Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

onezero.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 198 posts

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#121

Post by logicallee »

perilunar wrote: post #60
dr_dshiv wrote: post #46

Airplanes fly high and have tiny porthole windows. You can't appreciate the beauty of the earth. Zeppelins can have huge windows and fly relatively low. The experience of flight would be amazing -- focused on the beauty of the natural world. Zeppelins offer a low-carbon earth-conscious luxury good that the superrich should spend money on -- so that eventually it's affordable to the rest of us.

> Zeppelins can have huge windows and fly relatively low Also they are constrained by weight, not volume, so there's plenty of legroom. The Hindenburg had private cabins, a lounge, a bar, and a dining room (and a smoking room!). More like a cruise ship than an airliner.

Though, in retrospect, that smoking room may not have been the best idea.

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#122

Post by zozbot234 »

VonGuard wrote: post #36

This article doesn't seem to take into account that Helium is becoming scarce, and when used in airships, it's eventually just released and lost forever. NYT Article on the shortage: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/science/helium-shortage-p... We used to have a strategic Helium reserve in the US for zepplins and so forth, then it was just kept for chemistry and other purposes. I think we started selling it down un…

I think lower-purity Helium is not as scarce, and that's what you would use for party balloons, etc. No reason why it couldn't be used for Zeppelins too.

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#123

Post by mothsonasloth »

pasabagi wrote: post #110
b0rsuk wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would also rather use hydrogen. The Hindenburg disaster was spectacular, but not especially deadly! 36 fatalities, 62 survivors. Compare to modern passenger airplanes, where EVERYONE tends to die. If modern dislike for zeppelins is mostly due to Hindenburg, it's irrational.

I think there were a series of disasters - of which the Hindenburg was just the last. All the same, I think with modern materials, Hydrogen would be pretty safe.

Indeed, Iron Maiden wrote a song about the British Airship R101, called "Empire of the clouds"

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#124

Post by zozbot234 »

ShorsHammer wrote: post #90
VonGuard wrote: post #36

This article doesn't seem to take into account that Helium is becoming scarce, and when used in airships, it's eventually just released and lost forever. NYT Article on the shortage: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/science/helium-shortage-p... We used to have a strategic Helium reserve in the US for zepplins and so forth, then it was just kept for chemistry and other purposes. I think we started selling it down un…

It's the second most abundant element in the universe. Maybe we'll put in a tad more effort to explore it if Helium runs out.

Yeah, we could extract some Helium from the sun. The heat wouldn't be an issue, we'd go at night.

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#125

Post by ianai »

pasabagi wrote: post #110
b0rsuk wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would also rather use hydrogen. The Hindenburg disaster was spectacular, but not especially deadly! 36 fatalities, 62 survivors. Compare to modern passenger airplanes, where EVERYONE tends to die. If modern dislike for zeppelins is mostly due to Hindenburg, it's irrational.

I think there were a series of disasters - of which the Hindenburg was just the last. All the same, I think with modern materials, Hydrogen would be pretty safe.

It’s at least worth considering whether modern zeppelins could be safe. All options need to be on the table for dealing with climate change.

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#127

Post by dr_dshiv »

agumonkey wrote: post #89
dr_dshiv wrote: post #46

Airplanes fly high and have tiny porthole windows. You can't appreciate the beauty of the earth. Zeppelins can have huge windows and fly relatively low. The experience of flight would be amazing -- focused on the beauty of the natural world. Zeppelins offer a low-carbon earth-conscious luxury good that the superrich should spend money on -- so that eventually it's affordable to the rest of us.

Do you know if Solar heated balloons are good enough for small trips ?

And what's with the combination of solar heating and helium/hydrogen?

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#128

Post by dr_dshiv »

There is huge potential for solar energy production on zeppelins. Back of the napkin:

The Graf Zeppelin had a surface area of 27,299 square meters. If the top ⅓ was covered in solar, it could produce 10,800 kWh per day, assuming 1.2 kWh per day per square meter.

Re: Some scientists are serious about resurrecting zeppelins for cargo

#129

Post by dr_dshiv »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #128

There is huge potential for solar energy production on zeppelins. Back of the napkin: The Graf Zeppelin had a surface area of 27,299 square meters. If the top ⅓ was covered in solar, it could produce 10,800 kWh per day, assuming 1.2 kWh per day per square meter.

Also, they could harvest sea water or condensation to generate hydrogen.

To produce one kilogram of hydrogen, 12 cubic meters, it takes 9 kg of water and 50 kWh of electricity. The solar Zeppelin described above could generate 2,589 cubic meters of hydrogen a day. At this rate, it would take 77 days to fill the Graf Zeppelin's 200,000 cubic meter capacity

Post reply on HN