Airlander incident.
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
CAPP0 said:
Eric Mc said:
It's for the ground handlers to grab
" 'ere, Fred, can you just hang on to this 92m balloon for a minute?" 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7pon1YL8CM
@everyone else - be warned, the link above contains an unpleasant video of people dying. I didn't watch it all, I didn't need to.
CAPP0 said:
Eric Mc said:
CAPP0 said:
Eric Mc said:
It's for the ground handlers to grab
" 'ere, Fred, can you just hang on to this 92m balloon for a minute?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7pon1YL8CM
@everyone else - be warned, the link above contains an unpleasant video of people dying. I didn't watch it all, I didn't need to.
ecsrobin said:
I'm not sure what your issue is there, you mentioned a joke, Eric mentioned that you may joke but it has happened and with TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES and then posted a link. It's only the same as watching a documentary on the topic.I guess you don't watch the news?
Exactly. I first saw that sequence thirty plus years ago in the rather excellent BBC TV series on the history of flight, "Reaching For the Skies".
It is interesting this happened. When was the last time a professional flight test of a new aircraft went this badly wrong? It does seem to point to the inherent difficulty in making effective airships. You can't really picture Boeing/Airbus/Bombardier/embraer/Cessna/Cirrus having an accident on their second test flight. Actually, now I type that I do seem to recall a light business jet have an accident ...
[I say "professional" because I am aware of a handful Permit-To-Fly home built aircraft where the initial test flights were not great. But you would hope these guys could do better than Joe Bloggs in his garage.]
[I say "professional" because I am aware of a handful Permit-To-Fly home built aircraft where the initial test flights were not great. But you would hope these guys could do better than Joe Bloggs in his garage.]
Flooble said:
When was the last time a professional flight test of a new aircraft went this badly wrong?
I don't know about the most recent case, but I was thinking of the second test flight of the F-14, which resulted in a total loss of the airframe (and a very lucky escape for the crew...) - but that was 46 years ago though.Looks like a trim problem rather than operator error per se; anyone know how they manage non-dynamic trim?
bulldong said:
I don't know why people are still bothering with airships. None of them have ever worked.
Apart from the ones that successfully carried paying customers across the Atlantic and around Europe in an era when heavier than air flight was an exceedingly erratic and hazardous activity, the large fleet of blimps the USN used to hunt subs very successfully in WW2 and of course the Goodyear blimp and its little blimp progeny? They work fine, it's just a niche solution looking for a problem, not unlike hovercraft, ekranoplans, gyrodynes and gyroplanes.hidetheelephants said:
Looks like a trim problem rather than operator error per se; anyone know how they manage non-dynamic trim?
Whether they worked commercially 70 years ago is irrelevant, there has been repeated attempts ever since by small British companies who raise seemingly fantastic amounts of money to reinvent some ridiculously out of date, useless technology. It is always sold as "the next mode of transport" or "the new container ship" and the end result is always the same, a failure, whether that's commercially, or in its suitability as a passenger aircraft/container ship replacement/rescue platform. I am just astonished that these projects still get funded, that's all.bulldong said:
I don't know why people are still bothering with airships. None of them have ever worked.
Apart from the ones that successfully carried paying customers across the Atlantic and around Europe in an era when heavier than air flight was an exceedingly erratic and hazardous activity, the large fleet of blimps the USN used to hunt subs very successfully in WW2 and of course the Goodyear blimp and its little blimp progeny? They work fine, it's just a niche solution looking for a problem, not unlike hovercraft, ekranoplans, gyrodynes and gyroplanes.There have been airships in constant use since the 1930s. They never went away.
However, they are a niche product with limited uses. They have mainly been used since the 1940s as airborne advertising hoardings.
The fact that British companies can't get their act together is more to do with failings of those companies than with failings of their product. Zeppelin still seem to be able to make and use airships effectively.
However, they are a niche product with limited uses. They have mainly been used since the 1940s as airborne advertising hoardings.
The fact that British companies can't get their act together is more to do with failings of those companies than with failings of their product. Zeppelin still seem to be able to make and use airships effectively.
Eric Mc said:
There have been airships in constant use since the 1930s. They never went away.
However, they are a niche product with limited uses. They have mainly been used since the 1940s as airborne advertising hoardings.
The fact that British companies can't get their act together is more to do with failings of those companies than with failings of their product. Zeppelin still seem to be able to make and use airships effectively.
I am pretty sure they use them for tourism only. However, they are a niche product with limited uses. They have mainly been used since the 1940s as airborne advertising hoardings.
The fact that British companies can't get their act together is more to do with failings of those companies than with failings of their product. Zeppelin still seem to be able to make and use airships effectively.
CAPP0 said:
Er yeah, thanks for the warning there, watching people die is not quite my favourite way of passing time. I didn't know about this and wasn't referencing it in any way with my earlier post, that was just meant in jest.
@everyone else - be warned, the link above contains an unpleasant video of people dying. I didn't watch it all, I didn't need to.
And yet in our 'anything goes' 21st century we watch things like Inglorious Basterds on TV without a murmur. Seems we love death, gore and torture - until it really happens.@everyone else - be warned, the link above contains an unpleasant video of people dying. I didn't watch it all, I didn't need to.
Gretchen said:
Not moving tanks and other military machinery?
I can see the want to invent something that can remain airnourne for up to a week. But it's taking its time, and a lot of money, leaving employees owed too...
Are you referring to the financial state of the Zeppelin company - or some other airship operators?I can see the want to invent something that can remain airnourne for up to a week. But it's taking its time, and a lot of money, leaving employees owed too...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff