![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 9, 4:50*am, BradGuth wrote:
On May 28, 10:22 am, wrote: ? I'm still trying to figure out what this topic has to do with rec.aviation.piloting. -- Or reality for that matter... Obviously your DARPA brown-nosed expertise is insurmountable, just the way them Zionist/Nazi always intended. What is it about the rigid composite airship idea of such applied technology that's over your DARPA head? I'd like you to explain how you make a rigid shell light enought. Remember increased atmosphere density also implies increased pressure. Cheers |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "More_Flaps" wrote in message ... On Jun 9, 4:50 am, BradGuth wrote: .. What is it about the rigid composite airship idea of such applied technology that's over your DARPA head? I'd like you to explain how you make a rigid shell light enought. Remember increased atmosphere density also implies increased pressure. Whilst hating to appear to support anything the Guthbot posts I feel it necessary to point out that this is a red herring. As long as you equalise pressures inside and outside the envelope there is no reason for the shell to be any heavier than for a terrestial airship. The boiling sulphuric acid rain storms are another matter however. Keith |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Keith Willshaw wrote: Whilst hating to appear to support anything the Guthbot posts I feel it necessary to point out that this is a red herring. As long as you equalise pressures inside and outside the envelope there is no reason for the shell to be any heavier than for a terrestial airship. Dittos... and the higher the atmospheric pressure, the greater the difference of the density of the gas inside the envelope and outside of it on said airship will work to generate increased lift, in much the same way that fish swim bladders make up only a small part of their overall volume, yet the huge difference in density between air and seawater brings them to neutral buoyancy. Anyway, you are now trying to argue logic with a certifiable paranoid schizophrenic, which is inevitably a losing game. This guy, not to put too fine of a point on it, is completely off of his little Venusian rocker. He needs a lithium chew-bar around the size of a brick. :-D If I may paraphrase my father's words of wisdom: "Beauty is only skin deep, but crazy goes right to the bone." ....and here's the ZMC-2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZMC-2 not that it's going to tolerate 800 F. or sulphuric acid rain at all well. Pat |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 8, 2:16 pm, More_Flaps wrote:
On Jun 9, 4:50 am, BradGuth wrote: On May 28, 10:22 am, wrote: ? I'm still trying to figure out what this topic has to do with rec.aviation.piloting. -- Or reality for that matter... Obviously your DARPA brown-nosed expertise is insurmountable, just the way them Zionist/Nazi always intended. What is it about the rigid composite airship idea of such applied technology that's over your DARPA head? I'd like you to explain how you make a rigid shell light enought. Remember increased atmosphere density also implies increased pressure. Cheers Correct, even pressure plus full interior vacuum if you like. Or, one could simply offset or displace the mostly CO2 with good old reliable and failsafe H2. How much pressure will a good sphere made of a tough composite take? Remember that for robotics, conventional viewing ports or pilot/crew escape hatches are not required, and there could be several of these tough spheres per rigid airship. The rigid airship quest and of the R&D give and take of this topic is intended to argue exactly this kind of related technical issue. I do not have all the answers that I honestly believe others do have at their disposal. Go figure as to why such public funded expertise isn't being touted or much less shared. It seems to me that a given planet of terrific pressure and good atmospheric density beats most anything moon like or Mars vacuum like, especially nifty if that planet were at times only 100X as far away as our moon. These robotic composite rigid airships could be rather nicely remote piloted from a manned station (aka POOF City) as safely and efficiently kept within Venus L2. Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt hot-air airships | Jim Logajan | Home Built | 8 | July 21st 06 06:49 PM |
Airships Flying boat 1934 FA | JaneyP | General Aviation | 0 | August 11th 05 12:21 AM |
Balloons Airships vintage book FA | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | July 16th 05 01:12 AM |
Are there any fligh-simulators for Venus ??? | Tristan Beeline | Simulators | 7 | June 28th 05 02:42 PM |
Unmanned airships at FL650! | Roy Smith | General Aviation | 0 | July 6th 04 06:31 PM |