With a deck size of over an acre it would be very easy to accomadate enough passangers to allow for travel cost that match or perhaps come in less than that of a traditional aricraft

As for parachutes I did not see any on my last flight to Russia or on the return trip so there would be no difference here

Emergency landing would seem to me to be much easier to accomidate than say a 747 which requires something like a two mile runway - this thing could land at many private runways as well as many open fields - with the possibility of taking off again - try that in a 747

Cross winds could be a problem however, someone with more knowledge of the ships aerodynamics would have to answer that - although I’m willing to bet there are very practical soulituions

As for fuel conservation - if the ship can carry say twice the passanger load of a 747 with the same fuel comsumption then we have just made it twice as economical to fly, requiring half sa many craft in the air to carry the same amount of passangers - sounds like good savings to me

Modern materials and technology, radar, geo-sats, etc.., can all be combined to offer an alternative, SAFE transport method. Every drop of fossil fuel we use is a one-way trip closer to exhaustion (if we don’t cook ourselves out of the running first).

Airships can be repaired in-flight (when’s the last time you saw THAT done on a 747?). Current and near-term regenerative fuel cell technology can present a near or actual closed-loop energy system.

I just wish I had MORE disposable funds- ’cause I’d be putting the major portion of it into LTA construction….

“Up Ship!” anybody???

Also because airships rarely fly above 17,000 feet engines could operate on biofuels rather than kerosene.

Normally biofuel is not an option because it gells at low temperatures, but it would not affect this craft below 12,000ft.

It’s fuel economics alone make it very promising

I am concerned with how this will handle in cross winds or heavy weather. Even though we have decent weather forecasts now and should be able to route this around bad weather, what happens if this gets trapped in an area where it can’t escape. Can it survive on the ground? Will a hanger be needed? etc.

While this does allow point to point transport of goods to remote locations. Admitably there will always be some demand for remote access, I don’t think it has the capacity to handle LARGE counts of goods. Maybe two containers worth. Will this be a cost effective amount or will it be regulated to special needs. (Check passenger count if you think this will handle large weight, Light bulky things are easy, but a large amount of heavy things probably not)

I like the idea of transportable services. Hospitals and such. Things that are mostly empty space. I think libraries will bulk too much to be transportable unless they are reduced to mostly electronic form, but a moving laboratory could be very useful.

Mobile Command centers and assistance centers are also a good use.
Think Katrina. Aid could be dropped right where it is needed. The people directing the recovery can hover over where they are needed without leaving their command infrastructure.

Mobile radio centers for places where services are out. It’s in the air so it has a large line of sight.

Passenger use, probably not. Maybe for the private jet set. However, If the price was close to that of normal economy air fair, I would chose this even though it is slower. I would enjoy the ability to move around and the space per passenger. While not overweight, I am a large person and my shoulders are wider than the space allowed in normal economy seats. Not to mention leg room. I’ll build in the extra day for the travel.