WoT Blimp-like aerostats are heading to D.C. area

LibertyMom

Senior Member
http://wtop.com/41/3216375/Defense-aerostats-head-to-DC-area

WASHINGTON - The blimp-like aircraft called aerostats are designed to protect against terrorist attacks from thousands of feet above the clouds.

Soon, they are coming to the Washington, D.C. area.

The aerostats are filled with helium and are three-fourths of the size of a football field. They fly up to 10,000 feet above sea level while tethered to mobile stations on the ground. They carry powerful, 360-degree radars that can see threats beyond the horizon, alerting the military of potential terrorist attacks.

The aircraft is also known as Raytheon's Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System, or JLENS. The Defense Department will integrate JLENS with existing surveillance programs.

Reuters reports the $450 million dollar aerostats will arrive in the area by Sept. 30. They will be tested at an undisclosed location for up to three years.

I thought it interesting in light of the recent article about something similar being removed shut down along the southern border. I know to me, a civilian with a love of history, it sort of makes me think of a war-preparation. Northern Virginia and DC are kind of strict about maintaining an uncluttered skyline with no tall billboards and restrictions on where they can be. I cannot picture these things deployed in and around DC without it looking very...obvious.

Link to thread about the TARS along the southern border being removed.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
images


Dobbin
 

LibertyMom

Senior Member
I chose the WOT prefix because that's what the article indicates it's for. Perhaps "WTF?" would have been more appropriate (if I used that sort of language.) I'm picturing DC looking like the skies over Normandy's beaches in the days and weeks after D-Day.

blimp-force-383.jpg
 

FarmerJohn

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Airships, static, drone or mobile, are the wave of the future. They say.

Engineers Build High-Tech Blimp-Like Cargo Airship
Wed, 01/30/2013
Associated Press, Raquel Dillon

The Aeroscraft airship, a high-tech prototype airship, is seen here in a World War II-era hangar in Tustin, Calif. Work is almost done on a 230-foot rigid airship inside a blimp hangar at a former military base in Orange Co. The huge cargo-carrying airship is has shiny aluminum skin and a rigid, 230-foot aluminum and carbon fiber skeleton. Image: AP Photo, Jae Hong
The massive blimp-like aircraft flies but just barely, hovering only a dozen feet off a military hangar floor during flight testing south of Los Angeles.

Still, the fact that the hulking Aeroscraft could fly for just a few minutes represents a step forward in aviation, according to the engineers who developed it. The Department of Defense and NASA have invested $35 million in the prototype because of its potential to one day carry more cargo than any other aircraft to disaster zones and forward military bases.

"I realized that I put a little dot in the line of aviation history. A little dot for something that has never been demonstrated before, now it's feasible," says flight control engineer Munir Jojo-Verge.

The airship is undergoing testing this month at Marine Corps Air Station in Tustin, and must go through several more rounds of flight testing before it could be used in a disaster zone or anywhere else. The first major flight test took place Jan. 3.

The biggest challenge for engineers is making sure the airship will be able to withstand high winds and other extreme weather conditions, Jojo-Verge says.

Worldwide Aeros, the company that developed the aircraft, says it also must secure more funding for the next round of flight testing, but is hopeful the Defense Department and others will step in again as investors.

The company says the cargo airship's potential to carry more cargo more efficiently than ever before would provide the U.S. military with an advantage on the battlefield and greater capacity to save more lives during natural disasters.

The lighter-than-air vehicle is not a blimp or a zeppelin because it has a rigid structure made out of ultra-light carbon fiber and aluminum underneath its high-tech Mylar skin. Inside, balloons hold the helium that gives the vehicle lift. Unlike hydrogen, the gas used in the Hindenburg airship that crashed in 1937, helium is not flammable.

The airship functions like a submarine, releasing air to rise and taking in air to descend, says Aeros mechanical engineer Tim Kenny. It can take off vertically, like a helicopter, then change its buoyancy to become heavier than air for landing and unloading.

"It allows the vehicle to set down on the ground. And then when we want to become lighter than air, we release that air and then the vehicle floats and we can allow it to take off," Kenny says.

The project has set abuzz the old hangars at the Marine Corps Air Station in Tustin. The structures were built to hold blimps during World War II. Now workers zip around in cherry-pickers, and the airship's silvery surface shines against the warm tones of the aging wood of the walls.

"You could take this vehicle and go to destinations that have been destroyed, where there's no ports, no runways, stuff like that. This vehicle could go in there, offload the cargo even if there's no infrastructure, no landing site for it to land on, this vehicle can unload its whole payload," says Kenny.

Next, Aeros wants to build a full-size 450-foot-long vehicle that can carry 66 tons of payload.
 

