Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Progress in Aerospace Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paerosci

Research and advancements in hybrid airships—A review

Manikandan M. ∗, Rajkumar S. Pant
Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal, India
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Hybrid Airships (HAs) are being touted as an efficient aerial platform for various applications involving heavy
Hybrid airships cargo transportation, communications, scientific exploration, observation, and surveillance in the stratosphere.
Lighter-than-air Hybrid airship technologies have developed significantly from mid-20th century onwards, and promise to offer
Semi-buoyant
unique operational advantages over conventional airships. The purpose of this review paper is to explore the
Dynastat
concepts of hybrid airship designs that have been proposed in the recent past, and highlight the current state-
Unconventional
of-the-art in this field. Major milestones in the development of hybrid airships are presented followed by the
description of types of hybrid airships and their distinct features. This review paper focuses on dynastat type
of hybrid airships, since they seem to be the most promising version of hybrid airships owing to the simplicity
in their designs, and suitability for various civil and military applications. The characteristics of two types of
dynastat, viz., winged-hull and multiple-hull are discussed in detail. The different aspects of the conceptual
design and key disciplines including aerodynamics, dynamics, performance, thermal characteristics, structure,
and optimization involved in the design of hybrid airships are reviewed in detail.

1. Introduction and background
Airships are aerial vehicles which derive most of their lift from aero-
static principles to obtain cruise equilibrium with significant reduction
in fuel consumption. The principle of aerostatics was postulated around
2000 years ago by the ancient Greek mathematician and inventor
Archimedes. In the first half of the twentieth century, large airships
filled with hydrogen gained popularity in both the military and civil
aviation industries for decades because of their simplicity compared to
airplanes of that time. After the Hindenburg disaster, and some other
accidents following that, airships fell out of favor in aviation for many
years due to their vulnerability to weather conditions, and the difficulty
in procuring non-combustible helium as an alternate for extremely
flammable hydrogen gas. This, along with rapid developments in fixed
wing aircraft technology, especially speed and dispatch reliability,
sounded the death knell for airships. Although airships seem to be
old technology, they are back in the reckoning due to the renewed
attention towards low environment impact, high payload capacity, long
endurance capability, and low energy consumption.
In the recent years, airships have become a major research focus in
the field of aeronautics spurred by the rapid development in technology
like composite materials, vectoring engines, satellite weather forecast-
ing, and computer assisted design. This has led to the development of
modern airships as efficient platforms, mainly for high payload and
long endurance missions.
Airships are members of a family of the lighter-than-air (LTA)
systems, which has two primary classes, viz., Unpowered and Powered,
as shown in Fig. 1. Depending on the shape and geometry of the hull
(or the envelope which holds the LTA gas), airships are categorized
as Conventional or Body of Revolution (BOR) and Unconventional or
Non-Body of Revolution (Non-BOR).
Based on the structural configuration of the envelope, airships can
also be classified into three main types, viz., rigid, semi-rigid, and
non-rigid as shown in Fig. 2.
A rigid airship has the envelope made of rigid internal structures
with an outer fabric covering. The envelope contains multiple gasbags
enclosing the lifting gas that helps to generate the buoyant lift. A
non-rigid airship, on the other hand, has a flexible fabric envelope
filled with pressurized lifting gas and no internal framework. The
envelope (also called as hull) of non-rigid airships may contain one or
many internal air bags called ballonets. Ballonets are used to control
buoyancy by maintaining the pressure equilibrium between the lifting
gas enclosed in the envelope and the ambient pressure. High Altitude
Airships (HAAs) or Stratospheric airships are powered airships designed
to fly for long endurance (which range from several days to months)
at very high altitudes around 15–20 km for various applications like
telecommunications, remote sensing, surveillance and monitoring, and
exploration [2]. HAAs are usually powered by solar energy drawn

∗ Corresponding author at: Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal, India.

E-mail address: manikandan.m@manipal.edu (Manikandan M.).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741
Received 28 January 2021; Received in revised form 26 May 2021; Accepted 26 May 2021
0376-0421/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Manikandan M., Rajkumar S. Pant, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 1. Airship categorization.

Fig. 2. Types of airship (1) Rigid (2) Semi-rigid and (3) Non-rigid.
Source: Ref. [1].

from solar panels placed over the upper surface of the envelope and
secondary energy storage devices like rechargeable batteries and regen-
erative fuel cells. The altitude range for high altitude airships is driven
by the facts that at these altitudes the wind speed is lower, and solar
radiation intensity is higher compared to other altitudes.
The most common envelope shape for airships is the long, narrow,
streamlined body of revolution as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. As seen from
Fig. 4, the conventional airships with axi-symmetric BOR have lower
drag than airships with Non-BOR. However, bulk of the lift in such
airships is due to the buoyancy generated by the LTA gas, and only
a small amount of aerodynamic lift is generated when it is in motion.

1.1. Hybrid airships

There has been dramatic renaissance in the development of airship

designs and technologies, since mid-1990s, to improve the aerodynamic
efficiency, performance, and the payload capability. In an effort to im-
prove the efficiency of the airship in terms of its payload capability and
aerodynamics, NASA conducted a feasibility study of modern airships Fig. 3. Conventional airship with BOR.
in collaboration with Boeing-Vertol company and Goodyear Aerospace
Corporation that has led to the development of a new type of airship
configuration called Hybrid Airship [4]. Hybrid airships offer unique airborne transport vehicles, because they combine the characteristics
operational advantages over conventional airships. The term hybrid of lighter-than-air (LTA) airship technology and heavier-than-air (HTA)
airship (HA) refers to any airship that is capable of generating more
technology, fixed-wing aircraft or helicopter. HAs generate a large
than 30% of its total lift from the aerodynamic force, and has also been
used to describe an airship comprising a mix of rigid, semi-rigid, and fraction of their total lift from the buoyant force, and a substantial
non-rigid structural configuration. HAs are considered as cost-effective amount of aerodynamic lift from the hull-wing combination, and/or

2
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 4. Aerodynamic data of airships.
Source: Ref. [3].
Fig. 5. Methods of lift generation.
Source: Adapted from www.reddit.
com.
Fig. 6. AEREON III, a rigid hybrid airship with multiple hull.
Source: Ref. [7].
non-axisymmetric flatter envelopes, and/or through a vectored propul-
sion system [5,6]. Fig. 5 illustrates methods of lift generation of a
hybrid airship.
The first rigid tri-hulled hybrid airship, viz., AEREON III shown
in Fig. 6, was designed by Aereon Corporation in 1960 based on the
original design by an American inventor of the late 19th century Dr
Solomon Andrews, [1]. Aereon III consists of three streamlined rigid
hulls connected in parallel by a structure of airfoil section.
Companies that have invested in the current state of hybrid lift
airship technology include Worldwide Aeros Corp., Hybrid Air Vehicles
Ltd. (HAV), Lockheed Martin, Aero Vehicles Inc., Boeing, and Voliris,
just to name a few.
Most of the modern hybrid airships have semi-rigid, and non-rigid
constructions, while few designs are employed with rigid hull [8]. The
3
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 7. Millennium Airship’s SkyFreighter.
Source: www.millenniumairship.com.
Fig. 8. Aeroscraft, a rigid variable buoyancy air vehicle.
Source: www.aeroscraft.com.
Fig. 9. Aerocat R-40, a rigid hybrid cargo airship.
Source: www.lynceans.org.
Canadian company Millennium Airship planned to design and develop
a heavy-lift, vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) airship, SkyFreighter
shown in Fig. 7, which is a rigid shell hybrid cargo airship employing
a thrust augmented vectoring propulsion/airfoil.
Aeroscraft, shown in Fig. 8 is a planned heavy-lift, variable-buoyancy
cargo airship (neither a blimp nor a hybrid airship) with rigid hull
and it is the only one of its kind with a technology to avoid the need
for ballast, which they call "control of static heaviness" (COSH). It is
powered by three-swiveling engines that provide both aerodynamic lift
and thrust to propel it forward. Aerocat R-40, shown in Fig. 9 and
ATLANT, shown in Fig. 10 are the two examples of the rigid hybrid
cargo airship concept proposed by an Argentinian firm Aerovehicles
and an Israeli firm Atlas LTA, respectively.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 10. ATLANT, a hybrid cargo airship.
Source: www.atlas-lta.com.
Fig. 11. Cost-speed tradeoff in freight transportation.
Source: Ref. [9].
Fig. 12. CO2 equivalent emissions (kg) per metric tonne cargo per nautical mile [10].
Today’s cargo transportation industry has two significant gaps in
terms of available modes of transportation [9]. There is a large cost-
speed gap amongst the current modes of cargo transportation as de-
picted in Fig. 11, also a large discrepancy in terms of environmental
impact, as shown in Fig. 12.
To bridge these gaps, there is a need for a mode of freight trans-
portation which is ‘‘greener’’ than airplanes and trucks, but faster
than ships and rail. A hybrid airship can be one such platform, to
overcome these two glaring needs in the cargo transportation industry.
The hybrid airship was found to be superior to the other aerial vehicles
for transportation of cargo, as shown in Fig. 13 [1].
4
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 13. A comparison of efficiency between different modes of transportation to carry
10,000 kg of cargo with 1 gallon (≈ 4.55 liters) of fuel.
Source: Adapted from: Ref. [1].
Fig. 14. Hybrid airship vs. conventional modes of transportation.
Source: Ref. [11].
Stockbridge et al. [11] claim that hybrid airships can offer large
cargo capacities with significant reductions in fuel consumption, as
compared to other aerial vehicles, while remaining faster than land and
sea transportation systems, as shown in Fig. 14.
1.2. Types of hybrid airship
There are several concepts of hybrid airship designs that have been
proposed in the past and the motivation is always associated with the
focus of providing more feasibility, stability, and safety in design. HAs
that have been explored in the past include Rotastats (which integrate
the characteristics of a blimp and a helicopter) and Dynastats (which
combine the features of a blimp and an airplane) [4].
Rotastat is a hybrid airship with rotary wings capable of Vertical
Take-off and Landing (VTOL). In this concept, vertical thrust from
rotors is created, in addition to net buoyant lift from lifting gas con-
tained in the hull, which makes it suitable for heavy lift applications.
Several designs of rotastat have been proposed in the past includ-
ing Piasecki’s PA-97 Helistat shown in Fig. 15(a), Helitruck shown in
Fig. 15(b), Helicostat, and the twin-hulled Heliship shown in Fig. 15(c)
[5]. Few conceptual studies (e.g., [12–20]) have proposed the roto-
stat configuration as a potential solution for various applications like
heavy-cargo transportation, surveillance, planetary exploration, and
hypercommuting.
The most recent such concept is SkyHook’s JHL-40 shown in Fig. 16,
which is a joint project between SkyHook and Boeing, and it combines
the best features of a conventional airship and a helicopter. Boeing
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 15. Examples of Rotastat.

Source: Adapted from Ref. [5].

Fig. 17. Winged-hull dynastat.

Fig. 16. Boeing’s The SkyHook JHL-40. Source: Ref. [24].
Source: www.skyhookhlv.com

claims that JHL-40 is capable of carrying a payload of 40 tons load

without refueling [21].
Dynastat is a hybrid airship with fixed wings and/or a lifting-
body, intended for various applications. It creates the aerodynamic lift
from the wing or cambered hull [22]. In this configuration, lifting gas
supports the dead weight of the airship and the dynamic lift carries
the disposable load. The airship in which wings are attached to the
conventional shaped hull is called winged-hull dynastat, as shown in
Fig. 17, while an airship with an aerodynamic shaped hull is called a
lifting-body dynastat, as shown in Fig. 18 [23].
Fig. 18. Lifting-body dynastat.
Source: www.solarship.com.
1.3. Lenticular airships

Very few dynastats have been proposed with a lenticular shaped

envelope, as shown in Fig. 19.

5
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 19. Lenticular airship.
Source: Adapted from Ref.
[25].
Fig. 20. AMES Megalifter, winged hybrid airship.
Source: Ref. [5].
A lenticular airship has many advantages over the conventional
airship. It has large surface to volume ratio, which provides greater
top surface area for installing the solar cells [25]. Majority of the
surface is flatter which results in higher power production from the
solar cells. This flatter shape also helps to generate higher aerodynamic
lift. It is less sensitive to lateral winds due to its very low side profile
[27]. At low speeds, lenticular shapes have reasonable aerodynamic
and stability characteristics. The major drawback with this shape is that
it becomes very unstable at high speeds which has discouraged many
designers from adopting it.
Fig. 21. Aerodynamic characteristics of conventional and winged airship.
Source: Adapted from [26].
6
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
1.4. Winged dynastat
Winged hybrid airship is a type of rigid airship with wings attached
to the hull to generate aerodynamic lift similar to a conventional
aircraft. The first winged hybrid airship was designed, developed, and
flown by Santos-Dumont in 1905 [28]. In 1974, a winged hybrid airship
AMES Megalifter shown in Fig. 20 was proposed by Fink [29], but
it was never built. Adding wings to a conventional airship helps to
produce substantial dynamic lift, improves vehicle stability as well as
payload capability with increase in drag [26,29] as shown in Fig. 21.
Spearman and Feigh [30,31] proposed a concept of a hybrid airship
having twin-hulls placed side-by-side and connected by aircraft-type
cambered wing, as shown in Fig. 22. The twin-hull concept has several
advantages, viz., increase in buoyant lift due to increase in volume
of the hull for a given length, additional aerodynamic lift from the
cambered wing, and better aerodynamic performance compared to a
winged hull airship by reducing the loss of lift due to wing tip vortices.
A number of winged-hull dynastat concepts exist, including Dynalifter,
a hybrid airship with lift augmentation mechanism, Dinosaure, and
Aeroship proposed by Liu et al. [32], as shown in Fig. 23. Fig. 24
shows that a Dynalifter can serve as a roadless trucking platform, which
is more fuel efficient than airplanes and heavier than blimps, thus
requiring less ground infrastructure. The Aereon’s Dynairship shown in
Fig. 25 and Dynairship II shown in Fig. 26 are two proposed conceptual
deltoid lifting-body dynastat for civil and military cargo transportation.
The design concept of dynairship was derived from Aereon 26, which
was an experimental aircraft developed to investigate lifting-body de-
sign manufactured by Aereon Corporation [33]. Another example of
a proposed lifting-body dynastat is Solar Ship’s Wolverine airship [34]
shown in Fig. 27. It is a large, helium-filled delta wing powered by
solar energy capable of short take-off and landing (STOL). WB-1010
[35] shown in Fig. 28 and Airship One [36] shown in Fig. 29 are the
two examples of modern winged-Hull dynastats.
1.5. Multiple-hull dynastat
The multiple hull design is a combination of multiple (two or three)
conventional single lobed bodies of same shape and size separated
horizontally (may or may not be parallel to each other), with some
overlap between them, as shown in Fig. 30. The hulls may be separated
horizontally by a supporting structure as shown in Fig. 22 or they
may be joined together with some horizontal offset between them,
viz., multi-lobed configuration as shown in Fig. 30. There are many
advantages of such an envelope configuration, viz., reduction of overall
length for a given volume, generation of aerodynamic lift from its
cambered shape, and lower sensitivity to lateral winds.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 22. Twin-hulled hybrid airship.
Source: Ref. [30].
Fig. 23. Aeroship, winged-hull dynastat.
Source: Ref. [32].
Fig. 24. Comparison of dynalifter with airplane and blimp.
Source: www.ohioairships.com/dynalifter.
Some hybrid designs, use multi-lobed envelope to increase aero-
dynamic lift. Examples of this type include Lockheed Martin’s P-791
shown in Fig. 31(a), a non-rigid, catamaran-shaped hybrid airship
demonstrator, HAV’s Airlander 10 shown in Fig. 31(b) a semi-buoyant,
semi-rigid hybrid airship derived from HAV-304, and Lockheed Martin’s
LMH-1 shown in Fig. 31(c) also a semi-buoyant, semi-rigid hybrid
airship derived from P-791.
A French firm Voliris has recently proposed a multiple-hull hybrid
airship configuration for various applications. The proposed concepts
include Voliris V901 shown in Fig. 32(a), the first hybrid airship with
non-rigid multiple-hull, Voliris V901RC shown in Fig. 32(b), a remote-
controlled version developed to demonstrate the automation features
needed for future unmanned cargo airships, Voliris V930 shown in
7
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 25. Aereon’s Dynairship.
Source: Ref. [33].
Fig. 26. Aereon’s Dynairship II.
Source: www.aereoncorp.com.
Fig. 27. Solar Ship’s Wolverine.
Source: www.skiesmag.com.
Fig. 32(c), semi-rigid hybrid airship with three-lobe gas envelope for
cargo transportation, and Voliris NATAC V932 shown in Fig. 32(d),
semi-rigid autonomous hybrid airship for heavy-cargo transportation
proposed based on Voliris V902 concept, that resembled an inflated
wing.
The aerodynamic approach for a multiple-hull configuration is sim-
ilar to that of a lifting-body aircraft, although the airspeeds involved
are much lower. A multi-lobed design reduces the radius of curvature
of the hull, thereby reducing the stress on the hull created by the
pressurized lifting gas contained therein. The reduced stress allows the
hull to be constructed from light-weight material, thus reducing the
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 28. WB-1010.
Source: Ref. [35].
Fig. 29. Airship One.
Source: Ref. [36].
Fig. 30. Multi-lobed hull design.
Source: Ref. [37].
hull mass, and enabling the airship to carry more cargo. The lobed
design helps to reduce the cross-sectional area of the airship, thereby
potentially reducing its aerodynamic drag. The attainable dynamic-lift-
to-drag ratio ranges between 2.5–5 (data projected based on [38–41]).
This is significantly below that of efficient fixed wing aircraft (ranges
between 12–20 for jet transport [42]), in part because induced drag
increases with decreasing aspect ratio [43] as shown in Fig. 33. As a
result, the lift comes at a higher drag penalty than when using wings.
On the other hand, compared to a helicopter, the multi-lobed dynastat
has better fuel efficiency within a given speed range [5].
1.6. Advantages of hybrid airships
There are many advantages of the hybrid airship designs compared
to the conventional airships. Hybrid airships have heavy-lift capability
8
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
[8], better controllability [44], lower susceptibility to side winds [45],
and larger surface-to-volume ratio [4] that helps to generate more
power using a solar array due to its large surface area. Hybrid airships
have better ground-handling [46], flexible altitude adjustment [5],
lesser dependence on ballast weight and ground infrastructure for op-
eration [1]. Multi-lobed airship envelopes are structurally lighter than
conventional body of revolution envelopes having the same volume,
and also have better aerodynamic [43] and lateral stability character-
istics [1]. The unconventional shape of a multi-lobed hybrid airship
supports the integration of an air cushion landing system (ACLS) at
the bottom of the envelope, which also allows the airship to land and
taxi on unprepared surfaces, soft ground, and water bodies. A tri-lobed
configuration separated horizontally by half of the lobe diameter has
∼ 6% greater surface area compared to a single-lobed airship of the
same envelope volume [1]. The immense size of a multi-lobed airship
allows the integration of a huge cargo bay with loading ramps at each
end [46]. Burning less than a tenth of the fuel compared to a rotorcraft
per ton cargo carried, hybrid airships can redefine the sustainability
of the transportation system of the future. This aerial platform has
the potential to provide affordable transport and easy loading to more
than two-third of the world’s land area and more than half the world’s
population, who currently do not have direct access to traditional roads
or runways.
1.7. Historical developments
Table 1 presents the historical timeline of development of hybrid
airships, right from 1905, till the present day.
Several manned and unmanned prototypes of hybrid airships are
under various stages of development in UK, USA, Russia, and Italy as
technology demonstrators. But none of these prototypes have yet been
built for commercial production [11].
1.8. Literatures available related to the subject
Many promising characteristics of HAs have lead to increased inter-
est and focused research and studies at institutes and research organi-
zations around the world. The outcomes of these studies is reflected in
the form of several research articles in national and the international
journals, shown in Fig. 35.
Three sources, viz., Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar
were used to collect the data of scientific articles for this study.
Most of the technical publications were focused on winged-hull
dynastat [6,24,26,30,32,41,63–108], followed by multiple hull dynas-
tat (mostly multi-lobed configuration) [3,9,37–41,43,44,109–140]. The
remaining were on the other configurations of hybrid airship, viz.,
rotastat [15–17,19,20,141–160], lifting-body [12,18,25,27,161–180],
and unconventional [181–183].
2. Survey of hybrid airship design methodologies
Hybrid airships design concepts are being seriously considered for
various applications in the field of civil and defense transport; however,
only a few design methodologies are available in the open literature
for hybrid airships. The design process of an airship includes sizing
of envelope from the required buoyant lift and mission requirements,
selection of appropriate shape for the envelope, estimation of lift and
drag coefficients, estimation of structural weight from the envelope
geometry, mass breakdown, and estimation of operating cost. In the
recent years, many studies have focused on conceptual design and
sizing of unconventional and hybrid airship configurations; some of
these are described here (see Fig. 48).
Donaldson et al. [9] presented a design process that can be used
for the parametric design of a multi-lobed hybrid airship as a solution
for the heavy cargo transportation. In this study, the geometry of
the multi-lobed lifting envelope is limited to a single shape based on
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 31. Multi-lobed hybrid airship.

Fig. 32. Hybrid airship with multiple-hull design.

Source: www.voliris.com.

9
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1
Major milestones in the research and development of hybrid airships.
1905 First hybrid airship prototype named Number 14 shown in Fig. 34 was
designed, developed, and flown by Santos-Dumont, a Brazilian who lived in
France and an aviation pioneer of the controlled flight of airships.
Unfortunately, this concept of airship with wings made of structural frames
similar to aircraft wings was unusable and broken during test flight. This
combined configuration was referred to as a ‘‘monstrous hybrid’’ [47].

1959 AEREON Corporation was established to advance airship technology towards

a practical and economically useful cargo transport, by augmenting Buoyant
and Aerodynamic lift (Source: www.aereoncorp.com).

1959–67 During this period, first experimental hybrid airship prototype with rigid hull
construction (tri-hull configuration) AEREON III shown in Fig. 6 was
designed and built by the AEREON corporation. This was not a successful
design because the construction did not meet the market’s expectation and
was never produced on a mass scale. AEREON III was destroyed during
taxiing test and scrapped without having flown [48].

1967–70 Several wind tunnel experiments were performed to measure the

aerodynamic performance, stability and control characteristics of AEREON’s
deltoid lifting-body (Source: www.aereoncorp.com).

1970 AEREON III was succeeded by the AEREON 26, an experimental hybrid
airship of deltoid configuration developed and flown to investigate the
aerodynamic performance of the lifting body design (Source:
wikipedia/AEREON III). The concept of DYNAIRSHIP (patented in 10
countries), a large semi-buoyant airship was studied by the AEREON for
long-endurance open ocean surveillance [49].

1971 AEREON 26 was tested again with the additional attachment of vortex
generators and third propeller. Lack of sufficient technology, suitable engine,
and funding for such a large semi-buoyant airship put an end to the test
program [48].

1974 William Miller, Chairman and President of AEREON Corp., proposed three
concepts of Dynairship for patrol, cargo transportation, and logistic supply
[49].

1977 Boeing-Vertol Company and Goodyear Aerospace Corporation conducted

feasibility study of modern airships for NASA that led to the development of
new concepts of hybrid airships [4].

1980 AeroLift Inc. was set up by Arthur Crimmins with the objective of building a
hybrid airship capable of conducting aerial logging at remote sites
inaccessible by conventional means. AeroLift CycloCrane is a proof-of-concept
(Helistat ) hybrid airship, which combines the features of helicopter and
airship [50]. It flew successfully, but no large production airships were built.

1984 AeroLift Inc. conducted unmanned test flights of revised CycloCrane and
successfully conducted its first manned test flight.

1986 Piasecki PA-97 Helistat, an experimental heavy-lift hybrid airship made its
first flight. It consisted of four Sikorsky S-58 helicopters attached to a
framework beneath a helium-inflated blimp envelope [51,52].

1990–2000 Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, an American aerospace company received

funding from NASA for the development of semi-buoyant hybrid airships to
serve as an outsized freighter.

2000 Advanced Technologies Group (ATG) built and flew a small, radio-controlled,
and unmanned hybrid airship technology demonstrator for SkyCat
technology, the SkyKitten. The successful demonstration bagged a sponsorship
for SkyCat 1000 to investigate HA in support of strategic lift from U.S. Army
and the Joint Staff [53].

2002 The Joint Staff funded a Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) study on
investigating the feasibility of HAs [53].

2004 With the satisfactory results obtained from NAVAIR study, the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics recruited the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to oversee hybrid
airship development [53].

2005 The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) initiated the
WALRUS program as an advance technology demonstration program to prove
the operational concepts of a large semi-buoyant lifting airship. Worldwide
Aeros Corp., an American manufacturer of airships was granted the largest
contract under DARPA’s project Walrus HULA (Hybrid Ultra Large Aircraft)
program to develop Aeroscraft, a heavy-lift hybrid airship for cargo
transportation [54].
(continued on next page)

10
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1 (continued).
2006 Lockheed Martin underwent manned test flights (independently of WALRUS)
of P-791 [55], a multi-lobed hybrid airship built as a technology
demonstrator associated with key technologies including semi-buoyant airship
with pressure stabilized non-rigid hull generating aerodynamic lift, thrust
vectoring propulsion system, and Air Cushion Landing System (ACLS) under
Long Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle program (LEMV). At that time, it
was the largest HA flown successfully [53].

2007 Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV) Ltd. a British manufacturer of hybrid airships was
formed by Roger Munk. The company developed a remote-controlled
technology demonstrator HAV-3 based on the Skycat concept.

2008 HAV-3 made its first flight. Boeing, an American aerospace company
contracted with SkyHook to develop heavy-lifting hybrid airships, the
SkyHook JHL-40, a proposed rotastat concept [55].

2009 HAV Ltd. in partnership with Northrop Grumman as prime contractor won
the U.S. army contract to develop heavy-lifting hybrid airships for the
defense applications under LEMV project. This led to the development and
construction of HAV 304, a twin-lobed hybrid airship.

2010 DARPA funded Walrus HULA program was canceled.

2011 Lockheed Martin signed a contract with a Canadian based company Aviation
Capital Enterprises of Calgary to develop a family of commercial cargo
airships. The airship named SkyTug, a larger commercial version of the P-791
[56].

2012 HAV 304 made its maiden flight for 90 min in Lakehurst, New Jersey
[57–59]. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced that
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics submitted an application for the certification
for LMZ1M, a manned cargo-lifting hybrid airship [60]. Voliris tested their
first hybrid airship (Source: www.voliris.com).

2013 LEMV project was canceled [61]. The SkyTug trademark was abandoned.
Lockheed Martin promoted their next large commercial hybrid airship named
LMH-1 based on the P-791 design. Lockheed Martin in collaboration with
FAA defined criteria to certify HAs for the transport category and
successfully approved by the FAA [62].

2014 Voliris completed its first test flight of remote-controlled hybrid airship
named V902RC (Source: www.voliris.com).

2016 The HAV’s Airlander 10, originally developed as the HAV 304 had its first
successful test flight outside the Cardington Hangars, RAF Cardington, UK
(Source: wikipedia/Airlander 10).

Till the date Research and developments of hybrid lift airships are still in progress to
achieve safe and reliable platforms for civil and military applications [11].

Fig. 34. First hybrid airship prototype: Number 14.

Source: www.flyhistoria.se.

Fig. 33. Variation of lift induced drag coefficient w.r.t aspect ratio for elliptical
planform.
existing hybrid lift vehicles, with a view to limit the design space. The
profile of NACA 5527 airfoil is used to shape the envelope, to meet the
requirement of large internal volume. In the proposed design process,
a cost module is also included, which estimates the operating cost in
terms of crew, fuel and maintenance, in order to obtain the cost optimal
design to meet the mission requirements. From this study it is observed
that the larger the vehicle size, the higher the mission efficiency and the
lower the emissions per ton mile. The study concludes that two main
areas need to be further investigated. These include a more sophisti-
cated CFD analysis required to estimate the aerodynamic parameters

11
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 35. Scientific publications per year on hybrid airships.
Fig. 36. Break-up of publications on various types of hybrid airships.
to improve the design space, and an in-depth market analysis to make
a balance between payload and accessibility.
Agte et al. [114] proposed a sizing methodology focused on con-
ceptual design of a hybrid lift multi-lobed airship for intra-regional
flexible access transport. The proposed work addressed sizing and
constraint analysis, included an innovative system for lift management,
and incorporated important operational constraints.
Mitchell [74] developed a conceptual airship design methodol-
ogy that can be used for both conventional and hybrid airships. This
methodology can help in carrying out a comparative study between
an airship and an aircraft designed at the same level of detail for the
same mission, to evaluate the vehicle performance. The methodology
can be used to carry out sizing of the airship based on payload, range,
and altitude and also allows for rapid development of aerodynamic and
weight data for the sized vehicle.
Li et al. [75] proposed a new buoyancy-lift integrated hybrid airship
design, viz., tandem wing configuration, and studied the aerodynamic
performance by employing a numerical method. To enhance the perfor-
mance, the problem was posed as an optimization problem to achieve
an aerodynamic efficient design through response surface method, to
obtain a better design with improved lift-to-drag ratio of 6.08%.
Ceruti and Marzocca [45] presented a novel design methodology
to estimate weight breakdown, envelope volume, dimensions, and the
12
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
performance parameters of unconventional airship configurations, us-
ing the concept of volume fractions. This methodology can also be used
to perform sensitivity analysis.
Haque et al. [79,95] proposed a new conceptual design method-
ology for winged-hull hybrid airships based on existing fundamental
relations to design an airship and aircraft. The methodology is focused
on estimation of mass breakdown; it uses available analytical formulae
to evaluate the weight of each system and sub-system of a new design
in the initial design phase.
Zhang et al. [40] described a methodology for the conceptual de-
sign of a multi-lobed hybrid airship powered by two different power
sources viz., solar powered and hydrogen powered with the perfor-
mance analysis based on the wing loading (Total mass/Reference area).
An interesting outcome of this study is that the hydrogen powered
airship has 30% less weight compared to the airship powered by
conventional fuel at the same cruise velocity condition.
Baraniello et al. [136] presented a design process for the conceptual
design of a stratospheric platform of four different configurations for
Earth observation and telecommunications. The airships are designed
for the payload of 1000 kg and airspeed of 16 m/s. The configurations
used in this study are conventional airship, flying wing, and two hybrid
platforms. The authors concluded that the hybrid platform represents
the best configuration based on power consumption, size, weight, and
safety.
One of the challenges involved in the sizing of hybrid airships is
to define the volume of an envelope. Envelope volume is a parameter
that directly affects the aerostatic lift generated by an airship. The
estimation of envelope volume of hybrid airship configurations is a
non-trivial task. There are different approaches proposed by researchers
to estimate the volume at the stage of conceptual sizing. Donaldson
et al. [9] derived the envelope volume for parametric design of low
emission hybrid-lift cargo aircraft based on envelope geometry and
buoyant lift required. Ceruti and Marzocca [45] proposed an iterative
method to obtain the volume of the envelope for unconventional airship
configurations. Carichner and Nicolai [43] presented a trade study of
conventional and hybrid configurations, in which an iterative method
shown in Fig. 37 was used to estimate the volume of multi-lobed hybrid
airships for a given shape, based on the Breguet range equation to meet
the specified range requirement, and summation of weight breakdown
of major sub-systems of the vehicle, using empirical formulae.
The Monte Carlo method can be used to find an approximated
volume of the intersection between the lobes to define the total volume
of the airship. Manikandan and Pant [138] have proposed an analytical
method to estimate the envelope volume of tri-lobed configuration.
Apart from other design challenges, the primary concern in design
of hybrid airships is the optimal apportionment of total lift from two
sources, viz., buoyant lift from lifting gas and aerodynamic lift from
the geometry and/ or wings attached to the envelope. Zhang et al.
[72] studied the performance of hybrid buoyant aircraft to obtain an
optimal flight condition based on apportionment of buoyant lift and
aerodynamic lift.
Verma et al. [120] addressed the problem of finding the optimum
lift apportionment and proposed a novel approach to obtain a hybrid
lifting-body airship design by minimizing fuel consumption using dif-
ferent flight strategies with range and duration of flight as constraints.
Interesting outcomes of this study are that the optimal hybrid airship
consumes more fuel during short duration of flight as well as at higher
altitudes, behaves more like an aircraft for short duration of flight
and at higher altitudes, and the optimal configuration needs to fly
at maximum aerodynamic efficiency (L/D) for minimum endurance
condition. The shape of the airship is fixed and represented by a drag
coefficient (CD0 ).
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 37. Iterative method to obtain an envelope volume of the multi-lobed airship for a given shape [1].

2.1. Solar-powered hybrid airships

Depletion of fossil fuel and environmental concerns shifted the re-

search focus of airships towards renewable energy as source of power to
fulfill all their requirements. In the design and sizing of solar-powered
airships, the main challenge faced by the designer is to the keep the
vehicle compact in size, which is advantageous in several aspects [180].
Zhang et al. [40] proposed a sizing methodology for conceptual de-
sign and analysis of multi-lobed hybrid airships with renewable energy
for two different applications, viz., a solar power high-altitude airship
and a hydrogen powered airship for cargo transportation. An improved
sizing methodology has been proposed in this study, to estimate the
total weight and the size to meet the given requirements. Aerodynamic
characteristics of the designed configurations are obtained through the
computational fluid dynamic (CFD) analysis.
Most existing studies on solar-powered airships for high altitude
applications assume the airship envelope to be an axi-symmetric body
of revolution. On the other hand, several studies have been focused on
non-axisymmetric bodies of revolution such as double-hull [17], del-
toid [184], oblate spheroid [185], multi-lobed [37,40,44,114,132,137,
138,186], winged hull [67,76,187,188], and lenticular shaped [25,27, Fig. 38. Discoidal shaped airship.
168]. There are a number of challenges involved in making inflatable Source: Ref. [175].
structures with unconventional shapes.
The most common issue related to the design of a solar-powered
high altitude airship is layout and orientation of photovoltaic array over
the surface of the envelope. Though, the conventional airships with
axi-symmetric body of revolution have many advantages over other
configurations, the curved surface of the airship makes the photovoltaic
array inefficient compared to the flat surface. A possible solution is to
use an unconventional envelope configuration that provides a flatter
surface over which solar panels are mounted, which increases their
power generation efficiency.
Cimarelli et al. [175] proposed a novel concept of disc-shaped
airship viz., discoidal shape shown in Fig. 38 to achieve the maximum
efficiency of the solar array affixed over the envelope. An airship
having a discoidal shape with maximal surface area to volume ratio,
results in higher upper surface area available for mounting solar panels.
However, it is not easy to fabricate such a shape for an inflatable Fig. 39. Disc-shaped hybrid airship by MAI, Russia .
structure. Ponyaev et al. [179] proposed the hybrid electric solar disc- Source: Ref. [179].
shaped hybrid airship in Fig. 39 as one of the efficient platforms for
air transportation in arctic and north polar regions, and for High Alti-
tude Stratospheric & Orbital Complex as Astronomical Observatories. of multi-lobed airships is a flatter upper surface of the hull, which
The airship was designed by Moscow Aviation Institute (MAI) and results in improved efficiency of the solar arrays, due to relatively lower
developed by a Swiss-based company.
curvature as shown in Fig. 40.
Several studies (e.g.,[37,44,130,132,186]) have proposed the con-
cept of multi-lobed hybrid airship configuration powered by solar A continuous power supply and ability to hover are the two key de-
energy for high altitude long endurance missions. The key advantage sign requirements of the airships designed for long endurance missions.

13
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 40. Tri-lobed airship with solar array.
Source: Ref. [139].
Most of the proposed concepts have used a renewable energy source
for power supply for a continuous flight and an electric propulsion
system to maintain the stationary or precision flight, i.e., hovering.
Rotary-wing aircraft can be one of the possible solutions to fulfill the
requirement of ability to hover for long endurance, but they have
low payload capacity, are less fuel efficient, and prone to mechanical
failures. The most promising solution for high endurance mission is a
Rotastat. Earon and Apkarian [19] proposed a concept of hybrid airship
platform, viz., Rotastat (airship with rotary wings) for precision UAV
applications and tested its hovering capability and endurance.
2.2. Design methodologies based on aerodynamic shape optimization
In a typical shape optimization of a fuel-powered airship, the main
objective is to minimize the fuel burn for a given range or maximize
the range for a given amount of fuel by minimizing the drag of the
airship. But in the case of fully solar-powered airships, the concepts of
fuel burn or range do not apply. Few studies (e.g., [38,79,100,180])
have proposed the design methodology based on aerodynamic shape
optimization.
Mahzan and Muhamad [38] proposed a design methodology for
HA based on its aerodynamic characteristics, as shown in Fig. 41.
The vehicle was designed to satisfy the mission requirements given in
Request for Proposal (RFP) proposed by American Institute of Aeronau-
tics and Astronautics (AIAA) in their Foundation Undergraduate Team
Aircraft Design Competition (2010). To satisfy the RFP requirements,
four envelope designs were analyzed. The main objective of this study
was to find the optimum HAV envelope design to fulfill the lifting
criteria.
Hartmann [100] proposed a synthesis model for the conceptual
design of a hybrid-lift air vehicle. This study involves a fast and simple
parametric aerodynamic modeling of lifting body geometry and the op-
timization of lift fractions. The assessment of the configuration is done
through a common enhanced direct operating cost model. To study the
aerodynamic characteristics, a surrogate model was developed from a
database of CFD results to capture the nonlinearities and their effects
on stability and performance.
Buckley et al. [180] presented a methodology to design the en-
velope for a solar-powered hybrid airship through the application of
aerodynamic shape optimization methodology, viz., Jet Stream. The
algorithm used in this study consists of a three-dimensional flow solver
to evaluate the aerodynamic properties, geometry module to capture
the variations in the geometry, and a gradient-based optimizer. The
chosen design variables are envelope section shapes, span, twist, angle
of attack, and flap angle. The optimal envelope design was achieved
through the three-point optimization.
14
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
3. Methodologies to estimate performance of hybrid airships
To study the advantages and drawbacks of any kind of vehicle,
performance analysis becomes an essential element of the design pro-
cess. This analysis helps to frame the set of rules and guidance to
the designers at different stages of the design process. Few existing
studies were focused on the flight performance analysis of hybrid
airships including the derivation of set of formulas for the various
flight conditions. Boyd [109] presented a version of top-level formulae
to deal with the performance analysis of hybrid airships. Liu et al.
[32] investigated the flight performance of winged hybrid airships
particularly on the optimum ratio of aerostatic lift to the total weight
to achieve the maximum lift-to-drag ratio. To validate the analytical
results, a model of a remote-controlled airship with wings was built
and tested in flight. The results obtained from the test flight using a
stereo-videogrammetry system were consistent with the performance
analysis. Similarly, Zhang et al. [71] formulated an improved set of
formulae (based on primary formulae derived for a conventional air-
craft by Anderson [189]) to analyze the performance of an airship for
steady and accelerated flight conditions. These formulae were used
to analyze the performance of a hybrid winged airship. The results
indicate that the ratio of aerodynamic lift to total lift (sum of aerostatic
lift and aerodynamic lift), power-to-weight ratio, and the effective wing
loading are the three key parameters that have significant impact on
the performance of a hybrid airship. The main objective of this study
was to compare the performance of winged airships with conventional
aircraft at different flight conditions. In 2010, Zhang et al. [72] revised
the analytical formulations developed earlier for performance analysis
of hybrid airships with simple expressions.
In addition to the buoyant lift, an airship can generate aerodynamic
lift with the help of wings attached to the envelope. Hence, some of the
key parameters related to fixed-wing aircraft become important aspects
in the design of a hybrid buoyant airship. Using the fact that some
of the key design parameters are similar for both aircraft and airship,
Haque et al. [92] studied the effect of wing loading on gross take-off
mass of a hybrid buoyant aircraft. The ratio of empty to gross take-off
mass was estimated using regression analysis based on existing data and
aerodynamic characteristics of wing using XFLR5, a low fidelity tool.
Mass estimation is one of the most challenging parts in the con-
ceptual design of an airship. In the mass estimation, empty mass is
the one that contributes the most, and plays a significant role in the
sizing of an airship. The most common approach for mass estimation
in the conceptual design phase of an aircraft/airship is the statistical
adaptation of data from the past designs. Unfortunately, the historical
database for the hybrid airships is very sparse compared to conven-
tional airships, and hence no proven formulation exists. In general, for
any new complex design, an additional margin of ∼ 6%–10% of the
total mass is taken into consideration to account for the uncertainty
in the mass estimation procedure. There is a need for theoretical or
an analytical approach to estimate the various mass fractions. Based
on a theoretical approach, Haque et al. [94] established a new set of
analytical relationships to estimate the mass and volume fractions of
fuel-powered-hybrid buoyant aircraft. Studies (e.g., [1,40,92,132,168,
186]) that were focused on the conceptual design of hybrid airships
also considered the mass breakdown and estimation of mass of each
component based on its geometry and characteristics of the material
used. A list of formulae (in Imperial Units) for the estimation of mass of
airship components is given in Table 2.
4. Optimization techniques employed in hybrid airship design
To achieve better shape and design of an airship, optimization
becomes an important tool which is widely used in the modern design
process. The sizing of HAs involves multiple disciplines, including
aerodynamics, propulsion, structure, stability, and energy subsystems
which have mutual interactions with each other as shown in Fig. 42.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 2
Mass estimation of airship components.
Components Formulae for mass estimation Source
Hull 𝜌𝑓 𝑎𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝜆ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 [1,186]
Tail 𝜌𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙 𝜆𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙 𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓 [40,44,132]
LTA gas 𝜌𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑉ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙 [186]
Solar array 𝜌𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑦 𝜆𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑦 𝑆𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑦 [40,44,186]
( )
Energy storage 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑞 𝑇𝑛𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 )∕(𝜌𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝜂𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 [40,44,132]
Propulsion 𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∕𝜂𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝑆𝑃𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝 [40,44,132]
Ballonet 𝜌𝑏𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑆𝑏𝑎𝑙𝑙 [1,5]
( )0.6
0.036 𝑆𝑤0.758 𝑊𝑓0.0035𝑤
𝐴∕ cos2 𝛬
Wing 0.006 0.04 −0.3
𝑞 𝜆 (100(𝑡∕𝑐)∕ cos 𝛬) [92]
( )0.49
𝑁𝑧 𝑊𝑑𝑔
ACLS 𝜆𝐴𝐶𝐿𝑆 𝑆𝐴𝐶𝐿𝑆 [1]
Gondola 𝜆𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑑 [1]
0.391
( )0.782
Propeller 𝐾𝑝 𝑁𝑝 𝑁𝑏𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑝 𝑆𝐻𝑃 ∕1000 [1]

Fig. 41. Design methodology for the hybrid airship [38].

and Monte-Carlo method. The major drawback with a heuristics based

Fig. 42. Key disciplines involved in the design of HAs.
Therefore, it becomes essential to establish disciplinary models and
a multi-disciplinary design optimization (MDO) problem needs to be
framed and solved to obtain an optimum and balanced design. MDO
based studies of HAs used heuristic algorithms like Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO), Simulated Annealing (SA), Genetic Algorithms
(GA), and Monte-Carlo method for the single objective optimization.
The key reasons to use these algorithms is that they are computation-
ally less expensive, derivative free, and explore large design space to
achieve the global optimal solution. Ceruti et al. [168] presented an
MDO methodology for an unconventional airship configuration using
heuristic algorithms to optimize the envelope shape. The key learning
from this study are that the GA and PSO are more efficient than SA
algorithm is its poor capability to find the precise location of the global
optimum solution. Gradient-based search methods are highly efficient
to search the extremum, but only in a small neighborhood. Hence,
combining the heuristic algorithms with gradient-based search methods
is a feasible way to achieve global optimum from large design space ef-
fectively. Zhang et al. [44] used a hybrid method combining the GA and
gradient-based technique to achieve an optimal design of solar-powered
multi-lobed hybrid airship. In our previous study [186] we have pro-
posed a conceptual design methodology based on MDO for tri-lobed
airship configuration using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). The
optimal solutions obtained for different operating conditions through
PSO are compared with the GA to study the computational efficiency.
From the results, the PSO was seen to be more computationally efficient
compared to GA, based on the time for convergence. Though both
these optimization techniques are evolutionary-based, GA needs a much
larger number of input parameters to be tuned, compared to PSO to
improve the convergence time.
Many MDO problems involve multiple objectives which may be
conflicting with each other. Hence, a multi-objective multi-disciplinary
design optimization framework needs to be developed to solve them.
Wang et al. [73] developed a design methodology for a near space
solar-powered hybrid air vehicle which combines the features of LTA
system and HTA system. The design problem was posed as a multi-
objective optimization and the optimal configuration of winged hybrid
airship was achieved using Non-dominated Sorted Genetic Algorithm
(NSGA-II). In general, a Multi-Objective Optimization (MOO) problem
helps to identify the trade-off between the objectives. To demonstrate
the trade-off between flight altitude and total mass of an airship, Zhang
et al. [132] presented a multi-objective multi-disciplinary optimization
methodology of a high altitude solar-powered hybrid airship. The study
was carried out using NSGA-II to obtain pareto-optimal set of solutions
to explore the design tradeoffs at different flight altitudes. The results
obtained indicated that there is a strong influence of operating altitude
on airship design with the multi-phase strategy.

15
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
5. Aerodynamic analyses of hybrid airships
Aerodynamic performance is one of the key design features in the
design process of hybrid airships. Aerodynamic characteristics of hybrid
air vehicles is different from the conventional airships due to the
addition of dynamic lift from its lifting-body shapes or attachment of
wings. Methods to evaluate aerodynamic characteristics of unconven-
tional airships are quite scarce and need to be improved to predict
lift and drag coefficients and moments. Aerodynamic coefficients have
significant impact on the accurate prediction of performance param-
eters and design-related studies of any flying vehicle. There are dif-
ferent approaches like wind tunnel experiment, numerical simulations,
and approximate model to evaluate the aerodynamic characteristics of
airships.
5.1. Wind tunnel testing
Wind tunnel tests are carried out for high fidelity estimation of
aerodynamic properties. Only a few experimental studies have been
reported in the open literature. This is because the wind tunnel tesing
of complete airship is a time consuming process and requires a large
test section [103]. There are few technical reports (e.g., [24,76,86,87,
89,93,99,105]) that summarize the aerodynamic behavior applicable
to the winged-hull dynastats using wind-tunnel experiments. Haque
and his associates carried out the significant number of experimental
investigation of winged-hull dynastat using low speed wind tunnel
(LSWT) facility available at International Islamic University Malaysia
(IIUM). The major outcomes of the contribution were reflected in
several technical publications. In one of the study, Haque et al. [93]
carried out an experimental investigation on a generic model of a
hybrid lifting hull. The shape of the hybrid lifting hull was derived from
the profile of a marine animal which generates aerodynamic lift from
the body. From the trends of the experimental data and its comparison
with the theoretical calculations, the hybrid lifting hull was found to be
statically unstable. Haque et al. [99] also demonstrated the advantage
of using open jet testing for the aerodynamic analysis of winged-hull
dynastats. One of the experimental studies proved that a winged-hull
dynastat produces thrice the amount of aerodynamic lift produced by
a conventional airship and the drag increases in the range of 20%–
40% [76]. Another important observation of this study was that the
wing dihedral angle and its layout have a significant effect on the static
rolling stability.
In general, scaled-down models as shown in Fig. 43 are used for
wind tunnel testings to meet the requirements of flight Reynolds num-
ber and the allowable blockage of the test section. It is very important
to capture the geometric details of all the components on the airship
while scaling the model to achieve the results in greater accuracy
relative to the actual data. Haque et al. [87] has discussed the issues
involved in the fabrication of the scaled-down model and prescribed an
easy procedure to develop it for static testing in the wind tunnel.
There are a number of challenges in using a wind tunnel to study
the aerodynamic characteristics of hybrid airships, especially for the
multi-lobed ones [126]. Data measurements on small-scaled models of
airships are generally poor for measuring the drag and the aerodynamic
lift. Hybrid airships, in general, operate at high Reynolds number rang-
ing between (107 ∼108 ) but quite low velocity in comparison with the
other conventional aircraft. High Reynolds number leads to the transi-
tion of flow from laminar to turbulent. Using a small-scaled model, the
effect of transition and mixture of flow may not be accurately captured,
and it may become difficult to represent what is occurring on the full
sized vehicle [1]. Wind tunnel testings on large scale models will give
better aerodynamic data, but it becomes very expensive. Unfortunately,
there is no experimental data reported in open literatures on aerody-
namic characteristics for hybrid designs. Most of the aerodynamic data
is only available for conventional airships with axisymmetric envelope.
An alternative to wind tunnel testing for obtaining the aerodynamic
characteristics of hybrid airships that operate at high Re is to use CFD
based solvers which are relatively accurate and a suitable method [41].
16
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 43. Scaled-model of winged-hull dynastat attached in the test section.
Source: Ref. [105].
5.2. CFD based approach
In the initial design phase, analytical methods and empirical rela-
tions are good enough to estimate the aerodynamic parameters like
lift-to-drag ratio without the need to resort to computationally ex-
pensive methods. But for the accurate prediction of the aerodynamic
characteristics of hybrid air vehicles, it is necessary for wind tunnel
tests or computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis to be carried out.
Using CFD for aerodynamic analysis involves a number of challenges
like large computational time, meshing of the whole fluid domain, and
selection of appropriate solver and turbulence model [190]. Though the
CFD codes for aerodynamic prediction were popular from the beginning
of the history of digital computation, few studies [191–196] have
focused on applying the numerical approximation method for 2-D and
3-D bodies, using panel methods. These methods are ideal for concep-
tual design studies, as they need lesser computation time and have
lower complexity compared to more accurate methods like Direct Nu-
merical Simulations (DNS), RANS (Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes),
and Large Eddy Simulation (LES). A panel method performs better
when modeling fully-attached, high Reynolds number (> 105 ), subsonic
(Mach number <1) flow. Panel methods are adept at calculating the lift
force and pressure drag force of the whole airship, but not the skin-
friction drag force (which is dependent on viscous force). Zero-lift drag
coefficient (CD0 ) due to skin friction is one of the important elements
of aerodynamic coefficients required for total drag estimation of the
airships. Total drag is the sum of the form drag and skin-friction drag. It
can be evaluated using analytical methods, empirical relations, and/or
numerical methods. The panel method alone is incapable of capturing
viscous effects, predicting boundary layers, and flow separation, but it
can be done by coupling with the integral boundary-layer equations.
Donaldson et al. [9] used a 3-D panel method to solve the potential
flow problem around the body and to compute the non-dimensional
aerodynamic coefficients CL and CD for the initial study on the design
of low emission hybrid-lift airship and estimated the skin-friction drag
from the Von Karman Reynolds number relation.
In the estimation of the aerodynamic characteristics and perfor-
mance parameters of airships, friction drag plays a major role while
computing the power required. Experimental studies have shown that
the hull of an airship comprises the largest part of the drag. Hoerner
[197] presented an empirical relation based on experimental data to
predict the volumetric drag coefficient of hull based on length-to-
diameter ratio known as Fineness Ratio (FR) as follows:
[ ]
𝐶𝐷𝑉 = 𝐶𝑓 4(𝑙∕𝑑)0.3 + 6(𝑑∕𝑙)1.2 + 24(𝑑∕𝑙)2.7 (1)
However, this empirical relation is insensitive to the changes in
shape of the envelope, because it predicts the same drag coefficient
value for two different shapes with the same FR and Reynolds number.
Alam and Pant [198] modified Hoerner’s empirical relation to capture
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 44. Equivalent ellipsoid to a multi-lobed envelope with same volume.

the variation in the drag more accurately, by introducing a modification

factor 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 which results in the following modified Hoerner’s formula,
0.18(𝑙∕𝑑)0.3 + 0.27(𝑙∕𝑑)−1.2 + 1.08(𝑙∕𝑑)−2.7
𝐶𝐷𝑉 ,𝑚 = (2)
(𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑅𝑒)1∕6
For conventional and hybrid airships, the zero-lift drag coefficient
can be estimated by employing Hoerner’s equation [39]. Since the
relation is basically a function of FR, for a multi-lobed hybrid airship,
the reference diameter of the hull can be taken by treating the complex
geometry equivalent to an ellipsoid (refer to Fig. 44), as suggested by
Carichner and Nicolai [1]. A comparison of drag coefficient data of the
bare hull of a hybrid airship with Hoerner’s equation and CFD revealed
a mismatch of 40%–50%. Brandon [115] carried out a comparative
study of lifting body hybrid airships with conventional ellipsoidal
airships for long endurance surveillance missions and assumed that the
skin friction drag of the hull of a lifting body hybrid airship is 1.5 times
Fig. 45. Lift curve slopes for the aerial vehicles [3].
the value of single-lobed conventional airship.
Carichner and Nicolai [1] presented an approach to estimate the
zero-lift drag of each component of a hybrid airship for a given shape
based on a well-known method called Drag Build-Up method. In this lift coefficient (C𝐿 ), lifting surface planform area (S), and Aspect Ratio
method, the drag of each component of the airship exposed to the (AR). It can be expressed in terms of lift and drag coefficients as follows:
flow, summing the components together, then adding an interference 𝐷𝑖 𝐶𝐿2
factor of 4%–12% of that sum. Zero-lift drag coefficient (CD0 ) can be 𝐶𝐷,𝑖 = = (4)
0.5𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆 𝜋𝐴𝑅
expressed as a function of form factor (FF) for airship hulls in terms of
Lift coefficient (C𝐿 ) can be estimated from the lift-curve-slope
FR, wetted area (Swet ), and frontal area as reference (Sref ), (dC𝐿 /d𝛼 or C𝐿𝛼 ) and angle of attack (𝛼),
𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡
𝐶𝐷0 = 𝐶𝑓 .𝐹 𝐹 .𝑄. (3) 𝐶𝐿 = 𝐶𝐿𝛼 𝛼 (5)
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓
From the study of aerodynamics of wings and bodies [199], the
where Cf is the skin-friction coefficient, FF is form factor, Q is the
lift-curve-slope for the airships and hybrids is derived as follows:
dynamic pressure.
2𝜋𝐴𝑅
One of the unique characteristics of hybrid airships in comparison 𝐶𝐿𝛼 = √ (6)
to the conventional airships is the generation of dynamic lift (so- 2+ 4 + 𝐴𝑅2
called aerodynamic lift) which is around 20%–40% of the total lift. Fig. 45 shows the variation of lift-curve slope with respect to Aspect
All airships generate some dynamic lift while operating at an angle Ratio (AR) and also the aerodynamic lift data of single-lobe body
of attack, but its magnitude is very small compared to the buoyant of revolution with/or without tail and hybrid airships. It is observed
lift. This makes the hybrid airships aerodynamically superior to the that the airships with a body of revolution; single lobe envelope, and
conventional airships. The larger the dynamic lift, the smaller the without tails are poor lifting bodies compared to single-lobed airships
requirement for ballast weight to be carried to maintain the heaviness with tails. Though airships with body of revolution envelopes and tails
have many advantages over unconventional shaped airships, hybrid
of the airship. The aerodynamic lift can be modulated to adjust the
airships have better aerodynamic performance and payload capacity
change in heaviness, but the buoyant lift is constant for airships with
which makes them superior for cargo transportation. Looking at the
ballonets. Nicolai and Carichner [3] presented the relationship between
data in Fig. 45, it is clear that there exists a relation between buoyant
aircraft and hybrid airships based on aerodynamic forces generated and vehicle and aircraft based on aerodynamic forces.
related parameters like lift-to-drag ratio (L/D), lift curve slope (CL 𝛼), It is a fairly difficult task to estimate the aerodynamic characteristics
and the drag-due-to-lift factor in the drag polar equation. of the multi-lobed hybrid airship without carrying out experiments in
For a hybrid airship, lift-induced drag arising from dynamic lift is the wind tunnel and/or Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis.
another important parameter that needs to be considered during the There is severe dearth of experimental aerodynamic data in the open
evaluation of aerodynamic performance. Induced drag is a function of literature for multi-lobed hybrid airships.

17
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 46. Airlander 50 — full configuration.
Source: Ref. [39].
Fig. 47. Airlander 10 — full configuration.
Source: Ref. [124].
A CFD study on full configuration of multi-lobed hybrid airship
in Fig. 46 with a shape similar to the Airlander 50 airship of Hybrid
Air Vehicles (HAV) Ltd. has been reported by Carrión et al. [39]. The
work begins with the validation of CFD data of a 6:1 prolate spheroid
to test the efficiency of the solver which can be used to solve the
defined problem. The reason to choose the prolate spheroid as a testing
model is because of its similarity of Reynolds number and availability of
abundant experimental data to enable the validation. It is a preliminary
study focused on estimating the aerodynamic properties of a multi-
lobed hybrid airship and to analyze the effects of variation in Reynolds
number.
Carrión et al. [124] also studied the aerodynamic characteristics of
a double-lobed hybrid airship, viz., Airlander 10 of Hybrid Air Vehicles
Ltd. (refer Fig. 47), at high pitch and yaw angles. The effect of airship
components like fins, strakes, leading edge root extension (LERX),
skids, gondola, bowthruster, and ducts of the engines at different pitch
angles and also for mild and strong yaw conditions were also analyzed.
The sensitivity study on the location of the ducts was also conducted
along with the other investigations. Zhang et al. [40] estimated the
aerodynamic performance of multi-lobed hybrid airship as part of the
conceptual design using RANS turbulence model viz., Spalart–Allmaras.
Few studies in the recent past have focused on investigating the
aerodynamic performance of winged-hull dynastats using CFD. Andan
et al. [26] presented a comparative study between conventional and
winged-hull airship based on numerical investigation of aerodynamic
performance over a range of angle of attack. The major outcome of
the study is that both the conventional and the winged-hull airship
18
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 48. Solar powered buoyancy-lifting vehicle.
Source: Ref. [86].
have poor rolling stability. Another important observation from the
results is that the winged-hull airship has less longitudinal stability and
higher directional stability than the conventional airship. Numerical
simulations revealed that the change in wing placement and its dihedral
angle have a strong positive effect on the rolling stability. Haque et al.
[24,88,92] made extensive use of CFD solvers to study the aerodynamic
characteristics of winged-hull dynastats and reported many interesting
observations and results.
Chen et al. [86] proposed a new configuration of buoyancy-lifting
vehicle for near space applications and investigated the aerodynamic
characteristics using an engineering method for lift-to-drag ratio, CFD
and wind tunnel test for aerodynamic coefficients. The proposed con-
figuration combines the features of high-altitude airship and solar-
powered unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). From the comparison of
results using different methods, it is concluded that the engineering
method is inefficient to evaluate aerodynamic coefficients.
Selection of an appropriate turbulence model is an important, chal-
lenging, and difficult task while using CFD for investigation of flow
around a body and estimating the aerodynamic characteristics of the
airships with complex shapes as in HAs. Choosing the right turbulence
model helps to achieve the solutions in better agreement with the actual
flight data. There is no standard procedure for the choice of turbulence
model. Results obtained using different turbulence models show large
variation with each other. One of the standard ways to choose an appro-
priate turbulence model is to research the existing literatures in detail.
The most commonly used mathematical models for turbulence are LES
and RANS. In LES, turbulence models like Smagorinsky-Lilly, Dynamic
subgrid-scale, RNG-LES, Wall-adapting local eddy-viscosity (WALE) are
used. Similarly, RANS have algebraic models, one equation models
(Spalart-Almaras, etc.), two equation models (k-𝜖, k-𝜔, etc.), Non-linear
eddy viscosity models, Reynolds stress model (RSM). In a study of flow
around a hybrid airship model similar to the Airlander by HAV, Carrión
et al. [39] compared the Shear Stress Transport (SST) k-𝜔 model against
the k-𝜔 Explicit Algebraic Stress (EASM) model within the unsteady
RANS framework, and also investigated the effect of low pitch angles
on transition effect, high pitch angles provided the substantial lift
augmentation, and sensitivity of the transition location to the Reynolds
number. Meng et al. [41] investigated the aerodynamic performance
of multi-lobed and winged-hull hybrid airships based on numerical
approach using CFD solver. The effect of different turbulence models
of RANS and Variational Multiscale Large Eddy Simulation (VMS-LES)
were analyzed on a 6:1 prolate spheroid model and concluded that the
combined LES achieved better agreement with the experimental data
than the RANS model. From the results of the comparative study, the
VMS-LES model was used to study the aerodynamic performance of two
different hybrid airships (see Fig. 36).
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
5.3. Approximate models for aerodynamic estimation
In the process of Multi-disciplinary Design Optimization (MDO) of
an airship, approximation models known as Surrogate Models, Re-
sponse Surface Models (RSM), and Metamodels or Emulators are often
proposed to evaluate aerodynamic performances to avoid the coupling
of the CFD module since they are computationally expensive. Few
studies have focused on developing the approximate model for hybrid
airships to enhance the computational efficiency of design optimization
and to increase the degrees of freedom for the aerodynamic-based
shape optimization. Zhang et al. [132] developed a response surface
model of aerodynamic characteristics with different fineness ratios (FR)
for the multi-disciplinary design analysis of lifting-body hybrid airships.
In our previous study [139], we have proposed a surrogate model of
aerodynamic characteristics to couple it with the MDO framework. The
model used in this study was developed based on Krigging approxima-
tion to predict the drag coefficient of tri-lobed airship configuration
within ±3% error band.
6. Thermal models for analyzing hybrid airships
Hybrid Airships for stratospheric applications are, in general, de-
signed to be deployed at an altitude of around 15–20 km, where the
wind speed is stable and suitable for station keeping of long endurance
missions such as surveillance, communication relay, navigation and
environment monitoring [200–203]. However, the solar radiation is
stronger than at a lower altitude, and the density of air is very low,
and diurnal variation of the temperature affects the performance of
the airship. It degrades the efficiency of the solar panels which is the
major power source of solar-powered airships. During day time, the
temperature of the internal gas raises due to direct radiation from
the sun, infrared radiation, reflected radiation, scattered radiation,
heat radiation from onboard avionics, and convection heat transfer.
This leads to a phenomenon called superheat. During the night time,
however, the temperature of internal gas becomes lower than the
ambient air, due to a phenomenon called supercool. For the airships that
are developed for the long endurance applications, both superheat and
supercool have significant effect on the pressure differential between
the gas enclosed inside the envelope and ambient air, thermal stress
of the hull, mechanical strength of the envelope, and the airship net
buoyancy. The thermal environment also has a significant effect on
the performance of the photovoltaic array. To overcome these issues,
and to design a highly reliable system, the thermal characteristics
of the airship must be taken into consideration during the design
and optimization process. Zhang et al. [130] developed a simplified
thermal model using CFD of a high-altitude solar-powered multi-lobed
hybrid airship. The proposed model includes a user defined function
(UDF) program to investigate the thermal effects of the photovoltaic
module array (PVMA), lifting gas inside the envelope, and the envelope
surface on the performance of airships. The results obtained through
numerical simulations were validated with the ground experiment and
shown that the PVMA has significant effects on an airship’s thermal
performance. Meng et al. [137] investigated the effects of flight time,
location, attitude and relative wind speed on thermal performance and
output power of a hybrid airship during long-distance transportation
across different latitudes and longitudes by coupling the three different
modules on thermal, output power, and dynamics.
7. Modeling of hybrid airship dynamics
In general, airships are modeled as a rigid body with six degrees
of freedom, which results in six non-linear equations of motion that
represent the dynamics of an airship. The external forces that impact
the dynamics are weight, buoyancy force, aerodynamic forces & mo-
ments, and propulsive forces. In addition to these forces, the inertia of
the fluid displaced by a body, viz., Added Mass (AM), also plays an
19
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
important role in the evaluation of dynamics of airships. For a buoyant
vehicle with large body volume and density similar to the surrounding
fluid (e.g., an airship), the effect of AM cannot be ignored [204,205].
Many methods [206,207] are available for the computation of AM for
the airships with an axial-symmetric envelope shape. Several studies
evaluated the approximated value of AM for complex shapes using an
equivalent-ellipsoid method. However, to enable precise calculation of
AM for non-standard shapes, better methods have to be developed.
With the technological improvement and advancement in numerical
methods, some standard methods have been proposed to compute the
added mass of unconventional configurations. Atkinson and Urso [112]
presented a method for modeling the apparent mass effects of airflow
obtained from a potential flow code for hybrid airships. From this
study, it is observed that there is a significant destabilizing effect
on vehicle dynamics. Azouz et al. [208] presented a dynamic model
and computed the added masses matrix for unconventional airships
of flying wing type by means of velocity potential flow theory. There
are computationally efficient approaches to compute AM, which can
be coupled to an optimization framework to study the dynamics of
hybrid airships. Ceruti et al. [131] have developed a framework to
optimize the external shape of an unconventional airship configuration
with multi-lobed envelope, this framework also includes a method to
estimate the AM.
8. Structural analysis of hybrid airships
To design a safe and reliable system, structural analysis becomes
an essential module of the design process. Advances in the field of
materials and related technologies, have enabled usage of flexible
membrane structures for aerospace applications. The main advantage
of using flexible membrane structures is mass saving compared to the
conventional designs. Airships experience deformation due to aerostatic
and aerodynamic loads during their flight. In particular, the deforma-
tions due to loads acting on the structure at different flight conditions
have significant impact on the system performance, and can lead to
catastrophic failure. In the recent years, many studies have been carried
out on the design and analysis of HAs. But very few studies on multi-
disciplinary design optimization of hybrid airships have focused on the
structural analysis and structural-based shape optimization. Advance-
ment in the computational techniques over many decades, have lead
to the development of Computer Aided Design (CAD) tools to design
geometry models of complex non-linear structures and Finite-Element
(FE) based tools to perform extensive structural analysis with high
degree of accuracy. Boeing used the FEA package ABAQUS to develop
an internal loads model for the Skyhook’s JHL-40 airship, as seen in
Fig. 16.
Over many years, a leading UK based consulting engineering firm
Tensys has developed FE analysis tools called inTENS for architectural
structures, but recently the tools have been adapted and developed
to permit the design, analysis and patterning of the hulls of several
large-scale flying HA demonstrators. Current activities include the de-
sign of envelopes for the HAs, investigations of high-altitude tethered
aerostats, and the design of very large kite sails for use in auxiliary
propulsion for cargo ships. Brooke and Bown [113] have outlined the
work carried out on the structural analysis of multi-lobed hybrid airship
in the last ten years by Tensys design group and also focused on the
general requirements and concept design of hybrid airships. In order
to achieve better design and performance of airships, multidisciplinary
design criteria have to be applied to the structural models. Kuhn
and Baier [210] developed a multi-disciplinary model based on struc-
ture to reduce the total mass of ultra-lightweight hybrid airship. The
main objective of the study is to demonstrate the interaction between
membrane deformations and aerodynamics based on fluid membrane
interaction models.
In the total mass estimation of an airship, envelope mass is one
of the important elements which depends on material density and
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
Fig. 49. Contribution of fins to the lift and drag.
Source: Data taken from Ref. [209].
thickness of the envelope fabric. In particular, the thickness affects the
stress distribution and deformation behavior of an airship. Agte et al.
[114] conducted the finite-element analysis to determine the thickness
requirement of fabric based on the load distribution. From the analysis
it was observed that at the seams, the magnitude of load exceeds the
allowable stress value and hence, the thickness at these locations must
be four times the thickness of the envelope.
The Italian Aerospace Research Center (CIRA) is currently working
on designing a long endurance unmanned stratospheric hybrid airship
platform for Earth observation and telecommunications (also known
as HAPS, i.e., High Altitude Pseudo Satellite) [136]. As part of this
project, design teams developed some tools to obtain the conceptual
layout which can be used to perform CFD, FEM analysis, and stability
analysis.
9. Hybrid airships stability
Although the aerostatic lift dominates the aerodynamic lift in pro-
viding the total lift, the aerodynamic characteristics of HAs determine
its stability. Studies [211–215] have shown that an airship experiences
statically unstable behavior due to envelope shape and the Added Mass
(AM) terms. The stability derivatives and AM terms play an important
role in the dynamics of an airship. The stability derivatives can be
obtained through CFD, wind tunnel experiments, flight test data, or
using empirical relations. For complex geometries of hybrid airships
operating at high Reynolds number, CFD is an efficient method to
derive the stability derivatives. Haque et al. [24] studied the effect of
empennage arrangement (arrangement of stabilizing surfaces at the tail
of the airship) on the stability of winged hybrid airships using CFD
to compute the aerodynamic characteristics and stability derivatives.
From the results obtained, it is very clear that the different arrangement
of empennage has significant impact on the stability. In the later study,
Haque et al. [216] analyzed the static stability of a hybrid buoyant
vehicle using the panel method. They derived the stability derivatives
based on the aerodynamic characteristics of all the components of the
airship except the fuselage, and used a CFD solver to compute the flow
over the fuselage. The results obtained from this study showed that
the proposed hybrid airship configuration with three lifting surfaces
(canard, wing and horizontal stabilizer) and two vertical tails exhibited
good stability characteristics. This study clearly brought out how the
various components of an airship contribute to its stability. Similarly,
Carrión et al. [209] demonstrated the advantage of CFD to predict the
aerodynamic damping of a multi-lobed hybrid airship, and compared
the aerodynamic performance and stability of the full configuration
including fins, LERX (leading edge root extension), and strakes with
the bare hull. An airship with fins and stabilizers was found to be
stable compared to just the bare hull. Adding fins to a hybrid airship
20
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
contributes the most to the lift and also drag with less percentage
change compared to the lift [126,209] as shown in Fig. 49.
The preliminary aerodynamic and stability analysis of low-speed
