It's such a cool idea. Why don't we have this??

[Isaac]

I got the idea from the flying hotel post, from not too long ago.
This would totaly work if the boeing gave it a shot!

imageshack


So think aircraft carrier + blimps

[dissent]

Perhaps because the idea of landing is to actually be on the the ground.

In low earth orbit it might come in handy ...

[Flatlander]

This is my (admittedly fanciful) take on the concept of flying aircraft carriers.

[Valin Halcyon]

You know..if it could be made to be a flying industrial center and launching platform, it could be used to build space structures in the atmosphere using conventional jet propulsion, and a lot less fuel to get it spaceborne once completed. You could even use them as something like a glider field is today...civillians fly up in a normal plane then jump in their little 2 seater orbiter and blast off.

[VonVulcan]

I think balance and loading would be a real issue... \"TIPPY\" about sums it up.

[ccb056]

You know..if it could be made to be a flying industrial center and launching platform, it could be used to build space structures in the atmosphere using conventional jet propulsion, and a lot less fuel to get it spaceborne once completed. You could even use them as something like a glider field is today...civillians fly up in a normal plane then jump in their little 2 seater orbiter and blast off.

except it wouldnt work, use simple energy consetrvation equations

U = mgh
K = .5mv^2

[VonVulcan]

Please translate for us lowly non-Einsteins?

[Mobius]

What part of \"Explodes with a squeaky POP\" do you not understand????

Just one word scuppers your idea: Hindenburg.

[Xamindar]

It's similar to this:

http://the-flying-legion.com/gallery/di ... um=1&pos=7

[SuperSheep]

What part of "Explodes with a squeaky POP" do you not understand????

Just one word scuppers your idea: Hindenburg.

I think the word your looking for is Helium They don't make blimps from Hydrogen anymore.

Moving on...

Another possibility would be if (big if) they could find a lightweight way of containing a vacuum. Not sure how many, if any benefits that provides.

The other problem with this is that the higher one goes, the lighter the air gets, therefore the more lift one needs. Think massive weather balloons.

[Kilarin]

Just one word scuppers your idea: Hindenburg.

The Hindenburg was fuled with Hydrogen, modern blimps and zepplins are fueled with Helium.

Although, I don't fully understand how people that have no qualms about spending an enormous amount of time riding around at high speed sitting on tanks full of gasoline get nervous the first time you mention a bag of explosive gas.

[ccb056]

At 100% efficiency, it would take the same amount of energy to transfer raw materials to a floating station, build a craft on such station, and launch the craft out of earth's orbit; compared to building it on the ground and launching it from the ground.

[Topher]

That's the coolest looking hand sander ever!!

[Isaac]

What?!?!? Firt of all i would land in the water. And if balance is the prob then why not just make the blimps stick out a bit more? If weight is the issue make em bigger!!

[MD-2389]

Looks like something that would've been in \"Sky Captain\".

[Kilarin]

At 100% efficiency, it would take the same amount of energy to transfer raw materials to a floating station, build a craft on such station, and launch the craft out of earth's orbit; compared to building it on the ground and launching it from the ground.

Absolutely true, but rockets use energy in a way that is expensive because we are trying to reach escape velocity in one big burst. A Lighter Than Air approach is, by comparison, MUCH cheaper and potentially reusable.

The "Rocket Ballon", also known as a "Rockoon", is an idea with some merit.

And while a gigantic dirigible launching platform would certainly have some technical issues to work through, it is an idea that has been seriously considered and will probably continue to be, and one day MAY actually be implemented on a large scale.

[Isaac]

kilarin, dosnt it cost nasa 40thousand dollars per killogram, on a rocket? If the station could even float 20 miles, there would be about 580 miles the rocket would still have to fly to reach space. The money they save on gas might not be enough to build a flying launch pad.

[Kilarin]

dosnt it cost nasa 40thousand dollars per killogram, on a rocket?

there are lots of ways to calculate the shuttle expense. Simplest is about 55million per launch. (not counting facilities etc). With a payload max of 22,700kg, we get about $2423/kg.

If the station could even float 20 miles, there would be about 580 miles the rocket would still have to fly to reach space.

The International Space Station is at about 236 miles. Of course rockets don't usually go STRAIGHT up. AND, the first few miles are the most expensive. The force of Gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, so getting 20 miles up would actually be a signifigant savings. Note again the Rockoon links I listed above. People ARE playing with this idea. They are also playing with some wackier ones. I think a Lighter Than Air launch platform has a much better chance of becoming practical than a space elevator.

[Isaac]

my point was would the 20miles of fuel cost more or less than a flying launch pad.



I could see this thing being used as a mobile amry base. now THAT's cool!

[Immortal Lobster]

Having designed a blimp in the past, all I gotta say is, youd need some BIG blimps for this thing. lots of helium. Blimps work best by suspending the weigh below the bag, not by building over the bag, somebody mentioned tippy. tippy is fair, accurate, and understated. Helium is not as bouyant as hydrogen, but is safer, and to keep this thing afloat would probably exceed the benefits it offers. There, ive bust someones bubble for the day

as to the tippyness, as I said, this thing would have 0 stability to it, you could theoretically suspend this platform on cables, but even then the transfer of the smallest amount of weight would cause the entire platform to shift. This could be overcome by creating it all on one single massive bag, or by somehow joining all the smaller bags and linking them in such a way that everything is in a constant balance, this is where it begins to get wildly expensive and unreasonable.

[Kilarin]

Having designed a blimp in the past

OOOOOHHHH! That is so unbelievably COOL!

Blimps work best by suspending the weigh below the bag, not by building over the bag

Oh, absolutely. I was commenting on the general idea, not this specific design. I think IF they ever managed to make something work it would be much more likely to be a structure suspended BENEATH the LTA envelopes. Thats how the rockoons work. In the case of rockets, the launch would need to be at a steep angle to avoid exhaust destroying your platform and balloons.

Helium is not as bouyant as hydrogen, but is safer, and to keep this thing afloat would probably exceed the benefits it offers.

Yep, if it was simple, they'd be doing it that way NOW. But there are still many kinks and bugs to work out. It is not YET a practical idea, I was just saying that it is NOT unreasonable to think we might be able to work out the problems and that it might one day (perhaps even soon) BE a practical idea. The Rockoon community is experimenting with it with exactly that purpose in mind.

[Immortal Lobster]

Just remember the simple law, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction,since this platform isnt anchored or connected to the ground, even launching that rocket at an angle would cause the entire plat form to shift, that leaves two options, perfectly straight up whilst expecting signifigant loss in altitude,or perfectly sideways with center of effort exerted on the CG of the entire structure. Theres also the sudden loss of a mass that existed on the structure before launch/takeoff/whathaveyou, after its launched, not only would the CG have shifted, but now theres extralift involved, and of course the entire structure would rise ata rate depending on the weight lost.

[Kilarin]

for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction,since this platform isnt anchored or connected to the ground, even launching that rocket at an angle would cause the entire plat form to shift

The platform should, ideally, be unaffected by the Rocket reaction. I believe in some of the designs I've seen played with they actually DROP the rocket first, and let it fall for a distance before ignition, to get the exhaust further away from the balloons.

of course the entire structure would rise ata rate depending on the weight lost.

THAT is a much more serious problem. Any LTA structure that could lift a large payload rocket is going to experiance a LOT of upward acceleration upon release of that weight. Gonna have to vent a LOT of expensive gas, or hang on for a rough ride and hope your envelopes can take the pressure change.

BUT, it's an ill wind that blows no good, this decreases the problem of seperation between the LTA craft and the launch vehicle at ignition...

[Immortal Lobster]

aye, I can see dropping the rocket first as plenty feasable, and as we both agree this would cause a sudden excess of lift.

conclusion here is, this is a perfectly good idea if it were to remain static forever