Marthanoir

TB Fanatic
I chose the WOT prefix because that's what the article indicates it's for. Perhaps "WTF?" would have been more appropriate (if I used that sort of language.) I'm picturing DC looking like the skies over Normandy's beaches in the days and weeks after D-Day.

blimp-force-383.jpg

Or WWII London during the Blitz
 

FarOut

Inactive
Airships have a long and mostly forgotten history. They carried trans-altantic passengers in luxury, circumnavigated the globe and the US Navy had a fleet of dirigibles in the 1930s. The problem was they had almost no resistance to wind shear; fly too near a storm or run into severe clear air turbulence and they would fold up and crash. Hope they solved that problem.
 

Publius

TB Fanatic
At 1.8 mile up it can be taken down by a common hunting rifle and seeing how it's firing almost at 90 degree up just bore sight it on a tripod.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
An Airship comeback has been predicted at least since I was a child, the main issue simply being public horror at the idea from anyone who was old enough to remember the live reporting of the Hindenburg crash. Now the gentlemen who reported that live only recently died himself (sometime in the last few years) and most of his generation had proceeded him; but with most terrible accidents (a Black Swan in its own way) of this sort, the technology can easily be set back for a generation or more; especially if it isn't really "needed."

Aircraft and Cargo planes were filling the niche that airships once held (at least for the public and military) and it wasn't until about 30 years ago (when I was in College) that the really serious need for modernized air ships began to start dawning on the military and industry - the first Oil Shock helped (damaging both air and sea travel, as well as trucking) but a much bigger problem was how to transport huge weights of goods to places where airplanes couldn't land easily.

But there was also that pesky Hindenburg problem; anytime period were polled about anything much beyond the Goodyear blimp they would say "won't it blow up?"...and so the research continued behind the scenes (won't be surprised to find out someday that maybe the "Phoenix Lights" and a few other UFO sightings were military prototypes of really, really big airships (not saying they were, but would not surprise me if they were).

Now, finally; I think industry, the military and the media all realize that finally things can return to what might have been if the Hindenburg had not happened. Oh, things might have stalled out anyway; some ship was likely to go up in massive flames sooner or later plus there were problems that the early 20th century technology just could not really cope with very well. But airships probably would have continued for longer and been used more in passenger travel had it not been for the accident.

Today, there is not only the desperate need for new ways to transport huge amounts of cargo (military and civilian) all over the globe, but the rising costs of fuel plus the horrible way airlines have treated people in North America for the past decade are all coming together to make a safe (or relatively safe) air ship look very attractive and marketable.

Heck, if the price were inexpensive enough (which it won't be at first) husband was saying he'd much rather take 3 or 4 days to get across the Atlantic, sleep in a nice bed, relax on an observation deck and listen to a piano in bar than be strapped into a 17 inch seat between 3 other people for 8 to 12 hours, with barely a walk back and forth to the bathroom to keep the blood clots away.

I think for now, the very wealthy are going to see this the same way; both with private air ships (at first as novelties) and posh air "cruises" that will cost less than the Queen Mary but more than a Virgin Flight First Class from London to JFK.

If they work, the prices may come down and eventually there probably will be "budget" airships - a lot depends on how expensive they turn out to be to run and how well they do crossing the Atlantic and the Pacific during all times of the year.
 

Publius

TB Fanatic
Meanwhile they're shutting down this system.....

TARS Air Defense Systems Along US/Mexican Border to be Shut Down on 3/15/2013
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...S-Mexican-Border-to-be-Shut-Down-on-3-15-2013

Hummm.......


That was done to detect low flying small aircraft used for drug running where they air drop (not landing) the drugs and turn and head back. Obama and his handlers must be getting really worried about we the people to put such a multi pronged surveillance system in place over DC.
 

LibertyMom

Senior Member
Melodi, that's all really interesting, and I hope I don't sound flippant--I really do find it fascinating--but airships for cargo transport is a different issue from blimps being deployed around DC (and removed from the southern border) for the purposes of surveillance? Long-range detection of aircraft? or ships? or missiles? Why is this needed to combat terrorism? The favored method of attack by most terrorists is a vehicle or suicide bomb at street level. Sure, we've all considered a myriad of other possibilities, and of course we all know they can use airplanes. Iran is building up its navy, too, so there's that. But what exactly is the purpose of having the blimps in DC? And how is it that the other technology we currently use is no longer suitable? If it were just for testing, and they still felt a need to release a news story on it, wouldn't they just say it was for testing purposes, not to combat terrorism? It just seems odd.

I'm not a wild conspiracy theorist, despite my name (it was chosen many years ago as a joke related to the "vast, right-wing conspiracy.") But I'm willing to listen.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
That's a really good point, you right it is different and unless there's a military exercise going on - I have no idea why they would suddenly need more blimps in DC than at other times. Perhaps Blimps do certain sorts of spy work more easily than trucks or helicopters (I have no idea but would seem logical) either on foreign embassies or US citizens.

I do think we are going to just start seeing a lot more airships for all the reasons I mentioned, but this is a bit peculiar all right.
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
These are aeroSTATS - meaning they are tethered and essentially stationary. They aren't the barrage balloons pictured above, which are designed to fend off attacking aircraft.

Aerostats provide mobile, retractable high altitude platforms for electronic sensors. Here's one version, in use with DoD...
===================

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/lighter-than-air-vehicles/ptds.html

1323742236717.jpg


A tethered aerostat-based system in use by the Army since 2004, the Persistent Threat Detection System (PTDS) is equipped with multi-mission sensors to provide long endurance intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and communications in support of coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Recognized as one of the Army’s Greatest Inventions of 2005 by the Department of the Army Engineers and Scientists, PTDS leverages a wide-area, secure communications backbone for the integration of threat reporting from multiple available sensors. The system’s sensor integration architecture supports the automated interoperability between tactical/theater surveillance assets and the dissemination of threat data to operational forces to aid interdiction of hostile fires and unconventional threats.
The PTDS consists of an aerostat, tether, mobile mooring platform, mission payloads, ground control shelter, maintenance and officer shelter and power generators and site-handling equipment.
Lockheed Martin delivered its first Lighter-Than-Air-based persistent Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) systems to the U.S. Navy more than 75 years ago. This enduring legacy of Lighter-Than-Air (LTA) innovation, engineering and production has resulted in more than 300 airships and thousands of aerostats in support of military operations world-wide.
 

AustinPSD

Inactive
Here's a recent photograph of the TARS aerostat located between Valentine, TX and Marfa, TX on U.S. 90, near where I live... the locals are pretty steamed over the closure, as Excelis is a large employer in the area.

Around here, we call it "Dread Zeppelin", a 208.5 ft. long, 69.5 ft. in diameter, 410,000 cu. ft. radar carrying balloon.
 

Attachments

  • 7917659596_84d3f441ae_h.jpg
    7917659596_84d3f441ae_h.jpg
    172.5 KB · Views: 168

LibertyMom

Senior Member
So while these are similar, I gather that TARS is not exactly the same as JLENS. But is that a distinction of function (when hunting for drug-runners on the border they are TARS and when employed in anti-terrorism duties they are JLENS) or are they different types of aerostats? In other words, while they are shutting down TARS and starting up something in DC, they aren't necessarily moving them from one to the other, are they?
 

AustinPSD

Inactive
So while these are similar, I gather that TARS is not exactly the same as JLENS. But is that a distinction of function (when hunting for drug-runners on the border they are TARS and when employed in anti-terrorism duties they are JLENS) or are they different types of aerostats? In other words, while they are shutting down TARS and starting up something in DC, they aren't necessarily moving them from one to the other, are they?

The TARS sites are large, fixed, and immobile - I doubt they are being relocated, just shut down. The TARS installation near me has a bulk helium storage facility, bulk fuel storage (the aerostat has two large generators inside it), several support buildings, and a fixed mast/tether system anchored into the ground. You can get some idea of the infrastructure from the above photograph. In high wind/bad weather, the aerostat is grounded - it takes a 4 - 7 man crew to winch in the tether and secure the aerostat to the mooring tower. These often 'crash' during grounding operations - it has happened twice out here that I know of. We're in the middle of nowhere, so the damage is limited - in an urban, or suburban area it would be a different story...
 

Kent

Inactive
Reuters reports the $450 million dollar aerostats will arrive in the area by Sept. 30. They will be tested at an undisclosed location for up to three years

How can something almost the size of a football field be tested at 10,000 feet without planes or people seeing them?
 

timbo

Deceased
There's been thousands of gallons of invisible ink put in reserve next to all the helium the govt. is stockpiling.

I read that on the internet.
 

LibertyMom

Senior Member
AustinPSD, do I understand correctly that both the photo you posted and the Lockheed one DozDoats posted are of the same aerostat aircraft? Or at least something very similar? And that these are likely what is shown in the article I posted about aerostats being deployed in DC? But the aerostats discussed in the link to the thread about TARS are a different type altogether? something much larger and less likely to be transported across the country?

