View Full Version : So, you've always wanted to vacation on a helicopter?
ravenvii
Mar 29, 2009, 07:55 PM
Well, your dream has come true!
Stay at the Hotelicopter - the World's First Flying Hotel? (http://i.gizmodo.com/5187289/stay-at-the-hotelicopter-the-worlds-first-flying-hotel?skyline=true&s=x)
Thomas Veil
Mar 29, 2009, 08:34 PM
Meh. Too many problems. Noise. Vibration. Refueling. It's a helicopter, for cryin' out loud.
Plus, I don't think I want to risk my life spending extended time in a Soviet aircraft.
r.j.s
Mar 29, 2009, 08:35 PM
Sounds like fun.
Although the noise would get to me after a while.
notjustjay
Mar 29, 2009, 09:38 PM
What is this, Sky Captain? Those images are pretty silly.
I took a helicopter ride over the Grand Canyon. Beautiful scenery, but I couldn't stand looking at it for very long because the shaking of the helicopter made me start to feel very sick.
brad.c
Mar 29, 2009, 09:43 PM
What's the point of staying in the air all the time? And once you land, what's the point of it being a helicopter?
Abstract
Mar 29, 2009, 09:51 PM
And once you land, what's the point of it being a helicopter?
The same point of a car remaining a car once you arrive. I don't know if you were hoping it'd 'transform' into a robot or something. ;)
Besides, helicopters can land (and take-off) in areas you wouldn't be able to if you were in an airplane. I think that's the point of helicopters.
brad.c
Mar 29, 2009, 10:17 PM
The same point of a car remaining a car once you arrive. I don't know if you were hoping it'd 'transform' into a robot or something. ;)
Then that's one fugly RV, man. :D
Besides, helicopters can land (and take-off) in areas you wouldn't be able to if you were in an airplane. I think that's the point of helicopters.
Something tells me this thing can't go to that many remote places. Maybe they should target the vanity rock star tour bus market.
joepunk
Mar 29, 2009, 10:50 PM
From their website (http://hotelicopter.com/cabins-amenities/)
... and unlike the A380, there are no restrictions on how much sex you can have in your cabin.
;)
Dagless
Mar 30, 2009, 08:25 AM
Is that The Master I see piloting the thing?
peskaa
Mar 30, 2009, 09:59 AM
April Fool jokes are starting early I see.
Chip NoVaMac
Mar 30, 2009, 11:00 AM
April Fool jokes are starting early I see.
My thoughts exactly...
Consultant
Mar 30, 2009, 12:23 PM
Since the V-12 never went into production and only two prototypes were built, the name "Mi-12" was never adopted.
...
The first prototype remained at the Mikhail Leontyevich Mil helicopter plant in Panki-Tomilino, Lyuberetsky District near Moscow and is supposedly still there today. The second prototype was donated to Monino Air Force Museum (50 km east of Moscow) and is on public display.
Fake. See above quote. Part of world might have started April fools already.
If they are suppose to fly in a few months, they would have real photos instead of renderings.
Sounds like fun.
Although the noise would get to me after a while.
suppose to be soundproofed room. However see above.
sushi
Mar 30, 2009, 12:34 PM
Meh. Too many problems. Noise. Vibration. Refueling. It's a helicopter, for cryin' out loud.
Exactly.
I don't understand this concept and why it would be appealing.
Plus, I don't think I want to risk my life spending extended time in a Soviet aircraft.
That much is certain.
Close to April 1st ... might be a fake.
AoWolf
Mar 30, 2009, 01:06 PM
Obviously fake however,
I think a flying hotel could work but I think it would have to be a Zeppelin like dirigible. Just imagine sipping hot chocolate as you float over the north pole, or some tropical paradise...
sushi
Mar 30, 2009, 01:10 PM
I think a flying hotel could work but I think it would have to be a Zeppelin like dirigible. Just imagine sipping hot chocolate as you float over the north pole, or some tropical paradise...
Agree.
Something where you can stay in the air for days and not a couple of hours.
r.j.s
Mar 30, 2009, 01:40 PM
Fake. See above quote. Part of world might have started April fools already.
If they are suppose to fly in a few months, they would have real photos instead of renderings.
Fake or not, it's still an interesting concept.
Abstract
Mar 30, 2009, 01:50 PM
True.
Saying that, there may be a limit of how long you can stay at one of these hotels due to health regulations on background radiation. There's a limit on the effective dose a person can receive without being considered a radiation worker. The general public gets an annual dose of around 3 mSv per year, while the limit for pilots and flight attendants is much more than that. That doesn't mean it's ok for pilots and flight attendants to get blasted by cosmic neutrons all the time, but that's another issue. Saying that, there's a limit on that as well (for major commercial airline pilots, at least), and it's accounted for by the total flight time.
I don't know whether passengers would be allowed to stay on one of those for a week.
Gray-Wolf
Mar 30, 2009, 07:29 PM
There's no way it would work. With the weight it would have, it would eat fuel like you would not believe. And could not stay in the air more than a couple hours. Short of doing a tourist hopper, it would be worthless.
sushi
Mar 30, 2009, 07:36 PM
As big as it is, you can not land anywhere you want to. It would require a reinforced landing area due to the weight -- especially since it has tires.
Anyhow, this has been added at the bottom of the article:
UPDATE: Sadly, the Hotelicopter has been outed as a fake.
dmr727
Mar 31, 2009, 12:32 AM
Saying that, there's a limit on that as well (for major commercial airline pilots, at least), and it's accounted for by the total flight time.
Well crap, I wish I were an airline pilot - I just pumped about 0.1 mSv into my body today alone, and I'm pretty sure the FAA doesn't give a crap. :)
Cassie
Mar 31, 2009, 12:35 AM
How much fuel does this thing use? That's a ridiculous waste.
swiftaw
Mar 31, 2009, 12:36 AM
It's a fake.
Abstract
Mar 31, 2009, 02:48 AM
Well crap, I wish I were an airline pilot - I just pumped about 0.1 mSv into my body today alone, and I'm pretty sure the FAA doesn't give a crap. :)
That's too bad. I think the reason there's no actual regulation is because pilots aren't technically considered "radiation workers" even though they should be. However, the airlines may have taken the responsibility of watching out for workers anyway. Perhaps that's why you're not being bothered by policy? ;)
I think most radiation workers at US hospitals are supposed to get a maximum of around 20 mSv per year, while in certain other industries, they can get 30 or 40 mSv per year. I forget the standard because I haven't seen it brought up in quite awhile. The US has its own standards, but most countries just decided to use the same ones, or very similar. Why do the research themselves? :p Most people at risk would wear "thermoluminescent dosimeter" (TLD) badges to measure their radiation dose, but pilots get more damage from neutrons than x-rays, which means it's a bit trickier to measure. ;)
As a private flight pilot, do you need to wear any sort of detector, or limit your flight time? :confused:
dmr727
Mar 31, 2009, 11:53 AM
As a private flight pilot, do you need to wear any sort of detector, or limit your flight time? :confused:
No and no. And you're right, galactic radiation is the bigger problem for us. Unfortunately, it doesn't scale linearly with altitude, so in many cases I'm getting almost double the dosage at FL450 than the airline pilots ten thousand feet below me. However that's typically offset by the fact that most airline pilots work a lot more than I do. ;)
If you're curious, the FAA set up a website where a pilot can get an estimate of the amount of (galactic) radiation they received for a given flight:
http://jag.cami.jccbi.gov./cariprofile.asp
jzuena
Mar 31, 2009, 12:50 PM
As a private flight pilot, do you need to wear any sort of detector, or limit your flight time? :confused:
Well, DMR is more of a corporate/charter pilot than a private pilot. As for private pilots, they don't ever bring the subject of radiation up. They don't want to scare all the students away, after all.
No and no. And you're right, galactic radiation is the bigger problem for us. Unfortunately, it doesn't scale linearly with altitude, so in many cases I'm getting almost double the dosage at FL450 than the airline pilots ten thousand feet below me. However that's typically offset by the fact that most airline pilots work a lot more than I do. ;)
That's what you get for flying those sports cars of the airplane world:D Come on back to Cesna 172s and you won't have to worry about anything more than tenths of a microSv per flight:o Better yet, join us helicopter pilots down in the weeds (at least that's where you stuck-wingers tell us we belong!) and it drops to hundredths of a microSv per flight... can't say this hotelicopter thing would be welcome at the altitudes we normally fly at, though. Something that big at 1500agl might be a bit loud for the ground-folk.
dmr727
Mar 31, 2009, 01:07 PM
Better yet, join us helicopter pilots down in the weeds (at least that's where you stuck-wingers tell us we belong!) and it drops to hundredths of a microSv per flight...
But but but....250 knots is so slow! ;)
Man, I'm still jealous of you helicopter drivers. That sounds like a blast.
sushi
Apr 1, 2009, 03:11 AM
But but but....250 knots is so slow! ;)
Well I can tell you that 100-120 knots with NVGs about 10-20 feet off the deck dodging trees, power lines, buildings and such is a bit of a rush. :)
andiwm2003
Apr 2, 2009, 02:23 PM
well, a Zeppelin would achieve the same and be much safer, more comfortable and cheaper. Aside of burning up the original Zeppelin was the first flying hotel. Anyway, it's a fake but I'm sure some fools will invest money in it.
dmr727
Apr 2, 2009, 08:39 PM
Well I can tell you that 100-120 knots with NVGs about 10-20 feet off the deck dodging trees, power lines, buildings and such is a bit of a rush. :)
Oh man, I'm sure. I'm so jealous of that kind of flying. What I do is very, very pedestrian in comparison!
r.j.s
Apr 2, 2009, 09:03 PM
Well I can tell you that 100-120 knots with NVGs about 10-20 feet off the deck dodging trees, power lines, buildings and such is a bit of a rush. :)
These days you have to worry about UAVs as well ... we almost clipped one in a UH-60 on approach to Baghdad International. Some of those bastards are really small.
northernmunky
Apr 3, 2009, 01:01 AM
This was in the London Metro a few days ago... as an april fools :rolleyes:
sushi
Apr 4, 2009, 01:54 AM
Oh man, I'm sure. I'm so jealous of that kind of flying. What I do is very, very pedestrian in comparison!
Here are a couple of fun videos:
The BO-105 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoWQd8pcvek) is an awesome helicopter.
The AH-1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRD1jeownCE) is my baby. Brings back memories... :)
BTW, I would love to fly your biz jet. So cool! :)
All flying is good. :D
These days you have to worry about UAVs as well ... we almost clipped one in a UH-60 on approach to Baghdad International. Some of those bastards are really small.
UAVs are very interesting to me.
If you consider that a UAV is a remote control helicopter or fixed wing AC, then I saw my first ones at a test location many years ago. The fixed wing was an F4 Phantom jet and the helicopter was a UH-1. Really cool time for me during my military career.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.