney, however, apparently survives the Simpsons' disaster.
GURPS has a range of 1,650 yards.
Dungeons & Dragons v3.5 can reach about 1,240 yards but some some inexplicable reason is more popular.
The old Chivalry & Sorcery RPG had a range of nearly five miles, but figuring out how to shoot it could take years.
yes they'll be fat old targets, but it'd take more than a pin prick to down one of those. They've got double celled walls, some nifty hole filling stuff, and lots of other nice ways to keep the airship from falling to the ground.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
I for one welcome our new robotic blimp overseers.
On the other hand, now I have to find the BB gun I had as a kid... :-)
A hysterical line from "Father Ted". You remind me of Dougal.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Guess i'll need a bigger tinfoil hat.
The blindingly bright advertising and public service announcements that run down the sides all hours of the night would be a dead give-away.
Fort Benning is also home to the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation," previously known as School of the Americas.
It also earned the nickname of "School of the Assasins" after training Latin American soldiers in such fields as "interrogation techniques" (torture), counterinsurgency techniques and psychological warfare.
Every year, protesters converge on the SOA and "cross the line" and get arrested, a mass protest to bring attention to this institutions horrible record. It is unlikely a surveillance blimp will deter many, but the first thought I had was that there had to be a link. The base may want to be able to identify more of those protesters that have only supporting roles and stay well behind the confrontation?
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
BEN: That's no moon! That's a Security Blimp!
My business: Farstrider Studios.
Gee, why don't they call them balloons?
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
The Lockheed blimps will patrol at around 65,000 ft so I do not expect terrorist attacks on them. However, with lots of these around, I can imagine them being something of a hassle for civilian aircraft. The location of surveillance blimps will no doubt be kept a secret, so I wonder when we will hear the first report of a Jumbo having collided with a blimp. Probably a simple transponder wil do but I have this feeling that disaster will have to occur before this issue will be addressed.
----- One learns to itch where one can scratch.
The next Robocop is going to be very slow
Oh great, now on top of light pollution, astronomers will have to contend with blimp blind-spots. Could they let us keep the Hubble at least?
You only use 2% of your DNA
Not only were both rigid-body airships and blimps everywhere, helium was declared a strategic war material. A National Helium Reserve was established in 1925, and we've been sitting on stockpiles of the stuff ever since. Finally, it will get used for its intended purpose (hopefully...)
This is merely offtopic.
Three cheers for the almighty dollar.
It seems to me that using the blimps as missile defense is a bit of a stretch. Everyone knows our current enemies don't use missiles...
Called Cops at donut shops?
Security Blimps have been around for a long time; just check out the 400 lb. Mall Cop who's passed out after polishing off a box of Krispy Kremes...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Out here in western USA, we get loads of wild fires. rather than flying tankers and people, it would be very useful to use these to get huge volumes of water in. In addition, they may be able to drop off fighters in close to the action.
Now, lets hope that somebody does not come up with the idea of using hydrogen and doping for this.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
...can be found here. Other companies were interested, but showing commercials 13 miles above the earth kinda defeated the purpose.
My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
a more useful purpose.
It's time to go balloon hunting..
I think every town in coastal california has a local story about a Zero that crashed in cousin Zeke's back yard or in the strawberry patch back in '42. All "friend of a friend" type stories, of course.
-- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
The military and the DEA have been using smaller blimps, albeit teathered drones, for drug enforcement along the US/Mexico border in Southern California since at least 1990. Gives them a better look at all of the civilian air and ground traffic on the Mexico side of the border or something.
OR SO THE GERMANS WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE!!!
Keine eier
...Make a comment about "Welcoming our new Security Blimp Overlords"?
Or, has that finally died out?
I think I think, therefore I think I am.
Defense Tech has a blimpload of info on the Pentagon's lighter-than-air efforts, including communications dirigibles for Iraq, and a Darpa plan for a giant zeppelin that keeps watch over an entire city.
...into my house or a building!? Oh the humanity!
Microsoft Windows runs on stress and frustration.
Anoncow poster is Emmanuel Goldstein thoughtcriminal. Crimespeak will be punished.
Detain and erasure at MiniLuv (Gitmo)
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
Before someone gets killed with one of them randomly pops and comes back?
Suppose someone shot a high-power CO2 laser at it and cut the thing open from 50 miles away on the ground? (They really do sell 700 watt CO2 lasers on E-Bay)
At any rate, I don't care as long as the keep the damned things AWAY from Frazier Park; It's the only dark sky site within an hours drive of me.
Sounds just like a larger implementation of the not-too-sucessful Aerostat program they tried along the Southern borders of the US.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
A few simple modifications to my potato gun should do the trick...
paintball
There have been several posts to the effect of "what a big target, anyone with a gun could shoot these down". Consider the physics of this for a moment.
A Magnum-powered hunting rifle has a muzzle velocity of around 2,000 mph (You could try using an AK or such, but these are going to be considerably lower velocity). With the high-altitude blimps flying at 65,000 feet per the article, your shot would hit it in about 22 seconds, were it not for two things:
The first is gravity. 32.2 feet per second squared downward acceleration. Vith v^2/2*g = 131,400 feet maximum height, there is high enough initial velocity to hit the blimp.
The second problem, however, is air resistance. The aforementioned bullet loses half its velocity within the first 1,800 feet or so even in level flight, and continues to slow down from there.
Between these two considerations, there is no way for a bullet (except maybe from a huge cannon) to hit something that is 65,000 feet up in the air.
Even if you did hit it, a blimp is not going to suddenly pop like a rubber balloon. You might get lucky and hit a motor or some other critical component, but just hitting the surface of the blimp (which is what makes it such a big target) is just going to put a 1/3" hole in something as big as a skyscraper, and make it leak at a negligible rate.
Talk about easy target, just fly up with a gun or something, one shot and there's millions of millions of dollars in repair costs.
the surveiled do not have the technology to shoot the blimp down.
As soon as they do, rewind history, splat U2, SR71, Keyhole
Finally, blimps/balloon cameras are MUCH, MUCH cheaper than sats.
stop making fun of obese security guards
Table-ized A.I.
Unload a few clips into that sucka, watch er' deflate! Although they'd have devices to handle such obvious problems like self-healing material. Still, a 3 foot hole from an RPG or "imrpovised rocket-propeled explosive device" would probably do quite a bit of damage, especially if the hole were on top.
Remindes me of the little blimp from They Live, or the really big blimps from The Matrix.
Anyone know what they'll be used for besides survelience? Like, mebbe, mind control rays or somethin?
Candy-Coated Knowledge
Two words: Kon Tiki
> what happends when somone flys over canadian air
> space and around the blimps?
Nothing. We trust the Russians too.
We can't tap into that supply now, what if someday there is a strategic need for everyone in the US to speak in a high squeky voice?
that weren't required to read it in high school and are wondering what all these double-plus-ungood and 'big brother' comments are, check this out.
/. would know this.
There was once a time where everyone on
Ummm, hello, not even CLOSE, a 50 cal BMG dosent even have the altitude they are talking about is > 50k ft.
Alaska and Hawaii weren't states during World War II, so "continental US" is redundant. They were both admitted into the union in 1959.
Sure, they're easy targets. And for every one that gets shot down, you'll lose another "inalienable" right. Is anybody else tired of being treated like a suspect by the government we're supporting with outrageous taxes? Sure...maybe we'll be a little closer to real freedom when we're 65 and we can stop working to support our inefficient government--of course, by then, we'll all be too broke to enjoy it. All of our potential savings will have gone toward buying blimps.
Does any one else see anything wrong with launching giant "targets" into our skies?!?!?!
*inhales* (high-pitched voice) Somehow I think it won't!
