Steampunk Airship

[Tallpine]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2570118/Worlds-longest-aircraft-revealed-300ft-long-airship-unveiled-UK-hailed-game-changer.html#undefined

"part balloon, part helicopter, part airplane"

[Perd Hapley]

"part balloon, part helicopter, part airplane"

I also found that to be an interesting description. Seems like the same know-nothing journalism that brought us military-grade assault-style magazine clips.

[freakazoid]

One of the descriptions under a picture.

Useful: It's claimed the unusual craft could be used for surveillance, staying airborne for three weeks at a time

He says it like it's a good thing.

[Tallpine]

Would be fairly easy to shoot down 

[BobR]

Still kind of small by airship standards.

USS Macon (ZR5)



And it had guns, and baby planes to take along.

Specifications
(As built)
Air displacement: 7,401,260 ft³ (209,580.3 m³)
Dimensions: length (oa), 785'; hull diameter, 132.9'; total height, 146.5'  /  239.3 x 40.5 x 44.7 meters
Gas volume (nominal): 6,500,000 ft³ (184,059.5 m³) of helium, 95% inflated; 12 gas cells
Armament: Eight .30-cal machine guns in nose, dorsal, ventral, and tail positions. Five Curtiss F9C Sparrowhawk fighter aircraft stowed in an internal hangar.
Power plant: Eight Maybach VL-2 12-cyl water-cooled inline engines (560 hp each), driving three-bladed fixed-pitch, rotable metal propellers.
Speed: 75.6 knots (max); 55 knots (cruising)
Ceiling: 26,000 feet (~7,925 meters)
Cruising range: 5,940 nautical miles @ cruising speed
Useful lift: 160,644 lbs. (73,020 kg)
Crew: 60 (flight crew)

http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/99/029905.htm


bob

[lee n. field]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2570118/Worlds-longest-aircraft-revealed-300ft-long-airship-unveiled-UK-hailed-game-changer.html#undefined

"part balloon, part helicopter, part airplane"

The first pictures looks like an enormous derrière.

[RocketMan]

Interesting how they keep trying to make airships a viable form of air transportation.  If at first you don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, etc.... try, try again.
It is kind of cool looking, though.

[Tallpine]

Interesting how they keep trying to make airships a viable form of air transportation.  If at first you don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, etc.... try, try again.
It is kind of cool looking, though.

Well, maybe if they used coal fired steam engine for propulsion ....   

[Azrael256]

[Gewehr98]

I should post that first photo to Fark.com and see if somebody will photoshop a big brown eye in that vertical grin.   

[Scout26]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq-N3_plNq8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxk0ZcFG8Go

[freakazoid]

Classic.

[Regolith]

Would be fairly easy to shoot down 

Not so much. The Brits found it a bit challenging during WWI, and that was when they were still using hydrogen.

http://video.pbs.org/video/2365154711/

Problem is that small holes don't do much. They need to be really, really big holes.

[Parker Dean]

Interesting how they keep trying to make airships a viable form of air transportation.  If at first you don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, and don't succeed, etc.... try, try again.
It is kind of cool looking, though.

Well, it's because the things can be so damn cool. Though not necessarily this one lol

FWIW, the Zeppelin company operated dirigibles for decades without serious issue, mostly because they were paranoid of weather. The US Navy kept trying to shove the things into thunderstorms with predictable results. Same with R101 iirc. And I think I remember that bringing Hindenburg in at the time they did so soon after a thunderstorm was technically a violation of Zeppelin Co. policy borne out of political pressures to show Nazi efficiency. With modern forecasting and weather data I would think that it wouldn't be an issue as long as the  airship had the flexibility in routing and schedule to avoid inclement weather. Of course that's what ruins an airships' commercial viability. Everybody wants their stuff on time, or to get there on time.

[230RN]

I should post that first photo to Fark.com and see if somebody will photoshop a big brown eye in that vertical grin.   

Or at least garter straps.

[MechAg94]

50 tons with time in air of 2 to 3 weeks.  Not bad.  Probably need more tonnage. 

Would there be any use for this delivering heavy cargo where no airstrip exists?  I guess the $ per ton delivered would be the deciding factor?  Could it replace ice road truckers? 

[freakazoid]

Could it replace ice road truckers? 

On an all new Polar Vortex Sky Captains...

[Angel Eyes]

Looks like a prop from a Pink Floyd concert.


Or:

"And now for something completely different: a dirigible with three buttocks."

[Sergeant Bob]

50 tons with time in air of 2 to 3 weeks.  Not bad.  Probably need more tonnage.  

Would there be any use for this delivering heavy cargo where no airstrip exists?  I guess the $ per ton delivered would be the deciding factor?  Could it replace ice road truckers?  

50 tons isn't really all that much compared to an 18 wheeler. One can haul 25 tons (grossing 40 tons, we have them grossing about 80 tons in Michigan). Add a few more axles and they go quite a bit heavier than that on the ice roads.

[Tallpine]

50 tons isn't really all that much compared to an 18 wheeler. One can haul 25 tons (grossing 40 tons, we have them grossing about 80 tons in Michigan). Add a few more axles and they go quite a bit heavier than that on the ice roads.

And then they have those "road trains" in Australia 

[MechAg94]

And then they have those "road trains" in Australia 

Like I said, it depends on the total cost of tons delivered.  I expect trucks would be a lot cheaper unless they could increase the tonnage.  It also depends on the all-weather capability of the craft.  Could they deliver supply runs to Antarctica for example and handle storms and high winds?  I guess I see it as having potential, but I tend to agree that this version may not cut it for most applications. 

I recall a some SciFi books talked about using derigibles for transport due to lack of roads and air strips.  It made more sense when talking about scattered settlements on a colony world where there was no extensive road development and water transport was unavailable.  There are not that many places where that would apply here and now in real life.