Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:43 am
#1643908
We have long-term plans for a much larger Airlander 50. What we are designing now is Airlander 10 which is the size we flew as aircraft 001 (G-PHRG).
joe-fbs wrote:Airfield TBD. Anything you hear at the moment is speculation.But may be true.......
Facts and Figures
- Three-day expedition with up to 19 passengers plus crew
- Can accommodate a variety of layouts including reception areas, on-board catering, and flexible seating options
- Current configuration includes en-suite cabins
- Full-height windows with horizon to horizon visibility
- 46m long cabin – larger than most single-aisle aircraft
- Ability to take off and land on virtually any flat surface without the need for infrastructure like runways or ports.
Bobcro wrote:I entirely agree with most of your comments GAZNAV for it is not just the 19 passengers that need accommodation but the Operating crew including the pilots (3) purser, bar tender, head chief, stewards (m/f) and so many others. It's offered as a luxury tour and the paying passenger with expect the finest selection of food, beverages and service. The crew and staff are not going to hot bed and need suitable accommodation all of which adds weight.
I understand that a mockup of this cabin exists somewhere in Bedford. I hope whoever built it has been paid.
HAV gloss over their operational difficulties that are yet unproven.
As I have said before I believe that it is all smoke and mirrors and that though well meaning they are delusionalistic in their attitude if they consider that it will ever be a paying proposition. They are already operating in 'Cloud Cuckoo land'.
Their Company Accounts are now overdue, are they hiding something from their existing investors?
cockney steve wrote: I'd submit, that , like the Wright Flyer, the pilot had to "suck it and see" as this was a unique machine and therefore very little current piloting experience anywhere in the world, on anything comparable.