Slashdot Mirror


Large, Slow Airships Could Move Buildings

Algorithmnast writes "The Economist has a short article on using big, slow-moving airships to move large objects without the need to dismantle them. The company mentioned, Skylifter, refers to the lifting ship as an 'aerial crane,' not a Thor weapon. It could easily help move research labs to new parts of the Antarctic, or allow a Solar Tower to be inserted into an area that's difficult to drive to, such as a mesa in New Mexico."

36 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Buildings falling from the sky by xaoslaad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The first time a house falls on a house they will be out of business from the lawsuits.

    1. Re:Buildings falling from the sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unless it's Xzibit putting a house in your house so you can be at home when you're at home, dawg.

    2. Re:Buildings falling from the sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know, there have been incidents where a flatbed carrying a house has crashed into things and destroyed them, they haven't shutdown all flatbeds yet. I'm sure insurance on something like this would be astronomically expensive, at least until the method is proven, but I don't think a single incident would immediately shut them down.

    3. Re:Buildings falling from the sky by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Funny

      That or the owner's pissed off sister is coming back to reclaim her shoes.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  2. Is the company called ACME? by Draconi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because I know a very well educated coyote that would be really interested in this sort of innovative technology with his work in high speed pest control.

    1. Re:Is the company called ACME? by Draconi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wile E. Coyote? Road Runner? A high speed pest?

      Giant building sized anvil dropped from excessive heights courtesy an ACME Skylifter?

      The joke - it is now explained

  3. Re:But what happens when they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ease back on the LSD there friend. Ease back.

  4. Re:Pffft... That's nothing. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah. And small, fast planes can move 'em, too!

    If you define your movement as descent on a vertical axis... :-)

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  5. Goodbye Building Industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    And I thought local builders were relatively safe from outsourcing. Now it seems like China has a way to take another industry...

    1. Re:Goodbye Building Industry by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They do not need to. They simply fix the Yuan against the dollar, subsidize, and then dump the product. With their QA, we even have a double entendre here.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Goodbye Building Industry by istartedi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I thought local builders were relatively safe from outsourcing

      Easy enough to do with panelized construction, components, etc. When they were still building houses like crazy, most of them were probably framed by illegal immigrants, and fitted with imported appliances.

      Now excuse me while I prop another 2x4 against my office wall...

      In all seriousness, I've been told that when looking for a house you want to find one that was built during a recession. In theory, people were able to chose better contractors during hard times, whereas boom-time houses are more likely to be slapped together quickly to make a buck.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re:Goodbye Building Industry by vux984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In all seriousness, I've been told that when looking for a house you want to find one that was built during a recession. In theory, people were able to chose better contractors during hard times, whereas boom-time houses are more likely to be slapped together quickly to make a buck.

      I don't think that is a reliable indicator. Its true boom-time houses are often built as quickly as possible to get on to the next project; its true some developers cut corners get cut to save time.

      But recession housing has a counter-indicator as well... the contractors are often on hard times themselves, and cut corners to bring costs down. I live in a multi home development, that was started during the boom, and was finished as the recession hit hard. There is a noticeable degradation in the quality as you move from the homes that were done first to the ones that were done last. Little details, for example: my unit, an early unit, can turn the lights at the bottom of the stairs using a switch at the top or at the bottom. Later units, only have the one switch at the bottom.

      Even worse are projects where developers/contractors were bankrupted during construction. The last thing you want is a home that was half built, then went into limbo for 5 months with some plastic sheets keeping the weather out, and then finished up by another contractor/developer as inexpensively as possible so that they might still turn a profit on them.

      Ultimately I think good and bad homes can be built in any economic climate. But a good reputable developer working in a healthy or better economy probably is probably the safest bet. A crappy developer is going to do crappy work in any economy, but even good developers will cut corners if they fall on hard times.

  6. Yeah, I saw that movie too. by SpiffyMarc · · Score: 5, Funny

    It was super sad when that dude's wife died. The talking dog was funny though. Wait, what?

