Best read after breathing in some helium
February 19, 2019 8:35 AM Subscribe
Steampunk fans and climate hawks alike want to know: what about airships? After investigating the subject for a time, I've come to a tentative conclusion that airships could indeed play an important role in a zero-carbon transportation infrastructure — but probably not in the form of romantic luxury travel. Big and weird cargo shipping might just be where the airship does best. The return of the airship (slTheWeek)
posted by Fizz at 8:42 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
The hindenburg did not end the zeppelins, aluminum refining and high performance engine machining changed the economic equation, just like it's going to take a truly huge margin in cost to replace container ships and shipping probably has pretty robust margins that would slaughter any serious alternative it it came to that.
posted by sammyo at 8:54 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by sammyo at 8:54 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
The Return of the Airship is an evergreen Wired/Popular Science article. Every 5 years a new company comes out, talks about how efficient they are at heavy loads, and how safe they are with new technologies. The owner gets a glowing profile, they talk up the decommissioned WWII hangars that will serve as their base of operation, and nothing happens.
posted by thecjm at 9:05 AM on February 19, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by thecjm at 9:05 AM on February 19, 2019 [20 favorites]
I have always been fascinated by airships; this book was a favorite of mine as a young teenager (and I recommend it for anyone interested in the subject). It seems like every few years since the 1970's I have seen an article predicting the rebirth of the airship. But much like fusion power, we never seem to quite get there. Being big, slow, and vulnerable to storms doomed airships in the 1930s, and those are intrinsic qualities of airships that may be mitigated with modern technology, but will never go away.
posted by TedW at 9:07 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by TedW at 9:07 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
Yes, as cjn says, this pattern repeats on a regular cycle. I can only assume that there just isn’t the demand for the unique lift capability that airships provide.
posted by pharm at 9:19 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by pharm at 9:19 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Clearly we think alike, because I was going to say we could fill the airships with all the cheap helium we'll generate as a byproduct of nuclear fusion in the glorious someday.
(And for the record I like fusion, and think it has a future, and that the reputation comes from long-term underfunding. Like if we hadn't gone to the Moon, one could point at the last 40 years of space travel and say it'll never happen. But the joke was still too good.)
posted by traveler_ at 9:31 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
(And for the record I like fusion, and think it has a future, and that the reputation comes from long-term underfunding. Like if we hadn't gone to the Moon, one could point at the last 40 years of space travel and say it'll never happen. But the joke was still too good.)
posted by traveler_ at 9:31 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
The difference this time, I think, is that there aren't many low-carbon alternatives for aviation or for container ships, and airships could fill an important niche in this regard.
posted by Cash4Lead at 9:33 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Cash4Lead at 9:33 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Yes, this was the theme of one of John McPhee's early books, The Deltoid Pumpkin Seed (about the AEREON project), way back in 1973. My takeaway from that book is that the technology exists, and is feasible, but that it will take the shock of another major energy crisis to make it actually happen.
posted by verstegan at 9:41 AM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by verstegan at 9:41 AM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
The difference this time, I think, is that there aren't many low-carbon alternatives for aviation or for container ships, and airships could fill an important niche in this regard.
The article closes with "on paper, this all sounds pretty good. But it will require sustained investment and policy attention."
Here's a proposal: a carbon tax as big as three Hindenburgs to lift all the low-carbon alternatives (in all the sectors) into the game.
posted by notyou at 9:45 AM on February 19, 2019
The article closes with "on paper, this all sounds pretty good. But it will require sustained investment and policy attention."
Here's a proposal: a carbon tax as big as three Hindenburgs to lift all the low-carbon alternatives (in all the sectors) into the game.
posted by notyou at 9:45 AM on February 19, 2019
Airships need moorings. An article in this month's Car and Driver about Goodyear's new Zeppelin points out that it is accompanied by a specially-equipped Mack truck with a retractable mast and outriggers. An airship might be able to bring some oversized cargo to a remote location but when it gets there it will need something large and expensive to moor to.
posted by leaper at 9:48 AM on February 19, 2019
posted by leaper at 9:48 AM on February 19, 2019
Have we reached the fiftieth anniversary of the impending return of the airship already?
And to think I was just celebrating the fortieth anniversary of fusion power being less than twenty years away!
Mind you, I'd like to see airships back, because planes suck.
posted by sonascope at 9:51 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
And to think I was just celebrating the fortieth anniversary of fusion power being less than twenty years away!
Mind you, I'd like to see airships back, because planes suck.
posted by sonascope at 9:51 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Airships need moorings.
Or an anchor.
Do airships have, theoretically, enough surface area to support photovoltic cells to drive electric motors to move themselves around?
posted by maxwelton at 10:08 AM on February 19, 2019
Or an anchor.
Do airships have, theoretically, enough surface area to support photovoltic cells to drive electric motors to move themselves around?
posted by maxwelton at 10:08 AM on February 19, 2019
Yeah well, we could also have huge high orbit solar farms beaming unlimited power via microwave transmission and could do away with all terrestrial fossil and nuclear fuel use, why dream so small?
The one thing I always loved about the airship fantasy is how there is always some remote location that desperately needs HUGE equipment. This is such a late 19th century first 3/4 of the 20th boys own adventure idea both in its attractiveness and its blinkered navel gazing. It comes from the idea of a world of frontiers and savages, enlightenment machines traveling out from the center to the unlimited wilderness to wrest wealth from "the very earth upon which we stand."
posted by Pembquist at 10:20 AM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
The one thing I always loved about the airship fantasy is how there is always some remote location that desperately needs HUGE equipment. This is such a late 19th century first 3/4 of the 20th boys own adventure idea both in its attractiveness and its blinkered navel gazing. It comes from the idea of a world of frontiers and savages, enlightenment machines traveling out from the center to the unlimited wilderness to wrest wealth from "the very earth upon which we stand."
posted by Pembquist at 10:20 AM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
But if *we& get airships, how am I supposed to know if I've suddenly been transported into an alternate timeline?
posted by Mogur at 10:26 AM on February 19, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by Mogur at 10:26 AM on February 19, 2019 [13 favorites]
Pembquist: It doesn’t have to be a remote location - there are large bits of machinery being shipped around the place that are an enormous pain to move by road. It’s not completely unreasonable on its face that some of these would actually be cheaper & easier to move by airship.
Presumably either there isn’t enough of these cargoes, or no-one trusts new airship companies with their precious one-off difficult to move items for any newbie airship company to get a toehold in the market, or else (thirdly) the cargos that would actually benefit need huge airships & no one can raise the capital required once they run the numbers. Sometimes there just isn’t an economic path to get to profitability without risking everything up front & that’s a hard sell.
There are a bunch of ideas like this that suffer from returns to scale that make smaller versions uneconomic & larger versions prohibitively expensive without any way to manage the risk that the thing won't work like you expect (and what version 1 object ever does?).
posted by pharm at 10:35 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Presumably either there isn’t enough of these cargoes, or no-one trusts new airship companies with their precious one-off difficult to move items for any newbie airship company to get a toehold in the market, or else (thirdly) the cargos that would actually benefit need huge airships & no one can raise the capital required once they run the numbers. Sometimes there just isn’t an economic path to get to profitability without risking everything up front & that’s a hard sell.
There are a bunch of ideas like this that suffer from returns to scale that make smaller versions uneconomic & larger versions prohibitively expensive without any way to manage the risk that the thing won't work like you expect (and what version 1 object ever does?).
posted by pharm at 10:35 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Saw the heavens fill with commerce, argosies of magic sails, Pilots of the purple twilight dropping down with costly bales;This is a future with form for staying in the future.
posted by clew at 10:54 AM on February 19, 2019
I would like to have these common enough to do minimal-road-damage installations of various things in remote places, even if they're always rare and have to wait for good weather &c.
posted by clew at 10:55 AM on February 19, 2019
posted by clew at 10:55 AM on February 19, 2019
I don't know much about airships, but I know one thing after talking to an airship captain: don't call it a blimp.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:14 AM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:14 AM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Airships, Dirigibles, Zeppelins, & Blimps:
What’s the Difference?
posted by j_curiouser at 11:35 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
What’s the Difference?
posted by j_curiouser at 11:35 AM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
My favorite thing about the SF show Fringe was that in one of the other dimensions, the "other" side, their time-line found a way to make dirigibles feasible as a form of travel/transit.
posted by Fizz at 11:36 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Fizz at 11:36 AM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
They are probably best at about 30-70 miles per hour, to keep drag down. But that's a lot faster than container ships — indeed, shipping companies have themselves taken to slowing their big ships down to 12-14 miles per hour to save on fuel.
Wow....Cargo ships travel 14 miles an hour? HOw long does it take to cross the pacific like that? ....huh...~15 days. That's not bad. I guess that's the advantage of moving 24 hours instead of stopping for the night.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 11:41 AM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Wow....Cargo ships travel 14 miles an hour? HOw long does it take to cross the pacific like that? ....huh...~15 days. That's not bad. I guess that's the advantage of moving 24 hours instead of stopping for the night.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 11:41 AM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
I am a huge LTA fan, and many years ago wrote a business plan for a Seattle-based tourist airship company, intended to use Zeppelin NT dirigibles along the lines of what Airship Ventures was doing with the Eureka out of San Francisco Bay. The idea of starting small with tourist ships is not quite as crazy as it sounds - it is exactly what Eckener did at Lake Constance in the years leading up to WW1, and it's not unreasonable to say that tourist flights are what permitted the development of the wartime zeppelins.
However once I started looking at the operating costs it became clear that a tourist flight business here in Seattle was not viable on a permanent basis. The reason? Weather. Dirigibles are inherently not able to operate in certain kinds of weather. They can stay aloft in violent storms but will be blown terribly off course. They will rise and fall uncontrollably on powerful storm up and down drafts. The majority of dirigibles lost in peacetime service were lost in-flight to storm events, with one US vessel, the Shenandoah, torn apart in midair over Ohio. The NT may be less susceptible to such storm damage due to its' smaller size, I grant. The much larger vessels envisioned for shipping would likely retain this vulnerability, in my opinion.
The upshot of this is that LTA will always be limited in service reliability by weather events, and for shipping, especially specialty shipping, date-certain is a primary consideration. After looking at this quite seriously over several years I concluded that LTA as a mode of transport is quite likely to always remain a niche mode. To my disappointment.
posted by mwhybark at 11:43 AM on February 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
However once I started looking at the operating costs it became clear that a tourist flight business here in Seattle was not viable on a permanent basis. The reason? Weather. Dirigibles are inherently not able to operate in certain kinds of weather. They can stay aloft in violent storms but will be blown terribly off course. They will rise and fall uncontrollably on powerful storm up and down drafts. The majority of dirigibles lost in peacetime service were lost in-flight to storm events, with one US vessel, the Shenandoah, torn apart in midair over Ohio. The NT may be less susceptible to such storm damage due to its' smaller size, I grant. The much larger vessels envisioned for shipping would likely retain this vulnerability, in my opinion.
The upshot of this is that LTA will always be limited in service reliability by weather events, and for shipping, especially specialty shipping, date-certain is a primary consideration. After looking at this quite seriously over several years I concluded that LTA as a mode of transport is quite likely to always remain a niche mode. To my disappointment.
posted by mwhybark at 11:43 AM on February 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
So for no reason that I can articulate, I feel like these wouldn't work well in very cold weather (even though in the His Dark Materials Trilogy, they're definitely used near the north pole). I feel like it has something to do with how balloons tend to shrivel in the cold. Do these work in cold weather?
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 11:46 AM on February 19, 2019
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 11:46 AM on February 19, 2019
Pembquist: It doesn’t have to be a remote location - there are large bits of machinery being shipped around the place that are an enormous pain to move by road. It’s not completely unreasonable on its face that some of these would actually be cheaper & easier to move by airship.
Please don't misinterpret my tone to be fighty but I have to disagree. I admit the figure is from Wikipedia but the Hindenburg had a useful lift of 22,000 lbs and would doubtless cost a fortune to recreate and build infrastructure for. An Erickson Air Crane,(a venerable heavy lift helicopter,) has a payload of 25,000 lbs and can operate in winds that would destroy a dirigible. Maybe you could come up with some hybrid creature like this (warning fatal crash footage) but unless there is a HUGE financial incentive around carbon I don't think an LTA Heavy Lift aircraft is ever going to be financially practical and frankly I think it would probably be just plane impractical. Put the Pentagon on it maybe.
I personally am guilty of the kind of extravagant thinking that airship enthusiasts fall prey to, (hell I have been a lighter than air enthusiast,) as an example I once was doing an excavation and part of the work involved a convoluted part that the excavator couldn't reach, in the time I spent maneuvering some conveyor belts into place the work was 2/3 done by 3 guys with shovels and a wheel barrow.
posted by Pembquist at 12:05 PM on February 19, 2019 [5 favorites]
Please don't misinterpret my tone to be fighty but I have to disagree. I admit the figure is from Wikipedia but the Hindenburg had a useful lift of 22,000 lbs and would doubtless cost a fortune to recreate and build infrastructure for. An Erickson Air Crane,(a venerable heavy lift helicopter,) has a payload of 25,000 lbs and can operate in winds that would destroy a dirigible. Maybe you could come up with some hybrid creature like this (warning fatal crash footage) but unless there is a HUGE financial incentive around carbon I don't think an LTA Heavy Lift aircraft is ever going to be financially practical and frankly I think it would probably be just plane impractical. Put the Pentagon on it maybe.
I personally am guilty of the kind of extravagant thinking that airship enthusiasts fall prey to, (hell I have been a lighter than air enthusiast,) as an example I once was doing an excavation and part of the work involved a convoluted part that the excavator couldn't reach, in the time I spent maneuvering some conveyor belts into place the work was 2/3 done by 3 guys with shovels and a wheel barrow.
posted by Pembquist at 12:05 PM on February 19, 2019 [5 favorites]
I feel like these wouldn't work well in very cold weather
high altitude reduces the lift potential of the gas, although I forget the specific physics at work. I think that is more an effect of lowered atmosphic density than temperature, though. Cold can also cause ice buildup on hulls, increasing weight. There are ways around this, iirc.
during the war the last and largest bombing zeps were built to fly primarily at night and at very high altitudes. Their immense size became part of the design parameters for the ocean-crossing postwar ships. Size increases the volume of lifting gas which increases the operational ceiling of the ship. For the interwar builders and designers, size also meant they were designing away from hydrogen and toward helium, which has a lower bouyancy than hydrogen. At least some of the famous German ships of the 30s were designed to use helium but the Nazi seizure of power led the US, which had (has?) a monopoly on helium, to restrict exports of the gas as a strategic good.
Polar and mountain overflights are a couple of the challenges that peacetime dirigibles found most difficult. The US dirigibles were occasionally asked to fly above their designed height ceiling just to get over passes in mountain ranges, and Umberto Nobile led a polar expedition that was lost over Antarctica.
posted by mwhybark at 12:10 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
high altitude reduces the lift potential of the gas, although I forget the specific physics at work. I think that is more an effect of lowered atmosphic density than temperature, though. Cold can also cause ice buildup on hulls, increasing weight. There are ways around this, iirc.
during the war the last and largest bombing zeps were built to fly primarily at night and at very high altitudes. Their immense size became part of the design parameters for the ocean-crossing postwar ships. Size increases the volume of lifting gas which increases the operational ceiling of the ship. For the interwar builders and designers, size also meant they were designing away from hydrogen and toward helium, which has a lower bouyancy than hydrogen. At least some of the famous German ships of the 30s were designed to use helium but the Nazi seizure of power led the US, which had (has?) a monopoly on helium, to restrict exports of the gas as a strategic good.
Polar and mountain overflights are a couple of the challenges that peacetime dirigibles found most difficult. The US dirigibles were occasionally asked to fly above their designed height ceiling just to get over passes in mountain ranges, and Umberto Nobile led a polar expedition that was lost over Antarctica.
posted by mwhybark at 12:10 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
I love the airship idea but it's really hard to come up with a meaningful application. (h/t to Pembquist, in all my nerd-dom I never connected the airship imagery in genre literature to pulp lit's colonial roots.)
They are talking about large airships carrying 500 tons. For comparison, a medium containership carries 25,000 tons. Containerships + railroads are enormously efficient for distributing large volumes of goods. If you can convince people to give up overnight shipping maybe they replace airplanes but that's the only way they make a dent in carbon.
posted by mark k at 12:17 PM on February 19, 2019
They are talking about large airships carrying 500 tons. For comparison, a medium containership carries 25,000 tons. Containerships + railroads are enormously efficient for distributing large volumes of goods. If you can convince people to give up overnight shipping maybe they replace airplanes but that's the only way they make a dent in carbon.
posted by mark k at 12:17 PM on February 19, 2019
Put the Pentagon on it maybe
Funny you should mention that, in-atmosphere long-duration wide-area surveillance platforms for, ahem, "security" use are one of the traditional potential uses for LTA. At this point I think drones have pretty well filled that niche, although I seem to recall seeing something (an Amazon patent?) covering the idea of using a stationkeeping permalofted LTA platform as a drone hive over urban centers, such that your drone swarm leaves from and returns to the LTA hive at altitude.
posted by mwhybark at 12:19 PM on February 19, 2019
Funny you should mention that, in-atmosphere long-duration wide-area surveillance platforms for, ahem, "security" use are one of the traditional potential uses for LTA. At this point I think drones have pretty well filled that niche, although I seem to recall seeing something (an Amazon patent?) covering the idea of using a stationkeeping permalofted LTA platform as a drone hive over urban centers, such that your drone swarm leaves from and returns to the LTA hive at altitude.
posted by mwhybark at 12:19 PM on February 19, 2019
I don't doubt the technical viability of airships, but it's not clear what economic niche they would inhabit, even in a high carbon tax regime.
Ocean freight could move faster, but doesn't because there's not an economic incentive sufficient to offset the cost of fuel. Big, slow ships are fuel efficient, and that's what the market wants. In previous eras, faster ships were used. It's sort of a cyclic process. The latest iteration was the Maersk B-class, which are all currently mothballed. They were designed to cruise at 29 knots, and can tolerate all but the worst weather.
If there's not an economic incentive to operate a 29 knot cargo ship that already exists and is just sitting around, I question if there's really a demand for airships that would go only slightly faster. (Bear in mind that there's fixed time-costs at either end of the trip for loading/unloading, so even if the airship moved twice as fast, the overall journey probably wouldn't be half the time. And airships are incredibly vulnerable to weather.) The cargo would have to be time-sensitive enough for that travel time improvement to matter, but not so time sensitive that you'd want to just use conventional air freight.
Carbon taxes could create some incentives, but I think there's some real low-hanging fruit to be picked in terms of cleaning up the existing merchant fleet, long before you get to the point of building airships. Changing from bunker fuel to cleaner, more-refined fuels or even natural gas would help. Altering shipping routes from their current straight-line trajectories to take advantage of long-ignored trade winds, and adding parachute sails, would be comparatively trivial.
There are applications for airships/aerostats, particularly as space becomes more crowded and we run out of orbits to just keep tossing satellites into, and the public's hunger for bandwidth grows unabated. (Aerostats seem like a reasonable way to provide next-generation wireless service to rural areas currently served by satellites.) But for heavy-lift transportation, challenging the economic advantage of ocean shipping seems like a tough nut to crack.
posted by Kadin2048 at 12:22 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Ocean freight could move faster, but doesn't because there's not an economic incentive sufficient to offset the cost of fuel. Big, slow ships are fuel efficient, and that's what the market wants. In previous eras, faster ships were used. It's sort of a cyclic process. The latest iteration was the Maersk B-class, which are all currently mothballed. They were designed to cruise at 29 knots, and can tolerate all but the worst weather.
If there's not an economic incentive to operate a 29 knot cargo ship that already exists and is just sitting around, I question if there's really a demand for airships that would go only slightly faster. (Bear in mind that there's fixed time-costs at either end of the trip for loading/unloading, so even if the airship moved twice as fast, the overall journey probably wouldn't be half the time. And airships are incredibly vulnerable to weather.) The cargo would have to be time-sensitive enough for that travel time improvement to matter, but not so time sensitive that you'd want to just use conventional air freight.
Carbon taxes could create some incentives, but I think there's some real low-hanging fruit to be picked in terms of cleaning up the existing merchant fleet, long before you get to the point of building airships. Changing from bunker fuel to cleaner, more-refined fuels or even natural gas would help. Altering shipping routes from their current straight-line trajectories to take advantage of long-ignored trade winds, and adding parachute sails, would be comparatively trivial.
There are applications for airships/aerostats, particularly as space becomes more crowded and we run out of orbits to just keep tossing satellites into, and the public's hunger for bandwidth grows unabated. (Aerostats seem like a reasonable way to provide next-generation wireless service to rural areas currently served by satellites.) But for heavy-lift transportation, challenging the economic advantage of ocean shipping seems like a tough nut to crack.
posted by Kadin2048 at 12:22 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
I don't know guys, after Bonham died I just don't think they can pull it back together. What? Oh, sorry. Move along.
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 12:24 PM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 12:24 PM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
The hindenburg did not end the zeppelins
And somehow it didn't stop the 20+ airship accidents that happened after the Hindenburg but the ratio of successful flights to accidents has to be the lowest possible out of all forms of transportation, even in modern times.
The US Navy lost several airships to nothing more exotic than bad weather. Out of the 5 rigid airships the US Navy built or ran I think only 1 was actually decommissioned - the rest were, as the Navy guys say, "lost".
posted by GuyZero at 12:24 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
And somehow it didn't stop the 20+ airship accidents that happened after the Hindenburg but the ratio of successful flights to accidents has to be the lowest possible out of all forms of transportation, even in modern times.
The US Navy lost several airships to nothing more exotic than bad weather. Out of the 5 rigid airships the US Navy built or ran I think only 1 was actually decommissioned - the rest were, as the Navy guys say, "lost".
posted by GuyZero at 12:24 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
I don't doubt the technical viability of airships
Based on history you should 100% doubt the technical viability of airships.
posted by GuyZero at 12:25 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Based on history you should 100% doubt the technical viability of airships.
posted by GuyZero at 12:25 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Also I want to plug the on-base museum at Moffet Airfield in Mountain View, CA. The US Navy's WW 2 airship program was something that is straight out of an alternative timeline novel.
posted by GuyZero at 12:28 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by GuyZero at 12:28 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Here's the thing: you can ship a TEU [1] from China to LA for about $3,000. A TEU has a maximum permitted weight of 25,000kg counting it's own weight, though not all are filled with stuff that weighs that much. Container ships range from carrying upwards of 14,500 TEU to little ones that only carry up to 1,000.
The "big" airship mentioned in the article might, possibly, carry as many as 25 TEU.
Meaning that you'll need a fleet of 40 of the biggest airships currently under discussion to match even a single one of the very smallest variety of container ships currently in operation.
Unless a freight airship can match that $3,000 per TEU price, or unless we apply a carbon tax to traditional shipping that brings the price per TEU up to the price an airship would need to charge, then airships will remain a cool dream.
I'm not actually sure it's possible to bring the price of ocean shipping up to the level where airships would be competitive. Even passing laws requiring container ships to completely transition away from fossil fuels wouldn't really be enough to make airships competitive as it's expensive, but possible, to switch a container ship over to hydrogen or even batteries.
In China there's already a cargo ship operating short range on batteries, it's only got a 50km range, but it's in operation right this second. The company Port Liner has several electric barges, with more than a 50km range, operating in the Netherlands carrying about 250 TEU each [2]. None of them are ready to displace container ships yet, but it's not entirely unthinkable though a conversion to hydrogen seems more likely in the short term.
The single biggest shipping company on Earth, Dutch based Maersk, has managed to reduce CO2 emissions by over 48% just by improvements to existing tech, not even swapping out fossil fuels for non-carbon energy sources and their stated goal is zero emissions by 2050.
All told, I'm just not seeing a market for cargo airships even if we use a really aggressive carbon tax. I love the concept, but sadly it just doesn't seem to be something that has any economic place in the world.
[1] That's Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, one of those standard sized cargo containers you see at docks, on trains, and on semis being carted around. Long distance bulk shipping tends to be measured in TEU rather than weight.
[2] Also worth noting is that many of Port Liner's barges are autonomous, no human pilot required. Take that Exxon Valdez!
posted by sotonohito at 12:40 PM on February 19, 2019 [11 favorites]
The "big" airship mentioned in the article might, possibly, carry as many as 25 TEU.
Meaning that you'll need a fleet of 40 of the biggest airships currently under discussion to match even a single one of the very smallest variety of container ships currently in operation.
Unless a freight airship can match that $3,000 per TEU price, or unless we apply a carbon tax to traditional shipping that brings the price per TEU up to the price an airship would need to charge, then airships will remain a cool dream.
I'm not actually sure it's possible to bring the price of ocean shipping up to the level where airships would be competitive. Even passing laws requiring container ships to completely transition away from fossil fuels wouldn't really be enough to make airships competitive as it's expensive, but possible, to switch a container ship over to hydrogen or even batteries.
In China there's already a cargo ship operating short range on batteries, it's only got a 50km range, but it's in operation right this second. The company Port Liner has several electric barges, with more than a 50km range, operating in the Netherlands carrying about 250 TEU each [2]. None of them are ready to displace container ships yet, but it's not entirely unthinkable though a conversion to hydrogen seems more likely in the short term.
The single biggest shipping company on Earth, Dutch based Maersk, has managed to reduce CO2 emissions by over 48% just by improvements to existing tech, not even swapping out fossil fuels for non-carbon energy sources and their stated goal is zero emissions by 2050.
All told, I'm just not seeing a market for cargo airships even if we use a really aggressive carbon tax. I love the concept, but sadly it just doesn't seem to be something that has any economic place in the world.
[1] That's Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, one of those standard sized cargo containers you see at docks, on trains, and on semis being carted around. Long distance bulk shipping tends to be measured in TEU rather than weight.
[2] Also worth noting is that many of Port Liner's barges are autonomous, no human pilot required. Take that Exxon Valdez!
posted by sotonohito at 12:40 PM on February 19, 2019 [11 favorites]
I'm still waiting for personal dirigibles to get me over the 405 every day.
and to start a band called Personal Dirigible
posted by davejay at 12:49 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
and to start a band called Personal Dirigible
posted by davejay at 12:49 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
I'm still waiting for personal dirigibles to get me over the 405 every day.
All you need is a lawn chair and a bunch of balloons.
Oh, you also want to get down?
posted by GuyZero at 12:49 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
All you need is a lawn chair and a bunch of balloons.
Oh, you also want to get down?
posted by GuyZero at 12:49 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Airships would be very useful for transporting and installing wind turbine blades and masts. Currently blade length and mast diameter is limited because they must be transportable by road. Both parts are pretty light for their volume, so they should be well within an airship's cargo weight capacity.
An airship with precision station keeping could be used to erect turbines on site. This avoids the need to use massive cranes. We wouldn't need to build heavy duty roads for installation either, thus preserving more agricultural land.
posted by monotreme at 12:53 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
An airship with precision station keeping could be used to erect turbines on site. This avoids the need to use massive cranes. We wouldn't need to build heavy duty roads for installation either, thus preserving more agricultural land.
posted by monotreme at 12:53 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Oh, you also want to get down?
That’s what the BB gun is for.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 12:54 PM on February 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
That’s what the BB gun is for.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 12:54 PM on February 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
That’s what the BB gun is for.
Oops! Dropped it!
posted by Pembquist at 12:55 PM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
Oops! Dropped it!
posted by Pembquist at 12:55 PM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
IIRC, global shipping is very low margin due to it being a commodity business. It isn’t as cool as a zeppelin, but I expect we’ll see Magnus-effect sails being retrofitted to cargo ships to reduce operational costs.
I know the fuel oil is very dirty, but isn’t a container ship actually quite efficient carbon-wise?
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:01 PM on February 19, 2019
I know the fuel oil is very dirty, but isn’t a container ship actually quite efficient carbon-wise?
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:01 PM on February 19, 2019
We don't need another Hindenburg. The Republican Party has already supplied us with more than enough flaming Nazi gasbags.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:07 PM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:07 PM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
frankly I think it would probably be just plane impractical.
