4 ms·
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
by 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 agoWeather 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 agoIt'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.
- da3da 13y agoYeah, you have to think that was a joke, right? Can you imagine the headlines, "Google Drone kills 7 on Somali border"
- Cushman 13y agoWe're discussing this a bit downthread-- in my opinion it's not a realistic threat. To kill a blimp at a couple of km you would need a modern ground-to-air missile (and know how to use it), or mass small arms fire of similar expense. It wouldn't be a good investment for a poor warlord, you'd only need to worry about organized military or other very well-financed organizations.
- solistice 13y agoWouldn't shooting down one of these constitute attacking a comercial aircraft of american origin? I think the implications of that would rule out organized military or other very well-financed organizations unless they are run by lunatics. But I've never attacked commercial us aircraft, so if anyone has experience with it...
- tomjen3 13y agoUnlike satellites the airspace where the blimp would fly would be in the territorial area of the country in question so they would have every right to make it turn away or force it down. Of course the warlords who might actually control some parts of these countries wouldn't have that ability nor would they care about shooting it down.
- jlgreco 13y agoYou can put a suprising amount of holes in a low pressure blimp/zeppelin before it becomes a problem. Unlike party balloons, they don't "pop". Armoring them against the occasional small arms fire is probably not worth it (the extra weight would probably cause more overall loss of buoyancy than the occasional hole.)