Hacker News Reader

Comment by hellbannedguy | Hacker News Reader

This has been on here a few days ago.

I didn't want to say anything, but have been thinking about the payload. I belive it's 675 lbs.

That is not much. A truck can deliver thousands of pounds. (I have weight on my mind because I have to pick up a 800 lb mill, and bring it home in one piece.)

It might make sense in Alaska delivering small amounts of material though, but not near power lines.

View on HN

The idea is they aren't delivering to houses directly, they're moving packages between shipping facilities. So, they can presumably having landing pads on either side that aren't near power lines.

675 pounds isn't much, but if you have a high-priority delivery that's not very heavy it might make a lot of sense. Especially in remote places; they're particularly interested in serving places that are currently served by planes and helicopters, like remote locations in Alaska.

Yup, this is basically it. It's impossible to compete with a truck that's fully loaded, but there are tons of short middle mile trips where trucks aren't fully loaded (LTL or less-than-truckload freight). This type of freight is surprisingly inefficient, particularly in low density areas.

It's very easy to compete with a truck in some areas of Alaska: they simply aren't reachable by road!

If freight has to be brought in either by boat or by plane, an autonomous blimp suddenly sounds like a great alternative.

Except if the weather conditions force you to delay the shipment.

...which can happen with planes and boats too.

Here's their take on the inherent tradeoffs of various transportation options in inclement weather:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28278843

I wonder how much the airship itself will cost at scale. Since their plan is to be autonomous, and energy costs will be low, it seems the economics of this depend on the cost of the airship and maintenance.

Put differently, if they’re cheap enough you could just buy 100 and ship 67,500 lbs a day.

Or to be put evem more differently, 100 airships could ship less than 2 40-foot shipping containers. (At least according to https://www.technogroupusa.com/size-and-weight-limit-laws/ , though I suspect density would be the limiting factor.)

Your link says a 40' container weighs 20,000kg. The Hindenburg alone could lift 232,000kg [1].

Bouyant needs to go bigger.

[1] https://erik-engheim.medium.com/calculating-lifting-capacity...

No. It had 232 tons of bouyancy. Most of that was taken up by its own mass. The amount it could lift, its payload, was a tiny fraction of that amount. Wikipedia says it could lift aprox 10,000kg. Roughly the 5% payload ratio of a typical space launch today.

A FH can put 63,000kg to low Earth orbit. A delta 4 heavy 28,000.

Not sure where your 200,000kg “typical” comes from, even Saturn V, SLS and Starship aren’t 200t.

For those wondering:

Starship is "promissing" 100t [1] but targeting 150t reusable and 250t expendable [2], Saturn V was 140t [3], SLS 95 (block 1)/135 (block2) tons [4].

It's not clear we will ever see starship launch without an attempt to recover the booster stage, but at least in theory it's a 200t size vehicle.

[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1423677217133957127

[2] https://www.spacex.com/media/starship_users_guide_v1.pdf

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System

Ratio. Payload to orbit is about 5% of launch mass.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payload_fraction

What did you mean about not near power lines? As in a safety thing, or that where there a powerline then theres some better option for transport? Like a cargo size hyperloop runing along the powerlines?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com