[Zaephyr]

Airships, particularly rigid airships (Zeppelins), are massive and it's the mass that becomes a problem. The airship is inflated to a state of neutral buoyancy so it floats and can hang in the sky (cool!) but the mass has to be dealt with when you want to start, stop, or change direction. I believe that the Hindenburg required a ground crew of ~200 to control the airship during landing and mooring. It's also a problem in flying in the vicinity of strong storms.

You also have to maintain the neutral buoyancy as you burn fuel. Zeppelins could use diesel but the preference was for 'blau gas' which had a density close to air, and didn't cause the airship to lighten as it was burned. Maintaining buoyancy also complicates using an airship as a freighter; an offsetting load is needed when making a delivery, otherwise you end up venting your lifting gas.

All that said, if I had the money I'd totally blow it building a Zeppelin-style (and size) airship.

[gozur88]

>I believe that the Hindenburg required a ground crew of ~200 to control the airship during landing and mooring. It's also a problem in flying in the vicinity of strong storms.

The ground handling problems have been solved. You either use directional thrust like Zeppelin NT, or you make the airship a lifting body that's slightly heavier than air, landing it on a runway like an airplane like Airlander 10. Both work.

[chiph]

If they could get the fare down to the equivalent of a business class airline ticket, I'd do it. Even if food + beverages were extra-cost.

> I believe that the Hindenburg required a ground crew of ~200 to control the airship during landing and mooring.

A solution might be to never land. Have a helipad on top of the airship, and have passengers arrive/depart via helicopter (as well as resupply via containers slung under a helicopter).