World's longest aircraft takes disaster relief to new heights
reuters.com
reuters.com
Looks as if the Airlander's good for about 100 mph from this:
http://www.infotales.com/airlander-the-largest-airship-in-th...
So while "disaster relief" is a good use for this thing, rapid response is not. It's in for the long haul - you set up in a neighboring city and use it to ferry goods back and forth. But by the time it arrives, the existing disaster-relief structure may have more conventional approaches to shipping in goods/personnel (rail/train/ships/runways)
... this thing really seems to be a solution looking for a problem. If the technology could be made cheap, I could see the worth of a low fuel-to-weight ratio for air-freight in servicing remote areas (places above the arctic circle come to mind) but that's a mass-produced fleet of flying trucks, not a lone relief ship.
When you're talking about the difference between getting supplies to a region that's cut off from the rest of the world, even a 10km or 100km haul can be hugely useful, and the airship can cover that distance in 6 - 60 minutes.
I would not want to see this in bad weather, either strong thunderstorms or winter conditions. Having seen so many proposals time and time again I am still trying to figure out what need they latched onto? It changes each time, disaster relief just sounds better. The issue there is, how long would it take to get to a disaster area? Staying time isn't the issue.
The US Army cancelled the contract last year.