kuai43 7
Recommended Posts
QuoteApparently it's a long trip to 'altitude'.
1 hour to 3k.
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4287004;search_string=blimp%20jump;#4287004
That was an older design, I think the new one may have better numbers.
"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message
dthames 0
If you read about the large airships of the past, you will see that most were lost to wind. Trying to get them moored, in the hanger, out of the hanger, and some in flight storms destroyed most of them.
The nature of the beast has not changed in the past 80 years, only the old farts that knew better have died off.
The nature of the beast has not changed in the past 80 years, only the old farts that knew better have died off.
Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”
Cape 0
Sure if they mount a ski lift to it to haul jumpers up to it once at altitude LOL! 
"When you reach your Limits, kick him in the junk and kiss his girlfriend named Fear!"
I´m sold, put me down for one.
When in Danger or in doubt run in circles scream and shout.
BIGUN 1,042
QuoteIf you read about the large airships of the past, you will see that most were lost to wind. Trying to get them moored, in the hanger, out of the hanger, and some in flight storms destroyed most of them.
The nature of the beast has not changed in the past 80 years, only the old farts that knew better have died off.
Somebody did not read the spec sheets. Go to your room.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.
JohnMitchell 14
I was talking to Keri Farrington the other day. She was one of the wingsuiters jumping from the airship (not a blimp, I believe) down in SFO for the live commercial last summer. She said that it was very expensive in helium costs to go to about 3000', that the airship had limited vertical range.
Now this new one speaks about "variable bouyancy" which means to me that they've engineered their way around this problem. Could be a very fuel cost effective way to get a big load to 12500. I'd jump it. 
BIGUN 1,042
I think its a rather cool idea. Is it feasible for skydiving in the near future... prolly not. They're catering to the big dollar customers right now.. But, perhaps in time, something to take over the otter, caravan, casa market.
I like your idea too. 100 tons of payload is quite the bigway. Gotta be at least 100 Anvil Brothers worth!! 
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.
dthames 0
QuoteQuoteIf you read about the large airships of the past, you will see that most were lost to wind. Trying to get them moored, in the hanger, out of the hanger, and some in flight storms destroyed most of them.
The nature of the beast has not changed in the past 80 years, only the old farts that knew better have died off.
Somebody did not read the spec sheets. Go to your room.
Lighter than air = sail (unless it is shaped like a pancake)
No mention of how it will weather a storm. Check back in 5 years and see how they are doing with it.
Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”
Shredex 0
Just wait for NASA to finish the Space Elevator.
BIGUN 1,042
Do NOT make me call Grill on your ass!!
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.
jzzsxm 0
Alright, so you get two of them, and then you spread a giant cargo net between them. We're talking 2x football-field size. You get lifted into the air already in formation and you climb to altitude holding everybody's grippers. Then, when at altitude, they cut the net (with a lot of weight attached so it falls faster than the formation), and VOILA! 300 way! Don't even need oxygen!
riggerrob 558
Quote...
Now this new one speaks about "variable bouyancy" which means to me that they've engineered their way around this problem. Could be a very fuel cost effective way to get a big load to 12500. I'd jump it.
.........................................................................
The old way to do that was with balloonettes: adjustable air bags with in the hull.
A newer method would involve compressing the hydrogen down to liquid form. I recently read a scientific paper that said they had found a catalyst that reduced the energy cost of liquifying hydrogen. It was one of the rare elements sometimes co-located with platinum ore.
If you need to ask how much that costs ...
Hah!
Hah!
DJL 232
QuoteIf you read about the large airships of the past, you will see that most were lost to wind. Trying to get them moored, in the hanger, out of the hanger, and some in flight storms destroyed most of them.
The nature of the beast has not changed in the past 80 years, only the old farts that knew better have died off.
Look at the history of the flying wing. It's an example of how the technology wasn't there at a given point to make something work.
Now imagine a military platform that could allow soldiers to float 50 ft above an urban warfare environment surrounded by bulletproof glass.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher
wolfriverjoe 1,339
QuoteQuoteIf you read about the large airships of the past, you will see that most were lost to wind. Trying to get them moored, in the hanger, out of the hanger, and some in flight storms destroyed most of them.
The nature of the beast has not changed in the past 80 years, only the old farts that knew better have died off.
Look at the history of the flying wing. It's an example of how the technology wasn't there at a given point to make something work.
Now imagine a military platform that could allow soldiers to float 50 ft above an urban warfare environment surrounded by bulletproof glass.
Technology can't trump physics. A large, lighter than air craft is at the mercy of the wind. It's really big and really light. Srong winds will overpower just about any engine you can put on them.
Not sure what you mean about the flying wing. It worked, and worked fairly well from the beginning. The XB-35 and YB 49 flew quite well. There were a few stability issues, but nothing that was insurmountable. It was politics, inertia and bad luck that doomed them (some say sabotage killed Edwards, but I'm not one of them).
And I don't want to imaging a slow moving target 50 feet up. RPGs or big guns (say 20mm or 30mm) would blow through just about any armor you could put on one of those.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
riggerrob 558
... Look at the history of the flying wing. It's an example of how the technology wasn't there at a given point to make something work. ...
.......................................................................
Shhh!
Don't tell all those USAF pilots flying around in B-2 (flying wing) bombers.
Don't tell President George Bush the Second that his Convair F-102 (or F-106) that it was an "unflyable" flying wing.
... and you better not tell all those (British) Royal Air Force crews who flew (flying wing) Vulcan bombers during the Cold War.
Speaking of the Cold War, don't tell any USAF crews that their Hustler bombers were "unflyable" flying wings.
... and what about all those thousands of foreign pilots and all their hours flying "unflyable" Mirage fighter jets?????????
Bottom line, flying wings fly great when carefully balanced, but you cannot expect civilians to balance flying wings properly.
DJL 232
Quote
Bottom line, flying wings fly great when carefully balanced, but you cannot expect civilians to balance flying wings properly.
Ok, nevermind. There will be no advancements that could make this work better and get rid of some of the problematic issues that plagued previous models and concepts.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher
quade 3
QuoteNow imagine a military platform that could allow soldiers to float 50 ft above an urban warfare environment surrounded by bulletproof glass.
If you think that is an application suitable for this aircraft, please, stay out of the aircraft business. Anything this large and slow is pretty much a sitting duck for any type of weapon system. At 50ft AGL, even if the cabin were a bullet-proof titanium shell it wouldn't matter because the rest of the aircraft certain can't be. It's not going to explode like the Hindenburg, but an RGP would certainly make a big enough hole in it to effectively vent gas and bring it down. And at 50ft . . . there'd be a hell of a lot of target. You wouldn't even have to really aim.
You just don't fly large, slow multimillion dollar manned aircraft at low level over enemies who can shoot them down with devices costing a couple hundred bucks. That's silly. That's Blackhawk down.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
baronn 111
Pretty sure one could base in that hanger....
DJL 232
Actually, one of the first missions of this platform will be base or embassy aerial observation. Won't be long before it's weaponized. It doesn't have to be manned.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher
BIGUN 1,042
Here's how they're doing...
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/a-giant-floating-airship-could-be-future-of-flight-fwQl8D1ZSjWwx5lNNvHOvg.html?cmpid=taboola.video
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/a-giant-floating-airship-could-be-future-of-flight-fwQl8D1ZSjWwx5lNNvHOvg.html?cmpid=taboola.video
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.
1 hour to 3k.
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4287004;search_string=blimp%20jump;#4287004
Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man. - Anthony Burgess
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites