News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by DrScump on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @08:55PM (#14650901)
The lifting power of helium is small, as opposed to hydrogen. Also, helium has supply problems.

Is it not possible to have a modern airship with hydrogen as its primary lifting agent?

Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by mikeash on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @09:13PM (#14650977)
Hydrogen doesn't buy you that much additional lifting power.

Air is about 1.2kg/m^3 at STP, so that's the theoretical maximum you can lift with a cubic meter of gas bag. (And you can only get that value if you could somehow hold a vacuum, of course.)

Hydrogen is about 0.09kg/m^3 at STP, so you can lift about 1.1kg/m^3. Helium is about 0.18kg/m^3, so you can lift about 1kg/m^3. Helium is twice as dense, but that only costs you about 10% of your lifting power since both are so light compared to air.

I see no reason you couldn't use hydrogen, but I don't know if anyone would want to take the risk. (Specific flaws of the Hindenburg aside, hydrogen is explosive across a distressingly wide range of mixture ratios with air.) If you did use hydrogen, I think the main motivation would be avoiding the use of scarce helium, not the minor increase in lift capacity.

Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by ForHackernews on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @05:46AM (#14652842)
If it's an unmanned drone-blimp, the safety issue because somewhat less critical.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by gozur88 on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @09:28PM (#14660075)
But still critical enough to make it impractical. How would you do maintenance on a hydrogen airship without risking the people doing the maintenance? And you'd never be able to fly over populated areas.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by petre on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @12:14AM (#14651635)
It is possible but we all know what happened to the Hindenburg. Using hydrogen is asking for a fire to happen.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster

Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by lostlogin on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @03:21AM (#14652288)
Keep in mind that the Hindenburg was supposed to be helium filled, but due to import restrictions they couldn't get enough.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by DrScump on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @12:34AM (#14651709)
Far more helium airships have wrecked than hydrogen airships, even counting only before the Hindenburg.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by petre on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @12:43AM (#14651736)
Wrecked, yes, but they probably didn't burn like a torch with people jumping out of them to avoid burning alive.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by Nomentatus on Friday June 30, 2017 @05:30PM (#14673713)
What you saw was the engine-fuel burning on the ground; the hydrogen went straight up in flames and burnt no-one.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by honestoHeminway on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @02:38AM (#14652119)
Vacuum still has the best lifting power of them all..
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by guelo on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @03:09AM (#14652235)
We just need a material as light as a balloon but rigid enough to hold its shape and maintain a huge vacuum at 1 atmosphere outside pressure.
Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by scarmig on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @11:44AM (#14655090)
Perhaps graphene aerogel, with a nonpermeable graphene casing?

I'm not sure of what its behavior would be with all its air sucked out, though.

Re:MIT’s gas-powered drone is able to stay in the air for fi... by honestoHeminway on Saturday July 01, 2017 @12:17PM (#14677701)
like a hair full of nothing..