Look up there, a Kardashian
,
'Flying Bum's' first flight was a gas, gas, gas
To quote Douglas Adams, “uglier things have been spotted in the sky, but not by reliable witnesses”: England's Airlander 10, nicknamed the “flying bum” for obvious reasons, has taken its first test flight. Originally created for the US Army's since-cancelled Long Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV), the enormous …
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 05:26 GMT allthecoolshortnamesweretaken
Does it really sound like that?
I live some 30 km from an airport where a conventional blimp is based. They do sightseeing trips and use it as a flying billboard. So it is a faily common sight around here. If you're outdoors you usually hear it before you see it - but it's a constant low frequency steady drone that's not unpleasant. I find it actually has a kind of soothing, reassuring quality. A perfect background sound for a lazy afternoon out in the garden.
But this? Sounds like some silly contraption that is about to fall apart any minute. That being said, it looks amazing. Like a Typhoon-class submarine swimming in the sky. (Well, that's what lighter-than-air aircraft are all about and how they work, right?)
Anyway, all the best for HAV, hope the Airlander is successfull - I for one would like to see airships cruising the sky.
Bootnote: the Airlander 10 is roughly 5 times larger than the Zeppelin NT in terms of volume and payload.
-
-
-
-
Friday 19th August 2016 20:44 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: International Rescue - Is that You?
I am humbled by the near universal spanking I have received over my opinion on The Thunderbirds. I apologize.
In my defense, all I can really remember about the show are visible strings, heads looking the wrong way, terrible dialogue, and loooong padded action sequences.
Ghod, how I loved it then...
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 09:55 GMT ChrisBedford
Re: Hindenburg
This is heavier than air
No it's not! No wings or other lifting power. Why would the body need to be so enormous if it was HTA?
In any event, the statement was "largest aircraft" not largest "lighter than aircraft". And the Hindenberg was indeed 245 m long, so the flying bum is a l-o-o-o-o-o-o-n-g way short of the largest or longest aircraft ever made.
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 10:33 GMT phuzz
Re: Hindenburg
The body is designed to act as a wing, so when it has cargo on board, it will be heavier than the air. Or at least that's the plan.
"The massive envelope maintains its shape by internal gas pressure, blimp-style, and is intended to generate extra dynamic lift over and above that from its helium filling as the ship flies along. The vessel will normally be heavier than air overall - it won't lift off the ground on its own. This is what is meant by a "hybrid airship"."
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 10:40 GMT TitterYeNot
Re: Hindenburg
"No it's not! No wings or other lifting power. Why would the body need to be so enormous if it was HTA?"
The article may be playing with semantics a little. The Hindenburg was lighter than air, and so strictly speaking an airship not an aircraft (yes, I know...), while the HAV 304 Airlander 10 is a hybrid airship (the clue is in the name of the manufacturer, Hybrid Air Vehicles) which is heavier than air and so could be classed as an aircraft.
It manages to fly due to the whole of the craft being shaped as a lifting body (thats why it looks like two airships squished together) and so uses forward motion to produce enough lift to fly. If you look at the video, you'll see it taking off as it moves forward, not lifting straight up in the air like a conventional airship.
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 19:44 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Hindenburg
Pure aircraft are expensive to run (especially helicopters) and the fixed-wing ones require runways. Pure airships are cheap to run, but are slow, huge compared to their cargo, have buoyancy issues, and are easily pushed around by the wind.
This hybrid is an attempt to split the difference between them and hit some kind of sweet spot. It does eliminate the buoyancy issues and is somewhat less affected by wind (it's smaller than a pure airship), but the running costs are up and now it needs a runway.
Apparently the US Army decided this white elephant was exactly that and wrote it off.
-
Friday 19th August 2016 14:22 GMT a_yank_lurker
Re: Hindenburg
The concept is interesting and has merit for some applications. The idea is combine the lift from He with a modified flying wing so that is can use shorter runways for the same cargo capacity. There may be no real good military applications as they not terribly fast and are rather large targets. But there may be some civilian applications, both passenger and cargo, where they would be a fit (certain short haul passenger flights and heavier cargo). Often military research is judged a failure when the military applications are not viable but the concept is viable.
-
-
-
Friday 19th August 2016 10:44 GMT dajames
Re: Hindenburg
This is heavier than air
No it's not! No wings or other lifting power. Why would the body need to be so enormous if it was HTA?
It is a "hybrid aircraft" aka "hybrid airship"
It is heavier than air, but not by a lot. It relies on the body acting like a wing and creating lift as it moves forward.
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 09:12 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: If I owned that
> I wonder how difficult it is to steal?
I shouldn't think it'd have any anti theft devices on board but you'd probably want the manual to start it. Another thing to consider is that unless you can dress it up as a very convincing cloud then it's going to be tricky to sneak it away.
I do have the SR-71 pilots notes, a set of bolt-cutters and a map to Duxford if you need a plan B....
-
-
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 14:47 GMT annodomini2
Re: Sorry how much?!
"Obviously it's more than just helium, but what the hell has cost $100 million?"
Engineering cost + nice fat pay off for military contractor.
Ford usually spend around $2bn developing a new generation Transit van.
VW spend ~$13Bn/year on R&D.
Boeing spent $32bn on the Dreamliner.
So $100m for a prototype is cheap TBH.
-
Friday 19th August 2016 14:12 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Sorry how much?!
I recall looking at the designs for various models of Skycat, and looked up pricing, and IIRC the price quoted back then (some years ago) for a small one that could lift enough to be turned into a private sky yacht was about five million quid. So, just need a big win on the lottery, say 20 million, to allow for purchase of HAV, purchase of hangar, annual fuel helium and maintenance costs, crew salaries, etc and I could just wander the skies for the rest of my life. (cue 'Airship Pirates' by Abney Park)
Incidentally, when lightly laden, the steerable fans can be used to increase lift, making it more nearly VTOL. And it can land on water as well as land. Superb. WANT!
-
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 17:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
As an airship fan I am quite pleased...
...but I do wonder why the A600 had been painted with double-yellow lines outside the sheds (derestricted, fairly narrow, blind bends) and then people were allowed to park on the lines both sides and create a traffic nightmare. With hundreds of pedestrians around there too it was just asking for trouble.
I wish HAV well, but someone needs to think about what to do with the spectators.
-
Thursday 18th August 2016 23:24 GMT John Brown (no body)
Tower, requesting a flyby
Negative, the pattern is full.
Oh shit, he's going for it anyway, here he comes!
clunkrty clunkety clunkety clunkety clunkety .....
Has he passed yet?
No sir!
Make me another cup of tea while we're waiting.
Yes sir!
clunkety clunkety CLUNKETY CLUNKETY CLUNKETY ...
Oh Christ, someone pass me the earmuffs and tell me when he's passed. And get me another cup of tea. Indian this time, none of that china muck!
Biting the hand that feeds IT
