Dirigible and Airship Design May Be Hinting at a New Way of Flying for All | Hacker News Reader

Dirigible and Airship Design May Be Hinting at a New Way of Flying for All

autoevolution.com

11 points_hypx6 comments

On this subject, they recently uncovered new footage of the hindenburg disaster, it's in this Nova: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35682179

Hydrogen is a much better gas for this purpose. It’s lighter, can be produced in flight, and is much cheaper.

Forays into the general space by helium airships will pave the way for rewriting the laws prohibiting hydrogen’s use for this purpose. With proper regulation and safety measures, hydrogen can be used.

The biggest issue is dealing with wind.

Hydrogen is a bad choice from safety purpose. It is flammable. The famous Hindenburg disaster [1] where the Zepplin caught fire used Hydrogen.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1937-05-10_Special_Releas...

My point is that these fears are outdated. We have the technological capability to provide lift with hydrogen safely.

No. I don't buy it. You are asking me to believe that an accident or malfunction will NEVER occur (i.e., probability = 0) causing the hydrogen to leak in an environment containing air/oxygen (which makes an explosive mixture).

That compound failure mode (H + O_2 explosive mix upon structural failure/leak) doesn't exist with Helium. So, I respectfully disagree that the fears are outdated.

A survey of NASA's experience [1] is informative. From the linked article:

> Even small amounts of liquid hydrogen can be explosive when combined with air, and only a small amount of energy is required to ignite it. Both its explosiveness and the extremely low temperatures involved make handling it safely a challenge. It has taken a lot of experience, including the experience of dramatic failures, to teach us just how dangerous it is and how carefully we need to treat it.

[1]: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/513855main_ASK_41s_explosive.pdf

Like I said, helium airships would be a necessary step to pave the way for hydrogen airships.

Consider the eventual progress of the automobile to gasoline. Hydrogen is more dangerous than gasoline, but there are many similarities that can be drawn between the proposed use of hydrogen and the current use of gasoline (also extremely explosive). Earlier automobiles, before the advent of widespread gasoline adoption, showed how the investment into IC engines (including safety) was worthwhile.

The prospective gain in the efficiency of global logistics is extremely significant. Airships, once we have established the infrastructure necessary for accommodating low-altitude wind-related challenges, effectively eliminate propulsion/fuel costs. They are sailboats unconstrained by the shape/locations of oceans, and wind patterns are reliable and predictable at altitude. Fully autonomous airships, needing human involvement only at ports, are entirely realistic. The marginal cost of global shipping, for goods where time isn’t a concern, is almost completely eliminated.

Imagine airships for the purpose of relocating natural resources. Natural resources inherently need be relocated, and the time value is negligible. Airship ports could be engineered specifically to overcome the safety challenges. Autonomous airships make the marginal cost of natural resource distribution completely negligible. It’s entirely realistic to ship quantities via airship that reflect today’s largest container ships.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com