Flagged for crimes against humanity.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:27 PM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
Flagged for crimes against humanity.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:27 PM on February 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
Big Al 8000 Well, the clickbait stories about cargo ships emitting more pollution than X million cars are, when you drill through the BS, purely about non-CO2 emissions. And yes, bunker fuel is absolutely filthy compared to the fuel in a car. Several ports are mandating that ships stop burning it as they approach and either enter port on some other fuel or be towed by tugs with other fuel simply due to the soot issue.
But container ships are also a significant source of CO2. THey're estimated to account for around 4% of global emissions. It takes a lot of energy to get something as massive as a full container ship moving and keep it moving, and that means burning a lot of fuel.
On the gripping hand, they are remarkably efficient when considered per gram of CO2 per tonne per kilogram. Moving one tonne one kilometer by container ship will produce between 10 to 40 grams of CO2. Moving one tonne one kilometer by truck will produce between 60 and 150 grams of CO2. And by plane it's about 500 grams.
So the reason container ships produce as much CO2 as they do isn't because they're inefficient, but because they move a **LOT** of freight. Container ships account for around 60% of all international freight moved.
Interestingly this does make them a good point for reducing emissions even further, or eliminating them entirely. There are only around 55,000 cargo ships planetwide, and of those only around 11,000 are bulk carriers.
Retrofitting and upgrading 11,000 container ships is going to be a simpler and cheaper exercise than retrofitting and upgrading the estimated 15.5 million cargo trucks in the USA alone, never mind upgrading the rest of the world's trucks.
posted by sotonohito at 1:46 PM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
But container ships are also a significant source of CO2. THey're estimated to account for around 4% of global emissions. It takes a lot of energy to get something as massive as a full container ship moving and keep it moving, and that means burning a lot of fuel.
On the gripping hand, they are remarkably efficient when considered per gram of CO2 per tonne per kilogram. Moving one tonne one kilometer by container ship will produce between 10 to 40 grams of CO2. Moving one tonne one kilometer by truck will produce between 60 and 150 grams of CO2. And by plane it's about 500 grams.
So the reason container ships produce as much CO2 as they do isn't because they're inefficient, but because they move a **LOT** of freight. Container ships account for around 60% of all international freight moved.
Interestingly this does make them a good point for reducing emissions even further, or eliminating them entirely. There are only around 55,000 cargo ships planetwide, and of those only around 11,000 are bulk carriers.
Retrofitting and upgrading 11,000 container ships is going to be a simpler and cheaper exercise than retrofitting and upgrading the estimated 15.5 million cargo trucks in the USA alone, never mind upgrading the rest of the world's trucks.
posted by sotonohito at 1:46 PM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
navy dirigible 'docking' at the empire state building is pretty breathtaking! (and fake ;)
posted by kliuless at 1:49 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by kliuless at 1:49 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Interestingly this does make them a good point for reducing emissions even further, or eliminating them entirely. There are only around 55,000 cargo ships planetwide, and of those only around 11,000 are bulk carriers.
Flettner Rotor-Fitted Ultramax Wins Ship of the Year Award -"The Flettner Rotor system, designed and installed by British company Anemoi Marine Technologies, utilises the aerodynamic phenomenon known as the Magnus Effect to provide useful propulsion to the vessel by harnessing wind power to enhance vessel efficiency, reducing net fuel consumption and lowering harmful exhaust emissions."
Shipbuilding Contract Signed for Unmanned, Zero-Emission Container Ship 'Yara Birkeland' -"The world's first autonomous and electric container ship is one step closer to reality with a shipbuilding contract now in signed and sealed for the vessel."
Maersk Containership Loads World Record 19,038 TEUs in Malaysia - "The accomplishment marked the first time a ship has surpassed the once-mythical 19,000 TEU mark."
posted by kliuless at 2:06 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Flettner Rotor-Fitted Ultramax Wins Ship of the Year Award -"The Flettner Rotor system, designed and installed by British company Anemoi Marine Technologies, utilises the aerodynamic phenomenon known as the Magnus Effect to provide useful propulsion to the vessel by harnessing wind power to enhance vessel efficiency, reducing net fuel consumption and lowering harmful exhaust emissions."
Shipbuilding Contract Signed for Unmanned, Zero-Emission Container Ship 'Yara Birkeland' -"The world's first autonomous and electric container ship is one step closer to reality with a shipbuilding contract now in signed and sealed for the vessel."
Maersk Containership Loads World Record 19,038 TEUs in Malaysia - "The accomplishment marked the first time a ship has surpassed the once-mythical 19,000 TEU mark."
posted by kliuless at 2:06 PM on February 19, 2019 [2 favorites]
Airships would be great for moving the new SpaceX rocket, which will be too big to travel on roads. Electricity generating windmills, at least on land, are also limited by what will fit on an 18 wheeler and/or train.
posted by Ansible at 2:23 PM on February 19, 2019
posted by Ansible at 2:23 PM on February 19, 2019
Umberto Nobile led a polar expedition that was lost over Antarctica.
ahh, that is, by Antarctic I of course meant Arctic. Your humble &c regrets the error &c &c
posted by mwhybark at 2:54 PM on February 19, 2019
ahh, that is, by Antarctic I of course meant Arctic. Your humble &c regrets the error &c &c
posted by mwhybark at 2:54 PM on February 19, 2019
What I want to get into is personal dirigibles. Think kayaking, but at treetop level. Just drifting along…
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:24 PM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:24 PM on February 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
Blades for wind turbines are moved by truck despite being almost as long as a 747 at 66.5 meters(219 feet). No need for an airship.
posted by leaper at 5:44 PM on February 19, 2019
posted by leaper at 5:44 PM on February 19, 2019
They clearly are limited by how long a thing will actually fit on the road, though. But I expect assembling them onsite out of shorter segments is probably not out of the question.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:49 PM on February 19, 2019
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:49 PM on February 19, 2019
Turbine blades need to get to remote rural sites. Tight curves on hilly roads limit what length loads can go up those roads. Using airships would allow wind-farms to be installed in less accessible sites.
posted by monotreme at 8:35 PM on February 19, 2019
posted by monotreme at 8:35 PM on February 19, 2019
However blades aren't particularly heavy and so can be transported by a general purpose helicopter.
Airships would probably be wizard for selective logging in sensitive terrain. They do this with helicopters now but it is pretty expensive and the choppers spend quite a bit of time flying back and forth. And the noise disturbs wildlife. An airship could collect many logs on each trip and would be a lot quieter. I'd also guess they would also have lower carbon emissions.
posted by Mitheral at 11:45 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
Airships would probably be wizard for selective logging in sensitive terrain. They do this with helicopters now but it is pretty expensive and the choppers spend quite a bit of time flying back and forth. And the noise disturbs wildlife. An airship could collect many logs on each trip and would be a lot quieter. I'd also guess they would also have lower carbon emissions.
posted by Mitheral at 11:45 PM on February 19, 2019 [1 favorite]
US historical use of LTA in logging and the Heli-Stat
posted by mwhybark at 8:07 AM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by mwhybark at 8:07 AM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
US historical use of LTA in logging and the Heli-Stat
Fascinating! How'd that turn out I wonder?
The vast majority of airships ever built failed in-flight. Not every flight. But very, very few airships ended their lives peacefully. There's no mystery here as to why people don't use airships.
posted by GuyZero at 10:50 AM on February 20, 2019
Fascinating! How'd that turn out I wonder?
In a test run of the massive airship on July 1, 1986, the Heli-Stat failed in dramatic and spectacular fashion. On the same Lakehurst airfield where the Hindenburg crashed in 1937, the Heli-Stat rose thirty feet off the ground before the right rear helicopter broke loose and the entire craft collapsed into a burning heap. One of the five crew members was killed.Yeah, so not that good then.
The vast majority of airships ever built failed in-flight. Not every flight. But very, very few airships ended their lives peacefully. There's no mystery here as to why people don't use airships.
posted by GuyZero at 10:50 AM on February 20, 2019
Yeah, the inherent problem with airships is that to get the lifting capacity that would make them interesting economically, they need to be really big—particularly if you want to use helium instead of hydrogen. The size means lots of wind loading. You also need the structure containing the lifting gas to be lightweight; if you built it heavily enough to resist high winds, it wouldn't have much lifting capacity left. These conflicting design goals tend to make them very fragile, with unfortunate consequences.
I don't think it's DOA as a concept, and it's worth coming back to as materials science gets better and better. An airship built with 2010s materials is likely to be a lot better than one built with 1930s materials, but I'm still not sure if you can get the strength to be all-weather capable and still have it lift enough to be useful. But maybe with carbon fiber and low-permeability vacuum aerogels or something, it could be done safely.
I personally have it filed in the same bucket as space elevators: there's no law of physics that prohibits it (unlike, say, FTL travel or something), but the engineering involved is beyond current capabilities. In a sane world, it's the sort of thing we'd be spending our military budget on, instead of building expensive things that sit in warehouses until someone cuts them up with a torch and sells them for scrap.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:09 AM on February 20, 2019 [2 favorites]
I don't think it's DOA as a concept, and it's worth coming back to as materials science gets better and better. An airship built with 2010s materials is likely to be a lot better than one built with 1930s materials, but I'm still not sure if you can get the strength to be all-weather capable and still have it lift enough to be useful. But maybe with carbon fiber and low-permeability vacuum aerogels or something, it could be done safely.
I personally have it filed in the same bucket as space elevators: there's no law of physics that prohibits it (unlike, say, FTL travel or something), but the engineering involved is beyond current capabilities. In a sane world, it's the sort of thing we'd be spending our military budget on, instead of building expensive things that sit in warehouses until someone cuts them up with a torch and sells them for scrap.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:09 AM on February 20, 2019 [2 favorites]
A friend of mine calculated the strength and density of an evacuated rock crystal sphere and says it came out plenty strong enough and would float in (your choice based on size) anywhere in the troposphere and even the lower stratosphere. We imagined long-distance heavy freight traveling on these using the winds. And occasionally in a disaster their harnesses would fall off and the sphere would bob up to its density and stay there until recaptured.
So all we need is a novel molecular construction technique! And skyhooks.
posted by clew at 11:54 AM on February 20, 2019
So all we need is a novel molecular construction technique! And skyhooks.
posted by clew at 11:54 AM on February 20, 2019
Fascinating! How'd that turn out I wonder?
In fairness, the Heli-Stat was a deeply insane design, which is what is so fascinating about it. I am not gonna link to videos of the crash because, well, a guy died. But it's literally four Hueys without tail rotors bolted to a surplus Navy blimp, without any crosslinking the lifting rotors at all - that's why there were four pilots. Ridiculously underengineered.
posted by mwhybark at 3:33 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
In fairness, the Heli-Stat was a deeply insane design, which is what is so fascinating about it. I am not gonna link to videos of the crash because, well, a guy died. But it's literally four Hueys without tail rotors bolted to a surplus Navy blimp, without any crosslinking the lifting rotors at all - that's why there were four pilots. Ridiculously underengineered.
posted by mwhybark at 3:33 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
instead of building expensive things that sit in warehouses until someone cuts them up with a torch and sells them for scrap.
Ironically, this describes the fate of the USS Los Angeles, although she was built on the Germans' dime as war reparations.
posted by mwhybark at 3:38 PM on February 20, 2019
Ironically, this describes the fate of the USS Los Angeles, although she was built on the Germans' dime as war reparations.
posted by mwhybark at 3:38 PM on February 20, 2019
Of course, what they'll actually end up getting used for is police surveillance. That and advertising seem to be the two main applications of lighter-than-air craft in the real world.
