Big airships can appear in the sky again.

22
In the United States of America, tests are underway on a new British Bedford hybrid airship. If all goes well, airships, which for a long time were considered exotic (after a series of 30 disasters), could be in service with US forces in Afghanistan. In the UK, which is the birthplace of developers, the military does not show much interest in these devices. Can we expect the rebirth of the air giants?

Big airships can appear in the sky again.


A whole group of multi-purpose airships developed by a small British company Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV). One of the types of apparatus may soon be put into operation by the American army. The tests are conducted by Americans under the control of Northrop Grumman.

Why precisely “hybrid” airships? Such apparatuses are distinguished by small wings, creating a lifting force that compensates up to 40% of the weight of the airship itself. In other words, unlike the Zeppelin, it does not take off on its own. And this means that they lack some disadvantages, but with the pluses, everything is in order. They are much easier to keep on the ground: if the motors are turned off, then they “do not tear” into the sky. Having a smaller weight compensation, they are not so much demolished side wind. A hybrid airship requires less ballast, and it is almost not affected by the production of fuel. While the classic airship, having lost five to ten percent of its mass, is forced to release expensive gas into the atmosphere when it returns to the ground, the hybrid airship simply turns off the engines, the lift force from the wings disappears, the aircraft smoothly descends.

There is a British device and a highlight: as in the "Thermoplane" of Soviet production, the body, having an elliptical shape, is itself something of a wing, having a particularly thick profile. It is this feature allows you to raise the weight compensation from the lifting force to forty percent (for conventional hybrid cars - up to twenty percent). Thus, the disadvantages arise from the merits: the "hybrid" is not able to hang permanently; if all 4 engines fail, you will have to land. However, it is worth noting that even when operating one motor, it will stay in the air, which cannot be said about a single four-engined aircraft. Like all hybrid airships, Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV) requires a runway platform, but relatively short and requiring no special training. For this you can use the field, any water surface and so on.



The intelligence of the US military, having a shell volume in 304 38 m³ and a ceiling in 000 6 m, is able to patrol in a given area for 000 of the day with only one refueling station. The length of the device is 21 meters, width - 91 meters, height - 34 meters. Despite the fact that its cruising speed is 26 km / h, the speed at which reconnaissance is supposed to be equal is just 150 km / h. At this rate, HAV 37 without refueling gets to almost anywhere in the world. The car has four 304-strong diesel four-liter eight-cylinder engines, providing low fuel consumption at "economic" speed. The airship is equipped with an original chassis system consisting of two inflatable cylinders located along the side edges of the device, which are huge floats that allow you to sit on the water. In this case, the double-shell hull performs the function of a catamaran, which significantly reduces the risk of tipping over. During the flight, balloon floats are drawn into the hull to reduce aerodynamic drag.

The management of a hundred-meter-wide hulk takes place with the help of one pilot, and it is an option rather than a necessity: the airship feels fine under the supervision of a remote operator or on-board computer.

The semi-rigid design of the HAV 304 (as in the combat airships of the First World War) has many compartments that are filled with helium. If the non-flammable shell is shot through by a bullet or a rocket, then its damage will be minor: a modern rocket is not capable of disabling such a large apparatus. Even with a massive bombardment, the airship will only go on a slow decline. It will not sink into the sea: they will not allow compartments with helium to sink.



It is assumed that such a machine will cost 60 million pounds.

The British company from Bedford has other projects that have interested the US military: cargo types of airships designed by developers. They can easily be transported by air to 150 troops with a light weapons and even with inflatable boats. These airships can be effectively used to combat pirate ships. When launched, the airships are very stable and at the same time much less energy consuming than, for example, hovercraft.

According to reports, back in 2010, HAV received an order from the Pentagon for the 4 airship of the type described for a total of 315 million pounds. It was reported that these aircraft will be used in Afghanistan.

Despite this, the British themselves are still not reliably able to explain the real principles of the designation of airships produced. HAV304’s descriptions are deliberately inaccurate, indicating that the UK is unwilling to disclose the full range of information about its developments.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    22 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. QAZAQ
      +2
      20 February 2012 12: 52
      good idea
    2. Setevik
      +1
      20 February 2012 13: 50
      Ours, like, are also doing something in this direction.
      In general, we can put radars on such aircraft and let them drift along the borders - cheaply and cheerfully ..
      1. 755962
        +5
        20 February 2012 15: 40
        In general, the capabilities of such an apparatus can only be envied. Its use in various fields of both military and civilian is enormous. There are more pluses than minuses. It is a pity that in ancient times they were undeservedly forgotten.
        1. damba
          +1
          20 February 2012 19: 25
          755962,

