Wow Dude has been quiet for a long time. Did you get pregnant? Or did that frigging cat eat you?
Hi again. we are back to hydrogen versus helium, or methane. Let's not forget that methane is a highly explosive gase also and sucks as a lifting gas. Steam cannot be maintained and ammonia is deadly. If you want a gas to thin hydrogen out with, it seems logical to use helium. But not in the main lifting bags, but rather in the space between the lifting bags and the outer shell. I mentioned this a year ago and I think Boldt or someone mentioned it a few days back. The more sequestered your hydrogen is, the safer it is. Sadly this still would leak as much helium as a full helium ship each day. Back to the drawing board then on permiability, graphene and water are the best so far that I have heard of for blocking helium. Any other gas used to dilute Hydrogens' flamibility would significantly lower it's lift.
I was away for some time and then lost my internet. Closed down my shop and am working out of my home shop and garage, still designing furniture and studying airships and related sciences. I am at my mother's house, she is ill with end stage liver disease and is on the transplant list so I spend a lot of time here. I have had little to contribute in the last six months but look in from time to time to see if you guys have solved any major problems, heck, even any little problems are a blessing to see solved. I am still tackeling structural weaknesses in my big ship, energy consumption, top speed scenarios, adding more consealed brushless motors, new ideas keep coming. But as a comercial ship, it may have to be advertized as helium, not hydrogen. It is possible there might be a loop hole about having a supply of hydrogen on board as a fuel....say, 200,000 cubic feet of fuel.
You must be a member to post in this forum
