Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Defense Tech Radio
Dissent Tech
Door Kickers
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Podcast
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Soldier Systems
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Big Bucks for Giant Blimp

I can't figure it out, honestly, what's behind this blimp fetish of mine. Maybe it's because I dig retro visions of the techno-future -- from pneumatic subways to mobile homes on the Moon; blimps somehow feed into that. Maybe it's the idea of being lighter than air that grabs me.

AIR_High_Altitude_Airship_lg.jpgEither way, I'm not alone. There are a bunch of other people in the Defense Department who share my obsession. And they are handing out hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a new fleet of military airships.

The latest, Defense Industry Daily tells us: a $149 million contract to Lockheed, to build a massive High Altitude Airship that will look out for ballistic missile launches.

The blimp will hover above the jet stream at an altitude of 65,000 feet for months at a time and will also have the ability to detect low-flying missiles that may have slipped underneath ground-based radars. Once operational, it will be an important early-detection element of the broader U.S. missile defense architecture. It may also add as a weather surveyor and telecom relay.

There are a number of challenges associated with an effort of this nature.

Solar cells and an advanced fuel cells that can deliver up to 500 kW must be developed to power the craft. An aerodynamic design and a control system must be developed to help keep the airship steady amid the high winds at that altitude, without consuming excessive power. Another important factor is determining how the airship would react to changing temperatures as the sun rises and sets every day, heating and cooling the helium. Then there's the major challenge of finding materials for the airship's skin that are capable of withstanding the extreme ultraviolet radiation at such high altitudes for extended periods without becoming brittle.

But this HAA is actually a little less ambitious than earlier designs. Before, the airship was supposed to be King Kong big, at 25 times the size of the Goodyear Blimp. Now, it's merely huge, at two-and-a-half Goodyears in length. Plans to power the airship with lasers seem to have also fallen by the wayside, for now.

If everything goes well, a prototype HAA should be ready to fly in 2010. I can't wait.

UPDATE 5:23PM: Via the Wonk, here's a presentation on "Advanced Concepts in Missile Defense." The HAA is in there, as well as a program for one interceptor with "multiple kill vehicles."

Comments

Some time has passed since this Defense Tech article, but during that time we've also managed to see a real threat of ballistics testing taking place by the North Koreans. It also highlighted the inadequacies in our own missle-defense systems as contractors are racing toward a solution that has an accuracy to fail rate of over 80 percent. Unfortunately, unless expressed by those contractors otherwise, that challenge has not been able to be met.

This recent article from The Engineer expresses the challenges with the near-space program quite eloquently, and appropriately. It lists the key players who are researching and developing the platforms toward a viable solution, as well as the challenges that each face.

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/294613/Return%20of%20the%20blimp%20.htm

If you're aware of the value added to procuring a working platform of this type, then you would understand the ramifications in the amount of government tax-payer dollars within the budget that could be potentially saved. There are a near endless variety of uses for such a platform and yes, the government is fully aware and is incentivizing the ones who do develop a working solution.

So far - Sanswire is in that lead. Lockheed had a fire at their hangar in Akron which actually exposed to the public that they didn't even have a prototype in its building phase, and wouldn't be expected for some time. It may be possible to suggest however that both companies can pursue this in their own ways and depending on its end-uses. Or, a technology partnership might be a good idea to consider.

Raytheon is also lending tentative support to Sanswire, and Sanswire has not taken or awarded any support from the support. There are a variety of documents on the web however that show the support that they are receiving in discussions from the top officers who are responsible for these initiatives.

And yes. It is very much a materials, technology, and environment issue. Bob Jones of Sanswire addresses his thoughts on Lockheed's design in The Engineer piece.

Posted by: Daniel at August 3, 2006 07:39 PM


I am doing a project on a smaller solar powered blimp that may be able to carry cargo across the ocean.I would like to know some details about this one so maybe i could replicate a smaller one

Posted by: Luke J. at March 22, 2006 08:13 PM


Sanswire's Stratellite™ is a high-altitude airship that when in place in the stratosphere will provide a stationary platform for transmitting various types of wireless communications services currently transmitted from cell towers and satellites. It is not a balloon or a blimp. It is a high-altitude airship.

Made of Space age Materials and powered by solar powered electrical engines, each Stratellite will reach its final altitude by utilizing proprietary lifting gas technology. Once in place at 65,000 feet (approx. 13 miles) and safely above the jet stream, each Stratellite will remain in one GPS coordinate, providing the ideal wireless transmission platform. The Stratellites are unmanned airships and will be monitored from the Company's Operation Centers on the ground.

