Is the dream dead?
As noted in comments, they still have specialized applications, which may expand with evolving technology, though helium prices are an issue.
This freaked me out, though:
A dock at the top of the Empire State Building, it was thought, would allow airships like the Graf Zeppelin to fly passengers directly to Midtown Manhattan — where the vessels would “swing in the breeze” while those passengers walked an attached gangplank down to the street below.
“Walk” over a quarter of a mile on a “gangplank” that extended to the street? Not for me. No. Way. In. Hell.
That couldn’t be serious. Ignoring the wind issues at that altitude (that can’t be ignored), maybe mating it to the 86th-floor observation deck with something like a long jetway (I know I wouldn’t want to be looking down), so they could take the elevators, but the notion of walking all the way to the street from that height would be insane, even for the non-acrophobes.
[Update a while later]
Here’s a fascinating account of the history (and yes, they were supposed to embark/debark from the 103rd floor). It was so crazy it never happened.
That can’t be right. I always thought the passengers were supposed to enter the building at the dock and then go down to street level.
I agree. The Empire State Building has elevators after all.
For us acrophobes, that’s not an improvement. Especially if it was an open gangplank, or even a jetway type contraption, it’s still a narrow bridge 1250 feet above the street of uncertain construction and connected to a moving object at one end.
I’m with Rand: No. Way. No. How.
Rand,
I think your latter supposition is the correct one – they would have walked a short gangplank down to the first open platform on the building.
Don’t looks down though……..
Here is a good representation:
http://www.interestingamerica.com/2011-02-04_Empire_State_Building_at_80_by_R_Grigonis.html
About a third of the way down the page they give a detailed look at what was supposed to be.
Great article! Have to take the kids to visit next time we go to New York.
I’d assume that statement is a result of a staff writer on a deadline. Deep understanding of the technical operations should not be expected.
The period illustrations are pretty cool though. The second one, “Two Days To Europe In A Flying Hotel”, gives a clue as to why the airship paradigm was so powerful for so long: Airships mapped much better to public conceptions of the leading existing method of intercontinental travel, ocean liners. (One might guess that any “gangplank” involved would have been wide and solidly hand-railed, similar to boarding arrangements for liners.)
The question I see raised is, what similar errors might we currently be making, trying to map the possible future onto what we’re comfortable and familiar with?
Bingo! Henry – I second your last line in particular, an acute observation.
Other examples: The extension of under/overground castes into species division in “The Time Machine,” or the aircraft zooming around and between buildings in “Metropolis.”
Or more recently… Gerry O’Neill’s space habitat with the folks having a wine party & looking like they stepped out of upper class N. CA in the ’70’s.
I say all this with affection of course. The real question as you point to is whether we are making fundamental errors in how we’re trying to build for the future based on analogous, more fundamental things that we don’t even recognize.
Charlies,
Dome cities on the surface of the Moon and Mars also come to mind as additional examples…
My stepdad was born in 1930. I think it was after his death several years ago that I found out his dad had taken him to see the Hindenburg when he was seven.
I never got the chance to ask him about it.
See “Sky Captain, World of Tomorrow” for a short scene showing the Hindenburg docking to the Empire State building.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0346156/
The idea was a PR dig on the Chrysler Building. Both were vying for tallest building when they were under construction. It was never a serious plan.
The dirigible problem is not about hydrogen and the Hindenberg and whether it was the thermite doping compound on the fabric rather than the hydrogen that did it in.
The dirigible problem is about weather, where common thunderstorms can generate downdrafts of 2000 feet per minute, where a jet airliner can just about climb at 2000 feet per minute. If a dirigible an avoid all but the most benign weather, I suppose OK, but a dirigible cannot be around any kind of convective weather, witness the tragedies of the Akron, Macon, and Shennendoah with only the German-made Navy Los Angeles dying in its sleep of old age.
The article is wrong. Passengers were intended to debark to the 102nd floor.
I once landed in a helicopter on the roof of the Pan Am building. I can assure everyone, wind was a VERY significant factor. Gusts and updrafts were unpredictable, and this in powered flight, subsequently banned. There is no way a dirigible could have managed to “dock” up there.
I had heard of the idea of docking at the Empire State Building. My understanding was that it was planned but never done, perhaps due to the end of that era with the destruction of the Hindenburg? Thanks for the information.
One problem with helium as a lifting gas is its rarity; the other is its extremely low atomic weight, meaning that it leaks very readily out of just about anything.
Would it not be possible to consider neon as an alternative? Sure, its lifting power would be less than helium in the ratio 10:26 (roughly) but could that not be coped with?
Just to be a bit pedantic, helium is tricky to contain because it is light and because it is monatomic; hydrogen is lighter but diatomic, so the molecule is bigger and easier to contain (of course, it has its own problems).
Neon has an atomic weight of 20; it’s going to have only about 1/3 the lifting capacity of helium. You’d need at least 3x the envelope size you need for helium.
I’m having a hard time finding decent sources of prices for helium vs neon. One paper gives a price of $2/cubic meter of helium, another of $17/liter for neon. One says that neon is about 55x helium. The price of helium is likely artificially low right now, but neon just doesn’t seem very likely as a hydrogen/helium alternative.
Had the National Lampoon Building ever been erected, it would have had a dirigible hangar up near the 500th floor (to go along with the indoor ocean).
Here’s a fascinating account of the history (and yes, they were supposed to embark/debark from the 103rd floor). It was so crazy it never happened.
I had a death grip on the arms of the chair here in my den while reading that.
And that photo of the 103rd floor is going to give me nightmares.
C’mon, Rickl. The Empire State Building is the closest thing to heaven in this city. And when I saw it, all I could say was “hello”….
Instead of gangplank to the street, how about a bungee drop?