          dear 755962 then there were large-scale wars where technology was needed not expensive expensive enormous and vulnerable and easy cheap and efficient that could go into serial production without problems now there is a technology war and prices as American practice has shown make people think about technology better than it's worth
    3. Region71
      +7
      20 February 2012 14: 07
      I don’t know how in the military sphere, but such a technique can be useful in civilian life. The topic of airships was very popular in the 70-80s of the last century, I remember the rare magazine Technique of Youth came out without any projects using lighter vehicles than air.
      1. +2
        26 May 2014 10: 36
        Quote: Region71
        The theme of airships was very popular in the 70-80 of the last century.
        And at the same time, the cart, as they say, is still there. Projects of airships are very attractive and their demonstration flights are certainly fascinating, but in reality they are of no more use than from helicopters. So if they are in the foreseeable future where they will find a niche for themselves, then only, IMHO, in intelligence. And, most likely, it is in marine intelligence - such a device is well suited for the role of a submarine search engine.
    4. +1
      20 February 2012 15: 27
      a great thing for anti-terrorist operations (such as operational surveillance, hangs for a long time sees far) and in the Far East you can throw such on duty .. to solve only the issue with strike weapons and the cart is ready)))
      1. Antoxa
        +1
        20 February 2012 18: 55
        Well, we would now raise ordinary aircraft. For example, put into service the UAV.
    5. +1
      20 February 2012 18: 59
      Despite this, the British themselves are still not reliably able to explain the real principles of the designation of airships produced. HAV304’s descriptions are deliberately inaccurate, indicating that the UK is unwilling to disclose the full range of information about its developments.


      it’s just that the platform is so multifunctional that it makes no sense to paint, so the comrades above posted so many ideas without a hint.
    6. gercog_75
      0
      21 February 2012 01: 20
      in the early 90s there was a project of a military thermoplan http://paralay.com/termo.html
    7. +4
      21 February 2012 06: 54
      Airships are suitable for us for cargo transportation in Yakutia and Eastern Siberia where there are no roads and railways, I don’t know how for Moscow Region, but for civilian use you can try
      1. SIA
        SIA
        0
        21 February 2012 06: 59
        Quote: Kyrgyz
        Of Eastern Siberia where there are no roads and railway

        Why did you get the idea that we have no railways, and roads in general?
        1. Tenok
          +2
          21 February 2012 08: 12
          For transportation of large, oversized cargo.
      2. +2
        26 May 2014 10: 38
        Quote: Kyrgyz
        We use airships for cargo transportation in Yakutia and Eastern Siberia where there are no roads and railways
        These issues have long been successfully solved by helicopters.
    8. +2
      21 February 2012 18: 56
      The airship, at the moment, is very promising as a platform for AWACS, air defense and missile defense ..... good
      1. +1
        22 February 2012 00: 33
        In the USA, since 1999, 18 tethered airships equipped with radar and television cameras (power via cable from the ground) have been used on the Mexican border since 9, which monitor both ground and air conditions in the program to combat drug trafficking and illegal emigration. Similar devices (towed) are used by the coast guard on ships (250 units). The height of duty is 400 - XNUMX m. Airships were purchased in the UK, equipment manufactured in the USA.
    9. +1
      27 February 2012 12: 00
      In principle, airships can be used as reconnaissance and strike forces in local conflicts, when the opposing side has no air force and relatively weak air defense. Of course, only practice can show how effective they will be in this role, but I think that airships in this case will be preferable to "gunships" ...
      1. Darn
        +1
        28 February 2012 15: 36
        Oddly enough, but in the First World War, the German airships did not go astray well. Although they flew on hydrogen, not on helium.
    10. 0
      3 March 2012 12: 23
      Quote: Region71
      The topic of airships was very popular in the 70-80 years of the last century, I remember the rare magazine Technique of Youth came out without any projects using lighter-than-air devices.

      Yes, I remember, I read it myself. It is a pity that this remained only on paper.
    11. Pessimist
      0
      April 7 2012 01: 40
      In the USSR, there were developments in combat airships. They died with the beginning of perestroika ... It was supposed to be used on the combat escort of the US AUG. Keeping at a distance from the launch of the Moskit anti-ship missile system from the AUG airships would force amers to constantly have a pair of fighters in the air, and at the most lethal low speeds for fighter engines! Moreover, airships in the project also had air-to-air missiles. AUG could not get away from such an escort, leaving the anti-ship missile battery hanging in the air without "escort" is also ticklish !!! The wear and tear of the service life of deck aircraft engines and a headache with nervous breakdowns for US admirals was provided cheaply and angrily! laughing It's a pity that everything remained at the stage of the project in the 80s ... And now the "enemy" has come to this with his mind. Or bought ...
    12. lilit.193
      +1
      April 10 2013 16: 35
      The idea itself is not bad. Only in practice will it be implemented soon.
    13. 0
      17 January 2015 12: 25
      I think all the same, these airships will find their place in the civilian sphere, and not in the military. But the British of course raised these devices to a new level.

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"