This sig is certified free of self-referential humour!
It's an AIRSHIP!!! /Zeppelin von MontePython
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
The 88mm Flak 18 had a ceiling of only 9900m (32500 ft) and even the 88mm Flak 41 had a ceiling of only 15000m (49000 ft). See here.
Just like in Batman...
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
You know you're a fucking moron, right?
I wanna go for a ride!
-Imidazole
Hilarious Office Prank!
And especially for covering up that statue's naked boob ...
A bigger question is: how many idiots will try to shoot these down and end up raining bullets on their neighbors' roofs?
Until the day you see one hanging over downtown newyork with NYPD printed on the side of it :/
As part of a early-warning system floating up and down the coast of the US, that's not so bad, there's already vast survalance nets on and under the water.
If you had well-designed directional antennae, could you bounce wifi network signals off of these?....
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Seriously, why does it seem so difficult and expensive to put a 100+ year old technology back up into the sky? I understand that there are going to be costs, license and approval needs (both FAA and FCC - I bet that is a crazy process - one or the other is bad enough, but both? Gack!) - but what is really taking so long?
I would think someone could throw a few million at this problem and have it solved (by a "few million", I mean something like 10-20 million - I think that is realistic). How much has been spent by various people on getting to the X-Prize? Why couldn't a similar amount be spent on these supposed blimps - the engineering can't be as rigorous (it isn't like you are building a dirigable needing an internal airframe - a blimp is a couple of bags filled with helium inside a larger bag). Even if a Hindenburg-style machine was needed, they built them once a long time ago, before commercial air transport - so where is the holdup?
I can only think of one reason - there isn't a real need for these things. Money is spent "studying" all of this, maybe prototypes are made - but in the end it all comes down to lining a few pockets with money for nothing that is really needed. A definition of pork spending if there ever was one...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Stormtroopers and Tie Fighters. Don't ever forget the Tie Fighters.
Bucky Fuller calculated that if you built a geodesic sphere greater than 1/4 mile in diameter, the weight of the air inside would be so much greater than the weight of the structure that an increase of 1 degree in the air temp inside over the air outside would make the thing float away! He envisioned huge, half-mile wide "floating cities" that could stay aloft indefinitely - he called them "cloud nines"...
I wonder long it'll take before someone stows away
aboard one of these things, so they can skydive off
it at 65,000 feet (better bring bottled oxygen...)
>;k
Actually, it would probably ask for more pylons.
If you look at the initial usage (see a post below), thee were supposed to carry small planes to act as scouts.
The similarity with a Protoss Carrier is disturbing, and yet so cool.
Better yet, check this out for the free online version.
Okay, wouldn't the easiest way to take one down be a much smaller ballon with a small explosive payload? Some kind of optical guidance and a little motor to seek the target would finish the job.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Bull:
In 1963 Bull started a series of test-firings using specialised discarding-sabot rounds and then finned projectiles known as Martletts. By June these had been replaced by a dart-like shell known as the Martlett-2, which was soon reaching altitudes in excess of 100 km.
I don't think NORAD has been completely disassembled, has it? If we want blimps up here, that's our lookout; but in the meantime, something flying over us is likely to be noticed. And that's a fairly(if not extremely) long way to go without refueling - especially if they want to go back.
NB: YMMV. IANAL. Take the above with a grain of salt.
... which I've always thought was a toddler guard in The Village for kids!
I'm trying to bend my mind to see if it would be in any way possible, but I would imagine that it would be impossible to keep the hard shell from imploding prior to actually rising.
The reason regular blimps work, and this presumebly can't, is that the air, while it would love to get inside the norm baloon to even out densities, can't because the shell is supported (pushed outward) by all the gas have you inside, and it doesn't require too much persuading to just have the air be content to be below the shell.
With a vacuum however, the support of the shell would have nothing to defend against the air trying to get in, except perhaps additional metal/whatever struts, which of course would add to the weight of the craft.
Fun thought excercise though.
Plus, I just like anthropomorphizing things, like air.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
Well, he's no Himler, but he's not bad!
Excuse me? In what way are 500-foot-diameter blimps like helicopters? They're big. Round. Like... I dunno... like... eyes! Big... electric... eyes! Yeaaaaaaaaaaahhhh!
George Orwell's 1984's helicopters are totally pwn3d by Judas Priest's Electric Eye, and Rob Halford sang it in 1982. Nyaaah!
It's too damned bad I already commented (on another of your comments, actually). How unlikely that the parents comment would include the name of the plane, as well as the it's slang nick. Good on you for catching it.
Only criminals should worry. You will have nothing to fear as long as you:
Don't mug anyone, shoplift, or steel a car
Obey the speed limit and use your turn signal
Do not leave the house if you called in sick to work
Use only BSA approved software
Don't post on Slashdot
Go shopping in the xmas season
Refrain from coping music
Go to church
Stay away from abortion clinics
Stay away from libraries
Stay away from voting booths
Do not throw your grass clippings into the neighbor's yard.
Don't have the same haircut as a criminal (mistakes can happen when looking down from above)
Seriously, what concerns me is that these big brother blimps wouldn't hover above suburbs or high-income neighborhoods and cities. God-forbid the blimps raise property values. No, the blimps would hover above lower income areas, which would have a demoralizing effect on lower income population.
_______
2B1ASK1
1) Rail Gun (It would make a hole at least)
2) HERF Gun (OK, so it would not shoot it down)
The best part of these is their multipurpose use. Consider this: Build large solar collectors in orbit, and beam the energy to a series of very high altitude floaters. That powers any electronics on board, fans, etc, as well as being a nice relay for the power to the ground. Next, use the electonics equipment as a big floating telecom / gps / weather / etc (all in one cheap satellite) rack, and things begin to look a little more rosy. Cheaper than satellites by far, and they can hopefully keep themselves aloft for >6mo.
:-)
Without the need for batteries or solar collectors on board the floater (besides the power receiver (microwave or laser)), there's lots more payload room for productive use. The only drawback is that they might spoil the view somewhat.
You could always coat the surface with e-paper to use as sign realestate!
"(1) COMMENCEMENT.--Not later than January 1, 2005, the Secretary shall commence offering for sale crude helium from helium reserves owned by the United States in such amounts as would be necessary to dispose of all such helium reserves in excess of 600,000,000 cubic feet on a straight-line basis between such date and January 1, 2015.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I always wondered why they never have made floating radio towers that are tied to the ground. Sort of like a reverse suspension bridge- rather than hold the bridge up- the cable would hold the lighter than air building down.
Build it and come to find out the neighborhood sucks- move the building. No biggie.
I remember reading a year or so ago about a company that would build luxury airships for CEOS. This would be a great way to travel.
If I were a terrorist, you can bet your ass I'd be thinking of much simpler/better targets for inducing terror in the civilian populace than a probably fairly well guarded military surveillance aircraft (and chances are when they bring it down for 'upgrades' it will be on a military base, hardly an interesting target for a terrorist). Hell, it's a thousand times easier and more effective to just car-bomb an office building or mall, or plant explosives in a busy subway, or try poison some water supply or something.
The only way that sort of thing could do much is a combination of blind luck and utterly stupid lack of redundancy. You'd more likely need at least fragmentation to do the job, probably an explosion from inside to burst the gasbag(which is not really meant for high pressure, especially when punctured and lacerated by shrapnel).
Granted, the altitude is almost excessive - can't read the initial article from work, but 65,000 ft / 5280 ft/mile ~= 12.3 miles; 100 km / 1.6 km/mile ~= 62.5. If you could apply this to a large shell that exploded at the right time, sure; it only has to go to 1/5 of the original results.
That's still pretty steep for a large explosive shell.
NB: YMMV. IANAL. Take the above with a grain of salt.
look around for c.o.w.s.
much more realistic
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Even if it had the altitude, putting a few pinpricks into the thing isn't going to bring it down. This is not a super-inflated balloon; extra pressure means extra mass, which increased density and defeats the point. It would have little more pressure than is required to maintain its shape, so even if you poke a few tiny holes in the thing, first, you're dealing with a massive volume of gas, and second, it's not leaking out very quickly.
NB: YMMV. IANAL. Take the above with a grain of salt.
but as you well know, blimps are evil.
Alright, so we won't be able to shoot it down with a conventional rifle, so we should use lasers instead! Some big laser like the ones they are mounting in the front of the 747's to shoot down missles should do the trick.
Actually, people like me have been using the strategic helium reserve for years. I'm a physics grad student who uses liquid helium for cryogenics experiments, and about half of our helium comes from the reserve, with the other half coming from coal mines and oil wells. I'm too young to remember it, but the old guys in the physics department remember when helium was $10-20 per liter (liquid), whereas now it's about $5-7 thanks to the Feds selling it cheap.
"At 803.8 feet in length and 135.1 feet in diameter, the German passenger airship Hindenburg (LZ-129) was the largest aircraft ever to fly. "
500 feet what a bunch of wimps
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi311.htm - a really strange helicopter/blimp combination from the US.
I for one welcome our new blimp overlords.
aw, fuck it.
and fuck you too!
I've had this question in mind for a while, perhaps someone here can answer it. As I understand, most of the helium in the world is found in deposits in the US. Since helium is incredibly light and inert (won't combine with other elements to make heavier matter) - is there a chance we could run out?
Last post!
How much of an engine would be required to keep this thing stationary in the jet stream? What type of engine is going to be most efficient at this altitude?
I knew it. I told my friends "ITS TIME FOR A BLIMP AND ZEPPLIN COMEBACK!!!" ...usually over beer... ...usually standing on a table...
Regardless, I have always thought zepplins and blimps have deserved anouther look with new technology and materials running about. A bit bummed about it being a big brother blimp, but its nice to see them come back.
The areas I can see getting much attention are radial blimp shapes, computer aided control and station keeping systems (reducing problems from the wind by being able to adjust control surfaces and vents to keep blimp stable and in right place), reduced weight and flamability due to new materials, and different propulsion/control systems.
Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
Since when did Sally Struthers start flying?
Now I can drive the tin hats nuts by randomly releasing black balloons.
It won't matter if the real thing has been built yet or not, they'll be certain they've been lurking around for decades anyway.
http://www.sejus.com/earth2willi/forums/viewtopic. php?t=80
He must get very tired pursuing evildoers all over the world.
Now I live in New Zealand and these giant gas bags won't be showing up here any time soon, but I was wondering, will it be possible to see them from the ground? I expect not in the cities, but out where the air is clear?
As a rough rule of thumb (in imperial units):
Take your height above the ground in feet, multiply by 1.5 and take the square root to get the visible horizon in miles.
For a six foot person this would be sqrt(6*1.5)=3miles. If they moved to 150 feet it would be 15 miles......
Tx, i think your #s are the ones i was trying to recall. Never the less, the mods put me in my place for being so wrong.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
- Helium is too light to stay around Earth's atmosphere for long.
- Hence Helium can be found trapped underground near natural gas, oil wells etc.
- Helium is naturally produced in quantity on earth as a result of alpha particle decay. As you may recall, an alpha particle is basically the nucleus of Helium. Personally, I'd have thought this means Helium would get trapped in substances like granite, but shrugs.
As to the theory that most deposits are in the US, I find that hard to believe, though I haven't heard of the theory or its justification.
We won't run out of Helium (as it is naturally produced), but it is certainly possible for us to have a major shortage if (say) speaking in high pitch becomes fashionable.
Ft Benning, 182,000 acres = 284 square miles
Ft Hood, TX = 339 square miles
Ft Benning
Ft Hood
What was your unit of measurement for 'largest'?
I, for one, welcome our neo-facist Republican overlords and their puritanical naievete. Give the supposed terrorists tax cuts and a real religion - problem solved!
Your sig should replace "it's" with "its". Otherwise, I agree with it in its entirety.
As much as I hate Hard copy I subscribe to popular science and news about this new homeland security was in their feb. issue. For 22 bux for 2 years yah can't beat it
Border Patrol used these along the Mexican border i the 1980's. Hunters used them as target practice.
The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
If the American government builds rigid surveillance airships, Godwin's law would get used every five minutes.
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
...the old guys in the physics department remember when helium was $10-20 per liter (liquid)...
How in the world does one make liquid helium? Is there a tap somewhere underground you can turn on?
These spheres--how do you keep them from blowing away in stiff winds? How can reasonable amounts of power installed in them enable them to keep station? (To keep station an airship must be able to counter the wind's airspeed, it is the same as flying at that speed in a calm.)
For me these are rhetorical questions, because I believe an answer would be-"boundary layer control!" With that I bet the drag per volume might be brought _below_ normal streamline levels. And you would reap great structural advantages, need no fins, and be able to turn around pretty quick. (Don't say you don't have to--any reasonable BLC system I can imagine would need to work on one axis only. But you would have smaller moment arm than an elongated airship.)
But this only works_ with_ the BLC system. These bozos don't know from BLC apparently and are stuck with the normal amount of drag any sphere would have. Which is terrible compared to a streamline turned into the wind even with its fins and accessories--a factor of 12 I think. Not good at all. That is how much extra power you need compared to a normal airship at the same tonnage and altitude, that shows how strong the forces are.
To be fair, the Techsphere guys do say their airships should be thought of as being to other airships as helicopters are to airplanes. What they either don't understand or don't want to draw attention to is, the amount of power and the size of the rotors they need to use that efficiently would be about the same as for a helicopter of similar mass. They would basically _be_ helicopters, with some buoyancy.
Bad, bad idea without BLC. I have tried to tell these gentlemen that and they show no sign of listening. Watch the DoD's projects blow away the way the Sanswire sphere did--these guys did that one too and made the same promises.
No blimp can change the density of the craft to make it ascend or descend, except to the limited extent that heating the gas can vary the density. As a practical matter that method is limited. But lots of people seem to believe that the ballonets of blimps can gulp in extra air to make the ship heavier or squeeze the helium to a lower volume or something. To the extent that the hull materials can bear overpressures both things happen--but a typical blimp (or any other airship--most of the fastest airships were rigids but the very fastest ever was a US Navy ZPG-2W, a blimp) is designed around overpressures of about 1 percent sea level atmosphere pressure. One measly percent! That is how much latitude you have for pressure variation hence that is the limit for "buoyancy control." And to strenghten the hull to take more pressure would make it much too heavy to lift anything else, or even itself. Airships cannot be compared to submarines on this point of buoyancy control. Practically speaking their buoyancy is a function of how much gas they have, period. A kilogram (mass) of helium lifts the same amount of weight whenever its pressure and temperature are the same as the air outside, no matter what
First of all--there is no reason why rigidity or flexibility of a substance has anything to do with whether it is heavy or light. You can have a very heavy fur coat and a very light aluminum soda can.
.225 percent of the total available lift. The weight of the helium is only 1/7 or so that of air of the same volume so about a third of that discarded shell weight is useful lift despite deducting the weight of the helium.
