Absalom wrote:Largely from the lack of nose and tail reinforcements, right?
And the general shape, especially under load.
Absalom wrote:All good points, except that I would expect the actual rigging to consist of preparing the cargo-side lines first, grounding the Zeppelin when it arrives, and then quickly attaching the Zeppelin-side harness to the Cargo-side harness.
Ah, i detect a fundamental misunderstanding: Zeppelins do not "fly", so they do not "land". Zeppelins
sail, and they do this without so-called aerodynamic "weight". So you can´t just attach cargo without transferring gas.
And ballast is no solution, because where to get ballast from at the unloading site? When you can haul ballast, you can haul freight also. No need for a blimp then. This was also a fundamental flaw to the Cl.
And then: A Zeppelin is called "rigid" per definition, but in fact
it isn´t.
No chance of simply attaching a huge weight to a
point.
You have to distribute the weight over the better part of the whole length.
The CL would have "solved" this problem by it´s carbon-fiber backbone (which in reality doesn´t work, because there will never be autoclaves big/long enough to produce them; heck, detaaails!).
Absalom wrote:Yeah, I guess cheapo-blimps would make more sense for the actual carrying portion. And, for that matter, that would actually increase the cargo capacity of the zeppelin, in much the same way that barges (vastly) increase the carrying capacity of tugs.
Exactly. There are already commercial solutions for up to 75 metric tons of lift, and they´re used as cranes on very remote construction sites. With little modification they can be used as trailers.
Absalom wrote:Seriously, the Hindenburg was coated in "rocket" fuel, the hydrogen was just gasoline thrown onto an already-lit fire.
Yes, but it remains to be proved if/how far a fire on the skin would have damaged the lifting cells, if they were filled with helium.
Absalom wrote:If we can get sufficient production of carbon nanotubes going then we'll have the structural portion of the vacuum bag ready, which will leave a sealant for the bag (which might not be needed, depending on how the structural portion is built), the internal tension members (to keep the bag from collapsing), cables to keep the tension members in the correct alignment (imagine a tank-trap made from three I-beams), and the cushioning that you stick onto the ends of the tension members to keep them from ripping the bag.
Whereas we can't yet confirm that anti-grav can work :p .
A vacuum-zeppelin would be (technologically, at least) easier than a true anti-grav device.
You underestimate vacuum and pressure issues quite a little. Differential pressure is a strong power, i once saw a test, where they blew open a safe with only a few hundred millibar (!) internal pressure peak. So i´m pretty sure that nano-thingies won´t work because of too much structural weight.
Remember, a cubic metre of air is roughly only 1,1 kg of weight on sea level, and a cubic metre of helium has roughly only 1 kg of lift at the same level. If you ascend, this capability decreases quickly. That´s why it is even uneconomic to go above 2500ft.