Revival of airships. Airships as an important part of the armed forces of the XXI century

45
In a recent articles Airships and aerostats were considered as a means of providing anti-aircraft missile systems (ZRK) with the possibility of hitting low-flying targets at a long distance, without the involvement of air force planes. However, the possibilities of airships are not limited only to radar reconnaissance, and therefore there is a desire to consider this area in more detail.

Revival of airships. Airships as an important part of the armed forces of the XXI century




История вопроса


It is believed that the airship, controlled by muscular strength, was invented in the XVIII century by the French mathematician and divisional general Jean Baptiste Marie Charles Meunier. Airships developed half a century later when steam, and then electric motors, internal combustion engines appeared. The development of airships reached its peak in the period between the two world wars, when airship giants appeared, such as the “Graf Zeppelin” model, capable of carrying up to 25 tons of cargo over a distance of more than 10 000 km.


Airship "Count Zeppelin"


The airship "Hindenburg", capable of transporting loads of 100 tons, possessed even greater capabilities. Unfortunately, it was the disaster that occurred on 6 on May 1937 of the year with the Hindenburg that marked the end of the dirigible era.


The crash of the airship "Hindenburg"


The main problem of the airships of that time was that their tanks were filled with explosive hydrogen. Taking into account the fact that it is impossible to guarantee the absence of leakage of such a volatile and combustible substance throughout its service life, the disaster was predetermined.

Technically, non-combustible helium was already produced in 1937, however, only the United States, which refused to ship it to Germany, which produced the largest airships, could produce it on an industrial scale. There are conspiracy theories that airship accidents were the result of competition with aircraft manufacturers. However, it seems most likely that a big war loomed on the horizon, with all the advantages of airships, their “combat” capabilities were significantly inferior to the capabilities of airplanes, which predetermined the latter’s primary development. It was hardly justifiable to invest heavily in obtaining expensive (even now) helium in the conditions of pre-war time.

Return to the airships. Western projects


Nevertheless, story spirals, and in the 21st century there is a certain interest in the revival of the construction of airships at a new technological level. Development companies and the Air Force are considering several areas of construction of promising airships. Firstly, these are airships designed to accommodate means of reconnaissance and communications, and secondly, these are transport giant airships capable of carrying hundreds of tons of cargo over great distances.

In 2005, the well-known agency of advanced defense research projects DARPA announced the opening of the program to build the Walrus super-heavy transport airship with a payload from 500 to 1000 tons and a range to 22 thousands of kilometers.


The concept of a military airship of large carrying capacity "Walrus"


As part of the super-heavy airship program, the aforementioned DARPA agency issued a grant to 3 of a million US dollars to Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin's subcontractor, Worldwide Aeros Corp, proposed the design of the Aeroscraft airship. The company Worldwide Aeros Corp planned to build the Aeroscraft airship in three versions, the model ML866 with a loading capacity of 66 tons, the model ML868 with a loading capacity of 250 tons and the model ML86X with a loading capacity of 500 tons.

Unfortunately, they managed to create only a Dragon Dream airship prototype with a length of 81 meters and a volume of 17 thousands of cubic meters. In 2015, a part of the roof of the hangar collapsed, in which the prototype of the Dragon Dream was based, which led to its destruction and collapse of work. By the way, Worldwide Aeros Corp was founded in 1992 by the current CEO and Chief Engineer Igor Pasternak, who came to America from Ukraine after the collapse of the USSR.


The prototype of the Dragon Dream Aeroscraft airship company Worldwide Aeros Corp



General Director and Chief Engineer of Worldwide Aeros Corp Igor Pasternak (in the center of the picture)



The first flight of the Dragon Dream airship

Obviously, the creation of airships carrying capacity of 500-1000 tons will require the solution of a huge number of complex technical problems. Given that the airship industry has been in oblivion for quite a long time, on the way to the creation of super-large-capacity airships, smaller-capacity samples should be built in stages.

One of the projects implemented is the Airlander 10 airship designed and manufactured by the British company Hybrid Air Vehicles. The airship “Airlander 10” is a hybrid one — it uses aerodynamic lift when lifting and then is airborne due to the volume filled with helium. Its length is 92 meter, payload ten tons. The cruise altitude of the airship is 6 100 m, cruising speed 148 km / h. He can be in flight up to two weeks in unmanned mode and about five days with the crew.

Initially, the airship was designed for the US Army under the LEMV program for conducting reconnaissance and surveillance in the interests of the ground forces. However, in 2013, the US Army abandoned this airship, presumably because of its high cost. In the future, the project developed as a commercial, updated version of the airship made several flights, but in 2017, the Airlander 10 airship broke away from the mooring mast and was completely destroyed as a result of hitting the take-off field.