As for the whole "vacuum" thread-look, suppose for a moment you have some wonderful substance that _can_ form a shell that can hold the air out of a vacuum. It has some finite weight, would you not assume so? Say it weighs a quarter what the air excluded from the inside would weigh. (this is not bad at all for an airship.) Thus you have 3/4 that weight as "useful lift" for payload or fuel. (ignoring the detail of the weight of other things that form the essential structure like engines, cabin walls, props, etc). Groovy. But now you fill this shell with helium. Oops! you just added weight to no purpose, because it didn't increase the volume of air displaced any. But wait! before your shell was holding out a pressure equal to the weight of ten tons of material on one square yard--that is a lot of force. If you flood the inside with helium it relieves all that stress. Since you probably won't want to drive your airship much faster than speeds that exert pressures like 1 percent of the atmosphere on it, maybe 10 percent tops (10,000 Pascals) you can throw away 9/10 the shell's thickness, thus saving
Obviously if the best substances available would not weigh only 1/4 that of the air but something worse, the corresponding weight savings by using helium would be even greater.
Whether vacuum can work or not, its advantage over helium is too small to be worth using. Helium practically is a vacuum, but one that exerts pressure.
How to make liquid helium? with great difficulty, that's how. Essentially the way any other gas is liquefied but it is very hard because helium atoms are very light (hydrogen is hard to liquefy too) and _also_ are noble gases--the helium atom has a filled shell of electrons and is very symmetrical so it has little tendency to interact with other atoms by the various molecular bonds that affect others, mainly because they are 'dissatisfied" with their electron arrangements.
Still, if you compress the gas and let it cool, eventually it should condense, if the temperature is low enough. It is very hard to get the temperature that low however. The stuff boils away very easily.It also can exhibit very weird behavior that is explained only by means of quantum mechanics.
Yes and no. What actually happens with fossil resources of any kind is, as the easy to mine sources give out, the harder known ones are all that is left--the difficutly of getting the stuff increases and if there is a demand the price rises, thus making more marginal extraction more profitable and exploration for more sources a more attractive risk. I think what you want to know is, how much would the easy sources we know now yield and how fast are we approaching that limit? I don't know, but helium is used for lots of stuff besides balloons and most of its uses throw it away--only airships strive to retain it and keep it pure. So we'd be better off from the conservation POV if airships were its major use.
When the extraction costs of mining it rise high enough we could then extract it directly from the atmosphere, then we'd have a "renewable" source since any lost gas goes back into the supply pool, But such helium would be terribly expensive.
Still, if you compress the gas and let it cool, eventually it should condense, if the temperature is low enough.
So, like, you'd need a compressor and a refrigerator (let's say "ice box"). Wouldn't you also need an expander somewhere in the process? Just guessing.
" 'Still, if you compress the gas {helium} and let it cool, eventually it should condense, if the temperature is low enough.' {me}
So, like, you'd need a compressor and a refrigerator (let's say "ice box"). Wouldn't you also need an expander somewhere in the process? Just guessing."
To be honest I am hazy on the details too but the technical challenge I think you are indicating is indeed formidable. How to make a heat pump that removes heat from the substance with the coldest condensation temperature in the universe? They use all kinds of ultra-exotic techniques to peel away at those last few degrees Kelvin! It is incredibly difficult and expensive. Thermodynamically speaking yes there is something like "expansion" going on but in very exotic contexts--electron gases in semiconductors, weird quantum effects, stuff like that. I'd have to do a lot of research to be more specific. It is done in stages, each one stranger and harder than the last.
Wow, what fun things to reply to!
"The "answer" was given here.[See up thread for link, I use plain text-Foxwell] It basically amounts to more weight == more thrust required. A fair enough stance, but I still don't buy it."
Good for you! I did answer this person--he seems to think a ton of aluminum weighs more than a ton of Dacron! A less efficient structure would indeed have to be bigger to lift a given payload and hence have more drag and need even more lift for more fuel. But there is no reason at all to say a blimp would weigh less empty and deflated than a rigid would, and lots of history that contradicts that mindless assumption. You might think a blimp ought to be lighter but they aren't. And I think the same investment in effort that would lighten blimps to the degree already achieved in the 1930s with rigids would if applied to a rigid project yield really fantastic results. There are gripes against rigids that have some merit but rarely does anyone bring them up.
