"Israel Airship to keep eye on Mideast"

[Mike]

Airship to keep eye on Mideast
Israel has begun development of a 200-yard-long airship that would
remain stationed at almost 70,000 feet above Earth for years and
permit tracking of aircraft and missile firings as far as 600 miles
away, a distance covering most of the Arab world.
at http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040303-094723-7239r.htm

[Jarg]

"Mike" > wrote in message
om...
> Airship to keep eye on Mideast
> Israel has begun development of a 200-yard-long airship that would
> remain stationed at almost 70,000 feet above Earth for years and
> permit tracking of aircraft and missile firings as far as 600 miles
> away, a distance covering most of the Arab world.
> at http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040303-094723-7239r.htm

Seems like a great idea - a cheap AWACS/JSTAR! And particularly well suited
for a small geographical area like Israel.

Jarg

[Paul F Austin]

"Jarg" wrote
>
> "Mike" wrote
> > Airship to keep eye on Mideast
> > Israel has begun development of a 200-yard-long airship that would
> > remain stationed at almost 70,000 feet above Earth for years and
> > permit tracking of aircraft and missile firings as far as 600 miles
> > away, a distance covering most of the Arab world.
> > at http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040303-094723-7239r.htm
>
> Seems like a great idea - a cheap AWACS/JSTAR! And particularly well
suited
> for a small geographical area like Israel.
>
High altitude airships are being considered for both civil and military
applications. One limitation they have is in electrical generating capacity
over the long mission times planned. It's not insuperable, especially with
passive sensors but it is a problem. The other obvious limitation is the
ease with which angry strangers could punch holes in them.

[David E. Powell]

"Paul F Austin" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Jarg" wrote
> >
> > "Mike" wrote
> > > Airship to keep eye on Mideast
> > > Israel has begun development of a 200-yard-long airship that would
> > > remain stationed at almost 70,000 feet above Earth for years and
> > > permit tracking of aircraft and missile firings as far as 600 miles
> > > away, a distance covering most of the Arab world.
> > > at http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040303-094723-7239r.htm
> >
> > Seems like a great idea - a cheap AWACS/JSTAR! And particularly well
> suited
> > for a small geographical area like Israel.
> >
> High altitude airships are being considered for both civil and military
> applications. One limitation they have is in electrical generating
capacity
> over the long mission times planned. It's not insuperable, especially with
> passive sensors but it is a problem.

What about solar cells on the envelope? Especially at altitude, where
sunlight would be stronger.

The other obvious limitation is the
> ease with which angry strangers could punch holes in them.

True, but winds would be more of a concern to me, though that seems a
problem in transiting from ground to high altitude, going through the
atmospheric layers. Getting to 70,000 ft. is necessary to engage them, and
even back over the Mediterranean Sea an airship at that altitude can see a
long way, depending on how good the sensors are. (And, of course, those
monitoring and coordinating the data.) Not to mention that even a large gas
bag could be somewhat stealthy, if the radar waves pass right through.....

DEP

[Jim Yanik]

"David E. Powell" > wrote in
s.com:

> "Paul F Austin" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>


>
> The other obvious limitation is the
>> ease with which angry strangers could punch holes in them.
>
> True, but winds would be more of a concern to me, though that seems a
> problem in transiting from ground to high altitude, going through the
> atmospheric layers. Getting to 70,000 ft. is necessary to engage them,
> and even back over the Mediterranean Sea an airship at that altitude
> can see a long way, depending on how good the sensors are. (And, of
> course, those monitoring and coordinating the data.) Not to mention
> that even a large gas bag could be somewhat stealthy, if the radar
> waves pass right through.....
>
> DEP
>
>
>

Seems to me that many SAMs could reach that altitude.Even old SA-2s.

and several ME states have Mig-25's that can reach that altitude,IIRC.

I wonder if the design is a rigid-frame airship?(considering the size)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

[Harry Andreas]

In article >, "Paul F Austin"
> wrote:

> "Jarg" wrote
> >
> > "Mike" wrote
> > > Airship to keep eye on Mideast
> > > Israel has begun development of a 200-yard-long airship that would
> > > remain stationed at almost 70,000 feet above Earth for years and
> > > permit tracking of aircraft and missile firings as far as 600 miles
> > > away, a distance covering most of the Arab world.
> > > at http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040303-094723-7239r.htm
> >
> > Seems like a great idea - a cheap AWACS/JSTAR! And particularly well
> suited
> > for a small geographical area like Israel.
> >
> High altitude airships are being considered for both civil and military
> applications. One limitation they have is in electrical generating capacity
> over the long mission times planned. It's not insuperable, especially with
> passive sensors but it is a problem. The other obvious limitation is the
> ease with which angry strangers could punch holes in them.

If they want to use it as a transmission platform (as stated) then they're
going to need kW worth of generating capacity. A significant problem.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

[Harry Andreas]

In article >, "David E.
Powell" > wrote:

> "Paul F Austin" > wrote in message
> . ..

> > High altitude airships are being considered for both civil and military
> > applications. One limitation they have is in electrical generating
> capacity
> > over the long mission times planned. It's not insuperable, especially with
> > passive sensors but it is a problem.
>
> What about solar cells on the envelope? Especially at altitude, where
> sunlight would be stronger.

As stated in the article.


> The other obvious limitation is the
> > ease with which angry strangers could punch holes in them.
>
> True, but winds would be more of a concern to me, though that seems a
> problem in transiting from ground to high altitude, going through the
> atmospheric layers. Getting to 70,000 ft. is necessary to engage them, and
> even back over the Mediterranean Sea an airship at that altitude can see a
> long way, depending on how good the sensors are. (And, of course, those
> monitoring and coordinating the data.) Not to mention that even a large gas
> bag could be somewhat stealthy, if the radar waves pass right through.....

It's the 1.9 tons of electronic equipment that will not be strealthy, especially
the antennas.

There's quite a bit of hyperbole in the article, not least of which is this:
"Although Malam is not the first to think about such airships, it is believed
to be the first to have resolved the problem of keeping the craft in
geostationary position"

The whole project has so many technological hudles as to be laughable.

Resolved? What BS.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur