Airships – bit part players with no future?

I’d say the airship has massive potential (just done an exam question on this topic actually) – the US ‘Walrus’ project for starters, which was cancelled

http://www.livescience.com/technology/050912_walrus.html

and the HAA

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/haa.htm

There is a huge stigma to airships because of the hindenberg caught on film burning like a stick. The irony was that it was the doping material the external cover was made of plus of course the light aluminum and magnesium structure that actually burned so visibly. Hydrogen actually burns invisibly and unlike petrol will not explode except under pressure and with the right fuel air mix.

With a modern large airship made of modern carbon composites that actually are fire retardants and helium within the internal lifting areas a modern airship would actually be quite hard to bring down with a missile or gun.

Of course storage, and problems with weather exist but for ultra high flying balloons used for radar observation weather should not be a problem.

Cardington, a different view?

A very interesting view for Cardington.

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=12962&highlight=cardington

Those interested in this thread might want to check this out:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4242974.html

The Aeros design reminds me of Thunderbird 2.

Seriously, the airship’s future might be crimped by a worldwide helium shortage that will get worse before it gets better.

Of course there is a future for airships – especially in the ‘black-ops’ area. There was a wonderful clip of film circulating recently of the Lockheed Martin airship.

They need huge sheds for construction, though a couple of hangars nr Bedford are going spare!

I understand you need an appreciation of fixed-wing, rotary-wing and boat-handling skills in order to pilot one. That takes a special pilot.