In article m, "David E.
Powell" wrote:

"Paul F Austin" wrote in message
. ..

High altitude airships are being considered for both civil and military
applications. One limitation they have is in electrical generating
capacity
over the long mission times planned. It's not insuperable, especially with
passive sensors but it is a problem.

What about solar cells on the envelope? Especially at altitude, where
sunlight would be stronger.

As stated in the article.


The other obvious limitation is the
ease with which angry strangers could punch holes in them.

True, but winds would be more of a concern to me, though that seems a
problem in transiting from ground to high altitude, going through the
atmospheric layers. Getting to 70,000 ft. is necessary to engage them, and
even back over the Mediterranean Sea an airship at that altitude can see a
long way, depending on how good the sensors are. (And, of course, those
monitoring and coordinating the data.) Not to mention that even a large gas
bag could be somewhat stealthy, if the radar waves pass right through.....

It's the 1.9 tons of electronic equipment that will not be strealthy, especially
the antennas.

There's quite a bit of hyperbole in the article, not least of which is this:
"Although Malam is not the first to think about such airships, it is believed
to be the first to have resolved the problem of keeping the craft in
geostationary position"

The whole project has so many technological hudles as to be laughable.

Resolved? What BS.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur