That’s debatable!

No, no it’s not.

your voice go funny is so impure there is barely any helium in it. (She may have been exaggerating)

read elsewhere its around 5% Helium.

So, exactly how do you imagine that a 30,000 tonne freighter would be able to drop it’s cargo fifteen miles inland after a massive earthquake or tsunami?

err…. How about a couple of Chinooks? Which could be carried by the cargo ship if necessary?

Please, this sort of vehicle has been in use for the best part of a century, it’s fuel consumption is a tiny fraction of any passenger jet,

How many? How successful? There has been numerous man powered flying machines in the last 30 years, doesn’t mean it’s a viable form of transport.
It’s fuel consumption is lower when comparing mpg, what about tonnes per gallon per mile?
What about the cost of the helium?

You cannot defy the the laws of physics. To fly anything will take more energy than moving it on the surface of the earth, so why not use ships? By far the most green form of transport available.

A super rich, aviation obsessed, rock star playing about is not going to solve transport problems!

I speak as a rock fan – the actual quality of Iron Ma’s music is very debateable! Their marketing was superb when they were building the brand, I’ll give them that.

I speak as a rock fan – the actual quality of Iron Ma’s music is very debateable! Their marketing was superb when they were building the brand, I’ll give them that.

Who died and made you the judge of what is “good quality” music? OK, there was a drop in quality around No Prayer for the Dying and the **deep sigh** Blaze Bailey era, but as it happens, they have remained a remarkably consistent band, up to and including The Final Frontier. Bands don’t have the kind of fanbase they have through marketing alone, otherwise they’d be resorting to playing local arts theatres at this stage in their career, like so many of their contemporaries.

Apologies to the OP who probably didn’t expect this to result in a musical debate.

here’s the final model. It was going to happen eventually. I reckon a massive big screen would weigh, err say 1225kg?[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxHmIYLNjig[/video]

In other news Biff Byford has now been inspired to get one of those bicycle rickshaws.

Waderider – Member

Their marketing was superb when they were building the brand, I’ll give them that.

Go to a Maiden gig today, half the crowd weren’t born when they were “building the brand”. Like ’em or not they’re undeniably still huge, in fact probably bigger than they ever were in the 80s, so dismissing Dickinson as an “80s music star” is just ridiculous.

Unless you follow the genre you’d be forgiven for thinking they’d disappeared. You might not hear them in the charts, but trust me: they’re still big news. They pull in massive crowds all around the world, and usually make a point of playing in countries that others never go to. In summary, i think the “80s rock star” comment is very misplaced.

Anyway, who cares who’s paying for it?

Looks a bit like a ladies front bottom with the cockpit being the, well, erm you know!

“The current aircraft can carry a load of 1225kg for up to 21 days, but on shorter flights could take up to 5 tonnes. Aircraft still on the drawing board may be able to carry 50 tonnes or more.”

So we can expect the 50 tonne ones to be 7/8 times the volume? That is a lot more area to be caught by winds and try to land somewhere.

I think they are cool for monitoring areas – eg disaster zones. i don’t really see them as being much use for dropping off supplies but more directing relief from above and surveying a situation. To me the payload would be better used for cameras, detectors, powerful lights and the means to power them. Seeing that overhead lighting you up at night would be a great mental boost to those on the ground.