Airlander 10

It does raise the question of whether there is an inherent design flaw in all airship designs though. The side profile is so large that they seem to be disproportionately affected by wind, even when teathered and not flying.
 
Amp34 said:
It does raise the question of whether there is an inherent design flaw in all airship designs though. The side profile is so large that they seem to be disproportionately affected by wind, even when teathered and not flying.
Click to expand...
I'd assume its designed to weather vane when moored in high winds.
However as you say thats not a flaw inherent to just this aircraft but all airships/aerostats in general, and i cant see how thats going to change.
 
Amp34 said:
It does raise the question of whether there is an inherent design flaw in all airship designs though. The side profile is so large that they seem to be disproportionately affected by wind, even when teathered and not flying.
Click to expand...

It's always been an issue with airships due to their size (The Hindenburg was 245 meters long, far larger than even the Airlander which is 92 meters long) and the need to keep down weight led to internal structures that were vulnerable to buckling in high winds. Also due to their light weigh even slights gusts of wind could cause an airship to move and hit other objects of the ground. Far more Airships were destroyed by being caught in high winds and storms and breaking apart, sometimes in mid air, or being blown into the ground than catching fire in mid air, which they tend to be more infamous for.
 
UCssMAZ.png


Not flying at this time you say? :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom