Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
> John Garcia schreef:
>
> > back in the late 80s early 90s, someone at the Navy Department tried to revive
> > the old airship idea, at least until someone with knowledge of Naval Aviation
> > history remembered the Shennandoah and Akron (the two airships that were lost in
> > the 30s). that idea went down the tubes rather quickly.
>
> I thought that a revolutionary design was launched for some very large and safe
> rigid mamoth airship that can transport extreem (heavy/large) loads over very long
> distances at much lower cost than special road transport would ever allow. I've
> heard it mention once or twice but lately haven't heard anything about that project
> anymore. Anyone?
>
> Sonja
there was an article in the Air&Space Smithsonian magazine a while back about this
airship. it works very well, and is a great alternative to using a large helicopter as
a flying crane. i'll try to find the article.
but this was not what was proposed to the US Navy. that proposal was to build an
airship of classic design (but using new materials) that would hover along with the
fleet providing electronic surveillance to the ships below. it would have to fly in bad
(but not extreme) weather, and survive the (inevitable) attacks on it by enemy aircraft
(a blimp/airship is essentially a sitting duck). the proponents never seemed to come up
with answers to these problems.
john
