Comments on: Hydrogen and Helium in Rigid Airship Operations

By: John Hansen

John Hansen — Mon, 04 Sep 2023 14:41:29 +0000

If they could only find some helium 3. It’s atomic weight is only 3 since it only has one neutron. Now that would be the ideal lifting gas!

By: FLYPOOL

FLYPOOL — Sun, 20 Aug 2023 09:23:12 +0000

Excuse me, what is the purity of helium in a helium airship? , what is the price of helium with this purity?

By: Duke Porter

Duke Porter — Sat, 29 Apr 2023 19:19:44 +0000

No sustainable future for commercial LTA transportation can exist without the use of hydrogen as the primary lifting gas. Further, the use of hydrogen for propulsion and other power/energy requirements by airships will significantly enhance the positive environmental impact such vehicles will exhibit. This, in turn, will greatly improve public acceptance of LTA technology and help stimulate investment in all aspects of the industry.
The current climate of public perception is that LTA hydrogen technology has seen its day and is a failed experiment. It is curious that at the same time, great effort is being expended to develop hydrogen powered vehicles in other segments of the transportation industry. Hydrogen power is also seen as an environmentally sound source of energy for the global electrical grid. And, it is already accepted as a necessary power source for space-based uses and technologies.
The problem is not hydrogen. It’s how LTA systems that can benefit from its use are designed. The public’s negative perception of hydrogen is based on a very limited percentage of failures out of a vast number of successes. Even a cursory review of the history of LTA travel in the 1920’s and 1930’s indicates that the use of hydrogen as a lifting gas was very safe. Proper precautions and safe handling practices made travel across oceans and continents a regular occurrence without incident. Crashes were due to unanticipated extreme weather conditions and insufficiently developed technologies. Neither of these barriers any longer exist. If Graf Zeppelin could circumnavigate the globe with these hindrances in place, imagine what could now be accomplished with them removed.
A review of “futuristic” airship illustrations, designs, and models reveals a strong commitment to the classic “cigar” shaped vehicle. This design was appropriate for the technology and materials that were available to builders at the dawn of LTA vehicle development, but we now have options. While aerodynamics will continue to dictate what an efficient hull configuration will be, advances in materials development will allow the overall design of the airship to vary from the preferred design of the 1930s. For example, it is not necessary for the lifting gas to be contained in the same space as the passengers and crew. The all-in-one traditional cigar shape hull can be replaced with a multi-hull design that separates the lifting gas from other areas of the airship. Shuttles are now capable of getting people and materials to the airship without the need for the airship to land. Satellite and advanced radar navigation eliminate concerns about unfavorable weather conditions suddenly bearing down on an airship with disastrous results. Also, the ability to stay aloft for extended periods of time utilizing solar power and hydrogen generated by electrolysis using water condensed from the atmosphere, means the vehicle can easily avoid threatening weather patterns until they dissipate.
I urge all who understand the great environmental and economic benefits that can be realized through the extensive use of LTA transportation options, to encourage those with appropriate political and regulatory authority to allow and promote the application of already established advances in aviation, materials science, and hydrogen technology toward the development and use of LTA transportation systems. We are at a point where it is the heavier-than-air, carbon based transportation systems that are becoming obsolete, and the benefits of lighter-than-air hydrogen based transportation systems that are beckoning us toward a more sustainable future.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Sun, 12 Feb 2023 01:33:22 +0000

Doesn’t the comparitive % of lift provided change significantly with altitude and pressure? One way or the other.

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 09 Feb 2023 06:08:23 +0000

Actually I think your numbers are off. With a volume of 7063000 the Hindenburg would have lift of 511500lb. After it’s weight 215000 it would have a lot of lift left.
And if it was helium it would still have lift. It would have 423000 pound of lift. That’s still enough to fly.
Can someone explain this maybe I misread some things or misunderstood them.

By: Guillermo Cornejo

Guillermo Cornejo — Thu, 09 Feb 2023 04:25:19 +0000

In reply to Burt Buchen. Hydrogen is cheap to produce. The problem with cars is that they need a network of gas stations, and thats not cheap

By: Guillermo Cornejo

Guillermo Cornejo — Thu, 09 Feb 2023 04:22:57 +0000

In reply to J.T.. I've been contemplating this concept too, for years. With modern tech, the Hindenburg design would have 10x more payload I think. But it still wouldn't beat transatlantic ships as those are extremely fuel efficient; it would win on speed, number of trips per year and could find a niche with perishables or on land with no infrastructure

By: Guillermo Cornejo

Guillermo Cornejo — Thu, 09 Feb 2023 04:20:54 +0000

In reply to Dan Grossman. To expand, the weight required to maintain the vacuum outweighs any benefits. The concept has been explored with certain designs at small scales, and they often blow up. The idea...doesn't fly

By: Dan Grossman

Dan Grossman — Thu, 02 Feb 2023 23:34:53 +0000

In reply to Henry. Not a practical or serious concept.

By: Henry

Henry — Sat, 28 Jan 2023 08:11:23 +0000

I wonder how vacuum (for theoretical vacuum airship) compares to hydrogen and helium?