NationStates Jolt Archive

OK, since now I've completely ditched the whole superzeppelin thing, how about this?

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/newskybase2.jpg

Instead of blimps, the ultralight base (about 3000 tons) is held aloft in the sky (albeit at a low altitude, say four or five thousand feet) by 24 massive turboprop turbines that each produce 500,000 lbf of maximum lifting force, totallying up to 12 million pounds of force, which is enough for 2500 tons of payload.

Sound extremely unrealistic? Or somewhat obtainable?

Where does it get its fuel from?

OK, wait, miscalc... how about the structure weighs 3000 tons itself, and each rotor assembly has about 500,000 lbf? The base just seemed a little TOO light

looks good

Where does it get its fuel from?to be determined... i'm thinking about a cluster of massive hydrogen fuel cell powerplants, or just a big hydrogen powerplant

OK, since now I've completely ditched the whole superzeppelin thing, how about this?

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/newskybase2.jpg

Instead of blimps, the ultralight base (about 500 tons) is held aloft in the sky (albeit at a low altitude, say four or five thousand feet) by 24 massive turboprop turbines that each produce 250,000 lbf of maximum lifting force, totallying up to 6 million pounds of force, which is enough for 2500 tons of payload.

Sound extremely unrealistic? Or somewhat obtainable?

Hmm.

I've read about such things in Science magazines and what not... though for 2500 tons. I'm an optimist when it comes to marvels of science and whatnot... but what would you use it for...?

Holy moly! 1,500 tons!

I actually liked the zepplin design.

Umm, I do have uno objection


Fuel. Unless this thing is tethered by a fuel cable, then after about half an hour then we will see this thing plummet and make a big hole in the ground.

*Flies a Mach 4+ jet right into one of those turboprop engines*

Umm, I do have uno objection


Fuel. Unless this thing is tethered by a fuel cable, then after about half an hour then we will see this thing plummet and make a big hole in the ground.

Correction: a REALLY big hole.

LOL WELL?! Do any of you have any other ideas on how to save the sky base? I've given up on it, but a lot of people want to see it still!

But I do like the design, and the concept. It retains the same arguement like the time-old arguement of Mechs and Tanks...

I vote tanks.

Both look cool. Anyways, you could power it nuclearly. 4 or so plants on board would probably be more than enough, and I'm talking fission, not fusion, for you non-future tech nitpickers.

hey raysia u make ur own images correct? hows this man, no 3d rendering crap, just photoshop and me........................ (yes this is a complete joke)

http://www.laogaming.com/images/russ/ns/cb2.jpg

The New CB-2 From Homeless Deopt!!!




http://www.laogaming.com/images/russ/ns/hobo1.gif

Umm, I do have uno objection


Fuel. Unless this thing is tethered by a fuel cable, then after about half an hour then we will see this thing plummet and make a big hole in the ground.

Actually, I just solved the problem in my own sarcasm there, didnt I? Altjough....Raysia, Zeppelins do have purposes. The skybase could work. Just cut the number of aircraft down.

What is wrong with hydrogen fuel cell systems?

I liked the Zeppelin better

I suppose at this weight I could have a nuclear reactor lol

TFT: Dude, the zeppelin doesn't work. Trust me.

hey raysia u make ur own images correct? hows this man, no 3d rendering crap, just photoshop and me........................ (yes this is a complete joke)

I bet the homeless don't find it funny... :lol:

The lens flare is cool...

Well, they just dont provide that much power per weight.... :roll:

Edit:And why not? Because they can be shot down?

What is wrong with hydrogen fuel cell systems?I dunno, that's my top option right now.

Someone want to do some math and figure out how much electricity it'd take to drive these engines? :P

I suppose at this weight I could have a nuclear reactor lol

TFT: Dude, the zeppelin doesn't work. Trust me.

I think a reactor is a pretty good idea... actually...

This thing reminds me of SHIELD headquarters. Nick Fury, Agent of Shield!

A big floaty thingie in the sky. I think nuclear power would do just fine, keep you from having to refuel too often. And instead of having just floating, you might want to make it cruise - get some veturi(sp?) effect to help keep that beast up in the sky.

hey im a hobo... so ihave a home now but i was....... for like a day.......

Well, they just dont provide that much power per weight.... :roll:

Edit:And why not? Because they can be shot down?NO. Because to lift a 2500 ton payload, you need a Blimp that can lift itself PLUS the 2500 ton payload... which would mean the blimp would be over a kilometer in length, which would be bloody insane

well that Mofo Doujin just made me build a km long battleship, whats your point :P

I suppose at this weight I could have a nuclear reactor lol

TFT: Dude, the zeppelin doesn't work. Trust me.

I think a reactor is a pretty good idea... actually...That, or hydrogen Fuel cell. How much does each reactor on a Nimitz put out? can you find that for me? I need an answer in kilowatts

A lot...lol.

But the reactor set and turbine does weigh somewhere in the region of 6,000 to 8,000 tons :oops:

Well, they just dont provide that much power per weight.... :roll:

Edit:And why not? Because they can be shot down?

Lighter than air craft do not begin to be able to carry armor. They are easy targets, completely incapable of being armored with anything except MAYBE kevlar.

Fuel cells on something that freakin' huge powering an ungodly amount of building sized engines will simply run out before too long. Cost-wise: Ineffective.

Nuke reactors: Power from these is 12 times that of a normal gasoline generator.

You may consider using anti-gravity, millions of solar powered propellers and possibly EM repulsion, too.

well that Mofo Doujin just made me build a km long battleship, whats your point :PYou're talking about a floating chunk of armor with 20-30" guns... I'm talking about a balloon the same size

A Naval vessel.. yea nevermind raysia got it -.-

HEY! why you call me a mofo :(

A lot...lol.

But the reactor set and turbine does weigh somewhere in the region of 6,000 to 8,000 tons :oops:

The turbine holds most of the weight.

Well, they just dont provide that much power per weight.... :roll:

Edit:And why not? Because they can be shot down?

Lighter than air craft do not begin to be able to carry armor. They are easy targets, completely incapable of being armored with anything except MAYBE kevlar.

Fuel cells on something that freakin' huge powering an ungodly amount of building sized engines will simply run out before too long. Cost-wise: Ineffective.

Nuke reactors: Power from these is 12 times that of a normal gasoline generator.

You may consider using anti-gravity, millions of solar powered propellers and possibly EM repulsion, too.I ain't going future tech.

Can this be done, or not?

A lot...lol.

But the reactor set and turbine does weigh somewhere in the region of 6,000 to 8,000 tons :oops:well, that screws that idea

All that time spent working out armour ratios and ammo storage when I could have been downloading pictures of BRitney Spears in a catholic schoolgirl uniform being span...I mean...working. YEs

Does anyone have a reasonable idea of how to keep a 2500 ton structure aloft? if not, then I'm rescrapping the skybase idea.

You could use solar panels to power thousands of tiny propellers... but that would be a lot of polygons...

lmfao JIM!

The reactor holds most of the weight because of the necessary shielding. And what would happen if it did fall from the air to the ground?

Can it just stay afloat, not with propulsion?

You could use solar panels to power thousands of tiny propellers... but that would be a lot of polygons...no.

A nuclear reactor won't work, simply because of the dangers involved. Like Freethinkers said, if it fell to the ground.. then what?

Can it just stay afloat, not with propulsion?what are you talking about? I AM ASKING YOU HOW TO GET IT TO STAY AFLOAT! :P

Use pulse detonation engines!

SCRAMJETS!

MASSIVE AIR CUSHION!!

Check out http://slashdot.org NSF says nuke fusion will be here in the year 2014, so i guess you can be a little far out.

Well, how much bouyancy do you have in the zeppelin helium bags?

helium: Doesn't work
solar: doesn't work
hfc: someone said it runs out of power fast
nuclear: too heavy/dangerous

Anyone? Anyone?

A nuclear reactor won't work, simply because of the dangers involved. Like Freethinkers said, if it fell to the ground.. then what?

Make a good RP.

Use pulse detonation engines!

SCRAMJETS!

MASSIVE AIR CUSHION!!ok, I have officially stopped taking advise from you lol

Raysia...how much bouyancy from helium?

Raysia
Postmaster-General
Founded: 08 Jul 2003
Posts: 8407
Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:14 pm** *Post subject:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moozimoo wrote:
what about a large circular air craft which has many jet engines pointing downwards, thus providing a stable base for large cannon etc. Engines could then be turned, like the v-22, to move the airplane forwards.
Raysia wrote:
nonono... that would be insane. it wouldn't even be able to carry its own fuel
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
:wink:

Well, how much bouyancy do you have in the zeppelin helium bags?1,000,000 lbs.... enough to lift exactly 1/20th the things weight.

Why must it be one big balloon? Are several balloons not a solution for your problem?

Raysia
Postmaster-General
Founded: 08 Jul 2003
Posts: 8407
Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:14 pm** *Post subject:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moozimoo wrote:
what about a large circular air craft which has many jet engines pointing downwards, thus providing a stable base for large cannon etc. Engines could then be turned, like the v-22, to move the airplane forwards.
Raysia wrote:
nonono... that would be insane. it wouldn't even be able to carry its own fuel
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
:wink:nonono... that would be insane. it wouldn't even be able to carry its own fuel

Why must it be one big balloon? Are several balloons not a solution for your problem?Nope... that's even worse... more balloons means more material means more weight which means more buoyancy is needed which means more volume which means more material... you'd still wind up with something really freakishly huge

try cutting the weight, and...making bigger balloons.

Why must it be one big balloon? Are several balloons not a solution for your problem?

One balloon has less actual balloon. The balloons themselves must be weighed as well. When you speak of a ballon the size of a football field be prepared for fabric to weigh a ton.

Somehow... I just don't think it's feasible to have it hover capable. Otherwise, you could do a Mach 20 scramjet thing where it just flies and flies, keeping itself at sufficient speed to combat Earth's gravity at lower altitudes.

try cutting the weight, and...making bigger balloons.not possible, not practical

That it would be large is unavoidable but it would make it somewhat more damage resistent. But you are right that it would probably end up being bigger.

Why must it be one big balloon? Are several balloons not a solution for your problem?

One balloon has less actual balloon. The balloons themselves must be weighed as well. When you speak of a ballon the size of a football field be prepared for fabric to weigh a *ton. Try one HUNDRED tons

try cutting the weight, and...making bigger balloons.not possible, not practical

If we're talking practicality, this entire arguement is moot. The base itself isn't practical - we've established that. Case in point, practicality is apparently not an issue.

That it would be large is unavoidable but it would make it somewhat more damage resistent. But you are right that it would probably end up being bigger.Bigger: Not possible; not practical.

try cutting the weight, and...making bigger balloons.not possible, not practical

If we're talking practicality, this entire arguement is moot. The base itself isn't practical - we've established that. Case in point, practicality is apparently not an issue.With the original miscalculated crazy design, it was 100% practical... it's purpose was to be a fast-action aircraft carrier, because the navy is too slow.... if this thing is so huge ans so slow that a navy would go just as fast, then screw it.

Get it?

Raysia.

Do you have some fear of big balloons relating to a traumatic childhood experience?

Okay. This thing is the size of a Nimitz. Making it bigger is not going to have any effect tactically I can think of. Make the balloons bigger. It might cost more. We would be willing to pay more. Okay?

Raysia.

Do you have some fear of big balloons relating to a traumatic childhood experience?

Okay. This thing is the size of a Nimitz. Making it bigger is not going to have any effect tactically I can think of. Make the balloons bigger. It might cost more. We would be willing to pay more. Okay?Umm. It would greatly affect speed... greatly... so what the eff are you getting at? Do you just want a floating airbase? well for pete's sake, I could probably build that... but it would serve absolutely no purpose.

Okay, a practical use.

We need on station airbases in areas where the ground simply cannot support an airbase. We want somehting that can be used to launch fighters but not have to move, or indeed do anything.

try cutting the weight, and...making bigger balloons.not possible, not practical

If we're talking practicality, this entire arguement is moot. The base itself isn't practical - we've established that. Case in point, practicality is apparently not an issue.With the original miscalculated crazy design, it was 100% practical... it's purpose was to be a fast-action aircraft carrier, because the navy is too slow.... if this thing is so huge ans so slow that a navy would go just as fast, then screw it.

Get it?

I hear you.

Speed though, isn't much of a factor. I suppose being able to put an airwing on top of someone's city on a moment's notice would be a tactical advantage, but this thing is .... augh!

It's... it's... well, it's cool, but if we're rooting for cool and practical, we can take a look at orbit. Maybe you ought to design a rocket or something that has, like, 80 planes piggybacked. Maybe you should put that sucker in space.

In any case, what the main problem seems to be to me, is gravity, and air resistance. Otherwise, yes, it is a good idea.

Okay, a practical use.

We need on station airbases in areas where the ground simply cannot support an airbase. We want somehting that can be used to launch fighters but not have to move, or indeed do anything.Oh, well that explains why you bought like 20 of these crazy things :P

Sure, I'll make you one of THOSE:

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/crazysss.jpg

That's how crazy-shaped the ship would have to be. You try getting THAT to move at any faster than like 20 kts...

I hear you.

Speed though, isn't much of a factor. I suppose being able to put an airwing on top of someone's city on a moment's notice would be a tactical advantage, but this thing is .... augh!

It's... it's... well, it's cool, but if we're rooting for cool and practical, we can take a look at orbit. Maybe you ought to design a rocket or something that has, like, 80 planes piggybacked. Maybe you should put that sucker in space.

In any case, what the main problem seems to be to me, is gravity, and air resistance. Otherwise, yes, it is a good idea.So basically, you have nothing to contribute. Thanks, that's all I wanted to know.

Perhaps you could power this sucker with your hopes that this project is feasible.

:shock: Whoah!

Well....Im trying to help.

What would it weigh if it had no propulsion and only twelve aircraft?

:shock: Whoah!Surprisingly, that design would float.

Well....Im trying to help.

What would it weigh if it had no propulsion and only twelve aircraft?catapults or no catapults?

So basically, you have nothing to contribute. Thanks, that's all I wanted to know.

Um...

I ... guess... I was trying to help... but... not... at... um...

Yeeeeaaaahh.... okay.... I'llll just slowly back away from this topic... I don't seem to be helping.... have fun....

no catapults. Ill be alright with helis and harriers.

no catapults. Ill be alright with helis and harriers....you're kidding me.. right? That defeats the whole purpose of even having a floating airstrip!

Just give me a answer

Britney is waiting

So basically, you have nothing to contribute. Thanks, that's all I wanted to know.

Um...

I ... guess... I was trying to help... but... not... at... um...

Yeeeeaaaahh.... okay.... I'llll just slowly back away from this topic... I don't seem to be helping.... have fun....lol sorry... but you just got way off topic

Just give me a answer

Britney is waitingYour answer? *hands you a refund for all the zepps you bought*

:?

I never bought any.

Give me an answer goddamnit

I never bought any.

Give me an answer goddamnitLOL what do you want me to say?!?

OK, let's say 12 harriers... that's 600,000 lbs... a platform and hangar, that's 500,000 lbs... the infrastructure... that's 5,000,000 lbs... the shells and the envelope and whatever armor: about another 3-5,000,000 lbs.

Total lifting force needed: 12,000,000 lbs
Volume of helium needed: 187500000 cu ft. or roughly 1200 ft x 400 ft x 400 ft

Basically:

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/crazysss.jpg

did you say that 400m x 100m sized bouyancy balloons could support about that?

did you say that 400m x 100m sized bouyancy balloons could support about that?Total lifting force needed: 12,000,000 lbs
Volume of helium needed: 187500000 cu ft. or roughly 1200 ft x 400 ft x 400 ft

Right...so.....why not have two balloons that size?

Look, im very interested in making a purchase here!

Right...so.....why not have two balloons that size?

Look, im very interested in making a purchase here!i could make you that. Give me 2 years and 100 billion dollars and I'll make 4.

Bit pricey?

Look.

Our Coastguard need floating helicopter platforms to be anchored out in the ocean in order to combat drug runners and provide fast and quick rescue capabilties.

Bit pricey?

Look.

Our Coastguard need floating helicopter platforms to be anchored out in the ocean in order to combat drug runners and provide fast and quick rescue capabilties.... dude... You said nothing about water. I recommend a... oh, what do you call them... one of them metal thingies... floats in water... holds helicopters and stuff... oh yeah! A BOAT.

:lol:

Yes, but.

Boats need more crew. Boats need fuel. Boats are expensive. Boats corrode. Boats dont look as cool at this. Boats smell of fish.

HA!

Yes, but.

Boats need more crew. Boats need fuel. Boats are expensive. Boats corrode. Boats dont look as cool at this. Boats smell of fish.

HA!then fork over the 100 billion dollars.

Fine. We'll develop our own.

Fine. We'll develop our own.LOL I doubt you could get that much aluminum and helium and R&D and labor for anything less than 50 billion...

other than that... it was kind of my point... make it yourself :)

(steal Raysias pic! QUICK!) muahahhaa :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

(steal Raysias pic! QUICK!) muahahhaa :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:I don't care, have it. I made it for him.

OOC: How will you resupply it?

OOC: How will you resupply it?who cares? It ain't mine anymore lol

What if you beamed power up to it, or ran a cable?

What if you beamed power up to it, or ran a cable?...from what? We're talking about a moving ship here...

Going way out here, but why don't you make it orbital, with specially designed planes that can launch from space, make an attack run, then leave the atmosphere for space? You'd probably need SCRAMjets for exit, but it might work.

Or...if you didnt want scrams...have refuelable rockets that the pilots would use to exit.

give it up, guys

WHY? This is fun.

Do you still need a source of fuel, Raysia? Because if you do, I'm thinking that this thing is just cool and strategically useful enough to let me lend you my Plasma Power Plants, which get power from Hydrogen-Helium conversions and mass-energy conversions, same as those found in the sun. Sure it'd add a bit more weight, but you could add some extra engine mass to more than compensate for it, as the plasma plant provides a ludicris amount of power.

Going way out here, but why don't you make it orbital, with specially designed planes that can launch from space, make an attack run, then leave the atmosphere for space? You'd probably need SCRAMjets for exit, but it might work.You could use my spaceplanes for that... heck, it just might work. I could totally steal this idea, and make it so much better with my tech! :D

But no, that'd be low, even for ol' nation-selling Resi. Besides, Raysia/CC is a good nation, and I have no reason to rip them off.

Going way out here, but why don't you make it orbital, with specially designed planes that can launch from space, make an attack run, then leave the atmosphere for space? You'd probably need SCRAMjets for exit, but it might work.You could use my spaceplanes for that... heck, it just might work. I could totally steal this idea, and make it so much better with my tech! :D

But no, that'd be low, even for ol' nation-selling Resi. Besides, Raysia/CC is a good nation, and I have no reason to rip them off.go ahead, it's a feee market :)

go ahead, it's a feee market :)Yeeeah, but then you'd steal my stuff (*COUGH*robots*COUGH*), and I'd steal more of yours, and we'd have a war on our hands.

Do you still need a source of fuel, Raysia? Because if you do, I'm thinking that this thing is just cool and strategically useful enough to let me lend you my Plasma Power Plants, which get power from Hydrogen-Helium conversions and mass-energy conversions, same as those found in the sun. Sure it'd add a bit more weight, but you could add some extra engine mass to more than compensate for it, as the plasma plant provides a ludicris amount of power.Just so ya see this...