This guy was not even talking about a classic Zeppelin type airship but apparently guessing at a structure like Upson's Metalclad ZMC-2. Which by the way itself skewers his argument--the "Tin Balloon" as the Navy guys at Lakehurst liked to call it was too small and had some other weird issues but it was a sound structure, being basically a skin of aluminum sheet minimally reinforced by some bracing rings (mainly for attaching things I think) and a small pressure to keep its sides from creasing, but the resistance to bending or collapsing came from the mechanical strenght of the egg-shaped metal sheet itself--think of it as a very thin-walled tube or pipe. It also held helium very well and plenty of folks today think it is the true future of serious LTA.
BTW--you or anyone else interested in airships might check this site out:
http://spot.colorado.edu/~dziadeck/airship/lists er v.htm
That's the page for joining the listserv, but check out the rest of the site first. John himself rarely posts except to help people asking the list for help and advice, and there are no archives so you just have to dive in and see if you like it. Lurk a while. But this is the main place I have ever found for serious airship talk. I learned a lot from it.
Onward!
"I *still* think that a rigid airship is the way to go for a truly large vessel."
Well sure. Actually I am not a fanatic and I like to see as many options developed as possible. I believe in giant blimps too. But honestly first of all, only rigids have ever been made and worked in the big size ranges. Second, I think they are subject to great economies in fabrication using modern automated industrial methods. Third, taking an old design and just substituing in more modern materials (largely for the fabric--much of the weight of a Zeppelin was fabric!) would improve their good lift ratios even more. Bottom line--if you want a big airship ASAP the rigid beckons. It has been done! I think that is part of the problem--no one wants to be known as a great imitator or updater.
"Hey, since you seem to have spoken with quite a few airship designers,"
I read books and then found the listserv above. This did lead to conversations with actual airship designers but I never buy into every part of any of their individual visions. Diversity is good I think but in LTA it often is more like radical parochialism!
"... let me pose a question to you. One of my dream ideas has always been to build a carrier in the sky. The way I figure it, the sides of the deck would be lined with large rigid frame balloons that would provide buoyancy for the craft. With its entire weight lightened, it could then use turbofans built into the bottom of the craft to provide the actual lift power. These turbofans would be powered by the onboard nuclear reactors. (Who else would need an aircraft carrier other than the miliatary?) I'm still thinking about how forward thrust would be applied, but it could be accomplished by building the turbofans to "ti
I must confess that I've done a bit of cryogenic piping design (cold boxes) in my time and I have no clue about helium. Offtopic, but related: interesting (but poorly-presented) PDF on LH2.
Well, the process is actually pretty difficult. One normally uses ordinary refridgeration techniques (compress the gas and let it cool, then expand it again and it cools further) in several cycles.
Step 1: liquify nitrogen. Nitrogen can be liquified with ordinary refridgeration. It costs pennies per liter. Temperature now ~80 Kelvin.
Step 2: Use liquid nitrogen to liquify hydrogen. By pumping on the liquid nitrogen, it is possible to cool it to the point where one can get liquid hydrogen out of it. Liquid hydrogen costs $1-2 per liter. Temperature now ~20 Kelvin.
Step 3: Use pumped liquid hydrogen to liquify the helium. It costs $5-10 per liter. Temperature now 4.2 Kelvin.
Step 4: In my case, 4.2 Kelvin is still too warm. Use pumped liquid helium4 to liquify helium3 (the light isotope of helium). Cost now $1,000 per cubic centimeter. Temperature now 1.2 Kelvin. This is still too warm. Pump on the helium 3 and one can get to 0.3 Kelvin. There are various techniques to get colder, but this is as far as I personally have gone.
Step 1: liquify nitrogen.
Shouldn't step 0.5 be, "make air a liquid"?
(For some reason I am now reminded of Hugh Gallagher).