Army UFO

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:07 pm

Looking something like this:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/tars.htm

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:56 pm

Not really. Aerostat radar is done with balloons and US Army is not permitted to have active operations inside the US. Only a superficial similarity. Do note though, that aerostats are likewise unable to function in moderate to high winds, whereas aircraft fly right through hurricanes.

303 · Post by **303** » Tue Aug 14, 2012 9:17 pm

fair point, but the mighty dirigible can block out the sun, causing the enemy to flee in disarray

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:35 am

djolds1 wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_West_Agreement

Forrestal was thrown out of a window. Hmmmm.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:24 pm

GIThruster wrote:Not really. Aerostat radar is done with balloons and US Army is not permitted to have active operations inside the US. Only a superficial similarity. Do note though, that aerostats are likewise unable to function in moderate to high winds, whereas aircraft fly right through hurricanes.

?

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:05 pm

My point is that lighter than air or "airships" as opposed to heavier than air or "aircraft" suffer this huge disadvantage that they're subject to the winds. Just how many aircraft do you think get grounded in 15 knot winds? When some dopy colonel supports a program we don't need and common sense says is not well advised, it's usually because someone's palm is getting greased.

The big killer of this program is not that these can't be relied upon whenever it's windy--which is true--but that they cannot be put in service without building them their own enormous bases. Drones fly off every strip, no matter how short or rough. These things need a 600 yard diameter circle clear of all obstructions, and a tower in the center to moor. All support for refueling, etc. has to be kept at 300+ yards distance from the tower and brought to the craft periodically. This makes the bases hugely expensive to create as well as to operate, and they can't service more than a single airship at a time.

These are the kinds of reasons that airships went out of use. Had very little to do with the Hindenburg disaster, though that was the catalyst for the end of that era.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:13 am

My point is that lighter than air or "airships" as opposed to heavier than air or "aircraft" suffer this huge disadvantage that they're subject to the winds. Just how many aircraft do you think get grounded in 15 knot winds? When some dopy colonel supports a program we don't need and common sense says is not well advised, it's usually because someone's palm is getting greased.

The big killer of this program is not that these can't be relied upon whenever it's windy--which is true--but that they cannot be put in service without building them their own enormous bases. Drones fly off every strip, no matter how short or rough. These things need a 600 yard diameter circle clear of all obstructions, and a tower in the center to moor. All support for refueling, etc. has to be kept at 300+ yards distance from the tower and brought to the craft periodically. This makes the bases hugely expensive to create as well as to operate, and they can't service more than a single airship at a time.

agreed

bennmann · Post by **bennmann** » Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:38 am

303 wrote:fair point, but the mighty dirigible can block out the sun, causing the enemy to flee in disarray

http://youtu.be/qdDdHMwhU2s?t=1m50s

choff · Post by **choff** » Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:38 pm

Dirigibles aren't so great, but back in the day(WWI) Zep's allowed Jerry to bomb London, might be useful on other planets that aren't so windy.

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:10 pm

No mere wind could overpower electric thrusters connected to 5GW of Polywell power.

Muwahhhahhhahahhha!