A Stratellite will have a payload capacity of several thousand pounds and clear line-of-sight to approximately 300,000 square miles, an area roughly the size of Texas .

Posted by: Troy Thomes at February 12, 2006 10:12 PM


I find it ironic that Lockheed has claimed a 2 year existence of their program when, in fact, they exuded no excitement until very recently when Globetel/Sanswire's demonstrations were met with great success at Edwards AFB. I also find it highly suspect that they've decided to trademark the term HAA concept (High Altitude Airship), as it has been the defacto generic terminology for many years concerning this type of platform. And just as suspect is the fact that, and as another here pointed out, that their copy does appear to be nearly a word-for-word of the Globetel/Sanswire concept.

The award mentioned for contract HQ0006-06-C-0001, in mind is greatly limited to the objectives that Sanswire has set out for even with their commercial platforms - which they've concluded to be able to draw 10kW of power from their photovoltaic top-surface coverage (due to the whale rigid shape design).

As far as to the usefulness of these platforms and to perhaps enlighten those who have commented negatively against them - I'd urge all those people to understand that no technologies before these have been as elegant to provide the best use in communications, intelligence, surveillence opportunity, security, defense, and scientific applications. These platforms will be fully reclaimable, as satellites are not - not have the same inherent problems associated with satellite inefficiencies, such as tasking timeliness, etc, or gaps in comm - as well as have an efficient deployment lifespan which includes in its reclaimability.

There is no doubt in my mind that it will add to the automony of our military forces and provide better mission-critical advantages or safety benefits for our troops on the ground, as well as provide for meaningful solutions in both the security of our nation and people and in communications with the rest of the world.

I can understand the grief that some feel toward the concerns in the lack of armor for our troops overseas - believe me. It burns my heart to also understand that our Secretary of Defense hasn't made the adjustments necessary to ensure such an extent to the safety of our boys as we'd have hoped - and as is his job to do so.

As far as the money - the 150M in contract HQ0006-06-C-0001, I believe you also have to reflect on how very little money that is to the government in the greater scheme of things. Of course, I'm sure Lockheed doesn't mind taking in such an amount, and I'm certain that their shareholders peak with all light contentment when they see such an amount of money as well. Such in the life of business, I suppose.

Posted by: Daniel at January 11, 2006 07:40 AM


I'm going to lean on the side of probability with this one. How probable is it that we have balistic missiles shot at us? Not very likely. Now how high of a probability is it that our enemies have the technology to produce balistic missiles that are able to fly under our current radar systems and strike at the vitals of our country? Extremely unlikely. I'm in a Marine Corps ARFF Plt (aircraft rescue and fire fighting), and our first line of defense is our flight suits because they are fire retardant. Riddle me this: Now why is it that even though flight suits are supposed to be standard issue, we don't have them, but the DoD is looking at spending millions on things that are not pertinent?

Let's spend money where it counts. Maybe in a time of peace it would be different, and we can spend money on b.s. stuff that is whimsical, but we have iraq, afghanistan, and soon to be iran syria or korea.

Posted by: Kevin at December 19, 2005 03:53 PM


Seems like old news as Sanswire has been in development on the Stratellite for over 2 years and the award went to Locheed. Seems like a copy infringement as it incorporates the same technology.Research Globetel symbol GTE on the American Exchange...

Posted by: Dave at December 16, 2005 02:58 AM


Under the right circumstances, blimps make good economic sense. Border patrol, disaster communications platform when cell sites are kaput,heavy lift to areas with destroyed roads, bridges and no airports/runways. In addition, During WW2 no ship was lost to enemy action when their convoy was protected by blimps. And yes NAS Lakehurst was very cold during the winter months.

Posted by: Robert R Smith at December 15, 2005 06:00 PM


Rod's comments prove that the right to bear children should be restricted.

Posted by: David Bolton at December 15, 2005 04:12 PM


I actually served in a unit that had blimps from 1958-1960, The Naval Air Development Unit (NADU). While there the unit managed to deflate two blimps in accidents. One when a gust of wind caught it as it was being towed out of the hangar. It was slammed against the hangar door and deflated. The other was parked outside on the ramp so that an inspection of the troops could be made. It snowed rather heavily and before the inspection could be cancelled and the blimp moved inside, the weight of the snow cause it to deflate. These were very late model state of the art blimps at the time. About 1962 the last active blimp was folded away. These were billed as all-weather airships. Unless there are great strides made over what was used at that time, this is a waste. At that time they were being used for early warning purposes.

Posted by: Slats Wolfe at December 15, 2005 01:54 PM


And how much money has been spent on so col at Wright Patterson dream? Maybe he will make General. One well placed SAM/SLM/SRAM/ETC, billions up in, sorry, down in somke

Posted by: DAN at December 15, 2005 12:39 PM


Amazing the vitriol of some of the comments. The government has bought in on some pie in the sky schemes over the years. They've backed some ambitions notions that didn't pan out. Plenty did. We don't still fight from trenches with muzzle loaders. We don't get to the battle on foot or horseback. Give the brass some credit that this scheme may well have merit. Putting a man on the moon was absurd to some. Enough money and brainpower brought it about.

Posted by: Robert Galloway at December 15, 2005 10:52 AM


This has got to Win the “Dumb-Award-Of the Year” What I want to know is

1. Why does the person in the “Defense Department” that came-up with this Idea
“Giant Blimps” WHY does he Still have a Job working for the “Defense Department”??

2. Also, why is the person that spend our “TAX-MONEY” on this Idea of a “Giant-Blimps NOT in Jail for Government Waste !

Posted by: Rod at December 15, 2005 10:44 AM


I think the 'eye in the sky' concept has merit but, in absence of any data, empirical or otherwise, about the vulnerability of such a craft, it's impossible to evaluate its potential value. Such questions as a. will it be armed and b. will it be able to protect itself against attack were the first of many to come to mind.

Posted by: Jim Morris at December 15, 2005 10:07 AM


JLENS....that the combat surviellance system. its just a floating security camera. one at camp liberty got its tether slice by a helo and the air force had to shoot it down. a waste of money!


funny stuff

Posted by: PFCR at December 15, 2005 09:59 AM


What a plan. Spend 149 million on a blimp then TRIPLE and DOUBLE Tricare Prime fees? And how much do you think was spent to come up with these great ideas? Just another bright idea from the ranks of the "BECAUSE I AM IN CHARGE AND I DON'T CARE IF IT'S STUPID".

Posted by: Chris at December 15, 2005 09:29 AM


our goverment now have the ability to destroy incoming missiles, we will now have the ability to detect and destroy much earlier than before better to pay a small price fot this high tech defensive system than to pay a high cost of lives in the future.

Posted by: John Robino at December 15, 2005 09:25 AM


Nice Language!!! German airships were filled with explosive hydrogen, these are not. I don't like the idea either but have some couth and find out what your talking about.

Posted by: d at December 15, 2005 08:54 AM


Are you people Fucking Retarded the germans made these and they did shit but blow up god. May God punish whoever stupid half ass idea this is.

Posted by: Kegan I King at December 15, 2005 08:33 AM


While in Iraq I was part of a PAC team that looked at bringing in Blimps as part of the JLENS program. The fact that they move too slow in the fluid and rapidly changing airspace above a combat zone makes them a non-starter.

Posted by: Andy at December 15, 2005 08:18 AM


Wow, lets think about the fact that a dart can pop one of these suckers, and you want to spend how much on it? lets spend the money right here at home. Heck, they are trying to get them to raise the tricare premiums, remember when they said that you would have medical benefits free? well my husband does. All i am saying is that to waste the oublic money for this endeavor seems very pointless. We have enough weapons of mass destruction.

Diane

Posted by: Diane at December 15, 2005 06:03 AM


Efficiency of weapons is the new standard of deployability? Let's go back to throwing rocks then. It's OK if missiles launched from China (thanks, Bill) destroy us.

Posted by: Tod at December 15, 2005 04:08 AM


The companies that profited from Starwars, devised by the people who programmed Reagan will profit from this project fed to SonofReagan.
Lasers are perhaps the least efficient weapons in existence. Efficiency: Power into a device divided by power out. The most efficient ballons are are over the heads of cartoon characters. Such humor ballons are perhaops the most efficient way to expose the lack of efficiency in investing resources and faith in imaginary shields.
Better what has served. Being very clear about the response to such an attack: The elimination of a country that allows such to originate.

Posted by: john shoemaker at December 15, 2005 12:41 AM


Heres a idea, stop wasting money on spy balloons that can shoot lasers at missiles which is not needed, and buy some BODY ARMOR! How about that? Did you forget you have a war going on right now, in what country, oh IRAQ!!!! Stupid, fucking, people.

