Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses The Almighty Buck Transportation Technology

Google's Co-Founder Is Building a Gargantuan $150 Million Blimp (futurism.com) 152

Posted by BeauHD from the traveling-in-style dept.
We first learned that Google co-founder Sergey Brin was secretly building a "massive airship" inside of Hangar 2 at the NASA Ames Research Center back in 2017, but few details on the project have emerged since. Now, according to a report from the Telegraph, progress on the project appears to be picking up as Brin is currently soliciting aerospace engineers to work on his blimp from a hangar in Mountain View, California. From a report: At 656 feet in length, the massive craft is expected to be the largest of its kind in the world upon completion, and it's reportedly costing Brin upwards of $150 million to construct. Some of that money will presumably go toward paying the $28 per hour salary and pension benefits Brin is offering entry level engineers to work on the project, according to the Telegraph piece, which notes that the job listing also requires that applicants be "comfortable working outdoors."

As for why Brin wants to build this massive blimp, sources with knowledge of the project told The Guardian in 2017 that the Google billionaire plans to use craft as an intercontinental "air yacht," ferrying his friends and family around the globe in style. The blimp will also find use on the other end of the privilege spectrum, according to those sources, who told the newspaper that Brin envisions using it to deliver supplies and food to remote locations on humanitarian missions.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's Co-Founder Is Building a Gargantuan $150 Million Blimp More

Google's Co-Founder Is Building a Gargantuan $150 Million Blimp

Comments Filter:

  • Captain Nemo (Score:3)

    by pr0t0 ( 216378 ) on Thursday June 06, 2019 @09:40PM (#58722902)

    For some reason, this feels like the air-version of the Nautilus with Brin as Nemo.

    There's an uncharted patch of sky over the Pacific where I'm told there are motes of land that float thousands of feet over the water. They are perhaps inhabited by an indiginous tribe of people and a variety of wildlife most people wouldn't believe. Come along Wilke! Prepare the moorings!

  • $28 hour??? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Thursday June 06, 2019 @09:47PM (#58722920) Homepage Journal

    Christ. In Mountain View?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      That was my reaction. Good luck staying afloat.

    • Well it does say that the workers have to be happy outdoors. Maybe hes recruiting from the homeless community?
    • That was my thought too. $28 per hour * 2080 hours a year is $58K for an engineer! That's low no matter if it is California or not. I can only hope he means "engineer" in the same terms a janitor might be a sanitation engineer and he's really looking for people to operate his blimp. Otherwise, I would be real nervous flying around in something created by bottom-rate engineering.

      • For $28 per hour the pilots might also be bottom-rate. But as it is very unlikely I'll ever fly on that thing, I don't care...

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by cb88 ( 1410145 )
      Well I mean he did say they'd have to be comfortable with living outside...

  • Hold on... wait a second. (Score:3)

    by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Thursday June 06, 2019 @09:53PM (#58722932)

    Could someone please remind me why a wealth tax on people with over $50M is a bad thing? Clearly, this $150M dollar private airship has pushed that fact outside of my head.

    • Re:Hold on... wait a second. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Actually, I do RTFA ( 1058596 ) on Thursday June 06, 2019 @10:16PM (#58723006)

      Keep in mind that the proposed wealth taxes are currently eclipsed by Google's rising share price - it's a 2% tax, not a wealth cap. So, his sweet airship will cost him 3MM to pay the taxes on... which isn't that unreasonable. I mean, a house also requires annual payments (usually at more than 2% of the purchase price)

      • Keep in mind that the proposed wealth taxes are currently eclipsed by Google's rising share price - it's a 2% tax, not a wealth cap. So, his sweet airship will cost him 3MM to pay the taxes on... which isn't that unreasonable. I mean, a house also requires annual payments (usually at more than 2% of the purchase price)

        A house requires police and fire protection, schools, roads, libraries, parks, and a bunch of other things that require money from property taxes. An airship only needs fire protection. A 2% property tax on an airship isn't justified by the amount of services it needs.

        • Taxes aren't a fee for service. They're a way of paying for government services for all. I mean, a billionaire doesn't use the library, the public schools, and even fire and police protections are probably covered by private contractors.

          • Part of the government's responsibilities are to help protect the assets and property of its citizens; as a billionaire has more assets than other people, they get more benefit from the government in that respect.

    • Doesn't the USA already have a capital gains tax? Of course the real question then is: do the rich actually pay that tax? My instinct says no. But keep in mind that a wealth tax would fare little better. We have a wealth tax in lieu of capital gains tax, since it was too hard to figure out the actual gains we just assume a return of around 4% and tax that at a rate comparable to labour. But even such a simple scheme is dodged left and right (even the royals engage in that practice)
    • Not sure why you think the government would spend it better, government blimps like JLENS cost more and required billions to design.Though maybe a wealth tax could incentive Brin to also buy a submarine or something instead of hoarding it

    • Because the ultra-rich have the money to easily relocate to another country if they feel they're being treated unfairly. What's better:

      1) Tax them, have them leave the country, and get nothing at all.

      2) Encourage them to remain in the country where they will create economic activity by doing stuff like building blimps.

      This $150 million isn't just disappearing; it's paying employees' wages, it's creating business for suppliers, and it's generating tax revenue. It has consistently been shown that high rates

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • England had an industrial revolution because it was a low tax economy, while France had no industrial revolution because the high-rate of tax made it unviable to do business profitably.

        What research are you basing this from? France did participate in the Industrial Revolution, though it was hampered by 3 main factors: the lack of coal and iron deposits, the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. The French Revolution probably had the greatest impact, when a large number of the nobles lost their heads it had two major effects that affected industrialization: the people with the capital and organization to implement large industrial projects were no longer around to do so and the disp

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        You're right, the rich idiots building blimps aren't the problem. They're busy taxing themselves. The problem are the smart rich, who hide their trillions overseas.

        It has been repeatedly estimated, and demonstrated, that the tax rates in most countries, certainly in the US, are well below the optimum revenue generating level. You can argue that lower tax rates increase economic activity (the might) but they don't do so enough to produce greater government revenue.

    • Historically, we tax income rather than wealth because transactions are much easier to track than total assets. In other words, income taxes are harder to dodge.

      Theoretically, a wealth tax would be greatly preferable to an income tax. It would help to keep money in circulation, and it would help to ensure that people are contributing members of society instead of living off of their ancestor's lucky break. This last thing is what the estate tax is supposed to help address... I'm going to ramble for a min
  • "Brin envisions using it to deliver supplies and food to remote locations on humanitarian missions."

    It's not hard to shoot down a blimp. Warlords and cartels would probably enjoy the target practice.
    • A blimp with a pressurized compartment can fly at 35,000 feet - well out of the range of pretty much anything a warlord or cartel would have.

      • A blimp with a pressurized compartment can fly at 35,000 feet - well out of the range of pretty much anything a warlord or cartel would have.

        So it's going to drop the food and medicine from 35000 feet? Because otherwise it'll make quite a target on the way up and/or down.

        • Yes [wikipedia.org]. Dropping from altitude above surface-to-air missile range is a fairly regular thing. However, my guess is Brin won't be flying into hot war-zones, but probably into places that were ravaged by natural disasters.

  • Like, archer already did it (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fermion ( 181285 ) on Thursday June 06, 2019 @09:58PM (#58722946) Homepage Journal
    The thing with airships is they are slow, like under a hundred miles per hour. This is a physical limitation of the rigid airship, not something that can be designed out. What this means is more than a day to cross the US, a few days to cross the Atlantic or Pacific, and even a day to get up the coast from LA.

    Certainly in pre jet days, this was not unreasonable. Compared to days in a train, this was luxury. It is possible that the airship will provide plenty of space, possible tens of thousands of square feet for passengers, but you are still stuck for days. This is why cruise ships are for entertainment and not travel.

    It might be cost effective for cargo. This has actually been researched extensively. Automatic airships transporting things cheaply. The problem is that we are in a world of highly engineered transportation, and time and accuracy is critical. That is why so much is transported by truck instead of train. But I think cargo is a good application, but no one has made it cost effective. Probably because of weight issues

    That said, if this uses helium, it is a criminal waste of a severely depleted resource

    • The thing with airships is they are slow, like under a hundred miles per hour. This is a physical limitation of the rigid airship, not something that can be designed out. What this means is more than a day to cross the US, a few days to cross the Atlantic or Pacific, and even a day to get up the coast from LA.

      Yeah, but you don't need a real airport to land at. No TSA.

      Is that worth $150M? If you have over $151M, maybe. How much is your dignity worth? For a billionaire, $150M seems cheap to possess dignity while traveling. And he has the time, it isn't like he's in the trenches making their ad business go.

      • you don't need a real airport to land at. No TSA

        A big airship needs an airfield. Needs things like mooring masts. Consider putting down in a field in Africa, then having a wind come up and blow it into the trees.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by twosat ( 1414337 )

        They can be quite difficult to handle at times. Saw this mooring accident with the USS Akron on TV many years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

        • The USS Akron crashed in 1933.

          That tells you nothing about if it would be hard to handle. Even if you built a copy of the USS Akron, but with modern electronic controls similar to a passenger car, maybe it would be easy to handle, instead of difficult?