hybrid airships (airships with wings) can also be carried out using
an aircraft design software called Digital DATCOM, which is one of
the tools in the Flight Dynamics module of MATLAB® . Aerodynamic
characteristics and stability derivatives can be obtained using this
tool for airships with a geometry similar to a conventional aircraft.
Haque et al. [217] used Digital DATCOM to model the aerodynamic
characteristics and to determine the stability and control derivatives
of winged-hull hybrid airships for static analysis. Xiao et al. [81]
compared the aerodynamic characteristics and longitudinal static sta-
bility of winged-hull dynastats and conventional airships. The results of
the study indicate that the winged-hull dynastats are statically stable
in longitudinal motion, which helps to restrain the airship against
sudden wind interferences during ascending flight. Haque et al. [104]
investigated the issues related to the directional stability of a winged-
hull dynastat at low speed, and provided a solution of using electric
trimmers (propeller attached to the electric motor) to control the yaw
motion.
10. Conclusions
Development of new technologies in various fields made it possi-
ble for modern hybrid airships to emerge as an ideal, multi-purpose
platform for several civil and defense applications. They can also be
used as an alternate to replace the high-cost satellites for surveillance,
communications, and explorations. Better and more efficient techniques
have to be developed for design and development of hybrid airships, so
that they can emerge as an optimal solution for the cargo transportation
industry, without the need for a multi-billion-dollar infrastructure.
However, there is still a long road ahead for hybrid airships to reach a
state of reliable and functional system to meet today’s market demands
and applications.
This paper presents a state-of-the-art literature review on research
and advancements of hybrid airships, focused on key areas like con-
ceptual design, performance, multi-disciplinary design optimization,
aerodynamics, thermal performance, dynamics, and structures. There
are several disciplines related to hybrid airships that need to be care-
fully modeled to design truly capable and operational and safe hybrid
airships. Some of the key challenges to be addressed in the future
development of such a vehicle are brought out in this paper, and new
methodologies to be created have also been highlighted, viz.,
• Computationally inexpensive methods for aerodynamic analysis
of such complex designs at the conceptual design phase
• Efficient parameterization of envelope geometry to increase the
degrees of freedom in shape selection and to achieve better
configurations for the given mission requirements
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
• Multi-disciplinary integrated design tool for conceptual layout
and design optimization
• In-depth market analysis to estimate the market size of hybrid
airships
• Combination of market analysis with the design process to shape
the vehicle that suits the existing ground infrastructure
• Development of a cost etimation module for hybrid airships
• Development of highly reliable ground handling systems
This list is by no means exhaustive, but it contains some of the
challenges involved in the design of hybrid airships, with a sustained
effort in R&D and development of new technologies.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] Grant E. Carichner, Leland M. Nicolai, Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship
Design: Volume 2-Airship Design and Case Studies, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/4.868986.
[2] Flavio Araripe d’Oliveira, Francisco Cristovão Lourenço de Melo, Tes-
saleno Campos Devezas, High-altitude platforms—Present situation and tech-
nology trends, J. Aerosp. Technol. Manag. 8 (3) (2016) 249–262, http://dx.
doi.org/10.5028/jatm.v8i3.699.
[3] Leland Nicolai, Grant Carichner, Airplanes and airships... evolutionary cousins,
in: 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum
and Aerospace Exposition, 2012, p. 1178, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2012-
1178.
[4] Mark D. Ardema, Feasibility of modern airships: preliminary assessment, J.
Aircr. 14 (11) (1977) 1140–1148, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.58902.
[5] Gabriel Alexander Khoury, Airship Technology, vol. 10, Cambridge university
press, 2012.
[6] Anwar ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Erwin Sulaeman, Ashraf Omar, Jaffar Syed Mo-
hamed Ali, Pugh Analysis for Configuration Selection of a Hybrid Buoyant
Aircraft, Technical Report, SAE Technical Paper, 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.
4271/2015-01-2446.
[7] Nigel Kaley, The modern airship: A review of 40 years of airship development,
2003.
[8] Lin Liao, Igor Pasternak, A review of airship structural research and develop-
ment, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 45 (4–5) (2009) 83–96, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
paerosci.2009.03.001.
[9] Alexander Donaldson, Ioannis Simaiakis, Jonathan Lovegren, Nikolaos Pyrgiotis,
Lishuai Li, Christopher Dorbian, Chelsea He, Parametric design of low emission
hybrid-lift cargo aircraft, in: 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including
the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 2010, p. 1395, https:
//doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-1395.
[10] USA Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2007, EPA, 2009.
[11] Casey Stockbridge, Alessandro Ceruti, Pier Marzocca, Airship research and
development in the areas of design, structures, dynamics and energy systems,
Int. J. Aeronaut. Space Sci. 13 (2) (2012) 170–187, http://dx.doi.org/10.5139/
IJASS.2012.13.2.170.
[12] M. Harper, A hybrid airship concept for naval missions, in: Aircraft Systems
and Technology Meeting, 1976, p. 923, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.1976-923.
[13] W.F. Putman, H.C. Curtiss Jr., Stability and control characteristics of the
aerocrane hybrid heavy-lift vehicle, J. Aircr. 17 (10) (1980) 719–726, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.57959.
[14] Mark D. Ardema, Vehicle concepts and technology requirements for buoyant
heavy-lift systems, 1981.
[15] C. Venkatesan, P. Friedmann, Aeromechanical stability analysis of a multirotor
vehicle model representing a hybrid heavy lift airship (HHLA), in: 25th
Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, 1984, p. 987, https:
//doi.org/10.2514/3.45232.
[16] D. Quam, The other hybrid airship developments, in: Aircraft Systems, Design
and Technology Meeting, 1986, p. 2740.
[17] Shigenori Ando, Preliminary feasibility study for a new hybrid airship (Hel-
iship), in: 8th Lighter-than-Air Technology Conference, 1989, p. 3161, https:
//doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-3161.
[18] John Gundlach IV, Unmanned solar-powered hybrid airships for mars ex-
ploration, in: 37th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1999, p. 896,
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-896.
21
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
[19] Ernest Earon, Jacob Apkarian, The development of a hybrid airship platform
for precision UAV applications, in: AIAA Balloon Systems Conference, 2007, p.
2621, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-2621.
[20] Dhwanil Shukla, Nandeesh Hiremath, Narayanan Komerath, A Cycloidal Rotor
and Airship System for On-Demand Hypercommuting, Technical Report, SAE
Technical Paper, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-2026.
[21] G. Warwick, Boeing, skyhook team on heavy-lift airship, Aviation Week (2008).
[22] David Arthur, David Newman, Jason Wheelock, Raymond Hall, Options for
Strategic Military Transportation Systems, Congressional Budget Office (U.S.
Congress) Washington D.C., 2005.
[23] Edwin Mowforth, An Introduction To the Airship, Airship Association, 2007.
[24] Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Suleiman, Jaffar M. Ali, et al., Static
longitudinal stability of a hybrid airship, in: Proceedings of 2014 11th In-
ternational Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology (IBCAST)
Islamabad, Pakistan, 14th-18th January, 2014, IEEE, 2014, pp. 343–348, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/IBCAST.2014.6778167.
[25] Alessandro Ceruti, Piergiovanni Marzocca, Vitaly Voloshin, New Unconventional
Airship Concept by Morphing the Lenticular Shape, Technical Report, SAE
Technical Paper, 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-2577.
[26] Amelda Dianne Andan, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Aerodynamics of a hybrid
airship, AIP Conf. Proc. 1440 (1) (2012) 154–161, http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/
1.4704214.
[27] Eduardo Pinto, José Barata, High maneuverability lenticular airship, in: Doc-
toral Conference on Computing, Electrical and Industrial Systems, Springer,
2012, pp. 207–216, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28255-3_23.
[28] Santos-Dumont, My Airships, Honoloulo HI, Reprint of Translated Edition, Dans
L’Air-in the Air, University Press of the Pacific, Dover, 1973.
[29] D. Fink, Hybrid heavy lift vehicle under study, Aviat. Week 24 (1974).
[30] M. Spearman, Karen Feigh, A hybrid airship concept having twin-hulls and an
inboard-wing, in: 13th Lighter-than-Air Systems Technology Conference, 1999,
p. 3914, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-3914.
[31] M. Leroy Spearman, An Inboard-Wing Arrangement for High-Capacity Airlift
and Sealift Vehicles, Citeseer, 2003.
[32] Tianshu Liu, W.W. Liou, M. Schulte, Aeroship: a hybrid flight platform, J. Aircr.
46 (2) (2009) 667–674, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.39950.
[33] W.M. Miller, The Dynairship (deltoid aerobody combining buoyant and dynamic
lift), in: Interagency Workshop on Lighter than Air Vehicles, Monterey, Calif,
Proceedings, vol. 9, no. 13, 1974.
[34] Ben Forrest, Solar ship challenges lockheed martin to airship race, 2016,
https://www.skiesmag.com/news/solar-ship-challenges. (Accessed 27 February
2021).
[35] Martin Hoffmann, Beautiful concept airship looks 85 years into the future, 2010,
https://senatus.net/article/wb-1010-reindy-allendra/. (Accessed 27 February
2021).
[36] Gosha Galitsky, Airship One : A Hybrid Between An Airplane and A
Semi-Rigid Airship, https://www.tuvie.com/airship-one-a-hybrid-between-an-
airplane-and-a-semi-rigid-airship/. (Accessed 27 February 2021).
[37] M. Manikandan, R.S. Pant, A comparative study of conventional and tri-lobed
stratospheric airships, Aeronaut. J. (2021) 1–33, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/aer.
2021.24.
[38] Muhammad Iyas Mahzan, Sallehuddin Muhamad, An evolution of hybrid airship
vehicle (HAV) envelope: Aerodynamics analysis, Appl. Mech. Mater. 660 (2014)
498–502, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.660.498.
[39] Marina Carrión, Rene Steijl, G.N. Barakos, D. Stewart, Analysis of hybrid air
vehicles using computational fluid dynamics, J. Aircr. 53 (4) (2016) 1001–1012,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.C033402.
[40] Lanchuan Zhang, Mingyun Lv, Junhui Meng, Huafei Du, Conceptual design and
analysis of hybrid airships with renewable energy, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. G 232
(11) (2018) 2144–2159, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0954410017711726.
[41] Junhui Meng, Moning Li, Lanchuan Zhang, Mingyun Lv, Li Liu, Aerodynamic
performance analysis of hybrid air vehicles with large Reynolds number, in:
2019 IEEE International Conference on Unmanned Systems, ICUS, IEEE, 2019,
pp. 403–409, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICUS48101.2019.8996035.
[42] Mohammad H. Sadraey, Aircraft Design: A Systems Engineering Approach, John
Wiley & Sons, 2012.
[43] Grant Carichner, Leland M. Nicolai, Hybrids... the Airship Messiah? in: AIAA
Lighter-than-Air Systems Technology (LTA) Conference, 2013, p. 1317, https:
//doi.org/10.2514/6.2013-1317.
[44] Lanchuan Zhang, Mingyun Lv, Junhui Meng, Huafei Du, Optimization of solar-
powered hybrid airship conceptual design, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 65 (2017)
54–61, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.02.016.
[45] Alessandro Ceruti, Pier Marzocca, Conceptual approach to unconventional
airship design and synthesis, J. Aerosp. Eng. 27 (6) (2013) http://dx.doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000344.
[46] Barry E. Prentice, Robert Knotts, Cargo airships: international competition, J.
Transp. Technol. 4 (3) (2014) 187–195, http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jtts.2014.
43019.
[47] Nancy Winters, Man Flies: The Story of Alberto Santos-Dumont; Master of the
Balloon; Conquerer of the Air, Bloomsbury, 1997.
[48] John McPhee, The Deltoid Pumpkin Seed, Macmillan, 1973.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
[49] W.M. Miller Jr., The dynairship, in: Proceedings of the Interagency Workshop
on Lighter than Air Vehicles, Flight Transportation Laboratory Report R75-2,
Cambridge, Mass.
[50] A.G. Crimmins, The Cyclo-Crane-A Hybrid Aircraft Concept, Technical Report,
SAE Technical Paper, 1983, http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/831524.
[51] Julius Dahms, Andreas Bardenhagen, Approach to a synthesis of hybrid
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in rotastatic configuration, in: 7th EASN
International Conference on Innovation in European Aeronautics Research,
Warsaw, Poland, 2017.
[52] Julius Dahms, Andreas Bardenhagen, Propulsion model for (hybrid) unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS), Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 91 (2) (2019) 373–380,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-01-2018-0033.
[53] Nicholas A. Kristof, Hybrid Aircraft for Heavy Lift/High Speed Strategic
Mobility, Technical Report, Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell, United
States, 2011.
[54] Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Walrus Heavy Lift Air Vehicle
Design Program, Phase I, Draft Program Solicitation 04-XX, Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, Arlington, VA, 2004.
[55] Hybrid Airships, The Airship Association, 2012.
[56] Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Canadian company buys
commercial rights for skytug from lockheed martin, 2011, https:
//www.uasvision.com/2011/03/28/canadian-company-buys-commercial-
rights-for-skytug-from-lockheed-martin/.
[57] First flight test successful for army’s long endurance multi-intelligence
vehicle air vehicle, 2021, https://www.army.mil/article/85175/First_flight_test_
successful_for_Army_s_Long_Endurance_Multi_Intelligence_Vehicle_air_vehicle.
(Accessed 10 April 2021).
[58] World’s largest blimp passes flight test, 2021, http://www.
homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dr20120814-world-s-largest-blimp-passes-
flight-test. (Accessed 10 April 2021).
[59] Jim Moore, Army airship makes maiden flight in lakehurst, 2021,
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2012/august/15/army-
airship-makes-maiden-flight-in-lakehurst. (Accessed 10 April 2021).
[60] Airworthiness criteria: Proposed airship design criteria for lockheed martin
aeronautics model LMZ1M airship, 2021, https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2013/06/25/2013-15056/airworthiness-criteria-proposed-airship-
design-criteria-for-lockheed-martin-aeronautics-model-lmz1m. (Accessed 10
April 2021).
[61] Erik Schechter, US Army sells cancelled LEMV airship to original design-
ert, 2021, https://www.flightglobal.com/us-army-sells-cancelled-lemv-airship-
to-original-designer/111509.article. (Accessed 10 April 2021).
[62] Lockheed martin hybrid airship certification plan for commercial
transport approved by the FAA, 2021, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-
releases/lockheed-martin-hybrid-airship-certification-plan-for-commercial-
transport-approved-by-the-faa-300179764.html. (Accessed 10 April 2021).
[63] D.E. Calkins, A feasibility study of a trans-ocean hybrid cargo airship operating
in ground effect, 1975.
[64] Jon Davis, Description of CASCOMP Comprehensive Airship Sizing and
Performance Computer Program, vol. 2, 1975.
[65] D.E. Calkins, Feasibility study of a hybrid airship operating in ground effect, J.
Aircr. 14 (8) (1977) 809–815, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.58857.
[66] M.D. Ardema, Comments on ‘‘Feasibility study of a hybrid airship operating in
ground effect’’, J. Aircr. 15 (2) (1978) 126–127, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.
58327.
[67] P.A. Mackrodt, Further studies in the concept of delta-winged hybrid airships,
J. Aircr. 17 (10) (1980) 734–740, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.57960.
[68] Larry A. Young, Vertical Lift-Not Just for Terrestrial Flight, Technical Report,
NASA, 2000.
[69] Chin E. Lin, Shih Che Hung, Kuo Ming Lee, Design analysis and performance
assessment of winged-airship for micro transport, Zhongguo Hangkong Taikong
Xuehui Huikan/Trans. Aeronaut. Astronaut. Soc. Republ. China 33 (4) (2001)
257–268.
[70] Kuo-Ming Lee, Chin Lin, Shih-Che Hung, Analysis and implementation of
a winged-airship for micro transport and test platform, in: AIAA Guidance,
Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, 2001, p. 4335, https://doi.
org/10.2514/6.2001-4335.
[71] Ke-shi Zhang, Zhong-hua Han, Bi-feng Song, Flight performance analysis of
hybrid airship, in: 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New
Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 2009, p. 901, https://doi.org/10.
2514/1.47294.
[72] Ke-shi Zhang, Zhong-hua Han, Bi-feng Song, Flight performance analysis of hy-
brid airship: revised analytical formulation, J. Aircr. 47 (4) (2010) 1318–1330,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.47294.
[73] Wang Haifeng, Song Bifeng, Zhong Xiaoping, Configuration design and sizing
optimization of a winged airship, in: 2011 International Conference on Network
Computing and Information Security, vol. 2, IEEE, 2011, pp. 41–45, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/NCIS.2011.107.
[74] Robert Mitchell, Effectiveness of hybrid airships as cargo airlifters, in: 11th
AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference,
Including the AIAA Balloon Systems Conference and 19th AIAA Lighter-than,
2011, p. 6832, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2011-6832.
22
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
[75] Feng Li, ZhengYin Ye, Chao Gao, Design of a new tandem wings hybrid airship,
Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 55 (10) (2012) 1886–1893, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s11433-012-4883-6.
[76] Amelda D. Andan, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Investigation of aerodynamic
parameters of a hybrid airship, J. Aircr. 49 (2) (2012) 658–662, http://dx.doi.
org/10.2514/1.C031491.
[77] Alessandro Ceruti, Piergiovanni Marzocca, Casey Stockbridge, Rapid Prototyp-
ing as a Tool to Support Wind Tunnel Testing of Unconventional Unmanned
Airships, Technical report, SAE Technical Paper, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.
4271/2013-01-2193.
[78] D.L. Ma, C. Ye, Dynamic derivative analysis for hybrid airship incorporating
lift and buoyancy, J. Aerosp. Power 28 (5) (2013) 1074–1080.
[79] Anwar U. Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Jaffar M.
Ali, Conceptual design of a winged hybrid airship, in: 21st AIAA Lighter-than-
Air Systems Technology Conference, 2014, p. 2710, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.
2014-2710.
[80] K. Kiran Sagar, Aman Raj Verma, Pankaj Priyadarshi, Comment on ‘‘Aeroship:
A hybrid flight platform’’, J. Aircr. 51 (2) (2014) 701, http://dx.doi.org/10.
2514/1.C031974.
[81] Hou Di Xiao, Pan Pan Mi, Long Bin Liu, Shuai Cao, A new method of strength-
ening longitudinal static stability of airship in ascent, Appl. Mech. Mater.
687 (2014) 212–215, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.687-
691.212.
[82] Yang Liu, Pan Zeng, Li Ping Lei, Experimental study on the stability proper-
ties of different design of tandem wing airship models, Appl. Mech. Mater.
457 (2014) 1611–1614, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.
457-458.1611.
[83] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf Ali Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Jaffar S.
Mohamed Ali, Stability and takeoff ground roll issues of hybrid buoyant aircraft,
660 (2014) 503–507, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.660.
503.
[84] Mofeez Alam, Kumar Ashish, Sanjay Limaye, Aerodynamic analysis of
BlimPlane-A conceptual hybrid UAV for Venus, in: 2014 IEEE Aerospace
Conference, IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2014.
6836331.
[85] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Mohamed J.S.
Ali, Aerostatic and aerodynamic modules of a hybrid buoyant aircraft: an
analytical approach, IIUM Eng. J. 16 (1) (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.31436/
iiumej.v16i1.532.
[86] Guangqiang Chen, Bingyan Chen, Pengfei Li, Peng Bai, Chunqun Ji, Study
of aerodynamic configuration design and wind tunnel test for solar powered
buoyancy-lifting vehicle in the near-space, Procedia Eng. 99 (2015) 67–72,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.12.509.
[87] Anwar Ul Haque, Nik Mohamad Amri Hafiz, S.M. Kashif, Waqar Asrar,
Ashraf Ali Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, J.S. Ali, Design and fabrication of a winged
hybrid airship model for IIUM-LSWT, in: Advanced Materials Research, 1115,
Trans Tech Publ, 2015, pp. 513–516, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.
net/AMR.1115.513.
[88] A.U. Haque, W. Asrar, A.A. Omar, E. Sulaeman, J.S.M. Ali, Power-off static
stability analysis of a clean configuration of a hybrid buoyant aircraft, in: 7th
Ankara InternatÕonal Aerospace Conference, METU, Ankara Turkey, 2015, pp.
11–13.
[89] Amarandaas Kaluvan, Pier Marzocca, Alessandro Ceruti, Walter Lacarbonara,
Wind tunnel testing of unconventional airships docking in-flight and conceptual
design of docking mechanism, in: 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2015,
p. 0246, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-0246.
[90] Tânia Sofia Bettencourt Amaral, Conceptual Design of the Gondola of a Hybrid
Airship Including Loading and Unloading Mechanisms (Ph.D. thesis), 2015.
[91] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, A.A. Omar, E. Sulaeman, J.S.M. Ali, A prospec-
tive solutions for consistent aerostatic lift for a hybrid buoyant aircraft, in: Sixth
International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
(IEOM) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2016.
[92] Anwar U. Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Jaffer S.M.
Ali, Effect of wing loading on gross takeoff mass of a hybrid buoyant aircraft,
Int. J. Unmanned Syst. Eng. 4 (1) (2016) 11.
[93] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Asharf Ali Omar, Erwin Suleiman, Wind tunnel
testing on a generic model of a hybrid lifting hull, J. Aerosp. Technol. Manag.
8 (4) (2016) 467–474, http://dx.doi.org/10.5028/jatm.v8i4.645.
[94] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf Ali Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, J.S. Mo-
hamed Ali, Establishing the analytical relationships for mass and volumetric
mass fractions for hybrid buoyant aircraft, J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 11 (1) (2006)
286–291.
[95] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Mohamed J.S.
Ali, Framework of conceptual design methodology for hybrid buoyant aircraft,
Aerotecnica Missili & Spazio 95 (2) (2016) 99–110, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
BF03404719.
[96] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf Ali Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Jaffar
Syed Mohamed Ali, et al., Hydrostatic and hydrodynamic characteristics of
swimming animals-an inspiration for hybrid buoyant aircraft, Animal Rev. 3
(1) (2016) 1–9, http://dx.doi.org/10.18488/journal.ar/2016.3.1/101.1.1.9.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
[97] Jie Hua, Xiao-lu Wang, Zhen-yu Ma, Qiu-shuo Jin, Design and verification of
a small unmanned hybrid lift airship, Flight Dyn. (2016) 03.
[98] Anwar U. Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, J.S. Mohamed
Ali, Assessment of engine’s power budget for hydrogen powered hybrid buoyant
aircraft, Propuls. Power Res. 5 (1) (2016) 34–44, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
jppr.2016.01.008.
[99] A.U. Haque, W. Asrar, A.A. Omar, E. Sulaeman, J.S. Mohamed Ali, Open jet
testing for buoyant and hybrid buoyant aerial vehicles, Int. J. Aerosp. Mech.
Eng. 10 (1) (2016) 89–95, http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1338676.
[100] Johannes Hartmann, Conceptual design of air vehicles with hybrid lift concepts-
a design space exploration, in: 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2017,
p. 1625, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-1625.
[101] Waqar Asrar, Ashraf Ali Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Jaffar Syed Mohamed Ali, et
al., Hybrid buoyant aircraft: Future STOL aircraft for interconnectivity of the
Malaysian islands, J. Aviat. Technol. Eng. 6 (2) (2017) 5, http://dx.doi.org/10.
7771/2159-6670.1138.
[102] Anwar-Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Defining
reference area for prediction of aerodynamic coefficients of a biologically
inspired hybrid buoyant vehicle, Unmanned Syst. 5 (04) (2017) 237–246,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S230138501750011X.
[103] Fauzul Nugraha, Dadang F. Erawan, Waqar Asrar, Erwin Suleiman, et al.,
Structural design of hybrid buoyant aircraft’s model for subsonic wind tunnel
testing, in: 2017 14th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences
and Technology, IBCAST, IEEE, 2017, pp. 109–115, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
IBCAST.2017.7868043.
[104] A.U. Haque, W. Asrar, A.A. Omar, E. Sulaeman, J.S.M. Ali, Yawing force of
electric trimmers of a hybrid buoyant aerial vehicle, Pertanika J. Sci. Technol.
25 (1) (2017).
[105] Waqar Asrar, Ashraf Ali Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, J.S. Mohamed Ali, et al., Wind
tunnel testing of hybrid buoyant aerial vehicle, Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol.
(2017) http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-06-2015-0165.
[106] Chengjing Ma, Caiwen Zhang, Guanxiong Li, Parametric sensitivity study of
unmanned buoyancy-lifting aerial vehicle, in: MATEC Web of Conferences,
vol. 189, EDP Sciences, 2018, p. 08004, http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/
201818908004.
[107] Julian F.M. Foerster, Mohamed K. Helwa, Xintong Du, Angela P. Schoellig,
Hybrid model predictive control for crosswind stabilization of hybrid airships,
in: International Symposium on Experimental Robotics, Springer, 2018, pp.
499–510, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33950-0_43.
[108] Om Prakash, Multibody dynamics of winged hybrid airship payload delivery
system, in: AIAA Aviation 2020 Forum, 2020, p. 3200, https://doi.org/10.2514/
6.2020-3200.
[109] R. Boyd, Performance of hybrid air vehicles, in: 40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting & Exhibit, 2002, p. 388, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2002-388.
[110] M. Battipede, P.A. Gili, L. Massotti, P. Vercesi, Design characteristics of a
non coventional thrust-vectored airship, in: Proceedings of the 2003 UAV
International Technical Conference & Exhibition, 2003.
[111] Richard Jensen, Operational considerations for large hybrid air vehicles, in:
AIAA 4th Aviation Technology, Integration and Operations (ATIO) Forum, 2004,
p. 6447, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-6447.
[112] Christopher Atkinson, Robert Urso, Modeling of apparent mass effects for the
real-time simulation of a hybrid airship, in: AIAA Modeling and Simulation
Technologies Conference and Exhibit, 2006, p. 6619, https://doi.org/10.2514/
6.2006-661.
[113] Luke Brooke, Adam Bown, Design, analysis, and patterning of inflated lift-
ing body form LTA vehicle hulls, in: 18th AIAA Lighter-than-Air Systems
Technology Conference, 2009, p. 2870, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-2870.
[114] Jeremy Agte, Thomas Gan, Fabrice Kunzi, Andrew March, Sho Sato, Brandon
Suarez, Brian Yutko, Conceptual design of a hybrid lift airship for intra-
regional flexible access transport, in: 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting
Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 2010, p. 1391,
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-1391.
[115] Brandon Buerge, The suitability of hybrid vs. conventional airships for persistent
surveillance missions, in: 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including
the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 2010, p. 1014, https:
//doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-1014.
[116] Long Fei, Huang Longtai, Jiang Wan, Overall design and performance analysis
of a conventional airship and a hybrid airship, Adv. Aeronaut. Sci. Eng. 2
(2012).
[117] Peng-jun Cao, Wan Jiang, Hua Zhang, Aerodynamic configuration optimization
of hull of a hybrid airship, Aeronaut. Comput. Tech. (2012) 01.
[118] Brandon T. Buerge, The scalability of heaviness fraction for large airships, in:
AIAA Lighter-than-Air Systems Technology (LTA) Conference, 2013, p. 1275,
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2013-1275.
[119] Muhammad Iyas Mahzan, Muhamad Sallehuddin, Cost Analysis of a Hybrid
Airship Vehicle for Cargo Delivery, vol. 465, Trans Tech Publications Ltd,
2014, pp. 373–378, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.465-
466.373.
[120] Aman Raj Verma, K. Kiran Sagar, Pankaj Priyadarshi, Optimum buoyant and
aerodynamic lift for a lifting-body hybrid airship, J. Aircr. 51 (5) (2014)
1345–1350, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.C032038.
23
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
[121] V. Kh Pshikhopov, M. Yu Medvedev, A.R. Gaiduk, R.V. Fedorenko, V.A.
Krukhmalev, B.V. Gurenko, Position-trajectory control system for unmanned
robotic airship, IFAC Proc. Vol. 47 (3) (2014) 8953–8958, http://dx.doi.org/
10.3182/20140824-6-ZA-1003.00393.
[122] Mi Panpan, Meng Junhui, Mingyun Lyu, Aerodynamic and overall parameters
analysis of buoyancy-lifting hybrid airship, J. Beijing Univ. Aeronaut. Astronaut.
41 (6) (2015) 1108.
[123] Massimo Biava, George N. Barakos, Optimisation of ducted propellers for hybrid
air vehicles using high-fidelity CFD, Aeronaut. J. 120 (1232) (2016) 1632–1657,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/aer.2016.78.
[124] Marina Carrion, Massimo Biava, Rene Steijl, George N. Barakos, David Stewart,
CFD studies of hybrid air vehicles, in: 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting,
2016, p. 0059, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2016-0059.
[125] Massimo Biava, Marina Carrion, George N. Barakos, David Stewart, Adjoint-
based optimisation of ducted propellers for hybrid air vehicles, in: 54th AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2016, p. 1784, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2016-
1784.
[126] M. Carri, M. Biava, R. Steijl, G.N. Barakos, D. Stewart, et al., Computational
fluid dynamics challenges for hybrid air vehicle applications, Prog. Flight Phys.
9 (2017) 43–80, http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/eucass/201609043.
[127] V.R. Baraniello, Giuseppe Persechino, conceptual design of a stratospheric
hybrid platform for earth observation and telecommunications, in: Aerospace
Europe 6th CEAS Conference, 2017.
[128] G.E. Dorrington, J. Silva, C. Bil, P. Marzocca, et al., On the potential of
lighter-than-air and hybrid aircraft for the Australian civil sector, in: 17th
Australian International Aerospace Congress: AIAC 2017, Engineers Australia,
Royal Aeronautical Society, 2017, p. 489.
[129] Lanchuan Zhang, Mingyun Lv, Cong Sun, Junhui Meng, Flight performance
analysis of hybrid airship considering added mass effects, J. Dyn. Syst. Meas.
Control 140 (11) (2018) http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4040220.
[130] Lanchuan Zhang, Jun Li, Junhui Meng, Huafei Du, Mingyun Lv, Weiyu Zhu,
Thermal performance analysis of a high-altitude solar-powered hybrid airship,
Renew. Energy 125 (2018) 890–906, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.
03.016.
[131] Alessandro Ceruti, D. Gambacorta, Pier Marzocca, Unconventional hybrid
airships design optimization accounting for added masses, Aerosp. Sci. Technol.
72 (2018) 164–173, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.10.042.
[132] Lanchuan Zhang, Mingyun Lv, Weiyu Zhu, Huafei Du, Junhui Meng, Jun
Li, Mission-based multidisciplinary optimization of solar-powered hybrid air-
ship, Energy Convers. Manage. 185 (2019) 44–54, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.enconman.2019.01.098.
[133] Abhishek K. Shanklesha, M. Manikandan, Rajkumar S. Pant, A generic approach
for geometry generation of multi-lobed airship envelopes, in: 33rd National
Convention of Aerospace Engineers, the Institution of Engineers (India), 2019,
pp. 78–81.
[134] Saurabh Vijay Bagare, Rajkumar S. Pant, Hybrid airship: More of a faster ship,
than a slower aircraft, in: 33rd National Convention of Aerospace Engineers,
the Institution of Engineers (India), 2019, pp. 82–87.
[135] Rameiya Paramalingam, Ryan England, Daniel Mollura, David Koff, Expanding
the reach of global health radiology via the world’s first medical hybrid airship:
A SWOT analysis, J. Glob. Health 10 (1) (2020) http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.
10.010374.
[136] Vincenzo Rosario Baraniello, Giuseppe Persechino, Roberto Borsa, Tools for the
Conceptual Design of a Stratospheric Hybrid Platform, Technical Report, SAE
Technical Paper, 2020, http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/2020-01-0025.
[137] Junhui Meng, Moning Li, Lanchuan Zhang, Mingyun Lv, Effect of flight
parameters on thermal performance of a hybrid air vehicle for cargo trans-
portation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 168 (2020) 114807, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2019.114807.
[138] M. Manikandan, Rajkumar S. Pant, Conceptual design optimization of high-
altitude airship having a tri-lobed envelope, in: Advances in Multidisciplinary
Analysis and Optimization, Springer, 2020, pp. 49–61, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1007/978-981-15-5432-2_4.
[139] M. Manikandan, Rajkumar S. Pant, Surrogate based aerodynamic shape opti-
mization of tri-lobed hybrid airship envelope, in: AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum
and Exposition, 2021.
[140] Junhui Meng, Moning Li, Nuo Ma, Li Liu, Multidisciplinary design optimization
of a lift-type hybrid airship, J. Beijing Univ. Aeronaut. Astronaut. 47 (1) (2021)
72.
[141] Gordon H. Fries, John J. Schneider, HLH and Beyond, Technical Report, SAE
Technical Paper, 1979.
[142] R.G.E. Browning, Preliminary design study of a hybrid airship for flight
research, 1981.
[143] B.L. Nagabhushan, P.P. Jacobs, C.E. Belknap, D.A. Euler, Performance
characteristics of a buoyant quad-rotor research aircraft, 1982.
[144] B.L. Nagabhushan, N.P. Tomlinson, Dynamic stability of a buoyant quad-rotor
aircraft for airlifting payloads externally on a sling, in: NASA Report, 1982.
[145] B.L. Nagabhushan, Dynamic stability of a buoyant quad-rotor aircraft, J. Aircr.
20 (3) (1983) 243–249, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.1982-242.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
[146] B.L. Nagabhushan, D.W. Lichty, N.P. Tomlinson, Control characteristics of a
buoyant quad-rotor research aircraft, J. Guid. Control Dyn. 6 (2) (1983) 91–99,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.56342.
[147] Mark B. Tischler, Robert F. Ringland, Henry R. Jex, Heavy-lift airship dynamics,
J. Aircr. 20 (5) (1983) 425–433, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/3.44888.
[148] D. Sandlin, Flight test of the HX-I radio-controlled hybrid airship, in: 5th
Lighter-than Air Conference, 1983, p. 1992, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1983-
1992.
[149] B. Lindenbaum, D. Quam, W. Grady, A new concept of hybrid airship, in: 6th
Lighter-than-Air Systems Conference, p. 868, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1985-
868.
[150] C. Venkatesan, P.P. Friedmann, Aeromechanical stability analysis of a hybrid
heavy lift multirotor vehicle in hover, J. Aircr. 22 (11) (1985) 965–972,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.1984-987.
[151] B. Pershing, Performance prediction and flight evaluation of hybrid heavy lift
systems, in: Aircraft Systems, Design and Technology Meeting, 1986, p. 2741.
[152] Shigenori Ando, A new hybrid airship (‘Heliship’) for commuter transport,
Trans. Japan Soc. Aeronaut. Space Sci. 32 (1989) 79–93, http://dx.doi.org/
10.2322/jjsass1969.37.344.
[153] Ernest Earon, Camille-Alain Rabbath, Jacob Apkarian, Design and control of
a novel hybrid vehicle concept, in: AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control
Conference and Exhibit, 2007, p. 6821, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-6821.
[154] Yasmina Bestaoui, Modeling of a quad-rotor airship with wind and varying
freight mass effects, Int. Rev. Aerosp. Eng. 2 (2) (2009) 91–97.
[155] W. Grady, Performance characteristics of a 25 ton payload agilifter, in: Aircraft
Systems, Design and Technology Meeting, 2010, p. 2738.
[156] T.R. Quackenbush, W.F. Putman, J.E. Risser, W. McE Miller, Design and control
studies for the vectorotor hybrid VTOL heavy lift vehicle, in: 67th American
Helicopter Society International Annual Forum, 2011.
[157] C. Whittenbury, A commercial view of hybrid airships, in: Aircraft Systems,
Design and Technology Meeting, 2012, p. 2703.
[158] Bianca Isabela Gomes, Marcio Guilherme Martins, Marcus Vinicius Barbosa
de Morais, Rafael Rodrigo Marione, Alexandre Brincalepe Campo, Control of
an unmanned aerial hybrid airship-quadrotor vehicle, in: 23rd ABCM Inter-
national Congress of Mechanical Engineering, 2015, https://doi.org/10.20906/
CPS/COB-2015-0862.
[159] Azizi Malek, M.F. Sedan, ASM Harithuddin, Development of attitude control
system for hybrid airship vehicle, Int. J. Eng. Technol. 7 (4.13) (2018) 99–106,
http://dx.doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.13.21339.
[160] A. Zolin, A. Didkovsky, Development of the transport airship for cargo delivery
to the vostochny cosmodrome, AIP Conf. Proc. 2171 (1) (2019) 120004,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.5133260.
[161] C.D. Havill, Some factors affecting the use of lighter than air systems economic
and performance estimates for dirigibles and semi-buoyant hybrid vehicles,
1974.
[162] J. Lancaster, Semi-buoyant lifting body hybrid characteristics for advanced
Naval missions, in: 2nd Lighter than Air Systems Technology Conference, 1977,
p. 1194, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1977-1194.
[163] J. Glod, Airship potential in strategic airlift operations, in: 3rd Lighter-than-
Air Systems Technology Conference, 1979, p. 1598, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.
1979-1598.
[164] Raffael György, Klaus Broichhausen, Jost Seifert, Bauhaus Luftfahrt eV, Poten-
tials of lighter-than-air technology in future markets–an evaluation, in: 26th
Congress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Anchorage,
2008.
[165] Antonio Dumas, Michele Trancossi, Stefano Anzillotti, An airship design
methodology based on available solar energy in low stratosphere, in: ASME
International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, vol. 44250,
2010, pp. 171–181, https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2010-38931.
[166] Said Chaabani, Naoufel Azouz, Jean Lerbet, Azgal Abichou, Modelling of an
unconventional airship, in: 11th ASME Biennial Conference on Engineering
Systems Design and Analysis, ESDA2012, 2012. vol. 1, pp. 661–668, https:
//doi.org/10.1115/ESDA2012-82143.
[167] Vincenzo Quaranta, Salvatore Ameduri, Giordano Tomassetti, Giuseppe Per-
sechino, Massimiliano Lega, Acoustic antenna on aerial platforms: The advanced
hybrid airship, a proof of concept, in: Proceedings of European Conference on
Noise Control, 2012, pp. 498–503.
[168] Alessandro Ceruti, Vitaly Voloshin, Pier Marzocca, Heuristic algorithms applied
to multidisciplinary design optimization of unconventional airship config-
uration, J. Aircr. 51 (6) (2014) 1758–1772, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.
C032439.
[169] J. Bock, H. Künkler, Concept of a lenticular hybrid airship using hydrogen for
multiple operation modes, in: 10th International Airship Convention, 2015.
[170] Mauro Madonia, Antonio Di Furia, Samantha Bonasia, Dean Vucinic, Structural
analysis of an engine chassis for a disc-shaped airship with thrust vector control,
SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. 8 (1) (2015) 128–138, http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/
2014-01-9102.
[171] Donald O. Shaw, The Mars Parafoil Airship (MPA), in: AIAA SPACE 2016, 2016,
p. 5599, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2016-5599.
24
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
[172] J. Jalasabri, F. Romli, Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) study on a hybrid
airship design, Int. Rev. Mech. Eng. 11 (8) (2017) http://dx.doi.org/10.15866/
ireme.v11i8.11645.
[173] Alessandro Ceruti, Pier Marzocca, Heuristic optimization of bezier curves based
trajectories for unconventional airships docking, Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol.
(2017) http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-11-2014-0200.
[174] Umberto Papa, Salvatore Ponte, Giuseppe Del Core, Conceptual design of a
small hybrid unmanned aircraft system, J. Adv. Transp. 2017 (2017) http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/9834247.
[175] Andrea Cimarelli, Mauro Madonia, Diego Angeli, Antonio Dumas, Aerodynamic
study of advanced airship shapes, J. Aerosp. Eng. 30 (3) (2017) http://dx.doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000687.
[176] Fatih Mehmet Dağ, Özgür Tamer, Conceptual design of low altitude unmanned
small hybrid airship, Int. Res. J. Electron. Comput. Eng. 4 (1) (2018) http:
//dx.doi.org/10.24178/irjece.2018.4.1.11.
[177] Jürgen Bock, Uwe Apel, Richard Van Treuren, Lenticular cargo airships: The
case for carbon-free fuel operation, in: AIAA Aviation 2019 Forum, 2019, p.
2862, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2019-2862.
[178] Yu V. Pisarevskiy, V.B. Fursov, A. Yu Pisarevskiy, P.N. Tatarnikov, N.V.
Sitnikov, S.A. Goremykin, Electric hybrid airship with unlimited flight time,
in: E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 220, EDP Sciences, 2020, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1051/e3sconf/202022001028.
[179] L.P. Ponyaev, M.Y. Kuprikov, N.M. Kuprikov, New arctic air transportation with
hybrid electrical disc shaped airship and body plane aircraft innovation, IOP
Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 539 (1) (2020) 012134.
[180] Howard P. Buckley, Nick Holt, Andrew Leinonen, Sebastien Fournier, David W.
Zingg, Preliminary design of a solar-powered hybrid airship, J. Aircr. 57 (2)
(2020) 256–267, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.C035463.
[181] John J. Schneider, Future Lighter-Than-Air Concepts, Technical Report, SAE
Technical Paper, 1975, http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/750618.
[182] S. Miley, P. Mosley, Investigation of hybrid airship RPV for entomological
research, in: 7th Lighter than Air Technology Conference, 1987, p. 2304,
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1987-2304.
[183] Alessandro Ceruti, Pier Marzocca, Conceptual approach to unconventional
airship design and synthesis, J. Aerosp. Eng. 27 (6) (2014) 04014035, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000344.
[184] Edward Barocela, Patrick F. Cassidy, Delta-winged hybrid airship, Google
Patents, US Patent 7, 093, 789, 2006.
[185] Henry Cathey, The NASA super pressure balloon-a path to flight, Adv. Space
Res. 44 (1) (2009) 23–38, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2009.02.013.
[186] M. Manikandan, Rajkumar S. Pant, Design optimization of a tri-lobed solar
powered stratospheric airship, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 91 (2019) 255–262, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2019.05.016.
[187] P.-A. Mackrodt, Further advancements in the concept of delta-winged hybrid-
airships, in: 3rd Lighter-than-Air Systems Technology Conference, 1979, p.
1599, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1979-1599.
[188] Patrick P. Mcdermott, Hybrid winged airship (dynastat), Google Patents, US
Patent 6, 581, 873, 2003.
[189] John D. Anderson, Aircraft Performance and Design, 1999.
[190] Jesús Gonzalo, Diego Domínguez, Adrián García-Gutiérrez, Alberto Escapa, On
the development of a parametric aerodynamic model of a stratospheric airship,
Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 107 (2020) 106316, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2020.
106316.
[191] K. Wong, J. Delaurier, L. Zhiyung, An application of source-panel and vortex
methods for aerodynamic solutions of airship configurations, in: 6th Lighter-
than-Air Systems Conference, 1985, p. 874, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1985-
874.
[192] Xiao-liang Wang, Xue-xiong Shan, Shape optimization of stratosphere airship,
J. Aircr. 43 (1) (2006) 283–286, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.18295.
[193] Thorsten Lutz, S. Wagner, Drag reduction and shape optimization of airship
bodies, J. Aircr. 35 (3) (1998) 345–351, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/2.2313.
[194] Yuwen Li, Meyer Nahon, Modeling and simulation of airship dynamics, J. Guid.
Control Dyn. 30 (6) (2007) 1691–1700, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.29061.
[195] Xiao-liang Wang, Ye Ma, Xue-xiong Shan, Modeling of stratosphere airship,
in: 2010 3rd International Symposium on Systems and Control in Aeronautics
and Astronautics, IEEE, 2010, pp. 738–743, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISSCAA.
2010.5633300.
[196] M. Zhang, X. Wang, D. Duan, Panel method predictions of added mass for
flexible airship, Aeronaut. J. 117 (1191) (2013) 519–531, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1017/S0001924000008162.
[197] Sighard F. Hoerner, Fluid-Dynamic Drag: Practical Information on Aerodynamic
Drag and Hydrodynamic Resistance, Hoerner Fluid Dynamics Midland Park,
1965.
[198] Mohammad Irfan Alam, Rajkumar S. Pant, Estimation of volumetric drag
coefficient of two-dimensional body of revolution, J. Aircr. 56 (5) (2019)
2080–2082, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.C034887.
[199] Holt Ashley, Mårten Landahl, Marten T. Landahl, Aerodynamics of Wings and
Bodies, Courier Corporation, 1965.
[200] Xixiang Yang, Duoneng Liu, Renewable power system simulation and endurance
analysis for stratospheric airships, Renew. Energy 113 (2017) 1070–1076,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.06.077.
Manikandan M. and R.S. Pant
[201] Ira Smith, Mike Lee, Michael Fortneberry, Ricky Judy, HiSentinel80: flight of
a high altitude airship, in: 11th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and
Operations (ATIO) Conference, Including the AIAA Balloon Systems Conference
and 19th AIAA Lighter-than, 2011, p. 6973, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2011-
6973.
[202] Stavros P. Androulakakis, Ricky Judy, Status and plans of high altitude
airship (HAATM) program, in: AIAA Lighter-than-Air Systems Technology (LTA)
Conference, 2013, p. 1362, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2013-1362.
[203] J. Morgado, M. Abdollahzadeh, M.A.R. Silvestre, J.C. Páscoa, High altitude
propeller design and analysis, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 45 (2015) 398–407, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2015.06.011.
[204] S.H. Lamb, Hydrodynamics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1932.
[205] Alexandr I. Korotkin, Added Masses of Ship Structures, vol. 88, Springer Science
& Business Media, 2008.
[206] Horace Lamb, The inertia coefficients of an ellipsoid moving in fluid, in:
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Reports and Memoranda No. 623, London,
UK, 1918.
[207] Max M. Munk, Some tables of the factor of apparent additional mass, 1924.
[208] Naoufel Azouz, Said Chaabani, Jean Lerbet, Azgal Abichou, Computation of
the added masses of an unconventional airship, J. Appl. Math. 2012 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/714627.
[209] M. Carrión, M. Biava, G.N. Barakos, D. Stewart, Study of hybrid air vehicle
stability using computational fluid dynamics, J. Aircr. 54 (4) (2017) 1328–1339,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.C033987.
25
Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
[210] Thomas Kuhn, Horst Baier, Multidisciplinary modeling approaches and op-
timization of membrane structures in aerospace applications, in: 13th
AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis Optimization Conference, 2010, p.
9273, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-9273.
[211] Max M. Munk, The Aerodynamic Forces on Airship Hulls, Washington, 1924.
[212] Hugh B. Freeman, Force measurements on a 1/40-scale model of the US airship,
1933.
[213] Sérgio B.V. Gomes, An Investigation of the Flight Dynamics of Airships with
Application to the YEZ-2A (Ph.D. thesis), Cranfield Institute of Technology,
1990.
[214] Yuwen Li, Meyer Nahon, Inna Sharf, Airship dynamics modeling: A literature
review, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 47 (3) (2011) 217–239, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.paerosci.2010.10.001.
[215] Xiao-Liang Wang, Gong-Yi Fu, Deng-Ping Duan, Xue-Xiong Shan, Experimental
investigations on aerodynamic characteristics of the ZHIYUAN-1 airship, J.
Aircr. 47 (4) (2010) 1463–1468, http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.C000243.
[216] Anwar Ul Haque, Waqar Asrar, Erwin Sulaeman, Jaffar Syed Mohamed Ali,
Ashraf Ali Omar, Power-off static stability analysis of a clean configuration of
a hybrid buoyant aircraft, in: Ankara International Aerospace Conference, 2015.
[217] Anwar U. Haque, Waqar Asrar, Ashraf A. Omar, Erwin Sulaeman, Mohamed J.S.
Ali, Preliminary aerodynamic and static stability analysis for hybrid buoyant
aerial vehicles at low speeds using digital DATCOM, Can. Aeronaut. Space J.
61 (3) (2016) 51–60, http://dx.doi.org/10.5589/Q16-001.