5 ms·

My girlfriend just asked a question that had not even occurred to me: what happens during a storm? I am sure Google's engineers have a way to handle that, but

My girlfriend just asked a question that had not even occurred to me: what happens during a storm? I am sure Google's engineers have a way to handle that, but I am genuinely curious about what their solution is.

cfn 13y ago
I am not an expert but I would guess that they would ground the blimp and secure it.
zeckalpha 13y ago
I believe the blimps would be above the cloud layer.
ams6110 13y ago
What happens when local militants/vandals shoot them down?
- bennyg 13y ago
  Local militants/vandals then lose access to the internet - and hopefully get reprimanded by the other folks of the area. Hopefully said militants/vandals would be more willing to use the services (maybe even to further their own nefarious goals) than destroy them.
  - Hovertruck 13y ago
    They'd probably find more value in the general populace not having access to the rest of the world.
- a-priori 13y ago
  I don't know what altitude they'd fly at, but this quote from the Wikipedia article on Airships says: "In November 2006, the U.S. Army bought an A380+ airship from American Blimp Corporation through a Systems level contract with Northrop Grumman and Booz Allen Hamilton. The airship started flight tests in late 2007, with a primary goal of carrying 2,500 lb (1,100 kg) of payload to an altitude of 15,000 ft (4,600 m) under remote control and autonomous waypoint navigation." So it's perfectly possible for these things to typically fly a few kilometres above the ground. That is outside the range of small arms: the furthest confirmed sniper kill to date was at a range of 1,250 m. So while it would certainly be possible for someone to shoot one of these airships down using aircraft or guided missiles, they would not be able to with small arms fire. Except during takeoff and landing, of course.
  - Cushman 13y ago
    I'd quibble. While I agree it wouldn't be vulnerable in practice, I don't think the longest sniper kill is relevant at all. A battle rifle caliber can definitely break 10,000 feet fired straight up. The issue would be whether it has enough energy left to penetrate the skin of the blimp, and whether it winds up anywhere near where you aimed at. They're definitely not at risk to the odd potshot, but massed small arms/crew-served rifle fire could potentially be effective in the lower altitudes.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      > That is outside the range of small arms: the furthest confirmed sniper kill to date was at a range of 1,250 m. Also keep in mind that snipers are shooting at humans. That's a much, much harder target than a blimp.
      - Cushman 13y ago
        Well it'd be ten times as large in your scope, but I don't think I'd call it an "easier target"-- you have to deal with a much more dramatic arc and unknowable atmospheric wind conditions.
        Chronic24 13y ago
        Then you keep firing until you hit it.
        Cushman 13y ago
        Yup, that's exactly the idea with massed fire. If you can't hit a point target, just designate it an area target and get enough rounds together to be effective on the entire area. When it comes to taking down a blimp with a round that barely has the energy to get there, though, I imagine that number of rounds is measured in thousands at least. Less of "keep firing" and more of "we're gonna need a lot of guys". And also don't forget the numbers I'm using suggest this is only plausible if you're firing more or less straight up, meaning the area you're ultimately targeting is where you are.
momodomo 13y ago
Similarly, will it float so low that it could be shot down with a gun or missile? To avoid these two risks (storm and attack), I imagine it'd have to be at an altitude above weather currents and beyond shooting range... or be able to stabilize during a storm and be bulletproof.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- tpurves 13y ago
  Weather can be a problem for airships. Their max airspeed can be much less than what's needed to maintain station in a strong wind. The US navy also gave up on (manned) airships in the 20s after big storms would bring them down with loss of life. If you don't mind that they get blown downwind sometimes, or that sometimes you have to ground them, or you just use them mostly during good weather or good seasons, or if they crash and you only lose equipment not people on board, then blimps can be viable. Some parts of Africa might not even see a lot of seriously adverse weather.
- themstheones 13y ago
  It's clear, especially considering that these are meant to fly in some unstable countries in central Africa, that certain parties will be trying to attack these blimps. What kind of defenses to you think the blimps will have to defend against these strikes? Some sort of armor plating on the underside would seem to be the minimum. Hopefully they'll be equipped with some offensive capabilities as well to combat and dissuade guerrilla and terrorist acts. Or would it make more sense to just use expendable blimps, like a $10 balloon and a $20 router?
  - primelens 13y ago
    > Hopefully they'll be equipped with some offensive capabilities as well to combat and dissuade guerrilla and terrorist acts. Um ... Google drones are the last thing we need. Enough problems with the military ones already.
    - 13y ago
btilly 13y ago
The obvious thing to do would be to fly the balloon above the weather. That would also let you cover more area. The choice becomes whether to have regular launch/recovery at jet stream levels, or to go above it. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_airship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_airship it seems that the technology exists to put an airship above the jet stream and keep it in place for a long time. I don't know if that is their solution, but it would make a lot of sense.

cfn 13y ago

I am not an expert but I would guess that they would ground the blimp and secure it.

zeckalpha 13y ago

I believe the blimps would be above the cloud layer.

ams6110 13y ago

What happens when local militants/vandals shoot them down?

bennyg 13y ago
Local militants/vandals then lose access to the internet - and hopefully get reprimanded by the other folks of the area. Hopefully said militants/vandals would be more willing to use the services (maybe even to further their own nefarious goals) than destroy them.
- Hovertruck 13y ago
  They'd probably find more value in the general populace not having access to the rest of the world.
a-priori 13y ago
I don't know what altitude they'd fly at, but this quote from the Wikipedia article on Airships says: "In November 2006, the U.S. Army bought an A380+ airship from American Blimp Corporation through a Systems level contract with Northrop Grumman and Booz Allen Hamilton. The airship started flight tests in late 2007, with a primary goal of carrying 2,500 lb (1,100 kg) of payload to an altitude of 15,000 ft (4,600 m) under remote control and autonomous waypoint navigation." So it's perfectly possible for these things to typically fly a few kilometres above the ground. That is outside the range of small arms: the furthest confirmed sniper kill to date was at a range of 1,250 m. So while it would certainly be possible for someone to shoot one of these airships down using aircraft or guided missiles, they would not be able to with small arms fire. Except during takeoff and landing, of course.
- Cushman 13y ago
  I'd quibble. While I agree it wouldn't be vulnerable in practice, I don't think the longest sniper kill is relevant at all. A battle rifle caliber can definitely break 10,000 feet fired straight up. The issue would be whether it has enough energy left to penetrate the skin of the blimp, and whether it winds up anywhere near where you aimed at. They're definitely not at risk to the odd potshot, but massed small arms/crew-served rifle fire could potentially be effective in the lower altitudes.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > That is outside the range of small arms: the furthest confirmed sniper kill to date was at a range of 1,250 m. Also keep in mind that snipers are shooting at humans. That's a much, much harder target than a blimp.
    - Cushman 13y ago
      Well it'd be ten times as large in your scope, but I don't think I'd call it an "easier target"-- you have to deal with a much more dramatic arc and unknowable atmospheric wind conditions.
      - Chronic24 13y ago
        Then you keep firing until you hit it.
        Cushman 13y ago
        Yup, that's exactly the idea with massed fire. If you can't hit a point target, just designate it an area target and get enough rounds together to be effective on the entire area. When it comes to taking down a blimp with a round that barely has the energy to get there, though, I imagine that number of rounds is measured in thousands at least. Less of "keep firing" and more of "we're gonna need a lot of guys". And also don't forget the numbers I'm using suggest this is only plausible if you're firing more or less straight up, meaning the area you're ultimately targeting is where you are.

momodomo 13y ago

Similarly, will it float so low that it could be shot down with a gun or missile? To avoid these two risks (storm and attack), I imagine it'd have to be at an altitude above weather currents and beyond shooting range... or be able to stabilize during a storm and be bulletproof.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
tpurves 13y ago
Weather can be a problem for airships. Their max airspeed can be much less than what's needed to maintain station in a strong wind. The US navy also gave up on (manned) airships in the 20s after big storms would bring them down with loss of life. If you don't mind that they get blown downwind sometimes, or that sometimes you have to ground them, or you just use them mostly during good weather or good seasons, or if they crash and you only lose equipment not people on board, then blimps can be viable. Some parts of Africa might not even see a lot of seriously adverse weather.
themstheones 13y ago
It's clear, especially considering that these are meant to fly in some unstable countries in central Africa, that certain parties will be trying to attack these blimps. What kind of defenses to you think the blimps will have to defend against these strikes? Some sort of armor plating on the underside would seem to be the minimum. Hopefully they'll be equipped with some offensive capabilities as well to combat and dissuade guerrilla and terrorist acts. Or would it make more sense to just use expendable blimps, like a $10 balloon and a $20 router?
- primelens 13y ago
  > Hopefully they'll be equipped with some offensive capabilities as well to combat and dissuade guerrilla and terrorist acts. Um ... Google drones are the last thing we need. Enough problems with the military ones already.
  - 13y ago

btilly 13y ago

The obvious thing to do would be to fly the balloon above the weather. That would also let you cover more area. The choice becomes whether to have regular launch/recovery at jet stream levels, or to go above it. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_airship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_airship it seems that the technology exists to put an airship above the jet stream and keep it in place for a long time. I don't know if that is their solution, but it would make a lot of sense.