New high capacity airplanes

July 8th, 2014 at 4:51:46 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 753
Posts: 8879
Quote: Evenbob
I don't see why it has to be dropped. Just
drop it off on an elevated platform.


Possibly the elevated platform would make sense (which is closer to the 1930's concept). But this isn't the 1930's. You can't have all those people coming down stairs or escalators. I understand that the original concept for the Empire State Building was that Zeppelins would be able to moor on top.


But they solve the problem of building rail systems at 180-200 mph. Most conceptual airship designs can go that fast. The fundamental problem of runways is gone.

Runways are limited resources. If we clog them with traffic going 200-300 miles they are not available for flights of 2000 -8000 miles.
July 8th, 2014 at 4:55:42 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 2
Posts: 1972
Have the platform move to the ground with the people still in the container. Then you don't need a winch or people individually on stairs, escalators, or elevators.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
July 8th, 2014 at 6:10:00 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 753
Posts: 8879
Quote: Dalex64
Have the platform move to the ground with the people still in the container. Then you don't need a winch or people individually on stairs, escalators, or elevators.


That's what I was thinking of when I said it isn't the 1930's. The question is does it make sense for the blimp to lower the platform (in all sort of weather and wind), or does it make sense to lock into a tower and then have the tower lower the platform.

There is obvious questions about throughput, and the cost of all these vehicles. I suspect that it would be more expensive to operate than a rail system, but it might be a whole lot easier to build, especially if you think of mountain ranges and earthquakes.

Plus once you build it, it would be much easier to add a new location.

July 8th, 2014 at 6:36:30 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 331
Posts: 11745
Quote: Pacomartin
But it would be nice if it could pick up a container with 150 people, move to a nearby city at 200 mph, and drop one container, and winch another one up.


Can you make an airship move that fast? Air resitance and drag are high despite any shapes, as the basic shape has to remain balloon-like. Not to mention all the dead mass they carry, including the helium.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
July 8th, 2014 at 7:55:17 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 2
Posts: 1972
I think a winch and cables would be extremely heavy and you wouldn't want to carry them with you all the time.

Even if it could go that fast, and I have no idea if it could or not, is 200 mph fast enough?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
July 8th, 2014 at 10:27:06 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 753
Posts: 8879
Quote: Nareed
Can you make an airship move that fast? Air resistance and drag are high despite any shapes, as the basic shape has to remain balloon-like. Not to mention all the dead mass they carry, including the helium.


Graf Zeppelins could only go 80 mph, but spent most of their time cruising at 73 mph. But they had only 5*550 horsepower engines. Everything I've read said modern concepts aim for around 200 mph, or sometimes 175 mph. The new ones are not really lighter than air, which makes me question how easily it is to modify them to hover.

Perhaps if you can drive the carriage into a lock, then the remaining airship could easily become lighter than air. It could disconnect from one carriage and connect to the other.


XpressWest estimates that it will carry around five million round trip passengers in the first full year of operation, with the company charging fares of around $50 for a one-way trip between Victorville and Las Vegas. The round-trip will be around $89. The trains are expected to run every 20 minutes on peak and up to every 12 minutes as demand requires. The 185-mile link between Las Vegas and Victorville is designed to be double-tracked which is dedicated for the high-speed trains. The costs of this section is estimated at $6.9 billion. The trip should take 84 minutes.

Google estimates 79 miles from Anaheim to Victorville, which would take 85 minutes with no traffic. Plus the time to transfer from one vehicle to the train.

But the 224 mile straightline distance from Anaheim Metro station | Angel Stadium to Las Vegas. Conservatively assume you could fly that distance in 2.5 hours (150 minutes). That is an average speed of 90 mph, In Los Angeles you could take Amtrak or Metro rail to get to the airship so you have no parking to worry about. Plus you appeal to people on vacation at Disneyworld.
July 9th, 2014 at 7:15:18 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 331
Posts: 11745
Quote: Pacomartin
Graf Zeppelins could only go 80 mph, but spent most of their time cruising at 73 mph.


And that was a big improvement over sea-going ships.

Quote:
The new ones are not really lighter than air, which makes me question how easily it is to modify them to hover.


Ah, you can't hover without using some power to generate lift if your craft isn't lighter than air.

BTW, speaking of mindless train schemes, construction is set to start on an express train between Mexico City and Toluca.

Wouldn't it be easier, and cheaper, to just take the money somehwere and burn it?
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
July 9th, 2014 at 9:10:16 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 753
Posts: 8879
Quote: Nareed
BTW, speaking of mindless train schemes, construction is set to start on an express train between Mexico City and Toluca.

Wouldn't it be easier, and cheaper, to just take the money somehwere and burn it?


Quote: (Source: Volta o Trem 14-3)
The Mexican Secretary for Communication and Transport invited Tenders for construction of the 4,6 km long tunnel between Ocoyoacac and Cuajimalpa early April 2014. The planned passenger train line México City Toluca will pass through this tunnel. Earlier on construction of the 36 km long section from Zinacantepec (in Toluca) to the tunnel was called for tenders and the remaining section of 18 km from the tunnel to the Observatório station at México City will follow soon. The entire line follows mostly the existing line but will be double tracked and electrified. Four intermediate stations will be built and opening is planned for 2017.


I have some questions
1) Ocoyoacac and Cuajimalpa are over 30 km apart, so that doesn't narrow down very much where the 4.6 km tunnel will be built
2) I thought those mountains were susceptible to earthquakes?
3) I thought the priority was to build HSR to Queretero?
4) Will the train will stop at the Toluca Airport ?
5) Without the connection to Observatorio it will be very underutilized. Is that going to come in two years or ten?
July 9th, 2014 at 9:23:36 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 50
Posts: 5124
Quote: Pacomartin
A lot depends if the train will stop at the Toluca Airport. MC has to do something about future airline expansion.
Future airline expansion is like anything else, well ....up in the air.

Presently there are limitations as to gates, take off time slots, landing slots... a nimble plane provides some "slack" but larger planes take more space, take longer to load and unload, etc.

Alot depends if the FAA goes to free flight or not. Instead of following prescribed zig zags think of what a direct flight from A to B might do to lessening time aloft. See already the advantages of 'free floating' an air taxi service. Fuel and time savings will come when the exaggerated zig zags are abolished and pilots are permitted to simply dial in their destination and take off.
July 9th, 2014 at 9:53:01 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 331
Posts: 11745
Quote: Pacomartin
A lot depends if the train will stop at the Toluca Airport. MC has to do something about future airline expansion.


It's about 70 km from the bus station in Observatorio to the outskirts of Toluca. A high-speed train strikes me as overkill, even if it works.

Currently buses run like water between the two cities. Better yet, even the expensive lines make stops before reaching the terminal (because it's a commuter route). The train, as I understand, will also make stops. I just don't get the need for this.

I don't think it will stop at the airport. Toluca airport is a few km distant from the highway, which would mean too much of a detour for a train line (not to mention the overpass already in place makes adding a rail line difficult). I'd like to see the route. I could tell you more about it that way.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.