"Oh the humanity!" No, wait.. What?

that has to be one of the shittiest looking aircraft I have ever seen.

I have no idea why someone would think it was safe.

What's worse is that someone died as a result of this stupidity. I can't imagine many engineers of note would say that was structurally sound at all.

So, you want to attach a zeppelin to a metal patchwork connected to four helicopters without their tails? I cannot imagine a better idea in all of the world's history. Let's do that.

Why decommissioned helicopters?

[redacted]

"Destroyed in Seconds: Because the FCC won't let you title a program "Shit Blows Up".

If they didn't have morons designing the thing, it would've been fine. The recent increase in HAA (high altitude airships) is really promising, so long as they don't hire these guys to design them.

How can you even look at that thing and think "Yeah, this is a good idea."?

Four parts helicopter to one part blimp? I wouldn't call that thing a blimp.

I think you're all being a bit judgemental. It just needs a few more helicopters without tails on that baby.

It's crappy engineering like this that effectively killed one of the most brilliant concept in aviation. Blimps are without question, -the- most efficient design for heavy airlifting. No fuel wasted on lift makes them remarkably cost-effective. But letting designers do idiotic things like use hydrogen as the lifting gas (instead of the non-flammable helium, and/or paint the body with thermite, or build some ridiculous scaffold to hold four partial helicopters has made it so nobody will ever seriously consider them again.

WTF? Looks like something on There, I Fixed it. Calling that a "freak disaster" is like calling LiLo's drinking "social drinking".

Actually, I am looking for rich singles and sexy beauties! Unfortunately, I'm also a millionaire, so that rules me out. But thanks for the heads up, sexygaga.

>> ^syncron:

Why decommissioned helicopters?


No commissioned helicopter (in it's right mind) would participate in something like this. But, apparently, someone thought they would success...

Erm, each of those chopper bodies would be the better part of their original empty weight of 7900 lbs (the tail section wouldn't make up more than a quarter of the empty weigh) + fuel...

And they thought that shitty aluminium framwork would handle 4...

I like the "unexpected vibrations" from 4 separate MacGyvered nacelles...

you guys are talking trash, but who of you would speak against someone who said, "that's pretty good, but let's put four helicopters on it"

[object] + 4 helicopters = holy shit, that thing has four helicopters!

TIMBERRRRRRR!

or I guess BLIMPPPPPPPPP!

Army Surplus Junkheap Owner: What should I do with all these extra helicopters?
"Engineer": I have an idea, *hic* let's put them on a blimp by using a large erector set.
Army Surplus Junkheap Owner: That seems redundant and useless!
"Engineer": Naw, we'll lift lots of wood!
Army Surplus Junkheap Owner: Oh I see, that makes sense.
"Engineer": Yup! Pass the moonshine!
Army Surplus Junkheap Owner: Yeah, let's stop thinkin' so hard and watch more porn.

Looks like an idea straight from my 5 year old's Lego creation!

This makes no sense!!! Why? WHY? Why would anybody build anything like that? Why??!!

Wait... Did he say $40 Million Airship?
$40M for a balloon, some aluminum toothpicks and 4 helicopters from the junkyard?

And they couldn't bother to think through making it structurally sound?

There is no excuse for a project this expensive to not have some proper design put into the Meccano-set they used to create the under-body with! Common, every one of us could see how flimsy that thing was from the start!

This brings a new meaning to roflcopter, plus did I hear right, 40 million dollars spent on that hunk of junk, how the hell do you plan and get approved such a bad design so that you're given 40 million dollars.

>> ^sexygaga:

That's cool!
═════════════════════
552;══════╮
S u g a r B a b y M a t c h．ｃｏｍ
╰════════════════════
552;═════╯
T h e 　b e s t　c l u b　f o r s e e k i n g r i c h s i n g l e s,　a n d s e x y b e a u t i e s,　W h a t ' s t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t i
s t h a t y o u d o n ' t h a v e t o b e a m i l l i o n a i r e, b u t y o u
c a n m e e t o n e.
I believe you will success there since thousands of singles, include me, have found true love there.


I found true love -- it works!

I was expecting one of the copters to sling a blade or break off and go up into the blimp. I mean....the blimp is holding the weight of the undercarriage up so why wouldn't you put some protection there to keep the blades from slinging things into it.

And yeah it didn't look real stable, but was expecting the failure to come from the balloon being popped and deflating down into the blades of the remaining blenders below it.

I'm usually not one for superstition, but maybe don't do anything with blimps at Lakehurst anymore. Just a thought.

Duuuur.

*eia

Adding video to channels (Eia) - requested by gwiz665.

Here's the Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piasecki_PA-97

From the video I got the impression that this was the first test flight, but apparently not. Also the entire contraption was controlled from the left-rear helicopter. It seems in one of the shots you can see a pilot in that helicopter being violently thrown around.

"...killing one of the pilots" ...leads me to believe there were more than one pilot.
I don't know why, but I was imagining one in each copter...
>> ^rychan:

Here's the Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piasecki_PA-97
From the video I got the impression that this was the first test flight, but apparently not. Also the entire contraption was controlled from the left-rear helicopter. It seems in one of the shots you can see a pilot in that helicopter being violently thrown around.

*ring ring*

"hello planes? its blimps. you win!"

>> ^Sagemind:

"...killing one of the pilots" ...leads me to believe there were more than one pilot.
I don't know why, but I was imagining one in each copter...
>> ^rychan:
Here's the Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piasecki_PA-97
From the video I got the impression that this was the first test flight, but apparently not. Also the entire contraption was controlled from the left-rear helicopter. It seems in one of the shots you can see a pilot in that helicopter being violently thrown around.



Yeah I found that phrasing odd as well. It does definitely imply multiple pilots. But if only one pilot is operating the thing, it seems idiotic to put more test pilots at risk. But that seems to be par for this course.

I wonder what the engineers behind this think. Maybe management forced them into the ridiculous situation.

I for one thought it was a good idea. It didn't work out, but if it did you'd all be saying "Wow, cool, upvote!"

It was worth a shot.

*length=2:11

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 2:11 - length declared by blutruth.