usecase in 2025?

>>105699696 (OP)
Can be made EMP proof.

>>105699696 (OP)
Very slow and long cruise with no way of escaping, perfect for taking a very (very very very) young woman along to fuck repeatedly.

>>105699696 (OP)
Transporting cargo with no cost (slap some solar panels on top, backup battery just in case).

>>105699696 (OP)
rape cruiser

>>105699820
won't the wind or aero-somalis ruin it for white people?

>>105699696 (OP)

tiktok streamer content

>>105699696 (OP)
energy efficient air transportation of very heavy and/or very large stuff

>>105699848
(cont.)
wouldnt blimps be more energy efficient than cargo boats?
air generates less drag than water, after all
and lift is provided by buoyancy in both cases

>>105699696 (OP)
They said cargo ships. I don't know tho. I feel you can built twice the ships with just one airship.

>>105699696 (OP)
What's the viability of creating housing out of these things?

>>105699848
>Very heavy
What, its the complete opposite

>>105699820
>Bro if you just spend billions on the craft, the infrastructure and the helium, you can transport 1 ton of cargo across the Atlantic in 7 days for basically free!

>>105699696 (OP)
It's the basic unit of an alternative cargo network that never fully got off the ground because special interests were threatened by its cheap (often nearly free) costs which threatened their heavily entrenched infrastructure and business models.

>>105699696 (OP)
floating above football games

>>105700522
>billions
It's a blimp. You fill it full of gas, rig up some solar panels to a solid state motor attached to a propeller, hang a cargo bay from it, and set off in a direction. It's not, say, a plane with millions of intricate components or a giant slab of welded steel belching diesel fumes. It's a blimp.

>>105700434
*comparatively heavy
*when air transport is unvoidable
but also blimps scale way better than planes
a blimp doesnt need a takeoff strip
and given it functions based on buoyancy- the square cubed law is gonna help more than with a plane bc buoyancy = fluids and you can leverage internal pressure for structural stability
kinda like you cant crush a closed plastic bottle, but when opened it has no structural stiffness

>>105699696 (OP)
Advertising and that's it. Libertarians like to fap about them as way to get around sea port union strikes. This is purely masturbatory fantasy
>>105699848
>energy efficient
Lol no. They consume roughly the same amount of power as airplanes, but get there slower. See: https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/guest-blog/helium-hokum-why-airships-will-never-be-part-of-our-transportation-infrastructure/
>>105699969
Totally nonviable, payload capacity is very low and they are sensitive to severe weather.
>>105700583
Blimps are inefficient, see above. The giant slab of steel has a much greater payload capacity than any blimp ever built
>>105700666
They need hangars to protect them in severe weather. Wind shear becomes more of a problem as the blimp gets bigger

>>105699696 (OP)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piasecki_PA-97_Helistat?useskin=vector
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroLift_CycloCrane?useskin=vector
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyHook_JHL-40?useskin=vector
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CargoLifter&useskin=vector
Smarter people than us have tried and failed.
The idea of being able to move cargo from anywhere without needing any infrastructure is a good idea; until we can create buoyant solids filled with hydrogen(SEAgel) then we're grounded. Filling a balloon with loose hydrogen is retarded and helium is too expensive and less buoyant.

>>105700703
Inefficient on a cargo per unit basis, but think of how many blimps you could build with the steel in a cargo ship. The goal of efficiency isn't to optimize for the minimum number of units but the maximum use of scarce resources per unit of cargo moved from point to point. The skins could easily be made from renewables.

>>105700802
blimps aren’t made of steel. Like pretty much all other aircraft they’re so weight sensitive they need to be made of fancy aluminum alloys.