In short, everything is terrible.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 3:59 PM on February 20, 2019
In short, everything is terrible.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 3:59 PM on February 20, 2019
I guess I'm a little surprised why there isn't an amateur dirigible scene, though. Hot air ballooning is a thing, and you'd think this would be a natural extension of that.
Also, luxury airship cruises. There have got to be some rich people who are into the steampunk thing, right? I'm a bit surprised that Elon Musk doesn't already have his own personal luxury airship. Personal luxury submarines are a thing, so why not dirigibles?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 4:01 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
Also, luxury airship cruises. There have got to be some rich people who are into the steampunk thing, right? I'm a bit surprised that Elon Musk doesn't already have his own personal luxury airship. Personal luxury submarines are a thing, so why not dirigibles?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 4:01 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
In fairness, the Heli-Stat was a deeply insane design
Yeah, I'm sure it was terrible but in some ways he predicted the modern drone/quadcopter. With modern computer control systems a quadcopter that gets extra lift from a gasbag might actually work. Except for it being slow and probably completely uneconomical. And the big question is how it handles in bad weather.
posted by GuyZero at 5:07 PM on February 20, 2019 [3 favorites]
Yeah, I'm sure it was terrible but in some ways he predicted the modern drone/quadcopter. With modern computer control systems a quadcopter that gets extra lift from a gasbag might actually work. Except for it being slow and probably completely uneconomical. And the big question is how it handles in bad weather.
posted by GuyZero at 5:07 PM on February 20, 2019 [3 favorites]
Personal submarines are a thing so why not dirigibles blimps?
Design sensibility?
(there does indeed appear to be a fool's market for personal airships, but they tend not to be dirigibles)
GuyZero, not sure if you read my upthread contribs but we are 100% in agreement on the inherent weather vulnerability of LTA. I haven't ever made the pilgrimage to Moffat but I assure you I will.
posted by mwhybark at 5:12 PM on February 20, 2019
Design sensibility?
(there does indeed appear to be a fool's market for personal airships, but they tend not to be dirigibles)
GuyZero, not sure if you read my upthread contribs but we are 100% in agreement on the inherent weather vulnerability of LTA. I haven't ever made the pilgrimage to Moffat but I assure you I will.
posted by mwhybark at 5:12 PM on February 20, 2019
That's not a luxury blimp though. Also, a luxury dirigible cannot be a blimp by definition, because "blimp" is a very silly word. They must be rigid-body airships, like the Graf Zeppelin.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:16 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:16 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
And yeah… with circa-2019 technology, that Heli-Stat thing sounds way less crazy. Like, I could see it being scaled down to become a drone that can carry a larger-than-usual camera rig with a longer-than-usual flight time. It sounds like the original one was designed very sloppily even by 1980s standards; done right and with current technology, it seems like it could actually work.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:22 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:22 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]
In short, everything is terrible.
A new life awaits you in the offworld colonies!
posted by mwhybark at 1:34 AM on February 21, 2019
A new life awaits you in the offworld colonies!
posted by mwhybark at 1:34 AM on February 21, 2019
I guess I'm a little surprised why there isn't an amateur dirigible scene, though.
I've seen a few people build radio-control airships. I think the newer flight control boards (basically the brains of any modern R/C model) support them as a design.
I don't know if they're much fun to fly outdoors, though. But since the FAA has gone all anti-drone, maybe we'll see more people flying indoors (wherever you can find a large empty building, anyway; maybe domed stadiums when they're not otherwise in use?) and that might lend itself to more interest in lighter-than-air.
There's a sub-hobby of ham radio enthusiasts who do high-altitude balloon launches, but they're not controlled. They just go up until the balloon envelope pops, and then the payload is recovered via a parachute. They fashion themselves "the poor man's space program".
Unrelated: The U.S. Navy K-Type Airship Pilot's Manual, courtesy of the FAA. (I hope the restrictive markings on it are out of date, or I'm probably going down under the Espionage Act, apparently. At least the weather in Guantanamo is nice.)
posted by Kadin2048 at 1:46 PM on February 21, 2019
I've seen a few people build radio-control airships. I think the newer flight control boards (basically the brains of any modern R/C model) support them as a design.
I don't know if they're much fun to fly outdoors, though. But since the FAA has gone all anti-drone, maybe we'll see more people flying indoors (wherever you can find a large empty building, anyway; maybe domed stadiums when they're not otherwise in use?) and that might lend itself to more interest in lighter-than-air.
There's a sub-hobby of ham radio enthusiasts who do high-altitude balloon launches, but they're not controlled. They just go up until the balloon envelope pops, and then the payload is recovered via a parachute. They fashion themselves "the poor man's space program".
Unrelated: The U.S. Navy K-Type Airship Pilot's Manual, courtesy of the FAA. (I hope the restrictive markings on it are out of date, or I'm probably going down under the Espionage Act, apparently. At least the weather in Guantanamo is nice.)
posted by Kadin2048 at 1:46 PM on February 21, 2019
“With China’s help, huge, balloon-like craft could revolutionize air transport. Just don’t call them blimps.” (Bloomberg)
posted by pharm at 6:37 AM on March 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by pharm at 6:37 AM on March 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
sotonohito: "[1] That's Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, one of those standard sized cargo containers you see at docks, on trains, and on semis being carted around. Long distance bulk shipping tends to be measured in TEU rather than weight."
Pedantry: TEUs are used as the unit of measurement because those are the smallest size, but most of the ones you'll actually see are 40 footers.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:39 PM on March 13, 2019
Pedantry: TEUs are used as the unit of measurement because those are the smallest size, but most of the ones you'll actually see are 40 footers.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:39 PM on March 13, 2019
Why Giant Airships Could Be a Trillion Dollar Industry :P
posted by kliuless at 12:34 PM on March 14, 2019
posted by kliuless at 12:34 PM on March 14, 2019
« Older In Case of Emergency, Print Money | “The split between countryside and city...” Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments