Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: Army Cancels Hybrid Airship Project [Updated]
popsci.com ^ | 2/17/13 | Kelsey D. Atherton

Posted on 02/17/2013 10:33:52 AM PST by Nachum

Once seen as the future of surveillance, the Long-Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle has been terminated, InsideDefense.com reports. Is the military airship revival drawing to a close?

UPDATE, 6:30pm Thursday: The Army confirmed that the LEMV airship project has been canceled. Here's the statement an Army spokesman emailed us:

"The Long Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV), a hybrid air vehicle, is a technology demonstration project administered by the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command. This project was initially designed to support operational needs in Afghanistan in Spring 2012; it will not provide a capability in the timeframe required. Due to technical and performance challenges, and the limitations imposed by constrained resources, the Army has determined to discontinue the LEMV development effort."

--Dov Schwartz Army Public Affairs

InsideDefense is reporting that the Long-Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV), the U.S. Army's hybrid airship and a Popular Science Best Of What's New winner in 2012, has been canceled. The U.S. Army did not immediately return a call for confirmation.

Designed to stay aloft for 21 days and provide continuous surveillance, the LEMV was heavier than expected and could only "stay aloft for about five or six days," despite two years of development and $356 million having been spent on it so far, InsideDefense reports.

(Excerpt) Read more at popsci.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: airship; army; cancels; hybrid; lemv; military
Ah, just as well. Obama might call it a drone and fly it over Los Angeles.
1 posted on 02/17/2013 10:34:04 AM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Oh the Humanity!!!


2 posted on 02/17/2013 10:41:04 AM PST by CapnJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CapnJack
Three n'a half million ???

for a frikkin' BLIMP !!????!!!

3 posted on 02/17/2013 10:43:08 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Just as well. The only people who use those things are bad guys


4 posted on 02/17/2013 10:43:08 AM PST by freedumb2003 (I learned everything I needed to know about racism from Colin Powell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Oh the humanity.


5 posted on 02/17/2013 10:43:45 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Popular Science cover artists on suicide watch.

Obama had better not ban flying cars too.

6 posted on 02/17/2013 10:45:19 AM PST by Dagnabitt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf
How is it in the Army's charter to build such a thing?

Haven't we had a separate Air Force since 1947?

I think money could be saved and yet spent well if the services weren't always trying to stovepipe missions that really belong to another service.

And to prove I'm not just speaking as a flyboy, the Air Force has several search and rescue boats better left to the Coast Guard or Navy...

7 posted on 02/17/2013 10:53:42 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Three n’a half million ???

NO

three hundred fifty six million dollars

for a freakin’ blimp


8 posted on 02/17/2013 11:04:14 AM PST by maine yankee (I got my Governor at 'Marden's')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: maine yankee

Um, a blimp that was supposed to stay aloft for 21days straight, streaming video surveillance to ground stations. Useful if you have to
watch and target bad guys over a wide area 24/7. Would have been useful if the designers hit their specs adequately and if Barry wasn’t surrendering in the war it was supposed to support. Think of it being a very low orbit positionable satellite and you get the picture.


9 posted on 02/17/2013 11:18:33 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


10 posted on 02/17/2013 11:43:40 AM PST by RedMDer (Support Free Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I want one of these - Johnny wont lend me his, says his dad said no.

11 posted on 02/17/2013 1:53:23 PM PST by corkoman (Release the Palin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail
For the price tag, that is still unreasonable. I am reminded of when I was first assigned to the Avionics Lab in the military, and was given an HF transceiver to repair. The metal-encased thing was about twenty-eight inches wide by fourteen inches deep by ten inches high, weighed in the neighborhood of about thirty pounds, and had a mechanical channel selector. For a total of, I think, seventeen channels. Channels tuned by selected pairs of coils and capacitors instead of crystals. For those who don't know that much about electronics, it was the equivalent of a gas streetlamp compared to an electronic bulb.

I asked the E5 in charge why we didn't just replace the entire thing? After all, any one of several cheap CB radios had more to offer than that! I mean, the CB's were even crystal-controlled, for pete's sake, with more channels and better receive sensitivity and transmitter power. Sure beat tuning those monsters by spreading apart or squeezing together the coils for each channel.

Not possible I was told. Contracts to procure new devices would have to be approved, changes in the aircraft performance envelopes had to be studied, and connector fittings and mechanical adaptors would have to be procured. Not to mention previous contracts to continue purchasing parts for the next twenty years subject to increase if the lifetime of the aircraft was extended would have to be renegotiated, and the disposition of previously purchased parts already in the Supply Chain would have to be taken care of.

Parts such as a replacement resistor for five hundred dollars -this when you could purchase a resistor for about a dollar for a package of twenty-five at Radio Shack.

Maybe this project really did not need to be continued after all, perhaps?

12 posted on 02/17/2013 2:06:21 PM PST by Utilizer (What does not kill you... -can sometimes damage you QUITE severely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail; All
(slapping forehead, flattening still MORE of what's left of my lobotomy ... )

Wait A Minute !!!

Google Earth is FREE !!!

13 posted on 02/17/2013 2:07:28 PM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: corkoman

>>Johnny wont lend me his, says his dad said no.<<

Race has the real say over there. He’s a freaking tyrant!


14 posted on 02/17/2013 2:24:36 PM PST by freedumb2003 (I learned everything I needed to know about racism from Colin Powell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: knarf
Google Earth is NOT real time.

Even our best low earth orbit "spy" satellites pass over a particular spot on earth just a few time per day. They can view the target area for only a minute or so, at best on each pass.

Geosynchronous satellites (weather, sat-tv) are 24,000 miles up and cannot see the detail needed.

This is what is needed.

"Proteus, A High-Altitude, Multi-Mission Aircraft"

"NASA Dryden Fact Sheet - Proteus"


15 posted on 02/17/2013 3:20:40 PM PST by BwanaNdege ("To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"- Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Utilizer; knarf
*Sigh*. You guys don't seem to understand what it takes to stay ahead of the rest of the world in defense technology AND every piss-ant safety and security regulation we're required to satisfy. You can't go to Wal-Mart to buy next-generation warfare capabilities - and Google Earth is stale information when it comes to watching moving targets on the way towards your position. Research, design, and engineering costs a lot of money because you are inventing something completely new using the most talented (and expensive) people available. Takes a LOT of man-hours. There are three ways to get ahead technologically: 1. Go to industry with your design specifications and bid the job to them. This is the most expensive option but the most usual direction taken. Requires very careful management to make sure that the vendor really does hit the performance, budget, and time requirements. 2. Do it in in-house using government assets for design and fabrication - like Picatinny or Watervliet arsenals or Dahlgren and Rock Island to manufacture. Easier to control and less costly but somewhat idiosyncratic in their approaches to performance. or 3. Wait until our enemies get the technologies first.

There are no cheap ways to keep this country ahead of its very eager enemies. You may not think that having a dependable long-term loitering observation system standing by overhead is a good idea, but then I would venture a guess that you've never been down on the ground with a rifle waiting and wondering where the enemy was, either.

16 posted on 02/18/2013 5:20:19 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail
Yeah ... yer right, of course.

My comment was tongue n cheek.

And no, I was never in country and never knew why

Enlisted March '65, Signal Corps Radio-Teletype and went to Korea after AIT.

I've drunk a lot of beer with returnees, and that's the best my history can document.

17 posted on 02/18/2013 5:54:01 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Sheesh, now you have me feeling bad - I deeply appreciate your duty in ‘65: we didn’t have a surplus of young men willing to do their duty back then. I can be a bit pompous sometimes. You can probably guess that I have been in the weapon/capabilities development system for a bit. I am proud of our work but fully aware of our shortcomings. Just galls slightly to catch a whiff of ingratitude for our work - but the only real payoff is when we really do get something worthwhile out to our troops and that brings more of them home in good shape.


18 posted on 02/18/2013 6:20:43 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail
Aw hell, sahge, I don't re-fight the war .. just ramble through my diminishing brain capacity while the eyes and body follow close behind.

FreeRepublic came around too late for me to take advantage of a body and attitude more conducive to actually DOing something about what I see going on around me.

Don't feel bad ... except, I don't drink anymore and can't even bend an elbow with you.

19 posted on 02/18/2013 6:28:32 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson