Hi Mike,
Thank you, this is exactly what happened to Usenet.
You seem to get one of my point. Hydrogen is the most useful and studied
atom in the Universe is not too dangerous to have in it's liquid form in a
university or test range setting. If it has unique safety requirements,
deal with it.
The Subject Line of this thread is still, "Hindenburg Syndrome" a disaster
that has shaped societies perception of Hydrogen in a very negative way for
over 80 years. Several Theories, but in reality we never know. I like the
landing line grounding the charged airship generating a spark igniting the
incendiary fabric skin theory. The Hydrogen adding fuel to the fire, but if
the outer skin of the airship burns on it's own, Helium may have put out
the fire on top, but the airship still would have crashed, just not as
spectacularly. The leak theory bag theory is just as good, after all, the
airbags were made out of hundreds of thousands of cow intestines.
Even today NASA displays symptoms of "Hindenburg Syndrome", unnecessarily
using massive quantities of Helium in a single use application where
Hydrogen could reasonably and safely perform the same function, with proper
safety measures.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yRWhu0UGYw
Personally, I think from a safety point, you can't substitute hydrogen for
helium in children's balloons, but you can do it in a controlled
environment like a high altitude balloon launch. 100 Million children
balloons wasted because NASA can't figure out how to safely use Hydrogen
for single use high altitude balloons? Or, NASA can't be seen doing
something that might be perceived by the general public as Hindenburg-esk?
Hindenburg Syndrome.
I took apart this video from 60 years ago in way too much detail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bFJK5kU_UQ
It essentially say, yes, Hydrogen is flammable but not explosive in Air.
How many in this group noticed that the video was "Film Number 1" and
actually went looking for "Film Number 2"
https://youtu.be/RNzjksIImb8?t=329
It's the oxygen concentration that makes it explosive, just like any other
fuel. RP-1, "...the blast pressures within the zone of detonation itself,
were much more severe than with oxygen and hydrogen."
It's Hydrogen, not Hydrazine, which I would consider a tad bit more
dangerous.
--
Craig Fink
WeBeGood@xxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 12:12 PM Mike Ross <mross77062@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
... often wouldn't be be sent upon review the next morning. Craig has a
point that hydrogen is a worthy goal, and you have one that it is
dangerous, perhaps too dangerous for a university team. These are both
valid opinions. Namecalling is, or at least should be, beneath this august
group.
Mike Ross