Airship 10 Airship



First flight of the Airlander 10 hybrid airship

The American company JP Aerosapce is developing the Ascender stratospheric airship, designed to launch space launch vehicles, from a height of about 50-60 kilometers. Despite the fact that the concept itself raises many questions, the obtained results can be used to create airships with more realistic application scenarios, for example, used as communication repeaters or carriers of high-altitude reconnaissance vehicles.


Ascender 36 Technology Demonstrator, a smaller version of a full-size stratospheric airship


From the height of 50-60 kilometers, the visibility range will be almost 1000 km, which will allow reconnaissance in the depth of the enemy’s territory without violating its borders. These heights are quite reachable for devices lighter than air — in 2009, the BU60-1 research unmanned ball, developed by the Aerospace Exploration Agency of Japan, rose to a height of 53 kilometers.

Airship building in Russia


In Russia, the main creator of the airships is the Avgur-RosAeroSystems holding. In June, 2015 of the year, the president of the holding company, Gennady Verba, announced that the company plans to build the Atlant airship by the end of 2018. The estimated cost of the project was several billion rubles. The family of airships "Atlant" should include three versions with a carrying capacity of 16, 60 and 170 tons, capable of operating at altitudes up to 10 thousands of meters. The military use of Atlant airships suggested their use as elements of a missile attack warning system. Vladimir Mikheev, Advisor to the First Deputy General Director of the Radioelectronic Technologies Concern (KRET), confirmed the information on the creation of the airship in the interests of the needs of antimissile defense in July 2015 of the year.


Concept airship "Atlant"



Presentation of the promising Russian airship "Atlant"

Another promising unmanned airship, the Golden Eagle, should be able to climb a kilometer 20-23 and stay in the air for up to six months. Longer flight duration must be ensured due to the absence of crew (unmanned airship) and the power supply system from solar panels. The main intended tasks of the airship "Berkut" - providing communication retransmission and altitude intelligence.



Estimated tactical and technical characteristics of the high-altitude airship "Berkut"


Airships are a rather vulnerable platform in the event of a conflict with a high-tech adversary due to their huge size and low airspeed, which, however, does not diminish their role as a means of warning of an attack using low-flying air attack weapons (EAS). Any large stationary objects, for example, such as radar stations of a missile attack warning station, can be considered easily vulnerable targets, which is no reason to abandon them.

If the development of airships with a carrying capacity of 500-1000 tons is successfully implemented, they can also become an essential element of the logistic system of the modern armed forces, combining the advantages of transport aircraft, helicopters and ships. In this case, the platform's vulnerability can be compensated by choosing the optimal flight routes to avoid colliding with the enemy forces.

Airships in local conflicts


It can be assumed that airships can play a crucial role in local conflicts against an adversary that does not have modern air defense systems.

One of the global problems of modern air forces is the high cost of not only airplanes and helicopters, but also the high cost of their operation.


The cost of flight hours of air attack means the US Army


As a result, local wars against militants, the most modern weapons of which can be anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS), become financially unbearable even for superpowers, as evidenced by the experience of the USSR and the USA in Afghanistan. There is no doubt that the costs of aviation the support of the Syrian government forces also flies to Russia in a penny.

How can the use of airships affect the situation? In the material Combat "Gremlins" US Air Force: the revival of the concept of aircraft carrier aircraft considered the concept of the US Air Force for the construction of advanced aircraft carriers - carriers of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). According to DARPA agency projects, the placement of low-cost, reusable UAVs on board transport planes, bombers and tactical planes will reduce the likelihood of losses and simplify the enemy's air defense breakthrough. It can be assumed that this concept is also justified in terms of reducing the cost of conducting air / air combat.

However, in the fight against irregular formations, even the use of airborne aircraft carriers based on transport aircraft and bombers would be very expensive. As discussed in the same material, the first air carriers were just airships.



The concept of the airship-aircraft carrier may well be recreated at the modern technological level to solve problems in local conflicts.

Presumably, the creation of an Atlant-type airship with a payload of 60 tons and an altitude of more than 5000 meters will make it possible to develop a carrier airship on its base accommodating several types of small and medium-sized UAVs, as well as fuel and armament for them using 2-4 autonomous use weeks. The design of the UAV should be as simple as possible to reduce their cost.


Small reconnaissance-impact UAV Forpost-M



Ultra Small UAV with Rifle weapons and UAV medium dimension "Dozor-600"


The number of UAVs on board may vary depending on their weight and size characteristics. For Forpost-M type UAVs, it is possible to consider as optimal the number of the order of 12-16 UAVs, in order to ensure that the UAV 3-4 in the three-shift version or the 6-8 in the two-shift mode can be around the clock. UAV control operators, the number of which is determined in accordance with the number of UAVs and work shifts, should also be placed on board the dirigible carrier.

UAV dirigible carrier application scenario


For example, in the course of a local conflict, it is necessary to seize control of a city that has become a stronghold of militants and demanding significant forces to be captured by government troops. Direct assault can lead to large losses among personnel, the use of combat aircraft and helicopters requires significant financial resources. In addition, modern fighters are ill-suited to defeat scattered militant groups, and Su-25-type attack and attack helicopters are vulnerable to enemy fire.

The dirigible carrier takes a given position above the city (or aside, at a short distance). The altitude above five kilometers makes it invulnerable to the air defense weapons available to the militants. In addition, it can be equipped with a means of countering attacks of MANPADS, such as "President-C".


Presentation of the system "President-C"

After entering the airship position, the UAV launches for patrolling. Patrol UAVs should be equipped with weapons with a minimum cost - guided and unguided small diameter bombs, unguided aircraft rockets, small arms and grenade launchers, etc. Detection of the enemy is conducted both by the means of reconnaissance of the UAV and by the means of reconnaissance of the dirigible carrier, which, after detecting the target, directs the closest UAV to it. The airship carrier is on duty for two weeks, after which it is replaced by another carrier airship.

The main task of the airship carrier and its wing is to carry out a constant, round-the-clock, exhausting effect on the enemy. Any target detected must be destroyed as soon as possible. Radar and thermal imaging intelligence should provide round-the-clock detection of the enemy, and finding the dirigible carrier near the area of ​​responsibility will provide the minimum response time.

After several weeks of continuous exposure, it can be expected that the enemy will be significantly demoralized and will suffer heavy losses in manpower and weapons. In the event that a decision is made on ground-based storming, the UAVs from the carrier airship should provide direct air support to the ground forces. Given the specifics of the tasks performed, the UAV airship carrier should not be part of the Air Force, but part of the ground forces, acting directly in their interests, which will allow achieving the maximum level of interaction between the UAV operators and ground fighters.

Alternative placement of a UAV on a ground base will require either attracting models with a greater range of flight, and, therefore, with a higher flight cost, or equipment of the base near the zone of responsibility, and its defense. In any case, the reaction time will be increased and the possibility of detecting the enemy will be reduced.

As we saw in the table above, the cost of flying a Predator medium-sized UAV is about 4000 dollars, the cost of flying a small dimension UAV should be comparable to or lower than the cost of flying an OV-10 Bronco attack aircraft (1000 dollars) from the same table. The combination of the low cost of the flight of the UAV and the low cost of operating the airship, which is usually presented by their creators as an advantage of this type of aircraft, will significantly reduce the total cost of aviation support in local conflicts. The loss of a small dimension UAV is also much less sensitive than the loss of a medium dimension UAV, not to mention the loss of manned aircraft and helicopters.

In peacetime, carrier airships can be used to control extended sections of the state border of Russia, ensuring the detection and, if necessary, destruction of smugglers, militants or terrorist groups. For example, the control zone of a carrier airship with a Forpost-M type UAV can make up a circle with a diameter of 300-400 km.

Hack and predictor Aviator


The history of airships did not end with the tragedy of the Hindenburg. New technical solutions, new challenges and challenges can help the heavenly giants to find their niche in the sky. The most promising areas for the development of airships can be considered the provision of reconnaissance and retransmission of communications, as well as the delivery of massive bulky cargo over long distances with the possibility of working on unequipped sites. A separate direction of airship development can be the creation of UAV airship carriers for use in local conflicts against an adversary that is not equipped with modern air defense systems.
Our news channels

