The world's largest aircraft breaks cover in Silicon Valley
The world's largest aircraft breaks cover in Silicon Valley
techcrunch.com
The world's largest aircraft breaks cover in Silicon Valley | TechCrunch
60 comments
-
Twelve electric motors powered by diesel generators and batteries enable vertical take-off and landing. They can propel the Pathfinder 1 at up to 65 knots (75 mph), although its initial flights will be at much lower speeds.
Who the hell wants a 2-day ride to London?
Archer apparently got the math on that right too, in 2010. New York to London is about 3500 miles, which would take about 47 hours at the top speed of 75 mph.
I can't believe they actually got enough money to build this thing. It's like a vaporware project that somehow made it.
The market for this must be literally dozens of people.
-
Honestly? I would love to take a 2-day trip to London on an airship. That sounds like a great adventure. You're not on a ship, so you don't get seasick, and you're not on a plane, so there's plenty of room to move around.
-
FYI you can get motion sick in aerial vehicles, including blimps.
-
Did you take a look at the cabin? Seems in line with something like a private jet.
-
Oh, if they actually manage to run a passenger line for a little while I'll try to go for a ride on it - you know, just to see it before they go bankrupt.
But that's the thing, it's only attractive as an "adventure" or publicity stunt (I can see a short-lived market for "influencers"), kind of like taking passenger rail in the US - it's fun to ride the train when you can afford multiple days of travel time. The difference is, freight rail is practical, useful and economically viable and pays the maintenance cost of the rail lines. This gasbag won't ever be useful in that sense, and it won't ever have value as a regular commuter vehicle.
The only practical use I can see for this is if you need to stay in the air over a particular area for an extended time - maybe an observation platform? but you could just put cameras on a smaller, cheaper balloon...
None of the proposed use cases make sense.
Another important niche could be responding to natural disasters like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and hurricanes.
This is a farcical pipe dream. How would it respond? It can't carry enough weight to be useful, and a helicopter would be faster and more flexible for delivering medical personnel or extracting victims. If there's one thing you want in emergency response, it's speed. And you certainly wouldn't take this thing anywhere near a recently erupted volcano or a hurricane because the air currents would be crazy hazardous for a lighter-than-air vehicle.
-
-
-
I'd love to take a slow (presumably more environmentally friendly) flight like that. Limited vacation time is the only issue.
-
The market for this must be literally dozens of people.
Maybe cargo, not people.
-
Not a chance. If you're paying for air freight it's because you need something delivered now. If you don't need it fast, then train/truck shipping is more cost effective.
While Pathfinder 1 can carry about four tons of cargo in addition to its crew, water ballast and fuel, future humanitarian airships will need much larger capacities.
By comparison, the Airbus A350-900 has a payload capacity of 53 tons, and the newer A350F version can carry 111 tons.
Even if they manage to triple the payload capacity, the A350F can carry 10x the weight.
-
-
I'd love to take a ride on a dirigible.
-
Upvote cus Archer reference.
-
Stupid, naturally safe helium!
-
-
It's even more entertaining: it's airspeed not ground speed, so the trip duration depends on the direction and force of the wind at the heigh it travels in (and that's a lot worse for airships that aircraft because the formar have a much larger area facing the wind than the latter).
So that trip at top speed would likelly be shorter than that on the way to London, but longer than that on the way back (as the predominant winds - except during the El Niño - are from the west).
-
I can see this being used in international shipping if the get the cost down. Why put your product on a big ship when you can use an air ship? Also for landlocked countries.
-
-
It's not like the world is running out of Helium or anything and maybe it would be better used in scientific and medical applications than a big fuckoff airship.
-
This is the future of air travel! An airship revolution! Just need a few million dollars from
daddy"investors". Silicon Valley is full of these absurd schemes and games for bored billionaires. -
Don't worry, we'll make more helium later when cold fusion finally happen.
-
-
For everyone saying it has no market.... some googling finds it is intended for slow cargo delivery to places that have no existing infrastructure. Also this is a prototype, so the bigger ones will have a much larger capacity. They also say it is for disaster relief, similarly to places with no infra, or where that infrastructure has been destroyed like in an earthquake or what not.
-
slow cargo delivery to places that have no existing infrastructure.
And how much cargo demand is there in places that have no infrastructure?
Yeah no, there's still no market. Anyplace that has the need for cargo delivery builds the infrastructure.
Also this is a prototype, so the bigger ones will have a much larger capacity.
Accepted, but "much larger" in this context is going to be like 2x, maybe 3x payload. Not 10x.
They also say it is for disaster relief, similarly to places with no infra, or where that infrastructure has been destroyed like in an earthquake or what not.
Ah yes, just what the world has been waiting for... slow disaster relief.
There's no disaster relief role that this could fill that isn't already being done better by helicopters.
Also, the idea of sending a lighter-than-air vehicle anywhere near a hurricane or recently erupted volcano is ludicrous. Earthquake, maybe, but a helicopter would still do supply drops and rescue faster and more flexibly than a ponderous gasbag.
-
-
It's made of indestructible materials, not even god can sink it!
-
I do believe those are traditionally called airships rather than aircraft or is the renaming of lighter-than-air dirigibles to "aircraft" yet another example of Silicon Valley Marketing spinning yet-another-reinventing-of-the-wheel as innovation.
-
Aircraft is a general term for basically anything that flies while being supported by air pressure (wings, jets/rotors, balloons). A rocket would (generally) not be considered an aircraft because the rocket supports its own weight (it doesn't create lift from the atmosphere around it).
-
-
This is the best summary I could come up with:
As dawn breaks over Silicon Valley, the world is getting its first look at Pathfinder 1, a prototype electric airship that its maker LTA Research hopes will kickstart a new era in climate-friendly air travel, and accelerate the humanitarian work of its funder, Google co-founder Sergey Brin.
The airship — its snow-white steampunk profile visible from the busy 101 highway — has taken drone technology such as fly-by-wire controls, electric motors and lidar sensing, and supersized them to something longer than three Boeing 737s, potentially able to carry tons of cargo over many hundreds of miles.
This morning, the airship floated silently from its WW2-era hangar at NASA’s Moffett Field at walking pace, steered by ropes held by dozens of the company’s engineers, technicians and ground crew.
The first lesson its engineers hope to learn is how Pathfinder 1’s approximately one million cubic feet of helium and weather resistant polymer skin will respond to the warming effect of Californian sunshine.
At the start of September, the FAA issued a special airworthiness certificate for the Pathfinder 1 allowing test flights in and around Moffett Field and the nearby Palo Alto airport, and over the southern part of the San Francisco Bay.
That will involve a long, slow slog to validate the new technologies and to demonstrate, to the FAA and paying customers, that a new generation of super-large airships can match the generally excellent safety and reliability record of today’s commercial jets.
The original article contains 1,145 words, the summary contains 241 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
-
Airship, tons of cargo? They famously suck at carrying anything of weight. The hindenburg could carry like 10 tons, and a regular zeppelin around 2 tons.
-
Helium isn’t exactly an abundant resource either, is it? I’m all for a future with a sky dotted with airships, but how could you possibly scale this up?
-
The article says it can carry about 4 tons of cargo on top of the requirements to run the thing, but that's for Pathfinder 1. I'm trying to think of an actual real world use case for these. Outside of tours that carry around 50 adult passengers with no belongings, I don't see the practicality of it.
-
-
-
-
Straight out of Bloons 😂
-
60 comments