NAVY WILL TEST FUEL-EFFICIENT AIRSHIP FOR MARINE PATROL

I look for airships to make a comeback both in utility roles and
domestic passenger operations. They are ideal candidates for electric
motor propulsion, because the motors don't have to support the weight
of the machine as well as provide motive power as is necessary with
airplanes.




https://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/586/213452/
Airship to Patrol South Florida Straits

KEY WEST, Fla. -- The Navy, in coordination with the Coast Guard and
the recently created National Office of Global Maritime Situational
Awareness (OGMSA), will conduct a six-week-long series of evaluations
off Florida's southern coast of an airship in a maritime surveillance
role this summer. Several recent studies have indicated the utility
and potential cost effectiveness of airships in this role. This
demonstration is an effort to examine the subject further.

The lighter than air platform will fly patrols for up to 8 hours to
test both the systems and crew mission loading and fatigue factors.
The airship, a Skyship 600, which is owned and operated by Airship
Management Services, Inc. (AMS) and leased by NAVAIR PMA-262, Patuxent
River, MD, was configured for this mission with the assistance of the
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC. It is manned by a
three-person crew, including two pilots and a crew member. They will
receive operational, technical and administrative support from both
Coast Guard Sector Key West and Naval Air Station Key West .

AIRSHIP FACTS

The Skyship 600 is a 6,797 cubic meter (240,000 cubic feet),
helium-filled airship. Over the years it has proven itself an
excellent platform for a variety of missions. Capable of persistent
surveillance, communications relay, data-gathering, scientific
monitoring and sampling, or test and evaluation of new equipment, the
long endurance of the airship allows it to remain on station far
longer than helicopters while providing a solid, vibration free
platform for equipment.

The airship is also a very cost-effective airborne platform for sensor
applications. The ability to deploy to an area of operation, lift a
sizeable payload and provide a stable platform for sensors with long
endurance is unique among most airborne vehicles.

Boasting a large cabin, which incorporates a lavatory, the Skyship 600
can carry a wide range of equipment and its operators (or up to 12
passengers). It has been demonstrated that the ship can provide
endurance for up to 52 hours without refueling. Furthermore, the use
of safe, non-flammable helium keeps fuel consumption very low and the
airship environmentally friendly. The Skyship 600 is also one of the
safest forms of transport in the world.

The Skyship 600 is operated by a crew of 20 personnel consisting of
two pilots, three engineers and 15 ground crew who bear responsibility
for all aspects of the safe and effective operation of the airship.
While on the ground, the ship's systems are monitored by a watchman
located at the airship at all times.

The joint airship experiment for maritime surveillance between the
Navy and Coast Guard reflects the cooperative strategy for 21st
century seapower between the sea services. The Chief of Naval
Operations and the Commandants of the U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Coast
Guard unveiled the cooperative maritime strategy at the International
Seapower Symposium in Newport, R.I. on Oct 17, 2007. The strategy
will bring the Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard even closer together
in working to protect and sustain the United States.




NAVY WILL TEST FUEL-EFFICIENT AIRSHIP FOR MARINE PATROL
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#198181)
A Skyship 600 (http://skycruisergroup.com/Startoura.htm) will be
tested by the U.S. Navy this summer off the coast of Florida to
evaluate its performance as a surveillance aircraft. ...
The ship's cabin, with room for up to 12 passengers,
has plenty of space for surveillance equipment, and vibration is
minimal. It can fly for up to 52 hours without refueling, and
consumes only about 10 to 12 gallons of fuel per hour.

A case of deja vu all over again. I grew up in Akron Ohio, where
Goodyear built the Navy's blimps - and used to watch them flying
around all the time. Then they decided to get rid of them. Guess they
were unexciting and too slow when gasoline cost the Gov't only pennies
a gallon (about half my flight training was in a military flying club
- who paid 16 CENTS a gallon for avgas). Those were the days...

Dave

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:00:10 -0700 (PDT), Dave wrote
in
:

A case of deja vu all over again. I grew up in Akron Ohio, where
Goodyear built the Navy's blimps - and used to watch them flying
around all the time. Then they decided to get rid of them. Guess they
were unexciting and too slow when gasoline cost the Gov't only pennies
a gallon (about half my flight training was in a military flying club
- who paid 16 CENTS a gallon for avgas). Those were the days...

Dave

Thank you for the information.

It looks like the run-up in fuel prices is resurrecting a lot of old
ideas:

http://gm-volt.com/
GM CEO Rick Wagoner attended a forum with Barack Obama and other
automotive executives and academics today at Carnegie Mellon
University.

Obama asked automakers how the next President could help them
through the current crisis.

Wagoner asked for help with research funding to develop advanced
batteries and vehicles.

Per the article:
Wagoner sounded a note of optimism, noting GM’s plan to introduce
the plug-in hybrid Chevrolet Volt by 2010 ...




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General...1#cite_note-41
According to GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner, the worst decision
of his tenure at GM was "axing the EV1 electric-car program and
not putting the right resources into hybrids. It didn’t affect
profitability, but it did affect image."[Motor Trend, June 2006,
p. 94]

According to the March 13, 2007 issue of Newsweek, "GM R&D chief
Larry Burns . . . now wishes GM hadn't killed the plug-in hybrid
EV1 prototype his engineers had on the road a decade ago: 'If we
could turn back the hands of time,' says Burns, 'we could have had
the Chevy Volt 10 years earlier.'" [Why Toyota Is Becoming the
World’s Top Carmaker - Newsweek International - Newsweek.com.
Retrieved on 2008-05-19. http://www.newsweek.com/id/36484 ]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Kil...lectric_Car%3F
A large part of the film accounts for GM's efforts to demonstrate
to California that there was no demand for their product, and then
to take back every EV1 and dispose of them. A few were disabled
and given to museums and universities, but almost all were found
to have been crushed; GM never responded to the EV drivers' offer
to pay the residual lease value ($1.9 million was offered for the
remaining 78 cars in Burbank before they were crushed). Several
activists are shown being arrested in the protest that attempted
to block the GM car carriers taking the remaining EV1s off to be
crushed.
http://i.treehugger.com/files/th_ima...hed-ev1-01.jpg

The film explores some of the reasons that the auto and oil
industries worked to kill off the electric car. Wally Rippel is
shown explaining that the oil companies were afraid of losing out
on trillions in potential profit from their transportation fuel
monopoly over the coming decades, while the auto companies were
afraid of losses over the next six months of EV production.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5245036.stm
The General Motors EV1 had a top speed of 80mph. It had a range of
over a hundred miles. It could do 0-60mph in under eight seconds.
And it was an electric car.

The development of the car by GM came as California brought in the
zero emission vehicle regulation in 1990 which aimed to have 10%
of all cars sold by 2003 give off no pollution. The film accuses
lobbyists working for the motor manufacturers of getting the
regulation watered down until eventually, it was no longer
necessary to make electric cars. Indeed, GM was one of two car
markers which sued the California regulators to repeal the
emission mandate.

GM leased 800 EV1s, starting in 1996, and celebrities like Tom
Hanks and Mel Gibson were among its fans. But even they couldn't
save the EV1. In 2003, GM scrapped the programme, and insisted the
cars be returned. Most were crushed.

Activists and former owners - including Baywatch star Alexandra
Paul - picketed a yard where doomed EV1s were being stored. But
all efforts to buy the cars were rebuffed by GM. GM said it could
not sell the EV1s as this would make it liable for safety and
continued maintenance of the cars, which would cost it money.



http://www.cleanup-gm.com/ev1.html