4 ms·

I believe the best use for this Airships is for cargo. Cargo routes from Valencia to Palma are beyond full capacity during peak vacation season (summer holidays

by eb0la 4y ago

I believe the best use for this Airships is for cargo. Cargo routes from Valencia to Palma are beyond full capacity during peak vacation season (summer holidays, christmas, semana santa). If you plan to board a Ferry to Palma, you must be ready to suffer from delays in departure (arrivals are usually on time). If they can use their airlanders with just 20-30% cargo, they have a sound busines case since ferrys are a huge bottleneck to get cargo into Balearic islands.

dmix 4y ago
Apparently the problem with lifting heavy cargo is that all weight that gets released must be replaced in some way when it's not being used. Otherwise the airship won't be able to land or maintain a lower altitude. Helium, unlike Hydrogen, is too expensive to simply release into the atmosphere when you need to go lower, so it needs: a) gas compression b) exchanging the cargo with water or weights at the transfer point https://youtu.be/h0hpcpnWAsQ?t=796 https://youtu.be/h0hpcpnWAsQ?t=796 Airlander makes an appearance too^ Transporting people is easier simply because they are lighter. The video projects it's still a 5-10yr R&D project to solve the weight exchange issues via gas compression (which usually means 10-20yrs in practice).
- gxt 4y ago
  Transporting people in airship has never been made safe, and I don't think it can ever be. Anybody with a rifle can deflate an airship, where as planes can resist these low skill attacks. The only business case to be made for airships is cargo.
  - kspacewalk2 4y ago
    >Anybody with a rifle can deflate an airship But in fact: >If the vehicle does find itself in a flashpoint, Metzger’s confident that the its skin – a blend of Vectran, Kevlar and Mylar – will be able to cope with a reasonable amount of small arms fire. ‘It’s a woven fabric and has a lot of redundancy in it to mitigate tears, if one was to experience a bullet hole it’s not going to propagate the length of the hole. You may lose a little bit of helium but the pressure between the inside of the hull and the outside is not very great so a small anomaly like that is not going to cause any significant damage.’[1] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20190415183800/https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/12-july-2010/meet-lemv-the-first-of-a-new-generation-of-advanced-military-airship/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190415183800/https://www.theen...
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - dmix 4y ago
      > You may lose a little bit of helium but the pressure between the inside of the hull and the outside is not very great so a small anomaly like that is not going to cause any significant damage.’ The key bit of the quote
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    > Anybody with a rifle can deflate an airship, where as planes can resist these low skill attacks. This is a complete fabrication Airhsips bombed London with impunity in WW1, Machinegun fire was useless, they would take many days to deflate through bulletholes. Only after intruduction of incendiary ammunition they became vulnerable. Modern airships use helium and inflamable materials, so your guy with a rifle is useless.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
I don't think air transport can ever compete with sea transport on costs and efficiency if you need to move a lot of volume.
- jandrese 4y ago
  I agree. What is the advantage of using an airship in this scenario? It's no faster than the ship, can't carry as much cargo, is no more fuel efficient, has more difficult load/unload procedures, and the ships/ports already exist. The only advantage of the airship is that its port can be inland if you are are over capacity and the ports are already full and there is no free coastline to build more, but that's a pretty minor benefit. Airships for passenger transport makes a little bit of sense for a vacation destination. The airship can fly around the island providing a sightseeing tour as well as transport for the tourists. It becomes more than just a mode of transport, it is an attraction. Kind of like one of those old timey scenic railroads.

by eb0la 4y ago

dmix 4y ago

Apparently the problem with lifting heavy cargo is that all weight that gets released must be replaced in some way when it's not being used. Otherwise the airship won't be able to land or maintain a lower altitude. Helium, unlike Hydrogen, is too expensive to simply release into the atmosphere when you need to go lower, so it needs: a) gas compression b) exchanging the cargo with water or weights at the transfer point https://youtu.be/h0hpcpnWAsQ?t=796 https://youtu.be/h0hpcpnWAsQ?t=796 Airlander makes an appearance too^ Transporting people is easier simply because they are lighter. The video projects it's still a 5-10yr R&D project to solve the weight exchange issues via gas compression (which usually means 10-20yrs in practice).

gxt 4y ago
Transporting people in airship has never been made safe, and I don't think it can ever be. Anybody with a rifle can deflate an airship, where as planes can resist these low skill attacks. The only business case to be made for airships is cargo.
- kspacewalk2 4y ago
  >Anybody with a rifle can deflate an airship But in fact: >If the vehicle does find itself in a flashpoint, Metzger’s confident that the its skin – a blend of Vectran, Kevlar and Mylar – will be able to cope with a reasonable amount of small arms fire. ‘It’s a woven fabric and has a lot of redundancy in it to mitigate tears, if one was to experience a bullet hole it’s not going to propagate the length of the hole. You may lose a little bit of helium but the pressure between the inside of the hull and the outside is not very great so a small anomaly like that is not going to cause any significant damage.’[1] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20190415183800/https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/12-july-2010/meet-lemv-the-first-of-a-new-generation-of-advanced-military-airship/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190415183800/https://www.theen...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - dmix 4y ago
    > You may lose a little bit of helium but the pressure between the inside of the hull and the outside is not very great so a small anomaly like that is not going to cause any significant damage.’ The key bit of the quote
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > Anybody with a rifle can deflate an airship, where as planes can resist these low skill attacks. This is a complete fabrication Airhsips bombed London with impunity in WW1, Machinegun fire was useless, they would take many days to deflate through bulletholes. Only after intruduction of incendiary ammunition they became vulnerable. Modern airships use helium and inflamable materials, so your guy with a rifle is useless.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago

I don't think air transport can ever compete with sea transport on costs and efficiency if you need to move a lot of volume.

jandrese 4y ago
I agree. What is the advantage of using an airship in this scenario? It's no faster than the ship, can't carry as much cargo, is no more fuel efficient, has more difficult load/unload procedures, and the ships/ports already exist. The only advantage of the airship is that its port can be inland if you are are over capacity and the ports are already full and there is no free coastline to build more, but that's a pretty minor benefit. Airships for passenger transport makes a little bit of sense for a vacation destination. The airship can fly around the island providing a sightseeing tour as well as transport for the tourists. It becomes more than just a mode of transport, it is an attraction. Kind of like one of those old timey scenic railroads.