Home > Archive > Alternative Power sources > February 2006 > Re: "fly me to the loon..." was OT: this is why ideology/ideologues suck









You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

 

Author Re: "fly me to the loon..." was OT: this is why ideology/ideologues suck
Thomas Lee Elifritz

2006-02-18, 11:21 pm



H2-PV NOW wrote:

> Gunner wrote:
>
> The Hindenberg Effect? What's that? The fact that the USA wouldn't sell
> non-flamable Helium to Nazi Germany? Or were you referring to painting
> your flamable cellulose cloth aircraft skin with Rocket Fuel aluminum
> particles paint?
>
> The Nazis then weren't very smart, painting their hyperflamable
> aircraft with rocket fuel and then loading it with very flamible Diesel
> Fuel. All persons who were burned in the Hindenberg were burned by
> heavy hydrocarbon petroleum products, while the ultralight Hydrogen gas
> fire burned above the aircraft and continued rising until the fuel was
> gone. It was the dripping heavy petroleum products that doused the burn
> victims below.
>
> I guess you haven't read the book. Can't expect dumbo rightards to keep
> up with LAST CENTURY'S KNOWLEDGE. These facts have been known since the
> 20th cenury fer crying out loud...
>
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/18...glance&n=283155
> The Freedom Element: Living with Hydrogen (Paperback)
> by Addison Bain
>
> Editorial Reviews
> Robert L. Crippen, Capt. U.S.N., Former NASA Astronaut and Director,
> Kennedy Space Center
> "Dr. Bain presents excellent logic as to why hydrogen is not as
> dangerous as many people think ...a must read."
>
> William D. Van Vorst, Professor Emeritus, Chemical Engineering, UCLA
> "Great value for learning more about using hydrogen as fuel for
> automotive engines, as it surely seems destined to be."
>
> http://www.esdjournal.com/articles/blame.htm
> The Hindenburg:
> Was Hydrogen Really To Blame?
>
> Based On An Article by Mariette DiChristina, Popular Science, Nov. 1997
>
> Mariette DiChristina's article What Really Downed the Hindenburg
> appeared in the November, 1997 issue of Popular Science. DiChristina
> reported on years of research conducted by Addison Bain, a retired NASA
> engineer, into the crash of the Hindenburg on May 6, 1937.
>
> Bain, who managed hydrogen programs at NASA, had always been curious
> about the cause of the disaster. It had been held for years that the
> Hindenburg crashed because free hydrogen aboard the craft had been
> ignited by a natural electrical discharge or by sabotage. One of the
> things that made him doubtful of this theory was his knowledge of
> hydrogen. He understood that hydrogen does not burn as a red hot fire
> as shown in all the famous photographs of the tragedy. A hydrogen fire
> radiates little heat and is barely visible to the unaided eye.
>
> Bain soon became obsessed with the Hindenburg and spent most of his
> spare time in research. His work took him from the National Air and
> Space Museum in Washington, DC to archives in Maryland, the Fire
> Sciences Lab in Montana, and finally into contact with Richard Van
> Treuren, a member of the Lighter-Than-Air Society in Akron, Ohio.
>
> Through his contact with Van Treuren, Bain discovered that pieces of
> the Hindenburg's skin still existed. He traveled all over the country
> buying whatever original materials, papers and books he could from
> collectors. He was even able to obtain a small clipping of the swastika
> painted on the Hindenburg's side from a collector in Chicago, Cheryl
> Gantz, who heads up the Zeppelin Collectors Club.
>
> Bain approached researchers at NASA who all agreed to donate their free
> time to work on "Project H". Their first task was to examine the
> materials to determine what was in the fabric that covered the
> Hindenburg. By using an infrared spectrograph and a scanning electron
> microscope, the scientists were able to discover the chemical
> signatures of the organic compounds and elements present in the fabric.
>
> The Hindenburg was covered with a cotton fabric that had been swabbed
> with a doping compound to protect and strengthen it. Unfortunately, the
> doping compound contained a cellulose acetate or nitrate (used in
> gunpowder). This compound was followed by a coating of aluminum powder
> (which is used in rocket fuel). Additionally, the structure was held
> together using wood spacers and ramie cord; the furnishings were make
> of silk and other fabrics; and the skeleton itself was duralumin coated
> with lacquer. Added together, all of these made the craft itself highly
> flammable. In DiChristina's article, Bain was quoted as saying that
> perhaps "... the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with
> rocket fuel."


There you go, confusing the crackpots with evidence.

That will only inflame them..

http://cosmic.lifeform.org


LinkBot





Other archives available: Cellular phones topics archive | Web Design forum archive | Software help archive | Hardware reviews archive | Programming topics archive

Copyright 2004 - 2008 homeownerschat.com