>>105700703
>They need hangars to protect them in severe weather. Wind shear becomes more of a problem as the blimp gets bigger
planes need hangars too
internal gas sacks can be deflated
external skin removed and youre left with just a skeleton
make it weather proof and you dont even need a hangar, or rather you need one just for to store the removable bits
that is more of a hassle than a hangar and a plane
but you can carry with a blimp weights that would be impossible to carry with a plane
you can use multiple blimps while you cannot use multiple planes because vtol

and the energy numbers must be wrong
it makes 0 fucking sense to have a plane going 900 km/h take less energy per ton per km than a blimp that goes 80.
im sorry, it just fucking doesnt
chud gpt agrees. im too lazy to look it up, burden on proof is on you

>>105700522
>helium
rare, and easily lost to space
hydrogen is more abundant and has the highest lifting power per mass density

>>105700895
>hydrogen
also hydrogen is quite harder to contain

>>105700831
Everything has steel in it because steel is the best. The cheapest and most economic blimp design is going to employ steel because it's easy to work with and very structurally sound in a bunch of different ways. You aren't going to need a LOT of steel, but you will need it.

>>105700934
This. Steel doesn't absorb moisture, shrugs off vibrations and has a low(-ish) coefficient of thermal expansion. When you're designing something as big as an airship you have to consider things like thermal expansion, stresses from the gas becoming more or less dense in relation to altitude/temperature. So many forces are at work that you want to simplify the materials used and we understand steels extremely well.

>>105699908
Helium and hydrogen are good at being lighter than air, but not that good. You'd need a behemoth of an airship to be able to carry 1000 tons. Likely larger than a Panamax container ship.
I'm all about airships, but they're not that good.

Billions must displace an equal volume of fluid with a lighter element.

advertising. every year, those are circling above my house during the f1 race

>>105699696 (OP)
looking cool as hell

>the think it'd be cool to learn to fly a blimp or airship
>do research
>almost every single person with this license in the US works for Goodyear and is contractually obligated not to teach you unless you too work for Goodyear
>You can build a steerable hot air airship, but the FAA will class it as a hot air balloon instead of an airship, even tho the balloon category by definition isn't steerable
Reeeeeeeeee

>>105700934
Wind turbine blades and some aircraft use huge fiber reinforced composites, so why not do the same for airships?

>>105700840
>it makes 0 fucking sense to have a plane going 900 km/h take less energy per ton per km than a blimp that goes 80.
It appears that the plane uses 20x as much as an airship.

>>105703150
non-experimental composite wings still have aluminum stringers, but yes you're at least right in that aluminum is a far superior structural material in this context. It's easy to work with, easier to extrude, stronger than steel by weight, corrosion resistant, and also cheap.

There's no way to fill an airship that isn't either expensive or insanely dangerous. Solve that problem and you might have the honor of being killed by Boeing for being a threat to their business.

IMO the problem isn't the cost, it's the speed. The planning timeframes explode if you consider these things can carry cargo at cycling speeds at best.

>>105699696 (OP)
he cute

>>105703244
Fill it with wind

>>105699719
>very (very very very) young woman
h-how young are we talking about?

https://www.realclearscience.com/quick_and_clear_science/2019/08/08/could_giant_airships_replace_cargo_ships.html

Freight transport

>>105703993
out of 10

They're neat

>>105699696 (OP)
overland yachting

hear me out
blimp train

>>105699696 (OP)
>KIROV REPORTING

>>105703244
>you might have the honor of being killed by Boeing for being a threat to their business
I thought they only kill the ones that support their business?

>>105699696 (OP)
There are people on this board and in this thread RIGHT NOW who haven't read pic related. I pity you.

>>105700782
HNNNNNNNNNNNNGHGHHNGNGNHNHGNHNNHNHNGNHNHNHHGNG

>>105700782
Daaaamn

>>105708538
your mom at the anime convention

>>105699719
It's the implication

>>105706502
I think I’m sold. How big of a blimp do you need to carry as much stuff as an rv?

>>105706502
This. If I were billionaire wealthy, I'd travel by airship when I could. It's pretty much a flying yacht, where the point isn't travel speed, but rather travel comfort and style.