    1. Re:Yeah, I saw that movie too. by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 3, Informative

      Squirrel!!

  7. Or another idea ... by Jumperalex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    use it to move the ever increasing wind turbine parts that, a year ago, seemed to be getting too large to move over roads especially as regulations pushed them into less and less accessible areas.

    --
    If you can't be good, be good at it!
    1. Re:Or another idea ... by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Parts?

      You think too small young apprentice.

      One of these could conceivably move a complete wind turbine into place. Just bolt it to a waiting foundation.

  8. Helium by snookerhog · · Score: 2, Interesting
    there might be a bit of a speed bump when we start running out of helium

    anyone care to do the crossref math and tell us how much helium it will take to lift 150 tons and how that relates to the dwindling supply?

    1. Re:Helium by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those building will soar high above the skyline, just like the Hindenburg! Wait...

    2. Re:Helium by Dare+nMc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Helium is not the only lighter than air substance, large balloons are mostly hot air today. Also we know Hydrogen, methane, and ammonia will also work, each with at least one downside. Personally I think birthday parties would be way more fun with Hydrogen balloons anyway (then again, maybe that's why I never had any kids.)

  9. Re:Absolutely Terrible Idea by confused+one · · Score: 2, Informative

    buildings are picked up from the bottom, using steel beams run through & under the foundation.

  10. Idea needs building industry support by Spectre · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Skyscrapers may be vastly more affordable if built from interlocking modules on the ground that could be airlifted into place. Would such a structure be feasible (I'm not an architectural nor a mechanical engineer)?

    As pointed out by somebody else, if anybody (these people aren't the first with this idea) could get this to market, it would be a boon for the growing wind turbine industry.

    --
    "Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
  11. Fat chance by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Funny

    If obesity rates continue to climb in this country, we could be looking at a new way to commute to the local KFC/Taco Bell.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  12. We don't learn fast, do we? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Large airships have been a recurrent proposal for moving large and bulky items which exceed the routine capabilities of the transport system.
    The problem is that the airship needed is huge. That makes it very difficult to operate in anything other than good weather, even before attaching a massive but somewhat frail payload.
    The record is full of airship and air lifter crashes because of bad weather or unexpected turbulence. Until that problem is resolved, the proposal is not serious.

  13. Re:U.F.O. by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As opposed to now, when the actual answer is drugs, mental illness or weather balloon? Seriously, considering that the UFO phenomenon was purely a cover for balloons used to spy on the USSR back before satellites could, it's amazing how long this paranoia has gone on for.

  14. Re:Get the puns out of the way by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Informative

    It will go over like a lead balloon.

    You can no longer use that phrase as the MythBusters showed you can make a balloon out of lead and have it float.

    I prefer to use the phrase, "It will go over like a granite balloon."

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  15. Re:Get the puns out of the way by smitty777 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nice attempt at levity.

    --
    "Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
    Albert Einstein
  16. Re:U.F.O. by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hardly amazing. People like stories. Considering how long we've had nonsense like astrology, homeopathy, religion, and all sort of other superstitious nonsense, how can you be surprised that the UFO nutters are still at it?

  17. Re:Absolutely Terrible Idea by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Both you and the OP are correct in different ways - and aptly illustrate why this is such a bad idea.

    Buildings (and pretty much everything else on Earth) are mostly designed to resist compressive loads I.E. the force of gravity. Thus, if you want to move a structure using this method your pretty much have two major options: First, to move an existing structure you can build a heavy cage around it so you can lift it from the top. Second, to move a new structure you can design in massive reinforcements so you can lift it from the top. Both are expensive and add considerable parasitic loads to the structure and the lift.

    Not to mention, this idea has been floated a dozen times or more in the last fifty odd years, and always with the same result - a bankrupt company and penniless investors. While they've got some cool hacks in this scheme, they don't seem to have overcome the basic solution-in-search-of-problem problem. I.E. there doesn't actually seem to be a market.

  18. Re:But what happens when they... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Funny

    But what happens when they ...run into the building?

    Did anybody think of that?

    No, you're just waaaaaaaaay smarter than the large group of people in this liability-happy society working on this project. What's it like being a highly sought after engineer?

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  19. Has been done before - and failed spectacularly. by Wdi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Remember Cargo Lifter?

    One of the most spectacular failures during the wild technology startup stampede a decade ago in Germany. They burned several hundred millions before folding.

    The only remaining legacy is a huge indoor pool in their former airship hangar...

  20. Haar! That's just what we be needin'! by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Me'n the crew 'ere took o'er this 'ere buildin' some 12 years ago now, matey! If it were just a wee bit more mobile, we could plunder and pillage other buildin's! We'll be in touch with this 'ere company an' then we'll set sail on the high plains, movin' from city to city an' plunderin' buildin's as we go! Haaarr!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  21. Re:U.F.O. by petermgreen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or even someone playing a prank.

    I remember a TV show (called "a very British UFO hoax") about a group of special effects guys trying to pull off a UFO hoax. They were pretty successful, the flying saucer they built wasn't very big (I don't remember the exact size but it could be broken down into segments that would fit in a SUV) but the eyewitnesses reported it as much larger.

    Most people don't understand their own vision. An eye doesn't directly tell us the size of or distance to objects just the angle is subtends on the retina (which roughly corresponds to size/distance).

    Binocular vision tells us distance but it only works effectively over short distances .

    So our brains use various clues to judge the size and depth of objects. One of those clues is how big we expect the object to be. An object flying at night takes away the other clues so if people are expecting it to be big they will see it as big!

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  22. Re:Absolutely Terrible Idea by zeropointburn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There is a market, just not necessarily in the skyscraper size class yet. Build them smaller, but big enough to move a house. My house was moved to its present location decades ago. Aside from permanent structures, consider modular homes (trailer houses). I see four or five of those a week pass through on trucks, and I live in a small town. I also see a lot of wind farm equipment like tower segments, generators, and blades. Instead of running a convoy of 8 trucks plus spotter cars, load it all onto one or two of these lifters. Less than half as many people involved, can fly direct, doesn't impact traffic, and can carry objects larger than 2 highway lanes. Similar benefits apply to things like power substations or rail switching shacks, if you can do it cheaper than a helicopter.
      Fit one out with crane equipment like that found at a major port. Now if a freighter has a problem in the open ocean, you can fly one of these to it and offload the cargo to another ship (or ships, more likely). You could also haul out a complete replacement power train, and if new ships were designed with this in mind you would eventually be able to drop-in major components in most ships afloat. Same gear could be deployed to a train derailment, or to replace a malfunctioning locomotive on the track in the middle of nowhere. The way that scale affects LTA craft is very different from how it affects HTA craft like helicopters. If you can build one big enough and fast enough, you could anchor to a sinking ship and keep it afloat, or simply pick it up and haul it to a dry dock. This could be useful for deep-sea salvage, though the existing barge-style ships are quite effective already.
      In short, there may not be much of a market right now for moving large buildings, but there are plenty of other markets that such a device could tap.

    --
    -1 raving lunatic; +6 subGenius... Things even out...
  23. Thermite paint by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Those building will soar high above the skyline, just like the Hindenburg! Wait...

    It wasn't just the hydrogen; it was also the fact that the envelope of the Hindenburg was painted with thermite. Zeppelin learned its lesson, and its modern airships use far less flammable materials for the envelope. So even if airships did have to go back to hydrogen, it'd be far less risky than in the 1930s.

    1. Re:Thermite paint by Lotana · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hindenburg paint as the cause of the disaster is a myth that has been debunked but alas still persists.

      This is a good page I found with a quick Google search. Follow the links inside for in-detail information and maybe hopefully we can put this to rest.

      http://www.airships.net/hindenburg-paint/