Maybe unlikely to be seen in the skies anytime soon:
The Magnus Aerospace Corporation of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada tried to develop a Magnus effect-assisted airship in the early to mid 1980s.
The spherical balloon spins on its horizontal axis between the gondola's "wingtips".
The
planned craft was called the LTA 20-1; diameter of balloon/ envelope 28m/ 30.6 yards.
Illustration from the blog of James Lowe, a former flight dynamicist with Magnus Aerospace
https://30squaresofontario.blogspot.com/2014/02/400-posts-1-about-blimps.html
At least one substantial scale model was built:
(I think we have to approve the forced perspective being pointed out).
-Both images from "Magnus Aerospace Corp. - hybrid spherical airship", Peter Lobner, updated 9 March 2022, work done for the Lyncean Group of San Diego.
PDF below; link
https://lynceans.org/wp-content/upl...ce_spherical-airship-converted-compressed.pdf; it contains more pictures and descriptions of how the craft was meant to function.
(The Lyncean Group of San Diego
External Quote:
...consists of retired and semi-retired technical professionals who meet regularly to discuss subjects associated with science and technology...
https://lynceans.org/aboutus/, I've no idea how accurate the document is.)
Some of the pics are artist's conceptions from Magnus Aerospace Corp. brochures, and show what might be improbably heavy loads (large bundles of timber, a battle tank) carried by LTA 20-1s.
Interestingly the basic specifications quoted from Magnus Aerospace don't seem to include any estimates of what amount of lift is added by the Magnus effect. Quoted weights (if I understand them correctly) might be at odds with the types of payloads depicted.
A full-scale LTA 20-1 was never built and Magnus Aerospace Corp. is no longer operating. There were a number of new-style airship proposals in the 1980s, none of which came to much.*
That said,
if the Magnus effect is usefully exploitable by lighter-than-air designs, the small size and low weight of modern signals/ control and (e.g.) surveillance systems might make craft with a family resemblance to LTA 20-1 of interest to some.
*One reason might be that designs for carrying large payloads have a limited ceiling and relatively modest speed; they would be vulnerable to bad weather.
Environmentalist George Monbiot wrote an article in The Guardian, 06 May 2008, "If there is a God, he's not green. Otherwise airships would take off"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/may/06/travelandtransport.carbonemissions proposing the large-scale replacement of commercial passenger jet airliners with airships.
This is anecdotal, but IIRC there was a flurry of replies from people pointing out the inability of airships to avoid extreme weather. Monbiot gave reasonable estimates of airship speed (130 kph/ 81 mph) and ceiling (4000 ft., 1220 m) and had written
External Quote:
Airships are more sensitive to wind than aeroplanes, which means that flights are more likely to be delayed.
but hadn't explained what an airship on a 43-hour transatlantic trip could do if it encountered stormy weather, which it might not be able to avoid.