The Worldwide Aeros Corporation says it is going to build a The flying luxury hotel. I'll believe it when I see it. One thing that all but poked me in the eye was the crowing that they're going to use hydrogen or some such to power it. Not. Going. To. Happen. For the last time, hydrogen is a net energy loser as a fuel. It is simply not cost efficient. For me, that puts the whole project in the highly suspect category. Numerous corporations in the last 15 years have made claims about lighter-than-air ships and how they are going to transmogrify the future. One company in Germany spend tens of millions to build a hangar to build the ships that would carry the cargo of the future and then promply went bankrupt. The site was later reborn as an indoor beach resort in remote eastern (formerly East) Germany.
I love the idea of aerostats and blimps as both luxury and cargo carriers. They could be large enough to carry significant quantities of either people or cargo. Imagine being able to float above the Serenghetti in near silence and watch the wildlife below. Tour the Grand Canyon or the Painted Desert from the comfortable confines of an air conditioned stateroom. They are elegant, quiet and generally environmentally friendly. Given the choice, would you rather have a airplane traffic route over your house or a blimp? Exactly.
I haven't studied the problem closely but there are a number of problems that are obvious.
1. Where do you land them? You need a fairly large airfield to land a vehicle of sufficient size to be either a cruise ship or cargo carrier. You cannot simply allocate space at an airport. They are already taxed to maximum capacity.
2. How do you power them efficiently? We have the Goodyear and Bud ships but they are novelties and largely advertising platforms.
3. Consumer confidence. Most people immediately think of the Hindenberg when thinking of blimps. It's been almost 70 years but that image still burns brightly (if you'll pardon the pun).
Here's hoping they've done their homework and this becomes a reality.
I love the idea of aerostats and blimps as both luxury and cargo carriers. They could be large enough to carry significant quantities of either people or cargo. Imagine being able to float above the Serenghetti in near silence and watch the wildlife below. Tour the Grand Canyon or the Painted Desert from the comfortable confines of an air conditioned stateroom. They are elegant, quiet and generally environmentally friendly. Given the choice, would you rather have a airplane traffic route over your house or a blimp? Exactly.
I haven't studied the problem closely but there are a number of problems that are obvious.
1. Where do you land them? You need a fairly large airfield to land a vehicle of sufficient size to be either a cruise ship or cargo carrier. You cannot simply allocate space at an airport. They are already taxed to maximum capacity.
2. How do you power them efficiently? We have the Goodyear and Bud ships but they are novelties and largely advertising platforms.
3. Consumer confidence. Most people immediately think of the Hindenberg when thinking of blimps. It's been almost 70 years but that image still burns brightly (if you'll pardon the pun).
Here's hoping they've done their homework and this becomes a reality.
Comments