The Flying Luxury Hotel – Popular Science — Personally I like to get there sooner than later.
This is not a Blimp. It’s a sort of flying Queen Mary 2 that could change the way you think about air travel. It’s the Aeroscraft, and when it’s completed, it will ferry pampered passengers across continents and oceans as they stroll leisurely about the one-acre cabin or relax in their well-appointed staterooms.
Unlike its dirigible ancestors, the Aeroscraft is not lighter than air. Its 14 million cubic feet of helium hoist only two thirds of the craft’s weight. The rigid and surprisingly aerodynamic body—driven by huge rearward propellers—generates enough additional lift to keep the behemoth and its 400-ton payload aloft while cruising. During takeoff and landing, six turbofan jet engines push the ship up or ease its descent.
This two-football-fields-long concept airship is the brainchild of Igor Pasternak, whose privately-funded California firm, Worldwide Aeros Corporation, is in the early stages of developing a prototype and expects to have one completed by 2010.
found by Howard Harawitz
Who doesn’t see a big, huge disaster-waiting-to-happen here? You couldn’t pay me to get on that thing.
The problem with the Zepplins are well documented. This is using Helium instead of Hydrogen. Personaly I can’t wait to get aboard something like this.
If that thing ever does go into production, Dr. Phil will have a field day giving it counseling. I can’t imagine it has much self-esteem at that size.
Count me out. Being on a ship with hundreds of other people talking in a high-pitched voice is enough to drive anyone insane.:)
Take a gander at the helium airships the US has lost in the past. Take a look at what happened to the USS Macon airship. Just having helium inside doesn’t make it’s any more safe.
Airships have an undeserved reputation. The Hindenburg disaster was probably due to the skin of the ship, not the hydrogen. People also seen to forget how many aircraft and ships were lost in those days. Did we stop building ocean liners after the Titanic? I would personally love to travel in a way that combines the relaxation of a cruise with the greater speed of air travel. Furthermore with the price of oil lighter aircraft are coming whether we like it or not!
Oh, the humanity! {sorry, i couldn’t help my self}
Does this thing come with life boats or a parachute?
finally, a flight with enough legroom!
Looks like a great big terrorist target to me.
gquaglia
For once I agree with you. This might not be the ultimate reason for failure, but an important one none the less. (Or is the second time?)
Its true… the most likeley cause of the Hindenburg’s Skin was impregnated with a combination of chemical preservitives and sealents that the designer’s didn’t realize that it would create a gunpowder-like compouind.
Also everyone got off the hindenburg mostly unharmed, and in the history of derigables there were 6 “deaths”. Two people got caught in lines, fell wrong and died. Another two fell from the derigable wile making skin repairs. The final two ‘disappeared’ in a bremuda triangle like incedent.
I’d rather be in a zeplin and lose engines, have a fire, mid air collision, or crash.
PS
Derigables can be made using vaccums insead of the 2 H’s.
Awhhh finnaly the benefits of Rorer’s Quaalude 714…
yes, forget fires and explosions. one does not need sparks to wipe out an airship – good, strong wind can break it up. very few airships were ever retired intact.
however, this craft is purportedly HTA, so perhaps it will not be as vulnerable. I do think it is a cool idea, especially for long hauls where being cooped up in an airplaine is highly unpleasant. But we have by in large acclimatized ourselves to being jammed into metal tubes for such flights.
I am skeptical about this project’s prospects. What niche will it fill? Planes for getting you there fast, cruise ships for when getting there is half the fun, airships for … what? Looking at the Grand Canyon from 8k feet? seems like a limited market.
Very interesting. Were I designing this machine, I would already be considering two problems:
– Terrorism. As gquaglia mentioned, it does seem like a target. Safety must be very well thought.
– Weather. Reading a caption associated to the main news, there is a mention to the low altitudes of the aircraft as the reason for it not needing pressurization. This means it will fly at most at 15000′ (this is already too high for many people, if not most of them), precisely where much of the weather happens. Current commercial airliners usually fly above the troposphere, in the stratosphere, where there is no weather, mainly when flying at high latitudes, where the tropopause is lower than near the equator.
oops, submitted before completing the previous post. Most probably their engineers will workout those two problems and considering that, this idea seems terrific nonetheless. 😀
Kind of reminds me of the titanic of the sky. Just not ment to be.
Thunderbird 8, F-A-B.
This is a thought for everyone!! If you realy think about it, every means of transportation has a weekness. This simply means you could ride your horse to town and he breaks his leg in a hole! Mabey you ride a snowmobile and fall through the lake! No it was a car and it collided with another, a train derails, a 747 drops in the pacific, faulty screw or somthing!! Do you get it yet? Personaly if i can get my hands on a zeplin or blimp i would entrust my family in flight to the cottage as i would in my car!! Have you ever driven ontario roads, people are incredably unaware!! Thank you for reading my input and i hope i did not ofend anyone
No offence..
Murphy said it LONG ago..
If man has anything to do with it, it will MESS UP.
But it would still be cool, and alot more efficent. and probably CHEAPER.
I think that this is such a great idea for the people that can afford it, its like the point of taking a cruise, you have to have the time though, i mean look at that thing! it cant g to fast 🙁