Posted by: Matt at December 14, 2005 10:54 PM


I am amazed that recent news appears to be lost in this discussion. A giant military robot airship powered by solar cells was flown successfully out of Edwards by Sanwire/Globetel on November 14th. http://www.sanswire.com/ They had two of them, and the details have not been released, but it is designed to reach 70,000 feet, and act as a platform for multiple uses. They are currently building a working commercial communications model to be flying in 2006, and pre sales agreements have already been made with Europe and South America. The Lockheed model maybe designed as a laser mirror platform for megawatt class digital ground based lasers to knock down missiles. By 2010 Globetel will have high altitude airships flying around the world. There is also a company called Cyber Defense CYDF.OB that holds the current high altitude record for a manned airship at 20,000 feet. They are following the same goal, are not telling anybody anything, and they're board of directors is mostly Navy Brass. The guy who invented they're spherical airship is building one to fly a crew of five around the world in 2006, and we are talking powered flight, not a balloon. One of my ancestors named Ira Smith patented the first powered airship in the 1830's so I have an interest in airships that's in my blood.

Posted by: Franklin at December 14, 2005 12:24 AM


I never thought there would any others that has been interest in blimps for military use. I'm not a maniac nor fetish of these, but I believe it has great potentials. However, I hope this topic would be toned down for its sensitivity.

Posted by: pedestrian at December 13, 2005 07:54 AM


Point of fact: The winds in the stratosphere are very light. I don't remember the number but try google.

Posted by: Mike at December 12, 2005 10:23 PM


I am THE expert on all things "airships".

Development of so called High Altitude Airships has been downplayed within the last six months because the technology hasn't been able to match the hype.

Envelope materials, fuel cells, photovoltaic systems, even as simple a thing as propulsion; no one is able to yet field anything even close to working. A recent stratospheric balloon featuring "superpressure" envelope gives some idea of the difficulty, while it reached great heights, it nevertheless did not last structuraly for any decent amount of time; latest airship envelope materials just are not up to snuff.

Far more likely is that monies for this type of airship development will be slid into tethered aerostat programs like that beginning in Iraq,Afganistan, India......or, perhaps shunted off into true "black" programs like DARPA proposed electrokinetic drive for airships.

discussion is always welcome.

Posted by: Mr. campbell at December 12, 2005 09:45 PM


Good Afternoon Folks,

This contract was let on 12/8/05 and it has a cost of $149Million est. but is open ended till 11/2010. It goals are quote, "...to develope an unmanned and untethered protype...high altitude airship...500lbs. payload and 3Kv. power."

This seems to be rather modest for this large of funding. I think what we have going here is another project like Boeing contract in December 2003 for satellites the Air Force didn't want, all this appears to be is corporate welfare intended to install investors confidence in order to support the price of Lockheeds stock.

The need for a high altitude airship to support missile defense is in itself humorous, are we not building a multi billion dollar installation in Alaska to detect these nonexistant missiles?

Well maybe it can be sold to the TV networks, at a huge discount and be flown over NFL games.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Posted by: Byron Skinner at December 12, 2005 06:40 PM


I'd like to point something out to the author first.

King Kong Big??? ah.......no. It was planned to still be smaller then the hindenburg.

How big is an average goodyear blimp anyway?

And when talking about these airship, for example the HAA, as you pointed out will be 25 times larger then a goodyear blimp, BUT...They came up with that fugure not by measuring feet, but volume...which is far different.

Off the top of my head i'm thinking a good year blimp is around 200 feet (that could be wrong though), and if this is 2 1/2 times longer then its 500 feet...which is the exact same number the proposed HAA is intended to be.

In other words...ITS THE SAME AIRSHIP DESIGN...they just tagged it with another and new mission for it.

Posted by: Murc at December 12, 2005 04:32 PM


I was reading Ben Rich's memoirs about his time at Skunk Works and was reminded of the blimp.

In one contract proposal for a high-altitude airplane they propose using a giant blimp to lift a ramjet aircraft to the proper height and jettison the aircraft from the blimp. Kelly Johnson runs the calculations and tells the presenter that the blimp would be too large, to the point of being infeasible. I forgot the size number given, and I'd have to check the book again at a later date.

If you have the book, it's probably around the part where they develop the U2 or maybe the SR. The book is this one:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0316743003/102-3282819-5609722?v=glance&n=283155

But yeah, Lockheed and blimps fired a neuron or two.

Posted by: Charles at December 12, 2005 02:00 PM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.