          Maybe it would still suck, but you're not going to get the answer by waving your hands at engineering from the 1930's. Maybe if they had had a few Arduinos running PID controllers it would have been easy?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      The Tethered Aerostat Radar System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
      JLENS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    • Instead of "rapid transportation", think "very small cruise ship" or "flying yacht". The sort of trip you take when the journey is at least part of the destination, and your vehicle has room for a banquet hall and private rooms for enough people to fill it. And unlike a seagoing ship, where at best one side of the ship gets a view of the coastline in the distance, and the other gets a view of ocean to the horizon, an airship gets a close view on all sides (and through any glass floors) of whatever land yo

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The niche for cargo is going to be pretty small. It's faster than ship but more expensive. So the gap is something that is faster than a ship, slower than a jet, and priced in the middle.

      Infrastructure will be a major issue of course.

      • I agree that it is small, but high margin. I would restate your limits to:

        Slower than a jet and more expensive than a ship but able to go over land where there are no roads, rails, or runways. Able to carry things much larger than jets can carry. Able to cross the water/land boundary with no cargo interchange facility.

        Just shooting from the hip: transporting large wind farm rotor blades (bigger is better but size is currently limited by highway size restrictions), transporting/installing factory-built ho

    • What this means is more than a day to cross the US, a few days to cross the Atlantic or Pacific, and even a day to get up the coast from LA.

      So better than by car, and still not normal hellish air travel. I'm still on board ...

  • We'll get your disaster relief supplies to you in 6-8 weeks depending on the weather.

    • It often takes months to get infrastructure built to start getting aid in. Maybe you get it to the nearest airport quickly, and then what? You might only be able to move a small amount over the roads after an earthquake or hurricane. When this gets there, then you can move things more easily.

    • Re:Humanitarian (Score:4, Interesting)

      by azcoyote ( 1101073 ) on Friday June 07, 2019 @02:02AM (#58723516)
      Heh. But nothing says "rich humanitarianism" like using a $150m ambling sky-yacht to be seen delivering a few bucks worth of food to some convenient third-world photo op extras.

  • $28 an hour (Score:3, Funny)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Thursday June 06, 2019 @10:17PM (#58723014)

    Oh, with that salary the bay area you can easily take an Uber to IKEA and check out its dumpster where you can find a nice cardboard box in which to live.

    • That's what an entry level engineer makes in Oregon, and the cost of living is really low.

      And this is partly working outside, usually that increases the pay.

      Maybe these listings were really for entry level "engineering technicians" or something like that, and not "aerospace engineers."

      I'd expect a welder on that sort of project to be making around $28/hr, since you need people who are really good.

  • they don't exactly do sane things [wikipedia.org] with it.

  • Please tell me this dirigible is made of spruce wood...

    Then we can call it the Spruce Goose II, or maybe "Spruce on the Loose".

  • The US Government basically just gave Google Moffett Field. Annoys the crap out of me. Crony capitalism at it's finest!

  • This is the kind of dynamic futuristic new industry that the Trump's tax cut is bringing to America! Toys for people who are so damned rich that they want to cruse the world in a $150 million luxury airship and be able to literally look down on everyone.

    I bet Bezos is spitting mad because his billion dollar yacht has been upstaged and Brin can fly overhead while he moons the yacht. How will Bezos strike back? Look out for the Blue Origin Ultra Luxorious Private Space Station. Then Bezos can moon the world

  • This vanity blimp is an unconscionable and unecesary waste of scarce helium. Conspicuous consumption or what?

    • This vanity blimp is an unconscionable and unecesary waste of scarce helium.

      For the last time, the world is not running out of helium. The spike in helium prices this year is a result of war, not any natural scarcity. Saudi Arabia is blockading Qatar, which was producing 30% of the world's helium. Of course there's a price spike.

      The rise in prices over the last 30 years is primarily because prior to the 1990s, the US was producing all the world's helium at a loss. There was essentially no production outside the US because the US federal government had made it impossible to prod

      • Seems like lots of Googlers getting on here to defend their lord and master, whatever stupid tonedeaf ideas he might have. Yah, Helium is scarce (see "abundance of elements in the crust" and you are a loudmouthed idiot.

  • ... Donald Trump?

  • Helium is a limited resource. Once it is extracted from the ground and released, it escapes Earth and will never be available for human use again.

    Party City recently shut down 200 stores primarily due to the effect of helium shortages. It is a byproduct of natural gas and oil production which is higher than ever, but we don't seem to have regulations in place to make sure it is always separated out and kept. Sadly, most producers just let it go.

    We should be collecting all helium and storing it for the use o

  • We're running out of helium and this is a stupid use for what we have left. One it's gone, it's gone. This is a great big boondoggle. He could easily go around the world on a 777 or buy an old 747. I think 747's are about a dime a dozen these days having been taken out of service. Plenty of parts too. He'd get there far faster and he could do it in style.

Slashdot Top Deals

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer

Close