Monday, March 3, 2014

The New Flying Fortress

The troubles of transporting large amounts of supplies over vast distances to far reaching military operations have plagued logisticians since the beginning of warfare.  In past times, carts and wagons could only carry a small amount of supplies and required large amounts of resources to support the horses that pulled them. Soldiers can only carry so much on their backs. In the current age, trucks, ships, and especially cargo planes require large amounts of fuel, maintenance, and support structures to function. In other words, such mediums for transportation are not incredibly efficient, at least compared to an emerging technology,

The airship in its hangar at CardingtonThe issues stated above, and many more, could be addressed with the HAV 304: the worlds largest airship currently being built in Great Britain. While it's not a very aesthetically pleasing beast, this new airframe boasts some very serious statistics. It has the capability of carrying up to 50 tons of equipment/supplies in it's cargo bays. With this cargo load, it is 70% more efficient on fuel than a traditional cargo plane. The selling point is that it can fly for up to 5 days straight without the need for in-air-refueling. It also does not require a landing strip in order to take off or land, and can land on virtually any surface (to include water). Exactly how is it capable of doing this?

The HAV (Hybrid Air Vehicle) gets sixty percent of its lift from the large helium-filled chambers that the cockpit and cargo bays hang from, much like a traditional airship. The difference with this airship is that the hull/helium chambers act as a hydrofoil, creating the other 40% of the lift capability. It can operate in nearly any temperature range and will continue to fly for a reasonably long period of time if its hull is penetrated(a great war zone capability).

The U.S. Military already purchased the first aircraft three years ago and put it through testing and use but abandoned the project due to the large initial investment cost for the new prototype vehicle (and a shrinking budget).

An illustration of HAV's Airlander airship When the vehicle becomes producible in large quantities in upcoming years, it could have a serious impact on the military logistics world. In regards to the G-T-S-R framework with which we analyze much of the logistical world, the HAV could have significant impacts on the transport, sustain, and redeploy realms. The simple act of transporting our supplies over long distances would become much more efficient without having to worry about mid-air refueling or maintaining refueling bases. In cases where our forces are deploying to a region with no large airport infrastructures, this airframe would allow logistics units to transport large amounts of supply until airstrips for cargo planes could be built. Had this capability existed in the early 1990's, operations like Desert Storm might have been able to start much earlier.

The ability for this transport airframe to land on water also fits in perfectly with the U.S. military's web of prepositioned supply stocks floating in various oceans around the world. Such stocks could be relocated much faster and in larger quantities than before. It would also create the need for fewer modes of transport as it would be able to carry supplies from stocks directly to sustainment bases in the theater of conflict.

These are just a few of the possibilities that the Airlander HAV presents to the military logistics world. It is a bold product that tackles traditional and new challenges with transporting supplies, sustaining forces in conflict, and re-deploying them to the far reaches of the globe. 

2 comments:

  1. I wonder what the maximum carrying capacity of such an aircraft would be? I doubt it would serve in a rapid deployment role like the C-17s, but it would also fall short of the carrying capacity of large cargo ships. Is this technology viable when trying to balance aircraft size, number of aircraft, and speed of deployment? I don't have any numbers, but to me it seems like the Air Force and the Navy might be a little more efficient than trying to utilize a relatively slow and cargo-light transport vehicle.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It would be interesting to calculate how long it would take to get the HAV integrated into our logistics in a large scale war where it may be needed. Some of the challenges include the time to build these HAV's, the time to train pilots/operators to fly them, the time to train load masters to load equipment on them, as well as training a maintenance staff to the specific specifications of the HAV. It's a very interesting concept though. These definitely seem to add efficiency to our military's strategic mobility. I agree with Rico though, that the C-17's would be the first responders. These HAV's move much slower so they would work well if you know what supplies are needed well ahead of time.

    ReplyDelete