Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: BradGuth <bradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 07:23:47 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 21, 2:09 pm, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Dec 21, 7:43 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Actually, I wasn't wearing my classes and I mis-read the wing span
64.4 m as length on these sites. Sorry about that.
Apology accepted. You should have checked your 'facts' before being so assertive about them
however.
Of course, that doesn't change any of the other stuff I've said, and it doesn't let
Graham off the hook for not supporting their contention that it is
IMPOSSIBLE to stretch a 70 m aircraft to 90 m. Look at the NLA
Stretch from Boeing
The NLA WASN'T A STRETCH ! It was a *new aircraft*.
So? It proves my point that you can increase length AND diameter and
get huge volume increases.
It still wasn't suitable for hydrogen fuelling..
For its design payload it needed the internal room to accomadate both passengers and cargo.
Any design suitable for hydrogen will require a seriously 'outsize' fuselage way beyong anything
around today.
Graham- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I don't know how Graham posts so damn much. I just REPLY to his
nonsensical BS and I get over my posting limit. This must be a
technique to limit real discourse, along with shouting IDIOT and stuff
like that. A poster who has a real contribution to make to the
hydrogen energy question if he can't be bamboozled by supposed expert
opinion, if he can maintain credibility against personality attacks,
isn't put off by supposed crazies, or crazies used to degrade
information, or bad manners, you and your buddies get together and
respond multiple times to one entry, and get him to either give up, or
go over his posting limit.
lol.
Do you guys have a day job? haha.. I'm online as part of my day job,
and I type like the wind, and like Sudoku, the challenges here builds
my mind - if I have my reading glasses on - haha..
But I wonder about the effort you're putting into your efforts here,
and what is motivating you.
As to the point you are attempting to make here Graham about oversize
fuselages, you have given absolutely no references or numbers, I have
ALREADY given you references to outsized aircraft ALREADY IN SERVICE.
And given you pointers to the Dassault hydrogen airplane now under
construction - with hydrogen nacelles slung under the wings.
I guess its progress though. At first you said the increased fuel
tank weight would decrease payload. When I showed that the decreased
fuel weight more than made up for any increase in tank weight, you
then insisted payload was measured in terms of volume. When I showed
that if you take a portion of the weight savings as increased
structure, you'd have plenty of volume. Then you said you'd have huge
performance losses. When I showed that if you take a portion of the
weight savings as increased fuel, you can increase thrust and range
and not lose any performance - and in fact gain. Now you are reduced
to saying the fuselage would be 'outsized' - haha - so what. and that
is beyond anything we have today. The LCF the Super Guppy, a host of
modified airframes already are way larger than they need to be to
accomodate hydrogen fuel and increased payload. Obviously, this is
not a show stopper for a hydrogen aircraft.
Plainly all we're talking about, is an aircraft fuselage that is
around 22% larger in all dimensions than existing fueslage - for a
given wing set - to carry the fuel AND the increased loads made
possible by the switch to hydrogen.. Alternatively, smaller wings can
be put on a fuselage - but generally speaking fuselage expansion is
easier to achieve - as Boeing's experience with the LCF shows.
I'll agree that a hydrogen aircraft as modified from something
existing is technically doable, although not quite as good as you've
suggested, especially once all of the birth-to-grave factors are taken
into account.
Getting vast amounts of Mook LH2 established at most international
airports is perhaps the first order of business. Just getting the LH2
storage and refueling process established would be impressive.
Therefore, provide the LH2 and those modified aircraft will come.
BTW, how's the Usenet flak up there in the all hydrogen realm of
William Mookism?
I'd help, but then you already know all there is to know, and then
some. Apparently Mook is only poor and rather powerless because for
some good reason you've elected to remain that way. (seems rather
spook/mole like to me, but then what do I know)
- Brad Guth
.
- References:
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Al G
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- Prev by Date: Here you go, your so claimed 85% of Alkaline Solutions that failed on somebody else
- Next by Date: Re: Also I tried to be open-minded, I tried splitting H2O tonight with 12V 120 amps,
- Previous by thread: Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- Next by thread: Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|