The TARS sites are large, fixed, and immobile - I doubt they are being relocated, just shut down. The TARS installation near me has a bulk helium storage facility, bulk fuel storage (the aerostat has two large generators inside it), several support buildings, and a fixed mast/tether system anchored into the ground. You can get some idea of the infrastructure from the above photograph. In high wind/bad weather, the aerostat is grounded - it takes a 4 - 7 man crew to winch in the tether and secure the aerostat to the mooring tower. These often 'crash' during grounding operations - it has happened twice out here that I know of. We're in the middle of nowhere, so the damage is limited - in an urban, or suburban area it would be a different story...
 

LibertyMom

Senior Member
This may clear up some of my confusion --there are different sizes.


The TARS program uses two different sizes of aerostats, categorized by volume. The 275,000 cubic foot, or 275K, aerostat is 186 feet long and 62.5 feet in diameter with a fin span of 68.6 feet. The 420,000 cubic foot, or 420K, aerostat is 208.5 feet long and 69.5 feet in diameter with a fin span of 75.5 feet. These aerostats can rise up to 15,000 feet mean sea level, while tethered by a single nylon and polyethylene constructed cable. The normal operating altitude varies by site, but the norm is approximately 12,000 feet MSL. Aerostat power is developed by an on-board, 400 Hertz generator. The aerostat also carries a 100-gallon diesel fuel tank. All systems, to include the generator are controlled via an aerostat telemetry link.
 

AustinPSD

Inactive
AustinPSD, do I understand correctly that both the photo you posted and the Lockheed one DozDoats posted are of the same aerostat aircraft? Or at least something very similar? And that these are likely what is shown in the article I posted about aerostats being deployed in DC? But the aerostats discussed in the link to the thread about TARS are a different type altogether? something much larger and less likely to be transported across the country?

The two photographs represent two different systems implementations, but they are conceptually the same. The PTDS system in DozDoats photograph is transportable/mobile - the mooring tower and recovery systems are vehicle-based, and the support components are containerized. The TARS system is fixed, and uses either the 275K cu. ft. aerostat, or the 410K cu. ft. aerostat. Both versions of the TARS installations use the same mooring tower. The differences between the TARS aerostats are payload and payload capacity - the larger version has a longer-range and more sophisticated radar and other sensors.
 

LibertyMom

Senior Member
So it would appear that the aerostats mentioned in the op are probably related to Athena, the Raytheon system Nightdriver posted about in the TARS thread. And it's just a coincidence that TARS is folding at the same time this is being deployed in DC? There's presumably no shared equipment or personnel between the two. Just a shifting of focus from south to east? Even though O says we're pivoting toward the Pacific?

Of course China is looking at property in the Azores, I understand.
 
Last edited:

tanstaafl

Has No Life - Lives on TB
A few weeks ago I saw this link at Bloomberg TV and thought it looked very cool since I really like airships. The short video (after a commercial you can't skip) shows at least two different airships, one of which has flown and another which is just starting ground tests (the latter is the Worldwide Aeros vehicle).

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/a-gi...-future-of-flight-fwQl8D1ZSjWwx5lNNvHOvg.html

Nobody talks about it much, but from what I understand the reason the Hindenburg was using hydrogen instead of helium was because the US (I think far and away the world's leading source of the stuff) wouldn't sell helium to the Nazis.

Also, I understand these days that you can take tourist blimp rides in San Francisco. I heard they are based in the old monster blimp hangers at the NASA Ames Research Center (or very nearby).
 

FarmerJohn

Has No Life - Lives on TB
At 1.8 mile up it can be taken down by a common hunting rifle and seeing how it's firing almost at 90 degree up just bore sight it on a tripod.

The operators will take a dim view of that.

IIRC the surveillance blimps in Afghanistan get hit all the time without being brought down. They're left up for long periods then brought down for maintenance. With 100 gallons of diesel for the generator, they can stay up for a long while. There are a bunch of competing military blimp and drone systems, some tethered like TARS, others free-flying.
 

joannita

Veteran Member
saw something like this is Puerto Rico several years ago. watching for illegal immigrants crosing from the DR I suspect
 

Mountain Man

Senior Member
IIRC the surveillance blimps in Afghanistan get hit all the time without being brought down. They're left up for long periods then brought down for maintenance. With 100 gallons of diesel for the generator, they can stay up for a long while. There are a bunch of competing military blimp and drone systems, some tethered like TARS, others free-flying.

They are shot down all the time and they also crash a lot being retrieved. The power systems are external to the envelope in a "gondola". The only thing on the inside is the balonet which helps control the rise and descent.
The company I work for builds and repairs the PTDS airship.
If you find the above airships interesting look up LEM-V, it's a fairly large airship that had it's test flight last year in NJ.
 
Top