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

45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    14 May 2019 05: 09
    Satellites are expensive and can only monitor when flying over a controlled area. Therefore, in Israel, the TAOS balloon system is used for this purpose. A similar system is used by the Americans on the border with Mexico. The system is relatively cheap and efficient.
    TTX of a helium balloon: volume 285 m3; lifting height 300 m; linear size 16 m (there are devices 32 m long).
    The control station is located in the trailer.
    Payload: weight 35 kg; diameter 300 mm; height 400 mm; azimuth viewing area circular; accuracy of determination of coordinates in azimuth + -2 degrees; the viewing area in the vertical plane from +25 to -110 degrees.
    The device is equipped with a thermal imaging system of the front view. Operating range - the long-wavelength part of the IR spectrum; field of view: narrow 1,7 x 1,3 degrees; average 5,1 x 3,9 degrees; wide 24 x 18 degrees. The system includes a mini cooler.
    The optical system has a field of view of 1,5 x 1,2 degrees, a focal length of 24-240 mm, an optical magnification of 1:10.
    The payload along with the information sensors of day and night observation includes a system for diagnosing the state of the platform and monitoring its position over a given geographical area.
    The only cable is used for mooring a tethered balloon, powering the platform and two-way communication. The video signal is transmitted via fiber optic communication, which avoids signal distortion due to electromagnetic interference.
    The multi-sensor payload consists of high resolution CCD and FLIR sensors. In addition, radar, a laser range finder and a laser target illumination system can be placed on a balloon.
    TAOS optical and infrared equipment is gyro-stabilized along two axes and is controlled by the operator in azimuth and vertical plane with the help of a joystick.
    The device can operate normally at wind speeds up to 20,5 m / s.
    The deployment time of the balloon is 45 minutes.
    In addition, Israel has almost created two mini-balloon systems for use at altitudes of 100-200 m, respectively, with payloads of up to 26 kg and up to 4 kg.
    A stratospheric (flight altitude of about 21 km) autonomous (up to three years of continuous flight) SPA airship is also being developed, which uses solar panels and batteries for power supply. But Israel cannot complete this work without a strategic partner who would take upon itself the financing, since the cost of the prototype is at least $ 100 million, and serial airships - about $ 30 million.

    Details in my article:
    http://www.sinor.ru/~bukren1/anti_t_b.htm
  2. +3
    14 May 2019 05: 23
    A great target for a combat laser!
    1. +6
      14 May 2019 07: 56
      And not only. The irreparable shortcomings of airships are: 1-huge visibility, that radar, as well as visual, 2-extreme dependence on weather, wind, electrification when moving, 3-screen effect at the surface of the earth, which makes it extremely difficult to maneuver at the surface, 4-small payload in the case of helium and fire hazard in the case of hydrogen, 5-large sizes require overall storage space.
      1. +3
        14 May 2019 11: 01
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        - low payload in the case of helium and fire hazard in the case of hydrogen
        And why is it taken that helium is very different from hydrogen in terms of lift? Yes, helium is twice as heavy as hydrogen - but no one has yet repealed the law of Archimedes. We consider: the molecular mass of air 29, hydrogen - 2, helium - 4. One mole (22,4 liters) of lifting force under normal conditions is 29-2 = 27 g for hydrogen, 29-4 = 25 g for helium accounts for 2/27, or 7,4%. Just. So before you say something categorically, it’s worth considering.
      2. +1
        14 May 2019 11: 25
        In general, the stool from "Ikea": expensive, square and not very functional.
      3. +1
        14 May 2019 18: 25
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        And not only. The unavoidable shortcomings of the airship are: 1 — its great visibility, that the radar, which is visual,


        The Voronezh radar is also huge and noticeable, and even stationary, but no one refuses it. For airships, warning of an attack on stationary objects is not critical. For a UAV anti-tank aircraft carrier too.

        Quote: Monster_Fat
        2 - extreme dependence on weather, wind, electrification during movement,


        Their 20 years have been exploited, experience is there, and if it were not for the absence of helium and WWII, it would be possible to continue. In addition, hybrid airships are being worked out. At a great height, it is not so critical. See what wind resistance for your aerostats / dirigibles is Augur.

        Quote: Monster_Fat
        3 - screen effect at the surface of the earth, which makes it extremely difficult to maneuver at the surface,


        EDSU will help

        Quote: Monster_Fat
        4-small payload in the case of helium and fire hazard in the case of hydrogen, 5-large dimensions require storage space.


        Non-combustible and non-explosive mixture of hydrogen 15% and helium 85% can be used, the lifting force of such a mixture is equal to 93,4% of the lifting force of hydrogen.
  3. +4
    14 May 2019 05: 38
    No, it cannot, with hydrogen there will be the same parsley as in the 20-30 years when everything that can burn and explode ...
    As for helium, even stuttering is not worth it, superfluidity and the price will completely make any project based on it not gold, but diamond, and in the current situation even more expensive https://3dnews.ru/985753
    1. +2
      14 May 2019 11: 44
      Quote: armata_armata
      superfluidity and price will completely make any project on its basis not diamond, but diamond, and in the current situation it’s even more expensive https://3dnews.ru/985753

      Superfluidity of helium appears only at temperatures close to absolute zero. At ordinary temperatures, its diffusion through polymer shells practically does not differ from that for hydrogen. This is called "hearing ringing". As for the price, it is now about 800 rubles. per cubic meter. This is about 730 thousand rubles per ton of lift. Hydrogen, of course, is cheaper - about 40 thousand rubles per ton of lifting force.
      1. 0
        14 May 2019 16: 21
        Quote: astepanov
        This is approximately 730 thousand rubles per tonne of lift. Hydrogen, of course, is cheaper - about 40 thousand rubles per ton of lift.

        The difference is almost 20 times !! Dear helium for widespread use.
        But methane generally has a cost of less than 10 thousand rubles per tonne of lift.
        Moreover, it is fundamentally less explosive and fire hazard than hydrogen.
        1. +1
          14 May 2019 17: 08
          Quote: aristok
          Moreover, it is fundamentally less explosive and fire hazard than hydrogen.

          But methane has a lift less than half that of hydrogen, which means that it is necessary to increase the volume of the cylinder, this entails an increase in its mass and an increase in aerodynamic drag, and a decrease in controllability. And the heat of combustion of methane is three times higher than hydrogen (in terms of unit volume), so it is not a fact that methane is safer. As for the price of helium, there is at least one reserve: the addition of hydrogen to helium. With a hydrogen content of up to 15%, its mixture with helium does not ignite at all, at higher concentrations it has very narrow flammability limits and is therefore safe.
          1. 0
            14 May 2019 19: 27
            Quote: astepanov
            the heat of combustion of methane is three times higher than hydrogen (in terms of unit volume), so it is not a fact that methane is safer.

            Fact fact !!
            Methane is fundamentally less explosive and fire-hazardous than hydrogen, this is a generally recognized fact among TBshnikov.
    2. +1
      14 May 2019 18: 28
      Quote: armata_armata
      No, it cannot, with hydrogen there will be the same parsley as in the 20-30 years when everything that can burn and explode ...
      As for helium, even stuttering is not worth it, superfluidity and the price will completely make any project based on it not gold, but diamond, and in the current situation even more expensive https://3dnews.ru/985753


      With some delay, the helium deficit can be eliminated thanks to international companies that plan to begin helium mining by the end of the next decade. So, with a delay of a couple of years, in 2020, a new platform will be opened by Qatar (the sanctions of the Arab coalition against this country in the winter of 2018 of the year affected). In 2021, Russia will bite its slice of helium from the helium market by launching another large helium production facility. In the US, Desert Mountain Energy and American Helium will start operating in this market. Helium mining companies will be engaged in Australia, Canada and Tanzania.
  4. +5
    14 May 2019 07: 18
    No ... what? Dreaming is not harmful! So let's dream of balloons, sailboats, steam engines, muzzle-loading muskets "in a new way"! fellow If only there was money! good And it is not difficult to attach Prostokvashino to money!
    ... Of course not! I do not categorically reject "dirjabls, erostats" ... Such things have the right to "exist"! Well, if not for peaceful purposes, then for the police! Patrolling the vast territories covered with jungles, deserts, taiga, water resources in order to identify poachers, smugglers and lightly armed "contras", drug agrarians, unregistered gold miners and other "resource miners" - can be quite justified measure! But why did the Author imagine that "jungles and deserts" would certainly come to Russia? request Will the Syrian desert be enough for him? Or will soon there will be money in "bulk" in the Russian Federation ... and it will be possible to easily acquire "one thing" against the "barmaley", and "another" against NATO? The Author himself admits that the "dirjables / erostats" will be "huge" in size and slow moving ... but this is not the whole "byad"! What kind of "logistics" should be built to supply balloons with helium or hydrogen? You can, of course, remember about hot air balloons! But don't you think that by getting rid of some "minuses", we will lose "some" "pluses" inherent in "helium" erostats? The only advantage of lighter-than-air vehicles over heavier-than-air aircraft; I see in the fact that they can "hang like a sausage" on a "leash" without consuming energy to move or hold in the air ... But even here a lot is "comparatively relative"! The author hopes for a "2-month free stay", but did he take into account: typhoons, cyclones, sandstorms, monsoons, bora, barguzin, dry wind? wink
    In general, "there will be a debate with vodka, answer! No democrats, only" tea "!" I mean, in our case, only "tethered" copters "of all stripes"; or aerial platforms based on the Burevestnik! Yes
    1. 0
      14 May 2019 07: 30
      To be continued .... or not? what
    2. +1
      14 May 2019 12: 00
      The author hopes for a "2-month free stay", but did he take into account: typhoons, cyclones, sandstorms, monsoons, bora, barguzin, dry wind?

      Yeah, is it 22km ??? bully
      Remember how the Japanese bombed America. At high altitudes, there are trains with constant uniform flows in different directions, which can be used both for barrage, maneuvering in height, and for relatively leisurely movement, with great fuel economy.
      1. 0
        14 May 2019 12: 30
        Well, if you absolutely needed airships on 22 km, then the flag is in your hands, but I will not discuss it ...
        1. 0
          14 May 2019 21: 40
          Well, why juggle? You did not read the article carefully ...
          In the context mentioned, it was an airship with an early warning radar. And there, the higher, the further "you can see".
          1. 0
            15 May 2019 01: 15
            I will not argue ... Indeed, I did not read the article very carefully ... feel Reason: About airships, balloons have already been written not so long ago and more than once ... and, in my opinion, by the same authors. That is why I decided that hardly anything new would be added ... I wrote my comments "without interest"; previously already "answered" in a similar way .. But if the Author persistently "pushes" his idea, which not everyone likes; then you have to "answer" so that the Author is not "delusional"!
    3. 0
      14 May 2019 12: 25
      Continued ... I. "Upper" option - Aeroplatforms based on "Petrel": Aerodynamic "configurations" -1. ,, multi-engine ,, "flying wing"; 2. "multi-engine" 2-3-fuselage structure ... On such platforms, you can try to implement the "stealth" technology ... (if not full, then half-full ...): a) "smoothing" of the corners, b) radio-absorbing coating, c ) reduction of thermal signature ... Types of gliders will allow placing, if necessary, large-sized equipment or weapons. In the case of using such "devices", certain restrictions will have to be observed, but not always and not everywhere. Such a "death star" can hang over a Syrian city at an altitude of over 5-6 km (beyond the reach of anti-aircraft weapons, barmaley "...) for a very long time, instead of the airships chosen by the Author ... The functionality (purpose) of such" flying platforms "can be very diverse ...
      II. "Uvtaroi" option: "Tethered" (cable-cable) "electro multicopters" ... (but about "electro" - not 100% necessary ...) "Electro multicopter" (even "tethered". ..) can be equipped with a rechargeable battery of a certain capacity or a small petrol.electrical unit, in order to be able to carry out a maneuver in the event of "emergency" situations. The functionality (purpose) of multicopters depends on their equipment with this or that equipment, weapons. An idea of ​​the functioning of multicopters can be obtained to some extent from the following "video" ...
  5. +2
    14 May 2019 07: 32
    Thank you for the interesting article. and for links to past articles on similar topics, it turns out some are missed.
  6. +1
    14 May 2019 08: 33
    Some time ago, there was a big hype in the press about hybrid (helium plus heat) airships, and even hinted at the start of work. Now everything is quiet. I wonder why - it was classified or considered futile?
  7. +1
    14 May 2019 08: 37
    Something about thermoplanes is now forgotten, and at one time there was a lot of noise about this project.
  8. +1
    14 May 2019 09: 12
    hi ... The peak of development of the airship reached between the two World Wars, when the giants appeared.
    Unfortunately, it was the disaster that occurred on May 6, 1937 with the Hindenburg that marked the decline of the airship era ... crying
    1. +1
      14 May 2019 12: 19
      There was a diversion in Hindenburg.
      The problem for airship builders was the same as for shipbuilders, when they began to build large ships - these are rapidly developing cracks in long beams. The shipbuilders coped with this matter, and the airship builders would have coped. The war prevented.
      Only the Americans continued to slowly build. During the war, airships and coastal waters patrolled their airships. We also during the war, a pair of airships participated in the supply of ammunition. They were even fired several times by German fighters, but could not be set on fire, despite being hit.
      The existing modern combustion control system (based on high voltages) allows the safe operation of even hydrogen airships.
    2. +1
      14 May 2019 13: 51
      Quote: san4es
      Unfortunately, it was the disaster that occurred on May 6, 1937 with the Hindenburg that marked the decline of the airship era ..

      Yes, in general, that nifiga like that. There, 4.000 people drowned in Oriy at once. More than all airships perished. And nothing ... No sunset of the ship era has come.
      The airship is deadly slow. That's all. While it was 1.5–2 times inferior in speed to airplanes, it was possible to put up with its shortcomings when its speed became 6–7 times lower than that of an airplane, and 2-3 times faster than a high-speed train, the minuses outweighed the pros. And cheapness ... The cheapest way to get from Astrakhan from Moscow is by raft. However, flying a plane. Are you personally ready to spend at least 3.5 days, or even a week, if the winds impede you? This and that ... Drive more than a plane ticket costs.
      1. 0
        14 May 2019 14: 13
        Quote: Lannan Shi
        ... The cheapest way from Moscow to Astrakhan is by raft.

        Yes nifiga like that laughing ...generally.
        ... Calculate how much food you use for 14+ days of such an alloy ... (not counting the risks)
        Compare with the prices of air transportation:
        1. +1
          14 May 2019 15: 59
          Quote: san4es
          Calculate the amount of provisions you use for 14+ days of such an alloy ... (not counting the risks)

          15 kg of potatoes + fish from the river + bread + bonfire. But with the airship, everything is more complicated. I doubt very much that passengers will be allowed to fish, load potatoes in bags and burn bonfires on board laughing
          But seriously if, here are exactly the same flaws and the airship, compared with the plane. Plus the cost of the salary crew is 6-12 times higher, based on the flight. All fuel savings are consumed once.
          Plus at times a lot of infrastructure costs. What is it like to build up the whole country with hangars for monsters of 200-300 meters long? And do not build up? Lost flexibility. And if some kind of silt flies from MSC to Vladik, even to Voronezh, even to Buenos Aires, then the inflatable balloon will be tightly tied to route 1.
          In general, the savings are penny, investments in infrastructure and staff training are monstrous, there is no logistic flexibility from the word at all, the dependence on weather conditions is total, and as a result, the overall benefit is not obvious.
          1. +1
            14 May 2019 16: 57
            Quote: Lannan Shi
            ... the overall benefit is not obvious.

            ... you can’t compare with an airplane. For business (Tula-here) to wander, of course he will not do. But as a cruise ship (pictured in the article), maybe some interested (if ever create one)

            P.S
            Quote: san4es
            Unfortunately, it was the disaster that occurred on May 6, 1937 with the Hindenburg that marked the decline of the airship era ..

            - this quote from the article was hi
  9. +1
    14 May 2019 10: 03
    True article!
    Russia should become the center of the world airship building, the whole world should have an understanding - if you need an airship - this is to Russia!
    1. 0
      14 May 2019 16: 09
      True article!
      Russia should become the center of the world airship building, the whole world should have an understanding - if you need an airship - this is to Russia!

      Here’s how the aircraft industry will be slammed, so let’s become, I hope it won’t reach such a scribe
  10. +1
    14 May 2019 10: 45
    Quote: MBRBS
    Something about thermoplanes is now forgotten, and at one time there was a lot of noise about this project.

    Well, there was no noise ... but there were "dreams". While "Turks" from Asia will be "desperately" in demand in the Russian Federation, forget about technological innovations! Or divide all the "news-promises" by 4 ... the rest: blah blah blah ...
  11. +3
    14 May 2019 10: 49
    for Russian open spaces and lack of roads in most of the country, an airship at least a cargo superheavy is simply necessary to ensure transshipment of goods
  12. +1
    14 May 2019 11: 39
    The transportation of natural gas from fields by airships seems promising.
    1. +1
      14 May 2019 16: 35
      Quote: 123456789
      The transportation of natural gas from fields by airships seems promising.

      Well, yes, while using natural gas itself as lifting force + payload.
      But here there are problems inherent in large airships - weather dependence + expensive infrastructure.
      Not the fact that such a project will come out cost-effective.
      1. 0
        14 May 2019 18: 28
        Quote: aristok
        Well, yes, while using natural gas itself as lifting force + payload.

        natural gas itself is a payload laughing in reverse (empty), you can take a payload.
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. 0
    14 May 2019 17: 54
    yes, is it difficult to come up with something worthwhile in this direction: folding (like a Russian doll) with some mechanization, with air heated by the propulsion system?
  15. 0
    14 May 2019 18: 16
    In terms of developing plans, our departments have no analogues in the world. According to plans, the lunar base has already been operating since 2015, and from 2020, industrial production and transportation of Helium-3 to Earth will begin.
    Only one chatter around and plans to create plans, promises that turn into impoverishment.
    1. -1
      16 May 2019 07: 12
      and have you become very impoverished? Sound the numbers, pliz!
  16. +1
    14 May 2019 21: 33
    Quote: Lannan Shi
    The airship is deadly slow. That's all. While it was 1.5–2 times inferior in speed to airplanes, it was possible to put up with its shortcomings when its speed became 6–7 times lower than that of an airplane, and 2-3 times faster than a high-speed train, the minuses outweighed the pros.

    The speed of a modern airship is comparable to the speed of a high-speed train (by the way, for some reason, high-speed trains do not transport goods to Dudinka or Igarka, as well as freight trains). A ton-kilometer for an airship is cheaper than for an airplane and even more so for a helicopter (and this indicator improves with increasing carrying capacity). The carrying capacity can be several times higher than that of the largest aircraft. And this is just a small part of the benefits. The main advantage is that there is no need for runways (very, by the way, not a cheap pleasure). It is possible to organize a mooring platform, literally, anywhere, with minimal costs. Even in the tundra, on the permafrost, which is important with the government's declared program for the development of the far north. We have a huge undeveloped territory, which, it seems to me, is simply impossible to develop without airships. As for the weather, there are not many stormy days a year and there is a forecast after all. True, Russia in the 90s lost a huge number of meteorological stations beyond the Arctic Circle, which is why the accuracy of forecasts is now significantly lower than under the Soviet Union. But maybe just airships will help restore the "former greatness".
    It is clear that one or two firms existing in Russia cannot develop the development of airship at the proper level. Here you can’t do without the state. But with the state we have, everything is sad. So opponents of airships can not worry. If a new take-off of the airship and arises, then it will definitely not be in Russia ....
    1. +1
      22 May 2019 23: 24
      Quote: whowhy
      huge undeveloped territory

      Not too large, cheap and fully automatic airships are capable of supplying checkpoints and groups detached from civilization and the main forces, and, while on duty in the air, support them, for example, by bombing from an external load. They can control the road outside settlements at night.
      This is especially important in mountainous areas, in which the transportation of any property is always a big problem. Even if due to weather conditions such a technique will regularly beat in the mountains.
      And the more automation is transported by air, the less it needs to be transported on the ground and the less burnt trucks will be on the sidelines.
  17. +1
    15 May 2019 00: 16
    The main problem of the airships of that time was that their tanks were filled with explosive hydrogen. Taking into account the fact that it is impossible to guarantee the absence of leakage of such a volatile and combustible substance throughout its service life, the disaster was predetermined.

    For some reason, the author forgot that all American helium giants died in the same catastrophes as hydrogen ones. :)

    The main problem of airships is not hydrogen but strength and controllability.

    The atmosphere is much more disturbing than the sea, wind, storm and hurricanes are a daily occurrence. The huge airship has a very large sail. Pressure on the shell hundreds of meters long is tens of tons. Half of the dead giants simply broke in the air. Until now, the strength problem for rigid airships has not been solved.

    No less problems with handling. A huge structure weighing many tens of tons (and even hundreds of tons) has zero buoyancy in the atmosphere. So it’s ready to move from any blow of the wind. And it takes tremendous power to just keep such a fool in place. A bunch of videos with experienced airships in recent years have shown how difficult it is to drive such a machine near the ground. Whoever didn’t get stuck in the ground .. And a hundred years ago, the second half of the airships was lost when trying to get out of their hangar or vice versa, to park for maintenance. :)

    In general, the deceptive simplicity of airships justifies itself only in the simplest cases. Like a bubble with hydrogen and a small package of equipment below. Attempts to increase the size lead to an increase in problems exponentially .. But enthusiasts are still there! :)
  18. 0
    15 May 2019 03: 06
    Projects of the series "flying house" have been forgotten. If you are a pensioner and are not in a hurry, it will be the most suitable for traveling the world. And anyway cheaper than private planes and yachts. For military purposes, aircrafts have exhausted themselves since the dawn of aviation. For air defense systems, these are fixed targets, even in grandfather's performance.
  19. +1
    15 May 2019 10: 37
    Thank you, history again makes a return to a bygone era. I read it with pleasure, I will wait for a similar theme.
  20. 0
    16 May 2019 14: 15
    Well, the ice has broken.
    I repeat, I see the possible use of airships in the following areas.
    1. Monitoring of naval exercises of "interesting" countries. Can be produced by airships correctly and accurately.
    2. Since they want to launch rockets into space from airships, why not install air-to-air missiles on them, having received mobile air defense in hard-to-reach places (and not only to help airborne missiles with reconnaissance)?
    3. And ... strategic peacetime missile carriers, hanging near the borders of a potential enemy and holding him at gunpoint. Their secrecy is zero, but patency is high (unlike submarines, which are partially locked in straits).
  21. 0
    21 May 2019 15: 27
    Quote: Lannan Shi
    ... The cheapest way from Moscow to Astrakhan is by raft ....

    In principle, you will not get .... Reach the maximum to the 1st gateway ....

    I understand that the raft from Moscow to Astrakhan was given as an example, but .... examples should also be correct.

"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"