| |
G0TEZ > INFO 20.07.02 12:22l 59 Lines 2462 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 173_G0TEZ
Read: DB0FHN GUEST
Subj: Re: Balloons/Hot Air
Path: DB0FHN<DB0ZWI<DB0HDF<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0GOS<DB0EEO<PI8DAZ<PI8WFL<PI8WFL<
GB7FCR<GB7BOB<GB7HVU
Sent: 020719/1101Z @:GB7HVU.#16.GBR.EU #:31428 [Great Harwood] FBB7.00i $:173_G
From: G0TEZ@GB7HVU.#16.GBR.EU
To : INFO@WW
G0TEZ/TPK 1.83c Num 173 19-07-02T04:38:34 GMT: COLNE,Lancs:
I had already written my other bull before I read those from Gerard and
Harry.
You don't really need to put the less dense gas in anything.
If you go back further than the Hindenburg to the Montgolfier bros, who
invented the balloon (it wasn't Edison, sri.) Thy fed hot air which is less
dense than cold air, into a paper and cloth ballooon, open at the bottom.
The balloon still rose as do those used by modern hot air balloonists.
In fact you can have a bubble of hot air rising and ride up with it.
Glider pilots do this all the time with thermals. A thermal isn't normally
continuous. The air over certain terrain such as plowed fields, gets hot.
Every few minutes, a bubble of hot air rises. An expert glider pilot can
spot this by the dust and flotsam rising with it. He joins it and gets
carried up with it. A hot air balloon without the hot air:-)
In practice, modern glider pilots have all sorts of electronic devices such
as GPS. One of the available devices is a kind of IR viewer, like the
military PIR glasses. With these he can see the hot air which must be a big
help. I wish I could afford to do it.
The only reason the rigid airships like the Hindenburg and the Graf
Zeppelin had aluminium frames was to keep the shape so that they could be
streamlined.
I don't know exactly what the discussion is about but, personally I would
like to see the return of airships. With lightweight metals and plastics,
they could be a lot lighter than the old ones. Helium is twice the density
of Hydrogen so there is only half the lifting force but it's better than
going Bang!
I like the idea of being able to cross the Atlantic at 100 mph or so much
more than crossing it in a Concorde at Mach 2 if the price was very low.
An airship could fly from Europe to the USA in a day or two with 1,000+
passengers and could be cheaper than a ship or an airliner.
I do know that there have been many attempts to bring back airships but
the problem has always been raising the money. Maybe they will return for
the same reason that Airbus has made profits ever since it went into
service, while Concorde has consistently made a slight loss.
All we need is a farsighted investor.
All the best *
/
~/~
-----73---Ian.
...............
PEACE MAN
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
