| Gunner 2006-02-19, 12:21 am |
| On 18 Feb 2006 17:47:06 -0800, "H2-PV NOW" <H2.PV@zig-zag.net> 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.
Yes and?
>
>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."
Yes and? I read this article in PS when it first came out. And
watching the film of the actual event, it was quite obvious where the
hydrogen went.
Now, that you have proven you can cut and paste..and are stupid enough
to preach to the choir, can you answer the implied question of why
lighter than air craft has not been utilized in greater areas besides
logging?
Gunner
"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences."
- Proverbs 22:3
|